|
In-Depth Issues:
U.S. Sets Conditions for Renewing Talks with Iran - Danny Zaken ( Israel Hayom)
The U.S. has set two conditions for renewing talks with Iran in Pakistan, according to two diplomatic sources.
The first is the full and unrestricted reopening of the Strait of Hormuz before the talks begin.
The second is agreement by all senior regime officials to any understandings reached in Islamabad.
So far, Iran has not fulfilled its commitment to reopen the strait, apparently because of opposition from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, despite prior agreement by the political echelon.
One diplomatic source said the Americans are sticking to a position of reciprocity.
If the Iranians prevent the movement of ships and tankers, their own ships and tankers will not be allowed to move through the strait either.
Two senior Revolutionary Guards officials, Ahmad Vahidi and Ali Abdollahi, did not allow the political delegation that was in Pakistan to reach agreements with the Americans.
The Americans responded that they would return to the talks only if the political delegation coming to meet them had the authority to close a deal.
Hizbullah Terrorists Caught Off Guard in Southern Lebanon - Ron Ben-Yishai ( Ynet News)
The IDF has continued an extensive campaign against rocket launchers in Lebanon while providing air support to ground forces in the south that is no longer constrained by the war with Iran.
The heaviest fighting is now in the Bint Jbeil area, where dozens of Hizbullah operatives, including members of the Radwan force, were surrounded and trapped in the town.
Hizbullah had massed a sizable force there for an attack into Israeli territory.
But the operatives were caught off guard. They did not detect the quiet advance of Israeli troops, who moved in and encircled them from three sides.
Several dozen terrorists who tried to flee were killed, and those who remained were left fighting for their lives.
Some Hizbullah operatives were filmed surrendering and throwing down their weapons.
Although Israeli forces are advancing with massive fire support in an effort to reduce casualties, the battle is unfolding in a densely-built urban area, making close-quarters clashes difficult to avoid.
IDF Battalion Commander Describes Lebanon Fighting - Elisha Ben Kimon ( Ynet News)
"We are the battalion combat team that first entered Lebanon, more than 40 days ago," said Lt.-Col. A.
"When you go on the offensive in Gaza, you mostly focus on short ranges. In Lebanon, the fighting is far more spread out....The main challenge for a commander is to understand that every meter is a potential combat zone."
"This is a type of warfare that requires a deep understanding of the terrain, of explosives, and of an enemy that is right there, 40 to 50 meters away from you, face to face."
He said Hizbullah operatives avoid direct engagement with Israeli forces. "Every time we move forward, they move back."
"When the enemy is pushed back, its drones and explosives hit the army and not civilians in the Galilee. The range of threats to the communities would have been far greater if we weren't there."
"The goal is clear: to create an area with no enemy and no population, to ensure that Israeli communities are not on the front line."
Follow the Jerusalem Center on:
Israel's Enhanced F-35s Performed Impressively in Iran War - Dean Shmuel Elmas ( Globes)
Although the F-35 is U.S.-made, the only country to have used it in large-scale operations is Israel.
The Israeli variant of the F-35 includes unique systems that Israel has installed, mainly in software, intelligence, and integration with Israeli command and control systems.
This allows a significant reduction in the time between target identification and neutralization.
While F-35 aircraft are considered to have significant maintenance needs and long time intervals between different missions, Israel has managed to drastically reduce this.
Why Iran's Rulers Are Not "Rational Actors" - Clifford D. May ( Washington Times)
If Iran's rulers were "rational actors," they wouldn't have wanted to repeat the experience of the 12-day war in June 2025.
Yet they're not. They are not peace-loving. They don't prefer compromise over conflict. Iran's rulers believe - literally - that they are on a mission from God.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's title was "Supreme Leader," implying that he was the divinely ordained guardian of Iran.
For nearly half a century, every American president pledged that Iran's theocrats would be prevented from acquiring the nuclear capabilities that could lead to the fulfillment of their grand ambition: "Death to America!" Yet no serious actions were ever taken.
If Mr. Trump had not struck when he did, then Tehran might have acquired nukes while continuing to build up an enormous arsenal of drones and missiles, leading to a war that future presidents could not win, or could win only at an exorbitant cost in blood and treasure.
This conflict was about degrading an American enemy's capabilities, not its intentions.
Their hatred of America, Israel and the West has not abated. They continue to believe it is their duty to wage jihad.
The writer is founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Search the Recent History of Israel and the Middle East
Send the Daily Alert to a Friend If you are viewing the email version of the Daily Alert and want to share it with friends, please click Forward in your email program and enter their address.
|
|
News Resources - North America, Europe, and Asia:
- U.S. Blockade of Iran Is Fully Implemented - Jenny Gross
The U.S. Navy blockade of Iranian ports appeared to be working on Wednesday, with no Iranian-linked ships visibly able to leave the region since the blockade took effect 48 hours earlier, according to U.S. authorities and vessel-tracking firms.
U.S. Central Command head Adm. Brad Cooper said Tuesday that the blockade had been "fully implemented" and had "completely stopped" commercial traffic to and from Iranian ports. More than a dozen Navy ships are enforcing a blockade on all vessels from all nations entering or leaving coastal areas or ports in Iran.
(New York Times)
- China Calls on Iran to Ensure Freedom and Safe Passage through Strait of Hormuz - Meredith Chen
China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Wednesday that "the freedom and safety of international navigation through the strait [of Hormuz] should also be ensured, and efforts to restore normal transit through the strait are a shared call of the international community." (South China Morning Post-Hong Kong)
- Damage to Iran's War-Shattered Economy Will Take Years to Repair - Sune Engel Rasmussen
Iranian leaders have portrayed the current ceasefire as a victory against an overwhelming U.S. and Israeli onslaught. But they now face a towering postwar reconstruction challenge that is putting pressure on them to negotiate for sanctions relief.
The U.S. and Israel hit 17,000 targets over five weeks of war, including factories; rail, road and port infrastructure; government buildings; and military facilities. The air campaign not only hit infrastructure but the facilities producing steel that is needed to repair it and operations such as petrochemicals that bring in the foreign currency to pay for the work.
During the war, Iran fired thousands of missiles and drones at Gulf states and Israel. The strikes caused lasting damage to some facilities but nothing nearly as comprehensive as the wreckage in Iran.
(Wall Street Journal)
News Resources - Israel and the Mideast:
- Hizbullah Fires 40 Rockets at Israel, IDF Strikes 200 Targets in Lebanon - Emanuel Fabian
Hizbullah fired over 40 rockets at northern Israel on Wednesday morning. Hizbullah has been firing hundreds of rockets per day, with the vast majority directed at Israeli forces operating in southern Lebanon. Hizbullah is launching most of its attacks from north of the Litani River.
Meanwhile, the Israel Air Force struck over 200 Hizbullah targets in southern Lebanon over the past day, including 20 rocket launchers. Israeli officials have said the IDF is establishing a demilitarized "security zone" in southern Lebanon up to the Litani River, until the threat of Hizbullah is removed. The IDF said it has killed 1,500 Hizbullah operatives, including hundreds of members of the Radwan Force, since hostilities escalated amid the war with Iran. (Times of Israel)
- Israel's U.S. Ambassador: Israel and Lebanon "Are On the Same Side" Against Hizbullah - Amichai Stein
Israel's Ambassador to the U.S., Yechiel Leiter, met on Tuesday with Lebanon's Ambassador to the U.S., Nada Hamadeh, in Washington. The meeting included U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Leiter said, "It was a crushing victory over Hizbullah. We are on the same side, we and the Lebanese, that the evil of Hizbullah must be eradicated. We are united in this need. We talked about possibilities, a vision for the long term, about how Lebanon can prosper."
The focus of the meeting was on efforts to disarm Hizbullah, while the broader goal is to open a path toward normalization between Israel and Lebanon. Leiter stressed that Israel would not discuss a ceasefire with Hizbullah, which continues to attack Israel. (Jerusalem Post)
- Poll: 80 Percent of Jewish Israelis Support Fighting Hizbullah
80% of Jewish Israelis think Israel should continue fighting Hizbullah, an Israel Democracy Institute poll conducted April 9-12 revealed Monday. Half of Jewish Israelis said Israel's strategic and security situation was better than it was before the campaign against Iran that began on Feb. 28. (Times of Israel)
- Hamas Rejects Board of Peace Disarmament Plan - Sam Halpern
Hamas has rejected the U.S.-led Board of Peace's disarmament plan, a source told the Jerusalem Post on Wednesday. Demilitarizing the group was part of the ceasefire agreement signed in October.
(Jerusalem Post)
Global Commentary and Think-Tank Analysis:
Iran
- Welcome to the New Iran - Col. (res.) Shay Shabtai
For the most part, that which once constituted Iran no longer exists. One can argue that the U.S.-Israel operation tipped Iran from a strong theocracy to a weak dictatorship. This process has been going on for at least two decades, but the operation caused an irreversible change. The death of Ali Khamenei created a vacuum. The growing need for both violent internal repression and dealing with external threats further strengthens the centrality of the IRGC in decision-making.
The damage to the Iranian economy and the regime's industries primarily harms its supporters. The regime will have to use the state's resources first and foremost to reestablish its power and core support base. This will come at the expense of most Iranian citizens.
The acquisition of unconventional weapons will now depend on technological feasibility and the ability to implement technical capability without its being detected, attacked, and destroyed beforehand.
The survival and way of life of the members of the public who support the regime are highly dependent on the survival of the regime. At the same time, they are being fed lies about the state's situation by the regime's media. The rest of the public is in a battle for survival and a significant portion of the Iranian population will have to fight for their most basic needs. In such a situation, and where brutal oppression is increasing, it is likely that widespread and organized protests will decrease significantly, while anger and willingness to commit violence will increase.
As Iran's economic situation worsens, the sanctions will become much more effective. It is therefore essential to push for their continuity and prevent ideas that might arise to ease them in the name of misplaced concern for the Iranian people.
The writer is a senior researcher at the BESA Center.
(BESA Center for Strategic Studies-Bar-Ilan University)
- An End to the War in Iran Would Hasten the Regime's Decay - Dennis Ross
It's not clear how much time Tehran has. Before the war, the Iranian regime had no answers to any of its fundamental governance failings that produced the public uprisings in December and January. When the war fully ends, it will be even less able to deal with water and electricity cutoffs, a currency that has no value, endemic corruption and the increasing difficulty of daily life. The Iranian public will not remain quiescent for long.
But the inner contradictions of the Islamic Republic will in time either produce an Iranian Gorbachev to try to avert regime collapse, or it will collapse outright. Ending the war may paradoxically hasten that day, and therefore ultimately produce a strategic win.
The writer, a former chief U.S. Middle East peace negotiator, is the counselor at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. (Washington Post)
Lebanon
- Can the Lebanese Army Disarm Hizbullah? - Col. (ret.) Dr. Jacques Neriah
In a country deeply divided by religion and politics, the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) is one of the few entities that enjoys broad trust across Sunni, Shia, Christian, and Druze communities. Historically, the army has often chosen neutrality during internal conflicts to prevent its own collapse. If the army were to take a side in a sectarian fight, it would likely fracture along religious lines, as happened during the Lebanese Civil War in 1975.
Gen. Rodolphe Heykal, the current army chief, reported to the government that South Lebanon was clear of Hizbullah's armed presence, but he gave false information. During a meeting in Washington with Sen. Lindsey Graham, Heykal was asked if he considered Hizbullah a terrorist organization. Heykal replied, "No, not in the context of Lebanon." If this is the LAF chief's view, what can the U.S. and Israel expect from the Lebanese army when it comes to implementing any agreement between Israel and Lebanon?
Nearly 60% of the LAF's rank and file are Shiites, and major positions in the army are held by Shiite officers, such as Gen. Souheil Harb, head of military intelligence, who reportedly serves as a debriefer to Hizbullah on major developments. For years, the LAF has operated under a "no-confrontation" policy with Hizbullah.
Critics argue that until the LAF has a monopoly on the use of force, its "national" loyalty remains compromised by Hizbullah's Iranian-backed influence.
The writer, a special analyst for the Middle East at the Jerusalem Center, was formerly Deputy Head for Assessment of Israeli Military Intelligence. (Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs)
- Israel's Withdrawal from South Lebanon Should Be Tied to Hizbullah's Complete Disarmament - Dr. Yossi Mansharof
The reality in Beirut is clear: despite efforts at revival, the Lebanese state remains a hollow entity. The Lebanese army lacks the ability and the will to enforce government decisions regarding the disarmament of Hizbullah. Accordingly, any diplomatic agreement signed with Lebanon, without physical guarantees on the ground, will not be worth the paper it is written on. Israel cannot entrust the security of its residents to a phantom sovereign that does not control its own backyard.
Faced with this governing vacuum, in which Iran and Hizbullah remain the true sovereign in Lebanon, Israel must shift from a strategy of active defense to one of creating a new reality. The key lies in establishing a sterile zone south of the Litani River to neutralize the direct-fire antitank threat that has become Hizbullah's main strategic tool for disrupting daily life in northern Israel. Neutralizing that threat requires physical Israeli control of the area and controlling the high ground that topographically overlooks the Galilee communities in Israel.
Israel's withdrawal from the sterile zone should be tied to one result alone: Hizbullah's complete disarmament. Jerusalem must reject pressure for a quick ceasefire in Lebanon and firmly refuse any dictate linking the northern campaign to a deal with Tehran. Halting the fighting prematurely, while leaving Hizbullah standing on the fences, would amount to a strategic victory for the axis of evil and lay the groundwork for a far more violent and deadly next round.
The writer is a lecturer in the School of Political Science at the University of Haifa, and a senior researcher at the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy. (Israel Hayom)
- Israel's New Security Zone in Lebanon - Shirit Avitan Cohen
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz outlined the IDF operation in Lebanon as including "the destruction of homes in the contact-line villages, the defensive positions line inside Lebanon, which was expanded from five to 15 points, the anti-tank line whose seizure was completed through the ground maneuver and is now being expanded at additional points, and the Litani line, where the IDF will maintain control."
For residents in northern Israel, this is a security necessity rooted in the understanding that the IDF must separate civilians from their enemies. Brig.-Gen. (res.) Effi Eitam, who commanded forces in the previous security zone in Lebanon which existed in 1985-2000, said, "Israel had an efficient, effective security zone for many years. It was not a Lebanese mire. It was exactly what a country needs to do to protect its line of civilian communities."
"Since we fled from there and announced that the war was over, we have been inside Lebanon twice. During the years of supposed quiet, Hizbullah was built up into a monstrous military force....To protect Metula, Misgav Am, Rosh Hanikra and Avivim, we need to be inside Lebanon up to the Litani line in order to prevent what Hizbullah's Radwan Force planned."
Meir Ben-Shabbat, head of the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, who served as head of Israel's National Security Council, said, "Before the withdrawal from Lebanon [in 2000], the public discourse focused on the price of our presence there. Today the public understands what people spoke less about back then: the price of our absence."
"Control of a security zone is by no means a recipe for a static presence, nor is it a stand-alone component. Alongside it there must be sustained offensive interdiction activity that does not allow the enemy to entrench itself and forces it to direct its efforts toward survival rather than attacking us." (Israel Hayom)
- Why Is Israel Fighting in Lebanon? - Editorial
Israel is not at war with Lebanon, but with Hizbullah, the terror group that occupies the country's south and until recently had the government bullied into complete submission. Hizbullah started the most recent war, ending a ceasefire by launching missiles at Israel. Israel is in the process of evicting Hizbullah from Lebanon south of the Litani River - as per the accords that ended the 2006 war - since neither the weak government nor the worthless UN peacekeeping force lifted a finger to make it happen. (New York Post)
- Why Is Lebanon Seeking Direct Talks with Israel? - Dr. Edy Cohen
In recent weeks, Lebanon's government has repeatedly called for direct talks with Israel. The talks in Washington on Tuesday marked the first direct negotiations between the two countries since the 1980s. Why is Lebanon, which until recently boycotted Israel and labeled it an enemy, now actively seeking direct talks?
The answer is that, beyond the Shi'ite community, much of Lebanon's political establishment and broader public do not view Hizbullah as a priority worth defending. In fact, weakening Hizbullah aligns with the interests of both the Lebanese state and much of its population. The Lebanese leadership view direct negotiations as a way to separate the Lebanese state from Hizbullah, which has strongly opposed the talks.
(Jerusalem Post)
Palestinian Arabs
- The U.S. Fantasy of Hamas Disarmament and Peace - Khaled Abu Toameh
Far from preparing to disarm, Hamas is publicly declaring its commitment to continued jihad, praising the Iranian regime and its proxies, and inciting Palestinians to escalate attacks against Israel. Hamas, like Iran, is not motivated by deadlines, incentives, or promises of reconstruction. It is motivated by ideology and war.
On April 5, Hamas military spokesman Abu Obaida portrayed the war not as a territorial dispute but as a religious obligation, meant to restore Islamic dominance. In Hamas's worldview, the war is not about Gaza. It is about reshaping the Middle East - and beyond. Any policy based on the assumption that Hamas can be persuaded to disarm is simply detached from reality.
Hamas is not negotiating. Hamas is not moderating. Hamas is not preparing for peace. Oct. 7, 2023, was not an isolated attack. Hamas remains a partner of Iran's regional war machine, a committed enemy of peace, and a direct threat to the stability of the Middle East. (Gatestone Institute)
Observations:
- Washington is applying military and economic pressure to compel Iran toward a deal, but without pursuing actual regime change. That is also the stated position of the White House: deny Iran nuclear weapons, degrade its ballistic missile infrastructure, strike its naval forces, and sever its support for proxy networks, but do not topple the regime.
- Iran, for its part, is not seeking a deal. It is seeking to stop the assault without any real loss of its core capabilities. From Tehran's perspective, walking away from a negotiation is a tactic, because Iran understands that Washington has no appetite for a sustained military campaign without a clear political objective of actual regime change. Tehran is therefore trying to force Washington into an impossible choice: either a war with no political endpoint, or a deal that contains no Iranian surrender.
- Negotiation is not an alternative to war. It is one of war's theaters. Iran shifts the battle into the negotiating room because that is where it holds a relative advantage. It can delay, buy time, fragment the opposing side, relieve external pressure, and keep the argument focused on language and formulas rather than on actual capabilities. This is the foundation of its strategic deception. What matters is not the declared intentions across the table, but what Iran retains while the world is talking.
- As long as Tehran holds the principle of enrichment, the technical knowledge, the physical infrastructure, ballistic reconstitution capacity, active proxy networks, and maritime pressure levers, what is happening is not threat dismantlement. It is threat management. There is no genuine diplomatic solution that would compel Iran to stop rebuilding its missile arsenal or halt its drive back toward nuclear capability.
- Any American concession on the question of the Strait of Hormuz, or any form of functional Iranian control over commercial shipping, would constitute an unambiguous Iranian victory and a strategic situation worse than the one that existed before hostilities began. Hormuz is therefore the only card Iran can convert into an unambiguous public victory, and the one place where Washington absolutely cannot afford to yield.
- If the genuine objective is to eliminate the Iranian threat, nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, proxy networks, and maritime coercion, there is no real diplomatic solution. If the U.S. is unwilling to pursue actual regime change, there are only solutions that manage the threat, suspend it, or defer it.
The writer, vice president of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, served in senior government positions for 27 years.
|