LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
July 15/08

Bible Reading of the day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew 10,34-42.11,1. Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. For I have come to set a man 'against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's enemies will be those of his household.' Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take up his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me. Whoever receives a prophet because he is a prophet will receive a prophet's reward, and whoever receives a righteous man because he is righteous will receive a righteous man's reward. And whoever gives only a cup of cold water to one of these little ones to drink because he is a disciple--amen, I say to you, he will surely not lose his reward." When Jesus finished giving these commands to his twelve disciples, he went away from that place to teach and to preach in their towns.

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Lebanon: Time for Peace With Israel-Middle East Times 14/07/08
The Jihadist Movements’ Dual Nature and U.S. Policy after U.S. Elections. Dr. Walid Phares 14/07/08
Only vigilance will protect Lebanon against its ruling elite- The Daily Star 14/07/08
Spotlight on Israel and Syria at Paris summit-Financial Times 14/07/08
Defying US, Hezbollah stronger than ever-By: By Tom Perry -Reuters 14/07/08
Lebanese army seeking to retake Shaba Farms.Mavireck 14/07/08

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for July 14/08
Hizbullah Radar-Guided Missile Base in Sannine-Naharnet
Ban: No Trial Date Set in Hariri Case-Naharnet
Suleiman for Military Force to Liberate Shebaa if Diplomatic Efforts Fail-Naharnet
Lebanese Maronites unite to welcome Patriarch-Special Broadcasting Service
Sfeir Warns against Foreign Meddling, Says Situation Not Promising-Naharnet
Key Events in Relations Between Lebanon and Syria-Naharnet
Sfeir Warns against Foreign Meddling, Says Situation Not Promising-Naharnet
Germany Demands 'Action, Not Words' from Syria-Naharnet
Hizbullah Received Final Report on Fate of 4 Iranians Kidnapped in Lebanon-Naharnet
Suleiman to Visit Damascus Soon in Response to Assad Invitation-Naharnet
EU Welcomes Syria, Lebanon Embassy Deal as Important Step-Naharnet
French Veterans Oppose Assad's Bastille Day Presence-Naharnet
Lebanon and Syria For Diplomatic Ties after 64 Years of Independence-Naharnet
Sleiman and Assad agree to exchange embassies-Daily Star
Sarkozy trumpets birth of Union for the Mediterranean-AFP
Sarkozy due in Damascus by mid-September-AFP
French slam Syria's President Bashar al-Assad over Lebanon-Telegraph.co.uk
Israel concerned Hizbullah will attack after prisoner swap-Jerusalem Post
Israel-Hezbollah prisoner swap set for Wednesday-Reuters
Arad's family given new photos, letters but no final answers-Ha'aretz
Syria comes in from the cold at Mediterranean summit-AFP
43 nations to seek Middle East free of WMDs-The Associated Press
New ministers voice commitment to help Lebanon overcome challenges-Daily Star
Hizbullah decorates South in anticipation of prisoner swap-AFP
Syrian-Lebanese diplomatic ties prove nothing, analysts say-AFP
Beirut index mirrors activity on political front as stocks recoup losses on news of Cabinet-Daily Star
Port of Beirut: safe harbor in a stormy economy-Daily Star
World Vision marathon looks to breach Beirut's sectarian rifts-Daily Star
Secular Quebec 'perfect example' for Lebanon-Daily Star
NDU president tells 900 graduates to stick together-Daily Star
LAU graduates 1,381 students at Beirut, Byblos campuses-Daily Star

Israel-Hezbollah prisoner swap set for Wednesday
Sun Jul 13, 12:53 PM
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah group will exchange prisoners on Wednesday under a U.N.-mediated deal, the Israeli prisons service said on Sunday.
A spokesman said Israeli soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev would be exchanged for five Lebanese prisoners, including Samir Qantar, jailed for life for killing an Israeli policeman, another man and his 4-year-old daughter in a raid on northern Israel in 1979.
Hezbollah has given no word on the condition of the two soldiers, although they are widely presumed to be dead. They were captured in a cross-border Hezbollah raid that led to a war between the Iranian-backed group and Israel in 2006.
The prisons service spokesman said the exchange would begin on Wednesday. He declined to say where the swap would take place. Previous exchanges have taken place at the Naqoura border crossing on the Mediterranean coast.
As part of the deal, negotiated by a German intelligence officer, Israel will hand over the bodies of 200 Arabs killed while infiltrating northern Israel.
Hezbollah will return the remains of Israeli soldiers killed in south Lebanon in 2006.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had described Qantar as the last bargaining chip for word on the fate of Israeli airman Ron Arad.
Arad disappeared after bailing out during a bombing run on Lebanon in 1986.
Under the prisoner exchange agreement, Hezbollah provided Israel with a report on Arad, who was captured by a different Lebanese group, Amal.
Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak told security officials that the Hezbollah dossier failed to give a definitive answer on Arad's fate.
"The report on Ron Arad, as passed by Hezbollah, does not give a clear answer on the fate of Ron Arad and does not resolve the issue. We are compelled to continue to work to discover what happened to him," the defence ministry said in a statement recounting Barak's words.
On Sunday, Israeli television showed two previously unseen photographs of Arad in captivity that accompanied the Hezbollah document and which were handed over to his family on Saturday with letters believed to have been written several years ago. (Reporting by Ori Lewis, Writing by Jeffrey Heller, Editing by editing by Matthew Jones)

Only vigilance will protect Lebanon against its ruling elite
By The Daily Star
Monday, July 14, 2008
Editorial
President Michel Sleiman has participated in the breaking up of several mutually supporting logjams in and around Lebanon. His own election ended an unscheduled and unwelcome interregnum of six months, he has presided over the formation of a "unity government," and his discussions with his Syrian counterpart, Bashar Assad, at the Mediterranean Union summit in Paris may herald the dawn of a new relationship between the two countries. Obviously, Lebanon is not out of the woods: The fractious manner in which the Cabinet was formed demonstrated clearly that the political establishment is at best indifferent - and at worst hostile - to the interests of the Lebanese people. The challenge for Sleiman in the wake of the logjam is to ensure that the leftover flotsam is not allowed to re-congeal and paralyze the machinery of government again.
A good starting point would be the tone he adopted in his inaugural speech on May 25. His remarks were a useful salve for a tense and divided society, but their effect can go far beyond the palliative if the president sticks to the principles he invoked. To this end, Sleiman has two key responsibilities. One is to act as primary guardian of the Constitution, an imperfect but necessary document for which disregard became almost routine under his predecessor. This further undermined the already shaky foundations of the Lebanese state, eroding its authority and preventing it from meeting the needs of citizens. Sleiman's other duty is to restore the presidency as a national institution and as a voice for the legitimate grievances of a long-suffering public - and thereby to transform Lebanon's famous diversity from a mortal weakness into a pillar of strength and stability.
What little momentum has been developed will dissipate with alacrity unless the president keeps these over-arching goals constantly in mind. Lebanon's political class has none of the population's imagination and optimism, so its jaded members will continue to be at each other's throats as they jockey for position and for their respective "shares" of the spoils to be derived from positions of power. Sleiman must remain above their tawdry squabbles in order to retain credibility as a "referee," but also to rebuild the dignity of the office he now holds. This country's requiring protection from a reckless and grasping political class is nothing new, but the advent of a president willing and able to stop them would be a novel and highly beneficial development. Sleiman is off to a good start, and if he stands by the ideals enunciated in his inauguration speech, he just might be that president.

Sleiman and Assad agree to exchange embassies
Leaders also plan mutual visits to each other's capitals
By Hussein Abdallah -Daily Star staff
Monday, July 14, 2008
BEIRUT: Lebanese and Syrian presidents Michel Sleiman and Bashar Assad exchanged visits in Paris over the weekend as Lebanon and Syria agreed on opening embassies in each others' capitals for the first time since their independence from colonial rule. The two leaders were in Paris to participate in the Mediterranean Union summit. Sleiman, accompanied by Foreign Minister Fawzi Salloukh, Lebanese Ambassador to Paris Butros Asaker, and other members of the Lebanese delegation, held a 50-minute meeting with Assad at his private suite in the Intercontinental Le Grand Hotel in the presence of Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem and other members of the Syrian delegation.
A statement released by Sleiman's office Sunday said the two leaders discussed bilateral ties, namely the measures that needed to be taken to establish diplomatic ties between the two neighboring states. It added that Sleiman and Assad agreed on exchanging visits to Beirut and Damascus in a bid to further discuss the establishment of diplomatic ties as well as other bilateral issues. Moallem will soon visit Beirut to deliver an invitation for Sleiman to visit Damascus, the statement added. At a new conference that followed the meeting, Assad said the establishment of diplomatic ties would be announced both from Beirut and Damascus.
"When President Sleiman visits Damascus, we will announce it from there and the same will happen when I visit Beirut," Assad told reporters.
Sleiman confirmed that he was planning to visit Syria, but did not specify a date.
"We are not normalizing relations with Syria ... We already have normal relations and establishing diplomatic ties will further develop the existing relations," he added. Asked whether Premier Fouad Siniora would attend the expected meeting with Assad, Sleiman said the invitation to visit Damascus would only be delivered to the president. Sleiman also told reporters that he was planning to discuss the status of the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms during his expected visit to Syria.
Both Lebanon and Syria have repeatedly said the territory was Lebanese, but the UN has requested that both states demarcate border in order to officially determine the Farms' identity. When asked how Lebanon planned to liberate the Shebaa Farms, Sleiman said Lebanon would resort to military means if diplomatic procedures failed to achieve the desired goal.
"We will try to liberate the occupied territory through diplomatic means, namely through the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1707, but if such means fail, we will resort to military operations," he said. For his part, Assad confirmed that Moallem would soon visit Beirut to formally invite Sleiman to visit Damascus.
Asked if Lebanon would have any role in the indirect peace negotiations between Syria and Israel, Assad said all the details of such negotiations would be discussed between Lebanon and Syria, adding that Lebanon would undoubtedly have a major role in the peace process.
Separately, a statement from Sleiman's information office said the two leaders had also discussed the issue of Lebanese detainees in Syrian jails.
The statement said Assad promised Sleiman to work on resolving this issue. Although many Lebanese families claim they have relatives in Syrian jails, Damascus has repeatedly denied such claims. Later on Sunday, Sleiman met with UN chief Ban Ki-moon on the sidelines of the Mediterranean Union summit.
After the meeting, Sleiman thanked Ban for all his efforts to help Lebanon. "As we draw closer to the expected prisoner swap between Lebanon and Israel, I would like to thank the UN for its efforts to facilitate such a swap as well as its past efforts to end the July war of 2006," Sleiman said, referring to the 34-day conflict between Lebanon and Israel. Lebanon's Hizbullah is expected to exchange prisoners with Israel Wednesday.
Sleiman also said he had discussed with Ban the implementation of Resolution 1701, namely the efforts being made to resolve the Shebaa Farms issue. "I am positive that the process by which the Shebaa Farms will be returned to Lebanese sovereignty has already kicked off," Sleiman said. For his part, Ban told reporters that he was optimistic about the situation in Lebanon following the election of Sleiman and the formation of a national unity government.
Ban promised to intensify his efforts to reach a solution for the Shebaa Farms issue. On Lebanese-Syrian relations, the UN chief said both Assad and Sleiman have vowed to work on establishing diplomatic ties between their countries. On the international tribunal to try suspects in the assassination of former Premier Rafik Hariri, Ban expressed hope that the tribunal would convene soon, but did not specify a date. French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced the landmark decision Saturday after talks with Assad and Sleiman. "For France, this is historic progress," Sarkozy said at a press conference. "Of course there are a number of legal questions that have to be settled ... but for us ... this announcement is absolutely historic."
Assad and Sleiman confirmed the news at a joint press conference later on Saturday. Sleiman said the two governments were going to "work together to put everything in motion as soon as possible." The Lebanese president added that he had discussed with Assad the establishment of diplomatic relations as well as the demarcation of borders between Lebanon and Syria. For his part, Assad said Syria did not mind establishing diplomatic ties with Lebanon.
"Some in Lebanon claim not establishing such ties means that Syria does not recognize Lebanon ... I would like to say Syria has no diplomatic representation in 130 countries around the world ... Does this necessarily mean Syria does not recognize such states?" he asked.
"Our position is that there is no problem for the opening of embassies between Syria and Lebanon ... If Lebanon is willing to exchange embassies, we have no objections," he added. The Syrian and Lebanese leaders met at the French presidential palace in the presence of Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, whose country brokered the power-sharing deal that led to Sleiman's election. Immediately after Sarkozy announced the diplomatic breakthrough between Lebanon and Syria, he said he would be visiting Damascus in September, taking a further step in ending Syria's diplomatic isolation.
Franco-Syrian ties went into a deep freeze after the 2005 assassination of Hariri, who was a personal friend of Sarkozy's predecessor, Jacques Chirac.
Chirac cut off all high-level contacts with Syria after repeatedly accusing it of having a hand in the killing, a charge Damascus has consistently denied.
After Sleiman's election, Sarkozy moved to reward Assad by renewing high-level contacts. Meanwhile, Sleiman on Sunday gave a speech at the Mediterranean Union summit, highlighting the importance of reaching a comprehensive settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
"The continuing postponement of solution-finding processes to the Middle East crisis had made the clashes the main reason for instability in the region, which threatens stability in the Mediterranean and the world," Sleiman said. The president called for building a culture of mutual respect, stressing that Lebanon's message was to struggle for freedom and social justice. "Lebanon's message was, and is until now, to struggle for the spaces of freedom to be bigger, the social injustice to decrease and the dignity of everybody to be restored.""Let us build together a culture of mutual respect, for a harmonious Mediterranean society," he added.
Sleiman called for paying attention to environmental issues as well as for education. "It is time to reconcile the man and his environment ... let us be committed to make education a priority.""Our destinies are interlinked, and no country can pretend to be able to confront alone all the challenges of this century. This is the message of Lebanon and this is, I think, our common aspiration in this summit," Sleiman said. - With AFP

West hails agreement to establish regular diplomatic ties
BEIRUT: The European Union welcomed Sunday the resumption of diplomatic ties between Syria and Lebanon as an important step that would help improve stability."It's very positive, it's a step that is going to help stabilize the situation, not only in Lebanon but throughout the region," EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana's spokeswoman said."It is very important," EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner told reporters in Paris.
"We finally have a president in Lebanon, and we have seen the formation of a government, and now one of the steps that was indeed not yet there was the question of having bilateral diplomatic relations," she said. Meanwhile, Britain, Germany and the US late Saturday welcomed a decision by Lebanon and Syria to open diplomatic ties, but the Washington urged Damascus to end its "destabilizing tactics" in the region.
"We continue to support the establishment of good relations between Lebanon and Syria on the basis of mutual respect and we join with France in reiterating the commitment to a sovereign and independent Lebanon," Rob McInturff, a State Department spokesman, told AFP.
But he added that Washington would "continue to limit our diplomatic engagement unless Syria takes concrete actions to end its destabilizing tactics in the region."
The State Department said Syria was "showing it is eager to engage with the international community."McInturff said the United States and other Lebanon watchers "were waiting for a signal that the Syrians are ready to renounce their sponsorship of terrorism, to do more to end the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq, to expel the leadership of Palestinian terrorist groups, and to end human-rights violations."
In London, a Foreign Office spokeswoman told AFP: "If it means that Syria is going to play a more constructive role in the region, that can only be a good thing."
Britain's Foreign Secretary David Miliband on Friday welcomed the formation of the national unity government in Lebanon, saying it was a "vital step forward" toward the implementation of the Doha agreement struck in May.Praising the Lebanese prime minister and president, he said they and the country had Britain's "full support in tackling the important political, security and economic challenges that lie ahead."Britain broke off diplomatic ties with Syria in 1986, but restored them in 1990. However, London remains concerned about Damascus' role in Lebanon, particularly its connection with Hizbullah.
German European Affairs Minister Guenter Gloser welcomed the two countries' decision to establish ties as "considerable progress."
"It shows Syria's change of perspective and contributes to stability in the region," he added - AFP

French slam Syria's President Bashar al-Assad over Lebanon
By Henry Samuel in Paris
Last Updated: 11:49PM BST 13/07/2008
French veterans have criticised the planned presence of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad at France's annual Bastille Day military parade, blaming Syria for the deaths of French soldiers in Lebanon. The former soldiers said inviting Mr Assad to watch the parade "dishonours the memory" of 58 French UN peace keepers who died in the 1983 blast at the Drakkar building in Beirut. Jean-Luc Hemar, head of the Association of veterans from Camp Idron in central France, said he was "uneasy" about soldiers filing past the Syrian leader during the march down the Champs-Elysées. "Drakkar will cast a shadow over the 14th of July," he said. The issue is particularly sensitive as some of the soldiers graduated from a military academy named in honour of one of the victims of the Drakkar bombing.
Mr Assad is one of a dozen leaders coming to the July 14 parade following the Union for the Mediterranean summit, which marks the return to the diplomatic fold for the Syrian leader after years of isolation. Mr Sarkozy's office defended its decision to invite Mr Assad, saying that the Beirut truck bombing was carried out by the Iranian-backed Hizbollah, not Syria. "To blame Syria for Drakkar is a historical mistake," said the Elysée spokesman. "There's really no reason for such controversy." He did concede that Syria probably had a hand in the 1981 assassination of France's ambassador to Lebanon.
Discomfort over Mr Assad's presence comes amid tensions in the French army over sweeping defence reforms and job cuts announced by Mr Sarkozy last month.
There is also reportedly widespread discontent within the army at Mr Sarkozy's reaction to a shooting last month in Carcassonne, when a soldier accidentally fired into a crowd, injuring 17. Mr Sarkozy is said to have described the army as "amateurish". The territorial army's chief resigned in the aftermath of a row over the shooting. Gen Bruno Cuche, the army chief, was said to be appalled at Mr Sarkozy's "particularly disagreeable" reaction to the drama.
The President arrived on the scene without even greeting the army chief, then stabbed his finger at him, saying: "You are all irresponsible, not professionals!" according to Le Point magazine. Gen Cuche, 60, who served in Kosovo as part of the United Nations force, handed in his resignation shortly afterwards in protest.

Lebanese army seeking to retake Shaba Farms?
Mavireck/The Lebanese army has paved a road that leads to the Bastara Farm, which is just 300 meters from the 'blue line,' the internationally recognized border between Israel and Lebanon until the United Nations suddenly decided otherwise one year ago. As you all may recall, Israel liberated Shaba Farms (known in Hebrew as Har Dov) from Syrian hands in 1967, and until last year, the 'international community' did not recognize Hezbullah's claim on the farms on behalf of Lebanon. Here's a map so you'll understand what I'm talking about:
Last week, Israel's embattled Prime Minister, Ehud K. Olmert, said that he willing to have 'direct talks' with Lebanon on Shaba Farms, in yet another bid to give away an Israeli security asset and keep himself in office.
On Friday, Israel rejected a French proposal to turn Shaba Farms over to the United Nations until ownership could be resolved between Syria and Lebanon.
The new initiative calls on Israel to relinquish the land to the UN, which would serve as a caretaker until the dispute over the identity of its true owner is solved.
The idea to hand over the land to the UN was reportedly raised during meetings Sarkozy held with the newly-elected Suleiman during a visit to Beirut early last month. The thinking behind the initiative is that by relinquishing the land Israel will erase Hizbullah's excuse to use force, namely, returning the Shaba Farms to Lebanon.
In addition, it is thought that this could bolster US-backed Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, during a surprise visit to Lebanon in mid-June, told Saniora the US "believes the time has come" to deal with the issue.
The Israeli defense official rejected the claim that giving up the area would bolster Saniora and deprive Hizbullah of its raison d'être, saying that after an Israeli withdrawal from the area, Hizbullah would simply find a new excuse for its existence.
As if proving this point, a senior Shi'ite religious leader was quoted in the Hizbullah-linked Al-Akhbar newspaper this week as saying that Hizbullah should liberate former Shi'ite villages now in northern Israel.
According to the report, Sheikh Abdel al-Amir Kiblan said the villages "must return to their owners, to our country and our people." The villages include the present day Israeli communities of Margaliot, Yuval and Yiron.
The defense official said the security establishment's recommendation to the political echelon was to relinquish the land only as part of a comprehensive peace deal either with Syria or with Lebanon.
Israeli 'defense officials' have confirmed that Hezbullah paved the road, but declined to comment on its significance. Don't expect the IDF to go in there and start shooting until they can see the whites of the eyes of the Lebanese army troops. Olmert just can't deal with it now, so it will just become another problem when the next war starts there.
For those who have forgotten, the 'Lebanese Army' coordinates its activities with Hezbullah. Much of the Lebanese army is in fact made up of Hezbullah members and sympathizers (probably more than half).

Syria takes over Lebanon; US supports 'good relations' between the two
Mavireck/Syria has completed its takeover of Lebanon, with its Hezbullah allies gaining a veto over policy enacted by the Lebanese cabinet, thus mooting the 16-11 advantage that the Saniora government still enjoys in the cabinet. This is from DEBKA.
The pro-Iranian Hizballah-led opposition has gained veto power and Damascus has solidified its grip on Lebanon’s center of power - both through the Shiite-led bloc and through a first-time cabinet member, the Syrian Social Nationalist Party – the SSNP, which is dedicated to a Greater Syria.
According to DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources, the shadowy SSNP was Syrian intelligence’s favorite terrorist arm in Lebanon for assassinations, attempted coups and bombings. Its operatives often worked with Hizballah (especially its military chief Imad Mughniyeh) and were believed implicated in the US embassy bombings in Beirut of 1982 and 1984.
The first known female suicide bomber in terrorist history was a SSNP operative who detonated a truck bomb which killed two Israel soldiers in 1985. Another member was accused of assassinating Lebanese president Beshar Gemayel in 1982.
The SSNP leader at the time, appointed by Damascus, was Ali Qanso, who now takes a seat in the new Lebanese government as minister of state.
The same Lebanese party also holds one seat in the Syrian parliament, having been granted legal standing by President Bashar Assad in 2005. The SSNP is now Syria’s largest party after the ruling Baath, while also represented in the Beirut government. It is thus faithful to its Greater Syria tenet which names Lebanon “Western Syria” and the Mediterranean the "Syrian Sea."
But what's most amazing is the Western - and particularly the American reaction to this turn of events.
Britain, Germany and the United States late Saturday welcomed a decision by Lebanon and Syria to establish diplomatic relations, but Washington urged Damascus to end its "destabilizing tactics" in the region.
"We continue to support the establishment of good relations between Lebanon and Syria on the basis of mutual respect (and) we join with France in reiterating the commitment to a sovereign and independent Lebanon," Rob McInturff, a State Department spokesman, told Agence France Presse.
But he added that Washington would "continue to limit our diplomatic engagement unless Syria takes concrete actions to end its destabilizing tactics in the region."
Lebanon and Syria said earlier Saturday that they had agreed to establish diplomatic relations, opening embassies in each others' capitals for the first time since their independence from colonial rule.
The State Department said Syria was "showing it is eager to engage with the international community."
Of course, the State Department went on to make the usual statement about expelling the 'Palestinian' terror groups from Damascus, but as long as Assad is being welcomed into the international community, there is no hope that will happen. Condi Rice's State Department is either totally clueless or is on the wrong side in the war on terror. Take your pick.
A full list of the new Lebanese cabinet members and their party affiliations is here. Lebanon is scheduled to hold parliamentary elections in 2009.
Cross-posted to Israel Matzav.

Exclusive: The Jihadist Movements’ Dual Nature and U.S. Policy after U.S.
FamilySecurityMatters.org.
July 14, 2008
As part of his summer 2008 visiting scholar lectures at the European Foundation for Democracies, Dr. Walid Phares made a presentation at the Institut Francais des Relations Internationales (French Institute for International Relations IFRI) in Brussels, on June 28, 2008.
Dr. Phares was introduced by IFRI's Brussels Director, DrSuzanne Nies, where the event was attended by a number of NGOs,EU officials and researchers. FSM has obtained from its contributor, Dr. Phares, a summary of his remarks.
Jihadist Movements Worldwide
In order to explain better the possible evolution of United States' policy vis-à-vis Jihadist movements following the American presidential election, Dr. Walid Phares dedicated the first part of his speech to analyzing the dual nature of the Jihadist movements worldwide. The term "Jihadist" is another - mostly American- equivalent of Islamism, a term used in Europe and in the Middle East to define radical Islamic Fundamentalists.
Academically, the "Jihadist movements" can be explained through a two trees metaphor. The first tree is the Salafist one. We can not write it off to a "violent activist movement"; it is a global movement that has a common ideological vision of the world. This ideology, which emerged in the 1920s, has been metastasizing since the beginning of the cold war. Its long term objective is the establishment of a caliphate mainly through an indoctrination process and the spread of the ideology throughout societies and governments. These Global Salafists - Wahhabis in Arabia, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Deobandis in the sub Indian continent - opposed the rise of modern and secular Arab and Muslim states and aimed at transforming them back into what was a Caliphate.
In early 1990s, Dr. Phares observed a clash between two schools within the Global Jihadi Salafists; he coined it the "Khartoum debate." Many Salafist activists -including those Jihadists returning from the War in Afghanistan - claimed that the long term process of indoctrination and penetration of societies was not efficient enough. As a consequence, they chose to engage themselves in "direct Jihad" or warfare against their perceived global enemies. Al Qaeda is the most visible example of a movement that follows this doctrine. This warfare occurs in such lands as Chechnya, Sudan or Algeria, but it is also targeted against the United States and other democracies. The other Islamists continued to follow a long term strategy of indoctrination and the spreading of their ideology.
The second tree is the Khomeinist movement based out of the Iranian Islamic Republic. Even though Khomeinism is significantly different from Salafism, the Iranian regime and its followers in the region seek the establishment of a regional and, ultimately global, Imamate, another form of Caliphate, led by the Shia. The Khomeinists have demonstrated a major difference with the first tree with regard to their organization and strategic discipline. Their movement is centralized and the main strategic decisions are made by the Iranian supreme leaders. The chain of execution is integrated and is carried out by the Pasdaran (Islamic Revolutionary Guards), and through them via Hezbollah in Lebanon and its networks spread throughout the world. The Lebanese Diaspora is an important vehicle to these networks. This Khomeinist (Shia) tree also has significant influence on radical Sunni groups, such as Hamas in Gaza, and other Islamists in Lebanon, thanks to the power of Iranian petrodollars. Whereas the Salafi Jihadi movement relies on the vast and dispersed pools of indoctrinated youth around the world, including those in the madrassas, the Khomeinist movement evolves around the Iranian regime strictly.
Counterterrorism Policy in the United States
One cannot adopt the same counterterrorism strategies to address both trees. Whereas the answer to the second tree is linked to geopolitical equations with Hamas, Iran or Hezbollah - which use terrorism within a balance of power and under a clear hierarchy of structures - the situation is more complex for Salafist movements. With the latter, counter-strategies involve identifying them, localizing them and acting on their funding as well.
From 2001 to 2006, in the war on terror's framework, the Bush administration has been engaged by both trees. That is to say that the American and international coalition have been confronting the Taliban in Afghanistan in order to protect the elected government. At the same time, U.S. and allied forces have been engaged in Iraq to remove the Saddam Hussein regime, set up a democratic government to preserve its stability by fighting al Qaeda in the center and containing the infiltrations by Iran, Hezbollah and Syria in other areas.
In a parallel course to these two military interventions, a soft diplomatic campaign has been put in place: a Strategic Communication policy aiming to sweep the Arab public opinion towards democracy and rejection of extremism.
A major change occurred in 2006 when Democrats gained a majority in the U.S. Congress; it has driven some major evolutions in the American fight against terrorism, with two trends that have emerged. The first one, followed by the Administration, is to pursue the current massive effort in the two conflict areas: Afghanistan and Iraq and attempt to gain influence among local allies on the ground such as the tribes and local politicians. The other trend, which was advanced by elements in some conservative circles opposed to the war and large segments within the Democratic Party, advocates a withdrawal from the battlefields and a dialogue with the radicals in the region such as with the Iranian and Syrian regimes as well as with those non al Qaeda Jihadists and Islamists.
The next presidential election is going to give predominance to one or the other.
The Changing American Presidency's Impact on Counterterrorism Policy
Dr. Walid Phares, in the third part of his speech, developed his views of the possible evolution of American counterterrorism policy based on which candidate ultimately will succeed.
First, he referred to the changing situation that might bring about the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States. The evolution would be slow at first, due to the fact that most of the new White House staff would be from among those who worked under the Clinton mandate. He will backed by a Democrat majority in Congress while bureaucracies in the military and diplomacy sectors will remain. The first half of the first mandate would be devoted to new statements about American foreign policy and the American position on terrorism. The second half would allow a first big shot delivered by American diplomats in the Middle East. In Iraq, we would see a gradual pullout and there would be some talks with Iran and Syria. Redeployment would be launched in order to satisfy these two regional powers. According to the speaker, a dramatic change towards more ideological assertions would occur during the second mandate if Obama wins it. The most dramatic changes away from the War on Terror will take place after re-election
Then, Dr. Phares referred to the changing situation that might come with the election of John McCain as President of the United States. We can sum it up with the following: "same general direction, but different approaches". The US forces' presence in Iraq will go on due to the insurgents' activities. Most of the Administration's bureaucracies will remain the same with exceptions. The attitude of John McCain vis à vis the Middle East will depend on the decisions made by various regional forces.
To conclude, we should not underestimate the civil society's evolution within Middle Eastern countries, which is not always reflected by Al Manar or Al Jazeera but also not by chat rooms, websites and forums on Internet. Even if Western media mostly reports violence and anti-Western attitudes, there is a deep evolution of civil societies towards more democracy. This evolution will depend on how authoritarian governments would react. Will they fiercely oppose the movement or will they reform?
IFRI's ‘s Tuesday lunch was concluded with an animated debate between the speaker and the audience on questions regarding NATO strategy in Afghanistan, the Muslim Brotherhood and the South East Muslim identity.
Brought to you by the editors and staff of FamilySecurityMatters.org.

TALKS AT POINT OF 'GRAVE CHOICES'
Craig Offman, National Post
Published: Monday, July 14, 2008
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in Paris yesterday his country has never been so close to reaching a peace agreement with the Palestinian Authority.
And as a goodwill gesture, it was reported, Israel offered to hand over an undisclosed number of Palestinian prisoners.
On the same day, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad told Arab broadcaster Al-Jazeera that Damascus would establish "normal" relations with the Jewish state, including the opening of embassies.
The flurry of diplomatic gestures came as leaders from Europe, North Africa and the Middle East launched a 43-nation Union for the Mediterranean. The inaugural summit at the Grand Palais in Paris sealed a new detente between Syria and Europe, with the Syrian and Israeli leaders sitting at the same table for the first time.
A pet project of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the Union of the Mediterranean hopes to address pollution, transportation links, immigration and regional conflict and other issues that affect nations in the affluent north and impoverished south.
The summit also helps further solidify France's position as a high-level peace-broker, along with the United States, China and Russia. While the kings of Jordan and Morocco cited other commitments and bowed out of yesterday's event, Libya's Muammar Gaddafi refused to attend, describing the proposal as warmed-over colonialism and "a form of humiliation."
Earlier, Mr. Sarkozy said he was committed to bringing peace to the region and hosted preliminary meetings with the Israelis and Palestinians, as well as the Syrians.
On Saturday night, France and Syria issued a joint statement calling for France and the United States to contribute to a future peace agreement between Damascus and Jerusalem. The statement added that Mr. Sarkozy would visit Syria by mid-September to repair relations between Paris and Damascus, which have been uneasy since the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik al-Hariri in 2005.
France suggests Damascus orchestrated his murder, a charge Mr. Assad has denied.
As the summit opened yesterday, the Palestinian Authority and Israel made dramatic announcements about the progress of their negotiations, being held at the Elysee Palace.
"We have never been as close to an accord as we are today," Mr. Olmert told a news conference.
"We are approaching the moment when we will have to make decisive choices, grave, important choices that will take us to a stage we have never reached before."
His Palestinian counterpart, Mahmoud Abbas, said his side was engaging in "in-depth negotiation" with Israel. "We will pursue this effort. We are quite serious," the PA leader said, voicing hope that the sides "could "arrive at peace within a number of months."
At the same time, reports emerged that Mr. Olmert has agreed to release an undisclosed number of Palestinian prisoners beyond the upcoming, controversial exchanges with militant groups Hezbollah and Hamas , one of which includes handing over a Palestinian who murdered a father and his four-year-old daughter almost 30 years ago.

Lebanon: Time for Peace With Israel
By ELHANAN MILLER
Published: July 14, 2008TOOLBAR
JERUSALEM -- Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora announced earlier this month that the upcoming prisoner swap between Lebanon and Israel constitutes a "national success" for Lebanon; a significant triumph over Israel. Many people in Israel share this view. The deal is widely considered a failure in Israel's deterrence power; proof of the futility of the last war between the two countries.
In our world there are small and large victories. Even if the prisoner swap is indeed a victory for Lebanon, surely it is the former rather than the latter.
Why do I say this? Because the people of Lebanon still live in a state of insecurity. They do not know when the next Lebanese will be taken by Israel, or when more Lebanese blood will be shed; the same goes for Israel.
Fear and uncertainty are the earmark of war. The only true national success that Lebanon can achieve vis-à-vis Israel (and vice-versa) is lasting peace through a signed agreement. Why? Because only such an agreement can provide the lasting feeling of calm and security that both Lebanese and Israelis are entitled to.
A leader who views a prisoner swap, favorable as it may be to his side, as an ultimate victory sells his people short and deprives them of the real thing. To this day, nations in Western Europe mark May 8 – the end of World War II – as a national holiday. Millions took to the streets on that day in 1945, celebrating the end of six vicious years of war. Prisoner swaps took place subsequently, but were seen as a necessary means of achieving lasting peace, not as an end in and of themselves.
Assuming that the media outlets are correct in informing us that the prisoner deal will be completed during the coming week, it is high time to ask ourselves: what next? Do we wait idly by until the next round of violence imposes itself on our two nations, bringing death and destruction, or do we initiate a process that will end this vicious cycle once and for all?
An answer to this question was given by the Italian foreign minister, Franco Frattini, during his visit to Jerusalem this week. The foreign minister conveyed the willingness of Italy to play the role of mediator in direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel.
The response to the Italian initiative sounded very different in Beirut and in Jerusalem. Israeli President Shimon Peres said that Israel has always offered its hand in peace to those who want it, adding that he has always believed "that there are no contradicting interests between Israel and Lebanon."
Fouad Siniora, on the other hand, informed the Italian ambassador that he would not be entering any talks with Israel. No ifs, no buts, a straight-out, resounding "No."
There are two possible explanations for Siniora's reaction. The first is that Siniora really is interested in peace with Israel, but is unable to admit it for political reasons. One could argue that Siniora understands that peace is the only viable way to ensure Lebanon's long-lasting security, and retrieve its once-thriving economy.
The problem is that he is in the midst of forming a new government and re-building national unity, which means he is currently unable to make controversial statements. One day, perhaps with the assistance of Western allies, Siniora could be brought to implement his true policy goals. His past statements rejecting the need for war with Israel and criticizing Hezbollah for it would support this view.
A second explanation, perhaps more pessimistic, would be that Siniora is genuinely uninterested in peace with Israel. In this case, however, he owes his people some answers. In order to deprive the Lebanese of the invaluable asset of peace along with the benefits that come with it, Siniora must counter Peres' arguments. Why do Israel and Lebanon's interests not converge? What prevents Lebanon from entering into direct negotiations with Israel?
Here are some points for Siniora to consider:
1. Lebanon and Israel are both modern, Western-oriented countries. Both countries share religiously and culturally diverse populations. Egypt and Jordan, who claimed territorial disputes with Israel and suffered through bloody wars over them, have both attained peace with Israel. Lebanon, which has no meaningful territorial dispute with Israel and much less historic animosity, should follow suit.
2. Israel and Lebanon both share an interest in quelling Syria's influence in the region, and maintaining Lebanon strong and free from foreign intervention in its internal politics. A peace treaty with Israel would strengthen Lebanon politically and economically and ensure its full sovereignty. Even if Israel eventually reaches a peace agreement with Syria, it will be under conditions more favorable to Lebanon.
3. A peace agreement with Israel would strengthen the moderate forces within Lebanon who seek stability in the region, and weaken those – such as Hezbollah – who seek to destabilize the region in the bidding of Iran.
In the rapidly changing Middle East, windows of opportunity tend to shut quickly. There may not be a second chance for Israel and Lebanon.
**Elhanan Miller is a Legacy Heritage fellow working at The Knesset and a student in the Department of Islam and Middle Eastern Studies at Hebrew University, Jerusalem.