Abbas issued the decree on October 10, cancelling the earlier legislative election date. The new timetable combines the parliamentary vote with a presidential election previously expected in early 2027.

Palestinian officials cited security concerns, movement restrictions and difficulties preparing elections across Gaza, the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem. However, France urged the Palestinian authorities to reconsider, while Hamas supported the delay and called for national dialogue.

The decree establishes a new date but does not guarantee that the elections will take place as planned.

Why Abbas Postponed the Vote

The Palestinian presidency said the decision followed consultations with political factions and a meeting of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee.

Officials cited continuing Israeli military operations, settlement expansion, violence in the West Bank, movement restrictions and economic pressures. They also said election workers and international observers faced difficulties accessing Gaza and East Jerusalem.

In Gaza, the leadership pointed to insecurity, humanitarian conditions, incomplete Israeli military withdrawal and delays in reconstruction and stabilization arrangements. It argued that these conditions prevented authorities from guaranteeing a safe, free and inclusive vote.

These are the Palestinian leadership’s stated reasons. Israeli officials have rejected the claim that Israel is responsible for the postponement, according to reporting on their response.

What the Decree Requires

The decree calls for Palestinians in Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza to elect a president and members of the Palestinian Legislative Council on September 11, 2027.

It directs the Central Elections Commission to prepare for, organize and supervise both elections under the applicable General Elections Law.

The commission will need to address voter registration, candidate procedures, polling arrangements and election oversight. However, the new date does not establish that security and logistical obstacles have been resolved or that all factions accept every aspect of the timetable.

Different Challenges Across Palestinian Territories

The Palestinian Authority administers parts of the occupied West Bank, where Israeli military operations, settlement expansion, violence and movement restrictions complicate political activity.

Gaza faces different challenges following years of conflict and widespread destruction. Palestinian officials say security conditions and restrictions on access prevent election workers and observers from operating freely enough to guarantee a credible vote.

East Jerusalem presents another dispute. Israel controls the city and considers it part of its capital, while Palestinians claim it as the capital of a future Palestinian state. The Palestinian leadership says restrictions there threaten residents’ ability to participate in national elections.

Because the decree calls for voting across all three areas, excluding significant parts of the electorate could undermine the reach and legitimacy of the process.

National Elections Have Not Been Held for Years

Palestinians last voted in a legislative election in 2006, when Hamas won a majority in the Palestinian Legislative Council. The result deepened tensions with Fatah, the movement led by Abbas.

The political split eventually left Hamas in control of Gaza, while the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority continued administering parts of the West Bank. That division has complicated efforts to restore unified Palestinian institutions.

Abbas won the presidential election in 2005. No subsequent presidential election has taken place.

The Palestinian leadership also postponed legislative elections planned for 2021, citing the inability to ensure voting in East Jerusalem. The latest delay extends the period without a national legislative vote.

Repeated postponements have raised concerns about democratic accountability and the legitimacy of Palestinian institutions. However, political factions and voters do not necessarily share the same views about the causes or consequences of the delays.

Hamas Supports Dialogue; France Calls for Reconsideration

Hamas supported the revised timetable, saying the current conditions did not allow free and fair elections throughout the Palestinian territories. It called for comprehensive national dialogue and institutional reform.

The response does not establish that every Palestinian faction agrees with the postponement. The Cairo talks among Palestinian groups had focused on reconciliation, election arrangements and the divisions between Gaza and the West Bank.

France criticised the decision on October 11 and urged the Palestinian authorities to reconsider. Its Foreign Ministry said the delay again deprived Palestinians of an opportunity to choose their representatives through elections.

France also offered support for election preparations alongside European partners, including through an EU election observation mission launched at its request. It linked democratic renewal to the legitimacy of Palestinian institutions and the two-state solution.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar rejected the Palestinian leadership’s claim that Israeli restrictions were responsible for the postponement, according to reporting on the dispute. The competing positions do not, by themselves, settle responsibility for the obstacles to voting.

What the Delay Means for Palestinian Representation

The postponement keeps the current leadership in place longer and delays a public electoral test of its authority.

The Palestinian Authority and the PLO are separate institutions. The Palestinian Authority administers parts of the West Bank under arrangements established in the 1990s. The PLO is the broader political organization representing Palestinians internationally and includes factions beyond the Authority’s governing structure.

The presidential and legislative elections are intended to renew the mandates of the president and the Palestinian Legislative Council. They would not, by themselves, resolve the division between Gaza and the West Bank or settle all questions about the PLO’s wider representative role.

The Central Elections Commission must now prepare for the revised date while political leaders seek to address security and access concerns.

For Palestinians who have not voted in a national legislative election since 2006, the delay means another year without a new parliamentary mandate. Whether the September 2027 vote proceeds will depend on conditions on the ground, decisions by the relevant authorities and agreement on the electoral process.

Reporting Credit: Palestinian Presidency; Palestinian Central Elections Commission; Palestine Liberation Organization Executive Committee; French Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs.

The post Mahmoud Abbas Delays Palestinian Elections Until September 2027 appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The Nobel Committee announced the award on October 9. It praised Pillay’s decades of work promoting peace, human rights and accountability for serious international crimes.

However, Israel argued that the award supported accusations against the country that it considers false and politically motivated. The dispute has added to tensions between Israel and international bodies investigating alleged violations of international law during the Gaza war.

Pillay chaired a UN-mandated Commission of Inquiry that concluded in 2025 that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza. Israel strongly rejects that finding. The commission’s conclusion is not a final court judgment, and separate legal proceedings continue under different rules.

Why Israel opposed the award

Pillay chaired the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel from 2021 to 2025.

In its 2025 report, the commission said Israel had committed genocidal acts in Gaza. It also concluded that investigators had established the intent to destroy Palestinians in the territory. In addition, the commission examined statements by senior Israeli officials and found that some amounted to incitement to genocide.

Israel has repeatedly rejected these conclusions. It has also accused UN bodies of political bias and unfair treatment.

The Foreign Ministry argued that the Nobel decision gave further legitimacy to what it described as anti-Israel hatred and prejudice. By contrast, the Nobel Committee highlighted Pillay’s long record in international justice and her work to strengthen international law.

The award does not settle the dispute over the commission’s findings. Instead, it recognizes Pillay’s work, while the legal and political arguments over Gaza remain unresolved.

Pillay’s career goes beyond the Gaza inquiry

Pillay, 85, has held several senior roles in international law and human rights. She served as the UN high commissioner for human rights and as a judge and president of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Earlier in her career, she worked as a lawyer defending anti-apartheid activists in South Africa. She later helped advance international efforts to hold people accountable for serious crimes.

One landmark Rwanda tribunal case recognized that rape and sexual violence could constitute acts of genocide and crimes against humanity. The case helped shape the way international courts address sexual violence during conflict.

Pillay also served as an ad hoc judge at the International Court of Justice in a case brought by The Gambia against Myanmar under the Genocide Convention.

The Nobel Committee said her career showed why international law should apply to states and national leaders. Its award recognized her broader work, rather than serving as a court ruling on the Gaza war.

The UN inquiry and the ICJ case are different

The UN Commission of Inquiry and the International Court of Justice have separate roles.

The commission, established by the UN Human Rights Council, investigates events, gathers evidence and publishes findings. Its conclusion about genocide in Gaza does not carry the same legal status as a judgment by the ICJ.

Meanwhile, the ICJ is hearing a separate case brought by South Africa against Israel under the Genocide Convention. That case concerns whether Israel bears state responsibility under the convention.

The court has issued provisional measures during the proceedings. These measures aim to protect rights at risk while the case continues. They are not a final ruling that genocide has occurred.

These distinctions matter. A commission’s findings, a court’s interim orders and a final judgment have different legal meanings and consequences.

ICC warrants address allegations against individuals

The International Criminal Court is separate from both the UN inquiry and the ICJ. It investigates and prosecutes individuals accused of crimes within its jurisdiction.

In November 2024, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. The warrants concern alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The court said there were reasonable grounds to believe the men bore criminal responsibility for specified alleged crimes. However, an arrest warrant is not a conviction, and the allegations are not the same as a final finding of guilt.

The ICC proceedings also do not determine whether Israel, as a state, committed genocide. That question falls under a different legal process, including the separate case before the ICJ.

Meanwhile, the United States imposed sanctions on the ICC in response to the court’s actions against Israeli leaders. Those sanctions were a separate government decision and had no direct connection to the Nobel Committee’s award.

A wider dispute over international institutions

The reaction to Pillay’s award reflects a broader dispute over how international bodies investigate the Gaza war.

Israel argues that some institutions have treated the country unfairly and that their findings reflect political bias. Supporters of the commission and the Nobel decision argue that independent investigations and consistent enforcement of international law are essential to accountability.

These opposing positions concern both the evidence gathered and the credibility of the institutions examining it. Neither position, by itself, settles the legal questions under review.

The Nobel award has renewed attention to Pillay’s record and the debate over international accountability. However, the decision does not replace court proceedings, establish legal liability or resolve Israel’s objections to the commission.

Ultimately, the dispute raises questions about how international bodies investigate alleged serious crimes, how much legal weight their findings carry and how courts assess those findings through established legal procedures.

Reporting Credit: Norwegian Nobel Committee; Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs; United Nations Human Rights Council; International Court of Justice; International Criminal Court.

The post Israel Condemns Nobel Peace Prize for Navi Pillay, Deepening Rift With UN Bodies appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Families and survivors are gathering across southern Israel to remember those killed. Some are returning to places linked to the attack, including the site of the Nova music festival.

This year’s anniversary carries a different weight. All remaining Israeli hostages and their remains have returned from Gaza, according to the United Nations.

The return has changed the focus of the commemorations. Families are now mourning those who died while survivors continue to deal with the effects of the attack.

The Oct. 7 attack began the war in Gaza. Three years later, the conflict continues to shape the lives of Israelis and Palestinians.

Gaza Still Faces Severe Hardship

The ceasefire that began in October 2025 has reduced the scale of the fighting. However, it has not ended the violence or the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The United Nations says Israeli strikes and other military activity have continued. Palestinian civilians also face major restrictions on movement and access to aid.

Gaza remains heavily damaged after nearly three years of war. Large numbers of Palestinians remain displaced, often living in crowded areas with poor shelter, water and sanitation.

The UN says about 1.7 million people remain displaced. It also reports that only 19 of Gaza’s 36 hospitals are functioning even partially.

Health services remain under severe pressure. Medical supplies, fuel and equipment are still in short supply.

A Ceasefire That Has Not Ended the Crisis

The October 2025 ceasefire brought major changes, including the return of all remaining Israeli hostages and their remains.

However, the UN says the ceasefire has not yet brought lasting security or enough humanitarian assistance.

Daily strikes and other violence continue. At the same time, aid groups face funding shortages and restrictions that limit their ability to respond.

The UN has called for the ceasefire to become permanent. Secretary-General António Guterres has also urged the parties to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza at scale and respect international law.

Two Peoples Still Living With the War

For Israelis, Oct. 7 remains a day of mass loss and trauma.

Families remember relatives, friends and neighbors who were killed. Survivors continue to live with physical and emotional scars from the attack and the years that followed.

For Palestinians, the war has brought mass displacement, deaths and widespread destruction.

The UN says civilians in Gaza continue to face intolerable conditions. Humanitarian agencies are also warning about unsafe shelters, limited access to clean water and pressure on basic health services.

The anniversary therefore comes with two very different but connected experiences of loss.

Israelis are remembering the attack that changed their country. Palestinians are living with the destruction and displacement that followed.

The events of Oct. 7 continue to shape both societies. They also remain central to the unresolved political future of Gaza and the wider Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Three years later, the central questions remain unresolved: how Gaza will be governed, how it will recover and rebuild, and whether Israelis and Palestinians can move toward lasting security and peace.

Reporting Credit: United Nations; Israeli government and memorial authorities; Israel Defense Forces; Gaza Health Ministry; Palestinian humanitarian authorities; United Nations humanitarian agencies; official ceasefire records.

Reporting Credit: United Nations; Israeli government and memorial authorities; Israel Defense Forces; Gaza Health Ministry; Palestinian humanitarian authorities; United Nations humanitarian agencies; official ceasefire records.

The post Israelis Mark Oct. 7 Anniversary as Palestinians Face Lasting Gaza War Devastation appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Netanyahu said Israel had acted to prevent genocide rather than commit it and defended the conduct of the Israeli military during the war in Gaza. He also pointed to humanitarian assistance and polio vaccination efforts as evidence for his argument.

The speech came as Israel faces continuing international scrutiny over its military operations in Gaza and while the genocide case brought by South Africa against Israel remains before the International Court of Justice.

The ICJ has issued provisional measures in the case, but it has not issued a final judgment determining whether Israel committed genocide. The proceedings remain active, with the court setting further deadlines for written submissions in 2026 and beyond.

Netanyahu rejects genocide allegations

Netanyahu directly addressed the genocide accusation during his speech, arguing that Israel was fighting Hamas and seeking to protect its population.

He said Israel had facilitated large quantities of food and medical assistance into Gaza and highlighted a polio vaccination campaign as evidence that its actions were inconsistent with an intent to destroy the Palestinian population.

Israel has consistently rejected the genocide allegation, saying its military campaign is directed against Hamas following the group’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel.

Netanyahu’s government has also disputed international assessments of Israel’s conduct and has argued that Hamas operates within civilian areas, making the protection of civilians during military operations more difficult.

The genocide allegation, however, is not simply a political accusation made by Israel’s opponents.

A United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry concluded in September 2025 that Israeli authorities and security forces had committed acts constituting genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. The commission said it had found evidence supporting all four categories of genocidal acts under the Genocide Convention and concluded that Israel bore responsibility. Israel rejected the finding.

The ICJ case remains unresolved

The legal question before the International Court of Justice is separate from the UN Commission of Inquiry’s conclusion.

South Africa filed the genocide case against Israel under the 1948 Genocide Convention. The ICJ issued provisional measures during the proceedings, ordering measures intended to prevent acts within the convention’s scope and to address humanitarian conditions.

The court has not yet issued a final judgment on whether Israel committed genocide.

As of September 2026, the case remains in the written-pleadings stage. The court’s May 2026 order set November 2027 as the deadline for South Africa’s reply to Israel’s written pleading, with Israel given until May 2029 for its rejoinder.

That means the legal dispute remains unresolved despite the increasingly strong language used by governments, international organizations and advocacy groups on both sides.

Delegates walk out as Netanyahu takes the podium

The speech itself became a diplomatic confrontation.

As Netanyahu approached the General Assembly podium, scores of delegates walked out of the chamber. The departure followed a call circulated by the Palestinian mission urging UN member states to leave when the Israeli prime minister began speaking.

Netanyahu responded by criticizing those who left and challenged remaining delegates who disagreed with Israel’s position.

The largely empty chamber became one of the most visible images of the address.

UN officials repeatedly called for order as the session continued.

The walkout did not represent a formal UN decision on the genocide allegations. It was a political and diplomatic protest by individual delegations.

UN leadership has described Gaza in stark terms

Netanyahu’s rejection of the genocide allegation came only days after UN Secretary-General António Guterres addressed the General Assembly’s opening debate.

In his September 22 remarks, Guterres described the destruction and killing in Gaza as unprecedented in his experience as secretary-general and reminded member states that the ICJ had issued legally binding provisional measures in the genocide case.

He called on all parties to comply with international law and the court’s orders and urged an end to the fighting and continued humanitarian access.

The secretary-general’s statement did not constitute a judicial finding that Israel had committed genocide.

That distinction is significant because the UN system contains several different mechanisms for addressing alleged international crimes. A commission of inquiry can conduct investigations and make findings, while the ICJ determines disputes between states under international law.

Netanyahu also defended Israel’s wider military campaign

Gaza was only one part of Netanyahu’s address.

He used much of the speech to defend Israel’s military actions against Iran and its broader regional security policy, arguing that Israel had acted against threats that endangered both itself and other countries.

He described the decision to attack Iran as one of the easiest decisions he had made as prime minister and presented Israel’s military operations as part of a wider struggle against Iran and armed groups allied with Tehran.

Netanyahu also criticized a number of foreign leaders and political figures, including New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

The speech therefore served simultaneously as a defense of Israel’s conduct in Gaza, an argument for its military campaign against Iran and a broader response to international criticism.

The legal and political disputes remain separate

The continuing disagreement over Gaza reflects different kinds of claims that should not be treated as interchangeable.

Netanyahu’s statement is a political defense of Israel and a rejection of genocide allegations.

The UN Commission of Inquiry’s 2025 report is an investigative finding that Israel committed genocide.

The ICJ genocide case is a judicial proceeding that remains unresolved.

The International Criminal Court has separately issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, including starvation as a method of warfare and intentionally directing attacks against civilians. The ICC warrant does not charge Netanyahu with genocide. Israel rejects the allegations and disputes the court’s jurisdiction.

Keeping those proceedings separate is essential to accurately describing the legal situation.

A speech delivered amid continuing international pressure

Netanyahu’s appearance came at a moment of intensified diplomatic pressure over Israel’s conduct in Gaza and the broader regional conflict.

Several governments and international bodies have condemned Israel’s military actions, while Israel maintains that its operations are necessary to defend the country and defeat Hamas.

The dispute over the word “genocide” has consequently become both a legal question and a major diplomatic dividing line.

Netanyahu used the UN’s most prominent international forum to reject the allegation outright.

But his declaration did not resolve the underlying legal dispute.

That question remains before the International Court of Justice, while the findings of the UN Commission of Inquiry continue to be contested by Israel.

For now, the competing positions remain sharply defined: Israel rejects the genocide allegation; the UN Commission of Inquiry has concluded that genocide occurred; and the world’s principal court dealing with disputes between states has yet to issue a final judgment on South Africa’s case.

Reporting Credit: United Nations — General Assembly proceedings and Secretary-General’s statements on Gaza; International Court of Justice — status and procedural developments in South Africa v. Israel; UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry — findings concerning alleged genocide in Gaza; International Criminal Court — arrest warrant and stated allegations against Benjamin Netanyahu.

The post Netanyahu Rejects Gaza Genocide Accusations in UN Speech appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The 81st General Assembly opened its high-level debate Tuesday amid the ongoing U.S.-Iran war, renewed fighting in Yemen and continuing conflict involving Israel, Hamas and Hezbollah. The conflicts are also disrupting major shipping routes and contributing to pressure on global energy markets.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian arrived in New York with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and other senior officials. Pezeshkian is scheduled to address the 193-member General Assembly on Wednesday, giving Tehran a prominent international platform to present its position on the war and its conditions for diplomacy.

The visit comes as Washington and Tehran remain publicly divided over how negotiations could resume.

Iran arrives with diplomacy and distrust

Pezeshkian said before leaving Tehran that Iran would use the General Assembly to present what he described as the grievances of the Iranian people and the distrust created by the conflict.

He also expressed skepticism about returning to negotiations after what he said were attacks by the United States and Israel during previous periods of talks.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has separately criticized the United Nations’ effectiveness in resolving international conflicts while continuing diplomatic contacts around the Assembly.

Iran’s participation itself reflects the unusual circumstances surrounding this year’s meeting. The United States approved visas for Iran’s core delegation despite the countries remaining at war, allowing Pezeshkian and other senior officials to attend the UN gathering.

The diplomatic opening remains narrow.

Iran has indicated that it is prepared to discuss arrangements that could restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, while linking such a step to demands concerning military pressure and the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports.

Hormuz is at the center of the diplomatic pressure

The Strait of Hormuz has become one of the most important points in the negotiations because of its role in global oil transportation.

Iran has signaled that it could reopen the waterway to Gulf shipping under conditions that include an easing of military pressure and restrictions on Iranian ports. Reuters reported that Tehran conveyed a proposal through mediators and indicated that reopening could occur within days if its conditions were met.

The proposal has created a potential link between diplomacy and the global economic consequences of the war.

The Gulf Cooperation Council has separately called on Iran and allied armed groups to halt attacks and allow freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

GCC Secretary-General Jasem Mohamed AlBudaiwi said disruption at the two maritime chokepoints was affecting oil markets and international supply chains.

For Gulf governments, the issue is therefore not limited to the fighting inside Iran or around its territory. Shipping security has become a direct regional concern.

Washington keeps pressure on Tehran

President Donald Trump used his UN appearance Tuesday to maintain pressure on Iran while also leaving open the possibility of a diplomatic agreement.

Trump called for complete economic isolation of Iran and warned that the United States could take further action if Tehran did not reach a deal. At the same time, he said he expected an agreement could eventually be reached.

The mixed signals reflect the central diplomatic problem facing the two sides.

Washington is demanding an outcome that addresses the issues driving its campaign against Iran, while Tehran is seeking an end to military attacks and economic pressure.

Neither side has publicly accepted the other’s terms.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said the United States remains open to discussions if they can produce a positive outcome, creating a diplomatic channel even as military pressure continues.

That leaves mediators with a narrow space in which to operate.

Gulf states push for a regional diplomatic route

Qatar has been particularly active in promoting diplomacy.

Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani told the General Assembly that the Gulf was experiencing one of its most dangerous periods and argued that the crisis could be addressed through diplomatic means.

He called for reopening the Strait of Hormuz and advocated a regional system of collective security.

Qatar has also been involved in efforts to establish a temporary agreement between Iran and the United States that could restore negotiations.

Other regional mediators, including Oman and Turkey, have also been involved in diplomatic efforts surrounding the conflict.

The objective is not necessarily a comprehensive settlement at the Assembly itself.

The immediate diplomatic goal is narrower: create enough space for communication to resume and prevent another escalation while the parties remain far apart.

Yemen adds another front

The Iran crisis is unfolding alongside renewed fighting in Yemen.

Houthi forces have expanded their control along parts of the western Yemen coast, while Saudi-backed forces have intensified their campaign against them. The renewed fighting has also produced attacks affecting Saudi Arabia and the Red Sea region.

At least six people were reported killed Tuesday in airstrikes in the Houthi-controlled port city of Mokha, according to the Houthi-run Health Ministry. The strikes followed fighting and accusations involving the Houthis and internationally recognized Yemeni authorities.

The United States and several European and Asian governments have called on Iran to stop supporting the Houthis, arguing that their attacks threaten regional stability and international trade.

The Yemen conflict therefore adds another obstacle to diplomacy with Tehran.

Even if Washington and Iran were able to reopen direct negotiations, fighting involving Iranian-aligned groups elsewhere in the region would remain a separate security problem.

Gaza and Lebanon remain part of the wider crisis

The General Assembly is also confronting the continuing conflict in Gaza and Lebanon.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said in his opening address that conflicts across the Middle East were cascading and called on governments to use the high-level week to pursue de-escalation and dialogue.

He called for fighting to stop, humanitarian aid to flow and navigational rights to be restored in accordance with international law.

The UN secretary-general also said the situation in Gaza remained a central international concern, pointing to the continuing humanitarian crisis and calling for compliance with international law and relevant court orders.

The different conflicts are not one war.

They involve separate actors, territorial disputes and political objectives.

But their interaction has made diplomacy more difficult because developments on one front can alter calculations on another.

The UN faces its own test

The Assembly is taking place against growing questions about whether the United Nations can influence conflicts when major powers disagree.

The opening of the session was framed around restoring trust and making the organization more effective.

UN General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock said the Security Council’s inability to act on major issues can undermine confidence in the UN as a whole, while emphasizing that the General Assembly can assume a greater role when the Council is blocked.

Guterres similarly warned that the international system is under increasing strain.

He described the world’s conflicts as a test of whether governments can restore cooperation and uphold international law while power becomes more fragmented.

The Iran war provides one of the clearest examples of that problem.

The United States and its allies are using military and economic pressure against Tehran. Iran rejects Washington’s approach and is seeking diplomatic concessions of its own. Other governments are attempting to mediate while protecting their territories and commercial routes.

The UN provides a venue where all of those positions can be presented.

Whether it can help convert them into negotiations is less certain.

Iran diplomacy enters a narrow window

Pezeshkian’s appearance gives Iran an opportunity to present its position directly to a global audience and meet foreign leaders and mediators.

The United States also has an opportunity to test whether regional governments can help establish conditions for negotiations.

The clearest immediate issue is the Strait of Hormuz.

A reopening would reduce pressure on global shipping and energy markets, but the conditions Iran has attached to such a move remain unacceptable to Washington in their current form.

That leaves diplomacy facing a basic sequencing problem.

Iran wants pressure reduced before making concessions.

Washington wants concessions before reducing pressure.

Regional mediators are attempting to find an intermediate arrangement that can allow talks to restart without requiring either side to abandon its principal position immediately.

The UN General Assembly cannot impose such an agreement.

It can, however, provide the setting in which the governments involved meet, communicate and test possible compromises.

A diplomatic opening without a settlement

The Middle East wars have made this year’s General Assembly unusually focused on immediate security questions.

Iran’s presence in New York creates a direct diplomatic opportunity, but the positions of Tehran and Washington remain sharply divided.

The Gulf states want attacks to stop and shipping routes restored. Yemen’s renewed fighting adds another layer of regional instability. Gaza and Lebanon remain major humanitarian and security issues.

For the United Nations, the immediate test is whether the gathering can produce more than speeches.

For Iran and the United States, the test is whether the diplomatic contacts surrounding the Assembly can reopen a channel that has repeatedly broken down.

No comprehensive agreement has emerged from the current meetings.

But with the war continuing and the economic consequences spreading beyond the region, the diplomatic activity in New York has become one of the few avenues available for testing whether the conflict can move back toward negotiation.

Reporting Credit: United Nations — General Assembly opening, Secretary-General’s statements and UN diplomatic framework; United Nations General Assembly — statements from the Assembly president and official 81st-session proceedings; U.S. Department of State — U.S. diplomatic position and Iranian delegation visa decisions; Government of Iran — statements by President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi; Gulf Cooperation Council — regional position on attacks and freedom of navigation; Government of Qatar — diplomatic statements concerning Iran, the Strait of Hormuz and regional security.

The post Middle East Wars Dominate UN Assembly as Iran Diplomacy Faces New Test appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Representatives of Kosovo, the Board of Peace and the ISF signed the Participating Country Agreement in Pristina on September 7. Kosovo Defense Minister Ejup Maqedonci signed for the government alongside Kosovo Security Force commander Lt. Gen. Bashkim Jashari and ISF commander Maj. Gen. Jasper Jeffers.

The agreement formalizes Kosovo’s participation in an international force authorized under the broader Gaza framework endorsed by the United Nations Security Council.

Kosovo Already Involved in Preparatory Work

The agreement marks more than a political pledge because Kosovo Security Force personnel have already participated in preparatory work connected to the planned mission.

According to information released by the Board of Peace and the stabilization force, Kosovo personnel have worked with the ISF headquarters on logistics planning, civil-affairs coordination and unexploded-ordnance clearance.

Kosovo’s parliament previously approved the government’s decision to contribute members of its security force to the planned mission. The September agreement therefore converts an earlier commitment into a formal participating-country arrangement.

U.N. Authorization Provides the Legal Framework

The ISF’s legal foundation is U.N. Security Council Resolution 2803, adopted in November 2025.

The resolution authorized the Board of Peace to establish a temporary stabilization force for Gaza. It provides for a unified command acceptable to the Board of Peace and calls for contributing countries to operate in consultation and cooperation with Egypt and Israel.

A subsequent U.N. report identified Albania, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Kosovo and Morocco as five founding contributors that signed a declaration of intent to contribute troops to the ISF in February 2026. Discussions with additional potential troop-contributing countries were reported to be continuing.

Kosovo’s September agreement consequently represents a further institutional step in the development of the multinational force.

Mission Linked to Gaza’s Postwar Transition

The proposed stabilization force forms part of a wider framework addressing security, demilitarization, transitional administration and reconstruction in Gaza.

U.N. briefings have described a role for the ISF between Israeli forces and areas administered under the proposed Palestinian transitional authority. Its responsibilities are expected to include supporting decommissioning efforts, securing the territory and protecting civilians and humanitarian operations.

The force is intended to operate within the broader political transition rather than replace Palestinian civilian administration and policing.

Kosovo Offers Demining and Civil-Affairs Capabilities

Kosovo has highlighted capabilities including demining, search and rescue, logistics and civil-affairs support.

Those functions could be relevant in a post-conflict environment where unexploded ordnance, damaged infrastructure and humanitarian operations create significant security requirements.

Kosovo’s participation also places its security forces among the countries contributing practical capabilities to the proposed international mission.

Participation Does Not Mean Full Deployment

The signing of the agreement should not be interpreted as confirmation that a full Kosovo contingent has already deployed throughout Gaza.

The ISF remains under development, and its wider deployment depends on the implementation of the Gaza transition framework as well as political, security and operational conditions.

Kosovo personnel have participated in preparatory activities, but the September 7 agreement establishes formal participation rather than confirming a completed deployment of Kosovo forces inside Gaza.

International Force Faces Major Operational Questions

The eventual effectiveness of the ISF will depend on unresolved questions surrounding the security environment and the implementation of the wider postwar framework.

These include coordination with Israeli forces, the relationship between the international force and Palestinian institutions, the role of Palestinian civilian authorities and the practical implementation of demilitarization and decommissioning arrangements.

The framework also calls for coordination with Egypt and Israel, making regional cooperation an important component of the mission’s potential operation.

Kosovo Joins Initial Group of Contributors

Kosovo now has a formal participating-country agreement alongside the initial group of contributors identified in the U.N. reporting: Albania, Indonesia, Kazakhstan and Morocco.

The participation of countries from different regions is intended to establish the force as a multinational security mechanism rather than an operation dominated by a single national military.

For Kosovo, the contribution also places its security forces in a new international operational context. The country has previously participated in an international security environment through the NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR), although the proposed Gaza mission has a separate mandate and political framework.

Gaza Mission Expands Kosovo’s International Role

Kosovo’s participation gives Pristina a direct role in an internationally backed security initiative concerning one of the Middle East’s most consequential conflicts.

The decision also carries significant operational responsibilities. Any international force operating in Gaza would face complex questions involving civilian protection, armed groups, Israeli military activity and the future political and administrative structure of the territory.

Kosovo’s formal commitment therefore extends beyond the signing ceremony. Its personnel will be operating within a broader international framework whose success depends on political agreements and security conditions that remain subject to implementation.

Implementation Will Determine the Mission’s Future

The September 7 agreement represents a concrete step toward establishing the planned International Stabilization Force, but it does not complete the process of creating a functioning security presence in Gaza.

For Kosovo, the immediate position is clear: Pristina has formally agreed to participate and has already provided personnel for preparatory work.

The wider deployment of the ISF will depend on implementation of the Gaza transition framework and the security arrangements necessary for the force to operate.

Kosovo’s agreement consequently strengthens the institutional foundation of the proposed multinational mission while leaving the more difficult question of operational deployment still ahead.

Reporting Credit: Government of Kosovo / Ministry of Defense — Official participation agreement establishing Kosovo as a participating country in the International Stabilization Force and the role of Defense Minister Ejup Maqedonci in signing the agreement. Kosovo Security Force (KSF) — Official information concerning Kosovo’s institutional participation, personnel contribution and the involvement of KSF commander Lt. Gen. Bashkim Jashari. Board of Peace for Gaza — Official announcement concerning Kosovo’s Participating Country Agreement, the multinational force and Kosovo’s contribution to the planned mission. International Stabilization Force — Official information concerning the force’s command structure, Kosovo’s participation and preparatory activities. United Nations Security Council — Resolution 2803 establishing authorization for a temporary International Stabilization Force in Gaza and defining its mandate and coordination framework. United Nations / Office of the High Representative for Gaza — Official implementation reporting and briefings concerning the proposed ISF role, coordination arrangements, decommissioning support and protection of humanitarian operations.

The post Kosovo Formalizes Participation in Planned Gaza Stabilization Force appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Pezeshkian made the statement on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Bishkek, saying Iran would immediately reciprocate if the United States returned to its obligations under the memorandum of understanding reached in June.

The proposal comes after U.S. forces struck Iranian minelaying forces on Larak Island in the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday. Iran responded by launching missiles at two U.S. military bases in Jordan. President Donald Trump has warned that the United States will respond, although he has said the latest exchange does not necessarily mean a return to full-scale war.

What the June agreement required

The June memorandum was intended to stop the fighting and create a 60-day negotiating period for a broader agreement.

Under the arrangement, Iran agreed to clear mines from the Strait of Hormuz and permit shipping to resume. The United States agreed to end its naval blockade, lift sanctions, issue waivers allowing Iranian oil exports and begin work toward a reconstruction package for Iran.

The agreement quickly deteriorated.

Washington and Tehran accused each other of violating its terms, and the memorandum eventually lapsed.

Iran has since maintained that unrestricted navigation through the Strait of Hormuz depends on the United States honoring the agreement.

Hormuz remains the central flashpoint

The Strait of Hormuz remains at the center of the confrontation because roughly one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments normally pass through the waterway.

Shipping has fallen sharply during the war, and renewed attacks have increased concerns that the disruption could persist.

Two Saudi-linked oil tankers were struck by projectiles while traveling through the strait on Monday, according to maritime authorities and shipping reports. No casualties were immediately reported.

Brent crude rose more than 2% Tuesday to about $92.66 a barrel, reflecting renewed fears about Middle Eastern supply disruptions.

Iran and Oman seek a shipping arrangement

Iran has also been working with Oman on a framework for managing commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

The talks are aimed at establishing conditions under which shipping could resume, although it remains unclear whether Washington would accept an arrangement giving Iran a major role in controlling the waterway.

Qatar and other regional governments have also called for a peaceful solution and the reopening of the strait.

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry said Tuesday that escalation was in no one’s interest and that Doha was working with partners toward a peaceful resolution.

U.S. and Iran remain far apart

Despite Pezeshkian’s statement, a new ceasefire agreement is far from certain.

The Trump administration had previously indicated that it was not interested in simply returning to the June memorandum and has instead emphasized economic pressure, sanctions and the naval blockade.

Iran, meanwhile, wants the U.S. blockade lifted and sanctions eased, while Tehran has also demanded compensation and greater recognition of its position regarding the Strait of Hormuz.

Those conditions leave substantial differences between the two sides.

Russia backs Iran

Pezeshkian’s comments came during the SCO summit, where he also met with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Putin said Russia supports Iran and described the previous ceasefire as unstable and fragile. The two countries have maintained economic and political ties despite Western sanctions.

Iran’s participation in the summit also gives Tehran an opportunity to strengthen diplomatic support from China, Russia and other countries while negotiations with Washington remain uncertain.

Gaza remains volatile

Elsewhere in the region, Israeli forces conducted an operation in Gaza City aimed at detaining a Hamas operative, according to Palestinian hospital officials and Israeli authorities.

At least four people, including two children, were killed in the operation, according to hospital officials. Six others were wounded.

Israel’s military said it had struck targets to remove threats to its forces and later said it had apprehended a senior Hamas operative.

Separately, Palestinian medical officials reported that an Israeli soldier shot and killed a child in central Gaza, while several others were wounded. The Israeli military had not immediately commented on that incident.

Islamic State leader killed in Yemen

Yemeni security authorities said Abu Huzayfah al-Ansari, identified as an Islamic State spokesperson, was killed Tuesday during a joint operation in Hadramout province.

Officials said he was killed while hiding in a house in Seiyun. Eight civilians, including women and children, were found at the location and were unharmed, authorities said.

The operation reflects the continued security challenges facing Yemen even as the broader region remains focused on the U.S.-Iran conflict.

Iraq processes thousands of suspected militants

Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council said it had completed investigations into approximately 5,704 suspected Islamic State members transferred from Syria earlier this year.

The detainees come from 67 nationalities, including thousands of Syrians and hundreds of Iraqis.

Some detainees will be released because investigators said there was insufficient evidence against them, while others will face trial.

Yemen’s hunger crisis deepens

The United Nations World Food Programme warned that further escalation in Yemen could worsen an already severe humanitarian crisis.

WFP Acting Executive Director Carl Skau said higher global food prices were adding pressure to displaced families who depend heavily on food assistance and cash support.

Some families, he said, are already surviving on one meal a day, while children are beginning to show signs of malnutrition.

What Happens Next

The immediate focus will be whether Washington responds positively to Pezeshkian’s offer or maintains its current strategy of military and economic pressure.

The safety of commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz will also remain critical. Continued attacks could push oil prices higher and further complicate diplomatic efforts.

For now, Iran’s proposal represents a potential diplomatic opening, but the conditions demanded by Tehran and Washington remain substantially different.

Key Facts

• Iranian president: Masoud Pezeshkian
• Proposal: Return to June ceasefire commitments if the U.S. does the same
• June agreement: Ceasefire and 60-day negotiations
• Recent U.S. action: Strike on Iranian minelaying forces on Larak Island
• Iranian response: Missile attacks on U.S. bases in Jordan
• Key flashpoint: Strait of Hormuz
• Brent crude: About $92.66 per barrel Tuesday
• Other developments: Gaza operation, Islamic State leader killed in Yemen, Iraq’s IS investigations, worsening Yemen hunger crisis
• Status: DEVELOPING — DIPLOMATIC AND MILITARY ESCALATION

Reporting Credit: Iranian Presidency and Foreign Ministry — ceasefire proposal and official statements; U.S. government — military and diplomatic policy; Qatar and Oman — regional mediation and Strait of Hormuz efforts; United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations — maritime security incidents; Israeli military and Palestinian health authorities — Gaza developments; Iraqi Supreme Judicial Council — Islamic State investigations; United Nations World Food Programme — Yemen humanitarian situation.

The post Iran President Offers Return to Ceasefire if U.S. Does as Mideast Tensions Rise appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Pezeshkian said he held a nearly seven-hour meeting with Khamenei to discuss livelihoods, employment, housing, market conditions and the effects of U.S. sanctions. He described preventing internal divisions as the most important message from the meeting.

The developments come as a broader regional crisis continues to affect shipping, energy supplies and security across the Middle East, with Iran maintaining demands for changes in U.S. policy before reopening the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran ties Hormuz reopening to U.S. concessions

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said Monday that Tehran would not reopen the Strait of Hormuz until the United States stops what Iran describes as illegal and destructive actions and addresses its demands.

Iran is seeking an end to the U.S. blockade of its ports, compensation for war damage, the lifting of economic sanctions and the release of frozen Iranian assets, according to the supplied material.

The standoff has international economic implications because the Strait of Hormuz normally carries roughly one-fifth of the world’s traded oil supplies. Its closure has therefore made energy prices a major issue in the United States as the country approaches November’s midterm elections.

Iran is also holding separate discussions with Oman over transit through the waterway, including the possibility of a temporary shipping corridor. Tehran has said, however, that a full reopening depends on negotiations with Washington.

New Iranian leadership faces questions over cohesion

Pezeshkian’s account of his meeting with Khamenei comes amid reported tensions within Iran’s leadership.

It was only the second meeting the president said he had held with the new supreme leader since Khamenei was appointed in March after a U.S.-Israeli strike killed his father. Khamenei was also believed to have been wounded in that attack and has not appeared publicly since then.

Pezeshkian said Khamenei warned that Iran’s adversaries were seeking to create divisions inside the country.

The meeting therefore combined immediate economic concerns with an emphasis on maintaining political cohesion as Tehran confronts external pressure and the consequences of the conflict.

Israel expands security restrictions in West Bank town

In the occupied West Bank, Israel’s military said Monday it had designated the Christian-majority town of Taybeh a closed military zone.

The measure is intended to prevent Israeli settlers and other non-residents from entering the town, which lies between settlements and has experienced arson, vandalism and incursions onto private and village property.

The military said Palestinian residents and journalists would not be covered by the restriction unless soldiers determine that their presence poses a threat. It also said troops would detain suspects and disperse gatherings in an effort to maintain order.

The designation follows months of reported difficulties by Israeli forces and police in responding to violence across the West Bank. The Ramallah-based Palestinian Health Ministry said at least 87 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli settlers or soldiers in 2026.

Residents of Taybeh have complained that Israeli forces and police have been slow to respond to attacks by extremist settlers.

Houthi attack adds pressure around Red Sea shipping

In Yemen, an attack by Iran-backed Houthi rebels on the Red Sea port town of Mokha killed seven people and wounded 30 on Sunday, according to Yemen’s Defense Ministry.

The ministry, which operates under Yemen’s internationally recognized government, said four military personnel and three civilians were among those killed.

The attack is part of a wider escalation in Houthi strikes against Yemeni military positions and areas controlled by the Saudi-backed government since a 2022 truce.

Renewed disruption around the Strait of Hormuz has also increased attention on the Red Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the strategic waterway linking the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden. Some shipping has shifted toward the Red Sea route as traffic through Hormuz remains heavily restricted.

Gaza beekeepers attempt to rebuild

In Gaza, where more than two years of war have devastated much of the territory and its economy, beekeepers are attempting to restart honey production.

The sector was previously concentrated on agricultural land near Gaza’s perimeter, much of which is now under Israeli military control. Beekeepers have instead returned to areas near the Yellow Line and found surviving hives that can support renewed production.

They say Israel’s blockade, including restrictions on equipment and other goods needed for beekeeping, continues to limit their ability to rebuild.

Ibrahim al-Dabbeh, head of the Cooperative Association of Beekeepers, described the sector as important to sustainability, ecological balance and agriculture.

The developments illustrate how the wider regional conflict continues to affect security, trade and civilian livelihoods across multiple fronts, from strategic waterways and energy markets to communities rebuilding damaged local economies.

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press.

The post Iran urges internal unity as Hormuz standoff deepens across Middle East appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Netanyahu told an Israeli Cabinet meeting that Israel does not accept the proposed sequence in the 15-point plan announced by U.S. President Donald Trump last month. He said discussions with Washington would continue, but maintained that Israeli forces would remain in place until Hamas had been genuinely disarmed.

The disagreement leaves major elements of the proposed Gaza framework unresolved, including the timing of an Israeli withdrawal, Hamas’ disarmament and the future administration of the territory.

Israel challenges Gaza withdrawal framework

Netanyahu said Israel’s military would not withdraw from Gaza before Hamas is disarmed. Israeli forces currently control more than half of the Palestinian territory, where about 2 million people live and where large areas have been destroyed during the war.

The White House did not immediately respond to Netanyahu’s remarks.

Bassem Naim, a member of Hamas’ political bureau, said the group remained committed to the proposed road map and expected mediators and the United States to pressure Israel over Netanyahu’s position.

The Gaza war began after the Hamas-led attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. A ceasefire has since reduced some fighting, but major questions over disarmament, Israeli troop withdrawals and Gaza’s future governance remain unresolved.

Netanyahu is also facing domestic political pressure as his government prepares for Israel’s next scheduled election on Oct. 27.

Houthi attacks increase pressure on Red Sea security

The dispute over the Gaza plan comes as Houthi forces in Yemen continue attacks that are widening security concerns around the Red Sea.

Houthi forces carried out a second attack in less than 24 hours against the government-held Red Sea port city of Mocha late Sunday. A Houthi military source told the group’s Al-Masirah TV that the operation targeted weapons depots and concentrations of Saudi troops.

Yemen’s internationally recognized government said residential areas were instead targeted with ballistic missiles and drones, adding that its air defenses intercepted some of the drones. The competing accounts could not be independently reconciled from the supplied reporting.

The National Resistance Forces, which support the internationally recognized government, said an earlier attack Sunday killed seven people — four troops and three civilians — and wounded 15 civilians.

Fayed al-Noman, an assistant undersecretary at Yemen’s information ministry, said the attack severely damaged port buildings and piers, along with commercial goods and food supplies. Yemen’s military later said missiles landed at several locations, including near a television station.

Mocha is controlled by Yemen’s internationally recognized government and has been renovated to accommodate shipping that avoids the Houthi-controlled port of Hodeida.

Houthi claims attack on Saudi oil facility

The Houthis also said they targeted an Aramco refinery in Jazan, Saudi Arabia, with a drone.

Houthi military spokesman Yahya Saree described the strike as retaliation for what the group said were Saudi drone operations over Yemen’s Hajjah and Saada provinces.

Saudi Arabia’s Energy Ministry reported a fire at a facility belonging to the Aramco refinery but said there were no casualties. The ministry did not identify the cause of the fire.

The latest attacks raise further concerns about renewed escalation in Yemen, where a 2022 truce significantly reduced fighting but did not resolve the country’s underlying political and security conflict.

Gaza and Yemen remain linked to wider regional tensions

The renewed violence in Yemen comes as the Gaza ceasefire remains fragile and Israel and Hamas remain divided over the conditions surrounding a potential Israeli military withdrawal.

The Houthi attacks also extend security risks beyond Yemen’s internal conflict, with strikes affecting a major Red Sea port and a Saudi energy facility.

For now, Netanyahu’s rejection of the proposed withdrawal sequence and continued Houthi attacks leave two important regional security issues unresolved. No agreement has been announced on the Gaza withdrawal framework, while renewed fighting in Yemen threatens to further complicate efforts to reduce tensions across the Middle East.

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press.

The post Israel Rejects Gaza Withdrawal Plan as Houthi Attacks Raise Regional Tensions appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The group said it would initially surrender some of its weapons under the proposed framework. However, it said the transfer of heavy weapons would come later and would depend on the creation of a Palestinian state, a condition Israel’s current government has rejected.

The statement is the clearest indication so far that Hamas is prepared to move ahead with one of the ceasefire’s central provisions. Israel had not publicly responded to Hamas’ announcement at the time of publication.

Ceasefire Progress Faces Continued Violence

Despite the diplomatic development, fighting continued in Gaza.

Hospital officials said Israeli airstrikes on Friday killed at least one Palestinian and wounded at least four others, including a child. The Israeli military did not immediately comment on the reported strikes.

Meanwhile, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres welcomed the reported agreement. He described it as the only positive development from the region in recent days and urged all parties to implement the deal without delay.

Under the proposed framework, Hamas would disarm and transfer governing authority to an independent Palestinian administration. In return, Israel would withdraw its forces from Gaza, while an International Stabilization Force would deploy to help maintain security.

Negotiations have remained stalled for months. Israel insists Hamas must disarm before further progress can be made. Hamas, meanwhile, accuses Israel of violating the ceasefire through continued military operations.

Human Cost of the War Continues to Grow

The conflict began after the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which Israeli authorities say killed about 1,200 people and resulted in 251 hostages being taken.

Gaza’s Health Ministry says Israel’s military campaign has killed more than 73,000 Palestinians, including those reported killed after the ceasefire agreement was announced.

Iran-Linked Tensions Keep Region on Edge

Although no new U.S. strikes were reported in Iran overnight, tensions remained high across the region.

Kuwaiti authorities said Iran launched drones toward Kuwait, which hosts U.S. military forces. Kuwait’s Defense Ministry said its air defenses intercepted drones that entered its airspace. Falling debris caused damage, but officials reported no casualties.

Iranian state media said the drones targeted an air base in Kuwait in retaliation for U.S. strikes carried out Thursday.

Separately, Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard said it struck two oil tankers attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz. State media also reported that four other tankers turned back, although officials did not identify the vessels or report possible casualties.

The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world’s most important shipping routes for oil and natural gas. Continued hostilities have disrupted maritime traffic through the waterway.

Regional Governments Strengthen Security Cooperation

Saudi Arabia announced plans to establish a 14-country defense alliance aimed at improving maritime security and protecting commercial shipping routes across the Red Sea region.

The Saudi Defense Ministry described the proposed coalition as defensive and said additional countries could still join.

Turkey, Egypt and Pakistan expressed support for the initiative. However, Oman and the United Arab Emirates were not part of the announcement.

A Houthi official, speaking anonymously because he was not authorized to comment publicly, said the alliance would not improve regional security unless Saudi Arabia first lifted its blockade on Yemen.

At the same time, the Houthis organized large rallies in Sanaa and other areas under their control to show support for the group’s attacks in the Red Sea.

Israel and Lebanon Prepare for New Talks

In southern Lebanon, Israeli forces detonated explosives inside an underground tunnel network beneath the Crusader-era Beaufort Castle.

Israel says Hezbollah had used the tunnels as a command center.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun criticized the operation, saying it sent negative signals ahead of another round of negotiations scheduled in Rome.

Israeli and Lebanese officials are expected to continue talks on a proposed agreement that would see Israeli forces withdraw from southern Lebanon in exchange for Hezbollah’s disarmament.

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press.

The post Hamas Confirms Disarmament Deal as Gaza Ceasefire Effort Advances Amid Wider Regional Tensions appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.