The National Interest Foundation Newsletter
Issue 311, November 28, 2025
Welcome to our NIF Newsletter. In this week’s edition, we examine Israel’s assassination of a top Hezbollah commander and its thousands of ceasefire violations in Lebanon, while also providing analysis regarding President Trump’s politically motivated decision to designate branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.
Editor: Bassam Tarbush
Israel’s Assassination of a Top Hezbollah Commander and Its Thousands of Ceasefire Violations in Lebanon
Earlier this week, Israel carried out a targeted assassination of Hezbollah’s top military commander Haytham Ali Tabatabai in an airstrike on Beirut. The escalation is merely one of the latest Israeli violations of the November 2024 Israel-Lebanon ceasefire agreement. Over the past year, numerous human rights and watchdog groups have extensively documented thousands of Israeli violations of the ongoing ceasefire. In fact, the assassination this week came amid a recent United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) report which confirmed that Israeli forces have committed more than 10,000 air and ground violations of the ceasefire agreement in Lebanon since it took effect last November. These have consisted of unauthorized drone flights, surveillance aircraft, and fighter jets entering Lebanese airspace, as well as illegal troop movements, construction of walls, and other unlawful activities north of the UN-mapped line of withdrawal.
The Israeli attacks have killed more than 100 Lebanese civilians since the initiation of the ceasefire agreement, with human rights organizations also documenting the extensive destruction of civilian infrastructure in southern Lebanon. Israel’s repeated violations and its recent targeted assassination underscore the concern regarding a potential new outbreak of all-out hostilities. As such, UN peacekeepers, rights advocates, and other observers have condemned the daily continued Israeli attacks and urged the international community to intervene and ensure full adherence to the ceasefire agreement. The United States and France-brokered agreement last November called for an end to hostilities, an Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon, and the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and UNIFIL peacekeepers in the area south of the Litani River – something that was intended to be free of any armed personnel. Despite this, Israel has violated the terms of the ceasefire through ongoing military operations and strikes, occupation of Lebanese territory, and airspace incursions – all of which have resulted in the killing of civilians and destruction of property.
In defiance of the November 2024 ceasefire agreement demanding a halt to offensive military actions, Israel has continued to launch regular airstrikes and ground operations in southern Lebanon and the Beqaa Valley. Furthermore, the agreement stipulated that Israel should withdraw its forces from southern Lebanon. Instead, Israeli troops have remained in, and in some cases advanced deeper into, multiple locations within Lebanese territory. International law experts have highlighted that Israel’s presence is deemed an illegal occupation and a direct violation of both the ceasefire and UN Security Council Resolution 1701. Additionally, reports from the UN and human rights organizations like Amnesty International have detailed Israel’s deliberate destruction of civilian property in southern Lebanon, including homes, agricultural land, and infrastructure. Israeli forces have also targeted journalists and civilians attempting to return to their homes in border villages, using live fire and drones. By maintaining an unlawful military presence and continuing attacks, Israel has prevented thousands of displaced Lebanese civilians from returning to their homes – in what represents yet another violation of the ceasefire terms.
Peacekeepers themselves have even been endangered by Israeli forces through repeated and deliberate attacks on or near UN positions. The incidents, which have been documented by UNIFIL, have included direct tank fire, drone-dropped grenades, and the use of white phosphorus near bases of peacekeepers. On multiple occasions, Israeli forces have fired on UN observation posts, damaging monitoring cameras and communication systems. There have also been instances of Israeli tanks and excavators forcibly entering UN compounds and destroying property, which observers have described as a flagrant violation of international law. Actions like these have drawn widespread condemnation from not only UN officials, but also countries that have contributed troops to the peacekeeping efforts such as France, Italy, and Ireland.
Ultimately, many have expressed significant concern over Israel’s continued systematic ceasefire violations and its recent targeted assassination of a top Hezbollah commander. There is fear that this might trigger escalation and retaliation which could potentially lead to a new outbreak of hostilities. The airstrike on a residential area in Beirut was both reckless as well as a blatant violation of Lebanese sovereignty and the November 2024 ceasefire agreement. It undermines the prospect of stability, and for various observers in the international community, demonstrates a lack of will on the part of Israel for a peaceful solution.
President Trump’s Politically Motivated Decision to Designate Branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as a Terrorist Organization
This week, President Trump signed an executive order to initiate the formal process for the U.S. government to consider designating chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood as foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs). The order directs certain Trump administration officials to submit a joint designation report within 30 days, after which relevant entities are called on to “take appropriate designation and sanction actions within 45 days after the aforementioned report is delivered.” Critics of the move have outlined how it is politically motivated and revives a several-year-old effort by Trump and his allies to seek the designations – which dates back to the president’s first term in office. Shortly after taking office, the first Trump administration considered designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a single, blanket FTO following a meeting with Egyptian President Abdel Fatah El-Sisi. The effort ultimately faced internal resistance and was stalled by officials within the State Department and other agencies, who argued that not all branches of the decentralized movement met the legal threshold for a blanket FTO designation. Now, the current administration is looking to target specific branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as a way to try and circumvent previous legal obstacles and justifiable pushback.
The attempts to pursue an FTO designation against the Muslim Brotherhood have been criticized as a blatant longstanding politically charged effort which has been fueled by some Republicans and right-wing voices. This is highlighted by the fact that almost all of those behind the attempts are Republican lawmakers on the far right of the political spectrum, including figures such as U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and U.S. Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY). Cruz introduced the latest version of the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act (S. 2293) in the Senate back in mid-July of this year and has introduced similar bills in multiple previous sessions of Congress. Meanwhile, Stefanik has co-sponsored the companion legislation in the House of Representatives and has been a vocal leader in these efforts. The respective Senate and House resolutions are expected to be voted on next week in early December, either on December 3rd or December 4th. The endorsements that these initiatives have received from various pro-Israeli organizations and figures has also been telling and has included entities like The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and billionaire investor Bill Ackman. To many observers, the enthusiastic praise from groups and individuals like these has been useful in exposing who is really behind these politically motivated efforts and demonstrates how it has also been largely propelled by attempts to secure continued backing and support from right-wing donors.
Analysts have also pointed to how the latest Trump move to try to designate branches of the Muslim Brotherhood is clearly a coordinated effort aimed at appeasing autocratic regimes in the Middle East, particularly those in Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. The governments in these countries view the Muslim Brotherhood as a significant political threat to their grip on power, and as such, the designations would empower these repressive regimes to continue suppression of political opposition and dissent. This damages the United States’ image as a promoter of democracy and human rights. Additionally, it sheds light on the troubling influence of foreign lobbying networks that strive to insert their own domestic political endeavors into U.S. government decisions. Critics of the Trump-led designation attempts have also raised legitimate concerns that it blurs the line between nonviolent political movements – such as the Muslim Brotherhood chapters in many countries across the Middle East and North Africa – and actual violent terrorist groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Ironically enough, while the Muslim Brotherhood designations are being pushed under the guise of “rooting out violent extremism,” experts contend that they are actually likely to instead counterproductively fuel radicalization and extremism by marginalizing mainstream political groups and providing recruitment propaganda for real terrorist organizations. Furthermore, the Muslim Brotherhood has legitimate political wings that participate in the governments of several U.S. allies including Turkey and Tunisia, and therefore an FTO designation could also severely strain diplomatic relations and complicate cooperation with these countries.
Lastly, the designation efforts have been labeled as a dangerous and troubling move for civil liberties and freedoms within the United States. This is due to the concern that they could lead to the increased targeting of reputable and legitimate U.S.-based Muslim organizations. Recently, this has already been seen in places like Texas where Governor Greg Abbott has drawn heavy criticism from rights groups for designating the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) – the country’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization – as an FTO, with CAIR suing the Texas governor over the unconstitutional designation. Civil liberties organizations like CAIR and others have rightfully pointed out that the Muslim Brotherhood designations at the national level could fuel Islamophobia in the United States, as it seeks to conflate a transnational political/social movement like the Muslim Brotherhood with actual violent extremist groups and be used to try to target, harass, suppress, and delegitimize mainstream Muslim-American entities within the United States.
