SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
lebanon
Amnesty Calls for War Crimes Probe After Israel 'Obliterated Entire Families' in Lebanon
"How many more families will have to pull the body parts of their children from the rubble before this devastating cycle of war crimes ends?"
Jul 09, 2026
Amnesty International on Thursday demanded a war crimes investigation into Israeli airstrikes in southern Lebanon, which the human rights watchdog described as "wiping out families."
The strikes in question took place in March and killed 24 civilians, including 12 children, in neighborhoods in the cities of Tyre, Saida, and Nabatieh.
Amnesty said it has gathered enough evidence to reasonably conclude that Israeli forces violated international law by failing to distinguish between civilian and military targets when conducting the campaign.
The human rights group said it reached these conclusions after conducting more than a dozen on-the-ground interviews with survivors, relatives of victims, and paramedics who were called to the scene after the strikes. Additionally, the group analyzed satellite photos along with videos of the strikes posted on social media.
One survivor, a retired Lebanese man named Hussein Saleh, said that the strike in his neighborhood in Tyre killed his wife, their two children, his sister-in-law and her five-year-old daughter, and two other relatives.
Moussa Chaalan, a paramedic who arrived on the scene after the attack, told Amnesty "there was nothing left of the house" when they got there.
"The body parts were scattered as far as 200 meters away from the impact site," Chaalan added.
Mohamad Taqi, 54, told Amnesty that Israel's strike in the Saida district killed seven family members, including his 78-year-old mother, Zeinab Nasser, and his 12-year-old daughter Zahraa.
"In the bedroom where the missile hit, I couldn’t find a trace of Zeinab and Zahraa," Taqi said. "The paramedics later found their body parts and they gathered them. When I lost hope of finding them alive, I went to the hospital. I was injured in my head, eye, and face."
Kristine Beckerle, deputy regional director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International, said the international community needed to impose consequences on Israel for what she described as "a callous disregard for civilian lives."
"Within the space of just a week, the Israeli military obliterated entire families, including a dozen children, in Lebanon," said Beckerle. "How many more families will have to pull the body parts of their children from the rubble before this devastating cycle of war crimes ends? The international community must act now: states must impose an immediate comprehensive arms embargo on Israel and use universal and extraterritorial jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute those responsible."
Beckerle added that the three attacks investigated by Amnesty "are part of a well-documented pattern of unlawful Israeli attacks carried out in Lebanon, amidst a total vacuum of accountability."
Keep ReadingShow Less
22 Democrats Join GOP to Block Lebanon War Powers Resolution, Enabling Netanyahu's Sabotage of US-Iran Ceasefire
"The United States is not a bystander to these war crimes. It's an active participant," said the resolutions sponsor Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
Jun 30, 2026
Nearly two dozen Democrats joined almost every Republican on Tuesday to vote down a war powers resolution that would have halted US military participation in Israel's assault on Lebanon, which is threatening to derail President Donald Trump's peace negotiations with Iran.
"More than 1.3 million people have already been forced to leave their homes or be killed, with the Israeli military telling them they will not be allowed to return," said the resolution's sponsor, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), on the House floor Tuesday. "Eighty-one Lebanese neighborhoods have been violently depopulated and demolished—erased from the map entirely."
Along with Republican Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.) and Lauren Boebert (Colo.), the resolution received support from 187 Democrats on Tuesday, more than double the number who supported a similar resolution introduced by Tlaib earlier this month.
Despite top House Democrats, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY) and Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (NY), giving rhetorical backing to the resolution this time around, The Intercept reported that they did not formally whip the vote.
Twenty-two Democratic hawks joined the GOP to vote against ending cooperation with Israel's war, which has killed more than 4,000 people since March.
Among them were a clique of Democrats who have signed on to the centrist "Promise to America" aimed at countering the momentum of progressive and democratic socialist candidates within the party—including Reps. Donald Davis (NC), Laura Gillen (NY), Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Adam Gray (Calif.), Susie Lee (Nev.), and Tom Suozzi (NY).
Others include favorites of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), including Reps. George Latimer (NY), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), and Brad Schneider (Ill.), who have each received over a million dollars from it and other pro-Israel lobbying groups over their careers, according to FEC reports reviewed by Track AIPAC.
Other Democratic opponents include Reps. Steny Hoyer (Md.), Greg Landsman (Ohio), Jared Moskowitz (Fla.), Donald Norcross (NJ), Jimmy Panetta (Calif.), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), Brad Sherman (Calif.), Darren Soto (Fla.), Norma Torres (Calif.), Juan Vargas (Calif.), and Marc Veasey (Texas), many of whom have also received extensive support from the lobby.
As voting began on Tuesday afternoon, Lebanese-American journalist Rania Khalek said that "how people vote on this is a big indicator of who is bought and paid for by the war machine and Israel lobby."
In a comment to Axios, the staunch pro-Israel centrist Golden justified his vote against the measure by claiming that "to the best of my knowledge, we're not engaged in a conflict with Lebanon."
Latimer made a similar statement on social media, claiming that the resolution was only good for "messaging" since the US did not have any active troops in Lebanon.
But Tlaib argued on the House floor that "the United States is not a bystander to these war crimes. It's an active participant."
"The United States is currently engaged in illegal and unauthorized hostilities supporting the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in violation of the War Powers Act," she said. "The Trump administration is providing intelligence, coordinating strikes, demonstrating overt command over the Israeli military decisions, including greenlighting specific Israeli attacks and operations."
Other supporters of the resolution emphasized that ending Israel's occupation of Lebanon is a precondition for ending Trump's war with Iran.
"Ending Israeli military action in Lebanon is a key part of ensuring that the negotiation process with Iran continues and peace prevails in the Middle East," said Rep. Betty McCullom (D-Minn.).
The memorandum of understanding signed by the US and Iran earlier this month states that, for peace to be achieved, it must be implemented on "all fronts," including in Lebanon.
Iranian negotiators have repeatedly emphasized that they will not allow Trump to pull back from the war he's desperate to end unless Israel fully withdraws troops from Lebanon, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has emphatically refused to do.
Janet Abou-Elias, a researcher at the Democratizing Foreign Policy Project at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Common Dreams earlier this month that without US military participation, Israel could likely continue its occupation “only for a limited period of time."
Just Foreign Policy, an anti-war group that has agitated for the passage of Tlaib's war powers resolution, lambasted the 22 Democrats who voted against it.
"These 22 fringe House Democratic hawks revealed today that they don't actually want the Iran War to end," the group wrote in a post to social media. "By failing to end US participation in the Israeli war in Lebanon, they are undermining a peace deal."
Noting that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has caused oil prices to spike and inflation to ripple across the economy, the group said these Democrats were "keeping prices high for Americans."
Just Foreign Policy's executive director Erik Sperling told The Intercept that although the resolution did not pass, the vote signaled that things were moving in the right direction.
“Democrats have been pretty unified about speaking out against the killing of innocents and all of the harm by the Iran War, but there has been less vocal outrage about the mass killing and occupation in Lebanon,” Sperling said. “This is just an important signal that Democrats are aware of the way the Lebanon war is a humanitarian crisis and is the key roadblock to ending this war and delivering the peace that Americans are demanding.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Congress to Vote on New Lebanon War Powers Resolution as Israel's Occupation Threatens to Blow Up Iran-US Peace Deal
"This vote is effectively a proxy vote on the Iran deal," an anti-war activist told Common Dreams. "Members who vote no are functionally prioritizing continued Israeli operations in Lebanon over the prospects of a deal."
Jun 29, 2026
As Israel's continued assault on Lebanon threatens to derail peace negotiations between the Trump administration and Iran, the US House of Representatives is expected to hold another vote on Tuesday on a war powers resolution that could halt American support for Israel's attacks.
H.Con.Res. 108, introduced in early June by Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), would direct President Donald Trump to halt US military involvement in "hostilities" connected to Israel's attacks on Lebanon, which have killed more than 4,000 people and led to the forced displacement of more than 1.2 million residents.
It is the second such resolution to be put to a vote in the House this month. H.Con.Res. 84, also introduced by Tlaib, was shot down after Democratic leadership declined to endorse it—since it did not include a carve-out allowing the US to continue coordinating actions against Hezbollah with the Lebanese military—but still received support from 91 Democrats, plus Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
The new resolution, which has the support of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), is expected to fare even better. The anti-war group Just Foreign Policy told Common Dreams that between 160 and 210 Democrats could now vote in favor of the measure.
Even in the best-case scenario, this would still require at least seven GOP defectors in addition to Massie. But Erik Sperling, Just Foreign Policy's executive director, said the fact that the vote was happening at all was still tremendously significant.
"This is only the second vote [to halt US military action in] Lebanon on the floor of Congress in history," he said. "It was already one of the most significant things imaginable that we'd even have a vote on it, much less have two in a month."
Adding to the significance is the fact that Israel's actions in Lebanon have become the primary obstacle to Trump's efforts to end the war in Iran.
The memorandum of understanding signed earlier this month calls for a halt to military operations "on all fronts," including Lebanon, and the Iranian delegation has repeatedly insisted that there is no deal without an Israeli withdrawal.
Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doubled down on his defiance of the agreement, stating that Israel would not withdraw "as long as I am prime minister." Defense Minister Israel Katz added there had been "no American demand for Israel to withdraw."
This is despite Trump's public and private fuming at Israel for derailing his desperate efforts to back out of the conflict, which is deathly unpopular among the American public and which he has warned will cause "global economic catastrophe" if allowed to drag on much longer.
Israel and Lebanon agreed to another US-brokered framework on Friday that is supposed to set up a path for the Lebanese army to take over so-called "pilot zones" in southern Lebanon that are currently controlled by Israel. But in order for Israel to fully withdraw, it has demanded that Hezbollah fully disarm, which the group has said it will not do.
On the ground, there is little sign the deal is being implemented. Since Friday, Israel has conducted several strikes both inside the occupation zone and outside of it against what it said were Hezbollah militants.
While members of House Democratic leadership have said that the US is "not currently engaged in hostilities in Lebanon," supporters of Tlaib's measure have noted that even without boots on the ground, the US is intimately involved in Israel's attacks. Trump has reportedly given a "green light" to multiple operations, and Israel has extensively relied on US intelligence.
Janet Abou-Elias, a researcher at the Democratizing Foreign Policy Project at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Common Dreams earlier this month that ending US coordination with Israel would significantly hamper its ability to continue its occupation of Lebanon.
With Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei reiterating on Monday that an end to Israel's occupation of Lebanon was an “essential prerequisite” for an end to the war with the US, the anti-war coalition on Capitol Hill has said the urgency of passing Tlaib's resolution is only continuing to grow.
"This vote is effectively a proxy vote on the Iran deal," Sperling said. "Any member who genuinely wants a negotiated end to the Iran conflict should be voting yes. Members who vote no are functionally prioritizing continued Israeli operations in Lebanon over the prospects of a deal."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Spoiler Alert in the Iran-US Peace Process
Spoilers often undermine fragile peace processes to disastrous effect, and several are currently attempting to derail the Islamabad memorandum of understanding; managing them is an important challenge.
Jun 29, 2026
In a seminal article, entitled “Spoiler Problems in Peace Processes,” Stephen Stedman writes that “peacemaking is a risky business.” The greatest source of risk “comes from spoilers—leaders and parties who believe that peace emerging from negotiations threatens their power, worldview, and interests, and use violence to undermine attempts to achieve it.”
Spoilers can be inside or outside a peace process. Those inside have signed an agreement but fail to fulfill key obligations; those outside are either excluded from it or have excluded themselves. In terms of managing spoilers, it is important to determine why a particular party is refusing to honor a peace agreement.
Spoilers are already causing problems for the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between Iran and the US announced on June 14, after weeks of Pakistani mediators trading proposals back and forth between the parties. The 14-point MOU was officially signed by President Donald Trump on June 17 in Versailles and by President Masoud Pezeshkian in Tehran the next day.
The Process of the Negotiations Following the Signing of the MOU
To develop the MOU into a permanent peace agreement, face-to-face negotiations were scheduled for June 19 in Bürgenstock, Switzerland under the auspices of Pakistani and Qatari mediators. But because heavy fighting in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah was violating the first clause of the MOU, which called for the termination of military operations “including in Lebanon,” the Iranians declared that they would not attend and threatened to reclose the Strait of Hormuz. Vice President JD Vance, who was to lead the US delegation, also canceled his flight to Switzerland.
Although the negotiations were successful, several parties—Israel, Hezbollah, Trump, and hardliners in Iran—almost derailed the process and are still attempting to do so.
Nonetheless, on June 20, after Iranian state TV announced that Iran’s delegation, led by the Speaker of Parliament Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, had arrived in Switzerland, Vance departed the US to join Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who had traveled there earlier.
The talks, dubbed the Lake Lucerne Summit, began on the morning of June 21 with separate meetings between the leaders of each delegation with the mediators, followed by quadrilateral talks in the afternoon between the two parties and two mediators.
Vance presented a promising opening statement, saying: “Never before has the Iranian and American leadership met at such a high level... What the President has asked us to do is turn over a new leaf to transform our relationship with the people of Iran, and to extend an outstretched hand that says to the people of Iran that if your leadership is willing to give up being a driver of regional instability, if they are willing to give up nuclear weapons ambitions for the long term, then the United States is willing to fundamentally transform our relationship.”
But 80 minutes later, the Iranians got word that Trump (apparently annoyed by the threatened closure of the Strait of Hormuz) told Fox News in a phone call that unless the strait remained open, the negotiators talking to Vance will “never make it back to their country—in fact, they will have no f**king country to return to at all.”
In response, the Iranian delegation protested to the mediators, saying this was an unacceptable threat to their personal safety and then staged a walkout. Their absence was apparently temporary, because Vance, describing the talks as “messy,” later said: “Yes, they did threaten to walk out... but we were negotiating well past one in the morning... so they didn’t [permanently] walk out.” In all, there were about 18 hours of intensive talks and consultations.
The Outcome and Substance of the Negotiations
The talks produced a road map for a final deal within 60 days and created a High-Level Committee for Political Oversight to manage the process and coordinate the three working groups who will report to the committee weekly: a Nuclear Working Group, a Sanctions Tracking Group, and a Monitoring and Dispute-Resolution Group.
Two crisis management mechanisms were also agreed: a Strait of Hormuz Secure Communication Channel (i.e., a hotline) to provide communication links between maritime security forces to “avoid incidents and miscommunication” and guarantee safe passage for shipping through the Strait of Hormuz; and a Lebanon De-Confliction Cell to prevent further military escalation and ensure compliance with the cessation of hostilities.
In the end, the talks were more successful than the first round in April in Islamabad. Vance called them “a good foundation;” Araghchi said the mediators delivered “major progress.” A joint statement by the mediators described “encouraging progress” and cited a “positive and constructive atmosphere.” The Swiss Foreign Ministry also welcomed “constructive progress.” Technical talks between the working groups began the next day.
Spoiler Issues
Although the negotiations were successful, several parties—Israel, Hezbollah, Trump, and hardliners in Iran—almost derailed the process and are still attempting to do so.
The success of the process appears to be due to the mediators employing “the departing train strategy, which implies that the peace process is a train leaving the station at a preordained time: Once set in motion, anyone not on board will be left behind.” It is a determination that the peace process will go irrevocably forward regardless of spoiling efforts. Other strategies that Stedman proposes for managing spoilers include: inducement, socialization, deterrence-coercion, and withdrawal.
Although a comprehensive accounting of each spoiler’s motivation and strategies for dealing with them exceed the scope of this article, some general points can be made.
Israel and Hezbollah
Long-term enemies, Israel and Hezbollah, reengaged in fighting on March 2, when Hezbollah launched missiles against Israel to protest Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s assassination, followed by intense hostilities between them. Since the first clause of the MOU calls for the termination of military operations, including in Lebanon, this presents a dilemma, since both Israel and Hezbollah were outside the US-Iranian peace process and didn’t agree. Indeed, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explicitly stated that since it isn’t a party to the MOU, Israel will not withdraw from Lebanon.
In response, the US established a separate mediation process between Israel and Lebanon (with Hezbollah again outside the process) which agreed to ceasefires of varying lengths, subsequently violated by both Israel and Hezbollah. More recently, Lebanon and Israel have agreed to a lasting peace and security deal, whereby the Lebanese Armed Forces would gradually assume control over all Lebanese territory as Hezbollah is disarmed; in parallel, Israeli forces would engage in a staged withdrawal. Hezbollah, however, rejects this and says that it will not disarm until Israel withdraws totally.
When peace processes are scuttled by spoilers and war resumes, the results are often catastrophic, with the casualties being infinitely higher than those of the original conflict.
Netanyahu, his government, and much of the Israeli public are disappointed with the MOU since it doesn’t address many of their war aims, e.g., regime change, Iran’s ballistic missile program, and its support for proxies. They also oppose sanctions relief and other economic benefits.
Both Israel and Hezbollah fit the description of “total spoilers,” who are often “led by individuals who see the world in all-or-nothing terms” and are opposed to compromise. “Any commitment to peace by a total spoiler tends to be tactical—a move to gain advantage in a struggle to the death.”
The “departing train strategy,” used by the mediators at the Lake Lucerne Summit, is a good way to manage total spoilers. Another effective approach is for the spoiler’s patron to warn the spoiler of dire implications if it escalates attacks, which apparently Trump has done, much to Netanyahu’s annoyance.
It has also been argued that Hezbollah might moderate its actions for now by inducement, e.g., the promise of renewed assistance from Iran if economic benefits accrue from the peace process, but if this allows it to rearm later, that would merely postpone the problem.
Trump
Trump is, of course, inside the peace process and probably fits the description of a “greedy spoiler,” i.e., one who “holds goals that expand or contract based on calculations of cost and risk. A greedy spoiler may have limited goals that expand when faced with low costs and risks; alternatively, it may have total goals that contract when faced with high costs and risks.”
Although Trump reportedly wants out of the war, his firm belief that any provocation must be met with a response of greater intensity inevitably causes conflict escalation. When four days after the Lake Lucerne Summit, Iranian hardliners attacked a vessel trying to exit the strait, Trump ordered bombing of Iranian missile and drone sites.
Hardliners in Iran
Iran’s new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has given his conditional approval to the MOU, with the qualification that he will not accept excessive demands by the US. He also praised the efforts of the Iranian negotiating team, which is seen as an attempt to silence opposition from hardliners. As well, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) leadership, the Supreme National Security Council, and some members of parliament support it.
The hardline Paydari Front, however, which rejects engagement with the West and considers itself the guardian of revolutionary values, opposes it. There are also hardline members within the IRGC. As well, segments of the population oppose the MOU and demonstrations broke out when it was signed, with calls for death to the negotiating team.
The recent incidents in the Strait of Hormuz are an example of how this opposition can manifest itself. Like Trump, IRGC hardliners believe that every provocation must be met with a greater response, which accounts for their recent attacks on US bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, following Trump’s bombing. These hardliners were also outside the peace process and fit the typology of total spoilers.
Conclusion
The four spoilers mentioned above are currently presenting significant challenges to the MOU and must be managed if the peace process is to go forward.
One problem is that the lack of specificity in the MOU allows for different interpretations that spoilers can exploit to disrupt the process. This relates to how the MOU was negotiated, i.e., through the long-distance exchange of each party’s preferred positions, as opposed to the mediators sitting with the parties to explore their underlying interests before developing options. The current dispute is apparently related to Iranian interests to have control of how clearing of the strait takes place, i.e., with vessels exiting on the Iranian side, rather than the Omani side, which the US is encouraging. If parties’ interests with regard to this issue had been thoroughly explored during negotiations, a more specific formulation could have been included which might have avoided this problem.
In order to keep the peace process on track, the international community needs to be aware of the role of spoilers and do everything in its power to manage any disruptions.
Another issue is the inclusion of conditions in the agreement (e.g., the termination of military operations in Lebanon) that must be fulfilled by parties who are outside the process and don’t agree (notably, Israel and Hezbollah). Attempts to overcome this through US mediation between Israel and Lebanon, but with Hezbollah still outside the process, are not addressing the interests of one of the major parties and are thus stalemated.
It also appears that the procedural mechanisms established at the Lake Lucerne Summit to deal with such problems are not being utilized. A Strait of Hormuz Secure Communication Channel is apparently non-operational. Presumably, the new Monitoring and Dispute-Resolution Group could also be engaged. Hopefully, the mediators will quickly assist the parties in resolving the current dispute and ensure that these mechanisms become operational.
Of particular concern, is Stedman’s warning that history has shown that when peace processes are scuttled by spoilers and war resumes, the results are often catastrophic, with the casualties being infinitely higher than those of the original conflict. Rwanda offers a horrifying example.
Such an ominous possibility is foreshadowed by Trump’s recent post on Truth Social: “There may come a point when we are no longer able to be reasonable, and will be forced to militarily complete the job that we very successfully started. If that happens, the Islamic Republic of Iran will no longer exist.”
In order to keep the peace process on track, the international community needs to be aware of the role of spoilers and do everything in its power to manage any disruptions before the conflict escalates again, perhaps tragically.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In 'Most Serious Test Yet' of Ceasefire Deal, Trump Bombs Iran After Strike on Cargo Ship in Strait
The US attack came as Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a trilateral agreement with Israel and Lebanon, which Israeli forces have bombed and occupied throughout the Iran War.
Jun 26, 2026
US President Donald Trump resumed bombing Iran on Friday, a day after an Iranian attack on a cargo ship in the Strait of Hormuz, elevating concerns about the future of a ceasefire agreement just as Israel and Lebanon signed a related deal.
The Trump administration—which partnered with Israel to launch an illegal war on Iran in late February—and the Iranian government agreed on a memorandum of understanding (MOU) earlier this month. On Thursday, Iran attacked the Singapore-flagged commercial vessel, the Ever Lovely, in the strait, a key trade waterway.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran shot at least four One Way Attack Drones at Ships transversing the Strait of Hormuz," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform Friday morning. "One of the Drones solidly hit the upper deck of a large and very expensive Cargo Carrying Ship. Damage was done, but the Ship was able to proceed on its way. We knocked down three other Drones. Obviously, this is a foolish violation of our Ceasefire Agreement."
Responding on the social media network X, Ebrahim Azizi, who heads the Iranian Parliament's Commission on National Security and Foreign Policy, said: "The reality in the Persian Gulf has changed. The Strait of Hormuz is governed by Iran, so: Respect the rules. Use secure routes. Do not mistake control for escalation. If you do not learn the rules, the Iranian armed forces will teach them to you. This is not a violation of the ceasefire; it is ceasefire management."
Later Friday, US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that "as a powerful response to yesterday's attack on a commercial ship that was transiting the Strait of Hormuz," American aircraft "struck Iranian missile and drone storage locations and coastal radar sites."
"The unwarranted aggression against commercial shipping by Iranian forces clearly violated the ceasefire," CENTCOM said. "Furthermore, Iran's dangerous behavior undermined freedom of navigation as commerce increasingly flows through the vital international trade corridor."
"CENTCOM forces continue to provide safe passage coordination and support to commercial vessels transiting the strait," Central Command added. "The US military remains present and vigilant to ensure all aspects of the agreement with Iran are adhered to, obeyed, and in full force and effect."
Flagging CENTCOM's announcement, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) pointed out that "this marks the first publicly acknowledged US military action against Iran since the recent ceasefire agreement, potentially representing the most serious test yet of the fragile understanding between Tehran and Washington."
"Notably, the alleged violation of the MOU resulted in military retaliation," NIAC added, "contra coordination via the executive mechanism that was supposed to be established to monitor implementation of the deal."
Al Jazeera reported late Friday that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) released a statement saying it has responded with fire:
The IRGC said its Navy targeted locations in the region where US forces are deployed, without specifying where or providing additional details.
It condemned the US strikes on Iran, saying Washington, "as always, violated its commitments and launched an airstrike” on the Iranian coast.
"According to Article 5 of the memorandum of understanding, Islamabad has arrangements for controlling traffic in the Strait of Hormuz with the Islamic Republic of Iran," the IRGC said.
"However, the US, by inciting various parties, sought to violate this commitment, which was met with the necessary response," the statement continued. "If the aggression is repeated, our response will be more extensive."
As for the administration's supposedly diplomatic efforts, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the United States, Israel, and Lebanon—which Israeli forces have been bombing throughout the Iran War—had signed a trilateral framework that he claimed "builds a realistic path out of endless conflict."
"This agreement establishes a clear and structured process to restore Lebanon’s sovereignty, disarm Hezbollah, and dismantle its terrorist infrastructure, and enable Israel to return to its borders once that threat to its citizens is removed," Rubio said. "It also creates a trilateral Military Coordination Group for Lebanon (MCG4L), facilitated by the United States, allowing the two sides to implement this framework. For Lebanon, this framework provides a genuine pathway out of a long crisis. For Israel, it creates a verifiable path to removing the persistent threat on its northern border."
The framework was met with protests in the Lebanese capital. Lebanon's National News Agency reported that Hezbollah supporters gathered on motorcycles in Beirut to oppose the deal.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Despite Trump-Iran Deal, Netanyahu Says Israel Will Not Leave Lebanon 'As Long as I Am Prime Minister'
"Words are not enough to restrain the Israelis," one journalist said. "There have to be real consequences."
Jun 24, 2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated on Wednesday that he will not end the military occupation of Lebanon even if it tanks US President Donald Trump's peace deal with Iran.
"As long as I am prime minister, we will maintain the security zone in southern Lebanon," he said, referring to Israel's occupation, which has cleared about one-fifth of the country of its inhabitants.
About 1.2 million residents have been displaced by Israeli attacks and forced evacuation orders since March as part of a military campaign that's killed about 4,200 people, according to the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health.
As Trump seeks an end to his war with Iran, the Iranian delegation has stressed that it must be peace "on all fronts," including Lebanon, which was outlined in the memorandum of understanding that has served as the basis for ongoing negotiations.
Behind the scenes, Trump has reportedly fumed that by ramping up attacks on Lebanon, Israel is trying to sabotage the deal and drag the US back into war.
But while he and Vice President JD Vance have offered some uncommonly blunt criticism of Israel over the past week, they've not yet gone beyond words. And Israel's leaders seem to believe they won't.
Echoing the prime minister, Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that the Israel Defense Forces were "not withdrawing" from Lebanon "even if there is an American demand to do so."
But he also stated that despite a US-mediated ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, "as of this moment... there is no American demand for Israel to withdraw from Lebanon," which he described as "a political achievement."
That's not likely to sit well with the Iranians, who, in response to a wave of Israeli attacks this weekend, announced that they were once again closing off the Strait of Hormuz, threatening more of the economic pandemonium that Trump wants to quell by ending the war.
“For us, a ceasefire in Lebanon is as important as a ceasefire in Iran and, further, an end to the war in Lebanon is as important as an end to the war in Iran,” said Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran's parliamentary speaker and lead negotiator, on Wednesday.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has attempted to thread the needle by claiming on Wednesday that "the Israelis have been clear they don't have any quarrels with the Lebanese people, nor do they have any claims on the territory of Lebanon."
But this was undercut somewhat by Katz's statement on Wednesday that the 200,000 civilians whom Israel ordered to leave southern Lebanon "will not return" to their homes because of the risk they allegedly pose to Israeli soldiers.
"Soldiers in, residents out," Katz said. "The infrastructure is destroyed, the houses are dangerous and ruined. We are not withdrawing."
Critics have pointed out that Trump does have ample amounts of leverage to coerce the Israelis to get with the program, including threatening to cut off US weapons shipments, and that his failure to do this may destroy any chance at peace with Iran.
"The Israelis are going to continue testing what they can get away with," said Rania Khalek, a journalist for BreakThrough News, on social media. "Iran was very clear that a deal with the US is dependent on a ceasefire in Lebanon."
"How embarrassing for Trump that the Israelis don’t care about his orders. They are trying to preserve their ability to kill all their neighbors," she added. "Words are not enough to restrain the Israelis. There have to be real consequences."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'They Knew Exactly Who Mona Khalil Was': Israel Kills Lebanese Turtle Conservationist
"The murder of Mona Khalil sends a chilling message: Even those whose only weapon is compassion, whose only mission is preservation, are not spared," said one observer.
Jun 22, 2026
For more than 25 years, she protected the endangered sea turtles that laid their eggs near her beachside home in southern Lebanon. But Mona Khalil could not protect herself from Israeli invaders who spared neither her sanctuary nor its steward.
Khalil, 76, was mortally wounded when Israeli forces bombed her brightly painted conservation hub and ecotourism site, called the Orange House, in al-Mansouri, Tyre province, on June 4. She suffered injuries including severe burns during the attack, which also wounded her Ethiopian assistant, and was transported to a hospital in Beirut for treatment.
"They knew exactly who Mona Khalil was," Lebanese journalist and professor Marwa Osman said on social media following Khalil's death. "They knew the bright orange house... They knew it was not a military site, not a command center, not a battlefield position. It was one of the most recognizable symbols of environmental conservation on Lebanon's southern coast; a sanctuary dedicated to protecting endangered sea turtles and preserving life."
The Israel Defense Forces said Saturday that Khalil "was not a target."
"There is no known IDF strike in which she was injured,” the military said. “However, strikes were conducted in the area after the IDF issued evacuation warnings.”
Khalil—who was born in Nigeria in 1949 and held Dutch and Lebanese citizenship—co-founded the Orange House Project in 1999 in what had once been her grandmother's home. Khalil and volunteers gathered there each nesting season to protect sea turtles, their eggs, and hatchlings from both predators and people. She also fought against the privatization of beaches, habitat destruction, dynamite fishing, and other threats.
"For decades, Mona dedicated her life to protecting endangered sea turtles and their nesting habitats," the Lebanese environmental group Green Southerners said on Instagram. "Through the Orange House, she inspired generations of Lebanese to value and protect their natural heritage and coastal ecosystems. Her work made her one of Lebanon’s most respected voices for marine conservation and biodiversity protection."
Green Southerners co-founder Hisham Younes told the BBC on Saturday that Khalil "used to talk about the beach like it was a person."
"Her bond to the sunset, her bond to the water and the turtles... she was really into conservation, and into the soul, the spirit of conservation," Younes added.
According to Lebanon's Ministry of Public Health, Israeli attacks have killed at least 4,106 people—including 383 women, 251 children, and 135 medical workers—and wounded 12,153 others since March 2. Over 1 million Lebanese have also been forcibly displaced.
Over the weekend, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said his country's forces "need to go berserk" and "obliterate" Lebanon, all of which, he said, "must burn."
Ben-Gvir's comments were widely viewed as part of Israel's efforts to sabotage an elusive peace agreement between the United States and Iran, which has endured 114 days of an illegal US-Israeli war of choice.
Israel's Lebanon onslaught, occurring amid a backdrop of its ongoing genocide in Gaza, did not deter Khalil.
"When the war broke out, she said, 'No one should tell me to leave. I don't want to leave,'" Lebanese journalist and environmentalist Fadia Joumaa told Al Jazeera on Monday. "She made the decision to stay. What she said was, 'I'm a civilian. I don't have a weapon. I'll lock myself inside my home. This is my life.' She made that choice and remained in her house."
The Lebanese environmental group Green Southerners decried the Israeli strike, which "targeted a site that had long been known for environmental conservation, biodiversity protection, and public awareness."
"[Khalil's] death stands as a stark reminder of the devastating toll that Israeli attacks continue to exact on civilians, environmental defenders, and the natural heritage they sought to protect," the group said on Instagram. "We condemn the killing of Mona Khalil and reaffirm that those responsible for attacks on civilians and environmental defenders must be held accountable."
Recalling Khalil's successful campaign to ban dynamite fishing and the violent backlash it sparked from opponents, Joumaa told NPR: "Mona was a fighter. She did not like diplomacy. There were times when they shot at her house."
"She always told me: Defend the beach, defend the turtles, defend your country," she added.
Osman called the Israeli strike that killed Khalil "an assault on a woman whose life's work was devoted to safeguarding life itself, a woman known internationally for her environmental activism, whose name had become synonymous with the protection of Lebanon's coastline and its endangered sea turtles."
"The murder of Mona Khalil sends a chilling message: Even those whose only weapon is compassion, whose only mission is preservation, are not spared," Osman added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israel Is Out of Control—And No, It's Not Just Netanyahu
Netanyahu's defeat or exit won’t mean “Happy Days Are Here Again.” It’s an entire Israeli political culture that has gone off the rails.
Jun 22, 2026
When looking at today’s Middle East, it is important to recognize that Israel is completely out of control, and no one has the will to rein them in.
This should have been understood back in July of 2024, in the waning days of the Biden administration, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu came to Washington to address a joint session of Congress. His government had already committed atrocious war crimes in Gaza and Lebanon. They had killed Iran’s Ayatollah and many of its political and scientific leadership. They had also occupied parts of Syria, destroyed much of that country’s military capacity, and were working to deepen Syria’s sectarian strife. At the same time, Israeli violent settlers, backed by the military, were running roughshod over the West Bank terrorizing Palestinians and systematically demolishing the homes of thousands.
In his address to the Congress, Netanyahu boasted that this murderous behavior demonstrated that Israel had become the dominant force in the Middle East fighting and winning on seven fronts. You are not defending us, he claimed, we are defending you—terming his bloody rampage across the region as Israel leading the effort to protect Western civilization against the barbarism of the East.
As inflammatory and disgraceful as his words (and the actions they described) were, he was applauded by Republicans and some Democrats, with only a handful of Democratic members of Congress vigorously protesting. For its part, the Biden administration left it to Vice President Harris to deliver a mild rebuke to Netanyahu.
During the past five US administrations, it has been precisely this pattern of behavior—whether outright support for Israeli crimes or silence and timidity in the face of them—that has fostered Israel’s impunity, coupled with a megalomaniacal sense of mission. President Clinton termed Netanyahu impossible or ridiculous; Obama considered him “incorrigible”; and even Trump has described his frustration with the Israeli leader in harsh, obscene language. But none have taken firm steps to rein him in.
In the wake of President Trump’s half-baked “deal” attempting to end his ill-considered, costly war with Iran, Netanyahu has been quiet. He has left criticism to ministers in his cabinet and opposition party leaders. Vice-President JD Vance’s rebuke of Israeli critics was noteworthy but absent threats of serious changes in policy Vance’s words will be dismissed as nothing more than words.
At this point it must be noted that Israel’s dangerous impunity and expansive sense of mission is not just a Netanyahu problem. It is a deeper Israeli problem that historically has manifested itself in two ways.
During the Clinton and Obama years, when the US wanted the Israelis to stop settlement expansion or honor terms of agreements that were being broken, their administrations hesitated to take tough measures against Israel, or even use tougher language, for fear that it would embolden Israel’s hardline right and end up being counterproductive. As a result, there were no crackdowns on Israeli governments led by Yitzak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak, Ehud Olmert, and Naftali Bennet.
This deference toward Israeli leaders, out of concern for the problems they would face from hardliners should we force them to make hard decisions, is never shown toward Palestinian or other Arab leaders. The result of this coddling has been the emboldening and empowerment of Israeli hardliners to the point where they and their espoused views are the dominant political current in today’s Israeli politics. This is not to say that there aren’t “liberals” contesting Netanyahu’s coalition government. But their liberalism is defined by their opposition to Netanyahu’s corruption, his authoritarian instinct, and his courting of the ultraorthodox and the religious policies they impose on the rest of Israeli society.
The opposition parties that will be contesting Netanyahu in the next election are not only not challenging his war policies, but also now posing as more hawkish than he is with regard to Israel’s wars and its treatment of Palestinians. In fact, all of the main contenders to head a post-Netanyahu Israeli government have roundly condemned his agreement to ceasefires in Gaza and Lebanon. They have uniformly denounced what they’ve called his displays of subservience to US President Trump thereby making Israel appear to be a humiliated “vassal state.” All have criticized the recently announced US-Iran peace agreement, with the self-described “liberal” Democrat party blasting the deal by suggesting that it threatens to “erase all of the gains Israel had achieved” in their war on Iran.
All of this should make it clear to liberals in the US that the problem in today’s Middle East isn’t just Netanyahu. His defeat won’t mean “Happy Days Are Here Again.” It’s an entire political culture that has gone off the rails. The only way it will change is if we make Israel pay a price by ending aid and political and military cooperation, thereby creating a shock that will force a political reckoning in the country. On the other hand, if we don’t act, Israel’s out-of-control rogue behaviors will continue to set the Middle East on fire and we will be complicit in all that they do.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Despite Trump Threats, Iranian Foreign Minister Declares 'Major Progress' in Peace Talks
Abbas Araghchi, Iran's top diplomat, specifically welcomed the announcement of a "deconfliction cell" aimed at "ensuring the termination of military operations in Lebanon."
Jun 22, 2026
Iran's top diplomat said late Sunday that peace negotiations in Switzerland have produced "major progress" despite US President Donald Trump's belligerent military threats and Israel's continued assault on Lebanon, both of which have risked derailing the high-stakes talks.
Abbas Araghchi, Iran's foreign minister, credited "tireless Pakistani and Qatari mediation" with securing commitments to establish a "deconfliction cell" to ensure "the termination of military operations in Lebanon," as required under the recently signed memorandum of understanding (MOU).
Araghchi added that negotiators agreed to an end to the US blockade on Iran, the release of some of Iran's frozen assets, and a "major reconstruction and development plan" for Iran, whose delegation reportedly left the Swiss negotiating venue on Sunday in response to Trump's threat to assassinate Iranian diplomats and "take over" the Middle East country. The threats violated the terms of the MOU, which requires parties to "refrain from the threat or use of force against each other."
In a joint statement late Sunday, the governments of Pakistan and Qatar said that negotiators agreed on "a roadmap towards reaching a final deal within 60 days, laying the foundation for the immediate commencement of further technical talks.
"In addition, a communication line between the parties has been formed... to avoid incidents and miscommunication with the aim of safe passage for commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz," the statement continued. "The mediating parties will continue to do their utmost to ensure that the negotiations continue to be conducted in a constructive atmosphere with the aim of reaching a final deal."
🔊PR No: 1️⃣5️⃣1️⃣/2️⃣0️⃣2️⃣6️⃣
Joint Statement by the State of Qatar and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan Regarding the Conclusion of Lake Lucerne Summit, First High-Level Committee Meeting with Participation of the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran pic.twitter.com/2G3PAf7LVY
— Ministry of Foreign Affairs - Pakistan (@ForeignOfficePk) June 22, 2026
The optimistic comments from Iran's foreign minister and mediators came after the first round of formal talks in Switzerland got off to a shaky start, with Iran's delegation postponing its arrival due to a deadly barrage of Israeli airstrikes in southern Lebanon late last week.
Israel's leadership, which is not a party to the peace negotiations, has refused to end its occupation of Lebanon, a major obstacle in the way of a final deal to end the war on Iran that the US and Israel launched in late February. Iran has said the Trump administration must force the Israeli government to end its assault on Lebanon.
In a social media post on Sunday amid the negotiations in Switzerland, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz declared that "Israel has no intention of withdrawing from the Beaufort, which is an integral part of the security zone in Lebanon and essential for the defense of the Galilee settlements and IDF forces."
"As Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu and I have clarified—Israel will not withdraw from the security zone in Lebanon," Katz added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Insulted by Trump's Threats, Iranian Negotiators Walk Out of Peace Talks
"Don’t they think that if their threats had worked, they wouldn’t have ended up in today’s desperate situation?" said Iran's chief negotiator.
Jun 21, 2026
US President Donald Trump’s threats to destroy Iran and send US forces to occupy the country on Sunday appear to have derailed peace negotiations in Switzerland, with the Iranian delegation reportedly walking out and demanding an apology.
Following Iran’s announcement that it was closing the Strait of Hormuz again after Israel intensified its assault on Lebanon, Trump went on a tirade Sunday in which he threatened to assassinate negotiators and said Iran “won’t have a country” if access to the critical waterway was shut off, while also threatening to “take over” Iran with a full US invasion.
But after Trump’s threats—which broke the first clause of the memorandum of understanding—Iran’s negotiators filed a complaint with the Pakistani and Qatari mediators and stormed out of the mountain resort where talks were being held, according to several outlets.
While Trump clearly sought to project strength, Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said his team “do not take American threats seriously.”
In previous months, as Trump sought to squeeze concessions from the Iranians, he issued escalatory threats to wipe out their “whole civilization” and “blow up” the whole country. However, he did not act on those threats, even as Iran refused to budge from its negotiating posture.
"Don’t they think that if their threats had worked, they wouldn’t have ended up in today’s desperate situation?" Ghalibaf said.
Ghalibaf said the US had “better be more careful with their statements,” adding that “our armed forces are ready to respond in a different way." He said, “No matter what they say, we are the ones who act.
While the Iranian delegation left the venue, talks are reportedly continuing via mediators. However, according to the Lebanese outlet Al Mayadeen, the delegation said it will not return until Trump apologizes for his threats and Israel fully withdraws from Lebanon.
According to senior Israeli officials cited by Channel 12, Israel is reportedly considering “limited withdrawals” from Lebanon, including in areas within its so-called “buffer zone.” Despite Iranian claims, the officials said the US has not requested Israel’s withdrawal from the country.
Previous peace talks have been derailed by Trump’s threats to commit indiscriminate war crimes in Iran. But this past week has seen perhaps the most violent swing yet in his approach toward Iran.
Where earlier this week, Trump acknowledged Iran's right to enrich uranium and maintain a nuclear energy program like that of other nations, his outburst Sunday appeared to have been prompted by a statement by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who said the US would be "forced to accept" its right to enrichment.
And while Trump has raged against Israel’s actions in Lebanon while privately claiming that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to sabotage peace, he has not taken concrete action to force Israel to comply with the memorandum’s terms.
"The mixed messages coming out of the White House," remarked Jeet Heer, a writer at The Nation, "are going to make it much harder to end the war, and could in fact spark further conflict."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy