A Palestinian was killed and others injured as a result of an Israeli bombing of Gaza City

The British newspaper “The Guardian” reported that Israel refuses to allow the progress of a project to establish an advanced military site in the Gaza Strip for the peace council of US President Donald Trump.

In early August, the Peace Council, an international body mandated by the United Nations in 2025 and headed by the US President, issued its first construction contract in Gaza, assigning the company “Arkel International”, which is based in the US state of Louisiana, the task of building an advanced military site that accommodates 150 international soldiers, to be the vanguard of an international stabilization force.

Two months later, Israel still refuses to allow the contract to be implemented, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter. Contractors and trucks are not allowed to enter Gaza and start work. The source said, “Israel will not open the crossing,” according to what was reported by the German News Agency.

A spokesman for the Peace Council declined to comment, and the Israeli army and government also declined to comment.

The Israeli war in Gaza is one of eight wars that Trump says he has succeeded in settling. He included it again last week in a lengthy post on social media, in which he complained about what he considered an injustice against him by not awarding him the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Peace Council, which was established following the ceasefire in Gaza in October 2025, is a key focus of Trump’s claims that he has ended the conflict, according to The Guardian.

Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz escalated his threats yesterday, vowing to deal a severe blow to Hezbollah and expand the scope of military control in the south, in addition to evacuating the southern suburbs of Beirut and displacing more than a million Lebanese Shiites, if the party joins any possible Iranian attack on Israel, saying that “more than a million Shiites will become displaced inside Lebanon.”

In parallel, Hezbollah's announcement of providing financial aid to the displaced and affected people raised questions about the sources of the funds and the mechanisms for their arrival and distribution, while a US State Department spokesman questioned, for the second time in a matter of days, its existence at all.

The US State Department spokesman said, “The money alleged to have arrived from Iran does not exist in the first place.” He added, "Even if the party had the money, it would use it to buy weapons to threaten Israel and intimidate its opponents... Its weapons have brought nothing but misery and destruction to Lebanon."

United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations, Jean-Pierre Lacroix, on Wednesday, urged the United Nations Security Council to begin negotiations on the future of peacekeeping forces deployed in Lebanon, at a time when Beirut seeks to extend its mandate scheduled to expire at the end of this year, according to what was reported by Reuters news agency.

The United Nations peacekeeping force, known as UNIFIL, has been deployed in southern Lebanon since 1978, but the Security Council ordered the mission last year to begin withdrawing at the end of 2026.

Since the outbreak of a new war in March between Israel and the Iranian-backed Lebanese Hezbollah group, the Lebanese government has been mobilizing efforts to extend UNIFIL’s mandate, noting its role in monitoring hostilities and facilitating the delivery of aid to villages located in areas occupied by Israel.

This year, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres presented proposals for the continued presence of UN forces in Lebanon, but Lacroix told Reuters in Beirut that no action has been taken so far.

He added: “These proposals are presented to the Security Council table. “There have been no movements in the Security Council yet, but I believe that negotiations will begin... soon and in earnest.”

He continued: “I think it is better to make a decision soon rather than postpone it, right? Because that will also show us the future vision, certainly from a more limited point of view related to our planning.”