LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِMay 12/2010

Bible Of the Day
Proverbs: 28:18 Whoever walks blamelessly is kept safe; but one with perverse ways will fall suddenly.
Proverbs:28:25 One who is greedy stirs up strife; but one who trusts in Yahweh will prosper.
Proverbs:28:11 The rich man is wise in his own eyes; but the poor who has understanding sees through him.

Free Opinions, Releases, letters, Interviews & Special Reports
The shape of things to come with Iran/Tony Badran/May 11,10
Low turnout a sign of failure/Daily Star/May 11/10
Is the US wiser to Syrian provocation?/By David Schenker/May 11/10
Annahar/Interview with Lebanon's PM, Saad Hariri/May 11/10

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for May 11/10
US warns Syria over Scuds-to-Hezbollah claim/BBC News
Geagea highlights Christian win in Beirut Mukhtar race/Now Lebanon
Medvedev urges more active US role in Mideast peace efforts/Now Lebanon
Egypt to push through extension of emergency law/Now Lebanon
Inside Hizballah's Preparations for the Next War/TIME
Israel: 2 Israeli Arab Activists Arrested/New York Times
A Vista of War and Peace at a Lebanese Crossroads/New York Times
Russian President Medvedev starts official visit to Syria/Xinhua
Vote-buying 'widespread' in Zahle during municipal polls - LADE/By Patrick Galey and Carol Rizk/Daily Star
March 14 takes Beirut, rivals grab most of Zahleh/By Wassim Mroueh/Daily Star
Tribunal chief vows to maintain impartiality/Daily Star
Zghorta: Franjieh-Moawwad Negotiations Hit Snags/Naharnet
Batroun: Aql-Daou Alliance Revived in Bid to Topple Bassil/Naharnet
Ongoing Efforts to Revive Sidon Consensus…Nasrallah Steps In/Naharnet
Zahle: FPM Candidate Ranks 43 out of 75 Runners/Naharnet
Sunni Representation Disappears in Zahle after Penetration in Skaff's List/Naharnet
Hariri in U.S. End of May after Alleged Reconciliation over Scud-Saddam Comparison/Naharnet
Hariri Meets Baroud … Backs Down on Political Career Risk/Naharnet
Hariri Denies Saying he Supported Hizbullah Rearmament to Defend Sovereignty/Naharnet
Israel Says it's Better Prepared for War with Iran, Hizbullah/Naharnet
Hariri Thanks Beirutis for 'Preserving Coexistence'/Naharnet
2 Israeli Arabs Arrested on Suspicion of 'Spying for Hizbullah'/Naharnet
Municipal, Mayoral Elections: March 14 Wins Beirut, Opposition Snatches Largest Part of Zahle/Naharnet
Beirut Christian Mayors: 25 for March 14, 15 for Aoun-Tashnag Alliance/Naharnet
Jumblat Calls on Mt. Lebanon Prosecutor, Security Officials to Resign over Ketermaya Lynching/Naharnet
Suleiman Urges Political Leaders to Accept Election Results/Naharnet
King Abdullah Stresses to Jumblat Jordan's Constant Support for Lebanon's Stability/Naharnet
STL President, Vice-President, Pre-Trial Judge Meet Representatives of Civil Society/Naharnet
Berri Calls Hariri from Turkey Seeking Consensus on Sidon Elections, Defends Baroud against Criticism/Naharnet
Williams Discusses with Abul Gheit Lebanon-Israel Tensions/Naharnet

US warns Syria over Scuds-to-Hezbollah claim
BBC/P.J. Crowley, U.S. State Department: "Great concern" over missile claims
A top US official has warned of serious repercussions for Syria if claims that it supplied the Lebanese Islamist group Hezbollah with Scud missiles are true.
Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman said "all options are going to be on the table looking at this".
But he declined to say whether the US could confirm a transfer had occurred.
Earlier, Lebanon's prime minister dismissed the accusation, first made by Israel, saying it seemed an attempt to find a pretext for a military strike.
"Threats that Lebanon now has huge missiles are similar to what they used to say about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," Saad Hariri said. "Israel is trying to reproduce the same scenario for Lebanon." The United States has shown in the past that we are able to act Jeffrey Feltman, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs
US worries about Syrian intentions Hezbollah fought a 34-day conflict with Israel in 2006 during which more than 1,200 Lebanese people, mostly civilians, were killed. Some 160 Israeli people, most of whom were soldiers, also died. UN Security Council resolution 1701, which ended the conflict, included an arms embargo on Lebanon, except for transfers authorised by the Lebanese government or UN.
'Provocative action'
Speaking before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday, the state department's top official on the Middle East said it would consider the "full range of tools" available to make Syria reverse any delivery of ballistic missiles to Hezbollah.
Mr Feltman would not confirm that Scuds had been delivered but said it would be an "incendiary, provocative action" if it turned out to be true.
The Syrian embassy has dismissed the allegations that it arms Hezbollah "The United States has shown in the past that we are able to act," he said. "I expect that all options are going to be on the table looking at this." The BBC's Kim Ghattas in Washington says the warning does come with an "if", but it is a dire one - this is language usually reserved for Iran and it usually implies that the US would consider military action. It also underscores the US government's concerns about what could be a volatile situation, our correspondent adds.
Senior US officials have told the BBC they believe Syria has been supplying Hezbollah with more sophisticated weaponry.
Analysts say that if Hezbollah's military wing obtains ballistic missiles with the help of its backers, Syria and Iran, it could potentially alter the military balance in the region, putting all of Israel within reach. The Syrian government has said the accusations are "fabrications".

Geagea highlights Christian win in Beirut Mukhtar race
May 11, 2010 /Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea praised the Interior Ministry and its minister, Ziad Baroud, for the way it handled the weekend’s municipal elections in Beirut and the Bekaa during a press conference on Tuesday. Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun announced last week his party would boycott the municipal elections, but still run in the Mukhtar race. Geagea said the FPM and Tashnaq party won 10 Mukhtar seats. Out of 28 Mukhtar posts up for grabs in Achrafieh, Rmeil and Saifi, the Christian parties in the March 14 alliance took home 21 seats, he said. And in Achrafieh, the March 14 alliance earned 54 percent of the Christian votes, according to the LF leader. Meanwhile, the FPM boycotted municipal elections in Zahle with one exception. Aoun announced last week his party “nominated Antoine Abi Younes in Zahle as a referendum, to see who people would vote for.”
Geagea said the FPM’s candidate in Zahle received 6,711 votes out of a total 24,000. Abi Younes earned 1,712 Shia votes, 242 Sunni votes and the rest of the ballots were turned in by Christian voters. Geagea also congratulated Popular Bloc leader Elias Skaff and Joseph Maalouf for their win in the Zahle municipal elections. Some political figures predicted an electoral showdown ahead of the city’s race between current head of the municipality Assaad Zoughaib and Skaff. “I disagree with those who say Skaff has regained the leadership of Zahle,” the LF leader said. Skaff’s list won 43 percent of the Christian vote in Zahle, according to Geagea. “Forty-seven percent of the Christian voters in Zahle are pro-March 14, a percentage that has increased since the 2009 [parliamentary] elections,” he said.-NOW Lebanon

Medvedev urges more active US role in Mideast peace efforts
Naharnet/May 11, 2010
During an official visit to Syria, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Tuesday called for a more active US role in the Middle East peace process, saying the situation in the region was "very bad" and risked worsening further. "In essence, the Middle East peace process has deteriorated," Medvedev said speaking alongside his Syrian counterpart Bashar al-Assad on a landmark visit to Damascus by a Russian head of state. "The situation is very, very bad. It's time to do something," the Russian leader said. “I agree with President Assad, the American side could take a more active position.”“A further heating up of the situation in the Middle East is fraught with an explosion and a catastrophe."Medvedev's visit comes against the backdrop of a nearly 18-month-old suspension of Turkish-led peace efforts between Israel and Syria and a mounting war of words between the two foes over Israeli accusations that Syria has been arming Hezbollah with Scud missiles. It also comes as renewed US-brokered peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians run into difficulties over Israeli settlement expansion in annexed Arab East Jerusalem.-AFP/NOW Lebanon

Israel Says it's Better Prepared for War with Iran, Hizbullah
Naharnet/Israel's deputy premier Moshe Yaalon said the country's air force has improved its capabilities and is now better prepared for a war with Iran and on "rockets from Lebanon."
Yaalon told an air power conference Monday that the air force has better refueling and range and has made "a massive improvement in the accuracy of ordnance and intelligence."
By spearheading assaults on Hizbullah fighters in Lebanon and militants in the Palestinian territories, the Israeli air force had gained the techniques necessary for any future strikes on Iranian sites, the former armed forces chief said. He said such advances could be used "for a war on terror in Gaza, for a war in the face of rockets from Lebanon, for war on the conventional Syrian army, and also for war on a peripheral state like Iran." Yaalon serves as a cabinet minister for strategic affairs as well as deputy premier. As a lieutenant-general, he served as chief of staff of the Israeli military from 2002-2005.(AP-Naharnet)

King Abdullah Stresses to Jumblat Jordan's Constant Support for Lebanon's Stability
Naharnet/Jordanian King Abdullah II held talks Monday with Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat in Amman, according to a statement issued by the Royal Hashemite Court. The statement noted that the meeting "tackled the current developments in the Middle East and a number of regional issues of common interest."During the meeting, King Abdullah stressed "his pride in the Jordanian-Lebanese relations and his keenness on developing them in all fields."The king stressed Jordan's continuous support for Lebanon's security and stability. In addition to his two sons Taymour and Aslan, Jumblat was accompanied by Public Works and Transport Minister Ghazi Aridi, State Minister Wael Abu Faour and PSP Deputy Chief Duraid Yaghi.

Beirut Christian Mayors: 25 for March 14, 15 for Aoun-Tashnag Alliance
Naharnet/The Beirut municipal and mayoral elections witnessed a heated battle between March 14 forces and the Free Patriotic Movement-Tashnag alliance as they competed over a total of 28 seats in Ashrafiyeh, Rmeil, and Saifi. The daily An Nahar reported Monday that as of this morning the results in Mdawwar resulted in the victory of a list of 12 mayoral candidates, eight from the Aoun-Tashnag alliance and four from the March 14 forces. Meanwhile, State Minister Michel Pharaon told LBC TV that the March 14-backed list swept all 12 mayoral seats in Ashrafiyeh and all four in Saifi. In Rmeil, five seats were won by the March 14-backed candidates and seven by the Aoun-Tashnag-backed candidates.
The ballot count process was accompanied by tensions at Sassine Square in Ashrafiyeh where the celebratory convoys of the rival political parties roamed the streets.
The army also cordoned a restaurant in the area that the Lebanese Forces had set up as an election office and prevented anyone from entering or leaving the establishment.
Some information said that the army had arrested a number of LF supporters. Head of the LF media department, Nadi Ghosn, said that some of the party's supporters had been assaulted, adding that the army "prevented a youth gathering of our supporters on a sidewalk outside one of our offices, which was surprising and we do not know the reason for it."
He called on Interior Minister Ziad Baroud to come "witness with his own eyes what is happening on the streets of Ashrafiyeh."

Zahle: FPM Candidate Ranks 43 out of 75 Runners
Naharnet/Victory for the "Zahle Decision" list was deemed significant at the political level as the Skaff family has reestablished itself in this east Lebanon Bekaa city. But this time, at the expense of the March 14 forces and the Free Patriotic Movement. Official results released by the interior ministry showed the "Zahle Decision" list backed MP Elie Skaff and headed by Joseph Maalouf has won 19 of the city's 21 seats. Incumbent municipal head Assad Zogheib and Mrs. Maha Maalouf Kassouf, who are supported by the majority March 14 alliance, won the remaining two seats. FPM candidate Antoine Abu Younis ranked 43 out of the 75 runners who competed for membership of the Zahle city council.

STL President, Vice-President, Pre-Trial Judge Meet Representatives of Civil Society
Naharnet/The President of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, Judge Antonio Cassese, the Vice-President, Judge Ralph Riachy, and Pre-Trial Judge, Judge Daniel Fransen, are visiting Lebanon from 8 to 14 May. During their stay, they will take part in a colloquium, jointly organized by the Tribunal and Saint Joseph University, comparing the applicable law of the Tribunal with that of Lebanon. "This colloquium will enable the Tribunal judges and Lebanese experts to have an exchange of views on three major topics: the status of victims, the rights of the accused and trials in absentia. The Tribunal judges will also take this opportunity to hold talks with representatives of Lebanese and international non-governmental organizations," said a communiqué released by STL's press office. "These meetings, which follow on from the visit made in February of this year, are a reflection of the Tribunal's desire to listen to concerns expressed within Lebanon in relation to its roles and the challenges it faces. They are also intended as a means of sustaining the ongoing dialogue between the Tribunal and civil society," the communiqué added.

Is the US wiser to Syrian provocation?
By David Schenker /Daily Star
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
In March, reports emerged in the Kuwaiti press that Syria had transferred Scud missiles to Hizbullah. One month on, news of the Scud transfer continues to reverberate in Washington and the Middle East. A congressional resolution condemning Syria has been drafted and confirmation of the Obama administration’s ambassador-designate to Damascus has been delayed. Meanwhile, tensions on the Lebanese-Israeli border have spiked, again raising the specter of war.
Despite the fact that no authoritative evidence has been presented showing that the transfer actually occurred, in many ways the reports appear credible. First, Israeli accusations were tabled by two unlikely officials – President Shimon Peres and Defense Minister Ehud Barak – well-known supporters of Israeli-Syrian peace negotiations. Likewise, although Washington has not officially confirmed the transfer, several statements – including one from Dianne Feinstein, who chairs the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and another off-the-record statement by a senior administration official to The Wall Street Journal – have lent weight to the allegations.
The transfer of Scuds to Hizbullah would be entirely consistent with the provocative policies pursued by Syrian President Bashar Assad in recent years. Despite the risks, for example, Damascus has openly facilitated the movement of insurgents into Iraq to kill Americans and destabilize its neighbor. And Syria – which proclaims that its “foreign policy depends on supporting the resistance” – has a track record of providing top-shelf weapons to Hizbullah, including the Russian-made Kornet anti-tank system and its own indigenously-produced 220 mm anti-personnel rockets. In this regard, the Scuds – if transferred – would represent a change of magnitude but not of kind.
Not surprisingly, Damascus and Beirut – which is increasingly parroting the Syrian line – have denied the Scud reports. Indeed, in a recent interview with the Italian daily La Stampa, Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri derisively likened the Scud claims to faulty US intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Meanwhile, Hizbullah has neither confirmed nor denied the Scud transfer, preferring constructive ambiguity. Hizbullah’s reaction has been quite similar to the way the organization responded last year to reports that Syria provided it with the IGLA advanced anti-aircraft system, a weapon many analysts believe the militia has obtained.
The Scud crisis is to some extent a tempest in a teapot. An antiquated system, the Scud is more a psychological than a strategic threat to Israel. While the missile is capable of carrying WMD warheads or a heavy payload in excess of 1,000 pounds, it does little to expand the already impressive arsenal that Syria has helped Hizbullah to acquire. Likewise, this heavy weapon would seem an anathema to the successful highly mobile insurgency tactics employed by the organization since its inception.
On April 15, an article in the Kuwaiti daily Al-Rai al-Aam laid out why Hizbullah – irrespective of whether the transfer occurred – does not consider the Scud to be a significant upgrade to its armory.
According to the anonymous Hizbullah official interviewed, while the Scud has a range of 1,000-1,500 kilometers, the fire prep time is a lengthy 45-60 minutes, and it is only accurate to five kilometers. (Reports in the Western press suggest the weapon in question, the Scud D variant, is accurate to within 50 meters). Meanwhile, the official said, Hizbullah already possesses the Iranian-made (Syria-provided) Fatah-110, which takes “less than four minutes for an experienced hand” to launch and is accurate to within 5-10 meters. Of course, the payload capacity and range are less, but 250 kilometers, the official noted, “is the distance required for precise strikes in all the land of occupied Palestine.” The Fatah-110 is also WMD capable.
Given the negligible strategic benefit the Scud constitutes for Hizbullah – as well as the logistical headaches involved with establishing an infrastructure for the nearly 12-meter-tall weapon and its challenging liquid fuel rocket – and the minimal additional detrimental impact for Israel, the real question is: Why have the reports emerged now?
Some analysts in the Middle East, including senior officials in Hizbullah, suggest that the government of Israel invented the issue to distract from its current bilateral problems with the Obama administration. Based on Washington’s sympathetic response to Israeli claims, however, this explanation isn’t particularly convincing.
More likely, Damascus and Tehran engineered the Scud crisis to divert US-led efforts to build an international coalition to sanction Iran for its nuclear endeavors. Indeed, the timing of the reports is eerily reminiscent of Hizbullah’s cross-border operation on July 12, 2006, which occurred the same day the meeting in Paris of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany was slated to refer the Iranian nuclear issue to the UN Security Council. The abduction and killing of Israeli soldiers sparked a war that effectively won Tehran nearly another year of unfettered enrichment activity. (While it’s impossible to know with any certainty, the new diversion initiative might have been what was discussed at the February 2010 meeting in Damascus between Assad, Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad).
Today, though tensions remain high, both Israel and Hizbullah do not appear interested in an escalation. And until the next war, it will likely not be known whether Hizbullah in fact obtained Scuds from Syria. Nevertheless, for Washington the crisis is a useful reminder that Damascus, whether innocent or guilty of this transfer, continues to provide the Shiite militia with increasingly advanced capabilities that will make the next war even costlier for Lebanon and Israel. For Washington, the Scud issue should prompt more than just a temporary refocusing on the well-intentioned but poorly implemented UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which calls for Syria to end weapons transfers to its Iranian-backed Lebanese allies.
That the Assad regime is upping the ante with Israel via Hizbullah at the very moment Washington is working to deepen its diplomatic engagement with Damascus should give the Obama administration pause. If this Syrian behavior continues, the Obama administration will likely arrive at the same conclusion the Bush administration reached in 2004: that Damascus actually is – as it so vociferously claims to be – a regime dedicated to supporting “the resistance.”
One year into President Barack Obama’s tenure, it may be too early to declare the Syria policy a failure. But the administration’s decision earlier this month to renew sanctions against Damascus just might suggest a growing appreciation in the White House as to the nature of the Syrian regime and perhaps for the limits of diplomatic engagement with a self-defined resistance state.
*David Schenker is the Aufzien Fellow and director of the Program on Arab Politics at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons-international.org, an online newsletter.

Low turnout a sign of failure
Daily Star/Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Editorial
The distressingly low voter turnout for the capital city’s municipal elections on Sunday delivered a massive reminder of the utter failure of Beirut’s public authorities to connect to the residents of this country’s most significant geographical entity.
Beside its many positives, Beirut suffers from a raft of typically urban diseases, and yet the registered voters of the capital conclusively turned their backs on the chance to express their political will through the electoral process. About 21 percent of the city’s voters went to the polls on Sunday; some would jest that greater Beirut contains 50 percent of the country’s inhabitants and 80 percent of its problems.
From our vantage point, we cannot see any legitimate excuse for the massive yawn given by Beirut’s electorate to the municipal polls, despite the numerical likelihood that the predominance of Sunni voters among the official residents of the capital’s formal electoral districts would mean inescapable victory for Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s Beirut Unity List. In Achrafieh, we instead witnessed a tight battle between candidates allied with the March 14 and March 8 political camps, and the full-throated celebrations lasting well past midnight would indicate that a number of residents did think that their votes mattered.
The truth of the silent majority, however, is they feel that the political elite has snuffed out the public’s ability to participate meaningfully in civic life. Sunday’s Beirut vote represented a litmus test of the electorate’s sense of involvement, and the test results were negative – for us all. We heard incessant campaign canards that Beirut was for all the Lebanese, but almost 80 percent of the voters said even more loudly that they think Beirut is not for them.
Alas, the Beirut Municipality can and should be a central player in residents’ lives, responsible for water, electricity (stop laughing), sewage, the streets and maintenance. Instead, we recorded a low-water mark of voter turnout. The abysmal turnout looks even starker when we consider that Beirut voters, unlike so many electors elsewhere, must not leave Beirut to drive to an ancient ancestral village to cast their votes. Of course, that begs for a comment on the antiquated system – keeping citizens registered as voters in a locale where their immediate family has not lived for generations – that has left so many of the capital’s residents without a voice in the city.
Added to the political inertia, this has created a situation where the vast majority of Beirut’s people feel disconnected from their local political representation. Sunday’s Beirut poll was a microcosm of the political system’s central ailment: citizens still actually live here and should be engaged in public life, but all they feel is apathy.

The shape of things to come with Iran
Tony Badran, May 11, 2010
Now Lebanon
Just as Egypt’s judiciary handed down convictions in the case of a Hezbollah cell that it uncovered, reports surfaced that an Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps cell had also been broken up in Kuwait.
This type of Iranian action, while hardly new, is a harbinger of what’s to come once Tehran, which is seeking hegemony over the Middle East and senses an American retreat from the region, crosses the nuclear threshold. It also highlights the precariousness of any containment policy against Iran and its regional proxies.
 

The Kuwaiti daily Al-Qabas first broke the story almost two weeks ago, and Kuwaiti and Saudi officials have since confirmed the existence of the cell. While officials have remained publicly tight-lipped about the specifics of the story, and an official order has been handed down forbidding the publication of any further information, several of the details in the newspaper reports are of interest.
The members of the cell apparently included two stateless citizens (known as al-bidoun), a Lebanese citizen who acted as the cell’s liaison with the Iranians, as well as several military officers. One report in Al-Qabas, quoting informed sources, claimed the spy network extended to Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates – which was roundly denied by Saudi Interior Minister Prince Nayef Bin Abdul Aziz. The Kuwaitis, however, are demanding an overhaul of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) security agreement (which Kuwait had previous refrained from signing) in light of “new challenges,” likely meaning the threat of Iranian security breaches.
Kuwait has had something of a history with Iran and Hezbollah. In the 1980s, Kuwait suffered attacks and two infamous airliner hijackings at the hands of Hezbollah (in cooperation with the Iraqi Al-Daawa Party) and Imad Mugniyah, the man who would head the party’s external operations network until his assassination in 2008.
After Mugniyah’s assassination, a commemoration rally was held for him in Kuwait, praising his legacy and absolving him of any wrongdoing against the state. Shia parliamentarians involved in the rally were expelled from their parliamentary bloc and placed in custody on suspicion of belonging to the Kuwaiti Hezbollah. The Kuwaiti authorities deported foreigners who had participated in the rally, which reportedly included Bahrainis, Lebanese and Iranians.
The episode led to an intimidation campaign against Kuwait in Lebanon. Its embassy in Beirut came under bomb threat (followed by a telephone call from a Hezbollah official assuring the diplomats that they would be safe!). This led to a Kuwaiti government travel advisory warning its nationals to avoid Lebanon. And just to make sure the Kuwaitis showed respect to Mugniyah, a massive portrait of him was placed on the embassy’s wall by Hezbollah supporters.
While it’s unclear whether the Kuwaiti cell indeed extended to Bahrain and the UAE, Bahrain has also been subject to subversive activities in recent years. On the eve of the Gaza war of 2008-2009, the Bahraini authorities announced the arrest of a group of Shia militants who had received training in Syria, accusing them of planning terrorist attacks during Bahrain’s national day celebrations.
At around that time, on December 19, 2008, a massive rally was held in Manama at the call of Hezbollah’s secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah. The aim was to pressure Arab governments into helping end Israel’s blockade of Gaza. A few days later, the Gaza war started.
As for the UAE, it followed Kuwait’s lead by deporting foreigners, especially Lebanese Shia. Starting in summer 2009, scores of Shia were suddenly expelled. A representative of those expelled linked the deportations to being “part of a community that supports the Resistance.” What prompted these expulsions remains unclear. However, given the role of Hezbollah’s networks in Iran’s regional activities, the decision was not particularly surprising.
All this shows how vulnerable Iran’s Arab neighbors are to Iranian manipulation, not least when it comes to their sectarian make-up.
While its conventional military power is limited, Iran has engaged in such manipulation through the IRGC’s Al-Quds Force, amplifying its sway through its surrogates and through arms smuggling. The potential interplay between a nuclear Iran and its regional alliances raises serious doubts about the effectiveness of a containment strategy directed against Iran – which is, nevertheless, fast emerging as a consensus strategy in Washington. Especially unconvincing is the notion that the United States can place the burden of its containment efforts on the shaky scaffolding of the Gulf Arab states.
Iran’s objective is to replace the US as the primary power in the Middle East, and to reshape the region’s security architecture. Tehran has been pushing the GCC countries to sign a new, collective security treaty with Iran, which has presented itself as the new regional security guarantor, therefore, implicitly, the acknowledged regional hegemony. Iran has been making it clear to its neighbors that the presence of American forces on their territory is a “source of instability” that must end. If Iran goes nuclear, it will have even more means to persuade these states of its displeasure.

The Iranian cell in Kuwait was reportedly monitoring, among other things, American movements and military bases in the country. While many might read such behavior as preparing retaliatory action in the event of a strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, there is an alternative interpretation: a nuclear-armed Iran, through cells active in the weak Gulf Arab states, will seek to pressure those countries to terminate American basing rights on their soil and agree to new security arrangements that enhance Tehran’s regional influence. 

**Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Tashnaq wants back in president’s political fold, says al-Anbaa
May 11, 2010 /Now Lebanon
An unnamed Armenian source told Kuwaiti daily Al-Anbaa in an interview published on Tuesday that the Tashnaq party has made a strategic decision to return to the president’s political fold. This is especially the case following the May municipal elections in Jbeil and Beirut, said the source. In Jbeil, the source said Armenian voters cast their ballots in favor of Ziad Hawwat – who is related to President Michel Sleiman – instead of voting for former minister Jean-Louis Kordahi’s list, which was supported by the Free Patriotic Movement. Also, the Tashnaq had two candidates on the capital’s Beirut Unity list for municipal elections, which was supported by the Future Movement, the source added. -NOW Lebanon

Saad Hariri
May 10, 2010
An-Nahar newspaper carried the following report on May 10:
“Yesterday, Prime Minister Saad Hariri cast his vote in the municipal elections in Beirut at the Prince Shakib Arslan mixed High School in Verdun. Following his tour of the polling centers to check the course of the electoral process, PM Hariri stated, “Today is a purely democratic day on which the people are voting in favor of the list they want to see winning. There are different political views and this is something we respect, considering that this is how the country is, this is democracy and this is what we want. Owing to God, everything is proceeding as it should so far, and I would like to thank the Interior Ministry and the military and security forces for carrying out all their required tasks. I would also like to thank the media outlets who have accompanied the electoral process minute by minute. To us, these elections aim to secure development and reconstruction, whether in Beirut or throughout Lebanon. There may be some locations where the battles are political, but in the end, the municipalities tend to the affairs of citizens in their home towns, which is why we hope that these elections will be successful and that Lebanon will do well.”
Do you expect the alliances seen in today’s elections to be similar to the ones which will prevail in 2013?
There are different alliances nowadays and they are quite odd. However, this is Lebanon and this is what we want. It represents the openness, solidarity and dialogue we are seeking and it is necessary to always enhance our national unity. Elections always carry political, familial or developmental battles, whether in large or small towns or Beirut.
Hezbollah described the elections in Beirut as a sectarian conflict. Why did you not exert enough effort to spare Beirut this sectarian conflict and ally with Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement?
This is not true. Amal is represented with us on the list and talk of a sectarian battle is groundless and I did have not heard it from Hezbollah. I say we are all living under the same sky and we all want what is best for the country. We want idevelopment and reconstruction and for citizens to live with dignity.
Why did you not ally with the Free Patriotic Movement?
We respect the Free Patriotic Movement and its political views. Moreover, I personally respect General Michel Aoun and his symbols. We are partners in the government and although we could not ally here, we might ally in other places. This is not the end of the world. These elections will end in a few weeks. Negotiations may take place and may succeed or fail. However, this does not mean we have a position against the Free Patriotic Movement.
Are you still afraid that some names will be written off during the elections in Beirut?
Regarding the Beirut municipality, I ask people to vote because their voices should be heard in the ballot boxes. This is a right granted to you by the Lebanese constitution, so do not treat it lightly, especially since many people around the world wish they enjoyed that right.
Do you promise an archetypal municipality in Beirut during the next term?
I believe that the Beirut Unity List enjoys all the necessary components in terms of women, men and competencies. With God’s will, it will be a list for the development of Beirut and for the people of Beirut [End of Q&A].

Ahmadinejad Unveils His Grand Strategy: A Nuclear Defensive Umbrella for Aggression
By Barry Rubin*
May 11, 2010
http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/05/ahmadinejad-grand-strategy
We depend on your contributions. To make one through PayPal click the Donate button on this page. For more options, including tax-deductible contributions, go HERE.
Whatever you think of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad he is not a stupid man. And he's also not acting like an intimidated one. During the latest UN meeting on nuclear issues, when the new International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)director-general urged Iran to "clarify" its activities, the camera showed Ahmadinejad laughing contemptuously.
Diplomatic engagement isn't going to win this guy over, nor are hollow threats. He knows the current U.S. government court-martials Navy Seals for giving a bloody lip to a terrorist who murdered American civilians in Iraq and mutilated their corpses (though the two tried have been cleared). What does he have to be scared about?
The main theme of Ahmadinejad's speech at the 2010 Review Conference by countries that have signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is to outflank Obama's calls for getting rid of nuclear weapons, trying to repeat Iran's success of last September in getting sanctions postponed. Back then, Iran proposed a plan for letting its nuclear materials be reprocessed abroad. But once the sanctions' momentum had been derailed, Iran made clear that it had no intention of agreeing to anything like that.
Incidentally, it was Obama who strongly supported adding the issue of getting rid of all nuclear weapons in the world to the UN conference agenda.
Afer running his own international nuclear summit under the slogan, "Nuclear Power for All, Nuclear Weapons for None," Ahmadinejad gave a UN speech sounding word for word what an idealistic pacifist would say: nuclear weapons are bad; ban them now.
Nuclear weapons, Ahmadinejad explained, don't bring real security and producing or possessing them, "under whatever pretext..is a very dangerous act which first and foremost makes the country" having them worse off. He even stated:
"The possession of nuclear bombs is not a source of pride; it is rather disgusting and shameful. And even more shameful is the threat to use or to use such weapons." The entire system of non-proliferation, said Ahmadinejad, is just an oppressive sham letting those who possess these weapons try to keep others from getting them in order to maintain their own supremacy. Those in control of the international system also, he continued, want to use nuclear arms as an excuse to get others from obtaining nuclear energy, "the cleanest and cheapest" source of power.
Ahmadinejad's alternative is, "Immediate termination of all types of research, development, or improvement of nuclear weapons and their related facilities" and dismantling all U.S. nuclear weapons everywhere.
Oh, yes, and he calls for reforming the UN Security Council to get rid of a veto or permanent membership for the United States and others. And--no stranger to chutzpah--Ahmadinejad called for kicking the United States off the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
At the end, Ahmadinejad invited Obama "to join this humane movement, if he is still committed to his motto of 'change.'"
What is all this about? Why is the leader most determined to pay a high price for getting nuclear weapons bad-mouthing them. Is this just camouflage to buy more time for Iran to get nukes? Yes but that's not all.
First, Ahmadinejad is calling Obama's bluff. You want to eliminate nuclear weapons? Make my day, let's do it! Obviously, this isn't going to work at this stage on Obama. But Ahmadinejad is not trying to persuade the United States but rather a range of Third World countries that might well oppose sanctions, including Lebanon, Turkey, and Brazil, which all happen to be on the Security Council right now and whose votes will be vital for passing (or, more likely, not passing) sanctions.
What's most important of all, however, is the second motive, an Iranian strategy I call creating a defensive umbrella for aggression. This might become the centerpiece of Middle East politics in the future. Let me explain.
Most discussion in the West has focused on Iran using nuclear weapons or threatening to do so. Yet, instead, Iran could genuinely be developing these arms in order to defend itself. The problem is that this defense is coupled with an aggressive policy.
In this framework, Iran would continue and escalate its subversive efforts against neighbors; consolidate and increase its influence in Lebanon and Iraq; support Hamas and client forces in Afghanistan; press regional states toward appeasement; recruit millions into revolutionary Islamist groups; and try to make Iran the hegemonic power in the region.
But when anyone tries to oppose Iran, Tehran need merely give a gentle reminder that it has nuclear arms and so they better shut up. To be fully intimidated by this tactic, Arabs don't have to believe that Iran would win a nuclear exchange with the United States. After all, even if Tehran lost they know their own countries would be devastated. Better to avoid any chance of a nuclear war than to offend Iran. Syria and Turkey, under its neo-Islamist regime; Hamas and Hizballah; Yemeni rebels and Iraqi insurgents would smirk and stick out their tongues from under Iran's protective umbrella.
The other element-as so often in the Middle East-is who the local rulers most fear. How can the Obama Administration, which has criticized past U.S. use of force and decisive leadership, persuade Iran to tremble in fear and convince moderate Arabs to stand tall feeling securely protected? Of course, these Arabs will accept American security guarantees but they would then be far more likely to bow to Iranian demands than to U.S. requests.
And there's still another trick up Ahmadinejad's sleeve. Under the current administration concept of containing Iran, the United States would have to do precisely what Ahmadinejad proposes to outlaw: threaten Iran with nuclear retaliation. So how will a U.S. threat that keeps nuclear Iran from flexing its muscles be worded, how scary will it be for Tehran, and how encouraging will it be for that regime's intended victims?
Ahmadinejad's apparently pacifist-style, peacenik stance at the UN conference fits into his strategy. Nuclear weapons may well provide the umbrella for him to seek regional hegemony with weapons of mass destruction unused but highly visible in his back pocket.

Is a nuclear nonproliferation consensus within reach?
By Joshua Pollack |
http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/joshua-pollack/nuclear-nonproliferation-consensus-within-reach
3 May 2010
Thanks to the participation of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the eighth conference "to review the operation" of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is attracting more attention than these affairs usually do. When it concludes on May 28, the NPT Review Conference may not yield a final document expressing the consensus of all 189 NPT member states--but that does not mean the event will be less than spectacular. On only its first day, the conference produced some fireworks.
The Iranians have already come in swinging, apparently determined to obscure their own lawless behavior by challenging the legitimacy of the entire international order."Beyond the entertainment value, however, something important is at stake: The spread of sensitive enrichment and reprocessing technologies has weakened confidence in the NPT. New ideas are needed to shore up the treaty. Partly as a result of the emphasis that the Obama administration has placed on nuclear diplomacy, a leadership role will fall to the United States.
As telegraphed in interviews, speeches and policy documents PDF, the American side will call for greater consequences for non-compliance with NPT obligations, an understanding that non-compliance cannot be evaded by withdrawing from the treaty, and recognition of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Additional Protocol--an agreement providing nuclear inspectors with expanded access necessary to detect undeclared nuclear activities--as "the new international safeguards standard."
The trick is getting all NPT member states to agree. Review Conferences normally operate on the principle of consensus, meaning that decisions are made unanimously. Because Iran is the only state currently out of compliance with nuclear safeguards, sometimes hints at NPT withdrawal, and declines to ratify the Additional Protocol, it can be expected to stand in opposition.
For that reason, U.S. officials are defining success in terms of whether Iran must go out on a limb alone (or very nearly so) to block consensus. According to Ambassador Susan Burk, the administration's special representative for nuclear nonproliferation, even if consensus is narrowly denied, the resulting "broad agreement" can be advanced in other forums. How baldly Iran acts to thwart consensus at the Review Conference may also influence the Security Council's months-long debate over a fourth round of sanctions. The name of the game, therefore, is to isolate what Under Secretary of State Ellen Tauscher has called the "few outliers," letting them absorb the blame for their own actions.
There are risks to lowering expectations too much; if it is already presumed that there will be no consensus final document, Iran may conclude it will pay no price for obstructionism. The Iranians have already come in swinging, apparently determined to obscure their own lawless behavior by challenging the legitimacy of the entire international order.
Speaking PDF from the lectern at the UN this morning, Iran's president denounced the United States and the "Zionist regime," repeated his call to expel America from the Board of Governors of the IAEA, and demanded the reform of the UN Security Council.
After excoriating the possession of nuclear weapons as "disgusting and shameful," Ahmadinejad observed that possession forces other states to follow suit. Earlier, when IAEA Director-General Yukiya Amano called upon Iran to "clarify activities with a potential military dimension," C-SPAN's camera showed Ahmadinejad laughing contemptuously. When it comes to winning over delegations, this undiplomatic conduct probably hurts more than it helps.
But if Iran must bear the albatross of its own president, the United States also carries burdens, some of its own making, and some not. These include unfulfilled pledges from past NPT Review Conferences. First, a resolution in the final document in 1995 called for making the "utmost efforts" to secure a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. For Washington, these efforts start with hammering out a regional peace agreement; but other states, especially Egypt, appear dissatisfied. Second, a resolution in the final document in 2000 called for 13 "practical steps," including seeking entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which the United States has balked at ratifying. Even if there are no prospects of quick success, the willingness of the American side to reaffirm these commitments will be important.
Another stumbling block is the U.S.-Indian civil nuclear agreement approved by the Nuclear Suppliers Group in 2008. India, which is not a member of the NPT, now can avoid the need to choose between nuclear weapons and access to other countries' peaceful nuclear technology. The unhappiness of non-nuclear-weapon states over the India deal may be deepened by China's decision to follow suit by supplying reactors to Pakistan, which--along with Israel and North Korea--also stands outside the NPT.
Fortunately, there are some new cards in the hand of the United States and the other states determined to reinforce the nonproliferation regime. America can now cite a renewed commitment to the principle of nuclear disarmament. The investment in goodwill represented in the "Prague vision," President Obama's reaffirmation of the ultimate goal of nuclear disarmament, should not be lightly dismissed; nor can the concrete steps already taken toward that end be ignored.
First, the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review curtailed the role of its nuclear arsenal, forswearing nuclear threats against those non-nuclear weapons states in compliance with their nonproliferation obligations, and ruling out the development of new nuclear military capabilities. Second, the New START treaty re-establishes nuclear arms control and verification measures between the United States and Russia, which together possess the overwhelming majority of the world's nuclear weapons. The U.S. Senate and the Russian Duma are expected to receive the treaty for consideration this month, during the Review Conference.
These are hopeful signs, and there are more. At the conclusion of the April 2010 Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, DC, a diverse group of 47 countries jointly released a communiqué and work plan committing themselves to do more against the threat of nuclear terrorism. Even this relatively uncontroversial warm-up would have been unimaginable just a couple of years ago. By comparison, Iran's counter-summit held last month produced only a statement by the chair. Ahmadinejad's dismissal of nuclear terrorism as a "phony" threat at the UN today hinted at frustration with the outcomes of the two summits.
Still, as mentioned above, consensus at the Review Conference will be hard to come by. The real test of the Obama administration's nuclear policies will be whether they suffice to midwife a "virtual consensus" that isolates the outliers and builds momentum toward a stronger nonproliferation regime. Even in the best case, that endeavor won't be completed in a month's time.

Time: Hezbollah Prepares for the Next War
11/05/2010 An article by Time magazine's Nicholas Blanford, following his visit to south Lebanon, focuses on Hezbollah’s military preparations for the ‘next war with Israel.”
Blanford writes that Hezbollah fighters revealed “an organization at the peak of its military powers, with an army of well-trained, disciplined and highly motivated combatants wielding advanced weaponry, cultivating new tactics and brimming with confidence.” "The next war is coming, 100%, but we don't know when," the author quotes “Ali, a thickly muscled university student and Hezbollah fighter” as saying. "We have big plans for it. God willing, you will see the end of Israel," Ali continues to speak though requesting anonymity, according to Blanford.
The journalist says he interviewed Hezbollah fighters, as he visited the southern town of Jizzine. “Since the end of its latest bout with the Israeli military, in July and August 2006, Hezbollah has built new defensive lines and firing positions, the fighters say, in the hills flanking the Bekaa and along the rugged, mountainous spine running up the middle of southern Lebanon,” he writes.
Blanford says in his article that he got the impression that he Hezbollah fighters do not fear the next round of clashes, and that they "actually look forward to it".
"It doesn't matter. We can always rebuild. Our dignity is more important than roofs over our heads," says Haj Rida, a square-jawed unit commander, according to Blanford’s article.
The journalist continues to quote Rida: "I have my studies at university and my family, but I also have the life of jihad and preparations for the coming war," he says. "I consider my jihad duties as something joyful. You cannot understand the joy of jihad unless you are in Hezbollah.”
The article notes that Israel has vowed “it will use far greater force in the next war and will treat the Lebanese state as the enemy, rather than just the Shi'ite militia, a prospect that frightens many Lebanese.” “But the resolve of the Hezbollah combatants remains unshaken by Israeli threats,” the author adds.
Blanford states that Hezbollah is seeking to improve its capabilities by developing new tactics and acquiring new weapons and that “it is placing particular emphasis on improved air-defense systems to challenge Israel's aerial superiority.”
“Reports over the past year suggest that Hezbollah has received advanced Russian shoulder-fired antiaircraft missiles, and some fighters have been trained in Syria on larger truck-mounted missile systems. U.S. and Israeli intelligence sources say Hezbollah has also augmented its arsenal with larger, longer-range rockets with guidance capabilities. Many analysts believe that in the event of another war, Hezbollah plans to strike strategic targets deep inside Israel. In February, movement leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah hinted that Hezbollah now had the ability to strike targets in Tel Aviv.”
Blanford goes on to analyze Hezbollah's weapons arsenal by interviewing whom he calls Hezbollah fighters. He reviews recent reports of the Hezbollah obtaining of surface-to-surface missiles and surface-to-air missiles. But ultimately, he finds that the Hezbollah fighters are also finding innovative ways to utilize older armaments.
"The RPG-7 is old but still a good weapon," says Ali according to the article. "It is how you use them that counts. We are always studying new combat techniques."
The article notes that “Israel's heavily armored tanks are to receive a newly developed defense system that fires mini-interceptors to destroy incoming antitank missiles.” Blanford adds that “Hezbollah fighters, without revealing details, say they are training to overcome such sophisticated defenses by "swarming" Israeli tanks with low-tech antitank weapons.”
He goes on to say: “Hezbollah’s battle plans may also include having fighters infiltrate Israel to carry out raids and sabotage missions — a move that would be unprecedented in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Israeli doctrine is to fight its wars in the territory of its enemies rather than on its home front. Says Ali: "God willing, we will go into Palestine next time."”

Hariri Ends 'Fabricated Dispute' with Baroud, Calms Him Down
Manar/11/05/2010 Just as it has started, the "fabricated dispute" between the Future movement and Interior Minister Ziad Baroud saw its end, without prior notice…
The "fabricated dispute," which followed the end of the second round of municipal elections in Beirut and the Bekaa, was "apparently" caused by the minister's "frankness" in analyzing the low vote turnout that didn't exceed 20%...
But the minister's "analysis" didn't seem to satisfy the capital's lawmaker who launched an unexpected "campaign" against the "young minister" as slammed by MP Ammar Houri who went on to "threaten" the minister, saying that he has hoped that the latter's political career "would be a long one."
But the minister reacted… For once, he decided to abandon the policy of "satisfying everyone." He recalled everyone that the Constitution gives him the right to voice his opinion, paying their attention to the fact that he doesn't need them to tell him what to say and what not to say…
Whether the campaign launchers were surprised or not is not a big deal… The campaign reached its end, and the MP who "threatened" the minister a few hours ago announced the "end" of the "problem," refusing to call it a "dispute," before "congratulating" the minister on achieving the second electoral day, such as nothing has happened…
The "end" of the "dispute" was marked by the meeting that joined Baroud to Prime Minister Saad Hariri at the Grand Serail where the PM calmed down his minister and withdrew the "threat of ending his political career" from circulation, claiming that his MP has "exaggerated in the reaction" to Baroud's statements…
Meanwhile, various politicians expressed support for Baroud in the campaign that targeted him… President Michel Sleiman reportedly played the major role in calming down the campaign while Speaker Nabih Berri didn't hesitate to classify him as one of the best five ministers in the government, adding that he was right in his statement.
Member of the Loyalty to the Resistance parliamentary bloc MP Nawwaf Moussawi also called him to express the bloc's solidarity with him against all campaigns.

Netanyahu Claims Iran Inciting to War with Lies
Manar/11/05/2010 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday accused Iran of attempting to escalate the relations between Israel and Syria.
Speaking during a tour of the Israeli Defense Forces' Northern Command, Netanyahu claimed that "Iran's recent attempts to incite to war between us and Syria are a completely groundless act." Netanyahu added that the Iranians were "spreading lies in order to escalate the relations."
Together with Israeli occupation Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, the prime minister attended a military drill in one of the fire practice areas in northern occupied Palestine. "We want security, stability and peace. Israel has not intention of attacking its neighbors, despite false rumors on this matter," Netanyahu claimed.
Addressing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's Declaration that Moscow would increase its involvement in the Middle East, he said, "We welcome any contribution to the promotion of peace and any practical measure on the part of our neighbors –including Syria – that will bring calm to the region and help launch a diplomatic process.
"We are willing to begin talks with Syria without any preconditions, just as we are currently doing with the Palestinians," said the Israeli premier.
Ashkenazi also relayed a calming message, saying that the military exercise was routine. "This is not the first drill, nor is it the last," he said, "There is no message here to anyone."