LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِJune 08/2010

Bible Of the Day
Luke12/22-38: "He said to his disciples, “Therefore I tell you, don’t be anxious for your life, what you will eat, nor yet for your body, what you will wear. 12:23 Life is more than food, and the body is more than clothing. 12:24 Consider the ravens: they don’t sow, they don’t reap, they have no warehouse or barn, and God feeds them. How much more valuable are you than birds! 12:25 Which of you by being anxious can add a cubit to his height? 12:26 If then you aren’t able to do even the least things, why are you anxious about the rest? 12:27 Consider the lilies, how they grow. They don’t toil, neither do they spin; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 12:28 But if this is how God clothes the grass in the field, which today exists, and tomorrow is cast into the oven, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith? 12:29 Don’t seek what you will eat or what you will drink; neither be anxious. 12:30 For the nations of the world seek after all of these things, but your Father knows that you need these things. 12:31 But seek God’s Kingdom, and all these things will be added to you. 12:32 Don’t be afraid, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom. 12:33 Sell that which you have, and give gifts to the needy. Make for yourselves purses which don’t grow old, a treasure in the heavens that doesn’t fail, where no thief approaches, neither moth destroys. 12:34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also".

Free Opinions, Releases, letters, Interviews & Special Reports
Interview with President Amin Gemayel/Al-Arab newspaper/June 07/10
Erdogan and Nasrallah…And Pulling the Rug?/Tarek Al Hamed/Asharq Alawsat/June 07/10
Turkish Regime Changes Sides, West Averts Eyes/By Barry Rubin/June 07/10
Another Golden Age in the region?/Daily Star/June 07/10
Phoenician or Arab? Lebanon's Never-ending Debate/AFP/June 07/10
Neutrality is the best policy/Abstinence is the best policy for Lebanon/Now Lebanon/June 07/10

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for June 07/10
Sfeir in Reply to Nasrallah's Call for More Ships to Gaza: We Are Not Men of War/Naharnet
Davutoglu: No normalization of ties with Israel without international probe/Now Lebanon
Allouch: Minieh-Donniyeh by-election is battle between Future Movement and Hezbollah/Now Lebanon
Suleiman-Assad Summit Postponed Due to Commitments/Naharnet
U.S. Reportedly Warned Lebanon on Iran Sanctions, Hariri Denies/Naharnet
UN atomic watchdog meets on Iran as sanctions loom/AFP
Turkey: Flotilla raid thwarted any chance of Israel-Syria talks/Ynetnews
Turkey FM: Raid halted Syria talks/Jerusalem Post
Liz Cheney: Turkey is siding with our enemies/Washington Post (blog)
Kerry: Israel Not Becoming a Strategic Liability for the US/ABC News (blog)
Berri Warns of Cabinet Grilling over Security Agreement, Says Suleiman Should Fix Flaws/Naharnet
Protesters rally near US Embassy in Lebanon to denounce Gaza blockade/AFP
Residents of southern border village hold protest against flotilla attack/Daily Star
Minyeh-Dinnieh set for fierce contest in by-election/Daily Star
Geagea will not attend National Dialogue/Daily Star
Hariri, Berri meet in bid to reach consensus on 2010 budget proposal/Daily Star
FPM crisis erupts over Aoun's plans to reshuffle posts/Daily Star
Abu Sharaf elected to head Beirut Order of Physicians/Daily Star
Economic growth to continue in 2010-11/Daily Star
Blast rips through culture club in Yamouneh/Daily Star
Abboud urges Arab tourists to visit south/Daily Star
GLC calls for nationwide strike on June 17/Daily Star
Siniora sings economy's praises at Dubai forum/Daily Star
US lawmakers meet with top officials in Beirut/Daily Star
Animal shelter urges Beirutis to adopt kittens/Daily Star
Red Cross project aims to raise awareness among youth on humanitarian standards/Daily Star
Schools taught about role of beekeeping for conservation/Daily Star
Ministry drive aims to wean shoppers off of plastic bags/Daily Star
World Cup star injuries may offer chance to lesser knowns/Daily Star
Lebanon's marathon record holder muses on his Beirut inspirations/Daily Star
Environment activists warn against off-shore oil drilling/Daily Star

Sfeir in Reply to Nasrallah's Call for More Ships to Gaza: We Are Not Men of War
Naharnet/Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir had ended a visit to Cyprus where he took part in a welcome reception for Pope Benedict XVI's. "We are not men of war," Sfeir told reporters upon his arrival at Beirut airport late Sunday in response to a question about whether he agrees with Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's call for sending new ships to the Gaza Strip to lift the siege. "But you know that we pray for peace to prevail in every region and across the world," Sfeir added. Asked whether Bkirki will continue efforts to unite Christian ranks, particularly among Samir Geagea and Suleiman Franjieh, Sfeir said: "We are doing the best we can." Sfeir had earlier told AFP that the document launched by Pope Benedict XVI in Cyprus is "addressed to Christians, urging them to unite ranks." He also stressed that the Arab-Israeli conflict negatively affects Middle East Christians "because situations of conflict and lack of harmony and consensus and going beyond the law drives more and more Christians to emigrate." Beirut, 07 Jun 10, 07:48

Davutoglu: No normalization of ties with Israel without international probe
June 7, 2010 /Normalization of ties with Israel is out of the question if it rejects an international inquiry into last week's raid on Gaza-bound aid ships, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said Monday. Israeli commandos stormed the Gaza-bound flotilla, killing nine Turkish activists. "If Israel... gives the green light for the establishment of an international [inquiry] commission and is ready to answer to the commission, then naturally Turkish-Israeli ties will follow a different path," Davutoglu told reporters."But if it continues to evade that, normalization in relations would be out of the question," he said.-AFP/NOW Lebanon

Allouch: Minieh-Donniyeh by-election is battle between Future Movement and Hezbollah
June 7, 2010 /In an interview published in As-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper on Monday, former Future Movement bloc MP Mustafa Allouch said this month’s by-election to fill a parliamentary seat in the Minieh-Donniyeh district in North Lebanon is a political battle between the March 14 coalition and March 8 factions, namely between the Future Movement and Hezbollah. The June 13 by-election in the Minieh-Donniyeh district is to fill the parliamentary seat left vacant after the death in April of Future Movement bloc MP Hashem Alameddine.
The daily quoted an anonymous Future Movement source as saying that his party’s candidate in the Minieh-Donniyeh district is Khazem Saleh al-Kheir, who was received by Prime Minister Saad Hariri at his office in Beirut.-NOW Lebanon

Neutrality is the best policy
Abstinence is the best policy for Lebanon
June 7, 2010 /Now Lebanon/The upcoming debate at the United Nations Security Council on imposing sanctions on Iran will present Lebanon with an opportunity to stake out a new set of diplomatic credentials that could be critical in positioning the country as a genuine Switzerland of the Middle East: a country that, because of its nature, history and inherent limitations has finally agreed to practice a formal policy of neutrality, advocating rigorous diplomacy and humanitarianism above the use of force.
It may take some doing. Already Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri is calling for Lebanon to vote against a resolution that could see the Arab world divided (Egypt and Saudi Arabia, who have their own regional agendas, are expected to vote for the imposition of sanctions). But even if the Middle East were as one on the matter, history has shown that Lebanon is not naturally predisposed to going with the rest of the Arab pack.
Berri is urging that Lebanon take sides in a crisis over which many Lebanese are divided, and yet division in Lebanon will always reveal the country’s inherent paradox: that its diversity is both its strength and weakness. This weakness was demonstrated in 1958, when President Camille Chamoun’s endorsement of the pro-Western Baghdad Pact threatened to plunge the country into violence, while the 1969 Cairo Accord arguably paved the way for 15 years of civil war six years later by pitting those who saw the Palestinian struggle as a moral cause against those who wanted to stay out of it. Lebanon does not have the luxury of taking such positions, and it is here that it can play to its strengths by abstaining over Iran and all other issues in which the burden of consequence will be too heavy to bear for such a small and pluralistic society, one on which “foreign load” is too heavy and where history has shown that taking sides can have disastrous internal consequences. In abstaining, Lebanon will send two unequivocal signals: one to the Arab world that it will no longer fall into line at the expense of its own internal interests, and the second to the international community that, in Lebanon, it has an ally that can set new standards in Arab diplomacy. That is not to say that Lebanon will wash its hands of Arab issues, but it will respond to all situations and crises as Lebanon should. It will, like Switzerland, not take sides, and it will not intervene militarily, as it chose not to do in 1967 and 1973. This is not to say that convincing the likes of Hezbollah to abandon its stated aim of armed resistance will be easy, but neutrality can create a counterbalance to the use of force. Any gains from Lebanon’s chosen diplomatic course will be a gain for the moderates in the region. Lebanon will be the peaceful honest broker, just as when it, in its capacity as chair of the Security Council, held an emergency meeting in the wake of last week’s flotilla shootings. Lebanon’s neutrality will be guided by its support for diplomatic solutions to conflicts and crises in accordance with international law and UN Security Council resolutions. A policy of neutrality would also have a strong commitment to humanitarian aid, as was demonstrated in its support of the people in Gaza in 2009 and those in Haiti in the wake of the devastating earthquake earlier this year. Ultimately Lebanon must be neutral so it can be allowed to focus on its internal development. It must be allowed to protect its interests. By abstaining over Iran, not only would Lebanon be defusing a crisis, or at least taking a safe middle-ground position, it would be statement of intent for a country that is still struggling to achieve full sovereignty and statehood. There are worse places to start.

Berri Warns of Cabinet Grilling over Security Agreement, Says Suleiman Should Fix Flaws
Naharnet/Speaker Nabih Berri warned that any MP could submit a demand to grill the cabinet if it didn't take appropriate measures to solve the controversy over a security agreement signed between Lebanon and the U.S. Berri said he told Prime Minister Saad Hariri during their meeting last week that the agreement should be discussed in cabinet. "The premier told me that he is reading the file that I sent him and will take the appropriate stance," the speaker told As Safir newspaper in remarks published Monday.
Berri has advised the government to review the agreement because it "lacked constitutionality." The speaker's report was prepared by the parliamentary media and telecommunications committee. The head of the Amal movement told the daily that President Michel Suleiman should spearhead efforts in solving the issue because the agreement mainly "violates the authorities of the presidency." "He will definitely be keen on fixing the flaws that took place," Berri said about Suleiman.
However, he warned that if the executive authority did not deal with the issue "through the appropriate means," then parliament would interfere, meaning any MP could submit a demand to debrief the cabinet. Berri also denied that he was targeting former Premier Fouad Saniora and his political team by wondering about the $11 billion that were spent above the ceiling set in the 2005 budget. The spending took place when the Amal movement and Hizbullah were represented in the government in 2004, 2005, 2006 all the way to the current national unity government that includes all parties, including the Free Patriotic Movement, Berri said. About the 2010 draft budget that the cabinet will continue to discuss on Monday, Berri told As Safir that his meeting with Hariri over the issue was positive and honest. Beirut, 07 Jun 10, 08:12

U.S. Reportedly Warned Lebanon on Iran Sanctions, Hariri Denies
Naharnet/The Obama administration has reportedly informed Premier Saad Hariri that it "will not tolerate any transfer of Scud missiles to Hizbullah" and advised Lebanon not to vote against U.N. Security Council sanctions on Iran. As Safir daily said Monday Defense Secretary Robert Gates informed Hariri during his visit to Washington that President Barack Obama's priority was Iran and Lebanon's voting at the Security Council which would impact U.S. military assistance to the country.  However, Hariri's press office denied the report, saying the information is inaccurate and baseless. According to As Safir, a high-level U.S. source said Hariri told officials in Washington that he was "in a difficult political situation," adding that voting in favor of new sanctions against Iran was a "political suicide that would impact his premiership." Asked by As Safir what stance the U.S. would take if Lebanon voted against the sanctions, the official said Washington would submit the draft law to the Security Council on June 11, adding "we have sent the message but it would be satisfactory to us if (Lebanon) abstains" from voting.
However, he advised Lebanon not to vote against the new sanctions over Iran's controversial nuclear program, As Safir said.  As Safir also asserted that during his meeting with Secretary of Transport Ray LaHood, Hariri called on him to invest in infrastructure projects in Lebanon that are exclusively executed by companies belonging to his family. "This information is fabricated, and has no foundations," the press office said. Beirut, 07 Jun 10, 09:55

Qassem: Resistance Achieved Balance of Deterrence that Prevents Israel from Waging War Anytime It Wants
Naharnet/Hizbullah Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem on Sunday stressed that "the Resistance has achieved a balance of deterrence that daunts Israel against waging war, and therefore preventing the expansion of the Israeli scheme." "Today, Israel can no longer decide to wage a war anytime it wants, because it knows the level of retaliation and the loss it will suffer. Israel can no longer intimidate, because it knows that the warnings of the resistance fighters are stronger and firmer. Israel can no longer expand its occupation, because it knows that the liberation is coming, and that what it had occupied has started to become liberated. It won't be able to realize a new occupation of our country – these are all the achievements of the Resistance," Qassem said. "Today, Israel is suffering from its shaken image in the world, especially in the Western world. Today, Israel is perceived by people as a criminal, murderer and committer of massacres, and as you are noticing, the European mobilization at the popular level is denouncing Israel for its acts in Gaza and against the Freedom Flotilla," Qassem added.
He stressed that with the Freedom Flotilla sailing toward Gaza, the image of Israel has become uglier, "and this is all for the sake of the resistance and liberating the land."
"Israel has become a burden on humanity as a whole after they had wanted it only to be a burden on us in the region. Today, Israel has turned into a burden on its sponsor, the U.S., and on Europe and the entire world," Qassem added. Hizbullah number two noted that "the Freedom Flotilla and everyone on its board contributed to the resistance's military activity."
"But we also call for political, cultural and humanitarian resistance of all types and together with all strugglers, peoples, nationalities and ideologies regardless of the political stance or sect -- the thing that grants us support and strength." In clear reference to Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea's latest remarks, Qassem said: "We heard some viewpoints wondering that if the Freedom Flotilla has managed to create this reaction and sympathy in the world, why we would resort to (military) resistance. We tell them: this is an integrated process, the Freedom Flotilla creates popular compassion and courage, and the Resistance deters Israel and achieves liberation; and we all can realize achievements, because the world will not give us back our land unless we restore it by force." Beirut, 06 Jun 10, 21:13

Qaouq: Israel Pressuring Syria to 'Besiege' Hizbullah
Naharnet/Hizbullah official in southern Lebanon Sheikh Nabil Qaouq accused Israel of seeking to pressure Syria into "besieging" the resistance under the slogan of U.N. Security Council resolution 1701 and the alleged transfer of arms. "Syria once again proved that its ties with the resistance overcome any blackmail as long as there are occupied Lebanese territories," Qaouq told a visiting delegation from the Syrian Bar Association in the southern city of Tyre. "The resistance in Lebanon cannot forget that Syria was a partner in liberation and victory," he said. Qaouq also said the U.S. is seeking "in vain" to distance Syria from Hizbullah. "This is a waste of time because this relationship is stronger than U.S. statements or Israeli maneuvers."
Beirut, 06 Jun 10, 12:58

Israeli Navy Kills 4 Palestinian 'Commandos' off Gaza
Naharnet/Israeli forces on Monday shot dead four Palestinian 'commandos' off Gaza as the Jewish state scrambled to cope with mounting fallout over an earlier deadly sea battle.
Palestinian witnesses said they saw Israeli helicopters and naval forces firing on a vessel off the coast south of Gaza City, at about 4:00 am (0100 GMT).
Two hours later, four bodies in diving suits were pulled from the water, medical sources and witnesses said, describing the dead as "commandos." A search was under way for another two people still missing after the attack. Israel's military confirmed its navy had attacked a boat carrying "a squad of terrorists wearing diving suits on their way to execute a terror attack."
Shortly afterwards, Israel mounted an air strike in northern Gaza, which left an armed Hamas militant wounded, Palestinian medical and security sources said.
The violence off Gaza came exactly a week after Israel's navy mounted a bungled operation to stop a fleet of aid ships heading for the beleaguered coastal Strip which has been under a tight blockade since 2006. That operation descended into chaos and violence which left nine foreign activists dead, most of them Turkish, and has sparked a huge backlash of anger across the globe -- and a mounting diplomatic crisis for Israel. The violence off Gaza came just hours after the last of the 19 activists and crew from the Rachel Corrie aid ship which tried to run the Israeli blockade on Saturday, were deported from Israel. "They have all left," Israeli immigration official Sabine Haddad told AFP, saying the five Irish nationals, including Nobel Peace Prize winner Mairead Maguire, had flown out on a plane which left at about 5:00 am (0200 GMT). Six Malaysians and a Cuban were deported to Jordan on Sunday while the remaining activists -- including six Filipinos and a Briton -- left overnight.  Israeli forces intercepted and seized control of the Rachel Corrie on Saturday as it tried to reach the Gaza Strip, in a peaceful operation which had a radically different outcome from the earlier raid on the aid flotilla that left nine dead last week.(AFP) Beirut, 07 Jun 10, 08:46

Erdogan and Nasrallah…And Pulling the Rug?
06/06/2010
By Tariq Alhomayed
Editor-in-Chief of Asharq Al-Awsat
A while ago my father asked me about the role of Iran and Turkey in the region, and the Iranian nuclear file, and I began to explain this in detail, however my father interrupted me saying "the issue is simpler than this, my son!" I asked him "how?" He answered "for years the game has been the same game, however the ability of the two players is in decline."
I remembered these words whilst I was reading a statement issued by Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, in which he called for the formation of a "Freedom Flotilla II" in order to break the Gaza blockade, as well as for [the people of Lebanon] to "embrace and support" the new Turkish position towards Israel via "more Lebanese participation in Freedom Flotilla II." Nasrallah also said that "Just as Israel takes into account the red flag of Turkey, so it takes into account the yellow flag" that belongs to Hezbollah. The Hezbollah leader justified a second Freedom flotilla, saying "those who take part in the Freedom Flotilla II should know that they belong to a resistance that doesn’t leave anyone in Israeli jails." What does all of this mean?
The issue is clear, and this is that Nasrallah feels that Turkey's new position [towards Israel] has pulled the rug from underneath him, and from under Iran of course, and as a result of this he wants to get involved and raise the stakes, and this is in order to pull the rug from under Turkey. However the fact of the matter is that we are afraid that this rug will tear in half from all of this pushing and pulling.
Nasrallah went out calling for people to "embrace and support the Turkish position" on the grounds that "Israel has begun to lose Turkey and this is a very significant change in the region." Nasrallah also celebrated the Turkish leadership's threat to cut off ties with Israel, considering this to be "tantamount to an earthquake at the strategic level in Israel" adding that "Turkey is a strong country with a strong leadership that knows how to use its power." In fact, Nasrallah went further than this when commenting on the Turkish position [towards Israel] saying "some people are talking about subservient and weak diplomacy [towards Israel]…which only results in disgrace and loss" however "diplomacy based upon force and arms is capable of accomplishing a lot."
However what Hassan Nasrallah, and many Arabs who are waving the Turkish flag, are not paying attention to is that following the Freedom Flotilla incident Turkey has issued numerous and contradictory statements, some escalating the situation, while others calming tensions. The Turkish Deputy Prime Minister [Bulent Arinc] said that military and economic agreements between Ankara and Tel Aviv are currently under discussion, however the Turkish Minister of Defense said that his country would not be scrapping any military agreements with the Israelis, particularly as one of the most prominent military contracts [between Israel and Turkey] is for military equipment that the Turkish army is using to bombard Kurdish sites.
As for cutting off ties with Israel, the Turkish Deputy Prime Minister said Ankara "will reduce relations in these fields to a minimum level…but as a state we cannot completely ignore a state whose existence we recognize." And so the question remains, where is this strategic earthquake or the diplomacy based upon force and arms that Nasrallah is talking about?
Therefore it is true that the game is the same game, but the ability of the players is in decline.

Residents of southern border village hold protest against flotilla attack
By Mohammed Zaatari
Daily Star staff
Monday, June 07, 2010
Mohammed Zaatari
Daily Star staff
MAROUN AR-RAS: Residents and Hizbullah supporters in southern Lebanon raised on Saturday the banner of Imam Hussein in the border town of Maroun ar-Ras in protest against Israel’s recent attack on an aid boat headed to Gaza.
At a rally, Hizbullah supporters raised the banner at the highest point in the village to show solidarity with the nine Turkish human-rights activists shot dead by Israeli commandoes on Monday. The rally also commemorated the 10th anniversary of south Lebanon’s liberation from Israeli occupation and the 21st anniversary of the death of Imam Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the Iran’s Islamic Revolution. Israel withdrew from most parts of south Lebanon on May 24, 2000.
People from across the region, including Hizbullah official in the south Sheikh Nabil Qaouk, turned out for the raising of the banner. On the other side of the border, Israeli soldiers were seen deployed in the fields.
Nine Turkish citizens, one of whom was a Turkish-American citizen, were killed when Israeli commandoes raided a boat belonging to a convoy of aid ships while they were still in international waters on Monday. The peace activists aboard the MV Mavi Marmara were attempting to reach the Israeli-blockaded Gaza Strip with humanitarian aid.
Reacting to the bloodshed, Qaouk condemned the silence of Arab countries and said Turkey, which has been highly critical of Israel’s killings, was “more Arab than Arab states.” He stressed the need for decisive action, saying Gaza and the rest of the Palestinians were tired of UN conventions and resolutions.
Qaouk also warned against having faith in the US and the international community, saying that “62 years of occupation and four years of blockade are more than enough to prove that placing bets on the international community, on international resolutions and on Arab conventions, is an illusion.”
In an article published in the daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat Sunday, member of Hizbullah’s political council Mahmoud Qomati argued the importance of the Hizbullah-led Resistance.
He said his party will not part with the weapons it has “because they protect the country,” adding that it was no longer acceptable to consider the party’s arsenal as a problem. Many in the March 14 coalition have urged Hizbullah to disarm.
Israel was trying to reach the same level of readiness Hizbullah has reached and “it won’t wage war before it can guarantee victory,” Qomati said.

Protesters rally near US Embassy in Lebanon to denounce Gaza blockade
By Agence France Presse (AFP)
Monday, June 07, 2010
AWKAR: Several hundred left-wing activists held a protest near the United States Embassy on Sunday, burning Israeli flags and calling for an end to Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip.
Chanting “Free Palestine” and “‘No’ to an American Embassy in Lebanon,” the demonstrators gathered about two kilometers away from the US Embassy in Awkar, north of Beirut, under the watchful eyes of soldiers.
The demonstrators, supporters of the Communist Party and the Democratic Youth Movement, carried Lebanese, Palestinian and Turkish flags, and placards denouncing Israel.
Protests have erupted worldwide since Israeli naval commandos stormed a Turkish-led multi-national aid flotilla headed for Gaza in defiance of an Israeli blockade, killing nine
On Saturday, Israeli forces stopped the Rachel Corrie, another aid ship headed for Gaza from Ireland, but there was no repetition of the earlier violence.
“Born in the USA, murdered for Palestine,” said a placard carried by a demonstrator, an apparent reference to Rachel Corrie, an American activist crushed by Israeli bulldozers in 2003 as she tried to stop the destruction of Palestinian homes.
Demonstrators also carried the dead activist’s photographs, and an Israeli flag symbolically splattered with drops of blood. They set ablaze two Israeli flags and a wooden replica of Israel’s emblem, the Star of David.
Some of the demonstrators removed a line of barbed wire separating them from the soldiers, before being warned to stop and move back.
On Saturday, two pro-Palestinian non-governmental organizations in Lebanon launched a campaign for funds to buy a boat to sail for Gaza next week with dozens of Arab and foreign journalists on board.
The non-governmental groups Free Palestine Movement and Reporters Without Limits said they hoped the boats would set off for the blockaded Gaza Strip at the end of next week.
It will carry aid, namely educational supplies for Palestinian children, as well 50 Arab and foreign journalists along with 25 European activists, including some MPs, organizers told a Beirut news conference.
“We launch an appeal to all the free people in this world to provide financial contributions to buy a boat,” Thaer Ghandour of the Reporters Without Limits said.
Israel has blockaded the impoverished and overcrowded territory since Hamas captured a soldier in a deadly cross-border raid in 2006. It further tightened its grip after the Islamist movement seized control of the territory the following year.
On Friday the head of Lebanon’s Hizbullah movement, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, called for a “Freedom Flotilla II” to break the Israeli-imposed siege on Gaza.
Nasrallah, who was speaking to a pro-Gaza rally in Beirut via video link, said it was important join “the humanitarian struggle” to break the blockade, insisting, however, that he had no plans to ignite a new war with Israel. – AFP

FPM crisis erupts over Aoun's plans to reshuffle posts
By The Daily Star
Monday, June 07, 2010
BEIRUT: The Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) is undergoing a fiery internal debate after a decision by its leader MP Michel Aoun to carry out a major reshuffling of the party.
Last week, Aoun issued a circulatory note in which he asked FPM coordinators and members of the executive committee to submit their resignations as part of the movement’s restructuring.
“There will be comprehensive changes in the FPM beginning soon,” Aoun told his party’s Sawt al-Madda radio station in late May.
The former army commander explained that he asked officials to submit their resignations but to pursue their work pending the new appointments. The reshuffling was a prerequisite to “review past mistakes in order to improve future performance,” he added.
Senior FPM official and former deputy Premier Issam Abu Jamra told the pan-Arab newspaper Ash-Sharq al-Awsat on Sunday that Aoun’s decision was harmful to the group. As with previous “unilateral decisions” carried out by Aoun, the reshuffle would further strip FPM of popular support without yielding any gains, he said.
“The exclusive control of decisions by one person is similar to the [political structure] of clans,” said Abu Jamra.
He denied forming an opposition current within the FPM. “We are still trying to correct mistakes that contradict sound logic,” Abu Jamra said.
The FPM official questioned the logic behind Aoun’s action, saying that the reshuffling could take place simply by replacing members. Aoun’s request was “moral pressure on those officials [asked to submit their resignations],” he added. Abu Jamra also disclosed to the newspaper that he had severed relations with Aoun since November 2009 as he believed the FPM leader was not being honest with him about his decisions that the former deputy premier said he opposed. On Friday, Abu Jamra and FPM officials Youssef Saadallah Al-Khouri and Salim Azar issued a statement in which they criticized Aoun’s decision. They said Aoun’s move cemented rather than eased the deadlock the party was suffering from and labeled the reshuffling measure “as an improvised decision that lacked any legal basis and constituted illegal moral pressure on FPM senior officials.” The statement also said that in democratic organizations, resignations were submitted rather than imposed. However, a senior FPM official told the Ash-Sharq Al-Awsat daily that Abu Jamra’s remarks reflected a “personal dispute between him and Aoun” and did not represent FPM’s true voice. He emphasized the solidity of the organizational and administrative structure of the FPM, stressing that the results of recent municipal elections confirmed it was still a unified and popular party. The official, who requested anonymity, said Aoun’s decision came in response to requests made by FPM officials and coordinators, many of whom had become busy with other occupations. He urged all FPM officials to discuss problems within the party rather than in the media.
Denying that the resignation of FPM coordinators had created confusion within party ranks, the official said the restructuring “is bigger and deeper than what [critics] are talking about, which proves that the party is more democratic than all Lebanese parties.” – The Daily Star

Abu Sharaf elected to head Beirut Order of Physicians
Monday, June 07, 2010
Wassim Mroueh and Antoine Amrieh
Daily Star staff
BEIRUT/ TRIPOLI: Sharaf Abu Sharaf was elected as the head of Beirut’s Order of Physicians on Sunday, with 1,312 votes.
Abu Sharaf, who was backed by the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), competed with Najib Jahshan and Ghassan Skaff who were endorsed by the Lebanese Forces and the Future Movement respectively.
March 14 followers didn’t vote in one block, but distributed their votes between Skaff and Jahshan with Abu Sharaf emerging as the main beneficiary of the split vote.
Skaff received 1,110 votes and Jahshan 319 votes.
Prior to electing the head of the syndicate, several attempts to convince either Jahshan or Skaff to withdraw their candidacies failed, resulting in a divided March 14 camp.
However, the March 14-backed “Syndicate Unity” list won six out of the eight seats, with Mariam Rajab, Najib Jahshan, Ghassan Skaf, Roland Rizkallah, Joseph Haddad, and Ali Mansour making it to the order’s board.
Sharaf Abu Sharaf and Maher Hamzeh were the only victorious members of the “Syndicate for Everybody” list, endorsed by the March 8 alliance and the FPM.
Hamzeh, who was running for the post of the head of the order as well, withdrew his candidacy in favor of Abu Sharaf.
An-Nahar newspaper reported on Thursday that MP Walid Jumblatt’s Progressive Socialist Party (PSP) was the first to call for consensus in accordance with the positive atmosphere in the country. Also, the PSP sought to restore the presence of March 8-backed members in the syndicate.
The elections of the Order of Physicians are held once every three years.
Several parties have been debating the issue of rotating the post of the head of the order between Muslims and Christians each term. Such a policy is adopted by the Syndicate of Engineers.
The Beirut Order of Physicians was established in 1946 and since then only two Muslims were elected as head of the body. Some 4,000 out of 7,028 doctors eligible to vote in the order’s elections are Muslim.
In the North, Fawwaz al-Baba became the head of the North Lebanon Order of Physicians with 383 votes while Omar Ayyash received 355 votes.
Around 1,400 doctors are registered in the North Lebanon order of Physicians with 1,048 members eligible to vote since they paid their annual subscriptions to the body.
Baba told The Daily Star that politics had nothing to do with the elections, while some reports said he was backed by the Future Movement. The same reports said that Ayyash enjoyed the support of March 8 forces along with Former Prime Minister, current Tripoli MP Najib Miqati.
Former Future Movement MP Moustafa Alloush told The Daily Star that the elections in the north were being held amid a “democratic spirit which constitutes part of Lebanese activeness.” He gave his comments after casting his vote. Asked about political interference in the elections, Alloush said that political polarization was not clear in the polls.
After his victory, Baba said the elections were democratic, promising to implement his program in cooperation with all the members of the order. “The Order of Physicians is our home and we will work together to protect it and enhance its role,” said Baba. Among the main demands raised by doctors in Lebanon is uniting the North Lebanon and Beirut Orders of Physicians, and raising the retirement salary from LL6,00,000 to LL1,500,000.

Another Golden Age in the region?
Monday, June 07, 2010 /Editorial/Daily Star
Pope Benedict XVI’s remarks during his visit to Cyprus this weekend stressed his great concern over the plight of the Christian community in the Middle East, and discussed in some detail the many ills that are forcing Christians to leave. The problems Benedict talks of appear to be the same that cause concern to the rest of the population in the region, namely the Israeli-Palestine conflict, the Iraq war and Islamist extremism. It is true that all of these are a factor in Christians leaving the region, and while the common factor in all these problems should be obvious, we should consider, what is the cost of losing our diversity?
The richness of the heritage of this area does not come from Islam as a religion, but from Islam as a culture. Islam as a culture cannot be separated from the Golden Age of Islam and the glorious record of achievement made by cities like Cairo, Baghdad and Aleppo, all of which made a huge contribution to the progress of humanity at various times.
None of those places were purely Islamic. All were a synthesis of Judeo-Christian-Islamic communities that had worked together for hundreds of years. Christians, Jews and Muslims have their differences, but they managed to find a modus vivendi that was maintained despite all kinds of strains, up until the West’s involvement in the region in the 20th century.
Western powers disrupted the working model of integration and diversity in the region as far back as World War I. This was cemented further following World War II, which resulted in support for a Jewish state from Europe born out of guilt for the crimes committed against Jews during the conflict. The diversity of the Middle East was shattered by the creation of Israel – a state created on a land once inhabited by all religions, which sought to ensure the dominance of one of those religions over the rest. The result was predictable: polarization, radicalization and conflict.
With all due respect, the pope cannot forge a solution unless he talks to the powers that be in Washington. He may not, as Joseph Stalin once pointed out, have any tanks, but he still carries great deal of moral value. And it is, after all, not a strategic or a military value that ties Israel and America, but a moral one.
If the pope wants to help Christians in the Middle East, in essence, he should help the Jews. That is, help the Jews save themselves from themselves by pursuing a course that calls for a just solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. In doing that he could revive the atmosphere of diversity and integration that prevailed for centuries between Jews, Christians and Muslims, and perhaps contribute to the beginning of a new Golden Age for the Middle East.

It’s Not About the Flotilla: Turkey Changed Sides Years Ago
June 3, 2010- by Barry Rubin
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/its-not-about-the-flotilla-turkey-changed-sides-years-ago/
The foolish think the breakdown is due to the recent Gaza flotilla; the naïve, who pass for the sophisticated experts, attribute the collapse to the December 2008-January 2009 Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip.
Such conclusions are totally misleading. The relationship breakdown was already clear — and in private every Israeli expert dealing seriously with Turkey said so — well over two years ago: the cause was the election in Turkey of an Islamist government.
Turkey’s AK Party government has not permitted a single new military contract with Israel since it took office. The special relationship was over then.
Turkey needed Israel as an ally when a secular government in Ankara regarded Iran, Syria, and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq as its main threats. Once there was a government which regarded Iran and Syria as its closest allies, Israel became a perceived enemy.
When the Turkish armed forces were an important part of the regime, they saw Israel as a good source for military equipment and an ally against Islamists and radical Arab regimes. But once the army was to be suppressed, its wishes were a matter of no concern. Depriving it of foreign allies was a goal of the AK Party government.
When Turkey thought it needed Israel as a way to maintain good relations with the United States, the alliance was valuable. But once it was clear that U.S. policy would accept the AK — and was none too fond of Israel — that reason for the alliance also dissolved. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced:
It’s Israel that is the principal threat to regional peace.
At first, this outcome was not so obvious. The AK Party won its first election by only a narrow margin. To keep the United States and EU happy, to keep the Turkish army happy, and to cover up its Islamist sympathies, the new regime was cautious over relations with Israel. Keeping them going served as “proof” of Turkey’s moderation.
Yet as the AK majorities in elections rose, the government became more confident. No longer did it stress that it was a center-right party with family values. The regime steadily weakened the army, using EU demands for civilian power. As it repressed opposition and arrested hundreds of critics, bought up 40 percent of the media, and installed its people in the bureaucracy, the AK’s arrogance and its willingness to throw off its mask grew steadily.
And then, on top of that, the regime saw that the United States would not criticize it, not press it, not even notice what the Turkish government was doing. President Barack Obama came to Turkey and praised the regime as a model of moderate Muslim democracy. Former President Bill Clinton appeared in Istanbul, and in response to questions asked by an AK Party supporter, was manipulated into virtually endorsing the regime’s program without realizing it.
Earlier this year, the situation became even more absurd as Turkey moved ever closer to becoming the third state to join the Iran-Syria bloc. Syria’s state-controlled newspaper and Iranian President Ahmadinejad openly referred to Turkey’s membership in their alliance, and no one in Washington even noticed what was happening. Even when, in May, Turkish policy stabbed the United States in the back by helping Iran launch a sanctions-avoidance plan, the Obama administration barely stirred.
A few weeks ago, the Turkish prime minister said that Iran isn’t developing nuclear weapons, that he regards President Ahmadinejad as a friend, and that even if Iran were building nuclear bombs it has a right to do so. And still no one in Washington noticed.
Turkey was not only what the Obama administration wanted in a Muslim-majority country, it was also one of the “responsible powers,” to quote the administration’s national security strategy document, that the White House saw as necessary attendants to shore up a weak America at the Home for Aging Senile Superpowers.
The current Turkish government hates Israel because it is an Islamist regime.

Turkish Regime Changes Sides, West Averts Eyes
By Barry Rubin*
June 6, 2010
http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/06/turkish-regime-changes-sides
We depend on your contributions. To make a tax-deductible donation through PayPal or credit card, click the Donate button in the upper-right hand corner of this page. To donate via check, make it out to "American Friends of IDC," with "for GLORIA Center" in the memo line. Mail to: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10003.
This article is based on one commissioned and published by PajamasMedia. I have added additional material to this more extensive version. Turkish readers: see a special note to you at the end.
Why have Israel-Turkey relations gone from alliance to what seems to be the verge of war?
The foolish think that the breakdown is due to the recent Gaza flotilla crisis. The merely naive attribute the collapse to the December 2008-January 2009 Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip.
Such conclusions are totally misleading. It was already clear-and in private every Israeli expert dealing seriously with Turkey said so-well over two years ago. For example, the Justice and Development (AK) party government did not permit a single new military contract with Israel since it took office. The special relationship was over. And the cause was the election in Turkey of an Islamist government.
After all, Turkey needed Israel as an ally when a secular government in Ankara regarded Iran, Syria, and Saddam Hussein's Iraq as the main threats. Once there was a government which regarded Iran and Syria as its closest allies, Israel became a perceived enemy.
When the Turkish armed forces were an important part of the regime, they promoted the alliance because they saw Israel as a good source for military equipment and an ally against Islamists and radical Arab regimes. But once the army was to be suppressed by those who hated it because of the military's secularism and feared it as the guardian of the republican system it sought to dismantle, the generals' wishes were a matter of no concern and depriving them of foreign allies was a priority of the AK party government.
And when Turkey thought it needed Israel as a way to maintain good relations with the United States, the alliance was also valuable. But once it was clear that U.S. policy would accept the AK and was none too fond of Israel, that reason for the alliance also dissolved. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced, "It's Israel that is the principal threat to regional peace." Not Iran, Israel.
At first, this outcome was not so obvious. The AK Party won its first election by only a narrow margin. To keep the United States and EU happy, to keep the Turkish army happy, and to cover up its Islamist sympathies, the new regime was cautious over relations with Israel. Keeping them going served as "proof" of Turkey's moderation.
Yet as the AK majorities in election rose, the government became more confident. No longer did it stress that it was just a center-right party with family values. The regime steadily weakened the army, using EU demands for civilian power. As it repressed opposition and arrested hundreds of critics, bought up 40 percent of the media, and installed its people in the bureaucracy, the AK's arrogance, and thus its willingness to go further and throw off its mask, grew steadily.
And then, on top of that, the regime saw that the United States would not criticize it, not press it, not even notice what the Turkish government was doing. President Barack Obama came to Turkey and praised the regime as a model of moderate Muslim democracy. Former President Bill Clinton appeared in Istanbul and, in response to questions asked by an AK party supporter, was manipulated into virtually endorsing the regime's program without realizing it.
Earlier this year, the situation became even more absurd as Turkey moved ever closer to becoming the third state to join the Iran-Syria bloc. Syria's state-controlled newspaper and Iranian President Ahmadinejad openly referred to Turkey's membership in their alliance. And no one in Washington even noticed what was happening. Even when, in May, Turkish policy stabbed the United States in the back by helping Iran launch a sanctions-avoiding plan, the Obama Administration barely stirred in its sleep.
Then there is the theatrical demagoguery of Erdogan himself who threw a choreographed fit at the Davos conference because Israel's President Shimon Peres, the mildest and most dovish of men, "offended" him. He returned home to an excited demonstration.
Bashing Israel to gain popularity and stir nationalist and religious passions is not the oldest of such tricks. It is merely a variation of doing the same historically to Jews in general. And yes it still works. Boy, does it work!
Then there's Turkey's new foreign minister. Ahmed Davudoglu. It's a pity that his writings in Turkish haven't been translated because when he writes in English Davudoglu says Turkey wants to be everyone's friend, but in the Turkish version he makes clear that his goal is to be friends with those who hate the West. Davudoglu's appointment completes the AK party's conquest of the Foreign Ministry, another institution that hates Islamism.
And so with electoral victories; advancing control over Turkey's bureaucracy, military and society; and Western complaisance, the regime has become continually bolder.
A few weeks ago, the Turkish prime minister said that Iran isn't developing nuclear weapons, that he regards President Ahmadinejad as a friend, and that even if Iran were building nuclear bombs it has a right to do so. And still no one in Washington noticed. Turkey was not only what the Obama Administration wanted in a Muslim-majority country, it was also one of the "responsible powers," to quote the administration's national security strategy document, that the White House saw as necessary attendants to shore up a weak America at the Home for Aging Senile Superpowers.
The current Turkish government hates Israel because it is an Islamist regime. Note who its friends are: it cares nothing for the Lebanese people, it only backs Hizballah. It never has a kind word for the Palestinian Authority or Fatah, the Turkish government's friend is Hamas.
Lately for the first time, however, the AK government began to run into domestic problems. The poor status of the economy, the growing discontent of many Turks with creeping Islamism in the society, and finally the election for the first time of a popular leader for the opposition party, began to give hope that next year's elections might bring down the regime. Indeed, polls showed the AK sinking into or very close to second place. With the army neutered, elections are the only hope of getting Turkey off the road to Islamist .
Now, however, the corpses of those killed after they or their colleagues attacked Israeli soldiers will probably guarantee AK's victory. As one Turkish columnist put it, the AK, "will sail on this wind into a third term in power."
This is a prize well worth sacrificing Israeli trade and tourism. And the action is all the more attractive since Turkey in doing so will not have to sacrifice any Western and particularly U.S. support. By making this behavior so cheap, the U.S. government has made it inevitable.
But even that is not all. On September 12, Turkey will come to a crossroads when a referendum will be held over constitutional amendments introduced by the government. If passed, these changes will give the government control over the court system, virtually the only remaining institution it hasn't taken over. As one Turkish analyst wrote, "This would be the end of checks [and balances] and democracy."
In light of national solidarity and outrage over the Gaza incident, how can the government not win?
A Turkish colleague gave a good guideline for dealing with the Turkish government's defection to the other side and march toward Islamism some time ago, an analogy most ironic given the nautical nature of the Gaza flotilla issue. It was very important, he explained, that the Turkish people not become the enemy for the West and Israel. They were, he continued, merely the passengers. The regime-the captain and the crew-was the problem.
Even within the AK party there were more moderate elements, mostly those who joined from non-Islamist center-right parties. When I hosted the Turkey-Israel parliamentary friendship committee, these were the people most eager for good relations, because they saw this alliance as a check on the more extremist forces in their own party.
But then the Gaza flotilla sailed in. Many Turks who support opposition parties see this as close to a conspiracy, and one can hardly blame them for doing so. A radical Islamist group close to the government organized this whole affair which, while nominally independent, enjoyed the Turkish government's patronage. This flotilla was a semi-official operation by the AK-ruled state apparatus.
This campaign set up the intensification of the regime's manipulation of the two powerful symbols in Turkey that motivate people: nationalism and Islam. This is an anti-nationalist government, dismantling the traditional traditions of Atatirk's republic. But it has managed to wrap itself in the Turkish flag. Thus, the less than 30 percent who support the AK and would back an attempt to help Hamas has been turned into 100 percent by turning this from an Islamist into a nationalist issue.
A national hysteria has been whipped up. In huge demonstrations, Palestinian flags were waved and slogans should like: "Stop military collaboration with the Israeli army," "Kill all the Israelis," "Allah akbar," "Death to the Jews," and "Attack Israel."
This has taken on dangerous proportions. For example, an article in the Islamist newspaper Zaman claims that Israel "ordered" the Kurdish PKK to attack a Turkish naval base. This is a blood libel. The PKK declared it would renew attacks long before the Gaza incident and the Israeli government went out of its way to declare the PKK a terrorist group years ago in order to support Turkey! Given such behavior, all Israeli tourism to Turkey is likely to end for a long time given the danger and the government might not be able to stop terror attacks on Jewish and Israeli targets in Turkey even if it wants to do so.
Even the opposition parties, persuaded or intimidated by nationalist fervor, shouted their outrage, with a unanimous vote in parliament supporting the regime's stance. The Turkish media censored out almost everything that challenged the narrative of peace-loving demonstrators brutally attacked. Thus, Turks--largely locked into only there own media due to language--don't have the basis to question what they are being told.
I do not mean to suggest here that Israel might not have made tactical mistakes or that the Turks don't have a reason to feel upset at the death of nine of their nationals. But a different government in Turkey would express anger and then try to resolve the matter calmly and peacefully through some kind of compromise. Past, non-AK party governments have at times been harsh in criticizing Israel but they also had a strong incentive to resolve the crisis. This government finds the crisis useful.
The AK government had three demands: all Turks be released immediately, something Israel had already announced would happen but the regime pretended only came about due to its tough stance; there should be an international investigation; and Israel must pay compensation. Turkey's top leaders spoke of Israel as committing "piracy" and "terrorism," the latter term one never applies to Hamas or Hizballah.
Indeed, Erdogan said something very revealing of his true intentions. Turkey, he said, chose to side with law, peace, justice, Palestine and the Gaza Strip. In other words, this is a political alliance, theoretically with the Palestinians but actually only with his fellow Hamas Islamists.
Incidentally, I think there is one hidden price Turkey will pay for this strategy. Although its chances of getting into the EU were already quite low, a view of Turkey as extremist will put the last nail into the coffin of its candidacy succeeding. Even if European states don't like Israel, a display of Islamic fervor in Turkey will not make them feel good.
Another is the increased antagonism in the United States which, up until now, has treated the regime uncritically. In a remarkable editorial, the Washington Post blames Erdogan. It is a signal of a significant potential rift in U.S.-Turkey relations.
Is this demagogic mobilization of nationalist and religious passions the magic weapon the AK will use to gain reelection next year? Many Turks think so and are angry at Israel for, in their eyes, helping the survival of the regime they hate.
But for the AK government to succeed in gaining a political advantage, it's going to have to create several more crises to keep nationalist fervor stoked.
Unnoticed in the hoopla and hysteria surrounding this incident was the Turkish government's insulting treatment of the United States, as an errant schoolboy to be bullied and punished. President Barack Obama seems to have swallowed this meekly. Davutoglu said, "We expect the United States to show solidarity with us....I am not very happy with the statements from the United States yesterday."
Quickly, U.S statements came into line. One might ask why the United States should show solidarity with a regime that organized a massive and aggressive operation on behalf of Hamas and had just stabbed it in the back by cooking up a deal with Iran to sabotage sanctions against Israel, an ally which had supported U.S. policies and made several tough concessions at Obama's request.
Yet such is what has become normal in these times and under this U.S. government. The message has thus been sent: The Turkish government can do anything it wants and its American counterpart won't even squeak in protest. Indeed, in his interview with Larry King, Obama went out of his way--in a situation where it was totally unnecessary--to praise Turkey and urge that it play a central role!
He said: "I think Turkey can have a positive voice in this whole process once we've worked through this tragedy. And bring everybody together to figure out how can we get a two-state solution where the Palestinians and Israelis can live side by side in peace and security." Presumably, the second sentence was meant to say that the United States would "bring everybody together" but it could be read as if he were referring to Turkey.
Ironically, Turkey's own behavior--which no other government or even news media seems to be mentioning--runs rather counter to its protestations. Since 1993, Turkey has blockaded Armenia in support of Azerbaijan. One wonders how it would respond to a humanitarian convoy trying to cross the border and attacking Turkish soldiers. It has repeatedly sent soldiers into Iraq to attack Kurdish rebels, too, even as the incident at sea unfolded. And the regime's human rights' record has many spots on it.
Any idea of saving Israel-Turkey warm relations is an illusion as long as the AK party remains in power in Turkey. Any thought that Turkey can be an acceptable mediator for Israel, a country the regime loathes, with the Palestinians or Syria is ridiculous.
As long as the AK party remains in power this is only the beginning of its unfolding friction with the West. For one thing, the regime will demand that Israel be found guilty, that the United States support this verdict, and that Israel pay compensation. If not, Erdogan will go into more fits of outrage and tens of thousands of angry demonstrators will be unleashed into Turkey's streets.
This internal battle, however, is far from over. Turkey remains enough of a democratic state that the voters can either throw out that party or so reduce its votes as to force it into a coalition where its power would be reduced and policy moderated. A good scare at the polls could also force the AK regime to resume the moderate mask, pulling back on foreign policy while continuing its effort to transform Turkey.
One of these options is the best hope for Turkey at present. For as bad as things seem, if a different party took leadership in Ankara, while the old days of a warm Turkish-Israel relationship could not return so easily, a more normal situation would prevail. In other words, Turkey's defection is not necessarily permanent if the AK party does not remain in power for a long time.
The question now becomes: how much will this Turkish government sabotage U.S. interests before U.S.-Turkish relations go the same way? The defection of Turkey to the other side is the biggest strategic shift in the Middle East and loss for the democratic West since the Iranian revolution three decades ago. Pretending that this isn't happening will make no difference in reality.
A note to Turkish readers. I can hear some of you saying: You are blaming Turkey for the breakdown of relations, what about Israel's responsibility? First, I'm not blaming Turkey but the current government. A lot of you know that's basically true. Indeed, many of you have told me that you are really angry at Israel because you feel the situation has been successfully exploited by the regime to further its ends, which are very bad for the Turkish people and democracy. Second, I'm glad to debate over the Gaza flotilla issue with you (and have been corresponding with many Turkish friends on this issue) but before this latest event Israel has done nothing that anyone can claim has damaged Turkey or is against Turkish interests and yet the relations were already terrible.
Think also of what this is doing to your country. When martyrdom is celebrated as public funerals; when individual Turks can decide to take over the country's international policy by choosing to attack the soldiers of another country; when Jihad replaces "peace at home, peace in the world," is this not taking Turkey down the path that Arabs have followed for sixty years?
Will this approach bring to Turkey the dubious benefits of such "heroism" that have fallen upon Lebanon and Iraq: fanaticism, instability, intolerance, dictatorship, endless bloodshed, long-term conflict with the West; social stagnation, and financial ruin? This is precisely the kind of thing that Ataturk sought to ensure never came to Turkey.
May this dreadful prophecy never come to be.

Interview with President Amin Gemayel
Al-Arab newspaper
June 7, 2010
On June 7, the Qatari-owned Al-Arab newspaper carried the following interview with former Lebanese President and head of the Kataeb Party Amin Gemayel:
…Is the region heading toward more escalation following the last Israeli attack [on the Freedom Flotilla] and what steps should be taken to prevent the region from heading toward a new war?
I am afraid that the obstruction of diplomatic steps and the decay we are sensing in the Arab world and Middle East will cause an explosion. The current situation will either provoke an explosion or lead to a solution. The stalemate cannot continue in the current climate and we ought to find a solution. President Obama has not given up yet and George Mitchell’s efforts are ongoing, although they are becoming more and more obstructed. The biggest fear is that the explosion will start in Lebanon.
Today, the threat in the region extends beyond Palestinian and Lebanese borders and reaches Iran, especially after the tripartite agreement signed between Turkey, Brazil and Iran was coldly received. Do you believe that in the event of an explosion, this circle could expand and affect the region as a whole?
We know how the explosion starts, but we never know how it will end. Israel was very clear in holding Lebanese and Syrian governments responsible for harassment and the issue will not be limited to Israel and Hezbollah. It is unfortunate that Lebanon could be the victim of the ongoing conflict between Iran and the international community over the nuclear issue. We all know the extent to which Hezbollah is strategically linked to Iran and Hezbollah might be used in any conflict which may erupt, regardless of its nature and whether it is tactical or strategic. The Lebanese arena pay the price of a war whose goals extend far beyond Lebanon once again.
Why do you describe Hezbollah as the aggressor and not the defender, especially since Israel has repeatedly proven its hostile behavior?
If we want to tackle the issue from a regional perspective, we would say that Lebanon should not be burdened with a responsibility that should be a collective Arab one. How can the Israeli border with Syria, Jordan and Egypt be calm while Lebanon is being placed in front of the cannon and held responsible for the entire Arab-Israeli conflict, recognizing that it is the weakest link? On the other hand, the Lebanese state is not a minor and if there is a decision to engage in a confrontation, it will be adopted by legitimate institutions represented by Parliament, the Cabinet and the presidency of the republic. They are the sides that ought to draw up a defense strategy while resorting to the energies available in the Lebanese arena. If there is a popular resistance, it should be conducted under the umbrella of the state and in coordination with the state. No side is allowed to monopolize peace. The decision to go to war is the only one capable of protecting the country in the face of any Israeli attack.
But Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah recognized the army, resistance, people trio, under the umbrella of which the resistance is operating.
This is the biggest constitutional heresy… There is not one state around the world in which the army is placed alongside the militia. Regardless of its goals, Hezbollah will remain a militia whether we were to call it a resistance or any other name. It is built on the basis of a military faction that is not subject to the authority of constitutional powers…
So, do you consider that the discussion of the defense strategy is useless?
We are open and this is why we responded to the invitation of the president with an extended hand and are proceeding with dialogue. But will this dialogue have results? I do not know...
You are always complaining that the Christians are the weak body in Lebanon. But, was it not the Christians’ choice to be affiliated with either the Sunni powers or the Shia powers in the Lebanese arena?
At least we in the Kataeb Party only take national interests into consideration and do not accept alignments if they do not serve these interests. Everyone knows that we try to be in contact with all parties, whether they are Christian or Muslim, regardless of disputes over certain political issues. We are seeking dialogue with all factions.
Which side is hindering the Christian dialogue you are constantly calling for? Is the Free Patriotic Movement still the biggest obstruction?
Christian dialogue is present one way or the other. There are meetings held from time to time, whether publicly or far from the spotlights, with groups of leaders with whom we differ over several issues. They are related to general political positions and our interpretation of certain sovereign matters. We disagree with the FPM over the interpretation of the aforementioned points due to its adoption of Hezbollah’s interpretation of matters related to sovereign decisions.
So, there is a major dispute with the FPM.
It is undoubtedly an important one related to the fate and stability of the country…
On the other hand, why are the positions adopted by Deputy Walid Jumblatt not being met with strong reactions from March 14? Is this due to fear of seeing the majority becoming a minority?
In politics, each person is free to adopt the positions he sees fit and which serve his interests and those of the country. Therefore, Walid Jumblatt is free to adopt the positions he wants and we are dealing with him accordingly. There is nothing preventing us from communicating with Walid Bek or enjoying common points with him, regardless of his new inclinations…
Normalcy was restored between Damascus and a large number of Lebanese political forces, although this rapprochement is still weak on the Christian level. Will Syrian-Kataeb relations return to normal any time soon and will we witness a meeting between yourself and President Bashar al-Assad?
Our dispute with Syria is not a question of moodiness and our behavior in this regard is not an emotional one. We have been through a stage of understanding with our Syrian brothers and saw visits to Damascus conducted by Camille Chamoun, Bachir Gemayel, Danny Chamoun and myself. We say it is necessary to enjoy good relations with the government and people of Syria… Many positive events have been witnessed since the withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon, and we should not always look at the empty half of the bottle.
What about this empty half?
We must proceed with dialogue with Syria and we support the efforts of Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri. When we believe that the Kataeb should help resolve the pending issues, we will see what can be done. These pending issues feature the demarcation of the border, especially in the Shebaa Farms, the closing of the border and the discontinuation of the arms smuggling operations, the Palestinian organizations outside the camps and the missing people …
But is it not the responsibility of the government to raise these issues which you believe are pending and must be handled? Therefore, it is not the responsibility of Prime Minister Al-Hariri to carry these files with him during his repeated visits to Damascus?
We did not say otherwise and we support the Prime Minister in his attempts to resolve these pending issues…

IED kills Canadian soldier in Afghanistan
By Tara Brautigam, The Canadian Press
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Sgt. Martin Goudreault was looking for a stockpile of insurgent weapons shortly after dawn when a makeshift bomb detonated, killing him.
On his third tour of Afghanistan, Goudreault would have been more aware than most of the dangers leading such a patrol.
But he wouldn't have had it any other way.
"Sgt. Goudreault died what he loved doing best: leading his section from the front," Brig.-Gen. Jon Vance, the commander of Task Force Kandahar, told a news conference Monday at Kandahar Airfield.
"If your way of life was in peril, you would want someone like Sgt. Martin Goudreault to show up and offer to help."
The 35-year-old Goudreault died Sunday after an improvised explosive device went off at 6:30 a.m. near the village of Nakhonay in the Panjwaii district, about 15 kilometres southwest of Kandahar city.
"Insurgents hide their weapons and IEDs amongst the civilian population and soldiers like Martin, both Canadian and Afghan, are working each and every day to find and eliminate these weapons caches," Vance said.
The native of Sudbury, Ont., known as "Marty" to his friends, was a 15-year veteran of the Canadian Forces and on his fifth overseas deployment when he died. Deployed about a month ago, he was a member of 1 Combat Engineer Regiment based at Canadian Forces Base Edmonton, serving with the 1st Battalion of the Royal Canadian Regiment Battle Group.
"Recognized early in his career for his leadership, Sgt. Goudreault was a model soldier, someone the soldiers in his section could look up to and emulate," Vance said.
"His subordinates and superiors alike will remember him as a tireless leader who was passionate about his work."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper expressed his condolences to Goudreault's family and friends.
"The lives of the Afghan people are better due to the efforts of Canadians like Sgt. Goudreault who provide security and stability," Harper said in a statement.
"These are the cornerstones that will allow the country to rebuild and grow into the future."
Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Goudreault's death was another example of the daily risks faced by the men and women of the Canadian Forces.
"Sgt. Martin Goudreault’s sacrifice will not be forgotten and it will not deter us from continuing to help Afghans rebuild their country," he said in a statement.
The latest death brings to 147 the number of Canadian military personnel who have died since the Afghan mission began in 2002.
It comes less than two weeks after Trooper Larry Rudd of Brantford, Ont., was killed by an IED, also in the Panjwaii district.
Known as the birthplace of the Taliban, the district has been a bloody battleground for Canadian troops since they arrived in Kandahar province in strength four years ago.
Dozens of Canadians have been injured or killed in the restive region, and while villages and towns have been repeatedly cleared, the Taliban has quietly reasserted itself in parts of the area.
IEDs have been the single biggest cause of death among Canadian troops in Afghanistan.
Seven out of nine Canadian deaths this year were the result of an IED blast. In all, 88 of the 147 Canadian fatalities in the eight-year-old Afghan mission came about from IEDs — roadside bombs or some other type of explosive, according to the Department of Defence.
Two civilians _ diplomat Glyn Berry and journalist Michelle Lang _ have also been killed in Afghanistan.

Phoenician or Arab? Lebanon's Never-ending
AFP
"I am a Phoenician, not an Arab," asserts 20-year-old Lebanese student Rebecca Yazbeck when asked to define her identity, with nothing more than conviction to back her claim.
But fellow Lebanese Shehade Seqlawi feels differently.
"There is no question that we are Arabs," says the 50-year-old chauffeur. "We live in an Arab environment."
A debate over national identity has raged in Lebanon since the start of the 20th century with many Maronites claiming direct ancestry from the Phoenicians in a bid to stand apart in the largely Muslim Middle East.
The Phoenicians were an intrepid seafaring people and tradesmen largely credited with creating the first widely used alphabet.
With the onset of the civil war in 1975, the debate over identity became more acute as the term Phoenician started being bandied about as an ideological weapon and a means to differentiate Christians from Muslims.
But various scientific studies in recent years have served to debunk the idea that Phoenician ancestry is related in any way to religion or a specific nationality.
"You can be Muslim or Christian and carry a Phoenician signature," said Pierre Zalloua, a Lebanese scientist who has carried out research to trace the genetic origin of Middle Eastern peoples.
He notes that populations across the eastern Mediterranean coastline -- Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories -- share much of the same genetic makeup.
"The Phoenicians lived before monotheistic religions and geopolitical divisions," said Zalloua, whose research has been published in the American Journal of Human Genetics and Annals of Human Genetics.
At least 30 percent of Lebanese, regardless of religion, have a genetic "stamp" that bears the mark of the Phoenicians, he told Agence France Presse.
"It was very surprising to find that after thousands of years there are still so many traces of Phoenician genes," added Zalloua, who collects DNA samples to trace genealogy.
"This shows that we are all not so different from each other."
But no science will convince some Lebanese, like Yazbeck, that they are anything other than Phoenician.
"Of course I am first and foremost of Phoenician origin," insists the green-eyed blonde.
"I don't think the Lebanese are Arabs," she adds. "Civilizations have evolved, but we have been here for centuries."
An article in the Lebanese constitution drafted in 1943 stipulated that Lebanon was a country with an "Arab face". This was replaced at the end of the civil war in 1990 with an article labeling it "an Arab country."
The ancient Phoenicians traversed the seas as early as 1200 BC, passing through what are today Lebanon, Spain and Morocco via Cyprus and Carthage, a thriving city which they founded in modern-day Tunisia.
The Lebanese port city of Tyre was the main city-state in Phoenicia, which covered roughly the same area as modern-day Lebanon. Among the other main centers of the civilization were Byblos, Sidon and what is now Beirut.
Historian Boutros Labaki argues that while the Lebanese today agree on the fact they are Lebanese, they differ as to whether they share a common identity.
"The decades-old debate over how you define yourself as a Lebanese persists," he told us.
"In order to promote its own political project, each community has sought to legitimize itself by forging an identity to mobilize its supporters."
This means that while Yazbeck and Seqlawi agree they are both Lebanese, they differ as to their origin, giving rise to wry comments and bemusement among Arab states and other countries.
Even Syrian President Bashar Assad quipped in an interview recently that he was surprised that some Lebanese still refer to themselves as Phoenicians.
For Marianne, a friend of Yazbeck who refused to give her last name, there is no two ways about it.
"We can't deny our Arab identity," said the 22-year-old. "But we're not really Arabs.
"We're more open than others