Flydubai plane accident and developments in southern Lebanon

There was disagreement over the motives of the accident that occurred on board a Flydubai plane, which was diverted to land at Tabuk Airport in Saudi Arabia, on Wednesday. While the Emirati company reported that “the reasons and motives behind what happened are still unknown at this initial stage” and that they are under investigation, official Israeli officials considered the incident “terrorist.”

A Flydubai spokesman explained in a statement that an altercation occurred inside the cockpit on board flight No. FZ 1073, heading from Dubai International Airport to Ben Gurion International Airport, noting that the plane crew was able to control the situation, change the flight path and land safely at Tabuk Airport in Saudi Arabia, stressing that all passengers and crew members are fine.

The spokesman added that the company operated two alternative flights to Tabuk, giving priority to transporting passengers and completing their journey to Tel Aviv, stressing that the rest of the carrier’s flights through its air network are operating according to their usual schedules.

Regarding the circumstances of the incident, he pointed out that “the reasons and motives behind what happened are still unknown at this initial stage, and are subject to an official investigation, calling for avoiding speculation until the competent authorities finish collecting the facts and determining the circumstances of the incident.”

The spokesman stressed that the company's top priority at the present time is to ensure the safety of the passengers and crew members involved in the incident, and to provide them with the necessary support, in addition to cooperating with the competent authorities in the official investigation.

Tabuk Airport receives a distress call

Early on Wednesday morning, Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz Airport in the city of Tabuk issued a statement, stating that the air control center received, at 8:44 am on Wednesday, September 30, 2026 local time, a distress call from the flight, requesting an emergency landing at Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz International Airport.

Following the distress call, the airport declared a state of emergency, raised the level of alert and readiness to provide the necessary assistance to the plane upon its arrival. About an hour after receiving the call, the plane landed safely at the airport at 9:45 a.m. local time. After landing, it was found that both the plane's captain and the co-pilot were injured, and they were taken to the hospital to receive the necessary medical care.

At the same time, the concerned authorities provided the necessary care for passengers in the passenger lounge, while coordinating with the air carrier to secure an alternative aircraft for them.

Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz International Airport confirmed its commitment to the regulations and instructions issued by the General Authority of Civil Aviation, in accordance with international treaties and agreements related to the safety of air navigation, passengers and cabin crews. The airport indicated that the competent authorities are continuing to work to complete the necessary investigations to determine the circumstances of the incident.

The Tabuk Airport administration explained, in an additional statement, on Wednesday evening, that all passengers on the Flydubai flight left for their final destination on an alternative plane at 5:40 p.m. The airport reaffirmed its commitment to the regulations and instructions issued by the Saudi Civil Aviation Authority in accordance with international treaties and agreements related to the safety of air navigation, passengers, and hospitality crews.

Netanyahu: The passengers prevented a major disaster

For his part, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the passengers of the plane “succeeded in neutralizing the attacker and preventing him from causing a major disaster.”

Netanyahu said that one of the pilots stabbed the other and tried to shoot down the plane, adding in a televised speech: “During the flight, and as they were approaching our country, one of the pilots stabbed his colleague and apparently tried to shoot down the plane with all its passengers,” praising the “heroes” who intervened to control the attacker, “and they saved many lives” and allowed “to avoid a major disaster.”

However, Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz asserted that the incident was “an attempted jihadist attack,” he said. He added: “The attacker had one goal, which was to destroy the plane.”

The Israeli operation in the town of Al-Mansouri in the Tire district raises a question about whether the storming and demolition operations pave the way for reducing the direct ground presence, in exchange for keeping larger areas under surveillance and fire control, amid a reduction in combat power. The Israeli army announced on Wednesday that the forces of the Golani Brigade’s combat team, led by the 36th Division, worked in the security zone in southern Lebanon to remove threats to the State of Israel, and are now entering a period of recovery.

This comes after the Israeli army announced the end of a brigade-level operation in Al-Mansouri, in conjunction with reducing the number of brigades deployed in the south from 8 to 6, without announcing a withdrawal from the area that Israel describes as “security.”

The Israeli army reported that the forces of the 55th Brigade, led by the 91st Division, and in cooperation with the “Yahloum” unit, destroyed more than 600 sites, which they classified as “infrastructure” for “Hezbollah,” and 8 underground tracks, in addition to finding dozens of launch pads.

A shift in the nature of control

Retired Brigadier General Dr. Bahaa Halal told Asharq Al-Awsat that what is happening in the town of Mansouri “holds indicators that go beyond a temporary military operation, and may reflect a shift in the nature of Israeli control in southern Lebanon, from direct control over the land to what can be described as control by fire.”

Halal explained that on September 28, Israel announced the end of a large operation in Al-Mansouri, which it said targeted Hezbollah’s infrastructure, and spoke of the destruction of more than 600 sites and 8 tunnels, after evacuation orders received by residents about two months ago, in parallel with systematic demolition and bombing operations that affected homes and facilities, including 17 demolition operations recorded during one night.

He said: “The issue is no longer necessarily how Israel enters the village, but rather how to make it after its entry less capable of restoring life and centering there. A traditional invasion requires large numbers of infantry, special forces, engineering, and reserves, while creating a smaller, more defensible security belt allows for a reduction in ground forces, in exchange for increased reliance on armor, reconnaissance, drones, artillery, and precision fire.”

He pointed out that this possibility “intersects with the restructuring of the Israeli forces, with the reduction of the number of brigades from 8 to 6, and the exit of elite, infantry, and reserve units, in exchange for the introduction of formations, including the 188th Armored Brigade, and the demobilization of numbers of reserve soldiers,” pointing out that “what is most important is not the number of brigades alone, but the nature of the units and their missions.”

He added: “If we use the term gray line analytically, and not as an official, established Israeli line, it can be viewed as a line of stabilization and expansion, while the area beyond it, towards what remains of the south of the Litani, up to the areas north of the Litani, becomes a zone of control by fire. That is, Israel does not need to permanently occupy this space, but it maintains the ability to monitor it, target movements there, and militarily control what is happening there from a distance.

Halal believed that Al-Mansouri might form an “operational laboratory” based on 3 stages: “evacuating the population, then dismantling the engineering and military infrastructure, houses and corridors that may facilitate repositioning or rapid return, then moving to remote control.”

He said that the presence of armor becomes more appropriate in the installation phase, because it allows “securing axes, protecting forward positions, rapid movement, and providing direct firepower,” after the need for assault and infantry units declines.

He added: “Israel may withdraw from a village, but it will not abandon it functionally if it keeps the drones, reconnaissance, artillery, and armored vehicles in controlling positions, observation points, and air capabilities. Then the withdrawal will be spatial, while the ability to control what is happening in the region remains with fire.”

He pointed to three possible scenarios: “an actual gradual withdrawal, or maintaining a smaller and more fortified security belt, or combining a security belt and fire control of the areas behind it.”

He concluded that the end of the UNIFIL mission at the end of 2026 constitutes an essential factor in this reading, as any decline in the international presence may, in his opinion, increase the importance of “reconnaissance and remote strikes as an alternative to keeping large numbers of soldiers inside villages.”

Operations are not limited to one model

In turn, retired Brigadier General Khaled Hamadeh told Asharq Al-Awsat that “what is happening in Al-Mansouri cannot be considered a final model or the end of a phase after which another phase begins,” explaining that Israel is benefiting from what he described as “the period of stagnation that the framework agreement is suffering from,” in order to “bulldoze the infrastructure and destroy as many villages as possible, and develop its military presence in southern Lebanon in different directions.”

Hamada said: “The model of destruction applied in Al-Mansouri may also be applied in other villages, but at the same time there is another model based on expansion and development of operations towards areas beyond the yellow line,” noting that “the bombing of the Al-Rayhan and Sajad areas and the remaining heights east of Nabatieh also falls into this context.”

He added: “It is not possible to definitively judge the form that military operations will take, or the direction towards which Israeli operational activity will develop. We may be facing a group of simultaneous activities, without the Israeli occupation being limited to one direction alone.”

Hamadeh believed that “the critical factor today is that the framework agreement is not effective,” pointing out that “the American desire may be behind the destruction operations that Israel is undertaking, with the aim of pressuring the Lebanese state to accept the framework agreement and go to the experimental areas and agree on verification criteria, given that this, according to the agreement, is the way to end (Hezbollah’s) weapons.”

He added: “On the other hand, Israel is acting at this stage on the basis that any place in the south may be a candidate to be considered as infrastructure for Hezbollah, and thus be targeted and destroyed.”

Hamadeh paused when the end of the UNIFIL mission was approaching, saying: “We are facing an imminent deadline related to the withdrawal of UNIFIL forces, and I believe that Israel may seek to seize these points and turn them into fixed sites.” In other words, the current operational deployment may turn into what could be called an occupied strip in southern Lebanon.

Regarding Al-Mansouri, he said: “The region overlooks the western axis and the city of Tyre, and seizing it and preventing the people from returning to it after its destruction allows Israel to transform it into a military site that supervises the city of Tyre and the coastal axis,” pointing out that “Israel did not mention the presence of Hezbollah’s infrastructure in the Al-Mansouri area.”

Hamadeh continued: “The occupation zone remains likely to expand, as military operations may be developed towards Sajad and Iqlim al-Tuffah, and the displacement of the people of Nabatieh may become one of the pressure factors that Israel is adopting to push the Lebanese state further towards implementing the framework agreement.”

He believed that one of the possibilities proposed is to “occupy the sites where UNIFIL forces are deployed today, and attempt to control the ruling points, so that the displacement of the population from them leads to their conversion into safe and stable military sites for the Israeli army.”

Continuous escalation

In parallel, the Israeli army carried out bombings in the towns of Mays al-Jabal, Majdal Zun and Zawtar al-Sharqiya, in conjunction with artillery shelling targeting Wadi al-Saluki and a number of homes on the western outskirts of Mays al-Jabal. A Merkava tank stationed in the town of Al-Bayada also fired artillery shells towards the town of Al-Mansouri.

Over the course of three years, dozens of Israeli attacks targeted the Lebanese army deployed in the south, and included friction between the two armies, despite the existing coordination mechanisms between the two parties through the American side, and before that through “mechanism” and “UNIFIL”, which indicates tension that does not rise to the level of confrontation in the relationship between the two armies.

These attacks, targeting, and coordination mechanisms will be part of the military negotiation session held by representatives of the Lebanese and Israeli armies, under American auspices, at the headquarters of the US Army Central Command in Florida on October 20.

Ministerial sources, keeping pace with the international talks, said that this session will not discuss any civil file, as negotiators specializing in law or economics will not participate in it, but rather it will be limited to the participation of military personnel, and it will be headed by the head of the Lebanese delegation to negotiations with Israel, Ambassador Simon Karam, and will also be attended by the Lebanese ambassador to Washington, Nada Hamada Moawad.

The sources indicated in statements to Asharq Al-Awsat that the talks “will be limited to field and military files, such as a ceasefire, a halt to bulldozing, and the possibility of expanding the model areas or making progress in the file of verifying them,” in addition to the prisoners’ file.

Lebanon will not boycott the negotiations

In light of the failure to hold the eighth session of negotiations in Rome, which usually discusses political, economic, and field issues through military and civilian delegations, and which will be postponed until after the Israeli elections, “the American side saw that it was most appropriate to hold a session limited to military representatives, discussing field matters.”

This session proves that “there is no break in the negotiations, nor a freeze in them,” despite the decline in hopes that any progress will be achieved on the level of the files at hand, especially the files of the model areas and prisoners. The American side sets the agenda for the session, and the Lebanese delegation will discuss the constants expressed by Lebanese President Joseph Aoun at the Paris conference, and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam at the United Nations General Assembly, according to what the sources confirmed.

Dozens of officers and soldiers since 2023

The Lebanese Army file, its role, and coordination and communications mechanisms are among the Lebanese priorities. Since the outbreak of war on October 8, 2023, more than 70 officers and soldiers from the Lebanese army have been killed in the south during three years of war with Israel, some of whom died in direct targets, and others in the explosion of war remnants.

These are divided into 46 soldiers who fell in the years 2023 and 2024, according to the “International Information” statistics, while the Lebanese army’s data documented 27 officers and soldiers since the start of the war that broke out after Hezbollah launched 6 missiles towards Israel on March 2, until the present.

The most recent of these incidents occurred on Wednesday in the town of Nabatieh Al-Fawqa, where a soldier was seriously injured as a result of the explosion of a suspicious object left over from war. The Army Command reported in a statement that a soldier and three civilians were injured in the Nabatiyeh al-Fawqa area as a result of an explosion while the army was accompanying residents to inspect their property in the area. She said: “As a result of investigations and engineering examination, it was found that the incident resulted from the explosion of a suspicious object,” noting that “follow-up is being conducted to uncover the circumstances of the incident.”

Banning official institutions from the security zone

Nabatieh Al-Fawqa was completely emptied of residents, as a result of the repeated bombing, which turned it into a dangerous area, and the army is deployed on its outskirts and entrances. Residents usually ask the army to accompany them there, to increase reassurance as a result of trust in the army.

On the other hand, the Israeli targeting of the army is repeated in any area to which the Israeli army prohibits entry, and this was evident in the targeting of a military vehicle that resulted in the killing of two officers and a soldier in the Al-Khardali area last June, as well as in the clashes in the town of Dermamas last week.

Although Lebanon does not believe that there is an Israeli message directed exclusively to the army, security sources say that the Israeli side “is applying the prohibited security zone model to all Lebanese, regardless of whether they are civilians or soldiers in the army or official institutions.” She told Asharq Al-Awsat that what happened in the town of Dermamas last week, in terms of friction with the Lebanese army that deployed at the request of the people, “is an example of what Israel is trying to impose, isolating the security zone it created from the Lebanese interior and official institutions,” despite the fact that the Lebanese army only recognizes international borders, and considers the Israeli presence in Lebanese territory an occupation.

Condemnation of targeting the army

The Lebanese Army activates its communications with the American side, whether “mechanism” or the Military Coordination Group for Lebanon (MCG4L), regarding every incident, to prevent friction, and the political authority and the Lebanese Parliament support the army’s position, which is deployed in implementation of the decision of the executive authority.

Representative Mark Daou confirms that committing crimes against the Lebanese army, which implements government orders to stabilize and establish security in the south, is condemned and denounced. In a statement to Asharq Al-Awsat, he pointed to communication mechanisms between the Lebanese Army Command, UNIFIL, and the Mechanism Command to review these attacks on the military and coordinate in this context to prevent crimes against the military and control the security situation, referring to direct coordination between the Army Command and the Mechanism Command, which is headed by American General Joseph Clearfield.