Syria to hold first parliamentary elections since the fall of al-Assad
Mohammed Taha al-Ahmad, chairman of the Higher Committee for People's Assembly Elections, confirmed the dates to the state-run SANA news agency.
The elections will be held under the authority of interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, who took power following a rapid rebel advance that ousted al-Assad in December.
One-third of the 210 seats in the new assembly will be appointed directly by al-Sharaa, while the remaining two-thirds will be filled through provincial-level elections.
In an interview with the Erem News website, committee member Hassan Al-Daghim said that electoral colleges would be established in each province to oversee the voting for the elected seats.
A temporary constitution, signed by al-Sharaa in March, established a People's Committee to serve as a transitional parliament until a permanent constitution is enacted and full national elections are held, a process expected to take several years.The announcement comes amid heightened political uncertainty and deepening divisions over Syria's new leadership, particularly after a wave of violence, between the Bedouin and Druze communities, erupted in Suwayda earlier this month.Clashes between the two groups spiralled into heavy fighting that left hundreds dead and threatened to destabilise the postwar transition.Though Syrian government troops intervened, their actions have been criticised. Some government forces allegedly sided with the Bedouins, reportedly carrying out executions against Druze civilians and looting homes in Druze areas.The violence also drew in Israel, which launched airstrikes targeting Syrian government positions, including the Defence Ministry headquarters, citing the need to protect the Druze minority as justification for its intervention. — Euronews
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leaders
2 hours ago
- Leaders
US Has Bank of Potential Military Targets in Iran: Col. Dahouk
On June 22, the US intervened in the Iran-Israel conflict, striking three nuclear facilities in Iran, namely Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, using bunker-buster bombs and Tomahawk missiles. The US President, Donald Trump, insisted that the US strikes had set Tehran's nuclear program back 'decades,' adding that Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities were 'completely and totally obliterated.' However, there are reports suggesting the Israeli and US strikes have not completely destroyed Iran's nuclear program. In the light of this, recent US assessments suggest that Washington has up to a year before it will be forced to take action against Iran's nuclear program, Al-Hadath TV reported, citing its sources. The sources added that the US does not want to give Iran the chance to restore its nuclear power. Within this context, the Former Senior Military Advisor to US Department of State, Colonel (Ret.) Abbas Dahouk, believes that the US strikes did not completely destroyed Iran's nuclear capabilities and that Washington has a bank of targets it could strike to prevent Tehran from possessing a nuclear weapon. One-Year Deadline Commenting on Al-Hadath's report, Col. Dahouk said: 'Based on the damage assessment of the US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, namely Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, it seems that these sites were not completely destroyed.' He suggested that the US thinks that a year is enough 'if the Iranian did not change their calculations or sought to rebuild these sites. If they did that, the US would repeat the strikes.' Nuclear Calculations Col. Dahouk said that the nuclear technology and knowledge are hard to destroy by military strikes. 'It is clear that Iran has the nuclear technology, even though that Israel assassinated top Iranian nuclear scientists – a major hit for Iran,' he noted. 'But in the end, no one benefits. The US favors diplomatic settlement but it doesn't seem available now. Iran is under harsh sanctions and pressure. The US wants to impose more, and the military solution seems to be the last option. And this is what the US and Israel tried to do, and pressures continue on Iran to push it toward changing its nuclear calculations,' he said. Snapback Sanctions Asked whether the snapback mechanism could influence Tehran's calculations or if Washington would need to pursue a new negotiation mechanism, Col. Dahouk said the US prefers diplomacy but Washington and Tehran have diverging red lines in negotiations. 'Washington and President Trump are ready for diplomatic settlement. They want to embrace the diplomatic path but the red lines are different between the US and Iran,' he said. 'The US doesn't want Iran to possess any enrichment capabilities, but Iran wants to keep its right to enrichment. Therefore, there are some conditions that Iran doesn't want to accept. I think here lies the problem and I think that Iran has some enriched uranium with unknown whereabouts. But the main issue is uranium enrichment. The US will not allow Iran to enrich but Iran wants to keep that right. This is the dilemma,' he explained. Iran Nuclear Facilities The Former Senior Military Advisor said that the one-year deadline is an indication that Iran's nuclear program was not completely destroyed. 'The recent US assessment suggests that the strikes have set back the program few years,' Col. Dahouk noted. 'But what lies underground is still unknown, especially the 400 kg of 60%-enriched uranium, and the condition of the centrifuges, whether they have been destroyed or not. So, the US strikes had some impact but they didn't destroy Iran's nuclear sites, particularly Natanz and Isfahan where facilities above the ground were destroyed but underground ones remained intact,' he added. Potential Targets Col. Dahouk explained that Iran has several sites, other than the three nuclear sites hit in the recent strikes, that could be on the US' target list. 'No, there are other sites that support the Iranian nuclear program. Some of these sites could be a potential target for US strikes,' he pointed out. Moreover, 'sites that were not completely destroyed could be hit again. I think that Iran's missile program could be also targeted, as well as other facilities. The US has a bank of military targets it could strike,' Col. Dahouk said. Short link : Post Views: 24
Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
EXPLAINER: Can Lebanon disarm Hezbollah?
Lebanon's cabinet has told the army to draw up a plan to establish a state monopoly on arms in a challenge to the Iran-backed Shiite Muslim group Hezbollah, which rejects calls to disarm. WHY IS THERE A PUSH TO DISARM HEZBOLLAH NOW? Israel pummelled Hezbollah last year in a war sparked by the conflict in Gaza, killing many of its top brass and 5,000 of its fighters before a November truce brokered by the United States. That deal committed Lebanon to restricting arms to six specific state security forces, and further stipulated that it should confiscate unauthorized weapons and prevent rearmament by non-state groups. In the months since, a new Lebanese government vowed to confine arms across the country to state control, Hezbollah's main arms route was cut when its Syrian ally Bashar Assad was ousted in December and Israel attacked its sponsor Iran in June. The government is facing pressure from Washington and Hezbollah's domestic rivals to act swiftly amid fears that Israel could intensify air strikes on Lebanon. Despite November's ceasefire, Israel has continued to carry out strikes on what it says are Hezbollah arms depots and fighters, mostly in southern Lebanon. HOW IS THE UNITED STATES INVOLVED? In June, US envoy Thomas Barrack proposed a roadmap to Lebanese officials to fully disarm Hezbollah in exchange for Israel halting its strikes on Lebanon and withdrawing its troops from five points they still occupy in southern Lebanon. But Hezbollah and its main Shiite ally the Amal Movement, led by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, say the sequencing should be reversed, with Israel withdrawing and halting strikes before any talks on Hezbollah's arms. Washington has grown impatient, demanding the Beirut government make the first move with a formal commitment to disarm Hezbollah. WHY IS HEZBOLLAH SO WELL-ARMED? After Lebanon's 15-year civil war ended in 1990 Hezbollah, founded by Iran's Revolutionary Guards in 1982, was the only group allowed to keep its weapons on the grounds that it was fighting Israel's occupation of the country's south. After Israel withdrew in 2000 the group did not give up its arms, arguing its ability to fight was still a critical element of national defense against future Israeli aggression. A ceasefire agreement after a war between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006 was backed by a UN resolution demanding the disarmament of all militant groups — but Hezbollah again kept its weapons, accusing Israel of having violated other parts of the truce deal, which Israel denies. Hezbollah took over parts of Beirut in fighting in 2008, underscoring its dominance. The group exercised decisive sway over state affairs in the following years as its power grew. WHAT DOES HEZBOLLAH SAY AND COULD THERE BE CIVIL STRIFE? Hezbollah has called the government's decision to ask the army to draw up plans to disarm it a 'grave sin' that 'fully serves Israel's interest.' Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem rejected each clause in Barrack's roadmap and when he spoke on Tuesday, dozens of motorcycles with men carrying Hezbollah flags drove around the group's stronghold in Beirut's southern suburbs — a show of its enduring strength. Hovering over any attempt to force Hezbollah to disarm is the spectre of previous bouts of civil unrest, including the 2008 fighting, triggered by the government's attempt to shut down the group's military telecoms network — an important facility for the group, but still less central than its arms. WHAT ARE THE POLITICAL COMPLICATIONS? Lebanon's power-sharing system apportions public sector posts — including in parliament, the cabinet and other roles — to different religious sects according to quotas. The system is meant to ensure no sect is cut out of decision making, but critics say it leads to political paralysis. Shiite representation in both parliament and cabinet is dominated by Hezbollah and its political ally Amal. Two Shiite ministers were traveling during Tuesday's cabinet session, and the other two walked out in the final moments as the decision was being taken. Qassem has said any government decision would require a national consensus and may challenge the legitimacy of cabinet decisions taken without Shiites. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? The cabinet decision gave the army a deadline to submit a disarmament plan to the government by the end of August. Another session scheduled for Thursday will discuss Barrack's proposal. Some Lebanese parties may keep trying to find a workaround that avoids a confrontation between Hezbollah and the state while warding off heavier Israeli strikes.
Saudi Gazette
3 hours ago
- Saudi Gazette
Saudi Arabia calls for global partnerships to support landlocked developing countries
Saudi Gazette report AWAZA, Turkmenistan — On behalf of Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman and Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia's Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, Eng. Waleed Al-Khuraiji, participated in the third United Nations Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs), held in Awaza, Turkmenistan, on Wednesday. In his address, Al-Khuraiji emphasized the importance of fostering international cooperation and building strategic alliances to help stabilize the global economy and promote sustainable development, particularly in landlocked developing nations facing geographic and infrastructure challenges. He reiterated the Kingdom's ongoing commitment to global economic sustainability, highlighting the need for collective international efforts to tackle economic obstacles in trade, connectivity, development, and transportation that hinder sustainable growth. Al-Khuraiji said Saudi Arabia prioritizes sustainable development through Vision 2030 and is committed to implementing global development goals via smart investments and sustainable projects. He underscored that the Kingdom actively engages in global organizations and multilateral blocs to advance development-oriented relations and strengthen cooperation between nations. He also called for greater international support to facilitate LLDCs' integration into global markets, reinforcing global peace, stability, and prosperity.
