Category: 2. World

LONDON: Former Labour MP Zarah Sultana has claimed she is set to start a new political party with Labour’s ex-leader, Jeremy Corbyn, after accusing the government of being “an active participant in genocide” in Gaza.

Sultana made the announcement on the social media platform X on Thursday evening, a day after Corbyn told the political TV show “Peston” on ITV that “there is a thirst for an alternative” in British politics. 

In her post, Sultana claimed the Westminster political system was “broken” and that the new movement would focus on social justice in the UK and abroad.

“Labour has completely failed to improve people’s lives. And across the political establishment, from (Reform leader Nigel) Farage to (Prime Minister Sir Keir) Starmer, they smear people of conscience trying to stop a genocide in Gaza as terrorists.

“But the truth is clear: This government is an active participant in genocide. And the British people oppose it.”

She added that the choice before voters at the next general election would be between “socialism or barbarism” and claimed, in relation to the vote earlier this week on changes to benefit rules, “the government wants to make disabled people suffer; they just can’t decide how much.”

Sultana continued: “Jeremy Corbyn and I will co-lead the founding of a new party, with other independent MPs, campaigners and activists across the country.”

Corbyn has yet to confirm whether he will be involved in the new party but admitted on “Peston” that he had been in discussions with the four Independent Alliance MPs elected in July 2024 on a platform of opposing the war in Gaza — Shockat Adam, Ayoub Khan, Adnan Hussain, and Iqbal Mohamed — about forming a party based on “peace rather than war.”

The BBC’s “Newsnight” program confirmed Sultana had held talks with Corbyn and the Independent Alliance earlier this week, but that the idea of co-leadership had not been received well by Corbyn.

Sunday Times journalist Gabriel Pogrund posted on X that a source told him Corbyn was “furious and bewildered” that Sultana made her announcement without consulting him first.

Israel denies it is committing genocide in Gaza.

Starmer has repeatedly demanded a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, describing the situation as “appalling and intolerable,” but has stopped short of accusing Israel of genocide.

Alastair Campbell, the former Labour director of communications, told the BBC that the “government’s handling” of the war in Gaza was a thorn in the side of the party, affecting people’s perception of Labour’s values.

Sultana was suspended by Labour last year for rebelling against the government in a vote on child benefits.

She has been a vocal critic of her former party, including last week, when the government sought to ban the group Palestine Action after activists broke into a Royal Air Force base and vandalized military aircraft.

Sultana posted “We are all Palestine Action” on X ahead of a vote to proscribe the group as a terrorist organization, which passed with just 26 MPs opposing the motion.

In her announcement about forming her new party, she said: “Westminster is broken, but the real crisis is deeper. Just 50 families now own more wealth than half the UK population. Poverty is growing, inequality is obscene, and the two-party system offers nothing but managed decline and broken promises.”

She continued: “We’re not an island of strangers; we’re an island that’s suffering. We need homes and lives we can actually afford, not rip-off bills we pay every month to a tiny elite bathing in cash. We need our money spent on public services, not forever wars.”

The announcement elicited mixed responses from Labour MPs.

John McDonnell, the former shadow chancellor who was also suspended at the same time as Sultana, posted on X: “I am dreadfully sorry to lose Zarah from the Labour Party.

“The people running Labour at the moment need to ask themselves why a young, articulate, talented, extremely dedicated socialist feels she now has no home in the Labour Party and has to leave.”

Dawn Butler, the MP for Brent East, said she could “understand (Sultana’s) frustration”

But Neil Coyle, MP for Bermondsey and Old Southwark, told The Times: “The hard left (is) seeking to damage Labour while the far right are on the march. As shabby as they ever were.”

Israel’s historic military operation in Iran delivered significant achievements whose complete impact will only emerge over time, whether through the elimination of key officials in the Islamic Republic’s leadership or through meaningful damage to its nuclear capabilities. However, this powerful operation triggered devastating retaliation that killed Israelis and scarred the nation with widespread destruction – damage that extends far beyond Israel’s borders affecting numerous European countries, and specifically, the European Commission.

We joined European Union Ambassador to Israel Dimiter Tzantchev during his visit to the Weizmann Institute of Science, among the hardest-hit locations from Iranian ballistic missile attacks, as part of a tour of strike sites nationwide. Two missiles rendered five buildings unusable, affecting research conducted by at least 52 research groups. The cancer research center suffered the worst damage, with laboratories now entombed beneath mountains of debris.

“We truly experienced the five stages of grief,”  Dr. Leeat Yankielowicz-Keren, who heads a team investigating connections between the immune system and cancer. Her laboratory housed cutting-edge, exclusive equipment essential to her Weizmann research team’s work – all completely destroyed. “We obtained special permission to enter the building today, and several people wept. The devastation is beyond belief. One of my students, a reserve combat soldier who served in Gaza, insisted he would rappel through windows to salvage what he could, though we told him ‘nothing’s left.’ He was really in denial.”

Another laboratory that became unusable as a result of the blast belongs to Dr. Ranit Kedmi, who studies the immune system. “I only opened my laboratory two years ago,” she shared.” Both research teams share a crucial commonality – they were enabled by European Research Council (ERC) grants, financed through the European Commission. The destruction of these laboratories means Iranian strikes directly impact European interests.

Dr. Yankielowicz-Keren stresses the consequences reach even further internationally. “During the first week [after the attack], I had to spend at least an hour every day replying to emails from all over the world – people offering to help, people offering to send students, people showing compassion,” she said. “After October 7th, I didn’t feel the same kind of solidarity. I think that this time the scientific community and particularly the cancer community experienced this as their own loss. It’s not a Weizmann-specific research – it’s our understanding of cancer that got pushed back years because of this, on a global level.”

The Weizmann Institute ranks among the world’s top research facilities. Though based in Israel, its research teams include students from across the globe. “Scientists excel at problem-solving,” Dr. Kedmi observed, describing how a South Korean student in her team chose to remain in Israel and help rebuild the damaged laboratory despite the wartime reality in Israel. Meanwhile, a colleague from Heidelberg, Germany, offered his laboratory facilities to one of Yankelvitz-Keren’s students to continue crucial research.

While the determination shown by these research teams and their female leaders inspires admiration, the growing global recognition of Weizmann’s damage cannot be overlooked. Worldwide discourse often reduces to either supporting or opposing Israel, missing the global ripple effects created when the Weizmann Institute becomes a target, impacting the European Research Council, scientists across the world, and potentially life-saving medical advances.

The tour naturally included Soroka Hospital, the Negev region’s sole medical facility. We were granted special access to examine the damage in the northern surgical building, which sustained a direct upper-floor hit. Exceptional preparation and threat assessment by Soroka personnel enabled patient evacuation one day before the strike that completely destroyed that floor and caused the floor below to collapse.

The strike’s severity and the ballistic missile’s warhead power became evident through the extensive ground-floor damage. Shattered ceilings and walls, demolished elevator shafts, displaced door frames, and patient rooms reduced to rubble fragments intensified as we ascended through the building’s floors. Medical staff that was inside the building during the attack followed proper defensive protocols and escaped injury.

“Anywhere else worldwide, we would transfer all patients to alternative hospitals and spend a year recovering,” Soroka Hospital Director Dr. Shlomi Kodesh told Ambassador Tzantchev. Remarkably, the hospital resumed 80% of operations surrounded by destruction and blast damage, in extremely difficult conditions for both patients and medical personnel alike. “We need tens of millions of dollars,” Dr. Kodesh emphasized, highlighting the critical importance of maintaining Soroka’s operations as southern Israel’s only hospital. “The Negev deserves better,” he concluded.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

The Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, is turning 90 and has confirmed – after years of uncertainty – that he will have a successor after his death and will not choose to end the line.

In Tibetan Buddhist tradition, the Dalai Lama is reincarnated after they die. Monks search, select, and school a successor – usually a child. The current Dalai Lama was recognised at the age of two. He and an estimated 150,000 Tibetans now live in exile in India, and other countries, after China annexed Tibet decades ago.

And that makes who the next Dalai Lama is, a concern of China’s.

Joining Matt Barbett is Professor Robert Barnett, who founded the Modern Tibetan Studies Programme at Columbia University and is now at University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). He has also met the Dalai Lama several times.

Producers: Soila Apparicio and Emma Rae Woodhouse
Editor: Wendy Parker

Sense of disbelief among people coming to Anfieldpublished at 19:29 British Summer Time

19:29 BST

Daniel Austin
Reporting from Liverpool

Meanwhile in Liverpool, the famous Paisley Gates in front of the Kop are adorned with homemade banners bearing Diogo Jota’s name.

The Portuguese forward’s tenacity, determination and knack for scoring at crucial moments made him one of the most popular players here.

There is a still a sense of disbelief among those who are coming to Anfield to pay their respects today.

Those paying tribute to Diogo Jota this evening include those from the Liverpool area and many from further afield.

Items laid in tribute to the forward include the badges of teams like Tranmere Rovers, Manchester City, Newcastle United, Atletico Madrid, Real Madrid, German side Borussia Monchengladbach, and Portuguese club Boavista.

Syria said on Friday it was willing to cooperate with the United States to reimplement the 1974 disengagement agreement with Israel, which created a UN-patrolled buffer zone separating the two countries’ forces.

In a statement following a phone call with his US counterpart Marco Rubio, Asaad al-Shaibani expressed Syria’s “aspiration to cooperate with the United States to return to the 1974 disengagement agreement”.

Washington has been pushing diplomatic efforts towards a normalisation deal between Syria and Israel, with envoy Thomas Barrack saying last week that peace between the two was now needed.

Speaking to The New York Times, Barrack confirmed this week that Syria and Israel were engaging in “meaningful” US-brokered talks to end their border conflict.

Following the toppling of longtime Syrian ruler Bashar al-Assad in December, Israel deployed its troops into the UN-patrolled zone separating Syrian and Israeli forces.

It has also launched hundreds of air strikes on military targets in Syria and carried out incursions deeper into the country’s south.

Syria and Israel have technically been in a state of war since 1948.

Israel conquered around two-thirds of the Golan Heights from Syria during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, before annexing it in 1981 in a move not recognised by much of the international community.

A year after the 1973 war, the two reached an agreement on a disengagement line.

As part of the deal, an 80-kilometre-long (50-mile) United Nations-patrolled buffer zone was created to the east of Israeli-occupied territory, separating it from the Syrian-controlled side.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said on Monday that his country had an “interest” in normalising ties with Syria and neighbouring Lebanon.

He however added that the Golan Heights “will remain part of the State of Israel” under any future peace agreement.

Syrian state media reported on Wednesday that “statements concerning signing a peace agreement with the Israeli occupation at this time are considered premature”.

Russia has become the first country to accept the Taliban government in Afghanistan since the group took power in 2021, building on years of quieter engagement and marking a dramatic about-turn from the deep hostilities that marked their ties during the group’s first stint in power.

Since the Taliban stormed Kabul in August four years ago, taking over from the government of then-President Ashraf Ghani, several nations – including some that have historically viewed the group as enemies – have reached out to them. Yet until Thursday, no one has formally recognised the Taliban.

So what exactly did Russia do, and will Moscow’s move pave the way for others to also start full-fledged diplomatic relations with the Taliban?

What did Russia say?

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement saying that Moscow’s recognition of the Taliban government will pave the way for bilateral cooperation with Afghanistan.

“We believe that the act of official recognition of the government of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan will give impetus to the development of productive bilateral cooperation between our countries in various fields,” the statement said.

The Foreign Ministry said it would seek cooperation in energy, transport, agriculture and infrastructure.

How did the Taliban respond?

Afghanistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote in an X post on Thursday that Russian ambassador to Kabul Dmitry Zhirnov met Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi and conveyed the Kremlin’s decision to recognise the Taliban government in Afghanistan.

The Ambassador of the Russian Federation, Mr. Dmitry Zhirnov, called on IEA-Foreign Minister Mawlawi Amir Khan Muttaqi.

During the meeting, the Ambassador of Russian Federation officially conveyed his government’s decision to recognize the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, pic.twitter.com/wCbJKpZYwm

— Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Afghanistan (@MoFA_Afg) July 3, 2025

Muttaqi said in a video posted on X: “We value this courageous step taken by Russia, and, God willing, it will serve as an example for others as well.”

What is the history between Russia and Afghanistan?

In 1979, troops from the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan to establish a communist government. This triggered a 10-year war with the Afghan mujahideen fighters backed by US forces. About 15,000 Soviet soldiers died in this war.

In 1992, after rockets launched by rebel groups hit the Russian embassy in Kabul, Moscow closed its diplomatic mission to Afghanistan.

The Russian-backed former president, Mohammad Najibullah, who had been seeking refuge in a United Nations compound in Kabul since 1992, was killed by the Taliban in 1996, when the group first came to power.

During the late 1990s, Russia backed anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan, including the Northern Alliance led by former mujahideen commander Ahmad Shah Massoud.

Then, on September 11, 2001, suicide attackers, affiliated with the armed group al-Qaeda, seized United States passenger planes and crashed into two skyscrapers in New York City, killing nearly 3,000 people. This triggered the so-called “war on terror” by then-US President George W Bush.

In the aftermath of the attack, Russian President Vladimir Putin was one of the first foreign leaders to call Bush and express his sympathy and pledge support. Putin provided the US with assistance to attack Afghanistan. Russia cooperated with the US by sharing intelligence, opening Russian airspace for US flights and collaborating with Russia’s Central Asian allies to establish bases and provide airspace access to flights from the US.

In 2003, after the Taliban had been ousted from power by the US-led coalition, Russia designated the group as a terrorist movement.

But in recent years, as Russia has increasingly grown concerned about the rise of the ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K) group – a regional branch of the ISIS/ISIL armed group – it has warmed to the Taliban. The Taliban view ISIS-K as a rival and enemy.

Since the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, accompanied by the withdrawal of US forces supporting the Ghani government, Russia’s relations with the group have become more open. A Taliban delegation attended Russia’s flagship economic forum in Saint Petersburg in 2022 and 2024.

With the ISIS-K’s threat growing (the group claimed a March 2024 attack at a concert hall in Moscow in which gunmen killed 149 people), Russia has grown only closer to the Taliban.

In July 2024, Russian President Putin called the Taliban “allies in the fight against terrorism”. Muttaqi met Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Moscow in October 2024.

In April 2025, Russia lifted the “terrorist” designation from the Taliban. Lavrov said at the time that “the new authorities in Kabul are a reality,” adding Moscow should adopt a “pragmatic, not ideologised policy” towards the Taliban.

How has the rest of the world engaged with the Taliban?

The international community does not officially recognise the Taliban. The United Nations refers to the administration as the “Taliban de facto authorities”.

Despite not officially recognising the Taliban as the government of Afghanistan, several countries have recently engaged diplomatically with the group.

China: Even before the US pulled out of Afghanistan, Beijing was building its relations with the Taliban, hosting its leaders in 2019 for peace negotiations.

But relations have picked up further since the group returned to power, including through major investments. In 2023, a subsidiary of the state-owned China National Petroleum Company (CNPC) signed a 25-year contract with the Taliban to extract oil from the basin of the Amu Darya river, which spans Central Asian countries and Afghanistan. This marked the first major foreign investment since the Taliban’s takeover.

In 2024, Beijing recognised former Taliban spokesperson Bilal Karim as an official envoy to China during an official ceremony, though it made clear that it was not recognising the Taliban government itself.

And in May this year, China hosted the foreign ministers of Pakistan and the Taliban for a trilateral conclave.

Pakistan: Once the Taliban’s chief international supporter, Pakistan’s relations with the group have frayed significantly since 2021.

Islamabad now accuses the Taliban government of allowing armed groups sheltering on Afghan soil, in particular the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), to target Pakistan. TTP, also called the Pakistani Taliban, operates on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and is responsible for many of the deadliest attacks in Pakistan in recent years. Afghanistan denies Pakistan’s allegation.

In December 2024, the Pakistani military launched air strikes in Afghanistan’s Paktia province, which borders Pakistan’s tribal district of South Waziristan. While Pakistan said it had targeted sites where TTP fighters had sought refuge, the Taliban government said that 46 civilians in Afghanistan were killed in the air strikes.

This year, Pakistan also ramped up the deportation of Afghan refugees, further stressing ties. Early this year, Pakistan said it wants three million Afghans to leave the country.

Tensions over armed fighters from Afghanistan in Pakistan continue. On Friday, the Pakistani military said it killed 30 fighters who tried to cross the border from Afghanistan. The Pakistani military said all the fighters killed belonged to the TTP or its affiliates.

Still, Pakistan has tried to manage its complex relationship with Afghanistan. In April this year, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar met Muttaqi and other Afghan officials in Kabul. Dar and Muttaqi spoke again in May.

India: New Delhi had shut its Kabul embassy in 1996 after the Taliban took over. India refused to recognise the group, which it viewed as a proxy of Pakistan’s intelligence agencies.

New Delhi reopened its embassy in Kabul after the Taliban was removed from power in 2001. But the embassy and India’s consulates came under repeated attacks in the subsequent years from the Taliban and its allies, including the Haqqani group.

Yet since the Taliban’s return to Kabul, and amid mounting tensions between Pakistan and the group, India’s approach has changed. It reopened its embassy, shut temporarily in 2021, and sent diplomats to meet Taliban officials. Then, in January 2025, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri flew to Dubai for a meeting with Muttaqi.

And in May, India’s Foreign Minister S Jaishankar spoke to Muttaqi over the phone, their first publicly acknowledged conversation.

Iran: As with Russia and India, Iran viewed the Taliban with antagonism during the group’s rule in the late 1990s. In 1998, Taliban fighters killed Iranian diplomats in Mazar-i-Sharif, further damaging relations.

But it views ISIS-K as a much bigger threat. Since the Taliban’s return to Kabul, and behind closed doors, even earlier, Tehran has been engaging with the group.

On May 17, Muttaqi visited Iran to attend the Tehran Dialogue Forum. He also met with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and President Massoud Pezeshkian.

After Russia, will others recognise the Taliban?

While each country will likely decide when and if to formally recognise the Taliban government, many already work with the group in a capacity that amounts, almost, to recognition.

“Afghanistan’s neighbouring countries don’t necessarily have much of an option but to engage with the Taliban for both strategic and security purposes,” Kabir Taneja, a deputy director at the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation, told Al Jazeera.

“Most would not be doing so out of choice, but enforced realities that the Taliban will be in Afghanistan for some time to come at least.”

Taneja said that other countries which could follow suit after Russia’s recognition of the Taliban include some countries in Central Asia, as well as China.

“Russia’s recognition of the Taliban is a geopolitical play,” Taneja said.

“It solidifies Moscow’s position in Kabul, but more importantly, gives the Taliban itself a big win. For the Taliban, international recognition has been a core aim for their outreach regionally and beyond.”

BEIRUT: Hezbollah has begun a major strategic review in the wake of its devastating war with Israel, including considering scaling back its role as an armed movement without disarming completely, three sources familiar with the deliberations say.

The internal discussions, which aren’t yet finalized and haven’t previously been reported, reflect the formidable pressures the Iran-backed Lebanese militant group has faced since a truce was reached in late November.

Israeli forces continue to strike areas where the group holds sway, accusing Hezbollah of ceasefire violations, which it denies. It is also grappling with acute financial strains, US demands for its disarmament and diminished political clout since a new cabinet took office in February with US support.

The group’s difficulties have been compounded by seismic shifts in the regional power balance since Israel decimated its command, killed thousands of its fighters and destroyed much of its arsenal last year.

Hezbollah’s Syrian ally, Bashar Assad, was toppled in December, severing a key arms supply line from Iran. Tehran is now emerging from its own bruising war with Israel, raising doubts over how much aid it can offer, a regional security source and a senior Lebanese official told Reuters.

Another senior official, who is familiar with Hezbollah’s internal deliberations, said the group had been holding clandestine discussions on its next steps. Small committees have been meeting in person or remotely to discuss issues including its leadership structure, political role, social and development work, and weapons, the official said on condition of anonymity.

The official and two other sources familiar with the discussions indicated Hezbollah has concluded that the arsenal it had amassed to deter Israel from attacking Lebanon had become a liability.

Hezollah “had an excess of power,” the official said. “All that strength turned into a weak point.”

Under the leadership of Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed last year, Hezbollah grew into a regional military player with tens of thousands of fighters, rockets and drones poised to strike Israel. It also provided support to allies in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

Israel came to regard Hezbollah as a significant threat. When the group opened fire in solidarity with its Palestinian ally Hamas at the start of the Gaza war in 2023, Israel responded with airstrikes in Lebanon that escalated into a ground offensive.

Hezbollah has since relinquished a number of weapons depots in southern Lebanon to the Lebanese armed forces as stipulated in last year’s truce, though Israel says it has struck military infrastructure there still linked to the group.

Hezbollah is now considering turning over some weapons it has elsewhere in the country — notably missiles and drones seen as the biggest threat to Israel — on condition Israel withdraws from the south and halts its attacks, the sources said.

But the group won’t surrender its entire arsenal, the sources said. For example, it intends to keep lighter arms and anti-tank missiles, they said, describing them as a means to resist any future attacks.

Hezbollah’s media office did not respond to questions for this article.

Isreal’s military said it would continue operating along its northern border in accordance with the understandings between Israel and Lebanon, in order eliminate any threat and protect Israeli citizens. The US State Department declined to comment on private diplomatic conversations, referring questions to Lebanon’s government. Lebanon’s presidency did not respond to questions.

For Hezbollah to preserve any military capabilities would fall short of Israeli and US ambitions. Under the terms of the ceasefire brokered by the US and France, Lebanon’s armed forces were to confiscate “all unauthorized arms,” beginning in the area south of the Litani River — the zone closest to Israel.

Lebanon’s government also wants Hezbollah to surrender the rest of its weapons as it works to establish a state monopoly on arms. Failure to do so could stir tensions with the group’s Lebanese rivals, which accuse Hezbollah of leveraging its military might to impose its will in state affairs and repeatedly dragging Lebanon into conflicts.

All sides have said they remain committed to the ceasefire, even as they traded accusations of violations.

PART OF HEZBOLLAH’S ‘DNA’

Arms have been central to Hezbollah’s doctrine since it was founded by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to fight Israeli forces who invaded Lebanon in 1982, at the height of the 1975-1990 Lebanese civil war. Tensions over the Shiite Muslim group’s arsenal sparked another, brief civil conflict in 2008.

The United States and Israel deem Hezbollah a terrorist group.

Nicholas Blanford, who wrote a history of Hezbollah, said that in order to reconstitute itself, the group would have to justify its retention of weapons in an increasingly hostile political landscape, while addressing damaging intelligence breaches and ensuring its long-term finances.

“They’ve faced challenges before, but not this number simultaneously,” said Blanford, a fellow with the Atlantic Council, a US think tank.

A European official familiar with intelligence assessments said there was a lot of brainstorming underway within Hezbollah about its future but no clear outcomes. The official described Hezbollah’s status as an armed group as part of its DNA, saying it would be difficult for it to become a purely political party.

Nearly a dozen sources familiar with Hezbollah’s thinking said the group wants to keep some arms, not only in case of future threats from Israel, but also because it is worried that Sunni Muslim jihadists in neighboring Syria might exploit lax security to attack eastern Lebanon, a Shiite-majority region.

Despite the catastrophic results of the latest war with Israel — tens of thousands of people were left homeless and swathes of the south and Beirut’s southern suburbs were destroyed — many of Hezbollah’s core supporters want it to remain armed.

Um Hussein, whose son died fighting for Hezbollah, cited the threat still posed by Israel and a history of conflict with Lebanese rivals as reasons to do so.

“Hezbollah is the backbone of the Shiites, even if it is weak now,” she said, asking to be identified by a traditional nickname because members of her family still belong to Hezbollah. “We were a weak, poor group. Nobody spoke up for us.”

Hezbollah’s immediate priority is tending to the needs of constituents who withstood the worst of the war, the sources familiar with its deliberations said.

In December, Secretary General Naim Qassem said Hezbollah had paid more than $50 million to affected families with more than $25 million still to hand out. But there are signs that its funds are running short.

One Beirut resident said he had paid for repairs to his apartment in the Hezbollah-controlled southern suburbs after it was damaged in the war only to see the entire block destroyed by an Israeli airstrike in June.

“Everyone is scattered and homeless. No one has promised to pay for our shelter,” said the man, who declined to be identified for fear his complaints might jeopardize his chances of receiving compensation.

He said he had received cheques from Hezbollah but was told by the group’s financial institution, Al-Qard Al-Hassan, that it did not have funds available to cash them. Reuters could not immediately reach the institution for comment.

Other indications of financial strain have included cutbacks to free medications offered by Hezbollah-run pharmacies, three people familiar with the operations said.

SQUEEZING HEZBOLLAH FINANCES

Hezbollah has put the onus on Lebanon’s government to secure reconstruction funding. But Foreign Minister Youssef Raji, a Hezbollah critic, has said there will be no aid from foreign donors until the state establishes a monopoly on arms.

A State Department spokesperson said in May that, while Washington was engaged in supporting sustainable reconstruction in Lebanon, “this cannot happen without Hezbollah laying down their arms.”

Israel has also been squeezing Hezbollah’s finances.

The Israeli military said on June 25 that it had killed an Iranian official who oversaw hundreds of millions of dollars in transfers annually to armed groups in the region, as well as a man in southern Lebanon who ran a currency exchange business that helped get some of these funds to Hezbollah.

Iran did not comment at the time, and its UN mission did not immediately respond to questions from Reuters.

Since February, Lebanon has barred commercial flights between Beirut and Tehran, after Israel’s military accused Hezbollah of using civilian aircraft to bring in money from Iran and threatened to take action to stop this.

Lebanese authorities have also tightened security at Beirut airport, where Hezbollah had free rein for years, making it harder for the group to smuggle in funds that way, according to an official and a security source familiar with airport operations.

Such moves have fueled anger among Hezbollah’s supporters toward the administration led by President Joseph Aoun and Nawaf Salam, who was made prime minister against Hezbollah’s wishes.

Alongside its Shiite ally, the Amal Movement, Hezbollah swept local elections in May, with many seats uncontested. The group will be seeking to preserve its dominance in legislative elections next year.

Nabil Boumonsef, deputy editor-in-chief of Lebanon’s Annahar newspaper, said next year’s poll was part of an “existential battle” for Hezbollah.

“It will use all the means it can, firstly to play for time so it doesn’t have to disarm, and secondly to make political and popular gains,” he said.