The Dictatorship

Israel’s new ‘buffer zone’ in Lebanon is a huge gift to Hezbollah

Published

2 months ago

April 28, 2026

Apr. 27, 2026, 6:57 PM EDT

ByHussein Ibish

The killing of veteran Lebanese journalist Khalil’s charity last Wednesday represents among the worst elements of the renewed fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, particularly the dangers to civilians posed by Israel’s new “buffer zone.” And if Israeli military officials are to be believed, the goal may be to create a huge area under permanent Israeli control.

On March 1, Hezbollah launched a salvo of projectiles, after which Israel demanded all civilians leave all of southern Lebanon that lies south of the Litani River. Over a million people left their homes and flooded into Beirut. While working as a journalist within that zone, Khalil was killed by IDF troops (and a colleague of hers was severely injured).

Khalil’s employer, Lebanese government officials and rights groups said Khalil’s car was clearly marked and rescue workers were prevented from reaching her for hours as she slowly died under rubble. Israeli officials said they were in a car that left a Hezbollah-linked building driving toward the “yellow line” delineation of a new “buffer zone” in southern Lebanon.

The overwhelming backlash I witnessed created political space for a clear repudiation of Hezbollah’s militia status and authorization for the Lebanese Armed Forces to disarm the group.

Israel has cast Khalil as a Hezbollah operative and, thus, a legitimate target. She worked for Al Akhbar, a newspaper with pro-Hezbollah sympathies, but there is no evidence Khalil was anything other than a reporter. It cannot go unnoticed that Israel has a long history of killing troublesome journalists such as Shireen Abu Akhleha Palestinian American Al Jazeera reporter who was shot to death in 2022 while wearing a clearly marked blue vest labeled “PRESS” in the occupied West Bank.

The war in southern Lebanon has followed Israel’s Gaza playbook: near-total depopulation and destruction. The aim has been to deny Hezbollah any supportive environment by removing the entire society.

But the IDF’s new “yellow line” map suggests Israel wants to gobble up a large chunk of Lebanese territory south of the Litani that it has been coveting since the early 1950squite possibly to divert waters from that river and the Wazzani River (both of which flow down from the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights) and cut Lebanon off from one of its two offshore gas fields. There is far more potentially at play here than just security or “buffer zone.”

And it’s all likely to backfire and strengthen Hezbollah. The Lebanese government, which has shown a greater willingness to confront and contain Hezbollah than it has in the past, has been compelled to strongly denounce Israel’s conduct. Protests by Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and President Joseph Aounechoing the Committee to Protect Journalists and other groups, indicate how badly Israel has misread the political equation.

Salam and Aoun led the cabinet in immediately denouncing Hezbollah for resuming hostilities and engineered a hitherto unthinkable unanimous cabinet decision identifying all of the organization’s paramilitary activities and arsenal illegal, unconstitutional and banned. Even Hezbollah’s Shiite allies in the cabinet from the Amal party endorsed the decision.

I was in Lebanon from late January to mid-March, and the overwhelming backlash I witnessed created political space for a clear repudiation of Hezbollah’s militia status and authorization for the Lebanese Armed Forces to disarm the group.

Lebanese Armed Forces Cmdr. Gen. Rodolphe Haykal, however, fears the military could split over a confrontation with Hezbollah, and he doesn’t want to be blamed for any resulting civil conflict. While Lebanese political leaders have tried to convince the military to move against the group in key southern areas, Israel has sabotaged them by overreaching.

The displacement of almost everyone in the south, combined with the new IDF map suggesting a major land grab plus potential diversion of water and Israeli control over Lebanese offshore gas, has alarmed even those most opposed to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

But a new Israeli occupation will not produce calm. Instead, it will take Hezbollah back to its 1982 founding mission: battling Israeli occupation troops in southern Lebanon. An Israeli land grab or occupation is an ideal scenario for Hezbollah’s paramilitary rebuilding and political rehabilitation, following the devastating 2023-2024 war that was triggered when Hezbollah launched attacks on Israel in solidarity with Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks.

Khalil was killed during a Trump administration-brokered ceasefire, which was recently extended by another three weeks. But Israel plainly only agreed to this pause, which neither side has fully respected, under U.S. pressure. The Lebanese and Israeli ambassadors to the U.S. have met twice in person at the State Department, demonstrating Israel has an unprecedented opportunity to deal with a Lebanese government that wants Hezbollah disarmed and contained, and it is willing to negotiate diplomatic normalization with Israel — unthinkable until now.

But Israel has not accepted that the only alternative to a Hezbollah-dominated Lebanon is a strengthened Lebanese state run with authority from Beirut through the LAF. And it has faced a Lebanese government that unanimously has endorsed that, but by trying to depopulate, devastate and occupy much of the south, while seemingly gobbling up Lebanese water and natural gas.

Israel has made it as difficult as possible for political leaders in Beirut to move against Hezbollah.

But a new Israeli occupation will not produce calm. Instead, it will take Hezbollah back to its 1982 founding mission: battling Israeli occupation troops in southern Lebanon.

Whatever Israel says, virtually no one in Lebanon believes Khalil was a fighter or operative for Hezbollah. The seemingly casual way in which she was dispatched, and especially the apparent blocking of rescue crews for many crucial hours while she was under the rubble, reinforces a belief in Lebanon that Israel is on an irrational rampage.

The political costs this has imposed on leaders such as Salam and Aoun, who want the same thing Israel says it does — a disarmed and contained Hezbollah — have been almost prohibitive. Yet they have persisted with negotiations, while explaining they are just trying to “save Lebanon.”

Yet the U.S.-imposed ceasefire is heavily dependent on Washington’s negotiations to end hostilities with Tehran. President Donald Trump has said Iran must end financial support for Hezbollah, but his administration’s war goals and demands have been constantly in flux since the war began. For now, Israel and Hezbollah have continued to blame each other for limited violations and portraying themselves as respecting the truce. Yet it will only last another three weeks.

If Israel returns to the fighting as soon as possible, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has given every impression of wanting to do, and continues imposing a new occupation in southern Lebanon, along with apparent efforts to seize Lebanese water and natural gas, the narrow and delicate political opportunity for the Lebanese state to take a hard line with Hezbollah will be squandered. Nothing could be better calculated to salvage Hezbollah from its own endless blunders and miscalculations, and provide the group a golden opportunity to rebuild militarily and politically.

We have seen this movie many times before, so we know how it ends: very badly for Lebanese and Israelis alike. The only winners will be in Tehran.

Hussein Ibish

Hussein Ibish is a senior resident scholar at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington.

The Dictatorship

Trump wants a Supreme Court do-over on birthright citizenship, but he won’t get one

Published

3 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Trump wants a Supreme Court do-over on birthright citizenship, but he won’t get one

For months, Donald Trump made clear that he expected the Supreme Court to rule against him on birthright citizenship, and his expectations were correct: Last week, a narrow majority of the high court ruled that the Constitution’s 14th Amendment means what it says.

Hours after the decision came down, the president downplayed the importance of his defeat, saying that he would pursue a legislative solution through Congress, but eight days later, the Republican published a very different kind of message to his social media platform that approached the issue in a more hysterical way. The missive read, in its entirety:

Signs and Billboards are being put up all over our Southern Border, and Mexico, advertising BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP, with “Deliveries starting at $4000.” Likewise, similar signs going up all over our Country. Billions of Dollars will be illegally made by this SCAM, with Citizenship going to anyone willing to pay. It will be, by far, the number one way of becoming a citizen, and then the entire family will be allowed to follow. Not sustainable.

NOBODY SAW THIS COMING!!! AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP IS NOT FOR SALE! In fact, that is a crime, and therefore, the Supreme Court’s ruling is wrong. I will be asking for a Rehearing by the United States Supreme Court, IMMEDIATELY. This miscarriage of justice will destroy America if they don’t change their absolutely insane decision. Thank you for your attention to this matter!

Even by Trump standards, this one’s a doozy.

The New York Times reported“The president appeared to be referring to a Fox News report that identified a hospital in Texas that had advertised paying for ‘Birth Packages in South Texas’ on billboards in Mexico. The outlet reported that Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, a Republican, had ordered an investigation into the hospital, which told Fox News that “marketing materials regarding maternity services are no longer in use due to any unintended misunderstanding.”

Trump apparently took this report and ran with it, inventing various other details, including the amusing idea that cross-border birth tourism will somehow become “the number one way of becoming a citizen” (“by far,” the president added), as opposed to simply being born on U.S. soil to American parents.

But even if such an advertising campaign existed, it wouldn’t generate a rehearing from the Supreme Court. There is no scenario in which justices would say, “Sure, we ruled last week that the unambiguous language of the 14th Amendment means what it says, but if there are billboards going up, that changes everything.”

For good measure, let’s not forget that, according to Trump, his administration has effectively ended illegal border crossings, so as a practical matter, he really shouldn’t be that concerned.

The president’s online rant said he intends to ask for an immediate rehearing. If he orders administration lawyers to go through with such a pointless exercise and they bother to do the paperwork, they should keep their collective expectations low.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

The Dictatorship

Democrats’ scramble to replace Graham Platner ramps up in Maine

Published

3 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Democrats’ scramble to replace Graham Platner ramps up in Maine

Christmas. 9, 2026, 9:46 AM EDT

Maine Democrats are scrambling to replace Graham Platner a day after their nominee for U.S. Senate ended his bid following an allegation of sexual assault.

There’s a July 27 deadline set by state law for the party faithful to pick a new standard bearer in a race that is expected to be instrumental when it comes to whether Republicans can keep control of the Senate in this fall’s midterms.

Incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins may be vulnerable, but she has won five straight races for the seat dating back to 1996, and trying to defeat her was likely to carry challenges for Democrats even in the best case scenario.

Their new candidate will have to essentially start from nothing in the race, mend the divisions sown by Platner, introduce (or reintroduce) themselves to the broader electorate and corral support from the ex-candidate’s outsider-minded current and former followers, all in less than four months.

That amounts to a daunting task with massive implications not only for Maine Democrats, but potentially for the final two years of President Donald Trump’s time in the White House. Democrats need to flip at least four GOP-held Senate seats, and maintain all their current ones from several competitive states, to vault themselves into the majority in the midterms. A loss in Maine would be a significant setback.

Maine Democratic Party leaders announced plans “to hold a nominating convention to choose a new nominee,” while stating that “transparency is of the utmost importance.”

Already, several major voices are in the race, including unsuccessful candidate for governor and past Platner supporter Troy Jackson. The former state senate president made his bid clear less than an hour after Platner left the race. One major Bernie Sanders-aligned group, Our Revolution, has quickly rallied around Jackson.

Dan Kleban, co-founder of Maine Beer Company,”https://x.com/mainebeerbrewer/status/2075028234962677872?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet”>is also in the fray, along with former governor candidate Nirav Shah, who worked as Director of the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention during the pandemic. Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows who also ran for governor this summer is among other potential contenders.

Platner’s exit also brings difficulty for Collins and Republicans as well, however. Instead of facing a Democratic rival with a string of alarming controversies even before the sexual assault allegationan accustation Platner has denied, Collins instead will have to try to keep her seat in a blue state against someone far less defined, and potentially with far fewer vulnerabilities, in November.

Across the country this year, Democrats have navigated a political environment rife with divisions over how to sway voters in these strange times, with tension between more entrenched party leaders and an energetic and angered left wing often spilling out into the open.

What happens in Maine over the coming weeks may prove to be no different.

Hunter Woodall covers politics for MS NOW. He’s reported on politics and presidential campaigns for The Associated Press and CBS News and reported on Congress for The Minnesota Star Tribune.

The Dictatorship

Platner’s exit amplifies a key difference between Democrats and Republicans

Published

3 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Platner’s exit amplifies a key difference between Democrats and Republicans

It’s been almost three years since Kevin McCarthy became the first sitting House speaker to be ousted in the middle of a congressional sessionbut the California Republican has nevertheless tried to maintain a public profile and has routinely appeared on conservative media to push partisan talking points.

So it wasn’t too surprising to see McCarthy on Fox News on Monday night, responding to the latest sexual assault allegations against Graham Platner, still a candidate for Senate at the time.

As part of an apparent effort to contextualize the scandals surrounding the Maine Democrat, the former GOP leader said, “One thing I know about Republicans is when we had a very bad candidate and found out, we didn’t vote for that person. We walked away.”

Moments later, McCarthy added, “When Matt Gaetz came forward, we got rid of him.”

As is too often the case, the failed former House speaker not only had it backward, but his mistake also offered a timely reminder of details that made him and his party look worse, not better.

Indeed, Gaetz offers a rather extraordinary example. The Justice Department investigated the Florida Republican over allegations of alleged sex trafficking, and while Gaetz repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and the prosecutors’ probe ended without charges, his House GOP colleagues made no effort to “get rid of him” as the scandal intensified.

What’s more, the House Ethics Committee found “substantial evidence” that Gaetz “regularly” paid women for sex, had sex with a 17-year-old during his tenure on Capitol Hill and possessed illegal drugs. Nevertheless, as that evidence came together, he remained a GOP member in good standing; he won re-election in 2024 with the Republican Party’s backing; and President Donald Trump thought it would be a good idea to nominate Gaetz to serve as the U.S. attorney general — a nomination endorsed by Republican senators such as South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham and Alabama’s Tommy Tubervilleeven after they had seen the House Ethics Committee’s findings.

This is what McCarthy cited as an example of the GOP maintaining the highest standards and throwing “very bad candidates” to the curb. That’s ridiculous.

But there’s no reason to stop with Gaetz. Indeed, the list of scandal-plagued Republicans who continued to enjoy the party’s backing long after ugly allegations had reached the public is not short. Trump is obviously the most glaring example, but the list includes other contemporary figures, including Rep. Cory Mills of Florida and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

There’s no reason to limit the list to electoral candidates, either: Former Fox News host Pete Hegseth faced an avalanche of scandals during his confirmation fight early last year, but Senate Republicans decided to ignore the allegations and make him defense secretary anyway.

As the Hegseth fight unfolded, political scientist Jonathan Bernstein published a smart piece that remains relevant: “I do not believe that Republicans or conservatives are any more prone to [scandals] than Democrats. What has changed, however, is the incentive structure. Once upon a time both parties were equally likely to rid themselves of bad actors; now Republicans are far more likely to tolerate, and in some cases even celebrate, behavior they once would have shunned.”

When Democrats learned of serious allegations against then-Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, the party abandoned him. When then-New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez faced serious criminal charges for which he was later convicted, the party abandoned him, too.

In Maine, the Platner example followed the same path, as evidenced by his decision to withdraw from the Maine race after Democratic officials left him with no other choice.

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, an MS NOW legal analyst, explained this week“The contrast here is hard to ignore. Democrats have shown that when credible allegations of sexual misconduct emerge against one of their own, the conversation turns quickly to accountability. Republicans have made a different choice. That’s not a partisan talking point, it’s a difference in how the two parties have approached questions of character and fitness for office over the last 10 years.”

That’s true, whether McCarthy wants to acknowledge it or not.