LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِJuly 10/2010

Bible Of the Day
Psalm 34:18
The LORD is near to the brokenhearted and saves the crushed in spirit.
 You Are Not Alone: Is your heart broken today? Is your spirit crushed? This Psalm reassures us that the Lord is very near to us when we're facing overwhelming troubles. In fact, the Lord is right there, present with you in the sorrow, in the heartache. He is walking right through it with you. And you can lean on him for comfort, because he too knows what it feels like to be crushed and broken.

Free Opinions, Releases, letters, Interviews & Special Reports
David Harris: Canada feeds the haters/National Post/July 09/10
Open Letter From the UNIFIL force commander to the people of south Lebanon/Friday, July 09, 2010
Iran is keeping a tight rein on Nasrallah and Hezbollah/By Yossi Melman/Ha'aretz/July 09/10
Barriers to peace/By Jack A Smith/July 09/10
Hezbollah grows up/By Avi Issacharoff/Ha'aretz/July 09/10

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for July 09/10
UNIFIL tries to calm anger over southern maneuvers/Daily Star
Israel Radio: Uncovering Hizbullah Arms Storage Locations a 'Warning' to Villagers/Naharnet
Paris Reportedly Mulling to Give Fresh Impetus to UNIFIL Intervention Force/Naharnet
Williams: Reinforcing LAF Presence in South Crucial in Implementation of 1701/Naharnet
Qabbani urges boosting cooperation with UNIFIL/Daily Star
Counter Terrorism Bureau warns all Israelis traveling abroad/Ha'aretz
British diplomat eulogizes Fadlallah/Ynetnews
The IDF fights back/Jerusalem Post
Geagea: South Incidents Damaged Government Reputation
ISRAEL: Army declassifies intelligence material showing Hezbollah's tactics/Los Angeles Times (blog)
Israel Says Hezbollah Moves Missiles Near Border/ABC News
LF Responds to Case of 4 Abducted Diplomats: We were the First to Abandon our Military Structure
Syria's ruler marks decade in power/Financial Times
IRAQ: Muted reaction to celebrated Lebanese Ayatollah Fadlallah's death/Los Angeles Times (blog)
UN in Lebanon urges cooperation with peacekeepers/Reuters Canada
SYRIA: Damascus teams up with Turkey to fight Kurdish aspirations/Los Angeles Times (blog
Syria Drowning in Debt/The Media Line
Israel Claims Hezbollah Storing Weapons in Lebanese Villages/Voice of America
Iraqi PM pays respects to late top Lebanese cleric/The Associated Press
UK envoy pays homage to Fadlallah/Jerusalem Post
The Israel-Turkey Imbroglio/New York Times
World Citizen: The Next War in the Middle East/World Politics Review
HRW wants charges against Sleiman critics to be dropped/Daily Star
Despite 'spy' arrests, Israel still has eyes in Lebanon/Ha'aretz
Britain Removes Ambassador's Blog Praising Fadlallah/Naharnet
Qassem Marking July War Anniversary: Israel Would Suffer Big Loss in Any Future Attack/Naharnet
Extra Security Precautions Taken to Ensure UNIFIL Safety for Fear of Third Party/Naharnet
Salam: I Will Stress that We Hold Onto UNIFIL's Role Based on Current Rules of Engagement/Naharnet
Hizbullah Sources: Israeli Weapons Claims 'Fake'/Naharnet
Sarkozy: Nasrallah's Rejection of Court Ruling against Hizbullah is Not Acceptable/Naharnet
Qahwaji: Army Committed to UNIFIL's Protection 100%/Naharnet

From the UNIFIL force commander to the people of south Lebanon
Friday, July 09, 2010 /Daily Star
Open letter
In the name of peace and the United Nations, of which all of us are proud members, let me enter into your lives and take some minutes from your valuable time in order to share with you my thoughts. I would like to express my feelings on what UNIFIL is doing in southern Lebanon, how we do it and why.
As a peacekeeper, as a soldier, as a man of peace, as a person who deeply loves this people, I would like to address some words to you in a spirit of total sincerity from the most profound depths of my heart. It is in our hearts that we share the strong human bond that has developed between us peacekeepers and you the people of south Lebanon through all these years of wars and destruction that we have suffered together, and it is in our hearts that we feel the pain of anything that goes contrary to this relationship we so cherish.
I want to speak directly to you, without intermediaries, so there are no misunderstandings, no manipulation, no misled interpretations, through this open letter reaching you through Lebanese media.
As you all know, some recent incidents have cast a shadow on the positive environment in which UNIFIL peacekeepers have been working, in close coordination with the Lebanese army, for your safety and security. We are fully aware of the problems military operations in civilian areas may cause to the people. Whereas we take all possible measures to mitigate inconveniences to the people, there may still be problems you may face. The way to deal with those problems is to discuss them directly with UNIFIL, as we have always done in order to find amicable solutions, not by obstructing the work of peacekeepers or by beating them. In that spirit, let me explain to you what UNIFIL is doing on the ground.
There are almost 12,000 soldiers and more than 1,000 civilians in UNIFIL. All of us give the best of our daily efforts to protect the lives and property of the population between the Litani river and the Blue Line. We are working alongside the Lebanese Armed Forces and the Lebanese government. We are fully aware that there has been a protracted and multifaceted conflict; we are aware that you have suffered too often the devastating effects of war. Therefore we came here from our distant countries at the invitation of the Lebanese government to perform specific tasks requested by the government and authorized by the UN Security Council with the aim of restoring security and stability for the people of south Lebanon.
UNIFIL forces are deployed in southern Lebanon to accomplish the mandate of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 (2006) after the war in 2006.
All UNIFIL personnel operate under my command and they have received strict orders to undertake the assigned mandate with full respect for the culture and traditions of the population that is hosting us; full respect for private property; full respect for the privacy of daily life in the streets of the villages; full respect for the desire of the population not to be photographed.
Our soldiers have received clear orders not to take pictures unless absolutely necessary for operational reasons; clear orders not to use tracked combat vehicles where there is possibility of damage to public or private infrastructure; clear orders to repair any damage so done and to talk to the local authorities and the communities to clear any misunderstanding that may arise from our actions. This is evident from the fact that the UNIFIL troops have shown utmost restraint when confronted by agitated civilians and always tried to explain to the people what they are doing and to defuse tensions with the help of the Lebanese Army.
Overall I expect the peacekeepers to act in a fully professional, objective and transparent manner and give their best in ensuring security and protection for the people, and accomplishing the mission without interfering in the daily lives of the Lebanese citizens. Above all, my troops are required to work in close coordination with the Lebanese Army and particularly when undertaking any sensitive tasks.
Those are my orders; those were also my orders when I was Sector East Commander in UNIFIL during December 2008 to April 2009. Let me tell you, I was really joyful during my first tenure in Lebanon; you won my heart to the point I promised to come back in any way, either as a tourist or, as is now the case, as UNIFIL Force Commander.
Today I am here again, with new responsibilities but with the same goal, which is to make possible that all men and women in UNIFIL stay alongside you; with our presence and what we represent in the world we contribute to your protection, providing stability to a part of Lebanon which has suffered a lot.
As your guests, the welfare we enjoy in our days here is a product of the efforts of all of you: you, the people of south Lebanon, the soldiers in the Lebanese Army, the leaders in the Lebanese government and in the municipalities where we operate, as well as the UNIFIL personnel. We can be proud to say that the last four years have been the calmest period southern Lebanon has seen in many years. It is not only me saying that, I have heard it from the Lebanese authorities too. And you can see it in the new infrastructure that is being built, as well as the new small businesses growing all along this area.
UNIFIL works in close cooperation with the Lebanese army and we ensure that all our activities are fully coordinated. This coordination does not imply that every one of the 350 daily patrols that UNIFIL does can be physically accompanied by the Lebanese Army. The Lebanese army has primary responsibility for security and law and order in the area. On its part, UNIFIL, with its significant capability, is patrolling the area of operations, monitoring the cessation of the hostilities, and assisting the Lebanese Army. UNIFIL is also conducting coordinated patrols and has set up collocated checkpoints with the Lebanese Army at key locations within its area of operations. Permanent checkpoints are established by the Lebanese Army to stop and search passing vehicles.
Implementation of Resolution 1701 and the operations of UNIFIL aim to ensure that stability prevails in this area and that the people of the south feel secure and protected to live their lives in peace and with a sense of future. Sometimes these activities may cause some disturbances, but in any case there will never be any hidden agenda behind those actions. Our presence in Lebanon, far from our homes, has no other purpose than helping you to live in peace, contributing with all our means to your protection and the stability of the area. The peacekeepers always try to do their utmost to assist and protect you; at the same time UNIFIL’s existence would have been hard without your strong support.
With this letter I would like to ask for your understanding and continued collaboration to help us undertake our difficult mission. UNIFIL contingents have periodic rotations, lasting from four to 12 months, so it is always possible that some mistakes be made, but always with the best intention of ensuring security and stability in the area.
I hope this letter would be useful for a better understanding between us of our common objective, so we all can work together for peace in south Lebanon.
With my best wishes,
Major General Alberto Asarta Cuevas
UNIFIL Head of Mission and Force Commander

Geagea: South Incidents Damaged Government Reputation
Naharnet/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea said Friday that recent incidents in southern Lebanon between UNIFIL and villagers "damaged" the reputation of both the Lebanese Government and its economy. Geagea's remarks came following a meeting with a U.S. congress delegation which included Senators Robert Casey, John Shaheen and Edward Kaufman. U.S. Ambassador Michele Sison also attended the meeting in Maarab. Beirut, 09 Jul 10,

Sarkozy: Nasrallah's Rejection of Court Ruling against Hizbullah is Not Acceptable
Naharnet/French President Nicolas Sarkozy has reportedly warned that France will not accept Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's rejection of an International Court ruling against Hizbullah.
As-Safir newspaper on Friday quoted a French source as saying that Prime Minister Saad Hariri had informed Sarkozy during a previous visit of Nasrallah's rejection to any STL ruling against Hizbullah members. "Any refusal by Nasrallah of a court ruling is unacceptable," the source quoted Sarkozy as warning. Beirut, 09 Jul 10,

Paris Reportedly Mulling to Give Fresh Impetus to UNIFIL Intervention Force
Naharnet/France is mulling to give new impetus to its special intervention force in UNIFIL and merge several of its units by the end of September, As Safir daily reported Friday.
The newspaper quoted the spokesman of the French army's chief of staff, Christophe Prazuck, as saying that UNIFIL wants "to consolidate the intervention force but the decision hasn't been taken yet.""We are waiting for answers from the U.N. leadership," he said. A former high-ranking French officer in UNIFIL said the decision comes due to the Lebanese army's low level of operations in the south and the drop in coordination levels between the two sides. The officer also said that Lebanon hasn't respected previous promises to keep 15,000 troops in the area south of the Litani to help U.N. peacekeepers in their operations. He told As Safir that there are now only 6,000 Lebanese soldiers in the south. Beirut, 09 Jul 10, 08:23

Williams: Reinforcing LAF Presence in South Crucial in Implementation of 1701
Naharnet/U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Michael Williams said Thursday that consolidation of the Lebanese army deployment in the south was crucial in moving forward with the implementation of Security Council resolution 1710.
Following talks with Foreign Minister Ali al-Shami, Williams hoped the situation in the south "has now calmed down and that there will be no recurrence of such incidents."
He welcomed cabinet's announcement on Thursday that it would reinforce the presence of the Lebanese Armed Forces in the south, describing it as "a positive development."
"I believe this is a very important element in moving forward with the implementation of 1701."
Williams stressed that the presence of U.N. peacekeepers in the south had been a cornerstone of 1701 and of the stability that has prevailed in the region since the 2006 war between Israel and Hizbullah."UNIFIL's freedom of movement is a critical element for it to discharge its mandate and it must be fully respected," he said, adding that this means cooperation and information sharing with the army "though not necessarily activities can only be carried out jointly." "I think we all agree that the excellent cooperation between UNIFIL and the LAF has been the backbone of the stability that has prevailed in the south, and we must do all we can to maintain and to enhance it," he said. Asked about a Security Council session scheduled to be held on Friday, Williams said the Council "will reflect on the events of last week but obviously they will be informed by the decisions of the Council of Ministers here in Beirut and I think this will certainly assist the Council in its discussions." Whether he thought that the latest skirmishes in the south were going to affect the renewal of UNIFIL's mandate, he said: "I certainly hope not and of course the renewal of the UNIFIL mandate is some way off, it's not until the end of August.""But I think it is very important that there be no recurrence of events such as happened last week and it is important that UNIFIL maintain its freedom of movement," he added. Beirut, 09 Jul 10, 14:38

Cabinet Sorry over South Incidents, Underlines Devotion to UNIFIL
Naharnet/Cabinet expressed regret over the incidents between U.N. peacekeepers and villagers in south Lebanon underling its devotion to UNIFIL and pledging commitment to 1701.
A Cabinet statement at the end of the meeting held at Baabda Palace late Thursday voiced "concern over the safety of UNIFIL."Cabinet also stressed its keenness to cement the good ties between UNIFIL and the Lebanese state. "The Council of Ministers underlined the role played by these forces (UNIFIL) in accordance with Resolution 1701 and within the rules agreed upon for the best interest of Lebanon and its sovereignty and independence," said a statement read by Information Minister Tareq Mitri. Beirut, 09 Jul 10, 08:00

Britain Removes Ambassador's Blog Praising Fadlallah
Naharnet/The British government said Friday it has taken down a blog posting by its ambassador to Lebanon praising late Shiite cleric Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, saying her views clashed with official policy. Ambassador Frances Guy wrote an obituary to Grand Ayatollah Fadlallah after his death on Sunday. A Foreign Office spokesman said the blog had been removed because it expressed a "personal view" on the cleric which did not reflect Britain's "disagreements" with him, particularly his attitude to Israel. Entitled "The Passing of Decent Men", Guy's blog described Fadlallah as the politician in Lebanon she enjoyed meeting the most. "When you visited him you could be sure of a real debate, a respectful argument and you knew you would leave his presence feeling a better person," she wrote on her official Foreign Office blog. "That for me is the real effect of a true man of religion; leaving an impact on everyone he meets, no matter what their faith." Mourning his death, the ambassador said: "Lebanon is a lesser place the day after but his absence will be felt well beyond Lebanon's shores."
She added: "The world needs more men like him willing to reach out across faiths, acknowledging the reality of the modern world and daring to confront old constraints. May he rest in peace." A Foreign Office spokesman said: "The ambassador expressed a personal view on Sheik Sayyed Fadlallah, describing the man as she knew him. This did not fully reflect HMG (government) policy and the blog has been taken down. "While we welcomed his progressive views on women's rights and interfaith dialogue, we also had profound disagreements -- especially over his statements advocating attacks on Israel." Fadlallah was a top authority in Shiite Islam and many followers revered him for his moderate social views, openness and pragmatism. But he was also a fiery critic of the United States and Israel and was an advocate of suicide attacks as a means of fighting the Jewish state's occupation of Arab land. Guy is not the first person to get in trouble over Fadlallah's death -- a senior editor for U.S. television network CNN left her job this week after sending a message on Twitter praising him.(AFP)
Beirut, 09 Jul 10,

LF Responds to Case of 4 Abducted Diplomats: We were the First to Abandon our Military Structure
Naharnet/The Lebanese Forces press office asserted Friday that some sides brought up the issue of the four abducted Iranian diplomats in a new attempt to target the LF after "they ran out of other fabrications."It said in a statement: "Their main purpose for bringing up such an issue, blowing it out of proportion, and taking it out of context is to target one group of Lebanese whose political views differ from theirs."It stressed that the Lebanese civil war did not revolve around the abduction of the diplomats, but a number of other assaults took place against ambassadors, diplomats and other foreign figures, "and the identity of the perpetrators behind them is known to all."It added that the Lebanese Forces "is a political party that conducts legitimate political and social work and it was the first to abandon its military structure and dismantle its militia according to the Taif Accord, which is what some Iranian-backed sides still refuse to do till this day."The statement addressed the Iranian embassy in Lebanon urging it to examine investigations conducted by the Lebanese government and evidence acquired by the German authorities in this case "which the embassy is well aware of." Beirut, 09 Jul 10, 16:20

Qassem Marking July War Anniversary: Israel Would Suffer Big Loss in Any Future Attack
Naharnet/Hizbullah's number two, Sheikh Naim Qassem, on Friday warned of a "big loss" for Israel in any future assault on Lebanon. "If the result of the July war was a failure to the Israelis, then Israel would suffer a big loss in its next aggression," Qassem said in an interview with Syria Satellite Channel. The Hizbullah deputy secretary general said he believed the national unity government in Lebanon has achieved a "very important goal -- political stability and security." Qassem called for raising the issue of ongoing Israeli violations against Lebanon in the U.N. Security Council. Beirut, 09 Jul 10,

Salam: I Will Stress that We Hold Onto UNIFIL's Role Based on Current Rules of Engagement
Naharnet/Lebanon's permanent representative to the U.N. Ambassador Nawaf Salam said a Security Council session scheduled to be held on Friday to discuss the situation of UNIFIL will be consultative. Salam told al-Mustaqbal newspaper "all member states will express their point of view" on the latest skirmishes between southerners and U.N. peacekeepers. He said he will stress in his statement that "Lebanon holds onto the implementation of (Security Council) resolution 1701 and UNIFIL's role in its current mission and rules of engagement."
Beirut, 09 Jul 10,

UNIFIL tries to calm anger over southern maneuvers
Peacekeepers looks to improve relations with villagers
By Patrick Galey and Mohammed Zaatari
Daily Star staff/Friday, July 09, 2010
BEIRUT/TIBNIN: The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) sought to dampen anger from civilians over recent military maneuvers, with leading force officials meeting representatives of southern towns to discuss the fallout from anti-UNIFIL protests. UNIFIL Force Commander Major-General Alberto Asarta Cuevas chaired a session which dealt with promoting the peacekeeping unit’s coordination with the Lebanese Army and improve relations with villagers. Deputy head of Lebanese Army Intelligence Services Abbas Ibrahim, UNIFIL Commander West Section General Giuseppe Nicholas Tata and Lebanese Army Commander in the South Khalil Mssan were present at the meeting in Tibnin, along with mayors and muhktars from villages south of the Litani River. The meeting was held amid the backdrop of two incidents in which UNIFIL peacekeepers were attacked by angry residents, who blocked patrol routes and hurled stones, injuring at least three soldiers.
The altercations prompted a flurry of reactions from Lebanese and international figures and the Security Council will discuss developments on Friday. Mohammad Raad, the head of Hizbullah’s parliamentary bloc, said some troops were taking orders from their own countries, not UNIFIL, an accusation stridently denied by the force’s Spokesperson on Thursday.
“Such speculations are not only totally unfounded, but also detrimental to the efforts of UNIFIL and the Lebanese Army in maintaining the unprecedented level of security that has been achieved in south Lebanon over the last four years,” Neeraj Singh responded to a question from the National News Agency (NNA). “This kind of talk is totally contrary to the way UNIFIL works under a singular command for the entire mission. All the troops deployed with UNIFIL, coming from 31 countries, are under UN command.”
Cuevas himself took the unusual step of issuing an open letter, addressed to southern residents, outlining his vision for his time at the head of the force.
“Some recent incidents have cast a shadow on the positive environment in which UNIFIL peacekeepers have been working, in close coordination with the Lebanese army, for your safety and security,” Cuevas wrote. “We are fully aware of the problems military operations in civilian areas may cause to the people.
“The way to deal with those problems is to discuss them directly with UNIFIL, as we have always done in order to find amicable solutions, not by obstructing the work of peacekeepers or by beating them.” Prime Minister Saad Hariri met with Ambassadors of Spain, France and Italy – all of whom head diplomatic missions from countries contributing large numbers to UNIFIL – at the Grand Serail, and discussed the need for the force to cooperate fully with the Lebanese Army. “We discussed with Hariri several issues and the stance was clear: the mission of UNIFIL will continue in the best circumstances,” Italian Ambassador Gabrielle Checchia told reporters after the meeting.
“We give the government and its prime minister our confidence to solve all problems that might arise concerning this subject. “We see that coordination is excellent and effective between the contributing countries in UNIFIL and between them and the Lebanese Army,” Checchia added. Hariri also met with the United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon Michael Williams, as well as Cuevas. Williams, following discussions with Hizbullah’s head of international relations Ammar Moussawi, stressed the need to deal with the future of UNIFIL’s presence in Lebanon. “I think we agreed in our discussions that it was important to move forward now and that there should be no recurrence of the incidents that have taken place,” Williams told reporters. “[I] underlined the importance of the coordination between UNIFIL and the Lebanese Armed Forces and we also agreed on the importance of freedom of movement for UNIFIL.” A number of politicians continued to comment on the role of UNIFIL on Thursday. President Michel Sleiman met with Cuevas and stated: “UNIFIL’s presence is necessary and its role is foremost in implementing Resolution 1701.” Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, following a meeting with Cuevas, said that anti-UNIFIL protests were now finished. “What happened recently in the South has been overcome,” the NNA quoted Berri as saying.

HRW wants charges against Sleiman critics to be dropped
By The Daily Star /Friday, July 09, 2010
BEIRUT: A leading civil liberty group called on Thursday for authorities to drop criminal charges against three men for posting comments criticizing Lebanese President Michel Sleiman on Facebook. Human Rights Watch (HRW) said that the charges constituted a violation of Lebanese freedom of speech and asked the government to repeal penal code provisions that treated libel and defamation as indictable offenses.
“These charges undermine Lebanon’s reputation as the country with the greatest tolerance for free expression in the Arab world,” said Nadim Houry, Beirut director at HRW. “Using criminal laws to censor Lebanese citizens is an embarrassing step in the wrong direction for the government.”
The “technology group” of the Internal Security Forces (ISF) arrested and detained Naim Hanna, Antoine Ramia and Cherbel Kassab in June for posting insulting comments on a page entitled “We don’t want a hypocrite at the helm of the presidency,” which featured comments insulting Sleiman. The three were released on June 2 but are set to stand trial before a judge.
HRW attacked the law, which makes it an offense to criticize the President in Lebanon. “Laws that allow imprisonment in response to criticism of individuals or state officials are incompatible with Lebanon’s international obligations to protect freedom of expression,” the group said in a statement. “Such laws create an environment that stifles free expression, and the penalties they impose are neither necessary nor proportionate to the violations they are meant to deter.” HRW claimed that the laws referring to “libel,” “defamation,” and “insult” were not sufficiently clearly defined. “Such vague and broadly worded provisions can be used – as these charges demonstrate – to quell criticism of the actions of policies of government officials,” the statement continued. The three men’s arrests came after political blogger Khader Salameh was detained for posting articles on his website which seemed to be critical of the president. Following interrogation, no charges were brought but Salameh removed the articles after seeking legal advice. HRW said that interviews with two of the three accused uncovered that there were no signs of mistreatment during their detention. Judicial sources told The Daily Star that the decision to release the three men on bail came after a pardon issued from the president’s office and Houry warned against future similar incidents. “Lebanon should not go back to the days where people get detained or harassed for things they say or write,” she said. “The only way to do that is to drop the charges against these youths and remove these provisions from its criminal code.”

Fadlallah and a forgotten liberal
Michael Young, July 9, 2010
http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=184491
Egyptian academic Nasr Hamed Abu Zeid was forced into exile and ordered to divorce his wife after being judged to be an apostate for advocating an interpretive approach to the Quran. He died on July 5 with little mention. (AFP photo/STR)
The death of Sayyed Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah brought on a veritable riptide of praise for the departed cleric from all quarters. Whatever one thinks of Fadlallah – and he was not someone easily encapsulated in a sound bite – the reaction was a trifle odd, only underscoring the difficulties faced by Arab liberals.
Why was the effusiveness odd? Because what made Fadlallah interesting, namely his innovative views on Islamic doctrine (for example his sanctioning of therapeutic cloning), were likely unknown to most of those extolling his qualities; while the views he was known for – his approval of suicide bombings and his antagonism toward Israel and the United States – were not particularly original, at least in revealing a man at stimulating odds with his environment.
You have to admire, for example, the acrobatics of elision that Britain’s ambassador in Beirut, Frances Guy, engaged in when writing this passage on her blog: “When you visited [Fadlallah] you could be sure of a real debate, a respectful argument and you knew you would leave his presence feeling a better person… Lebanon is a lesser place the day after but his absence will be felt well beyond Lebanon’s shores… The world needs more men like him willing to reach out across faiths, acknowledging the reality of the modern world and daring to confront old constraints. May he rest in peace.” (As the blog post provoked mounting criticism in numerous Western media outlets, the British Embassy in Beirut took it off the website.)
My friend and colleague Rami Khouri was equally generous in an article penned for the Daily Star. He argued that Fadlallah’s greatest achievement “was to provide a living example of the combination of the best qualities that any Arab or Muslim could aspire to in this era of great mediocrity, corruption, materialism, mindless violence and abuse of power throughout much of the Arab world. Fadlallah was – as Americans are fond of saying of sports figures who are talented, smart, humble, generous and personable – ‘the complete package.’”
In the United States, CNN’s Middle East editor, Octavia Nasr, paid a steep price for putting out a complimentary tweet on Fadlallah after news of his death. She had announced: “Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah… One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.” Earlier this week she was fired by the company despite having issued a statement clarifying her views, which included a compulsory denunciation of his endorsement of suicide attacks.
These reactions were less suggestive than those from Iran and from within the Lebanese Shia community pointing to Fadlallah’s contentious relationships with Tehran and with Hezbollah. But in their own way they did tell us something quite disturbing, and we can accentuate that something by noting the low-key response, especially among Westerners and Westernized Arab liberals, to the death on Monday of the Egyptian scholar of Islam Nasr Hamed Abu Zeid.
In 1995, Abu Zeid made headlines when the Cairo Court of Appeals ruled in favor of a plaintiff who sought to forcibly divorce him from his wife, on the grounds that he was an apostate. What had angered Abu Zeid’s detractors was that he advocated an interpretive approach to the Quran, treating it as a text worthy of discussion, against a more rigid approach that deals with the holy book as the inviolable word of God. The Egyptian Islamic Jihad called for Abu Zeid to be killed, and because of the increasingly intimidating atmosphere prevailing in Egypt he left the country, eventually resettling in Holland.
What the tributes to Fadlallah show us, against the backdrop of the relative silence surrounding Abu Zeid’s death throughout the Middle East, is that things are out of kilter when it comes to liberalism in the region. An essentially conservative cleric has been played up as the vanguard of progressiveness and dialogue, while a scholar who sought to introduce a freethinking outlook toward religion, who had to go into exile to escape possible assassination, departed from this world with little comment – certainly not from the British ambassador to Egypt, Dominic Asquith, who also hosts a personal embassy blog.
Who is guilty of this state of affairs? Spread the blame around. When those who shape Arab opinion – foreign representatives and Arab journalists and academics – can’t get their priorities straight, don’t expect others to get theirs straight either. Fadlallah was a fascinating individual, worthy of study and, at times, esteem. But in reading the passages used to describe him, you get a powerful sense that the accolades were really directed at an imagined Fadlallah, the product of the authors’ yearning to conjure up a tolerant Islam in clerical garb.
That’s where the problem lies. Why should diplomats and publicists strive so hard to seek the higher liberal virtues, above all dialogue and broadmindedness, in what is among the most insular recesses of Muslim societies, the clergy, while habitually ignoring those Arabs who display such virtues in their everyday life – in their scholarship, lifestyle or profession? Are the clerics and the Muslim traditionalists perceived as more authentic? Does giving rare courageous liberals their due mean taking something away from the Arab world in general, which so many Westerners and Westernized Arabs want to believe in, usually against the West, the source of imperialisms past?
These questions merit an answer, if only so that the Nasr Hamed Abu Zeids of this world are left with more choices than banishment.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Beirut. His book, The Ghosts of Martyrs Square: An Eyewitness Account of Lebanon’s Life Struggle (Simon & Schuster), has just been published.

Ghazi Aridi
July 9, 2010
On July 8, the Lebanese National News Agency carried the following report:
Minister of Transportation and Public Works Ghazi al-Aridi indicated that “any escalation with UNIFIL troops in South Lebanon and any mismanagement of this file will have negative repercussions on Lebanon. He stated: “Things are heading toward total agreement and full coordination between the army and UNIFIL,” holding “the Israeli enemy primarily responsible for what is happening in the South due to its non-commitment to Resolution 1701… Israel is a terrorist state which is eluding its commitments and since 2006 has never wished to implement Resolution 1701 since. Moreover, it is proceeding with its violations, attacks, breaches, occupation of the Shebaa Farms, Al-Ghajar and the Kfar Shouba hills while threatening and kidnapping citizens on a daily basis, violating Lebanese airspace, planting espionage and assassination cells inside Lebanese territories, threatening Lebanese citizens and the head of the Lebanese government to strike facilities and infrastructure. Now, it wants to violate our territorial waters and the oil wealth in our sea.
“In addition to that, the Israeli enemy neither wants international troops in the South nor Resolution 1701 because it was counting on the success of its attack in 2006 with clear support from the United States. Resolution 1701 related to the presence of international forces in the South is in our own interest and we should know how to deal with it so that the picture is not toppled and so that Israel does not appear to be right and Lebanon wrong; especially since Israel has now restored the best relations with the current American administration which announced its full support to it and protection on the nuclear issue.”
Asked whether or not the works were causing the traffic crisis, Al-Aridi assured: “The traffic crisis must be handled but until now no solution has been reached,” indicating that “in some regions, there is traffic but there are no works. This crisis has several causes, namely in regard to the ways drivers’ licenses are being issued, the quality of cars, chaos and indiscipline, non-respect of laws, road signals and parking places and the multitude of buses and mini-vans that do not stay in the zones allocated for them.
“Moreover, there is overall chaos due to the lack of education and absence of a civil culture. We also have problems related to the state of the roads and the absence of planning, in addition to reluctance on the political level. Today for example, the Arab Highway works are ongoing from the Sayyad roundabout to Masnah. This project was drawn up at the beginning of the nineties. Small parts of it were implemented while the rest was left out for intertwining political and financial reasons and disputes. The implementation cost of the remaining part today equals the cost of the entire project had it been implemented at the time. Therefore, there must be a comprehensive vision starting with the handling of management issues.
“There is also another problem causing traffic jams related to a very positive factor, i.e. the Beirut Port which is considered to be among the most active in the region. Growth is multiplying and containers are up to seven-storey high. We have already launched a project to expand it and work on this $130 million project has started. However, the unloading of the cargos and their transportation to the different regions in hundreds of trucks exiting the port will definitely cause a crisis… the railway project between Tripoli and Al-Aboudiya [Lebanese northern border with Syria] is also frozen, at a time when it could have limited traffic between Beirut and Tripoli by securing the transfer of the cargos from the Tripoli port – transit - toward the Arab countries. The project’s cost is of around $35 million and there is nothing more important or vital than it in regard to the traffic crisis...
“There are possible solutions but there should firstly be an initiative respected by everyone to handle this situation in a new way, in order to discuss all the proposals and ideas and come up with a strategic vision for traffic and transportation in Lebanon.”

Sfeir: Lebanon 'small and weak,' Israeli enemy 'huge'
By The Daily Star /Friday, July 09, 2010
BEIRUT: Lebanon is a small and weak state compared to Israeli military capabilities, said Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir on Thursday.
Speaking to members of the media working from the patriarchate’s summer residence in the village of Diman, Sfeir called for overcoming recent clashes between the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and southerners.
“We should overcome what happened in the south and work on solving it because Lebanon is a small and weak state compared to huge Israeli military capabilities,” said Sfeir.
“UNIFIL has come to the south to protect Lebanese from the Israeli enemy and from other sides,” he added. Recent clashes between residents of south Lebanon and peacekeeping forces have raised concerns over a potential disruption of the four-year status quo prevailing in the south after UNIFIL was beefed in the wake of summer 2006 war with Israel.
Sfeir pressed for unity and called for overcoming internal disputes and working on addressing people’s concerns in all fields.
Also, Sfeir received at his summer residence a delegation of Lebanese expatriates from Australia, during which he urged all expatriates to “always connect with their mother land.”
Sfeir also discussed with Minister of State Michel Pharaon recent developments in the south and the implementation of Resolution 1701 along with the issue of Palestinian refugees.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Pharaon said “there is a group in Israel along with other groups in and outside Lebanon that do not want the peacekeeping forces to stay in Lebanon.” “They do not even want a president and a Cabinet to manage the country’s affairs,” he said, adding that such parties wanted the south to become an “open battlefield that shakes following any regional event.” Pharaon said that problems with UNIFIL should be addressed via the ministries of defense and foreign affairs, and through relations with the Security Council.
Concerning proposals to provide Palestinian refugees with civil rights, the minister called for distancing the issue from political disputes. He called for implementing agreements that have been reached during National Dialogue sessions to “encourage the government to take care of humanitarian, economic and living conditions of Palestinians.”
“The agreement on controlling arms has yet to be implemented.” – The Daily Star

Lebanese Army to boost troop numbers in south
By Nafez Kawas /Daily Star staff
Friday, July 09, 2010
BEIRUT: Lebanon will send 3,000 to 5,000 army soldiers to boost its forces in south Lebanon after two incidents pitted peacekeeping forces against residents, a well-informed source told The Daily Star. The source said Defense Minister Elias Murr informed the Cabinet of his decision during Thursday’s session at Baabda Presidential palace. According to the source, Murr said his decision neither required Cabinet approval nor had it come at the request of the United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL). The Cabinet’s decision followed criticism by Hizbullah and southern residents of UNIFIL for undertaking missions inside “alleys of southern towns” independently from the Lebanese Army.
Recent clashes between UNIFIL and residents left three peacekeepers injured. Asked to comment on remarks by Israeli Army Commander Gabi Ashkenazi, Murr said before entering the Cabinet session that “what matters to us is our domestic front” as he expressed his readiness to boost the number of Lebanese Army soldiers to meet needs. Murr added that “the situation in south Lebanon will remain calm.” “As much as we are keen on UNIFIL’s mission on Lebanese territory, we are also keen that the Lebanese Army accompanies that mission to avoid incidents,” Murr said Wednesday after meeting French, German and Italian envoys to Lebanon. On another note, the Cabinet expressed its condolences to the Lebanese and to Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah’s family.

Qabbani urges boosting cooperation with UNIFIL
By The Daily Star /Friday, July 09, 2010
BEIRUT: Peacekeeping forces are the friends of Lebanon and reflect the sincerity of international interest in Lebanon’s safety and security, Grand Mufti Mohammad Rashid Qabbani said on Thursday. In a letter he issued to mark the Islamic occasion of Israa and Maaraj, Qabbani raised concern over recent clashes between the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and southerners, as he called for enhancing cooperation between the two for the sake of Lebanon and the Lebanese. In recent weeks, scuffles broke out between peacekeepers and southern residents, one of which left at least three peacekeepers injured as villagers accosted troops, confiscated weapons and hurled stones last week in the south. Qabbani rejected any debate over the role of international peacekeepers in Lebanon, reiterating his commitment to UN Security Council Resolution 1701. The statement described the Lebanese Army as the “pillar of the nation and the first defender of its sovereignty along with safety and unity of its territories.” The senior cleric voiced support for the Palestinian people right to liberate “their nation Palestine from the foreign Zionist occupier.” – The Daily Star

IDF: Hizbullah Holing Up Near Schools, Hospitals Again
by Gil Ronen/Arutz Sheva
Hizbullah is placing military positions, weapons and explosive charges next to schools and hospitals in southern Lebanon, a senior IDF source said Wednesday. The IDF may have to take action against these targets in case of hostilities with Hizbullah, and has said as much to the UN force in southern Lebanon (UNIFIL).
An officer in the IDF Northern Command said that Hizbullah is digging tunnels, preparing communications infrastructure and making other preparations for war. Hizbullah has about 40,000 rockets and about 10,000 militiamen scattered in about 160 villages in southern Lebanon. Inside each of these villages, the terror militia has an infrastructure that includes weapons, control centers, mines and other explosives, all of which are located very short distances away from population centers, schools and hospitals. IDF sources gave conflicting estimates regarding Hizbullah's warlike intentions. While one source said the militia is not showing signs that it is about to attack, the Commander of the Regional Brigade in northern Israel, Col. Ronen Morali, said Hizbullah is steadily inching toward the Israeli border. “The organization has the will to penetrate and mount an attack, against communities and against IDF soldiers,” Morali said. “It is clear that the Hizbullah organization wants to carry out a terror strike or a penetration, beyond the use of gunfire, light arms or rockets.”Morali said that the IDF is working in full cooperation with UNIFIL and that the UN soldiers have increased their presence and “are doing a good job.” The Lebanese Army has also deployed three brigades in southern Lebanon in order to improve its control over the region, he said. A favored tactic of terror militias Hamas and Hizbullah is to attack Israel from within population centers, thus luring Israeli forces into inadvertently causing civilian casualties among the Arab noncombatants. Macabre photographs of dead children are then circulated in the world as proof of Israel's supposed inhumanity. More than any other country that causes civilian casualties in war, Israel regularly apologizes for such events.

Hezbollah grows up
Latest update 08:22 09.07.10
Four years after the Second Lebanon War, the Shi'ite group has managed to rebuild its military capabilities across from Israel's northern frontier. Still, most sources say it's not interested in another round of fighting.
By Avi Issacharoff /Haaretz
Four years after the Second Lebanon War, Hezbollah can credit itself with yet another achievement in its campaign against Israel: southern Lebanon is once again in its hands. According to various assessments, the Shi'ite organization has rebuilt its military capabilities north of the Litani River, where it has established a network of missile launchers any army in the world would be proud to possess. Furthermore, it has repaired the infrastructure of the Shi'ite villages south of the Litani that were severely hit in the war.
The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, which was deployed to southern Lebanon in 2006 in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1701 - passed at the end of the war - was supposed to prevent such activity. In recent months, however, UNIFIL has been harassed by Shi'ite villagers in the southern part of the country who are apparently acting on Hezbollah's orders. The international peacekeeping force, particularly its French battalion, has been repeatedly humiliated by the local population. Villagers have hurled stones and eggs at them, and have even seized soldiers' weapons. UNIFIL's commander, Maj. Gen. Alberto Asarta Cuevas, this week asked the Lebanese government to protect his troops.
The confrontation Hezbollah initiated with the French contingent has renewed the internal debate in Lebanon - between the Shi'ite organization and the Al-Mustaqbal camp headed by Lebanese Prime Minister Said Hariri (and thought to be under French patronage ). While Hezbollah hinted that UNIFIL's French battalion is serving "foreign" (namely, Israeli ) interests, Hariri flew to Paris to conciliate President Nicolas Sarkozy and clarify that Lebanon is interested in keeping French troops on its soil.
'Not a knockout blow'
Thus, one of Israel's chief accomplishments in the Second Lebanon War - distancing Hezbollah from its northern frontier - is slowly vanishing. The Shi'ite organization, which was dealt a severe blow in the summer of 2006, has recovered at an impressive rate in the military, civilian and political spheres.
"It was not a knockout blow, but it was sufficiently painful to force Hezbollah to grow up," says Prof. Eyal Zisser, an expert on Syria and Lebanon, the director of Tel Aviv University's Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, and the university's dean of humanities.
"Since the war, the organization has been presenting a more controlled, a more restrained, stance," he says. "It's the kind of experience that makes you or breaks you. On the other hand, its scars from the war will lead it to think many times over before it tries to face off with Israel again."
In the last Lebanese parliamentary elections, in 2009, Hezbollah's political standing changed very little. Initially its leaders admitted defeat, but the organization actually lost only one seat when compared to the previous elections, while its Christian partner in the anti-West camp, former army chief Michel Aoun, increased his political strength and clarified that Lebanon's Maronites support Hezbollah.
Nevertheless, the group is limited by Lebanon's electoral system as the Shi'ites in that country are allocated a maximum of 27 parliamentary seats. Perhaps this explains why Hezbollah is steadily tightening its military foothold in Lebanon. The Lebanese army, which receives American assistance, avoids clashing with Hezbollah, which is also interested in maintaining "industrial peace" with the army.
For the moment, at least - despite the unprecedented rate at which it is arming itself - Hezbollah apparently is not looking for another round of fighting with Israel, preferring instead to focus on a gradual takeover of Lebanon. Still, it should be recalled that in early July 2006, a few days before the war broke out, the assessment in Lebanon was that Hezbollah was not interested in a confrontation with Israel.
The death of Grand Ayatollah Fadlallah
Last Sunday, Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah died in Beirut at the age of 75. One of the most important Shi'ite religious figures in the Muslim world, Fadlallah was regarded as one of Hezbollah's founders and as its spiritual leader in the 1980s. He was also one of the most fascinating Shi'ite religious leaders in the modern world. Although his religious rulings were a model for emulation for hundreds of thousands of followers, they also led to clashes with the Shi'ite religious institutions in Iran.
Born in 1935 in Najaf, Iraq, his father was a native of Lebanon. Fadlallah wrote poetry until the age of 12, when he began attending one of the city's Shi'ite madrassas (religious schools ). In 1966 he moved to Lebanon, where he engaged in religious studies as well as social welfare work among the Shi'ite community.
Displaying a marked interest in the status of women in Muslim society, Fadlallah argued that lack of equality between husband and wife ran counter to the Koran. In addition, he held relatively progressive views on abortions, maintaining that the procedure could be performed at any stage in the pregnancy if the fetus was endangering the mother's health.
On the topic of men doing household chores, Fadlallah wrote that the "social culture of ignorance, not Islam, is the source of the argument that a man humiliates himself if he does household chores." He even explained that Ali, regarded by Shi'ite Muslims as the first imam, used to help his wife Fatima (the prophet Mohammed's daughter ) with housework and that, when the prophet asked her to bake bread, Ali himself would clean the house and gather firewood.
Fadlallah also encouraged women to study Islamic religious law, to provide commentary on religious texts and to discuss such matters even with men.
While Fadlallah expressed total support for the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979, he challenged the authority of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his entourage, and repeatedly warned the members of the Islamic movement to beware of charismatic leaders (specifically mentioning Khomeini in that context ) whose personalities overshadow the message they are supposed to be conveying to their public. In 1982, he began setting up a network of social service agencies in Lebanon, as an emissary of his spiritual mentor and role model, Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Abul-Qassim al-Khoei, whom he regarded as the Marja al-Taqlid (a religious authority to be followed and emulated ) - despite the fact that Hezbollah and Iran considered Khomeini to be the Marja al-Taqlid.
Face-off with Iran and Hezbollah
Following Khomeini's death in 1989, the question of who would inherit the mantle of the Marja al-Taqlid in the Shi'ite world took on ever-increasing urgency. Fadlallah regarded Grand Ayatollah al-Khoei as his Marja al-Taqlid, as did many other people in the Shi'ite world. With al-Khoei's death in 1993, Grand Ayatollah Golpayegani of Iran became Fadlallah's Marja al-Taqlid. It was after Golpayegani died that the crisis between Fadlallah, Hezbollah and Iran really began to play out more openly.
Tehran proclaimed Ayatollah Sheikh Mohsen Araki, who was over 100 years old at the time, as the Shi'ite Marja al-Taqlid - a move intended to pave the way for the ascension of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (following Araki's death ). Fadlallah, however, announced his own support for Ayatollah Sistani, who at the time resided in Najaf.
At that point, Hezbollah declared its backing for Tehran's position and announced that its members must support Araki and must not regard anyone else as the Marja al-Taqlid. Araki died in December 1994; three months later, Iran declared Khamenei's appointment to that senior post.
Fadlallah argued that Iran was simply trying to bolster its own political-religious position among the Muslim Shi'ites; he continued to support Sistani, and as a result was severely criticized by other Shi'ite religious leaders. His mosque was banned and, on one occasion, shots were fired at his car.
Although he later reconciled with Hezbollah leaders, Fadlallah still kept his distance from them. Refusing to recognize Iran's leadership in the Shi'ite world, he maintained his religious autonomy and chose his own unique political path.

The IDF fights back
By JERUSALEM POST EDITORIAL STAFF
07/09/2010 08:16
Israel warns world of Hizbullah's strategy.
Talkbacks (2)
The IDF this week declassified sensitive intelligence information on Hizbullah’s rearmament campaign in south Lebanon. Detailed aerial photos, videos and maps show how the terrorist organization is again ruthlessly preparing to use Lebanese civilians as human shields, as exemplified by its deployment in one Shi’ite village – el-Khiam – located just 4 kilometers from the Israeli border. There, Hizbullah has embedded its weapon caches, bunkers, command-and-control centers and missile stockpiles – and stationed its armed personnel – in and alongside hospitals, mosques, schools and homes.
By making this sensitive information public, Israel runs the risk of revealing its intelligence-gathering procedures and giving Hizbullah the opportunity to adapt. Nevertheless, that risk was taken, as part of a laudable new IDF strategy geared toward confronting Israel’s rapidly changing military challenges.
In the past, wars were fought by uniformed soldiers on battlefields often far from civilian population centers.
Israel consistently prevailed in these conventional conflicts against Arab states and against the Palestinian militias that sought to destroy the Jewish state, from the 1948 War of Independence and through to the 1973 Yom Kippur War.
Realizing they were unable to defeat Israel in this way, Palestinians in south Lebanon and in Gaza, and their supporters, shifted first to the strategy of terrorism, and more recently, with Iranian inspiration, have gradually perfected an asymmetrical form of violence.
Cynically manipulating the instinctive aversion to the death of noncombatants, and exploiting a lacuna in outdated international law formulated when conventional wars were the only reality, Hizbullah and Hamas terrorists place themselves and their weapons in the heart of populated residential areas and launch rocket fire from there against Israel’s civilian population. When Israel is forced to come to the defense of its citizens, noncombatants on the enemy side, cynically placed in the line of fire by Hamas and Hizbullah, are unfortunately killed.
International criticism to date, based on the anachronistic Fourth Geneva Convention, has largely singled out Israel, the party responding to attack, for the ostensibly disproportionate killing of non-combatants. The result is castigation in the shape, for instance, of the Goldstone Report, which accused Israel of committing war crimes during Operation Cast Lead. In this distorted moral climate, Israel is gradually losing the legitimacy to defend itself – being expected, apparently, to indefinitely absorb civilian losses and live under constant threat of missile attacks from both Gaza and Lebanon, two fronts where it dismantled its presence in “occupied” territory and withdrew to borders demarcated by the international community.
THIS WEEK’S release of information shows Israel trying a new tactic. When pictures of war casualties in Lebanon or Gaza are relayed across the world and Israel is accused of disproportionality, few have been willing to listen to Israeli efforts at explaining the context. Now, Israel is adopting a preemptive approach – warning the world, ahead of a feared new conflict, of Hizbullah’s diabolical strategy.
According to Prof. Asa Kasher, an expert on military ethics and the author of the IDF’s code of ethics, Hizbullah’s deployment among civilians is “a violation of the spirit of the Geneva Convention.” Israel’s hope is that its newly revealed information will gain international attention, and it will be appreciated that it is Hizbullah’s leaders who are violating international law, not the IDF.There is also the hope that the residents of the 160 southern Lebanese villages caught up in Hizbullah’s web may register their concern, one way or another, about living next to an arms cache or a missile stockpile now that they know that the IDF likely has it targeted.
In June, Brig.-Gen. Yossi Heiman, head of the IDF’s Strategic Planning Department, presented evidence of Hizbullah’s immoral deployment to UN officials. UNIFIL commander in Lebanon Maj.-Gen. Alberto Asarta Cuevas was also briefed.
With the UN dominated by states that are both hypercritical of Israel and unwilling or unable to make moral distinctions between democracies and dictatorships, it is highly unlikely that any significant public acknowledgement of Hizbullah’s moral abuses will be forthcoming.
But the IDF is right to make the effort. Indeed, it needs to broaden its outreach, and ensure that this information is made available as widely as possible – to the media, no matter how unenthusiastic the reception, and in smaller briefings for key politicians and officials.
Many of the same moral dilemmas faced by Israel in Gaza and in Lebanon are being faced by the US, Canada, Italy, Germany and other NATO armies in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Western armies should compare and share their counterinsurgency doctrines in an attempt to develop both strategies and a military ethics code to deal with the new ruthlessness they face.
Where south Lebanon is concerned, nobody can now say that they weren’t warned about the nature of the looming confrontation

Poland Hands Israeli Diplomat to Germany Over Dubai Killing
by Hana Levi Julian/Arutz Sheva
Poland has joined the growing list of nations around the world that have expelled Israeli diplomats, following the January assassination of a top Hamas terrorist, the founder of the group's military wing. Polish passports were not involved in the incident, in which false documents were used to cover the tracks of the team of 30 agents involved in the operation. Nevertheless, the European Union nation has decided to comply with an international arrest warrant issued by its fellow EU member, Germany, and agreed Wednesday to hand over an Israeli diplomat, rather than send him home to be tried in Jerusalem. Some 26 passports were found by Dubai police to have been falsified from names and places within Germany, Britain, Ireland, France and Australia. Most nations assumed that Israel's international Mossad intelligence agency carried out the hit that ended the life of Hamas weapons acquisition specialist Mahmoud al-Mahbouh in his room at the Al Bustan Rotana luxury hotel. Israel has since taken the heat for the assassination, with a growing list of countries expelling its diplomats over the incident.
Polish Judge Tomasz Calkiewicz decided Wednesday in Warsaw to extradite Uri Brodsky to Germany, where he will face allegations of illegally acquiring a German passport in 2009 for one of al-Mabhouh's assassins. Seven anti-terrorism police officers, heavily armed and wearing masks, brought Brodsky into the courtroom for the closed-door hearing. Brodsky's face was covered and he was handcuffed for the proceedings. The Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza had reported in mid-June that the Israeli Embassy in Warsaw had approached Polish authorities, requesting to postpone extradition procedures. Tourism Minister Stas Misezhnikov and Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz both urged Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk not to extradite Brodsky. “Poland needs to tell Germany that it is sending an Israeli citizen to Israel, and if there is some complaint against him, we have legal procedures [that] have great credibility with the international legal system,” Misezhnikov said after Germany issued the warrant for Brodsky's arrest several weeks ago.
However, Poland turned a deaf ear to the request. It is not clear when Brodsky will be transferred to German custody.

David Harris: Canada feeds the haters
Tim Fraser/National Post
Protesters protest police action at their last protest.
National Post July 8, 2010 – 8:48 am
Businesses damaged. Cars aflame. It’s been two weeks and we’ve yet to take responsibility for Toronto’s G20 rioting. We should, because we laid the groundwork for it.
For years, our neglect, denial and self-censorship have prepared the conditions for this kind of mess. We citizens have elected, appointed and rewarded those who have all but telegraphed the message that it is open season on public order, peace and stability.
Toronto’s civic leaders and police management set the stage for the summit riots by advertising their self-paralyzing tendencies. Remember 2009, when the city signalled its willingness to be victimized by masses of Tamil Tigers’ terrorist supporters who flouted the law by blocking public thoroughfares? Ordinary citizens saw their constitutional right to free movement impinged, and had to get out of the way. Police high command met its own short-term convenience by refusing to act as police. This dereliction clearly had the support of city government. There were no consequences for Metro police and city managers who facilitated this lawlessness and public constraint. Meanwhile, society said little, and adversaries watched and took note.
The same thing unfolded contemporaneously in Ottawa in front of Parliament. Police bosses and city politicians, fearing offending radical vote-blocs, chose to smooth the way for disruption rather than enforce the law. In an appallingly graphic display of society’s malaise, smartly-uniformed Ottawa police were interspersed throughout crowds of people bearing Tamil Tigers flags. Some officers sported fluorescent vests emblazoned with the word, “Liaison”. What were police liaising with? Did it bother Ottawa’s mayor and police hierarchy that the visible presence of liaison personnel legitimized one of the world’s foremost terror organizations, the granddaddy of suicide bombers?
In major cities, disruptive terror-supporting elements have become emboldened. Hezbollah, another banned terror outfit, has had its agitators brandish their flags openly in our streets. This may be free expression, but it reflects a growing extremist conviction that there is nothing to fear from quaking authority. And little protection for average folk.
An exaggeration? Not to tourists attending Montreal’s charming Old Port district in 2006 for the international fireworks competition. Witnesses saw bearded and beveiled Hezbollah supporters take over an area near Place Jacques-Cartier in a solidarity moment with terrorists “back home.” Encircling and intimidating a lone busker, the yelling radicals ordered him to leave “their” territory. Frightened, the performer whimpered that he’d put money into a municipal permit to perform there, that he had a wife and kids to support.
Like any predator, Hezbollah recognizes helplessness – in society and people – and kicked out the terrified man. Two anxious police watched this extension of south Lebanese jurisdiction, considered the matter, and scrammed.
What are society’s enemies making of authorities’ betrayal of citizens and the rule of law? A great deal, and much of it spells licence. Why would the violence-prone be inhibited by non-existent consequences? And why should risk-averse police and city supremos change their ways when the public doesn’t discipline them?
Meanwhile, we sit back as opinion-making elites encourage the underlying confusion that brings this collapse of will and enforcement.
As though Toronto’s summit was a nonstop fundraising and recruiting drive, multi-million-dollar human-rights’ groups competed with one another’s inflated claims and demands for G20 public inquiries. One lawyer-ladened group raced out with what it claimed was a careful, comprehensive report condemning police – a scant two days after the summit.
Then there is the media.
We give audience to Canadian journalists who confound us by stumbling from one relativistic noun to another in confused attempts to be neutral about those wanting to kill us. Having effectively banned “terrorist” from their lexicon, media gut language and our understanding by grasping for the non-judgmental word “militant” – a term formerly reserved for nonviolent unionists and the like.
Remarking on the trend, I suggested – facetiously – in a speech a few years ago that CBC might soon describe as “activists” those firing rocket-propelled grenades into Parliament. Little could I know that CBC Toronto summit reporters would routinely refer to rioters, including some approximating Criminal Code definitions of terrorists, as mere “activists” and “protesters”. It reminded me of the former CBC foreign correspondent who preferred to “go live” on coverage of baby-killing guerrillas. It was the only way to slip in the “T” word without the producer’s snipping the tape.
So, too, in recent CTV stories of Taleban attacks on Afghanistan’s Jalalabad airfield. Neither a Kabul-based reporter nor the anchor nor the writer of the network’s accompanying website piece could force themselves to call these killers of our own Canadian and allied soldiers, “the enemy”, let alone “terrorists”. Instead, befuddled CTV journalists came up with the word “militant” – and repeated it eight times, plus “gunmen”, “insurgents”, and “fighters”. Like those local police and civic leaders, they’d do anything to avoid facing unpleasant reality, and we viewers put up with it. As in Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto and Kabul, we can no longer properly distinguish between our enemies and ourselves.
No wonder we are dangerously confused about the threats we face, the nature of our foes, our worth as a society, and our entitlement to come to our own defence.
No wonder we embolden our adversaries and render citizens blind to what is coming.
And no wonder urban guerrillas felt that they had a licence to destroy Toronto.
***National Post
A lawyer with 30 years in intelligence affairs, David Harris is director of the intelligence program, INSIGNIS Strategic Research Inc, has consulted with intelligence organizations in Canada and abroad, and served with the Canadian Security Intelligence Service in 1988-90.

.ANALYSIS / Iran is keeping a tight rein on Nasrallah and Hezbollah
08.07.10
By Yossi Melman/Haaretz
With aid from Iran, Syria has a factory producing M-600 missiles for Hezbollah. So is Assad really looking for peace?
At an undisclosed site, the Syrians have erected a factory that produces M-600 missiles, capable of hitting almost any target in Israel. According to the French newsletter Intelligence Online, the factory is a joint Iranian-Syrian venture. Iran funded construction of the site, and supplied the assembly line, the technology and the war doctrine. In return, Syria is committed to provide half of the factory's production - that is, half the missiles - to Hezbollah.
A few weeks ago, reports in worldwide media outlets indicated that Syria was smuggling missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon, in clear violation of the UN Security Council resolution that brought about the end of the Second Lebanon War. The reports, apparently leaked by a source inside Israel intelligence, were later confirmed by the Israeli government. In truth, the term "smuggling" is incorrect. Syria transfers the missiles according to its factory agreement with Iran, but tries to hide the weapons supply from Israeli intelligence and the Israel Air Force, which have been closely following these transfers.
An M-600 has a diameter of 600 millimeters, and a range of 250 to 300 kilometers; it is powered by solid fuel and can carry war heads weighing up to 500 kilograms. The missile is based on technology older than the Iranian Fateh 110, itself an improved version of the Soviet-Chinese-North Korean Katyusha rocket.
Even without the M-600, Syria has many tens of thousands of missiles and rockets, the basis for the Scuds and Katyushas that Hezbollah launched at Israel in the Second Lebanon War. During that war, Israel bombed Lebanon with 7,000 tons of explosives, while the explosives from the approximately 4,000 rockets and missiles Hezbollah fired on Israel added up to "only" 28 tons.
"It is clear that in the next war we will look back and miss the 2006 conflict, in terms of the amount of explosives that will fall on Israel," says a senior intelligence source. The question is whether this war will take place, when and with whom.
While experts say Hezbollah is preparing itself for war with Israel, there are no signs that it intends to start one any time soon. In fact, the Second Lebanon War limited Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah's room to maneuver. The political and military leadership in Iran was angered by Hezbollah's decision to kidnap Israeli soldiers in the ambush that kicked off the war with Israel. The Iranians did not want war at that point, and believed Nasrallah was mistaken in approving the kidnapping without first consulting them. As a result, they took away his right to decide whether to attack Israel in the future.
Since then, Hezbollah has succeeded in rebuilding its capabilities, increasing the number of its fighting units and equipping itself with tens of thousands of missiles, with generous support from Iran and Syria. But at this point in time, it appears Tehran is not interested in another round between Israel and Hezbollah, and Israeli intelligence does not believe a new war will break out this summer. Still, just one incident going out of control could lead to war.
An issue of intentions
A more interesting question being debated by Israeli intelligence is just where Syrian President Bashar Assad is heading. This is an issue of intentions, which intelligence - all intelligence services - always wonder about. Assad's capabilities can be quantified: Exact and up-to-date information can be acquired (Israel does this successfully ) about the number of Syrian soldiers, the structure of the army and its weapons, its theories of war and so on. It is much harder to determine the intentions of the Syrian leader, especially because they are the decisions of one man or no more than a small forum made up of army commanders and advisors.
Israeli intelligence is divided into optimists and pessimists. At the head of the optimist pack is Brigadier General Yossi Baidatz, head of the IDF research department, who believes that if Assad receives the Golan Heights back from Israel, he will consent to a peace agreement and everything it implies - including open borders, limited commercial relations and diplomatic ties. Outgoing IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi believes there is an opportunity here for a diplomatic process, and that everything must be done to pursue it.
In contrast, retiring Mossad chief Meir Dagan holds that Assad will never agree to peace with Israel, because hostility toward Israel is what justifies his rule. The outgoing director of Military Intelligence, Amos Yadlin, feels Assad is still uncertain about which path to take, although he thinks the Syrian leader's behavior in recent years shows that he is tending to distance himself from peace, just as Dagan contends. Israeli intelligence describes this as "strengthening self-confidence to the point of insolence."
'Told you so'
Before the United Staes invaded Iraq in 2003, Assad's advisors suggested that he support President George W. Bush, just as his father and predecessor Hafez Assad joined the senior Bush's coalition during the first Gulf War. Bashar Assad refused. Today he may feel this was a good bet and could tell his advisors, "I told you so." He did not join the American war, and still he is courted by the U.S. administration.
In contrast with both his father's stance and his own earlier positions, Assad is stiffening his demands. He is not prepared to forgo an alliance with Hezbollah and Iran, even in return for a peace agreement with Israel. Still, despite everything, he continues to act with great care and tries not to break the rules.
"What does Assad want?" the intelligence community asks. "That's a tough question," they answer themselves.

Counter Terrorism Bureau warns all Israelis traveling abroad
Bureau issues travel advisory warning of likely revenge attacks against Israelis by Iran or Hezbollah.
By Jonathan Lis/Haaretz/08.07.10
Israel terror Israel's Counter Terrorism Bureau on Thursday issued a travel advisory calling for Israelis to keep their wits about them in all parts of the world, suspicious of revenge attacks by Iran and Hezbollah. According to the warning, Hezbollah continues to blame Israel for the assassination of Imad Mughniyeh, the Lebanese militia's former operations officer, and Iran blames Israel for the death of a nuclear scientist in Tehran. The bureau statement reads "according to our intelligence, there continue to be threats of revenge killings or kidnappings of Israelis traveling outside the country, especially businesspeople and high-ranking ex-government officials."
The bureau advised Israelis traveling abroad to take precautions, completely avoid visiting countries mentioned in travel advisories and refuse all unexpected or tempting business or social offers and refuse all unexpected invitations to meetings, especially in remote areas and after dark.
The bureau further advised Israelis to refrain from entering a hotel room or place of residence and from receiving suspicious or unexpected visitors.
On extended stays abroad, the bureau advised altering one's personal habits by varying traffic routes, restaurants, entertainment venues and hotels frequented.

British diplomat eulogizes Fadlallah
In personal blog, Britain's ambassador to Lebanon calls Hezbollah spiritual leader 'decent man'
Roee Nahmias Published: 07.08.10, 16:57 / Israel News
Britain's ambassador to Lebanon surprised many people in London and Beirut Thursday by venerating Hezbollah's recently deceased spiritual leader.
In her personal blog, Frances Guy wrote that Ayatollah Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah was "a decent man". Israel's Foreign Ministry said in response later that Fadlallah is "unworthy of praise".
Ayatollah Fadlallah passed away on Sunday, at the age of 74. He was one of Shiite Islam's most influential clerics, and a harsh critic of both Israel and the US.
"One of the privileges of being a diplomat is the people you meet; great and small, passionate and furious. People in Lebanon like to ask me which politician I admire most… I usually avoid answering by referring to those I enjoy meeting the most and those that impress me the most," Guy wrote in her blog.
"Until yesterday my preferred answer was to refer to Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, head of the Shia clergy in Lebanon and much admired leader of many Shia Muslims throughout the world."
The ambassador explained why she admired the spiritual leader. "
When you visited him you could be sure of a real debate, a respectful argument and you knew you would leave his presence feeling a better person. That for me is the real effect of a true man of religion; leaving an impact on everyone he meets, no matter what their faith," she wrote.
Guy also recounted her first meeting with the ayatollah.
"I remember well when I was nominated ambassador to Beirut, a Muslim acquaintance sought me out to tell me how lucky I was because I would get a chance to meet Sheikh Fadlallah. Truly he was right," she wrote.
"If I was sad to hear the news I know other peoples' lives will be truly blighted. The world needs more men like him willing to reach out across faiths, acknowledging the reality of the modern world and daring to confront old constraints. May he rest in peace."
Earlier, CNN editor Octavia Nasr also praised the ayatollah in a tweet that ran, "Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah… One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot."
A Foreign Ministry official told Ynet in response that seeing as the US news channel decided to dismiss Nasr, it would be "interesting" to see how the British Foreign Office reacts to the newest praise of the terror group's spiritual leader.
"Between the phrase: 'Hezbollah spiritual leader' and 'decent' lies a moral and political ocean. We believe that the spiritual leader of a terror group such as Hezbollah, which publicly calls for Israel's annihilation, kidnaps people, fires thousands of missiles at women and children, and carries out murderous terror attacks in Lebanon, the Middle East, and the entire world, is unworthy of any praise or eulogizing. If Hezbollah was firing missiles at London and Glasgow, would this leader still be called 'decent'?" official asked.

ISRAEL, PALESTINE AFTER THE FLOTILLA
Barriers to peace
By Jack A Smith
This is the concluding article in a two-part report.
Part 1: Change is in the wind
Israeli domination and the right wing government's unwillingness to compromise are the biggest problems confronting the Palestinians. But there are two other big problems.
The first is the present disunity between secular Palestine National Authority (PNA) / Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Fatah in the West Bank and Islamist Hamas in Gaza. The two sides are far apart politically as well as geographically - a fact exploited by Jerusalem and Washington. The second problem is that while supportive of the Palestinians in general, the Arab countries themselves are split and relatively weak, with several of
them within Washington's sphere of influence.
Israel and the US do not recognize or speak to the Hamas leaders, including Ismail Haniyeh, who became prime minister after the January 2006 democratic election for the Palestine National Authority's Legislative Council - which Fatah previously dominated. Hamas gained 74 seats to Fatah's 45 in the 132-member body. Four other parties gathered the remaining seats. The George W Bush administration immediately joined the Israeli government in discrediting the voting, which former US president Jimmy Carter and other election monitors said was completely honest, and in seeking to subvert or overthrow Hamas, with which Israel considers itself to be at war.
The next year, as a consequence of a virtual civil war between Fatah and Hamas, PNA President Mahmoud Abbas - a former Fatah leader who is also is chairman of the PLO - dismissed Haniyeh as prime minister. (The PLO has long been recognized internationally and by Israel as the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people".)
The Hamas leader contested the firing as illegal and continues to function as prime minister in Gaza only, legally backed by the legislative council. Abbas, who announced recently that he does not plan to run for reelection in January because of a lack of progress in negotiations, named Salam Fayyad prime minister. Fayyad functions in that capacity in the West Bank, without legislative approval and presumably without legal authority. He is considered to be friendly to the United States, where he lived as a student at the University of Texas in Austin while obtaining a PhD in economics - a field in which he is said to excel.
Over the years, Israel has jailed dozens of elected Hamas legislators, mostly on spurious charges. At least 10 from Hamas remain locked up in Israeli prisons. According to a June 29 report by a Palestinian researcher, 7,300 Palestinians are at present held in some 20 Israeli prisons, including 17 legislators, two former ministers, and about 300 children.
The US and Israel treat only with Abbas, Fayyad and the PNA government. They are aware that these Palestinian partners are weaker today compared with the mass support enjoyed by the organization when it was led by the legendary Yasser Arafat until his death six years ago. And Abbas, of course, is more amenable than Hamas to making concessions to Israel and the US.
The reasons for the split between the two sides are complex. It cannot be forgotten that in earlier years Israel encouraged the growth of Hamas as an alternative to the secular and leftist Fatah led by Arafat. Fatah has lost some support from a portion of the Palestinian people for various reasons, not least being the internal contradictions, rivalry, and alleged, corruption within the organization. Hamas offers an extensive and popular program of social welfare, and is said to fight corruption and favoritism. As such it has gained considerable support.
Much to Jerusalem's regret, given its earlier hopes, Hamas turned out to be as dedicated to the national struggle as Fatah and the PLO. Unlike the PLO, Hamas refuses to recognize Israel, but has let it be known it is not inflexible when it comes to making a balanced and sustainable deal. Fatah does not recognize Israel either. In reality, whether or not a political party "recognizes" a state has no legal significance. Recognition is a state-to-state affair. It's fairly certain that an eventual Palestinian state will exchange mutual recognitions with Israel.
At this stage, the two Palestinian factions remain enemies, though they agree on many issues. There have been reports in recent months that both sides have been contemplating terms for a possible reconciliation. Abbas said he was willing to send a Fatah delegation to Gaza for talks, but Hamas evidently rejected the bid. The Arab League has been pressuring the factions to work toward unity.
Some kind of unity between Fatah and Hamas, within the context of the PNA and PLO, appears to be required if the Palestinian people are to achieve their goals. Eventual necessity may bring them into a working relationship, especially if serious negotiations begin to bring an independent state closer to reality.
The second big problem for the Palestinians is the lack of unity and purpose in the Arab world. Israel has worked to split the Palestinians. The US has worked to split the Arabs - or rather to reunite them within Washington's superpower sphere of influence, a process that seems to be succeeding so far.
A main purpose of Washington's strategy is to assure success for the US government's principal goal of controlling the Middle East. At this point it seems the US wants to reduce the Israel-Palestine irritant to manageable proportions to secure Jerusalem as America's surrogate at the eastern end of the Mediterranean, proximate to the strategic Persian Gulf with its oil reserves to the east, and North Africa including the Suez Canal to the west.
We will here briefly discuss the relationship between some key Arab states and the Israel-Palestine conflict, which has been going on for over six decades.
All the Arab countries give backing to the Palestinians rhetorically and some do materially as well. But very few these days - two decades after the collapse of the first global socialist project, which supported Palestinian aspirations - are willing to take political risks for Palestinian national liberation, given the probability of incurring Washington's wrath in a unipolar world. Only two Arab countries maintain diplomatic relations with Israel - Egypt and Jordan - both of which are adjacent to Palestinian territory. In most cases, relations between the other Arab countries and Israel are more distant but no longer antagonistic.
It may be of interest to note that the US provides annual subsidies to both Arab countries that recognize Israel. Egypt gets $1.3 billion this year; smaller Jordan receives $540 million.
Egypt is the most powerful Arab country, with a population of just over 80 million, and it remains influential in the region. But the days when the Cairo government sought to lead the Arab nations behind an anti-colonial and pan-Arab banner are gone with the desert winds of yesteryear, along with Egypt's once significant military forces.
Cairo today is well within Washington's orbit - and by extension, Jerusalem's as well. The regime of President Hosni Mubarak despises Hamas because it is ideologically associated with the Egyptian government's own principal internal enemy, the Muslim Brotherhood. It has thus joined Israel's blockade of Arab Gaza.
Egypt had little option in the aftermath of the flotilla debacle but to finally open the Rafah Border Crossing to Gaza just before Israel announced it was going to open some crossings of its own as part its partial easing of the blockade. These crossings are the only means for people or supplies to enter and exit Gaza. Access by sea remains prohibited by the Israeli navy.
Mubarak is now 82 and he has held office for nearly 29 years, all of them under a continuing state of emergency granting him such extraordinary powers that he has been reelected routinely without challenge. The next presidential election is in 2011, and he has not yet declared his candidacy. Mohamed ElBaradei, who retired last year as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, may enter as a candidate. He is not favored by Washington or Jerusalem, which wanted him to be much tougher on Iran. Mubarak is rumored to be grooming his son Gamal to succeed him in power. It's doubtful the election will produce changes in Egypt's relationship to Israel, but nothing's ever certain.
Jordan, with its large Palestinian population, is in Uncle Sam's pocket because it is small, weak and insecure about both Fatah and Hamas. The ruling Hashemite Kingdom dramatically crossed swords with the PLO by cracking down on militant Palestinian groups in September 1970 (known to Palestinians as Black September). By July 1971, the various organizations within the PLO were ousted from Jordan, with many finding refuge in Lebanon, where they were besieged again when Israel invaded that country in 1982.
Jordan's King Abdullah II may fear that either a secular democratic or an Islamic neighboring Palestinian state will ultimately undermine the monarchy. King Abdullah worked with US President Barack Obama on developing the concept of a Palestinian state without military forces.
The kingdom of Saudi Arabia has received US protection since the end of World War II in return for reliable access to petroleum, insuring the survival of the royal family with its particular form of Sunni Islam, Wahhabism. The Saudi government has helped the Palestinians financially and supports many of the PLO's political positions, but its close association with Washington makes it an inconsistent friend of Palestinian liberation. The Saudis do not have formal diplomatic ties with Israel, but the relationship is cooperative and friendly. A strong independent and modern Palestinian state, either under the secular leadership of Fatah or Islamic governance of a different Sunni type, is problematic for the House of Saud and constrains its support.
The oil-rich Arab Gulf States, now including post-Ba'athist Iraq (which before Washington's 2003 invasion was strongly supportive of Palestinian goals), all give a nod to the Palestinian cause but bend the knee to Washington's global power.
Syria strongly supports the Palestinians in many ways and maintains cordial relations with both Fatah and Hamas, but it is no match for Israel's regional military supremacy and America's demanding presence and keeps a relatively low profile. President Bashar al-Assad's main interest is in negotiating a peace treaty with Israel leading to the restoration of the occupied Golan Heights to Syria, and in retaining its historic influence in Lebanon. He strongly opposed Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 2006 and expressed admiration for the resistance waged by Hezbollah, the Shi'ite people's organization supported by Iran.
Sophisticated and small Lebanon has too often been an Israeli battlefield for it to invite Jerusalem's ire. However, some observers believe Israel will discover a pretext to invade once again to crush Hezbollah, the non-government Shi'ite Muslim defense force, after its failure to accomplish this objective in 2006. Israeli militarists are still smarting over the failure to destroy Hezbollah, which is essential to bring all Lebanon under its control. Israel's invasion cost the lives of 1,183 Lebanese civilians; some 4,000 were wounded, and more than 30,000 family homes were destroyed or severely damaged. Throughout the month of warfare, Hezbollah sent thousands of largely ineffective though frightening unguided rockets into Israel, killing 36 civilians. Hezbollah's death toll is unknown. Israel also lost 118 soldiers.
The rest of the Arab countries, including one-time radical states such as Libya, continue to back Palestinian hopes and vote correctly at Arab League meetings but do little else to promote the cause.
This leaves two wild cards in the region - neither of which are Arab - that are capable of complicating the US-Israeli game in the Middle East.
One is Turkey, the militarily strong, largely Westernized, secular democratic republic of nearly 78 million people, with a large Sunni Muslim population. The other is Iran, a largely modernized Islamic republic of just over 67 million people, mostly Shi'ite Muslims. Both are mature societies that have at one time controlled empires - Ottoman and Persian respectively. Both are strategically situated, Turkey between Europe and Asia, Iran between Central Asia and the Middle East.
Part 1: Change is in the wind
Turkey, a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member and long-time close ally of Israel and the United States, has kept to itself for many years. Then in early 2009 the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan abruptly stormed onto the regional stage when it sharply condemned Israel's calculatedly cruel invasion of Gaza.
A few months ago, Turkey unexpectedly strode onto the international stage along with partner Brazil, announcing that they had obtained a nuclear fuel swap agreement with Iran that obviated the need for additional US-UN sanctions. They believed that they had Obama's backing for this independent mission. But when they unexpectedly brought back a deal that was virtually identical to what Obama originally sought, the White House backed off and treated the unofficial intermediaries like pariahs.
In our view, all the Obama-Netanyahu cohort really wanted was intensified sanctions, not a nuclear agreement that would remove the pretext for demonizing Iran, probably in preparation for near-future aggression.
Last month - after Israeli commandoes cut down nine Turkish members of the humanitarian flotilla heading to Gaza - relations between Jerusalem and Ankara deteriorated further, and a furious Erdogan withdrew Turkey's ambassador, although he did not break diplomatic ties. He called on Israel to apologize for the killings and pay compensation to the nine families involved. Jerusalem has refused, claiming the commandoes were defending themselves. Erdogan announced, "If the entire world has turned its back on the Palestinians, Turkey will never turn its back on Jerusalem and the Palestinians," and took some modest steps such as banning Israeli military aircraft from its airspace.
An interview with Erdogan was aired on June 29 on the US's PBS Charlie Rose program. He called Netanyahu "the biggest barrier to peace", an obvious truth about which the Obama administration must be abundantly aware though publicly silent. Most importantly, Erdogan also added that Turkey remained "a friend to Israel", but Ankara soon announced that it would break diplomatic relations with Israel unless Jerusalem apologized for the flotilla killings or accepted the conclusion of an international inquiry.
The next day, Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu met secretly in Zurich with Israeli Trade and Labor Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer to discuss reducing tensions. Notice of the meeting was leaked by an Israeli television station. There was no report about the outcome of the conference. Recognizing that he was intentionally kept in the dark by Netanyahu about this important event where he logically should have presided, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman publicly excoriated his boss for excluding him.
Netanyahu is under pressure from Washington to seek reconciliation with Erdogan in order to keep strategic Turkey in Washington's political enclosure. Loud mouth Lieberman probably would have exacerbated tensions had he met with Davutoglu. Netanyahu needs Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party in his coalition to remain in office, which is the only reason such a hothead became foreign minister. Discussing the latest contretemps, the Jerusalem Post opined July 1 that "it is yet another indicator that Israeli diplomatic policy is dysfunctional".
At this point, no one really knows the extent of Ankara's geopolitical ambitions, which may determine how far Turkey will distance itself from Israel, and perhaps from the US as well. There's certainly a lack of dynamic leadership in the Middle East that Turkey, which seems to have good relations with all the Muslim countries, might seek to provide.
If Turkey confines itself to supporting the Palestinians and criticizing Israel, that will have an important regional impact - perhaps sufficient to galvanize the Arab countries to take more action on Gaza's behalf, to give Jerusalem pause, and to induce Washington to finally get serious about ending the colonial status of the Palestinian people.
If Turkey seeks a larger role in regional affairs beyond the Palestinian issue, perhaps in league with a couple of other regional players, this could possibly alter the balance of power in the Middle East, which is now tilted steeply toward the Washington/Jerusalem axis.
Where does the other wild card, Iran, fit into this scenario? Various commentators have speculated that the Islamic republic seeks to dominate the Middle East or that it wants to impose Shi'ite beliefs throughout the region, or that it seeks to destroy Israel, among other absurd speculations.
Any objective appraisal of the conditions confronting Teheran today would show that its first priority and nearly total preoccupation is national security, and its military strategy is defensive, not offensive, as Washington and Jerusalem are well aware. Consider this:
According to news reports, an armada of 11 US Navy warships and one Israeli ship, led by the USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier and its Strike Group of 60 fighter-bombers, passed through the Suez Canal on June 18 heading for the Persian Gulf, where they will join other ships positioned near Iran. Navy battle fleets with Cruise and Tomahawk missiles and air wings roam the Arabian Sea, Mediterranean Sea, Gulf of Oman, and Indian Ocean, as well as the Persian Gulf.
The immense US base of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean is being stocked for possible war against Iran, including nearly 400 so-called bunker-busters for deep ground penetration.
The US Air Force is at the ready to quickly thrash Iran when the signal is given.
Israel is continually threatening to attack Iran.
The American military machine is camped on Iran's western border (Iraq), and on its eastern border (Afghanistan). The Pentagon's Special Forces troops have been probing Iran from both directions, looking for vulnerabilities, and getting the lay of the land.
For several years during the Bush Administration, news analysts were predicting an imminent attack by the US. It didn't occur, probably because of the quagmire leading to a military stalemate in Iraq. But Teheran knows it likely faces a greater danger today than during the Bush years.
Iran is under 24-hour surveillance from US satellite spying and eavesdropping technologies throughout the country that can "see" every part of the country and "hear" every phone conversation, not to mention spies on the ground.
Iran has been laboring under ever-tightening US economic and trade sanctions for several decades after the Islamic revolution dispatched Washington's puppet potentate in Tehran, the dreaded shah.
Iran's big-power friends, Russia and China, have just joined the US in imposing the latest UN sanctions, after diluting them (but knowing Washington would add additional sanctions of its own to compensate). This shocked and worried Teheran, though both Russia and China are still considered allies and are not expected to abandon Iran.
For the past decade - at least - Washington has been providing material support and encouragement to the anti-regime dissident movement. The Bush administration sent funds to support some anti-regime armed forces, and the Obama government is no doubt continuing the practice.
Washington is trying to create an anti-Iranian coalition composed of several Sunni Arab states, exacerbating ethnic and religious tensions in order to better divide and conquer.
America's medium- and long-range missiles, with both conventional and nuclear warheads, are on the alert - patiently awaiting the signal.
For its part, Teheran is continuing to support the Hezbollah Shi'ites in Lebanon and Sunni Hamas in Gaza. Hezbollah - a political movement that leads the second-largest electoral coalition in Lebanon - criticizes Jerusalem as colonialist and its guerrilla defenders usually fight against Israel when it invades Lebanon. Hezbollah fighters were largely responsible for Israel's decision to withdraw its military forces in May 2000 after a nearly two-decade occupation of Lebanon, and for a second humiliation of the IDF when it returned in 2006 with guns ablaze.
Hamas is a political organization dedicated to liberating the Palestinian people from colonial domination. It is without heavy weapons, tanks or planes to employ in its liberation struggle against the IDF, so it propelled relatively primitive unguided rockets into Israel and killed up to 10 civilians over the last several years. Israel, of course, killed many thousands of Palestinians during that time.
The US and Israel identify both groups as "terrorist" and Iran as "terrorist" for supporting them. In the opinion of many leftists and numbers of people in the developing (third) world, they are resistance fighters against colonial and imperialist oppression.
The government of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denies building nuclear weapons and declares its efforts are directed at producing energy for peaceful purposes, not bombs. Even with all the spy techniques at Washington's command, there is still no evidence to convict Iran on this charge. Yet Israel - which is said to possess some 200 nuclear weapons in defiance of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - poses as Iran's intended victim. Iran has not engaged in an aggressive war since the first half of the 1800s (a short-lived incursion over the Afghan border), and is absolutely in no position to do so now.
Neither the US nor Israel is actually worried that Iran will in effect commit national suicide by preparing to attack, or actually attacking, the Jewish state - thus triggering a preemptive offensive or instant mass retaliation from Jerusalem, with the US near at hand to help out.
There are two other regional concerns for the US and Israel to think about over the longer term:
1. Shi'ite Iran and majority Shi'ite Iraq eventually may bloc together in one type of close relationship or another several years hence. They share a number of interests in addition to their compatible branch of Islam - a minority often held down in Sunni-dominated lands. They both want to be independent of US threats and violence and may conclude that unity enhances their defenses. As a team they could more profitably exploit their extraordinarily huge petroleum reserves. And they are both concerned about the Kurdish independence movement, among other factors.
Washington will do its best to keep Baghdad and Teheran apart. It plans to retain considerable influence in Iraq after most of America's foreign legion departs for other battlefields, but the era of puppet governments and colonial masters, despite remnants here and there, is fading into history.
2. The other, perhaps even more nettlesome, long-term concern for Uncle Sam is the possibility Iran might bloc with Turkey and Syria to oppose US domination of the Middle East. If Iraq joined in, the four countries would stretch some 2,200 miles from the Dardanelles in the Mediterranean to the Arabian Sea. This might even induce Egypt to get moving again. It's a long shot, of course, but a potential game-changer in the Arab world, which is due for a change.
The Middle East often looks static, with the Americans ruling the roost, but that's deceptive. No one knows what is going to happen in the next couple of decades with any of the many possibilities for change that are swirling around the Middle East today, particularly as other world nations rise while the US engages in what appears to be the start of a long decline.
Those bold volunteers who took part in the recent humanitarian flotilla have through their deeds obliged Israel to weaken the blockade of Gaza. That's an important change. And their efforts focused a bright light on the misdeeds perpetrated upon the Palestinians by Israel and its superpower enabler.
That's a good start toward further change, and it may become a transitional moment that in time results not only in fruitful outcomes for the oppressed Palestinian people, but also for the entire region.
Jack A Smith is the editor of the e-mail Activist Newsletter, and the former editor of the Guardian Radical Newsweekly. He may be reached at jacdon@earthlink.net, and his web is http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/.
(Copyright 2010 Jack A Smith.)