LCCC ENGLISH NEWS BULLETIN
October 09/06
Biblical Reading For today
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 10,2-16.
The Pharisees approached and asked, "Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife?" They were testing him. He said to them in reply, "What did Moses command you?" They replied, "Moses permitted him to write a bill of divorce and dismiss her." But Jesus told them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother (and be joined to his wife), and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, no human being must separate."In the house the disciples again questioned him about this. He said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery." And people were bringing children to him that he might touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. When Jesus saw this he became indignant and said to them, "Let the children come to me; do not prevent them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Amen, I say to you, whoever does not accept the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it."Then he embraced them and blessed them, placing his hands on them.
Release From SOLIDA
Repressive measures against SOLIDA- E/F 09.10.06
Free Opinions
The Guardianship and the 'Obstructing Third'. By: Abdullah Iskandar Al-Hayat 09.10.06
Latest New from miscellaneous sources for October 09/06
Berri Seeks to Stunt Shiite-Sunni Clash on Landmark Visit to Saudi Arabia-Naharnet
Construction, Repair Delay Return of Students to Public Schools-Naharnet
Casualty Toll from Israeli Bomblets on the Rise-Naharnet
German Magazine: Hizbullah's Rockets Could Reach Turkey-Naharnet
Siniora warned Nasrallah: We'll end up like Gaza-Ynetnews
Inside Hezbollah, Big Miscalculations-Ya Libnan-Lebanese PM Won't Resign-All Headline News
Hezbollah may attack -- experts-Monsters and Critics.com
Hezbollah gets medium-range missiles, German magazine claims-Monsters and Critics.com
Israel's State Comptroller assigns team to probe Israel-Hezbollah-People's Daily Online
Is Aoun a reformer or trouble maker ?Ya Libnan - Beirut,Lebanon
Nasrallah's Popularity Fading-ShortNews.com
Hezbollah Rejects Monopoly of One Group over Lebanon-Fars News Agency
Syria: Sunnis converting to Shiites in homage to Nasrallah-Ynetnews
Lebanese PM appeals on the UN to stop Israeli violations-Monsters and Critics.com
Lebanon's Speaker Says UN Should Stick To Mandate-All Headline News
Israel: No intention of attacking Syria-Israel Today
Beilin Attacks PM Olmert's Position Regarding Syria-Arutz Sheva
Nasrallah’s Waning Popularity
By Olivier Guitta
FrontPageMagazine.com | October 6, 2006
On the evidence of a massive demonstration of Hezbollah supporters in South Beirut on September 22, one might conclude that the terrorist army's commander, Hassan Nasrallah, is surfing on a wave of popularity.
But things are not as they appear. First, the “rent-a-crowd” tactic is well known in that region of the world and does not necessarily translate into popular support. Furthermore, scores of these demonstrators came from Africa and Iran. Nasrallah’s popularity, in other words, may not be a homegrown phenomenon. Reinforcing that view is the fact that voices of dissent are starting to rise. A recent L’Orient Le Jour poll shows that the majority of Lebanese, 51 percent, want Hezbollah disarmed. Similarly, the French daily Le Figaro cited a stunning statistic: 47 percent of Lebanese do not think that Hezbollah won this summer's war against Israel. While one might have expected the reversal of fortune of Nasrallah's movement among Christians and Sunnis, what's most surprising is that he is being attacked by some major figures in the Shi'ite community. One is the very well-respected mufti of Tyre, Sayeed Ali Al Amin. Like Nasrallah, he is a descendant of the prophet. In 1983, he was one of the original founders of Hezbollah. Yet he has been very vocal in attacking Nasrallah for what he calls “his illegal war against Israel.” Of that war, al-Amin has said: “Not only did Hezbollah not win the war but it was wrong to start it, Hezbollah has violated international resolutions and the Blue line [the border with Israel]. This kidnapping operation of the two soldiers was neither legitimate nor necessary.”
Al Amin's outspoken opposition has drawn notice. A headline in the An Nahar daily recently announced: “Ali Al Amin denies Amal and Hezbollah the right to speak for all the Shias." He has also vehemently criticized Hezbollah’s allegiance to Iran, which dearly cost the people of South Lebanon: “It’s not because Hezbollah has excellent relations with Iran that it’s the same for all Shias. Their allegiance should be to the motherland.”
Significantly, this is not the first time that al-Amin has challenged Hezbollah on its home turf. Following the Israeli withdrawal in 2000, al-Amin urged the Lebanese army to fill the security void in the south instead of Hezbollah. Then, three years ago, al-Amin started a group composed of about 100 Shi'ite intellectuals to call for reform and propose an alternative to Hezbollah. Although the initiative did not last -- members were physically threatened and the group failed to attract Western support -- it demonstrated that not all Lebanese Shi'ites march in lockstep with Hezbollah.
Other Shi'ite personalities, too, are finally speaking out. For instance, the academic Mona Fayad recently wrote in An Nahar that Shi'ites “are a people of heroes who know only one thing: to sacrifice themselves.” Vibrant testimonies are echoing this new rebellion against Hezbollah: the French Libération interviewed Habib, a Shi'ite living in the South, who asked: "What did we gain? Hundreds of dead and destroyed houses. The winners are Syria and Iran; they manipulate us, it’s like they have the remote control. The others are mum because they are scared of not getting the financial aid from Hezbollah.”
Another major leader of the Shi'ite community, Ahmad Al Assaad, went further in criticizing Hezbollah. In a speech on September 17, he said: “Lebanese Shias are in danger because of the policies followed in their names. Without the money and the weapons, they could not speak in the name of all the Shias. Shias do not want to suffer anymore; they want to get rid of the culture of death.” Little by little, some in the Shi'ite community are rebelling against Hezbollah. At the same time, a Shi'ite political heavyweight, Nabih Berry, is gaining popularity in his community. Berry is the head of the Amal movement, which has traditionally been the rival Shi'ite movement to Hezbollah, but has been politically marginalized by Hezbollah since the early 1990’s. Now, for the first time in years, green Amal flags are outnumbering Hezbollah’s yellow banners in some southern villages. Some young people had never seen that green flag before. This may turn out to be a rebirth of Amal. What is more, if Amal really gains traction among Shi'ites with its more moderate views, it could mean real political trouble for Hezbollah. By attacking Israel, Nasrallah recently admitted, he committed his first major mistake. It may yet turn out to be fatal.
For Assad as for Milosevic
Posted on 10/7/2006 9:37:40 AM
Ahmed Al-Jarallah
By Ahmed Al-Jarallah
Editor-in-Chief, the Arab Times
AS the formation of an international tribunal to probe the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Al-Hariri will soon become a reality, the Syrian regime wears a terrified look, lives in a state of fear, adopts confusing decisions and the international community has lost trust in the Syrian leader. By claiming the regime has nothing to do with the assassination of Hariri, Syria is now doing its best to come out of the international tribunal’s nightmare even if it means helping to bring down the Lebanese government of Fuad Al-Siniora to form a new government to include its allies.
In the name of a national unity government, Syrian is using its influence to bring into the Lebanese government fold Hezbollah and Michel Oun claiming the present government does not represent all segments of Lebanese people. These sorts of silly attempts by Syria and its allies in Lebanon to bring down the current government, which is supported by a majority of the Lebanese, will in no way prevent the formation of an international tribunal.
These silly attempts will only make temporarily ripples but will not achieve their goals. Syria’s influence and power in Lebanon is not greater than Iran, which used all possible means to keep the world attention away from its nuclear file. Next week Iran will be referred to the UN Security Council for failing to respect the will of the international community and the world body is expected to slap economic and political sanctions as punitive measures.
While Iran unsuccessfully used all its trump cards to keep its nuclear program going, what trump cards does Syria have to prevent the formation of an international tribunal? It is not surprising the Syrian regime is fast losing control because of its failure to bring down a majority-supported government in Lebanon. It is now accusing Saudi Arabia of pursuing fundamentalist terrorists who recently attacked the US embassy in Damascus.
This sort of crazy, childish behavior, has increased the isolation of the Syrian regime. The regime should have admitted its involvement in the attack on the US embassy instead of killing prisoners — which it wanted to get rid of long ago — and blaming them of attacking the embassy, just like how the regime produced Abu Addas out of the blue to claim responsibility for Hariri’s assassination. These events were tailored by the Syrian regime to come closer to America and win Washington’s trust. The Syrian regime’s fear of the formation of an international tribunal is the reason why Syrian President Dr Bashar Al-Assad looks worried and confused because he is aware he is wanted by the international community and will face the same fate of Serbia’s dictator, Slobodan Milosevic who was tried for war crimes. After one week Iran will be summoned by the UN Security Council and the leader of the Syrian regime will be summoned to the international tribunal a few weeks later. The outlaw regimes which have committed ugly crimes against humanity will not escape justice.e-mail: ahmedjarallah@hotmail.com
The Guardianship and the 'Obstructing Third'
Abdullah Iskandar Al-Hayat - 08/10/06//
The Lebanese Cabinet of Ministers has taken two major decisions since the formation of the government led by Fouad Siniora. The first one was the approval of the International Tribunal to look into the assassination of PM Rafik Hariri. The second was the approval of Resolution 1701. These two decisions have put Lebanon at a major crossroad. Both decisions followed a series of procedures implemented by non-Lebanese forces and parties, and under the complete cover of the Security Council. The International Tribunal will be based on the detailed report of Brammertz's commission, which is more and more oriented toward linking the assassination of PM Hariri with other attempts and the 14 other murders that Lebanon has witnessed. This means that the investigation committee will continue to delve deeper into the security and political conditions in which these acts took place. In order for the commission to reach certain results and irrefutable evidence before the International Court, it will be obliged to thoroughly examine many files and records, including those concerning local forces, especially Hezbollah's, the strongest among them.
For this reason, the ministers belonging to Hezbollah have expressed their reticence about some of the commission's functions. Additionally, the party also believes that the commission's work will unconditionally put the Movement's structure and its other organs under international guardianship, knowing that the function of the international commission comes under Article 7, which is binding.
On the other hand, Siniora's government believes that Lebanon's weak capacities and a possible ramification of the responsibilities for the killing of PM Hariri do not allow the Lebanese investigation to unravel all the aspects of the issue. Indeed, even if it did, it would not be able to carry out the required trial. Therefore, this Resolution was believed to help the State strengthen its sovereignty through the International Tribunal and without any local or regional pressure.
Resolution 1701 authorizes the international forces to keep peace in Southern Lebanon, in order to prevent any further contact between Hezbollah and Israel. The party considers this mission as an international mandate which places the military situation in the South under international control. But the government, which is striving to return to the truce agreement with Israel, thinks that this international presence supports the plan of the former and will enable it to regain its sovereignty on the ground, the sovereignty it has lost both because of Israel's violations and Hezbollah's armed presence.
At a time when Hezbollah describes this international presence as putting Lebanon under international protection and custody, the government affirms that it reinforces its sovereignty and integrity in making decisions. This is, in essence, the impasse Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah talked about in his 'victory speech'. The Shiite leader accuses the Lebanese government of being behind this guardianship and consolidating it, because the delegation of the international tribunal into the killing of PM Hariri, and the UNIFIL mandate are linked with the decision taken by the Cabinet of Ministers. The party lays the responsibility for this guardianship on the government, and depicts the situation as if the government strove to obtain this guardianship. By this accusation, which resonates in all the declarations made by the party's leaders and their allies, he pretends to forget, very simply, that this government was not in power when PM Hariri was assassinated. It was formed after the event through the influential popular conviction that this was a crime. In addition, this logic also pretends to forget that UNIFIL was a result of the wide military confrontation between Hezbollah and Israel, in which the government had no role.
Siniora's government may be criticized for a lot of decisions. But imposing international guardianship on Lebanon is the responsibility of those who were behind the assassination and caused the International Tribunal to be established. Also to blame are those who ignited the Southern front, leading to the adoption of Resolution 1701. Today, the party and its allies are striving to thwart the government's support of the two international resolutions, under the pretext that these were the resolutions that led to international guardianship, not the original event that led up to them.
This is the meaning of the demand for the 'obstructing third' in the Cabinet of Ministers. The execution of this demand relies on the formation of a new government under the pretext of conformity, with the knowledge that the issue of the 'suspended third' is the negative concept of a government's function, and that it is proposed only in extreme cases. Eventually, voting on the basis of a two-third majority will be the last judgment. Hence, in this sense, the 'obstructing third' is a mechanism for making decisions by the Cabinet of Ministers in the framework of a government in which all members abide by the guidelines of the government's program. However, demanding this 'obstructing third' from a position of radical differences, and from a position where there are attempts to push the government's function toward the opposite direction, could become a target in itself, and could be equivalent to a peaceful coup in the best of circumstances.
Siniora warned Nasrallah: We'll end up like Gaza
Hizullah official told Lebanese prime minister, 'it will calm down in 48 hours,' but latter was skeptical. Washington Post revisits events leading to war as they unfolded, depicting tensions behind the scenes in Beirut
Ynet Published: 10.08.06, 12:34
Hizbullah miscalculated the extent of Israel 's reaction to the abduction of the two Israel Defense Forces soldiers, according to an article published Sunday in the Washington Post. The article claims that in the events leading up to the war and during its infancy the organization made a series of miscalculations. Among these: Promises made by organization heads to Lebanese government officials that the conflict would be short lived and would end quickly and the failure to evacuate the civilian population of southern Beirut. The article detailed how events unfolded, starting with the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev on July 12th. Shortly after their abduction Lebanese PM Fouad Siniora summoned Hussein Khalil, an aide to Hassan Nasrallah , to his Beirut office. "What have you done?" asked a riled Siniora. Khalil tried to calm him, guaranteeing him that "it will calm down in 24-48 hours."
But Siniora was skeptical, he reminded Khalil of what was happening in Gaza ever since Palestinian gunmen abducted IDF soldier Cpl. Shalit; attacks on Gaza's infrastructure including a power station, roads and bridges. But Khalil calmly assured him that "Lebanon is not Gaza."
The reality, however, would prove to be different. "They were prisoners of their assumptions," said Nizar Abdel-Kader, a retired Lebanese general, told the Washington Post. The outcome of the war highlighted both the strengths and weaknesses of Hizbullah.
The organization misjudged the Israeli response but thanks to its well prepared infrastructure – the result of years spent digging tunnels, upgrading and positioning weaponry and carrying out surveillance operations along the border - Hizbullah survived the war.
"We were prepared because we always knew that the day would come when we have to fight this war," Hussein Hajj Hassan, a Hezbullah member of parliament told the Post. "We also knew that God was with us. He was with us."
Hizbollah promises to defend Lebanon
The paper reported that early in June Hizbullah leader Nasrallah came to the Lebanese parliament in an attempt to convince them to refrain from disarming the organization – a demand brought on by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559 from September 2004.
Nasrallah stated that it is best for his organization to stay armed so that they could help defend Lebanon in the case of a conflict with Israel. According to Nasrallah, leaving the organization as it is would help maintain the "balance of fear" between the two countries and provide support for the Lebanese army which cannot handle the Israeli army. When legislators demanded explanations from Narallah in an additional session which took place on June 29th the Hizbullah leader said, "I can reach Haifa and beyond Haifa," Marwan Hamadeh, the telecommunications minister and a critic of Hizbollah told the Washington Post. Israel would not risk a Hizbullah missile attack, Nasrallah added, which could strike sensitive facilities and heavily populated areas.
At the time, much of Nasrallah's words were hypothetical and parliament felt secure that Hizbullah would not ruin the Lebanese tourist season, one of the country's main sources of income. "He said this summer would be a quiet summer," Hamadeh told the Post. "He said all the actions they would do would be reminders of their (Hizbollah's) existence.""It didn't draw the attention of anyone at all," Said parliament member Boutros Harb, "he mentioned it like you'd write in the margins of a text." According to former UNIFIL spokesman Timor Goksel Hizbullah "might have been surprised by the Israeli response, but they were prepared for it." He told the Post that the weaponry used by the organization during the war was already deployed on the ground, ready for action. Almost three months later the war broke out. Hizbullah's timing still remains a mystery, according to Goskel.
They don't attempt adventures. They're not adventurous types," he said, explaining that they take into account what any operation would mean for Shiites, what it would mean for the party, what it would mean for Lebanon and what it would mean for Syria.
Inside Hezbollah, Big Miscalculations
Sunday, 8 October, 2006 @ 7:40 AM
By Anthony Shadid
Beirut- The meeting on July 12 was tense, tinged with desperation. A few hours earlier, in a brazen raid, Hezbollah guerrillas had infiltrated across the heavily fortified border and captured two Israeli soldiers. Lebanon's prime minister summoned Hussein Khalil, an aide to Hezbollah's leader, to his office at the Serail, the palatial four-story government headquarters of red tile and colonnades in Beirut's downtown."What have you done?" Prime Minister Fouad Siniora asked him.Khalil reassured him, according to an account by two officials briefed by Siniora, one of whom later confirmed it with the prime minister. "It will calm down in 24 to 48 hours." More technocrat than politician, Siniora was skeptical. He pointed to the Gaza Strip, which Israeli forces had stormed after Palestinian militants abducted a soldier less than three weeks earlier. Israeli warplanes had blasted bridges and Gaza's main power station.
Calmly, Khalil looked at him. "Lebanon is not Gaza," he answered. What followed was a 33-day war, the most devastating chapter in Lebanon's history since the civil war ended in 1990, as Hezbollah unleashed hundreds of missiles on Israel and the Israeli military shattered Lebanon's infrastructure and invaded its south. Nearly three months later, parts of the country remain a shambles and tens of thousands are still homeless as winter approaches.
In speeches and iconography, Hezbollah has cast the war as a "divine victory." But a reconstruction of the period before and soon after the seizure of the soldiers reveals a series of miscalculations on the part of the 24-year-old movement that defies its carefully cultivated reputation for planning and caution. Hezbollah's leadership sometimes waited days to evacuate the poor, densely populated neighborhood in southern Beirut that is its stronghold. Only as Israeli warplanes began reducing the headquarters to rubble did they realize the scope of what the Israeli military intended. Hezbollah fighters were still planning to train in Iran the very month that the soldiers were seized; Hezbollah leaders in Beirut had assured Lebanese officials of a relatively uneventful summer. "They were prisoners of their assumptions," said Nizar Abdel-Kader, a retired Lebanese general.
The outcome of the war, still a matter of perceptions, reveals both the strengths and weaknesses of Hezbollah, perhaps the world's best-organized guerrilla group. The movement, even by the admission of its leaders, misjudged the Israeli response. But by virtue of its complex infrastructure and preparations -- years spent digging tunnels, positioning weapons, upgrading its arsenal and carrying out surveillance along the border -- Hezbollah survived.
"We were always prepared because we always knew that the day would come when we have to fight this war," said Hussein Hajj Hassan, a Hezbollah member of parliament. "We also knew that God was with us. He was with us."
Timur Goksel, a former spokesman and adviser to the U.N. peacekeeping force in Lebanon, put it more bluntly: "Hezbollah did not expect this response, but they were ready for it."
The Militia as Deterrent
On March 2, to great fanfare, leaders from across Lebanon's fractured political landscape began what was hailed as a National Dialogue. It drew together implacable foes: Walid Jumblatt, the chieftain of the Druze sect, sat across from Hasan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's leader; the two regularly traded thinly veiled insults. Michel Aoun, the most popular Christian leader, sat with Saad Hariri, a political novice who derives clout as the son of a former prime minister slain in a car bombing in 2005. For months, they tackled issues that threatened to tear the country apart: relations with Syria, the presence of armed Palestinians and the future of the isolated, pro-Syrian president.
Last on the agenda were Hezbollah's weapons.
Backed by France and the United States, U.N. Resolution 1559 was passed in September 2004. Under it, all militias in Lebanon -- diplomatic phrasing for Hezbollah -- were supposed to disarm. Five months later, Hariri's father, Rafiq, was assassinated, setting in motion events that forced Syria's withdrawal from Lebanon after a 29-year military presence. Deprived of the cover of one of its two main allies -- Iran is the other --Hezbollah was left relatively isolated, and its weapons became an even more pressing issue in a country whose sectarian tension was as pronounced as at any time since the civil war began.
Virtually no one expected the Lebanese army and its meager, outdated arsenal to disarm Hezbollah, which has cultivated broad support among Shiite Muslims through a variety of social services, political representation and a language of empowerment that resonates with the community's long sense of disenfranchisement. Only consensus could reach a solution short of strife.
On June 8, at the parliament building on place de l'Etoile, amid a security blanket that shut downtown, Nasrallah offered his defense at the National Dialogue. Dressed in clerical robes and a black turban, he spoke for more than an hour, participants recalled. Lebanese often remark on Nasrallah's highly organized speaking style; this speech was no different. Point by point, confident and determined but not arrogant, he explained why the militia -- what Hezbollah calls the Islamic resistance -- should retain its arms, from guns to thousands of missiles.
First, Nasrallah said, it provided a cover to the Lebanese state; in any battle with Israel, Hezbollah would suffer the consequences of Israeli reprisals, not the rest of the country. Second, Hezbollah had created a deterrent -- in the words of one participant, "a balance of fear and terror." Third, he said, the Lebanese army alone was not enough to protect a border that Israeli routinely violates by air and sometimes by sea.
In that session and the next on June 29, Hezbollah's critics at the dialogue questioned, sometimes sharply, the supposed balance of terror.
"I can reach Haifa and beyond Haifa," Nasrallah was quoted as answering them, according to Marwan Hamadeh, the telecommunications minister and a critic of Hezbollah who took part in the dialogue. Israel would not risk a Hezbollah missile attack, Nasrallah added, which could strike its petrochemical industry and the northern third of the country, including some of its most populated regions.
"He considered his potential threat as his deterrent," Hamadeh said, "that Israel would not escalate."
At the time, much of the talk was hypothetical. Participants were put at ease by what they took as Nasrallah's reassurance that nothing would disrupt the crucial tourist season, one of the Mediterranean country's lone patches of economic vitality. "He said this summer would be a quiet summer," Hamadeh recalled. "He said all the actions they would do would be reminders of their presence."
But almost as a footnote in Nasrallah's speech was a reiteration of a promise he had made many times before: the need to capture Israeli soldiers as leverage to win the release of three Lebanese prisoners. Hezbollah had tried before, in November 2005.
"He didn't say it to take approval," said Boutros Harb, a member of parliament, who sat three seats away from Nasrallah. Harb flicked his wrist in a flippant gesture. "He mentioned it like you'd write in the margins of a text."
"It didn't draw the attention of anyone at all."
Preparing for Ground War
Goksel, the former spokesman for the U.N. force, has watched Hezbollah's evolution since its incarnation in the wake of Israel's devastating 1982 invasion of Lebanon. He recalled an incident in 2001-02, more than a year after the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon. In two locales near the border, Khiam in the east and on the road to Naqoura on the coast, Hezbollah brought out excavation equipment and trucks, hauling away dirt. Men hung around, looking suspicious. And over as many as six months, in plain sight, tunnels were dug into the limestone of rugged southern Lebanon.
"We were meant to see these things," he said. "They were not making any effort to stop us looking."
At the time, he said he now believes, Hezbollah, farther from view, was digging other tunnels around Labouna, Aita al-Shaab and Maroun al-Ras, all along the Israeli border, that they employed for ambush and cover in combat to sometimes devastating effect during this summer's war.
"Looking back, they really fooled us on that one," Goksel added.
While Hezbollah's missiles were supposed to deter an all-out Israeli assault, the movement, by its own admission, also began preparing for a ground war almost from the day Israeli forces left in May 2000. Most of the militiamen were drawn from their villages and kept their weapons at home. Abdel-Kader said the town or village became the unit of defense, where other arms were stashed. The towns, in turn, were organized into three or four sectors, with a regional command.
"All the weapons were in the right place," he said. "They didn't need to mobilize."
Elias Hanna, another retired general, said the arsenal was updated over the past two years. In addition to rockets, anti-tank weapons were ferried through Syria; their use required at least some degree of training and their sophistication surprised Israeli forces.
As important to Hezbollah was surveillance. Goksel recalled fighters sometimes sitting for three months on the border "and they would write about everything that moves." He added, "They are the most patient watchers in the world."
On July 11, Goksel and seven students from a university class he was teaching stood on the Qasmiya Bridge, which spans the Litani River, the natural border of southern Lebanon. "I said, 'Look at this bridge. If anything happens, this is the first target.' " He wasn't worried, though. It was summer, and towns were filled with vacationing Shiite expatriates, many of them Hezbollah supporters. "I've never been so wrong in my life," he said.
The cross-border raid was carried out at 9:05 a.m. the next day. Soon after, Israeli warplanes struck the Qasmiya Bridge.
Three months later, Hezbollah's timing remains puzzling.
"They don't attempt adventures. They're not adventurous types," Goksel said. In every operation, they would project "what it means for Shiites, what it means for the party, what it means for Lebanon, what it means for Syria."
He paused. "One wonders if that process collapsed somehow," he said.
Hezbollah officials have hewed to the line Nasrallah delivered that night: They had long telegraphed such an operation, and the opportunity arose. Nasrallah has acknowledged that they did not anticipate the Israeli response, though Hezbollah's officials say they believe the Israelis were planning to carry out such a campaign by this October. In statement after statement, Nasrallah has dismissed charges by critics that Iran and Syria, both under international pressure, encouraged or even ordered the ambush.
Others offer a domestic rationale. The last session of the National Dialogue was set for July 25, nearly two weeks after the war began. Hamadeh suggested that Hezbollah could return to the table "with the proof that the deterrence philosophy would work." But even he admits, "The precipitation has something of a mystery around it."
Underrating a Threat
Two hours after the raid, Hassan, a reticent chemistry professor and one of the longest-serving members of parliament from Hezbollah, was sitting in a meeting for the committee on public works. His cellphone rang. "I smiled, hung up the phone and told the members of parliament in the room, 'Congratulations, our hostages will be coming home soon.' " Some smiled with him; others sat expressionless.
In another room, Nawwar Sahli, a Hezbollah representative who sends his children to an American-affiliated high school, sat in a parliamentary meeting on computerizing Lebanon's ministries. He, too, broke the news to colleagues.
"God help us," he recalled one of them responding.
Sahli went on with his day, getting an MRI exam at 3 p.m. for a pain in his neck. (He picked up the results after the war.) He listened to Nasrallah's speech, then went to his office at night to deal with paperwork in the Hezbollah-controlled southern suburbs known as the Dahiya. He ignored warnings by Hezbollah security not to stay late. From Khalifah, a local fast-food restaurant that was later bombed, he ordered a chicken fajita sandwich and Philly steak sandwich, then went for an interview on a Lebanese television station.
"I said that we shouldn't exaggerate, that Israel will just retaliate a bit, bomb a couple of targets and that would be the end of it," he recalled. "When I stayed in the office, I wasn't trying to be a hero. I seriously didn't think there was a threat."
Near the airport, Amin Sherri, another Hezbollah representative, sat with his wife, four children and three grandchildren.
"My family asked me if we should evacuate the house," he remembered. "I told them, 'Absolutely not.' " On that first day and early into the war, Hezbollah's political arm was relatively lax about security. Officials said they at times slept in other homes and changed their cars, but little else. Sherri kept his cellphone on throughout; Sahli said he was only occasionally advised to shut it off and remove its SIM card. Only by the third day, after Israeli forces had struck the airport road, Nasrallah's offices, Hezbollah's television and radio stations and several bridges, was the Dahiya fully evacuated, military officials said.
It was on that day, Sahli said, that he began getting worried.
But, he added, "I kept telling myself that no war lasts forever."
A Fighter's Call to Duty
Along the rolling hills of southern Lebanon that face the Israeli border, Shadi Hani Saad was getting ready for breakfast in the village of Aita al-Shaab on July 12. He was the oldest son of Zeinab Hammoud and her favorite.
But when he was as young as 8, with southern Lebanon still occupied, she remembered him asking her, "Will Hezbollah still be there when I grow up?"
Tall and broad-shouldered, Saad joined the Hezbollah youth movement in 2000 after the Israeli withdrawal. As a 14-year-old, he bypassed the lower grades of the Mahdi Scouts -- the Blossoms, the Cubs and the Sailors -- and had become Infantry. Within two years, he had achieved the highest rank, a Rover, and then carried out his first operation as a militiaman.
"They didn't tell us where," she said.
He trained once or twice a week. This summer, he was groomed for even more responsibility; his mother said Hezbollah was about to send him for six months of military training in Iran.
The trip never happened. A little after 9 a.m. on July 12, after Saad had gotten out of the shower, another fighter showed up at her door and whispered something to him. Saad grabbed his M-16 rifle, along with ammunition he kept at the house, and walked away in a T-shirt and jeans. "He told me, 'I might return, I might not return,' " his mother recalled.
Years of surveillance had given Hezbollah an idea of where the Israeli forces might cross the border, Goksel said. Of 24 gates, they entered four, and at each, Hezbollah had guessed right with its fortifications and defenses, he said.
Aita al-Shaab was one. "They were waiting for them," he said.
In addition, Lebanese analysts say Israeli hesitation in the early part of the war allowed Hezbollah, caught off guard, time to prepare its defenses. By the time Israeli troops entered in force, more than a week later, Hezbollah's men were in place in villages like Aita al-Shaab. Saad's mother said he called her the first day, then the second, using a land line they deemed more secure. On the third day, he planned to come home to visit and asked her to cook dinner.
That was the last time they spoke. Israeli raids escalated that day, and the Israeli military warned residents of border towns to flee. In a blue 1986 Mercedes, she left with her four other children for Tyre, then north to the Chouf Mountains. After they fled, Saad called an uncle. "Where's my family?" he asked. Nearly three weeks later, on a Thursday night, he was killed in an airstrike.
"What God wants to leave me, he'll leave," his mother said. "What he wants to take, he'll take."
She sat at her home, with a picture of Nasrallah on the wall. A school picture of Saad hung nearby in a black frame. A sprawling poster, with a purple tint, pictured Saad in military uniform and declared him a martyred crusader. Another picture showed all nine of the Hezbollah fighters who died in the village, among the 30 or so who stayed -- by local legend, against Nasrallah's wishes -- to face Israeli troops.
Her blue eyes glimmered with tears, and she recalled a conversation before the war. As they sat at home, Saad had asked that when he died he be buried among martyrs. "What do you mean martyrs?" she shot back, half-joking. "Why do you tell me this kind of stuff?"She shook her head. "Who knew there would be a war?"
Source: Washington Post
Lebanese PM Won't Resign
October 7, 2006 1:57 p.m. EST
Joseph S. Mayton - All Headline News Middle East Correspondent
Beirut, Lebanon (AHN) - Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said that he had no intentions of resigning from his post. The Prime Minister argued that the Lebanese people are "happy with this government and it is here to stay" at a press conference on Thursday in the capital.
His comments come after weeks of conflict between political groups in the country, some of whom are calling for the resignation of the PM's government following the recent month-long war with Israel. Siniora reiterated previous assurances that the Lebanese military has clear instructions to remove any weapons uncovered in the south of the country. "We reiterate our respect for all those who struggled and fought in the south but there will be no weapons in the south apart from the army's," the prime minister said. "The Lebanese army will not deal with those who fought Israel as bandits - but at the same time only the army's weapons will be present in the south," Siniora added. He continued to say that the goal of the government is to strengthen the army and train soldiers and that the army will not be caught in a confrontation with the resistance [Hezbollah]
Hezbollah may attack -- experts
By Anne Dececco Oct 6, 2006, 23:11 GMT
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- As tension between Iran and the United States continues to mount over the Islamic republic`s nuclear program, some experts speculate that the United States should be on guard for possible retaliatory attacks, in the event the Pentagon were to target Iranian nuclear sites. It`s no mystery that Hezbollah receives funding from Iran, and that it is one of the largest and most organized groups in the world, with assets in nearly every continent. The Lebanese Shiite organization is considered to be a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union and Israel. So, the question looms large: would Hezbollah attack the United States, if asked to do so by Iran. And if so, in what manner?
'Although Hezbollah`s military capacity has undoubtedly been degraded by Israel`s recent offensive in southern Lebanon, the organization`s will to rebuild its resources... remains undiminished -- as does the willingness of Syria and Iran to support Hezbollah`s military and terrorist capabilities,' wrote Barak Ben-Zur, a visiting fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and Christopher Hamilton, director of Terrorism Studies at WINEP.
Under the hypothetical context that the United States was to attack Iran, 'Hezbollah would be a main part of Iran`s response,' Daniel Byman, director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies and the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University, said. He added, however, that the group would more likely attack U.S. assets overseas. Dennis Lormel, senior vice president of the Anti-Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Division at Corporate Risk International, explained why that might be. 'In my view, I think that they`re (Hezbollah) less likely to attack in the United States because the United States is such a fertile fundraising ground,' he said. Lormel is a former FBI agent of 30 years who helped establish the Terrorist Financing Operations Section within the FBI.
'That`s not to say that if the situation deteriorated enough they wouldn`t attack here. They definitely have the wherewithal and the capacity,' he added.
Lormel explained that apart from state sponsors like Syria and Iran, Hezbollah gets millions from its fundraising around the world. In the United States, the organization uses criminal activities and the solicitation of money from sympathizers, including Lebanese communities.
Going along with the hypothetical question of what a Hezbollah attack would involve if it were to occur, he said, 'Hezbollah is more likely to strike in ally countries. If it wanted to make a point, it`s more likely to do it in another part of the world, where it could maximize visibility and media attention but minimize the disruption of fundraising.' In contrast, Lawrence J. Korb, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and former assistant secretary of defense from 1981 to 1985, said: 'If we launched a preventative war against Iran, there is a nearly 100 percent likelihood that Hezbollah would try (an attack). You would see attacks on the United States and U.S. allies around the world.'According to Christopher Hamilton, if we were to attack Iran, Hezbollah would respond not only here but overseas as well. For now, he said, the group`s intentions are low, although its capabilities are high. But there are other threats that are very scary, too, Hamilton noted. 'We also have to be concerned about intelligence gathering, even in terms of penetration in the U.S. government.' He mentioned the possibility that terrorists who appear to be normal citizens could apply for government positions, thereby becoming able to intercept security information. Whether or not they believe a Hezbollah retaliation would be likely to occur, all the experts interviewed agreed that it is important for the United States to continue taking security measures against terrorist attacks. When asked what U.S. authorities should be doing to ensure protection, Michael O`Hanlon, senior fellow for Foreign Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution, said: 'We should put a premium on doing what we`ve done in New York: figuring out what the vulnerable buildings are, sealing off underground garages, using bullet-proof glass, making the air circulation intakes inaccessible to the public.' Even so, O`Hanlon said that he thought an attack was only 'moderately likely.'
Copyright 2006 by United Press International
Hezbollah gets medium-range missiles, German magazine claims
Oct 7, 2006, 13:54 GMT
Munich - The Lebanese militant group Hezbollah possesses medium-range missiles capable of striking targets in Turkey and Crete, the German news magazine Focus reported Saturday. The arms were produced in Iran and transported by road via Syria, the magazine quoted from what it said was a top-secret report by the German foreign intelligence service BND. The missiles, which have a range of up to 1,000 kilometres, were delivered on the orders of the government in Tehran, according to the article released in advance of publication on Monday. The BND dismissed the Focus report as false and 'lacking in substance.' According to the magazine, the Shiite militia also received large quantities of rocket launchers, other weapons and ammunition.
It quoted BND experts as saying that Hezbollah had replenished its arsenal since the end of fighting with Israel on August 14 and was in some ways stronger militarily than before the conflict erupted. The magazine quoted a high-ranking BND official as saying the deployment of German navy ships off the coast of Lebanon as part of a UN mission to stop arms smuggling 'is nothing more than a show. Hezbollah is bursting with strength.'
Hezbollah fired hundreds of short-range missiles into Israeli territory during the month-long war that began after the militants captured two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid on July 12. Some 157 Israelis were killed in the conflict, which claimed the lives of at least 1,110 people in Lebanon.
© 2006 dpa - Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Israel's State Comptroller assigns team to probe Israel-Hezbollah conflict
Israel's State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss has appointed a team of 50 staff members to look into the government and army's handling of the July-August Israel- Hezbollah fighting, local newspaper Ha'aretz reported on Friday. Lindenstrauss and his office's security chief met on Thursday with high-ranking officials from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), police units, the cabinet as well as heads of northern communities for inquiry, said the report. The state comptroller's office, a government watchdog, has begun investigating the events of the war and on the home front shortly after Israel's fighting with Lebanese Hezbollah subsided. The Knesset (parliament) State Control Committee expects the comptroller to submit an interim report soon while the opposition hopes to use the report to promote the establishment of an independent state commission to probe "the war", according to the report. Despite a national sentiment calling for the establishment of an independent state commission, the Israeli government appointed on Sept. 17 a governmental inquiry committee, headed by retired judge Eliyahu Winograd to examine the decisions made by political and military leaders during the Israel-Hezbollah conflict.
Violence between the two sides erupted on July 12 after Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and killed eight others during cross-border attacks. The 34-day-long Israel-Hezbollah conflict ended on Aug. 14 after Israel agreed to bow to a UN-brokered truce without retrieving the two captive soldiers and disarming the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah. In the wake of the truce, calls for forming a state inquiry committee in the Jewish state to probe the issue mounted. Source: Xinhua
Is Aoun a reformer or trouble maker ?
Saturday, 7 October, 2006 @ 10:03 PM
Beirut- Ever since General Aoun returned from exile in Paris, he has been nothing but a trouble maker for the people who want to see a Lebanon that is free, sovereign and democratic. After his return he allied himself with the same people he criticized all the time he was in exile.
General Aoun claims to be a reformer. Instead of promoting his reforms so that they are adopted by the government , he has been attacking the government ever since it was formed.
He has been so fixated on becoming the next president, he aligned himself with the same people he despised during his time in exile.
In an interview with the ultra rightist evangelist Pat Robertson on Sept 12, 2002 Aoun described Hezbollah as a terrorist organization that is under the complete control of Syria. Yet Aoun now describes Hezbollah as his no. 1 ally. The question is what made Aoun change direction ?
Many think Aoun stroke a deal with Syria before returning to Lebanon. This perhaps explains why he aligned himself with pro- Syrian politicians in the elections of 2005 and continued to enhance his relations with the pro-Syrian politicians till this moment in time. Syrian regime has also been full of praise for the general.
The strange thing is the current government is the first one in the modern history of Lebanon that was created without the influence of Syria. General Aoun was solicited to join the government but he refused. He elected to be in the opposition along with his pro- Syrian allies.
The negative attitude of Aoun against the people who rose against the Syrian occupation and forced Syria out under the banner of the Cedar Revolution is suspicious. He always sees the glass as half empty whatever the government does and blames it for everything wrong in the country even the last war between Hezbollah and Israel. This negative attitude has been a very destabilizing factor for Lebanon. He reminds me of the old Slavic ladies during communism “babooshkas”. These ladies would join any queue they see to buy anything that is available without even knowing what is the queue for. Yet these ladies always complained about shortages in the country without realizing that they themselves created the shortages, by their greed.
Many blame his negative attitude on the depressions he gets due to his health. But then what are doctors for ?
Aoun is now chasing the prime minister and wants to force him to quit. The question is whom does he have in mind to replace him ? Lebanon has never had a more professionally qualified statesman to run the country or a cleaner man than Siniora.
Aoun needs to forget his greed and fixation to become the next president and start thinking what is best for Lebanon. He should review his memory when he was in Paris and the Lebanon he dreamed of . The government of Siniora may not be perfect but it is the best for Lebanon right now and it is a government of National unity . If he wants to help the government achieve more and adopt some of his reforms he should support the ousting of president Emile Lahoud, who has been one of the main obstacles against a free, democratic and sovereign Lebanon.
Aoun’s attacks against the government does not serve Lebanon’s interests at all. His attacks have created the political ambiance for the Syrians to return to Lebanon in full force. The Syrians and Aoun are now one voice in criticizing the government. The Syrians are worried about the International tribunal for trying the Hariri killers and they see a window of opportunity in disrupting it.
If Aoun want reforms he should start with reforming himself . Time for the general to change his divisive attitude.
Picture: General Michel Aoun ( R) with Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah
Sami Y Haddad , Ya Libnan volunteer
Nasrallah's Popularity Fading
Frontpage reports that Hezbollah's demonstration on 9/22 in Beirut was not a true indication of Nasrallah's support as many of those that attended were part of a "rent-a-crowd" group from Africa. A L'OPrient Le Jour poll indicates 51% of Lebanese want to disarm Hezbollah and Le Figaro's poll indicates that 47% of Lebanese thinks Hezbollah lost the war against Israel. Many prominent Shi'ite leaders are speaking out against Hezbollah.
One referring to the war, "“his illegal war against Israel." Another saying "The winners are Syria and Iran; they manipulate ... The others are mum because they are scared of not getting the financial aid from Hezbollah.”
Hezbollah Rejects Monopoly of One Group over Lebanon
TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- Spokesman of the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah said that his movement is not seeking to force anyone out of the political scene, but meantime stressed that Hezbollah does not accept monopoly of one group over the entire Lebanon.
Hosein Rahal pointed out that Hezbollah has several options to reach what it demands, including peaceful political, legal and public venues, which have all been endorsed by the constitution. The official declined to comment on the details of Hezbollah's plan, and did not mention if the plan includes resignation of all Hezbollah-representing ministers from the cabinet. He stressed that the Lebanese government is about to topple down in just a few weeks.
Stating that the incumbent government is weak and unable to manage the affairs of the country, the spokesman reminded that Hezbollah may not give up its demands for the formation of a national unity government which can protect the country and fulfill the reconstruction task.
Elsewhere in his statements, he dismissed any possibility for the emergence of civil wars in that country and pointed out, "Speaking about civil war and unrests in our country is all void and aimed at scaring the Lebanese nation." "We are confident that the Lebanese nation may never be gripped by unrests and civil wars, yet formation of a government representing all the Lebanese people is truly the most important move to prevent such problems," the Hezbollah spokesman reiterated.
Syria: Sunnis converting to Shiites in homage to Nasrallah
Many Sunnis convert, join Shiite sect in appreciation of what they see as Hizbullah's victory against Israel. A weekly review of Arab newspapers
Roee Nahmias Published: 10.08.06, 09:30
The war in Lebanon continues to impact the Middle East. The Shiite sect, whose people were persecuted for years in the region, has become popular following the war. In Syria , Sunni Muslims, who compose about 70 percent of the population, have begun adopting Shiite laws
and practices. For most, the motive behind their conversion is not religious but political, done in appreciation for the Shiite Hizbullah organization.
Mustafah al-Sada, a religious Shiite Muslim, told al-Arabia that many Sunnis are now asking him, "What must I do to become a Shiite?" Al-Sada said that he knows of 75 Sunnis from Damascus who have converted to the Shiite sect since the beginning of the war.
"George Bush has done us a favor," said al-Sada, "he has united the Arabs." Assad and young Syrian supporters, this weekend (Photo: Reuters)
Munir A-Sayed, a 43 year old lawyer says: "I'm Sunni, but I belong to Hasan Nasrallah ." "I've converted politically," he explained. For Wael Khalil, a 21 year old student of international law in Damascus, the change started when he watched the Arab television stations and saw "Hizbullah fighters defeating the Israeli troops easily." According to Khalil, it was the first time he saw a war that the Arabs were winning.Several years ago the residents of the town of Hatla, a five hour drive from Damascus and about 150 kilometers (about 93 miles) from the Sunni Anbar district of Iraq, gathered together and converted their sect from Sunni to Shiite. "For five years we feared to announce that we had accepted the Shiite sect," said one of the men from the village, mentioning that following wider media coverage of Shiites these past few years, primarily in Iraq, the situation has improved.
According to reports, some officials in Damascus are not pleased with the trend, saying that it's a sign of Iran's growing influence in the region. However some political commentators have assessed that the Syrian regime is encouraging the increase in Nasrallah's popularity to hold up President Bashar Assad's own. In support of this claim, stickers have surfaced recently with images of Nasrallah and Assad together, as well as images of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Khaddam to Syrian army: Abandon Assad family
The attempts to strengthen Assad are apparently necessary, there are those who seek to remove him from power. On Friday Syrians marked the anniversary of the "October War" (the Yom Kippur War) and former Syrian Vice President Abdel Abed al-Halim Khaddam used the opportunity to call for mutiny in the armed forces against the regime. In a letter to the Syrian army Khaddam, who defected to France to form a "government in exile," said that the army is now faced with "a historic decision". According to Khaddam, the Syrian regime has reached the end of the road and all the army has to do now is choose a side: the regime or the homeland. "Your decision to stand with the regime is a great loss for you and for the homeland," wrote Khaddam in the letter obtained by UPI.Khaddam also spoke directly against the late President Hafez Assad, claiming that his policies since 1973 only weakened Syria.
The 'October War'
Egypt also marked the Yom Kippur War, though this year the anniversary took a beackseat to the Ramadam and the 25th anniversary of President Anwar Sadat's assassination. Mohammed Basyouni, former Egyptian ambassador to Israel, stated in an editorial to the al-Ahram newspaper what was always well known.
"The effects of each holiday on the IDF's recruitment capabilities were studied and it was found that Yom Kippur was the only day where radio and television stations don't broadcast, making a speedy public recruitment impossible," he wrote. President Mubarak also addressed the war in an interview to the military newspaper al-Quwwat al-Musallaha, stating that the armed forces are "in the highest level of readiness to carry out any mission." He warned that the region might be dragged into a new war is the peace process remains frozen. Mubarak again addressed the issue of building a nuclear plant, saying that "no one can take away our right to act in this manner on the strategic issue in question. We will make decisions according to what is best for national interests and for our sons."
And al-Manar? Still in hiding
Despite the time which has passed since the end of the war in Lebanon it seems that Hizbullah continues to operate on high alert, just in case.
Chief of the Hizbullah television station al-Manar, Abdallah Kassir, revealed that the station turned down offers to broadcast from other capitals during the war. "We preferred to stay with our families and fight so that al-Manar's voice would not be silenced," he said.
Kassir revelaed that the station continues to broadcast from its hiding place which was built during the first week of the war, two days after their main building was destroyed by the Israel Air Force. The al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper reported that the station suffered from numerous setbacks during the fighting but the Hizbullah leadership decided to continue the broadcasts at any cost. As for the war itself, Hizbullah claims that only 800 fighters took part in the battles against the IDF and that only 150 of these fighters were killed. The organization estimates that it used only 6 percent of its armed forces and additional forces were ready to go into combat behind enemy lines. Kassir announced that in the coming days more details would emerge about "the truth about the Israelis on the battlefield."
Lebanese PM appeals on the UN to stop Israeli violations
Oct 7, 2006, 13:43 GMT
Beirut - Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Seniora has called on the United Nations to exert pressure on Israel to stop its violation of Lebanon's airspace and to withdraw from a Lebanese village, the premier's office said Saturday. Seniora and during a telephone conversation with UN chief Kofi Annan late Friday, said 'the overflights violate UN Security Council Resolution 1701,' which put an end to 33 days of war between the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah and Israel on August 14. According to the premier's office Seniora also called on Annan to put an end to Israel's violation of the UN-demarcated Blue Line, which forms the border with Israel. Seniora referred particularly to Israel's occupation of the village of Ghajar. Israeli aircraft have continued to overfly areas across Lebanon since the Israeli army pulled out its troops last Sunday from all of southern Lebanon except from the village of Ghajar. Ghajar, which is located at the border between Lebanon and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, is still occupied by the Israeli troops. Ghajar is divided into two parts, two-thirds of which lie inside Lebanese territory and the rest in Syrian territory captured by Israel during the 1967 Middle East war. The village's residents are Alawites and most of them have Israeli citizenship. Israel has announced that it will not stop its overflights until the release of two of its soldiers who were captured by Hezbollah on July 12. The capturing of the two soldiers sparked the Hezbollah- Israel war in which 1,200 Lebanese and 162 Israelis were killed. On Friday, Israeli warplanes flew at a low altitude over the Bekaa Valley and areas near south Lebanon. © 2006 dpa - Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Lebanon's Speaker Says U.N. Should Stick To Mandate
October 7, 2006 2:13 p.m. EST
Joseph S. Mayton - All Headline News Middle East Correspondent
Beirut, Lebanon (AHN) - Lebanon's speaker of parliament said the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) should confine its activities to those stipulated in the United Nations resolution that ended the month-long war between Hezbollah and Israel on August 14. "We, as Lebanese, are facing major problems and we don't need a new controversial issue to talk about," Nabih Berri, the speaker, said, referring to internal debates concerning Hezbollah. Berri was commenting on the recent report issued by UNIFIL that said the international peacekeeping force could use force against "hostile activity." The report added that if the Lebanese army is unable to intercept unauthorized weapons, they would conduct the activity.
"UNIFIL should abide by Resolution 1701 by helping the Lebanese Army in defending Lebanon's sovereignty," the speaker argued.
UNIFIL on Friday also said they had recorded all Israeli violations of the Blue Line during the previous week and have submitted an official complaint to the Israeli military.
Beilin Attacks PM Olmert’s Position Regarding Syria
09:11 Oct 08, '06 / 16 Tishrei 5767
(IsraelNN.com) Meretz-Yahad opposition party leader Dr. Yossi Beilin sharply criticized the position of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert regarding Syria. Beilin stated a peace agreement with Syria is of critical importance, something that would bring stability to the region. Olmert and his cabinet ministers are not taking Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s statements seriously; pointing out Damascus continues to support Hizbullah’s terrorist activities
Israel: No intention of attacking Syria
Israeli officials have said over the weekend that despite what the Syrians believe, Israel has no intention to attack Syria. This statement comes in reaction to the words of President Bashar Assad who said that his country was ready for an Israeli offensive at any moment. An unnamed senior Israeli official said that “Israel has no hostile intentions toward Syria. We have no plans to initiate conflict." The official said that the comments by Assad to the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Anba over the weekend were “disturbing,” and added that the level of alertness of the Israel Defense Forces on the Golan Heights near the Syrian border has been high since the outbreak of war in Lebanon during the summer. According to the interview given by Assad, Syria is “preparing for an Israeli attack at any moment." Assad added that “Israel had given up on the peace process even though most of the issues between the two countries had been resolved.” Over the past weeks, since the end of war in Lebanon, President Assad has been back and forth on statements offering peace on one hand, and aggressive statements of threat and war on the other hand.
Israel, for its part, has maintained a line of non-aggression towards Syria since the war despite the military level of alert, but has also sent mixed messages as to its readiness to negotiate for peace with Syria as long as it keeps supplying Hizballah in Lebanon and hosting and supporting Palestinian terror groups in Damascus. President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt has also chimed in on the current Middle East situation over the weekend saying that “the Middle East is on the verge of exploding." Mubarak said these words to an Egyptian army journal in a story marking 33 years since the Yom Kippur War.
Mubarak also spoke about the situation within the Palestinian Authority and urged both Hamas and Fatah to cease the hostilities between them and enter into peace talks as soon as possible, saying that the current infighting between them could spark a greater conflict in the area.