LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 3/2007

Bible Reading of the day
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 11,27-33. They returned once more to Jerusalem. As he was walking in the temple area, the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders approached him and said to him, "By what authority are you doing these things? Or who gave you this authority to do them?" Jesus said to them, "I shall ask you one question. Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. Was John's baptism of heavenly or of human origin? Answer me." They discussed this among themselves and said, "If we say, 'Of heavenly origin,' he will say, '(Then) why did you not believe him?' But shall we say, 'Of human origin'?"--they feared the crowd, for they all thought John really was a prophet. So they said to Jesus in reply, "We do not know." Then Jesus said to them, "Neither shall I tell you by what authority I do these things."

Free Opinion
Two Examples: Iraq and Lebanon.Dar Al-Hayat
Time for sane leaders in the region to take charge of their own affairs. Daily Star. June 3/07
Analysis: Hopes high for Lebanon tribunal.United Press International. June 3/07
The Islamists Are Coming!The Weekly Standard. June 3/07
Analysis: UN Lebanon tribunal a promising step.World Peace Herald. June 3/07
The Syrian-Jihadi "highway" in Lebanon.World Defense Review

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for June 3/05/07
UN team inspects main Lebanon-Syria border crossing (Extra).Monsters and Critics.com
PLO official in Lebanon says army is not targeting civilians.Monsters and Critics.com
The UN and Lebanon: Brutal Power and Noble Justice Converge.Middle East Online
Another Israeli general resigns over failure in Lebanon war.Ya Libnan
Lebanon's Hezbollah & Amal met Iran FM in Syria.Ya Libnan
Fatah al-Islam Terrorists Set up bases at mosques-Naharnet
March 14 Alliance Proposes 'Historic Settlement' to End Lebanon Impasse-Naharnet
Beirut Boulevard Where Hariri Was Killed Reopened for Traffic-Naharnet
Opposition prepares to launch 'Act of Deliverance' proposal.Daily Star
Syria condemns decision to set up of Hariri tribunal.Khaleej Times
US supplying only light weapons as Lebanon faces Al Qaida offensive.World Tribune
Syria Interfering in Assyrian Church Affairs.AINA
Hariri court 'has no bearing on Syria' - Moallem.Daily Star
Palestinian factions work to end fighting.Daily Star
Yacoubian: Linkages between Special UN Tribunal, Lebanon, and Syria.Council on Foreign Relations
Lebanese Army seizes Fatah al-Islam positions.Daily Star
Karami touts unity government as only solution-Daily Star 
Opposition prepares to launch 'Act of Deliverance' proposal-Daily Star 
Palestinian factions work to end fighting-Daily Star 
Nahr al-Bared children lose hope amid squalor-Daily Star 
Palestinians protest 'random' attack on camp-Daily Star 
Israeli general resigns over Lebanon failure-Daily Star 
Charity helps repair bomb damage in Achrafieh-Daily Star 
Northerners brace themselves as army forges into Nahr al-Bared.Daily Star

Russia spy murder seen as G8 topicIsrael response to violence seen limited
Analysis: Hopes high for Lebanon tribunal
By DALAL SAOUD
BEIRUT, Lebanon, June 1 (UPI) -- An international criminal tribunal set up to prosecute the killers of Lebanon's former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri is a step forward for the Middle East, which has been long plagued by political assassinations. The United Nations Security Council voted Wednesday for its creation, more than two years after the assassination of Hariri in a massive bomb explosion that hit his convoy in Beirut on Feb. 14, 2005. "It is a big step. ... Definitely we are in a new era, a new phase," Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, told United Press International. "The tribunal has become a reality."
Lebanon, which has been hit by a series of bombings and other assassinations since the killing of Hariri and 20 other people in the 2005 explosion, has been in a deep political crisis with its main political powers split over the tribunal and power-sharing as well as relations with Syria and the United States.
It is too soon to predict if the newly adopted Security Council Resolution 1757 that provides for the creation of the tribunal will further deepen divisions in Lebanon or pave the way for dialogue among the conflicting Lebanese parties -- encouraged by the fresh Iran-U.S. dialogue that took place in Baghdad earlier this week.
To parliamentarian Boutros Harb, who is also a member of the pro-government March 14 Movement, the tribunal "is a precedent" and "the first to be established in a region full of disturbances and events."
"It creates a new reality which would contribute in an indirect way into forcing the regimes (in the region) to respect human rights and protect citizens' rights more," Harb, a lawyer, told UPI. "It also ushers an inclination by the international community and the U.N to support people of the world even by expanding the role of the U.N. in settling conflicts and struggles." He highlighted the importance the resolution as "it solves a dangerous case which endangered Lebanon's stability and future."
The resolution, which will take effect on June 10, was approved 10 to 0 by the 15-member Security Council. China, Russia, Qatar, Indonesia and South Africa abstained from voting, saying it bypassed the Lebanese parliament's constitutional role in approving international agreements and would further deepen divisions in Lebanon and threaten its shaky stability. "They expressed fears but they (Russia and China) did not use the veto," Harb noted. Now that the tribunal has become a reality, he believes that "the concerned parties will deal with the new situation in a realistic way."
"Realism requires these parties and countries to deal (with the tribunal) in such a way to avoid further complications and instead help ease the ongoing struggle," he said.
He was mainly referring to Syria, which was accused by many Lebanese of being behind Hariri's killing and many other assassination and bombings in Lebanon -- a charge repeatedly denied by Damascus. The international investigation into Hariri's assassination hinted at the possible involvement of some Syrian and Lebanese officers in the killing, which occurred while Lebanon was still under Syria's control and before Damascus was forced to withdraw its troops from its neighboring tiny Arab country.
Syria has insisted it was cooperating with the international investigation but was not concerned with the international tribunal. Its allies in Lebanon, including Hezbollah, maintained Hariri's killers should be punished but fell short of supporting such an international tribunal on the basis it violates Lebanon's sovereignty. Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who heads the pro-Syrian Amal movement, refused to convene a session of parliament to allow a vote, prompting Prime Minister Fouad Siniora to issue a direct appeal to the Security Council to establish the court.
Dr. Shafik al-Masri, legal expert and professor of international law at the American University of Beirut, said the international tribunal "is the judicial mechanism that could disclose the criminals who carried out the terrorist act against Hariri and the other crimes."
Masri explained that the tribunal was adopted under Chapter Seven, "meaning that all countries should abide by the court requirements."
Noting that the international investigation carried out by Belgian Serge Brammertz referred to Hariri's killing as a politically motivated terrorist act, he explained that the court was set "to try and then punish those who committed terrorist crimes on the basis that terrorism constitutes a threat to international peace and security."
"It is the first court to try and convict terrorist crimes at the legal level," he told UPI. "It is the first judicial mechanism of international character in the Middle East region where political assassinations, suppression, collective arrest and violations of essential rights" are widespread.
But is such a tribunal restricted to revealing the truth about Hariri's assassination?
According to Salem, "It also has political goals beyond disclosing the killers. ... It's always politics. China and Russia, which abstained from the vote, have different interests and playing their cards to counterbalance the U.S. (in the region)." He said the international tribunal, which somewhat resembles the Security Council measures recently adopted against Iran because of its nuclear program, was "an international mechanism to put pressures on certain regimes in the region."
After the first round of a U.S.-Iran dialogue, which he described as "a turning point" in Iraq, and the adoption of the international court, Salem believes the "(U.S.) talking to Syria becomes easier." The court is thus "a red line" and was "the last card" for bargaining.
Syria, Salem said, "will have to deal with this reality and will have to find a way to talk with the U.S., the West and Saudi Arabia" in order to stabilize Lebanon, pave the way for the formation of a new government and the election of a new president as well as discussing the fate of Hezbollah's weapons.
The formation of the international tribunal boosted hopes that Hariri's killers will be held accountable, but many remain skeptical about learning the truth.
It will probably takes years, according to Harb. Yet the nagging question remains: Would such a tribunal deter any future political assassinations in the Middle East?

Time for sane leaders in the region to take charge of their own affairs
Saturday, June 02, 2007
Editorial-Daily Star
Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia used by hundreds of millions of people around the world, describes the Middle East as "a historical and political region with no clear definition." Several reasons explain why this is so, but the most important ones have to do with the bias and irrationality of those who have taken it upon themselves to define this part of the world for the past half-century or so - and with the cowardice and laziness of those who have abdicated a responsibility to do so.
Whatever its boundaries, today the Middle East is almost universally associated with violence, a product of both indigenous and foreign inputs. Palestinian diplomat Saeb Erekat condemned the former on Friday, demanding to know of the militants who kidnapped BBC correspondent Alan Johnston in Gaza: "Who's paying them? Who's sponsoring them? They're destroying the Palestinian cause. They're harming us. They're harming Islam and I believe the government must act." He also compared them to the jihadists battling the Lebanese Army in North Lebanon, many of whom, he noted, "are not even Palestinian." International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, an Egyptian, had similarly harsh words for some of the outside actors in the region, warning that despite the disastrous Anglo-American occupation of Iraq, there are now "new crazies who say 'let's go and bomb Iran.'"
The radicals referred to by Erekat are driven by an all-consuming sense of dispossession and persecution, but at least some of their intolerance and aggression can be rationalized by their having led lives of deprivation under foreign occupation and/or domestic repression. The "crazies" described by ElBaradei are motivated by a volatile mix of fear and presumptuousness that makes them equally dangerous. But the latter are the products of an affluent and free society: They have no excuse for their blinkered perspective, especially when the policies they continue to champion have produced nothing so much as more of the people and organizations they claim to hate.
Both sets of actors currently shaping the region are self-righteous sorts who dismiss anyone who criticizes them with labels like "infidel," "freedom hater," "cross worshipper," "surrender monkey," and a host of other absurdities. They will not stop - and the region will continue to suffer the consequences - unless and until thoughtful people like Erekat and ElBaradei step forward to reclaim and redefine the Middle East.

Opposition prepares to launch 'Act of Deliverance' proposal
By Mirella Hodeib
Daily Star staff
Saturday, June 02, 2007
BEIRUT: While the March 14 Forces launched an initiative to solve the ongoing political deadlock in Lebanon, opposition forces are waiting for Free Patriotic Movement leader and MP Michel Aoun's imminent arrival from Paris to announce their proposal. Well-informed sources told the Central News Agency (CNA) Friday that numerous discussions and meetings were under way among opposition forces to coordinate the official launch, expected following Aoun's return, of what is being termed t¤he Lebanese Opposition's Act for Deliverance.
The ruling majority launched its initiative Thursday to solve the six-month-old political standoff. Points of the initiative included the rejection of any form of foreign tutelage over Lebanon and restructuring Lebanese-Syrian ties, which strongly deteriorated following the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon in April 2005.
The ruling majority's initiative also stressed having presidential elections on time, followed by the formation of a government of national unity, which runs counter to repeated opposition calls for early parliamentary elections.
Sources close to parliament ary Speaker Nabih Berri said the speaker wanted the March 14 Forces to show some "seriousness" and that their calls for dialogue be sincere. The sources added that Berri considered the ruling majority's latest initiative "contradictory."
"The speaker is surprised at the fact that while some members from the March 14 coalition wanted dialogue initiated on the topic of the international tribunal, others refuse to launch any dialogue until after presidential elections," sources said. Meanwhile, Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir on Friday declined to comment on the initiative. "We were the first ones to suggest the formation of a six-minister salvation government to rescue the country from the escalating crisis, for such a strategy brought fruit during the mandate of former President Fouad Shehab," Sfeir told his visitors. President Emile Lahoud adopted Sfeir's initiative for a six-minister salvation government, but he was heavily criticized by members of the ru-ling majority. Sfeir added that he was "not entitled" to delve into political issues, while dismissing media rumors that he suggested the names of four candidates for the presidency during a visit to the Vatican earlier this year.
Reactions Friday to the March 14 initiative were mostly positive; the first international reaction was from Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu al-Gheit, who said his government was "reassured" by the initiative. "Egypt is glad to know that the international tribunal will not be used to fulfill political ends and hopes the Lebanese will be able to reach an accord," the minister said in a statement issued by the Egyptian Embassy in Beirut. The ruling majority's announcement of their plan followed the UN Security Council's vote on Wednesday to create a tribunal to try suspects in the killing of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and others.
Commenting on the intentions of the international court, former President Amin Gemayel said he hoped the tribunal would be "a tool to solve Lebanon's crisis rather than adding to the problem.""We want restart dialogue and we are planning to cooperate with all groups, overlooking their acute differences" Gemayel added during a news conference Friday. Meanwhile, Social Affairs Minister Nayla Mouawad also stressed the importance of  dialogue, adding that "it was no time for any more fights and arguments. Also Friday, the head of the leading parliamentary bloc, Saad Hariri, met with Egyptian Ambassador Hussein Darrar, and the two discussed local and regional developments.

Hariri court 'has no bearing on Syria' - Moallem
By Agence France Presse (AFP)
Saturday, June 02, 2007
DAMASCUS: Syria will not cooperate with the UN tribunal being created to try suspects in the assassination of former Lebanese Premier Rafik Hariri, Foreign Minister Walid Moallem reiterated on Friday. UN Resolution 1757, adopted on Wednesday by the Security Council, "has no bearing on Syria, and we have informed the Security Council that we will not cooperate," Moallem told a news conference in Damascus with his Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki. "The issue of the tribunal concerns Lebanon alone, and Syria will not concede its sovereignty to any party, no matter who that party is," he said. Moallem said the move "infringes on Lebanese sovereignty," and deplored "the speed with which the Security Council decided on a tribunal without unanimity either on an international or Lebanese level." "It would have been better to have a consensus among the Lebanese on the tribunal. We hope that the Lebanese use dialogue to reach an agreement that will end divisions and guarantee security and stability."
For his part, Mottaki said that Iran will only hold fresh talks with the United States on stabilizing Iraq if Washington changes its policies there.
"We are examining the results of those discussions and if there is a real willingness on the part of the US administration to change ... we will continue them," he said.
"The lack of security in Iraq and the continuation of the occupation are the root causes of the crisis," Mottaki added. "Iran is one of the countries that could help resolve the crisis." Iranian and US delegations met in Baghdad on Monday for their highest-level official talks since the two governments broke off relations shortly after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Mottaki and Moallem said their governments are keen to maintain security and stability in the Middle East.
On a possible Israeli attack on Syria, Mottaki said his country "would relentlessly support Syria," noting that "Israel would never dare to launch another attack in the region following its rout in Lebanon last summer." - AFP, KUNA

Fatah al-Islam Terrorists Set up bases at mosques
Lebanese Army gunners pounded the remaining outposts of Fatah al-Islam terrorists in the northern refugee camp of Nahr al-Bared Saturday as militants sought refuge in mosques and medical centers. Reliable sources said at least 42 Fatah al-Islam militants have been killed since the new round of fighting broke out at dawn Friday.
The Army, according to reliable sources, lost five "matryrs" in the fierce confrontation to root out the Fatah al-Islam network.
The highest building in Nahr al-Bared was totally demolished by a series of explosions that shattered its structure, witnesses told Naharnet by telephone.
The building had been used b Fatah al-Islam militants as a sniping nest to open fire at Lebanese troops on the cam's northeastern flank. They said Six Fatah al-Islam fighters were killed in the building. The army command said Fatah alIslam militants were setting up firing outposts at mosques and medical centers, stressing the troops were respecting such hy sites.
On Friday at least 36 militants from Fatah al-Islam were killed in fierce clashes with the Lebanese army in Nahr al-Bared as the army urged the to surrender.
"The army command calls on the gunmen to surrender to justice, and underlines its determination to continue to track them down until this is achieved," an army communiqué said. The communiqué urged "our Palestinian brothers not to provide safe haven to these criminals, and expel them from among the innocent civilians."
"Army units have pursued their field operations around Nahr al-Bared camp in order to control buildings and areas that the gunmen are infiltrating to in order to open sniper fire on military and civilian centers," it added. The army "succeeded in destroying their bases and controlling them with fire power, while further tightening its grip on them and foiling any attempts to infiltration" out of the camp. "There were many casualties among their (the militants) ranks, and some of them have fled while others have hidden among civilians in order to use them as human shields," the communiqué added.
The army, according to reliable sources, launched a three-pronged attack against Fatah al-Islam terrorists from the northern, eastern and southern flanks of the camp, 82 kilometers north of Beirut. Army troops backed by a heavy curtain of artillery fire punched through Fatah al-Islam defenses from the north and east destroying the terrorists' hideouts at the old naval base, the Samed and Khan buildings. One source said a 12-man Fatah al-Islam squad was "wiped out" by army fire as it tried to infiltrate out of the camp along the Nahr al-Bared river runway on the southern edge of the camp.
The route, the source explained, leads to the rough mountainous range overlooking the northern town of Tripoli, where the terrorists had apparently aimed to spread and hide. The army, according to the source, has blocked the terrorists' escape route to the mountains and the mere fact that they are trying to escape means that they their defenses are collapsing. Another Fatah al-Islam squad tried to escape by boat across Mediterranean waters from the northern sector of the camp, in an apparent effort to head to neighboring Syria, 10 kilometers further north, but they were killed by army shelling, the source said.
Fatah al-Islam also lost eight fighters in the Samed building and six in the Khan, he added.
Army troops also arrested four Fatah al-Islam fighters, one of them wounded, at Samed building, the source disclosed.
Smoke billowed from the northern and eastern flanks of the camp as the thuds of exploding artillery shells echoed across the northern province.
Army gunners pounded Fatah al-Islam bases and outposts with 155-mm howitzers and tank cannons with "precision" to avoid inflicting casualties among the camp's civilian population which declined to less than 3,000 people, Palestinian sources told Naharnet. A Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) source said the army was "exerting exceptional efforts to pacify civilians, most of whom have evacuated the camp in the past 12 days."The camp's original population was estimated at 30,000 people before the clashes broke out 12 days ago between Fatah al-Islam and the army. PLO ambassador to Lebanon Abbas Zaki told reporters after meeting Premier Fouad Saniora earlier in the day the camp was more like "a hijacked plane or ship. It has been hijacked by Fatah al-Islam which does not represent the Palestinian people."He declared support for the Lebanese government's efforts to stabilize the situation, stressing that a stable situation was in the interest of both the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples. The Saniora government accuses Syria of sponsoring Fatah al-Islam to destabilize Lebanon, from which it was forced to withdraw in April 2005, nearly two months after the assassination of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri. Syria denies the charge. Beirut, 01 Jun 07, 10:02

Analysis: U.N. Lebanon tribunal a promising step
By Dalal Saoud |
United Press International
BEIRUT, Lebanon -- An international criminal tribunal set up to prosecute the killers of Lebanon's former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri is a step forward for the Middle East, which has been long plagued by political assassinations. The United Nations Security Council voted Wednesday for its creation, more than two years after the assassination of Hariri in a massive bomb explosion that hit his convoy in Beirut on Feb. 14, 2005.
"It is a big step. ... Definitely we are in a new era, a new phase," Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, told United Press International. "The tribunal has become a reality."Lebanon, which has been hit by a series of bombings and other assassinations since the killing of Hariri and 20 other people in the 2005 explosion, has been in a deep political crisis with its main political powers split over the tribunal and power-sharing as well as relations with Syria and the United States.It is too soon to predict if the newly adopted Security Council Resolution 1757 that provides for the creation of the tribunal will further deepen divisions in Lebanon or pave the way for dialogue among the conflicting Lebanese parties -- encouraged by the fresh Iran-U.S. dialogue that took place in Baghdad earlier this week. To parliamentarian Boutros Harb, who is also a member of the pro-government March 14 Movement, the tribunal "is a precedent" and "the first to be established in a region full of disturbances and events."
"It creates a new reality which would contribute in an indirect way into forcing the regimes (in the region) to respect human rights and protect citizens' rights more," Harb, a lawyer, told UPI. "It also ushers an inclination by the international community and the U.N to support people of the world even by expanding the role of the U.N. in settling conflicts and struggles."He highlighted the importance the resolution as "it solves a dangerous case which endangered Lebanon's stability and future."
The resolution, which will take effect on June 10, was approved 10 to 0 by the 15-member Security Council. China, Russia, Qatar, Indonesia and South Africa abstained from voting, saying it bypassed the Lebanese parliament's constitutional role in approving international agreements and would further deepen divisions in Lebanon and threaten its shaky stability. "They expressed fears but they (Russia and China) did not use the veto," Harb noted. Now that the tribunal has become a reality, he believes that "the concerned parties will deal with the new situation in a realistic way."
"Realism requires these parties and countries to deal (with the tribunal) in such a way to avoid further complications and instead help ease the ongoing struggle," he said.
He was mainly referring to Syria, which was accused by many Lebanese of being behind Hariri's killing and many other assassination and bombings in Lebanon -- a charge repeatedly denied by Damascus. The international investigation into Hariri's assassination hinted at the possible involvement of some Syrian and Lebanese officers in the killing, which occurred while Lebanon was still under Syria's control and before Damascus was forced to withdraw its troops from its neighboring tiny Arab country. Syria has insisted it was cooperating with the international investigation but was not concerned with the international tribunal. Its allies in Lebanon, including Hezbollah, maintained Hariri's killers should be punished but fell short of supporting such an international tribunal on the basis it violates Lebanon's sovereignty. Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who heads the pro-Syrian Amal movement, refused to convene a session of parliament to allow a vote, prompting Prime Minister Fouad Siniora to issue a direct appeal to the Security Council to establish the court.
Dr. Shafik al-Masri, legal expert and professor of international law at the American University of Beirut, said the international tribunal "is the judicial mechanism that could disclose the criminals who carried out the terrorist act against Hariri and the other crimes." Masri explained that the tribunal was adopted under Chapter Seven, "meaning that all countries should abide by the court requirements."
Noting that the international investigation carried out by Belgian Serge Brammertz referred to Hariri's killing as a politically motivated terrorist act, he explained that the court was set "to try and then punish those who committed terrorist crimes on the basis that terrorism constitutes a threat to international peace and security."
"It is the first court to try and convict terrorist crimes at the legal level," he told UPI. "It is the first judicial mechanism of international character in the Middle East region where political assassinations, suppression, collective arrest and violations of essential rights" are widespread.But is such a tribunal restricted to revealing the truth about Hariri's assassination? According to Salem, "It also has political goals beyond disclosing the killers. ... It's always politics. China and Russia, which abstained from the vote, have different interests and playing their cards to counterbalance the U.S. (in the region)."
He said the international tribunal, which somewhat resembles the Security Council measures recently adopted against Iran because of its nuclear program, was "an international mechanism to put pressures on certain regimes in the region." After the first round of a U.S.-Iran dialogue, which he described as "a turning point" in Iraq, and the adoption of the international court, Salem believes the "(U.S.) talking to Syria becomes easier."The court is thus "a red line" and was "the last card" for bargaining. Syria, Salem said, "will have to deal with this reality and will have to find a way to talk with the U.S., the West and Saudi Arabia" in order to stabilize Lebanon, pave the way for the formation of a new government and the election of a new president as well as discussing the fate of Hezbollah's weapons.
The formation of the international tribunal boosted hopes that Hariri's killers will be held accountable, but many remain skeptical about learning the truth.
It will probably takes years, according to Harb. Yet the nagging question remains: Would such a tribunal deter any future political assassinations in the Middle East?

Two Examples: Iraq and Lebanon
Mustafa Zein Al-Hayat - 02/06/07//
The US-Iranian talks on 28 May stressed Washington's admittance of Tehran's role in Iraq and the Arabian Gulf too. The talks were "successful and very positive", as described by the two ambassadors Ryan Crocker and Kadhmi Qummi, and were a first step in building confidence between the two sides.
For Iran, the positive aspects are the fact that the US had to backtrack on its hard stance and its threats to overthrow the Islamic regime by force without having the "axis of evil" ceding anything. Tehran does not have to do so for many reasons, foremost of which is the fact that it fights its war against others on others' land, which turned into a war of attrition with yesterday's defeated enemy (Iraq) and today's enemy (the great Satan) which has sunk in a quagmire and asks for help.
As for the US, the positive aspects are the fact that it will not have to engage in another war after it sustained a lot of casualties, and after it was convinced that it cannot run the world alone. As the US plans to stay for long in Iraq, as stated by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, it is better for the US to do so through agreements with Iraq's neighbors to guarantee the safety of its forces and freedom of its companies in working to control the country's resources, and to put Baghdad under its permanent guardianship; wasn't this its aim from the war and in toppling the Iraqi regime?!
The other important aim which Washington sought to achieve is to keep Iraq away from the Arab-Israeli conflict and any prospective Arab coalition. It managed to achieve this aim by portioning Iraq into states unable to unite in solidarity and which are in conflict over Iraq's identity. There is no problem if the US guarantees the Kurds' interests in return for Iran's guaranteeing the Shiites' interests, and other countries' guaranteeing the Sunnis' interests. However, all this will be at the expense of the comprehensive national interest under the slogan of democracy and freedom which will be an example for the New Middle East!
The same is happening in Lebanon today. Conflict is ongoing in the name of identity, and the conflict among the sects and their sticking to their gains has prevented them from exploiting the victory in 2000 when Israel withdrew from the south unconditionally. It also prevented the sects from cashing in on the Jewish State's defeat in the war of last July to build a strong country able to guarantee its people's interests. Victories have turned into a crushing political defeat, which - in turn - is about to turn into a civil war. In this sense, Iraq has been 'lebanized;' or both countries are the same in establishing a federalism of sects and maintaining their interests by seeking support from foreign powers, even from Israel.
It has become clear that the US is waiting for the results of its talks with Iran over Iraq to have similar talks with Syria. The US prepares for these talks through visits on the level of legislators and through assurances to the Lebanese that this will not be at their expense and will not be through sharing influence with Damascus.
In fact, Washington - with its new orientations - has divided the region into two parts: the first consists of Iraq and its surroundings, and the second consists of Lebanon and its surroundings. Washington is interested in bringing stability to the first part, and creating a state of peace with Iran in order to guarantee its military and political presence. This was the essence of the talks and the meaning of sharing influence between the two sides.
As for the second part, Washington is interested in distancing Damascus from its Iranian ally and - accordingly - its Lebanese alley (Hezbollah), and joining it in a political process confined to Iraq.
Out of that American planning, Washington gave the green light to the Israeli government to hold negotiations with Syria (Haaretz, 24/5/2007) on condition of confining the talks to the future of the Golan Heights and not discussing the Lebanese or Iraqi issues, as this has to be tackled by the US administration only, lest the "Syrians feel that their isolation has started to ebb".
However, the Americans plan and implement, taking into account reactions that may be unrealistic like what happened to them during the occupation of Iraq, and the threat to invade Iran and Syria. Experiences have taught us that the perfect plans on paper become catastrophic on the ground. So, what if Iran agrees to share influence in Iraq and insists on its alliance with Syria? And what if Israel launches negotiations with Damascus and the two sides fail to reach an agreement or the negotiations take a long time? And what if a new uprising erupts in Palestine or a refugee camp war breaks out in Lebanon? And what is to be done if the Lebanese regime collapses?
All these questions carry answers to the effect that the region in the American age is on the brink of wars and shifts, the best example of which may be Iraq and the other example is Lebanon

The Syrian-Jihadi "highway" in Lebanon
By Walid Phares, Ph.D.
World Defense Review columnist
June 2/07
PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION
A curious "debate" is growing rapidly among a number of Western-based analysts about the "impossibility" of the existence of Syrian Jihadi-Salafist links. More particularly, some analysts went to the extent of describing the existence of links between the Syrian Mukhabarat and the group Fatah al Islam operating in North Lebanon as "hazy."
Ironically this mounting trend meets the current Syrian diplomatic and media campaign halfway, as Damascus is deploying extensive efforts to deny "any link whatsoever" with Fatah al Islam. In fact, Assad shut down the passage points in northern Lebanon just a few hours after the Jihadists began slaughtering the Lebanese soldiers. Interestingly enough Syria has not closed entry checkpoints to Lebanon since 1976, even though Tripoli's skies were burning during many battles between militias and factions.
Was Assad too fast in denying his backing of Fatah al Islam, as with his instant denial of his regime's role in the Hariri assassination?
We'll come back to this matter later. But first let me examine the arguments in the claim stating that Fatah al Islam is al Qaeda, and therefore it cannot be backed by the Syrian regime.
"Intoxication"
Intelligence and Counterterrorism experts are familiar with the weapon known as "intox" from the root word intoxication. It is a form of deception used by powers throughout history and developed as a special skill by the Soviet KGB during the Cold war. Later on various Jihadi networks, both Iranian and Salafist, have improved this method via the use of Khid'a (deception) and the historically rooted concept of Taqiya (dissimulation tactic).
The bottom line is that regimes and organizations, Islamist and ultra-nationalists (i.e. not sanctioned by domestic checks and balances) can use all deceptions possible and don't have to be transparent. In the War on Terror or the Terror War against Democracies, do not expect -- naively -- these radicals to tell you the real story. Hence do not expect either the Syrian regime to declare that it is supporting Fatah al Islam at this point, or expect the latter to declare that they are coordinating with Damascus as they are announcing they have pledged to al Qaeda. Reading short of this complex reality would only mean that you have been the victim of "intox," the enemy's Khid'a at its best.
Assad regime's History
To those who cannot fathom how a Baathist secular -- and socialist -- regime engags in alliances with Islamist forces, fights them, befriend one and represses another, just review the very dense history of Hafez Assad between 1970 and 2000, and the short but bloody history of his son Bashar from 2000 until 2007.
For 37 years the Assad dynasty practiced Taqiya and Khid'a as well as cross-ideological alliances. The regime supported the PLO between 1970 and 1976, before Assad ordered the bloody conflict with Arafat in 1976. Briefly claiming coordination with Right wing Christian parties in 1976-1977, Assad bombed the PLO in 1978. Then using Amal against the Palestinians, the regime supported its own "Palestinian" factions.
Allying himself with Iran and Hizbollah in 1982, the regime wanted to contain Hizbollah in Beirut in 1986. Fighting against the Lebanese (Christian) Forces since the 1970s, the Syrians backed a faction among them (Elie Hobeika) in 1986, fought another (Samir Geagea) until 1989, claimed to befriend the latter for a short time before ordering oppression of their partisans as of 1993.
Assad fought the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, but funded the Islamists in Lebanon and Palestine. His regime claimed it was secular while becoming the single strategic ally of Iran's Islamist elite. In Lebanon and after the withdrawal of the bulk of his army, Bashar kept his entire apparatus: from Shia Hizbollah and Amal, some Druse factions, and a few Christian warlords, to a large range of pro-Sunni politicians and groupings. How can the Assad intelligence net achieve this?
That is another story about the Baathist sophistication. And as of spring 2005, a main former anti-Syrian politician was added to the panoply of Syrian (and Iranian) political assets in the country: General Michel Aoun. However, perhaps the most advantageous "grabs" by the Baathist Mukhabarat were Sunni Islamists, who should have been ideologically on the other side of Assad, but who, with the attraction of a "deity" -- dollars and power -- have agreed to line up with a Taghut (unjust ruler in Jihadi literature).
Indeed, as of the early 1990s, Assad, the father, succeeded in recruiting Islamic (Sunni) Fundamentalists. Obviously the prime against-nature alliance was with Hamas and Islamic Jihad, both Sunni Islamists. Once that was "accomplished," other models were possible. Hence, the next wave of Sunni Islamists to be "recruited" by the Syrian intelligence were precisely those based in Tripoli and Sidon in Lebanon, for example Harakat al Tawheed of Shaaban and the Gama'a al Islamiya. And once Syrian intelligence can penetrate that far in Sunni radical land, it can naturally fund those who will at some point "join" al Qaeda.
Years later, the Assad junta's efforts paid off. While many in the realm of Western logic cannot absorb it, the fact is that Syrian intelligence not only has a strategic relationship with Islamic Fundamentalists who are fighting a same enemy, but also has a control process over some groups who, while being attracted ideologically to al Qaeda, are enjoying the checks of the Assad regime. Hence, the odd situation of Fatah al Islam in their affiliation with the ideology of al Qaeda (contradictive with the Baath) and their acceptance of Syrian logistical (and binding) aid.
Jihadi tactical history
One has also to have a solid understanding of Jihadi-Salafi tactical history. This type of movement is indeed very rigid on ideology. Its attitude towards the so-called Kuffar (infidels) is unshakeable: Jews, Christians, Hindus, Muslim Shiites and even Sunni "apostates" are ranked as enemy.
But the Salafi Jihadists have often used their enemies, accepted their donations and produced all the reasons for this behavior. If Wahabi Islamists have welcomed strategic assistance from American infidels in Afghanistan in the 1980s they surely would accept weapons and money from the region's Baathists. Western "experts" shouldn't have an existential crisis if the Jihadists divert a little from the books they print. Yes, even the Salafi Jihadists can be "tactical." In Tripoli's case, not only Fatah al Islam was encouraged by the Syrian intelligence, but a number of its leadership were jailed then freed by Damascus .
Stakes for Bashar's regime
Another component of the "unnatural" cooperation between the Syrian regime and a more than one Jihadi group in Lebanon is the urgency for Bashar. Hafez Assad used Islamist groups in Lebanon and in Palestine during the 1980s and the 1990s for very specific reasons: control of the game with Israel and with the opponents of the Baath in Lebanon.
Bashar's intelligence is using them for a higher stake: to protect the Syrian regime from collapse by ordering the crumbling of the Lebanese Government before. It centers on the Hariri UN Court and on the implementation of UNSCR 1559. Only seasoned readers of Assad politics can see it as clearly as a grand plan.
The Syrian game plan
It is always beneficial for commentators and analysts to look at developments involving terrorism, from historical and geopolitical angles. When Fatah al Islam began the attacks against the Lebanese soldiers it wasn't because of a bank robbery. The group declared last November the purpose of enflaming Tripoli, and with it a "northern front" against the Seniora Government. Reading it otherwise is a short sight watching of unfolding events.
The road to the battle of Tripoli began in April of 2005, when Bashar Assad delivered a speech in Damascus in which he declared his intention to withdraw his army from Lebanon under American, French and international pressures. A thorough reading at the time told all those connoisseurs of the Baathist regime that he was planning on pulling out the "first army" (the regular troops and tanks), but he had instructed the "second army, " (Hezbollah, the pro-Syrian militias, and the Terrorists implanted within Palestinian camps) to take the offensive.
From July to December 2005, a number of Cedars Revolution leaders were savagely assassinated and bombs targeted several areas. From January to June 2006, while the March 14 (anti-Syrian) politicians were lured into discussions with Hezbollah, the Syro-Iranians introduced weapons and terrorists through the Bekaa borders with Syria . By July, Hezbollah waged a war against Israel. As of October 2006, Nasrallah waged an urban war against the Seniora Government: A Minister was assassinated and downtown Beirut was occupied.
From January 2007 until now the Jihadi card has been used. This is the strategic context in which Fatah al Islam operates today: engaging the Lebanese Army in several spots, starting with Tripoli. In short, the Assad regime has no doctrinal ethics as many fooled experts believe in the West. The Syrian regime would sleep with any enemy and use all assets to reach its goal.
Bashar's war room can assassinate Lebanese politicians with the agents of the neo-Nazi SSNP, set off bombs and suppress Shiites intellectuals with Hezbollah expertise, besiege the Lebanese Church with the help of Christian feudals such as Soleiman Frangieh, disorient the Maronite masses with turncoat Michel Aoun, penetrate the Sunni community with "funded" Salafi Jihadists and thrust into the Druze clan with "paid" operatives.: And as this Terrorist architecture is set up in Lebanon, another span of "Assad Labyrinths" lures outside powers into the game.
The Syrian regime, while ally with the Mullahcracy in Tehran, tells the Americans it could do business with them; and, as Bashar instructs his operatives overseas to blast the Saudi regime, he flies over to Riyadh to assure them of his friendship. Hence, a regime that can master such a diabolical engineering can easily recruit and have remote control over the little Fatah al Islam and place it in Assad's vast tool-set in Lebanon and the region.
Fatah al Islam: Opportunistic Jihadi Hybrid
To understand the nature of Fatah al Islam, one has to cross several layers of distinctions -- first between an "official chapter" of the Bin Laden organization and the other types. Shaker al Absi's group is not a chapter, yet. Then one must distinguish between those Jihadist entities fully independent from regimes and intelligence services and those "implicated" in some ways.
Fatah al Islam is Salafi Jihadist, regards Bin Laden as an ideological leader, but also happens to be on the receiving end of Assad's payroll. In short, not all Jihadi groups are perfect. So, at the end of the day, the Nahr al Bared based Salafi Terrorists are Jihadi in nature and tied to Syrian intelligence per needs. They could be seen as "Opportunistic Hybrid Jihadis." They can adapt to future situation in the future, if they survive as an organized networks.
Some Terrorism commentators in the West and in the US spoke of an "elusive Fatah al Islam." Unfamiliar with the Levantine nature of the phenomenon, those commentators still struggle with what they describe as "speculation" over the group's "real motives," as if they haven't captured the equation behind Fatah al Islam. These commentators base their inability to define the group on classical ethnocentric errors in analysis. First, they conclude that this group can't have ties to Damascus because the Syrian regime executed four members of the group. Ironically, the news came from the Syrian intelligence itself, which means that the Assad regime can go as far as killing operatives to intimidate the rest of the group, and on top of it, "sell" the news to the world as an "an anti al Qaeda" activity, which by the way would be bought by US officials.
It would take a world, and many books to explain the twisted -- but successful -- mind of the regime in Damascus. "Killing" Islamists at the hand of the Syrian soldiers is another form of taming wild activities and raining in. And for those who can't fathom this behavior, just remember how in 1987, Syrian special forces slaughtered a number of Hezbollah fighters in Beirut even when Syrian intelligence was coordinating with Iran. Each blood shed, has a specific reason in this business.
The analysts who can't absorb the Syrian-Fatah al Islam form of cooperation often cite statements made by al Qaeda in Iraq's past commander attacking the Shiites, and hence the Alawite regime. But what escapes commentators is that theological and ideological principles can be selectively applied, so that strategic goals can be reached. The "principles" are never forgotten but the roads to attain them can be full of blind spots. And just as a reminder, it was Ayman Zawahiri, al Qaeda's number two, who asked Zarqawi to forget about the Shiia apostates in Iraq until time opportune comes. So, statements made by a few hot-headed Jihadi commanders in Iraq won't stop pragmatic Jihadists in Lebanon from receiving aid from Alawi apostates.
There is something called al Darura that escapes many on-the-spot analysts as they navigate in the highly intricate world of the Jihadists: it translates into "necessity." If it is deemed necessary by the Emir of a group to use the goodies of an infidel party to fight the other infidel party, it will be selected comfortably. Remember how the Wahabis of the 1980s used all resources from a far-Infidel power, the United States, to fight a close infidel enemy, the Soviet Union , and learn from that example.
Seeing beyond "Intox"
Once more, the unseen tie between the Assad regime and the Terrorist Jihadi groups is in the center of international and US scrutiny. The Iraq debate in 2002-2003 fell short of reading the type of "links" that existed between the Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Most observers missed the actual state of those relationships that existed. From my reading of 42 pages of Iraqi intelligence (in Arabic) from the 1992-1994 years, I saw clearly how both sides were exploring the potentials. From my previous observation of Saddam's symbolic metamorphosis in the 1990s towards a higher use of Islamist symbols I understood that he wanted to have this dimension at his disposal, without changing his regime's doctrine deeply.
It was the level of darura again. But in Assad's case, the darura is high: The regime depends on arming Jihadists (even if they could sting you later) and sending them off to Iraq , and now to Lebanon.
The Salafi Jihadists are like a dangerous chemical weapon that you'd want to throw on your foe while knowing it can come back at you. But guess what? It is more important for the Assad regime to crumble the Seniora Government now and crush future Salafi backfiring later. The Syrian intelligence is expert at eliminating their past tools, even if they were Syrians as well.
What the expert community in the West and in the US must do is to see beyond the analytical "intoxication" unleashed by the regimes and organizations in the region, and expanded by their advocates in the West. Just keep in mind that the Iranian-Syrian axis is spending millions of dollars on one of the most sophisticated PR campaigns aiming at blurring the vision of their foes.
If you investigate thoroughly the grapevines, you'd be able to find out that most of the "arguments" made in our public space about the types of relationships that "can" exist, and those that "shouldn't," are manufactured in Tehran and Damascus. Subconsciously or not, many in the West parrot the claims made by Middle East dictatorships, Jihadi strategists and al Jazeera commentators, unfortunately weakening democracies' stand in the War of Ideas.
At the end of the day, as I try to argue in my latest book, the ultimate strategic goal of the enemies is to force the West to see wrongly and act accordingly. In the case of Fatah al Islam's battling in Tripoli, the aim of the Syro-Iranian propagandists is to camouflage what is obvious for as long and thick as they can: That the Syrian regime not only has established ties to some Jihadist groups, but has in fact paved a "highway" in their direction, with the goal of using them as one of the defense lines for the regime. Hence, it is up to the public and the policy makers in the West to thrust through the deceptive "intoxication" tactic by Damascus and Tehran, to see clearer, and only then, to act accordingly.
 

***— Dr Walid Phares is a senior fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) in Washington, D.C., and director of the Future Terrorism Project of the FDD. He is a visiting fellow with the European Foundation for Democracy in Brussels. His most recent book is Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against the West.
Dr Phares holds degrees in law and political science from Saint Joseph University and the Lebanese University in Beirut, a Masters in international law from the Universite de Lyons in France and a Ph.D. in international relations and strategic studies from the University of Miami.
He has taught and lectured at numerous universities worldwide, practiced law in Beirut , and served as publisher of Sawt el-Mashreq and Mashrek International. He has taught Middle East political issues, ethnic and religious conflict, and comparative politics at Florida Atlantic University until 2006.
Dr. Phares has written seven books on the Middle East and published hundreds of articles in newspapers and scholarly publications such as Global Affairs, Middle East Quarterly, the Journal of South Asian and Middle East Studies and the Journal of International Security. He has appeared on CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, BBC, al Jazeera, al Hurra, as well as on radio broadcasts.
Aside from serving on the boards of several national and international think tanks and human rights associations, Dr. Phares has testified before the US Senate Subcommittees on the Middle East and South East Asia, the House Committees on International Relations and Homeland Security and regularly conducts congressional and State Department briefings, and he was the author of the memo that introduced UNSCR 1559 in 2004.

Visit Dr. Phares on the web at walidphares.com and defenddemocracy.org.
© 2007 Walid Phares