LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
April 01/09

Bible Reading of the day.
John 7/6-13 Jesus therefore said to them, “My time has not yet come, but your time is always ready.  The world can’t hate you, but it hates me, because I testify about it, that its works are evil. You go up to the feast. I am not yet going up to this feast, because my time is not yet fulfilled.” Having said these things to them, he stayed in Galilee.  But when his brothers had gone up to the feast, then he also went up, not publicly, but as it were in secret. The Jews therefore sought him at the feast, and said, “Where is he?”There was much murmuring among the multitudes concerning him. Some said, “He is a good man.” Others said, “Not so, but he leads the multitude astray.” Yet no one spoke openly of him for fear of the Jews.

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Iran, Syria Got Indirect U.S. Nuclear Aid.By SIOBHAN GORMAN/Wall Street Journal 31/03/09
What it means to talk with Hamas-By Ben White/Christian Science Monitor 31/03/09
The Obama Administration’s chance to engage in a Middle East peace. by Seymour M. Hersh/New Yorker 31/03/09
Iran, Syria Got Indirect US Nuclear Aid.By: By SIOBHAN GORMAN/Wall Street Journal 31/03/09
U.S. Drops 'War on Terror' Phrase, Clinton Says.By JAY SOLOMON/Wall Street Journal 31/03/09

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for March 31/09
Nayla Tueni Accuses Aoun of 'Radical' Shifts-Naharnet
PSP Denies Jumblat Quitting March 14 Alliance-Naharnet
Tripartite Meeting Discusses Resolution 1701-Naharnet
Raad Speaks against Acts of 'Discrimination and Deprivation'-Naharnet
Kidnapped Lebanese Woman Freed in Venezula after One Month Ordeal-Naharnet
Canada judge upholds ban on British pro-Hamas MP/AP-Haaretz
'Dozens of Israeli jets and drones attacked in Sudan-Haaretz
Teenager Kidnapped for $1.5 Million Ransom-Naharnet
Tripartite Meeting Discusses Resolution 1701-Naharnet
Jumblat Reportedly Threatened Hariri over Ghattas Khoury Candidacy-Naharnet
Majority Seeks Election Strategy, Jezzine is Opposition's Key Obstacle-Naharnet
Amin Gemayel: No Voice for Southern Christians-Naharnet
Aoun Says Self-Made Men Are State-Builders, Slams Tuenis-Naharnet
Consultation Committee Throws Mayors Ball Into Interior Ministry Court-Naharnet
Baroud: I Am Neutral-Naharnet
Suleiman Tells Arabs: Lebanon Now Enjoys State-to-State Dealings with Nations-Naharnet
Phalange Demands Urgent Meeting to Settle Candidacy Issue-Naharnet
March 8 and 14 Enter Decisive Week ahead of April 7 Election Candidates Deadline-Naharnet
Jumblat Stresses 'Lebanon's Arabism,' Denounces Delay in Rebuilding Nahr el-Bared-Naharnet
Tensions rise in Palestinian camps in southern Lebanon-Monsters and Critics.com
Sleiman cites 'urgent need' for regional reconciliation-Daily Star
Siniora lauds diplomatic ties with Syria as 'very significant'-Daily Star
Jumblatt urges Lebanese to abide by principles of Arabism in Taif-Daily Star
Draft law on rents unlikely to pass - Ghanem-Daily Star
Iran offers expertise on labor, social affairs-Daily Star
Army warns citizens not to hunt south of Litani-Daily Star
Memorial honors Chouf leader-Daily Star
US 'committed' to flexible approach to aid programs-Daily Star
Hizbullah vows 'no operations abroad-Daily Star-Daily Star
Beirut probed 226 cases of money laundering in 2008-Daily Star
Lebanon on cusp of lower cell-phone fees, fair distribution-Daily Star
st targets Fatah member in Ain al-Hilweh-Daily Star
AUB lecture to address sustainable energy policies-Daily Star
NGO teaches tolerance to adolescents-Daily Star
Elite pubescent birthday parties adhere to rigidly structured code-Daily Star


Canada judge upholds ban on British pro-Hamas MP
By The Associated Press
A judge on Monday upheld a government order banning an outspoken anti-war British lawmaker from visiting Canada for a speaking tour.
The government refused entry to Parliament member George Galloway on national security grounds, saying he provided money to the Palestinian group Hamas, which is banned in Canada as a terrorist organization. Federal Court Justice Luc Martineau denied a request for an injunction to allow Galloway in to begin his speaking tour. The judge said in a written ruling that he was not willing to exempt Galloway from Canada's Immigrations laws. Galloway vigorously denied any suggestion of terrorism support in a video speech aired to supporters at a Toronto church Monday night, saying he gave money and aid to help the people of Gaza, not for terrorism. "I am not a supporter of Hamas," he said. "But I am a supporter of democracy." Galloway is well known in Britain for his ardent opposition to the U.S.-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. He was recently awarded an honorary Palestinian passport in a secret meeting with Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, whose office released a photo of the two men embracing. In 2005, Galloway created a spectacle on Capitol Hill in Washington by denouncing U.S. senators while testifying before a committee that accused his political organization of receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in U.N. oil-for-food allocations from Saddam Hussein. He denied the allegation. Alykhan Velshi, a spokesman for Canadian immigration minister, said border officials made the decision to bar Galloway on the grounds he is a national security threat, saying he has given financial support to Hamas. In a letter to Galloway, the government said the lawmaker delivered humanitarian goods to war-torn Gaza and gave $45,000 to Hamas. Galloway has called the ban outrageous, saying Canada should support freedom of speech

Dozens of Israeli jets and drones attacked in Sudan'
By Haaretz Service
TIME Magazine on Tuesday cites high-ranking Israeli security officials as saying that dozens of Israeli jets and unmanned drones took part in the January strike on a Gaza-bound weapons convoy in Sudan. According to sources cited in the TIME article, the attacks were carried out by F-16 fighters, which carried out two attack runs on the convoy. F-15 fighter planes were also positioned nearby, a precaution against the possibility of hostile fighters rushing to the area. Once the first bombing run was completed, unmanned drones laden with cameras passed over convoy site to ensure its destruction. After the footage indicated that the party was only partially hit, a second pass was ordered. Since, according to the source, Israel had but a few days to prepare for the strike, from the time the initial Mossad tip-off was received, naval and aerial rescue teams were speedily directed to the Red Sea, ahead of a potential rescue mission, the TIME report said. The sources told TIME that while the Americans were notified of the attack U.S. planes were not directly involved. The article added that contrary to some reports, neither a ship nor a second convoy were attacked. "There was only one raid, and it was a major operation ... [involving] dozens of aircraft," he told TIME. Although similar shipments headed for Gaza were smuggled through Sudan before, the convoy which was attacked was unprecedented in volume, according to TIME. The attack was aimed at warning Iran and another hostile states that Israel possesses the intelligence capability and the willingness to carry out military operations far from her borders.

Hizbullah vows 'no operations abroad'
Resistance group will only defend against 'assaults on our land'
By Mohammed Zaatari /Daily Star staff
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
SIDON: Hizbullah vowed on Monday that it would deter any possible Israeli aggression but would not carry out any military operation outside the country. "We will not carry out any operation outside our Lebanese territories, but we will not accept after today that the Israeli enemy stages any assault against our land," head of Hizbullah's Loyalty to the Resistance parliamentary bloc MP Mohammad Raad said at a funeral in the southern town Sujod. Hizbullah abducted two Israeli troops in July 2006 from the Israeli side of the border, prompting Israel to launch a devastating 34-day war on Lebanon. But Raad stressed that "Israel will pay the price for any possible attack on Lebanon, and will receive the proper response." As for the Western attempts to open dialogue with Hizbullah, Raad said "Hizbullah welcomes this gesture," but "it is a mistake if we assume the United States will abandon Israel for the sake of the Arabs." "The United States' interest is with Israel, and the US foreign policy will not change," he said. Britain announced earlier in March that it is willing to open dialogue with the political wing of Hizbullah, while the United States reaffirmed that it still considers the Lebanese party a terrorist organization. Raad also commented on the parliamentary elections in June, criticizing the attempts of the March 14 Forces to marginalize a large segment of the Lebanese society. Meanwhile, spokeswoman for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) Yasmina Bouziane said Monday that UN peacekeepers were twice intercepted outside their area of operations in south Lebanon over the past 24 hours.
She said the first incident took place Saturday afternoon in Nabatiyeh north of the Litani River when a UNIFIL officer in a UN vehicle lost his way on one of the dirt roads.Bouziane said the officer was stopped by civilian-clothed men, two of them armed, who confiscated his camera, mobile phone and his UNIFIL ID.
She said the officer was not "granted dismissal" before Lebanese intelligence men arrived at the scene and gave him back the confiscated items.
Bouziane said the officer was traveling outside UNIFIL's area of operations, adding that UNIFIL opened an investigation into the incident in collaboration with the Lebanese Army. The second incident, according to Bouziane, took place Sunday morning when a man in civilian clothes stopped a vehicle carrying two UNIFIL peacekeepers on the main Yuhmur-Zillaya road in western Bekaa north of the Litani River.
The UN officers, who were on furlough, were traveling in civilian clothes in a rented car. The civilian man intercepted the UNIFIL officers as they were taking pictures of scenery and ordered them to follow him to a nearby Lebanese army intelligence post. An army vehicle escorted the men back to UNIFIL's area of operations. A laptop, camera, cell phone, map and the two men's IDs were kept, however, at the intelligence position. Bouziane said UNIFIL in cooperation with the Lebanese Army opened an investigation into the incident. - With agencies and Naharnet

Teenager Kidnapped for $1.5 Million Ransom
Naharnet/A 14-year-old student has been kidnapped in Beirut for $1.5 million ransom, news reports said Tuesday. The daily An Nahar said Amin Jihad al-Khansa was abducted on Monday while waiting for a school bus outside his house in Beirut's Ghobeiri – airport highway district. It said Khansa's parents were not aware of the kidnapping until they received a call from an anonymous man at midday, demanding a $1.5 million ransom. The kidnappers threatened with the words "or else" if ransom was not paid. An Nahar said the father thought the call was a joke. To be 100 percent certain, however, he called up the International College, where his son attends intermediate classes, to find out that Amin did not show up that day. He called up Amin's bus driver only to get this answer: Amin was not waiting as usual to be picked up. It was at this point that the kidnapped boy's father realized his son had been abducted. He informed police of the kidnapping and immediate investigation showed that the anonymous caller used a public telephone booth in the eastern Bekaa Valley to make his call. Beirut, 31 Mar 09, 08:15

Tripartite Meeting Discusses Resolution 1701
Naharnet/A tripartite meeting was held between officials from the Lebanese army, UNIFIL Commander Maj. Gen. Claudio Graziano and Israeli military representatives at a U.N. base near the area of Ras al-Naqoura on Monday, UNIFIL spokeswoman Yasmina Bouziane said. The officials discussed the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1701, particularly violations of the U.N.-drawn Blue Line to avoid any incident in the border area, Bouziane said in a press release. The issue of the border village of Ghajar and the marking of the Blue Line were also discussed, she added. Beirut, 31 Mar 09, 13:38

Jumblat Reportedly Threatened Hariri over Ghattas Khoury Candidacy
Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat has reportedly threatened to withdraw from the majority March 14 camp if MP Saad Hariri continued to back the candidacy of former lawmaker Ghattas Khoury to one of three Maronite seats in the Shouf district.
The daily As Safir on Tuesday quoted parliamentary sources in the March 14 coalition as saying that Jumblat's threat came following receiving information that Khoury intended to launch his election campaign on Sunday. The sources said preparations were underway for the event as Khoury accompanied Hariri on his visits to Britain and Belgium.
The problem was aggravated when Jumblat observed "unusual movement" by activists known for their close ties with Hariri in the Shouf and Iqlim al-Kharroub region, according to the sources.
It was at this point that Jumblat asked: "Is what Ghattas Khoury doing the work of Qoreitem or is it from abroad?"
"Has he (Khoury) decided to open up his own shop?" Jumblat reportedly asked sarcastically.
As Safir said Jumblat spoke in an angry tone when he telephoned Hariri while he was in Saudi Arabia on Friday.
The daily said Hariri swiftly responded, promising Jumblat that he would deal with Khoury's issue urgently.
Hariri's wishes did not match Khoury's, the paper said.
It said Khoury informed Hariri about his rejection to abide by the agreement between Jumblat and the Mustaqbal Movement leader.
As Safir said Hariri at this point informed Mustaqbal media outlets to refrain from mentioning Khoury in any news article.
Khoury, meanwhile, reportedly told visitors that he felt "betrayed."
"This is not the first time that he (Hariri) makes promises and does not keep them," Khoury reportedly told visitors in Beirut.
"Does Walid beik want to finish off what the Syrians had started -- marginalizing the role of Christians in Lebanon?" asked Khoury furiously.
As Safir said Khoury moved ahead with his election campaign anyhow, distributing assistance to residents in the Shouf.
Meanwhile, local media said an overnight meeting was held between Jumblat and National Liberal Party leader Dory Chamoun to discuss electoral lists in the Shouf district. The meeting was also attended by MP Marwan Hamadeh and PSP Secretary Sharif Fayyad. Beirut, 31 Mar 09, 10:02

Majority Seeks Election Strategy, Jezzine is Opposition's Key Obstacle
Naharnet/As an April 7 election candidates deadline approaches, there is no clear picture yet as to how alliances in Lebanon's two major camps are taking shape.
The daily An Nahar on Tuesday said the ruling March 14 coalition was already engaged in consultations on drawing up an election strategy.
MP Butros Harb said that the majority's consultations will remain open until the nominations in all districts are finalized. "Some of the districts can be settled before April 7, while other districts could take longer due to competition," Harb told the Voice of Lebanon radio station. Meanwhile, the daily Al Liwa said Speaker Nabih Berri will likely demand a Shiite seat in Jbeil for his AMAL Movement, if Gen. Michel Aoun insisted on a Shiite seat in the southern suburbs. Pan-Arab daily Al Hayat, in turn, said the opposition is likely to finalize the list of election candidates sooner than March 14 forces. It said the opposition has gone a long way in settling the controversy over the names of its candidates in religiously mixed areas under the influence of Hizbullah, Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement and AMAL. Al Hayat said the only obstacle seemed to be Jezzine, adding that a settlement is likely in the offing following an agreement between Berri and Aoun to allow Hizbullah find an exit to the crisis related to the Catholic seat. Beirut, 31 Mar 09, 09:17

Amin Gemayel: No Voice for Southern Christians
Naharnet/Phalange Party leader Amin Gemayel expressed his belief that Christians from south Lebanon do not have a voice, adding that his only electoral goal in the south is the defense of the "presence, dignity, and coexistence" of the area's residents. In a gathering of party members and supporters from the areas of Marjayoun-Hasbaya and Bint Jbeil on Tuesday Gemayel criticized what he considers ongoing injustices toward people in the south and suggested there be a future law that would give southern Christians more say in elections. He assured that the Phalange Party does not distinguish between Christians from Beirut and those from other areas of the country and described the party as national and not electoral. The prominent Christian political figure also called for a private Phalange meeting to deal with various issues surrounding the party and the south. Gemayel later met with National Liberal Party leader Dory Chamoun at Phalange party headquarters in Saifi to discuss electoral concerns. Beirut, 31 Mar 09, 13:04

Aoun Says Self-Made Men Are State-Builders, Slams Tuenis
Naharnet/MP Gen. Michel Aoun on Monday showered praise on deputy premier and candidate Issam Abou Jamra placing him among "self-made" men who he said are the real force behind state-building as opposed to "spoilt brats."In a play on words, Aoun said "self-made men (in Arabic issam-i-youn) - especially those who are named Issam (the struggle to build oneself) - are much more essential than the sons (and daughters) of prominent families." He was referring to Abou Jamra who is the Change and Reform bloc's parliamentary nominee for the Orthodox seat in Ashrafiyeh in Beirut's first district.
"They (self-made men) are the ones who build states as opposed to spoiled brats who were born with a spoon of gold in their mouths," Aoun said after a weekly meeting of his bloc. Aoun defended Abou Jamra's nomination in Beirut saying the latter was a public figure and thus represents "the entire Orthodox sect and all Lebanese regions." He said Abou Jamra's candidacy carries "a symbolism of its own. The nomination should be awarded to someone reputed for his positions and (personal) strength." Aoun expressed "hopelessness" with the majority which he said is "dodging regulations" and called on all politicians to "shoulder their responsibilities." "If the Lebanese want to build a state then no one from the majority should be allowed back in parliament," he said, accusing it of being behind a rising deficit in state budget. "They intend to destroy the economy. We want to ensure production growth and they want growth of deficit. Now they are heralding news of a significant rise in the new budget's deficit," he complained. Asked to comment on statements by candidate Nayla Tueni, Aoun said: "I will not respond to Nayla Tueni … I do not answer to youngsters. "Her political education is limited and that was why I advised her not to rush into the elections." The FPM leader also described slain MP and An Nahar General Manager Gebran Tueni as a man of "seasonal" principles. Beirut, 30 Mar 09, 19:35

Consultation Committee Throws Mayors Ball Into Interior Ministry Court
Naharnet/The justice ministry's legislation and consultation committee said that the interior ministry should decide whether it is necessary for a mayor to travel abroad to carry out his tasks. After receiving several complaints, Interior Minister Ziad Baroud asked the committee last month to assess the legality of mayors performing their duties outside their geographical areas for election purposes. The committee, however, told Baroud on Monday that his ministry should decide whether there is a necessity for a mayor to travel to perform his task, which should be set by the ministry. Minority officials, who met last week under Free Patriotic Movement leader Gen. Michel Aoun, raised a list of complaints about the conduct of the ruling March 14 coalition before Baroud. One of the complaints was the travel abroad of mayors with the purpose of taking the fingerprints of Lebanese expatriates who support March 14 forces. Beirut, 31 Mar 09, 10:54

Baroud: I Am Neutral
Naharnet/Interior Minister Ziad Baroud said Monday he was not politically biased and dismissed as false statements that claim otherwise.
"I do not belong to any party. I am neutral and (statements) that say otherwise are false," he said during a meeting with Press Federation head Melhem Karam.
"I am at an equal distance from everybody. I do not have relatives (among parliamentary candidates). Personally, I will not be running in the polls," Baroud said.
He stressed on "delicate nature" of the current phase as the country gears up for the June 7 polls. "At least 200,000 IDs have been handed out to citizens recently," he said, adding that some "30,000 security monitors will be deployed before, during and after the elections to ensure the calm we need." Beirut, 30 Mar 09, 20:03

Suleiman Tells Arabs: Lebanon Now Enjoys State-to-State Dealings with Nations
Naharnet/Lebanon now enjoys state-to-state relations with Arab countries after Lebanese-Syrian bilateral ties were back on the right track, President Michel Suleiman said on Monday at the opening of the Arab summit in Doha. Suleiman praised both Qatar and the Arab League for ending "the state of disunity that had prevailed in Lebanon" last year. In 2008, Qatar brokered an agreement among rival Lebanese political leaders ending a months-old political lock jam and bloody conflict in the country. "We can witness remarkable progress in the Lebanese situation starting with the election of the president through consensus, the creation of a national unity government …," he told Arab leaders. Since the Doha agreement, bilateral ties between Lebanon and Syria "returned to the right track, and were crowned by the establishment of diplomatic relations," he said in reference to the opening of the first ever embassies in both countries.
"Lebanon's dealings with Arab, regional and international states now take place on a state-to-state basis via the presidency, state apparatuses and organs," Suleiman said. On a separate note, the Lebanese leader urged participants to "boost Arab investments in Lebanon." As the world grapples with an international financial crisis, the Central Bank's "wise financial policy" was able to regain trust in Lebanon's banking sector and served as a "positive guarantor" for investors, he said.
He reminded the participants that Lebanon still faces a series of challenges, such as recovering Israeli-occupied land, combating terrorism, implementing of Resolution 1701, ensuring the Palestinian right of return to their homeland and the inauguration of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. He expressed faith that the Arab nations will continue to provide Lebanon with the needed support in the "political and economic sectors."On the Arab front, Suleiman said Lebanon "places special importance on a Palestinian accord." He expressed concern over the continuous inter-Palestinian tension. "Arab reconciliation is now an urgent need especially in light of the Arab consensus over the peace initiative launched in Beirut" during the 2002 Arab League summit. Beirut, 30 Mar 09, 18:32

Phalange Demands Urgent Meeting to Settle Candidacy Issue
Naharnet/The Phalange party on Monday called for an urgent meeting of the March 14 coalition to settle the issues of candidacies and alliances ahead of an April 7 deadline. In a statement at the end of a regular meeting, the Phalange party denounced what it called a "provocative attempt" targeting the house of Phalange party leader Amin Gemayel in Bikfaya. Security forces last Tuesday night defused an explosive device in a vehicle parked near Gemayel's home in Bikfaya and arrested its Syrian driver. The statement said the incident was a "message of intimidation" that was directed to the Phalange party and its leadership. Beirut, 30 Mar 09, 20:31

March 8 and 14 Enter Decisive Week ahead of April 7 Election Candidates Deadline
Naharnet/A few days to go before the general election write-in candidates filing deadline, Lebanon's two major camps were trying to iron out the remaining obstacles holding up the completion of the electoral tickets. The daily An Nahar on Monday said an agreement is not likely to be reached soon, particularly since the ruling March 14 forces have not made up their mind about candidates in several electoral constituencies.
It said March 14 is looking forward to a meeting this week at the level of its leaders to smooth out obstacles delaying completion of its lists in "sensitive areas."
On the opposition side, An Nahar said Hizbullah, too, even if the process of choosing candidates in the Bekaa as well as in north and south Lebanon is well under way, has not cut a deal yet with its allies – Speaker Nabih Berri and Gen. Michel Aoun -- in religiously mixed areas.
The daily said Hizbullah has also made no progress in clearing snags facing its mediation efforts between Berri and Aoun.
In view of this, well-informed sources ruled out the birth of election tickets for both camps before mid-April, knowing that the candidate withdrawal deadline ends April 21. Meanwhile, Tashnag party announced the names of five candidates for the upcoming legislative elections, paving the way for an Armenian participation following the 2005 boycott of the polls. "The party is reaffirming its decision to fully participate in the elections through candidacy and through voting in all districts, in a reversal of its 2005 boycott of the polls in Beirut," Tashnag secretary general Hovig Mekhitarian told a press conference in Burj Hammoud before naming the contenders.
Tashnag, however, did not touch on the names of its allies to the electoral alliances. The move though is likely to uncover Tashnag's alliances soon based on its union with Aoun, yet without closing negotiation doors with MP Michel Murr and the Phalange Party in the Metn region. Jamaa Islamiya, or the Islamic Grouping, also announced the names of three candidates -- Rami Dergham in Tripoli, Asaad Harmoush in Dinniyeh and Mohammed Hawshar in Akkar. Well-informed sources said the move is a sign of progress in consultations over the anticipated alliances in these constituencies, particularly between MP Saad Hariri and Najib Mikati. For his part, March 14 general secretariat coordinator Fares Soaid announced his candidacy in the district of Jbeil.  "Those who prevailed in the face of the Syrian intelligence services and Lebanese-Syrian security apparatuses will not be intimidated by your attempt to take hold of decision-making" in the district of Jbeil, Soaid said in reference to Hizbullah's electoral campaigns in Metn, Kesserwan, Jbeil and Batroun over the past ten days. Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat refused to respond to a question about the launch of former MP Ghattas Khoury's election campaign, saying: "No comment … The day will come when I will speak about it." Asked whether his Shouf list would include a member of the Bustani family in line with the traditions, Jumblat told the daily As Safir that in view of his alliance with March 14, he may be compelled to exclude "this friendship" from the upcoming elections. Beirut, 30 Mar 09, 08:47

Jumblat Stresses 'Lebanon's Arabism,' Denounces Delay in Rebuilding Nahr el-Bared
Naharnet/Democratic Gathering head Walid Jumblat has said that Lebanon needs to concentrate on the provisions of the Taef Accord, particularly Lebanon's Arab identity.Lebanon needs to "refocus on the guarantees of the Taef Accord, particularly on the issues of Lebanon's Arabism," Jumblat noted in his weekly submission to al-Anbaa newspaper published on Tuesday. He went on to say that many slogans "such as civil society" have been "failed" to achieve their higher objective, this is why only the "Arab identity protects Lebanon." He also criticized campaigns from both March 8 and March 14, stressing that "service of the people is the first gauge of success," adding that "the comfortable leather seats under the dome of parliament are not for prestige but rather for true representation." The Progressive Socialist Party leader also denounced the delay in rebuilding the Palestinian refugee camp Nahr el-Bared for what he called "illogical and incomprehensible reasons." He also praised the steadfastness of the residents of Gaza during the current blockade of the coastal strip. Jumblat also lashed out at politicians who seem to "have forgotten or ignored that the Taef Accord stipulates truce with Israel, which would mean freezing the state of war without entering into [a state of] peace." He added that there is not much difference between the new Israeli government and previous ones. Beirut, 30 Mar 09, 16:15

Sleiman cites 'urgent need' for regional reconciliation
By Nafez Qawas /Daily Star correspondent
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
DOHA: President Michel Sleiman reiterated his calls for the establishment of an Arab unified and comprehensive strategy to face challenges in the region, mainly Israeli threats. Addressing Arab leaders at the Arab Summit on Monday in Doha, Sleiman said: "Arab reconciliation is an urgent need; it is necessary to reach an agreement over an Arab comprehensive strategy to face the current challenges, in particular Israeli challenges and the legitimate right for the resistance."
Sleiman also stressed the need to find a comprehensive and sustainable solution for the Palestinian cause.
Lebanon "places special importance on a Palestinian accord," the Lebanese president said, expressing his concern over "the continuous inter-Palestinian tensions."
Concerning Lebanese internal issues, Sleiman said Lebanese-Syrian bilateral ties were back on the right track and thanked both Qatar and the Arab League for ending "the state of disunity that had prevailed in Lebanon" last year.
In 2008, Qatar brokered a deal among rival Lebanese political leaders, which put an end to a political impasse and violent clashes in Beirut and the Chouf.
"We have witnessed remarkable progress on the Lebanese internal arena, starting with the election of the president through consensus, the establishment of a unity government, in addition to promoting state institutions and spreading an atmosphere of peace," Sleiman said. He added that bilateral ties between Lebanon and Syria "returned to normal after the establishment of diplomatic ties" and exchange of embassies.
Commenting on Lebanon's economic situation, Sleiman praised the Central Bank's "wise financial strategy," which he said was able to preserve the trust in Lebanon's banking and financial sectors despite the world financial crisis. He also called on Arab leaders to "promote Arab investments in Lebanon," saying that the banking sector In Lebanon was a "guarantor" for foreign and Arab investments. Sleiman said Lebanon was still facing "a series of challenges," such as recovering Israeli-occupied land, fighting terrorism, implementing Resolution 1701 and ensuring the Palestinian right of return to their homeland," but added that he was confident Arab nations would continue to provide Lebanon with the needed support in the "political and economic sectors."

Siniora lauds diplomatic ties with Syria as 'very significant'
Daily Star staff
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
BEIRUT: Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said in comments Monday that diplomatic ties between Syria and Lebanon were "very significant" but stressed that Syria must regard Lebanon as an "independent" country. In an interview with Ash-Sharq al-Awsat daily published Monday, he called for reconciliation between Syria and Lebanon on the Saudi-Syrian model and praised the recent steps toward establishing diplomatic ties as "very significant" but cautioned that further steps remain.
He indicated that both countries benefit from these diplomatic exchanges but insisted that "Syria must ... work with [Lebanon] and respect it as an independent country." On Sunday, President Michel Sleiman described Lebanese - Syrian ties as "excellent," adding that Arab reconciliations reflected positively on Lebanon.
Upon his arrival in Doha to take part in the Arab summit Monday, Sleiman met with Syrian President Bashar Assad.
"We discussed subjects of mutual interest and the issues that would be discussed in the Arab summit," Sleiman told reporters following the meeting.
"Lebanon's relations with Syria are deep: we are strongly tied to Syria historically, geographically and economically, but establishing diplomatic relations is necessary to tackle administrative issues," he added. Sleiman also spoke about the issue of border demarcation with Syria, saying: "We agreed on this issue with the Syrians before the establishment of diplomatic relations."Regarding the upcoming June 7 legislative polls, Siniora said "all sides have an interest in holding the elections ... with calm, without problems," adding that the "240 hours" until nominations must be finalized was a long period of time.
After the elections, regardless of the outcome, the prime minister said he would welcome a national unity government but was adamant that the government "should abandon the idea of the blocking third, since it is a bad option." Ahead of the Arab summit in Doha, Siniora told Ash-Sharq al-Awsat that the meeting would be "a good first step" for Arab rapprochement." He went on to say that "the Arab scene witnesses much divergence [but the summit] is an opportunity to depart from conflicts and disputes." The premier said Lebanon was "the state that benefits most when Arab cooperation prevails." - The Daily Star

Jumblatt urges Lebanese to abide by principles of Arabism in Taif
Aoun insists 'no one in current majority should be re-elected'
By Therese Sfeir /Daily Star staff
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
BEIRUT: Progressive Socialist Party (PSP) leader MP Walid Jumblatt reiterated on Monday his calls for the implementation of the Taif Accord, saying that the Lebanese should seek to abide by the principles of Arabism stipulated in the agreement. Jumblatt has been stressing in recent statements to the media the need to preserve good relations with Syria and to revive the Taif Accord, which put an end to the 1975-90 Civil War.
Lebanon needs to "refocus on the guarantees of the Taif Accord, particularly on the issues of Lebanon's Arabism," Jumblatt said in his weekly statement to PSP Al-Anbaa newspaper to be published Tuesday. He added that many slogans stipulated in the Taif, "such as civil society," have "failed" to achieve their higher objective, stressing that only Arab identity could protect Lebanon.
The PSP leader criticized campaigns launched by the March 8 and March 14 Forces, saying that "service of the people is the first gauge of success."
"The comfortable leather seats in Parliament are not for prestige but rather for true representation of the people," he said. Jumblatt said some politicians "have forgotten or ignored that the Taif Accord stipulate truce with Israel, which would mean freezing the state of war without entering into [a state of] peace."
Commenting on Monday's Arab summit in Doha, Jumblatt praised a Saudi initiative launched at the gathering "which stressed the necessity of dialogue as the only means to resolve Arab political disputes." Meanwhile, the head of the Reform and Change parliamentary bloc, MP Michel Aoun, said that if the Lebanese "want to build a state, no one in the current majority should be re-elected."
During a news conference following the bloc's weekly meeting Monday, Aoun said that "the Lebanese people are frustrated with the current majority, because of their unclear positions ... the current ruling system and the current majority should be changed."
Aoun added that Deputy Prime Minister Issam Abu Jamra "represents all the Greek Orthodox in the Cabinet, and we have chosen him to run for a seat in Beirut's first district during the upcoming parliamentary elections so that the capital can be represented by a strong man such as himself."
"We asked Nayla Tueni not to run in the elections, because of her lack of political experience," Aoun said. Aoun had called on Beirut's Greek Orthodox seat candidate Nayla Tueni to withdraw from the elections, saying that she had no political experience "whatsoever." In response, Tueni said Aoun violated the basic principles of democracy. The FPM leader said he would not reply to "children." "How can Beirut be represented by people who haven't said a word about corruption?" he asked. Commenting on the media campaign launched by the Future Movement, Aoun said: "Future Movement leader MP Saad Hariri should talk to people about decreasing taxes rather than addressing them through advertisement billboards." He also accused the current parliamentary majority of "seeking to make the public debt even larger, while we want to increase national production."
Separately, opposition figures met in Damascus to discuss the upcoming elections, An-Nahar newspaper said Monday.
According to An-Nahar, the meeting was called for by Speaker Nabih Berri's Amal Movement and was attended by head of the Council of the South Qabalan Qabalan representing Berri; Sana Skaff, representing Agriculture Minister Elias Skaff; former Deputy Prime Minister Elie Ferzli, former Minister Abdel-Rahim Mrad, as well as other figures. In a separate development, Interior Minister Ziyad Baroud was quoted as saying that he was not siding with a party against the other in the upcoming parliamentary elections. "I am neutral and I stand at an equal distance from all parties," Baroud was quoted by Journalists Union head Melhem Karam.
He added: "I am not running in the polls and none of my relatives is an electoral candidate."
Meanwhile, Hizbullah number two Sheikh Naim Qassem stressed the importance of the upcoming parliamentary elections in "maintaining the path of the resistance and granting Lebanon a new experience by putting an end to corruption and foreign ambitions in Lebanon."
"International and regional atmospheres contribute to more internal unity, especially after the US and Israel were defeated," he added.
Meanwhile, the Phalange Party called for an urgent meeting of the March 14 Forces' leaders in order to "decide on the candidates and alliances."
In a statement on Monday, the party stressed the need to hold the elections "in atmospheres of solidarity" between all the March 14 Forces.

Iran, Syria Got Indirect U.S. Nuclear Aid
By SIOBHAN GORMAN
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123845791330271707.html
WASHINGTON -- Four countries designated by the U.S. as terrorism sponsors, including Iran and Syria, received $55 million from a U.S.-supported program promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy, according to a report by Congress's investigative arm.
Iran received more than $15 million from 1997 to 2007 under the International Atomic Energy Agency's Technical Cooperation program, according to the Government Accountability Office report set to be released Tuesday. An additional $14 million went to Syria, while Sudan and Cuba received more than $11 million each, it said.
The U.S. is the largest funder of the United Nations body's program and provided $20 million in 2007, or about a quarter of the budget, the report said.
The Technical Cooperation program funds some projects with a direct connection to nuclear energy, but many other projects it funds have no such link. Recent examples include projects to improve livestock productivity and eradicate the tsetse fly in Africa.
The GAO said it was concerned that some of the projects could provide expertise useful both for peaceful purposes and for the development of nuclear-weapon capabilities. The U.S. Energy Department, which reviews these proposed projects for the State Department, examined 1,565 such proposals between 1998 and 2006 and found that 43 of them had some degree of proliferation risk. The IAEA approved 34 of them, the report found.
Iran says it is developing nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes, but the U.S. fears it is seeking a nuclear weapon. Syria is under investigation for alleged covert nuclear activities, and U.S. officials have said a Syrian site bombed by Israel in 2007 was a nuclear facility.
U.S. oversight of the IAEA program is weak, the report said. Officials at the State and Energy departments often know only the titles of proposed projects, it said. The State Department division dedicated to monitoring the program shrank in 2005 by two-thirds to five employees.
A top IAEA official at the Technical Cooperation program told the GAO that the program aims to engage as many countries as possible and "there are no good countries and there are no bad countries," the report said. The IAEA also said confidentiality agreements often prevent it from providing details about the projects for which countries are seeking aid.
IAEA spokesman Peter Rickwood said he wasn't able to reach an official to comment before press time. A State Department spokeswoman said she couldn't comment because she hadn't had time to review the report. Sen. Daniel Akaka, a Democrat from Hawaii who requested the report, said he is troubled by the findings. "Just knowing the title of a project alone is insufficient," he said.
The report recommends Congress prohibit the State Department from funding projects in countries that sponsor terrorism, but the State Department opposes this. In a written response to the report, State officials said withholding U.S. money wouldn't stop the programs from being funded and would discourage other countries from fulfilling obligations.
Write to Siobhan Gorman at siobhan.gorman@wsj.com

U.S. Drops 'War on Terror' Phrase, Clinton Says
By JAY SOLOMON
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123845123690371231.html
THE HAGUE -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the Obama administration has stopped using "war on terror," breaking with the Bush administration's terminology in describing the conflict with al Qaeda and militant Islam.
"The administration has stopped using the phrase, and I think that speaks for itself," Mrs. Clinton told reporters as she traveled here for a United Nations-led conference on Afghanistan.
The phrase has been criticized as having inflammatory connotations in the Muslim world. Some Democratic officials believe it is better to describe more specifically whom the U.S. is fighting, such as al Qaeda or the Taliban.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrives at Schiphol Airport, Netherlands on Monday, ahead of a U.N.-sponsored conference on the future of Afghanistan.
Mrs. Clinton made her remarks in response to reporters' questions. Asked whether there was a specific policy decision on the terminology, she said: "I haven't gotten any directive about using it or not using it. It's just not being used."
Looking ahead to the one-day conference Tuesday, Mrs. Clinton said she expects Iran to work more closely with the international community in combating Central Asia's spiraling narcotics trade as a result of Tehran's participation in the meeting.
Mrs. Clinton and Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Medhi Akhundzadeh are among 72 delegation heads expected to attend.
The conference will mark one of the highest-level diplomatic engagements between American and Iranian officials since the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran, although Mrs. Clinton said she doesn't know whether she will speak directly to Mr. Akhundzadeh or other Iranian diplomats. President Barack Obama has repeatedly stressed his desire to engage with Tehran, both to negotiate an end to its nuclear program as well as to stabilize international hot spots such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon.
Mrs. Clinton said she will pledge $40 million Tuesday to support Afghanistan's elections in August. The U.S. is also seeking more support in fighting al Qaeda and the Taliban. Mrs. Clinton said the U.S. won't seek formal troop or funding commitments. "The real goal [of the conference] is to raise the international commitment to Afghanistan," she told reporters traveling with her to the Netherlands on Monday.
Mrs. Clinton said the Obama administration wants to work with Iran and other nations to bolster Afghanistan's border security, monitor the financial flows of drug trafficking and help Afghan farmers move away from opium cultivation.
Iran has reacted cautiously to Mr. Obama's overtures, which included a direct address to the Iranian people earlier this month. U.S. officials acknowledged that Iran's sending of Mr. Akhundzadeh, rather than Foreign Minister Manouchechr Mottaki, signaled Tehran's ambivalence over direct negotiations with Washington. Officials said Mr. Obama may send a direct letter to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to begin formal talks.
Write to Jay Solomon at jay.solomon@wsj.com

What it means to talk with Hamas
Engaging it is fundamentally about accepting (perhaps uncomfortable) facts.
By Ben White
Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0330/p09s01-coop.html
March 30, 2009 edition
Sao Paulo, Brazil - March 2009 may come to be seen as a critical month in the ending of the international community's isolation of Hamas. Finally engaging Hamas would spell the end of hypocritical Western policy and bring the peace process in line with the realities of the Middle East.
First, a group of high-level US foreign policy officials, past and present, went public with their recommendation that the Obama administration talk to Hamas. Coincidentally, European politicians who visited Hamas officials in Syria about the same time echoed that view.
Typically, meetings between European lawmakers and Hamas leaders are conducted discretely, if not entirely in secret. Now, the trips have begun to be publicized: In March there were trips by a cross-party group of British and Irish members of parliaments, as well as their counterparts from Greece and Italy.
There was also an open letter to President Obama, published on March 10, and signed by more than 120 experts and academics. The letter urged a change of US policy in the Middle East. Significantly, the signatories advocated an end to the US "fear of Islamist parties coming to power," and also urged prioritizing human rights over supporting the region's autocrats.
Originally, the rationale behind isolating Hamas (a social and political movement condemned by many in the West as a terrorist group) was to weaken the organization and force a change in policy vis-a-vis the armed struggle and Israel, while simultaneously supporting the Ramallah-based leadership of Mahmoud Abbas. The international boycott emerged in parallel with the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip that began post-Palestinian parliamentary elections in early 2006. The aim: Punish the civilian population into rethinking their choice, and make a Hamas government untenable.
But the attempt to sideline Hamas has not worked. Hamas is no weaker for the cold-shoulder from diplomats, and, in fact, has been able to use the siege to deflect criticism of its policies in the Gaza Strip. The West Bank "moderates" dominated by Fatah have little to show for their negotiations with Israel; rather, the colonization of the occupied territories continues.
Consequently, the anti-Hamas united front is starting to crack. European politicians have been independently visiting Hamas leaders in Syria, and urging a rethink in the position of the so called Quartet of the US, the UN, the EU, and Russia. The appeals to Obama represent this shift in approach, reflective of both how the current policy has failed, and how engaging Hamas will be beneficial.
Ending the isolation of Hamas would strike a blow to hypocritical foreign policy – a small but important step toward changing the way the US and international community relate to Middle East politics. After Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman's success at the polls, Quartet envoy Tony Blair said that "We've got to work with whoever the Israeli people elect"– a courtesy not yet offered to the Palestinians.
Israel's propagandists have tried to use Hamas's increased power in recent years to their benefit by placing the movement at the centre of the debate, presenting the group as an extremist, Iran-sponsored existential threat to the Jewish state. Yet Hamas has only been around for 20 years; Israel conquered the occupied territories in 1967, while Palestinians were originally expelled from their homes more than 60 years ago.
Thus to engage Hamas is to acknowledge that the movement is not integral to the conflict, but neither is it peripheral nor ignorable. It has grown into a powerful social and political force, with a tendency toward prioritizing the pragmatism of political power. The oft-cited Charter – rightly condemned as anti-Semitic, but penned in 1988 by one person – has become increasingly insignificant; the discourse of ceasefires, truces, and national liberation typically trumps inflexible religious doctrine.
But engaging Hamas is fundamentally about accepting (perhaps uncomfortable) facts. Hamas was democratically elected and continues to enjoy considerable support from Gazans. It's important to ask not just why it got such substantial backing in 2006, but why it continues to despite the ongoing Israeli siege and the devastation wreaked in the December war, as well as the cases of human rights abuses by Hamas personnel.
The lesson is that the Palestinian people saw through the flaws of the international community's approach to the conflict long before a few voices in foreign capitals started raising questions about the wisdom of isolating Hamas. In the Middle East, the international community's self-defined moderate/extremist division is but a transparent charade.
The peace process game, the vacuous endorsements of a two-state solution as Israel absorbs the occupied territories, the lack of will to hold Israel to account – this is the fuel for Hamas support, and no amount of "isolation" can change the profound unpopularity of current US and Quartet policies among Palestinians.
Ending the boycott would not be an endorsement of Hamas, but an end to the obtuse – and damaging – refusal to recognize reality.
Ben White is a freelance writer, specializing in the Middle East. His articles appear in a wide variety of publications and his forthcoming book, "Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner's Guide" will be published later this year.

Syria Calling The Obama Administration’s chance to engage in a Middle East peace.

by Seymour M. Hersh

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/04/06/090406fa_fact_hersh

April 6, 2009

When the Israelis’ controversial twenty-two-day military campaign in Gaza ended, on January 18th, it also seemed to end the promising peace talks between Israel and Syria. The two countries had been engaged for almost a year in negotiations through intermediaries in Istanbul. Many complicated technical matters had been resolved, and there were agreements in principle on the normalization of diplomatic relations. The consensus, as an ambassador now serving in Tel Aviv put it, was that the two sides had been “a lot closer than you might think.”

At an Arab summit in Qatar in mid-January, however, Bashar Assad, the President of Syria, angrily declared that Israel’s bombing of Gaza and the resulting civilian deaths showed that the Israelis spoke only “the language of blood.” He called on the Arab world to boycott Israel, close any Israeli embassies in the region, and sever all “direct or indirect ties with Israel.” Syria, Assad said, had ended its talks over the Golan Heights.

Nonetheless, a few days after the Israeli ceasefire in Gaza, Assad said in an e-mail to me that although Israel was “doing everything possible to undermine the prospects for peace,” he was still very interested in closing the deal. “We have to wait a little while to see how things will evolve and how the situation will change,” Assad said. “We still believe that we need to conclude a serious dialogue to lead us to peace.”

American and foreign government officials, intelligence officers, diplomats, and politicians said in interviews that renewed Israeli-Syrian negotiations over the Golan Heights are now highly likely, despite Gaza and the elections in Israel in February, which left the Likud Party leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, at the head of a coalition that includes both the far right and Labor. Those talks would depend largely on America’s willingness to act as the mediator, a role that could offer Barack Obama his first—and perhaps best—chance for engagement in the Middle East peace process.

A senior Syrian official explained that Israel’s failure to unseat Hamas from power in Gaza, despite the scale of the war, gave Assad enough political room to continue the negotiations without losing credibility in the Arab world. Assad also has the support of Arab leaders who are invested in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani,* the ruler of Qatar, said last month when I saw him in Doha that Assad must take any reasonable steps he can to keep the talks going. “Syria is eager to engage with the West,” he said, “an eagerness that was never perceived by the Bush White House. Anything is possible, as long as peace is being pursued.”

A major change in American policy toward Syria is clearly under way. “The return of the Golan Heights is part of a broader strategy for peace in the Middle East that includes countering Iran’s influence,” Martin Indyk, a former American Ambassador to Israel, who is now the director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, at the Brookings Institution, said. “Syria is a strategic linchpin for dealing with Iran and the Palestinian issue. Don’t forget, everything in the Middle East is connected, as Obama once said.”

from the issuecartoon banke-mail thisA former American diplomat who has been involved in the Middle East peace process said, “There are a lot of people going back and forth to Damascus from Washington saying there is low-hanging fruit waiting for someone to harvest.” A treaty between Syria and Israel “would be the start of a wide-reaching peace-implementation process that will unfold over time.” He added, “The Syrians have been ready since the 1993 Oslo Accords to do a separate deal.” The new Administration now has to conduct “due diligence”: “Get an ambassador there, or a Presidential envoy. Talk to Bashar, and speak in specifics so you’ll know whether or not you’ve actually got what you’ve asked for. If you’re vague, don’t be surprised if it comes back to bite you.”

Many Israelis and Americans involved in the process believe that a deal on the Golan Heights could be a way to isolate Iran, one of Syria’s closest allies, and to moderate Syria’s support for Hamas and for Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite group. Both Hamas and Hezbollah are listed as terrorist organizations by the U.S. State Department. There is a competing view: that Assad’s ultimate goal is not to marginalize Iran but to bring it, too, into regional talks that involve America—and perhaps Israel. In either scenario, Iran is a crucial factor motivating each side.

These diplomatic possibilities were suggested by Senator John Kerry, of Massachusetts, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, who met with Assad in Damascus in February—his third visit since Assad took office, in 2000. “He wants to engage with the West,” Kerry said in an interview in his Senate office. “Our latest conversation gave me a much greater sense that Assad is willing to do the things that he needs to do in order to change his relationship with the United States. He told me he’s willing to engage positively with Iraq, and have direct discussions with Israel over the Golan Heights—with Americans at the table. I will encourage the Administration to take him up on it.

“Of course, Syria will not suddenly move against Iran,” Kerry said. “But the Syrians will act in their best interest, as they did in their indirect negotiations with Israel with Turkey’s assistance—and over the objections of Iran.”

President Assad was full of confidence and was impatiently anticipating the new Administration in Washington when I spoke to him late last year in Damascus. Trained as an ophthalmologist, partly in London, he took over the Presidency in 2000, after the death of his father, Hafez Assad, who amassed enormous personal power in thirty years of brutal rule. Bashar had not expected a life as the Syrian leader—his older brother, Basil, who was killed in an accident in 1994, had been groomed to replace their father. Bashar, thirty-four when he became President, was said to be a lesser figure than either of them. He has since consolidated his position—both by modernizing the economy and by suppressing domestic opposition—and, when we spoke, it was clear that he had come to relish the exercise of power.

Assad said that if America’s leaders “are seeking peace they have to deal with Syria and they have to deal with our rights, which is the Golan Heights.” In the Six-Day War, in 1967, Israel seized the Golan Heights, about four hundred and fifty square miles of territory that is rich in Biblical history and, crucially, in water. It includes part of the Jordan River Valley and a plateau overlooking the river which extends to Mt. Hermon, in the north. Syria was left with no access to the Sea of Galilee and the upper Jordan River. Roughly twenty thousand Israeli settlers live there, and they have built towns, vineyards, and boutique hotels in its valleys and strategic heights.

Assad said, “The land is not negotiable, and the Israelis know that we are not going to negotiate the line of 1967.” But he suggested that compromises were possible. “We only demarcate the line,” he said. “We negotiate the relations, the water, and everything else.” Many who are close to the process assume that an Israeli-Syrian settlement would include reparations for the Israelis in the Golan Heights, and, for a time, the right of access to the land. Assad said, “You discuss everything after the peace and getting your land. Not before.”

If Israel wants a settlement that goes beyond the Golan Heights, Assad said, it will have to “deal with the core issue”—the situation in the West Bank and Gaza—“and not waste time talking about who is going to send arms to Hezbollah or Hamas. Wherever you have resistance in the region, they will have armaments somehow. It is very simple.” He added, “Hezbollah is in Lebanon and Hamas is in Palestine. . . . If they want to solve the problem of Hezbollah, they have to deal with Lebanon. For Hamas, they have to deal with Gaza. For Iran, it is not part of the peace process anyway.” Assad went on, “This peace is about peace between Syria and Israel.”

In his e-mail after the Gaza war, Assad emphasized that it was more than ever “essential that the United States play a prominent and active role in the peace process.” What he needed, Assad said, was direct contact with Obama. A conference would not be enough: “It is most natural to want a meeting with President Obama.”

If the Netanyahu government is to trade land for peace, it needs to be assured of domestic political support—and help from Washington. In September, 2007, Israel destroyed what it claimed was a potential Syrian nuclear-weapons reactor during a cross-border raid, an action that won the approval of the Israeli public. (Syria insisted there was no reactor on the site.) At the time, the two countries were already laying the groundwork for the indirect negotiations. In December, 2008, Ehud Olmert, who was then Prime Minister, flew to Ankara, Turkey, and conducted more than five hours of intense talks on the return of the Golan Heights, with the mediation of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who was often in direct telephone contact with Bashar Assad. But Olmert’s standing was tarnished, both inside Israel, by a series of criminal investigations that led to his resignation (he has denied any wrongdoing), and outside Israel, by the Gaza war, which began days after he left Ankara.

Netanyahu’s coalition government will include, as Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, the head of the Israel Beytenu Party, who has argued for a measure, aimed at Israeli-Arabs, requiring citizens to take loyalty oaths or forfeit many of their rights, and has rejected any land-for-peace agreement with Syria (though he is open to trading other territories); and, as Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, the Labor Party leader, who has consistently supported talks with Syria. Current opinion polls indicate that the majority of Israelis do not support a full withdrawal from the Golan Heights. Netanyahu himself—in what was widely seen as a plea for votes—declared two days before the elections that he would not return the Golan Heights.

Daniel Levy, a senior fellow at the New America Foundation, who served on Israeli peace delegations in 1995 and 2001 and also as an adviser to Prime Minister Barak, said that Netanyahu “may have huge coalition problems, not least within his own Likud Party,” and that he “may have to publicly disavow any land-for-peace agreement, given his political position. Can the Syrians swallow that? If they can’t, it means that the only option left will be secret talks.” Levy added, “Barak’s appointment does not change the fundamental dynamics of the coalition, but it means that Bibi [Netanyahu] has a Defense Minister who will be on board for dealing with Syria, who wants to deal with Syria—and who also will be on board for doing it in secret.”

Itamar Rabinovich, a former Israeli Ambassador to Washington, who was Israel’s chief negotiator with Syria under Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and informally advises his government on Syrian issues, argued that the war in Gaza had not changed Israel’s essential interest in a Golan Heights settlement: “Gaza is Gaza, and I say that Bashar Assad definitely wants to go ahead with the talks. And he may find a partner in Bibi Netanyahu. Bibi would prefer to make a deal with Syria rather than with the Palestinians.”

But if the talks are to proceed, Rabinovich said, “they will have to be transformed to direct negotiations.” This would require the support and involvement of the Obama Administration. Rabinovich said that he thought Obama, like Netanyahu, “after weighing the pros and cons, will see a Golan Heights settlement as being more feasible” than a deal with the Palestinians. “The talks are serious, and there is a partner.”

The former American diplomat, who is an expert on the Golan Heights, said that it would take between three and five years to evacuate Israelis living there. “During that time, if there is a party moderating the agreement—the U.S., perhaps—it would be necessary for that party to stay engaged, to make sure that the process stays on course,” he said. This factor may explain why Assad wants the U.S. involved. “The key point is that the signing of an agreement is just the beginning—and third parties are needed to reinforce the agreement.”

Obama’s Middle East strategy is still under review in the State Department and the National Security Council. The Administration has been distracted by the economic crisis, and impeded by the large number of key foreign- and domestic-policy positions yet to be filled. Obama’s appointment of former Senator George Mitchell as his special envoy for Middle East diplomacy, on January 22nd, won widespread praise, but Mitchell has yet to visit Syria. Diplomatic contacts with Damascus were expanded in late February, and informal exchanges with Syria have already taken place. According to involved diplomats, the Administration’s tone was one of dialogue and respect—and not a series of demands. For negotiations to begin, the Syrians understood that Washington would no longer insist that Syria shut down the Hamas liaison office in Damascus and oust its political leader, Khaled Meshal. Syria, instead, will be asked to play a moderating role with the Hamas leadership, and urge a peaceful resolution of Hamas’s ongoing disputes with Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The Syrians were also told that the Obama Administration was reëvaluating the extent of Syria’s control over Hezbollah. (The White House did not respond to requests for comment.)

The United States has been involved in negotiations over the Golan Heights before, notably those brokered by Bill Clinton in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, in 2000. Those talks, despite their last-minute collapse over border disputes, among other issues, provided the backbone for the recent indirect negotiations. Martin Indyk, who advised Clinton at Shepherdstown, said that those talks were about “territory for peace.” Now, he said, “it’s about territory for peace and strategic realignment.”

During the long campaign for the White House, Obama often criticized Syria for its links to terrorism, its “pursuit of weapons of mass destruction,” and its interference in Lebanon, where Syria had troops until 2005 and still plays a political role. (Assad dismissed the criticisms in his talk with me: “We do not bet on speeches during the campaign.”) But Obama said that he would be willing to sit down with Assad in the first year of his Presidency without preconditions. He also endorsed the Syrian peace talks with Israel. “We must never force Israel to the negotiating table, but neither should we ever block negotiations when Israel’s leaders decide that they may serve Israeli interests,” he said at the annual conference, last June, of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). “As President, I will do whatever I can to help Israel succeed in these negotiations.”

The differences between Obama’s Syria policies and those of the Administration of George W. Bush have attracted relatively little attention. In December, 2006, the Iraq Study Group called for direct talks with Syria. In a speech soon afterward, Bush explained why he disagreed. “I think it would be counterproductive at this point to sit down with the Syrians, because Syria knows exactly what it takes to get better relations,” he said. The President then provided a list: stop its support for Hamas and Hezbollah; stop meddling in Lebanon; coöperate in the investigation of the murder, in 2005, of Rafik Hariri, Lebanon’s former Prime Minister; and stop serving as “a transit way for suicide bombers heading into Iraq.” (The Bush Administration accused Syria of failing to monitor its long border with Iraq, and, last October, staged a raid into Syria, killing eight people, one of whom was said to be a senior Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia operative. A huge number of Iraqi refugees have also fled to Syria, straining the economy.) Bush added dismissively, “When people go sit down with Bashar Assad, the President of Syria, he walks out and holds a press conference, and says, ‘Look how important I am. People are coming to see me; people think I’m vital.’ ”

An official who served with the Bush Administration said that late last year the Administration thought it was unrealistic to engage Syria on the Golan Heights. “The Bush view was, if we support the talks, with no preconditions, what are we going to say to our supporters in Lebanon who are standing up to Hezbollah? ‘You stood up to Hezbollah’—and where are we?”

Assad noted late last year that the Bush White House did not “have to trust me, because they are not involved in peace anyway. . . .They created a lot of problems around the world and they exacerbated the situation in every hot spot [and] made the world more vulnerable to terrorism. This is the most important thing,” he said. “Nobody can say the opposite.”

As the Bush era wound down, U.S. allies were making their own openings to Syria. In mid-November, David Miliband, the British Foreign Secretary, distressed the White House by flying to Damascus for a meeting with Assad. They agreed that Britain and Syria would establish a high-level exchange of intelligence. Vice-President Dick Cheney viewed the move by Britain—“perfidious Albion,” as he put it—as “a stab in the back,” according to a former senior intelligence official.

In his e-mail, Assad praised the diplomatic efforts of former President Jimmy Carter. “Carter is most knowledgeable about the Middle East and he does not try to dictate or give sermons,” Assad said. “He sincerely is trying to think creatively and find solutions that are outside the box.” Carter’s calls for engagement with Hamas have angered many in Israel and America. In “We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land,” published in January, Carter described Syria as “a key factor in any overall regional peace.” Last December, Carter visited Syria, and met not only with President Assad but with Khaled Meshal, the Hamas leader.

A senior White House official confirmed that the Obama transition team had been informed in advance of Carter’s trip to Syria, and that Carter met with Obama shortly before the Inauguration. The two men—Obama was accompanied only by David Axelrod, the President’s senior adviser, who helped arrange the meeting; and Carter by his wife, Rosalynn—discussed the Middle East for an hour. Carter declined to discuss his meeting with Obama, but he did write in an e-mail that he hoped the new President “would pursue a wide-ranging dialogue as soon as possible with the Assad government.” An understanding between Washington and Damascus, he said, “could set the stage for successful Israeli-Syrian talks.”

The Obama transition team also helped persuade Israel to end the bombing of Gaza and to withdraw its ground troops before the Inauguration. According to the former senior intelligence official, who has access to sensitive information, “Cheney began getting messages from the Israelis about pressure from Obama” when he was President-elect. Cheney, who worked closely with the Israeli leadership in the lead-up to the Gaza war, portrayed Obama to the Israelis as a “pro-Palestinian,” who would not support their efforts (and, in private, disparaged Obama, referring to him at one point as someone who would “never make it in the major leagues”). But the Obama team let it be known that it would not object to the planned resupply of “smart bombs” and other high-tech ordnance that was already flowing to Israel. “It was Jones”—retired Marine General James Jones, at the time designated to be the President’s national-security adviser—“who came up with the solution and told Obama, ‘You just can’t tell the Israelis to get out.’ ” (General Jones said that he could not verify this account; Cheney’s office declined to comment.)

Syria’s relationship with Iran will emerge as the crucial issue in the diplomatic reviews now under way in Washington. A settlement, the Israelis believe, would reduce Iran’s regional standing and influence. “I’d love to be a fly on the wall when Bashar goes to Tehran and explains to the Supreme Leader that he wants to mediate a bilateral relationship with the United States,” the former American diplomat said, referring to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

An Israeli official acknowledged that his government had learned of “tensions between Syria and Iran in recent months.” Before Gaza, he said, there had been a noticeable change in the Syrian tone during informal contacts—“an element of openness, candor, and civility.” He cautioned, however, “You can move diplomatically with the Syrians, but you cannot ignore Syria’s major role in arming Hamas and Hezbollah, or the fact that it has intimate relations with Iran, whose nuclear program is still going forward.” He added, with a smile, “No one in Israel is running out to buy a new suit for the peace ceremony on the White House lawn.”

Martin Indyk said, “If the White House engages with Syria, it immediately puts pressure on Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah.” He said that he had repeatedly sought, without success, to convince the Bush Administration that it was possible to draw Syria away from Iran. In his recent memoir, “Innocent Abroad,” Indyk wrote, “There is a deep divergence between Iran and Syria, captured in the fact that at the same time as Iran’s president threatens to wipe Israel off the map, his Syrian ally is attempting to make peace with Israel. . . . Should negotiations yield a peace agreement, it would likely cause the breakup of the Iranian-Syrian axis.” When we spoke, he added, referring to Assad, “It will not be easy for him to break with Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran, but he cannot get a peace deal unless he does. But, if he feels that things are moving in the Middle East, he will not want to be left behind.”

Thomas Dine, who served as the executive director of AIPAC in Washington for thirteen years, said, “You don’t have to be Kissingerian to realize that this is the way to peel the onion from Iran.” Dine went on, “Get what you can get and take one step at a time. The agenda is to get Syria to begin thinking about its relationships with Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah.” A Pentagon consultant said, “If we ever really took yes for an answer from Syria, the Iranians would go nuts.”

The official Syrian position toward Iran, which Assad repeated to me, is that Iran did not object to the Golan Heights talks, on the principle that any return of sovereign land was to be applauded: “They announced this publicly . . . and I went to Iran and I heard the same.” But there is some evidence that the Syrians may be, in Dine’s terms, reassessing the relationship. The senior Syrian official said that an opening to the West would bring the country increased tourism, trade, and investment, and a higher standard of living—progress that would eventually make it less reliant on Iran. If Israel then attacked Iran, he asked, “what will Syria do?” His answer was that Syria wouldn’t do more than condemn the attack. “What else could we do?”

In an interview in Berlin, Joschka Fischer, the former German Foreign Minister, who has continued to closely monitor Middle Eastern affairs, argued that the Iranians would “have to make a public move” after a settlement. “Yes, they will react to an Israeli-Syria deal, because they do not want to be isolated, and do not want to lose their last ally to the West.” In other words, serious regional diplomacy could be possible.

However, Alastair Crooke, a former British intelligence officer who operated in the Middle East and later served as an adviser to the European Union and a staff member for a fact-finding committee on the Middle East headed by Mitchell, said that the new Administration should not assume that Bashar Assad could be separated easily from Iran, or persuaded to give up support for Hamas and Hezbollah. “Bashar now has enormous standing in the Arab world, and it comes from these pillars—he was among the first to oppose the American war in Iraq and his continued support for Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas,” Crooke said. “He cannot trade the Golan Heights for peace with Israel, and cut off his allies. What Syria can do is offer its good standing and credentials to lead a comprehensive regional settlement.” But, he said, “the Obama Administration is going to make it really painful for Syria. There will be no bouquets for Syria.”

He went on, “The real goal of Assad is not necessarily an agreement on the Golan but to begin to engage America and slice away the American demonization of his state.” The changed political landscape in Israel would complicate this process for the Syrians. He said, “They’re starting all these processes to break their isolation and change their strategy. It’s going to be bloody difficult for them to manage this.”

Robert Pastor, a former National Security Council official who has visited Damascus with former President Carter, similarly said that he believed the Syrians had no intention of ending their relationship with Iran. “The Syrians want bilateral talks with Washington and they also want America to be involved in their talks with Israel on the Golan Heights,” Pastor said. “They also believe their relationship with Iran could be of help to the Obama Administration. They believe they could be a bridge between Washington and Tehran.”

Khaled Meshal, the leader of Hamas, works in an office in a well-protected, tranquil residential area of Damascus. In recent years, he has met privately with Jewish leaders and Americans. Meshal is seen by Israel as a sponsor of suicide bombers and other terrorist activity. In 1997, he survived a botched assassination-by-poisoning attempt by Israeli intelligence which Netanyahu, then the Prime Minister, had ordered. Under pressure from Jordan and the U.S., the Israelis handed over the poison’s antidote, saving Meshal’s life.

Speaking through a translator, Meshal said that he believed that the Iranians would not interfere with negotiations between Israel and Syria, although they were not enthusiastic about them. Meshal also said he doubted that Israel intended to return the Golan Heights to Syrian control. But, he said, “If we suppose that Israel is serious, we support the right of Syria to negotiate with Israel to attain its legitimate rights.”

Hamas’s presence in Damascus had, he knew, been a contentious issue in Syria’s relations with both the United States and Israel. “Bashar would never ask us to leave,” he said. “There are some who believe that Hamas would react defensively to an agreement, because of our presence in Syria. But it does not make a difference where our offices are. We are a street movement and our real power is inside Palestine, and nothing can affect that. We are confident about Bashar Assad, and we would never risk being a burden to him. . . . We can move at any time, and move lightly. The Hamas movement will not work against the interests of any other country, and any agreement can be concluded, whether we like it or not. But, also, we don’t want anyone to interfere in our affairs.”

Farouk al-Shara, the Vice-President of Syria, was, as Foreign Minister, his nation’s chief negotiator at Shepherdstown. When he was asked whether Syria’s relationship with Iran would change if the Golan Heights issue was resolved, he said, “Do you think a man only goes to bed with a woman he deeply loves?” Shara laughed, and added, “That’s my answer to your question about Iran.”

There are other impediments to a new relationship between the United States and Syria, including the still unresolved question of who killed Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese Prime Minister, who was assassinated in February, 2005. Years of investigation have produced no criminal charges. The Bush Administration suggested that the Syrians were at least indirectly responsible for Hariri’s death—he had been a sharp critic of Syria’s involvement in Lebanon—and it wasn’t alone; Hariri’s murder exacerbated tensions between Syria and France and Saudi Arabia. But the case is clearly less important to French President Nicolas Sarkozy than it was to his predecessor, Jacques Chirac, who was close to Hariri. (“This was personal for Chirac, and not political,” Joschka Fischer said.) An adviser to the Saudi government said that King Abdullah did not accept Assad’s assurances that he had nothing to do with the murder. But there has recently been a flurry of renewed diplomatic contacts between Damascus and Riyadh.

One issue that may be a casualty of an Obama rapprochement with Syria is human rights. Syrians are still being jailed for speaking out against the policies of their government. Sarah Leah Whitson, the Middle East director for Human Rights Watch, said that Assad “has been offering fig leafs to the Americans for a long time and thinks if he makes nice in Lebanon and with Hamas and Hezbollah he will no longer be an outcast. We believe that no amount of diplomatic success will solve his internal problems.” The authorities, Whitson said, are “going after ordinary Syrians—like people chatting in cafés. Everyone is looking over their shoulder.”

Assad, in his interview with me, acknowledged, “We do not say that we are a democratic country. We do not say that we are perfect, but we are moving forward.” And he focussed on what he had to offer. He said that he had a message for Obama: Syria, as a secular state, and the United States faced a common enemy in Al Qaeda and Islamic extremism. The Bush White House, he said, had viewed the fundamentalists as groups “that you should go and chase, and then you will accomplish your mission, as Bush says. It is not that simple. How do you deal with a state of mind? You can deal with it in many different ways—except for the army.” Speaking of Obama, he said in his e-mail, “We are happy that he has said that diplomacy—and not war—is the means of conducting international policy.”

Assad’s goal in seeking to engage with America and Israel is clearly more far-reaching than merely to regain the Golan Heights. His ultimate aim appears to be to persuade Obama to abandon the Bush Administration’s strategy of aligning America with the so-called “moderate” Arab Sunni states—Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan—in a coördinated front against Shiite Iran, Shiite Hezbollah, and Hamas.

“Of course, the Iranians are nervous about the talks, because they don’t fully trust the Syrians,” Itamar Rabinovich said. “But the Assad family does not believe in taking chances—they’re very hard bargainers. They will try to get what they want without breaking fully from Iran, and they will tell us and Washington, ‘It’s to your advantage not to isolate Iran.’ ” Rabinovich added, “Both Israel and the United States will insist on a change in Syria’s relationship with Iran. This can only be worked out—or not—in head-to-head talks.”

The White House has tough diplomatic choices to make in the next few months. Assad has told the Obama Administration that his nation can ease the American withdrawal in Iraq. Syria also can help the U.S. engage with Iran, and the Iranians, in turn, could become an ally in neighboring Afghanistan, as the Obama Administration struggles to deal with the Taliban threat and its deepening involvement in that country—and to maintain its long-standing commitment to the well-being of Israel. Each of these scenarios has potential downsides. Resolving all of them will be formidable, and will involve sophisticated and intelligent diplomacy—the kind of diplomacy that disappeared during the past eight years, and that the Obama team has to prove it possesses. ♦

*Correction, March 30, 2009: The name is Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, not Sheikh Hamid bin Khalifa al-Thani, as originally stated.

British MP loses bid to enter Canada

Galloway to appear at speaking event by video after Federal Court denies request for injunction

COLIN PERKEL AND ALLISON JONES

The Canadian Press

March 30, 2009

TORONTO — A court decision Monday upholding a ban on George Galloway from entering the country amid allegations he engaged in terrorist acts will see the British MP deliver speeches to Canadian audiences via a live video link from New York.

Following the Federal Court ruling, organizers of Mr. Galloway's now aborted speaking tour said the maverick politician would not attempt to enter Canada.

“We're not interested in doing anything illegal whatsoever,” said James Clark, a peace activist and one of the speaking tour's organizers.

“Our expectations were such that we were already implementing Plan B, which was to make sure that he can still deliver the speech from a live broadcast.”

The Canada Border Services Agency advised Mr. Galloway, in a letter dated March 20, that he had been deemed inadmissible to Canada on the grounds he allegedly engaged in terrorist activities.

The MP has denied such links although he has openly voiced support for the Palestinian cause and was part of a group that delivered financial and other assistance to Gaza.

Mr. Galloway and supporters asked Federal Court on Sunday for an emergency injunction allowing him to come, pending the possibility of a judicial review of the government's position.

However, Justice Luc Martineau ruled Monday he was not in a position to allow Mr. Galloway into the country although he did say there were “serious issues to be tried” if the judicial review occurs.

“The arguments raised by the applicants are not frivolous or vexatious,” Martineau ruled. “However, a proper factual record and the benefit of full legal argument . . . are lacking at the present time.”

The decision represented a “partial victory” in that the court did recognize there was a serious issue at stake, Mr. Clark said.

“We want to pursue and examine all the questions that have come up about how and why the (border agency) preemptorily issued this ruling of inadmissibility to Mr. Galloway,” Mr. Clark said.

Mr. Galloway planned to deliver his speeches to Toronto, Mississauga, Ont., Montreal and Ottawa this week from a studio in New York City.

In the letter to Mr. Galloway, the government said he had given $45,000 to Hamas, which is a banned terrorist organization in Canada.

Under Canada's Anti-Terrorism Act, it is an offence to knowingly participate in or contribute to any activity of a terrorist group.

His supporters say Mr. Galloway had given money to the head of the government in Gaza but not to the head of Hamas, even though they are the same person.

Canadian Jewish Congress CEO Bernie Farber said the fact Mr. Galloway would still broadcast what he had to say showed that free speech was not at stake.

In a release, the congress said Canadians understand that “fundraising for international terrorism puts us all at risk here at home.”

 “Canada must not be regarded as a piggybank for international terrorist financiers like George Galloway,” the release stated.

 Mr. Clark called the suggestion that Mr. Galloway was soliciting Canadian donations to support terrorism “absurd.”

 The money raised by the events will go toward organizing them, logistics for the video feeds for Galloway, and a possible legal challenge.

“Beyond that, we are unapologetic if we do decide to fundraise for the people of Gaza,” Mr. Clark said.

“It's not illegal in this country or around the world to raise funds for humanitarian relief.”

About 500 people filled a downtown church for the broadcast of the speech Monday. Tickets were $15 with a discount for students and seniors.

The government, in its letter to Mr. Galloway, did not make the allegation that he was coming to Canada to raise funds for terrorism.

The British legislator is no stranger to controversy.

In 2007, the British Parliament's lower house suspended him based on accusations he concealed his financial dealings with deposed Iraqi president Saddam Hussein's government.

Mr. Galloway was suspended for 18 days following an investigation which found that a charity he set up was partly funded by the now-executed Iraqi dictator.

He accused his opponents of hypocrisy, saying none of the political parties in the House had ever asked people who gave them money where it came from.

In 2005, Mr. Galloway created a spectacle on Capitol Hill by denouncing U.S. senators while voluntarily testifying under oath before the committee. He called the panel of senators a “lickspittle Republican committee” and accused them of “the mother of all smoke screens.”

After he was expelled from the Labour party for urging British soldiers not to fight in Iraq, Mr. Galloway formed his own party, Respect, and won re-election to the Commons in 2005.

:1 After these things, Jesus was walking in Galilee, for he wouldn’t walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill him. 7:2 Now the feast of the Jews, the Feast of Booths, was at hand. 7:3 His brothers therefore said to him, “Depart from here, and go into Judea, that your disciples also may see your works which you do. 7:4 For no one does anything in secret, and himself seeks to be known openly. If you do these things, reveal yourself to the world.” 7:5 For even his brothers didn’t believe in him.