Israel bombs Damascus military HQ as sectarian strife rages in Syria
The roar of jet engines reverberated around Damascus' downtown districts as Israeli drones and warplanes peppered the Syrian military's General Staff headquarters in the capital with missiles, engulfing sections of the compound in multiple fireballs. Bombs also were dropped near the presidential palace.
The bombing of Damascus comes as Israel continues to wage a multi-front war against most of its neighbors just weeks after it launched a campaign against Iran in hopes of destroying its nuclear capabilities. On Wednesday, even as it continued fighting in Syria, it launched attacks in Lebanon on what it said were assets for the Iran-backed Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, even while pressing its campaign against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
Israel has hewed to a zero-threat-tolerance policy with the government of Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, a former Al Qaeda-affiliated rebel leader — he split from the group years ago — who was designated a terrorist by the U.S. until earlier this year.
In the hours after Assad fell, Israeli troops occupied a swath of territory along the border with Syria stretching toward neighboring Daraa province, adding to land Israel already annexed in the Golan Heights in 1981. (The occupation is considered illegal by international law.) At the same time, the Israeli military launched an all-out air campaign to destroy Assad-era materiel it feared could be used against it in a future conflict.
Since then, Israel has barreled its way into Syria's complicated sectarian dynamics, vowing to defend the country's Druze minority from the Islamist-dominated government: Over the last few months, it repeatedly hit Syrian security forces moving to subdue Druze-dominated areas; critics say it has used recent sectarian unrest as a justification to destabilize a once-troublesome neighbor.
The Druze, members of a religious sect that is an offshoot of Ismailism, number around 1 million people across the world, half of them in Syria. Most of the others are spread between Lebanon and Israel.
During Syria's 14-year civil war, the Druze, wary of jihadi groups dominating the anti-Assad opposition, formed militias that fought the rebels but maintained a wary distance from Assad's government as well.
Though many Druze were pleased to see Assad toppled, they — like other minorities in the country— remain fearful of the government's jihadist origins. Recent sectarian unrest — such as in March, when government-linked factions massacred some 1,500 people, mostly from the Alawite sect — have only increased their suspicion. Then in May, other clashes in Druze-majority areas near Damascus left 39 people dead
Druze community leaders have resisted calls to have their militias stand down, insisting they will not surrender arms until government-affiliated factions disband.
Fighting began on Sunday, when an intensifying wave of tit-for-tat kidnappings and robberies between Bedouin tribes and Druze militias near Sweida devolved into open conflict. As casualties mounted, the government announced a ceasefire agreement brokered with Sweida's Druze leaders and dispatched its forces to secure the city.
But fighting soon restarted, with a Druze leader accusing security forces of indiscriminate shelling, while the government on Wednesday said that 'outlaw groups' fired on Druze personnel and that the militia reserved its right to respond.
Later on Wednesday, a Druze religious leader, Sheikh Yusef Al-Jarboo, announced another ceasefire agreement with the government that would end all fighting in Sweida. But it was rejected by another Druze notable, who urged his co-religionists to continue fighting.
'There is no agreement, negotiation or mandate with the armed gangs that falsely call themselves the government,' said Sheikh Hikmat Hajari, a figure long opposed to the new authorities.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based monitor with a network of activists in Syria, said 248 people have been killed in the violence since Sunday, including 21 people — three of them women — killed in field executions by government forces.
Activists spoke of additional infractions, publishing videos depicting government-affiliated gunmen forcibly shaving the mustaches of captured Druze fighters and harassing Druze civilians. Another clip depicts sword-toting government fighters entering Sweida and vowing to slaughter Druze. Druze fighters also uploaded videos to social media showing them beating up security personnel or posing with their corpses.
Al-Sharaa, whose government has yet to release a report investigating responsibility for the Alawite massacres in March, issued a statement Wednesday vowing that government forces 'will be held accountable legally.'
'We will never allow this to happen without punishment,' he said.
In a statement posted to X, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said the military 'will continue to operate forcefully' in Sweida against government forces 'until their complete withdrawal,' and vowed a series of 'painful blows' would follow — a threat soon made good when live broadcasts showed plumes of smoke shooting out of the military headquarters' compound in Damascus.
Meanwhile, Israel's military brought additional units to the border with Syria and inside the Israeli-occupied Syrian buffer zone. In a statement, it said it has struck more than 160 targets in Syria, mostly in the Sweida area since Monday.
As strikes began in Damascus and areas of southern Syria, more than 1,000 Israeli Druze assembled near the Israeli-Syrian border to protest violence against their co-religionists; they broke through the barrier and entered Syria, according to the Israeli military, which was returning them to Israeli territory. The military said it also had prevented Syrians from entering Israel.
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington is 'very concerned' by the sectarian fighting in Syria.
'We want the fighting to stop,' Rubio said. He added the United States was coordinating with relevant parties to end the conflict. 'Hopefully we'll have some updates later today.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New U.S. assessment finds American strikes destroyed only one of three Iranian nuclear sites
WASHINGTON — One of the three nuclear enrichment sites in Iran struck by the United States last month was mostly destroyed, setting work there back significantly. But the two others were not as badly damaged and may have been degraded only to a point where nuclear enrichment could resume in the next several months if Iran wants it to, according to a recent U.S. assessment of the destruction caused by the military operation, five current and former U.S. officials familiar with the assessment told NBC News. The assessment, part of the Trump administration's ongoing efforts to determine the status of Iran's nuclear program since the facilities were struck, was briefed to some U.S. lawmakers, Defense Department officials and allied countries in recent days, four of those people said. NBC News has also learned that U.S. Central Command had developed a much more comprehensive plan to strike Iran that would have involved hitting three additional sites in an operation that would have stretched for several weeks instead of a single night, according to a current U.S. official and two former U.S. officials. President Donald Trump was briefed on that plan, but it was rejected because it was at odds with his foreign policy instincts to extract the United States from conflicts abroad, not dig deeper into them, as well as the possibility of a high number of casualties on both sides, one of the current officials and one of the former officials said. 'We were willing to go all the way in our options, but the president did not want to,' one of the sources with knowledge of the plan said. In a speech in the hours after they took place, Trump called the strikes he directed 'a spectacular military success' and said, 'Iran's key enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' The reality as gleaned through intelligence so far appears to be more nuanced. And if the early findings about the damage inflicted to Iran's nuclear program hold up as more intelligence comes in, the United States could find itself back in a conflict there. There have been discussions within both the American and Israeli governments about whether additional strikes on the two less-damaged facilities could be necessary if Iran does not soon agree to restart negotiations with the Trump administration on a nuclear deal or if there are signs Iran is trying to rebuild at those locations, one of the current officials and one of the former officials said. Iran has long said its nuclear program is purely for peaceful, civilian purposes. The recent assessment is a snapshot of the damage U.S. strikes inflicted amid an intelligence-gathering process that administration officials have said is expected to continue for months. Assessments of Iran's nuclear program after the U.S. strikes are expected to change over time, and according to two of the current officials, as the process progresses, the findings suggest more damage than previous assessments revealed. That assessment remains for now the current thinking on the impact of the strikes, officials said. 'As the President has said and experts have verified, Operation Midnight Hammer totally obliterated Iran's nuclear capabilities,' White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly told NBC News in a statement. 'America and the world are safer, thanks to his decisive action.' In a statement of his own, chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said: 'The credibility of the Fake News Media is similar to that of the current state of the Iranian nuclear facilities: destroyed, in the dirt, and will take years to recover. President Trump was clear and the American people understand: Iran's nuclear facilities in Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz were completely and totally obliterated. There is no doubt about that.' He added, 'Operation Midnight Hammer was a significant blow to Iran's nuclear capabilities thanks to the decisive action of President Trump and the bravery of every man and woman in uniform who supported this mission.' Destruction and deterrence The U.S. strikes targeted three enrichment sites in Iran: Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan. U.S. officials believe the attack on Fordo, which has long been viewed as a critical component of Iran's nuclear ambitions, was successful in setting back Iranian enrichment capabilities at that site by as much as two years, according to two of the current officials. Much of the administration's public messaging about the strikes has focused on Fordo. In a Pentagon briefing they held in response to reporting on an initial Defense Intelligence Agency assessment that concluded that Iran's nuclear program had been set back by only three to six months, for instance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, talked extensively about the strike at Fordo but not the strikes at Natanz and Isfahan. U.S. officials knew before the airstrikes that Iran had structures and enriched uranium at Natanz and Isfahan that were likely to be beyond the reach of even America's 30,000-pound GBU-57 'bunker buster' bombs, three of the sources said. Those bombs, which had never been used in combat before the strikes, were designed with the deeply buried facilities carved into the side of a mountain at Fordo in mind. As early as 2023, though, there were indications that Iran was digging tunnels at Natanz that were below where the GBU-57 could reach. There are also tunnels deep underground at Isfahan. The United States hit surface targets at Isfahan with Tomahawk missiles and did not drop GBU-57s there, but it did use them at Natanz. A U.S. official pointed NBC News to a closed-door briefing conducted in late June by CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who told lawmakers that Iran's nuclear program was 'severely damaged' and that several key nuclear facilities were 'completely destroyed,' according to an administration official's description of the briefing. Ratcliffe said the only metal conversion facility at Natanz, required for nuclear enrichment, was destroyed to the point that it would take 'years to rebuild,' according to the official, who was authorized to describe some contents of the classified briefing. Ratcliffe also said that the intelligence community believes the strikes buried the vast majority of enriched uranium at Isfahan and Fordo and that thus it would be extremely difficult for the Iranians to extract it to resume enrichment, according to the official. The United States has not seen indications that Iran is trying to dig out the facilities, two officials said. As NBC News has reported, the Israeli government believes at least some of Iran's highly enriched uranium remains intact but buried beneath the Isfahan facility, according to a senior Israeli government official who briefed reporters in Washington last week. The official said, however, that Israel considers the material effectively unreachable, because it is watching and will conduct new strikes if it believes Iran is trying to dig up the uranium. The official also said Israel believes Iran's nuclear program has been set back by up to two years. Similarly, even if the targeted Iranian nuclear sites were not completely destroyed, U.S. officials and Republican advocates of the operation believe it was a success because it has changed the strategic equation for Iran. From their point of view, the regime in Tehran now faces a credible threat of more airstrikes if Israel and the United States believe it is trying to revive clandestine nuclear work. Asked late last month whether he would consider bombing Iran again if intelligence reports concluded Iran can enrich uranium at a level that concerns him, Trump said: 'Sure. Without question. Absolutely.' Iran's air defenses have been largely destroyed, making it all but impossible for Iran to defend against further strikes on facilities in the future, the U.S. official said. 'It was made clear that Iran no longer has any more [air defenses], so the idea that they can easily rebuild anything is ludicrous,' the official said. The 'all-in' plan Beginning during the Biden administration, as early as last fall and into this spring, Army Gen. Erik Kurilla, the head of U.S. Central Command, had developed a plan to go 'all-in' on striking Iran, according to a current U.S. official and two former officials. That option was designed to 'truly decimate' Iran's nuclear capabilities, in the words of one of the former officials. Under the plan, the United States would have hit six sites. The thinking was that the six sites would have to be hit repeatedly to inflict the kind of damage necessary to completely end the program, people familiar with the thinking said. The plan would also have involved targeting more of Iran's air defense and ballistic missile capabilities, and planners projected it could result in a high number of Iranian casualties. U.S. officials expected that if that were to take place, Iran would target American positions, for example in Iraq and Syria, a person familiar with the plan said. 'It would be a protracted air campaign,' the person said. Some Trump administration officials believed a deeper offensive option against Iran was a viable policy, two of the former officials said. Trump was briefed on the so-called all-in plan, but it was rejected ultimately because it would have required a sustained period of conflict. The history During his first term, in 2018, Trump pulled the United States out of a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers that was negotiated during the Obama administration. The agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, imposed strict limits on Iran's nuclear program in return for an easing of economic sanctions. Under the deal, Iran was a year away from obtaining enough fissile material for a nuclear bomb. After Trump withdrew from the accord and reimposed sanctions, Iran flouted restrictions on its uranium enrichment. Before the June airstrikes, the regime had enough fissile material for about nine to 10 bombs, according to U.S. officials and United Nations inspectors. Trump has since sought a new agreement with Iran that would block it from developing nuclear weapons. Indirect talks between U.S. and Iranian officials failed to clinch a deal before Israel launched airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. Iran has long denied that it wants to build a nuclear weapon, a position its foreign minister reiterated in an interview with NBC News the day before the U.S. strikes. This article was originally published on Solve the daily Crossword
UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
2 killed, priest among injured as Gaza catholic church 'shelled' by Israel
The Roman Catholic Church of the Holy Family in Gaza City pictured just before Christmas 2020. Two people taking refuge from the war inside the church were killed and several injured Thursday when it was shelled, apparently by an Israeli tank. File Photo by Ismael Mohamad/UPI | License Photo July 17 (UPI) -- Two people were killed Thursday and a priest was among several people injured, four of them seriously, in what appeared to be an Israeli attack on Gaza's only Catholic church where displaced Christian families were taking refuge from the fighting. Local priest, Father Gabriel Romanelli, who is from Argentina, was hurt in what the parish and the Vatican said was "an apparent strike by the Israeli army" on the Holy Family Church in Gaza City. His injuries are not thought to be serious. Pope Leo XIV issued a statement expressing shock and sorrow at the loss of life and injury caused by the "military" attack and reiterated his calls for an immediate cease-fire, while Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni pointed the finger squarely at Israel, calling it "unacceptable." The Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the diocese the church comes under, condemned the strike. "With deep sorrow, the Latin Patriarchate can now confirm that two persons were killed as a result of an apparent strike by the Israeli army that hit the Holy Family Compound this morning. We pray for the rest of their souls and for the end of this barbaric war. Nothing can justify the targeting of innocent civilians," it said. Latin Patriarch Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa told Vatican News that the church had been fired on by an Israeli tank. "What we know for sure is that a tank, the IDF says by mistake, but we are not sure about this, they hit the Church directly. Four people are seriously wounded, among these four, two are in very serious condition and their lives are in grave danger," he said. "There are also other injured but less problematic, among them also the Parish Priest, because they were all in the Church." The BBC said it had seen footage and photos showing damage to the roof and shattered windows. The Holy Family Church was temporarily housing an estimated 600 displaced people, mostly children, as well as 54 people with special needs, when it was struck. Many local Christian families had been there for 21 months since the conflict erupted in October 2023. Churches and other places of worship are traditionally places of refuge that are not targeted by combatants in military conflict; however, the Holy Family is located in the north of the Palestinian enclave in an area where the Israeli military ordered people to leave some time back. The Israel Defense Forces said it was aware of reports that the church had been damaged and people injured and that it was reviewing the circumstances surrounding the incident. The incident comes amid a rising toll of collateral deaths from Israeli military action, including six children killed in an airstrike on Sunday as they waited in line to get water, blamed by the IDF on a "technical error," and 15 Palestinians killed, including 10 children and two women, as they waited outside the clinic of a U.S.-health non-profit on Friday.
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
Iran Has a Mass-Deportation Policy Too
Last month's war with Israel and the United States lasted only 12 days, but Iran is likely to feel its consequences for years. The country's intelligence services failed to prevent Israel from assassinating many top military officials, and now the Iranian regime is lashing out in all directions. It has handed down harsher sentences to political prisoners, harassed members of religious and ethnic minorities, and executed dozens of people. But one community has suffered perhaps more than any other: Afghan migrants in Iran, who number as many as 6 million by some estimates. In the past few months, Iran has deported hundreds of thousands of Afghans— The New York Times reports 1.4 million since January—sending them back across the 572-mile border the two countries share. This process began well before the Israeli bombing campaign. Back in March, Iranian authorities warned Afghans that many of their temporary residence papers would soon cease to be valid. But the war seems to have accelerated the campaign. Iran deported more than 100,000 Afghans within a few days last month. In June alone, at least 5,000 children were separated from their parents. The security forces have haphazardly picked up thousands of Afghans and even people suspected of being Afghans. Some are legal residents who were deported before they could produce their papers. In some cases, authorities have torn up residency papers. Every day, thousands are boarded onto buses bound for Afghanistan. Both the Taliban administration and the United Nations migration officials there have complained about the sheer number of migrants appearing at the border. Arash Azizi: Iran's stunning incompetence Deportation camps near Tehran are now filled with thousands of Afghans. Shargh, a Tehran daily, has published many harrowing reports on the deportation effort. With no time to change out of their slippers or work clothes, some Afghans scramble to get their relatives to bring them their papers before they are expelled from the country. An elderly woman told reporters that her husband, who is deaf, had lost his documents at one of the camps and is now being deported. Another woman lamented that her family had lived in Iran for 58 years and were now forced to leave the only country they knew. According to the latest instructions, only Afghans in certain migrant categories are allowed to stay. Temporary documents that once allowed others access to certain services are now void. Many Afghans have been deported before being able to collect the considerable security deposits held by their landlords (Iran's inflation is such that renters typically put down a large lump sum as a deposit in lieu of paying a monthly rent). Iran is justifying the mass deportations with the spurious claim that Afghans assisted Israeli operations in Iran. The authorities have paraded Afghan migrants on state television, airing their undoubtedly coerced confessions of guilt. In one clip, an Afghan migrant is shown confessing to the head of the judiciary that he filmed Iran's air-defense systems, presumably for Israel. The authorities claim that these Afghans were paid via cryptocurrencies. Such cynical ploys fool very few. Social media abounds with jokes about how the regime is so humiliated by Israel's battering, all it can muster is a desperate crackdown on Afghans. Iran has been home to millions of Afghans for decades. They are a long-standing part of Iranian society, commonly working in demanding jobs such as construction. The two countries share many cultural similarities and a lingua franca. Many Afghans even hail from regions, such as Herat, that were intermittently part of Iranian territory until the 19th century. Many more consider themselves part of the broader Iranian cultural sphere and grew up on Persian literature. Yet they've long been treated as an underclass. Until 2015, most Afghan children were not allowed to register in schools. The majority of Afghans has to regularly renew residence permits without any path to permanent status. Although Afghan women can be naturalized if they marry Iranians, this option is not open to Afghan men. In fact, even children born to such unions are denied status. And without status, Afghans have problems completing basic tasks, such as opening bank accounts or renting apartments. Anti-immigrant sentiments in Iran have only intensified since the Taliban's capture of Kabul in 2021 produced an influx of irregular migration. The Islamic Republic is thus using this moment of crisis and heightened nationalism to push a program likely to be popular. During last year's presidential election, candidates competed by offering anti-migrant programs. One even promised to build a wall on Iran's eastern border. The winning candidate, Masoud Pezeshkian, promised to block the borders to prevent further migration from Afghanistan. Nor is this a partisan issue. One of the very few causes that brings together many pro- and anti-regime Iranians is opposition to Afghan migration. One conspiracy theory that has currency in anti-regime circles holds that the Islamic Republic has brought in Afghans to engineer the country's demographics, making the society more conservative and recruiting Afghans to beef up the repressive forces. Little evidence supports this theory, but Tehran does have a history of politically using the Afghan refugees. It dispatched tens of thousands of Shiite Afghans to fight its sectarian wars in Syria and Iraq. Other anti-migrant voices invoke the familiar trope that immigrants are behind violent crimes, even though there is no evidence of Afghans in Iran committing a disproportionate share of such crimes. In late May, a young Iranian woman was killed by a taxi driver, her body left in the desert, and some Iranians tried to link the crime to Afghan migrants, even though the driver, who confessed, was Iranian. The deportations are especially hard on Afghan women because the Taliban happens to be running arguably the world's only regime more misogynistic than the Islamic Republic. Under the Taliban's rule, Afghan girls are barred from studying after sixth grade, and women cannot travel or appear alone in public. Before the Taliban sent them home, more than 100,000 women were studying in Afghan universities. Some fled to Iran in the hope of continuing their education. If Iran had a more rational immigration policy, it could use the talents of these women and others fleeing the Taliban. Many have Ph.D.s and other professional qualifications. Afghans born in Iran or those who have spent decades in the country should have been offered a path to permanent residency and naturalization. Instead, Iran's migration policy has long been chaotic and arbitrary, and the country tolerates a sometimes shocking degree of crude racism. Not only is there almost no path to legal citizenship, but No Afghans allowed signs are known to appear at shopping centers, and some Afghans have suffered racist assaults. Fereshteh Hosseini, an Afghan Iranian actor, appeared at the Karlovy Vary film festival last week. Donning a traditional Afghan hat, she took the opportunity to criticize Taliban rule and advocate against the mass deportation of Afghans from Iran. Hosseini is perhaps the best known Afghan Iranian in Iran, in part because she's married to a famous Iranian film star, but her status has not shielded her from racist abuse. In response to the viral clip of her speech at Karlovy Vary, a major conservative Iranian website attacked her, accusing her of ' treason.' There have always been Iranians who oppose the country's discriminatory policies and the society's casual racism toward Afghans. Almost 20 years ago, I volunteered in southern Tehran every weekend, teaching Afghan children who were then deprived of the right to education. The classes were organized by an Iranian NGO and taught by young activists like me. In recent years, Iranian sociologists, activists, and filmmakers have come to advocate for Afghan migrants. This work has made a difference. In 2015, the regime relented and allowed Afghan children to go to school. Some Iranians are raising their voices now. The Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi has attacked the mass deportation of Afghan migrants as contradicting 'humanitarian principles' and Iran's 'international obligations.' A group that tracks executions has warned about an uptick in executions of Afghans in Iran. An op-ed in Shargh criticized the 'extremism' of the anti-migrant campaign and called for a more rational policy. The Iranian expulsions are part of a global trend. Much like the United States and Europe, countries such as Iran, Turkey, Lebanon, Pakistan, and South Africa have cracked down hard on migrants. The lot of Afghans is particularly bad. In Turkey, they've suffered from the broader anti-migrant backlash targeting Syrians. From September 2023 to January 2025, Pakistan sent more than 800,000 Afghan migrants home. Millions anxiously remain in Pakistan. Much like those still in Iran, they are caught between the draconian rule of the Taliban and a world ever less friendly to migration.
