LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِApril 27/2010

Bible Of the Day
Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians 10/23-33
10:23 “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are profitable. “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things build up. 10:24 Let no one seek his own, but each one his neighbor’s good. 10:25 Whatever is sold in the butcher shop, eat, asking no question for the sake of conscience, 10:26 for “the earth is the Lord’s, and its fullness.”* 10:27 But if one of those who don’t believe invites you to a meal, and you are inclined to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no questions for the sake of conscience. 10:28 But if anyone says to you, “This was offered to idols,” don’t eat it for the sake of the one who told you, and for the sake of conscience. For “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.” 10:29 Conscience, I say, not your own, but the other’s conscience. For why is my liberty judged by another conscience? 10:30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced for that for which I give thanks? 10:31 Whether therefore you eat, or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. 10:32 Give no occasions for stumbling, either to Jews, or to Greeks, or to the assembly of God; 10:33 even as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of the many, that they may be saved.

 

Free Opinions, Releases, letters, Interviews & Special Reports
New Opinion: As if they’d never left/Now Lebanon/April 26, 01
The view from the White House/Daily Star/April 27/10

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for April 27/10
PM reassures: No truth to alleged planned strike against Syria/Ynetnews
Clinton: U.S. still seeks engagement with Syria/Examiner.com
'Scud charges aim to harm Syria'/Jerusalem Post
Beware of Small States/Financial Times
US messages to Syria may not be getting through/Washington Post
Sfeir Holds International Policies Responsible for Emigration, Says All Sects Should Take Part in Governance/Naharnet
Nahhas lashes out over Zahle MP's allegations of leaking telecom reportl/Daily Star
LF, FPM signal support for consensus list in Jezzine pollsl/Daily Star
Sleiman urges diaspora in Brazil to invest in Lebanonl/Daily Star
Geagea denies tensions with Jumblatt after war of wordsl/Daily Star
STL releases first annual report on trial progressl/Daily Star
Egypt describes Israel's Scud allegations as 'laughablel/Daily Star
Beirut and Zahle brace for FPM-March 14 electoral battlel/Daily Star
Thousands march in Beirut to promote secularism in politicsl/Daily Star
Sidon seminar highlights dangers of drug usel/Daily Star
Cleveland Clinic signs deal with AUB's medical centerl/Daily Star
Anti-harassment efforts inch along, need more support/AFP
Tens of thousands of Armenians march in Beirut to mark genocidel/Daily Star
Caritas safe house fights for rights of migrant workersl/Daily Star
Beirut Scene of Municipal Election Maneuvers Amid Slim Chance of Consensus/Naharnet
Consensus Reached on Shouf Municipal Elections
/Naharnet
Jounieh Witnesses Frenzied Election Atmosphere
/Naharnet
Metn Alliance Still Shrouded in Uncertainty, Coming 48 Hours Crucial
/Naharnet
Nahhas Defends Himself against Criticism
/Naharnet
Hizbullah Stresses Alliance with Amal Shows Unity Behind Resistance Choice
/Naharnet
Lebanese Activists March for 'Civil Marriage, Not Civil War'
/Naharnet
Zahraman Demands Nahhas Accountability after 'Misleading Report'
/Naharnet
Oqab Saqr Accuses Nahhas of Leaking Report
/Naharnet
Hariri Seeks Consensus in Beirut, March 14 Christians Reject Being Overstepped in Dialogue with Aoun
/Naharnet
Salim Aoun Says Talks Back to Square 1 in Zahle, Blames Skaff
/Naharnet

As-Sharq: Nahhas’ Sunday statement inaccurate/Now Lebanon


'We Refuse to Be Muslims By Force' Say Egyptian Christian Twin-Boys After Losing Court Case

GMT 4-26-2010 1:32:19
Assyrian International News Agency
http://www.aina.org/news/20100425203200.htm
(AINA) -- On March 30 an administrative judicial court in Egypt dismissed a lawsuit filed by Mrs. Camilia Lutfi, mother of the Coptic Christian twins boys Mario and Andrew, against the Interior Minister, and the director of the Civil Status Department for refusing to re-instate the Christian religion on their birth certificates, and invalidate those which were forcefully changed to "Islam" in 2005 by their father Medhat Ramsis Labib, who had converted to Islam.
After his conversion, Andrew and Mario became Muslims in what is called "Islamization by dependence," by which children follow the religion of a converted parent (to Islam only) until they reach the age of puberty (fifteen), because Islam is "the best among all religions," according to Egyptian Court rulings.
The purpose of Lutfi's litigation was to restore back to her twins their identity as Christians, before reaching the age of 16 in June, when they will have their national ID cards issued. Camilia said that because of the developments in their case, her worst nightmares would materialize, in which they would have Islam as religious affiliation on their ID cards. "If they change to Christianity after that, they will be considered apostates," she told Freecopts advocacy. She expressed her surprise at the intransigence of the judiciary in dealing with the issue of her sons, especially after they have already reached the legal age of 15-years, when they can choose their own religion. "The boys have lived this tragedy for the last ten years, through no fault of their own."
ElYoum 7 Newspaper reported that 15-years-old Mario and Andrew were extremely disappointed with the court verdict, saying "faith is not by force, we want to remain Christians and we do not wish to become Muslims." Both boys are practicing Christians and were consecrated last year as deacons in their regular church in Alexandria.
The court explained in its verdict, which was issued on April 14, that Camilia Lutfi has not presented a verdict from a relevant court (it did not say which court) proving the change of her sons' religion from Islam to Christianity. "How come that when their father changed their religion from Christianity to Islam, he required no court verdict, and now that they want to revert back to Christianity, the court requires a verdict?" she told Freecopts.
Although the mother's lawyers presented to the court a portfolio containing 15 different certificates proving they are Christians, contradicting what was written on their birth certificates, the court said in its reasoning that it does not recognize the validity of a certificate issued by the Church as a document of change of religion from Islam to Christianity, as "churches by law are not competent to issue such certificates." The courts only accept certificates of religion change from Al-Azhar (the Muslim theology school in Cairo). Moreover the Court said that there is no law to force the Interior minister and the Civil Status Department chief to change the religion of the boys on their documents without a court ruling to this effect.
Camilia criticized the judiciary in Egypt for being biased, based on her personal experience. "I do not believe the recent verdict has been taken solely by the judges. I feel there is a higher authority which orders the judges to decide in a certain way, even if it goes against the documents in front of them," she told Freecopts.
Mario and Andrew were born on June 24, 1994 to Christian parents, sea captain Medhat Ramsis and tax inspector Camilia Lutfi, but in February 2000 their father converted to Islam to marry a Muslim woman. In 2005 Medhat changed their twin boys birth certificates to show that they are Muslims, born to a Muslim father and a Christian mother.
The case of Mario and Andrew caught the attention of the media in May 2007, after they challenged the Ministry of Education which forced them to sit in for the Islamic Religion exams at school, where students are obliged to pass in order to be promoted to a higher class. They refused to answer the questions. On his answer sheet Andrew wrote "I am Christian" and Mario wrote "My religion is Christianity." They failed the exam and had to re-take it, but again insisted on writing these single phrases. Due to public pressure, the Minister of Education exempted them from passing those exams until their case was finalized by the court. On national television they declared: "We do not want to be Muslims. We are born Christians, will remain and die as Christians."
After a five-year legal battle, Lutfi won a landmark victory in June 2009 when Egypt's Court of Cassation gave her the right to retain custody of Andrew and Mario. The Court also affirmed, for the first time, the right of a non-Muslim mother to retain custody of her child until the age of fifteen, as stipulated by Egypt's Personal Status Law, even when the child's father converts to Islam and the state automatically changes the child's religion as a result. Previously it was only until the age of seven, which is considered the age of "religious maturity" by the Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence (6-20-2009).
At a press conference held on Thursday April 22, Lutfi said that the refusal of the judiciary to establish the religion of her children as Christians is a blow to the principles of citizenship, and a "disregard" for Christianity and Christians. She called on President Mubarak to protect the freedom of religion by issuing laws "to tie down the hands of the judiciary in deciding on these issues without a legal basis." She also addressed a message to the President of the State Council saying that all judgments regarding conversion to Christianity take as a starting point that Islam is the State religion, and the State guarantees freedom of religion but ends up by "insulting Christianity and those wishing to convert to Christianity."
During the press conference, Camelia also called on the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar to issue a Fatwa (Islamic religious edict) to remind the authorities of the Quranic verse "Let there be no compulsion in religion."
Dr. Awad Shafik Awad, international attorney based in Switzerland and President of the Confederation of Coptic Human Rights Organizations in Europe, stated his intention to refer the case of Mario and Andrew to the international courts, after all stages of litigation in Egypt have been exhausted. He said that the recent court's refusal to prove the Christian faith of the twin boys was "unjust and has nothing to do with the law."
Coptic attorney Ramsis elNaggar stated that his law firm represents thousands of Christian children who were forced to become Muslims following the conversion to Islam of one of their parents, and tried in vain to revert back to Christianity.
In 2007 the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights issued a joint report with Human Rights Watch entitled 'Prohibited Identities: State Interference with Religious Freedom', regarding involuntary "conversions." It quoted 89 cases of Egyptians whose religious affiliation in official documents was changed by the state to Islam against their will -- and in some instances without their knowledge -- after their fathers converted to Islam. Moreover, the Interior Ministry has refused to change their religious affiliation to Christianity when they reached the age of fifteen, in violation of the law. The report highlighted the far-reaching consequences for the daily lives of those affected, including choosing a spouse, educating one's children, or conducting the most basic financial and other transactions (report).Last month before the court dismissed their case, CBN News carried out an interview with Mario and Andrew, bringing their fight to retain their Christian identity and the fear of being considered as apostates and getting killed to the international public (video).
Renowned Coptic activist and writer Magdi Khalil calls for the non-application of Islamic Sharia law on Christian families in Egypt, saying that the case of Mario and Andrew represents the situation of the Copts under Sharia. The Egyptian Personal Status Law for Muslims and non-Muslims of mixed religions or denominations is based on the Sharia law according to the Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence,"which discriminates against fundamental human rights, and against women in general as lawyer Ms Safaa Zaki describes it," he said. Khalil warns about a wider application of the Second article of the Egyptian Constitution which stipulates that the principles of Islamic Sharia law are the main source of legislation. "If Sharia is applied to all the laws, this would be a real catastrophe to the secular state, for Muslims and Christians alike and a a bomb ready to explode," he said.
By Mary Abdelmassih
Copyright (C) 2010, Assyrian International News Agency. All Rights Reserved. Terms

British Ambassador in Yemen OK After Terror Attack
by Hillel Fendel /Arutz Sheva
A suicide terrorist, assumed to be from Al-Qaeda, detonated himself near the convoy of the British ambassador to Yemen early Monday, but succeeded in killing only himself. British Ambassador to Yemen Tim Torlot was on his way to the embassy in Sanaa when the attack occurred. As of shortly after the attack, Al-Qaeda had not claimed responsibility, but Yemen has long been a target of Al-Qaeda. In September 2008, Al-Qaeda terrorists attacked the U.S. embassy in Sanaa, killing 19 people. In March of the same year, three missiles aimed at the same target missed their mark, hitting a girls' school. A spokesperson for the British embassy confirmed to Reuters that there had been "an incident this morning involving a member of embassy staff," and said there were no UK or embassy member casualties. Britain and the United States stated intentions to close their embassies in Yemen early this year in the face of Al-Qaeda threats. Both are heavily fortified, surrounded by large sand-bags and machine gun posts.

As if they’d never left
April 26, 2010
Now Lebanon
Five years ago today, after a brief ceremony in the border town of Aanjar that tried to paint a patina of respect on a total of 29 years of military and security “presence”, the last Syrian soldier left Lebanese soil. Until that moment, and for more than a decade after the Lebanese civil war ended, it was hard for first-time visitors to Lebanon to determine who actually ran the country.
From the moment they landed at Beirut Airport to when they reached their hotels, tourists would see that the walls and roads of Beirut were dotted with portraits of former Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, sometimes alongside those of his then-Lebanese counterpart, Elias Hrawi, but in many instances alone.
Even more mystifying to the neophyte would have been the three days of mourning for Assad’s son and heir, Basil, who was killed in a car accident in Damascus in January 1994. Soon after, a statue of Basil in uniform on one of his beloved horses was erected at the entrance to the Bekaa town of Chtoura.
And all the while the Syrian army lived in abandoned buildings and controlled the strategic intersections around Beirut and the rest of Lebanon. There was very little respect or courtesy from the occupying army. Shopkeepers would be careful not to fall foul of their neighbors, while at the checkpoints, petty extortion was practiced on commercial vehicles. Elsewhere anxiety was added to humiliation as drivers would be “asked” to give lifts to Syrian soldiers. Then there were the summons for those who dared speak out against the presence. They could range from a verbal reprimand to abuse and intimidation that could last for days.
The events leading up to the withdrawal have been well documented. Rafik Hariri, the man who had come to represent post-war Lebanon, had been murdered in an outrageous assassination that took the lives of 21 others, and this time the Lebanese were not going to take it like they had with previous killings. They took to the streets, blaming Syria for the murder. This time, with the US army camped in Iraq and a US administration that would not brook any insolence from the region’s despots, there was no crackdown on the huge and unprecedented demonstration of people power, arguably the biggest in modern Arab history.
But even though the 2005 elections showed that the popular expression of anger on the streets months earlier was reflected at the ballot box, the battle to hang on to the hard-won freedom and independence had begun. The problem was that Syria didn’t need to be in Lebanon to influence its internal affairs and take its place in the subsequent internal struggle between the Western-backed pro-democracy government and a pro-Syrian and Iranian opposition.
Crisis after crisis – political killings, war, mass intimidation, civil violence – all ate away at the gains made since 2005. In August 2009, arguably the biggest blow to what had become known as the March 14 movement came when Walid Jumblatt, one of the leading lights of the 2005 Independence Intifada, read the political runes and abandoned the cause, taking with him not only his energy, but crucially his parliamentary bloc. Those were just the internal factors. Elsewhere, a new US administration is keen to curry favor with Damascus even amid allegations that it continues to supply arms to Hezbollah, while an “understanding” between Saudi Arabia and Syria has seen a “truce” over Lebanon and a cooling of anti-Syrian sentiment.
There will be little fanfare today to commemorate one of the most significant moments in Lebanon’s history. The Syrian army may have gone, and the detested intelligence headquarters at Aanjar may no longer be in operation, but Lebanon is once again in regional bondage. Syria is back and yet it does not have one soldier on the ground. Last week’s celebration of Syria’s national day at the BIEL exhibition center in Beirut, which all Lebanon’s politicians dutifully attended, said it all. It was as if they’d never left.
Lebanon’s democratic foundations are still intact. The spirit that coursed through Lebanese veins in 2005 still remains, even if it has been abandoned by the political class. While there is little to celebrate, the achievement of April 26, 2005 must stand as a permanent reminder, both to what can be accomplished and how fleeting success can be.

Sfeir Holds International Policies Responsible for Emigration, Says All Sects Should Take Part in Governance
Naharnet/Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir has held international policies responsible for the emigration of youth from Lebanon and called for participation of all sects in governing local affairs. Sfeir told Lebanese, Arab and foreign journalists in Rome on Sunday that the Maronite church was working on limiting emigration of Christians, although this does not mean "the church is capable of playing the role of the state." The international community "is behind the political reasons" that lead to emigration, he said. Sfeir was in Rome to participate in preparations for the Synod of Bishops for the Middle East that will be held in October. He thanked the pope for "his interest in Lebanon and the region and his call for the Synod." Sfeir called for "the consolidation of Muslim-Christian coexistence, which should allow all confessions … to truly participate in governing Lebanese national affairs."The prelate also urged Christians and Muslims "to work together to find likely solutions to their fateful problems," saying the Synod aims at "developing prosperous dialogue with Muslims who have good intentions in the region." The patriarch presided over Sunday mass at Rome's St. Maroun church. During a lunch banquet thrown in his honor by Maronite bishops, Sfeir hoped Lebanese would be united for "a free, sovereign and independent Lebanon." About the elections, he said: "We hope the polls would be a stage to unite" the Lebanese.
Sfeir returns to Beirut 4:00 pm Monday, ending his four-day visit to Rome.

Victims of Harassment Speak Out in Lebanon Despite Taboo

Naharnet/On three occasions Doha had to jump out of her cab when the driver assaulted her in broad daylight. But now she has joined a growing number of women in Lebanon who speak out against sexual harassment.
While the subject remains taboo to a large part in the country, a group of activists have launched a campaign to raise awareness.
A television ad features a young employee named Salwa who is summoned by her boss. When she enters his office, he is sprawled out in his chair, cigar in hand, and holds out a promotion form to her. Salwa happily reaches out for the form when the boss tries to kiss her. Red with anger, she deals him a blow with her handbag before slamming the door as she leaves.
"We are not preaching violence. Our message aims to encourage women to defend themselves and not to fear social stigma," said Leen Hashem of local non-government organization IndyACT which is supporting the campaign.
Although Lebanon is widely considered more "Westernized" than its neighbors in the Arab world, it does not penalize what the West would consider sexual harassment, such as unwanted comments or touching. On a daily basis, local women continue to suffer harassment in the streets, workplace and while using public transport.
According to a 2007 study by the social affairs ministry, three complaints of harassment and rape are filed in Lebanon each week. But activists say the figure falls far short of the reality. "Unfortunately, this phenomenon is increasing," Hashem said. "For many female victims of harassment, the issue remains taboo. Our slogan is, 'Don't shy away -- speak out.'" Raghida Ghamlouch, a social worker with the non-governmental Lebanese Council to Resist Violence Against Women, said Lebanon's social fabric does not encourage victims to speak out.
"Lebanese society is still macho and systematically places the blame on the woman," Ghamlouch told Agence France Presse. "Women are told it is their fault if they hitch a cab off the street, if they are dressed a certain way, if they come home late, and so forth," she added. "And for women who are adults, it is even worse: They are accused of having deliberately provoked the man." Another factor that silences victims are Lebanon's unjust laws, which do not explicitly consider harassment a crime. And a convicted rapist in Lebanon is let off the hook if he consents to marry his victim. "Even police mock women who come in to their station to file complaints of harassment or domestic violence," Hashem said. Ghamlouch noted that Lebanese authorities have yet to understand that these victims are scarred for life and sometimes require psychological intervention to overcome the trauma.
"Victims tend to give up, because they realize they will be victims whatever they do," she added. Eighteen-year-old Joy is a case in point. Shaking, she recounts the day a taxi-driver touched her genital area. "I screamed and cried but he did not stop," Joy told AFP. "I had to throw myself out of the car. I felt hurt and betrayed. Those who harass women ought to go to jail." While Salwa and her campaign are a significant step forward, activists say more collective action is needed to ensure victims feel safe enough to speak up and take action. "If the complaints increase, perhaps then the authorities cannot discount it," Hashem said. "Perhaps then they will see it is a real problem."(AFP)

Sarkozy Assures France Would Stand by Lebanon against Israeli Threats

Naharnet/President Nicolas Sarkozy again assured Lebanon that France would stand by a commitment to protect its Arab ally against Israeli threats. Sarkozy's assurances came in a late Sunday telephone call between him and Prime Minister Saad Hariri. "France will not allow any attack on Lebanon," Sarkozy said, emphasizing France's commitment to Lebanon's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. A statement issued by the Elysee Palace said Sarkozy expressed "concern over the escalating tension in the region," urging all sides to "bear responsibility and refrain from any action that could fuel tensions and undermine stability in the region." Hariri's office, meanwhile, said in a statement that the two leaders discussed Israeli threats against Lebanon and Syria, in conjunction with failure of international efforts to push Israel for progress toward Mideast peace.

Balloons with Hebrew Writings Found in South Lebanon

Naharnet/Balloons with Hebrew writings on them were found on Monday in the southern town of Aishiyeh, the state-run National News Agency said. It said the Lebanese army subsequently examined the balloons for the presence of toxins.

Israeli Warplanes Break Sound Barrier over South Lebanon

Naharnet/Israeli warplanes on Monday flew over south and east Lebanon, breaking the sound barrier over Iqlim al-Tuffah and the Bekaa. The National News Agency said Israeli jet fighters flew at medium altitude over Jezzine and Iqlim al-Tuffah around 11 am. It said the warplanes continued their overflights over Hasbaya, Marjayoun and Western Bekaa for over an hour, breaking the sound barrier.

Lebanese Man Given Death Penalty for Spying for Israel

Naharnet/Government Commissioner to the Military Court Judge Saqr Saqr on Monday demanded the death penalty for Lebanese citizen Ibrahim Amin al-Baba on charges of spying for Israel. Baba was also charged with contacting the Israeli enemy and entering the Jewish state several times in addition to engaging in plots and providing information about Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad activities in return for hefty cash rewards

The view from the White House
Monday, April 26, 2010
Editorial/Daily Star
It is with a sense of déjà vu that we enter yet another critical period in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. Unabated settlement growth, disputes over holy sites in the West Bank and clashes on the Israel-Gaza border have put the conflict firmly on the Obama administration’s radar once more.
In a speech to the Washington Institute last week, Obama’s national security advisor General James L. Jones gave some insight as to how the US might approach their latest drive for peace in the region, as he outlined its main security concerns.
Most prominently on the list, somewhat predictably, was the reassertion that Iran would not be allowed to attain a nuclear bomb, and the concern that it was expanding its influence in the region. The second most significant on the list was Israel’s internal problem in the form of a demographic bomb – that is the unfeasibility of Israel remaining a democratic “Jewish state” in the absence of a two-state solution – which the US sees as something that is in its own interests to solve.
The two problems are by no means disconnected. It is the view of the US that solving Israel’s dilemma would deprive Iran of the justification for expanding its influence in the region. This then translates into a question: Is Obama poised to take the initiative and use his clout to convince his strategic ally Israel to accept a peace deal with the Palestinians, and in doing so, kill two birds with one stone?
Jones’ speech puts him among a growing number of senior military figures, including Commander of US Central Command General David Petraeus, who see the Israel-Palestine conflict as a serious threat to the United States’ national security. What must surely follow from this long overdue realization is a discussion within the American security community as to what their country can do to forge peace in the region.
This discussion, if undertaken seriously, should reveal the task of at least restarting peace negotiations as something of a low-lying fruit for the Obama administration.
At this moment in time, everyone involved in the conflict is weakened in some way. Israel, Iraq and Turkey are all facing ethnically-fueled predicaments within their borders, and in Egypt problems of a political nature are growing for the ruling regime. Obama on the other hand, is emboldened by his recent successes with healthcare and a nuclear reduction treaty.
Jones has given us the view from the White House, and it is how Obama responds to this emerging viewpoint of his security advisors that will decide the region’s fate. Will the US use its substantial leverage with Israel to pressure it to halt settlements completely and allow for peace talks? Are we to see a different approach and in turn a new lease of life to a seemingly irreconcilable dispute? Or is it to be more of the same, and a decade of instability and conflict worse than any that has gone before.

STL releases first annual report on trial progress
By The Daily Star
Monday, April 26, 2010
BEIRUT: President of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) Antonio Cassese issued Friday the first annual report of the tribunal’s work after being referred by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to the Security Council. The report, which was obtained by pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat, will be considered as one of the UN’s official documents. It covers the period between March 1, 2009, and February 28, 2010, and labeled the first year of STL’s work as a period of “vital importance.” Also, the report covered the “tribunal’s achievements” and the challenges it faced due to extreme complication of the mission of dealing with terrorism on the international judicial level and because of the newness of this task.
According to the report, STL’s 2010 budget increased to $55.4 million compared to $51.4 million in 2009.
Cassese stressed that “despite the challenges that the tribunal will face, it intends to achieve justice free from any political or ideological chains, and based on complete mutual respect for the rights of the prosecuted as well as the victims.” “Accordingly, continuous efforts should be pursued to secure funding and judicial help from countries and international organizations,” he added. “In addition to all difficulties that international forensic tribunals usually suffer from, STL which is an international forensic tribunal dealing with terrorism cases, faces other problems pertaining to the investigation and collecting evidence,” said Cassese. “That’s why the tribunal should persist in overcoming those complications and challenges that constitute an undividable part of investigations in terrorist crimes and chasing the perpetrators,” he noted. In addition, the tribunal should tackle another major challenge for it is the first international judicial committee that decides on the responsibility of terrorism as a crime in itself, Cassese added. According to the STL official, “the tribunal aims at improving the culture of accountability among the Lebanese.” Cassese emphasized that the STL aimed at reconciling Lebanese, a step enhanced by the quick revealing of truth. The STL was created by the UN Security Council in May 2007 to try suspects involved in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and other related crimes. – The Daily Star

Geagea denies tensions with Jumblatt after war of words
By The Daily Star /Monday, April 26, 2010
BEIRUT: Head of the Lebanese Forces Samir Geagea responded on Saturday to the accusations of Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblatt by saying that the relations between the two were “not tense at all.” Jumblatt had accused Geagea in an article published by the Arabic newspaper Al-Akhbar of not having learned from the lessons of the past. “He is revealing himself day after day and his words are worrying. He doesn’t want to learn from past experiences.” Geagea responded to Jumblatt’s allegations during a meeting he held with Prime Minister Saad Hariri at Beit al-Wasat in Beirut. He was asked by media outlets if relations between himself and Jumblatt were tense due to the published comments, a question to which he answered, “They are not tense at all.” “Of course there are no tensions but Walid Jumblatt has his own opinion,” he added. Jumblatt had also mentioned in the article that Geagea’s words reminded people of the 1982 and 1983 war years when the Palestinian weaponry was the focus of discussions. “Their alibi today is the weaponry of the resistance,” he said. Geagea discussed several local affairs during his meeting with Hariri, including the coming municipal elections and Lebanon’s security situation. Hariri, meanwhile, also met on Saturday with Lebanese Army commander General Jean Kahwaji and a number of military figures at the air base of the Rafik Hariri International Airport. He examined the four Puma SA330 airplanes that were presented to Lebanon this year by the United Arab Emirates out of 10 planes the Arab country donated to reinforce Lebanon’s air defense. Hariri announced that six more planes should be arriving to Lebanon and vowed the government was doing its best to strengthen Lebanon’s defense. – The Daily Star

Tens of thousands of Armenians march in Beirut to mark genocide
Organizers appalled by absence of Government representatives

By Sebastien Malo /Daily Star staff
Monday, April 26, 2010
BEIRUT: Tens of thousands of Lebanese of Armenian decent rallied Saturday to commemorate the massacres of their relatives at the hands of Ottoman Turks almost a century ago, while organizers and political leaders expressed their worries at Turkey’s growing influence in the region and in Lebanon.
The boisterous crowd of Armenians who gathered at the yearly demonstration reaffirmed the claim that 1.5 million Armenians where killed in a genocide by Ottoman Turks between 1915 and 1923. Sixty-thousand Armenians ignored the political divisions that frequently pit them against one another and marched together according to organizers.
The protesters waved banners calling for the recognition of the genocide and flags of Armenia and Lebanon as they walked on the coastal highway – partially closed for the occasion – under the curious eyes of drivers caught in the opposite lane’s congested traffic. Several troops of scouts, clad with their multicolor uniforms, could be seen chanting slogans and drumming as they strolled alongside families and dignitaries. They paraded for nearly two hours after a morning Mass at the Armenian Catholicostate in Antelias and headed to the Bourj Hammoud Municipal Stadium where they listened to speeches by Armenian political and social leaders.
“This march is very important because 10 decades after the Ottomans committed the first genocide, authorities are still denying it took place,” said 64-year-old Mardig, a teacher and businessman of Armenian descent whose parents settled in Sidon in 1920.
For the Armenians whose relatives have been compelled to live in exile, universal recognition of the genocide has become a crucial quest. “Everybody knows the reality, but because of economic reasons, great powers are denying it happened,” said Mardig, his son at his side. Since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1922 and the subsequent creation of modern day Turkey, authorities in Ankara have persistently denied the contentious accusations of genocide and claimed that both Turks and Armenians were killed as a result of their empire’s chaotic breakdown.
So far, only 20 countries – including Lebanon – have assigned the stigmatizing label of genocide to the massacres, often as a result of the large number of Armenian descendents among their population. Ankara has generally responded with hostility when countries have passed resolutions recognizing the genocide. Last month, such a declaration by the US House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs Committee saw Turkey reconsider its ties with Washington.
Several organizers and political leaders said that with Lebanon’s Parliament having already passed a resolution recognizing the genocide in 2000, they hoped the government would now curtail its growing economic ties with Turkey, and that it would show less contempt toward its Armenian population.
With Turkey’s growing importance in the region, Armenians accuse the Lebanese government of increasingly taking decisions that please their Turkish counterparts, but are unpopular among the Armenian community. In 2008, for instance, the Lebanese government stripped Martyrs Day – a tribute to the killing of Lebanese intellectuals by the Ottomans – from the list of public holidays celebrated in the country, a move many Armenians have yet to stomach.
During a speech in Bourj Hammoud Municipal Stadium, Armenian Tashnag Party MP Hagop Pakradounian warned his Armenian audience against the growing influence of Turkey in the Middle East and in Lebanon. “We demand not to fall to Turkey’s ambitions in the region. Turkey is trying to take a role of mediator, but that is only a cover to … take control of the Middle East. We won’t let Turkey go too far, especially in Lebanon,” he said.
Organizers said they were particularly appalled by the absence of representatives of the heads of the government’s executive branch, which they said they perceived as a snub. “I’m very upset,” said Krikor Khasholian, a member of the manifestation’s organizing committee. “We sent them an invitation and expected they would [reply].”
“The Lebanese are keener to establish relations with Turkey than to respect their Lebanese citizens,” added Maral Joulouyan, another organizer.
Several protesters at the rally said this year’s march was particularly significant given the current peace talks between Armenia and Turkey. The talks are hugely unpopular among the Armenian Diaspora, which objects ways in which border issues are being discussed, and given Ankara’s refusal to recognize the genocide as part of the process. “The talks have been a slap in the face of the whole Armenian Diaspora,” said Rafi, an engineer at the march. The event was organized by the Central Committee of the Commemoration of the Armenian Genocide in Lebanon, which comprises all Armenian political parties, organizations and associations.

Pretexts for Downplaying the Possibility of War
Fri, 23 April 2010
Walid Choucair/Al Hayat
Diplomatic efforts are underway to treat the Middle East Crisis, in parallel with the danger of war in the region. The drums of war are beating every month or two, and each time there are new pretexts for war.
It has been striking to notice the common denominator with regard to the threats of war being talk about Lebanon and Hizbullah, and not Iran or Gaza. It has also been observed that countries concerned with stability in Lebanon are continuing to affirm their commitments to strengthening a minimum level of stability and preventing a deterioration of conditions. Meanwhile, the pretext for escalating the rhetoric of war, coming from Israel and buttressed by American warnings about Hizbullah’s growing supplies of new weapons and large rockets, quickly dies down, after the Israelis rant on about threats to them, and make warnings about preparations for war. However, each time, the wave of threats dies down, leaving repercussions on the regional political situation, not to mention the situation in Lebanon, which is the country in the region most concerned with fears of this war, since it is the likely arena for it to take place, not elsewhere, whether Syria, Palestine or Iran. With the ebbing of each wave, we continue to remember that there is something dangerous in the current regional equation, requiring a rise in the “danger level” each time. If the clouds of war dissipate each time, this does not mean the possibility of such a war has disappeared. This is because there are few opportunities by which we can follow-up the efforts to avert tension, and become convinced that it has receded.
A little more than two months ago, these circles concluded that the idea that effort to contain the tension had postponed a war, and not eliminated the possibility of one. Some of these circles talked about the need for more time, to test the Barack Obama administration’s ability to impose sanctions on Iran, and test the effectiveness of these sanctions in forcing Iran in the direction of useful negotiations and their ability to cause a breakthrough in peace negotiations on the Palestinian track until the end of 2010. Thus, if war becomes the likely option, it will be pushed back to 2011. Any war in the foreseeable future, even if a limited one in Lebanon, will destroy the efforts underway to secure a consensus or semi-consensus on sanctions against Iran and restrict America’s ability to begin Palestinian-Israeli peace talks, until further notice, irrespective of the consequences of this war.
In the most recent wave of war threats, the high-pitched tone by Israel and western countries had aspects of self-restraint, when talking about the reports of Hizbullah’s obtaining ballistic missiles, including Scuds, as well as aspects of a threat that the war would hit reach Syria, and not just Lebanon.
There is really no justification for comparing Washington’s statement that all options are on the table vis-à-vis Syria if the “possibility” that it has supplied the party with these missiles is proven, to the statements by American officials that there is no evidence that Syria has delivered these missiles. The only justification is an American desire to reverting to the war option. Some say that even if the White House had such evidence, it will not go public, if it wants to avoid a war in the region under these circumstances. Bringing the evidence out in to the open means the administration will be committing to behavior that is in line with the Syrian step, i.e. trying to strike at Hizbullah’s military power, as a tool being used by both Syria and Iran. This is what the US administration wants to avoid for now. Moreover, diplomats concerned with following up the seriousness of Israel and the west are talking about disparities in the intelligence information. Sometimes it indicates that the party has transferred long-range missiles of unknown quality, or that Syria has provided the Hizbullah with these missiles but that these complex weapons have not been completely assembled, or that an officer from Hizbullah trained in how to use these missiles, either in Syria or Iran, without obtaining them. All of this renders the ongoing commotion about missiles less important than what official statements are saying about the matter.
The movement toward downplaying the specter of war is not limited to Washington (and the west along with it), through statements by the assistant secretary of state, Jeffrey Feltman, in his response to criticisms by Republican congressmen of the Obama administration’s policy of openness to Syria; he affirmed that “engagement with Syria is in order to change its relations with Hizbullah and Iran.”
Bearing in mind the fiery statements by Iranian leaders, one cannot ignore the statements by Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmat Davatoglu, about his optimism about the possibility of a settlement with Iran, after it mediated with the Islamic Republic two days ago, over its nuclear program. If Syria was playing a game of brinksmanship in its relations with Iran and Hizbullah, the logic of this policy has demanded from the beginning that we do not fall into the abyss. This is what Damascus is trying to do in its openness to Washington and its progress in improving its Arab relations, which in coming days should witness a new step, in terms of reconciliation with Egypt.

What does Israel Want from Escalation against Syria
Fri, 23 April 2010
Raghida Dergham/Al Hayat
New York-The development, or the tension, in the relationship between the US and Syria, resulting from accusations against Damascus of providing Hezbollah with Scud missiles, accusations which Syria has denied and Israel has confirmed, deserves to be examined, in order to analyze its background, perspectives and repercussions on the bilateral relationship and on Syria positioning itself regionally. Indeed, the Barack Obama Administration warning the Syrian government against “the risk of miscalculation that could result from this type of escalation” was followed by a violent campaign from Congress against the Administration, warning it against the policy of leniency, opening up, dialogue and engagement with Damascus without holding it accountable for the past and without closely examining current Syrian policies towards Iran, Hezbollah and armed Palestinian groups inside Lebanon. This coincided with insinuations to the fact that the US Administration would not wage a losing and costly battle to prevent Israel from carrying out a military operation that would include Syria and would not be limited to Hezbollah, due to weapons being leaked in violation of Security Council Resolutions. Indeed, the Administration is in the process of a battle with Israel because of illegal settlement-building and escalation in Jerusalem. In fact, the relationship between the Barack Obama Administration and the Netanyahu government is growing increasingly tense, while there is recurrent talk of the US Administration preparing a plan to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli and Arab-Israeli conflict, one which Israel opposes. Moreover, the US Administration is also waging the battle of strengthening sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran and working to prevent Israel from embarking on any military adventure against Iran. And because these battles have priority and are fundamental in the US’s strategy, the Obama Administration will not expose them to fragility by adding to them another battle it is not convinced of, in order to restrain Israel from undertaking military operations to eliminate Hezbollah’s missiles and to obstruct the routes through which military supplies are leaked to it in Syria. Thus, indications out of Washington point to the fact that the US Administration will not stand in Israel’s way if it is proven beyond doubt that advanced missiles have reached Hezbollah, regardless of whether these missiles came from Syria or from Iran, reaching Hezbollah through Syria. Indeed, in both cases, Syria would be deeply involved in this crisis. If the missiles came from Iran, Tehran would thereby be violating two Security Council Resolutions, one which forbids it from exporting weapons and another which forbids any weapons being leaked to any party in Lebanon other than the Army. Regarding Syria, the matter is complicated and increasing in complexity due to Damascus’s positioning, the obscurity of its aims and the excess in some of its “tactics”, shedding doubts on and raising questions over its strategy. Primarily raised is a question revolving around Syria’s strategic choice towards each of Israel and Iran, and such a choice intertwining with the relations sought-after with the United States.
To begin with, and if the issue of the missiles has been “fabricated” as Syria claims, having categorically denied Israel’s accusations, the questions asks itself from the perspective of: what does Israel want from such escalation against Syria, and not just against Hezbollah?
Israel today has crammed itself in a corner and brought international isolation upon itself. Its deteriorating relations with the US Administration have led to division within the circle of its supporters in Jewish-American organizations and to heating up the voice of part of US public opinion. The US military institution has grown restless towards Israel because it finds in its rejection of peace and its insistence on moving forward with occupation, settlement-building, oppression, assassinations, targeting of civilians, destruction of homes and expulsion, policies which are harmful to the national interest of the US. Indeed, the military institution is waging wars against extremism in numerous parts of the Muslim world, and the measures taken by Israel are feeding extremism, strengthening it and setting it against American targets because of the US continuing to embrace its “spoilt child” Israel without holding it accountable. Thus the pressures of the military institution, the US Administration and public opinion on Israel have increased, so that it may stop taking the national interest of the US lightly.
Fabricating crises, provoking wars or taking decisions that had been postponed until further notice – such as confronting Hezbollah’s missiles – are measures which help bring Israel out of international isolation and help it elude US pressures. Providing Hezbollah with advanced missiles is an issue that does not earn international sympathy, but in fact provokes anger and places Israel in the position of the “victim” which is “defending itself”. This may well be what Israel had planned for by fabricating the missile crisis, or it may have been offered it on a silver platter if the accusations of these additional missiles being leaked to Hezbollah turn out to be true.
They are additional because Hezbollah does not deny possessing missiles which it boasts about publicly. Iran in general denies being the one to have provided Hezbollah with such missiles, and Syria always pretends that its borders with Lebanon are not under its complete control. Israel has repeatedly made clear that it could temporarily coexist with Hezbollah’s arsenal at its border, but that it would not permanently coexist with such an arsenal, especially as it increases in quantity and in quality. Thus, if the Lebanese Dialogue Table fails to resolve the issue of this arsenal and if regional deals, whether with Syria or with Iran, fail to contain it, then a destructive war against all of Lebanon will be the decision taken by Israel at the end of the day.
The novelty lies not in Israel’s relationship with Hezbollah’s arsenal on the Lebanese scene, but rather in directly threatening Syria militarily by making it bear responsibility for these missiles after Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman had spoken of “toppling the regime in Syria”.
The US Administration has sought to contain Israeli-Syrian escalation and has prevented Israel from rushing to take military measures because of the Scud missiles. Nevertheless, with the rise in anger and accusations, the Administration felt that it might not be able to continue to hold back Israeli operations, and thus it escalated the investigation into Israel’s claims and informed Syria through its ambassador in Washington and through the statement made by Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman before Congress, saying that: “If these reports turn out to be true, (…) [then] Syria has made a mistake (…) [and] we are going to have to review the full range of tools that are available [to] us”.
At first, Damascus behaved as if it had found in Israel’s threats an opportunity for it to raise the banner of steadfastness and resistance. It worried a little from the effect of this on the White House’s decision to return the US ambassador to Damascus – after having been withdrawn by the George W. Bush Administration in the wake of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri’s assassination. Yet it quickly became reassured of its conclusion that the Barack Obama Administration would not go back on its strategic decision to engage Syria, and thus on its decision to send an ambassador to Damascus.
Damascus indulging in such an assumption contributed to Washington warning it three days ago against “the risk of miscalculation”, and the heated debate among the ranks of members of Congress in the unruly session two days ago with Feltman has sent a message to Damascus that it should be very careful.
Indeed, stances have emerged, articles have been published and seminars have been held, most of them warning Damascus against being excessive in “celebrating victory” to the point of intoxication. Some mentioned that the reason for Syria slipping into isolation for five years came as a result of committing the mistake of insisting on imposing an amendment to the Lebanese constitution in order to extend former President of the Republic Emile Lahoud’s term in office. Many spoke of “the straw that broke the camel’s back”. They pointed to the Resistance Summit hosted by Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and attended by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Secretary-General of Hezbollah Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah, through which Damascus hinted at replacing its declared strategic choice based on negotiations and peace by the strategic choice of resistance.
If Damascus were really to go through with this, i.e. to abandon the doctrine of “negotiations are our strategic choice” and replace it with that of “resistance is our strategic choice”, then it would have to do the following: prepare for a military confrontation with Israel in a war that would take place in both Syria and Lebanon, one which Iran would not wage and which Arab armies would not take part in, and do without a relationship with Washington, one which Damascus has sought after for a long time, reaching the phase of the US ambassador being returned, the past being overlooked, Syria’s leadership being dealt with as an essential party in the region, and work being done towards negotiations between Syria and Israel.
However, if Syrian diplomacy is adopting maneuvers to obtain the maximum of what it wants at a time when the US, Europe and the Arabs are being lenient towards it, its wager might succeed just as it could result in a terrible failure. So far, Damascus has reaped benefits without having to pay any price, thanks to Qatari, French, Saudi, American as well as Israeli diplomacy. Damascus did this without losing or even seriously putting at risk the strategic Iranian-Syrian relationship.
Today, after Damascus has informed all those concerned that their wager on splitting it way from Iran was naïve, it is behaving with the same kind of exaggeration that has characterized Iran’s behavior. In other words, Damascus seems as if it is in turn trying to make Barack Obama fail and to cripple the policy of engagement he has adopted, at a time when the US President seeks to pressure Israel.
Noteworthy is the fact that the ruling regimes in Israel and Iran are the ones who would benefit most from fabricating wars – through Lebanon – in order to turn international pressure away from themselves. Yet Syria seems as if playing a dangerous game between the two.
There is talk – even if it seems unlikely – of a Syrian desire to bring about an Israeli military strike against itself and against Lebanon, in order to redraw the map of the region, such that Syria would take on the position of Arab leadership in confronting Israel with an alliance with Iran. Such a scenario seems unbelievable because the cost of war and the cost of such a decision would be momentous. Yet in times like these it is unwise not to take into consideration even unbelievable scenarios.
Realistically, Syria will most likely run up the ladder to safeguard its relationship with the United States and to return its relationship with Israel to its restraints. Yet this crisis has placed it under the microscope of observation, and thus it would be useful for Damascus to make a show of good will. Moreover, it is necessary for the US Administration to stop burying its head in the sand in terms of the relationship between Syria and Iran – or between Syria and Lebanon – and to do all that it can to strip Israel of pretexts and prevent it from engrossing the region in costly wars.

PM reassures: No truth to alleged planned strike against Syria

Published: 04.26.10, 16:16 / Israel News Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the opening of a Likud faction meeting in the Knesset, "There is no truth to insinuations that Israel is allegedly planning a move against Syria." Netanyahu's comments came in response to recent Syrian concerns over an Israeli strike. "I estimate that this is an attempt made by Iran and Hezbollah to distract the international community from the sanctions planned against Iran," added Netanyahu. (Roni Sofer)

Clinton: U.S. still seeks engagement with Syria
April 26, 8:24 AMNY
A.P. photo/ Virginia Mayo -- with Finland's Foreign MinisterSecretary of State Clinton says that the U.S. will still seek engagement with Syria until if finds that Syria actually did ship Scuds to Hizbullah in Lebanon.
She said, “We would like to have a more balanced and positive relationship with
Syria." "We would like to see Syria play a more constructive role and engage in an effort to resolve its outstanding conflict with Israel." (IMRA, 4/25/10).
To think that Syria, an imperialist country allied with fanatical Iran, would be constructive and try to resolve a conflict without conquering its enemy is childishly naïve. A conspiracy buff would add that notion to all the other foreign policy blunders by the Obama administration and conclude that the blunders, like those in domestic policy, are designed to bring the U.S. down. Such a buff prefers to see a plot rather than conclude that Obama’s radical ideology is an all-around failure.