LCCC NEWS
BULLETIN
May 5/2006
Below news from the Daily
Star for 5/05/06
Nasrallah slams March 14 Forces for 'provoking Damascus'
Parliament snubs Lahoud by passing critical laws
Taiwanese president's plane denied Beirut pit stop
Economy Ministry denies plan to liberalize bread prices
Siniora denies any dispute with Maronite patriarch
Soueid accuses FPM of war-era tactics in dividing confessions
Hariri, Hamade, Jumblatt immune from Syrian prosecutors... for now
March 14 Forces set to strike back in dialogue
Rice seeks meeting with French FM to discuss Lebanese course
European parliamentary delegation aims to help Lebanon reform
U.S.-Israel 'may have hand' in Hariri murder
Lebanon needs reform, not reform talk
Sfeir backs riot victims demanding compensation
Turn up the heat on Egyptian repression-By
Gordon Robison
Ahmadinejad seeks regional support as pressure mounts on Iran
Below news from
miscellaneous sources for 5/05/06
FT Interview: Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah-Financial Times
Beirut bombshell-CNNMoney.com
Syria denies State Department terror label-UPI
Hezbollah lambastes US for listing it as terrorist group-People's
Daily Online
The Axis of Terror-Australia-Israel Jewish
Affairs Council
Only by author-American Thinker
FEATURE-Where gunmen once roamed, Lebanese now make wine-Reuters
The devil is in the details-Al-Ahram
Parliament Receives Official Notice of Syrian Summonses Against Jumblat, Hariri,
Hamadeh
Lebanon Prevents Taiwanese President from Landing in Beirut
Rice to Discuss Lebanon with Douste-Blazy as U.N. Plans to Increase Pressure on
Syria
Lebanese Relief Expert Named U.N. Humanitarian Envoy to Iraq
Tension escalates again between Damascus and Beirut-AsiaNews.it
Iraq-Iran: Exchanging Accusations of Terrorism-Dar Al-Hayat
The Syrian-Lebanese War of Barriers!-Dar Al-Hayat
Lebanese-American delegation in Beirut criticizes US interference-Al-Manar
Parliament Receives Official Notice of Syrian Summonses Against Jumblat,
Hariri, Hamadeh
Naharnet: Parliament has received an official notification for the appearance of
MP Walid Jumblat, parliamentary majority leader Saad Hariri and
Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamadeh before a Syrian military court.
Speaker Nabih Berri said during a parliamentary session Wednesday that he had
been notified by the justice ministry and that the legislative body would
examine the matter, but refused further comment.
The summonses against the three MPs and journalist Fares Khashan, who are all
known for their anti-Syrian views, were received by the Lebanese judiciary in
April. Justice Minister Charles Rizk notified parliament Wednesday.
A judicial source in Damascus earlier told AFP that Jumblat had been summoned by
a Syrian military court to appear within seven days on charges of "inciting
against Syria."
The presiding military judge "preferred not to issue a warrant for his arrest,
but to notify him of the court date to give him an opportunity to defend himself
against the charges," the source close to the case said.
"According to Syrian law, the accused is asked to appear within seven days from
the date of his notification if he is outside Syrian territory," said the
source.
The Syrian action drew angry reaction from legislators at the parliamentary
session in Beirut. Many demanded an immediate rejection of the Syrian subpoenas
arguing that under the Lebanese constitution, MPs enjoy immunity and cannot be
prosecuted for political views.
MP Akram Shehayyeb of Jumblat's Progressive Socialist Party blasted the
summonses and accused Syria of "treating Lebanon as though it were ... one of
the suburbs of Damascus."
"This is complete insolence…It's as if they (the Syrians) cancelled the
parliamentary immunity that the Lebanese people gave (MPs) with an order from a
Syrian officer with the rank of military judge," Shehayyeb said.
MP Boutros Harb, called on his country to reject the notifications.
Berri said parliament has not taken an action yet as it has just received
official notification of the Syrian request.
Druze leader Jumblat is a key member of Lebanon's anti-Syrian parliament
majority which has accused Syria of involvement in a series of bombings,
including the 2005 murder of former premier Rafik Hariri.
Jumblat, who has called for regime change in Syria, has also accused Damascus of
being responsible for the 1977 assassination of his father, Kamal Jumblat, of
former President Rene Mouawad in 1989 and of several other Lebanese leaders.
He has recently met with members of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, the most
powerful rival to President Bashar Assad's regime. Jumblat received a delegation
of the group at his palace in the Chouf mountain town of Moukhtara on Sunday.
Hariri and Hamadeh are Jumblat's close allies in the anti-Syrian alliance.
Relations between the young legislator and Damascus have been tense since his
father's murder. Hamadeh has been one of Syria's most vocal critics in Lebanon
since the Oct 2004 attempt on his life that was blamed on the Syrian regime.
U.S. ambassador Jeffrey Feltman has described the Syrian legal action as
"interference" and part of Syria's "crude attempts to intimidate the Lebanese
people and their political leaders."
A Syrian military court had filed a lawsuit against Jumblat on charges of
"inciting the U.S. administration to occupy Syria" as well as "defaming"
Damascus.(AFP-Naharnet) Beirut, 04 May 06, 08:13
Nasrallah slams March 14 Forces for 'provoking
Damascus'
By Raed El Rafei -Daily Star staff
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: Hizbullah's chief lashed out at the March 14 Forces Thursday, saying
they did not really want to demarcate Lebanon's borders with Syria "but are just
looking to disarm Hizbullah." Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, who has headed Hizbullah
since 1992, criticized the Parliament majority for refusing to postpone the
demarcation of the Shebaa Farms border until after its liberation and rejecting
Syria's request to start the demarcation in the North and the Bekaa.
Delivering a speech at the opening of an international book fair in Beirut's
southern suburbs Thursday, he said that the issue of the sand-berms, which were
erected by Syria in Ras Baalbek and Ersal, was an old issue "totally made up" by
the March 14 Forces to cause tension with the Syrians. "I object that problems
with Syria over border issues be qualified as a new Shebaa Farms," he said,
adding that this comparison was "shameful."Nasrallah was referring to statements
made by acting Interior Minister Ahmad Fatfat, who said Tuesday following a
central security meeting with Premier Fouad Siniora that Syria had erected
military posts and sand barricades inside Lebanese territory.
Hizbullah's leader said the March 14 Forces were "provoking Damascus and
creating silly problems daily," accusing them of failing to abide by the
decisions of the national dialogue, which called for good relations with Syria.
The leaders of the country have agreed over the past few months to demarcate
borders and establish diplomatic relations with Syria. The next national
dialogue session, which will be held on May 16, will discuss the more
controversial issues of the presidency and Hizbullah's arms. Nasrallah also
voiced his support for the country's unions and syndicates and added that
Hizbullah would participate in the demonstrations that the unions have called
for on May 10, if the government failed to meet their demands. He criticized the
economic reform plan, presented recently by Siniora's team to the Cabinet, for
reducing cultural and educational matters to figures.
He said that education should be a priority in the government's policies. A
five-year economic reform plan was put to the government by Siniora for
discussion before endorsement. Commenting on regional issues, Hizbullah defended
Iran's right to acquire and export nuclear power for peaceful purposes and
accused the United States, Britain and France of "monopolizing knowledge" in the
world.
"The knowledge of dancing ... and singing ... is acceptable ... but acquiring
the knowledge or technology of enriching uranium for peaceful energy purposes is
banned for Arabs, Persians and Turks," he said.
"It is only allowed for Anglo-Saxons, and I do not know why the French are
joining them," he said.
Parliament snubs Lahoud by passing critical laws
By Nada Bakri -Daily Star staff
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: Lebanon's parliamentary majority scored a victory against pro-Syrian
President Emile Lahoud Thursday after it passed two critical decrees he and
several other politicians had opposed and returned unapproved. The general
legislative session witnessed heated debates between the March 14 Forces and
Free Patriotic Movement MPs over passing a draft law to amend the Constitutional
Council while the second decree to organize the Druze sect was passed relatively
smoothly.
The Constitutional Council supervises the constitutionality of laws and
arbitrates conflicts that arise over parliamentary and presidential elections.
Its members are elected by Parliament and the Cabinet.
The president, the speaker, the premier, along with any 10 MPs, have the right
to consult the council on matters that relate to the constitutionality of laws.
The officially recognized religious leaders have the right to consult this
Council only on laws relating to personal status, the freedom of belief and
religious practice, and the freedom of religious education.
The parliamentary majority had presented a draft law to Parliament requesting
the council's members be changed as they had been assigned to their posts by the
former regime. The council members are elected every six years and their term
ended three years ago but the judges remained in post. However, Lahoud returned
the law unapproved.
The majority criticized Lahoud for returning the draft law, saying this turned
him into a biased party rather than the country's referee. They also said
parties who oppose "are doing so for political reasons aimed at disabling
Parliament."
"President Lahoud has sided with them, which violates his jurisdiction and his
role as a referee," anti-Syrian MP Butros Harb said.Lahoud said he returned both
decrees out of national, legal and constitutional motives and not "out of
political considerations or desires to side with one party against the other."
The FPM MPs - who voted against the law - accused the parliamentary majority of
seeking to amend the law in order to appoint new judges who will rule in their
favor when it comes to challenges put forward against the results of the June
2005 parliamentary elections. "They want to change the Constitutional Council to
bring in one which conforms to their political line," said MP Yacoub Hassan from
the FPM's Reform and Change bloc.
The March 14 Forces strongly rejected the FPM allegations, saying that they want
to elect a new, politically invulner-able council. "The current council has been
submissive to political will and to the former tutelage authority and is no
longer acceptable ... that is why we are seeking to change it," said
Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamade.
Parliamentary majority leader Saad Hariri said, following the session, that it
would be a "scandal" if the current council stays in duty. Hariri added that the
current judges were appointed by Syrian officials. Druze leader Walid Jumblatt,
attending a Parliament session for the first time in several months, said the
decree was a "very important step."
The second decree passed in relation to organizing the Druze sect includes a
proposal to replace acting Druze spiritual leader Bahjat Ghaith, a key opponent
of Jumblatt.
Opponents of Jumblatt have been warning against adopting this law saying it will
create division among their sect.
But Jumblatt said that "the decree will not create any division" adding that
"organizing the sect will be done through discussions and votes." Former
pro-Syrian MP Faysal Daoud said the decree will not be implemented because
Ghaith will challenge it before the Constitutional Council, and added that the
spiritual leader will not step down.
Amal movement MPs voted against the first decree and withdrew from the session
before voting on the second. Hizbullah MPs did not attend the session.
FT Interview: Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah
Published: May 4 2006 18:54 | Last updated: May 4 2006 18:54
Excerpts from an FT interview with Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanon's
top Shia cleric.
On Lebanon's Shia community:
When we study the situation from a realistic viewpoint we find that the shia in
Lebanon have been outside the political spectrum, and society in general. They
lived deprived of rights on all fronts: services, education, and on the
political front. There was some leadership in the south, family leaderships, and
in the Bekaa [eastern Lebanon]. ...
Then matters progressed and the Shia managed to enter into political life and
the fabric of Lebanese society, and government also started to gradually
improve. The Shia as a community were able to enter the Lebanese state and to
move away from injustice. But there were regional differences: in the south
their situation was better than in the Bekaa – in particular they were able to
get services and projects going because of immigration, to Africa mostly and to
America. Shia of the Bekaa are still living in deprivation.
The Shia are Lebanese, a minority that is sometimes portrayed as a majority, but
their nationalism is strong and they don't think of replacing Lebanon with any
other country. Their political role is represented through participation in
parliament and they participate like others. Their role is not bigger than that
of the Sunni or the Christians.
And their participation in government is not as effective – many of the
important ministries are in the hands of other sects. The Shia, however, are the
resistance [i.e. Hizbollah, which fought Israel’s occupation of southern
Lebanon], which doesn't represent a normal political role. So the Shia don't
play a bigger role in the political sphere, rather they take less than their
share, if we consider their demographic weight.
I think the Shia represent a community that has very normal relations with other
sects. The problem that is raised sometimes by March 14 forces [a coalition of
anti-Syrian groups] is that they count the Shia as Syrian forces. But the
alliance [with Syria] is not that of one group answering to another – it emerges
out of Syria's political stance, which is one of resistance to Israel, and it
comes because Syria adopted a good policy with regard to the [Lebanese]
resistance, a policy to protect the resistance.
Lebanon's Shia, whether in Amal or Hizbollah [the two main parties], will not
replace any other country for Lebanon and they will not accept that they be
governed by Iran or Syria. They coordinate with Syria and Iran on issues that
they believe in, exactly in the same way that others coordinate with America or
France. The intervention of the US, through the American ambassador, and of the
French – why is this considered ‘independence’ while help from other countries
is considered ‘occupation’?
On Iraq and Iran:
From a political viewpoint, there is no relationship between [regime] change in
Iraq and the situation in Lebanon. Yes, there is a psychological change: the
Shia used to feel oppressed by the previous regime in Iraq, and when this regime
fell all the Shia in the world breathed a sigh of relief, of happiness, because
of religious and spiritual kinship. But in Lebanon the Shia were not affected.
So I think the Shia did not win anything big in the change in Iraq. It is very
possible that the Arab world, where there are difficulties for the Shia, doesn't
want the Shia to have an effective role, particularly because some Arab sides
connect the Shia to Iran, for example, and are afraid that the Shia could open
the way for Iran to control the Arab world.
But this is born out of a complex against the Shia, which is historic. Secondly
there it is a big political mistake to suggest that the Shia have an allegiance
to Iran – a mistake made by Hosni Mubarak, or when King Abdallah II of Jordan
spoke of the “Shia crescent”, which doesn't correspond to reality. Syria will
not be merging with Iran, Iraq, or with Lebanon's Shia – this is only in the
imagination of those who have a complex against the Shia, but it has no basis in
reality.
On tensions between Shia and Sunni communities:
There is a Sunni world within the Arab world, and elsewhere, with a history of
bloody and complicated relations with the Shia, particularly in the Islamic
world, and this survived even when the region moved from being an Islamic region
to an Arab region.
There is also similar talk in Iraq about how the Shia are controlling
everything, but the Shia in Iraq only want to be citizens like others and take
their democratic rights. On political and religious alliances in the Middle East
Political “crescents” are to be found everywhere in the world. Arab countries,
with the exception of Syria, now represent states that answer to America and
follow American policy. Why are relations with the US justified and important,
while political relations with Iran are considered threatening? We know that
every political axis, whether Iranian, Turkish or European, tries to serve its
interests through political and economic ties with others. So the fear of an
Iranian threat is an imaginary fear, especially given that Iran has no absolute
control over the Shia of the world.
When we look at Iraq, not all the Shia are with Iran, some factions could
coordinate with Iran but others don't... The Shia in Iraq generally do not
believe in velayat el faqih [the foundation of the Iranian theocracy].
On the impact in Lebanon of Sunni-Shia strife in Iraq:
Some could try to provoke sectarian tensions between Shia and Sunni, but they
won't succeed in Lebanon. There are guarantees in Lebanon and immunity against a
Sunni-Shia conflict.
Every Sunni family has Shia member, and we find that the political leaderships
meet and coordinate with each other. The economic and social reality also
prevents this. When we had a civil war, we noticed that Christians and Muslims
didn't fight each other in West Beirut, for example.
On reactions of pro-Iranian groups in the region to any US attack on Iran's
nuclear facilities:
I don't think there will be a military response. There will be political
reactions, as used to happen when there was a problem against a Arab country,
for instance when the Arab and Islamic world rallied to support Egypt.
Conditions don’t allow for military responses against the American side.
[But] when we study any US attack on Iran, we think its negative impact will set
light to the Gulf, and in Iraq, where the Iranians have 130,000 [US] troops as
hostages. So in attacking Iran, especially if it's a [full-fledged] war, it will
affect the world. What if Iran closes the straights of Hormuz, by how much will
oil prices rise?
And Iran could target, perhaps, American forces in the Gulf, and this would
badly affect the Gulf. This is why we see the US and Europe being cautious about
any military move against Iran. They know the price on the economic and military
fronts.
It’s not that Iran is stronger than America – America is stronger. But Iran is
different from Iraq. There are 70m Iranians and there is a vast state, a big
state in the region, and Iranians are different too, they will be united when
faced with outside aggression. There is also the mukhabarat [Iranian
intelligence]. Iran has a mukhabarat presence in more than one place, and they
will play perhaps the main role after the military.
Beirut bombshell
The assassination of a former Prime Minister may have been linked to the
collapse of Lebanon's Bank al-Madina.
By Mitchell Prothero, FORTUNE
May 4, 2006: 11:30 AM EDT
(FORTUNE Magazine) - Last year, when Syrian intelligence operatives were
implicated in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri,
their motive seemed clear: to neutralize a political opponent of Syria's
three-decade occupation of Lebanon.
But United Nations investigators and other sources have told FORTUNE there may
have been an additional reason for the hit. The February 2005 car bombing in
Beirut, the sources say, may have been partly intended to cover up a corruption
and bank fraud scandal that siphoned hundreds of millions of dollars to top
Syrian and Lebanese officials.
Bank documents, court filings, and interviews with investigators and other
sources show that some of the officials were deeply involved from the late 1990s
until early 2003 in a kickback scheme that supplied them with cash, real estate,
cars, and jewelry in exchange for protecting and facilitating a
multibillion-dollar money laundering operation at Lebanon's Bank al-Madina that
allowed terrorist organizations, peddlers of West African "blood diamonds,"
Saddam Hussein, and Russian gangsters to hide income and convert hot money into
legitimate bank accounts around the world.
Despite efforts to cover up the details surrounding the bank's collapse in early
2003, these sources say, the Syrian and Lebanese officials allegedly involved in
the fraud feared that Hariri could return to power and reveal their role in one
of the biggest illegal banking operations in the Middle East since the Bank of
Credit & Commerce International scandal in the early 1990s.
"Was the scandal part of the reason Hariri was killed?" asks Marwan Hamade,
Lebanon's Minister of Telecommunications and a Hariri confidant who was himself
the target of a car-bomb assassination attempt. "Absolutely. It was certainly
one of the cumulative reasons. If he had been reelected, Hariri would have
reopened the file, which we know goes directly to [Syrian President Bashar]
Assad through the [Lebanese] presidential palace in Baabda."
UN investigators looking into Hariri's death, led by German prosecutor Detlev
Mehlis, became interested in the link to al-Madina on the suspicion that money
stolen from the bank helped fund the plot, says a Lebanese security source who
helped investigate the bank's collapse and later worked with the UN team. After
reviewing some of the banking records of suspects in both Syria and Lebanon,
says the source, who asked not to be identified as he isn't authorized to talk
about the matter, the UN team started looking into whether at least some of the
plotters were motivated by a desire to obscure their roles in the al- Madina
affair.
"It goes all the way to the top people in Syria," the source says. Mehlis's
reports on the assassination make reference to financial fraud as a possible
motive.
"Fraud, corruption, and money laundering could have been motives for individuals
to participate in the operation that ended with the assassination of Mr.
Hariri," Mehlis wrote last December in his second report, referring specifically
to the collapse of al-Madina.
Mehlis, who would not be interviewed, also mentioned in his report a taped
conversation in which General Rustom Ghazali, Syria's top military official in
Lebanon, accused Hariri of discussing Syrian corruption in a newspaper
interview, apparently in violation of an agreement to remain quiet on the
matter.
In late April, noting UN findings, President George W. Bush ordered a freeze on
assets held in the U.S. by anyone involved in the assassination, though the
order did not cite names.
As part of the power struggle that ensued after Assad extended the term of
Lebanese President and Syrian ally Émile Lahoud in 2004, Hariri resigned as
Prime Minister with the intention of running for Parliament on an anti-Syrian
platform. Hariri confidants say that, once returned to power, he planned to
reopen the investigation into the bank's collapse. The case file and a trove of
supporting documents were sealed in the vault of Lebanon's Central Bank in 2003
after threats by Ghazali, who appears to have made millions of dollars from the
scheme himself.
The Syrian occupation of Lebanon from 1976 to 2005 has long been viewed as a
geopolitical move designed to stabilize its smaller neighbor after decades of
civil war and create a bargaining chip in the Arab-Israeli conflict. But over
time, the occupation turned into a moneymaking operation for Syrian elites and
their Lebanese allies.
"When the Syrians came to Lebanon," says Adnan Araki, a former Lebanese member
of Parliament and Syrian loyalist, "they wanted the Golan Heights back and
considered Lebanon and Hezbollah something to bargain with. We had to teach them
how to steal."
Investigators looking into the looting at Bank al-Madina got a break in March,
when Brazilian police arrested Rana Koleilat, al-Madina's former executive
secretary. Koleilat, who jumped bail in Lebanon last year and eluded an
international manhunt, is believed to have played a key role in the bank
scandal.
She is alleged in lawsuits brought by the bank's owners to have used false
withdrawals and bogus loans to enrich her family and pay off authorities. Even
as al-Madina failed, she is said by investigators to have extracted millions of
dollars from owner Adnan Abou Ayyash, a construction magnate who lives in Saudi
Arabia, through a series of wire transfers and check exchanges.
Koleilat denied the charges after her capture and said that the bank's owners
had authorized all withdrawals and that Ghazali had blackmailed her into paying
him for protection.
When the dust settled in the summer of 2003, after depositors were paid and
assets liquidated, the Abou Ayyash family found itself about $1.5 billion
poorer, a stunning turn of events for a Lebanese family that controlled a vast
business empire.
But as Koleilat and the Abou Ayyash brothers sued and countersued, and the
Central Bank grabbed whatever money was left to pay depositors, it became clear
that no investigation would be forthcoming. The money was gone, and only
questions remained, questions whose answers were locked away in a vault in the
Central Bank.
In an interview last year, Central Bank governor Riad Salameh didn't deny
reports that Ghazali had threatened him into closing the investigation. The
general's family, records produced by the bank appear to show, got more than $32
million from al-Madina via transfers approved by Koleilat. But with a pro-Syrian
Parliament and Justice Minister in place, then-Prime Minister Hariri was unable
to force an investigation beyond the initial 2003 fraud claims.
It is only recently, a year after the departure of Syrian troops, that the bank
files have been transferred to the Ministry of Justice for a proper
investigation into how the money was stolen and who benefited from the bribes.
Just a handful of bank documents have emerged, but they detail an impressive
pattern of corruption and fraud on the part of Syrian political and security
officials and their Lebanese allies.
Critical evidence of the extent of the money-laundering operation was
unintentionally revealed during an investigation by the U.S. Federal Bureau of
Investigation to ensnare an arms dealer with ties to the Islamic resistance
movement Hezbollah, based in Lebanon, which the U.S. and several other
governments consider a terrorist organization.
In 2004, U.S. prosecutors charged Naji Antoine Abi Khalil with attempting to
purchase and ship night-vision goggles and other military equipment from the
U.S. to Hezbollah. Khalil's ties to al-Madina's money-laundering operations came
to light when he bragged to agents and informants that he traveled the world
picking up cash to be delivered to the bank on behalf of Hezbollah and Russian
mobsters.
According to court papers, Khalil, who has since pleaded guilty, accepted
$100,000 to launder from agents as part of a sting and told them the single
biggest delivery he had made to the bank was $160 million in cash.
But those amounts pale when compared to the piles of cash laundered by Iraqi
officials and their partners in illegally gaming the UN's oil-for-food program.
Designed for humanitarian reasons to allow Iraq to sell oil through vouchers
that could be used to purchase food and medicine, the program became a hotbed of
corruption that Saddam and his loyalists used to earn illegal money. By the late
1990s, proceeds flooded the Middle East as favored allies of the regime received
coupons good for oil purchases at lower-than-market prices.
Investigations into the program found rampant corruption on the part of UN
officials, Middle Eastern government officials, and oil companies. The son of
Lebanese President Lahoud was implicated, as were other prominent Lebanese and
Syrian officials and businessmen. And al-Madina served as a place for them to
hide the proceeds.
Several sources, including one alleged conspirator in the oil-for-food scandal,
who refuses to let his name be used for legal and safety reasons, put the amount
transferred and laundered through al-Madina at more than $1 billion, with a 25
percent commission going to Syrian officials and their Lebanese allies. The
source says that among the recipients of this money were Bashar Assad's brother
Maher and the head of military intelligence in Lebanon at the time, Ghazi Kanaan.
(Kanaan committed suicide last October after Mehlis questioned him about the
plot to kill Hariri.)
To protect this operation, Koleilat had developed a network of graft that
shocked even a Lebanese society comfortable with questionable business dealings.
She threw dinners where guests received Rolex watches, and she gave luxury cars
to friends and officials. The graft was so widespread that one security official
described the parking lot of his office during that era as a "Mercedes
dealership."
Some bank records point to 155 pieces of real estate - villas, apartments,
hotels, and condos - purchased or distributed by Koleilat and her brothers. The
Koleilats also had five luxury yachts and as many as 194 cars and motorcycles,
not including the gifts to friends, associates, and greedy officials.
Koleilat and the al-Madina plotters needed protection and sought out high-level
officials who could help them, says a former employee of the Koleilat family who
witnessed many of their dealings.
The source, who requested anonymity because the matter is still considered
dangerous to discuss in Lebanon, says one of those was Jamil Sayeed, a former
director of Lebanese internal security, since arrested on suspicion of plotting
Hariri's murder. (Sayeed refused to comment.)
"Rustom Ghazali would receive money, cars, jewels, and hunting trips," the
source says. "People used to come and wait in the office. The big shots would
get checks; the lower people, like generals and officers, would get cash. This
situation went much higher than Ghazali. It was a way for Maher Assad and others
to profit from Lebanon and from the Iraq factor."
Several Syrian officials mentioned in the Mehlis reports can be tied to money
from al-Madina by documents supplied to FORTUNE by the bank's owners. Ghazali's
three brothers were issued four ATM cards linked to a fake account with a $2,000
daily limit for withdrawals, which they made each day from December 2002 to
January 2003, according to one document. One of the four cards had a total
yearly cash withdrawal of $8 million.
Ghazali's brother Mohammed also received a money transfer for $1,091,000 from
the bank on Jan. 20, 2003. Investigators and lawyers for the bank's owners say
that during these final months, Ghazali and other top officials decided that the
bank's failure was inevitable and acted quickly to drain the remaining monies.
One bank employee says that he witnessed Rustom Ghazali demanding a $300,000
payment just after the bank had been put under Central Bank management, a
payment approved by regulators.
Among the 155 suspicious real estate transactions flagged by investigators is
the transfer of an apartment valued at $2.5 million from the Koleilat family to
a friend of Maher Assad's office manager - a transfer the bank's lawyers say
they believe was intended to put it under Maher Assad's control. Lebanese
political and security officials say that the sealed documents show far more
money and property transferred to Maher.
"The entire file on Madina is now at the Ministry of Justice, except for the key
parts that implicate Maher Assad, which are still being held in the Central
Bank, because people are afraid of being killed over it," says Hamade, the
Telecommunications Minister. "While there is not the same level of threats, the
Syrian presence remains, and judges are very cautious about this case." (Efforts
to reach Maher Assad and the Ghazalis for comment through several Syrian
government agencies were unsuccessful.)
Other documents show transfers or transactions made by the bank to the benefit
of Lahoud's son - allegations he refused to comment on - and to Lebanese
security officials, including the four generals arrested last year on suspicion
of participating in the plot to kill Hariri. Current Finance Minister Jihad
Azour, a friend of Hariri's, insists that only today, with Syrian troops out of
the country, can Lebanon commit to a full investigation. And he believes fear of
such an investigation drove some of the murderers. "The risk of reopening the
file could have led to this murder," Azour says. "Al-Madina reached the biggest
people in Lebanon and Syria."Azour says Hariri wanted to pursue an investigation
into al-Madina and other cases of corruption and would have gone forward, even
knowing the danger.
"Hariri wanted this file to reach its conclusion," Azour says. "He was concerned
about the scandal's ramifications. It has a very negative impact on the status
of the Lebanese banking system. And it's important that the case be treated in
an extreme way to fix this perception."FEEDBACK fortunemail_letters@fortunemail.com
Sfeir backs riot victims demanding compensation
By Maroun Khoury -Daily Star correspondent
Friday, May 05, 2006
BKIRKI: Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir expressed his support of a
delegation from the advertising agency Team Holding Group (THG) in its request
to be compensated by the government for damages incurred to its property during
the Black Sunday Achrafieh Riots on February 5. THG's offices occupied the
floors below the Danish Consulate, and were severely damaged when demonstrators
sacked and burned the building during the anti-cartoon riots.
"Three months after the Achrafieh attacks, the Lebanese state has still not
compensated us for the damage done to our property, although it publicly
declared its readiness to deploy the necessary efforts in this regard," said THG
chairman Talal Makdessi. "We came to the prelate since we do not belong to any
party, militia or political side and after we had enough of the state's promises
and the policy of discrimination," he added.Makdessi went on to say that
government officials told him that the state is waiting for the report from a
British expert who was contracted to evaluate the amount of damages, despite the
fact that a committee from the Lebanese Army already submitted a report at the
government's request. The prelate criticized the government for depending on the
results of a non-Lebanese committee, "as if the Lebanese are no more reliable."
In addition to the state's failure to compensate THG, Makdessi also informed the
prelate that he and his employees have to vacate their temporary offices by the
end of May.
"Do we work from the street or add to the number of 100 new unemployed
families?" he asked. "Is the government trying to force us to leave our country
again after we returned to it and invested the money we've earned while working
in foreign counties? Does the government want to make us pay the price of its
failure in protecting the citizens' properties?"
The prelate expressed his sympathy for the delegation and his willingness to
approach the government on its behalf.
"We certainly have to claim our rights, but at the same time we have to support
the state and urge those who are capable of supporting it to do so," he said.
Hariri, Hamade, Jumblatt immune from Syrian
prosecutors... for now
By Leila Hatoum -Daily Star staff
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: MP Walid Jumblatt, who has been charged in Syria with incitement against
the government there, offered Thursday to help the Syrian opposition to
establish a democratic regime. "I tell the opposition that if it sees I could
serve its objectives in order to establish a democratic and free Syria, I am
ready," he told reporters. Jumblatt was referring to the controversy raised by
pro-Syrian groups in Lebanon after he received a delegation Monday headed by the
London-based spiritual guide of Syria's banned Muslim Brotherhood, Ali Sadr
Eddin el-Bayanuni.
Jumblatt said he signed a petition presented to him by the delegation for the
revocation of Law 49 in Syria. Adopted after the regime crushed Islamists in the
1980s, it stipulates the death sentence for those convicted of membership in the
Brotherhood.
"When I signed this petition ... I think I was serving a Syrian Arab citizen
seeking freedom."
Meanwhile, MP Boutros Harb said that it was "impossible for Parliament to revoke
the immunity of three of its MPs so that they can be prosecuted in Syria." Harb
was commenting on warrants issued by the Syrian judiciary last month against MPs
Saad Hariri, Jumblatt and Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamade. Another
warrant was also issued against anti-Syrian journalist Fares Khashan.Speaking to
The Daily Star, Harb said that the Lebanese Parliament is the "only rightful
authority to revoke the immunity of any MP."He said: "I expect Berri to reject
the warrants as it is impossible that Parliament agrees to revoke the MPs'
immunity."Harb said that according to "articles 39 and 40 of the Lebanese
Constitution, an MP has immunity ... and should not be legally pursued for his
political ideas."
He also mentioned a judicial agreement with Syria which states that litigations
should not contradict public order in either county. "In this case it breaches
the Lebanese Constitution regarding an MP's right to express his political
thoughts without being prosecuted," Harb said.
As for Khashan, who is not an MP and thus enjoys no parliamentary immunity, Harb
said he should be protected by "the Constitution's guarantee of freedom of
speech."Contacted by The Daily Star, Hamade described the subpoenas as "stupid."
He said: "We demand that Berri's reply comes in accordance with the Constitution
not only because we have immunity as MPs, but also because we are Lebanese
citizens and our Constitution guarantees us freedom of speech."
Hamade added: "I believe that Berri will take the right decision and the natural
answer would be that the warrants are null and void. After that we will demand
the Parliament to adopt a recommendation of strong words against this Syrian
attempt." - With agencies.
Soueid accuses FPM of war-era tactics in dividing
confessions
Daily Star staff-Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: Former MP Fares Soueid said Thursday that the Free Patriotic Movement
was "acting like the Lebanese Forces did during the war by treating Lebanon like
a federal state where confessions choose their representatives." In an interview
with Magazine to be published on Friday, Soueid said that the basic problem of
Christians does not lie in knowing the identity of the future president, "but in
securing the Christian presence in Lebanon through a state of law whereby both
Christians and Muslims live in peace and harmony."
MP Nabil Nicholas, a member of the parliamentary Change and Reform bloc headed
by MP Michel Aoun, said Thursday that participants in the Cedars' March 14
Forces meeting on Sunday "do not speak on behalf of all Christians in Lebanon."
He added that the deadline for the government "is over and it is time for the
people to demand their rights."
In an interview with the Central News Agency, Nicholas said "curtailing Aoun's
rise to the presidency is difficult because he represents 70 percent of the
Lebanese," and accused the March 14 forces of failing to fulfill their promises
"to anyone."
Meanwhile, Ali Faisal, a politburo member of the Democratic Front for the
Liberation of Palestine, said Thursday that Aoun "supported the Palestinian
people's struggle to determine their fate," calling for keeping human rights
issues for the refugees "away from internal bickering." - The Daily Star
Siniora denies any dispute with Maronite patriarch
'I will pay him a visit soon'
By Nafez Qawas - Daily Star staff
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: Prime Minster Fouad Siniora said Thursday there were no disputes between
him and the Maronite Patriarch, adding that he is expecting to see the prelate
"soon." Speaking after Thursday's Cabinet session, Siniora said: "I have a
continuous contact with Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir and I will pay
him a visit as soon as possible."
Siniora's comments came a day after the Maronite Bishops' Council complained
that a certain sect has been monopolizing power and providing employment to
groups of that sect, neglecting more qualified candidates.
Siniora also responded to Hizbullah's Secretary General Sayyed Hassan
Nasrallah's declarations of earlier Thursday that the issue of the sand-berms,
which were erected by Syria in Ras Baalbek and Ersal, was an old issue "totally
made up" by the March 14 Forces to cause tension with the Syrians.
However, Siniora said: "The sand-berms issue is new."
When asked if the May 10 demonstrations, called for by unions here, will be able
to topple the government, Siniora said: "Never, never. The Lebanese people are
mature and know how to put their economy on the right track. If they do not want
to, I do not have any problem."
Although President Emile Lahoud presided over the Cabinet session, there was no
confrontation between him and the March 14 ministers. The session focused on
administrative appointments in the National Social Security Fund as well as the
judicial dispute between the state and the former telecommunications company
LibanCell.
Energy and Water Minister Mohammed Fneish said: "Before making any appointment,
ministers should submit a thorough timetable of all the appointments. In turn,
Justice Minister Charles Rizk agreed with Fneish, saying that it would be "the
best way to eliminate the doubts of the Council of Maronite Bishops expressed in
Wednesday's statement that followed their monthly meeting with Patriarch
Nasrallah Butros Sfeir." Following Tuesday's extraordinary session, the Council
of Ministers convened at the Social and Economic Council in Downtown Beirut.
Ministers Joe Sarkis, Yacoub Sarraf, Ahmad Fatfat and Tareq Mitri refrained from
attending.
Addressing the journalists before the beginning of the session, Aridi said
regarding the draft law to organize the Druze sect: "Why are you highlighting
the law this much while many other laws were passed by Parliament and caused
more disputes?"
Aridi hoped it would not lead to any "perturbation among the Druze."Concerning
the issue of sand-berms, Aridi said: "Who saw the sand-berms on television,
found out that they were new, otherwise, why has the issue been raised today?"
In turn, Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamade said when asked if there was
an agreement over the draft law to organize the Druze sect: "MPs representing
the Druze have voted on the law, how can there not be agreement?"
Labor Minister Tarrad Hamade said that there wasn't any problem with the
National Social Security Fund appointments. "We will hold an extraordinary
session next Monday to discuss the issue," he said.
Lebanon needs reform, not reform talk
Commentary by - Daily Star
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Commentary by World Bank
The quarterly update released by the World Bank's Lebanon office last month
analyzed the progress of the much-needed economic and social reforms taking
place in the country. While the report praised the commitments demonstrated by
both the private and public sectors in 2006, the bank urged the political elite
to transform the dialogue of the past three months into action. The introductory
editorial argues that a concrete reform strategy is imperative both for the good
of Lebanon and in preparation for the upcoming Beirut I Donor Conference. The
state of Lebanon's electricity sector is but one example of the obstacles
impeding the countries' economic growth and must be remedied immediately by the
state.
While the national political dialogue moves forward, the political elite of
Lebanon should also focus on long-awaited social and economic reforms. The
demands of the private commercial and financial sectors, and the attempts of the
Minister of Finance to introduce the economic reform agenda into the dialogue,
are laudable efforts to remind the country's political elite of their
responsibility to jumpstart the economy and address neglected social needs.
Some observers have said that the social and economic reform dialogue is only
aimed at the expectations of a proposed Donors' Conference. But Lebanon needs to
undergo a reform process not for the sake of the international community, but
for its own sake, especially for the young generation. Indeed, the ultimate
challenge for Lebanon is to keep its young, talented and entrepreneurial
workforce at home rather than export it in return for remittances used for
consumption. The challenge is to give its young workforce hope and provide them
with opportunities to build and propel Lebanon into one of the strongest
emerging economies with its unique Lebanese branding - something hard to beat.
This will all require reform. "Reform talk" sometimes can get too esoteric, too
removed, too couched in technical jargon: debt to GDP, primary surpluses or
deficits, levels of reserve, etc. All of these are very important measures of
inherent strengths or weaknesses in the economy, which signal deferred costs to
society and short- to medium-term risks. But behind these esoteric terms are
real problems experienced by ordinary citizens every day. Solving practical
problems would demystify what is meant by "reform" and help build national
support for constructive economic programs for modernization and development.
An example is the power sector. This sector is responsible for many of Lebanon's
economic, fiscal, environmental and social woes, and it has also become a symbol
of the inability of successive governments to address a glaring example of
public sector failure. ElectricitŽ du Liban (EDL) is costing the country over $2
million per day in subsidies, while charging the highest tariffs in the region.
A recent World Bank survey of businesses (still unpublished) reveals that 94
percent of businesses with over ten employees have parallel power generators to
supplement the EdL supply (which was interrupted 220 times last year by EDL's
own estimate).
The necessary steps for reforming the power sector are obvious. Indeed, the last
three governments came up with very similar solutions, differing only in minor
details. There is agreement that EDL needs to be run efficiently - like a
business. It should be corporatized under the Commercial Code; a new board of
directors should be appointed, composed of members of high caliber and
integrity; and management capacity needs to be enhanced through management or
service contracts for specific operation and maintenance functions (including
bill collection and loss reduction). As these measures go forward, ways and
means of privatization can be considered. There might be legitimate questions
remaining as to the scope and speed with which private-sector participation can
take place. These are not ideological questions, but rather empirical ones
requiring immediate work on EDL's operations, and the testing of market appetite
for various forms of private participation.
Launching this process should not be delayed either for further breakthroughs in
the political dialogue or the convening of a Donors' Conference. The Lebanese
people are paying daily for the cost of these delays, through added national
debt, power outages, less competitive exports, lost jobs and a worsening
environment. The power sector is perhaps the most egregious, but not the only
sector in dire need of reform. The state of national health, education, solid
waste, social security, tax, business procedures and justice are all far from
what Lebanon aspires to, is capable of achieving and deserves. Individual
ministries' efforts can be heroic, but frequently lack the needed authorizing
environment (new laws), reforming procedures, selecting qualified personnel and
efficient implementation.
Now that important breakthroughs have been achieved on the political dialogue
front, we urge the leaders to bring social and economic dialogue in from the
cold and move to tangible actions which would bring hope to young Lebanese men
and women that they have a future in their beloved country.
European parliamentary delegation aims to help Lebanon
reform
By Daniella Matar -Special to The Daily Star
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: The head of the European parliamentary delegation currently visiting
Lebanon, EU MP Beatrice Patri said Thursday that the group comes as friends and
partners to exchange ideas on how Lebanon can bring about internal changes.
Following a news conference held at the Movenpick Hotel in Beirut, Patri said
that discussions with the various factions have enabled them to reach a
consensus on "the necessity for reform, the necessity for new institutions and
above all the necessity to normalize Syrian relations and find a solution to
disarming the resistance."
The group of parliamentarians is here on a five-day visit and has already
visited high-ranking political and religious figures, acting Interior Ahmad
Fatfat, head of the Loyalty to the Resistance parliamentary bloc Mohammad Raad,
president of the Free Patriotic Movement MP Michel Aoun, Economy and Trade
Minister Sami Haddad, Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt,
president of the Democratic Renewal Nassib Lahoud, Lebanese Forces leader Samir
Geagea and Social Affairs Minister Nayla Mouawad. They are scheduled to meet
with Speaker Nabih Berri Friday.
The delegation said they "were impressed by the frankness and extremely open
nature of discussions and were certain a number of action programs for reform
have been set up in both the economic and social sectors."
Patri said these programs have long been awaited by the Lebanese population
because there is an intense need for reform. She was here on March 14 and
realized the passionate desire of the population "to turn a new page in
Lebanon's history."
Patri said she recognizes Lebanon is taking steps toward reform and applauds the
national dialogue.
She said that the delegation's interest in Lebanon stems from the Association
Agreement between Lebanon and the EU, which came into force on April 1, 2006, as
well as from other partnerships such as the European Mediterranean Partnership
Agreement. Also Thursday, the European delegation visited Mouawad at her
residence in Hazmieh in the presence of EU Ambassador Patrick Renauld. Speaking
after the meeting, Patri said the visit aimed at "evaluating the development of
the Lebanese democratic situation." She added the EU and Parliament "support the
ongoing national dialogue as well as issues of social and economic reform."In
turn, Mouawad said: "The government fully respects the European partnership
accord and is trying to set a neighborhood accord with Europe."
Hezbollah lambastes U.S. for listing it as terrorist
group
The Hezbollah (Party of God) group of Lebanon on Saturday criticized the United
States for putting it in the list of foreign terrorist organizations, saying
that the list was made in accordance with unjust standards set by Washington.
The decision by the U.S. State Department just proves the correctness of
Hezbollah's stance and policy on fighting Israeli aggression and U.S. hegemony,
said Hezbollah in a statement issued on Saturday.
The statement said the one who deserves most to be put in the list of terrorist
organizations is the countries who support Israel's "terror acts," aggression
and occupation of Arab territories, and they should be put on top of the list.
It added the U.S. pressure on Hezbollah would have no effect on its stance on
fighting aggression and occupation, as well as on liberating the occupied
territories and safeguarding Lebanon.
Hezbollah has 14 seats in the 128-member Lebanese National Assembly, and two
government ministers are from the group.
In a recent annual report, the U.S. State Department listed Hezbollah, along
with al-Qaida and militant Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as
"active extremist and terrorist groups" in the Middle East.
Source: Xinhua
Syria denies State Department terror label
WASHINGTON, May 3 (UPI) -- The U.S. State Department has released its annual
"Country Reports on Terrorism" in which Syria figures as a State sponsor of
terrorism since Dec. 29, 1979.
A press release from the Syrian Embassy in Washington, D.C., however, points out
that the State Department's report "fails to recognize two major facts that have
induced the increase of terrorism in the Middle-East and worldwide."
The communiqué from the Syrian Embassy cites:
1. The invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq, which has fueled anti-Western
sentiments in the region.
2. The Israeli occupation of Arab lands, and continuous suffering and
humiliation of Palestinians and Syrians living under occupation. The Syrian
communiqué goes on to say that "The only way to eradicate terrorism lies in
dealing with the root causes of this phenomenon; simply put, ending all
occupations in our region. In the past, United States administrations realized
this fact and saved no efforts in trying to broker peace in the Middle-East.
Today, the United States is widely regarded as a major factor of instability in
this region." Syria furthermore denies charges that it has allowed infiltration
of jihadi fighters into Iraq across its borders. The Syrian Embassy blames the
United States for its "policies that are fomenting
Rice to Discuss Lebanon with Douste-Blazy as U.N. Plans
to Increase Pressure on Syria
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hopes to meet with her French
counterpart next week in New York to discuss the situation in Lebanon, the State
Department spokesman has said.
"We're trying to arrange a meeting between the two of them," Sean McCormack told
reporters Wednesday.
Rice and French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy are scheduled to attend a
meeting in New York on Monday of top diplomats from Britain, China, France,
Germany and Russia to weigh a response to Iran's disputed nuclear program.
A separate meeting on the Middle East with envoys from the European Union,
Russia, the United States and the United Nations is set for Tuesday. That
session may be followed by a possible dinner meeting between Rice and
Douste-Blazy, according to a State Department official.
A report by U.N. special envoy Terje Roed-Larsen has prompted interest in fresh
measures by the U.N. Security Council, McCormack said. "Certainly in the wake of
Terje Larsen's report, we think that some other measure through the Security
Council might be merited," he said. "We're going to talk to the French
government about that. We've worked very well together on this issue, and we
look forward to doing so in the future."France said last week that it was
preparing a draft resolution that would urge Syria to respond to Lebanon's call
for establishment of formal diplomatic ties between the two neighbors and for a
demarcation of their common border. An Nahar's Washington correspondent Hisham
Milhem reported Thursday that U.S., French and British envoys are discussing a
"strongly worded" U.N. Security Council draft resolution against Syria to press
it to implement Resolution 1559.
He quoted sources as saying that the draft resolution would "urge Syria to
cooperate with the council and the Lebanese government to implement 1559 in full
including demarcating the border, establishing diplomatic ties, and facilitating
the disarmament of armed militia." The sources said that the Lebanese government
is concerned about the possible inclusion or harsh language against Hizbullah in
the resolution which may increase tensions between the group and authorities.
Resolution 1559 among other things calls for the disarmament of all Lebanese
militias including Hizbullah. Top rival political leaders will discuss the issue
during the next national dialogue session, hoping to solve the matter internally
without any further international pressure.(AFP-Naharnet) Beirut, 04 May 06,
09:46
Lebanese Relief Expert Named U.N. Humanitarian Envoy to
Iraq
A long-serving Lebanese official with the U.N. refugee agency UNHCR has been
named Secretary-General Kofi Annan's Deputy Special Representative for Iraq.
Jean-Marie Fakhouri, whose new assignment will focus on humanitarian relief,
reconstruction and development in war-ravaged Iraq, was named to the post after
serving in the world's worst humanitarian crisis in Sudan. Fakhouri served as
UNHCR's Director of Operations, a position which required him to direct
activities of 840 agency staff in the region addressing the needs of Sudanese
refugees, returnees and internally displaced persons.
During his 25-year tenure at UNHCR, Fakhouri has managed other humanitarian
operations and complex emergencies, serving in various capacities both at the
Geneva Headquarters and in field locations such as Iraq. The 55-year old
envoy is fluent in English, French and Arabic. He succeeds Staffan de Mistura,
who held the post since January 2005. Beirut, 04 May 06, 11:28
Tension escalates again between Damascus and Beirut
by Youssef Hourany
Syrian roadblocks on Lebanese territory, arrest warrants issued by Damascus
against Beirut politicians, continued postponements of a meeting between the
President Bachar al-Assad and the Lebanese premier Fouad Siniora… all these
factors escalate tension between the two countries.
Beirut (AsiaNews) – Tension is on the rise again between Syria and Lebanon,
while the UN prepares to examine a report on execution of Resolution 1559, in
which the USA and France should present a plan that further hardens
international feelings towards Damascus. Syrian roadblocks in Lebanese
territory, arrest warrants issued by Damascus against politicians in Beirut,
continued postponements of the meeting between President Bachar al-Assad and the
Lebanese premier Fouad Siniora… these are all factors contributing to tension in
links between the two countries.
Officially prompted by the struggle against smuggling, Syrian roadblocks in
Lebanon are making trade between the two countries and towards other Arab
countries, like Iraq, very difficult, if not downright preventing it. In the
face of declared anticipation by the Lebanese prime minister Fouad Siniora to
meet Assad, the secretary of the Higher Council of Lebanese-Syrian Coordination,
Nasri Khoury, said the meeting was being prepared “with caution, prudence and
profound study, without any haste on the Syrian part.” Then there is the court
summons of three Lebanese leaders, with a seven-day ultimatum, by the highest
Syrian tribunal: Druze leader Walid Joumblatt, the minister Marwan Hamade and
the journalist Fares Khachan. And there are persistent attacks of the Syrian
press against the policies of the Lebanese government and the prime minister
Fouad Siniora, held to be “responsible for the deterioration in ties between the
two neighbouring countries and a mercenary of the American market.” The press,
strictly controlled, indicates “the path of sincere dialogue as the only way of
making Lebanon come out of its current crisis”, but it also talks about the
“risk facing Lebanon if its pursues this mistaken policy”.
The Maronite bishops also tackled ties between Syria and Lebanon in a statement
published at the end of their monthly meeting, held yesterday, under the
chairmanship of the patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir. The bishops called on the
international community to find a “just and lasting” solution to the Palestinian
problem, and expressed hope for the resumption of ties between Lebanon and
Syria, that should be based on “mutual respect and the sovereignty and
independence of both countries”. The statement criticized the latest measures
taken by the Syrian army on the Lebanese borders, a means of pressure that
“should not be implemented in this manner and that could be the cause of new
tension that could lead to further deterioration of ties.”
As for Lebanon’s domestic situation, the bishops launched a fresh appeal to all
leaders to respect Lebanon’s noble tradition and to resume the path of dialogue,
started on 2 March last.
The statement emphasises the urgency of finding a solution to all social crises,
owing to the gravity of the economic situation, calling on the government to
draw up a “project able to help the Lebanese people to emerge from the crisis
and to tackle the many challenges facing Lebanon”. The bishops also exhorted
leaders to respect the “social tissue of the country, to involve all Lebanese in
the reconstruction process” and they expressed hope of “respect of rights of all
religious communities in Lebanon in a harmonious and just way.”
The Maronite bishops also implored for the intercession of Our Lady of Lebanon
in this month of May, urging all Lebanese to look to this mother, “the only
protector of Lebanon, of its history and its religious communities.”
The Syrian-Lebanese War of Barriers!
Zouheir Kseibati Al-Hayat - 04/05/06//
Is it appropriate for brethren, who used to be more brotherly, to be dragged
into a war over soil, rather soil barriers? Guerillas and special units, who are
willing to fall as martyrs to shield the Lebanese or Syrian sovereignty are
involved in this war.
This question, which may be raised by the Syrians and Lebanese, may give rise to
another: which party first damaged the structure of fraternity; which, it is
said, Resolution 1559 sowed enough mines to blow it apart.
Is it right for two brethren, bound by Arabism (even if there are some who doubt
the possibility that Arabism could bind them forever), to have the US-dominated
Security Council act as arbitrator? The authority of this Council is granted by
the White House. It defends sovereignties and independencies that were, for
decades, easy targets for US interests around the world. But is it not Lebanon's
right to enjoy sovereignty - even though unable to defend it?
Does the "ethics" of those who outlined the Treaty of Brotherhood, Cooperation
and Coordination encompass giving the Judiciary a free hand to issue a subpoena
addressed to 'brotherly' minister or leader? The reference here is to Marwan
Hamadeh and Walid Jumblatt. Damascus preferred to associate their names with
acts of the past, an attitude which changed as if by magic. As the Syrian
brethren say: is it right for a leader to "conspire"? How else can you describe
the meeting of brethren? He prefers to ask: who started first?
Some examples may recall guerilla warfare; other examples highlight, perhaps in
the literal sense, a battle of the trenches! Would it come as a surprise if, one
day, such a battle flared up in many points of the undefined Lebanese-Syrian
border?
Undoubtedly, questions will be endless as long as the brethren's mistakes
continue to yield new ones. Damascus is forced into a tight corner by US-French
pressure. The response is directed towards Lebanon, which the parliamentary
majority in Beirut sees as one and complete entity, while the minority seeks
nothing more than to jump into the trenches dug by the Security Council under
daily US sponsorship; neither for the sake of the Lebanese, nor to uphold their
aspiration to a certain sovereignty.
Damascus is mistaken in refusing to receive Terje Roed-Larsen. It is as if it
were deliberately offering to the Americans and to the Security Council a golden
opportunity to give UN Resolution 1559 some sharp fangs, following a long grace
period for Lebanon and a trial period for Syria, from a US-French viewpoint. The
fangs may revive the battle to overthrow President Emile Lahoud, after the
Lebanese have failed to persuade him to step down; especially since a large
number of Lebanese are neither convinced of the reasons for removing him from
power, nor persuaded of the pretexts for a Security Council intervention and
what may be described as the composure of the Christian side.
The 1559 sharp fangs would also mean forcing Syria, which is infuriated with its
younger brother who enjoys US backing, to defy the United Nations (UN). In this
case, any UN resolution would bring the borders demarcation issue under the
auspices and supervision of the international organization; a situation which
would put an end to the 'guerilla' and 'trench' warfare!
Further fangs to bite into the Lebanese-Syrian brotherhood body. To make things
worse, more mistakes have been committed by Lebanon and Syria in 'good will'.
These mistakes took the form of hasty reactions, or seizing prematurely on what
they thought were ripe opportunities. However, it is absolutely understandable
for PM Fouad Siniora's government, or the parliamentary majority, to ask about
what may force Syria to accept demarcating the borders since it is actually
refusing the idea… Instead of demonstrating mutual good will, i.e. one step for
another, the gap is surprisingly widening.
Damascus has the right to question the Lebanese about their change of heart,
their 'compromises', turnabouts, and even their division over the resistance
movement that liberated South Lebanon from Israel; a movement that has become
the enemy of some of the Lebanese. What hurts the 'elder Syrian brother' is that
he cannot bring himself, after 30 years, to accept the notion that brotherhood
and sovereignty are not incompatible. Hence, Syria attempts to block what it
considers is an American roadmap for Lebanon. It has only one way to do it: It
must convince many Lebanese that it will give willingly what it would otherwise
have to relinquish under international pressure and resolutions; and it should
do this without fear of a conspiracy against it.
In Lebanon, it would be right to remember that it is a long way from Beirut to
Damascus. The distance will definitely not be reduced after demarcation, with or
without barriers. However, the question remains: how many sins will be committed
before mistakes are corrected?
Iraq-Iran: Exchanging Accusations of Terrorism
Hani Fahs Al-Hayat - 04/05/06//
Exchanging accusations is a resilient human nature displayed by both the
individual and the community. It was expected that political movements and
parties - being part of civil institutions - would care more to mitigate such a
destructive behavior. This behavior distorts facts through the overwhelming
tendency to demonize the other and glorify the self. However, these parties
worsened the situation and incurred all of us considerable losses. This exchange
of negative behavior is most dangerous when it has ideological, religious or
sectarian motives. This leads to 'Takfir' [claiming the right of declaring
fellow Muslims apostates] which usually ends with murder based on extremist
premises and ideologies that manage extremism with more extremism. Religious
ideology originates from, and moves toward, the absolute. Thus, many religious
people confuse the absolute with the relative, or raise the relative to the
status of the absolute. They see themselves as absolutely good and see the other
as absolutely evil. They are innocent; the other, guilty. This logic justifies
harming the other. They invoke fanaticism among their people in order to provoke
more evil and harm, and to drag the other into a similar or even more
detrimental behavior. What is even worse is that each party alleges that its
eliminatory and purgatory creed is a call to God. As a result, innocent blood is
shed under religious pretexts. We noticed earlier that the European Union was
established on the ideology of putting an end to religious wars that had lasted
for 500 years. However, we Arabs and Muslims still renew these wars amongst us.
This means that instead of being destroyed by the greedy, we are now to be
destroyed by the ambitious. The best example and indicator of the dangers we
face, is this daily exchange of accusations between the Sunnis and Shiites in
Iraq. These groups feel that they can only exist in an atmosphere of imbalance
and struggle. However, they cannot prevent moderation and transparency on the
two sides from striving to alter seditions. Yet, the sectarian discourse is the
most strident, nourished by daily bloodshed. Such discourse is doomed since it
incurs great losses that could banish moderation on the short term. The
propagator of this discourse is, and will always be, available as long as there
are narrow-minded people whose practical minds do not match their level of
scientific understanding.
The direct initiator of what I am writing here is something I heard from a
Muslim Iraqi leader whose faith and knowledge are beyond any suspicion. This
man, who is most eminent among the scholars of his doctrine, discussed the Iraqi
situation in a founding conference by the moderation trend, in an Arab capital.
He said a lot; most of his talk can be accepted and a great deal debated.
Consequently, he arrived at a minefield when he said: 80% of what is happening
in Iraq is a fierce resistance against the occupier, while 20% is military
actions against the Sunnis, few of which are against the Shiites. He then
generally alluded to the origins of terrorism, only mentioning Iran as a main
source of direct and indirect terrorism, either in a form that is purely Iranian
or that which is supported by Iran.
Here, some of the attendees started a sensible and peaceful discussion. They
believed that if this were true, then it needs a clear condemnation and an
effective treatment. This means that there should be detailed documents that
include incidents. One incident supported by modern authentication methods,
which can be controlled by using the rules and principles of the Hadith [Prophet
Muhammad's traditions], would be enough. One incident would be enough for a
condemnation that would be acknowledged by all but the arrogant and the
hypocrite.
Thus, everyone is required to stand firmly in the face of the flagrant
contradiction that most Iraqi and Arab Shiites are offended by the manner the
events in Iraq are handled by the two satellite channels: Al Aalam (The World),
and Al Manar (The Beacon). They believe that sometimes the channels'
performances show ambiguousness in their stance against the occupier, where they
ignore the Shiite position and flatter the Sunni one. One of the two channels is
purely Iranian, while the other is Iranian to a great extent.
Such a contradiction needs to be fully understood, because everyone knows
without a shadow of doubt that - although some disagree - Hezbollah, which is
considered by everyone an affiliate of Iran, is the fiercest opponent of the US
plan - the strongest opposition to Hezbollah.
The most salient part of the US plan for the region was confronted by armed
resistance which culminated in the liberation of South Lebanon. The result was
that Hezbollah became a US target. This in turn has led to ever-increasing and
serious debates in Lebanon, the region, and the world.
Perhaps it became known to everyone that the last months uncovered the strong
Iranian sway in Iraq. Some Shiites, or the majority of them, might express
reservations regarding this influence; however, there is an Arab and Islamic
consensus that the Iranian sway counters the US influence in Iraq and the region
as a whole.
Does this correspond to Iran's terrorism in Iraq, which is ultimately in the
interest of the occupation? We should note that a percentage of Iraqi Shiites
and others are angry with Iran in Iraq. They accuse Iran of encouraging
resistance without distinguishing between Sunni and Shiite resistance, and that
its support sometimes extends to Sunni parties accused by some Shiites of
practicing terrorism. Such accusations lack evidence.
Some Iraqi leaders insist on this issue, even though they have sensed that the
largely moderate and theologian Shiite wave in Arab countries does not asses its
relation with the Iraqi issue in this manner which only exists among extremists
that strike with remarkable severity in all the Arab countries, from the
Atlantic Ocean to the Persian Gulf.
*Mr. Hani Fahs is a Lebanese Writer
Lebanon Refuses Taiwan Leader's Plane
By BASSEM MROUE- Associated Press Writer
May 4, 2006, 9:08 AM EDT
BEIRUT, Lebanon -- Lebanon prevented the Taiwanese president's plane from making
a refueling stop in Beirut after China's ambassador complained to authorities, a
Lebanese official said Thursday.
China's envoy to Lebanon called an urgent meeting with Prime Minister Fuad
Saniora and asked him not to allow President Chen Shui-bian's plane to land, the
official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized
to speak with the press. . "Lebanon in this case had to respond positively to
the Chinese demand because of the good relations and agreements signed between
the two countries," the official said.
Lebanon does not have diplomatic ties with Taiwan, and it is eager to maintain a
good relationship with China because it wants the support of the veto-wielding
country on the U.N. Security Council, especially in disputes with Syria.
Officials at Rafik Hariri International Airport said "concerned security
authorities" told air traffic controllers to "inform the plane's captain...that
the plane is not allowed to land in Beirut for refueling." The officials, who
also spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak
to the press, did not elaborate.
Chen, on his way to Latin America, landed in the United Arab Emirates. It was
not clear if that decision was made after the Lebanese ban.
The Axis of Terror
Those still arguing that Iran poses no danger to the outside world should take
note of an article that ran on April 23 in London’s Sunday Times. The paper
reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took a breather from
uttering verbal threats against Israel to go on a trip to see what he could do
about putting those words into action.
Ahmedinejad visited Syria where he met one of the world’s most wanted terrorist
leaders — Imad Mugniyeh, the chief of overseas operations for Hezbollah.
Mugniyeh has an international rap sheet as long as your arm. He is wanted in
Argentina for the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish community centre in Buenos
Aires. And the Americans have a US$5 million bounty on Mugniyeh’s head for his
role in the suicide attack against the US Marine barracks in Beirut, plus the
torture and mutilation of the CIA’s Lebanon station chief William Buckley.
Analysts believe that the tete-à-tete in Damascus was a coordination meeting to
plan a global terrorism backlash if Iran’s nuclear facilities are attacked by
the US or Israel. After all, Teheran is the major source of Hezbollah’s
financial and military support. The mullahs have the right to expect a return on
their investment.
Just as worrisome is the headway that Iran is making in its quest to purchase
influence and power amongst Palestinians. Security analysts have long since
concluded that Palestinian Islamic Jihad is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the
Islamic Revolutionary Guards. And there is growing evidence that Hamas and the
Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades have found Iranian largesse too much of a
temptation to resist.
Intelligence also indicates that al-Qaeda has set its sights on getting its own
slice of the Palestinian terrorist pie. There are increasing reports of al-Qaeda
elements making their presence known in Gaza. And a substantial part of Osama
bin Laden’s latest audio tape decried Western opposition to the new Palestinian
Hamas government as evidence of a crusade against Muslims.
Ironically, Hamas displayed remarkable ingratitude for bin Laden’s supportive
statement, criticising the bombings in the Egyptian resort of Dahab, which most
analysts have attributed to al-Qaeda, as a crime. Perhaps this has more to do
with internal turf wars over political influence in the Palestinian community
than anything related to real principle. But it was ironic to see Hamas
representatives criticise the bombing of a restaurant tourist precinct as if
they hadn’t done precisely the same things themselves, and publicly supported a
similar attack in a Tel Aviv restaurant less than two weeks previously.
And throughout all this, direct Palestinian terrorism against Israel proceeds
apace. On literally a daily basis, gunmen are killed trying to cross into
Israel, and Qassam rocket launches, and even Katyushas, have become a matter of
grim routine. The Israeli army responds with artillery counter-battery fire
against the rocket launching sites, and the Palestinian residents of Gaza
continue their self-inflicted decline into the abyss of penury and societal
disintegration.
Meanwhile, Syria plays a key role connecting Iran, Hezbollah, and the
Palestinian terror groups. Israeli intelligence believes that it was the
Damascus office of Islamic Jihad that ordered the Tel Aviv bombing. Hamas too,
has its external headquarters in Damascus. And Hezbollah has acted as almost a
Syrian client militia, highly dependent on Syrian willingness to act as an agent
for transferring arms, expertise, and funds supplied by Teheran.
While none of these alignments are exactly new, the ascension of Hamas and
Iran’s growing regional belligerence create a new and much more dangerous
situation. Hamas is on record that it will never arrest members of any other
terror groups for attacking Israel, nor will it stop rocket attacks.
Essentially, the Hamas controlled PA is planning on turning the Palestinian
territories into a base for this axis of terror — Iran, Syrian Hamas, Hezbollah,
and Islamic Jihad, with possible assistance from al-Qaeda — to wage a constant
war on Israel.
Back in Israel, it’s coalition construction time, with all the untidy political
machinations that entails. New PM Ehud Olmert’s task is doubly sensitive, as he
seeks to construct a government that can implement his convergence plan to pull
back from most of the West Bank. He will need all the solidarity and expertise
he can muster, because he must implement convergence in such a way as to
preserve Israel’s freedom to control and respond to the ongoing efforts at mass
murder from Hamas and its "axis of terror" allies.
There is no reason to expect that Labor leader Amir Peretz will not be an
effective defence minister, as is currently being proposed, despite his lack of
military background. Many of his most succesful predecessors in the post, from
Levi Eshkol through Shimon Peres to Moshe Arens, were similarly purely civilian
leaders. But whoever is defence minister will need considerable help from the
prime minister and the many talented people in the leadership of both Labor and
Kadima.
Convergence and separating from the Palestinian population remains a good idea.
But it is time for friends of Israel abroad to recognise how much of a risk it
entails and find new ways to help. Hamas must either change its policies in the
ways the Quartet is demanding, or be cut off from the funding and arms needed to
turn their territories into a perpetual terror base. This is also just one more
reason that Iran must absolutely not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons, which
would allow the Revolutionary Guards and radical mullahs to support terror with
absolute impunity. And international apologetics for Palestinian terror must be
fought with as much vehemence as possible.
Convergence needs international support against the new "axis of terror" if it
is to lead, ultimately, to the stable two state resolution that both Israelis
and Palestinians deserve
Hezbollah from Sea to Shining Sea?
If the United States attacks Iran’s bomb factories in Natanz and Isfahan, will
Iran’s fanatics sic their terrorist proxies on us? Ahmadinejad has promised to
do so. And he has the track record to make it sound real. Hezbollah would be his
terrorist attack dog.
Frontpage Magazine has an excellent article by LTC Joseph Myers and Patrick
Poole called “Hezbollah, Illegal Immigration, and the Next 9/11”
In September 2002, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage described the
danger of the organization: “Hezbollah may be the A team of terrorists and maybe
al-Qaeda is actually the B team.” Hezbollah has been an Iranian terrorist arm
for twenty-five years, specializing in terror attacks in Lebanon, Israel,
Argentina. American military and CIA personnel have been targeted, and Jewish
civilians.
Now Hezbollah has infiltrated the United States mainland, according to FBI
Director Robert Mueller. The US has a large Lebanese Shiite community, and
terrorist moles can fit right in. Through his control of Hezbollah, Ahmadinejad
could set off some nasty terrorist strikes in this country. A few weeks ago
Ahmadinejad held a personal meeting in Damascus with the biggest terrror master
of them all, Imad Mughniyeh. We can guess what they talked about.
Myers and Poole quote NewsMax:
FBI Director Robert Mueller said this week that his agency busted a smuggling
ring organized by the terrorist group Hezbollah that had operatives cross the
Mexican border to carry out possible terrorist attacks inside the U.S. This was
an occasion in which Hezbollah operatives were assisting others with some
association with Hezbollah in coming to the United States,” Mueller told a House
Appropriations subcommittee during a Tuesday hearing on the FBI’s budget.
In a stunning revelation, Mueller admitted that Hezbollah had succeeded in
smuggling some of its operatives across the border, telling the House committee:
“That was an organization that we dismantled and identified those persons who
had been smuggled in. And they have been addressed as well.”
Hezbollah was responsible for the single most deadly terrorist attack against
the U.S. before 9/11 – the Oct. 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut,
which killed 243 U.S. troops.
In November, an al-Qaida operative who was on the FBI’s terrorist watch list was
captured near the Mexican border, housed in a Texas jail and turned over to
federal agents, according to Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas.
A confirmed al-Qaida terrorist, an Iraqi national, was held in the Brewster
County jail,” Rep. Culberson told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity. “He was captured
in Mexico. This was within the last six weeks. He was turned over to the FBI.”
The Frontpage Magazine article cites Tom Diaz and Barbara Newman in their recent
book Lightning Out of Lebanon: Hezbollah Terrorists on American Soil (Presidio
Press, 2005).
Diaz was the lead Democrat Congressional counsel on terrorism issues, and Newman
is an NPR/ABC News Producer—- not exactly fire-breathing Republicans, we can
guess. Yet they write flatly that
“active Hezbollah cells have been identified in Boston, New York, Newark,
Atlanta, Miami, Tampa, Charlotte, Louisville, Detroit, Chicago, Houston, Los
Angeles, San Francisco and Portland.”
You might call it Hezbollah from sea to shining sea.
So the next time you hear some demagogue rant against “Americans being
wire-tapped without warrants,” you might want to remind yourself of Hezbollah’s
crop of US moles, and say a little prayer:
I sure hope somebody on our side is wiretapping them.
James Lewis 5 02 06
The devil is in the details
Al Ahram. Serene Assir assesses the challenges facing the restart of the
Lebanese National Dialogue
Following a three-week interlude, the Lebanese National Dialogue was resumed on
28 April with the aim of coming to a consensus on the future of the presidency.
This time round, leaders had said early in April, if there was no agreement on
the issue, then the talks would move swiftly on to their final phase, in which
the armaments of Hizbullah would be discussed. Days on, the presidency
controversy continues to be far from solved, but there are strong indications
that even if President Emile Lahoud -- who is described by the anti- Syrian bloc
as constituting the last vestige of the Syrian occupation, which ended with the
withdrawal of 14,000 Syrian troops in spring 2005 -- were to remain at the helm
for now, the name-list for new potential presidents is near complete.
And there seems to be no shortage of names in the offing. In fact, a total of 12
Christian Maronites, in accordance with an unwritten code established ever since
French rule over Lebanon by mandate ended, are now being considered. Considered,
that is, following a Christians-only meeting held at the residence of Samir
Geagea, who heads the Lebanese Forces Party (LF) and who was released from
prison last year, having been absolved of his sentence for war crimes. Geagea
was reported as saying that the intentions behind holding such a meeting, from
which non-Christian leaders had been excluded, were not indicative of any form
of sectarianism, and that he remained above all faithful to the 14 March
alliance in the Lebanese political process, which includes prominent leaders
from other sects too. However, given that the president will ultimately be a
Maronite, Christian leaders thought it would be best to come up with a shortlist
internally first, in order to minimise the immediate danger of further disputes.
Not present at the meeting was former General Michel Aoun, who returned to
Lebanon last year following the Syrian withdrawal, after 15 years of
self-imposed exile in France. Commenting on the fact that the prominent Maronite
Christian leader, who in a surprise move allied himself with Hizbullah following
last year's parliamentary elections and thus broke away from the 14 March
coalition, had not been invited to the gathering, participants said that he
would not be welcome among them unless he abandoned Hizbullah and returned to
the anti-Syrian camp.
Nevertheless, Aoun's chances of making it to the top post in Lebanese politics
have by no means been dimmed -- or at least, not yet. For his name was included
in a list of candidates discussed with influential religious leader Cardinal
Nasrallah Sfeir and announced at the National Dialogue meeting Friday, alongside
11 others. Geagea was not, however, on that list.
It appears that even without Lahoud resigning, the anti- Syrian bloc is fast
moving towards achieving some kind of consensus of its own, in a sense to get
ahead. Pressure on the president -- whose term was extended under Syrian
pressure in 2004, some say unconstitutionally -- has all the while been building
up ever since the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri in
February 2005. He has so far, however, insisted that he would only resign if new
parliamentary elections were called first, adding that if his presidency is to
be deemed unconstitutional, then so should parliament.
Meanwhile, following what appeared to be an unbreakable deadlock for weeks on
end, the pace in Lebanese politics has been significantly sped up over recent
days. The key to get things going again, it seems, lay not so much in
concentrating on the dialogue process, but in politicians finding alternative,
more classical means to settle crises. The National Dialogue has now become
little more than a showcase for the media -- while real political decisions are
made elsewhere.
Among the factors contributing to the build-up has been the imposition of
ever-clearer pressure on Damascus by the United Nations, thus leaving the
anti-Syrian bloc with the option to discuss and create the future of Lebanese
politics at its own pace. Among the factors perceived by some to have added to
such pressure was the recent visit by Prime Minister Fouad Al-Siniora to
Washington.
While United States officials have openly supported the National Dialogue
process, Al-Siniora insisted that he went to Washington only to discuss means to
liberate the Shebaa Farms, an area whose identity is still controversial. A
peculiar development is that Walid Jumblatt, Druze leader and prominent ally of
the Saad Al-Hariri-led movement -- of which Al-Siniora is also a member -- has
insisted regularly that the Shebaa Farms are not Lebanese. But then again,
Jumblatt has been noticeably quiet over recent days, in comparison to moments
when his anti-Syrian statements were so inflamed that some feared he was simply
going too far. And in Syria, UN envoy Terje Roed-Larsen's call for an immediate
final demarcation of Syrian-Lebanese borders was rejected on the grounds of the
ongoing Israeli occupation of Shebaa.
Still on the cards is perhaps the most controversial subject of all, namely UN
Resolution 1559's demand that Hizbullah disarm. The National Dialogue seems to
be saving this issue for last, not least because it will no doubt cause major
splinters harboured by different groups in Lebanon against each other to
resurface. For Hizbullah, the suggestion that it should disarm is tantamount to
paving the way for Lebanon to be vulnerable to renewed Israeli aggression. For
the anti-Syrian bloc, Hizbullah's military capacity grants the Shia group
unnecessary powers. Leaders of the 14 March coalition have instead called for an
integration of Hizbullah fighters into the Lebanese army. New violations of
Lebanese airspace by Israeli jets this week caused uproar among various
political groups. Al-Siniora's plea in Washington for assistance in dealing with
Israel, where at least 2,000 Lebanese prisoners remain, included a request for
the US to put more pressure on its ally. Given that it increasingly appears that
the anti-Syrian bloc will be calling most shots in Lebanon, at least for some
time to come, one would hope that it recognises that a naïve relationship with
Washington is as good as a bad one.
MOUSSAOUI: WRONG COURT, WRONG DEBATE..
By Walid Phares
Should we be surprised by the watershed debate following Zacarias Moussaoui's
trial ending? Not really. The jury rendering of its recommendation is not
unusual throughout the American legal war with Terrorism: For the five years
court struggle to try al Qaida members and other terrorists in the US legal
structure hasn't been working. After the classroom, America's court room is too
alien to the conflict. In short Moussaoui's case is not the only one to display
a systemic crisis, all other cases did and will continue to do. My take on it,
as an analyst of past and future terror wars, can be simplified: The terrorists
are processed in the wrong courts and our debate on this legal process is the
wrong debate.
Let me be clear from the beginning: The issue I am raising is not about the
death sentence or life in prison sentencing. That part should have been the last
stage in the debate: The one that seals the sentencing logic, not the discussion
that makes the debate. The Moussaoui trial is not about the principle of common
criminal sentencing per se; it is about criminalizing Terrorism and its root
ideologies. Here are few points that make my analytical case:
1. Zacarias Moussaoui's personal life is not a main factor in determining this
particular mass crime, but one of the factors that could lower the punishment,
if incriminated. If he had a bad childhood or other negative factors that
affected his clarity of thinking, it should be considered as elements of
clemency in the case of extreme sentencing, but not the foundations of the case
evaluation. For 9/11 and the war it was part of, was not a personal vendetta by
M. Moussaoui against the US Government, but an al Qaida genocidal war against
the American people. This and other similar cases aren't a private affair
between individuals with some bad luck- and US policies with consequences on
national security. By his own admitting, M Moussaoui is a member, call him
Jihadist or not, of a Terrorist organization. He shouldn't be tried in a US
Court system designed to process common crimes instead of war crimes.
2. The victims of September 11, 2001 weren't selected by al Qaida, or even by
the perpetrators including Moussaoui- personally. The men, women and children
massacred throughout that day of infamy are the targets of a Terror war on
America not vandalism on two towers in New York and a large building in
Washington. Terrorism could have targeted other high rises and objectives in
different cities. The matter is not an individual vendetta between Moussaoui and
the 3,000 persons Mohammed Atta and his Jihadists have killed. America was
targeted as a nation for the purpose of genocide. As a massacred collectivity,
the victims of 9/11 belong to the nation not to their relatives. As individuals
the victims are profoundly mourned by all Americans and above all by their
survivors. So who tried al Qaida on behalf of the nation?
3. Moussaoui is part of machinery larger than himself. In the 9/11 planning
process, he is not a sole mechanism acting individually. He was executing orders
by al Qaida and had the intention of carrying them out. He is a nucleus that
fell behind, in a wider cell that moved forward. His relation to the massacre is
not pragmatic but mechanical. Hence the judicial process of finding out if he
caused or not, the process of specific deaths of 9/11 is not the issue: For he
has openly admitted, and it was proven, that he was part of the machinery put in
place to perpetrate the massacre. That he slipped, failed or missed his
opportunity is only one fact within a greater reality: his commitment to achieve
the mass-killing and his participation in a chain of event that led to it, even
if he didn't walk through the last part of the horror.
4. More seriously is the current system ability to process the Terror cases: Per
my own experience and open documents available, most of the players in a current
court room setting are often unable to absorb the density of the confrontation.
The Jury, made of ordinary citizens, generally do not comprehend the ideology of
the Jihadists, hence can't make a strategically educated decision, not on the
sentencing process but on the essence of the war crime at hand. US Judges are
highly capable of controlling the procedure in their court rooms but haven't
been enabled by the system to try a war with Jihadi terror, if not specialized
in Salafism, Khumeinism and other movement's strategies, thinking process or
even tactics. Prosecutors as well are thrown into battles of ideas beyond their
basic training. In the Moussaoui case, the jury asked for a dictionary, refused
by the judge. The question deserves an answer.
5. As for the defense lawyers, and I was one in the past, in the absence of
specialized courts, they would twist history and geopolitics to achieve a
legitimate goal: win their case. But instead of focusing on proving the
innocence of their clients and distancing him/her from the enemy, they tend to
defend the ideology of their client, putting themselves in the wrong side of the
war their nation is victim of.
These above five facts and many more to develop in the future constitute the
basis of US failure in the courts processing of Jihadism-related Terror cases.
What is needed for future successes is the following:
a. That Congress identifies the ideologies of the Terrorists. In the heels of
many congressional hearings which already produced significant bipartisan
consensus, as well as in several speeches by the President since last September,
the country not so far from identifying the missing link. Simply speaking:
educate the jury, the judges, the prosecutors and the defense attorneys, as to
who is the enemy and what is its ideology. The rest should flow as American
justice at its best, impartial and fair.
b. As in France and Spain, train Counter-Terrorism Judges. From Paris to Madrid,
these bright specialized men and women have all the tools they need to decide on
procedures deemed appropriate to prosecute and ultimately try the Terrorists at
war with democracies. A similar training could provide the Justice Department
with Counter Terrorism Prosecutors. In a sum, all players in the court room must
at some point be acquainted with what they will have to reflect on, in Terrorism
cases.
The debate on the Moussaoui case won't stop nationwide and beyond in view of the
progressive realization by most Americans and many citizens of other democracies
that this case will be a benchmark in the history of the judicial front with
Terror. Therefore, it is important to avoid Byzantine debates and reserve the
energies to the center of the crisis not its peripheries. Consider for example
how the martyrdom affair plays in the Salafist chat rooms: These Kuffars
(infidels) are easy to dupe, said a cadre in the al-Ansar Paltalk room few
months ago. All you have to do is to play their akhlaq (ethics) or lead them to
believe that we are busata (simple minded).
That's what Zacarias was able to achieve, alone against the whole American
political culture: First, he dramatized his personal life to the extreme,
leading some to believe that his past was the root cause for his violent
choices. While in fact the ideology that recruited him was responsible for the
Jihad he chose to practice. Second, he dramatized his stance to the limits by
threatening to throw himself into the death row and force the jury to retreat
into psychological guilt. Indeed, one al Qaida man, initial member of the 9/11
Ghazwa (terror-raid) single handedly outmaneuvered the jury, the court and
potentially the public. By transforming the judicial challenge into a debate
about death penalty and all the American psychological consequences that
follows, Zacharias Moussaoui deflected the attention from the real mammoth in
the courtroom: The ideology of Salafi Jihadism. Instead of trying the criminal
ideology he acted on behalf, America fell into the trap of struggling with
itself as a merciful or revengeful society.
Moussaoui feels he won all the way, even if he got life in prison. He played the
martyrdom card till his audience nauseated. He then played his personal life
card till he obtained the mitigating factor. He played it tight, close, and
smartly. His colleagues brought down towers five years ago, but Moussaoui
administered another type of strikes against his foes: Defeating them through
their own system.
What the court room in Virginia missed in its trial of the decade was the
factory that produced Moussaoui's mind. A life sentence is not necessarily a bad
choice in democracies, or the wrong message to send when needed, if the nation
the jury came from is enabled to cast a death sentence on the ideologies of
hatred.
**Dr Walid Phares is a Senior Fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of
Democracies in Washington and a Professor of Comparative Politics. He is the
author of Future Jihad. Dr Phares practiced as a defense lawyer in the 1980s and
served as an Islamic Fundamentalism Expert in terrorism cases in the US and
Europe after 2001.
Lebanese-American delegation in Beirut criticizes U.S.
interference in Lebanon's affairs
Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 03:30 PM [Kods Time]
Lebanese Prime Minister Foaud Saniora met with the heads of Lebanese- American
communities in Michigan at the Grand Serail during which he informed them of the
political situation and of the economic plans.
The delegation met several Lebanese showing their support to the resistance and
expressed the community's relief following the understanding document that was
forged between Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic movement. The delegation told
the US ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman of their opposition to the US
intervention in Lebanon's affairs.
Americans of Lebanese origin came all the way from the United States to Lebanon
to express their dissatisfaction with Washington's policy. The Lebanese-American
institutions in Michigan one of the biggest gathering of Lebanese and Arabs in
the United States oppose the US policy, saying it not just harmful to Americans
of Lebanese origin but to US citizens as well. The delegation met President
Emile Lahoud, parliament speaker Nabih Berri and Labor minister Trad Hmade,
during which they defended the Lebanese resistance and its weapons.
OSAMA SIBLANI, Lebanese-American Community said "We are with the Lebanese
resistance. Its' weapons is for the sake of liberating the Lebanese land and
defending Lebanon. The United States as a sole superpower should not put its
heavyweight behind a certain side against the other."
ABED HAMMOUD, Lebanese-American Community said "We stand with the resistance,
the side that protects Lebanon because we come from here, and we know what the
Israeli attacks are. I was not born in America, I lived here under the Israeli
shelling and I told that to the US ambassador. I told him you don't need to
explain to me and reassure me because you cannot do that."
The delegation was not just supportive of the resistance but also of the
understanding document forged between Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan
Nasrallah and head of the Free Patriotic movement MP Michel Aoun. Besides
labaling this document as a launchpad for a nationwide dialogue, they say it
left the Lebanese-American community at great ease.
OSAMA SIBLANI added "Lebanon was going through a crisis. It was aggravating, and
it could have taken the country into a civil war if it weren't for the awareness
of the officials mainly his eminence Sayed Hasan Nasrallah and General Michel
Aoun. Their meeting on February 6th which produced the understanding document
cast a sense of great relief among the Lebanese immigrants."
ABED HAMMOUD also said "Of course we went through the Understanding document and
we told its opponents if you want dialogue then why were you bothered from this
document. They said it is about Hezbollah and being put on the terrorist list.
Just like Mr. Osama said: your viewpoint of Hezbollah differs from ours."
The visit comes as the US warned its citizens from traveling to Lebanon for
security reasons. But the delegation had informed the US state department of
their visit and told the officials there and the US ambassador to Lebanon
Jeffrey Feltman of their position from the US policy.