Pope: 'Courageous Decisions' Needed from Israel, Palestinians
Naharnet /Pope Francis called on Tuesday for Israel and the Palestinians to "resume negotiations" and "take courageous decisions", the Vatican said in a statement, after a meeting between the pontiff and Israeli President Shimon Peres. "A speedy resumption of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians is hoped for," it said. "With the courageous decisions and availability of both sides, as well as support from the international community, an agreement may be reached," it added. Such an agreement should "respect the legitimate aspirations of the two peoples, thus decisively contributing to the peace and stability of the region."
The meeting, the first between a leader from the Middle East and Francis, who was elected in March, came at a time of important developments in peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
Peres also invited Pope Francis on an official state visit to Israel. On Tuesday, Israel's lead peace negotiator Tzipi Livni praised as "important" a concession by the Arab League that Israel and the Palestinians could trade land in a bid to move the peace process forward. The development emerged out of talks in Washington between U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and an Arab League delegation to discuss the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative.
The proposal would see 22 Arab countries normalizing ties with Israel in return for a withdrawal from lands it occupied during the 1967 Six Day War.
During the meeting, Peres and Francis also expressed "worry for the conflict that plagues Syria" and hoped for a political solution to the crisis, the Vatican said.
Source/Agence France Presse.

British Minister from Beirut: Don't Send Your Sons to Fight and Die in Syria
Naharnet /British Minister for the Middle East Alistair Burt on Monday called on the Lebanese to refrain from sending fighters to war-torn Syria, reiterating “the importance of international community support to Lebanon's disassociation policy.” “As I discussed with Speaker (Nabih) Berri, President (Michel) Suleiman and the Army Commander (General Jean Qahwaji) today, I am pleased that we are, together, building Lebanon’s capacity to protect its sovereignty,” Burt said after talks with Berri in Ain al-Tineh. “At this challenging time, I say to Lebanon: ‘Don’t send your sons to fight and die in Syria.’ Getting sucked in to Syria’s conflict would be easy. Neutrality is the braver choice. Disassociation is the only policy that works for Lebanon,” Burt added. He called on all political parties to “engage urgently with PM-designate Tammam Salam to form a government and run the legislative election.” “Uncertainty in the region is no excuse for dodging the constitutional timeframe for elections. The technical work is done. Now it is time for all parties to put Lebanon first. I call on Lebanon’s politicians to agree an elections law to enable elections to take place within the constitutional timeline,” Burt said. “Burt later reinforced these messages with PM-Designate Tammam Salam. He also reiterated the UK’s readiness to support the transparent management of Lebanon’s oil and gas resources, noting the success of all six British companies in the oil and gas pre-qualification round,” said a press release issued by the British embassy in Lebanon.
Burt announced $400,000 of UK capacity building support to the Lebanese parliamentary elections.
In his meeting with Qahwaji, Burt discussed “Lebanese stability and welcomed the increased cooperation between the UK and the Lebanese Armed Forces to protect Lebanon's sovereignty.”
Burt also visited the offices of the U.N. High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), where he met Syrian refugees and highlighted the UK’s $40m contribution to the response to the Syrian humanitarian crisis in Lebanon.
The British minister also heard from religious leaders from across Lebanon's confessions about the importance of “inter-faith dialogue in times of regional uncertainty.”
Before leaving Beirut, Burt will attend the first Social Media Awards in Lebanon, where he will discuss Digital Diplomacy and freedom of expression with digital activists, according to the embassy's press release.
“This is Burt's third visit to Lebanon and builds on the visit by British Foreign Secretary William Hague, in February 2013. Mr. Hague announced $17m for use in Lebanon bringing the total to $40m of UK funding for the Lebanon humanitarian response,” said the embassy.

President Michel Suleiman Slams Syrian PM's Attempted Murder: Dialogue Needed to End Country's Crisis
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman condemned on Tuesday the failed assassination attempt against Syrian Prime Minister Wael al-Halqi and the car bombing in front of the Syrian Interior Ministry in Damascus' Marjeh district on Tuesday. He said: “Dialogue among all parties is necessary to reach a political solution that will lead to national reconciliation in Syria.” “Violence cannot lead to solutions, but it only complicates the crisis and increases the threat of division,” he warned. At least 13 people were killed and 70 wounded in the Marjeh blast on Tuesday, Syrian state television reported. The attack came a day after a blast in the Mazzeh neighborhood of the capital targeting Halqi.The car bomb, which exploded as his convoy passed through the upscale neighborhood, killed one of his bodyguards and five other people

Berri Accuses March 14, 8 of Pressing Adoption of Electoral Law that Favors Their Interests
Naharnet/Speaker Nabih Berri slammed on Tuesday Lebanese officials for seeking to adopt an electoral law that help them achieve the parliamentary majority, pointing out that the cabinet could be formed ahead of a parliamentary session set to be held on May 15. Berri said in comments published in As Safir newspaper that his hybrid electoral law proposal calls for electing half of the lawmakers in the new parliament based on the winner-takes-all system, with the other half elected under the proportional representation system and 26 districts. “Lawmakers were supposed to adopt the proposal as a whole but several sides are trying to amend it according to what suits them until it loses its originality,” he stated. He accused the March 14 alliance and several parties affiliated with the March 8 coalition of seeking to press the adoption of an electoral law that best suits their needs to acquire the parliamentary majority. “My proposal is set to suit the whole nation not a certain group,” the head of the AMAL movement noted. Berri had granted political blocs until May 15 to reach an agreement over a new electoral law before calling parliament to session to vote on the Orthodox Gathering proposal that was approved by the joint parliamentary committees.
President Michel Suleiman, caretaker Premier Najib Miqati, Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat's National Struggle Front, the Mustaqbal Movement, and independent March 14 MPs have rejected the law, saying that it deepens sectarian divisions in Lebanon.
The political powers have so far failed to reach an agreement on an alternative law, threatening to postpone the parliamentary elections that are scheduled for June 16.
Concerning the formation of the cabinet, Berri said that it shouldn't be linked to the dispute over the new electoral law, expressing belief that it might be formed ahead of the May 15 session.
Prime Minister-designate Tammam Salam was tasked earlier this month with forming the cabinet after he received the support of 124 out of 128 MPs during binding consultations led by Suleiman at Baabda palace.
However, the speaker said that the consensus over the electoral draft law would have a positive impact on the formation of the cabinet as the rival parties would become more lenient regarding the division of portfolios.
Berri pointed out that Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov, who held talks with senior Lebanese officials during his four-day visit last week, briefed him on his country's stance on the importance of holding the polls. “Moscow is keen to maintain stability in Lebanon,” he said.
On the oil and gas natural reserves offshore Lebanon, Berri expressed surprise over the state's negligence in the matter and its failure to preserve the country's rights, in particular concerning the 854 square kilometers zone that Lebanon and Israel are bickering over. The zone's suspected energy reserves there could generate billions of dollars.
He accused the presidency and premiership of failing to tackle Lebanon's Exclusive Economic Zone with the international community to resolve the matter.
Lebanon has been slow to exploit its maritime resources compared with other eastern Mediterranean countries. Israel, Cyprus and Turkey are all much more advanced in drilling for oil and gas.
Beirut argues that a maritime map it submitted to the U.N. is in line with an armistice accord drawn up in 1949, an agreement which is not contested by Israel.
In March 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated a mean of 1.7 billion barrels of recoverable oil and a mean of 34.5 trillion cubic meters of recoverable gas in the Levant Basin in the eastern Mediterranean, which includes the territorial waters of Lebanon, Israel, Syria and Cyprus. The formation of the Petroleum Authority in November was the first major step in future oil exploration since parliament passed a law in 2011 setting the country's maritime boundary and Exclusive Economic Zone. The country will witness the first oil exploration process in 2015 and it will take a year to enter the production stage.

Report: Hizbullah Faithful Ready to Die in Syria
Naharnet/Hizbullah commander Hussein Habib's family is still mourning his death in Syria, where he fought alongside regime soldiers. But they say they are ready to offer another son up as a "martyr".In their town of Baalbek and other Hizbullah strongholds in eastern Lebanon, it's no longer a secret that the group's members are crossing the border to bolster the ranks of government troops battling rebels. Supporters of the movement, a long-standing ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad, proudly describe the fighters they say are defending Shiite land and religious sites in Syria. Habib, a Hizbullah field commander, was killed in the countryside around Qusayr in Syria's central Homs province, according to his family. He died about two weeks ago, they say, but they are still waiting for his body to be returned. "We're tortured by the fact that his body hasn't been delivered and is with the gunmen (rebels)," says Fatima Habib, a cousin. She says Habib was born in a village in the Qusayr countryside in Syria, but lived in Baalbek.
"He went to defend his family and his home," she says.
"We have lost someone dear to us and the situation is hard but if other people from the family were needed, it would be no problem for them to go and be martyred."Habib, a married father of two, is known in the area as a senior fighter with Hizbullah, but his family insists he was killed fighting alongside the so-called Popular Committees -- groups of local pro-regime militia in Syria. A few kilometers (miles) from Baalbek is the entrance to the town of Qasr in the Hermel region, which has been targeted by Syrian opposition shelling. The sympathies of residents are clear: posters of Assad hang in the streets and locals refer to opposition fighters as "terrorists," just like Syrian state media. "Terrorists were oppressing thousands of Lebanese in Syrian border villages and they asked the resistance (Hizbullah) to help defend their land and their honor," says Abu Fadi Kanaan. As he speaks, he looks over from the roof of his house into Syria, where black smoke is rising from Qusayr in the aftermath of a regime air raid. "We protect our homes in these villages," he says. "Yes, we send our children to defend them and we are ready to fight the battle." The narrative advanced by Habib's family and Kanaan -- of Lebanese residents of Syria fighting to defend their homes -- is the official party line that Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah first outlined last October. He pointed to the plight of 13 villages inside Syria that are home to Lebanese citizens, saying Hizbullah members in the town "have bought weapons in order to defend themselves against armed Syrian and non-Syrian groups." "The party has nothing to do with their decision, but I cannot tell them not to go fight," Nasrallah said. But the claim is belied by the fact that dozens of bodies of fighters killed in Syria have been brought to Hizbullah strongholds in southern and eastern Lebanon for burial. And senior Hizbullah leader Sheikh Nabil Qaouq, speaking at a mourning ceremony for a fighter killed in Syria in April, described the group's actions in Syria as "a national and moral duty." "Hizbullah's martyrs are the martyrs of the entire nation because they are defending their Lebanese compatriots," he said at the ceremony in south Lebanon. One expert estimates between 800 and 1,500 Hizbullah fighters are now in Qusayr, with more further north at the Sayyeda Zeinab shrine near Damascus. Kanaan brushes aside critics who say Hizbullah has strayed from its stated focus of "resistance" to Israel.
"We're keeping an eye on Israel... and these (rebels) are Zionists as well," he says. "We have the right to defend Lebanese wherever they are, and particularly if they are Shiites," he adds, accusing rebel forces of trying to "finish us off." Syria's opposition has reacted with dismay and anger to Hizbullah's role, and in recent weeks has openly targeted towns like Qasr in response. At the entrance to the town of Hermel, some 15 kilometers from the Lebanese border with Syria, 54-year-old Ali Shamas is on the roof of a three-floor building under construction, holding pieces of shrapnel in his hands. They come from a rocket that hit the building, which he had planned to move into with his family. He wants the Lebanese government to protect the region. "If you don't do your duty," he warns the government, "the resistance and the people are ready to defend themselves."
Source/Agence France Presse.

Berri's Aide Meets Franjieh: We are in Agreement over Govt. Reflects March 8 Camp's Will
Naharnet/Caretaker Health Minister and aide to Speaker Nabih Berri, Ali Hassan Khalil, stressed on Tuesday the strength of the ties between the speaker and Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh.
He said after talks with the lawmaker: “We are in agreement with Franjieh over a government that reflects the will of the March 8 camp.”“This new cabinet would be capable of confronting the challenges of this period of time and will be able to oversee efforts to devise a new parliamentary electoral law,” he stressed. “The ties between Berri and Franjieh are strengthened during all important developments Lebanon and the region pass through,” he remarked. The two officials tackled at depth the issue of the electoral law and the formation of a new cabinet. “We stressed the need to stage the elections on time and maintain consultations to reach an agreement over a new vote law,” Khalil stated. A delegation from the March 8 camp is scheduled to hold talks later on Tuesday with Prime Minister-designate Tammam Salam over the formation of a new government and efforts to come up with a new electoral law. Salam is seeking the formation of a cabinet of national interests that will be able to hold the elections. The March 8 camp is seeking the formation of a political cabinet, while the rival March 14 alliance is demanding the establishment of a neutral one.

UNIFIL increasingly frustrated with Hezbollah
May 01, 2013 /By Nicholas Blanford/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: A gradual drawdown in Lebanese troop numbers in the southern border district has led to a recent increase in standoffs between UNIFIL and suspected members of Hezbollah.
UNIFIL patrols are finding paths blocked and former temporary observation points suddenly out of bounds in what is being interpreted as Hezbollah seeking to flex its muscles on the ground at a time of heightened regional uncertainty and aggressive postures by Israel. UNIFIL officers are privately expressing frustration at the often humiliating confrontations with Hezbollah personnel where the peacekeepers feel compelled to back down.
One officer noted that U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 calls on the Lebanese Army to take control of the southern border district, with UNIFIL playing a support role. “The Lebanese Army is nowhere near that right now. In fact, they are further away from that than before,” the officer said. With units withdrawn in response to deteriorating security situations in Tripoli, Sidon and the north, the Lebanese Army troop strength has dwindled to an estimated 3,000 soldiers in the border district, according to various UNIFIL sources.
Only around 10 percent of the peacekeepers’ patrols are conducted jointly with Lebanese troops. The absence of Lebanese soldiers as interlocutors leaves UNIFIL patrols more vulnerable to intimidation by Hezbollah or local residents. In one of several examples given to The Daily Star, on Feb. 9, a motorized patrol of Belgian peacekeepers drove down a track to inspect the border fence near Mais al-Jabal. As the peacekeepers approached the fence, they saw a civilian vehicle coming the opposite way with five men inside, one of them in military uniform. The Belgians stopped the car and one of the peacekeepers attempted to snap a picture of its occupants. Four of the five men jumped out of the car and snatched the camera along with the keys to the Belgians’ vehicle. The Belgians cocked their rifles and one of the Lebanese men put his hand inside his jacket as if to reach for a pistol.
Another of the four men quickly interceded and explained they did not want any trouble. The four men returned to the car and drove away, taking with them the camera and the vehicle keys, leaving the Belgians stranded. Moments later, the car reversed back down the track and the keys were tossed out of the window for the Belgians to collect.
On March 25, a patrol of Italian peacekeepers was blocked by two men equipped with walkie-talkies from accessing a site overlooking Wadi Mashawish just south of Teir Harfa in the western sector. A third man nearby was scanning the valley with a pair of binoculars. The site had been used before by the Italians as a observation post. Lebanese troops were called to the scene and after conversing with the two men told the Italians that the location was private property and that UNIFIL was not permitted to access the area. The Italians decided to withdraw to “defuse the situation.”
A similar incident occurred in almost the same location a month later on April 22 when a joint UNIFIL and Lebanese Army foot patrol following a track that led into Wadi Mashawish were halted by a chain slung across the route carrying a sign saying that the valley was “private property.” The peacekeepers noticed that they were being watched by several small groups of men equipped with binoculars and walkie-talkies on nearby hills. A pickup truck arrived at the scene and two men inside informed the Lebanese soldiers the area was private property. The patrol retreated.
Other similar incidents have occurred at Majdal Zoun in the western sector. On April 19, a UNIFIL vehicle broke down on the edge of the village and was pelted with large rocks and glass bottles by four men, causing damage to the vehicle.
Incidents of friction between local residents and UNIFIL peacekeepers are not unusual although the recent confrontations with men clearly belonging to Hezbollah are less common.
The presence of unarmed Hezbollah personnel monitoring Wadi Mashawish has spurred speculation within UNIFIL’s ranks that the resistance may have resurrected some of the undiscovered pre-2006 war military facilities in the valley.
Before the 2006 war, the Mashawish/Hamoul valley was one of several sealed-off security pockets manned by Hezbollah in the southern border district. The valley was heavily hit by Israeli artillery and airstrikes during the war and was littered with unexploded cluster bombs in the aftermath.
The Lebanese Army and UNIFIL discovered some abandoned Hezbollah facilities in the valley in the months following the war, including 122mm Katyusha rocket-firing positions and underground bunkers.
The facilities are inspected from time to time to make sure they have not been reactivated. However, it remains unknown, outside the ranks of the resistance, how many – if any – other facilities lie undiscovered beneath the dense canopy of trees that cover the steep slopes of the valley.
If Hezbollah is looking to reactivate some of its old facilities, it is likely on a small scale. Before 2006, the southern border district and a relatively narrow area north of the Litani River was considered the main zone of confrontation in the event of a war between Hezbollah and Israel because of the limited range of the former’s rockets.
Today, the border district is simply the first line of a tiered defensive infrastructure that stretches to the northern Bekaa Valley due to the increased size, range and accuracy of Hezbollah’s suspected post-2006 rocket arsenal.
Another conclusion to be drawn from the activities in the southern border district is that, despite the media attention lately on Hezbollah’s role in Syria, the resistance has not taken its eye off the ball in terms of the confrontation with Israel. On the contrary, the vast bulk of Hezbollah’s fighting force is looking south toward Israel, not east and north into Syria.
Israel’s actions toward Lebanon this year have become more aggressive with a significant escalation in the number of overflights as well as the unprecedented airstrike against a suspected arms convoy outside Damascus at the end of January.
And on Sunday, Israel launched a surprise military exercise, the largest of its kind in several years, involving 2,000 reservists to assess how quickly they can mobilize for a war with Hezbollah.
Hezbollah is well aware that the war in Syria is creating new levels of turmoil and insecurity in the region that put at risk the certainties that have helped maintain calm along the Lebanon-Israel border for nearly seven years.
As such, given the stakes involved, frustrating UNIFIL on the ground is of small consequence to Hezbollah.

Nasrallah hints Assad’s allies could intervene
May 01, 2013/By Wassim Mroueh, Thomas El-Basha/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah hinted Tuesday that Syria’s allies Iran, Russia and “resistance groups” could intervene militarily to prevent the downfall of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Nasrallah also said his fighters would continue to defend Lebanese in Syrian border villages from rebel attacks, arguing that the Lebanese state was unable to fulfill the task itself.
“Syria has real friends in the region and the world that will not let Syria fall at the hands of America, Israel or takfiri groups. They will not let this happen,” Nasrallah, Assad’s closest ally in Lebanon, said in a televised speech.
“How will this happen? Details will come later. I say this based on information ... rather than wishful thinking.”
Nasrallah said judging by facts on the ground, Syrian rebels lacked the military capabilities to topple Assad, who is supported by Iran and Russia.
“We tell you that you [rebels] are unable to topple the regime through military means. After two years and based on facts in the field ... you have no ability to do so,” the Hezbollah chief said.
“This is the case when you are now only fighting the Syrian army and the popular forces loyal to the [government],” he added. “Up to this moment there are no Iranian forces in Syria.”
Nasrallah, who commands Lebanon’s largest military force, asked: “What if dangerous developments occur, forcing states or resistance groups to step in the field in Syria?” But the Hezbollah leader reiterated that only a political solution would resolve the conflict in the war-ravaged country.
On the subject of Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria, Nasrallah said the Lebanese state could not fulfill its duty of defending Lebanese in Syrian border towns.
The party has argued that its members have been helping Lebanese residents in a string of Syrian villages in rural Qusair to defend themselves against attacks by Syrian rebels. However, Hezbollah’s rivals in Lebanon maintain that the party is assisting Assad in his crackdown.
Nasrallah pledged that his party would protect the residents of these rural villages. “What can the [Lebanese] state do? Let us be objective ... can it send the Army to Syrian border towns that are inhabited by Lebanese? ... The Lebanese state, given its nature and structure, cannot do so,” he said.
Nasrallah said Lebanese residents of Syrian villages have the right to defend themselves, adding that assisting them did not require authorization from any side.
“This is a moral and humane issue. We are not talking about Lebanese from a specific sect but about all Lebanese living in rural villages of Qusair,” he said.
“We clearly will not let the Lebanese in Qusair be subjected to attacks from armed groups and we will not hesitate to offer this help to whoever wants to stay in his village,” Nasrallah added.
In response to Hezbollah’s involvement in Qusair, two Salafi sheikhs in Lebanon issued calls for jihad to defend residents of the area against attacks they claimed Hezbollah was carrying out. Nasrallah said these calls publicized what had been happening since the uprising in Syria began.
“In Lebanon over the past two years all those who could issue fatwas, stir incitement, send fighters and arms [to Syria], not only through Lebanese borders but also through [those in] Turkey, Jordan and Iraq, all that they could have done to Syria from Lebanon, they have done,” he said.
Nasrallah blasted what he said was exaggeration by some Arab and Lebanese media outlets of the number of Hezbollah fighters that had been killed in Qusair, but provided no exact figures.
“This is not the first time we face psychological warfare ... we have been living in the heart of psychological warfare for 30 years,” Nasrallah said.
He also said his group had definite information that a massive rebel force was mounting an operation to take over these villages and accused some Lebanese of being involved in the affair.
Regarding the ongoing case of the Lebanese pilgrims kidnapped in Syria, he said no one in Lebanon knew yet what the captors wanted in return for their release.
“Do they want ransom, money, or to release them in exchange for prisoners in Syria? If you want money, say it,” Nasrallah said. “Where do you want things to go? Demonstrations and sit-ins here and there can not solve the problem. The state’s negotiations with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey and other states have led nowhere so far,” he said.
“Do you imagine that we can stand by idly seeing women and children moving from one street to another and allow this tragedy to continue?” Nasrallah asked, referring to almost daily protests in Lebanon by the relatives of the kidnapped. He said that up to this moment, Israel had not provided proof for its claim last week that it had shot down an unmanned drone coming from Lebanon. Hezbollah denied responsibility shortly after the news emerged. “I tell the Lebanese there is nothing so far confirming that the incident happened,” he said.
Nasrallah ruled out the possibility that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard sent the drone. “This is unrealistic, impossible and not true,” he said.
The Hezbollah leader enumerated a number of possibilities on who might have sent the drone, including friendly Lebanese or Palestinian groups in Lebanon.
“The third possibility is that a non-friendly side, other than Israel ... has sent this drone from Lebanon or elsewhere ... in order ... to drag ... Israel and Hezbollah into a confrontation,” he said.
The fourth possibility, Nasrallah continued, was that Israel sent this drone to Lebanon and back to Israel before shooting it down in order to achieve psychological, political and deterrent goals.

Israel summons reservists to rehearse war with Hezbollah
May 01, 2013/By Daily Star Staff /OCCUPIED JERUSALEM: Israel’s military said Tuesday it had called up hundreds of reservists for a drill in northern Israel where tensions are high with neighbors Syria and Lebanon, but a military spokesman said there was no change in the overall security situation.
Israel has been on high alert for a spillover from Syria’s civil war, which has included sporadic fire at Israeli frontier positions. It has also warned it would act to prevent Syria’s sophisticated weapons from falling into the hands of Hezbollah. The drill – planned in advance as part of the annual training schedule – is meant to simulate a scenario of “quick escalation” in which troops would be sent to the north, the military said in statement. No specific details were included. Israeli media reported that the exercise was aimed at preparing for a sudden escalation with Hezbollah. “The reality requires us to prepare accordingly and maintain high readiness,” a senior officer from Israel’s Northern Command said of the drill. Chief military spokesman Brigadier-General Yoav Mordechai told Israel Radio: “This is an exercise, it is not connected to any change in the security situation.”
Israel has enjoyed a decadeslong, stable standoff with Syria under the Assads, but fighting in the insurgency has drawn close to the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. Israel says its air force shot down a drone from Lebanon over the Mediterranean Sea last week as it was approaching the Israeli coast. Hezbollah said it was not behind last week’s incident.

Lebanon's March 8 meets Salam, demands veto power
May 01, 2013 /By Van Meguerditchian/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Lawmakers in the March 8 coalition met Prime Minister-designate Tamam Salam Thursday and renewed their demand for veto power in a new Cabinet in which every parliamentary bloc gets its proportional share.
During the meeting in Salam’s Moseitebeh residence the March 8 coalition rejected a neutral or technocratic government and insisted on having veto power in the new Cabinet, sources who took part in the meeting told The Daily Star. The sources, who refused to be identified by the media to give government formation talks a chance to succeed, said that a long and tense discussion took place between the March 8 officials and Salam.
“But the talks concluded positively when both Salam and the March 8 [lawmakers] agreed to continue their meetings and reach an agreement on the formation of a new Cabinet that could oversee parliamentary elections,” one source said. Despite the March 8’s nomination of Salam as prime minister-designate to succeed caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati, sharp differences have surfaced over the government formation, as Salam prefers a technocratic Cabinet to oversee elections. According to the sources, Salam told the March 8 officials that he refused to give either of the two major coalitions a blocking third in the new Cabinet, adding that such veto power should be given to President Michel Sleiman, the National Struggle Front of MP Walid Jumblatt and himself.
“Salam believes that the March 8 and March 14 coalitions should each get seven seats in a 24-seat Cabinet and the remaining 10 seats should be shared between Sleiman, Jumblatt and ministers loyal to the prime minister,” a source said. The delegation of March 8 officials visiting Salam included caretaker ministers Ali Qanso, Ali Hasan Khalil, Marwan Kheireddine and Gebran Bassil, in addition to Metn MP Hagop Pakradounian and Hezbollah official Hasan Khalil. “Our meeting was very positive, and we will update Prime Minister-designate Tammam Salam about the talks in the next few days,” Pakradounian told reporters after the meeting.
The meeting was held hours after Amal Movement officials met with Marada Movement leader Sleiman Franjieh in Zghorta. Sources also said that in their meeting with Salam, March 8 officials were open to some changes in the question of who would control major ministerial portfolios. Earlier this week, sources from the March 8 coalition rejected earlier calls for rotating ministerial portfolios, arguing that such a move intended to target the Free Patriotic Movement’s control of the energy and telecommunications ministries.
Speaking after their weekly Change and Reform bloc meeting in Rabieh, FPM leader Michel Aoun said that a new Cabinet should represent the parliamentary blocs. Aoun also called on Speaker Nabih Berri to hold a legislative session to vote on a draft electoral law. “The Orthodox Gathering law is the only law that was agreed on by the joint parliamentary committees and it’s the only law that could be voted on in Parliament,” he said. Aoun also defended the Orthodox law – which calls for each sect to elect its own representatives – in the face of criticism from other political parties. “The worst thing that has happened in the country’s history is not the crimes but statements saying that the Orthodox Gathering law hurts coexistence in Lebanon,” Aoun said. “The Orthodox Gathering law alone respects coexistence, the National Pact and Article 24 of the Constitution. No other law that has been discussed so far ensures equality between the Lebanese,” Aoun added.
Also Tuesday, talks over the electoral law between Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and March 14 officials continued in Nejmeh Square. Berri met with Metn MP Sami Gemayel and Minyeh MP Ahmad Fatfat to discuss his hybrid proposal that combines proportional representation and a winner-take-all system. Sources said Fatfat asked Berri for time to come up with a decision from the Future Movement.
Meanwhile, the Future Movement parliamentary bloc voiced its readiness to agree on an acceptable electoral law that would ensure just representation.
“Despite the negative steps taken by some who don’t want to hold parliamentary elections, there is still time to agree on a new electoral law and hold elections,” the bloc said in a statement.
The Future Movement also said that March 8 was seeking to hamper the work of Salam by imposing conditions that obstruct the Cabinet formation.
“The recent political developments show that the March 8 coalition’s move to name Tammam Salam as Prime Minister-designate after Prime Minister Najib Mikati’s resignation was only a political and media maneuver to ease its losses,” the bloc said in a statement after its weekly meeting in Beirut. The bloc said that the hope of forming a new Cabinet to oversee parliamentary elections and ease tensions in the country would remain as such because of the conditions placed by the March 8 coalition.

Aoun Reiterates Calls for Adopting Orthodox Draft, Warns: Inequality in Vote Law Not Source of Stability
Naharnet/Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun stated on Tuesday his rejection of “sharing Christians' rights”, warning against a “serious problem” that could result if no equality was assured in the electoral law.
“Until now we have not yet reached an electoral law that respects the Lebanese constitution and the National Pact. No adopted law has so far respected religious co-existence,” Aoun expressed after the weekly meeting of the Change and Reform bloc. He elaborated: “The basis of co-existence requires that every person enjoys his rights and this was not respected.“
"Inequality will cause a problem and will not be a source of stability,” the FPM leader warned, pointing out that a “single-sect domination has slaughtered Christian presence.”
“Only the Orthodox Gathering's draft electoral law respects the constitution.” Aoun accused those who oppose the draft of being “subordinate to other forces.” He stressed: “The Orthodox proposal must be submitted to the parliament for vote. When it fails, I will then realize who are my enemies and who are with me. Maneuvers have been on the rise.” “Christians are held responsible in front of the people for the stands they take.”
The Orthodox proposal, which calls each sect to elect exclusively its own MPs based on a proportional representation system has been rejected by President Michel Suleiman, caretaker Premier Najib Miqati, Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat's National Struggle Front, the Mustaqbal Movement, and independent March 14 MPs.
They said it deepens sectarian divisions in Lebanon.
Aoun gave a brief overview on the electoral laws that were adopted in Lebanon since the Taif Accord. “We all know that laws assigned the deputies although they should have been elected. And as a consequence to the 1992's deformed law, 87% of the Lebanese boycotted the elections,” he said. “It was a shameful event in the history of the world's democracy.” Aoun continued: “The 1996's law was worse because Christians were eliminated from four provinces and Mount Lebanon was divided into districts to decrease the poisonous influence of this sect's presence." Meanwhile, in the year 2000, Beirut did not have any influence in the parliamentary elections and the minority won, according to Aoun. Tackling the Doha Summit's accord, he said: “We have proposed proportional representation and after a tough discussion we have agreed, under an Arab pressure, on the amendments presented in the Doha law that gave us back some of the Christians' seats.” FPM's head stated: “Those who are clinging to the 1960's law are the ones that have committed the massacres in Mount Lebanon and occupied people's properties and since then have not provided them with a decent life.” “And they say co-existence has not been hit,” he remarked.
The Lebanese political powers have so far failed to reach an agreement on an alternative law, threatening to postpone the parliamentary elections that are scheduled for June 16.
Commenting on the calls to extend the terms of several officials in public offices, Aoun said he is against such suggestions. “We have committed this mistake once and we will not repeat it,” he announced.

No Lebanese Cabinet until key March 8 demands met
April 30, 2013/By Hasan Lakkis/The Daily Star
The Cabinet formation will remain stalled if Prime Minister-designate Tammam Salam does not take the demands of March 8 seriously, sources from the coalition say. The sources say no progress will be made until the coalition’s positions on several key issues are dealt with. First, March 8 wants a political Cabinet, not a technocratic or neutral one. This is connected to their concern the next government will remain in place for a significant period of time given that elections do not appear imminent. Second, March 8 opposes a change in the control of major ministerial portfolios, arguing such a rotation targets the Free Patriotic Movement and means that Michel Aoun’s party will lose the Energy Ministry. For its part, Hezbollah insists that the Telecommunications Ministry be headed by a March 8 minister, given the ministry’s relationship to security and ongoing differences of opinion between March 14 and March 8 about data.
The sources say that the distribution of portfolios is likely to be a major stumbling block for Salam, as March 8 no longer believes that ministers loyal to President Michel Sleiman are truly neutral. They say that given his positions on electoral law and the Syrian crisis, Sleiman’s sympathies now lie with March 14. There are those in March 8 who believe that Salam himself is also not a neutral figure, as he was first nominated by the Future Movement. But the prime minister-designate denies that his loyalties lie with any particular party. There has also been talk that Salam and Sleiman have already decided several major portfolios will be given to centrists, officially designated by both men. March 8 is demanding to know more about the names currently being discussed, especially those in line for the Defense, Energy and Interior ministries. Finally, the Cabinet’s policy statement is likely to be another sticking point. Sleiman and March 14 are adamant that the Baabda Declaration form the core of the statement, but March 8 takes issue with this given that it does not contain a clear statement in support of the current “Army, people and resistance” formula. The sources add that Salam has asked for suggestions of names for ministers from both March 14 and Sleiman. He has not requested the same from March 8, because it will not submit any names without a prior understanding of which portfolios it will control. The debate over an electoral law is intertwined with forming a government, and the sources say Speaker Nabih Berri is trying to convince Salam that a deal about elections must be close before the Cabinet is put together. But given the Progressive Socialist Party’s negative comments about Berri’s electoral proposal, Salam may look to separate the two processes.

Obama balks on Syria chemical arms threat
BEIRUT: President Barack Obama, said Tuesday that the United States must be more certain of all the facts regarding the use of chemical weapons by Syrian leader Bashar Assad before he decides on how his country will intervene in the conflict. The president said, however, that if it is determined that the Assad regime used chemical weapons “we would have to rethink the range of options that are available to us.”
With the U.S. disengaging from the unpopular war in Afghanistan and still smarting from the difficult conflict in Iraq, Obama has been reticent to unleash American military power in the Syrian fighting, a civil war that has killed tens of thousands of people. The president said the conflict is a “blemish on the international community generally.”But he added that he was not prepared to rush to respond to growing evidence that chemical weapons had been used in Syria, something he had termed would mark the crossing of a “red line” and a game-changer.
“I meant that we would have to rethink the range of options open to us,” Obama said. In the White House news conference, the president said he had a full range of such “options on the shelf” but he declined to enumerate them.
Many critics of Obama’s disinclination to use the American military in Syria are calling for the president to establish safe zones for Syrian rebels, to protect them with a no-fly zone and begin sending arms to forces fighting to overthrow the Assad regime. The problem facing the U.S. is that Syrian air defenses are far stronger than NATO allies faced when they intervened with air power in Libya, and some of the rebel forces identify as Islamists, aligned with Al-Qaeda. Noting that American humanitarian aid has flowed to victims of the conflict, Obama said the civil war has been “a slowly unfolding disaster for the Syrian people, and this is not a situation in which we’ve simply been bystanders.”
But when measuring additional action, Obama said, “I’ve got to know I’ve got the facts.”“We don’t know who used them. We don’t have a chain of custody that establishes” exactly what happened.
Obama further declared that the international community had to be completely confident in the assessment that chemical weapons have been used. Syria urged the United Nations to send scientists to investigate its claim of a chemical attack by rebels in Aleppo, but said it does not trust U.S. accusations that such arms were used elsewhere in the country. Syria’s U.N. Ambassador Bashar Jaafari also accused “armed terrorist groups” of spreading powder from plastic bags – which he described as “probably a kind of chemical material” – among crowds in the northern city of Saraqeb Monday.
“Many people were affected by this heinous, irresponsible act and the wounded, as well as the victims, had manifested signs similar to those during the use of chemical weapons,” Jaafari told a news conference at the United Nations in New York. Opposition groups have accused the government of the attack. Jaafari alleged that the rebels had “prearranged” for the victims to be transported into neighboring Turkey so proof of a chemical attack could be gathered and blamed on the government. The United States and Syria both believe a credible U.N. investigation is the best way to establish chemical weapons use. But nearly six weeks after Syria initially asked for such an inquiry, investigators have been unable to enter the country.
The Syrian government and the opposition blame each other for alleged chemical weapons attacks in Aleppo in March and Homs in December. Syria wants the U.N. team to probe only the Aleppo attack, but Ban wants the inquiry to cover both incidents. Ban has said that while waiting to gain access to Syria, the investigators were gathering and analyzing available information on the alleged attacks, which included possible visits to countries that said they had evidence of chemical weapons use.
In Damascus, a bomb blast in the government-held center of the city killed 14 people, state news agency SANA said. Residents described scenes of carnage in Marjeh Square, in a commercial district in the heart of the capital, with dozens of cars and buildings damaged by the bomb, which went off in front of the former Interior Ministry building. The attack followed a car bomb targeting Prime Minister Wael al-Halqi in upmarket Mezzeh district. He escaped unscathed, but several others were killed. Along the Syrian-Turkish border in Reyhanli, a government airstrike on a headquarters of a rebel brigade killed at least five people, including children, and wounded dozens more, opposition activists said. The attack targeted buildings belonging to the Ahrar al-Sham, a Salafist Islamist rebel unit fighting to topple Assad, the activists said. A Turkish aid worker said the strike also hit a warehouse on the Syrian side of the border used by aid groups. “The target appears to be Ahrar al-Sham but most of the fighting brigades have a presence at and around the crossing and it is impossible to get them without harming civilians,” said Mohammad, an activist at the crossing, who gave only his first name. Health officials in the Turkish border town of Reyhanli said the local hospital there, which frequently receives Syrian patients from just over the border, had taken “precautions” because of unconfirmed reports that some of the wounded may have come into contact with chemical weapons.
Some Syrian activists said some of the casualties were suffering breathing difficulties but said they did not know what type of munitions had been used in the attack. “We cannot confirm that there were any chemical weapons involved,” Reyhanli Mayor Huseyin Sanverdi told Reuters.

Blast in Central Damascus Kills 13
Naharnet/A blast in the central Damascus district of Marjeh on Tuesday killed at least 13 people, Syrian state television reported, a day after Prime Minister Wael al-Halqi survived a bomb attack elsewhere in the capital.
"The number of casualties in the cowardly terrorist blast targeting the commercial and historic center of Damascus in the Marjeh district rose to 13 martyrs and more than 70 injured," state television reported, citing the interior ministry. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported "14 dead, including nine civilians and five members of the security forces, in a car bomb attack near the old interior ministry headquarters."
The toll could rise further because a number of the wounded were in critical condition, the monitoring group said.
"Internationally-financed and -supported terrorism committed a terrible massacre against civilians in the commercial and historic center of Damascus," state television reported, citing an official source. Official channels broadcast footage showing smoke billowing over the site of the explosion, which blew out the windows of nearby cars, knocking off the bumpers and starting fires. Uniformed and armed plainclothes security forces could be seen running near the scene, as residents fled.
Several mutilated bodies could be seen lying in the street, and at least one body wrapped in a white sheet was laid out alongside an ambulance.
Fire engines were at the scene with firefighters battling several blazes. "What mistake have we committed? I was going to work. Look at the bodies. Is this the freedom they want?" a bystander said to state media.
The attack came a day after a blast in the Mazzeh neighborhood of the capital targeting Halqi.
The car bomb, which exploded as his convoy passed through the upscale neighborhood, killed one of his bodyguards and five other people, according to the Observatory.
The blast, apparently detonated by remote control, took place in the well-secured Mazzeh district, which is home to politicians, embassies, government offices and intelligence facilities.
Halqi, who was appointed prime minister in August 2012 after his predecessor Riad Hijab defected to the opposition, is the latest in a growing list of regime officials to be targeted for assassination.
In July 2012, a suicide bomb attack killed Syria's defense minister and deputy defense minister and seriously wounded the interior minister.
Damascus has seen a wave of major bombings in recent weeks, including on April 9, when a massive blast in the center of the city killed at least 15 people.
Source/Agence France Presse.
 

King Willem-Alexander Takes Dutch Throne
Naharnet/Dutch Crown Prince Willem-Alexander became Europe's youngest monarch on Tuesday after his mother, Queen Beatrix, abdicated and his country hailed the avowedly 21st-century king with a massive, orange-hued party. "I Queen Beatrix... abdicate in favor of my son Willem-Alexander," the act said, as read out before the signing that was broadcast live from the Amsterdam palace.
The queen shed a tear on arrival, and the act was then witnessed by Willem-Alexander, his Argentine-born Queen Maxima and members of the government.
A cry went up from the 25,000 crowd in the Dam, the main square opposite the palace where the signing was shown on giant screens.
"Thank you Bea", they shouted using her affectionate nickname.
The king and queen's three daughters, including their eldest, now Princess of Orange Catharina-Amalia, 9, attended the ceremony, wearing identical yellow and white dresses.
Willem-Alexander, 46, is the first Dutch king since 1890 and the first of a new wave of relatively youthful European monarchs, with future kings and queens, including Britain's Prince Charles, attending.
Amsterdam's population is set to double with at least 800,000 visitors flooding the city's streets and canals as Beatrix, 75, ended her 33-year reign.
Willem-Alexander will now be sworn in rather than crowned at deconsecrated church Nieuwe Kerk, a stone's throw from the palace, before a joint session of the houses of parliament.
A who's who of royals-in-waiting, including Britain's Prince Charles, Spain's Prince Felipe and Japan's Prince Naruhito and his wife, Crown Princess Masako, are attending the ceremony.
Princess Masako is on her first trip abroad in nearly seven years, while Prince Charles also attended Beatrix's enthronement in 1980. Dam Square, which lies opposite the palace and can hold 25,000 people, was packed with wellwishers early in the day, all hoping to catch a glimpse of King Willem-Alexander and his glamorous Argentine-born Queen Maxima, 41.
Some people spent the night on Amsterdam's main square to ensure having a good view of the royal balcony, while partygoers from across the Netherlands descended on the capital, many carrying Dutch flags.
"We've been here for several hours, we wanted to be sure to have a good place to see them appear on the balcony," said Edith, 22, who sat with two friends on a large piece of cardboard on Dam Square since 5:00 am.
Someone else waved an Argentine flag printed with: "Thank you the Netherlands for loving and trusting Maxima."
Over 10,000 police have been deployed in Amsterdam, and bomb-sniffing dogs carried out last-minute security checks for the expected 25,000 orange-clad crown on Dam Square.
Police said that they had arrested 70 people since Monday.
Authorities have closed off Amsterdam airspace to civilian aircraft for three days and issued strict orders prohibiting the use of drones, with rooftop snipers keeping a watchful eye.
Beatrix, 75, bade farewell to the nation in her role as queen in a televised address to the nation late Monday, before becoming a mere princess again.
"Not power, nor personal will, nor hereditary authority, but only the will to serve the community can give substance to a contemporary monarchy," said an emotional Beatrix.
Willem-Alexander is well-prepared for the task ahead of him and will stand above party and group interests, she said.
The monarchy is popular in the Netherlands, but some question the cost of the royal household and republicans are seeking to get the king's 825,000 euro (million-dollar) tax-free salary reduced.
While her pre-recorded speech was being broadcast, Beatrix attended a sumptuous gala dinner at the city's landmark Rijksmuseum on Monday evening, attended by top royals from around the world.
Queen Maxima wore a Valentino dress to the dinner that she had previously worn in 2008. Dutch media said that this was a deliberate move to reduce the royal family's image of extravagance in times of economic belt-tightening.
While Beatrix was known for her formal court, Willem-Alexander has already said that he will not be a "protocol fetishist".Beatrix's enthronement in 1980 was marred by violent protests and running street battles over a housing crisis that left the city looking like a war zone.
Anti-royalists this time have been allotted six locations in Amsterdam to stage protests. But only one has been booked by Republicans planning playful protests, including by wearing white. Preparations for the day have been overshadowed by a rancorous debate about the event's official song, known as the Koningslied, which many considered ill-fitting, with its mix of traditional and rap music.
The nation will now sing the Koningslied as one on Tuesday evening, just before the royal family heads off on a water pageant behind Amsterdam's central train station.
Maxima is largely responsible for having made her husband popular after an allegedly boozy youth which earned him the nickname "Prince Pils".
Ever smiling, she has mastered the Dutch language and even taken a charity swim in Amsterdam's canals, endearing herself further in a country that expects their royals to be at once normal and regal. Speaking ahead of the enthronement, Willem-Alexander said that "people can address me as they wish because then they can feel comfortable."
He stressed he wanted to "be a king that can bring society together, representative and encouraging in the 21st century".
Source/Agence France Presse.

Analysts Say Assad Fall Would be Best Option for Israel
Naharnet/A rebel victory in Syria's civil war would be the most positive outcome for Israel despite fears of instability and a stronger jihadist presence on the Golan should the regime collapse, analysts say. The Syrian conflict has increasingly affected the Jewish state, as alarm mounts over the deployment of President Bashar Assad's chemical weapons arsenal and the potential for it to fall into the hands of non-state militant groups.
The conflict has split the Israeli defense community into two camps -- those who oppose the fall of Assad, and those who see his ouster as less dangerous for Israel.
But experts believe a rebel victory would have the best geostrategic implications for Israel.
"The defence advantages of Assad going outweigh the potential security risks," said Jonathan Spyer, a senior researcher at the Global Research in International Affairs Center in Herzliya, near Tel Aviv.
The split in the intelligence community "to some degree reflects the split that existed prior to the uprising in Syria," Spyer said.
"The Assad regime is a dangerous force because of its alliance with Iran" -- but it is "not fanatical," and has never supported hardline Islamist groups such as those leading the rebel fighting.
These groups pose the lesser risk, he maintains.
"The presence of fledgling armed groups on the border... is a concern. "But Assad going would be a blow to Hezbollah, which is the most powerful paramilitary force" opposing Israel in the region, Spyer said.
Earlier this month, Israel implicitly admitted carrying out a January air strike on a weapons convoy in Syria thought to be en route to Hizbullah -- a long-time Damascus ally.
Mike Herzog, former head of strategic planning in the Israeli army and a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, agreed.
"Israel would be better off without the Assad regime," he said, describing the Syrian president as "a lynchpin" connecting Iran and Hizbullah.
"If the regime collapses this will be a very serious blow to Iran, Hezbollah and the whole axis.
"This doesn't come without risks -- the risk of Islamists and jihadists becoming a dominant force in a future Syria," Herzog cautioned.
But Assad clinging onto power would "outweigh the risk of Islamist elements coming to the fore. Of course that's not something Israelis would like to see... (but they) have to choose between two evils," he said.
A victorious jihadist-dominated rebel force would not be able to form as cohesive and large-scale a threat to Israel as Assad, Iran and Hezbollah working together, Herzog said.
"There are other elements in Syria. It's a very complex mixture of ethnic and sectarian groups. It's more likely to go in the direction of... areas controlled by different elements.
"We're more likely to see this scenario than a central government with control over the whole of Syria," he said.
The perceived jihadist threat, whilst a concern, was far less worrying than the "possibility of chemical or non-chemical weapons falling into wrong hands. This is a much more complicated challenge to deal with," said Herzog.
Eli Karmon, a senior fellow at the Institute for Policy and Strategy in Herzliya, also saw the fallout of Assad's ouster as a more manageable threat.
"The most important thing is to see the fall of the regime. This will provoke ... the weakening of Iran's strategic position in the Middle East... and Hezbollah will be much more isolated and under pressure," he said.
Karmon acknowledged the opposing view in certain defense and strategic circles.
"There are some who think the best thing would be to have the regime and opposition fighting as long as possible in order to weaken (both of) them," he told Agence France Presse.
In any case, Israel cannot decisively influence the outcome of the Syrian conflict, the analysts noted, saying the best course of action for the Jewish state was to avoid involvement unless its security is directly threatened.
Israel has already responded with fire to mortar and small arms fire spilling over the ceasefire line in the occupied Golan Heights this year. What is assumed in government is that "40 years of quiet along the northern border will come to an end," Herzog said. At that stage, "both sides in the Israeli (intelligence) discussion would have to agree on the practical measures needed to be taken, which would boil down to strengthening border security," said Spyer.

The Iranian Nuclear Crisis: A Memoir
by Seyed Hossein Mousavian.Middle East Forum
Reviewed by Patrick Clawson
Middle East Quarterly/Winter 2013, pp. 87-89
http://www.meforum.org/3495/the-iranian-nuclear-crisis-a-memoir
Be the first of your friends to like this.
Few issues in recent years have seen as intensive high-level, international negotiations as Iran's nuclear program. Unfortunately, the account by Mousavian, an Iranian policymaker and scholar, will probably become the definitive book about that effort. A more important work, but one unlikely to get as much attention, is from a team led by Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which examines in detail how Iran's nuclear program fits within the broader challenge to U.S. interests from the Islamic Republic.
Mousavian's account gains credibility from his previous position as spokesman for Iran's nuclear negotiating team as well as through the vigorous promotion of his views on U.S. television and at lectures in elite venues. His personal story is intriguing: An important official on Iran's Supreme National Security Council, he was, in effect, jailed for his opposition to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and is now a fellow at Princeton, though clearly still deeply supportive of the Islamic Republic. But the reason his book will become the standard reference is not necessarily due to his pedigree: It is the care with which it was prepared, with 1,113 footnotes to all the right sources. On question after question, Mousavian recounts the facts in detail, providing the references to check up and follow further.
But for all that Mousavian gets the details right, he casts the nuclear impasse in a profoundly misleading way. The fundamental problem has always been that Iran has not lived up to its obligations under the international agreements to which it is a party. At its heart, the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is a trade-off: Countries have the right to dangerous nuclear technology if they accept the responsibility to be fully transparent about what they are doing. The irony is that had Iran, an NPT signatory, followed through on the requirements of the treaty, Washington may have been profoundly unhappy about Iran's nuclear progress but could have done little to mobilize international pressure. On this, as so many other issues, the Islamic Republic's leaders have systematically miscalculated where Iran's national interests lie. Their attitude, shared by Mousavian, is the profound arrogance of asserting rights but refusing responsibilities.
In Mousavian's account, Iran never did anything worse than miss some tactical opportunities. And in his telling, that only happened after he left the job. Mousavian makes a persuasive case that Iran was better served by his policy, which was to blow smoke in the West's eyes rather than to spit into them. The prolonged negotiations he describes persuaded Europe that Iran should be offered incentives and not penalized so as to entice it into further negotiations and temporary concessions. His team understood the importance of looking reasonable, whereas Supreme Leader Ali Khamene'i's priority seems to be what the ayatollah called resistance to "global arrogance."[1]
In contrast to Iran's excellent track record, Mousavian presents the West—especially the United States—as continuously taking unreasonable positions and missing chances to improve relations. But not surprisingly, there is a telling omission: The George W. Bush administration is often castigated for spurning an alleged May 2003 Iranian "grand bargain" to open talks with Washington about all the issues separating the two sides. Mousavian makes no mention of it whatsoever.
While Mousavian recognizes that many issues besides the nuclear program separate Washington and Tehran, the Council on Foreign Relations' (CFR) Iran: The Nuclear Challenge edited by Blackwill simply ignores that strategic context. While it could be argued that the CFR report is intentionally only about the nuclear issue, the obvious response is that Iran's pursuit of nuclear capabilities is not isolated from its other activities, nor are vital U.S. interests about Iran confined to its nuclear program: Most U.S. sanctions on Iran can be justified as reactions to its state support of terrorism, not just its nuclear program.
This narrow focus on Iran's nuclear program is all the more striking given the main theme in Blackwill's insightful concluding essay: Consider carefully and do not jump to conclusions. He warns against unanticipated consequences, artificial analogies, false certainty, and short-term thinking that ignores longer term repercussions. He suggests eleven pertinent questions to focus thinking about a potential preemptive attack, bringing great depth of knowledge to the subject. Regrettably, he hardly mentions how actions on the nuclear issue could affect broader U.S. interests regarding Iran. In particular, his essay is infused with the implicit view that the Islamic Republic is a given, not an unnatural system whose days may be numbered. If one concludes that the Islamic Republic will, at some point in time, disappear, then U.S. policy thinking ought to be much more about timing: Delaying the nuclear program becomes a potential route to successful resolution of the problems between the two states, depending on what nuclear policy a successor regime might pursue.
The six other authors in the CFR volume offer much insight about sanctions, negotiations, military options, regime change, the implications of a nuclear-armed Iran as well as what is known about the Iranian nuclear program. But their lens is so centered on the nuclear issue that everything else is essentially left out of the picture. For instance, Elliott Abrams' essay on regime change, while presenting a thoughtful evaluation of current U.S. programs and practical suggestions for alternatives, devotes exactly one sentence to the nonnuclear advantages for U.S. strategic interests were the Islamic Republic to fall. Surely the end of the mullahcracy would have vast repercussions on world Islamist movements and on the Middle East. To take one point that preoccupies U.S. Persian Gulf allies: Were Washington to form a close working relationship with a friendly Tehran, might that make relations with the gulf monarchies less important to U.S. administrations? Under those circumstances, Washington might choose to be more supportive of the forces calling for democratic reform in those countries, a prospect the ruling families find profoundly unsettling.
In comparison to the tight focus of the CFR volume, the great strength of U.S. and Iranian Strategic Competition is that Cordesman, et al., capture the full character of U.S.-Iran relations. They demonstrate that the United States and Iran are in a low-level war, or in "strategic competition," a phrase often used in national security circles. That war has many fronts, which the authors cover in great (sometimes excessive) detail. Separate chapters, generally coauthored by Cordesman and one or more collaborators, cover the nature of the strategic competition in general, as well as sanctions and energy, the gulf military balance, and competition between Washington and Tehran in various parts of the world including Iraq, the Levant, Turkey, the Caucasus, "Af–Pak," Europe, Russia, China, Latin America, and Africa. The concluding chapter, on policy implications, stresses that the U.S. administrations must compete with the Iranians in a wide array of geographic arenas and with many policy instruments. That is, in effect, something Washington is now doing but not always with a conscious understanding of how all these disparate efforts should fit together.
Cordesman is led to the pessimistic conclusion that the mullahs' pursuit of nuclear weapons is part of a concerted strategy around which the entire military and national security strategy is built. Restrictions on Tehran's enrichment activities, he argues, are not likely to impede Iran's nuclear progress much because it has developed such a varied and robust set of nuclear weapons-related programs (including delivery options) that it could break down the remaining work into compartmentalized programs. Each is readily concealed and could be presented to a credulous international community as peaceful in intent. He concludes that if one studies the full range of strategic competition between Washington and Tehran, the current P5+1-Iran negotiations—even if fully successful—would make only a small difference in the mullahs' challenge to U.S. policymakers and not much of a difference to its nuclear pursuits.
Cordesman's message is not likely to have the resonance of Mousavian's. Too many in the West seem inclined to assume that Iran is being reasonable in the current nuclear impasse and that more understanding of the developing world is needed. Unfortunately, if history is any guide, few international problems can be solved through the greater display of empathy, especially toward rogue regimes.
Patrick Clawson is director for research at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
[1] Karim Sadjadpour, Reading Khamenei: The World View of Iran's Most Powerful Leader (Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2008), pp. 3, 23; Ali Khamene'i, speech, Tehran, Sept. 9, 1998.