Damascus Says Israel Arrested Civilians During Beit Jin Raid
A source at the Syrian Interior Ministry denied Israeli claims that its forces had arrested Palestinian Hamas members during a raid on the southern village of Beit Jin in the early hours of Thursday.
The source told Asharq Al-Awsat that the detainees were civilians and not affiliated with any party.
Saleh Daher, a resident of Beit Jin, told Asharq Al-Awsat the Israeli soldiers entered the village at 2:40 am on Thursday.
'We were awakened by the sound of gunfire,' he revealed. A unit of dozens of soldiers were raiding the village, while ten tanks were stationed at its entrance.
The forces surrounded the houses of the people they wanted to arrest, calling out their names on loudspeakers. They detained seven people, continued Daher.
One person, who is known in the village for having a mental disability, attempted to stop the soldiers, who shot and killed him, he said.
The soldiers left at 4:15 am after detaining the people they were after.
Daher said they were all Syrian natives of the village and used to be members of armed opposition groups that rose up against the Bashar al-Assad's ousted regime.
Sources revealed to Asharq Al-Awsat the names of the detainees: Amer al-Badawi, Mamoun al-Saadi, Ahmed al-Safadi, Mohammed al-Safadi, Hassan al-Safadi, Mohammed Badi Hamadeh and Ali Qassem Hamadeh.
Daher said he and his family had returned to Beit Jin in 2018 and that they never noticed any behavior by the detainees that they were working against Israel.
Israel had previously assassinated three residents of the village. They too were members of armed factions.
Moreover, Daher said he hasn't noticed any activity by residents that indicate that they are members of or associated with Palestinian factions.
The Israeli army said it detained Hamas members during the Beit Jin raid and that they were planning attacks against it.
They have been taken to Israel for investigation. The army also said it discovered weapons in the area.
Syrian media confirmed the arrest of seven people and death of one person during the raid.
Since the fall of Assad's government in early December, Israeli forces have moved into several areas in southern Syria and conducted hundreds of airstrikes throughout the country, destroying much of the assets of the Syrian army.
Tensions ticked up in early June after projectiles were fired from Syria towards Israel. Israel retaliated with its first strikes in nearly a month.
On June 8, Israel carried out a strike on the outskirts of Beit Jin on what it described as a Hamas member.
A resident of the village denied the claim, saying Israel targeted a youth called Anas Abboud and that he was a former member of a Syrian opposition armed group.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Tehran remains committed to diplomacy, but ‘peace by force is not peace,' Iran's ambassador to Japan tells Arab News Japan
TOKYO: From the only country ever targeted by atomic bombs, a senior Iranian diplomat has called for a return to diplomacy over destruction amid simmering nuclear tensions in the Middle East. Peiman Seadat, Tehran's ambassador to Japan, says his country remains open to dialogue but cautions that 'peace by force is not peace' following recent attacks on its nuclear sites and failed negotiations. In an exclusive interview with Arab News on Saturday, Seadat described genuine diplomacy as requiring 'mutual respect, even on points of disagreement, equal footing, and a willingness to achieve a satisfactory outcome for parties involved.' Iranian authorities are 'now assessing the situation' and weighing options for resuming negotiations, he said. Seadat's remarks come amid simmering tensions following a 12-day conflict between Iran and Israel, which ended with a ceasefire on June 24. Accusing both the US and Israel of choosing aggression over diplomacy, he said the attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities were carried out two days before planned talks with the US, and thus have deepened a 'legacy of distrust.' 'Rather than condemning the party that disrupted the negotiations, the Americans sided with the aggressor,' he said. 'They, therefore, betrayed the very negotiation to which they were a party. 'Accordingly, the conclusion is that they were complicit in the aggression, a fact they further proved when they launched attacks against our peaceful nuclear sites, thus joining the Israelis in gross violation of every tenet of international law.' In his first public remarks after the truce, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared victory, claiming Iran 'slapped America in the face' by striking the Al-Udeid base in Qatar in retaliation for the US bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities. Warning that any future attacks would prompt further strikes on American targets, he asserted Iran's regional capabilities and rejected calls for concessions. Khamenei also downplayed the impact of the strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, claiming that the US acted mainly to protect Israel after Iranian missiles penetrated Israeli defenses. US President Donald Trump ridiculed Khamenei's victory claims, insisting Iran had been 'decimated' and its nuclear sites 'obliterated' during the conflict. Trump said he had considered but ultimately rejected plans to assassinate Khamenei, claiming he 'saved him from a very ugly and ignominious death' by stopping direct attacks from the US or Israel. He also said he halted plans to lift sanctions on Iran following Khamenei's 'blatant and foolish' statements and warned he would 'absolutely' consider bombing Iran again if Tehran resumed nuclear enrichment at threatening levels. Trump further claimed to have pressured Israel to avoid delivering a 'final knockout' blow, suggesting Israeli strikes could have targeted Tehran directly if not for US intervention. On Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned Trump's comments, saying a potential nuclear deal hinges on the US ending its 'disrespectful tone' toward the supreme leader. 'If President Trump is genuine about wanting a deal, he should put aside the disrespectful and unacceptable tone towards Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, and stop hurting his millions of heartfelt supporters,' Araghchi posted on the social platform X. Seadat said that Iran remained committed to diplomacy, citing his country's continued adherence to the 2015 nuclear deal and participation in talks until Israeli strikes derailed the process. 'Iran has always been a party to genuine diplomacy, but peace by force is not peace; it is, rather, coercion,' he said. 'What we wanted was a cessation of aggression, and we achieved it at this stage, with resolve. So, while we remain highly vigilant, we will see how the situation unfolds.' As diplomatic strains persist, Israeli officials have signaled a readiness to escalate. On June 26, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz told local media that Israel has a 'green light' from Trump to strike Iran again if it appears to be advancing its nuclear program. He added that Israel would not have needed US permission to target Khamenei directly. That same day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed victory and framed the conflict as a strategic opportunity to expand diplomatic ties with Arab states. 'We have fought with determination against Iran and achieved a great victory. This victory opens the path to dramatically enlarge the peace accords,' Netanyahu said in a video address, referencing the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab countries in 2020. However, Gulf states have condemned both Iran's missile strike on Qatar and Israel's attacks on Iranian facilities, citing concerns over regional stability and national sovereignty. In a joint statement on June 16, Arab countries rejected and condemned Israel's military aggression against Iran, calling instead for a return to negotiations. Seadat insisted that Iran's nuclear program remains peaceful and said Iran's parliament moved to limit cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) only after repeated, ignored reassurances from Tehran. 'Up to the moment our sites were attacked in contravention of the NPT rules, the IAEA Statute, and two resolutions by its General Conference that prohibit any attack on IAEA-safeguarded peaceful nuclear sites, 130 IAEA inspectors were in place, meaning one-fifth of all inspections conducted by the IAEA in the world,' Seadat said. He added: 'Regardless of disagreements, the IAEA continued its most robust verification regime in the world in Iran.' Even after the attacks, Seadat said, both the IAEA and US intelligence confirmed there were no signs of nuclear weapons activity — despite early claims, which he attributed to a 'very irresponsible' IAEA report. He said the 2015 nuclear agreement created 'a balance: a cap on our peaceful nuclear program in return for full removal of sanctions.' That arrangement, he added, was especially reassuring as it was backed by UN Security Council Resolution 2231. 'This is a model that Japan and some others have. They also enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. I do not know what to say, unless the meaning of reassuring has changed, perhaps because of the aggressions by the Israeli regime and the Americans on Iran,' Seadat said. Tensions had started escalating after a May 31 IAEA report revealed that Iran had increased uranium enrichment to 60 percent — the only non-nuclear weapons state to do so — and expanded its stockpile of near-weapons-grade material by 50 percent in three months. Iran dismissed the report as 'politically motivated' and 'baseless accusations.' On Wednesday, Rafael Grossi, IAEA director general, said his top priority is resuming inspections in Iran to determine the impact of the recent strikes. The extent of any damage remains unclear. While Grossi suggested Iran may have relocated parts of its stockpile ahead of the attacks, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Thursday he had seen no intelligence supporting that claim. Looking ahead, Seadat noted that Japan could play a significant diplomatic role, referencing its unique moral standing as the only country to have experienced atomic bombings. 'The Hibakusha, the first generation of survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, still walk among us in Japan,' he said. 'Because of this, Japan possesses a profound moral authority, having known the depths of suffering like few others.' He added that Japan is well-positioned to support peace through 'inclusive' regional development, particularly efforts that enhance energy security for all. Seadat also said there is growing alignment between Iran and Arab and Islamic states, which he described as a 'positive and constructive path' toward regional peace. However, he cautioned that maintaining momentum would require active, sustained support from all sides. Although East Asia lies far from Iran, Seadat emphasized cultural similarities and the potential for cooperation — especially through Japan's technological expertise and diplomatic engagement. 'We need this new paradigm in our region, and I believe Japan, through the dynamism of its diplomacy, can contribute to it,' he said.
Arab News
3 hours ago
- Arab News
Partnering for prosperity: UK's industrial strategy and Saudi Vision 2030
The UK and Saudi Arabia stand at a pivotal moment in their bilateral relationship. As we witness the remarkable transformation underway across the Kingdom through Vision 2030, I am pleased to share how the UK's newly launched Modern Industrial Strategy creates an exceptional opportunity to further strengthen the partnership between the two nations. This week, the UK government unveiled its comprehensive, 10-year industrial strategy, establishing a clear roadmap for economic growth focused on eight high-value sectors in which Britain has international competitive advantage. This strategy represents our commitment to making the UK an even more attractive destination for international investment by creating a stable, open, and strategic business environment. What makes this moment particularly exciting is how closely our industrial strategy aligns with Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030. Both national frameworks share remarkably similar objectives: economic diversification, technological innovation, human capability development, and the creation of environments that attract quality foreign investment. This alignment creates natural synergies that can accelerate mutual prosperity. As partners in economic transformation, we recognize that prosperity requires a strategic approach. The global landscape has changed fundamentally in recent years, presenting new challenges, from supply chain disruptions to energy-security concerns. Yet within these challenges lie tremendous opportunities for collaboration on frontier industries in which both nations can excel together. The eight growth-driving sectors of the Industrial Strategy that will power Britain's economic future are: advanced manufacturing, clean energy industries, creative industries, defense, digital and technologies, financial services, life sciences, and professional and business services. In each of these sectors, we see clear alignment with Vision 2030's priorities for economic diversification. The Great Futures campaign, launched last year, has already proven to be an exceptional vehicle for delivering on this shared vision. We brought more than 450 business leaders to the Kingdom in May 2024 — the largest and most senior UK business delegation to visit any country in over a decade — and witnessed the immense appetite for partnership between our business communities. That event catalyzed partnerships worth more than £7.7 billion ($10.6 billion) and delivered more than 50 agreements across priority sectors. Together, we can build a future of shared innovation, sustainable growth, and mutual success. Neil Crompton These are not merely commercial transactions; they represent transformative collaborations that advance the strategic interests of both nations. Take clean energy, for instance. UK firm HYCAP has partnered with leading Saudi companies to invest more than £750 million in hydrogen-powered transport, securing more than 1,000 jobs across both kingdoms. Meanwhile, Carbon Clean's collaboration with Saudi Aramco on modular carbon capture technology is accelerating sustainable development. In infrastructure development, British expertise is contributing significantly to projects that are reshaping the landscape of the Kingdom under Vision 2030. These include airports, aviation, rail transportation, and construction within Saudi giga-projects, with many more in the pipeline. Financial services represent another area of exceptional synergy. London's position as a world-leading financial hub has created natural partnerships with Saudi institutions. The UK is the main location for Saudi companies and investors who want to issue green and Islamic bonds outside the Kingdom, while the London Stock Exchange has 100 percent of Saudi market share across corporate and sovereign banks. Human capability development stands at the heart of both our strategies. The recent Great Futures UK-Saudi Skills Forum brought together our governments to accelerate their partnership on technical and vocational education. Working with Saudi ministries, the UK is identifying sustainable opportunities to develop the skills vital for the economy of tomorrow. As we look ahead, the announcement of the UK-Saudi Sustainable Infrastructure Assembly marks an important next step in our partnership. This initiative will boost collaboration between the UK's financial and professional services sectors and Saudi Arabia's sustainable infrastructure developers, ensuring that British expertise can contribute effectively to Vision 2030 projects. The Industrial Strategy has been international from the start, built on lessons learned from what works in other countries, and designed for the global context. This is evident in our diplomatic engagement approach, which prioritizes mutually beneficial partnerships rather than competition. We seek to deepen economic collaboration with partners such as Saudi Arabia to increase reciprocal investment and trade, foster innovation, and bolster the resilience of supply chains critical to our frontier industries. Later this year, Great Futures will mark a year of successful partnerships with a leadership summit in London. Bringing together senior UK and Saudi ministers, alongside representatives from key industries in both nations, this celebration will showcase the tangible achievements of our campaign while setting the agenda for future collaboration. I hope many Saudi business and government leaders will join us on this important occasion. The relationship between the UK and Saudi Arabia has never been stronger, with bilateral trade exceeding £17 billion annually and more than 1,300 UK firms operating in the Kingdom. But I believe the opportunities before us are even greater. By aligning the ambitions of the UK's Modern Industrial Strategy with Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030, we can create a model for international economic collaboration that delivers prosperity for both our nations. Together, we can build a future of shared innovation, sustainable growth, and mutual success. The UK stands ready as your committed partner on this journey.
Arab News
4 hours ago
- Arab News
Missile exchanges may have ended — but questions remain
As befits 21st century diplomacy, US President Donald Trump announced a complete and total ceasefire between Iran and Israel on social media, congratulating 'everyone' for this, especially himself. After regrettable violations within the first few hours of the truce, which needlessly caused more loss of life, the deal to end this 12-day war seems to be holding. It is probably the first good news for the region in months, as both sworn enemies have given way to pressure exerted by Washington and are holding fire, at least for now. Until the ceasefire was agreed there was a danger the region might become embroiled in a long war of attrition. Now that the missile and drone exchanges have ended, one inevitable question is whether this costly affair could have been prevented — not just as a hypothetical exercise, but as a lesson in how to avoid another military confrontation between two of the most powerful militaries in the region. Could diplomacy have achieved the same, or even better, results, without inflicting death, destruction, and psychological scars on both combatants? The build-up to these 12 days of hostilities began more than a quarter of the century ago, and some might argue as far back as 1979 when the Iranian revolution rather artificially marked Israel, for its close relations with both the toppled shah and the US, as an enemy. History will look back at this deep enmity and might struggle to find objective reasons for it. Initially this hostility served the revolution as a tool for consolidating its hold on power at home and suppressing opposition. In turn, it also helped to propel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to power as Israel's defender against the Iranian threat, both conventional and potentially nuclear. Time will possibly reveal how close Iran was to assembling a nuclear bomb, and most analysts agree that the US decision to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal in 2018, during Trump's first term, removed the shackles from Iran's uranium enrichment program, bringing it closer to weapons grade. It is hardly believable that the Tehran regime should have invested such huge resources only for civilian use. It is also the case that in forming and leading the so-called axis of resistance, Iran, through its proxies in the region, posed a threat to stability sufficient to eventually merit a response. Ultimately, despite being a source of major disruption, even a lethal one in the case of Hamas, and to a lesser extent Hezbollah, it could not match Israel's military capabilities, especially when the latter was backed by the US and other allies. On this occasion, Netanyahu managed also to lure Trump to act against his instincts and use military force. For the US leader the dilemma was between maintaining his posture as a president who brings an end to wars, and the temptation to deliver an almost risk-free strike against Iran's main nuclear sites after Israel's air force had eliminated the country's air defense capabilities. Could diplomacy have achieved the same, or even better, results? Yossi Mekelberg The latter then gained the upper hand, enabling Trump, in a matter of days, to potentially inflict a decisive blow against Iran's nuclear program, especially in Fordow, where it is believed more than 400 kg of uranium enriched to 60 percent was stored, and then lean on both sides to stop the hostilities. When both violated the ceasefire, Trump was furious, telling the media in no uncertain terms that 'we basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what ... they're doing.' Yet, his criticism of Israel was far more robust, including a demand that Netanyahu order its pilots to return from another mission immediately. Allowing Iran a symbolic attack on US military bases in Qatar without any loss of life permitted an act of theater that allowed Tehran to save face after weeks of humiliation during which it lost many of its military chiefs and top scientists, exposing the level of Israel's penetration to nearly every government department, scientific institution, and military command. Nevertheless, Israel's vulnerability was also exposed by its failure to sufficiently protect its civilian population, revealing a severe shortage of adequate shelters as their enemy hit hospitals, the main international airport, and even oil refineries in Haifa. What emerged quickly was the difference between the open-ended conflict that Israel embarked on and Washington's priorities. Israel had many far-reaching objectives beyond Iran's nuclear program, including degrading its conventional military power, and instigating regime change. For Trump, however, it was simply about setting back the nuclear program and returning to the negotiating table. The war with Iran gave Netanyahu a new lease of life. A man who had barely talked to the Israeli media or mixed with people in public, especially since Oct. 7, suddenly could not stop himself from doing both, including visiting sites that were hit by Iranian missiles. But 21 months after the massacre, incapable and unwilling to take responsibility, he still has not visited the communities that were destroyed there. Yet the destruction caused by Iran gave him much-needed justification to continue the war before Trump put a stop to the conflict, and the photo-ops were exactly what he needed considering his high level of disapproval among voters. After this brief bout of fighting, Netanyahu's Likud party is doing slightly better in the polls, which might tempt him to call a snap election, but in the meantime, he will have to convince Israel's voters that the outcome of this war justified the unprecedented terrifying 12 days that they endured. Can he, together with Trump, also translate military achievements into a diplomatic success, one that ensures both that future uranium enrichment is limited to what is needed for civil use, and that Tehran ceases its meddling in the affairs of other countries? This remains an open question, but the next task for Israel's prime minister is to explain to the electorate why the war in Gaza is still raging and 50 hostages are still in captivity.
