Lebanon Enters Talks Constrained by Adamant Israel, Hezbollah Positions

Women mourn over the coffin of a civil defense member killed in an Israeli strike in south Lebanon during his funeral on Wednesday (AP)
Women mourn over the coffin of a civil defense member killed in an Israeli strike in south Lebanon during his funeral on Wednesday (AP)
TT

Lebanon Enters Talks Constrained by Adamant Israel, Hezbollah Positions

Women mourn over the coffin of a civil defense member killed in an Israeli strike in south Lebanon during his funeral on Wednesday (AP)
Women mourn over the coffin of a civil defense member killed in an Israeli strike in south Lebanon during his funeral on Wednesday (AP)

Lebanon heads into direct talks with Israel on Thursday, with little room to maneuver as positions harden on both sides. Officials in Beirut believe Israel does not want to end the war soon, while Hezbollah, fully aligned with Iran, has largely cut off contact with Lebanese authorities.

The third challenge is the US position, which appears close to “understanding” Lebanon’s stance, without fully “sympathizing” with it.

A Lebanese official source told Asharq Al-Awsat that Lebanon is pressing Washington hard to secure a real ceasefire before negotiations begin, but has not yet received answers, making that effort likely to fail.

The source said Lebanon cannot boycott the negotiations, both to avoid embarrassment with the US side, which is playing a supporting role for Lebanon, and to avoid giving pretexts to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who appears clearly unwilling to engage in the talks.

The source said the Lebanese delegation would enter the negotiating room with one issue on the table, a ceasefire, before moving into any other discussion. But the source would not say whether this could obstruct the negotiation process.

A meeting between President Joseph Aoun and Netanyahu was “not on the table”, the source said.

They added that Ambassador Simon Karam, who heads Lebanon’s negotiating delegation, had arrived in Washington and would meet separately with US State Department officials before the talks begin, in a bid to urge Washington to keep pressure on Netanyahu to secure a ceasefire.

The source said another obstacle to a ceasefire was internal and Lebanese, represented by Hezbollah’s lack of communication.

Washington had responded to Lebanon’s demand by asking what guarantees existed that the party would abide by a ceasefire if one were declared.

The source revealed that Aoun had sent questions to Hezbollah on the matter, but had received no answers. They went further, saying Aoun had invited MP Hassan Fadlallah, the new official handling the file, to visit him, but had received no response so far.

Negotiating agenda, a “truce +”

Lebanon is heading into these negotiations with a clear headline that does not end with “a peace agreement or normalization with the Hebrew state.”

Sources say the president is treating the talks as limited to measures and security arrangements that would ultimately lead to a formula resembling the 1949 armistice agreement, albeit in an updated form described by some of those close to him as a “truce plus.”

In principle, this approach includes cementing a ceasefire, followed by the withdrawal of Israeli forces to the border and a halt to attacks, after which the Lebanese army would deploy and assume responsibility for security in the south, and then across all of Lebanon.

The source concluded that Lebanon wants the negotiations to end the state of hostility, not to produce a peace agreement tied to an Arab track that has not yet matured.

Lebanon’s position is caught in a difficult place between two electoral processes. The first is Israeli, where the source does not express much optimism that Israeli operations in Lebanon will stop soon, citing Netanyahu’s clear desire to keep them going as Israel’s general elections approach.

The second is American, where Lebanon fears it could lose the attention of the US administration as elections approach, when elections in “Nevada become far more important than all the crises of the Middle East.”

Hezbollah’s weapons

As for Hezbollah’s weapons, sources say Lebanon’s vision is to “address” the issue at a later stage, based on an official view that dealing with it under military confrontation and security pressure remains unrealistic.

Any approach to it would first require stabilizing the situation and halting military operations, with a clear commitment by Lebanon to end this file in line with the provisions of the president’s oath of office, which firmly stated that no weapons should exist outside the framework of the state.

The source voiced frustration with Hezbollah’s conduct, saying the party shows no regard for Lebanon’s situation or for the heavy losses suffered by Lebanese citizens, foremost among them the people of south Lebanon.

They said many southerners have been deprived of their land and homes and forced to leave with no clear prospect of return, either because the fighting continues or because their houses may not remain standing as they are systematically destroyed in violation of norms and international conventions.

The source pointed to what he described as a striking incident on the day the ceasefire was announced, when Hezbollah fired heavy rocket barrages during the preliminary Lebanese-Israeli meeting attended by US President Donald Trump.

The Israeli delegation quickly used the news with Trump to point to the “danger posed by the party.”

A hot summer

The source fears what he describes as a “hot summer” if the negotiations become more complicated, amid a clear bet on a position by Trump that could break the deadlock and impose a ceasefire.

Growing domestic support

Inside Lebanon, support is growing for the negotiation track pursued by Aoun.

MP Mohammed Suleiman, spokesman for the National Moderation bloc, said after the bloc met the president: “We affirmed to President Aoun our full support for every path that strengthens state-building, preserves the higher national interest, and protects civil peace and national unity.”

Suleiman added that “the sovereign decisions taken by the government regarding the monopoly of arms, reclaiming authority over the decision of war and peace, and extending state authority over all Lebanese territory represent the demand of the majority of Lebanese. Implementing them lies at the heart of applying the law and respecting the constitution.”

He continued: “We called for intensified coordination with Arab and foreign countries, especially the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in order to end the Israeli attacks in a formula that preserves the dignity of Lebanon and the Lebanese.”

The right track

In addition to domestic support, the track has international backing. Egypt’s ambassador to Beirut, Alaa Moussa, said after meeting Maronite Patriarch Bechara al-Rai that he discussed the situation in Lebanon and the region with the patriarch.

“This concern greatly preoccupies His Beatitude, and we exchanged some assessments about the present and the future. I heard positive ideas from him, and confidence that the path the Lebanese state is taking is the right path and must be pursued, strengthened and given the chance to succeed in everything that serves the restoration of the Lebanese state’s sovereignty over all its territory, as it was before,” Moussa said.

He added: “We also discussed the path the Lebanese state is now taking, and we hope it will bring positive results. We can speak specifically of a round of negotiations beginning Thursday. Naturally, His Beatitude carries all positive wishes for positive results that will help achieve more accomplishments in the future.”



Saudi Arabia Strongly Condemns Drone Attack on East-West Pipeline by Drones Launched from Iraq

The Saudi flag. Asharq Al-Awsat
The Saudi flag. Asharq Al-Awsat
TT

Saudi Arabia Strongly Condemns Drone Attack on East-West Pipeline by Drones Launched from Iraq

The Saudi flag. Asharq Al-Awsat
The Saudi flag. Asharq Al-Awsat

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs expresses in the strongest terms the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s condemnation of the targeting of the East-West Pipeline in Riyadh and Madinah regions by several drones launched from Iraq, resulting in injuries and some damage that is currently being addressed, SPA reported.

In a statement, the ministry stated: “The Kingdom clarifies that, following a request from the prime minister of Iraq to give the brotherly Iraqi government the opportunity to take the necessary measures to prevent attacks launched from Iraqi territory against Saudi Arabia and neighboring countries, the Kingdom has opted not to respond at this stage and to support the efforts of the Iraqi government.”

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia further affirmed that it reserves the right to take all necessary measures to protect its sovereignty, security, facilities, citizens, and residents.


Houthi Casualties Strain Sanaa Hospitals’ Capacity

Houthis use images of their dead to recruit more fighters (X)
Houthis use images of their dead to recruit more fighters (X)
TT

Houthi Casualties Strain Sanaa Hospitals’ Capacity

Houthis use images of their dead to recruit more fighters (X)
Houthis use images of their dead to recruit more fighters (X)

The fallout from the Houthis’ military escalation in Yemen is straining hospitals and endangering civilians in areas under the group’s control, while fueling rare criticism from within its own ranks.

Activists and former fighters accuse the group of exploiting poverty to recruit young men, trading on fighters’ blood and diverting resources to the war effort at the expense of civilian needs.

Medical sources in the Houthi-held capital Sanaa told Asharq Al-Awsat that the group’s Health Ministry had recently ordered several government hospitals to limit admissions of critically ill patients.

Intensive care units, emergency departments and other wards have instead been reserved for wounded Houthi fighters arriving from the front lines.

The measures cover Al-Thawra, Al-Jumhouri, Police, Military, Al-Quds, 48 and Kuwait hospitals — among the capital’s leading medical facilities. Their capacity to treat civilians has consequently shrunk, particularly for patients needing urgent care or intensive treatment.

The restrictions coincided with the arrival in Sanaa of large numbers of dead and wounded Houthi fighters following battles on several fronts across Yemen.

Health workers said hospitals were taking in growing numbers of casualties and setting aside beds, equipment and wards for those arriving from combat zones, including fighters requiring surgery or intensive care.

Hospitals under strain

The Houthis have tightened security around several medical facilities, barred media access and withheld information about the identities and conditions of casualties arriving from the front lines.

Health workers said the influx of wounded fighters had pushed hospitals closer to capacity, leaving less room for civilian patients.

Ahmed, whose relative needed treatment in Sanaa, said his family struggled to obtain the necessary care at Al-Jumhouri Hospital and was forced to look elsewhere because the facility lacked the resources to treat the patient.

He accused the Houthis of channeling available medical resources into the war effort, warning that civilians — particularly children, older people, chronically ill patients and emergency cases — faced growing risks.

The measures come as the health system in Houthi-held areas reels from years of war, dwindling funding and severe shortages of medicine, supplies and medical staff. Health facilities have also been damaged, forcing some to close.

The strain extends beyond Sanaa. The capital’s main hospitals routinely receive referrals from other provinces and regions, meaning their reduced capacity affects a far wider population under Houthi control.

Dissent from within

As the escalation weighs on the health sector, criticism is also mounting among figures and activists aligned with the Houthis.

Their complaints center on the war’s human cost, the treatment of fighters and the families of those killed or wounded, and recruitment practices that prey on economic hardship.

In the latest rebuke, activist and former Houthi fighter Abdullah Sharaf al-Mahdi attacked the group’s leaders and supervisors, accusing them of trading on fighters’ blood and sidelining bereaved and wounded families for personal gain.

Fighters and their families bear the cost of the war, al-Mahdi said, while officials and supervisors receive privileges including property and financial allocations. The conflict, he added, had become a vehicle for advancing the interests of factions within the group.

Al-Mahdi said he regretted the years he had spent fighting for the Houthis and would not support them again. His comments reflect a shift among some critics from opposing the group’s policies to questioning its motives for prolonging the war.

Criticism has also emerged from within Houthi-controlled institutions.

Abdu Bishr, a member of the Houthi-controlled parliament in Sanaa, accused the group of ignoring Yemenis’ suffering and pursuing what he called “futile” wars. He urged it to keep economic and humanitarian issues out of the conflict.

Bishr called for salaries to be paid, detainees released and airports reopened. He warned that what he described as “taking pleasure in bloodshed” would deepen the humanitarian catastrophe and urged the group to ease people’s suffering or “leave the scene.”

Houthi activist and writer Zaid al-Kibsi also criticized the group’s recruitment of young people and adolescents, saying it exploited poverty and worsening economic conditions to push more of them toward the front lines.

He accused the Houthis of using religious and sectarian rhetoric, along with slogans of “jihad and martyrdom,” to recruit young people as many families struggle to meet their basic needs.

Some recruits depend on the group’s modest payments to support their families while risking death or injury in combat, al-Kibsi said.

Many are young men who have had no chance to build their lives or start families, leaving their relatives to bear the consequences when they are killed or wounded.


Israeli Support for Ethiopia’s Maritime Access Bid Fuels Tensions With Egypt

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed holds earlier talks with the Israeli president in Addis Ababa (Ethiopian News Agency)
Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed holds earlier talks with the Israeli president in Addis Ababa (Ethiopian News Agency)
TT

Israeli Support for Ethiopia’s Maritime Access Bid Fuels Tensions With Egypt

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed holds earlier talks with the Israeli president in Addis Ababa (Ethiopian News Agency)
Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed holds earlier talks with the Israeli president in Addis Ababa (Ethiopian News Agency)

Israeli support for landlocked Ethiopia’s bid for access to the Red Sea is fueling tensions with Egypt, which has repeatedly opposed Addis Ababa’s moves amid a separate dispute over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and its impact on Cairo’s Nile water share.

The Israeli backing raises friction with Egypt and gives Tel Aviv another way to pressure Cairo over its positions, despite the legitimacy of Egypt’s stance under international law, experts told Asharq Al-Awsat. They said the international community would ultimately determine the outcome.

Ethiopia has been landlocked since 1993, when Eritrea gained independence after a three-decade war. It relies on neighboring countries’ ports, particularly Djibouti’s.

The Ethiopian News Agency said Israel had announced diplomatic support for Ethiopia’s efforts to secure access to the sea. It quoted Israeli Ambassador to Ethiopia Avraham Neguise as saying that his country firmly backed the East African nation’s push for a Red Sea outlet.

Empowering and strengthening Ethiopia and stabilizing the Red Sea are in everyone’s interest, not Ethiopia’s alone, and Israel stands with Ethiopia in this effort, Neguise told the agency on Thursday evening.

It was not Neguise’s first intervention on an issue dividing Egypt and Ethiopia. In August, he told reporters that Israel would “continue to strengthen its support for Ethiopia, with the aim of helping it become a leading economic power on the African continent.”

Threat to Egyptian interests

African affairs expert Asmaa al-Husseini said the Israeli statements “increase tensions with Egypt” and point to “a covert Israeli role in Ethiopia’s Red Sea moves aimed at harming Egyptian interests.”

The issue may not trigger a direct crisis between Cairo and Tel Aviv, she told Asharq Al-Awsat, but Egypt would closely monitor it. Cairo’s response would depend on the level of escalation and Ethiopia’s actions on the ground.

“Egypt has the right to defend its national security,” Husseini said. “If any military arrangements targeting it are pursued in the Red Sea, Egypt will take measures to prevent them. Ethiopia and Israel understand this, but they are trying by every means to impose a fait accompli. Egypt will never accept that.”

Neguise’s latest remarks coincided with renewed Egyptian opposition to Ethiopian access to the Red Sea.

“There are sovereign states with ports on the Red Sea, and no one has the right to grant any country military maritime access. Otherwise, there would be chaos, particularly as many African countries are landlocked,” Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty told a news conference on Thursday evening.

“There is no problem with commercial access,” he added.

Ramadan Qarny, an expert on African affairs, said Egypt’s opposition rested on several established principles.

“The first is legal: respect for international law, which affirms the exclusive right of littoral states to maintain a presence on the Red Sea coast,” Qarny told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“The second is respect for African Union principles, which uphold the sanctity of borders inherited from the colonial era. Raising this issue could therefore open the door to widespread unrest across African countries.”

The third principle, Qarny said, was that “Egypt’s actions and position align with the principles of the African and Arab states bordering the Red Sea.”

Qarny said Israel was seeking Ethiopian backing on a similar issue: Israel’s presence in, or recognition of, the breakaway Somaliland region, which took place in December 2025.

“There is a political quid pro quo,” he said. “Israel supports Ethiopia in obtaining access to the Red Sea coast in exchange for Ethiopian support for Israel’s recognition of the breakaway Somaliland region.”

Cairo’s position

Cairo has not officially responded to Israel’s continued moves on Ethiopia.

Former Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohamed El-Orabi, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the chairman of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs, has downplayed their impact.

In earlier remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, he said they would “neither undermine nor change” Egypt’s positions.

Qarny said Israeli support was unlikely to significantly alter the dynamics of the Egyptian-Ethiopian disputes.

“Tensions already exist and are likely to increase,” he said, adding that Ethiopian media had in recent months waged what he described as “a coordinated and organized campaign,” led by the Ethiopian News Agency, against Egypt’s positions.

The campaign, he said, had targeted Cairo’s stance on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, the Nile Basin countries’ Cooperative Framework Agreement and Ethiopia’s bid for maritime access.