LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِMay 13/2011

Biblical Event Of The Day
Genesis 01/26-28: " God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” God created man in his own image. In God’s image he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them. God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth"

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Syria fortifies Obama in his indecision/By: Michael Young/May 12/11
Historic fluctuations in France's relationship with Syria/By Randa Takieddine/May 12/11
Walid Phares: Phares: Al-Qaida Threat Outlives bin Laden/Newsmax/May 12/11
Murderer vs. reformer/By: Hanin Ghaddar/May 12/11
About Syria’s Christians/By: Hazem Saghiyeh/May 12/11

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for May 12/11
Report: Bellemare Finds New Leads of Syrian Involvement in Hariri Murder/Naharnet
Al-Rahi: Other Summits Must Follow to Bolster Ties between Spiritual and Political Powers/Naharnet
Bellemare Spokeswoman: Amendment of Indictment Based on Course Investigation Had Taken/Naharnet
Neither Syria nor Hezbollah have will to form a cabinet, Lebanese MP,Fatfat says/Now Lebanon
Syrian forces crushing dissent town by town, activists say/Now Lebanon
The Cable: 16 Senators: Syria's Assad has lost his legitimacy/Foreign Policy
UN chief calls on Syria to allow humanitarian access after deadly violence/UN News Centre
Q&A: In Syria, Destroying the Country to Save the Regime?/PBS NewsHour
Syrian tanks shell Homs as violence escalates/Telegraph
Across Syria, fears, deaths mount, Syrians say/CNN
Senator Rubio urges more US action against Syria/Miami Herald
Syrian-Americans watch from afar as reports of violence grow/CNN
Latest developments in Arab world's unrest/AP
Syria Drops Bid for Seat on UN Human Rights Council/VOA
Ban urges Syria to stop arrests, allow UN to assess situation/Business News
19 dead in latest Syria shelling/Irish Times
A Look Back At Syria's 1982 Crackdown/NPR
Syria, Libya and Middle East unrest - live updates/The Guardian
Muslim-Christian summit kicks off in Bkirki/Daily Star
IIF: Lebanon missing great opportunities/Daily Star
Situation in southern Lebanon quiet and stable, says UNIFIL commander/Daily Star
Bellemare spokeswoman signals further secrecy/Daily Star
Responsible rivals/Daily Star
Snags obstruct final government deal/Daily Star
Syria expels US journalist to Iran: Syrian embassy/AFP
Geagea: Hizbullah and Syria Want to Form a Cabinet that Reflects their Image/Naharnet
Jumblat Heads to Syria: Might Discuss Cabinet Formation with Syrian Officials/Naharnet
Cabinet Formation Awaits Comprehensive Deal on Lineup/Naharnet
Miqati's Circles: Leaked Info Aimed at Luring him into Confrontations/Naharnet
Pietton Warns Miqati, Berri About Political Vacuum/Naharnet
Maronite Bishops Call for Forming Government Capable of Thwarting Dangers against Lebanon/Naharnet
Berri Cites Tangible Progress in Cabinet Formation/Naharnet
March 14: March 8 Camp Won't Dare Form Government According to Hizbullah's Standards/Naharnet
Williams to Aoun, Hizbullah: Challenges Can't be Met Without Active Cabinet/Naharnet
Agreement Reached on Nominating Marwan Charbel as Interior Minister/Naharnet

Syrian forces crushing dissent town by town, activists say
May 12, 2011 /Syrian security forces on Thursday kept crushing dissent town-by-town and rounding up opposition leaders, activists said, in an unrelenting crackdown that Washington has slammed as "barbaric." The army and security services arrested dozens of people in the flashpoint coastal city of Banias and the neighboring villages of al-Bayda and al-Qariri, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. The London-based group said lawyer Jalal Kindo was among those detained on Thursday in the Mediterranean city of Banias, where security forces have been hunting down dissidents and protest organizers. The Syrian Revolution 2011, a Facebook group organizing protests against the government of President Bashar al-Assad, called for a "Free Women Friday" in support of women demonstrators in custody. "On May 13, we will demonstrate for the dignity of our arrested sisters," the group said.
Several female protesters have been arrested in recent weeks, particularly in Damascus and Banias, where women marched calling for the release of their detained relatives and an end to the army's assault on protest hubs. Four women were killed during May 7 protests, activists said. Late on Wednesday, thousands of students defied the crackdown to stage a protest in Syria's second-largest city Aleppo before being dispersed by baton-wielding loyalists and security force personnel, a rights activist said. At least 19 civilians were killed on Wednesday as troops and unidentified gunmen assaulted protest hubs across the country, firing on some and encircling others with tanks, according to accounts by human rights activists. Among the dead was an eight-year-old boy, the head of the National Organization for Human Rights in Syria, Ammar Qurabi, told AFP. Between 600 and 700 people have been killed and at least 8,000 arrested since the start of the protest movement in mid-March, human rights groups say.-AFP/NOW Lebanon

Neither Syria nor Hezbollah have will to form a cabinet, Fatfat says
May 12, 2011 /Future bloc MP Ahmad Fatfat said on Thursday that neither Syria not Hezbollah have the will to form a Lebanese cabinet. “There is no regional will or Hezbollah [will] to form a government especially because of Hezbollah’s strategic interests and what is going on in Syria,” he told Future News television. Fatfat also said that that the March 14 coalition did not refuse to take part in the upcoming government but decided “to give priority to its political demands.” “We did not ask for [cabinet] shares to participate [in the government],” he said, adding, “We don’t see the country for its electoral tactics but for its principles – starting with the international tribunal and the [issue of non-state] weapons.” Fatfat said that Change and Reform bloc leader MP Michel Aoun is the one demanding shares and gave up everything he believed in to ally with the Syrian- Iranian-backed Hezbollah. According to the Future bloc MP, the public “will try the new majority that carried out a coup and that proved that it is unable to run the country’s affairs.” He added that Prime Minister-designate Najib Mikati could resign but will first have to explain to the Lebanese people who was behind the cabinet formation crisis. According to published reports, both President Michel Sleiman and Aoun have agreed on the names of three candidates for the Interior Ministry portfolio. A dispute over the ministry has reportedly been behind the delay in cabinet formation.
However, the Change and Reform bloc leader said on Tuesday that even if the issue of the Interior Ministry is resolved, there would only be more issues to resolve related to other ministries like the Energy Ministry. Mikati was appointed on January 25 with the Hezbollah-led March 8 coalition’s backing and is working to form his cabinet. The March 14 alliance has announced that it will not take part in the upcoming government following the forced collapse of Saad Hariri’s unity government. Meanwhile, for almost two months, protests have railed against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime.Between 600 and 700 people have been killed and at least 8,000 arrested since the start of the protest movement in mid-March, human rights groups say.-NOW Lebanon

Al-Rahi at Launch of Spiritual Summit: Other Summits Must Follow to Bolster Ties between Spiritual and Political Powers
Naharnet/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi opened the Islamic-Christians spiritual summit at Bkirki on Thursday with a prayer that the Lebanese, Muslims and Christians, would achieve unity for the greater good of their country. He said in his opening speech: "I welcome you at this summit that is aimed at demonstrating our Lebanese national unity through asserting our joint national principles." "We demanded that this summit be held because of the flaws in our national unity that has resulted in sectarian disputes that were caused by contradictory political decisions," he continued. "Holding the summit was therefore inevitable in order to confirm national principles and goals that would help officials take national decisions in a free and democratic manner to confirm coexistence between Christians and Muslims," the patriarch stated. "The developments in the Arab world and their repercussions on Lebanon, given its current divisions, also drove us to hold this summit," al-Rahi added. On this note, he quoted late Pope John Paul II's statements on Lebanon in which he said that dialogue and cooperation between Christians and Muslims in Lebanon should set an example to other countries and help them achieve the goal of building a future of coexistence. Al-Rahi concluded that other meetings should follow the Islamic-Christian summit in order to bolster cooperation between the spiritual and political authorities. Religious leaders and representatives present at the summit included the new Papal Ambassador to Lebanon, Monsengieur Gabriele Jordano Cascia, the Vice President of the Higher Islamic Shiite Council, Sheikh Abdul Amir Qabalan, Druze spiritual leader, Sheikh Naim Hassan, Sunni Mufti, Shiekh Mohammed Rashid Qabbani, Head of the Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia Aram I Keshishian, Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch Gregorios III Laham, Greek Orthodox Archbishop Elias Aoude, Syriac Catholic Patriarch Ignatius Joseph III Younan, Father Riad Jarjoura on behalf of the Evangelical Church in Lebanon, and members of the Muslim-Christian national dialogue committee. Beirut, 12 May 11, 12:37

Bellemare Spokeswoman: Amendment of Indictment Based on Course Investigation Had Taken
Naharnet/The Special Tribunal for Lebanon prosecutor's spokeswoman, Sophie Boutaud de la Combe, stated on Wednesday that the new elements added by Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare to the indictment in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri does not mean that what had initially been sent was not good or sufficient.
She told al-Balad newspaper in remarks published on Thursday that Bellemare took the decision based on the course the investigation had taken and not at a request by Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen. These new elements were added because they simply weren't available earlier and the amendment has nothing to do with the developments in Lebanon and the region, she continued. She added that the investigation will continue its fieldwork even if the pre-trial judge was examining what had been previously submitted to him and therefore the timing of the amendment is only linked to recently discovered evidence, she added. On Friday, Bellemare submitted an amended indictment to Pre-Trial Judge Fransen. He had first handed in the indictment on March 11. Beirut, 11 May 11, 19:40

Maronite Bishops Call for Forming Government Capable of Thwarting Dangers against Lebanon
Naharnet/The Maronite Bishops Council stressed on Wednesday the need to form a government capable of tackling the citizens' concerns and thwarting dangers against Lebanon.
It said after its monthly meeting headed by Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi: "We hope that Thursday's spiritual summit will provide a push towards achieving national unity and that the gatherers would seek to bolster coexistence between all sects." "We also hope that they would respect religious diversity and commit to dialogue," the council added in a statement.
The council voiced its concern over the ongoing political crisis in Lebanon and the regional developments "that may negatively affect Lebanon on the security and economic scenes."
It therefore called on officials to speed up the formation of a new government to safeguard the country's sons and their future. Addressing the recently held Maronite summit, the statement said: "It provided a step forward towards reconciliation and will hopefully bolster the role of Christians in Lebanon." The summit brought together Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, Phalange Party leader Amin Gemayel, and Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh Beirut, 11 May 11, 12:44


Geagea: Hizbullah and Syria Want to Form a Cabinet that Reflects their Image
Naharnet/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea blasted Hizbullah on Thursday for allegedly targeting the country's democracy saying Lebanon's problems would not be solved without a solution to the Shiite party's arms. "We are living today in a state of emergency and have a problem given the presence of an armed party" that cripples "democratic work," Geagea told a visiting delegation from the Popular University in Batroun. Reciting the kidnapping of the seven Estonian tourists, the bombing of the church in Zahle and the building of thousands of illegal buildings on state property, Geagea said: "As if we are living in another state whose laws and systems differ from ours." "After we were done with the problem of the Syrian presence in Lebanon in 2005, we faced another problem which is the existence of Hizbullah in this form," he lamented. "We can't go about solving our problems and dealing with our issues unless we find a solution to this matter." Geagea accused Hizbullah and its backer Syria of seeking to form a new cabinet that reflects their own image while President Michel Suleiman and Premier-designate Najib Miqati want a government that reflects the Lebanese fabric.
"But there are new developments on the level of the formation (of the cabinet) which we're not sure if they will lead to a certain result," he said. "If they were able to form the cabinet, how would it be? Will it be able to take decisions so that it survives?" he wondered. He called for adopting a wait-and-see approach amid the developments in the region. The LF leader described the latest upheaval in the Arab world as "very serious," insisting however, that western countries have no plan to "divide" the region. The revolutions in Arab countries are the result of the peoples' willingness to live decent lives and enjoy freedom, he told his visitors. Beirut, 12 May 11, 13:20

16 Senators: Syria’s Assad has lost his legitimacy
By Josh Rogin
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Many in Congress are getting impatient with what they see as a lack of concrete action by the Obama administration to condemn and punish the Syrian government for its brutal crackdown on civilian protesters. Today, 16 senators are co-sponsoring a resolution calling on the administration to get tough on the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) spearheaded the resolution (PDF) with Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Ben Cardin (D-MD), and John McCain (R-AZ). The foursome held a press conference on Wednesday afternoon at the Capitol to announce their new effort and demand that the Obama administration expand its activities to sanction, condemn, and pressure the Syrian government to stop killing civilians in the streets.
"I know that there are some who had hoped when these protests first broke out that Bashar al- Assad would pursue the path of reform rather than the path of violence and brutality. But that has clearly not been his choice. He is not a reformer. He is a thug and a murderer who is pursuing the Qaddafi model, and hopes to get away with it," said Lieberman.
"First and foremost, [the resolution] sends a clear message that Bashar al Assad -- through his campaign of violence -- has lost legitimacy, and puts the Senate squarely on record as standing with the aspirations of the Syrian people," Lieberman added.
The resolution condemns the Syrian government for its crackdown on peaceful protesters, violating international human rights agreements, withholding food, water, and basic medical services to civilians, and torturing protesters in government custody. The resolution also mentions Iran's assistance to Syria's repressive government and Syrian meddling in Lebanon, which has included transferring weapons to Hezbollah.
The senators want the administration to expand the targeted sanctions it imposed last month on senior Syrian government officials, sanction Assad directly, expand the effort to combat media and information censorship in Syria, engage more with the Syrian opposition, and seek condemnation of Syria at the U.N. Security Council. The senators also want President Barack Obama to speak publicly about the crisis there.
"It's time to indict the guy who is giving the orders," said McCain. "And it's time for the President of the United States to speak up."
Two senior Senate aides said they expect the resolution to move to the Senate floor and be passed relatively soon.
Importantly, the Senate resolution declares that the Syrian government "has lost legitimacy" and expresses the belief that the Syrian people should determine their own political future. The State Department has resisted making that statement, knowing that once the administration declares Assad is no longer "legitimate," all efforts to work with the Syrian government to encourage better behavior will become more difficult.
Pressed repeatedly on that very question at Tuesday's briefing, State Department spokesman Mark Toner refused to say the Syrian government was no longer legitimate.
"We believe that he needs to take concrete steps to cease violence against innocent protesters and civilians, and he needs to address their legitimate aspirations," he said.
But Syria's main advocate in the Senate, SFRC Chairman John Kerry (D-MA), told The Cable on Tuesday that Assad's chance to be a reformer had passed.
"I said we have to put him to the test. I've always said it's a series of tests," Kerry said. "The chance was lost and that's the end of it."
UPDATE: Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) is now also a co-sponsor of the resolution, bringing the total number of co-sponsors to 17.

Rubio urges more U.S. action against Syria
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio joins a bipartisan group of senators condemning the violence in Syria and asking the White House to get tougher on its government.
By Lesley Clark
WASHINGTON -- Florida Sen. Marco Rubio Wednesday called for the Obama administration to ratchet up the pressure on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whose regime has attacked anti-government protestors.
The freshman senator joined fellow Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., John McCain, R-Ariz., and Ben Cardin, D-Maryland, at a Capitol Hill press conference, to unveil a resolution that urges President Obama to expand sanctions against the Syrian government and speak out on the situation “directly, and personally.”
“We ask you to lead us now in making the cause of the Syrian people America’s cause as well,” Rubio, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in remarks directed at Obama. “In our words and actions, it should be clear that America is on the side of the Syrian people and that we support their right to peacefully pursue a better future for their country. We must also send an important message to the Syrian regime that we condemn its crimes and that Bashar al Assad should no longer be treated as the legitimate ruler.”
The press conference marks the Miami Republican’s first major appearance on the foreign policy stage and he bookended it with appearances on CBS and CNN.
“Any time a government has to use government forces and army forces to kill unarmed citizens in order to hold onto power, that makes them illegitimate and that’s what’s happening in Syria,” he said on CBS. “I hope the United States will be a clear voice saying that.”
The resolution declares that al-Assad’s government – “through its campaign of violence and gross human rights abuses, has lost its legitimacy” – an assertion the White House has not made, as it has with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
"I know that there are some who had hoped when these protests first broke out that Bashar al- Assad would pursue the path of reform rather than the path of violence and brutality,” Lieberman said. “But that’s clearly not been his choice… He is not a reformer. He is a thug and a murderer, a totalitarian leader who is pursuing the Qaddafi model, and hopes to get away with it.” McCain said that three officials with the Syrian regime face sanctions, “but not the guy that’s giving the orders. It’s time we indicted the guy that’s giving the orders. And it’s time for the president of the United States to speak up forcefully and frequently.”
McCain said the senators aren’t pushing for air strikes like those launched in Libya – noting the uprisings are occuring “all over Syria.
“As a matter of practicality it’s almost impossible to intervene in any way but the ways we are advocating,” McCain said.
State Department spokesman Mark Toner called the treatment of protestors “barbaric measures” and suggested “there’s a window here for the Syrian government to address those concerns and that’s closing rapidly.” White House spokesman Jay Carney said the White House has increased pressure against Syria and is working with its allies “to urge the government of Syria to cease the violence, to engage in political dialogue.” He said the situations in Libya and Syria were unique, but that “it has been made abundantly clear to the Syrian government that its security crackdown will not restore stability and will not stop the demands for change in Syria. “As it is in all these countries, it’s up to the people of the region to decide who its leader should be,” Carney said. “But we believe that the government ought to listen to its people, refrain from violence, and engage in political dialogue.

UN chief calls on Syria to allow humanitarian access after deadly violence
11 May 2011 – Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said today that the United Nations would continue to press Syria to allow an independent humanitarian team to be granted access to the cities and towns where security forces have clashed with protesters, many of whom have been killed. Voicing disappointment that the UN has not been given the access it was promised by Syrian authorities, he said that an assessment mission was vital so that the international community can mount an effective humanitarian response to the recent deadly violence.
“I again urge President [Bashar] Assad to heed the calls of the people for reform and freedom, and to desist from excessive force and [the] mass arrest of peaceful demonstrators,” Mr. Ban told a press conference in Geneva. He reiterated that Mr. Assad should take “bold and decisive measures before it is too late.” Media reports say hundreds of people have been either killed or detained in recent weeks as Syrian security forces respond to demonstrations that are part of a broader pro-democracy movement across the Middle East and North Africa.
The UN Human Rights Council approved the sending of a mission to Syria to investigate alleged abuses and the Secretary-General today urged the country’s authorities to cooperate with the Council and allow monitors full access. Mr. Ban’s call today echoes that of Valerie Amos, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator, who voiced concern yesterday about the lack of humanitarian access within Syria.

Syria fortifies Obama in his indecision
May 12, 2011
By Michael Young
The Daily Star The New York Times gave readers a double-whammy of Syrian statements on Tuesday. Its correspondent in Beirut, Anthony Shadid, landed interviews with presidential adviser Bouthaina Shaaban and with Rami Makhlouf, the powerful maternal cousin of President Bashar Assad, who represents the financial front of the regime.
Shadid was allowed into Syria for only a few hours to conduct the interviews. You have to wonder whether this provoked much debate in the newspaper’s offices. The condition transformed the correspondent into a stenographer, and the New York Times into a platform, for the dual messages emanating from Damascus. This irked quite a few people. However, it’s also fair to say that Shadid has kept the Syria story on the front pages of his daily, at a moment when the attention in the United States has been drifting elsewhere.
What did Shaaban and Makhlouf say? The essence of Shaaban’s remarks was that the Syrian regime had gained the upper hand against the uprising. “I think now we’ve passed the most dangerous moment. I hope so, I think so,” she said. Shaaban repeated the government line that Syria faced an armed rebellion, and disclosed that she had been tasked with initiating a dialogue with dissidents. “We see [the Syrian events] as an opportunity to try to move forward on many levels, especially the political level,” she added.
Makhlouf’s comments sounded more ominous. “If there is no stability [in Syria], there’s no way there will be stability in Israel,” he warned. “No way, and nobody can guarantee what will happen after, God forbid, anything happens to this regime.” He observed that the regime had opted to fight, insisting that all its members were united: “We will sit here. We call it a fight until the end.” He also issued a transparent threat: “They should know when we suffer, we will not suffer alone.”
Some have suggested that the two messages reveal a split in the Syrian regime. That’s not convincing. The messages were not that different, and to put Shaaban on the same level as Makhlouf is absurd. Shaaban is viewed as a spokesman for the president, but she plays no central role in the Assad-Makhlouf constellation. She doubtless needed a green light to go ahead with the interview, one that required some measure of approval by Makhlouf and Assad’s younger brother Maher, both of whom have taken an eradication approach to the protests. Makhlouf, in turn, needed no authorization whatsoever.
What Shaaban said was likely intended to be interpreted in the United States as a marginally soft statement by Bashar Assad. In contrast, Makhlouf offered the harsher alternative if the president’s approach was rejected by the international community. It was a classic good cop, bad cop routine, and those familiar with Syrian manners will be little surprised by the ploy. That’s why it seems far-fetched to assume that we are witnessing a fundamental rift in Syria’s ruling family.
The reason for this is that there is no serious alternative to what the Assads and the Makhloufs are doing today. They can either stand together behind repression, or fall apart. That’s hardly to justify the regime’s butchery of hundreds of unarmed civilians. Rather, it’s to affirm that the Syrian leadership is incapable of undertaking anything different. There simply is no reform option, and there never was. Genuine reform means dislodging the bricks holding up Assad-Makhlouf authority. Bashar Assad’s open-ended presidency, the crony capitalism practiced by his cousin and other members of Syria’s elite, the abuse practiced by the all-powerful security services, even Alawite predominance, would never survive a system shaped by free elections, the rule of law, and the existence of independent media.
The New York Times interviews were made possible by the deep uneasiness in the Obama administration with moves that might destabilize the Assad regime. The Syrians are good judges of their adversaries’ weaknesses, and what they see in Washington is a president who prefers the Assads to the possibility of chaos. They realize that the measures taken until now by the United States and Europe have been relatively gentle, therefore wholly ineffective. Add to that the U.N. Security Council’s recent failure to condemn Syria and official Arab support for Syrian stability, and you will grasp why the Assad regime saw an opening to reinforce American paralysis.
Nor can the Obama administration ignore that the Syrian leadership regards American dithering as a sign of implicit approval of its actions. Indeed, Shaaban described the recent statements of President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Syria as “not too bad,” and the sanctions against Syria as manageable. That can only mean one thing: If Washington fails to clarify its views on the carnage in Syria through effective policies, the killing and the arrests there will continue, with the U.S. bearing partial responsibility. The White House’s uncertainty can be measured in human lives.
The Syrian protesters are right in not pursuing their salvation in Washington, let alone Brussels, Paris, or London. This is not an American administration overly outraged by the viciousness of dictatorships. Even in Egypt, Obama only turned against Hosni Mubarak when he was left with no other choice – although doing so against an old ally while sparing Assad suggests that Obama is like the coward who will yell at his wife to avoid a brawl with the neighbor.
What all this could also mean, however, is that the Syrian regime is wrong in pursuing its salvation in foreign capitals. Ultimately, Assad, his legitimacy in tatters, will have to win out against his own people. That will not be easy, not when the president has had to order the military occupation of several of his major cities. The regime’s behavior is a daily insult to Syrians, one they will not readily forget.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR and author of “The Ghosts of Martyrs Square: An Eyewitness Account of Lebanon’s Life Struggle” (Simon & Schuster), listed as one of the 10 notable books of 2010 by the Wall Street Journal. He tweets @ BeirutCalling.

Q&A: In Syria, Destroying the Country to Save the Regime?
By: Larisa Epatko
This third-party photo, reportedly taken in Daraa, was obtained by AFP/Getty Images and cannot be independently verified.
The Syrian government stepped up its campaign to quash a seven-week uprising Thursday, reportedly using tanks to fire on cities. At least 20 people and two Syrian soldiers died in the latest clashes.
We asked Andrew Tabler, Next Generation fellow in the Program on Arab Politics at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, about the government's actions.
Why is the government escalating the crackdown now?
ANDREW TABLER: Because they know it's a make or break moment. They want to negotiate from a position of strength. And that strength would be people going back to their homes, but people aren't doing that.
The regime has used extreme force in Daraa and now Homs, where there have been reports of shelling. This means a new phase of the crackdown and that we might be getting closer to the events of February 1982 when large parts of the city of Hama was leveled by the military in response to a revolt. In a sense, they are heading on a trajectory where they would almost have to destroy the country to save the regime.
What are the tactics of the government?
TABLER: Basically, to use outright repression to cut off the protests and gain the upper hand. Now they're talking about instituting reforms, but the only problem is and the New York Times reports that if Assad institutes these reforms, it means his undoing. Assad's family hails from the Alawite sect, and these minorities are in key positions of the secret forces and the army, so they're involved in the crackdown. To come up with a political solution there have to be political reforms, but that means undermining the minority base of the government. This is why the Obama administration is taking a more aggressive stance. More measures might be coming out in the coming days in the realm of Treasury Department of Syrian officials. There are rumors this could include designations of President Assad himself.
The economy of the country has ground to a halt, so the sanctions would have an increasingly large effect. Syria has the reserves to survive it, but the question is how long. The French are coming close to saying the Assad government must go. This is far from over.
How is the government finding and arresting people?
TABLER: They're doing house-to-house sweeps. They're using technology provided by Iran to monitor cell phones and emails. They have a firewall made by a European company that allows them to monitor people, the activities of Syrians. Members of the security forces, usually younger ones with foreign language skills, are doing the monitoring.
The protest leaders are not from the traditional opposition, so the regime has to go after these people who have gone into hiding. They've been uploading videos via satellite phones, so they're desperately asking for refill cards to recharge the credit on their phones in order to upload videos. You have a traditional opposition also, but this is a narrow group of people. It's unclear to what degree the opposition would agree to talk to the government at all, or if it just wants the government's fall.
In the face of this crackdown, how are the protesters able to continue?
TABLER: The protesters have been resilient. They know that if they leave the squares or stop they'll lose their leverage on Assad. One week you might see thousands, another week hundreds scattered throughout the country. It's unclear how this will play out. But it won't look like Cairo or Tunisia; it will be a long process. What makes this alarming is a lot of powers could be at play -- Iranians are worried about the fall of the Assad regime -- not just the arms flow to Hezbollah, but Syria manufactures the missiles paid for by Iran, which they want on hand if there is a war with Israel. On the other hand, it doesn't seem like the regime will tip over -- at least very easily.
The opposition is organized, but has less practice working together than in Egypt. There you had a separate military to step in, where the senior command hails from the same Alawite minority as the president. Everyone's trying to figure out where this is going. Many in the Syrian opposition want President Obama to make a public statement to boost the opposition's cause. We'll have more on Syria on Wednesday's NewsHour. View all of our World coverage and follow us on Twitter.

Bellemare spokeswoman signals further secrecy
May 12, 2011
By Michael Bluhm The Daily Star
BEIRUT: The Special Tribunal for Lebanon Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare gave Wednesday the clearest indication yet that he wants to keep the details of the indictment secret, meaning the public might not find out the names of those accused or the evidence until a trial begins.
“A warrant of arrest may be requested at the same time the indictment is filed. Experience at other international tribunals has shown that the successful execution of warrants is enhanced if the indictment remains under seal until served,” Bellemare’s spokeswoman Sophie Boutaud de la Combe told The Daily Star.
Bellemare last Friday submitted an amendment indictment to pretrial Judge Daniel Fransen, who can confirm or reject Bellemare’s proposals to charge individuals in the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
Court spokesman Marten Youssef said Fransen would make his decision in “the coming months.”
If Fransen confirms Bellemare’s indictment but keeps it sealed, then the public would only see the names of those charged or the evidence once proceedings start, which would require either Lebanese authorities to arrest the accused and transfer them to the STL’s Holland headquarters or for the tribunal to commence a trial in absentia – either option only adding more time until the contents of the indictment are released.
Shafik Masri, who teaches constitutional law, said it was likely that Fransen would order the indictment sealed. Masri added that he hoped Fransen would keep the charge sheet confidential, because international law traditionally gives the trial court the right to decide on which materials are made public.
“What I wish to see is to keep it secret until it will reach the [trial] itself,” Masri said, adding that he anticipated Fransen would rule on the indictment toward the end of summer. “This is a well established rule in international law.”
Divulging the names of those accused before the trial could also provoke a crisis in Lebanon, Masri said. Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has said that he expects the court to accuse the group’s members, but he said the court was a tool of Israeli and U.S. interests to weaken Hezbollah, and he has called on all Lebanese to boycott the court. Irreconcilable differences over Lebanon’s stance on the tribunal served as a major factor in the fall of Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s government in January
Sari Hanafi, professor of transitional justice at the American University of Beirut, said previous international courts had typically announced their indictments as openly as possible, but the circumstances of the STL differ greatly from earlier tribunals. The STL is the first international court to try an act of terrorism, where other courts had dealt with charges of war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide.
Also, most international courts have prosecuted well-known figures who had already fallen from power, such as the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia or former Liberian President Charles Taylor for his role in Sierra Leone’s civil war. However, the identity of Rafik Hariri’s killers remains unknown, and the case is still fraught with a great deal of political baggage, Hanafi said. The March 14 political coalition, and many Western powers, blamed Syria for Hariri’s assassination, although Damascus has categorically denied any involvement in the killing.
“It’s a very special case,” Hanafi said. “The political issues at stake for the indictment – we don’t find it elsewhere. There’s pressure, internal and external pressure, to play with the disclosure of the indictment.
“Legal factors in the tribunal are very minor factors compared to the political factors.”
Many domestic and foreign actors would like to take advantage if the indictment names Hezbollah members, while others might want to keep the charges secret because the accusations would only add to the instability roiling the region, Hanafi said.
De la Combe’s reference to how sealed indictments increase the chances for arrest recalls the difficulties of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, which saw accused Bosnian Serb war criminals Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic evade authorities for more than 12 years after their indictments were publicly announced. Mladic still has not been arrested.
The political polarization in Lebanon over the STL, meanwhile, has also affected the country’s annual contribution of the court’s funding. Lebanon agreed to pay 49 percent of the court’s costs for its first three years, but the country has not paid its share of this year’s budget, Youssef said, adding that he saw the political vacuum as responsible for the delay.
“Given that there is a caretaker government in Lebanon at the moment, it is unsurprising that we have not yet had a formal response to the request for the Lebanese contribution,” Youssef said. “We look forward to receiving the money, which the Lebanese state is obliged to pay under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter.”
A Justice Ministry official confirmed for The Daily Star that Saad Hariri’s caretaker Cabinet would not make a move on the financial obligation to the court. Many have speculated that any government formed by Prime Minister-designate Najib Mikati would take steps to distance Lebanon from the court, but Masri said cutting off the funding would do nothing to halt the STL’s prosecutions.
In addition to Lebanon possibly facing U.N. Security Council sanctions for violating Chapter VII, the international community would easily make up the shortfall in the court’s 2011 budget of $65.7 million, Masri added.
“It is actually a hopeless attempt, [if] they decide not to pay the annual contribution,” Masri said. “The court will never stop, [even] if some of the Lebanese factions think that by not paying, the court will be terminated.”

Responsible rivals
May 12, 2011
The Daily Star
According to the latest indications, the stalemate over the formation of a new government in Lebanon is finally eroding.
The major players have been put on notice that they simply must produce an agreement, after a high-level, one-two punch by Walid Jumblatt, openly, and Damascus, behind closed doors.
According to the latest indications, the impasse over the Interior Ministry is finally at an end, and although one can’t say that the “crisis is over,” until the decree is actually issued by Baabda Palace.
But, assuming that the government is now just a few days away, there is no use going back to the last 100-plus days, to start looking for scapegoats.
It is simply a time in which Lebanon needs to get down to business, and face the facts. There will be a government of “one [political] color,” irrespective of the different shades within the next Cabinet. In this new situation, the country’s new opposition, the March 14 coalition, will have an important role to play.
Since Taif, Lebanon has suffered from several types of political arrangements. Whether it was the infamous troika system, or the unstable periods of “national unity,” the same phenomenon resulted: Rival groups were present in the Cabinet, meaning a lack of cohesiveness and effectiveness.
Today, in sharp contrast, the country will see a more legitimate “game,” where the opposition is actually outside the Cabinet, playing its proper role of monitoring the executive branch and holding it accountable. The new opposition must play this proper role by using legitimate tools: it can’t rely solely on rhetoric and polemic; it has the right to criticize, but it will also be expected to put forward its alternatives. This political formula is a basic part of any respectable democracy. The new government in turn, must address the people’s needs and secure their well-being. It would be fruitless to focus on the stalemate of the last 100 days, and determine who exactly has been responsible for the delay in forming a government, and hold people accountable for the damage they have done to the country. By the same token, it would be fruitless for the next government to take office with an attitude of trying to pursue a vendetta against its rivals. The new government must simply look forward, and get on with the business of governing, or else it will have failed before the ink is even dry on the long-awaited decree. Perhaps Lebanon will be lucky enough to see a political system based, healthily, on a government, and an opposition.
The new government will have its hands full as it seeks to defuse the various tensions present in Lebanon’s streets, whatever the reason behind them. It is time to see two distinct groups – the government and the opposition – take responsibility for matters, and let the people decide who can do a better job.

Snags obstruct final government deal
May 12, 2011 07:
By Hassan Lakkis The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Last-minute snags over the distribution of portfolios among March 8 allies are holding up a final deal on the formation of a new government despite an agreement Wednesday on the nomination of a retired police officer, Brig. Gen. Marwan Charbel, as interior minister, sources close to the Cabinet formation process told The Daily Star Wednesday.
“The biggest obstacle has been overcome and a few other details remain to be solved,” a senior March 8 source told The Daily Star. “Things are positive now that the deadlock over the Interior Ministry portfolio has been resolved but other details regarding the distribution of portfolios still need further examination.”
Prime Minister-designate Najib Mikati tried to finalize the distribution of remaining key portfolios with the March 8 coalition but failed after representatives of parties disagreed among themselves on their shares in the government.
President Michel Sleiman and Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun had agreed earlier Wednesday on Charbel as a “neutral candidate” for the Interior Ministry portfolio, said the sources close to the formation process.
Charbel, a resident of Sleiman’s hometown Jbeil, has recently escorted the president on several official foreign visits, while Charbel’s son-in-law, known to be a high ranking FPM official, is among other relatives known for their close ties with Aoun. Charbel has served as police chief in Mount Lebanon and north Lebanon.
Fayez Ghosn, an official in Suleiman Franjieh’s Marada Movement, a close ally to Aoun, may be up for either the key post of defense or telecommunications minister.
A Mikati spokesman confirmed that talks concerning government formation were positive, but said the outcome of deliberations was not conclusive.
The spokesman added that contacts were needed, and that all reports about arriving at a “solution” were unfounded.
Intense deliberations, which kicked off late Tuesday, were scheduled to resume Thursday with March 8 officials holding more talks with Mikati and other officials to finalize the deal on the government make-up.
The meetings will bring together Mikati with Speaker Nabih Berri’s aide Ali Hassan Khalil, Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s assistant Hussein Khalil, Aoun’s son-in-law caretaker Energy Minister Jebran Bassil and Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt’s representative Ghazi Aridi.
A source close to the formation process said Mikati was negotiating the demands of each of the March 8 groups separately, adding that the number of Maronite ministers to be allotted to the FPM was currently the main topic of contention between the party and Mikati.
The source said that while Mikati was pressing Aoun to submit his list of preferred candidates so as to allot them with portfolios, the FPM requested that the prime-minister designate inform them about their share of portfolios so they can name suitable ministers. The source added that Hezbollah could withdraw its plea for certain portfolios to facilitate the formation process.
“If discussions continue at the same positive pace in the next few hours, ignoring for the moment the devil in the details, intensified contacts will result in the birth of a government as soon as possible,” said the source.
Renewed efforts to break the almost four-month-long Cabinet deadlock kicked off Saturday night, with March 8 parties under strong Syrian pressure to speed up the formation process after a visit by the political aides of Berri and Nasrallah to Damascus.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem followed up on the visit Monday with over-the-phone talks with March 8 officials, urging the prompt formation of a government, a senior March 8 source told The Daily Star.
Sleiman held separate meetings with Mikati and Berri Wednesday at Baabda presidential palace.
Berri, who left Baabda without making any statement, told his visitors at Parliament later in the day that considerable progress had been made in the formation of a Cabinet but added that he “could not guarantee the formation of a government before it is actually formed.” Berri had said upon his arrival at Baabda that the “atmosphere is better than before.”
Minutes after Berri left, Mikati arrived and held talks with Sleiman. He also declined to speak with reporters following the meeting, the second between Mikati and Sleiman in less than 24 hours.
Lebanon has been under a caretaker Cabinet since the collapse of Hariri’s government on Jan. 12 in a long-simmering feud between Hariri and the March 8 alliance over the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, which is probing the 2005 assassination of Hariri’s father, former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
Mikati, the Tripoli MP and telecom tycoon, nominated by March 8, was appointed on Jan. 25 to form a new Cabinet.
In other indications of progress in the formation process, United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon Michael Williams, following separate meetings with Aoun and Hezbollah’s caretaker Minister of State Mohammad Fneish, conveyed to the media their “cautious optimism.”
“I was pleased that General Aoun is positive that there can be progress in the formation of a government soon,” Williams told reporters at Aoun’s residence.

Syria Drops Bid for Seat on UN Human Rights Council
Margaret Besheer | The United Nations May 11, 2011 /VOA
Syria has dropped its controversial bid for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council. There has been growing international pressure for Syria to withdraw its bid as its two-month military crackdown on peaceful anti-government protesters continues.
Syrian U.N. envoy Bashar Ja’afari said his delegation and Kuwait’s called for the meeting of countries belonging to the so-called Asian Group to inform them the two governments had made an agreement between themselves to trade candidacy slots. Kuwait will now run for the 2011 to 2013 term and Syria will postpone its candidacy and take Kuwait’s place on the slate for the 2014 to 2016 term. Asked if Damascus made this decision under pressure or because it wants to focus on events at home, Ambassador Ja’afari said that was not the reason. “It is a sovereign decision based on the Syrian government’s will to reschedule the timing of our candidacy. Rescheduling the timing of our candidacy based on reconsidering our priorities on the list of U.N. candidacies. That is it," he said. Kuwait Ambassador Mansour Ayyad Alotaibi echoed his Syrian counterpart’s remarks and added that his country is not running against Syria nor is Syria “withdrawing” its candidacy. Both diplomats said the Asian Group unanimously endorsed their agreement.
This means Kuwait will join India, Indonesia and the Philippines as the candidates for the four open seats allotted to the Asian Group on the Human Rights Council. Several other countries are running for seats on other regional slates. The U.N. General Assembly will vote May 20 on which countries to seat.
Syria’s bid had come under growing criticism as its crackdown on peaceful protesters has continued.
U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice welcomed the developments, saying the Asian Group demonstrated it was unwilling to lend sufficient support to Syria, a country she said, that has a deplorable human-rights record and is in the process of killing and arresting its own people. Human Rights Watch said Syria may have escaped accountability in the U.N. General Assembly by abandoning its bid, but said it should not have the same luck in the Security Council. Human Rights Watch called for the council to take strong measures, including imposing sanctions.
The Security Council has been divided on a response to the Syrian situation. Speaking in Geneva, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon again urged Syria’s president to stop using excessive force and mass arrests of protesters. He said he is also disappointed a U.N. humanitarian team has not been given access to Syria as President Bashar al-Assad had promised him. On April 29, the Human Rights Council held a special session adopting a resolution calling for an end to human rights violations in Syria and to grant access to human rights monitors.

Historic fluctuations in France's relationship with Syria
Thursday, 12 May 2011
By Randa Takieddine
Those who have followed the ties between France and Syria since the era of President Francois Mitterand are seeing the same fluctuation in the quality of this relationship. France has constantly tried to improve its relationship with the Syrian regime because Syria is important in the Middle East, and because it plays an important role in Lebanon and in the peace process.
Thus, in 1984 Mitterand's decision to visit Damascus generated considerable criticism in France, because it came two years after the assassination of the French ambassador to Lebanon, Louis Delamare. French circles, along with Delamare's family, blamed Mitterand for the visit after French accusations over the murder had pointed in the direction of the Syrian regime.
Mitterand undertook this famous visit, which ended in huge failure because the Syrians made every effort to sabotage it. This was particularly the case when Mitterand and his Syrian counterpart Hafez Assad tackled the topic of Lebanon. If one goes back to the joint news conference that ended the visit, there was the hard-line stance of the Syrian regime and the failure to benefit from the opportunity to respond to the "open hand" France had extended to Damascus.
After Mitterand, the same thing happened with President Jacques Chirac, during the Hafez Assad and Bashar Assad presidencies. Chirac began with a policy of openness to President Hafez Assad, with the encouragement of the late Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri. Chirac made an effort to cancel Syria's debt to France without going through the Paris Club for rescheduling it. Chirac did so in a decision that stirred criticisms in French financial circles. He also invited Hafez Assad to make a state visit to France, despite the cautions and criticisms voiced by his Socialist Prime Minister, Lionel Jospin, who in the end agreed to the visit.
This was because the president in France has the final say on foreign policy matters.
When Hafez Assad died, Chirac was the only Western president who traveled to attend the funeral, despite the criticisms that were directed at him. Chirac believed that a good relationship with Syria would help convince Damascus that a secure Lebanon was in its interest. Chirac was also the first one to receive Assad's son Bashar, who inherited the presidency, even before he became president, hosting him at the Elysee Palace.
After that, he rolled out the red carpet for President Bashar Assad during a state visit that was preceded by a visit from Assad's ally, Lebanese President Emile Lahoud. After this, the relationship deteriorated, when Bashar Assad did not heed the advice of the entire world, led by President Chirac, to not extend Lahoud's mandate. This was despite the fact that Assad could have chosen another president from among his friends in Lebanon. However, he insisted on Lahoud, despite the advice of his Iranian ally at the time, President Mohammad Khatami.
After this, Rafiq Hariri and his comrades were assassinated and a string of killings followed in Lebanon. There was a complete rupture in ties between Syria and France until President Nicolas Sarkozy came to office, trying once again in July 2008 to open a new page with the Syrian regime. This honeymoon lasted until a few months ago, and French Foreign Minister Claude Gueant, who was previously the secretary general of the Presidential Palace, was the motivator of this policy, along with a number of France's friends, among them the prime minister of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem Al Thani, and the Aga Khan, while Israeli President Shimon Peres also encouraged Sarkozy to open up to Syria. Sarkozy believed that he could succeed where Chirac failed.
However, the Syrian regime did not take advantage of the hand that was extended to it. Sarkozy should not be blamed for this, especially since this initiative was supported by many in his party, and even by rivals such as the former prime minister, Dominique de Villepin, and the current foreign minister, Alain Juppe. But after less than three years of this honeymoon, Sarkozy began to notice that the Syrian regime was not responding to him.
He tried to put together a contact group on Lebanon in Paris, grouping Turkey and Qatar, after the March 8 camp's ministers resigned from the government of Saad Hariri. Syria did not agree, and it, through its allies in Lebanon, brought down the government of Saad Hariri, removing him from the prime minister's office; Sarkozy expressed his irritation in a telephone call with Assad. When popular protests began recently in Syria, Paris advised Damascus to engage in dialogue and undertake reforms. But the Syrian regime did not listen. Today, the rupture in ties has returned, after France sought to impose sanctions on the Syrian president himself.
The Syrian regime continues to fail to take advantage of opportunities presented to let it exit its isolation, and it does not respond to its friends in France, Turkey and Qatar, or respond to the demands of its people. But it should read the regional changes, and the change in the peoples of the region. The regime cannot remain in the stone age, because the vigilance and bravery of the Syrian people cannot be defeated!
(Published in the London-based al-Hayat on May 11.)

Mideast Expert Phares: Al-Qaida Threat Outlives bin Laden
Wednesday, 11 May 2011
By Andra Varin and Kathleen Walter
The killing of Osama bin Laden is a victory for the United States, but it does not mean jihadists will stop trying to attack the country from all quarters, terrorism and Middle East expert Dr. Walid Phares told Newsmax.TV.
Although bin Laden capitalized on anti-American feelings in the Middle East, Phares said, the al-Qaida leader did not initiate them — and the threat is still out there.
“What we need to do is understand the mind-set of the jihadists,” Phares said in the exclusive interview with Newsmax. “This is an ideological network. I liken it to ‘The Lord of the Rings.’ Yes, the lord is very important — the emir, the caliph, the chief of all these networks is important — but he did not create these networks.
“Osama bin Laden was created by the jihadist movement; he did not create the jihadist movement.”
It is important for the U.S. government and the American public to realize that the al-Qaida threat exists not just in faraway places such as Yemen and the border areas of Pakistan but also in the United States, Phares said.
“Their agenda is not going to stop with the vanishing of their boss. They’re going to continue with their attempts to strike the homeland,” said Phares, a Newsmax contributor and author of “The Confrontation: Winning the War Against Future Jihad.”
He warned that, if the United States and NATO withdraw from Afghanistan before a stable government and civil society take root there, the Taliban quickly will assume power again.
“That means the establishment of a Taliban-controlled regime in Kabul,” Phares said. “Are we going to give them that gift?”
Considering the terrible sacrifices U.S. troops have made, he said, it would be a shame to let the Taliban come right back to the position they enjoyed 10 years ago, before the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan chased them out.
Phares also said that it would have been impossible for bin Laden to live undetected in a villa in Pakistan for so many years without someone in the government knowing — and someone within the national security agency must have been protecting the terrorist leader.
“While it is possible that the president of Pakistan, the Cabinet of Pakistan, who are coming from a party that has been targeted by al-Qaida . . . the government may not have known exactly the location, but they knew bin Laden was within their country,” Phares said.
And he said it would be impossible for an intelligence service as well-developed as Pakistani’s ISI to be unaware of bin Laden’s hideout in the pleasant mountain town of Abbottabad.
“A circle, a segment within the national security must have known and these must have been the case officers protecting bin Laden,” he said.
Nevertheless, Phares said the United States should not yank the billions in aid it gives Pakistan each year. Instead, he said, it would be more effective to put pressure on the Pakistani government to reform its intelligence service.
“There are jihadists, among them terrorists, who have great influence inside Pakistan,” Phares said, adding, “The government and the people are our allies, or at least opposed to the Taliban.”
© Newsmax. All rights reserved.


 

Hanging with Hezbollah, Part II
May 10, 2011 - 11:23 am -
by Michael J. Totten
Pyjama Media
http://pajamasmedia.com/michaeltotten/2011/05/10/hanging-with-hezbollah-part-ii/
Here is the second part of an excerpt from my new book, The Road to Fatima Gate: The Beirut Spring, the Rise of Hezbollah, and the Iranian War Against Israel. If you missed it yesterday, read Part I first.
I called Hussein a few days later. He said Dan and I were scheduled for an interview with Mohammad Afif, a member of Hezbollah’s political bureau, back at the office.
“I know a guy who can translate for us,” Dan said. “He owns a woodcrafting shop in Achrafieh and his English is perfect.”
So Dan called his man Abdullah and asked him to meet us for coffee ahead of our appointment. The café he chose wouldn’t have been out of place in Seattle or Portland except that it served European-style espresso instead of American. Abdullah and his wife waited for us at a table in the back.
The four of us shook hands and sat down to talk.
“Do you always work in countries at war?” Abdullah’s wife asked me while squinting and nervously smoking her cigarette. Lebanon wasn’t at war at that time, but the car bombs had made the country just dangerous and unstable enough that I didn’t immediately catch that she was exaggerating.
“This isn’t a war,” Abdullah said gently. “This is a crisis.”
He didn’t seem to feel perfectly comfortable about going to the dahiyeh to meet with Hezbollah, although he was willing.
“Have you been down there before?” I said.
“Why would I have been there before?” he said. “For some sightseeing?”
Dan and I laughed.
He didn’t say much in the taxi on the way. And he looked nervously out the window as we rolled past Hezbollah’s flags and posters of “martyrs.”
When we were left alone in Hezbollah’s waiting room, he looked profoundly uncomfortable. His eyes turned to saucers when he saw the gigantic poster of the grim-faced Khomeini on the wall.
“This is nuts,” he said. “I can’t believe I’m here.”
Hussein Naboulsi made a brief appearance, introduced himself to Abdullah, and chaperoned us down the hall to Mohammad Afif’s spacious office.
Afif wasn’t friendly and didn’t pretend to be. His handshake was perfunctory, he wouldn’t smile, and he had no interest in small talk. I turned on my voice recorder and placed it between myself and Abdullah. Dan snapped pictures as I rattled off questions.
Almost everything Afif said had been scripted and packaged for Western consumption. He did not say to us what Hezbollah said on its Al-Manar TV station, which was banned in the United States for broadcasting terrorist propaganda. He didn’t refer to Israel as “the Zionist Entity,” nor to the United States as “the Great Satan.” He condemned the car-bomb assassinations of his Lebanese political enemies, although it sounded like he only did so because he was supposed to. He said Hezbollah wasn’t interested in destroying Israel, only in justice for Palestinian refugees.
I groaned silently to myself while wishing he would say something, anything, remotely interesting and worth publishing. Almost an hour passed before he did.
He droned on and on, lecturing me and Dan about Palestinian suffering. He didn’t know it, but I actually did sympathize with Palestinian suffering and did not need to be lectured.
“You should visit the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps,” he said. “You need to see how Palestinians in Lebanon live.”
“I have seen those camps,” I said, which seemed to surprise him. Charles Chuman had shown them to me, and they were unspeakably squalid. What I said next surprised him much more. “And it’s obvious to me that Palestinians are treated much worse in Lebanon than they are by Israelis.”
He sat bolt upright in his chair. That, apparently, was the last thing he thought I would say. But he quickly recovered.
“Yes,” he said. “You are right. I am sorry about that.” It was my turn to be surprised. At last he didn’t have a scripted response, and his answer was honest.
More interesting than anything Afif actually said were his facial expressions. I wished Dan had brought a video camera instead of a still camera so he could capture them.
“You must know,” I said, “that Americans are sick to death of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Is there any chance we’ll see peace in this region any time soon?”
Afif didn’t need Abdullah to translate the word “peace.” He knew exactly what it meant in English just as almost every Westerner in the Middle East knew how to say it in Arabic. And when he heard me say “peace,” when he was relaxed and not thinking about the fact that I was carefully watching his face, he twisted his flat expression into a grimace. The moment was fleeting, and he composed himself almost instantly, but it’s almost impossible for even the most accomplished poker players and liars to control all involuntary facial muscles that reveal their inner thoughts and emotions.
What Afif actually said—that Hezbollah sincerely hoped for peace and a mutually agreeable settlement between Israelis and Arabs—was simply not credible. Hezbollah said nothing of the sort in its own media and said nothing of the sort in its schools and its summer camps, where it indoctrinated children into a culture of martyrdom, death, and resistance.
Aside from the oft-repeated Death to Israel and Death to America slogans, those suckled on Hezbollah schooling and weaned on Hezbollah media were bombarded with hysterical bigotry, conspiracy theories, and warmongering.
“The Jews invented the legend of the Nazi atrocities,” Hassan Nasrallah said in a declaration on April 9, 2000. “Anyone who reads [Islamic and other monotheistic holy] texts cannot think of co-existence with them, of peace with them, or about accepting their presence, not only in Palestine of 1948 but even in a small village in Palestine, because they are a cancer which is liable to spread again at any moment.”
The only terrorism and “resistance” Afif sincerely opposed was that committed by al Qaeda’s fanatical Sunnis. “We hate them,” he said, showing real emotion for the first time. “They call us cockroaches and murder our people.”
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s head-chopping and mosque-burning al Qaeda in Iraq said it was God’s will that Shia Muslims be slaughtered. And al Qaeda matched its words with deeds. Thousands of Iraqi Shias had been car bombed to death by Sunni psychotics in Baghdad and elsewhere. I was hardly less offended by this than Hezbollah was. And I found myself wishing Afif and his people were moderate, reasonable, and smart enough to realize al Qaeda and other like-minded groups posed a far bigger threat to him than Americans and Israelis did. Americans, I thought, might naturally sympathize with them, with the abuse they suffered in the modern era and through the ages, if it weren’t for Hezbollah and Khomeini’s Islamic Republic.
A huge number of Shias in Iraq at the time were willing to fight alongside Americans, not only against Sunni death squads and terrorists but against Iranian-backed Shia militias much like Hezbollah. That was a bridge too far for most Lebanese Shias, however, who remained firmly under the thumb of Hezbollah’s Khomeinists.
“People in the United States find it hard to understand how people in Hamas and Hezbollah think,” veteran Middle East reporter Jeffrey Goldberg told me when I met him in Washington. “It’s alien. It’s alien to us. The feverish racism and conspiracy mongering, the obscurantism, the apocalyptic thinking—we can’t relate to that. Every so often, there’s an eruption of that in a place like Waco, Texas, but we’re not talking about ninety people in a compound. We’re talking about whole societies that are captive to this kind of absurdity. So it’s very important—and you know this better than almost anyone—to go over there yourself and tape it, get it down on paper, and say, ‘This is what they actually say.’”
I never published most of what Afif said to me, though, because it was too slickly packaged and disingenuous. I wanted to let Westerners know what the Party of God really believed, but Afif was smart enough not to tell me.
Hezbollah got itself too much bad press in the West when its members and officials were allowed to say whatever they wanted, unfiltered, to journalists. Goldberg himself published a devastating two-part exposé in the New Yorker in 2002 before Hezbollah figured this out and clamped down.
Firas Mansour, for example, a film editor at Hezbollah’s Al-Manar station, showed Goldberg a work in progress and said he wanted to call it “We Will Kill All the Jews.” When Goldberg said he thought a title like that might encourage the recruitment of suicide bombers, Mansour answered, “Exactly.”
Hezbollah eventually learned to send journalists like me and Dan to men like Mohammad Afif who were well practiced in the art of saying little that was controversial or even of interest.
On our way out, Hussein asked how the interview went. “Great!” I said to be polite. “It was great. Thank you for everything.”
“Excellent,” he said and placed his hand affectionately on my back. “I am glad I could help.”
“Can I ask you to set up another interview for us?” I said, hoping to meet someone a little less disciplined.
“I’m sorry,” he said. “Journalists can only have one.”
“Only one?” I said, stunned. It would have been nice if he had told me that before the interview started. Hezbollah’s message, though, had to be tightly controlled, especially since the withdrawal of the Syrian military left it exposed and with an uncertain future.
“I can invite you to an iftar this Thursday,” he said, referring to a fast-breaking meal just after sunset during the month of Ramadan. “Hassan Nasrallah will be there.”
Dan smiled. “Nasrallah will be there?” he said.
“Yes,” Hussein said. “You are both welcome. And you can take pictures. I will add your names to the list.”
Dan and I would soon stand within feet of the boss. The event was one of the last of Nasrallah’s life before he blew up the Eastern Mediterranean and found himself driven underground like an urban dwelling Osama bin Laden.
You can read the rest by ordering a copy of The Road to Fatima Gate from Amazon.com.

 

Murderer vs. reformer
Hanin Ghaddar, May 12, 2011
A grab taken off a video downloaded from YouTube shows Syrians demonstrating in Kofr Bel on May 6, 2011, a "Day of Defiance" in which thousands of Syrians rallied even as the regime of President Bashar al-Assad deployed tanks. (AFP photo/YouTube)
It has been two months since the Syrian uprising started, and the result is that more than 9,000 protestors have been arrested, almost 1,000 murdered, and no reforms have been instituted. It is clear now that the protestors will not stop, but neither will President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
How this is going to end, no one knows, but there are a few issues that have become clear to both the Syrian people and those who are watching the uprising closely.
First, Assad has lost his credibility before the international community. It is clear now that he is not only incapable of reform, but he also has no problem murdering his own people. His ordering his troops to kill peaceful protestors is, quite simply, a crime against humanity.
Second, he and those who committed these crimes should be punished through the proper channels; otherwise, the people who have been tortured, humiliated and have had their loved ones killed might eventually resort to non-peaceful methods.
Third, there are no armed groups among the protestors. All the videos of street protests being posted on the internet show unarmed demonstrators being shot and humiliated by armed security forces, who are sometimes dressed in civilian clothes. There are no videos showing demonstrators shooting at the security forces.
The regime would have certainly broadcasted on its official TV channels such videos if they existed. All they are showing is pre-recorded interviews with individuals claiming that they were armed and funded by “outside forces,” in an attempt to convince viewers that there is a conspiracy by foreign powers to bring down the Assad regime.
Fourth, there is no conspiracy. The uprising of the Syrian people is a result of their desire for dignity, democracy and freedom. They aspire to be treated like citizens and have followed the lead of their brothers and sisters in Tunisia and Egypt. They believe that this is their moment, and if they let it pass, they will regret it forever. The Arab Spring will not wait for them to prepare themselves more. So they organized themselves with whatever technical and logistical expertise that was available to them and broke the barrier of fear that has kept them silent for 40 years.
Fifth, there is no turning back for the Syrian people. They know that if they give up their movement and the regime survives, it will come out stronger than ever, and will go after dissenters one by one to make sure that no one ever dares criticize it again.
Sixth, Islamists, Salafists and Muslim Brothers do not constitute the majority of the Syrian protestors. Those protesting against the regime are regular Syrian people. They are liberal intellectuals, students, Kurds in Qamishly, Druze in Soweida, and tribes in Hama, Daraa, Banias and other areas. That is why it will be difficult for the Syrian regime to shut down the protests: They are widespread and diverse. The people will still find ways to continue, unless the regime is able to kill hundreds of thousands of protestors spread across the country.
Because of the above, and in the context of the Arab Spring that is sweeping the whole region, the Syrian uprising cannot be stopped with violent means. But the question remains: Why are the Libyan people’s lives and demands for reform more valid for the international community than the Syrians’? Is it because the Libyans, whose rebellion has not been as peaceful as the Syrians’, have oil?
The West couldn’t tolerate the idea of Muammar Qaddafi’s forces entering Benghazi and killing innocent people during the first stages of the Libyan uprising, and so they interfered, politically and militarily. Syrian forces are massacring their own people in more than one area, and the international community, including the suspiciously silent Arab states, has been extremely reserved in its reaction.
The Syrian people do not want any foreign interference – especially militarily – in their uprising, but they certainly do not want to feel abandoned.
The Syrian regime is killing innocent people. The security forces are collectively punishing villages and towns where protests have been taking place, and are ignoring all calls for reform and for ending the use of violence against the people. The regime believes that this is the only way to survive, and it will not stop before it makes sure everything goes back to normal.
However, nothing will go back to normal. For one, the past 40 years were not “normal” for the Syrians, who have suffered from corruption, violation of their basic human rights and freedoms, and oppression in the name of “resisting Israel.” Secondly, the Syrian people are aware that there is no turning back.
The whole region is turning toward democracy, and a dictatorship in Syria cannot survive in this context, no matter how protected and confident it feels. The question is not whether Assad’s regime survives or not, but how many more people it will murder before the world realizes that it is time for him to step down.
**Hanin Ghaddar is managing editor of NOW Lebanon

About Syria’s Christians
Hazem Saghiyeh, /Now Lebanon
May 11, 2011
There are some today who are using “the support of Syrian Christians for Assad’s regime” as an argument to condemn the Syrian uprising, to prove that “Islamists and Salafists” are involved in the uprising and uphold the “secularism of the regime” in contrast.
Of course, we do not have anything to confirm or deny this “support” and its extent. But its presence, if true, is nothing but another sign of what the Baathist regime has sown since its establishment in 1963 (especially after the “corrective movement” in 1970) and of what it is reaping in Syria today. If the Christians’ fear has led them to this, it only betrays the weight of the destruction that the Baathist decades inflicted on the Syrian social fabric. Communities began relating to one another only through fear and suspicion, not seeing any future besides open killing. Honesty requires us to say that sectarianism and minorities’ fears are of course not the product of the Baath or its rule. These sentiments run throughout the history of religious communities and the partisan structures and cultures that flourished in our region. Yet, having said this, it is difficult to avoid the bitter reality that 48 years of the authority of “unity, liberty and socialism” has aggravated such sentiments rather than limiting and restraining them. It can be deduced from this that more Baathist rule necessarily means more social disintegration, more fearful minorities asking them ruler to “protect” them – in fact, it means more fear on all sides, from all sides. If it is true that the Christians are “supporting” Assad’s regime, it is also true that they are mistaken. By doing so, they are creating worse conditions that will backfire on them in the future. As for the dangers of transition – and there may well be real dangers for both minorities and majorities – the other side of transition is the establishment of new beginnings. Intolerance accompanied by a possibility for change is less costly than established, entrenched, closed and arrogant intolerance. It was said before that Iraq’s Christians were supporting Saddam and his regime because he “protected” them. This – again, if true – is a sign of the role the Baathist regimes play in the breakup of their countries’ social fabric by offering minority communities protection in exchange for their loyalty. They do this rather than replace the fear-protection dualism with the standards of actual citizenship. Was not Saddam Hussein’s era itself, with its prolonged discrimination and repression, the reason behind the explosion of bloody, fanatical hatreds among the Iraqis following his overthrow? These kinds of regimes are based on a type of Stockholm Syndrome, where the hostage falls in love with his captor. In this case, all the captor has to do is keep from killing the hostage so that it appears he is the one giving him life. The Syrian Christian – in fact, any human being – should be smarter than this.