ceasefire

The reported truce follows the release of 360 villagers abducted during a Boko Haram attack in northeastern Nigeria.

The Nigerian government has been involved in a secret ceasefire with Boko Haram for the past three months, according to an investigation by The New Humanitarian, in a development that could mark a rare pause in years of fighting in northeastern Nigeria.

The reported truce began in June after negotiations that secured the release of 360 civilians abducted from Ngoshe village, in the foothills of the Mandara Mountains near Nigeria’s border with Cameroon, The New Humanitarian reported.

Three people with contacts among Boko Haram members, including some senior figures, independently told the organisation that the ceasefire had been in effect since June and was likely to be extended for another 40 days.

Two of the sources said attacks had stopped in communities around Ngoshe, which have repeatedly been targeted by the armed group.

Truce followed mass abduction

The 360 villagers were abducted in March during a Boko Haram attack on a nearby army base, according to The New Humanitarian.

The negotiations that led to their release reportedly included a payment of five billion naira ($3.7m) by the Nigerian government.

The alleged payment has become controversial in Nigeria, with the government denying that it paid a ransom.

The New Humanitarian said it contacted government, defence and army spokespeople to verify the reported ceasefire but received no response before publication.

Al Jazeera has not been able to independently verify the reported ceasefire or the alleged payment.

The reported agreement does not include Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), a rival armed group that operates in northeastern Nigeria and the wider Lake Chad region.

Fighting between Boko Haram and ISWAP has continued, according to The New Humanitarian.

Government publicly rejects talks

The reported ceasefire comes despite the Nigerian government’s public rejection of negotiations with Boko Haram, which is designated as a “terrorist organisation” by the Nigerian authorities.

President Bola Tinubu has instead focused on expanding the military’s capacity to fight armed groups. In July, he announced plans to recruit 30,000 additional personnel and create four new army divisions.

Behind the scenes, however, there have been repeated attempts to establish dialogue with Boko Haram, according to The New Humanitarian, citing security officials, diplomats and mediators familiar with previous efforts.

Those efforts have included ceasefire arrangements that eventually collapsed.

Conflict researcher Malik Samuel told The New Humanitarian that the latest reported agreement should not necessarily be interpreted as the beginning of a lasting peace process.

“It could be just a temporary, tactical ceasefire that benefits both sides, but doesn’t really affect the trajectory of the war,” Samuel said.

The current arrangement could also allow Boko Haram to strengthen its position, with two sources warning that the group could use the pause to move equipment into the Mandara Mountains, The New Humanitarian reported.

Boko Haram has carried out attacks and kidnappings in northeastern Nigeria and neighbouring countries around the Lake Chad region since 2009. The group has since fractured into several factions, while ISWAP operates as a separate and rival armed group.

BEIRUT: Since a ceasefire went into effect between Israel and Hezbollah more than two months ago, fighting has stopped in much of Lebanon, but not on a strategic hill overlooking parts of a main southern city.

In recent weeks, Ali Taher hill has been the scene of daily shelling and airstrikes by Israel’s military. Hezbollah, a militant group backed by Iran, has repeatedly attacked Israeli forces in the area with drones.

The United States, which is mediating talks between Lebanon and Israel, had wanted Hezbollah to hand over the hill to the Lebanese army as part of larger plan to disarm the militant group and dismantle its infrastructure. But Hezbollah has refused.

Lebanon and Israel reached a framework agreement in June stating Israel will withdraw from Lebanon as Hezbollah is disarmed. The militant group was not a party to the negotiations and has rejected calls to disarm in areas north of the Litani river, which is where Ali Taher is located.

A full-on battle over this hill near the city of Nabatiyeh could escalate fighting across the country, and unrest in Lebanon complicates efforts to resolve the war in Iran.

On Thursday night, Israel’s military announced it had taken “operational control” of Ali Taher and a network of tunnels beneath it that Hezbollah uses to shelter its fighters and weapons. It is unclear how far Israel’s control extends. Just before Israel’s announcement, its air force was still targeting the hill, according to Lebanese state media.

There has been no official statement from Hezbollah since Israel’s announcement.

US pushes Lebanon to pressure Hezbollah

Hezbollah firmly rejected a proposal from the Lebanese government to hand over Ali Taher to the country’s army. It fears Israel would then seize control of the hill from the Lebanese army and then demand the handover of more territory.

Israel had occupied Ali Taher for 18 years before it withdrew from Lebanon in 2000.

The hill has a strategic location overlooking several villages as well as main roads leading to Nabatiyeh. Losing full control of it would disrupt Hezbollah’s presence and supply lines in the area.

The Israeli military says the site is also important to Hezbollah because of tunnels it built there, with funding from Iran.

Israel said in its statement Thursday that the hill housed underground command centers, weapons storage rooms, generators, living quarters, showers and a kitchen. Israel said it cleared Ali Taher of Hezbollah fighters and was working to “neutralize underground infrastructure sites.”

Hezbollah legislator Ihab Hamadeh questioned why the Israeli military was still attacking the hill if it was really in control of the area, according to the Arabic-language version of Russia’s state-funded news outlet Sputnik. An Associated Press photographer who visited the nearby village of Kfar Rumman on Friday saw no sign of Israeli military presence on the hill.

The hill, topped with a shrine to a Muslim scholar, sits north of the Litani river, which has become the de facto boundary of the area captured by Israel since its latest war with Hezbollah began in early March.

Fighting in the area has heated up in recent weeks

Israel has been conducting military operations around Ali Taher since July, said Nasser Khdour, a Middle East researcher at the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, or ACLED, a US-based group that tracks conflicts around the world.

Hezbollah official Mahmoud Qamati told a Lebanese podcaster in late August that the group’s fighters were repelling attempts by Israeli troops to take Ali Taher. But he, and others, downplayed the significance of the site should Israel take it.

“Ali Taher is important, but if it is lost it does not mean the end of Hezbollah,” Qamati said.

In mid-August, Israel carried out a series of airstrikes on southern Lebanon that it described as retaliation for a Hezbollah drone attack on Ali Taher that seriously wounded three soldiers. The Israeli strikes, which killed 11 people, including women and children, were the deadliest since the US-brokered ceasefire went into effect in late June.

On Aug. 27, Israel carried out a series of airstrikes, killing one person and wounding six, after the military said Hezbollah fired two explosive drones at Israeli troops in the area. Hezbollah did not claim responsibility for any of the attacks.

Lebanon says Israel is hindering its army

Lebanon’s Deputy Prime Minister Tarek Mitri told an Arab TV station in late August that the Lebanese army was ready to take over Ali Taher.

He accused Israel of blocking the army due to its own political considerations ahead of Israeli national elections on Oct. 27.

“The problem is not in the Lebanese army’s readiness but in Israel’s stance,” he said.

Lebanese and Israeli officials are set to meet for negotiations in Rome later this month. Meanwhile, Hezbollah, which has always refused to speak directly to the US, appears to be changing its policy after the major setbacks it has suffered during its wars with Israel since 2024.

A Lebanese official told The Associated Press that indirect contacts are going on between the US and Hezbollah, but refused to give any details. He spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations.

The US ambassador to Lebanon, Michel Issa, said recently that Washington is ready to speak with Hezbollah if the group agrees to disarm.

Still, Hezbollah is not likely to take any move forward regarding talks with the US without a green light from its main backer, Iran. While talks with the US over their war have stalled, Iran has sought guarantees that Israel will halt its attacks on Hezbollah as part of any permanent deal.

Capture of Ali Taher could lead Israel to other Hezbollah strongholds

The capture of Ali Taher would open the way to Nabatiyeh and also lead to the nearby Apple Province and Rihan Mountain, where Hezbollah has been building up its presence since the late 1990s.

Israeli leaders have repeatedly pledged to leave troops in Lebanon and threatened to escalate military pressure until Hezbollah disarms.

“Israeli control of the area is an operational and military setback for Hezbollah,” said Khdour of ACLED. He said clearing these sites helps Israel protect towns in the northern part of its country, and increases pressure on Hezbollah.

“This will strengthen Israel’s position in any future negotiations over its withdrawal,” said Khdour.

The administration of former US President, Joe Biden, knowingly allowed Israel’s genocide in Gaza to continue long after it had lost any clear military objective, with senior officials in Washington privately admitting it amounted to “killing and destroying for the sake of killing and destroying”. This damning assessment, along with revelations of political manipulation, diplomatic cover-ups and sabotaged peace efforts, comes from a bombshell investigation aired by Israel’s Channel 13. Details of the investigation have been translated by Drop Site News and shared on X.

The Biden administration allowed Israel unprecedented leeway to carry out its military offensive, despite the enormous death and devastation it inflicted on Gaza. Former Israeli ambassador, Michael Herzog, made a startling admission about Biden’s support: “God did the State of Israel a favour that Biden was the president during this period. We fought [in Gaza] for over a year and the administration never came to us and said, ‘ceasefire now.’ It never did. And that’s not to be taken for granted.” His remarks encapsulated a broader sentiment that the White House gave Benjamin Netanyahu all the political space he needed to execute the military offensive, which has claimed the lives of more than 52,000 Palestinians, mainly women and children.

READ: ICC judges order prosecutor to keep arrest warrant requests confidential in Gaza probes

The investigation, which included interviews with nine current and former US officials, reveals a deeply troubling portrait of US complicity in Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Former national security aide, Ilan Goldenberg, stated that the war amounted to “killing and destroying for the sake of killing and destroying”, with no viable political alternative ever established. Despite the White House’s public messaging about restraining Israel, the internal consensus appeared to be that the administration had no intention of exerting real pressure on the Occupation state.

The Biden administration also shielded Israel from allegations of war crimes, prompting a major backlash from staffers in the State Department. Lawyer Stacy Gilbert, for example, resigned in protest after being excluded from a key report that falsely claimed Israel had not violated US arms laws. Gilbert described the report as “shocking in its mendacity”, pointing out that aid obstruction and settler attacks were well documented, yet ignored. Meanwhile, Washington continued to certify Israeli compliance with US law, ensuring the uninterrupted flow of weapons.

The investigation also revealed that Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, deliberately sabotaged hostage negotiations in order to prevent a ceasefire. US officials confirmed that Netanyahu tanked talks out of fear that a deal would compel him to halt the war.

Despite public backlash, Biden’s private approach remained deferential. Even after reportedly telling Netanyahu he was “full of shit” and hanging up mid-call, Biden ultimately maintained support. After briefly halting a shipment of 2,000-lb bombs due to concerns about their use in densely populated areas of Gaza, Netanyahu publicly accused Washington of broader arms delays. Biden, rather than escalating pressure, resumed the shipment process shortly thereafter.

The Channel 13 exposé further confirms that Biden’s reluctance to push Israel was deeply tied to a failed diplomatic initiative with Saudi Arabia. A landmark normalisation deal was in sight, but it required Israeli recognition of Palestinian statehood. These were flatly rejected by Netanyahu’s far-right coalition. Former US ambassador, Jack Lew, said he found Israel’s refusal “shocking”, while Amos Hochstein expressed disbelief that such a strategic opportunity was squandered. Sources confirmed that Netanyahu deliberately stalled negotiations in hopes that President Trump would return to office and claim the diplomatic win for himself.

These revelations lend significant weight to long-standing accusations that the Biden administration has not only provided diplomatic cover for Israel’s propaganda by repeating lies, but also actively enabled what many view as a campaign of ethnic cleansing. Critics note that Biden himself amplified false Israeli claims, such as the widely discredited allegations of Hamas beheading babies, rhetoric that helped to dehumanise a population in order to carry out genocide.

OPINION: Advisory opinions will not stop genocide

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.