Connect with us

உலகம்

The Iran war has exposed the limits of neutrality

Published

on

The US-Israeli war on Iran exposed the limits of containment, divided allies and forced the world to choose between cautious diplomacy and risky regime change.

Executive Director of the Middle East Council on Global Affairs.

The recent US-Israeli military confrontation with Iran is not merely a limited military operation or another round in the cycle of mutual deterrence. Rather, it presents a revelatory moment for the entire structure of the international order. This confrontation redrew geopolitical divisions in an unprecedented way, exposing the limits of assumptions that had governed the behaviour of major powers for decades, chief among them the belief that conflicts could be contained through neutrality or conventional diplomatic instruments.

What became clear in the earliest days of the war is that the world no longer operates according to the logic of managed tensions and deliberate restraint, but within a highly interconnected environment where geography intersects with transnational networks, and regional crises can rapidly transform into direct global shocks. Iran launched strikes across several countries in the region in the first few days of the war alone, targeting American assets as well as Gulf energy and other infrastructure – almost immediately causing global market disruption.

The course of the war demonstrated that the concept of “neutrality” is no longer viable in contemporary regional contexts, particularly in the Middle East. When the instruments of conflict extend through armed proxies, the closure of vital maritime corridors and threats to global energy supplies, any state, regardless of its efforts, finds itself drawn into the trajectory of the crisis in one form or another. Qatar, for example, had invested years in mediation between Washington and Tehran, keeping channels open with all sides, yet faced Iranian strikes on its civilian infrastructure and energy installations hours after the war began.

Neutrality is easier to declare than to maintain. Iranian strikes on energy infrastructure across Gulf states forced several producers to declare force majeure and suspend their operations. In Qatar, Qatar Energy halted LNG production, and the effects were felt almost immediately in Europe through a surge in gas prices of almost 50 percent in the Netherlands and the UK, a reminder that the global economy, energy security and supply chains are now directly tied to the stability of this region.

Engagement with difficult or intransigent regimes has remained a persistent challenge. Several NATO member states signalled reluctance, or declined altogether, to support Washington’s request for expanded cooperation. At the multilateral level, divisions within the UN Security Council became evident: while some members condemned Iran’s strikes on Gulf states, the Council was unable to reach a consensus regarding the US-Israeli strikes, underscoring deep disagreements among major powers over how to approach and engage with Iran.

The ceasefire camp draws on a weighty historical record. Military interventions, such as those in Iraq and Libya, for example, have demonstrated that toppling regimes by force does not necessarily lead to the construction of stable systems; more often, it opens the door to chaos and institutional collapse. In both Iraq and Libya, external military interventions contributed to prolonged conflict, fragmentation and institutional collapse, from which both countries are still recovering.

This camp holds that war is a crisis multiplier and that the priority must be to halt the humanitarian and economic toll and return to the diplomatic track, even if that means coexisting with a difficult or intransigent regime. It also considers relative stability preferable to chaos with no predictable outcome.

However, this argument faces a central dilemma: it assumes that the Iranian regime is amenable to containment within the rules of conventional diplomacy, an assumption that Iran’s own actions since February 28 have now called into question. For example, Iran struck several Gulf states, including Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which had both given explicit assurances that their territories would not be used to launch any offensive operations against Iran.

The regime change camp takes the opposing view, arguing that the war did not create the crisis but rather revealed its true nature. It contends that Iranian behaviour, whether through targeting maritime corridors or expanding proxy wars, has proven that the regime cannot be contained or tamed through traditional instruments. Decades of diplomacy and sanctions did not prevent the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

Proponents of this position maintain that decades of diplomacy, including the nuclear agreement and regional mediation, have helped expand Iran’s capabilities and expand its influence rather than contain them. For this camp, the solution lies in changing the very structure of the regime itself.

Nevertheless, this argument raises a profoundly complex question: what comes after regime change? Previous experiences in the region offer no successful model for state reconstruction following the overthrow of regimes, making this option riskier than its potential gains may justify. The opening strike of this war, the assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was itself premised on the assumption that removing the head of state would precipitate collapse. Instead, a successor was selected shortly after the initial strike, and state institutions continued to function.

Indeed, this war reveals a deeper transformation in the nature of the threats confronting the international order. Threats are no longer conventional or confined within state borders; they have become networked and able to spread across military, economic and digital fronts simultaneously. They originate not only from regular armies but from the convergence of multiple instruments: militias, cyberattacks, economic targeting and the closure of maritime passages. This complexity makes it exceedingly difficult to rely on traditional tools, whether diplomatic or military, to address crises effectively.

Calling for a cessation of hostilities without addressing the root causes of the crisis may amount to nothing more than postponing the inevitable explosion, while pursuing radical change without a clear vision for the day after may open the door to even wider chaos.

Between these two options, the world confronts a fundamental question: How can it deal with a regime widely viewed by many states as part of the problem, without allowing the pursuit of its transformation to create an even greater one?

What appears evident is that the coming phase will leave little room for the grey zone within which states have long been accustomed to manoeuvring. It will be either the logic of cautious containment or the logic of decisive resolution. In either case, the cost of the decision will be steep, not only at the regional level but for the international order as we know it.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

📰 மூல செய்தி (Source): https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2026/4/17/the-iran-war-has-exposed-the-limits-of-neutrality?traffic_source=rss

உலகம்

Lebanese return to devastated south as fragile 10-day truce takes hold

Published

on

Hezbollah warns it has its ‘finger on the trigger’ in case of Israeli violations of the temporary ceasefire.

Displaced Lebanese have begun cautiously returning to their homes in the south after Lebanon and Israel agreed to a 10-day truce, even as the Lebanese army calls on residents to delay their return and Hezbollah warns it has its “finger on the trigger” in case of Israeli violations.

Tens of thousands of people poured into areas of southern Lebanon on Friday morning hours after the truce went into effect, many heading back to homes and villages battered by more than a month of Israeli attacks.

“People just couldn’t wait,” reported Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr from Nabatieh, one of the hardest hit areas.

“Even if it’s 10 days, they want to return to their homes. Some of them are just coming to see what remains of their homes, what remains of their lives.

“They want to show that they don’t want to give up their lands,” added Khodr.

While the ceasefire largely appeared to hold, Lebanon’s army accused Israel of several early violations on Friday, including intermittent shelling of ‌southern Lebanese villages.

Lebanon’s National News Agency also reported that unexploded ordnance killed a boy in the town of Majdal Selem, while rescuers uncovered the bodies of at least 13 people killed in attacks shortly before the ceasefire in Tyre.

French President Emmanuel Macron warned that the ceasefire “may already be undermined by ongoing military operations” and called for “the safety of civilians on both sides of the border”.

Hezbollah said its fighters “will keep their finger on the trigger because they are wary of the enemy’s treachery”.

Israeli air strikes and a ground invasion of parts of southern Lebanon have killed more than 2,100 people and displaced some 1.2 million in the latest round of fighting, according to Lebanese authorities.

Hezbollah attacks, meanwhile, killed two Israeli civilians, while 13 Israeli soldiers were killed in Lebanon, according to Israel.

Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said the ceasefire did not mean Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah was over, and that the group’s fighters would have to be disarmed one way or another – either through diplomacy or military force after the truce.

He also said Israel’s military would continue to hold all positions it has “cleared and captured”, warning that if fighting resumed, Lebanese returning to the south would have to flee yet again.

As residents assessed the damage to their hometowns, some pledged to stay, while others – finding nothing to return to or fearing the fragile truce could collapse – said they would leave again.

“There’s destruction and it’s unliveable. Unliveable. We’re taking our things and leaving again,” said Fadel Badreddine, who returned to Nabatieh with his young son and wife. “May God grant us relief and end this whole thing permanently – not temporarily – so we can return to our homes and lands.”

Al Jazeera’s Khodr said “wherever you look you see damage, destruction” in Nabatieh. “So much has been lost in this conflict in the past 46 days.”

If the ceasefire holds, it could ease one of the main points of tension in US-Iran negotiations. Iran and mediator Pakistan had maintained that Lebanon should be covered in a separate US-Iran ceasefire framework, while Israel claimed it was not part of that deal and continued its attacks.

Ali Akbar Dareini, a researcher at Iran’s Center for Strategic Studies, said the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire had removed one obstacle to wider negotiations between the US and Iran because Tehran views the regional conflict as interconnected, describing this as a “unity of fronts”.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, whose country hosted last week’s ceasefire talks between the US and Iran, welcomed the Israel-Lebanon truce on Friday and expressed “hope that it will pave the way for sustainable peace”.

He also praised the mediation role of US President Donald Trump, who has invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun to the White House for “meaningful talks”.

Aoun on Friday said direct negotiations with Israel would be “crucial” and that the government hoped to secure Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon, recover prisoners and resolve bolder disputes.

“A ceasefire is the gateway to proceeding with negotiations,” Aoun added in a statement shared by the presidency.

📰 மூல செய்தி (Source): https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/17/lebanese-return-to-devastated-south-as-fragile-10-day-truce-takes-hold?traffic_source=rss

Continue Reading

உலகம்

What we know about the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire

Published

on

US President Donald Trump announced the 10-day ceasefire between the two countries.

Israel and Lebanon have announced a 10-day ceasefire to allow negotiations for a more permanent security and peace agreement to continue.

The truce was announced by United States President Donald Trump on Thursday and came into effect at 21:00 GMT.

The ceasefire follows six weeks of fighting between Israel and the Iran-backed Lebanese group, Hezbollah. In its war on Lebanon, Israel has killed at least 2,196 people and displaced more than one million.

But on Friday morning, Lebanon’s army reported several ceasefire violations by Israeli forces.

Will the ceasefire last? What are its terms? Here’s what we know:

Announcing the ceasefire on Thursday, Trump called it a “historic day”.

In a post on Truth Social, he said, “May have been a historic day for Lebanon. Good things are happening.”

According to a statement released by the US State Department on Thursday, under the terms of the ceasefire agreement, Israel will “preserve its right to take all necessary measures in self-defence”, while not carrying out “any offensive military operations”.

The statement suggested that Israel can also exercise this right “at any time, against planned, imminent, or ongoing attacks”.

“This shall not be impeded by the cessation of hostilities,” it added.

Trump said that the 10-day truce includes Hezbollah.

“I hope Hezbollah acts nicely and well during this important period of time. It will be an GREAT moment for them if they do,” Trump wrote in his Truth Social post.

“No more killing. Must finally have PEACE!”

The direct negotiations to discuss a truce between Israeli and Lebanese officials in Washington on Tuesday did not include Hezbollah, however. The Lebanese armed group had opposed the ceasefire talks.

On Thursday, Ali Fayyad, a Hezbollah politician, told Al Jazeera Arabic that the group will approach the newly announced ceasefire with “caution and vigilance” and any targeting of Lebanese sites by Israeli forces will constitute a breach of the truce.

“The next phase is thorny and fraught with pitfalls and challenges,” Fayyad said, adding that the “worst-case scenario” for Lebanon would be the resumption of civil strife.

Israel has demanded that the Lebanese government disarm Hezbollah, which refuses to give up its arms as long as Israeli forces remain on the ground in Lebanon and pose a threat to the country.

Late on Thursday, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his government now has the opportunity to “make a historic deal” with Beirut.

He said that Israel had “agreed” to the temporary, 10-day ceasefire but its forces would remain in Lebanon with an “extensive” security zone up to the Syrian border.

He highlighted that Israel’s key demand remains the disarmament of Hezbollah and said that Israel would not agree to Hezbollah’s request that it withdraw troops beyond its border.

Former Israeli diplomat Alon Pinkas dismissed the Israeli government’s framing of the deal, telling Al Jazeera: “Netanyahu says a lot of things. I wouldn’t take him at face value. He’s saying this because he was coerced into this by President Trump. This is not a ceasefire that he wanted.”

On Netanyahu’s suggestion that the truce could pave the way for a historic peace deal, Pinkas pointed to repeated failed efforts in the past.

“I think Netanyahu failed … he failed in his stated objective of disarming Hezbollah,” he said, adding: “I honestly cannot see any peace agreement being signed between Israel and Lebanon, with Hezbollah still armed.”

Yair Lapid, Israel’s opposition leader,  also slammed the ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel announced by Trump.

“Not for the first time, all the promises of this [Netanyahu] government are crashing against the ground of reality. The confrontation in Lebanon can only end in one way: the permanent removal of the threat to the northern settlements,” Lapid said in a post on X.

“In this government, it will no longer happen; we will do it in the next government,” he added.

After the ceasefire was announced on Thursday, celebratory gunfire was heard in Beirut as the truce began.

But displaced people in downtown Beirut told Al Jazeera they didn’t trust the Israelis to uphold the ceasefire and would wait before returning to their homes – if they have homes to return to at all.

On Friday, the Lebanese military said there had already been a number of ceasefire violations, “with several Israeli attacks recorded, in addition to intermittent shelling targeting a number of villages”.

In a post on X, the Lebanese army also renewed its call for citizens to “exercise caution in returning to southern villages and towns” as the ceasefire takes effect in Lebanon.

The Lebanon 24 media outlet has reported that Israeli forces fired a machinegun and an artillery shell towards an ambulance team affiliated with the Islamic Health Authority in Kunin in the Nabatieh Governorate of Southern Lebanon. The news outlet said casualties have been reported.

Earlier, Israeli military spokesperson Avichay Adraee issued an “urgent message” to the residents of southern Lebanon , warning them to remain north of the Litani River despite the commencement of the ceasefire.

In a statement on X, Adraee said that while the ceasefire agreement has entered its implementation phase, Israeli forces are maintaining their current positions to counter what he described as “ongoing terrorist activities” by Hezbollah.

“Until further notice, you are requested not to move south of the Litani River,” he said.

In a statement carried by Lebanon’s National News Agency on Thursday, Hezbollah had also urged displaced people to remain cautious amid uncertainty over the truce.

“With the announcement of the ceasefire, and in the face of a treacherous enemy that is accustomed to breaking covenants and agreements, we call on you to be patient and not to head to the targeted areas in the South, the Bekaa and the southern suburbs of Beirut, until the course of events becomes fully clear,” it said.

Pinkas told Al Jazeera that despite a ceasefire, key details in the agreement remain unresolved, particularly in southern Lebanon.

“There is a Hezbollah kill zone in the south of Lebanon, and it’s not at all clear that the ceasefire will include that area. And once the ceasefire becomes partial, it ceases to be a ceasefire,” he said.

But people are eager to return to their homes in the south despite the ceasefire violations.

Reporting from Nabatieh in southern Lebanon, Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr said people returning don’t want to give up their land.

“There is a lot of anger. But at the same time, people here tell you that they have managed to remain steadfast,” she said.

On Thursday night, in the run-up to the ceasefire, Hezbollah said its fighters had launched 38 attacks on Israeli forces inside Lebanese territory and 37 attacks in northern Israel.

On Friday morning, however, sirens which sound before a missile strike remained silent across Israel.

But leaders of regional councils in northern Israeli regions, which include the worst-hit areas from the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, expressed unhappiness with the ceasefire.

Moshe Davidovich, head of the Mateh Asher Regional Council in the western Galilee of northern Israel, told local media in a statement that the ceasefire and the establishment of a security zone up to the Litani River “is not a diplomatic achievement” but risks further violence.

“The residents of the north are not mere statistics in a show of international public relations,” he added.

Shimon Guetta, head of the Ma’ale Yosef Regional Council, also in northern Israel, rejected outside influence over Israel’s security policy, and demanded that any agreement must guarantee “complete disarmament of Hezbollah” and “absolute security” for northern communities, adding that “agreements on paper are meaningless” without clear enforcement.

Political commentator Abed Abou Sh

📰 மூல செய்தி (Source): https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/17/what-we-know-about-the-israel-lebanon-ceasefire?traffic_source=rss

Continue Reading

உலகம்

Israeli attacks kill several over two days in Gaza despite ‘ceasefire’

Published

on

As Gaza violence continues, activist says Israeli settlers torch vehicles, attack Palestinian homes in occupied West Bank.

Several Palestinians have been killed in two days of separate Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip, despite the so-called “ceasefire” that is now in its seventh month, as raids and assaults continue in the occupied West Bank.

Brothers Abdelmalek and Abdel Sattar al-Attar were killed after an Israeli drone struck Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza on Thursday, in an area witnesses said fell outside the zone under Israeli control under the “ceasefire”, Mahmoud Bassal, spokesman for the Palestinian Civil Defence, told the AFP news agency.

Nine-year-old Saleh Badawi was shot dead by Israeli forces in the Zeitoun neighbourhood east of Gaza City later that day and Mohsen al-Dabbari, 38, was killed by Israeli fire south of Khan Younis, Bassal said.

Three others were wounded, including a teenage boy, after Israeli forces fired towards homes and tents sheltering displaced people east of Maghazi refugee camp, according to a witness speaking to Anadolu agency.

On Friday, three more Palestinians were killed. Brothers Mohammed and Eid Abu Warda were shot dead on Mansoura Street in the Shujayea neighbourhood east of Gaza City while transporting water by vehicle, with a third brother wounded with moderate injuries, medical sources told Anadolu.

An Israeli drone separately struck a water desalination facility in the same neighbourhood, killing one Palestinian and wounding several others, according to Wafa news agency.

Gaza’s Government Media Office said Israel has committed 2,400 violations of the “ceasefire”, which began between Israel and Hamas in October. These include killings, arrests, blockades and starvation policies.

Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza has killed more than 72,340 people since October 2023, according to the Gaza Ministry of Health, including at least 765 since the “ceasefire” took effect. At least 32 of those deaths have occurred since the start of April alone, among them Al Jazeera journalist Mohammed Wishah, who was killed in a drone strike west of Gaza City on April 8.

On Friday, UN Women said an average of at least 47 women and girls were ⁠killed each day ⁠during the war in Gaza, with more than 38,000 killed between October 2023 and December 2025.

“Women and girls accounted for a proportion of deaths far higher than those observed in previous conflicts in Gaza,” Sofia Calltorp, the agency’s humanitarian action head, told reporters. The agency that focuses on gender equality expressed concern that the violence has continued since the ceasefire.

Meanwhile, in the occupied West Bank, Friday’s predawn hours brought raids and attacks across multiple governorates.

Israeli settlers set fire to two vehicles during an attack on Palestinian homes in the southern West Bank, according to a local activist.

Osama Makhmara told Anadolu that a group of armed Israeli occupiers infiltrated from the illegal settlement of Otniel into the Majd al-Ba’a area west of Yatta, south of Hebron, where they attacked Palestinian homes and burned two vehicles belonging to brothers Khaled and Yasser Abu Ali. The fire destroyed both vehicles, he added.

Israeli forces also stormed ar-Ram town north of Jerusalem, breaking into homes and arresting a number of Palestinians; and in Nablus, soldiers ransacked houses and detained about a dozen people in total across both governorates, according to Wafa.

The raids require no search warrant, conducted under Israeli military law, granting army commanders full authority over three million Palestinians who have no say in how the law is exercised.

According to Addameer, the Palestinian Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association, 9,600 Palestinian political prisoners are in Israeli prisons and detention centres, including 342 children and 84 women. Of these, 3,532 are held under administrative detention imprisonment without charge or trial, for renewable intervals of three to six months, based on undisclosed evidence that even the prisoner’s lawyer is barred from viewing.

United Nations experts this week described the displacement being driven by Israeli forces and state-backed settler activity as “ethnically cleansing the West Bank through daily attacks resulting in killing, injury, and harassment of women and children, and the widespread destruction of Palestinian homes, farmland and livelihoods”.

📰 மூல செய்தி (Source): https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/17/israeli-attacks-kill-several-over-two-days-in-gaza-despite-ceasefire?traffic_source=rss

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 by 7Tamil Media, All rights reserved.