LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

Bible Quotation for today/
01 Corinthians 10/14-22/: "So then, my dear friends, keep away from the worship of idols. I speak to you as sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. The cup we use in the Lord's Supper and for which we give thanks to God: when we drink from it, we are sharing in the blood of Christ. And the bread we break: when we eat it, we are sharing in the body of Christ. Because there is the one loaf of bread, all of us, though many, are one body, for we all share the same loaf. Consider the people of Israel; those who eat what is offered in sacrifice share in the altar's service to God. Do I imply, then, that an idol or the food offered to it really amounts to anything? No! What I am saying is that what is sacrificed on pagan altars is offered to demons, not to God. And I do not want you to be partners with demons. You cannot drink from the Lord's cup and also from the cup of demons; you cannot eat at the Lord's table and also at the table of demons. Or do we want to make the Lord jealous? Do we think that we are stronger than he?

Hezbollah's bogus Liberation & Resistance Day
By: Elias Bejjani*
Believe it or not, on May 25 each year since 2000 Lebanon has been celebrating a so-called "Liberation & Resistance Day." Sadly, this celebration commemorates a bogus event, and a phony heroism that did not actually take place. On May 22, 2000 the Israeli Army unilaterally and for solely Israeli domestic reasons withdrew from the security zone of South Lebanon in accordance with UN Resolution 425. The withdrawal was a fatal Israeli decision that has inspired the Hamas terrorism acts and the on-going havoc in the Palestinian Gaza strip. During the last 13 years many Israeli officials and politicians form all parties openly and harshly criticized Barak's Government (Barak was PM at that time) hasty and unwise decision through which Israel' abandoned its ally the South Lebanon Army (SLA) and gave Hezbollah all south Lebanon on a plate of sliver.
The unilateral Israeli withdrawal created a security vacuum in south Lebanon. The Syrians who were occupying Lebanon at that time and fully controlling its government, did not allow the Lebanese Army to deploy in the south and fill this vacuum after the Israeli withdrawal. Instead Syria helped the Hezbollah militia to militarily control the whole southern region, and even patrol the Israeli-Lebanese border.
It is worth mentioning that the Israeli army's withdrawal was executed without any military battles, or even minor skirmishes with Hezbollah, or the Lebanese and Syrian armies. The Syrian regime, in a bid to justify both its on going occupation of Lebanon and the avoidance of disarming Hezbollah, came up with the "Shabaa Farms occupation big lie" and declared Hezbollah a Liberator, alleging it had forced Israel to withdrawal from South Lebanon.
Syria, in the same camouflaging and devious context, dictated to both the Lebanese parliament and government to declare May 25th a National Day under the tag of "Liberation & Resistance Day".
In reality Hezbollah did not force the Israeli withdrawal, and did not play any role in the Liberation of the southern Lebanese region. In fact both Hezbollah and Syria deliberately hindered and delayed the Israeli withdrawal for more than 14 years.
Every time the Israelis called on the Lebanese government to engage in a joint, serious effort under the United Nations umbrella to ensure a safe and mutually organized withdrawal of its army from South Lebanon, the Lebanese government refused to cooperate, did not agree to deploy its army in the south, and accused the Israelis of plotting to divide and split the Syrian-Lebanese joint track. This approach to the Israeli calls was an official Syrian decision dictated to all the Lebanese puppet governments during the Syrian occupation era.
Since then, Hezbollah has been hijacking Lebanon and its people, refusing to disarm and advocating for the annihilation of Israel. This Iranian mullahs' terrorist army stationed in Lebanon, is viciously hiding behind labels of resistance, liberation and religion. Hezbollah has recklessly jeopardized the Lebanese peoples' lives, safety, security and livelihood. It has been growing bolder and bolder in the last four years and mercilessly taking the Lebanese state and the Lebanese people hostage through terrorism, force and organized crime.
Sadly, Hezbollah is systematically devouring Lebanon day after day, and piece by piece, while at the same time marginalizing all its governmental institutions in a bid to topple the Lebanese state and erect in its place a Shiite Muslim regime, a replica of the Iranian Shiite mullahs' fundamentalist republic. Meanwhile the free world and Arabic countries are totally silent, indifferent, and idly watching from far away the horrible crime unfolding without taking any practical or tangible measures to put an end to this anti-Lebanese Syria-Iranian scheme that is executed through their spearhead, the Hezbollah armed militia.
Who is to be blamed for Hezbollah's current odd and bizarre status? Definitely the Syrians who have occupied Lebanon for more than 28 years (1976-2005). During their bloody and criminal occupation, Syria helped the Iranian Hezbollah militia build a state within Lebanon and fully control the Lebanese Shiite community.
But also the majority of the Lebanese politicians, leaders, officials and clergymen share the responsibility because they were subservient and acted in a dire Dhimmitude, selfish and cowardly manner. If these so-called Lebanese leaders had been courageous and patriotic and had not appeased Hezbollah and turned a blind eye to all its vicious and human rights atrocities, intimidation tactics, crimes and expansionism schemes, this Iranian Shiite fundamentalist militia would not have been able to erect its own mini-state in the southern suburb of Beirut, and its numerous mini-cantons in the Bekaa Valley and the South; nor would Hezbollah have been able to build its mighty military power, with 70 thousand militiamen, or stockpile more than 50 thousand missiles and force the Iranian "Wilayat Al-Faqih" religious doctrine on the Lebanese Shiite community and confiscate its decision making process and freedoms.
Since Hezbollah's emergence in 1982, these politicians have been serving their own selfish interests and not the interests of the Lebanese people and the nation. They went along with Hezbollah's schemes, deluding themselves that its militia and weaponry would remain in South Lebanon and would not turn against them. This failure to serve the people of Lebanon allowed Hezbollah to make many Lebanese and most of the Arab-Muslim countries through its terrorism propaganda to blindly swallow its big lie of theatrical, faked resistance and Liberation. Hezbollah would not have been able refuse to disarm in 1991, like all the other Lebanese militias in accordance to the "Taef Accord," which called for the disarmament of all militias. Hezbollah would not have become a state inside the Lebanese state, and a world-wide terrorism Iranian-Syrian tool which turned against them all after its war with Israel in year 2006 and after the UN troops were deployed on the Lebanese - Israeli borders in accordance with the UN Resolution 1701. On May 7, 2008 Hezbollah invaded Sunni Western Beirut killing and injuring in cold blood hundreds of its civilian citizens, and attempted to take over by force Mount Lebanon.
Hezbollah's General Secretary Sheik Hassan Nasrallah called that day (May 7, 2008) a great and glorious victory for his resistance, and keeps on threatening the Lebanese that a replicate of that day will take place if they do not succumb and obey his Iranian orders.
Hezbollah is a deadly dragon that the Lebanese politicians have been allowing him to feed on sacrifices from the southern Lebanese citizens, especially on those who were living in the "Security Zone" and who fled to Israel in May 2000 after the Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon. This dragon who enjoyed devouring his southern sacrifices has now turned on all the Lebanese and if they do not stand for their rights and dignity, he will keep on devouring them all one after the other.
We call on the Lebanese government, the Lebanese Parliament and on all the free and patriotic Lebanese politicians and leaders to cancel the May 25 National Day, because it is not national at all, and also to stop calling Hezbollah a resistance, put an end for its mini-state, cantons and weaponry, and secure a dignified, honorable and safe return for all the Lebanese citizens who have been taking refuge in Israel since May 2000.

U.S. Worried Syrian War Spilling into Lebanon
Naharnet /The United States expressed concern Friday that Lebanon could find itself dragged into Syria's civil war and expressed support for efforts by the country's army to halt an outbreak of fighting. "The United States is deeply concerned about the situation in Lebanon," State Department deputy spokesman Patrick Ventrell said. Clashes have erupted in the northern city of Tripoli between two armed factions, one sympathetic to Bashar Assad's Syrian government and the other to the rebels fighting for his removal. Meanwhile, Hizbullah fighters have crossed the border into Syria in order to support Assad's forces battling to control frontier communities. "The United States fully supports Lebanon's security, stability, and sovereignty and welcomes efforts by Lebanon's leaders to take all necessary steps to put an end to the violence," Ventrell said.
"The latest clashes in the northern city of Tripoli, in which at least 23 people have been killed, constitute a stark reminder that the conflict in Syria poses an increasingly dangerous threat to Lebanon's stability and security.
"We call on all parties in the region to avoid any actions that would exacerbate that crisis, increase the propensity for spillover violence, and negatively affect civilian populations."Hizbullah leaders' decision to escalate the group's role in the fighting in Syria violates and undermines Lebanon's dissociation policy and risks dragging Lebanon into a foreign conflict," he warned.Source/Agence France Presse.

Death Toll Rises to 23 as Cautious Calm in Tripoli Occasionally Violated by Sporadic Gunfire
Naharnet/The death toll from the battles in the northern city of Tripoli rose on Friday to 23 as cautious calm prevailed after fierce battles between pro- and anti-Syrian regime supporters.
The cautious calm was occasionally violated by intermittent gunfire as a rocket hit Naji Center in Azmi street, causing only material damage. Voice of Lebanon radio (93.3) reported that the army was preparing to enter Bab al-Tabbaneh neighborhood after it fortified its presence in the rival neighborhood of Jabal Mohsen.
A meeting chaired by al-Mustaqbal bloc head MP Fouad Saniora was held on Friday afternoon at the Center House with the participation of Tripoli's MPs.
The lawmakers announced after the talks that they are keen on preserving religious coexistence in the northern city, noting that both the residents of Jabal Mohsen and Bab al-Tabbaneh “are one, and have the same rights and duties.”"We reject the use of illegal weapons and transforming the city into a passage for local and regional political messages,” al-Mustaqbal MP Samir al-Jisr stated after the meeting.
"We call on the Public Prosecution in the north to sue those threatening to bomb the city and terrorizing its people.”
The MPs also urged President Michel Suleiman, “as the legal guardian of the constitutions and the Higher Commander of the army," to ask the army to "act firmly and fairly" with all perpetrators, and to safeguard the stability in Tripoli and strengthen trust in the military institution."Thursday was the bloodiest day yet in the clashes, with at least 11 people killed in 24 hours.
At least 167 people have been wounded in the clashes. The bickering parties in Bab al-Tabbaneh, whose residents are mostly Sunni, and the Alawite Jabal Mohsen used flares to locate the sources of the shelling.
Heavy weapons were also used in the fighting in Tripoli, which has in the past years witnessed deadly gunbattles.
But the war in Syria worsened the security situation there after Bab al-Tabbaneh residents backed the revolution against Syrian President Bashar Assad and the families of Jabal Mohsen supported him.
Elsewhere in the city of 500,000 people, life has continued as normal to some extent, but with traffic lighter than usual and schools closed but most shops still open.
Troops have been deployed across the city since the outbreak, but this has failed to halt the fighting.
The latest violence began as Assad's regime launched a withering assault on the rebel stronghold of Qusayr, near the border with Lebanon.
Hizbullah has been sending fighters across the border to help Syrian regime forces attack Qusayr.
In 1985, the Syrian army clashed with Sunni groups in Tripoli, and bombarded areas of the city, during Lebanon's civil war.

Suleiman on Liberation Day: Concept of Resistance Must Rise above Strife on Local, Regional Scenes
Naharnet /President Michel Suleiman noted on Friday that the Lebanese people are “willingly” turning Lebanon into a battle ground through the unrest in the northern city of Tripoli and through fighting in the Syrian region of al-Qusayr. He said on the occasion of the Resistance and Liberation Day: “The concept of resistance must rise above strife on the internal scene or in fraternal countries.”
“We must therefore not pay the price of the democracy of others,” he remarked after meeting Army Commander General Jean Qahwaji at the Defense Ministry in Yarze..
“Lebanon has not reaped the rewards of the liberation of southern Lebanon” and its people have not liberated themselves from their allegiances to political powers, he continued on the 13th anniversary of the liberation of southern Lebanon from Israeli occupation.
“How can a country that has provided such a great example of resistance and sacrifice adopt practices that deepen sectarianism?” he wondered.
“Resistance and liberation are high concepts that should recognize the results of democratic, legal, and constitutional practices,” Suleiman said.
“The concept of resistance must rise above strife, whether on the local scene or in neighboring countries, because the resistance has fought for national and popular, not sectarian, causes,” declared the president.
Moreover, Suleiman said: “Elections are a democratic practice that we should not abandon.”
Hizbullah has become involved in fighting in al-Qusayr, with its combatants becoming increasingly involved in Syria's conflict, fighting alongside President Bashar Assad's forces against an insurgency that flared after a brutal regime crackdown on democracy protests.
Initially Hizbullah said it wanted only to defend 13 Syrian villages along the border where Lebanese Shiites live, and the Sayyeda Zeinab shrine, revered by Shiites around the world.
However its elite fighters later encircled the rebel-held central town of al-Qusayr with regime troops before the launch on Sunday of a withering assault on the strategic border town that is home to 25,000 people.
Seventy-five fighters from Hizbullah have been killed in Syria since late last year, a source close to the group said on Thursday.
Suleiman continued: “We will not allow vacuum at the army and we have tasked the Military Council, headed by Qahwaji, to tackle the affairs of the military institution after the formation of a new government.”
In addition, he stated that Lebanon should be protected through the implementation of United Nations Security Council resolution 1701, adherence to the Baabda Declaration, and adoption of a defense strategy that “clearly organizes the relationship between the army and resistance.”
The army, said the president, is Lebanon's salvation and it enjoys the support of all Lebanese.
“It therefore has the mission to protect the people in Tripoli and Sidon and the border against the flow of gunmen,” he added. Political powers must support the army instead of simply exploiting it to protect themselves, he demanded. “The government is obligated to implement the will of the people,” he stressed. The army has been tasked with containing clashes that broke out on Sunday in the northern city of Tripoli. The clashes erupted between the rival neighborhoods of Bab al-Tabbaneh, which backs the Syrian revolution, and Jabal Mohsen, which supports the Syrian regime. At least 22 people have been killed in the recent round of clashes.

Berri Seeking to Extend Parliament's Term before Month's End
Naharnet /Speaker Nabih Berri has intensified his contacts with various political powers in order to garner their approval over the extension of parliament's term given their failure to agree on a parliamentary electoral law, said media reports on Friday.An Nahar daily stated that Berri is seeking to extend the term before the end of May, while parliament's tenure ends on June 19. He is seeking to extend the term to a year-and-a-half or two, adding that he is opposed to a six-month extension, continued the daily. He explained that situation in the country and the tensions, especially those in the northern city of Tripoli, will prevent the staging of the elections “in a normal manner,” it added. The speaker's efforts however are expected to be met with the March 14 camp's opposition, as some of its prominent sources told An Nahar that Mustaqbal, Lebanese Forces, Phalange Party, and independent Christian MPs reject the extension for two years.Berri is expected to hold talks later on Friday with head of the Mustaqbal bloc MP Fouad Saniora to tackle the extension of parliament's term and agree on how long the extension should be. Al-Joumhouria daily reported Friday that a meeting was held at the Center House on Thursday between Saniora, LF MP George Adwan, Phalange MP Sami Gemayel, and Mustaqbal officials to discuss the extension. Sources from the meeting said that the gatherers agreed that parliament's term should not be extended for more than four or six months.Meanwhile, An Nahar revealed that President Michel Suleiman had reportedly agreed to a six-month extension that would not be renewed.Berri had held talks on Thursday night with Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat, who supports the extension as does the March 8 camp, excluding Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Michel Aoun.An Nahar said that efforts would be exerted to garner Aoun's consent in order for the a majority to be reached at parliament to extend its term. Aoun has been insisting on staging the parliamentary elections as scheduled on June 16.

Hizbullah Losses in Syria Steep, but Morale High
Naharnet /Hassan is just 18 and a fighter with Hizbullah, which sent nearly 2,000 men to support the Syrian army's assault on the central town of Qusayr this week.
His father Ali was also among the ranks of the Hizbullah men battling rebels in the key town, many of them holed up in tunnels. Hassan, a gunner, came back to his home in Bekaa's Baalbeck city on Wednesday after three days of grueling combat. His father did not.
Hassan discovered that Ali had been killed on day one of the fierce firefights. Together they had left to fight in Qusayr, but now his 43-year-old father was dead -- shot twice in the chest. "We were not in the same place, but I had a hunch, a weight on my chest. I was thinking of him all the time," Hassan admitted before breaking down in tears.
He quickly regained his composure: "I must be strong. From now on, I have to look after my mother and sister, then I will have to go back to the battle to finish what we started."
Hassan said the resistance put up by rebels in Qusayr had taken him and his comrades by surprise.
"On the first day, we advanced through the alleyways towards the center of Qusayr, and then suddenly the rebels attacked us from behind," he told Agence France Presse.
"We could not see any fighters, we thought there was no one there," he added, still wearing his combat fatigues, a Hizbullah scarf draped over his shoulders and a weapon in his hand.
"When we had pushed through two thirds of the city, towards the north, they came out of tunnels and opened fire on us. We had a lot of fighters killed and wounded, all of them shot in the back," he said.
The regime assault on the rebel stronghold of Qusayr, in central Homs province, began on Sunday.
Troops backed by fighters from Hizbullah, a staunch ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad, stormed the town after seizing a string of nearby villages.
Hizbullah forces were organized into 17 units of 100 men each, before storming the city from the east, south and west, a source close to the group said.
The town, which lies near the border with Lebanon, is home to some 25,000 people, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
It is a key prize for the rebels, a conduit through which weapons and fighters can be channeled from Lebanon.
Qusayr is also important for Assad's forces because of its strategic location between Damascus and the Mediterranean coast, the rear base for the regime.
Hassan said hundreds of well-armed and organized rebels put up a fierce fight.
"It took us a long time to eliminate them," he said.
"We had to search each house or burn it. Some tunnels were destroyed but others are still there and the rebels are still hiding in them."
Over the past eight months, the Observatory says, Hizbullah has lost 104 fighters in fighting in central Homs province, which borders Lebanon, and around a revered Shiite pilgrimage site near Damascus.
Hizbullah spokesman Ibrahim Musawi denied those figures, without providing an alternative number, and a source close to the movement said it had lost 75 dead.
Despite the losses, Hassan said that the hardest was yet to come for Hizbullah, as they will have to take the town's northern neighborhoods where most residents and rebel fighters are dug in.
"It is very difficult to take the last part. There are snipers everywhere. It will cost us dearly, but we will take it," he said with determination.
His mother Umm Hassan, 45, recalled the day her husband and son left for the battle. "When my husband left the house, I did not say goodbye to him," she said.
She maintained that the fight in Syria is vital for Hizbullah.
"It is much more important to fight in Qusayr now than against Israel because there are many (rebels) from different nationalities who are even more dangerous enemies than Israel," she insisted.
The Syrian regime says fighters from 28 countries have joined the rebels.
"My husband went to fight over there before they could attack us in Lebanon. We are not fighting against the Syrians but against our enemies who are in Syria," Umm Hassan said.
Source/Agence France Presse.

Al-Rahi Urges Timely Elections under Any Law, Rejects 'Implicating Lebanon in Regional Axes'
Naharnet/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi on Friday called for holding the parliamentary elections on time and stressed the importance of sparing Lebanon the impact of regional conflicts. “We categorically reject extension (of parliament's term) and elections must be held according to any current or new law, and laws must not be an excuse” for postponing elections, al-Rahi said at the Rafik Hariri International Airport upon his return from a 56-day tour of Latin America. "We cannot say that the situation deteriorated because of my absence and of course we voice regret that the parties concerned have not been able to reach a new electoral law," al-Rahi stated. He noted that this failure created a "major disappointment" and that it may be attributed to the lack of trust among the parties. "We call for holding elections within the constitutional timeframe because Lebanon's feature is the rotation of power," the patriarch added. Asked about the war of words over the electoral law between Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun and Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, al-Rahi said: "Christians are united and the conflicting viewpoints do not imply that there is a rift."
“There is no dispute among the Christian leaders and they are characterized by their free and diverse opinions,” he added.
“I do not accept claims that the ball is only in the court of Christians and a consensual electoral law is not only a Christian concern,” al-Rahi noted.
“We must restore our unity as Christians and Muslims and this is our wish amid these critical circumstances,” he went on to say. Turning to the issue of Hizbullah's military involvement in the Syrian conflict, al-Rahi said: “The Baabda Declaration was firm in stating that Lebanon is a neutral country and no one must be allowed to implicate it in regional and international axes and we regret that it is being implicated against its will."
"We were honored by the things we heard about Lebanon while abroad concerning its role in peace and stability in this Levant and this is what we're working for," al-Rahi added.
Several officials submitted on Friday their candidacies to the upcoming parliamentary polls, including the FPM, the LF, the AMAL movement and the March 14 Independent MPs to avoid uncontested victories despite strong objections over the adoption of the 1960 electoral law.
The parliamentary electoral subcommittee failed on Monday to reach an agreement over a new electoral law and Speaker Nabih Berri did not set a date for a new session.
Failure to reach consensus over an electoral law has raised fears of a political vacuum in Lebanon. In absence of consensus, the other two alternatives are holding the polls according to the 1960 law or extending the term of the current parliament. Last week, al-Mustaqbal bloc, the Lebanese Forces, MP Walid Jumblat’s National Struggle Front and March 14 alliance's independent lawmakers proposed a hybrid draft-law, which calls for 46 percent of MPs to be elected based on proportional representation and 54 percent under the winner-takes-all system.
Under the same proposal, Lebanon would be divided into 26 districts and six governorates.
But the members of the subcommittee that are part of the Hizbullah-led March 8 alliance expressed reservations on it along with March 14's Phalange Party.

Miqati, Salam, Ex-PMs Stress Need for New Govt. to Take Necessary Measures to Tackle Unrest
Naharnet /Caretaker Prime Minister Najib Miqati, Premier-designate Tammam Salam, and former PM Fouad Saniora and Omar Karami condemned on Friday the clashes in the northern city of Tripoli, calling on security agencies to tackle the situation. They said in a statement after meeting at the Grand Serail: “The dangerous political and security situation requires speeding up the formation of a new government that can take the necessary measures to tackle the unrest.” They called on the security and military agencies to “strike down with an iron fist all who violate the law and carry arms.”
The security agencies must implement an immediate security plan to remove all armed presence in Tripoli and hold all those responsible for the unrest accountable for their actions, they demanded. The gatherers rejected the spread of arms outside of the state's authority throughout Lebanon, calling on the security agencies to take the necessary measures to put an end to this phenomenon and demanding that Tripoli become an arms-free city. Moreover, they called for “completely respecting the policy of disassociation, which was aimed at averting dangers lurking around Lebanon, particularly the crisis in Syria.
They renewed their commitment to the Baabda Declaration and Arab League and international resolutions on Lebanon, specifically in their call for Lebanon to refrain from meddling in the affairs of other countries.
The army has been tasked with containing clashes that broke out on Sunday in the northern city of Tripoli.
The clashes erupted between the rival neighborhoods of Bab al-Tabbaneh, which backs the Syrian revolution, and Jabal Mohsen, which supports the Syrian regime.
At least 22 people have been killed in the recent round of clashes.

Geagea Says 1960 Law Harms Coexistence, Leads to 'Bigger Chaos'
Naharnet /Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea on Friday rejected a return to the 1960 electoral law, urging Speaker Nabih Berri to hold a parliamentary session aimed at voting on a new law.
“Holding a cabinet session to form the electoral supervisory commission and take the necessary measures to hold the polls under the 1960 law is against the National Pact and thus illegitimate despite being legal,” Geagea said in a press release. The caretaker cabinet will convene on Monday at the Baabda Palace to discuss the formation of the electoral supervisory commission and the electoral expenses, state-run National News Agency reported.
“The majority of Lebanese parties had rejected holding this electoral juncture under the 1960 law,” Geagea added.
“Instead of holding a cabinet session and reviving the 1960 law, the parliament must convene immediately to vote on a new electoral law, as holding the elections under the 1960 law would undermine the coexistence pact and drag the country into bigger chaos,” Geagea warned.He categorically rejected “putting some factional interests ahead of the agreement reached over the past few months, especially in the Bkirki meetings, on refusing any return to the 1960 law and seeking a new electoral law.”“Anyone who takes part in preparing for elections under the 1960 law would be contributing to imposing this law and preventing the adoption of any new law that ensures real representation for all Lebanese components,” Geagea added.Several officials submitted on Friday their candidacies to the upcoming parliamentary polls, including the FPM, the LF, the AMAL movement and the March 14 Independent MPs to avoid uncontested victories despite strong objections over the adoption of the 1960 electoral law.
The parliamentary electoral subcommittee failed on Monday to reach an agreement over a new electoral law and Speaker Nabih Berri did not set a date for a new session.
Failure to reach consensus over an electoral law has raised fears of a political vacuum in Lebanon. In absence of consensus, the other two alternatives are holding the polls according to the 1960 law or extending the term of the current parliament. Last week, al-Mustaqbal bloc, the Lebanese Forces, MP Walid Jumblat’s National Struggle Front and March 14 alliance's independent lawmakers proposed a hybrid draft-law, which calls for 46 percent of MPs to be elected based on proportional representation and 54 percent under the winner-takes-all system.
Under the same proposal, Lebanon would be divided into 26 districts and six governorates.
But the members of the subcommittee that are part of the Hizbullah-led March 8 alliance expressed reservations on it along with March 14's Phalange Party.

Plumbly Meets Charbel, Calls for Elections According to 'International Standards'
Naharnet /United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon Derek Plumbly reiterated on Friday calls for political foes to carry out the parliamentary elections according to “international standards.”
“The U.N. is involved in providing technical support to the Ministry of Interior in the preparations for elections... Lebanese leaders must ensure the continuity of institutions,” Plumbly said after holding talks with Caretaker Interior Minister Marwan Charbel.Asked if he supports holding polls based on the 1960 electoral law, the diplomat noted that the “there are discussions in the Parliament... We hope they're successful.”
In its eighth round of talks, the parliamentary electoral subcommittee failed to reach an agreement over a new electoral law as Speaker Nabih Berri did not set a date for a new session. This failure has raised fears of a political vacuum in Lebanon or that the parliamentary elections will be held according to the 1960 law or that the term of the current parliament will be extended. Plumbly also discussed with Charbel the ongoing clashes in the northern city of Tripoli.“This tragic fighting, for which there is no excuse, must stop for the sake of Lebanon,” the official said. He urged all political leaders and “those with influence” to do all it takes to “enable the army and security forces to control the situation and restore peace and normality in the city.”Plumbly described the meeting with Chabel as “good.”
At least 23 people have been killed and 167 others wounded since Sunday in Syria-linked clashes between Sunni and Alawite residents Tripoli.
The latest round of violence began as President Bashar Assad's troops launched an assault against the rebel stronghold of Qusayr in Syria's central province of Homs.

French Ambassador to Lebanon Patrice Paoli Reiterates Calls for Lebanese Foes to Reach Consensus over Controversial Issues
Naharnet /French Ambassador to Lebanon Patrice Paoli reiterated calls for foes in Lebanon to find a way to return to dialogue and to agree on preventing the developments in the neighboring country Syria from having a negative impact on the situation in the country.“The battles in Qusayr don't fall in Lebanon's best interest and we are looking forward for the foes to carry out the parliamentary elections on time and to form a new cabinet,” Paoli said in comments published in the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat. Fighting in the Syrian town of Qusayr has spilled over into Lebanon, with rebels targeting border towns inside Lebanon in response to Hizbullah involvement in the conflict.Paoli warned of falling into a political vacuum, stressing on the message conveyed by Director of the North Africa & Middle East department at the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs Jean-Francois Girault, who recently visited the country.The French ambassador described the visit of Girault as a message of “friendship to the Lebanese amid the difficult situation” in the country.”
Girault kicked off his visit to Lebanon last week by meeting with President Michel Suleiman.He also met with senior Lebanese officials and party leaders.
Girault expressed hope that a cabinet would formed soon to oversee polls. The Lebanese foes failed repeatedly to reach an agreement over a new electoral law, raising fears of a political vacuum in Lebanon or that the parliamentary elections will be held according to the 1960 law or that the term of the current parliament will be extended.
Paoli stressed that his country doesn't interfere in Lebanon's affairs, pointing out that “democracy would be applied by holding the elections.
The diplomat praised the role played by President Michel Suleiman, describing him as “the unity of the country and the guarantee of the constitution.” He also expressed hope that Prime Minister-designate Tammam Salam would be able to form his cabinet “France doesn't give instructions or orders... We openly discuss the matters with all of our friends,” Paoli added.
He stated that the French authority conveyed its message through Girault to all the rival parties in the same manner.
“We encourage the foes to meet and agree on all the disputable matters,” Paoli said.

Syria Army Says Captured Rebels in Qusayr's North with Hizbullah's Support
Naharnet /Syrian troops have captured much of the rebel stronghold of Qusayr, in central Homs province, squeezing opposition fighters into the north of the strategic town, a military officer told Agence France Presse on Friday.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights watchdog said regime forces backed by members of Hizbullah were bombing northern areas of the city, encircling rebel fighters there.
"The armed men are surrounded on all sides, there is no escape for them now," the officer told an AFP journalist accompanying army forces in the embattled town.
The regime uses the term "armed men" to refer to the rebel forces fighting to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad.
"The battle will continue until the complete liberation of Qusayr. We're in the second and penultimate phase of the fight," the officer said.
The Syrian army, backed by Hezbollah fighters, began on Sunday their assault on Qusayr.
They advanced into the south, east and west of the city, quickly claiming the municipality building in the center of town.
The eastern part of the town, which has been abandoned by residents, has effectively been transformed into a military barracks, the AFP journalist said.
Armored vehicles, military positions and fortifications can been seen in every street and on every corner.
Soldiers are posted on all the buildings overlooking the northern part of the town.
"There are many snipers who are trying to infiltrate buildings to monitor army movements in the secured areas," another army officer says. At the entrance to a bakery, soldiers drink coffee and smoke cigarettes, while another group keeps a close eye on the main road, "to stop any infiltration by armed men," one of them said. The army says it now controls the road linking Qusayr to the Lebanese Bekaa city of Baalbeck, a stronghold of Hizbullah which is allied to the Syrian regime.
Qusayr is strategically important for both the rebels and the regime. For the rebels, the town of 25,000 people is a conduit on a route along which weapons and fighters arrive from Lebanon. The regime wants to control the town to deny the rebels their strategic prize and also keep open the road between Damascus and the coast, which runs by Qusayr.
The Observatory reported violent clashes in the areas of Hamdiyeh and Arjuneh, as well as Dabaa airport, north of the city of Qusayr.
"The regime forces are trying to isolate Dabaa airport from the town to completely encircle the rebel groups," Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman told AFP.
Hezbollah, meanwhile, "is using heavy artillery and mortars" in the fight against the rebels, he added.
The Observatory said at least 67 people had been killed across Syria on Friday, including 18 soldiers, 17 civilians and 32 rebel fighters.
Source/Agence France Presse.

Jumblat Meets Berri, Rejects Holding Polls 'amid These Bleak Circumstances'
Naharnet/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat on Friday announced his support for extending parliament's term, rejecting “the elections farce” and defending the army against verbal attacks from Tripoli politicians.“Amid these bleak circumstances, I don't think that it is useful to engage in the elections farce,” said Jumblat after meeting Speaker Nabih Berri in Ain al-Tineh.
“Today, I'm with extending parliament's term because we can't hold elections in this tense atmosphere and because it would prevent vacuum and chaos in state institutions,” Jumblat explained.
“These are my words after my meeting with my friend, Speaker Berri, and I take responsibility for what I'm saying,” he added.
Jumblat's remarks come after state-run National News Agency reported that the caretaker cabinet will convene on Monday at the Baabda Palace to discuss the formation of the electoral supervisory commission and the electoral expenses.Several officials submitted on Friday their candidacies to the upcoming parliamentary polls, including the Free Patriotic Movement, the AMAL movement, the March 14 Independent MPs, the Lebanese Forces and Hizbullah, despite strong objections over the adoption of the 1960 electoral law.
The parliamentary electoral subcommittee failed on Monday to reach an agreement over a new electoral law and Berri did not set a date for a new session.
Failure to reach consensus over an electoral law has raised fears of a political vacuum in Lebanon. In absence of consensus, the other two alternatives are holding the polls according to the 1960 law or extending the term of the current parliament.
Last week, al-Mustaqbal bloc, the Lebanese Forces, Jumblat’s National Struggle Front and March 14 alliance's independent lawmakers proposed a hybrid draft-law, which calls for 46 percent of MPs to be elected based on proportional representation and 54 percent under the winner-takes-all system.
Under the same proposal, Lebanon would be divided into 26 districts and six governorates.
But the members of the subcommittee that are part of the Hizbullah-led March 8 alliance expressed reservations on it along with March 14's Phalange Party.
Turning to the issues of the deadly clashes in Tripoli and the battle in the Syrian town of Qusayr, Jumblat said: “There are forces who have opted for chaos in Tripoli and it is prohibited to attack the army because we would be committing self-destruction." "We must protect the army under any circumstances," Jumblat stressed. He noted that "major world powers are currently trying to resolve the crisis in Syria, such as the U.S. and Russia." "So who are we to be able to change the equation in Syria, we won't be able to change anything," he added. "I recommend reducing the interference in Syria and Tripoli's residents are Lebanese citizens. When Tripoli's political leaders reject the army, this is a condemned thing," Jumblat said.

Lebanese Candidacies to Elections Pour into the Interior Ministry ahead of Deadline
Naharnet/Several officials submitted on Friday their candidacies to the upcoming parliamentary polls, including the Free Patriotic Movement, the AMAL movement, the March 14 Independent MPs, the Lebanese Forces and Hizbullah, despite strong objections over the adoption of the 1960 electoral law at the polls to avoid uncontested victories. Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, Caretaker Telecommunications Minister Nicolas Sehnaoui and several members of the party filed their electoral candidacies. “We were hoping to file our candidacies according to the Orthodox Gathering draft,” Sehnaoui told reporters. MTV reported later on that members of Speaker Nabih Berri's parliamentary bloc and others from the Marada movement, which is lead by Suleiman Franjeih, also submitted their candidacies.
Berri delegated his adviser Ali Hamdan to the ministry to file his candidacy on his behalf. Four National Liberal Party officials submitted their candidacies, however, head of the party Dori Chamoun is expected to file his request to run for elections on Monday. March 14 Independent MP Butros Harb also filed his candidacy to the polls, the NNA said. Later 26 members of the Lebanese Forces arrived at the Interior Ministry to submit their candidacies.
In the afternoon, Hizbullah submitted the candidacies of 14 nominees who will run in the upcoming parliamentary elections. The party nominated all its current MPs in the Loyalty to Resistance bloc without any changes.
The NNA noted that the total number of nominations submitted on Friday has reached 240. A parliament session was set to convene on May 15 in order to vote on the proposal, but the meeting was never held due to a lack of quorum.In its eighth round of talks, the parliamentary electoral subcommittee failed again on Monday to reach an agreement over a new electoral law as Berri did not set a date for a new session. This failure has raised fears of a political vacuum in Lebanon or that the parliamentary elections will be held according to the 1960 law or that the term of the current parliament will be extended.
Monday is the deadline for candidates to file their requests to run for the elections according to the 1960 law. Several has already submitted their candidacies.

Syria Opposition Sceptical as Russia Says Regime Will Talk
Naharnet/Syria's opposition on Friday urged President Bashar Assad's government to speak out on whether it will take part in an international peace conference, after Russia claimed the regime had agreed "in principle" to attend."We would like to hear that statement from the Assad government. This has been related to us through the Russians, I have no idea why the Syrians are silent," Louay Safi, spokesman for the National Coalition, told Agence France Presse at a meeting of the main Syrian opposition group in Istanbul. "We need more clarity. The announcement is still very vague. And why is it not made by Damascus?"
Meanwhile, another coalition member called on Assad to prove he is working for a transition of power in the war-torn country. "We want to stop the bloodshed. It's very important for us to have goodwill gestures, and from both sides," Khaled al-Saleh, spokesman for the Coalition told reporters in Istanbul."We want to make sure that when we enter those negotiations the bloodshed in Syria will stop," he added. Saleh also renewed accusations against the regime over the alleged use of chemical weapons, this time in the town of Adra near the capital.
"In terms of us making goodwill gestures, we're ready to make those," said Saleh. "From the regime's perspective, at least don't use chemical weapons the night before" Moscow announced Damascus' willingness to go to the negotiating table, he added."You know, simple things like that. Stop using Scud missiles. Withdraw the army from Syrian cities."
The peace conference, dubbed "Geneva 2" and expected to be held in June, would be aimed at ending the raging Syrian civil war, which in two years has killed more than 90,000 people. But organizers must first get both sides to attend.The conference was jointly proposed by Russia, a key backer of Assad, and the United States, which supports the rebels fighting to overthrow him.
Earlier Friday, Russian foreign ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said Moscow had "received an agreement in principle from Damascus to attend the international conference".Meeting in Istanbul for three days, members of the opposition have stipulated that in order for the conference to go forward, the National Coalition would need international guarantees that talks would lead to Assad's resignation.
"We would like to have guarantees particularly from the Russian side, because the Russian leadership has been defending Assad himself," said Safi.
"If the Russians will come forward and realize that they are moving against history and siding with the wrong party, then I think we are going to see a meaningful change, and that will save the Syrian people, who have suffered a lot," he added.The Coalition's meeting began Thursday, a day after backers of the anti-Assad uprising gathered in Amman and told the Syrian regime that should it fail to work for peace, they would step up their assistance to the opposition."As far as the United States, France and the rest of participants in Amman's conference are concerned, the framework for Geneva 2 was clear," said another Coalition member, Khaled Khoja.
"But if they are playing with words and trying to gain time, we can't consider that the Syrian regime is really willing to talk," Khoja told AFP. He also said only if the opposition has the upper ground in battle will the regime accept to negotiate on the rebels' terms, renewing opposition calls for military aid."We want the Friends of Syria (who back the uprising)... to increase their military assistance to the (rebel Free Syrian Army's) command, until Assad complies to the idea of a real political solution," Khoja added.Source/Agence France Presse.

Questions Obama Dodged in Terror Speech
Naharnet /U.S. President Barack Obama set out Thursday to redefine the U.S. fight against global terrorism.
But despite calling for a more targeted and not "boundless" theater of global operations, Obama left the specifics and timelines for action, by which his success or failure can be measured, out of his big speech.
Here are some critical questions Obama did not raise or answer in the address at the National Defense University.
Guantanamo Bay timeline. Obama renewed his call for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay camp for terror suspects in Cuba.
But he did not provide a timeline for doing so -- other than saying that if the camp were open 10 or 20 years from now it would be antithetical to U.S. values.
The president appears to have learned a lesson from his first term, when, in one of his first acts as president, he ordered the camp closed within a year. His failure to follow through remains a blemish on his presidency.
Detention without release
Obama also did not specify what he would do with Guantanamo Bay inmates who are deemed too dangerous to release -- but who cannot be tried because evidence against them came from coercive interrogations and is not admissible in court. Even if most Guantanamo inmates are shipped out, a small number of such detainees face detention without trial in perpetuity and no legal framework yet exists to govern their plight. Obama simply said he was "confident" that the issue could be worked out according to the rule of law.
When will the war end?
Obama warned that a "perpetual" global war against terrorism would be self-defeating for the United States.
Though urging the adoption of new strategies to tackle burgeoning franchises that pledge allegiance to al-Qaida but are not in its command structure, and homegrown radicals, he did not put an end date on the war on terror.
Still Obama's critics quickly accused him of "winding down" US anti-terror operations that have been in place since the September 11 attacks in 2001, and accused him of not taking the diffuse global threat sufficiently seriously.
Opacity on drones
Obama gave his most public, detailed, justification of the U.S. drone war against al-Qaida and other Islamic extremist groups yet but left many questions unanswered.
He did not for instance say he would cede the right to use drone strikes as he sees fit, despite unveiling new guidelines for their use.Though admitting he was "haunted" by civilian deaths in drone strikes, he did not give details on how many unintended victims there had been. He did argue that there was a "wide gap" between government assessments of casualties and those of independent groups who say thousands of civilians may have died. It also remained unclear whether the White House or the Pentagon will in future confirm details about suspected drone strikes. Previously, government spokespeople have refused to tell journalists any details of the covert program when asked to confirm reports of strikes reported by authorities in other countries like Pakistan or Yemen.
Obama did not, as some observers expected, announce that the CIA role in drone strikes (mostly over Pakistan) would be ceded to the U.S. military -- likely because operations by the spy agency remain classified.
The president also did not define the concept of an "imminent threat" to U.S. security that he says a terror suspect must pose to be the target of a U.S. drone strike abroad.
Some human rights groups say the term is elastic and unspecified and leaves the government far too much latitude in mounting drone strikes overseas.
Source/Agence France Presse.

Liberation Without Its Illusions
Husam Itani/Al Hayat
Friday 24 May 2013
Tomorrow, we will read and hear the same words. Hence, those who liberated South Lebanon from the Israeli occupation will be saluted. The infallible will be glorified. Every detractor or anyone with a different opinion will be threatened and the enemy will be informed about our total readiness to face its malicious ambitions and eternal callousness.
We will watch television shows prepared without the least amount of imagination or talent about the thirteenth anniversary of the ousting of the Israeli occupation from our untainted land, and listen to testimonies reiterated for the thirteenth time about the sins of the violating enemy and the pureness of the resistance fighters and the populations of the occupied regions. The moulds are ready, and so is the audience.
All of this remains acceptable, considering that the Israeli occupation was a dark page in Lebanon’s history, and we should not forget the disasters which accompanied it. However, the indoctrination facet in recollecting this memory goes beyond the direct drawing of the lessons from the occupation and its resistance, even beyond its political exploitation by the side which controlled the resistance.
Thirteen years after the withdrawal of the Israeli forces, the picture in Lebanon appears to be very bleak. This is due to the fact that the liberation stripped the Lebanese of the last pretext they used to justify their failure to build their state and society, while publically displaying their internal flaws. Part of the Lebanese believed – due to their extreme naïveté – that the Israeli withdrawal will liberate Lebanon from its task as a regional bargaining card and an arena for the settlement of external scores. And the Maronite bishops’ statement in September 2000 points in that direction.
But as usual, the Lebanese people’s imagination fell short of grasping what had been prepared for their country. The Shebaa Farms cause was thus flicked and Lebanon found itself mobilized at the service of another project, whose importance extended beyond the Syrian regime’s negotiations with Israel. Ever since the Israeli pullout, we have entered the direct Iranian calculations which doubly held the Lebanese card, via the Syrian security services and Hezbollah. Consequently, we were forced to link our country’s fate to that of the Iranian nuclear reactors and the uranium enrichment levels in the Natanz facility.
More importantly, the liberation put back on the table the impossible rebuilding of the country, thus eliminating the ambiguity of the illusions which accompanied the reconstruction phase in the 1990s and placed the Lebanese before the bitter truth, i.e. that there is no national consensus over anything, from the definition of the state to that of the enemy, reaching national interest, independence, sovereignty and foreign relations.
The liberation revealed that Israel’s occupation of parts of the Lebanese territories was the least of the Lebanese people’s problems, and the Israeli pullout exposed the fake settlements they had reached at the end of their wars in 1990. The assassination of Rafik al-Hariri in 2005, then the July 2006 war, both confirmed that the building of an independent Lebanon is still pending and that the local powers are much too weak to assume real political responsibilities, thus favoring the system of loyalty to foreign powers, regardless of the consequences on the Lebanese.
In other words, and far away from any maneuvering or misleading, the liberation marked the beginning of a journey to discover the depth of Lebanese dependency, the frailty of the state project and the absence of citizenship in this part of the world. And the dramatic rise of sectarian sensitivities, along with the prevalence of half-demented people on the overall political scene in Lebanon, is a mere side effect for the collapse of Lebanese society on the political and civil levels.
Far away from the praising of a resistance which goes wherever its leaders order it to, there is a question about the meaning of independence, the nation and the state, as long as we are unable to exit the shell of the sect, the tribe and the denomination, as long as we prefer to live in a state of illusions, and as long as our future is a series of endless funerals.

Western Powers Appease the Iranian Regime
Raghida Dergham/Al Hayat
Friday 24 May 2013
The ambiguity of Western attitudes towards the Islamic Republic of Iran raises many questions about whether it is the goal of the United States, Britain, and France to enable Tehran to prevent the victory of the armed opposition in Syria, or to further involve Iran and its ally Hezbollah in the Syrian quagmire.
This time, the West has been silent about the presidential elections in Iran, turning a blind eye to the growing repression there unlike in 2009, before the Iranian authorities managed to crush the protests and the reformist-led uprising. Furthermore, the West continues to engage in open-ended negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear program, while rejecting to set timeframes or issue warnings vis-à-vis Iran’s continued stalling and refusal to comply with international demands.
Proceeding from this, it seems that Western stances over Iran’s elections and nuclear program seek to appease the mullahs’ regime in Tehran. Then concerning Tehran’s regional role, which Iran views as a fundamental right, the West seems to be pursuing conflicting policies.
The West appears at times a partner of Tehran’s – as in enabling its role in Arab countries such as Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon – while at others, Washington, London, and Paris seem satisfied with the mutual carnage and attrition in the Syrian quagmire, between Shias and Sunnis, and happy to ward off terror from their cities.
The recent public Western acknowledgement of a direct role of Iranian combatants in Syria effectively pushes Western powers into a corner. For one thing, the UN Security Council, in a resolution issued under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, bars Iran from exporting troops, military equipment, or military aid beyond its borders, and pledges to take measures against Iran in the event it is found in breach of those requirements.
The Western powers have also recently warned against the continued military involvement of Lebanon’s Hezbollah in Syria, with hints coming from Europe about plans to designate the Shia group’s military wing as a terrorist organization. All these developments could lay the groundwork for further action at the UN Security Council, including a battle with Russia, another supplier of military aid to the Syrian regime, over Iran’s involvement in Syria.
Whatever happens in the planned Geneva II conference, if it is indeed held, will determine the next move for Western powers. Yet one Gordian knot at that conference will be Iran as well.
The statement issued by the foreign ministers of the Friends of Syria grouping at the end of their meeting in Amman this week, reaffirmed their commitment to stepping up support for the Syrian opposition, until a transitional government with full powers sees the light. But what kind of support could this mean? The answer to that question is the main issue of contention among the group, which includes the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Qatar, and Jordan.
This week as well, the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations issued a resolution that would help shield US President Barack Obama from criticism when and if he decides to provide real and tangible support for the Syrian opposition – at least to restore the balance of power on the ground and prevent the victory of regime forces backed by Iranian troops, Hezbollah fighters, and superior Russian weaponry.
So will the US president decide to support the Syrian opposition with effective weapons, either directly or through Arab and European channels? Or will Obama continue to drag his feet – whether out of his naïve aversion to involvement in any quagmires, or based on his subtle ploy for both sides to mutually exhaust one another in that quagmire?
The main issue here is the military balance of power. But it seems that the US policy pursued by Barack Obama so far is to prevent a decisive victory for either side in Syria: The armed opposition, which includes in its ranks the al-Nusra Front, even if in no bigger proportion than five or ten percent; or Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia.
Britain and France, as usual, make threats and then back down. They have both pledged more than once to go ahead and arm the Syrian opposition, after they failed to convince other members of the European Union to lift the arms embargo on Syria, only to backtrack on their pledges after that, more than once as well.
Perhaps among the reasons for Western attitudes that seem to favor a war of attrition in Syria, are the benefits of this war for US and European intelligence services. To be sure, the Syrian conflict has shed light on the breadth of Sunni extremism throughout the world because of the rallying call made by al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and their ilk. As Sunni extremists answered the call for help, the intelligence community was able to expose their identities and attitudes, and intercept their communications.
The most recent development to impact the military balance of power involves the clear determination of Iran and Hezbollah to triumph in Qusayr, a battle that is fateful at both the military and moral levels. Qusayr is a vital artery if the planned outcome of the battle is the survival of the regime or the partitioning of Syria, and also the backbone for any future Iranian presence in Syria.
The statement of the Friends of Syria, which stressed that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would have no future role in Syria, called on Iran and Hezbollah to withdraw their fighters and said their armed presence in the country was a threat to the stability of the region.
That statement was made with a ‘straight face,’ calling on Assad’s allies to pull out their fighters and affirming that Assad cannot have a role in Syria’s future, while Tehran, Damascus, and Hezbollah are waging a fierce battle to ensure the survival of the regime with Assad in the helm. Moreover, the statement all but overlooked the ‘ethnic cleansing’ committed by Assad’s forces in Baniyas, and also showed disregard for the warnings about the use of chemical weapons by deploying vapid and inconsequential language on the issue.
In other words, one side is waging war to alter the military balance of power and keep it in its favor – and hence its triumphalist tone. And one side is vacillating between aversion to engagement on the ground, and deliberately undermining the balance of power, and hence its tone of supplication and appeal for intervention.
In truth, the boost to self-confidence made possible by the successful assault on Qusayr has allowed Hezbollah and Iran to advance their bid to extend the term of the Lebanese parliament for two years, and to form a political cabinet according to a configuration that is satisfactory to their camp. Their ‘victory’ in Qusayr has translated into successfully blocking the general election in Lebanon.
While the Mumanaa axis – the so-called pro-resistance camp – plans and makes such moves, the other camp is in a slumber, and does nothing more than make promises or threats from time to time.
Meanwhile, the issue of Iran’s participation in Geneva II, which was agreed to by US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, has become a major obstacle to holding the international meeting.
Ahead of the international conference, Kerry went to Amman to meet with the Syrian opposition and the Friends of Syria to unify the ranks of the opposition, and rally their support for political talks between the regime and the opposition. But Kerry appears as though he was marketing ‘Russian goods,’ especially if one is to recall that the previous US stance insisted on Bashar al-Assad stepping down. In addition, Kerry’s seal of approval to the Amman statement, which mentioned that Bashar al-Assad would not have a future role in Syria, is but a natural reflection of the unnaturally conflicting attitudes of the United States.
Returning to Iran’s participation in Geneva II which Russia insists upon, the debate is taking place at a time when the US administration has confirmed that Iranian troops are fighting alongside pro-Assad forces, and also amid growing US talk about the Syrian conflict having turned into a regional war with Iran now a direct party, both through its troops and its proxy Hezbollah. Yet the Western stance on the idea of Iran’s participation in Geneva II remains vague and irresolute.
For their part, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are opposed to granting Tehran a role on the table that would go on to discuss Syria’s future, and believe that this would give legitimize Iran’s regional role in Syria and beyond.
Yet Lakhdar Brahimi, joint envoy of the UN and the Arab League, has always sought to give Iran a role in light of its influence and direct role in Syria. Brahimi believes this must be taken in to account; otherwise, proxy wars in Syria would only continue with no end in sight.
Russia has proposed that both Saudi and Iran attend the conference. So far, Saudi has refused to take part following this formula, lest it be the one to endorse an Iranian role in an Arab country. Consequently, Iran’s participation remains one of the many obstacles facing Geneva II, which is supposed to convene prior to the US-Russian summit in mid-June. By then, Iran would have been done with its presidential election.
Incidentally, the Iranian authorities have preempted these elections by excluding the two men who had the best odds to win: Former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, and Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, an ally of incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The regime in Tehran also forestalled the elections by coming down hard on dissidents, perhaps to send out a message to all those concerned that meddling in Iran’s electoral affairs was a red line, and that the regime would ensure that the protests that erupted in 2009 would not happen again.
Iran’s Guardian Council has practically aborted the elections by excluding those candidates. However, voices rose from within the council for the first time to criticize its decisions, which may signify the beginning of dissent. Furthermore, Mashaei pledged to expose corruption among his opponents. But will he be allowed to do that?
Most likely, the exclusion of candidates and the repression will affect voter turnout. Protest campaigns in Iran such as Vote4Zahra are meant to highlight the reactionary nature of the regime in Tehran and its misogyny. However, these remain protest campaigns and not electoral campaigns that are basically prohibited.
The presidential elections in Iran carry little significance in their capacity as elections, so what matters is the disillusionment they will lead to after they are held, and how this would progress after that within Iran. Those who had hoped that something like the Arab Spring would erupt in Iran are disappointed. But in the end, disappointment is an essential part of the Iranian regime’s strategy of repression, intimidation, and exclusion, which the rulers of the Islamic Republic practice only too well.
The Supreme Leader of the Republic Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is alive and well, and continues to control all facets of power as he pleases. He has managed to exclude his significant opponents, and did not lose the rival project that is the Revolutionary Guard (IRGC), which is seeking to safeguard its economic and military privileges and its powers that it accumulated over the years through Mashaei. It is worth mentioning that the task of internal repression is assigned to the Basij, while the job of protecting Iranian interests abroad is entrusted to the Pasdaran – i.e. the IRGC.
The majority of Iranians have no qualms with what the IRGC is doing in Syria, or with what Khamenei wants through forward military deployments in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon to get Iran closer to the warm waters of the Mediterranean Sea. The Soviet Union spent decades in pursuit of the same goal, and did not manage to do so except recently with its heir Russia, in Tartous.
Iran reached the warm waters through what it sees as its prized possession, i.e. Lebanon, thanks to Hezbollah. Indeed, through Lebanon, Iran believes it has borders with the United States, given the special relationship between the latter and Israel. Furthermore, the support the IRGC receives in Syria, in the view of Iranian officials, is the result of the success of the Quds Brigade in the July War in Lebanon against Israel.
All these overlapping factors call for deeper reflection on the relationship between the West and Iran. For in parallel with claims about a quagmire in Syria and this being Iran and Hezbollah’s Vietnam, there is talk about grand bargains being hatched behind closed doors, where the Western and Eastern powers would allow Iran to triumph in Syria against extremist Sunni factions, for which Iran would be rewarded in the grand regional scheme.

Kerry calls for “hard decisions” in Israel - while Hizballah-al Qaeda forces build up in Syria
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis May 24, 2013/
Al Qaeda gunmen march into Syria
After spending 48 hours in Jerusalem and Ramallah, trying to talk Israeli and Palestinian leaders into reviving the long-stalled Middle East peace process, US Secretary of State John Kerry’s exit line Friday, May 24, was: “We’re getting toward a time now when hard decisions need to be made.”
That was all he had to say about Israel's comments on US proposals on the subject as unworkable and the Palestinian view that American ideas were still unformed and conditions for reviving talks non-existent.
In any case, the Syrian crisis hurtling forward heedless of its disastrous potential for its neighbors is fully exercising their leaders’ attention at this time and confronting them with much more urgent “hard decisions.”
The Secretary himself had just come from a Friends of Syria meeting Thursday in Amman, which was attended by a sparse 11 members compared with the original 80. The meeting ended with a demand that the international conference on Syria, which Kerry is trying to convene in Geneva in the first week of June in partnership with Russia, will not accept Assad regime representatives with blood on their hands.
Moscow took exception to this demand Friday by means of a Russian Foreign Ministry statement that Syria has agreed in principle to participate in the conference, but obstacles to a date were still raised by the Syrian opposition.
It can’t therefore be said that Washington and Moscow see eye to eye on the key issues of Syrian representation at the conference they are jointly sponsoring.
The US still insists that Bashar Assad must go before a political solution can be broached, while Russia continues to champion and arm him.
The most conspicuous feature of Kerry’s current Middle East tour is the strong dichotomy between his public statements and mission and the events taking place in the real world around him.
debkafile analysts assign this gap between the Secretary’s perceptions and reality to US President Barack Obama’s own evasiveness on the “hard decisions” he needs to take for determining the level of US involvement in the acute crises shaking this highly volatile region.
This was evident in the speech he delivered Thursday, March 23, in which he stressed the effort to pull the United States away from its inclusive “post 9/11 war on terror” and “return to normalcy.”
He said “lethal force [such as drones] will only be used against targets who pose a continuing imminent threat to Americans.”
Obama’s message was totally unrelated to the rising militancy of the two most virulent Islamic terrorist movements of the present day.
As he spoke, Al Qaeda, on the one hand, and the Lebanese Shiite Hizballah, on the other, continued to pour fighting strength into Syria and feed the flames of a calamitous civil war which has claimed more than 80,000 lives in a little more than two years.
Our military sources report that Hizballah brigades are forming up with the Syrian army for their next decisive battle, after their al-Qusayr victory, for the capture of the northern city of Homs; Al Qaeda jihadis are streaming across the border from Iraq to cement rebel control of the Deir a-Zor region of eastern Syria.
The aggressive actions of both Hizballah and al Qaeda in Syria are outside the bounds of the US president’s revised objectives for the US war on terror – hence, the rationale for US non-involvement in any part of the Syrian conflict.
At the same time, both these movements are at war, declared or undeclared, on Israel, Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. Their destabilizing impact extends to the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah too.
In terms of timing and immediacy, therefore, the ”hard decisions” John Kerry called for are right outside the current Middle East context. Israel’s leaders must decide urgently how to address Syria’s headlong descent into more bloodshed at a time that Iran, Russia, Al Qaeda and Hizballah are in charge of events.
The initiative led by the US Secretary of State and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov for an international conference to hammer out a political solution for the Syrian crisis in no way slowed its momentum.
Israel’s leaders might perhaps best be advised to prioritize attention to determining how best to handle the perils looming from Syria ahead of Kerry’s bid for a return to talks with the Palestinians.