Floods, Drought Raise Questions over Türkiye’s Tigris, Euphrates Leverage

The Ataturk Dam on the Euphrates River sparked a Türkiye -Syria crisis in the 1990s. (Turkish State Hydraulic Works website)
The Ataturk Dam on the Euphrates River sparked a Türkiye -Syria crisis in the 1990s. (Turkish State Hydraulic Works website)
TT

Floods, Drought Raise Questions over Türkiye’s Tigris, Euphrates Leverage

The Ataturk Dam on the Euphrates River sparked a Türkiye -Syria crisis in the 1990s. (Turkish State Hydraulic Works website)
The Ataturk Dam on the Euphrates River sparked a Türkiye -Syria crisis in the 1990s. (Turkish State Hydraulic Works website)

Floods that swept northern and eastern Syria in early June, along with a rise in the Euphrates River after heavy rain and increased flows from Türkiye, have revived questions about the water crisis in Syria and Iraq, and whether Türkiye is using the Tigris and Euphrates as a political and security pressure card.

The crisis between Türkiye, Iraq and Syria centers on how to share the waters of the two rivers. Türkiye, the upstream state, controls the main tributaries. Its water policies and expanding dam network have sharply reduced flows, worsened drought and pushed water levels to near-catastrophic lows, especially in Iraq, which has faced its worst drought in more than 80 years.

Türkiye says the Tigris and Euphrates are transboundary rivers and that it has the right to manage them under its territorial sovereignty. Iraq and Syria want them classified as international rivers, with fair-sharing rules and international law applied under historic agreements, including the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne and joint cooperation protocols.

Mismanagement or resource depletion?

Türkiye has been accused of using water as leverage against Iraq and Syria for security reasons, mainly linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, and its extensions inside both countries. Those tensions later widened into Turkish air and ground operations in the two neighboring states, leaving a Turkish military presence that has long caused friction, especially between Ankara and Baghdad.

Several issues drive the crisis. The most important is Türkiye’s Southeastern Anatolia Project, designed to develop eastern and southeastern Türkiye. Under the project, Türkiye built major dams and reservoirs, including the Ataturk, Keban and Ilisu dams, to regulate irrigation and generate power. That sharply reduced the water reaching Syria and Iraq, the transit and downstream states.

The impact has been especially severe in Iraq. Water scarcity has battered agriculture, shrunk farmland, damaged the southern marshes listed as a World Heritage site and triggered repeated social and environmental crises.

Lower flows have also hit hydroelectric power generation and drinking water supplies for millions of people. In Syria, drought periods have raised the risks of pollution and disease.

Diplomatic efforts have surfaced from time to time. The countries have reached understandings, joint agreements and bilateral, and sometimes trilateral, memorandums of understanding to secure the minimum vital needs of each state. During severe droughts, Iraq and Syria have also tried to persuade Türkiye to increase flows. Türkiye insists it is a water-poor country and says Iraq’s crisis stems from local mismanagement and poor resource use, not from Turkish dams.

In Mesopotamia, water has rarely been just a natural resource. It has been a foundation of civilization, a source of conflict and, at times, a key to reconstruction and joint development. That was reflected in the Iraq-Türkiye framework agreement on water and development signed in November 2025.

What the Tigris brings together, the Euphrates drives apart

Turkish writer and water affairs researcher Bilgay Duman said the agreement, whose full terms have not been disclosed, marked an important development not only in Ankara-Baghdad relations, but also in redefining how shared resources are managed in the Middle East.

Duman said that after Türkiye, Iraq and Syria emerged as states, regulating the use of resources became a political and legal necessity. It also became a permanent source of dispute. The Euphrates turned into a three-way issue, while the Tigris became central to Turkish-Iraqi relations.

Early attempts were made to agree on water shares. The 1921 Ankara Agreement and the 1946 agreement between Türkiye and Iraq laid technical foundations for cooperation, including data sharing and flood control.

Later came the 1987 Syrian-Turkish agreement, a temporary deal to share Euphrates waters during the five-year filling of the Ataturk Dam reservoir.

Signed on July 17, 1987, the agreement committed Türkiye to provide an annual average of more than 500 cubic meters per second at the Turkish-Syrian border until a final arrangement was reached among the three Euphrates states.

On April 17, 1989, Syria and Iraq signed an agreement setting Iraq’s share at 9.106 billion cubic meters a year through the Syrian border, Syria’s share at 6.627 billion cubic meters and Türkiye’s at 15.700 billion cubic meters.

Syria registered its agreement with Türkiye at the United Nations in 1994 to secure its minimum share, and Iraq’s, of Euphrates waters. But that did not solve the problem.

Water for the PKK

As accusations grew that Türkiye was using water to pressure its neighbors, squeeze Kurds in Syria and push Iraq to act against the PKK and classify it as a terrorist organization, the 1997 UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses set out the principles of no harm and equitable distribution.

It also required states to consider the water, economic and social needs of all riparian countries, as well as the needs of populations dependent on the watercourse and its direct and possible effects.

The convention strengthened Iraq and Syria’s legal position against Türkiye because both countries have large areas along the Tigris and Euphrates. Syria was among the first states to ratify it. Türkiye did not join, saying it harmed its interests and water rights, and voted against its adoption.

Syria, where the Euphrates irrigates more than 640,000 hectares, did not turn to international arbitration to secure its water rights from Türkiye. International law remains inconclusive in such cases, and arbitration requires both sides to agree.

Syrian support for the PKK, and its decision to allow the group’s fighters to use northern Syria as a rear base, pushed Türkiye into a harder position and led Ankara to link that support to the water dispute.

In 1993, Turkish-Syrian talks were held in Ankara to reach a final agreement on water shares. They produced nothing beyond the temporary 1987 arrangement, which was tied only to the filling of Lake Ataturk.

The same period saw Syria and Türkiye sign a joint development agreement on the Orontes River, which rises in Lebanon’s upper Bekaa Valley. Türkiye had been excluded from sharing the river with Syria and Lebanon in 1994. Giving up its share was a small price for greater benefit from the Euphrates.

Only 10% of the Orontes reached Türkiye’s Hatay province, and by then it was polluted and unusable. For decades, residents of the province bordering Syria, historically known as the Sanjak of Alexandretta, saw central government policies as unfair and blamed them for marginalizing the area and depriving it of a natural resource for political, ethnic and religious reasons.

Syrian revolution, Turkish opportunity

After the Syrian uprising against Bashar al-Assad began, Türkiye moved quickly to complete the Sanliurfa water canals project in 2012. The canals allowed water held at the Ataturk Dam to irrigate the border plains with Syria in Harran, Mardin and Ceylanpinar. The Silvan Dam was also filled in 2011. Syria took no countermeasure because Assad’s authorities were busy suppressing the uprising.

Syria’s approach to the water file showed that its main strategy against Türkiye had been to exploit internal security and the PKK threat, a strategy that ended with the Adana Agreement. Other options seemed impossible because of Türkiye’s military strength, external alliances and control of the Euphrates source.

Iraq: Drought and unrest

Iraq, which gets 60% of its water needs from Türkiye, has been the hardest hit by shortages. It faced successive severe crises across its territory, especially after the Ilisu Dam, built on the upper Tigris in Türkiye, began operating in 2020. Other dams on smaller tributaries added to the pressure. Tensions with Türkiye over water reached their peak.

Other environmental issues, including tree-cutting in northern Iraq during a Turkish military campaign against PKK militants, deepened tensions with Ankara. Pressure on the Turkish government produced little beyond a slight delay in filling Ilisu, postponing the problem rather than solving it.

In the summer of 2018, dwindling water resources and pollution caused fish to die in the Euphrates. Water shortages then became a major cause of social unrest across Iraq in the following years, culminating in the worst drought in 80 years in 2025.

The Ilisu Dam reduced Iraq’s share of Tigris waters to nearly 60% because of power generation.

In June 2025, Iraq called for water not to be used as a political pressure card and urged a joint regional vision based on fair distribution of transboundary waters. At the same time, it noted progress in negotiations and in the work of joint committees with Türkiye and Iran.

Despite this, Iraq and Türkiye kept positive relations, which expanded under Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani. The two sides reached understandings on security, the economy, trade, water and energy, while focusing on cooperation over the Development Road project.

Water disputes, also tied to security as in the Syrian case, became a route to cooperation after Iraq’s National Security Council declared the PKK a banned group in 2024.

Development Road runs through politics

On Nov. 2, 2025, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein signed a document establishing a mechanism to finance projects under a framework agreement for water cooperation. The mechanism implements the water cooperation framework agreement signed in 2024 during Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan’s visit to Iraq.

The agreement set a framework for water projects worth billions of dollars. Turkish companies will build new infrastructure to improve water-use efficiency and storage in Iraq. The projects will be financed from Iraqi oil revenues, in an attempt to turn crude exports into water security.

According to details that have emerged but have not been formally announced by either side, the first projects include water-collection dams and land-reclamation initiatives.

Ankara described the initiative as mutually beneficial for regional stability and economic cooperation.

“We in Türkiye are keen to support Iraq’s security, development and safety, and our support in this regard is absolute,” Fidan said at the signing ceremony.

Hussein said the agreement was needed to protect water security, food production and economic stability. He said Baghdad had long suffered from a weak position because of the absence of formal treaties regulating the use of Tigris and Euphrates waters.

Securing Erdogan’s presidency in 2028?

The agreement stirred doubts and fears among some Iraqi politicians and water experts. Some said it serves Türkiye more than Iraq and supports Erdogan’s effort to remain president after 2028.

Some Iraqi political forces reject the agreements with Türkiye, including those linked to the Development Road project and water cooperation. They say the deals could make Iraq dependent on Türkiye.

Allocating oil revenues to contracts with Turkish companies also raises legal and constitutional questions, along with concerns about corruption, weak transparency and possible obstacles caused by relying on one funding source, oil, which is exposed to global price swings.

Some opponents point to the absence of a final, binding legal framework agreed by both sides that defines the water share Türkiye must release to Iraq from the Tigris and Euphrates.

Although Türkiye and the PKK have begun a process to end the group’s activity, the PKK file and the presence of its members in northern Iraq, in areas beyond Baghdad’s control, could still obstruct implementation of the agreement.

The issue is not limited to Iraq’s domestic situation. It also touches the regional balance, with some parties seeing stronger Iraq-Türkiye ties as a source of pressure. That could turn Iraq into an arena for regional competition and influence struggles.

The Ottoman legacy

Duman said the agreement serves the interests of both Türkiye and Iraq. He said the water problem between the two countries did not emerge in recent decades, but dates back to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, when the Tigris and Euphrates changed from internal rivers inside one political entity into transboundary rivers between independent states.

What marks the current phase in Turkish-Iraqi relations, he said, is the gradual shift from conflict over water shares to managing mutual benefit, and a broader rethinking of transboundary resources as a driver of integration, not a permanent source of tension.

He said the agreement’s most important new feature is the direct link between water and energy. Revenues from oil Türkiye imports from Iraq will finance water projects inside Iraq.

Turkish companies specializing in dams, modern irrigation networks, water treatment and waste reduction will carry them out. That bypasses one of Iraq’s biggest development obstacles, lack of funding, without turning to foreign loans or the conditions of international financial institutions.

In an article on the Turkish platform Fikir Turu, Duman said the model gives Türkiye a new role, not just as a state that controls water sources but as a partner in rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure. That strengthens Türkiye’s regional influence through economic and development tools rather than hard-power tools.

The model could also expand regionally and become a practical reference for future cooperation with Syria, especially on Euphrates water management, if the right political conditions emerge.

Water diplomacy in the Levant could then shift from a source of fragility and chronic conflict into a platform for trust-building and regional integration, by linking natural resources to economic development rather than reducing them to sovereignty and conflict.

Prominent Turkish transboundary water researcher Dr. Tugba Evrim Maden told Asharq Al-Awsat that shared water resources need joint management based on technological solutions, not conflict or legal disputes.

She said the problems of downstream countries mostly stem from political instability, destroyed infrastructure, poor resource use and waste.

Türkiye is not rich in water

Contrary to common belief, Türkiye is not rich in water resources. It is not water-abundant compared with its region. It lies in a semi-arid climate zone and has less annual water per person than its neighbors, North America and water-rich northern Europe.

In water-rich countries, the annual per capita share of usable water exceeds 10,000 cubic meters. In Türkiye, it is about 1,350 cubic meters, according to Turkish Foreign Ministry data.

If the population reaches 100 million in 2030, Türkiye’s per capita water share is expected to fall to about 1,000 cubic meters. Because Türkiye’s water resources vary by region and season, they cannot meet current and expected needs everywhere. Some areas have abundant water that is not suitable for use, while densely populated industrial areas lack enough water.

Türkiye’s arid and semi-arid regions receive rain for only four or five months a year. That makes water development projects, including dams and reservoirs that store rainwater for year-round use, vital to sustainable social and economic development.

At the same time, Türkiye’s energy consumption is rising because of rapid urbanization and industrialization. Its per capita energy use is only one-sixth of the European Union average. Türkiye has no major oil or natural gas resources, so it is pursuing domestic resources to meet rising energy needs, including renewable, cheap and environmentally friendly hydropower.

The UN Convention to Combat Desertification’s report, “Global Drought Hotspots 2023-2025,” placed Türkiye among critical areas in the drought belt stretching from southern Europe to the Middle East.

The report warned that current trends could push Türkiye into severe water scarcity by 2030, with nearly 80% of its farmland potentially exposed to repeated and severe drought waves over the next decade.

As climate change intensifies, Türkiye is nearing a crisis that threatens its water security. Turkish and international experts say it is approaching the critical threshold of water poverty and could be officially classified as water-poor by 2030 if current conditions continue.

Türkiye’s per capita share of renewable water has fallen from about 1,650 cubic meters at the start of the millennium to below 1,300 cubic meters now, nearing the UN red line of 1,000 cubic meters a year.

The 19% decline in two decades reflects not only a resource crisis, but also an unsustainable consumption pattern and a water management system facing a serious structural challenge, water experts say.

Türkiye suffered severe drought in 2025, marked by scarce rain, record temperatures and dried-up lakes and water bodies. It recorded its hottest December in more than half a century, with rainfall more than 50% below seasonal averages, according to the Turkish State Meteorological Service.

Lack of response

Experts say that despite growing warnings about water poverty, the authorities’ response remains below the scale of the challenge.

Mustafa Chashmaz, a climate professor at Karadeniz Technical University, warned that evaporation caused by rising temperatures has become one of the main drivers of water loss. He said that storing water in broad-surface dams without accounting for climate conditions makes reservoirs more vulnerable to evaporation as heat waves intensify.

He called for urgent technical solutions, including deeper reservoirs less exposed to sunlight, covered basins in sensitive areas, and a ban on the use of freshwater in private swimming pools at coastal resorts, replacing it with treated saltwater.

He also said state institutions are part of the problem because public facilities consume large amounts of water without effective conservation systems or modern saving technologies.

Türkiye faces one of the most complex environmental challenges in its modern history: widening desertification, worsening drought and rising environmental stress. Recent years have brought repeated severe heat waves and forest fires, including about 3,000 fires in the summer of 2025.

Türkiye’s water crisis extends beyond its borders and affects regional water security, especially in Syria and Iraq. Türkiye controls about 90% of Euphrates waters and a large share of Tigris waters.

At the opening of water projects in October 2025, Erdogan said Türkiye was not water-rich, as some believe. Annual average rainfall does not exceed 574 millimeters, he said, far below the global average.

Experts say agriculture consumes 70% to 75% of total water withdrawals, while cities lose 20% to 35% through leaking networks. Dam efficiency is also weakened by evaporation and sediment buildup.

The Turkish government recently announced a program to restore shrinking or dried-up lakes, including Lake Marmara in western Türkiye. It also plans to invest in wastewater recycling plants for irrigation, agriculture and industry, and to build new desalination plants in areas with chronic freshwater shortages, especially western Anatolia and the Mediterranean coast.

Urgent priorities include cutting urban water losses to below 15%, expanding high-efficiency irrigation systems to save up to 30% of agricultural consumption, reducing evaporation by improving reservoir design and expanding underground storage, raising treated-water reuse to 20% of urban demand, adjusting water tariffs, shifting to less water-intensive crops and adopting mandatory drought management plans.



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.