Bible Quotation for today/ First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

Obama launches diplomacy with Tehran after quietly accepting Iran’s current nuclear capabilities
DEBKAfile Exclusive /Analysis September 25, 2013,/
http://www.debka.com/article/23305/Obama-launches-diplomacy-with-Tehran-after-quietly-accepting-Iran’s-current-nuclear-capabilities
Iranian President Rouhani conspicuously avoided shaking the hand President Barack Obama extended to his government at the UN Tuesday, Sept. 24, by absenting himself from the UN reception for world readers. He made this gesture under strong international spotlight to underscore the value Iran places on being respected as an equal in the negotiations ahead with the United States, Iranian sources stress.
Although his words were relatively mild for an Iranian revolutionary, Rouhani nonetheless made no concessions on Tehran’s fundamentals: "Acceptance of and respect for implementation of the right to enrichment inside Iran and enjoyment of other related nuclear rights provides “the only path to the framework to manage our differences." Obama knew the “handshake rebuff” was coming, yet he went through with his announcement of direct engagement with Iran earlier Tuesday. To give his rhetoric weight, he demonstratively instructed Secretary of State John Kerry to take charge of the pursuit of "face to face negotiations" with Tehran. The link Obama made in his speech between the Iranian and Palestinians negotiating processes as the two focal issues of his Middle East policy was further embodied by his appointment of the same official, John Kerry, to take charge of both tracks. This has placed Israel at a disadvantage on both fronts. Kerry finds the Iranian track in good shape. It has been secretly active for the past two months between president Obama and Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Rouhani, as first revealed by debkafile. Oman’s Sultan Qaboos was their go-between. The Secretary of State wins a flying start from the four points of agreement they have already reached:
1. Iran’s nuclear capabilities will be preserved in their present state. Tehran has already pocketed respect for its right to enrich uranium and keep back in the country all accumulated stocks, including the quantities enriched to the 20 percent level (a short hop to weaponised grade).

2. Tehran accepts a cap on the number of centrifuges enriching uranium at the Natanz facility. The exact number has not been decided.
The number of machines for enriching uranium to 5 percent is still at issue. There are no restrictions on centrifuges generating a lower level of purity.
Discussions on this point have not been finalized, since Washington wants to limit the number of advanced IR2 and IR1 centrifuges in operation and Tehran is holding out against this,
3. Iran will sign the Additional Protocol of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty-NPT, which allows International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to make unannounced visits outside declared nuclear sites, when they are suspected of carrying out banned operations.
It will also allow the IAEA to install cameras in the chambers where the centrifuges are spinning and not just the areas where the enriched uranium is deposited.
Here too, it is not clear whether Tehran will also stipulated that Israel sign the same article and permit inspections of its reputed nuclear sites.
4. The US and European Union will gradually lift all sanctions.
The linkage President Obama made between the Iranian and Palestinian negotiating tracks is puzzling:
Does it imply that the more land Israel gives up on the West Bank for a Palestinian state, the more heavily he will lean on Iran to give up its nuclear weapons program?
Was the president suggesting that if Israel is ready to evacuate settlements and reach a land swap deal with the Palestinians, he will be all the more ready to use force to preempt a nuclear-armed Iran?
If that is the president’s thinking, he is giving the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, by accepting or rejecting the extent of Israeli concessions, the power to determine the endgame of US nuclear negotiations with Iran.
Does that make sense? Obama’s interconnection of the two issues, if that can be extrapolated from his words, is self defeating: It would allow Tehran to carry on with its nuclear weapons program while spouting more pacific slogans to the American public and Binyamin Netanyahu to refuse to pull Israel out of substantial areas in Judea and Samaria, while advising the Palestinians to be satisfied with the control they have over seven West Bank cities and their economic autonomy. Buried under the verbal avalanche produced in two days of UN business, was a major diplomatic concession tossed by Obama at Iran’s feet: His call on the UN Security Council to enforce Syria’s compliance with the international ban on chemical weapons as a major challenge to the international community. First he shunted the Syrian chemical issue aside by relegating to the US Congress a decision on limited US military intervention.He then put it on the table for a US-Russian deal in Geneva; and finally he has passed it on to the UN. The Russians have made it clear that they will block any Security Council measures that would hold Syria to account for non-compliance with the Chemical Weapons ban. So the buck-passing has reached a dead end and Iran’s ally Bashar Assad is off the hook for using poison gas against his own people.

Incompetent Rebel Syrian leadership
September 26, 2013 12:37 AM The Daily Star
This week’s announcement by 13 Syrian rebel groups that they support the establishment of an Islamic state is being touted in some quarters as the latest in a long list of disappointments when it comes to Western, and particularly American, policy on the Syria crisis. Around a month ago, Washington sprang into action in the wake of a chemical weapons attack near Damascus, issuing ultimatums and finally obtaining pledges from both Russia and Syria that the chemical weapons held by the Assad regime would be addressed in serious fashion.However, ever since the events of late August, the Syria crisis has generated a series of challenges for the international community and the United States. The rebels launched an attack against the Christian village of Maaloula, which has little importance in military terms but tremendous significance when it comes to how the rebels and the opposition can generate support for their cause. Then, in the north and east of the country, a series of battles erupted between hard-line Islamists and mainstream rebel groups. Moreover, hard-line Islamists have targeted pro-opposition activists with a campaign of arrests and worse, in a sign of the growing influence on the ground enjoyed by the Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria.
This was crowned by the announcement by rebel factions that they rejected the leadership of the National Coalition and backed the establishment of an Islamic state, dashing the hopes of many people who have supported the rebel cause over the last two and a half years. The lack of leadership by Washington on the Syria crisis is now leading to disasters such as the rebel announcement, due to the White House’s focus on the chemical weapons held by the Syrian regime. What is taking place in Syria is certainly complex, but not something beyond the realm of human comprehension. The humanitarian crisis in Syria is reaching staggering proportions, and the world’s most influential country must act immediately to alleviate the situation, with no excuses. The political crisis of the opposition is reaching alarming levels, due to an inability to solve the Kurdish conundrum, and an inability or unwillingness to support mainstream rebel groups against their hard-line rivals. The threat of hard-line extremists has been there all along but Washington appears content to see their influence rise, as disappointment and anger grow in the ranks of the mainstream groups that receive only crumbs in terms of support and assistance from the supposed backers of the opposition. If U.S. policy on Syria is reduced to an obsession with weapons of mass destruction, it will be replaying the disaster of Iraq, under different circumstances, but with a similar, disturbing result. And if policymakers in Washington can’t figure out how to direct meaningful help to the groups that need it the most, they should step aside and let someone else lead on Syria.

Dialogue Between Hollande and Rohani Will Go Nowhere
Randa Takieddine/Al Hayat
Tuesday's meeting between Francois Hollande and his Iranian counterpart, Hassan Rohani, at the United Nations, at Iran's request, will not solve Tehran's problem with the west and the world in the short term, or even in the middle term, as long as Iran remains convinced of its right to develop nuclear weapons. This issue is of fundamental importance for the west, because Israel will not compromise on it, even if its ally Barack Obama strongly wants to reach a deal with Iran. During his meeting with Rohani, Hollande wanted to learn how committed the new president, who speaks the renewed language of moderation, was to carrying out what he said. The Iranian leadership is certainly skilled in maneuvering, as the Iranians are known as rug merchants who are skilled in buying and selling, and able to stall until the buyer's needs rise precipitously. This is what the Iranians are now doing, to try and escape the sanctions that are strangling their economy. During the meeting between the French and Iranian presidents on Tuesday the course of discussions began and perhaps it will continue with a meeting between the Iranians and the Americans. However, this is not expected to achieve any real results, as long as the Iranian nuclear issue concerns Israel. As for other topics of concern to Paris, namely Iran's position on Syria and the transitional phase there, Tehran will not, until further notice, abandon the regime, even if it is aware that Bashar Assad in the end will not continue in power, especially since Iran is fighting alongside Assad, via the Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah, its agent in Lebanon and Syria. Can anyone believe that Hollande asked Iran to agree to a transitional phase in Syria and neutralize Assad, and that Rohani will carry this out?
Meanwhile, Hollande believes that it is in the interest of Hezbollah to pull out of the fighting in Syria and return to the domestic Lebanese political game, and take part in the formation of the government and stop blocking its formation. But what will Iran receive in return? Paris says that there is no linkage between the Iranian nuclear issue and the country's stance on Syria and Hezbollah. In reality, there is a link, due to Iran's request to leave behind international sanctions, which have greatly affected its oil exports and revenues, and its economy. Rohani and the flexibility that was spoken of by the Supreme Leader, Khamenei, will not change Iran's relationship with the west and the international community, if Iran retains its stance on developing nuclear weapons. With the presence of Rohani, the difference is that he allows the opportunity for maneuver and giving the impression of flexibility on this issue, and giving additional time to the continuing bid to obtain nuclear weapons. Iran will not leave Pakistan as the only Muslim nuclear power. The discussions in New York between Rohani and Hollande and between Rohani and William Haig, and also the meetings with his foreign minister, Zarif, who is experienced with American leaders, will not change much, if Iran does not abandon its drive to develop nuclear weapons, because this is what led to the sanctions. However, the Khamenei regime does not work for the interest of its people, but rather to carry on a negative policy in the region, from Syria to Lebanon, Iraq and the Gulf countries. Things will not change between Iran and France, Britain and the United States, as long as Iran continues to seek to obtain nuclear weapons.
 

Suleiman Holds Talks with World Leaders in New York, Gets $5.6 Million in Russian Aid
Naharnet /President Michel Suleiman met on Wednesday with several world leaders during his visit to New York in the United States. Suleiman held talks with new Iranian leader Hasan Rowhani at the headquarters of the United Nations in the U.S. state. LBCI television said the Iranian head of state stressed during the talks that the solution to the Syrian crisis is political. "Rowhani also hoped to calm the current tension with Saudi Arabia and Bahrain,” the same source added. Earlier in the day, Suleiman met with his Turkish counterpart Abdullah Gul and with Qatar's Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani at the headquarters of the Qatari embassy in New York.
During his talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the president was informed that Moscow will grant Lebanon $5.6 million in aid, LBCI reported. The Russian diplomat also told Suleiman that Lebanon will be invited to take part in the Geneva II summit, “as a country neighboring Syria.”Meanwhile, MTV said that Lavrov will visit Lebanon soon. "Suleiman will also meet will U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on Thursday to follow up on the issue of military assistance to the Lebanese army,” MTV remarked. The White House announced on Tuesday that the United States had approved $8.7 million in military assistance focused on increasing the Lebanese Armed Forces’ ability to "monitor, secure, and protect Lebanon’s borders against terrorist threats and the illicit transfer of goods.”The U.S. also donated more than $74 million to help Lebanon cope with the growing refugee crisis.

Report: The Hague Has Convincing Evidence of Syrian Regime, Iranian Links to Hariri Assassination
Naharnet /The Special Tribunal for Lebanon has “convincing” evidence that Iran and the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad are involved in the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, reported The New Yorker magazine. It said that Hizbullah likely “pulled the trigger” in the assassination, but could not have done so without Syria and Iran's blessing and logistic support. The perpetrators behind the assassination had in their possession a telephone that they used to make at least 12 calls to Iran before and after the crime, added the magazine. The STL investigators sought to determine who the perpetrators were contacting in Iran and they requested the aid of western intelligence agencies. Meanwhile, the magazine quoted a senior CIA official as saying that Iranian agents were heard talking minutes before the assassination. The Iranians were orchestrating the assassination over the phone, added the former CIA official. Head of the elite Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard General Qassem Soleimani had to be involved in Hariri's assassination if the Islamic republic was truly linked to the crime, noted the official. Four Hizbullah members have been named suspects by the STL in the Beirut truck bombing that killed Hariri on February 14 , 2005.
The party denies the charges and has refused to hand over the suspects.

Army Thwarts Nusra Front Scheme to Enter Lebanon, Kills One
Naharnet/The Lebanese army opened fire at dawn at a mini-bus transporting Syrians into the country through the Bekaa town of Arsal. An army communique pointed out that the mini-bus "was trying to escape from a checkpoint set in the area despite being warned several times, prompting soldiers to open fire at it.”The statement added that “one passenger was killed and two others where lightly injured.”“The remaining passengers fled with one of the injured people while the driver turned him self in to the army.”Earlier, media reports said that the driver of the bus is from al-Braidy family. According to the reports Syrians from al-Nusra Front were aboard the mini-bus. The al-Nusra Front, completely unknown before the rebellion in Syria that began two years ago, has been a rebel standard-bearer since mid-2012 when it became the spearhead of the insurgency ahead of the Free Syrian Army. The organization has been blacklisted in December by the United States as a "terrorist" organization and makes no secret of its aim for Syria to become an Islamist state.

Rouhani calls for 'time-bound' talks on nuclear program

By MICHAEL WILNER 09/25/2013/J.Post

http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Netanyahu-Rouhanis-speech-cynical-Iran-buying-time-327016
During first speech at the UN General Assembly, Iranian president decries "unjust" and "inhumane" Western sanctions, calls fear of Iran an "imaginary threat" and urges West to hold "immediate, results-oriented" negotiations. NEW YORK - Hassan Rouhani, president of the Islamic Republic of Iran, called for "time-bound" talks on its nuclear program with the West while harshly criticizing US interference in the Middle East in his first speech to the United Nations on Tuesday afternoon. The speech was a resounding defense of the governing model of the Islamic Republic and a forceful rebuke of its detractors, with many veiled references to the "mistaken" policies of the United States, which has sanctioned Iran punishingly for continuing to develop a nuclear program. He said that all nuclear programs must be peaceful in nature, and said that any military element to such a program in Iran "would contradict our religious convictions."But he said that nuclear energy was Iran's inalienable right, as were the qualities of life being deprived of ordinary Iranians by "unjust" Western sanctions that are "intrinsically inhumane.Sanctions, beyond any and all rhetoric, create belligerence, warmongering and human suffering," he said.
Rouhani called for "immediate, time-bound, results-oriented" negotiations in "full transparency," as the US and Israel continue to point to the clock on Iran's uranium enrichment program and voice skepticism of its recent "charm offensive," as one senior State Department official referred to Iran's recent overtures on Monday.  Rouhani said that his own election to the presidency represented a rare "peaceful transfer of executive power" in a tumultuous region, "the realization of democracy consistent with religion." He called Iran an anchor of peace in the ocean of instability that is the Middle East. "The age of zero-sum games is over," he said, echoing very similar words from US President Barack Obama in his speech earlier in the day. He said that Iran wanted peace with the West, and the rest of the world, and called the fear of Iran an "imaginary threat.""Faith-phobic, Islamophobic, Shia-phobic and Iran-phobic discourses" has reached "dangerous proportions," Rouhani told the UN General Assembly, calling it "xenophobia "My country has been a harbinger of just peace and comprehensive security," Rouhani said. He spoke just hours after Obama laid out his own policy toward Iran, and the Middle East as a whole, in which he reiterated the threat of military force to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.
But Rouhani said that "nuclear knowledge had already been domesticated" in Iran, and that its program was too far along to be disrupted by military force.
He said Iran is ready to work bilaterally with responsible actors just hours after denying an offer of a bilateral encounter with Obama by the US government.
"We indicated that the two leaders could have had a discussion on the margins if the opportunity presented itself. The Iranians got back to us; it was clear that it was too complicated for them to do that at this time given their own dynamic back home," a US official said. The official emphasized that "nobody contemplated a formal bilateral meeting or a negotiation of any sort."
"We’re not prepared for heads of state to negotiate or Presidents to negotiate on the nuclear issue," the official continued, saying that the Iranians have their own "internal dynamic" to manage politically at home.
The entire diplomatic effort was conducted on site in New York over the past two days. In a veiled mock of American exceptionalism, Rouhani said that the perception of superiority was unhealthy for the region. He directly and harshly criticized "coercive economic and military policies" as doomed and unproductive, and went through various US military operations as examples, including its support of Saddam Hussein in the 1980s, the Gulf War and Afghanistan. "Efforts to deprive regional players from their natural domains of action, containment policies, regime change from outside, and the efforts to redrawing of political borders and frontiers is extremely dangerous and provocative," Rouhani charged. While he did not mention Israel or refer to "the Zionist state," as did his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, repeatedly throughout his tenure as president, Rouhani called the plight of the Palestinian people "nothing less than structural violence." Despite a plea for peace through talks, and not strength, the speech surprised many as more combative than expected from the perceived moderate, who won the Iranian election this year by a large margin. And although the 2013 election was indeed peaceful, as described by the new leader, Iran's last election in 2009 resulted in the Green Revolution, in which the regime of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei suppressed protests by force and killed over 80 people.

Who Is Hassan Rouhani?
Steven Ditto/Washington Institute/September 24, 2013

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/who-is-hassan-rouhani
President Rouhani's track record shows that he is deeply committed to preserving the regime's longstanding interests, and frequently at odds with the principles of international law. Three months on from his June election victory, there is still a knowledge deficit surrounding Iranian president Hassan Rouhani. On the eve of his first major international trip to the UN General Assembly, this gap has led to vastly different perceptions of his intentions on key issues and his overall posture toward the West and its values. This should not be the case, however. During the past decade alone, Rouhani has authored at least ten books and forty academic articles on politically pertinent issues, totaling over 7,000 pages of open-source Farsi-language material. These writings, along with countless speeches and campaign interviews from his three-decade political career, mean that a clear picture of him is well within reach. Beyond the details of today's speech at the UN, it is crucial that policymakers understand Rouhani's background and rhetoric and how they align with his perceptions of his role as president.
FROM IDEOLOGUE TO "CRISIS MANAGER"
In December 2003, two months into his tenure as Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Rouhani wrote the following in an academic article: "The fundamental principle in Iran's relations with America -- our entire focus -- is national strength. Strength in politics, culture, economics, and defense -- especially in the field of advanced technology -- is the basis for the preservation and overall development of the System, and will force the enemy to surrender." This quotation encapsulates the overwhelming impression gleaned from Rouhani's history and writings: his identity as a revolutionary ideologue and defender of the Iranian "System." It is the common thread throughout his life, the clearest manifestation of his actions in political office, and the driver of his rhetoric and motivations today.
What separates Rouhani from traditional ideologues, however -- and what fuels perceptions of him as a "reformist" -- is his belief that certain kinds of political and social reform can facilitate the defense, upkeep, and legitimization of the Iranian regime. On multiple occasions, he has tied reformist ideals such as meritocracy, national unity, and minority rights to the regime's "security" and "capability." In a 2000 interview, for example, he stated, "If the bond between the people and the ruling establishment becomes stronger and more extensive, our capability, power, and national security will increase."
To achieve this objectives, Rouhani is convinced he needs to ease outside pressure on Iran, which means reaching a nuclear deal. In a January 2013 academic article -- his last before the presidential campaign -- he implicitly likened nuclear negotiations with the United States to the resolution that ended the Iran-Iraq War. Regime elites tend to view that 1988 resolution as a necessary but temporary compromise in Iran's revolutionary ideals -- a way of preserving the survival of the "System." As Rouhani put it, "The objectives of public policy in every country are designed so as to control crises related to specific times and transient events, and stand in relation to larger issues." In February, he likewise asserted that the next president should be a "crisis manager...who has the power to negotiate with the world."
This combination of ideological intellectualism -- which sees some reform measures as a strength, not a threat -- and the nuclear crisis has transformed Rouhani's public persona over the past few years and fueled his conciliatory rhetoric with the international community. "We should talk carefully so as not to provoke the enemy, we should not give them any excuses," he stated in 2007 -- a point he has frequently reiterated.
Yet Rouhani's primary identity is as a defender of the Islamic Revolution. In addition to "saving the economy" and "interacting with the world," one of his central campaign pledges was to "revive morality" -- a phrase he uses to connote the renewal of not only religious values, but also national unity under the guardianship of the Supreme Leader. He made this point clear at a July press conference following his election victory: "Danger is when there are gaps and disagreement among main pillars of the society. Danger is when, God forbid, there is a group that considers itself equal to Islam, a group that considers itself equal to the Revolution, a group that considers itself equal to velayat-e faqih [the doctrine granting the Supreme Leader his authority]...All problems originate from this point."
NO GRAND RAPPROCHEMENT
In light of this background, there will be no moral, political, or intellectual meeting of minds between Rouhani and the West. In an unusually candid May campaign briefing with Iranian expatriates, he claimed that while he does not wish to see an "increase in tensions" with the United States, he has no desire to see a "decrease" in them either: "Today, we cannot say that we want to eliminate the tension between us and the United States...We should be aware that we can have interactions even with the enemy in such a manner that the grade of its enmity would be decreased, and secondly, its enmity would not be effective."
As this revealing admission demonstrates, Rouhani has not always followed his own advice to "talk carefully." The quote also highlights the most important takeaway from his many speeches, interviews, and writings: the utter incompatibility between his personal history and any notion of allegiance to international law and Western political or moral ideals. The following are some of the most salient examples of this incompatibility:
Rouhani has expressed support for blatant violations of international law over the past thirty years, including the 1979 U.S. embassy takeover, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's 1989 fatwa against Salman Rushdie, and the general use of extrajudicial, transnational violence (e.g., in 1987, he declared that Iranian forces had the capacity to "destroy American economic interests around the world"). He has done so both at the time the violations occurred and in the years since.
Contrary to this year's campaign rhetoric, Rouhani's military and intelligence background includes past violations against the liberties of the Iranian people. As secretary of the Supreme National Security Council in the 1990s, he directed the quelling of peaceful protests, the closure of newspapers, and bans on satellite dishes and open media.
Following the September 11 attacks against the United States, Rouhani blamed the "wrongs and mistakes of American policies" and claimed that Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, had been "shot down by the U.S. Air Force." And in a September 2002 interview with ABC News, he explicitly endorsed suicide bombings against Israeli civilians, even children, saying that Palestinians had "no alternative."
In the mid-1980s, as a military commander and nascent diplomat, Rouhani implicitly endorsed the development and use of chemical weapons, a claim he has denied in recent years. In an April 2001 academic article, he likewise praised the role of nuclear technology in "ending World War II." And in a 2009 article, he predicted that because of "double standards" in the West's treatment of Israel, there will be an "arms race" that makes "nonproliferation in the Middle East complex and difficult in the future." In addition, the late Morteza Motahhari, a founding member of Rouhani's own political party and a close intellectual and religious mentor, endorsed the theological permissibility of nuclear weapons.
CONCLUSION
Understanding Rouhani's personal beliefs and the context of his rhetoric is more important than poring over the content of any one UN speech. The perception of positive signals in his recent rhetoric has raised the international community's expectations and given hopes for a new era in relations with Iran. Yet it is important to bear in mind his longstanding, deep commitment to the regime's objectives.
That applies to the nuclear issue as well. In a far-reaching June interview, Rouhani described concerns about Iran's nuclear aspirations as a "fabricated crisis" that is "directed by Israel," claiming that the UN Security Council had "lost its credibility." He also declared that talks with the United States must be prefaced by American promises of noninterference in Iranian affairs, recognition of Iran's "nuclear right," and avoidance of "unilateral bullying" against Iran. "If we feel there is goodwill involved," he concluded, "the grounds for talks will be ready." Clearly, this vague path forward is less than satisfying. As Washington and its international partners consider their next steps at the UN meeting and afterward, they should make sure that all nuclear negotiations are based on cold calculation of strategic interests, not positive rhetoric.
**Steven Ditto is an independent Middle East analyst and author of the forthcoming Washington Institute Policy Focus Reading Rouhani: The Promise and Peril of Iran's New President.

Netanyahu: Rouhani's UN speech hypocritical PR ploy

http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Netanyahu-Rouhanis-speech-cynical-Iran-buying-time-327016

By TOVAH LAZAROFF 09/25/2013J.Post
Steinitz warns against repeating same mistakes made with N. Korea.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s United Nations speech Tuesday was a public relations stunt to lull the west into believing that Tehran had softened its stance on its nuclear weapons program, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu warned overnight Tuesday. “It was a cynical speech full of hypocrisy,” said Netanyahu in a statement he issued from Jerusalem hours after the newly elected Iranian president made his first appearance before the General Assembly in New York. Related: Steinitz: Iran may want an agreement, but it's liable to be 'Munich agreement' Netanyahu instructs Israeli delegates to walk out during Rouhani's UNGA speechUpon Netanyahu’s orders the Israeli delegation was not in the General Assembly plenum when Rouhani spoke. Rouhani has promised world leaders that Iran’s nuclear program was for peaceful purposed and that nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction had no place in his country. The international community’s sanctions leveled against Iran has violated its inalienable human rights, Rouhani said.Iran wants to constructively engage with other countries and to decrease tensions with the United States, Rouhani said. He alluded to Israel’s insistence that a credible military threat was needed against Tehran, when he said he hoped the US would not “follow the short sighted interest of warmongering pressure groups.” After listening to US President Barack Obama’s speech earlier Tuesday, Rouhani said he believed that that a framework could be created “to manage our difference.”
But although Rouhani’s words were tamer than those of his predecessor, Netanyahu said he was not swayed. Rouhani spoke of human rights even as Iranian forces have slaughtered innocent civilians in Syria and backed terrorism in dozens of countries, Netanyahu said. Iran has not invested capital in ballistic missiles and underground nuclear facilities just to produce electricity, Netanyahu said. “It is no coincidence that the speech lacked both any practical proposal to stop Iran's military nuclear program and any commitment to fulfill UN Security Council decisions,” Netanyahu said. He warned that Tehran’s strategy was to use negotiations with the West on its nuclear program as a fig leaf to hide its continued pursuit of nuclear weapons, Netanyahu said. “The international community must test Iran not by its words but by its actions,” Netanyahu said.
He added that he was glad Israel had not lent legitimacy to Rouhani by sitting in the plenum as he spoke. “As the Prime Minister of Israel, the state of the Jewish people, I could not allow the Israeli delegation to be part of a cynical public relations ploy by a regime that denies the Holocaust and calls for our destruction," Netanyahu said. It’s the second harsh statement he has issued against Iran in the last two days. When Netanyahu addresses the UN General Assembly next Tuesday, he is expected to focus on Iran and warn the international community to learn from its mistakes with North Korea, which engaged in diplomacy to hide its development of nuclear weapons. Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz delivered this message to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday, when he met with him in New York.Steinitz noted that Ban as a citizen of South Korea should understand Israel’s concern better than anyone. “You understand better than anyone the disastrous consequences of the agreements based on gestures and illusions,” Steinitz said.

Obama to UN: Iran, Israeli-Arab conflict our top priorities
By MAYA SHWAYDER IN NEW YORK, TOVAH LAZAROFF/J.Post/ 09/25/2013/Netanyahu: We will not be fooled by Tehran’s "smoke screen"; US president scolds world body for inaction on Syria. Preventing a nuclear Iran and solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are the two top priorities for the rest of his term, US President Barack Obama told the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday.“In the near term, America’s diplomatic efforts will focus on two particular issues: Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and the Arab-Israeli conflict,” he said. “While these issues are not the cause of all the region’s problems, they have been a major source of instability for far too long, and resolving them can help serve as a foundation for a broader peace.”Obama said in his speech that Iran’s nuclear program and bringing the Arab-Israeli conflict to a peaceful end would be “primary diplomatic initiatives going forward for the rest of my term.”“The United States and Iran have been isolated from each other since the Islamic Revolution of 1979,” the president said. “This mistrust has deep roots that can’t be overcome overnight. But if we can resolve the issue of Iran’s nuclear program, that can serve as a major step down a long road toward a different relationship, one based on mutual trust and respect.”
Obama emphasized that the US is “not seeking regime change” in Iran but rather, that it should respect the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and said that “conciliatory words have to be matched by actions.”
He then announced that he was directing US Secretary of State John Kerry to pursue the task with the Iranian government in cooperation with the European Union.
After hearing Obama’s speech, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu clarified that his opposition to diplomacy as the best tool to halt Iran’s nuclear weapons program stems from his belief that Tehran has no interest in dismantling those weapons. “Israel would welcome a genuine diplomatic solution that truly dismantles Iran’s capacity to develop nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu said. “But we will not be fooled by half-measures that merely provide a smoke screen for Iran’s continual pursuit of nuclear weapons. And the world should not be fooled either.”As such, Netanyahu said, he appreciated Obama’s statement in his speech that “Iran’s conciliatory words will have to be matched by action that is transparent and verifiable.” Netanyahu said he looks forward to discussing the matter with Obama when the two leaders meet in Washington next week.
“Iran thinks that soothing words and token actions will enable it to continue on its path to the bomb,” Netanyahu said. He warned that Iran had learned a lesson from North Korea, which used negotiations with the West to hide its nuclear weapons capability.
Netanyahu noted that it did not bode well that Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani – like his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – denied the Holocaust. Tehran’s new regime has not changed its attitude toward Israel, Netanyahu said. On Tuesday, Netanyahu instructed the Israeli delegation in New York to boycott Rouhani’s speech, as they had the year before when Ahmadinejad spoke.
“When Iran’s leaders stop denying the Holocaust of the Jewish people, and stop calling for the destruction of the Jewish state and recognize Israel’s right to exist, the Israeli delegation will attend their addresses at the General Assembly,” Netanyahu said. Finance Minister Yair Lapid said Netanyahu’s decision to have the Israeli delegation to the UN General Assembly walk out during Rouhani’s speech was misguided. He said it was wrong to use the same tactics used against Israel in the past. “Israel should not let itself be portrayed as a chronic opponent of negotiations and as a state that is not interested in peaceful solutions,” Lapid said.
“We should let Iran be the obstacle to peace and not look like we are not open to change.”A senior US administration official told reporters that Iran had denied Obama’s request to meet Rouhani “on the sidelines” of the General Assembly. “We did not have any plan for a formal bilateral meeting here,” the official said. “We indicated that the two leaders could have had a discussion on the margins if the opportunity presented itself. The Iranians got back to us; it was clear that it was too complicated for them to do that at this time, given their own dynamic back home.”
The official emphasized that “nobody contemplated a formal bilateral meeting or a negotiation of any sort.”
“We’re not prepared for heads of state to negotiate or presidents to negotiate on the nuclear issue,” the official continued, saying that the Iranians have their own “internal dynamic” to manage politically at home.
During his speech, Obama also scolded the UN and the Security Council for their inaction on the Syrian crisis, and told the assembled masses of diplomats that since Israeli and Palestinian leaders have “shown a willingness to take risks, the rest of us must be willing to take risks as well.” Addressing the General Assembly at the start of the UN General Debate, Obama touched briefly on international concerns about the National Security Agency’s international spying – an issue to which Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff devoted part of her speech. He said that he is “limiting the use of US drones,” but noted that “even a glance at today’s headlines indicates that dangers remain.” “The destabilization of the Middle East region goes to the heart of the challenge to the international system,” Obama said, touching on the recent attack at a Kenyan mall, the church suicide bomber in Pakistan, and the almost-daily car bombs in Iraq. Of course, he said, as the camera cut to the Syrian delegation, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction “casts a shadow over the pursuit of peace.”
“It is an insult to human reason and this institution to suggest that anyone other than the [Assad] regime carried out this attack,” Obama said, referring to the August 21 attack on the al-Ghouta suburb of Damascus that killed more than 1,000 people. “When I stated my willingness to use limited military force, I did not do so lightly,” he said. But he added: “As I’ve discussed with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, diplomacy has always been my preference.” He called on the UN to strictly enforce the ban on chemical weapons, a ban he said was “older than the UN,” and called on the Security Council specifically to put forth a “strong resolution” to verify that the Syrian president is keeping to his commitments outlined by the Russian- American agreement on Syria’s weapons of mass destruction, and ensuring that there will be consequences if Assad does not comply.
“This is not a zero-sum endeavor. We’re not in a cold war. There’s no great game to be won,” Obama said.
“The United States has no interest in Syria beyond the well-being of its people, the stability of its neighbors, the elimination of its chemical weapons and ensuring it does not become a safe-haven for terrorists.”
Turning to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Obama spoke of the young Israelis in Jerusalem and Palestinians in Ramallah whom he met during his official trip to Israel last February, and how he was inspired by the passion of young Israelis who “believed that peace is just,” and the young Palestinians who were cynical and frustrated that “they have no firm place in the community of nations.”
“The State of Israel is here to stay,” Obama said. “I will never compromise the US’s commitment to Israeli security, nor my support for its existence as a Jewish state.”
But, he added, “The Palestinian people have a right to live with security and dignity in their own sovereign state,” and said that the “continued Israeli occupation of the West Bank is tearing at the democratic fabric of the Jewish state.” “Let’s emerge from our familiar corners of blame and prejudice,” he said. “Let’s support the leaders walking the difficult road to peace.”
Obama further emphasized that solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would not be a magic bullet to bring ultimate stability to the region, but that “real breakthroughs on these two issues [Iran and the Palestinian conflict] would have a profound and positive impact on the entire Middle East and North Africa.”Gil Hoffman contributed to this report.

Lebanon is facing a crisis of existence: Sleiman
September 25, 2013/By Hussein Dakroub/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: President Michel Sleiman warned Tuesday that Lebanon faced a crisis of existence as a result of regional conflicts around it and urged the international community to help his cash-strapped country cope with the rising flow of refugees from war-ravaged Syria. Sleiman was addressing the U.N. General Assembly in New York shortly after U.S. President Barack Obama pledged during a meeting with him $8.7 million in additional aid to the Lebanese Army to help maintain Lebanon’s stability. During a meeting with Sleiman on the sidelines of the Assembly, Obama said the financial aid was aimed at helping the military protect its borders against terrorist threats and illicit goods. Lebanese authorities have repeatedly said the Army was incapable of fully protecting its 550-kilometer-long border with Syria, which complains that the joint frontier has become a smuggling route for gunmen and weapons. U.S. officials have voiced similar concerns. “Lebanon is facing a crisis of existence as a result of regional conflicts around it. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinian and Syrian refugees are flooding into the country,” Sleiman said in his speech. Declaring that the 30-month-old conflict in Syria presented Lebanon with “several challenges,” he said: “We call on the international community to support Lebanon with regard to the issue of Syrian refugees.”“Lebanon needs the support of friendly and brotherly countries to face the repercussions of regional conflicts that are threatening its security and stability and are negatively affecting its economic and social conditions,” Sleiman added. “The most pressing burden resulted from the increasing number of Syrian refugees. Their number now accounts for a quarter of Lebanon’s population,” he said.
Sleiman called for the convening of an international conference on Syrian refugees during which the burdens of hosting the refugees could be shared among donor countries.
For his part, Obama praised Lebanon for its generosity in welcoming refugees fleeing the war in Syria and pledged tens of millions of dollars in aid to help offset the costs of the crisis.
“The United States strongly supports the role of the Lebanese Armed Forces in maintaining Lebanon’s stability, and today we’re announcing an additional $8.7 million that would provide needed equipment in support of the Lebanese armed forces in internal stability and border security missions,” Obama said, according to the National News Agency.
Obama urged all parties in Lebanon to refrain from engaging in the 30-month-old Syrian conflict, saying the U.S. strongly rejected Hezbollah’s heavy involvement in that conflict. He added that Lebanon has full U.S. support as it seeks to preserve its independence amid the regional chaos. Commenting on the U.S.-Russia deal that would see Damascus handing over its stockpile of chemical arms, Obama said: “We are pleased that there may be progress in getting rid of Syria’s chemical weapons ... which would be good for Lebanon.”
The meeting with Sleiman came after Obama announced $339 million in additional humanitarian aid in response to Syria’s crisis, including $74 million for Lebanon to support the refugees.
Obama called on the international community to do more to help. He praised Lebanon for having been “tremendously generous” in welcoming refugees fleeing the war in Syria.
Sleiman said Lebanon has had a difficult time dealing with the influx of refugees. Lebanon has a population of about 4.5 million and now officially hosts more than 700,000 registered refugees. He has estimated at least 1 million Syrian refugees are in Lebanon, with thousands more crossing over each week.During the meeting with Obama, Sleiman demanded “support from the international community and the United States to ensure the success of the meeting of the International Support Group for Lebanon and help Lebanon face the burden of the influx of Syrian refugees,” NNA reported. On the eve of the meeting of the International Support Group for Lebanon, Sleiman said: “We are hoping for the important U.S. participation in this meeting to secure the political and economic support for Lebanon, support for the Army and necessary support to accommodate the Syrian refugees.”
Addressing the General Assembly, Sleiman called for a political solution to the crisis in Syria that would preserve the country’s unity. He said he hoped the U.S.-Russian understanding to destroy Syria’s chemical stockpiles would be “a gateway to a political solution” in the strife-torn country. He also called for reforming the world’s political and financial systems in order to guarantee the participation of minorities in running public affairs and preserving the free presence of these minorities in the world.
Sleiman also met separately with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal and the head of the World Bank Jim Yong Kim. He is expected to meet Iranian President Hassan Rouhani.
He will attend Wednesday a conference of the International Support Group for Lebanon designed to help Lebanon cope with the rising number of Syrian refugees. The meeting will address three main concerns: Support for refugees and host communities, helping Lebanon’s economy and financial system and assisting the Lebanese security forces. Lebanon has repeatedly called for international assistance to address the refugee crisis, complaining that pledged assistance from the international community has failed to materialize. Lebanese officials say the refugee influx has strained the country’s health care and education systems, as well as Lebanon’s economy.
Lebanon is officially committed to a policy of disassociation from the Syrian crisis, despite the involvement of various Lebanese factions in the civil war there. From New York, Sleiman will fly to Saudi Arabia on an official visit to discuss with Saudi officials the political crisis in Lebanon and the repercussions of the war in Syria on the country’s security and stability.

Obama, Rouhani exchange overtures,but no handshake

September 25, 2013/The Daily Star
UNITED NATIONS: Iranian President Hassan Rouhani expressed hope Tuesday that U.S. President Barack Obama would not be swayed by “warmongering pressure groups” at home in dealing with the Iranian nuclear dispute and called for a consistent voice from Washington on the issue. Rouhani was speaking just hours after Obama cautiously embraced recent overtures from Iran’s new president as the basis for a possible nuclear deal, but a failed effort to arrange a much anticipated handshake between the two leaders underscored entrenched distrust that will be hard to overcome.Speaking to the United Nations General Assembly for the first time, Rouhani said he was prepared to engage in “time-bound and results-oriented” nuclear talks and did not seek to increase tensions with the United States.
“I listened carefully to the statement made by President Obama today at the General Assembly,” he said. “Commensurate with the political will of the leadership in the United States and hoping that they will refrain from following the short-sighted interest of warmongering pressure groups, we can arrive at a framework to manage our differences.”
“To this end, equal footing, mutual respect and the recognized principles of international law should govern the interactions,” he said.
“Of course, we expect to hear a consistent voice from Washington.”Rouhani also warned that the greatest threat to the Middle East was the danger of chemical weapons falling into the hands of extremists. Obama said he was determined to test Rouhani’s recent diplomatic gestures and challenged him to take concrete steps toward resolving Iran’s long-running nuclear dispute with the West.
Rouhani said he was prepared to engage in nuclear negotiations under certain conditions, but also blasted international sanctions against Iran. “These sanctions are violent, pure and simple,” he said, adding that normal people, not political elites, ended up suffering because of them.
“The negative impact is not nearly limited to the intended victims of sanctions,” Rouhani said. The Iranian leader reaffirmed his country’s position that its nuclear drive is “exclusively peaceful.”
“Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction have no place in Iran’s security and defense doctrine, and contradict our fundamental religious and ethical convictions,” Rouhani said.
While referring to the conflict in Syria only obliquely, Rouhani said “the greatest threat to the Middle East” was the danger of chemical weapons falling into the hands of extremists and terrorist groups.
Obama earlier appealed to the General Assembly to back tough consequences for Syria if it refuses to give up chemical weapons.
The two leaders addressed the U.N. at period of heightened diplomatic efforts to reach a deal between international backers of the Syrian civil war to rid Syria of its chemical stocks following a chemical attack in Damascus on Aug. 21 that U.S. officials say killed 1,400 people. Obama said an agreement on Syria’s chemical weapons should energize a larger diplomatic effort to end two and a half years of civil war – a sentiment that was echoed by the leaders of Turkey, Jordan and France, among others. Obama’s challenge at the United Nations was to persuade world leaders to join in applying pressure on Damascus with a U.N. Security Council resolution that includes tough consequences should Assad not surrender his chemical weapons stockpiles in a verifiable way.
“The Syrian government took a first step by giving an accounting of its stockpiles. Now, there must be a strong Security Council resolution to verify that the Assad regime is keeping its commitments, and there must be consequences if they fail to do so,” Obama said.The worry from the U.S. side is that Russia might veto any resolution that contains even an implicit threat of military force against Syria. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was due to meet his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov Tuesday in an effort to agree on the wording of a resolution this week.
Speaking earlier in Moscow, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov reiterated Russia’s opposition to any threat of military action against Assad. He said Moscow would not accept a resolution stipulating automatic punitive measures if Assad fails to comply with the U.S.-Russian deal. But prospects for an agreement between Russia and the West on a draft resolution may be improving, with Western powers giving up on what U.N. diplomats call a “trigger” clause for automatic punitive measures in the event of noncompliance.
French President Francois Hollande told the Assembly that too much time had been wasted trying to end the civil war. “We must ensure that this war ends. It is the deadliest war since the beginning of this century. The solution is a political one, and too much time has been lost,” he said.
Obama said it was not for America to determine who would lead Syria, but he added: “A leader who slaughtered his citizens and gassed children to death cannot regain the legitimacy to lead a badly fractured country.”
“It’s time for Russia and Iran to realize that insisting on Assad’s rule will lead directly to the outcome they fear – an increasingly violent space for extremists to operate,” he said.
Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, the emir of Qatar, which has been backing Syrian rebels, condemned what he called “horrible massacres” by the Syrian government. “It is unfortunate that the perpetrators of these brutal crimes and massacres that have shocked every human conscience are enjoying impunity from deterrence or accountability,” he told the Assembly.
In his opening speech to the General Assembly, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appealed to member states not to abandon the Syrian people, and said it was not enough to destroy Syria’s chemical weapons while the wider war continued. “Military victory is an illusion. The only answer is a political settlement,” Ban said.
Turkish President Abdullah Gul and Jordan’s King Abdullah were among world leaders at the General Assembly who called for a more robust international effort to end Syria’s civil war.
“This conflict has evolved into a real threat to regional peace and security,” said Gul. “Any recurrence of the proxy wars of the Cold War era will plunge Syria into further chaos.”
King Abdullah said the number of Syrian refugees in Jordan could rise to 1 million by next year, equivalent to 20 percent of its population, and called for additional international support as the economic burdens weigh on the state. “My people cannot be asked to shoulder the burden of what is a regional and global challenge,” he said. “More support is urgently needed to send a strong signal that the world community stands shoulder-to-shoulder with those who have borne so much.” Obama announced the U.S. would provide an additional $339 million in humanitarian aid to ease the Syrian refugee crisis, including $161 million for people inside Syria and the rest for surrounding countries.

Self-mutilation
September 25, 2013/The Daily Star
Speaking at the U.N. General Assembly Tuesday, U.S. President Barack Obama said that along with Iran and Syria, the Palestinian-Israeli peace process was one of his highest priorities. Indeed, the latter has been the central, most constant problem in this part of the world for the last 65 years, feeding into and affecting many other regional conflicts and issues. But while the peace process may still be one of Obama’s alleged priorities, for many in the Palestinian community, whether at home or in the diaspora, it appears that is the last thing on their minds. For many, it appears that internecine battles over small-scale territorial control are a bigger concern. And while of course these self-interested individuals represent a minority, their actions leave an impression, and they are detracting from the position of respect and standing that the Palestinian people – millions of whom have struggled for their rights for generations – deserve on the international stage. Of course, it is important to remember that the Palestinians have been used and manipulated by external actors, whether Arab states or those further afield, to further their own interests in the region. But these attitudes, coupled with an apparent self-destructive streak, leaves Fatah members fighting other Fatah members in camps in Lebanon, and Hamas more concerned with how to deal with the Egyptian authorities than with the Israelis. Sometimes it seems that more Palestinian lives are being lost at the hand of other Palestinians than by members of the Israeli army. In the Yarmouk area outside of Damascus, almost 100,000 have been rendered refugees after pro- and anti-regime Palestinians brought the civil war firmly into their neighborhood.
For many Palestinians, any resistance they practice in their daily lives is not being directed at Israel, but at each other, their concentration being targeted not at their right to return, but at nurturing their own egos.
The occupation of Palestinian lands and the subsequent and continued disregard for Palestinians’ most basic rights and freedoms – to work, to live in freedom and dignity, to move freely, and to feel secure – is one of the biggest global injustices of the last century. And while there are partners around the world who would be willing to work together with Palestinians on this cause, the sheer number of small-minded and apparently masochistic individuals, whether in Palestine or the diaspora, who seem intent on undermining the struggle looks set to jeopardize the successes that Palestine might have on the international stage.
If Palestine is to have any chance of global recognition, if Palestinians are ever to live in freedom in their own lands, then all efforts must be focused in this one direction, and these germs, present at the grassroots level, must be weeded out. Otherwise negotiations held in New York or London will achieve nothing, and we can only expect further decades of bloodshed and strife.

Aoun intends to step down as FPM leader: source
September 24, 2013/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun intends to step down as the movement’s leader within six months, a senior source in the FPM told The Daily Star Tuesday. However, the head of the FPM's media office, Wassim Hnoud, denied reports that Aoun was stepping down. “Gen. Michel Aoun intends to step down once the new organizational structure is set and the elections for the movement’s leadership are held,” said the source who spoke on condition of anonymity and referenced remarks made by Aoun a year ago. The FPM spokesman said such reports are untrue. “This issue has been in the media for a while now but it is not accurate,” said Hnoud. He also criticized the writer of the local daily which published the report. “Someone tries to make themselves interesting by publishing such things,” Hnoud said. The anonymous source said that once the implementation of a new FPM organizational structure, that was launched eight months ago, is complete, the movement will hold elections for its chief. “General Aoun told us last year he will not be running for the presidency of the movement to allow for power rotation within our group,” the source said. The anonymous source said that Aoun told FPM members that he wants power to rotate within the movement and wants to ensure this happens while he is still alive,“to guarantee the continuity of the movement.” Aoun commented Tuesday on reports that he plans to step down from the FPM helm, saying he has been training a cadre to take over the party and continue its mission after he departs. “I have a vision for the future and look forward to it, and contrary to what some people say, the Free Patriotic Movement will survive after Aoun,” the MP told reporters after his party’s weekly meeting in Rabieh. He also said that the FPM had an agenda that should be adopted by the coming generations “to continue the mission.” "I will establish and train a cadre who will take over...We have a number of people who accompanied us, and know many details and ongoing social issues,” he added. Aoun declined, however, to name possible candidates to lead the party.