LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
February 20.2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.february20.20.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006

Bible Quotations For today
Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord
First Letter to the Corinthians 11/23-32:”I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, ‘This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me. ’For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord. Examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgement against themselves. For this reason many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves, we would not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.”

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on February 19-20/2020
Report: Unemployment Hits 40% in Crisis-Hit Lebanon
Aoun Won't Sign 2020 Budget over 'Violation'
Berri Meets Greek FM, Says Debt Restructuring is Best Solution
Greek Foreign Minister Meets Senior Officials in Beirut
Diab meets with ABL delegation over Eurobond issue
Hitti welcomes Greek counterpart, listens to Greece's experience in overcoming difficult circumstances
Report: Lebanon Invites 8 Firms to Bid to Provide Financial Advice
Lorimer: Time for Urgent Action for the New Government
Hariri Says Bassil's Remarks Prove He's 'Shadow President'
Najm Orders Expansion of Probe in Suspicious Capital Flight
ABL Urges Eurobond Negotiations with Bond Holders
Fahmi meets Rampling, Abu Faour, Heads of UN missions
Minister of Information tackles sector laws with delegation of Editors Syndicate
Shraim chairs meeting for Displaced Fund: To close this file entirely
Moucharafieh meets ILO delegation, UNICEF Representative
UNICEF provides cash support to more than 40,000 Lebanese children in context of current crisis
Fahmi Says Ready to Authorize Accountability for Corrupt
Lebanon 'Kick Queen' Protest Icon to Face Trial
France Steps Up Probe into Ghosn's Versailles Wedding
Lebanon: 'One-Sided Government' to Resolve Issue of Syrian Displaced
Lebanon Speaker Nabih Berri calls for restructuring Eurobond as ‘best solution’
Iran’s Larijani in Lebanon viewed as signal of Beirut's pivot toward Iran axis/Abby Sewell, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Trump’s peace plan rejected by Lebanese parties, Palestinian groups in Lebanon/Abby Sewell, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Statue Of Qassem Soleimani Put Up By Hizbullah In South Lebanon Sparks Criticism: It Is An Expression Of Iran’s Patronage Over Lebanon/MEMRI/February 19, 2020
Iran’s Larijani in Lebanon viewed as signal of Beirut's pivot toward Iran axis/Abby Sewell, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Why Shouldn’t the Kataeb and Communist Parties Meet?/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/February 19/2020
What Does Saad al-Hariri’s Political Shift Mean?/Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/February 19/2020
Full-blown economic crisis will plunge quarter of Lebanese below poverty line/Georgi Azar/Annahar/February 19/2020
Iran, Hezbollah operating with impunity in Yemen/Fatima Abo Alasrar/Arab News/February 20/2020

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on February 19-20/2020
Pompeo says prepared to talk to Iran ‘anytime’, pressure to continue
Black box in downed Ukrainian plane sustained ‘noticeable damage’: Iran
Iran Says Won’t Hand over ‘Damaged’ Black Box of Downed Ukraine Plane
Coronavirus Kills Two in Iran
Russia Warns against Turkey Operation in Syria
UN envoy warns of ‘imminent danger’ of escalation in Syria
In tense UN meet, Russia opposes declaration calling for Syria ceasefire
Syrian air defense intercepts hostile targets in Jableh town in Latakia
Israeli military says will create command to combat Iran threats
United Nations Human Rights Council delegitimizes Israel
Turkish military operation in Syria’s Idlib ‘a matter of time’: Erdogan
Turkish military operation in Syria’s Idlib ‘worst-case scenario’: Kremlin
Flight heads toward Aleppo International Airport for first time in eight years
Syria Aid Groups in Desperate Plea for Idlib Displaced
Civilians flee homes, safe zone shrinks as Syrian regime bombards Idlib
Iraq: Abdul Mahdi Warns He Will Walk Away If Allawi's Govt Not Approved Soon
Pompeo to meet Saudi Arabia’s King Salman, Crown Prince in the Kingdom
Pompeo in Saudi Arabia for talks on Iran
Drones used in Saudi Arabia’s Aramco attack have Iranian components: Report
Saudi Arabia’s stance on Iran is ‘very clear,’ no back channels: Al-Jubeir
Yemeni defense minister survives attempted assassination
Iran reports two cases of deadly coronavirus

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on February 19-20/2020
UK Court: Sharia Marriages Not Valid Under English Law/Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute/February 19/2020
Revisiting Arab Peace Initiative is best hope to solve Israel-Palestine conflict/Ksenia Svetlova/Al Arabiya/February 19/2020
Facebook’s Business Model Is What Brussels Hates/Lionel Laurent/Bloomberg/February 19/2020
Put a Stop to Economic Growth? Huge Mistake/Noah Smith/Bloomberg/February 19/2020
The Labor Party’s Long Road Back/Matt Singh/Bloomberg/February 19/2020
The Ugly History of Blaming Ethnic Groups for Outbreaks/Stephen Mihm/Bloomberg/February 19/2020
The Intolerance of the "Tolerant" Left: The End of Liberal Democracy?/Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff/Gatestone Institute/February 19/2020
Rep Ilhan Omar’s ‘peace’ proposal puts her duplicity on display/Hussain Abdul-Hussain/Al Arabiya/February 19/2020
Iran must be forced to reconsider its revolutionary aims/Dr. Hamdan Al-Shehri/Arab News/February 20/2020
Who is to be Syria’s master?/Sir John Jenkins/Arab News/February 20/2020

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on February 19-20/2020
Report: Unemployment Hits 40% in Crisis-Hit Lebanon
Naharnet/February 19/2020
Unemployment rate in Lebanon has hit dangerous levels with 300 thousand individuals left jobless amid an unprecedented economic crisis sweeping the country since October. An-Nahar daily on Wednesday said the numbers reflect a “tragic” situation in Lebanon where unemployment figures have reached 40%, and around two million Lebanese will live below the poverty line. The daily said that 785 restaurants and cafes closed down between September 2019 and February 2020, 25 thousand employees were expelled from restaurants and hotels. 120 establishments closed down in Sidon. Jewelry stores moved their merchandise from malls to safer shops, and some returned them to their parent companies abroad. Moreover, dozens of troubled institutions slashed salaries to a half. Banks imposed (illegitimate) capital controls on funds, with the possibility of deducting parts of the deposits in a “haircut” procedure, it added. In view of these facts, the visit of the International Monetary Fund delegation does not provide much hope for solutions to Lebanon's chronic problems, said the daily. Tony el-Ramy, president of Syndicate of Owners of Restaurants, Cafés, Night-Clubs and Pastries in Lebanon, revealed to the daily the latest figures saying 785 institutions dealing with food and drinks closed down between September 2019 and February 2020. Since the start of the crisis, the number of unemployed reached 160 thousand people, according to an Infopro study. "The number of unemployed people includes discharged employees and disguised unemployment, which in this case cuts part of the employees’ wages to low levels that affect people's capability to live a decent life," said economist Professor Jassim Ajjaqa. Former Minister of Social Affairs Richard Kouymjian sounded the alarm saying: “Two million Lebanese will live below the poverty line in 2020 if the new government does not give special attention to this issue. The situation has reached dangerous levels in Lebanon.”

Aoun Won't Sign 2020 Budget over 'Violation'
Naharnet/February 19/2020
President Michel Aoun will not sign the 2020 state budget because it “does not include a final account for the year 2018,” his adviser Salim Jreissati said on Wednesday. “This is considered a violation and the President rejects it,” Jreissati told MTV. “The President will wait for the one-month deadline to expire and the budget will automatically enter into force without him granting it his signature, in line with Article 57 of the Constitution,” Jreissati noted. The budget was approved by parliament on November 27 last year.

Berri Meets Greek FM, Says Debt Restructuring is Best Solution
Naharnet/February 19/2020
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri on Wednesday held talks with visiting Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias and discussed with him the bilateral ties, the situation in Lebanon and the region, and means to boost cooperation between the two countries. Separately, Berri told MPs during the weekly Ain el-Tineh meeting that restructuring Lebanon’s debt is the “best solution” for the country’s dire financial and economic crisis. “The electricity file should be tackled next to lay out a complete and comprehensive solution for it, seeing as half of the public debt and the annual deficit come from this file,” the Speaker added.
“The situation in Lebanon, especially at the financial and economic levels, cannot withstand an agitation of political bickering,” Berri warned, urging “the unification of all efforts in order to cooperate for the sake of the national interest and the historic responsibility.”Berri also stressed that it is unacceptable to oblige citizens to pay the price for the financial, economic and banking crisis through “humiliating them and subjecting them to an organized deduction of their deposits and lifelong savings and through the uncontrolled hike of the prices of commodities and essential goods.”

Greek Foreign Minister Meets Senior Officials in Beirut
Naharnet/February 19/2020
Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias led a delegation to Beirut on Wednesday to hold talks with President Michel Aoun, Speaker Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Hassan Diab, and Foreign Minister Nassif Hitti, the National News Agency reported on Wednesday. Dendias first held talks with Aoun at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, said NNA. The two reportedly broached cooperation ties between Lebanon and Greece. Dendias later met with his Lebanese counterpart Nasif Hitti after which they held a joint press conference. He will wind up his Lebanon visit in a lunch and meeting with Prime Minister Hassan Diab. Dendias and his accompanying delegation were received at Beirut’s Rafik Hariri International Airport by the Director of Protocols at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Najla Assaker, and other ministry diplomats, as well as by a delegation from the Greek Embassy in Lebanon. The Greek minister will discuss with Lebanese officials a number of issues that will be presented during the tripartite summit between Greece, Cyprus, and Lebanon, to be held in March 2020 in Cyprus. The tripartite summit is planned to discuss tourism, archeology, security, economy, trade, and other matters that are of interest to the three countries. Several agreements are expected to be signed during the aforementioned meeting, concluded NNA.

Diab meets with ABL delegation over Eurobond issue
NNA/February 19/2020
Prime Minister, Dr. Hassan Diab, met this afternoon at the Grand Serail a delegation of the Association of Banks in Lebanon (ABL), chaired by Salim Sfeir, in the presence of Chairman of Executive Committee of the Union of Arab Banks (UAB) Dr. Joseph Torbey
On emerging, Sfeir said that they discussed with the Premier the issue of "Eurobond" dues estimated at $2.5 billion Eurobonds in 2020, including $1.2 billion Eurobond maturing in March. He stressed ABL's stance that if the government intends to opt for debt rescheduling, this must take place in an orderly manner through negotiations with bondholders "especially investment funds abroad that have so far shown readiness to negotiate on this basis."
He affirmed that the aim of the Association has been and shall remain the preservation of the proper functioning of public facilities, as well as the preservation of bank deposits. Sfeir relayed the Premier's keenness on the safety and continuity of the banking sector in a manner that preserves the rights of depositors and regulates the relationship between banks and customers.
This afternoon, Premier Diab welcomed Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias, and his accompanying delegation, with whom he discussed the means to bolster bilateral relations, as well as most recent developments.

Hitti welcomes Greek counterpart, listens to Greece's experience in overcoming difficult circumstances
NNA/February 19/2020
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants Nassif Hitti held talks this Wednesday with his Greek counterpart Nikos Dundas, followed by a ten-minute retreat. After the meeting, Hitti and his counterpart held a joint press conference, where the former started by welcoming "the foreign minister of a neighboring and friendly country that enjoys historic relations with Lebanon." "This visit reflects the good ties that exist between the two countries and the Greek and Lebanese peoples. We have a common history that brings us together, next to our Mediterranean and our many common traditions. The most important values that draw us together, though, are determination, love of life, love of individual initiative, and compulsion towards work and innovation. (...) Phoenician and Greek boats have carried our people, our civilization and our culture to the most remote corners of the globe," Hitti said.
"Today, the dialogue between friends has focused on economic cooperation between our two countries, in light of the difficult conditions we are presently undergoing in Lebanon. We heard from our friend, the minister, about his country's experience in this context, and how it managed to face the difficult circumstances it went through. Perhaps this will be a useful lesson for us, especially since Greece has managed to recover," the minister added, pointing out that "discussions have dealt with the necessity of enhancing trade exchange between the two countries by encouraging Lebanese agricultural and industrial exports.""Greece is a main country in the European Union, and this is another very important entrance towards the European Union; geographical proximity contributes a lot in this field.""We also tackled the issue of strengthening the tourism sector, namely traditional and cultural tourism, and all kinds of productive tourism, which can bolster ties between the two countries in several fields. (...) Our main concern today is economic, and we will do what we can in Lebanon to rescue the productive sectors and maintain jobs," Hitti stressed.
He added: "We also broached the oil and gas sectors in the two countries as we must share expertise and knowledge to ensure the largest quantity is extracted at the lowest possible cost. Greece has preceded us and has thus gained a pioneering experience in this field from which we can largely benefit."
"The conversation also dealt with developments in the region; there is an agreement on respecting and activating the rules of international law and the principles of the United Nations and its relevant resolutions which should be the reference in settling any conflict or dispute in the region. As you know, Lebanon, Greece and Cyprus are preparing for a tripartite summit in late March, so it was only natural for us to discuss the agenda, review the issues and topics on it, and follow up on the preparations," the Lebanese Foreign Minister went on to say.
In turn, Greece's Dundas addressed Hitti by saying: "It gives me great pleasure to congratulate you today, and wish you success in your new tasks. The relationship between us is based on solid foundations, friendship and mutual respect; this was confirmed in the talks that we held today, where we agreed to find ways to sustain political, economic and cultural ties, be it on the bilateral or the tripartite level with Cyprus. This tripartite cooperation has borne fruit so far."Emphasizing "Greece's constructive role in pushing Lebanon's relations with the European Union forward," he said "we have expressed our support for the agenda of reforms laid out by the government. We have exchanged views on the regional situation, and we underscore our support for political solutions under the United Nations umbrella, whether in Libya, Syria, or other countries of the world."
"I listened to the viewpoints of Lebanese officials on the situation in Syria, and we expressed our admiration for the great efforts made by Lebanon towards the displaced people. This [issue] is of great importance to both countries, as Greece is the gate to the continent of Europe. We also discussed the situation in Libya and the latest decision by the Foreign Affairs Council on Lebanon. We support the efforts of UN envoy Ghassan Salameh," the Greek minister added.
"Based on the Memorandum of Understanding between Ankara and Mr. Siraj, I reiterate our view: although this memorandum is null and void, being outside the framework of international law (...) it ignites civil war and constitutes an attempt to impose foreign powers on Libya. In addition to that, it gives the conflict an international character by violating the sovereign rights of Greece and thereby threatening peace and stability in the eastern Mediterranean. I must say, after the meetings I held with Greek partners in the Arab League, I have the impression that Turkey’s efforts to expand its influence over the areas that were previously part of the Ottoman Sultanate form a source of concern and are rejected by those parties," he concluded.

Report: Lebanon Invites 8 Firms to Bid to Provide Financial Advice
Naharnet/February 19/2020
Lebanon plans to invite eight firms to compete on providing financial advice on whether it should pay or default on its $1.2 billion Eurobond debt, which matures next month, media reports said on Wednesday. According to reports, the firms were identified as Rothschild & Co, Guggenheim Partners, Citibank, Lazard, JP Morgan, PJT Partners , Moelis & Company and Houlihan Lokey. Lebanon has the world's third-highest debt-to-GDP ratio and has been sliding towards default in recent months, with tight capital controls and a currency devaluation already hitting purchasing power. Lebanon is expected to decide whether to pay $1.2 billion in Eurobonds that reach maturity on March 9 or to default on its debt.

Lorimer: Time for Urgent Action for the New Government
Naharnet/February 19/2020
The UK's Defence Senior Adviser to the Middle East and North Africa, Lieutenant General John Lorimer urged Lebanon’s new government for quick action to counter its economic crisis, a statement released by the UK embassy said on Wednesday. General Lorimer ended a one day visit to Lebanon on 18 February and held high level meetings with Lebanese officials, accompanied by British Ambassador Chris Rampling and Defence Attaché, Lieutenant Colonel Alex Hilton. His meetings included discussions with President Michel Aoun, Parliamentary Speaker Nabih Berri, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Zeina Akar, and Lebanese Army Commander General Joseph Aoun. General Lorimer discussed the current situation in Lebanon, and the role of the Lebanese Army and Security Forces in maintaining security and stability as the sole legitimate defender of Lebanon.
At the end of his visit, General Lorimer said: ‘This is a crucial time for Lebanon and its new government as it tackles huge economic challenges. Urgent action is needed. I held constructive meetings with Lebanese officials and reaffirmed UK’s support to the Lebanese Armed Forces who are key to Lebanon’s security, stability and sovereignty. Our partnership and friendship between our armed forces continues. For his part Ambassador Chris Rampling said: ‘There should now be no delay on the detailed economic plan the government has promised, the necessary decisions, and urgent implementation. Time is running out. This crisis needs an inclusive and urgent response to the legitimate demands, with calm and clear judgement on what lies ahead.’

Hariri Says Bassil's Remarks Prove He's 'Shadow President'
Naharnet/February 19/2020
Al-Mustaqbal Movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri said recent remarks by Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Jebran Bassil prove that he is the country’s “shadow president.”“If he is the one who decides when I would return (to power), this proves what I said about him being the shadow president,” Hariri told reporters when asked about Bassil’s remarks. He was speaking after a meeting for Mustaqbal’s Central Council. “We will not evade responsibility; we will rather bear it,” Hariri said. He noted that “the incidents at the banks and the attack on the central bank governor reflect the people’s pain,” but decried that “some parties are distorting the facts as to why we reached this state.”Responding to those who lament that Lebanon’s economy is a rentier one, Hariri said: “Banks have borrowed the private sector $55 billion, is this a rentier economy?”“The main problem in the country is that over the past 15 years, half of Lebanon’s debt was for providing electricity. Why did we have to borrow money for electricity? Here lies the responsibility,” Hariri added. “I’m not like others. I don’t evade my responsibility like those who are saying that Hariri bears the political responsibility,” he went on to say.
As for the calls for rescheduling Lebanon’s public debt, Hariri said: “If there is a plan, anything can be done, but what’s important is the plan.”Hariri also dismissed media reports claiming that his relation with Saudi Arabia is not good.

Najm Orders Expansion of Probe in Suspicious Capital Flight
Naharnet/February 19/2020
Justice Minister Marie-Claude Najm on Wednesday asked State Prosecutor Ghassan Oueidat to expand investigations into all “suspicious” transfers to foreign banks. The National News Agency said Najm called on Oueidat to request that the central bank’s Special Investigation Commission provide him with “all the information it has about all the money transfers from Lebanon to foreign banks and not to limit the information to the money that was transferred to Switzerland.” The minister also said that the probe must tackle all the transfers made as of July 2019 – three months prior to the eruption of the popular uprising. Lebanon has moved to combat “capital flight” after it emerged that $1 billion has already been transferred out of the country despite restrictions on withdrawals. In January, Central Bank Governor Riad Salameh confirmed that $1 billion had been transferred out of the country despite tight restrictions on withdrawals. Salameh's comments came amid suspicions of politically motivated capital flight that are the subject of a probe launched in late December. "Of the $1.6 billion that was withdrawn (from the Lebanese banking sector) between October 17 and the end of the year... one billion dollars were transferred abroad by Lebanese," Salameh said in an interview with the France 24 TV news channel. Since October 17, Lebanon has been rocked by an unprecedented protest movement against an entrenched political class seen as corrupt and incompetent. The protests coincided with an increasingly crippling shortage of dollars, prompting banks to impose tight restrictions on withdrawals and transfers overseas. Protesters have accused bankers of complicity with the political class and suspect politicians of transferring funds abroad despite the restrictions and a prolonged local bank closure when protests first broke out.
Salameh said the central bank's investigation "would focus on the $1 billion," but that it would "take some time."The other $600,000 that were taken out of Lebanese banks during the period in question were capital deposits held by foreign banks, he added. He noted there had been reports of "politicians, senior civil servants and bank owners" involved in capital flight, but said a probe is necessary to identify those responsible. A report by the Carnegie think tank in November said that nearly $800 million left Lebanon between October 15 and November 7, when most citizens could not access their funds because banks were closed due to protests.

ABL Urges Eurobond Negotiations with Bond Holders
Naharnet/February 19/2020
The Association of Banks in Lebanon on Wednesday called for negotiations with the holders of Lebanon’s Eurobonds regarding the March 9 payment. “We stressed to Mr. Premier ABL’s stance that if the government is inclined to reschedule the debt, this rescheduling must happen in an organized manner, which means through negotiations with bond holders, especially that the foreign investment funds have so far showed readiness to negotiate on this basis,” ABL chief Salim Sfeir said after meeting PM Hassan Diab along with a delegation from the Association. “We emphasize that ABL’s objective has been and is still to safeguard the continuity of public facilities and to preserve the deposits with which the banks are entrusted,” Sfeir added. “I remind that any decision regarding the Eurobond issue is for the government to take exclusively in light of what it sees appropriate for Lebanon,” Sfeir went on to say, noting that Diab “expressed his keenness on the safety and continuity of the banking sector in a manner that preserves depositors’ rights and regulates banks’ relation with client.” Lebanon has the world's third-highest debt-to-GDP ratio and has been sliding towards default in recent months, with tight capital controls and a currency devaluation already hitting purchasing power. An International Monetary Fund delegation will arrive in Beirut Thursday to provide advice on the nation's economic policies. Diab's government won parliament's confidence only last week, and the state immediately requested the IMF's advice on tackling the economic crisis. Lebanon is expected to decide whether to pay $1.2 billion in Eurobonds that reach maturity on March 9 or to default on its debt. Lebanon has requested help from the IMF to assess the measures needed to rebuild the economy but has not yet asked for financial assistance.

Fahmi meets Rampling, Abu Faour, Heads of UN missions
NNA/February 19/2020
Minister of Interior and Municipalities, Mohammad Fahmi, on Wednesday reviewed with MP Wael Abu Faour, most recent developments on the local arena. Minister Fahmi also met with Heads of missions, bodies, and programs of the United Nations, chaired by UN Resident Coordinator for Lebanon, Philippe Lazzarini, where they emphasized the importance to continue working and assisting the displaced Syrians and host communities, especially in these difficult economic conditions. The Minister highlighted the importance of permanent coordination with the United Nations in the interest of Lebanon.
On the other hand, Minister Fahmi met with British Ambassador to Lebanon, Chris Rampling, with whom he discussed UK aids to Lebanon and the importance of ongoing support in this regard.

Minister of Information tackles sector laws with delegation of Editors Syndicate
NNA/February 19/2020
Minister of Information Manal Abdel Samad welcomed at her office in the Ministry a delegation from the Editors Syndicate headed by Syndicate Head Joseph Al-Qossaifi, who delivered a speech in which he first congratulated the minister on her assuming the Information portfolio “amid these dreadful circumstances under which weight the country is writhing.”
"We are here to support the workshop awaiting the press and media sector on which calamities have befallen, leaving Lebanon at the bottom of the list of countries whose media can still maintain the mere survival necessities and the sheer ability to keep pace with the present times and provide decent means of living for workers in this profession," he said.
Praising the minister's "desire to leave the direly-needed imprint by the much-troubled Lebanese media," Qossaifi paid tribute to those whom he labelled "the victims of the press and the media" for sharing in their employers' suffering and thus incurring major financial losses.
"The laws regulating the media sector are outdated and lack the sense of modernity. (...) Lebanon has become at the bottom of the list; it has lost its leadership and avant-garde role at the media level. It is lagging behind, compared to what we are witnessing in many countries that used to follow in our footsteps," he said regrettably.
He noted that the Editors Syndicate had presented proposals years ago, "and with your predecessor, Minister Melhem Riachy, we reached a draft law to organize the union's work, which allows it to open the door for workers in audio-visual media and e-press; a project that accommodates everyone and achieves unity is the media family. It included the establishment of two funds: a mutual and a pension fund to protect colleagues socially and healthily, especially in the retirement phase. It would also achieve the independence of the Editors Syndicate, unshackling it from outmoded laws and restrictions. This bill is still locked in the drawers of the Council of Ministers, and we demand that it be referred to the Parliament for discussion and approval as soon as possible."
"We will stand by your side in this workshop, and are certain that you are on our side in defending colleagues who are subjected to violence when carrying out their professional duty, and who face the sword of being sued before unspecialized courts. (...) Likewise, you are on our side against the mistreatment that affects media personnel’s livelihood, at the hand of institutions who are failing to pay employees their salaries, or cutting more than 50% of wages, or failing to pay compensation for unfair dismissals, in light of the unhurried court proceedings in such cases," Qossaifi concluded.

Shraim chairs meeting for Displaced Fund: To close this file entirely
NNA/February 19/2020
Minister of the Displaced Ghada Shraim welcomed this Wednesday the Norwegian Ambassador to Lebanon, Leni Stenseth, and discussed with her the latest developments and the overall situation in Lebanon, with emphasis on the need to strengthen bilateral relations, especially in the field of rural development. Minister Shraim also convened with representatives of the Central Fund for the Displaced, whereby conferees discussed the proposed plans to finalize the return of displaced people. The Minister stressed the "necessity to continue coordination and integration between the ministry and the fund at all levels, and work together to accomplish this task, within the available financial capabilities, in the hopes of closing this file in full."

Moucharafieh meets ILO delegation, UNICEF Representative
NNA/February 19/2020
Social Affairs Minister, Professor Ramzi Moucharafieh, welcomed on Wednesday in his office at the Ministry International Labor Organization 's Regional Director for Arab States, Dr. Ruba Jaradat, along with a delegation from the Organization. Discussions reportedly touched on the Organization's activities related to intensive employment and social protection programs in cooperation with the Ministry. Minister Moucharafieh also met with the Representative of the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) in Lebanon, Yukie Mokuo, with talks reportedly touching on joint projects between UNICEF and the Ministry with regard to protecting children from early employment and violence.

UNICEF provides cash support to more than 40,000 Lebanese children in context of current crisis
NNA/February 19/2020
Lebanon's deteriorating economic situation is threatening the livelihoods of the most vulnerable Lebanese households, putting children and young people's education, protection and health at risk. UNICEF with partners have activated a cash assistance programme to support approximately 40,000 children from 15,000 Lebanese families.Working with the National Poverty Targeting Program (NPTP), the Ministry of Social Affairs (MOSA), the Prime Minister's Office and the World Food Programme (WFP), UNICEF is targeting the poorest Lebanese households to receive a cash grant of between 160,000 LBP and 640,000 LBP. The grant is provided according to the number of children in the household, from zero up to six, supporting therefore more than 40,000 Lebanese children at risk due to the ongoing harsh economic conditions. "Children are now most vulnerable, in the midst of the current economic crisis in Lebanon," said Yukie Mokuo, UNICEF Representative to Lebanon. "As prices rise and people lose their jobs, everyone is affected, particularly in the poorest communities. While we continue to support the Government to develop a National Social Protection Policy, we also wanted to act fast and provide immediate support, as far as our resources would allow, to some of the poorest households in the country". Families are being informed of the cash assistance programme through the available communication channels including mobile phone messages, the NPTP call centre, and engagements at Social Development Centres across the country. This cash support to Lebanese households comes on top of UNICEF's existing programmes that support the most vulnerable Lebanese, Syrian and Palestinian children and young people across the country with basic services, including education, social assistance, child protection, youth development, health and nutrition, and water and sanitation.--UNICEF Press Release

Fahmi Says Ready to Authorize Accountability for Corrupt
Naharnet/February 19/2020
Interior Minister Mohammed Fahmi expressed readiness to authorize accountability mechanisms for any corrupt mayors or employees in Lebanon’s municipalities, LBCI TV said on Wednesday. The TV station said Fahmi has contacted Financial Prosecutor, Judge Ali Ibrahim affirming readiness to sign permits to pursue mayors and employees on charges of bribery and squandering of public funds. The Minister had earlier expressed determination to fight corruption and counter all kinds of challenges he might face in his ministry.

Lebanon 'Kick Queen' Protest Icon to Face Trial
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/February 19/2020
A woman whose kick to the groin of a Lebanese ministerial bodyguard made her an instant protest icon was summoned to court Wednesday and will face trial in November. On October 17 last year, the day unprecedented cross-sectarian protests demanding a radical overhaul of the political system erupted across the country, she kicked the gun-wielding bodyguard whose minister was being confronted by demonstrators. The moment she delivered her side kick was caught on video, fast becoming a viral meme and a symbol of the kind of message protesters wanted to send their rulers. Malak Alawiye, against whom charges were brought last year over the kick, was summoned to a military court on Wednesday, a judicial source told AFP. She will face trial in November for bodily harm and insulting the security forces. The protest movement was ignited in October by a tax on voice calls made with WhatsApp and other messaging apps. It has since grown into the biggest challenge yet to the patriarchal, sectarian and nepotistic political system that has governed the country for decades. Earlier this month, Human Rights Watch criticized Lebanon for resorting to military courts to try several other civilians involved in the protest movement. "Military courts have no business trying civilians," the watchdog said in a statement. "Lebanon's parliament should end this troubling practice by passing a law to remove civilians from the military court's jurisdiction entirely," it added.

France Steps Up Probe into Ghosn's Versailles Wedding
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/February 19/2020
French investigators said Wednesday they were stepping up their investigation into two parties thrown by fallen auto titan Carlos Ghosn at the Palace of Versailles, including his lavish 2016 wedding. The prosecutor's office in the Paris suburb of Nanterre, which had been leading the probe, said it had been handed to an investigating magistrate, which means that Ghosn -- who jumped bail in Japan in December -- could soon face charges in France. The big-spending former chief of Japan's Nissan and France's Renault is suspected of wrongly obtaining use of the sumptuous home of 17th century "Sun King" Louis XIV in exchange for a sponsorship deal between the state-owned palace and Renault. The first party, on March 9, 2014, was officially held to celebrate the alliance between Nissan and Renault, which had turned 15. But it also happened to coincide with Ghosn's 60th birthday and most of the guests were friends and family of the businessman, leading to suspicions that it was, in fact, a birthday bash. Ghosn, 65, returned to Versailles in October 2016 to exchange vows with his wife Carole. Versailles waived the usual 50,000-euro rental fee for the Marie Antoinette-themed wedding in what could amount to a further misuse of company resources. He is also being investigated by France's tax fraud office over suspicious financial transactions between Renault and its distributor in the Gulf state of Oman, as well as over contracts signed by Renault's and Nissan's Dutch subsidiary RNBV. The car industry was left reeling after Ghosn was arrested in Tokyo in November 2018 on charges of financial misconduct at Nissan. He spent 130 days in detention in Japan before being placed under house arrest, but slipped past police out of the country, back to his native Lebanon. The tycoon has denied all the charges against him and vowed to take Renault to court to claim millions of euros in unpaid pension and retirement pay.

Lebanon: 'One-Sided Government' to Resolve Issue of Syrian Displaced
Beirut- Paula Astih/Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 19 February, 2020
President Michel Aoun is counting on the new government to speed up the birth of a solution for the return of the Syrian displaced to their homeland, after internal disagreements in the former government had hindered a solution to the file. In remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, a parliamentary source in the Free Patriotic Movement said that Prime Minister Hassan Diab’s government might be able to finally implement a plan for the safe return of the displaced. “Perhaps some people’s description of the current government as ‘one-sided’ could help resolve the displaced issue, which put great burdens on the Lebanese economy,” he noted. Former Minister for the Displaced, Saleh al-Gharib - who is close to the head of the Democratic Gathering party Talal Arslan - was working on a plan that faced opposition from some other members of the former government. The ministry was dissolved, and its work was put under the framework of the Ministry of Social Affairs, which is now headed by Minister Ramzi Msharafieh, who is also close to Arslan. According to available information, the team, which was working on the plan under Gharib, has maintained the same role, but this time within the Social Affairs ministry. “Implementing the plan has become easier for the new government, given its line-up, which gives it the opportunity to work away from political bickering,” the parliamentary sources told Asharq Al-Awsat. Aoun links the economic and financial crises that beset the country to the influx of displaced. He said last week that the cost of the Syrian displacement crisis in Lebanon amounted to $25 billion, according to estimates by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

Lebanon Speaker Nabih Berri calls for restructuring Eurobond as ‘best solution’
Reuters/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Lebanon’s Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri sees debt restructuring as the “best solution” for the country’s Eurobond maturities, which include one on March 9, an MP from Berri’s Shia Amal Movement said after a weekly meeting on Wednesday. His comments came on the day a source familiar with the matter said that Lebanon will invite eight firms to bid to be its financial adviser as it studies all options on its sovereign debt. Berri's comments on Monday were the first by a top-level leader publicly urging restructuring, one the eve of talks between a team of IMF experts and Lebanese authorities. Previously, Berri said he believes Lebanon needs technical help from the IMF to draw up an economic rescue plan and a decision on whether to pay a Eurobond maturing in March should be taken based on IMF advice, according to sources on Tuesday. Berri also believes Lebanon cannot “surrender” itself to the IMF “because of its “incapacity to bear its conditions,” said the government source, who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity, and an-Nahar, quoting Berri’s visitors.

Iran’s Larijani in Lebanon viewed as signal of Beirut's pivot toward Iran axis
Abby Sewell, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Iranian Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani’s visit to Lebanon has sent a signal that Tehran is seeking to drag Lebanon closer to the Iranian axis, but his offer of Iranian money to help Lebanon's struggling economy has been dismissed by experts as untrue. The first foreign official to visit Beirut since new Prime Minister Hassan Diab formed a government, Larijani said Tehran is ready to help Lebanon through its current economic and currency crises. Diab's government was selected exclusively by parties from the Iran-backed Hezbollah-allied bloc, previously known as the March 8 coalition.
Larijani's visit has therefore been seen as Iran attempting to boost its influence in Lebanon with the new government. In Beirut, Larijani met with Lebanese officials, including President Michel Aoun, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Diab, and Hezbollah head Hassan Nasrallah, who does not hold any official position in government. Speaking at a press conference Monday, Larijani said, “Lebanon is going through a sensitive stage, and we hope that the new government headed by Hassan Diab will be able to overcome all difficulties, and we are fully prepared to cooperate with the Lebanese government in all areas.”Iran's Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani meets with Lebanese President Michel Aoun. (Twitter)

Trump’s peace plan rejected by Lebanese parties, Palestinian groups in Lebanon
Abby Sewell, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
A group representing the major Lebanese political parties and Palestinian factions in Lebanon rejected on Wednesday US President Donald Trump’s plan to solve the Israel-Palestine conflict, known as the so-called “Deal of the Century.”
While the US plan was immediately embraced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his election rival Benny Gantz, it has been rejected by much of the international community, including Palestinian and Arab leaders. The Lebanese-Palestinian Dialogue Committee (LPDC), a body set up by the Lebanese government to oversee issues related to Palestinian refugees, is the latest organization to reject the deal with a joint statement issued by its Palestinian and Lebanese working groups after a meeting in Beirut’s Grand Serail.
The US plan “poses risks not only to the refugees and the Palestinian cause, but also to all countries and entities of the Arab region, specifically Lebanon,” said LPDC Chairman Hassan Mneymneh.
“This ‘deal’ aims specifically to abolish the identity and existence of the Palestinian people and their national rights … and to settle them in the host countries, including Lebanon,” he added.
No right of return, no UNRWA
The LPDC groups criticized the plan’s provisions that would curtail the right of return for Palestinian refugees and abolish the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for Palestinian refugees.
Under the proposed deal, there would be no right for Palestinian refugees to return to areas in what is now Israel, and applications to return to the Palestinian territory could also be rejected for security or other reasons. The deal envisions those unable to return to Palestine being absorbed into their host countries.
More than 470,000 Palestinian refugees are registered with UNRWA in Lebanon, although due to immigration, the actual number living in the country is believed to be much lower. A census conducted in all of Lebanon’s Palestinian camps and gatherings in 2017 counted only 174,000 Palestinian refugees.
Mneymneh told Al Arabiya English after the meeting, “The Arab community, the Arab countries, must meet and work seriously to provide the possibility to cancel this deal, through strong and effective diplomatic maneuvers, through increasing support for the Palestinian people, increasing support for UNRWA.”
The end of UNRWA in Lebanon, he said, “would be a complete disaster, because Lebanon is not able to take on the cost” of providing the needed services to the refugees.
Plans to take action
The working group statement also outlined plans to lobby to advocate for the Palestinians and counter the proposed plan.
On the international level, it pledged to lobby for a “two-state solution and the right of return of refugees based on relevant international resolutions” and for ongoing support for UNRWA.
Regionally, the group confirmed its “commitment to the Arab peace initiative in dealing with the continued Israeli aggression and [that of] its American ally against the Palestinian people and their rights.”
Within Palestine and Lebanon, it pledged to resolve conflicts between factions and “expand the scope of civil resistance in occupied Palestine; and at the Lebanese level to coordinate steps to confront the deal with the Arab League, the Palestinians, and the international community.”
Fathi Abu al-Ardat, secretary of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) in Lebanon, told Al Arabiya English, “The most important thing is that there should be a unified stance from all groups: Palestinians and Lebanese and Arabs, that there is a refusal of the Deal of the Century … Today there is a shared stance by Lebanese, Palestinians, Christians and Muslims. We are all speaking in one language.”
Renewed focus on Palestinians in Lebanon
The group statement also committed to working to “improve the conditions of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, thereby strengthening their resilience until their return to their homeland.”
Palestinians have had a contentious status in Lebanon, where they have limited rights with regards to work and property ownership in the country. Last year, mass protests erupted in the country’s Palestinian camps after the Ministry of Labor began cracking down on businesses employing non-Lebanese workers – including Palestinian refugees – without work permits.
Abu al-Ardat said he is hoping that now, with the newly formed government in place, Lebanese officials will return to the question of Palestinians’ rights and living conditions.
“In the past period there has been October 17 and the popular movements, but we need to find space to open the Palestinian case,” he said.
“Today the Palestinian is living in difficult circumstances in the camps. There is unemployment, there are no work opportunities – it’s a miserable situation …We need solutions, and this is the responsibility of UNRWA and the Lebanese state and the international community and the PLO factions,” he added.

Statue Of Qassem Soleimani Put Up By Hizbullah In South Lebanon Sparks Criticism: It Is An Expression Of Iran’s Patronage Over Lebanon
MEMRI/February 19, 2020
On February 15, 2020, Hizbullah unveiled in the village of Maroun Al-Ras in South Lebanon a large statue of Qassem Soleimani, the commander of the Qods Force in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps who was killed in an American airstrike on January 3, 2020 in Baghdad. The statue, which stands near the Lebanon-Israel border, shows Soleimani pointing towards Israel while a Palestinian flag flies behind him. The unveiling ceremony was attended by Soleimani's children and by many Hizbullah officials and supporters.[1]
Hizbullah’s erection of the statue sparked considerable criticism from Lebanese public figures, politicians, journalists and citizens, who described it as yet another expression of Iran’s patronage over Lebanon by means of its proxy, Hizbullah. They accused this organization of being Iranian rather than Lebanese and of ignoring the existence of the state. Some also criticized the Lebanese leaders, who they said allow Hizbullah to do as it wishes in Lebanon and never hold it to account.
In response to the criticism, a Hizbullah MP defended the decision to erect the statue, and asked why Beirut could have streets named after French WWI generals, yet a statue of the fighter Soleimani sparks objection.
It should be noted that this is not the first time Hizbullah has honored Iranian officials and Hizbullah commanders who were involved in terrorism by memorializing them in public places in Lebanon. The previous instances likewise sparked public criticism.
This report presents translated excerpts from some of the reactions to the statue of Soleimani.
Lebanese Politicians: This Confirms Iran's Patronage Over Lebanon
Politician and journalist May Chidiac, former minister of Administrative Development and member of Samir Geagea's Lebanese Forces party, who is known for her tough stance against Hizbullah, tweeted angrily: "Are we in Lebanon or in Iran? After naming the road to the [Beirut] airport after [Ayatollah] Khomeini [in February 2019], Hizbullah has now celebrated the unveiling of a statue of Soleimani in the South! Why this insistence on changing the identity of Lebanon and involving it in the struggle between the axes[?]! Where is [the policy] of disassociating [Lebanon from conflicts]?[2] Every day Hizbullah confirms that it is a branch of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps and of the [Iranian Rule of the] Jurisprudent, rather than a Lebanese body!"[3]
Georges Hayak, also from the Lebanese Forces party, tweeted: "I might have understood if they had erected a statue of a late Hizbullah leader on the Lebanese border, even without the consent of all Lebanese. But putting up a statue of an Iranian military figure such as Qassem Soleimani [only] confirms what is said about Lebanon being under Iranian control. It is also an affront to the will of the entire Lebanese people."[4]
Former justice minister Ashraf Rifi tweeted: "The erection of a monument to Soleimani in South [Lebanon] has nothing to do with the conflict with Israel, but is merely confirmation of Iran’s patronage of Lebanon. [Soleimani's] Qods Force did not fight for Jerusalem, but devastated Syria and Iraq and turned Lebanon into a failed state. Iran's patronage makes our economic crisis worse. This is a matter for the Lebanese president, prime minister and [other] officials to address.[5]
Diana Mukalled, a columnist for the Lebanese Al-Hayat daily, tweeted: "A statue of Qassem Soleimani has been erected in South Lebanon… As usual, [these are] useless and contemptible attempts to give this criminal murderer a false halo of sanctity."[6]
Former Lebanese prime minister Fouad Al-Siniora said that the roads were public spaces and that no faction was entitled to put up statues there without at least consulting the Lebanese government. "The country has no shortage [of problems], and the erection of this statue is an unhelpful and imprudent move," he added.[7]
Criticism Of The Authorities: The State Has No Presence; Its Officials Ignore The Iranian Occupation
Some former politicians directed their criticism at the authorities and current officials, who allow Hizbullah to do as it pleases. Antoine Zahra, a former MP from Samir Geagea’s Lebanese Forces party, wondered: "Are statues not considered idols? As far as I know, [Hizbullah] does not believe in idols and regards statues [as a form of] paganism and heresy… The problem is that the state does not seem to exist, [and its heads] think it wise to refrain from asking [Hizbullah] any questions, as though this can distance them from any problems. [Hizbullah members] recognizes the existence of the state only when they need it, and circumvent it when they do not need it. When they start wars in the region without asking anyone, Nasrallah expects us to come to an agreement and support the government, [warning that otherwise] the roof might collapse over our heads. How can we hold these people to account?... Hizbullah tries to impose a certain way of behavior, so that the Lebanese become used to refraining from asking questions, protesting or holding it to account for its illegal actions. This organization thinks the law applies to others, but not to itself."[8]
Former MP Fares Souaid also directed harsh criticism at the Lebanese officials, who allow the Iranian occupation, as he called it. He tweeted: "The criticism voiced by some over the erection of the statue of Qassem Soleimani is absurd. Lebanon is under Iranian occupation, [but] nobody has the honesty to admits it. Moreover, [even] some [state officials] are okay with it, on the pretext of being 'pragmatic.' You [officials] sit with representatives of the Iranian occupation in the municipal councils, in parliament, in the government and in [other] administrative bodies, and voice no objection. And you make muscles when it comes to a statue? Remove Iran's patronage [from Lebanon]."[9]
Lebanese Twitter Users: How Would Hizbullah Respond If We Put Up A Statue Of An American Or A Saudi?
Criticism of Hizbullah for putting up the statue was also voiced by Lebanese users on Twitter. Paula Nawfal, who writes in the Al-Nahar daily, tweeted: "A statue of Soleimani on the Lebanese border [with Israel]. What do you think? Imagine it: how would [Hizbullah's] respond if we put up a statue of some American or Saudi figure?"[10]
Lebanese user Walid Ghanem tweeted: "What did Qassem Soleimani do for Lebanon to deserve having his statue [put up] in Maroun Al-Ras? Who is more important, Qassem Soleimani, or the martyrs of the Lebanese army who sacrificed their lives to liberate the land? Only they deserve a statue [in their honor]."[11]
Many Lebanese also tweeted under the hashtag "Lebanon is greater than your Soleimani." Among them was user Abu Rimas, who tweeted: "The Lebanese will pay the price for Lebanon melting into Hizbullah's mini-state and its joining of the Iranian axis. Sadly, we will pay very dearly."[12]
Hizbullah Official: Iran Came To Lebanon's Aid; Putting Up The Statue Is Legitimate
In response to the criticism, Hizbullah MP Anwar Jum'a said: "There are several streets in the capital Beirut named after enemies of Lebanon. Let’s replace the names of the streets named after the [French] generals Foch and Gouraud, who conquered Lebanon."[13] He condemned what he called the ceaseless attacks on Iran, "which always extends aid to Lebanon when the Americans are throttling us. We have placed the monument in front of the [Israeli] occupier who [once] humiliated us and today does not dare to glance in our direction…"[14]
Highway Named After Khomeini; Street Named After Senior Hizbullah Member Accused Of Assassinating Al-Hariri
This is not the first time that Hizbullah has chosen to memorialize Iranian leaders and its own senior commanders in public places in Lebanon, and especially in the Dahiya, its stronghold in Beirut.
In February 2019, the Lebanese were surprised to discover a sign indicating that the highway leading out of Beirut international airport was now called Imam Khomeini Avenue, after the founder of the Islamic regime in Iran. This aroused many angry reactions among Lebanese who wondered, "Why does the name of the imam Khomeini meet us just as we leave the airport? Are we in Beirut or in Teheran?" Others accused Hizbullah of attempting to transform Lebanon into an Iranian province, to change its identity, and to take over its culture.[15]
In response to the criticism, the mayor of the town of Al-Ghobeiry, which is part of the Dahiya, said that the town had decided to name the highway after Khomeini already in 2002, and that the interior ministry had approved this, but that implementation of the decision had been delayed.[16]
Imam Khomeini Avenue at the exit from Beirut airport (Source: Lebanondebate.com, March 1, 2019)
Furthermore, in September 2018, the Al- Ghobeiry municipality announced that it had named a road in the town after Hizbullah official Mustafa Badr Al-Din, who was killed in Syria in 2016 and who was identified by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon as one of the main suspects in the assassination of Rafiq Al-Hariri. Then-interior minister Nohad Al Machnouk stated that the ministry had not approved the naming of the street after Badr Al-Din and demanded the removal of the sign, since the matter was politically controversial and was likely to disrupt public order in the country.[17] Other political figures and journalists agreed with the criticism, while Hizbullah members justified the naming of the street after Badr Al-Din.[18]
Street named after "the martyr Mustafa Badr Al-Din" (Source: Al-Nahar, Lebanon, September 19, 2019)
[1] Raialyoum.com, February 16, 2020.
[2] In August 2011, following UNSC discussions on the events in Syria, Lebanon – at the time headed by the administration of prime minister Najib Mikati comprising primarily allies of Syria, and also at the time a member of the UNSC – took an official position of "disassociating itself from" events in Syria. The UNSC passed, 14 to 1 (Lebanon), a Presidential Statement condemning Syria. Lebanon "cut itself off" from the consensus, thus refraining from criticizing Syria, but also not thwarting the UNSC's condemnation. Since then, every Lebanese government has defined its policy as one of "disassociating itself" from events in Syria and from the disputes in the region – meaning also from the Saudi-Iranian dispute. This solution, which is essentially refraining from taking a stand at all, has successfully bridged the tremendous gaps between the pro-Saudi camp in the country led by Prime Minister Sa'd Al-Hariri and the pro-Iran camp led by Hizbullah.
[3] Twitter.com/may_chidiac, February 16, 2020.
[4] Twitter.com/georgeshayak712, February 15, 2020.
[5] Twitter.com/Ashraf_Rifi, February 16, 2020.
[6] Twitter.com/dianamoukalled, February 16, 2020.
[7] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), February 17, 2020.
[8] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), February 17, 2020.
[9] Twitter.com/FaresSouaid, February 17, 2020.
[10] Twitter.com/paulanawfal, February 15, 2020.
[11] Twitter.com/walidghanem, February 15, 2020.
[12] Twitter.com/mufrh1, February 16, 2020.
[13] Henri Gouraud was a high-rankling French general in World War I and the first French High Commissioner in Syria and Lebanon after the war. On September 1, 1920 he declared the creation of the Greater State of Lebanon. Ferdinand Foch was also a French general, who served as the Supreme Allied Commander in World War I. In 1983 a destroyer named after him helped the French forces that were posted in Lebanon as part of a multinational force.
[14] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), February 17, 2020.
[15] Almodon.com, February 21, 2019.
[16] Lebanondebate.com, March 1, 2019; Lebanon24.com, February 23, 2019.
[17] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), September 19, 2018.
[18] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London), Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), September 19, 2018; Arabipress.org, September 24, 2018.

Iran’s Larijani in Lebanon viewed as signal of Beirut's pivot toward Iran axis
Abby Sewell, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Iranian Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani’s visit to Lebanon has sent a signal that Tehran is seeking to drag Lebanon closer to the Iranian axis, but his offer of Iranian money to help Lebanon's struggling economy has been dismissed by experts as untrue. The first foreign official to visit Beirut since new Prime Minister Hassan Diab formed a government, Larijani said Tehran is ready to help Lebanon through its current economic and currency crises. Diab's government was selected exclusively by parties from the Iran-backed Hezbollah-allied bloc, previously known as the March 8 coalition.
Larijani's visit has therefore been seen as Iran attempting to boost its influence in Lebanon with the new government. In Beirut, Larijani met with Lebanese officials, including President Michel Aoun, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Diab, and Hezbollah head Hassan Nasrallah, who does not hold any official position in government. Speaking at a press conference Monday, Larijani said, “Lebanon is going through a sensitive stage, and we hope that the new government headed by Hassan Diab will be able to overcome all difficulties, and we are fully prepared to cooperate with the Lebanese government in all areas.”
Iran unable to offer much
Larijani “called for promoting Tehran-Beirut relations and expressed his country's readiness for helping Lebanon in the economic, trade, industrial, pharmaceutical, scientific, cultural, agricultural, and military arenas,” according to Iran’s official Islamic Republic News Agency. He noted specifically that Iran might be able to help Lebanon with their chronic electricity problem by providing technological support. However, he did not specify how much aid was on offer, or what form it would take, making some observers skeptical. “What the Iranians are capable of providing I would imagine to be fairly limited, given their dire financial situation,” said Firas Maksad, a Washington-based consultant on Middle East policy and adjunct professor at George Washington University’s Elliot School for International Affairs. Iran had, in the past, offered to provide Lebanon with more affordable, Iranian-made medications – which could help in the current situation in which Lebanon could face shortages of imported drugs due to the lack of dollars in the country – noted Maksad. Already, Lebanon has had to ration dialysis supplies and some medical equipment is in short supply.
Iran has also offered military aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces, he said, but accepting such assistance could lead to the US cutting its military aid.
Surprise visit drew critical responses
Larijani’s had not been invited and his visit came as a surprise to many Lebanese officials, said Maksad.
“It caught Lebanese officials off guard and put them in a difficult situation politically,” Maksad said, given how the visit was likely to be perceived by Western countries, which have already been wary of the new Lebanese government. Larijani also praised Hezbollah and advocated for Lebanon to turn away from the US and Saudi Arabia, saying that if Lebanese officials “hold out their hand for help to the US and Saudi Arabia, their crisis will remain unresolved.” Larijani’s visit and Lebanon’s apparent move toward Iran more generally have been criticized by political leaders in the camp opposed to Hezbollah, formerly known as the March 14 coalition. Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, who resigned in November, said Friday, on the anniversary of the 2005 assassination of his father, former Prime Minister Rafic Hariri, that the promise of Iranian money “solves a party crisis, not the country’s crisis.”
Ashraf Rifi, a former Minister of Justice and sometime political rival of Hariri within the Sunni community, wrote on Twitter following Larijani’s visit, “Mr. Larijani must know that Lebanon is an independent country, not an Iranian governate, and that illegal weapons will not change its identity.”
Lebanese citizens, whatever their political alliances, are largely eager for the country to stay out of larger geopolitical conflicts. Abed, a warehouse worker in Beirut who was relaxing on the corniche Tuesday afternoon, told Al Arabiya English that he wants to see Lebanon remain neutral.
“We are a small country, a very small country,” he said. “We don’t want to take sides with anyone – not with Iran, not with Saudi [Arabia], not with England, not with America. We need to be friends with all of them.” As to the proffered Iranian aid, he said, “If someone wants to come to the country and wants to be a friend to the country, he’s welcome. But if someone wants to come and push his politics, the politics of the country he’s coming from, here, I don’t think that’s right.”
US Ambassador meets Diab
The day after Larijani’s visit on Monday, Diab received the US Ambassador to Lebanon, Elizabeth Richard, a potential signal that the new government does not want to entirely pivot away from the West. On Wednesday, Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias arrived in Beirut.
According to the state National News Agency, the meeting “focused on the most recent developments in Lebanon and the region. The pair also discussed the best means to boost US-Lebanese bilateral ties.”
The embassy declined to give a statement following the meeting.

Why Shouldn’t the Kataeb and Communist Parties Meet?
Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/February 19/2020
Two weeks ago, delegations from the Lebanese Kataeb party and the Lebanese Communist Party met to hold discussions and ''dialogue''. The meeting, as became known later, was not the first of its kind, but it was the first of its magnitude. There are two reasons for this: it was announced, and it was held in the midst of the revolution’s atmosphere. This was followed up by another one that brought together a delegation from the Kataeb with a delegation from the ''Communist action organization''.
The event took social media websites by storm, accompanied by many positive and negative reactions. However, what was remarkable was the prominence of hardline voices within what is supposedly the Communists’ environment, which is led by Hezbollah and, behind it, the Syrian and Iranian regimes.
These hardliners condemned the communists and disavowed their "deed".
Actually, many justifications and explanations can be offered for this meeting. For the two parties held similar positions during the revolution, and their opposition to the ruling establishment links them to one another in the first place. The Kataeb, under Samy Gemayel’s leadership, is different to what it had been before it: it seems determined to appear more modern and in touch with the changes brought about by the passage of time. It boycotted government (though not the regime) through its three deputies’ non participation in the session held to give it parliament’s confidence. Most importantly, the party transformed its headquarters in Saifi, Beirut, into one of the revolutions’ centers, offering first aid and urgent treatment to the revolutionaries.
The Communist Party, or some of it at least, has changed as well. After a long period of being ignored by its allies during the Pax Syriana period (1990-2005) and after the murder of several of their major figures and intellectuals at the hands of men linked to Hezbollah, the October 17 revolution put the party at a crossroads that it is difficult to overlook: are we to support the socio-economic demands being made by the vast majority of Lebanese, which is supposedly our raison d'être, or should we support the regime that includes Hezbollah?
In southern Lebanon, in Nabatieh, Kfar Rumman and Tyre communists and ex-communists beat their party to solving this contradiction as they favored the revolution. Thus, Hezbollah and its ally, the Amal movement, went about repressing it more than once.
Looking back on major historical turning points, one can add other instances to this rapprochement: the two parties were brought to life in almost the same geographical region, and their histories have witnessed few junctures at which their positions intersected, though there are many junctures at which they collided. Some of their agreements include the battle for independence in 1943 and Fuad Chehab’s rule in the sixties, which they both supported, though from different positions.
Why then, should the Kataeb and the communists not meet and hold discussions?
The most prominent justification, if not the only one, which the meetings’ critics hold on to, starts with the 1975 war, also known as the Two Year War. That is because the Kataeb fought against the Palestinian resistance, which the Communist Party had been allied with. This conflict with the Palestinian militants, then with the Syrian hegemony, established Kataebist-Israeli relations that culminated in 1982 with the Bashir Gemayel’s arrival to the presidency in the midst of the Israeli invasion.
However, while many Lebanese see departure from a supposed Lebanese consensus in this issue, is there not a similar number of Lebanese who see in the Communist Party’s support of the Palestinian resistance against the Lebanese state the same departure from the supposed Lebanese consensus?
Let us agree, then, that the real issue is one of building a new national Lebanese consensus, or that this is what should be hoped for in a country where the meanings of nationhood and patriotism, and many other notions as well, have been contentious for a long time. If this assumption is correct, then it would be valid to say that the October 17 revolution is an attempt to establish new meanings for patriotism and nationhood that break with the divisions inherited from the civil war. In this sense, we ought to welcome the step taken by the Kataeb and the communists, and other similar steps that may be taken by other parties that had been in conflict.
This is precisely where those who condemned this meeting see the problem to be: they do not want a Lebanese patriotism to take form, preferring the country to remain an arena in which regional issues are contested. Their memory is stuck in 1975 and their world is that of the civil war. This position cannot but be sectarian: for what is being said about the Kataeb could, with the same rationale, also be said about the Lebanese Forces and even about the Aounists before they joined the Assad camp.
In other words: a view that prioritizes regional conflict inevitably translates to isolating Christians, not just the Kataeb, as was said in 1975. The least that could be said about this sectarian stance is that it relies purely on outdated rhetoric and consciousness. Whoever doubts this ought to go over the concerns and slogans that dominated the Lebanese revolution and that also dominated the other Arab revolutions, which prioritized the national over the regional and the nation over the ''arena''.
However, and for this reason, those who incited against the two parties' meeting have nothing but animosity for the revolution. It is a new national event, and they are old sectarians. Supporting it dictates the encouragement of any rapprochement among its forces and those sympathetic to it, while those who oppose the revolution oppose the convergence among those forces, suggesting that the communists should continue to support Hezbollah instead. After all, isn’t the latter exonerated from sectarianism, which is monopolized by the Kataeb?

What Does Saad al-Hariri’s Political Shift Mean?
Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/February 19/2020
It was truly dramatic how Lebanon’s ex-Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri announced the ‘end of the road’ for the ‘Presidential Settlement’ of 2016, which resulted in electing General Michel Aoun as President, and him taking over as Prime Minister.
The ‘settlement’ that now seems dead was then seen by many Lebanese as an illogical deal with no justification but gaining time, while Lebanon was under the burden of an effective regional occupation armed that was too powerful for the Lebanese to end.
Several considerations led to this catastrophic deal, which – at least on paper – gave the armed occupation the legitimacy it has always lacked. Among these considerations were:
1- The animosity of Aoun - as well as his Christian sectarian base - towards the ‘Taif Accords; and subsequently the Sunni leadership built by the late Rafic al-Hariri, made him in February 2006 enter an alliance with Hezbollah, the strongest theocratic Shi’ite organization. Indeed, Hezbollah, and those behind it in Iran, were never less hateful to ‘political Sunnism’ than Aoun and his followers.
2- The Aoun – Hezbollah alliance has been the main beneficiary from Washington’s ‘soft’ stance and its silence towards it. The alliance has done even better, as the Middle East policies of former US President Barack Obama showed that the White House was not only willing to co-exist with the Iranian regime, but actually accepted Tehran’s de facto hegemony over most of the Middle East.
3- As the survival of the Assad regime in Syria was secured, thanks to strong Iranian and Russian support, the lukewarm international position developed into an intentional letting down of the Syrian Uprising, under the pretext of ‘confronting terrorism and extremism’. This situation had its own repercussions in Lebanon, where Hezbollah was one of the primary military backers of Assad’s regime, while Aoun and his pro-Iran Shiite ally used “saving Lebanon from ISIS” as an excuse to resurrect the old ‘Coalition of Minorites’ against ‘Political Sunnism’ after accusing the Sunnis of being a ‘fertile ground’ for terrorism and extremism.
4- The international community’s betrayal of the Syrian Uprising, which both almost killed it off, and helped besiege the Lebanese Sunnis politically, convinced many Lebanese Christian that Aoun’s gamble on Hezbollah was perhaps a wise bet, that reflected the ‘General’’s wisdom and his good understanding of global politics. This feeling within the Christian community pushed Aoun’s opponents and critics into a corner; thus pushing the ‘Lebanese Forces’ party, Aoun’s strongest Christian opponents, to turn the page and sign an agreement with Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) in 2016. This agreement, according to which the LF would support the election of Aoun as President, became known as the ‘Mi’rab Agreement’; noting that Mi’rab is the village where Dr. Samir Geagea, the LF leader, resides.
5- The agreement between the FPM and the LF - the two largest Christian parties - to nominate Aoun deprived Saad al-Hariri (the strongest Sunni leader) and Walid Jumblatt (the foremost leader of the Druze) of any excuse to oppose their old foe Aoun; as the latter now enjoyed the widest possible Christian support to fill the highest post constitutionally reserved for the Christian Maronite community.
The above-mentioned five considerations, in addition to the regional and international positions, allowed the election of Aoun in 2016, although he was for years the declared candidate of Hezbollah. In fact, in order to force his election Hezbollah disrupted Lebanon’s political life on several occasions.
This achievement secured Iran’s ‘occupation’ (through Hezbollah) a political ‘legitimacy’ the Iranians were keen to cement. This goal required two more steps while Hezbollah keeps its arms and its security, financial, and political structures.
The First was to adopt an electoral law that suits Iran and ensures the election of a pliant pro-Tehran parliament where Hezbollah and its allies would win a majority of seats thanks to its exclusive arms’ advantage.
The second was to undermine the ‘Taif Accords’ – whose text was now enshrined in the Lebanese Constitution – through disabling and nullifying it by marginalizing the Prime Minister, diminishing his powers, and overruling him in favor of the President.
From the standpoint of ‘consociationalism’ (or factional consensus), whereby major sects are represented by its strongest representative leaders, this was the major advantage for Aoun. However, in order to complete the ‘scenario’ the most representative Sunni had to be co-opted, albeit temporarily, in a masterplan he was supposed to understand where it would lead to.
Saad al-Hariri, given his deep knowledge of Aoun’s political history, and the history and aims of Hezbollah, was expected to be aware that he would be used to destroy the ‘Taif Accords’, and cover Iran’s hegemony through Hezbollah. This would lead to the collapse of his credibility within his own sectarian power base.
Thus, when al-Hariri spoke on the 15th anniversary of his father’s assassination and announced the demise of the Presidential settlement’, he candidly declared that there were strong attempts to bringing Lebanon back to the pre-1989 period; i.e., attempts to finish off the ‘Taif Accords’ and bring down ‘Harirism’!
He also talked about the mentality of ‘Wars of Elimination’ which “one time wanted to eliminate the Progressive Socialist Party and its leader Jumblatt, another wanted to eliminate the ‘Lebanese Forces’ even after Mi’rab, a third wanted to eliminate the Popular Uprising, and now its wants to eliminate Harirism and the Future Movement”. Defending why he still went ahead with the said settlement, Hariri explained: “I was trying to ensure stability to the relationship between the Presidency and the Prime Minister’s office; first, because stability merits endurance and patience, and second because disagreement would only lead to disabled institutions”.
Well, this is a noble thing to say; however, politically it is both ill-timed and useless. Regarding the issue of time, the Lebanese economic situation is so critical that people do not believe their political leaders can rally their supporters through stirring up familiar tribal affinities anymore.
As for the issue of uselessness, Hariri’s mistake in going through with what proved to be a ‘suicidal settlement’ was so huge that he failed to convince even some of his most loyal advisors. Those have since moved away from him, and relations soured between him and many of his allies, although some of them would still give him the benefit of the doubt. Furthermore, what happened has happened, whether regarding the barely constitutional electoral law that has been implanted under the shadow of Hezbollah’s arsenal, or the election of a president who wanted to be a foe and an arbiter at the same time.
Thus, Hariri’s ‘uprising’ is necessary but insufficient, in the absence of a serious political vision that can reassure a hungry, worried, and frustrated population that there is a light at the end of the tunnel, and are trustworthy alternatives in the political elite.

Full-blown economic crisis will plunge quarter of Lebanese below poverty line
Georgi Azar/Annahar/February 19/2020
Data from the World Bank in 2018 had set the poverty rate at 32 percent and unemployment between 35 and 38 percent.
BEIRUT: Almost two million people will drop below the poverty line while unemployment skyrockets to above 40 percent, setting the stage for one of the worst economic downturns in Lebanon's history.
"Two million Lebanese will live below the poverty line in 2020 if the new government does not emphasize social protection," former minister of Social Affairs Richard Kouyoumjian told Annahar. A person living below the poverty threshold in Lebanon earns less than $8.6 a day.
Data from the World Bank in 2018 had set the poverty rate at 32 percent and unemployment between 35 and 38 percent.
"My concern is that will jump to over 50 percent," Kouyoumjian said. Austerity measures are in full effect across the board, with the Ministry of Education slashing public school hours. Students will be let go early on Wednesdays, according to a statement obtained by Annahar.
Drops in school funding mean cuts that affect school inputs, from teacher salaries to student resources; they also "have significant impacts on critical outcomes such as student achievement", according to the Center for American Progress.
Youth unemployment is also projected to reach 50 percent as Lebanese graduates find it increasingly difficult to secure jobs while dozens of businesses slash their salaries in half.
The food and beverage industry has taken the hardest hit, with 785 restaurants and cafes closing between September 2019 and February 2020, leading to 25,000 employees being laid off, Tony Ramy, the head of the Syndicate of Owners of Restaurants and Cafés, told Annahar.
With the lack of an effective social safety net, Lebanese lives will be put in jeopardy by the disintegration of what was once one of the Middle East's more prosperous economies.
240 F&B businesses closed shop in January alone with the majority of them (54.6 percent) located in Mount Lebanon, followed by Beirut (29.4%), North Lebanon (6.7%), South Lebanon (6.6%) and Bekaa (2.5%), Ramy said.
With Lebanese' purchasing power taking a massive hit as a result of inflation and the local currency losing more than 50 percent of its value, sales have decreased by more than 75 percent.
This has prompted hospitality establishments to halve salaries or shifting full-time workers to a part-time basis, he said.
Lebanese families are now finding it extremely difficult to secure basic foods, as even essential commodities have seen their prices increase given the lack of governmental oversight coupled with the lack of dollar liquidity.
"We've had to ration our food expenses after my paycheck was reduced by more than 30," Ibrahim, a father of four told Annahar.
“We used to allocate 50,000 LBP per week for groceries, and now $50 is not even enough. If things persist, I won’t be able to enroll my children next year in school or I'll will have to move them to public schools," he said.
Jad Radwan, a local grocery shop owner, laid the blame at the feet of the soaring black market dollar rate as banks have overwhelmingly halted lending.
“People come here and complain that prices are increasing. We have no choice. If we keep prices at the 1,500 rate, then we lose money. If we increase prices, we’re still losing money," he said.
A number of NGOs have sprouted in recent months in attempt to provide relief to struggling families while others have ramped up their efforts. Foodblessed, a local hunger-relief initiative founded in 2012 is sending out food assistance package or boxes to feed families of four for a month.
"We help anyone in need regardless of race, nationality or sex and focus on the neediest all across Lebanon. We help Lebanese, Syrian refugees, migrant workers, orphans, the elderly and vulnerable communities," Maya Terro, Co-founder and Executive Director at FoodBlessed told Annahar.
The economic slump has also caused a substantial spike in immigration.
Brain drain has always been a Lebanese distinction, given that the output of graduates far outweighs the local market's capacities.
Lebanon has one of the best-educated populations in the Middle East. The literacy rate is among the region’s highest, universities are among the best ranked, and according to UN’s Human Development Report (HDR) from 2013, 43 percent continue on universities or technical institutes after finishing high school.
In the leadup to the nationwide protests that broke out in late last year, however, immigration has almost increased two-folds.
According to Information International, a leading research and consultancy firm in Beirut, 61,924 Lebanese sought pastures news abroad between January and November 2019, up from 41,766 during the same period in 2018.
Mohamed Shams El-Din, a researcher at the firm, told Al-Nahar that "82 percent of them were less than 40 years old."
Google searches from within Lebanon of the term "immigration" rose during the same period, hitting a five-year peak between November and December, according to Google Trends.

Iran, Hezbollah operating with impunity in Yemen
Fatima Abo Alasrar/Arab News/February 20/2020
Four Hezbollah military operatives working alongside the Iran-backed Houthi militia east of the Yemeni capital Sanaa were killed by Saudi-led coalition airstrikes last week. The operatives were in Al-Jawf and Nihm, areas that witnessed intense fighting at the start of the year. These locations, known to be heavily tribal, are strongly aligned with Yemen’s government and the majority of them are under its authority. Hezbollah’s involvement and cooperation with the Houthis in these areas point to Iran’s overall interest in sustaining violence in Yemen and increasing the Houthis’ territorial gains, as it relies on its proxies to bolster its overall position in its current standoff with the US.
This increased appetite for violence and expansion is at odds with the Houthis’ rhetoric of de-escalation, which it signaled in September last year. The activity points to a renewed calculus in Yemen’s war, dictated to a large extent by Iran’s interest in the region, especially since the death of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) member Qassem Soleimani, who was the commander of Iran’s expeditionary Quds Force that specializes in unconventional warfare outside of Iran’s borders.
Evidence to support Iran or Hezbollah’s military involvement in Yemen was challenging to come by at the beginning of the conflict. But this involvement has been uncovered gradually throughout the years, showing a series of sophisticated covert operations and military support that elevated the Houthis’ capability. IRGC operatives thrived in Yemen and were able to enter the country and travel freely using Yemeni passports issued to them by the Houthis, according to local sources. Abdul Reza Shahlai, the deputy commander of the Quds Force, was recently targeted by the US in Yemen. Shahlai and his comrades have been focused on external operations that would serve Iran’s overall regional interests, including hampering the Saudi-led coalition’s actions in Yemen and attacking the Kingdom’s oil and military installations.
Iran, through its IRGC operatives and Hezbollah strategists, has set an agenda in parallel to the Houthis’ in order to reach its objectives in the region. Within this context, Iran helped the Houthis expand to achieve Tehran’s broader regional vision, which extends well beyond the scope and capacity of the Houthi group. Through the “Axis of Resistance” network, which the Houthis openly flaunt their membership of, extremist Shiite groups are uniting under Iran as a rival to Saudi Arabia, choosing destruction and violence as their methods of resistance.
Iran’s investment in nurturing the Houthis’ ability is not as recent as many may think. A video that was uncovered in a Saudi raid in Saada in early 2016 showed a Lebanese Hezbollah operative training several Houthi militiamen, citing examples of how Hezbollah helped the Houthis hide in water tankers in 2013 as they attacked the religious institute of Dammaj. This demonstrated the Houthis’ level of coordination with Hezbollah, which predates the current devastating nationwide conflict.
When in doubt about the relationship between the Houthis and Iran’s proxies, one should look for evidence from the Houthis’ leadership positions, statements or actions. In one instance last year, the Houthis organized a fundraiser to “pay back” Hezbollah for their “initial” support in the war. Add to this the several Houthi delegations that have been dispatched to Lebanon and Iran, openly flaunting their alliance with Hezbollah and the Iranian leadership.
The Houthis’ direct relationship with Iran needs to be assessed on its own, because it will have consequences for Yemen’s peace process. Undermining this aspect will lead to further miscalculations.
Of course, aside from moral support, there is an immaterial and ideological component that has rarely been assessed in understanding the Houthis’ relationship with Iran’s proxies, such as Hezbollah’s media support before and during the conflict. Hezbollah’s main television channel, Al-Manar, has been giving the Houthis a voice throughout Yemen’s conflict by broadcasting their messages. Al-Maseera, the Houthis’ main channel, has also aired messages of solidarity with Iran, Hezbollah, Bashar Assad, and all actors within the Axis of Resistance.
Moreover, material support to the Houthis from Hezbollah and Iran has continued unabated. Last week, the US Navy confirmed seizing a dhow with weapons that were being smuggled to the Houthis. The UN panel of experts report released in early February also mentioned that some of the weapons used by the Houthis “have technical characteristics similar to arms manufactured in the Islamic Republic of Iran.” This evidence, on top of other UN reports and fuel and arms smuggling from Iran, shows Tehran’s consistency in helping the Houthis maintain and increase their power.
Overlooking the relationship between Hezbollah and the Houthis has led to many erroneous assumptions about Yemen’s conflict; chief among them being the one that emphasizes the Houthis as an independent actor with a modest strategic and military capability and that rejects any foreign interference. This view is considered a “moderate” one among many Western analysts and Houthi sympathizers, allowing Iran and Hezbollah to operate with impunity in Yemen.
The Houthis are, of course, perfectly capable of making decisions on their own. Still, their decision-making capacity needs to be critically questioned when it goes against their self-interest or their stated objectives to de-escalate. For example, they falsely claimed to have attacked Saudi Aramco facilities in May last year, within days of their stated commitments of peace and good engagement in Hodeidah, which the UN had praised. The Houthis also falsely claimed to have attacked the Abqaiq and Khurais oil installations in September last year, completely covering up for Iran. Moreover, they have escalated in Al-Jawf, Marib and Al-Dali provinces despite issuing verbal commitments to peace in September last year. Focusing on the Houthis’ rhetoric and ignoring their actions is no longer useful if anyone is serious about the pursuit of peace in Yemen.
The Houthis’ direct relationship with Iran’s transnational Shiite network needs to be assessed on its own, because it will have consequences for Yemen’s peace process. Undermining this aspect will lead to further policy miscalculations, which up until now have completely underestimated the level of Iran’s dictation of policymaking by the Houthis, who continue to operate with significant latitude in Yemen. Stronger critical thinking into the Houthis’ behavior and prompt actions regarding their violations are needed if a settlement for Yemen is to be achieved.
*Fatima Abo Alasrar is a Non-Resident Scholar at the Middle East Institute. Twitter: @YemeniFatima

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on February 19-20/2020
Pompeo says prepared to talk to Iran ‘anytime’, pressure to continue
Reuters, Addis Ababa/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday said authorities in Washington were prepared to talk to Iran “anytime”, but that it needed to “fundamentally” change its behavior and that a campaign of maximum pressure against it would continue.“We are not rushed, the pressure campaign continues. It’s not just an economic pressure campaign... it’s isolation through diplomacy as well”, Pompeo told reporters in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa before boarding a flight to Saudi Arabia.

Black box in downed Ukrainian plane sustained ‘noticeable damage’: Iran
Tamara Abueish, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020A A
The black box of the Ukrainian passenger plane that was accidentally shot down by Iran has sustained “noticeable damage,” Tehran’s Defense Minister Amir Hatami said on Wednesday, according to the official IRNA news agency. The box “has sustained noticeable damage and it has been requested of the defense industry to help in reconstructing (it),” Hatami said. “The reconstruction of the black box is supposed to take place first and then the reading.”The plane was accidentally downed by Iran after Tehran launched several missiles targeting Iraqi bases hosting US troops. The attack came a few days after top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani was killed in Baghdad in a US airstrike. Tehran had asked the US and French authorities to help download the information on the boxes, after refusing to hand them over. The airstrike on the passenger plane, which was heading from the Imam Khomeini airport in Tehran to Kiev, killed 176 people. (With Reuters)

Iran Says Won’t Hand over ‘Damaged’ Black Box of Downed Ukraine Plane
Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 19 February, 2020
Iran said on Wednesday it will not hand over the black box of the downed Ukrainian airliner, resisting international press for access. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said last week he had "impressed upon" Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif that a complete and independent investigation into the shooting down of the airliner had to be carried out. Many of the 176 who perished in the disaster were Iranians with dual citizenship, which is not recognized by Iran. Canada had 57 citizens on board. "We have a right to read the black box ourselves. We have a right to be present at any examination of the black box," Zarif said. "If we are supposed to give the black box to others for them to read it in our place then this is something we will definitely not do," he said. Defense Minister Amir Hatami said the flight data recording box had "sustained noticeable damage and the defense industry has been requested to help in reconstructing (it)." "The reconstruction of the black box is supposed to take place first and then the reading," Hatami said. All 176 passengers aboard the plane were killed when the Revolutionary Guards fired missiles at the plane after mistaking it for a hostile target. Iran is in discussions with other countries, particularly Ukraine, about the investigation, Zarif said.

Coronavirus Kills Two in Iran
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/February 19/2020
Two people have died in Iran after testing positive on Wednesday for the new coronavirus, the health ministry said, in the Islamic republic's first cases of the disease. They are also the first deaths from the COVID-19 virus in the Middle East and only the seventh and eighth outside China where the outbreak has killed more than 2,000 people. State news agency IRNA quoted Kianoush Jahanpour, a ministry spokesman, as saying the virus was detected in two elderly people with immunity problems in the holy city of Qom, south of the Iranian capital. "Following the recent cases of chronic respiratory diseases in Qom, two of the patients tested positive in preliminary tests," it quoted him as saying. "Unfortunately both passed away in the intensive care unit due to old age and issues with their immune system." The state news agency had earlier quoted Jahanpour as saying that the "new coronavirus" had been confirmed in two people and that other suspected cases were isolated. IRNA also quoted a media adviser to Iran's health minister as saying two people had died after testing positive for the coronavirus. "Both of the people who had tested positive for coronavirus were in Qom and were old. Both have passed away," said Alireza Vahabzadeh.

Russia Warns against Turkey Operation in Syria
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/February 19/2020
Turkey and Russia exchanged warnings on Wednesday after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan threatened an "imminent" operation in Syria to end the regime's brutal assault on the last rebel enclave. Syrian aid workers called urgently for a ceasefire and international help for nearly a million people fleeing the regime onslaught in the country's northwestern Idlib province -- the biggest wave of displaced civilians in the nine-year conflict. Turkey, supporter of some rebel groups in Idlib, has been pushing for a renewed ceasefire in talks with Russia, which backs the Syrian regime. Ankara is eager to prevent another flood of refugees into its territory adding to the 3.7 million Syrians it already hosts. The Syrian NGO Alliance said displaced people are "escaping in search of safety only to die from extreme weather conditions and lack of available resources". "We have hundreds and thousands of people who are fleeing... not just from bombardments but from lack of insulation, from the weather, a lack of heating. It feels like doomsday," Razan Saffour, of the Syrian Expatriate Medical Association, told AFP at the press conference in Istanbul. The group said a total of $336 million was needed for basic food, water and shelter. Education resources were also needed for 280 million displaced school-aged children. Erdogan said talks with Moscow over the past fortnight had so far failed to achieve "the desired result" and warned that Turkey would launch an offensive into Syria unless Damascus pulled its forces back by the end of the month.  "An operation in Idlib is imminent... We are counting down, we are making our final warnings," Erdogan said in a televised speech. He called for Syrian forces to retreat behind Turkey's military posts in Idlib, which were set up under a 2018 deal with Russia designed to hold off a regime advance. The Kremlin quickly responded to Erdogan's threat, warning that any operation against Syrian forces would be "the worst scenario." With Turkey moving large numbers of reinforcements into Idlib in recent weeks, Defense Minister Hulusi Akar emphasized that it was "out of the question for us to withdraw from our observation posts.""If there is any sort of attack against them, we will retaliate in kind," he told reporters in Ankara.
'Indiscriminate' violence
Earlier this week the United Nations said the displaced were mainly women and children and warned that babies were dying of cold because aid camps are full. The Syrian NGOs called for the warring parties to allow safe access for humanitarian groups and for a "complete ceasefire and end to human rights violations". The regime offensive has killed more than 400 civilians since it began in December, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. "The violence in northwest Syria is indiscriminate. Health facilities, schools, residential areas, mosques and markets have been hit," the U.N. head of humanitarian affairs and emergency relief, Mark Lowcock, said earlier this week. Moscow has repeatedly vetoed Security Council resolutions. The head of the World Health Organization said Tuesday that out of nearly 550 health facilities in northwest Syria, only about half were operational.
"We repeat: health facilities and health workers are not a legitimate target," Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told journalists in Geneva. Syrian troops have reconquered swathes of Idlib and retaken the key M5 highway connecting the country's four largest cities as well as the entire surroundings of Aleppo city for the first time since 2012. According to the Observatory, government forces made new gains in western Aleppo province on Tuesday and were pushing towards the Sheikh Barakat mountain. That would give them a vantage point over large parts of Idlib and Aleppo provinces, including sprawling camps housing tens of thousands of displaced people.

UN envoy warns of ‘imminent danger’ of escalation in Syria
AFP, United Nations/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
The UN envoy to Syria said Wednesday that the country was on the brink of worsening violence after an exchange of threats between key players Turkey and Russia. Syrian aid workers have called for an urgent ceasefire and international help for nearly a million people fleeing the regime’s onslaught in northwestern Idlib province -- the biggest wave of displaced civilians in the nine-year conflict. “I cannot report any progress in ending the current violence in the northwest or in reconvening the political process,” Geir Pedersen told the UN Security Council. “Russian and Turkish delegations have met intensively in recent days ... but no understanding has yet emerged,” he said. “To the contrary, public statements from different quarters, Syrian and international, suggest an imminent danger of further escalation.”President Recep Tayyip Erdogan earlier Wednesday warned that Turkey would launch an offensive into Syria unless Damascus pulled its forces back by the end of the month. “We are counting down, we are making our final warnings,” Erdogan said in a televised speech. He called for Syrian forces to retreat behind Turkey’s military posts in Idlib, which were set up under a 2018 deal with Russia designed to hold off a regime advance. Russia quickly responded to Erdogan’s threat, warning that any operation against Syrian forces would be “the worst scenario.” Turkey, supporter of some opposition groups in Idlib, has been pushing for a renewed ceasefire in talks with Russia, which backs the Syrian regime.
The UN said 900,000 people had been displaced in “horrendous conditions” since December 1, more than 500,000 of them children.

In tense UN meet, Russia opposes declaration calling for Syria ceasefire
AFP, United Nations, United States/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Russia on Wednesday objected to the UN Security Council adopting a statement that would have called for a ceasefire and respect for international humanitarian law in northwest Syria, diplomats said, after a tense closed-door meeting. “Russia said no,” French Ambassador to the United Nations Nicolas de Riviere told reporters. “There is no statement,” confirmed his Belgian counterpart, Marc Pecsteen de Buytswerve, the current council president.

Syrian air defense intercepts hostile targets in Jableh town in Latakia
Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Syrian air defense thwarts hostile targets in Jableh town in Latakia, Syrian state television said late Wednesday. The nature of the targets was not clear and there were no immediate reports of damage or casualties. Last week, on February 13, Syria had intercepted and downed several missiles coming across the occupied Golan Heights in Israel before they hit their targets in the capital Damascus. On that occasion, state agency SANA had said the “missiles were launched from over the occupied Golan H

Israeli military says will create command to combat Iran threats
The Associated Press/Tuesday, 18 February 2020
Israel’s military will set up a special branch in its general staff dedicated to threats from Iran, it said Tuesday. The military said it will appoint a major general to head the command, which is part of a broader restructuring in the general staff. A statement by the military offered few details about the new command, saying the nature of the new branch’s work was “yet to be determined.” But the move highlights the importance Israel places on the threats it views coming from Iran. Iran has forces based in Syria, Israel’s northern neighbor, and supports Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. In Gaza, it supplies Islamic Jihad with cash, weapons and training, and also supports Hamas, the Islamic militant group that rules the coastal territory. Israel also accuses Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons - a charge Iran denies. Israel has repeatedly struck Iran-linked targets in Syria in recent years and has warned against any permanent Iranian presence on the frontier. But its battle against Iran has increasingly come out of the shadows, with Iranian and Israeli forces coming into direct confrontation. In November, the Israeli military said fighter jets hit multiple targets belonging to Iran’s elite Quds force, including surface-to-air missiles, weapons warehouses and military bases. Israel has also struck a number of Iranian military targets in Syria, including munition storage facilities, an intelligence site and a military training camp, in response to an Iranian missile attack a day earlier.

United Nations Human Rights Council delegitimizes Israel
Clifford D. May/The Washington Times/Tuesday, February 18, 2020
A motley crew of Orwellian rights violators seeks to harm Israelis and Palestinians alike
A question: What do Eritrea, Mauritania, Somalia, Qatar, Pakistan, Libya and Venezuela have in common? An answer: All are lands ruled by chronic violators of basic human rights. And, oh yes, all are members of the U.N. Human Rights Council. This is no mere coincidence. Members of the UNHRC needn’t worry about being criticized by the UNHRC. Membership has an additional privilege: A license to slander Israel, the only state in the Middle East that actually guarantees rights to its citizens — Jews, Arabs, Muslims, Christians and Druze alike. The UNHRC has condemned Israel more than all other nations of the world combined. It has passed not a single resolution condemning China, Russia, Cuba or Zimbabwe. In 2018 the Trump administration withdrew the U.S. from the UNHRC. Then-Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley called the entity a “protector of human-rights abusers, and a cesspool of political bias.” She added: “America should not provide it with any credibility.” The UNHRC has not improved since. Last week, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, published a blacklist of 112 companies operating in the West Bank, 94 of them Israeli, six American and 12 from other countries.
“I am outraged,” responded Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. “We call upon all U.N. member states to join us in rejecting this effort, which facilitates the discriminatory boycott, divestment, and sanction (BDS) campaign and delegitimizes Israel. Attempts to isolate Israel run counter to all of our efforts to build conditions conducive to Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that lead to a comprehensive and enduring peace.”

Turkish military operation in Syria’s Idlib ‘a matter of time’: Erdogan
Reuters, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
A Turkish military operation in Syria’s Idlib province is only “a matter of time,” said Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, adding that this was the “final warning” to the Syrian regime. Turkey backs opposition groups in Idlib province against the Russian-backed Syrian regime, which has intensified its bombing campaign against opposition-held areas in the northwestern Syria. Turkish has sent convoys of military vehicles to the front line to support three observation posts it set up to monitor the conflict in the area. Tensions between Damascus and Ankara have spiked after eight Turkish soldiers were killed by an air strike, prompting Turkey to respond with air strikes against Syrian troops.

Turkish military operation in Syria’s Idlib ‘worst-case scenario’: Kremlin
Reuters, Moscow/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
The Kremlin said on Wednesday that a Turkish military operation against Syrian government forces in the Idlib region would be a worst-case scenario. Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said earlier on Wednesday that a military operation there was a “matter of time” after talks with Russia on Idlib had failed to meet Turkey’s demands. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that Moscow was strongly opposed to such an operation, but that Russia and Ankara were staying in contact to try to prevent tensions in Idlib escalating further.

Flight heads toward Aleppo International Airport for first time in eight years
Joanne Serrieh, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
A flight from Damascus International Airport headed toward Aleppo International Airport on Wednesday for the first time since the airport was shut down over eight years ago, state news agency SANA reported. The airport was shut down in order to protect the safety of travelers as the ongoing civil war caused severe damage throughout the country. The Syrian army said on Monday it had taken full control of dozens of towns in Aleppo’s northwestern countryside and it would press on with its campaign to wipe out militant groups “wherever they are found”. The advances were made after President Bashar al-Assad’s forces drove insurgents from the M5 highway linking Aleppo to Damascus, reopening the fastest route between Syria’s two biggest cities for the first time in years in a big strategic gain for Assad.- With Reuters

Syria Aid Groups in Desperate Plea for Idlib Displaced
Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 19 February, 2020
Syrian aid workers issued an urgent call for a ceasefire and international help for nearly a million people fleeing a regime onslaught in the country's northwest on Wednesday. It came as Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan threatened to launch an operation in Syria by the end of the month unless Damascus ended its offensive in the last rebel stronghold of Idlib. The Syrian army's offensive, backed by Russian airpower, has triggered the biggest wave of displaced civilians in the nine-year conflict. At a press conference in Istanbul, the Syrian NGO Alliance said existing camps are overcrowded and civilians forced to sleep in the open as more than 900,000 people flee the violence. "We are facing one of the worst protection crises and are dealing with a mass movement of IDPs (internally displaced persons) who have nowhere to go," the Syrian NGO Alliance said in a statement. They are "escaping in search of safety only to die from extreme weather conditions and lack of available resources," it added. The group said a total of $336 million was needed for basic food, water, shelter. Education resources were also needed for 280 million displaced school-aged children. Turkey, which backs some rebel groups in Idlib, has been pushing for a renewed ceasefire in talks with Russia, eager to prevent another flood of refugees into its territory adding to the 3.7 million Syrian refugees it already hosts. "An operation in Idlib is imminent... We are counting down, we are making our final warnings," Erdogan said in a televised speech, calling for Syrian forces to retreat behind Turkish positions in Idlib. "Unfortunately we could not obtain the desired result during negotiations in our country and Russia, as well as on the ground," he said, adding that talks were ongoing with Moscow. The Syrian NGOs called for the warring parties to allow safe access for humanitarian groups and for a "complete ceasefire and end to human rights violations". The regime offensive has killed more than 400 civilians since it began in December, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. "The violence in northwest Syria is indiscriminate. Health facilities, schools, residential areas, mosques, and markets have been hit," the UN head of humanitarian affairs and emergency relief, Mark Lowcock, said earlier this week. Regime and Russian forces have been accused of deliberately targeting hospitals and clinics, but Moscow has repeatedly vetoed Security Council resolutions. The head of the World Health Organization said Tuesday that out of nearly 550 such facilities in northwest Syria, only about half were operational. "We repeat: health facilities and health workers are not a legitimate target," Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told journalists in Geneva.
Syrian troops have reconquered swathes of Idlib and retaken the key M5 highway connecting the country's four largest cities as well as the entire surroundings of Aleppo city for the first time since 2012. According to the Observatory, government forces made new gains in western Aleppo province on Tuesday and were pushing towards the Sheikh Barakat mountain. That would give them a vantage point over swathes of Idlib and Aleppo provinces, including sprawling camps housing tens of thousands of displaced people.

Civilians flee homes, safe zone shrinks as Syrian regime bombards Idlib
Tommy Hilton, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Thousands of Syrians are fleeing to an ever-shrinking safe zone in Idlib province as the regime steps up its bombardment of the last opposition-held area in the country’s northwest. Since December 1, 2019, more than 875,000 people have been displaced by the combined air and ground offensive in Idlib. The Syrian regime, with Bashar al-Assad at the head, has gained control of the strategic M5 highway connecting Damascus and Aleppo and is now stepping up its campaign to capture the areas of Idlib and Aleppo provinces held by opposition groups, sparking the latest humanitarian crisis in Syria’s nine-year-long war. “People are facing a desperate situation,” said Julien Delozanne, head of the Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) mission for Syria. “Attacks are now taking place in areas that were previously considered to be safe. The people fleeing north are being squeezed into a territory that is getting smaller and smaller, between the frontline to the east and the closed Turkish border to the west.”
Civilians on the move again, hospitals destroyed
The regime, backed by Russian aircraft, has recently intensified its assualt on the opposition-held areas in Idlib province and the western areas of Aleppo province. Many of the Syrian civilians in the area are already in camps, having been transferred there alongside opposition fighters in deals with the regime as it recaptured cities elsewhere in Syria through siege and bombardment. This week, shelling hit camps around the town of Sarmadah, which hosted refugees fleeing the fighting in southern Idlib. Takad and other towns have also recently come under fire, forcing residents to flee into an increasingly small zone of opposition control. “The only people who have stayed are the ones who can’t afford a vehicle or don’t know where to go. We are moving our medical supplies to another location and I am looking for a safe place to resume our activities in an area where the medical needs are becoming more and more urgent,” said Dr. Mustafa Ajaj, a local doctor and director of the health center supported by MSF in Takad. MSF said that gaining access to healthcare has become increasingly difficult as the frontline continues to move and a number of hospitals in the area have been hit and destroyed. The remaining two hospitals in the western Aleppo countryside have closed as the cities that in which the hospitals were located in have come under attack. Dr. Ajaj had initially refused to move his family from Takad, but said recent the recent intensification of airstrikes has made it impossible to live there any longer.
Pushed toward the Turkish border
The government assault has pushed many of the region’s inhabitants, many of whom have already been displaced multiple times, into makeshift refugee camps. “The whole area is covered in tents, and the closer you get to the Turkish border, the more tents there are. Those who can’t afford to buy a tent are sharing tents with other families,” said a doctor working in the Deir Hassan camp in the north of Idlib province, 30 kilometers west of Aleppo. “Some people have dumped all their belongings on the ground because they haven’t got a tent yet and they are living in the open. The people living in the open are freezing. It’s catastrophic,” the doctor added.
Turkey, Russia, and the crisis
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has warned of a humanitarian catastrophe and promised to not let Idlib fall. Turkey backs opposition groups against the al-Assad regime and has observation posts in the region that it recently reinforced with a vehicle convoy. With Turkey backing the opposition and Russia backing the regime, the most recent clashes in Idlib have strained Russian-Turkish relations across the region. This month, six Turkish soldiers were killed, prompting a war of words between the two countries. On Thursday, Erdogan warned the Syrian regime that it was only a “matter of time” before a Turkish military operation the area, giving what he said was the “last warning” to the Syrian regime. Russia described the move as the “worst possible scenario.”But back on the ground in northern Syria, civilians are suffering from the cost of the conflict. “People are lost and have no idea what is going on. Fear has devastated us. We don’t know what’s going on politically, and we don’t know what will happen in the future,” said the doctor from Deir Hassan camp. “No one knows what the situation will be tomorrow, only that there are bombings and that government forces are advancing. All we want is a safe place to live,” the doctor added.

Iraq: Abdul Mahdi Warns He Will Walk Away If Allawi's Govt Not Approved Soon
Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 19 February, 2020
Iraq's outgoing prime minister urged political leaders on Wednesday to quickly approve his designated successor's cabinet and warned he would walk away from his caretaker post if they do not do so by March 2. Facing a wave of protests and civil unrest that has claimed the life of almost 500 people since Oct. 1, Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi quit in November. He has stayed on as a caretaker, but says now he's ready to leave, which would create an unprecedented political vacuum at the top of the government. "It would not be correct or appropriate for me to remain in power after March 2, and I will have no recourse but to implement the text of the constitution and the cabinet's internal bylaws," said Abdul Mahdi, who has already stopped chairing weekly cabinet meetings. It took Iraq's political leadership until Feb. 1 to agree on Mohammed Tawfiq Allawi to replace Abdul Mahdi, missing a constitutional deadline to appoint one within 15 days of his resignation. Allawi now takes over a government tasked with organizing early elections. The constitution gives him 30 days -- until March 2 -- to present a cabinet to parliament for approval. He has made little progress as rival political factions squabble over ministerial portfolios. But on Saturday he said he would form a government within the coming week.

Pompeo to meet Saudi Arabia’s King Salman, Crown Prince in the Kingdom
Reuters/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will meet with Saudi Arabia's King Salman bin Abdulaziz, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan during a three-day visit to the Kingdom starting on Wednesday, the US State Department said.

Pompeo in Saudi Arabia for talks on Iran
Arab News/February 19/2020
RIYADH: The US Secretary of State landed in Riyadh on Wednesday for talks with Saudi Arabia’s leaders focused on countering Iran. Mike Pompeo’s visit is his first to the Kingdom since the US killed Iran’s powerful military commander Qassem Soleimani. He will hold talks with King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as well as Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan, State Department officials said. "We'll spend a lot of time talking about the security issues with the threat from the Islamic Republic of Iran in particular," Pompeo told reporters in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa before heading to Riyadh. Pompeo said the United States was "prepared to talk anytime" to Iran but emphasised that the Iranian regime has "got to fundamentally change their behavior". "The pressure campaign continues. It's not just an economic pressure campaign, its diplomatic pressures, isolation through diplomacy as well," he said. US President Donald Trump in 2018 withdrew from a nuclear accord with Iran and imposed sweeping sanctions aimed at reducing Tehran's regional clout. Pompeo's three-day visit to Saudi Arabia comes after an increase in regional tensions following the drone strike last month in Baghdad that killed Soleimani. Iran responded with missile strikes on US forces in Iraq. Speaking in Riyadh, Pompeo said that the US will not tolerate Iran’s attacks on American troops in Iraqi bases. Earlier, he warned that the US would respond to Iranian attacks on its troops in Iraq. “We are mindful that it cannot become ordinary course that the Iranians through their proxy forces in Iraq are putting the lives of Americans at risk,” he said. He added that there “has to be accountability connected to those very serious attacks.”Iran has also been blamed for a drone and missile strike on two Saudi Aramco facilities in September that temporarily shut down more than 5 percent of global oil supply. Pompeo also said he would discuss a broad range of issues including the economic relationship between the two countries during his visit to the Kingdom. Last week, Saudi Arabia and the US celebrated the 75th anniversary of the USS Quincy meeting between President Franklin Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz. Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz met on board the USS Quincy in 1945 and the first encounter between a US president and a Saudi King laid the foundation for the broad strategic partnership shared by the two countries today. After Riyadh, Pompeo will fly to Oman to meet the new sultan, Haitham bin Tariq, on Friday. Pompeo will offer condolences over the death of his predecessor Sultan Qaboos, who was the Arab world's longest-serving leader and served as a go-between for Iran and the United States.*With AP

Drones used in Saudi Arabia’s Aramco attack have Iranian components: Report
Tuqa Khalid, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Drone components used in attacks which targeted Saudi Aramco facilities on September 14 were Iranian-made, according to a report by Conflict Armament Research published on Wednesday. CAR documented a component called the “vertical gyroscope” and according to UAV experts familiar with this technology, such vertical gyroscopes “have not been observed in any UAVs other than those manufactured by Iran.” “The gyroscopes appear to be of the same make - yet not the same model - as a unit that Saudi authorities recovered following the aerial attack on the Aramco oil facility in Abqaiq, Saudi Arabia, on September 14.”Read: Pompeo blames Iran for attack on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia. Many countries including Saudi Arabia and the United States blamed Iran for the attack on the Aramco oil facilities which shut down more than 5% of the global oil supply for a few days. The Houthis claimed responsibility for the attacks, and Iran denied any involvement. But evidence pointed to the fact that the cruise missile and drone attack originated from the north in the direction of Iran, rather than the south in the direction of Yemen. The Houthis have been using drones to launch dozens of attacks against Saudi Arabia, whose forces lead the Arab coalition that intervened in Yemen to re-instate the internationally recognized government of President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi.

Saudi Arabia’s stance on Iran is ‘very clear,’ no back channels: Al-Jubeir
Tamara Abueish, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
Saudi Arabia’s stance on Iran is “very clear” and the Kingdom does not have a back channel with the country, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Adel al-Jubeir said on Wednesday. “There is no back channel with Iran, because our position with regards to Iran is very clear. I just said it to you publicly. What we want Iran to abide by the rules … we want Iran to respect international law, we want Iran to respect the sovereignty of other countries,” al-Jubeir said. The minister’s comments came during a joint press conference with the Norwegian Foreign Minister Ine Marie Eriksen Soreide after they held a meeting to discuss bilateral relations and regional issues, including the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq.
Vision 2030
Al-Jubeir also said that he had spoken to Norway’s foreign minister about the new investment opportunities that are becoming readily available in the Kingdom, as the country continues to implement its Vision 2030 reform plan. Vision 2030 is a set of reforms, introduced by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, that aim to diversify and improve Saudi Arabia’s economy. “We are going to open up new areas for investments and reduce our reliance on oil. And [we will] open areas such as tourism, the creation of entertainment” al-Jubeir said. “We seek to empower women and the youth, we seek to instill cultural innovation and technology, tolerance, and moderation, so that the population, 70 percent of them under the age of 30, should have the ability to realize their hopes, dreams, and ambitions.”

Yemeni defense minister survives attempted assassination
Al Arabiya English/Wednesday, 19 February 2020
The Yemeni Minister of Defense Mohammed al-Maqdisi survived an attempted assassination which killed several members of his entourage. His convoy was struck with an explosion from a land mine n the Sirwah district in Yemen, a military source told Al Arabiya. Six members of his entourage were killed, and several others were wounded. The source did not provide further details.

Iran reports two cases of deadly coronavirus
The Associated Press, TehranWednesday, 19 February 2020
Iranian authorities confirmed two cases of the new coronavirus, the first reported outbreak in Iran, according to the country’s semi-official ISNA news agency. The report on Wednesday did not elaborate on the nationality of the two people infected by the virus. ISNA quoted an official in the country’s health ministry, Kiyanoush Jahanpour, as saying that “since last two days, some suspected cases of the new coronavirus were found.” The new virus emerged in China in December. Since then, more than 70,000 people have been infected globally, with more than 2,000 deaths being reported, mostly in China.

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on February 19-20/2020
UK Court: Sharia Marriages Not Valid Under English Law
Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute/February 19/2020
"We sought to inform the Court of Appeal that many minority women, especially Muslim women, are deceived or coerced by abusive husbands into only having a religious marriage, which deprives them of their financial rights when the marriage breaks down...." — Southall Black Sisters, an advocacy group for South Asian women, February 14, 2020.
In February 2018, an independent review of the application of Sharia law in England and Wales...recommended changes to the Marriage Act 1949 and the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 that would require Muslims to conduct civil marriages before or at the same time as the nikah ceremony. This would bring Islamic marriage in line with Christian and Jewish marriage in the eyes of British law.
"The Assembly is concerned that the rulings of the Sharia councils clearly discriminate against women in divorce and inheritance cases." — Council of Europe (COE), January 2019.
As of now, neither the British government nor the British Parliament has introduced legislation that would require Muslims to conduct civil marriages before or at the same time as the nikah ceremony...[but] The court's decision effectively reaffirms the principle that immigrants who settle in Britain must conform to British law, rather than the other way around.
The Court of Appeal, the second-highest court in England and Wales after the Supreme Court, has ruled that the Islamic marriage contract, known as nikah in Arabic, is not valid under English law.
The landmark ruling has far-reaching implications. On the one hand, the decision strikes a blow against efforts to enshrine this aspect of Sharia law into the British legal system. On the other hand, it leaves potentially thousands of Muslim women in Britain without legal recourse in the case of divorce.
The case involves an estranged couple, Nasreen Akhter and Mohammed Shabaz Khan, both of Pakistani heritage, who took part in a nikah ceremony officiated by an imam in front of 150 guests at a restaurant in London in December 1998.
In November 2016, Akhter, a 48-year-old attorney, filed for a divorce, allegedly because Khan wanted to take a second wife. Khan, a 48-year-old property developer, tried to block Akhter's divorce application on the basis that they were not legally married under English law. Khan said that they were married "under Sharia law only" and sued to prevent Akhtar from claiming money or property from him in the same way a legally married spouse could.
Akhter said that the couple, who have four children, intended to follow the nikah with a civil marriage ceremony that would be compliant with English law. No civil ceremony ever took place, however, because, according to Akhter, Khan refused.
On July 31, 2018, the London-based Family Division of the High Court ruled that the nikah fell within the scope of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, which establishes three categories of marriage: valid, void and non-marriage. Valid marriages may be ended by a decree of divorce; void marriages may be ended by a decree of nullity; non-marriages cannot be legally ended because legally the marriage never existed.
The high court determined that the Akhter-Khan marriage was a "void marriage" because it had been "entered into in disregard of certain requirements as to the formation of marriage." It ruled that Akhtar was therefore entitled to a "decree of nullity of marriage."
The Attorney General, on behalf of the British government, filed an appeal on the basis that it was wrong to recognize the marriage as being "void" rather than a "non-marriage."
On February 14, 2020, the London-based Court of Appeals overturned the High Court's decision and ruled that nikah marriages are "non-marriages" within the scope of English law. In its ruling, the court explained:
"The Court of Appeal finds that the December 1998 nikah ceremony did not create a void marriage because it was a non-qualifying ceremony. The parties were not marrying 'under the provisions' of English law (Part II of the Marriage Act 1949). The ceremony was not performed in a registered building. Moreover, no notice had been given to the superintendent registrar, no certificates had been issued, and no registrar or authorized person was present at the ceremony. Further, the parties knew that the ceremony had no legal effect and that they would need to undertake another ceremony that did comply with the relevant requirements in order to be validly married. The determination of whether a marriage is void or not cannot, in the Court's view, be dependent on future events, such as the intention to undertake another ceremony or whether there are children.
"There is no justification for treating the civil ceremony, which the parties intended to undertake, as having in fact taken place, when it never did. This might result in a party being married even if they change their mind part way through the process of formalizing the marriage. That would be inconsistent with the abolition of the right to sue for breach of an agreement to marry by Section 1 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970. The parties' intentions cannot change what would otherwise be a non-qualifying ceremony into one which is within the scope of the Marriage Act 1949."
The Court of Appeals added: "It is not difficult for parties who want to be legally married to achieve that status."
The ruling, which Akhter presumably will appeal at the Supreme Court, has been greeted with outrage by activists who argue that thousands of Muslim women in Britain now have no legal rights when it comes to divorce.
In a press release, Southall Black Sisters, an advocacy group for South Asian women, said:
"We sought to inform the Court of Appeal that many minority women, especially Muslim women, are deceived or coerced by abusive husbands into only having a religious marriage, which deprives them of their financial rights when the marriage breaks down....
"The Court found that 'it is not difficult for parties who want to be legally married to achieve that status.' But this disregards the accounts of many minority women, who have great difficulty in obtaining that status in the context of domestic abuse, patriarchal family dynamics and considerable power imbalances....
"Today's judgment will force Muslim and other women to turn to Sharia 'courts' that already cause significant harm to women and children for remedies because they are now locked out of the civil justice system."
In November 2017, a survey carried out for a Channel 4 documentary — The Truth About Muslim Marriage — found that nearly all married Muslim women in Britain have had a nikah, but more than 60% had not gone through a separate civil ceremony which would make the marriage legal under British law.
In February 2018, an independent review of the application of Sharia law in England and Wales, commissioned by Theresa May in May 2016 when she was home secretary, recommended changes to the Marriage Act 1949 and the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 that would require Muslims to conduct civil marriages before or at the same time as the nikah ceremony. This would bring Islamic marriage in line with Christian and Jewish marriage in the eyes of British law. The report stated:
"By linking Islamic marriage to civil marriage, it ensures that a greater number of women will have the full protection afforded to them in family law and the right to a civil divorce, lessening the need to attend and simplifying the decision process of Sharia councils."
The review added:
"The panel's opinion is that the evidence shows that cultural change is required within Muslim communities so that communities acknowledge women's rights in civil law, especially in areas of marriage and divorce. Awareness campaigns, educational programs and other similar measures should be put in place to educate and inform women of their rights and responsibilities, including the need to highlight the legal protection civilly registered marriages provide."
Finally, the panel recommended that the government create a new agency to regulate Sharia courts and thus legitimize them:
"That body would design a code of practice for Sharia councils to accept and implement. There would, of course, be a one-off cost to the government of establishing this body but subsequently the system would be self-regulatory."
In March 2018, then Secretary of State Sajid Javid, in a Green Paper titled, "Integrated Communities Strategy," responded:
"We welcome the independent review into the application of Sharia law in England and Wales. Couples from faith communities have long been able to enter a legally recognized marriage through a religious ceremony if the requirements of the law are met.
"However, we share the concern raised in the review that some couples may marry in a way that does not give them the legal protections available to others in a civilly registered marriage. We are also concerned by reports of women being discriminated against and treated unfairly by some religious councils.
"The government is supportive in principle of the requirement that civil marriages are conducted before or at the same time as religious ceremonies. Therefore, the government will explore the legal and practical challenges of limited reform relating to the law on marriage and religious weddings.
"The government considers that the review's proposal to create a state-facilitated or endorsed regulation scheme for Sharia councils would confer upon them legitimacy as alternative forms of dispute resolution. The government does not consider there to be a role for the state to act in this way."
In January 2019, the Council of Europe (COE), the continent's leading human rights organization, raised concerns about the role of Sharia courts in family, inheritance and commercial law in Britain. It called for the government to remove obstacles that stop Muslim women from accessing justice:
"Although they are not considered part of the British legal system, Sharia councils attempt to provide a form of alternative dispute resolution, whereby members of the Muslim community, sometimes voluntarily, often under considerable social pressure, accept their religious jurisdiction mainly in marital issues and Islamic divorce proceedings but also in matters relating to inheritance and Islamic commercial contracts. The Assembly is concerned that the rulings of the Sharia councils clearly discriminate against women in divorce and inheritance cases."
The COE also set a deadline of June 2020 for the UK to report back on reviewing the Marriage Act, which would make it a legal requirement for Muslim couples to undergo civil marriages — which is currently required for Christian and Jewish marriages.
A Home Office spokesperson responded to the COE resolution:
"Sharia law does not form any part of the law in England and Wales. Regardless of religious belief, we are all equal before the law. Where Sharia councils exist, they must abide by the law.
"Laws are in place to protect the rights of women and prevent discrimination, and we will work with the appropriate authorities to ensure these laws are being enforced fully and effectively."
As of now, neither the British government, nor the British Parliament has introduced legislation that would require Muslims to conduct civil marriages before or at the same time as the nikah ceremony.
The Court of Appeal's ruling does, however, put a brake on the further encroachment of Sharia law into the British legal system. The court's decision effectively reaffirms the principle that immigrants who settle in Britain must conform to British law, rather than the other way around.
*Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.
© 2020 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Revisiting Arab Peace Initiative is best hope to solve Israel-Palestine conflict
Ksenia Svetlova/Al Arabiya/February 19/2020
The “deal of the century” is here, and so is the simmering, century-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Although the publication of the details of President Trump’s peace initiative has not so far led to an outbreak of violence, as some experts predicted, there is little hope the new plan will help resume negotiations after years of estrangement. It takes two to tango, and if one of the partners refuses to dance, the outcome may be grim and grotesque.
It is time to revisit the one peace initiative that gained support from every Arab state in the Middle East: the Arab Peace Initiative.
Today, when uncertainly about the future of Israeli-Palestinian conflict is rising, the Arab Peace Initiative could serve as a good basis for relaunching negotiations between the two sides. Almost 18 years ago, then-Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz al Saud presented his peace vision during the Arab League summit in Beirut, Lebanon. This plan was adopted by the Arab League members and it is still valid today.
Sadly, no Israeli government has so far officially reacted to this peace proposal that aims at providing a just and acceptable solution for the conflict and establishing normal relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Almost two decades have passed since its inception, and while some updates may be required, this initiative is still by far the best platform for resuming the bilateral negotiations with much needed regional support.
What will happen if the Trump administration’s “deal of the century” does not take off? Many in Israel believe the status quo is not such a bad thing. We live our lives, there is no major violence, and the world seems to be less and less interested in what is happening in this part of the region. But, in fact, nothing can be farther from the truth, as the status quo is nothing but illusion.
Escalation is here already, even if it doesn’t affect daily life of the majority in Israel - yet. In recent weeks there were more attacks, more clashes in Jerusalem, and more desperate and disillusioned young Palestinians that increasingly support the one-state solution.
In fact, a status quo takes us back to the dangers of recent past when the two nations and their leadership lacked communication, understanding, and compromise. While the settlements will grow and the Israelis will be busy annexing segments of West Bank, more and more Palestinians will depart from the two-state solution and opt for one state where they will seek equal political and civil rights. The possibility to separate and draw the border between two warring nations will be lost forever.
Naturally, the Israelis and the Palestinians will be the biggest losers, but the consequences might be quite dangerous for the broader Middle East region, as well. As the situation in Israel and West Bank deteriorates - according to Israel Defense Forces (IDF) chiefs and Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) leaders, it will, barring real progress with negotiations - it inevitably will affect the stability of the West Bank and Jordan, and also damage relations between Israel and the Arab world.
The dream of regional integration, as well as forging a powerful alliance between all those in the region who seek stability and peace will remain just a dream. No positive development between the Palestinians and Israelis will also mean no normalization, integration or advancement of cooperation. We don’t need a status quo, but a reasonable base to resume the negotiations and regional support of the process. The Arab Peace initiative provides this foundation.
Today we have a clear vision of how a partnership in the spheres of technology, trade, tourism and defense might look like between Israel and the Arab states. The only way of getting there is by first taking care of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Whoever emerges as the winner in Israel’s upcoming parliamentary elections will need to focus on two issues: how to prevent the deterioration between Israel and Palestinian Authority, and how to promote Israel’s integration in the region. These two issues are interconnected, and the Arab Peace Initiative should be the key. It’s not too late for that today, however it might be too late tomorrow.
*Ksenia Svetlova is a former member of Israel’s parliament, the Knesset. Today she serves as Director of the Program on Israel-Middle East relations at the Mitvim Institute and is a senior research analyst at Institute for Policy and Strategy, IDC Herzliya.

Facebook’s Business Model Is What Brussels Hates
Lionel Laurent/Bloomberg/February 19/2020 
It’s not very surprising that Mark Zuckerberg’s state-visit-style trip to Brussels got a pretty chilly reception from European Union officials. The Facebook Inc. co-founder is pleading for more regulation to solve what he and his top lobbyist Nick Clegg consider to be a failure of public policy: If only governments could agree on how to regulate the internet without curbing free expression, the social network would be only too happy to comply.
This analysis is not new, and entirely misdiagnoses the problem in the Europeans’ view: It is Facebook’s business model, which hoovers up billions of users’ intimate thoughts and behavior patterns to better target ads, which is the issue. And it’s one that the social network would prefer just to tinker with at the margins, given the costs involved.
Judging by Facebook’s new 22-page paper on regulating online content, and Zuckerberg’s published speeches, the company views its own misadventures as simply symptoms of a bigger online disease. If regulators could just define harmful or illegal content, set the limits on free speech, quantify targets for the quality control that tech platforms should perform on their networks’ content — and do so at a global level — the results would be clear.
There’s a clear self-interest on display here. Aside from being short on detail and big on “stakeholder” dialog, Facebook’s vision would conveniently raise the barriers to entry for smaller rivals in a market that is already dominated by a handful of players, while itself continuing to benefit from the scale effects of keeping Whatsapp and Instagram under one roof. Together, Facebook and Google controlled over half of digital ad revenue in 2018.
One-size-fits-all regulation would be ideal for a globe-straddling company that boasts billions of users, an array of interlocking and addictive apps, and plans to launch its own digital currency to further lock people into its walled garden. There would be less to fear from the idea of data “portability” — even if users had the freedom to leave with all of their data and contacts, where else would they go? Facebook might also be only too happy to push quantifiable regulatory targets onto its 30,000 frazzled and overloaded content moderators. No wonder European Commissioner Thierry Breton dismissed Zuckerberg’s ideas as “too slow” and “too low” in terms of accountability.
The real blind spot for Zuckerberg is the Facebook business model, which is precisely what the EU wants the firm to address. Mark Zuckerberg says he cannot be responsible for 100 billion pieces of content — but that’s not really true. It’s more that it would be very painful — possibly existential — for the economics of Facebook to hire the necessary moderators and engineers to make it happen. Zuckerberg’s idea that Facebook is somewhere between a newspaper and a telecom operator is exactly the kind of vision that European regulators reject: They are more inclined to view Facebook as a financial-services firm, where valuable consumer deposits — or personal data — rub up against speculative and risky activity, such as targeted advertising and monopoly power. Systemic risk merits systemic scrutiny.
Therein lies the challenge for Brussels. So far, the sum total of regulatory action against Facebook is akin to “being nibbled to death by ducks,” a view recently expressed by Roger McNamee, one of Facebook’s earliest investors. Facebook’s stock price slumped last month after its results showed slowing growth and higher expenses, but it has since rebounded. This is still a $610 billion company with an adjusted net income margin of 35% that makes over $20 billion in revenue per quarter. Shareholder challenges to company management have hit the brick wall of Zuckerberg’s absolute control of voting rights. And despite some US politicians’ calls to break up Facebook, there’s increasing convergence between Zuckerberg’s interests and Donald Trump’s geopolitical ambitions. European attempts to better tax tech companies have resulted in swift US counter-blows on trade; Trump also sees Facebook’s financial-services push as an extension of the US dollar’s power.
If the aim is to change the way Facebook works, there will have to be a lot more biting going forward, from enforcement of privacy law and upgrading of antitrust law to more scrutiny of how the company’s algorithms and content moderation are working. Otherwise Zuckerberg’s next visit to Brussels risks being depressingly familiar.

Put a Stop to Economic Growth? Huge Mistake
Noah Smith/Bloomberg/February 19/2020
One of the more pernicious ideas now coming into vogue is that societies should voluntarily halt their economic growth. In a recent New Yorker article, John Cassidy chronicles the rise of this so-called degrowth movement. The idea holds appeal for environmentalists concerned about planetary destruction, egalitarians who worry that growth leaves the poor behind, futurists who envision a leisure society and so on. Degrowth might even be a way for citizens of wealthy, declining nations to maintain their pride as hungrier up-and-coming societies catch up, since it recasts economic slowdown as virtue.
Although the degrowth movement does contain a few nuggets of insight, it’s based on a number of misconceptions about what economic growth is and why it’s desirable.
First, it’s important to understand why politicians care about growth. For developing countries, yes, it’s about raising living standards. But for rich countries such as the US, the biggest reason elected leaders like growth is that it’s correlated with low unemployment. Faster growth -- more consumption and investment -- means more demand for labor, which means more jobs and rising wages. So when US presidents or legislators talk about growth, it’s usually not about visions of eternally rising living standards; it’s about jobs.
A second misconception is that growth requires feeding ever more of the earth’s resources into the hungry maw of manufacturing industries. Actually, growth often means doing more with less. In recent decades, even as the US economy has continued to grow, extraction of many natural resources has remained constant or gone down. For example, use of metals in the US peaked two decades ago.
In a number of rich countries, growth has become decoupled from carbon emissions, even taking offshoring of manufacturing into account.
This is happening for several reasons. Consumer demands are shifting from physical goods to services, including online ones. Innovation allows more efficient resource use. And sustainable technologies such as solar power can replace polluting, non-renewable ones like coal and gas. Sometimes growth is even what causes declining resource use, such as when farmers implement better irrigation technologies or when coal plants are replaced with solar farms.
This is why the idea that economic growth can’t continue forever is wrongheaded. Eventually the sun will explode, but in the meantime growth might continue for a very, very long time.
But just because growth can be sustainable doesn’t mean that trying to maximize it is always wise. Gross domestic product is only one of many measures of human well-being; often it makes sense for a society to focus on improving health, fighting inequality or promoting leisure. And as economist Dietrich Vollrath explains, slowing growth can be a sign of economic maturity rather than weakness; in a healthy global economy, developed countries tend to grow more slowly than developing ones. And services such as health care and education, which people in rich countries tend to want more of, have low productivity growth.
Nevertheless, there is one important reason to pursue economic growth: Poor countries need it. Although much of the world has escaped extreme poverty, some remains, and it’s concentrated in countries such as Nigeria, which struggles with slow growth. And many of those who live in those countries still have living standards that would be seen as unconscionably low in developed countries; they may have enough to eat, but they often lack running water, electricity, quality housing, basic health care, efficient transportation and many other things that people in the developed world take for granted.
So for the sake of their people, developing countries need to keep growing. And also for the sake of the environment; wealthier countries can more easily afford to cut pollution, stop burning down forests, ban chemicals that poison marine life and so on. Ironically, the less wealthy a country is, the more economic needs tend to take priority over environmental protection.
But poor countries don’t grow in a vacuum. Developed economies provide a crucial source of demand for goods produced in nations such as Bangladesh, Vietnam and Ethiopia, helping these nations to boost productivity and make the transition to rich-world status. Growth in advanced countries also creates the technologies -- solar power, batteries and environmentally friendly chemicals -- that let developing nations do more with less.
Although slower growth in rich countries isn’t cause for alarm, calls for intentionally shutting off growth are misguided. Someday, when the developed nations of the world have caught up and sustainable technology has permeated every facet of society, we can settle into a comfortable leisure society. But that day is still far in the future.

The Labor Party’s Long Road Back
Matt Singh/Bloomberg/February 19/2020
Two months after suffering its worst general election result for 84 years, Britain’s Labor Party continues to pick up the pieces. While Boris Johnson’s Conservatives govern with an 80-seat majority in the House of Commons, Labor is simultaneously reflecting on its thrashing and electing a successor to outgoing leader Jeremy Corbyn.
This week saw the publication by Lord Ashcroft -- a Conservative peer but whose research is generally accepted as non-partisan -- of a report into Labor’s defeat. The report highlighted a number of issues that doomed Labor, including Corbyn's leadership, the flip-flopping over Brexit, a domestic platform that wasn’t seen as credible and obsession with fringe liberal issues. But the common theme throughout was the party’s failure to listen.
What might the road back to power look like? The first thing Labor obviously needs is a change at the top, and it’s currently in the process of electing new leadership. The contenders are Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer, Shadow Business Secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey, Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry and the former Shadow Energy Secretary Lisa Nandy.
The contest has been very much pitched to the left, which dominates the party membership. This has certainly been the case with front-runner Starmer’s bid, which has turned out to be less moderate than some had expected. Long-Bailey is known as the “continuity Corbyn” candidate, though without the historical baggage. Nandy’s pitch is centered around bridge-building to the lost voters, with a relentless focus on towns.
Thornberry is regarded as a strong performer in the House of Commons but is struggling to attract much support, and may struggle even to make the ballot.
This raises the question of whether the right debates are taking place. One problem highlighted by the Ashcroft report is the gulf between the general electorate and the Labour membership that choose the leader, even with many new members ahead of the leadership vote potentially narrowing the gap.
But for now it seems difficult for any candidate to carry both the party and the country. (While the Tory Party membership, which chose Boris Johnson last summer, was also a small subset of Conservative voters, it was ruthlessly focused on choosing a candidate capable of winning office.) At the very least, the new leader will have to pour a lot of cold water on the Corbynites within the party, just as Neil Kinnock did in the 1980s after Labor was crushed by Margaret Thatcher.
Secondly, Labor needs to stop ducking the difficult conversations. The period of reflection that Jeremy Corbyn called for when he announced his resignation as the votes were being counted has often seemed more like a period of deflection, with Corbynites blaming almost everything and everyone besides their helmsman.
This includes talking about the cultural divide between where much of the current Labour Party sits and where many of its lost voters sit. It is invariably more comfortable for those on the left to attribute Brexit and the election results to economic factors -- yet these are clearly not the main drivers of either result.
Understanding the scale and causes of the election defeat in full is obviously painful for a party in this position. But it is necessary. So besides the debate around what social democracy should mean in a modern post-industrial economy, there are also debates to be had about reconnecting with lost voters, many of whom have very different values to the party they once considered theirs.
Thirdly, Labor needs to stop finding people to antagonize. This includes its flip-flopping over Brexit, which upset both supporters and opponents of the UK’s departure from the EU. Brits may be divided, but they largely agreed on when it came to disliking Labor’s policy.
It also encompasses the party’s perceived obsession with fringe issues, which has often done it more harm than good. A conference motion critical of the Indian government over Kashmir provoked a backlash among some of the Indian diaspora in Britain, to no apparent upside. The Israel-Palestine debate may be of huge interest to Labor members, but is hardly the talk of the town in the rustbelt districts that turned so decisively against Labor in December.
The road is certainly long – after 1983 it took 14 years before Tony Blair finally took Labor back into power. The challenges are arguably greater now -- the hard left is more in control of party structures, the battle is on multiple fronts against the Conservatives in England and Wales and against the Scottish National Party in Scotland, and the challenges go well beyond policy into more awkward, cultural issues.
But there are also potential opportunities. The next phase of Brexit could go wrong, the economy could go stutter, among other things. Labor needs to be ready to seize any that come along.

The Ugly History of Blaming Ethnic Groups for Outbreaks
Stephen Mihm/Bloomberg/February 19/2020
As the coronavirus outbreak grows in scale and scope, a nasty side effect spreads: discrimination. Inside China, people from Wuhan have been treated like lepers. Outside, we’re seeing numerous reports of verbal and physical abuse aimed at ethnic Chinese, and an aversion to Chinese restaurants and other places associated with the country.
Sadly, this is nothing new: Past outbreaks have often gone hand in hand with ugly prejudice, with various ethnic or racial groups blamed for the disease. But this behavior, however commonplace in the past, has always backfired for the most obvious of reasons: Diseases don’t discriminate. Indeed, a pathogen like the coronavirus is the ultimate reminder of our shared humanity.
Consider the gold standard of pandemics: the bubonic plague, better known as the Black Death. It came roaring into Europe in 1348 and managed to kill off a quarter of the population within a few short years. As the death toll soared, many self-professed Christians looked for an explanation – and a way to put an end to the epidemic.
They fell back on anti-Semitism. Because some Jewish communities initially escaped the epidemic, Christians accused them of masterminding the outbreak. Lacking a germ theory of disease, they claimed that Jews had poisoned the wells, or as one deranged medieval conspiracy theorist claimed, the Jews “wished to extinguish all of Christendom, through their poisons of frogs and spiders mixed into oil and cheese.”
These zealots proceeded with a bloodletting as horrifying as the plague itself. Hundreds of Jewish communities, many concentrated in what is now Germany, became the target of extermination campaigns. In town squares, mobs gathered together Jewish communities and burned them alive en masse. One chronicler, unusual because he betrayed sympathy toward the victims, reported that “women and their small children [were] cruelly and inhumanly fed to the flames.”
And yet the plague continued to rage, killing off these same communities. Genocide, it became apparent, was not going to keep the plague at bay.
Mercifully, the response to subsequent outbreaks rarely rivaled the brutality of this episode. But the larger pattern of scapegoating outsiders continued, as did the quaint belief that eliminating those outsiders – or at least curtailing contact – would protect you from the disease.
Typical was the spread of syphilis in the fifteenth century. Unlike the plague, syphilis killed its victims very slowly (if painfully) and did not spark the same panic that accompanied the plague. But as it spread throughout Europe, each population inevitably blamed other foreigners for the gruesome chancres, sores, and eventual insanity that defined the disease.
As one historian wryly observed, “the increased movement of people across national borders reinforced the need to protect social boundaries. Every national group in Europe defined syphilis as a disease of other nations.” The Germans blamed the French, calling it the “French Disease.” Not to be outdone, the French blamed the Italians. Later, the Poles blamed the Russians, the Persians blamed the Turks, Muslims blamed Hindus, and the Japanese would blame the Portuguese.
This was ridiculous, of course, but no matter: the idea that one could avoid a disease by policing – and excluding – people different from oneself was (and remains) an immensely appealing, if deeply misguided, approach to managing disease. Indeed, as Germans studiously avoided French prostitutes and the French avoided Italian courtesans, syphilis continued to burn through Europe.
Something similar happened in the United States. Waves of immigration fundamentally transformed the country over the course of the nineteenth century. Inevitably, each ethnic group who arrived found themselves accused of carrying some dread disease. Then, as now, people held them in contempt – and avoided them if at all possible.
The Irish experience was typical. In the early part of the century, the Irish emigrated to the U
S in growing numbers. Unfortunately, their arrival coincided with the outbreak of cholera in cities. For Protestant elites who hated Catholics, it was only natural to assume that the odd, alien newcomers must have brought what became known as the “Irish disease.”
This may explain why so many reputable doctors strongly advised patients to avoid consuming “ardent spirits.” Don’t drink whiskey like the Irish, they said; drink water. Ironically, this just happened to be the best possible way to catch cholera in the first place: It was spread through contaminated municipal wells. Such was the stupidity of equating disease with ethnicity.
Other groups soon found themselves tarred by their association with disease. Jewish immigrants, scapegoated as carriers of the plague and typhus in Europe, were accused of carrying “consumption,” better known as tuberculosis, to the US.
This was the “Jewish disease” or the “tailor’s disease,” so-called because so many Jews followed that occupation. Prominent anti-Semites happily peddled this belief, arguing that Jews were sickly, weak, and diseased – unlike strapping, native-born “Anglo-Saxons.” This had no basis in fact. In reality, Jewish immigrants actually had longer life expectancies than their native counterparts, with lower levels of tuberculosis. But that didn’t stop these “race theorists” from using these claims to justify draconian restrictions on immigration in the 1920s.
Other outbreaks followed this same script. In 1916, a major outbreak of polio in New York City lead misguided doctors and medical vigilantes to blame a host of culprits before settling on Italian immigrants as the cause. New Yorkers desperately avoided Italians, believing that they carried the disease. But polio spread anyway because it had actually infiltrated the larger population by the time that the Italians got the blame.
In fact, the practical problem with identifying a particular group as the exclusive carriers of disease (or the culprits behind the spread of it) is that it blinds people to the reality viruses and bacteria don’t care if you’re from Wuhan or Washington. If you’ve got a pulse, you’ll make an excellent host.
And at this point, with coronavirus cases scattered around the world, you’re just as likely to catch the coronavirus from someone who looks exactly like you.

The Intolerance of the "Tolerant" Left: The End of Liberal Democracy?
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff/Gatestone Institute/February 19/2020
"Germany is witnessing the gradual erosion of democracy and the rule of law, a process that began in 2015 [during the migrant crisis] and which has become even more visible since and has ended in putsch against democracy." — Vera Lengsfeld, political analyst, February 7, 2020.
"The vote is unforgivable and must be reversed." — German Chancellor Angela Merkel, regarding a duly elected German state premier.
"Why bother exercising the right to vote when the 'wrong' choice can be annulled by the media and the chancellor through propaganda and veto?... Do we stand for democracy or for elections until the results suit the ruler?" — Dushan Wegner, political commentator, February 7, 2020.
Josef Hueber explains in a commentary how in a pseudo-democracy, elections mean voting until the result is "correct"...
We are presently faced with yet more politically-based show trials: of the parliamentarian Geert Wilders in The Netherlands and of Matteo Salvini in Italy. It is up to the population and voters to decide whether liberal democracy is worth fighting for.
When Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ripped up a copy of President Donald Trump's State of the Union address, she showed a disappointing lack of argumentative abilities. If tolerance is to mean anything, Pelosi and her fellow Democrats should have exhibited just that. Instead, she, as a role model, did the opposite by engaging in petty and irresponsible behavior.
We recently witnessed two events that indicated the possible demise of liberal democracy. The implications should frighten supporters of democratic forms of government in which individual rights and freedoms are officially recognized and protected, and the exercise of political power is limited by the rule of law.
The growing intolerance of many "left-wing" groups is apparent in the uproar of the democratic election of the state premier of the German state of Thuringia as well as in the performance of the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, publicly ripping up US President Donald J. Trump's State of the Union address. It was an official document that belongs not to her but to the public, and of which she was merely its custodian.
That does not even start to mention the entire sham "impeachment" of President Trump, in which centuries of accepted due process were thrown in the gutter. The Senate "trial," which probably should have been dismissed from the get-go as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" -- a legal metaphor meaning that if any evidence is found to be tainted or violates a defendant's constitutional rights, whatever "fruit" follows from it must be thrown out. The House, however, like the Inquisition, is allowed make up its own rules, and make them up it did. Another central problem seemed to be that a US president is obligated by law -- under Ukraine (12978) - Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, signed in 1998 -- not to hand taxpayer money over to the Ukraine without first checking to see that there is no corruption. Trump did, there was not, case closed. Trump was not only totally acquitted in a show trial that should not have existed in the first place, but his accusers seemed more guilty of what he was accused of -- the non-crimes of "abuse of power" and "obstruction of Congress" -- than he was.
Currently, there is growing concern on both sides of the Atlantic that the ability of many on the political "left" to accept the democratic process and the rights of those with whom one disagrees is becoming increasingly rare. According to Andreas Unterberger, Austria's most widely read political blogger:
"The left exhibits mocking scorn or even aggressive violence. If a relevant part of the population is unwilling to respect democracy and those with dissenting opinions, then the constitutional state will necessarily implode."
Sometimes it seems as if the underlying intention is actually to dismantle democratic norms and replace them with authoritarian ones. The thinking seems to be: If you vote any way other than for what we want, the result is automatically illegitimate and need not be accepted. In the US, this view had been evident in the three-year refusal to accept the election of President Trump by the "wrong" people", as well as a refusal by many last year to accept the vindication of US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in yet another show trial devoid of evidence , and most recently warnings about a refusal to accept President Trump's acquittal. The title of the latest book by the noted defense Attorney Alan M. Dershowitz, Guilt by Accusation, seems to be fast becoming the norm.
In Germany, the media establishment as well as Chancellor Angela Merkel were shocked to the point of demanding the reversal of the vote for the "wrong" premier of the state of Thuringia because the election came as a result of the "wrong" votes, namely those from the Alternative for Germany party (AfD). Baron Bodissey of the blog Gates of Vienna provided background information:
"The FDP (Freie Demokratische Partei, Free Democratic Party) is a relatively minor conservative business-oriented party in Germany. Nowadays it would be described as "classical liberal" if it were in an American context. In last fall's state elections in Thuringia, the FDP just barely surpassed the threshold to seat representatives in the state parliament. The Left (Die Linke) gained the greatest share of the vote, but the constellation of leftist parties did not have enough seats to automatically form a government.
"Since then there has been wheeling and dealing by all parties in an effort to establish a viable coalition. Yesterday came a big surprise: with the support of the CDU (Christlich Demokratische Union, Christian Democratic Union) and the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany), Thomas Kemmerich of the FDP was elected minister president (the equivalent of premier or governor) of the state of Thuringia...
[I]t seemed the cordon sanitaire against the AfD had been breached. Up until now, all across Western Europe the major immigration-critical populist parties had been kept out of government: the Sweden Democrats, the PVV in the Netherlands, Vlaams Belang in Belgium, and the AfD in Germany. Even though those "xenophobic" parties are quite popular, they have yet to obtain a majority of the vote in their respective countries, and the other parties simply agree never to join a coalition with them. Did yesterday's events in Thuringia signal a change?"
Not quite. The cordon shuddered a little bit, but remained intact. It seems the FDP never asked for the support of the AfD, and received it unexpectedly. Mr. Kemmerich and his party were just as appalled by the AfD as [the] leftist parties were. And Mr. Kemmerich announced he would resign his position to force new elections.
Mr. Kemmerich's announcement of resignation came as a result of massive intimidation against his family, his children requiring police protection, and "Antifa" protests outside Thuringia's parliament building. In this context, it is important to note the irony of the political left. The Left Party ("Die Linke"), the successor party of the SED, the Socialist Unity party of the communist German Democratic Republic (DDR), accused the Free Democrats of believing that it was "better to rule with fascists than not to rule at all." Indeed, there are grounds to argue that it is the Left Party, exhibiting the intolerance of fascists as the predecessors of the Left Party, that was responsible for the cold-blooded murder of Germans trying to escape East Berlin by breaching the Berlin Wall. Even more ironic, it was on the 31st anniversary of the execution of 17-year-old Chris Gueffroy, guilty in the eyes of the ruling elite of wanting to leave the DDR, that the German mainstream media began its campaign of hatred against a democratically elected official.
Adding insult to injury, the strategist of the Left Party had the gall openly to insinuate that Mr. Kemmerich was voted into office "by the grace of those who murdered liberals, commoners, leftists and millions more in Buchenwald [concentration camp] and elsewhere." In saying this, the strategist and others used what is currently the most potent weapon in political discourse: the instrumentalization of Nazi crimes as a weapon against political competitors. According to the German political analyst Vera Lengsfeld, politicians and media are employing psychological terror by igniting the "Nazi nuclear bomb" and by suggesting that the election of Mr. Kemmerich occurred thanks to a "Nazi party", namely the AfD. Lengsfeld adds:
"What has taken place in Germany in the past three days can be considered a breach of the dam. Germany is witnessing the gradual erosion of democracy and the rule of law, a process that began in 2015 [during the migrant crisis] and which has become even more visible since and has ended in putsch against democracy.
"Overnight, Germany has turned into an open dictatorship of convictions. Unless true democrats display resistance and firmly defend democracy and the rule of law, it will once again become cold and dark in Germany."
Dushan Wegner, another political commentator, asks whether a country can call itself a democracy if its chancellor demands the annulment of the election and the Free Democrats buckle in the face of disagreement, only because of the election of a state minister with the help of votes of a party behind a cordon sanitaire. Wegner argues:
"From faraway South Africa, Chancellor Angela Merkel said something very painful and simultaneously very frightening and shocking: 'The election of the state minister was unforgivable and the vote must be reversed.'
"The chancellor openly demands the annulment of a democratic vote, one that she is unhappy about, and politics remains silent. I find it difficult to call those democrats that do not use all democratic and legal means to remove the chancellor from office.
"Germany currently fluctuates between democracy and absolutism thanks to Angela Merkel. Why bother exercising the right to vote when the 'wrong' choice can be annulled by the media and the chancellor through propaganda and veto?
"A Chinese proverb says: 'May you live in interesting times.' Yes, these are interesting times, and yes, it is a curse. What is positive about interesting times is that they force us to define our stance. Do we stand for democracy or for elections until the results suit the ruler?"
Josef Hueber explains in a commentary how in a pseudo-democracy, elections mean voting until the result is "correct." Moreover, it is important to use the right words: the undesirable democratic election is a "political Fukushima", a breach of the dam, a catastrophe. The consequence of elections can be an "undesirable" or unexpected result for one political side; some will be elated, others disappointed. One could argue that this is democracy; this is how it is supposed to be. The understanding of democratic processes was unveiled with what recently transpired in the Thuringian parliament.
The situation in the United States is not much different. Th recent State of Union (SOTU) address demonstrated clearly what the Democrats' view of tolerance and respect for the office of the president looks like. What began with the absence of self-avowed democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, Maxine Waters and others ended in Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ripping up a copy of the speech at the end of the State of the Union address delivered by democratically elected President Donald Trump. By doing so, Pelosi disdained all America, not just the president.
Pelosi disdained the president's supporters as well as a black girl who wants nothing more than a choice in education; she disdained the Tuskegee airman honored by the president; she disdained the great economic performance of the country. She acted in a petty and classless manner, unfitting for someone holding one of the highest offices in the United States. When asked by a reporter why she tore up Trump's speech, Pelosi shot back, "Because it was the courteous thing to do considering the alternatives." What are the alternatives, Madam Speaker? The legal scholar Jonathan Turley, who disagreed with some aspects of the SOTU, said:
"She represents the House as an institution — both Republicans and Democrats. Instead, she decided to become little more than a partisan troll from an elevated position. The protests of the Democratic members also reached a new low for the House. Pelosi did not gavel out the protest. She seemed to join it.
"It was the tradition of the House that a speaker must remain in stone-faced neutrality no matter what comes off that podium. The tradition ended last night with one of the more shameful and inglorious moments of the House in its history. Rather than wait until she left the floor, she decided to demonstrate against the President as part of the State of the Union and from the Speaker's chair. That made it a statement not of Pelosi but of the House."
Pelosi's behavior shows a disappointing lack of argumentative abilities. If tolerance is to mean anything, Pelosi and her fellow Democrats should have exhibited just that. Instead, she, as a role model, did the opposite by engaging in petty and irresponsible behavior, followed by days futilely trying to have her outburst scrubbed from social media.
The entire episode fits seamlessly into a series of illiberal actions by the left in recent times. Consider the shutting down of debates on college campuses, thereby restricting freedom of speech. Or the attack on people wearing MAGA (Make America Great Again) hats. The author Kim R. Holmes explains the left's increasing intolerance as follows:
"What we call a 'liberal' today is not historically a liberal at all but a progressive social democrat, someone who clings to the old liberal notion of individual liberty when it is convenient (as in supporting abortion or decrying the 'national security' state), but who more often finds individual liberties and freedom of conscience to be barriers to building the progressive welfare state."
Seldom has the left on both sides of the Atlantic exhibited its increasing intolerance of dissenting opinions in a more concentrated manner than these past weeks. The foundations of liberal democracy are shaking noticeably. We are presently faced with yet more politically-based show trials: of the parliamentarian Geert Wilders in The Netherlands and of Matteo Salvini in Italy. It is up to the population and voters to decide whether liberal democracy is worth fighting for.
*Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is an Austrian human rights activist fighting for the right to freedom of speech as enshrined in the U.S. First Amendment. In 2009 she as charged for incitement to hatred and later found guilty for denigrating the religious teachings of a legally recognized religion. Her case was later accepted at the European Courts for Human Rights. She is the author of the book, "The Truth is No Defense."
© 2020 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Rep Ilhan Omar’s ‘peace’ proposal puts her duplicity on display
Hussain Abdul-Hussain/Al Arabiya/February 19/2020
In an attempt to show she is more than a poster child for veiled women of color, US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar revealed a so-called “Pathway to Peace” policy proposal last week.
The package of seven bills purports to outline “a progressive foreign policy… that centers on human rights… and makes military action a last resort,” according to a statement by the Democratic representative.
It claims to “rethink the country’s approach to foreign policy,” but really seeks to undermine America’s most trusted international alliances, redraw the global geopolitical map and puts the Congresswoman’s shocking double standards on display.
The proposal creates a new type of sanctions for foreign countries “with respect to foreign countries that are in violation of international human rights law.” But the sanctions are not intended to contain hostile foreign powers, but to stop America from providing defense cooperation, security assistance, intelligence, training or equipment to other countries.
American security assistance and defense cooperation are not available to all world governments – they are only reserved for Washington’s allies. So Omar’s “progressive foreign policy” is designed to punish America’s allies, not its foes.
Omar has a track record of opposing America’s sanctions policy, arguing that they hurt ordinary people more than their state. In October, the Congresswoman penned an article for the Washington Post titled “Sanctions are part of a failed foreign policy playbook,” arguing against sanctions on Turkey, led by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose government backs the Muslim Brotherhood extremist organization and is a close ally of Omar.
However, she appears to support the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement when it applies to Israel.
In each one of her proposed foreign policy actions, Omar’s double standards are on display. She calls for sanctions against America’s allies that allegedly violate human rights, but at the same time argues against sanctions for Iran, which has a well-established track record of supporting terrorism around the world and suppressing basic freedoms in their own country. And when Omar calls for withholding American defense and intelligence cooperation with allied countries that violate human rights, she seems to forget that she broke ranks with her Democratic Party in Congress and voted repeatedly against sanctions on Turkey designed to punish Ankara’s military operation against Syria’s Kurds.
Omar’s bias is clear. She has clearly allied herself with Erdogan, whom she met in 2017 and whose Turkish-American cousin donates to her campaign. Her foreign policy advisor was Iranian-American Mahyar Sorour – who is affiliated with NIAC, an organization whose founder Trita Paris was found to be lobbying for the Iranian regime. Whether Omar’s double standards are because of malice or naiveté is anybody’s guess. Either way, her duplicity does not reflect American democracy and her self-styled “progressive” policies for peace would empower America’s most hostile enemies.

Iran must be forced to reconsider its revolutionary aims
Dr. Hamdan Al-Shehri/Arab News/February 20/2020
Iran is the world’s leading state supporter and funder of terrorism thanks to its insistence four decades ago on one project: Exporting its terrorist revolution. This has adversely affected the security and stability of the region and the world at large ever since.
Iran’s terrorist actions are increasing day after day, especially as it has armed for its own benefit terrorist militias in the region that carry out dirty actions on its behalf, including seizing four Arab capitals. These militias are the head of its war and terrorism in the region. The US recently realized this and targeted the head of Iran’s overseas operations, Qassem Soleimani, removing him from the scene. There is no doubt that this ideal American action came in response to Tehran’s terrorist practices in the region and its threat to global and US interests. It is natural that this provoked global reactions, from both supporters and opponents, and this clearly shows who stands with Tehran’s terrorism and who is against it.
Soleimani’s death will also have provoked a reaction in Tehran and among its militias deployed around the region, which may carry out terrorist operations in revenge for Soleimani.
Tehran has militias with ideologies that directly relate to its own, such as Hezbollah, the Houthis, Iraqi militias, and those that fill Syria today. Also, there are organizations linked to Iran indirectly, but that share many goals with Tehran, such as Al-Qaeda and Daesh, which agree on hostility to the region and the US. Therefore, Iran will carry out terrorist acts that primarily serve Tehran and will coordinate and carry out the work of the Soleimani file. Soleimani's natural successor in the region is the secretary-general of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah.
Nasrallah is considered the premier candidate for Tehran in managing the region’s files so that the mullahs can catch their breath and rearrange their ranks — especially regarding the economic sanctions against them, canceling the nuclear agreement, and the tests of ballistic missiles. Iran’s multi-headed threat hangs over the region: It promises to ignite more wars and see a greater proliferation of nuclear weapons unless Tehran and its terrorist ambitions are checked.
There are three important ways to address the Iran threat and make Tehran think a thousand times about its behavior and alleviate its stubbornness.
Stopping the Iranian threat depends on the positions of the influential countries in the region and major countries globally, such as the US. We have truly felt strong support from Washington on this since the advent of the Trump administration. It has shown its seriousness in facing up to Iranian terrorism with its classification of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hezbollah and other terrorist militias as terrorist organizations, as well as the liquidation of Soleimani.
There are three important ways to address the Iranian threat and remove it. First is from inside Iran, with the support of the Iranian people, who have refused to stop demonstrating since 2009 and every day hope to get rid of this unjust regime, which has ruled them with iron and fire. If the Iranian people could change the equation from inside the country, this would be hugely important because it would allow the Iranian constitution to be rewritten to cancel the export of the revolution and support for terrorism. It would also allow a new nuclear deal to be agreed, remove the ballistic weapons threat, and normalize relations with the countries of the world based on principles that serve common interests, security and peace.
The second way is to defeat the Iranian expansionist project and bring about the removal of Tehran from all the countries where its militias have influence, such as Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen. Soleimani’s death, despite its importance, is only considered to be the beginning because the militias are still present and are performing their work, so the danger remains.
Finally, Iran’s military mechanisms should be neutralized, Tehran should be financially restricted, and those affiliated with the terrorist militias should be prosecuted. This would be enough to make Tehran think a thousand times about its behavior and alleviate its stubbornness. This may cause the mullahs to review their policies and consider it to be impossible to successfully export their revolution.
The idea of exporting Iran’s revolution was the initial catalyst for much of the region’s troubles. All countries interested in security and peace must send the Iranian revolution to hell.
*Dr. Hamdan Al-Shehri is a political analyst and international relations scholar. Twitter: @DrHamsheri

Who is to be Syria’s master?
Sir John Jenkins/Arab News/February 20/2020
From the very beginning, the conflict in Syria has been about illusions. The so-called peace process has been an illusion, starting in 2012 in Geneva. At times, it almost looked as though the US and the European powers were serious about reaching and implementing a new constitutional settlement. But, as we saw most clearly in August 2013, they were never prepared to put any actual force behind this.
And so it made no difference whether they wanted a Syria free of the Assads or a Syria where the Assads or their representatives would be allowed to oversee a transition to a different future. However unrealistic either aspiration might have been, it didn’t matter because nothing could come of it. And nothing did.
The Russians — who, true to their noble traditions, acted as spoilers throughout — then added a Slavic twist through the Astana process, which began at the end of 2016. The only difference was that this was a deliberate illusion designed to divert the attention of the international community while Russia went about the business of preserving the Assad regime diplomatically and through military intervention.
Turkey was self-deluding from the beginning, believing that, by supporting certain Islamist elements in the armed opposition, many of them highly unpleasant, it would create useful clients for the future and enable Ankara to see off the threat of the largely PKK-aligned Kurdish resistance that controlled territory along large sections of the Turkish-Syrian border. Its experience in Libya from the end of 2011 should have told Recep Tayyip Erdogan that it was unwise to bite off more than you could chew. But it didn’t.
And the Syrian opposition in exile was an illusion in itself, divorced from the situation on the ground and increasingly from the internal armed opposition groups, squabbling among themselves and backed by various external actors, for all the world like anti-czarist exiles in the Geneva of 1900 — except with no train ever likely to take one of their number in a sealed carriage to Damascus station.
We have now arrived at the final scene of yet another act of the Syrian tragedy. Turkey thought it had an agreement with Russia and Iran over de-escalation and buffer zones in Idlib, where many of those opposition fighters who survived battles elsewhere had been allowed to retreat, along with thousands of refugees. But that was always likely to prove another illusion, especially after the Al-Qaeda affiliate Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, which rejects any cease-fire, emerged as the dominant armed faction, more or less guaranteeing that no one else would come to its aid and complicating Turkish efforts to ensure a genuine cessation of hostilities.
Sending 2,000 militants to Libya doesn’t even begin to address the problem — it simply spreads it to North Africa. And, ever since Bashar Assad realized that Russian and Iranian support meant he could not be overthrown, he has been prepared to do whatever necessary to recover as much of Syria as he possibly can, no matter what the human or material cost. The same will eventually apply in northeastern Syria, where Kurdish forces still patrol territory within a complicated patchwork of regime, US, Russian and Turkish zones of influence and control — with Iranian-backed militias hovering in the background. For the moment, this is all held in some sort of precarious balance, with friction but no overt clashes.
But that will inevitably change. The situation is inherently unstable. The regime, with direct Russian support and Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah providing security to the rear, pushes on with its offensive against the remaining opposition positions in Idlib. It has already taken back control of the critical M5 highway, connecting Aleppo with Damascus and the coast. According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the city is now reportedly free of insurgents and out of range of their artillery for the first time in years — at a very high human cost. We also see a new seriousness of purpose in the deadly clashes we have witnessed over the past few weeks between regime and Turkish forces. The rest is a matter of time.
This poses a serious national security challenge for Turkey. Some 800,000 people may already have been displaced in this most recent round of fighting. Ankara does not want another massive surge of refugees to add to the 3 to 4 million it already hosts. And it has a lot of prestige wrapped up in being able to keep its promises of protection to elements of the armed opposition and the civilian population of Idlib. It has significantly reinforced its positions in and around Idlib over the past few weeks. But, in the end, all this is dependent on what Russia and the US — both of which have had a difficult relationship with Turkey since the outbreak of the conflict — decide to do.
Without Russian air and logistical support, Assad would find it hard to sustain an offensive. Turkey sought at first to confront Moscow. Finding that game too dangerous, it then tried to play Russia off against its NATO partners. Given that Vladimir Putin clearly has no intention of stopping Assad pushing on and seems to have no inclination or ability to dictate terms to Iran, Turkey therefore needs the US fully on its side.
But it is almost certainly too late, whatever the US now decides to do. That, in turn, has implications for the Syrian Kurds, who have been hedging their bets for some time now. And all this is essentially because of Turkish maladroitness — claiming they supported the overthrow of Assad but actually backing some of the worst elements of the opposition and acting mainly against the Kurds, who were one of the most effective, if complicated, Syrian opposition actors. In this they were, of course, aided and abetted by mixed signals and similar policy confusion in Washington and enduring policy weakness in the EU.
The Turks say they now want a renewed cease-fire in Idlib. But, even if one is achieved, it won’t mean much. In reality, what Ankara, like the rest of the international community, now faces is the challenge of dealing with the inevitable victory of Assad over his domestic enemies. That will be a major problem. With hundreds of thousands dead and about 13 million refugees or internally displaced, in addition to the material damage to large parts of Syria’s urban fabric, the country will need long-term reconciliation, resettlement and massive reconstruction.
But it is very hard to see how this is going to happen. When rebel-dominated areas have surrendered in the past, the regime has claimed to apply a process of status normalization to those who it suspects of having opposed it. In practice, this has often meant harsh and vengeful punishment. There are no signs that Assad actually wants any of the refugees back. It may be that he believes them to be irreconcilable. And they represent a useful political lever to be used against those states that host the largest numbers — Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, and parts of Europe. And, as with physical reconstruction, where is the money going to come from?
In the meantime, the Turks are dialing up the bellicosity of their statements. So the chances of a serious clash involving Turkish, regime and maybe even Russian forces in Idlib seem to be increasing. It is, however, unlikely that anyone — apart from maybe Assad — actually wants that to happen. So it is entirely possible that Putin and Erdogan will come to yet another agreement. But the slow tide of the regime advance will only be delayed for a time because, in the end, the real question is the future of Syria as a whole. And that is part of the wider game that is being played out in the Middle East. As Humpty Dumpty put it to Alice in Lewis Carroll’s “Through the Looking Glass,” the question is: Who is to be master? You can’t answer that question without considering Iraq, or Iraq without Iran, or any of this without the US.
What is happening in Syria is not really about the next month or so — it is about the next 50 years. And, given the state of global politics, that remains profoundly unclear. Part of the answer would be if the EU and the US could come up with a properly considered, long-term and coherent joint approach, setting clear and rigorous conditions for any post-conflict re-engagement with Syria.
And if — as part of this — Turkey concentrated on agreeing with the EU proper arrangements for meeting the humanitarian needs of refugees and eventually their reintegration back into Syria, rather than threatening simply to dump them on Europe’s doorstep again; if Syria’s other neighbors, particularly Jordan and Lebanon, were also brought into this discussion; and if the continuing anti-Daesh campaign was itself integrated into this approach rather than being seen as a separate tasking.
I’m not holding my breath.
*Sir John Jenkins is a senior fellow at Policy Exchange. Until December 2017, he was Corresponding Director (Middle East) at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), based in Manama, Bahrain and was a Senior Fellow at Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. He was the British ambassador to Saudi Arabia until January 2015.