The commission said its findings followed multiple verification and analysis procedures conducted in coordination with Syrian authorities, marking a significant development in one of the country’s most prominent unresolved disappearance cases.

Al-Abbasi, her husband Abdul Rahman Yasin, and their six children, who were between three and 15 years old at the time, vanished in March 2013 after security forces raided their home in Damascus, according to rights organizations.

Their disappearance became a symbol of the broader issue of missing detainees and forcibly disappeared civilians during Assad’s rule.”We have reached reliable and corroborating results that allow us to conclude with a high degree of professional certainty that Dr. Rania Al-Abbasi’s children are deceased,” the commission said in a statement.

It added that efforts to locate the children’s remains were continuing.The commission was established by Syria’s new authorities in May 2025 to investigate cases involving missing and forcibly disappeared persons following Assad’s ouster in 2024.Hassan Al-Abbasi, Rania’s brother, confirmed the children’s deaths in a video posted on Facebook.

He said family members had viewed video recordings linked to a suspect accused of involvement in a 2013 massacre in a Damascus district.According to Hassan Al-Abbasi, one recording showed children being accused of financing terrorism.

He said the children in the footage were identified as members of the Al-Abbasi family.The fate of Rania Al-Abbasi and her husband remains officially unresolved. Contact with both was lost after their arrest, and while rights groups and media reports have suggested they may have died, no official confirmation or recovery of their remains has been reported.

The case underscores the scale of Syria’s missing persons crisis, which includes detainees who disappeared in government prisons, civilians who went missing during years of conflict, and individuals who vanished at checkpoints or while fleeing violence.The Syrian conflict began in 2011 after a government crackdown on anti-government protests and evolved into a prolonged civil war.

Tens of thousands of people were detained or disappeared during the conflict.The commission said last year that the number of people who went missing over decades of Assad family rule could exceed 300,000.

The clips, many circulated through social media platforms including TikTok, Instagram and Telegram, show soldiers inside damaged homes and villages handling personal belongings, damaging property and posing for videos during military operations in southern Lebanon.

One widely shared image showed an Israeli soldier placing a cigarette in the mouth of a statue of the Virgin Mary in the Christian town of Debel. The Israeli military later confirmed the soldier had been identified and said disciplinary measures would be taken, describing the conduct as inconsistent with military values.

Another video from the same town appeared to show a soldier striking a statue of Jesus with a sledgehammer, prompting criticism internationally and within Israel.Benjamin Netanyahu said he was “stunned and saddened” by the incident, while the Israeli military said it viewed the act with “great severity” and would pursue “appropriate measures.”

The controversy intensified after Israeli newspaper Haaretz⁠ published testimonies from soldiers and commanders alleging widespread looting by Israeli forces in southern Lebanon.

One soldier cited in the report said theft increased after military checkpoints were removed from certain areas.Another Israeli publication, Yedioth Ahronoth⁠, quoted a reservist alleging that troops took personal items including jewelry, blankets and photographs from homes near the Lebanese border.

The reports prompted a public warning from Israeli military chief Eyal Zamir, who ordered commanders to investigate incidents involving looting and social media posts by soldiers. Zamir said such behavior damaged the reputation of the Israeli military and instructed that potential criminal violations be referred to military police.

Human rights organizations and legal analysts say the growing volume of online material shared by combatants is reshaping the documentation of alleged wartime abuses, with soldiers increasingly recording and distributing footage themselves rather than such evidence emerging solely through witness accounts or later investigations.

Under international humanitarian law, pillage and destruction of civilian property during armed conflict are prohibited. Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention bans pillage, while the International Criminal Court classifies pillaging during armed conflict as a potential war crime under the Rome Statute.

The incidents come as Israeli strikes continue across parts of Lebanon despite a temporary ceasefire announced on April 17. Israel says its operations target Hezbollah fighters and infrastructure, while Lebanese officials and humanitarian groups report extensive civilian damage and displacement.

Ori Goldberg told Arab News that Israeli society was facing a broader moral and political crisis over the conduct of the war, though he predicted accountability would likely remain limited to lower-ranking personnel.Residents returning to damaged communities in southern Lebanon described feelings of humiliation and violation extending beyond physical destruction.

A Lebanese resident identified only as Ali told Arab News that the looting of personal belongings carried emotional consequences that could not easily be repaired.

conflict

Dagalo, the brother of RSF commander Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, widely known as Hemedti, was identified as playing a key role in sustaining RSF operations, including in El-Fasher, where widespread abuses have been documented during the group’s siege of the city.

A February report by the U.N. Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan detailed what it described as grave violations committed during the assault on El-Fasher, including systematic starvation, torture, killings, rape and deliberate ethnic targeting on a large scale.

In addition to Dagalo, the council imposed sanctions on three Colombian nationals — Alvaro Andres Quijano Becerra, Claudia Viviana Oliveros Forero and Mateo Andres Duque Botero — for their alleged roles in recruiting former Colombian military personnel to fight for the RSF in Sudan.

According to evidence cited by U.N. officials, Colombian recruits provided tactical and technical support to RSF forces and served as infantry fighters, artillery operators, drone specialists, drivers and military trainers. Some were also accused of involvement in training children for combat.

The recruits were reported to have taken part in multiple battles across Sudan, including in the capital Khartoum, Omdurman, Kordofan and El-Fasher.
British Minister of State for Africa Jenny Chapman said the sanctions reflected a broader determination to hold those responsible for abuses accountable.

“We are cracking down on those who facilitate and profit from this conflict,” Chapman said in a statement. “We are determined that all individuals responsible for these atrocities will be held to account.”

She added that Britain, working with allies, would continue efforts to push Sudan’s warring parties toward negotiations, secure humanitarian access and pursue justice for victims.

The 1591 sanctions regime, established in 2005, includes travel bans, asset freezes and arms embargoes against individuals and entities accused of obstructing peace efforts in Sudan’s Darfur region. Diplomats said the latest measures were approved unanimously by all 15 members of the Security Council sanctions committee.

In February, Britain, France and the United States secured sanctions against four RSF commanders linked to atrocities in El-Fasher, signaling growing international concern over the deepening conflict.

Sudan has been engulfed in war since April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the RSF, a power struggle that has triggered one of the world’s largest humanitarian crises, displacing millions and devastating large parts of the country.

Judges said the reparations would mainly take the form of collective rehabilitation measures, including educational programs, vocational training and psychological support, with particular focus on women and girls who suffered persecution under the religious police overseen by Al Hassan.

Al Hassan was convicted in June 2024 on eight counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity for helping run the morality police established by the Ansar Dine Islamist group after militants seized Timbuktu, a historic desert city in northern Mali.

The court said women and girls were among the worst affected because their daily lives were tightly controlled under the group’s strict interpretation of sharia law. They were required to wear specific clothing and could leave their homes only under strict conditions, leading many to fear going outdoors.

Judges found that Al Hassan took part in or was present during public floggings and other punishments carried out by the religious police, which caused severe trauma to both victims and witnesses.Because Al Hassan is unable to personally pay the reparations, judges asked the ICC’s Trust Fund for Victims to help finance the compensation measures.

The fund has until January next year to submit an implementation plan for judicial approval.Reparations are a formal part of ICC proceedings following convictions, and the court currently has five other active reparation orders being administered through the Trust Fund for Victims.

Al Hassan was sentenced to 10 years in prison. Having already spent around six years in custody before his conviction, he is expected to be released soon.The ICC, the world’s only permanent war crimes tribunal, has been investigating crimes committed in Mali since 2012, when Islamist armed groups linked to Ansar Dine took control of northern cities including Timbuktu.

French and Malian forces later recaptured the city in 2013.

The three men, taken to Syria by their parents at the age of 11 or 12, were allegedly forced to participate in propaganda activities, policing duties and combat roles under Islamic State, according to legal filings submitted in France.

A source familiar with the case said the detainees are seeking recognition as victims of a war crime due to their recruitment as minors.Their lawyers, Marie Dose and Matthieu Bagard, said in a joint statement that the French authorities were failing to uphold obligations under international conventions prohibiting the use of child soldiers.

They argued that the men’s transfer to Iraq and continued detention amounted to inhumane treatment rather than victim protection.The detainees are among approximately 5,700 suspected Islamic State fighters of multiple nationalities transferred from Syria to Iraqi custody earlier this year, following shifts in territorial control in northern Syria.

France has opened investigations into the three men for alleged terrorism-related offenses committed during their time in Syria.The lawyers contend that, instead of pursuing prosecution, French authorities should prioritize repatriation and rehabilitation, citing the circumstances under which the individuals were recruited and their age at the time.

Hundreds of French citizens joined the Islamic State after it seized large areas of Iraq and Syria in 2014 and declared a so-called caliphate. Iraqi authorities, supported by a U.S.-led coalition, declared victory over the group in 2017, while Kurdish-led forces in Syria defeated its remaining strongholds in 2019.

Since then, thousands of suspected fighters and their families have been held in detention facilities across Syria and Iraq. Kurdish authorities in Syria have repeatedly called on foreign governments to repatriate their nationals, but most Western countries, including France, have proceeded cautiously, often handling returns on a case-by-case basis.

The recent transfer of detainees to Iraq has renewed scrutiny over their legal status and future, particularly in cases involving individuals recruited as minors.

The 47-year-old former member of the Australian Defence Force was detained at Sydney Airport and will face charges carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, according to the Australian Federal Police.

Police allege the victims were not participating in hostilities and were detained, unarmed, and under the control of Australian forces at the time of their deaths. Authorities further allege the killings were either carried out directly by Roberts-Smith or by subordinates acting under his orders.

Roberts-Smith, who received the Victoria Cross for his service, has previously denied wrongdoing. Allegations against him first emerged in 2018 through media investigations and later became the subject of a high-profile defamation case.

In 2023, a Federal Court judge ruled that reports by Nine Entertainment had substantially proven several accusations, including the unlawful killing of detainees. His final appeal was dismissed by the High Court in 2025.The charges follow a broader inquiry into alleged misconduct by elite Australian forces in Afghanistan.

A 2020 military report found credible evidence that members of the Special Air Service Regiment unlawfully killed dozens of prisoners and civilians.The investigation into Roberts-Smith was conducted jointly by the Australian Federal Police and the Office of the Special Investigator, led by Ross Barnett, who said the process was complicated by limited access to crime scenes in Afghanistan.

Authorities said 53 war crimes allegations have been examined, with several cases ongoing. Another former special forces soldier is scheduled to stand trial on similar charges next year.

Roberts-Smith is expected to appear before a court in New South Wales later on Tuesday.

The 47-year-old suspect, whose identity has not been officially confirmed by authorities, was arrested at Sydney Airport after arriving on a domestic flight from Brisbane, Australian Federal Police Commissioner Krissy Barrett said.

He is due to appear in a Sydney court later on Tuesday.Police allege the victims were not taking part in hostilities at the time of their deaths and were detained, unarmed, and under the control of members of the Australian Defence Force.

Barrett said the accused either directly carried out the shootings or ordered subordinate personnel to do so.The charges come as part of a broader investigation into alleged misconduct by elite Australian forces in Afghanistan.

A landmark 2020 military inquiry found credible evidence that special forces personnel unlawfully killed 39 Afghan prisoners, farmers, and other noncombatants.Barrett said the latest case involved only a limited number of personnel and emphasized that the allegations did not reflect the conduct of the wider military.

She described the accused actions as confined to “a very small section” of the defence force.The Office of the Special Investigator, established to examine war crimes allegations, has reviewed 53 incidents to date, with 39 cases concluding without charges, according to its director Ross Barnett.

The case follows separate proceedings against former SAS soldier Oliver Schulz, who has pleaded not guilty to a charge of war crime murder over the alleged killing of an Afghan man in Uruzgan province in 2012.

War crime murder is a federal offense in Australia and carries a potential sentence of life imprisonment. Around 40,000 Australian personnel served in Afghanistan between 2001 and 2021, during which 41 troops were killed.

“The U.S. military hasn’t even started destroying what’s left in Iran. Bridges next, then Electric Power Plants,” Trump wrote on social media, urging Iran’s leadership to act quickly in response to Washington’s demands.

In a televised address a day earlier, Trump said military operations could intensify over the coming weeks if Tehran did not comply, with possible strikes extending to energy and oil facilities. However, he did not provide a clear timeline for the end of the conflict.

The war, which began on February 28 with coordinated U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran, has since expanded, with Tehran launching retaliatory strikes on Israel and Gulf states hosting U.S. military bases. The conflict has resulted in thousands of deaths and widespread displacement, while also driving up global oil prices and increasing volatility in financial markets.

Iranian media, including Fars News Agency, reported that regional infrastructure, including major bridges in neighboring countries, could also face risks following recent strikes.

The latest remarks have drawn scrutiny from legal experts. Dozens of international law specialists in the United States signed an open letter warning that attacks on infrastructure essential for civilian life could violate the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit targeting civilian objects and require distinction between military and non-military assets during armed conflict.

Trump’s statements add to uncertainty surrounding U.S. strategy in the conflict, with shifting objectives and timelines contributing to concerns among analysts about the scope and duration of military operations.

Aoun said in a statement that the attack constituted a “blatant crime” and breached international humanitarian law, emphasizing that journalists are civilians performing professional duties and are entitled to protection under the laws of war.

The statement was released by the Lebanese presidency shortly after reports of the strike emerged.A Lebanese military source told AFP that three journalists were killed when their vehicle was targeted in the Jezzine area of southern Lebanon.

The victims included a correspondent affiliated with Hezbollah’s Al-Manar television and another journalist from Al-Mayadeen, a broadcaster seen as close to the Iran-backed group.

Al-Manar confirmed the death of its correspondent, identified as Al Shouaib, while Al-Mayadeen said its journalist, Fatima Fatouni, and her brother, who was working as a cameraman, were also killed in the strike.

The incident adds to mounting concerns over the safety of media personnel operating in conflict zones, particularly in areas experiencing intensified cross-border exchanges between Israeli forces and Hezbollah fighters.

Aoun’s statement framed the strike as part of a pattern of violations, asserting that it undermines established international norms governing armed conflict. No immediate response from Israeli authorities was included in the available information.

The strike occurred amid heightened tensions in Lebanon’s south region as spillover from the broader Iran-linked confrontation continues to draw in multiple actors across the Middle East.

Warning leaflets reportedly dropped in parts of Beirut and ongoing strikes in southern areas reflect an expanding operational environment, raising the risk to both civilians and media workers covering developments on the ground.

Umar Shareef

We do not seek war. We desire peace. But peace cannot come at the cost of silence against terror.

The recent Pahalgam terror attack has once again tested the patience and resolve of the Indian nation. The aftermath has taken us to the brink of yet another war-like situation between India and Pakistan. In response to the brutal killing of 26 Indian civilians, the Indian government launched Operation Sindoor, a precise military strike aimed at dismantling Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).

According to reports, the Indian Air Force targeted 14 locations, including the JeM camps in Bahawalpur—reportedly killing 13 individuals associated with the terror outfit, some of them family members of the group’s chief, Masood Azhar. This decisive retaliation is a reflection of India’s zero-tolerance policy toward terrorism, particularly those sponsored or sheltered across the border.

But what followed was telling.

In retaliation, Pakistan shelled the border town of Poonch in Jammu & Kashmir. The victims were not military targets—they were civilians. Among the dead were Kashmiri Muslim children and women. These were our own people. This act by the Pakistani army reflects not strength, but a moral bankruptcy that has long plagued its strategic outlook. Instead of countering India’s military moves tactically, Pakistan chose to engage in indiscriminate shelling, targeting those who had no weapons, no uniforms, and no role in the military operations—just ordinary Indian Muslims.

This isn’t the first time Pakistan has committed such atrocities. If history teaches us anything, it’s that we’ve seen this script before. During the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War, the Pakistani army reportedly killed over 300,000 Bengalis, according to the Bangladesh Genocide Archive. Most were Muslims. Many women were raped. Entire villages were wiped out. And yet, Pakistan continues to cloak itself in the garb of Islamic righteousness while violating every ethical and humanitarian code Islam prescribes.

This duality is not just deceptive—it is dangerous.

To the leaders of the Islamic world, I pose some hard questions:

Is Pakistan’s retaliation to India’s Operation Sindoor consistent with Islamic ethics?

Can the killing of Muslim children in Poonch be justified under any circumstances?

Is this the conduct of an “Islamic Republic”?

As an Indian Muslim, I say this with clarity and conviction: India is my homeland. It is a sovereign, pluralistic, democratic country that upholds the rights of all its citizens—Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and others. Our Constitution protects us, and our armed forces include us.

I was deeply moved watching a recent press conference where Colonel Sophia Qureshi, Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, and Ambassador Vikram Misri stood united, explaining the strategic aims of Operation Sindhoor. It was a portrait of unity: a Muslim woman in uniform, a Sikh diplomat, and a Hindu officer—this is the India we live in, and this is the India we love.

Let no one tell us we do not belong.

The Qur’an commands us clearly: “And if two groups among the believers should fight, then make peace between them. But if one oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the command of Allah…” – Surah Al-Hujurat (49:9)

This is not a call to bloodshed—it is a call to justice. We fight oppression, not people. We fight terrorists, not civilians. And when peace is offered, Islam commands us to accept it. But if one side continues to shelter groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba or The Resistance Front, who actively undermine regional stability, then standing by and doing nothing is not an option.

Yes, Operation Sindoor may have caused some collateral damage. No life lost is ever trivial. But the mission had a clear objective: dismantle terror networks—not harm civilians. India’s action was measured and targeted. Pakistan’s was indiscriminate and vengeful.

As Indian Muslims, we draw our strength from both faith and patriotism. We are heirs to the legacy of Brigadier Muhammad Usman, the “Lion of Nowshera,” who laid down his life defending Kashmir in 1948. We remember Captain Haneefuddin, who fought bravely in the 1999 Kargil War. These are our heroes, our martyrs—Muslims who defended India against Pakistani aggression.

It is critical to understand that Islam encourages peaceful coexistence. When the Prophet Mohammed established the state of Madinah, he created a pluralistic charter involving Muslims, Jews, and pagans. He taught that alliances with non-Muslims are not just permissible, but necessary in the cause of justice and societal harmony. The story of Ja’far ibn Abi Talib, who sought refuge with the Christian King of Abyssinia, is a powerful reminder that justice transcends religion.

We Indian Muslims face many challenges—from Pakistani propaganda to the rise of far-right elements at home. Yet, we stand firm. We will not be pawns in foreign agendas. We will not be deceived by narratives that seek to divide us.

We say with dignity: Inqilab Zindabad. Hindustan Zindabad. Victory to India.

We may critique our government or hold differing political opinions, especially with regard to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). That is our democratic right. But our nation is not defined by any one party. India is defined by its people, its Constitution, and its unity in diversity.

We do not seek war. We desire peace. But peace cannot come at the cost of silence against terror. And peace cannot be preserved if Pakistan continues to target civilians and shelter jihadist outfits.

India reserves the right to protect itself. Under Public International Law, every sovereign nation has the right to eliminate threats to its people. That is what Operation Sindoor was about—and that is what justice demands.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.