Israel launches strikes on weapons in Syria
The Israeli strikes on southern Syria caused "significant human and material losses", Syria's foreign ministry said, adding that Israel was "trying to destabilise the region".
Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said he held Syrian interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa responsible for the projectiles launched into Israel.
Despite recent indirect talks to ease tensions between the two countries, Israel has stepped up attacks on targets in Syria since Sharaa led a rebel offensive that overthrew Bashar al-Assad's regime in December 2024.
"Violent explosions shook southern Syria, notably the town of Quneitra and the Daraa region, following Israeli aerial strikes," said the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights, a UK-based monitoring group.
In a statement, Syria's foreign ministry said: "This escalation constitutes a blatant violation of Syrian sovereignty and aggravates tensions in the region.
"Syria has never been and will never be a threat to anyone in the region."
It was unclear how many people were killed or injured in Israel's strikes.
Israel said the strikes came after two projectiles launched from Syria landed in open areas of the country, causing no injuries.
Israeli media reported that the strikes were the first launched from Syria since the fall of the Bashar al-Assad regime.
It was not immediately clear who fired the projectiles.
"We consider the president of Syria directly responsible for any threat and fire toward the State of Israel," Katz said.
Syria's foreign ministry said reports of the launches from inside Syria "have not been verified yet".
When the Assad regime was deposed, Israel launched a wave of attacks to degrade Syrian military infrastructure.
It has also encouraged the expansion of settlements in the occupied Golan Heights, territory which Israel seized from Syria in 1976 and is considered illegally occupied under international law.
Last month, US President Donald Trump announced plans to lift decade-old sanctions on Syria, imposed in response to atrocities committed by forces loyal to Assad during a 13-year civil war.
During that conflict, more than 600,000 people were killed and 12 million others were forced from their homes.
Last month, Israel bombed an area near Syria's presidential palace in Damascus, a strike which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said was a "clear message" that it would "not allow the deployment of forces south of Damascus".
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the bombing was a "violation of Syria's sovereignty".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
30 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Syrian American Man Among Members of Druze Community Killed in Sectarian Clashes in Syria
BEIRUT—A Syrian-American man of the Druze religious minority was killed in southern Syria when he got caught up in sectarian clashes there last week while visiting family members, relatives, and officials said Tuesday. The U.S. State Department confirmed the death of U.S citizen Hossam Soraya in the city of Sweida and extended its condolences to his family. His relatives and friends told The Associated Press that Saraya, in his mid-30s from Oklahoma, was killed in an attack on July 16.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Trump birthright citizenship order "unconstitutional," appeals court rules
President Trump's executive order that seeks to end birthright citizenship in the U.S. is "unconstitutional," a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday. Why it matters: The 2-1 ruling upholds a nationwide pause on enforcement of the policy, which is likely headed for the Supreme Court. It's the first time an appeals court has weighed in on the matter since the Supreme Court last month limited lower courts ' ability to freeze federal policies — specifically, Trump's effort to eliminate U.S. birthright citizenship. Driving the news: "We conclude that the Executive Order is invalid because it contradicts the plain language of the Fourteenth Amendment's grant of citizenship to 'all persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,'" per the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' majority ruling. Context: Although the Supreme Court limited lower courts' powers, it left room for broader relief through the filing of class-action lawsuits. The Trump administration has since faced fresh challenges to the policy. For the record: Democratic attorneys general in Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon brought the case against President Trump and agencies including the State Department, Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security. Administration officials named in the suit include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
U.S. appeals court blocks Trump's order curtailing birthright citizenship
A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that U.S. President Donald Trump's executive order curtailing automatic birthright citizenship is unconstitutional and blocked its enforcement nationwide. The 2-1 decision by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals marked the first time an appeals court has assessed the legality of Trump's order since the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of lower court judges to enjoin that and other federal policies on a nationwide basis. The Supreme Court's June 27 ruling in litigation over Trump's birthright citizenship order limited the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directed lower courts that had blocked the Republican president's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions allowing courts to potentially still block it nationally again. That has already allowed a judge in New Hampshire to once again halt Trump's order from taking effect by issuing an injunction in a nationwide class action of children who would be denied citizenship under the policy. The 9th Circuit's majority in Wednesday's ruling said the Democratic-led states that had sued to block the policy - Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon - likewise still were entitled to a nationwide injunction as a more narrow order would not provide them "complete relief." "The court agrees that the president cannot redefine what it means to be American with the stroke of a pen," Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said in a statement. The Trump administration could either ask a wider panel of 9th Circuit judges to hear the case or appeal directly to the Supreme Court, which is expected to have the final word in the litigation. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump signed the order on Jan. 20, his first day back in office, as part of his hardline approach toward immigration. Trump's order directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. It was swiftly challenged in court by Democratic attorneys general from 22 states and immigrant rights advocates who argued it violates the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, long been understood to recognize that virtually anyone born in the United States is a citizen. The Constitution's 14th Amendment citizenship clause states that all "persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." The first judge to block Trump's directive was Seattle-based U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, an appointee of Republican President Ronald Reagan, who called it "blatantly unconstitutional." The 9th Circuit's ruling upheld his decision. U.S. Circuit Judge Ronald Gould, writing for Wednesday's majority, said Coughenour rightly concluded that Trump's executive order violated the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment by denying citizenship to many persons born in the United States. Gould said a geographically limited injunction would harm the four states by forcing them to overhaul their government benefits programs to account for how people denied citizenship under Trump's order might move into them. "It is impossible to avoid this harm absent a uniform application of the citizenship clause throughout the United States," Gould wrote. His opinion was joined by U.S. Circuit Judge Michael Hawkins, a fellow appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton. U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, dissented, saying in his view the Democratic-led states lacked standing to challenge Trump's order, as he warned of the risks of "judicial overreach."
