Israeli strike kills at least three people in northern Lebanon
The attack in the Ayrounieh area on Tuesday came as Israel intensifies its strikes in Lebanon amid Hezbollah's weakened position, the Lebanese army's inability to fight back and the international community's failure to pressure Israel to abide by the truce.
The strike near Lebanon's northernmost major city – more than 180km (110 miles) from the Israeli border – highlights Israel's willingness to launch assaults across the country, not just in the south.
The Israeli military claimed that it struck a 'key' figure from the Palestinian group Hamas without identifying the target.
A Hamas source in Lebanon told Al Araby TV that no senior official from the group was killed in the strike. Lebanon's Annahar newspaper reported that initial reports indicated that the assassination attempt might have failed.
Hamas and other Palestinian groups maintain a presence in various areas of Lebanon, mostly in refugee camps that have housed Palestinians for decades. Tripoli is home to the large Beddawi Palestinian refugee camp.
Since the outbreak of the war in Gaza in October 2023, Israel has carried out attacks against the Lebanese group Hezbollah and members of Palestinian factions in Lebanon.Hamas's deputy chief Saleh al-Arouri was killed in an Israeli air strike on Beirut's southern suburbs in early 2024.
While the ceasefire last year ended the conflict, Israel has continued to carry out strikes on what it says are Hezbollah arms depots and fighters, mostly in southern Lebanon. Israeli attacks have also targeted homes, municipal workers and civilian infrastructure.
On Monday, at least one person was killed in a suspected Israeli air attack on a van in the town of Deir Kifa in southern Lebanon.
The recent attacks were launched as United States envoy Thomas Barrack was in Lebanon for a two-day visit to discuss disarming Hezbollah.
On Monday after meeting Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Barrack told reporters he was 'unbelievably satisfied' with Lebanon's reply to a US proposal on taking away Hezbollah's weapons.
Barrack, a longtime adviser to US President Donald Trump who also serves as US ambassador to Turkiye and special envoy for Syria, said he believed 'the Israelis do not want war with Lebanon'.
'Both countries are trying to give the same thing – the notion of a stand-down agreement, of the cessation of hostilities and a road to peace,' he said.
On Sunday, Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem ruled out giving up the group's weapons before Israel withdraws from the areas it still occupies in southern Lebanon in violation of the ceasefire.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
College group Zohran Mamdani co-founded welcomed radical speaker who blamed US for 9/11 attacks: 'Made its bed'
Mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani co-founded a college club that invited a radical speaker who called Israel a bigger terror threat than Hamas – and boasted he was greatly influenced by a Palestinian leader nicknamed the 'godfather of Middle-eastern terrorism.' The professor, As'ad AbuKhalil, also later claimed that the US brought the Sept. 11 attack on itself and accused the government of inflicting 'many 9/11s' on the world. In November 2013, Students for Justice in Palestine at Bowdoin College — which Mamdani helped launch — welcomed the controversial Lebanese-American academic to campus. Advertisement 7 Mamdani co-founded a college club that invited a radical speaker who called Israel a bigger terror threat than Hamas. Paul Martinka for NY Post AbuKhalil was invited to speak to SJP about 'trends in the Middle East in the age of uprising' while Mamdani was still a student. Years after the invite, he hadn't tampered down his inflammatory rhetoric. Advertisement 'We have to remember that the US basically was hit on 9/11 by forces that were reactionary and fanatic and were raised and armed and sponsored by America and its allies in the Middle East,' Abukhalil said in 2021. 'People forget that 9/11 is a repercussion of the Cold War when the US made its bed and clearly with the religious fanatics of the Muslim world,' he also said. 'This is a time where socialists around the world in Chile, in the Arab world and everywhere were under attack by the US. Reactionary forces in support.' 7 AbuKhalil was invited to speak to SJP about 'trends in the Middle East in the age of uprising' while Mamdani was still a student. GiraZapatistaBE/X While AbuKhalil stressed it's 'heart-wrenching remembering all these people who came from 80 nationalities, the ones who died on 9/11 here in the United States,' he also argued, 'but there were many earlier 9/11s that the US inflicted on people around the world.' Advertisement The questionable invite was one of several inflammatory actions the students group has taken in the past decade after Mamdani helped launch the small liberal arts school's branch of the activist organization. The democratic socialist who won big in the crowded Democratic primary for Big Apple mayor, has faced a wave of criticism for his association with leaders accused of antisemitism and past comments. 7 New York's Zohran Mamdani holds rally with union leaders inside HTC (Hotel & Gaming Trades Council) midtown HQ at 707 8th Avenue (between 44th and 45th streets) in midtown Manhattan. Paul Martinka for NY Post AbuKhalil's most eyebrow-raising 9/11 comments came after he was invited to Bowdoin but he made several shocking statements leading up to the event. Advertisement In 2006, AbuKhalil claimed Israel committed more destructive terrorism than Hamas and slammed Americans for not acknowledging that. 'And if Hamas has practiced versions of indiscriminate and aimless violence—which I personally reject on principle–, it should be pointed out that Israeli terrorism—in scale and in magnitude–by far exceeds that of Hamas, but nobody has noticed here in the US. Fatah is facing a dilemma, and it does not know how to respond,' he wrote in a blog post. 7 AbuKhalil's most eyebrow-raising 9/11 comments came after he was invited to Bowdoin. Bowdoin SJP/X AbuKhalil said he was 'honored to have known' George Habash, the leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which has been designated a terror organization by the US since 1997. 'He was a great Palestinian leader,' said AbuKhalil in 2012 to an audience in Edinburgh that was pointed out by Canary Mission. AbuKhalil also commended Habash as a figure who had 'tremendous influence' on the academic. 'Of course if you look at newspapers he would be seen as terrorist,' he said. A Time magazine story in 2008 about his death assailed Habash as 'the godfather of Middle East terrorism.' Advertisement 'The PFLP was founded in 1967 by a group of radical socialists led by George Habash and became infamous in the 1970s for airplane hijackings,' according to the Anti-Defamation League. 7 AbuKhalil said he was 'honored to have known' George Habash, the leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. An email seeking comment from AbuKhalil, who teaches at California State University Stanislaus, was not immediately returned. Longshot mayoral candidate Jim Walden slammed Mamdani for his past ties to the student. Advertisement 'Mamdani needs to come clean with voters on his support for Islamic radicals and terrorists while at Bowdoin,' said Walden, an attorney. Mamdani's campaign did not immediately reply to a request for comment. It's unclear if Mamdani was involved in getting AbuKhalil to campus or if he attended the talk. 7 It's unclear if Mamdani was involved in getting AbuKhalil to campus or if he attended the talk. asadabukhalil/X While Mamdani graduated from Bowdoin in spring 2014, the SJP chapter has had other instances in which it was a hotbed for radical activism. Advertisement SJP occupied a first floor of a campus building earlier this year tied to protesting the school's investment practices and President Trump hinting at taking control of war-torn Gaza, according to the Bowdoin Orient. 'As Israeli aggression obliterates Palestinian homes and guns down children in Jenin, as unspeakable suffering continues in Gaza, and as America descends further into fascism, we ask – what type of institution does Bowdoin want to be?' the group argued in a press release. 'One that cowers to authoritarianism, that chooses cowardice in the face of injustice? The choice is Bowdoin's.' 7 New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani attends a press conference with union leaders and supporters in New York City, July 2, 2025. REUTERS Advertisement Scrutiny into Mamdani's background has only intensified since he easily coasted to victory in the Democratic Party primary last month, clobbering former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and a slew of other candidates in the ranked-choice vote. In resurfaced tweets Mamdani appeared to defend al Qaeda fiend Anwar al-Awalaki, who was later killed in a drone strike approved by then-President Barack Obama. It was also revealed last week that Mamdani, who was born in Uganda, claimed he was 'African American' along with 'Asian' in a college application to Columbia University that was ultimately rejected. The far-left darling still needs to get past the general election in which he'll face GOP candidate Curtis Sliwa as well as Mayor Eric Adams, Cuomo and Walden each of whom are appearing on minor ballot lines. Big Apple moderates are in a frenzy in a bid to stop his ascension to City Hall while prominent Democrats in New York have yet to endorse his candidacy despite Mamdani clinching the most votes ever in a city primary.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
USAID review raised ‘critical concerns' over Gaza aid group days before $30 million US grant
An internal government assessment shows USAID officials raised 'critical concerns' last month about a key aid group's ability to protect Palestinians and to deliver them food – just days before the State Department announced $30 million in funding for the organization. A scathing 14-page document obtained by CNN outlines a litany of problems with afunding application submitted by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a US-backed group established to provide aid following an 11-week Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip. The United Nations human rights office says that hundreds of Palestinians have since been killed around private aid sites, including those operated by GHF. The assessment flags a range of concerns, from an overall plan missing 'even basic details' to a proposal to potentially distribute powdered baby formula in an area that lacks clean water to prepare it. A USAID official came to a clear conclusion in the report: 'I do not concur with moving forward with GHF given operational and reputational risks and lack of oversight.' 'The application was abysmal… it was sorely lacking real content,' a source familiar with the application told CNN on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Trump administration officials have consistently downplayed and rejected criticisms about GHF. Israel has also disputed media reports, eyewitness and doctor accounts, and Palestinian officials blaming the Israeli military for killing aid-seekers near GHF sites. A State Department spokesperson said in a statement to CNN Tuesday that the funding for GHF will fulfill 'President Trump's commitment to feed the people of Gaza' and accused critics of engaging in 'bureaucratic turf wars.' 'The Department provided emergency support to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation after determining that it was the only viable way to get aid into Gaza without empowering Hamas,' the spokesperson said. 'GHF is a results-focused alternative to a broken aid system, delivering more than 66 million meals to the people of Gaza in just weeks.' A GHF spokesperson defended the organization's work in Gaza and described the USAID assessment as normal for a funding application. 'As with any U.S. Government procurement process, questions and requests for clarification from USAID/State are routine,' GHF spokesperson Chapin Fay told CNN in a statement. 'We are addressing each question as per regulations and normal procedure and will continue to do so as required.' The 14-page document outlining USAID's outstanding questions and concerns was not sent to GHF before the funding was approved, according to another source familiar with the matter who spoke to CNN on the condition of anonymity because they are not officially authorized to speak. Instead, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the top political appointee for foreign assistance, Jeremy Lewin, pressed for the approval for U.S. funding to be fast-tracked, the two sources said. It is unclear whether top political leadership read the full 14-page document. One of the sources said USAID staff had voiced concerns internally about working with GHF, especially given the humanitarian principle of 'do no harm.' In an internal memo dated June 24 – four days after the date listed on the assessment – a top political appointee at the State Department, Kenneth Jackson, recommended that Lewin 'waive the various criteria given the humanitarian and political urgency of GHF's operations.' Both Lewin and Jackson were initially installed into government roles by the Elon Musk-backed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The State Department announced the award two days later and sent GHF a document conveying requirements for the funds, including some related to concerns raised by USAID. Tranches of the $30 million award will be released when GHF completes key tasks – including many typically required before funding is approved, like registering in the government system, pre-vetting partners and providing evidence of external audits. As of last week, the funding had not yet been disbursed, State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said. The previously unreported details in the assessment echo international criticism of GHF's ability to act as the primary aid distributor to thousands of Gazans living in desperate conditions and highlight how the Trump administration greenlit funding for the group despite career staffers' concerns. The swift approval of the funding for GHF comes amid mounting international pressure against the group's militarized operation, which relies on armed American security contractors working in coordination with the Israel Defense Forces. 'Today, Palestinians in Gaza face an impossible choice: starve or risk being shot while trying desperately to reach food to feed their families,' said a joint statement last week from over 240 NGOs calling for an immediate end to GHF's operation. GHF has faced significant controversy since it was established. The group's head resigned before operations began in late May, citing concerns over the organization's adherence to humanitarian principles. Amid ongoing reports of deadly violence outside GHF's four Gaza aid sites, the group in early June submitted a page-and-a-half long request seeking emergency humanitarian funding, according to one of the sources. USAID officials asked GHF to submit more documentation to support the request. But a more fulsome proposal sent by the group was still 'missing several required elements,' according to the USAID assessment, which included dozens of clarification questions and requests for more details. The internal review found that GHF's application was missing at least nine elements typically required for an award to be approved. A three-page long risk planning document lacked detailed explanations on its plans to ensure Palestinians in need would receive aid, the USAID assessment found. The risk management plan 'does not provide sufficient information to ensure that aid will reach intended recipients,' it said. Another brief document meant to detail GHF's mission did not meet 'requirements for Safe and Accountable programming,' the review said. 'GHF must explain how it will Do No Harm,' USAID said in the feedback form, asking the group to provide 'specific details' of plans to ensure safety, access, and accountability. USAID also asked GHF to review its budget to ensure line items correctly added up, and noted 'inconsistent' timelines for the project across the application. According to the proposal, GHF estimated that in the month of June it needed roughly $100 million in operating costs, with the group seeking $30 million of that total from the State Department. GHF's proposal also noted a planned expansion from four to eight aid distribution sites across Gaza – but did not include details on where the sites would be located. 'Is GHF able to provide a map indicating where the distribution points will be?' USAID asked in the feedback form. It also questioned how the $30 million in funding would be used for the expansion, noting the budget 'does not provide sufficient detail' to assess whether GHF would have adequate staffing for eight sites. While GHF proposed that it could distribute infant formula, the assessment noted that without following USAID guidelines, formula 'is dangerous and can increase infant morbidity and mortality due to contamination from unsafe water and poor preparation practices.' 'Powder milk formula must be prepared with sterilized/boiled water, which is difficult in the current context,' the form said. It also asked the organization to give details on how it was working to ensure that there were facilities and fuel for people to prepare the food it distributed. Under normal procedures, the concerns outlined in the assessment would have been relayed to GHF before the funding was approved, the sources told CNN, and the group would have time to reply before a decision was made. That did not happen. On June 26, the State Department publicly announced the approval of the $30 million in funding and encouraged other countries to contribute. A former USAID official who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation said that there is precedent for a quick approval process, but that is typically reserved for trusted partners. Under normal procedural circumstances, GHF would likely not have been funded, the official said. In an internal State Department memo on June 30, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee touted the approved award and praised GHF's operations inside Gaza. 'After monitoring the success of GHF, the Department of State announced a $30 million grant to GHF on June 26 that will enable GHF to continue its critical operations and expand to more distribution sites,' Huckabee wrote. The memo focused on GHF's 'success' in undermining Hamas, alleging the militant group is stealing aid in Gaza and profiting from sales, though Israel hasn't presented any evidence publicly to back up the claim. Trump administration officials defended GHF against growing criticism from human rights groups amid mounting death tolls around the aid sites as starving Palestinians clamor for assistance. Officials have blamed Hamas for the deadly violence and suggested publicly and privately that GHF is the only effective way to get aid into the besieged enclave. 'GHF is a decisive break from a status quo that has enabled corruption and complicity in enabling the continued rule of terrorists,' a State Department spokesperson said in a statement to CNN. Last week, an Associated Press report found American contractors guarding aid distribution sites in Gaza used live ammunition and stun grenades as Palestinians attempted to access food. An internal State Department memo outlining coverage of GHF, including negative headlines, was recalled and replaced with a memo only containing positive coverage, another source told CNN. A State Department official last week suggested the US could provide further funding to GHF, saying that if the organization continues to operate 'safely and securely and consistent with sort of the principles that we've laid out for them, then we're happy to invest more in them.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
If there is a ceasefire tomorrow, were the last four months of fighting 'worth it?'
How much more did Israel really defeat Hamas than it had already done, and how much did it lose in doing so? Whether it is one day, a few days, or a couple of weeks, the chances of another ceasefire is growing – possibly one that ends the war entirely – which will leave the question of whether Israel's returning to fighting since March and other new moves were worth it. How much more did Israel really defeat Hamas than it had already done – and how much did it lose in doing so? On the con side of the coin, 37 IDF soldiers have been killed since March, and another approximately 200 have been wounded. The numbers especially increased since the anti-Hamas operation picked up its intensity in early May, with more soldiers standing in fixed spots and performing patrols in repetitive patterns in order to hold territory, which makes them easier to target. All of this was once again highlighted on Tuesday with the IDF announcing that five soldiers had been killed and 12 wounded in an ambush in Beit Hanun in northern Gaza – one of sometimes weekly, sometimes daily announcements of soldiers' deaths and injuries in recent months. Another con is that throughout this time, the 20 remaining live hostages have continued to suffer unimaginable conditions that they might not have suffered if the January-March ceasefire had continued and Israel had ended the war. Extending the war for four more months has seen between 20% and 40% of reservists' commitment to serve become shaken in many units (there is a constant debate on the real number), with potential long-term negative impacts on the IDF. This has neutralized and overtaken some of the unusual 'rally round the flag' effect that was seen at the start of the war. On the pro side, the IDF invasion progressed into new areas, and destruction of more tunnels helped it finally locate and kill Mohammed Sinwar, who had replaced his brother Yahya Sinwar as head of Hamas since the latter was killed in October 2024. Moreover, the IDF rescued several bodies of deceased hostages in multiple special operations, which it likely was only able to do after it held complete and extended control of specific areas it had not dared to remain in for any length of time at earlier stages of the war. Leaks from Israel-Hamas ceasefire negotiations have indicated that increased military pressure since March has led Hamas to give up on getting Israel to withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor. In addition, the Gazan terror group seems ready to handover more hostages without a loud and precise Israeli commitment to end the war, something it was not ready to do four months ago. Whether this is because of added IDF military pressure or a greater readiness by Hamas to trust that US President Donald Trump will hold Israel back, after he called back an Israeli airstrike following the ceasefire with Iran, is an open debate. But either way, the events of recent months do seem to have weakened Hamas's negotiating positions somewhat. Maybe the largest issue in determining success or failure is the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's aid initiative. The purpose of this initiative was to break Hamas's control over food in Gaza, and therefore, to take a major bite out of its political control of Palestinian civilians there. GHF has had some notable successes, but also some notable failures. Although some of them have not been the 'fault' of the foundation, they have been failures nonetheless. On the overwhelmingly positive side, GHF has now provided 66 million meals from four different food distribution centers in southern and central Gaza to Palestinians since it started operating in late May. For several hundred thousand Palestinians and possibly far more, Hamas no longer controls their food needs as a threat to hold over them. This is a radical change in the reality of Gaza and one of the first major challenges to Hamas's political rule. The initiative has yet to help Palestinians in northern Gaza and some other areas, but it is a potential game changer in many ways if it manages to continue. On the other hand, somewhere between several dozen and several hundred Palestinians have been killed with some kind of connection to the new GHF project. According to the aid organization, and there is no contrary hard evidence to date, no Palestinians have been killed within their facilities. That said, critics of Israel and the GHF, mostly based on Hamas-sponsored statistics, have claimed that several hundred Palestinians have been killed by the IDF near or on their way to GHF sites. Confusingly, the IDF is not present within those food centers, but does supervise entry to travel lanes that lead to them. Even the IDF has admitted that it has probably mistakenly killed several dozen Palestinians in three to four incidents where soldiers mistook Palestinian crowds for Hamas or otherwise lost their cool when those crowds were running toward the food centers in close proximity to the soldiers. Some of these incidents are under investigation by the IDF and could even lead to charges being brought against some soldiers, but the military still says that the Hamas-sponsored numbers parroted by much of the global media are highly exaggerated. One reason to believe the IDF regarding the GHF controversy is that it has not challenged the idea that it has mistakenly killed tens of thousands of Palestinians during the 20-month war, though it frames that point with reducing the Hamas sponsored numbers of dead by over 20,000 killed Hamas fighters and blames the terrorist group for using civilians as human shields. Taking all of this into account, the fact is that if not for Israel and the GHF starting this new food distribution project, at least dozens of Palestinian civilians would probably not have been killed, even if their food needs would still be wrongfully controlled by Hamas. However, Israel tries to spin that fact, in broad terms, it is clearly on the failure side of the 'balance sheet' in grading the last few months of the war. There are other, smaller negative incidents regarding the mix of the IDF and the GHF. In fact, the aid group, though clearly supportive of Israel, even filed a series of complaints against soldiers for 'harassing' their food trucks near the central Gaza food center for several consecutive days. GHF never explained the nature of the harassment, but it was significant that they publicized the criticism of the IDF and that it took several days to be resolved. There have been two incidents in which foundation workers were either killed or wounded due to attacks by Hamas. These workers knew the risks they were taking and their deaths or injuries may not have strategic significance, but they are certainly cons in the overall scheme. Meanwhile, the UN and the NGO community continue to boycott the GHF. This boycott may be well-meaning, in a vacuum divorced from reality, in terms of general humanitarian principles that the GHF should not restrict food distribution to anyone, including members of Hamas. But in the real world, the boycott is unfair and short-sighted in that it puts pressure on Israel to allow Hamas to retain its control over food for Palestinian civilians. And yet, after around seven weeks of operations, the GHF has made no progress bringing the international humanitarian community in to assist it. The reasons for this may ultimately be irrelevant, and the foundation may not be viable long-term. There have always been concerns about its funding, with largely undenied or not fully denied reports that Israel has provided some funding through odd side channels and straw companies, and with other funding coming on a temporary basis from the US or American Evangelicals supportive of Israel. But is that mix of sponsors a steady permanent source of support for food for over two million people? Also, in terms of the food distribution process within the GHF facilities, top Israeli officials have simultaneously praised the aid group while labeling the process 'chaos,' with Palestinians dashing in first come first serve to grab food, and not always leaving enough food for slower or weaker sectors. The GHF has responded to questions from The Jerusalem Post on these matters, saying, "GHF is the only aid organization providing food safely and reliably. In just a few short weeks, we have proven that we can deliver food directly to those who need it in one of the most challenging and complex environments in the world. We are actively working to scale up food aid operations to meet the urgent and overwhelming needs of the population in Gaza." Regarding reports of chaos at aid distribution sites, saying, "There is a food insecurity problem in Gaza. In Gaza's current environment, marked by severe food shortages and widespread desperation, failing to address the reality on the ground is having deadly consequences." "Until there is enough food in Gaza, chaos will persist, and that chaos must be managed responsibly," a representative noted. The GHF also clarified that despite the threats to its personnel, it remains committed to distributing aid to Gazans. "GHF has repeatedly warned of credible threats from Hamas, including explicit plans to target American personnel, Palestinian aid workers, and the civilians who rely on our sites for food. Despite this violence, GHF remains fully committed to its mission: feeding the people of Gaza safely, directly, and at scale." "Attempts to disrupt this life-saving work will only deepen the crisis. We will continue to stand with the people of Gaza and do everything in our power to deliver the aid they urgently need." GHF Interim Executive Director John Acree also pointed to a financial commitment from the US government to the amount of $30 million for funding for continued operations, saying, "This commitment reflects a simple truth: Americans deeply care about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and want to see real action, starting with getting food to those who need it most without interference from Hamas and other terrorists." "We are grateful for the support from President Trump and his administration in getting life-saving aid directly into the hands of the Palestinian people in Gaza. Now is the time for unity and collaboration. We look forward to other aid and humanitarian organizations joining us so we can feed even more Gazans, together," Acree concluded. Returning to the broader picture, reigniting the war in March also led to a return of Yemen's Houthis firing rockets into the home front. While not a strategic problem, this is a large negative for Israel economically, as well as for terrorizing Israelis psychologically. Some may try to debate how the Iran war works into all of this, but Jerusalem could have struck Tehran with or without an ongoing war with Hamas. The Israeli win against Iran may have helped make Hamas more ready to make certain concessions, but it did not completely change its attitude. Looking through this whole list of factors, the question of whether the last four months of war were 'worth it' is highly complex and not one-sided. Ultimately, in deciding whether all of this was 'worth it,' most observers will probably look at what terms Israel and Hamas agree to and how truly different they are than the terms the terrorist group offered for a return of the hostages and an end to the war in March.
