Latest news with #Syria-based
Nahar Net
19-07-2025
- Politics
- Nahar Net
Qassem says to talk 'defense strategy' after 'existential threat' ends
by Naharnet Newsdesk 9 hours Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem has said that his group senses the presence of an 'existential threat,' citing Israel's 'genocidal war' in Gaza, its attacks on Syria and Iran, the new Islamist rulers in Damascus, and the sectarian massacres in Syria. 'There is an existential threat to the resistance, the resistance's environment and the resistance's supporters, as well as an existential threat to Lebanon with all its sects,' Qassem said in a televised speech commemorating slain Hezbollah commander Ali Karaki. 'Today, if a decision is taken, (Syria-based extremist Sunni fighters) do not need a long time to come through eastern Lebanon to Lebanon to carry out extraordinary attacks. Today we are before a real Israeli threat and a threat from Israel's proxies that can be used one way or another,' Qassem warned. He added that Hezbollah is ready to 'defend' against any new Israeli attack on Lebanon. 'If we defend and incur major losses, and this is expected if we defend, we would have hope that confrontation might enable us to block them and open a door to solutions and liberation,' Qassem said. Addressing those in Lebanon calling for Hezbollah's disarmament, Qassem said: 'Be confident that after we eliminate this threat, and after the needed is achieved, we will be willing to discuss the national security strategy and the defense strategy and to achieve results that serve Lebanon's strength and Lebanon's continuity.' 'I call on you not to offer a service to Israel. Together we can be stronger and through confrontation America cannot achieve its goals,' he added. 'We are ready for confrontation to achieve one of two good things: victory or martyrdom. We do not have surrender. We will not submit to Israel and Israel will not be handed over the weapons by us,' Qassem went on to say. He added: 'We are ready for any action that leads to Lebanese understandings, Lebanese capability and Lebanese strength. But we will not give this under any form of threats … Let no one think of such a course.' 'We know that confrontation would be very costly, but surrender would leave us with nothing,' Qassem said. Noting that Hezbollah would not initiate any attack on Israel but would rather 'defend if Israel attacks,' the Hezbollah leader called on everyone 'not to bet on an inter-Shiite rift' between Hezbollah and Speaker Nabih Berri, nor on a dispute among President Joseph Aoun, Berri and PM Nawaf Salam. Aoun, Berri and Salam are 'cooperating' and 'have enough wisdom and awareness and recognition of threats and reality in order to pull the country out of its crisis in a proper way,' Qassem added.
Nahar Net
19-07-2025
- Politics
- Nahar Net
Qassem says to talk 'defense strategy' after 'existential threat' ends
by Naharnet Newsdesk 19 July 2025, 12:51 Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem has said that his group senses the presence of an 'existential threat,' citing Israel's 'genocidal war' in Gaza, its attacks on Syria and Iran, the new Islamist rulers in Damascus, and the sectarian massacres in Syria. 'There is an existential threat to the resistance, the resistance's environment and the resistance's supporters, as well as an existential threat to Lebanon with all its sects,' Qassem said in a televised speech commemorating slain Hezbollah commander Ali Karaki. 'Today, if a decision is taken, (Syria-based extremist Sunni fighters) do not need a long time to come through eastern Lebanon to Lebanon to carry out extraordinary attacks. Today we are before a real Israeli threat and a threat from Israel's proxies that can be used one way or another,' Qassem warned. He added that Hezbollah is ready to 'defend' against any new Israeli attack on Lebanon. 'If we defend and incur major losses, and this is expected if we defend, we would have hope that confrontation might enable us to block them and open a door to solutions and liberation,' Qassem said. Addressing those in Lebanon calling for Hezbollah's disarmament, Qassem said: 'Be confident that after we eliminate this threat, and after the needed is achieved, we will be willing to discuss the national security strategy and the defense strategy and to achieve results that serve Lebanon's strength and Lebanon's continuity.' 'I call on you not to offer a service to Israel. Together we can be stronger and through confrontation America cannot achieve its goals,' he added. 'We are ready for confrontation to achieve one of two good things: victory or martyrdom. We do not have surrender. We will not submit to Israel and Israel will not be handed over the weapons by us,' Qassem went on to say. He added: 'We are ready for any action that leads to Lebanese understandings, Lebanese capability and Lebanese strength. But we will not give this under any form of threats … Let no one think of such a course.' 'We know that confrontation would be very costly, but surrender would leave us with nothing,' Qassem said. Noting that Hezbollah would not initiate any attack on Israel but would rather 'defend if Israel attacks,' the Hezbollah leader called on everyone 'not to bet on an inter-Shiite rift' between Hezbollah and Speaker Nabih Berri, nor on a dispute among President Joseph Aoun, Berri and PM Nawaf Salam. Aoun, Berri and Salam are 'cooperating' and 'have enough wisdom and awareness and recognition of threats and reality in order to pull the country out of its crisis in a proper way,' Qassem added.
Time of India
16-07-2025
- Business
- Time of India
After huge US cuts, who pays for aid in the Middle East now?
After huge US cuts, who pays for aid in the Middle East now? (Image: AP) Ask around various civil society organizations working in the Middle East and the answer is always the same. "Nobody really knows what's happening," one project manager running a Syria-based project told DW about the US cuts in aid funding. "They haven't put a complete stop to it yet so we're just spending the money on a monthly basis and hoping for the best. " "We still don't know if we're going to get the funding we were promised this year," the founder of an Iraqi journalists' network in Baghdad said. "We probably won't be able to pay some of our journalists. Right now, we're approaching other organizations to try to replace the money." Neither interviewee wanted their names published because they didn't want to criticize their donors publicly. They are not alone. Since US President Donald Trump took power, he has slashed US funding for what's known as "official development aid," or ODA. Often simply called foreign aid, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development defines ODA as "government aid that promotes and specifically targets the economic development and welfare of developing countries." ODA can be bilateral — given from country to country — or multilateral, where funds are pooled by an organization like the UN, then disbursed. The US is not the only country cutting ODA. Even before what insiders described as the US' "chaotic" budget cuts, reductions in ODA were a longer-term pattern. Global ODA fell by over 7 percent in 2024, as European nations and the UK also reduced ODA in favour of channeling more money into defence. Last year marked the first time in nearly 30 years that major donors like France, Germany, the UK and the US all cut ODA. Funding cuts' impact on the Middle East? In 2023, countries in the Middle East got around $7.8 billion (€6.7 billion) out of the $42.4 billion (€36.3 billion) the US spent that year. That is why, Laith Alajlouni, a research associate at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Bahrain, wrote in March, "the effects of US aid cuts … will be felt deeply in the Middle East, where key US partners continue to rely heavily on US assistance to meet their military and economic needs." Between 2014 and 2024, the US pledged around $106.8 billion to countries in the region. Israel gets just under a third of that, although much of the money is earmarked for military purposes. But for other countries, funds from the US were equivalent to a significant portion of their national income, Alajlouni pointed out. Now funding for emergency food and water in Sudan, medicines in Yemen, children's nutrition in Lebanon, and camps for the displaced, including families allegedly connected to the extremist "Islamic State" group in Syria are all are at risk, Alajlouni argues. Other countries, like Jordan and Egypt, are heavily reliant on foreign funding for "economic development" to keep their ailing economies afloat, he noted. It remains unclear exactly how much Middle Eastern countries will lose due to ODA cuts. Last month, researchers at Washington-based think tank, the Centre for Global Development, tried to calculate the fallout. "Some countries are projected to lose large amounts of ODA simply because of who their main donors are," they noted, "while others are projected to lose very little." For example, Yemen will likely see its ODA reduced by 19 percent between 2023 and 2026. In 2025, its three biggest donors, via the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, or UNOCHA, were Saudi Arabia, the EU and the UK. Somalia, on the other hand may lose as much as 39 percent. Its main donors, via UNOCHA, were the UK, the EU and the US. Who pays for aid in the Middle East now? "It is clear that in the short term, the shortfall in aid funding will not be closed," Vincenzo Bollettino, director of the resilient communities program at Harvard University's Humanitarian Initiative in Boston, told DW. "In the mid-to-long term, it's likely there will be a tapestry of different forms of aid." Part of that will be a larger number of states "providing aid and development assistance where it aligns with their own political objectives," Bollettino predicts. Russia's main agency for international cooperation, Rossotrudnichestvo, recently announced it would restructure to be more like USAID and will open outposts in the UAE and Saudi Arabia. But at just $70 million annually, Rossotrudnichestvo's budget is comparatively small. Chinese money could be another alternative to US and European funding. "China has positioned itself as the US' greatest competitor in global development," experts at US think tank, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, warned in July. But China isn't all that interested in the Middle East, experts point out, and is more engaged in Southeast Asia and Africa. "Neither Russia nor China have played traditionally significant roles in the international humanitarian aid system and this is unlikely to change anytime soon," Bollettino explains. How aid became more political Much more likely donors in the Middle East will be the wealthy Gulf states, says Markus Loewe, a professor and the coordinator for research on the Middle East and North Africa at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability, or IDOS. Over the last two decades, four Gulf states — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Kuwait — have been internationally significant donors. "For example, Saudi Arabia is already offering substantial support to Syria," Loewe told DW. "They have been supporting Lebanon to quite a degree and they would definitely be ready to pay a lot of the costs of reconstruction in Gaza, provided there is an acceptable agreement on a ceasefire." Hardly any Gulf money goes into what are called "pooled" funds like those run by the UN. Most is bilateral, from country to country, because the Gulf states tend to use their ODA in a more transactional way. That is, as a diplomatic tool where it ties into different Gulf states' often-competing foreign policy aims. "Aid recipients who are considered politically important for Gulf donors tend to receive more aid," Khaled AlMezaini, a professor at the UAE's Zayed University, wrote in a recent analysis. For example, despite waging war on parts of Yemen from 2015, Saudi Arabia and the UAE were also the country's biggest donors. But as Harvard's Bollettino points out, ODA is not meant to be political. That goes against basic humanitarian principles of neutrality and impartiality. "The essential problem with instrumentalized aid is that it's just as likely to be a catalyst of conflict and violence as a source of peace and security," he argues. "The so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation — where 'humanitarian aid' being delivered to starving civilians has resulted in hundreds of Palestinians being killed — is a case in point."
DW
15-07-2025
- Business
- DW
After huge US cuts, who pays for aid in the Middle East now? – DW – 07/15/2025
For the first time in 30 years, in 2024, some of the world's biggest spenders on aid and development cut funding. Now aid organizations in the Middle East are forced to seek new, potentially more demanding, donors. Ask around various civil society organizations working in the Middle East and the answer is always the same. "Nobody really knows what's happening," one project manager running a Syria-based project told DW about the US cuts in aid funding. "They haven't put a complete stop to it yet so we're just spending the money on a monthly basis and hoping for the best." "We still don't know if we're going to get the funding we were promised this year," the founder of an Iraqi journalists' network in Baghdad said. "We probably won't be able to pay some of our journalists. Right now, we're approaching other organizations to try to replace the money." Neither interviewee wanted their names published because they didn't want to criticize their donors publicly. They are not alone. Since US President Donald Trump took power, he has slashed US funding for what's known as "official development aid," or ODA. Often simply called foreign aid,the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Developmentdefines ODA as "government aid that promotes and specifically targets the economic development and welfare of developing countries." ODA can be bilateral — given from country to country — or multilateral, where funds are pooled by an organization like the UN, then disbursed. The US is not the only country cutting ODA. Even before what insiders described as the US' "chaotic" budget cuts, reductions in ODA were a longer-term pattern. Global ODA fell by over 7% in 2024, as European nations and the UK also reduced ODA in favor of channeling more money into defense. Last year marked the first time in nearly 30 years that major donors like France, Germany, the UK and the US all cut ODA. In 2023, countries in the Middle East got around $7.8 billion (€6.7 billion) out of the $42.4 billion (€36.3 billion) the US spent that year. That is why, Laith Alajlouni, a research associate at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Bahrain, wrote in March, "the effects of US aid cuts … will be felt deeply in the Middle East, where key US partners continue to rely heavily on US assistance to meet their military and economic needs." Between 2014 and 2024, the US pledged around $106.8 billion to countries in the region. Israel gets just under a third of that, although much of the money is earmarked for military purposes. But for other countries, funds from the US were equivalent to a significant portion of their national income, Alajlouni pointed out. Now funding for emergency food and water in Sudan, medicines in Yemen, children's nutrition in Lebanon, and camps for the displaced, including families allegedly connected to the extremist "Islamic State" group in Syria are all are at risk, Alajlouni argues. Other countries, like Jordan and Egypt, are heavily reliant on foreign funding for "economic development" to keep their ailing economies afloat, he noted. It remains unclear exactly how much Middle Eastern countries will lose due to ODA cuts. Last month, researchers at Washington-based think tank, the Center for Global Development, tried to calculate the fallout. "Some countries are projected to lose large amounts of ODA simply because of who their main donors are," they noted, "while others are projected to lose very little." For example, Yemen will likely see its ODA reduced by 19% between 2023 and 2026. In 2025, its three biggest donors, via the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, or UNOCHA, were Saudi Arabia, the EU and the UK. Somalia, on the other hand may lose as much as 39%. Its main donors, via UNOCHA, were the UK, the EU and the US. "It is clear that in the short term, the shortfall in aid funding will not be closed," Vincenzo Bollettino, director of the resilient communities program at Harvard University's Humanitarian Initiative in Boston, told DW. "In the mid-to-long term, it's likely there will be a tapestry of different forms of aid." Part of that will be a larger number of states "providing aid and development assistance where it aligns with their own political objectives," Bollettino predicts. Russia's main agency for international cooperation, Rossotrudnichestvo, recently announced it would restructure to be more like USAID and will open outposts in the UAE and Saudi Arabia. But at just $70 million annually, Rossotrudnichestvo's budget is comparatively small. Chinese money could be another alternative to US and European funding. "China has positioned itself as the US' greatest competitor in global development," experts at US think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, warned in July. But China isn't all that interested in the Middle East, experts point out, and is more engaged in Southeast Asia and Africa. "Neither Russia nor China have played traditionally significant roles in the international humanitarian aid system and this is unlikely to change anytime soon," Bollettino explains. Much more likely donors in the Middle East will be the wealthy Gulf states, says Markus Loewe, a professor and the coordinator for research on the Middle East and North Africa at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability, or IDOS. Over the last two decades, four Gulf states — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Kuwait — have been internationally significant donors. "For example, Saudi Arabia is already offering substantial support to Syria," Loewe told DW. "They have been supporting Lebanon to quite a degree and they would definitely be ready to pay a lot of the costs of reconstruction in Gaza, provided there is an acceptable agreement on a ceasefire." Most of that ODA has gone to Arab countries, although Qatar and Kuwait have also funded work in Turkey, Afghanistan and some African countries. Hardly any Gulf money goes into what are called "pooled" funds like those run by the UN. Most is bilateral, from country to country, because the Gulf states tend to use their ODA in a more transactional way. That is, as a diplomatic tool where it ties into different Gulf states' often-competing foreign policy aims. "Aid recipients who are considered politically important for Gulf donors tend to receive more aid," Khaled AlMezaini, a professor at the UAE's Zayed University, wrote in a recent analysis. For example, despite waging war on parts of Yemen from 2015, Saudi Arabia and the UAE were also the country's biggest donors. But as Harvard's Bollettino points out, ODA is not meant to be political. That goes against basic humanitarian principles of neutrality and impartiality. "The essential problem with instrumentalized aid is that it's just as likely to be a catalyst of conflict and violence as a source of peace and security," he argues. "The so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation — where 'humanitarian aid' being delivered to starving civilians has resulted in hundreds of Palestinians being killed — is a case in point." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
US revokes foreign terrorist designation of Syria's HTS
The US has revoked the Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO) designation of Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a Syria-based organisation which had ties with al-Qaeda and was also a front of al-Nusrah. In a statement issued by the US Department of State on Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the decision was made in alignment with US President Donald Trump's promise to deliver sanctions relief to Syria following the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime in December last year. According to the statement, the revocation of the FTO comes into effect from today, July 8. The decision came in recognition of the dissolution of HTS and the new Syrian government's efforts to combat terrorism. "In line with President Trump's May 13 promise to deliver sanctions relief to Syria, I am announcing my intent to revoke the Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) designation of al-Nusrah Front, also known as Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), under the Immigration and Nationality Act. This revocation will be effective tomorrow, July 8," the statement read. In late January, HTS was disbanded, and its fighters were integrated into the formal Syrian military and security services, as reported by Al Jazeera. The action builds on the momentum of the June 30 Executive Order 'Providing for the Revocation of Syria Sanctions' by the US, which aimed to foster a stable, unified, and peaceful Syria under President Ahmed al-Sharaa's leadership. "Tomorrow's action follows the announced dissolution of HTS and the Syrian government's commitment to combat terrorism in all its forms. This action also builds on the momentum of the June 30 Executive Order 'Providing for the Revocation of Syria Sanctions' and recognises the positive actions taken by the new Syrian government under President Ahmed al-Sharaa. This FTO revocation is an important step in fulfilling President Trump's vision of a stable, unified, and peaceful Syria," the statement added. As per Al Jazeera, the HTS was labelled a "terrorist" organisation by the US back in 2018 because of its previous connections to al-Qaeda. The group originated from the al-Nusra Front, which had been al-Qaeda's official affiliate in Syria but officially broke away in 2016 when HTS leader Ahmed al-Sharaa announced its separation. Al-Sharaa, who commanded the opposition forces that swiftly ousted al-Assad in a rapid offensive last December, has since assumed the presidency of Syria, as reported by Al Jazeera. However, HTS is still subject to United Nations Security Council sanctions, originally imposed in 2014 due to its past links to al-Qaeda. Al-Sharaa is also personally sanctioned by the UNSC, Al Jazeera reported. Meanwhile, in a parallel development, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) conducted a special operation in southern Syria, apprehending a cell operated by the Iranian 'Quds' Force in the Tel Kudna area. "Special Operation in Southern Syria": A cell operated by the Iranian 'Quds' Force was apprehended in the Tel Kudna area of southern Syria. For the second time in the past week, IDF troops completed a targeted overnight operation and apprehended several operatives who posed a threat in the area. IDF troops are continuing to operate and prevent the entrenchment of any terrorist entity in Syria, with the aim of protecting Israeli civilians," the IDF stated in a post on X. The operation was part of Israel's ongoing efforts to counter Iranian influence in Syria following the fall of the Assad regime. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
