LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
March 12/2013

Bible Quotation for today/ Healing of the possessed by possessed by demons
Mark 05/01-20: "They came to the other side of the lake, to the country of the Gerasenes. And when he had stepped out of the boat, immediately a man out of the tombs with an unclean spirit met him. He lived among the tombs; and no one could restrain him any more, even with a chain; for he had often been restrained with shackles and chains, but the chains he wrenched apart, and the shackles he broke in pieces; and no one had the strength to subdue him. Night and day among the tombs and on the mountains he was always howling and bruising himself with stones. When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and bowed down before him; and he shouted at the top of his voice, ‘What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I adjure you by God, do not torment me.’For he had said to him, ‘Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!’Then Jesus asked him, ‘What is your name?’ He replied, ‘My name is Legion; for we are many.’ He begged him earnestly not to send them out of the country.
Now there on the hillside a great herd of swine was feeding; and the unclean spirits begged him, ‘Send us into the swine; let us enter them.’ So he gave them permission. And the unclean spirits came out and entered the swine; and the herd, numbering about two thousand, rushed down the steep bank into the lake, and were drowned in the lake. The swineherds ran off and told it in the city and in the country. Then people came to see what it was that had happened. They came to Jesus and saw the demoniac sitting there, clothed and in his right mind, the very man who had had the legion; and they were afraid. Those who had seen what had happened to the demoniac and to the swine reported it. Then they began to beg Jesus to leave their neighbourhood. As he was getting into the boat, the man who had been possessed by demons begged him that he might be with him. But Jesus refused, and said to him, ‘Go home to your friends, and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and what mercy he has shown you.’And he went away and began to proclaim in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him; and everyone was amazed.

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources

March 11, 2013 01:00 AM The Daily Star
BEIRUT: A senior Hezbollah official indirectly accused March 14 parties Sunday of trying to bring Lebanon back to the “era of defeat.” Responding to politicians in the March 14 coalition who have called on Hezbollah to surrender its arms to the Lebanese Army, Hashem Safieddine, head of Hezbollah’s Executive Council, told a rally in the southern village of Tayr Felsay: “The attempt by some through some proposals is to bring Lebanon back to the era of reactionary, backwardness and defeat. We are today facing a political battle.” “It is not a matter of an electoral law, or who wins a majority [in Parliament].Rather, there is a party in Lebanon, under various slogans and instructions from abroad, which wants to bring our country back to the era of defeat at the political level at a time when the resistance had ushered it into the era of victories and power in the face of the Israeli enemy,” he added.

UK’s Hague: Will Pursue Blacklisting of Hezbollah, No Formal EU Request to Do so Yet.
By Laurence Norman/The wall Street Journal
The U.K. will pursue the blacklisting of the Shi’ite Lebanese group Hezbollah at the European level, U.K. Foreign Secretary William Hague said Monday, although he acknowledged differences within the 27 nation bloc over the issue. Senior European Union officials have said the regional bloc would look at the option of including Hezbollah on its terrorist list, but there has been no formal request to do so yet. The debate re-emerged after Bulgaria linked Hezbollah to an attack which killed five Israeli tourists and a Bulgarian in that country last year. Hague said the U.K., which already labels the military wing of Hezbollah a terrorist group, would push for the EU to follow its lead, although he stopped short of saying the U.K. would make a formal request for the issue to be debated. “We already proscribe in the U.K. the military wing of Hezbollah and we would be in favor of that at the European level as well. We will be pursuing that, but as you say not at our meeting today,” he said on his way into a meeting of EU foreign ministers. While the U.K. and the Netherlands include Hezbollah on their terrorist list, countries like Sweden and France have traditionally resisted pressure from the U.S. and others to move against the group. Critics of blacklisting the group say it could destabilize the political situation in Lebanon. No blacklisting can happen until one EU member state formally asks for a special committee to be convened to consider the evidence. For that to happen, there must be clear evidence linking the group to a terrorist act. Hague acknowledged the “differing views about this around the table” in the EU. I know some countries have asked to see more of the evidence from the terrible bombing that happened in Bulgaria, and others have reservations for different reasons.”

Hezbollah says opposition wants return to ‘defeat’

March 11, 2013/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: A senior Hezbollah official indirectly accused March 14 parties Sunday of trying to bring Lebanon back to the “era of defeat.”Responding to politicians in the March 14 coalition who have called on Hezbollah to surrender its arms to the Lebanese Army, Hashem Safieddine, head of Hezbollah’s Executive Council, told a rally in the southern village of Tayr Felsay: “The attempt by some through some proposals is to bring Lebanon back to the era of reactionary, backwardness and defeat. We are today facing a political battle.” “It is not a matter of an electoral law, or who wins a majority [in Parliament]. Rather, there is a party in Lebanon, under various slogans and instructions from abroad, which wants to bring our country back to the era of defeat at the political level at a time when the resistance had ushered it into the era of victories and power in the face of the Israeli enemy,” he added.

Venezuela News: Hezbollah is in Venezuela, But There's No Threat to U.S. Security
Pierce WillansinPolitics,National Security
Is Hezbollah in Venezuela? Probably. A more interesting question is: Does it matter, and if so, how much? American foreign policy hawks have been sounding the alarm on this for years, claiming Hezbollah’s activities in South America, which they often refer to as "America’s backyard," are a threat to national security.
The U.S. State Department labels Hezbollah as a terrorist organization and Iranian proxy. The origins of Hezbollah are murky, but it first emerged as a force in the early 1980s, in reaction to Israel’s occupation of Southern Lebanon. During this period, the group quickly gained infamy in the United States when it blew up the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing over 200 Marines, only months after it had blown up the U.S. Embassy there.
That being said, attacks on American targets have been the exception, rather than the rule. Throughout its history, the majority of Hezbollah’s energies have been directed towards Israel. In the decades since its creation, Hezbollah has evolved and expanded its activities, operating as a political party in Lebanon while simultaneously maintaining its separate criminal and military activities. Sometime in the 1980s they are believed to have established a foothold in South America, probably to raise funds from the large Lebanese community there. It has been established that the group is engaged in narcotrafficking and money laundering, no doubt spurred in part by Iran’s declining support due to the crushing international sanctions against it. Though their activities in Latin America appear to be primarily aimed at raising money, fears of Hezbollah’s capacity for violence in the region are not without basis; Hezbollah is widely blamed for bombing the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires and then again that city’s Jewish Community Center in the early 90s, killing over 100 people.
The fears of a Venezuelan-Hezbollah axis seem to be spurred in large part by the highly visible personal friendship between the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This unlikely alliance between two men of such different cultural backgrounds appears to be a product of their respective governments’ isolation and shared antagonism towards the United States. In the UN, Venezuela has voted against international sanctions on Iran for its nuclear program. Iran has billions of dollars invested in Venezuela. There is, however, nothing particularly treacherous about that. The claims of a more sinister relationship have been most prominently voiced by Roger Noriega.
Mr. Noriega is currently a visiting fellow at conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Noriega is no stranger to murky Iran-Latin American intrigue; while at the U.S. Agency for International Development, he was implicated in the Iran-Contra Scandal during the Reagan administration. He subsequently served in high-level diplomatic posts under President George W. Bush, including as Ambassador to the Organization of American States, where he supported the abortive coup against Hugo Chavez in 2002. More recently, he has publicly accused Venezuela of having a secret nuclear program. In his July 2011 testimony before Congress, Mr. Noriega further stoked the fires by claiming that Venezuela actually supports Hezbollah and allows it and drug cartel members to operate in its territory, though he offered no proof. He also hinted darkly that the federal government knows more than it is willing to say publicly on the subject. Noriega clearly knows how to get attention in Washington, but that is not the same as offering well-informed advice. In this post-9/11 foreign policy environment, his efforts seem to be aimed at reinforcing conservatives’ penchant for conflating a group’s stated anti-American sentiments with an unstated intention to actually do us harm. In many ways, Hezbollah’s activities in Latin America are similar to those of other drug cartels, which are rightly viewed as a problem. But their activies are a law enforcement problem, and needs to be confronted without the hysteria that seems to accompany any statement containing "Hezbollah" and "America’s backyard" in the same breath.

Lebanon unable to confirm hostages executed in Nigeria
Now Lebanon/Lebanon is still trying to confirm the fate of two Lebanese abducted in Nigeria, Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour told AFP Monday after a video posted online claimed to show bodies of some executed hostages.
"After seeing the video it appeared that the two Lebanese are not among the bodies which were shown" in the footage, Mansour said. "Contacts are still underway between Lebanon and the Nigerian interior ministry to know the fate of the Lebanese" citizens Imad Andari and Carlos Abu Aziz. Mansour also said that the Lebanese men “have been separated from the rest of the foreign abductees along with a Syrian national and his wife and were moved to a different area.”The pair are among seven foreign hostages kidnapped on February 16 in Nigeria and whose alleged execution was claimed by the Islamist extremist group Ansaru.
The FM added that “the Lebanese mission in the Nigerian capital Abuja are making efforts to locate Andari and Abou Aziz and when the accurate full information is available, it will be revealed to the people concerned with this matter.”A grainy and silent video posted on YouTube and seen Monday by AFP appears to show at least four victims next to a man standing with a rifle. Close-up shots of three bodies can also be seen.
The 91-second video is titled in Arabic "the death of the seven Christian hostages in Nigeria," while an English statement announcing the executions is copied in below. The two Lebanese were abducted along with two Syrians, a Greek, an Italian and a Briton, all of whom were employed by Lebanese-owned construction firm Setraco on a site in the northern Nigerian state of Bauchi. Britain, Italy and Greece on Sunday said that the claim by Ansaru that it had killed the seven foreign hostages appeared to be true, but there has been no confirmation from Nigerian authorities. Ansaru, considered an offshoot of the Nigerian Islamist group Boko Haram, has been linked to several kidnappings, including the May 2011 abductions of a Briton and an Italian working for a construction firm near the border with Niger. The victims were killed in March 2012 in neighboring Sokoto state during a botched rescue operation.

Barak: Iran question likely to be answered in 2013
AFP/Now Lebanon/Whether Iran will rein in its nuclear program or push ahead with its suspected bid for a weapons capability is likely to become clear by the end of 2013, Israel's Ehud Barak said on Monday.
"Iran remains the central challenge this year, and it is possible we’ll see the direction determined by the end of the year," the outgoing defense minister told members of the parliamentary committee on foreign affairs and defense.
Barak, who will step down when the new coalition government is announced later this week, used the opportunity to renew warnings that Iran is seeking to put its nuclear facilities out of reach of any military strike. "The Iranian leader wants to reach the zone of immunity with a large and well-defended number of nuclear facilities," he said. "He thinks the United States will have trouble in attacking in the future if he achieves these things." Israel and much of the West suspects Iran is using its civil nuclear program as a front for developing a weapons capability, a charge Tehran denies.
Israel, the Middle East's sole if undeclared nuclear power, has refused to rule out a pre-emptive military strike on Iranian installations if it becomes the only way to prevent the Islamic Republic from going nuclear.
Any military confrontation would become much more complex if Iran managed to build a weapons capability, he said. "Dealing with Iran militarily today is complex, but any attempt to deal with it in the future, especially when it becomes nuclear, will be much more difficult," he said. Barak also used the occasion to express his appreciation for new US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel whom he met in Washington last week.
"I found a person who supports Israel's security," he said of Hagel, whose nomination to the top Pentagon job caused concern in Israel where some accused him of taking a hard line on the Jewish state.
Barak said such fears were unfounded, saying there was "an exaggeration" of the criticism heard about him in Israel. Iran's nuclear ambitions will be one of the key issues up for discussion in Jerusalem next week when US President Barack Obama makes his first visit to Israel since being elected president in 2008.

Israel army chief: Syria "terrorist" groups getting stronger
AFP/Israel's military chief Benny Gantz said on Monday that "terrorist" groups fighting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad alongside other insurgents were becoming stronger.
"The situation in Syria has become exceptionally dangerous. The terrorist organizations are becoming stronger on the ground. Now they are fighting against Assad but in the future they could turn against us," Gantz said.
The Israeli chief of staff, who was addressing an annual security conference, warned that the Syrian army's "very important" arsenal "could fall into the hands of these terrorist organizations."
Several radical Islamist groups have joined the ranks of the nearly two-year Syrian rebellion against Assad's regime, Al-Nusra Front being the most prominent. Completely unknown before the uprising began, it has been a rebel standard-bearer since mid-2012 when it became the spearhead of the insurgency ahead of the Free Syrian Army.
FSA fighters, composed mainly of army deserters, have told AFP that despite being fewer in number, the Al-Nusra jihadists have better logistic and economic backing and receive financing "from abroad."

Ain al-Hilweh Islamists threaten Hezbollah
Now Lebanon/ An Islamist group in the Palestinian Ain al-Hilweh refugee camp in South Lebanon’s Sidon issued a statement warning Hezbollah the group would strike the Shiite party if any Sunni Muslim figure, including Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir, was harmed.“If any Sunni Muslim [is violated], especially in Sidon, then we will announce a war against everyone associated with Hezbollah in areas where the party is present,” Al-Markaziya news agency quoted the “Islamists and Free Youths of Ain a-Hilweh” as saying. “No one will stop us from targeting any of the sites,” the statement added. The Sunni group also said: “We represent ourselves and if anyone thinks that Palestinian or Islamic leaders will affect [our decision], they are delusional.” Meanwhile, a Palestinian resident of the Ain al-Hilweh camp told the news agency that “the statement aims at creating strife between the camp and its surrounding regions.”“The statement was issued 24 hours after a Hezbollah delegation had visited the Ain al-Hilweh camp and met with Palestinian National Security leaders,” the man also stated. Assir has stirred controversy in Sidon with his anti-Hezbollah language and accusations that fighters from the party are residing in apartments near his Bilal bin Rabah Mosque in Sidon’s Abra area. The leader of the Shiite party, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, warned Assir against taking any inciting action in a February speech.

Fatah al-Islam official shot in Ain al-Helweh gunfire exchange
Now Lebanon/Fatah al-Islam official Bilal Badr and at least three others were injured when an unknown assailant opened fire at the radical Islamist official in Sidon’s Ain al-Hilweh camp. The National News Agency reported that tension arose in the Palestinian refugee camp following the incident. The report added that a Palestinian committee conducted a series of phone calls to handle the situation and restore calm in the camp. The incident came after an Islamist group in South Lebanon’s Sidon Ain al-Helweh camp issued a statement warning Hezbollah the group would strike the Shiite party if any Sunni Muslim figure, including Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir, was harmed. Assir has stirred controversy in Sidon with his anti-Hezbollah language and accusations that fighters from the party are residing in apartments near his Bilal bin Rabah Mosque in Sidon’s Abra area. The leader of the Shiite party, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, warned Assir against taking any inciting action in a February speech

The Lebanese Forces bloc holds government responsible for institutional paralysis
Now Lebanon/The Lebanese Forces bloc held the government fully responsible for the institutional paralysis caused by the Syndicate Coordination Committee’s ongoing strike.“The government is fully responsible for the institutional paralysis and the economic recession Lebanon is witnessing due to the government’s policy of lies and ambiguousness,” the LF said on Monday following its periodical meeting.
The Lebanese cabinet is scheduled to discuss the thorny issue of how to fund the ranks and salaries issue on March 21 after President Michel Suleiman returns from a trip in Africa. Meanwhile, earlier on Monday, the Syndicate Coordination Committee chief Hanna Gharib called for a large demonstration on March 21 to coincide with the cabinet session set to tackle the issue of public-sector wage increases.
Lebanese school teachers and government employees are engaged in an ongoing open strike that began on February 19 and have been participating in general protests across the country demanding the government speed up its approval of salary raises. In early September 2012, the Lebanese cabinet approved a new ranks and salaries system. However, a debate is ongoing regarding the requisite funds to cover the wage increase for public employees.
The opposition bloc also tackled the issue of “Hezbollah’s growing military involvement in Syria which will lead to implicating Lebanon in the Syrian crisis.”The LF called on “members of the government to take an official stance regarding Hezbollah’s [involvement] in Syria; otherwise, they should resign.” Reports have recently emerged of Hezbollah’s involvement in fighting alongside the Syrian regime and rebels threatening to shell the Shiite group’s posts in Lebanon. In February, Free Syrian Army chief of staff General Selim Idriss said that the rebel army is poised to launch a military campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon after a top commander last Wednesday formally confirmed a 48-hour ultimatum for the Shiite group to stop “firing” on rebel positions in the Homs province. Hezbollah has systematically denied sending fighters into Syria, though its leader Hassan Nasrallah acknowledged in October 2012 that party members had fought Syrian rebels but said they were acting as individuals and not under the group's direction. Lebanon is sharply divided over the Syrian conflict, with the Sunni-led March 14 movement supporting the revolt against President Bashar al-Assad and the Shiite group Hezbollah and its allies backing the regime.

US envoys discuss Lebanon offshore gas reserves
Now Lebanon/ Two top US envoys visited Lebanese leaders on Monday in Beirut to discuss energy issues, according to a statement issued by the US Embassy in Lebanon. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Diplomacy Amos Hochstein and Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Lawrence Silverman “expressed their support for the Lebanese government’s efforts to implement fair and transparent regulations for Lebanon’s energy sector, and discussed Lebanon’s maritime exclusive economic zone.” “They had meetings with President Michel Sleiman, Speaker Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Najib Mikati, and Minister of Energy and Water Gebran Bassil,” the statement added. In 2011, Israel's cabinet approved a map of the Jewish state's proposed maritime boundaries with Lebanon following an agreement the year before with the internationally recognized Cyprus Republic for the delimitation of their maritime economic zones in the Mediterranean. Lebanon has since contested the border. In August the year before, the Lebanese Parliament passed an oil exploration bill, which calls for the establishment of a treasury and a committee to oversee exploration and drilling off the coast of Lebanon. The US embassy also said that the envoys “welcomed the efforts of Lebanese leaders to reach consensus and uphold Lebanon’s democratic and constitutional principles and hold parliamentary elections on time.” March 8 MPs have slammed the US ambassador for allegedly pressuring the country’s president and premier into signing an electoral decree calling for June parliamentary elections. President Michel Suleiman and Miqati signed off on a decree last week to hold the elections on June 9, a move that would have the elections held according to the current 1960 law if the country’s political parties fail to reach a consensus on a new electoral law. The move sparked angry responses from the March 8 coalition, which rejects the 1960 law and has supported the Orthodox draft proposal that calls for sectarian voting along proportional lines.

Jumblatt says providing wage increase funding “very important”
Now Lebanon/Lebanon’s Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblatt said on Monday that it is “very important” to provide the funding for the ranks and salaries system.
“In spite of the different public sectors’ rightful demands, the random approval of the ranks and salaries system might have negative repercussions on several levels,” Jumblatt wrote in his weekly column to Al-Anbaa website.
The Lebanese cabinet is scheduled to discuss the thorny issue of how to fund the ranks and salaries system on March 21 after President Michel Suleiman returns from a trip in Africa. Meanwhile, earlier on Monday, the Syndicate Coordination Committee chief Hanna Gharib called for a large demonstration on March 21 to coincide with the cabinet session set to tackle the issue of public-sector wage increases.
Lebanese school teachers and government employees are engaged in an ongoing open strike that began on February 19 and has seen general protests across the country demanding the government speed up its approval of salary raises. In early September 2012, the Lebanese cabinet approved a new ranks and salaries system. However, a debate is ongoing regarding the requisite funds to cover the wage increase for public employees.
Elsewhere, Jumblatt stressed that “the PSP will seek to reach a consensual electoral law proposal before the end of April that combine the majoritarian and proportional laws to prevent postponing the parliamentary elections.”
“The PSP notes its complete and absolute refusal of some suggestions of forming a founding committee [to amend the country’s constitution] because it violates the Taif Accord,” the PSP leader added.
Lebanese Premier Najib Miqati and President Michel Suleiman signed off on a decree to hold the elections on June 9 last week, a move that would have the elections held according to the current 1960 law if the country’s political parties fail to reach a consensus on a new electoral law. March 8’s Change and Reform bloc party has called for the Orthodox law—which the Lebanese Forces and Kataeb backed—to be brought up for a vote in a general session of the parliament, but Speaker Nabih Berri has said that he would not convene the legislature until consensus can be reached on a law. Sources told NOW last week that the mixed electoral law that the Future Movement and PSP have reached consensus on is based on majoritarian voting in 26 electoral districts and proportional voting in 9 other constituencies.

Kataeb Party sounds Syrian refugee warning
Now Lebanon/ Lebanon’s Kataeb Party warned of the repercussions of the Lebanese-Syrian border violations in addition to the increasing number of Syrian refugees in Lebanon. “Military and security agencies must address this situation which is likely to cause dangerous complications on the national, political, and security level,” Kataeb said in a statement issued following the opposition party’s periodical meeting. The Kataeb also said that this situation calls for a series of measures, “the least of which is controlling the borders and having accurate statistics of the people coming into Lebanon and their locations and calling for an international conference to be held in Beirut which results in aiding the Lebanese state to address [this issue].” Lebanon has been facing difficulties dealing with the increasingly high number of refugees fleeing Syria’s violent uprising against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad, which has killed more than 70,000 people and displaced more than 325,000 according to the UNHCR since its outbreak in March 2011. The opposition party also said that “there are a number of employees at the Energy Ministry who have complained about arbitrary measures taken against them solely because they belong to the March 14 coalition.” Therefore, the Kataeb Party “demands the government to tackle this grave violation of the simplest rules of citizenship and equality.” Energy Minister Gebran Bassil is affiliated with the March 8 coalition’s Free Patriotic Movement, a rival of the March 14 forces, to which the Kataeb belongs.

Suleiman “very worried” about Lebanon situation
Now Lebanon/Lebanon’s president on Monday warned that he was “very worried” about the repercussions of the Syrian war on his country, adding that Lebanon cannot continue to bear hosting one-million refugees.
"I am very worried about the situation. We are working to prevent the explosion. Nobody has any excuse to avoid their responsibilities,” Michel Suleiman told Reuters in an interview.
“When there is a fire next to your house, you have to assume that it will spread and you have to try to stop it from reaching you,” he added. The president also said that “those who benefit from the existing situation have no right to subject the country to a problem,” without elaborating on which Lebanese parties he was criticizing. Suleiman added that there are one-million Syrian refugees in Lebanon, saying “those numbers are more than the capacity of any country to bear.” “It’s not just a matter of material help and relief - the geographic and demographic capacity is saturated and the problems resulting from this massive number affects us socially, economically and on security." Lebanon’s president called for “an international conference to find ways for other countries to absorb the refugees,” Reuters added. "The world should think about how to alleviate this burden from Lebanon.... For humanitarian reasons we cannot turn back any refugee who is hungry, wounded, frightened or persecuted.” He also offered his opinion on how to resolve the Syrian ciris, saying, “Europe, Russia, the United States and major powers should agree on a solution and should impose it on Arabs and on the Syrians.” The Syrian crisis has split the Lebanese political scene between pro-Syrian regime parties affiliated with the March 8 alliance and parties associated with the March 14 coalition who are backing the rebels. The civil war has also compelled a significant number of Syrian nationals to seek refuge in neighboring countries, with Lebanon hosting over 325,000 refugees, according to the UNHCR’s latest report. This huge wave of exodus has caused the country a great deal of social and humanitarian problems, as Lebanon is constantly seeking aid from the international community.
Meanwhile, the repercussions of the Syrian conflict on Lebanon have recently escalated into deadly clashes along the northern and eastern border the country shares with the war-stricken state.

Change and Reform bloc MP Naji Gharios deputy unsurprised no candidates registering for elections
Now Lebanon/Change and Reform bloc MP Naji Gharios on Monday said that he was not surprised that no candidates have registered to run in the upcoming parliamentary elections so far.
“Every party in Lebanon has announced their rejection of the 1960 electoral law, [so] who would announce their candidacy for office [under the law]?” he told Akhbar al-Yawm news agency.
“As for us, we are not enthusiastic about [registering] our candidacies under the auspices of the law, [since] we will give the law legitimacy through our candidacies,” the FPM deputy said.
His comments come in response to media reports Monday that no one has registered their candidacy for the upcoming elections after the Interior Ministry started the registration process.
Suleiman and Miqati last week signed off on a decree to hold the elections on June 9, a move that would have the elections held according to the current 1960 law if the country’s political parties fail to reach a consensus on a new electoral law. The move sparked angry responses from the March 8 coalition, which rejects the 1960 law and has supported the Orthodox draft proposal that calls for sectarian voting along proportional lines.
Gharios also addressed reports that the Progressive Socialist Party and Future Movement are working toward a mixed-electoral law proposal, saying the two parties would “only propose an [electoral] formula that benefits” their interests. Sources told NOW last week that the mixed electoral law that the Future Movement and PSP have reached consensus on is based on majoritarian voting in 26 electoral districts and proportional voting in 9 other constituencies.

Opposition MP: Future, PSP in final phase of electoral talks
Now Lebanon/Future bloc MP Samir al-Jisr said that the electoral proposal his party is developing with the Progressive Socialist Party is close to being officially presented to the cabinet. “In the past 78 hours, the Future Movement and the PSP have reached the final [stage] of drafting a new electoral draft amid discussions with [our] allies,” Jisr told Voice of Lebanon (100.5) radio on Monday. The opposition lawmaker added that his party is against any postponement of the elections and that his bloc is working to prevent such a delay. Earlier on Monday, Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblatt said that talks are underway between multiple Lebanese parties on a mixed electoral law that would be acceptable to the Future Movement and its March 8 foes the Amal Movement and Hezbollah. This mixed electoral law is based on majoritarian voting in 26 districts and proportional voting in 9 other constituencies, according to sources. Another Future MP, Jamal al-Jarrah, commended the “earnest” effort being put into finding a new electoral draft to replace the current 1960 law.
“We hope that the other party would meet us half way and would not cling to… the Orthodox law because some Lebanese [politicians] refuse it,” Jarrah told Voice of Lebanon (93.3) radio on Monday.
He also added that “no one” wants to hold the parliamentary elections according to the 1960 law. Meanwhile, Future bloc MP Ammar Houri slammed the Shiite party Hezbollah by claiming that it has the ability to obstruct the voting process. “Hezbollah has the security veto [capable of] disrupting the upcoming parliamentary elections,” Houri said in an interview on Future television on Monday.
Last week, Premier Najib Miqati and President Michel Suleiman signed off on a decree to hold the elections on June 9, a move that would have the elections held according to the current 1960 law if the country’s political parties fail to reach a consensus on a new electoral draft. March 8’s Change and Reform bloc party has called for the Orthodox law to be brought up for a vote in a general session of the parliament, but Speaker Nabih Berri has said that he would not convene the legislature until consensus can be reached on a law. The Orthodox draft, which calls for proportional voting along sectarian lines, has been endorsed by the country’s four major Christian parties. However, it was met with severe opposition from March 14’s Future Movement, the PSP, and independent Christian MPs, as well as the prime minister and president.

MP Houri accuses Hezbollah of trying to delay elections
March 10, 2013
Future bloc MP Ammar Houri accused Hezbollah of trying to postpone the parliamentary elections in an effort to keep the present cabinet until the conflict in neighboring Syria ends .“ Hezbollah does not want to hold the elections. Wants to keep the current cabinet in power in order to wait until the Syrian [conflict concludes,” Houri told Voice of Lebanon radio on Sunday. Houri’s comments follows talks on the possibility of delaying the parliamentary elections after the country’s political parties failed to reach a consensus on a new electoral draft for the 2013 elections that would replace the 1960 law which is currently on the books.
In February, Lebanon’s joint parliamentary commissions approved the Orthodox law that calls for proportional representation and voting along sectarian lines. The law is supported by the country’s major Christian parties and top March 8 parties but is rejected by the Future Movement and Progressive Socialist Party as well as PM Nagib Mikati and president Michel Suleiman. The Future Movement and the PSP have jointly been developing a a hybrid electoral draft law that would serve as an alternative to the 1960 law. PSP leader MP Walid Jumblatt will present the draft to Speaker Nabih Berri ,who in turn, will present it to his ally Hezbollah, according to Houri. The hybrid draft is based on majoritarian voting system in 26 electoral districts and proportional representation voting system in 9 other constituencies, according to a report by Now.
Decree

President Suleiman and Prime Minister Mikati signed a decree last Monday calling for elections to be held in June based on the 1960 law if no consensus is reached on a new law. The PM had said in a televised interview last week that the cabinet did not study the Orthodox law and would not discuss it, adding that “it will not be adopted because it is unconstitutional.”
Suleiman also has said he would challenge the Orthodox plan before the Constitutional Council if it is approved by parliament, while Mikati stressed that the proposal will not pass, revealing that he has “ways to block it.”The cabinet approval in September 2012 a draft law based on proportionality and 13 electoral districts, but speaker Nabih Berri pronounced it in Early March as “dead” and “orphan” and said that even PM Mikati is not defending it anymore.The winner take all 1960 electoral law which calls for 26 electoral districts is favored by MP Walid Jumblatt and the Future Movement whic is headed by former PM Saad Hariri. Hariri and other March 14 leaders are opposed to proportional representation as long as Hezbollah remains armed.An Nahar quoted last Monday parliamentary sources as saying that March 19 is the deadline to propose a new electoral draft-law or else other options will be on the table, including the technical postponement of the polls.

Egyptian Christian dies in Libyan detention
By By AYA BATRAWY, Associated Press /CAIRO (AP) — An Egyptian Foreign Ministry official says a man suspected of trying to spread Christianity in Libya has died in prison there.The diplomat says Ezzat Atallah, who suffered from diabetes and heart ailments, likely died of natural causes. He spoke anonymously Sunday in line with regulations.Atallah was among five Evangelical Christian Egyptians detained in Libya for allegedly proselytizing in the predominantly Muslim nation.Last week, Egypt's Foreign Ministry intervened to win release from Libya of 55 Egyptians who were also suspected of proselytizing. Thirty-five of them were deported for illegally entering the country, while 20 were cleared to stay in Libya.Also, four foreigners under investigation for alleged espionage and proselytizing remain in a Libyan prison. They are a Swedish-American, a South Korean, a South African and an Egyptian. Copyright © 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Christian Homes Torched by Muslim Mob over Blasphemy in Pakistan
3/11/2013 Washington D.C. (International Christian Concern) - International Christian Concern (ICC) has learned that more than 100 Christian homes were torched on Saturday by an enraged Muslim mob, following reports that a Christian man had blasphemed Islam in Lahore, eastern Pakistan. Thousands of Christians demonstrated throughout the country the next day demanding justice and criticizing the police for failing to protect them.
A mob of some 3,000 Muslims set fire to approximately 178 Christian homes and two churches in the Joseph Colony of Lahore on March 9 following accusations that Sawan Masih, a Christian sanitation worker, had made derogatory remarks about the Muslim prophet Muhammad. Masih had allegedly made the blasphemous comments on Wednesday during a dispute on religious issues with Shahid Imran, a Muslim, while the men "were drunk," said local resident Altaf Masih. The violence began after Friday prayers when about 100 Muslims pelted Masih's house with stones and beat his elderly father, according to ICC sources. After the mob had gathered, Masih was taken into police custody and charged with blasphemy under Section 295-C of Pakistan's Penal Code. Hundreds of Christians fled the area later that night in fear for their safety. On Saturday, thousands of Muslims returned to the area and attacked Christian-owned houses, shops, and two churches. No Christians were reportedly injured, but their possessions were stolen or destroyed during the raid.
"[Christians] don't want to return to their burnt houses as they are petrified," Gulzar Bibi, a local Christian resident, told The Express Tribune. "I have nothing left to me apart from these clothes. Nothing is left behind in these charred houses for me." Thousands of Christians in Lahore, Karachi, and Islamabad protested the violence on Sunday, accusing the police of failing to protect the Christians of Joseph Colony while also condemning the country's blasphemy laws. Though the Pakistani government claims it instituted blasphemy laws to seek religious harmony through uniformity, in practice blasphemy laws provide cover for personal vendettas against religious minorities. Approximately 1,400 blasphemy cases have been registered since the law was first enacted in 1986, according to Human Rights Watch. There are at least 16 people currently on death row, including several Christians, in Pakistan for blasphemy, and 20 serving life sentences. If convicted, Masih could be given the death sentence.

Hundreds of UN Syrian Golan UN observers scramble to safety in Israel
DEBKAfile Special Report March 11, 2013/
The flight of hundreds of UN Disengagement and Observers Force (UNDOF) soldiers - Indian, Austrian and Filipino - in trucks and APCs from the Syrian side of Golan into Israel was in full swing early Monday, March 11. debkafile quotes them as telling Israeli officers manning the Israeli side of the enclave that their commanders urged them to get out when they could because “We can no longer vouch for your safety.”
Many more UN troops are expected to make their way during the day to refuge in IDF camps across the border. Their officers, they said, had already placed their belongings aboard waiting vehicles ready to move across as soon as they received permission from their governments in Vienna, New Delhi and Manila or the UN Secretariat in New York.
Our military sources report that this mass exit signals the breakup of the 1,000-strong UNDOF which for 39 years manned the 8 sq. km separation zone between Syria and Israel. It was set up in 1974 to end the war of attrition fought in the sequel to the Yom Kippur War between the IDF and Cuban armored brigades flown in from Angola by the Soviet Union to support the Syrian army.
The UN force’s collapse began with the Croatian government’s recall of its 100 troops last week.
As the peacemakers flee, Russia is today hardly likely to interfere with who gets to control the Golan separation zone which was split between Syria and Israel.
debkafile reports three potential candidates are eying the sliver of land for different reasons:

1. The Martyrs of Yarmuk Islamist militia force of the Syrian rebel movement, which staked its claim last week by kidnapping 21 blue-and-white helmeted Filipino observers on the Golan and later releasing them in Jordan.
It is feared in Washington, Jerusalem and Amman, that Al Qaeda-associated forces will waste no time in overrunning the highly strategic patch of Golan borderland, armed with chemical weapons and even Scud D missiles captured from Syrian army bases. They may even be plotting an attack during President Barack Obama’s visits to Jerusalem and Amman, starting March 20.
debkafile’s military sources report that in sync with the UN observers’ escape, Israeli military reinforcements are massing on the Golan Syrian border.
2. US, Jordan and/or Israel may step in to keep the Islamists out, using either large special forces units for ground raids or a swarm of armed drones.
3. Hizballah militia units were spotted Sunday night on the move from south Lebanon toward the Lebanese-Syrian border areas abutting on the Golan separation zone.

Has America Changed its Stance?
Written by : Michel Kilo/Asharq Alawsat
Various news reports have been leaked over the past few weeks about new weapons reaching the Free Syrian Army (FSA). As has already been said, these are not going to fully bridge the gap between the Assad regime’s forces and those fighting against them, but they can narrow the gap and bring about a change in certain areas where the regime suffers from structural weaknesses, particularly in the north and northeast of the country, a highly significant region from humanitarian and economic perspectives. These weapons may curb the Assad army’s push to settle the situation in Homs, where “the mother of all battles” is taking place. The city holds strategic importance for Syria’s entire political, military, and humanitarian situation, and could be the key to whether the country remains a united state or faces division in the future.
Whether these news reports are correct or exaggerated, they are an important indication of the US stance towards the complex Syrian crisis, which in the past has been based on two main principles: Firstly, no weapons should be provided to the Syrian resistance and there should be no direct military interference. Secondly, the emergence of fundamentalist rule in Syria cannot be tolerated. This would have impact on Israel and could potentially draw it into the violent Syrian crisis, leading to an armed confrontation with powerful, organized, radical Islamist groups. Were these groups then to gain the upper hand in the conflict, this would be a violation of an international red line, particularly if they were in possession of weapons of mass destruction.
It seems that the recent provision of weapons to the Syrian opposition indicates either a change in the US equation, with its two aforementioned principles, or strong pressure being applied by Arab and regional parties. If the US itself had agreed to send the weapons, this would mean that there had been a change in its policy, and that it had abandoned its first principle. However, if the US did not agree to send the weapons, this would indicate that its influence over relations between some Arab countries and Syria has weakened or collapsed. Has Washington’s control over the conflict weakened, or has it changed its stance and begun to warm to the idea sending weapons to Syria? Or, is the US encouraging certain countries to become more involved in the military conflict taking place on Syrian soil, and to supply the opposition fighters there with weapons to make a qualitative change in the battle, in an effort to confront either the regime or those parties affiliated with anti-West jihadi groups?
It has been hinted, and even openly stated, that weapons have been sent to Syria to cut certain groups down to size, and enable other opposition forces to restore the initiative in the battlefield. The role of extremist opposition groups has become more prominent in the past few months as they have emerged as extremely active and influential parties, whose presence in most areas and battles eclipses that of the FSA. They have seized airports and large military bases and enjoy broad popularity. Now we even hear clerics in Friday sermons saying, “We do not recognize the legitimacy and courage of any fighters except the Jabhat Al-Nusra, and we do not seek the protection of others.”
Does this potential change in the US stance come in accordance with the desire of the Gulf states to prevent radical Islamists from seizing power in Damascus, and also to weaken the chances of moderate Islamists coming to power after the overthrow of Assad and his entourage? Or has the opposition armament taken place in light of a decision made by the Gulf states without consulting the Americans—a call to arm the revolution whether the US likes it or not—especially as Syrian developments are becoming more and more an issue of national security for the Gulf? Or did the Gulf states simply observe the jihadi activities taking place in Syria, and assume that America’s preoccupation with this phenomenon would prevent Washington from continuing with its original stance, and hence they took the step to arm the opposition while confident that Washington’s reaction would be moderate or even accepting?
Whatever the answer, I think that what happened has taken place within the framework of these calculations, and that the US is no longer considering changing its policy, but has actually done so. Consider the rumored shipment of weapons from Croatia; a country with positive relations with both the US and Germany, and also what is being said about the transfer of these weapons through Turkey, and Washington’s encouragement for opposition groups that are not affiliated with fundamentalist factions. There is also the talk about attempts to ensure the safe use of this relatively advanced weaponry, and plans to supervise and restructure the FSA so that its leadership and command hierarchy is purely military. This would create a stronger distinction between civilian and military opposition, enabling the latter to gain control of the ground, while the former can address worrying developments such as the Islamists’ coming to power, Assad’s weapons falling into the wrong hands, sectarian infighting, and regional conflicts. There are many military and political dimensions that cannot be ignored in any future development plan.
It has become clear in recent weeks that a change in the balance of power would have to precede any form of negotiation with the Assad regime. This change has now been demonstrated in the arming of the opposition, enabling it to deter the regime’s army, break its siege of Homs, and expedite its collapse in and around Damascus. Are we about to witness key developments both in terms of US policy and the Syrian arena? I believe there is some truth to this. The eventual objective is to force the regime to abandon Assad, and for influential members of the regime to declare their readiness to negotiate a democratic transition that would take place in a relatively secure climate. What would happen if the regime continues to remain united and insists on escalating the conflict? I think that we would then see weapons flow in the quantity necessary for opposition fighters to storm the presidential palace in the near future.

The Brotherhood’s Dilemma in Ruling Egypt
Written by : Dr. Hamad Al-Majid
Asharq Alawsat/It is not too early to say now, after the recent succession of unfortunate events, that President Mursi and the Muslim Brotherhood are facing a real dilemma. The elections have been postponed by order of the judiciary, while civil disobedience continues in Port Said, as private property and government offices are burned down. Clashes and skirmishes have also spread to other cities in the Delta—Mansoura and Mahalla—and more dangerous than all this, police factions have rebelled and begun to join the protests. This worsening situation is exacerbated by the failed and fragmented Egyptian opposition, united only by their opposition to the president. A segment of this opposition is clearly dishonest; aiming to thwart the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood even if they ignite the whole country in doing so, supported by an intoxicated media force that delivers more painful blows to an already severely strained situation, laughing sardonically at the confusion of the president and his fragile government.
This is a real dilemma, because with regards to the security deterioration, the president is facing two bitter solutions: Firstly, he could adopt a strict and firm approach to security by using live ammunition against the thugs and vandals who are attacking public and private property, some of whom carry weapons. This is the solution advocated by some supporters of the president and his Islamist allies, and this is also the demand of a significant portion of the people who are growing tired at the continuing unrest and protests that have contributed to the deterioration of the economic situation, the decline in currency, and rising prices.
This solution involves significant risk because using force will pour more fuel on the already burning fire, potentially accelerating the country’s downfall into a spiral of violence and counter attacks. If a security officer shot dead one thug on the street, would the deceased turn into a martyr or national hero? Would we hear people ask “what crime did he commit that he deserved to die?” And then, what if the death toll turned into the dozens and hundreds? The second solution, and this is what has so far been adopted by the president and his advisory team, is as follows: To exercise the highest degree of restraint towards violence and attacks on private and public property, and not to use arms against the perpetrators of these offences. This solution, although it appears humane and wise, also has serious side effects. It means more insecurity, a decline in the prestige of the ruler, and the further deterioration of the economic situation. If the people are not fed when they are hungry, and not protected when they are scared, then they will pay little attention to a ruler’s kindness, humanity, and humility, even if he lives in a modest rented apartment. Certainly, Egypt is a complex state with remnants and collaborators who are actively seeking to undermine the president and his group, and distort the role they are playing in what is happening. This fact however does not diminish the other side of the coin, namely that those who are objecting, protesting, and demonstrating are not all remnants or conspirators. The opposition includes a segment that does not have an affiliation and voted for Mursi not out of appreciation for him but out of hatred for Shafiq. This particular segment, if it does not find the president doing what he was elected for, will quickly shift into an opposition and this is what is happening now. This explains the declining popularity of the president, because of dissatisfaction towards his style of governance. The president and the Brotherhood have no choice but to accommodate various forces and engage with them in governance, regardless of the degree of their animosity towards them. It is not true that these are the demands of the National Salvation Front alone, even some Salafis and independents—who tipped the balance in Mursi’s victory over Shafiq—have now begun to demand a real and honest expansion in government participation, to pull the country out of its current impasse. The participation of the opposition groups in power will not only clip their sharp claws, it will mean that everyone plays a part in the government’s success or failure, rather than one faction alone.

The assassination of Lebanese security chief brigadier general Wissam Hassan on October 19 has rekindled fears of renewed confessional strife in Lebanon. The anti-Assad opposition quickly blamed the Syrian regime for eliminating one of its foremost Beirut opponents while enraged demonstrators took to the streets to demand the resignation of prime minister Najib Miqati.[1]
Yet while the persistence and intensification of the Syrian civil war has undoubtedly amplified Lebanese instability and placed the country's fate on the edge, the assassination is unlikely to "drag Lebanon into the fray."[2] Western countries, Saudi Arabia, and Iran are not interested in destabilizing Lebanon, and Syria has lost its ability to manipulate its neighbor's internal affairs.
The tables have turned, and it is Syria's time to suffer. Despite their deep ideological divisions, the Lebanese appear to have come of age and learned to prevent their differences from reaching the point of open confrontation.
Economic Costs for Lebanon
While the Lebanese government stays officially neutral in the current Syrian civil war, its various confessional groups surreptitiously seek to support one side or another in the fighting. The Sierra Leone-registered Lutfallah II was detained by the Lebanese navy for illegally transporting arms and ammunition, seen here, to Syrian rebels.
The Syrian conflict has thus far caused greater economic difficulties than political ones for Lebanon, especially in the investment, banking, tourist, and agricultural sectors. Fearing a Syrian spillover, some Persian Gulf entrepreneurs are refraining from investing in the Lebanese market, which depends on these investments to plug its current account deficit estimated at $5.6 billion (or 14.4 percent of the country's gross domestic product).[3]
According to economist Muhammad Shamseddine, Lebanon has become "Syria's backyard in circumventing Western trade and banking sanctions against it."[4] Riad Salame, governor of the Central Bank of Lebanon, acknowledged the adverse impact of the situation in Syria on Lebanese banks, which are by far the country's most important economic sector. He reports that seven Lebanese banks with branches in Syria "have taken provisions based on stress tests of about $380 million in anticipation of loans that could not be repaid."[5]
Realistically, Beirut cannot completely implement European and U.S. sanctions on Syria since Damascus can retaliate and choke off Lebanon's substantial exports to the Persian Gulf by closing its land borders. In addition, Syria has strong allies in Lebanon who can easily ignore cabinet decisions to comply with the sanctions.
The crisis in Syria and the state of tension in Lebanon have had a negative effect on the latter's tourist sector. Visitors from the Persian Gulf states and Jordan have stopped coming to Lebanon via Syria. A further crippling blow to tourism occurred when angry rioters in the predominantly Shiite suburbs of Beirut threatened to kidnap gulf tourists in response to the abduction of a Lebanese Shiite in Damascus by the Free Syrian Army (FSA). The Gulf Cooperation Council reacted by ordering their subjects to refrain from travelling to Lebanon, causing the loss of seven billion dollars in expected revenues.[6]
The Politics of Dissociation
The Assad regime also sought to link the fate of Lebanon to the vicissitudes of the Syrian crisis so as to prevent its transformation into an anti-Syrian hotbed. Damascus ruled out the possibility that Saad Hariri would return to the premiership, insisting instead on Miqati's appointment to that post in June 2011. The Syrian uprising was just beginning at that time, and the Assad regime still held important political assets in Lebanon. But as soon as it became clear that the Syrian uprising was not going to end soon, Miqati opted for officially dissociating Lebanon from the crisis, appealing for Arab countries' help in shoring up Beirut against the untoward developments next door.[7]
However, the official position of the Lebanese government does not usually mean much in view of its inherent weakness vis-à-vis the disproportionate strength of the major sects. Groups such as the Iranian-created and backed Hezbollah, former Sunni prime minister Saad Hariri's Saudi-patronized Future Trend, the anti-Syrian Christian nationalist Lebanese Forces, the Progressive Socialist Party (PSP) of maverick Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, and the pragmatic and secularizing Shiite Amal Movement have actually transformed Lebanon into a major regional political actor in relation to this crisis, an unprecedented development that has turned the relationship between the two countries upside down. The Syrian patron for nearly forty years has suddenly splintered into warring factions working with the former Lebanese clients on an equal footing.
Much to the chagrin of the pro-Assad Lebanese army command, Lebanese Sunnis have provided a major base of support for the FSA. A Lebanese army bulletin cautioned against efforts to infiltrate its ranks and implicate it in regional issues.[8] This stern warning by army commander Jean Qahwaji came after intelligence agents arrested a Sunni officer and several civilian accomplices affiliated with Hariri's Future Trend on grounds of stealing weapons from an army depot and giving them to the FSA.[9] Rifaat Eid, secretary general of the historically Alawite-based Arab Democratic Party, accused the Future Trend of training and arming members of the FSA in Tripoli and blamed it for vandalizing Alawite property in the city.[10]
Eid's accusations were not isolated. The Syrian regime has, since the beginning of the uprising, regularly charged the Future Trend with arms smuggling. Syrian ambassador to Lebanon, Ali Abdulkarim, reiterated his country's frustration over the failure of the Miqati government to curtail the Future Trend's sponsorship and support of arms smuggling, which he said violated the prime minister's dissociation policy.[11] The Russian foreign ministry spokesman, Alexander Lukashevich, corroborated these charges and called upon the U.N. Security Council to put an end to arms smuggling from Lebanon to Syria. He referred to the Syria-bound ship, Lutfallah II, intercepted by the Lebanese navy in April 2012 en route to Tripoli and laden with arms for the rebels.[12]
Meanwhile, Lebanese armed forces chief Qahwaji has not responded to Syrian incursions and frequent shelling of Lebanese border villages while military intelligence operatives have abducted many anti-Assad Syrian activists and handed them over to the authorities in Damascus.[13] In response to its collusion with Syrian government forces, the Lebanese army has lost its legitimacy in the eyes of most Lebanese Sunnis who have ceased to consider it "an embodiment of the country's unity."[14] Although Hariri has consistently denied any involvement in arms smuggling to Syria, he never hid his desire to see the Assad regime fall. In fact, Future Trend spokespersons have repeatedly expressed their strong belief that Assad's exit from the political scene is unavoidable. Echoing a similar perspective by other leaders in the anti-Syrian March 14 coalition, Samir Jea'jea, leader of the Lebanese Forces Party has declared that it was "only a matter of time before the Syrian revolution triumphs." He has distanced himself from the pro-Assad position of Lebanese Maronite patriarch Bishara al-Ra'i and reminded coreligionists that "Assad had broken the back of Lebanese Christians."[15] Likewise, in an interview with a Saudi newspaper, Butrus Harb, a parliamentary deputy affiliated with the March 14 coalition, accused the Syrian regime of attempting to assassinate him in collusion with its local allies. He said the regime in Damascus "has launched a campaign of sabotaging Lebanon's peace."[16]
Hezbollah and Its Rivals
The Syrian uprising—which has inspired Lebanese Sunnis and partially militarized them—has placed Hezbollah in an awkward position. The succession of events in the region does not augur well for its future as Tehran's forward military division. Hezbollah has been actively involved in the fighting on the Assad regime's side since the beginning of the uprising but in a relatively subdued fashion.
In May 2012, a confrontation between Hezbollah and the FSA occurred over the abduction of Lebanese Shiite "pilgrims" near Aleppo, allegedly working on behalf of the Syrian regime. Then in August, a member of the Lebanese Shiite al-Miqdad clan was kidnapped and identified by the FSA as a Hezbollah sniper fighting on the side of Syrian government troops. The clan responded by announcing the formation of a military wing and launching a counter abduction campaign against Syrian laborers in Lebanon. While releasing two of the "pilgrims," the FSA demanded an apology from Hezbollah head Hassan Nasrallah as a precondition for releasing the rest.[17] Instead, Nasrallah threatened to declare war on the FSA. In October 2012, Hezbollah publicly announced for the first time the death of a number of its men during a "jihadist mission" in Syria.[18]
Despite its close affinity with the Assad regime and its occasional bellicosity, Hezbollah includes elements that are keen on preventing the war in Syria from spilling over into Lebanon. Damascus seems determined to spread chaos into Lebanon as a means of convincing the international community that other countries in the region are not impervious to the crisis. Former Hezbollah chief Subhi al-Tufaili pointed out that the Syrian regime made no secret of its expectation "that the entire region would go on fire unless the country's uprising is halted."[19] He criticized Nasrallah for taking the wrong side in the Syrian crisis: "The position of Hezbollah is subjecting Lebanese Shiites to retribution after the fall of the Syrian regime."[20]
Paul Salem of the Carnegie Middle East Center expressed concern that the demise of the Assad regime might render Hezbollah impotent and invite a crippling Israeli military operation against Lebanon.[21] According to the Kuwaiti paper Al-Anba, Hezbollah is going through an existential crisis because "its strength does not emanate from the vast array of weapons it possesses, but from the regional function it performs on behalf of Iran and the Syrian regime." The paper notes that Hezbollah is aware of its predicament, which simultaneously encourages Speaker of the House and rival Amal Movement leader Nabih Berri to "attempt to seize the limelight from his Shiite rival group."[22]
Hezbollah is not oblivious to the quandary in which it finds itself. Shortly after the Shiite kidnappings, angry demonstrations broke out in the southern Shiite suburbs of Beirut in protest over these events, disrupting normal operations of the nearby Beirut international airport.[23] Surprisingly, Hezbollah invited the Lebanese army to restore law and order in the area. Clearly embarrassed, Muhammad Fneish, a member in Hezbollah's parliamentary bloc, told the Future Trend's flagship media outlet that the party "is not responsible for the demonstrators' disturbance of the public peace, and invites the state to shoulder its responsibilities."[24]
While Hezbollah aims to give a helping hand to Assad's forces without reigniting Lebanon's civil war, its rivals find themselves playing similar games. In August 2012, a Lebanese military tribunal indicted Ali Mamluk, head of the Syrian National Security Bureau, and Michel Samaha, former Lebanese parliament member and cabinet minister, on grounds of conspiracy to set off explosive devices in Lebanon and trigger civil war.[25] Despite the damning evidence that implicated the Syrian government, Prime Minister Miqati's criticism was mild and did not refer to the Assad regime by name.[26] President Michel Suleiman then instructed the minister of foreign affairs, Hussein Mansour, to hand the Syrian ambassador a memorandum of protest. Mansour, a member of the pro-Syrian Shiite Amal Movement, refused and instead sent the ambassador an apparently innocuous memorandum. When asked by a reporter to justify his mild response, he said: "There are no hard feelings between our two sister countries."[27]
Nabih Berri, Amal's leader, has remained mostly quiet on the developments in Syria, neither praising the Syrian regime nor criticizing the opposition, delegating these tasks to second tier members of the movement. Berri seems to be betting on Assad's eventual departure from the scene and is thus seeking to secure for himself a leading role in Lebanese politics in the post-Assad period. This calculation appears to view Assad's exit as an opportunity to weaken the position of his Shiite rival, Hezbollah.
Similarly, Walid Jumblatt, who leads the predominantly Druze Progressive Socialist Party, did not deny that the Syrian crisis had created discord in Lebanon although he refused to call it "a Sunni vs. Shiite division."[28] He recognized the threat of the Syrian situation to Lebanese stability but expressed confidence that the rival factions were "managing their differences and keeping them civil."[29] Following the extradition of fourteen anti-regime, Syrian activists to Damascus, Jumblatt led a successful drive to discontinue this practice. His tough stand on the matter generated a heated debate in Lebanon and drove Western ambassadors to demand granting asylum and accommodation to Syrian activists and refugees. The U.S. ambassador in Lebanon, Maura Conelly, expressed her country's deep concern over the deportation of Syrian refugees "and demanded providing them with refuge, in keeping with Lebanon's humanitarian responsibilities."[30] Jumblatt continued to denounce Assad and implore the Druze in Syria to join the uprising but eschewed revolutionary change in Syrian politics in favor of Assad stepping down in a Yemeni-type exit akin to that of Ali Abdullah Saleh. He apparently prefers the introduction of an accommodationist political system in Syria, in which the political rights of its minority groups, including the Druze, would be safeguarded.
Conclusion
While the Assad regime continues to wield significant, if decreasing, political, security, and economic influence on its small and polarized neighbor, it is not likely that it can shape the course of events there. If anything, Syria's domestic troubles offer the Lebanese people a rare opportunity to work out their differences without outside manipulation and usher in a new era in national politics in which foreign powers do not continually play one ethnic group against another.
Washington appears committed to preventing the collapse of security in Lebanon as a result of the raging conflict in Syria. Ambassador Conelly reiterated the "U.S. commitment to a stable, sovereign, and independent Lebanon."[31] It is in this context that one can understand the sudden display of resolution and might by the Lebanese army in responding to security breaches in the southern suburbs and in Tripoli. The existing modus operandi is to respond to the Syrian crisis by officially observing neutrality without obstructing the country's two major political coalitions from supporting the faction of their choice across the border.[32]
In response to the Hassan assassination and attendant calls for Miqati's resignation, the French ambassador rushed to President Suleiman to emphasize the importance of allowing the government to "continue performing its duties."[33] His British counterpart, who also talked to the president right after the assassination, echoed the same position: "The best response is … through solidarity, unity, and resilience."[34] With the army swiftly containing the sporadic skirmishes in Beirut and Tripoli and President Suleiman urging Miqati to "stay on in the national interest,"[35] the predictions of a renewed Lebanese civil war seem largely premature.
***Hilal Khashan is a professor of political science at the American University of Beirut.
[1] See, for example, Max Fisher, "Why Wissam al-Hassan Matters for the Middle East," The Washington Post, Oct. 19, 2012; Mike Giglio, "Does the assassination of Wissam al-Hassan reopen a bloody chapter of Lebanon's past?" The Daily Beast, Oct. 20, 2012.
[2] Tess deBlanc-Knowles, "Syrian Conflict: Lebanon at Risk," Institute for National Security Studies, National Defense University, Washington, D.C., Mar. 20, 2012.
[3] Al-Arabiya News Channel (Dubai), July 25, 2012.
[4] "Riyah ar-Rabi al-Arabi: Lubnan wal Iraq yushakilan as-Suq al-Wahid lil iqtisad as-Suri," Iktissadiat, Aug. 26, 2012.
[5] The Daily Star (Beirut), July 12, 2012.
[6] An-Nahar (Beirut), June 20, 2012.
[7] Al-Jazeera TV (Doha), Dec. 10, 2010.
[8] "Orientation Bulletin," no. 1/2012, Lebanese Army, Mar. 9, 2012.
[9] Al-Akhbar (Beirut), Apr. 10, 2012.
[10] El-Nashra (Beirut), June 13, 2012.
[11] Tishrin (Damascus), Aug. 24, 2012.
[12] Al-Balad (Beirut), May 12, 2012.
[13] Now Lebanon (Beirut), Aug. 2, 2012.
[14] Ibrahim al-Amin, al-Akhbar, May 21, 2012.
[15] MTV (Beirut), Mar. 12, 2012.
[16] Okaz (Riyadh), July 18, 2012.
[17] Naharnet news website (Beirut), Aug. 26, 2012.
[18] Ibid., Oct. 2, 2012.
[19] Saidaonline (Sidon, Leb.), Aug. 22, 2012.
[20] Al-Watan (Doha), Sept. 30, 2012.
[21] "Taqyim Ttada'iyat al-Azma as-Suriyya 'ala Lubnan fi markaz Carnegie lil sharq al-awsat fi Beirut," Carnegie Middle East Center, Beirut, June 25, 2012.
[22] Al-Anba (Kuwait), Aug. 24, 2012.
[23] Al-Jazeera TV, May 23, 2012.
[24] Al-Mustaqbal (Beirut), Aug. 17, 2012.
[25] Ibid., Aug. 10, 2012.
[26] Levant News (Beirut), Aug. 13, 2012.
[27] An-Nahar (Beirut), July 26, 2012.
[28] Al-Rai (Kuwait City), June 3, 2012.
[29] Ibid.
[30] An-Nahar, Aug. 2, 2012.
[31] Embassy of the United States, Beirut, news release, Oct. 4, 2012.
[32] Ad-Diyar (Beirut), June 18, 2012.
[33] Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation, Oct. 20, 2012.
[34] Embassy of the United Kingdom, Beirut, news release, Oct. 20, 2012.
[35] BBC News, Oct. 21, 2012.