LCCC
ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
August 20/09
Bible Reading of the day
Holy Gospel of Jesus
Christ according to Saint Matthew 22:1-14. Jesus again in reply spoke to them in
parables, saying, The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who gave a
wedding feast for his son. He dispatched his servants to summon the invited
guests to the feast, but they refused to come. A second time he sent other
servants, saying, 'Tell those invited: "Behold, I have prepared my banquet, my
calves and fattened cattle are killed, and everything is ready; come to the
feast."' Some ignored the invitation and went away, one to his farm,
another to his business. The rest laid hold of his servants, mistreated them,
and killed them. The king was enraged and sent his troops, destroyed those
murderers, and burned their city. Then he said to his servants, 'The feast is
ready, but those who were invited were not worthy to come. Go out,
therefore, into the main roads and invite to the feast whomever you find.' The
servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, bad and good
alike, and the hall was filled with guests. But when the king came in to meet
the guests he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment. He said to him,
'My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?' But he
was reduced to silence. Then the king said to his attendants, 'Bind his
hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be
wailing and grinding of teeth.' Many are invited, but few are chosen."
Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special
Reports
Is
Michel Aoun a problem or a solution?
By
Michael Young 20/08/09
Now Lebanon: Possible rivalries
overshadow accomplishments of security forces 20/08/09
Now Lebanon: The very silly season
August 20, 2009
Tehran – Damascus versus Lebanon’s
Democracy/Randa Takieddine/20.08.09
Gaza: Big Jihad V/S Little
Jihad.By
Walid Phares 20/08/09
Fear of
radicalization is no reason to delay democratic reforms-The
Daily Star 20/08/09
Iran may
change if it is attracted by an Asia model-By
Kishore Mahbubani 20/08/09
Latest
News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for August
20/09
Message from Jumblat to Sfeir Stresses Commitment to Mountain's Reconciliation-Naharnet
Hariri Moves toward Talks with
Opposition, Karami Says Aoun Remarks 'Provocation of Sunnis'-Naharnet
Suleiman: Internal, Not External, Obstacles to Cabinet Formation-Naharnet
Hizbullah: External Obstacles to Cabinet Lineup-Naharnet
Riyadh
Denies Inter-Arab Disputes over Lebanon Government Formation-Naharnet
Lebanese Army commandos capture
escaped Islamist fighter-Daily Star
Fadlallah: Cabinet formation
hampered by 'Arab backing-Daily Star
Aoun refuses to 'share a meal' with
Hariri-Daily Star
Lebanon on the crossroads to reform
and prosperity-Daily Star
Central criminal laboratory to open at Emile Helou
barracks-Daily
Star
Truck drivers block Metn road to
demand permits for quarries-Daily
Star
Army arrests member of wanted Jund
al-Sham militant near Sidon-Daily
Star
Sky Bar hosts charity event to curb
drunk driving-Daily Star
Chouf's Cedar Reserve lures 20,000
tourists-Daily Star
AUB draws in international crowd
with language lessons-Daily Star
Group challenges women's beauty
perception-Daily Star
Khamenei praises Syria's
'resistance'-(AFP)
Karameh meets Hariri: Aoun’s
rhetoric provokes Sunnis/Future News
Mahfoud: Aoun fragmented the
Christian society/Future News
Fouad el-Saad: we are dealing with
a psychopath who needs sanatorium/Future News
Houri asks Aoun: Does the FPM lack
proficient members?/Future News
Cabinet formation towards
deadlocked crisis, Souaid/Future News
Fugitive behind bars…More mute politicians/Future
News
Message
from Jumblat to Sfeir Stresses Commitment to Mountain's Reconciliation
Naharnet/State Minister Wael Abu Faour on Thursday conveyed a message of respect
from Druze leader Walid Jumblat to Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir which also
stressed the Progressive Socialist Party's commitment to the recent
reconciliation in the mountain. Jumblat's message "stressed commitment to the
mountains' reconciliation which produced many positive results and national
achievements on the level of relations among the Lebanese," Abu Faour told
reporters following his meeting with Sfeir in Diman, the seat of the Maronite
church in north Lebanon "This reconciliation has become a daily reality in
the mountains," he added. On the stalled Cabinet lineup, he stressed the
importance to "form a government and remove all the obstacles whether they are
personal, public or artificial to clear the way for the PM-designate to form a
government as soon as possible." Earlier Thursday, MP Fouad al-Saad said a visit
by a delegation from the Democratic Gathering bloc would "dampen the atmosphere"
between Sfeir and Jumblat, stressing on the ongoing relationship between the two
sides.
Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 13:17
Suleiman: Internal, Not External, Obstacles to Cabinet Formation
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman stressed that the obstacles facing formation
of a national unity government were internal and not external. As-Safir
newspaper, citing Suleiman visitors, said Thursday that the President pointed
that external states were "trying to assist Lebanon in the completion of a
Cabinet lineup." Suleiman reportedly hinted that demands by "some local sides
related to names and Cabinet portfolios were too high." The president said he
has asked Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri to reactivate consultations with
the various political leaders in hopes to speed up government formation. Beirut,
20 Aug 09, 09:01
Khamenei praises Syria's
'resistance'
By Agence France Presse (AFP) /Thursday, August 20, 2009
TEHRAN: Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei praised key ally Syria on
Wednesday for its “resistance” in the face of world powers in a meeting with
visiting Syrian President Bashar Assad, state media reported. “Syria’s most
important characteristic among Arab countries is its steadfastness and
resistance,” Khamenei said, noting Syria’s “excellent standing” in the region.
Khamenei said “the resistance front” in the Middle East “should strengthen its
cooperation and ties,” the state news agency IRNA reported.
“America’s blade has become blunter in the region,” Khamenei added. The unity
between Iran and Syria is the embodiment of resistance in the region,” the
supreme leader said.
Khamenei also branded as “very positive” Syria’s improved relations with Iraq
and said that unity between Iran and its western neighbors, Iraq and Turkey, and
with Syria would benefit the region. Assad arrived in Tehran earlier on
Wednesday on a one-day visit during which he congratulated Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on his re-election, which he said was a “lesson for
foreigners,” IRNA reported. “I have come here today to cordially congratulate
you and the Iranian people,” Assad said, according to IRNA.
“What happened in Iran was a major event and a great lesson for foreigners, that
is why they are so upset,” the Syrian president said. Assad also insisted that
relations between regional allies Syria and Iran and their positions on Middle
East issues should remain unchanged during Ahmadinejad’s second four-year
tenure. “Iran and Syria should pursue their … policies in the region,” IRNA
quoted Assad as telling AhmadinejadHe added, the report said without
elaborating, that meetings between Iranian and Syrian officials are “necessary
to send a message to faraway countries and those in the region as they have a
weak memory and forget the lessons they learned.” Ahmadinejad for his part said
“Iran and Syria are in the same trench” and insisted that the West “terribly
needs the help and cooperation” of the two regional allies. “Every political
event is an opportunity that we should fully exploit with each other’s help,”
Ahmadinejad said, without giving further details. Ahmadinejad’s disputed
re-election, which the opposition charges was the result of fraud, was met with
mass protests, plunging the Islamic Republic into its worst crisis in 30 years
of its existence. During the hardline president’s first term Iran faced further
international isolation over his uncompromising nuclear stance and frequent
verbal attacks on Israel. Assad’s trip comes after France praised Syria for
helping secure the release on bail of French university teaching assistant
Clotilde Reiss and an Iranian employee at the French Embassy in Tehran The two
were detained for their alleged role in the riots that broke out after
Ahmadinejad’s disputed re-election.
Assad last visited Iran in August 2008. – AFP
Fadlallah: Cabinet formation hampered by 'Arab backing'
Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
BEIRUT: Senior Shiite cleric Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah said on Wednesday
the government formation process still needs “Arab backing to come to an end.”
Fadlallah held talks on Wednesday with British ambassador Frances Guy at his
residence in Haret Hreik. The meeting touched on local and regional developments
and discussed the living conditions of the Arab and Muslim diaspora in the
United Kingdom. The situation in Iraq and the occupied territories was also
discussed. Fadlallah criticized Lebanese politicians, saying they were “still
far from achieving true unity.” He said Lebanon’s “crisis of confidence” has
deteriorated further, adding that the country was suffering from “more serious
ills in light of recent developments.”
“This can delay the reconciliation process, which should be the precursor for
nationwide reform projects,” he said. He also blamed the political stalemate on
foreign intervention, saying inter-Arab reconciliation “has yet to mature.” Each
Arab group is looking to acquire a role on the Lebanese scene, he explained.
“The situation in Lebanon is still blurry and will become clearer once the
situation on the Arab scene is clear,” the Sayyed said. “However,” he added,
“Arab players don’t seem to be in a rush to make this happen.” He slammed
politicians, accusing them of neglect and urged them to keep the political
process moving, especially government formation. The cleric said paralysis
witnessed on the Lebanese political scene, “will have drastic repercussions on
the Lebanese people, who always pay the price.” He also urged the European Union
to rethink its relations with the Arab and Muslim countries. He especially
referred to the complications that arose between the EU and the Islamic Republic
of Iran following the Iranian presidential elections. “We should remedy mistakes
in accordance with the law and with an open mind,” he said. Fadlallah also
stressed that it was not in Europe’s best interest to complicate its relations
with Iran and that the latter was determined to adopt an open policy toward
Western countries. – The Daily Star
Aoun refuses to 'share a meal' with Hariri
Berri vows to promote dialogue so that cabinet formation process reaches ‘happy
ending’
Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
BEIRUT: Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun declined on Wednesday an
invitation for lunch by Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri to discuss pending
issues related to the government formation process. Aoun’s decision is likely to
further complicate the government formation process, which kicked off eight
weeks ago but has yet to bear fruit.
Obstacles faced in the formation of the cabinet were also reflected in the
silence of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who refused to comment to reporters
following a weekly meeting with President Michel Sleiman at the Baabda Palace on
Wednesday. Sources close to Berri, however, said the speaker was determined to
promote “reconciliation and dialogue” among all factions, in order to reach “a
happy ending.” Speaking to reporters after the weekly meeting of his Change and
Reform bloc, Aoun said he refuses to “share a meal” with those who are waging a
defamation campaign in the media against him. “I follow a principle. You all
remember that I had once declined MP Walid Jumblatt’s invitation to dinner
because he was attacking our supporters. How can I possibly accept the
invitation of someone who has been personally attacking me and insulting me in
the media?” Aoun asked.
“So please allow me, I will not share a meal with them,” he said, in reference
to Hariri. Aoun said his party was “under attack by opponents.”
“They don’t consider the FPM fit to join the cabinet,” he said. “It is because
we are not troublemakers and cannot put with the existing corruption in the
state’s structure nor can we tolerate the mafia attitude of [Lebanese political
groups].” Earlier this week, Aoun had accused the premier-designate of waiting
for outside instructions to form the cabinet.
The FPM leader also demanded that his son-in-law caretaker Telecommunications
Minister Gebran Bassil be reappointed to his post, and asked for the FPM to be
granted the Interior Ministry, or any other “key ministries.” On Wednesday, Aoun
questioned the reasoning behind calls to delay deliberations until after the
month of Ramadan.
Media reports on Wednesday predicted that the government would not see the light
until after Ramadan. Earlier on Wednesday, the March 14 Forces issued a
statement slamming Hizbullah and its ally Aoun and blaming them for the recent
deadlock. The coalition said following its weekly meeting that Hizbullah had
agreed on the 15-10-5 formula after Aoun’s consent, adding that the Shiite party
had shown readiness to deal with any problem related to the government formation
process. The agreed-upon formula grants the parliamentary majority 15 seats in
cabinet, the opposition 10 and the president five. “Aoun’s demands for a key
ministry are nothing but an attempt to weaken the president, the statement said.
“Therefore, the March 14 Forces believe that MP Aoun’s latest escalatory tone
couldn’t have happened without Hizbullah’s consent,” it added.
The alliance reiterated its support for Hariri in his efforts to form a
coalition government and called for a swift distribution of portfolios.
Meanwhile, well-informed sources told the Central News Agency that Syrian-Saudi
dialogue was “back on track” after having been frozen for a while. The sources
added that Saudi King Abdullah tasked his son Prince Abdel-Aziz with reviving
contacts with the Syrian and Lebanese administrations “in a bid to facilitate
the government formation process in Lebanon, which has so far been stalled.”
The sources also said Saudi Information Minister and former ambassador to
Lebanon Abdel-Aziz Khoja “recently paid an unanounced visit to Lebanon in order
to help break the deadlock over the government.” Khoja met with Hariri and
Jumblatt during his two-day stay, the sources said. Earlier in August, the
government formation process was further complicated when Jumblatt announced his
departure from the March 14 coalition. In other news, caretaker Public Works and
Transport Minister Ghazi Aridi warned on Wednesday against further delay in
cabinet formation in light of the ongoing Israeli threats. He called for
accelerating the process, since it is “not acceptable to obstruct the government
formation to fulfill personal interests,” a reference to Aoun’s demand to
reappoint Bassil. Aridi stressed that all groups should make concessions.
Following a meeting with Premier-designate Hariri, caretakerYouth and Sports
Minister MP Talal Arslan said on Wednesday that “neither the opposition nor the
parliamentary majority want the cabinet formation to be delayed.” Arslan urged
various Lebanese groups to cooperate “in order to maintain unity, partnership
and stability in the country, especially given Israel’s ongoing threats.” “Both
the opposition and the parliamentary majority should provide clear explanations
for the delay in forming the cabinet,” he added.
Last week, Arslan demanded that his Democratic Party be represented in the
upcoming cabinet with one ministerial portfolio. – The Daily Star
Army arrests member of wanted Jund al-Sham militant near Sidon
By Mohammed Zaatari /Daily Star staff
Thursday, August 20, 2009
SIDON: The Lebanese Army arrested on Tuesday one of the prominent members of the
disbanded Jund al-Sham Islamist militant group who is wanted by the Lebanese
judiciary for several charges. Lebanese Army Intelligence Units arrested Wissam
Tahbish Wednesday afternoon as he was about to enter the Ain al-Hilweh
Palestinian refugee camp, on the outskirts of the coastal city of Sidon.
Well-informed military sources told The Daily Star that Tahbish, a Palestinian
refugee, had left Ain al-Hilweh, “less than one year ago and headed to a
European country but recently decided to return back.” The sources added that
Tahbish had joined the Al-Qaeda inspired Fatah al-Islam militant group, which
fought the Lebanese Army in the north Lebanon camp of Nahr al-Bared. Tahbish is
the son-in-law of one of the founders of Fatah al-Islam, Sheikh Hisham Sharidi.
Chouf's Cedar Reserve lures
20,000 tourists
By Maher Zeineddine /Daily Star staff
Thursday, August 20, 2009
CHOUF: Tourism in the Chouf region this summer has been primarily
environment-friendly as the region’s Cedar Reserve had recorded 20,000 visitors
since the start of the summer season. The Chouf Cedar Reserve offers a special
program this season dubbed “Ecotourism Package” for its tourists who come to
enjoy one of UNESCO’s declared biosphere reserves.
As part of the package, tourists and locals get the opportunity to discover the
largest of Lebanon’s nature reserves and to experience life in the countryside.
Visitors can not only enjoy walking between the historic cedar trees but also
discover the traditions, cuisine and folkloric artifacts found in neighboring
villages.
Stretching from Dahr al-Baidar in the north to the Niha Mountain in the south,
the reserve offers the best of Lebanon’s beautiful scenery. Hikers are able to
walk from a couple of hours to five days as part of the Lebanon Mountain Trail,
the first long-distance hiking trail in Lebanon.
“You can enjoy nature’s flowers and birds here and then head to a nearby village
to savor a home cooked traditional meal in one of the local houses” says the
reserve’s scientific coordinator Nizar Hani. Hani explains that five guest homes
in the villages of Niha, Baatharan, Khraybe, Maaser and Barouk are equipped to
host tourists and offer them food and shelter.
“We have organized the tours in a way to introduce visitors to the villages’
traditions, literature, poetry and artifacts,” he adds , while highlighting that
one of the guest houses on the tour was built 200 years ago. The tours organized
by the reserve can also be considered a useful history lesson. The village of
Niha, for example, holds a fort from the time of the famous Lebanese Prince Emir
Fakhreddine and the village of Barouk is the birth place of renowned poet Rachid
Nakhle. “You can spend up to five days discovering the region,” says Hani,
adding that 12 new artificial lakes had been built “under the care of
Progressive Socialist Party leader and Chouf MP Walid Jumblatt.” The lakes can
hold thousands of cubic meters of water and were able to contain 90 thousand
cubic meters this year according to Hani. Development projects have been ongoing
in the Chouf region and this summer’s tourism season has more than benefited
from the artificial lakes. The number of tourists to visit the Chouf Cedar
Reserve has reached 20,000 visitors and is still expected to go up to 30,000
thousand.
The reserve had witnessed a record number of 28,000 visitors in 2004 but the
18-month political deadlock between 2006 and 2008 caused that number to decrease
in the following years.
“This year’s ecotourism package aims at protecting the environment and
benefiting the local communities,” says Hani, who is pleased that the reserve is
receiving support from the Tourism Ministry. The Chouf Cedar Reserve also
collaborates with the Tourism Ministry and the Italian Embassy to promote forest
fire prevention projects.
Is Michel Aoun a problem or a solution?
By Michael Young
Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
There was snickering and indignation on Monday, after Michel Aoun held a press
conference to defend his son-in-law Gebran Bassil. Aoun’s vulgarity on the
occasion notwithstanding, his nepotistic tendencies aside, it would be a mistake
to blame him alone for the blockage in the government’s formation. The essence
of the problem lies elsewhere.
The fuss being made over Bassil’s appointment is silly. Bassil is a notably
unremarkable figure, despite his father-in-law’s extravagant commendations.
However, nothing in Lebanon’s Constitution or political practice justifies the
decision to deny him a ministerial post. Ministers are not parliamentarians and
shouldn’t be obliged to meet the same criteria. To win a seat in Parliament, a
candidate must usually ride the coattails of a powerful political leader. This
means that governments filled with election winners also tend to be governments
filled with yes-men. Is that a model we should be promoting, under the guise of
enhancing legitimacy?
It would have been wiser from the start to give Aoun what he wanted, a portfolio
for Bassil, and leave the Aounist movement, which had been divided over his
appointment, to thrash out the consequences. Why did Saad Hariri allow himself
to be trapped by what should have been a relatively minor political obstacle?
Instead, the Aounists are now united behind Bassil, even those among them who
dislike him, while the real reason for the delay in the Cabinet’s formation
remains hidden.
The fact is that the delay is due to tensions in the relationship between Syria
and Saudi Arabia, in the shadow of their uneasy reconciliation. The Syrians seek
to hammer home their indispensability to any inter-Lebanese reconciliation, and
they apparently still want Saad Hariri to visit Damascus before the government
is finalized. The American veto of such a visit, but also Hariri’s reluctance to
go along with a whitewash of his father’s assassins, evidently contributed to
the cancellation of a meeting in Damascus several weeks ago between King
Abdullah and Bashar Assad. Since then progress on the government has been slow,
and was further hindered by Walid Jumblatt’s speech earlier this month.
In this context, the Gebran Bassil saga is a footnote, one being exploited by
Aoun to raise the ante on Hariri, That is why it would have been far better for
the prime minister-elect to neutralize this particular headache preemptively, by
accepting Bassil and therefore perhaps avoiding the current row over handing the
Aounists a sovereign ministry, which Aoun is using as leverage to shoehorn his
son-in-law into the Cabinet.
It’s easy to underestimate Aoun. Rare are the major battles he has undertaken
that he has won. He failed to liberate Lebanon from Syria when he headed a
military government between 1988 and 1990, and he failed to defeat the Lebanese
Forces afterward. Upon returning home in 2005 he scored a major victory, but
then did nothing with it when he failed to become president – though he would
have been uncircumventable had he remained neutral in the March 8-March 14
rivalry. And finally, he failed to win a majority in the elections last June,
instead becoming a lighting rod for the growing number of Christians voting
against him.
That Aoun should now be fighting so hard over Bassil is a revealing sign of how
far he’s dropped. Having lost almost everywhere else, he at least wants to win
the struggle over his succession. This creates an opening that Hariri and March
14 should profit from, in light of the aggressive Syrian endeavor to reimpose
some sort of hegemony over Lebanon.
March 14 needs more imagination in dealing with Aoun. In the end his excessive
demands are part of a bargaining ploy. Hariri has to advance gingerly when it
comes to the general: he doesn’t want to alienate President Michel Sleiman or
his own allies Samir Geagea and Amin Gemayel. That’s understandable, but as
prime minister he will have to widen his horizons beyond March 14, while also
preserving his Christian partnerships. One of the main aims of the Syrians is to
break Hariri and the Sunnis off from the anti-Syrian Maronites. That is why they
have threatened Gemayel, making him more responsive to engagement from Damascus;
and it is why Syria’s local peons are now preparing to isolate Geagea, otherwise
a much tougher nut to crack.
This situation makes it more desirable for Hariri to help facilitate
inter-Christian reconciliation, which would bolster his own authority and his
community’s defiance in the face of Syrian efforts to contain the Sunnis and
undermine their ability to remain the backbone of opposition to some form of
Syrian restoration. Such a plan is by no means easy. Since when have Sunni
leaders dared play Christian politics? And with the Christians so divided,
Hariri is more likely to fail than to succeed.
However, it’s equally true that Aoun is most dangerous when he feels forsaken.
That’s why it’s worth determining what it is he really wants, and conceding what
can be conceded in exchange for greater support from Aoun against Syrian moves
weakening Lebanese sovereignty. Aoun has tried to use the Syrians to his
advantage, but ultimately he has gotten very little out of them. Even his trip
to Syria last year did not generate any particular warmth or long-term
cooperation. Aoun may be more receptive to Hariri on the Syrian front than the
general’s detractors imagine, even as his close ties with Hizbullah and Iran
will doubtless limit his maneuverability.
The balance of power has shifted in Lebanon since Jumblatt’s turnaround. The
Druze leader will be very careful not to alienate the Saudis, but that doesn’t
mean Saad Hariri should stand pat. Political alignments are changing and it
might be time to seriously investigate whether Michel Aoun would not himself
welcome an opportunity to revise a political strategy that has ultimately left
him empty-handed.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR.
Fear of radicalization is no reason to delay democratic reforms
By The Daily Star /Thursday, August 20, 2009
Editorial
During his visit to Washington this week, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak tried
to deflect criticism of his government’s miserable track record on implementing
long-promised democratic reforms. Mubarak warned through his spokesman on
Tuesday that moving too quickly on democratization risks bringing extremists to
power. “If Egypt falls down, many other countries will be destabilized. We know
that moving too fast might give control to radicals,” he warned.
We’ve heard similar ominous predictions from Middle Eastern leaders before. The
autocrats of the region have long cautioned that introducing too much democracy
too quickly could have horrible ramifications Some have argued that democracy
contradicts local culture or have said that it is necessary to first improve
economic conditions before allowing people to vote. Many, like Mubarak, cite the
example of the Palestinian territories, where the last legislative elections saw
the rise of Hamas, and warn that radicals will be empowered if the people are
allowed to go to the polls.
But as this regions leader’s keep changing the benchmark of “readiness” for
democracy, we’re left wondering, when will it ever be the right time to embrace
democratization?
Fear of radicalization is certainly not a good enough reason to continue
delaying key reforms. Democratization involves more than just holding elections.
It’s about fostering tolerance, allowing more freedom of speech, promoting
education and bolstering the independence of institutions such as the judiciary
and the press. Plenty of steps can be taken toward democratization without any
risk of a country falling into the hands of extremists.
These types of reforms would bring far more benefits to Middle Eastern societies
than merely quieting disgruntled populations. One of the hallmarks of
contemporary life is the need of citizens to be knowledgable about their world.
Business leaders need to make informed decisions on the basis of reality, not
the fiction that passes as “news” in many of the region’s countries whose media
outlets are suppressed or controlled by governments. Investors and entrepreneurs
need to know the laws of the land, and more importantly they need reassurances
that these are being applied consistently by a fair and transparent judiciary
that acts without any form of political interference. A nation’s prospects of
achieving prosperity are improved whenever leaders are bold enough to embrace
reforms that advance democratization.
Our region unfortunately lacks such consistently courageous leadership. Instead
we experience long periods of stagnation, interrupted by the occasional
revolution or coup that ushers in new leaders who promise something new but end
up resorting to the same old oppressive tactics. Will today’s Middle Eastern
leaders yield to popular demands for better governance? Or will they dig in
their heels and eventually be swept away like their predecessors?
Tehran – Damascus versus Lebanon’s Democracy
Wed, 19 August 2009
Randa Takieddine
Ever since the Iranian authorities released French hostages Clotilde Reiss and
Nazak Afshar (of Iranian origin) from prison to the French Embassy in Tehran,
France has praised the role of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, which led to
the release. French President Nicholas Sarkozy has saluted President Bashar
al-Assad, and newspapers close to Sarkozy, such as Le Figaro, which is
considered his official mouthpiece, praised this role and Sarkozy’s decision to
remove Syria from its isolation and disengage it, in the view of the French,
from Iran.
Certainly, President al-Assad played a role in moving the two hostages from the
Iranian prison to the French Embassy in Tehran, and this is very important for
Sarkozy and French public opinion, while it is a humanitarian step that can only
be applauded.
However, the belief that the Syrian-Iranian alliance is headed for collapse is
hugely mistaken. This strong alliance has joint interests in the region; the
first example of this is what is happening in Lebanon with Hizbullah and General
Michel Aoun. The difficulty of forming a government and the obstacles faced by
the prime minister-designate, Saad al-Hariri, are linked to the Iranian-Syrian
alliance that was surprised by the results of parliamentary elections in
Lebanon, which it lost. It sought to halt the country’s democratic path through
the Christian ally in order to avoid a new Sunni-Shiite conflict.
Syria is aware that releasing the two French hostages is a priority for the
French president. President Sarkozy can only praise the role of the President
al-Assad and thank him. However, afterward, will he be able to pressure his
friend President al-Assad to prompt him to solve the impasse over forming the
next Lebanese Cabinet?
While Iran did not encourage a coming-together by Syria and Saudi Arabia, and
Syria’s interest certainly lies in reconciliation with the Kingdom, interests
shared with Iran in the region (Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine) are an obstacle in
the face of Arab moderates, meaning the two biggest states in the Middle East,
Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
The only thing that distances Syria from Iran is Damascus’ reaching a stage of
direct negotiations with Israel. When Syria began its talks with Israel, the
Iranian leadership blamed Damascus for not informing it about the details of
these negotiations. Iran was getting information from Turkey about the matter.
Since Israel and its officials do not want peace with Syria, or with the
Palestinians, the Iranian-Syrian alliance is stronger during this period. The
expected visit by President al-Assad to Iran will demonstrate this. He is going
to congratulate his Iranian counterpart and thank him for the credit for
releasing the two French hostages, which serves Syria’s interest with France and
Europe. The Syrian president, with his visit, will give support to the Iranian
president locally, as the result of his election was rejected due to the
falsification of the majority of the Iranian people’s votes, and by a group
belonging to the regime as well. The Syrian president has already affirmed to
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, during the latter’s visit to Damascus
in July, that the popular demonstrations in Iran were at the instigation and
encouragement of the outside world, and that the legitimacy of the
president-elect is not doubted.
The situation in Lebanon today is the result of this Iranian-Syrian alliance,
which blocks or hinders the country’s democratic path. Any country in the world
enjoying democracy that sees one group gaining a majority in free elections
cannot form a government because the losing side is blocking things in one way
or another. If the premier-designate forms a government of the majority without
the agreement of the opposition, we will see Lebanon facing political blackmail
by the opposition, in setting up tents in the streets of Beirut and blocking
life in Lebanon.
The prime minister-designate is aware of this possibility; thus, he wants true
participation. However, General Aoun, who criticized the candidacy of Minister
Nassib Lahoud for president on the grounds that he lost in the parliamentary
elections, has forgotten what he said about the candidate of a huge majority of
the Lebanese people, and now wants to impose his son-in-law, who lost in the
last legislative elections, as a minister in the democratically-elected
government recognized by all. Aoun’s positions and principles accommodate
themselves to family ties, since he insists on seeing his son-in-law as a
minister.
However, the obstacle of naming Gebran Bassil a minister could have been
overcome, if Aoun’s strongest ally, Hizbullah, truly wanted to facilitate the
formation of the government. This reminds us of what Iranian Foreign Minister
Manouchehr Mottaki said when he visited Paris before the elections in Lebanon.
He told Kouchner that “Hizbullah and its allies were going to win in the
elections and you will be forced to work with us to move things along in the
country.” The Iranian minister’s expectations proved to be wrong, but the
Iranian regime and its Syrian partner now want to block the democratic path in
the way the leadership in Iran did domestically after the presidential
elections.
GAZA: BIG JIHAD V/S LITTLE
JIHAD
By Walid Phares
19/08/09
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2009/08/gaza_big_jihad_vs_little_jihad.php
Hamas’ attack against a Jihadist group inside Gaza is about to provide the
Palestinian Islamist organization a pass to become a “mainstream” movement,
acceptable internationally as a partner in negotiations. Or at least that is
what Hamas strategists think may happen as a result of crushing the minuscule
militant entity known as Jund Ansar Allah (The Soldiers or the Partisans of
Allah) last week. This is another murky development in the world of Jihadism,
where the biggest brothers in holy war devoured the little ones, in a race
between who can achieve final victory against the Kuffar (infidels). But in
Gaza, these intra Jihadist slaughter fests are peculiar in as much as the
“Palestine cause” is so central to the Islamist political narrative worldwide.
In November of 2008, a new group in Rafah declared itself as the ultimate Salafi
Jihadist force of Palestine. After many previous attempts made previously by al
Qaeda inspired factions at least since 2001, Jund Ansar Allah (JAA) led by Abel
Latif Mussa, aka Abu al Nour al Maqdissi, seized the control of a local Mosque
and segments of a neighborhood and launched a couple attacks against Israel as
of early 2009. The JAA issued many declarations calling for “real Jihad,” ending
negotiations with Fatah, the international community and opposing any type of
elections and constitutional structure in Gaza other than pure Sharia. From his
pulpit, Sheikh Mussa criticized Hamas’ leadership for failing the Jihad they
promised to deliver, and for betraying their own constitution calling for an
Islamic Emirate all over Palestine, not just in Gaza and the West Bank. Hundreds
of already indoctrinated youth joined the JAA and formed the nucleus of a Jihadi
milita. Their ranks were growing at an alarming rate for Hamas, which felt time
came to squash them, before they became a competitive organization. The JAA was
on its ballistic way to devour Hamas from the inside. It was using the same
doctrines upon which Hamas was founded, grew and used to overthrew Fatah from
Gaza.
After a few incidents, Hamas forces overwhelmed the headquarters of JAA killing
dozens of militants. The fighting took its toll on both groups. Unverified
reports said Abu Jibril Shemali, commander of Izzedine al Qassam Brigades
(Hamas’ SS-like force) and Abu Abdallah al Suri, JAA’s military commander were
both killed in the clashes. The founder of the Jund Ansar Allah Abdel Latif
Moussa was killed during the explosion of one of his suicide bombers as he
targeted advancing Hamas fighters. By now, the “Jund” has been crushed, its
Mosque seized and its survivors pursued. In return JAA underground has
threatened to punish Hamas leadership for their apostasy against “Allah’s true
fighters.” In this is Jihad versus Jihad inside a world of indoctrinated circles
of militants, one circle enjoying power, money and recognition and the smaller
circle wanting to snatch it away from the most powerful. But what are lessons we
need to learn from this pool of piranhas, where big Jihadi fish eat little
Jihadi fish?
1. According to many commentators on al Jazeera, Hamas chose to finish up the
“Jund” as a maneuver to lure the West in general -- Great Britain and the United
States in particular -- into “engaging” the organization, lifting its name from
terror lists and adding it to the peace process between the Palestinians and
Israel. Hamas spokespersons rushed to use one term, that resonates greatly in
Western ears, especially with the Obama Administration and the Brown Government,
“we too are fighting the extremists, the terrorists as you are fighting them and
pursuing al Qaeda,” declared Hamas English speaking communicators, hours after
the combat was over. Analysts in the Arab world, shrewd enough to detect the
Hamas tactical move wasn’t greedy in revealing their game: crushing an “al
Qaeda” like group in Gaza would grant an immediate license to the mainstream for
Hamas. One must expect sympathizing journalists, apologist academics and soon
enough diplomats and envoys citing the “glorious” deeds of Hamas as evidence of
fight “against terrorism.” Some savvier analysts believe many “engagement”
architects in Europe and America have even suggested such a move to break the
veto against Hamas. Interestingly, the US narrative lately has been underlining
that there is no war against “Global Jihadsim” but only a “war against al Qaeda”
only. So those in the business of Jihad, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and a
plethora of other groups, can make their credential known to the West by
slapping some local, little al Qaeda boys, and claiming a green card to the
world of “accepted Jihadists.” Two summers ago, the Syrian regime and to an
extent, Hezbollah, tried to come up with a similar model: Damascus released a
copycat group in northern Lebanon, Fatah al Islam, before they claimed they
beheaded the organization few months later, suggesting to Washington that Bashar
can also kill al Qaeda crowds.
2. Is there a link between Hamas and the “Jund” it just sacrificed as a price
for its public international image to be enhanced? In classical Western eyes,
these links cannot be seen. But seasoned observers of Middle Eastern politics
and Jihadi tactics can swiftly detect the equation Hamas-Jihadist factions.
Firstly, the constituents of the “Jund” (JAA) are part of the larger
indoctrinated pools created by Hamas. There are no differences in the basic
doctrine between Hamas and JAA: they are both adepts of Jihadi Salafism.
Secondly, Hamas tolerated the presence of these ultra-Jihadists in their midst
for a reason, that is as long as their size was small and as long as they were
allowed to grow so that they can be used tactically: either by blaming them for
wild rocket launching or to crush them and cash in. Comparatively, Hamas
couldn’t “tolerate” Fatah for example. By June 2007 the followers of Mahmoud
Abbas were massacred in the enclave, because they were credible partners in a
potential peace process and real competitors. Ghazi Hamad, a Hamas spokesperson
told al Jazeera English his organization was always dialoguing with the “Jund.”
Which means they had relationship with them even though Hamas was the only
dominant force in Gaza. Hence there was a reason for this “tolerance” before
Hamad admitted that Hamas stopped “tolerating.” Logically, the Jihadist regime
in Gaza fed the little Jihadists and allowed them to grow until the time of the
sacrifice came.
3. This brings us back to review the current Western re-reading of the so-called
War on Terror and the decision by the Obama and Brown Administrations to let go
of the counter Jihadist narrative hoping, as they said, to drive a wedge between
the so-called “good Jihadists” and the “extremists.” Hamas quickly understood
the message and delivered the goods promptly hoping they will be reclassified as
“good Js.” Not so fast, because Hamas needs to also cater to its own Gaza
indoctrinated constituencies, which were made to believe for decades that Jihad
fi Sabeel Allah is the only way. Tragicomically, Hamas was trapped by a smart
question fielded by an al Jazeera English anchor who was pressing their
spokesperson to show the difference between Hamas and the JAA. “Don’t you think
that the people you just killed are more faithful to your constitution calling
for the establishment of an Islamic Emirate on all of Palestine than yourselves,
who are in power now? Ghazi Hamad rushed to answer by instincts, revealing too
much perhaps: “These guys wants to establish the Caliphate immediately on any
part of liberated land, they are irrational; they don’t understand how Jihad
works, we do.” He said Hamas knows better how to achieve victory. In my book
Future Jihad, I have often argued that the Jihadists are of several strategic
schools of thought: short term, medium term and long term. The difference
between Hamas and the JAA is not about good or bad Jihad, as experts to Western
Governments are claiming. Not at all. It is a difference about when to trigger
the missile, under whose orders and within which framework of alliances. The
“Jund” wants it all the time, anytime they can. Hamas wants a perfect kill,
coordinated with its allies Hezbollah, Syria’s Baath and Iran’s Pasdaran. The
Jund doesn’t care what the infidels in Washington and London think. Hamas cares
strategically how the allies of its immediate enemy, Israel, behave. It wants to
be part of the widest regional alliance against the Jewish state, while the
latter loses all its allies, before D-Day is unleashed.
**Dr Walid Phares is the Director of the Future Terrorism Project at the
Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the author of The Confrontation:
Winning the War against Future Jihad. He teaches Global Strategies in Washington
DC
Hizbullah: External Obstacles to Cabinet Lineup
Naharnet/Hizbullah reiterated it was not acting a "mediator" between Prime
Minister-designate Saad Hariri and Free Patriotic Movement leader Gen. Michel
Aoun in the stalled Cabinet formation. As-Safir newspaper on Thursday, citing
Hizbullah sources, said the Shiite group called on Hariri to "open direct
dialogue" with Aoun to discuss his demands.
"Even if Hizbullah was asked to facilitate negotiations between Hariri and Aoun,
it will not succumb to pressure," one source told As-Safir.
While President Michel Suleiman believed that the obstacle to government
formation was internal and not external, the Opposition made sure to express
certainty about the "existence of an external knot that is delaying formation of
a government." As-Safir quoted well-informed Opposition circles as asking: What
prevents Hariri from presenting a "compromise formula" such as the
premier-designate would reappoint Aoun's son-in-law Jebran Bassil as
telecommunications minister in exchange for giving up his demand for a key
Cabinet portfolio, an offer likely to be accepted by Aoun. Al-Liwaa newspaper,
meanwhile, uncovered that Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah contacted Aoun
prior to his latest press conference and expressed his desire "not to close the
door in the face of Hariri without being obliged to abandon his demands on
government formation." Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 10:03
Hariri Moves toward Talks with Opposition, Karami Says Aoun
Remarks 'Provocation of Sunnis'
Naharnet/Contacts made by Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri with Opposition
leaders, the first from outside the Opposition triangle – Hizbullah, AMAL and
the Free Patriotic Movement -- broke the deadlock over Cabinet formation. Hariri
has met with Lebanese Democratic Party leader Talal Arslan whose sources denied
that the Sports and Youth Minister has delivered any letter from any political
side.The sources said the Hariri-Arslan meeting at Center House on Wednesday was
agreed upon in advance and before Arslan's visit to FPM leader Michel Aoun on
Tuesday. Another Arslan source told pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat that it was
"time to end the boycott and resume dialogue."He said Arslan accepted Hariri's
invitation regardless of the political bickering between Aoun and the
PM-designate. The source acknowledged that Arslan, together with leadership and
supporters, "feels bitter" about the way he was treated with regards to the
Cabinet lineup. Also Wednesday, Hariri discussed the political situation and
obstacles facing government formation with former Prime Minister Omar Karami.The
two men are scheduled to have lunch together at Hariri's mansion on Thursday.
As-Safir newspaper the Hariri-Karami talks focused on the powers of the prime
minister in the wake of Aoun's latest remarks. It said Hariri believed that
Aoun's demands "hurt the premier-designate and his role" in achieving a
government of national unity.Karami, for his part, said he believed Aoun's
comments were provocation of Sunnis. "Aoun's statement about the presence of
only one president for the state which is the president of the republic provokes
Sunnis in Lebanon," Karami said in remarks published by As-Safir on
Thursday.Hariri also met late Wednesday with Phalange party leader Amin Gemayel.
Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 08:34
Aoun: I will accept Hariri’s invitation if Future stops its lies against us
August 19, 2009
Now Lebanon/Change and Reform bloc leader MP Michel Aoun held a press conference
following his bloc’s weekly meeting in Rabieh on Wednesday saying that he will
accept Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri’s invitation to lunch “if the Future
Movement stops its lies and defamation against us.”He commended Hariri’s “calm
composure,” however, accused the majority of corruption, adding that the March
14 alliance does not want the Free Patriotic Movement to be involved in the
formation of the government because “the movement is against corruption.” Aoun
said that he is convinced the government is being formed in foreign states,
noting the cabinet formation will freeze during the month of Ramadan.“We know
very well which countries do not function during Ramadan,” a reference to Saudi
Arabia, stressing it is questionable that some political leaders tour the Arab
countries, a reference to Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea’s recent visit to
Saudi. Aoun told reporters that reappointing his son-in-law, Telecommunications
Minister Gebran Bassil, in the new cabinet “is not the reason we are delaying
government formation, but rather because we refuse to give into [the majority’s]
requests.”He also said that the Lebanese judicial system is not doing anything
to prosecute the suspects involved in the Barouq internet station incident and
in illegal telecommunications networks.-NOW Staff
The very silly season
August 19, 2009
Now Lebanon
The media calls this time of year the “silly season”. Politicians in Europe and
the US are on their summer recess, while news editors, desperate to fill space,
are forced to run what they call “human interest” stories: “Mouse rescues cat
stuck in tree” or “Villagers queue to worship turnip in the image of the Virgin
Mary”.
Lebanese news gathers have had no such worries this summer. Politics is in full
swing and, although Walid Jumblatt may have stolen the headlines with his
stunning Damascene conversion, the horse trading over the allocation of cabinet
seats has also taken top billing.
Leading the charge is Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) leader Michel Aoun, who is
trying to secure a place in the new government for his son-in-law, the former
telecom minister Gebran Bassil. As far as we can tell, his only achievement has
been to reduce the cost of a mobile phone call, and yet his Aoun, himself no
stranger to overblown historical comparisons, once compared his accomplishments
to that Emir Fakhreddine II.
But the standards of today’s truly mediocre political class and Aoun’s habit to
descend into hilarious hyperbole, the comparison is outlandish. Bassil, after
all, was only doing his job. If today, this is enough to warrant comparisons
with the good and the great of Lebanon’s past then we truly are all sunk in
mediocrity.
To be fair, with the battle for cabinet seats really heating up, it is easy to
see why has chosen to champion Bassil. He and outgoing Interior Minister Ziad
Baroud were the star pupils of the outgoing administration. Aoun has a knack for
being able to tap into the frustrations of his supporters, most of whom have
hitched their fortunes to the unpredictable former army commander because he
rode into town on a ticket that promised change.
Still, Aoun, who has a habit of comparing himself to the great men and women of
world history, should spend less time sprinkling historical stardust on his
family members and spend more time worrying about the ideas some of his allies
are peddling.
Last week, Loyalty to the Resistance bloc MP Mohammad Raad warned that the
proposal to appoint a cabinet of technocrats in the absence of a consensus was
unworkable because such men would be unable to handle the complex political
issues currently facing Lebanon.
Raad should re-examine his motives for entering public life. His statement
highlights the warped priorities of Lebanon’s so-called political elite. Raad
clearly believes that selecting qualified men and women, people who could start
addressing the mountain of malaises Lebanon has accrued since the end of the
war, would send Lebanon to hell in a hand basket; that the daily needs of
Lebanese – the economy, health, education, transport, environment to name a few–
are secondary to consolidating power or fawning to regional masters.
When considering his words, it is worth remembering that an oft-cited example of
a post-war government actually having done something is that one can reach Rafik
Hariri International Airport from the center of Beirut in just under ten
minutes.
This and the new downtown are probably the only memorable achievements of any
government since the end of the 1975-90 civil war (if any of our readers can
list more please feel free to comment). Sure, there have been a few
infrastructure projects, many subsidized by foreign governments, but the fact
that 20 years later our roads are still being rebuilt, water is still rationed
and electricity does not surge through the national grid 24/7 is a woeful
indictment on successive administrations.
Then again Mr. Raad would say that we don’t really understand the complex issues
facing Lebanon today. That takes a man of his caliber.
Possible rivalries overshadow accomplishments of security forces
August 20, 2009 /Now Lebanon
Yesterday was a bad day for criminals in Lebanon. Not only was the man behind
the 1999 murder of four judges caught, but fugitive Fatah al-Islam member
al-Hajj Sleiman was apprehended. The military court also issued arrest warrants
against eight ISF members for negligence leading to Sleiman’s escape.
An-Nahar led with the Army Intelligence’s capture of Palestinian national Wissam
Tohaibesh, supposedly the gunman who walked in to a courtroom in Saida in 1999
and shot four judges during a trial. He was caught at the entrance of the Ain
al-Hilweh camp, off-limits to Lebanese army and police.
The more-covered incident of the day, however, was the arrest of Taha Ahmad
al-Hajj Sleiman in the wooden area near the town of Bsalim by a Lebanese Armed
Forces Commando regiment.
Sleiman had been the only one of a group of eight members of the militant
Palestinian group Fatah al-Islam to escape during a breakout attempt from
Roumieh Prison on Tuesday morning. The inmates apparently used tools smuggled
into the prison inside hollowed-out copies of the Koran to saw off the window
bars of their cell and attempted to scale the wall using a rope of tied-up
blankets. The breakout attempt was foiled only after Sleiman escaped into the
woods.
In the wake of the breakout, many questions began to fly about the state of
Lebanon’s prison system, and about the competence and level of corruption among
prison guards and officials. Interior Minister Ziad Baroud went on the
defensive, shielding himself from attacks by the Lebanese media and politicians
about his performance.
An-Nahar wrote today that “the Roumieh incident highlighted the deep divisions
undermining the General Directorate of the Internal Security Forces amid
questions regarding the method used by the Interior minister to manage the
conflicts among ISF officers.”
The incident revealed an “intense rivalry” that has been simmering for years
between the Lebanese army and police, the paper reported, which politicians and
security leaders have been exploiting.
The paper cited conflicting reports as to which branch of the security system
arrested Sleiman; the LAF had issued a statement whereby “a unit from the
Commando regiment arrested Taha Sleiman,” but some media outlets have reported
that Sleiman was apprehended by the ISF Intelligence.
Regardless of who was behind the arrest, prison guards who were on the job
during the escape attempt are in hot water. Military Investigative Judge Maroun
Zakhour issued on Wednesday arrest warrants against eight ISF members, including
four officers and non-commissioned officers, who were on duty at the Roumieh
Prison during Tuesday’s breakout after Judge Saqr Saqr, the government
commissioner to the Military Court, filed charges against them on account of
neglect.
Those charged were then handed over to Zakhour for interrogation.
ISF Director General Achraf Rifi, for his part, ordered the arrest of Prison
Brigade Commander Brigadier General Elias Saadeh and the warden of Roumieh’s
Building D.
-NOW Staff