Rebels set Syrian fighter jets and helicopters ablaze opposite Golan
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report June 3, 2012/As Syrian ruler Bashar Assad stood before parliament in Damascus Sunday, June 3, declaring, “Not even monsters could have carried out the Houla massacre,” rebels attacked a Syrian Air Force base east of the southern town of Deraa opposite the Israeli Golan border – their first such attack in the 14-month uprising, debkafile’s military sources report. Several rebel bands firing mortars set fire to fighter aircraft and assault helicopters in their hangars and ripped up runways at the As Suwayda air base. The burning warplanes were a strategic bull’s eye for the anti-Assad revolt. The air base they attacked is Syria’s southernmost air facility. It is positioned to be available for backing up the Syrian units posted on the Golan border opposite Israeli forces - the 5th, 7th, and 10th Divisions. Arrayed behind them in reserve is the 9th Division, the only one the regime has never enlisted for operations to crush the revolt.
The air fleet housed at As Suwayda is there to provide air cover for Syrian border units in the event of a war with Israel and engage Israeli warplanes coming into to attack the divisions on the ground. It is also entrusted with providing air cover for the forces posted in the Jordanian and Iraqi border sectors. No information was immediately available about the number or types of aircraft destroyed by the rebels or casualties. The Syrian state media have not disclosed the incident. In northern Syria, our military sources reveal that in the last few days the rebels are showing up with a new piece of war materiel, improvised armored vehicles sporting anti-air rockets or heavy machine guns. They are capable of downing the aircraft or combat helicopters the regime is increasingly sending to attack the heavily embattled protest centers in that region. These APC’s are essentially Toyota pickups fitted with steel plates to protect teams of three rebel fighters each behind the rockets and machine guns. Their homemade APCs are dubbed “T-HOMS 75.”

Mikati might suspend Cabinet sessions over Tripoli loan
June 04, 2012/By Hasan Lakkis The Daily Star
President Michel Sleiman heads a Cabinet meeting at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, east of Beirut, Wednesday, May 30, 2012. (The Daily Star/Mohammad Azakir)
BEIRUT: Prime Minister Najib Mikati might suspend Cabinet sessions if the group fails this week to approve Finance Minister Mohammad Safadi’s proposal for the allocation of $100 million in a treasury loan to finance projects in Mikati’s home city of Tripoli, sources close to the premier said Sunday. The Cabinet is scheduled to meet at Baabda Palace under President Michel Sleiman Wednesday in a session devoted to resuming discussion of the draft 2012 state budget and some items related to public spending. If the Cabinet does not approve Safadi’s proposal, which was presented to the body in coordination with Mikati, the prime minister will suspend the session and will not call for another one, the sources said. During last week’s Cabinet meeting, the $100 million loan proposal was opposed by some ministers, particularly by those from MP Michel Aoun’s parliamentary Change and Reform bloc, who demanded that the matter should be part of the state budget. But Mikati and Safadi, both from Tripoli, rejected the ministers’ argument, saying that including the matter in the state budget meant the cancellation of the project because the 2012 budget has not yet been approved by the Cabinet or Parliament. Mikati was quoted as saying during last week’s session: “Either there is a government or there is not. A government cannot rule if it is unable to spend.” Mikati added that spending issue should be isolated from political rivalry. “Next Wednesday should be a decisive date after which we will act accordingly,” he said. If the Cabinet fails to approve the Tripoli loan, Mikati’s decision to suspend sessions is irreversible, the sources said. They added that Mikati was mulling other options aimed at energizing the Cabinet’s work by urging the members to act on outstanding issues, such as the long-awaited appointments in the public administration and the security field as well as other socio-economic matters that concern the citizens. Sources in the Change and Reform bloc blamed Sleiman’s refusal to sign a decree authorizing the Cabinet’s LL8.9 trillion (nearly $6 billion) in extra-budgetary spending and the failure to approve the 2012 budget for the obstruction of public spending. “The bloc will not change its stance and will not agree to illegal decisions,” the sources said.
However, Labor Minister Salim Juraisati, one of 10 ministers who belong to Aoun’s bloc, said: “There is no random [decision] in approaching the financial spending. The approach is serious and united inside the Cabinet. We have studied how to give a treasury loan in a legal manner in the absence of an approved budget.”
During next Wednesday’s session, the Cabinet is also expected to discuss the issue of Electricite du Liban contract workers who staged nationwide demonstrations last week to press demands that the state-run company make them permanent employees. Some workers forced open the gate of the EDL’s head offices after warning members of the Internal Security Forces that they would storm the premises.
Energy Minister Gebran Bassil briefed the Cabinet last week on a letter from EDL employees who threatened a widespread electricity shutdown unless measures were taken to protect them and the company from “the workers’ action which took a dangerous trend.”

Suleiman, Kuwaiti Emir Discuss 'Boosting Cooperation, Regional Issues'
Naharnet/ 03 June 2012/President Michel Suleiman on Sunday held talks in Kuwait with Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmed al-Sabah on “strengthening the brotherly and special bilateral ties” between the countries and “the latest developments in the region and the world,” Kuwait’s state-run news agency KUNA reported.Suleiman, who arrived in Kuwait at noon Sunday, was accompanied by Deputy Prime Minister Samir Moqbel. The talks “witnessed a friendly atmosphere that reflected the spirit of brotherhood that characterizes the bilateral ties and the common desire for further cooperation and coordination at all levels, in a manner that would contribute to consolidating and reinforcing Arab solidarity,” KUNA said. The meeting was attended by Kuwait’s Crown Prince Sheikh Nawwaf al-Ahmed al-Sabah, Prime Minister Sheikh Jaber al-Mubarak al-Sabah and other top Kuwaiti officials. Suleiman’s trip to Kuwait came after talks on Friday in Jeddah with Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz.
The president announced on Wednesday that he would visit Kuwait “to encourage tourism” after its foreign ministry and three other Gulf countries issued a travel advisory to Lebanon.
Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Bahrain issued the travel warnings after deadly clashes erupted between pro- and anti-Syrian groups in Beirut and the northern city of Tripoli last month. Suleiman said Saturday that the Lebanese are anxiously waiting for Kuwaiti tourists this summer. In an interview with KUNA, Suleiman added: “The Lebanese will not forget the support of the Kuwaiti emir, the government and the people.” “The Lebanese are anxiously awaiting for the Kuwaitis this summer during the tourism season,” he said. “Lebanon officially and at the popular level is ready to embrace them and ensure their security, freedom and dignity.”

Gemayel: Accepting Dialogue Means We Won't Tolerate Continued Presence of Illegal Arms
Naharnet/03 June 2012/Phalange Party leader Amin Gemayel on Sunday said his party has agreed to take part in national dialogue to underline that “we will not tolerate the continued presence of illegal arms outside state control.”“We in the Phalange Party have supported the president’s call for dialogue, despite our awareness of the current negativities in the country and the other camp’s intentions, in order to create a national environment that allows the state to address people’s concerns away from the major political conflicts,” Gemayel said in a speech during the inauguration of a party office in the Batroun town of Kfar Abida. “We have accepted the principle of dialogue in order to raise all issues around the table rather than on the streets. Who can bear street action anymore? Our acceptance of dialogue means that once again we are stressing that we will not tolerate the continued presence of illegal arms outside state control,” Gemayel added. He stressed that his party will not accept to “put an end to the issue of justice and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon,” adding that “our acceptance of dialogue means that once again we are rejecting the continued presence of Palestinian camps as military bases and the presence of Palestinian weapons outside camps.”“Our acceptance of dialogue means that once again we are confirming that we will not accept the presence of this government indefinitely. We want dialogue a door to change this government instead of reviving it, not to mention that the call for national dialogue is itself an acknowledgement of this government’s failure and factional nature,” Gemayel added.
“After resolving the problem of arms, a national conference must be held, and the Phalange Party had voiced such a call in 2006 and 2008 and on more than one occasion this year, in order to agree on constitutional reforms based on our successes and failures over the last 100 years,” he said. He noted that such a conference would “put an end to any sentiments of injustice or concern felt by any component of the Lebanese society.”“We want the national conference to pull Lebanon out of the dilemma of the impotent, failed and weak state and out of the dilemma of neglected regions,” Gemayel added. Addressing the latest clashes in the northern city of Tripoli, Gemayel said: “Enough with offering the North and Lebanon as an arena for others, a trench for others, a passageway for others and a barracks for others. Enough with turning the North into a front on which foreign countries and extremist movements settle their scores.”

Jumblat: Only Dialogue Can Prevent Spillover of Syrian Crisis
Naharnet/03 June 2012/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat has stressed that only dialogue can prevent a spillover of the Syrian crisis into Lebanon, saying the Lebanese have two options: “entering the Syrian inferno or organizing their disputes.”During a meeting with Lebanese expats on Saturday in Kuwait, Jumblat described the latest clashes in Tripoli as “very dangerous,” urging Lebanese leaders to avoid a crisis in the key northern city. He also warned that the Lebanese army’s intervention in the city would be risky, noting that the Syrian army “suffered deterioration and divisions” when it intervened in its country’s crisis. Jumblat hailed Saudi King Abdullah’s call for President Michel Suleiman to convene a national dialogue conference, saying “when the king asks us to shoulder the responsibility of dialogue, we must not find excuses to dodge it as the country’s fate is at stake.”“Lebanon is a society that is sharply divided between supporters of the Syrian revolution and supporters of the regime,” Jumblat noted, saying the Lebanese have two options – “entering the Syrian inferno or organizing their disputes through dialogue.”The Druze leader said he supports dialogue “without preconditions, unlike the March 14 camp which has insisted it won’t engage in dialogue in the presence of arms.”Commenting on the issue of Hizbullah’s controversial arsenal of weapons, Jumblat said: “We will try to agree with it on a precise mechanism we have called a defense strategy that requires incorporating its weapons, at the right time and in the manner Hizbullah sees fit, into the Lebanese state.”“Whoever believes that a solution can be reached by force is insane,” Jumblat added.He also said Hizbullah’s weapons are beneficial in defending the country against Israel, but stressed that he is against their use

Al-Rahi Stresses Importance of Dialogue: Govt. Must Be up to Task of Facing Challenges
Naharnet/ 03 June 2012/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi urged on Sunday the government to be up to the task of facing challenges in Lebanon.He stressed during his Sunday sermon “the importance of national dialogue given the political, security, economic, and social situation in the country.” “The government should therefore take the necessary measure in addressing security, economic, and administrative affairs,” he stated. President Michel Suleiman had called on the various political powers to resume the national dialogue. He set as June 11 the date for resuming the talks.The March 14-led opposition has said that it will take part in the dialogue if Hizbullah’s arms are the sole topic of discussion. Party chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has repeatedly said that Hizbullah would return to the talks if no conditions are placed. On the developments in Tripoli, al-Rahi condemned the unrest, adding: “We pray for the residents in the city and that peace would be restored.”The patriarch demanded that the Lebanese authorities take “the immediate and wise measures to halt the conflict and reunite the people of Tripoli.”Clashes broke out late on Friday between the rival Tripoli neighborhoods of Bab al-Tabbaneh and Jabal Mohsen, leaving 14 people dead and some 50 wounded.

Syria Frees Two Lebanese Men Abducted from al-Abboudiyeh
Naharnet /03 June 2012/Syrian authorities on Sunday released two Lebanese citizens abducted by Syrian forces on Wednesday from the northern border town of al-Abboudiyeh.
The abduction led to an uproar in the region and prompted residents to block the international highway. A statement issued by the Army Command on Sunday said “as a result of the exerted efforts, citizens Mohammed Yassine al-Merehbi and Mahdi Hamdan were freed this afternoon, after they were arrested on May 30, 2012 by Syrian forces in the al-Abboudiyeh area on the northern border.”
“The joint cooperation and coordination bureau of the Lebanese and Syrian armies handed them over to the (Lebanese army’s) Intelligence Directorate at the al-Masnaa border crossing, and they were released following the necessary legal measures,” the army’s statement added. For his part, Higher Lebanese-Syrian Council Secretary-General Nasri Khouri told state-run National News Agency that he handed over the abductees to the military bureau. NNA said the Akkar region was preparing to celebrate the return of the two men. Arab Democratic Party Secretary-General Rifaat Eid said Saturday the abductees would be released shortly. “Mohammed Yassine al-Merehbi and Mahdi Hamdan will be in Lebanon in the next few hours,” he said after his party mediated for their release. On Thursday, President Michel Suleiman urged the Syrian authorities to release the two farmers. The Syrian army also kidnapped Yehya Mohammed Fleiti in the border town of Arsal on Thursday afternoon. “The rise in the rate of kidnappings and killings along the Lebanese-Syrian border is rejected,” Suleiman said. He urged the Lebanese and Syrian authorities to carry out the necessary investigations regarding the issue to “halt any recurrence.”“Respecting Lebanon and Syria’s sovereignty falls in the best interest of the security and peace of both countries,” Suleiman said.
The two men, who were cultivating a grove, were "kidnapped by five armed men who crossed into Lebanon from across the Syrian border," NNA reported. In a statement on Wednesday, the opposition Syrian National Council accused the Syrian regime of "escalating its breaches of the Lebanese borders (and of) increasing its armed attacks targeting Lebanese citizens and Syrian refugees."
The SNC also accused the Syrian regime of "kidnapping Syrian wounded patients from hospitals" in northern Lebanon, while also accusing "the regime's mercenaries of setting up checkpoints inside Lebanese territory."The statement called for "people kidnapped on Lebanese territory by mercenaries of the Syrian regime to be set free."

Report: Tripoli Clashes Favor Syrian Regime
Naharnet/03 June 2012/Syrian pressure on Prime Minister Najib Miqati is increasing on a daily basis and the Tripoli clashes have been provoked by the Syrian regime, a French source told the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat in remarks published on Sunday. It said: “The situation in Tripoli favors the Syrian regime.” It noted however that the regime and Hizbullah “are in a difficult position”, adding that the “entire political class in Lebanon has been weakened.” Prominent Mustaqbal Movement sources told the daily An Nahar in remarks published on Sunday that the Tripoli clashes “affirm Syrian President Bashar Assad’s efforts to create chaos in Lebanon have not stopped.” “These efforts will fail,” they stressed. Meanwhile, concerned circles told the daily that the situation in Tripoli “reflects the state’s inability to contain the unrest as demonstrated in a failed attempt to deploy security forces in the areas that witnessed clashes.” They warned that the city has now become a “hostage of regional powers seeking to exploit the unrest” for Lebanese, Arab, and regional ends. The army and security forces have since deployed in the city on Sunday morning. In a related development, al-Hayat revealed that French President Francois Hollande is “very interested in the developments in Lebanon.” He recently telephoned President Michel Suleiman and French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius also contacted Miqati in a reflection of this interest, added the daily. The French president is scheduled to hold talks on Thursday with Qatari Premier Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani on the developments in Lebanon and Syria, it added.
The rival Tripoli neighborhoods Bab al-Tabbaneh and Jabal Mohsen have been gripped by frequent fighting, reflecting a split between Lebanon's parties where the March 14- led opposition backs the revolt in Syria while a ruling coalition led by Hizbullah supports the Damascus regime. Twelve people were killed and 50 wounded in the latest round of clashes that broke out on Friday.

Assad says foreigners plotting to destroy Syria
June 3, 2012/Now Lebanon
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said Sunday that his government faces a foreign plot to destroy Syria, and blamed "monsters" for the Houla massacre, in a rare televised speech delivered in parliament.
Assad's accusations came as Arab leaders called on the United Nations to act to stop bloodshed in Syria and France raised the prospect of military action against Damascus under a UN mandate.
"The masks have fallen and the international role in the Syrian events is now obvious," Assad said in his first address to the assembly since a May 7 parliamentary election, adding the polls were the perfect response "to the criminal killers and those who finance them.”
The embattled leader, who was greeted with warm applause from lawmakers, said atrocities like the May 25-26 massacre of at least 108 people near the town of Houla, in central Syria, were committed by "monsters.”"What happened in Houla and elsewhere [in Syria] are brutal massacres which even monsters would not have carried out," he said.
Assad, dressed in a smart suit and tie, also paid tribute to civilian and military "martyrs" of the violence in Syria, saying their blood was not shed in vain.
"We are not facing a political problem but a project to destroy the country," Assad said, adding there will be "no dialogue" with opposition groups which "seek foreign intervention."
"Syria is open to all Syrians regardless of their views, but terrorism cannot be part of the political process and we must fight against terrorism to heal the nation," Assad said, dismissing the impact in Syria of uprisings sweeping the Arab world.
On Saturday, violence in Syria killed 89 people, including 57 soldiers, the largest number of casualties the military has suffered in a single day since an uprising began in March 2011, a watchdog said.
The casualties also included 29 civilians and three army defectors killed in various parts of the country in shelling by regime forces or in clashes or gunfire, said the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
As Arab leaders called for UN action in Syria, France, which spearheaded an air assault against Moammar Qaddafi’s forces last year, said it has not excluded military intervention in the country.
France "has not excluded military intervention" in Syria, but only under a United Nations mandate, Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said on Sunday.
Speaking in Singapore at an Asian security summit, the minister also urged Russia to drop its backing for Assad.
He said that "the Russians have to understand that the future of Syria is not to be considered" with Assad still in power.
"Until then we have to increase pressure, increase sanctions, mobilize public opinion and isolate [Assad] as much as possible -- and make those who still support him lose interest, and I'm thinking of Russia of course," Le Drian said.
On Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin stood firm against growing pressure over Moscow's position on Syria, opposing foreign military intervention and raising doubts about the effectiveness of sanctions.Washington and Moscow agreed on the need to work together on Syria, a US official said following a phone conversation between US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. "Her message to him was: 'We've got to start working together to help the Syrians with Syria's political transition strategy. And I want our people to work together on ideas in Moscow, Europe, in Washington, wherever we need to'."
At a ministerial meeting in the Qatari capital Doha, international peace envoy Kofi Annan warned: "The specter of an all-out war with a worrying sectarian dimension grows by the day."
"The situation is complex and it takes everyone involved in the conflict to act responsibly if the violence is to stop. But the first responsibility lies in the Syrian government and President Assad," he said.
Earlier, the Arab League's ministerial committee on Syria had called on Annan, who met Assad earlier this week, to set a deadline for the terms of his peace initiative to be met.
"We request Mr Annan to set a time frame for his mission because it is unacceptable that massacres and bloodshed continue while the mission is ongoing indefinitely," Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al-Thani said.
"We demand the UN Security Council refer the six-point [Annan plan] to Chapter VII so that the international community could assume responsibilities," he added.
Chapter VII outlines action the Security Council might take, including military force, in response to threats to international peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression.
Tensions from Syria have also spilled across into neighboring Lebanon, where clashes between pro- and anti-Damascus gunmen left 14 dead and 48 wounded over the weekend in the northern city of Tripoli, security officials said.
The Observatory says as many as 2,300 of the more than 13,400 people killed in Syria since the uprising erupted in March 2011 have died since the so-called ceasefire began on April 12.
Because of the worsening violence and Assad's failure to meet commitments under an agreed peace plan, the United States has warned that it may not agree to renew the UN observer mission when its mandate expires on July 20.
-AFP/NOW Lebanon

The ballot blues
Michael Young, June 1, 2012 /Now Lebanon
A man casts a ballot during the parliamentary elections in 2009. March 14 should prepare for next year’s polls. (AFP photo)
There is a consensus that the outcome of Lebanon’s parliamentary elections next year will be greatly affected by the situation in Syria. That’s a sensible conclusion to draw, but it should not detract from the fact that the March 14 coalition would do better to start preparing for elections now, independently of Syrian developments.
As Hezbollah observes its ally, Bashar al-Assad, struggling for political survival, it is devising a fallback plan to protect itself if the Syrian regime is ousted. The party is focused on winning a parliamentary majority, which would select a new president a year later and then take full control of the apparatus of the state. This is a strategic necessity for Hezbollah, and therefore denying the party and its allies such a victory should be a strategic necessity for March 14.
Among March 14 devotees, particularly in predominantly Christian areas, the mood is upbeat. They sense that Michel Aoun has lost ground, and that some of the political alignments that have afforded him considerable electoral punch are fraying. They will argue, for instance, that Aoun may no longer benefit from the block Armenian vote in the Metn. How the Armenian Tashnaq Party leans will, in part, be shaped by the behavior and survivability of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, where a sizable Armenian community resides.
That assessment could be correct. The results in the predominantly Christian districts of Mount Lebanon—specifically Baabda, the Metn, Kesrouan and Jbeil, as well as Aley and the Chouf, where Walid Jumblatt rules—will probably define who ultimately holds a parliamentary majority. But would Bashar’s fall, assuming his regime does go within the coming year, necessarily harm Aoun’s chances of remaining the politician with the largest Christian bloc?
March 14 could err on the side of hubris by answering in the affirmative, providing Aoun with a decisive advantage. The reality is that if elections were held today, the general would still likely win the largest bloc of Christians, despite his setbacks. Here is why.
Even if we accept that Aoun’s popularity has regressed, this does not mean that March 14 has gained. There are anecdotal signs that the Lebanese Forces have expanded their base of support in Mount Lebanon, but winning the vote involves a complex game of alliances that Samir Geagea would have trouble managing alone. Aoun will benefit greatly from unified Shia backing in Baabda and Jbeil, and his prospects for a victory in Jezzine are relatively high, since the alternative is a list of candidates backed by the parliament speaker, Nabih Berri, who is not liked among Christians in the district.
In the Metn the Armenians may yet go their own way, but there is no overriding motivation for them to do so. If Aoun is the dominant player, why should they abandon him? Tashnaq has been talking to Michel al-Murr lately, but this need not be at Aoun’s expense. Remember that during the last elections in 2009, the Armenians voted for Murr even though they were represented in the Aounist list.
As for Sami Gemayel, he, too, will probably win reelection. However, the Gemayels are arguably more wary of their professed allies than of their adversaries. The Kataeb Party quietly views the Lebanese Forces as a political competitor, since both fish in the same electoral pond. Sami Gemayel rightly feels that he can appeal to the Aounist base in the Metn, but if he expects to win only his own seat (as opposed to bringing several candidates in on his coattails), he doesn’t want to have to compete with a Lebanese Forces candidate over that seat.
In the Kesrouan, where traditional politics tend to dominate, it will be equally difficult to unseat Aoun. That does not mean that the general’s list will not be vulnerable to individual challenges. In 2009, for instance, Carlos Eddé made a surprisingly strong showing in the district. Past parliamentarians, such as Mansour al-Bon, continue to have followers, and family rivalries can affect voting patterns. However, because party politics are less influential in the Kesrouan, electoral jockeying could undermine a concerted March 14 campaign.
In the districts of Aley and the Chouf, March 14 may have the upper hand, but only through a door opened by Walid Jumblatt. The Druze leader is flirting with March 14 because he needs Sunni votes in the Chouf and for his candidates in Beirut and the West Bekaa. However, once elections are over, his interests and those of March 14 may yet diverge. Jumblatt, if he strides the middle as he has in the past three years, can become the kingmaker in a new government.
To win an election, one needs money. March 14, by the admission of its own partisans, does not have a great deal to spare these days, with Saad Hariri outside of Lebanon. These are early times, however, and the checks may begin arriving in early 2013.
However, it will require a bit more to persuade voters to choose the candidates of the former majority. Hezbollah and Aoun are exposed enough, their project of governance discredited enough, that March 14 has a valuable weapon to deploy in its own favor. But unless, and until, it can show that its project is more credible than that of the current majority, and convince a public whose cynicism is at an apoplectic high, the election consequences may disappoint.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of The Daily Star newspaper in Lebanon. He tweets @BeirutCalling.

When Syria sneezes Lebanon gets the flu
June 04, 2012/By Murhaf Jouejati/
The Daily Star
According to an old Levantine dictum, when Syria sneezes Lebanon gets the flu. Part of the reason is that Lebanon, Syria’s smaller neighbor, is populated by extensions of Syria’s rival political and sectarian groups.With the crisis in Syria now at its apex following 15 months of a popular uprising against the Assad regime, Syria is not only sneezing, it may be suffering from pneumonia. Despite Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati’s “dissociation policy” – an attempt to prevent the Syrian affliction from infecting his county – Lebanon is increasingly getting sucked into the intra-Syrian conflict.
In addition to the assassination of anti-Assad Lebanese politicians and journalists and the abductions of a score of Lebanon-based Assad opponents, Syrian security forces have regularly staged incursions into Lebanese territory in hot pursuit of fleeing Syrian rebels while the far smaller Lebanese Army looked the other way. Syrian security forces have shelled Lebanese border villages suspected of smuggling arms and/or providing shelter to anti-Assad rebels, killing scores of Lebanese bystanders in the process. This is to say nothing of the economic and political impact on Lebanon of the tens of thousands of ordinary Syrians who have flocked to that country for refuge.
As the violence in Syria escalates and the collapse of his regime approaches, President Bashar Assad, in desperation, will do all he can to destabilize Lebanon – never mind the catastrophic regional repercussions this entails. Assad’s strategy is to threaten civil war in Lebanon so as to deter the international community from dislodging his regime by force, as it did with Moammar Gadhafi’s regime in Libya.
Although no firm evidence links recent events in Lebanon with Syrian skullduggery, the arrest by Syria-friendly Lebanese intelligence agents of Shadi al-Mawlawi, a Sunni Lebanese anti-Assad activist allegedly involved in the trafficking of arms to the Free Syrian Army, and the killing by similarly friendly Lebanese Army personnel of Sheikh Ahmad Abdul-Wahed, a Sunni anti-Assad cleric who apparently did not heed the order to stop at a checkpoint, are no coincidences. That these twin episodes set off deadly street battles between Lebanese pro- and anti-Assad activists in Lebanon’s two largest cities, Beirut and Tripoli, and that the funeral procession for Abdul-Wahed drew thousands of people who fired their rifles in the air as a sign of mourning, are exactly the kind of instability Assad is trying to foment next door.
That Assad is keen on sowing chaos in Lebanon to ensure his survival and that of his Alawite-dominated regime should not come as a surprise. By killing his own people in the thousands for opposing his continued authoritarian rule; by forcing the militarization of an otherwise peaceful Syrian revolution through untold, brute force; and by coaxing Syria’s religious minorities into believing that their bleak destiny is in the hands of so-called “vengeful Salafists” should his “secular” regime collapse, Assad has shown that he will stop at nothing to maintain his power and the privileges (mostly illicit) that come with it.
But while it is not very hard for Assad to fish in Lebanon’s muddy sectarian waters, the Syrian dictator is finding it more difficult than usual to get his Lebanese allies to do his bidding. Lebanon is still exhausted from its past travails, including a 16-year civil war and a devastating slugfest between Hezbollah and Israel, both of which left their scars on Lebanon’s psyche, not to mention its physical infrastructure. Accordingly, despite skirmishes here and there the Lebanese body politic has no appetite for another war.
In spite of its pro-Assad leanings, the Lebanese government has thus far been able to contain some of the fires: Mawlawi’s sudden release on bail is one case in point; the Lebanese Army’s apology for the killing of Sheikh Abdul-Wahed is another. Even Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, a seemingly die-hard supporter of the Assad regime, appealed for calm when some of his Shiite co-religionists were kidnapped in Aleppo while on their way to Lebanon from a pilgrimage in Iran.
Still, despite its current attempts to stay out of the Syrian conflict, one should not discount Lebanon’s propensity to descend into chaos. It would not be the first time Lebanon is the theater for proxy wars. In this particular instance, the longer the crisis in Syria, the greater the likelihood Lebanon will be engulfed in war. International statements urging both sides of the Lebanese divide to exercise restraint may be too little, too late. What is urgently needed is for the international community, in tandem with the Syrian opposition, to remove the Assad regime before Assad causes further death and destruction in both Syria and Lebanon.
**Murhaf Jouejati is professor of Middle East studies at the National Defense University’s NESA Center for Strategic Studies. He also teaches at The George Washington University and is a scholar at the Middle East Institute. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons.org, an online newsletter.

Annan is frustrated…this is a disaster!
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
UN envoy Mr. Kofi Annan expressed his frustration at the situation in Syria, saying “we have run out of patience, we are not grateful to the killings. I’m the first to condemn these operations and I want the acceleration of the plan.” Annan also acknowledged that Syria is sliding towards a state of all-out war, which would mean that his initiative has failed to implement a ceasefire in the country, and so the question that must be asked here is: if Annan is frustrated, then how do you think the Syrians – and all those who are sympathetic with them – feel, with regards to the al-Assad regime’s crimes?
Since the announcement of Annan’s initiative, until today, a significant number of Syrians have been killed; men, women and children. This is not to mention the increasing number of massacres committed by al-Assad regime forces, whilst the last such incident saw an injured Syrian civilian being crushed to death beneath a tank. And so after all this, Annan is now expressing his frustration? This, in itself, is truly frustrating, and indeed infuriating, particularly as Annan says that if his initiative is not the right solution, then “there is another solution, and this is the work of the Security Council.” In other words, Mr. Annan has no intention of announcing the failure of his initiative, but rather he wants the Security Council to do so, despite the fact that he is well aware that it is completely paralyzed towards the situation in Syria due to Russia and China’s position. It is clear that Annan does not resent Moscow and Beijing’s position which is supporting al-Assad’s crimes, but is trying to exploit this in order to avoid announcing the failure of his own initiative; therefore this is a disaster!This means that the international community does not only have to convince Russia and China that al-Assad is a murderer who must not be defended, and that standing behind him will cost Moscow and Beijing; the international community must also – unfortunately – convince Mr. Annan of the necessity of announcing the failure of his failed mission in Syria. This is something, of course, that does not necessarily mean the announcement that Annan has failed personally so much as it means that al-Assad has failed to fulfil his promises. Therefore it is extremely frustrating that Mr. Annan is expressing his frustrations regarding his own initiative, and does not want to announce its failure, and in addition to this has put the ball in the court of the UN Security Council, whose hands are tied by the Russian and Chinese veto. However what is even more frustrating than this is the fact that Annan himself is well aware that al-Assad’s killing machine has never stopped, and that Syria’s future is in danger, as is the security of the region as a whole. Therefore, after all this, what must happen in order for Annan to announce the failure of his initiative? Why did he not, at least, impose a deadline for his initiative, as called for by Qatar? This is not a personal issue towards Annan, for people are being killed in Syria on a daily basis, and the country’s social peace is at stake, whilst there is also a genuine threat to the security of the region as a whole. Does Annan want Syria to end up as another Rwanda or Bosnia, whose crises he failed to address during his time as UN Secretary-General?
Therefore if there is frustration, this is because there are many people who want to avoid confronting the truth, and this includes Mr. Annan himself, whilst things that we were saying months ago are now what people want to see happen today, as if this were completely new. Only a few recognize that what is happening in Syria is the real revolution in our region, and therefore if Annan, and others, do not want to acknowledge this, then the least that they – particularly Annan – must do, is not grant al-Assad one opportunity after another, because people are being killed in Syria on a daily basis.

The truth about the Russians
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Alawsat
Russia's stances have not only been negative towards Syria, but also with regards to most major issues. Thus, when we look for signals from Moscow in the hope that it will change its stance on the Syrian tragedy, perhaps we are deluding ourselves. In fact, all the justifications we make for the Russians are not true; they will not change their stance until after Bashar al-Assad's fall.
I can give a long list of similar Russian stances dealing with dangerous international crises, from Bosnia to Herzegovina to Kosovo to Libya, and now to Syria. In all these cases, Russia stood alongside the villain until the end. Even its stance on the Palestinian issue - which is better than that of the US – has always been a mere stance of solidarity. Russia's position in support of Iran has encouraged the latter to go to excesses in its nuclear project, and has led to dangerous regional and international ramifications in the Gulf region.
Of course, all superpowers have their own policies; they do not behave in accordance with the pressures of the news and the media. In major crises, however, we expect these states to be realistic when it comes to serving their interests and the interests of others. The Americans were pragmatic when they realized that their ally Hosni Mubarak was a hopeless case in Egypt. Before that, the Americans were also realistic when they saw that Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was unable to do anything. As for Moscow, it always adopts a bizarre stubborn policy. In the 1990s, Moscow backed the butchers of Belgrade until the last moment, and later did the same in Libya. For the past 15 months, it has been supporting Bashar al-Assad despite the horrific crimes that his forces have been perpetrating since April of last year. Not a month passes without horrible scenes and acts of widespread killing and torture throughout the country against the civilian population. Russia is supporting a falling regime, a regime that has no value or popularity in the region, a regime that is not productive or influential in the wider world.
The truth is that Russia’s stance has prolonged the Syrian crisis, and perhaps it has also hurt Moscow’s ally al-Assad. A compromise political solution could have been agreed upon in the beginning. However, Bashar al-Assad’s attitude that he can disobey the world – confident that Russia will protect him in the Security Council against any resolution to fight him – has led to the adoption of a savage and oppressive policy. This policy has since made it impossible for him or for any member of his regime to be rescued in the future, regardless of the duration of the crisis. Now, despite all their efforts to support it and protect it, the Russians will not be able to keep the regime standing on its feet, it will suffer an ugly fall. A war consisting of more than 70 percent of the Syrian people against the regime is now under way. Al-Assad will fall no matter how long it takes.
With their stubborn stance and support for the Syrian regime, against the wrath of the Syrian people and Arab and international indignation, the Russians are imperiling al-Assad just as they did with their ally Muammar Gaddafi last year. At one stage during the confrontations, the Libyan dictator was prepared to accept a solution proposed by the government of South Africa that would have allowed him to step down and live in exile with international guarantees. It was a political solution that would have preserved Libya. However, Gaddafi was then reassured by Russia's military and political support; he thought that he was leaning on a solid wall. In the end, however, he suffered a horrible fall.

Israel, U.S. mulling further sanctions on Iran
By Barak Ravid | Jun.04, 2012/Haaretz
U.S. Treasury Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, arrived in Israel for talks with top Israeli diplomatic and security officials.
Israel and the U.S. have been discussing a new series of sanctions to be imposed on Iran in the event that nuclear talks between six powers and Teheran on June 18 end in failure. Officials in Jerusalem and Washington have confirmed that these discussions about new sanctions are being held.
David Cohen, the U.S. Treasury Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, arrived in Israel on Sunday for talks with top Israeli diplomatic and security officials. Cohen's discussions related to sanctions against Syria and monitoring of the flow of money to terror organizations.
Cohen, who coordinates the U.S. sanctions policy against Iran, said in an interview with Haaretz that the U.S. and Israel are discussing a new list of sanctions against Iran. "We are working with our partners, including the Israelis, to talk about additional steps to enhance the pressure," Cohen said.
"We have today and over the past years had very close cooperation with the Israeli government across a range of our sanctions programs. They are a very good partner. They are creative. They are supportive and we will continue to consult with the Israelis."
A well-placed Israeli official said that Cohen will meet during his visit with Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, IDF Intelligence head Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi, national security adviser Yaakov Amidror, Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer and top foreign ministry officials. The source confirmed that the U.S. and Israel have taken up staff work to draft a possible new list of sanctions against Iran, in the event that the June 18 negotiations between the six powers and Tehran break down.
In the interview, Cohen indicated that new sanctions would be imposed should these negotiations fail. "The important point for the Israeli public to understand and for the Iranian leadership to understand is that if we are not able to make progress on the diplomatic track there is additional pressure that can be brought to bear on the pressure track. If we don't get a breakthrough in Moscow there is no question we will continue to ratchet up the pressure," he said. As things stand, starting on June 28 any country that purchases oil from Iran and relays payments to its central bank will face sanctions imposed by the U.S. government. In order to avoid the U.S. sanctions, states will have to prove that they have reduced the import of oil from Iran. On July 1, the European Union's oil embargo on Iranian oil will go into effect.
"We have already begun to see the combined effect of those two measures," Cohen explained. "The countries in the EU that already reduced the amount of oil they are importing from Iran, Japan and number of other countries did the same. The effect of this is that Iran today is able to sell less oil than six months ago. There are reports of oil tankers sitting off the cost of Iran full of oil, just in storage, because they can't find buyers."
Cohen noted that Iran is having problems securing payments from countries for its oil exports. "They are also encountering difficulties getting paid for the oil they are able to sell," he explained. "Iran's ability to get access to the revenues from that oil was limited by the sanctions that we have applied. The result is that Iran's revenue from oil sales - that is by far it's most important source for revenues for the government - is under pressure. Though the U.S. government is convinced that the sanctions have had significant effect in Iran, the Obama administration is aware that they have yet to bring about a strategic change in Tehran's nuclear policies.
"There is no question that the sanctions have been effective. We have had a quite significant economic effect on the banks that have been facilitating Iran's nuclear program," Cohen said. "Whether that has resulted in a change in the political approach to the nuclear program - time will tell. The Iranian willingness to come to the table in Istanbul and Baghdad and now in Moscow can be traced directly to the pressure they are feeling from the sanctions, but the objective is to bring about a strategic change with regard to the nuclear program, and I recognize that more needs to be done and we intend to do that."

Jordan faces a crossroads
Yaron Friedman/6.04.12,/Ynetnews
Op-ed: As Islamists grow stronger, will King Abdullah have to resort to brutality to save Hashemite kingdom? We shall cut the hand sent against the reforms and against the Muslim Brotherhood. I wish to Allah that the leadership of this country will go in the right direction, or else its fate will be the same as the fate of five other Arab leaders" (A Muslim Brotherhood young guard leader during a mass protest in Amman, in an interview to al-Jazeera, December 12, 2011.)
Jordan is one of the first countries where Arab Spring riots broke out. Thus far, King Abdullah II managed to keep the revolution in the first phase of street rallies, with minimal bloodshed. Jordan’s king enjoys special Muslim prestige because of his Hashemite ancestry (said to be part of Muhammad the Prophet’ lineage) and the fact that the Jordanian royal house is the only one among regional Arab regimes that sanctioned Muslim Brotherhood activity by law.
Generally speaking, the most stable regimes during the Arab revolution period are royal houses (Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Jordan) and principalities (the Emirates, Kuwait and Qatar.) Bahrain is the exception because of the impassioned Shiite majority in its midst. Yet Jordan is the most sensitive of those states because of the economic distress and high unemployment rate maligning the country in recent years. Jordan’s royal house traditionally relies on veteran Jordanians and Bedouin tribes, preferring them to the country’s Palestinian majority. However, privatization and the failure of the king’s economic policy provoked unrest among some of his traditional supporters, who also joined the protest against corruption and rising prices.
King Abdullah II made an effort to cope with the riots in his country cautiously. He dedicated parts of his speeches to the importance of social reform and pledged in the media to promote government and economic reforms. However, the reforms he needs to undertake are very difficult and threaten his ongoing rule in the country. One indication of the crisis is the replacement of three prime ministers.
The king cannot improve the economic situation as Jordan lacks natural resources and the kingdom is wholly dependent on foreign aid, mostly from the United States. Abdullah is also unable to implement the reforms demanded by the protestors, as such changes would make him lose power and turn the royal house into a symbolic body only, just like Britain’s royal house.
The rising power of Islamic movements in the Arab world currently threatens the royal housel’s survival. The Islamic movement’s power in Jordan has grown in recent years, and the raising of the voting threshold left the Islamic Action Front as Jordan’s largest and most organized party. It now constitutes the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan. In the 2003 elections, the party won almost one-quarter of parliament seats. Even though Abdullah’s father, King Hussein, expelled Hamas activists from Jordan in 1999, the Action Front remained the leading legal opposition group.
Another "Black September?"
The latest changes in the Muslim Brotherhood movement in Jordan should be of great concern to the king. The movement’s radical leader, Hammam Said, was recently elected for a second term. Said, who hails from Jenin, symbolizes the Palestinian, more radical part in the movement. After his election, the movement’s hawks defeated its doves. This change, which took place recently, ensures an ongoing rift between the Islamic movement and the king’s regime.
During the riots, the Islamic Brotherhood showcased its power by bringing thousands of supporters out to the streets. The group’s gripe combines demands for social justice and democratization with protest against Israel. The Action Front clashed with the regime before, when it boycotted the elections for six years in the wake of the peace treaty with Israel.
It appears that the rising power of the Muslim Brotherhood raised the alarm in the king’s palace. The Jordanian royal house has a difficult history of coup and takeover attempts, always on the initiative of the Palestinians. In a bid to bridge the gaps with the Islamic movement, King Abdullah met with its chairman and even initiated a historical meeting with Hamas Political Bureau Chief Khaled Mashaal.
However, these efforts did not prompt a change in the Muslim Brotherhood’s position. Jordan’s king understood well that the Islamic movement’s demand for democratization is a veneer for its desire to take over the country via elections.
There is no doubt that Jordan’s security apparatuses are the means for the king’s survival. The Muslim Brotherhood’s demand for separation of powers and limiting the authority of Jordan’s internal security service hides its aspiration to operate freely and put an end to the close monitoring of its activity at offices and mosques.
It appears that the decision to operate against the Islamic movement was made in May. The king appointed the conservative Fayez al-Tarawneh as temporary prime minister. Tarawneh served as prime minister and defense minister during King Hussein’s era and was part of the negotiations team with Israel. Meanwhile, regime thugs took part in dispersing the latest protests in the country and some Muslim Brotherhood offices were torched in several cities, while security forces were significantly reinforced to prepare for further escalation.
Will the king continue to pursue the restraint policy, which allows the Muslim Brotherhood and the country’s Palestinian majority to grow stronger? And when protests escalate and spin out of control, will the king have to follow the path of the “Black September” massacre, as his father King Hussein did in 1970? There is no doubt that Abdullah’s regime is facing a critical crossroads.
**Dr. Yaron Friedman is a graduate of the Sorbonne. He teaches Arabic and lectures about Islam at the Technion, at Beit Hagefen and at the Galilee Academic College. His book, the Nusayri Alawis: An Introduction to the Religion, History and Identity of the Leading Minority in Syria, was published in 2010 by Brill-Leiden