Matthew 18 Who Is the Greatest

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
December 03/2011

Bible Quotation for today/Jesus Goes to the Temple
Matthew 21/12-17: " Jesus went into the Temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the moneychangers and the stools of those who sold pigeons, and said to them, It is written in the Scriptures that God said, My Temple will be called a house of prayer. But you are making it a hideout for thieves! The blind and the crippled came to him in the Temple, and he healed them. The chief priests and the teachers of the Law became angry when they saw the wonderful things he was doing and the children shouting in the Temple, Praise to David's Son! So they asked Jesus, Do you hear what they are saying? Indeed I do, answered Jesus. Haven't you ever read this scripture? You have trained children and babies to offer perfect praise. Jesus left them and went out of the city to Bethany, where he spent the night.

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah,s Speech of o1.12.11/December 02/11
Crisis averted—for now/By: Matt Nash/December 02/11
Has the Shiite star set?/By Tariq Alhomayed/December 02/11
Iran - US war: A clash of imaginations/By Amir Taheri/December 02/11

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for December 02/11
Former Mossad chief briefed comptroller about Iran strike plans
Former Mossad chief: Israeli attack on Iran must be stopped to avert catastrophe
STL confirms it received more than $32m from Lebanon
Report: Iran authorities behind attack on U.K. embassy
U.S. talks of freezing assets of Iran's central bank
Detailing the anatomy of a Lebanese protest movement
MEA pilots extend strike after Salameh talks fail
Nasrallah: We will not cause crisis over STL funding
Gemayel Praises STL Funding, Hopes Govt. Will Further Commit to Justice
Nasrallah Calls on Miqati to Put 'False Witnesses' on Cabinet Agenda
Lebanese banks tighten control on Syrian account holders
Al-Assad must choose between fate of Ben Ali or Gaddafi – Turkish official
Arab sanctions close net around Syrian trade finance
Syria now in state of civil war, death toll at 4,000: U.N.
Arab League rejects Syria intervention at EU talks
Syria Suspends Role in Mediterranean Union over EU Sanctions
EU Slaps Sanctions on 180 Iranian People, Companies
Syrian repression condemned at Human Rights Council meeting
Russia delivers anti-ship missiles to Syria-report
Report: Russia delivers supersonic cruise missiles to Syria
March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid: Nasrallah’s speech was weak
Geagea to Nasrallah: If STL Were Truly an Israeli-U.S. Product, Govt. Would Have Resigned
Miqati Has No Comment on Nasrallah’s Remarks as False Witnesses Come to the Forefront
Jumblat Holds onto Alliance with Miqati: I Believe in it
Hariri: Thousand Speeches Like Nasrallah’s Won’t Eliminate Lebanon’s Recognition of STL
U.N. Rights Chief Urges ICC Referral of Syria Crimes
Syrian National Council Leader Vows to Cut Syria's Ties to Iran, Hizbullah
Syria Troop Fire Hurts Two in Lebanon
Explosion Heard in South, Speculation whether it Was Caused by Hizbullah or Israel
Syria Rebels Attack Intelligence Base, Kill 8
Biden Says Assad should Quit, Praises Turkey's 'Real' Leadership
Syria's Al-Watan Daily Hit by EU Sanctions

Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea criticizes Nasrallah’s take on STL funding
December 2, 2011 /Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea on Friday criticized Hezbollah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s comments regarding the funding of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), which is probing ex-Premier Rafik Hariri’s 2005 assassination. “How can [Nasrallah] claim to not have any relations with the STL funding matter although he knew that Prime Minister Najib Mikati was going to finance it?” Geagea asked according to a statement issued by his office. “Since [Hezbollah] labels the tribunal as a politicized US-Israeli tool, shouldn’t its ministers [and their allies] resign from the government to force its collapse and prevent the STL’s financing?” Geagea also asked. The LF leader said that the Hezbollah-led March 8 parties “continuously deceive the public,” adding that MP Michel Aoun’s Change and Reform bloc –which is Hezbollah’s key Christian ally –is “underestimating the people.” “[Aoun’s ministers] are pretending that social demands [should be] the priority of the cabinet.” On Thursday, Nasrallah said that Lebanon would not have transferred its share of funding to the STL had the issue been put to a vote in cabinet. Mikati announced on Wednesday that he transferred Lebanon’s annual share of funding to the Netherland-based court. Lebanon is responsible for meeting 49 percent of the STL's financing, which amounted to $32 million this year.-NOW Lebanon

March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid: Nasrallah’s speech was weak
December 2, 2011 /March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid on Friday described as weak Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s speech addressing Prime Minister Najib Mikati's decision to transfer Lebanon's share of funds to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. “Nasrallah wanted to justify to his supporters why he allowed the funding of a tribunal that he described as Israeli,” Soueid told LBC. He also said that Nasrallah “allowed” for the STL to be funded upon the “Syrian regime’s request.” Mikati announced on Wednesday that he transferred Lebanon’s annual share of funding to the STL probing the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The Netherlands-based court has indicted four Hezbollah operatives in connection with the murder, but they have not surrendered to the court.-NOW Lebanon

LBC: Shelling in Syrian village injures Lebanese citizens in Baqaiaa
December 2, 2011 /Shelling in Syria’s Tal Kalakh reached the Lebanese area of Baqaiaa, on the Lebanese-Syrian border, and injured four Lebanese citizens, LBC television reported on Friday.
However, the report did not elaborate any further. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s troops have cracked down on protests against almost five decades of Baath rule which broke out mid-March, killing over 4,000 people and triggering a torrent of international condemnation.
-NOW Lebanon

Syria's Al-Watan daily hit by EU sanctions
December 2, 2011 /Al-Watan, Syria's only privately-owned political daily, was added to a European Union sanctions blacklist on Friday for its alleged role in a state crackdown on dissent.
In an expanded blacklist of companies and individuals, the EU included Al-Watan and website Sham Press, also privately owned, but did not add state-run newspapers Tishrin, Al-Baath and Ath-Thawra.
Created in 2006 by three businessmen, Al-Watan is based in a Damascus free trade area, allowing it to skirt state censorship. The paper has 120 employees, including 52 journalists, a worker at Al-Watan said. It is expected to lose $1.7 million this year. "Close to power in a country where the press is muzzled, Al-Watan was the only [newspaper] worth reading because it uses its own sources when other papers are so boring," a Western diplomat told AFP. "Actually, the paper is put out by journalists whereas the others are edited by civil servants," he said. Europe announced tightened economic sanctions on Syria on Thursday, including bans on exporting gas and oil industry equipment and trading Syrian government bonds in an effort to choke off funding.
-AFP/NOW Lebanon

Syrian repression condemned at Human Rights Council meeting
December 2, 2011
Members of the UN Human Rights Council lined up Friday to condemn the murder and torture of civilians by Syrian authorities after being told that 56 children were killed last month.
They urged more international action against Damascus at an emergency session of the inter-governmental body called after a UN-appointed special commission found widespread killings and abuse of dissidents since a crackdown began in March. "We condemn in the strongest possible terms the ongoing slaughter, arbitrary arrest and torture of peaceful protesters," US ambassador Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe told the meeting, the third called to discuss Syria since the repression began. A draft resolution calls for the United Nations General Assembly and the UN Security Council to consider the commission's report and take appropriate action while urging the appointment of a Special Rapporteur to investigate further. European Union chair Poland said those guilty of abuses must be prosecuted. "Perpetrators of the human rights violations must be held to account, in particular those who committed crimes that may warrant the attention of the International Criminal Court," said ambassador Remigiusz Henczel. "This report deserves full consideration not only by this council, but by all relevant UN bodies, including the Security Council. The international community must do everything in its power to stop the violence, the ambassador added. However Russian ambassador Valery Loshchinin said the global community had been given a "one-sided" report of events in Syria. The UN estimates that more than 4,000 have been killed and many more injured in the crackdown which High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said had brought the country to the brink of civil war. "The Syrian authorities' continual ruthless repression, if not stopped now, can drive the country into a fully-fledged civil war," she told the opening of the meeting. "In light of the manifest failure of the Syrian authorities to protect their citizens, the international community needs to take urgent and effective measures to protect the Syrian people." The High Commissioner repeated a call to the Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court. "The commission's report reinforces that the need for international accountability has even greater urgency today," Pillay said.
In its findings published Monday the panel said Syrian security forces committed crimes against humanity, including the killing and torture of children, after orders from the top of Bashar al-Assad's regime.
It interviewed 223 victims and witnesses, among them defectors from Assad's security forces who told of shoot to kill orders to crush demonstrators and cases of children being tortured to death.
The three-member group tasked by the Human Rights Council was not allowed access to Syria and carried out its interviews elsewhere and via Skype, chair Paulo Pinheiro told the meeting.
State forces killed 56 children in November in the "deadliest month" since the start of crackdown on dissidents, he said, adding that a total of 307 were estimated to have been killed.
-AFP/NOW Lebanon

Crisis averted—for now
Matt Nash, December 2, 2011
Prime Minister Najib Mikati Wednesday announced Beirut sent its 49 percent share of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon’s funding, averting a crisis for now, but more problems related to the court loom on the horizon. (AFP photo/Dalati & Nohra)
While Prime Minister Najib Mikati was able to score serious political points and avert a government collapse this week by funding the Special Tribunal for Lebanon without a cabinet vote, the court and issues related to it will no doubt continue to be a thorn in his side in the months to come.
The STL’s mandate ends in March, but since the court has not yet begun a trial, spokesman Marten Youssef told NOW Lebanon that it has already requested UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon extend its lease on life. That, he added, requires negotiation between the UN and the Lebanese government.
Ministers from Michel Aoun’s Change and Reform bloc have already publically said they want to revise Lebanon’s level of cooperation with the STL in any negotiations to extend the court’s mandate. This could lead to another cabinet crisis early next year, as could the issue of the so-called “false witnesses.”
In a speech Thursday night, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah reiterated his position as the top STL opponent and called on Mikati to put the “false witness file” on cabinet’s agenda. The “false witnesses” are people who allegedly lied to UN investigators initially probing the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, before the STL was founded.
This supposedly false testimony is apparently the basis on which four high-level Lebanese security officers were held in detention without charge for nearly four years. Arrested in 2005 on the recommendation of then-UN investigation chief Detlev Mehlis, the STL ordered the generals’ unconditional release in 2009 because evidence against them was “not sufficiently credible.”
The “false witnesses” were at the center of a political debate in late 2010. March 14 and March 8 disagreed over which court had the authority to try the “false witnesses,” a debate that was never resolved but will certainly resurface if the “file” is brought to light again.
Mikati will face these impending challenges strengthened by his win over the funding. According to the Daily Star’s Rima S. Aboulmona (who got the scoop before Mikati formally announced Lebanon had paid its $30-million-plus dues to the court), the PM used cash from his office’s budget via the Higher Relief Council (HRC) to fund the STL without having to hold a cabinet vote.
Other local media outlets have since reported that Mikati put the funds in the HRC’s account at the Central Bank and then transferred the money to the court (which confirmed receipt of the payment Thursday afternoon). The HRC exists to assist in national disasters and is legally structured to be able to quickly spend money without the bureaucratic procedures that constrain ministries and other government bodies, according to former Finance Minister Jihad Azour.
The HRC—along with a wide variety of other institutions, including religious courts, the state’s statistics office and the National Council for Scientific Research—is under the authority of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, which exists as a legal authority separate from and above the PM’s office, Azour said. Budgets for these various institutions are allocated through the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, but the PM has no legal authority to actually run or interfere with these institutions, nor does he have discretionary authority to spend from their budgets, Azour said.
The PM only has authority to spend petty cash funds from his own office, Azour said, noting that the $32.1 million Mikati spent on the STL is far more than the PM’s office’s petty cash fund. It is still unclear exactly where the money came from, and repeated efforts to reach someone from Mikati’s office to clarify were unsuccessful.
Both Azour and Tourism Minister Fadi Abboud questioned the legality of Mikati’s move in interviews with NOW Lebanon. However, the HRC—as well as the Council for South, the Fund for the Displaced and the Council for Reconstruction and Development—are “widely known to be the epitome of patronage in Lebanese administration,” according to a February 2009 US Embassy cable released by Wikileaks. Regardless of whether his move was legal, funding the court is a political boon for Mikati and spells trouble for March 14 in general and Sunni leader Saad Hariri specifically, many analysts have said. Journalist, blogger and architect Karl Sharro recently wrote that “the biggest losers however have to be March 14, who have invested so much hope and political capital in the STL, only to see it adopted by Mikati now. Their position is further weakened by the fact that Mikati can now exploit his support for the STL politically while they won’t be able to make any political gains through it.”
American University of Beirut Professor of Political Science Hilal Khashan, however, disagreed with the argument that funding the court will lead to more support for Mikati from the Sunni “street” at Hariri’s expense. “This will not strengthen Mikati or weaken Hariri, he’s weak enough already,” Khashan told NOW Lebanon.

Iran - US war: A clash of imaginations
By Amir Taheri/Asharq Alawsat
The way a war is waged, and to some extent its outcome, may depend on how adversaries imagine it before it starts.
As tension rises between the Islamic Republic and potential adversaries, led by the United States, how do both sides imagine a war that we must hope would not happen?
In Tehran, the virtual exclusion of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from decision-making means that, for the first time since 1989, the Islamic Republic is under a single command symbolized by “Supreme Guide” Ali Khamenei. Khamenei, who now likes to call himself “Imam”, may well be a puppet of the military-security apparatus. But what matters for this discussion is that the time when different voices could be heard within the establishment has ended. The presidency has been reduced to an embarrassment and the Majlis, the supposed legislature, has turned into a club of adulation for “the Imam.” Khamenei and his entourage believe that war with US is inevitable. But how do they imagine that war?
In a speech last month, Khamenei hinted that Tehran was preparing to abandon its 32-year old low intensity war against the US in favour of a high-intensity strategy.
“We are not the type to sit back and watch as powers made of straw, and rotten to the heart, threaten our steadfast and steel-like nation,” he said. “Faced with aggression, we know how to be offensive.”
Four days later, the Deputy Commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) General Muhammad Baqeri told the Majlis that Khamenei’s speech indicated “a change in Iran’s Defense Doctrine.”
Baqeri indicated that Tehran's strategists believe that the US would carry out a series of air strikes against the Islamic Republic before launching a ground offensive. And, when the war starts on land, Iran’s huge size and difficult terrain would defeat “the invaders”.
“The outcome of the war will be decided on land,” the general said. “And the land of Iran belongs to the Iranian people.”
Piecing together the two speeches, it seems that Tehran imagines the war like this: The Americans will bomb Iran’s suspected nuclear sites while assembling forces for a land invasion. Iran will retaliate by attacking US forces in the region while ordering the Lebanese branch of Hezbollah and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad to fire rockets against Israel. The conflict will last a couple of weeks after which mounting US and Israeli casualties, accompanied by worldwide anti-war demonstrations, would force Washington to stop its “aggression”. The “Imamate” would emerge wounded but alive, its nuclear project and prestige intact.
What if the war doesn’t happen as Khamenei imagines?
To start with, air strikes may be more than the pinpricks Tehran imagines. Since the Iraq war, the US has increased its fire-power fourfold. It has manufactured “bunker-busting” bombs capable of destroying even the deepest mountain hideouts in places like Fardo. The “bunker-busters” are the world’s most powerful weapons, short of nuclear warheads. According to the Centre for Strategic Studies, almost 400 of these are now “in position”, aimed at Iran.
Next, it is not certain that air strikes would be limited to nuclear sites. Wouldn’t US strategist think of first wiping out Iran’s air, missile and naval assets that could be used to defend the nuclear sites? And wouldn’t the attempt to destroy such targets require the dismantling of Iran’s command-and-control systems?
According to Dan Plesch of the London University, the US is "gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran".
The US plan is to destroy over 10,000 targets in Iran within a few hours. Because suspected nuclear sites do not number more than a dozen, it is obvious that Iran’s conventional military assets and economic and industrial centres would represent the overwhelming majority of targets.
Retaliating against US forces “in the region” won’t be relevant to the conflict. By the end of the year there would be few US troops in Iraq for Jaish al-Mahdi and other Iran-financed groups to harass. Attacking US forces in Afghanistan would be declaring war on NATO.
In any case, the air strikes would be carried out by the US Air Force operating from the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, beyond any retaliation Tehran might imagine.
With Iran’s nuclear, military and economic assets destroyed, the US would have little interest in invading a failed state.
Khamenei’s threat of closing the Strait of Hormuz is also dubious. Shutting the chokepoint would need months to impact global oil supplies. Furthermore, the inauguration of the Fujairah pipeline would reduce the effect of any closure of Hormuz. Closing Hormuz would also shut Iran itself out of the oil market.
What about how the US imagines war with Iran?
Under Barack Obama the US has returned to the doctrine of long distance war discarded by George W Bush with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Now, Washington imagines a short war from the air that would enable opponents within the Khomeinist establishment to topple Khamenei, repeating what happened to Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia.
But what if the Khomeinist regime, wounded but alive, accepts to halt the nuclear project to gain time to suppress internal opponents? And what if a year or five years later, the same regime resumes its nuclear project? In any shape or form, the Khomeinist regime would remain a thorn in the side of the United States and its allies. Khamenei is running a regime that cannot be reformed. What it does is dictated by its political DNA. The question that Obama must ask before triggering a war is whether military action would alter that DNA?

Has the Shiite star set?
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
When Jordan’s King Abdullah II warned of the danger represented by the Shiite crescent in the region, Iran’s allies - at the time - reacted by suggesting that the crescent had become a full moon. This was a clear case of arrogance on the part of Iran’s agents in the region, whether in Iraq, Lebanon or pre-revolutionary Syria. So is the Iranian moon still full?
I do not think so, but we seem to have entered a phase where the Iranian star is setting in our region, whether we are talking about Syria, Lebanon, or Iraq, and indeed there are clear indications of this. Today Iran is facing a severe external test; namely the collapse of the Bashar al-Assad regime, at the hands of the Syrians and not outside forces. Iran is feeling the threat that this represents, as evidenced by its clear irrational behavior in the region, whether with regards to its dealings with Turkey or others. The Iranian concern is justified of course, especially as the revolution to overthrow Bashar al-Assad has raised unprecedented slogans condemning Iran and its allies. For example, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah can now hear insults hurled against him in broad daylight from the Syrians, and the Syrian revolution is saying: “No Iran, no Hezbollah, we want a leader who fears God”. Thus, in the event of the collapse of the al-Assad regime, Tehran will not only lose an ally, but it now seems clear that the majority of the [Syrian] people detest Iran and resent Hassan Nasrallah and his organization.
The same thing now applies to Iran’s agents in Iraq, whether we are talking about the Sadrists or those who are hijacking the country in the name of its government. The stances taken by the Iraqi government has revealed its abhorrent sectarian façade. This means that the government has now been exposed to nearly half of the Iraqi people, not to mention the honorable Shiites of Iraq who do not accept their country’s subordination to Iran, and this is something that will have consequences sooner or later.
More important than all that is the fact that the Iranian axis has not only been exposed in Syria and Lebanon, but in fact in most of the Arab world, for it has also been exposed in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco and Bahrain. Today, any statement released by Hassan Nasrallah has no value, just as any stance adopted by [Iranian President] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a man who has long been silent, has no value. Even Iran’s Supreme Leader has become preoccupied with dealing with Iran’s internal affairs, rather than external events. This is justifiable because Iran itself today is living amidst a genuine internal conflict at the highest level between the Supreme Leader and the President, alongside the remnants of the Green Revolution which is still burning under the ashes. Tehran today must face up to its foreign dues, which may result in it facing military strikes. There are many indications in this regard, including the systematic targeting of crucial domestic Iranian targets, and the accuracy of this suggests that this targeting is the result of external operations with the objective of disrupting Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
There is a tense international escalatory stance towards Iran, whether regarding the plot to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to Washington, or the Iranian mob that recently stormed the British Embassy in Tehran. The latter incident seems to be the behavior of the Iranian axis par excellence, because what happened to the British Embassy in Tehran is very similar to what happened to both the Saudi Arabian and Qatari embassies in Damascus. In the same manner, what happened in Qatif in Saudi Arabia recently is precisely the same thing that happened in Bahrain. Therefore, all of the above poses the following question: Are these irrational acts and the display of mob justice carried out by Iran and its axis an indication of the setting of the Shiite star in our region? I think that this is the beginning of the end.

Al-Assad must choose between fate of Ben Ali or Gaddafi – Turkish official
By Asharq Al-Awsat
Istanbul, Asharq Al-Awsat – Ankara on Wednesday suspended all financial credit dealings with Damascus – including freezing the Syrian government’s assets in Turkey – joining the Arab League in isolating President Bashar al-Assad over his ongoing brutal military crackdown on opponents. One Turkish official, speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat on the condition of anonymity, stressed that these economic sanctions “will not affect the [Syrian] people” adding that they aim to “push the [Syrian] regime to re-think its position.” Although many of these economic sanctions have already been in place for months, the Turkish authorities chose to make a special announcement in this regard on Wednesday in solidarity with the sanctions imposed on the Damascus regime by the Arab League.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu announced that “the Syrian administration has lost further legitimacy with every bullet fired and every minaret bombed”, adding that “in our opinion, by wasting all the opportunities offered to them…the Syrian administration has come to the end of the road.”
A Turkish official, speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat on the condition of anonymity, stressed that “there is no place for al-Assad in the new Syria”, adding that “it is just a matter of time.” The Turkish official said that “it is up to al-Assad to choose, sooner or later, between two fates: Zine El Abidine Ben Ali or Muammar Gaddafi.”
The Turkish official confirmed that Ankara wants to see a “better Syria”, adding that “there is no place for al-Assad in the new Syria, he lost his legitimacy more than 6 months ago, and he is today acting in the same manner as his father [Hafez al-Assad]…and this is very sad.”
The Turkish official also told Asharq Al-Awsat that “al-Assad did not learn any lessons from what happened in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya”. He said “it is up to al-Assad now to choose the model that he wants to follow… between the Tunisian and Libyan models” adding that “this is a choice that he must make sooner or later”. The Turkish official also stressed that “al-Assad must reconsider his position, for if he believes that he will remain in power forever then he is wrong…and if he believes that he is not Zine El Abidine Ben Ali or Hosni Mubarak or Ali Abdullah Saleh or Gaddafi, then he is also wrong.”
In addition to this, a senior Turkish official, also speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat on the condition of anonymity, stressed that Ankara had no option but to impose sanctions on Syria. However the senior source made certain to clarify that the Turkish government “does not support military operations against Syria.” The senior Turkish source also said that he believes that these sanctions may prove to be a useful way to push the Syrian officials to “rethink” their position, adding that “al-Assad is not listening to anyone…not to us [Turkey], nor the Arab League, and now he is paying the price with his regime becoming increasingly isolated, in the Arab world, the Islamic word, and internationally.”
As for what further steps Ankara might take in this regard, the senior Turkish official told Asharq Al-Awsat that “Ankara will monitor the behavior of the [al-Assad] regime” however he was not optimistic about the Syrian response to this, saying “they [the Syrians] are irrational, for if they do not like the position of some countries they send a mob to confront their embassies.” He added “they always blame the Arab states that give them one opportunity after another, and they do not commit to anything in return, continuing to kill people in the street.” The senior Turkish source also expressed his astonishment at the actions taken by the Syrian regime and its security apparatus, saying “they even continued killing people during the holy month of Ramadan and Eid.”
The Turkish source stressed the importance of Damascus returning to the negotiating table with the Arab League. He also noted that Ankara had “lost much due to the Syrian situation, for Ankara has invested a lot in Syria, and had hoped to see a gradual and peaceful transition of power, but this did not happen.” The senior Turkish official also confirmed that “the military option is not an option” adding that the issue of the “buffer zone” is not on the table at this moment. However he did say that this could change if more displaced Syrians cross the border into Turkey. He said that “the situation along our borders remains the same, and there are only a few thousands displaced persons; we will only think about this issue [buffer zone] if there is a dramatic increase in the number of [Syrian] displaced persons.”
The Turkish official also strongly rejected the claims that the Turkish sanctions were “less than expected” stressing that “we have taken more action than anyone else.” He also told Asharq Al-Awsat that Ankara “is coordinating its steps with the steps of the Arab League and the international community.”
The senior Turkish official said that he believes that the Russian backing of Syria “is not serious, and the same goes for Iranian [support of Syria].” He said “our relations with Iran are good on all levels, except with regards to the Syrian file” adding that “we told them [the Iranians] that their policy [on Syria] is contradictory, for they are speaking about the Arab Spring in every country except Syria!”
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu outlined nine sanctions being coordinated with a similar list put forward by the Arab League. Davutoglu said that Turkey would no longer deal with Syria’s central bank; halt all credit to the Syrian government; halt new transactions with the Commercial Bank of Syria; and freeze an existing credit agreement signed to support Turkish involvement in Syrian infrastructure projects. Other sanctions include a travel ban and asset freeze against certain Syrian figures, including Syrian officials accused of being involved in illegal actions against civilians, as well as Syrian businessmen with close ties to the al-Assad regime.

Britain seeks EU action on Iran as China urges calm
BRUSSELS/TEHRAN (Reuters) - Britain urged the European Union on Thursday to tighten sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme, as China warned against "emotionally charged actions" that might aggravate a bitter row between London and Tehran. Foreign Secretary William Hague stressed that his call for tougher economic action against Iran - which might stretch to an oil embargo - had nothing to do with Tuesday's storming of the British embassy in Tehran by protesters.
But a leader of Iran's Basij militia, which joined hardline conservative students in ransacking the British mission, said he was tired of decades of British "plotting" against his country.
Hague was expected to lead the push for the tighter sanctions when EU foreign ministers map out their response to a report the U.N. nuclear watchdog issued last month which suggested Iran has worked on designing an atom bomb. "I hope we will agree today additional measures that will be an intensification of the economic pressure on Iran, peaceful legitimate economic pressure, particularly to increase the isolation of the Iranian financial sector," he told reporters.
Britain shut down Iran's embassy in London and expelled all its staff on Wednesday, saying the incursion into the British mission in Tehran could not have taken place without the consent of Iranian Islamic authorities. Hague denied a link between the embassy storming and the EU's reaction to the International Atomic Energy Agency report on Iran's nuclear programme, which Tehran insists is peaceful.
"I stress that the measures I hope we will agree today are related to the Iranian nuclear programme. These are not measures in reaction to what has happened to our embassy," he told BBC radio before the Brussels meeting. Britain withdrew all its diplomatic staff from Iran and EU
diplomats who visited the embassy in central Tehran told Reuters of devastating damage to buildings. "I saw two rooms where you couldn't see what they were. There was just ashes ... It was devastating to see," one said. "You could tell the action was coordinated," he added, saying a building that had not been used for years was untouched, while the most important offices were gutted.
Britain's uneasy relations with Iran date from long before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. In Iran, Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Naqdi of the Basij militia said Iranians "were tired of decades of London's plots against Tehran," the official IRNA news agency reported.
STAY RATIONAL, CALM AND RESTRAINED
With the diplomatic temperature rising, Beijing issued an appeal for cool heads. "China hopes that the relevant parties can remain rational, calm and restrained, to avoid emotionally charged actions that could intensify the dispute," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said in Beijing.
"Countries should ... focus on the long term and the big picture. When encountering issues and conflicts, they should resolve problems through dialogue and consultations," Hong told reporters during a regular press briefing. The U.N. nuclear watchdog, citing intelligence reports, said last month that Iran appeared to have conducted research and experiments relevant to developing an atom bomb and may still be pursuing work to that end. The nuclear programme has raised the question of whether Israel might take military action against arch-foe Iran.
In Jerusalem, Defence Minister Ehud Barak said an Israeli attack was not imminent but all options remained open to stop what Israel sees as an Iranian bid to develop nuclear weapons.
"We have no intention, at the moment, of taking action, but the State of Israel is far from being paralysed by fear," Barak told Israel Radio. "It must act calmly and quietly -- we don't need big wars."
NEW STEPS
Some of the EU's new steps to isolate Iran have already been agreed, including the addition of 180 names to a list of people and entities targeted by pan-European sanctions, an EU official said. But proposals for a sledgehammer embargo on Iranian oil imports remain contentious and the EU's top energy official said all EU 27 members would need to back a possible ban.
"We need a common position of all European Union member states," Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger told Reuters on a visit to Moscow when asked about a possible ban.
His comments suggested that an effective oil embargo may not be workable. EU members take 450,000 barrels per day of Iranian oil, some 18 percent of the Islamic Republic's exports.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy had proposed the oil import ban and won backing from Britain, but resistance from other countries persists.
An embargo might boost global crude oil prices during hard economic times. And debt-strapped Greece has been relying on Iranian oil, which comes with an attractive financing offer.
Diplomats say the foreign ministers may not reach an agreement on any embargo yet, but discussions could be finalised next week, when EU heads of government meet on December 8-9.
Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt said he was prepared to agree to a crude oil embargo, but questioned the effectiveness of such a measure.
"I am prepared to go along with that," he told reporters. "I don't think it will necessarily have that much of an effect because of the nature of the global oil market."

Russia delivers anti-ship missiles to Syria-report
December 02, 2011/By Thomas Grove
Anti-ship missile launch by a shore installation during Russia's Black Sea Fleet exercise.
MOSCOW: Russia has delivered anti-ship cruise missiles to Syria, the Interfax news agency cited an unnamed military source as saying on Thursday, days after a United Nations commission of inquiry called for an arms embargo on Damascus.
Economic and diplomatic pressure has isolated Syrian President Bashar al-Assad following a nine-month government crackdown against protesters in unrest the United Nations says has killed more than 4,000 people.
Moscow has spoken out against further sanctions imposed by Western and Arab League states, and it has defended its right to sell Syria weapons -- tens of millions of dollars worth last year.
"The contract was completely fulfilled, almost ahead of time," Interfax cited the source as saying of the deal, estimated at $300 million. The source did not say when the deliveries had taken place.
Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said in February that Moscow was pressing ahead with the deal despite Israeli concerns, indicating the missiles might have been delivered earlier this year.
"This weapon allows coverage of the entire coastline of Syria from possible attack from the sea," Interfax quoted the source as saying.
Russia teamed up with China in October to veto a Western-backed U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Assad's government. Russia said the resolution could have opened the door to Western military intervention like in Libya, where it says NATO overstepped its Security Council mandate.
A United Nations commission of inquiry said on Monday that in cracking down on protesters, Syrian military and security forces had committed crimes against humanity including murder, torture and rape, and called for an arms embargo on Syria.
Earlier this week, Russian newspaper Izvestia reported that Russia planned to send its aircraft carrier and other ships to Syria.
Besides accounting for 7 percent of Russia's total of $10 billion in arms deliveries abroad in 2010, according to Moscow defence think-tank CAST, Syria also hosts a Russian naval maintenance facility.
Russia traditionally used what influence it still has in the Middle East as a lever in diplomatic maneuvering with Europe and in particular the United States.
Israel has voiced concerns over the contract for sale of the rockets, capable of hitting ships 300 km (190 miles) off Syria's coast. Hezbollah used a surface-to-air missile in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon War to hit the INS Hanit warship, killing four sailors.

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah,s Speech of o1.12.11
December 1, 2011
Now Lebanon
A day following Prime Minister Najib Mikati's decision to transfer Lebanon's share of funds to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on December 1 delivered a speech to address the issue.
"Peace and mercy be upon you all. Tonight, I will address from the start the political developments in Lebanon, including those pertaining to the funding of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) and the status of the government. First, I will talk about the political rhetoric used [by public figures] in the country; and second, I will tackle the [STL] funding issue.
To begin with, there is a certain political [coalition] that keeps using provocative rhetoric against others. Let us agree, brothers, that there is a fundamental political dispute, which is not related to any religious [motives].
Second, let us agree that criticizing certain religious figures or a person from a certain [sect] does not mean that [we are] criticizing the whole sect, whether they are Maronite, Shia, or Sunni. If a certain party represents the majority of a certain sect, by criticizing this party, it does not mean that the whole sect is [targeted]. This is why when we disagree with a certain political party, it does not mean that the dispute should turn into a religious conflict. We are committed to certain [respectful] political rhetoric that does not [provoke sectarianism]. You can notice from our rhetoric that we have [never] dealt with any party on the basis of sectarianism.
Based on this introduction, I would like to address the Future Movement and tell [its members] to stop using this [sectarian] rhetoric and stop exploiting unfounded stories in order to incite sectarianism. For example, a Lebanese army patrol recently entered the [Bekaa] town of Aarsal, they might have arrested someone, I do not want to go into the details. Yet, the Future Movement's media and [politicians] started saying that the Lebanese army intelligence and Hezbollah operatives stormed the town, which is mostly Sunni. What is the purpose of saying such lies? Do the Future bloc MPs want the people of the Bekaa to suffer from a conflict between each other? [Who] benefits from this? I hope the Future MPs would give me an answer.
In the same context, whenever [someone] disagrees with [the Future Movement], the latter starts insulting them and cursing them.
In Tripoli and in North Lebanon, our allies come from families and parties that have struggled and that have existed even before we did and even before the Future Movement. Our allies in Tripoli and the North have popular support, despite the fact that [the Future Movement] paid a lot of money in past elections to beat them. Here I call on the Future Movement to learn a lesson. They should evaluate and assess the size of the rally that was held [last Sunday] to see the extent of representation [they have]. Our relations with our allies in Tripoli and in the North is an honor.
Moving on, concerning the situation in Syria, some media outlets are trying to show that there is a sectarian conflict there. Why are some insisting on sectarian and religious provocation? Some are insisting that there are 3000 [Hezbollah] fighters and that thousands of fighters from the Iraqi Mahdi army entered Syria to [back the troops of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad]. This shows that they insist on inciting sectarianism. Where do these people want to go? If they think that through sectarian provocations they can scare and silence [us], I tell them: You are going to fail. We are not scared or affected by this kind of provocation.
In the past [decades], we suffered from the ugliest situations but did not collapse. So I tell [our rivals] to not bother with their provocations. If there is anyone who thinks that they can grow stronger [by relying on a third state or party], I tell them: you are also gambling [on a failing bet]. What [goal] do these people want to reach? Civil war? Destroying the country like some Lebanese did in the past?
So, in a nutshell, I want to say that this behavior will not yield results. We do not want to battle anyone in Lebanon. But if anyone is planning to reach that point [of battle], they can only imagine what the outcome of this fight will be. So I call for self-restraint and for avoiding sectarian rhetoric.
Secondly, we move on to the issue of the STL and its funding. Briefly, in the past cabinet of Saad Hariri, we were very honest and collaborative. At the time, the cabinet [of Hariri] was said to be working to ensure the people's needs. However, the [Hariri] government took a different path, and [the court] came close to the issuance of the STL indictment at the time. We were at the doors of an indictment that was published by the press in 2006 and then unsealed years later. And so the conflict [with March 14] began over [the STL], and there was Saudi-Syrian mediation attempting to resolve the dispute.
Everyone knows who worked day and night to bring down the Saudi-Syrian efforts; it was Saad Hariri and the March 14 parties. Syria was then informed that the talks failed and, thus, we moved toward the next phase, in which our [ministers] resigned from the Hariri cabinet, and it collapsed. After this collapse, there were reports that [we, along with our allies] intended to nominate a respectful Sunni Muslim figure to assume the premiership instead of Saad Hariri. After the collapse of the cabinet, Turkish, French, Qatari and Saudi officials planned on holding a conference in Paris, where they would offer us a deal. The deal was that Hezbollah [will no longer have to face] the STL in exchange for certain conditions. First, the deal stated that the STL funding would stop; second, that Lebanon would withdraw its judges in the court; and third, abolish the protocol signed between Lebanon and the court.
Article 6 of the deal stated: "In order to preserve security in Lebanon, Saad Hariri would sign an agreement stating that he will review the status of the STL and add this issue as the first item on the next cabinet session in order to take legal measures regarding the withdrawal of the Lebanese judges, the halting of funding and the cutting of ties with the tribunal." We were told that, in return, we should again nominate Hariri for premiership and protect the political, judicial and security parties that belong to [Hariri], preventing any cabinet collapse.
My personal opinion was that I do not approve of this deal, and this was also the same view of the command of Hezbollah. I felt that had I accepted this deal, I would have betrayed [my principles]. I told these foreign ministers [who proposed this deal] that the country is more important; let the tribunal stay and whatever happens, happens.
I also want to clarify something. It was unfair to accuse Syrian President Bashar al-Assad of obstructing Turkish-Qatari efforts to reach a solution on the crisis in Lebanon. The brothers in Syria said that if this deal was going to end the problem, then why not? It benefits Syria. But we did not go along with that bargain.
Moving on, concerning the nomination of Najib Mikati for premiership, from day one, [March 14] started accusing him of treason and announced that they will boycott the government.
Concerning the STL funding, all the recent racket only intended to exert pressure on Lebanon. [March 14] knows that their leader [Saad Hariri] not only accepted to let go of the issue of STL funding, but also renounced the tribunal as a whole to stay in power.[Mikati's rivals] started saying that any person who becomes premier and does not honor the STL commitment would be a [Sunni] traitor. What is this logic? The bet of [March 14] was to wait for the moment in which the STL funds [need to be transferred to the court]. [Members of March 14] thought that the cabinet would either collapse and they would return to power or that the funding would not go through, after which they can label [Mikati] a traitor.
From the very beginning of the cabinet formation, we did not put conditions on Mikati. Second, we agreed to collaborate in order to resolve the funding issue. Third, we believed that Mikati embarrassed himself when he through the media repeatedly voiced commitment to the STL without consulting with [ministers]. Also, when Mikati announced that he will resign if the STL funding is not secured, we entered a government crisis, especially after [MP Michel Aoun's] Change and Reform bloc ministers took a position vis-à-vis the cabinet's performance, and this had nothing to do with [Mikati's] view on the funding. [Aoun's] ministers were rightful to boycott the cabinet session [last week] because they have demands regarding social needs and projects [that are at a stalemate].
As for [Hezbollah], the STL is unconstitutional, Israeli and US-made, oppressive and it will stay like that. Second, we are still against it and against its funding. Third, had the cabinet or parliament convened on the STL funding, [our representatives] would have voted against financing it. We reaffirmed our commitment to maintain this government and fix the gaps. [Mikati] took a decision to finance the tribunal out of the Higher Relief Commission's budget. Whether he used the funds out of donations or the HRC's budget, I did not get into the details. The days will show how this process happened. I still do not know if the way the financing happened was legal or not. The weird thing is that the US, France, Turkey, Qatar and even Syria, wanted to make a deal in order to abolish the STL, but later, [after we rejected the deal] they started warning us that we should fund the tribunal. This means that their move is politicized. We are with maintaining the current government, reject all means of funding or cooperation with the STL, but we will make the country's interests a priority.
It is my duty to thank the political parties who supported [our position] of rejecting the STL's funding. I also thank all parliamentary blocs and ministers who voiced solidarity with us. Had the cabinet put the funding issue up for a vote, it would have definitely not passed. Mikati's recent behavior was for the sake of achieving justice, and because of his position as premier and as a Sunni, he cannot but to commit to the STL. His words, not mine.
However, I call on Mikati to be just to the oppressed, [especially] the four generals [who were imprisoned for four years on suspicion of being involved in Rafik Hariri's murder]. I call on Mikati to open the issue of witnesses who gave false testimonies to the international commission investigating the murder. [Mikati] should include the false witnesses issue on the cabinet's agenda.
Additionally, I call on the cabinet to enhance its work and finalize projects. The Change and Reform bloc's ministers' demands are rightful. Mikati did not bring up the STL funding issue in cabinet because he knew that it would have not passed, and he knew that the government would have collapsed. This is why he sought to fund the tribunal the way he did.
Finally, the national interests of Lebanon have always been and will always be above everything. Peace and mercy be upon you all."

They paid up after all
December 1, 2011/Now Lebanon
After 12 months of politicking and putting the Lebanese people through unnecessary crises, the government paid its STL dues. (Image via STL)
So that’s it! After all the blood-and-thunder rhetoric about the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) being an American-Zionist plot to unhinge the region; after the numerous cabinet walk-outs in recent years; after the mind-numbing debate about the so-called false witnesses; and after the bloodless coup in January of this year, which saw the democratically elected government of Saad Hariri toppled with the sole intention of killing the court, the pro-Syrian March 8 government of Najib Mikati has approved the payment of Lebanon’s 49 percent share of the court’s costs, roughly $35 million, and transferred the monies.
We still don’t know exactly through which mechanism the money was transferred. There are allegations that the funds were paid through the Higher Relief Council without a cabinet vote, leading many opposition MPs to claim the “transfer” was a sop to Damascus, an empty gesture devoid of a full government commitment to seeking international justice. If true, the process reeks of a Lebanon pandering to a Syrian government that wanted the issue dealt with quickly and with minimal fuss. That said, it hard to see how the move has not embarrassed Hezbollah and its allies in the Free Patriotic Movement.
The STL is, of course, the international court created to bring to justice those responsible for the murder of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and 21 other people on February 14, 2005 as well as investigate the deaths of dozens of subsequent victims of political violence. The worth has divided opinion in Lebanon in recent years.
To look at the glass half full for one moment, the move is not just a victory for Lebanese and Middle East justice, it is proof (and a lot was needed, given decades of cynical indoctrination by successive authoritarian regimes) that a sense of what is right can prevail in the face of the usual barrage of conspiracy theories. It has demonstrated that anything vaguely uncomfortable, unpalatable or that makes us question what we believed to be certain is not always the work of Israel and/or a scheming American-backed West. Sometimes things happen because right has prevailed.
And what of Hezbollah and its gutless allies in the Free Patriotic Movement? Even if Mikati transferred the money on the sly to avert a crisis that might have a negative effect on his masters in Damascus, they can no longer claim the court is a sham because they are part of the cabinet. To claim otherwise, as many in the FPM are already doing, would simply highlight the disarray we have all suspected exists in Mikati’s fragile government. Will they resign? Unlikely; Damascus won’t let them.
As Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea pointed out on Wednesday, the government’s acceptance to release the funds will also have far-reaching implications on those Hezbollah members indicted earlier this year for their involvement in the killing. One can now argue that the party (and its erstwhile allies) can no longer object to handing over the four men to the court. Basic logic dictates that if they approve the funding of the tribunal, then they must also approve of the tribunal itself and therefore there should be no objections to cooperating to the fullest.
Indeed, Mikati’s government is in a bind. It is clearly still in the thrall of a Syrian regime that has somehow managed to once again call the shots in Lebanon but has been forced to bend to the will of the international community and the demands of the March 14 opposition.
To make matters worse, the government is still covered in shame over the way in which it has behaved for the best part of a year. Surely it must take a long, hard look at itself and ask why it has spent the last 12 months subjecting the Lebanese to, in the words of former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, countless “crises, pressures and tensions” only to then transfer the funding.
It really doesn’t look good from whichever way you look at it. The only winners are those who support Lebanon’s march to sovereignty and greater democratic freedoms, and who have been shown that their demands for justice are still on track. They can be reassured that the commitment made on that day nearly seven years ago was not an empty gesture and the process it set in motion is alive and well.