Israeli drone attack near Beirut kills at least one, injures three others
The air raid on Thursday hit a vehicle on a busy motorway in the Khaldeh area, about 12km (8 miles) south of Beirut.
The Israeli military said it targeted 'military sites and weapons depots' in the area.
Bombing an area near the Lebanese capital marks another escalation by Israel, which has been carrying out near-daily bombardment in Lebanon since it reached a truce with Hezbollah in November of last year.
The identities of the victims of the attack have not been released.
Reporting from outside Beirut, Al Jazeera's Zeina Khodr noted that the Israeli air raid took place during rush hour, with many people making their way from Beirut to south Lebanon.
'Israel is also acting with little restraint. The Lebanese state wants these attacks to stop, but the state has little leverage. Hezbollah, too, if it does respond, could trigger a harsh Israeli retaliation,' Khodr said.
'We don't see a wide-scale Israeli bombardment like we saw last year, targeting areas where Hezbollah has influence, but we see these attacks happening almost on a daily basis.'
Later on Thursday, the Israeli military carried out a wave of air strikes across south Lebanon, with heavy bombardment targeting the outskirts of Zawtar al-Charqiyeh, near Nabatieh, Lebanon's official National News Agency reported.Lebanese officials often condemn such attacks and call on the United States and France – the two sponsors of last year's ceasefire – to pressure Israel to end its violations.
But diplomatic efforts have failed to stem the ceasefire breaches, amid unwillingness by the US and its Western allies to hold Israel to account.
The repeated Israeli attacks are testing Hezbollah's position in Lebanon after it suffered painful blows in its confrontation with Israel last year.
The Iran-allied group started attacking Israeli military positions at the border in October 2023, in what it said was a 'support front' to help bring an end to the war on Gaza.
For months, the conflict remained largely confined to the border region, but in September of last year, Israel launched an all-out assault on Lebanon that destroyed large parts of the country, especially areas where Hezbollah enjoys support.
The Israeli military also assassinated the group's top political and military leaders, including Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah.
A ceasefire was reached in November, in accordance with Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended a previous conflict in 2006.
The truce stipulated that Hezbollah must withdraw its forces to the north of the Litani River, about 30km (20 miles) from the Israeli border.
But after the truce came into effect, Israel continued to occupy parts of south Lebanon in violation of the agreement, and it has been carrying out attacks across the country.
Weakened by the war, Hezbollah has refrained from responding. The Lebanese Armed Forces have also failed to hit back against Israel.The latest strike in Khaldeh comes amid Lebanese media reports about a US proposal that would see Hezbollah disarm in exchange for an end to Israel's attacks and a full withdrawal from the country.
But Hezbollah's Secretary-General Naim Qassem appeared to dismiss any agreement to give up the group's weapons that would involve Israel.
'We are a group that cannot be driven to humiliation. We will not give up our land. We will not give up our arms to the Israeli enemy,' Qassem said. 'And we will not accept to be threatened into concessions.'
Qassem previously warned that Hezbollah's 'patience' in allowing the Lebanese state to deal with the Israeli attacks diplomatically may run out.
But given the cost of the previous war on Hezbollah's military structure as well as its civilian base, it is not clear whether the group is in a position to renew the conflict with Israel.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
Trump's Ukraine weapons freeze is GOP coalition management
A few weeks ago, President Donald Trump devastated the anti-interventionists in his political base by not only condoning Israel's assault on Iran but ultimately joining in with the U.S. Air Force. Traditional Republican advocates of muscular foreign policy exulted. But this week, Trump disappointed hawks by freezing shipments of key weapons to a different American ally, Ukraine, as it resists Russia's invasion.
Wall Street Journal
an hour ago
- Wall Street Journal
U.N. Pulls Nuclear Inspectors Out of Iran for Safety Reasons
The United Nations atomic agency is pulling its inspectors out of Iran over safety concerns, severing the link between the agency and Tehran, which earlier this week suspended cooperation with the international monitor, according to people familiar with the matter. The International Atomic Energy Agency's team of inspectors were driven by road out of Iran on Friday despite international departures from Iran's main airports resuming normal operations in the wake of a 12-day conflict with Israel, two of the people said.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
American bombs in Iran also reverberate in China and North Korea
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — President Donald Trump campaigned on keeping the United States out of foreign wars, but it didn't take long to convince him to come to the direct aid of Israel, hitting Iranian nuclear targets with bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 stealth bombers and Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from a submarine. Beyond the attack's immediate impact on helping bring the 12-day war to a close, experts say Donald Trump's decision to use force against another country also will certainly be reverberating in the Asia-Pacific, Washington's priority theater. 'Trump's strikes on Iran show that he's not afraid to use military force — this would send a clear message to North Korea, and even to China and Russia, about Trump's style,' said Duyeon Kim, a senior analyst at the Center for a New American Security based in Seoul, South Korea. 'Before the strikes, Pyongyang and Beijing might have assumed that Trump is risk averse, particularly based on his behavior his first presidency despite some tough talk," Kim said. China, North Korea and Russia all condemn US strike Ten days into the war between Israel and Iran, Trump made the risky decision to step in, hitting three nuclear sites with American firepower on June 22 in a bid to destroy the country's nuclear program at a time while negotiations between Washington and Tehran were still ongoing. The attacks prompted a pro forma Iranian retaliatory strike the following day on a U.S. base in nearby Qatar, which caused no casualties, and both Iran and Israel then agreed to a ceasefire on June 24. North Korea, China and Russia all were quick to condemn the American attack, with Russian President Vladimir Putin calling it 'unprovoked aggression,' China's Foreign Ministry saying it violated international law and 'exacerbated tensions in the Middle East,' and North Korea's Foreign Ministry maintaining it 'trampled down the territorial integrity and security interests of a sovereign state.' While the strikes were a clear tactical success, the jury is still out on whether they will have a more broad strategic benefit to Washington's goals in the Middle East or convince Iran it needs to work harder than ever to develop a nuclear deterrent, possibly pulling the U.S. back into a longer-term conflict. US allies could see attack as positive sign for deterrence If the attack remains a one-off strike, U.S. allies in the Asia-Pacific region likely will see the decision to become involved as a positive sign from Trump's administration, said Euan Graham, a senior defense analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. 'The U.S. strike on Iran will be regarded as net plus by Pacific allies if it is seen to reinforce red lines, restore deterrence and is of limited duration, so as not to pull the administration off-course from its stated priorities in the Indo-Pacific,' he said. 'China will take note that Trump is prepared to use force, at least opportunistically.' In China, many who have seen Trump as having a 'no-war mentality' will reassess that in the wake of the attacks, which were partially aimed at forcing Iran's hand in nuclear program negotiations, said Zhao Minghao, an international relations professor at China's Fudan University in Shanghai. 'The way the U.S. used power with its air attacks against Iran is something China needs to pay attention to,' he said. 'How Trump used power to force negotiations has a significance for how China and the U.S. will interact in the future.' But, he said, Washington should not think it can employ the same strategy with Beijing. 'If a conflict breaks out between China and the U.S., it may be difficult for the U.S. to withdraw as soon as possible, let alone withdraw unscathed,' he said. China and North Korea present different challenges Indeed, China and North Korea present very different challenges than Iran. First and foremost, both already have nuclear weapons, raising the stakes of possible retaliation considerably in the event of any attack. There also is no Asian equivalent of Israel, whose relentless attacks on Iranian missile defenses in the opening days of the war paved the way for the B-2 bombers to fly in and out without a shot being fired at them. Still, the possibility of the U.S. becoming involved in a conflict involving either China or North Korea is a very real one, and Beijing and Pyongyang will almost certainly try to assess what the notoriously unpredictable Trump would do. North Korea will likely be 'quite alarmed' at what Israel, with a relatively small but high-quality force, has been able to achieve over Iran, said Joseph Dempsey, a defense expert with the International Institute for Strategic Studies. At the same time, it likely will be seen internally as justification for its own nuclear weapons program, 'If Iran did have deployable nuclear weapons would this have occurred?' Dempsey said. 'Probably not.' The U.S. decision to attack while still in talks with Iran will also not go unnoticed, said Hong Min, a senior analyst at South Korea's Institute for National Unification. 'North Korea may conclude that dialogue, if done carelessly, could backfire by giving the United States a pretext for possible aggression,' he said. 'Instead of provoking the Trump administration, North Korea is more likely to take an even more passive stance toward negotiations with Washington, instead focusing on strengthening its internal military buildup and pursuing closer ties with Russia, narrowing the prospects for future talks," he said. China and Taiwan will draw lessons China will look at the attacks through the visor of Taiwan, the self-governing democratic island off its coast that China claims as its own territory and President Xi Jinping has not ruled out taking by force. The U.S. supplies Taiwan with weapons and is one of its most important allies, though Washington's official policy on whether it would come to Taiwan's aid in the case of a conflict with China is known as 'strategic ambiguity," meaning not committing to how it would respond. Militarily, the strike on Iran raises the question of whether the U.S. might show less restraint than has been expected by China in its response and hit targets on the Chinese mainland in the event of an invasion of Taiwan, said Drew Thompson, senior fellow with the Singapore-based think tank RSIS Rajaratnam School of International Studies. It will also certainly underscore for Beijing the 'difficulty of predicting Trump's actions,' he said. "The U.S. airstrike on Iran's nuclear facilities caught many by surprise," Thompson said. "I think it demonstrated a tolerance and acceptance of risk in the Trump administration that is perhaps surprising.' It also gives rise to a concern that Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te, who in recent speeches has increased warnings about the threat from China, may be further emboldened in his rhetoric, said Lyle Goldstein, director of the Asia Program at the Washington-based foreign policy think tank Defense Priorities. Already, Lai's words have prompted China to accuse him of pursuing Taiwanese independence, which is a red line for Beijing. Goldstein said he worried Taiwan may try to take advantage of the American 'use of force against Iran to increase its deterrent situation versus the mainland.' 'President Lai's series of recent speeches appear almost designed to set up a new cross-strait crisis, perhaps in the hopes of building more support in Washington and elsewhere around the Pacific,' said Goldstein, who also is director of the China Initiative at Brown University's Watson Institute. 'I think that is an exceedingly risky gambit, to put it mildly," he said. ___ Tong-hyung Kim in Seoul, South Korea, and Didi Tang and Albee Zhang in Washington contributed to this report.
