LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
January 11/19

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.january11.19.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
Very truly, I tell you, the one who believes in me will also do the works that I do
John 14/08-14: "Philip said to him, ‘Lord, show us the Father, and we will be satisfied.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father"? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own; but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; but if you do not, then believe me because of the works themselves. Very truly, I tell you, the one who believes in me will also do the works that I do and, in fact, will do greater works than these, because I am going to the Father. I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If in my name you ask me for anything, I will do it."

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on January 10-11/19
Lebanon bids farewell Edgar Maalouf
UNIFIL head chairs first Tripartite meeting of 2019
Official measures announced to prepare Lebanon for next storm and deal with weaknesses
Israel Resumes Installation of Cement Blocks Opposite Adaisseh
Shiite Figureheads Mobilize to Pressure Postponement of Economic Summit
Aoun Meets Hariri as Defense Council Tackles Israeli Violations
Aoun Decries 'Regional Influences on Domestic Situation'
Hariri: Everything Is Possible!
Berri, Rampling tackle current developments
Pompeo Says U.S. Won't Accept Hizbullah 'Status Quo' in Lebanon
Report: Govt. Formation 'May Be Pushed' until Arab League Summit in Spring
Report: Lebanon Prepares Plan to Restructure Public Debt
Bishop: Patriarch to Convoke Maronite Politicians to a Meeting in Bkirki
Al-Mustaqbal Newspaper to Cease Print Edition
Consultative Gathering Backs Delaying Economic Summit, Says Govt. Solution 'in Hariri Hand'
Lebanon Storm Worsens Syrian Refugees' Miserable Conditions
Al-Mustaqbal daily to turn into digital newspaper as of February

Litles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on January 10-11/19
AMCD Supports President Trump’s Stance on Syria
Iran will not comply with US sanctions as they are ‘illegal’: oil minister
Iran Intelligence Unit on EU’s Terrorist List
Russia Questions US Seriousness in Syria Withdrawal
Pompeo in Egypt amid concerns over US Mideast policy
Pompeo: US will pull forces from Syria, maintain battle against ISIS
Pompeo: Erdogan threats against Kurds will not stop Syria withdrawal
Iraq Deploys Special Forces in Kirkuk amid Kurdish Flag Dispute
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham Takes Over Idlib After Ceasefire Deal
Report says Hamas leader’s trip to Moscow cancelled
Three killed as police use tear gas against protesters in Sudan
Six soldiers killed, 20 injured in Houthi drone attack on Yemen’s army parade
Griffiths Calls for More Efforts to Save Fragile Hodeidah Truce

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on January 10-11/19
The changing geo-strategic scenario in the Middle East/Shehab Al-Makahleh/Al Arabiya/January 10/19
The ‘big battle’ never happened in Syria/Ghassan Charbel/Al Arabiya/January 10/19
A century after the end of World War I, her dominoes continue to tumble/Faisal Al-Shammeri/Al Arabiya/January 10/19
White House and the challenges of uniting Iranian opposition/Karim Abdian Bani Saeed/Al Arabiya/January 10/19
How Shin Bet chief’s election meddling comment on Iran and Hizballah morphed into media frenzy against Russia/Debka File/January 10/19
Trump should re-energize presidency with less divisive policies/Andrew Hammond/Arab News/January 10/19
Waiting for an ‘Arab Project/Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/January 10/19
Qatar and the Legitimate Interests of Iran/Salman Al-dossary/Asharq Al Awsat/January 10/19
Germany Isn’t Floundering, Despite the Data/Leonid Bershidsky/Bloomberg/January 10/19
Is Rashida Tlaib Guilty of Bigotry/by Alan M. Dershowitz/Gatestone Institute/January 09/19
A New Cold War Has Begun/Robert D. Kaplan/Foreign Policy/January 10/19
EU sanctions on Iranian regime long overdue/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/January 10/19

Latest LCCC English Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on January 10-11/19
Lebanon bids farewell Edgar Maalouf
Thu 10 Jan 2019/ NNA - Lebanon bid farewell the late Minister and MP Edgar Maalouf in an official and popular funeral, attended by scores of political dignitaries, notably President of the Republic Michel Aoun. A funeral service was held at the Melkite Greek Catholic Archdiocese, with prayers on his soul presided over by Patriarch of Antioch and the the Orient Youssef Absi, aided by scores of clerics. Attending funeral service had been Caretaker Ministers Gebran Bassil. Melhem Riachy, representing Lebanese Forces Leader Samir Geagea, as well as Michel Pharoun, Riad Sarraf, Nicolas Tueini and Cesar Abi Khalil. In his delivered sermon, Patriarch Absi eulogized the late General Maalouf, saying Lebanon has lost one of its most significant political and military figures.

UNIFIL head chairs first Tripartite meeting of 2019
Thu 10 Jan 2019/NNA - UNIFIL's Head of Mission and Force Commander Major General Stefano Del Col today chaired the first regular Tripartite meeting of 2019 at the UN position in Ras Al Naqoura, with a focus on discussions regarding tunnels and ongoing engineering works near the Blue Line, as per UNIFIL statement. Release said: "Today's meeting offered a forum to hear perspectives from both sides, especially regarding activities near the Blue Line, with the UNIFIL Head of Mission reiterating his call to the parties to continue to work through UNIFIL's coordination mechanisms to maintain the overall stability." "I again call on the parties to make full use of UNIFIL's liaison and coordination arrangements," said Major General Del Col. "Any activity close to the Blue Line should be predictable, with sufficient prior notification to allow UNIFIL to duly inform the other party and so that coordinated security arrangements could be put in place to prevent incidents or violations." Major General Del Col added: "The parties were updated about UNIFIL's independent investigation that had confirmed the existence of four tunnels, of which two crossed the Blue Line in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 (2006). UNIFIL remains closely engaged with both sides in this regard as the operations continue." Looking back at 2018, the UNIFIL head noted that despite the challenges there had been many successes, and commended the parties for their continued commitment to resolution 1701.
"Going forward, there is a need to build on these achievements and work towards more sustainable solutions to long standing problems along the Blue Line," he added. Release concluded: ""Tripartite discussions also touched on air and ground violations, as well as other issues within the scope of resolution 1701 and related Security Council resolutions.
Tripartite meetings have been held regularly under the auspices of UNIFIL since the end of the 2006 war in south Lebanon as an essential conflict management and confidence building mechanism. UNIFIL currently has around 10,300 peacekeepers who carry out some 14,500 operational activities monthly in the area of operation south of the Litani River and at sea. The mission also has more than 800 civilian staff."

Official measures announced to prepare Lebanon for next storm and deal with weaknesses
Thu 10 Jan 2019/NNA - Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri headed today at the Center House a meeting focused on the damages caused by the storm that hit Lebanon.
The meeting was attended by the Ministers of Interior, Nouhad Machnouk, Agriculture, Ghazi Zeaiter, Finance, Ali Hassan Khalil and Public Works, Youssef Fenianos, the President of the Council for Development and Reconstruction Nabil Jisr and the mayors of Beirut, Ziad Shbib, Akkar ,Imad Labaki, Mount Lebanon, Mohammed Makkawi, Baalbek, Bashir Khodr, Bekaa, Kamal Abu Joude, Nabatieh, Mahmoud Mawla, North, Ramzi Nohra, and South, Mansour Daou, the Secretary General of the Higher Relief Council Major General Mohammed Kheir, Hariri's advisor Fadi Fawaz and the Head of the disaster risk management unit at the Presidency of the council of ministers Zahi Chahine.
After the meeting, Minister Machnouk said: "The meeting focused on the weaknesses that emerged during the storm that hit Lebanon last week. The participants congratulated the Internal security forces, the Civil defense volunteers, the Lebanese army and the Ministry of Public Works employees, for the tremendous efforts they exerted to reduce the possibility of serious harm to the citizens during their movements in the areas that witnessed heavy snowfall.
It appeared that several measures must be taken in preparation for the next storm, which all weather forecasts are talking about and which will start on Sunday night.
They are:
First: Clean up four storm drains basins located within Greater Beirut, which will help facilitate the flow of water. We asked Fadi Fawaz to coordinate with the Ministry of Energy because it is its responsibility.
Second: There are three roads that need temporary and quick solutions. Dbayeh road, which was flooded, Jezzine, which showed serious cracks, and Chekka, where a wall was subjected to some cracks. The Ministry of Public Works was mandated to carry out emergency measures in cooperation with the Higher Relief Council on these three roads to prevent the recurrence of what happened.
Third: To prevent what happened on the two main roads subjected to heavy snowfall, Faraya and Dahr al-Baidar, it must be clear to all citizens from now on that the security forces will not allow any car to pass from Sunday night until the end of the storm, if not equipped with metal chains. Everyone must take this matter seriously, thank God nothing serious happened to the citizens throughout the last storm.
Fourth: The disaster risk management unit at the Presidency of the Council of Ministers will coordinate with all provinces.
Fifth: The Ministry of Public Works will try to take action in Ghadir, because there is a problem due to the violations at the border of the river, which caused serious damages.
Sixth: Measures will be taken concerning the South road, where technical problems occurred. These measures will be quick due to the landslides, and will be temporary.
All of these measures will be followed by with Prime Minister Hariri, but the most important thing for the citizens is to cooperate".
Question: Citizens have been affected, who is responsible?
Machnouk: Practically there are several types of responsibilities, there are agricultural responsibilities, there are responsibilities related to attacks on public property, the third matter concerns the responsibility of the state in the areas that have been identified. This happens in any country in the world as a result of a snowstorm.
Question: Why do you always resort to "patchwork" measures?
Machnouk: This expression is not accurate because we said that we will take temporary measures now, because we cannot work during the storm. In practice, weaknesses have been identified. There are projects at the CDR that include many of these points that we discussed today. They will be sent today, not tomorrow, to the General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers so that after the storm they will be approved.
We have seen on television what happened in many places around the world that experienced storms. Alsa, a problem emerged in the Bekaa where there are 38 random camps of Syrian refugees. In fact, we do not have the means to take any action, but we will ask the relevant UN bodies about measures to alleviate the damage.
Question: Is it true that no compensations will be paid?
Machnouk: The areas that need compensation have not yet been identified. This is a long procedural matter that requires conducting a survey, studying the conditions of the regions, and checking the impact of the storm. Now, the priority is to solve the weaknesses that have emerged, to relieve citizens during the coming storm and prevent further damage.
Question: Do you have a shortage of equipment?
Machnouk: There is no shortage of equipment. There is a lack of modernization. The equipment that we have is old. I salute the snow workers, roads workers, civil defense volunteers, internal security forces and the army because they are exerting a great humanitarian effort, despite the harshness of natural conditions. We cannot say that our equipment is among the newest in the world, because getting them requires a much larger budget than what we have today.
Question: Do you still say that the government is not being formed due to a link with in the presidential file? Minister Gebran Bassil described what you said earlier as shameful?
Machnouk: The real shame is to describe the words as shameful. This is a political point of view that you may or may not agree with, and it is not an accusation against someone.
I still believe that there is a fist match about the presidency, and this should not be considered as an insult to anyone. It is normal in a country like Lebanon. This is one of the things delaying the government. We did not discuss this issue during our meeting today, but I am talking from a personal point of view so as not to be misunderstood.
Question: Will the measures include removing the violations you talked about?
Machnouk: The Council for Development and Reconstruction has a specific project related to this matter. It will send it to the General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers today. It includes the removal of specific violations, they are not many, because it is necessary to bear in mind that these citizens have lived in these houses for decades.

Israel Resumes Installation of Cement Blocks Opposite Adaisseh
Naharnet/January 10/19/An Israeli tank was positioned behind a dirt cover in the settlement of Meskavam while the Israeli forces resumed digging and installing cement blocks along the technical fence in the outskirts of Adaisseh village in Marjayoun, the National News Agency reported on Thursday. The enemy deployed a number of soldiers while the Lebanese Army and the international emergency forces patrolled the area, NNA added. New threats emerged between Lebanon and Israel over several issues, including the wall the Jewish state is building along the border that Beirut says may jut into Lebanese territories, as well as plans for oil and gas exploration in the Mediterranean.

Shiite Figureheads Mobilize to Pressure Postponement of Economic Summit
Kataeb.org/Thursday 10th January 2019/Head of the Higher Islamic Shiite Council, Sheikh Abdel-Amir Qabalan, called for an emergency meeting on Friday to discuss the repercussions of Libya’s participation in the Arab Economic and Social Development Summit that is set to be held in Beirut on January 19-20. Meanwhile, the family of missing Lebanese Shiite Imam Moussa Sadr issued a statement saying that it is the duty of all Lebanese officials to support the "sacred" cause of their disappeared kin, adding that they must all abstain from normalizing ties with Libya until it cooperates in uncovering the fate of Sadr. Sadr, one of the most influential Shiite figures in Lebanon in the previous century, disappeared in August 1978 while on an official visit to Libya at the invitation of Moammar Gadhafi. Journalist Abbas Badreddine and Sheikh Mohammad Yaacoub were also kidnapped along with Sadr. Lebanon has been blaming Gadhafi’s regime for the kidnapping. Moreover, NBN channel issued a statement annoucing the boycott of the forthcoming Arab economic summit, arguing that this decision goes in line with calls for the postponement of said event due to the failure to invite Syria and with the choice to not engage in the media warfare that is aimed at settling inter-Arab accounts on the Lebanese soil. Speaker Nabih Berri on Wednesday said that it would be better to postpone the Arab economic summit until after a government is formed, stressing that this is the optimal solution so that the meeting would not be considered as successful.

Aoun Meets Hariri as Defense Council Tackles Israeli Violations
Naharnet/January 10/19/President Michel Aoun held talks Thursday with Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri ahead of an emergency meeting for the country’s Higher Defense Council. Caretaker Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq told reporters upon his arrival at the Baabda Palace that the council would discuss “the Israeli violations.”The National News Agency for its part reported that the council would tackle “the Israeli hostility at the Blue Line, especially the attempt to build a wall on disputed territory.”

Aoun Decries 'Regional Influences on Domestic Situation'
Naharnet/January 10/19/President Michel Aoun on Thursday lamented what he called “the regional influences” on Lebanon’s “domestic situation,” amid a protracted government formation deadlock. “We were hoping to achieve our wishes last year, but unfortunately the formation of the government faltered after elections and a number of developments occurred in the region,” Aoun said at the Baabda Palace during a meeting with the members of the consular corps. “The biggest threat during the (Syrian) war was from the negative repercussions that Lebanon suffered, but it has become clear that the more things and political solutions get complicated abroad, the more they in turn reflect on the Lebanese arena and further complicate our situations,” the president added. Lamenting “our inability to get rid of the regional influences on our domestic situation,” Aoun hoped “we will soon be able to overcome the big hurdles and continue the journey of reviving the state.”

Hariri: Everything Is Possible!
Kataeb.org/Thursday 10th January 2019/Prime Minister Saad Hariri on Thursday did not dismiss the possibility of reactivating the work of his caretaker government, as he was chairing a meeting with several ministers to discuss the latest developments in the country. "Everything is possible," Hariri said when asked whether the expanded ministerial meeting is the first step towards activating the caretaker Cabinet.Hariri also revealed that the option of holding a government session to approve the 2019 state budget is being mulled.

Berri, Rampling tackle current developments
Thu 10 Jan 2019/NNA /House Speaker, Nabih Berri, welcomed this Thursday in Ain El Tineh the British Ambassador to Lebanon, Chris Rampling, with whom he discussed most recent developments and the bilateral relations between the two countries.
At noon, Speaker Berri met with a delegation of the Supreme Judicial Council, led by Judge Jean Fahed, who well-wished him on the festive season. The visit was a chance to discuss an array of judicial affairs. The new Uruguayan ambassador to Lebanon also paid a protocol visit to Berri today.

Pompeo Says U.S. Won't Accept Hizbullah 'Status Quo' in Lebanon
Naharnet/January 10/19/The United States will not tolerate the “status quo” that Hizbullah has created in Lebanon, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Thursday. "In Lebanon, Hizbullah is a major presence, but we won’t accept this as the status quo. Our aggressive sanctions campaign against Iran is also directed at the terror group and its leaders, including the son of Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hizbullah," Pompeo said in a speech at the American University of Cairo. “We are working to reduce Hizbullah’s rocket arsenal,” he added. Pompeo also said that the Obama administration had ignored the growth Hizbullah's strength in Lebanon to the detriment of Israel's security.

Report: Govt. Formation 'May Be Pushed' until Arab League Summit in Spring
Naharnet/January 10/19/Speaker Nabih Berri’s suggestion to postpone Beirut’s Economic Social Development Summit until Lebanon’s government is formed is “because there is an effort to bring Syria back to the Arab League,” the pan-Arab al-Hayat daily reported on Thursday. Quoting sources it described as “concerned” about Syria's invitation to the economic summit in Beirut, they told the daily that Berri's suggestion to postpone the summit was because “there is an effort to bring Syria back to the Arab League. But, the Arabs will not decide on this except on the eve of the regular Arab summit in March in Tunisia, which the Tunisian presidency has begun extending invitations to.”The sources added “this assumes there are arrangements and negotiations about the political implications of the return related to the situation in Syria on the one hand, and the regional situation on the other in the light of the positioning of international powers.”“In the coming weeks and months there appears to be mutual pressure and contacts on the issue of the return between Damascus and the major Arab countries concerned. The issue of Lebanon’s government formation seems one of its means. It will not be formed until the results of these contacts and maneuvers crystalize. Forming the government remains in the hands of Damascus’ allies,” added the sources. “The Lebanese government will be governed by the normalization of relations with the Syrian regime when the summit is held under a new regional scene,” they added. “Damascus' allies seek to ensure that this normalization is translated from now through the new government, or else postpone its formation to the date of the Tunis summit, and hence the extended delay of forming the government until the spring,” they said. On Wednesday, Speaker Nabih Berri suggested postponing the summit scheduled in Beirut on January 19-20 in light of Lebanon’s failure to line-up a government. Berri’s call also came amid controversy over whether Syria is going to be invited to the summit or not. In November 2011, Syria was suspended from the Arab League, as the death toll was escalating and several regional powers bet on Syrian President Bashar Assad's demise.

Report: Lebanon Prepares Plan to Restructure Public Debt
Reuters/Thursday 10th January 2019/The Lebanese finance ministry is preparing a “financial correction” plan that includes restructuring public debt and will propose solutions to spare Lebanon “dramatic developments”, the finance minister was quoted as saying on Thursday.
Lebanon has the third largest public debt-to-GDP ratio in the world at around 150 percent and has suffered from years of low economic growth. Ali Hassan Khalil told al-Akhbar newspaper the plan had not been revealed to anyone. “This matter requires decisions in cabinet, the involvement of parliamentary blocs and the central bank, ... and others who are concerned with the solutions that we will propose to spare Lebanon dramatic developments”. “The public debt cannot continue in this way,” he said. Fitch and Moodys both last month revised the outlook on Lebanon to negative from stable. “What we are saying today is that the country cannot not be managed with the same previous policies, and the public debt cannot be left on this same path,” Khalil said. “We must strive to increase tax collection, and to review public debt servicing,” he said. The International Monetary Fund urged Lebanon in June to carry out “an immediate and substantial fiscal adjustment” to improve debt sustainability. Lebanon has been without a new government since May as politicians continue to wrangle over the make-up of a new national unity cabinet.

Bishop: Patriarch to Convoke Maronite Politicians to a Meeting in Bkirki
Kataeb.org/Thursday 10th January 2019/Bishop Samir Mazloum revealed that Maronite Patriarch Bechara Al-Rahi will convoke Maronite politicians to a meeting to discuss the lingering crisis and the difficult phase that the country is going through. "No specific date has been set yet, but the meeting will certainly take place before January 21, given that the Patriarch will travel to the U.S. on that day," Mazloum told the Kataeb website. "The meeting will serve as a dialogue table to discuss the hard phase that we are living as seven months have passed without reaching any breakthrough regarding the government formation," he said. "This situation has become unacceptable because Lebanon is now on the brink of collapse." "This meeting's mission will be to help rescue Lebanon which is collapsing while we are standing idly by," he stressed. "Everyone has to realize that there is a responsibility to assume because everyone is responsible for what's happening."Mazloum pointed out that another expanded meeting might be held to include politicians from other sects.

Al-Mustaqbal Newspaper to Cease Print Edition
Naharnet/January 10/19/Another Lebanese newspaper has decided to stop printing and go fully online in the face of the deteriorating readership of print media in Lebanon and the world. “Faced by the transformations that the press industry is witnessing in Lebanon and the world, and the continuous decline in sales and advertising revenues in the local marker, the administration of al-Mustaqbal Newspaper has decided to stop issuing the daily’s print edition as of February 1, 2019,” it said in a statement. The daily “will become a fully digital newspaper,” the administration added. “The mission of turning the daily into a digital platform and managing it has been tasked to the colleague Georges Bkassini,” al-Mustaqbal’s incumbent managing editor, the newspaper’s administration said. It added: “Al-Mustaqbal Newspaper, which has accompanied the readers of its print edition throughout 20 years, promises them and promises the current and future readers of its digital edition that it will continue to seek offering them the best media service, with the spirit of the national and Arab message that it has carried since its establishment.” The daily also pledged to “follow up on the profound transformations that the press industry is witnessing across the world.” The press in Lebanon has been in crisis for several years, both as it struggles to adapt to the digital era and faces economic difficulties. In September, al-Anwar newspaper, which was first issued in 1959, said its publisher was suspending its print version, citing "financial losses." The publisher's eight other publications -- including popular cultural weekly al-Shabaka -- would also cease to be printed, it said. In June, prestigious pan-Arab newspaper al-Hayat closed its Lebanon offices, where it was first founded in 1946 before later becoming Saudi owned. Its printing presses in Beirut stopped the same month, leaving its international version only available online. In late 2016, Lebanese newspaper as-Safir shuttered 42 years after it published its first edition, with the founder saying it had run out of funds. Other newspapers have carried out mass layoffs or suspended salary payments.

Consultative Gathering Backs Delaying Economic Summit, Says Govt. Solution 'in Hariri Hand'
Naharnet/January 10/19/The Consultative Gathering, a grouping of six Hizbullah-backed Sunni MPs, on Thursday voiced support for calls to postpone Beirut’s upcoming Arab economic situation to ensure Syria’s participation in it. “Avoiding the invitation of Syria to the summit is not beneficial for Lebanon, which has endorsed the dissociation policy,” MP Faisal Karami announced after the Gathering’s periodic meeting, saying “it is okay to postpone the economic summit until Syria regains its normal place in the Arab League.”Speaker Nabih Berri, another ally of Hizbullah and Damascus, had voiced a similar stance on Wednesday. As for the issue of the stalled government, Karami said the Consultative Gathering is “not concerned with any ideas that have not been directly presented to it.”“The only solution is in the hands of the PM-designate who is not practicing his constitutional powers,” Karami added. “The Gathering has not asked President Michel Aoun to cede a minister from his share and the initiative came from him, but we were surprised that the concession was conditional, which strips it of its concessional nature,” the MP went on to say. Karami, however, announced that the Gathering maintains its “positive stance on the presidential initiative despite its interruption.”

Lebanon Storm Worsens Syrian Refugees' Miserable Conditions
Associated Press/Naharnet/January 10/19/A storm that battered Lebanon for five days has displaced many Syrian refugees after their tents were flooded with water or destroyed by snow. On Thursday, volunteers were pumping water from a refugee settlement in the eastern town of Bar Elias and distributed rubber boots, blankets and winter clothes to Syrian refugees needing help.The U.N. refugee agency says 151 sites that are home to some 11,000 Syrians have been heavily affected. The storm killed a Syrian girl who fell in a river in north Lebanon and her body was found a day later.

Officials Meet at Center House to Discuss Plans after Storm
Associated Press/Naharnet/January 10/19/Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri chaired an "expanded" ministerial meeting at the Center House on Thursday to discuss the damages and compensation following a storm that pummeled Lebanon for five consecutive days. The meeting was held in the presence of several officials including caretaker: Finance Minister Ali Hassan Khalil, Public Works and Transport Minister Youssef Fenianos, Agriculture Ghazi Zoaiter, Interior Nouhad Mashnouq, Higher Relief Committee chief Maj. Gen. Mohammad Kheir, head of the Council of Development and Reconstruction Nabil al-Jisr, and the governors of the districts of Akkar, Beirut, Baalbek, Bekaa, Nabatieh, the North and South. A storm packing snow and rain has battered Lebanon for five days and flooded neighborhoods and paralyzed major mountain roads. Residents in some Beirut neighborhoods awoke Wednesday to find their cars immersed in water as rivers overflowed, inundating streets with muddy water. Some of the most affected areas were the northern Beirut suburb of Antelias and Hay al-Sollom just south of the capital, where two rivers overflowed, flooding some parking lots and the ground floors of some buildings, forcing people to move to higher stories.

Al-Mustaqbal daily to turn into digital newspaper as of February
Thu 10 Jan 2019/NNA - The administration of Al-Mustaqbal daily announced in a statement on Thursday that the paper would cease being issued in a printed version as of forthcoming February1, and that it would turn into a digital newspaper.

Latest LCCC English Miscellaneous Reports & News published on January 10-11/19
AMCD Supports President Trump’s Stance on Syria
WASHINGTON, DC, USA, January 9, 2019 /EINPresswire.com/ -- The American Mideast Coalition for Democracy supports the President’s planned withdrawal from Syria after ISIS has been completely decimated and the Kurds are reasonably protected. AMCD also supports the consolidation of a Kurdish-minorities autonomous region in Northeast Syria as exists in Iraq.
“Even though this may not be the outcome the Kurds ultimately wanted, it may result in a stable situation which will allow many refugees to return to their homes,” said AMCD co-chair Tom Harb. “The Kurds have proven to be reliable allies and President Trump wants to leave them in a safe and stable condition.”
The Sunni areas of Syria also need protection from the Iran-backed Shi’a militias which are now seeking to consolidate power in a continuous land bridge from Iran, though Iraq, Syria and into Lebanon where the Iranian proxy Hezbollah is ascendant. In this regard, there are European forces already deployed in Syria and these, coupled with a possible deployment of forces from Egypt and the UAE, could frustrate Iran’s plans, stabilize those areas and destroy the remnants of ISIS at the same time.
“In other words, we need a final allied surge to destroy ISIS once and for all,” said AMCD advisor and FOX news analyst, Dr. Walid Phares. “Ideally an Arab force comprised of troops from the UAE and Egypt along with some European forces should be able to block Iranian ambitions as well as shielding the Sunni, Christian and Yazidi populations from the depredations of the Shi’a militias allied with Iran. Once these areas are stable, Europe can begin returning refugees and rebuilding destroyed areas with the help of promised funds from Saudi Arabia.”
AMCD supports President Trump’s insistence that the Arab world take care of their own neighborhood and that the stabilization and rebuilding of Syria be shouldered by those with a vested interest there.
Rebecca Bynum
The American Mideast Coalition for Democracy
(615) 775 6801

Iran will not comply with US sanctions as they are ‘illegal’: oil minister
Reuters/January 10, 2019/BAGHDAD: Iranian Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh said on Thursday US sanctions against his country were "fully illegal" and Tehran would not comply with them. "We believe that we should not comply with the illegal sanctions against Iran," Zanganeh told a joint news conference in Baghdad with his Iraqi counterpart, Thamer Al-Ghadhban. Zanganeh also said Iran would not discuss the volume or destination of its oil exports while it remained under US sanctions. "We have discussed today how to improve cooperation with Iraq on different aspects, especially on oil issues," Zanganeh said. Al-Ghadhban, who also said the discussions had touched on energy issues, added that Iraq had not yet reached an agreement with Iran to develop joint oilfields. He said a decline in global oil prices had stopped and that he expected them to rise gradually. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, of which Iran and Iraq are members, and its Russia-led allies agreed on Dec. 7 to cut output by more than expected, despite pressure from US President Donald Trump to reduce oil prices. The OPEC deal had hung in the balance on concerns that Iran, whose crude exports have been depleted by US sanctions, would receive no exemption and block the agreement. Ghadhban said any decision relating to future OPEC cuts would depend on monitoring price developments.

Iran Intelligence Unit on EU’s Terrorist List
Brussels - London- Abdullah Mustafa and Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 10 January, 2019/The European Union added two Iranian individuals and the directorate for internal security of the Iranian Ministry for intelligence to the bloc's terrorist list, it said in a statement on Wednesday.
"These listings have been adopted by the Council as part of its response to recent foiled attacks on the European soil," the statement said. EU ministers agreed in Brussels on Tuesday to add the names to the list and freeze their assets, effective from Wednesday, as the Netherlands accused Iran of two killings on its soil and joined France and Denmark in alleging Tehran plotted other attacks in Europe. Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qassemi called the EU's actions "illogical" and "surprising,” Reuters reported. "Iran will adopt the necessary measures in response to this move and within the framework of reciprocation," Qassemi said in a statement published on the ministry's official website. Iran has denied any involvement in the alleged plots, saying the accusations were intended to damage EU-Iran relations. Qassemi, in his statement, accused the EU of supporting "terrorist groups" such as the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), a group that seeks to overthrow the Iranian government.

Russia Questions US Seriousness in Syria Withdrawal
Moscow – Raed Jabr/Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 10 January, 2019/Preparations are underway for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s visit to Russia, which is expected to take place in the near future, but no dates have been set yet, announced the Kremlin. Two weeks ago, Turkey announced it is discussing a new Russian-Turkish summit in January, but Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said: "We are making preparations for such a visit that will take place in the near future, if not very soon. However, no dates have been set yet.” Russian media sources said that the Syrian file will be strongly present during the upcoming summit, along with other matters, especially in the implementation of the deal to supply Turkey with the Russian missile systems “S400”. On the Syrian matter, observers believe both Russia and Turkey are seeking to complete the understandings on the level of joint action and the need to deal with the vacuum that will happen if the United States implemented the decision to withdraw from Syria. However, Russia is questioning the seriousness of Washington's plans to implement the decision to withdraw. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Wednesday it was hard to believe that the US would pull out of Syria completely under the current circumstances, given the strong position of those who support the continued US military presence in Syria. "I cannot imagine that the United States will fully and indisputably leave Syria in terms of physical military presence in the current situation where Washington is locked in an unstoppable contest for world domination and driven to be present everywhere and resolve issues only on its own conditions," Ryabkov told reporters.
The diplomat stressed that contacts on Syria between Russia and the US would not stop even if they were not always announced, there were no long pauses in the talks. “The contacts on various aspects of the situation in Syria do not stop… These contacts are not always announced; if the information on them becomes widely available, they attract additional attention. But the contacts are ongoing on various issues. There will be contacts on other topics in the near future… The breaks in the contacts may be different, but there are no long pauses,” he asserted. Meanwhile, Russia launched a new campaign against the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) stating that the new mechanism will undermine the peaceful settlement in Syria. Russia's Permanent Representative to the OPCW, Alexander Shulgin indicated that empowering the Organization with punitive functions will undermine the peace process, which starts in early 2019. Speaking during an interview, Shulgin noted that if the organization’s mandate expands, the West would be given carte blanche on blaming Damascus for any sort of chemical attacks, which devalues its participation in a peaceful settlement.
The diplomat also assessed the current relations between Moscow and Amsterdam and explained how Russian diplomatic methods differ from that of the US. He added that Western countries look forward to the establishment of a prestigious international organization to directly charge the Syrian leadership of using chemical weapons, which puts the peace settlement with the participation of Damascus in question. Schulgen reiterated his country's refusal to finance the special body, which the organization has decided to develop to implement its new initiative to identify the sides they consider perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks. In November, Russia said it was strongly against turning the Organization into a “punitive body,” noting that if it receives the right to identify perpetrators of chemical attacks the issue of the organization’s encroachment into the sphere of exclusive prerogatives of the US Security Council will become particularly relevant. "It is safe to say that the initiative stems from the US’ desire to dominate the world, bringing everything, including international organizations, under their control," Shulgin said.

Pompeo in Egypt amid concerns over US Mideast policy
AP/January 10, 2019/CAIRO: US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo held talks with Egyptian leaders in Cairo on Thursday as he continued a nine-nation Mideast tour aimed at reassuring America’s Arab partners that the Trump administration is not walking away from the region and is continuing to step up pressure on Iran. Amid confusion and concern over plans to withdraw US forces from Syria, Pompeo met with Egypt’s President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi and Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry to discuss security and economic cooperation. He was later to deliver a speech on the administration’s broader Mideast objectives focused on combatting threats from Iran. Pompeo said on Twitter that his meeting with el-Sisi had been “productive.” Adding that “the US stands firmly with Egypt in its commitments to protecting religious freedom and in the fight against terrorism that threatens all of our friends in the Middle East.”
President Donald Trump has boasted of his close relationship with el-Sisi, a former general who has been criticized for his human rights record and democratic shortcomings. The Trump administration has resumed weapons sales to Egypt that has been suspended over human rights concerns, including the jailing of several American citizens on what US officials say are false charges. Shortly before Pompeo got to Cairo, the State Department put out a fact sheet detailing close US cooperation with Egypt that noted some improvements in the country’s human rights record. It said Washington welcomed the recent acquittal of employees of American civil society groups who had been “wrongly convicted of improperly operating in Egypt” and said the US supports el-Sisi’s pledges “to amend Egyptian law to prevent future miscarriages of justice.”On Wednesday, however, an Egyptian court sentenced a leading activist behind the country’s 2011 uprising to 15 years in prison after convicting him of taking part in clashes between protesters and security forces later that year. The statement went on to laud Egypt for its “vital role” in regional security and stability and lauded el-Sisi for being “a steadfast partner in the anti-terror fight and a courageous voice in denouncing the radical extremist ideology that fuels it.” In his speech at the American University of Cairo entitled “A Force for Good: America’s Reinvigorated Role in the Middle East,” Pompeo was to extol the Trump administration’s actions in the region, including taking on Daesh in Iraq and Syria and imposing tough new sanctions on Iran. “In just 24 months, the United States under President Trump has reasserted its traditional role as a force for good in this region, because we’ve learned from our mistakes,” he was to say, according to excerpts released by the State Department. “We have rediscovered our voice. We have rebuilt our relationships. We have rejected false overtures from enemies.”Since withdrawing from the landmark 2015 nuclear deal with Iran last year, the administration has steadily ratcheted up pressure on Tehran and routinely accuses the nation of being the most destabilizing influence in the region. It has vowed to increase the pressure until Iran halts what US officials describe as its “malign activities” throughout the Mideast and elsewhere, including support for militia in Yemen, anti-Israel groups and Syrian President Bashar Assad. “The nations of the Middle East will never enjoy security, achieve economic stability, or advance the dreams of its peoples if Iran’s revolutionary regime persists on its current course,” Pompeo was to say in his speech, according to the excerpts. Pompeo arrived in Egypt after stops in Jordan and Iraq where he sought to assure leaders that withdrawing from Syria doesn’t mean the US is abandoning the fight against Daesh or easing pressure on Iran. From Egypt, Pompeo will travel to the Gulf Arab states of Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Kuwait to press the case.

Pompeo: US will pull forces from Syria, maintain battle against ISIS
AFP, Reuters, Cairo/Thursday, 10 January 2019/US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met on Thursday with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi in Cairo, part of a tour to address concerns of American allies in the Middle East. The visit by Washington’s top diplomat comes amid confusion in the region over a surprise plan by President Donald Trump’s administration to pull US troops out of Syria. Pompeo arrived in Cairo late Wednesday following stops in Jordan and Iraq, in his longest trip since taking the post last year. He met with Sisi in Ittihadeya Palace and is scheduled to hold talks with Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry before giving a keynote speech Thursday at the American University in Cairo outlining US Middle East policy. Later, speaking at a joint news conference with Shoukry in Cairo, Pompeo said that Washington remained a steadfast partner in the Middle East. “The United States under President Trump will remain a steadfast partner in the region for Egypt and others. We urge every country to take meaningful action to crush terrorism and denounce its ideological roots. You’ll not fight these battles alone. Our robust battle against ISIS, al-Qaida and others will continue.” Pompeo said on Thursday the US would withdraw its troops from Syria while continuing to finish the battle against ISIS. The United States and Egypt enjoy warm ties under the Trump administration. Trump and his Egyptian counterpart Sisi have lavished one another with praise on several occasions. Since 1980, the US government has provided Egypt with more than $40 billion in military and $30 billion in economic assistance. From Cairo, Pompeo is scheduled to head to Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman and Kuwait.

Pompeo: Erdogan threats against Kurds will not stop Syria withdrawal
Reuters, Baghdad/Cairo/Thursday, 10 January 2019/The US troop withdrawal from Syria will not be scuppered despite Turkish threats against Washington’s Kurdish allies there, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Wednesday, promising to ensure that the Kurds would still be protected. Pompeo met leaders in Iraq’s capital and its semi-autonomous Kurdistan region on Wednesday, aiming to reassure them about Washington’s plans following President Donald Trump’s surprise announcement last month of an abrupt withdrawal from Syria. The unannounced visits to Baghdad and the Kurdish regional capital Erbil came on the second day of a Middle East tour also taking in Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Oman. Pompeo has the task of explaining US policy in the region after Trump’s announcement of the withdrawal of all 2,000 US troops from Syria, which rattled allies and came as a shock to top US officials. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis quit over it. The US forces have been working with a Kurdish militia to fight against ISIS extremist group. The Kurds control a swath of northeastern Syria, Washington’s foothold in a conflict that has drawn in Russia, Iran, Turkey and other regional powers. Washington has repeatedly said its Kurdish allies will remain safe despite the withdrawal. But Turkey, which considers the US-backed Syrian Kurdish YPG militia an enemy, has repeatedly vowed to crush the group and repudiated any suggestion of protecting it once US troops leave. Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan denounced visiting US National Security Adviser John Bolton on Tuesday for suggesting that protecting the Kurds would be a pre-condition of the US withdrawal, a suggestion Erdogan called “a serious mistake”. Asked in Erbil if Erdogan’s pushback on the protection of the Kurds puts the withdrawal at risk, Pompeo told reporters: “No. We’re having conversations with them even as we speak about how we will effectuate this in a way that protects our forces.”Pompeo added: “It’s important that we do everything we can to make sure that those folks that fought with us are protected and Erdogan has made commitments, he understands that.”
Smooth over relations
The withdrawal of US forces in Syria strengthens the hand both of Turkey and of the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad, which is backed by Russia and Iran. Pompeo has stressed throughout his trip to the region that Washington still aims to counter Iranian influence. In Iraq, Pompeo also sought to smooth over relations after political leaders were angered when Trump visited US troops on the day after Christmas at a remote desert air base without stopping in Baghdad or meeting any Iraqi officials. Many politicians from the ruling coalition of mainly Shi’ite parties called Trump’s visit a violation of Iraqi sovereignty and demanded the United States withdraw troops. In Baghdad, Pompeo met Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, Foreign Minister Mohammed al-Hakim, Speaker of Parliament Mohammed al-Halbousi and President Barham Salih. President Salih, answering a reporter’s question on whether he wants the United States to keep troops, said Iraq “will need the support of the US” and expressed his “gratitude to the US for support over the years”. “ISIS is defeated militarily but the mission is not accomplished,” Salih said. The United States withdrew its troops from Iraq in 2011 eight years after an invasion to topple Saddam Hussein, but sent thousands back after ISIS fighters swept into the north of the country in 2014. It now has around 5,200 there, and Trump has not announced plans to pull them out. ISIS militants are still waging insurgent attacks in the north of the country and trying to make a comeback, although they were driven from all towns and cities last year. Asked on Tuesday about what would be discussed during a possible meeting with Pompeo, Abdul Mahdi said deepening Iraq’s relationship with the US-led coalition fighting Islamic State. “He’s an ally, he represents a friendly country,” Abdul Mahdi said of Pompeo on Tuesday. “We will raise those issues, and how to deal with regional issues altogether and deepen our economic and educational relations with the United States.”

Iraq Deploys Special Forces in Kirkuk amid Kurdish Flag Dispute
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/January 10/19/Iraqi special forces deployed Thursday in Kirkuk after the raising of the Kurdish flag over a political party headquarters revived tensions more than a year after Baghdad seized the disputed northern city. Iraq's counter-terrorism chief gave President Barham Saleh's Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) until noon on Friday to lower the red, white, green and yellow flag of the autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan. Under Iraq's constitution, multi-ethnic Kirkuk province is controlled by the central government in Baghdad. Kirkuk is one of several regions that Kurdish peshmerga fighters took over in 2014 as jihadists from the Islamic State group swept through much of northern and western Iraq. Angered by an independence referendum held in the three provinces of Iraqi Kurdistan as well as in disputed border areas including Kirkuk, Baghdad deployed federal forces to retake the oil-rich province in 2017. The vote saw more than 92 percent of Kurds back secession, but the federal government rejected the poll as "illegal," imposed economic penalties and seized the disputed Kirkuk oil fields, halting exports. In December Baghdad and Iraqi Kurdistan announced a deal to resume oil exports from Kirkuk. Prime Minister Adel Abdel Mahdi, seen as a consensual figure who has settled disputes between Kurdistan and Baghdad in the past, appealed to Saleh after the flag was raised on Tuesday evening. Abdel Mahdi spoke by telephone to the president, who was on a visit to Qatar, the premier's office said. Abdel Mahdi complained that flying the flag above party headquarters in Kirkuk is "a violation of the constitution". He suggested the matter be referred to the Supreme Court, which had ruled the independence referendum was illegal.

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham Takes Over Idlib After Ceasefire Deal
Beirut, London- Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 10 January, 2019/A militant group dominated by Syria's former Al-Qaeda affiliate Thursday sealed its grip on northern Idlib, the last major rebel bastion, in a deal ending days of fighting with rival factions. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) signed a ceasefire with what was left of a rival alliance that sees it confirm its supremacy and unites the region under a jihadist-led administration. Under an accord reached by rebel backer Turkey and regime ally Russia in September, Ankara was expected to rein in Idlib factions to stave off a threatened regime offensive with potentially disastrous humanitarian repercussions. The militants' deal, a copy of which was circulated on local media outlets, brings an immediate end to the fighting between HTS and the rival National Liberation Front, which was directly backed by Turkey. "This morning, HTS and NLF signed an agreement to put an end to ongoing fighting... and establish the control of the salvation government in all areas," the group's propaganda channel Ebaa said. The self-proclaimed Salvation Government is an HTS-dominated body which had been administering large parts of the Idlib area, including its eponymous capital.
Its reach now extends to most of the Idlib province and parts of the neighboring provinces of Aleppo and Hama. The deal sees Ankara-backed radical factions Ahrar al-Sham and Suqur al-Sham stand down, as areas they once held come under HTS administrative control.
These include the two major towns of Ariha and Maarat al-Noman.
Last week, HTS seized dozens of villages from another key NLF component, Noureddine al-Zinki, in the northeast of the enclave. Other militants-- such as the Al-Qaeda-linked Hurras al-Deen group and Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP) -- maintain a presence in the Idlib region but are allied with HTS. The clashes between HTS and its NLF rivals in Idlib had killed 137 people on both sides since the start of the year, most of them fighters, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring group. The deal announced on Thursday provides for an immediate cessation of hostilities, an exchange of detainees, the lifting of all checkpoints inside the region, and its unification under the authority of the Salvation Government. Analyst Sam Heller said the latest development put HTS squarely in control of the Idlib region. "Now it can present itself to Turkey and others as an indispensable interlocutor in any non-military solution to Idlib," said the analyst with the International Crisis Group. It was however unclear if it would make it harder for Turkey to implement the September deal for a buffer zone around Idlib, reached in the Russian resort town of Sochi. "It's not clear whether the Sochi deal's success and the continuation of the Idlib de-escalation actually depends on the memorandum's literal implementation, or more political atmospherics such as the health of the Turkish-Russian bilateral relationship," he said. Simultaneously, Ankara has been threatening to launch a cross-border offensive against the Kurdish militia controlling large parts of northeastern Syria. The recent announcement by US President Donald Trump that he was ordering a full troop pullout from Syria has left Washington's Kurdish allies more exposed than ever. They have had to cozy up to Damascus, at the expense of their plans for increased autonomy, to guarantee their survival in the face of Turkish threats. Turkey, which considers the Kurdish YPG militia a terrorist organization, could move into northern Syria to create a buffer along its border. It made its intentions clear Thursday and warned that it would launch an offensive against Syrian Kurdish forces if the United States delays the withdrawal of its troops from the war-torn country. "If the (pullout) is put off with ridiculous excuses like Turks are massacring Kurds, which do not reflect the reality, we will implement this decision," Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu told NTV television. Syria's war has killed more than 360,000 people and displaced millions since it started in 2011 with the brutal repression of anti-government protests. The Russia-backed regime notched up a series of victories against the rebels and extremists last year, and is now in control of around two-thirds of the country.

Report says Hamas leader’s trip to Moscow cancelled
Reuters, Moscow/Thursday, 10 January 2019/A trip to Moscow next week by the leader of Palestinian movement Hamas has been cancelled, Interfax news agency quoted the ambassador for the Palestinian Authority to Russia as saying on Thursday. The Hamas leader had been expected to hold talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on January 15. In the latest development in the escalation between Hamas and the Palestinian Authorities, Egypt announced last Monday that it will bar Gazans from crossing into its territory as of Tuesday after the Palestinian Authority withdrew staff from the border point over alleged abuses.

Three killed as police use tear gas against protesters in Sudan
Reuters, Khartoum/Thursday, 10 January 2019/Sudanese police used tear gas to disperse “illegal” protests against the 30-year rule of President Omar al-Bashir in the city of Omdurman in which three people were killed, state news agency SUNA said on Thursday. Sudan’s second-largest city “witnessed riots and illegal gatherings” on Wednesday, SUNA said, amid weeks of demonstrations. SUNA quoted police as saying that they knew of three deaths and several people being wounded and that these attacks were being investigated. No other details were immediately available. Police chased demonstrators into side roads, from where they regrouped to resume their protests, witnesses said. Hundreds also blocked a main road. Bashir vowed at a rally of thousands of supporters in the capital Khartoum on Wednesday that he would stay in power. His speech failed to quell the unrest, with security forces fighting running battles on Wednesday with protesters in Omdurman on the other side of the Nile to the capital. Protesters have been staging demonstrations almost daily for weeks, enraged by shortages of bread and foreign currency. The unrest has come as the ruling party has pressed ahead with plans to change the constitution so Bashir can stay in office beyond his present term, which ends in 2020.

Six soldiers killed, 20 injured in Houthi drone attack on Yemen’s army parade
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English/Thursday, 10 January 2019/In their continuous attempts to abort the Sweden peace agreement brokered by the United Nations – the pro-Iranian Houthi militias launched on Thursday, a drone attack targeting a military parade by the Yemeni National Army in al-Anad military base in Lahaj province. Al Arabiya news channel correspondent reported that six soldiers of the Yemeni Army were killed and 20 others injured, among them journalists as well as the governor of Lahaj, the deputy chief of army staff, the head of the intelligence unit, the commander of the military police and the army commander of the fourth region. For his part, the correspondent of Al Hadath news channel reported that an Iranian-made bomb-laden drone exploded on a podium, attended by officials from the ministry of defense, watching the parade. The correspondent pointed out that ambulances were seen carrying the wounded to Aden hospitals. Also, Yemen’s Information Minister Muammar al-Iryani said that: “Once again this proves that the Houthi criminal militias are not ready for peace and that they are exploiting truces in order for deployment and reinforcements,” adding that two senior military officials were wounded in the attack. “This is time for the international community to stand by the legitimate government and force the militias to give up their weapons and pull out of the cities,” he added. It is worth mentioning that the Yemeni army used to launch attacks against al-Qaeda terrorist organization from al-Anad military base in Lahaj. On the other hand, as many as 15 members of the coup militias were killed on Wednesday during a failed attempt to fire a ballistic missile in al-Tayyar district in Saada governorate north of Yemen, targeting Saudi Arabia. Al Arabiya sources said the Houthis, among them missiles’ experts, were trying to launch the ballistic missiles targeting the kingdom when it exploded. The Arab coalition backing the legitimate Yemeni army released a video documenting the Houthis’ violations, especially in regards to violations related to their use of populated areas and civilians for military purposes. The footage shows an arms depot in Razeh district in Saada as well as militants loading a truck in a very populated area.

Griffiths Calls for More Efforts to Save Fragile Hodeidah Truce
New York - Ali Barada/Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 10 January, 2019/Despite welcoming lowered violence in Yemen, UN Special Envoy Martin Griffiths demanded pouring more effort into shoring up a fragile Hodeidah ceasefire deal, before holding additional rounds of peace talks. Briefing the United Nations Security Council through video from Amman, Jordan, Griffiths said that Yemen’s warring parties are still working to finalize a deal covering both a prisoners’ swap and the opening of routes for humanitarian relief convoys. Noting that the December 18 ceasefire, dubbed the Stockholm Agreement, in and around Hodeidah had been largely adhered to, Griffiths said the fighting was now “very limited” compared to the clashes beforehand. “This relative calm, I believe, indicates the tangible benefit of the Stockholm Agreement for the Yemeni people and the continued commitment of the parties to making the agreement work,” he asserted. The UN envoy also revealed Yemeni warring parties, the internationally-recognized government headed by President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi and Iran-backed Houthi insurgents, are working to close a de-escalation agreement for the southern Taiz province. “Civilians in Taiz have suffered far too much for too long, and the destruction in the city has been terrible”, he underscored. “The flow of humanitarian aid needs to increase, and people need the chance to rebuild”, he added, pointing out that the Stockholm consultations provided a platform for this. As for upcoming Yemeni peace talks, leaks suggested holding a new round of talks either in Kuwait or Jordan. However, this information has not been formally confirmed. Yemeni Foreign Minister Khaled al-Yamani will be visiting Jordan on Thursday, during which he will discuss with Jordanian officials issues related to the Yemeni conflict, Jordanian Foreign Ministry sources said. Hadi, for his part, reiterated his government’s support for UN-led diplomatic efforts and revealed readiness to re-run domestic flights—rebooting local transportation is meant to alleviate the suffering of citizens in all Yemeni provinces and airports, including Sanaa airport. Hadi said that his government has presented many “concessions in order to achieve peace,” but was unfortunately met with intransigence by Houthis, who find it hard to uphold their end of agreements and understandings.

Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on January 10-11/19
The changing geo-strategic scenario in the Middle East
Shehab Al-Makahleh/Al Arabiya/January 10/19
The Middle East has been in the eye of international politics since the end of World War II. The hostility and confrontation of two erstwhile superpowers – the United States of America and the former Soviet Union – cast a dark cloud over the whole region leading to decades of regional divisions and conflicts. Recently, China has started trying to protect its interests in the Middle East and people in the Middle Easter are witnessing the impact of China on the regional chessboard, albeit it is quite limited.
Eye of the geopolitical storm
The old world order collapsed in 1991 and a new one emerged. This left the US, Russia and China as the drivers of change for many countries in the Middle East, which has seen a rise in many conflicts. Stability in the Middle East is a global issue because its implications extend beyond the borders of the region for a variety of reasons. Firstly, the region is one of the richest in natural resources. The Middle East is a major energy supplier and is the lifeline of the global economy. Secondly, the region is hub of global security threats on account of its many wars and conflicts, whose solution can pacify the region and stabilize its countries. Thirdly, impasse in the Middle East peace process involving Israelis and Palestinians irks many countries in the region and the conflict saps the financial and economic potential. Fourthly, Iran's nuclear program, which developed in 2002, is deemed a threat to regional security. Such challenges collectively pose a threat, not only to energy supplies but also to global endeavours against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Once its dependence on Middle East energy declines, US interest in the region may diminish
Since the 1970s, there has been a growing movement in the Middle East seeking change in the world order. It started with the Iranian Revolution in 1979, Iran-Iraq War, rise of terrorist groups and the war on terror. Such issues fomented regional conflicts which have had tectonic ramifications on Asian, African and European countries due to the proximity of these continents to the Mideast. Middle East issues are given global coverage as the region influences both domestic and international issues of international players, which include amongst others the US and Europe.
The big powers
In 1914, the British first landed in Basra, southern Iraq, to protect oil supplies from Persia. At that time, the US had little interest in the Middle East, its oil or the regional geopolitics of the Gulf, the Levant and North Africa. At that time, it was giving more attention to its own backyard, Latin America and East Asia. In fact, US President Woodrow Wilson even declined to partake of the bounty of World War I, when the UK offered it the spoils of the Ottoman Empire.
This situation changed after World War II when the Soviet Red Army, the US troops and the British forces were positioned in Iran to move their militaries against the USSR and guard Iranian oil. Josef Stalin pulled out his Red Army only after Harry Truman opposed Soviet presence in Iran. Truman had asked Turkey to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), and cemented bilateral ties with Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran. By then, Truman had turned the Middle East into a Cold War front with the Soviet Union. Since then, political games commenced between the superpowers in the Middle East.
China has numerous motives behind replacing the US in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. The most important of these is its heavy dependence on the energy resources of the Middle East. Chinese government is fully aware that its strength and longevity hinges upon its economic stability, which is expected to top the list of world economies by 2020.
To maintain the momentum of economic growth, China requires Middle East energy resources. Although China imports oil and gas even from Russia, the Middle East remains the major energy source and lifeline for the Chinese economy.
The second reason why China seeks to strengthen its relations with the Middle East is the region’s strategic location between China and Europe. The Chinese look at Middle East as a market for its manufactured goods. The region’s geographic location could play a key role in its military strategy. Although China may have its reasons to displace the US in the Middle East and to replace it, the question remains: Is China capable of replacing the US in the region?
Replacing US influence
The Middle East sticks out as a sore thumb for US foreign policy. Nonetheless, the region has been of key strategic importance for the US over decades due to its political, security, energy and military considerations. The last ten years have witnessed a decline in US influence in the Middle East as a result of its own domestic issues and due to the rise of other powers on the global scene, such as China and Russia. Washington has been a peace broker for countries of the Middle East. After the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, radical factions exploited the political vacuum to gain strength and started conducting operations against Iraqi government and its people, crossing borders between Iraq and Syria. Such a threat to the region is well understood by the Americans and their allies. However, the region has devoured too much American blood and financial resources.
Would it be easy for any other country to replace the US in the Middle East? The US has had to safeguard geostrategic interests in the Middle East since WWII, driven by its international ambitions and energy dependence. Once its dependence on Middle East energy declines, US interest in the region may diminish. Russians have no energy ambitions in the Middle East, but seek strategic control over key seaports from where they can defend their country and reverse their pre-1991 decline. China has the biggest aspirations as its continuity and survival lies in the hands of population in the Middle East.

The ‘big battle’ never happened in Syria
Ghassan Charbel/Al Arabiya/January 10/19
Syria’s internal war or other proxy wars that were launched on its territory have stolen the world’s attention for years. This is not surprising. In fact, Syria is a key country in the region, and what happens in it concerns neighboring countries as well, and impacts the region’s balances and conflicts, including the Arab-Israeli conflict. In addition, Syria has also been an arena for major states’ interference from conflicting and competing positions and for a broad battle against terrorist organizations. It is also true that the events in Syria were considered one of the episodes of the so-called “Arab Spring”. It is a cycle that gave birth to the plight of displaced people and refugees, especially after many Syrians crossed Europe.
The war in Syria was about a series of wars of different interests and objectives, sometimes divided and other times intertwined. The intensity of confrontations prompted many politicians and commentators to go far in their analyses and concerns.
There are those who thought that the “big battle” was going on in the land of Syria and that its results would determine the balance of international and regional powers in the next stage, especially after the Russian player turned the tables on others with direct military intervention.
There are also concerns that major interventions in Syria would trigger a crisis similar to the Cuban missile crisis of the early 1960s when America and the Soviet Union were on the brink of nuclear confrontation.
I never want to underestimate the size of the Syrian crisis and its tragedy. This crisis has not yet ended, although some outlines of its results have been clarified. It is undeniable that these results will leave their mark on Syria itself and on some relations in the region. Due to the dual – internal and regional – nature of the crisis, it is necessary to take a little time before preparing a complete list of losses and profits. There are also concerns that major interventions in Syria would trigger a crisis similar to the Cuban missile crisis of the early 1960s when America and the Soviet Union were on the brink of nuclear confrontation
Strongest side
The strongest side in a war is not necessarily the most capable of assuming reconstruction. The calculations of intervening powers are not always consistent with those of their local allies. Moreover, the logic that prevails in time of fear is not the same as that of normal days.
There are also those who believe that it is imprudent to celebrate the military presence of a side or another on Syrian soil; because the Syrian people are not known to accept tutelage nor they express the desire to coexist with many flags on their land.
It is undeniable that the Syrian crisis provided Vladimir Putin with an opportunity to inform the world that a new Russia was born internationally and that the West should forget vulnerable Russia in the wake of the Soviet collapse and the Afghan complex, similar to America’s former Vietnam knot. However, one should remember that Russia was present in Syria before it intervened there and that America, under both Barack Obama and Donald Trump, considered that winning in Syria did not deserve spending billions of dollars and the blood of US soldiers. Washington acted on the grounds that the deployment of the Russian army in Syria did not constitute a coup against the balance of powers. It did not deal with the battle in Syria as the last or major battle. In Washington, there are those who believed that Syria would become a burden on the victor because the latter would be practically responsible for the country’s reconstruction and profit sharing. The same can be said about regional players. Iran has contributed through its “advisers” and militias to prevent the overthrow of the Syrian regime, and now has a field presence on Syrian soil, and perhaps within the Syrian fabric itself.
But it must be noted that pre-war Syria was a full ally of Iran. A question arises: Does the problem of the Iranian regime lie in Syria or inside the Iranian map? The problem is mainly economic, aggravated by the fortieth anniversary of the revolution, with the continued refusal of the decision-makers to turn their country into a natural or semi-natural state, on the path of similar revolutions that could survive only by embracing the logic of the state and institutions internally and abroad.
Field presence
Turkey also expanded its field presence on Syrian soil, citing Kurdish threat to its national security. But is the problem of Turkey within the Syrian territory or is it a problem of options inside and outside the map? Does Turkey have an economy that can withstand a major regional role?
In London, diplomats and experts believe that the wars of strategic locations in the world have lost much of their previous importance. They believe that the open “big battle” will not be fought by fleets and military interventions. The world has changed. The big battle is going on in the heated economic race. The battle is fought in giant companies, universities and research centers… with the weapons of innovation, creativity and excellence. Battles are determined by sales figures, investments and competitiveness. They talk about the initial results of the actual “big battle”, which will continue in the coming years among five influential economic blocs: China, America, India, Europe and Russia. They emphasize that this relentless race will be affected by a combination of factors: technology, population, economy as a whole and military capability. In this context, they point to a possible Japanese decline, under the weight of the aging society, and the lack of necessary elements for Brazil and South Africa to enter the club of Five, including the size of the population. The “big battle” is going on between huge economies and giant corporations. That’s why observers depend on the China-US trade war and the battle of the fifth-generation Internet services. This explains the US and western concerns about China’s Huawei - the second telecommunications company in the world. This type of company is capable of causing more damage to the competing state than any other army.
We are in a new world, whether we like it or not. What was happening on Syrian soil was important, but the “big battle” was not there.

A century after the end of World War I, her dominoes continue to tumble
Faisal Al-Shammeri/Al Arabiya/January 10/19
If it were not for World War I (1914-1919), we would not have had the Russian Revolution, the rise of Communism, Fascism, Nazism, the Holocaust, Stalinism, the Sykes-Picot Agreement, colonialism, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, World War II or The Cold War. In addition, the Great War claimed millions of lives who died in the World War itself. After the Napoleonic wars that ended in 1815, Europe experienced a unique period of economic and social growth due to several factors, such as the Industrial Revolution and colonial expansionism. This new wealth produced rapid developments in science, art, medicine, and political philosophy. For Europe, the future looked bright, but suddenly the continent was set alight by a new conflagration.
Pandora’s box of disasters
The story began in June 1914 in Sarajevo, when heir to the Austro-Hungarian Empire Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated by a Serbian nationalist. The incident should not have been more than a tragic incident; instead, it triggered a series of disasters that changed the world forever.
After the Napoleonic wars that ended in 1815, Europe experienced a unique period of economic and social growth due to several factors, such as the Industrial Revolution and colonial expansionism
Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia after receiving the blessings of Germany. Recognizing that it had no chance to survive the onslaught of Austria-Hungary, Serbia sought support of Russia and the latter obliged. For its part, Russia asked French support in its bid to support Serbia. Ever suspicious of German intentions, France extended a helping hand to Russia. Keen to pre-empt a French attack, Germany invaded France through the neutral territory of Belgium. This move prompted Britain to support France against Germany. Suddenly, the entire continent of Europe was engulfed in war.
Germany proved to be the critical player and their ploy was to strike France through Belgium in order to capture Paris, even before the French army could react. With France defeated, they would shift their attention to Russia. Germany thought that the Schlieffen Plan (named after Field Marshal Alfred von Schlieffen who masterminded the invasion of France and Belgium on 4 August 1914) would work. It all ended when German emperor, Kaiser Wilhelm II, who ascended the throne in 1888, was forced to abdicate in 1918. Wilhelm was a profoundly obnoxious, unpredictable and impetuous person. He held the belief that Germany should not only hold sway over the entire continent, but the entire world. If the Schlieffen Plan had worked, Germany would have certainly become a superpower and would have dominated the globe.
Emergence of US power
However, Germany’s strategy didn’t work. The British and the French put up a great resistance in the West. Russia did the same in the east. The losses suffered by all sides were not only huge, they were catastrophic. For the first time in history, widespread use of mechanical war machines, guns, tanks, worst of all, and poison gas were used in the fields of France and the plains of Russia, which turned into vast graveyards. By 1917, the war reached a stalemate. No one knew how long it would take to break the deadlock, until the United States intervened.
The American people did not want anything to do with Europe. Ironically, President Wilson had been elected because of his campaign pledge that he would keep America out of “Europe’s War”.However, his views changed when the German navy sank American merchant ships. The infamous Zimmerman Telegram proved to be the proverbial last straw which exposed Germany’s alliance with Mexico against the America. This led the US military to join the Allies in the war.
Prelude to World War II
The US entry into the fray proved decisive and the war finally ended in 1918. Around 20 million people, including soldiers and civilians, died in the war leading to the downfall of four Kingdoms: Deutschland (Germany), Turkey (Ottoman Empire), Austria-Hungary, and Russia.
Russia became a communist country under Vladimir Lenin, and the Bolshevik Revolution formed the Soviet Union. French and British economy were in meltdown. Germany was forced to surrender under the humiliating Treaty at Versailles, with its economy in recession.
After the Great War, the United States retreated from European affairs. In the end, World War I caused so much bitterness and hostility among nations that it made the occurrence of World War II inevitable. World War I transformed the face of modern warfare forever. Its ends proved to be a mere hiatus in the violence and did not usher in peace. The stage was set for World War II, which claimed over 50 million lives. It was incited by the lunacy of Adolf Hitler, who shared the megalomania of Kaiser Wilhelm II. Therefore, if I could change one event in history, it will be the First World War.

White House and the challenges of uniting Iranian opposition
Karim Abdian Bani Saeed/Al Arabiya/January 10/19
As expected, the Iranian intelligence minister, Mahmoud Alavi, warned on 25 December, 2018, that efforts and consultations are intensifying among the non-Persian ethnic nationalities, the nationalist parties, and the Iranian opposition groups. They seek to unite their ranks to overthrow the rule of the velayat-e faqih, i.e., the rule of Shiite theocracy in Iran. Iran is in a volatile state because of increased popular demonstrations and labor protests at home. In addition, the intensification of opposition forces abroad coincides with increasing international and American pressure on the Iranian regime to stop its terrorist activities in the region and worldwide and end the suppression of its peoples at home. Based on these developments, the survival of the mullah’s regime has become an issue. There is a real possibility of an eruption – at any moment – of the situation from within. These situations have become a source of concern for the international community, especially in the White House, and among the leaders of countries in western Europe. The focus is inside Iran because of the widespread protests, demonstrations, and popular movements in most regions. Especially concerning are the labor demonstrations that began two months ago by workers at sugar factories in the city of Sous and Haft Tappeh, north of the Arab-majority province of Ahvaz.
Labor strikes spread to workers in the heavy steel industry groups in Ahvaz, Abadan refinery workers, and those in the petrochemical industries in the city of Mahshahr (Ma’shur) because workers’ salaries have not been paid for several months, in some cases up to eleven months.
Throughout Iran, campaigns and solidarity demonstrations have occurred in support of the workers’ demands at Tehran University and Sharif University as well as among journalists and political and human rights activists. Many journalists and activists have been arrested.
I believe Americans do not want regime change in Iran at the moment, even though they desire that outcome and do not rule out overthrowing it
US sanctions
All this occurred after November 5, 2018, when the second round of US sanctions took effect. Sanctions have contributed to the deterioration of the Iranian economy. The regime is indeed facing a dilemma and has seemingly reached an impasse in its internal and external policies.
About two weeks ago on December 14, one of the oldest American intellectual institutions, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, held a seminar in Washington, followed by a press conference in the presence of Reza Pahlavi, the son of the Shah who was deposed by the revolution.
During the question-and-answer sessions, Barbara Slavin, director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, asked if Reza Pahlavi had met President Trump or others at the White House about overthrowing the regime in Tehran. She also asked Mr. Pahlavi how his efforts are being financed—from America or elsewhere. A journalist asked Mr. Pahlavi, “What is your relationship with the Iranian Mujahedin Organization, or MEK? Do you cooperate or work with them or disagree with them and how?”
Reza Pahlavi responded that he had never met President Trump or anyone else in the White House but that he was ready to do so and looks forward to the occasion. He said that MEK rejected him and is not prepared to sit down and cooperate with him. Nor is MEK willing to cooperate with any other person or organization in the Iranian opposition.
Although debate in the West over the possibility of overthrowing the Iranian regime at any moment has wide interest and is of a strategic concern, why shouldn’t the United States cooperate with the leadership of the Iranian opposition forces, whether royalists, nationalists, non-Persian ethnic political parties, or otherwise? Why doesn’t Washington facilitate a peaceful transition from the dictatorial regime of the Islamic Republic to a democratic system to prevent chaos in Iran?
I believe that Americans do not want regime change in Iran at the moment, even though they desire that outcome and do not rule out overthrowing the regime. In my opinion, this is because the White House and the National Security Council believe there is no comprehensive alternative to replace the rule of the mullahs in Tehran.
They also believe that the monarchy in Iran and its history have been abolished, and Iranians no longer accept it. There will be no turning back, despite people’s hatred of the regime of the Islamic Republic. The growing political and national awareness among Iranians rejects any hereditary system of governance, whether constitutional or an absolute totalitarian regime, whether monarchical or clerical. The current slogan “no to the shah, no to the shaykh (mullah),” has become a well-established slogan among Iranians, and I think the West knows it perfectly well.
I have told Reza Pahlavi that I think the monarchy has ended in Iran. During meetings at his home in a Maryland suburb of Washington, DC, we discussed the coordination of the opposition’s efforts against the regime. We are prepared to cooperate with all those forces who want to bring down the mullahs, including him and his supporters—even though his father imprisoned and tortured me for years. I said that neither I, the organizations and parties that I lead or cooperate with, nor the Arab Ahwazi people have forgotten the black history of the shah and the SAVAK’s repressive role. They certainly do not accept the return of any hereditary system in Iran.
But we will work with Reza Pahlavi, as he is a democrat, and we should find common ground for cooperation with the aim of overthrowing the Islamic Republic. The establishment of a federal democratic republic will provide the rights and freedoms of all citizens, peoples, nationalities, minorities, and constituents in the future Iran. Reza Pahlavi’s statement about the unwillingness of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI) to cooperate at the same level with the monarchists or any other opposition group is true, and I have tried and experienced this myself through several meetings. On the other hand, supporters of the monarchy are an influential group who work around Reza Pahlavi. They intensively lobby the US Congress, the White House, and the State Department. They broadcast hostile propaganda against the PMOI, portraying them as terrorists. Also, the same monarchist groups in the United States spread similar propaganda about non-Persian nationalities parties and organizations, telling the Americans that they are secessionists, and trying to prevent other opposition groups from connecting with Trump and his White House.
As for the Persian left forces in Iran, unfortunately, even though they are republicans, they are at the same time extreme nationalists. They are unwilling to cooperate with the monarchists or the Mujahedin-e-Khalq because of the organization’s cooperation with Saddam.
Leftist parties are also not willing to work with non-Persian political parties and organizations, as they falsely claim that non-Persian groups are all secessionists and that federalism is just a precursor to dismantling Iranian territorial integrity. Notwithstanding that, they know that the non-Persian ethnic groups have recently united with the common goals of the republicanism, democracy, and federalism; they are by far the largest block within the opposition. Unfortunately, most of the Iranian left is under the influence of the Persian ultranationalist extremists who frighten the Iranians from federalism with the pretext that it paves the way for the disintegration of Iran and the secessionist nature of non-Persian peoples. The Iranian left, despite their deafening rhetoric, do not acknowledge the multinational, multiethnic, multicultural, and multilingual nature of Iranian society with various religious views and still insist on the vision of unilateralism.
Persian identity
They contend that Iran is a country with one language and culture, and its identity is Persian – not a country of various nationalities and components. Thus, they deny the rights of peoples and nationalities to self-determination.
They don’t want to accept that Persian-Iranians are no more than a third of the total population. On the other hand, the political forces of non-Persian peoples have made great strides in political achievements and formed cohesive coalitions to overthrow the regime and bring about a democratic federation.
It is the lack of acceptance of Persian nationalists, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq, the monarchists, and the left of the devolution of power unto a federal system of governance that is the real solution in Iran. That is currently the most important obstacle that prevents the cooperation and unification of Iranian opposition.
However, most just declare in media statements and not in their political platforms that they will recognize the mere autonomy for non-Persian non-nationalities in future Iran—but no further. Nonetheless, there are still active and ongoing negotiations to unite around the goal of overthrowing the regime and then establishing a constituent assembly to discuss the idea of the right of self-determination for the ethnic nationalities within the framework of Iran among different parties in order to crystallize a unity against that immediate goal of overthrowing the regime. As for the American official position toward the Iranian opposition forces, there were many meetings during the past year, both in the US Congress and by both parties, the White House, and the State Department, where there is agreement on the need for gradual and peaceful transition by democratic forces at home and abroad.
But at the same time, it was made very clear that there are no dealings with Iranian opposition groups who demand separation or independence. Officials in the Trump administration made it clear that they are even unwilling to sit down and meet with these organizations.
While the parties and organizations of non-Persian-nationalities that do not demand separation and call for the establishment of a democratic federal republic within a pluralistic system, three major coalitions have been formed in recent years. These coalitions began in 2005 with the Congress of Nationalities for a Federal Iran (CNFI), which includes fourteen regional non-Persian ethnic political parties, based in Sweden.
Second is the Council of Iranian Democrats (CID), based in Germany and formed in 2016. It consists of twelve Arab, Kurdish, Azeri-Turkish, Baluchi, Turkmen, and Lur organizations, and some progressive Persian political parties and forces such as the Iranian Democratic Front.
The third and the latest, which formed last year and is based in Paris, includes eleven organizations, including Iranian leftists, liberals, nationalists, and representatives of all ethnic nationalities and parties. All these coalitions agree on three principles: republicanism, democracy and rule of law, and federalism.
Of course, there are challenges and difficulties to unite all the forces and parties of the Iranian opposition, as recognized by Reza Pahlavi and others. The biggest challenge is President Trump’s position vis-a-vis the Iranian regime and whether he really wants to get rid of this regime. The Tehran regime is viewed by many as the world’s greatest sponsor of terrorism and is now a threat to regional as well global peace and security. The other challenge is the activity of the Iranian lobby in the United States, funded by the Tehran regime, which collaborates with the ultranationalist Persian and Pan-Iranian fanatic group in the West. This group is funded by Iranian extreme right-wing wealthy individuals and groups in their efforts to prevent unity of the opposition.
Despite all this, there is a serious and wide-ranging move in Washington by important parties from the Iranian opposition to persuade the Trump administration to take serious steps to support the process of change in Iran by supporting democratic forces to find a realistic and comprehensive alternative to the rule of the mullahs in Iran.

How Shin Bet chief’s election meddling comment on Iran and Hizballah morphed into media frenzy against Russia
Debka File/January 10/19
Shin Bet chief Nadav Argaman carefully avoided names when he warned that a” foreign country” intended interfering in Israel’s coming election. But Israel’s media instantly decided he meant Russia, without explaining what interest Vladimir Putin had in disrupting Israel’s election.
In his lecture on Jan. 8 before the Friends of Tel Aviv University, Argaman said: “I don’t know to whose benefit or disadvantage that intervention is aimed, or that country’s political interest, but it will certainly intervene – and I know what I am talking about.” But then, in answer to a question from audience, the Shin Bet chief remarked in an aside that Iran and Hizballah may be planning cyber attacks on targets in Israel.
This remark was drowned out by the wild panic Israeli media whipped up against Russia, which no one had accused. Attempting to cool the hysteria, the Shin Bet security service issued a statement asserting that Israel and its intelligence services were fully capable of handling a cyber attack and armed with all the tools and resources for locating, monitoring and thwarting any such intervention. This statement was drowned out too. The denial hastily issued by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Wednesday was reported but not addressed.
Israel’s voters cast their ballots on paper, not electronically, and so foreign influence peddlers would have to focus their efforts on disinformation and disruption. No Israeli official or media outlet has explained what interest President Vladimir Putin might have in sowing mayhem in Israel’s election – especially when so much of it is self-inflicted. All the “information” published comes from cyber experts – not politicians. And so no one is asking that question. If they did, they may will conclude that, with all due respect, Israel is not the United States of America and Binyamin Netanyahu is not Donald Trump. Israel is therefore not exactly pivotal to Putin’s global strategy.
Any cyber threats are more likely to come from Israel’s own neighborhood, which its cyber warfare experts are experienced in handling. But, above all, Israel has much thornier issues to take up with Moscow, such as the restrictions the Russians have clamped down on Israeli air strikes against Iranian targets in Syria. Such issues are not addressed by the columnists. The artificial storm raised over an illusory cyber war waged by Moscow may needlessly ramp up friction with Moscow at a time when amicable dialogue would better serve Israel’s fundamental security compulsions.

Trump should re-energize presidency with less divisive policies
Andrew Hammond/Arab News/January 10/19
Donald Trump will visit the US-Mexico border on Thursday after his first televised Oval Office speech on Tuesday, which focused on his proposed wall. This issue, and the federal government shutdown it has fostered, is only the latest bout of turbulence in what is turning out to be an unprecedented presidency, which could yet extend to 2025.
With Trump now at a potential post-midterm election pivot point, he made the case on Tuesday for why he perceives a brewing humanitarian and national security crisis on the border necessitates a wall. Yet polls indicate that the overwhelming majority of Americans want the president to compromise, with only a minority looking for him to follow through on construction.
Despite this — and Trump’s broader, generally low job approval ratings — his chances of re-election are significant. This is not least because, since the 1930s, the party that has won the presidency has tended to hold the White House for at least two terms of office, with only one exception: The Democrats in 1980, when Jimmy Carter failed to get re-elected.
And, as Trump showed with his against-the-odds victory in November 2016, he should never be completely counted out. In the absence of any seismic fall-out from the Mueller investigation and/or a serious economic downturn, he remains most likely to be the 2020 Republican presidential candidate.
While some Democrats continue to raise the prospect of the potential impeachment of Trump, any such proceedings are a significant distance off. Yet there is no question that the probes of Mueller and Congress into the Trump team’s ties with Russia are a potentially brewing scandal that could yet become a full-blown political crisis.
Two years in, Trump still remains a political enigma in many respects. He has shown himself to be an effective — if unorthodox — campaigner, but the jury is still out on what level of governing competence he will be shown to have demonstrated as the first president since Dwight Eisenhower never before to have held elected office. To be sure, he has secured some significant wins with the approval of two Supreme Court justices, for instance, and the Republican tax cut plan that has fueled the current economic expansion. Yet, despite claims of being a master deal-maker, repeated policy setbacks and his stumbles from controversy to controversy underline how different the national political domain can be to that of running a private family conglomerate.
As Trump showed with his against-the-odds victory in November 2016, he should never be completely counted out.
The presidency provides Trump with at least two broad powers: That of setting governing themes and that of creating interactive coalitions among the public and within Congress in support of the administration’s legislative and wider program. Trump’s effectiveness in setting governing themes and building coalitions of support, which has been very limited to date, will depend on his ability to exploit two sources of power: The popular prestige of the presidential office and his leadership reputation among members of Congress and senior federal bureaucrats.
Strong, effective presidents exploit each source of power interactively — as, for example, Democrat Franklin Roosevelt and Republican Ronald Reagan did in the 1930s/40s and 1980s, respectively. To make the presidency work most effectively, Trump will now have to try to rapidly show whether he knows how to do both, defying expectations that are held about him by many voters and political elites.
Indeed, since he assumed office, the White House has instead all too often appeared riven by incompetence and confusion.
Going forward, if Trump is to maximize his prospects of re-election in 2020, should he indeed be in a position to run for a second term, he needs to demonstrate he is capable of developing a much more powerful and appealing governing agenda that has more popular support. With the Democrats having won Congress, it looks likely he will now try to build this around agendas like boosting infrastructure spending, where there could well be majorities to cultivate.
Trump’s presidency has also been characterized by unprecedented levels of party polarization. According to Gallup, there has been an average 77 percentage point gap in his approval ratings between Republicans and Democrats. In this extraordinary context, Trump needs to use less polarizing rhetoric and demonstrate greater reconciliation after the long, bitter election campaign of 2016. After a long period of such rancor, the country may be more divided than at any time in living memory.
There have been only four previous occasions when a winning presidential candidate lost the popular vote, as Trump did in 2016: In 2000, when George W. Bush beat Al Gore; in 1888, when Benjamin Harrison bested Grover Cleveland; in 1876, when Rutherford Hayes beat Samuel Tilden; and in 1824, when John Quincy Adams bested Andrew Jackson.
Taken overall, Trump cannot be counted out from a second term, despite the chaos that often engulfs his presidency. In suitably skilled hands, the office offers potential for national renewal and unity in troubled times, and this remains true today despite the massive political baggage that Trump brings. The next key test will be whether he can re-energize his administration, work more effectively with congressional colleagues, and forge a domestic policy governing agenda that can bring the country closer together, rather than driving it further apart.
*Andrew Hammond is an Associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics

Waiting for an ‘Arab Project’
Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/January 10/19
There is a disagreement regarding the next practical steps in the countdown for the Arab Economic Summit that is expected to be hosted by the Lebanese capital Beirut later this month.
In Lebanon, there are those who are trying hard to turn this Summit into the opportunity in which the Syrian regime is restored, although the Arab League is the organization entitled to send the official invitations.
This Summit actually takes place in an atmosphere of confusion and cautious expectation at various levels; as neither the already-troubled Arab states look capable of producing a clear vision for the future, nor the Arab regional alliances – as it seems – genuinely agree on how to suitably handle the serious challenges that lie ahead.
The next few months, notwithstanding the warnings of experts of an impending financial crisis that may even surpass that of 2008, does not usher any good news to the Arab world and the Middle East, especially, the states lying within the Israel-Iran-Turkey ‘triangle’. Then, if the protectionist financial policies adopted by the US administration of President Donald Trump are contributing, one way or another, to a confusion in the world’s markets, its strategic policies towards the Middle East reflect two things:
1- A solidly-based cohesive approach
2- A reliable long-term commitment
Well. A couple of days ago when the General Confederation of Lebanese Workers called for a general strike, one of its top leaders said: “We are only for a cabinet…!”
On the face of it, this is a simple and innocent demand. The least required in any state that regards itself independent is a cabinet that runs its affairs and takes responsibility of government. However, Lebanon, which is hosting the aforementioned Economic Summit, is still unable to form a cabinet although the general elections were conducted last May. Eight months have passed, and Lebanon remains without an executive authority, that works under the supervision of an elected legislature, in the midst of a frightening economic downturn, and a political vacuum that the country’s political, religious and labor leaders do not seem ready to come clean about.
In fact, to make matters worse, some of those who are attempting to suggest ‘settlements’ that would end this vacuum, are among its main culprits; since the current political set-up is underpinned on temporary interests and spiteful calculations, whereby all parties are playing for time, and waiting for a favorable change in the regional climate.
What I mean here is that there are no genuine ‘common denominators’ between the Lebanese; more so between those who claim to be ‘allies’. Simply put, the current regional situation pushes for the creation of certain temporary coalitions. These, sooner or later, would collapse the moment the regional situation changes or international approaches differ.
Given the above, the camp associated with the Christian Maronite president is keen on securing a ‘blocking third’ of the cabinet ministers through enlarging the president’s lot. This, it hopes, would also facilitate the issue of succession from within his own camp.
On the other side, there is Hezbollah, the de facto strongest player in Lebanon, although it does not constitutionally enjoy a comparable sway. Thus, it is adamant on keeping the ‘status quo’ which guarantees its real exclusive control of security and non-governmental arms; and it is doing so by:
1- Undermining from within the unity of non-Shiite religious and sectarian groups
2- Preventing the president’s camp from gaining a free hand, and benefiting from its constitutional privileges
Then, there is a third camp, which is headed by the prime minister-designate, and where the Sunnis constitute the major part of its base. This camp now finds itself a spectator in a fight between two ‘allied’ camps which in reality have nothing in common but weakening the prime minister and his Sunni base. They have been doing this through marginalizing and undermining the ‘Taif Accord’; enshrined in Lebanon’s constitution 28 years ago, since it ended the country’s 15-year civil-regional war.
What has been happening in Lebanon does not differ much from what has been taking place in Iraq. There too there is a crisis of diversity made worse by the influence of the same regional power that has aided Lebanon’s Hezbollah in achieving its ascendancy. In Iraq, Iran is also the principal player whose wishes and ambitions are carried out by the most powerful organization with the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) and some Tehran-linked political groups. Here too there is a crisis caused by the failure to form a complete cabinet, months after the general elections. The reason has been the disagreement on who would be given the three key cabinet portfolios; i.e. the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Defense, and the Ministry of Justice.
Iran and its henchmen have already succeeded in securing their Sunni candidate the post of the Parliament Speaker, which is constitutionally reserved to the Arab Sunnis. This outcome resembles Hezbollah’s insistence on securing a cabinet seat to one of six Sunni MPs close to its line, and refusing that this minister would vote with the President’s lot which would allow the latter to enjoy a ‘blocking third’ within the cabinet.
As for the Iraqi Kurds, who have been constitutionally given the office of the President, they have been effectively and temporarily neutralized, thanks to what seems like an undeclared ‘truce’ in the Iraqi arena between Washington and Tehran.
The Kurdish angle leads us to Syria. Here, Washington’s on the ground handling of the ‘Kurdish situation’ and Iran’s presence in Syria looks far from clear. Indeed, President Trump’s decisions, and the resignations of Gen. Jim Mattis, the US Secretary of Defense, and Brett McGurk (Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIS) make the whole picture ever more confusing and complicated. So, one hopes the visits of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton to the Middle East may clarify the situation, at least for the region’s leaders. East of the Euphrates is inseparable from the ongoing Kurdish contacts with Bashar al-Assad’s regime. The developments, also give the impression that there are some sort of ‘arrangements’ that would involve the Turks in the north, the Iranians in central Syria, the Russians in the west, and perhaps, the Israelis in the south of what looks like a ‘New Syria’ which would, for the time being, be left under Assad’s police state institutions.
In the meantime, some moves are gathering pace aiming at ‘ending the Arab absence’ from Damascus, and ‘filling the void’ in Syria. However, such justifications run contrary to two stark truths: ending ‘Arab absence’ requires an ‘Arab project’ which so far does not exist; and the ‘vacuum’ in Syria is also a myth since the independent decision-making of Syrians has been paralyzed !

Qatar and the Legitimate Interests of Iran
Salman Al-dossary/Asharq Al Awsat/January 10/19
Qatar did well by putting the record straight and calling things by their names. It officially announced, through its ambassador to Moscow, its true position towards the Iranian occupation of Syria, by considering that Iran has “legitimate” interests in Syria and supporting Tehran’s quest to maintain those interests; and that the “Syrian regime, which oppressed its opponents, is responsible for allowing for international and regional foreign intervention, which should not be blamed on others.”
This is only part of a new chapter of the Qatari contradictions that the region and the world have witnessed for more than two decades.
On one hand, Doha supports extremist groups fighting Bashar al-Assad’s regime and its Iranian ally on Syrian territory, and on the other hand, it stands with Iran in its occupation of Syrian territory and legitimizes its presence; hence supporting two conflicting parties at the same time.
This is the climax of the political tragedy in which Qatar excels, in search of a role that it believes will give it a diplomatic advantage in the region, no matter whether the result is feeding conflicts and prolonging wars... and regardless of whether it was the worst thing a regime in the world can do. What is important is that Qatar continues its destructive practices and behavior, with which no one is competing.
The Qatari position obviously did not explain the “legitimate interests” of Iran in Syria, nor did it clarify the potential interests of a foreign country on the territory of another state. This strange definition of sovereignty may be understood only in one case; when we reflect on the size of the “legitimate interests” of Turkey over Qatar’s land, with the recent disclosure of the full details of the secret military agreement between Doha and Ankara on the Turkish military bases, which were mysteriously set up on the territory of Qatar, and which will enable “Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to use the Qatari airspace, land and maritime blocks in the promotion of his ideology and ideas in the Gulf region, in addition to achieving his interests and personal goals.”
Qatar’s notion of sovereignty is radically different from international concepts. Iran has the right to settle in Syria, contribute to the killing of 700,000 Syrian citizens, and release its militias. At the same time, according to that concept, the Turkish army has the right to remain on Qatari land for as long as it wants and to increase the number of its soldiers without even requesting the approval of the Qatari regime.
At a time when the international community, as well as the Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia, are seeking to bring Syria back to the Arab circle, in an effort to end the civil war and the Iranian occupation of its territory, even with their radical disagreement with the regime’s practices, hoping to strengthen the Arab role and activate it in order to preserve Syria’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, Doha stands in sharp contrast in an attempt to nurture the conflict to the fullest extent and keep the Syrian regime a hostage of Iran.
Thus, Qatar maintains its destabilizing behavior in the region, prolonging chaos after it was a sponsor to its ignition. The Qatari regime proves once again that it lives out of chaos and crises, surviving only in a jungle of instability.

Germany Isn’t Floundering, Despite the Data
Leonid Bershidsky/Bloomberg/January 10/19
After Tuesday’s disappointing industrial output data, the German economy could be headed for a technical recession — two consecutive quarters of negative growth. “Technical,” however, is the operative word; the country isn’t really in trouble, at least not yet, and the worrying data are driven by a single regulatory change that has wreaked havoc on the domestic car industry.
The German government reported a 1.9 percent month-on-month drop in industrial production, the biggest since August 2015. Much of that decrease is explained by a 4.1 percent decline in consumer goods production, a catastrophic-looking number not seen in the last seven years. That slump was likely determined by a huge drop in auto sales. The car industry generates 20 percent of total domestic industrial revenue, and new car registrations in Germany tumbled 9.9 percent in November from the year-earlier period.
This development dwarfs other factors that determined the dismal industrial growth numbers in November, a convenient gap between a public holiday and the first weekend of the month and unusually warm weather that necessitated less energy production. It stems from something called the Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP), a new European emissions test that became obligatory in September. It’s a more stringent test than the old one, and uses actual driving data, rather than laboratory simulations. German companies were woefully unprepared for this. They had to stop offering dozens of models because of certification and retrofitting issues.
Analysts’ models are powerless to predict this damage, and so Germany has faced a whole chain of negative economic surprises, starting with the negative growth in the third quarter of 2018. The entire fourth quarter promises to be awful; in December, new car registrations were down 6.7 percent year-on-year.
The WLTP fiasco has laid bare serious problems within the German auto industry. For too long, it has enjoyed political protection while treating environmental standards as no more than a regulatory nuisance; some companies, such as Volkswagen AG, have paid billions in fines after being caught cheating their emissions tests. But the problem goes beyond VW case: All German carmakers should have seen stricter regulation coming.
This, however, doesn’t mean there’s anything fundamentally wrong with the German economy. Some recent economic surprises, in fact, have been positive. The latest releases on retail sales and consumer confidence beat analysts’ expectations. The unemployment rate, at 5 percent, is in line with forecasts. The factory orders index unexpectedly dropped 1 percent in November compared with October, but orders from inside Germany and from outside the euro area were actually up — it was demand from the euro zone that weakened.
While German carmakers will eventually come to terms with the WLTP, the economic deterioration in the euro zone presents a more long-term problem. After the European Central Bank ended its quantitative easing program last month, the era of cheap, abundant credit is ending. The ECB itself is counting on still-robust domestic demand to keep the euro-zone economies from shrinking, but Germany’s export-oriented economy is still vulnerable: about a third of its exports are to the euro area.
So far, the consensus among economists is that growth will merely “normalize” after a prolonged economic boom. In a recent report, DIW Berlin, the economic institute, described a strong, stable, prosperous Germany in which companies are slowly expanding their core workforces even as growth in temporary employment is slowing. Order books are full, and corporate investment is growing. Capacity utilization, though it has dropped a little since last year, is above 87 percent (compared with 78.5 percent in the US). Healthy budget surpluses allow the government to step up investment and make up for any growth shortfalls in the private sector.
Germany has accumulated an insulating level of prosperity in recent years. It doesn’t really have to grow much to maintain it, given the slow growth of its population. And it would take an economic cataclysm in neighboring countries to affect this. So far, the data don’t all point that way; retail trade was up 0.6 percent in the euro area in November, according to Eurostat — a promising sign for Germany’s exporters.

Is Rashida Tlaib Guilty of Bigotry?
by Alan M. Dershowitz/Gatestone Institute/January 09/19
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13529/rashida-tlaib-bigotry
To single out only the "Jew among nations," and not the dozens of far more serious violators of human rights is bigotry pure and simple, and those who support BDS only against Israel are guilty of bigotry.
What is unacceptable is discriminatory actions, and nothing can be more discriminatory than singling out an ally with one of the best records of human rights in the world for a boycott, while continuing to do business with the worst human rights offenders in the world.
Many of the same bigots who support BDS against Israel, oppose boycotting Cuba, Iran, China, Russia, Venezuela, Syria, Saudi Arabia and other human rights violators. Legislation designed to end such discriminatory actions would be constitutional, if it did not prohibit advocacy.
No one has accused Tlaib of forgetting what country she represents when she supports the Palestinian cause, even though Palestinian terrorists, acting in the name of "Palestine," have killed numerous Americans. Americans of any religion have the right to support Israel, and most do, without being accused of disloyalty, just as Americans of any religion have the right to support the Palestinian cause. It is both bigoted and hypocritical to apply a different standard to Jews who support Israel than to Muslims who support the Palestinian cause.... If she is the "new face" of the Democratic Party, we Democrats should begin worrying.
If Congress were considering legislation prohibiting boycotts directed against gays, women or Muslim owned companies, would Senator Bernie Sanders be arguing that such a ban would violate the First Amendment? If Congress were considering legislation prohibiting companies from boycotting majority Muslim countries, would Rashida Tlaib be accusing its supporters of dual loyalty?
American laws have long dealt with discrimination based on sexual orientation, race, gender and national origin. Our laws prohibited compliance with the Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses in the 1930's and the Arab boycotts of the 1950's and 1960's. Now Congress is considering legislation dealing with companies that boycott only the nation state of the Jewish people, and only Jews within Israel. To single out only the "Jew among nations," and not the dozens of far more serious violators of human rights is bigotry pure and simple, and those who support BDS [boycotts divestments and sanctions against Israel] only against Israel are guilty of bigotry.
ters of BDS claim that it is a protest tactic designed to put pressure on Israel to change its policies. That is not what the leaders of BDS say. Their goal is the elimination of Israel and its replacement by a Palestinian state "from the river to the sea."*
So long as these anti-BDS statutes do not prohibit advocacy of such boycotts, but focus instead on the commercial activities themselves – namely the economic boycotts – there are no serious freedom of speech concerns. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not freedom to discriminate economically based on invidious classifications. There are close questions, as evidenced by the difficult case involving a baker's refusal to design a cake for a gay wedding, based on the baker's claimed religious beliefs. But it is not a close case to prevent the bigot from renting an apartment to a black couple or even from advertising that he rents to whites only. I have in my collection postcards from Miami Beach hotels, as recently as the 1950's, advertising "restricted clientele," "discriminating clients," or "gentile clientele only." These were euphemisms for "no Jews allowed." Or as one hotel brazenly put it: "Always a view, never a Jew." Similar advertisements were directed against Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, African-Americans and other minorities. These advertisements would be illegal today despite the fact that they take the form of words. The First Amendment permits a hotel owner to advocate a return to "gentiles only," or "whites only" hotels, but it does not protect the act of discrimination itself or boycotting based on religion or national origin.
On which side of this Constitutional line does anti-BDS legislation fall? That depends on the precise wording of the statute. If the law prohibits advocacy, it is unconstitutional. If it prohibits economic discrimination based on religion or national origin, it is constitutional.
What is unacceptable is discriminatory actions, and nothing can be more discriminatory than singling out an ally with one of the best records of human rights in the world for a boycott, while continuing to do business with the worst human rights offenders in the world. Many of the same bigots who support BDS against Israel, oppose boycotting Cuba, Iran, China, Russia, Venezuela, Syria, Saudi Arabia and other human rights violators. Legislation designed to end such discriminatory actions would be constitutional, if it did not prohibit advocacy.
Tlaib argues that "boycotting is a right and part of our historical fight for freedom and equality." Would she have supported, in the name of equality, the right of white bigots to boycott Black owned stores in the South or Black apartment renters in the North? Would she support the right of homophobes to boycott gay owned stores? Or the right of anti-Muslim bigots to boycott Muslim-owned stores or products from Muslim nations? If she were to support legislation prohibiting anti-Palestinian boycotts, how would she respond to an accusation that she "forgot what country" she represents? Her accusation that supporters of anti-BDS legislation "forgot what country" they represent invoked the old canard of dual loyalty, which is directed only against Jews. No one has accused Tlaib of forgetting what country she represents when she supports the Palestinian cause, even though Palestinian terrorists, acting in the name of "Palestine," have killed numerous Americans. Americans of any religion have the right to support Israel, and most do, without being accused of disloyalty, just as Americans of any religion have the right to support the Palestinian cause. It is both bigoted and hypocritical to apply a different standard to Jews who support Israel than to Muslims who support the Palestinian cause.
Hypocrisy and bigotry go hand in hand, and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib is the poster person for both. If she is the "new face" of the Democratic Party, we Democrats should begin worrying.
*Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law Emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of The Case against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump, Hot Books, January 2, 2019 , and a Distinguished Senior Fellow of Gatestone Institute.
* The Case Against BDS by Alan M. Dershowitz, page 10.
© 2019 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.

A New Cold War Has Begun
Robert D. Kaplan/Foreign Policy/January 10/19
The United States and China will be locked in a contest for decades. But Washington can win if it stays more patient than Beijing.
In June 2005, I published a cover story in the Atlantic, “How We Would Fight China.” I wrote that, “The American military contest with China … will define the twenty-first century. And China will be a more formidable adversary than Russia ever was.” I went on to explain that the wars of the future would be naval, with all of their abstract battle systems, even though dirty counterinsurgency fights were all the rage 14 years ago.
That future has arrived, and it is nothing less than a new cold war: The constant, interminable Chinese computer hacks of American warships’ maintenance records, Pentagon personnel records, and so forth constitute war by other means. This situation will last decades and will only get worse, whatever this or that trade deal is struck between smiling Chinese and American presidents in a photo-op that sends financial markets momentarily skyward. The new cold war is permanent because of a host of factors that generals and strategists understand but that many, especially those in the business and financial community who populate Davos, still prefer to deny. And because the U.S.-China relationship is the world’s most crucial—with many second- and third-order effects—a cold war between the two is becoming the negative organizing principle of geopolitics that markets will just have to price in.
This is because the differences between the United States and China are stark and fundamental. They can barely be managed by negotiations and can never really be assuaged.
The Chinese are committed to pushing U.S. naval and air forces away from the Western Pacific (the South and East China seas), whereas the U.S. military is determined to stay put. The Chinese commitment makes perfect sense from their point of view. They see the South China Sea the way American strategists saw the Caribbean in the 19th and early 20th centuries: the principal blue water extension of their continental land mass, control of which enables them to thrust their navy and maritime fleet out into the wider Pacific and the Indian Ocean, as well as soften up Taiwan. It is similar to the way dominance over the Caribbean enabled the United States to strategically control the Western Hemisphere and thus affect the balance of forces in the Eastern Hemisphere in two world wars and a cold war. For the United States, world power all began with the Caribbean, and for China, it all begins with the South China Sea.
But the Americans will not budge from the Western Pacific. The U.S. defense establishment, both uniformed and civilian, considers the United States a Pacific power for all time: Witness Commodore Matthew Perry’s opening of Japan to trade in 1853, America’s subjugation and occupation of the Philippines starting in 1899, the bloody Marine landings on a plethora of Pacific islands in World War II, the defeat and rebuilding of Japan following World War II, the Korean and Vietnam wars, and, most important, Washington’s current treaty alliances stretching from Japan south to Australia. This is an emotional as well as a historical commitment: something I have personally experienced as an embed on U.S. military warships in the Western Pacific.
In fact, the U.S. Defense Department is much more energized by the China threat than by the Russia one. It considers China, with its nimble ability as a rising technological power—unencumbered by America’s own glacial bureaucratic oversight—to catch up and perhaps surpass the United States in 5G networks and digital battle systems. (Silicon Valley is simply never going to cooperate with the Pentagon nearly to the degree that China’s burgeoning high-tech sector cooperates with its government.) China is the pacing threat the U.S. military now measures itself against.
This American refusal to yield blue water territory to China is championed by liberal hawks who will likely staff any incoming Democratic administration’s Asia portfolios, to say nothing of the Republicans—both pro- and anti-President Donald Trump. As for the so-called restrainers and neo-isolationists, when you boil it right down, they are really about getting American ground troops out of the Middle East, something that may actually strengthen the U.S. position against China. And as for left-wing Democratic progressives, when it comes to a hard line on trade talks with China, they are not too far away from Trump’s own economic advisors. Remember that the Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton was forced to publicly disown the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement because of pressure from her own party. The fact is, since President Richard Nixon went to China in 1972, U.S. policy toward the Pacific has been notably consistent whatever party has held the White House, and the turn against China has likewise been a bipartisan affair—and thus unlikely to be dramatically affected by any impeachment or presidential election.
Regarding the trade talks themselves, what really riles both the Trumpsters and the Democrats (moderates and progressives alike) is the very way China does business: stealing intellectual property, acquiring sensitive technology through business buyouts, fusing public and private sectors so that their companies have an unfair advantage (at least by the mores of a global capitalistic trading system), currency manipulation, and so on. Trade talks, however successful, will never be able to change those fundamentals. China can adjust its business model only at the margins.
And because economic tensions with China will never significantly lessen, they will only inflame the military climate. When a Chinese vessel cut across the bow of an American destroyer, or China denied entry of a U.S. amphibious assault ship to Hong Kong—as happened last fall—this cannot be separated from the atmosphere of charged rhetoric over trade. With the waning of the liberal world order, a more normal historical era of geopolitical rivalry has commenced, and trade tensions are merely accompaniments to such rivalry. In order to understand what is going on, we have to stop artificially separating U.S.-China trade tensions and U.S.-China military tensions.
There is also the ideological aspect of this new cold war. For several decades, China’s breakneck development was seen positively in the United States, and the relatively enlightened authoritarianism of Deng Xiaoping and his successors was easily tolerated, especially by the American business community. But under Xi Jinping, China has evolved from a soft to a hard authoritarianism. Rather than a collegial group of uncharismatic technocrats constrained by retirement rules, there is now a president-for-life with a budding personality cult, overseeing thought control by digital means—including facial recognition and following the internet searches of its citizens. It is becoming rather creepy, and American leaders of both parties are increasingly repelled by it. This is also a regime that in recent years has been imprisoning up to a million ethnic Uighur Muslims in hard labor camps. The philosophical divide between the American and Chinese systems is becoming as great as the gap between American democracy and Soviet communism.

EU sanctions on Iranian regime long overdue
د. ماجد ربيزاده: لقد طال انتظار عقوبات الاتحاد الأوروبي على النظام الإيراني
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/January 10/19
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/70949/dr-majid-rafizadeh-eu-sanctions-on-iranian-regime-long-overdue-%D8%AF-%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%AF-%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%87-%D9%84%D9%82%D8%AF-%D8%B7%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AA/
While some politicians continue to advocate in favor of the Islamic Republic, it has become clear that the Iranian regime has in recent years been putting significant efforts into plotting assassinations and attacks on foreign soil. And, as a result, the EU appears to have finally come to the realization that a firmer stance toward Tehran ought to be implemented.
That is why the EU this week leveled sanctions against Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence, as well as two Iranian citizens — Assadollah Asadi, a diplomat in the Iranian Embassy in Vienna, and Saeid Hashemi Moghadam, a senior official in Iran’s intelligence ministry.
These sanctions are significant because they are the first ones imposed on Iran by the EU since the nuclear deal was adopted in 2015. This might be the beginning of a major policy shift. Dutch Foreign Minister Stef Blok revealed that European diplomats warned Iran that “further sanctions cannot be ruled out” if Tehran does not address its violent and destructive activities in Europe.
Although Iran’s attempts to bomb or assassinate rivals have been witnessed across the world since the establishment of the Islamic Republic in 1979, there seems to have been a heightened focus to carry out such attacks on European soil recently. In fact, since the nuclear deal was struck, Tehran has been involved in carrying out four major assassination or bomb plots in the EU.The first terror plot was the assassination of a Dutch citizen in December 2015. Mohammad Reza Kolahi, who fled Iran in 1980 and entered the Netherlands as a refugee, was reportedly shot by two people.
The second involved the killing of Ahmad Mola Nissi, who was shot in front of his house in 2017. This assassination also occurred in the Netherlands. Nissi, a 52-year-old activist, was the founder of an Arab nationalist movement that operates in the Iranian province of Khuzestan.
These sanctions against Iran are long overdue. More pressure is required by the EU to force Tehran into altering its destructive policies toward European countries.
This week, the Dutch government acknowledged for the first time it had “strong indications” that the Iranian government was behind these assassinations. Blok said that Tehran’s actions “flagrantly violate the sovereignty of the Netherlands and are unacceptable.”
The third plot was a much larger scale terrorist attack targeting a convention in Paris called “Free Iran,” which I attended, in July 2018. The plot was thwarted and an Iranian diplomat and several other individuals of Iranian origin were subsequently arrested in France, Belgium and Germany. This was the first time that an Iranian official had been arrested for orchestrating a terrorist attack on European soil. The bomb plot drew significant attention from politicians and media outlets because tens of thousands of dissidents and human rights defenders were present at the location where the bomb was supposed to detonate.
Finally, the fourth major plot, which was foiled last September, was an attempt to assassinate an Arab separatist leader who lives in Denmark. The would-be assassin was arrested and the Danish Security and Intelligence Service said in a statement that: “There is sufficient basis to conclude that an Iranian intelligence service has been planning the assassination.”
Some politicians, including French President Emmanuel Macron, have argued that these plots might not have originated from the top of the political establishment in Iran. But it is critical to point out that such major terrorist plots are unlikely to have been implemented by agents of the Iranian regime without the blessing or knowledge of top officials. In addition, the fact that President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif are denying any responsibility and refusing to pressure or criticize the intelligence ministry highlights the fact that there exists a tacit consensus between the moderates and hardliners when it comes to carrying out such heinous acts.
Intriguingly, although US President Donald Trump had been attempting to rally the EU to impose pressure on the Iranian government, it was ultimately the Iranian leaders themselves who paved the way for Tehran’s further isolation.
These sanctions against Iran are long overdue. More pressure is required by the EU to force Tehran into altering its destructive policies toward European countries.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist. He is a leading expert on Iran and US foreign policy, a businessman and president of the International American Council. Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh