LCCC NEWS BULLETIN
JANUARY 26/2006
Below News from the Daily
Star for 26/1/06
Lebanon bids fond farewell to Edmond Naim
Security Council statement reflects support for Lebanon
U.S. wants Lebanese Army to take control of South
Berri calls for Taif overhaul to cope with Lebanon discord
Hariri praises Saudi initiative
UN 'has enough evidence to pin Hariri's assassins': source
Karami reiterates support for Hizbullah
The conflict of tutelage and the Arab attempts
Iran considers Russian plan to calm nuclear row
Exit poll shows Fatah as biggest winner in Palestinian elections
Chidiac fails to completely dismiss candidacy reports
Gas, oil companies to help tackle pollution
Lebanon bids fond farewell
to Edmond Naim
By Rym Ghazal - Daily Star staff
Thursday, January 26, 2006
SHIAH: Lebanon bid farewell to one of the "oldest faces" in Lebanese politics,
Lebanese Forces (LF) MP Edmond Naim, laying him to rest on Wednesday in his
hometown of Deir al-Qamar in Chouf. "You will go down in history as one of
Lebanon's greatest and wisest men," said LF MP Strida Geagea during Naim's
funeral service at the Mar Mikhael Church in Shiah, which was attended by
family, friends and colleagues across the political spectrum. Naim, 88, who was
of the Maronite faith, was the most senior member of the legislative body, died
on Monday of natural causes.
"You called for equality and for respecting human rights and always defended
Lebanon as a whole. A man of great integrity and loyalty who will be greatly
missed and will never be forgotten," said Strida. Naim headed Samir Geagea's
defense team when the LF leader was accused of the 1994 bombing of the "Notre
Dame de Deliverance" Church north of Beirut, and he continued to defend Geagea
until his release last year. "We lost the main pillar of our parliamentary bloc,
but we will not weaken, as you left behind strong foundations upon which we will
continue to build," said Strida.
LF flags were banned from the service, as a message by the LF that Naim was
being honored as "a great Lebanese," and was not a member of the LF. Also during
the service, Naim was awarded the Legion of Honor by Justice Minister Charles
Rizk, on behalf of President Emile Lahoud. "You were born a great man, you lived
a great life and you died an even bigger man," said Bechara Samaha, speaking on
behalf of Naim's family.
"You left behind you a legacy of free thought and a way of life that we should
aspire to live up to," said Samaha, bursting into tears in the midst of his
speech. Naim was honored by the Beirut Bar Association, who described him as a
"tenacious man who fought for what he believed in." "A man of firm stands and
courage. Who used his knowledge of the law and applied it for the good of
humanity and Lebanon," read a statement from the association. Naim, a lawyer by
profession, wrote several books in Arabic and was respected by the association
as "a great authority on constitutional law whose wisdom will be greatly missed
by the Lebanese Parliament."He served as head of Lebanon's Bar Association,
president of the state-run Lebanese University for several years and was also
appointed Central Bank Governor by the former President Amin Gemayel. "Naim held
many positions during his life, and always maintained his integrity through them
all," said the association.
U.S. wants Lebanese Army to take control of South
UN Security council meets to discuss unifil term
By Leila Hatoum -Daily Star staff
Thursday, January 26, 2006
BEIRUT: No final decision was made by the UN Security Council, which convened
Wednesday, to extend the mandate of the United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon
(UNIFIL). The Security Council, which has until January 31 to extend the
UNIFIL's mandate for six more months starting February 1, discussed a draft that
France had already circulated to the UN Security Council's members.The French
draft denounced the constant violations along the Blue Line and called upon all
concerned parties to implement self restraint. It also suggested that the
UNIFIL's mandate be extended for six months, that the UNIFIL hold a common
operations room with the Lebanese security forces, and that the Lebanese
government deploy its army and security personnel in all Lebanese territories.A
UN diplomatic source in New York told The Daily Star late on Wednesday that the
United States supported extending the UNIFIL's mandate for six months. The
source also said that the U.S. "has concerns because of the continuous
violations" that occur along the UN-demarcated Blue Line, but that "it supports
extending the UNIFIL's mandate."
The source added that the U.S. concern comes from its "need to ensure that the
Lebanese were able to extend their authority all over the Lebanese territories
and that the Lebanese government needs to be the sole authority in Lebanon."
During the UN Security Council's meeting, "there were comments around the
table," on the matter, the source said, adding that the U.S. made the
aforementioned point clear. The sources didn't rule out the possibility that the
French "might come up with another draft," which holds amendments to some
clauses in the original draft. Other UN diplomatic sources had told The Daily
Star earlier this month that "France is quite open to renewing the mandate of
the peacekeeping forces, but that it also needs to see the Lebanese government
taking some concrete steps to extend its authority over all its territories."
The Lebanese government had already requested that the UN extend the UNIFIL's
mandate in an official letter it sent to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan on
January 9, 2006. Last week, Annan made a recommendation that the Security
Council extend the term of the UNIFIL, in his report to the UN Security Council
on UNIFIL for the period from July 22, 2005 until January 20, 2006. Annan based
his recommendation on the "fragile political and security environment [which]
continues to prevail in Lebanon," and the "numerous breaches," along the Blue
Line. The UNIFIL's mandate had been continuously extended since the force was
established in 1978; the latest taking place in accordance with Resolution 1614,
of July 29, 2005.
Security Council statement reflects support for Lebanon
Daily Star staff - Thursday, January 26, 2006
BEIRUT: Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamade said the statement issued by
the President of the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday "reflects a
universal consensus that strongly supports Lebanon's independence, sovereignty
and freedom of decision."Speaking Wednesday following a meeting with U.S.
Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman and the UN chief's personal representative for South
Lebanon Geir Pederson, Hamade stressed that the ministerial statement labels the
Lebanese resistance as the "legitimate and true resistance for the Lebanese
people." In regards to the much-needed dialogue in Lebanon, he said: "Parliament
and this government are the appropriate bodies in which to hold such a dialogue
about the issues under dispute."The UN statement praised the Lebanese government
for launching dialogue, said Hamade, who also said the international community
"urges Lebanon but doesn't pressure it to hold a dialogue and gives the Lebanese
people the freedom to discuss issues arising from Resolution 1559." The U.S.
ambassador said the UN statement "is a very important signal to the Lebanese
people on how strong the international support for Lebanon is and shows the
intention to help Lebanon in its transformation." In his comments on whether UN
Security Council Resolution 1559 will be implemented in 2006, Feltman agreed
with Hamade that "internal dialogue" is needed for the debate around the
resolution. "The U.S. supports a similar mechanism to solve the issue," he said.
He expected that there will be "progress" in this regard.
In another meeting between Pederson and Social Affairs Minister Nayla Mouawad,
the statement issued by the UN Security Council on Tuesday received praise, and
Mouawad said "it gave the Lebanese people the impression that the international
community is still concerned about Lebanon despite all rumors circulating."
Mouawad said the statement focused on "the illegality of amending the
Constitution that allowed the extension of the mandate of the president of the
republic." She added that this point stressed that it is "high time President
Emile Lahoud resign and that his presence is preventing accord between the
Lebanese people and is hindering a modern state from being built."
Mouawad slammed the "terrorist war" and threats launched by the Syrian regime
and its remaining accomplices in Lebanon against Lebanese leaders. When asked
what would happen should Syria refuse to demarcate the borders with Lebanon,
particularly when it comes to the Shebaa Farms, she said: "Every country has a
right and duty to demarcate borders with its neighboring country regardless of
the status of their relations." She referred to the Security Council statement
that "reinforced Lebanon's independence, sovereignty and free decision regarding
the issue." - The Daily Star
Berri calls for Taif overhaul to cope with Lebanon
discord
By Adnan El-Ghoul -Daily Star staff-Thursday, January 26, 2006
BEIRUT: In a rare interview, Speaker Nabih Berri declared Wednesday the Taif
Accord needs updating because the "turbulent developments in 2005 have disturbed
many elements in the national reconciliation process." In an interview broadcast
by the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera television station, Berri reaffirmed he was still
working for his initiative for national dialogue and that all political parties
including the March 14 forces are very interested in it.He said: "The government
crisis was caused by a failure to adhere to the soul of the Taif Accord and the
Constitution. The Taif Accord could not anticipate Security Council Resolution
1559, the assassination of former Premier Rafik Hariri and the deterioration of
Syrians-Lebanese relations."
The Lebanese need to redefine certain articles in the Taif Accord to accommodate
for the new developments, he added. In regard to reconciling differences between
Jumblatt and Hizbullah, Berri said the problem had not reached a point of no
return. "During my meeting with Premier Fouad Siniora, i called for dialogue
between all parties without any exception and Hizbullah shares this stance with
Amal." Berri said it was his suggestion that the ministers suspend their
participation rather than resign. "Resigning would have pushed the country into
turmoil, whereas solving the issue of boycotting the Cabinet sessions is easier
and less detrimental."The Speaker said he believed [Premier Fouad] Siniora can
replace the ministers with other Shiites candidates; "he can ask the four
ministers to resign if he sees this would be in the best interest of the
country."
Siniora held several meeting with political leaders on Wednesday, in intensified
efforts to ease tensions and create an appropriate climate to boost the ongoing
negotiations to get the country out of the political impasse, especially ending
the six-week old Shiite ministers' boycott.
Siniora met with President Emile Lahoud in Baabda and discussed the appointments
of five new members in the Higher Judicial Council and a new secretary to the
Higher Privatization Council, which is the sole item scheduled for discussion in
Thursday's Cabinet session in the absence of the Hizbullah and Amal ministers.
After the meeting, Siniora said he had not reached an agreement on the judicial
appointments, "which need further consultations and discussions."He added: "The
Lebanese want a sensible judicial system that serves the country well."Asked if
he had reversed his views on the Saudi initiative, Siniora reiterated that he
supports all Arab initiatives. "We cannot deny our Arabic identity," he said,
"we are all under the Arab roof."
The premier added that his visit to Egypt comes in line with the Arab
initiatives. "The Saudi officials did not rebuke my initial criticism as such;
there was a misunderstanding which I will clarify to the Saudi foreign minister
and king as soon as they return to Riyadh."Siniora said Lebanon sought "special
and good relations with Damascus" as long as our independence and sovereignty
are preserved. "We want special relations with all Arab countries, particularly
with Syria, our closest neighbor."
Earlier in the day, Siniora met with Speaker Nabih Berri and Chouf MP Walid
Jumblatt, noting "positive indications" that the opposing parties are close to
putting an end to the government crisis. The premier heads to Cairo Thursday to
meet with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
Asked about these meetings, Siniora said they were "good" without revealing any
details", while emphasizing the need to encourage calm away from heightened
tensions.Meanwhile, the Egyptian Ambassador Hussein Derar met with Jumblatt for
over an hour, discussing the recent Arab initiatives, which the Druze leader had
attacked in the last few weeks. The Grand Serail announced that tomorrow's
Cabinet meeting has one item on its agenda, an item that would add fuel to the
fire. The Cabinet will appoint a new secretary of the Higher Privatization
Council, and the majority nominated Christian Mouchbahani, Raed Qombarji and
George Sarraf.However, any administrative appointment is part of the
controversial state issues that demand "observing the principles of power
sharing in the country."When asked, Hizbullah officials were not enthusiastic
about the Cabinet's intentions, but refused to comment before they met and
assessed the majority's real intention.
Hizbullah minister Mohammad Fneish said: "We consider that appointing high
ranking statesmen requires the consent of partners sharing in the Cabinet; we
will discuss the new development in a special meeting tonight (Wednesday)."
Majority sources do not believe the Cabinet decision will "add fuel to fire"
saying: "On the contrary, the Cabinet plan reflects the positive climate of the
ongoing talks and negotiations with the Shiite leaders."
Labor Minister Tarrad Hamade said the Cabinet could not discuss issues that
require consensus until the boycotting ministers had returned to work. "It would
be a bad indication and a blow up to the efforts to solve the problem."
Hariri praises Saudi
initiative
Daily Star staff-Thursday, January 26, 2006
BEIRUT: Parliament majority leader MP Saad Hariri said Wednesday the Saudi
initiative "is very important to Lebanon. Let all the Lebanese know that Saudi
Arabia always brings gains to our country, as it helped end the civil war and
sponsored the Taif Accord."He added: "Saudi Arabia would like to see stability
restored in Lebanon and the killings stopped, but it will never compromise the
international investigation." Hariri continued his talks with U.S. officials in
Washington, ahead of a meeting with President George W. Bush. He also met with
the World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz Wednesday, after meeting with the U.S.
Assistant Secretary of State David Welch Tuesday. Following the meetings, Hariri
told reporters: "My talks with Welch and Wolfowitz focused on the economic
and political support to Lebanon. The World Bank is willing to offer economic
assistance, which will be the topic of talks with [Premier Fouad] Siniora."For
the first time in the history of the White House protocol, President George W.
Bush will meet Hariri, as a foreign MP, in the Oval office for 45 minutes.
Wolfowitz said: "We have talked about the challenges facing Lebanon today; in
particular the economic challenges and it is really important that the World
Bank deploys all possible efforts to help Lebanon overcome this difficult
period."
Asked about Lebanon's economic future, he said: "I believe in the short term
there are serious challenges but I see the Lebanese people are able to resolve
their economic issues; I believe we can work together with the international
community to overcome the problems."Meanwhile, Change and Reform MP Nabil
Nicolas met unofficially with Hariri in Paris "on the sidelines of the
conference of the French-Lebanese physicians."Nicolas said discussions focused
on what MP Michel Aoun had called the "malicious practices the government was
carrying out with state appointments" which was marginalizing the Maronites. -
The Daily Star
UN 'has enough evidence to pin Hariri's assassins':
source
By Leila Hatoum - Daily Star staff-Thursday, January 26, 2006
BEIRUT: UN Chief Investigator Serge Brammertz "has enough evidence to pin
Hariri's assassins," according to judicial sources, as Lebanon's top officials
prepare to discuss the nature of the court that will try those accused of
assassinating former Premier Rafik Hariri.The judicial sources said that
Brammertz, who succeeded Detlev Mehlis in leading the UN probe investigating
Hariri's murder, "has told a Lebanese officials whom he met since his arrival in
Beirut last Thursday, that he has enough evidence and information from the files
he received from Mehlis to determine and pin those involved in Hariri's
assassination."The spokesperson of the commission stated that "the commissioner
has made no comment of this nature to anyone, owing to the confidential nature
of all investigation activities."UN Undersecretary General for Legal Affairs
Nicolas Michel will arrive in Beirut Thursday to confer with Lebanese officials
on the nature of the court that will try Hariri's murderers. Lebanon had
officially requested a court of an international nature. The Security Council
passed a resolution (1644) to this effect, but added that more discussions with
Lebanese officials were required.
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's spokesperson said: "Michel will meet with
Lebanese officials to discuss ... the nature and scope of the international
assistance needed for those charged with the killing of Hariri and others to be
tried by a tribunal of an international character in keeping with Resolution
1644." During his three-day visit, Michel will meet with Lebanese President
Emile Lahoud, Speaker Nabih Berri and Premier Fouad Siniora, Foreign Minister
Fawzi Salloukh and Justice Minister Charles Rizk. Lebanese sources said Michel
will only listen to what Lebanese officials have to say and note their ideas on
the matter, but will not present them with ideas.The sources added that through
this step, the "formation, headquarters and jurisdiction of the international
court will be determined."Meanwhile, judicial sources said that Brammertz
"considers the Syrian side to be the main complexity in the work of the UN
probe, especially that Damascus has not given a clear and definite reply
regarding its full and unconditioned cooperation with the UN probe. He is also
waiting to interview Syrian President Bashar Assad, who hasn't given the UN
probe an OK for that."Damascus had declared more than once that it will
cooperate with the UN probe, but holds on to the condition that Brammertz signs
a memorandum of understanding with Syria, which would limit the jurisdiction of
the international investigations.
The sources ruled out the possibility that Brammertz would sign such a
memorandum "because he sees that there is a UN Security Council resolution
[1636] which is clear about Syria's role and its obligation to extend full
cooperation to the UN probe."Also Wednesday, Lebanese Chief Investigating
Magistrate Elias Eid listened to the statements of two witnesses in the Hariri
assassination case.Michel is also expected to look at whether the UN Hariri
investigation should be expanded to probe a wave of deadly bombings in Beirut
since Hariri's death.
The conflict of tutelage and the Arab attempts
By Philip Abi akl - Daily Star-Thursday, January 26, 2006
On Thursday, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora will visit Egypt, where he will meet
President Hosni Mubarak to discuss the latest developments in Lebanon and the
region. Discussions will also tackle the efforts deployed by Saudi Arabia and
Egypt to promote Syrian-Lebanese relations.The Arab countries carried on their
attempts to help Lebanon and Syria restore their relations and to put an end to
tension between the two countries.Ministerial sources said that these attempts
were not only based on the Syrian proposals, but that both Saudi Arabia and
Egypt tried to offer solutions.The sources added that Syria submitted to Saudi
Arabia a series of proposals, which it called an "initiative," and asked the
Saudi king to adopt it; consequently, several Lebanese officials and parties,
including Siniora, rushed to reject what is called the "joint initiative."
While Damascus accused those forces of hindering the Arab initiative, the
ministerial sources said that Saudi Arabia understood the Lebanese position and
stressed that it only conveyed the Syrian proposal without adopting it.
For its part, Egypt preferred to hold dialogue to deal with this issue and
wanted Saudi Arabia to present its own ideas, rather than presenting Syria's
paper. A foreign diplomat told a Lebanese financial authority that Saudi Arabia
committed a diplomatic mistake by doing so.Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon
Abdel-Aziz Khoja visited Baabda and met with President Emile Lahoud to inform
him of the efforts of Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal to promote improved
Syrian-Lebanese relations.
Khoja also stressed that his country was playing the role of a mediator and it
did not side with any particular party.
The Saudi ambassador insisted on meeting with Lahoud to show that his country
was not boycotting the president.
Meanwhile, the head of the parliamentary majority, MP Saad Hariri, will meet on
Friday with U.S. President George W. Bush at the White House. Hariri will also
meet with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Vice President Dick
Cheney.
Hariri's visit to the White House came upon a request from Bush and was
considered a clear message to Damascus, especially after the issuing on January
23 of the Security Council presidential statement, which called on Syria to
cooperate with Lebanon in the full implementation of UN Security Council
Resolution 1559. Hariri's meeting with Bush also comes following the visit of
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Syria, and the Iranian president's meetings with Speaker
Nabih Berri and Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. Some
observers said Hariri's visit to Washington falls within the conflict of
tutelage over Lebanon, which involves Syria and the United States.Meanwhile,
Siniora continues his political movements in Lebanon and Arab countries in order
to find the means to resolve the ministerial crisis, which resulted from the
Shiite ministers' boycott of Cabinet sessions. According to some politicians,
the crisis will be soon resolved, since the Shiite forces are no longer able to
bear the consequences of their boycott. Sources said that during his meetings
with Berri and MP Walid Jumblatt, Siniora presented the ideas he will submit to
Mubarak, regarding the means of restoring Syrian-Lebanese relations and putting
an end to the internal crisis. The prime minister is adopting a strategy of
secrecy in dealing with the current crisis, while focusing on the ministerial
Policy Statement and the Taif Accord as the means of resolving the ministerial
crisis.
He also acknowledged the Arab attempts to promote Syrian-Lebanese relations,
which deteriorated in the wake of the Syrian troops' withdrawal, in line with
Resolution 1559.
What's gotten into you Michel Aoun?
By Michael Young -Daily Star staff
Thursday, January 26, 2006
What is it about Michel Aoun that makes him so infuriating when he reacts to
someone else's death? From Samir Kassir to Edmond Naim, without forgetting
Gebran Tueni, Aoun has a talent for saying or doing exactly the wrong thing on
such occasions, for routinely exposing himself as indifferent to the victim's
fate, for making it seem that what matters only is how the demise in question
affects Michel Aoun's fortunes.
Aoun may be too honest to feign bereavement for people he cares little for. Fair
enough; at the end of the day the general is pursuing a presidential project,
and exile has made him more of an egoist than ever. But was it necessary for
Aoun to announce his plan to run a candidate in the Baabda-Aley district before
Edmond Naim's body had cooled? He's since retreated, but perhaps no better was
to be expected from someone who dispatched two of his parliamentarians to attend
a speech by Hassan Nasrallah on the 40-day anniversary of Tueni's death, though
Hizbullah remains devoted to a Syrian regime accused of being responsible for
Tueni's murder, as well as that of Rafik Hariri. Beyond the displeasure Aoun's
actions provoke, there lie deeper calculations, and contradictions.
Aoun's calculations are sometimes sensible. Having watched his opposition
partners Walid Jumblatt and Saad Hariri betray him in favor of an electoral pact
with Hizbullah and Amal last summer, the general accepted the impermanence of
alliances. His doubts were only confirmed when Hariri declined to endorse an
Aounist as justice minister while Fouad Siniora formed his government, only to
accept bringing in President Emile Lahoud's choice, Charles Rizk. Aoun went into
"opposition," though he realizes today that this status leaves him with few
means to pursue the presidency. That's why he's now calling for a government of
national unity, even though spawning such a monster in the present atmosphere
would only illustrate national disunity.
Aoun's most controversial endeavor - playing the balance between Hizbullah on
the one hand, and the March 14 coalition on the other - can be justified on
sectarian grounds. In his inner chambers Aoun argues that it makes no sense for
Lebanon's Christians to take sides in what is increasingly a Sunni-Shiite
struggle over Lebanon's future. Better for the community to be on good terms
with everybody and avoid the dangers of sudden reversals in alliances. Indeed,
only three weeks ago Hariri supported a draft agreement reached in Saudi Arabia
that would have resolved the ministerial crisis by having the government consent
to open-ended resistance by Hizbullah in South Lebanon. Had this been accepted,
Aoun could argue, what would have been the gain for him to take a lead in
criticizing the Shiite parties?
Walid Jumblatt was the first to reject the Hariri-Hizbullah accord, and, sensing
frailty on Hariri's side, the Druze leader followed this up with a call for
closer relations with Aoun. Already, however, the March 14-Aounist rapprochement
is in trouble because of mistrust between Jumblatt and Aoun. Aoun remembers that
Jumblatt tried to act as mediator between the March 14 coalition and Hizbullah
before the general did; and Jumblatt believes Aoun returned to Beirut thanks to
a contract arranged with Syria. Aoun's initial reaction to Naim's death, his
harsh criticism of the Siniora government last week, and his cajoling of
Hizbullah, to the extent that he recently, outrageously, justified the
kidnapping of foreigners by the party during the 1980s, have all since shaken
relations with Jumblatt. And this is where Aoun's contradictions come in.
If Aoun's intention is to avoid political attachments that might weaken him
politically, then why did he so hastily declare he would advance a candidate for
the by-election in Baabda-Aley after Naim's death? The general may have
backtracked, but wasn't it obvious to him when he made the announcement that his
contender was likely to have Hizbullah's support, and that this would force
Jumblatt to either sponsor a rival or very grudgingly accept whomever Aoun
chose? Either way, Jumblatt was certain to take offense, and the Aounists would
be beholden to Hizbullah for its votes. This hardly qualified as a policy of
independence.
Machiavelli wrote that "a prince ... wins prestige for being a true friend or a
true enemy." Aoun's persistent neutrality will only guarantee that both the
March 14 coalition and Hizbullah continue to mistrust him. But worse, he has
shown himself incapable of clearly defining a position on Lebanese sovereignty,
the one thing that won him national credibility. He no longer mentions Syria
critically anymore, though he still claims it was his actions that forced the
Assad regime to remove its forces from Lebanon. He can stomach a relationship
with Hizbullah, which has made no bones about its fidelity to Iran and Syria,
even though he is privately said to be worried about the party's allegiances.
Where is the consistency here? (Speaking of which, how delicious it was to hear
Aounist parliamentarian Ibrahim Kanaan declare on Monday that his movement
opposed any kind of foreign intervention in Lebanon, when Aoun once took
exaggerated pride in being among the midwives of the U.S. Congress' Syria
Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act.)
At the end of the day, Aoun's strategy will fail because he is working at
cross-purposes. To be president, he needs to have Hizbullah on his side; but of
what value is that support if he is regarded as unreliable by the parliamentary
majority? Aoun doesn't want to commit the Christians to alliances they might
later regret; but how does that square with his teaming up with Syria's friends
and agents in Lebanon? Aoun believes he is manipulating Damascus and its allies
so that he can be president; but, more often, he seems to be their tool to
divide the March 14 coalition - with a car-bomb perhaps following as his
recompense.
Aoun has hit a brick wall in chasing his political aspirations, otherwise why
would he be so impatient for a new government? He's beginning to sense that
political independence is not the same thing as sullen isolation. But there is
much vindictiveness in the man, and a destructive urge to go against the grain
when it's not necessary to do so. With things now clear in Lebanon, with Syria's
strategy obvious and perilous, aren't Aoun's stabs at subtlety just instances of
his missing the point about where his country's interests lie?
**Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR.
Iran considers Russian plan to calm nuclear row
Compiled by Daily Star staff -Thursday, January 26, 2006
Iran signaled interest in a Russian proposal aimed at calming its nuclear row
with the West but vowed to start industrial-scale enrichment at home if it is
hauled before the UN Security Council. "We positively evaluate this offer," top
Iranian negotiator Ali Larijani was quoted as saying by RIA Novosti news agency
after talks with Russian security and energy officials in Moscow.
He added that "this plan can be perfected" during further Russian-Iranian talks
planned next month. Under the proposed deal, uranium for Iran's nascent nuclear
power program would be enriched in Russia in order to keep tabs on the material.
The council's five veto-wielding permanent members plus Germany plan to meet in
London on Monday to try to resolve differences over whether to send Iran to the
council at a crisis meeting of the UN nuclear watchdog on February 2, diplomats
said.
They said foreign ministers of Britain, China, France, Russia, the United States
and Germany would seek a consensus before the 35-nation board of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) gathers in Vienna to weigh what to do
about Iran. A senior U.S. diplomat suggested a nuclear cooperation deal with
India could collapse unless New Delhi votes against Iran next month at the IAEA.
If India failed to vote against Iran, "the effect on members of the U.S.
Congress with regard to the civil nuclear initiative will be devastating," the
U.S. ambassador to India, David Mulford, told the Press Trust of India news
agency.
India responded by saying "we categorically reject" linking the bilateral
nuclear technology deal to the Iran situation.
In Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said the Russian
proposals "do form a basis for an agreement acceptable for both sides,"
according to the official Iranian news agency IRNA.
But Iran "will be obliged ... to immediately stop all voluntary measures,"
including allowing tougher IAEA inspections and freezing large-scale enrichment,
if its case is sent to the UN Security Council, he said.
Mottaki urged the EU's Britain, France and Germany to renew talks they halted
this month when Iran removed UN seals on uranium enrichment equipment and
resumed nuclear fuel research.
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw reiterated that the Russian proposal was
welcome
if it enabled Iran to receive nuclear fuel that was processed safely outside its
borders.
"That may provide a solution," he told a news conference in Cyprus. "But what
the world is also looking for is for Iran to stop the beginnings of running its
centrifuges. That's essential if it is to avoid reference to the Security
Council."
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said it was encouraging to hear the Iranians say
they were considering the Russian offer seriously. "It is a solution that the
international community is ready to accept," he told Reuters on the sidelines of
the World Economic Forum in Davos.He said he was not sure any decision on
referring Iran to the Security Council could be taken before the IAEA board gets
a report that the agency's chief Mohammad ElBaradei aims to deliver at the end
of February for a regular board meeting in March. ElBaradei has already rejected
Western pressure to provide a full report for the February 2 emergency meeting.
IAEA safeguards investigators led by deputy agency director general Olli
Heinonen flew to Tehran on Tuesday to try to get Iran to reveal more about its
past nuclear activities.
Larijani, who begins a visit to China on Thursday, warned that referral would
prompt Iran to begin large-scale enrichment.
"In those conditions, our activities will not be limited to scientific research.
Then we will start industrial production."
Mottaki said there was no way Iran would suspend its atomic fuel research
program - a step the EU trio has made a condition for any renewal of talks that
began in 2003. An EU diplomat said Moscow wanted the IAEA only to "inform" the
council about Iran. He said China had told the EU it had its own proposal, but
had not submitted it in writing. - Agencies
Chidiac fails to completely dismiss candidacy reports
'The idea occurred to me but nothing is final yet'
By Nada Bakri - Special to The Daily Star
Thursday, January 26, 2006
BEIRUT: Prominent anti-Syrian journalist May Chidiac, who survived an
assassination attempt on her life last September, did not completely dismiss
news reports claiming she will run in the Baabda-Aley parliamentary by-election.
Chidiac told The Daily Star from her hospital room in Paris: "The idea of
running occurred to me. But nothing is final yet."
In her telephone interview Chidiac said she had met with MP Saad Hariri during
his last visit to Paris two days ago.
But the 42-year-old journalist failed to completely deny a report published
Wednesday in As-Safir newspaper that said Hariri suggested her name during a
telephone call he made from Paris to the head of Lebanese Forces executive
committee Samir Geagea and Democratic Gathering leader Walid Jumblatt. "He
visited me in my Paris hospital room but the story did not exactly happen in the
way it was reported," Chidiac said. LF sources said Hariri and Jumblatt had
called Geagea and told him that they would back whoever he suggested for the
seat.
Chidiac, who said she is well on her way to recovery, is believed to have
welcomed the idea of replacing LF legislature Edmond Naim who died Monday after
due to illness. But Hariri's press office had earlier during the day denied in a
press statement the newspaper's report.
According to As-Safir unidentified parliamentary sources, Hariri telephoned
Jumblatt and Geagea from Paris, in addition to other political allies to suggest
fielding Chidiac for the vacated seat. The newspaper quoted Hariri as saying: "[Chidiac]
brings an additional value to Parliament." The sources added Jumblatt and Geagea
welcomed the suggestion and considered Chidiac the best candidate for this seat.
Jumblatt was not available for comment. Political analyst Khalil Khashan said
fielding Chidiac for the vacated seat is a clear indication that the March 14
Forces have limited options when it comes to fielding a strong candidate capable
of facing an FPM-Hizbullah candidate. The analyst said the attempt on her life
immediately transformed the journalist into a political figure, adding her
strong will and love of life ensures she is up to the challenge. "This is a
salute to all the martyrs and the survivors in last year's [attacks]," said
Khashan. "Such a move is permissible in politics. Politics is about seizing
opportunities," he said.
But Former Interior Minister Suleiman Franjieh criticized the LF for fielding
Chidiac to the by-election saying it enforces "political inheritance.""The LF
was very vocal in opposing political inheritance. Today they are saying this
seat belongs to them and are wondering how anyone can run facing their
candidate," said Franjieh.
"If so why don't they register the seat as a 'limitation of succession' of the
late Naim?" asked Franjieh.
Free Patriotic Movement MP Ibrahim Kenaan told The Daily Star that he will not
comment on Chidiac's candidacy until it becomes official. Meanwhile, the FPM has
yet to finalize its decision as to whose candidate to field after sources close
to the FPM said the party is waiting for the results of the talks they will hold
with their newest ally, Hizbullah. Talal Arslan, the head of the Druze Lebanese
Democratic Party, will also discuss the coming by-election with FPM leader
Michel Aoun at his house on Thursday. According to informed sources close to the
FPM, the Christian-Shiite coalition's first choice is former MP Pierre Dakkashe.
Dakkashe ran the June elections on the FPM electoral list and narrowly lost
facing the March 14 political forces' Maronite candidates. Another potential
candidate is FPM member Hikmat Deeb, who also lost with a slim difference of
votes during the June 2005 elections. Hizbullah said they had yet to start talks
about the elections with their allies.
Iran: We can put Israel in 'eternal coma'
Iran's defense minister says if Israel attacks Muslim republic, Iran and its
allies can retaliate, 'put Israel in coma' similar to that of PM Sharon. Iran a
lunatic regime, Israel's ambassador to U.N. says earlier Wednesday
Nir Magal Iran threatens again: Iran's Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar
said Wednesday that the country and its allies could put Israel "in an eternal
coma," like that of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, if Israel attempts to attack
the Muslim republic.
Gillerman Speaks
'Iran may be preparing another Holocaust' / Associated Press Israeli U.N.
Ambassador Dan Gillerman calls Iran 'extreme, fundamentalist, lunatic regime';
says he fears only reason Iranians are showing interest in Nazis' slaughter of
European Jews is because they have plans for another Holocaust Full Story
"Israel does not have the courage to attack Iran, and if it commits such a big
mistake, the defenders of Islamic Iran will put Israel in an eternal coma like
Sharon," he said in a television appearance. Najjar, who branded the United
States and Israel as "the great and little Satan, who are using psychological
war to intimidate Iran," was responding to recent statements by Israeli Defense
Minister Shaul Mofaz, who said Israel may attack Iran if diplomatic measures to
neutralize its nuclear armaments efforts fail. "The state of Israel will not be
able to accept Iranian armament, and must prepare to defend itself. The Iranian
president's regime supports terror in the Middle East by providing terror
organizations with rockets that threaten Israel, money and knowledge," Mofaz
said at the Herzliya Conference Saturday. Earlier Wednesday, Israel's Ambassador
to the United Nations Dan Gillerman said Iran's planned Holocaust conference was
"proof of what a global threat Iran really is."
"I fear that the only reason Iran is showing so much interest in the Holocaust
is because they may be preparing another Holocaust and it is up to the world and
the United Nations to prevent that from happening," Gillerman said on the
sidelines of the opening of the "No Child's Play" exhibit at the U.N.
commemorating Holocaust remembrance week.
"Iran is proving yet again what an extreme, fundamentalist, lunatic regime it
is," Gillerman said.
News agencies contributed to the report
A Most-Wanted Terrorist Is Spotted in Syria
By MEGHAN CLYNE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
January 25, 2006 - The New York Sun
http://www.nysun.com/article/26427
WASHINGTON - One of the American government's most wanted terrorists visited
Syria late last week with Iran's President Ahmadinejad, according to a former
Reagan administration national security official and Iran watchers on Capitol
Hill.
The former official, Michael Ledeen, now an author and scholar at the American
Enterprise Institute, made the claim in an article published yesterday afternoon
on the Web site of the conservative magazine National Review. Several American
government officials refused to confirm that the Lebanese Hezbollah figure, Imad
Mugniyah, was sighted at the meeting in Damascus last Thursday with Mr.
Ahmadinejad and the Syrian dictator, Bashar Assad.
Major Matthew McLaughlin, a spokesman for the Central Command, the military
division responsible for the Middle East, said, "Central Command keeps its eyes
on various terrorists and terrorist groups within the region, but would not
offer any comment on the whereabouts of a particular terrorist because the
information is classified."
Congressional staffers familiar with America's Iran policy, however, said
yesterday that while they had not received confirmation of Mr. Mugniyah's
participation in the Ahmadinejad-Assad summit from American officials, they had
heard from foreign "diplomatic sources" that the terrorist was at the meeting.
Mr. Mugniyah appears on the FBI's most wanted terrorists list along with Al
Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the government has
offered a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to his capture. Mr.
Mugniyah, of Lebanese origin but said to be living now in Iran, is described by
the FBI as the "alleged head of the security apparatus" for Lebanese Hezbollah.
He was indicted by America for his role in hijacking TWA Flight 847 in June
1985, a terrorist act in which an American citizen and Navy diver, Robert
Stethem, was beaten and tortured, shot in the head, and his body dumped out on
the Beirut International Airport runway.
Mr. Mugniyah is also linked to other attacks on Americans and reportedly has met
with Mr. bin Laden.
A Washington-based Iranian exile leader and a former Iranian minister of
education, Manoucher Ganji, told The New York Sun yesterday that while he had
not heard of Mr. Mugniyah's purported appearance in Damascus, the purpose of the
Assad-Ahmadinejad meeting was to plot against America and Israel. Mr. Ganji said
it would therefore make sense for a representative of Hezbollah to be present
for the discussions.
News of the alleged connections among Messrs. Assad, Ahmadinejad, and Mugniyah
came amid intensifying pressure on the governments of both Syria and Iran. The
Assad dictatorship finds itself embroiled in increasing calls for the
disarmament of Hezbollah and intensifying scrutiny of its alleged role in the
assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri, whose death is
under investigation by the United Nations.
And yesterday in the southwestern Iranian town of Ahvaz, in the oil-rich
Khuzestan province, two bombs detonated in a bank and outside a government
building, according to the Associated Press and Arabic news outlets. The
explosions rocked Ahvaz on the same day that Mr. Ahmadinejad and his entire
cabinet were scheduled to meet in the town, a trip that Mr. Ahmadinejad
cancelled yesterday, citing forecasts for inclement weather. The bombs killed
six and wounded 46.
It remained unclear yesterday who was responsible for the bombings, as scholars
and analysts of Iran pointed to a violent opposition, separatist movements, and
even the Ahmadinejad regime itself as possible culprits.
A fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Patrick Clawson, told
the Sun yesterday that the bombings were the latest episode in more than a year
of ethnic minority unrest in Iran, where Sunnis, Arabs, Kurds, and Turks are
outnumbered by the Persian Shia majority. As Mr. Ahmadinejad's "hard-liner"
approach to nuclear armament - prompting increasing concern and action among
Western governments - gains greater attention in America and Europe, Mr. Clawson
said, Iranians are already aware that Mr. Ahmadinejad is a hardliner at home.
The bombings, Mr. Clawson said, were likely a violent manifestation of Iranian
outrage at the regime.
The scholar said the actions demonstrated that "the main victims of Iranian
terrorism are Iranians," and that anti-Ahmadinejad sentiment among the Iranian
population is one of America's most valuable weapons against Iranian extremism.
"We have a natural ally in the people of Iran, and we should be using it," Mr.
Clawson said.
Mr. Ganji, too, called upon Washington to respond to the attacks with greater
support for Iranian democracy activists, both inside the Islamic Republic and in
exile. "Washington has been paralyzed all these years, they're still paralyzed.
They don't know what to do," Mr. Ganji said. He urged the American government to
bring free TV and radio to Iran, and to provide assistance to the exile movement
to provide for a peaceful transition to Iranian self-rule.
As for the explosions, Mr. Ganji said they were likely the work of separatists,
and said that the violence by enemies of the mullahs' regime would likely set
the Iranian pro-democracy movement back. Mr. Ganji condemned the violence, and
said that almost all Iranians agree with the regime about Iran's territorial
integrity, opposing separatism. The killing of innocent Iranians by separatists,
the activist said, would likely increase Iranian support for the Ahmadinejad
government.
Moreover, he said, "this is the kind of action that is certainly going to make
the work of the non-violent opposition more difficult." The perpetrators of
yesterday's attack are "in no way a responsible freedom movement," Mr. Ganji
said, adding that the bombings would almost certainly result in the government's
using the attacks as an excuse to jail scores of peaceful democracy activists.
An author and scholar of Iran, Kenneth Timmerman, said the attacks may have been
perpetrated Ahmadinejad government to inflate its support. "The Iranian regime
has a long track record of fabricating bomb attacks inside Iran to advance its
own political agenda," Mr. Timmerman said, citing an arson attack in August 1978
orchestrated by Ayatollah Khomeini, originally blamed on the shah but designed
by Khomeini's officials to spark the revolution that brought him to power. "I
would not be surprised if Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps were doing the same
thing today, in a vain attempt to get Iranians to rally around the Islamic
Republic," Mr. Timmerman said in an email to the Sun.
The signs of internal unrest in Iran also come amid increasing external pressure
on the Islamic Republic. As America, Britain, France, Germany, and the United
Nations work to defang Mr. Ahmadinejad's growing nuclear arms program, a
movement is afoot in the American Congress to support Iranians hoping to replace
the dictatorship with a free government.
In the Senate, Senator Santorum, Republican of Pennsylvania, has introduced the
Iran Freedom and Support Act, which mandates government support for Iranian
civil society and democracy movements. The legislation - which includes among
its cosponsors almost half the Senate, with backing from both Republicans and
Democrats - provides increased support for free press and broadcast outlets in
Iran, and calls on the American government to facilitate a transition to
democracy in the Islamic Republic resembling its anti-communist efforts in the
Soviet bloc during the Cold War. Companion legislation has been introduced in
the House by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Republican of Florida, and has more than
330 cosponsors on both sides of the aisle. The House bill, while also calling on
American support for Iranian democracy activists, also requires sanctions
against the Ahmadinejad regime in response to its nuclear threat.
The White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, said yesterday, "the president has
made it very clear that we stand with the Iranian people who seek greater
freedom."
105 Chambers Street, New York, NY 10007
© 2005 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC. All rights reserved.
UN tells Syria to block arms flow into Lebanon
(DPA)25 January 2006
NEW YORK — The UN Security Council warned that it cannot tolerate terrorist
attacks in Lebanon and called for Syria to block the flow of weapons and
militants blamed for recent killings and bombings.
The 15-nation council issued a formal statement in an open meeting after
reviewing progress in the implementation of its Resolution 1559, which in 2004
demanded the complete withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon and for the
latter to carry out democratic reform.The statement said “significant further progress” had been made to meet the
resolution, in particular the Syrian military withdrawal and holding of
elections in Lebanon.But it noted “with regret” that other demands have not been met, including the
disbanding and disarming of Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias. Beirut also has
failed to extend government control over all its territory and hold free and
fair presidential elections.It said Lebanon and Syria have failed to establish full diplomatic relations and
agree on a border. The two countries never had a formal border and maintained
close neighbourly friendship as Syria militarily occupied its neighbour for more
than three decades.
United States calls on Syria to free political
prisoners
WASHINGTON, Jan 24 - Newskerala-: The Bush administration today called on Syria,
which freed five political prisoners last week, to immediately release all
remaining opposition activists and to stop harassing Syrians who sought peaceful
democratic reforms.
The White House saluted the courage of those arrested in 2001 after a brief
period known as the ''Damascus Spring'' in which the authorities tolerated
dissent following the death of President Hafez al-Assad the previous year. They
were later sentenced to five years in prison for violating the constitution.
Five of them were released last week after the court cut their sentences by
seven months -- a normal procedure under Syrian law when a prisoner has served
three-quarters of a sentence.
''The United States calls upon the Syrian authorities to release immediately all
remaining Syrian prisoners of conscience, including Dr Kamal Labwani, Habib
Saleh, Nizar Rastanawi and the final remaining Damascus Spring detainee Arif
Dalilah,'' White House spokesman Scott McClellan said in a written statement.
One of the newly freed dissidents, Riad Seif, a former member of parliament,
pledged on Tuesday to use peaceful means to bring democracy to Syria. He said he
was setting up a political party and hoped to win Western support.
McClellan said Bush celebrated the freedom of Seif and four others, but had
''deep concern'' that many political prisoners remained jailed in Syria.
''The Syrian regime continues to respond to the Syrian people's legitimate calls
for change with harsh repression,'' McClellan said.''The United States calls upon the Syrian government to cease its harassment of
Syrians who peacefully seek to bring democratic reform to their country.''
Osama's unmistakable message
By Walid Phares - The Washington Times
January 25, 20
In his last audiotape, aired at the discretion of al Jazeera a few days ago, the
lord of al Qaeda seemed to be trying to score many points, using new editorial
tactics and addressing more than one audience. His prepared speech seemed more a
state of jihad address than a specific threat to America, although sounding very
menacing. So what was the message really about?
As of September, the jihadi chat rooms have asked if "we are we winning the war
on the infidels?" The mentors of the rooms have tried to reassure the
participants that all was going fine, referring to the letters between Ayman al
Zawahiri and Abu Musab al Zarqawi. But 2005 left a lot of explaining for the
jihadists in the region: elections in Afghanistan with millions of women voting
and being elected; two elections and one referendum in Iraq: A Cedar Revolution
in Beirut and debates about democracy raging on the Internet.
Despite car bombs, assassinations, massacres, kidnapping and videotapes on al
Jazeera and beyond, the jihadists weren't going anyway. Young people in the Arab
and Middle East region are turning increasingly to freedom, contradicting the
ideological speeches of al Qaeda and its sisters in the region. Blood alone was
not bringing victory to the jihadists.
Hence the master had to strike from his cave. The bottom line of the audio is
simple: We, as jihadists, are winning the war; they, American and other
infidels, are losing it. Reverberated by al Jazeera in a thoroughly prepared
script: The news of the tape's existence gradually leaked to other news agencies
that aired fragments first, followed instantly by a panel of well-prepared
"experts" to "explain the document" and educate the masses about it. In a few
hours, Web sites made it available with all the analyses and simplifications.
"We are devastating your forces in Iraq" declared bin Laden, but "your president
is hiding the facts." A first salvo in a psychological war aimed at minimizing
the trust inside the "enemy homeland," thought the speechwriters of bin Laden.
Indeed, the Arabic language and the concepts used in this audio indicate that
jihadi eyes and ears, very attentive to the Western and American political
process, seemed to be feeding the construction of the text.
"The morale of the U.S. troops is fading, and your government is attempting to
suppress your media, including al Jazeera," said bin Laden. It was the first
time al Qaeda's leader mentioned the channel directly. Penetrating America's
political culture, bin Laden railed over the presidential "victorious" landing
on the aircraft carrier, and used U.S. polls as evidence that the United States
was on the verge of a world policy collapse.
Then he threatened with upcoming operations inside the United States. Referring
to the London model, he hinted at a second-generation al Qaeda, citizens
potentially awaiting his instructions and moving at will when preparedness
allowed. He wanted to show his troops that the "final weapons are being
readied," as Hitler used to promise his military. But even if bin Laden is
shooting in the dark, jihadist ears, indoctrinated by Wahhabi money and
ideology, are indeed listening: They are preparing a future jihad.
Then he offered a truce. Speaking as a caliph, al Qaeda's boss said he will
suspend operations if the United States apologizes and withdraws from all Muslim
lands. Some sympathizers ran on media airwaves to "assure the Western public" of
the good intentions of bin Laden. "He will deliver" said one of them on BBC.
"See how Spain saved itself from strikes after the withdrawal from Iraq."
But what the public ignores about the "hudna" (cease-fire) offered by bin Laden
is that the international community, and the United States, will have to
recognize al Qaeda as the representative of the Muslim world. In short, that all
Muslim governments would elevate bin Laden as the world caliph -- hence he will
be able to "resume" the jihad after the hudna is over, since it is only a truce
after all. The world, thus, would be divided in two spheres, with Osama as
emperor from Morocco to China, with his full sovereign control of the resources,
that is oil, and the nuclear toys of Pakistan.
***Walid Phares is the author of "Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies
against America," and a senior fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of
Democracies.
Interview: Politics and change in Syria and Egypt
By Shinkichi Suzuki and Hind el Hallage
Special to World Peace Herald
Published January 24, 2006
CAIRO -- After a dizzying series of events, the international community is
looking forward to the Mehlis probe's climax to prove once and for all the
involvement of Syria in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister
Rafik Al-Hariri. There has been a flurry of speculation surrounding Syrian
President Bashar Assad's regime in recent months. As for Egypt, the Muslim
Brotherhood's plans regarding their role in the parliament are the focus of the
political situation there. World Peace Herald interviewed the head of Al-Ahram
Center of Political and Strategic Studies (ACPSS), Abdul Monem Saeed, for his
analysis about the future of Assad's regime and the unveiled intentions of
Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood.
Q: In you opinion, did President Bashar Assad give the order to execute
Lebanon's late Prime Minister Rafik Al-Hariri?
A: I cannot answer this question because I do not have the evidence yet. I
believe that it has certain responsibilities. Hariri was killed while Syrian
intelligence forces were still active in Lebanon. Therefore, they had
responsibilities regarding security in Lebanon. It is not possible for anyone to
tell, as the U.N. investigative committee is carrying out this mission. The
committee has to find out the truth by questioning all sides and investigating
whether the Syrian president had a hand or not in the killing of Hariri.
Q: Some speculate about the imminent fall of Assad's regime within half a year.
What do you think?
A: Certainly, there is an overwhelming sense of decay in the Syrian system. I
think this situation will continue. Yet, there are some alternatives for Assad
to fend off this state of decay. He should carry out certain reforms, such as
gaining much more time by cooperating in Iraq, speeding up the democratization
process in Syria, or releasing some political prisoners.
In addition, in order to fight the decline of his regime, he should increase the
number of representatives in the cabinet to reflect all of Syria's ethnic groups
in fairly. He can change his discourse and the way he is delivering speeches in
terms of the Arab-Israeli conflict or Iranian ties with the West.
Assad should realize the depth of Syria's crimes in Lebanon and cooperate to
resolve them, instead of just accusing Israel and other evil forces that he
never defines. If he changed his discourse in that way he would gain much more
time to fix this decay. But if he continues as he has, I think his regime will
face increasing difficulties.
Q: What were Assad's true intentions when he first took power? Did he plan to
cooperate with the West or the opposite? If so, what then are the main reasons
for his change in policy?
A: Bashar Assad came to power under unique circumstances. His father, Hafez
Assad, was a towering figure in Syria. He managed to gain the respect of all
Arab countries as well as the West. Bashar came to power in the shadow of the
grand image of his father. In addition, he took over power under circumstances
that lacked legitimacy, necessitating a change in the constitution for his sake.
At first, Bashar lacked the experience of his father, both in economic affairs
and foreign policy. Therefore, he had to learn about this later. In fact, it
seems that Basher Assad tended to be influenced by the Baath party's policies,
security groups, and apparatus that he inherited from his father. Therefore, I
do not think he came into power with a mind to stay on good terms with the West
or not.
I think he came with the idea of surviving as a Syrian president. However, the
ideological makeup of the party and the groups in Syria were not helpful to make
good ties or build bridges with the West. Thus, he did not succeed in
instituting political or economic reforms, or retreating from Lebanon at the
right time, nor was he able to open up Syria. Therefore, I think that he did not
make a decision to be against the West, rather he just continued the status quo
without much legitimacy. In addition, he was in a weaker position than his
father, and the way he came to power did not give him the legitimacy he needed.
Q: Regarding Egypt, is President Mubarak encouraging Syria to strengthen ties
with Iran or the West?
A: I think that President Mubarak is encouraging Syria's cooperation with the
West. In Cairo there is uneasiness and anxiety regarding Iran. First, the
Iranian president is conservative and his choice of radical language is not one
that Cairo likes. Secondly, Iran seems to be after nuclear capability, which
will bring instability into the region. Finally, because of both reasons stated
above, there has been an increasing tension between Iran and the West. Those
three reasons make Egypt worried. Egypt's main role in the region is seeking
stability and allowing the element of time to work in making the changes
necessary for peace. Therefore, Egypt has always been involved in behavior
modification, rather than invading countries and changing regimes.
Egypt was against the American invasion of Iraq, Saddam's move on Kuwait, and
Syria's on Lebanon. The outcomes of these invasions have brought much more
instability than before. In politics, we do not choose between bad or good
results, but rather between bad and worse ones.
Q: What are the prospects for the Muslim Brotherhood and the development of the
democratic process in Egypt.
As for the development of democracy, I believe that in last ten months the
Egyptian political scene has gone through many changes. Some of them were
positive, while others have been negative.
Yet, at last, Egypt is changing. In parliament, the balance between forces is
changing as well as in the streets and media. In the meantime, the constitution
of the country is being reviewed, which means that Egypt is undergoing a process
of rebuilding its political system. Dealing with the constitution means tacking
the president's power and the cabinet, as well as the next election process. It
is a good step towards democracy in 2006.
As for the Muslim Brotherhood, they have sense of power for the first time in
the parliament. Therefore, we need time to see what they are going to do
regarding their issues and tactics. On the current political ground now, I
believe the Muslim Brotherhood is going to seek a more legitimate position in
Egypt by participating in the Shura council and local elections. They plan to
reach the presidential elections gradually. To enter the next presidential
elections, they will need 65 parliamentary candidates, which they already have,
but they still have to get 25 candidates for the Shura council and at least
another ten of fourteen governors.
Regarding their current position in the parliament, I do not believe they intend
to force any confrontation or make harsh speeches. They voted for president of
the Egyptian People's Assembly, Ahmed Fathi Sorour, which implies their moderate
point of view and improved policies aimed at increasing their legitimacy, and
not to score any more points in the meantime.
LEBANON: PREMIER ON SECOND CAIRO VISIT
Beirut, 25 Jan. (AKI) - Lebanon's prime minister Fuad Siniora is due in Cairo on
Thursday for a meeting with president Hosni Mubarak, his second in two weeks.
The focus of the talks will be the regional politics and in particular relations
between Syria and Lebanon, Lebanese government sources told Adnkronos
International (AKI). Egypt and Saudi Arabia have been seeking to jointly mediate
between the two neighbours whose ties are tense after the February 2005
assassination of prime minister Rafik Hariri and the subsequent Syrian troop
pull out from Lebanon.
In an interview with the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat on Wednesday Siniora said
"Lebanon welcomes any inter-Arab initiative to help the two countries to restore
brotherly relations based on respect of reciprocal sovereignty and independence.
Siniora visited Cairo on 12 January to meet Mubarak, before flying on to Riyadh
where he met the Saudi foreign minister.
Are the Iranian Mujahedin “Monsters”?
By FrontPage Magazine
FrontPageMagazine.com | January 25, 2006
[Below is an exchange between Jalal Arani and Michael Rubin over the nature of
the Iranian opposition group: the Mujahedin -- The Editors].
In “Monsters of the Left: The Mujahedin al-Khalq,” Mr. Michael Rubin, a scholar
of Iran and Middle East affairs, makes a brave effort to familiarize the many US
Congressmen, Senators, and US Administration officials that favor supporting
dissidents to Tehran’s rule [i], about a group which is commonly called the
largest, most organized, and longest standing opposition to the regime in Iran
[ii]. The group has arguably the largest and most dedicated following among the
Iranian Diaspora of over 2 million throughout the US and Europe [iii] and boasts
a tenacious ability to annoy the Iranian regime by unveiling sensitive
intelligence, particularly on Tehran’s covert nuclear activities.[iv]
Of particular interest is the timing of Mr. Rubin’s article which coincides with
unprecedented condemnation of Tehran from around the world. Why would Mr. Rubin
attack an Iranian “opposition force” when everyone is condemning and fretting
about the Iranian “regime” and no less with a six page article that goes back to
the pre-formation history of the organization from almost 50 years ago?
Whatever the author’s thinking, it is quite an interesting hodge-podge of
material taken from a former Tudeh (Communist) party sympathizer turned scholar
(Ervand Abrahamian), quotes from Kurds that the author grew familiar with in his
stint in Iraq, and discourse with Iranians during his visit to Iran, but
interestingly enough no direct dialogue with the subjects of his condemnation.
Aside from many factual errors and unscholarly references such as to the
renowned Dr. Ali Shariati as Ayatollah Shariati, which might reveal the shallow
depth of the author’s personal knowledge on Iran, his conclusion that the
Iranian Mujahedin are “monsters”, is a particularly unscholarly term to define a
political movement with wide-ranging support among Iranians and as the author
concedes among both Republicans and Democrats in the US Congress and US
officials.
Already, a vast disinformation campaign is afoot by the Iranian Ministry of
Intelligence and Security (MOIS) [v] to do exactly what the author has set out
to do: demonize the Iranian Mujahedin. The campaign has been well documented and
some of the sources the author quotes in his lengthy diatribe against the
Iranian Mujahedin are part of that campaign, intentionally fed with
disinformation about the Mujahedin by the MOIS.
It is disappointing that Mr. Rubin has chosen to rely on arguments stemming from
such sources to warn us against supporting what many independent sources attest
to as a legitimate resistance movement to the Iranian regime. He would have done
better to initiate an independent prime source research rather then rehashing
old “monster” stories about the Mujahedin. W
ith his knowledge of the Farsi language, Mr. Rubin could have easily engaged in
discussion with the subjects of his article either in France, Britain or even in
Iraq where nearly 4,000 are currently staying at Ashraf camp as protected
persons under the Fourth Geneva Convention after a 16-month investigation by
seven US agencies concluded that there are no grounds to charge even a single
one of them with links to terrorism. [vi]
The terrorist designation of the Iranian Mujahedin is a vestige of the
Clinton-era opening to Tehran that was never reciprocated and the present-day
appeasement policy of the Europeans that has finally collapsed in the face of
the Iranian regime’s intransigence. As with the policy that led to the
designation, it too should be abandoned in the interest of US policy to promote
democracy and the US should support the resistance movement to the religious
fascism which today threatens its neighbors and the world.
Jalal Arani is an Iranian-American researcher, scholar of Iranian history, and
expert in Iranian Affairs. He writes frequently for foreign policy and political
journals.
Notes:
[i] “Policy-group outlines U.S. options on Iran in Capitol Hill session,” Iran
Focus, April 7, 2005
[ii] US Policy Options for Iran and Iranian Political Opposition, IPC, September
13, 2005
[iii] “Twenty Thousand Iranians Rally outside UN, Demand Expulsion of
Ahmadinejad,” NY Committee Against Ahmadinejad, September 14, 2005; “Thousands
rally in support of Iran opposition group,” Iran Focus, November 8, 2005; Rally
for democratic change in Iran. Council for Democratic Change in Iran, January
14, 2005
[iv] "Group: Iran's Nuke Program Growing," The Associated Press, 15 August 2002;
in New York Times, 15 August 2002; “Iranian Opposition Group Blows Nuclear
Whistle, Receives Terrorist Designation,” National Journal, September 10,2004 ;
“Western Officials Lukewarm Over Iranian Nuclear Allegations,” Nuclear Threat
Initiative, October 15, 2003;
[v] Mohaddessin, “Masters of Disinformation,” IranTerror.com, November 22, 2005
[vi] Douglas Jehl, “THE REACH OF WAR: PEOPLE'S MUJAHEDEEN; U.S. Sees No Basis to
Prosecute Iranian Opposition 'Terror' Group Being Held in Iraq,” New York Times,
July 27, 2004.
Rubin Responds:
While Mr. Arani is passionate, rather than address the original article’s
points, he seeks to sully other scholars as dupes of Iranian intelligence.
It is ironic he seeks to dismiss Professor Ervand Abrahamian. While I disagree
with Abrahamian’s personal politics, his academic works are solid. He based his
study of Mujahedin al-Khalq ideology upon the group’s own writings. Ignoring the
group’s murder of innocents does not absolve it of terrorism.
Mr. Arani is untruthful with his statement that seven U.S. agencies cleared the
residents of Camp Ashraf of terrorism. Nor does saying the Mujahidin al-Khalq is
popular make it so. Iranians are quite sophisticated. Ordinary Iranians inside
Iran do not hesitate to condemn their theocratic government. Especially as Iran
now marks the centenary of its Constitutional Revolution, many Iranians discuss
their fondness for alternatives: the majority for constitutional republicanism
or parliamentary democracy, but others for monarchy or ethnic federalist groups.
No one expresses anything but contempt for the Mujahedin al-Khalq. Iranians
crave liberty, democracy, and an end to the isolation brought on by the Islamic
Republic. They do not want an Iranian Pol Pot. The Mujahedin al-Khalq’s
terrorist designation was a result of its embrace of terrorism, not politics.
Terrorism cannot be justified upon hatred of the politics of its victims.
That said, the U.S. government should do much more to enable Iranians to achieve
freedom, liberty, and democracy. We should support neither political parties nor
Iranian government-operated non-governmental organizations, but rather fund
independent labor unions and independent civil society groups. Los Angeles-based
Iranian televisions stations are more effective than the money-drain of U.S.
government-produced media. That the U.S. Congress is willing to allocate more
money to landscaping the Kennedy Center than in supporting democracy in Iran is
inexcusable.
I stand corrected that my reference to Ayatollah Shariati should have been to
Dr. Shariati.