Living with fear: Inside a southern Lebanon village divided by Israel
NewsFeed Southern Lebanon’s Mansouri village is divided by Israel’s Yellow Line, a military boundary separating 6% of Lebanese territory it occupies from the rest of the country. Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr spoke to residents who say they’re living with fear. Published On 30 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Why did Anthony Fauci invoke the Fifth Amendment? Senate hearing explained
Dr Anthony Fauci, a former top United States public health official, has declined to answer questions at a Republican-led Senate committee hearing into the origins of COVID-19 and the handling of the pandemic. The former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination on Wednesday. Recommended Stories list of 1 item list 1 of 1Fauci invokes Fifth Amendment in heated COVID-19 Senate hearing end of list Fauci was called to testify by Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who accuses him of misleading Congress and questions whether US-funded research in China played a role in the pandemic, allegations Fauci denies. Although former President Joe Biden granted Fauci a preemptive pardon in 2025, Republicans claim it does not protect him from any alleged crimes committed after it was issued, such as perjuring himself at a Senate hearing. Fauci’s lawyers advised him not to testify, arguing that anything he said under oath could expose him to new legal risks. Here is what to know: Who is Anthony Fauci? Fauci, 85, is a physician and immunologist who led the US NIAID for 38 years, advising seven presidents, both Republican and Democratic. He became the public face of the US response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, after helping lead the country’s response to health crises including HIV/AIDS, Ebola and the 2001 anthrax attacks. He became a target of conservative criticism over pandemic policies, including mask recommendations, vaccines and school closures. During his last year in government, Fauci was also chief medical adviser to Biden until he retired in 2022. During the pandemic, between 2019 and 2022, he kept more than 1,000 pages of diary entries documenting his work advising the White House and responding to the pandemic. The notes chronicle his interactions with senior officials and the media. Why is Fauci being questioned? He was subpoenaed to testify over his handling of the pandemic and its origins before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The hearing, led by Paul, focused on several issues: COVID-19’s origins: Paul has long argued that the coronavirus that causes COVID may have leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and questioned whether US-funded research played a role in the outbreak. Gain-of-function research: Republicans say Fauci misled Congress about whether the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, involving modifying viruses to understand how they evolve and assess pandemic risks. Fauci says the NIH did not fund research that caused COVID-19. Allegations of a cover-up: Paul accused Fauci of making false statements to Congress and concealing the NIH’s involvement in research in Wuhan. Fauci denies that. Fauci’s diary: Before the hearing, Paul released more than 1,100 pages of Fauci’s typewritten diary. Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr said the notes were government record because they were written by a federal employee on a government computer during a public health emergency and they were found on government property. Paul said the diary showed differences between Fauci’s private discussions and his public statements. Fauci’s supporters say the entries reflect the uncertainty scientists faced as they learned more about a new virus. Dr Anthony Fauci appears before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee at the Capitol on July 29, 2026 [Allison Robbert/AP] What happened at the hearing? The tense hearing lasted about three hours. After a brief opening statement, Fauci repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and declined to answer more than 100 questions. He accused committee chairman Paul of having an “obsession” with prosecuting him. Committee chairman Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky [AFP] The hearing included several tense moments: Contempt vote: Paul said the committee would vote next week on whether to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress over his refusal to answer questions, threatening “consequences for refusing to answer”. Lawyer removed: Paul directed Capitol Police to remove Fauci’s lawyer, David Schertler, after he tried to speak without being recognised by the committee. “This testimony is from Anthony Fauci. This is not a game with his lawyers,” Paul said. Schertler later described the hearing as an “obsessive vendetta”. Democrats defend Fauci: Democratic senators said the hearing was politically motivated. Senator Gary Peters called it “a partisan exercise” designed to support “a predetermined conclusion” rather than offering legitimate oversight. Closing the hearing, Paul asked rhetorically: “Did [Fauci’s] actions lead to the largest man-made plague in history?” Why did Fauci invoke the Fifth Amendment? Fauci said he invoked the Fifth Amendment on the advice of his lawyers because he believed his answers could expose him to new legal risks. He argued that Paul was trying to build a criminal case against him rather than conduct legitimate congressional oversight. Although Biden’s pardon protects Fauci from prosecution for actions before January 2025, Republicans say any false statements made under oath during this hearing could still expose him to perjury charges. The Fifth Amendment protects people from being forced to give evidence that could incriminate them in a criminal case. Invoking it is a constitutional right and does not imply guilt. What do scientists believe about COVID-19’s origins? Most scientists believe COVID-19 likely spread naturally from animals to humans, known as zoonotic spillover, pointing to a wildlife market in Wuhan as the most likely place where it first spread. Fauci has consistently said he believes that scientific evidence points to a natural origin, while remaining open to other possibilities. Notes from his diary detail a January 2020 call with 11 top virologists and evolutionary biologists – only two were convinced the virus had a natural origin, while the rest debated whether it could have been engineered. Today, most scientists favour a natural origin, while the US intelligence community is divided. The FBI said in 2023 that a laboratory-related incident is the most likely origin of the pandemic. The CIA reached the same conclusion in 2025, but with low confidence. Other agencies and the National Intelligence Council continue to favour
Dramatic sea rescue as firefighters die on the Greek island of Crete
Dramatic sea rescue as firefighters die on the Greek island of Crete NewsFeed The Greek Coast Guard is rescuing people trapped by rapidly spreading wildfires on the island of Crete. Two firefighters were killed battling the blaze. A third died on the mainland. Published On 30 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
US and Israeli leaders expected ‘swift outcome’ in Iran
NewsFeed New details are emerging of how US and Israeli officials seemed to believe the war on Iran would be straightforward and short-lived. NYT reporter Maggie Haberman says Benjamin Netanyahu presented regime change scenarios to Donald Trump, while Lindsey Graham described a timeline of weeks. Published On 29 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Indian student in Russia says he’s been wrongly charged over Bihar protests
Indian student in Russia says he’s been wrongly charged over Bihar protests NewsFeed An Indian student from Bihar says he has been charged over ‘Cockroach’ protests despite being in Russia for the last four months. Hundreds of students across India have faced arrest for participating in the youth-led demonstrations. Published On 29 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Why Saudi Arabia holds the key to Palestinian statehood
Nearly eight decades after the establishment of Israel, the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state remains the defining question of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Wars have been fought, peace treaties signed and diplomatic initiatives launched, yet this central strategic issue remains unresolved. Today, Saudi Arabia is at the forefront of the efforts to establish a Palestinian state and deliver a lasting peace arrangement with Israel. Its commitment to the issue is made clear by its decision to cosponsor the creation of the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the Two-State Solution in 2024, which is currently meeting in Rome. King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman are following in the footsteps of successive Saudi monarchs. For more than half a century, the kingdom has maintained a remarkably consistent position. The question has never been whether peace with Israel is possible, but whether the political conditions required to make such a peace comprehensive, legitimate and irreversible were present. Within that framework, recognition of Israel and the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state are parallel components of a single settlement. Neither is intended to precede the other. That doctrine originated under King Faisal, who made Palestinian self-determination a central pillar of Saudi national security policy. His successors preserved the principle while adapting its diplomatic expression to changing regional realities. The objective remained constant even as the diplomatic environment evolved. The Fahd Plan of 1981 – named after King Fahd – translated that doctrine into a formal peace proposal calling for Israeli withdrawal from occupied Arab territories and recognition of Palestinian national rights. Two decades later, the Crown Prince and later King Abdullah expanded the same strategic logic through the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. Israel was offered comprehensive peace and normal relations with the Arab world in return for withdrawal from the territories occupied in 1967 and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. The current Saudi leadership therefore inherits an established strategic doctrine rather than an unresolved policy debate. Their responsibility is to determine whether today’s diplomatic environment can finally satisfy conditions that have remained fundamentally unchanged for decades. That continuity also reflects a broader question of state legitimacy. For the Saudi monarchy, support for Palestinian statehood has never been solely a matter of foreign policy. It has become one of the enduring pillars of the kingdom’s political and religious legitimacy, rooted in the monarch’s role as Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques and reinforced by the kingdom’s longstanding position within both the Arab and Islamic worlds. The significance of that continuity became clearer after the Abraham Accords of 2020. By establishing diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, later joined by Morocco and Sudan, the accords demonstrated that Arab-Israeli normalisation could advance without progress on Palestinian statehood. They reshaped regional diplomacy, but they neither resolved the Palestinian question nor completed the wider peace process. Successive US administrations have regarded Saudi participation as the decisive missing element. The Abraham Accords could expand without Riyadh, but they could not acquire their full strategic significance without the kingdom’s participation. The Trump administration has once again placed Saudi-Israeli normalisation at the centre of its regional diplomacy. But this diplomatic push has to be evaluated in the larger post-October 7 context. The war in Gaza created an entirely new diplomatic environment. The subsequent ceasefire initiative and the establishment of the Board of Peace introduced a framework intended to end the conflict, stabilise the territory and begin reconstruction. Their significance lies not in replacing a political settlement, but in creating conditions under which one might become possible. For the kingdom, however, the essential political requirement remains unchanged: the actual and irreversible establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state. That position rests upon mutually reinforcing political, religious and economic foundations. The monarch governs not only as head of state but also as Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, a responsibility carrying religious authority throughout the Islamic world. Any decision concerning recognition of Israel would therefore require both political approval and broad religious legitimacy. Such legitimacy could not credibly rest upon promises of future negotiations. It would require the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state. The kingdom’s wider influence reinforces that position. It is by far the Arab world’s largest economy, representing about one-third of total Arab economic output. The kingdom is the only regional member of the G20, one of the world’s leading energy superpowers and the world’s leading crude oil exporter. It is also the Middle East’s principal economic engine. Combined with its religious standing, these factors give Saudi decisions consequences extending far beyond bilateral diplomacy. The implications would reach well beyond the kingdom itself. Several major Arab states, including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Algeria, have not recognised Israel. Their decisions are sovereign, but a Saudi-Israeli settlement founded upon Palestinian statehood would nevertheless transform the political environment in which those decisions are made. Lebanon illustrates the point. Washington is encouraging Beirut to move towards formal relations with Israel as part of a broader effort to stabilise the Israeli-Lebanese frontier. The domestic political cost of such a decision, however, would look fundamentally different after a Saudi-backed settlement based upon Palestinian statehood than before one. The same logic extends across the wider Muslim world. Major influential countries such as Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Malaysia have withheld recognition of Israel because the Palestinian question remains unresolved. A settlement accepted by the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques and accompanied by the establishment of a Palestinian state would compel those governments to follow. It would remove the principal political and religious obstacles to reconsidering their positions. This is what ultimately distinguishes Saudi Arabia from the earlier Abraham Accords. Saudi Arabia’s participation would be different in kind, not merely in scale, carrying political, economic and religious significance across the Arab and Muslim worlds. Whether the current diplomatic process can ultimately reach that point remains uncertain. Israel, the Palestinians, the United States, the European Union and certain regional governments all have indispensable roles to play. The final Saudi decision,
Iran rejects Trump frozen funds plan, warns ships of Hormuz transit ban
Iran rejects Trump frozen funds plan, warns ships of Hormuz transit ban NewsFeed Iran rejected US President Donald Trump’s claim that ships damaged by Iran in the Gulf would be compensated from frozen Iranian funds. IRGC spokesperson Ebrahim Zolfaghari warned that any vessel taking such money will be banned from transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Published On 28 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Trump expresses frustration with Netanyahu before White House meeting
US president says Iran talks progressing, reups threats if diplomacy fails before sit down with Israeli prime minister. United States President Donald Trump has appeared to express frustration with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before their meeting at the White House. Trump made the comments to Fox News on Tuesday, just hours before he and the Israeli prime minister were set to meet in the Oval Office, their first such meeting since they jointly launched the war with Iran on February 28. Recommended Stories list of 3 items list 1 of 3Israel’s approval of limited Gaza force a calculated manoeuvre, experts say list 2 of 3Are the US and Iran heading towards a forever war? list 3 of 3Trump calls protester ‘communist’ after Michigan speech interruption end of list The US president pushed back when asked about reports that Netanyahu planned to discuss alleged intelligence related to Iran’s Pickaxe Mountain, an underground nuclear site. “I don’t need Bibi to tell me that,” Trump said, using Netanyahu’s nickname He added that Netanyahu is “telling me that because he wants me to stay involved”. “I said: ‘Why didn’t you just tell it to me, why did you have to announce it to the world?’” he said, referring to the report. “I know exactly what’s going on at Pickaxe. It’s not a big problem,” Trump said. Tuesday’s meeting with Netanyahu comes at a precarious time for Trump, who has said the US and Iran are engaged in a new diplomatic push following a 13-day escalation. He has repeatedly threatened new attacks, including on Pickaxe Mountain and Iran’s civilian infrastructure, if the talks fail. That fighting followed the breakdown of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed by the US and Iran in June, which saw a halt to fighting, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and the lifting of the US naval blockade on Iran. Netanyahu’s government had opposed that deal and has favoured continued military operations aimed at regime change. US media reports, meanwhile, have fuelled public perception that Netanyahu has repeatedly influenced Trump to take military action against Iran, including in the run-up to the 12-day war last year and the current war, which has stretched on for five months. The conflict has remained widely unpopular in the US, and increasingly, within segments of Trump’s Republican party. Still, Trump downplayed the differences on Iran when speaking to reporters on Monday. “We have a little difference,” Trump said of Netanyahu, “but pretty close, yeah.” During that exchange, Trump also pushed back on Israel’s opposition to the US resuming its F-35 programme with Turkiye. “Frankly, we’re being very nice to a lot of countries that would not survive without us. And you know who wouldn’t survive without us? Israel.” Despite Trump and, notably, his vice president, JD Vance, showing more willingness to criticise Israel in recent weeks, Washington’s policy of staunch military support has remained unchanged. Netanyahu’s visit comes as lawmakers continued to mull a defence budget that would integrate parts of the US and Israel’s militaries, with the package already passed by the US House of Representatives. For his part, Netanyahu, speaking on Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures” over the weekend, said he hoped to sit down with Trump “to hear what he has in mind” for Iran. Analysts have said the Israeli prime minister is acutely aware of his tanking popularity in the US, and will likely try to shed the perception he is trying to push the US into further war. On Trump, Netanyahu said it’s largely “his decision” on how to move forward. “If he can do so without returning to intense military fighting, that’s fine. Why not?” he said, before reiterating his government’s zero-tolerance approach to Iran’s civilian nuclear programme. “But one way or the other, they have to end their nuclear program,” he said. Adblock test (Why?)
Is Netanyahu’s Trump card losing its power in Israel?
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long presented his closeness to the United States – both politically and personally – as evidence of his indispensability to Israel. Arriving with a camera-ready American accent after spending a large portion of his youth in the country, Netanyahu is said to have used his unique understanding of US politics to charm and cajole numerous presidents into maintaining their unflagging support of Israel and his personal political projects. Recommended Stories list of 4 items list 1 of 4Israeli ex-generals urge Trump to push Netanyahu on ‘settler terror’ list 2 of 4‘War criminal’: Protesters confront Netanyahu motorcade in Washington DC list 3 of 4Netanyahu meets Trump at the White House: What’s on the agenda, what’s next list 4 of 4Trump flouts political risk to host Netanyahu’s seventh White House visit end of list For a time it appeared as though US President Donald Trump was the most amenable of all past presidents to Israel and to Netanyahu, particularly after he became the first US leader to agree to participate in a joint war with Israel against Iran. And yet, with that war stalling, Trump appearing more willing to make deals in the Middle East without Israeli input, and increasing criticism of Israel in the US, there is a sense in Israel that Netanyahu’s Trump card may not be as useful as it once was. That has come at a bad time for Netanyahu, who faces an election at home in late October and an ongoing trial for corruption, as well as several unresolved conflicts in the region. Netanyahu’s visit to Washington on Tuesday to meet Trump – his first since the war on Iran began – therefore is an opportunity for a refresh – and a photo opportunity to remind the Israeli public of his ties to the US president. The optics Strains in Netanyahu’s relationship with Trump have been growing since the start of the war on Iran, after reporting emerged that it was the Israeli prime minister who convinced the US president of the feasibility of the mission, and the potential for the Iranian state to be overthrown. Concern has also grown within the US Congress over Netanyahu’s apparent indulgence of Israel’s increasingly violent settler movement – which included the extrajudicial detention of a US senator by settlers – alongside friction over Washington’s decision to consider selling F-35s to Israel’s regional rival Turkiye and agreeing a nuclear cooperation deal with Saudi Arabia. “The real reason Netanyahu’s got this visit [to Washington] is purely cynical,” Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli ambassador and consul general in New York, told Al Jazeera. “He’s claimed that he’s flying all the way to the US to attend the wake of his apparently great friend [deceased Republican Senator] Lindsey Graham.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the media as he is welcomed by US President Donald Trump for meetings at the Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida in December [File: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters] “Supposedly there’s an agenda, supposedly they’re going to talk about Iran, F-35s and Saudi Arabia’s potential nuclear deal,” said Pinkas. “But really this is about two things: hoping to assure allies and critics within Israel that the relationship with Trump holds and, separately, hoping that Trump will again call for his pardon in the corruption trial,” he added, referring to Trump’s unorthodox intervention in Israel on Netanyahu’s behalf in November 2025. However, while Netanyahu may be hoping that a good meeting with Trump may help him in the polls, he arrives at a time when his stock in the US is potentially at its lowest. Netanyahu has received widespread criticism from figures on the American right, such as podcast host Tucker Carlson and the former Republican US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene. Vice President JD Vance has also been critical of “some” Israelis, using an interview with US podcaster Joe Rogan to suggest that figures within the Israeli government were trying to derail the agreement he was brokering with Iran to end the war. Analysts have suggested that the Trump-Netanyahu meeting will combine public flattery with private cynicism on the US president’s part. Asked about Netanyahu’s public resistance to the F-35 sale to Turkiye on board Air Force One on Monday, Trump told reporters, “Nobody tells me what we should be selling”. President Trump used a press conference on board Air Force One on Monday to push back against Israeli concerns over the potential sale of fighter jets to Turkiye, telling reporters, ‘Nobody tells me what we should be selling’ [Evan Vucci/Reuters] Burnt bridges “Netanyahu arrives in Washington at a time when even many around [Trump] are suspicious of him. He has become toxic in the US,” Ahron Bregman, an Israeli security analyst and senior teaching fellow in the Department for War Studies at King’s College London. “He is regarded in the US – rightly or wrongly – as the one who dragged Trump into a war of choice that has turned into a strategic catastrophe. Nobody, not even Trump, will let him pretend to be the cleverest guy in the room. Those days are gone.” While few expect any overt signs of disharmony from the visit in public, Netanyahu’s ability to present himself as uniquely positioned to manage the country’s relationship with the US – a key factor in the upcoming election – may be limited. “Netanyahu’s had a tremendous track record with the US, but he’s burned a lot of bridges,” Mitchell Barak, an Israeli pollster and a former Netanyahu aide in the 1990s, told Al Jazeera, adding that the criticism of Netanyahu was not isolated to figures within the nationalist wing of the Republican Party, but included Israel’s traditional allies within the party’s centre right. “We’ve seen tension through Trump’s comments on the various F-35 sales, including most recently to Turkiye, as well as US criticism of Netanyahu at the start of the Iran war, so I’m not too sure if Trump’s going to be stumping for Netanyahu for all that much longer,” Barak said.
Trump says Iran talks taking place during pause in US military strikes
NewsFeed US President Donald Trump says talks with Iran are continuing during a pause in US military strikes, adding he believes there is ‘a good chance’ of a breakthrough but warning military action could resume if negotiations fail. Published On 28 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)