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
Lebanon Is Being Pressured to Disarm Hezbollah While Israel Stays—How Is That Sovereignty?
Washington says it wants the Lebanese state to reclaim authority, but Beirut is still being asked to move first while Israeli withdrawal remains conditional.
Aug 27, 2026
This week, the argument over Lebanese sovereignty became concrete on a ridge overlooking Nabatieh. The New Arab reported on August 24 that Washington is pressing for the strategic Ali al-Taher ridge, where Hezbollah fighters are present, to be transferred to the Lebanese Army in exchange for Israeli withdrawal. The same area has been subjected to repeated Israeli shelling. In one small patch of southern Lebanon, the larger problem is suddenly hard to hide: Beirut is being asked to move first, while the withdrawal of foreign forces from Lebanese territory remains the inducement offered in return.
That pressure did not begin this week. Reuters reported in July 2025 that Washington was pressing Lebanon to make a formal cabinet commitment to disarm Hezbollah before talks could continue on halting Israeli military operations. Lebanese officials were told that without such a commitment, the United States would stop sending its envoy and would no longer press Israel to halt airstrikes or withdraw troops. Even the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, which strongly favors disarmament, later described Lebanon's policy shift as having been adopted “under duress.”
Call it diplomacy if you like. It is still leverage. And it is being applied unevenly. Lebanon is expected to reduce its own side's military leverage first, while Israeli withdrawal is treated as something Lebanon must earn through compliance. If sovereignty means anything, it should not mean that a weaker country first dismantles its deterrent while a stronger military power keeps troops on its land.
None of this requires pretending Hezbollah has made no miscalculations. In March, after Hezbollah fired on Israel during the US-Israeli war with Iran, Lebanon's cabinet prohibited Hezbollah's military and security activities and ordered it to surrender its weapons to the state. The principle behind that decision is legitimate. A political movement, however rooted or powerful, should not be able to decide by itself when an entire country goes to war.
That is what real sovereignty would look like: not simply fewer Hezbollah weapons, but a Lebanese state strong enough that people no longer feel they need Hezbollah for protection, reconstruction, or basic support.
But sovereignty cannot stop at Hezbollah's weapons. It also has to mean that Israeli troops leave Lebanese territory and that Israeli strikes do not become a permanent feature of Lebanese life. Washington itself warned Israel this month that a permanent military presence in southern Lebanon would conflict with the US-backed framework. Yet the practical sequence still asks Beirut to show progress first. For many Lebanese in the south, that does not feel like state building. It feels like being told to surrender under fire.
There is another reality that is often flattened out of the American debate: Hezbollah is more than an arsenal. Its institutions became deeply rooted because they stepped into places where the Lebanese state was weak, slow, or absent. CNN reported as far back as 2006 that Hezbollah was providing water, helping pay medical costs, running schools, and collecting garbage in communities where government capacity was thin. The Council on Foreign Relations still describes a broad network of Hezbollah-linked healthcare, schools, infrastructure, and youth programs.
Calling that a “state within a state” is not far-fetched. But the phrase contains an uncomfortable admission: There was space for a parallel state because the official one repeatedly left a vacuum.
After the 2006 war, NPR found Hezbollah moving into reconstruction within hours of the ceasefire, assessing damage and distributing assistance while the government struggled to respond. For families standing in front of rubble, that was not an abstract debate about militias. It was help arriving when they needed it. People remember that.
The pattern returned after the 2024 war. The World Bank estimated Lebanon's reconstruction and recovery needs at $11 billion. While Lebanon searched for financing, Hezbollah's Jihad al-Bina network was already surveying damaged communities and paying compensation. Le Monde reported in early 2025 that Hezbollah had paid about $400 million to roughly 140,000 people. The effort was imperfect, and residents complained about delays. But it was there, visible on the ground, while the state had nothing comparable at that scale.
The same failure of formal institutions helped the Hezbollah-linked Al-Qard al-Hassan network grow during Lebanon's banking collapse. Families turned to it because ordinary depositors had been locked out of their savings. The United States has sanctioned Al-Qard al-Hassan officials and says the institution helps Hezbollah evade sanctions and move money. That allegation belongs in the picture. So does the reason such an institution became useful to ordinary people: The formal banking system had failed them.
This is the part a disarmament order cannot solve. Remove the weapons, and then what? Who fills the security gap along the border? Who rebuilds the next damaged neighborhood? Who replaces the clinics, schools, relief networks, and financial lifelines people have relied on for years? Lebanon's army can and should become the country's sole military authority. But it cannot also become a nationwide welfare system and reconstruction agency overnight.
There is a path out, but the order matters. Hezbollah should ultimately give up its military role and function as a political and social organization. Israel should withdraw fully from Lebanese territory, with an enforceable mechanism to stop renewed attacks and violations. At the same time, Lebanon and its international partners need to build institutions strong enough to replace the civilian functions that helped Hezbollah become indispensable to many communities.
That is what real sovereignty would look like: not simply fewer Hezbollah weapons, but a Lebanese state strong enough that people no longer feel they need Hezbollah for protection, reconstruction, or basic support.
The Ali al-Taher dispute shows why sequencing is not an academic concern. When Washington asks Beirut to take control of a strategic position in exchange for Israeli withdrawal, it reinforces the very perception that has sustained Hezbollah's argument for decades: that Lebanon is expected to prove its sovereignty by satisfying conditions imposed from outside. You cannot build a sovereign state by removing structures people rely on and promising that the state will catch up later. Build the security, capacity, and trust first. Then disarmament becomes a transfer of responsibility to a functioning state rather than an act of surrender to someone else's timetable.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Halt This Escalation': Lebanese Prime Minister Condemns Israel's Latest Deadly Bombings
Israel has no "right to violate Lebanese territory or endanger civilians," said Prime Minister Nawaf Salam.
Aug 15, 2026
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam issued a statement Saturday condemning Israel's latest deadly bombings in southern Lebanon, attacks that killed nearly a dozen people, including several children.
Salam rejected the Israeli government's insistence that it was targeting a Hezbollah "military compound," saying, "The seven martyrs of the Israeli airstrike on the town of Ansar are not 'military infrastructure,' nor are the children and women killed in it military targets."
"The responsibility for dealing with any military structures, if they exist on Lebanese territory, lies exclusively with the Lebanese state, through the Lebanese army and its legitimate institutions, and their existence does not grant Israel the right to violate Lebanese territory or endanger civilians," said Salam, who warned that the new strikes threaten to derail tenuous steps toward a diplomatic resolution.
"Israel must halt this escalation," Salam said. "For the security of our people and their right to life on their land are not subject to negotiation or bargaining."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz have said their country's military won't end its illegal occupation of and attacks on southern Lebanon until Hezbollah disarms.
"We will cleanse this area and ensure the security of the northern residents [of Israel]," Katz said earlier this week, referring to southern Lebanon.
On Friday, Michel Issa, the US ambassador to Lebanon, echoed the Israeli government's message.
"Tell Hezbollah that as soon as it hands over its weapons, everything will stop," said Issa.
The Associated Press reported on Saturday that Israel struck "a home on the edge of the village of Ansar" and bombed the village of Deir al-Zahrani, killing 11 people total. Three children were killed by the Israeli airstrikes and two were wounded.
Hezbollah called the Israeli strikes "a fully fledged crime" and said that "the responsibility for this persistent aggression and violation of Lebanon's sovereignty lies with the enemy government and the United States, which provides it with support and cover."
"The Americans are partners with the Israeli enemy in its crimes and massacres against Lebanon," the group added.
In late June, the Republican-controlled US House of Representatives voted down a war powers resolution that would have halted American military participation in Israel's assault on Lebanon. More than 20 Democrats joined Republicans in voting against the measure.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Ecocide': Israel Accused of Deliberately Starting Wildfires in Lebanon
“They had already bulldozed the whole village," said one mayor of a southern Lebanese town. "Then they set fire to the trees."
Aug 12, 2026
Environmental and rights advocates are condemning what one academic called "the latest in a neverending series of international crimes" by the Israel Defense Forces as firefighters and residents in southern Lebanon report that the IDF has purposely started destructive wildfires by continuing to bomb the region.
The blazes are an attempt, one town mayor said Wednesday, to make it appear "as though nobody had ever lived here.”
Israel renewed attacks against Hezbollah in Lebanon in March, as the US-Israeli war on Iran widened across the Middle East. Following a "ceasefire" agreement in June, Israeli forces have continued occupying about 20% of Lebanese territory after forcibly displacing over 1 million people from the southern part of the country.
Israeli officials have said they aim to apply the "Gaza model" to Lebanon, deploying the kinds of attacks that have destroyed 90% of civilian infrastructure in Gaza since the IDF began attacking the exclave in October 2023 in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack, and Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz recently boasted that the IDF had destroyed 24 villages “that had existed for hundreds of years."
Now, Hafez Ghasham, mayor of the southern town of Yaroun, told The Guardian, “they are trying to make the land uninhabitable."
“They had already bulldozed the whole village. Then they set fire to the trees. What remained in this particular area were the olive trees—large groves, with very old olive trees," Ghasham told the newspaper. “Many of these trees, most of them, in fact, were inherited from our grandparents and parents. They have enormous sentimental value. The trees were also an important source of income for the people of the village."
Residents who had been forced out of Yaroun said they learned from people in nearby Christian towns that their olive and fruit groves as well as many homes had been set on fire by Israeli soldiers.
The head of Civil Defense in the Nabatieh region said about 30-40% of the land in the area had been affected by the fires, and firefighters have been forced to withdraw as they've tried to extinguish the flames as the IDF has launched drone strikes after the initial attacks that sparked the fires.
"There are enormous areas of woodland that have burned," Hussein Fakih told The Guardian.
Kelley B. Vlahos, editor-in-chief of Responsible Statecraft, noted that "while the rest of the world is trying to put out forest fires this summer, Israel reportedly started them as a military tactic," even following the Lebanon ceasefire.
Last Friday, large wildfires were caused by Israeli munitions and drones that struck woodlands in Kfarchouba and in the area between Jezzine and the western Bekaa valley.
The Israeli military has accused Hezbollah of using woodland areas as cover for its military outposts and tunnels. The IDF has similarly defended extensive bombing of Gaza's schools, hospitals, and other civilian infrastructure by claiming Hamas operates in tunnels beneath the buildings.
In a statement, Hezbollah's media relations officials said the fires represent "a continuation of urban destruction, the bulldozing of infrastructure, and the theft of ancient olive trees."
"The party called on the government, the Ministry of Environment, and all relevant authorities to speak out and act immediately to halt Israeli savagery against the environment, human life, and infrastructure," reported Al Mayadeen.
Hisham Younes, the founder of Lebanese conservation group Green Southerners, told The Guardian that Israel's bombing of forested areas amounts to "ecocide."
“These are long-established woodlands," said Younes. "They perform critical functions. The wider area is also an important passage and resting ground for migratory birds."
“It is not about any single fire or attack, but a pattern of destruction that progressively erodes the ability of ecosystems to function, regenerate, and sustain life," Younes added. "When those cascading effects also undermine livelihoods and people’s ability to return to and remain on their land, environmental destruction becomes inseparable from the wider transformation of the territory itself.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Landmark Victory' for Human Rights as Lebanon Becomes First Arab Nation to Abolish Death Penalty
"In a country that has experienced profound loss and suffering, this decision represents a powerful commitment to the right to life," said the UN's human rights chief.
Aug 11, 2026
In a move cheered by human rights defenders around the world, Lebanon's Parliament on Tuesday abolished the death penalty for all crimes, making the country the first in the Arab world to do so and standing in stark contrast to neighboring and nearby nations.
Lebanon's abolition—announced on June 30 at the 9th World Congress Against the Death Penalty in Paris—was approved by parliamentary lawmakers and, once signed by President Joseph Aoun as expected, will make the country the 129th worldwide to abolish capital punishment.
Under amendments introduced by Independent MP Abdul Rahman Bizri, execution—formerly carried out by hanging or firing squad—will be replaced as the ultimate punishment by life imprisonment under hard labor for crimes committed after abolition. Those currently condemned to death will have their sentences commuted to hard labor for life.
“Lebanon is regaining its pioneering role in the region as a defender of human rights,” Lebanese Justice Minister Adel Nassar said, adding that his country “has chosen to combat murder rather than resort to capital punishment."
MP Georges Okais of the Christian, right-wing Lebanese Forces party, said that “Abolishing the death penalty is a historic achievement, and we have adopted international standards regarding human rights.”
Hezbollah's parliamentary bloc walked out in protest of abolition, which is also opposed by other lawmakers including Independent MP Jihad al-Samad, who called the move "contrary to Islamic law."
Opponents of abolition argue that it, plus a general amnesty draft law introduced in April, could result in leniency for perpetrators of bombings and other serious crimes.
However, Nassar insisted that abolition “does not mean leniency toward criminals.”
Lebanese law had designated execution as punishment for a wide range of crimes including—but not limited to—murder, aggravated rape, terrorism, treason, spying, military desertion, aggravated theft, and arson. While 84 people were sentenced to death, Lebanon has not executed anyone in 22 years.
“We can see the uncertainty that those who are condemned to death are living under," one psychologist working in Lebanese prisons told the French advocacy group Together Against the Death Penalty in a 2021 study. "We don’t apply the death penalty, but we don’t cancel it either."
"Are we going to wake them up one day and tell them that they will be executed?" the psychologist added, describing the process in Japan and Europe's last executioner, Belarus, without mentioning the countries. "It is the most horrible thing to live through. It leads to anxiety, depression, and stress that is sometimes uncontrollable. They are alive, but without living.”
Lebanon's imminent abolition stands in stark contrast with neighboring and regional countries. Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen rank among the world's most prolific executioners, while Syria's recent history is marred by thousands of extrajudicial executions during the administration of President Ahmed al-Sharaa, and Israel recently legalized the hanging of "terrorists"—a law critics claim will only be applied to Palestinians.
Daniel Cullen, project manager at Oxford University's Death Penalty Research Unit, lauded Lebanon's achievement, which came at "a time of myriad domestic challenges."
"Since October 2023, Israeli forces have conducted intense bombardments in their campaign against the Hezbollah militant group, resulting in thousands of civilian deaths, including during periods of nominal ceasefire," Cullen wrote. "Together with the Israeli military occupation of large areas of the south of the country and issuing of evacuation orders, this has resulted in the displacement of around one million people."
"Even prior to this, the country had already experienced a stark economic collapse since 2019, with a near 40% reduction in GDP, in addition to recovering from the effects of the explosion at Beirut port in August 2020," he continued. "Against this background, Minister of Justice Adel Nassar specifically highlighted the importance of the abolition legislation as a demonstration of Lebanon’s ability to commit to international human rights standards."
"Lebanon’s commitment to achieving abolition during a time of national crisis demonstrates that this is entirely possible," Cullen added.
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said on social media: "I welcome the Lebanese Parliament's decision formally to abolish the death penalty, and call on others to follow its lead. In a country that has experienced profound loss and suffering, this decision represents a powerful commitment to the right to life."
European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas called Lebanon's abolition "a significant step forward for human rights in the country."
"As the first country in the region to abolish the death penalty, Lebanon is setting a powerful example for other countries in the Middle East and beyond, reinforcing the strong global trend towards abolition and the growing international support for ending the death penalty worldwide," she continued.
"The European Union calls on all countries that still apply the death penalty to abolish it and, pending abolition, to maintain or introduce a moratorium on executions as a first step," Kallas added, urging "those considering its reintroduction to refrain from such a regressive step."
The West African nation of Burkina Faso adopted a draft penal code last December that would restore the death penalty for crimes including treason, terrorism, and espionage. An effort to revive capital punishment in the Central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan was blocked by its Constitutional Court. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has repeatedly said he is ready to reintroduce the death penalty during his 23 years in power, while populist Filipino Sen. Ronald dela Rosa—a former police chief closely associated with former President Rodrigo Duterte's mass-murderous drug crackdown—reintroduced death penalty legislation after his reelection last year.
Human Rights Watch Lebanon researcher Ramzi Kaiss hailed Lebanon's "final break from a cruel sentence that should never be imposed.”
“Capital punishment is unique in its cruelty and finality and is plagued with arbitrariness, prejudice, and error,” Kaiss asserted.
Amnesty International called the move "a landmark victory."
“Lebanon’s decision to abolish the death penalty marks a major milestone and a victory for human rights in the country," said Heba Morayef, Amnesty's Middle East and North Africa director.
Morayef continued:
Justice must be rooted in human rights, not in an irreversible and cruel punishment. After more than two decades without executions, today’s step transforms a precarious hiatus in executions into lasting legal protection upholding the right to life and bringing Lebanon in line with the global trend towards abolition.
The passing of this law is testament to the decades of tireless advocacy by Lebanese human rights defenders and organizations, as well as the leadership of key officials who recognized the death penalty as a cruel and inhuman punishment, often imposed after unfair proceedings and the burden of which frequently falls on those at most disadvantage.
“To turn this law from paper to practice, Lebanese authorities must now ensure that all death sentences are commuted and ratify the key international treaty on abolition, while advancing broader reforms to strengthen a justice system based on dignity, fairness, and respect for human rights," Morayef added. "Authorities must accompany this law with broader legislative reform, including to ensure that any criminal justice punishments are consistent with human rights principles.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Groups: Israel’s Killing of Journalist Amal Khalil ‘Must Be Investigated as a War Crime’
“Amal’s killing can’t be allowed to become yet another unresolved case of a journalist killed by Israeli forces with complete impunity,” said one campaigner demanding a probe into the Lebanese reporter's death.
Aug 06, 2026
An Amnesty International investigation published Thursday led human rights defenders in Lebanon and around the world to renew their calls for a war crimes probe into an Israeli attack that killed Lebanese journalist Amal Khalil and wounded a colleague earlier this year.
Khalil, a 42-year-old veteran correspondent for the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, and 21-year-old freelance photographer Zeinab Faraj were reporting in the southern Lebanese village of al-Tiri on April 22 when an IDF drone bombed what Amnesty said was a civilian vehicle traveling in front of them. A second strike then hit the journalists' car, wounding them.
As Khalil and Faraj sheltered in a nearby building, IDF drones hovered overhead for two hours before the structure was bombed, collapsing it. Lebanese Red Cross personnel coordinated access to the site with Israeli authorities, and once granted permission, rushed to the scene and pulled Faraj—who suffered a fractured skull, severe leg and eye injuries, and a crushed hand—from the rubble. But due to what they called threats of further attack while trying to save the mortally wounded Khalil, the Red Cross workers said they had to withdraw. Recovery operations were delayed for hours.
A medical examiner's report said that Khalil died of cardiac arrest due to head trauma and severe bleeding hours after rescuers were forced to leave her.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam at the time condemned that attack as "a clear-cut war crime."
The IDF contends that it declared the area where Khalil was killed off-limits and that it was targeting Hezbollah militants.
"The IDF does not target journalists in any way and works as much as possible to minimize harm that may befall them while maintaining the security of our forces," a spokesperson said.
However, dozens of journalists have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces in Lebanon, while the figure is in the hundreds in Gaza, where Israel is waging what Amnesty and many others say is a genocide in retaliation for the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. The IDF also attacked and invaded Lebanon—which it has repeatedly done before—to stop Hezbollah from firing rockets at Israel in solidarity with Gaza.
According to Reporters Without Borders, Israel was the world's leading killer of journalists last year, while the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said in February that Israel was responsible for two-thirds of all journalist deaths worldwide in 2025.
“The Israeli military says it does not target journalists, but the facts and evidence show that it has repeatedly done so. Amal Khalil and Zainab Faraj are the latest victims in a long series of such attacks,” Ramzi Kaiss, a researcher at Human Rights Watch in Lebanon, said Thursday. “The evidence is clear that the Israeli military knew or should have known that Faraj and Khalil were civilians, but attacked them anyway, and then prevented paramedics from rescuing them for hours."
“Israeli forces’ continued killing of journalists shows a brazen willingness to commit atrocities without any fear of consequences," Kaiss added.
Amnesty argues that the IDF strike on the building where the journalists were sheltering, and the subsequent delay in allowing first responders to rescue them, should be investigated as a war crime.
“Amnesty International’s investigation paints a harrowing picture of a direct attack on two civilians while they had sought refuge from Israeli attacks," Amnesty Middle East and North Africa regional director Heba Morayef said Thursday in a statement.
"After the first strike had eliminated the military-stated target, and with two drones flying low overhead, the Israeli military knew or should have known that two civilian women were sheltering in that building," she continued. "Despite this, they proceeded with what we have reasonable grounds to believe amounted to a direct attack on civilians, demonstrating a shocking disregard for international humanitarian law (IHL)."
“The fact that the two journalists were in what Israel has designated a no-return zone does not make them lawful targets," Morayef added. "All parties to a conflict have a clear obligation to distinguish between civilians and military targets at all times and to direct their attacks only at military objectives. There can be no justification for targeting civilians who sought shelter in search of safety. This attack must be promptly, independently, and impartially investigated as a war crime.”
CPJ regional director Sara Qudah said Thursday that “Amnesty International’s findings paint, yet again, a deeply disturbing picture of a systemic failure of legal mechanisms designed precisely to protect civilians—including journalists.”
“Amal’s killing can’t be allowed to become yet another unresolved case of a journalist killed by Israeli forces with complete impunity,” Qudah stressed. "This repeated failure to conduct transparent investigations into attacks on journalists has reinforced a climate of impunity and hollowed out the protections granted to the press under IHL."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Expert: Trump's Trying to Exert Control With Claim He Canceled Iran Strikes Over Progress on Deal
"It's a narrative designed to give the impression that Trump is in the driving seat in this conflict. It's been clear for some time now: He isn't."
Aug 01, 2026
Trita Parsi, an expert on US-Iranian relations, cast doubt on President Donald Trump's Saturday claims that he halted planned strikes on Iran due to progress in negotiations to end the illegal conflict, launched by the Republican and Israel in February.
"The U.S.A. is locked and loaded and ready to go against the Islamic Republic of Iran, at levels of Military Terror, Strength, and Power not seen since World War II. Despite this, we have just been asked by Iran, and other Middle Eastern Countries, to hold off any attack in that the perimeters of a deal has been agreed to," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform at 10:05 pm Eastern time.
"This would include the Immediate, Complete, and Total OPENING OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT, and an end to Iran's nuclear threat," Trump declared—despite repeated conclusions from US intelligence agencies that the Iranian government was not aiming to build a nuclear weapon when the United States and Israel began bombing Iran five months ago.
"Based on this request, I have agreed, for the future benefit of the WORLD and, likewise, the survival of a successful and prosperous Iran, to cancel the attack, subject to being able to rapidly make a DEAL," Trump added. "The Country of Israel joins me in this commitment. Get to work, everybody, and get it DONE."
Sharing the post on the platform X, Parsi said, "Trump 'cancels' 'planned' 'attack' on Iran..." The expert struck a similarly skeptical tone during a Saturday on-air interview with CNN about the president's announcement.
Parsi, co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that "I don't believe there was an imminent attack. We've gone through this several times, in which Trump issues these threats, and then he backs off because the other side calls his bluff."
"Trump does not have an escalatory way out of this conflict, but what he is trying to do is to give the impression that he is in control—that he is in the driving seat," Parsi suggested. "And I think it's been quite clear for quite some time now he is not."
During Trump's first term, he tore up the Obama administration's Iran nuclear deal, and so far, he has been unable to negotiate a replacement. Since launching this war, without authorization from Congress and in violation of the United Nations Charter, the ceasefire agreement reached in April and a June memorandum of understanding ultimately have not stopped the bloodshed.
Earlier this week, most US Senate Republicans and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.) blocked yet another war powers resolution intended to prevent the Trump administration from launching further attacks on Iran without congressional approval—a vote that came as polling showed 64% of Americans disapprove of continuing the war, including 37% of Republicans.
The Iran War has killed thousands of Iranians and Lebanese civilians—the latter mostly from Israeli attacks purportedly targeting Hezbollah—as well as hundreds of people in other nations across the Middle East and at least 18 US service members.
In the hours before Trump's Saturday Truth Social post, Axios revealed that "Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Trump spoke on Saturday, with MBS expressing concern over the strike plans," and "other regional powers, including Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey and Pakistan, have also pressed the US and Iran to de-escalate.”
CBS chief foreign affairs correspondent Margaret Brennan reported on social media about Saturday's "flurry of phone calls by Iran's top diplomat Abbas Araghchi to regional leaders, which suggests an effort underway to avoid military strikes."
"Earlier today, the State Department advised Americans throughout the Mideast to leave the region," Brennan noted.
Araghchi said Saturday that "any hostile action by the US or Israel—or participation or cooperation by regional countries in such actions—would be met with a decisive and proportionate response from Iran's powerful armed forces."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Human Rights Official Says Israeli Strikes in Lebanon Could Amount to 'War Crimes'
“The trauma, frustration, and despair are palpable—but so too is the demand for justice, which I heard resoundingly," said Volker Türk after visiting Lebanon.
Jul 28, 2026
Pointing to the mass forced displacement of at least 1 million Lebanese people, the denial of returns, and the widespread destruction of homes and civilian infrastructure since the Israel Defense Forces began attacking the armed group Hezbollah in the regional conflict stemming from the Israeli-US war on Iran, the United Nations' top human rights official reported Monday that the assault on Lebanon could amount to "war crimes."
Volker Türk, the UN high commissioner for human rights, spoke after a trip to Lebanon where he met with government representatives, local and international civil society groups, and people who have been forced to flee their homes due to the conflict, in which Israel is continuing to occupy parts of southern Lebanon and to attack residential neighborhoods despite a ceasefire that was brokered on June 26.
"The Israeli military continues to kill and injure people in Lebanon, with continued airstrikes and ground operations," said Türk. "My office has recorded large-scale violations of international humanitarian law, some possibly amounting to war crimes. Under certain circumstances, they may also constitute crimes under international law."
When Israel began retaliating against Hezbollah on March 2 for the group's attacks that had been in response to the war on Iran, the IDF issued "evacuation warnings to residents of more than 53 villages and densely populated areas in Lebanon and intensified airstrikes forced families across Lebanon to flee within minutes," according to the UN Refugee Agency.
Israeli officials have said they aim to model their operations in Lebanon on the destruction of Gaza over the past 32 months. The IDF has also established a self-declared "security zone," advancing six miles into Lebanon and taking control of about one-fifth of the country's territory, first ordering people in southern Lebanon to move north of the Litani River and then pushing past that point.
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz recently boasted about the IDF's demolishing of 24 villages "that had existed for hundreds of years," saying: "The army systematically flattened the villages with bulldozers and explosives. 90% of the houses are gone. Between 15,000 and 20,000 homes have been destroyed.”
On Sunday the Lebanese military said Israeli forces were continuing shelling in the southern part of the country, preventing the military from taking control of the villages there as the agreement reached last month had stipulated.
Al Jazeera reported that residents of the town of Zawtar al-Gharbiya "had returned to homes of rubble" after having been displaced.
More than 4,300 people in Lebanon have been killed in Israeli attacks and more than 12,000 have been injured. More than 135 healthcare workers are among those who have been killed, Türk emphasized on Monday, as well as a number of journalists and media workers.
“I am struck by the widespread damage and compounded suffering that I have seen," Türk said. “The trauma, frustration, and despair are palpable—but so too is the demand for justice, which I heard resoundingly.”
The human rights official spoke about a victim he met during his visit to a school that had been repurposed as a shelter for about 1,000 people who'd fled violence. The man had lost his mother and brother in Israeli strikes on their residential building in Beirut, and was determined to seek justice and accountability.
“Even from this darkness, there is an opportunity. We are mobilizing in a way that we have not done before, through documenting [violations]," the man told Türk.
Türk also heard about how "ongoing demolitions have flattened homes, schools, healthcare facilities, water distribution networks, electricity infrastructure, places of worship, and agricultural land."
The official gave his assessment of Israel's destruction of Lebanon days after Israel and its top military funder, the US, attempted unsuccessfully to sink his nomination to serve a second term as the UN's human rights commissioner.
Türk has condemned Israel's US-backed destruction of Gaza, the war on Iran, and President Donald Trump's “abuse and denigration of migrants and refugees” in the US.
Despite the powerful countries' objections and attempts to delay the vote, UN member states on Friday voted 144-10, with 13 abstentions, to give Türk another four-year term.
“Human rights are the antidote to today’s turbulence and defeatism," said Türk after the vote. "I will give my all for the rights of everyone, everywhere."
Keep ReadingShow Less
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
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