Thursday, February 26, 2026

US-Iran nuclear negotiations: Red lines, risks, and what’s at stake in Geneva talks - explainer -Yonah Jeremy Bob

 

by Yonah Jeremy Bob

A deal would also have to require thorough accounting for Iran's stock of enriched uranium. Any doubts about that could trigger a new conflict.

 

An Iranian newspaper with a cover photo of US President Donald Trump delivering the State of the Union address, in Tehran, Iran, February 26, 2026
An Iranian newspaper with a cover photo of US President Donald Trump delivering the State of the Union address, in Tehran, Iran, February 26, 2026
(photo credit: MAJID ASGARIPOUR/WANA (WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY) VIA REUTERS)

 

The United States hopes talks with Iran in Geneva on Thursday will produce an agreement to end or reduce Iran's nuclear weapons program substantially below what it was coming out of the 2015 Obama-era nuclear deal, as well as to reduce the threat of Tehran's ballistic missile program.

US President Donald Trump has amassed the largest buildup of American forces in the Middle East since 2003 to increase pressure on the Islamic Republic to reach a deal, with the open question being whether the two sides' redlines can overlap just enough to avoid a broader war.

Israel would only support a deal that neutralizes both the nuclear and ballistic missile threats, whereas Trump has signaled readiness to reach a deal even if he achieves less than fully neutralizing those threats, especially regarding ballistic missiles, as long as he can portray his achievements as far beyond Obama's.

What is at stake?

Iran has, over the decades, developed an advanced and large-scale uranium enrichment program. While enriched uranium can be used as fuel in power plants at various purity levels, at high levels it can be used to make nuclear weapons.

USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier leaves Souda Bay on the island of Crete, Greece, February 26, 2026
USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier leaves Souda Bay on the island of Crete, Greece, February 26, 2026 (credit: REUTERS/Makis Kartsonakis)

Until Israel and the US attacked its nuclear facilities last June 2025, Iran was enriching uranium to up to 60% purity, a short step from the roughly 90% that is weapons-grade.

It had enough material enriched to that level, if enriched further, for 10 nuclear weapons, according to an International Atomic Energy Agency yardstick, and more at lower levels.

That material is one of the few elements of the nuclear program that was not destroyed last year, with virtually the entire fleet of 20,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges damaged, all weapons program items damaged, and most of the top nuclear scientists killed.

Iran has yet to declare what happened to its enriched uranium or allow the IAEA nuclear watchdog agency to inspect its bombed nuclear facilities. However, Israeli officials have said that they know the whereabouts of the enriched uranium, and other sources have indicated that most or all of the uranium was buried under rubble from the nuclear sites bombed in June 2025.

What do both sides want?

Enrich elsewhere: In previous rounds of talks, the idea of a regional enrichment consortium was floated, involving a joint venture with one or more other Middle Eastern countries outside Iran. To date, Tehran has always rejected that as an alternative to enriching on its soil.

Enrichment to a low level: It becomes exponentially easier to enrich to weapons-grade the more highly enriched uranium you start with. In terms of effort, once you have enriched to 5% purity, you are more than halfway to weapons grade.

Keeping Iran at arm's length from being able to race towards nuclear weapons will involve limiting the purity it can enrich to and how much enriched uranium it can amass.

The 2015 deal let Iran enrich to 3.67% purity. Diplomats have said, only half-jokingly, that Trump's rejection of that deal is so great that 3.67% is the only enrichment level he will not accept now.

The latest leaks have indicated that Iran is prepared to commit to zero enrichment for a period of years, with negotiations between Tehran and Washington over whether that period would be three, five, seven, or 10 years.

Even after that period, the Trump administration would demand enrichment at some level below 3.67%.

Iran has demanded that it not give up the right to enrich, but showed greater readiness regarding limits, especially since it currently lacks the machines to enrich uranium.

If Trump agreed to allow such a deal, the US would likely demand far more invasive IAEA inspections than previously existed to ensure the regime's compliance.

Alternatively, Trump may decide that, absent an end to enrichment, he prefers to attack Iran.

An Iranian newspaper with a cover photo of US President Donald Trump delivering the State of the Union address, in Tehran, Iran, February 26, 2026 (credit: MAJID ASGARIPOUR/WANA
An Iranian newspaper with a cover photo of US President Donald Trump delivering the State of the Union address, in Tehran, Iran, February 26, 2026 (credit: MAJID ASGARIPOUR/WANA (WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY) VIA REUTERS)

What else needs to be addressed?

Any deal would also have to require thorough accounting for Iran's stock of enriched uranium. Any doubts about that could trigger a new conflict.

As in 2015, a deal would most likely require diluting or removing enriched uranium and would limit the number of centrifuges and where they can be used.

Little has been discussed about ballistic missiles.

The US, at a minimum, would likely want Iran to stop activities that could lead to developing intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which could eventually strike the continental US.

Israel wants the range of ballistic missiles to be cut to below 1000 kilometers so that they will no longer be able to reach the Jewish state.

Alternatively, Jerusalem wants to preserve its right to strike the Islamic Republic's ballistic missile program, even if the US promises not to strike, in the event that the ballistic missile program is not sufficiently curbed to avoid threatening Israel.

Reuters contributed to this story.


Yonah Jeremy Bob

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-888117

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Rubio: Iran missile threat to US ‘unsustainable’ - Joshua Marks

 

by Joshua Marks

The secretary of state warns Tehran's expanding missile arsenal and bid for ICBMs endanger U.S. forces, allies and the homeland as Geneva nuclear talks resume.

 

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks to reporters at Robert L. Bradshaw International Airport in Basseterre, Saint Kitts and Nevis, on Feb. 25, 2026, after meetings with Caribbean Community leaders. Photo by Jonathan Ernst/Pool/AFP via Getty Images.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks to reporters at Robert L. Bradshaw International Airport in Basseterre, Saint Kitts and Nevis, on Feb. 25, 2026, after meetings with Caribbean Community leaders. Photo by Jonathan Ernst/Pool/AFP via Getty Images.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called Iran’s refusal to discuss its ballistic missile program a “big problem” and an “unsustainable threat” to the American home front ahead of Thursday’s indirect nuclear talks in Geneva, the third round this month between Washington and Tehran.

“Iran possesses a very large number of ballistic missiles, particularly short-range ballistic missiles that threaten the United States and our bases in the region and our partners in the region, and all of our bases—in the UAE, in Qatar, in Bahrain, and they also possess naval assets that threaten shipping and try to threaten the U.S. Navy,” the top American diplomat said on Wednesday.

“So I want everybody to understand that beyond just a nuclear program, they possess these conventional weapons that are solely designed to attack America and attack Americans, if they choose to do so,” Rubio continued.

Rubio delivered his warning about Iran’s missile ambitions while speaking to reporters in a departure lounge at Robert L. Bradshaw International Airport in Basseterre, Saint Kitts and Nevis following meetings with Caribbean Community (CARICOM) leaders.

The United States currently maintains around 30,000–40,000 troops in the Middle East region, The New York Times reported, including at bases operating near Iran.

Rubio has told lawmakers in recent weeks that Iranian missiles can reach about nine bases where U.S. forces are stationed. “They are all within range of a system comprising thousands of Iranian drones and short-range ballistic missiles threatening our force presence,” Rubio told lawmakers, according to The Wall Street Journal.

“These things have to be addressed. The negotiations tomorrow and the talks tomorrow will be largely focused on the nuclear program, and we hope progress can be made because that’s the president’s preference, to make progress on the diplomatic front,” he asserted on Wednesday. “But it’s also important to remember that Iran refuses to talk about the ballistic missiles to us or to anyone, and that’s a big problem.”

U.S. President Donald Trump again dispatched U.S. envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to meet indirectly with Iranian regime officials led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Thursday.

Oman has been mediating the talks, the first of which took place in Muscat and the second round in Geneva.

After the U.S. and Iranian delegations were reported leaving the talks on Thursday afternoon, Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said the parties exchanged “creative and positive ideas in Geneva today.”

“Both U.S. and Iranian negotiators have adjourned for a break. We’ll resume later today. We hope to make more progress,” he tweeted.

While Jerusalem insists that the Iranian regime’s ballistic missile program, along with Tehran’s regional terror proxies, both of which pose direct threats to Israel, be on the table during the talks, Rubio warned that the Islamic Republic is seeking to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching the continental United States and already possesses weapons that can reach much of Europe.

The Trump administration official cited, as an example, the Iranian regime’s attempts to launch satellites into space and to increase the range of its current missile stock, saying that the “ranges continue to grow exponentially.”

Rubio expressed astonishment that the Iranian regime is able to invest so heavily in its ballistic missile program despite “facing sanctions, with an economy in tatters and a population that is suffering.” He continued: “Somehow they still find the money to invest in missiles of greater and greater capacity every year. This is an unsustainable threat.”

Rubio pointed to Trump’s Tuesday night State of the Union address, saying the president had been “clear” that he “always prefers diplomacy.” However, Rubio emphasized that “Iran poses a very grave threat to the United States and has for a very long time. They are in possession, first and foremost, after their nuclear program was obliterated, they were told not to try to restart it and here they are, you can see … trying to rebuild elements of it. They’re not enriching right now but they’re trying to get to the point where they ultimately can.”

U.S. Vice President JD Vance said on Tuesday about the upcoming Geneva talks that “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon; if they try to rebuild the nuclear weapon, that causes problems for us, and in fact we’ve seen evidence that they have tried to do exactly that. He stressed that Trump is sending the negotiating team to try to address that issue and reiterated that the president has said he prefers diplomacy, “but of course the president has other options as well.”

Trump said at the State of the Union that Iran has not yet given up on its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

The president told the assembled members of Congress, Supreme Court, the U.S. military and his administration that the United States warned Iran not to attempt to rebuild its weapons programs after Operation Midnight Hammer in June.

“We wiped it out, and they want to start all over again, and are at this moment again, pursuing their sinister ambitions,” said Trump.

“We are in negotiations with them,” he added. “They want to make a deal, but we haven’t heard those secret words, ‘We will never have a nuclear weapon.’”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday that Trump prefers diplomacy as his first option but is prepared to use force if needed.

The Pentagon has assembled a massive U.S. air and naval buildup in the Middle East, the largest force buildup in the region since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, with two aircraft carrier strike groups and other warships, along with a large complement of U.S. combat and support aircraft, deployed to waters including the Arabian Sea and eastern Mediterranean. 


Joshua Marks

Source: https://www.jns.org/rubio-iran-missile-threat-to-us-unsustainable/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Is There a Trump Great Game? - Victor Davis Hanson

 

by Victor Davis Hanson

Trump’s strategy prizes preemptive deterrence over drift or isolation, exploiting leverage to sap rivals, steady allies, and avert the cascading conflicts that metastasized under Obama and Biden.

 

Critics of Trump’s second-term foreign policy—the usual Left and some on the neo-isolationist Right—claim it is recklessly herky jerky and guided by no consistent grand strategy.

Yet, in both the first Trump administration’s National Security Strategy paper and its second-term update, he clearly disdained ground wars abroad, nation-building, and isolationism.

A better description of U.S. strategy across Trump’s two terms in office might be called Jacksonian or preemptive deterrence.

That is, Trump’s foreign policy neither ignores nor merely reacts to crises.

Instead, it seeks out favorable cost-benefit scenarios to weaken its strategic enemies and bolster its friends.

The aim is to preclude the outbreak of major wars of the sort that were common during the Obama and Biden years.

Those two administrations projected indifference abroad and anemic deterrence. As a result, four major theater conflicts broke out during their tenures: the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea, the 2014 absorption of much of the Donbas, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the 2024–25 Middle East theater war.

Some telling first-term examples of the Trump grand strategy were the lethal strikes on Iranian general and terrorist mastermind Qasem Soleimani and ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. The 2018 demolition of a Wagner Group force in Syria and the 2018–19 bombing of ISIS into irrelevance also restored a deterrent U.S. presence in the Middle East.

Trump’s first-term warnings to China and Russia, respectively, not to move on Taiwan or invade Ukraine, were effective—as were ultimatums to North Korea to cease its reckless missile launches.

However, the ensuing Biden administration’s skedaddle from Afghanistan, its mixed prewar signals to Putin, and the pathetic efforts to reenter the Iran deal and to put distance between Israel and the U.S. all collapsed prior U.S. deterrence, ensuring the outbreak of major wars.

Biden’s own cognitive decline and his policies of open borders, therapeutic woke/DEI Pentagon initiatives, and uncertainty over who was in charge of U.S. foreign policy also confirmed an image of an America adrift at home and abroad.

Trump’s second-term strategy has focused on diminishing the power and influence of China, weakening Russia while offering it an eventual out by détente/reset with the West, and neutering Chinese–Russian terrorist client states.

Compare the following:

  1. Trump’s confrontation with Panama about its de facto violations of the spirit and the law of the Panama Canal Treaty eroded China’s effort to absorb or control the canal.
  2. In Venezuela, the removal of the Maduro Marxist government and the restoration of the Monroe Doctrine restored U.S. predominance in the Western Hemisphere—again, at the expense of China.
  3. Closing the U.S. southern border, stern warnings to the Mexican government, and efforts to stop Chinese shipments of raw fentanyl to the cartels have likewise damaged China’s Western Hemisphere efforts.
  4. The diminution of the Iranian nuclear threat, and perhaps soon even the theocracy itself, with the end of the Assad regime in Syria—both terrorist states supported and aided by North Korea, Russia, and China—also restored American preeminence in the Middle East.
  5. Record U.S. oil and gas production lowered world prices at the expense of Russia and the Middle East. Interrupting embargoed oil shipments from Venezuela and Iran has weakened Chinese influence and nearly strangled Cuba.
  6. Passive-aggressive, tough-love talk with NATO members encouraged (or enraged) Europeans to raise their NATO spending targets from 2 to 5 percent and expand the alliance with strategically valuable members like Finland and Sweden. Trump’s appeal to Europe’s self-interest (and its innate anti-American chauvinism) helps the region rearm and deter Russia, while freeing up U.S. assets for an increased Western profile in Asia and the Pacific.
  7. Efforts to strangle the Cuban and Iranian governments will starve their respective anti-Western surrogates and their own terrorist efforts in Latin America and the Middle East—once more to China’s chagrin.
  8. Pivoting the defense budget toward both weapon quantity and quality, prioritizing battlefield efficacy over social agendas, and expanding the number of defense contractors will increase American lethality.
  9. Quietly continuing aid to Ukraine to ensure it does not lose the war, while appealing to Putin that it is in his self-interest to cut his catastrophic losses, could restore Russian triangulation with the West vis-à-vis China.
  10. The Trump domestic economic, social, and cultural counterrevolution has encouraged the spread of conservative, pro-American governance in South America, Japan, and soon Europe as well—with negative consequences to China.

The media has fixated on Trump’s tariffs and his provocative tweets. Meanwhile, he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have already done more to hinder China and its terrorist clients and proxies than any administration in memory.


Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He is an American military historian, columnist, a former classics professor, and scholar of ancient warfare. He has been a visiting professor at Hillsdale College since 2004, and is the 2023 Giles O'Malley Distinguished Visiting Professor at the School of Public Policy, Pepperdine University. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007 by President George W. Bush, and the Bradley Prize in 2008. Hanson is also a farmer (growing almonds on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author of the just released New York Times best seller, The End of Everything: How Wars Descend into Annihilation, published by Basic Books on May 7, 2024, as well as the recent  The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won, The Case for Trump, and The Dying Citizen.

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2026/02/26/is-there-a-trump-great-game/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran waged decades-long revolutionary terror war against U.S. in Middle East — and here at home - Jerry Dunleavy

 

by Jerry Dunleavy

Iran killed hundreds of Americans across the Middle East, with its Hezbollah proxy being the most effective terrorist group against the U.S. prior to Al-Qaeda's terror attacks on 9/11.

 

The revolutionary Iranian regime — which may possibly find itself in a war with the United States in the coming days — has positioned itself as an adversary of the U.S. ever since it came into power decades ago in 1979.

President Donald Trump appears to be moving toward striking Iran, with the U.S. military moving significant military assets into the region, insisting he would prefer to strike a deal with the Iranian regime but that, if it comes to war, his top general has told him “it will be something easily won.”

Much of the discussion around possible conflict has focused on the Iranian regime’s nuclear program, its ballistic missiles, and its support of regional terrorist proxies — but not as much attention has been placed on a host of Iranian-directed terrorist attacks against U.S. troops, diplomats, and citizens which have killed hundreds of Americans. Iran has also sought to carry out a number of attempted plots on U.S. soil as well.

“Hezbollah has been involved in numerous anti-U.S. terrorist attacks, including the suicide truck bombings of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in April 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in October 1983, and the U.S. Embassy annex in Beirut in September 1984, as well as the hijacking of TWA 847 in 1985 and the Khobar Towers attack in Saudi Arabia in 1996,” the Office of the Director of National Intelligence says.

Iranian regime uses terror proxies to target Americans across the Middle East

Radical Iranian students and operatives backed by since-deceased Ayatollah Khomeini took dozens of American embassy staffers hostage in 1979 and held them for 444 days.

Since then, Iranian-backed terrorists have been determined to be behind the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon which killed 241 U.S. service members, as well as the deadly bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon that year. That attack killed 17 Americans. The Iranian regime was behind the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia which killed 19 U.S. Air Force personnel.

Iran and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) played a key role in fueling the deadly insurgency in Iraq after the U.S. invaded in 2003, with a spokesman for the Defense Department stating in 2019 that Iran was responsible for “at least 603” U.S. service member deaths.

There is also significant evidence that Iran collaborated with the Taliban and al-Qaeda to carry out attacks against U.S. troops, international coalition forces, and the Afghan republic’s military in an effort to eject the West from Afghanistan.

The State Department also assessed that, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, "Iran has allowed al-Qaeda facilitators to operate a core facilitation pipeline through Iran since at least 2009, enabling AQ to move funds and fighters” and that “senior AQ leaders continued to reside in Iran and facilitate terrorist operations from there."

Just the News reported this week on how al-Qaeda leader Saif Al-Adel — the successor to al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman Al-Zawahiri — had been shielded by the Iranian government for decades and is believed to currently run the terrorist group behind the 9/11 attacks under the protection of Tehran.

The Treasury Department has noted that “until September 11, 2001, Hezbollah was responsible for more American deaths than any other terrorist organization.”

Iranian regime has sought to conduct kidnappings and assassinations on U.S. soil

The Justice Department announced in 2011 that Manssor Arbabsiar, a naturalized U.S. citizen who held an Iranian passport, had been arrested in an Iranian military-linked plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. at Café Milano in Washington, D.C. 

Then-Attorney General Eric Holder said at the time that Arbabsiar “is accused of working with members of an arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps to devise an international murder-for-hire scheme targeting the Saudi Arabian Ambassador.” Arbabsiar pleaded guilty in 2012 and was sentenced to 25 years in prison.

The Justice Department announced in 2021 that “Iranian intelligence services allegedly plotted to kidnap a U.S. journalist and human rights activist” — Masih Alinejad — “from New York City for rendition to Iran.” A number of those involved in the plot were convicted, while others remain at large in Iran.

The DOJ again announced in 2024 that another man, Carlisle Rivera, had been hired “to murder Masih Alinejad on instructions from high-ranking members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.” He pleaded guilty.

Federal prosecutors have also alleged that two Iranian-linked plots to assassinate then-candidate Donald Trump — including one plot directly linked to Iranian intelligence services — were launched in 2024 as Iran sought to meddle in the election to stop Trump’s return to the White House.

The Justice Department filed charges against Pakistani national Asif Merchant and against Afghan national Farhad Shakeri in 2024 for their alleged roles in Iranian-backed assassination plots.  The former defendant’s murky plot seemed to target Trump, while the latter defendant’s more sophisticated plot was definitely aimed at the now-president.

Merchant has pleaded not guilty, and the trial against him is slated to begin late this month. Shakeri remains at large in Iran.

U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut: 2,000 pounds of explosives

The CIA noted that “a suicide bomber crashed a truck into the front of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut and detonated 2,000 pounds of explosives” in April 1983, and that “the massive blast killed 63 people, including 17 Americans, eight of whom were CIA officers, and wounded more than 100 others.”

“The Islamic Jihad Organization, which later became part of Hezbollah, claimed responsibility,” the agency said. “The terrorists targeted the Embassy in an effort to force Americans to leave the country.”

A federal court ruling from 2005 noted that now-former Ambassador Robert Oakley — who had coordinated the State Department's counterterrorism efforts and was tasked with figuring out who conducted the 1983 embassy bombing, testified that it was"very clear that Islamic Jihad [Hezbollah] was behind the bombing in 1983."

The judge noted that Oakley further had "confiden[ce] that the government of Iran was involved directly in the Hezbollah organization, which was created, armed, trained, protected, [and] provided technical assistance by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards."

The State Department’s Patterns of Global Terrorism: 1983 report — released in 1984 — assessed at the time that “most instances of state-supported terrorism occurred in Lebanon” and that “there, radical Lebanese Shias, using the nom de guerre Islamic Jihad, operated with Iranian support and encouragement from Syrian-controlled territory.”

The department found that these Iranian-backed terrorist groups “were responsible for the suicide bombing attacks against the U.S. Embassy and the headquarters of the US and French contingents of the Multinational Force in Beirut.”

“It turns out that the embassy was hit essentially by Hezbollah, even though that was not clear at the time,” Robert Dillon, the U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon at the time of the attack, said in 2013. “Hezbollah had Iranian support. It was simply a blow at the most visible symbol of American presence. … My outrage over Lebanon has shaped my career.”

The Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training, founded by retired foreign service officers, says that “the attack is thought of as the beginning of anti-U.S. attacks from Islamist groups.”

An even deadlier Iranian-backed Hezbollah attack on the U.S. in Lebanon was still in the offing.

Marine barracks bombing in Beirut: “Over 12,000 pounds of TNT”

The U.S. Marine Corps memorial website says that “220 Marines, 18 U.S. Navy sailors, and 3 U.S. Army soldiers lost their lives in the Marine Barracks at the Beirut Airport” in October 1983.

The Defense Department’s December 1983 "Report of the DoD Commission on Beirut International Airport Terrorist Act" assessed that “a truck laden with the equivalent of over 12,000 pounds of TNT crashed through the perimeter of the compound of the U.S. contingent of the Multinational Force at Beirut International Airport” and that “the force of the explosion destroyed the building resulting in the deaths of 241 U.S. military personnel.”

The Pentagon report said that the FBI’s Forensic Laboratory “described the terrorist bomb as the largest conventional blast ever seen by the FBI's forensic explosive experts.” The Pentagon said its commission “concludes that international terrorist acts endemic to the Middle East are indicative of an alarming world-wide phenomenon that poses an increasing threat to U.S. personnel and facilities.”

Judge Royce Lamberth issued a 2003 court opinion where “the Court finds that it is beyond question that Hezbollah and its agents received massive material and technical support from the Iranian government” and that “the sophistication demonstrated” in the attack along with “the devastating effect of the detonation” made it “highly unlikely that this attack could have resulted in such loss of life without the assistance of regular military forces, such as those of Iran.”

Lamberth ruled that “the complicity of Iran in the 1983 attack was established conclusively at trial by the testimony” of Admiral James Lyons, who had been the deputy chief of naval operations for plans, policy and operation at the time of the attack.

“It is clear that the formation and emergence of Hezbollah as a major terrorist organization is due to the government of Iran,” Lamberth ruled. “Hezbollah presently receives extensive financial and military technical support from Iran, which funds and supports terrorist activities. The primary agency through which the Iranian government both established and exercised operational control over Hezbollah was the” Iranian MOIS.

Lamberth said that the Iranian ministry “acted as a conduit for the Islamic Republic of Iran's provision of funds to Hezbollah, provided explosives to Hezbollah and, at all times relevant to these proceedings, exercised operational control over Hezbollah.”

Khobar Towers bombing was “largest non-nuclear explosion ever up to that time”

Then-Defense Secretary William Perry published a report later in 1996 which said that “Khobar Towers is a residential compound built by the Saudi Government near Dhahran that housed the residential quarters of almost 3,000 U. S. military personnel” along with military personnel from the United Kingdom, France, and Saudi Arabia. Perry said that “on Tuesday, June 25, 1996, a fuel truck parked next to the northern perimeter fence at the Khobar Towers complex” and that “Air Force guards began to evacuate the building, but were unable to complete this task before a tremendous explosion occurred.”

“The blast completely destroyed the northern face of the building, blew out windows from surrounding buildings, and was heard for miles,” the defense secretary said. “Nineteen American servicemen were killed and hundreds more were seriously injured [...] In addition, many Saudis and other nationals were injured.”

A federal court ruling said that “the investigation determined that the force of the explosion was the equivalent of 20,000 pounds of TNT” and that “the Defense Department said that it was the largest non-nuclear explosion ever up to that time.”

Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft announced in June 2001 — just a few months before 9/11 — that a federal grand jury had charged “fourteen individuals with murder, attempted murder of federal employees, conspiracy to commit murder, and conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction” related to the Khobar Towers attack which had killed nineteen U.S. airmen and wounded 372 other Americans.

“Named as defendants are the leader of the Saudi Hezbollah terrorist organization, as well as several prominent members, including the head of the Saudi Hezbollah's military wing, along with members of terrorist cells in Saudi Arabia who planned and carried out the Khobar attack,” Ashcroft said.

The attorney general added that “the indictment explains that elements of the Iranian government inspired, supported, and supervised members of the Saudi Hezbollah” and that “the charged defendants reported their surveillance activities to Iranian officials and were supported and directed in those activities by Iranian officials.”

The FBI said that month that Iranian officials were kept apprised of planning for the attack, and that, in 1995, “an Iranian military officer directed” Hezbollah members “to conduct surveillance on the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia for sites of possible future attacks against Americans.” The indictment also said that “the attack would serve Iran by driving the Americans from the Gulf region.”

Lamberth ruled in 2006 that “the attack was carried out by individuals recruited principally by a senior official of the IRGC, Brigadier General Ahmed Sharifi” and that Sharifi “planned the operation and recruited individuals for the operation at the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Syria.” The judge also concluded that this Iranian general  “provided the passports, the paperwork, and the funds for the individuals who carried out the attack.”

The judge also ruled that “the terrorist attack on the Khobar Towers was approved by Ayatollah Khameini, the Supreme leader of Iran at the time” and that “it was also approved and supported by the Iranian Minister of Intelligence and Security at the time, Ali Fallahian, who was involved in providing intelligence security support for the operation. Fallahian’s representative in Damascus, a man named Nurani, also provided support for the operation.”

“The six individuals also indicated that the selection of the target and the authorization to proceed was done collectively by Iran, MOIS, and IRGC, though the actual preparation and carrying out of the attack was done by the IRGC,” the judge ruled.

Qassem Soleimani and the IRGC helped kill over 600 U.S. troops in Iraq

The Iranian regime — in particular the IRGC — was also responsible for the deaths of hundreds of U.S. troops in Iraq through the provision of explosives and weapons to Shiite terrorist insurgents in the country, according to multiple U.S. government assessments.

General Joe Dunford testified to the Senate in 2015 that “I know the total number of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines that were killed by Iranian activities, and the number has been recently reported as about 500. We were not always able to attribute the casualties that we had to Iranian activity, although many times we suspected it was Iranian activity, even though we did not necessarily have the forensics to support that.”

Later that year, U.S. Central Command spokeswoman Major Genieve David echoed the estimate of 500 Americans killed through a hidden Iranian hand.

“It is important to understand that the CENTCOM statistics on EFP [explosively formed penetrator] detonations are a subset of all the Iranian activities estimated to have killed approximately 500 U.S. troops in Iraq during OIF [Operation Iraqi Freedom],” David said at the time.

A spokesperson for the Defense Department revealed in 2019 that the Iranian regime was behind the deaths of “at least” 603 troops in Iraq, and that “the casualties were the result of explosively formed penetrators, other improvised explosive devices, improvised rocket-assisted munitions, rockets, mortars, rocket-propelled grenades, small-arms, sniper, and other attacks in Iraq.”

“In Iraq, I can announce today, based on declassified U.S. military reports, that Iran is responsible for the deaths of at least 608 American service members,” then-Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook also said in 2019. “This accounts for 17 percent of all deaths of U.S. personnel in Iraq from 2003 to 2011. This death toll is in addition to the many thousands of Iraqis killed by the IRGC’s proxies.”

The Defense Intelligence Agency assessed later that year that “during the Iraq War, Iran established strong ties with Shia militia groups, some of which have received Iranian financial backing for decades” and that “using Iranian-provided weapons, these groups were responsible for at least 603 U.S. personnel killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2011.”

The U.S. military struck and killed IRGC-Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani in early January 2020, with the Defense Department stating that “General Soleimani and his Quds Force were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more.”

A couple weeks after deadly Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7, 2023, former State Department official Nathan Sales stressed to Congress that “the IRGC was responsible for killing 603 American soldiers in Iraq, in part due to the advanced explosively formed penetrators it provided to its terror proxies in the country” and that “that is one-sixth of  all U.S. fatalities during the war in Iraq.”

Iran helped the Taliban kill Americans

report from the U.S. military’s Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization assessed in 2006 that “the smuggling of Iranian weapons to Afghan insurgent groups is simply another tool to leverage against foreign threats while maintaining overall cooperation in the stabilization of Afghanistan.” The report said at the time that Iran’s goal was to “actively extend Iranian influence and maintain strategic awareness of important actors at the state, substate, and non-state levels.”

Thomas Joscelyn, then a senior fellow at Foundation for Defense of Democracies, wrote in 2010 that it had been reported that “based on Taliban sources, that the Iranians are paying bounties to the Taliban to kill American soldiers” and that “we learn that the going rate is $1,000 per dead American and $6,000 for each American vehicle that is destroyed.”

“This isn’t the first time we’ve heard of Iran paying out rewards for dead Americans,” the FDD terrorism analyst added. “When WikiLeaks released tens of thousands of U.S. military documents earlier this year, a number of intelligence reports pointing to collusion between Iran and the Taliban (as well as al-Qaeda) came to light.”

The Defense Intelligence Agency assessed in 2019 that “since at least 2007, Iran has provided calibrated support — including weapons, training, and funding — to the Taliban” in an effort to “counter U.S. and Western influence in Afghanistan … and increase Tehran’s influence in any post-reconciliation government.” 

It was reported by CNN in 2020 that U.S. intelligence agencies had assessed that the Iranian regime had offered bounties to Taliban fighters to encourage them to target U.S. and coalition troops, with Iran making the bounty payments to the Haqqani Network after successful Taliban attacks on troops in Afghanistan.

Long War Journal senior editor Bill Roggio tweeted in 2022 that “we found evidence that Iran’s IRGC was providing funds to Taliban and al-Qaeda-led terror cells operating in and around Kabul.”

“These IRGC-supported cells were known as the Kabul Attack Network,” Roggio said. “The IRGC was financing some of the most spectacular attacks in the heart of Afghanistan, against U.S., NATO and Afghan security forces, as well as civilians.”

The Long War Journal analyst said that “Iran found common ground with the Taliban, al-Qaeda, & other groups as they all wanted to kill & wound U.S. servicemen, & drive up the cost for the U.S. to remain in Afghanistan. Iran feared the U.S. on its eastern & western borders (Afghanistan & Iraq), & wanted the U.S. out.”

“Iran (along with Pakistan) succeeded in helping the Taliban/Syndicate wear down the U.S. and force it to abandon Afghanistan,” Roggio concluded. “Iran achieved its primary goal – force the U.S. to leave.”

The Taliban — which protected al-Qaeda before and after 9/11 — rapidly took over Afghanistan in August 2021 amid a chaotic U.S. withdrawal and evacuation. 


Jerry Dunleavy

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/iran-waged-decades-long-revolutionary-terror-war-against-us-middle-east-and

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

President Trump's Proliferating 'Board of War' - Khaled Abu Toameh

 

by Khaled Abu Toameh

The PA wants to return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join forces with it.

 

  • Recently, there have been attempts to give Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority (PA) a role in post-war management of the Gaza Strip -- along with Qatar, Turkey and Pakistan, all Islamists and long-term adversaries of Israel.

  • Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA.

  • Mladenov seems to believe that the PA can play a positive role in the Gaza Strip, even though polls published by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research have consistently shown that more than 80% of Palestinians believe it is corrupt.

  • Unsurprisingly, Palestinian officials were quick to welcome Mladenov's announcement: it whitewashes the PA and makes it appear as a legitimate and credible party in post-war Gaza arrangements.

  • Meanwhile, a senior Palestinian official closely associated with PA President Mahmoud Abbas, Azzam al-Ahmad, also Secretary-General of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), told the Egyptian newspaper Al-Shorouq, in an interview published on February 23, that "Hamas is not a terrorist organization and we reject its disarmament."

  • Al-Ahmad also rejected [other] demands by the Trump administration....

  • The statements by al-Ahmad are proof that the PA leadership continues to talk in two voices: one in Arabic intended for Arab audiences and the second in English directed at Westerners.

  • Based on public opinion polls conducted in late 2025, a large majority of Palestinians share al-Ahmad's opposition to the disarmament of Hamas. Just because many Palestinians might be enraged at Hamas does not mean they are ready to live peacefully side-by-side with Israel.

  • What we are currently witnessing is an attempt to bring the PA back into the Gaza Strip through the back door. If the PA does not consider Hamas a terror organization and wants it to keep its weapons, what exactly is it going to do in the Gaza Strip? Pay salaries to Hamas and its employees? Or perhaps serve as a channel for transferring billions of dollars in aid to Hamas?

  • In light of al-Ahmad's statements, it is clear that the PA's return to the Gaza Strip would only help Hamas and other terror groups maintain their political and security control of the territory. Al-Ahmad is currently trying to convince Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terror groups to join the PLO. According to reports, that is why he recently met in Egypt with representatives of the terror groups.

  • The PA wants to return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join forces with it.

Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA. Pictured: Mladenov speaks at the "Board of Peace" meeting in Davos, Switzerland on January 22, 2026. (Photo by Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)

Recently, there have been attempts to give Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority (PA) a role in post-war management of the Gaza Strip -- along with Qatar, Turkey and Pakistan, all Islamists and long-term adversaries of Israel.

Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA.

Mladenov seems to believe that the PA can play a positive role in the Gaza Strip, even though polls published by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research have consistently shown that more than 80% of Palestinians believe it is corrupt.

According to Mladenov's office:

"The Liaison Office will provide an official and organized channel for communication and coordination between the office of the UN Special Coordinator and the Palestinian Authority, ensuring that correspondence is received and transmitted through a clear institutional mechanism...

"The office of the UN Special Coordinator looks forward to working with the liaison office to implement the twenty-point peace plan announced by President Trump, in alignment with UN Security Council Resolution 2803 (2025), and to build a brighter future for the people of Gaza and the entire region."

Unsurprisingly, Palestinian officials were quick to welcome Mladenov's announcement: it whitewashes the PA and makes it appear as a legitimate and credible party in post-war Gaza arrangements.

In a letter to Mladenov, the PA's No. 2, Hussein al-Sheikh, wrote:

"I am pleased to express our welcome of the statement issued by your Office regarding the establishment of a Palestinian Authority Liaison Office and your affirmation of the importance of this institutional framework for communication and coordination. In this context, we wish to reaffirm that the contacts held with you, as well as the ongoing consultations with Mr. Steve Witkoff, Mr. Jared Kushner, and a number of partners, have all taken place within the framework of ensuring the success of the efforts led by President Donald Trump and supporting the political track aimed at achieving stability and peace."

Meanwhile, a senior Palestinian official closely associated with PA President Mahmoud Abbas, Azzam al-Ahmad, also Secretary-General of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), told the Egyptian newspaper Al-Shorouq, in an interview published on February 23, that "Hamas is not a terrorist organization and we reject its disarmament."

Al-Ahmad also rejected demands by the Trump administration that the PA implement significant structural, financial, educational, and security reforms and end its "Pay-for-Slay" program to reward Palestinians involved in terrorism as a precondition for playing a role in the management of the Gaza Strip.

Both Fatah and the PLO, headed by Abbas, dominate the PA, which was established in accordance with the 1993 Oslo Accord signed between Israel and the PLO. As such, the PA is often labeled by some Israelis and Westerns as Israel's "peace partner" due to its alleged readiness to make peace with Israel.

Al-Ahmad dismissed the demand that Hamas have no role in the Gaza Strip and said the terror group was "part of the Palestinian national movement." He went on to reject demands by the Trump Administration for the PA to implement reforms.

"All talk about disarming Hamas and labeling them a terrorist organization is unacceptable to us," al-Ahmad announced.

"Hamas is not a terrorist organization. We have never considered them a terrorist organization, and we always reject any decision issued by any international institution or government to classify them as a terrorist organization, as they are part of the Palestinian national fabric."

Hamas, incidentally, has been designated as a terrorist organization by several countries and international bodies, including the US, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, in addition to Israel.

Al-Ahmad said the Palestinian leadership was opposed to any attempt to exclude Hamas from participating in the management of the Gaza Strip:

"They don't want Hamas to have any role in the Gaza Strip, and we completely reject this because Hamas is part of the Palestinian national movement."

Al-Ahmad also rejected demands by the Trump administration that the PA implement significant structural, financial, educational, and security reforms and end its "Pay-for-Slay" program to reward Palestinians involved in terrorism as a precondition for playing a role in the management of the Gaza Strip.

"It is impossible to tamper with the [Palestinian] school curriculum, and we will not allow any modifications," al-Ahmed stressed.

"The changes they are demanding include removing the word 'Palestine' and the map of Palestine from the curriculum and prohibiting the display of the Palestinian flag in textbooks. This is unacceptable. What they are calling for is a contrived reform, and we tell them that we have more intelligent and educated people than they do, and we have more scholars than they do, some of whom are relied upon by America. Therefore, we believe that the main purpose of these demands is simply to waste time."

The PA ruled the Gaza Strip from 1994 until 2007, when Hamas seized the entire territory from the PA in a violent and bloody coup. Since 2007, the PA (together with Fatah and the PLO) has been operating only in the West Bank, where Hamas has no substantial political or military activities thanks to the presence there of the Israel Defense Forces.

The PA, an extremely corrupt and unpopular regime, has indicated its eagerness to return to the Gaza Strip to assist in the management of day-to-day affairs and reconstruction after two years of a war that began on October 7, 2023, when thousands of Hamas terrorists and other Palestinians invaded Israel and murdered, wounded, tortured, mutilated and kidnapped thousands of Israelis and foreign nationals.

The statements by al-Ahmad are proof that the PA leadership continues to talk in two voices: one in Arabic intended for Arab audiences and the second in English directed at Westerners.

To his credit, al-Ahmad, unlike many senior PA officials, does not mince words when it comes to the true position of the Palestinian leadership.

When he says that Hamas is not a terror organization, he is reflecting the views of the majority of Palestinians who, according to polls, continue to support Hamas and its October 7 atrocities. Based on public opinion polls conducted in late 2025, a large majority of Palestinians share al-Ahmad's opposition to the disarmament of Hamas. Just because many Palestinians might be enraged at Hamas does not mean they are ready to live peacefully side-by-side with Israel.

Al-Ahmad's remarks about rejecting the Trump administration's demands for reforms in PA government institutions also show that the Palestinian leadership has no intention of changing.

What we are currently witnessing is an attempt to bring the PA back into the Gaza Strip through the back door. If the PA does not consider Hamas a terror organization and wants it to keep its weapons, what exactly is it going to do in the Gaza Strip? Pay salaries to Hamas and its employees? Or perhaps serve as a channel for transferring billions of dollars in aid to Hamas?

In light of al-Ahmad's statements, it is clear that the PA's return to the Gaza Strip would only help Hamas and other terror groups maintain their political and security control of the territory. Al-Ahmad is currently trying to convince Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terror groups to join the PLO. According to reports, that is why he recently met in Egypt with representatives of the terror groups.

The PA wants to return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join forces with it.


Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22312/gaza-board-of-war

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

John Fetterman speaks on possibly being lone Democrat to shake Trump's hand at State of the Union - Madison Colombo

 

by Madison Colombo

Senator warns party that 'dancing frogs' and shouting won't move the ball for voters

  

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who appeared to be the only Democrat to shake hands with President Donald Trump at Tuesday's State of the Union, argued the left's behavior won't help its cause.

"I do believe that that’s true," Fetterman said Wednesday on "America’s Newsroom" of apparently being the lone Democratic handshake.

"I shook his hand, of course. He walked in, and I'm always going to do that, for sure," he added.

A number of Democrats skipped Trump’s address to Congress, an event marked by several tense exchanges between the president and liberal lawmakers.

Trump criticized Democrats at times, while some Democratic lawmakers shouted back. Democrats also wore anti-ICE and "Release the Files" pins in protest.

PAM BONDI TORCHES DEMOCRATS FOR REFUSING TO STAND FOR GRIEVING MOTHER OF MURDERED REFUGEE AT SOTU

Sen. John Fetterman applauds during State of the Union.

Sen. John Fetterman applauds during President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address in the House chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., Feb. 24. (Daniel Heuer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

SPEECHWRITERS SPLIT AFTER TRUMP’S RECORD-BREAKING SOTU: ‘LIVING IN HIS OWN REALITY’ VS. ‘RESOUNDING SPEECH’

On the Democratic side of the aisle, there were several empty seats because lawmakers refused to attend the event. Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, was also ejected from the address for the second year in a row after holding a sign that said "BLACK PEOPLE AREN’T APES!"

Rep. Al Green holds 'BLACK PEOPLE ARENT APES' sign

Rep. Al Green holds up a sign as President Donald Trump delivers his State of the Union address during a joint session of Congress. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Fetterman described his side of the aisle as "disappointing," adding he found it sad so many of his colleagues didn’t show up.

HOUSE GOP MOVES TO CENSURE DEM WHO DISRUPTED TRUMP ADDRESS FOR 2ND STRAIGHT YEAR

"I think, show up. You don't have to clap for everything. You don't have to agree with anything," he said.

"It’s the constant kinds of yelling and screaming and holding up signs and for doing all these things. I don't care if it's a Republican or Democrat. It's a president. Just don't do that. Respect the office."

Donald J. Trump delivers the State of the Union

President Donald Trump delivers the first State of the Union address of his second term to a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., Feb. 24. (Kenny Holston/Pool via Reuters)

Some Democrats instead chose to attend the "State of the Swamp" event, intended as a response to the State of the Union. Actor Robert De Niro attended the event, which featured members of the Portland Frog Brigade dressed in inflatable frog costumes.

Fetterman argued those kinds of events aren’t helping his party with everyday voters. 

"I don't believe, as a Democrat, dancing frogs really moves the ball for us as a party either," he said.

Madison Colombo is a writer for Fox News Digital on the Flash team.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/media/john-fetterman-speaks-allegedly-being-lone-democrat-shake-trumps-hand-state-union

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

FBI obtained Kash Patel's phone records while he was a private citizen in 2022 - Misty Severi

 

by Misty Severi

The bureau also obtained White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles' phone records in 2023.

 

The FBI obtained phone records for its now-director Kash Patel during the Biden administration in 2022, while he was a private citizen, two sources confirmed to Just The News on Wednesday.

The subpoena for the phone records were issued as part of an investigation into President Donald Trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. 

It also obtained White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles' phone records in 2023. 

Patel told Reuters that the bureau's subpoenas were an example of federal overreach by unelected officials.

“It is outrageous and deeply alarming that the previous FBI leadership secretly subpoenaed my own phone records – along with those of now White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles – using flimsy pretexts and burying the entire process in prohibited case files designed to evade all oversight,” Patel said. 


Misty Severi

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/fbi-obtained-kash-patels-phone-records-while-he-was-private-citizen

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

PA drops UN General Assembly presidency bid under pressure - JNS Staff

 

by JNS Staff

Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. Danny Danon urged the Palestinian Authority to instead reform itself and “stop incitement of terrorism.”

 

Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian “permanent observer”  to the United Nations, speaks at the U.N. Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East on Oct. 9, 2024. Credit: Eskinder Debebe/U.N. Photo.
Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian “permanent observer” to the United Nations, speaks at the U.N. Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East on Oct. 9, 2024. Credit: Eskinder Debebe/U.N. Photo.

Palestinian Authority envoy Riyad Mansour has dropped his bid to preside over the U.N. General Assembly following diplomatic efforts by several countries, Israel’s ambassador to the world body said on Thursday.

Ambassador Danny Danon said Mansour withdrew his candidacy on Wednesday for an appointment for the 2026-27 session, which the Palestinians had sought with backing from the Arab Group.

Danon welcomed the move, calling the bid “yet another attempt to turn the U.N. General Assembly into a political circus against Israel and to bolster the status of the Palestinian delegation through the back door.” He urged the Palestinians to instead “stop incitement of terrorism” and reform the Palestinian Authority.

The U.N. General Assembly 2026-2027 session opens on Sept. 8. Mansour was nominated for the presidency by the 22-member Arab Group caucus on March 24, 2025.

The 193-member General Assembly elects its president annually under a rotation system, with the larger Asia-Pacific Group—which represents some 55 member states, including Arabs nations—next slated to fill the post.

In May 2024, the U.N. General Assembly approved an unprecedented measure to give the Palestinian Authority novel rights beyond those reserved for a non-state member, including the right to speak on any matter before the General Assembly and to offer amendments to resolutions.

The United States on April 18, 2024, vetoed a Security Council resolution that would have afforded the Palestinians full member-state recognition, noting that Ramallah did not have the required elements of statehood.

A U.S. State Department spokesperson told JNS last year that Washington “opposes the Palestinian Authority’s candidacy for U.N. General Assembly president.”

A non-state member has never held the assembly presidency, and such a move would create legal and political uncertainty.

The 2024 resolution did not explicitly give the Palestinian Authority the right to hold the presidency, but an interpretation by U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres stated that a P.A. representative could do so.

The Palestinian Authority was competing with at least two other candidates in the Asia-Pacific Group: Bangladesh, which declared its bid years ago and is actively campaigning, and Cyprus, which also entered the race.

The vote in the General Assembly is scheduled for June 2026.


JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/pa-drops-un-general-assembly-presidency-bid-under-pressure/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter