LCCC
ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِNovember
16/2011
Bible Quotation
for today/Jesus Speaks about His
Suffering and Death
Matthew 16/21-28: "From that time on Jesus
began to say plainly to his disciples, I must go to Jerusalem and suffer much
from the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the Law. I will be put
to death, but three days later I will be raised to life. Peter took him
aside and began to rebuke him. God forbid it, Lord! he said. That must never
happen to you! Jesus turned around and said to Peter, Get away from me, Satan!
You are an obstacle in my way, because these thoughts of yours don't come from
God, but from human nature. Then Jesus said to his disciples, If any of you want
to come with me, you must forget yourself, carry your cross, and follow me. For
if you want to save your own life, you will lose it; but if you lose your life
for my sake, you will find it. Will you gain anything if you win the whole world
but lose your life? Of course not! There is nothing you can give to regain your
life. For the Son of Man is about to come in the glory of his Father with his
angels, and then he will reward each one according to his deeds. I assure you
that there are some here who will not die until they have seen the Son of Man
come as King.
Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from
miscellaneous sources
Syria's second government/Hanin
Ghaddar/November
15/11
No excuses (for Lebanon to
vote against the Syrian uprising)/Now
Lebanon/November
15/11
The Vanishing Little Star of
Bethlehem: Christianity under Attack in the Middle-East/Rabbi
Dr. Daniel M. Zucker/November
15/11
Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for November 15/11
Iran will have five nukes by April
2012. Only 2-3 months left for military option
Germany, France, Turkey join chorus of countries
opposing Israeli attack on Iran
Report: Iran blames Israel for
deadly blast
Lebanese Cabinet in disarray
over Lebanon's stance in Arab League vote on Syria
U.N. concerned by lack of control over border with
Syria
Jumblatt: STL funding in
Lebanon's top national interest
Lebanese Army searches for unidentified object in
south Lebanon
Mikati promises to fight corruption in
administration
Bellemare Prepared a Successor from
Day 1 to Secure Orderly Probe Progress
Shukur, Alloush Heated Debate
Erupts into On-Air Fistfight
Hizbullah Denies Claims Linking It
to Bahrain 'Terrorist' Cell
Watkins Meets Miqati, Says Report
on 1701 to be Discussed at Security Council by End of Nov.
Berri: Decision on Syria Can be
Modified to Avert Negative Repercussions
Report: Syrian Army Continues
Planting Landmines along Lebanese Border
One of the Jassem Brothers Killed
in Syria
33 Civilians, 19 Regime Troops
Killed as Syria Clashes Rage
Arab League Plans to Send 500
Observers to Syria
Syria: Exiled Assad uncle wants to lead transition
Jordan deepens Assad’s isolation
Turkey warns Syria
leaders to meet people's demands
Juppe Warns Iran Strike May Drag
World into 'Uncontrollable Spiral'
Iran will have
five nukes by April 2012. Only 2-3 months left for military option
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report/ November 14, 2011 According to the briefing given to
a closed meeting of Jewish leaders in New York Sunday, Nov. 13, the window of
opportunity for stopping Iran attaining a nuclear weapon is closing fast,
debkafile's sources report. It will shut down altogether after late March 2012.
The intelligence reaching US President Barak Obama is that by April, Iran will
already have five nuclear bombs or warheads and military action then would
generate a dangerous level of radioactive contamination across the Gulf region,
the main source of the world's energy.Sunday, too, President Barack Obama said
the sanctions against Iran had taken an "enormous bite" out of its economy. He
also said that the "US is united with Russian and Chinese leaders in ensuring
Iran does not develop an atomic weapon and unleash an arms race across the
Middle East."
He spoke after talking to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Chinese
President Hu Jintao at the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Hawaii
about the new evidence submitted by the International Atomic Energy Agency that
Iran was engaged in clandestine efforts to build a bomb.
He said both shared the goal of keeping a bomb out of Iran's hands.
As to sanctions, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told a news conference
that sanctions against Iran had been exhausted and "now the problem should be
solved though diplomatic channels." debkafile's analysts note that tough
sanctions are pretty much off the table now. In any case, it is obvious that
they failed to slow down Iran's work on a bomb as confirmed by the latest IAEA
report. The road of diplomacy, favored by Moscow, has proved worse than
ineffectual. Its only result was to buy time for Tehran to carry on with its
military atomic project free of international pressure. Obama went on to say
Sunday that, while his strong preference was to resolve the Iran issue
diplomatically, "We are not taking any options off the table. Iran with nuclear
weapons would pose a threat not only to the region but also to the United
States."
This was the first time the US president had called a nuclear-armed Iran a
threat to the United States. Until now, official statements limited the threat
to "America's regional interests and influence."The Jewish leaders meeting
Sunday were informed that the Obama administration had intelligence data that
the US and Israel have no more than a couple of months left for striking down
Iran's military weapons development by force. This will not longer be viable
after Iran is armed with five nuclear bombs or warheads.
debkafile's military and intelligence sources refute the wild rumors alleging
that the American CIA or Israeli Mossad was responsible for the massive
explosion Saturday at a Revolutionary Guards base west of Tehran in which Iran's
missile chief Brig. Hassan Moghadam was killed.
While both organizations have formidable capabilities which Iran has experienced
in the past, there is no way - even with a UAV - they could have hit a single
missile warhead in the middle of a Guards base at the very moment that IRGC
chiefs were gathered around considering how best to improve its precision.
All the evidence garnered in the two days since the attack indicates that a
single warhead blew up by accident while it was being handled, rather than by
sabotage.
The Vanishing
Little Star of Bethlehem: Christianity under Attack in the Middle-East
Rabbi Dr. Daniel M. Zucker - 11/14/2011/Global Politician
News coming out of the Middle-East in the last few months has focused on two
principal areas: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the so-called “Arab
Spring”. The headlines have been restricted to these two topics.
Buried deep within the bodies of such prestigious papers as the New York Times,
the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times, if covered at all, are stories
of the on-going destruction and persecution of millennia-old Christian
communities within the cradle of Christianity: the Middle-East. The phenomenon
is not exactly new; it’s been going on for decades if not centuries, but the
growth and spread of Islamic fundamentalism within the last decade and the
overthrow of Western-oriented Arab dictatorships has set in motion a rising tide
of anti-Christian behavior that threatens to wipe out Christianity in the
Middle-East in what amounts to a repetition of what has occurred to Jewish
communities throughout Islamic nations within the past six decades since the
creation of the Jewish State of Israel.
Five nations that demonstrate the ongoing obliteration of Christianity in the
region will serve to illustrate the point: Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine,
and Iran.
We start with Egypt, a nation of eighty million with a 10 % minority population
of eight million Coptic Christians. The Coptic Church is one of the world’s
oldest, and its appearance in Egypt precedes Islam by at least half a
millennium. Earlier this past month, Copts throughout Egypt organized
demonstrations to protest the fire-bombing of a church in upper Egypt the prior
week, as well as one back in mid-March, and the on-going campaign of harassment
by Islamists in the region. At the October 9, 2011 demonstration in front of the
Maspero district headquarters of the national television network, attended by a
reported figure of 10,000 Copts,1 the Egyptian army opened fire with live
ammunition, killing Copts indiscriminately. Then armored military vehicles
appeared driving into the crowds randomly and causing widespread mayhem. Final
tally: 24 dead and over 300 wounded.2 The on-going Islamist attacks3 against the
Copts are causing many to consider seeking refuge in the West.4
Let’s move on to Iraq. Twenty years ago, Iraq’s Christian community numbered
over a million members.5 A decade ago, out of a total population of almost 24
million, 850,0006 identified as Christians. Today, with a population of 30.7
million, the Christian population appears to be less than 335,000.7 What has
happened?8 Although the new Iraqi constitution guarantees freedom of religion,
there is no provision in the Iraqi system for those that wish to convert,
especially if it is from Islam to Christianity. And radical Islam has been
launching attacks on Christian Iraqis ever since Saddam Hussein’s ouster.9 This
past year has seen the level of violence increase, starting with last year’s
al-Qaeda attack on Our Lady of Deliverance Syrian Catholic Church in Baghdad
which left 52 dead.10 Anti-Christian persecution continues, unabated.11
In Afghanistan, along with the country being virtually “Judenfrei” or
“Judenrein”,12 it is now free of any overt symbol of Christianity with the
destruction of the last remaining church in March 2010.13 The U.S. State
Department’s recently released report on religious freedom14 indicates that the
small native Christian population feels tremendous pressure to remain out of
sight, and the case of the Moslem who converted to Christianity and was nearly
executed under Afghanistan’s Sharia law for Islamic apostasy15 demonstrates that
freedom of conscience does not exist in present day Afghanistan despite the
presence of American and NATO forces in that country for a decade.
When we turn to the Palestinian Territories, we are looking at the birthplace of
Christianity. To see this two millennia community threatened with disappearance
must be gut-wrenching for devout Christians. But like it or not, the Christian
Arab population of the Holy Land16 faces the threat of extinction.17 The causes
are many, but explosive Muslim birth rates compared with bare replacement rates
among Arab Christians have caused the Christian percentage of the Palestinian
Territories to diminish sharply.18 In actuality, the Palestinian Christian
population has increased in the past forty-four years from 42,494 in 1967 to
slightly more than 50,000 today.19 However, because of the changing percentage
ratios of Christians to Muslims in the greater Bethlehem area—a region
traditionally associated with very high percentages of Christian populations
(70-95%)—the decreases to 28-60% appear as precipitous declines.20
Along with the huge Muslim population explosion in the West Bank and Gaza there
is now a phenomenon that does not bode well for the Christian Arab populations
of these two areas. The radicalization of Islam, especially in Gaza where HAMAS
controls the government, has resulted in pressure on the Christian community.21
But even in areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority, such as Bethlehem,
Christian Arabs feel persecuted by the Moslem majority.22 Whether or not the
persecution is officially sanctioned by the PA and/or HAMAS in their respective
regions of control, it is clear that neither is doing enough to root out
anti-Christian vigilantism.23
The final country that we examine in this brief survey is Iran. Although the
Islamic Republic of Iran enshrines freedom of religion in its constitution and
has seats each for a Jewish and Armenian Christian representative in the
national legislature (Majlis), because of Islamic (Sharia) law, conversion from
Islam to Christianity is considered apostasy and as such is a capital crime. The
result is that both converts to Christianity, and those Christians that aid
them, find themselves under severe persecution, imprisonment,24 and
occasionally, threat of execution.25 The current case of Pastor Yusef Nadarkhani
is a perfect example. Nadarkhani is currently scheduled for execution for
apostasy from Islam.26 Over 250 Christians were arrested in the last year for
their religious beliefs and more than one has been release from prison only to
disappear until his or her body parts show up in different locations.27
In conclusion, it was revealed recently that some 105,000 Christians are killed
annually because of their religious convictions, the vast majority at the hands
of radical Muslims.28 At the end of his article,29 Elwood McQuaid makes a
poignant statement, raising several pertinent questions that deserve repetition
here: “In America, Muslims are protected, much more so than evangelical
Christians. Protecting Muslim citizens is an honorable pursuit that raises
America’s standards far above those in so many other parts of the world. Yet why
are the same leaders who so passionately protect Muslim rights in America doing
nothing for Christians who are dying in record numbers? Why do so many of our
leaders hold their tongues as the world turns a blind eye? And there is another
question—one we must all ask ourselves: Why has the church been virtually silent
about the suffering of our brethren?” Why, indeed?
NOTES
1 Reuters, “Egyptian Christians clash with police in Cairo, 23 killed”, The
Jerusalem Post, October 9, 2011, http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=241079.
See also: Oren Kessler and Reuters, ”Egypt’s Copts mourn dead after clashes with
army kill 25”, The Jerusalem Post, October 14, 2011, http://www.jpost.com/VideoArticles/Video/Article.aspx?id=241249.
2 Mary Abdelmassih (AINA), “Egyptian Army, Police Kill 24 Coptic Christian
Protestors”, Assyrian International News Agency, October 10, 2011, http://www.aina.org/news/20111010003621.htm.
3 Raymond Ibrahim, “Egypt's Massacre of Christians: What the Media Does Not Want
You To Know”, Hudson New York, October 31, 2011, http://www.hudson-ny.org/2544/egypt-massacre-christians-media.
4 Elwood McQuaid, “Where have all the Christians gone?”, The Jerusalem Post,
October 31, 2011, http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Opinion/Article.aspx?id=243128.
5 Alex Murashko, Christian Post, “Christians in Iraq feel 'failed' by
government”, Christian Today, October 19, 2011, http://www.christiantoday.com/article/christians.in.iraq.feel.failed.by.government/28786.htm.
6 Ibid.
7 http://www.opendoorsusa.org/persecution/country-profiles/iraq/.
8 See Daniel Pipes, “Christians Disappearing from Iraq”, New York Sun, August
24, 2004, http://www.danielpipes.org/2033/christians-disappearing-from-iraq.
9 Aidan Clay, ASSIST News Service, “Iraq's Christians torn between staying or
facing death at home”, Christian Today, October 31, 2011, http://www.christiantoday.com/article/iraqs.christians.torn.between.staying.or.facing.death.at.home/28841.htm.
10 AP, “Baghdad church siege ends with 52 dead”, The Jerusalem Post, November 1,
2010,
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=193526
11 See amongst others, the following reports at http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/iraq/:
CDN, “The Double Lives of Iraq’s Christian Children”,Compass Direct News,
October 11, 2011, http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/iraq/article_121814.html,
CDN, “Insurgent Blast Ravages Church Building”,Compass Direct News, August 16,
2011, http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/iraq/article_116306.html, CDN,
“Blast Near Church in Kirkuk, Iraq Injures 13”, Compass Direct News, August 3,
2011, http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/iraq/article_115875.html, and
CDN, “Kidnappers Allegedly Called Murdered Iraqi Christian’s Employer”, Compass
Direct News, May 18, 2011, http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/iraq/article_112815.html.
12 “Jew-free”. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judenfrei. There actually is
one Jewish Afghan remaining in Kabul according to this report of Edwin Mora,
“Only One Jewish Resident Left in Afghanistan, Says State Department”, CNS News,
October 11, 2011,
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/only-one-jewish-resident-left-afghanistan-says-state-department.
13 Edwin Mora, op. cit., http://cnsnews.com/news/article/only-one-jewish-resident-left-afghanistan-says-state-department.
14 International Religious Freedom Report 2010 : http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2010/index.htm.
See material for Afghanistan at:http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2010/148786.htm
(November 17, 2010).
15 Aidan Clay, “Afghan Christian Refugees under Threat”, Assist News Service,
May 24, 2011, http://www.assistnews.net/Stories/2011/s11050153.htm.
16 “Open Doors” sets the current Christian population of the Palestinian
Territories at 400,000 out of a total population of 4.3 million, without
explaining how it arrives at this figure. See: http://www.opendoorsusa.org/persecution/country-profiles/palestinian-territories/.
17 Although a decade old, see Daniel Pipes, “Disappearing Christians in the
Middle East”, Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2001,http://www.danielpipes.org/1050/disappearing-christians-in-the-middle-east.
18 Ethan Felson, “JCPA Background Paper: The Palestinian Christian Population”,
JCPA, Jerusalem, 2011,
https://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5145/images/JCPA%20Background%20Paper%20on%20Palestinian%20Christians%207%202.pdf.
19 Ibid, p. 7.
20 Ibid. See Chart “Christian Percentage in Bethlehem and Bethlehem Area” on p.
10, and Appendix B on p. 16.
21 CBN News, “Christians under Siege in Gaza – UN Silent”, The Chronicle Watch,
July 27, 2009, http://www.chroniclewatch.com/2011/05/08/christians-under-siege-in-gaza-un-silent/.
Also see attached video.
22 http://www.shoebat.com/videos/christianBethlehem.php which shows video of CBN
News, “Baptist Church in Bethlehem Stands With Israel and Gets the Usual Muslim
Treatment”,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jGBxOkmOV0o.
23 http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2010/148825.htm, see second half of
report: “OCCUPIED TERRITORIES (INCLUDING AREAS SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF
THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY)”.
24 CBN, “Iran Steps Up Persecution of Christians”, CBN News, May 27, 2011,
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/May/Iran-Steps-Up-Persecution-of-Christians/.
25 http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2010/148819.htm. See latter portion of
report for abuse of Christians in Iran, especially of Moslem converts to
Christianity.
26 Walter Russell Meade, “Iran’s Persecution of Christians Grows”, The American
Interest, August 21, 2011, http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/08/21/iranian-persecution-of-christians-grows/.
27 Compass Direct News, “Pastor in Iran Awaits Decision on Execution”, The
Christian Post, August 2, 2011, http://www.christianpost.com/news/pastor-in-iran-awaits-decision-on-execution-53249/.
28 Michael Carl, “Report: Christian dies for beliefs every 5 minutes”, World Net
Daily, June 19, 2011, http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=311393.
29 Elwood McQuaid, op. cit., http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Opinion/Article.aspx?id=243128.
*Rabbi Dr. Daniel M. Zucker is founder and Chairman of the Board of Americans
for Democracy in the Middle-East, a grassroots organization dedicated to
teaching the public and its elected officials of the need to promote genuine
democratic institutions throughout the Middle-East region as an antidote to the
dangers posed by Islamic fundamentalism. He may be contacted at contact@ADME.ws
U.N. concerned by lack of control
over border with Syria
November 14, 2011/By Patrick Galey The Daily Star
BEIRUT: The government’s lack of border control remains an issue of profound
concern for the United Nations, the organization's acting head in Lebanon said
Monday.
U.N. Interim Special Coordinator for Lebanon Robert Watkins, following talks
with Prime Minister Najib Mikati, said that recent Syrian military incursions
into Lebanon continued to jeopardize security in both countries. “We are
concerned about border management issues, particularly on the border with Syria
where we have noted over the period a number of incursions of the Syrian
military into Lebanese territory,” Watkins told reporters. “We are very
concerned about these developments and what this implies about the lack of
control that the Lebanese government has over the borders with Syria and how
important it is for those borders to be demarcated so that there is clarity
about those issue.”
Watkins briefed Mikati on the latest implementation report of U.N. Security
Council Resolution 1701 which covers the last six months, indicating that the
safety of the organization’s peacekeeping force in the south was a source of
worry in New York. The report, which covers the implementation of 1701 between
May and October, will be discussed at U.N. Headquarters at the end of the month.
“We continued to be concerned about the security of the UNIFIL forces. We
appreciate the support that we are getting from the Lebanese Armed Forces and
the security services. That remains an issue of concern,” Watkins said. Twin
bomb attacks targeted UNIFIL peacekeepers over the summer, wounding 11 soldiers
and prompting Italy, the largest troop-contributing country, to cut by a third
its contingent serving in the south.
In spite of the aggression against UNIFIL peacekeepers, Watkins said the
six-month reporting period had been largely quiet, in spite of a number of
outstanding issues in need of address
“Basically there has been a fairly stable period in the south. There has been no
progress made towards a permanent cease-fire, which is of concern to us,” he
said.
The U.N. representative mentioned the demarcation of the Blue Line – the U.N.
delineated boundary of Israeli military withdrawal from Lebanon – and the
cessation of Israeli overflights as serious hindrances to a lasting cease-fire
between the two warring states.
Hizbullah Denies Claims Linking It to Bahrain 'Terrorist'
Cell
Naharnet/Hizbullah on Monday denied as “totally baseless” allegations by
Bahraini MPs linking the party to a suspected "terrorist" cell recently busted
in Bahrain.
“No one knows if the individuals arrested by the Bahraini authorities were
members of a military cell or if the cell had military objectives as claimed,
and the whole thing could might be one of the fabrications of the authoritarian
al-Khalifa regime,” Hizbullah said in a statement.“It is a failed attempt by the
al-Khalifa regime to divert attention from the civil and peaceful popular
revolution of the steadfast and aggrieved Bahraini people, amid the
international community’s silence and the Arab League’s suspicious apathy,” the
party charged.
“It will not prevent the Bahraini people from pursuing its legitimate struggle
to achieve its noble patriotic objectives,” Hizbullah stressed.
The party’s regional ally Iran has also rejected as "ridiculous" claims by
Manama that it has links to the alleged busted cell, state television's website
reported on Monday.
Amir Abdolahian, a deputy foreign minister in charge of Arab and African
affairs, was quoted as saying that the "baseless allegation is repeating a
ridiculous scenario fabricated by the United States.""Intensifying the security
atmosphere in Bahrain and pursuing the ineffective policy of Iranophobia will
not lead to solving the problem," the website quoted him as saying.
"It is necessary for the Bahraini officials, instead of deflecting (their
problems) and making these baseless allegations, to work on trust-building to
solve the chasm created between the regime and the people," Abdolahian added. In
response, Bahrain's foreign ministry said Monday it was "surprised" by the
comments that "contradict the principles of diplomacy, good neighborhood, and
rules of international conduct," the Bahraini news agency BNA reported.
The foreign ministry said Abdolahian's comments amounted to "blatant
interference" in the kingdom's internal affairs.
It said "terrorist organizations linked to Iran are without the least doubt
involved in spreading terrorism and undermining security and stability in the
region, which threatens world peace and security."Bahrain's judiciary on Sunday
linked the cell to Iran's Revolutionary Guards, a day after announcing the
arrest of five Bahrainis planning attacks in the Arab kingdom.
The five men are accused of belonging to a "terrorist group" with ties to the
intelligence services of a foreign state, a judiciary spokesman said, quoted by
BNA.
The spokesman said the five were to be "sent to Iran to receive military
training," notably with the elite Revolutionary Guards.
On Saturday, Bahrain's interior ministry said a cell had been broken up that was
planning to attack the ministry, the Saudi embassy in Manama and the causeway
which links the archipelago state to Saudi Arabia. Citing alleged confessions
from the suspects, the judiciary spokesman said the cell had been set up by two
men living abroad.
"They coordinated with military structures abroad, including the Revolutionary
Guards and the Basij (militia) in Iran to train the recruits of the group in
handling arms and explosives," he said.
The Sunni-ruled Arab monarchies of the Gulf have repeatedly accused mainly
Shiite Iran of meddling and of inciting the Shiite-led protests which rocked
Bahrain for a month from mid-February. The Bahraini government crushed the
pro-democracy protest with the help of Gulf Cooperation Council troops, drawing
condemnation from Tehran.
Relations between Iran and its Arab neighbors in the Gulf have deteriorated in
the past year amid accusations that Tehran is fomenting unrest, engaging in
espionage or planning attacks.
The accusations have been vehemently denied by Tehran, which says its neighbors
have become Iranophobic.Saudi Arabia accused Iran in October of being behind the
unrest in its northeastern region of the kingdom which has a Shiite population.
It has also said it is "holding Tehran accountable," after the United States
said it had uncovered "plot" to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington.
In July, Bahrain sentenced three people to 10 years in prison after finding them
guilty of charges of spying for the Revolutionary Guards.
Iran, meanwhile, on Sunday announced the arrest in the southern city of Abadan
of two Kuwaitis it said were spies. Kuwait denied those arrested are spies,
saying they are journalists working for a television channel who had entered
Iran on valid visas.
Bellemare
Prepared a Successor from Day 1 to Secure Orderly Probe Progress
Naharnet Exclusive Report – Leidschendam:
The pace of work at the Office of the Prosecutor of the Special Tribunal for
Lebanon appears to be dynamic, coherent and organized despite Prosecutor Daniel
Bellemare’s absence from Leidschendam over the past few weeks due to health
problems.
Those familiar with Bellemare’s condition attribute it to the impact of diabetes
on the functionality of kidneys, veins and the blood vessels that feed the
body’s extremities, especially the feet.
During the session held Friday by the Trial Chamber to hear arguments from the
Prosecution and the Defense Office on whether the initiation of in absentia
trials was appropriate, Bellemare’s team appeared to be in a strong position
compared to that of the Defense Office led by counsel Francois Roux and his
Lebanese-French Deputy Alia Aoun.
Employees at Bellemare’s office told Naharnet on the sidelines of the session
that work at all the organs of the tribunal, especially at the OTP, has become
institutional in a manner that does not get affected by the absence of any
individual, no matter their position and role.
The employees back that up by giving example about how the work of the Trial
Chamber remained systematic despite the resignation of late STL president,
Italian judge Antonio Cassese, a few weeks before his death.
A high-ranking OTP official told Naharnet that Cassese was keen before his death
to secure a calm, normal transfer of responsibilities to Judge Sir David
Baragwanath, who was elected as STL president only days before Cassese’s
departure from Leidschendam to Italy, where he passed away.
Although Bellemare’s health condition is not as grave to require a similar step,
the prosecutor has sought – in coordination with his aides, who are involved in
the investigations’ course and files, and with U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon, who is
the side that appoints prosecutors – to take the precautionary measures
necessary to guarantee that the OTP would keep functioning in a normal manner
upon any emergency, especially that Bellemare had realized upon taking office
that he is subject to security threats that might endanger his life given the
sensitivity of the case he is probing. The OTP official noted that Bellemare’s
mandate ends in February 2012 and that the prosecutor takes into consideration
the possibility that he might not carry on with his mission after that date due
to personal reasons or a U.N. decision, without that being inevitable. The
official added that Bellemare’s possible successor was ready and that the
substitute would not need any extra time to delve into the case and resume the
mission. The official also stressed that anyone betting on impeding or slowing
down the investigations would suffer a major disappointment, especially that
Bellemare will be ready -- over the next few weeks and within a timeframe that
might not exceed early 2012 – to release new indictments that will include
further positive surprises to those counting on the progress of the STL’s work
and shocking surprises to those betting on obstructing its progress.
Shukur, Alloush Heated Debate Erupts into On-Air Fistfight
Naharnet /A heated debate between Baath Party leader Fayez Shukur and Mustaqbal
Movement official ex-MP Mustafa Alloush erupted into a verbal clash and a
fistfight during a live talk show on MTV on Monday. As the two were arguing over
the Syrian crisis, Shukur repeatedly asked Alloush to refrain from describing
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as a “tyrant”, “criminal” and “liar”. Alloush,
however, insisted that he had the right to speak his mind. “You are a liar and
your master is a liar,” Shukur shouted at the rival Mustaqbal official at that
point, which prompted Alloush to hit back with “shut your mouth!” and “eat
s***.” An infuriated Shukur retaliated with a tirade of obscenities and cursed
Alloush’s mother.
He then hit Alloush with a pen and a cup of water and carried a chair to assault
the rival politician. The show’s host, a shocked Walid Abboud, physically
intervened at that point and prevented Shukur from reaching Alloush. The program
then went off air before resuming around 10 minutes later, with the two foes
returning to their seats and the episode witnessing no further incidents.
Cabinet in disarray over Lebanon’s
stance in Arab League vote on Syria
November 15, 2011/By Hussein Dakroub, Hasan Lakiss/The Daily Star
Monday, November 14, 2011
BEIRUT: Lebanon’s vote against the Arab League’s decision to suspend Syria’s
participation in the League’s meetings seems to have thrown the Cabinet into
disarray with some ministers complaining that they were not notified of the
controversial Lebanese stance taken by Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour.
“We want to know who took this decision [voting against the Arab League’s
decision to isolate Syria] and on what basis?” Public Works Minister Ghazi Aridi
told The Daily Star Monday night. He said that since the government’s well-known
position was to dissociate Lebanon from the developments of the seven-month
popular uprising in Syria, it was surprising to see Lebanon voting against the
Arab League’s decision.
“Regardless of whether the Lebanese stance [at the Arab League] was correct or
not, this stance has sparked a heated debate in the country,” Aridi added.
Aridi said he and his two colleagues in MP Walid Jumblatt’s parliamentary
National Struggle Front bloc, Social Affairs Minister Wael Abu Faour and
Minister for the Displaced Alaaeddine Terro, in addition to other ministers were
not informed of Lebanon’s stance.
“Therefore, the Front’s ministers will raise this issue at the Cabinet session
tomorrow,” Aridi said. However, Aridi, who has been boycotting the Cabinet’s
meetings in protest at what he contends is the obstruction of his ministry’s
allocations, said he will not attend Tuesday’s session. He added that he would
continue his boycott of the Cabinet’s meetings until his ministry’s allocations
have been released.
“There is a mismanagement in the Cabinet,” Aridi said. Earlier, Abu Faour
criticized the Lebanese position at the Arab League, saying that Lebanon should
have instead adopted a neutral stance. Abu Faour said “a large number of
ministers” have learned of Lebanon’s vote against the Arab League’s decision to
isolate Syria through the media. “The Front’s ministers will bring up this
subject at the next Cabinet session,” Abu Faour told Future News television,
adding that he hopes to get “a convincing response” in the Cabinet.
“Lebanon is split, half of it is with the Syrian regime and the other half is
with the Syrian uprising,” he said. “It was in Lebanon’s interest not to involve
itself in this matter. It would have been better if it had taken a neutral
stance.”
Earlier Monday, Prime Minister Najib Mikati met briefly at the Grand Serail with
the Egyptian Ambassador to Lebanon Mohammad Tewfic, the Jordanian Ambassador
Ziyad Majali and the European Union’s Ambassador Angelina Eichhorst to brief
them on the Lebanese stance at the Arab League.
Both Mikati and President Michel Sleiman have defended Lebanon’s stance at the
Arab League, whose foreign ministers decided Saturday to suspend Syria’s
participation and impose political and economic sanctions on Damascus in
response to the Syrian government’s failure to implement an Arab plan to end the
unrest there.
Sleiman rejected the Arab League’s decision to isolate Syria, warning that it
could lead to foreign intervention, but he called on President Bashar Assad to
implement the Arab initiative and open a dialogue with the opposition.
Sleiman’s and Mikati’s defense of the Lebanese vote drew fire from former Prime
Minister Saad Hariri who lashed out at the two, saying their stance put the
country on the side of “murder and dictatorship.”
The Arab League also decided to withdraw Arab ambassadors from Damascus in a
move that further isolates the Assad regime which is already facing tough U.S.
and European sanctions over Syria’s brutal crackdown. Lebanon, Syria and Yemen
voted against the decision, which would take effect Nov. 16, while Iraq
abstained.
Mansour has been the target of scathing attacks by March 14 politicians, some of
whom have called for his resignation.
Responding to his critics, Mansour said he did not act unilaterally. “The
decision taken [at the Arab League] reflected the Lebanese government’s opinion
and the supreme Lebanese national interest,” Mansour said in an interview with
Al Nour radio station Monday.“We are not in a political bazaar. There are
obligations with which we have to comply. We cannot go against the supreme
national interests,” he said.
Mansour criticized the League’s decision to isolate Syria. “It is not
permissible to isolate Syria, which is a major and founding state of the
League’s charter. Therefore, it was not permissible for such decisions to be
issued against it [Syria],” Mansour said.
Meanwhile, Hariri said Assad does not want to implement the Arab plan to end the
crisis in Syria “because if he does he will be finished. His problem is the
regime itself.”
Answering questions from his supporters on the social network site Twitter
Monday, Hariri said he hoped the Syrian people never allow Assad to drag the
country into a civil war.
Asked to comment on the statement by Jordan’s King Abdullah II in which he said
that if he were in Assad’s shoes, he would have stepped down, Hariri said, “Yes
I would have a long time ago, with no blood spilled.”
Asked whether he advocates an international military intervention in Syria,
Hariri said, “Look if this regime keeps killing people like they are doing, the
world will not sit and watch. And this regime must be stopped. I am with
everything to protect the people of Syria.”
Asked whether the Assad regime’s collapse would set the Middle East ablaze, he
said, “No, I don’t think so at all. I think the whole region will be better
off.”
Asked to comment on Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri’s call on Saudi King Abdullah
Bin Abdul-Aziz to mediate in the Syrian crisis and bring about a reconciliation
between Syria and Arab states, Hariri said, “I think it’s a bit too late. The
whole idea of the Arab League … is to protect the people not the regime.”
Hezbollah’s State Minister for Administrative Reform Mohammad Fneish expressed
regret over the Arab League’s decision “to freeze and suspend Syria’s
membership, punish it and besiege it politically and economically.”
“The Arab League’s decision is a flagrant proof [of] U.S. involvement in
sabotage in Syria,” he said. “Anyone who targets Syria does not harbor good for
the Arabs, Arabism or the Palestinian cause.”
Beirut MP Ammar Houri from Hariri’s parliamentary Future bloc denounced the
Lebanese position at the Arab League, saying that “Lebanon has sided with the
killer of the brotherly Syrian people.”“What is worse is that the Lebanese
decision was not discussed in the Cabinet. It came in breach of Arab unanimity,”
Houri told Al Fajr radio station.
“The government has committed a flagrant crime by standing against the Syrian
people. This stance is not strange for such a government which is the creation
of the Syrian regime,” Houri said.The Kataeb (Phalange) Party criticized the
Lebanese vote at the Arab League, saying Lebanon should have dissociated itself
from the issue.
“If it was difficult [for the government] to go ahead with Arab unanimity, it
would have been better for it to dissociate itself like it did in its previous
attitudes and decisions,” said a statement issued after a meeting of the party’s
political bureau chaired by party leader Amin Gemayel.
Jumblatt: STL funding in Lebanon’s
top national interest
November 15, 2011/ The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt called Monday for a
“new, serious and calm” approach to be adopted on the divisive issue of the
Special Tribunal for Lebanon, whose funding he described as in “Lebanon’s
highest national interest.”
“We look forward to a new, serious and calm approach to be adopted in dealing
with this matter [the STL], with complete understanding of the reservations
expressed by Hezbollah over the tribunal,” Jumblatt wrote in his weekly
editorial in the PSP’s al-Anbaa newspaper.
“I was the first to warn of the dangers of leaks to the media [of STL findings],
but this does not negate the fact that the tribunal has become a reality, and
Lebanon’s highest national interest requires that funding [for the tribunal] is
passed,” the Chouf MP added. The issue of STL funding is currentlydividing the
Cabinet in two camps. Prime Minister Najib Mikati, President Michel Sleiman and
Jumblatt favor funding the court, established by the U.N. to try the assassins
of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and other figures, while Hezbollah, a key
member in Mikati’s Cabinet, rejects the funding and has called for putting the
matter to a vote in Cabinet, where it’s likely to be voted down by the party and
its allies who together enjoy a majority.
The STL indicted four Hezbollah members in late June, but the party denies any
involvement and has slammed the court as a “U.S.-Israeli tool” targeting the
resistance.
Touching on the ongoing unrest in Syria, Jumblatt said that the Arab League’s
initiative is the best way for Syria to emerge from the crisis. “And this does
not take place except through radical political reform as clearly stipulated in
the items of the initiative,” he added. The PSP leader said that his party
condemns the “threatening and escalatory rhetoric” of right-wing Israeli groups
and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against Iran “over its acquisition of
nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.”“It [PSP] views this to be aimed at
drowning the entire region in chaos in order to disavow the legitimate
historical rights of the Palestinians,” Jumblatt said. Jumblatt reiterated his
support for the resistance’s arms in defending Lebanon against Israeli
aggression. “But this does not cancel the need to return to national dialogue at
the suitable time to study the circumstances – determined by the resistance –
for the gradual integration [of the resistance’s arms] into the state, which
remains the ultimate recourse for all Lebanese and southern residents in
particular.”
Syria: Exiled Assad uncle wants to lead transition
November 14, 2011/By Deborah Pasmantier
Daily Star
PARIS: Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad's exiled uncle, a former regime insider
accused of carrying out a massacre in 1982, says he wants to oversee a peaceful
transition of power in his homeland. On Sunday, Rifaat al-Assad took charge of a
new opposition movement in exile. Afterwards, in an interview with AFP and Le
Monde, he urged Arab and world powers to negotiate his nephew's safe departure
from power.
But Rifaat's former close ties to the regime and his current gilded life --
since quitting Syria in 1984 he has lived in luxury properties in London, Paris
and Marbella -- may undermine his appeal to other opposition groups. "The
solution would be that the Arab states guarantee Bashar al-Assad's security so
he can resign and be replaced by someone with financial backing who can look
after Bashar's people after his resignation," he argued.
"It should be someone from the family ... me, or someone else," he said. Since
March, Assad's regime has been violently repressing a popular revolt against his
rule, a campaign which the United Nations says has left at least 3,500 people
dead and which has drawn international condemnation. Opposition groups have been
organising to form a credible alternative government. Rifaat's National
Democratic Council is led by close allies from his own party and former members
of the ruling Baath Party.
Rifaat al-Assad, aged 73 or 74, is the younger brother of Syria's former
dictator Hafez al-Assad and was a feared figure who commanded his internal
security forces in the 1970s and early 1980s.In 1982 these forces attacked the
town of Hama to put down an Islamist revolt, in an attack which historians and
rights groups such as Amnesty International estimate killed between 10,000 and
25,000 civilians. Then, in 1983, with his brother receiving treatment for heart
problems, he tried to seize power himself. The attempt failed, Hafez recovered,
and the next year Rifaat left Syria for a long life in well-heeled exile.
Speaking to AFP on Sunday, Rifaat dismissed reports that he had a leading role
in the Hama massacre as a "myth" and insisted he is now best placed to bring the
latest crisis to an end.
"The regime is ready to go but needs guarantees not just of the personal safety
of its members, but also that there will not be civil war after it is gone," he
said, warning of trouble between Syria's religious communities. The Assad clan
are members of Syria's Alawite minority, which controls most senior posts in the
security forces, while the bulk of the population are from the Sunni
tradition."We need a kind of international or Arab alliance ... that could enter
into talks with the government itself ... and be a real guarantor of the
concessions that the regime would make," he said. Rifaat suggested that Britain,
France, Russia or Iran play a role. He was also dismissive of the other
opposition groups, branding the main Syrian National Council of Paris-based
Burhan Ghaliun "a band of Muslim Brothers hiding behind someone who is unknown
in Syria".He said the internal opposition groups were ready for compromise, but
added they would be unable to negotiate a truce without outside help
Arab
League Plans to Send 500 Observers to Syria
Naharnet/The Arab League is preparing to send observers to Syria but needs
guarantees from Damascus on their mission and the rights of each side, the
organization’s chief Nabil al-Arabi said Monday. The decision to send a
500-strong delegation follows a vote to suspend Damascus from the 22-member Arab
bloc over its deadly crackdown on protests. It came a day after Syria said it
would welcome such a mission.
"None of the delegates of Arab organizations tasked with protecting civilians
will go to Syria until a clear memorandum of understanding is signed with the
Syrian government spelling out the duties and rights of all the parties," Arabi
told reporters.
He made the remarks after separate talks in Cairo with representatives of Arab
human rights groups and Syrian opposition figures.
Arabi chaired a meeting of the groups at which it was agreed a 500-strong
delegation made up of rights activists, media and military experts would head to
Syria on a fact-finding mission to study measures to protect civilians. Arab
foreign ministers are due to organize the trip and set a date for the mission on
Wednesday, on the sidelines of a meeting in Rabat, according to a League
official. A senior member of the Union of Arab doctors, Ibrahim al-Zaafarani,
said Syrian authorities will be asked to sign a document providing the
delegation "guarantees" for their protection and freedom of movement. "We will
go everywhere and write up reports on the conditions of civilians and means of
protecting them, and we will submit the reports to the Arab foreign ministers,"
he added. The Arab League on Saturday voted to suspend Syria from all Arab
League activities over its failure to implement a deal to end the violence which
has left around 3,500 dead since March, according to U.N. figures.
Arabi said he has received a letter from Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem
calling for an urgent Arab summit to discuss the crisis.
Arab leaders have been informed of the request, the secretary general said,
adding that the emergency summit can only be held if two-thirds of the bloc's
members endorse the call.
Syria on Sunday said it would welcome the dispatch of an "Arab ministerial
delegation accompanied by observers, civilian and military experts and Arab
media," according to an official statement.It said the delegation would be able
to see for itself the situation on the ground "and supervise, in coordination
with the Syrian government, the application of the Arab (peace) plan."The plan
to end violence in Syria was drawn up by Arab foreign ministers on November 2
and endorsed by Syria.
Under the deal, Syria was given 15 days to pull back its troops from the cities
that were the focus of anti-government protests, release detainees, allow free
movement for observers and media, and negotiate with the opposition.Source
Agence France Presse
Syria's
second government
Hanin Ghaddar , November 14, 2011
Bravo Lebanon. Now we can officially say that Syria has two governments, the one
in Damascus and the one in Beirut. Lebanon to the regime of Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad is just another province. Bravo President Michel Sleiman. Bravo
PM Najib Mikati. Now you are internationally regarded as puppets of the Syrian
regime. You did not even try to explain to the Lebanese why Lebanon voted
against the Arab League’s decision to suspend Syria’s membership for the
regime’s bloody eight-month crackdown on the protest movement. We could have
just abstained, as we did when the Security Council voted to condemn Syria. Is
the Arab League a scene where can just be ourselves?
And bravo to the Lebanese people. Now you have been declared pathetic and
cowardly. We think that if we just keep everything on hold, do nothing too risky
or forward, then the Syrian people will topple the regime by themselves and our
lives would be better. But maybe we should start thinking ahead. Maybe the Arab
League’s decision on Saturday will have long-term consequences for both Lebanon
and Syria. If the Assad regime lives on a bit longer, Lebanon could become as
isolated as Syria.
The only difference is that the Syrian opposition will recuperate and bring
their country back to life, while the Lebanese will have to suffer the
consequences of its support for a criminal dictator. Of course, the Lebanese are
divided between those who sincerely support the Syrian regime and consider the
movement against it a Western conspiracy, and those who are just worried about
the violence spilling from Syria into Lebanon, including the "Islamist threat,"
as if Lebanon is a safe haven with a normal political life.
If the international community isolates Lebanon along with Syria, we would have
only ourselves to blame. Lebanon was the only country besides Syria and Yemen,
two dictatorships on the verge of falling, that voted in the Assad regime's
favour. Our government preferred to protect a dictator rather than protect
itself.
Hundreds of Hezbollah supporters demonstrated against the Arab League's decision
last night in the party’s stronghold of southern Beirut. These people want the
Syrian regime to survive the "conspiracy" but at the same time cannot live
without the international community.
They hate the US but love what it can offer them. If they had the chance, they
wouldn't hesitate to do business or work with any company in Europe or America.
They cannot live without Western commodities or inventions. They would love to
send their children to study at American universities. Iranian or Syrian
universities are certainly not an option.
These people, Hezbollah supporters and other fans of Syria and Iran in Lebanon,
would do anything to get a European or an American passport. They would leave
everything if they got a job in the West. They would never go to work and live
in Syria or Iran. Yet they chant “death to America.”
These people would suffer from international isolation or economic sanctions on
Lebanon as much as everyone else.
Now let’s see. Lebanon got a little warning last week from the US when Assistant
Treasury Secretary for Terrorist Financing Daniel Glaser visited Beirut and met
with top officials just as the Financial Times reported that “between three and
five billion dollars” flowed to Lebanon from Syria since mid-March.
During his meeting with Prime Minister Najib Mikati and members of the banking
community, Glaser stressed “the need for authorities to protect the Lebanese
financial sector from potential Syrian attempts to evade US and EU financial
sanctions,” according to a press release.
With the country stalling on the issue of funding the Special Tribunal for
Lebanon and its stance at the Arab League, Lebanon might get more warnings and
could eventually face sanctions, if not real political and economic isolation.
Lebanon cannot afford that. We are already on the verge of crisis, and any small
economic or political shakeup might jeopardize our fragile stability. Are we
seriously ready to sacrifice ourselves for the sake of the Syrian regime? Are we
ready to commit suicide just because Hezbollah wants us to?
Lebanon’s stance at the Arab League does not represent most of the Lebanese.
This is shameful, appalling and inexcusable. It was not a surprise for anyone
here, but it was certainly a harsh reality check that should push the Lebanese
to say “No.” No to staying behind the Arab Spring. No to supporting a dictator.
No to turning our backs on the miserable situation of the Syrian refugees in
Lebanon. No to the continuous abduction and arrest of Syrian activists in
Lebanon. No to the Syrian Social Nationalist Party thugs in Hamra. And finally,
a big no to the presence of the Syrian ambassador in Lebanon, whose job is
supervising all of the above.
*Hanin Ghaddar is the managing editor of NOW Lebanon
No
excuses for Lebanon to vote against the Syrian uprising
Now Lebanon/November 14, 2011
Where does one begin? In a year of so many lows, Lebanon, by choosing not to
sanction Syria at Saturday’s Arab League meeting in Cairo, has probably reached
its nadir. For in doing so, it has torn up its much-vaunted democratic
credentials and sided with the forces of repression and systematic murder.
Subsequent explanations from both the Lebanese president and prime minister did
little to justify the way Lebanon, along with troubled Yemen and Syria itself,
voted.
Prime Minister Najib Mikati explained that the decision to side with the Syrian
regime was based upon “historic and geographic considerations and facts that
take into account the Lebanese peculiarity, which we know that [our] Arab
brothers understand.”
This regime has killed more than 3,500 protesters and has constantly broken all
promises to embark upon a program of reform.
Lebanon’s “Arab brothers” understand only one thing: Beirut and Damascus are
joined at the hip, and the March 8 forces that overthrew the democratically
elected government of Saad Hariri in January of this year did so with the
overarching aim to restore Lebanon to Syria’s orbit after a six-year hiatus. It
is for this and this reason only that Lebanon sided with one of the region’s
darkest forces.
President Sleiman’s explanation was as bizarre as it was cynical. “Lebanon’s
basic position is known. Lebanon supports democracy and rotation of power in all
states surrounding us, be it in Syria or in other countries. But it does not
advocate at all the achievement of political goals by violent means.”
One might read those words and assume that Sleiman himself was leading the
charge to sanction Damascus. But he too is clutching at straws. Sleiman claims
that Lebanon supports all the demands—democracy and regime change—of those
Syrians bearing the brunt of President Bashar al-Assad’s repression, but it will
not cast its vote in their favor because they are, according to Sleiman’s
reading of the situation, using violence to achieve these ends. Someone really
should take him aside and explain that the Syrian uprising is on the receiving
end of the “violent means.”
Sleiman added that isolating Syria might lead to “unwanted international
intervention”—a sound bite designed to stoke fears that Syria will go the way of
Libya but one based on absolutely no evidence. It was matched by a similar
accusation from Syria’s representative at the Arab League, Youssef Ahmad, who
branded the body’s decision part of “an American agenda.”
But the bottom line is there for all to see: Lebanon, a country that in 2005 was
a beacon of democracy (arguably the ground zero of the 2011 Arab awakening), has
agreed that the killing of innocent and mostly unarmed civilians can continue
unchecked.
For Syria has already laughed at the Arab League’s November 2 roadmap that
called for the release of political prisoners, the withdrawal of the army from
urban areas, free movement for official observers and media, as well as talks
with the opposition Syrian National Council. Since that date, the death toll has
exceeded 130.
Each day, blood is shed in towns and cities across Syria, and those Lebanese who
are reluctant to rock the boat assuage their conscience by convincing themselves
that the Assad regime must stay for the sake of regional stability. If regional
stability is paid for with the lives of ordinary Syrians who want a decent
future, economic prosperity and the right to live without the constant shadow of
the state hovering over their daily lives, then we don’t want it.
There can be no excuses, no accusations of a Western plot, no special pleading
of Beirut’s unique brotherly relationship with Damascus and no warning of
domestic instability (or worse) in Lebanon should the Assad regime collapse. As
former Prime Minister Saad Hariri said via Twitter, “Those claiming to want to
keep Lebanon neutral and shielded from Syria’s repercussions have thrown the
country in the middle of the storm” and on the side of murder, dictatorship and
anti-Arab identity. The government must go, and the people must demand its
dissolution in the name of dignity and self-respect.
Turkey warns
Syria leaders to meet people's demands
November 14, 2011/By Michel Sailhan
Daily Star/ANKARA: Turkey's foreign minister warned embattled leaders in Syria
and other Middle East countries on Monday that those who cannot meet the demands
of their people "will go".Ahmet Davutoglu spoke a day after Ankara expressed
outrage over weekend attacks on its diplomatic missions in Syria by pro-regime
protesters and summoned the country's envoy.
"Those in the Middle East who are not at peace with their people and cannot
satisfy them will go," Davutoglu told a parliament committee, adding that Turkey
would "take a very firm stand" in the wake of the attacks. Thousands of
protesters carrying knives and batons attacked Turkey's diplomatic missions on
Saturday night, furious over Ankara's support for an Arab League decision to
suspend Syria, state-run news agency Anatolia reported.
In Aleppo, protesters managed to break into the consulate building, while in
Damascus they pelted the embassy building with stones, plastic bottles and tear
gas shellings, which the police used to disperse the crowd. No one was injured
in the attacks but Turkey decided to evacuate the families of diplomats and
non-essential personnel from Syria.
A Turkish Airlines plane brought a group of 60 people to Ankara but ambassador
Omer Onhon and diplomatic staff will stay on in Syria.
"The attitude of the Syrian government... demonstrates the need for the
international community to respond with a united voice to the serious
developments in Syria," the Turkish foreign ministry said in a statement on
Sunday.
A government source told AFP that this meant "We are no longer with (Syria) and
we are joining international efforts aiming to isolate" it.
Also on Sunday, Davutoglu -- for the second time in less than a month -- met
members of Syria's opposition National Council, the country's largest and most
representative opposition grouping, who sought permission to set up office in
Turkey.
A Turkish diplomat who declined to be named said Ankara was considering the
request.
Turkey has welcomed an Arab League decision to suspend Syria until it agrees to
apply an Arab peace plan for an end to the crisis.
Under the deal, Syria would pull back its troops from the cities that were the
focus of anti-government protests and free demonstrators arrested since the
start of the uprising.
A November 2 meeting had given Syria 15 days to comply with the plan.
At a meeting of the League's foreign ministers in Cairo on Saturday, 18 of the
22 members voted to suspend Syria from November 16 over its failure to end the
crackdown.
"The Syrian government should draw conclusions from the Arab League message and
stop resorting to violence against its people," the Turkish foreign ministry has
said.
Arab foreign ministers and Arab League chief Nabil al-Arabi are to meet again on
the Syria crisis Wednesday in Morocco. Arabi will also meet with Syrian
opposition groups in Cairo on Monday.
Davutoglu will be in Rabat but will not attend the Arab League meeting as Ankara
is not a member.
He also said Monday he regretted that mediation bids since the start of the
unrest in Syria early this year had failed.
"We have done everything (to avoid) that no blood is shed... So that our
friendship with this country with which we share a 910-kilometre-long border is
strengthened," he added.
He also said Turkey was backing people's demands in the Middle East for their
rights.
"We support the demands of people who rise up for their rights," he said.
"Turkey cannot just watch when universal rights are spurned."
Ankara, once a close economic and political ally of Syrian leader Bashar
al-Assad, has for months expressed frustration at his failure to listen to his
people.
Almost daily pro-democracy rallies in Syria have been met with violent
repression, at a cost of 3,500 lives, mostly civilians, according to the United
Nations.
Making the case for "Islam and democracy" during a visit to Egypt, Tunisia and
Libya in September, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, vaunted his own
country as a political model. "Turkey is 99 percent Muslim yet it is a
democratic secular state where all religions are equal," Erdogan said. "A
Muslim, a Christian and a Jew are equal in a secular state."
Iran Signals Its Readiness for a
Final Confrontation
Lt.-Col. (ret.) Michael Segall
Jerusalem Centre For Public Affairs
http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=9990&TTL=Iran_Signals_Its_Readiness_for_a_Final_Confrontation
•Since the publication of the November 2011 IAEA report, which explicitly
spotlights Iran's plans to build nuclear weapons, senior figures of the Iranian
regime and the state-run media have begun to use threatening, defiant, and
sometimes contemptuous language toward Israel and the United States.
•From Iran's standpoint, an ongoing, head-on confrontation with the U.S. and
Israel would serve its purposes in the region and build its image as a key actor
that stands firm against the West and provides an alternative agenda to reshape
the Middle East. Hence, compromise has almost ceased to be an option for Iran.
•The current round of the conflict between Iran and the United States and Israel
over Iran's (military) nuclear program should be seen in a much wider context,
one that centers on shaping a new landscape in the Middle East. Iran views
itself as "the next big thing" in the region and behaves accordingly-at the
moment with no significant challenge or response from the United States and the
West.
•If in the past Iran held clandestine contacts with Islamic movements, mainly
from North African Arab states, on Sudanese soil (such as Ennadha, which has now
won the Tunisian elections), it can now openly boost its influence in countries
where the "U.S.-supported dictators" have fallen.
•Iran no longer fears openly acknowledging that it has built capabilities for
reacting to an attack-including the Palestinian organizations in Gaza and
Hizbullah in Lebanon-and depicts them as part of its defensive strategy and
response in case of a confrontation with Israel and the United States.
•At home, the growing strength of the Revolutionary Guards enables them to
increasingly influence foreign policy and mainly to export the revolution in
ways not seen in the past. The top commanders of its elite Quds Force are
emerging from the shadows and will have a key role in the future struggle
against the U.S. and its remaining allies in the region, particularly Israel.
Iran, as its president said, is preparing for the "final confrontation."
The animated talk in Israel and the West about a possible attack on Iran's
nuclear facilities is naturally arousing great interest in Iran. Initially, the
Iranian leadership chose not to react and made only minor statements about this
discourse. But since the publication of the November 2011 report of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),1 which spotlights the military
dimension of Iran's nuclear program and its plans to build nuclear weapons,
senior figures of the regime and the state-run media have begun to use
threatening, defiant, and sometimes contemptuous language toward Israel, the
United States, and IAEA Chairman Yukiya Amano, who was described by President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as "America's lackey" and as having "no authority of his
own."2 Iran's ambassador to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltanieh declared: "This report
is unbalanced, unprofessional, and prepared with political motivation and under
political pressure mostly by the United States...this is in fact a prime
historical mistake."3 Concurrently, Iranian spokesmen and commentators emphasize
Iran's power, its capability to react "decisively" (including along Israel's
borders), and its ability to withstand both sanctions and a military offensive.
"The Final Confrontation"
Of all the Iranian statements, one made by Ahmadinejad stands out. During a
meeting with supporters, he said, "the West is mobilizing all its forces to
finish the job because it is clear as day that NATO is yearning to act against
Iran." He added in an apocalyptic-messianic spirit that the conditions taking
shape in the region are not normal (a hint at the Imam Mahdi),4 and that "we are
nearing the point of final confrontation." Such a confrontation, he explained,
will not necessarily be military and could take a political or other form.
Ahmadinejad stressed that Iran is now almost at the apex of its power, but
could, if it does not demonstrate resolve, absorb a blow from which it will not
recover for at least five hundred years. He also warned that an attack on Syria
by NATO would cause a regional explosion.5
Iran is not only observing the crisis brought on by the IAEA report but also the
changing Middle East and its own role in it. On November 4, Iran honored the
anniversary of the 1979 takeover of the U.S. embassy in Tehran (right in the
midst of the debate on the possibility of a Western attack). Indeed, Iran views
the upheaval in the Middle East and the growing Islamic trends (with Tunisia as
an example) as further proof of the (divine) justice of its path. These are
added to a series of "glorious" achievements, as Iran sees it, over the course
of more than a decade-the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, the Second Intifada,
the wars in Afghanistan (the harsh blow to the Taliban) and Iraq (the fall of
Saddam), the Second Lebanon War, and Israel's 2009 Gaza operation.
Hubris?
From Iran's standpoint, a head-on confrontation with the United States and
Israel would serve its purposes in the region and build its image as an actor
that stands firm against the Western powers and does not submit to pressure. If
there still was any chance of Tehran agreeing to concessions in its sporadic
talks with the West about its nuclear program, the Middle Eastern turmoil has
now made a compromise all but impossible. Indeed, given the harsh IAEA report,
more critical than in the past and providing more detail on the military aspects
of the nuclear program, compromise has almost ceased to be an option for Iran,
which is deliberately ramping up its defiance in light of Middle Eastern and
world developments.
Tehran is also encouraged by the positions of Russia and China, which are
granting it (along with its client Syria) immunity against any stringent
Security Council sanctions. Specifically, Iran is encouraged about its ability
to withstand sanctions by Russia's statements since the IAEA report's
publication6 (which have made much mention of Iran's reaction to the report). So
Iran has been exuding confidence-sometimes verging on hubris-and is prepared to
take risks, even to the point of trying to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to
the United States and thereby moving the Middle Eastern playing field to
Washington itself.
An interview that Ahmadinejad gave in early November to the Egyptian paper Al-Akhbar
accurately reflects Iran's interpretation of recent Middle Eastern developments
and the threats it faces. The United States, Ahmadinejad asserts, is indeed
looking to attack Iran, as was President Bush, but what a huge difference there
is between Bush's fate and the status Iran enjoys today.... Iran is becoming a
more and more advanced country and therefore can counterbalance and contend with
the global powers....The Zionist entity and the West, and especially the United
States, fear Iran's power and (growing) role and so are trying to enlist the
world for a battle to contain and reduce its power and role....They must know
that Iran will not allow such a development.
The Iranian president claims further that the United States aims to safeguard
the "Zionist entity," but will fail in that endeavor because this entity has no
place in the Middle East and is destined for extinction. If, Ahmadinejad
suggests, the peoples of the region were to hold a referendum on the Zionist
entity's existence among them, it is clear what the results would be. "This
entity can be compared to a kidney transplanted into a body that has rejected
it...it has no place in the region and the countries will soon get rid of it and
expel it from the region...it will collapse and its end will be near."7
Iran continues to project military, political, and economic power in the region,
and sees the Israeli and American focus on possibly attacking it as aimed at
undermining its rising status in the changing Middle East-and also as
manifesting the West's loss of its traditional mainstays of power in the region.
Iranian propaganda claims that the talk about attacking it is not serious
"because no such option really exists," and that the real aim of such talk is
only to encourage tougher sanctions-with poor chances of success given Russia
and China's position.
Political and Military Bluff
In an editorial that analyzes the discourse surrounding an attack on Iran
(quoting Ha'aretz, The Guardian, and President Shimon Peres), Iran's
conservative Mehr news agency assessed that "the Israelis are trying to set the
stage for the imposition of stricter sanctions on Iran." Mehr observed: "Over
the past few days, Western media outlets have created brouhaha about the
possibility that the Zionist regime may make a unilateral military strike
against Iran." The article noted, "Israel recently test-fired a ballistic
missile, purportedly capable of reaching Iran," and that "the Israeli military,
which is usually secretive about its activities, allowed media people to report
on the event."
The editorial concludes by saying, "it is clear that a military attack on Iran
cannot be a viable option for Israel" and offers several reasons for this:
(1) They know that a strike could not stop Iran's nuclear program.
(2) Even Israeli and U.S. strategists, who believe that the strike could delay
Iran's nuclear program, say that the strike would only set back Iran's program
for two years, and thus it would not be worth the trouble to start a war with
Iran.
(3) Any attack against Iran would strengthen Iran's national cohesion.
(4) Iran has shown that it is totally prepared to counter any military threat
and is capable of involving regional and extra-regional countries in any
possible war.
(5) U.S. and Israeli intelligence and military officials do not believe that
Iran's nuclear program is their number one threat. They know that the Arab
Spring is a much greater threat to their interests.
So, what is the reason behind the new political game directed at Iran?
It seems that the Israelis are trying to set the stage for the imposition of
stricter sanctions on Iran, but the biggest obstacle is the fact that Russia,
China, and some members of the European Union are strongly opposed to new
sanctions.
All this rhetoric about war is being used to compel these countries to stop
opposing the moves to impose new United Nations Security Council sanctions on
Iran, which they prefer to the outbreak of a dangerous war, which could have
serious repercussions for the world.8
In a similar spirit, Esmaeil Kowsari, deputy chairman of the National Security
and Foreign Policy Committee of the Majlis, asserts that
recent threats made by officials of the U.S. and the Zionist regime are a
political and military bluff. The Zionist regime and the U.S. are in no position
to attack Iran....The U.S. and the Zionist regime are gripped by an intense fear
and great concern in dealing with developments in the region and the world. And
after losing their strongholds and illegitimate interests in regional countries,
they are trying to extricate themselves from this situation.9
Active Diplomacy
Amid the Israeli media campaign about a possible attack on Iran's nuclear
facilities, commentators in Iran's leading conservative outlets have called on
the country's leaders to adopt an active diplomacy to counter it. Behind this
"murky" campaign, they claim, stands Israel's fear that Middle Eastern
developments have removed the nuclear issue from the Western agenda and that the
tide is not in Israel's favor. Thus, these commentators contend, Israel is using
a tactic of trying to scare the world and draw attention to the nuclear issue,
hoping thereby to increase the pressure on Russia and China to support further
Security Council sanctions. This, in these pundits' view, is primarily
psychological warfare by Israel and the West and does not stem from a real
intention to attack Iran.
They argue, then, that Iran needs to take two clear stances toward the world.
First, it should emphasize that no military attack on its nuclear facilities
will benefit the attackers because these sites are dispersed and underground.
Second, it should declare that if there is an attack, even if it fails to damage
these facilities, it will be considered an act of aggression and a violation of
international conventions, and therefore Iran will quit the Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) and no longer be obligated to the IAEA or allow the presence of
nuclear inspectors. According to the commentators, such a threat would have a
great impact. And to further neutralize the psychological warfare, Iran should
espouse an active diplomacy and convey its positions to the other states such as
Russia and China.10 Other commentators have suggested putting the Russian
step-by-step initiative on the agenda.11
A Crushing Response
Senior Iranian military officials, clerics, and commentators have adopted
threatening language, warning that Iran will react with great severity to any
attack on it.
•Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei: IRGC and Basij (volunteer) forces will
respond to any aggression with a strong slap and an iron fist that "the enemies,
the U.S., its allies, and the Zionist regime, in particular, should take into
consideration, that the Iranian nation is not to attack any country or nation
but rather is to strongly react to any aggression or threat so that the
aggressors and attackers would collapse from inside....The Iranian nation will
not remain only an observer of the threats of the absurd materialistic
powers....Only a nation with a stable power of self-defense can survive in a
world where, unfortunately, relations between nations and countries are based on
the power of weapons."12
•Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi said any sort of hostile act against Iran's
territorial integrity would be met by a rapid, firm, and crushing response by
its armed forces.13
•Yadallah Javani, politburo chief of the IRGC (Revolutionary Guards), said that
"if the Zionist regime commits such a mistake [as attacking Iran], it would mean
that it has entered the final days of its existence since the Islamic Republic
of Iran is a powerful and strong country which can defend its territorial
integrity and interests across the globe, especially in the Middle-East.... The
Islamic Republic of Iran has some means and possibilities in areas very close to
the Zionist regime and can easily give a response to Israel to make its leaders
repent their action" (emphasis added).
•Javani also pointed to the Israeli military's successive failures and defeats
in the thirty-three-day war in Lebanon in summer 2006 and the twenty-two-day
offensive in Gaza in winter 2008-2009, and underlined that Israel is not strong
enough to threaten Iran.14
•Deputy Chief of Staff for Cultural Affairs and Defense Publicity Brig.-Gen.
Massoud Jazayeri said that Iran will not be handcuffed if comes under enemy
aggression. Israel's Dimona nuclear plant and all other parts of Israel are
within the reach of Iranian missiles. "The easiest target for Iranian military
capabilities is the (Dimona nuclear) reactor....Our capabilities and our
defensive tactics will definitely make the enemies, including the U.S. and the
Zionists, repent....Tel Aviv knows well that any small step against Iran will be
linked with the existence of this fake entity...such a military step from the
Zionist entity against Iran will lead to the total disappearance of this entity
from existence...if smoke columns rise from our nuclear facilities, then this
smoke could rise from other installations and places....Our military information
on our enemies is good and sufficient."15
•Ayatollah Seyed Ahmad Khatami, a member of the Experts Assembly, said, "Today
Iran is mighty, strong and powerful and will retaliate against any plot so
powerfully that it would become a lesson for others."16 Another member of the
same assembly, Hossein Ebrahimi, warned that "before [being able to take] any
action against Iran, the Israelis will feel our wrath in Tel Aviv." Ebrahimi
"assessed Israel's military capabilities during the Second Lebanon War, ‘and
found it weak.'" He stated: "The Israelis entered the war with the capabilities
they had but earned nothing but humiliation....I do not think that Israelis
along with the Americans and Britons will commit such a folly....If the threat
is carried out, they will see the political might of the (Islamic)
establishment, the solidarity of the Iranian nation, and the strength of the
country."17 Still another Experts Assembly member, Mahmud Alavi, said,
"Washington and Tel Aviv are aware of the fact that putting their anti-Iran
threats into practice would cost them dearly, and thus they would not become
involved in such folly." He added "that the United States and Israel know that
such empty threats cannot intimidate Iran and also know that they would receive
a crushing response if they ever attacked the Islamic Republic."18
Particularly notable are the tough statements of Sadollah Zarei of Kayhan
newspaper, which reflects the outlook of the leader of Iran. Zarei claims it is
very unlikely that Israel has any plan to attack Iran or even to take part in a
larger attack; the regional conditions and Israel's capabilities do not allow
it. "Iran is too great for the Zionist regime to threaten it." Four regular
Iranian missiles, Zarei asserts, will cause a million Zionists to become
refugees, while even if Israel fires a hundred missiles at Iran not even a few
houses will be demolished. He stresses that Iran's power and ballistic-missile
capability can cause a total Israeli defeat and adds: "Iranian missile fire on
Israel will not involve any expenditures from the national budget, because Iran
sells missiles in thirty-five countries of the world and builds its operational
missiles from the profits of these sales. Hence, with very little money it will
be possible to destroy Tel Aviv and the occupied lands." 19
"The Next Big Thing"
To sum up, the current round of the conflict between Iran and the United States
and Israel over Iran's nuclear program should be seen as another battle in a
much wider campaign, one that centers on shaping a new landscape in a Middle
East that is still in upheaval. Iran views itself as "the next big thing" in the
region and behaves accordingly-at the moment with no significant response from
the United States and the West. The November 2011 IAEA report will probably
temporarily increase the pressure on Tehran and lead to limited measures against
it. It appears that ultimately, however, the unhurried approach of the
international system, though it certainly wants to leverage the IAEA report for
"crippling" sanctions (mainly on Iran's banking and energy sectors) and for
another round of talks with Iran (the Russian proposal?), will again be stymied
by Russia and China, which will act to soften any measures.
Given its assessment of the international and regional balance of power, Iran's
audacity is growing even in areas distant from the Middle East (as revealed in
its recruitment of a Mexican drug cartel for the assassination plot against the
Saudi ambassador). In the Middle East itself, Iran's perception is that the dams
have burst. If in the past it held clandestine contacts with Islamic movements
on Sudanese soil (such as Ennadha, which has now won the Tunisian elections), it
can now openly boost its influence in countries where the "U.S.-supported
dictators" have fallen. Iran no longer fears openly acknowledging that it has
built capabilities for reacting to an attack-including the Palestinian
organizations in Gaza and Hizbullah in Lebanon-and depicts them as part of its
defensive strategy and response in case of a confrontation with Israel and the
United States.
Standing up to the United States and Israel on the nuclear issue well serves
Iranian interests in the Arab street, which was and remains hostile toward those
two countries. As Islam regains its hold over the Middle East, after years in
which it was repressed by the Arab regimes, Iran's confidence grows that it can
determine the new power equations in the region and drive the United States out
of it-as well as Israel.
At home, the growing strength of the Revolutionary Guards-who play a central
role with respect to both domestic politics and the Iranian nuclear program, its
protection, survivability, and the missiles that are eventually supposed to
carry nuclear warheads-enables them to increasingly influence foreign policy and
to export the revolution more boldly and in ways not seen in the past. Indeed,
recently Kayhan made an extraordinary admission that testifies to Iran's
self-confidence perhaps more than anything else. It stated that the Quds Force
of the Revolutionary Guards has already been clashing for some time with U.S.
forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere:
The Quds Force is more than an active operational force; it is an ideology that
does not recognize borders, a worldview whose tenets and beliefs directly
conflict with Western culture....Since conquering Iraq and Afghanistan and
entering the region, the United States has experienced more than ever the taste
of conflict with the Quds Force as profoundly and tangibly as possible.
America's appreciation of Iran's regional power is based mainly, and perhaps
exclusively, on the experience of clashing with the Quds Force (emphasis
added).20
Asr-e Iran also writes openly about the Quds Force's active presence in Iraq,
and its contribution to bolstering Iran's status, to the detriment of Saudi
Arabia.21
In light of the Quds Force's involvement in planning the putative hit on the
Saudi ambassador in Washington, there have been American suggestions to
assassinate senior Quds Force figures including its commander, Kassem Suleimani.
This has sparked a wave of adulation for the force and its leaders in the
Iranian media; they are seen as playing, and as destined to play, a key role in
the struggle against the United States and Israel. Suleimani's name was also
recently mentioned as a candidate for the next president of Iran (in 2013). The
previous commander of the Quds Force, Ahmad Vahidi, is now defense minister.
Iran indeed views itself as prepared for a final confrontation.
IDF Lt.-Col. (ret.) Michael (Mickey) Segall, an expert on strategic issues with
a focus on Iran, terrorism, and the Middle East, is a senior analyst at the
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.