Israeli raids deep inside southern Lebanon target Hezbollah's tunnels
BEIRUT: Israel launched airstrikes on alleged weapons caches of the Iran-backed Hezbollah, and tunnels in southern Lebanon on Monday, soon after it had struck targets within Iran.
Israeli warplanes carried out the surprise strikes on the outskirts of several villages, and valleys and hills in the districts of Jezzine and Nabatieh, and all the way to the district of Sidon.
The Israeli military claimed that 'air force warplanes raided Hezbollah military sites containing rocket launchers and missiles, as well as weapons depots in the area north of the Litani (River),' adding that 'the presence of Hezbollah weapons and activities in this area constitute a flagrant violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon.'
According to a Lebanese security source, no casualties were reported in the raids that focused on the valley between Ansar and Al-Zarariyeh, the Kfar Melki valley, and the area between the towns of Azza, Kafrwa Zefta, and Deir Al-Zahrani, along with the outskirts of Al-Aishiyeh, Al-Mahmoudiya, Al-Dashmakiyeh, and Wadi Barghoz.
The source told Arab News: 'These raids apparently targeted areas containing Hezbollah tunnels and previous gathering points, which had previously been targeted repeatedly.'
The source noted that 'the Israeli army used concussion missiles in these new raids, the sound of which caused powerful explosions and ground shaking, and the echoes of the explosions reverberated throughout most of the southern regions.'
He added: 'The reason for these raids now is (as) a warning message to Hezbollah not to consider any attempt to rehabilitate what has been completely destroyed.
'The Lebanese army has not yet entered these targeted areas north of the Litani River to confiscate their contents, as it is still confining its mission to searching for weapons and ammunition south of the Litani River.'
Lebanon's President Joseph Aoun and the country's Prime Minister Nawaf Salam have held a series of meetings in light of regional developments to help prevent Lebanon suffering any repercussions from the escalating Israeli-Iranian conflict and to keep Lebanon neutral.
Aoun said on Sunday: 'Lebanon, its leadership, parties, and people, are aware today, more than ever, that it has paid a heavy price for the wars that have erupted on its soil and in the region. It is unwilling to pay more, and there is no national interest in doing so, especially since the cost of these wars has been and will be greater than it can bear.'
Salam has stressed the need to 'prioritize the supreme national interest and maintain unity and national solidarity, which requires avoiding Lebanon's involvement or being dragged in any way into the ongoing regional confrontation.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
3 hours ago
- Arab News
Demand by UN for access to Iran's uranium
VIENNA: The UN nuclear watchdog on Monday demanded access to highly enriched uranium that Iran is thought to have moved before US attacks last weekend on its nuclear development sites. 'Iran, Israel and the Middle East need peace,' said Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. 'We must ... go back to Iran's nuclear sites and account for the stockpiles of uranium, including, most importantly, the 400 kg enriched to 60 percent.' US strikes on the underground Fordow nuclear site had probably caused 'significant damage,' Grossi said, but it was impossible to assess without a visit. Meanwhile Israel launched new strikes on Monday on the notorious Evin prison and Revolutionary Guard command centers in Tehran. Video footage showed rescue workers combing the flattened wreckage of a building at the prison, and carrying an injured man on a stretcher. Israel said its strikes on Tehran were intended to hit the Iranian ruling apparatus broadly, and its ability to sustain power. Evin has long been Iran's primary jail for political and security detainees. Several high-profile foreign prisoners are also held there.
Asharq Al-Awsat
4 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Oil Falls Nearly 4% as Iran's Retaliation Focuses on Regional US Military Bases
Oil prices slipped more than $3, or 4%, on Monday after Iran attacked the US military base in Qatar in retaliation for US attacks on its nuclear facilities, and took no action to disrupt oil and gas tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Brent crude futures were down $2.91, or 3.8%, at $74.09 a barrel by 1:13 p.m. ET (1713GMT). US West Texas Intermediate crude (WTI) eased $2.8, or 3.8%, to $71.06, Reuters reported. "Oil flows for now aren't the primary target and is likely not to be impacted, I think it's going to be military retaliation on US bases and/or trying to hit more of the Israeli civilian targets," said John Kilduff, a partner at Again Capital. US President Donald Trump said he had "obliterated" Iran's main nuclear sites in strikes over the weekend, joining an Israeli assault in an escalation of conflict in the Middle East as Tehran vowed to defend itself. Israel also carried out fresh strikes against Iran on Monday including on capital Tehran and the Iranian nuclear facility at Fordow, which was also a target of the US attack. At least two supertankers made U-turns near the Strait of Hormuz following US military strikes on Iran, ship tracking data shows, as more than a week of violence in the region prompted vessels to speed, pause, or alter their journeys. About a fifth of global oil supply flows through the strait. However, the risk of a complete shutdown is low, analysts have said. A telegraphed attack on a well defended US base could be a first step in reducing tensions provided there are no US casualties, Energy Aspects said in a post. "Unless there are indications of further Iranian retaliation or escalation by Israel/the US then we may see some geopolitical risk premium come out of the price in subsequent days," it said. Qatar said there were no casualties from the attack on the US military base. Iran, which is OPEC's third-largest crude producer, said on Monday that the US attack on its nuclear sites expanded the range of legitimate targets for its armed forces and called Trump a "gambler" for joining Israel's military campaign against Iran. Meanwhile, Trump expressed a desire to see oil prices kept down amid fears that ongoing fighting in the Middle East could cause them to spike. On his Truth Social platform, he addressed the US Department of Energy, encouraging "drill, baby, drill" and saying, "I mean now." Investors are still weighing up the extent of the geopolitical risk premium, given the Middle East crisis has yet to crimp supply. HSBC expects Brent prices to spike above $80 a barrel to factor in a higher probability of a Strait of Hormuz closure, but to recede again if the threat of disruption does not materialize, the bank said on Monday. Iraq's state-run Basra Oil Company said international oil majors including BP, TotalEnergies and Eni had evacuated some staff members working in oilfields.
Arab News
4 hours ago
- Arab News
What the intensifying Israel-Iran conflict says about the future of diplomacy
LONON/DUBAI: The Iranian missile attack which was intercepted by Qatar on Monday night when it launched missiles against US troops stationed at Al-Udeid Air Base comes as a major setback for peace in the region. As Iranian missiles lit up the sky over Doha in a retaliatory strike targeting the US military, a diplomatic solution to the Israel-Iran conflict, which has now drawn in the US, seemed further away than ever, with Tehran appearing to wash its hands of further nuclear talks. Although no casualties were reported at Al-Udeid Air Base — the largest US base in the region — Iran's counterattack is likely to invite additional American strikes and further regional escalation. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have both condemned the attack on Qatari sovereignty. The Saudi foreign ministry lambasted Iran for its 'unjustifiable' attack, offering to deploy 'all its capabilities' to support Doha. Since the Israeli-Iran conflict dramatically escalated over the weekend, the mixed global response to Israeli and US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities is testing the limits of modern diplomacy and exposing deep divisions among major powers. What most seem to agree on is that while diplomacy is on the decline, it could have been the solution. Experts say the fractured international reaction to the escalation reflects a shifting global order and the erosion of the post-Cold War consensus. 'There is no 'global response' to speak of at this moment,' Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Arab News. 'This Israel-Iran war is taking place in a fractured geopolitical context.' He argues that divisions among the US, China and Russia 'make it next to impossible to marshal a collective diplomatic effort in the way that the world did in previous eras, like the immediate post-Cold War period of the 1990s. 'That's why we will continue to see a lot of empty words disconnected from the actions that are actually reshaping the Middle East as we know it.' On June 13, Israel launched airstrikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites including Natanz, Isfahan and Tehran, reportedly killing senior officials, nuclear scientists and civilians. In response, Iran launched 'Operation True Promise III,' firing missiles and drones into Israel. Several struck Tel Aviv, Haifa and other cities, causing civilian casualties. Despite initially assuring G7 allies that the US would stay out of the conflict, President Donald Trump reversed course on June 22, ordering B-2 bombers to strike Iran's underground nuclear facilities with MOP 'bunker-buster' bombs — weapons only the US possesses. Although Trump declared that the strikes had 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear program, it remains unclear whether Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was destroyed or relocated in time. If material and technical capacity remain, diplomacy may be the only path to prevent Iran from eventually building a nuclear weapon — a goal the regime could now prioritize more urgently. Even with severe military losses and the effective loss of airspace control, Iran appears undeterred. Hostilities with Israel continue, and the possibility of Iranian retaliation against US targets is growing. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated that the war will not end until Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is removed from power. The US entry into the conflict has triggered a range of diplomatic responses — from enthusiastic support to fierce condemnation. Netanyahu praised Trump's decision as a 'courageous choice' that would 'alter history.' Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, meanwhile, called it an 'outrageous, grave and unprecedented violation' of international law, insisting Tehran reserves 'all options' to defend its interests. Iran's ambassador to the UN demanded an emergency Security Council session and called the strikes 'premeditated acts of aggression.' Russia, a close ally of Iran, 'strongly condemned' the US action. Its Foreign Ministry labeled the strikes a 'gross violation of international law,' while Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia's Security Council, dismissed their impact and provocatively suggested some states might now help Iran obtain nuclear weapons. China echoed the condemnation. The Chinese Foreign Ministry said the strikes 'seriously violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter,' and warned of regional destabilization. Chinese Ambassador to the UN Fu Cong called on Israel to halt hostilities immediately and backed a UN resolution demanding an unconditional ceasefire. Chinese analysts have also warned that the conflict threatens global trade routes such as the Strait of Hormuz. Other voices have called for diplomacy. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned of a 'hazardous escalation,' stressing that 'military solutions are not viable' and urging a return to negotiations. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer — positioning himself as a bridge between the US and Europe — highlighted the danger of the war spreading beyond the region. While stopping short of endorsing the US strikes, he reiterated that Iran must not develop nuclear weapons and called for negotiations to stabilize the region. European powers had previously been pressing for a deal requiring Iran to halt uranium enrichment, curb its missile program and stop supporting proxy groups. But Iran has rejected a full halt, claiming its enrichment is for peaceful purposes. With Western diplomacy faltering, regional actors are stepping in. Most Arab states — including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and the Gulf states — have condemned Israel's strikes on Iran and are working to deescalate tensions. Still, these efforts have so far achieved little. Strikes continue, ceasefire mechanisms remain absent and attempts to coordinate sanctions or arms embargoes have stalled. A narrow diplomatic window may remain. Recent Geneva meetings involving Iranian, US, and European officials showed conditional openness to talks. But the latest US strikes have likely hardened positions. Analysts say the only viable path forward begins with renewed diplomacy, ideally starting with a ceasefire. Yet fundamental disagreements over Iran's nuclear ambitions and widespread distrust leave a comprehensive solution elusive. Some fear that Israel, emboldened by US support, may escalate its military campaign to seek regime change in Tehran — a move that would risk greater instability across the Middle East, as the world has seen in the recent attack over Qatar. Others argue that Iran's military retaliation is a necessary step before negotiations can resume. However, nobody seems to safely conclude just how far this retaliation will go. Firas Maksad, managing director for the Middle East and North Africa at Eurasia Group, told CNN that without such a response, Iran would lack both international leverage and domestic legitimacy to reenter talks. Still, he later added: 'Diplomacy is dead for the foreseeable future.' With Iran and Israel entrenched and global powers divided, prospects for a diplomatic breakthrough appear slim. Yet Katulis believes regional 'swing states' — such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE — could help shift the dynamic. 'One of the biggest brakes on further escalation lies right in the heart of the Middle East itself,' he said. 'The key 'swing states' like Saudi Arabia and the UAE could lead more regional collective efforts to avoid further escalation by working publicly and quietly with the main combatants to find pathways toward a diplomatic settlement.' In geopolitical terms, these 'swing states' balance relationships with Washington, Moscow and Beijing — and can influence outcomes through neutrality or engagement. Katulis believes Riyadh, in particular, could help change the calculus. Right now, he said, Israel and Iran 'have more incentives to engage in military action than they do to pursue diplomacy.' But 'the key powers in the region like Saudi Arabia could do even more than they are already doing to change the calculus for Israel and Iran.' Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel's actions as violations of international law and warned that continued escalation threatens long-term regional stability. The Kingdom has urged the UN Security Council to take meaningful steps to prevent further deterioration and has refused to allow its airspace to be used in military operations — a clear signal of its neutrality and strategic caution. Looking ahead, the stakes remain dangerously high. Maksad has warned that unchecked escalation could have serious consequences. 'The last step in that escalatory ladder is to go after American bases, whether it is in the GCC, or perhaps even attempt to disrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, where some 20 percent of global energy passes through,' he told CNN. As the war drags on, the fragmented international response highlights the fragility of global diplomacy and the difficulty of conflict resolution in an increasingly multipolar world. For Tehran, halting enrichment altogether would not only undermine decades of strategic investment but also damage regime legitimacy. As Maksad put it, Tehran's 'entire prestige rests on enrichment.' Still, he sees a potential way forward: Focusing not on enrichment itself, but on preventing a weapon. 'That,' he said, 'opens up the possibility of a negotiated outcome.'
