The US on Friday approved a $1.98 billion weapons package for Kuwait.

The US State Department said the deal includes the acquisition of counter-drone systems produced by defense firm Anduril, a company established by a backer of US President Donald Trump.

According to the State Department, the sale is intended to strengthen the defense capabilities of Kuwait, which Washington considers a key non-NATO partner in the region.

“This proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security objectives of the US by improving the security of a major non-NATO ally that has been an important force for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East,” the statement said.

Illustration released by Hezbollah Military Media depicting Israeli soldiers fleeing from a military vehicle during combat operations.

Despite renewed talk in Washington of a ceasefire in Lebanon, the reality facing Israeli occupation forces deployed in southern Lebanon appears markedly different, according to military affairs correspondent Yaniv Kubovich in Haaretz.

Israeli occupation troops operating in the area say there is little sense of any genuine de-escalation. Drones, aerial attacks, rocket fire, and attempts to target soldiers continue to occupy commanders and troops on the ground, despite US President Donald Trump’s assertion that Hezbollah had agreed to halt attacks on Israeli forces. Solely on Tuesday, the occupation forces reportedly faced ten drone-related attack attempts. The only tangible change, soldiers say, has been a reduction in launches toward the occupied territories and the suspension of attacks in Beirut.

Kubovich reports that the Israeli military maintains that the US-backed ceasefire directives do not apply to the areas where ground forces are operating. Field commanders say neither the threat environment nor operational tasks have changed and that fighting continues at nearly the same intensity.

According to the report, the Israeli military has drawn a distinction between areas under Northern Command responsibility—including buffer zones and territories entered during ground operations—and areas overseen directly by the General Staff, including Beirut, major urban centers, and deeper regions of Lebanon. While little has changed in the first category, military attacks in the second were halted following a direct request from Trump.

Senior officers described an unprecedented situation in which authority over the use of force is no longer determined solely by the Israeli occupation government or military leadership but is increasingly influenced by decisions made in the White House. Planned strikes against targets in Beirut and elsewhere in Lebanon—including operations requiring extensive preparation by the air force, intelligence services, and other military branches—were reportedly canceled at the last moment.

The situation has reportedly generated unease within the Zionist entity’s military leadership. Many officers say they have never operated under conditions where battlefield decisions with direct consequences for troops are so immediately affected by a foreign government’s political choices.

For commanders, uncertainty has become a defining feature of the conflict. Commanders prepare large-scale plans, mobilize forces, and ready complex operations without any guarantee of their execution. Some military officers also believe recent public statements by the Zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the defense minister undermined military initiatives. According to those officers, key targets had been awaiting favorable operational conditions, but inflammatory political rhetoric increased international and political pressure, complicating their execution.

Kubovich further reports that military and security officials presented political leaders with multiple escalation scenarios ahead of a proposed expansion of military operations. Some options included strikes deep inside Lebanon and broader campaigns targeting Hezbollah’s centers of influence.

The military reportedly believed such operations could inflict greater damage on Hezbollah but would require substantial resources and lengthy preparations. Ultimately, the plans were not fully approved. The operation that did proceed was more limited than the alternatives proposed and has now also been suspended following the US push for a ceasefire.

According to military and security sources, a widening gap between actual battlefield outcomes and the rhetoric promoted by political leaders and official spokespersons has fueled frustration and eroded public confidence among Israeli settlers.

In this context, Israeli military officials acknowledge that while Hezbollah has suffered significant blows, it has not been defeated. Its command structure remains intact, much of its organizational framework survives, and substantial capabilities have been preserved for the future.

Field commanders have also warned against a return to the institutional culture that prevailed before the October 7 attacks. They argue that conformity with senior leadership is increasing while critical voices are being marginalized. According to officers, the perspectives of commanders on the ground are often ignored, and few within the military are willing to challenge operational decisions.

Israel currently maintains military operations across Lebanon, Syria, and the Gaza Strip. Each front demands significant manpower, intelligence resources, logistical support, and defensive capabilities. Field commanders warn that such a posture is unsustainable without a clear strategic vision. Reserve forces are already under severe strain, while regular units continue to face rapid attrition.

One senior reserve officer summarized the dilemma: “The issue is not how much territory can be occupied. The issue is who will hold it a year from now. If the state does not define a strategy for all fronts, the Israeli military will eventually reach its breaking point.”

Former Israeli Army Chief: Current Situation in Lebanon Is Pointless

The concerns raised by serving officers and security officials are echoed by prominent figures from Israel’s military establishment. As criticism grows over the absence of a clear strategy, former Chief of Staff Dan Halutz has joined a widening chorus of voices questioning the government’s conduct of the war and warning that continued military operations without defined political objectives risk further deepening the Israeli occupation’s strategic predicament.

Halutz said military leaders must establish clear limits and demand solutions from the government.

Speaking to Radio 103FM about developments on the northern front and in southern Lebanon, Halutz delivered a scathing assessment of the government’s conduct.

“They sent our soldiers like sitting ducks into a shooting range. They are exposed. These soldiers are doing everything they can with courage, but they have been given undefined objectives and no clear path to achieving them,” he said.

Halutz also criticized the capture of Beaufort Castle (Qalaat Al-Shaqif), arguing that Netanyahu was seeking “symbolic victories” rather than strategic achievements.

“We seized Beaufort Castle, and Netanyahu was looking for symbols. Suddenly he remembered Begin’s symbolism from 44 years ago and clung to it. The castle means nothing without a comprehensive strategy,” he said, adding that the insistence on maintaining the current situation in Lebanon serves no purpose.

Asked whether military leaders should tell the government that enough is enough, Halutz answered unequivocally in the affirmative. “Of course. They should say, ‘This is enough.’ Let’s stop and consider another solution.'” Halutz expressed little confidence that Netanyahu’s political and diplomatic circle would challenge his decisions.

Source: Agencies (translated and edited by Al-Manar)

Tehran:

The spokesperson for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Brigadier General Hossein Mohabb, said on Wednesday evening that the destruction of the passenger terminal at Kuwait Airport was the result of an error in American “Patriot” systems.

Brigadier General Mohabb added, in a statement quoted by Fars News Agency: “The investigations we conducted regarding the strike on the Kuwait Airport passenger terminal revealed that the Revolutionary Guard’s Aerospace Force did not launch any missile towards this target, and that the destruction of the Kuwait Airport passenger terminal was caused by an error in the American ‘Patriot’ systems, which fell on this terminal after failing to intercept Iranian missiles.”

• “The result of the direct negotiations, which are futile, humiliating, and disgraceful for Lebanon, and which are rejected in their entirety by broad segments of the Lebanese people, came in the form of the Washington Declaration, which outlines the basic principles through which the United States and Israel seek Lebanon’s submission to the project of Greater Israel.”

• “Making the disarmament of the resistance the primary objective and starting point of any agreement means executing Lebanon’s source of strength. It constitutes an existential threat that could lead to the annihilation of its resistant people. It is a declaration aimed at destroying Lebanon, destabilizing it, and creating internal strife among the Lebanese in Israel’s interest, allowing Israel to obtain through politics what it failed to obtain through war.”

• “This is impossible for anyone who seeks dignity, honor, and the preservation of the blood of the martyrs, the wounded, the prisoners, and this great people who have sacrificed so much. We are not among those who betray the trust of the martyrs, the land, and the future of generations.”

• “This declaration is a roadmap for the annihilation of part of the Lebanese people and the subjugation of the rest.”

• “To place the security track under the slogan of a supposed ceasefire, interpreted as requiring Hezbollah to stop firing, resistance fighters to leave the south, while aggression continues under military pressure, is surrender, defeat, and the realization of the enemy’s objectives. It is like Satan dreaming of entering paradise.”

• “We are concerned only with ending the aggression completely, achieving a ceasefire, and securing Israel’s withdrawal.”

• “The ceasefire must be comprehensive. There can be no division between the south and the rest of Lebanon, nor can the Israeli enemy be granted freedom to kill throughout Lebanon. As long as occupation exists, the resistance will continue.”

• “We have given no commitment to anyone that we will refrain from resisting aggression or responding to it. As long as aggression continues, we will confront it with all the power at our disposal and strike wherever we decide and are able.”

• "As long as our villages remain unsafe, bombed, demolished, and our people are being killed, the settlements will not be safe, and they will witness our strength and determination. "

• “The killers of prophets will not settle on our land. We will fight the invaders until we expel them from our land and end their aggression, relying on Allah’s assistance and support, the courage of the resistance fighters, the embrace of our great and exceptional people who have made enormous sacrifices, and the ever-burning legacy of the martyrs’ blood.”

• “The primary objective must be Lebanon’s sovereignty, which can only be achieved through the exclusive solution of ending Israeli aggression against Lebanon in all its forms—by air, land, and sea—along with Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanese territory, the deployment of the Lebanese Army south of the Litani River, the release of prisoners, the return of residents to all of their villages, and reconstruction.”

• “We reject any linkage between the existence of the resistance and the cessation of aggression or Israel’s withdrawal.”

• “No one has the right to interfere in Lebanon’s internal affairs or in how the Lebanese organize their political, economic, and social life, nor in the decisions they reach among themselves concerning their country’s sovereignty and protection within the framework of a national security strategy upon which they agree.”

• “We are committed to national unity in confronting aggression, and it is a source of strength for all of us.”

• “We hold the authorities responsible for fulfilling their duties and addressing the internal Lebanese divisions caused by political choices that do not represent national consensus among Lebanon’s components, nor the principles of the constitution and the formula of coexistence.”

• “The authorities are responsible for initiating measures and dialogue that lead to the unification of the Lebanese in confronting Israeli aggression against our country, for it is an aggression against all of us.”

• “It is more important that the people of the country first come together in confronting aggression, and only afterward address their internal issues under the framework of the constitution, the Taif Agreement, the unity of citizens, and coexistence.”

• "We call on officials to put an end to this farce and humiliation known as direct negotiations, so that you may be stronger through the support of all your people behind the choice of a sovereign state under your administration, a state to which the enemies will inevitably submit.