11 requests, a burst of anger from Beirut and a legal loophole: How George Abdallah was finally released
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Ya Libnan
25 minutes ago
- Ya Libnan
Time for Trump to recognize Palestine—Before it's too late
Palestine, officially the State of Palestine, has been recognized by 147 of the United Nations' 193 member states. It encompasses the Israeli-occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip—together known as the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Now, in a historic shift, some of America's closest allies—France, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Spain, Canada, and Malta—have pledged to formally recognize the State of Palestine this September. They are doing what history demands: affirming the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to statehood. The clock is ticking. September is just weeks away. If President Donald Trump wants to keep the United States from being left behind—or worse, further isolated—he must act swiftly and decisively. The moment for leadership is now. President Trump has expressed a strong desire to expand the Abraham Accords. But Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has made it crystal clear: there will be no normalization of relations with Israel without a credible commitment to a two-state solution. That solution begins with international recognition of Palestine. Without it, the Accords cannot advance, and regional peace will remain out of reach. For the sake of Israel's future and U.S. credibility abroad, Trump must follow the lead of our allies and recognize the State of Palestine. The main obstacle to this historic step is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—perhaps the last major political figure still openly rejecting the two-state solution. But even his grip on power is weakening. With his credibility shattered by the devastating war in Gaza and mounting domestic opposition, his days in office are likely numbered. Recognizing Palestine would not endanger Israel. On the contrary, a future Palestinian state would be demilitarized, governed by internationally accepted terms, and committed to peaceful coexistence. The people of Palestine, like all people, deserve a state of their own—one they can call home. To deny them that right is to invite more conflict, more extremism, and more chaos—not only in Gaza and the West Bank, but across the entire Middle East. Refusing recognition now would also send the message that the U.S. is unwilling to lead when leadership is most needed. The international tide is turning. America's allies have chosen justice, diplomacy, and peace. If Trump delays, he will find himself on the wrong side of history—isolated alongside Netanyahu, while the world moves forward. There is still time—but not much. The month of September will be remembered as a turning point. The question is: will Trump help shape it, or be left behind by it? The Palestinian people have waited long enough. So has the world.
Ya Libnan
an hour ago
- Ya Libnan
President Aoun says Lebanon determined to disarm Hezbollah
Beirut (Lebanon) (AFP) – Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said Thursday that he was determined to disarm Hezbollah, a step it has come under heavy US pressure to take, despite the group's protests that doing so would serve Israeli goals. Hezbollah and Israel fought a two-month war last year that left the militant group badly weakened, though it retains part of its arsenal. Israel has kept up its air strikes on Hezbollah targets despite a November ceasefire, and has threatened to continue them until the group has been disarmed. In a speech on Thursday, Aoun said Beirut was demanding 'the extension of the Lebanese state's authority over all its territory, the removal of weapons from all armed groups including Hezbollah and their handover to the Lebanese army'. He added it was every politician's duty 'to seize this historic opportunity and push without hesitation towards affirming the army and security forces' monopoly on weapons over all Lebanese territory… in order to regain the world's confidence'. Under the November ceasefire, Hezbollah was to withdraw its fighters north of the Litani river, about 30 kilometres (20 miles) from the Israeli border. Israel was meant to withdraw all its troops from Lebanon, but has kept them in five areas it deems strategic. The truce was based on a two-decade-old UN Security Council resolution that said only the Lebanese military and UN peacekeepers should possess weapons in the country's south, and that all non-state groups should be disarmed. However, that resolution went unfulfilled for years, with Hezbollah's arsenal before the latest war seen as far superior to the army's, and the group wielding extensive political influence. Aoun took over the presidency in January ending a two-year vacancy — his election by lawmakers made possible in part by the shifting balance of power in the wake of the conflict. On Wednesday, Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem , who fled to Tehran last October said that 'anyone calling today for the surrender of weapons, whether internally or externally, on the Arab or the international stage, is serving the Israeli project'. He accused US envoy Tom Barrack, who has visited Lebanon several times in recent months, of using 'intimidation and threats' in his talks with senior officials with the aim of 'aiding Israel'. Collapse or stability Israel has carried out near daily strikes in Lebanon in recent months, targeting what it says are Hezbollah militants and infrastructure, but the group has refrained from striking back. Israel launched several strikes on Hezbollah strongholds in the south and east on Thursday, targeting what it said were sites used by Hezbollah to manufacture and store missiles. Defence Minister Israel Katz said the targets included 'Hezbollah's biggest precision missile manufacturing site', and the military said it had hit 'infrastructure that was used for producing and storing strategic weapons' in south Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley. In his speech, Aoun said Lebanon was at 'a crucial stage that does not tolerate any sort of provocation from any side'. 'For the thousandth time, I assure you that my concern in having a (state) weapons monopoly comes from my concern to defend Lebanon's sovereignty and borders, to liberate the occupied Lebanese territories and build a state that welcomes all its citizens,' he said, addressing Hezbollah's supporters as an 'essential pillar' of society. Lebanon has proposed modifications to 'ideas' submitted by the United States on Hezbollah's disarmament, Aoun added, and a plan would be discussed at a cabinet meeting next week to 'establish a timetable for implementation'. Aoun also demanded the withdrawal of Israeli troops, the release of Lebanese prisoners and 'an immediate cessation of Israeli hostilities'. 'Today, we must choose between collapse and stability,' he said. Hezbollah is the only group that held on to its weapons after Lebanon's 1975-1990 civil war, doing so in the name of 'resistance' against Israel, which occupied south Lebanon until 2000. Lebanon has also committed to disarming Palestinian militant groups that control the country's refugee camps. A huge Burden for Lebanon Hezbollah's actions and influence are widely seen as a significant burden on Lebanon, contributing to the country's instability and economic hardship. The organization's military activities, particularly its conflict with Israel, have had devastating consequences for Lebanon, including displacement, casualties, and economic losses. Additionally, Hezbollah's political dominance and resistance to international involvement in Lebanon's economic crisis further exacerbate the situation. Here's a breakdown of why Hezbollah is considered a burden: 1. Military Conflict and Instability: 2. Economic Impact: 3. Political Obstacles: 4. Displacement and Humanitarian Crisis: In summary, Hezbollah's military activities, political influence, and resistance to international involvement have significantly contributed to Lebanon's instability, economic hardship, and humanitarian crisis France24/AFP/ YL
Ya Libnan
2 hours ago
- Ya Libnan
Trump is burning bridges with allies, not 'Making America Great Again'
Trump Is Burning Bridges With Allies, Not Making America Great Again By Vlad Green, Op-Ed History has a way of repeating itself—especially when its painful lessons are ignored. Today, President Donald Trump is once again using tariffs as a weapon, punishing nations for political disagreements and attempting to strong-arm trade concessions with threats instead of negotiations. His approach may resonate with a narrow base at home, but it is fracturing long-standing alliances abroad and putting America's global leadership at risk. As he wraps himself in the flag of economic nationalism, Trump forgets—or ignores—that tariffs have consistently backfired throughout American history. One of the first cautionary tales comes from President William McKinley, a staunch protectionist who, in the 1890s, championed high tariffs as a tool to shield American industries. But as the economic and diplomatic backlash grew, McKinley began to regret his position. Before his assassination in 1901, he had changed course, calling for greater international cooperation and freer trade, recognizing that economic isolationism would only harm American prosperity. McKinley's lesson went unheeded three decades later when the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 plunged the world into economic chaos. Enacted just months after the 1929 stock market crash, the tariffs raised duties on over 20,000 imported goods and prompted retaliatory measures from U.S. trading partners. Instead of protecting American jobs, it worsened the Great Depression, slashed global trade, and deepened the suffering of millions. Fast forward to today, and we're seeing history dangerously echo itself. President Trump has turned tariffs into tools of intimidation. With no coherent trade strategy, he threatens Mexico one day, slaps tariffs on Europe the next, and targets Canada—America's closest neighbor and trusted ally—as if it were a rival state. He boasts about 'winning' trade wars, but the reality is rising costs for American consumers, unstable global markets, and fraying relationships with the very nations that stood by the U.S. through thick and thin. It's not just the economic consequences that are alarming. Trump's brand of economic nationalism is wrapped in authoritarian tactics. He surrounds himself with loyalists, fires anyone who questions his decisions, and demands obedience over debate. This is not how a democracy operates. This is not how a civilized world leader behaves. Instead, America under Trump increasingly resembles a transactional bully, not a principled partner. The irony is that Trump claims to be making America great again—yet he is isolating it from the very world order it once led and helped build. From NATO to the World Trade Organization, America's credibility is shrinking as allies question whether they can count on Washington. What started as a promise to bring back manufacturing jobs is morphing into a full-blown foreign policy disaster. The tragedy is avoidable. America doesn't need to abandon its economic interests to remain a global leader. But it must stop using tariffs as threats and allies as bargaining chips. It must return to smart diplomacy, to building coalitions rather than burning bridges, and to leading not through fear, but by example. The world is watching. And history is watching too. The question is not just what Trump will do next—but what price America will ultimately pay for choosing confrontation over cooperation.
