Kuwait Bans Dealings with Hezbollah Financial Entity Al Qard Al Hassan
The Kuwaiti Foreign Ministry's sanctions committee, acting under UN Security Council resolutions enacted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, also imposed sanctions on three individuals of Lebanese, Tunisian, and Somali nationality. The Lebanese man, Adel Mansour, is AQAH's designated leader, whose assets have been frozen.
All Kuwaiti companies and financial institutions must immediately cease cooperation with Hezbollah-affiliated individuals and entities, and freeze any related funds or economic resources.
At least seven Lebanese individuals are currently sanctioned because of their alleged involvement in the financial networks between Lebanon and Kuwait, which serve Hezbollah. \
In July 2025, Lebanon's central bank issued a circular forbidding all licensed banks and brokerages from dealing directly or indirectly with AQAH or other unlicensed financial entities, signaling a move toward curbing Hezbollah's economic footprint.
In November last year, Kuwait arrested 18 individuals because of suspected economic links with Hezbollah.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
UN Security Council members disagree on when to lift Syria sanctions
A potential dispute is widening among UN Security Council members over sanctions on Syria, with some opposing a US-led drive to lift all restrictions on Damascus. President Donald Trump last month ordered an easing of sanctions on Syria but as some US measures require an act of Congress to be wiped, several Security Council designations remain in place. The US sees full and immediate sanctions relief as vital to stabilising and rebuilding Syria after a 14-year civil war ended in December with the removal of president Bashar Al Assad. His defeat was led by Hayat Tahrir Al Sham (HTS), which once had ties to Al Qaeda and has been on the US sanctions list since 2014 - though its designation as a foreign terrorist organisation was revoked this month. Several HTS members including Syria's interim President Ahmad Al Shara remain subject to a travel ban, frozen assets and other measures. The US this week urged the Security Council to review its sanctions on Mr Al Shara and HTS, saying changes were necessary to support Damascus in its fight against terrorism, including ISIS and Al Qaeda-linked groups. Dorothy Shea, acting US ambassador to the UN, said Washington was working with council members to address the Syria-related sanctions, stressing the government in Damascus had demonstrated a commitment to combat extremist threats. The 36th UN report of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team said that while no operational ties between HTS and Al Qaeda had been observed, some member nations raised concerns that other members, particularly those in tactical positions or absorbed into the newly formed Syrian army, remained ideologically loyal to Al Qaeda. Ms Shea called on the Security Council to adjust its sanctions so 'the Syrian government can prevail in the fight against terrorism, while keeping the most dangerous and unrepentant actors designated". The report estimated more than 5,000 foreign 'terrorist fighters' remain at large in Syria, posing a threat to regional stability. 'Member states noted the complexity of the issue and expressed concern that efforts to legitimise foreign terrorist fighters may regularise their status in the Syrian Arab Republic without reducing their threat,' the report notes. Some foreign terrorist fighters – in particular those from Central Asia- retained 'external ambitions' and were dissatisfied with the interim government's approach. Several council members, including Russia, China and France, advocate a more measured approach to lifting sanctions, with Beijing the most vocal. 'China's main issue with delisting HTS remains the question of foreign fighters, specifically the presence of Uighur nationalists in Syria, whom they consider an issue of national security concern,' Maya Ungar, a UN analyst at the International Crisis Group, told The National. 'Russia, France and other European countries remain concerned about foreign fighters as well, as there are European, Chechen and Central Asian fighters active in Syria." She noted any compromise on foreign fighters that satisfies the Chinese on the issue is also likely to end up satisfying Russia and France as well. Mr Trump has embraced Mr Al Shara's presidency and during a visit to Saudi Arabia in May he said he would end all sanctions on Syria. But only the US Congress can repeal the Caesar Act, legislation from 2019 that sought to punish the Assad regime. In Washington, recent violence in Syria is fuelling a debate in Congress about whether it should repeal the Caesar Act in full, or adjust it so restrictions can be lifted only if Damascus meets human rights and other benchmarks. Republican Representative Mike Lawler this month introduced a bill that would amend the act to allow it to be waived if the Syrian government is not targeting civilians, among other provisions. The Syrian Emergency Task Force, which works to help build democracy in Syria, urged US legislators to vote against Mr Lawler's bill and push for a clean repeal. Because the Caesar sanctions were placed against the Assad regime, they should by definition be lifted without conditions, Mouaz Moustafa, the task force's executive director, told The National. 'Lifting those sanctions does not mean the US can't sanction Syria, or individuals or groups or whoever in Syria that commits any crimes against any minority,' he said. The Caesar Act currently has a temporary and renewable waiver but Mr Moustafa said the US has a moral obligation to scrap the legislation once and for all. He said using Caesar as leverage over Syria's new government threatens to destabilise Syria and risk further civil war. 'Caesar is not the way to hold the Syrian government accountable for any mistakes it may make, or has made,' Mr Moustafa said. 'Caesar was about Assad. Assad is gone.'
The National
4 hours ago
- The National
Trump announces 25% US tariff on India 'for buying Russian weapons and energy'
The US will impose a 25 per cent tariff on goods from India as well as a 'penalty' for buying Russian energy and military hardware, President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday. In a message on his Truth Social platform, Mr Trump accused India of enabling the war in Ukraine through its purchases from Russia. 'They have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia's largest buyer of energy along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to stop the killing in Ukraine – all things not good!' Mr Trump wrote. He also accused India of having the world's most 'strenuous and obnoxious' non-monetary trade barriers and said the penalty would start on Friday. Mr Trump not specify what the additional penalty would be, but this week said he would place additional sanctions on Russia unless it complies with his demand to end the war in Ukraine. The Indian embassy in Washington referred The National to a statement by the Ministry of Commerce & Industry that said New Delhi had "taken note" of Mr Trump's comments and was studying the implications. "India and the US have been engaged in negotiations on concluding a fair, balanced and mutually beneficial bilateral trade agreement over the last few months. We remain committed to that objective," the statement read, adding that India would take "all steps necessary" to secure its national interest. The Census Bureau reported that the US ran a $45.8 billion trade imbalance in goods with India last year, meaning it imported more than it exported. India is the world's most populous country, with more than 1.4 billion inhabitants, and a possible geopolitical counterbalance to China. India and Russia have close relations, and New Delhi has not supported western sanctions on Moscow.
The National
7 hours ago
- The National
High Court grants Palestine Action bid to challenge terrorist ban
Palestine Action will be allowed to challenge a UK government decision to designate it a terrorist organisation at the High Court in London, a judge ruled on Wednesday. The protest group's co-founder Huda Ammori sought to challenge Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision, which came into effect this month. Mr Justice Chamberlain approved the application on two grounds: first, that the proscription order " amounts to a disproportionate interference with the claimant's and others' rights to freedom of expression, and freedom to protest". Second was that Ms Cooper had not consulted the group before making the proscription order, in breach of "natural justice" and of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Planes damaged The move to proscribe Palestine Action was announced after members of the group damaged two Voyager aircraft at RAF Brize Norton late last month. Police said about £7 million ($9.3 million) worth of damage was caused. The group claimed the planes had been involved in supporting Israel's military action in Gaza via the Royal Air Force base at Akrotiri in Cyprus. But the decision to designate the group was made as early as March, over some of its previous protests. Mr Justice Chamberlain rejected Ms Ammori's claims that the move was unlawful because it was influenced by "the views of pro-Israeli lobby groups", or that the group seeks "to prevent conduct which many regard as amounting to genocide". 'Reasonably arguable' However, he accepted other points. 'As a matter of principle, I consider that it is reasonably arguable that a duty to consult arose,' he said. 'Having considered the evidence, I also consider it reasonably arguable that there was no compelling reason why consultation could not have been undertaken here.' After Wednesday's ruling, Ms Ammori said: 'This landmark decision to grant a judicial review, which could see the Home Secretary's unlawful decision to ban Palestine Action quashed, demonstrates the significance of this case for freedom of speech, expression and assembly, and rights to natural justice in our country, and the rule of law itself.' Judges had previously denied Ms Ammori's legal challenge for an injunction on July 4 that would have postponed the proposed ban, citing a strong public interest in bringing the order into force. The latest ruling was welcomed by campaign groups, who fear the terror designation could have an adverse effect on the wider pro-Palestine protest movement. A representative for Defend Our Juries, the group organising the protests, said: 'Yvette Cooper has no one to blame for this crisis but herself. We are confident the High Court will soon strike down this absurd and repugnant order.' Any ban would mean support for, or membership of, Palestinian Action is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in jail.
