Lebanon says 1 dead, 20 wounded in Israeli strikes in south
BEIRUT: Lebanon's health ministry said a woman was killed and 20 other people were wounded in Israeli strikes Friday in the country's south, as Israel's military said some raids targeted Hezbollah sites.
Israel has kept up regular strikes on Lebanon, particularly in the south, since a November 27 ceasefire meant to end over a year of hostilities, including two months of all-out war that left Hezbollah severely weakened.
'The Israel enemy strike on an apartment in Nabatiyeh led to a preliminary toll of one woman killed' and 13 other people wounded, the ministry said in an updated statement carried by the official National News Agency.
The NNA said an Israeli drone targeted the apartment.
The agency earlier reported 'a wave of successive heavy strikes' in several other areas in the Nabatiyeh region that the health ministry said wounded seven people.
An Israeli army statement said fighter jets struck a site that Hezbollah used 'to manage its fire and defense array in the area of the Beaufort Ridge,' near Nabatiyeh and the Israel border.
It said the site was 'part of a significant underground project that was completely taken out of use' by the raids.
The military said it 'identified rehabilitation attempts made by Hezbollah beforehand and struck terror infrastructure sites in the area,' calling the actions 'a blatant violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon.'
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun in a statement condemned the strikes and said Israel continued 'to disregard regional and international resolutions and calls to stop the violence and escalation in the region,' urging 'effective action from the international community.'
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in a statement called the strikes 'a blatant violation of national sovereignty and the cessation of hostilities arrangements' and a threat to stability.
Under the ceasefire deal, Hezbollah was to pull its fighters back north of the Litani river, some 30 kilometers (20 miles) from the Israeli border, leaving the Lebanese army and United Nations peacekeepers as the only armed parties in the area.
Israel was required to fully withdraw its troops from the country but has kept them in five locations in south Lebanon that it deems strategic.
In a letter to the United Nations requesting a one-year renewal of the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon which expires in August, the foreign ministry demanded 'Israel's withdrawal from all Lebanese territory it occupies and a stop to its ongoing violations.'
On Thursday, Israeli strikes on south Lebanon killed two people, with the Israeli military saying it targeted Hezbollah operatives.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Israeli military orders war crime probe into Gaza aid shootings, Haaretz reports
JERUSALEM: Israel's Military Advocate General has ordered an investigation into possible war crimes over allegations that Israeli forces deliberately fired at Palestinian civilians near Gaza aid distribution sites, Haaretz newspaper reported on Friday. Hundreds of Palestinians have been killed over the past month in the vicinity of areas where food was being handed out, local hospitals and officials have said. Haaretz, a left-leaning Israeli newspaper, quoted unnamed Israeli soldiers as saying they were told to fire at the crowds to keep them back, using unnecessary lethal force against people who appeared to pose no threat. The military told Reuters that the Israel Defense Forces had not instructed soldiers to deliberately shoot at civilians. It added that it was looking to improve 'the operational response' in the aid areas and had recently installed new fencing and signs, and opened additional routes to reach the handout zones. Haaretz quoted unnamed sources as saying that the army unit established to review incidents that may involve breaches of international law had been tasked with examining soldiers' actions near aid locations over the past month. The military told Reuters that some incidents were being reviewed by relevant authorities. It added: 'Any allegation of a deviation from the law or IDF directives will be thoroughly examined, and further action will be taken as necessary.' There is an acute shortage of food and other basic supplies after the nearly two-year-old military campaign by Israel against Hamas militants in Gaza that has reduced much of the enclave to rubble and displaced most of its two million inhabitants. Thousands of people gather around distribution centers desperately awaiting the next deliveries, but there have been near daily reports of shootings and killings on the approach routes. Medics said six people were killed by gunfire on Friday as they sought to get food in southern Gaza Strip. In all, more than 500 people have died near aid centers operated by the US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) or in areas where UN food trucks were set to pass since late May, the Gaza health authorities have said. The unnamed Israeli soldiers told Haaretz that military commanders had ordered troops to shoot at the crowds of Palestinians to disperse them and clear the area. During a closed-door meeting with senior Military Advocate General officials this week, legal representatives rejected IDF claims that the incidents were isolated cases, Haaretz reported. There has been widespread confusion about access to the aid, with the army imposing for a time a 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew on approach routes to GHF sites. But locals often have to set out well before dawn to have any chance of retrieving food. The Gaza war began when Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, killing nearly 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and taking 251 others hostage into the enclave. In response, Israel launched a military campaign that has killed more than 56,000 Palestinians, the majority of them civilians, according to local health authorities in Gaza. The Gaza health ministry said on Friday that at least 72 people were killed and more than 170 wounded by Israeli fire across Gaza Strip in the past 24 hours.
Al Arabiya
4 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
A pause or a prelude? The fragile ceasefire between Iran and Israel
On June 25, 2025, a ceasefire between Israel and Iran came into effect, bringing a sudden and dramatic halt to twelve days of direct and unprecedented military confrontation. The truce surprised many observers around the world. For weeks, tensions had escalated rapidly after Israel launched airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, followed by a wave of Iranian missile and drone retaliation. The ferocity of the exchange, coupled with long-standing hostilities between the two states, led many analysts and politicians to assume that Israel would pursue the campaign until Iran's nuclear infrastructure was completely dismantled or until the Islamic Republic's central authority was irreparably shaken. Many expected Israel to press its military advantage and continue striking; There were even speculations that the broader goal might be to destabilize or collapse the Iranian government altogether. Yet the ceasefire, as unexpected as it may have seemed to some, was ultimately the product of deeper historical patterns, strategic calculations, and logistical realities. First, a look at the history of Israel's military conflicts reveals that temporary ceasefires are a consistent feature of its wartime strategy. During past wars with Hezbollah in Lebanon or in operations against Hamas in Gaza, ceasefires were accepted at key junctures. These pauses have rarely signaled the end of conflict. Instead, they have served multiple purposes – providing breathing room for the population, allowing the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to assess battlefield performance, and giving political leaders time to navigate shifting diplomatic and military conditions. In that context, the current ceasefire with Iran should not come as a shock. Though the stakes and geography are dramatically broader in this case, the strategic logic remains consistent. Ceasefires could be tactical pauses. For Israel, this ceasefire most likely offers significant, albeit temporary, advantages. First and foremost, it allows the government and military command to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of their twelve-day aerial campaign. With advanced surveillance, satellite imaging, and digital tracking systems, Israel can now measure the success of its strikes, identify which Iranian assets remain intact, and prepare for any future engagements. These kinds of reassessments are critical in an era of high-tech, multi-front warfare. Second, the truce enables Israeli civilians to return to a semblance of normalcy. Throughout the conflict, cities like Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Beersheba were subjected to repeated Iranian missile and drone attacks. For many residents, life had ground to a halt. The ceasefire now allows citizens to reemerge, regroup, and recover from the psychological strain of continuous alerts and air raid sirens. The return to normal life – no matter how temporary – is a crucial relief for the country. Third, the ceasefire grants Israel a valuable diplomatic opportunity. By agreeing to halt its military operations – even after successfully striking key targets – Israel projects to the international community that it is not pursuing escalation for its own sake. This move can help mend some of the frayed ties with Europe and parts of the Global South, where criticism of Israeli military policy has grown. At the same time, it reinforces Israel's image as a responsible actor, capable of restraint even in the face of provocation. Fourth, the IDF now has time to replenish its resources, repair any damage to bases or weapons systems, and evaluate operational weaknesses. Despite Israel's superiority in the air, the Iranian counterattacks – especially the use of longer-range drones – provided Israel with a sobering glimpse into Iran's evolving tactics. This ceasefire gives the Israeli military the space to adapt, train, and integrate new technologies into their defense apparatus. Fifth, and no less important, the ceasefire allows Israel to redirect its focus to other strategic concerns. With the Iranian front on pause, Israel can recalibrate its posture and attend to other critical theaters. From Iran's perspective, the need for a ceasefire was even more urgent. For nearly two weeks, Israeli air dominance over Iran was overwhelming. Precision strikes targeted military installations, air defense systems, radar units, and multiple nuclear-related sites in Natanz, Fordow, and Arak. In addition, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) suffered major losses, including several high-ranking commanders. The Iranian public – already under severe economic pressure from international sanctions – faced further hardship as oil refineries and power grids were damaged. More than 100,000 residents fled Tehran in a matter of days, fearful that the next wave of Israeli strikes would devastate the capital. Internally, the government faced growing frustration: How could a country with one of the region's largest militaries be so vulnerable? Why had the government not anticipated the scale of Israeli retaliation? The Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, reportedly faced intense pressure from within the elite circles of the IRGC and clerical establishment. In such a climate, agreeing to a ceasefire was less about diplomacy and more about necessity. Iran needed to stop the bleeding – militarily, politically, and psychologically. The pause offers Tehran a chance to evaluate the damage, regroup its forces, and attempt to fortify what remains of its nuclear infrastructure. It also gives the leadership time to address domestic unrest, recalibrate messaging, and possibly shift blame onto external enemies to consolidate control. Yet the key question remains: will the ceasefire hold? If past history is any indicator, the prospects are not encouraging. Ceasefires in this region are rarely long-lasting. They are fragile by design – stopgaps between rounds of fighting, not solutions to the underlying tensions. In this case, the balance of power has shifted dramatically, and that creates an incentive for renewed confrontation. For Israel, walking away from a conflict while the Iranian government is at its weakest point in decades might be seen as a strategic blunder. This is a rare window – one where Iran's command structure has been shaken, its nuclear plans disrupted, and its population demoralized. Some in the Israeli cabinet may argue that allowing Iran to recover from this moment would be tantamount to leaving a wounded enemy alive on the battlefield. Moreover, from a strategic standpoint, Israel now faces the risk that Iran – having experienced such a devastating attack – will accelerate its push for nuclear weapons. Even if Iran had not made the political decision to pursue a bomb before, this war may have changed that calculus. The logic of deterrence could now dominate Iran's thinking: Only by acquiring a nuclear weapon, Iranian strategists may argue, can the country prevent another catastrophic strike. Iran has already announced the suspension of cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a worrying signal that transparency is no longer a priority. In this environment, trust is virtually nonexistent. Finally, the ceasefire's fragility is also reinforced by the broader geopolitical context. Proxy forces aligned with Iran – particularly Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and various militias in Iraq – remain active. They can resume attacks on Israel or US allies at any time, either with or without Tehran's direct orders. Any incident along these fronts could easily unravel the ceasefire. Similarly, internal politics in both countries can lead to escalation. An assassination, a rogue militia strike, or even a political crisis could reignite hostilities overnight. In conclusion, while both Israel and Iran found compelling reasons to agree to this ceasefire – strategic breathing room, humanitarian concerns, and domestic stability – the truce rests on shaky foundations. It is, in many ways, a pause born of exhaustion rather than reconciliation. As history has repeatedly shown, these kinds of ceasefires in the Middle East are inherently unstable. Unless profound diplomatic engagement follows – and there is little sign of that at present – the risk of renewed war remains not only possible, but probable.
Arab News
4 hours ago
- Arab News
Lebanon says 1 dead, 20 wounded in Israeli strikes in south
BEIRUT: Lebanon's health ministry said a woman was killed and 20 other people were wounded in Israeli strikes Friday in the country's south, as Israel's military said some raids targeted Hezbollah sites. Israel has kept up regular strikes on Lebanon, particularly in the south, since a November 27 ceasefire meant to end over a year of hostilities, including two months of all-out war that left Hezbollah severely weakened. 'The Israel enemy strike on an apartment in Nabatiyeh led to a preliminary toll of one woman killed' and 13 other people wounded, the ministry said in an updated statement carried by the official National News Agency. The NNA said an Israeli drone targeted the apartment. The agency earlier reported 'a wave of successive heavy strikes' in several other areas in the Nabatiyeh region that the health ministry said wounded seven people. An Israeli army statement said fighter jets struck a site that Hezbollah used 'to manage its fire and defense array in the area of the Beaufort Ridge,' near Nabatiyeh and the Israel border. It said the site was 'part of a significant underground project that was completely taken out of use' by the raids. The military said it 'identified rehabilitation attempts made by Hezbollah beforehand and struck terror infrastructure sites in the area,' calling the actions 'a blatant violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon.' Lebanese President Joseph Aoun in a statement condemned the strikes and said Israel continued 'to disregard regional and international resolutions and calls to stop the violence and escalation in the region,' urging 'effective action from the international community.' Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in a statement called the strikes 'a blatant violation of national sovereignty and the cessation of hostilities arrangements' and a threat to stability. Under the ceasefire deal, Hezbollah was to pull its fighters back north of the Litani river, some 30 kilometers (20 miles) from the Israeli border, leaving the Lebanese army and United Nations peacekeepers as the only armed parties in the area. Israel was required to fully withdraw its troops from the country but has kept them in five locations in south Lebanon that it deems strategic. In a letter to the United Nations requesting a one-year renewal of the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon which expires in August, the foreign ministry demanded 'Israel's withdrawal from all Lebanese territory it occupies and a stop to its ongoing violations.' On Thursday, Israeli strikes on south Lebanon killed two people, with the Israeli military saying it targeted Hezbollah operatives.
