LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS
BULLETIN
January 09/08
Bible Reading of the day
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to
Saint Mark 6,34-44. When he disembarked and saw the vast crowd, his heart
was moved with pity for them, for they were like sheep without a shepherd; and
he began to teach them many things. By now it was already late and his disciples
approached him and said, "This is a deserted place and it is already very late.
Dismiss them so that they can go to the surrounding farms and villages and buy
themselves something to eat." He said to them in reply, "Give them some food
yourselves." But they said to him, "Are we to buy two hundred days' wages worth
of food and give it to them to eat?" He asked them, "How many loaves do you
have? Go and see." And when they had found out they said, "Five loaves and two
fish." So he gave orders to have them sit down in groups on the green grass. The
people took their places in rows by hundreds and by fifties. Then, taking the
five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he said the blessing,
broke the loaves, and gave them to (his) disciples to set before the people; he
also divided the two fish among them all. They all ate and were satisfied. And
they picked up twelve wicker baskets full of fragments and what was left of the
fish. Those who ate (of the loaves) were five thousand men.
Free Opinions and Releases
Syria and the
two Michels.By Sami Moubayed. January 08/08
The Arab League can help, but only
the Lebanese can fix their own country-By
The Daily Star. January 08/08
Syrian games without frontiers-ByL Jonathan Spyer.Guardian Unlimited. January
08/08
Latest News Reports From
Miscellaneous Sources for January 08/08
Pope Wishes for 'Free' Lebanese Decisions-Naharnet
Two Rockets Fired into Israel from Lebanon-Naharnet
Israeli Troops Release Kidnapped Lebanese
Shepherd-Naharnet
Two rockets from Lebanon slam into Israel: police-AFP
Militant Leader Releases 1st Web Message-AP
Rocket fired into Israel from Lebanon-CNN
Barak: Hezbollah's rocket arsenal bigger than before
war-Jewish Telegraphic Agency
Fatah al-Islam's
Abssi to Lebanese Army: 'You Will Not Live Safely'-Naharnet
American Critic of
Israel Meets Hizbullah Official-Naharnet
Moussa's Visit is to
Test Arab, Syrian Commitments toward Presidential Elections-Naharnet
Arabs Share Concerns on Iran over
Hizbullah's Growing Power-Naharnet
Barak Warns of Hizbullah's Capabilities-Naharnet
Solana Gives EU Blessing to Election Plan-Naharnet
Syria for 'Lebanese Consensus' on Arab
Initiative and Nasrallah for 'True Partnership'-Naharnet
Ban Urges Lebanese Leaders to Elect
President-Naharnet
Aoun Criticizes 'American-Blessed' Arab
Initiative, Wants Consensus Premier, Veto Powers-Naharnet
Nasrallah Insists on 'True Partnership'-Naharnet
France backs Arab League plan to
end crisis over presidency in Lebanon-Daily
Star
Bush calls for isolating Syria over its role in
'thwarting' vote-AFP
Rival Lebanese leaders welcome
Arab League proposal to elect Suleiman-Daily
Star
Zaki apologizes for burden posed
by Palestinians-Daily
Star
Saudi crown prince hopes
Lebanese will act wisely-Daily
Star
UK daily claims UNIFIL boosting
patrols to intercept Hizbullah's weapons-Daily
Star
AUB Medical Center receives full
JCI accreditation-Daily
Star
Mazen Abboud publishes new book-Daily
Star
Lebanon on alert following bird-flu outbreak in
Israel-AFP
One young Lebanese makes it his
mission to change his country - and the region-Daily
Star
Jewish-American academic
deplores Israel's massacres-Daily
Star
Ban Urges Lebanese
Leaders to Elect President-Naharnet
Syria for 'Lebanese Consensus' on Arab Initiative and
Nasrallah for 'True Partnership'-Naharnet
Moussa Carries Arab
Rescue Plan to Beirut-Naharnet
Samir Franjieh Ridicules Nasrallah's Threats and Places Bets
on Pressuring Syria-Naharnet
France Supports Arab
Initiative-Naharnet
Muslim Spiritual
Leaders Urge Implementation of Arab Initiative-Naharnet
Nasrallah Insists on 'True Partnership'-Naharnet
Iran:
Incident with U.S. Navy was 'normal'-AP
Aoun Criticizes 'American-Blessed' Arab Initiative, Wants ...Naharnet
Formidable obstacles face Arab plan for Lebanon-Reuters
Israeli border incident sparks row with Lebanon-AFP
Israeli troops take Lebanese shepherd in southern Lebanon-Earthtimes
Arab countries share concerns on Iran as Bush heads to Mideast-International
Herald Tribune
Syria for 'Lebanese Consensus' on Arab Initiative and Nasrallah
...Naharnet
Hariri Lauds 'Noble' Arab Stand-Naharnet
American Israeli critic meets senior Hezbollah official, visits
...International Herald Tribune
Standoff Continues on Decision Over Lebanon's Next President-Wall
Street Journal
Jumblatt: Let’s not miss another opportunity for Lebanon-Ya
Libnan
Syria: Palestinian refugees fleeing Iraq still seeking shelter in
...Adnkronos International English
Committee of Jordanian Detainees Sues Syria In UN-MEMRI
The Arab League
can help, but only the Lebanese can fix their own country
By The Daily Star
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Editorial
The latest Arab League initiative aimed at ending the seemingly interminable
crisis in Lebanon has given many reason to believe that a solution is just
around the corner. If the plan does indeed work, it would see the election of a
consensus president and the creation of a unity government in an arrangement
that would finally bestow upon the presidency the necessary clout to be a key
player in Lebanon's political system - and not the lackey of a foreign power, as
has been the case for nearly three decades. But a major challenge would still
remain: how to keep Lebanon's tortured politics from dragging the country into
yet another impasse.
The Arab League's plan addresses this issue by recommending that a new electoral
law be put together as soon as possible, the idea being that sounder mechanisms
will impart greater legitimacy to the eventual victors. That will be a necessary
part of any long-term solution, but it cannot be sufficient unless other
measures are also taken. First and foremost, these must include sweeping reforms
to improve the administration of justice. Only when Lebanon has a truly
independent judiciary can all the other elements that make up a democracy fit
into their proper places.
Elections are a universally recognized symbol for the consent of the governed,
but effective judiciaries are what make this possible. Without a body of jurists
empowered to adjudicate disputes among political rivals, the rights of voters
are little more than curiosities to be used or abused by those who hold or seek
public office. If a political system does not provide and protect space for
judges to ensure the rule of law, everything else it may or may not do is
largely irrelevant.
If and when Lebanon's political establishment can wrap its collective head
around this idea, the speed with which the country can regain stability and
forward momentum is liable to be a pleasant surprise. The Lebanese people have
been through far worse than a year of paralysis, so their indomitable spirit can
be expected to accomplish in months what might otherwise take years. They will
not rebuild to their full capacity, though, unless and until they have reason to
feel that an investment of time, money and effort will be worth it. They need to
see evidence that their leaders - government, opposition, and all those in
between - have understood the need for change and have a plan to bring it about.
Syrian games without frontiers
The involvement of Damascus in Lebanese politics is clearly interference which
the west must now counter to avoid disaster
Jonathan Spyer
January 7, 2008
The ongoing impasse over the appointment of the next Lebanese president, after
Emil Lahoud stepped down on November 24, is the product of Syrian machinations
and interference in Lebanese politics. The agreement reached on Sunday in Cairo
may finally ensure the appointment of General Michel Sleiman as president, but
it is unlikely to bring the crisis in Lebanon to an end. The nature and extent
of Syrian involvement can only be understood in the context of the larger,
region-wide rivalry between US-led and Iranian-led blocs that is shaping and
defining the politics of the region.
Tiny Lebanon is one of a series of theatres in which the complex games of this
rivalry - some call it a new Middle East cold war - are being played out. The
overarching choice now facing the west in Lebanon is between accepting Syria's
right to foment political instability in its neighbour, and adopting vigorous
counter-measures.
Syria had been expected to regard the proposed appointment of Sleiman to the
Lebanese presidency as a significant achievement for its own cause. Sleiman was
appointed to his position during the period of Syrian occupation of Lebanon, and
is well known to the regime. Instead, the Assad regime in Damascus supported
additional opposition demands for prior agreement on the structure of a
government of national unity that would guarantee a third of cabinet seats to
the opposition. This would give Hizbullah veto power over the governmental
decision-making process. In addition, the opposition demanded a government
commitment to electoral reform, and agreement on Sleiman's successor as head of
the army. Granting such demands would represent unconditional surrender on the
part of the Lebanese government.
Syria has thus been pushing either for the granting of Hizbullah veto power over
the Lebanese government, or for a continuation of the standoff, in which no
effective central government is permitted to exist in Beirut at all. The
apparent acceptance by Syria in Cairo on Sunday of a proposed compromise to
settle the issue should be treated with caution. Hizbullah is known to be
unhappy with the proposed Arab League plan, and may well work to torpedo it
(very possibly under Syrian direction).
Underlying Syria's stance is Damascus's determination to prevent the emergence
of the international tribunal to investigate the murder of former Lebanese prime
minister, Rafiq al-Hariri. For this to be achieved, a Hizbullah-led government,
or continued political stalemate, and/or general chaos will do. In support of
the latter goal, Syria is the likely force behind the mysterious assassinations
of a string of prominent pro-government figures in the last 18 months. The
latest to die was Brigadier-General Francois al-Haj, a staunch opponent of
Syrian interference in Lebanon, who had been tipped to succeed Sleiman as chief
of staff.
The boldness of this strategy evidently derives from the Assad regime's
assumption that no serious response from the western and regional backers of the
March 14 government is likely. There is, unfortunately, a considerable body of
evidence to support this assumption.
The recent harsh criticism of Syria by Presidents Bush and Sarkozy
notwithstanding, there is as yet no evidence of a major change of direction in
western thinking regarding Damascus. The dominant view of Syria in western
capitals is that since Damascus has invested heavily in supporting organisations
fomenting instability, it must be offered incentives to induce it to abandon
this investment. Thus, EU aid and technical assistance to Damascus have
continued regardless of Syrian machinations in Lebanon. And the wooing of the
Assad regime by parts of the US establishment is also ongoing - see Annapolis
and the recent visit to the Syrian capital by senator Arlen Specter.
It would be difficult to exaggerate the depth of the political fissure that
divides Lebanon. To take the two-hour drive from downtown Beirut to the border
villages of the Shia south is to pass from one political universe into another.
Two societies based on quite irreconcilable principles currently exist in the
country. The first is a place of enormous entrepreneurial energy and verve. It
is not immune to the political pathologies of the region, but ultimately, the
triumph of the Cedar revolution in 2005 still represents perhaps the only
unambiguous success for the project of spreading something resembling liberty to
the Arabic-speaking world. The second is a closed, Islamist society, whose icons
- displayed everywhere in the south - are Ayatollahs Khomeini and Khamenei, amid
endless reproductions of the visages of Hizbullah fighters killed in the 2006
war with Israel.
Since Hizbullah began its push for power in November 2006, Lebanese society has
been in a state of high tension, looking into the abyss of civil war between
these two very different political cultures. Syria's overt and covert promotion
and support for the zero-sum demands of the opposition makes renewed violence
more likely. If Lebanon falls off the knife-edge and renewed civil strife takes
place, the result will be uncertain, but the process will be without doubt
disastrous. The Saudis - backers of March 14 - are understood to be furious at
the regional role being played by Syria. Druze leader Walid Jumblatt has
rejected in the starkest terms the Hizbullah demand for veto power. Lebanon will
not be handed to the Iran-Syria alliance without a fight.
There are no easy solutions. But appeasement of Syrian - and Iranian -
machinations in Lebanon has produced the current situation. The EU and the US
possess a wide array of options - economic and diplomatic - to put real pressure
on Damascus to back off from its very dangerous stirring of the pot in Lebanon.
It is time for these options to be used.
Can the Arab League solve Lebanon's political crisis?
By Nicholas Blanford | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
The Arab League's secretary-general flies into Beirut this week in an effort to
end the country's presidential stalemate.
By Nicholas Blanford | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
from the January 8, 2008 edition
Reporter Nicholas Blanford talks about the mood of Beirut citizens when it comes
to resolving Lebanon's leadership dilemma.Beirut, Lebanon - Amr Moussa,
secretary-general of the Arab League, is expected in Beirut this week, the
latest high-profile visit here in a string of efforts to solve Lebanon's
six-week presidential deadlock.
He will push for the acceptance of a joint Arab proposal – a plan that supports
the election of Army chief General Michel Suleiman – that was adopted
unanimously Sunday at a meeting of Arab foreign ministers in Cairo. Syria, which
backs the Lebanese political opposition to the Western-supported government,
also approved the plan.
Where Mr. Moussa hopes to succeed, French and other Arab initiatives have
failed.
Lebanon has been without a president since Nov. 23, when the previous incumbent,
Emile Lahoud, left office at the end of his term. New elections have been
delayed largely due to disputes over power-sharing.
Although the Lebanese opposition, spearheaded by the militant Shiite Hizbullah,
has cautiously welcomed the Arab plan, analysts suggest that it could founder as
rivals discuss the finer points in the days ahead.
"The devil is in the details and there are plenty of opportunities to derail the
plan in the future," says Michael Young, opinion editor of the English-language
Daily Star newspaper.
The March 14 coalition, which holds a slim parliamentary majority, gave a more
positive reception to the Arab League proposal than did the opposition. Saad
Hariri, a top March 14 leader, hailed it as "historic and noble."
The proposal calls for the immediate election of General Suleiman,whose
nomination as head of state is supported by both sides; the formation of a
national unity government in which Suleiman would hold the balance of power
through ministers close to him; and the adoption of a new electoral law.
Under the Lebanese Constitution, a new government is formed after the election
of a president. The opposition has blocked Suleiman's election since November,
demanding a prior arrangement on the composition of the next government as well
as key civil service appointments.
Hizbullah demands enough of a share of the next government to allow it to block
any legislation that it deems a threat, such as moves to force the organization
to disband its formidable military wing.
Mohammed Raad, who heads Hizbullah's parliamentary bloc, says a final decision
on the Arab League proposal would depend on subsequent developments. "We don't
want to be pessimistic or block the route to any productive decision, especially
in a complicated matter like the Lebanese issue."
Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a Hizbullah expert at the Carnegie Endowment's Middle East
Center in Beirut, says the Arab League proposal appeared to be an attempt to
"weaken the opposition and corner it. It seems that Hizbullah is not too
thrilled about it and I think that the end result will be that the opposition
will not agree."
Michel Aoun, Hizbullah's main Christian ally in the opposition who harbors
presidential ambitions himself, is also likely to object to the proposal,
analysts say. Granting the balance of power in the next cabinet to Suleiman, a
Maronite Christian, as all Lebanese heads of state traditionally must be, will
significantly weaken Mr. Aoun's political influence.
So why would Syria sign onto a plan that might weaken its Lebanese allies? One
reason, analysts say, is the threat of a boycott of the Arab League summit
scheduled to be hosted by Damascus in March. The summit is a prestigious annual
event attended by Arab heads of state and will boost Syria's credentials in the
region.
According to Lebanon's An Nahar newspaper, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem
was warned on the sidelines of Sunday's Arab League meeting that Saudi King
Abdullah would refuse to attend the March summit if Damascus failed to endorse
the Arab League proposal.
"The Syrians want the summit to be a success," says Sami Moubayed, a Syrian
political analyst, adding that although the Arab League proposal is "not perfect
[for Syria] … it's the closest thing to perfect at this stage."
Still, Mr. Muallem, in Cairo, said that while Syria and Saudi Arabia have agreed
to cooperate on Lebanon, Damascus "cannot put pressure on anyone in Lebanon
because the solution [to the presidential crisis] should be Lebanese."
Some Lebanese analysts interpret Muallem's comment as an attempt to absolve
Damascus of blame should the Lebanese opposition eventually reject the Arab
League proposal and continue holding out for a better deal.
Syria and the two Michels
By Sami Moubayed
DAMASCUS - The long-lasting presidential dilemma in Lebanon is finally on its
way to being solved. The Presidential Office in Lebanon has been empty since the
term of ex-president Emille Lahhoud ended last November 24.
This week, the Arab League called for the immediate amendment of the Lebanese
constitution to enable army commander Michel Suleiman to become president. It
also expanded the powers of the Maronite president by giving him the right to
appoint 10 ministers in the upcoming Lebanese government.
Another 10 would be named by the Hezbollah-led opposition, while the final 10
would be in the hands of the Saudi-US-French
backed March 14 Coalition headed by Saad al-Hariri. The Hariri-led parliamentary
majority would still hold the post of prime minister. Therefore, the top posts
in Beirut would be one anti-Syrian (prime minister), one pro-Syrian (speaker of
Parliament), and one relatively pro-Syrian (the president). The new formula
divides power equally among Lebanese adversaries, without giving major influence
to one party over another.
Some saw this as a coup against the Sunnis of Lebanon, since it gave the
Maronite president more powers than he has ever enjoyed since the signing of the
Taif Accord at the end of the Lebanese civil war in 1989. From where Syria
stands, that is okay as long as one of its allies stands at the Presidential
Palace in Lebanon. Had an anti-Syrian president been in power, that means that
he, and the Hariri-led team, would control 20 seats in the Lebanese government.
Syria would certainly have said "no". That would be too dangerous for the
Syrians since they have always said that they would never tolerate an
anti-Syrian regime in Beirut. It is a fact that the Syrians lost the bulk of
Lebanese Sunnis to Saad al-Hariri after 2005. Those who remain pro-Syrian are
more-or-less, lightweights in Beirut politics. To weaken the Hariri bloc, Syria
did not mind a formula that empowers a Maronite president who is allied to the
Shi'ites. If that is what it takes to take power and decision-making away from
the March 14 Coalition, then so be it. This might explain why Vice President
Farouk al-Shara went to the Vatican roughly two months ago.
At first glance, this formula is not-too-satisfying for Hezbollah and ex-army
commander Michel Aoun, since they were demanding a blocking third of the
cabinet. But that is too ambitious - they have probably realized - and settled
for the second best thing that was offered by the Arab League in Cairo. A
win-win solution, the new formula means that the Hariri-led bloc will be unable
to impose a two-thirds majority on decision-making, but the Hezbollah-led
opposition will not have a one third vote to bloc legislation as well.
The Syrians are beaming at the results - although the March 14 Coalition insists
that this formula was reached only after Saudi Arabia and Egypt exerted immense
pressure on Damascus. Unable to accept that this formula comes out tailor-made
to Syria's interest, they are saying that it was imposed on Syria. They claim
that Syria accepted the resolution only after Saudi Arabia threatened to boycott
the upcoming Arab Summit, scheduled to be held in Damascus in March 2008. That
is not true. This is actually what the Syrians have wanted all along.
During the presidential campaigns in Beirut, Syria made sure to refrain from
saying: "We want Mr X for President." It was very clear, however, that it would
not tolerate a member of the March 14 Coalition. Given the slim chances of
bringing any March 14 candidate to power, due to the veto of Hezbollah and its
ally, General Aoun, the only real candidates for presidential office were Aoun,
Suleiman, Riad Salameh, the governor of the Central Bank of Lebanon, and to a
certain extent, the elderly Michel Edde, who was backed by the Maronite
Patriarch Mar Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir. At the end of the day, the campaign
boiled down to the two Michels: Aoun or Suleiman.
Many in Beirut thought that Syria wanted Aoun. It seemed only logical: Aoun was
allied to Hezbollah and Hezbollah was allied to Syria. That is the impression
Syria gave - without ever saying it. That actually ruined Aoun in his Christian
constituency and was severely used against him by his opponents in March 14.
That was done on purpose. The Syrians actually feared Aoun as president. The man
has a strong anti-Syrian record, and is accredited with the Syrian
Accountability Act that was passed in 2003.
When they were in Beirut, the Syrians prevented him from returning to Lebanon
due to his unwavering criticism of Syria and its then number one ally, prime
minister Rafik al-Hariri. The Syrians do not forget that in the 1990s, Aoun
wrote an open letter to then-US president Bill Clinton, saying: "Even if we [and
the Syrians] are the same people, we don't have the same values, so there is a
big difference between us."
In an interview with Middle East Quarterly in 1996, Aoun was asked if he
dislikes the United States. He replied: "My grandfather and cousins fought in
the American army. My mother was born in the United States, my sister and her
family live in the United States. I studied in the United States. I have never
been against the United States and have always respected Americans, a democratic
people who forward their values and peace, as we do. I cannot be against the
United States; besides, politically, I am linked to American politics."
What can the Syrians expect from someone with such a record? But nevertheless,
he is playing it wisely nowadays because he realizes that the only way to become
a pan-Lebanese leader is to be allied to Christians and non-Christians alike.
Since Hezbollah is a numerical majority, he cannot develop his own presidential
ambitions without them. Likewise, they need a strong Christian patriot with them
to ward off accusations that they are establishing a Shiite Republic in Lebanon.
Who wins and who loses? The Arab League formula produces several winners and
losers in Lebanon.
Winner 1:
The upcoming president Suleiman is certainly a winner, since not only will he
come to power, but he will also have more powers than previous presidents
Lahhoud and Elias Hrawi. By virtue of his post becoming not-so-ceremonial after
all, he will enjoy greater influence in the Lebanese streets, particularly among
Lebanese Christians.
Winner 2: Syria is definitely a winner because it got what it wants, did not
have to change its policies, yet showed the world that it was cooperating on the
Lebanese file.
Winner 3: Hezbollah and its leader Hasan Nasrallah. The military group was
fearful for its fate in case a March 14 president came to power. After all,
prime on his agenda would be implementing UN Resolution 1559, which calls for
the disarming of Hezbollah. He would also honor UN Resolution 1701, passed after
the summer war of 2006, keeping Hezbollah away from the Lebanese-Israeli border.
Even worse, he would rally his 10 ministers rank-and-file behind March 14 in
carrying out the Hariri international tribunal under Chapter 7 of the UN
Charter.
Now with Suleiman as president, this becomes highly unlikely. The new president
is a friend of Hezbollah. He believes in its mission to liberate the Sheeba
Farms from Israel and does not seem to be annoyed by them being a state-within-a
state nor does he feel threatened by the arms they hold. Those arms, he says,
will never be used against the Lebanese.
Loser 1: Michel Aoun. The former army commander was obsessed with becoming
president, in a manner similar to how French President Nicolas Sarkozy once said
that he had been thinking about the presidency in France since he was 17 years
old. Aoun is currently 72 and by the time the next elections take place in 2010
he will probably be too old to run for president.
Loser 2: Iran wanted Aoun for president. It fears a Syrian-US rapprochement via
Suleiman - a formula that brings Syria and the US closer at the expense of
Tehran. In April and May 2007, the Iranians made it clear they were unimpressed
with the Syrian-US meeting in Sharm al-Sheikh or the visit of US House
Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi to Damascus. News of Iranian contempt was
published in the Saudi daily al-Hayat. The Syrians always defended their
alliance with the Iranians. They claimed - and still do - that Washington could
not continue not talking to both Tehran and Damascus.
It has to talk to one of them and Syria is the most likely partner since it is
moderate, reasonable and does not have a history of anti-Americanism. Syria can
talk to the Iranians and get them to moderate their behavior, like it did in
2007 when 15 British sailors were abducted in Iranian waters. Under request from
then-British prime minister Tony Blair, the Syrians helped secure their release.
The Iranians fear Suleiman will be a new link between Damascus and Washington.
This stance is not secure, however, nor is it permanent. It just worries the
Iranians.
Loser 3: The March 14 Coalition. Not only did it not get one of its members as
president. It also had to accept 10 seats being given to the pro-Hezbollah
president, Suleiman. March 14 already considered itself having made a grand
concession by accepting Suleiman in the first place. It now has to tolerate
another two years of someone who will block any anti-Syrian legislation in
Beirut.
The Christians win. The Syrians win. And Hezbollah wins.
Sami Moubayed is a Syrian political analyst.
(Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us
about sales, syndication and republishing.)