Connect with us

world news

Alleged Israeli airstrikes target Iranian stronghold near Damascus

Published

on

Alleged Israeli airstrikes target Iranian stronghold near Damascus



Alleged Israeli airstrikes targeted sites near Set Zaynab, a stronghold of Iranian militias, near Damascus on Sunday night, according to Syrian reports.

A site used by Iranian militias between Set Zaynab and Al-Bahdaliyah, south of Damascus, was hit in the strikes, according to the reports.

Video reportedly from the scene showed a structure on fire and individuals telling civilians who had gathered to leave the area. Ambulances rushed to the area shortly after the strikes, according to Syrian reports. Nour Abo Hassan, a journalist in southern Syria, reported that about eight Iran-backed militants were killed in the strikes.

Shi’ite Muslims mostly from Iraq flock to the shrine of Sayyida Zeinab in Syria, March 25, 2003. (credit: REUTERS/JAMAL SAIDI)

SANA, the Syrian state news site, reported that the airstrikes were carried out from over the Golan Heights, causing only material damage.

The strikes were reportedly conducted in two waves. Simultaneously, Israeli artillery targeted sites near the town of Hader in the Quneitra region along the Syrian-Israeli border, according to the Syrian Capital Voice news site.

Advertisement

Israeli strikes intensify in Syria

The strikes came just a few days after three Hezbollah members and one Iran-backed Syrian militant were eliminated in an alleged Israeli drone strike in Quneitra, including son of the head of Hezbollah’s terrorist operations near the Syrian-Israeli border.

The Hezbollah members killed in that strike were identified as Ali Idris Salman, Hussein Issam Taha, and Hassan Ali Daqduq. Muhammad Anas al-Tamer, one of the commanders and founders of the Arab Nationalist Guard, a pan-Arab militia aligned with the Assad regime. Tamer was affiliated with the “Golan File,” Hezbollah’s efforts to build up terrorist infrastructure along the Syrian-Israeli border.

Daqduq was the son of Ali Mussa Daqduq, also known as Abu Hussein Sajid, the commander in charge of the Golan File.

About a week ago, two members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) were killed in alleged Israeli airstrikes that targeted sites in Set Zaynab, according to the IRGC.

The two were identified as Mohammad Ali Ataee Shoorche and Panah Taqizadeh, with the IRGC saying they were carrying out an “advisory mission” in Syria.

Set Zaynab is a stronghold for Iranian and Iran-backed militias in the Damascus area. Iranian militias have numerous facilities in the area, including facilities used to store weapons headed to Hezbollah in Lebanon.





Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

world news

Haniyeh’s son: Hamas rejected ‘deal of a century’ for statehood – report

Published

on

By

Haniyeh’s son: Hamas rejected ‘deal of a century’ for statehood – report



Abd Al-Salam Haniyeh, the son of the killed Hamas terror leader Ismail Haniyeh, claimed in an August interview with SamaQuds that his father rejected the “deal of a century” which would have seen the establishment of Palestinian statehood, according to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute.

Haniyeh Jr. claimed that the deal would have allegedly seen billions invested into Gaza. 

“May our hands be paralyzed if we sign an agreement which would separate Gaza from Palestine,” the Hamas leader has allegedly said in response to the proposed deal.

The deal would have also encompassed the disarmament of Hamas.

Haniyeh also claimed that media coverage of the 2008-2009 conflict also saw increased convoys entering the Gaza Strip, which led to more active construction of terror tunnels. 

Demonstrators pray near a mock coffin during a protest against the killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Iran, in Lebanon’s capital Beirut, August 2, 2024. (credit: REUTERS/EMILIE MADI)

Rejecting statehood

The Palestinian leadership has rejected multiple deals that would see the establishment of Palestinian statehood. In 1936, the British offered the Peel Commission, which would have seen a separate Arab state but which was rejected by the Palestinian leadership, according to CIJA.

In 1948, Palestinian leadership rejected the Partition Plan, which also encompassed an opportunity for statehood. In 2000, under Prime Minister Ehud Barak, the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat, again rejected an offer of statehood. Finally, as referenced by Haniyeh, in 2008, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas rejected a land-for-peace offer. 

Hamas officials have continued to speak against a two-state solution in conversation with Arab media, insisting on a singular Arab nation. 

Ismail Haniyeh

Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in July while attending the inauguration of Iran’s new president in Tehran.


Stay updated with the latest news!

Subscribe to The Jerusalem Post Newsletter


While Israel neither accepted nor denied responsibility for the attack, Iran has promised to retaliate





Source link

Continue Reading

world news

Israel approaching full-scale conflict with Hezbollah as tensions rise – analysis

Published

on

By

Israel approaching full-scale conflict with Hezbollah as tensions rise – analysis



Right now is the closest Israel has been to a full war with Hezbollah since October 7.

This is true even in comparison to the period between July 30 and August 25, probably the second most dangerous period between the sides.

How do we know that the coming days, weeks, and months or two before the coming winter are so potentially explosive?

It is not just the statement that Defense Minister Yoav Gallant issued on Monday about his talk with US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin in which he said that the possibility for a diplomatic solution with Hezbollah in the North is running out.

It is not just the rumors that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intends to replace Gallant with Gideon Saar as defense minister in order to have greater support for a major operation against Hezbollah.

Fire near Yaara in the northern Galilee started by a Hezbollah rocket on September 12, 2024. (credit: SETH J. FRANTZMAN)

It is not even just that Netanyahu’s main political opposition, Benny Gantz, continues to pound the prime minister as being too scared to risk a major battle in the North, which has left the 60,000 evacuated northern residents abandoned for nearly a year.

Confidence for major Hezbollah operation

These are the open and obvious signs – and frankly, much of Israel’s political and military class has been threatening to send Hezbollah back to the Stone Age since late early spring 2024.

It is also that the Jerusalem Post has received indications behind the scenes at both the political and military levels from sources who before were pouring cold water on the public statements, who are now signaling that the public statements are serious.

The reasons they give show how realities have changed a lot throughout the war.

For most of the war, the main reason not to get into a big fight with Hezbollah was to avoid distractions that might handicap the IDf from taking apart all 24 of Hamas’s battalions in Gaza.


Stay updated with the latest news!

Subscribe to The Jerusalem Post Newsletter


As of August 21, Gallant declared Hamas’s last battalion in Rafah defeated.

Despite Netanyahu’s publicly threatening words and tone, another major reason that a big war with Hezbollah was not likely going to really happen until now was that the prime minister was privately terrified of how many Israelis might die from the expected Hezbollah onslaught of 6,000-8,000 rockets per day in the event of such a war.

That seems to have changed as of August 25.

On August 25, Hezbollah planned to launch several hundred and maybe up to 1,000 rockets on Israel, including on critical Israeli intelligence headquarters bases just North of Tel Aviv.

Netanyahu and the war cabinet instructed the IDF not to launch a full preemptive war on Hezbollah because, among other reasons, he was still worried about the impact on the Israeli home front.

However, something changed radically as a result of the events of August 25.

Since October 7, Netanyahu has doubted the IDF in areas where the objective risk was higher, even if the military supposedly would have the upper hand.

Sources have indicated that behind closed doors he was initially hesitant for each of the three invasions of Gaza; northern Gaza in late October, Khan Yunis in December, and Rafah in May.

Yet on August 25, the IDF did not just beat Hezbollah – it cleaned house.

Despite IDF’s substantive victories over Hamas and small tactical victories against Hezbollah, this was the first time that the IDF won a major and complex strategic victory over Hezbollah during this war.

It blew up the vast majority of the rockets and drones Hezbollah intended to attack Israel with before these threats could even be launched.

Hezbollah neither killed nor damaged anyone or anything of significance, while the IDF destroyed thousands of Hezbollah rockets.

Suddenly, Netanyahu has a newfound confidence that he can afford a major operation against Hezbollah with much fewer losses to the home front than he had expected.

What if – instead of 5,000 to 10,000 dead Israelis from tens of thousands of Hezbollah rockets over several weeks – he could hit Hezbollah harder than it’s ever been hit before – and destroy so many of its rocket launchers on the ground, that Israeli casualties might be not just smaller, but exponentially smaller?

Another factor was until now there was a good chance that Hamas would agree to a ceasefire and that such a deal would lead Hezbollah to unilaterally stop attacking Israel, just as it did during the November 23-30 ceasefire with Hamas.

While this is not impossible, the chances of a ceasefire with Hamas now are lower than they have been in several months after both sides have dug in on various issues after having seemed to have navigated around 90% of the obstacles.

All along, the only other option that has been discussed if diplomacy failed was a major Israeli operation.

And Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah is still furious about the killing of his military chief Fuad Shukr by the IDF on July 30, so no one views him as being more flexible now than in other periods.

Finally, the winter comes into play.

Sources have told the Post that if more than 4-6 weeks pass without an operation, it may be impossible or much harder to carry out such an operation until Spring 2025.

That would mean condemning the northern residents to another 6 months outside of their homes, something becoming increasingly untenable domestically in Israel.

Pressed that the IDF managed a successful invasion of Khan Yunis and the finishing off of Hamas in Shejaia in northern Gaza in the middle of winter 2023-2024, sources responded that the winter in mountainous Lebanon is far more fierce and difficult to manage than in the deserts of Gaza.

None of this means that a new broader war with Hezbollah is certain.

It would still be a massively risky proposition for Israel, Hezbollah, and also for the sides’ sponsors: the US as well as Iran.

The US could be drawn into a regional war or at least be seen as having failed to prevent a larger war after a year of diplomacy, something that could impact the current US presidential election.

Iran could lose Hezbollah as its major potential threat to hold over Israel should the Jewish state dare to think of attacking the Islamic Republic’s nuclear facilities. Hezbollah would undoubtedly remain the main player in Lebanon but might lose many of its most feared capabilities.

But this is clearly the riskiest moment in the North since October 7.





Source link

Continue Reading

world news

Yemen ballistic missile attack shows why time is not on Israel’s side – comment

Published

on

By

Yemen ballistic missile attack shows why time is not on Israel’s side – comment



Time might have been on Israel’s side for significant portions of the current war, but it no longer is and likely has not been since April-May.

Yemen’s ballistic missile attack on Israel on Sunday made this clearer than ever.

Too much of the conversation about how long the war should go revolves around whether more military pressure can crack Hamas and get the Israeli hostages back versus whether a deal must be cut now, even if Hamas remains in power, so as to get the hostages back as time runs out for them.

Too little of the conversation takes into account how much more vulnerable Israel is becoming to attack on new fronts. Regarding these new fronts, Israel might never have taken direct hits or might have avoided taking direct hits for years or decades more if not for the length of this war, gradually exposing additional asymmetric holes in Israel’s military power.

In order of current severity, Israel is facing seven fronts of attack: Lebanon, Iran, Yemen, the West Bank, Gaza, Syria, and Iraq.

IDF troops operate in the Gaza Strip. July 25, 2024. (credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON’S UNIT)

That’s right: Gaza is now probably only the fifth most dangerous front militarily, even though Israel is still treating it as the most important in terms of military resources (and diplomatically, it may be the most important front.)  

Originally, when longer meant from October until January, part of the purpose of being willing to drag out the war longer was to take the necessary time to defeat Hamas in different pockets of Gaza while leaving time to move the Palestinian civilian population from place to place in between invasions.

Another part was to use the mix of ongoing pressure and threats of continued impending military invasions and pressure to wear Hamas down into cutting a deal to return the Israeli hostages.

A third part was that a slower war using strategic air strikes, tanks, and artillery as a prelude to infantry invasions of various areas meant fewer infantry casualties.

The theory was that Israel’s air defense was strong enough to withstand whatever Hamas could fire on the home front up until the point that the IDF destroyed most of Hamas’s rocket firing capability around December-January.


Stay updated with the latest news!

Subscribe to The Jerusalem Post Newsletter


But all of this was assuming the war with Hamas would end around January – the official estimate of all defense officials in October-November – and that the other fronts would stay relatively quiet.

But as the war drew on, Hezbollah started firing on a larger number of northern towns and cities; Yemen joined the war, at first only against Eilat, but eventually also striking Tel Aviv, and now aiming again for central Israel.

Iran started pushing much harder to threaten Israel from the West Bank, Syria, and Iraq, as well as encouraging its proxies in Lebanon and Yemen to take more risks against Israel.

Israel’s increasing tolerance for terrorism

Prior to the war, Israel had come to terms with a horrible, nearly 20-year-long conceit that it would be “ok” with low-level rocket and other attacks on its Gaza corridor villages as long as this did not touch the rest of the country.

From March 2022 until October 7, 2023, most of Israel came to terms with it being “ok” for significant waves of terror against Jews in the West Bank as long as not too much of it crossed the Green Line.

Starting on October 8, 2023, Israel decided it was “ok” for 60,000 northern residents to be evacuated from their homes and for whole towns and cities to be ghost towns, not just for a few weeks, but for nearly a year and counting with no deadline in sight.

Then, it was “ok” for Eilat to be attacked from time to time by the Houthis as long as the missiles were shot down outside of Israeli airspace.

On April 13-14, it became “ok” for Iran to launch over 300 aerial threats at Israel as long as a remarkable number of the threats were shot down, people were not killed, and Israel got to “deter” Tehran in a retaliatory strike against its S-300 anti-aircraft missile system on April 19.

It was “ok” that Israel got into a huge fight about a partial arms freeze with the US in May and that the International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice, which had warned Israel but stayed on the sidelines from October to May, went more all out after the Jewish state in May.

It was “ok” that Hezbollah in August wanted to target 11 IDF bases and northern Tel Aviv key intelligence headquarters as long as the military preemptively struck hard enough on August 25 that Hezbollah’s main goals were thwarted.

The truth is that many of Israel’s nuanced approaches would have worked if the war had ended a long time ago or shortly after the nuanced retaliation.

And there were critics of Israel bashing it from November onward.

But when time continues to drag on, Israel’s enemies on many fronts have more time to dissect the way the IDF operates and when and where it lets its guard down more, and then get lots of chances to test the many potential holes. When time drags on, Israel’s legitimacy problems move from critics to its top allies like the US, UK, and France and metastasize with the international courts from a minor problem to a major crisis.

On Thursday of last week, I was in Rafah in Gaza. There were no Palestinians to be seen. No battles. No gunfire. I had my helmet and flak jacket, and they moved us around in a Namer armored vehicle. I felt as safe as could be. Of course, there are still thousands of Hamas terrorists in Gaza, and if anyone ignores them as we did on October 7, there could be another disaster in Israel’s future.

But right now, they can barely pose a threat to IDF forces a block away from them – and that only if the forces are not in Namers and lack air and tank support – let alone to anyone outside of Gaza.

This morning, waking up at 6:21 a.m. in Modiin to rocket sirens after months of quiet, not knowing whether Hezbollah or Iran was firing missiles at us, only to then learn that it was the Houthis, I felt far less safe than I had in Gaza.

When I traveled to Paatei Modiin Train Station Platform 4 this morning and saw the impact of shrapnel on an escalator I have walked on a thousand times, it was clear how many people could have been killed if the Houthis had fired an hour or two later than 6:21 a.m. This is without even getting to the mass mayhem and death that even one ballistic missile getting through to a populated area could cause.

How the war should end, and whether it should be with a quick ceasefire to get back the hostages or with a relatively quick but intense major invasion of Lebanon, synchronized with major strikes on other parties threatening Israel, is an important debate.

Yet, whichever direction is chosen, Israel should pick a direction and act to wrap things up rapidly and decisively.

And anyone who thinks that the war can just continue with no price on these other fronts beyond Gaza until after the US elections in November is kidding themselves and ignoring the writing on the wall on a grossly negligent and serial basis.     





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending