Hamas leader killed in Tripoli airstrike, as Israel intensifies bombardments amid broader conflict with Hezbollah

Israel’s recent airstrike in Tripoli, northern Lebanon, marks a significant escalation in its military campaign. Previously concentrated near Lebanon’s southern borders, Israel’s actions have now spread to urban centers far from Hezbollah’s strongholds, a shift that carries profound implications. In this latest attack, a senior Hamas official, along with his family, was killed in a Palestinian refugee camp in Tripoli. Israeli officials have not commented, but this strike deepens the entangled web of proxy warfare in the region, where Iran-backed Hezbollah and Hamas continue to challenge Israel’s military supremacy.

The ongoing conflict, rooted in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian struggle, has morphed into a multifaceted battleground, with Hezbollah and Hamas coordinating operations and drawing on Iranian support. While Hezbollah has launched over 200 rockets into Israel recently, Israel’s military response has been nothing short of devastating, primarily targeting Hezbollah strongholds in southern Beirut and now expanding northward. Israel claims these strikes are aimed at dismantling military infrastructures, but Lebanese authorities assert that civilians bear the brunt of the attacks.

Tripoli, Lebanon’s Sunni-majority port city, has historically been removed from the direct impact of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, but its involvement signals a worrying expansion of the war’s geographical reach. With the northern Lebanese city now under fire, more Lebanese civilians find themselves caught in the crosshairs, raising international concerns. The death toll in Lebanon has climbed, with over 2,000 killed, and humanitarian organizations warn that the displacement crisis is worsening.

The humanitarian toll continues to mount. Strikes on medical facilities and civilians, including in Hezbollah-controlled areas, have sparked outrage from international organizations, with the U.N. denouncing the situation as “totally unacceptable.” Lebanon’s infrastructure, already fragile, struggles to cope with the growing number of displaced people, as over a million Lebanese have been forced to flee their homes. Many sought refuge in Tripoli or neighboring Syria, but Israeli airstrikes are closing off escape routes, adding to the region’s isolation.

Israel’s strikes are part of a larger military strategy that involves responding to Hezbollah and Hamas attacks on its own territory, including missiles launched at Israel’s main airport. While the Israeli government maintains that its operations are focused on military targets, Lebanon accuses Israel of indiscriminately targeting civilians. Meanwhile, Hezbollah, undeterred, continues its rocket fire, further inflaming the conflict.

Adding to the tensions, Israel’s recent killing of Hezbollah’s top military commander, Hassan Nasrallah, has left a leadership vacuum, further destabilizing the region. Although Nasrallah’s successor, Hashem Safieddine, was reportedly targeted in an underground bunker this week, Israeli officials have not confirmed his fate. The growing leadership void within Hezbollah complicates both the group’s operations and the broader geopolitical landscape in the Middle East.

At the core of this escalating conflict is Iran’s steadfast support of Hezbollah and Hamas. Israel, aware of Iran’s influence, has been weighing its response options following Iran’s ballistic missile strikes earlier this week. Talks of a potential attack on Iran’s oil infrastructure loom large, which could further destabilize the global energy market. As oil prices fluctuate in response to these tensions, the possibility of wider military engagement between Israel, Hezbollah, and their regional backers cannot be ignored.

President Biden has urged caution, asking Israel to consider alternatives to escalating tensions with Iran. However, as Hezbollah’s rocket fire continues and Israeli airstrikes persist, the region remains at a boiling point. With Hezbollah and Hamas gaining momentum, the stakes are higher than ever, and the path forward remains uncertain.

In the coming days, the world watches closely as the Israel-Lebanon conflict teeters on the edge of a wider regional war, with civilians trapped in the middle. How long this fragile state of heightened conflict can hold before erupting into full-scale warfare is a question that will shape the region’s future.

Yahya Sinwar, Hamas’ Elusive Leader, Unyielding in Conflict with Israel

Yahya Sinwar, Hamas’ leader in Gaza, remains resolute in his stance toward Israel, even as his orchestrated Oct. 7, 2023, cross-border attacks have escalated into a brutal conflict that devastated Gaza and sparked widespread regional violence. Sinwar, 62, described as the architect behind these attacks, is committed to armed struggle, believing it to be the sole method to achieve Palestinian sovereignty, according to sources familiar with him. Despite Israel’s retaliatory invasion that has claimed over 41,000 Palestinian lives and displaced nearly two million, Sinwar remains deeply committed to Hamas’ ideological goals of Israel’s destruction, operating from Gaza’s underground tunnels.

The former prisoner, released in a 2011 exchange after serving 22 years for orchestrating killings, has shaped Hamas’ military strategy and forged strong ties with Iran, central to the broader Axis of Resistance. His unwavering ideology, molded by his childhood in Gaza’s refugee camps and imprisonment, underscores his rejection of negotiations, favoring confrontation as the path to liberation. Despite massive Israeli military efforts targeting senior Hamas and Hezbollah leaders, including high-profile deaths, Sinwar remains an influential yet enigmatic figure, reportedly still alive and commanding Hamas.

As Israeli airstrikes continue and Hezbollah in Lebanon faces serious setbacks, the regional conflict shows no sign of de-escalating. Sinwar’s strategy, while bringing the Palestinian issue back into the global spotlight, has left the possibility of a Palestinian state as distant as ever. Yet, his command over Hamas remains solid, sustained by personal and political motivations intertwined with his long-standing role within the movement.

Rising Casualties and Evacuations Mark Intensified Israeli-Lebanese Conflict

Israeli air strikes have triggered massive explosions near Beirut’s international airport, escalating the conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Heavy bombardment targeted Hezbollah’s stronghold near the airport, with 37 people killed and 151 injured within the past 24 hours, according to Lebanon’s public health ministry. As Israel continues its invasion, the Lebanese army has reported the deaths of two soldiers amid a push to evacuate southern villages. Israeli air and ground forces persist in targeting Hezbollah sites, while Hezbollah retaliates by launching rockets into northern Israel. The conflict is displacing civilians and heightening regional tensions.

The renewed Israeli strikes follow weeks of military operations aimed at dismantling Hezbollah’s military capabilities along the border. The strikes have heavily impacted Hezbollah’s strategic positions in Beirut and southern Lebanon, where over 1,300 people have died, and more than a million have been displaced. Amid the air strikes, Hezbollah continues its cross-border rocket attacks, with more than 230 projectiles fired into Israel over the past day.

As the fighting intensifies, humanitarian organizations are overwhelmed by the growing numbers of displaced civilians. Traffic-choked roads and makeshift shelters in Beirut highlight the widespread displacement, with many families, including children, fleeing from the violence in southern Lebanon.

The international community has called for de-escalation, though neither Israel nor Hezbollah has shown signs of halting military activities. The situation remains volatile, with continued Israeli bombardments and Hezbollah’s retaliatory attacks threatening further instability in the region.

A former Islamic State sex slave rescued in a rare collaboration amid diplomatic tensions between Israel and Iraq.

A Yazidi woman once enslaved by the Islamic State (ISIS) was successfully rescued from Gaza and reunited with her family in Iraq. The woman, 21-year-old Fawzia Amin Saydo, had been living under harrowing conditions, trapped in the Palestinian enclave since 2020. Her rescue represents a beacon of hope, not just for her but for countless others still suffering in the shadows of war and extremism.

Fawzia’s story is one of unimaginable endurance. Abducted by ISIS from her hometown of Sinjar in 2014, when she was just 10 years old, she was subjected to brutal treatment and forced into slavery. Her journey took her across war-torn territories and into the hands of a Palestinian ISIS fighter in Syria, who held her captive and fathered two children with her. Despite years of abuse, her plight remained mostly hidden from the world until the devastating Hamas-led attack on Israel in October 2024 thrust her circumstances into a global spotlight.

What makes this rescue even more astonishing is the rare diplomatic ballet that made it possible. Iraq and Israel, long-standing adversaries, played silent partners in a mission that stretched the limits of geopolitical cooperation. The State Department’s involvement added a further layer of complexity. Humanitarian activists worked tirelessly behind the scenes, lobbying Iraqi, Israeli, and U.S. officials to coordinate Fawzia’s escape.

For months, she had been living in fear, trapped between a hostile Palestinian family in Gaza and the chilling knowledge that her children would likely never be accepted back into the Yazidi faith due to their parentage—an unbearable dilemma. But following Hamas’ brutal attack on Israel, the urgency of her situation escalated, and her rescuers seized the moment.

The intricacies of her extraction read like something out of a spy thriller. Humanitarian groups, including the Montreal-based Liberation of Christian and Yazidi Children of Iraq, spearheaded efforts to move her from her dangerous living situation to a hidden location, just kilometers from the Israeli military. The clock was ticking. Every delay brought fresh dangers, and the multi-nation coordination faced countless setbacks.

It took the intervention of U.S., Israeli, Jordanian, and Iraqi officials to bring Fawzia to safety. On October 1, she was evacuated across the Kerm Shalom crossing in a United Nations ambulance. She was then quietly moved through Jordan before arriving in Iraq, where an emotional reunion with her long-lost family awaited her.

While the successful mission is a victory for Fawzia and her family, it leaves behind a haunting question: what about her two children? Born from years of violence and exploitation, they remain with their father’s family in Gaza. Fawzia’s escape required her to make an impossible decision—to leave her children behind. As humanitarian workers who aided in her rescue noted, this agonizing choice was the only way for her to find a sliver of freedom and reconnect with her family in Iraq.

The trauma she endured has not ended with her physical rescue. Fawzia, like so many other Yazidi women who survived the horrors of ISIS captivity, faces an uncertain future. Her community’s rigid beliefs about children born of rape complicate her reintegration. Will she ever be able to return to her home in Sinjar fully? Will she be able to heal from the years of abuse while living apart from her children?

Fawzia’s case is emblematic of the deep scars ISIS left on the Yazidi community. Thousands of Yazidis are still missing—trapped in similar circumstances in conflict zones across the Middle East. Her story is both a reminder of the resilience of survivors and a reflection of the slow and often inadequate international response to their plight.

For those who helped orchestrate her rescue, like Steve Maman, the mission’s success is bittersweet. While a life was saved, the wider tragedy continues. Many Yazidis remain in captivity, scattered across the remnants of ISIS’s former territories or hiding in plain sight in places like Gaza. Their rescue efforts provide some hope, but the reality remains grim for the thousands still missing.

Fawzia’s rescue is a rare victory in an otherwise bleak landscape for Yazidi survivors. Yet, it underscores the lengths to which humanitarian workers, governments, and activists must go to ensure even a single person’s freedom. And it leaves the world with a provocative question: how many more lives are waiting to be saved?

Recap: Following Hamas’s brutal October 7 massacre, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) launched a multi-front strategy: intensifying operations in Gaza, holding off Hezbollah in the north, managing unrest in the West Bank, and preparing for broader regional threats—most recently underscored by Iran’s ballistic missile assault.

The IDF’s ground campaign in Gaza, while crucial, has been marked by slow progress. Hamas’ intricate underground tunnel networks presented a formidable challenge, requiring a full-scale ground operation to dismantle. While Israeli airstrikes targeted key above-ground structures in civilian areas, the real battle lay beneath, in the dense labyrinth of tunnels from which Hamas launched attacks, stored weapons, and commanded operations.

Israel’s leadership, under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, hesitated before committing to the offensive. Former officials and international allies, including the U.S., warned of high casualties and the potential backlash of global public opinion. However, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi pressed for action, arguing that without a ground assault, Hamas’ military capabilities could not be neutralized.

In the early stages, the IDF coordinated air and ground assaults with tank battalions, infantry, and engineering units to methodically dismantle Hamas’ “centers of gravity.” Although the pace of the underground offensive was slow and arduous, above-ground operations were more rapid, with airstrikes clearing key resistance hubs. Despite Hamas’ initial counterattacks, the IDF’s precision munitions and active defense systems like the Trophy minimized casualties and effectively neutralized many threats.

The IDF reported 346 soldiers killed during the Gaza ground campaign, with over 2,000 wounded. The slow but steady progress in dismantling Hamas’ military infrastructure underscores the complexity of urban and subterranean warfare.

In the north, Hezbollah posed an immediate and grave threat. For days, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah weighed launching a full-scale invasion of northern Israel. His elite Radwan Force, heavily armed and ready, had been poised for such an operation for years. However, the swift deployment of IDF divisions and rapid defensive preparations likely deterred Hezbollah from capitalizing on Israel’s moment of vulnerability following the Hamas attack.

Still, Hezbollah remained a formidable foe. With thousands of missiles and an elite ground force stationed at Israel’s border, Northern Command, led by Major General Ori Gordin, implemented a phased strategy to contain the threat while focusing the IDF’s resources on Gaza.

Over the course of months, the IDF gradually eroded Hezbollah’s capabilities, targeting its command structure and eliminating key field commanders through precision strikes. By August, Israel launched Operation Northern Arrows, further weakening Hezbollah’s operational capacity. The assassination of Nasrallah last week signaled a turning point in the northern conflict.

Despite Hezbollah’s missile attacks and continued threats, Israel has successfully held off a large-scale northern invasion. However, the northern front remains tense, with IDF operations ongoing to neutralize Hezbollah’s firepower and prevent further infiltration attempts.

In the West Bank, Central Command faced the daunting task of preventing widespread unrest. With terrorist groups emboldened by Hamas and Iran, Israel sought to prevent the outbreak of a third Intifada. Intensive IDF operations in key refugee camps and strategic raids helped curb the potential for widespread rebellion.

The most recent and alarming development came with Iran’s ballistic missile assault on Israel. The attack, involving hundreds of missiles, marked a significant escalation in the conflict. U.S. and Israeli forces, through coordinated efforts, managed to thwart the strike, with U.S. warships and Israeli air defense systems playing critical roles.

Iran’s attack, though largely ineffective due to Israel’s missile defense systems, represents a new and dangerous regional dynamic. The confrontation opens opportunities for Israel to strengthen regional alliances, particularly with Sunni Arab states, in forming a cooperative defense network against Iranian aggression. Such a network could have profound implications for the future stability of the Middle East, particularly as concerns over Iran’s nuclear ambitions grow.

As Israel continues to battle on multiple fronts, the stakes grow ever higher. In Gaza, the focus remains on fully neutralizing Hamas’ military threat. In the north, the IDF continues to weaken Hezbollah’s capabilities, while working to avoid a broader conflict. Iran’s missile strike underscores the wider regional stakes and the need for Israel to bolster its defenses and alliances.

Ultimately, Israel’s ability to navigate this complex, multi-front conflict will define not only the outcome of this war but also its standing in an increasingly volatile Middle East.

The success of the IDF’s strategies, combined with Israel’s diplomatic efforts, will shape the region’s future for years to come.

Prime Minister Netanyahu warns of severe retaliation, targeting Iran’s nuclear and oil infrastructure in response to escalating hostilities.

In the aftermath of a large-scale ballistic missile attack from Iran, Israel has reportedly conveyed a stark warning to Tehran: any further aggression, regardless of scale, will be met with direct strikes on Iran’s nuclear and oil facilities. This message, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal, reflects Israel’s heightened readiness to escalate the conflict should Tehran continue its attacks.

On Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Iran’s Islamist rulers had made a “grave mistake” with the missile assault, in which approximately 180 ballistic missiles were launched toward Israel. While many of the missiles were intercepted by Israel’s advanced air defense systems, several hit various locations across the country, and others reportedly landed in neighboring Jordan. “Iran will pay the price,” Netanyahu warned, underscoring Israel’s determination to defend its citizens and respond forcefully to any aggression.

U.S. and Israeli officials confirmed that U.S. warships, including the USS Cole and USS Bulkeley, were involved in intercepting incoming Iranian missiles, highlighting the deep military cooperation between the two allies. President Joe Biden reaffirmed U.S. support, calling the thwarting of Iran’s attack a testament to the joint military capabilities of both nations.

Israeli officials stressed that any future attacks from Iran would provoke significant retaliation, including possible strikes on key Iranian infrastructure, particularly its nuclear and oil facilities. Analysts within Israel are now discussing the possibility of a preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear assets, an option that has gained traction amid growing tensions.

The missile barrage comes at a time of heightened volatility in the region, with Iran’s proxies—Hezbollah and Hamas—both significantly weakened by recent Israeli operations. Military analysts argue that this window of vulnerability for Tehran might push Israel to take more decisive action against Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Nadav Eyal, an analyst with Ynet, noted that the latest Iranian attack has bolstered support for a potential preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, which Israeli officials have long regarded as an existential threat.

While Israel has not officially confirmed any specific targets for retaliation, military spokespeople have hinted at impending airstrikes across the Middle East. The Israeli Air Force remains fully operational, and senior military officials have pledged a “severe reaction” to the Iranian attack. Defense officials emphasized that Iran’s missile strike represents only a fraction of what it will face in response.

Netanyahu reiterated Israel’s resolve, stating that Tehran still does not understand the extent of Israel’s determination to defend itself. “Iran once again attacked Israel with hundreds of missiles. This attack was thwarted thanks to Israel’s air defense, the most advanced in the world. Iran made a grave mistake tonight—and it will pay for it,” he said.

The attack has further strained an already volatile region, with Lebanon’s Hezbollah also firing rockets into northern Israel earlier in the day. In response, Israel launched a limited ground incursion into southern Lebanon to neutralize Hezbollah infrastructure. However, this move was met with sharp criticism from the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), which called the incursion a violation of Lebanese sovereignty.

Meanwhile, the international community is bracing for further instability. The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has launched an appeal for $426 million in aid to assist those affected by the conflict, the largest escalation in the region since the 2006 Lebanon War.

Israel’s Foreign Minister, Israel Katz, echoed Netanyahu’s strong words, stating that Iran had crossed a “red line” and that the global community must stand with Israel. He praised the United States and other allies for their swift support in intercepting the missile barrage and emphasized the importance of international solidarity in confronting what he called Iran’s “axis of evil.”

In Tehran, Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, have defended the missile attack as a retaliatory strike following Israel’s targeted killings of senior Iranian and Hezbollah commanders. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed the attack was in response to the recent assassination of key figures, including Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and IRGC Brigadier General Abbas Nilforoushan.

As tensions continue to rise, the risk of a broader conflict between Israel and Iran is becoming increasingly palpable. Israel’s consideration of strikes on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure marks a critical juncture in a conflict that could reshape the Middle East’s political and security landscape. Whether diplomatic efforts can intervene and prevent further escalation remains uncertain, but Israel’s message is clear: it will not hesitate to strike Iran at its core if provoked further.

As the skies over Israel once again light up with missile fire, the source is unmistakable: the Islamic Republic of Iran. In what has become a recurring pattern, Iran has launched a barrage of missiles at Israeli cities and military targets, forcing civilians into bomb shelters and placing immense pressure on Israel’s multi-layered missile defense systems. These systems, impressive in their effectiveness, cannot guarantee complete safety—particularly if Iran’s missiles ever carry non-conventional warheads.

This latest attack, surpassing a previous salvo of 300 missiles six months ago, serves as a stark reminder of the fundamental threat posed by the Iranian regime under Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. His relentless enmity toward Israel is deeply rooted in ideology, impervious to diplomacy or negotiation. As Khamenei nears the end of his life, his drive to destroy Israel intensifies, leaving little room for conventional diplomacy.

For years, arguments against direct military intervention in Iran have centered on the need for caution and restraint. However, the calculus has changed. Iran’s leadership, particularly Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), remains the architect of regional instability, and their ambitions increasingly threaten not only Israel but global security.

While the Iranian people should not be seen as adversaries—many of them are victims of the same oppressive regime—military action against the Islamic Republic’s leadership and military infrastructure has become a necessity. A strategic campaign to dismantle the regime’s military capabilities, particularly its air bases, missile batteries, and naval power, is imperative. This approach should be carefully calibrated to avoid unnecessary civilian harm, but it must also be decisive.

Israel, with the backing of its regional and Western allies, should focus on systematically degrading Iran’s military infrastructure. This means targeting naval assets, missile launch sites, and the IRGC’s sprawling network. The aim would be to incapacitate the regime’s ability to wage war without embarking on a ground invasion—a strategic decision rooted in the belief that Iran, unlike Iraq, does not require occupation to facilitate political change.

Any military strategy targeting the Islamic Republic must be clear about its purpose: dismantling the regime, not punishing the Iranian people. Iran’s population is distinct in its historical and cultural legacy, with a rich tradition of democratic aspirations. The Woman, Life, Freedom movement and the Green Movement before it have shown the world that the Iranian people have long sought to free themselves from theocratic tyranny.

By removing the regime’s leadership and crippling its military power, external forces could open the door for Iranians to pursue genuine self-determination. The fall of the Islamic Republic could provide a historic opportunity for Iranians to reclaim their political future, as their ancestors sought to do in the Constitutional Revolution over a century ago.

While military action might be necessary, it is only part of the solution. The international community, led by the United States and its allies, must simultaneously prepare for the economic and diplomatic rebuilding of Iran post-regime. A well-coordinated Marshall Plan for Iran could provide the resources necessary for reconstruction, offering a future beyond theocratic rule. Such a plan should aim at stabilizing the economy, rebuilding infrastructure, and supporting a transition toward democracy.

It is critical to understand that the fall of the Islamic Republic would not signal the end of instability in Iran. Without a coherent international strategy, the IRGC or other factions could exploit the chaos, much as they have done in the past, to maintain their grip on power. This makes it imperative that any military strikes be accompanied by clear diplomatic efforts aimed at ensuring a smooth political transition.

Targeting Khamenei and the IRGC leadership is central to dismantling the regime. Khamenei, nearing the end of his reign, represents the ideological heart of the regime’s anti-Israel stance. While his removal is necessary, attention must also be given to his potential successors—those within his inner circle who share his vision of regional dominance through military aggression. Any successor with similar ambitions must be seen as a legitimate target.

A targeted campaign that includes the decapitation of the IRGC’s leadership is crucial. The IRGC, with its deep involvement in the Iranian economy and military, represents the regime’s backbone. Without neutralizing its influence, the Islamic Republic’s power structure could simply reconstitute itself, allowing the cycle of violence to continue.

For the U.S. and its Western allies, the decision to support this strategy offers a chance to reshape the region for the better. President Joe Biden, in particular, faces a defining choice. His administration can either continue down the path of cautious engagement with Iran, risking further destabilization, or it can seize the opportunity to support meaningful regime change in Tehran.

If successful, dismantling the Islamic Republic could provide lasting security for Israel and shift the balance of power in the Middle East. The benefits would extend beyond Israel’s borders, offering hope to millions of Iranians who have suffered under the regime’s repressive rule. For Biden, this could be the legacy of a president who restored a semblance of order and freedom to a region long beset by tyranny and violence.

The path forward requires courage and clarity of purpose. Israel, with the support of its allies, must act decisively to end the Islamic Republic’s threat once and for all. This does not mean punishing the Iranian people but rather freeing them from the grip of a regime that has caused untold suffering both at home and abroad. By neutralizing Khamenei and his inner circle, Israel and the West can help Iran’s people build a future grounded in peace, security, and democracy.

U.S. Secretary of State Blinken emphasizes the need for stronger international cooperation to counter ISIS’s potential resurgence amid Middle Eastern conflicts.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has issued a stark warning about the potential for ISIS (Daesh) to exploit the volatile conditions in the Middle East to regain influence. Speaking at the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS ministerial meeting in Washington, D.C., Blinken urged international partners to intensify their efforts in maintaining security, particularly in Iraq and Syria, where ISIS remains a persistent threat.

Blinken stressed the importance of addressing the current instability:

“This is a moment of enormous volatility in the Middle East… it’s more important than ever that we enhance our efforts to strengthen security and stability, including in Iraq and Syria, and prevent extremists like ISIS from exploiting conflict in the region for their own benefit.”

The meeting followed the U.S. announcement that the military mission against ISIS in Iraq will conclude by the end of September 2025. Blinken indicated that discussions would center on transitioning operations in Iraq, ensuring that the Iraqi government takes on increased responsibility for preventing ISIS from reclaiming territory.

“In return, our Iraqi partners will assume greater responsibility for ensuring that Daesh/ISIS cannot protect territory within Iraq’s borders.”

As the U.S. prepares to scale back its direct military involvement in Iraq, Blinken underscored the need for sustaining security partnerships and assisting Baghdad in managing the threat.

While the U.S. plans to reduce its military presence in Iraq, Blinken made clear that counterterrorism operations in Syria would continue “as long as needed.” In Syria, ISIS still controls small pockets of territory, especially in the northeast, where the situation remains complex due to the presence of other militant groups and the ongoing humanitarian crisis.

Blinken also highlighted the importance of addressing the repatriation of foreign fighters and their families, currently held in detention camps in Syria, as a key component of preventing the resurgence of extremism:

“The repatriation of foreign fighters and their families is the only durable solution to the humanitarian and security crisis in northeast Syria.”

The Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, formed in 2014, comprises nearly 87 countries and organizations dedicated to eradicating ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Representatives gathered to discuss the next steps in countering the extremist group, with key issues including long-term security partnerships and coordination between coalition members. Türkiye, a crucial partner in the region, was represented by Deputy Foreign Minister Nuh Yilmaz.

As conflicts across the Middle East, including the wars in Gaza and Lebanon, present opportunities for ISIS to rebuild its network, the U.S. and its coalition partners face the challenge of preventing the group from exploiting the chaos for recruitment, fundraising, and territorial gains.

As the coalition shifts its strategy, the question remains whether the Iraqi government can effectively assume the mantle of leadership in the fight against ISIS. Additionally, the ongoing instability in Syria complicates efforts to fully eradicate ISIS, as regional power struggles and the influence of non-state actors contribute to a highly fragmented security landscape.

The Biden administration has been vocal about its intention to prevent a broader resurgence of ISIS, but the upcoming transition in Iraq, combined with volatile conditions across the region, means that the road ahead is uncertain. Maintaining international cooperation and addressing the long-term socio-political drivers of extremism will be critical in ensuring that the efforts to defeat ISIS are sustained.

The ministerial meeting underscored the fragility of security gains in Iraq and Syria and the ongoing need for multilateral efforts to prevent ISIS from taking advantage of regional chaos. With the U.S. scaling back military operations in Iraq by 2025, the focus will shift to building local capacities and ensuring that the Iraqi government can prevent ISIS from resurging. Meanwhile, ongoing counterterrorism efforts in Syria and the repatriation of foreign fighters remain crucial to addressing both the humanitarian and security challenges posed by ISIS.