LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
January 21/2012
Bible Quotation for today/The Parable of the Good Samaritan
Luke 10/25-37: "A teacher of the Law came up and tried to trap Jesus. Teacher,
he asked, what must I do to receive eternal life? Jesus answered him, What do
the Scriptures say? How do you interpret them? The man answered, Love the Lord
your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and
with all your mind; and Love your neighbor as you love yourself. You are right,
Jesus replied; do this and you will live. But the teacher of the Law
wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, Who is my neighbor? Jesus
answered, There was once a man who was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho when
robbers attacked him, stripped him, and beat him up, leaving him half dead. It
so happened that a priest was going down that road; but when he saw the man, he
walked on by on the other side. In the same way a Levite also came there, went
over and looked at the man, and then walked on by on the other side. But a
Samaritan who was traveling that way came upon the man, and when he saw him, his
heart was filled with pity. He went over to him, poured oil and wine on his
wounds and bandaged them; then he put the man on his own animal and took him to
an inn, where he took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and
gave them to the innkeeper. Take care of him, he told the innkeeper, and when I
come back this way, I will pay you whatever else you spend on him. nd when I
come back this way, I will pay you whatever else you spend on him. And Jesus
concluded, In your opinion, which one of these three acted like a neighbor
toward the man attacked by the robbers? The teacher of the Law answered, The one
who was kind to him. Jesus replied, You go, then, and do the same.
Latest analysis,
editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Great expectations/By: Michael
Young/January 20/12
The cost of the fall of al-Assad/By Tariq Alhomayed/January 20/12
The imam sends a satrap/By
Amir Taheri/January 20/12
Are the Arabs prepared for the new weapons of war?/By
Osman Mirghani/January 20/12
Threats against Iran are harmful/By Yoel Marcus /January 20/12
The weak/Hazem al-Amin/January 20/12
Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for
January 20/12
Netanyahu: Iran has decided to become a nuclear state.
Action needed before it is too late.
Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey in
Israel, calls for bolstered communication
Top U.S. General: We have many joint interests with Israel
in Middle East
UN watchdog urges full Iran cooperation in nuclear probe
Iran says information gathered by UN may have played part in scientist killing
France's Sarkozy: Military strike on Iran would trigger Middle East war
Report: Iran police close down toy shops selling Barbie
dolls
Syrian opposition leader,Kamal al-Labwani seeks to counter
Islamists
Arab League considers extending Syria mission
Meshal failed to pass on Arab League's message to al-Assad
- Sources
France threatens to pull out of Afghanistan after troops
killed
HRW urges Arabs to seek UN sanctions against
Syria
Violence keeps Syria on
edge, Arab mission in doubt
Out of jail, lifelong dissident joins Syria
revolt
Abducted Syrian activist at risk of torture:
Amnesty
Syrian town in opposition hands
Thailand officially recognizes Palestinian statehood
Iranian general says Iraq, South Lebanon “submit” to
Tehran
March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid demands
Hezbollah clarify Iranian general’s statements
Special Tribunal for Lebanon Pre-Trial Judge Daniel
Fransen is Setting Stage to Issue Indictments in 3 Cases Linked to Hariri’s
Murder
Report: Thailand Issues Arrest Warrant against 2nd
Lebanese, Sammy Paolo a Hizbullah Suspect
Report: Thailand terror suspect blames Israel's Mossad for
arrest
Lebanese fingerprint
records feared in Israel: report
Geagea says game over for Hezbollah, Assad out by year's end
Lebanon's Arabic press digest - Jan. 20, 2012
Jumblatt: Syria concerns me not Assad
government
Labor Minister Charbel Nahhas Signs Wage Hike Decree,
Refrains from Approving Transportation Allowance
Owners of Collapsed Beirut Building Charged, to be
Questioned Monday
U.S. Source Hails Lebanon’s Neutrality on Syria Says
Washington Playing Role in Stability
Netanyahu: Iran has decided to become a nuclear state. Action needed before it
is too late.
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report/January 19, 2012/ Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
declared Thursday night, Jan. 19 that Iran had decided to become a nuclear
state. He urged action before it was too late to stop Iran completing the
construction of a nuclear weapon. His statement at the end of a visit to Holland
gave Gen Martin Dempsey, on his first visit to Israel as Chairman of the US
Joint Chiefs of Staff, the message he will be asked to take back to President
Barack Obama. It also contradicted Defense Minister Ehud Barak's statement that
Tehran had not yet decided to go nuclear.
On Dec. 22, 2011, debkafile first revealed Tehran had reached a decision to go
ahead and build a nuclear weapon.
Netanyahu has kept the Iranian cards close to his chest. His statement therefore
caught wrong-footed the Israeli officials, including Defense Minister Ehud Barak,
who in the last 48 hours had asserted that Iran had not yet decided whether to
build a nuclear bomb and there was still time for US-led sanctions to work.
debkafile reported earlier Thursday:
Gen. Martin Dempsey begins his first visit to Israel as Chairman of the Joint US
Chiefs of Staff amid a major falling-out between the two governments over the
handling of Iran's nuclear weapon potential. debkafile's military and Washington
sources confirm that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stands by the view that
Iran is advancing its plans to build a nuclear bomb full speed ahead, undeterred
even by the threat of harsher sanctions. Netanyahu therefore stands by his
refusal of President Barack Obama's demand for a commitment to abstain from a
unilateral strike on Iran's nuclear sites without prior notice to Washington.
The US president repeated this demand when he called the Israeli prime minister
Thursday night Jan. 13. Netanyahu replied that, in view of their disagreement on
this point, he preferred to cancel the biggest US-Israel war game ever staged
due to have taken place in April. The exercise was to have tested the level of
coordination between the two armies in missile defense for the contingency of a
war with Iran or a regional conflict.
The prime minister was concerned that having large-scale US military forces in
the country would restrict his leeway for decision-making on Iran.
In an effort to limit the damage to relations with the US administration,
Defense Minister Ehud Barak struck a conciliatory note Wednesday, Jan. 18,
saying, "Israel is still very far from a decision on attacking Iran's nuclear
facilities."
Striking the pose of middleman, he was trying to let Washington know that there
was still time for the US and Israel to reach an accommodation on whether and
when a strike should take place.
debkafile's sources doubt that President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu are
in any mood to respond to Barak's effort to cool the dispute. Obama needs to be
sure he will not be taken by surprise by an Israel attack in the middle of his
campaign for re-election, especially since he has begun taking heat on the
Iranian issue.
Republican rivals are accusing him of being soft on Iran. And while the economy
is the dominant election issue, a majority of Americans disapprove of his
handling of Iran's nuclear ambitions by a margin of 48 to 33 percent according
to a Washington Post-ABC News poll this week.
Wednesday (Thursday morning Israel time), President Obama responded by
reiterating that he has been clear since running for the presidency that he will
take "every step available to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."
Echoes of Barak's arguments were heard in the words of US Defense Secretary Leon
Panetta, Wednesday night: "We are not making any special steps at this point in
order to deal with the situation. Why? Because, frankly, we are fully prepared
to deal with that situation now."
Panetta went on to say that Defense Minister Barak contacted him and asked to
postpone the joint US-Israeli drill "for technical reasons."
Before he took off for a short trip to Holland, Netanyahu instructed Barak and
IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz not to deviate in their talks with Gen. Dempsey
from the position he took with the US president, namely, no commitment for
advance notice to Washington about a unilateral strike against Iran.
The Israeli prime minister is convinced that, contrary to the claims by US
spokesmen and media, that current sanctions are ineffective insofar as slowing
Iran's advance toward a nuclear weapon and the harsher sanctions on Iran's
central bank and oil exports are too slow and will take hold too late to achieve
their purpose.
In any case, say Israeli officials, Washington is again signaling its
willingness to go back to direct nuclear negotiations with Tehran, although past
experience proved that Iran exploits diplomatic dialogue as grace time for
moving forward on its nuclear ambitions.
US spokesmen denied an Iranian report that a recent letter from the US president
to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei proposed opening a direct channel for
talks.
Still those reports persist. American and European spokesmen were forced to deny
a statement by Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi Wednesday on his
arrival in Ankara that Iran and the big powers are in contact over the revival
of nuclear negotiations.
Netanyahu fears that dialogue between Iran and the five powers plus Germany (the
P5+1) will resume after bowing to an Iranian stipulation that sanctions be
suspended for the duration of the talks. Once again, Tehran will be enabled to
steal a march on the US and Israel and bring its nuclear weapon program to
conclusion, unhindered by economic constraints.
The imam sends a satrap
By Amir Taheri/Asharq Alawsat
After months of hand wringing and, perhaps, internal squabbles, Iran appears to
have decided to play a direct role in shaping the outcome of the struggle over
Syria's future.
Several signs indicate the change in policy. For almost a year, the state-owned
media had tried to appear neutral on the Syrian issue. News of the uprising was
either under-played or presented in a more or less balanced way, reflecting the
views both of the Baathist regime and its opponents. In recent weeks, however,
the Khomeinist media have adopted a position openly hostile to the Syrian
opposition. Instead, they offer a narrative that echoes the Syrian regime's
claim that the uprising is a "foreign plot" and that the violence that has
claimed over 5,000 lives is the work of "terrorist groups." However, the Tehran
media have not deemed it fit to cover the Syrian events directly. Not a single
Iranian media outlet has despatched a reporter to Syria. Two of Iran's
state-owned news agencies have permanent offices in Damascus. But they, too,
make no attempt at covering the nationwide revolt. The reason is that even the
most mercenary journalist would not be able to put his name to the Baathist
regime's brazen lies.
Another sign that Iran may have decided to heighten its profile in Damascus is
the increase in arms shipments to Syria. An Iranian air cargo company, Aseman
[Airlines], reports a 50 per cent increase in flights to Damascus. Although part
of the "air-bridge" may be used for non-military cargo, the dramatic increase
could also be related to faster gunrunning to save the Syrian regime.
There is also an increase in overland transport to Syria. While the flow of
pilgrims from Iran has dwindled to a trickle, the number of trucks carrying
cargo, including arms, has risen sharply. Last week, Turkey impounded four
Iranian trucks on suspicion of smuggling weapons to Syria. Despite denials from
Tehran, Turkey insists that this is the second time in six months that it has
stopped Iranian trucks ferrying weapons to Syria. Yet another sign of Iran's
greater involvement in Syria is the recent visit to Damascus of General Qassem
Suleimani who commands the Qods Force (Sepah Quds), an ad hoc military unit with
the official mission of "exporting revolution".
According to Tehran sources, Suleimani held a four-hour meeting with President
Bashar al-Assad in Damascus to discuss "coordination of strategy to protect
Syria against foreign conspiracies."
Suleimani reports directly to the "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenei. Thus, his visit
might indicate that the " Supreme Guide" has seized control of policy on Syria,
by-passing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Salehi.
On a number of occasions, Ahmadinejad and Salehi have expressed reservations
about backing the Syrian regime. It now seems that Khamenei has brushed aside
those reservations. Sources in Tehran tell me that the "Supreme Guide" has
decided to prevent the fall of Syria into "the camp hostile to the Islamic
Republic."
Could Iran save the Syrian regime?
Of course, Iran could ease the effect of sanctions on Syria by supplying it with
money and arms. It could also play a role by bolstering the Syrian regime's
policy of trying to crush the revolt by killing and kidnapping. General
Suleimani already has a presence in Syria with a military mission of over 600
men. He could bring in units from the Lebanese branch of Hezbollah to help
Syrian forces loyal to the regime. The Qods Force has trained hundreds of
Hezbollah fighters for operations outside Lebanon. Suleimani has tested some of
those fighters in operations in Iraq.
Suleimani could also count on elements from the Iraqi Jaish al-Mahdi (The Amy of
the Hidden Imam). Although it is supposed to have disbanded, Jaish al-Mahdi has
retained its arms and maintains informal existence under Suleimani's men.
Stronger support from Iran could also raise the moral of Syrian ruling elites,
some of whom have began to waver in recent weeks. Some potential deserters from
the Syrian security forces may decide to await the outcome of Iranian
intervention before making their move.
Iranian intervention could also persuade Russia and China to continue dragging
their feet over possible United Nations' intervention to stop the massacre in
Syria.
More importantly, as some circles in Tehran suggest, the Islamic Republic could
promote a formula under which President Assad is asked to step down so that the
Baathist regime could survive in a new configuration. Despite all that, Tehran's
chances of success in Damascus are slim. To start with, the Syrian armed forces
have never really warmed to the Tehran-Damascus axis. Although the two countries
have signed a defence pact, exchanges between Iranian and Syrian military have
remained limited. Iran has more such exchanges with North Korea and Venezuela
than with Syria.
Syrian elites are equally cool towards alliance with the Iranian imamate.
The Baathist Party claims to stand for a secular, non-sectarian system of
government with a Socialist programme. The Iranian imamate, on the other hand,
is based on religious mumbo-jumbo, sectarian superstitions, and anti-left
hatred. A Syria controlled by "Walayat al-Faqih" [Guardianship of the Jurists]
might not be attractive to many members of the elite in Damascus.
Even if Tehran succeeds in making Suleimani de facto Satrap of Syria, the Syrian
revolt may prove more resilient than Khamenei imagines. Ahmadinejad and Salehi
have understood this. This is why, in cryptic style, they have tried to put some
blue water between the Baathist regime and Iran. Iran has no national interest
in helping crush the Syrian uprising. Its military intervention could open the
way for other nations to also send troops to Syria. Prudence dictates that
Iranian policymakers take into account the possibility that the Syrian revolt
may succeed in bringing about regime change in Damascus.
By trying to prevent Syria from moving to the "hostile camp", Khamenei and
Suleimani may well render that inevitable.
Iranian general says Iraq, South Lebanon “submit” to Tehran
January 20, 2012 /An Iranian general said Iraq and Hezbollah-dominated South
Lebanon “submit” to Tehran’s wishes. “Those two countries, in a way or another,
submit to the will and the wishes of Tehran,” head of Iran’s elite al-Quds
Force, Qassem Suleimani, was quoted as saying by Al-Arabiya television. He added
that his country “can organize any movement that leads to the formation of
Islamic governments [in Iraq and Lebanon] in order to fight
imperialism.”According to Al-Arabiya, Suleimani’s remarks came during a seminar
entitled “Youth and Islamic Awareness”, which was held in Tehran on Thursday.
Commenting on the Syrian crisis, the general said that “the Syrian people
support the government [of President Bashar al-Assad] completely.” Assad’s
troops have cracked down on protests against almost five decades of Baath rule
which broke out mid-March, killing over 5,400 people and triggering a torrent of
international condemnation.-NOW Lebanon
March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid demands Hezbollah
clarify Iranian general’s statements
January 20, 2012 /March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid
condemned on Friday the statements of the head of Iran’s elite al-Quds Force,
Qassem Suleimani and demanded that Hezbollah clarify them.
“The statements of Suleimani are rejected because they violate the sovereignty
of Lebanon and puts the residents of the South in danger by making them a mail
box between Iran and the US,” Soueid said in a statement issued by his office.
Soueid also said that Suleimani’s statements “took off the mask of Hezbollah,
which is trying to convince the Lebanese people and the world that it is a
Lebanese party which works to achieve Lebanese goals.”Al-Arabiya television
quoted Suleimani earlier in the day as saying that the Hezbollah-dominated South
Lebanon “submits” to Tehran’s wishes.
-NOW Lebanon
Report: Thailand Issues Arrest Warrant against 2nd Lebanese, Sammy Paolo a
Hizbullah Suspect
by Naharnet /..Thailand charged another Lebanese Hizbullah suspect identified as
James Sammy Paolo, who is an alleged accomplice of Hussein Atris, for planning
to carry out a terrorist activity.
The Criminal Court in Thailand issued on Thursday an arrest warrant against
Paolo, 40, who will face the same charges as Atris, of possessing forbidden
chemical substances.
Thailand Police Chief Gen. Priewpan Damapong said that the sketch of Paolo was
given from a description by Atris. Paolo was Atris' housemate at the warehouse
in Samut Sakhon, on the western outskirts of Bangkok, where police seized 4,000
kilograms of urea fertilizer and several gallons of liquid ammonium nitrate,
according to media reports published on Friday. Bangkok Post said that police
are trying to determine whether Paolo is still in Thailand and have contacted
Interpol in their efforts to track him down. Priewpan told the daily that both
men are accused of violating the Military Supply Act by possessing ammonium
nitrate without permission. “Atris and Paolo were planning to send the chemicals
to another country and had rented 10 containers from the Transport Co.,”
Priewpan said.
Atris denied he is a member of Hizbullah consequently Thai police can only press
a criminal charge against him where he could face up to five years in prison.
The U.S. Embassy had issued an "emergency message" last Friday warning of a
possible terror threat against Americans in Bangkok, and Israel warned its
citizens as well.
Thai authorities were caught off-guard by the U.S. announcement, hastily
revealing they had detained a Swedish national of Lebanese origin with alleged
links to Hizbullah and that intelligence indicated a plot could be carried out
between Jan. 13 and 15. Details of the alleged plot remained hazy due to
conflicting accounts from Thai officials, some of whom said that Thailand
appeared to have been a staging ground but not the target of any attack. In
Stockholm, Swedish Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Linn Duvhammar confirmed Atris
has dual citizenship and said the Swedish embassy is helping him find a lawyer.
He moved to Sweden in 1991 and spent 2006-09 in Lebanon before returning.
Duvhammar said the man was carrying a valid Swedish passport when he was
arrested, as well as an old one that had been stained.
Report: Thailand terror suspect blames Israel's Mossad for
arrest
Lebanese-Swedish man Atris Hussein proclaims innocence to Swedish newspaper;
says incriminating evidence found in warehouse was probably placed there by
Mossad. By The Associated Press/A Lebanese-Swedish man detained in a
terror probe in Thailand has told a Swedish newspaper that he's innocent and
blamed Israel's Mossad spy agency for his arrest. The tabloid Aftonbladet
on Friday said it spoke to 47-year-old Atris Hussein in a Bangkok prison where
he's being held on allegations of illegally possessing explosive materials. Thai
police officers escort a Lebanese suspect in Samut Sakhon province, on the
outskirts of Bangkok, January 16, 2012. Hussein was quoted as saying he is
"100 percent innocent" and that "much of the material the police found in my
warehouse had been placed there, probably by the Israeli security service Mossad."
Thai police have said Hussein was storing the explosive materials in Bangkok
before shipping them to another destination. His arrest last week was linked to
U.S. and Israeli warnings of a possible terror threat in Bangkok.
Special Tribunal for Lebanon Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen is Setting Stage to
Issue Indictments in 3 Cases Linked to Hariri’s Murder
by Naharnet /Special Tribunal for Lebanon Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen has
made a progress in preparing the indictments in the assassination attempts of MP
Marwan Hamadeh and ex-Defense Minister Elias Murr, and the murder of former
Communist party leader George Hawi, Lebanese sources said Friday. The informed
sources told pan-Arab daily al-Hayat that STL Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare has
referred to Fransen his probe into the three cases and that the pre-trial judge
is preparing the indictments pending their release. The court has already
indicted four Hizbullah members in ex-Premier Rafik Hariri’s Feb. 2005
assassination. But Lebanese authorities have so far failed to arrest them.
In August, Fransen linked the three attacks on the Lebanese politicians to
Hariri’s murder. According to the tribunal’s statute, a case is connected to the
2005 attack if it is of a "similar nature and gravity" and has a number of
elements in common with it, such as “the criminal intent (motive), purpose
behind the attacks, the nature of the victims targeted, the pattern of the
attacks (modus operandi) and the perpetrators.” According to Article 1 of the
statute, the tribunal has jurisdiction over attacks that occurred in Lebanon
between Oct. 1, 2004 and Dec. 12, 2005 but only if their connection to the
Hariri attack is determined by the pre-trial judge. Al-Hayat’s sources said that
Bellemare’s expected visit to Beirut next week is not linked to the indictments
that could be issued in the three cases in the coming weeks.
They stressed that he would come to Lebanon for a farewell visit to top
officials, including Hamadeh, Murr and the families of Hawi and Hariri.
Bellemare informed U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon last month that he will
not seek reappointment to his post on Feb. 2012 due to health reasons.
Threats against Iran are harmful
By Yoel Marcus /Haaretz
When Netanyahu says sanctions against Iran are not effective, reality shows he
is talking nonsense. How is it that he doesn't understand that such scornful
talk endangers cooperation with America?
In the final analysis, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan was right after all. His
assessment that Iran is not so close to producing a nuclear bomb was widely
criticized in the government. Some even claim it was the reason the government
refused to extend his term by another year. But now the defense establishment is
no longer certain its panic was justified.
In Wednesday's Haaretz, Amos Harel reported Israeli intelligence claims that
"Iran has not yet decided whether to make a nuclear bomb," due to a fear of
instability in the regime. Under these circumstances, sanctions that are making
life hard for Iran have caused its leadership to have second thoughts.
U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt was reported to have said, "Speak softly and
carry a big stick." Talking less, threatening less - these are assets of a sane
country. Our threats imply that what Israel is actually saying is, "Hold us
back." There are limits to our ability to strike at Iran. With all due respect
to ourselves, there are also limits to our military capability. We are not
America, at best we are dependent on it. Sometimes our threats are exaggerated.
After all, we are not the only ones who know how to threaten - Iran also knows
how to use scare tactics.
"We must not exacerbate the situation," says Prof. Shlomo Avineri. This means we
cannot allow criticism against us to be worse than the danger facing us - the
very fact that we would be considered crazy endangers the country.
This week The New York Times columnist Roger Cohen called his column "Don't do
it, Bibi," referring to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by his nickname. Cohen
was talking about Israel's threats to bomb nuclear installations in Iran. "Don't
go there, Mr. Netanyahu. It would be a terrible mistake" to do so before the
U.S. elections, wrote Cohen. He said it would affect U.S. President Barack
Obama's attitude toward Israel in the future, if he is elected for a second
term. Not to mention increasing the danger of radicalization in the heart of the
hot Islamic region.
Cohen is not considered a fanatical Israel-lover, in spite of his name. But that
doesn't mean that what he writes does not express the feelings of the White
House.
Not only are talk and threats not helpful, sometimes they are even harmful. When
Netanyahu says that sanctions against Iran are not effective, reality shows he
is talking nonsense. Even Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman is not behaving
very wisely when he reacts to the American approach by saying, "The time has
come to switch from talk to action." How is it that these two brilliant minds
don't understand that with such scornful talk they are endangering the
extraordinary security cooperation between Israel and America?
The belief that sanctions would not stop Iran has proved to be mistaken. The
fact is that Iranian leaders are not finding it easy to take the last lethal
step. We should recall that when the United States invaded Iraq in 1991, Israel
was attacked by Scud missiles in revenge for the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear
reactor. Thirty-nine measly Scuds caused panic in the country. Half of the
residents fled the Tel Aviv area and the other half drank water and urinated in
pots they had prepared in their sealed security rooms. That means that if the
Americans themselves take military action against Iran, we, in any case, will
also be attacked by Shahab missiles in the heart of Tel Aviv. Not only from Iran
but from the bastions of Hezbollah, perhaps because of our overuse of empty
threats. Even more so if we act alone. Don't think that if the Americans
attack we will continue to have a good time in Tel Aviv. During the Second
Lebanon War we were not prepared for the daily shelling from the north down to
Hadera. We don't have to hear the frequent scaremongering of Home Front Defense
Minister Matan Vilnai to know that our ability to absorb such a blow is nothing
to write home about.
There is a problematic aspect to every war scenario. In our region, the future
is clouded by uncertainty. If we attack on our own, the results are liable to be
disastrous. If we sit and do nothing, Iran may take action. In either case, we
are liable to be attacked. The question is whether at this time, when Israel is
in a hostile environment and is expressing its desire to attack, we have a
leadership that can be relied on to make the right decisions.
I'm afraid we have no reason to sleep peacefully.
The cost of the fall of al-Assad
19/01/2012/By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
There are many expectations that the al-Assad regime is about to collapse, and
that it is only a matter of time…expectations repeated by politicians on several
levels, which have received the support of many of the Syrian people involved in
the situation, but not the analysts who rejoiced at the revolutions in their own
countries but denounced the Syrian revolution. However the question that must be
asked here is: what is the cost of the fall of al-Assad? The press report that
was published by our newspaper yesterday, in cooperation with the British
newspaper “The Guardian”, addressed this question, conveying a number of
viewpoints attributed to different personalities inside Syria, including
Alawites, reflecting the almost unanimous conviction that it will be difficult
for the al-Assad regime to continue, but everyone fears the price of its
downfall. This is compounded by the al-Assad regime’s current state of weakness,
with the Muslim Brotherhood recently rejecting an Iranian offer to grant the
Brotherhood representation in government on the condition that al-Assad remains
in power! Why would al-Assad do that if he was in a position of strength,
especially as he described the Muslim Brotherhood in his latest speech as the
“Devil’s Brotherhood”?
Hence, concerns over the potential costs of the fall of al-Assad must be
reflected at the regional and international levels. Delaying the fall of al-Assad
will entail subsequent security and economic complications, not only for Syria,
but for the region as a whole. Of course, in the event of al-Assad remaining in
power, the price will also be high for the Syrians and the region, specifically
Turkey, as at this point al-Assad would be far more dangerous than Saddam
Hussein following the liberation of Kuwait.
Therefore, simply expecting, or waiting for the al-Assad regime to collapse on
its own, without any significant effort to accelerate this process from our
regional states and the international community, means that the interests and
stability of the region and world at large is being put at risk. This is not to
mention the dangers that threaten Syria itself, and also the complications of
the post al-Assad phase. Waiting for the “expected” moment of collapse is
dangerous, and costly, for everyone.
The true cost of delaying the fall of al-Assad is that the Syrian crisis will
deepen, and a civil war will be fuelled. As one Western diplomat said in “The
Guardian”: “if you shoot at people for months, you shouldn't be surprised when
they start shooting back”, and this is what is happening in Syria today.
Prolonging the life of the al-Assad regime also means further complicating the
solutions for the post al-Assad phase, and it is inevitable that those who will
pay the highest price will be the Turks, not the Iraqis. The Baghdad regime, for
example, has concerns regarding the Syrian revolution because it could awaken
the Sunni giant, particularly as the Iraqi regime is a sectarian system par
excellence. Whilst the Turks are concerned about the future of Syria following
the revolution, out of fear for their commercial interests and security. Ankara
is not a sectarian regime, it is a democracy, and the survival of the ruling
elite there depends on providing economic accomplishments to the Turkish people,
rather than sectarian promises cloaked in deceptive slogans such as “resistance”
and so on, along the lines of what is repeated by the al-Assad regime and Iran’s
allies in the region.
Hence, it is dangerous to merely wait for the fall of the al-Assad regime
without doing anything to accelerate this process. This is what those concerned
with the stability of our region must be aware of, whether we are talking about
the Saudis or the Turks, or even the Europeans and the Americans.
Meshal failed to pass on Arab League's message to al-Assad
- Sources
20/01/2012/By Sawsan Abu-Husain and Salah Juma
Cairo, Asharq Al-Awsat – Arab sources have informed Asharq Al-Awsat that the
message that Arab League Secretary-General Nabil Elaraby announced that he had
given to Hamas chief Khalid Meshal to pass on to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad
never reached him. During a joint-press conference held in Cairo between the
Hamas chief and the Arab League Secretary-General on 6 January 2012, Elaraby
announced that Meshal would be passing on a message from him to the Syrian
president; however Arab sources have now revealed that the Syrian regime refused
to transfer this message to the Syrian president, viewing this as “interference
in internal Syrian affairs.”During the press conference, the Arab League
Secretary-General had announced “I gave him [Meshal] a message today to the
Syrian authorities that it is necessary to work with integrity, transparency and
credibility to halt the violence that is taking place in Syria.” This was after
Arab League monitors had been dispatched to the country, and a suicide bomber in
Syria’s capital Damascus killed 25 people. Elaraby also told reporters that
Meshal had played a key role in convincing Syria to sign the Arab League
protocol. Meshal, speaking alongside Elaraby, said Hamas had been working to
bring an end to the crisis in Syria through diplomacy.
However a source close to the Hamas chief informed Asharq Al-Awsat that Meshal
did not try to meet with al-Assad on his return to Damascus, but instead met
with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem, who he passed this message on to.
According to the Arab source, Meshal’s actions in Cairo served as a source of
embarrassment for the Hamas movement, not least because many senior Hamas
members – including Meshal himself – live in Syria as guests of the al-Assad
regime, whilst the majority of other Palestinian factions are of the view that
the Palestinians should not get involved with the Syrian crisis, as this could
serve as a pretext for Syrian intervention in Palestinian affairs. The Arab
source also informed Asharq Al-Awsat that this message was viewed as
representing interference in internal Syrian affairs, particularly as the Hamas
movement is a guest in Syria, and so is in no position to get involved in Syrian
affairs in this manner.
Senior Palestinian figures strongly criticized Hamas chief Khalid Meshal for his
involvement in this issue, particularly PLO Executive Committee
Secretary-General Yasser Abed Rabbo. Abed Rabbo stressed that Meshal had “no
right to mediate on behalf of any regime – Syrian or any other". The source also
revealed that this response led Hamas to stress that Meshal’s latest visit to
Cairo has nothing to do with the situation in Syria, or the issue of Hamas
mediation. When asked to comment on the fate of the message that Elaraby had
entrusted to Hamas chief Khalid Meshal to pass on to the Syrian President, Arab
League Deputy Secretary-General Ahmed Ben Helli called on everybody “not to blow
this issue out of proportion” adding “I don’t want to go into any more detail
[about this issue].”
As for whether Hamas chief Khalid Meshal will meet Arab League Secretary-General
Nabil Elaraby during his latest visit to Cairo, Ben Helli asserted that Elaraby
is in constant contact with Meshal, adding that the Arab League committee on the
peace process is expected to meet either later this month or early next month.
Are the Arabs prepared for the new weapons of war?
20/01/2012
By Osman Mirghani/Asharq Alawsat
Imagine the scenario: an attack paralyzes sensitive government circles, defense
systems and power grids; disrupting bank, internet and mobile services, and
freezing all vital [state] infrastructure. Suddenly, the cycle of everyday life
and the majority of services come to a halt. No ATMs or mobile phones work; the
whole internet system breaks down, as does the electricity grid, whilst many
other services either come to a complete standstill or experience a state of
chaos.
Such an attack could paralyze any country and disrupt the cycle of everyday life
there for hours or even days before the authorities are able to restore order,
provided that they have contingency plans in place to deal with such a threat.
The source of the attack might not be known for some time because the attacker
may not have disclosed their identity, not to mention the fact that an attack
such as this does not require a single bullet to be fired or a single missile to
be launched.
If you think that this scenario could only happen in science fiction, then you
should think again because a war such as this has already begun in our regions
and in other places around the world. Moreover, a number of countries have begun
to step up their preparations in order to confront this potential danger, by
recruiting specialist units and allocating space in their defense and
intelligence budgets for developing [cyber] counter-weaponry; for the purpose of
protection and deterrence.
A few days ago, the [Israeli] "Jerusalem Post" newspaper revealed that the
Israel Defense Force (IDF) had recruited around 300 computer experts to join up
with other recruits to work in a department responsible for cyber warfare,
affiliated to the military intelligence sector. This department will be tasked
with encrypting and protecting army and intelligence networks against any
cyber-attack launched by countries, organizations or even individuals. The
department will also be assigned the task of protecting power, water and
telephone networks along with the other basic services.
Interestingly, Israel also recently declared that it has begun construction on a
new command center to coordinate between different military and industrial
institutions, for protection against cyber-attacks. Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu announced the first step of its establishment last May,
stressing that it would be allocated a large budget, because Israel “is seeking
to counteract the danger of any future cyber-attacks.”
These steps reveal a new concern and they are not without foundation, because
according to a number of experts, Israel itself has participated in the launch
of several cyber-attacks, including the “Stuxnet” computer virus attack on an
Iranian nuclear center in June 2010. The attack was considered the largest
cyber-attack of its kind, as it led to considerable problems in the Iranian
nuclear facility’s network, paralyzing its operations for some time. Tehran was
later able to identify the virus and eliminate it from its corrupted equipment.
As of yet, the true extent of the damage caused by this cyber-attack is
difficult to assess. It is also important to note that nobody every claimed
responsibility for this attack, although many experts believe that the US,
Israel and perhaps Germany took part in the development of the Stuxnet virus,
with the aim of disrupting or hampering Iran's nuclear program.
Israel's concern [about cyber-attacks] could also be attributed to recently
published information suggesting that Iran has begun to strengthen its defensive
and offensive efforts in the domain of cyber warfare, after being exposed to the
Stuxnet virus. Iran believes that the aforementioned attack was not an isolated
incident, particularly amidst perceived efforts to step up the secret war to
paralyze Iran's nuclear program, either by mounting cyber-attacks, or by
assassinating scientists and destroying facilities.
Furthermore, when the Obama administration announced the new US defense strategy
this month, it highlighted a reductions in troop numbers, and dismissed the idea
that it was preparing itself to wage two simultaneous wars, focusing on Asia
with special reference to China, Iran and North Korea. This was the main pillar
in the new strategy, which proposes to trim around 500 billion dollars from the
US defense budget. However, there is a side to this strategy that did not
receive wide media coverage, namely that the US is now concentrating on future
war techniques such as mounting aerial attacks utilizing drones, as well as
maximizing and expanding its cyber-warfare capabilities. These techniques do not
depend on a large number of troops but rather on the quality of America’s
capabilities, especially in the field of technical and cyber warfare, which will
form the mainstay of future wars. The US realizes that China has come a long way
in its cyber warfare developments, and there are dozens of reports holding
Beijing responsible for a series of cyber-attacks that recently targeted Western
countries.
For example, in mid-2011, a report was published revealing that several Western
intelligence agencies suspected that China was behind a cyber-attack where
anonymous "hackers" had tried to gain confidential information in order to
access the email inboxes of hundreds of senior US and South Korean government
officials, who held "Gmail" accounts. Even though China's government denied its
involvement in any form of cyber-attack against another country, Google
announced that the source of the Gmail hack had been traced back to the city of
Jinan, the capital of Shandong province in Eastern China. Google confirmed that
it had detected the attack and prevented it. The significance of this, the
attack being traced back to Jinan, is that this city was mentioned in a report
drawn up by a US congressional committee, as the city houses one of the
technical reconnaissance centers supervising China's cyber espionage operations.
Cyber warfare has been a reality for some time, through methods such as hacking,
phone tapping and email interception. But today this war has acquired new
dimensions and capabilities as people have grown more dependent on computers and
the internet in all fields of life; including the economy, banking and the
military. According to the views of a number of experts at the International
Conference on Cyber Security held in London in 2011, a feverish race is on to
advance the capabilities of cyber warfare now that several countries have gained
the power to launch destructive attacks without the need to fire a single
bullet.I wonder where the Arab World stands in this turmoil. Are there any
preparations and plans to confront this new intensifying danger?
Syrian opposition leader,Kamal al-Labwani seeks to counter
Islamists
Prominent Sunni Muslim opposition figure Kamal al-Labwani says most Syrians want
Islam to 'remain a religion, not a political party'.
By Reuters
Syria's religious and ethnic minorities need to work together with liberal Sunni
Muslims to
counter the influence of Islamists in the uprising against President Bashar
Assad, a prominent Sunni Muslim opposition figure said.
Kamal al-Labwani said Islam was being used to galvanize street protests against
Assad and the population had grown more devout, but most Syrians still want
Islam to "remain a religion, not a political party".
"The bloody repression has given the opportunity for clerics to pump Jihadist
Islamist values into the street, so we have seen the emphasis on slogans such as
'God is great' and martyrdom," Labwani said.
Syria's Christian, Alawite, Ismaili and Kurdish communities, which form about 30
percent of the population, should join ranks with Sunnis opposed to mixing
religion with politics, he said.
There are few accurate indicators of public opinion in Syria but many minority
groups, including Assad's own Alawite sect, are reluctant to support the
uprising, fearing an Islamist takeover if the president were to be toppled.
Islamists made strong gains in elections following the overthrow of entrenched
leaders in Egypt and Tunisia, and are also a growing influence in post-Gadhafi
Libya. But Labwani said Syria's broader religious mix made that unlikely in his
country. "If we allow Islamists to take over the revolution it will be a
problem (but) if we ask the rebels to deny their identity and their religion it
will (also) be a problem," said Labwani, a
53-year-old physician from the town of Zabadani who left Syria after being
released from a lengthy jail term in November. "The solution is to form an
all-encompassing current that respects civic and individual rights." No Islamist
democracy The main Muslim Brotherhood movement and other Islamists in the
opposition say they do not aim to turn Syria into an Islamic state and that they
will honor democratic practices, although some secular Syrians are skeptical.
"If Syria becomes a religious dictatorship, the next day you will see a crisis
and the day after civil war," Labwani said. "There has been no Islamist
democratic country in history, and we do not want to try to be the first."
But he said Assad's minority Alawite sect, an offshoot of Islam that has
dominated the country for the last five decades, needed to take a stand against
a crackdown that has killed at least 5,000 people, according to a United Nations
count. "The Alawite community still has to take a clear position against the
killings by the regime," he said, pointing to Syria's 300,000 Shi'ite minority
whom he said have distanced themselves from Assad and continue to co-exist with
Sunnis, even though Shi'ite Iran is Assad's biggest supporter.
Labwani met U.S. officials in the White House in 2005 to push for support for
human rights in Syria. He was arrested upon return but was freed under an
amnesty last year and fled to
Jordan. "It was impossible to stay in Syria and be publicly active in the
opposition. If one appears on television one is either arrested or assassinated.
I also wanted to help strengthen the Syrian National Council," Labwani said. He
was referring to the main opposition group which formed in Istanbul last year
and which is heavily influenced by Islamists such as the Muslim Brotherhood. The
Brotherhood, which played a major role in armed opposition to Assad's late
father Hafez Assad in the 1980s, has said it no longer wants an Islamist state
and supports a civic democratic system in future.
But Labwani said Islamist politics must change more. "This region will not
stabilize without a reformation in Islamic culture that creates an Islam
compatible with liberal values and modernism and breaks the totalitarian
dogmatic Islamist thinking," he said. "This project needs work," he said. "It
will start in a free Syria after the revolution triumphs."
Owners of Collapsed Building Charged, to be Questioned
Monday
by Naharnet /A judge charged on Friday the owners of the building that collapsed
in the Beirut neighborhood of Ashrafiyeh for causing the death of 27 people due
to negligence. Beirut Prosecutor Judge George Karam filed the charges against
Michel and Claude Saadeh based on articles 564 and 565 of the criminal law. The
judge later referred the suspects to Beirut Examining Magistrate Ghassan Owaidat
who set Monday as the date for the questioning of the two. The building collapse
in the area of Fassouh on Sunday has left 12 people injured. On Thursday,
Ashrafiyeh MPs put the telephone hotline 03000019 in the service of the
citizens, saying the incident changed their priorities and put public safety at
the forefront. They also vowed to renovate the apartment block next to the
collapsed building so it becomes habitable and doesn’t pose any threat to the
lives of residents. The building was evacuated on Sunday for fears that it could
also collapse.
France threatens to pull out of Afghanistan after troops killed
20/01/2012/PARIS, (Reuters) - France threatened on Friday to pull out early from
the NATO-led war in Afghanistan after a rogue Afghan soldier opened fire on
French soldiers, killing four and wounding about 15 others. The killings in the
Taghab valley of Afghanistan's eastern Kapisa province were the latest in a
series of incidents that have seen Afghan troops turn on their Western allies,
damaging trust.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy said all French operations on the ground were
being suspended and his defence minister was dispatched to clarify things on the
ground in Afghanistan.
"If the security conditions are not clearly established then the question of an
early return of French forces from Afghanistan will arise," said Sarkozy. France
has almost 4,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of the 130,000-strong NATO-led
force there. French troops mainly patrol Kapisa, an often restive province in
mountains near Kabul. They are due to leave by around the end of 2013.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe told a news conference about 15 other
soldiers were wounded, eight of them seriously.
NATO has been rapidly expanding the size of the Afghan security forces so that
they will be able to take over all responsibility for security by the time
Western combat forces leave in 2014.
Previous incidents in which Western troops were killed by Afghan colleagues have
been blamed either on Taliban infiltration of the Afghan military, or on stress,
indiscipline and divided loyalties within the hastily trained Afghan ranks."It's
unacceptable that our soldiers are killed by our allies," Sarkozy said.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai said in a statement: "In regard to the killing of
four French soldiers in Kapisa, I would like to express my deep sadness and
condolences to the families of the victims as well as to the French people."The
Taliban said that they could not confirm whether or not the killer was a Taliban
member but signalled that such attacks were part of its strategy.
In an email statement to media, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said:
"There are a number of Afghan soldiers who have an Afghan, Islamic dignity in
their hearts and who have carried out a number of attacks against foreign
troops."The Taliban "has skilfully placed the Taliban inside enemy ranks who
have carried out attacks, however it is not clear whether the shooter (in Kapisa)
belonged to the Islamic Emirate," he said, using another name that the Taliban
call themselves.
Jimmie Cummings, spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance
Force in Kabul, said: "There is no indication that these incidents are linked or
part of any larger coordinated effort."
"INSIDER THREAT"
More than 2,500 foreign troops have died in Afghanistan since the NATO-led war
began in 2001. The latest killings take the French toll to 82. The shooting was
the latest in a string of attacks by "rogue" Afghan soldiers and police on their
foreign partners, or by insurgents who had infiltrated security forces.Dozens of
foreign soldiers have been killed in recent years by what NATO dubs the "insider
threat," complicating coalition efforts to train Afghanistan's army and police
force. Two French Foreign Legion soldiers and one American were killed in
separate episodes of so-called "green-on-blue" shootings last month, which refer
to the colours of the Afghan army and the symbol of NATO. The coalition no
longer releases the number of its troops killed by Afghan soldiers.
French Defence Minister Gerard Longuet said he would report back to Sarkozy by
next Tuesday after his trip to Afghanistan. Separately, six foreign soldiers
were killed in a helicopter crash in southern Afghanistan on Thursday. The
Taliban, which often makes exaggerated claims of military successes, said it
shot the helicopter down. NATO denied this.
It was the worst crash since August last year when 30 soldiers, mostly elite
U.S. navy SEAL commandos, died when their helicopter came down in eastern
Afghanistan.
Labor Minister Charbel Nahhas Signs Wage Hike Decree,
Refrains from Approving Transportation Allowance
by Naharnet /Labor Minister Charbel Nahhas signed on Friday the government’s
decision on a wage hike decree, but he did not sign the bill on the
transportation allowance because he has deemed it “illegal.”He is instead
preparing a draft law concerning the transportation and education allowances to
refer it to the parliament for endorsement, according to newspapers published on
Friday.
A ministerial source told al-Liwaa that the cabinet adopted the Baabda Palace
deal that was modified by the minister in order to “legalize” it.
The Baabda agreement was sponsored by Prime Minister Najib Miqati in December
between the Economic Committees and the General Labor Confederation.
The plan sets the minimum wage at LL675,000, canceling a LL200,000 increase in
wages given on January 1, 2010. The increase on brackets sets the raise on the
first bracket up to LL400,000 to 100 percent , a sum that wouldn’t be less than
LL375,000 while the increase on the second bracket – up to LL1.5 million- would
include the first LL400,000 plus a 9 percent raise. However, Nahhas’
reservations are over the transportation allowance, which he argues, should be
included in the minimum wage for the Shura council will turn down any plan that
puts the allowance outside the minimum salary because such a move contradicts
the labor law. But when the issue was put to vote on Wednesday at the cabinet
session, his proposal won the support of 10 ministers while 19 voted against it.
Sources told al-Liwaa that Nahhas would not resign, but travel outside Lebanon
thus avoiding the possibility of signing the allowance decree by referring the
matter to acting Labor Minister Nicolas Fattoush.
Economy Minister Nicolas Nahhas, who is loyal to Miqati, expressed satisfaction
over the wage boost settlement that “ended a controversial issue.” An Nahar
daily Friday quoted him as saying: “The important thing is that the people were
paid their raises after we reached a formula and overcame useless disputes.”
Great expectations
Michael Young, January 20, 2012
Now Lebanon/Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and Sunni leader Saad Hariri are two
Lebanese politicians who may gain politically in post-Assad Syria. We may not
quite notice it yet, but a reversal of roles appears to be taking place between
Lebanon and Syria. Whereas for many decades Syria greatly influenced politics in
Lebanon, today a number of Lebanese politicians are lining up and waiting for
the fall of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime to expand their influence in
Syria. Syria’s impact long predated the deployment of its army to Lebanon in
1976. From the early years of the French Mandate, when Syrian nationalists had
close allies in Beirut—such as the future prime minister, Riad al-Solh, who
opposed the creation of a Lebanese republic independent of Syria—to the 1950s,
when Arab nationalists in Cairo and Damascus formed the United Arab Republic,
Lebanon swayed to the decisions taken by its larger neighbor.
The revolt against the Assad regime shows no signs of abating. Indeed, it is
virtually impossible to imagine today that the Syrian leader will be able to put
the genie back in the bottle and re-impose the authority he enjoyed a year ago.
However, his collapse may take time, and it is this period that Lebanese
political figures must carefully maneuver through if they seek to shape the
aftermath in Syria.
Last summer, Walid Jumblatt admitted to the Syrian regime that he was anxious
about Syria’s Druze. Fearing that, as a minority, they would be identified with
the Alawite minority carrying out the repression, he began walking a tightrope.
While several Syrian Druze notables declared their solidarity with the uprising,
the community at large maintained a low profile. In turn, Jumblatt, who has
substantial credibility among Syria’s Druze, became increasingly critical of
Bashar al-Assad. In that way, he gambled, his positions would help shield the
community from the antagonism of the Syrian opposition.
Jumblatt has a strong incentive to assert himself among his Syrian
coreligionists. An estimated 300,000 Druze live in Syria. If Jumblatt were to
play the dominant role among them that he has among the 200,000 or so Druze in
Lebanon, he could significantly bolster the always fragile Jumblatti leadership,
across Lebanon’s borders. This would provide the Lebanese Druze with demographic
depth, at a time when they feel vulnerable because of the Shia expansion into
areas between their mountains in Lebanon and Druze districts in Syria.
Traditionally, the Assad regimes have sought to isolate the Jumblatts, both
Kamal and Walid, from Syria’s Druze. When Walid was still with the March 14
coalition, the Syrian leadership brought Wiam Wahhab to the Jebel Druze and
organized grand receptions for him, as a riposte to Jumblatt. Though one should
not presume that Syria’s Druze will mechanically fall into line as one behind
Jumblatt, he would yet have considerable say over the community, especially as
the Assads never allowed potentially powerful rivals to emerge.
And what of Syria’s Sunni community? Saad Hariri’s advocacy of the Syrian revolt
also appears, somewhere, to be a bid for clout next door. Nor is such an
ambition exceptionally far-fetched. Rafik Hariri was always viewed by the Assads
as dangerous because of his prospective appeal—that of a strong Sunni—to Syria’s
Sunnis, who had to submit to Alawite supremacy. Indeed, you can make a good case
that Hariri’s assassination was motivated by the Syrian regime’s fears of
precisely such a scenario, after the former prime minister decided to turn
against Syria and its allies in the elections of 2005.
New leaderships will come forward in a post-Assad Syria, so it would be
simplistic to assume that Jumblatt or Hariri will inevitably become paramount
decision-makers there. But it’s also true that Assad’s rule has been so
invasive, so intolerant of alternative power centers, in fact so cannibalistic,
that once the Syrian president and his acolytes exit, a vacuum is certain to
ensue. And it’s in that vacuum that the Lebanese will find golden opportunities
to impose themselves.
Can Lebanese Christian leaders hope to influence their brethren in Syria? Here
the situation appears more difficult. None of the Lebanese Christian leaders
seems potentially attractive to Syrian Christians. Michel Aoun and Sleiman
Franjieh have so defended Assad’s brutality lately that Christians in Syria
would steer well away from them to better contend with a post-Assad leadership.
Samir Geagea has sided with the Syrian revolt, but it’s difficult to see a rural
Maronite having any allure whatsoever for Syria’s majority Orthodox communities,
or for most urban Christians in general.
Syria is a complicated country, and to reduce events there to power moves by
Lebanese politicians is undeniably constricting. But Lebanon is bound to have a
profound impact on the Syria that will rid itself of four decades of Assad
dictatorship. It’s the politicians who will seek to benefit, but it’s the
democrats alone, in Lebanon and Syria, who will ensure that Syria develops into
an open society.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Beirut and
author of The Ghosts of Martyrs Square: An Eyewitness Account of Lebanon’s Life
Struggle. He tweets @BeirutCalling.
The weak
Hazem al-Amin, January 20, 2012 /Now Lebanon
Using a dose of “asceticism” and political austerity, PM Najib Mikati is trying
to trace an alternative route to the one he chose to take, the one leading only
to Damascus and Tehran. The man is aware of his dire predicament and of the
steepness of the way. In Turkey, he addressed parties to the Justice and
Development government using the language of economy and investment. In Saudi
Arabia, he sneaked in, trying to address his enemies’ enemies there claiming a
simplicity, which – as he knows – is short-lived. In Washington, he sold the
idea of a hypothetical confrontation that pitted him against Hezbollah against a
backdrop of financing the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, and the same holds true
for European capitals.
It is no secret to anyone that Mikati’s allies, Syria and Hezbollah, are
facilitating his mission or, at least, are not angry at him. The tracing of
alternative routes provides them as well with opportunities to take care of a
lot of business in politics, not to mention the fact that their ally may achieve
breakthroughs that would help them to turn down their foes. Still, Mikati’s job
is made a lot more efficient by the blatant absence of his opponents. This
non-political absence is filled in by the wait for events in Syria and the
results of international sanctions on Iran, and allows people with limited power
in terms of international relations to replace broad political and electoral
representation.
Indeed, Mikati successfully breached the isolation wall that had been built
around him back when Hezbollah first commissioned him with forming the
government. These breaches are palpable as soon as you land in any neighboring
capital. Minor though these breaches are, the resounding absence of Mikati’s
rivals makes them the only alternative available to regional players who are
going after playing a given role or yielding influence in Lebanon. In Ankara,
some were pleased with the wish of businessman Najib Mikati to invest in Turkey.
Others were impressed by offers made to Turkish companies to invest in Lebanon.
In Riyadh, the man managed to talk to elites by endorsing STL financing and in
Washington, some saw him as compromise and a key to stability.
Mikati has but limited capabilities with his creative “distance-keeping” policy.
However, a defeat inflicted by an adversary with limited capacities and
imagination is worse than one inflicted by a strong opponent. It is also
indicative of the state of staggering, which is not allowing you to compete
against weak people who have nothing but “barren land.”
Waiting is by no means a political action. Time – and the political factors it
entails – does not go by swiftly. Absence is heavy and unfruitful, and this
holds especially true if those betting on this absence are spurred by the power
of the “Black Shirts” and the resourcefulness of the weak.
Speaker Nabih Berri praised the cabinet’s policy of “keeping one’s distance.”
Since politics is all about action, and “distance-keeping” is all about
seclusion and keeping away, the battle is easy and not fighting it is tantamount
to an unannounced resignation.
*This article is a translation of the original, which appeared on the NOW Arabic
site on Friday January 20, 2012