Hezbollah’s Deputy Secretary-General, Sheikh Naim Kassem, expressed confidence during an interview with LBCI on Tuesday night that the ongoing cross-border clashes with Israel are unlikely to escalate into a full-scale war. He suggested that there is a strong possibility, around 90 percent, that the situation will not escalate further. However, he also emphasized that Hezbollah is prepared for the remaining 10 percent, should the need arise.

In the interview on “Kalam Bel Siyasa” (“Political Talks”), Kassem stated that Israel’s perception of Hezbollah’s readiness serves as a deterrent, potentially preventing an escalation. He asserted that Hezbollah has not provoked conflict but highlighted the significant threat posed by Israel. According to Kassem, the persistent threat of war stems from an undeterred enemy.

Kassem reassured that Lebanon is not on the brink of total war, stating that the likelihood of a larger-scale conflict in the country is low. He reiterated that Hezbollah’s current stance is defensive, emphasizing the party’s reluctance to involve Lebanon in a war. However, he emphasized the constant danger posed by a formidable adversary capable of instigating hostilities at any moment.

The importance of early deterrence was underscored by Kassem, who emphasized that it is crucial to safeguard Lebanon’s interests. He claimed that Israeli restraint would benefit all Lebanese people. Additionally, he clarified that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps is not active on Lebanese soil.

Regarding potential ceasefire talks between Hamas and Israel, Kassem indicated that no commitments or agreements have been made yet. Despite US Special Envoy Amos Hochstein’s statement that a Gaza truce would not automatically extend to Hezbollah, Kassem expressed a different view. He suggested that if a ceasefire were to occur in Gaza, a similar arrangement could be expected in southern Lebanon. However, he warned that if Israel rejects peace in southern Lebanon, Hezbollah would resist, asserting that Israel cannot dictate terms and would face defeat.

Since October 8, Hezbollah and Israel have engaged in daily exchanges of fire, with Hezbollah supporting the Hamas in Gaza. Mediators are currently in Cairo attempting to broker a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, with hopes of extending the truce before the start of Ramadan.

In the realm of politics, Kassem reaffirmed Hezbollah’s support for Sleiman Frangieh as the primary presidential candidate. He stated that Hezbollah is not considering alternative candidates at present, and others must adapt to this decision.

Regarding a recent presidential initiative aimed at ending the prolonged vacancy, Kassem revealed that Hezbollah has not yet provided a definitive response. The initiative seeks to convene all parliamentary blocs for an open session to elect a president, a position vacant since October 2022.

Kassem highlighted Frangieh’s alignment with the political ethos of the ‘Axis of Resistance’ and his efforts towards reconciliation and engagement with various parties. He characterized the presidential deadlock as primarily internal and attributed it to a lack of willingness to compromise.

On the strained relationship with the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), Kassem acknowledged differences in beliefs but emphasized that communication remains open despite disagreements. He asserted Hezbollah’s right to dissent and obstruct the quorum in parliamentary sessions.

Image Credit: Anwar AMRO / AFP

In the convoluted maze of Middle Eastern politics, few figures loom as large and enigmatic as Mohammed Dahlan. Born in the Gaza Strip in 1961, Dahlan emerged as a prominent figure in Palestinian politics, a confidant of the late Yasser Arafat, and a key player in the Fatah movement. However, his journey through the turbulent currents of regional politics has been marked by controversy, ambition, and intrigue.

Dahlan’s rise to prominence began in the 1980s when he became involved in Palestinian activism against the Israeli military. His charisma and leadership skills quickly earned him recognition within the Fatah movement, the dominant faction of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). He played a significant role in organizing resistance activities in the Gaza Strip and rose through the ranks to become head of the Preventive Security Force in the Palestinian Authority.

However, it was during the tumultuous years of the Second Intifada (2000-2005) that Dahlan’s star truly ascended. As violence engulfed the region, he became one of the most influential figures in Gaza, wielding considerable power and authority. His efforts to combat Hamas, the Islamist group that had gained popularity among Palestinians, earned him both admirers and detractors. While some praised his efforts to maintain order and security, others accused him of heavy-handed tactics and human rights abuses.

Dahlan’s relationship with Yasser Arafat was complex. Despite being a close ally and confidant, he also found himself at odds with the Palestinian leader at times, particularly over issues of reform and governance. Nevertheless, his influence continued to grow, and he played a key role in brokering ceasefire agreements and peace negotiations with Israel.

However, Dahlan’s fortunes took a dramatic turn following the death of Yasser Arafat in 2004. With the rise of Mahmoud Abbas to the presidency of the Palestinian Authority, Dahlan found himself increasingly sidelined. Abbas, wary of Dahlan’s growing power and popularity, gradually marginalised him within the Fatah movement and the Palestinian political establishment.

In 2007, Dahlan was expelled from Fatah amid allegations of corruption and abuse of power. He fled to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where he embarked on a new chapter in his political career. Despite his exile, Dahlan remained a divisive figure within Palestinian politics, with some viewing him as a pragmatic leader capable of delivering stability and others as a traitor who had sold out to foreign interests.

In the UAE, Dahlan cultivated close ties with the ruling elite and became involved in various business ventures. He also positioned himself as a regional player, using his connections and influence to mediate conflicts and promote stability in the wider Middle East. His role as an advisor to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan further bolstered his standing in the region.

However, Dahlan’s ambitions have not been limited to the political arena. In recent years, he has sought to expand his influence through media ventures and philanthropic initiatives. He launched a satellite television channel, Al-Mustaqbal, which aimed to provide an alternative perspective on Middle Eastern affairs. He has also been involved in humanitarian efforts, particularly in Gaza, where his charitable activities have earned him praise from some quarters.

Despite his exile and the controversies that have surrounded him, Mohammed Dahlan is emerging as a potential new leader in Gaza, backed by the UAE and the West. His pragmatic approach to governance and his track record in maintaining stability could make him an attractive candidate for those seeking an alternative to the current leadership in the region.

Dahlan’s close ties with the UAE and his relationship with Western powers could give him the support and legitimacy needed to navigate the complex political landscape of Gaza. While some may view him with suspicion due to his past controversies, others see him as a viable option for bringing much-needed stability to the region.

As the Middle East continues to grapple with uncertainty and conflict, the emergence of leaders like Mohammed Dahlan could signal a shift in the dynamics of the region. Whether he will be able to overcome the challenges and obstacles that lie ahead remains to be seen. However, one thing is certain: Mohammed Dahlan is a figure to watch in the ever-evolving landscape of Middle Eastern politics.

Five members of Britain’s elite Special Air Service (SAS) have been arrested by the British military police amidst allegations of war crimes committed in Syria two years prior, according to recent media reports. This marks a severe development in what is proving to be one of the highest-profile cases involving alleged military misconduct in recent years.

The soldiers are suspected of employing excessive, lethal force against a suspected militant, leading to the individual’s death. The incident took place during an anti-ISIS operation in Syria. Critics argue that the troops should have sought to detain the suspect, rather than resort to violence.

According to the military, the suspect posed a significant threat and had plans to instigate a suicide attack. Nevertheless, the question of whether this threat warranted the suspect’s death, as opposed to arrest, is now central to the investigation.

Rumours of suspected misconduct from SAS troops have been circulating for some time, though this case represents one of the first instances where SAS members have been arrested on the official suspicion of war crimes.

Founded in 1941, the SAS is one of the most highly-trained and respected special forces units globally. Since its founding, the SAS has been involved in various conflict zones worldwide, including Syria, where the alleged war crime took place two years ago.

The allegations, if proved true, could deal a considerable blow to the reputation of the SAS, a unit renowned for its precision and professionalism. The situation also poses severe questions about the training and discipline within the ranks of the British military’s elite forces.

Currently, it remains unknown what punishments could be inflicted on the arrested SAS troops if the allegations are confirmed. In some precedents, soldiers in similar circumstances have faced courts-martial, imprisonment, or dishonourable discharge.

As it stands, the matter is yet to go to trial, but the rumours of the alleged war crime and the subsequent arrest of the involved SAS soldiers have fuelled concerns about the British military’s involvement in Syria and its conduct towards suspected militants.

This incident may also inspire a broader debate around rules of engagement and the use of lethal force by special forces units worldwide. The matter also brings into question the level of transparency and accountability within the British special forces.

This high-profile case brings about questions over Britain’s role in the global fight against ISIS and other extremist groups, particularly if allegations of misconduct become confirmed.

While the specific details of the suspected crime have not yet been disclosed, the nature of the accusations alone will likely provoke significant public discourse in Britain and beyond. At this stage, the course of the investigation will likely largely determine the impact on Britain’s military reputation and diplomatic relations, particularly in the Middle East.

Regardless of the case’s outcome, this incident serves to remind us of the need for stringent ethical rules and oversight within military operations worldwide. This issue isn’t simply about holding individuals accountable for their actions; it’s about ensuring our defence forces operate with integrity, professionalism, and above all, respect for human life.

As this investigation unfolds, the nation awaits the outcome, holding in the balance not just the futures of the accused SAS soldiers but also Britain’s reputation in how it conducts its military operations overseas.

Image Credit: Marek Studzinski / Unsplash

Kuwait’s High Court of Cassation has officially designated Lebanon’s Hezbollah as a “forbidden and criminal group” under national law. The court accused Hezbollah of orchestrating plans to destabilise Kuwait with the aim of instituting an Iranian-style republic in the country. This landmark decision clarifies the legal standing of Hezbollah, a matter contested by individuals accused of espionage on behalf of the group.

The High Court’s definitive ruling transpired in the context of convicting three Kuwaiti nationals for espionage on behalf of Hezbollah, overturning their previous acquittal. However, the court refrained from imposing a specific punishment, instead mandating them to adhere to “good conduct,” a legal term stipulating their obligation to abstain from involvement in similar unlawful activities. Nevertheless, the court underscored that affiliating with Hezbollah and collaborating with its agenda constitutes a punishable offence under the law.

The trial, centred on three Kuwaiti citizens and one Lebanese national, revolves around allegations levied by the State Security apparatus regarding their financial support to Hezbollah-linked entities and the transmission of funds and donations to them. Initially adjudicated in the Court of Appeals in late 2023, the three defendants received acquittal. However, subsequent appeals against the appellate court’s decision prompted a rehearing by the High Court of Cassation. The Court, in its final verdict issued on Thursday, overturned the earlier acquittal and reconvicted the Lebanese and Kuwaiti nationals involved in the case.

This judicial pronouncement reflects Kuwait’s steadfast stance against activities deemed detrimental to its national security and sovereignty. By categorising Hezbollah as a “forbidden and criminal group,” Kuwait reinforces its commitment to combatting threats posed by entities seeking to undermine its stability and territorial integrity. The court’s decision also serves to underscore the severity of involvement with organisations like Hezbollah, emphasising the legal consequences individuals face for supporting or collaborating with such groups.

The ramifications of this ruling extend beyond the confines of Kuwait’s borders, resonating regionally and internationally. It sends a clear message regarding Kuwait’s intolerance towards organisations espousing ideologies or engaging in activities inconsistent with its laws and values. Moreover, the designation of Hezbollah as a prohibited entity under Kuwaiti law aligns with broader efforts to counter the proliferation of extremism and safeguard against external influences seeking to subvert the country’s socio-political fabric.

For Lebanon, the court’s verdict underscores the potential repercussions of associations with groups like Hezbollah, both domestically and abroad. It highlights the imperative for Lebanese authorities to address concerns raised by neighbouring countries regarding Hezbollah’s alleged involvement in destabilising activities. Failure to do so could exacerbate tensions and strain diplomatic relations, jeopardising Lebanon’s standing in the international community.

In a broader context, the ruling underscores the complexities of navigating regional dynamics characterised by competing interests and ideological divides. It underscores the need for constructive dialogue and concerted efforts to address underlying grievances and foster mutual understanding and cooperation among nations. Moreover, it underscores the importance of upholding the rule of law and respecting the sovereignty of states in addressing transnational challenges and promoting regional stability.

Moving forward, the court’s decision is likely to inform Kuwait’s policies and actions concerning Hezbollah and similar organisations. It underscores the necessity of vigilance in safeguarding against threats to national security and reinforces Kuwait’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and preserving its sovereignty. Moreover, it sends a resolute message to individuals and entities contemplating involvement in activities deemed detrimental to Kuwait’s interests, underscoring the legal consequences and the uncompromising stance of the judiciary in upholding the country’s laws and values.

In the tumultuous landscape of the Middle East, Syria has long been a battleground for regional and international powers vying for influence and control. While Russia and Iran have historically held significant sway in the region, a new player has emerged onto the scene – China. With its economic prowess and strategic interests, China could potentially reshape the dynamics of power in Syria and the wider Middle East.

Russia and Iran have been pivotal in supporting the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad during the brutal civil war that has ravaged the country since 2011. Russia, with its military intervention starting in 2015, provided crucial support to Assad’s forces, helping to turn the tide of the conflict in his favor. Iran, through its support for Hezbollah and various Shiite militias, has also played a key role in bolstering Assad’s regime and countering opposition forces.

However, China’s approach to the Syrian crisis differs significantly from that of Russia and Iran. While Russia and Iran have primarily focused on military intervention and supporting the regime, China has opted for a more nuanced approach, emphasizing economic cooperation and reconstruction efforts.

One of China’s key interests in Syria lies in the establishment of trade routes that connect Iran to the Mediterranean through Syria. These trade routes, often referred to as the “Silk Road,” hold immense economic potential for China, allowing it to access markets in the Middle East, Europe, and beyond. By investing in Syria’s infrastructure and reconstruction projects, China aims to solidify its position as a major player in the global economy while also exerting influence in the region.

The significance of these trade routes cannot be overstated. They not only offer economic opportunities for China but also serve as a means of bypassing traditional maritime routes, reducing dependency on potentially vulnerable sea lanes such as the Strait of Malacca. This strategic diversification of trade routes aligns with China’s broader geopolitical ambitions of securing its energy supplies and asserting its influence on the global stage.

Moreover, China’s involvement in Syria complements its broader foreign policy objectives, particularly its ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The BRI, unveiled by President Xi Jinping in 2013, seeks to enhance connectivity and cooperation among countries across Asia, Africa, and Europe through infrastructure development and trade linkages. By investing in Syria’s reconstruction, China not only contributes to the stabilization of the region but also advances its own strategic interests under the guise of promoting economic development and connectivity.

While China’s engagement in Syria may appear primarily economic in nature, it also carries significant geopolitical implications. By establishing closer ties with the Syrian regime, China undermines Western efforts to isolate Assad diplomatically and economically. As Western powers grapple with the complexities of the Syrian conflict, China’s pragmatic approach offers an alternative narrative that prioritizes stability and economic development over regime change and intervention.

Furthermore, China’s growing presence in the Middle East challenges the traditional hegemony of Western powers in the region. As the United States gradually disengages from the Middle East and focuses its attention elsewhere, China senses an opportunity to fill the void and assert its influence. By cultivating strategic partnerships with countries like Syria, China seeks to reshape the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East in its own image.

However, China’s rise as a new player in the Syrian game of influence and control is not without challenges and risks. The complex and volatile nature of the Syrian conflict presents numerous obstacles to China’s ambitions, including security concerns, political instability, and competing interests among regional actors.

Moreover, China’s pragmatic approach to foreign policy may encounter resistance from Western powers, particularly the United States and its allies, who view China’s growing influence with suspicion and apprehension. As China expands its footprint in the Middle East, it must navigate carefully to avoid exacerbating existing tensions and conflicts in the region.

In conclusion, China’s emergence as a new player in the Syrian game of influence and control signifies a paradigm shift in the geopolitics of the Middle East. With its emphasis on economic cooperation and reconstruction, China offers a fresh perspective that challenges traditional power dynamics dominated by Russia and Iran. As China deepens its engagement in Syria and the wider region, the geopolitical landscape is poised for further transformation, with far-reaching implications for global security and stability.

Image Credit: Hosein Charbaghi / Unsplash