JEDDAH: The political deadlock has ended in Lebanon with the election of Michel Aoun as president — but experts on the country’s politics are still deeply divided on what it means for the region.
Two leading commentators, speaking to Arab News, were divided on whether the move marks a political compromise — or power grab.
For Eyad Abu Shakra, the veteran Lebanese political analyst and journalist, what happened on Monday was not even an election.
“These are not elections given the de facto domination of the country by one faction,” he said. “The Lebanese Parliament has been convened 45 times in the last 29 months. It never succeeded because of certain blocs which are the real de facto power on the ground and which prevented Parliament from having the quorum needed to elect a president. The country was in a political vacuum filled only by the dominance of Hezbollah which is much larger now than the Lebanese state.”
He pointed out that Aoun was the official candidate of Hezbollah.
“It was Hezbollah that stipulated that there would be no meeting of Parliament unless Aoun was elected president. In that sense, you cannot call these elections,” he said.
However, Rami G. Khouri, senior public policy fellow and professor of journalism at the American University of Beirut, described the coming together of different parties as the politics of compromise.
“Both Saad Hariri and Aoun realized that nothing was going to happen if they stuck to their positions,” he said. “Hariri was in greater difficulty than Aoun because Hariri basically was losing a lot of support and credibility in the country,” said Khouri.
“He also had a big shock recently when the municipal elections took place and quite a few Sunnis abandoned him and his group of March 14 and voted for other people who were challenging the traditional leaders.”
As part of the compromise, Khouri expects Hariri to become the prime minister.
“Everybody expects Aoun to name Hariri as prime minister ... that will balance the two sides to some extent and allow the political system to function more efficiently again,” he said. “We expect Hariri will now become prime minister for some years.”
Yet Abu Shakra is not optimistic about Hariri’s predicted premiership.
“Even if he becomes prime minister tomorrow, what would it mean? We will have a puppet president and a rubber-stamp prime minister. That is it. That will mean nothing,” he said.
His pessimism stems from his belief that Aoun will never turn against Iran-backed Hezbollah.
“Many optimistic people would say that now that Aoun has all the constitutional powers, he will be his own man; he will do whatever he pleases ... But, you know, Hezbollah is not stupid nor is Iran (their main backers). These are people who, for the last two and a half years, insisted on having Aoun appointed as a puppet president. They know what to expect. I am sure they are prepared for any eventuality should Aoun decide to do a volte-face, change his mind, and change his alliances as he usually does,” said Abu Shakra.
Khouri agrees with Abu Shakra’s assessment.
“No, I don’t think Aoun will go against Hezbollah,” said Khouri. “If he did, he would probably create a big crisis in the country. I am sure there was an understanding among Hezbollah, Aoun and Hariri about achieving this kind of agreement. I don’t think there is any expectation that Aoun will turn against Hezbollah. They have been allies for the last eight or 10 years and that will probably continue.”
The question that everyone has in mind is how the dynamics will work given that Hariri is a declared foe of the Syrian regime — he has in the past hinted at Syria’s role in the assassination of his father, Rafik Hariri, in 2005 — and Aoun, a politician who in the past built his reputation on his stance against the Syrian presence in Lebanon, becoming a partner of Syria’s ally, Hezbollah.
Khouri said one should look further than Syria.
“You have to look at Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. The region as a whole is quite involved in internal Lebanese affairs and has been for some time. Iran and Saudi Arabia have been very active in Lebanon. The Saudis with Hariri and the Iranians with Hezbollah. But I think the regional powers are quite preoccupied with other things. The Saudis basically pulled out of Lebanon when they withdrew their $3 billion pledge. The Iranians are very busy in Syria,” said Khouri.
He said the relationship between Aoun and Syria would take a while to become clear.
“My suspicion is that Aoun will maintain cordial relations with Syria. He can’t afford to make an enemy of Syria and he hasn’t done that in recent years. He has reconciled with the Syrians. And the Syrians and the Iranians and Hezbollah make a very strong tripartite alliance and that basically is the alliance that allowed him to become president,” he said.
While Aoun is popular and has a huge following among Lebanese Christians and is backed by Hezbollah, many Lebanese have long accused him of being mad with power and irrational in his behavior to the extent that he would go to any length to become president. So is he the Donald Trump of Lebanon?
“Yes,” said Abu Shakra. “Minus the charisma.”
Khouri thinks otherwise.
“No, I wouldn’t go that far. Yes, Aoun has a long track record of activism in Lebanon, of doing political work and he was the head of the army. He is the most powerful Christian leader. He also has many critics. He is controversial and sometimes dramatic but I wouldn’t go so far as to equate him with Trump … Trump is a much more erratic kind of person,” he said.
What Aoun’s election means for Lebanon and the region
What Aoun’s election means for Lebanon and the region
Trump claims ceasefire between Iran and Israel after Iran’s missile attack on US base in Qatar
- Trump posted on Truth Social that the 24-hour phased-in ceasefire will begin about midnight Tuesday Eastern time. He said it would bring an “Official END” to the war
- A senior White House official said Trump communicated directly with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to secure the ceasefire
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates: US President Donald Trump said that Israel and Iran had agreed to a “complete and total ceasefire” soon after Iran launched a limited missile attack Monday on a US military base in Qatar, retaliating for the American bombing of its nuclear sites. Iran said that as long as Israel stopped its attacks early Tuesday morning, it would halt theirs.
Israel did not immediately acknowledge any ceasefire, but there were no reports of Israeli strikes in Iran after 4 a.m. local. Heavy Israeli strikes continued in Tehran and other cities until shortly before that time.
“As of now, there is NO ‘agreement’ on any ceasefire or cessation of military operations,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote in a post on X. “However, provided that the Israeli regime stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4 am Tehran time, we have no intention to continue our response afterwards.”
His message was posted at 4:16 a.m. Tehran time. Araghchi added: “The final decision on the cessation of our military operations will be made later.”
Trump posted on Truth Social that the 24-hour phased-in ceasefire will begin about midnight Tuesday Eastern time. He said it would bring an “Official END” to the war.
The Israeli military declined to comment on Trump’s statement and the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
Speaking on Iranian state television, an overnight anchor repeatedly referred to a “Trump-claimed” ceasefire, without saying whether Tehran accepted it. The anchor noted: “Simultaneously with Trump’s claim of a ceasefire, the Zionist enemy targeted several points in the cities of Tehran, Urmia and Rasht, including a residential area in the capital.”
Israel’s military put out a warning earlier that District 6 in Tehran could be struck.
Early Tuesday, Iran, mirroring the language and maps of the Israeli military, put out a warning telling people in Ramat Gan it would target “military infrastructure” there.
HIGHLIGHT
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that there was no ceasefire agreement with Israel as of now, but if it stopped its attacks then Tehran would also stop firing
Iran’s attack Monday indicated it was prepared to step back from escalating tensions in the volatile region. The US was warned by Iran in advance, and there were no casualties, said Trump, who dismissed the attack as a “very weak response.”
Qatar condemned the attack on Al Udeid Air Base as “a flagrant violation” of its sovereignty, airspace and international law. Qatar said it intercepted all but one missile, though it was not clear if that missile caused any damage.
Iran said the volley matched the number of bombs dropped by the United States on Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend. Iran also said it targeted the base because it was outside of populated areas.
Those comments, made immediately after the attack, suggested Iran wanted to de-escalate with the United States, something Trump himself said after the strikes early Sunday on Iran.
Qatar Maj. Gen. Shayeq Al Hajjri said 19 missiles were fired at the base that is home to the Combined Air Operations Center, which provides command and control of air power across the region, as well as the 379th Air Expeditionary Wing, the largest such wing in the world. Trump said 14 missiles were fired, 13 were knocked down and one was “set free” because it posed no threat.
Iran announced the attack on state television, with a caption calling it “a mighty and successful response” to “America’s aggression.”
Just before the explosions, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on the social platform X: “We neither initiated the war nor seeking it. But we will not leave invasion to the great Iran without answer.”
Earlier reports that a missile was launched at a base housing American forces in Iraq were a false alarm, a senior US military official said. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly, said debris from a malfunctioning Iranian missile targeting Israel had triggered an alert of an impending attack on the Ain Assad base.
Israel expands war to include symbolic targets
On the 11th day of the conflict, Israel and Iran traded airstrikes that have become a reality for civilians in both countries since Israel started the war to target Tehran’s rapidly advancing nuclear program.
Iran struck Israel with a barrage of missiles and drones while Israel said it attacked “regime targets and government repression bodies in the heart of Tehran.”
But Israeli officials insisted they did not seek the overthrow of Iran’s government, their archenemy since the country’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.
The latest strikes unfolded only hours after Trump himself mentioned the possibility of regime change a day after inserting America into the war with its stealth-bomber strike on three Iranian nuclear sites.
“If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change???” he asked on his Truth Social website.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later described Trump as “simply raising a question.”
The US strikes over the weekend prompted fears of a wider regional conflict. Iran said the US had crossed “a very big red line” with its risky gambit to strike with missiles and 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs.
Israel aims to wind down the war in the coming days, but that will depend on the Iranians, an Israeli official said on condition of anonymity to discuss high-level internal deliberations. The official spoke before Trump’s announcement about a ceasefire.
Israel’s preferred outcome is for Iran to agree to a ceasefire and reenter negotiations with the US over its nuclear program, the official said. But Israel is prepared for the possibility of an extended low-intensity war of attrition or period of “quiet for quiet,” in which it would closely monitor Iran’s activities and strike if it identifies new threats.
Tehran strikes open new chapter of war
Before the ceasefire announcement, the Israeli military warned Iranians it would continue to attack military sites around Tehran as its focus shifted to include symbolic targets. The military issued the warning on the social platform X, though Iranians are struggling to access the outside world due to an Internet shutdown.
In Tehran, Israel hit the headquarters of the military force that suppressed recent protests and blew open a gate at Evin prison. That facility is known for holding political activists. Iranian state television shared black-and-white surveillance footage of the strike at the facility known for holding dual nationals and Westerners often used by Iran as bargaining chips in negotiations with the West.
Evin also has specialized units for political prisoners run by the paramilitary, all-volunteer Revolutionary Guard, which answers only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The facility is the target of both US and European Union sanctions.
There were no immediate reports of casualties in Iran or significant damage.
Iranian state television aired footage it said was shot inside Evin, with prisoners under control. However, the Washington-based Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran said many families of detainees “have expressed deep concern about the safety and condition of their loved ones” in the prison.
According to an Israeli official familiar with the government’s strategy, Israel is targeting these sites to put pressure on the Iranian administration but is not actively seeking to topple it. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal government deliberations.
The Israeli military also confirmed it struck roads around Iran’s Fordo enrichment facility to obstruct access to the site. The underground site was one of those hit in Sunday’s attack by the United States. The Israeli military did not elaborate.
In Vienna, the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog said he expected there to be heavy damage at the Fordo facility following Sunday’s US airstrike there with sophisticated bunker-buster bombs.
Several Iranian officials, including Atomic Energy Organization of Iran spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi, have claimed Iran removed nuclear material from targeted sites ahead of time.
Iran presses on attacking Israel
Iran said its Monday attacks targeted the Israeli cities of Haifa and Tel Aviv, according to Iranian state television.
Explosions were also heard in Jerusalem, possibly from air defense systems in action, and Israel’s Magen David Adom emergency rescue service said there had been no reports of injuries.
In Israel, at least 24 people have been killed and more than 1,000 wounded in the war. Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 974 people and wounded 3,458 others, according to the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists.
The group, which has provided detailed casualty figures from Iranian unrest such as the protests surrounding the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022, said of those killed, it identified 387 civilians and 268 security force personnel.
The US has evacuated some 250 American citizens and their immediate family members from Israel by government, military and charter flights that began over the weekend, a State Department official said.
There are roughly 700,000 American citizens, most of them dual US-Israeli citizens, believed to be in Israel.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, who leads one of Iran’s closest allies, said Monday after meeting in Moscow with the Iranian foreign minister that they had explored “how we can get out of today’s situation.”
Putin called the Israeli and American attacks on Iran an “absolutely unprovoked aggression.”
NGOs urge closing of Gaza aid group, warn of possible ‘war crimes’ liability
- The signatories include the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, the American Center for Constitutional Rights, and the International Commission of Jurists
UNITED NATIONS, United States: More than a dozen human rights organizations called Monday on the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), whose aid distribution has seen chaotic and deadly scenes, to cease its operations, warning of possible complicity in war crimes.
“This new model of privatized, militarized aid distribution constitutes a radical and dangerous shift away from established international humanitarian relief operations,” the 15 organizations said in an open letter.
It called the US-backed group’s operations “dehumanizing, repeatedly deadly and (contributing) to the forced displacement of the very population it purports to help.”
The groups urged GHF and all the organizations and individuals who have been supporting its work, to “to cease their operations.”
“Failure to do so may expose these organizations... to further risk of criminal and civil liability for aiding and abetting or otherwise being complicit in crimes under international law, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide in violation of international law,” the letter warned.
The signatories include the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, the American Center for Constitutional Rights, and the International Commission of Jurists.
An officially private effort with opaque funding, GHF began operations on May 26 after Israel completely cut off supplies into Gaza for more than two months, sparking warnings of mass famine.
The United Nations and major aid groups have refused to cooperate with the foundation over concerns it was designed to cater to Israeli military objectives.
According to figures issued by the health ministry in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, at least 450 people have been killed and nearly 3,500 injured since GHF began distributing meal boxes in late May.
GHF has denied responsibility for deaths near its aid points, contradicting statements from witnesses and Gaza rescue services.
Demand by UN for access to Iran’s uranium
- ‘We must ... go back to Iran’s nuclear sites and account for the stockpiles of uranium, including, most importantly, the 400 kg enriched to 60 percent,’ IAEA chief says
VIENNA: The UN nuclear watchdog on Monday demanded access to highly enriched uranium that Iran is thought to have moved before US attacks last weekend on its nuclear development sites.
“Iran, Israel and the Middle East need peace,” said Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. “We must ... go back to Iran’s nuclear sites and account for the stockpiles of uranium, including, most importantly, the 400 kg enriched to 60 percent.”
US strikes on the underground Fordow nuclear site had probably caused “significant damage,” Grossi said, but it was impossible to assess without a visit.
Meanwhile Israel launched new strikes on Monday on the notorious Evin prison and Revolutionary Guard command centers in Tehran. Video footage showed rescue workers combing the flattened wreckage of a building at the prison, and carrying an injured man on a stretcher.
Israel said its strikes on Tehran were intended to hit the Iranian ruling apparatus broadly, and its ability to sustain power. Evin has long been Iran’s primary jail for political and security detainees. Several high-profile foreign prisoners are also held there.
Iraq removes, South Korea eases restrictions on import of Brazil chicken meat
- South Korea ow restricts only chicken meat from the region affected by the bird flu, the ministry said, without providing more details
SAO PAULO: Iraq removed a trade ban it had imposed on Brazilian chicken meat after a bird flu case on a commercial farm last month, while South Korea eased its restrictions, the Brazilian Agriculture Ministry said on Monday.
South Korea ow restricts only chicken meat from the region affected by the bird flu, the ministry said, without providing more details. Both Iraq and South Korea had imposed nationwide trade bans to Brazilian chicken meat.
Brazil hopes to reverse trade bans after declaring last week itself free of the bird flu virus in commercial flocks following a 28-day period without any new commercial farm outbreaks.
What the intensifying Israel-Iran conflict says about the future of diplomacy
- Efforts in Geneva to restart diplomacy now hang in the balance, with Iran and the US hardening positions after recent strikes
- Analysts warn that without regional diplomacy led by powers like Saudi Arabia, the Israel-Iran conflict risks spiralling into a wider war
LONON/DUBAI: The Iranian missile attack which was intercepted by Qatar on Monday night when it launched missiles against US troops stationed at Al-Udeid Air Base comes as a major setback for peace in the region.
As Iranian missiles lit up the sky over Doha in a retaliatory strike targeting the US military, a diplomatic solution to the Israel-Iran conflict, which has now drawn in the US, seemed further away than ever, with Tehran appearing to wash its hands of further nuclear talks.
Although no casualties were reported at Al-Udeid Air Base — the largest US base in the region — Iran’s counterattack is likely to invite additional American strikes and further regional escalation.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE have both condemned the attack on Qatari sovereignty. The Saudi foreign ministry lambasted Iran for its “unjustifiable” attack, offering to deploy “all its capabilities” to support Doha.
Since the Israeli-Iran conflict dramatically escalated over the weekend, the mixed global response to Israeli and US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities is testing the limits of modern diplomacy and exposing deep divisions among major powers.
What most seem to agree on is that while diplomacy is on the decline, it could have been the solution.
Experts say the fractured international reaction to the escalation reflects a shifting global order and the erosion of the post-Cold War consensus.
“There is no ‘global response’ to speak of at this moment,” Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Arab News. “This Israel-Iran war is taking place in a fractured geopolitical context.”
He argues that divisions among the US, China and Russia “make it next to impossible to marshal a collective diplomatic effort in the way that the world did in previous eras, like the immediate post-Cold War period of the 1990s.
“That’s why we will continue to see a lot of empty words disconnected from the actions that are actually reshaping the Middle East as we know it.”
On June 13, Israel launched airstrikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites including Natanz, Isfahan and Tehran, reportedly killing senior officials, nuclear scientists and civilians. In response, Iran launched “Operation True Promise III,” firing missiles and drones into Israel. Several struck Tel Aviv, Haifa and other cities, causing civilian casualties.
Despite initially assuring G7 allies that the US would stay out of the conflict, President Donald Trump reversed course on June 22, ordering B-2 bombers to strike Iran’s underground nuclear facilities with MOP “bunker-buster” bombs — weapons only the US possesses.
Although Trump declared that the strikes had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program, it remains unclear whether Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was destroyed or relocated in time. If material and technical capacity remain, diplomacy may be the only path to prevent Iran from eventually building a nuclear weapon — a goal the regime could now prioritize more urgently.
Even with severe military losses and the effective loss of airspace control, Iran appears undeterred. Hostilities with Israel continue, and the possibility of Iranian retaliation against US targets is growing. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated that the war will not end until Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is removed from power.
The US entry into the conflict has triggered a range of diplomatic responses — from enthusiastic support to fierce condemnation. Netanyahu praised Trump’s decision as a “courageous choice” that would “alter history.” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, meanwhile, called it an “outrageous, grave and unprecedented violation” of international law, insisting Tehran reserves “all options” to defend its interests.
Iran’s ambassador to the UN demanded an emergency Security Council session and called the strikes “premeditated acts of aggression.”
Russia, a close ally of Iran, “strongly condemned” the US action. Its Foreign Ministry labeled the strikes a “gross violation of international law,” while Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia’s Security Council, dismissed their impact and provocatively suggested some states might now help Iran obtain nuclear weapons.
China echoed the condemnation. The Chinese Foreign Ministry said the strikes “seriously violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter,” and warned of regional destabilization.
FASTFACTS
- China and Russia have condemned US strikes on Iran while the UN and Europe have appealed for deescalation.
- Analysts say without regional diplomacy led by powers like Saudi Arabia, the Israel-Iran conflict risks spiraling into wider war.
Chinese Ambassador to the UN Fu Cong called on Israel to halt hostilities immediately and backed a UN resolution demanding an unconditional ceasefire. Chinese analysts have also warned that the conflict threatens global trade routes such as the Strait of Hormuz.
Other voices have called for diplomacy. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned of a “hazardous escalation,” stressing that “military solutions are not viable” and urging a return to negotiations.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer — positioning himself as a bridge between the US and Europe — highlighted the danger of the war spreading beyond the region. While stopping short of endorsing the US strikes, he reiterated that Iran must not develop nuclear weapons and called for negotiations to stabilize the region.
European powers had previously been pressing for a deal requiring Iran to halt uranium enrichment, curb its missile program and stop supporting proxy groups. But Iran has rejected a full halt, claiming its enrichment is for peaceful purposes.
With Western diplomacy faltering, regional actors are stepping in. Most Arab states — including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and the Gulf states — have condemned Israel’s strikes on Iran and are working to deescalate tensions.
Still, these efforts have so far achieved little. Strikes continue, ceasefire mechanisms remain absent and attempts to coordinate sanctions or arms embargoes have stalled.
A narrow diplomatic window may remain. Recent Geneva meetings involving Iranian, US, and European officials showed conditional openness to talks. But the latest US strikes have likely hardened positions.
Analysts say the only viable path forward begins with renewed diplomacy, ideally starting with a ceasefire. Yet fundamental disagreements over Iran’s nuclear ambitions and widespread distrust leave a comprehensive solution elusive.
Some fear that Israel, emboldened by US support, may escalate its military campaign to seek regime change in Tehran — a move that would risk greater instability across the Middle East, as the world has seen in the recent attack over Qatar.
Others argue that Iran’s military retaliation is a necessary step before negotiations can resume. However, nobody seems to safely conclude just how far this retaliation will go.
Firas Maksad, managing director for the Middle East and North Africa at Eurasia Group, told CNN that without such a response, Iran would lack both international leverage and domestic legitimacy to reenter talks.
Still, he later added: “Diplomacy is dead for the foreseeable future.”
With Iran and Israel entrenched and global powers divided, prospects for a diplomatic breakthrough appear slim. Yet Katulis believes regional “swing states” — such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE — could help shift the dynamic.
“One of the biggest brakes on further escalation lies right in the heart of the Middle East itself,” he said. “The key ‘swing states’ like Saudi Arabia and the UAE could lead more regional collective efforts to avoid further escalation by working publicly and quietly with the main combatants to find pathways toward a diplomatic settlement.”
In geopolitical terms, these “swing states” balance relationships with Washington, Moscow and Beijing — and can influence outcomes through neutrality or engagement. Katulis believes Riyadh, in particular, could help change the calculus.
Right now, he said, Israel and Iran “have more incentives to engage in military action than they do to pursue diplomacy.” But “the key powers in the region like Saudi Arabia could do even more than they are already doing to change the calculus for Israel and Iran.”
Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel’s actions as violations of international law and warned that continued escalation threatens long-term regional stability. The Kingdom has urged the UN Security Council to take meaningful steps to prevent further deterioration and has refused to allow its airspace to be used in military operations — a clear signal of its neutrality and strategic caution.
Looking ahead, the stakes remain dangerously high. Maksad has warned that unchecked escalation could have serious consequences.
“The last step in that escalatory ladder is to go after American bases, whether it is in the GCC, or perhaps even attempt to disrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, where some 20 percent of global energy passes through,” he told CNN.
As the war drags on, the fragmented international response highlights the fragility of global diplomacy and the difficulty of conflict resolution in an increasingly multipolar world.
For Tehran, halting enrichment altogether would not only undermine decades of strategic investment but also damage regime legitimacy. As Maksad put it, Tehran’s “entire prestige rests on enrichment.”
Still, he sees a potential way forward: Focusing not on enrichment itself, but on preventing a weapon. “That,” he said, “opens up the possibility of a negotiated outcome.”
