Abu Mohammed al-Golani, born Ahmad Hussein al-Shara, is a prominent and controversial figure in the Syrian conflict, leading the militant group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). HTS emerged from the Nusra Front, the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda, which al-Golani established in 2012 at the behest of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Initially a senior figure in al-Qaeda, al-Golani helped Nusra Front grow into a significant force during Syria’s civil war. In 2016, al-Golani announced the group’s formal split from al-Qaeda, renaming it Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, ostensibly to facilitate cooperation with other Syrian factions and reduce international pressure.

In 2017, al-Golani consolidated various Islamist factions into HTS. The group became the dominant force in Idlib, imposing its rule through a “salvation government” and strict governance, often criticized for human rights abuses.

Al-Golani has worked to distance himself and HTS from its jihadist roots, promoting an image of pragmatism and tolerance. He has sought to gain legitimacy by engaging with ethnic and religious minorities and advocating for Syria-focused objectives, claiming HTS poses no threat to the West.

Al-Golani’s leadership during HTS’s recent offensives, including the capture of Aleppo and other territories, underscores his strategic acumen. These advances have reignited Syria’s conflict, challenging President Bashar al-Assad’s authority.

Despite his rebranding efforts, al-Golani and HTS remain designated as terrorists by the United States and other nations due to their violent history and extremist ideologies. The group’s control of Idlib has significant implications for the region, including humanitarian concerns and the broader geopolitical conflict in Syria.

The United States has voiced alarm over Iran’s decision to intensify its nuclear activities, according to a State Department spokesperson who spoke with VOA Persian. Washington emphasized that Tehran’s continued production of enriched uranium at levels up to 60% lacks a credible civilian purpose and urged Iran to cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The U.S. highlighted the IAEA Board of Governors’ demand that Iran resolve longstanding issues related to its nuclear obligations. These concerns have persisted for over five years, creating heightened tension amid stalled progress.

Britain and France have echoed these concerns. Nicolas Lerner, head of France’s foreign intelligence service, identified Iran’s nuclear activities as one of the most pressing security threats. Similarly, Richard Moore, head of the UK’s MI6, described Tehran’s nuclear ambitions as a global security challenge, even as Iran’s regional proxy groups face setbacks.

Diplomats from the UK, France, Germany, and the EU met with Iranian representatives in Geneva to explore ways to de-escalate regional tensions and address Iran’s nuclear program. Notably absent from these discussions was the United States. The Biden administration clarified it is not participating in negotiations with Iran but is closely coordinating with European allies to hold Iran accountable for its nuclear obligations.

Meanwhile, reports from the IAEA indicate Iran plans to install thousands of new centrifuges for uranium enrichment, further alarming Western nations. This development coincides with ongoing criticism from the U.S. and EU over Iran’s provision of drones and missiles to Russia, its role in Middle Eastern instability, and its human rights violations.

In response, Western nations have imposed sanctions on Iranian officials and entities. The U.S. reiterated its call for Tehran to comply with international safeguards, urging swift action to prevent further escalation.

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.