News Digest — 3/25/26
Woman Killed In North, Nine, Including Infant And Child Injured In Bnei Brak Missile Strike
A woman in her 30s was killed in northern Israel, and seven people, including an infant and a seven-year-old boy were injured in Bnei Brak on Tuesday (24th) when rocket and missile fire struck multiple civilian areas across the country.
The fatality occurred at the Mahanayim Junction, where a Hezbollah rocket hit. Magen David Adom teams confirmed the woman’s death at the scene. Two others at the location were treated for minor and shrapnel wounds.
In a separate strike in central Israel, a missile with a fragmenting warhead hit Bnei Brak without being intercepted.
Emergency services reported one man, 23, in moderate condition with shrapnel injuries, while eight additional casualties were listed in light condition, including an infant and a 7-year-old boy.
Damage from the impact was reported in several areas. In Bnei Brak a residential balcony collapsed, while in nearby Rosh HaAyim, a car overturned.
Additional rocket fire targeted northern communities, with sirens sounding again shortly after the initial strike. In Safed, two people sustained light injuries from broken glass.
In southern Israel, a separate incident left a staff doctor at Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba wounded after fragments fell near his home in the Bedouin village of Alsira, following the interception of an Iranian missile near Nevatim.
Soroka Medical Center said the doctor, Asra Abu Rafa, in his 30s, was in moderate condition. His wife and infant daughter were reported to be in good condition. The hospital also said it was treating 17 people suffering from severe anxiety.
Emergency responders continued operating across multiple locations as impacts were reported in northern, central and southern Israel.
Lebanon Expels Iranian Ambassador
The Lebanese government on Tuesday (24th) announced that it had ordered the Iranian ambassador to Beirut to leave the country, declaring him persona non grata.
Beirut also ordered the Lebanese ambassador to Tehran, Ahmed Sweidan, to return home for consultations.
In a post to his account on X, Lebanon’s foreign minister, Youssef Raggi, wrote that the Iranian envoy to Lebanon, Mohammad Reza Shibani has five days to leave the country.
“I instructed today the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants to summon the Iranian Charge d’ Affaires in Lebanon to inform him of the decision to withdraw the agreement for the designated Iranian Ambassador, Mohammad Reza Shibani, declare him persona non grata, and request that he leave Lebanese territory no later than March 29, 2026”
The Lebanese Foreign Ministry said that Sweidan had been recalled from Iran over “Tehran’s violation of the norms and principles of diplomatic dealings between two countries.”
Tensions between Iran and Lebanon have increased since the outbreak of the war with Israel on Feb. 28, as Beirut sought to avoid a renewal of hostilities between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah terrorist group.
Days later, Hezbollah terrorists launched missiles and drones at northern Israel, sparking a full-scale Israeli military operation in southern Lebanon.
After announcing the recalling of Lebanon’s ambassador from Tehran and the expulsion of Iran’s ambassador from Beirut, the Lebanese Foreign Ministry emphasized that the two countries have not severed diplomatic ties.
Instead, Lebanon described the booting of Iran’s ambassador as “a measure against the ambassador for violating the rules of diplomatic dealings and his obligations as an appointed ambassador to Lebanon.”
The Lebanese Foreign Ministry went on to accuse Ambassador Shibani of “interfering in the internal affairs” of Lebanon by weighing in publicly on Lebanese politics and “holding meetings with Lebanese unofficial bodies.”
Report: Palestinian Authority Building ‘Shadowy Army’ In Violation Of Oslo Accords
The Palestinian Authority has massively expanded the size of its internal security apparatus, a new report warns, forming a de facto standing army in violation of the PA’s agreements with Israel.
According to an investigation published by the Regavim movement, the PA has developed what the report calls a “shadowy army,” including more than 60,000 armed personnel – far exceeding the roughly 18,000 permitted under the Oslo Accords.
The authors of the report added that aside from the swelling ranks of the Palestinian Security Services, the PSS no longer behaves as a conventional policing body but rather has engaged in training more suited to a military force.
The PSS has also undergone a significant expansion in weaponry, both Quantitatively and qualitatively, further violating limits imposed by the Oslo Accords.
While the Oslo framework limited PA forces to light arms for policing purposes, PSS units now possess newer weapons, including machine guns, grenade launchers, and armored vehicles.
The Regavim report also states that PA personnel have undergone advanced military training abroad, including officer training in Russia, armored and artillery instruction in Pakistan, and tactical parachute training in Egypt and Italy.
In addition, training exercises conducted in Jordan and Jericho reportedly include urban warfare, mobile shooting drills, and breaching operations – activities that analysts cited in the report say are characteristic of offensive combat preparation rather than civilian law enforcement.
The report also identifies several elite units within the PA security apparatus, including a commando force of approximately 2,000 troops, a rapid-deployment unit trained for deep raids, and a covert intelligence unit tasked with gathering operational targeting information.
Israeli officials have increasingly warned that reliance on the Palestinian Authority as a stabilizing security actor may carry growing risks if its capabilities continue to evolve.
Regavim concluded that the scale and structure of the PA’s forces place it closer in size to a standing army than a police force, noting that the ratio of armed personnel to population in PA-controlled areas is significantly higher than in Israel. Israel has three police officers per 1,000 residents, compared to 19 officers per 1,000 residents in the PA.
“This exceptional figure shows that these forces do not function as a standard civilian police force but are also intended to serve as a full-fledged army, with one armed individual for every 53 civilians,” the report warns.
The clear conclusion from the findings and field evidence is that these forces have begun practical preparations for raid and territorial takeover scenarios, similar to the events of October 7. Public statements by Palestinian Authority figures about their intention to ‘return’ to cities such as Haifa, Jaffa, and Tiberias indicate that the moderate image that the PA has built for itself is a dangerous illusion.”
“Relying on the Palestinian Authority as a security partner and as a ‘contractor’ in Judea and Samaria, as well as in discussions about the day after in the Gaza Strip, paves the way for a threat. Israel’s security must rely solely on its own strength and sovereignty.”
Iran Likely Behind Arson Attack On London Jewish Ambulances, Analysts
Experts and security officials cited by The Guardian point to Iran as the likely culprit behind the arson attack against four Jewish community ambulances outside a synagogue in northern London on Monday (23rd).
A video of the attack was published on Iran-linked social media channels by Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamia, or “The Islamic Movement of the Companions of the Right,” which Israel’s Diaspora Ministry said last week was responsible for a series of attacks on Jewish institutions in Europe.
However, security officials close to the ambulance arson investigation say the “working assumption” at the moment is that “the group doesn’t exist and it is a front and a brand invented by Iranian intelligence or the Quds Force.” the Guardian says.
The Quds Force is the expeditionary unit of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, responsible for coordination with Iran’s terrorist proxies.
Analysts say Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamia’s name and visual branding draw inspiration from other Shiite groups supported by Iran, The Guardian notes.
Will The International Community Confront Iran’s Illegal Use Of Cluster Munitions? – Amb. Alan Baker
Iran’s use of cluster munitions has become a dominant feature in its conduct of warfare against Israel and many of the Gulf states. International law acknowledges that such munitions may be used against purely military targets. However, Iran’s widespread and indiscriminate use of cluster bombs that could endanger civilians and civilian locations is strictly forbidden and constitutes a violation of international humanitarian law.
One of the principle international humanitarian law norms of armed conflict is that of distinction, requiring an attacker to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. When fired at targets where non-combatants are in close proximity, their use violates the international law principle of distinction.
During the present ongoing hostilities, Iran has been indiscriminately and deliberately firing cluster munitions on a large scale against Israeli residential areas. In light of Iranian violations, there exists every legal necessity and justification to make appropriate representations to the international community, its institutions and to the international media and to provide evidence of such misuse by Iran.
The malicious, deliberate, and indiscriminate targeting by Iran and its proxy Hezbollah of Israel’s civilian areas clearly violates all humanitarian norms and is absolutely prohibited.
The writer, former Legal Adviser and Deputy Director-General of Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, heads the international law program at the Jerusalem Center.
(jcfa.org)
Suicide By Timidity – Irwin Mansdorf (Tablet)
“No imminent threat” is a talking point which has gained prominence with the joint U.S.-Israeli military operation against Iran. For opponents of the operation, the phrase serves as evidence that the rationale for attacking Iran is fraudulent. It functions as a linguistic sedative to assure a nervous public that the wolf is not yet at the door, and to assert that any military action at this time constitutes reckless and unnecessary warmongering.
But by reducing the complexity of strategic judgment to a single metric- is an attack occurring right this second? – we have traded genuine security for a dangerous and ultimately temporary, emotional relief. Humans are hardwired to undervalue future risks in favor of present comforts.
For a modern populace, “immediate reward” of social stability today – no disruption of the daily routine – is so intoxicating that we are willing to accept the “delayed punishment” of an adversary completing a nuclear facility that renders future defense impossible. We are, in effect, choosing a quiet Tuesday today at the cost of a radioactive Wednesday tomorrow.
The traditional legal formulation for anticipatory self-defense required a threat to be “instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.” It emerged in the mid-19th century when armies moved at the speed of a horse.
But modern warfare has compressed the timeline of destruction into a digital pulse. Today, an adversary can achieve a “breakthrough” that permanently alters the strategic balance before a single soldier crosses a border. Equating “imminent” with “immediate” risks transforming the sacred right of self-defense into a strategic suicide pact. If we wait until the missile is airborne, we have already lost.
When we isolate “imminence” to the final seconds before a nuclear detonation, we allow the regime to build an irreversible capability under the cover of our own legalistic hesitation. Progressives who champion human rights and oppose authoritarianism find themselves trapped by a doctrine that effectively protects the world’s most oppressive regimes during the only period when preventive action remains viable.
Waiting for a “smoking gun” is a surrender of sovereignty. Strategic leadership requires acting before an adversary secures an irreversible advantage. Passivity framed as “restraint” does not prevent war; it emboldens the aggressor. When a state approaches irreversible nuclear weapons capability, coupled with ballistic missiles capability, the “final effective window” for action is not a matter of hours before a launch, but the final realistic opportunity to prevent the breakthrough altogether.
The writer is a clinical psychologist and a fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, specializing in political psychology.
