As the conflict between Israel and Iran simmers, Iraq finds itself at a crossroads. Its Shia leadership is striving to shield the country from becoming another battleground in the volatile Middle East. With its unique geopolitical position and deeply intertwined relations with both Iran and the United States, Iraq’s careful diplomacy will be crucial in avoiding entanglement in a widening regional war.

Iraq shares a delicate relationship with its powerful neighbor Iran, bound by historical, cultural, and religious ties. At the same time, it has relied on the United States for military and economic support, especially in combating the Islamic State (ISIS). However, this balancing act is growing increasingly precarious.

Iranian-backed paramilitaries in Iraq have recently escalated attacks against Israel, drawing concerns that retaliation could drag Iraq deeper into the Israel-Iran conflict. These factions, aligned with Tehran, have historically targeted U.S. interests in Iraq and view the ongoing presence of U.S. troops as an affront. Yet, there is a growing awareness within Iraq’s leadership that becoming a staging ground for Iran’s regional ambitions could severely destabilize the country.

Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani has been pivotal in guiding Iraq away from chaos. As the most influential Shia cleric in Iraq, Sistani wields significant moral and political authority. His call for Iraqi paramilitaries to align with Baghdad, rather than Tehran, underscores his commitment to Iraq’s sovereignty. His intervention, supported by Iraq’s political leadership, has thus far helped restrain Iranian-aligned groups from escalating their activities.

Shia political leaders, including figures previously seen as close to Iran, are increasingly advocating for Iraq’s neutrality. Former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, once perceived as a staunch ally of Tehran, has echoed calls to prioritize Iraq’s domestic stability over involvement in regional conflicts. Leaders of powerful militias, such as Hadi al-Ameri of the Badr Organization, have also emphasized the need to prevent Iraq from being drawn into war.

Iraq’s population, fatigued by decades of conflict, is largely opposed to any action that might provoke further violence. While the public sympathizes with the Palestinian cause, there is growing resentment toward Iran’s interference in Iraq’s internal affairs. This sentiment is likely to influence political decisions, particularly as federal elections approach in 2025. Politicians and paramilitary groups may be wary of alienating voters by appearing too closely aligned with Tehran’s agenda.

Europe has a vested interest in preventing Iraq from becoming another front in the Israel-Iran conflict. European nations, which have invested heavily in stabilizing Iraq over the past two decades, should leverage their diplomatic access to Iraqi political and religious leaders.

Unlike the United States, which faces considerable hostility from some Iraqi factions, European diplomats are viewed more neutrally. This positions them to mediate between Baghdad and Tehran, urging Iran to respect Iraq’s sovereignty and refrain from using it as a launchpad for attacks. At the same time, European states can encourage the incoming U.S. administration and Israel to avoid actions that undermine Iraq’s efforts to assert its autonomy from Tehran.

Despite these efforts, Iraq’s stability remains fragile. The ceasefire in Lebanon, where Iranian-backed Hizbullah has been drawn into conflict with Israel, is tenuous. Should it collapse, Iran’s allies in Iraq could face renewed pressure to escalate attacks, further jeopardizing the country’s hard-earned peace.

Additionally, the incoming Trump administration’s potential hardline stance on Iran could exacerbate tensions, leaving Iraq caught in the crossfire of a broader confrontation. The task of preventing conflict will require sustained diplomatic engagement, both domestically and internationally.

Iraq’s ability to navigate the Israel-Iran conflict without being drawn into war will depend on the strength of its leadership and the support of international partners. Its Shia leaders, particularly Ayatollah Sistani, are key to maintaining stability and curbing the influence of Iranian-backed paramilitaries. However, the stakes remain high. With Iraq’s sovereignty and fragile peace hanging in the balance, the international community must act decisively to support Baghdad in its quest for neutrality and stability.

Israel and Hezbollah agreed to a cease-fire early Wednesday, pausing months of intense fighting that had displaced thousands in southern Lebanon. The agreement, facilitated by U.S. and French diplomats, is seen as a potential blueprint for de-escalating violence in the Gaza Strip.

The cease-fire was approved by Israel’s Security Cabinet on Tuesday and involves a 60-day period during which both sides will withdraw forces from contested areas in southern Lebanon. Israeli troops are to retreat south of the Israel-Lebanon border, while Hezbollah fighters are to relocate north of the Litani River. The Lebanese army, which has not been involved in the hostilities, will patrol the buffer zone between the two sides.

Brokered Agreement and Regional Implications

U.S. President Joe Biden described the cease-fire as a “critical step” toward ending violence in the region. He emphasized that the deal is intended to be a “permanent cessation of hostilities,” while warning that Israel retains the right to self-defense under international law should Hezbollah violate the agreement.

The cease-fire follows prolonged fighting that began in October 2023, when Hezbollah launched attacks on Israel in solidarity with Hamas, which was engaged in its own war against Israeli forces in Gaza. Analysts believe the agreement could pressure Hamas to consider a similar truce, as Hezbollah’s involvement has served as a critical second front for Iranian-backed militants.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, speaking at a G7 meeting in Italy, expressed hope that the deal would stabilize the northern front and encourage Hamas to negotiate a cease-fire.

Israeli and Hezbollah Reactions

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that the truce would allow Israel to concentrate on what he described as the “broader threat” posed by Iran. He warned that any violation of the agreement or attempts by Hezbollah to rearm would prompt an immediate Israeli military response.

“The length of the cease-fire will depend on Hezbollah’s actions,” Netanyahu said.

In his comments, Netanyahu highlighted the continued focus on hostages held by Hamas in Gaza, urging their release as a pathway to a broader cease-fire in the region.

Humanitarian Crisis in Lebanon

The fighting in southern Lebanon has caused a severe humanitarian crisis. The United Nations World Food Program (WFP) has already provided emergency assistance to over 500,000 displaced people and aims to reach one million in the coming weeks. Infrastructure damage and displacement have compounded Lebanon’s existing economic challenges, leaving communities reliant on international aid.

Hezbollah’s attacks on Israel and subsequent Israeli counterstrikes along the Lebanon-Syria border also contributed to casualties and destroyed critical infrastructure. Syrian state media reported at least six deaths during Israeli airstrikes on transit routes allegedly used to supply Hezbollah with weapons.

The Syrian Arab Red Crescent confirmed the death of one volunteer and the injury of another while aiding victims of these strikes, urging all parties to respect humanitarian law.

Background and Broader Context

The Israel-Hezbollah cease-fire comes amid ongoing violence in Gaza, where Israel continues its military campaign following the October 2023 attack by Hamas that killed 1,200 people and resulted in the capture of 250 hostages. The Gaza Health Ministry estimates that over 44,235 Palestinians have died in the counteroffensive, with conflicting reports on how many were combatants versus civilians.

As international efforts to secure peace continue, the cease-fire in Lebanon represents a critical moment. While it provides a pause in hostilities, its long-term success will depend on the commitment of both Israel and Hezbollah to maintain the agreement and the broader regional dynamics, including the role of Iran and the unresolved crisis in Gaza.

Israel’s Cabinet approved a U.S.-backed ceasefire agreement with Hezbollah on Tuesday evening, marking a critical step toward de-escalating tensions along the Israeli-Lebanese border. The deal, approved by a 10-1 vote, went into effect at 4 a.m. Wednesday, local time, following weeks of negotiations mediated by U.S. officials.

The agreement mandates the Lebanese army and security forces to deploy in southern Lebanon within the next 60 days, taking control of territories previously dominated by Hezbollah. Simultaneously, Israel will withdraw its forces from the area to allow civilians to return to their homes on both sides of the border.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu underscored that the ceasefire hinges on Hezbollah’s adherence to the terms. “The duration of the ceasefire depends on what happens in Lebanon,” he stated, warning of swift military retaliation against any violations.

President Joe Biden, addressing the deal from the White House, affirmed that Israel retains the right to self-defense under international law. He emphasized the U.S.’s commitment to Israel’s security, while also expressing hope for stability and prosperity for both Lebanese and Israeli civilians affected by the conflict.

Despite the agreement, violence persisted up to the moment the ceasefire took effect. Israeli airstrikes targeted Beirut late Tuesday, signaling the fragility of the truce. Hezbollah has yet to issue an official response to the agreement.

Netanyahu hailed the ceasefire as a victory, citing “great achievements” in the conflict, including the reported killing of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and the destruction of significant Hezbollah military assets. He reiterated Israel’s intention to monitor and respond to any efforts by Hezbollah to rearm or rebuild infrastructure near the border.

While the ceasefire represents progress in the Israel-Hezbollah conflict, it does not extend to the ongoing war in Gaza between Israel and Hamas. President Biden called for renewed efforts to end the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, highlighting the severe toll on civilians.

“Hamas must make a choice,” Biden declared, urging the group to release hostages as a step toward de-escalation. He pledged continued U.S. involvement in pursuing peace in Gaza.

The ceasefire deal followed intensive diplomacy, including meetings between Netanyahu and U.S. special envoy Amos Hochstein. Hochstein also traveled to Beirut to engage Lebanese officials in the discussions.

Tensions had reached a boiling point in October when Israel launched a ground invasion of southern Lebanon, escalating its conflict with Hezbollah. The weekend preceding the agreement saw one of Hezbollah’s heaviest retaliations, with the group firing approximately 250 rockets into Israel.

The implementation of the ceasefire will test the durability of the agreement and the ability of both parties to manage volatile dynamics in the region.

The United States on Thursday firmly rejected the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) decision to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, accusing them of committing war crimes during Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza.

A White House spokesperson dismissed the ICC’s actions, stating the court has no jurisdiction over Israel, which is not a party to the Rome Statute that governs the ICC. The U.S., also a non-member of the court, has long maintained that the ICC should not investigate nationals of non-member states unless referred by the United Nations Security Council.

U.S. Government Response

“The United States rejects the detention order against Israeli officials based on the court’s decision,” the spokesperson said, criticizing the move as both legally flawed and politically motivated.

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, condemned the warrants as a “dangerous precedent” and part of a campaign that overlooks the realities of the war in Gaza. He underscored that Israel has an independent judiciary capable of investigating allegations of misconduct.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) echoed this sentiment, accusing the ICC of corruption and bias against Israel. Graham called for legislative measures to shield American and allied officials from what he described as “politically motivated prosecutions” by international tribunals.

Netanyahu’s Reaction

Netanyahu’s office labeled the ICC “a corrupt and discriminatory political institution” and the allegations “absurd.” In a statement, his office defended Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, describing it as the most justified war in the country’s history, aimed at combating terrorism and safeguarding its citizens.

Netanyahu also criticized ICC prosecutor Karim Khan, accusing him of bias and calling for a broader investigation into what he termed the court’s failures.

Broader International Reactions

The ICC warrants, issued as part of an investigation into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, have drawn mixed responses globally:

• European Union: Josep Borrell, the EU foreign policy chief, called for adherence to international legal norms but stopped short of fully endorsing the ICC’s ruling.
• Jordan: Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi supported the ICC’s jurisdiction and emphasized the importance of accountability for actions in Gaza.
• France: The French Foreign Ministry urged conflict resolution based on international law.
• Netherlands: The Dutch government, where the ICC is headquartered, signaled its readiness to execute the arrest warrants if Netanyahu or Gallant traveled to ICC member states.

The ICC’s decision has reignited debates over its jurisdictional reach. Israel, like the U.S., is not a party to the Rome Statute, and both nations argue that the court has no authority to investigate their citizens. The ICC, however, claims jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed in territories recognized by the United Nations as part of Palestine, including Gaza and the West Bank.

Netanyahu and Gallant face potential arrest if they enter any of the 123 countries that are ICC members. Both have rejected the court’s authority, emphasizing Israel’s right to self-defense against Hamas, which they accuse of committing atrocities during its October 7 attacks and the subsequent Gaza conflict.

The ICC’s decision comes amid Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, launched after the October 7 attacks by Hamas that killed over 1,200 people and resulted in the kidnapping of hundreds. Israel’s government has framed its actions as a legitimate response to Hamas’s terrorism.

Hamas, designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S., EU, Israel, and others, continues to face international scrutiny for its actions. Meanwhile, the ICC ruling highlights the growing polarization over how to address accountability in the Gaza conflict.

For the U.S., the ICC’s move underscores tensions over international justice mechanisms and their application to non-member states, as Washington continues to stand by its ally Israel.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants on Thursday for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas military chief Muhammad Deif, accusing them of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The charges stem from the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict, which erupted following Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack on Israel.

Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of using starvation as a method of warfare, alongside crimes against humanity including murder and persecution. The ICC said these alleged crimes occurred between October 8, 2023, and May 20, 2024.

Israel, which is not a member of the ICC, has rejected the charges. Netanyahu called the allegations “absurd and false,” maintaining that Israel’s military campaign in Gaza is a legitimate act of self-defense against Hamas. Gallant, recently dismissed by Netanyahu, has yet to issue a formal response.

While the ICC lacks jurisdiction over Israel directly, the arrest warrants could complicate international travel for Netanyahu and Gallant, as ICC member states are obligated to enforce such warrants.

Hamas military leader Muhammad Deif faces charges of crimes against humanity, including murder, hostage-taking, and sexual violence. These charges relate to Hamas’ October 7 assault, which killed approximately 1,200 people, including 46 U.S. citizens, and resulted in the abduction of about 250 hostages. Hamas is designated a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union, and other Western nations.

Following Hamas’ attack, Israel launched an extensive military campaign in Gaza. According to the Gaza health ministry, about 44,000 people have been killed, over half of them reportedly women and children. The figures have not been independently verified, and the death toll includes both combatants and civilians.

The ICC prosecutor, Karim Khan, described the charges as part of the court’s mandate to hold accountable those responsible for atrocities, regardless of their political or military status.

The arrest warrants underscore the ICC’s attempt to address alleged violations on both sides of the conflict. However, the court’s jurisdictional limitations and the political sensitivities surrounding the Israel-Palestine issue are likely to provoke significant international debate.

While the ICC warrants have no immediate enforcement mechanism against Netanyahu, Gallant, or Deif, they mark a symbolic moment in international law, reflecting growing scrutiny of the conduct in one of the world’s most volatile conflicts.

Despite Israel’s ongoing offensives against Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, neither group has been critically weakened, according to Brett Holmgren, acting director of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). Speaking in Washington, Holmgren noted that while Israeli intelligence and military strikes have considerably diminished these groups’ abilities to attack Israel, both retain significant assets and influence.

Holmgren highlighted Hezbollah’s substantial resources, including extensive missile stockpiles and well-armed ground forces in southern Lebanon. He acknowledged that Israeli operations have damaged Hezbollah’s leadership but stressed that the group’s “external capabilities” remain mostly unaffected, posing potential threats beyond the Middle East. U.S. officials remain on high alert for indications that Hezbollah could pursue retaliatory attacks abroad.

Hamas, which instigated the recent conflict with its October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, has faced major losses. U.S. assessments indicate the group’s shift toward insurgent-style tactics, including hit-and-run strikes. Yet, Holmgren warned that Hamas’s appeal endures, particularly among disenfranchised youth in Gaza, where viable political alternatives are lacking.

Prior to the attack, U.S. intelligence estimated Hamas’s forces between 20,000 and 30,000, and Hezbollah’s at around 40,000. Israeli estimates suggest they have neutralized about 14,000 Hamas fighters and over 2,500 Hezbollah fighters. Despite Israel’s destruction of around 80% of Hezbollah’s short- and medium-range rockets, the group’s entrenched influence in Lebanon remains substantial.

Concerns are rising that the escalating death toll in Gaza and Lebanon could inspire further extremism. U.S. officials report an uptick in propaganda from groups like ISIS and al-Qaida, which are exploiting the conflict to bolster recruitment. ISIS activities in central Syria and the IS-Khorasan affiliate in Afghanistan continue to pose serious challenges, with the latter benefiting from Taliban control issues.

In Africa, ISIS and al-Qaida affiliates have surged, particularly in the Sahel, where instability has worsened as local governments increasingly turn to Russian security forces. The U.S. warns this trend could become a major long-term threat if left unchecked.

With Hezbollah and Hamas under strain, the U.S. anticipates that Iran may leverage its regional proxies for retaliatory actions against U.S. and Israeli interests. Iran’s support of groups like al-Qaida also remains a key concern, as does Tehran’s influence strategy, which U.S. officials have observed targeting U.S. political dynamics, including the recent election.

Holmgren affirmed the NCTC’s commitment to working with the incoming Trump administration to safeguard U.S. and allied interests against these evolving threats, ensuring a seamless transition for national security operations.

Israel launched intense airstrikes across southern Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley on Wednesday, targeting towns where the militant group Hezbollah maintains influence. The strikes, which resulted in dozens of casualties, come amid an ongoing 13-month conflict between Israel and Hezbollah that has claimed more than 3,000 lives in Lebanon alone, with a significant escalation since Israeli ground forces entered southern Lebanon on October 1.

In a prerecorded statement, Hezbollah’s leader, Naim Kassem, issued a stark warning to Israel, vowing to continue the resistance until Israel “seeks to demand an end to the aggression.” Kassem hinted at the potential for indirect negotiations, should Israel halt its operations.

The strikes hit Hezbollah strongholds in Beirut’s southern suburbs and multiple locations in the eastern Baalbek-Hermel governorate. Governor Bachir Khodr, who reported the casualty numbers, said rescue operations continue amid the rubble left by at least 40 Israeli raids. In response, Hezbollah launched rockets at northern and central Israel, with air-raid sirens sounding as far south as Tel Aviv.

The conflict’s repercussions are also being felt in Gaza, where Israeli incursions against Hamas in the north have led to the displacement of over 100,000 civilians, according to U.N. estimates.

UNRWA Faces Scrutiny as Israel Targets Agency’s Role in Gaza

In the United Nations, UNRWA, the U.N. agency dedicated to supporting Palestinian refugees, is facing an existential threat as Israel’s parliament moves to ban its operations in Gaza. Established in 1949, UNRWA plays a central role in the humanitarian aid infrastructure for Palestinians, with a significant presence in Gaza.

UNRWA Commissioner General Philippe Lazzarini issued a plea for international intervention, warning that dismantling the agency would plunge Palestinian territories into deeper chaos. Israeli officials allege UNRWA’s complicity with Hamas and accuse the agency of harboring staff with ties to terrorist activities, though UNRWA maintains that no concrete evidence has been presented.

The proposed Israeli legislation has sparked a backlash from international representatives. General Assembly President Philemon Yang condemned the move, while ambassadors from several states expressed alarm at the precedent this could set for the United Nations’ autonomy.

“The eviction of a U.N. agency by the decision of a single member state would set an alarming precedent,” Belgian Ambassador Philippe Kridelka stated, representing a coalition of 16 countries supporting UNRWA’s role.

In northeastern Lebanon, rescue efforts are ongoing after Israeli airstrikes reportedly killed at least 52 people in the Bekaa Valley, as confirmed by Lebanon’s Health Ministry. The strikes, which injured 72 others, prompted mass evacuations, with video footage capturing buildings reduced to rubble and smoke clouding the area. In Beirut’s southern suburb of Dahiyeh, Israeli jets also struck dozens of structures, although no casualties were reported.

The IDF has claimed responsibility for the overnight attacks, stating that intelligence-targeted strikes aimed at Hezbollah’s alleged weapons facilities, central command sites, and infrastructure in southern Lebanon were conducted, reportedly with prior warnings to civilians. The escalation follows recent Hezbollah rocket attacks, which, according to IDF reports, killed seven people in northern Israel. Lebanon’s acting Prime Minister Najib Mikati condemned the strikes as an expansion of Israeli aggression, casting doubt on ceasefire efforts amid ongoing U.S.-led diplomatic interventions.

In Gaza, Israeli strikes on the Nuseirat refugee camp killed over 30 people, adding to a severe humanitarian crisis in the territory. Leaders of major U.N. agencies have described the situation as “apocalyptic,” highlighting the denial of essential humanitarian aid to Gaza’s displaced populations.

Meanwhile, Secretary of State Antony Blinken reiterated the need for Israel to comply with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which mandates Hezbollah’s withdrawal from areas south of the Litani River. Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin have also pressed Israel to expedite humanitarian access to Gaza, linking future U.S. military support to these efforts.

The conflicts across Lebanon and Gaza underscore the region’s volatility following Hamas’s deadly October 2023 attack on Israel, which triggered the current escalation. In the intervening weeks, casualties have mounted on both sides, displacing millions and deepening the humanitarian crisis across affected areas.