LCCC
ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِApril
29/2010
Bible Of the
Day
Hatred & Grudges lead to bloody
disasters & to endless hostilities.
What victims of temptation ignore is that their adversaries will by the end be
forced to speak their language, love and forgiveness or wars and revenge. Saint
Peter calls on every one to pursue peace. Could those who have ears use them and
hear? 1Corinth...ians
1:10 Now I beg you, brothers, through the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ, that
you all speak the same thing and that there be no divisions among you, but that
you be perfected together in the same mind and in the same judgment
Free Opinions, Releases, letters, Interviews & Special Reports
Egyptian Christians
Protest Judicial Ploy/ICC Release/April 28/10
Do
the Scuds make sense?/By: Nicholas Lowry/April
28/10
America’s “big game”/By:Tony
Badran/April 28/10
Peaceful resistance needs
reconciliation/Daily Star/April 28/10
Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for April 28/10
Egypt hands down jail terms in
Hezbollah trial/Now Lebanon/Naharnet
Mubarak
Reassures Hariri: No War on Lebanon/Naharnet
European Parliamentary Delegation Visits Hariri: Support for Peace Process,
UNIFIL Presence/Naharnet
LAF arrests four in
southern village of Hasbaya/Now Lebanon/Naharnet
EU
Urges Mideast Parties to Avoid 'Provocation' after Scud Claims/Naharnet
March
14 Urges Lebanese to Rally Behind Government and Win its Protection/Naharnet
Hizbullah Strikes Back at
US Accusations, Pledges to Continue Arming/Naharnet
Berri Suggests Forming
'Nucleus' of Committee for Abolishing Sectarianism/Naharnet
Beirut Municipal Council
Deal Not Looming on the Horizon/Naharnet
Hariri Asks Media to
Expose Bad Shipments, Cabinet Approves Setting Up Hospital in Aley/Naharnet
Brennan, Lebanese
Officials Discuss Iran Nuclear Program, Scuds, Counterterrorism/Naharnet
Geagea Doesn't Rule Out
Negotiating with FPM in Beirut Elections/Naharnet
Threat
of catastrophic earthquake looms over Lebanon/By
Sebastien Malo/Daily Star
Edde:
resistance, defense forces must be balanced/Daily
Star
Egyptian court convicts 26 men of Hezbollah links/Washington
Post
US, Israel say Syria arming Hezbollah with
missiles/Washington Post
Israel eyes Syria-Turkey
military drill/Jerusalem Post
The moderate Arab bloc - now you see it, now you
don't/Ha'aretz
Lebanon transfers soldiers' remains to Syria/Ynetnews
Scuds or No Scuds, South Lebanon
Beckons Tourists/ABC News
Southern Lebanon seeks to become tourist
destination, despite Scud claims/Ha'aretz
Egypt warns of Israel-Lebanon
escalation/Jerusalem Post
Barak says Syria transferring weapons to
Hezbollah/Reuters
EU foreign policy chief: Avoid all provocations in
Middle East/Ynetnews
No Iran military presence in Venezuela: US general/Washington
Post
Austria refuses to send troops to UNIFIL in
Lebanon/Ya Libnan
Egypt: Scud controversy ups Israel-Lebanon
tension/The Associated Press
Israelis
hack National News Agency website/AFP
Visiting
delegation says Europe will keep UNIFIL in south/Daily
Star
Saqr
reiterates call for Nahhas to resign after Telecoms Ministry 'scandal'/Daily
Star
Iraqi
premier to work on releasing Lebanese truckers/Daily
Star
FPM,
Future Movement intensify efforts to clinch deal in Beirut municipal polls/Daily
Star
Hariri:
Israel's Scud charges an excuse to start another war/Daily
Star
Safadi
urges boycott of Israeli goods in Arab markets/Daily
Star
Kassar
calls on Arab countries to improve exports, imports record/Daily
Star
Hariri meets with Berri at Nejmeh
Square/Now Lebanon
Adwan slams Bassil’s criticisms of
LF/Now Lebanon
US:
Hizbullah Has One of World’s Largest Missile Arsenals
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu//Arutz Sheva
Syria is helping Hizbullah stockpile “far more rockets and missiles than most
governments in the world,” U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday at a
joint press conference with visiting Defense Minister Ehud Barak.
Without specifically mentioning the Scud missile, which Hizbullah reportedly is
adding to its arsenal with Syria’s and Iran’s help, Secretary Gates stated,
"Syria and Iran are providing Hizbullah with rockets and missiles of
ever-increasing capability… and this is obviously destabilizing for the whole
region.”
His comments came at the same time that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has
tried to assure Lebanon that Israel has no intention of attacking Hizbullah. The
latter's forces have blended in with the Lebanese army to the level that Prime
Minister Netanyahu said it is hard to distinguish between the two.
Defense Minister Barak (pictured at left with Gates) also tried to soothe fears,
saying at the press conference that "we do not intend to provoke any kind of
major clash in Lebanon or vis-a-vis Syria.” Israel and Hizbullah fought the
34-day Second Lebanon War in 2006, which ended with United Nations guarantees
that Hizbullah would be disarmed. However, commanders of UN Interim Forces in
Lebanon (UNIFIL) said at the outset that they were not able to carry out the
mandate.
The United Nations has ignored most of Israel’s appeals to put a stop to
Hizbullah’s smuggling of missiles, which now number three or four times the
20,000 missiles it possessed before the war and which are far more
sophisticated. The Scud missile, used by Iraq against Israel in the 1991 Gulf
War, can easily strike Tel Aviv from Lebanon.
Although the United States has not confirmed that Hizbullah has Scuds, the
reports on their being shipped by Syria actually may have been leaked by the
United States in order to put pressure on UNIFIL. Hizbullah’s dominance in
southern Lebanon and its alliance with the Lebanese government would make any
counterterrorist measures or diplomatic moves ineffective.
Following the report last week, which was confirmed by President Shimon Peres,
the U.S. State Department summoned Syria’s chief of mission for a warning of
Damascus’ “provocative behavior,” but Syria has rejected all accusations.
Egyptian Christians Protest Judicial Ploy
Thousands Expected to Assemble to Demand Equal Representation in Court
http://www.persecution.org/suffering/newssummpopup.php?newscode=12211
Washington, D.C. (April 27, 2010) – International Christian Concern (ICC) has
learned that on April 28, Egyptian Christians will gather in Saint Mark’s
Cathedral in Cairo to protest the continuous postponement of the trial of
Mohammed al-Kammuni, the primary suspect charged with killing six Christians in
Naga Hammadi.
On April 18, the emergency court hearing of Mohammed al-Kammuni and two other
defendants was postponed for a third consecutive time. Coptic Christians are
furious, believing that the delay is a government ploy used to cause frustration
among the Copts and to deter public attention so that the case is eventually
forgotten. Copts suspect that once the case is removed from the forefront of
popular debate, the judge will sentence al-Kammuni with an inconsequential
punishment or possibly emit an acquittal.
Wagih Yacoub, an outspoken Coptic human rights activist, told ICC, “They are
trying to kill the case, and they are blocking the media from broadcasting the
case. They are trying to push us to forget the case. This is an emergency court,
which should reconvene immediately, but it has been five months now.”
ICC sources expect thousands to be at the protest, including the father of a
young man who was shot dead by Muslim fundamentalists in Naga Hammadi. However,
protestors have asked Coptic leaders to stay home, stating that Coptic bishops
and priests should remain leaders in the church, and avoid becoming entangled in
a political movement.
“This is a protest among the Coptic people to express their anger and show the
government that we are not forgetting our blood,” said Yacoub. “We will not let
them play with us like they did in El-Kush or Abu Fanah. We have requested that
leaders of the Copts not involve themselves in politics. They cannot appear in
such a protest, or the government will push on the church.”
Yacoub went on to say, “We will keep pushing. We will not be quiet again. They
will not shut us out until the court issues proper judgment against those who
killed our youth.”
Aidan Clay, ICC Regional Manager of the Middle East, said, “Earlier this year,
we saw Copts demonstrating throughout the world in protest of the Egyptian
government’s failure to respond to the Naga Hammadi killings. The Christians of
Egypt are still dissatisfied. They are continuing in their struggle for equal
rights and fair representation in court. Egyptian Christians are courageously
demanding that their injustice be known, and ICC stands firmly beside them.”
Muslim Mob Brutally Murder Two Christian Journalists in Nigeria
Washington, D.C. (April 27, 2010)–International Christian Concern (ICC) has
learned that on April 24 Nigerian Muslims murdered two journalists working for a
church publication in Jos, Nigeria. Nathan Sheleph Dabak and Sunday Gyang Bwede
were working for “The Light Bearer” Newspaper, a publication of the Church of
Christ in Nigeria.
According the church’s press statement, the journalists were on duty when the
Muslims murdered them. The Muslims also took their cell phones and other
belongings. When a friend of Dabak called his number, one of the Muslims
responded, saying, “We have killed all of them; you can do your worst.”
ICC’s representative in Nigeria spoke with sources in Jos today and confirmed
that the journalists were stopped by a Muslim mob which brutally slew them after
finding out that they were Christians working for a Christian newspaper. The
church found their bodies on April 25 in the mortuary of the Jos University
Teaching Hospital.
The slaying of the journalists comes on the heels of the murder of two members
of the church on April 13 in Bauchi state. Reverend Ishaya Kada and his wife
were forcefully taken from their homes by Muslims. When their bodies were found,
they had been burned beyond recognition. The Church of Christ in Nigeria has
declared April 26 and April 27 to be a mourning period for the four martyrs. “We
call all our members to remain calm; although there are security lapses. They
should not panic but trust God with their lives…We must cry out to God and allow
Him to take vengeance. The leadership will take the matter to appropriate
quarters,” said Reverend Dr. Pandang Yamsta. Reverend Yamsta is the president of
the Church of Christ in Nigeria. ICC’s Regional Manager for Africa, Jonathan
Racho, said, “We are deeply saddened by the continuous murder of Christians in
Nigeria. The Nigerian government has failed to protect its citizens from
killings. We urge the international community to put pressure on Nigeria to end
the killings.”
Please sign the petition to ask Nigerian officials to bring the perpetrators of
the attacks to justice and put an end to the loss of its citizens. (To read and
sign the petition:
http://www.persecution.org/suffering/petitions.php)
Hizbullah
Strikes Back at US /Accusations, Pledges to Continue Arming
NaharnetHizbullah hit back at U.S. accusations that the Shiite group was
building up stocks of powerful weapons and pledged to continue arming. "Our
choice was and remains to secure all the arms of resistance that we can,"
Hizbullah MP Hasan Fadlallah said in an interview with AFP. Fadlallah said
Hizbullah's weapons "do not measure up to the level of armament and crimes of
the U.S. which it used in its crimes against peoples around the world -- from
Hiroshima to the more than 100,000 martyrs killed in Iraq and the tens of
thousands killed in Palestine, Lebanon and Afghanistan." "There is a difference
between weapons which only serve invasions, occupations and aggressions, such as
those of the United States and its ally Israel ... and the arms of a resistance
which defends, protects, and liberates," he stressed. U.S. Defense Secretary
Robert Gates has accused Iran and Syria of arming Hizbullah with "increasingly
sophisticated" rockets and missiles. He said Hizbullah had "far more rockets and
missiles than most governments in the world, and this is obviously destabilizing
for the whole region and we're watching it very carefully."(AFP-Nahartnet)
March 14 Urges Lebanese to Rally Behind Government and Win its Protection
Naharnet/The majority March 14 coalition on Wednesday urged Lebanese to rally
behind the government which considers safety of people's life.
"We call on all Lebanese to unite and rally behind the state which has the
exclusive right to take action to protect Lebanon, given that such protection is
a national, Arab and international responsibility," said a statement issued by
March 14 at the end of its weekly meeting. The statement pointed to the
increasing political and security tensions in the region and the accompanying
threats and preparations of war on the part of Israel and Iran which « puts
Lebanon at serious risk, » particulary since the threats exchanged between the
parties deal with Lebanon on the basis that it is a main arena of confrontation
in any future war. March 14 also called on the government to activate its role
in supporting peace in the region on the basis of the Arab Peace Initiative and
relevant international resolutions relevant «because peace and stability in
Lebanon are part of regional peace and stability. » Beirut, 28 Apr 10, 14:30
Brennan, Lebanese Officials Discuss Iran Nuclear Program, Scuds,
Counterterrorism
Naharnet/The secrecy that has so far surrounded the visit of a top U.S. official
to Beirut has been noteworthy.
According to the Central News Agency, John Brennan, U.S. Assistant to the
President and Deputy National Security Adviser for Homeland Security and
Counterterrorism, held talks with Lebanese officials on the Iranian nuclear
program, the Scud missiles row and the means of cooperation with Lebanon on
counterterrorism in shadow of reports about extremist groups being active inside
Palestinian refugee camps.
Brennan also reportedly discussed the means to deal with the weapons of the
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, "especially that
the U.S. is ready to present military aid to Lebanon and to arm the Lebanese
Army to enable it of facing such threats."
The top U.S. official was quoted as saying that he considers Hizbullah as one of
the groups conducting "terrorist acts under the veil of resistance and social
activities."
Brennan reportedly noted that the U.S. efforts, through its special envoy to the
Middle East George Mitchell, as to relaunching the peace talks are going in
parallel with the efforts to curb the activities of groups such as Hizbullah and
Hamas, "given that peace between Israel and the Palestinians is apt to isolate
these two groups."
Other sources associated Brennan's visit with the Iranian controversial nuclear
program and noted that the U.S. administration -- which is contacting the member
states of the Security Council, including Lebanon, to press them to support
further sanctions against Iran – had previously assigned the mission of
following up on this issue to William Burns, U.S. Undersecretary of State for
Political Affairs.
"However, the U.S. administration decided to work through more than one channel
due to its belief that sanctions on Iran affect the arming of Hizbullah,
especially that Iran is jeopardizing global security and providing Hizbullah
with weapons, the thing that makes it a threat to the entire Middle East region,
not only Lebanon," the sources added.
The same sources noted that "Brennan, who is leading the U.S. steps in the face
of the Iranian nuclear threat, has heard from Lebanon the same stance Burns had
heard before from the officials he met during his last visit – that Lebanon will
not back such sanctions in the Security Council."
Lebanon's Foreign Minister Ali al-Shami was quoted as saying that Iran cannot be
prosecuted over its development of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes,
"the thing confirmed by Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who ruled
out any use of atomic weaponry as 'haram,'" meaning religiously banned under
Islam.
On Tuesday evening, a statement issued by the U.S. Embassy said that "Brennan
met with Lebanese government representatives, including President Michel
Suleiman, Prime Minister Saad Hariri, Foreign Minister Shami, Defense Minister
Elias Murr and Interior Minister Ziad Baroud and discussed the United States'
continuing support for Lebanon as the Lebanese government seeks to strengthen
state institutions, build peace and stability within Lebanon, and contribute to
peace and stability throughout the region."
"Brennan also met with Army Commander General Jean Qahwaji and Director General
of the Internal Security Forces (ISF) Maj. Gen. Ashraf Rifi."
The top U.S. official expressed that "the United States is fully committed to
strengthening its partnership with the Government of Lebanon and its security
forces."
Brennan reiterated that the United States hopes and expects that the Government
of Lebanon will exercise its legitimate authority over all of Lebanon and that
the only legitimate weapons in the country are those held by the Lebanese state
or authorized by UNIFIL.
"Calling it a threat to the stability and security of Lebanon and the region,
Mr. Brennan expressed concern about recent reports about the smuggling of
weapons to Hizbullah through Syria," the statement of the embassy went on to
say. Beirut, 27 Apr 10, 20:37
Hariri: Israel's Scud charges an excuse to start another war
EU urges parties to avoid provocation
By Carol Rizk and Dalila Mahdawi /Daily Star staff
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
BEIRUT: Israeli accusations that Syria supplied Hizbullah with Scud missiles are
intended to justify the possibility of another war, Prime Minister Saad Hariri
said Tuesday, as European Union officials urged parties to “avoid provocation.”
Speaking in Sharm el-Sheikh after meeting Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak,
Hariri said that although Israel’s claims were unfounded, they were aimed at
destabilizing the region and had to be addressed “seriously.”
“We should consider these threats very seriously,” Hariri told reporters.
“Lebanon is today being accused of [receiving] missiles from Syria, but there is
no proof. We completely reject these allegations and see them as an attempt to
make excuses for the possibility of a war on Lebanon.”
Israeli President Shimon Peres last week accused Syria of sending Scud missiles,
which have a strike range of 300-500 kilometers, to Hizbullah. Damascus rejected
the charges, saying Israel made the allegations to justify a possible military
strike in the future.
Lebanese Armed Forces chief General Jean Kahwaji has also dismissed the claims,
saying the outdated 30-meter missiles would be too hard to conceal for Hizbullah
to bother with.
Heightened tensions over the missiles prompted European Union officials on
Tuesday to urge Israel, Lebanon and Syria to avoid provocative acts.
“The European Union is concerned by the public statements that have been
exchanged recently between various parties to the Arab-Israeli conflict in the
Middle East,” EU Foreign Affairs chief Baroness Catherine Ashton said in a
statement that did not explicitly mention the Scud missiles.
“Such developments go against the efforts of the EU and its key partners, who
are working constantly to address the problems that are hampering the peace
process.”
She called upon “all parties to avoid any provocation and move toward lasting
peace,” adding that the EU had repeatedly “reiterated its concern about the lack
of progress in the Middle East peace process.”
The US, which is edging toward rapprochement with Syria after years of icy
relations, has been careful not to openly accuse Damascus of transferring Scud
missiles to Hizbullah but said it continued to provide the Shiite group with a
“wider array” of arms.
Last week, US officials admitted there were “no indications”
any Scud missiles had arrived in Lebanon from Syria, saying they would be easily
detected by Israeli surveillance planes, which violate Lebanese airspace on a
daily basis.
Lebanon was reassured by Mubarak’s “calming message” that he was holding
personal talks to prevent an escalation in the political stand-off, Hariri said.
He added the fact that Israel’s allegations came at a time when peace talks were
being re-launched proved Tel Aviv did not genuinely want peace in the region.
“Israel doesn’t really want peace.
“We have to be clear with the international community and demand that it
pressure Israel,” Hariri said. Lebanon spoke of peace while Israel “only talked
of war,” he added.
Hariri’s comments reiterated those made Friday by President Michel Sleiman, who
claimed Israel made the allegations to shift media attention away from the Arab
Peace Initiative.
In a letter to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, Egyptian
spokesman Hossam Zaki warned the missiles controversy could spark a dangerous
escalation between Israel and Lebanon, and urged Washington to help “defuse
tensions.” During a visit to Beirut last week to discuss the issue, Egyptian
Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu al-Gheit dismissed Israel’s allegations as
“laughable” lies. Hariri discussed the Scud missile controversy with assistant
to US President Barack Obama and counterterrorism and homeland security adviser
John Brennan in Beirut on Monday. At the meeting, Brennan reiterated
Washington’s view that Hizbullah is a terrorist organization whose continuing
possession of weapons threatens Lebanon and the rest of the Middle East, a
source told the Central News Agency. In a report last week, UN Secretary Ban Ki-moon
indirectly addressed the Scud missiles controversy, warning it had the potential
to “destabilize” Lebanon. “I continue to receive reports asserting that
Hizbullah has substantially upgraded and expanded its arsenal and military
capabilities, including sophisticated long-range weaponry,” he said last week.
Edde: resistance, defense forces must be balanced
By The Daily Star /Wednesday, April 28, 2010
BEIRUT: Equal resistance and a better balance in defense forces are the bases of
peace in Lebanon, said Roger Edde, the head of the Lebanese Peace Party, on
Saturday. The party held a meeting attended by about 120 political figures from
various Lebanese movements and the gathered discussed available means to achieve
peace. Edde said the first condition to have peace in Lebanon was equality in
resistance and a balance in defense forces. “Some of our forces [in the country]
today are armed and I refer to the Islamic resistance, but others aren’t,” he
explained, calling for creating a diversified Lebanese defense force, provided a
certain balance is guaranteed. However, Edde warned that to create a diversified
defense force, Lebanon needed training and weaponry. He said they should be
sought internally and not from foreign countries because each country was after
its own interests and Lebanon risked becoming dependent of foreign authorities.
He also warned of internal strife and said it was the best and the cheapest tool
for war. He gave the example of Israel when they tried to instigate strife
between the Palestinians and the Lebanese in the 1970s. “Arabs and the Lebanese
fell in the trap … Israel has repeatedly occupied Lebanon since 1968 and it aims
at repeating the same with a fatal blow,” he said. – The Daily Star
FPM, Future Movement intensify efforts to clinch deal in Beirut municipal polls
By Wassim Mroueh /Daily Star staff
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
BEIRUT: Contacts intensified on Tuesday to reach an agreement between the Future
Movement and Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) over elections of the Beirut
Municipality scheduled to be held on May 9. Energy and Water Minister Jebran
Bassil, an FPM official, held talks with Premier Saad Hariri Tuesday at the
Grand Serail on Tuesday.
According to media reports, two main conditions obstructed an agreement between
the FPM and the Future Movement. The first one was Hizbullah’s request that a
municipal member from the Sunni opposition be nominated, which was not
consistent with the results of 2009 Parliamentary elections.
The other obstacle was MP Michel Aoun’s insistence on negotiating personally
with Hariri over the Christian seats in Beirut, although Hariri has decided not
to get involved in such a mission, tasking MP Michel Pharoan with the issue.
For his part, Lebanese Forces (LF) leader Samir Geagea stressed that the door
was still open to an agreement with the FPM regarding Beirut’s municipal
elections, adding that March 14 Forces Christians would finalize Tuesday the
discussions on the distribution of municipal seats in Beirut.
Geagea voiced surprise for Aoun’s rejection of the March 14 alliance’s offer for
an agreement and his insistence to negotiate with Hariri over the Christian
share in the capital’s municipal seats.
Speaking to reporters, he expressed fear of a “political decision to instigate
an electoral battle in Beirut aimed at confusing the work Premier Saad Hariri.”
Concerning the Bekaa Valley city of Zahle, the picture is getting clearer with
the head of the Popular Bloc, former MP Elie Skaff, announcing his list of
candidates running for the city’s municipality.
Entitled “the Decision of Zahle,” the list is headed by Diab al-Maalouf.
Skaff’s attempt to form an alliance with MP Nicolas Fattoush and the FPM has
broken off. Fattoush decided that he would not take part in the polls
Earlier, Fattoush, a former member of the March 14-backed bloc Zahle in the
Heart that swept all seven parliamentary seats in the June 2009 polls, expressed
openness to an alliance with his Greek Catholic political rival Skaff. Following
the June 2009 parliamentary elections, controversies emerged between Fattoush
and his colleagues after three members of Zahle in the Heart bloc joined the
parliamentary bloc of the LF. Fattoush said he would refrain from forming an
electoral list to avoid promoting sharp divisions among the residents of the
city. However, a statement released by the Popular Bloc attributed the failure
of negotiations with Fattoush and the FPM to “unachievable conditions that
didn’t take into account the peculiar situation in Zahle and the consequences of
the last parliamentary elections.” Also, Skaff told the Lebanese channel OTV
that the reason for the dispute with the FPM was that the latter insisted on
nominating Zahle’s deputy mayor from outside the city ‘s neighborhood of Al-Muallaka.
The As-Safir daily quoted sources following up on the dispute as saying that
Skaff had been “betrayed by his allies who didn’t take into consideration the
condition of the Catholic sect in Zahle.”
Zahle will ultimately witness a fierce electoral battle pitting in addition to
Skaff’s list, an incomplete list supported by the FPM, a third one headed by the
city’s incumbent Mayor Asaad Zgheib and endorsed by the March 14 Forces while a
fourth list, formed by Walid Choueiri, enjoyed the support of March 14 coalition
as well.
As the deadline for withdrawing candidacies for the Mount Lebanon governorate
passed at midnight on Monday, the consensus on candidates to the municipal
council in the Chouf town of Deir al-Qamar has collapsed over disputes on the
distributions of seats among parties and the town’s families. Elections in the
governorate will be held on May 2.
The Interior and Municipalities Ministry issued a statement Tuesday announcing
56 municipal councils and 199 mukhtars in Mount Lebanon had won unopposed after
the deadline for withdrawing candidacies passed at midnight Monday. Sources said
that the head of the National Liberal Party MP Dory Chamoun withdrew from a
meeting Monday night to discuss the formation of a consensus list after he
received an offer of one municipal seat. Also, the representatives of the
Catholic sect objected on granting them one seat while they had the right for
two. The same sources added that another meeting had been held Tuesday to
resolve the issue. As for the Metn towns of Jdeideh-Sad al-Boshriyeh, which
share a municipality, a consensus was reached between the FPM, MP Michel Murr,
the Phalange and Tashnag parties after the FPM withdrew its reservations on
incumbent Mayor Antoine Jbara, known for his close ties to Murr. Concerning the
coastal town of Jbeil, Aoun urged President Michel Sleiman to intervene after a
member of a municipal electoral list, headed by former Minister Jean Louis
Qordahi, an ally of Aoun, was pressured to abandon the list under the threat of
losing his job.
Qordahi’s list is running against a list headed by Ziyad Hawwat, a relative of
Sleiman.
UNIFIL in south
By The Daily Star
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
BEIRUT: A delegation of the European People’s Party (EPP) met on Tuesday with
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Saad Hariri and former President
Amin Gemayel, following a visit to south Lebanon. The delegation was led by
European lawmaker Vito Bonsignore and it held talks with Berri in the presence
of Italian Ambassador to Lebanon Gabriel Checchia. It made a visit to the south
prior to the meeting and Bonsignore told Berri the speaker the EPP was pleased
to find men and women devoted to their work as members of the United Nations
Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). Bonsignore added that Europe would vote for
keeping UNIFIL forces in Lebanon and would work on reaching peace in the Middle
East. “All parties, especially countries south of the Mediterranean, European
countries and the European Parliament, should be concerned with settlement
efforts and should have the will to be present and to work toward development
and peace,” he added. For his part, Gemayel confirmed the need to reinforce
bilateral relations between Lebanon and the European Union, to put an end to
Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty and to abide by Security Council
Resolution 1701. “We need to take a clear stance concerning an illegal arsenal
so that we don’t qualify it as legal at the expense of the Lebanese Army and
Lebanese security forces,” the former president added. Gemayel then emphasized
the importance of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) in bringing to a stop
“the series of assassinations which have been ongoing in Lebanon for many
years.” The Phalange Party leader added that the STL would send a clear message
to those who thought of attacking the Lebanese but said that he feared certain
people were trying to hinder the work of the STL. – The Daily Star
US:
Hizbullah has Rockets More Than Most World Governments, Berri Calls it Cover Up
Naharnet/The United States has accused Iran and Syria of arming Hizbullah with
sophisticated missiles and warned that Hizbullah now has more rockets than most
governments.
"We are at a point now where Hizbullah has far more rockets and missiles than
most governments in the world," Gates said following talks at the Pentagon with
his Israeli counterpart Ehud Barak. "This is obviously destabilizing for the
whole region." In response, Speaker Nabih Berri said the Pentagon allegations
were an attempt to cover up the crisis between Washington and Israel. These
claims "have been used as a cover up for the complexities of U.S. relations with
Israel," Berri told the daily An-Nahar in remarks published Wednesday.
"People are now busy with municipal elections, and post-elections are more
important than issues at internal and regional levels," he said. The daily As-Safir
frontpage headline read: "Washington and Tel Aviv push missile hoax to brink of
war." Gates accused Iran and Syria of supplying weapons of "ever-increasing
capability" to Hizbullah, but stopped short of identifying Hizbullah's missiles.
He did not say if Syria was providing Hizbullah with powerful Scud missiles, as
Israel has claimed. Hizbullah and Israel fought a 34-day conflict in the summer
of 2006. More than 1,200 Lebanese people, mostly civilians, were killed and some
160 Israeli people, most of whom were soldiers, also died. U.N. Security Council
resolution 1701, which ended the conflict, included an arms embargo on Lebanon,
except for transfers authorized by the Lebanese government or the United
Nations. Israeli President Shimon Peres said earlier this month that Syria was
providing "sophisticated Scud missiles to Hizbullah that threaten Israel." Syria
denied the charge. Syria was arming Hizbullah with "weapons systems that can
turn or disrupt the very delicate balance in Lebanon," Barak warned. Barak,
however, played down the chances of war over the alleged transfers. "We do not
intend to provoke any kind of major collision in Lebanon or with Syria, but are
watching closely these developments," he said at the joint press conference with
Gates. He ducked a question of whether Syria specifically supplied Hizbullah
with Scud missiles. Beirut, 28 Apr 10, 08:17
Williams Rules Out War Says 'Too Much at Stake to Lose'
Naharnet/U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Michael Williams on Wednesday
ruled out the possibility of war between Lebanon and Israel stressing it was in
the interest of all parties to abide by Security Council Resolution 1701. "I
don't believe there will be (war). I think there is too much at stake to lose
for all the parties," Williams said following talks with Premier Saad Hariri at
the Grand Serail. "I think tensions have been high the last few days. But I hope
that those will lower now." When asked if he believed Hizbullah had Scud
missiles, he said: "I cannot make an assessment on that issue. What is important
for me is Resolution 1701 because I think that is the key to peace." He added
the resolution states clearly that any transfer of arms to Lebanon should only
be through the government. Williams said he discussed with Hariri the tension
that rose as a result of allegations and counter-allegations made in recent days
over the alleged Syrian transfer of Scud missiles to Hizbullah. "I commended
Prime Minister Hariri for his efforts to reduce tension and especially his visit
yesterday to Sharm el-Sheikh to meet with President (Hosni) Mubarak of Egypt,"
the U.N. official said. "I am convinced that it remains in the interest of all
parties to abide by Resolution 1701 and to preserve the cessation of
hostilities," he told reporters. Williams added that he expected all parties to
maintain stability in the south and across the U.N.-drawn Blue Line. Beirut, 28
Apr 10, 13:57
Samir Geagea
April 28, 2010
On April 27, the Lebanese National News Agency carried the following report:
The head of the Lebanese Forces Executive Committee, Samir Geagea, wished in a
chat with journalists that “General Michel Aoun explained what he meant when he
talked about the adoption of pressures by certain official sides and
institutions to ensure the withdrawal of certain candidates,” denying the
occurrence of any of the sort and considering: “Certain official sides in some
regions are intervening to form the lists.” Asked about the criticisms made
against the alliances in the municipal elections and the talk saying they
undermined the principles of March 14, he stated: “I do not place these
alliances in this context,” mentioning the example of the consensus reached in
Jounieh and assuring in this context: “Neither the Free Patriotic Movement, nor
the Lebanese Forces, the Kataeb Party or any other party opposes development,
free economy and the Jounieh Port legislation. The political disputes should not
affect the developmental character [of municipal work] and there is consensus in
the majority of the regions.”
Geagea then expressed his surprise toward what was happening in Beirut,
“especially following the great efforts that were exerted during the last four
years to set things straight, considering that the municipalities continued to
be divided equally between the Christians and Muslims regardless of the
demographic reality and there was consensus between us and our allies to let the
Christian team in March 14 make the decisions in regard to the Christian
representation in the municipalities. It is based on these facts that we have
been calling on General Aoun - for the last two weeks - to accept concord
between the Lebanese Forces and the Free Patriotic Movement in Beirut.
Unfortunately, no concord has been reached so far. What we are hearing today is
that General Aoun is insisting on discussing this issue with Prime Minister Saad
al-Hariri directly. However, we do not understand this demand, especially since
the head of the Change and Reform bloc has always showed discontent toward the
interference of the prime minister at the level of the Christian shares.”
He therefore expressed his surprise toward “General Aoun’s rejection and
non-cooperation with our call to reach consensus over the Christian
representation and his ongoing efforts to negotiate with Prime Minister Hariri
himself. Everyone knows how good our relations are with the latter but we must
tend to our affairs. The door of coordination is still open before the Free
Patriotic Movement.” About the FPM’s refusal to accept an alliance in Beirut as
it has done in other regions such as Qobayat and Kesrouan among others, Geagea
stated: “I do not know if this has something to do with Hezbollah’s presence in
Beirut. This reveals a clear intention to provoke a battle because Beirut is the
stronghold of the prime minister. There is a political decision to engage in a
battle to confuse Prime Minister Hariri, and in this case, the Free Patriotic
Movement is forced to comply because the issue is no longer related to the
shares.”
Regarding the elections in Northern Metn, he assured: “Each municipality in this
district enjoys a special status and a different pattern. There is an alliance
between the Lebanese Forces, the Kataeb Party and Minister Al-Murr in the
majority of these municipalities, while others are witnessing exceptional
alliances such as the one between the LF and the Syrian Nationalist Party or the
Free Patriotic Movement, considering that the municipal elections are familial
and developmental ones allowing all sorts of alliances without any tensions or
acuteness affecting the positions.” At the level of the elections in Zahle,
Geagea stated: “The Lebanese Forces has adopted its decision. However, I was
surprised to see the surfacing of the dispute which erupted between Former
Minister Elias Skaff and the Free Patriotic Movement. The reasons behind this
dispute are still unknown to me.”
LAF arrests four in southern village of Hasbaya
April 28, 2010 /The Lebanese army Intelligence on Wednesday arrested four
individuals from Hasbaya for investigation purposes, reported NOW Lebanon’s
correspondent in the South.
The army had found explosives in a vehicle belonging to a Spanish contingent
UNIFIL employee identified as Jihad S. The arrested included Jihad S., the owner
of the gas station where the former washed his car, and two others, added the
correspondent.-NOW Lebanon
Egypt hands down jail terms in Hezbollah trial
April 28, 2010 /An Egyptian court handed down jail sentences on Wednesday to 26
defendants it found guilty of working for Hezbollah in a trial that highlighted
difficult relations with Hezbollah. The 22 accused who were in the dock received
jail terms of between six months and 15 years, despite calls from prosecutors
for the death penalty to be imposed.
The four defendants who remain on the run, including the alleged head of the
Hezbollah cell, Lebanese national Mohammed Qabalan, received life sentences.
Sentencing by the state security court, a tribunal of exception set up under
Egypt's three-decade-old state of emergency, was greeted by cries of "Allahu
Akbar [God is Greater]" from the dock. The 26 were convicted of plotting attacks
against ships in the Suez Canal and tourist sites, along with other charges.
Most were detained between late 2008 and January 2009.
-AFP/NOW Lebanon
Do the Scuds make sense?
Nicholas Lowry, April 28, 2010
Now Lebanon/The flap over the Scud missiles Syria has been accused of
transferring to Hezbollah has now lasted the better part of the month driven by
a string of leaks and mutual recriminations, as both the Israelis and the
Syrians have ratcheted up their rhetoric and threatened to send the other back
to the Stone Age.
It began with a report in the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai and allegations leveled
by Israeli President Shimon Peres that Syria had smuggled long-range missiles
known as Scuds into Lebanon for Hezbollah, and was soon followed by leaks from
American and Israeli officials.The story has sparked fears of yet another war in
the region, and has complicated the American efforts to reach out to Syria that
have been underway in Washington.
With a range of nearly 500 miles, Scud missiles could conceivably give Hezbollah
the ability to hit Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, as well as Israel’s nuclear
installations.
If true, the transfer of Scuds to this country would, according to the US State
Department, “pose an immediate threat to both the security of Israel and the
sovereignty of Lebanon."
According to Riad Kahwaji, the CEO of Inegma, a private Middle East think tank
specializing in geopolitical affairs and military analysis, “If Hezbollah
actually received such a missile, then we are looking at a new ball game…a
different level of alliance between Hezbollah, Syria and Iran and an intention
of escalation.”
However, Kahwaji questioned whether acquiring Scuds made sense for Hezbollah,
and indeed, serious doubts have been cast on the accusations as of late, with
even the White House throwing cold water on the story. Reuters reported last
week that while “Washington believes Syrian was moving towards transferring more
sophisticated Scuds to Hezbollah…two US officials said there were ‘no
indications’ any Scud rockets were transported into Lebanon, which would sharply
escalate the risk of a conflict.”
According to Kahwaji the problems with reports of Hezbollah acquiring Scuds
begins with the missiles’ size, which means “they are difficult to hide. We are
talking about a 14 meter-long missile…This is not like a Katyusha [rocket] that
you can put in the truck of a car.”
Moreover, Kahwaji told NOW Lebanon that that the missiles are dangerous and
complicated to operate. “This is a liquid fuel missile, which means that you
have to put in the fuel just before firing it. This is a very difficult matter,
because the fuel itself is very volatile… and flammable, and carrying it around
is a very hard task.”
That difficulty means that extensive training is needed to operate such
missiles, which require crews of at least half a dozen and take “one hour to
prepare before they can be fired.”
Such a labor- and time-intensive process runs counter to the flexible guerilla
warfare tactics Hezbollah has practiced in past battles with Israel.
During the 2006 July War, for instance, Hezbollah was able to establish a
“simple and effective system” for firing Katyusha rockets into Israel. Using
small, rapidly deployable squads, the entire process for firing a Katyusha was
said to take “less than 28 seconds with many of the rocket squads riding
bicycles to the launch location. The vast majority of the rocket systems were
hidden in underground caches and bunkers built to withstand precision air and
artillery strikes,” according to Matt M. Matthews of the Combat Studies
Institute in We Were Caught Unprepared: The 2006 Hezbollah-Israeli War.
Scuds, in contrast, can be easily detected from the air and destroyed, Kahwaji
said. “In a narrow area like Lebanon, it is not easy to hide and transport [such
missiles], especially when you have satellite and reconnaissance planes over
Lebanese skies around the clock.”
America’s “big game”
Tony Badran, April 27, 2010
Now Lebanon/
During last week’s stormy hearing on Syria in the US House Subcommittee on the
Middle East and South Asia, the Obama administration for the first time laid out
its Syria policy. Unfortunately, the policy is based on a flawed, old premise
that brings Washington awfully close to accepting a line the Syrians perpetually
seek to sell – the politics of grievance. Distressingly, the Americans are
signaling that they're interested shoppers.
Although the basic components of US policy had been hinted at earlier, this was
the first time that an official openly laid out what the administration’s end
game is. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman,
who was the official testifying before the subcommittee, outlined the
administration’s conceptual framework as follows: The US is working to mitigate
Iran’s regional influence, which Syria facilitates. But Syria is not Iran, and
there’s a basic policy difference between them: Unlike Iran, Syria has an
interest in negotiating a peace agreement with Israel. Therefore, the peace
process is, in Feltman’s words, the “big game”. The administration believes that
a peace deal between Damascus and Jerusalem would cure the Syria problem.
If this sounds like a familiar tune from the 1990s, that’s because in the end
it's nothing but a reprise of the view that holds the conflict with Israel as
the engine driving all regional dynamics and regime behavior. It’s the politics
of grievance.
This line of thinking plays right into the Syrians’ hands, affording them a pass
for their actions and duplicity pending the conclusion of a peace deal that may
not materialize for years, if ever.
Witness, for example, this statement by Feltman: “Syria's relationship with
Hezbollah and the Palestinian terrorist groups is unlikely to change absent a
Middle East peace agreement.” The logic of this statement is but one step
removed from justifying the arming of Hezbollah. It’s the logic that holds
Syrian policy to be reactive and grievance-based. But the Obama administration’s
“big game” is nothing if not a cocktail of this grievance logic and the infamous
concept of “linkage”.
This toxic viewpoint was echoed by National Security Advisor Jim Jones at a
recent event at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy: “One of the ways
that Iran exerts influence in the Middle East is by exploiting the ongoing
Arab-Israeli conflict… Advancing this peace would... help prevent Iran from
cynically shifting attention away from its failures to meet its obligations.”
Such an outlook, distilled in Feltman’s testimony, poses as a grand strategic
concept that purports to help mitigate the challenge posed by Iran and the
collapse of the Arab-Israeli peace process all at once. It proposes that by
draining the swamps of grievance, Syria will be neutralized, and consequently so
will Hamas and Hezbollah, leaving Iran “isolated”. This in turn sets the stage
for uniting the Arabs and Israelis under the American umbrella facing Iran.
While this does nothing to prevent Iran from going nuclear, it could be the
blueprint for a future “containment” option, supposedly denying Iran the ability
to project power by using the region’s open conflicts.
It’s the new domino theory. Only there’s nothing new about it. As some of us
reasoned, Bashar al-Assad made his gamble with the Scuds calculating that this
peace processing impulse would be the administration’s default position. If the
US endgame is a comprehensive peace deal, one that by definition involves Syria,
then Assad can buy immunity and even leverage, simply by declaring he wants
peace.
Thus, Obama becomes trapped by his own “big game”. If Syria is deemed necessary
for his regional peace/containment edifice, then the US will not be able to
declare engagement a failure and suspend it, or else the entire edifice
collapses. The result is the confused paralysis evident in the administration’s
reaction to the Scud crisis: doubling down on engagement and the need to
convince Assad that his “real” interests lay not with Iran but with the US.
The sought-after model for Syria is Anwar Sadat’s Egypt. But that model is
totally inapplicable. Egypt made the leap into the pro-American camp before
signing the peace treaty. Whereas with Syria, the administration is de facto
justifying Assad’s continuing support for militant groups, affording him an
inexplicable exceptionalism.
The administration is trying to camouflage this muddle by arguing that this
situation necessitates sending an ambassador to Damascus to better communicate
with the Syrian leadership. This fig leaf is not convincing many, including
critics in Congress, who point out that the problem is not US communication, but
Syrian contempt.
The Obama administration might lean on the Israelis to resume peace talks with
Syria (assuming an acceptable formula is found to break the current impasse
since the breakdown of the Turkish-sponsored talks). But even if the Netanyahu
government agrees, it’s highly unlikely that the talks will lead anywhere,
especially since Assad has repeatedly rejected putting his ties to Hezbollah and
Iran on the table – a sine qua non for Israel. And so, the “grand idea” will
come crashing down, as it already has in its Palestinian version. Meanwhile,
Iran keeps spinning its centrifuges while we entertain ourselves with sending an
ambassador to Syria.
The “big game” is nothing but a sideshow.
**Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Safadi urges boycott of Israeli goods in Arab markets
By The Daily Star/Wednesday, April 28, 2010
BEIRUT: Economy and Trade Minister Mohammad Safadi underlined on Tuesday the
importance of preventing any Israeli economic infiltration into Lebanon. “Israel
is sending a lot of its products to our Arab markets and it is doing so with
volumes exceeding those of inter-Arab trade, unfortunately,” he said. “It is
important to promote a sound culture of resistance in this aspect along with the
armed resistance,” he added. Safadi’s remarks came during the opening of the
84th regional meeting of officers for the boycott of Israel. Safadi called upon
Arab countries to work in cooperation against Israel’s clear positions on
refusing to get into a comprehensive peace agreement with the Palestinians,
Syrians and Lebanese. He said that Israel wouldn’t have attacked the holy places
of Christians and Muslims if it really wanted peace to take place in the region.
“It wouldn’t have worked on weakening our economics capabilities,” he said. He
added that it was necessary to adopt programs and advanced policies for the
protection of the Arab economies, culture, water and land. Safadi also said that
Lebanon insists on activating the Arab boycott against Israel which will
restrict its economic expansion in the region. – The Daily Star
Peaceful resistance needs reconciliation
Daily Star/Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Editorial
Despite recent encouraging signs of renewed US involvement in the
Palestinian-Israeli peace process, pragmatism dictates that the Palestinians
need to dedicate considerable attention to preparing a radical new strategy
should these tentative half-steps toward peace come to naught.
The good news from Washington is that the viewpoint seems to be catching on that
establishing a viable Palestinian state would serve US security interests.
General David Petraeus outlined the connection in a report last month –
perceptions of bottomless US support for Israel were mushrooming into anti-US
sentiment throughout the region – while National Security Adviser James Jones
reiterated last week the link between Israel’s demographic time bomb and vital
US interests. President Barack Obama sent Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas a
letter recently pledging resolute US commitment to making progress in peace
talks.
However, Abbas – as well as his rivals in Hamas – need to look at these
developments in a coolly practical and skeptical manner; to be sure, they must
fully support and participate in US-backed talks, whatever form they might
assume, but Palestinian leaders also must get ready for the next stage, should
the talks fail.
The only strategy with a chance of success in such a scenario is a creative,
peaceful and sustained resistance movement eschewing armed struggle. For should
these peace efforts run aground – and signs on the ground do not augur clearly
for a happy ending – Israel is certain only to intensify and expand its policies
to annihilate any chance for future Palestinian statehood.
In the face of this ongoing Israeli strategy, the only promising path is that of
peaceful resistance and patience and cunning. A broad movement based on
nonviolence can resurrect Palestine; just as importantly, from a political and
tactical perspective it can reconnect the Palestinian story to the outside
world. Looking at the conditions in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, we cannot
escape the conclusion that the strategies of Hamas and the PLO – with their
central tenet of armed resistance – have failed.
The step of peaceful resistance will happen, however, only if Fatah and Hamas
can reconcile. We must call on them to recognize the gravity of the situation –
the dream of Palestinian statehood hangs in the balance. They must come together
and sweep up with them a movement in Palestine – encompassing the institutions
of the Palestinian Authority – and among the Arabs inside Israel. They must
abandon the mentality of armed struggle – certain in these circumstances to lead
only to dead Palestinians, outside opprobrium and crushing defeat – and adopt
the effective strategy of sustained, peaceful resistance, which has resulted in
some of history’s most stirring victories. If peace talks fail, and armed
resistance resumes, the story of the Palestinian quest for a state will likely
come to a tragic end.
War with Iran Could Last Years, Says Bar-Ilan U. Researcher
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu/Arutz Sheva
If war breaks out between Iran and Israel, it likely would last for ”years and
not weeks,” according to Bar-Ilan University researcher Dr. Moshe Vered. Iran
also might target Jews around the world.
He calls on Israel to internalize the prospect of an unprecedented lengthy war
and explains that once the government and public understand the threat, they
will be better prepared to find ways to shorten the conflict.
A researcher at the university’s Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, he
recently published a sobering paper that based his hypothesis on the Iranian
Shi’ite Muslim approach that the very existence of Israel is an insult to
Muslims. He states that its philosophy is that “Allah promises them victory” and
there is an obligation of Muslims to sacrifice themselves and surrender material
goods for the sake of annihilating the Jewish State.
Entitled “The length and conditions for ending a future war between Iran and
Israel,” the research paper notes that Iran fought Iraq for eight years despite
suffering the deaths of half a million people, with another two million wounded
and catastrophic damage to the economic infrastructure, amounting to $100
billion.
Dr. Vered (pictured at left) pointed out that the war ended only when the
Shi’ite rulers in Iran realized that the regime was in jeopardy. Until then, the
leaders felt there was no room for compromise.
The scenario
He rules out ideas that a quick missile war would put an end to a conflict
because neither side would score a “knock-out,” and Iran does not have the
capability of successfully attacking Israel with hundreds of long-range
missiles.
He predicts it is more likely that if Israel initiates a pre-emptive strike,
Iran will play the role of the victim and let the international community
condemn Israel. At the same time, Tehran would secretly ferry troops into Syria
and Lebanon, possibly through Shi’ite communities in Iraq and with the silent
approval of Turkey.
The next stage in the war would be massive rocket attacks by Hamas from the
south and Hizbullah from the north. Israeli military intelligence officials
estimate that both terrorist organizations possess advanced missiles far beyond
what were used in the 34-day-old Second Lebanon War in 2006.
With long-range weapons that could be fired from deep in Lebanon, Israel would
be forced into capturing most of the country, and face a deadly and costly
guerilla war. At the same time, a massive military threat from Syrian territory
to the Golan Heights would require large numbers of reservists to defend the
region.
El Al planes to be targeted?
Iran also probably would try to target Jews around the world, especially El Al
planes, synagogues, Israeli offices abroad and Jewish community centers. Hamas
would resume suicide attacks against Israel.
Dr. Vered points out that there are those who think that Iran’s verbal threats
against Israel are for internal political consumption, in which case war is a
distant possibility. However, Shi’ite fundamentalism requires a “holy war” to
wipe out Israel, whose existence violates Muslim principles against Jews ruling
”Muslim land,” meaning Israel, and having sovereignty over Muslims in the
country. Israel also stands in Iran's way to become the dominant force in the
Middle East.
Muslim rulers always have tolerated Jews on condition that they are a small
minority and dependent on their host rulers, Dr. Vered explains.
His sees three possibilities for a quick end to a war, barring a new level of
understanding and preparedness by Israel. International interference and the use
of nuclear weapons, presumably by Israel, are two options.
However, he explains that whereas world leaders previously shortened
Israeli-Arab wars, with Israel usually having the upper hand, the Jewish State
presumably would not be in such an advantageous position against Iran. The
result would be pressure on Tehran, where the Shi’ite philosophy does not allow
compromise.
Pressure would be wielded against Israel if the Israeli Air Force were to bomb
Iran’s oil fields, causing the price of oil to soar. Iran would use that
circumstance to strengthen its determination to annihilate Israel.
The use of nuclear weapons is far off in the horizon, Dr. Vered avers.
He sees one other solution to shorten the war: an American decision to join
Israel and strike Iran.
A Dilemma in June?
28/04/2010
Tariq Alhomayed
Editor-in-Chief of Asharq Al-Awsat,
The Lebanese are concerned because Washington wants to put forward a new
Security Council resolution for sanctions against Iran as soon as possible. Just
by putting forward sanctions in May will mean that Lebanon, which will assume
presidency of the Security Council, must make a big decision; either it will
surrender Tehran to the noose of sanctions or it will abstain from voting.
Tehran, Damascus and Hezbollah would not accept this and would not be satisfied
with anything less than rejecting the resolution.
Washington’s declared position is one of calm. The Americans are ruling out the
possibility that Lebanon will obstruct the sanctions resolution; however I
received information stating the contrary to the effect that there is serious
consideration in Washington to get through May and put forward the sanctions
[resolution] in June when presidency of the Security Council will be passed on
to Mexico in order to avoid embarrassing Lebanon. An intelligent person advised
some people in Lebanon to follow Turkey’s lead; if Turkey abstains from voting
then Lebanon should too, if Turkey votes then Lebanon should vote too, but some
people in Beirut are saying that the pressure coming from Iran is immense, not
to mention Hezbollah and Damascus. Nevertheless, whoever looks back at recent
history will find that Lebanon has no reason to be embarrassed, especially if
the Lebanese act in the same way as Syria did in 2002 when it voted for the
“final opportunity” project, i.e. Resolution 1441 that was presented to the
Security Council by Washington and was supported by Britain. This is the
resolution that offered Iraq the final opportunity to comply with its
disarmament obligations in accordance with [previous] Security Council
resolutions. Why did Syria at the time vote for the resolution that gained
unanimous consensus against Iraq, and yet today it rejects voting on the
sanction resolution against Iran and in fact considers this treason? Iran is not
an Arab country and is not one of Lebanon’s neighbors and it does not have the
rights that Iraq has.
What’s important here is that no matter how much Lebanon tries to avoid the
predicament of heading the Security Council next month, and the proposal for
sanctions on Iran, Western states will still be able to pass [the resolution
for] sanctions in June, even if they are postponed. The worst is yet to come for
Iran; postponing the Security Council resolution will not deflect the West,
Israel in particular, from dealing with the Iranian nuclear file issue. We all
remember how French opposition to the resolution for the Iraq war did not
dissuade America from taking the decision to overthrow the Saddam regime. In
fact at the time France fooled the Iraqi regime into continuing to believe that
the war was far away, yet what happened was the opposite.
Today, Iran is facing the same fate. The predicament [is that] delaying the
sanctions, or trying to bypass them, will not serve as a victory inasmuch as it
will be a dilemma because it is a matter that will speed up war. If America
doesn’t do it, Israel will, as most of the statements coming out of America do
not state that Israel will not strike Iran but are mostly to the effect that Tel
Aviv will not use force “now”.
Therefore, the Lebanese must not waver too much; if they vote for the
resolution, then [they should remember that] Syria did so before them with
regards to Iraq, and if they abstain from voting then that will cause less
damage. The conclusion therefore is that no one can protect Iran except the Iranians
themselves by being rational. All the signs show that the Tehran regime is as
far away as it can be from rational behavior.
Double Standards and Ambiguity in the Iranian Loss
Wed, 28 April 2010
Abdullah Iskandar/Al Hayat
Iran does not miss any chance to denounce the United Nations and its Security
Council, particularly through Supreme Guide Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad. The latter had even called a while ago for a new formula for the
international organization to run the world’s affairs, after he considered that
the incumbent organization is a tool within the hands of arrogance and injustice
represented by the West. But this international campaign against the
international organization does not mean that Tehran is not interested in what
happens inside it or does not seek through it to pass what it deems in its
interest. Now that the Security Council will soon call for a voting session on
international sanctions on Iran since it did not cooperate in solving the crisis
of its nuclear program, Iran is making efforts, tempting diplomatic and economic
ones, with the Security Council members.
The Iranian double-standard position vis-à-vis the United Nations could have
internal motives, especially when it comes to keeping the people rallied behind
the regime which implies to its citizens that the entire world is against it, in
addition to the “demonization” of the Security Council and the refusal in
advance of any of its resolutions that pertain to the nuclear file.
In any case, and contrary to its allegations that it does not care about the
resolutions issued by the international organization, Iran is making exceptional
efforts with the members of the organization, in the hope of enticing them into
adopting its positions or in order to reduce the new sanctions. It adopts the
most traditional means in the framework of the United Nations which condemns its
work mechanisms.
As a matter of fact, any resolution issued by the Security Council requires the
affirmative votes of 9 out of 15 members, provided that no permanent member uses
the veto power. The positions of the five permanent members are now clear: The
United States, Britain, France, and to a far extent Russia support the
sanctions, while China announces that it favors the diplomatic solution, and
maybe it will abstain from voting. The 10 non-permanent members were a target
for the Iranian diplomacy. For instance, the leaders of the regime, including
Ahmadinejad himself, his Foreign Minister Manoucheher Muttaki, and the National
Security Council Secretary and the former Head of the Nuclear File Sa’id Jalili,
visited the capitals of these countries. But they returned without being able to
achieve anything in their favor. Austria, Bosnia, and Herzegovina, Gabon, Japan,
Mexico and Uganda cast doubts over the nature of the Iranian nuclear program,
and called for the same guarantees which the previous international resolutions
called for. While the predicament of Lebanon’s stand pertains to its domestic
situation, the efforts of the two members who are most understanding of the
Iranian positions, i.e. Turkey and Brazil, failed in making Iran accept the
proposal of exchanging enriched material. This means that Iran did not succeed
even in gaining the support of those who are most understanding of its positions
and defending of its right to peaceful use of nuclear energy, and perhaps those
who need to cooperate with it in nuclear fields the most.
This conclusion means that the vagueness in the Iranian position vis-à-vis the
nuclear file and the continuation of this confusion, backfires on the Iranian
diplomacy, unless Iran considers that it achieved international victory through
the support it receives from Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe and Venezuelan
President Hugo Chavez!
As the Security Council’s vote on new sanctions has become imminent, perhaps at
the beginning of next month, it seems that the resolution is secured by a
majority that exceeds nine votes, and the Chinese veto is ruled out. Therefore,
the Iranian diplomacy will register a resounding failure in this regard.
This failure is not only attributed to the poor expertise of the Iranian
diplomats or their ignorance of how to manage these files. On the contrary, they
are known for their high competence and diplomacy. This failure is rather
attributed to Iran’s insistence on a vague position, and no one, even from among
its friends, can defend this position. This vague position has first embarrassed
Russia, China, Turkey, and Brazil, because defending the peaceful use of nuclear
energy should be associated with guarantees that it will not turn into military
use. But Iran associates its overt refusal of nuclear arms with another overt
refusal to give these guarantees. This cannot be accepted even by its friends.