Prezydent Turcji wita przewodniczącego Biura Politycznego Hamasu w pałacu prezydenckim w Stambule. [Handout: Murat Cetinmuhurdar/Presidency via Anadolu]

Turcja Erdogana: członek NATO sponsorujący terroryzm

Khaled Abu Toameh

Przez lata prezydent Turcji Recep Tayyip Erdogan prowadził obłudną podwójną grę: przedstawiał się Zachodowi jako regionalny mediator i odpowiedzialny sojusznik NATO, jednocześnie przekształcając Turcję w schronienie dla terrorystów Hamasu poza Strefą Gazy.

Nowe ustalenia wyłaniające się z izraelskich śledztw bezpieczeństwa rozwiały wszelkie złudzenia, jakoby relacje Turcji z Hamasem ograniczały się do „wsparcia politycznego” lub „zaangażowania dyplomatycznego”. Dowody coraz wyraźniej wskazują na znacznie bardziej alarmującą sytuację: Turcja stała się głównym operacyjnym, logistycznym i finansowym centrum globalnej infrastruktury terrorystycznej Hamasu.

Państwa umożliwiające działalność terrorystyczną nie mogą jednocześnie być traktowane jako niezastąpieni partnerzy w walce z terroryzmem.

Niedawny reportaż izraelskiego nadawcy publicznego KAN ujawnił, że bojownicy Hamasu otwarcie uczestniczyli w ćwiczeniach bojowych na poligonach w całej Turcji.

Według reportażu członkowie Hamasu trenowali w cywilnych ubraniach, aby uniknąć podejrzeń, ucząc się taktyki użycia broni palnej i zaawansowanych technik walki. Jeszcze bardziej niepokojące są doniesienia, że członkowie Hamasu zapisywali się na profesjonalne kursy pilotażu dronów i otrzymywali oficjalne tureckie licencje na ich obsługę.

Szkolenie to — według izraelskich urzędników cytowanych w reportażu — ma przygotować członków Hamasu do wysłania do Libanu, Jordanii i na Zachodni Brzeg z myślą o możliwych przyszłych atakach na Izrael.

To nie jest „symboliczne” wsparcie dla sprawy palestyńskiej. To pomoc militarna, równoważna wsparciu, jakiego reżim irański udziela Hamasowi od dziesięcioleci.

Drony są dziś jednym z najważniejszych narzędzi wykorzystywanych przez reżim irański i jego terrorystycznych pełnomocników — w tym Hamas, Hezbollah i Hutich — w ich dżihadzie (świętej wojnie) przeciwko Izraelowi. Hamas szeroko wykorzystywał drony podczas inwazji na Izrael 7 października 2023 r., a także w atakach na izraelskie systemy nadzoru i bazy wojskowe.

Pozwalając członkom Hamasu rozwijać zdolności korzystania z dronów na tureckiej ziemi, Ankara świadomie szkoli terrorystów do przyszłych wojen przeciwko Izraelowi.

Turcja, nie tylko gości działaczy Hamasu, celowo kształci kolejne pokolenie terrorystów tej organizacji i dba o dalsze rozszerzanie geograficznego zasięgu irańskiej osi dżihadystycznej.

Ponadto Turcja stała się kluczową arterią finansową dla Hamasu i jego sponsorów z Iranu.

W grudniu 2025 r. Siły Obronne Izraela oraz agencja bezpieczeństwa Szin Bet ujawniły — jak to określono — dużą sieć prania pieniędzy kierowaną przez Iran i działającą na terytorium Turcji. Wewnętrzne dokumenty Hamasu pokazują wyrafinowany system finansowy zarządzany głównie przez powiązanych z Hamasem emigrantów ze Strefy Gazy, którzy przenieśli się do Turcji.

IDF i Szin Bet publicznie wskazały co najmniej trzy osoby zaangażowane w sieć finansowania działającą w Turcji. Tamar Hassan miał rzekomo działać bezpośrednio pod kierownictwem lidera Hamasu Chalila al-Hajji. Khalil Farwana i Farid Abu Dayir zostali również wymienieni jako kluczowi pośrednicy działający w ramach szerszej sieci firm wymiany walut.

„Agenci Hamasu w Turcji przekazują środki na cele terrorystyczne” — powiedział arabskojęzyczny rzecznik IDF Avichay Adraee, dodając: „Można się zastanawiać, co robi członek NATO, pomagając w ułatwianiu terroryzmu”.

Kluczowa rola finansowa Turcji jest szczególnie istotna, ponieważ zapewnia Hamasowi dostęp do międzynarodowego systemu finansowego za pośrednictwem terytorium państwa członkowskiego NATO. Ta rzeczywistość powinna głęboko zaniepokoić zarówno Waszyngton, jak i europejskie stolice.

Ideologicznie — a także militarnie i finansowo — Erdogan otwarcie przyjął przywódców Hamasu. Wielokrotnie odmawiał uznania tej organizacji za terrorystyczną. Zamiast tego zdecydowanie bronił Hamasu i określał jego członków mianem „bojowników ruchu oporu” oraz wojowników „grupy wyzwoleńczej”, walczących o ochronę ziem palestyńskich.

Wysocy rangą przedstawiciele Hamasu, w tym Chalid Maszal i zlikwidowany Ismail Hanijja, byli zawsze witani w Turcji jako honorowi goście. Niektórzy działacze Hamasu mieli podobno otrzymać tureckie paszporty, pozwolenia na pobyt i swobodę przemieszczania się.

Zbliżenie Erdogana z Hamasem wydaje się zakorzenione w jego szerszych ideologicznych związkach z Bractwem Muzułmańskim i innymi ugrupowaniami islamistycznymi. Jego rząd konsekwentnie wspierał radykalne organizacje islamistyczne w Egipcie, Libii, Syrii i innych krajach.

Łatwo było przewidzieć, że Hamas — palestyńska odnoga Bractwa Muzułmańskiego — stanie się jednym z najbliższych ideologicznych sojuszników Ankary.

Przez lata zachodnie rządy trzymały się fikcji, że takie państwa jak Turcja i Katar mogą pełnić rolę neutralnych mediatorów między Hamasem a Izraelem. To założenie od początku było głęboko błędne.

Katar od dawna pełni rolę głównego finansowego patrona Hamasu, pompując setki milionów dolarów do Strefy Gazy i goszcząc przywódców Hamasu w Dosze. Turcja natomiast zapewniała operacyjne schronienie, szkolenie logistyczne i dostęp do systemów finansowych.

Dalsze poleganie Zachodu na Turcji i Katarze jako pośrednikach jedynie wzmocniło Hamas i przedłużyło niestabilność na Bliskim Wschodzie.

Jak Zachód może nadal uważać Turcję i Katar za wiarygodnych sojuszników, skoro państwa te upierają się przy wspieraniu organizacji terrorystycznych dążących do podporządkowania sobie nie tylko Izraela, ale także innych państw członkowskich ONZ — jak w przypadku tureckich ambicji wobec Cypru i Grecji?

Katar tymczasem nadal próbuje podważać pozycję Stanów Zjednoczonych, przekazując przez dziesięciolecia wiele miliardów dolarów na wpływanie na edukację — od szkół podstawowych po studia doktoranckie — w całej Ameryce. Uniwersytet Cornella otrzymał przez lata 10 miliardów dolarów; Carnegie Mellon „nieco poniżej 2 miliardów”; Texas A&M University „ponad miliard dolarów” (co dało Katarowi pełną własność ponad 500 projektów badawczych w dziedzinach takich jak nauki nuklearne, sztuczna inteligencja, biotechnologia, robotyka i rozwój uzbrojenia); a Uniwersytet Georgetown — 971 milionów dolarów. Dlaczego Katar i Turcja nadal obejmują Hamas wsparciem, jednocześnie domagając się zaufania USA i Zachodu? Dlaczego Zachód wciąż akceptuje tę obłudę?

Administracja Trumpa stoi przed kluczowym testem. Jeśli Waszyngton rzeczywiście poważnie podchodzi do likwidacji infrastruktury Hamasu i konfrontacji z reżimem irańskim, nie może dalej przymykać oka na zaangażowanie Turcji w działania dokładnie przeciwne: ochronę i wspieranie Hamasu.

Państwo członkowskie NATO — Turcja — ułatwia działalność wspieranej przez Iran organizacji terrorystycznej odpowiedzialnej za masowe mordy na cywilach, w tym wielu Amerykanach.

Pozwalając Hamasowi i innym organizacjom terrorystycznym działać swobodnie na swoim terytorium, Turcja podważa samą architekturę bezpieczeństwa, do obrony której NATO zostało stworzone.

Khaled Abu Toameh jest wielokrotnie nagradzanym dziennikarzem mieszkającym w Jerozolimie.

Link do oryginału: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22525/erdogan-turkey-sponsors-terrorism

Gatestone Institute, 11 maja 2026

‘Rapist dogs?’ Woke journalism’s antisemitic war on Israel crosses a line

Jonathan S. Tobin

The logo of The New York Times on the building’s facade in New York City on January 22, 2026. Photo by Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images.

The pro-Israel community has been complaining about The New York Times since the 1970s. Indeed, anger about the attitude of the so-called “newspaper of record” toward Jews can be traced back to long before that. Above all, the way it silenced coverage of the Holocaust because its assimilated Jewish owners didn’t wish to shine a spotlight on the specifically anti-Jewish crimes committed by the German Nazis and their collaborators, remains among the darkest chapters in the publication’s history.

The problems with the Times’ reporting about the State of Israel and the war being waged against it—or even its efforts to whitewash the Jew-hatred of some of its foes, like Iran—in past decades are well-documented. But now these issues fade almost into insignificance when compared to its current endeavors. Simply put, the newspaper, which remains among the most important in the world due to its reputation, vast readership and enormous journalistic resources that dwarf those of most of its significant competitors, has now crossed the line between biased coverage and outright antisemitic incitement.

Debunked and discredited

The publication of columnist Nicholas Kristof’s article“The Silence That Meets the Rape of Palestinians,” wasn’t merely a disgraceful example of bad reporting. Almost as soon as it was published on May 11, it was debunked by numerous media monitoring organizations and commentators as relying almost completely on sources associated with Hamas terrorists and containing little or no evidence that stands up to scrutiny.

Israelis have been subjected to false accusations before and, no doubt, will continue to be singled out for biased coverage. And that includes the work of some left-wing Jewish and Israeli publications that will put out just about any unfounded claim to bolster the anti-Zionist cause or merely because they hope it will discredit the current government, which they oppose.

But by lending credence to the ridiculous and undocumented accusation that Israelis trained dogs to rape Palestinian Arab prisoners, they published something that is not merely unproven even by the “evidence” which Kristof subsequently claimed exists, but which most experts about dogs believe to be impossible. By running that along with other horrible stories about sexual violence for which he provided no credible proof, Kristof left the realm of merely disputed or dubious claims and crossed over into the realm of open Jew-hatred.

This isn’t merely a controversial accusation that can be debated. It is a blood libel, pure and simple. Indeed, it is not going too far to say that the Times’ decision to publish, promote and defend the piece warrants comparison to the same sort of vicious Nazi propaganda published in Der Stürmer by the regime led by Adolf Hitler.

That the article was published on the eve of the release of a well-documented and detailed report about the atrocious sexual violence committed by Palestinian Arabs, led by Hamas, on Oct. 7 makes the paper’s decision even more outrageous. The Times knew about the report. It was approached by its authors and offered its findings months in advance. But they were rebuffed. Instead, the paper went ahead and ran Kristof’s dubious compendium of Hamas accusations first, so as to try to overshadow the truthful story about actual crimes committed by Palestinians against their Israeli victims.

That makes it clear that the Kristof piece is a classic case of “mirroring” in which criminal regimes and movements attempt to falsely claim that their opponents are committing the very crimes of which they themselves are guilty.

The rape accusations lodged against Israel are similar to the ones about “genocide” that are ubiquitous in the Times and uttered throughout the liberal media, as well as left-wing academics and politicians, as if they are documented truth. Hamas is a genocidal movement whose purpose is the destruction of Israel and the mass murder of its population. The attacks that occurred on Oct. 7, 2023, were not merely an actual attempt at genocide. They were a trailer for what the Palestinian Arabs—and by that, I mean Hamas and other Islamist groups, as well as its supposedly more “moderate” rivals—wish to do to the rest of Israel if given the opportunity.

Yet Kristof is standing by his story. And his publishers are brandishing his reputation and Pulitzer Prizes as an all-purpose answer to their critics.

A discredited reputation

That Kristof has been guilty of journalistic malpractice in the past and used his important perch to defend con men is a matter of record.

That the Pulitzers are something of a joke has long been known to journalists, reaffirmed this year with the awarding of one to a Times photographer for a picture that accompanied an article about the alleged starvation of Palestinians. But the picture that won the award turned out to be of a child suffering from cerebral palsy, not a starvation victim, thus making it yet another example of journalistic fraud. Sadly, the Pulitzers and the Times are no more willing to rescind or return this prize than they are of another one rooted in fraud that the paper won in 1932 by Times’ writer Walter Duranty for lying articles that denied the truth of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin’s mass murder of Ukrainians in the terror famine.

Still, the paper’s self-serving claims of accuracy will probably be more than enough for the now overwhelming liberal audience that reads the Times these days. That the publishers and editors of the newspaper would go along with Kristof’s decision to head down this particularly vile rabbit hole of hate says something important about the sea change in the liberal corporate media. The same applies to the credentialed elites to whom the paper largely appeals. If the comments posted to the article on the Times’ website mean anything, they are more than ready to believe a story as fantastic as the one about rape and dogs, as long as the accusations were lodged against Israel, and to cheer Kristof for his “courage” in spreading such obvious Hamas propaganda.

Readers are by this point accustomed not merely to the newspaper’s regurgitation of obviously exaggerated and/or false civilian casualty statistics provided by Hamas. Those who only get their news from this newspaper or the many other liberal mainstream media outlets that have similar attitudes toward Israel may think themselves among the best-informed people in the world. But, in fact, such persons are painfully ignorant about the war that Hamas and other Iranian proxies are waging against the Jewish state since they have been given little or no information about how Israel’s enemies operate in Gaza or Lebanon.

Eurovision ‘conspiracy’

More to the point, they have already been conditioned to think of everything Israel does as a nefarious conspiracy. To take but one of many examples of this pattern of coverage, you need only look at the feature published by the Times the same day as it ran Kristof’s blood libel about efforts to build support for Israel’s entry in the Eurovision song contest and to prevent the country from being expelled from the competition. The article depicted Israeli efforts to avoid being thrown out of the popular international television program as if it were a secretive intelligence operation that subverted the contest.

It may be hard to take something as silly and cheesy as Eurovision seriously. But the same global movement that has as its mission the destruction of the one Jewish state on the planet is angry about the success Israelis have enjoyed in the contest. Countries where antisemitism is endemic, like Ireland, have tried to throw the Israelis out. They don’t think those who watch it should be exposed to the spectacle of Israelis singing and dancing, and performing songs the same as other contestants.

And the Times hinted at dark forces somehow manipulating the public voting that plays a part in determining the victors. But like any such competition in which people can vote 10 times (the voting to determine who gets to play in Major League Baseball’s All-Star Game allows fans to vote five times a day for weeks), to even raise the question of voter fraud is absurd. But when Jews and Israelis are involved, anything is possible.

How is it conceivable that the Times and similar media outlets have gotten to the point where they are ready to suspend normal standards of journalistic credibility if it allows them to besmirch Israel, even with crazy charges like the one about training animals to commit rape?

The answer is both obvious and familiar.

Woke ideology and the end of journalism

A generation of journalists who were indoctrinated in the toxic leftist myths of critical race theory, intersectionality and settler-colonialism takes it as a given that the world is divided into two immutable classes of persons. On the one side are “people of color,” who are always victims, no matter what they do. On the other hand are “white” oppressors, who are always in the wrong, regardless of the evidence about their actions or those who seek their destruction.

The neo-Marxist intersectional mindset labels Israelis and Jews as the latter. That’s despite the fact that they form the most persecuted minority group in history and that the majority of Israelis are not “white.” But a press that doesn’t think evidence or facts matter as much as their assumptions rooted in their racialist politics doesn’t care about that.

That’s the only reason why anti-Zionist screeds are regularly published in the Times in recent years, even though such stands deny rights to Jews and apply double standards and smears to Israel that are the working definition of antisemitism.

Kristof began his career in an era where this was not the case. But to maintain his relevance and popularity in a newsroom where woke doctrine is the new orthodoxy, he has adapted his already loose standards to accommodate the current intellectual fashion. The result is the demonization of Israelis, even if it means resorting to the sort of lunacy that would assert that Israeli dogs rape human beings on the word of propaganda outfits like the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor.

To deem Kristof and the Times guilty of blood libels doesn’t mean that Israelis commit no crimes or that the Jewish state is perfect. It is no more perfect than any other nation, though compared to the rest of the region, its imperfect democracy stands out as an exception to the authoritarian and lawless standards of the Middle East. Still, it needs to be reiterated that there is no evidence that there is anything like the systematic criminal abuse of Palestinian prisoners (some of whom are guilty of taking part in the crimes of Oct. 7). And Kristof gives us none that any editor or publisher with a shred of integrity would accept as enough to justify running his story.

What then is the proper response to the Times?

Suffice it to say that we are past the point where polite, factual letters-to-the-editor or even the most scathing report by media monitoring organizations can serve as a sufficient response.

There needs to be a concerted effort to hold the paper accountable, but we already know what won’t work. Boycotts by pro-Israel and Jewish readers will be of little use because few who care if the Jewish state survives still pay for subscriptions to it. Demonstrations outside its offices on Manhattan’s 42nd Street are a good idea. But one-off events aren’t enough.

Isolate hate-mongers

The paper needs to be given the same treatment that some of its readers think should be accorded to Israel. No one in public life—be they Jewish or not—should treat their employees as if they are credible journalists or answer their queries. Times reporters should no more be entitled to credentials to cover government or any other sector of public life than would those who work for rags produced by hate groups that also traffic in blood libels against Jews or anyone else.

The paper deserves to be shamed and shunned at least until the unlikely event of its retracting Kristof’s article. And anyone who doesn’t—whether out of concern for the freedom of the press that the newspaper mocks or because they think it appropriate to publish such absurd and unproven lies—is just as guilty as Kristof, and his editors and publishers. There should be no reticence about making it clear that it is helping to incite the growing toll of antisemitic violence against Jews in this country and around the world.

Perhaps The New York Times is too big to fail or to be isolated. Perhaps the liberal popular culture that still exalts it as a credible source is still so pervasive that its current position as a never-ending source of bile hurled at President Donald Trump and Israel makes it untouchable.

But that should not discourage those who understand that Kristof’s article is a crossing of the Rubicon when it comes to the paper’s credibility. No decent person should accept the newspaper as a legitimate source so long as it is willing to traffic in blood libels against Jews. And we should be confident that—as with its past crimes against journalism, such as those committed in the 1930s and 1940s—the verdict of history will judge all those associated with the newspaper and those who support it as knowingly guilty of spreading falsehoods, misinformation and antisemitism.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of the Jewish News Syndicate, a senior contributor for The Federalist, a columnist for Newsweek and a contributor to many other publications. He covers the American political scene, foreign policy, the U.S.-Israel relationship, Middle East diplomacy, the Jewish world and the arts. He hosts the JNS “Think Twice” podcast, both the weekly video program and the “Jonathan Tobin Daily” program, which are available on all major audio platforms and YouTube. Previously, he was executive editor, then senior online editor and chief political blogger, for Commentary magazine. Before that, he was editor-in-chief of The Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia and editor of the Connecticut Jewish Ledger. He has won more than 60 awards for commentary, art criticism and other writing. He appears regularly on television, commenting on politics and foreign policy. Born in New York City, he studied history at Columbia University.

Hezbollah Belligerence Prompts Fears of Assassination Campaign in Lebanon

Ailin Vilches Arguello

Lebanese Hezbollah fighters take part in cross-border raids, part of a large-scale military exercise, in Aaramta bordering Israel on May 21, 2023, ahead of the anniversary of Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000. Photo: Fadel Itani/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect

As direct negotiations between Lebanese and Israeli officials resumed in Washington, DC on Thursday, fears continued mounting inside Lebanon that Hezbollah could unleash a new wave of political violence and destabilization efforts amid growing pressure to dismantle the Iran-backed terrorist group’s military grip.

According to a new report from the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC), an Israel-based research institute, concerns have intensified over Hezbollah’s escalating rhetoric and the prospect of internal unrest as the Lebanese government pushes to establish a state monopoly over weapons and curb the Islamist group’s influence across the country.

The Iranian proxy has accused Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam of betraying the “resistance” and collaborating with Israel amid ongoing direct bilateral negotiations, branding them “traitors” aligned with foreign interests.

At the same time, Lebanese officials have increasingly lashed out at Hezbollah, accusing the terrorist group, which Iran established inside Lebanon in the early 1980s, of dragging the country toward another devastating war and undermining Lebanon’s sovereignty and stability.

Against the backdrop of an increasingly hostile political climate, ITIC’s new report warns that Hezbollah could once again resort to political assassinations in an effort to block moves perceived as existential threats to the organization and restore its power.

According to Israeli intelligence assessments, the renewed direct negotiations with Israel could even place Aoun’s life at risk.

Experts point to Hezbollah’s Unit 121, a covert entity subordinate to the group’s leadership, which has been linked to a series of assassinations of Hezbollah opponents in Lebanon’s political and security arenas over the past two decades.

Given Hezbollah’s limited ability to exert broader influence within the Lebanese government — with its ministers accounting for less than a third of the cabinet — ITIC warns the group may increasingly rely on Unit 121’s operational capabilities and years of accumulated experience to drive internal destabilization and intimidate political rivals.

The terrorist group has repeatedly defied international calls to disarm, even threatening protests and civil unrest if the government tries to enforce control over its weapons.

According to a new report by the Israeli news outlet Walla, Hezbollah is now putting in place a plan of action to assert control over Beirut, the Lebanese capital, and push out more pragmatic political elements.

The group is also reportedly redistributing its forces across southern Lebanon and the Beqaa Valley, as its leadership believes Israel is preparing moves designed to divide the country, forcing a broader dispersal of its fighters accordingly.

With direct talks between Israeli and Lebanese officials resuming this week, Hezbollah has also called for a national referendum, arguing that the country’s leadership is ignoring a substantial segment of the population opposed to any future peace agreement with Israel.

“Joseph Aoun is one of the worst presidents to ever lead Lebanon because he is not a unifying figure. He ignores the concerns of a large segment of Lebanese society that rejects any peace with Israel,” senior Hezbollah official Nawaf al-Musawi told Qatari news channel Al-Arabi.

“It is a disgrace that such a handshake would be extended to someone whose hands are stained with the blood of our people while their homes are being destroyed,” he continued, referring to the possibility of a meeting between Aoun and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“The negotiations they are now offering are an illusion. Our roadmap is resistance on the ground that will force the enemy to retreat,” al-Musawi further said. “We are staying here, defending Lebanon, and we will not commit political suicide through direct and humiliating negotiations.”

With the third round of negotiations taking place on Thursday in Washington, Beirut is reportedly insisting that a ceasefire must precede any future talks and is even considering delaying the process unless full de-escalation is secured in advance.

Lebanese officials have also reiterated that the decision to establish a state monopoly over weapons is final, though its implementation remains contingent on securing a broader security arrangement with Israel under US guarantees.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem reiterated on Tuesday the group’s demand for an immediate end to direct negotiations between Israel and Lebanon.

“No external party has the right to interfere in the issue of weapons or the resistance. This is an internal Lebanese matter and has nothing to do with negotiations with the enemy,” the terrorist leader said.

“We will not surrender, and we will continue defending Lebanon and its people regardless of the sacrifices required. We will not abandon the battlefield, and we will turn it into hell for Israel,” he continued.

Israel has continued its military campaign in neighboring southern Lebanon to root out Hezbollah, with strikes reaching areas roughly 20 kilometers from Beirut over the weekend in one of the deepest escalations in months.

Over the past month, more than 45 Hezbollah infrastructure sites — including weapons depots, military facilities, and rocket launchers — have been struck, with the military also reporting that around 350 operatives have been killed and approximately 1,100 affiliated targets hit.

Israeli officials are now reportedly preparing for the possibility of a major expansion of ground operations in southern Lebanon after Israeli forces crossed the Litani River last weekend and began conducting covert operations deeper inside Lebanese territory.

Hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel reignited on March 2, when the terrorist group opened fire in support of Iran two days after the start of the joint US-Israeli military campaign against the Iranian regime. 

Since then, Israeli forces have established a “buffer zone” initially extending 5 to 10 km (3 to 6 miles) into Lebanese territory, which officials say is meant to shield northern residents from Hezbollah attacks amid thousands of rockets and drones fired throughout the war.

Even though a US-backed ceasefire has sharply reduced violence, negotiations and prospects for lasting peace remain fragile, with Israeli forces still launching strikes while positioned in southern Lebanon to maintain its buffer zone and dismantle Hezbollah infrastructure.