Lebanon summons Iranian ambassador over Hezbollah disarmament comments
Ambassador Mojtaba Amani was told not to interfere in Lebanon 's internal affairs at the meeting on Thursday, as Beirut seeks to bring all weapons in the country under state control.
Ministry Secretary General Hani Chmeitli met Mr Amani and emphasised 'the necessity of adhering to the diplomatic principles outlined in international agreements concerning the sovereignty of states and non-interference in their internal affairs, foremost among them the Vienna Convention', Lebanon 's National News Agency reported.
This incident marks a rare public rebuke of Iran by Lebanese officials, highlighting the shifting dynamics within Lebanese politics.
The election of President Joseph Aoun and appointment of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in January ended more than two years of political impasse, raising hopes that the country can finally tackle its financial and political crises. A new government was formed in February.
Previously, Tehran had held sway over Lebanese affairs for years.
Lebanon's government is facing mounting international pressure to disarm Hezbollah and place all weapons under state authority. The group, once a dominant force in Lebanese politics and security, has been weakened by its war with Israel.
This month, Mr Aoun said 'the decision has been taken' to grant the state exclusive control over weapons in the country − a goal he said would be pursued through dialogue, not force.
On April 19, Mr Amani posted on X that 'the disarmament project is a clear conspiracy'.
'We in the Islamic Republic of Iran are aware of the danger of this conspiracy … we warn others not to fall into the trap of enemies,' wrote the Iranian ambassador.
In an interview with local broadcaster Al Jadeed on Wednesday, Mr Amani acknowledged that he was being summoned by the Foreign Ministry over the post. He said he missed the initial appointment, prompting a second summons on Thursday.
Earlier this month, following a visit to Lebanon, US deputy special envoy for the Middle East Morgan Ortagus said that Hezbollah and other armed groups should be disarmed 'as soon as possible', and that Lebanese troops were expected to do the job.
Updated: April 25, 2025, 10:40 AM
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
4 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Trump, Starmer, Macron: A theatre of inhumanity
The images are finally breaking through the propaganda fog. Starving children - ribs sharp beneath thinning skin - have made the front pages, from The Daily Express to The New York Times. Aid agencies are now echoing what Palestinians have been shouting for months: this is not a humanitarian crisis. It is a man-made famine. It is genocide, and it is being broadcast in real time. According to Doctors Without Borders, cases of severe malnutrition among children under five in Gaza have tripled in just two weeks. A quarter of the children and pregnant women examined were malnourished. Since May, famine deaths have surged - over 50 in the past week alone. The World Food Programme confirms Gaza receives just 12 percent of the food it needs. A third of the population is going days without eating. Babies are starving, mothers faint and aid convoys are shot at or turned away. Now, the UN-backed Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) has issued an urgent alert: the "worst-case scenario of famine is currently playing out in the Gaza Strip". New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Famine thresholds for food consumption and acute malnutrition have already been breached. Starvation and disease are accelerating. Without immediate intervention, the outcome is clear: mass death. So how did the self-proclaimed leaders of the free world respond? With cruelty in three dialects. Social engineering at gunpoint US President Donald Trump delivered the blunt-force version: snarling, smirking and fundamentally uninterested in anything that cannot be monetised or golfed on. As skeletal children flickered across screens, Trump lied without blinking and denied there was a famine in Gaza. His team sabotaged ceasefire talks in Doha, blamed Hamas for selfishness and walked away - back to the clubhouse. Trump's indifference is total, playing golf while Gaza withers, he reveals the full rot of his worldview: entitlement, cruelty and a billionaire's disdain for those beneath him Hamas had proposed exactly what the international community demanded: UN-led food distribution, withdrawal of Israeli troops from civilian areas and a permanent ceasefire in exchange for hostages. But that was far too humane for Washington and Tel Aviv. They preferred their aid weaponised, their food politicised and their victims punished for surviving their tons of bombs. The so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a failed Israeli-American "humanitarian" scheme, was put in charge of feeding Gaza. Instead, it helped map out killing zones. Leaked documents detail $2bn "transit camps" to "re-educate" Palestinians - colonisation rebranded in PowerPoint - not relief, rather social engineering at gunpoint. Even Israel's military admits there was no evidence Hamas stole aid. Still, Gaza starves - not by accident, but by design. This is policy, and if anyone was still unsure, Netanyahu clarified: "In any path we choose, we will be forced to allow the entry of minimal humanitarian aid." Not enough. Not urgent. Minimal. Starvation, then, is not collateral; it is a strategy. Relief, drip-fed, outrage managed. This is rationed agony. Suffering, meted out with precision. Trump indifference Meanwhile, in Scotland, teeing off as Gaza collapsed, Trump was not only dodging genocide; he was running from Jeffrey Epstein's shadow. Palestinians - like the trailer park teens in Epstein's Rolodex - do not exist in Trump's gated universe. He sees only property values and dinner reservations. Everything else is expendable. Gaza famine: We hold British institutions accountable for enabling this horror Read More » Trump's indifference is total. Playing golf while Gaza withers, he reveals the full rot of his worldview: entitlement, cruelty and a billionaire's disdain for those beneath him. But he was not finished. Between rounds, Trump moaned: "We sent $60m… nobody acknowledged it… makes you feel a little bad." Apparently, Palestinians should send thank-you cards for the starvation, for the tents torched in the night and the children torn apart by US-made bombs. This is Trump's empathy: crumbs followed by tantrums - the logic of a mob boss. You clap or you get nothing. Trump does not just deny famine, he mocks it and downgrades it to "probably malnutrition". He lies again about Hamas stealing aid, even as Israeli officials admit otherwise. He wants praise for food that never arrived and impunity for the policies that blocked it. Then there is British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the master of the soft veto. Where Trump bellows, Starmer tiptoes. While tens of thousands chanted for a ceasefire, he released a polished video offering to treat a few injured Palestinian children in Britain. A gesture? Or a stage prop? Behind the sober tone lies staggering complicity. Starmer has done nothing to stop arms exports to Israel, including F-35 jet components. He talks about airdrops as if tossing food from 3,000m is more than a photo op. These drops kill as often as they feed. Starmer plays the reasonable man - all poise, no pressure - as if a well-worded statement could hush the cries from Rafah When asked why Britain will not act, officials shrug: we must follow America. And yet, when Trump abandoned Ukraine, Britain led alone. The difference is not capability; it is will, or rather, its absence. What could Starmer do? Plenty: suspend arms exports, freeze Israeli assets, sanction GHF-linked firms, join South Africa's genocide case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and even recall the ambassador. He could say the word: genocide. But instead, he plays the reasonable man - all poise, no pressure - as if a well-worded statement could hush the cries from Rafah. He performs concern while the bodies accumulate just behind the curtain. Macron's illusion Then comes French President Emmanuel Macron, cloaked in silk and the language of peace while selling his illusion. He announced France would recognise a Palestinian state. Dramatic? Until you read the fine print: no borders, no capital, no end to occupation, no teeth. It is the same vision floated by Canada's prime minister: a "Zionist Palestinian state" - defanged, demilitarised and designed to grease normalisation deals with Arab states. It is not a state, but a hologram, a soundbite, a mirage. Gaza genocide: The West finds new language - but does nothing to stop Israel Read More » While the Israeli army storms the occupied West Bank, while the Israeli parliament pushes annexation, Macron offers paper recognition. His "support" is sleight of hand, a magician's flourish to distract while the real work of ethnic cleansing proceeds unimpeded. If Macron were serious, he would sanction Israel, freeze reserves in French banks, support the ICJ case and stop arresting French citizens protesting genocide. But seriousness was never the point; performance was. And now, Starmer is following suit, offering to recognise a Palestinian state - not as an unconditional right to the whole of occupied Palestinian land, but as a bargaining chip, dangled only if there is no ceasefire, to politely urge Israel to reconsider its course. Where Macron offered a mirage, Starmer offered a shadow of one - not solidarity, not strategy, just PR in slow motion. Trump sneers, Starmer stage-manages and Macron suavely deceives. As Gaza starves and aid workers plead for a ceasefire, these men deliver rehearsed lines, not rescue. They offer theatre in place of leadership, gestures in place of justice, and euphemisms in place of courage. While Israeli ministers call openly for Gaza's erasure, these men retreat behind velvet curtains, pose for cameras and nod gravely. They are not statesmen. They are performers. Their suits are tailored. Their cowardice, too. Trump is only different in style, not in substance. Where Macron and Starmer lacquer their complicity in diplomacy and euphemism, Trump bellows his out like a wrecking ball - no disguise, just arrogance live-streamed. But the core is the same: a shared, deliberate disregard for Palestinian life, a common indifference to suffering and a unity of inhumanity. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Middle East Eye
7 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
While Iran stalls, Azerbaijan and Israel push forward
In his posthumously published memoirs, Iranian political heavyweight Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani recalled his meetings with Heydar Aliyev, then president of Azerbaijan, during the first Nagorno-Karabakh war in November 1993. According to Rafsanjani, Aliyev was demanding that Iran provide military support to Azerbaijan in the conflict with Armenia. Rafsanjani wrote: 'One of his constant remarks was that Iran should seize the opportunity of the war with the Armenians to expand its presence in Azerbaijan. At times, he even mentioned that Azerbaijan belonged to Iran, urging us to come, defend it, and take control.' He added: 'When we were in Nakhchivan, he said similar things. He argued that if Iran brought Azerbaijan under its influence, it would shake Russia's dominance over the entire Caucasus.' Thirty-two years later, the tables have turned. No longer do Azerbaijani officials seek Tehran's involvement in Baku's affairs. Now it is Iranian politicians who seem unsure how to manage relations with a small but assertive neighbour. A neighbour that gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, but was once part of Iran before being ceded to the Russian Empire through the treaties of Golestan (1813) and Turkmenchay (1828). New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Over the past decade, the power dynamic between the two countries has shifted significantly. Some Azerbaijani figures and media outlets are now even calling for the annexation of parts of Iranian territory. Meanwhile, Iran's recent 12-day war with Israel and the United States has deepened the political divide. In Tehran concerns are mounting over Azerbaijan's expanding military and intelligence ties with Israel. Where did the Israeli drones come from? Right after Israel's war on Iran ended, residents near Iran's northwestern border reported sightings of Israeli drones entering from the direction of Azerbaijan. These accounts were later echoed by Iran's state broadcaster, whose director is appointed by the supreme leader. The reports suggested that drones used in attacks on cities including Tehran, Tabriz and Urmia have crossed into Iran from Azerbaijan. The claims drew enough attention that foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei was asked about them during a news conference. 'We shared the cases with the neighbouring countries, and we are following up on this issue,' he said. A few days later, Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian stated that Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev had assured him that Israel had not used Azerbaijani territory to launch attacks. This reassurance did not convince many in Iran. Neither the media nor political experts accepted it. A Tehran-based professor of international relations, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the fact that both the foreign ministry and the president discussed the matter shows how serious it is for Iran. 'If Iran wasn't sure about Israeli involvement from the Azerbaijani border, it wouldn't have brought it up at such a high level,' the expert said. He also argued that Pezeshkian's comments about Aliyev's assurances show the failure of Iran's foreign policy in the Caucasus. 'What Pezeshkian said is just diplomatic language. In reality, Iran hasn't known how to deal with Azerbaijan since the last Karabakh war. Since then, Azerbaijan has gone from being a friendly - or at least neutral - country to a quiet but serious threat.' He pointed to high-level meetings between Azerbaijani and Israeli officials as further evidence of close collaboration between Baku and Tel Aviv. Israel on Iran's doorstep After breaking from the Soviet Union, Azerbaijan first grew close to Turkey, Iran's regional rival. Later, it also deepened its military and economic ties with Israel, which Iran sees as its main enemy. In recent years, Azerbaijan has become one of the leading suppliers of oil and gas to Israel, while importing advanced Israeli military and intelligence equipment. According to some reports, Israel provided nearly 70 percent of Azerbaijan's military arsenal between 2016 and 2020. Now, Azerbaijan is also working with the new Syrian government, which has shifted away from Iran after the fall of Bashar al-Assad. 'With no clear strategy in the Caucasus, Iran is now watching as Tel Aviv moves closer to its borders,' the expert said. He stressed that a new regional alliance between Israel, Syria and Azerbaijan could soon bring Israel to Iran's doorstep through Turkey. The only obstacle is the 43km stretch of land between Armenia and Iran that links Azerbaijan to its exclave, Nakhchivan. Control over this pass, also known as the Meghri or Zangezur corridor, has been a key demand from both Azerbaijan and Turkey since the 44-day Karabakh war in 2020. If war breaks out again between Azerbaijan and Armenia, Iran fears this corridor could fall into Azerbaijani hands. The expert warned that Azerbaijan is not just aligning itself with Israel, but it is also copying its military strategies. 'In recent years, Azerbaijan has favoured short but intense wars. This approach has helped it reach its goals. That's why another war with Armenia seems likely. In the long run, Iran should prepare for potential military pressure from its northwest. Even now, we're hearing louder voices from Azerbaijan calling for parts of Iranian territory,' he said. Demand for separating Iran's regions The expert was referring to increasing calls from some Azerbaijani figures for the separation of Iran's Turkish-speaking regions. Pan-Turkists refer to those areas as 'South Azerbaijan.' These include the provinces of East and West Azerbaijan, Ardabil, Zanjan, and even parts of Iran's Kurdish regions. Supporters of a Greater Kurdistan and Greater Armenia also claim some of these same areas. After ceasefire, Iran is preparing for the long war with Israel Read More » One of the latest campaigns promoting separation came after the 12-day war from the media outlet Araznews on X. The campaign, in Persian and Turkish, called for unity between the Turks of Tabriz in Iran, Baku in Azerbaijan, and Ankara in Turkey. Many participants shared videos of themselves flashing the hand sign of the far-right Grey Wolves group. In another example, Azerbaijani news outlet Caliber ran an English-language report describing Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as the "main enemy of the Azeris". A retired Iranian diplomat, who worked in the foreign ministry in the years after Azerbaijan gained independence, said these tactics started soon after Azerbaijan lost the first Karabakh war (1988-94). 'Once Baku realised it couldn't drag Iran into a military conflict with Armenia, it quickly turned to Iran's enemy, Israel,' said the former diplomat. 'There were concerns, but Azerbaijan wasn't seen as a major player in military, political, or economic terms, so Iran didn't develop a clear policy toward it.' That calculation has since changed. 'Active neutrality' Azerbaijan has built strong military ties with Israel and boosted its economy through oil and gas exports. But according to the diplomat, Iran's approach towards Azerbaijan has not shifted. Iran has called its stance 'active neutrality' in the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia - a policy that, the former diplomat argues, has now backfired. 'Iran is paying the price for this so-called neutrality. It may have made sense early on, but as Azerbaijan grew closer to Israel, it ended up hurting Iran. In reality, it wasn't neutrality, it was passivity.' He also dismissed the Iranian government's claim that its opposition to the Zangezur Corridor is about preserving trade routes to Europe through Armenia. Trade data from 2023 shows Iran exported just $412m worth of goods to Armenia and imported only $45m. 'With no clear strategy in the Caucasus, Iran is now watching as Tel Aviv moves closer to its borders' - Professor of international relations, Tehran Instead, he pointed to two deeper reasons for Iran's stance: first, its long-standing policy of aligning with Russian interests in the region; second, its fear of Israel getting too close to its borders. 'The establishment's leaders never expected to face a security threat from Azerbaijan. They focused on expanding their influence in Arab countries and didn't see this coming. That's where they got caught off guard.' While he declined to confirm whether Israel used Azerbaijani airspace in the recent attacks, the diplomat said Azerbaijan's use of Israeli-made drones, surveillance tech, and defence systems is clear proof of how far Israeli influence has reached. Right now, he added, Iran has no choice but to engage in diplomacy with Azerbaijan. But in the long run, that may only make things worse and give Israel another pressure point to use against Tehran. 'Whether or not Israel launched attacks from Azerbaijani territory, the real issue is that Iran knows it's vulnerable on its northwest border. The question now is whether the high-ranking decision makers will act, or continue down the same failed path of 'active neutrality',' the diplomat said.
Khaleej Times
8 hours ago
- Khaleej Times
Pakistan says Indian statement on Kashmir attackers is 'replete with fabrications'
The Indian home minister's account of forces killing who he said were three Pakistanis involved in the April attack on tourists in the Jammu and Kashmir federal territory was "replete with fabrications", Pakistan's foreign ministry said on Wednesday. Indian Home Minister Amit Shah told parliament on Tuesday that the three militants killed in a gun battle in a Kashmir forest this week were the perpetrators of the April 22 attack and that New Delhi had found evidence to back it. Pakistan has denied involvement in the attack in which 26 men were shot dead — the worst assault on civilians in India since the 2008 Mumbai attacks — and sought an independent investigation. "The account given by the Indian home minister is replete with fabrications, leading to serious questions about its credibility," Pakistan's foreign ministry said in a statement. The attackers, who India said were Pakistani nationals backed by Islamabad, had opened fire in a valley popular with tourists in Kashmir's scenic, mountainous region of Pahalgam, before fleeing into the surrounding pine forests. It led New Delhi to target what it called "terrorist infrastructure" in Pakistan and Pakistani Kashmir, leading to four days of intense fighting in May between the nuclear-armed neighbours before they agreed to a ceasefire. The Himalayan region of Kashmir is at the heart of the hostility between India and Pakistan, who have fought two of their three wars over the region, which they both claim in full but rule in part. New Delhi accuses Islamabad of helping Islamist separatists battling security forces in its part of Kashmir, but Pakistan says it only provides diplomatic and moral support to Kashmiris seeking self determination.
