Iran Links Hamas, its Allies’ Weapons in Lebanon to Hezbollah’s Arms

A Lebanese soldier sits on an armored personnel carrier at the entrance of Burj Barajneh Palestinian refugee camp in southern Beirut, Lebanon, 21 August 2025.   EPA/WAEL HAMZEH
A Lebanese soldier sits on an armored personnel carrier at the entrance of Burj Barajneh Palestinian refugee camp in southern Beirut, Lebanon, 21 August 2025. EPA/WAEL HAMZEH
TT

Iran Links Hamas, its Allies’ Weapons in Lebanon to Hezbollah’s Arms

A Lebanese soldier sits on an armored personnel carrier at the entrance of Burj Barajneh Palestinian refugee camp in southern Beirut, Lebanon, 21 August 2025.   EPA/WAEL HAMZEH
A Lebanese soldier sits on an armored personnel carrier at the entrance of Burj Barajneh Palestinian refugee camp in southern Beirut, Lebanon, 21 August 2025. EPA/WAEL HAMZEH

As efforts to address Hezbollah’s weapons continue to stall, along with the domestic dialogue over the issue, discussion of Palestinian weapons inside the refugee camps has simultaneously receded, despite the fact that the process of withdrawing those weapons actually began some time ago.

With key stages in the handover of weapons belonging to Palestinian factions of the Palestine Liberation Organization now completed, attention has turned primarily to weapons held by factions close to Hezbollah, foremost among them Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Both movements have refused to cooperate with the official Lebanese-Palestinian understanding on the issue, raising questions over whether the fate of these weapons will be addressed separately or whether it has, in one way or another, become tied to the fate of Hezbollah’s own weapons.

Since August 2025, the Lebanese Army has taken possession of a large portion of the medium and heavy weapons belonging to PLO factions. The process took place in stages, in implementation of the resolutions of the Lebanese-Palestinian summit held on May 21, 2025, between Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

The resolutions affirmed Lebanon’s sovereignty over its entire territory, the extension of state authority, and the principle that weapons must be held exclusively by the state.

However, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other allied factions rejected the resolutions of the Lebanese-Palestinian summit. They believe the Lebanese state should address the Palestinian issue in Lebanon as a single package, meaning that priority should not be given to weapons over Palestinian rights and demands.

A Bargaining Chip

After US President Donald Trump announced at the end of July that the “Board of Peace” he chairs had reached an agreement calling for the “full disarmament” of Hamas and other armed groups in the Gaza Strip, questions emerged over whether the fate of Hamas's weapons in Lebanon was linked to the fate of its weapons in Gaza.

However, a senior Lebanese official told Asharq Al-Awsat that “what is preventing the completion of the process of taking possession of Palestinian weapons deployed inside the camps, specifically the weapons of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and their allies, is that Iran and Hezbollah have linked the fate of these weapons to the fate of Hezbollah’s weapons, believing that they can be used as a bargaining chip in any future negotiations.”

He noted that “when Hamas is asked to hand over its weapons in Lebanon, it says the matter is in Hezbollah’s hands. When Hezbollah is asked about the issue, it says the time is not right to settle it.”

The source explained that “around 60 percent of the weapons belonging to PLO factions have been handed over, and most of the remaining weapons are small arms that the factions say they need to maintain security in the camps and defend themselves in any internal Palestinian conflict.” He added that “Hamas's main weapons are concentrated in Rashidieh camp south of the Litani River, including the Grad rockets located there.”

Hamas's Position

On whether the fate of Hamas's weapons in Lebanon is linked to the fate of its weapons in Gaza, sources within the movement said that, regarding Palestinian weapons in the Gaza Strip, “the discussion was about restricting and collecting the weapons, not handing them over, with the weapons to be collected by a Palestinian party, whether the local administration in the Gaza Strip or the Palestinian factions.” They stressed that “the weapons in Gaza cannot be compared with those in Lebanon because Gaza is under Israeli occupation, and the Palestinian people have the right to resist the occupation with all the means at their disposal.

As for the weapons in Lebanon, the movement does not have heavy weapons in Lebanon. There are many Palestinian factions that possess weapons, and they predate Hamas in terms of their presence in the camps and may possess quantities of weapons far greater than those held by Hamas. Therefore, we said that in Hamas's case in Lebanon, the discussion primarily concerns small arms held by the Palestinian resistance or by the movement, rather than heavy weapons in the conventional sense.”

The source told Asharq Al-Awsat that “the movement supports any steps that would strengthen Lebanon’s stability and security. It has held several meetings with the Lebanese-Palestinian Dialogue Committee to reach a comprehensive solution to the conditions of Palestinians, covering humanitarian, social, economic, and rights-related aspects. But recently we have observed new measures restricting Palestinians, contrary to what had been agreed, including preventing them from owning property and denying Palestinians certain professional and social rights.”

The source added: “As for the weapons, they have been there for decades and are historically linked to the issue of the Israeli occupation. Today, their presence is more symbolic than a means of confronting the occupation. If the Lebanese state wants to address this issue, we are open to dialogue and understanding to reach solutions that satisfy everyone, away from any tension or confrontation.”

Palestinian Factions in Lebanon

Palestinian armed forces in Lebanon are broadly divided into three main groups, although their situations today differ significantly.

The first group consists of PLO factions, most notably Fatah, the largest Palestinian force in Lebanon, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Palestine Liberation Front, along with smaller factions.

The second group consists of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the two most prominent Palestinian Islamist armed forces outside the PLO.

The two movements were part of the Palestinian forces alliance, which also included factions historically linked to Syria. In 2025, they announced that their weapons were tied to the “Palestinian cause,” rather than to PLO weapons, and therefore did not take part in the handover process that began in August 2025 in the same manner.

The third group consists of factions that were linked to the former Syrian regime and whose presence inside the camps has now become largely symbolic. Three main forces fall into this category: the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, the most prominent Palestinian faction that was closely linked to the Assad regime and maintained military bases outside the camps, most notably Qusaya and Sultan Yacoub in the Bekaa.

Fatah al-Intifada was also closely linked to Syria and maintained positions and weapons outside the camps, most notably in Naameh, south of Beirut, and in the Bekaa in eastern Lebanon. The third was Al-Sa'iqa, a Palestinian faction established by Syria's former leadership. Its ties to the Syrian regime were direct, although weaker in Lebanon than those of the General Command and Fatah al-Intifada.

These three factions effectively lost their Syrian political and military backing after the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024. The Lebanese state did not wait for a comprehensive agreement on disarming Palestinian factions inside the camps. Instead, the Lebanese Army began dealing with the military bases of Syria-linked factions outside the camps. It took control of General Command positions in Qusaya and Sultan Yacoub, including their weapons, equipment, and rockets. Several positions belonging to other factions were also dismantled.

Notably, this took place at the end of 2024 and beginning of 2025, before the process of handing over weapons in PLO camps began in August 2025.

Fatah al-Intifada, meanwhile, maintained a presence in some of the camps, and the handover of its weapons was not directly linked to the transfer of control over General Command bases. A month ago, the movement began handing over its heavy and medium weapons to the Lebanese Army at Beddawi camp in northern Lebanon, in a move described as the first instance of a Palestinian faction outside the PLO proceeding to hand over its weapons.



Australia, Canada, France and United Kingdom Regret Postponement of Palestinian Elections

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Reuters)
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Reuters)
TT

Australia, Canada, France and United Kingdom Regret Postponement of Palestinian Elections

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Reuters)
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Reuters)

The foreign ministers of Australia, Canada, France and the United Kingdom on Tuesday expressed deep “regret” over the Palestinian President's decision to postpone the Palestinian Legislative Council elections and the Presidential elections to September 2027.

“Nearly two decades have passed since the last Palestinian Legislative Council elections and five years since the planned 2021 elections were postponed,” the ministers said in a joint statement.

“An entire generation of Palestinians has reached adulthood without the opportunity to choose their elected representatives,” they said, adding that this delay will be deeply disappointing and once again deprive Palestinians of the opportunity to vote and will further erode public confidence in democratic institutions.

“We acknowledge that significant challenges and impediments have affected the ability to conduct elections in a manner fully consistent with international standards and with the participation of all eligible Palestinians,” the ministers said.

They commended the important work of the Central Elections Commission in advancing practical preparations to address these challenges and facilitate voter participation.

The votes were set to happen next month. On Saturday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas issued a decree calling for simultaneous presidential and legislative elections on Sept. 11, 2027, canceling a legislative vote scheduled for Nov. 28, 2026, after his Fatah movement and other Palestinian factions agreed to postpone it.

The widely anticipated decision sets a new date for Palestinians to elect both their president and lawmakers amid concerns over Israeli restrictions and the security situation in Gaza and the West Bank.

In their statement, the foreign ministers said credible elections are an important element of the commitment that Abbas and the Palestinian Authority made to reform, including democratic renewal and accountable governance, and are in line with the July 2025 New York Declaration.

They also noted that strengthening Palestinian governance is essential to continue building the institutional foundations of a viable two-state solution, which is the only path to lasting peace and security for both Israel and Palestine.

The ministers then called on the Palestinian Authority to reconsider the decision to postpone elections and to take the necessary steps to hold legislative and presidential elections, without further delay.

“We will continue to support efforts to deliver on these elections. We reiterate our call on Israel to refrain from actions that could impede the conduct of elections, including the practical arrangements necessary for all Palestinians to participate,” they said.

The four ministers also reiterated their longstanding position that Hamas can have no role in the future governance of Palestine.


Watchdog Chief Says Urgent to Find Remaining Assad-Era Chemical Weapons

Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani (R) and OPCW Director General Dallafior (L) attend a joint press conference at the Tishreen Palace in Damascus, Syria, 13 October 2026. (EPA)
Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani (R) and OPCW Director General Dallafior (L) attend a joint press conference at the Tishreen Palace in Damascus, Syria, 13 October 2026. (EPA)
TT

Watchdog Chief Says Urgent to Find Remaining Assad-Era Chemical Weapons

Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani (R) and OPCW Director General Dallafior (L) attend a joint press conference at the Tishreen Palace in Damascus, Syria, 13 October 2026. (EPA)
Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani (R) and OPCW Director General Dallafior (L) attend a joint press conference at the Tishreen Palace in Damascus, Syria, 13 October 2026. (EPA)

The head of the world's chemical weapons watchdog on a visit Tuesday to Syrian capital Damascus said the remaining chemical weapons from the era of ousted president Bashar al-Assad must be urgently identified and destroyed.

Assad was repeatedly accused of using chemical weapons during Syria's 13-year civil war, and there has been widespread concern about the fate of Syria's stocks since his 2024 ousting.

Sabrina Dallafior, the head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), hailed cooperation with the new authorities over chemical weapons which Assad allegedly used in mass attacks against his own citizens during the war.

"The most urgent priority now is to assess those sites of most concern from a proliferation perspective," Dallafior said during a joint press conference with Syria's foreign minister.

"That means identifying and securing any remnants of the Assad-era chemical weapons program," she said.

She said that "the OPCW verified the destruction by Syria of 42 chemical aerial bombs for the first time. Verified destruction in cooperation with the new government. This is a milestone."

Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani meanwhile said that eliminating chemical weapons was "a responsibility towards the victims and a commitment to ensuring that future generations never experience such atrocities again".

He said he had discussed with Dallafior "a roadmap to build on the progress made and move towards the final closure of the file".

The top diplomat said Syria had handed over more than 100,000 official documents to the OPCW and granted the watchdog access to records and witnesses.

Izumi Nakamitsu, head of the UN disarmament office, said an OPCW team in August "verified the irreversible destruction of 42 aerial bombs" by Syrian authorities.

"This significant development means that, for the first time since 2014, the OPCW has verified the destruction of chemical munitions from the Syrian Arab Republic," she said.

The OPCW reinstated Syria in July, following an unprecedented move in 2021 of stripping Syria of its voting rights after finding its air force had used nerve agent sarin and chlorine gas on its own people.

In 2013, Syria agreed to join the OPCW and disclose and hand over its toxic stockpile under Russian and US pressure, and to avert the threat of air strikes by Washington and its allies.

This came after a suspected chemical attack on the Eastern Ghouta suburb of Damascus that killed more than 1,000 people, according to US intelligence, and was attributed to the Syrian government, which denied involvement and blamed opposition forces.


Move to Repeal Syria’s Anti-Brotherhood Law Raises Questions over Group’s Political Return

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and several ministers attend a military parade in Damascus. (Syrian Defense Ministry)
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and several ministers attend a military parade in Damascus. (Syrian Defense Ministry)
TT

Move to Repeal Syria’s Anti-Brotherhood Law Raises Questions over Group’s Political Return

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and several ministers attend a military parade in Damascus. (Syrian Defense Ministry)
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and several ministers attend a military parade in Damascus. (Syrian Defense Ministry)

Syrian lawmakers are gathering signatures to propose repealing a law that makes membership in the Muslim Brotherhood punishable by death, as the group signals it wants to return to politics after decades of prohibition.

The parallel moves have raised questions about whether Syria’s transitional authorities will allow the Brotherhood back into political life, and how much room they will give political parties.

Abdel Nasser Houshan, chairman of the People’s Assembly’s Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, told Asharq Al-Awsat that the proposal to repeal Law No. 49 of 1980 was still at the signature-gathering stage and had not been submitted to the assembly.

Under the assembly’s rules, 17 members must first approve the proposal before a bill can be drafted and submitted for referral to the relevant committee, he said.

The legacy of Law 49

Media leaks had suggested lawmakers could discuss the proposal at their next session, expected in the middle of this month. Houshan’s comments indicate that the steps needed to bring it before the assembly remain incomplete.

Enacted in July 1980 under former President Hafez al-Assad, Law 49 classified every member of the Muslim Brotherhood as a criminal punishable by death. It became a key weapon in the former government’s confrontation with the group, whose members and supporters faced decades of arrests and persecution.

Hussam Jazmati, a researcher on Islamist organizations and groups, expects “broad support inside and outside the assembly” for repealing the law, given the abuses associated with it under the former government.

Repealing the “strange” law matters regardless of whom it targeted, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

He called it “one of the instruments of state terror under the Assad regime,” saying security agencies used it to pursue people merely suspected of belonging to the Brotherhood.

The law left a deep legacy of intimidation in Syrian society, particularly in conservative and religious communities, he said.

“Sympathy for its victims could provide a basis for supporting its repeal, even among groups that do not support the Brotherhood politically.”

Yet the law’s legal status is itself unclear.

The declaration issued at the “Victory Conference” on Jan. 29, 2025, after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government, suspended all exceptional laws. It remains unclear whether that covered Law 49 — or whether the law still requires a legislative repeal.

The declaration also dissolved the Baath Party, the parties of the National Progressive Front and their affiliated organizations, and banned their reconstitution.

It dissolved military factions and revolutionary political and civilian bodies, requiring their integration into state institutions.

But it did not dissolve all political parties without exception, leaving unresolved the legal basis for party activity during the transition.

A test of political will

For Abdel Rahman al-Haj, a researcher specializing in Islamist movements, bringing the repeal before the People’s Assembly would be “a test of the transitional government’s political will.”

An indefinite delay could signal that the authorities do not want to ease the Brotherhood’s return to politics or allow it an active role in the next phase, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“Leaving the law in place without invalidating it in the constitutional declaration, and leaving it to the People’s Assembly, will be understood as additional pressure on the group,” he said.

The Brotherhood had already faced various forms of pressure to dissolve itself, he added.

The Syrian Brotherhood’s Shura Council held its fifth regular session on Sept. 27, 2026, issuing a 16-point statement on political, security and economic developments, as well as regional and international issues.

The statement affirmed the group’s desire to participate in political life and called for pluralism and rules governing party activity. Observers read it as preparation for a return to politics inside Syria.

Al-Haj said its second and sixth points showed that “the group wants to engage in party competition and is preparing for the return of political life as set out in the constitutional declaration.”

The Brotherhood appears to feel it faces “systematic exclusion and marginalization,” he said. At this stage of the transition, he added, it needs to test how serious the government is about establishing a legal framework for political activity ahead of an agreed political transition.

Jazmati sees a more immediate obstacle.

“The return of political life depends on the authorities’ will,” he said, adding that they do not appear to want organized parties, at least during the transition.

Still, he believes the Brotherhood could return to political activity “in one way or another.” Syria has a broad religious current that could find expression in several political parties and organizations, whether or not a new political parties law is enacted.

Sympathy for victims, doubts about the group

Jazmati draws a distinction between sympathy for the Brotherhood’s treatment under Assad and support for the organization today.

“There is widespread sympathy for the victims of arrests, persecution and abuses committed by the former regime, and support for addressing the injustices and providing redress for the harm they suffered,” he said.

That sympathy, however, “does not necessarily mean support for the group’s return in its current organizational form.”

The Brotherhood’s record during the Syrian revolution draws a less favorable assessment, he said, citing accusations that it tried to dominate opposition institutions and bore some responsibility for their failures, along with criticism of its management of political and relief work.

He described that negative view as resting on “a set of facts as well as a set of exaggerations,” stressing the need to distinguish between former detainees and victims of the government and the political organization that exists today.

Early in the revolution, sections of the Brotherhood’s support base welcomed its participation in preparatory conferences to establish the opposition Syrian National Council. Criticism of its performance within opposition institutions later intensified.

“The group’s popularity declined during those years, while other Islamist currents rose, particularly the current from which the leaders of Syria’s present authorities emerged,” Jazmati said.

Could a return spur other groups?

The Brotherhood’s signals have also raised questions about what its return could mean for Islamist organizations and other political forces waiting for rules governing party activity.

Al-Haj sees the prospect of its return encouraging other Islamist organizations as “possible, but unlikely.”

The Brotherhood’s presence rests on “its organizational and political history, rather than solely on its Islamist ideology,” he said. Other currents compete to represent that ideology, including the one from which Hayat Tahrir al-Sham emerged.

He expects the group to attract some Syrians who share its ideological outlook and are dissatisfied with the course of the transition.

Its return could do more to encourage non-Islamist organizations than Islamist ones to prepare for political participation, he said. But the transition’s uncertain contours make the consequences difficult to predict.

With the repeal proposal still at an early stage and the rules for party activity unresolved, the Brotherhood’s return to politics would test more than its own future.

It would also test the limits of pluralism Syria’s transitional authorities are prepared to allow.