As It Attacks Iran's Nuclear Program, Israel Maintains Ambiguity about Its Own

FILE - This file image made from a video aired Friday, Jan. 7, 2005, by Israeli television station Channel 10, shows what the television station claims is Israel's nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first detailed video of the site ever shown to the public. (Channel 10 via AP, File)
FILE - This file image made from a video aired Friday, Jan. 7, 2005, by Israeli television station Channel 10, shows what the television station claims is Israel's nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first detailed video of the site ever shown to the public. (Channel 10 via AP, File)
TT

As It Attacks Iran's Nuclear Program, Israel Maintains Ambiguity about Its Own

FILE - This file image made from a video aired Friday, Jan. 7, 2005, by Israeli television station Channel 10, shows what the television station claims is Israel's nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first detailed video of the site ever shown to the public. (Channel 10 via AP, File)
FILE - This file image made from a video aired Friday, Jan. 7, 2005, by Israeli television station Channel 10, shows what the television station claims is Israel's nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first detailed video of the site ever shown to the public. (Channel 10 via AP, File)

Israel says it is determined to destroy Iran’s nuclear program because its archenemy's furtive efforts to build an atomic weapon are a threat to its existence.

What’s not-so-secret is that for decades Israel has been believed to be the Middle East’s only nation with nuclear weapons, even though its leaders have refused to confirm or deny their existence, The Associated Press said.

Israel's ambiguity has enabled it to bolster its deterrence against Iran and other enemies, experts say, without triggering a regional nuclear arms race or inviting preemptive attacks.

Israel is one of just five countries that aren’t party to a global nuclear nonproliferation treaty. That relieves it of international pressure to disarm, or even to allow inspectors to scrutinize its facilities.

Critics in Iran and elsewhere have accused Western countries of hypocrisy for keeping strict tabs on Iran's nuclear program — which its leaders insist is only for peaceful purposes — while effectively giving Israel's suspected arsenal a free pass.

On Sunday, the US military struck three nuclear sites in Iran, inserting itself into Israel’s effort to destroy Iran’s program.

Here's a closer look at Israel's nuclear program:

A history of nuclear ambiguity Israel opened its Negev Nuclear Research Center in the remote desert city of Dimona in 1958, under the country's first leader, Prime Minister David Ben Gurion. He believed the tiny fledgling country surrounded by hostile neighbors needed nuclear deterrence as an extra measure of security. Some historians say they were meant to be used only in case of emergency, as a last resort.

After it opened, Israel kept the work at Dimona hidden for a decade, telling United States’ officials it was a textile factory, according to a 2022 article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, an academic journal.

Relying on plutonium produced at Dimona, Israel has had the ability to fire nuclear warheads since the early 1970s, according to that article, co-authored by Hans M. Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project with the Federation of American Scientists, and Matt Korda, a researcher at the same organization.

Israel's policy of ambiguity suffered a major setback in 1986, when Dimona’s activities were exposed by a former technician at the site, Mordechai Vanunu. He provided photographs and descriptions of the reactor to The Sunday Times of London.

Vanunu served 18 years in prison for treason, and is not allowed to meet with foreigners or leave the country.

ISRAEL POSSESSES DOZENS OF NUCLEAR WARHEADS, EXPERTS SAY

Experts estimate Israel has between 80 and 200 nuclear warheads, although they say the lower end of that range is more likely.

Israel also has stockpiled as much as 1,110 kilograms (2,425 pounds) of plutonium, potentially enough to make 277 nuclear weapons, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a global security organization. It has six submarines believed to be capable of launching nuclear cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles believed to be capable of launching a nuclear warhead up to 6,500 kilometers (4,000 miles), the organization says.

Germany has supplied all of the submarines to Israel, which are docked in the northern city of Haifa, according to the article by Kristensen and Korda.

NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN THE MIDDLE EAST POSE RISKS

In the Middle East, where conflicts abound, governments are often unstable, and regional alliances are often shifting, nuclear proliferation is particularly dangerous, said Or Rabinowitz, a scholar at Jerusalem's Hebrew University and a visiting associate professor at Stanford University.

“When nuclear armed states are at war, the world always takes notice because we don’t like it when nuclear arsenals ... are available for decision makers,” she said.

Rabinowitz says Israel's military leaders could consider deploying a nuclear weapon if they found themselves facing an extreme threat, such as a weapon of mass destruction being used against them.

Three countries other than Israel have refused to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons: India, Pakistan and South Sudan. North Korea has withdrawn. Iran has signed the treaty, but it was censured last week, shortly before Israel launched its operation, by the UN's nuclear watchdog — a day before Israel attacked — for violating its obligations.

Israel's policy of ambiguity has helped it evade greater scrutiny, said Susie Snyder at the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, a group that works to promote adherence to the UN treaty.

Its policy has also shined a light on the failure of Western countries to rein in nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, she said.

They “prefer not to be reminded of their own complicity,” she said.



Death of Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah: The Libyan Who Escaped the Noose of the Lockerbie Case

A photo shows late Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi with Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah (second from left) upon the latter's arrival in the capital Tripoli, a day after his definitive acquittal in the plane bombing case (Tripoli, February 1, 2001) (Getty Images)
A photo shows late Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi with Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah (second from left) upon the latter's arrival in the capital Tripoli, a day after his definitive acquittal in the plane bombing case (Tripoli, February 1, 2001) (Getty Images)
TT

Death of Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah: The Libyan Who Escaped the Noose of the Lockerbie Case

A photo shows late Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi with Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah (second from left) upon the latter's arrival in the capital Tripoli, a day after his definitive acquittal in the plane bombing case (Tripoli, February 1, 2001) (Getty Images)
A photo shows late Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi with Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah (second from left) upon the latter's arrival in the capital Tripoli, a day after his definitive acquittal in the plane bombing case (Tripoli, February 1, 2001) (Getty Images)

On August 25, 2026, in a quiet corner of the Libyan capital Tripoli, the life of Libyan citizen Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah came quietly to an end at the age of nearly 70.

His death officially closes one of the most mysterious and compelling chapters in the history of the diplomatic and intelligence conflict between East and West. It also closes a living chapter in the case of the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which was traveling from Frankfurt to New York via London when it exploded over the Scottish town of Lockerbie in 1988, an incident that reshaped international politics for decades.

For an entire decade, the name of this man, who began his career as a low-ranking airline employee, echoed through the corridors of the United Nations Security Council. His photograph appeared on television screens around the world and in newspapers for years as the "second suspect" in the most horrific act of aerial terrorism of the 20th century.

Fhimah was an unwilling participant in a unique legal and political saga in which the details of his everyday life on the island of Malta became the basis of an international case that nearly brought an entire country to the brink. He later stood behind the glass of the historic Camp Zeist courtroom in the Netherlands and heard the word "acquitted" pronounced by Scottish justice at the dawn of the new millennium. He returned home carrying an acquittal that politics had been unable to grant him for years.

His death has reopened the memories of the era of crippling sanctions and international isolation, reminding the world of the story of a man who lived at the heart of the storm and died in complete seclusion, far from the political turmoil that had nearly consumed him.

Forgotten Beginnings: From Tripoli to Luqa Airport

Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah was born in 1956 in the Souq al-Jumaa area on the outskirts of the Libyan capital, Tripoli. He progressed through his career until he joined Libyan Arab Airlines. In the mid-1980s, he was sent to work as an airline official, dispatcher, and station manager for the company at Luqa Airport in Malta.

The position appeared routine for the young employee, had it not intersected with the intense intelligence conflict unfolding across the Mediterranean between the former Libyan regime and the United States and its Western allies.

At the time, Fhimah did not know that his signature on cargo documents and the timing of his shifts at the Mediterranean airport would later become key evidence cited in the international indictment prepared by senior investigators in Washington and London.

The Night the Plane Fell and the International Storm Began

On December 21, 1988, the sky over the Scottish town of Lockerbie was torn apart when a Boeing 747 operated by Pan Am, Flight 103, exploded while traveling from Frankfurt to New York, killing 270 people.

After three years of complex joint investigations by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Scottish police, two Libyan nationals were formally accused in November 1991: Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah.

At the time, Western investigators alleged that Fhimah had used his position and contacts at Malta's airport to facilitate the passage of a bomb-laden brown Samsonite suitcase. The suitcase contained a timed bomb concealed inside a cassette recorder and was allegedly placed aboard a Libyan Airlines flight bound for Frankfurt, from where it was transferred to the doomed Pan Am flight.

Historic Handover and Trial on Neutral Ground

Tripoli initially refused to hand over its citizens, placing Libya under severe international sanctions and an air and economic blockade imposed by the UN Security Council in 1992.

Libya endured a decade of deep isolation and economic paralysis until difficult diplomatic efforts led by Arab and African parties produced a unique legal and historic settlement.

Under the settlement, Libya agreed in 1999 to hand over the two suspects for trial before a special Scottish court, but on neutral ground at Camp Zeist, a former US military base near Utrecht in the Netherlands, under Scottish criminal law.

Camp Zeist Shock: Historic Acquittal and Return

On January 31, 2001, the world held its breath as Scottish judges delivered the verdict millions had been awaiting. While his associate Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, the court definitively acquitted Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah of all charges and ordered his immediate release from behind the bulletproof glass enclosure.

The judges based his acquittal on insufficient evidence and major gaps in the witnesses' account, particularly that of Maltese clothing merchant Tony Gauci. The defense also conclusively established that Fhimah was not in Malta but was in Sweden on a business trip when the bomb-laden suitcase was checked in.

Voluntary Seclusion Until His Final Days

Following his acquittal, Fhimah returned immediately to Libya, where he received a hero's welcome in Tripoli from both officials and the public. He was portrayed as living proof that Western justice itself had established the innocence of the Libyan state from the full American account of events.

Yet the man, exhausted by years of fear, uncertainty, and detention, made a firm decision to stay completely out of the spotlight and politics. He lived the rest of his life as an ordinary citizen among his family in Tripoli, refusing to give press interviews that might reveal the secrets of that era.

The announcement of his death and the official mourning that followed brought a complete chapter of the bitter Libyan-Western conflict to a close.


Gaza’s Children Lose Simple Joy as Israel Warns Against Kite-Flying

Boys fly a kite against the backdrop of smoke rising from the Gath shelter, that houses displaced Palestinians, after an Israeli air strike in the west of Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip on January 31, 2026. (AFP)
Boys fly a kite against the backdrop of smoke rising from the Gath shelter, that houses displaced Palestinians, after an Israeli air strike in the west of Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip on January 31, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Gaza’s Children Lose Simple Joy as Israel Warns Against Kite-Flying

Boys fly a kite against the backdrop of smoke rising from the Gath shelter, that houses displaced Palestinians, after an Israeli air strike in the west of Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip on January 31, 2026. (AFP)
Boys fly a kite against the backdrop of smoke rising from the Gath shelter, that houses displaced Palestinians, after an Israeli air strike in the west of Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip on January 31, 2026. (AFP)

There are few joys left for 10-year-old Ahmed Hamdouna, whose childhood has already been scarred by years of war and displacement in Gaza.

Now, what little reprieve he found playing with scraps of plastic and sticks has also been torn away, as Israel warns it will step up military operations in the territory if kites continue to land on the Israeli side of the border.

"My father stopped me from flying my kites because of the occupation's threats," said Ahmed, who has been displaced to Deir el-Balah in the central Gaza Strip.

"I felt heartbroken after spending so much time collecting sticks and nylon, only for the occupation to prevent us from playing with them," he told AFP.

"We are just young children. They destroyed our home and our whole neighborhood -- what more do they want?"

Israel accuses Hamas of cynically using children and says the kites could pose a threat, years after a wave of incendiary kites and balloons sparked fires in Israeli farmland.

A series of kites have flown in recent days across the border into southern Israel, communities shaken by the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023.

Hamas has denied responsibility. No explosives were detected, but at least one kite had a political message on it.

On Wednesday, an official of the US-led Board of Peace supervising the ceasefire plan in the territory said: "All militant activity in Gaza must stop, including the flying of kites."

"Israel, too, must comply with the ceasefire," a board official said.

Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem said the popular committees in Gaza's displacement camps were trying to prevent children from flying kites, over fears they could be targeted by the Israeli military.

Ahmed said he was now scared of playing, but couldn't understand why the Israeli military was "afraid of kites when they are just paper and string".

"I don't want to hurt anyone. I just want to play like children everywhere else," he said.

- 'Sense of freedom' -

For Gaza's children, building kites was a simple way to find joy among the ruins of war.

"There are no toys here, no amusement parks, not even a football to play with. The kite is the only thing we can make with our own hands that makes us happy when we fly it in the sky," said 11-year-old Yamen al-Mubayyed, who has also been displaced to Deir el-Balah.

"My friends and I get together and make them using pieces of wood we collect from destroyed houses, along with paper and string. We glue them together using flour and water, then go to the sea to fly them," he told AFP.

Yamen said even the buzz of Israeli surveillance drones didn't put him off flying his kites.

"It is the only thing that makes us feel that we children are alive and gives us a sense of freedom," he said.

Israel has kept up attacks in Gaza, saying it is targeting gunmen, despite a US-backed ceasefire which came into effect in October.

Israeli army chief Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir on Tuesday vowed to push on with demilitarizing Gaza "using all necessary means".

- 'Kill the joy in their hearts' -

For parents in Gaza, the once-harmless activity now carries immense worries.

Akram Abu Shurkh, 30, said he had forbidden his children from making kites but felt he had "killed the joy in their eyes" in doing so.

"These are children who do not understand military calculations. They only see it as a game and a way to release their energy," he told AFP.

"But I see death in the touch of the string and the flying of the kite."

In southern Gaza, 34-year-old Umm Moaz Huwayla said her heart raced from worry every time her children went outside with their kites, but felt she couldn't stop them from playing.

"The occupation wants to kill the joy in their hearts," she told AFP.

"They are not asking for much, only to live their childhood, even with a piece of string and a sheet of paper."


From UNIFIL to Verification Committees... Will Int’l Force in Lebanon Have Expanded Powers?

UN peacekeepers (UNIFIL) vehicles drive in the Lebanese village of Wazzani near the border with Israel, southern Lebanon, July 6, 2023. (Reuters)
UN peacekeepers (UNIFIL) vehicles drive in the Lebanese village of Wazzani near the border with Israel, southern Lebanon, July 6, 2023. (Reuters)
TT

From UNIFIL to Verification Committees... Will Int’l Force in Lebanon Have Expanded Powers?

UN peacekeepers (UNIFIL) vehicles drive in the Lebanese village of Wazzani near the border with Israel, southern Lebanon, July 6, 2023. (Reuters)
UN peacekeepers (UNIFIL) vehicles drive in the Lebanese village of Wazzani near the border with Israel, southern Lebanon, July 6, 2023. (Reuters)

With UNIFIL’s departure now all but certain, the question is no longer whether the UN force will remain in southern Lebanon, but who will replace it, and with what powers.

A European-led force and verification committees are under discussion, potentially expanding the international role from monitoring UN Security Council resolution 1701 to verifying exclusive state control over weapons south of the Litani River.

European-led force

Abbas Daher, director of the Center for Media Foresight, told Asharq Al-Awsat that a decision not to renew the UN Interim Force in Lebanon’s (UNIFIL) mandate was now “virtually certain,” despite recent attempts involving Italy to revive efforts for an extension.

“However, President Joseph Aoun’s visit to Italy and the current visit by Lebanese army Commander Gen. Rodolphe Haykal to continue discussions on implementation have effectively opened debate over the force that could succeed UNIFIL, whether in the form of verification committees or a force with a predominantly European composition,” Daher said.

“Discussions are now underway, and European countries, led by Italy, France and Spain, and perhaps Germany, are considering establishing a primarily European force to continue the mission,” he added.

“Efforts are also being made to gain international support for this arrangement.”

As for the verification committees, Daher said there was a proposal for the United States to play a role, particularly in verifying that weapons were under the state’s exclusive control and monitoring implementation. Discussions with Washington remain open, he added.

Italian proposal

Separately, local media reported having reviewed a four-page Italian proposal for the post-UNIFIL phase. The plan calls for a smaller, but more effective international presence focused on supporting the Lebanese army, protecting civilians and backing the mechanism monitoring the ceasefire.

The force could play a role in the disarmament measures, conditional on political approval.

Force’s mission

The debate over the force’s composition is closely tied to questions about its jurisdiction, mission and powers.

Asked how the new force would differ from UNIFIL, Daher said: “UNIFIL’s duties were defined by an international mandate and resolution 1701.”

“Lebanon will insist on replicating the experience or substance of the resolution in defining the nature of its work. The question, however, is whether that will succeed or whether amendments will be imposed, because Washington, under Israeli pressure, wants any committee to have greater executive powers.”

Retired Brig. Gen. Fadi Daoud agreed that the most important issue in the next phase was not limited to which party would replace UNIFIL. Rather, he said, it concerned a change in the nature of the international mission itself and the potential redefinition of the relationship between the new force and the Lebanese army.

“The process of ending UNIFIL’s mission has effectively become a reality, despite Lebanese efforts to secure an extension,” Daoud told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“The central question has therefore become: Who will replace it? The alternative arrangement will be the one that receives US approval,” he added.

“We are moving from peacekeeping forces to verification committees — from a mission linked to resolution 1701 to a different mechanism suited to a post-1701 phase, at least in the form in which we have known it over the past years.”

“Lebanon has no problem with any mechanism for verifying exclusive state control over weapons south of the Litani because it is committed to this issue,” Daher said.

“But the fundamental question is whether Israel will withdraw or remain an occupying force. If verification committees carry out their work, the army reaches certain areas and confirms that they are free of weapons, will Israel uphold its end of the arrangement and withdraw?”

“There must be a clear framework for an Israeli withdrawal, just as there is a clear framework for ensuring exclusive state control over weapons in the south.”

Powers of the verification committees

From a military perspective, Daoud said the scope of the committees’ powers lay at the heart of the debate. The distinction between verifying that the army had completed its mission and helping oversee its implementation could determine whether any new arrangement was viable.

“Will the verification committees’ role be limited to confirming that the Lebanese army has completed the task required of it, or will they take part in overseeing how it is carried out? There is a very significant difference between the two,” he stressed.

“For example, if information is received about a weapons depot at a particular location and the Lebanese army raids the site, will the committee merely receive a report confirming that the mission was completed and verify its outcome? Or will it accompany the military force and monitor the search on the ground using personnel, cameras and communications equipment?” he added.

“This is not a technical detail. It could be the most dangerous issue in any new arrangement because the Lebanese army cannot easily accept a foreign party or an entity outside its military chain of command exercising such close oversight over how it performs its duties or directing it during search operations,” he continued.

“An international body can verify that a mission has been carried out and confirm its results. But moving toward direct supervision of its implementation could create serious and sensitive problems,” Daoud said.