LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
November 05/2012

Bible Quotation for today/ you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church
Matthew 16/13-20: "Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’And they said, ‘Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’Simon Peter answered, ‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.’And Jesus answered him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.’ Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Obama runs from Iran/By: Tony Badran/Now Lebanon/ November 04/12
Is Syria's opposition extremist/By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 04/12

Egypt's Coptic church names Tawdros as new pope
By REUTERS 11/04/2012/Bishop Tawdros replaces Pope Shenouda III who died in March; many look to pope to ensure Christian voice is heard in Egypt. Photo: Mohamed Abd El Ghany / Reuters
CAIRO - The Coptic Orthodox church chose a new pope, Bishop Tawdros, on Sunday to lead the Middle East's biggest Christian community after dramatic political changes in Egypt swept Islamists to power. In a sumptuous ritual filled with prayer, chants and incense at Abbasiya cathedral in Cairo, the 60-year-old bishop's name was picked by a blindfolded child from a glass bowl in which the names of two other candidates had also been placed. Tawadros replaces Pope Shenouda III who led the church for four decades until he died in March aged 88. Many will look to the new pope to ensure the voice of Christians, who have long complained of discrimination in Egypt, are heard. In a ritual steeped in tradition and filled with prayer, chants and incense at Abbasiya cathedral in Cairo, the names of three candidates chosen in a vote were placed in a wax sealed glass bowl, and a child pulls out one name at random.
Copts believe this long-established process ensures that worldly influences do not determine the successor to Pope Shenouda III, who led the church for four decades until he died in March aged 88.
Many Christians in Egypt, who make up about a tenth of the population of 83 million, are worried by political gains made by Islamists since Hosni Mubarak was ousted last year. They have long complained of discrimination in Muslim-majority Egypt. "We pray that our Lord chooses a good shepherd," interim Pope Bakhomious, who has temporarily held the post since Shenouda's death, said in his gold-embroidered white robes after placing the names in the bowl and sealing it with hot red wax. "We are all witnesses before the Lord," he told the congregation in the packed cathedral in the centre of Cairo, where priests swung censers that wafted incense into the air. The other two candidates were: Bishop Rafael, a 54-year old who qualified as a doctor before entering the priesthood and Father Rafael Afamena, a 70-year old monk who studied law before entering the priesthood. Voters whittled the candidates down to three from a field which included leading members of the church, public figures and a handful of representatives of the Ethiopian Church, which has historic links to the church in Egypt. That ballot was held last week. Echoing the worries of many of Egypt's Copts, shopkeeper Michael George said before the service: "Christians fear the Islamists' rule especially because their presence is encouraging radicals to act freely." Since Mubarak was ousted, there have been several attacks on churches by radical Islamists. Those incidents have fuelled longstanding complaints that Christians are sidelined in the workplace and in law. Rules that make it harder to obtain official permission to build a church rather than a mosque have added to those fears.The Muslim Brotherhood, the mainstream Islamist movement that propelled President Mohamed Mursi to power, has sworn to guard the rights of Christians in the overwhelmingly majority Sunni Muslim nation.

Islamists protest in Cairo, call for Sharia law
By REUTERS 11/02/2012 /More than 1,000 Egyptians descend on Tahrir Square to demand the incorporation of Islamic law into new constitution. Photo: Ahmed Jadallah / Reuters
CAIRO - More than 1,000 Islamists rallied in Cairo on Friday and called for the implementation of sharia Islamic law, highlighting divisions in society as rival factions jostle to shape the new Egypt.
Liberals have locked horns over the role of Islam with Islamists who dominate a 100-strong assembly that is drawing up a new constitution, which must be approved in a referendum before a new parliamentary election can be held.
"Islamiya, Islamiya," the protesters chanted in Cairo's Tahrir Square, the center of the uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak who spent 30 years keeping a tight lid on Islamists.
The turnout at Friday's demonstration was smaller than had been expected after some of the main groups that espouse the ultraconservative Salafi school of Islamic thinking backed out. The Muslim Brotherhood, which propelled President Mohamed Morsi to power earlier this year, was also not involved in the protest.
"No to liberalism, no to secularism, I don't want anything other than sharia," the protesters also chanted, some waving black flags emblazoned with Islamic slogans.
Drafts of the constitution drawn up by the assembly so far indicate it will have more Islamic references than the previous constitution, worrying more liberal-minded Egyptians and Christians, who make up about a tenth of the nation of 83 million. They fear the imposition of social restrictions.
A key article stating that "the principles of sharia" are the main source of legislation has until now remained unchanged from the old constitution but a new article seeks to spell out what those principles are in Islamic terms. However, that is not enough for many Salafis who want an unequivocal call to implement sharia rather than wording that they say liberals will use to water down the meaning.

Iran suspends uranium enrichment. Gesture to boost Obama’s reelection
DEBKAfile Special Report November 4, 2012/Sources in Tehran put out word Sunday, Nov, 4, that Iran had suddenly suspended 20-percent enrichment of uranium, stopping a short step from building a nuclear device. The sources were not official. However, an Iranian lawmaker on the majlis foreign affairs and national security committee, Mohammad Hossein Asfari, was quoted as saying that the move was a "goodwill" gesture, ahead of a new round of talks with the US scheduled to take place after the presidential elections in two days. He said if sanctions were not lifted in response for the “softening” in Iran’s position, enrichment would be resumed.
Other sources report that enrichment continued uninterrupted. Tehran is therefore poised to jump either way. debkafile sources note that on Oct. 20, US media reported that President Barak Obama and Iran had agreed on one-on-one talks to resolve the nuclear issue directly after the elections if Obama was returned for a second term as president. The White House then denied those reports. However, two days before the election, Tehran is transparently throwing its weight behind Obama’s campaign by suggesting to the American voter that he is the best candidate to solve the nuclear crisis without resorting to the war option.
Obama’s staff has been building up to this critical moment, step by step. In late September, debkafile’s intelligence sources report, they met secretly with Iranian emissaries and agreed that direct negotiations would be launched after the election. A team in the White House went to work on position papers for the talks. It is headed by Gary Samore, coordinator for arms control and weapons of mass destruction, and Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman who led the US delegation to the failed six-power negotiations with Iran.
This team was presented to Israel as the authors of an “endgame paper” that was to be put before Tehran as an ultimatum. But no such paper was ever shown to Jerusalem.
Last Tuesday, Oct. 30, Israel’s defense minister Ehud Barak, told the Daily Telegraph on his way to London that in August, Iran quietly chose to convert 38 percent of its 20-percent stockpile of enriched uranium into fuel rods for civilian research purposes, “thereby delaying the moment when it could have built a nuclear bomb and delaying the moment of truth by eight to 10 months.”
These remarks painted Iran’s leaders as rational politicians, at odds with the hate-filled fanatical face shown to and by Israel. Barak only “forgot” to mention that this “gesture” was also a cover-up: Tehran had just completed the clandestine transfer of the entire set of 3,000 advanced centrifuges to the underground enrichment plant in Fordo, thereby expanding its capacity to produce medium-enriched uranium and replenish its stock.
While acting in the Obama interest and appearing to vindicate his pro-diplomacy policy, Tehran gained both time for finalizing its nuclear aspirations and two big advantages:
1. Iran overtly sacrificed just over one-third of its 20-percent enriched uranium stock, enough for one nuclear device, for the sake of clandestinely pressing forward on the production of fissile material for a whole arsenal of four to six bombs.
2. Iran managed to get its top-performance centrifuges hidden away in an almost impregnable “immune zone.”
Last April, Barak himself declared that the transfer of Iran’s nuclear program into “immune zones” would be a red line for Israel. Having made it nonetheless, Tehran is again sitting pretty and already naming a price - lifting of sanctions - for an unofficial and unverifiable claim to have halted 20-percent enrichment. But with the US presidential election almost too close to call two days before the vote, it could tip the balance.

Fars: Iran not suspending 20% nuclear enrichment
By JPOST.COM STAFF 11/04/2012/Semi-official news agency denies Arab media reports that the Islamic Republic is making a "goodwill gesture." Iran is not suspending 20 percent uranium enrichment in its nuclear program, the Fars news agency reported on Sunday. The semi-official news agency cited an "informed source" as saying "20 percent uranium enrichment activities continue as before and no change has happened." The informed source added that "News about Iran's nuclear issues is only announced by the secretariat of the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC)."
On Saturday, the pan-Arab Al Arabiya news channel cited an Iranian parliamentarian as saying that Iran suspended 20 percent uranium enrichment in an effort to release itself from Western sanctions.
Foreign Policy and National Security Commission of Parliament Mohammad Hossein Asfari news agency also referred to an enrichment suspension, describing it as a "good will gesture," according to an ISNA report the same day.

Iranian general claims missiles can pass Iron Dome
By JPOST.COM STAFF 11/01/2012/Deputy chief of Iranian armed forces warns Israeli strike could lead to the Jewish state's annihilation, Fars reports. Iranian missiles can penetrate the Iron Dome rocket-defense system, Brig.-Gen. Masoud Jazayeri, deputy chief of the Iranian armed forces said Thursday, according to Iranian news agency Fars. "There is no iron dome in the world that we cannot pierce through," Fars quoted him as saying. "What is said about this dome (the Iron Dome) is mostly psychological warfare and propaganda."He also labelled Israeli threats to strike Iran's nuclear facilities as psychological warfare, contending that the IDF lacks the military capability to attack the Islamic Republic. Jazayeri further accused Israel of having "serious vulnerabilities," and warned that an Israeli decision to strike Iran could lead to the Jewish state's annihilation. Last month, Fars quoted an Iranian military official as saying that the incursion by an unmanned aircraft into Israeli airspace exposed the weakness of Israeli air defenses. The Israeli air force shot down a drone after it crossed into southern Israel, the military said, but it remained unclear where the aircraft had come from.
Jamaluddin Aberoumand, deputy coordinator for Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said the incident indicated that Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile defense system "does not work and lacks the necessary capacity", Fars news agency reported. The Iron Dome system, jointly funded with the United States, is designed to shoot down short-range guerrilla rockets, not slow-flying aircraft. It intercepted more than 80 percent of the targets it engaged in March when nearly 300 rockets and mortars were fired at southern Israel, the Pentagon said at the time. Reuters contributed to this report

Simulation: The first 48 hours after an Iran strike
By YAAKOV LAPPIN 11/04/2012/ INSS war game simulates regional conflict scenario of a unilateral Israeli strike without US participation. The Institute for National Security Studies held a war game recently in which players representing regional actors simulated the first 48 hours after an IDF strike on the Islamic Republic. The simulation was based on the scenario of a unilateral Israeli strike without US participation, after midnight on November 9.'The Tel Aviv University-based institute began the game with the following “announcement”: “Al Jazeera reported that Israeli planes attacked nuclear sites in Iran in three assault waves. Following the reports, Israel officially announced it attacked nuclear sites in Iran, since it had no other choice.”
In this scenario, the strike successfully destroyed nuclear sites and set Iran’s nuclear weapons program back by three years.
As part of the exercise, Iran responded with full force, firing some 200 Shihab missiles at Israel in two waves, and calling on its proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas and other radical organizations, to attack Israel. At first, Iran refrained from striking US targets in the Persian Gulf region in the war game.
In the game, Israel, bolstered by a successful strike, attempted to absorb the attacks while trying to de-escalate the situation and reach an end to hostilities as soon as possible.
The international community remained paralyzed due to Russia’s attempts to exploit the situation to advance its strategic interests.
“After two days, the Iranians, and to a lesser extent, their allies, continue to attack Israel. The crisis did not appear to be approaching a solution,” the INSS concluded at the end of the war game.
Within the first 48 hours, Israel carried out a fourth air assault on Iran to complete the destruction of a main nuclear site.
“Israel’s strategic aim was to prevent a regional escalation and to strive to reach a level in which incidents were under control, in low intensity, as quickly as possible,” the INSS said.
Although the US was not notified in advance, Washington clearly sided with Israel and did not expose divisions, in order to show a united front and decrease the chances of a regional conflagration.
The US indicated its willingness to return to the negotiating table with Iran and to ease sanctions in exchange for Iranian restraint and an Iranian announcement that nuclear military activities had ceased.
The US stayed out of the fighting, based on a policy that it would only become involved if Iran were to shut off the globally important oil route of the Strait of Hormuz, or if Iran attacked US assets in the Gulf.
At first, Tehran shied away from a military confrontation with the US, but, the game’s participants found, “The more Iran was pushed into a corner and its options to act became limited, the more it understood that its principal card is to act against the US in the Gulf and to shut off the Strait of Hormuz,” the INSS said.
Iran’s Lebanese Shi’ite proxy Hezbollah found itself in a dilemma in the game. On the one hand, it was under heavy Iranian pressure to fire massive barrages of missiles and rockets at Israel. Tehran told Hezbollah that this was “judgement day” – the very reason Hezbollah had been provided with some 50,000 projectiles.
On the other hand, Hezbollah was deterred by the fear of once more causing widespread damage to Lebanon.
“Therefore, it chose to partially answer Iran’s demands, firing rockets and missiles at military targets in Israel, mainly airports and active defense systems,” the INSS said.
“Israel’s restrained response sharpened Hezbollah’s dilemma and strengthened its decision to fire relatively limited barrages, and to focus on military targets,” it added.
The player representing Hamas also chose a middle path in the game, displaying some commitment to Iran, but seeking to avoid giving Israel a reason to launch a large ground offensive in the Gaza Strip.
Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the Gulf states and Turkey all acted in their own interests, while distancing themselves from the conflict and looking to prevent a regional escalation.
The game’s participants all acted “very rationally, activating policies that were driven by essential interests only, and ignored internal and outside constraints,” the INSS noted.
The player representing Israel concluded that the Israeli public would be able to absorb an extended conflict, due to the public’s belief that the strike on Iran was justified, and because operational goals were achieved. The player representing the Islamic Republic found himself with limited tools with which to directly attack Israel, relying heavily on proxies.
Tehran had more tools to take action against US interests in the Gulf and spike oil prices, but realized that the price of involving the US in the fighting would be immensely high.
The INSS said that the game was planned earlier this year, when it seemed that this fall would be a decisive time in resolving the Iranian nuclear question.
“Since then, things have calmed down a little, but after the elections, towards the spring, the question of an attack will resurface. It is therefore vital to continue to examine the possible consequences,” it added. Within the INSS, there are two competing schools of thought regarding the outcome of an Israeli strike on Iran. The first foresees a major regional war that could develop beyond the area. The second believes that, due to the presence of restraining mechanisms, Iran’s ability to set the Middle East alight is limited.

Is Syria's opposition extremist?
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
There is no problem with the opposition representing all Syrians, including the fighters on the ground. This is normal and important. The Syrian opposition should not just represent one segment of society, particularly following the experiences of the Arab Spring states, which saw just one section of the opposition, namely the Islamists, achieve predominance. However the question that must be asked here is: is Syria's opposition extremist, or rather has it been hijacked by the extremists?
This is an inaccurate opinion, even if this was put forward by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, particularly as Bashar al-Assad expressed the same sentiments before her, indeed since the first day of the Syrian revolution. The reality is that the Syrian opposition has been neglected by everybody, regionally and internationally, for almost two years, namely since the revolution first began. All of the efforts that have been exerted to unify the opposition represented attempts to attract others with similar beliefs, for example, on the part of those who prefer the Muslim Brotherhood line and who sought to consolidate their ranks. Otherwise, dealings with the Syrian opposition were based on the approach of wasting time, to the point that some officials were embarrassed to be photographed with Syrian opposition figures! Therefore, nearly two years into the Syrian revolution and following the deaths of almost 30,000 Syrians, it is natural for the situation to have become increasingly complicated, not just in Syria, but also within the ranks of the Syrian opposition itself. Our duty now is to develop a practical plan to ensure that the Arab Spring states mistakes’ are not repeated in Syria. Most of these mistakes took place with western – and sometimes Arab – backing, from Egypt to Tunisia, not to mention some attempts in Libya. These mistakes can be summed up as attempts to impose the Muslim Brotherhood on these Arab Spring states based on the view that the Brotherhood was the strongest and most organized trend on the ground. This is something that is only permissible during a state of stability where the power in the street, for example, is the one that wins the elections. As for during periods of chaos and rebuilding, constitutions and legislation must be the guarantors for everybody. This mistake, which Arab Spring states are today suffering from, is precisely what happened in post-occupation Iraq, so predominance was granted to the party that was strongest and most organized on the ground, namely the Shiites. From this point, Iraq became a sectarian and exclusionist state, and the same applies to the Arab Spring states today. This is something that must not be repeated in Syria, whether from the international community, Arab world, or Syrian opposition themselves.
Therefore, blame is not helpful now, particularly as the Syrian revolution has seen enough organized deception and trickery, whether from the al-Assad regime or the international community. Saying that what is happening in Syria is a civil war is a deception, for in reality this is a revolution that was confronted by organized armed violence. Saying that Al Qaeda is involved with the revolution is a deception, for with al-Assad using all weapons under his control, not to mention the Iranian involvement, with all of their capabilities, as well as Hezbollah and Russian arms; nobody can blame the Syrians even if they appealed to the devil himself! The deception does not stop here, for the missions undertaken by General al-Dabi, Kofi Annan and Lakhdar Barahimi were also deceptions and time-wasting; therefore it is irresponsible to point the finger of blame at the Syrian opposition today. So what is required is serious work. The first step that the Arab world and international community must take is not to prefer one party over another, in addition to selecting a framework that includes all Syrians, which means restructuring the Syrian National Council [SNC] without preference or favor. The new Syria must be for all Syrians, whilst it must also avoid the mistakes made by Arab Spring states.

Hezbollah under fire, but Lebanon hold is tight
04/11/2012
MLEETA, Lebanon (AP) — A maze of military bunkers and tunnels carved into a mountain near the border with Israel hints at why the Shiite Hezbollah movement is unlikely to lose its grip in Lebanon despite the setbacks it has suffered because of the civil war in neighboring Syria.
Mleeta, a former staging ground for Hezbollah's battles with Israel that has been turned into a sprawling tourist attraction, is emblematic of the base of its power: its arsenal and military prowess.
That base ultimately remains firm, even if Hezbollah has faced sharper criticism among Lebanese for its siding with Syria's regime in the civil war and even if it has reportedly suffered some reduction in aid from its top patron, Iran, squeezed by Western sanctions. Besides its weapons, Hezbollah can also still count on an extensive patronage network, carefully nurtured alliances with religious minorities and alternative sources of funding.
Its backing among Lebanon's Shiite Muslims — who edge out Sunnis and Christians as the country's largest sectarian community — remains strong, and it also dominates the government in place since January 2011.
Even one of the militia's most outspoken critics in the Shiite community said he expects Hezbollah to remain dominant for the time being, even as support for it is eroding.
"Hebzollah still has the means of power, which is weapons, money and the support of the Lebanese government," said Ali al-Amin, a former top cleric in the southern city of Tyre who said he was expelled from his office by Hezbollah agents in 2008.
Certainly, Hezbollah is facing harder times. Misgivings have been growing among some Lebanese that the group is a destabilizing force because of a series of events in recent years. It was implicated by international investigators in the 2005 assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri — though it denies a role. It fought a devastating war with Israel in 2006. Its fighters overran the streets of Beirut in a 2008 power struggle. And now it has rushed to back Syrian President Bashar Assad since the uprising against his rule began 19 months ago.
"Politically, they are on the ropes," analyst Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy said of Hezbollah. "You see a willingness to challenge Hezbollah that you have never seen before."
The latest political crisis in Lebanon, set off by the assassination of a top intelligence chief by an Oct. 19 car bomb, highlighted both Hezbollah's entrenchment and the backlash against it.
The country's Western-backed opposition, the March 14 alliance, has blamed Hezbollah and Syria for the killing of Gen. Wissam al-Hassan, a leading anti-Syrian voice, and has demanded the Hezbollah-dominated government resign. Hezbollah has denied involvement in the attack.
"It's a mafia state," Nadim Koteich, a prominent March 14 activist and TV talk show host, said of Hezbollah's domination of Lebanon. Opposition figures allege al-Hassan was targeted because he uncovered information about purported Syrian attempts to further destabilize Lebanon with the help of Lebanese collaborators.
But at the same time, the Sunni-dominated March 14 has failed to galvanize supporters. After the general's Oct. 21 funeral, only a few dozen March 14 activists tried to storm the castle-like Cabinet building, which has since been declared a no-go zone, ringed by barbed wire barriers and rows of army trucks.
Some blame lack of leadership. Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, leader of Lebanon's Sunni Muslim camp and son of Rafik Hariri, has spent most of his time in Paris since Hezbollah brought down his pro-Western ruling coalition.
Since last month's assassination, U.S. and European diplomats have met with Lebanon's leaders and called for stability. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the Lebanese people deserve a government that is not a proxy for outside forces, a clear shot at Hezbollah, but she did not signal further practical moves.
That suggests the West does not see Hezbollah's predicament as an opening for challenging the group and wants to avoid a political crisis in Lebanon at a time when it's preoccupied with the Syria conflict, said Bilal Saab, an analyst at the Monterey Institute for International Studies.
"There will be a time when Hezbollah will be confronted, but this is not it," he said.
Hezbollah's media office in Beirut declined requests for interviews.
In response to domestic criticism, Hezbollah often plays the "resistance card," trying to draw political legitimacy from its combative stance toward Israel. The "Resistance Tourist Landmark" in the village of Mleeta is an outdoor shrine to Hezbollah's battle against Israel's 18-year military presence in Lebanon, which ended in 2000 when Israeli forces withdrew from a zone they controlled in the south.
A Hezbollah activist who serves as a volunteer tour guide at the site spoke dismissively of Lebanon's opposition.
"If you take a look at their numbers, they are very weak and small," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was expressing his personal view, not Hezbollah's official position.
The site, which was turned into a resistance museum in 2010, includes trenches covered by camouflage netting, a 200-meter-long tunnel and bunkers used by fighters at the time.
In one huge victory tableau, an Israeli Merkava tank is half-submerged into the ground. Hebrew letters in stone next to it read, "the Lebanese mud," a mocking reference to the phrase Israelis themselves use to describe their costly military entanglement across their northern border.
In its latest show of taking on Israel, the militia sent an Iranian-made drone on a reconnaissance flight over Israel earlier this month.
Israel shot down the plane near its Dimona nuclear reactor in the south, but an Iranian lawmaker later said Tehran was able to obtain images of Israeli military bases.
Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah said he'd send more drones, boasting that "we can reach any place" in Israel.
In the 2006 war, Hezbollah forces battled Israel's military to a standstill, winning it support across the Arab world, even among Sunnis. That has diminished because of the Syria conflict. But among some, its resistance credentials trump its alliance with a dictator trying to crush a Sunni-led rebellion among some.
That's particularly the case in southern Lebanon, where residents still nurse bitter memories of Israel's invasion in the early 1980s.
In Sidon, a Sunni stronghold in the mainly Shiite south, Mohieddine Sin, a 56-year-old Sunni smoking a waterpipe in a boardwalk cafe, said he supports Hezbollah regardless of its actions in Syria. "Whoever is against Israel, we are with them," he said.
"Either you are with America or you are with the resistance," added fellow Sunni Fadi Saed, 47, owner of a Sidon household goods store in Sidon.
Hezbollah would suffer a serious blow if Assad were to fall, but likely not a fatal one.
It has done well by Lebanon's Shiites and built alliances with Christian and Druze politicians. The militia can likely count on continued support from Iran, which would want to protect its strategic proxy on Israel's doorstep, particularly if Assad is toppled. And even if a post-Assad leadership were to prevent more Iranian weapons from being shipped to Hezbollah, the militia already has a huge arsenal of tens of thousands of missiles, according to Israeli estimates.
Saab, the analyst, said Hezbollah remains in good shape, provided it does not get into another major war with Israel.
"Hezbollah is going to come out on top, not matter what," he said.

Relatives of hostages protest outside Turkish UNIFIL base
November 04, 2012/By Mohammed Zaatari The Daily Star
TYRE, south Lebanon: Relatives of Lebanese who were kidnapped in Syria May 22 gathered Sunday outside the base of Turkey’s UNIFIL contingent in the southern district of Tyre, demanding their release. Around 30 men, women and children held signs addressing Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, saying: "Erdogan, you should be ashamed of your work," while other placards ridiculed Ankara for failing to secure the release of their loved ones. Eleven men were kidnapped on May 22 in Azaz, Aleppo, northwest Syria shortly after crossing from Turkey. They were heading back to Lebanon after a pilgrimage in Iran. Two have been released so far. During what the relatives described as a “peaceful protest,” children from each family were allowed to enter the Turkish base in the village of Shaeneye to offer 260 peacekeepers out of a 456-strong contingent a red flower amid heavy security measures. One of the relatives, Yamer Zogheib, said that the protesters are relaying a message of peace, urging Turkey to work toward the release of the remaining pilgrims. "We are here to deliver a message of peace to the UNIFIL. We came carrying flowers to salute the [soldiers] in hopes that the Turkish state can return our relatives," Zoghieb told The Daily Star. Others such as Safaa Termos did not agree, saying that peaceful movements have not resulted in a tangible outcome.
"I am here but not convinced that we should offer flowers but the relatives insisted," she said as Turkish soldiers could be seen on their towers monitoring the protesters.
"Peaceful behavior has brought us nothing and Turkey should release the hostages immediately because the issue is in its hands ... we are done waiting," Termos, a relative of one of the kidnapped, said.

France will confront destabilization in Lebanon: Hollande
November 04, 2012/ The Daily Star
BEIRUT: French President Francois Hollande said Sunday his country will confront attempts to destabilize Lebanon, praising President Michel Sleiman’s efforts to preserve unity via National Dialogue.
In a joint news conference with Sleiman at the end of a brief visit to Beirut, Hollande said that France will confront with all its power anyone who seeks to destabilize Lebanon in order to guarantee its independence, security and unity. He also said that there is a need to protect Lebanon and preserve its unity given the crisis in neighboring Syria, adding that the country should not become a victim in the 19-month-old bloody conflict. He added that France’s participation in the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon and its military support for the Lebanese Army to better protect the border are part of Paris’ efforts in assuring stability in the country. Hollande, who was elected in May, said he wanted his first visit to the Middle East to begin in Lebanon, adding that his trip comes at a critical time in the region
The French president also praised Sleiman’s efforts in bringing rival leaders to the Dialogue table in order to preserve Lebanon’s unity in the wake of the assassination of Brig. Gen. Wissam al-Hasan last month. Paris will offer its support to reveal the perpetrators behind Hasan’s killing, the French official said.
Hollande’s trip is the first by a French president since the previous head of state, Nicolas Sarkozy, visited Lebanon in June 2008. The country was rocked by the assassination of Hasan on Oct. 19, which led to calls from the opposition group for the resignation of Prime Minister Najib Mikati’s Cabinet, which it accused of providing the necessary cover for the car bomb in the Beirut district of Ashrafieh.
The March 14 coalition has also announced a total boycott of the government and all Cabinet-related meetings in Parliament as part of its moves to pressure the government to resign.
For his part, Sleiman, who has launched consultations with rival leaders to resolve the government crisis, renewed his call for Dialogue and the end of reactionary positions to prevent unrest.
“We ask everyone to overcome this incident and work together via Dialogue and cooperation to prevent future crises ... particularly with what is going on in Syria including tension and bloodshed,” Sleiman told reporters. “Difficult circumstances produce reactionary popular stances but we should be aware that such reactions will only lead to negative results,” he added.
Sleiman also said that he updated Hollande on his consultations as well as security developments in the country. “I affirmed to President Hollande our keenness to distance Lebanon from negative repercussions from Syria, noting that Syrians should be able to achieve reform and democracy away from the violence that has reached alarming levels, and without military intervention,” the Lebanese president said. He added that Hollande agreed to help Lebanon cope with the overwhelming presence of Syrian refugees in Lebanon, who now number over 100,000.
They also agreed on the importance of holding the 2013 parliamentary elections on time. Hollande earlier spoke of fears of a spillover of the crisis in Syria into Lebanon when speaking to reporters on board the plane to the Lebanese capital. He added that the aim of his brief visit is to send a message of support to Sleiman and follow up on the political situation in Lebanon, particularly with regards to the future of Dialogue and ties between Lebanon's rival parties. The French president, who arrived in Beirut around 8 a.m. for a three-hour trip, also said that he would be discussing with Sleiman the means to protect Lebanon from the crisis in Syria. Upon arrival at Baabda Palace, an official reception was held for Hollande and the accompanying delegation instead of at Rafik Hariri International Airport, where officials are usually received.

Hariri to Hollande: March 14 Decisive in Preventing Lebanon's Surrender to 'Arms'
Naharnet/Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri informed French President Francois Hollande that the March 14 opposition alliance holds onto its decision to call for the formation of a neutral government to salvage Lebanon, An Nahar daily reported on Sunday. The newspaper quoted French sources as saying that Hariri sent a letter to Hollande on the eve of his short visit to Beirut on Sunday.
According to the sources, the al-Mustaqbal movement leader explained to Hollande the reasons for the opposition's boycott of parliamentary sessions and the National Dialogue.
March 14 holds onto its stance in forming a neutral cabinet, he said in the letter. “The final decision of March 14 is (aimed at) putting an end to the chain of (attempts) to surrender the country to arms and their regional masters,” Hariri reportedly told the French president about the arsenal of Hizbullah and its main backers Syria and Iran. “The decision of the Lebanese to hold onto democracy and civil peace is the decision of March 14 to take a peaceful, democratic and nonviolent path,” he added. The opposition has been calling on Prime Minister Najib Miqati to resign over the Oct. 19 assassination of Brig. Gen. Wissam al-Hasan, the head of the Internal Security Forces Information Branch. It declared it would boycott the government and any political activity it is involved in after it blamed Syria and held the government responsible for the car bomb explosion that left two other people dead.

Obama runs from Iran
Tony Badran/Now Lebanon
President Obama insists the tides of war are receding. But from Iran’s vantage point, the only thing receding is American power. (AFP photo)
The Iranian challenge to US interests and allies is the most pressing strategic issue for Washington in the Middle East. With the US election less than a week away, now is as good a time as any to look back on the Obama administration’s Iran policy.
President Obama has defined US interests narrowly, instead of viewing Iran through a broader regional prism. Over the last four years, the US has focused on diplomatic initiatives and negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program. Yet, as critical as the nuclear program is, it is but one component—albeit a central one—of Iran’s broader regional project.
Possession of nuclear weapons is meant to serve, and cement, Iran’s bid for regional hegemony. However, in addition to its inability to halt Tehran’s uranium enrichment, the Obama administration has equally failed to devise a region-wide strategy to roll back Iranian influence, despite the opportunities the Syrian rebellion has opened up.
Some have maintained that the Syrian war has stunted Iran’s ability to project power in the region, requiring no further involvement from Washington. Iran has certainly taken a serious hit with the revolt against the Assad regime, its strategic ally of 30 years. However, to simply assume that it is not gaming out the Syrian situation is foolish. In fact, while going all in to salvage Assad, Iran also has been busy setting up multiple contingencies and shoring up its assets around the region. As one Arab columnist put it, Iran realizes that the best defense is offense.
Indeed, this has been the Islamic Republic’s modus operandi since its inception, having waged proxy wars throughout the region for three decades. The killing in October of Lebanese intelligence chief Wissam al-Hassan was likely one expression of Iran’s power play.
Tehran’s regional push has centered heavily on Iraq. In last week’s presidential debate, President Obama emphasized no fewer than five times how he had “ended the war in Iraq.” In contrast to the US president’s policy of extraction, Iran has been busy consolidating its gains in Baghdad, and looking to outflank its competitors. Now that the US has ceased to be a balancing fixture in Iraq, Iran has stepped in to take its place.
The Iranians have focused their efforts there on countering the influence of Turkey and its ally, the president of the Kurdistan Regional Government, Massoud Barzani. Ankara and Irbil have moved steadily closer, and against Iranian interests, on a host of issues, ranging from energy supply, to Syria, to the push to unseat Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
Iran has mounted a counter-offensive on all these fronts. According to the Iraqi Kurdish press, when Quds Force Commander Qassem Soleimani visited Iraqi Kurdistan in late September, his aim was to pull Barzani away from the alliance with Turkey. One paper claimed Iran was concerned about Barzani’s relationship with Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan and their budding strategic cooperation.
In addition, according to Kurdish press reports, Barzani also refused Soleimani’s request to allow Iranian weapons transfers to Syria. He also reacted coolly to Soleimani’s proposal of a détente with Maliki. Barzani’s uncooperative position led Iran to reach out to other Kurdish parties, in an attempt to isolate and pressure the Kurdish president.
Tehran is reportedly also fostering a rapprochement between Maliki and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). Iran is rumored to have arranged a meeting between PKK officials (from Iraq and Syria) and security advisors to Maliki. What brings Iran, Maliki and the PKK together is a shared hostility toward Turkey, as well as a convergence of interests in Syria.
Iran’s relationship with the PKK has accelerated since the eruption of the Syrian rebellion. The PKK is a useful asset for Iran to pressure Turkey. An advisor to the PKK recently explained the confluence of interests with Tehran: “Iran influences the PKK because the PKK is based on the Iranian border. When you fight a party, you have to find a support from some other party.”
Last but not least, Iran, which was instrumental in saving Maliki from the no-confidence vote, is calling on the Iraqi prime minister to show his gratitude and perform a service to Tehran. Last month, Iranian Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi went to Baghdad to push for a joint security and military treaty. Maliki’s opponents in the al-Iraqiya parliamentary bloc have accused him of making a secret deal with Vahidi to transfer weapons to Assad.
Vahidi’s treaty proposal was seen as not just an attempt to consolidate Iran’s influence in Iraq, but also as an Iranian contingency plan against a possible setback in Syria. In fact, the editor of the Saudi al-Sharq al-Awsat had described Maliki (and Iraq under his tenure) as “Assad’s replacement” for Iran.
The US has been all but absent in this picture. By doing nothing, Washington is steadily losing ground to Iran in the region, even as Tehran’s strategic ally is fighting for his life. What’s more, the Obama administration’s static approach to Iran’s dynamic offensive discredits its claim that it could contain a nuclear Iran.
Even before going nuclear, Iran is carving out more arenas it can play in and strike against American interests and allies. In some places it’s using so-called “soft” power, such as diplomatic pressure, whereas in others, such as Lebanon, it’s naked hard power, as evident in the assassination of Wissam al-Hassan.
The Syrian rebellion gave the Obama administration a golden opportunity to reshape the regional balance that it has refused to capitalize on. President Obama insists the tides of war are receding. But from Iran’s vantage point, the only thing receding is American power.
*Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He tweets @AcrossTheBay.