Who is Joseph Aoun, Lebanon’s army chief elected to the presidency?

1 / 3
Lebanon’s parliament elected the army chief Joseph Aoun as president on Jan. 9, ending a two-year power vacuum. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 12 January 2025
Follow

Who is Joseph Aoun, Lebanon’s army chief elected to the presidency?

  • After 12 failed attempts, Lebanon finally has a new president, ending two-year power vacuum in crisis-wracked nation
  • World and regional leaders, including Saudi Arabia, US, and EU, applaud election of “stabilizing” Aoun

DUBAI: A turning point was reached in Lebanon on Thursday when General Joseph Aoun was elected the country’s 14th president, ending a more than two-year power vacuum and restoring a glimmer of hope in the crisis-wracked nation.

Aoun’s election comes at a critical time as Lebanon grapples with its long political deadlock, economic crisis, and the devastating aftermath of Hezbollah’s 14-month war with Israel, which left vast areas of Lebanon in ruins and killed more than 4,000.

Since late November, Aoun, 61, has been a key player as the army commander in implementing the fragile ceasefire by overseeing the gradual mobilization of the armed forces in south Lebanon.




Lebanese cabinet ministers applaud newly elected Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, standing at the top, as gives his first speech at Parliament after being sworn in as president in Beirut on Jan. 9, 2025. (AP)

Under the terms of the truce, the Lebanese Army has been gradually deployed alongside UN peacekeepers in the south as Israeli forces withdraw — a process they must complete by January 26.

Widely backed by western and regional powers, Joseph Aoun is perceived as best to maintain the fragile ceasefire and strengthen Lebanon's international relations, crucial for rallying the support needed to revive the country’s depleted finances.

In a decisive second parliamentary session, Aoun gained 99 votes — enough to secure him the presidency. He became the fifth army commander to serve as Lebanon’s president — a post he will hold for the next six years.

His election reflects a critical compromise among Lebanon’s political blocs, which made notable concessions to ensure a resolution to the deadlock, after a failed first session brought Aoun 71 votes.




Mourners carry portraits of Hezbollah fighters killed in fighting with Israel, at their funeral procession in the southern Lebanese village of Majdal Selm on December 6, 2024. The Hezbollah had been considered an obstacle to peace and stability in Lebanon. (AFP)

Over the past 26 months, 12 previous attempts to choose a president failed amid tensions between Hezbollah and its allies on one side and opposition parties on the other, which accused the Iran-backed Shiite militia of seeking to impose its preferred candidate.

Aoun, who like all of his predecessors comes from the Maronite Christian community, as required by Lebanon’s National Pact, replaced Michel Aoun, whose term formally ended in October 2022.

In his inaugural address before the parliament, Aoun vowed to strengthen the position of the armed forces to secure Lebanon’s borders, particularly in the south, fight terrorism, and end Hezbollah’s war with Israel.




Like all of his predecessors, Lebanon's new president, Joseph Aoun, comes from the Maronite Christian community, as required by Lebanon’s National Pact. (AFP infographic)

He also pledged to lead postwar reconstruction efforts, reaffirming Lebanon’s unity.

Aoun arrives at the presidency having built an impressive military career. He steered the military through one of Lebanon’s most tumultuous periods since taking office as Commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces in 2017, a tenure that was later extended.

Fluent in Arabic, French, and English, Aoun began his military career in 1983 when he volunteered for the army as an officer cadet before enrolling in the Military College.




By shielding Lebanon's army from political conflicts, including Hezbollah’s war with Israel, Aoun ensured its role as a unifying force in a deeply divided country. (AFP) 

His leadership was lauded during the army’s “Dawn of the Outskirts” operation that successfully expelled Syrian militants affiliated with Daesh and Jabhat Al-Nusra in Arsal from Lebanon’s borders.

By shielding the army from political conflicts, including Hezbollah’s war with Israel, Aoun maintained his forces’ neutrality and ensured its role as a unifying force in a country of political and sectarian divides.

Additionally, he has worked to rid the military of corruption and has collaborated with other states to secure aid for army personnel after their monthly salaries dropped to less than $50.




People lift national flags as they offer sweets to passing cars in Beirut's southern village of Qlayaa on January 9, 2025, to celebrate the election of Gen. Joseph Aoun as president of Lebanon. (AFP)

Even before entering the Lebanese parliament’s main chamber and securing the necessary votes, Aoun was floated as an ideal candidate, garnering broad support on domestic, regional, and international fronts.

Washington is the main financial backer of the Lebanese Army, which also receives support from other countries including Qatar.

Underlining Arab and international backing for Aoun, Thursday’s parliamentary session saw notable attendees, including the Saudi Ambassador Walid Bukhari, US Ambassador Lisa Johnson, and French envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian.

The push for consensus, marked by successive high-level visits to Lebanon by Saudi, Qatari, French, and US officials before the election, was mirrored domestically, where Lebanese opposition forces and other parliamentary blocs lined up behind Aoun’s candidacy




Lebanon's new President Joseph Aoun (C-R) receiving a delegation of Lebanese Sunni Muslim religious figures headed by Sheikh Abdul Latif Derian (C-L) at the presidential palace in Baabda, east of Beirut on January 11, 2025. (Photo by Lebanese Presidency / AFP) 

Lebanon’s Forces of Change was among the factions that supported Aoun, praising his record of restoring order when thousands of Lebanese protesters took to the streets following the country’s economic collapse in 2019.

Notably, the Shiite duo — Hezbollah and the Amal Movement — backed his candidacy, solidifying the support needed to elect Aoun in the second round of voting.

However, the Free Patriotic Movement and other independent MPs opposed Aoun’s nomination, arguing that his election was the result of international and regional dictates over a sovereign Lebanese decision.

Aoun’s presidency was welcomed regionally and internationally.


READ MORE:

Many reasons for optimism about Syria and Lebanon
A new era and a golden opportunity for Lebanon
Uniting the Lebanese is Aoun’s most important mission


Saudi Arabia’s King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman welcomed Aoun’s success, wishing the Lebanese people further progress and prosperity.

Qatar likewise praised Aoun’s election, calling for “stability,” while Gulf Cooperation Council Secretary-General Jasem Al-Budaiwi wished him luck in achieving prosperity for Lebanon and stronger ties with the Gulf bloc.

Al-Budaiwi reiterated the GCC’s support for Lebanon’s sovereignty, security, and stability, as well as its armed forces.

The leaders of Jordan and the UAE pledged to work with the new president to boost ties and support reforms, while Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said Lebanon would overcome the “repercussions of Israeli aggression” under the new leadership.




Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, right, meets with Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani at the presidential palace in Baabda, east of Beirut, on Jan. 10, 2025. (AP)

French President Emmanuel Macron was among the first Western leaders to congratulate Aoun on Thursday.

“(The election) paves the way for reform and the restoration of Lebanon’s sovereignty and prosperity,” Macron posted on X. In a phone call with Aoun later, he said France “will continue to be at the side of Lebanon and its people,” vowing to visit the country soon.

In a statement, US President Joe Biden said Aoun “has my confidence. I strongly believe he is the right leader for this time.”

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for the swift formation of a new government, to preserve the country’s security and stability, strengthen state authority, and advance much-needed reforms.

 

 

The UN Security Council also congratulated Aoun and affirmed “strong support for the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and political independence of Lebanon,” while calling for a full implementation of Resolution 1701.

UNSC members also emphasized the importance of the election in ensuring fully functional state institutions to address the “pressing economic political and security challenges” of the country.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen described the election of Aoun as a “moment of hope” for the country. “The way is now open to stability and reforms. Europe supports this path,” she posted on X.

Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said Lebanon’s new president was a chance for “reforms and change.”

“After many years of crisis and stagnation, this is a moment of opportunity to bring about reforms and change,” Baerbock posted on X. “Germany stands by the side of the people of Lebanon on the way forward.”




Lebanon's Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri (R) receives Germany's Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (C) at his office in Beirut on October 23, 2024. (AFP)

Russia also welcomed the election of a new president of Lebanon, which it hopes will bring political stability to the country.

Aoun’s election “opened up the prospect of strengthening internal political stability in Lebanon and righting the country’s complex social and economic position,” the foreign ministry said in a statement.

The UK welcomed Aoun’s election, saying it was looking forward to working with him to support stability.

“I congratulate General Joseph Aoun on his election as president of Lebanon,” Foreign Secretary David Lammy wrote on X. “I look forward to working with his government to support Lebanon’s stability and prosperity.”

 

 

Aoun faces the daunting task of restoring stability and naming a prime minister able to lead reforms demanded by international creditors to save the country from its economic crisis, described by the World Bank as one of the worst in modern history.

The challenge lies in whether Lebanon’s diverse political forces can unite around Aoun’s leadership and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to form a consensus government.




Lebanese Parliament leaders led by Speaker Nabih Berri acknowledge army chief Joseph Aoun's election as the country's president at the parliament building in Beirut on January 9, 2025. (Reuters)

Even if shaped by the traditional “quota-sharing,” such a government must demonstrate the capacity to address Lebanon’s pressing challenges with a comprehensive and shared national vision.

The success of Aoun’s cabinet hinges on prioritizing the Lebanese people’s interests and leveraging parliamentary cooperation to ensure the nation’s recovery, navigating the nation out of the turmoil that has long overshadowed its potential.


 


Analysis: What happens if Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz?

Updated 16 June 2025
Follow

Analysis: What happens if Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz?

  • Tehran has never fully closed the strategic waterway but it has threatened to do so many times in response to geopolitical tensions
  • Iran-Israel war has potentially immediate ramifications for energy-exporting Gulf states and, in the longer term, for the entire world

LONDON: It is thanks to a quirk of ancient geological history that almost half the global oil and gas reserves are located under or around the waters of the Arabian Gulf, and that the flow of the bulk of bounty to the world must pass through the narrow maritime bottleneck that is the Strait of Hormuz.

On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the world that Israel’s unprecedented attack on Iran earlier in the day was an act of self-defense, aimed at disrupting its nuclear program.

By Saturday, Israel had broadened its targets from nuclear facilities, ballistic-missile factories and military commanders to oil facilities in apparent retaliation for waves of missile and drone strikes on its population centers.

This handout satellite image released by Planet Labs on June 15, 2025, shows close up view of damaged tunnel entrances at Kermanshah missile facilities, western Iran on June 15, 2025. (© 2025 PLANET LABS PBC via AFP)

In his video broadcast, Netanyahu said: “We will hit every site and every target of the ayatollahs’ regime, and what they have felt so far is nothing compared with what they will be handed in the coming days.”

In a stroke, Israel had escalated the conflict into a crisis with potentially immediate ramifications for all the oil- and gas-producing Gulf states and, in the longer term, for economies of the region and the entire world.

Reports originating from lawmakers in Tehran began to circulate suggesting that Iran was now threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz. Sardar Esmail Kowsari, a member of Iran’s parliament and a commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, warned in an interview that closing the waterway “is under consideration and that Iran will make the best decision with determination.”

While the strait is, in the words of the US Energy Information Administration, “the world’s most important oil transit choke point” — about a fifth of the world’s total petroleum liquids consumption passes through it — the two main oil producers, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, are not without alternative routes to world markets for their products.

This handout natural-color image acquired with MODIS on NASA's Terra satellite taken on February 5, 2025 shows the Gulf of Oman and the Makran region (C) in southern Iran and southwestern Pakistan, and the Strait of Hormuz (L) and the northern coast of Oman (bottom). (Photo by NASA Earth Observatory / AFP)

Saudi Aramco operates twin oil and liquid gas pipelines which can carry up to 7 million barrels a day from Abqaiq on the Gulf to Yanbu on the Red Sea coast. Aramco has consistently shown resilience and ability to meet the demands of its clients, even when it was attacked in 2019.

The UAE’s onshore oil fields are linked to the port of Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman — beyond the Strait of Hormuz — by a pipeline capable of carrying 1.5 million barrels a day. The pipeline has attracted Iran’s attentions before. In 2019, four oil tankers, two each belonging to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, were attacked off the port of Fujairah.

Iran has never fully closed the Strait of Hormuz but it has threatened to do so multiple times in response to geopolitical tensions.

Historically, it has used the threat of closure as a strategic bargaining tool, particularly during periods of heightened conflict. In 2012, for instance, it threatened to block the strait in retaliation for US and European sanctions but did not follow through.

This US Navy handout screenshot of a video shows fast-attack craft from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy swarming Panama-flagged oil tanker Niovi as it transits the Strait of Hormuz on May 3, 2023. (AFP/File)

Naturally, disruptions in supplies would cause an enormous increase in energy price and related costs such as insurance and shipping. This would indirectly impact inflation and prices worldwide from the US to Japan.

According to the experts, Iran can employ unmanned drones, such as the Shahed series, to target specific shipping routes or infrastructure in the strait. It may also attempt to use naval vessels to physically obstruct passage through the strait.

Ironically, the one country in the region that would face no direct consequences from a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz is Israel. All of its estimated consumption of 220,000 barrels of crude a day comes via the Mediterranean, from countries including Azerbaijan (exported via the Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan pipeline, which runs through Turkiye to the eastern Mediterranean), the US, Brazil, Gabon and Nigeria.

The capability to disrupt traffic in the Strait of Hormuz is one thing, a full closure is quite another, as it would harm Iran’s own economy given that it relies on the waterway for its oil exports.

History teaches that shutting off the flow of oil from the Arabian Gulf is far easier said than achieved. The first country to attempt to prevent oil exports from the Gulf was Britain, which in 1951 blockaded exports from the Abadan refinery at the head of the Gulf in response to the Iranian government’s decision to nationalize the country’s oil industry.

The motive was purely financial. In 1933 Britain, in the shape of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Co., a forerunner of today’s BP, had won a lopsided oil concession from the Iranian government and was reluctant to give it up.

The blockade did not last — impoverished post-war Britain needed Abadan’s oil as badly as Iran — but the consequences of Britain’s actions are arguably still being felt today.

The very existence of the current Iranian regime is a consequence of the 1953 coup jointly engineered by Britain and the US, which overthrew then Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, architect of the oil nationalization plan, and set Iran on the path to the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

The first modern blockade of oil shipments in the Gulf happened the following year, when Saddam Hussein, hoping to take advantage of the disruption caused by the revolution and the ousting of the shah, attacked Iran, triggering the disastrous eight-year Iran-Iraq War.

Still equipped with the shah’s US-supplied and trained air force and navy, Iran’s first reaction was successfully to blockade Iraqi warships and oil tankers in Umm Qasr, Iraq’s only deep-water seaport.

Picture released on November 17, 1980 of a column of smoke billowing from an Iranian helicopter shot by Iraqi anti-aircraft fire, near Abadan, during Iran-Iraq war. (AFP/File)

Iraqi aircraft began attacking Iranian shipping in the Gulf, provoking an Iranian response that focused initially on neutral ships bringing supplies to Iraq via Kuwait, a development that soon escalated into attacks by both sides on shipping of all flags.

The first tanker to be hit was a Turkish ship bombed by Iraqi aircraft on May 30, 1982, while loading at Iran’s Kharg Island oil terminal. The first to be declared a total loss was a Greek tanker, struck by an Iraqi Exocet missile on Dec. 18, 1982.

In terms of lives lost and ships damaged or destroyed, the so-called Tanker War was an extremely costly episode, which caused a temporary sharp rise in oil prices. By the time it ended in 1987, more than 450 ships from 15 countries had been attacked, two-thirds of them by Iraq, and 400 crew members of many nationalities had been killed.

Among the dead were 37 American sailors. On May 17, 1987, American frigate the USS Stark, patrolling in the Gulf midway between Qatar and the Iranian coast, was hit by two Exocet missiles fired by an Iraqi Mirage jet.

A port quarter view of the guided missile frigate USS STARK listing to port after being struck by an Iraqi-launched Exocet missile on May 17, 1987. (Wimimedia Commons: Pharaoh Hound)

But at no point throughout the Tanker War was the flow of oil out through the Strait of Hormuz seriously disrupted.

“Iran couldn’t fully close the strait even in the 1980s,” said Sir John Jenkins, former UK ambassador to Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

“It’s true that in those days the UK and others had a significant mine-sweeping capacity, which we lack today. But even if Iran laid mines again or interfered with shipping in the strait in other ways it will almost certainly draw in US maritime forces from the 5th Fleet (based in Bahrain) and perhaps air assets too.

US Navy warships are seen transiting the Strait of Hormuz, during a deployment to the US 5th Fleet area of operations. (AFP/File)

“Also, attempting to close Hormuz will hit their own significant illegal oil trade.”

Regardless, the Iranians “will be very tempted to do this. But it is a delicate calculation — doing enough to get Russia and in particular China involved in support of de-escalation but not enough to provoke US action, effectively on the side of Israel,” Jenkins said.

In an analysis published in February last year, following an uptick in maritime aggression by Iran in and around the Strait of Hormuz, the Center for Security Policy, a Washington think tank, concluded that because 76 percent of the crude oil that passes through it is destined for Asian markets, “as one of Tehran’s sole remaining allies, it would not be in China’s best interest for the strait to fully close.”

Oil tankers pass through the Strait of Hormuz. (REUTERS/File Photo)

Lessons learned during the 1980s Tanker War are relevant today. In the wake of that conflict, an analysis by the Strauss Center for International Security and Law offered a cool-headed assessment of the vulnerability of the Strait of Hormuz to any attempt at enforced closure by Iran.

“Our research and analysis reveals significant limits to Iran’s ability to materially reduce the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz for a sustained period of time,” the report, published in 2008, said.

“We find that a large-scale Iranian campaign would yield about a 5 percent chance of stopping each tanker’s transit with small boat suicide attacks and a roughly 12 percent chance of stopping each tanker’s transit with volleys of anti-ship cruise missiles.”

Initially, the Tanker War led to a 25 percent drop in commercial shipping and a temporary sharp rise in insurance premiums and the price of crude oil.

Tally of attacks on oil tankers during the so-called Tanker War of the 1980s. (Wikimedia Commons)

“But the Tanker War did not significantly disrupt oil shipments … Even at its most intense point, it failed to disrupt more than 2 percent of ships passing through the Gulf,” the report said.

The bottom line, it said, “is that if a disruption to oil flows were to occur, the world oil market retains built in mechanisms to assuage initial effects. And since the long-term disruption of the strait, according to our campaign analysis, is highly improbable, assuaging initial effects might be all we need.

“Panic, therefore, is unnecessary.”

Israel’s critics say it already has much to answer for in unleashing its unilateral assault on Iran. Netanyahu has been claiming for years that Iran was “only months away” from producing a nuclear weapon and his claim that that is the case now has no more credibility than before.

“Benjamin Netanyahu has started a war with Iran that has no justification,” said Justin Logan, director of defense and foreign policy at Washington think tank the Cato Institute.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s true motives in launching his attack on Iran at this time are not hard for political observers to divine. (Pool Photo via AP, File)

Friday’s opening attacks overtook US President Donald Trump’s statement earlier that same day that “the United States is committed to a diplomatic resolution to the Iran nuclear issue.”

“Iran was not on the precipice of acquiring nuclear weapons,” Logan said. “It had not thrown out IAEA inspectors, from whom all information about the Iran nuclear program flowed. It had not enriched uranium to weapons-grade.”

Netanyahu’s true motives in launching his attack at this time are not hard for political observers to divine.

He has successfully derailed US-Iranian nuclear talks — ongoing negotiations, due to have been continued on Sunday in Oman, were canceled.

The attack has also caused the postponement of the three-day joint Saudi-French Gaza peace summit at the UN, which had been due to begin on Tuesday, with the issue of Palestinian sovereignty high on the agenda — anathema to Netanyahu’s right-wing, anti-two-state government.

“Israel has the right to choose its own foreign policy,” Logan said.

But “at the same time, it has the responsibility to bear the costs of that policy.”
 

 


Former Israeli PM Ehud Barak: Only full-scale war or new deal can stop Iran’s nuclear program

Updated 15 June 2025
Follow

Former Israeli PM Ehud Barak: Only full-scale war or new deal can stop Iran’s nuclear program

  • Speaking to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, Barak said Israel’s ability to hold back Tehran’s program was limited
  • Barak said that while military strikes were “problematic,” Israel viewed the action as justified

LONDON: Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak has warned that military action by Israel alone will not be enough to significantly delay Iran’s nuclear ambitions, describing the Islamic republic as a “threshold nuclear power.”

Speaking to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, Barak said that Israel’s ability to hold back Tehran’s program was limited.

“In my judgment, it’s not a secret that Israel alone cannot delay the nuclear program of Iran by a significant time period. Probably several weeks, probably a month, but even the US cannot delay them by more than a few months,” he said.

“It doesn’t mean that immediately they will have (a nuclear weapon), probably they still have to complete certain weaponization, or probably create a crude nuclear device to explode it somewhere in the desert to show the whole world where they are.”

Barak said that while military strikes were “problematic,” Israel viewed the action as justified.

“Instead of sitting idle, Israel feels that they have to do something. Probably together with the Americans we can do more.”

The former premier said that stopping Iran’s progress would require either a major diplomatic breakthrough or a regime change.

“My judgment is that because Iran is already what’s called a threshold nuclear power, the only way to block it is either to impose upon it a convincing new agreement or alternatively a full-scale war to topple down the regime,” he said.

“That’s something that together with the United States we can do.”

But he said he did not believe Washington had the appetite for such a move.

“I don’t believe that any American president, neither Trump or any one of his predecessors, would have decided to do that.”

Israel unleashed airstrikes across Iran for a third day on Sunday and threatened even greater force as some Iranian missiles fired in retaliation evaded Israeli air defenses to strike buildings in the heart of the country.

Israeli emergency services said at least 10 people had been killed in the Iranian attacks, while officials in Iran said that at least 128 people had been killed by Israel’s salvos.


Qatari foreign minister discusses Iran-Israel strikes in calls with UAE, UK counterparts

Updated 15 June 2025
Follow

Qatari foreign minister discusses Iran-Israel strikes in calls with UAE, UK counterparts

  • Minister’s message confirms Doha’s condemnation of the Israeli attack
  • Qatar collaborating with partners to promote dialogue in pursuit of a diplomatic solution

LONDON: Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani, Qatar’s foreign minister, spoke with his Emirati and British counterparts in separate calls on Sunday to address the escalating hostilities between Israel and Iran.

Sheikh Mohammed and his UAE counterpart, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan, discussed the Israeli attack on Iran, which began on Friday morning.

The Qatari foreign minister reiterated Doha’s condemnation of the Israeli attack, which violates Iran’s sovereignty and security and is a clear violation of the principles of international law, the Qatar News Agency reported.

Sheikh Mohammed had a separate conversation on Sunday with UK Minister of Foreign Affairs David Lammy. During this call, he said that the ongoing Israeli violations and attacks in the region are undermining peace efforts and could lead to a broader regional conflict, the QNA added.

He emphasized the need for diplomatic efforts, saying that Qatar is collaborating with partners to promote dialogue and enhance security and peace in the region and worldwide.


Turkish president discusses Israel-Iran strikes with Oman’s sultan, Kuwait’s emir

Updated 15 June 2025
Follow

Turkish president discusses Israel-Iran strikes with Oman’s sultan, Kuwait’s emir

  • Leaders stress importance of de-escalation, halting aggression, resolving differences through diplomatic means

LONDON: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan discussed developments in the Middle East during separate phone calls on Sunday with the Sultan of Oman Haitham bin Tariq, and the Emir of Kuwait Sheikh Meshal Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah.

Erdogan discussed with the Omani sultan the Israeli strikes against Iran, which began on Friday morning, and their “worrying repercussions” for the region, the Oman News Agency reported.

The parties stressed the importance of dialogue and diplomacy and a return to the negotiating table to settle conflicts and prevent the escalation of crises in the region.

The ONA reported that they exchanged views on maintaining security and stability in accordance with international law.

Erdogan and the Emir of Kuwait Sheikh Meshal also discussed the rapid developments in the Middle East and the conflict between “the friendly Islamic Republic of Iran and the brutal Israeli entity,” the Kuwait News Agency reported.

In addition, both leaders renewed their condemnation of the ongoing Israeli strikes in the Gaza Strip, where at least 54,000 Palestinians have been killed since late 2023. They emphasized the importance of de-escalating tensions, halting aggression, and resolving differences through diplomatic means in the region, the KUNA added.


MP calls out lack of bomb shelters in Arab-Israeli communities

Updated 15 June 2025
Follow

MP calls out lack of bomb shelters in Arab-Israeli communities

JERUSALEM: Ayman Odeh, an Israeli member of parliament of Palestinian descent, accused the government on Sunday of failing to provide Arab-Israeli communities with enough shelters after an Iranian missile killed four people in the city of Tamra.

“The state, unfortunately, still distinguishes between blood and blood,” Odeh lamented on X, after touring the city of 37,000 predominantly Arab residents.

A house there was destroyed by a missile launched by Iran overnight in response to Israel’s unprecedented attacks on the Islamic republic’s military and nuclear sites.

“Four civilians were killed yesterday: Manar Al-Qassem Abu Al-Hija Khatib (39), her two daughters Hala (13) and Shada (20), and their relative Manar Diab Khatib (41),” Odeh said, adding that “dozens more” were wounded

Cars and buildings were also damaged by the strike on the community in the Israeli region of Galilee, an AFP journalist at the scene reported.

“Tamra is not a village. It is a city without public shelters,” Odeh said, adding that this was the case for 60 percent of “local authorities” — the Israeli term for communities not officially registered as cities, many of which are Arab-Israeli.

Arab-Israelis are Palestinians who remained in what is now Israel after its creation in 1948, and represent about 20 percent of the country’s population.

The community frequently professes to face discrimination from Israel’s Jewish majority.

With Israel and Iran engaged in their most intense confrontation ever, Odeh, a communist MP for over 10 years, warned of “a threat of unprecedented destruction (that) will not distinguish” between Arabs and Jews.

He also accused the government of “neglect” toward citizens of Palestinian descent.

A video shared on social media Sunday night caused outrage after showing families apparently rejoicing in Hebrew as missiles fell on Tamra.

In some Arab neighborhoods, missiles launched toward Israel have also been welcomed with joy, AFP journalists reported.