عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Arab World

Lebanese Health Minister to Asharq Al-Awsat: Hospital Capacity in Lebanon is Decreasing Daily

A Lebanese child injured in an Israeli airstrike lies in a hospital in Sidon, Lebanon (AFP)
A Lebanese child injured in an Israeli airstrike lies in a hospital in Sidon, Lebanon (AFP)
TT
TT

Lebanese Health Minister to Asharq Al-Awsat: Hospital Capacity in Lebanon is Decreasing Daily

A Lebanese child injured in an Israeli airstrike lies in a hospital in Sidon, Lebanon (AFP)
A Lebanese child injured in an Israeli airstrike lies in a hospital in Sidon, Lebanon (AFP)

Lebanon’s Ministry of Health is focused on creating plans to delay hospitals from reaching full capacity, especially in heavily bombarded areas in the country’s south and Bekaa regions.

 

Following last week’s explosion of Hezbollah’s communications devices, which resulted in thousands of casualties, and a new wave of airstrikes that began Monday, Lebanon’s healthcare system is under severe strain.

 

This raises concerns about its ability to manage if the conflict continues and Israel persists with its extensive attacks, potentially resulting in even more casualties.

 

Capacity Under Strain

 

Lebanese Health Minister Firass Abiad told Asharq Al-Awsat that the ministry is implementing a plan to evacuate hospitals nearing full capacity.

 

“We send ambulances to move patients whenever we sense a hospital is close to its limit,” he said.

 

“However, this becomes difficult in critical situations, especially after several paramedics were attacked and three hospitals in the south were damaged.”

 

Abiad explained that the plan allows hospitals to function as one large unit, sharing responsibilities and resources.

 

It also includes expanding capacity by increasing the number of nurses, doctors, and specialists, as well as opening new wards with support from international organizations.

 

“The situation is difficult, and capacity is decreasing daily,” he added.

 

“We are concerned about the ongoing Israeli attacks and their potential impact,” Abiad noted.

Most Viewed

 
 
Arab World

Arab Foreign Ministers Condemn Hormuz Closure, Demand Iran Pay Reparations

The Arab League headquarters in Cairo (Asharq Al-Awsat)
The Arab League headquarters in Cairo (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT
TT

Arab Foreign Ministers Condemn Hormuz Closure, Demand Iran Pay Reparations

The Arab League headquarters in Cairo (Asharq Al-Awsat)
The Arab League headquarters in Cairo (Asharq Al-Awsat)

Arab foreign ministers have condemned Iran's threats to close the Strait of Hormuz and disrupt international navigation, demanding, in a virtual meeting they held on Tuesday, that Tehran be compelled to compensate and make amends for the economic losses resulting from these threats.

The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, affirmed that “Arab countries have not been, and will not be, hostages in the hands of Iran to settle scores.”

At the request of Bahrain, the Council of the League of Arab States, at the foreign ministers' level, held an extraordinary meeting on Tuesday to “discuss Iranian attacks against Arab countries, Iran's obligations under international law, and efforts made to end the crisis in the region.”

In a resolution, the ministers condemned Iranian threats to close the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, calling on the UN Security Council to assume its responsibility in maintaining regional and international peace and security and to ensure accountability for attacks deliberately targeting civilian facilities and infrastructure.

They reaffirmed that these deliberate attacks constitute a grave violation of the sovereignty of those states, undermine regional peace and security, and represent a flagrant breach of international law, including international humanitarian law and the UN Charter.

Moreover, the ministers noted that Iran has failed to comply with Resolution 2817 to immediately cease its attacks against Arab states, adding that its continued deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian objects constitutes a violation of international law.

Tuesday’s resolution also stressed that Iran bears full international responsibility for its unlawful and unjustified attacks against Arab states, and is obligated under international law to make full reparation for all resulting damage and losses, including restitution and compensation.

It called on relevant Arab and regional bodies, in coordination with affected countries, to consider establishing mechanisms to document violations, assess damages and losses, and pursue avenues for redress through diplomatic, legal, and other peaceful means.

The resolution stressed that any attempt by Iran to obstruct lawful maritime passage constitutes a threat to the security of sea lanes and global energy supplies, affirming the right of Arab states to defend their vessels and means of transport in accordance with international law.

The council said that any attempt by Iran to obstruct lawful transit and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz would constitute an internationally unlawful act, adding that Iran would bear international responsibility and be obliged to provide full reparation for all resulting damage, injuries, and economic losses.

It reiterated that such actions threaten the stability of the Arabian Gulf region and its vital role in the global economy and energy supplies, as well as international peace and security.

The council also stressed its rejection and condemnation of Iran’s continued financing, arming, and mobilization of affiliated militias in several Arab countries in pursuit of its interests, describing this as a serious threat to the security and stability of those states and the region.

The Arab foreign ministers urged the Security Council to uphold its responsibility to safeguard regional and international peace and security, ensure accountability for deliberate attacks targeting civilian facilities and infrastructure, and work toward the full implementation of Resolution 2817, including requiring Iran to immediately halt all its attacks against Arab states and comply with its international obligations.

The council also affirmed the inherent right of affected Arab states to self-defense, individually or collectively, in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter, and to take all necessary measures to protect their sovereignty, security, and stability, stressing that the provisions of this resolution do not prejudice any rights or remedies available to states under international law.

The Secretary-General of the Arab League stated at Tuesday’s meeting that Iran has not complied with Security Council Resolution 2817 issued on March 11, calling for an immediate halt to aggression, nor has it acknowledged that its aggressions against Arab states in the Gulf, Jordan, and Iraq constituted a grave breach of international law, an unacceptable violation of state sovereignty, and a blatant disregard for all principles of good neighborliness.

Aboul Gheit demanded that Iran “immediately comply with the Security Council resolution and bear full responsibility for the damages and losses caused by these unlawful attacks, which necessitates compensation and reparation as stipulated by international law in such cases.”

He stated that “Iran's perceptions of controlling the Arabian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz are legally null and void, lack any argument or justification, and are rejected outright.”

He emphasized that 'freedom of navigation in international straits and waterways, including the Strait of Hormuz, is guaranteed by international law... and Iran cannot give itself the right to control the Strait of Hormuz, because it simply does not own it.”

He added that the Arab League “considers aggression against any Arab state, or the practice of threatening and terrorizing its civilian population, as aggression against all Arab states,” affirming that “everyone stands united in solidarity with the countries that have been subjected to sinful attacks.”

This marks the third time, since the outbreak of Iran's war on February 28, that the Arab League Council has convened at the ministerial level to discuss developments in the region.

The foreign ministers had previously condemned Tehran's attacks on Arab countries in an emergency virtual meeting on March 8, affirming their support for all measures taken by those countries, including the option of responding to the attacks.

Again, they reiterated their condemnation of the attacks at the 165th regular session meeting end of last month.

Arab World

Hezbollah Threatens to Derail Israel Talks, Invokes 1983 Scenario

A child wearing a military uniform at the funeral of a Hezbollah fighter in Beirut’s southern suburbs during the truce with Israel (Reuters)
A child wearing a military uniform at the funeral of a Hezbollah fighter in Beirut’s southern suburbs during the truce with Israel (Reuters)
TT
TT

Hezbollah Threatens to Derail Israel Talks, Invokes 1983 Scenario

A child wearing a military uniform at the funeral of a Hezbollah fighter in Beirut’s southern suburbs during the truce with Israel (Reuters)
A child wearing a military uniform at the funeral of a Hezbollah fighter in Beirut’s southern suburbs during the truce with Israel (Reuters)

Hezbollah has stepped up its campaign against Lebanon’s authorities, objecting to their decision to pursue direct negotiations with Israel and insisting the government reverse course, while warning it could seek to bring down the process by force.

The group argues that such talks require a broad national consensus, which it says is lacking, and has warned that the fate of any negotiations and resulting agreement would mirror that of the May 17, 1983 accord.

That agreement, reached 43 years ago, was a peace treaty between Lebanon and Israel that included security arrangements aimed at ending the state of war, securing an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon and regulating their shared border.

It followed Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in June 1982, when Israeli forces reached Beirut and occupied large parts of the country. The deal came after Palestinian factions withdrew from Lebanon and a new president, Amin Gemayel, was elected and led the negotiations.

However, the US-brokered accord was abandoned on March 5, 1984 after broad domestic opposition from Lebanese factions, particularly nationalist, leftist and Islamist groups, as well as outright Syrian rejection at a time when Syrian military presence in Lebanon was influential.

Different circumstances

Despite Hezbollah’s fierce opposition to direct negotiations, some observers say current conditions differ from those in 1983.

MP Salim Sayegh of the Kataeb Party said that in 1983 “the Lebanese government, presidency and parliament were facing Syria, the Warsaw Pact, Israeli ill intent and weak US commitment all at once.”

“Today, regional dynamics have changed. Hezbollah no longer has strategic depth, and its capabilities are very limited,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat, warning that “any misstep in the street would turn the entire Lebanese public against it.”

Sayegh added that the Lebanese government now holds a firm position and “will act decisively,” dismissing doubts about the army’s capabilities.

“The army knows the terrain, both land and people. What it lacked was a clearly defined battle. No army can throw itself into an open-ended conflict. But if Hezbollah chooses chaos and strife, it will face a cohesive army and a united people,” he said.

Anger and threats

Anger spread among supporters of the Shiite duo, Amal and Hezbollah, after images circulated of a meeting last Tuesday in Washington between the Lebanese and Israeli ambassadors.

Commentators and activists aligned with the two groups warned that the talks could meet the same fate as the May 17 agreement.

Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah said: “A large segment rejects the authorities’ path, and it was this segment, along with national forces, that brought down the May 17 accord, and it will not allow the experience to be repeated.”

“This is not limited to the Shiite community, which is a core component of the Lebanese people and rejects direct negotiations. No one can bypass its role,” he added.

Sayegh said Hezbollah also lacks the ability to create alternatives, as in the past, when Syrian influence in Lebanon allowed disruptions to serve Damascus’ interests.

“At the time, Israel was also mired in internal contradictions that led it to prefer managing the Lebanese file through security arrangements with Syria, as seen in the red lines agreement that covered Syria’s entry into Lebanon in 1976,” he said.

“Today, chaos offers zero benefit after the separation of the Lebanese and Iranian tracks. Israel will not bargain over Lebanon, having concluded that strengthening the state in Beirut secures what it wants in the south while respecting Lebanese sovereignty,” he added.

Civil war risks

While agreeing that conditions differ from 1983, political science professor Hilal Khashan of the American University of Beirut expressed a more pessimistic outlook.

“The key Syrian role in bringing down the agreement back then is absent today, and there is no longer a Syrian-Israeli struggle over Lebanon,” he said.

Khashan said Israel now seeks a peace agreement that would provide cover and legitimacy to continue fighting Hezbollah, adding that “it is clear no one can stop it, and its decision to end the group’s military presence is final.”

He warned the escalation could push Lebanon toward civil war, with a possibility of Syrian intervention from the north, noting that Hezbollah fighters are spread across the country.

“We also fear this could lead to the army splitting and ultimately the division of the country,” he said.

Khashan added that Hezbollah’s potential move to ignite internal tensions is tied to developments in the Lebanon-Israel talks and their possible outcomes, even as Israel itself does not appear to be placing much hope in the negotiations.

Arab World

Sources: Islamic Jihad Military Chief Survives Assassination Attempt in Iran

Akram al-Ajouri, commander of the Al-Quds Brigades of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (accounts supporting the group on X)
Akram al-Ajouri, commander of the Al-Quds Brigades of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (accounts supporting the group on X)
TT
TT

Sources: Islamic Jihad Military Chief Survives Assassination Attempt in Iran

Akram al-Ajouri, commander of the Al-Quds Brigades of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (accounts supporting the group on X)
Akram al-Ajouri, commander of the Al-Quds Brigades of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (accounts supporting the group on X)

Three sources in the Palestinian Islamic Jihad said a member of its political bureau and head of its military wing, Akram al-Ajouri, survived an Israeli airstrike that targeted him in Iran about a month ago.

Two senior sources in the group, based in Lebanon where al-Ajouri had lived in recent years, said the site where he was expected to be in the Iranian city of Qom was struck in mid-March, but he escaped along with those who were with him.

The military wing led by al-Ajouri, who is in his sixties, is the highest authority within the Al-Quds Brigades, the armed wing of Islamic Jihad. He has overseen it since the early days of the Second Intifada, which erupted at the end of 2000, and rose to prominence in late 2002 and early 2003.

One source said al-Ajouri was not at the targeted site at the time, having left “a day or perhaps hours before the strike for routine security reasons, as he frequently changed locations under the protection of intelligence from the Quds Force of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards.”

The source added that the targeted location in Qom belonged to Mohammad Saeed Izadi, known among Palestinian factions and Lebanon’s Hezbollah as “Hajj Ramadan.”

Izadi was assassinated by Israel on June 21 last year in an apartment in the same city.

Islamic Jihad is considered the Palestinian faction most closely aligned with Iran, which is its main source of funding and support.

Izadi was responsible for coordinating with Palestinian factions, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as well as Hezbollah, in his role as a representative of the Quds Force.

He maintained close ties with the group’s leadership, particularly its Secretary-General Ziyad al-Nakhalah and al-Ajouri.

The second source did not confirm or deny whether al-Ajouri had changed locations, saying only that “al-Ajouri is fine,” a statement echoed by a third source inside the Palestinian territories.

The two Lebanon-based sources said Palestinian leaders in Iran, including al-Ajouri and faction representatives, have adopted strict security precautions in anticipation of possible assassination attempts, particularly if the war resumes.

Islamic Jihad has not issued any official comment confirming the attempted assassination or al-Ajouri’s survival.

Israeli media had reported in March, citing an Israeli military source, that al-Ajouri and the group’s deputy secretary-general Mohammad al-Hindi had been targeted in Iran. Informed sources later told Asharq Al-Awsat that al-Hindi was not in Iran at the time, and he subsequently appeared in a televised interview.

Who is Akram al-Ajouri?

Al-Ajouri is regarded as a key figure within Islamic Jihad, not only in operational matters related to arming the Al-Quds Brigades in Gaza, but also for maintaining strong ties with Hezbollah’s leadership and previously with the government of ousted Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

Sources in the group say al-Ajouri is highly important to the IRGC due to his role in carrying out missions and drafting plans related to military operations and the transfer of weapons to the Gaza Strip and other areas. He is also responsible for forming several militant cells in the West Bank.

Al-Ajouri has managed the group’s armed wing for many years. In addition to overseeing armament in Gaza and the West Bank, he is credited with building the group’s military presence in Lebanon and Syria, and deploying fighters from both countries in attacks launched from Lebanon in support of Hezbollah since Oct. 8, 2023, during the latest war.

Al-Ajouri has survived several assassination attempts, including two in Syria, one in 2014 and another in 2019 that targeted his home and killed his son and others. At the time, estimates suggested he was in Lebanon, where he also survived at least one assassination attempt.

Sources said that shortly before the war involving Iran, al-Ajouri had been preparing to leave Lebanon, but several Arab and Islamic capitals refused to receive him despite efforts by al-Nakhalah, citing his inclusion in cases before local courts.