Barrack Says Lebanon Has an Opportunity; Israel, Not US, Setting Deadline for Hezbollah Disarmament

US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack arrives for his meeting with Lebanon's Prime Minister at the government palace in Beirut on July 21, 2025. (AFP)
US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack arrives for his meeting with Lebanon's Prime Minister at the government palace in Beirut on July 21, 2025. (AFP)
TT

Barrack Says Lebanon Has an Opportunity; Israel, Not US, Setting Deadline for Hezbollah Disarmament

US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack arrives for his meeting with Lebanon's Prime Minister at the government palace in Beirut on July 21, 2025. (AFP)
US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack arrives for his meeting with Lebanon's Prime Minister at the government palace in Beirut on July 21, 2025. (AFP)

US envoy Tom Barrack concluded his visit to Beirut on Wednesday by reiterating Washington’s stances related to the disarmament of Hezbollah, which he said is the responsibility of the Lebanese government that is obligated to limit the possession of weapons in the country to the state.

He warned that its failure to carry out tangible steps in this regard means that the current situation will persist, including Israeli strikes on southern Lebanon and drones flying over Beirut.

During a small meeting with a group of journalists, including Asharq Al-Awsat, Barrack said he was optimistic about everything.

It is time for the Lebanese government to assume its responsibility towards the agreements it struck in the past, he went on to say.

The government agreed to a number of conditions that may or may not have pleased everyone, he added. He said half of those he is referring to are saying that the current situation is good and will never change. So, let Hezbollah and Israel fight each other down there. That is their business; Beirut is fine.

He added that on the other hand, he saw some people who want change and so they must decide what this change demands.

Lebanon has embarked on a path; it elected a new president, chose a new prime minister and boasts a competent parliament speaker, remarked Barrack.

Lebanon has a new group of ministers who are very competent. Hold them to account, he urged. If there is a law, then someone must implement it. If the law is harsh on a segment of the population, then they must be informed that they are not above the law.

The reason for Lebanon’s success in the past was because everyone worked outside the system. Over time, since the 1970s, people came up with their own interpretations of the law. Courage lies in implementing the law, stressed the envoy.

Failure to do so in all likelihood means that Israeli strikes and drones will not stop. “It’s that simple,” Barrack said.

Surprisingly, he revealed that he sensed during his meetings with a Lebanese “readiness” to normalize relations with Israel. He clarified that none of the officials said this, as the government will always say that it never talks to Israel.

Moreover, Barrack said that Israel has no ambitions in Lebanon. “Who would be dumb enough to believe otherwise?” If Israel really wanted to swallow up Lebanon, it would have done so in a heartbeat. Everybody knows that. The government knows that. This is not what Israel wants, he asserted.

Barrack added that he had the opportunity to sit down with Lebanese ministers and senior officials, expressing his admiration of them.

He said that he believes that everyone, deep down, certainly wants to reach a solution to the conflict in this region.

Asked whether Lebanon has a timeframe to disarm Hezbollah, he replied: “Yes.” Lebanon’s neighbor, Israel, not the United States, is the one who sets that timeframe.

The envoy reiterated that Lebanon stands before an opportunity. “We believe we have an opportunity and that we can help,” he continued. Lebanon can be a link to all neighbors when it is in a good place. With Gulf friends and friends in the West, as well as France, “we can have a real impact on this path.”

But the message remains the same: Lebanon must implement its laws. As long as they are not implemented, then it doesn't matter what it does. Lebanon will not get a single cent in foreign capital, he cautioned.

Barrack speaks to a group of journalists in Beirut, including Asharq Al-Awsat's Thaer Abbas. (Asharq Al-Awsat)

Hezbollah ‘propaganda’

Barrack mocked Hezbollah’s “propaganda” on social media that said the party will not lay down its weapons so that it will be able to “protect” the Lebanese from the “evil Syrians”.

The “evil Syrians” can’t even make it outside of Damascus, he said.

Addressing the Lebanese people, he assured them not be concerned with Iran, Israel or Syria. They should instead be worried about their own internal affairs. If they stick together, then they can control the region.

Barrack also said there was an opportunity to strike a deal now between Hezbollah and Israel. Were he able to talk to Hezbollah, he would have told them so, he remarked.

Furthermore, he said the chances of Iran and the US failing to strike a deal are very slim, so the Lebanese must think about what points related to Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis must be included in the deal.

On reforms, he hailed Lebanon’s efforts, saying the banking crisis can be resolved after determining who is to blame for the losses. This happened in the US in 1989 and in other places around the world.

In the past, Lebanon had a group of elites who owned the banks and ran the country. They were the ones who benefited from all the money, even personally. That is why no one took any decision to address the crisis. But now, it seems that Lebanon has a number of people who are ready to do so, said the envoy.

Turning to Syria, Barrack expressed his support to the new Syrian leadership, calling on skeptics to present an alternative.

On Lebanese-Syrian relations, he said the two parties were never enemies. The new leadership has never thought about seizing Lebanese territories as they can barely handle developments taking place in Damascus.

Lebanon, meanwhile, has an opportunity, Barrack stated. Given the Lebanese capabilities, there is an opportunity for development in Syria through Gulf funds.

He noted that the Gulf is pouring funds into the new Syria. Even though interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa had a bad reputation in the beginning, now is the time to move forward.

Perhaps corruption will crop up in the future, but it isn’t there now, he said.

US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Thom Barrack attends an interview with Reuters in Beirut, Lebanon July 22, 2025. (Reuters)

Lebanon, on the other hand, is seen as very complicated for the Arabs, so they decided that they will invest in Syria and shape a new country. Lebanon will benefit the most from this because Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates will pump funds there.

As usual, however, the Lebanese have to decide what to do, he stressed.

Ultimately, relations between Lebanon and Syria boil down to a lack of trust, Barrack said. Agreement between the two sides will be very important. The current leadership is in no way affiliated with the ousted regime, so, from that standpoint, there should be no issue with it.

Patriarch Rahi

Barrack had met on Wednesday with Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi, who told his guest that the Lebanese people were awaiting the outcomes of his visit.

Barrack responded that he doesn’t know what the ending will look like, but efforts are underway to achieve stability.

He said his visit carried hope, which should be the focus, instead of statements made here and there.

He said he can offer hope, money and support because the Gulf and world stand with Lebanon, while reiterating the demand to limit the possession of arms in the country to the state.

Barrack acknowledged that the situation is complicated for the Lebanese leaders, adding that he will return to Lebanon when the need arises.

The government, meanwhile, must decide what it needs to do. The US is not the only one that wants to help Lebanon, but the Gulf and neighbors too, but to do so, the Lebanese people must achieve stability, he urged.



Yemen Faces New Phase of Iranian Threat

An image circulated on social media shows an Iranian aircraft at Sanaa airport, which is under the control of the Houthis (X).
An image circulated on social media shows an Iranian aircraft at Sanaa airport, which is under the control of the Houthis (X).
TT

Yemen Faces New Phase of Iranian Threat

An image circulated on social media shows an Iranian aircraft at Sanaa airport, which is under the control of the Houthis (X).
An image circulated on social media shows an Iranian aircraft at Sanaa airport, which is under the control of the Houthis (X).

Yemen’s internationally recognized government said it has entered a new phase in its confrontation with the Iran-backed Houthi movement after Iran operated a direct flight to Sanaa International Airport, controlled by the group, to transport senior Houthi officials to the funeral of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

The government condemned the flight as a violation of Yemen’s sovereignty, while the Coalition to Restore Legitimacy in Yemen warned against any escalation threatening either Saudi Arabia or Yemen.

In response, Yemen’s Presidential Leadership Council, chaired by Rashad al-Alimi, held an emergency meeting with senior military and security officials, signaling that it views the issue as more than a civilian flight. The council said it challenged the state’s exclusive authority over its airspace, airports and international crossings.

The council argued the flight underscored the Houthis’ close ties to Tehran and their continued use of state institutions under their control to advance Iran’s agenda. It said the move violated UN Security Council resolutions and international law, testing the international community’s commitment to protecting Yemen’s sovereignty.

The government warned that allowing international flights without its approval would set a dangerous precedent, bypass legitimate institutions and entrench the country’s political division. It vowed to use political, legal and diplomatic means to defend its sovereignty.

The council also linked the flight to a pattern of Houthi actions, including attacks on international shipping and rejection of peace initiatives, saying the group continues to put Iran’s interests ahead of Yemen’s.

Saudi warning

The Saudi-led coalition said the issue extends beyond Yemen’s internal conflict and affects regional security.

Coalition spokesman Maj. Gen. Turki al-Maliki warned that the alliance would respond “with full force and unprecedented strength” to any attempt to target Saudi Arabia or undermine Yemen’s sovereignty.

Analysts say the statement draws red lines against any permanent Iranian presence at Sanaa airport while stressing that any response would remain consistent with international humanitarian law.

Peace efforts under strain

The escalation comes as regional and international mediators seek to preserve Yemen’s fragile truce despite stalled peace talks.

Houthi threats to establish regular Iranian flights to Sanaa have raised fears of a more dangerous phase in the conflict, particularly given longstanding accusations that Tehran supplies the group with weapons, military technology and advisers.

Yemen’s government stressed that Sanaa airport is not merely a humanitarian issue but one of sovereignty and international recognition. It urged the United Nations and the UN Security Council to move beyond condemnations and take concrete action against Iranian violations.

Meanwhile, the Saudi-led coalition supporting Yemen’s internationally recognized government has sought to underscore its continued backing for the Yemeni administration, while issuing clear deterrent signals against any moves that could threaten its security or alter the existing rules of engagement.


Is a New Showdown Looming Between al-Sadr and the Coordination Framework in Iraq?

Sadrist Movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. (Reuters file)
Sadrist Movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. (Reuters file)
TT

Is a New Showdown Looming Between al-Sadr and the Coordination Framework in Iraq?

Sadrist Movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. (Reuters file)
Sadrist Movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. (Reuters file)

The decision by influential cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Sadrist Movement, to break his prolonged silence and publicly back Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s anti-corruption campaign appears to mark a turning point in Iraq’s political landscape.

It raises the prospect of a direct confrontation with the ruling Coordination Framework, after years in which rivalry between the two sides was largely confined to electoral politics and political maneuvering rather than open confrontation.

The first notable response came from former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, leader of the State of Law Coalition, who defended the Framework as a political project that had “proven its success.” His remarks were widely interpreted as an attempt to contain mounting pressure on the ruling Shiite alliance that has varying ties to Iran.

The developments come amid signs of growing divisions within the Framework, which emerged after the 2021 elections as an alternative to the Shiite alliances that had dominated Iraqi politics since 2005.

Al-Sadr’s silence

After the 2021 elections, al-Sadr sought to form a “national majority government” with the Kurdistan Democratic Party, led by Masoud Barzani, and a Sunni alliance headed by former Parliament Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi.

The effort collapsed because of the so-called “blocking third,” which prevented the election of a president by the constitutionally required majority and prolonged Iraq’s political deadlock.

In the summer of 2022, al-Sadr withdrew his lawmakers from parliament and announced his departure from political life, declaring that he refused to “participate with the corrupt in any form.”

He also said he would not take part in elections “while the corrupt remain,” urging his supporters to preserve their political and grassroots organization in preparation for a future stage should circumstances change.

Since then, al-Sadr has boycotted every subsequent election, including the most recent one, despite repeated calls — including from rivals within the Framework — to return to politics.

Anti-corruption campaign reshapes the landscape

The political equation shifted with al-Zaidi’s recent anti-corruption campaign, which reached its peak with the arrest of 21 political and parliamentary figures in the operation dubbed “Dawn Strike.”

The campaign gained further momentum after investigating judge Diaa Jaafar revealed that part of the embezzled funds had been used to finance election campaigns, raising broader questions about the integrity of the most recent elections and the influence of political money on their outcome.

Observers said these developments have given al-Sadr political ground that aligns with the position he adopted after leaving parliament: refusing to participate in what he considers a political system tainted by corruption.

Settlement or political realignment?

Al-Zaidi became prime minister after the Coordination Framework failed to agree on a candidate from within its own ranks.

After former Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani was effectively ruled out for a second term and al-Maliki’s candidacy faltered amid domestic and international objections, specifically from the US, political factions turned to a figure from outside Iraq’s traditional political class.

A businessman in his 40s, al-Zaidi is widely seen as an acceptable choice for Washington, while Iran has reacted with unusual caution, reflecting what many observers see as a decline in its influence in Iraq compared with previous years.

His early decisions attracted attention, including his announcement not to attend the funeral of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, which was attended by several Coordination Framework leaders and an official Iraqi delegation headed by President Nizar Amidi.

He has also pledged to strengthen ties with the United States and is expected to visit Washington in July.

Domestically, al-Zaidi has vowed to press ahead with mostly pro-Iran disarming armed factions, giving them until September to surrender their weapons, an issue successive Iraqi governments have failed to resolve because of its political and security complexities.

Al-Sadr breaks his silence

The turning point came when al-Sadr fully endorsed the anti-corruption campaign, describing al-Zaidi as a “soldier of reform.” The move went beyond political support, giving the government broad popular backing.

Pro-government demonstrations followed, while Sadrist leaders began openly supporting the campaign after months of silence awaiting al-Sadr’s instructions.

Observers viewed this as the first broad political and popular alignment against Iraq’s ruling establishment since 2003, particularly because the anti-corruption campaign has targeted figures associated with influential factions within the Coordination Framework.

The political stakes are heightened by the fact that al-Zaidi’s priorities — combating corruption and bringing all weapons under state control — overlap with those of US President Donald Trump’s administration toward Iraq.

Analysts said this creates a convergence of interests between Washington and the Sadrist Movement, despite their fundamental differences on other issues.

Pressure mounts on the Coordination Framework

The convergence does not amount to a direct political alliance between al-Sadr and the US administration. However, it gives al-Zaidi’s government support from two actors traditionally viewed as standing on opposite sides of Iraq’s political divide, thereby increasing pressure on the Coordination Framework.

In response, al-Maliki defended the alliance in a post on X, saying it had served as “the incubator of the national political process” and that its success was reflected in its role in forming three successive governments.

“There is no reason to abandon a project that has proven successful,” he wrote, adding that the Coordination Framework “will remain as it was founded, preserving its principles, identity and founders,” while arguing that any reform should be limited to improving its mechanisms and performance, without altering the essence of the project.


Israeli Military Says Killed Armed Militant in South Lebanon

This picture taken from a position in the Upper Galilee in northern Israel shows Israeli army tanks positioned along the Israel-Lebanon border, on July 1, 2026. (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) /
This picture taken from a position in the Upper Galilee in northern Israel shows Israeli army tanks positioned along the Israel-Lebanon border, on July 1, 2026. (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) /
TT

Israeli Military Says Killed Armed Militant in South Lebanon

This picture taken from a position in the Upper Galilee in northern Israel shows Israeli army tanks positioned along the Israel-Lebanon border, on July 1, 2026. (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) /
This picture taken from a position in the Upper Galilee in northern Israel shows Israeli army tanks positioned along the Israel-Lebanon border, on July 1, 2026. (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) /

The Israeli military said on Saturday that it killed an armed militant in the "security zone" under its control in south Lebanon.

The military said in a statement on Saturday that Israeli soldiers “identified an armed terrorist operating inside the Security Zone, in the Majdal Zoun area in southern Lebanon," adding that troops "opened fire at the terrorist" and, after conducting "extensive searches", then "eliminated" him.

Lebanon's state-run National News Agency (NNA) said an Israeli helicopter carried out "a broad sweep operation on the outskirts" of Majdal Zoun and launched five missiles towards the village, without specifying a target or immediately reporting casualties.

The NNA also reported on Saturday that an Israeli strike on the village of Mansouri wounded one person, and reported Israeli artillery shelling elsewhere.

Hezbollah drew Lebanon into the Middle East war on March 2 with rocket fire at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran's supreme leader in US-Israeli strikes days earlier.

Israel responded with heavy airstrikes and a ground invasion of southern Lebanon, where its troops still occupy swathes of territory near the border.

At the end of June, Lebanon and Israel agreed to a US-backed framework aiming to pave the way for a permanent end to hostilities.