LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِAugust 12/2010

Bible Of the Day
Hebrews 10:19–22/Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
Today's Inspiring Thought: Full Assurance of Faith
There's power in the blood of Jesus. His blood cancels our every debt from sin. It clears our minds of doubt. It cleanses our guilty conscience. It washes us clean. Because of his blood, through the sacrifice of Christ's flesh, our sins are forgiven! It cost the Lord everything—the very life flowing through his veins—to grant us unhindered access to God. That is why we can confidently draw near to God; that is how we can approach him in full assurance of faith—by the precious blood of Jesus. (about.com)

Free Opinions, Releases, letters, Interviews & Special Reports
The Week Lebanon Became Part of the Anti-Western Axis and West Governments Didn't Notice/By Barry Rubin/August 11/10
Lebanon through the Prism of US-Syrian Rapprochement/By: Jean-Pierre Katrib/August 11/10
Hezbollah on the defensive/By: Hanin Ghaddar/August 11/10
Aid to Lebanon is in the US’s best interest/The National/August 11/10
Focus U.S.A. / Will Israel really attack Iran within a year?/By: Natasha Mozgovaya/August 11/10

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for August 11/10
Bellemare to soon issue statement on Nasrallah’s press conference/Now Lebanon
Gen. Ben-Yisrael: Nasrallah Got Nothing after 1997 when Israel Ensured Transmissions were Secured/Naharnet
Israel's Army to Deal 'Firmly' with Lebanese Army/Naharnet
Military Experts: Link between Aerial Footage and Hariri Murder 'Very Weak'/Naharnet
International Tribunal Urges Submission of 'Evidence'/Naharnet
Sarkozy Meets Hariri, Lays Stress on Lebanon's Stability, Security, Sovereignty/Naharnet
France: Only Tribunal has Power to Prosecute Criminals/Naharnet
Lebanon Seeks to Assure U.S. after Military Aid Halt/Naharnet
Israel rejects Nasralah’s ‘proof’ on Hariri killing as ‘ridiculous’/Daily Star
US lawmaker cuts $100 million aid to Lebanon’s military/Daily Star
Iran ‘reiterates’ support for Lebanon against Israeli threat/Daily Star
Berman, Lowey block military funding to Lebanon/Jewish Telegraphic Agency
Iran plans help to Lebanon army, as US blocks aid/Ynetnews
Iran says it will make up for the cutoff of US aid to Lebanon/Los Angeles Times
10 wounded in a clash during wedding in south Lebanon/Ya Libnan
Lebanon to file UN complaint against Israeli spying/Xinhua
Nasrallah’s speech fails to meet high expectations/AFP
Iran digging graves for American troops in case of attack/Associated Press
March 14: Lebanese Committed to Tribunal and its Free Role/Naharnet
Berri after Meeting Suleiman: It is time to Work/Naharnet
Suleiman Assures: Indictment Won't Lead to Deterioration of Lebanon Situation/Naharnet
Syria's Ambassador: Nasrallah Evidence Points to Israel's Responsibility for Hariri's Murder/Naharnet
Alam was in Crime Scene 2 Hours before Ghanem's Assassination/Naharnet
10 Wounded in Fight at Wedding in Tyre/Naharnet
Berri: I'm Ready to Provide Weapons to Lebanese Army, Even from Underground/Naharnet
U.S.: Iran's Activities Compromise Lebanese Sovereignty/Naharnet
Lebanon's Crisis Strikes Dispute in Gaza, Report/Naharnet
Qabbani Announces Wednesday as 1st Day of Ramadan as Khamenei's Representative Says 1st Day is Thursday/Naharnet
Mustaqbal Calls on U.S. Not to Go Back on Aiding Army: For Exhausting All Hypotheses in Hariri Murder/Naharnet
Suleiman's Advisor Criticizes U.S. Congressman over Military Aid/Naharnet
Aoun: Those Serving Israel's Cause with Their Political Stands are the Ones Betraying the Country/Naharnet
Defense Ministry responds to Aoun/Now Lebanon

US lawmaker cuts $100 million aid to Lebanon’s military
By The Daily Star
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
A top US congressman has blocked $100 million in aid to Lebanon’s military, saying he cannot be sure the country’s armed forces are not working with Hizbullah.
The news sparked criticism from an aide to the Lebanese president, who said the money was needed to underpin the country’s sovereignty. Howard Berman, the Democratic chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement Monday that the hold had been in place since August 2, pointing to last week’s deadly clash between Israeli and Lebanese troops along the countries’ shared border.
“Until we know more about this incident and the nature of Hizbullah influence on the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) – and can assure that the LAF is a responsible actor – I cannot in good conscience allow the US to continue sending weapons to Lebanon,” Berman said. “The incident on the Israel-Lebanon border only one day after my hold was placed simply reinforces the critical need for the United States to conduct an in-depth policy review of its relationship with the Lebanese military,” he added. Relations between Israel and Lebanon have been strained in the wake of the deadly exchange of fire last week that killed two Lebanese soldiers and a journalist, as well as an Israeli officer.
The standoff was sparked when Israeli troops tried to cut down a tree on the border, prompting the Lebanese to fire.
On Monday, Iran offered support to Lebanon’s Army.
The offer from Iran, which supports Hizbullah, could fuel Western concern that Tehran is increasing its influence near Israel’s northern border. Iran’s ambassador to Lebanon met Lebanese Army chief Jean Kahwaji on Monday and said Tehran was ready to “cooperate with the Lebanese Army in any area that would help [it] in performing its national role in defending Lebanon.” Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is expected to visit Beirut next month. Meanwhile, State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said the United States was not planning “to re-evaluate our current military cooperation with Lebanon in light of this incident,” adding that military cooperation with Lebanon remains in US interests. “We are not aware that there was any US equipment used during the incident,” he told reporters.
“We do have training programs with Lebanon. It’s hard to say whether those who were directly involved in this incident were part of any program.”
“The last thing that the US or any other friend of Lebanon should do is to weaken the effort to build up our national army,” Mohammad Chatah, an adviser to Prime Minister Saad Hariri, told the Associated Press on Monday. He added that government officials were contacting Washington “to make sure that there is a better and fuller understanding of the situation in Lebanon and along the border.” Representative Eric Cantor earlier warned that the lines between Hizbullah and Lebanon’s armed forces had become “blurred.”
“The days of ignoring the LAF’s provocations against Israel and protection of Hizbullah in southern Lebanon are over,” added Cantor, the number two Republican in the House of Representatives. “Lebanon cannot have it both ways. If it wants to align itself with Hizbullah against the forces of democracy, stability and moderation, there will be consequences,” said Cantor, a fierce defender of Israel. Cantor said the United States had provided roughly $720 million since 2006 in military aid “to build up a Lebanese fighting force that would serve as a check on the growing power of the radical Islamist Hizbullah movement.” But, he said, “for the past few years, the US and the international community looked the other way as the lines between Hizbullah and the Lebanese military and government became blurred.” In Beirut, Nazem Khoury, an adviser to President Michel Sleiman, said “it is in the interest of those who claim to defend Lebanon’s sovereignty that Lebanon have a strong army. “The United States says it supports that sovereignty, but these statements should also be translated into acts,” he added. “It is time the Lebanese Army be adequately armed, and we are counting on the friends of Lebanon to help the army.” Sleiman announced Saturday a plan to build up the armed forces “regardless of the position of some countries,” in apparent reference to Israel’s complaints. A statement from his office said he had received numerous phone calls “from Lebanon and Lebanon’s friends … who expressed the desire to contribute to arming the military.” On Tuesday, the municipality of the Beqaa town of Zahle sent a letter to President Sleiman, informing him that it will donate 100 million LL to support the Lebanese Army, the state-run National News Agency reported. – Agencies, with The Daily Star

Bellemare to soon issue statement on Nasrallah’s press conference
August 11, 2010 /Naharnet/An-Nahar newspaper reported that Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare will in the next 24 hours make a statement on Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s Monday press conference. Nasrallah on Monday presented alleged evidence of Israeli involvement in the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, including footage he said came from Israeli Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) and a confession from a suspected Israeli spy. Sources close to the Future Movement and March 14 alliance told the daily that Nasrallah’s evidence is important and must be presented to the STL, adding that Bellemare will have to take the evidence into account. -NOW Lebanon

Sarkozy Meets Hariri, Lays Stress on Lebanon's Stability, Security, Sovereignty
Naharnet/French President Nicolas Sarkozy met Prime Minister Saad Hariri and stressed efforts to maintain stability, security and sovereignty in Lebanon.
A statement issued by the Elysee Palace, said Sarkozy commented on a deadly border clash between Israeli and Lebanese troops, saying "we must do everything in order to avoid new tensions." Sarkozy stressed that France, along with the various regional and international forces, "will continue to support Lebanese authorities, democratic institutions, and efforts to promote stability, security and sovereignty of Lebanon." The statement said the French President and Hariri discussed during the 90-minute meeting bilateral relations and the situation in the Middle East. It said the meeting came "within the framework of traditional friendship between France and Lebanon." Beirut, 11 Aug 10,

Israel's Army to Deal 'Firmly' with Lebanese Army
Naharnet/Israel's army will deal "firmly" with the Lebanese army, the Israel daily Maariv said. It said the Israeli army was instructed to be "more fierce" when responding to Lebanese troops in any new border violation. Maariv quoted its military correspondent as saying that the Israeli army has decided to change the pattern of dealing with the Lebanese army following the deadly gunbattle in the border town of Adeisseh. Beirut, 11 Aug 10, 11:07

Gen. Ben-Yisrael: Nasrallah Got Nothing after 1997 when Israel Ensured Transmissions were Secured
Naharnet/Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's accusations that Israel was behind the 2005 assassination of PM Rafik Hariri drew critical reaction from both Lebanon and Israel.
Nasrallah was attacked by many Israeli politicians and military personnel in the army reserve, but they differed on the extent of his sincerity, pan-Arab Asharq al-Awsat newspaper reported Wednesday. Others, however, were convinced by Nasrllah's revelations, the daily said. It said among those who believed Nasrallah was Gen. Yitzhak Ben-Yisrael, former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission and one of the inventors of drones. Bin-Yisrael said that the pilotless surveillance aircrafts known as MK used to transmit data without being secured at the beginning. He did not rule that Hizbullah likely intercepted footage from the planes until 1997 when Israel army ensured that transmissions were secured through codes. During Nasrallah's Monday press conference, several clips, each minutes long and undated, showed aerial views of the coastline off mainly Sunni west Beirut on various dates before the Hariri assassination, some dating back several years before 2005. Nasrallah, who has accused Israel of the February 14, 2005 bombing which killed Hariri and 22 others, said the footage was intercepted from MK aircrafts. He conceded the images were not conclusive proof but noted that Hizbullah had no offices, positions or presence in the areas under surveillance. Beirut, 11 Aug 10,

Indictment Likely to Be Postponed as Mirza Assures UN Committee Obliged to Look Into Nasrallah Revelations
Naharnet/In view of Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's revelations made during his latest press conference, several political and judicial circles appeared to be mulling a possible postponement of the indictment until after the end of the year. Others, however, went to estimate that the indictment -- which is likely to accuse Hizbullah members of the 2005 assassination of ex-PM Rafik Hariri – will not be announced before April of next year. In this context, former Justice Minister Bahij Tabbara told the daily As-Safir that "it is the duty of the U.N. investigating committee to scrutinize the facts and evidence presented by Mr. Nasrallah and to take them seriously."Meanwhile, State Prosecutor Saeed Mirza said that the international committee probing Hariri's murder is in principle committed to follow-up on circumstantial evidence presented by Nasrallah. Mirza said in remarks published by the daily As-Safir on Wednesday that efforts are underway to gather information about alleged Israeli spy Ghassan al-Jid, one of several agents Nasrallah accused of espionage. Beirut, 11 Aug 10, 09:14

Arrest Warrant Issued against Fayez Karam
Naharnet/The Military Court on Wednesday issued an arrest warrant against retired Lebanese army officer Fayez Karam on charges of spying for Israel. Military magistrate Riad Abu Ghida issued the arrest warrant after conducting a hearing with Karam. Beirut, 11 Aug 10, 14:21

Franjieh Meets Aoun, Criticizes Those who Ruled Out Israel Behind Hariri Murder
Naharnet/Marada Movement leader Suleiman Franjieh on Wednesday criticized those who ruled out the theory that Israel was behind the 2005 killing of former Premier Rafik Hariri.
"Anyone who rules out the hypothesis that Israel is behind Hariri's assassination either is accusing ex-PM Rafik Hariri that he had ties with the Israelis or is drawing suspicion away from Israel," Franjieh said. His remarks came following a meeting in Rabiyeh with Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun. "How can a Lebanese camp condemn and destroy the country through false witnesses and data that does not exceed 1 percent while ignoring what Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah had provided?" Franjieh asked. Beirut, 11 Aug 10, 14:11

March 14: Lebanese Committed to Tribunal and its Free Role
Naharnet/March 14 General Secretariat on Wednesday said the Lebanese are committed to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon "and its role, free from any interference and dictations."
"Lebanese are invited to fortify the Tribunal's work by standing alongside the court, given that it is a pillar of national consensus so that it is able to accomplish its mission at the highest levels of professionalism and impartiality," said a statement issued at the end of March 14's weekly meeting. The statement stressed that "justice will remain the most important pillar of peace and stability in communities.""That is why the Lebanese are committed to this Tribunal and its jurisdiction in full based on international standards of justice, and free from any interferences and dictations, and all restrictions and limitations in its work in order to uncover the truth of these crimes," March 14 added. Beirut, 11 Aug 10, 14:40

Berri after Meeting Suleiman: It isTime to Work
Speaker Nabih Berri said Wednesday "it is time to work."
Naharnet/His remark, the only one he made, came following his weekly meeting with President Michel Suleiman at Baabda Palace. Berri earlier expressed readiness to provide the army with weapons in response to Suleiman's appeal to arm the Lebanese military. "The Lebanese army has the right to obtain weapons from anywhere in the world," he said in remarks published Wednesday by the Beirut dailies An-Nahar and As-Safir. "I'm ready to provide weapons to the army, even from underground," Berri added. He believed that what is important is to "maintain the warfare doctrine and national unity." Beirut, 11 Aug 10,

Syria's Ambassador: Nasrallah Evidence Points to Israel's Responsibility for Hariri's Murder
Naharnet/Syria's ambassador to Lebanon Ali Abde-Karim Ali said "evidence and circumstantial evidence" provided by Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah points to Israel's responsibility for the 2005 murder of former PM Rafik Hariri. He described as "very important" the facts brought forward by Nasrallah during his Monday press conference. "They should be taken into account by investigators," Ali added. Beirut, 11 Aug 10,

Alam was in Crime Scene 2 Hours before Ghanem's Assassination
Naharnet/Alleged Israeli spy Adib al-Alam was in the crime scene in Sin el-Fil only two hours before the assassination of MP Antoine Ghanem, Al-Akhbar newspaper said Wednesday.
It said police intelligence discovered this fact after Alam's arrest in 2009. When asked about this "coincidence," according to al-Akhbar, Alam said he had dropped his wife at a nearby beauty salon. Alam's wife, who is also arrested in the same charge, said the same thing as her husband. Hence, investigation stopped at this point, Al-Akhbar reported.
Beirut, 11 Aug 10, 10:19

Lebanon's Crisis Strikes Dispute in Gaza, Report
Naharnet/Beirut is caught in a vice between Iranian and Syrian backed factions over the Saudi move to pull Syria away from its support for the Hizbullah and Tehran's counter-moves, Debkafile said. It cited military sources as saying that this conflict is reflected in the strains breaking surface between the ruling Hamas, whose political secretary Khaled Meshaal is based in Damascus, and Jihad Islami, Tehran's Palestinian arm. Both have put their armed men on the ready for a showdown which could end in the carving-up of the densely populated, tiny (360 sq. km.) Palestinian enclave, the sources added. They said on Saturday night, Hamas' Ezzedine al-Qassam and Jihad's Saraya al Qods-Jerusalem Battalions ordered a general mobilization.
Debkafile said this brink-of-factional war went unnoticed in Jerusalem and Israel's media, which are preoccupied with unending domestic political disputes. The military sources, however, described as "explosive" the situation in the Gaza strip. Beirut, 11 Aug 10, 06:34

Suleiman Assures: Indictment Won't Lead to Deterioration of Lebanon Situation
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman assured that a possible indictment of Hizbullah members by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon will not lead to deterioration of the situation in Lebanon.
"I'm confident that the difficulties facing Lebanon at present due the dispute over the International Tribunal and leaks about the indictment to be announced by Prosecutor Bellemare will not lead to deterioration of the situation in the country as some fear," Suleiman said in remarks published Wednesday by the daily Ad-Diyar.
"It is only in Israel's interest to explode the situation in Lebanon," he warned. On calls by some officials demanding that the government to withdraw Lebanese judges from the STL and stop funding the tribunal, as well as threats to cancel the court, Suleiman believed that "challenge and overly tense rhetoric will not lead to an acceptable solution." "Calm and wisdom and the resort to dialogue, instead, are always a successful settlement for all problems facing the Lebanese," he stressed.

Mustaqbal Calls on U.S. Not to Go Back on Aiding Army: For Exhausting All Hypotheses in Hariri Murder
Naharnet/In the wake of a U.S. Congress decision to put on hold 100 million dollars in military aid to Lebanon following the Adeisseh clashes, the Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc on Tuesday called on the U.S. government to "retain its previous commitments as to supplying military aid to the Lebanese Army at all levels" and not to go back on those commitments.
In a statement issued after its weekly meeting in Qureitem under former premier Fouad Saniora, the bloc stressed its "support for the initiative of President Michel Suleiman who is trying to obtain the necessary aid from all brotherly and friendly countries to equip the army."The Mustaqbal bloc also discussed the content of the press conference held by Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on Monday, stressing that it welcomes "every effort that contributes to providing any information, data, presumptions or evidences that may lead to uncovering the murderers who committed or were behind the assassination of martyr premier Rafik Hariri and his companions." The bloc said that it was "necessary to exhaust all hypotheses and possibilities regarding the side, or sides, that perpetrated or planned this major crime." The conferees highlighted "the need to put all data and available dossiers and documents, including what was demonstrated by Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah in the hand of the prosecutor of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon to conduct the necessary investigations about them according to specialty and in order to reveal the truth." Beirut, 10 Aug 10, 22:45

Hezbollah on the defensive
Hanin Ghaddar , August 11, 2010
Now Lebanon
There is a saying in Arabic about a mountain that went into labor to give birth to a mouse. It is mostly used to explain a pathetic or disappointing outcome after a long process with high expectations. It applies perfectly to how the Lebanese felt after Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s press conference on Monday in which he tried to prove Israel’s involvement in the February 2005 murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and 21 others.
Nasrallah succeeded in forcing almost all Lebanese to watch his presentation for more than two hours, glued to the TV, anticipating a serious and highly-significant turn of events. But the leader of the Party of God fell short in delivering the goods.
Nasrallah may have reassured his own supporters that Hezbollah played no role in the killing, but the footage from Israeli UAVs filming the usual routes Rafik Hariri allegedly used when driving in Beirut, Saida and Mount Lebanon, combined with a power-point presentation on Israeli spies and statements by Israeli officials on Hezbollah’s involvement in the assassination, did not prove Israel’s involvement either.
The “evidence” Nasrallah presented can be easily refuted. It is well known that Israel’s MK surveillance planes have filmed every inch of Lebanon, that it has agents and surveillance equipment on the ground, and that it has shown that it is more than capable of liquidating its enemies. In short, there were no surprises, which was not unexpected given that Nasrallah’s objective was not to surprise us.
But to give the Hezbollah leader some credit, apart from soothing any anxieties his supporters may have had, he showed us the extent to which his party has become technologically advanced. The footage he presented made a big impression, and not just on Hezbollah’s supporters, showing that the party can directly tap into video feeds from the many aerial drones circulating above Lebanon to Israel’s military command. He also reminded us of previous Israeli murder missions in Lebanon, highlighting the country’s historic disregard for Lebanese sovereignty. However, at the end of the day, the footage, according to the public and experts, was meaningless. It did not add anything new to our knowledge of Israel’s capabilities and intentions, and it failed drastically at constituting evidence.
But Nasrallah knew that. His intention was to send a clear message to the Lebanese and the international community that Hezbollah rejects the Special Tribunal for Lebanon and anything that comes from it. That is why he did not provide the STL with the information he’s been gathering.
Of course, even if the STL wanted to take his so-called “evidence” into consideration, there is serious doubt that Hezbollah will let the investigation team know just how it got the footage. Nasrallah does not have to prove it is authentic as long as his supporters believe so. This means that whatever indictment the STL issues, Hezbollah will not accept it. Still, Nasrallah demanded that the Lebanese government form an internal committee to carry out an independent investigation that would, of course, base its inquiry on Israel’s involvement in the assassination. By giving the Lebanese government an internal option, Nasrallah was simply telling PM Saad Hariri that he’d better take this alternative or face the possibility of violence between the Shia and the Sunnis, which would spread to the whole region.
He said this very calmly, dropping the tone that he used prior to last month’s Saudi-Syrian-Lebanese summit. This indicates that Hezbollah decided to abide by the summit’s statement of avoiding violence, at least until further notice.
The Syrian regime now, having agreed with the Saudis on preserving calm in Lebanon, won’t let Nasrallah violate the rules. However, as the Syrians still want to undermine the STL, they have supported Nasrallah’s presentation and have asked for it to be taken into account. Nasrallah is now waiting for Hariri’s answer, hinting through reports on Hezbollah media of a change of government should he not take his “recommendations” seriously.
What Nasrallah knew but did not tell his supporters is that despite it all, the STL will go on, independent of any internal struggle in Lebanon. Even if Nasrallah wishes to kill the tribunal, he cannot, despite the power his party wields over the country. So now what? Will the STL change course because Nasrallah has said it must? Of course not. Will Nasrallah change his rhetoric? Of course not. But one can say that things are not quite the same after Nasrallah’s Monday conference, only because now the debate has shifted, and whoever wishes to discuss the STL will have to include the footage, whether or not they are convinced by it. On the other hand, when and if the indictments are handed down, things will also not be quite the same for Nasrallah, who will be even more cornered. And until then, the Lebanese will probably witness more threats, messages and an escalation of tension.
Hanin Ghaddar is managing editor of NOW Lebanon

Defense Ministry responds to Aoun
August 10, 2010 /The Defense Ministry issued a statement in response to Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, who said on Tuesday that he held ministries – including the Defense Ministry – responsible for any leaks on the investigation with arrested Brigadier General Fayez Karam, refuting Aoun’s claims. Karam, who is also an FPM official, was arrested last week on suspicion of collaborating with Israel. “If Aoun had any information that could serve the investigation with Karam, he should present it,” the Defense Ministry statement said.
-NOW Lebanon

Michel Aoun
August 11, 2010
On August 10, the Lebanese National News Agency carried the following report:
The Change and Reform bloc held its weekly meeting in Rabieh headed by General Michel Aoun… He stated following the meeting: Today, we tackled all the issues of the hour, starting with the laws presented before parliament. In 2005, I presented a bill to form a parliamentary security committee to deal with the security apparatuses such as the army intelligence, general security, the information branch – when it becomes legal – the state security and the judicial police among others. In other words, [this committee would deal] with all the apparatuses that collect information, assess the security situation and overlook the implementation of the laws in place. We presented this bill and Mr. Robert Ghanem – and this is his responsibility – cannot block a bill presented by a parliamentary bloc or a deputy, especially since it is related to the core of our daily life.
The security situation imposes the presence of such a law and the parliamentary council should not be prevented from assuming its responsibilities. Certainly, this security committee should have its own statute in regard to the secrecy or the respect of the apparatuses and their work and coordination. Unfortunately, this did not happen and we saw last week the intelligence, media and political earthquake which was blown out of proportion and raised commotion among the public affecting the morale of the Lebanese people. To what was that due? To security sources and journalistic sources, as well as to the absence of monitoring apparatuses and ministries inquiring about what is happening in the country to give the event its right size. On Wednesday, they immediately mentioned Brigadier General Fayez Karam by name while he was still a suspect. We respected the secrecy of the investigation and distributed the report in a legal language that respected the people, the apparatuses, the state and the laws.
We said: ‘Brigadier General Fayez Karam being interrogated by the Information Branch.’ However, no news outlet is allowed to say anything more than this and start spreading rumors. Moreover, no official, whether a minister or otherwise, is allowed to leak confidential information about the investigations to the press. This was a grave mistake. I will not accuse any specific apparatus for the time being, but the news was spread. On Thursday, I talked and answered questions to place all that has happened in the right context. I said that if a person among us fell and was convicted, that would be a loss in our political battle. We are not a party with information and intelligence apparatuses. We are not a state… Therefore, it is not our duty to follow our partisans and see who they are talking to and with whom ‘they are going’.
It was normal for each member of the Free Patriotic Movement to perceive the issue as a ‘fabrication,’ especially since the arrest of Brigadier General Karam occurred during the week of August 7, a date linked in the memory of Aounis to great injustice. On August 7, 2001 all the leaders of the movement were arrested and accused of trying to stage a coup in collaboration with the Israeli state. So, ‘thank God’ there is only one person dealing with the Israeli state in light of the unjust treatment we received from the Lebanese state for fifteen years… Despite that, this fall remains an exceptional case in our ranks while it is collective and common in the ranks of others. Those serving the Israeli cause with their political positions are the ones harming the country and the resistance. One person alone, regardless of the information he was presenting, cannot cause as much damage. This is in terms of the outcome since we are not discussing the issue in terms of principles. We want Brigadier General Karam to be interrogated, and if he is guilty, let him bear the consequences. However, what is required from the apparatuses is the respect of the laws from A to Z. Who is responsible for the state of panic seen on Friday? Who provoked it? Did it aim to affect the morale of the Lebanese people? True, it passed peacefully because no one invaded us and because there are leaderships which are wise and capable of containing the situation…
We recently heard talk about the reassignment of Syria to handle the Lebanese file and there was a threat made by Minister Wiam Wahhab regarding Syria’s military return to Lebanon in the event of strife. Will Syria return to Lebanon?
I do not think so. It will be concerned about security on its border because it does not want to jeopardize its security and wishes to protect itself. This is normal. Had the issue been the other way around, we would have protected security on our border.
How do you comment on the efforts deployed by some in rejection of Israel’s possible assassination of Prime Minister Al-Hariri?
This goes against the investigation’s law and against the logic of criminal techniques. First of all, the investigation cannot exclude any course that might lead to the truth... Any exclusion in the investigations is suspicious, especially the exclusion of Israel which has an agent sentenced against the backdrop of three assassinations, i.e. the Majzoub brothers and Al-Awali. Why should I exclude it now? The biggest deficiency in the international investigation is the exclusion of Israel…

Lebanon through the Prism of US-Syrian Rapprochement
Jean-Pierre Katrib , L’Orient Le Jour Special Supplement, August 11, 2010
Since January of 2009 and in line with US President Barack Obama’s engagement strategy, multiple diplomatic openings towards Damascus were registered from the US administration.
Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns visited Syria on February 17th 2010, the highest ranking US official to visit Damascus in more than five years. Shortly after his visit, President Obama nominated Robert Ford as Ambassador to Damascus, filling in after Margaret Scobey was withdrawn in the wake of the 2005 assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
The US has also removed the American block to Syria’s attempt to join the WTO, and in July of 2009, it eased some export licenses for Syria, mostly pertaining to aircraft. In October of 2009, Syria’s deputy foreign minister, Faisal Al-Miqdad, was invited to Washington, the first such visit after years of boycott.
The objective behind these overtures was to moderate the Syrian regime’s behavior, constructively engage it in a regional peace process and lure Damascus away from its strategic alliance with Tehran.
In response, less than ten days after Mr. Ford’s nomination and Undersecretary Burns’ visit, Syrian President Bashar Assad hosted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah at a banquet in Damascus amid increasing international pressure on Iran. During the visit, Assad openly mocked US efforts to distance Syria from Iran, and stressed as recently as April 14 following a meeting with Iran’s Ambassador to Syria that, “Syria will continue developing ties with Iran in all fields,” and that he “fully backs Iran’s nuclear program.”
Further undermining President Obama's efforts to engage Syria were the series of reported advanced weapons transfers in recent months from Syrian territory to Hezbollah in Lebanon – the latest of which was the Scuds transfer controversy.
While weapons have been flowing from Syria to Lebanon for decades, the latest allegations further violates UN Security Resolution 1701, undermines the Lebanese government's ability to exercise sovereignty over all of its territory and risks sparking a conflict that might derail the fragile stability in the region.
US concern over these revelations was communicated in private to Syrian officials in both Washington and Damascus and in public through statements by military and Foreign Service officials. As two statements issued from the US Department of State in mid-April put it, “the transfer of these arms can only have a destabilizing effect on the region,” and “potentially puts Lebanon at significant risk” posing an immediate threat to its sovereignty.
Though Syria and Hezbollah both denied the charges, these developments have generated conflicting reactions in Washington and further unease in Beirut regarding engagement with Syria.
In Beirut, and following an uncoordinated engagement by France, Saudi Arabia, the EU, and now the US, an already fractured March 14th coalition feels abandoned and forced to compromise with the Syrian regime. It is argued that Syria's decision to upgrade Hezbollah’s arms cache proves Damascus is unwilling to distance itself from Tehran and that posting a US ambassador to Syria under current circumstances would send the wrong signal to Damascus and emboldens Assad further to bring Beirut back into his orbit.
On Capitol Hill, the shipment has refueled debate over recent overtures towards Syria. The US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations approved the nomination of Robert Ford as Ambassador to Syria. However, the Scuds crisis has further contributed to “holds” on Ford by senior Senators, making his confirmation unlikely anytime soon.
Although the senators holding up the appointment of the ambassador are all Republican, frustration with the Syrian regime’s behavior have crossed partisan lines, with leading Democrats like Senator Barbara Boxer and Representatives Eliot Engel and Gary Ackerman expressing reservations about the administration’s current policy of engaging Damascus. As Congressman Ackerman asserted in a May 4th statement applauding President Obama’s extension of sanctions on Damascus: “President Obama’s ‘open hand’ and willingness to engage the Assad regime is not a ‘get out of jail free’ card.”
Ackerman, who is the Chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, reiterated Obama’s concern about “Syria’s destabilizing and dangerous policies,” while concurring with the President on the reduction of the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq from Syria. Yet, he highlights a host of American concerns that Syria has yet to fulfill to date. From continuing “to seek an unwanted and illicit influence in Lebanon, provid[ing] Hezbollah of arms of increasing capability and sophistication,” to hosting the leadership of both Hamas and Iraqi Ba’ath in Damascus.
Notwithstanding American discontent with Syria’s behavior, the administration is not second-guessing its engagement strategy and is pushing forward with Ford’s confirmation. "Sending an Ambassador to Syria who can press the Syrian government in a firm and coordinated fashion ... is part of our strategy to achieve comprehensive peace in the region," the White House said in a statement. Proponents of engagement with Damascus argue that sending an Ambassador is part of a phased US reengagement with Syria that is to be tied to Damascus’s cooperation in Iraq, Lebanon and other areas, adding that an ambassadorial presence will improve communication with the Syrian regime.
While talking to adversarial states is necessary for progress, and while restoration of full diplomatic ties may allow the US to better deliver its message, there has been no shortage of communication when it comes to US-Syrian relations. Even in the best of times when Secretary of State Warren Christopher made twenty-six visits to Damascus during the period from February 1993 until April 1996, and after three summits between President Bill Clinton and President Hafez Assad (in January and October of 1994 and in March of 2000), engagement proved to be an exercise in futility. The crux of the issue is not about communication, but about the Syrian regime’s intransigence!
What have been lacking are concrete steps by the administration to accompany more engagement with more pressure. Toothless and unconditional engagement will not compel President Assad into tangibly delivering. Instead, open-ended engagement alienates US allies while gaining little, if any, from adversaries but a hardening in their belief that their intransigence will prevail in the end.
Evidently, the Scuds controversy reveals the limits of engaging Damascus without clearly defined objectives and benchmarks. Something the Assad regime can be judged upon and held accountable too. One mutual concern to Lebanon and US regional interests is the long overdue borders demarcation between Lebanon and Syria in accordance with UNSCR 1701. Another is the pariah status of pro-Syrian Palestinian militant’s camps, particularly along the porous border where arms smuggling routinely occurs. As both issues are monopolized by Damascus, and given the deleterious ramifications they pose not only to Lebanon but to the region at large, the US administration would be well advised to benchmark these in its next round of engagement against Syrian goodwill in promoting regional peace and stability. After all, the resolution of both issues is something that can be easily verified and corroborated.
**Jean-Pierre Katrib is a political analyst and human rights activist based in Beirut.
**The article originally appeared in French in L’Orient’s special supplement on Lebanese-Syrian Relations.

Focus U.S.A. / Will Israel really attack Iran within a year?
After interviewing dozens of Israeli, American and Arab officials, Atlantic Magazine correspondent concludes Israel may not even ask for American 'green light' to attack Iran nuclear sites.
By Natasha Mozgovaya
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/focus-u-s-a/focus-u-s-a-will-israel-really-attack-iran-within-a-year-1.307211
Israel might attack Iranian nuclear sites within a year, if Iran stays the current course and the U.S. administration doesn't succeed in persuading Israel's leadership that U.S. President Barack Obama is ready to stop Iran by force if necessary, so argues Jeffrey Goldberg in Atlantic magazine's September cover story, obtained by Haaretz ahead of publication.
Based on dozens of interviews the Atlantic correspondent conducted in recent months with Israeli, American and Arab officials, Goldberg came to the conclusion that the likelihood of an Israeli strike has crossed the 50 percent mark. And Israel might not even ask for the famous "green light" from the U.S. - or even give couple of false pre-attack alerts, so that Washington won't try to stop the unilateral operation.
Published 22:26 10.08.10
Latest update 22:26 10.08.10
Focus U.S.A. / Will Israel really attack Iran within a year?
After interviewing dozens of Israeli, American and Arab officials, Atlantic Magazine correspondent concludes Israel may not even ask for American 'green light' to attack Iran nuclear sites.
By Natasha Mozgovaya
Tags: Iran Iran nuclear Barack Obama Israel US
Israel might attack Iranian nuclear sites within a year, if Iran stays the current course and the U.S. administration doesn't succeed in persuading Israel's leadership that U.S. President Barack Obama is ready to stop Iran by force if necessary, so argues Jeffrey Goldberg in Atlantic magazine's September cover story, obtained by Haaretz ahead of publication.
Based on dozens of interviews the Atlantic correspondent conducted in recent months with Israeli, American and Arab officials, Goldberg came to the conclusion that the likelihood of an Israeli strike has crossed the 50 percent mark. And Israel might not even ask for the famous "green light" from the U.S. - or even give couple of false pre-attack alerts, so that Washington won't try to stop the unilateral operation.
"…one day next spring, the Israeli national-security adviser, Uzi Arad, and the Israeli defense minister, Ehud Barak, will simultaneously telephone their counterparts at the White House and the Pentagon, to inform them that their prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has just ordered roughly one hundred F-15Es, F-16Is, F-16Cs, and other aircraft of the Israeli air force to fly east toward Iran - possibly by crossing Saudi Arabia, possibly by threading the border between Syria and Turkey, and possibly by traveling directly through Iraq's airspace, though it is crowded with American aircraft…," Goldberg paints a possible scenario
The repercussions of such a strike, which could include the bombing of the Iranian facilities in Natanz, Qom, Esfahan, and maybe even the Russian-built reactor in Bushehr, are less than clear, despite the endless discussions and several simulations. American experts speculate that attacking Iran's nuclear facilities will only slightly delay the nuclear program, whereas some Israelis, according to Goldberg, are a bit more optimistic, in light of the successful Israeli operations against Iraqi and Syrian reactors in the past.
The results might be dire: It's likely that the Israeli air force won't have much time to waste in Iran, as Hezbollah will probably retaliate against Israel in the North and the fighter jets will be needed there. The unilateral operation might throw relations between Jerusalem and Washington into an unprecedented crisis, and might even unleash full-scale regional war with possible economic repercussions for the whole world, not to mention the cost of human lives.
The timetable in this issue is an evasive one - the red lines were pushed back again and again, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told New York Times reporters this week: "Based on my conversations with allies, it's not so much the timing of when or how the Iranians might pursue the nuclear weapons, it's whether they do so. And so whether it would take six months, a year, or five years, it's that deep concern about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons that is the preoccupation of our friends and partners. And we would be pursuing the path we're pursuing regardless of any issue of timing because we think it's got the best potential for changing Iranian behavior."
According to Goldberg, for Israel the red lines are clear. The end of December is Netanyahu's deadline to estimate the success of "non-military methods to stop Iran."
And while Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, reminded Goldberg that "the expression 'All options are on the table' means that all options are on the table," - the Israeli interviewees repeatedly questioned Obama's resolve to actually do it. Some even asked Goldberg if he thought the American president was actually an anti-Semite, forcing the reporter to explain that Obama is probably "the first Jewish President" – but not necessarily Likud's idea of a Jew.
But the reply he got from one official was: "This is the problem. If he is a J Street Jew, we are in trouble."
Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser, stressed that "This president has shown again and again that when he believes it is necessary to use force to protect American national security interests, he has done so" - but the Israeli government might need stronger assurances.
Israel is trying to convey the message not only through the official channels - Israeli military intelligence chief Major General Amos Yadlin visited Chicago recently to meet with the billionaire Lester Crown, one of Obama’s supporters, and asked to him to convey Israel's concerns to the American President, Goldberg reports.
"If the choice is between allowing Iran to go nuclear, or trying for ourselves what Obama won't try, then we probably have to try,” one senior Israeli official told Goldberg. Basically, the Israeli military officials agreed that it would be tough for Israel to do it alone – but on the other hand, the conclusion is Netanyahu might well risk this operation and alienation of his closest ally if he becomes convinced Iran's nuclear bomb "represents a threat like a Shoah."
Goldberg delves into Netanyahu’s relations with his father – the historical lessons he learned from Ben-Zion Netanyahu – and his eagerness not to disappoint him. He also offers a long list of Iran's verbal hostilities toward Israel to remind his readers that Israel is not personally obsessed with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
"I once asked Ali Asghar Soltanieh, a leading Iranian diplomat who is now Iran’s ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, why the leadership of Iran persistently described Israel not as a mere regional malefactor but as a kind of infectious disease. 'Do you disagree?' he asked. 'Do you not see that this is true?'" Goldberg writes.
A recent poll conducted in six Arab countries showed a shift of opinion in favor of the Iranian nuclear weapon – views that the Arab leadership clearly doesn’t share with the street.
For Netanyahu, it's clear the bomb will not only strengthen Iran's proxies, but will undermine Israel’s status as a safe haven for Jews, embolden terrorists all over the word, and make the Arab countries more reluctant to make peace with Israel.
According to Goldberg, all the Arab officials he spoke to didn’t think that the U.S. administration truly understood Iran's ambitions. “The best way to avoid striking Iran is to make Iran think that the U.S. is about to strike Iran. We have to know the president’s intentions on this matter. We are his allies," one Arab minister told Goldberg.
Dennis Ross, special adviser to the U.S. president, told the Atlantic that imposing sanctions on Iran could work, despite Israeli doubts, because the Iranian government already faces public alienation. "They are looking at the costs of trying to maintain control over a disaffected public. They wanted to head off sanctions because they knew that sanctions would be a problem. There is real potential here to affect their calculus. We’re pursuing a path right now that has some potential."
Last week, Obama unexpectedly joined a White House briefing for a small group of senior reporters in Washington, raising questions whether he intended to convey some new message to Iran or hint at some new initiative. The accounts of the meetings were somewhat different, and the final impression was that there still is no answer for the question, what President Obama is ready to do if sanctions fail.
**David Sanger, the New York Times reporter, heard from the White House sources that during his latest visit to Washington Netanyahu didn't list Iran as one of his top agenda items "whereas at the previous meetings when he has come here, [Iran] was the number one, two, and three issue," on the agenda, which might indicate that Netanyahu got some clear reassurances from the U.S. administration.

Aid to Lebanon is in the US’s best interest
August 10. 2010
The National
http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100811/OPINION/708109878/1033/editorials?template=opinion
We hope that common sense prevails in Washington this week as the debate over US military aid to Lebanon deepens. In a thinly disguised reaction to last week’s border skirmish between Israel and Lebanon, the chairman of the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Howard Berman, has blocked the appropriation of $100 million for the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). The reason, according to one of the most staunch defenders of Israel in the US Congress, is to clarify Hizbollah’s relationship with the state-backed army. Mr Berman is not the only one with such questions, given the complex political alliances in Lebanon. However, Mr Berman’s eagerness to show support for Israel by freezing aid to Lebanon’s only legitimate army, and a unifying element in a fractious nation, is shortsighted, not only for the long-term stability of that country, but for America’s own regional interests.
When the US bolstered its support to the LAF in 2005, its intention was to make the country more stable and assist in the creation of a counterterrorism force. To block these funds would discredit the US’s commitment to that effort.
Comments made last week by Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hizbollah, that his organisation would “not stand silent, or quiet or restrained” if the LAF were attacked by Israeli forces did little to silence critics of the US relationship with the Lebanese goverment, in which Mr Nasrallah’s organisation plays a role. His flimsy accusations on Monday that Israel was behind the former Lebanese president Rafik Hariri’s assassination in 2005 may have also turned heads on Capitol Hill.
But, Mr Nasrallah’s military forces operate outside of the LAF’s control. He and his organisation have derived much of their legitmacy from this independence.
Furthermore, with 85 per cent of the LAF’s equipment coming from the US, Lebanon’s search for alternative suppliers may leave a vacuum that other nations would be keen to fill. Few – Mr Berman included – would countenance greater Syrian or Iranian involvement in the country.
More broadly, a knee-jerk reaction by the US would also lend credence to the criticism that it budges only at Israel’s behest, rather than in consideration of its stated desire to secure regional stability and support other longstanding allies in the region. For the moment, the Obama administration denies that there are plans to review its military partnership with Lebanon. For the sake of Washington’s credibility and Lebanon’s stability, we hope that doesn’t change.

Iran ‘reiterates’ support for Lebanon against Israeli threat
By The Daily Star /Tuesday, August 10, 2010
BEIRUT: Lebanese Foreign Minister Ali Shami reiterated Iran’s support to Lebanon against Israeli aggression
Shami returned to Beirut on Monday following a visit to Tehran over the weekend.
The Foreign Minister told reporters at the Rafik Hariri International Airport, that the Iranian administration saluted the tripartite meeting held in Beirut in August. Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad paid a visit to Beirut in late July and met with Lebanese leaders in a bid to ease tensions. Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s statements on the Special Tribunal for Lebanon probing the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri sparked fears of an outbreak of violence in Lebanon. In July, Nasrallah revealed that Hizbullah was aware that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon was likely to indict members of its party, slamming the UN court as an “Israeli project.” Shami had met with top Iranian officials on Sunday, including Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) quoted Ahmadinejad as saying that Lebanon’s tripartite summit “has thwarted the enemies’ plots,” in reference to Israel. Ahmadinejad describes the initiative of his Lebanese counterpart Michel Sleiman, who invited King Abdullah and Assad for the summit, as “productive and constructive.” “The tripartite summit held in Beirut has foiled plots of the enemy Zionist regime,” Ahmadinejad said in a meeting with Lebanese Foreign Minister Ali al-Shami Sunday afternoon in Tehran. “Their presence represented solidarity and unity in the entire region and promoted the nation’s front against the Zionist regime and its sponsors,” Ahmadinejad added. Iran’s president said Israel sought discord among Lebanon, Syria and the resistance. Shami expressed gratitude for Iran’s “material and moral support for Lebanon against the Zionist regime” and called for boosting “bilateral cooperation,” according to ISNA. Shami also met with Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary Saeed Jalili. “The Lebanese Army, which has the backing of the people and the resistance, will not let the Zionist regime cut even one tree in Lebanon,” said Jalili. On Monday, Shami said Lebanon was preparing to file a complaint with the UN Security Council and General Assembly regarding Israeli espionage activities in Lebanon. “The report is now ready,” he added. In the last year, more than 70 people have been arrested in the spy probe, among them members of the security forces as well as telecommunications employees. – The Daily Star

Israel rejects Nasralah’s ‘proof’ on Hariri killing as ‘ridiculous’
Future Movement says only STL can probe murder
By The Daily Star /Wednesday, August 11, 2010
BEIRUT: Israel dismissed Tuesday as “ridiculous” Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s assertion that his group had acquired Israeli footage implicating Israel in the murder of former Premier Rafik Hariri. official
“Everyone in the world knows, even the Lebanese, that Nasrallah’s accusations are ridiculous,” a senior Israeli told AFP, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The accusations were “coming from the pressure on [Nasrallah] over the international community’s suspicions about Hizbullah’s involvement in Hariri’s murder,” he said.
Israel has repeatedly announced that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) would indict Hizbullah in the murder.
Nasrallah on Monday unveiled footage he said was intercepted from Israeli surveillance planes of the site where Hariri was killed in a bombing in February 2005.
Nasrallah’s claims prompted France to stress that the STL remains the sole authority in charge of putting suspects to trial while Iran said his presentation had uncovered Israeli involvement in the operation. “The STL established under UN Security Council Resolution 1757 holds alone the prerogatives to try those who executed, organized and were involved as well as ordered the assassination of Rafik Hariri,” French Foreign Ministry Assistant Spokesperson Christine Fage said. Nasrallah, who demanded that the government form a committee to study the evidence held by Hizbullah, said his party would not present the evidence to the STL, since he had “no trust” in the body.
Fage stressed France’s commitment to “international justice” and voiced support for the STL’s independent work, adding that her country “always worked against escaping justice.”
On the domestic level in Lebanon, parliamentary majority parties played down the importance of information presented by Nasrallah.
Echoing the French Foreign Ministry, the Future Movement said in a statement issued later Tuesday that the STL was the party authorized to investigate the murder and seek evidence that would uncover assailants. But Future Movement leader Premier Saad Hariri, who is currently on vacation in Sardinia, made no comments about Nasrallah’s news conference.
“The Future Movement bloc stressed that all data and files available including those presented by Sayyed Nasrallah should be submitted to the STL’s general prosecutor to conduct the necessary investigations,” the statement said. The statement added that it welcomed all information or evidence that could lead to the uncovering of the murder and stressed the need to “exploit all assumptions and possibilities of the side standing behind the murder.” Separately, Phalange Party leader Amin Gemayel said Nasrallah presented “presumptions rather than evidence.” “If the STL possesses presumptions than it should be compared to those held by Hizbullah but if the STL possesses proof then it should go ahead with presenting its indictment,” he said. Meanwhile, Hizbullah’s domestic and international allies slammed previous investigations by the STL and called for building upon Monday’s presentation as a new foundation for investigations. “The documents and proof presented by Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah that implicate Israel in the operation are interesting and worth studying,” Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Ramin Mahman said.
Similarly, the Syrian Ambassador to Lebanon said Tuesday evidence presented by Nasrallah was of major importance and should be taken into consideration. “The STL cannot disregard such information,” Ali Abdel-Karim Ali added. For his part, Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun said “the presented information was valuable and valid to constitute the start of a new investigation since [Nasrallah’s] information should be taken into consideration and interpreted more.” Aoun added that such consideration was necessary “given the flaws we witnessed in earlier investigations and the protection of those who misled investigations,” a reference to false witnesses. Development and Loyalty MP Qassem Hashem went further to stress that evidence presented by Nasrallah left no room for doubt or interpretation of Israel’s involvement in Hariri’s murder. UN chief Ban ki Moon refused to comment on reports about any STL’s indictment, stressing that the issue was part of the STL’s general prosecutor’s prerogatives. – Agencies, with The Daily Star

‘This time we went too far’
Norman finkelstein’s new book examines likelihood of an Israeli attack on lebanon
Wednesday, August 11, 2010 /Daily Star
perspective/Charles Glass
“Not Another War on Lebanon.” My old friend Norman Finkelstein has just written a foreword to a new edition of his first-rate book on the Gaza Strip, “This Time We Went Too Far,” in which he shares his fears of another Israeli war in Lebanon. Norman is usually right, but he is also usually a lonely prophet in the wilderness, ignored and scorned by kings and courtiers.
This time, however, most of the people he disagrees with are on his side: former US Ambassador to Israel Dan Kurtzer at the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Crisis Group and much of the Israeli and Lebanese press. It’s worth reading Norman’s foreword, as well as the book, to understand what is happening. As someone who has watched Lebanon suffer too much since 1975, I hope he is wrong. His argument, at least in the first draft that I read, goes as follows:
The most likely initial target of an Israeli attack is Lebanon. Of late Israel has been busily preparing the ground for it. Even Israel’s most vulgar apologists concede that should war break out, it is “more likely” that Israel will have initiated it (Daniel C. Kurtzer, “A Third Lebanon War,” Council on Foreign Relation, July 2010). The pretext is that Hizbullah has amassed a huge quantity of rockets and missiles targeting Israel.
It is also clear that the Israeli assault will replicate the Gaza massacre (of December 2009) but on a much grander scale. An Israeli general proclaimed shortly after the Gaza massacre that the Israeli military will “continue to apply” the Dahiya doctrine of directing massive force against civilian infrastructure “in the future” (Yaacov Katz, “The Dahiya Doctrine: Fighting dirty or a knock-out punch?” Jerusalem Post, 28 January 2001). On the same day as the (Turkish) flotilla bloodbath, DefenseNews was reporting that a prospective Israeli assault on Lebanon “would include attacks on national infrastructure, a total maritime blockade, and interdiction strikes on bridges, highways,” while “land forces would execute a ferocious land grab well beyond the Litani River.” The essence of Israeli strategic doctrine, the Israeli deputy chief of staff elaborated, was that “each new round” of fighting “brings worse results than the last” to Israel’s enemies.
It also brings fairly damaging results to Israel itself. In 2006, although the Israeli military killed about nine times as many Lebanese as the Lebanese did Israelis, about a million Israelis fled their homes to avoid being hit by Hizbullah rockets. (It is historically interesting that those Israelis, some of whom live in houses that Palestinian Arabs lived in before they fled violence in 1948, went home when the fighting stopped. Israel has always argued that people, i.e., Palestinians, who left their houses in wartime have no right to return to them. Different principles for different folks.) That was what Dan Kurtzer called the “second Lebanon war,” in his Council on Foreign Relations treatise urging the Obama administration to forestall the third. But Lebanon has had many wars, perhaps too many to count. Even against Israel, there has either been one long war or at least five.
Menachem Begin sent the Israeli military to occupy south Lebanon in March 1978. In 1982, the Israeli Army went further north into Lebanon to expel the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from Beirut. That was its high water mark, and the water has, as water does, been flowing downhill ever since. In subsequent forays into the country, it lost again and again to the resistance movement that would not have existed but for Israel’s occupation of south Lebanon from the summer of 1982 on, Hizbullah. The Israelis were better off for an enemy with the PLO, which has since been tamed and now does Israel’s bidding on the West Bank.
Hizbullah, for all the Levantine business acumen of some of its backers, is less pliable. It is also more serious. Its steady attacks on the Israeli occupiers from the time of its clandestine inception in late 1982 forced Israel to withdraw from Lebanon in 2000. Between the original invasion of 1978 and the summer 2006’s disastrous incursion, Israel has launched several mini-invasions that failed to make a dent in Hizbullah’s armor.
Has everyone forgotten the “decisive” Operation Grapes of Wrath? When the Israelis attempted to deal the deathblow to Hizuallah in the summer of 2006, the Shiite resistance handed them a humiliating defeat. Israeli soldiers in south Lebanon were so badly prepared for a serious battle that some of them ran out of drinking water. Israeli jets destroyed all of Lebanon’s bridges and much of its civilian infrastructure, but its troops on the ground were relieved to depart. So, what are the hawks in Israel urging the army to do? You guessed it, have another go.
Norman writes, “Tellingly, after each successive bungled operation, Israelis speak of “operational” errors, never conceptual ones, the tacit assumption being that if these errors are corrected, then next time around the goals still can and will be achieved.”
The question is: what does Israel intend to achieve? As I see it, its objectives are to maintain military superiority over all potential adversaries and, whenever an adversary threatens to become so much as an irritant, to destroy its power. This doctrine goes beyond mere preemption, which is itself of dubious legality. Preemption means attacking before you are attacked. Israel is going a step further and attacking before anyone can achieve the means so much as to consider an attack – even in retaliation.
You could call it pre-preemption. Just as its soldiers employ submachine guns on Palestinian children who throw stones, Israel’s army unleashes the full force of F-16s on those who merely bear arms in a neighboring state, Lebanon, to defend their territory.
Norman Finkelstein and Dan Kurtzer, who stand at polar ends of the Mideast spectrum, agree that another Israeli invasion of Lebanon will be bad for Lebanon, bad for Israel and bad for the US. Is that enough to convince Washington to stop it before it happens?
Charles Glass was ABC News Chief Middle East Correspondent from 1983 to 1993. His books include Tribes with Flags (Atlantic Monthly Press,1990) and Americans in Paris: Life and Death Under Nazi Occupation (Penguin Press, 2010). Article URL: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/not_another_war_on_lebanon/

Iran digging graves for American troops in case of attack
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Ali Akbar Dareini/Associated Press
TEHRAN: Iran has dug mass graves in which to bury US troops in case of any American attack on the country, a former commander of the elite Revolutionary Guards said.
The digging of the graves appears to be a show of bravado after the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, said last week that the US military has a contingency plan to attack Iran, although he thinks a military strike is probably a bad idea. The US and some of its allies accuse Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to build nuclear weapons. Iran has denied the charges, saying its nuclear program is geared merely toward generating electricity, not bomb.
General Hossein Kanaani Moghadam, who was the Guards’ deputy commander during the 1980s, said graves have been dug in Iran’s southwestern Khuzestan Province, where Iran buried Iraqi soldiers killed during the ruinous 1980-88 war between the Islamic Republic and Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s regime. “The mass graves that used to be for burying Saddam’s soldiers have now been prepared again for US soldiers, and this is the reason for digging this big number of graves,” Moghadam told the Associated Press Television News late Monday. He did not say how many were prepared. Footage obtained by APTN showed a large number of empty, freshly dug graves in a desert region of Khuzestan. The digging of the graves was first reported earlier this week by Iran’s news agency Fars. Moghadam repeated warnings that Iran will retaliate against US bases in the Gulf if there is an attack on Iran. The US Navy’s 5th Fleet headquarters is based just across the Gulf from Iran in Bahrain.
If US forces attack, “Iran will have no choice but to strike the American bases in the region,” he said. “The heavy costs of such a war will not be just on the Islamic Republic of Iran. America and other countries should accept that this would be the start of an extensive war in the region.” The war of words has intensified between Iran and the United States after the UN Security Council imposed a fourth tougher round of sanctions in June in response to Iran’s refusal to halt uranium enrichment, a technology that can be used to produce nuclear fuel or material for an atomic bomb. The US and Israel have said military force could be used if diplomacy fails to stop what they suspect is an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Iranian officials have stepped up their own rhetoric in recent weeks, threatening to close the Gulf to shipping and strike Israel if attacked.

Nasrallah’s speech fails to meet high expectations
By Agence France Presse (AFP)
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
analysis/Natacha Yazbeck
Agence France Presse
BEIRUT: Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s “evidence” implicating Israel in the murder of Lebanese former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri has failed to sway his political rivals and left analysts divided over its impact. “The press conference is likely part and parcel of a strategy of self-defense,” Mustafa Alloush, a former MP and member of the Future Movement, founded by Hariri, told AFP on Tuesday. “If the aim is to convince us of Israel’s guilt, then this evidence should be placed in the hands of the relevant authorities and jurisdiction.”
At a Monday night press conference, Nasrallah produced several undated clips of aerial views of various areas in Lebanon, including the site of the Hariri assassination in mainly Sunni west Beirut several years prior to the murder.
Nasrallah, who has accused Israel of the February 14, 2005, bombing which killed Hariri and 22 others, said the footage was intercepted from unmanned Israeli MK surveillance drones.
He conceded the images were not conclusive proof but noted that his party – which is believed constantly under surveillance by its arch-foe Israel – had no offices, positions or presence in the areas surveyed. Hariri’s allies initially blamed Syria for his killing but Damascus has consistently denied the allegations. Syria nonetheless withdrew its troops from Lebanon under international pressure in April 2005, ending a 29-year presence.
Nasrallah last month said he was aware the UN-backed tribunal on the Hariri murder, which is expected to issue an indictment this year, would indict members of his Syrian- and Iranian-backed party, slamming it as an Israeli project. But his highly anticipated address Monday failed to live up to the expectations of the Lebanese and was at best received as circumstantial evidence – and a show of counter-espionage prowess.
“No one took the evidence seriously or considered it objective,” said Hilal Khashan, a political science professor at the American University of Beirut. “Nasrallah was simply addressing his public,” Khashan told AFP. “He promised solid proof but instead offered new elements to support his rebuttal of the tribunal’s credibility and request they start anew.” Asaad Abu Khalil, a political science professor at California State University at Stanislaus, said the event was “a great political show” that aimed to sway Arab public opinion. “The expectations were high for the speech: in Lebanon, Hizbullah’s enemies did not want anything less than pictures of Israelis pulling the triggers on Hariri. That was not provided,” Abu Khalil wrote on his “Angry Arab” blog. “Hizbullah did something entirely different in this press conference: it recaptured Arab political opinion … with images, and visual effects and background music and graphics.”
But Fadia Kiwan, who heads the political science department at Saint Joseph University, said Nasrallah’s revelation was “extremely dangerous.”
“There is no conclusive evidence on the involvement of Israel but [Nasrallah presented] relevant arguments that make it inevitable that this hypothesis be seriously examined,” she told AFP.
Nasrallah’s statements have raised fears of a replay of the events of May 2008, when 100 people were killed in a week of fighting sparked by a government crackdown on the party’s private communications network. The government later repealed its decision.
The Hizbullah leader on Monday said he was willing to cooperate with the Lebanese government on the Hariri murder and present the Cabinet, which includes two Hizbullah ministers, with his findings. He refused to specify what measures Hizbullah would take should the UN tribunal implicate the Shiite party. But a high-ranking government official, who requested his name be withheld, told AFP on Tuesday that he did not expect Hizbullah to take any drastic measures. “The indictment will be issued by an international body so even withdrawing from the government would be a very artificial, contrived step that would cause problems here in Lebanon without presenting any corroboration of the evidence presented yesterday,” the official said. “Turning the table on the Lebanese government would seem to me taking Lebanon hostage and saying ‘I’m threatening the international community that my own country will be paying the price,’” he added. “I don’t expect that.” Israel on Tuesday dismissed Hizbullah’s claims of their guilt as “ridiculous.”

Elias Bejjani's response to Barry's editorial (Below)
Dear Barry, You analysis is fully right and because of this sad, unfortunate and dangerous imposed status quo by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah on our beloved Lebanon, the West has an obligation to step in and straighten the balance militarily. As you know Syria at least since 1990 has been Syrianizing all Lebanon's institutions, especially the armed forced, media, cabinet and parliament. At the same time it granted unlawfully the Lebanese citizenship to more than half a million in 1994 through which it messed badly with the country's very delicate demography. In 2005 when Syria was forced to leave Hezbollah the Syrian Iranian armed proxy took over the job and fully controlled the country and its institutions.
What is definite that the Lebanese alone are not able any more to reverse the Syrianization and HEZBOLLAHISATION of their country. They need military western intervention and the sooner the better.In conclusion Lebanon in the axis of evil orbit will not only hurt the Lebanese people, destroy their freedom, multicultural and democracy system and enslave them but will destabilize the whole middle east and threaten peace and stability all over the world.
The feasible solution would be via a new UN resolution under chapter seven through which the UN troops stationed in South Lebanon will be given the upper hand not only in the south but all over Lebanon and specially on the Lebanese Syrian border. The Lebanese army needs to be put under the UN troops command and Lebanon declared a country that is unable to govern itself. I personally have called for such a solution in one of my recent editorials. There is no doubt that losing Lebanon to the axis of evil means losing the whole middle east and toppling of all the so called moderate Arab regimes.

The Week Lebanon Became Part of the Anti-Western Axis and West Governments Didn't Notice
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
By Barry Rubin
History will record that Lebanon was integrated into the Iran-Syria empire in early August 2010. Here are some of the stories that mark that turning point, and also show how Western willingness to make concessions and eagerness to avoid confrontation are interpreted by moderates as a signal or surrender and radicals as an invitation to advance further.
Former Lebanese cabinet minister Wiam Wahhab explained that Lebanon is now, in effect, a Syrian province in a television interview, explaining that the country is back to the rule of Damascus that prevailed in the 1980s:, "In the event of a civil war, Syrian tanks will enter Lebanon. Syria is not fooling around."
No, Syria is not fooling around. But the West is.
Wahhab added that UNIFIL and other UN groups are hostages that Lebanon and Syria can dominate. The last four years has shown that the international community is weaker than Hizballah and won’t defend its own people. The UN and international community did not make a serious effort to implement any of the promises made at the time they brokered the 2006 ceasefire in the Israel-Hizballah war. Once again, Hizballah rules southern Lebanon. It imports weapons and builds military strong points at will. Hizballah will never defeat Israel in this situation but it has succeeded in defeating the entire world.
Meanwhile the Syrian media brags about extensive victories, including the acceptance of Syria’s domination over Lebanon by both Western and Arab countries (the Saudi king's visit marked the submission of Syria's main rival in Lebanon), the surrender of the former Lebanese independence forces, the alleged growing influence of Syria in Iraq, and the integration of Turkey into the Iran-Syria alliance.
Most Western governments and media still publicly ignore the transformation (perhaps temporary) of Turkey into part of the radical, anti-Western alliance but Iran, Syria, and Hizballah are quite aware of this huge change. Equally, they pretend that Lebanon still functions as an independent country, though Congress's cut-off of aid to Lebanon's army shows that it comprehends the situation.
Meanwhile, Hizballah leader Hasan Nasrallah charges that Israel killed former Lebanese president Rafik Hariri, the act that set off the short-lived Lebanese national revival against Syrian domination. Everyone in Lebanon knows Hariri was killed by Syria through Lebanese agents, who seem to have included Hizballah officials. But no one in political life has the courage to say so. And if the international investigation does implicate Syrian-Hizballah involvement, all the Lebanese leaders who once shouted in anger against these assassins will now tremble and deny it.
Other Hizballah statements include the claim that the unprovoked assassination of an Israeli officer in the tree incident was a defense of Lebanon against Israeli aggression. The extol the resistance as being so brave and strong that it would not even let a tree be cut down in Lebanon, though it is now established that the tree in question was in Israel.
Western observers might find such points to be foolish or unimportant but few in Lebanon, or even in the Arab world, will hear abou the truth. They will believe that the shooting incident was a heroic defense of the Arab homeland against still another Israeli act of aggression.
Moreover, many will be inspired by a struggle that will give neither an inch nor a tree. The message is also that the resistance will fight for one tree while the West won't fight at all. Such arguments are far more powerful than any rational matters of fact in stirring passions and shaping politics in the region.
If the Iran-Syria-Hizballah-Hamas-Iraqi insurgent-Turkish regime alliance is looking ever stronger and will kill over a tree, how is the leadership of the Palestinian Authority going to compromise over territory and give up the dream of conquering all of Israel? Now that the West has surrendered and, for all practical purposes, recognized the Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip, why should Palestinians believe that the Palestinian Authority is going to be their sole legitimate leader, especially if it makes compromises to achieve peace with Israel?
Perhaps most chilling in the rhetoric coming out of Lebanion is a statement by a Hizballah member of Lebanon’s parliament that the Lebanese army’s murder of an Israeli officer on the border proves the Lebanese army is now part of the radical resistance. The main U.S. activity in Lebanon during the last decade has been to provide aid to Lebanon's army based on the reasonable argument that it was a bulwark against Hizballah. But that claim no longer holds. To a large extent, Hizballah is governing Lebanon today, either directly, through the intimidation of violence and veto power in the cabinet, or due to the pressure of its Syrian and Iranian big brothers.
Iran offered to subsidize the Lebanese army if the United States cut off aid, an eventuality is unlikely. But the point is that the Lebanese army under the current government serves the interests of Tehran more than Washington. One can certainly make an argument that U.S. aid should continue to avoid an Iranian monopoly and keep open contacts in hope things will get better in future. I'm not necessarily arguing against that idea. But have no illusions that the Lebanese government and army are "pro-Western."
If some day a war breaks out between Lebanon and Israel, as in 2006, and Israeli forces hit the Lebanese infrastructure hard, remember all of this. Lebanon has now joined—however unwillingly on the part of most of its citizens—the radical, anti-Western Islamist bloc and may well have to pay the price for that allegiance.
Only if the huge Western setbacks in Turkey, the Gaza Strip, and Lebanon are taken into account can anyone get a realistic picture of what's going on in the region.
**Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center is at http://www.gloria-center.org and of his blog, Rubin Reports, at http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com.

Hizballah, a threat to the USA
http://fresnozionism.org/2010/08/hizballah-a-threat-to-the-usa/
Hizballah, second only to al-Qaeda in the number of American citizens murdered, is the most powerful terrorist group in the world today. Hizballah effectively controls Lebanon — thus finally putting an end to the idea of a state in which Muslims and Christians could share power — and will soon doubtless fight yet another war with Israel.
Hizballah has tentacles in numerous countries, and is especially powerful in Latin America. Originally financed from Iran, Hizballah now is also funded by drug operations in both hemispheres. It also receives contributions from Islamic charities around the world.
The degree of autonomy exercised by Hizballah is unclear, but its connection to Iran is close enough that it’s been called “the Foreign Legion of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.” It’s fair to say that one of the major factors that deters the US and Israel from military action against the Iranian nuclear program is the threat that Hizballah would both strike Israel with tens of thousands of rockets as well as unleash a wave of terror against American interests at home and abroad.
Hizballah is a tremendous threat to the US — probably more so than al-Qaeda — especially since it could easily infiltrate terrorists through our porous Mexican border.
So you would think that our foreign policy would be aimed at weakening it. You would think we would be doing our best to help keep weapons out of its hands.
You would think that if we knew that major parts of the Lebanese Armed Forces were controlled by Hizballah, we wouldn’t train them and give them advanced weapons.
You would think that we would help Israel, which directly confronts Hizballah. For example, if Israel was spying on Hizballah (and giving information to the US), we wouldn’t beef up the Lebanese security services, which in effect work for Hizballah, so they can use our equipment to catch and kill the agents working for Israel.
You would think all of this, but you would be wrong, because you would not have reckoned with the sheer stupidity — or worse — of the US State Department.
WASHINGTON – The State Department is working to allay the concerns of members of Congress who have put a hold on funding to the Lebanese military, following last week’s deadly border incident with Israel, a spokesman said Tuesday.
“We understand that this incident has raised very legitimate questions on the Hill and we will continue to engage leaders on both sides of the aisle to help assuage concerns that exist,” said State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley.
However, he defended US military assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces [LAF] as something that’s “in our national interest and contributes to stability in the region.” He added that the US has “no indications” that its training programs were in any way implicated in the incident.
Crowley also pointed to statements by Iran that it would fill whatever funding gap is left by the US with its own money as an example of the need for the US to keep up its contributions. “The statements by Iran are expressly the reason why we believe continued support to the Lebanese government and the Lebanese military is in our interest,” he said.
In addition to the recent border skirmish between Lebanon and Israel, House Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Howard Berman cited more general concerns of Hizbullah involvement with the Lebanese army in placing a hold on $100 million in funds slated for 2010.
Crowley responded to the concern by saying that, “Hizbullah is a fact within Lebanese society and much of our effort in supporting the Lebanese military is in fact the very professionalization that we think helps mitigate that risk.”
The suggestion that the Lebanese Army “contributes to stability” by confronting Hizballah is ludicrous. Here are some facts:
» The LAF confronts Israel on its border, as this recent incident shows. However, it takes absolutely no action to stop the continuous smuggling of weapons — including Scud missiles — to Hizballah across the border with Syria.
» The LAF, as far back as 2006, cooperated with Hizballah. Targeting information provided by the LAF allowed Hizballah to hit an Israeli ship with a missile during the last war.
» In 2008, the Lebanese President, Michael Suleiman, issued ‘guidelines’ that the LAF could fight alongside ‘the resistance’ [Hizballah] in order to “resist Israeli aggression.”
» There may have been a time where anti-Hizballah forces had a chance to prevail in Lebanon, but that time is past. In May 2008, in a bloody coup, Hizballah took effective control of the nation. Although they did not officially establish a Hizballah government, the real power is in their hands.
» The border ambush — which was not the action of a ‘rogue officer’, but was carefully planned — sent the message that the LAF and Hizballah are on the same side.
The argument that ‘if we don’t buy them weapons, Iran will’ is completely absurd. It would only be worth considering if Lebanon were ruled by pro-Western forces. But it isn’t. That battle is over. Perhaps we could have supported that side more effectively, but we didn’t, and now we can’t make up for it by arming our enemies. This is yet another case of the US trying to influence bad actors by bribing them in advance, the ‘all-carrot, no stick’ policy. The result is that they take our guns and think we’re stupid. They’re right.
Hizballah directly confronts Israel, but Israel is prepared for the inevitable war. That is more than can be said for the US, where the threat from Hizballah is being studiously ignored. My prediction is that if we don’t start taking it seriously, Hizballah will make al-Qaeda look like pikers.

Hezbollah is Lebanon’s Sherlock Holmes
Wed, 11 August 201/Al Hayat
By: Randa Takieddine
The news conference by Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah was certainly a skillful portrayal of a truth known by everyone, namely that Israel has intentions of committing sabotage actions and destabilizing Lebanon, and that it does not support the country’s economic revival. Lebanon’s modern history, since the civil war, has proven the existence of a situation that every honest and objective citizen acknowledges. However, the material presented by the secretary general of Hezbollah, particularly the photos taken from Israeli aircraft, do not constitute decisive evidence. Israel can certainly take such photos and follow the movements of Lebanese officials and leaders; however, the news conference was not decisive and convincing and did not have tangible evidence. 
Today, with advanced IT capabilities, it is easy to create visual documents and fashion them at will. Becoming convinced by such visual materials reminds us of Sherlock Holmes, the British detective. Relying on such documentation matches the complaint by Hezbollah’s secretary general about the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, namely relying on false witnesses. However, regardless of the fact that the international investigation into the Rafiq Hariri assassination, since Serge Brammertz and after him Daniel Bellemare, has abandoned the evidence of the false witnesses, and no longer relies on it. This led to the release of four senior security and military officers. The international investigator and public prosecutor, Bellemare, is a judicial official with no connection to politics, and no one can influence him, even if they wanted to.
Bellemare asked to investigate matters with a number of countries, including Israel. The notion that the STL has not conducted investigations with all concerned countries is not accurate. Since the beginning, the STL has requested cooperation with a number of countries. The fact that the talk and the rumors are focusing on the international investigation and Bellemare’s work also reminds us of Sherlock Holmes.
The news conference completely ignored the political conditions that preceded the assassination of Hariri and the extension of then-President Emile Lahoud’s mandate, and the repercussions, and the local and regional political climate that prevailed as a result. It is as if these conditions had no impact, and they were completely absent from the secretary general’s investigation. The issue was absent from the news conference, even though it has become part of Lebanon’s history, as acknowledged by Hezbollah’s allies today, and it appeared in the statements by General Michel Aoun, when he was in Paris. This was the reality of the Lebanese domestic and regional situations during the period that preceded the assassination of Hariri and the other martyrs who fell after him. Nasrallah told the tale, citing Syrian leaders, that an Arab leader tried to convince the Syrians to receive Lebanon in exchange for crushing Hezbollah’s forces in the South. This reminds us of what the Israelis continually say to western and American leaders, namely that Israel prefers that Lebanon remain under Syrian control, because only Syria can control Hezbollah. Ever since the civil war and the expulsion of Yasser Arafat from Lebanon, Israel has sought Syrian domination over Lebanon, since it believes the Lebanese political system to be weak, and that only Syria can rein in Hezbollah.
The documented presentation by Nasrallah at the news conference, and everything he said about Lebanese agents for Israel, will be taken into consideration by the international investigator. Bellemare is not finished with his investigation and has yet to issue an indictment. Everything that Nasrallah said was useful in the framework of Bellemare’s investigation, which is studying all possibilities and documents; however, it is searching for tangible and precise evidence, in purely legal terms.
What Nasrallah put forward will certainly be studied by the international investigation, which is working seriously and objectively. Doubting Bellemare’s work is a negative act. Trying to convince the states that supervised the establishment of the STL that it would be better to delay the indictment, because it will lead to a civil war in Lebanon, will not succeed, because Bellemare is completely independent and the STL, like similar trials for Rwanda and Kosovo, cannot be eliminated.