Lebanon says it will retaliate against gunfire from Syria after deadly cross-border fighting
Lebanon 's president Monday ordered troops to retaliate against the source of gunfire from the Syrian side of the border after more deadly fighting erupted overnight along the tense frontier.
The fighting happened after Syria's interim government accused fighters from Lebanon's Hezbollah militant group of crossing into Syria on Saturday, abducting three soldiers and killing them on Lebanese soil.
It was the most serious cross-border fighting since the ouster of former Syrian President Bashar Assad in December.
Syrian News Channel, citing an unnamed Defense Ministry official, said the Syrian army shelled 'Hezbollah gatherings that killed Syrian soldiers' along the border. Hezbollah denied involvement in a statement on Sunday.
Information Minister Paul Morkos said Lebanon's defense minister told a Cabinet meeting that the three killed were smugglers. He added that one child was killed and six people were wounded on the Lebanese side.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based war monitor, said five Syrian soldiers were killed during Monday's clashes. Footage circulated online and in local media showed families fleeing toward the Lebanese town of Hermel.
Lebanon's state news agency reported that fighting intensified Monday evening near Hermel.
'What is happening along the eastern and northeastern border cannot continue and we will not accept that it continues,' Lebanon's President Joseph Aoun said on X. 'I have given my orders to the Lebanese army to retaliate against the source of fire.'
Aoun added that he asked Lebanon's foreign minister, who is currently in Brussels for a donors conference on Syria, to contact Syrian officials to resolve the problem "and prevent further escalation.'
Violence recently spiked in the area between the Syrian military and armed Lebanese Shiite clans closely allied with the former government of Assad, based in Lebanon's Al-Qasr border village.
Lebanese media and the observatory say clans were involved in the abductions that sparked the latest clashes.
The Lebanese and Syrian armies said they have opened channels of communication to ease tensions. Lebanon's military also said it returned the bodies of the three killed Syrians. Large numbers of Lebanese troops have been deployed in the area.
Lebanese media reported low-level fighting at dawn after an attack on a Syrian military vehicle. The number of casualties was unclear.
Early on Monday, four Syrian journalists embedded with the Syrian army were lightly wounded after an artillery shell fired from the Lebanese side of the border hit their position. They accused Hezbollah of the attack.
Meanwhile, senior Hezbollah legislator Hussein Haj Hassan in an interview with Lebanon's Al Jadeed television accused fighters from the Syrian side of crossing into Lebanese territory and attacking border villages. His constituency is the northeastern Baalbek-Hermel province, which has borne the brunt of the clashes.
Lebanon has been seeking international support to boost funding for its military as it gradually deploys troops along its porous northern and eastern borders with Syria as well as its southern border with Israel.
Speaking from the southern border on Monday, U.N. envoy Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert also warned the Security Council that the sustained presence of Israeli forces on Lebanese territory, alongside ongoing Israeli strikes, could easily lead to 'serious ripple effects.'
___
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
40 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reform is Corbynism with a flag: the Tories stand for economic freedom
I confess I shudder every time I hear that word. Yet politicians from Keir Starmer to Nigel Farage are now gleefully chanting 'nationalisation!' as a solution to every economic challenge in the utterly deluded belief that the answer to our problems is getting civil servants to take control of business. The Conservative Party knows that the state is already too big, much too slow, and doing far too much and doing it badly. Some of that happened under previous Conservative governments. It's my job to fix this and to ensure that those mistakes are never repeated. The solution isn't more government, it's smarter government, better government – and that means getting out of the way of private enterprise. Growth comes from business, from the risk-takers, from the people who devote their time, money and energy to building things. It doesn't come from the politicians sat in offices dreaming up new ways to spend your taxes. Yet that is now the way Starmer and Farage are talking about economic growth. Let's start with oil and gas. As many as 10,000 jobs have been lost in this sector recently. According to Offshore Energies UK, capital investment in our domestic industry is set to collapse from £14.1 billion to £2.3 billion in just four years. The business environment is not friendly and not competitive. But what is Reform's answer? Give the Government a stake in new oil and gas fields. Labour's? Hike the so-called 'windfall tax' and make it permanent. Both will scare off serious investors. On Friday I called on the Labour Government to scrap the windfall tax on North Sea producers. The windfall is gone, but the tax is still there, strangling investment and killing jobs and growth. I am proposing a solution that puts business and workers first. But naturally Labour criticised it. The same fantasy economics is playing out in steel. British Steel in Scunthorpe is haemorrhaging money – losing nearly £1 million a day. Labour's answer is to nationalise it. Reform's is to do the same, but with even more gusto! When the Port Talbot steelworks faced a similar crisis, I worked with a private company – Tata Steel – to find a solution that made economic sense and secured a future for the community in South Wales. Because unlike Starmer and Farage, I know to be successful a business doesn't need politicians telling it how to operate. It needs politicians who will listen to what those who do the job says works. The Labour government started taking us backwards last year – sneaking through rail nationalisation, hoping voters had forgotten the British Rail disaster. It's not just farcical that the first nationalised train ended up being a replacement bus service, it's a warning of what's to come. And after oil, steel and rail, the next on their list is water. The drumbeat to nationalise Thames Water is getting louder. But the answer isn't to send civil servants in. The answer is to create a climate where investment flows in rather than out. That means protecting the profit motive, not punishing it. Everyone knows we Conservatives have a battle on our hands. Reform pretends to be a Right-wing party, but economically Reform is Corbynism with a flag: more benefits, more subsidies, more central planning, more control. It is socialism that is dressed up as patriotism. Under Labour, business taxes are at record highs. The Trade unions are running everything from education to business policy – hence the Employment Rights Bill that effectively makes everyone a union member unless they choose to opt out of it. The public sector is getting inflation-busting pay rises, while the private sector (the source of economic growth) is getting squeezed. It should tell you all you need to know that 10,000 entrepreneurs have already fled the country since Starmer took over last year. Reform and Labour both want to grow the state. Under my leadership the Conservatives will prioritise growing opportunity and prosperity. Margaret Thatcher once said progress comes from the 'inventiveness, ability, determination and the pioneering spirit' of ordinary people. She was right then and she's right now. The Conservative Party is not here to run your business, or burden you with endless taxes and pointless regulation. We are the last line of defence for economic freedom, and we will stop the other parties from taking away what belongs to you.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Fix our woeful rollout of EV charging to rescue our car industry
Cyclists can drive motorists round the bend. Small wonder then that car bosses were peeved when Rachel Reeves gave them £400 million to build electric vehicle chargers in last week's spending review, compared to the £616 million grant to maintain cycle lanes. To be fair, once you add in benefits across other ongoing government schemes, a total of £1.4 billion has been earmarked to support uptake of zero-emission vehicles. Not that this stopped the car industry complaining. Senior figures in the industry were quick to demand 'more substantive measures to incentivise private consumer demand' if our EV targets are to be met. The obvious complaint is that a shortage of subsidies is holding back motorists' full-throttle embrace of electric vehicles. Yes, Britain's car industry is in the grip of a net-zero-infused crisis. Production is languishing at 70-year lows — with the exception of the Covid paralysis in 2020 — and the blame has been placed squarely at EV production quotas. So what's the answer? How about a return to lavish incentives to jumpstart demand, as the likes of Ford and Nissan have advocated? The government has resisted thus far — and rightly so. There has been much debate over the decision to outlaw the sale of most new petrol or diesel-powered cars at the end of the decade. Boris Johnson introduced the 2030 ban; Rishi Sunak pushed it back to 2035; Sir Keir Starmer has dragged it forward to 2030 again. But the time for flip-flopping is over. Britain has charted its course for EVs. Now we must stick to it. Achieving this goal — five years ahead of the EU, we should remember — rightly requires carrots and sticks. In terms of carrots, the primary incentive is that workers buying a company car benefit from tax incentives through a salary-sacrifice scheme that is so generous, it accounts for the lion's share of new EV registrations. As for sticks, supply is being forced up by the government's controversial Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate. Under this, car manufacturers must sell a certain percentage of EVs each year. This started at 22 per cent in 2024, and will be 28 per cent this year, ratcheting up to 80 per cent in 2030 and 100 per cent by 2035. Manufacturers will be allowed to sell new hybrid vehicles from 2030-35. Until recently, failing to hit the quota would have resulted in carmakers being slapped with a £15,000-per-car penalty. They escaped these fines last year by discounting heavily to stimulate demand, costing them an estimated £4 billion. Some might argue that the scheme is working perfectly, then. Nevertheless, Starmer has now agreed to reduce the per-car penalty to £12,000, alongside other flexible measures that could mean the fines are reduced further or negated completely. The introduction of grants to subsidise new EVs beyond company car schemes might, on the face of it, make sense, however. The No 1 barrier to purchasing an EV is that they are more expensive than petrol or diesel-powered alternatives, according to polling by YouGov from last August. Crucially, though, we may not be so far from parity. An EV was 51 per cent costlier than a petrol or diesel equivalent in 2018; this fell to 18 per cent in 2024, according to analysis by JATO Dynamics. That gap could soon disappear as a tidal wave of cheaper Chinese EVs floods the UK market. We will need to park the geopolitics of this, but it's hard to see how this isn't good for consumers from a purely financial perspective. Which brings us to what we should be concentrating on: charging points. That same YouGov poll — in which, by the way, 49 per cent of respondents said they would never buy an EV — revealed that the second-biggest barrier to going electric was a 'lack of charging infrastructure'. Yes, there are roughly 80,000 EV chargers in the UK, but the pace at which they are being installed is slowing. The compound growth rate between 2021 and 2024 was 37.5 per cent; in the first five months of this year, the number has increased by only 10 per cent. The slowdown counted its first casualty last week. Pod Point, which listed on the London Stock Exchange in 2021 at a £350 million valuation, was rescued by French energy firm EDF in a deal worth little more than £10 million. The £400 million that Reeves has set aside in the Comprehensive Spending Review for charging is an important first step. But money alone is not the answer. State aid might be best reserved for funding chargers in locations where the operation is wholly uneconomic. Yet talk to those in the EV charging industry and they will tell you that receiving timely planning permission and access to the electricity grid capacity are as important, if not more important than taxpayer handouts. One senior executive recently recounted the tale of a company behind a prospective charging site near Gatwick airport, which was told by officials that it would not be hooked up to the grid until 2037. 'We don't want grants — we want certainty,' said another. Then there is the inverse relationship between wealth and the cost of running an EV. An estimated 40 per cent of Britons live in a home without off-street parking, forcing them to charge their car at public chargers, which attract VAT at a rate of 20 per cent. Those with off-street parking, likely to be better off, can charge using their home supply, upon which VAT is levied at 5 per cent. For a Labour government seeking to champion 'working people', this discrepancy seems bonkers — but the Treasury may not see it that way. Crucial to driving the car industry out of its current malaise is a renewed focus on charging. Otherwise, the danger is that drivers will be running out of power left, right and centre. Which might anger them more than cyclists. Oliver Shah is away
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
This must end the grooming cover-up for good
For decades, officials and politicians have systematically turned a blind eye to the horrific grooming gangs operating across Britain. It is therefore welcome that after months of pressure, Sir Keir Starmer has felt forced to announce a national inquiry into the full extent of the scandal. It is also long overdue. A culture of cover-ups and dismissive attitudes have concealed the true scale of offending from the public, extending from local council officials and police officers fearful of accusations of racism to national politicians like Lucy Powell, who in May felt able to call references to the scandal a 'dog whistle'. Even in January, when Elon Musk and others brought renewed focus to the issue on social media, Sir Keir Starmer's first instinct was to kick the issue into the long grass, commissioning a fresh review from Baroness Louise Casey and resisting calls for a full national inquiry. It is hard not to suspect – as Sir Trevor Phillips, former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, has claimed – that Sir Keir's reluctance was 'political', motivated by the extreme discomfort that a full inquiry will bring to the Labour party. Some of the highest profile scandals took place under the view of Labour councils, amid Pakistani-heritage communities seen as reliable Labour voters, and it is likely that any full inquiry will bring to light yet more damning evidence of the party's effective complicity. No matter how awkward, however, the inquiry must be given the freedom to ask all necessary questions. Those reviews and reports which have taken place to date have found that officials up and down the country felt under pressure to put 'community cohesion' ahead of the need to save children from sexual abuse. It is likely, moreover, that many in government will still be susceptible to this pressure, and wish to ensure that any inquiry is sufficiently sanitised to be 'safe' for public release. They must not get their way. There can be no more cover-ups. The inquiry must be broad enough to capture the full extent of offending, hold to account those politicians and officials who let the scandal go on, and given the resources and a timetable that brings the truth to light rapidly rather than dragging as the Covid Inquiry has. The grooming gangs scandal lay in plain sight for decades. Official inaction, through inertia and through deliberate choices to turn a blind eye, allowed abuse to continue unchecked. This cover-up must end once and for all, the officials and criminals responsible brought to justice, and the unvarnished truth laid before the country, no matter how damaging to our national self-image it may be.
