LCCC ENGLISH DAILY
NEWS BULLETIN
February 21/15
Bible Quotation For Today/All who exalt themselves will be
humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted.’
Luke 18/09-14. :" Jesus also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves
that they were righteous and regarded others with contempt: ‘Two men went up to
the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax-collector. The Pharisee,
standing by himself, was praying thus, "God, I thank you that I am not like
other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax-collector. I
fast twice a week; I give a tenth of all my income." But the tax-collector,
standing far off, would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast
and saying, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner!" I tell you, this man went down
to his home justified rather than the other; for all who exalt themselves will
be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted.’"
Letter to the Hebrews 03/14-19/04/01-04/Today,
if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion
We have
become partners of Christ, if only we hold our first confidence firm to the end.
As it is said, ‘Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in
the rebellion. ’Now who were they who heard and yet were rebellious? Was it not
all those who left Egypt under the leadership of Moses? But with whom was he
angry for forty years? Was it not those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the
wilderness?
And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, if not to those who
were disobedient? So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief.
Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest is still open, let us take
care that none of you should seem to have failed to reach it. For indeed the
good news came to us just as to them; but the message they heard did not benefit
them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened. For we who
have believed enter that rest, just as God has said, ‘As in my anger I swore,
"They shall not enter my rest" ’, though his works were finished at the
foundation of the world. For in one place it speaks about the seventh day as
follows: ‘And God rested on the seventh day from all his works.’
Latest analysis, editorials from miscellaneous sources published on February
20-21/15
A fake Iranian “defector” assassinated Argentine prosecutor Alberto Nisman/DEBKAfile/February
20/15
Friend and Foe in Syria/ The enemy of my enemy is my enemy’s enemy/Lee
Smith/February 20/15
Sisi’s “If Only” Moment/Tariq
Alhomayed/Asharq Al Awsat/February 20/15
The region crumbles and Lebanon trembles/Michael
Young/The Daily Star/February 20/15
Like Father, Like Son/Amir
Taheri/Asharq AlAwsat/February 20/15
Israel Threatened by Iranian Ground Forces on Northern Border/
Abraham Rabinovich/The Washington Free Beacon/February 20/15
Has Israel been cut out of Iran’s nuclear negotiations/Majid
Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya/February 20/15
The Trap Set for Egypt/Osman Mirghan/Asharq Al Awsat/
February 21/15
Lebanese Related News published on
February 20-21/15
Lebanon Shivers but Storm to Taper Off over the Weekend
Hezbollah buries two party members slain in Syria
Maronite Bishops Hope Dialogue Resolves Presidential Crisis, Urge Backing for
the State
Because of Nasrallah's calls for involvement in regional wars/Prepare for the
worst
Hariri: Cabinet crisis close to being resolved
Relaxation of smoking ban draws fire
Security forces corral criminals in north Lebanon, Bekaa Valley
Hariri: We Hope Dialogue with Aoun Would Continue Positively
Kanaan Discusses Document of Principles in Maarab as Aoun-Geagea 'Presidential
Bargain' Ruled Out
Security forces corral criminals in north Lebanon
New think tank takes aim at most pressing issues
Aoun still fancies his chances
Qatar blasts Hezbollah for 'killing Syrians'
Unified prescription form clears final hurdle
Three children die in fire caused by storm
Hrdlickova succeeds Baragwanath as STL head
Hizbullah Refutes Claims of Syrian Plot to Assassinate Samaha
Jumblat Warns: We Must Share Responsibility to Avert Chaos
Hariri’s legacy of
leadership
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on
February 20-21/15
Netanyahu throws cold water on IAEA report claiming Iran restraining its nuclear
program
Obama: Airstrikes not enough to defeat terror
US takes swipe at Netanyahu: Sounds like he knows more about Iran deal than
negotiators
Fighting rages in east Ukraine despite truce bid
Syria sees foreign foes as key to Aleppo truce
Turkey, U.S. sign deal to train, arm Syrian rebels
Report: ISIS militants in Turkey, plotting
Denmark to beef up fight against terrorism
Gulf states voice support for Egypt’s fight against terrorism
At least 30 dead in Boko Haram raids near Chibok, Nigeria: residents
Kobane: The clean-up begins
Exclusive: ISIS chief Baghdadi in new pictures
Bombs kill 40 in Libya in apparent revenge for Egyptian air strikes
Libyan army in need of training in fight against ISIS: Saudi diplomat
Canada Condemns Multiple Bombings in Libya
Jihad Watch Site Latest Reports
DHS intel report warns of domestic right-wing terror threat.
500 Muslims attend funeral of Copenhagen jihad murderer.
Islamic State in Libya burns musical instruments as un-Islamic.
UK: 3 teen Muslimas travel to Syria to join the Islamic State.
Islamic State’s new hashtag: #We_Are_Coming_O_Rome.
Nearly all Muslims who left Australia to join jihad were on the dole.
Detroit: Muslim who stabbed non-Muslims after asking if they were Muslim not
charged with hate crime.
Boston Muslim leader fumes that DoJ anti-terror efforts are “exclusively
targeting the American Muslim community”.
Atlanta Journal-Constitution claims Detroit Muslim who targeted non-Muslims
“targeted Muslims”.
CBS: “Is this a failure to properly identify the enemy?”.
Question: "What is the meaning of
Lent?"
GotQuestions.org?
Answer: Lent is a period of fasting, moderation, and self-denial traditionally
observed by Catholics and some Protestant denominations. It begins with Ash
Wednesday and ends with Easter Sunday. The length of the Lenten fast was
established in the 4th century as 46 days (40 days, not counting Sundays).
During Lent, participants eat sparingly or give up a particular food or habit.
It’s not uncommon for people to give up smoking during Lent, or to swear off
watching television or eating candy or telling lies. It’s six weeks of
self-discipline.
Lent began as a way for Catholics to remind themselves of the value of
repentance. The austerity of the Lenten season was seen as similar to how people
in the Old Testament fasted and repented in sackcloth and ashes (Esther 4:1-3;
Jeremiah 6:26; Daniel 9:3).
However, over the centuries Lenten observances have developed a much more
"sacramental" value. Many Catholics believe that giving something up for Lent is
a way to attain God’s blessing. But the Bible teaches that grace cannot be
earned; grace is “the gift of righteousness” (Romans 5:17). Also, Jesus taught
that fasting should be done discreetly: “When you fast, do not look somber as
the hypocrites do, for they disfigure their faces to show men they are fasting.
I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you
fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that it will not be obvious to
men that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who is unseen” (Matthew
6:16-18). Jesus’ command to “wash your face” seems to conflict with the practice
of rubbing ashes on one’s face on Ash Wednesday.
Fasting can be a good thing, and God is pleased when we repent of sinful habits.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with setting aside some time to focus on Jesus'
death and resurrection. However, repenting of sin is something we should be
doing every day of the year, not just for the 46 days of Lent. If a Christian
wishes to observe Lent, he is free to do so. The key is to focus on repenting of
sin and consecrating oneself to God. Lent should not be a time of boasting of
one’s sacrifice or trying to earn God's favor or increasing His love. God’s love
for us could not be any greater than it already is.
Lebanon Shivers but Storm to Taper Off
over the Weekend
Naharnet /Much of Lebanon continued to shiver and suffer in bitter cold Friday
as a fierce storm dumped more snow across the country. The blizzard has closed
schools and stranded people in their homes. But meteorologists predicted storm
“Windy” to subside over the weekend. The Meteorology Department said snow fell
in areas 300 meters above sea level a day after it reached Lebanon's shores.
Temperatures reached 5 degrees Celsius on the coast and -9 degrees Celsius in
mountainous areas. “Windy” is expected to dump more snow on Saturday morning but
at 600 meter elevations and mainly in southern Lebanon. The Meteorology
Department said the dark clouds will give way for a sunnier weather starting
Saturday afternoon despite relatively low temperatures. Sunday is expected to be
mostly sunny although icy roads will continue to pose a hazard to drivers, it
said. The Civil Defense Department said it rescued on Friday ten residents who
were stranded on Dahr al-Baidar road and were traveling on foot. The Red Cross
also announced that it was ready to assist people with special medical cases and
those who do dialysis. In the Bekaa region of Zahle, municipality bulldozers
rescued six citizens who were trapped in snow on the road of the Jesus the
Redeemer Monastery as other bulldozers towed seven SUVs that were trapped in
Ksara's heights. Meanwhile in Rashaya, snow covered low and high areas alike,
reaching a one-meter thickness, a level unseen since tens of years. The heavy
snow cut off the towns of Ain Ata, Yanta, Deir al-Ashayer, Bakka, Halwa, Aiha,
Kfarqouq, Rashaya, Ain Arab, Sultan Yaacoub, Libbaya, Mayzoun and Ain al-Tineh.
The storm has so far killed around 100 goats and sheep as thousands of cattle
remained trapped in the Malek, Mraymes, al-Faqiaa and al-Safineh farms. Several
cows also died in farms in Kamed al-Louz, Gaza, al-Mansoura, al-Khyara and Hawsh
al-Harimeh. In Keserwan, snow cut off the mountainous roads at the Ashqout
roundabout all the way upwards to Faraya and Oyoun al-Siman. In Northern Metn,
the illegal dumping of construction debris in the stream of the Fawwar Antelias
River led to a water overflow that invaded the public road. Meanwhile, a
rockslide struck the house of Marwan Ibrahim al-Abdullah in the Akkar town of
Bebnin, causing extensive material damage but no casualties. The storm also led
to a power outage in the Dinniyeh district for a second consecutive day.
Education Minister Elias Bou Saab has announced the closure of schools on Friday
and Saturday. A similar decision was taken by Health Minister Wael Abou Faour
for nurseries. This has been one of Lebanon’s coldest and snowiest winters in
years.
Prepare for the worst
The Daily Star/Feb. 20, 2015 |/Speaking earlier this week, Sayyed Hasan
Nasrallah warned of a renewed period of violence in Lebanon after the winter
recedes. He spoke explicitly of new jihadi attacks in Lebanon, and of
Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria, where we have seen heavy losses among
pro-regime groups in recent days. At least one foreign diplomat has also spoken
of intelligence which points to fresh militant attacks in Lebanon this spring,
with possible perpetrators coming in from Syria. Certainly it seems that
external powers are increasingly worried about the situation here, more so than
Lebanon’s own authorities and institutions seem to be. It appears that the Army
and partners are taking more of an observer role – listening to the various
warnings coming and nodding their heads.
There is little evidence to suggest that security measures are being increased,
that new steps are being implemented to reduce the likelihood of future threats,
or that people are being made aware of likely threats. If we were to assume that
just 50 percent of the threats coming in were accurate, then that is cause
enough to be very worried. After a spate of bombings that destabilized the
country between late 2013 and early 2014, security branches worked hard to
ensure the threat was minimized. New measures are now essential to maintain
peace. With threats on every border and political chaos, the last thing the
country needs is more attacks. The Lebanese people deserve, at the least,
immunity from violence on their streets. Now that intelligence is available, the
authorities must do all they can to confront the threat.
Maronite Bishops Hope Dialogue
Resolves Presidential Crisis, Urge Backing for the State
Naharnet/The Council of Maronite bishops welcomed on Friday the dialogue among
the country's different factions, hoping that it would lead to the election of a
new president, and urged the Lebanese to back the state at this critical stage.
The bishops hoped in a statement following their monthly meeting in Bkirki that
“talks among the Lebanese political parties would be aimed at electing a head of
state.”They said dialogue should take the country out of its crisis. Hizbullah
and al-Mustaqbal representatives have been holding talks since December to limit
sectarian tension. Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea and Free Patriotic
Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, who are both presidential candidates, are also
expected to meet. Despite welcoming dialogue, the bishops regretted that the
country is without a president since Michel Suleiman's term expired in May last
year. “The election of a head of state has become more than a necessity because
Lebanon entered a new stage in the government crisis,” said their statement.
Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi chaired the meeting which is usually held on
the first Wednesday of each month. But the bishops met this Friday because the
patriarch had been in Rome for several weeks. The Council lamented that social
and economic conditions have worsened and security threats have increased in
Lebanon.
The bishops also lauded the army and security forces for confronting terrorists
and urged everyone to support them through all means. The statement reiterated
that linking Lebanon to regional axes contradicts the National Pact. The bishops
called on the Lebanese to “back the state” and drop “limited factional
interests” to help the country come out of the crises engulfing the region. They
also “condemned the terrorist attack” carried out by the Islamic State extremist
group against Coptic Christians in Libya. They said “Christians are seeing the
worst type of prosecution in the Orient.”Last week, 21 Copts wearing orange
jumpsuits were marched onto a Libyan beach, forced to kneel with a masked,
knife-wielding militant standing behind each, and then beheaded.
Hariri: We Hope Dialogue with Aoun
Would Continue Positively
Naharnet/Head of the Mustaqbal Movement MP Saad Hariri emphasized on Friday the
importance of dialogue in Lebanon as a means to reach solutions to pending
issues, while describing as “positive” his talks with Free Patriotic Movement
leader MP Michel Aoun on Wednesday. He said: “The fact that dialogue with the MP
took place is positive and our dialogue with him had started over a year
ago.”“We hope that it will continue positively,” he added. “The election of a
president is a priority and we hope that our ties with Aoun, our allies, and our
dialogue with Hizbullah and the AMAL Movement would pave the way for achieving
this goal,” he remarked. Moreover, Hariri stated: “Terrorism can be combated by
the army and security forces, but this mission cannot be complete without a new
head of state.”“The presence of a president is necessary because he can hold
dialogue with all sides without exception,” said the former premier. “Failure to
elect a head of state is shameful,” he noted. Hariri had held talks on Friday
with Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Latif Daryan and a number of muftis from regions
throughout Lebanon. Hariri and Aoun had not met in public in more than five
years. They however held talks that were kept under wraps in 2014 in Rome. Their
talks on Wednesday tackled the latest local and regional developments, but media
reports said that they did not address the presidential polls. Lebanon has been
without a head of state since May when the term of Michel Suleiman ended without
the election of a successor. Ongoing disputes between the rival March 8 and 14
camps have thwarted the polls.
Hariri: Cabinet crisis close to being resolved
Hasan Lakkis| The Daily Star/Feb. 20, 2015
BEIRUT: The government will soon resume its sessions, former Prime Minister Saad
Hariri said Thursday, adding that the swift election of a new Lebanese president
was a necessary prelude to the implementation of a national strategy to combat
terrorism.
Speaking to a delegation of Arab ambassadors at his residence in Downtown
Beirut, Hariri stated that he expected the government to resume its work
shortly, and that he had spoken with Prime Minister Tammam Salam and other
relevant officials regarding the matter.
The government did not hold its weekly meeting Thursday, and Salam, who flew to
Rome on a private trip, has stressed that the Cabinet will only resume its
meetings after a new decision-making mechanism can be agreed upon.
The government began exercising the powers of the presidency on May 25 of last
year, when the post became vacant. Since then, members of the 24-member body
have insisted on the unanimous approval of decisions and decrees, significantly
reducing its productivity.
The Constitution stipulates that if unanimous approval cannot be achieved,
standard decisions can be passed by a simple majority, and major decisions,
specified by Article 65, with the approval of two-thirds of the Cabinet’s
members.
In his remarks to the Arab delegation, Hariri also stressed that any national
strategy to combat terrorism must be implemented by legitimate security forces.
“Any strategy to confront terrorism can only take place through the Lebanese
Army and legitimate security forces, who are already shouldering this
responsibility across the country,” he said. “But the proper prelude to the
implementation of a national strategy is the swift election of a president.”
Earlier, Hariri had discussed the security situation in the country with
Interior Minister Nouhad Machnouk, head of General Security Maj. Gen. Abbas
Ibrahim, Internal Security Forces chief Maj. Gen. Ibrahim Basbous, and head of
the ISF’s Information Branch Brig. Imad Othman. The Future Movement leader later
met separately with Maj. Gen. Mohammad Khair, secretary-general of the Higher
Defense Council.
The meetings came one day after Hariri had dinner with Free Patriotic Movement
leader Michel Aoun.
“The meeting was good, and was part of the efforts to strengthen understanding.
We will not turn away any assistance in our work to defuse tensions in the
country,” Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil told reporters at Rafik Hariri
International Airport, before departing on an official visit to Latin America.
“God willing, we can provide further help in future for larger agreements.”FPM
parliamentary sources also described the Hariri-Aoun meeting as
“friendly.”Speaking to The Daily Star, sources said the talks addressed a number
of issues, among them the presidential election, a controversy over the
retirement age of Army and police officers, the situation on Lebanon’s borders,
and the war on terrorism. According to sources, Hariri stressed to Aoun that he
had no issues with his candidacy, but that an agreement with Christian leaders,
particularly Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, was necessary. As for the
current governmental paralysis, both leaders agreed there was a need to
facilitate the Cabinet’s work, and that Salam and his ministers should look to
new formulas, but they did not discuss an alternative decision-making mechanism.
Other political figures have also weighed in on the stalled government sessions.
Health Minister Wael Abu Faour said MP Walid Jumblatt and Speaker Nabih Berri
were in agreement regarding the controversy.
“[Berri’s] position, and Jumblatt’s, is that we should facilitate the Cabinet’s
affairs, but we should not engage in a constitutional precedent,” Abu Faour told
reporters after visiting the speaker at his Ain al-Tineh residence.
“Political discussion is allowed, political agreement is allowed, but violating
the Constitution is unacceptable,” Abu Faour said. “Even if a presidential
vacuum exists, and has become unbearable, this should not lead us to create a
new precedent.”
Hizbullah Refutes Claims of Syrian
Plot to Assassinate Samaha
Naharnet /Hizbullah rejected on Friday media reports that said
Syria was seeking to assassinate detained former minister Michel Samaha. It said
in a statement: “Such claims are baseless accusations that do not rely on
facts.”It added that it reserves the right to take legal action in the matter.
Saudi Arabia's al-Watan daily had reported on Tuesday that “Damascus had
emphasized to Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah the need to eliminate
Samaha, who was indicted with attempting to transport explosives from Syria to
use them in criminal acts in Lebanon.”Police had thwarted a plot to kill the
former pro-Syrian information minister. The military prosecutor had recently
granted Samaha the right to be transferred to hospital for medical reasons, but
he later lifted his decision under the orders of General Prosecutor Judge Samir
Hammoud and Justice Minister Ashraf Rifi. Both Hammoud and Rifi interfered in
the case after security forces received information that Samaha could be killed
during the transfer for having dangerous information on the Syrian regime. Rifi
had confirmed the assassination plot on Tuesday. Samaha and two Syrian officials
have been indicted for transporting explosives from Syria to Lebanon in an
attempt to assassinate Lebanese political and religious leaders. His trial has
been adjourned on several occasions over the failure to summon Syrian security
chief General Ali Mamlouk.
Kanaan Discusses Document of
Principles in Maarab as Aoun-Geagea 'Presidential Bargain' Ruled Out
Naharnet/Change and Reform bloc MP Ibrahim Kanaan met on Friday with Lebanese
Forces leader Samir Geagea at his Maarab residence as part of preparations for
the document of principles between the two sides, as sources close to the
conferees denied reports of a possible “bargain” between Geagea and Free
Patriotic Movement chief Michel Aoun.
OTV revealed that Kanaan and Geagea held talks for two hours aimed at “reducing
obstacles” hindering the document.MP Sethrida Geagea and LF media officer Melhem
Riachi were present at the Maarab meeting. Riachi and Kanaan had launched in
recent weeks a series of meetings, at the behest of Aoun and Geagea, aimed at
easing tensions between the two rival leaders. Some media outlets saw in MP
Geagea's presence a proof that the two parties have turned the page on the
controversy stirred by a report on the FPM-affiliated OTV that took out of
context remarks voiced by the lawmaker in parliament. In the evening, OTV said
Kanaan “returned relieved from Maarab, where a joint review of the phases of
dialogue was conducted and a unified vision for the next steps was reached.”
MTV for its part said the meeting was “positive,” revealing that the document of
principles has become ready, “after Geagea introduced his amendments.”
“Discussions are currently focused on the final draft before the LF-FPM dialogue
gets underway,” MTV added.
Meanwhile, LBCI television said the document includes 17 clauses, “most of which
have been agreed on.”“The debate is currently focused on the dialogue's
objectives and the steps that must be taken to reach the goals at two levels,”
LBCI added.
“The first level is the relation between the two parties in terms of general and
national principles in addition to the current political issues, while the
second level is resolving the system crisis starting by the presidency,” the TV
network said.
Separately, sources described as baseless media reports about an alleged
“bargain” between the FPM and the LF over “the presidency, the army command and
the interior ministry.”“This scenario exists only in the minds of those who
fabricated it and it was not discussed between Kanaan and Riachi,” the sources
told LBCI. In its Friday issue, Kuwaiti daily An Nahar had quoted a “political
source close to March 14” as saying that Geagea was trying to convince Aoun of a
deal in which the FPM chief would be elected president and the LF leader would
be named interior minister. The alleged source did not rule out that an officer
close to Geagea might be appointed army commander under such a deal. The dispute
between the two sides is among the main causes of the ongoing failure to stage
the presidential elections. Lebanon has been without a president since May when
the term of Michel Suleiman ended.
Aoun still fancies his chances
Antoine Ghattas Saab| The Daily Star/Feb. 20, 2015
Nearly 10 months have passed and Lebanon’s top Christian post remains vacant,
but Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun is still betting he can become
president.
The latest parliamentary election session was doomed to fail, as were previous
attempts, as the body was unable to reach a quorum due to a boycott by the March
8 coalition and the lack of agreement on a consensus candidate.
But Aoun’s optimism isn’t unsubstantiated, according to a high-ranking FPM
source. It’s based on objective criteria as well as local, regional and
international considerations. One encouraging sign for Aoun is the active
communications between the March 8 and March 14 political alliances, most
notably the Future movement and the FPM. After an initial summit between Aoun
and Future movement leader Saad Hariri in Paris, a second meeting was held in
Beirut Wednesday, at which Hariri reiterated his support for any Christian
efforts, dialogue, or agreements that could produce a settlement to end the
presidential vacuum, according to information provided by both parties. Hariri
also reportedly stated that Saudi Arabia would support a candidate resulting
from such an understanding.
Another dialogue, between the FPM and its Christian rival, the Lebanese Forces
party, is currently being conducted by MP Ibrahim Kanaan and LF media officer
Melhem Riachi. The talks should culminate in a meeting between Aoun and LF
leader Samir Geagea.
Both sides have agreed on a list of 17 issues to be discussed, and the
preliminary talks are currently focused on finding common ground on the final
six.
FPM members have also reached out to deputies of the Progressive Socialist Party
led by MP Walid Jumblatt, an FPM source stated. Last week, Health Minister Wael
Abu Faour, acting as Jumblatt’s representative, visited Aoun at his residence in
Rabieh, where he also met with Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil. Abu Faour’s visit
was intended to clarify Jumblatt’s stance, according to the source, as just days
earlier Jumblatt had remarked that the issue of the presidential election should
not be monopolized by Christian parties. Abu Faour communicated to Aoun that the
statement was not intended to target him, and that Jumblatt supports the ongoing
Christian dialogues. The FPM is keeping its Christian political ally, the Marada
Movement, informed of all its talks. Aoun’s candidacy is supported by the
movement’s leader, Sleiman Frangieh. On a regional level, Aoun’s optimism has
been kept grounded by the slow pace of nuclear talks between the United States
and Iran. But the two sides are expected to make significant progress on the
issue by March, which could lead to a larger conciliation on regional crises,
especially regarding Syria.
U.N. envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura remarked last week that Syrian President
Bashar Assad should be considered “part of the solution” to the crisis, which
Aoun views as being only a good sign for his candidacy. The source stated the
accession of King Salman in Saudi Arabia was also a source of optimism for Aoun,
especially given the appointments the new king has made to a number of key
government posts. According to the source, Aoun believes that the war on
terrorism, both in the region and in Lebanon, will push powerful countries to
support his bid, due to his past as an army commander. Aoun’s optimism may be
well founded, as Christian parties, frustrated by the ongoing vacuum in the
post, appear ready to compromise and elect him president.
Hezbollah buries two party members
slain in Syria
Daily Star/Feb. 20, 2015 /BEIRUT/NABATIEH, Lebanon: Hezbollah Thursday buried
two of its members who died carrying out duties in Syria. Al-Manar director
Hasan Abdullah, who was killed while filming the raging battles in the Syrian
city of Aleppo, was laid to rest in the Beirut southern suburbs cemetery of
Rawdat al-Shahidain. His coffin roamed the streets of the suburb of Ghobeiri
before he was buried. Dozens of Abdullah’s relatives and his supports marched in
the funeral. In the south Lebanon village of Kfour in
the district of Nabatieh, the 3-year-old Qassem Qaoum would touch the coffin of
his father Hussein Qaoun, kissing it every once in a while, as members of
Hezbollah chanted “Labayki ya Zeinab” (All hail oh Zeinab), in reference to the
daughter of Imam Ali. The crowd braved the snow and
high winds to take part in the funeral procession of Qaoun, who died while
fighting in Syria. His coffin was draped in Hezbollah’s yellow flag and despite
the cold weather children took part by carrying yellow Hezbollah flags. Kfour’s
women threw rice and flowers at the fighter’s coffin.
Many spoke of Qaoun’s fight against Israeli forces during the summer 2006 war.
“Hussein Qaoun was martyred in Syria while defending all of Lebanon and all its
sects,” Zeinab Bakri told The Daily Star. “Sooner or later, everyone will
realize that Hezbollah’s fighting in Syria is aimed at safeguarding Lebanon from
the threat of ISIS and its ilk.” MP Mohammad Raad,
head of Hezbollah’s Loyalty to the Resistance parliamentary bloc, and other
party officials took part in the funeral. Earlier this
week, Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah rejected calls by rivals for the
party to withdraw its forces from Syria. Lebanon’s
fate is tied to the fate of Syria, Iraq, Egypt and all other states in the
region, he said. “Whoever wants to decide the fate of Lebanon must be ready to
confront the fate of the region.”
Security forces corral criminals in
north Lebanon, Bekaa Valley
The Daily Star/Feb. 20, 2015/BAALBEK, Lebanon: Lebanese security forces carried
out more raids across the eastern Bekaa Valley Thursday, detaining at least
eight people, security sources and the Army said. Meanwhile, a Palestinian man
wanted over terror-related activity died Thursday of wounds he sustained during
a shootout with police in north Lebanon. In the town of Arsal, the Army arrested
a Syrian national for possessing a fake identification document and driving an
unregistered car, the military said in a statement. A Lebanese was also detained
for attempting to smuggle food to the town’s outskirts, where jihadi militants
are hiding out. The statement added that a Lebanese fugitive as well as four
citizens driving unregistered cars were arrested in Baalbek and the nearby
villages of Telya and Douris. In Bar Elias, the Army arrested Syrian national
Walid Hussein over suspected links to terrorist groups, the statement added.
General Security and Army forces entered the village of Nabi Sheet on the Syrian
border, where they erected checkpoints and performed raids without making any
arrests or seizures. The raids came one day after security forces arrested 23
suspects in two villages of the Baalbek district and a West Bekaa village.
Wednesday’s Army raids also led to the confiscation of weapons and ammunition
but failed to prevent the murder of Lebanese national Fouad Hajj Hasan, who was
shot dead by gunmen facing his house 20 kilometers north of Baalbek.
Interior Minister Nouhad Machnouk said Wednesday evening that the number of
arrests made in the Bekaa since the launch of the security plan had reached 156.
He stressed that any illegal weapons found would be immediately confiscated.
Separately, a man accused of belonging to ISIS was arrested in the Zghorta
neighborhood of Airounieh Thursday, a security source told The Daily Star. The
source identified the detainee as Ali Mohammad Tarek Safsouf. He was arrested by
judicial officers from Lebanon’s counterterrorism bureau. Also in north Lebanon,
Palestinian man Wael Kamel Youssef, wanted over terror-related activity and a
series of killings, died Thursday of wounds he sustained during a shootout with
police in Tripoli.
A police officer was also slightly wounded in the late-Wednesday confrontation
during the raid on the home of Youssef in the area of Jabal Badawi in the
northern city of Tripoli, a security source said. The source told The Daily Star
Maj. Nazih Saleh was wounded when Youssef tossed a grenade at police following
the shootout.
The suspect, who goes by the nickname “Abu al-Madariss,” was wounded in the
shootout that preceded the grenade attack. He was captured and taken to Mulla
hospital in Tripoli, but died a few hours later. Gunfire could be heard in the
Tripoli neighborhood of Mankoubeen after news emerged that Youssef succumbed to
his wounds. An ISF statement said 35-year-old Youssef – who is wanted on 109
warrants for murder, drug trafficking, theft, forgery and throwing grenades –
was nicknamed Abu al-Madariss because he would “distribute drugs to
schoolchildren.” “Abu al-Madariss” translates to “the father of schools.”
“During the raid, [Youssef] opened fire on the [police] force and then tossed a
hand grenade that wounded a police officer, prompting police to respond to the
source of fire,” the statement said. It said Youssef was wounded in the shootout
and taken to a hospital for treatment but that he later died of his wounds. A
security source said Youssef’s relatives fired their weapons and threw a grenade
at a Lebanese Army patrol in the Jabal Badawi-Mankoubeen area when Abu al-Madariss’
body arrived in the town. No casualties were reported from the early afternoon
attack.
Hrdlickova succeeds Baragwanath as STL head
The Daily Star/Feb. 20, 2015/BEIRUT: Judge Ivana Hrdlickova of the Czech
Republic has been elected president of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon,
succeeding Judge Sir David Baragwanath of New Zealand, the STL announced in a
statement Thursday. Judge Ralph Riachi of Lebanon has also been re-elected as
vice president. The Judges of the Appeals Chamber, who met Thursday, elected
Judge Hrdlickova and Judge Riachy for a period of 18 months, starting from March
1, 2015, the statement said. The election of the president and the vice
president is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Tribunal’s Statute and Rule
31 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Judge Hrdlickova began her career as
a Judge in 1990 and has presided over both civil and criminal cases. Judge
Hrdlickova holds a Ph.D. from the law faculty of Charles University in Prague in
Shariah law and speaks Arabic. She was appointed an Appeals Chamber Judge in
November 2012. The president of the Tribunal has a wide range of
responsibilities, including oversight of the effective functioning of the
Tribunal and the good administration of justice, as well as representing the STL
in relations with states, the United Nations and other entities. Judge Sir David
Baragwanath, who remains an Appeals Chamber Judge, has served as President of
the Tribunal since October 2011. “For more than three years it has been my
privilege to be able to serve Lebanon and its people as President of the
Tribunal,” Judge Baragwanath said. “As a judge of the Appeals Chamber I now look
forward to supporting my very able and competent successor, Judge Hrdlickova, as
she assumes her new role and responsibilities at the beginning of a new mandate
for the STL.”
The region crumbles and Lebanon
trembles
Michael Young/The Daily Star/Feb. 19, 2015
As prospects for the emergence of new sectarian and ethnic entities rise in the
Middle East to replace illegitimate, authoritarian states, it is necessary to
ask what will happen to Lebanon, the only Arab state that has sought to build
its political system around a formula for sectarian compromise.
Lebanon’s most pressing danger is the presence of some 1.5 million Syrian
refugees in the country, most of them Sunnis from areas the Assad regime
considers vital for its political survival. Many have fled Homs and Qalamoun,
which sit on vital communication lines between Damascus and the coast. These are
both places the regime intends to retain, even as it has given up on far-flung
districts that it has no real hope of controlling, such as Syria’s north,
northeast and east.
Bringing back hundreds of thousands of Sunnis to Homs and its environs, the
vulnerable neck of Bashar Assad’s “useful Syria,” is not something the regime in
Damascus intends to do, amid rumors that the Iranians have resettled friendlier
Shiite populations there from outside Syria and even the region. So, what
happens to most of the refugees now in Lebanon?
Developments don’t offer much of an answer, let alone provoke optimism. Barring
a major victory by the regime to retake all of Syria, which seems highly
unlikely, the country will continue to fragment. Illustrating this, Syria’s
Kurds last Friday declared their intention of pursuing the “geographic and
political unity” of Kurdish areas in the context of a “federal state.” Under the
circumstances, however, that is less than what they hope to achieve – indeed
what is achievable – namely a virtually independent Kurdish entity in a very
loose state structure.
Is the permanent settlement of Syrian refugees in Lebanon a possibility, as some
Lebanese have warned? Certainly it is, and what is more worrisome is that there
are those Lebanese willing to go along with such a project, seeing that it will
boost Sunni demographics at the expense of Shiites. International humanitarian
organizations have insisted that Lebanon is obliged to care for the refugees,
but have given scant attention to the long-term, political implications of their
presence.
That is not to justify the disgraceful calls to expel the refugees, itself an
utterly unrealistic option in light of the vast numbers involved. However,
Lebanon must start raising international awareness of the lasting repercussions
of the Syrian refugee presence, particularly in light of the problems
accompanying the Palestinian refugee presence in Lebanon after 1948.
It took nearly two decades for the Palestinian refugees to be mobilized
politically, and the consequences were devastating for the Lebanese. The
possibility of this happening again with Syrians is infinitely more worrisome.
If the refugees come to form the core of a new insurgency operating from outside
Syria, Lebanon would very quickly be caught up in the maelstrom.
However, one factor alone plays in Lebanon’s favor. Iran has helped provoke
Syria’s fragmentation – no less than Iraq’s – believing that its influence is
much easier to exercise in an Arab world broken up into countless ministates.
But those who could be expected to lose most from the massive rise in the Sunni
population in Lebanon are Shiites, and it is doubtful that the Iranians or
Hezbollah would welcome this.
So what are the options for Assad, Tehran and Hezbollah? To eventually allow a
return of Sunnis to Syria, but then to ensure that they will not resettle in the
strategic Homs and Qalamoun areas from where they originate? Perhaps, but how
easy is that? After engaging in ethnic cleansing in those areas in recent years,
the regime would have to do so again, this time pushing the population into
parts of Syria where Sunnis are a majority and over which today only ISIS has
some control. This would not only be complicated, it would be no solution at
all.
Populations are not sacks of potatoes. As the regime’s intent becomes clearer,
the refugees will understandably resist it and many will refuse to leave
Lebanon. Ultimately, the thinking may be that if a Sunni ministate emerges in
Iraq, a broader Sunni state between Iraq and Syria may attract rural Syrian
Sunnis. However, such a view smacks of wishful thinking and hubris, and may well
perpetuate sectarian conflict in Syria indefinitely. Worse, from Lebanon’s
perspective it may heighten domestic sectarian hostility, damaging communal
relations.
The simple fact is that there is no good solution to the Iranian and Syrian
regimes’ efforts to engage in durable sectarian cleansing in Syria. All
scenarios are either unrealistic, flawed or damaging to those most closely
allied with Tehran.
Beyond that, the millions of Syrians in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey are a
potential reservoir of difficulties not only for the region but also for the
international community. A consequence of Sunni alienation in Iraq was ISIS; the
Syrian refugees present risks far more perilous, as millions of people without a
future, a territory, an anchor are circulating among fragile countries already
at their limits in coping with the present situation.
That the international community – starting with Europe, the United States, the
Arab countries, and Russia – has been less than useless with regard to the
Syrian refugees is self-evident. Nor have they taken any measures against those
exacerbating the refugees’ terrible predicament, namely the Syrian regime and
Iran. But the problem will not go away; it will only get worse for everyone.
It’s past time for the world to wake up.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR. He tweets @BeirutCalling.
Sisi’s “If Only” Moment
Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al Awsat
Friday, 20 Feb, 2015
Egypt has every right to defend itself and its citizens, and it is incumbent
upon us in the region to stand by President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi and Egypt
during this time, after the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) executed 21
Egyptian workers in Libya.
Despite this, I do wish Sisi had taken a different route before deciding to hit
ISIS and other extremists in Libya with full force. One would have hoped that
following news of the killing of the 21 Egyptians, Sisi would have immediately
called for an emergency Arab summit in Egypt to garner support for an open
military campaign in Libya. During this summit Sisi could have called on Arab
countries to support Egypt militarily, thereby striking a crucial blow to the
extremists in Libya and helping the country resume its course toward stability.
The importance of such a move can be seen in a number of points, which don’t
just concern Egypt but the region as a whole.
The whole point of such a summit would have been to gain Arab blessing for a
more central Egyptian role in supporting the transition in Libya and fighting
extremism there. This way, all those countries concerned about Libya’s future
could also have participated in the process and helped bring much-needed and
long-awaited stability to the country.
The summit would also have paved the way for the Arab League to become involved
in this fight. The organization needs to play a more effective, reforming role
than it has in previous crises—especially considering that the Arab League is in
reality a failure, and in need of drastic reforms. Egypt’s going to the Arab
League in this instance would have played an essential role in bringing about
this new stage in the organization’s history, which would have seen it give
authorization to countries in the region to take more forceful stances on a
number of crisis areas, such as Yemen, Iraq and Syria. This new phase for the
Arab League is vital not only today, but also in the future; the danger posed by
ISIS, the Al-Nusra Front, Hezbollah and their partner in crime, Syrian President
Bashar Al-Assad, shows why this is necessary.
The move would also have had the added advantage of showing up those Arab
countries whose roles in these crises have been less than genuine, to say the
least. Such countries may say they are fighting terrorism and extremism in the
region, but they might then go and praise a group like ISIS in the media. The
reactions by some Arab countries, first to ISIS killing Jordanian fighter pilot
Moaz Al-Kasasbeh, and then its killing of 21 Egyptians, are a case in point
here. Sisi’s going to the Arab League would have helped name and shame those
countries who offer to help fight terrorism one minute while giving terror
groups a leg-up in the media the next. If these countries had refused to
authorize Egypt’s taking military action in Libya—and in such an open forum like
the Arab League—they would have been shown up in front of the entire region, and
the world; for how can these countries have accepted NATO’s involvement in Libya
in 2011, but reject Egypt’s legitimate involvement today?
If only the Egyptian president had gone to the Arab League. Such a move would
have been even more important than going to the UN Security Council; it would
have helped usher in a new Arab moment, reining in and exposing all those who
play dicey games with the region’s destiny in order to fulfill their own narrow
interests.
Like Father, Like Son
Amir Taheri/Asharq AlAwsat
Friday, 20 Feb, 2015
In the past few days I have been bombarded with messages drawing my attention to
the emergence of a new chorus on Syria. The new song is sung by all sorts of
people: British and American journalists, Israeli pundits and former officials,
Russian and Iranian government mouthpieces, United Nations emissaries, and TV
“experts” from east and west.
The new song is about Syria and it has this refrain: “Assad is part of the
solution!” The narrative behind the new song is equally simple: the choice left
in Syria is between bad (the Assad regime) and worse (the self-styled Caliph Abu
Bakr Al-Baghdadi).
One pro-Israel commentator asks: Why should we ditch the Assad family, who
guaranteed the security of Israel’s borders for four decades, and risk having
the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) massed close to Golan?
Assad is also cast as a lesser of the two evils when it comes to the future of
Iraq. Since ISIS is seeking to dismember Iraq, wouldn’t it be wiser to help
Assad, who would be happy to remain in his own neck of the woods even if that
means massacring his own people? Even if Assad is succeeded by the Muslim
Brotherhood and not ISIS, shouldn’t we be concerned about the threat that such a
regime in Damascus might pose to others, notably Jordan and Egypt?
For his part Bashar Al-Assad, the man “re-elected” president of Syria with 99.9
percent of the vote in June last year, misses no opportunity to apply for his
father’s old job as a pawn of big powers engaged in the deadly chess game that
is the Middle East today. That was the tune that Hafez Al-Assad played when I
first met him in 1973. At the time Tehran regarded him as an enemy. However, he
used our interview to propose the idea of him switching sides and
counter-balancing Iraq under Saddam Hussein, who was an enemy of Iran at the
time. Once diplomatic channels moved into high gear, Assad succeeded in selling
his new narrative to the Shah’s government.
A year after our interview I ran into Assad again during the Islamic Summit
Conference in Lahore, Pakistan. Foreign Minister Abbas Ali Khalatbari—who headed
the Iranian delegation—was reluctant to meet Assad, partly because he had no
instructions on the subject from the Shah. The Pakistani hosts, however, were
keen for Khalatbari to receive Assad. At the time, Pakistan was an ally of Iran
and a member of the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) and its Prime Minister
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, whom I had known since 1971, believed that Assad could be
“more useful inside the tent than outside.”
Bhutto was trying to prevent what he saw as a Soviet-India axis from dominating
the region. In 1971, India backed by the USSR, had invaded and divided Pakistan
into two halves, the eastern half becoming Bangladesh. In that context Bhutto
had midwifed the US-China rapprochement and had also succeeded in wooing Libya’s
Muammar Gaddafi away from the Soviets. So, it was no surprise that the Pakistani
leader was keen to bring Hafez Al-Assad “on board.”
In the end, I believe the Pakistanis tried to force an “accidental” meeting
between Khalatbari and Assad. This came one evening as Khalatbari was dining
with four or five of us, when the Pakistanis suddenly informed him that Assad
had left his villa and was heading for the villa reserved for the Iranian
delegation. The dinner table was quickly cleared and the dessert postponed, and
Assad arrived about 20 minutes later. During a meeting that lasted more than two
hours, most of it devoted to mini-speeches by the Syrian despot, it became clear
that Assad wanted to assure the Iranians on two points.
The first was that all his talk of socialism and Arab nationalism was nothing
more than ideological pose. He was neither a pan-Arabist nor a leftist; he was
Assadist.
The second point was that he was ready to work for anybody who paid. As a
starter he was asking for an aid package of over 150 million US dollars,
including cut-price oil and cash handouts. Having no instructions, all that
Khalatbari could say was that he would report the request to the Shah. Later,
the Shah approved Assad’s application, and the Ba’athist regime in Damascus was
transferred from the list of enemies to that of “friends.”
A couple of days later, Bhutto, in a private conversation, asked me what I
thought of his efforts “to bring Assad into the fold,” which meant weaning him
away from the Soviets. Assad, of course, was embarking on his favorite sport of
swimming with the tide. He had seen that Egypt’s Anwar Sadat had switched sides
while Saddam Hussein in Iraq was deeply engaged in negotiations with Iran. The
Chinese were also moving closer to the so-called Free World led by the US,
strengthening a trend to isolate the USSR.
When I asked Bhutto what he thought of Assad, he described the Syrian leader as
“The Levanter.” Knowing that, like himself, I was a keen reader of thrillers,
the Pakistani Prime Minister knew that I would get the message. However, it was
only months later when, having read Eric Ambler’s 1972 novel The Levanter that I
understood Bhutto’s one-word pen portrayal of Hafez Al-Assad.
In The Levanter the hero, or anti-hero if you prefer, is a British businessman
who, having lived in Syria for years, has almost “gone native” and become a man
of uncertain identity. He is a bit of this and a bit of that, and a bit of
everything else, in a region that is a mosaic of minorities. He doesn’t believe
in anything and is loyal to no one. He could be your friend in the morning but
betray you in the evening. He has only two goals in life: to survive and to make
money.
President Bill Clinton described Hafez Al-Assad as “a man we could work with.” A
few years ago, when he was rather chummy with the Assad clan, the then-Senator
John Kerry believed that Bashar Al-Assad could be “useful like his father.”
Former Israeli Foreign Minister Itamar Rabinovich echoed that sentiment.
Today, Bashar Al-Assad is playing the role of the son of the Levanter, offering
his services to any would-be buyer through interviews with whoever passes
through the corner of Damascus where he is hiding. At first glance, the Levanter
may appear attractive to those engaged in sordid games. In the end, however, the
Levanter must betray his existing paymaster in order to begin serving a new one.
Four years ago, Bashar switched to the Tehran-Moscow axis and is now trying to
switch back to the Tel-Aviv-Washington one that he and his father served for
decades.
However, if the story has one lesson to teach, it is that the Levanter is always
the source of the problem, rather than part of the solution. ISIS is there
because almost half a century of repression by the Assads produced the
conditions for its emergence. What is needed is a policy based on the truth of
the situation in which both Assad and ISIS are parts of the same problem.
US takes swipe at Netanyahu: Sounds like he knows more
about Iran deal than negotiators
By JPOST.COM STAFF/02/19/2015
A nuclear deal with Iran does not yet exist, and therefore Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu cannot know what is in it, US State Department Jen Psaki said
on Thursday. "We've seen this movie before," Psaki said of skepticism from
leadership in Israel over the nuclear talks.
Earlier this week Netanyahu said that the current proposal to Iran would
endanger Israel. "It would enable Iran to breakout to its first nuclear device
within an unacceptably short time," Netanyahu told a gathering of American
Jewish leaders in Jerusalem.
Netanyahu also said he knows the contents of a framework proposal, offered to
Iran by the US, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany last month. But the
Obama administration is skeptical. "It sounds like he knows more than the
negotiators," Psaki said, responding to claims that Netanyahu knows the details
of the deal.
Netanyahu's scheduled speech before Congress continues to be a contentious issue
in both Washington and Jerusalem. Leading Democratic Senator Charles Schumer
called on his fellow Democrats on Thursday to attend the address next month,
saying the Israel-US relationship should “transcend” any political
differences.“It’s always been a bipartisan policy,” Schumer said of the
US-Israel relationship. “Democrats and Republicans have always worked together
on it, we ought to keep it that way.”
Some Democrats, including Vice President Joe Biden, have said they will not
attend the speech.
Schumer, a ranking member of his party, was instrumental in altering the
strident tone of the US-Israel relationship in the summer of 2010, after Biden’s
disastrous visit during which Israel announced the building of homes in the
Ramat Shlomo neighborhood of Jerusalem. At that point, Israeli-US ties hit a
nadir. After he went on the radio in New York criticizing US President Barack
Obama for pushing Israel too hard, the president’s tone changed dramatically. On
Tuesday, when asked whether he thought Republican Speaker of the House John
Boehner “blindsided” Obama with his invitation to Netanyahu, the senator said on
WAMC Northeast Public Radio that he thought it was a “bad idea” because “our
policy toward Israel should always be bipartisan.”
**Michael Wilner and Herb Keinon contributed to this report.
Friend and Foe in Syria/ The enemy of
my enemy is my enemy’s enemy.
By LEE SMITH/The Weekly Standard
Mar 2, 2015, Vol. 20, No. 24 •
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/friend-and-foe-syria_859648.html?nopager=1#
Last week, outgoing chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces Benny Gantz told
an American audience that it’s important the international community defeat both
camps of regional extremists. The way Gantz sees it, on one side there are Sunni
radicals, like the Islamic State, al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the
Nusra Front, an al Qaeda affiliate. On the Shiite side are Iran and the
Revolutionary Guards expeditionary unit, the Quds Force, as well as Hezbollah
and Iranian-backed Iraqi Shiite militias.
In urging European, Arab, and, of course, American officials to band together to
defeat Middle Eastern extremism of all varieties, Gantz was nominally tapping
into a consensus position. After all, the White House convened a summit last
week to “combat violent extremism,” so surely the United States and its allies
can agree that all types of radical violent actors—Shiite or Sunni, secular or
otherwise—are equally bad.
The reality, however, is that the government Gantz recently served has made
clear distinctions between extremist groups in the Middle East, and has backed
its preferences on the ground for certain actors in the Sunni camp. The Obama
White House has also signaled its priorities, acquiescing to, if not actively
supporting, the Iranian-backed Shiite axis. Thus the United States and its
longtime ally Israel have reached yet another point of strategic divergence over
Iran, one that may soon widen.
The January 18 Israeli strike on a three-vehicle convoy in the Golan Heights
carrying six Hezbollah fighters, a senior officer of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard
Corps (IRGC), and as many as five other Iranian officials was the clearest
indication yet of Jerusalem’s top priority—Iran. It’s possible that the IRGC/Hezbollah
delegation was plotting an attack that Israeli officials deemed urgent. But the
key point the strike showed is that Jerusalem will not allow Iran to open up a
second front on the borders of Israel from the Golan, in addition to its
Hezbollah stronghold in southern Lebanon.
The evidence that the Israelis have no such immediate concerns regarding the
Sunni rebels fighting against the Assad regime is that this was the first time
Israel targeted the region around Quneitra, Syrian territory that the rebels
have controlled for a year. Presumably, for the present at least, the Israelis
have turned a blind eye to rebel activities—even though those units surely
include fighters from Nusra, one of the groups that Gantz says should be
defeated.
“Israel has been reportedly working with rebel brigades in southern Syria for a
while,” says Tony Badran, research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies. “Israel has provided medical treatment not just to Syrian civilians
but also fighters. It’s a channel of communication, then, they’re talking to
them, and likely sharing intelligence, in the full knowledge that these rebel
units cooperate with Nusra against the Assad regime, Hezbollah, and the IRGC.”
The issue, as Badran notes, is that Israel perceives the Iranian axis not just
as the strategic threat, but also as the immediate threat. There may come a day
that the anti-Assad rebels, especially Nusra, will be a serious problem for
Israel, but at present Jerusalem’s chief concern isn’t nonstate Sunni militants
with rocket-propelled grenades, but a state sponsor of violent extremism that is
seeking a nuclear weapon. Moreover, as the regional press has reported, the IRGC
campaign to retake Quneitra, with Iranian officers not simply advising Assad’s
forces and its Hezbollah allies but actually fighting, is apt to force a direct
confrontation between Israel and Iran for the first time. It’s hardly surprising
then that Jerusalem sees a vital interest in keeping IRGC troops off its border,
even if that involves coordination with rebel groups that include Nusra forces.
The Obama administration has a different set of regional priorities. First is to
cut a deal with Tehran over its nuclear weapons program. Second is to prevent a
terrorist attack on the U.S. homeland, with a watchful eye especially on the
foreign fighters in the Syrian war who may be dispatched to an American city to
conduct a Charlie Hebdo-style operation.
Both of these goals have brought the administration into alignment with Tehran.
The White House believes that if it accommodates Iranian interests, from
Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq to Yemen, then Iran will be more willing to forsake, or
at least postpone, its nuclear ambitions. As for the second, the administration
believes that Iran shares an interest in halting the spread of Sunni jihadism.
Accordingly, the White House has partnered with Iran and its allies in Iraq to
fight ISIS, shared intelligence with Hezbollah in Lebanon, and promised Iran not
to attack Assad’s dwindling forces in Syria.
The upshot is that the Obama White House has a very different picture of the
region from Israel, and sees it almost exactly as Iran and its allies do. Where
Israel’s security needs require it to hold its nose and work with Nusra-affiliated
groups to keep the Iranian axis at bay, the White House makes no distinction
between the Islamic State and Nusra, which it designated as a foreign terrorist
organization in 2012. Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah has the same picture of
the world as former administration envoy to Syria Robert Ford. “Nusra Front is
just as dangerous” as the Islamic State, Ford said last week. “And yet they keep
pretending they’re nice guys, they’re Syrians.” From Nasrallah’s perspective,
Nusra Front and the Islamic State “are essentially one and the same . . .
[and] must be fought, without distinction.”
One obvious question, which wasn’t lost on Ford, was whether an active White
House policy to bring down Assad, as Obama stipulated in August 2011, might have
prevented the appearance of Nusra and other jihadist groups in Syria. As many
analysts warned at the time, if the White House stood by idly while the war
raged, the conflict might destabilize every U.S. ally on Syria’s borders,
including Turkey, Jordan, and Israel. Thus, it is largely the White House’s
negligence that has compelled U.S. allies, including Israel, to partner with
potential enemies against what they perceive as an even greater threat.
Further, there’s a possibility that some of those allies may be drawn into the
Syrian war in order to defend themselves against the Iranian axis. For instance,
if the anti-Assad rebels fail to hold what has become for Jerusalem a buffer
zone on the Golan, that will put Iranian troops on Israel’s border and make
confrontation likely.
And there’s an even more worrisome possibility. According to a Wall Street
Journal report last week, White House officials are concerned that a U.S. attack
on Assad’s forces in Syria might lead Iranian-backed militias to begin targeting
U.S. forces in Iraq. After repeated American assurances over the last few months
that Assad won’t be touched in the campaign against Islamic State, it’s unlikely
that the White House is about to call Iran’s bluff. But Israel can’t possibly
give the IRGC carte blanche on its border. Obama’s regional policy has made
American allies as well as American soldiers hostages of Iran—and pushed us ever
further from our chief regional ally.
**Lee Smith is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard.
Israel Threatened by Iranian Ground
Forces on Northern Border
BY: Abraham Rabinovich/The Washington Free Beacon
February 19, 2015 10:50 am
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/israel-threatened-by-iranian-ground-forces-on-northern-border/
JERUSALEM—The strategic threat posed to Israel by Iran’s nuclear program is
being augmented by a new and no less ominous threat: the presence of Iranian
ground forces adjacent to Israel’s northern border.
The Arabic-digital news site, Rai-al-Youm, reported this week that Iranian
troops have been participating, together with Hezbollah and the Syrian army, in
an attempt to drive rebel and jihadi forces from southern Syria, where they
dominate a triangle of territory between the Golan Heights, the province of
Daraa on the Jordanian border, and the outskirts of Damascus.
“This is the first time we have a public operational intervention by IRGC
[Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps] forces in the conflict,” the report said.
Several media outlets have reported the presence in the battle area of Qassem
Suleimani, the commander of the IRGC al-Quds force, which is responsible for
operations outside Iran’s borders.
Iran, which has been attempting to build its sphere of influence from Somalia to
Afghanistan, has been particularly successful in Syria, where it has become a
major prop for President Bashar al-Assad, and in Lebanon, where Hezbollah has
become a formidable proxy. Iranian military advisers have been active in both
areas for years, but the presence of Iranian troops on the ground–even in small
numbers–is little known.
In a recent bulletin, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), which
monitors media throughout the region, reported that the Iranian military
presence in the region has hitherto been in the form of command posts and a
limited number of special forces. It notes that according to a plan outlined by
a senior IRGC official on an Iranian website last year the command posts are
intended to operate “130,000 trained Iranian Basij (a volunteer militia)
fighters waiting to enter Syria.” The authors of the MEMRI report, Yigal Carmon
and Y. Yehoshua, said the statement was immediately removed from the site after
publication.
Syria’s Al-Hadath website, which is close to the regime, recently revealed
Iran’s active involvement on the regime’s side in the civil war.
“Iran, which had been taking part in the fighting in Syria by means of military
advisers, recently decided to join the military conflict officially and openly,”
it declared.
The presence of Iranian military personnel near the Golan border was revealed
last month when an Israeli aircraft, in a targeted strike, interdicted two SUVs
apparently reconnoitering the border area from the Syrian side. Twelve were
killed in the strike, six of them Hezbollah fighters and six of them Iranian
military personnel.
Although Iranian leaders frequently call for Israel’s demise, the authors note
that fomenting action against Israel by proxies such as Hezbollah stems from
Iranian strategy, not just ideology, since it is believed to create deterrence
against an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. This presumed deterrence
would be reinforced by the creation of another point of conflict on Israel’s
Syrian border.
The MEMRI authors say Teheran also has domestic considerations in its operations
beyond its borders.
“Mobilization of Iranian national forces and Iranian youth in the ideological
framework of struggle outside Iran inoculates Iran’s dictatorial regime against
internal uprising and rebellion,” according to the authors. The authors add that
Iran’s involvement on Israel’s northern front together with its deep involvement
in Syria and elsewhere “creates tremendous pressure on its dwindling resources
and exhausts it, intensifying its dependence on regional forces.”
Hezbollah leaders recently declared their intention of creating another front
inside Syria, presumably with President Assad’s assent, opposite the Golan.
After last month’s air strike, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon indicated
that the strike was intended as a statement that Israel would not permit
Hezbollah and its Iranian mentors to open a new front. Israel has established a
working relationship with rebels and even, reportedly, with jihadi militias who
have been operating near the Golan border—treating wounded and providing
humanitarian aid in return for keeping the border quiet.
A fake Iranian “defector” assassinated Argentine prosecutor
Alberto Nisman
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report February 19, 2015,
http://www.debka.com/article/24414/A-fake-Iranian-%E2%80%9Cdefector%E2%80%9D-assassinated-Argentine-prosecutor-Alberto-Nisman
A special investigation conducted by debkafile’s intelligence, Iranian and
counter-terror sources has discovered that the Argentine-Jewish prosecutor
Natalio Alerto Nisman, 51, was murdered on Jan. 18 by an Iranian agent, who had
won his trust by posing as a defector under the assumed name of Abbas Haqiqat-Ju.
His killer struck hours before Nisman showed the Argentine parliament evidence
that President Cristina Kirchner and Foreign Minister Hector Timerman had
covered up Iran’s complicity in the country’s worst ever terrorist attack, the
1994 bombing of the Buenos Aires Jewish community center in which 85 people
died, two years after 29 people were killed by a blast at the Israeli embassy.
Nisman’s evidence had it been presented would have ultimately proved Iran's
culpability in the two terrorist attacks.
According to our investigation, two Iranian Intelligence Ministers, the
incumbent Mahmoud Alavi and his predecessor Hojjat-ol-Eslam Heydar Moslehi, had
for nine years wracked their brains for a way to silence the Jewish prosecutor,
ever since he began probing the two attacks. They worked hand in glove with
senior Argentinean government and intelligence agencies.
(In Iran, intelligence ministers take their orders directly from supreme leader
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei although they attend cabinet meetings.)
Tehran's clandestine hand deep in the Americas
Nisman had made the powers-that-be in Tehran jittery, because a) he was
ambitious, honest and a courageous searcher after the truth; b) he was Jewish
and had active connections with Israel; and c) in pursuit of his inquiry, he
spread his net wide to include contacts with the Israeli Mossad and the American
CIA.
Furthermore, in 2006, after three years on the job, the prosecutor had put
together an intelligence file on the unbelievable scope of Iranian intelligence
penetration, using Lebanese Hizballah agents, deep into the government and
intelligence establishments of many Latin American countries - not only
Argentina, but also Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Surinam, Trinidad-Tobago and Guyana.
No sooner was this file put before the government in Buenos Aires when it was
locked away to prevent its publication.
Undeterred, Nisman went to New York in 2007 and put the contents of his file
orally before senior CIA officials and UN Secretariat bureaucrats. His briefing
also uncovered scores of Iranian diplomats and agents operating in the United
States under cover out the Pakistani embassy in Washington.
It is hardly surprising that in no time, the information leaked from the UN
Secretariat to Tehran, adding to the urgency of getting rid of this thorn in the
side of the Islamic Revolution’s clandestine operations against the West.
Bribery wouldn’t work on Nisman
Iran’s security organs are no strangers to political assassination at home and
among its exile communities, in such places as France, Austria and Germany.
But at first, they tried to win the Argentinean round by bribery, which had
always worked before in Buenos Aires. For $10 million, Carlos Saul Menem
(Argentine president from 1989 to 1999) and his minions agreed to close the
investigation of the two terrorist bombings in its tracks.
Tehran handled President Kirchner differently. She was promised economic and
trade benefits for Argentina, along with financial perks for government and
intelligence heads.
debkafile’s Buenos Aires sources report that, at first, Kirchner feared that
Nisman’s sudden demise would bring her under suspicion at the cost of her
presidency. But Tehran assured her through their private channels of
communication that the deed would be accomplished cleanly without leaving the
slightest trace. Some of the heads of Argentine intelligence eagerly adopted the
assassination plan and offered their assistance.
The first step was taken in 2010 when an Iranian contacted prosecutor Nisman to
request a secret meeting. He presented himself as a former high Iranian
intelligence official who had defected, fled to Denmark and was willing to fly
to Buenos Aires with a valuable cache of confidential documents relating to the
Jewish Center bombing.
Fake defector spent 4 years to build trust
He claimed that those documents exposed in detail the complicity in the crime of
Mohsen Rabbani, then senior intelligence official at the Iranian embassy in the
Argentine capital.
According to debkafile’s inquiry, Rabbani was the senior plotter of the
operation.
The agreed rendezvous took place in Buenos Aires. The phony “defector,” who
introduced himself as “Abbas Haqiqat-Ju,” handed Nisman genuine documents
containing evidence of Iran’s involvement in the bombings. This consolidated his
role as an enemy of the regime who was ready to betray its secrets.
In a relationship lasting four years, the phony defector convinced the
prosecutor of his good faith. The Argentinean called on the help of colleagues
in friendly agencies to check some of the confidential material he was given and
found them to be the real article. Ergo, their donor was a genuine Iranian
dissident.
By December 2014, Nissen was ready to submit a finished 300-page report
documenting his findings on Kirchner’s role in covering up the investigation of
Iran’s terrorist crimes two decades after the event.
Tehran decided that the bird was ready for plucking and it was time for
Haqiqat-Ju to cash in on his long investment in trust-building.
In a secret call to Nisman, the fake defector reported that a fellow
high-ranking Iranian intelligence officer had managed to flee Tehran with a
suitcase full of very important papers that shed valuable light on the criminal
collaboration between Argentinean security agencies and Iranian operatives in
the bombing attack on the Jewish center.
Three knocks on the door to murder
He explained that the second defector required a sterile location for their
meeting. Haqiqat-Ju warned the prosecutor that he must keep mum about the
rendezvous. Argentine intelligence was riddled with Iranian agents and the
slightest hint of the meeting would give the game away to Tehran. Above all, if
he wanted to see the new documents, he must get rid of the 10 bodyguards
assigned him and be alone when the guest arrived at his home on the 13th floor
of the Le Parc tower in the Buenos Aires district of Puerto Madero.
That guest would signal his arrival with three knocks on the door. Nisman must
not let the Iranian wait but admit him at once.
Before setting the scene for the assassination, Haqiqat-Ju had secretly rented
an apartment next door. It was he who knocked on the door three times on Jan.
18. The prosecutor opened the door to his murderer. As his confidant, he knew
exactly where the small gun Nisman had borrowed from a friend was to be found
and used it to shoot him dead. The Iranian assassin then escaped through the
central heating system connecting the two flats and assumed a disguise. His
Argentinean confederates had earlier disarmed the security cameras in the
building and so he was able to walk out, reach the airport and fly out on a
false passport to Montevideo, thence to Dubai and finally to Tehran. His
murderer was long gone when the prosecutor was found lifeless in a pool of blood
in his bathroom, killed by a single bullet to the head from a small .22-caliber
gun. On Feb. 18, hundreds of thousands of people marched in his honor in Buenos
Aires and called for justice.
Netanyahu throws cold water on IAEA report claiming Iran
restraining its nuclear program
By JPOST.COM STAFF, REUTERS/02/20/2015
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday accused Iran of concealing its plans
to develop nuclear weapons, citing a report by the UN nuclear watchdog which
credited Tehran with being in compliance with an agreement it struck with the
Western powers.
The International Atomic Energy Agency said that Iran has refrained from
expanding tests of more efficient models of a machine used to refine uranium
under a nuclear agreement with six world powers, allaying concerns it might be
violating the accord.
Netanyahu, however, released a statement insisting that the report indicates
Iran continues to be engaged in obfuscation.
"The IAEA report again notes that Iran is refusing to reveal to the world its
preparations for the production of nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu said. “Iran
insists on hiding this from the international community at a time when the major
powers are continuing to try and allow Iran to produce the core of such weapons,
enriched uranium. These do not go together.”
“The major powers do not need to court Iran to agree to accept the possibility
of producing nuclear weapons even as the latter refuses to divulge the details
of the preparations for its nuclear weapons," the prime minister said.
Tehran's development of advanced centrifuges is sensitive because, if
successful, it could enable it to produce potential nuclear bomb material at a
rate several times that of the decades-old version of the machine now in use.
An interim accord in 2013 between Iran and the United States, France, Germany,
Britain, China and Russia stipulated Tehran could continue its "current
enrichment R&D (research and development) practices," implying they should not
be stepped up.
But a UN nuclear agency report in November said Iran had been feeding one of
several new models under development, the so-called IR-5 centrifuge, with
uranium gas, prompting a debate among analysts on whether this may have been a
violation.
A confidential document by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),
distributed among its member states on Thursday and obtained by Reuters, showed
the IR-5 had been disconnected.
"The disconnection reflects Iran addressing concerns about its enrichment (of
uranium)," said the Washington-based Institute for Science and International
Security (ISIS), which closely tracks Iran's nuclear program.
"The disconnection provides additional confidence that Iran is abiding by its
commitments under the Joint Plan of Action," it said, referring to the 2013
agreement. Still, Iran has stalled the UN inquiry in other areas.
International talks are resuming in Geneva on Friday with the aim of narrowing
remaining gaps in negotiations to end Iran's 12-year standoff with the six
powers.
The deal sought by the powers would have Iran accept limits to its uranium
enrichment capacity and open up to unfettered IAEA inspections to help ensure it
could not put its nuclear program to developing bombs. They also want Iran to
resolve all IAEA questions to build trust in its nuclear aspirations. In return,
Iran would see a lifting of international trade and financial sanctions that
hobbled its oil-based economy.
The IAEA document about the UN inquiry, which has run parallel to the big power
talks, was issued to IAEA member states only weeks before a deadline in late
March for a framework agreement between Iran and the powers. They have set
themselves a deadline for a final deal at the end of June.
Has Israel been cut out of Iran’s
nuclear negotiations?
Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya
Friday, 20 February 2015
In recent days, the tension, deep disagreements and mistrust between Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Obama have further stepped up,
particularly over the ongoing nuclear negotiations between Iran and the six
world powers (known as the P5+1; the United States, United Kingdom, Germany,
France, Russia, and China).
As the nuclear talks inch forward towards the March deadline, Iranian and
American negotiators appear to be the major players in shaping the general
principles of a final nuclear deal.
While the disagreement between the American administration and Netanyahu
persist, the Israeli prime minister is planning to deliver a speech to the U.S.
congress on March 3rd (three weeks before the first phase of agreement on
general principles). The speech further reflects the rift and mistrust between
the two leaders.
The Israeli prime minister has been critical of the Obama administration due to
the White House’s tilt towards the Rowhani administration and the compromises
being made
The backbone of the speech will likely revolve around Iran’s nuclear and
ideological threat, as well as Tehran’s recent advancement and dominance in Iraq
and Syria. The speech will provide the Israeli prime minister with a high level
platform in order to influence the nuclear negotiations and potentially make his
case as to why the current nuclear talks are flawed and misleading. Although the
speech may be viewed as a blow to the Obama administration, nevertheless, it is
less likely to cause severe damages to U.S.-Israeli ties.
The widened mistrust: Leaked information
The Israeli prime minister has been critical of the Obama administration due to
the White House’s tilt towards the Rowhani administration and the compromises
being made. In order to alleviate the security and geopolitical concerns of the
Israeli administration, the White House had likely been updating Tel Aviv on the
nuclear talks. However, this trend appears to have been partially altered.
The Obama administration’s suspicion and mistrust came at a time when the White
House is concerned that Netanyahu had given the authorization to officials to
leak some nuances of the nuclear talks to Israeli journalists, such as the
details that President Obama accepted to allow the Islamic Republic to maintain
”6,500 or more centrifuges as part of a final deal.”
Several reasons can be behind the leak of information, including concerted
efforts to reveal the Obama administration’s unprecedented compromises to Iran,
to show Tehran’s leverage over Washington in the nuclear talks and to reflect on
the White House’s tilt towards Tehran rather than Israel. The leaked information
has prompted speculations that the Obama administration is cutting the Israeli
government out of the nuclear talks. The White House’s efforts are to prevent
any attempt that might scuttle the potentiality of striking a final nuclear deal
with the Islamic Republic.
Nevertheless, the Obama administration is less likely to halt updating Israel on
the nuclear talks due to the security concerns. But, this does not necessarily
mean that the White House will give in to the demands of Netanyahu on how to
deal with Iran’s nuclear file.
Netanyahu VS Obama over Iran
Netanyahu’s position on curbing Iran’s nuclear program differs substantially
with that of the Obama administration.
From the Israeli prime minister’s perspective, any final nuclear deal between
Iran and the P5+1, which does not urge the Islamic Republic to dismantle its
nuclear program completely, is a defective deal. Such a nuclear pact, from
Netanyahu’s point of view, would jeopardize Israel’s regional security and tip
the balance of power in favor of the Islamic Republic.
The Obama administration, on the other hand, will be satisfied with a final
nuclear pact that keeps Tehran only one year away from break-out capacity or
developing nuclear weapons.
This follows that the administration will accept a deal that permits Tehran to
enrich uranium at some level, maintain some of its centrifuges, and continue
nuclear research and development within a specified framework. Netanyahu,
however, contends that the Islamic Republic should not be allowed to enrich
uranium or spin centrifuges.
President Obama echoed his deep disagreement with Netanyahu in the recent Joint
Press Conference stating: “I don’t want to be coy, the prime minister and I have
a very different idea of Iran sanctions.” He insisted on embracing a final deal,
saying: “I have been very clear and Angela agrees with me and David Cameron
agrees with me, and the other members of the organizations agree that it does
not make sense to sour the negotiations a month or two before they are about to
be completed. And we should play that out, if in fact we can get a deal we
should embrace that.”
Finally, for Netanyahu, the 10-15 years final nuclear agreement will allow Iran
to resume enrichment after the end of this period. In addition, there is
suspicion that the International Atomic Energy Agency will not be capable of
effectively monitoring all dimensions of Iran’s nuclear activities. The
accumulated economic sanctions were mainly due to the IAEA’s failure to detect
Iran’s secret nuclear activities.
The major rift between Netanyahu and Obama comes from the fact that the White
House believes there is no other effective alternative than pursuing the nuclear
talks and ultimately working out a final nuclear pact with Iran in the next few
months. Netanyahu views other alternatives- such as ratcheting up sanctions on
the Islamic Republic or striking Iran’s nuclear infrastructure in case Iran
continues to enrich uranium- as effective methods.
Finally, the mistrust between Obama and Netanyahu over Iran is unlikely to cause
a lethal blow to U.S.-Israel relations. But, it is also unlikely to influence
the direction of the nuclear talks and the Obama administration’s stance on the
nuclear negotiations.
Canada Condemns Multiple Bombings in
Libya
February 20, 2015 – The Honourable Rob Nicholson, Minister of Foreign Affairs,
today issued the following statement condemning the multiple bombings in Libya,
which killed at least 30 people and injured dozens of others:
“Canada strongly condemns the terrorist bombings in Al Qubbah in eastern Libya,
which resulted in many deaths and injuries. This cowardly act of terrorism,
coming soon after the savage and ghastly beheading of 21 Egyptian Coptic
Christians, underscores once again the barbaric nature of terrorism and its
intrinsic threat to stability and freedom in the region.
“Canada believes that the best response to terrorism and violence is for all
Libyans to unite against extremists, reject terrorism and engage constructively
with the efforts of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya.
“On behalf of all Canadians, I offer my condolences to the families and friends
of those killed in this attack and wish a speedy recovery to the injured.”
The Trap Set for Egypt
Osman Mirghan/Asharq Al Awsat
Saturday, 21 Feb, 2015
Egypt launched airstrikes on Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) targets in
Libya this week after the group abducted and killed 21 Coptic Christian
Egyptians in utterly barbaric fashion, just weeks after ISIS released a video of
its horrific immolation and killing of Jordanian pilot Moaz Al-Kasasbeh. But how
far will Egypt be able to extend its current offensive against the group and its
affiliates in Libya?
Following the commencement of the airstrikes, which were carried out in
coordination with the Libyan Air Force loyal to Libya’s internationally
recognized parliament in Tobruk, a clear split has emerged in terms of people’s
stances on the strikes. Some see that an even stronger and more wide-ranging
response is required against ISIS and other extremist groups in Libya, while
others have taken a more cautious position, warning against the deployment of
Egyptian ground troops in the country, which would pull Egypt into a lengthy
conflict whose final results are by no means certain. There are even those who
say that the strikes are actually what ISIS wants, because the groups thrives on
creating and escalating tensions in the region, and benefits from any
intervention against it, which has the effect of drawing in more fighters into
the group’s ranks, as happened following the conflicts in Syria and Iraq.
The reality, though, is that Egypt, like Jordan before it, could not simply
stand idly by with its hands tied and not retaliate against the barbaric killing
of its citizens by ISIS’s butchers. But anyone who has ever engaged in
confrontations with terror groups knows how costly such conflicts are, as well
as the large amount of patience, resources, and outside regional and
international assistance that is required to successfully curtail terrorist
groups. Without all this, no country would ever be able to achieve any tangible
results against these groups on the ground, and any military efforts launched
would come to waste.
The current airstrikes therefore count as a partial, short-term solution, they
will never be enough to erase the threat of ISIS and other militant groups in
Libya. However, if Egypt were to step up its current offensive and put Egyptian
boots on the ground in Libya, it would allow itself to fall victim to a trap set
for it by ISIS and the other extremists allied to it: a war on two fronts; one
front to its east against militant groups in the Sinai, and another across its
western border, a situation any standing army would find difficult and costly.
It is of course no secret that there are many in the region and beyond who would
like nothing more than to bring down the regime of President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi
in Egypt. It is also no secret that there have been recent meetings between
members of the Muslim Brotherhood and extremist militias operating in Libya
aimed at taking over power in the country by use of force. There have been
similar meetings with respect to Egypt, whose capture, as the traditional
political and cultural center of the Arab world and its largest and most
populous country, would represent a major success for these groups. From here we
can see the connection between the rise of ISIS in Libya and the abduction and
killing of the 21 Egyptians. There is a thread linking the two, with the aim
here being the destabilization of Egypt, pulling it into a lengthy conflict that
would sap the strength of the Egyptian army, which stood so valiantly against
Brotherhood efforts to take over the centers of power in Egypt following the
organization’s meteoric rise to power after the events of January 2011.
The rationale behind the killing of the 21 Egyptian Copts was that it would
provoke Egypt into taking military action and stir up sectarian tensions in the
country. When the group first announced it had abducted the men it made
reference to a 2010 massacre of 58 Iraqi Christians at a Baghdad church carried
out by its predecessor, the Islamic State of Iraq. That group had previously
forced out Christians from Mosul and other places in Iraq, part of its efforts
to target minorities and sow the seeds of sectarian discord in the country. It
is also worth mentioning that those who carried out the attacks on the Baghdad
church were also behind an attack on a Coptic church in Egypt, when they
demanded the freeing of Muslim women they believed were being held hostage in a
Christian monastery.
Stoking sectarian tensions was the motivation behind the Baghdad church attacks
of 2010, as it was with the recent killing of the 21 Egyptian Copts. ISIS is
looking for a repeat of its experience in Syria and Iraq, this time in Egypt and
Libya. After all, the so-called Islamic “state” or “emirate” declared by
jihadist groups in Tripoli differs little from the one declared in the Sinai by
militants there, who like their counterparts in Libya, have declared their
allegiance to ISIS and Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi’s thoroughly un-Islamic and
so-called “caliphate.”
What Egypt needs to do now is use its weight in the region to form a new
coalition of willing and able Arab countries, in order to defeat the terrorist
scourge and prevent Libya from becoming another Syria, Iraq or Yemen. For if the
African countries are making joint efforts to fight Boko Haram and other terror
groups in their area of the world, why can’t the Arabs do the same for such
groups in theirs? After all, it is the Arabs who face the greater threat to
their region and their collective security.
It could be said, however, that the current divisions among Arab countries and
the conventions adopted by the Arab League will together prevent such a pan-Arab
force from coming together. This is, unfortunately, a bitter reality we must
confront. But another reality is that the current situation, with this ongoing
soap opera we are witnessing of Arab armies dismantling and Arab countries
fragmenting, cannot be allowed to continue. The formation of such a “coalition
of the willing” could usher in a new beginning and new phase for Arab countries.
More importantly, it would help us prevent Libya from becoming just another ISIS
state—and keep the fires away from Egypt.