As host of the key transit routes and operations Tehran uses to support Lebanese Hezbollah, Syria is a key battlefield in the burgeoning regional conflagration.
Israel has intensified its strikes on Iranian and Hezbollah-linked targets in Syria since the October 7 Hamas attack.
Syria has not joined other Iran-led Axis of Resistance partners in attacking Israel directly because of the weakness of the Assad regime as well as political differences with Hamas.
Sudan Today
Since fighting broke out between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the government-sponsored paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in April of 2023, according to the International Rescue Committee at least 25 million people out of a total population of roughly 48.7 million are in need of basic humanitarian aid. The crisis is escalating with fighting spreading to new parts of the country. Perhaps 37 percent of the country is confronting acute food insecurity.[1] Other statistics are also dire. Nine million people have been displaced within Sudan, while 1.7 million have been forced to flee to other countries. Most of the receiving countries such as Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, and South Sudan are already vulnerable. Initially the conflict was most intense in the capital of Khartoum and in the western provinces of Darfur and Kordofan, but in the last few months it has also spread to regions like Gezira state, the traditional breadbasket of the country.[2] The International Rescue Committee reports that, “Sudan is now the country with the largest number of displaced people and the largest child displacement crisis in the world.”[3] Many migrants who are able to head to the eastern regions of Sudan hope to eventually transit to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and from there potentially to other destinations.[4]
The Iranian regime is rapidly pursuing acquiring nuclear weapons. This breakout must be prevented.
Iran is already supplying terror groups — Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Houthis — with ballistic missiles. Presumably to hide behind “plausible deniability,” Iran’s regime does not seem particularly shy about arming these militias abroad with advanced weaponry. Why wouldn’t it equip these groups with nuclear weapons as well?
Vous vous rendez compte, n’est-ce pas, que tout ce qui se passe autour du fiasco de l’Ukraine du côté de l’OTAN est complètement fou ? Les gens qui dirigent le gouvernement américain – Barack Obama et sa bande de sorcières – ont tout déclenché là-bas, de concert avec une bande d’acteurs du monde des affaires (BlackRock, diverses compagnies pétrolières et gazières, des types d’Haliburton, des fabricants d’armes, un tas de grandes banques), plus l’ignoble WEF pour les «guider» (ha !), cherchant à s’emparer des richesses minérales de l’Ukraine et, en fin de compte, de la Russie elle-même. Belle tentative. Ça n’a pas marché. Des tonnes d’argent ont été jetées dans un trou à rats.
La lutte contre la menace «islamiste» a été le prétexte à la guerre contre le terrorisme initiée par George W. Bush après le 11 septembre 2001. C’est dans le cadre de cette guerre que les États-Unis et leurs alliés ont attaqué et occupé l’Afghanistan puis l’Irak.
While persuading Iran to roll back its nuclear programme at this stage may be difficult, the US and its allies can and should seek to reinforce Tehran’s perception that a decision to weaponise the programme would increase Iranian isolation and insecurity.
In recent months, unsettling rhetoric from senior Iranian individuals over the country’s nuclear programme – alongside continued Iranian advancements in this area and escalating tensions in the Middle East – has highlighted the urgency of finding a resolution to the now decades-old Iranian nuclear question. The options available to the US and its partners for inducing a roll-back of Iran’s programme are limited, given that economic threats and incentives, as well as security assurances, will be difficult to make meaningful and credible. However, Iran still appears to perceive some benefit from maintaining a threshold nuclear programme rather than developing a nuclear weapons capability. The US and its partners should leverage remaining carrots and sticks to reinforce this assumption, making clear to Tehran that it would be worse off with a nuclear weapons capability than its current threshold nuclear status.
On the morning of Saturday, June 29, 2024, a man injured a policeman after shooting him in the neck with a crossbow outside the Israeli embassy in the Serbian capital, Belgrade. The officer returned fire, killing the assailant, who was named as Milos Zujovic, a native of the Serbian town of Mladenovac born in 1999. Zujovic had converted to Islam and began calling himself Salah Al-Din. The Israeli embassy was closed at the time of the attack and none of its employees were harmed.[1]
Analysis: While Turkey has halted all trade with Israel amid the Gaza war, Azerbaijan continues to supply Tel Aviv with oil.
Amid global attention on pro-Palestinian demonstrations across the world, notably on US university campuses, another significant boycott campaign has been brewing in Turkey, albeit against Azerbaijan’s ties with Israel.
As tensions between Israel and Hezbollah escalate, the specter of a full-scale war, with the potential to draw in the United States and Iran, demands the US’ immediate attention. The Biden-Harris Administration has tasked, in response, White House Senior Advisor Amos Hochstein with the responsibility of mediating efforts to de-escalate the conflict and bring stability to the Lebanon-Israel border.
Like a wounded animal, vicious but aimless, Israel is lashing out at Lebanon. But, as Emad Moussa writes, Hezbollah won’t be deterred by wider regional war.
The prospect of an all-out war between Israel and Lebanon reached new heights on July 3 after the Israeli army assassinated senior Hezbollah commander, Taleb Abdullah, outside Tyre.