LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 04/2019
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.june04.19.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
Brothers and sisters, pray for us, so that the word of the Lord may spread rapidly and be glorified everywhere
“Second Letter to the Thessalonians 02/13-17//.03,01-05: “We must always give thanks to God for you, brothers and sisters beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the first fruits for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and through belief in the truth. For this purpose he called you through our proclamation of the good news, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter. Now may our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father, who loved us and through grace gave us eternal comfort and good hope, comfort your hearts and strengthen them in every good work and word. Finally, brothers and sisters, pray for us, so that the word of the Lord may spread rapidly and be glorified everywhere, just as it is among you, and that we may be rescued from wicked and evil people; for not all have faith. But the Lord is faithful; he will strengthen you and guard you from the evil one. And we have confidence in the Lord concerning you, that you are doing and will go on doing the things that we command. May the Lord direct your hearts to the love of God and to the steadfastness of Christ.”

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on June 03-04/2019
Israel destroys last Hezbollah tunnel from Lebanon
Militant attack kills two police, one soldier in Lebanon’s Tripoli
Shooting in north Lebanon city kills policeman, wounds 2
Satterfield Reportedly Warns over 'Any Rash Act' against Israel, U.S. Interests
EU Ambassador Christina Lassen meets with President Michel Aoun
Parliamentary Committee Extends Extra-Budgetary Spending
Constitutional Council Partially Annuls Government's Power Plan
Iran May Soon Release Zakka 'at Aoun's Request'
Report: Mustaqbal Says Bassil Seeking Appointments Hegemony
Mustaqbal Denies Hariri Has Called Bassil Asking for Pacification
Bassil Says Bid to 'Sabotage' Presidential Settlement Won't Succeed
Military Court of Appeals Challenges Hajj-Ghabash Ruling
Syria Hands Lebanon 2 Citizens Nabbed in Arsal Outskirts
Kataeb pushes for work ‘by all means’ for swift refugee return to Syria
Berri leaves Lebanon on private trip
Army Commander welcomes UNIFIL’s Del Col, US and British delegations
Hezbollah Isn’t Broke. So Why Is Everyone Claiming Otherwise?
Not Supporting the Lebanese Army Is Akin to Supporting Iran and Hezbollah

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June 03-04/2019
Damascus Pounds Jihadist Bastion, Ignoring Trump Warning
Israeli strike hits airbase in Syria’s Homs
Car bombing kills 19 people in Syria’s Azaz
Trump calls on Russia, Syria to stop bombing Idlib province
IRGC commander: negotiating with the US is irrational, impossible
Iran’s Rouhani rules out talks until US acts ‘normal
Kremlin rebuffs Trump on Syria, says military action in Idlib is justified
Over 30 killed as Sudanese forces storm protest camp
Twelve killed as Sudanese troops enter sit-in site, gunshots heard
US embassy says attacks on Sudan protesters ‘must stop’
Sudanese opposition says it is halting all contact with military council
Iraq death sentences a ‘disgrace’ for France: lawyers
Baghdad Green Zone set to open around the clock
Sisi says Egypt will not accept anything against Palestinian wishes
Trump Meets Queen of Britain after Insulting London Mayor

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June 03-04/2019
Israel destroys last Hezbollah tunnel from Lebanon/Ynetnews/Associated Press, Reuters/June 03/2019
Hezbollah Isn’t Broke. So Why Is Everyone Claiming Otherwise/Tony Badran/Tablet/June 03/2019
Not Supporting the Lebanese Army Is Akin to Supporting Iran and Hezbollah/Toufic Baaklini and Peter Burns/ Washington Examiner/June 03/2019
Jeremy Corbyn, a Pro-Terrorist Prime Minister/Denis MacEoin/Gatestone Institute./June 03/2019
Making Sense of the European Elections/Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute./June 03/2019
Serious steps should be taken to confront Iran’s behavior/Dr. Mohammed Al-Sulami/Arab News/June 04/2019
Israel cannot escape International Criminal Court jurisdiction/Ramzy Baroud/Arab News/June 04/2019
Will Iran heed the GCC summit’s message of peace/Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg /Arab News/June 04/2019
How low is low/Cornelia Meyer/Arab News/June 04/2019

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on June 03-04/2019
Israel destroys last Hezbollah tunnel from Lebanon
Ynetnews/Associated Press, Reuters/June 03/2019
The army showed the tunnel, discovered in Operation Northern Shield, to reporters Monday, saying it was almost a mile long and 22 stories deep under the Israel-Lebanon border
The Israeli military says it has finished sealing the last of a series of Hezbollah attack tunnels under the country's northern border with Lebanon, roughly six months after they were found. Military spokesman Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus told reporters Monday during a tour of the tunnel that it was "the longest and deepest attack tunnel that Hezbollah dug," plunging more than 80 meters (260 feet) below ground. On Monday, the army showed reporters the inside of the tunnel passing deep underground from Lebanon into northern Israel, saying it was intended for use by Lebanese Hezbollah militants. The tunnel was rigged with electrical wiring, fuse boxes and communications equipment. An army spokesman said it began almost a kilometer (mile) away inside Lebanon and reached depths of some 80 meters (265 feet) - about the height of a 22-storey building - as it crossed into Israel, near the town of Zarit. It came to light earlier this year during an army operation in which a number of attack tunnels dug by Iran-backed Shi'ite Hezbollah were discovered and sealed off, the military said. Israel launched "Operation Northern Shield" in December to find and destroy what it said were six Hezbollah tunnels burrowed into Israeli territory for the purpose of attacking soldiers and civilians. Hezbollah has not commented. Conricus says the military has "now completed this operation" and that "it is safe to say that there are no more Hezbollah cross-border attack tunnels from Lebanon into Israel." Hezbollah's leader, in response to Israel's tunnel operation, said in January that his group has been able to enter Israel for years. But he stopped short of acknowledging that the tunnels were the handiwork of Hezbollah, citing the heavily armed group's policy of "ambiguity" on military matters and a desire to deny Israel a pretext to attack. Israel and Hezbollah last fought a war in 2006. While they have at times traded blows within Syria and Golan Heights, the Israel-Lebanon border has mostly been quiet. Israel regards Iran as its biggest foe and Hezbollah as the main threat on its borders. It has waged an increasingly open campaign of military strikes against them both in Syria, where they have fought on the regime's side in the civil war.

Militant attack kills two police, one soldier in Lebanon’s Tripoli
Reuters, Beirut/Tuesday, 04 June/ 2019/A militant attacked a patrol of Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces (ISF) in the northern city of Tripoli on Monday night, killing two police officers and one army soldier, state news agency NNA said. Two security sources told Reuters the police and army have the shooter encircled in a building after he threw a bomb at security forces in a government building and fired at a patrol. One of the sources said the gunman had been in jail before on charges of belonging to ISIS. The Lebanese military confirmed the attack and the death of the soldier and said the attacker also fired at the security forces center. Lebanese authorities say they have foiled numerous attacks in recent years, including some tied to the conflict across the border in Syria. From 2013 to 2016, militants struck parts of Lebanon repeatedly with bomb attacks, but officials have since said that security has improved.

Shooting in north Lebanon city kills policeman, wounds 2
Associated Press/June 04/2019/BEIRUT: Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency says unknown gunmen have opened fire on a police vehicle in the northern city of Tripoli, killing a police officer and wounding two others. The agency gave no further details about the Monday night attack.The attack occurred on the eve of Eid el-Fitr, the feast that marks the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan of fasting. The Lebanese army increases security around the country because of Eid el-Fitr, when people go out to celebrate. Tripoli is Lebanon’s second largest city and seen in the past clashes between rival groups that support or oppose the Syrian government of President Bashar Assad. The city is also home to some extremists who fought against Lebanese army in the past.

Satterfield Reportedly Warns over 'Any Rash Act' against Israel, U.S. Interests
Naharnet/June 03/2019/U.S. Assistant Secretary of State David Satterfield has clearly told Lebanese officials that Washington “supports Lebanon's stability and sovereignty,” a diplomatic source said, referring to Satterfield's latest meetings in Lebanon. The U.S. official, however, relayed a warning against any “rash act” on the Lebanese-Israeli border or against U.S. interests in Lebanon, whether it came from Hizbullah or Iran-backed Palestinian factions, the source told al-Liwaa daily in remarks published Monday. Media reports published Sunday had said that Satterfield also warned Lebanese officials that Washington "might not manage to rein in the Israeli side if it decides to carry out a certain response" against alleged Hizbullah missile factories in Lebanon. Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on Friday rejected what he called U.S. conditions for mediating the border and maritime dispute with Israel. Nasrallah said in a speech that Washington is "using the talks" to discuss, and even make threats over, degrading his group's capabilities, bringing up an Israeli claim that Hizbullah has precision missile factories. Nasrallah acknowledged his group has the weapons but denied it produces them. "So far in Lebanon there are no factories for precision missiles," he said. Satterfield has been shuttling between Israel and Lebanon, technically still at war, to settle the dispute. Lebanon's foreign ministry said earlier this week that it and Israel are close to establishing a framework for negotiations under United Nations auspices and overseen by Washington on demarcating the borders. The demarcation is essential for Lebanon to access oil and gas resources.

EU Ambassador Christina Lassen meets with President Michel Aoun
Mon 03 Jun 2019/NNA - European Union Ambassador Christina Lassen met with President Michel Aoun today in Baabda to take stock of domestic and regional political developments. Ambassador Lassen welcomed the recent agreement of the Council of Ministers on a national budget and the efforts towards the reduction of the fiscal deficit as well as structural reforms. Ambassador Lassen also commended President Aoun's call to start preparations for the 2020 budget, agreeing that more time will allow for the next budget to be better embedded in an economic vision.
Ambassador Lassen called on the Government to use the momentum and tackle the reforms agreed last year at the CEDRE Conference. In this context, she underlined the importance of transparency and tackling corruption, including through the finalisation of the national anti-corruption strategy. The Ambassador encouraged the Government to allocate the financial means for the operationalization of Lebanon's National Human Rights Institution and National Preventive Mechanism against torture in the context of upholding human rights in Lebanon. She also reconfirmed the EU's favorable approach to the establishment of an Academy for Human Encounters and Dialogue in Lebanon as envisaged by President Aoun and to be presented at the UN later this year. Reaffirming the continuous strong support of the European Union for Lebanon across all policy fields and sectors, Ambassador Lassen discussed with President Aoun the situation of refugees in Lebanon. She expressed appreciation for the ongoing dialogue between all actors involved while highlighting the need to uphold the protection of vulnerable persons in applying laws and regulations and the continuing respect to international humanitarian standards.
Ambassador Lassen also emphasized the importance of preserving Lebanon's stability and security amidst the challenges in the region. She hoped for a consolidation of positive developments on international talks concerning Lebanon's southern border.

Parliamentary Committee Extends Extra-Budgetary Spending
Kataeb.org/June 03/2019/The Parliament's Finance and Budget committee on Monday allowed the government to maintain its extra-bugetary spending until July 15, pending the ratification of the State budget for the year 2019. The extension was approved based on the so-called "12th rule" which allows the allocation of the same amount of money to the same expenses as specified in the most recent budget whenever no new one is endorsed. The Parliament's general assembly will still have to endorse the extension decision. 53 lawmakers attended the committee's first meeting aimed at studying the 2019 draft budget which was approved by the government last week. The blueprint will be referred to the general assembly once the committee is done examining it. “No clear timetable can be set for the ratification of the budget; our efforts will focus on getting this done by mid-July,” the committee head, MP Ibrahim Kanaan, said. “We are awaiting the audits of the financial accounts of all the previous years, not only 2017 to be referred by the government; we shall not be lenient regarding this,” he added.

Constitutional Council Partially Annuls Government's Power Plan
Kataeb.org/June 03/2019/Kataeb leader Samy Gemayel on Monday announced that the Constitutional Council has partially annulled the government's electricity plan as per the challenge submitted last month to contest said project. “The Constitutional Council has decided to accept the challenge and partially annul the electricity plan. The Energy Ministry is now obliged to implement the laws in vigor when it comes to tenders aimed at building power plants and buying power supply; all exceptions have been nullified," Gemayel wrote on Twitter. Last month, Gemayel submitted to the Constitutional Council a challenge contesting the electricity plan approved in April by the government, after garnering the ten requisite signatures. The deputies who signed the challenge are: Samy Gemayel, Nadim Gemayel, Elias Hankache, Marwan Hamadeh, Paula Yaacoubian, Nicolas Nahas, Oussama Saad, Ali Darwish, Jihad Al-Samad and Faysal Karameh. The appeal, which mentions seven main law violations, requests that the contested plan be suspended until the Constitutional Council issues its verdict on the challenge. Gemayel had criticized the power plan following its endorsement, saying that it encloses a blatant violation of the concept of accountability and the basic tendering rules.

Iran May Soon Release Zakka 'at Aoun's Request'
Naharnet/June 03/2019/Iranian authorities might soon release Lebanese detainee Nizar Zakka from prison, Iranian media reports said on Monday. “Zakka's release will take place at the request of Lebanese President Michel Aoun, who has called on Iranian authorities to free him,” the Tabnak news portal, which is close to Iran's revolutionary guard, said. “President Aoun's request has been approached positively in light of his influential role and the decision to release Zakka will likely be implemented quickly and at any given time,” Tabnak added. Iran's Mehr news agency meanwhile quoted informed sources as saying that Iranian authorities are mulling Zakka's release following a request from Aoun. The sources said Aoun's request has been met positively in Iran in light of the Lebanese president's “pro-resistance stances.” Zakka has been detained in Iran since 2015 over spying allegations. He was sentenced in 2016 to 10 years in prison and a $4.2 million fine. Zakka, who lived in Washington and held resident status in the U.S., was the leader of the Arab ICT Organization, or IJMA3, an industry consortium from 13 countries that advocates for information technology in the region. He disappeared Sept. 18, 2015, during his fifth trip to Iran. He had been invited to attend a conference at which President Hassan Rouhani spoke of providing more economic opportunities for women and sustainable development. On Nov. 3 that year Iranian state television aired a report saying he was in custody and calling him a spy with "deep links" with U.S. intelligence services. It also showed what it described as a damning photo of Zakka and three other men in army-style uniforms, two with flags and two with rifles on their shoulders. But that turned out to be from a homecoming event at Zakka's prep school, the Riverside Military Academy in Georgia, according to the school's president.

Report: Mustaqbal Says Bassil Seeking Appointments Hegemony
Naharnet/June 03/2019/The current confrontation between the Free Patriotic Movement and al-Mustaqbal Movement is linked to FPM chief Jebran “Bassil's attempt to control the expected (administrative and security) appointments, Mustaqbal sources said. “Al-Mustaqbal Movement feels that Bassil is staging a preemptive campaign over appointments in preparation to the post-Eid al-Fitr cabinet session,” the sources told al-Akhbar newspaper in remarks published Monday. Bassil “has not concealed his intention to interfere in the Internal Security Forces appointments and his latest attempt to change the ISF director general. He is also eying the state prosecutor post, one of the most important Sunni posts, and the posts of the central bank ruler's deputies and Middle East Airlines,” the sources charged. The sources also warned that there is “major dismay in al-Mustaqbal Movement over the attack on (ISF chief Maj. Gen. Imad) Othman, which harms the popularity of Prime Minister (Saad) Hariri among his popular base.”“There is real fear that things might escalate in the Cabinet to reach a clash,” the sources added, noting that “everyone is awaiting Hariri's return from abroad.”A fierce FPM-Mustaqbal war of words has been raging for several days now over remarks attributed to Bassil in some media reports. Bassil has distanced himself from the remarks and launched an acrimonious response against his critics, describing them as “mad lunatics.”The Military Court's controversial ruling in the Hajj-Itani-Ghabash case has also contributed to the standoff between the two parties.

Mustaqbal Denies Hariri Has Called Bassil Asking for Pacification
Naharnet/June 03/2019/Al-Mustaqbal Movement sources have denied a report claiming that Prime Minister Saad Hariri had held phone talks Sunday with Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Jebran Bassil and told him that he is keen on the presidential settlement. Al-Akhbar newspaper reported Monday that Hariri told Bassil that he “will not personally engage in the responses campaign that is being led by al-Mustaqbal Movement's hawks and its media outlets.” The premier meanwhile asked Bassil to “pacify the rhetoric from his end,” al-Akhbar said. But a senior Mustaqbal source later told LBCI television that Hariri "has not called Bassil.""They have not communicated since the end of the draft state budget debate but this does not mean that things are headed for an escalation," the source said. Hariri's Future TV for its part reported that the premier "has not called Bassil, contrary to what al-Akhbar newspaper has said."
Sources informed on Bassil's stance meanwhile told al-Akhbar that the FPM chief is also “clinging to the presidential settlement.”“He understands the reasons behind the campaign against him,” the sources added, noting that those leading the campaign are “harmed by the relation with Hariri and are trying to embarrass the prime minister.” “The sides behind the campaign against Bassil are first the opposition inside al-Mustaqbal Movement: ex-minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq, ex-PM Fouad Saniora and Maj. Gen. Ashraf Rifi. These sides take advantage of any chance to pounce on Hariri and depict him as weak,” the sources said. The second group, according to the sources, is “the militias that have not yet come out of the war: the Lebanese Forces and the Progressive Socialist Party.”A fierce FPM-Mustaqbal war of words has been raging for several days now over remarks attributed to Bassil in some media reports. Bassil has distanced himself from the remarks and launched an acrimonious response against his critics, describing them as “mad lunatics.”The Military Court's controversial ruling in the Hajj-Itani-Ghabash case has also contributed to the standoff between the two parties.

Bassil Says Bid to 'Sabotage' Presidential Settlement Won't Succeed
Naharnet/June 03/2019/Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Jebran Bassil on Monday said that there are political parties that are “seeking to sabotage the presidential understanding,” referring to the political settlement that led to President Michel Aoun's election and Prime Minister Saad Hariri's designation. “Some are seeking to sabotage the presidential understanding, and they have expressed their madness to achieve this sabotage but they won't succeed,” Bassil said at a press conference dedicated to putting the public in the picture of the FPM ministers' “achievements” over the past 100 days. Asked whether the FPM has supported State Commissioner to the Military Court Judge Peter Germanos in his latest stance before the Military Court in the Hajj-Itani-Ghabash case, Bassil stressed that the FPM is “not covering anyone.”He however rejected “the domination of the judiciary by security agencies.”A fierce war of words has been raging for several days now between the FPM and al-Mustaqbal Movement over remarks attributed to Bassil in some media reports. Bassil has distanced himself from the remarks and launched an acrimonious response against his critics, describing them as “mad lunatics.”The Military Court's controversial ruling in the Hajj-Itani-Ghabash case has also contributed to the standoff between the two parties, while also drawing responses from other political forces.

Military Court of Appeals Challenges Hajj-Ghabash Ruling
Naharnet/June 03/2019/State Commissioner to the Military Court of Appeals Ghassan al-Khoury on Monday filed an appeal before the court against the Military Court's controversial acquittal of Lt. Col. Suzanne al-Hajj in the Ziad Itani case. The National News Agency said Khoury called for a retrial of al-Hajj and the hacker Elie Ghabash and for considering the verdicts as null and void. "He asked for Lt. Col. Hajj's conviction and for revoking the commutation granted to Ghabash, in coordination with acting State Prosecutor Judge Imad Qabalan," NNA added. "The (Military) Court of Appeals has therefore become in charge of the lawsuit," the agency said. State Commissioner to the Military Court Judge Peter Germanos had earlier in the day referred Hajj's file to Khoury. On Thursday, the Military Court acquitted Hajj and sentenced Ghabash to a year in prison on charges of fabricating electronic evidence to frame the actor Ziad Itani in a spying for Israel case. Several political parties have described the ruling that acquitted al-Hajj as politicized, suggesting that Free Patriotic Movement officials had pressured the court in order to settle scores with al-Mustaqbal Movement, Internal Security Forces chief Maj. Gen. Imad Othman and the ISF's Intelligence Branch.

Syria Hands Lebanon 2 Citizens Nabbed in Arsal Outskirts
Naharnet/June 03/2019/The Lebanese General Security agency on Monday was handed over by Syrian authorities the Lebanese nationals Wissam Kranbeh and Nayef Rayed, Lebanon's National News Agency said. The two men will now be interrogated by the agency, NNA added. Kranbeh and Rayed were nabbed by Syrian forces along with Arsal resident Hussein al-Hujeiri, who was killed during or shortly after the incident. Their families and Arsal's dignitaries say they were on a hunting trip in the town's outskirts while some media reports have claimed that the trio had crossed into Syria where they engaged in an armed clash with Syrian forces.

Kataeb pushes for work ‘by all means’ for swift refugee return to Syria
Mon 03 Jun 2019/NNA - Kataeb Party leader, MP Sami Gemayel, on Monday presided over the Political Bureau’s weekly meeting in Saifi, during which party members discussed the latest political developments and the general situation on the local scene. In a statement issued in the wake of the meeting, party members sounded the alarm on the simmering Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon, deeming the efforts being made handling this issue very little. “This issue has become very serious, especially that displacement has now taken the form of settlement, which is an outright existential threat to Lebanon," the statement read, calling for an effective application of the Labor Law and the decisions of the Ministry of Interior to remove the “refugee” title from all of those who go back and forth to Syria. The party also pushed for more efforts to work by all the available means to quickly repatriate refugees. Touching on Hezbollah’s most recent stances and the Arab reaction to them, Kataeb utterly refused any attempt at “confiscating the Lebanese state's decisions.”Moreover, the party condemned the absence of an official response to Hezbollah's fresh position, and snubbed what it described as “suspicious silence that would only consolidate authority confiscation and undermine Lebanon's international reputation." The statement also highlighted the necessity of Lebanon's commitment to neutrality and respect for Arab and international legitimacy. As for the newly approved state budget, Kataeb Party members regretted that austerity came at the expense of the pockets of low-income groups. “This will lead to increasing prices, hinder the purchasing power, beget economic stagnation, and raise the rates of unemployment and migration,” the statement added, warning of the perils of poor state performance and futile attempts at deceiving the international and local communities with unattainable reform figures.

Berri leaves Lebanon on private trip
Mon 03 Jun 2019/NNA - Speaker of the House, Nabih Berri, left Beirut on Monday on a private trip of a few days.

Army Commander welcomes UNIFIL’s Del Col, US and British delegations
Mon 03 Jun 2019/NNA - Lebanese Army Commander, General Joseph Aoun, on Monday welcomed at his Yarzeh office, United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) Head of Mission, General Stefano Del Col, at the head of an accompanying delegation. The meeting was an opportunity to discuss the current situation along the southern Lebanese border. Lieutenant General Scott Howell, the 15th Commander of the US Joint Special Operations Command, also visited Aoun with an accompanying delegation. The meeting reportedly touched on the best means to enhance cooperation between the Lebanese and US armies.Separately, the Army Commander met with the Director of the British Army Leadership, Major General Paul Nanson, accompanied by British military attache in Lebanon, Lieutenant Alex Hilton. Discussion featured high on the means to bolster relations between the armies of the two countries.

Hezbollah Isn’t Broke. So Why Is Everyone Claiming Otherwise?
طوني بدران/موقع تابليت: حزب الله ليس مفلساً وبالتالي لماذا الإدعاء بغير هذه الحقيقة
Tony Badran/Tablet/June 03/2019
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/75439/%d8%b7%d9%88%d9%86%d9%8a-%d8%a8%d8%af%d8%b1%d8%a7%d9%86-%d8%ad%d8%b2%d8%a8-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%84%d9%87-%d9%84%d9%8a%d8%b3-%d9%85%d9%81%d9%84%d8%b3%d8%a7%d9%8b-%d9%88%d8%a8%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%aa%d8%a7%d9%84/
U.S. officials claiming that sanctions against Iran have put the Lebanese terrorist organization in dire financial straits are cherry-picking evidence to paint a misleading picture
“Terrorist groups like Hezbollah are withering on the vine as Iran sanctions take effect,” Sen. Tom Cotton tweeted last week, voicing what has now become a consensus in Washington. In this age of polarization, the unanimity of this take is all the more remarkable, as it is shared by the Trump administration, Middle Eastern analysts, as well as The New York Times, The Washington Post, and even the Israeli government.
But this conventional wisdom is wrong. Hezbollah is nowhere close to being broke.
Such a result would indeed be remarkable, if true, considering that many of the administration’s new sanctions meant to hurt Hezbollah’s patron, Iran, have only been in effect for a few months, and not all have been fully applied. Without question, the maximum pressure campaign is the right policy. And there is no doubt that the administration’s economic squeeze is inflicting serious pain on Tehran, though more pressure can and should be applied. But none of this means that Hezbollah is “withering” or close to it. That assessment has been concocted by U.S. officials who latched onto isolated comments by Hezbollah’s secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah, and other flimsy evidence, which they are using to reach rash and unfounded conclusions about the organization’s financial state.
A cynic might dismiss all this very public messaging as a PR product by administration officials, highlighting newspaper stories about their successes. An even more cynical mind might imagine that stories about the impending financial collapse of Hezbollah are a way for the Trump administration to declare victory prematurely before pivoting to a new round of negotiations with Iran.
In early March, shortly after the United Kingdom blacklisted the entirety of Hezbollah, Nasrallah addressed his supporters in a speech marking the 30-year anniversary of the Islamic Resistance Support Association, a Hezbollah fundraising organization. Nasrallah explained that the U.S. was waging a financial war against the group and against Iran, and that more American sanctions were to be expected. After recalling the association’s past work, Nasrallah went on to say that “today, the ‘resistance’ needs this popular support and embrace.”
American media reports highlighted these select, decontextualized quotes, and the conventional wisdom took form: Things were so bad that Hezbollah was begging for donations. In turn, U.S. officials saw in Nasrallah’s remarks evidence of desperation caused by the economic pressure on Iran. Indeed, Nasrallah’s speech became the centerpiece in the public briefings of U.S. officials, as the best exhibit for the success of the pressure campaign on Iran. “Nowhere better can the impact of our efforts be seen than in the statements of Hezbollah’s secretary general,” said Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorist Financing Marshall Billingslea. “In fact, he’s stooping to new lows, recently resorting to exploiting charitable donations and diverting that funding to its fighters.” Meanwhile, U.S. special representative for Iran, Brian Hook, declared, “The leader of Hezbollah made a public appeal for donations and it was the first time in history they’ve had to do that.”
Even Secretary of State Mike Pompeo joined in, citing Nasrallah’s speech during his visit to Beirut: “Our pressure on Iran is simple. It’s aimed at cutting off the funding for terrorists, and it’s working,” Pompeo said. “On March 8th, Hassan Nasrallah begged Hezbollah supporters to make new contributions.”
Since officials and analysts have relied heavily on Hezbollah’s rhetoric, it’s useful to begin by reexamining what Nasrallah actually said, in context. Nasrallah’s line about popular support for the “resistance” began with an exposition of the work of the Islamic Resistance Support Association and Hezbollah’s changing needs, based on circumstances, in previous years. Between 1982 and 2000, and right up to 2006, he said, there was a dire need for support. Then after 2006, he continued, Iran, especially, increased assistance. As a result, Nasrallah explained, he had told association activists at the time “that we might not need money, but continue your work to provide room for participation for those who want to perform jihad with their money.”
In other words, Nasrallah was saying that the association’s donations drives were taking place even during the period when Iran’s funding was increased, after the 2006 war with Israel. That is to say, these fundraising drives are not an indicator of the group’s financial health.
How does the current moment compare with these previous eras? “Today, we are [somewhere] in between,” Nasrallah clarified; an acknowledgment of the challenges of blacklisting, and, more specifically, an anticipation of added pressure down the road; but hardly the message of cash-strapped panic it was portrayed as.
At the heart of Nasrallah’s much-cited speech was the domestic situation in Lebanon, which is central to Hezbollah’s operations and finances. The Lebanese economy is moribund, and international donors are demanding structural reforms from the government in Beirut. Given that context, it’s clear that Nasrallah’s messaging was not aimed at raising insignificant amounts of small change from the Shiite community to fund Hezbollah’s operations. Rather, he was addressing the Shiites, as their communal representative in the political system at a moment of economic hardship and uncertainty in Lebanon. Nasrallah was making his appeal to Lebanon’s Shiites while the sectarian leaders that form the Lebanese government were maneuvering to agree on measures supposedly to reduce spending, especially in the bloated public sector, in order to unlock Western loans that might keep the country afloat just a little while longer.
However, the assumption that Hezbollah was teetering on the brink of financial collapse was so unshakable that analysts engaged in even further misreading. This time it was a follow-up speech by Nasrallah in April, commemorating Hezbollah’s wounded. The evidence was yet another isolated line; an anecdote about a supporter telling Nasrallah how he and his wife and son would be willing to sell their kidneys so that the “resistance” could go on. Whether it was due to laziness or simply the inability to properly read obvious rhetorical devices, analysts once again asserted Hezbollah’s desperation for funds: Conditions are so bad now that Nasrallah needs supporters to sell their organs!
Well, not really. In fact, before Nasrallah relayed this and another similar anecdote at the end of his speech, he prefaced it by joking that, after his March speech, he reassured everyone who inquired that things were not actually that dire.
So why was Nasrallah openly making these statements at this particular juncture? He wasn’t reacting to any outcry from his supporters. It was he who decided to take the initiative; his speeches and anecdotes are purposeful rhetoric intended to serve a specific function: promoting total identification between Hezbollah and the Shiite community. A couple of years ago, for example, analysts held up the Islamic Resistance Support Association’s “Equip a Mujahid” crowdfunding campaign as yet another proof of the group’s financial dire straits—that’s two years before the maximum pressure campaign against Iran. Only that longstanding practice also had a specific function, which Nasrallah mentioned in his March speech: to open up the space for the community to participate in the jihad, further strengthening the bonds between it and Hezbollah.
Nasrallah uses his anecdotes—whether true or fictional it makes no difference—to foster a sense among the Shiites of Lebanon of a union of fate between them and Hezbollah. But since analyzing rhetoric only takes us so far, what about actual evidence?
Since March, officials and analysts have been amplifying Nasrallah’s rhetoric with various claims reported in the Lebanese and American press. The first of these to appear in the U.S. was a report in The New York Times that more or less encapsulated the gist of the consensus. In addition to the quotes from Nasrallah’s speech, the report quoted the grumblings of a Shiite militiaman in Syria complaining about a cut in his salary. The report proceeded to juxtapose the status of such Shiite fighters in Syria with that of Hezbollah. It then quoted a “Hezbollah fighter” who received “only base salaries,” and a “Hezbollah employee”—his job is unclear—who alleged that his salary, and some other perks, were cut. Lastly, the report quoted a “Hezbollah official,” who denied any cuts in salaries.
Taken together, the reports appeared to be more like a game of telephone, with bits and pieces getting passed on and mutating from one report to the next. In part, this reflects how the U.S. press has ingested the habits and style of Beirut’s cafe culture: trafficking in rumors from “insiders” and “sources close to” this or that, who supposedly heard something, which is never pinned down and verified, within a framework of endless speculative analysis and excitable confirmation bias. Analysts cited articles in the Lebanese press which spoke of Hezbollah closing down “a thousand offices and apartments.”
Were these apartments inhabited by families or were they repurposed for use by the group? Leaving this detail unaddressed creates an impression that Hezbollah was cutting down on its housing subsidies—which was the claim The New York Times report cited in the Syrian context. If that were the case, then closing down nearly a thousand apartments means that several hundred families were made destitute. Only nobody has heard a peep about that in Lebanon.
Compare this with 2017, when people in the Hezbollah-controlled southern suburbs of Beirut rioted, and even cursed out Nasrallah in front of TV cameras, after the party removed and shut down some illegal construction, which negatively affected a limited number of people’s businesses and livelihoods. Today we’re told Nasrallah is so desperate he’s appealing for people to sell their kidneys, and yet—far from rioting—no one makes a sound.
Rather, according to the second report on the subject in the American press, published in The Washington Post, the result of Hezbollah’s supposedly stifling financial crunch was to cancel unspecified programing on its al-Manar television station, which resulted in some layoffs. The source for this claim is a “Hezbollah insider,” whatever that means. None of those who were allegedly let go were located or reached for comment. At the same time, the southern suburbs of Beirut are headquarters to media operations supporting other Iranian assets in the region, like Yemen’s Houthis, who receive training and support from Hezbollah. None of these outlets has shut down, nor have there been stories of layoffs. In contrast, there has been ample local coverage of dismissals and payroll problems at al-Mustaqbal, the TV station and newspaper owned by the prime minister, Saad Hariri.
In fact, far from closing down institutions, Hezbollah has been building new ones. For instance, in recent months, Hezbollah’s Islamic Health Commission opened the Shifa Specialty Hospital, a large facility for psychiatry and mental health in the Aramoun region, in southern Mount Lebanon, at a cost of $15 million. There are also major investment projects in Hezbollah’s southern suburbs of Beirut. Just this month, the massive Centro Mall opened its doors in Jnah, a few minutes from Beirut airport.
Other services don’t seem to have been affected much, either. Again in March, Hezbollah’s small-loans provider, Al-Qard Al-Hassan Association (which is on the Treasury Department’s sanctions list) posted that it gave $476 million in interest-free loans in 2018. And when Nasrallah addressed supporting the “resistance” in his speech, he claimed that party members and institutions had raised $2 million a few months ago, which he made sure reached “the brothers in Yemen.”
So what is actually going on? Well, Nasrallah said it rather plainly: “reorganization, proper management, and prioritization.” To be sure, this in part reflects the cumulative sanctions the U.S. has slapped on the group in recent years. The close watch the U.S. has kept on Lebanon’s banks has made it more difficult to openly launder large sums through those institutions, as it did only a few years ago. But there are other considerations as well.
Over the past eight years, Hezbollah has been involved in military campaigns in four countries, most notably in Syria. In addition, Hezbollah has been using Lebanon as an operational headquarters to host, train, and treat militia fighters from the region. To sustain the logistical needs alone of these campaigns, Hezbollah’s expenditures had to grow exponentially. While its fighters are still very much actively deployed, in Syria especially, the conditions in all four theaters today have de-intensified since the peak of the conflicts, which has allowed Hezbollah to decrease or reallocate spending on the operations.
In fact, this is precisely the picture which emerges from local media reports—those which analysts either don’t cite or cherry-pick from. Some reports relay a decrease from previous spending levels on provision of food for fighters in Syria. One report, citing “sources close to Hezbollah,” explained that the group was now “squeezing expenses.” It is curbing spending in certain areas, for example by dispensing with rented spaces—which clarifies that these rented spaces were indeed for official, not civilian, use, and were now no longer essential. However, both this and the previously mentioned report about the closing down of “offices and apartments,” published seven months apart, categorically deny any freezing or reduction in salaries. Rather, the explanation their sources present is one of precaution and proper management: “The money is still there. But priority now is to manage it properly.” In other words, the message is uniform, and it repeats what Nasrallah said in March: prioritization and proper management.
The anecdotal evidence gathered in U.S. media reports hardly paints a different picture. If anything, it reinforces it. The “Hezbollah insider” The Washington Post spoke with in Beirut, for instance, affirmed that full-time fighters continued to receive salaries. Other fighters, the source claimed, are being pulled from Syria and reassigned back to reserves. This is in keeping with the premise that Hezbollah’s operations today no longer require what they did a few years ago and things are being brought back to their normal state—not that sanctions are forcing a cutdown in operational expenditures.
There are other questionable assumptions in the statements of U.S. officials. For instance, it is unclear whether or not the money Iran sends Hezbollah really constitutes “70% of their budget,” as some have asserted. If 70% of Hezbollah’s budget stands at $700 million, that means the entirety of Hezbollah’s global criminal enterprise (cocaine sales included) accounts for only $300 million. This makes little sense. To believe that Hezbollah has gone from taking in hundreds of millions from Iran and hundreds of millions more from criminal ventures to relying on paltry sums from the Shiite community in Lebanon is near-fantastical. And it is unwise for the administration to claim it is true.
Hezbollah is not bankrupt. But have Iranian funds to the group been affected by sanctions on Tehran? The answer is most likely yes but it misses the key point. The more critical question is: Has Hezbollah’s ability to continue to run its operations, both military and nonmilitary, been substantially curtailed at this point in the maximum pressure campaign? There is no convincing evidence to suggest that anything like that is happening.

Not Supporting the Lebanese Army Is Akin to Supporting Iran and Hezbollah
Toufic Baaklini and Peter Burns/ Washington Examiner/June 03/2019
As we mourn the loss of Maronite Patriarch Emeritus Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir, we are reminded of his legacy of being a courageous defender of the sovereignty of Lebanon in the face of Syrian occupation. It is striking that he passed at a moment when tensions between Iran and the United States are running high and threaten to drag Lebanon into an unwanted conflict.
Lebanon is a unique experiment in religious pluralism with religious freedom, freedom of the press, and a rich Christian history. Entangling foreign influence jeopardizes Lebanon’s sovereignty and causes instability, which could wreck Lebanon’s multiconfessional society. The only institution with the strength to defend Lebanese sovereignty is the Lebanese Armed Forces. U.S. support for the LAF is crucial to the role they play in providing stability and displacing other armed groups within Lebanon. With Congress in the throes of appropriation season, now is the time to consider what more we can do to strengthen the LAF as part of U.S. policy to counter destabilizing foreign influence and maintaining religious pluralism in Lebanon.
Lebanon, historically the heart of Christianity in the Middle East, is the last safe haven for Christians in the region. The current Lebanese political system, where Christians hold the presidency and half of the Parliament, is the only one in the Middle East where all religious sects share a delicate balance of political power. Iran, through its proxy Hezbollah, is positioning itself to force a realignment of power, by which Christians would lose their 50% share. If such a scenario were to be realized, it would result in a mass exodus of Christians from Lebanon.
Given Iran’s growing presence in Syria and Iran's increasing influence in Iraq through proxy militias in Christian areas, Lebanon would become the final domino to fall in Iran’s Shia Crescent, granting it access to the Mediterranean and Israel’s border. Should Iran draw Lebanon into a regional conflict or indirectly take control of the government, the Christian community would suffer irreversible and fatal consequences.
Thankfully, Lebanon is not yet a proxy state of Iran, and Hezbollah is far from controlling the government, only holding one major ministry: the Ministry of Health. Lebanon’s legitimate security institution, the LAF, can be used to weaken Hezbollah from within, by depriving the terrorist organization of its mandate to protect the southern border and by unquestionably displacing Hezbollah in domestic security. For over 10 years, the U.S. has invested in making the LAF a professional fighting force. Now, U.S. security assistance should focus on giving the LAF the distinct and prohibitive competitive advantage over Hezbollah. This is the best way to declaw Hezbollah from within and to avoid a conflict, internal or external, that would cause unspeakable human suffering on all sides.
In addition, the LAF has to maintain and increase its vigilance against other destabilizing armed threats, such as the many Palestinian armed factions and the infiltration of ISIS through the enormous 1.5 million displaced Syrians in Lebanon, creating a fertile ground for terrorist groups. The examples of terrorists sprouting from camps are numerous, such as Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, and consistently increasing. Lebanon must also secure its porous border with Syria, over which fighters and weapons cross almost unchecked.
This is where Congress must act. In 2018, Iran outspent the U.S. roughly 3 to 1, giving Hezbollah $700 million in support while the U.S. only provided the LAF with $222 million. For example, Iran has given Hezbollah tanks while the U.S. provided the LAF with anti-tank weapons. Hezbollah is estimated to have a fighting force up to half the strength of the LAF. Consider there being a nonstate actor within the U.S. that was designated a terrorist organization, yet had a force up to half as large as the U.S. Army. The very idea is staggering, but this is Lebanon’s reality.
There are two areas in which the U.S. can ensure the LAF gains the necessary competitive advantage to provide domestic security. The first is increasing its air superiority. Through U.S. support, the LAF is developing an air force that allows them to respond rapidly, but they desperately need more helicopters and planes, all of which can come from retired U.S. equipment. Secondly, Lebanon needs a bolstered maritime force to patrol its coastline and deal with smuggling and other illicit activity. Such investments by the U.S. would hardly put a dent in our foreign aid budget but would save another country from falling under the sway of Iran and the burden of terrorists.
The LAF have proven themselves to be a capable fighting force when properly supported, as they displayed to the world when they decisively defeated ISIS on the border with Syria. Central Command Commander Joseph Votel has said that “the Lebanese Armed Forces are second to none. Their skills, professionalism, dedication to duty, and commitment to defend their country are unsurpassed.” And former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said, “we have the legitimate state security organization in the Lebanese armed forces,” adding, “we have a … U.S. military partnership with them, and they are helping to keep the stable situation stable right now.”
Much has been made of the notion that the LAF and Hezbollah have collaborated and that U.S. equipment has ended up in the hands of a terrorist organization. However, the LAF has received the highest possible End User Monitoring rating, which tracks every piece of U.S. military equipment given to allies. Equipment, like the M113 Bradleys Hezbollah flaunted in their military parade, were proved not to have come from the LAF. Such rumors are pushed by Hezbollah, which stands to gain the most should Congress flinch at supporting the LAF.
In an interview during his recent visit to Lebanon, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo rightly stated that Iran wants to control the state of Lebanon to gain access to the Mediterranean. Then, he added that "the people of Lebanon deserve better than that, they want something different from that, and America is prepared to help." By ensuring the LAF has the strength and tools to contain, displace, and disarm Hezbollah, and defend against existing and potential terrorist groups, America will achieve a number of national security objectives, including pushing back on Iranian and Arab influence, undermining Hezbollah, and keeping Lebanon as the religious safe haven that it currently is.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June 03-04/2019
Damascus Pounds Jihadist Bastion, Ignoring Trump Warning
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 03/2019/Bombardments by the Syrian regime killed six civilians in northwest Syria Monday, hours after U.S. President Donald Trump urged Damascus and its allies to "stop bombing the hell" out of the jihadist-held region. Trump's call came after U.S. ally Israel carried out a series of strikes against Syria at the weekend, leaving at least 15 dead among pro-government forces, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The bombardment by Damascus and its ally Moscow of Idlib province and neighbouring areas has killed more than 300 people since late April, according to the Observatory, a Britain-based war monitor. It also displaced nearly 270,000 people in May alone, according to the UN. The violence, which comes despite a truce deal brokered by Russia and Turkey in September, has raised fears of a humanitarian catastrophe on a scale yet unseen in Syria's eight-year conflict, which has already claimed more than 370,000 lives. The Kremlin insisted Monday that the Russian army was only targeting "terrorists" in Syria's Idlib region, which is controlled by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, a group dominated by former members of al-Qaida's Syria affiliate. It accused them of firing at civilians and Moscow's troops. "Terrorist fire in Idlib is of course unacceptable," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. "Measures are being taken to neutralise such firing positions."The comments came in response to a tweet by Trump on Sunday calling for an end to the bombing on the jihadist-dominated enclave, a large area which is home to almost three million people. "Hearing word that Russia, Syria and, to a lesser extent, Iran, are bombing the hell out of Idlib Province in Syria, and indiscriminately killing many innocent civilians. "The World is watching this butchery. What is the purpose, what will it get you? STOP!" the US president said.
'Indiscriminate weapons'
But the aerial bombardment on Monday was unrelenting. The Observatory said at least four civilians were killed in regime strikes on the town of Maaret al-Numan. Another civilian was killed in the nearby town of Heish, while a sixth was killed by rocket fire on a village in the neighbouring province of Hama, it said. Human Rights Watch on Monday accused the Syrian regime and Russia of using "internationally banned and other indiscriminate weapons in unlawful attacks on civilians in northwest Syria in recent weeks." It said they "used banned cluster munitions and incendiary weapons... along with large air-dropped explosive weapons with wide-area effects, including 'barrel bombs'."A total of 24 health facilities and 35 schools have been hit in the latest escalation, according to the U.N.'s humanitarian office. Analysts predict that President Bashar al-Assad and his allies will continue to chip away at the area, but not unleash a major assault that would create chaos on Turkey's doorstep. In recent weeks, jihadists and pro-government have engaged in fierce battles over positions on the fringes of the enclave. On Monday, clashes between jihadists and pro-government fighters killed dozens of combatants in southern Idlib and parts of Latakia.
Israeli strikes
The latest violence in Syria's jihadist-held northwest comes amid soaring tensions between Syria and neighbouring Israel. Syria accused Israel of targeting an airbase in Homs province overnight, reportedly killing five people, just hours after carrying out raids on military and intelligence posts south of Damascus that killed 10. "Our air defenses thwarted an Israeli aggression and destroyed two of the rockets that targeted the T-4 airbase," a military source told state news agency SANA. The remaining rockets "killed one soldier, wounded two others, and damaged an arms warehouse," the source added. The Observatory reported five killed, including one Syrian soldier, adding that a rocket warehouse was destroyed. In addition to the Syrian army, Iranian fighters and Hizbullah paramilitary forces are also stationed at the airbase, according to the monitor. Israel did not claim the attack. A spokeswoman for the Israeli army told AFP: "We do not comment on foreign reports." But hours earlier, Israel said it had carried out strikes in the province of Quneitra. It said that attack was in response to rare rocket fire from its neighbor late Saturday. The Observatory said 10 people were killed, including Syrian soldiers and foreign fighters. Israel has carried out hundreds of air strikes in Syria, most of them against what it says are Iranian and Hezbollah targets. The country says it is determined to prevent its arch foe Iran from entrenching itself militarily in Syria, where Tehran backs Assad in the country's war.

Israeli strike hits airbase in Syria’s Homs
AFP, Damascus/Monday, 3 June 2019/An Israeli strike hits an airbase in Syria’s Homs province on Sunday in the second such attack over the past 24 hours, state media said. The strike on the T-4 airbase killed one soldier, wounded two others, and damaged an arms warehouse, a military source told state news agency SANA. Earlier on Sunday, Israel attacked Syrian military positions in the country’s south, killing ten soldiers and wounding several others, Syria’s state-run media reported. State news agency SANA quoted an unnamed military official as saying the attacks struck military positions in the southern region of Quneitra, near the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. They also caused material damage, it said.

Car bombing kills 19 people in Syria’s Azaz
The Associated Press, BeirutMonday, 3 June 2019/A suicide car bomb in a northwestern Syrian city held by Turkey-backed armed groups killed at least 19 people on Sunday, a war monitor said. Four children were among those killed in the explosion in Azaz, a city at the heart of a Turkish zone of influence in northern Aleppo province, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.The attack also wounded more than 20 people, according to the Britain-based monitor. “Many people were leaving evening prayers when the explosion happened,” Observatory head Rami Abdul Rahman told AFP. It was not clear who was behind the attack. The bombing comes one day after a similar explosion killed 10 people and wounded 20 in the northeastern city of Raqqa. Turkey launched Operation Euphrates Shield in 2016 and seized more than 2,000 square km in northern Syria including Azaz, clearing the area of ISIS fighters, while preventing any Kurdish advance in the region. Ankara keeps Turkish troops and intelligence forces in the area, and still backs the local police forces.

Trump calls on Russia, Syria to stop bombing Idlib province
Reuters, Washington/Monday, 3 June 2019/US President Donald Trump on Sunday urged Russia and Syrian government forces to stop bombing Syria’s Idlib province, following a Friday Kremlin statement that signaled Moscow would continue to back a month-long Syrian government offensive there. “Hearing word that Russia, Syria and, to a lesser extent, Iran, are bombing the hell out of Idlib Province in Syria, and indiscriminately killing many innocent civilians. The World is watching this butchery. What is the purpose, what will it get you? STOP!” Trump wrote in a Twitter post. Hearing word that Russia, Syria and, to a lesser extent, Iran, are bombing the hell out of Idlib Province in Syria, and indiscriminately killing many innocent civilians. The World is watching this butchery. What is the purpose, what will it get you? STOP! On Friday, the Kremlin said it was Turkey’s responsibility to stop rebels in Syria’s Idlib province from firing on civilian and Russian targets. Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan has long complained to Moscow about the Russian-backed Syrian government strikes against rebels who control the country’s northwest. The offensive in Idlib is the biggest escalation of the war between Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and rebel opponents of his government since last summer, and has raised fears of a humanitarian crisis as Syrians displaced by the fighting seek shelter at the Turkish border. More than 200,000 people have fled the violence in Idlib since the strikes began at the end of April, according to the United Nations. When asked on Sunday night before departing on a state visit to Britain what he intended to do about the massacre of civilians in Idlib, Trump told reporters he did not like the situation. “Bad things are happening,” Trump said.

Trump urges Israel to ‘get their act together’ amid election turmoil
Reuters, Washington/Monday, 3 June 2019/US President Donald Trump, voicing impatience with close ally Israel, said on Sunday he was not happy about electoral upheaval there and urged the Israelis to “get their act together.”Israeli lawmakers voted to dissolve parliament on Thursday, paving the way for a new election on Sept. 17 after veteran Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to form a government before a midnight deadline.Trump is expected to keep up his support for Netanyahu, a right-wing leader who has forged close ties with the US president over their tough stances on Iran. But the latest uncertainties clouding Israeli politics are expected to further delay the Trump administration’s long-awaited Middle East peace plan, which already faces deep skepticism from many experts. Palestinians have boycotted the effort, seeing it as heavily tilted in favor of Israel and denying them a state of their own.
The need to go to the polls again so soon after a closely contested April 9 election in which Netanyahu had claimed victory showed a new weakness in a leader who has been in power for the past decade. “Israel is all messed up in their election,” Trump told reporters at the White House before leaving on a European trip. “They have to get their act together.”“Bibi got elected and now they have to go through the process again? We’re not happy about that,” Trump said.

IRGC commander: negotiating with the US is irrational, impossible
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English/Monday, 3 June 2019/Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi told Iranian Tasnim News Agency on Monday that Iran’s missile power and defense capabilities will not be subject to negotiations.“Negotiating defense capabilities would be like making our homeland an easy target for our enemies,” Vahidi told the news agency close to the IRGC, “no sane mind will accept this and no country in the world is willing to negotiate its defense capabilities. Iran is no exception,” he added. He also emphasized that “negotiating with the US, especially with its current government, is irrational and impossible.” On Sunday, Deputy Chief of the Army for Coordination Rear Admiral Sayyari had also stressed that Iran’s missile power would be never subject to negotiations. “We declare explicitly that Iran’s defense and missile power is absolutely non-negotiable,” said Sayyari, speaking to Tasnim News Agency. Tensions have spiked in recent weeks between Tehran and Washington, which last year pulled out of a landmark Iran nuclear accord and imposed tough sanctions on the Islamic republic. But Washington’s top diplomat appeared to soften the US stance on Sunday, saying “we are prepared to engage in a conversation with no preconditions.”Washington is “certainly prepared to have (a) conversation when the Iranians will prove they are behaving like a normal nation,” Pompeo said in Switzerland, which represents Washington’s interests in Iran in the absence of bilateral relations. Pompeo, however, gave no indication that lifting sanctions would be on the table. On Saturday, Rouhani insisted that Iran would not be “bullied” into talks with the United States, saying “total respect” was needed for negotiations to take place.

Iran’s Rouhani rules out talks until US acts ‘normal’
AFP, Tehran/Monday, 3 June 2019/Iran’s president on Monday ruled out negotiations with Washington until it acts “normal”, after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the US is ready to talk to Tehran without preconditions. “The party that has left the negotiating table, the party that has trampled the pact must return to a normal” behavior, Hassan Rouhani said in a televised speech. “If the enemy truly realizes that the path it took was wrong, that will be the day to sit at the negotiation table and fix any issue,” the president added. Tensions have spiked in recent weeks between Tehran and Washington, which last year pulled out of a landmark Iran nuclear accord and imposed tough sanctions on the Islamic republic. But Washington’s top diplomat appeared to soften the US stance on Sunday, saying “we are prepared to engage in a conversation with no preconditions.” Washington is “certainly prepared to have (a) conversation when the Iranians will prove they are behaving as a normal nation,” Pompeo said in Switzerland, which represents Washington’s interests in Iran in the absence of bilateral relations. Pompeo however gave no indication that lifting sanctions would be on the table.On Saturday, Rouhani insisted that Iran would not be “bullied” into talks with the United States, saying “total respect” was needed for negotiations to take place.

Kremlin rebuffs Trump on Syria, says military action in Idlib is justified
Reuters, Moscow/Monday, 3 June 2019/The Kremlin on Monday rebuffed criticism from US President Donald Trump of Russian and Syrian government military action in Syria’s Idlib province, saying it was justified.
Trump on Sunday urged Russia and Syrian government forces to stop bombing Idlib, following a Friday Kremlin statement that signaled Moscow would continue to back a month-long Syrian government offensive there.
When asked about Trump’s criticism on Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that militants were using Idlib as a base to launch attacks against civilian and military targets, something he called unacceptable.

Over 30 killed as Sudanese forces storm protest camp
Reuters, Khartoum/Monday, 3 June 2019/Security forces stormed a protest camp in the Sudanese capital Khartoum on Monday and opposition-linked medics said more than 30 people were killed in the worst violence since the overthrow of President Omar al-Bashir in April. Footage shared on social media and verified by Reuters showed chaotic scenes of people fleeing through streets as sustained bursts of gunfire crackled in the air during violence that drew rapid Western and African censure. Witnesses said a sit-in next to the Defense Ministry, the focal point of anti-government protests that started in December, had been cleared. Protesters poured onto streets elsewhere in Khartoum and beyond in response, setting up barricades and roadblocks with rocks and burning tires. A group of doctors linked to the opposition said 30 people had been “martyred” in Monday’s violence, with the toll expected to rise because not all casualties had been accounted for. The group had earlier said at least 116 people were wounded.
‘A massacre’
The main protest group accused the ruling military council of perpetrating “a massacre” as it broke up the camp. The Transitional Military Council (TMC) denied that, with a spokesman, Lieutenant General Shams El Din Kabbashi, telling Reuter's security forces were pursuing “unruly elements” who had fled to the protest site and caused chaos. “The Transitional Military Council regrets the way the situation unfolded, reaffirming its full commitment to the ... safety of the citizens and renews its call for negotiations as soon as possible,” the council later said in a statement. Monday’s violence is likely to deal a blow to hopes for a restart to stalled talks and a negotiated settlement over who should govern in a transitional period after Bashir’s overthrow. Sudan’s public prosecutor on Monday ordered an investigation into the violence, state news agency SUNA said.
Smoke and stones
Television footage showed black smoke rising from tents, apparently torched by the raiding force. Internet users reported connection problems. As protests unfurled, demonstrators in Khartoum hurled stones at security forces, who charged amid sounds of intense gunfire. One video posted on social media showed a protester collapse to the ground, crying in pain after being hit by what appeared to be live fire. A Reuters witness saw troops wielding batons, including riot police and members of the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), deploy in central Khartoum and close roads, apparently to try to block people from reaching the protest site.The RSF is commanded by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, the military council’s deputy head. ...

Twelve killed as Sudanese troops enter sit-in site, gunshots heard
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English/Monday, 3 June 2019/A number of Sudanese troops have entered the site of a protest sit-in where heavy gunshots were heard on Monday, an Al Arabiya correspondent reported, in what activists said was an attempt to disperse the protest outside the Defense Ministry. The Central Committee of Sudan Doctors said in a statement that at least 12 people were killed and many critically injured following the attempt to disperse the sit-in by the troops. The Transitional Military Council said on Monday that criminal elements near a Khartoum protest site were targeted in a raid by security forces, denying that authorities were trying to clear the camp. Lieutenant General Shams El Din Kabbashi also told Reuters that the Transitional Military Council (TMC) remained committed to talks with the protesters and was ready to hold a meeting soon. Kabbashi earlier told Abu-Dhabi-based Sky News Arabia talks on a civilian transition were expected to resume “today or tomorrow.”Protesters have remained camped out in front of Khartoum's army headquarters to pressure the generals to yield power. Several activists and wtinesses reported that the troops are using force to disperse the longstanding sit-in. Thousands of Sudanese protesters also blocked roads with stones, and burning tires in Khartoum’s twin city of Omdurman, according to witnesses. “The protesters holding a sit-in in front of the army general command are facing a massacre in a treacherous attempt to disperse the protest,” the main protest group said in a statement, urging the Sudanese people to come to their rescue. “Now an attempt is taking place to disperse the sit-in at the headquarters of the people’s armed forces by force by the military council,” said a short statement from the Sudanese Professionals Association, the group which spearheaded nationwide protests that started in December. Live images broadcast by Arab television stations showed tents used by the protesters on fire, as other protesters ran away from the scene.

US embassy says attacks on Sudan protesters ‘must stop’
AFP, Khartoum/Monday, 3 June 2019/The US embassy in Khartoum said Monday attacks on protesters “must stop”, after at least nine people were killed when security forces tried to break up a sit-in outside army headquarters. “Sudanese security forces’ attacks against protesters and other civilians is wrong and must stop,” the embassy wrote on Twitter. Sudanese security forces' attacks against protesters and other civilians is wrong and must stop. Responsibility falls on the TMC. “Responsibility falls on the TMC. The TMC cannot responsibly lead the people of Sudan,” it added, referring to the Transitional Military Council, which has ruled Sudan since the ouster in April of president Omar al-Bashir.

Sudanese opposition says it is halting all contact with military council
Reuters, Khartoum/Monday, 3 June 2019/Sudan’s opposition and protest group alliance said on Monday it was halting all contact and negotiations with the country’s military council, after security forces launched a deadly raid on a protest sit-in. The Declaration of Freedom and Change Forces (DFCF) had been in talks with the Transitional Military Council (TMC) that took over from Omar al-Bashir in May, but negotiations have stalled in recent weeks.

Iraq death sentences a ‘disgrace’ for France: lawyers
AFP, Paris/Monday, 3 June 2019/The execution of nine French extremists on death row in Iraq would be a disgrace for France and leave an “indelible stain” on the mandate of President Emmanuel Macron, a group of prominent French lawyers said Monday. With controversy growing in France over the sentences handed out to the nine for joining the ISIS extremist group, the 40 lawyers urged Paris to keep the men alive, irrespective of their crimes. A court sentenced two more French citizens to death on Sunday, meaning that nine French extremists are now at risk of execution in the country. “We have taken a historic risk, which, if it is realized, will leave an indelible stain on the mandate of Emmanuel Macron,” said the lawyers, who included some of the country’s best known legal professionals such as William Bourdon, Henri Leclerc and Vincent Brengarth. It would mean allowing a “legal assassination which is now proscribed by the majority of countries on the planet with the exception of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, China and the United States,” said the open letter, published on the website of radio station Franceinfo. “It equates to renouncing our engagements by permitting the overseas implementation of the death penalty,” they added. “It would be a great disgrace for our country to make these death sentences possible.” The French citizens were handed over to Iraqi authorities in January by a US-backed force fighting the extremist group in Syria. Hearings for the last two suspected French ISIS members to be tried in Baghdad were set for Monday. France has long insisted its adult citizens captured in Iraq or Syria must face trial before local courts, while stressing its opposition to capital punishment. French government spokeswoman Sibeth Ndiaye insisted Sunday that officials were intervening “at the highest level” in the cases.

Baghdad Green Zone set to open around the clock
AFP, Baghdad/Monday, 3 June 2019/Baghdad’s high-security Green Zone, home to the Iraqi parliament and US embassy, will be opened to traffic around the clock from Tuesday, the government said. “From the first day of Eid al-Fitr” marking the end of the month of fasting for Ramadan, “the Green Zone will be completely open”, Prime Minister Adel Abdel Mahdi’s office said in a statement. “By doing this, we are showing that we are convinced the security situation is better” in Baghdad, Abdel Mahdi told a news conference on Monday evening. The Green Zone has been heavily fortified since the US-led invasion that overthrew dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003, with nearly all Iraqis denied access to its 10 square kilometers. It is where US forces set up their barracks before withdrawing in 2011. The US embassy is still located in the zone, but a large number of staff considered “non-essential” were withdrawn in mid-May over alleged threats from Iran. In recent months, the Baghdad municipality and Special Forces have removed thousands of concrete blocks surrounding the Green Zone and other parts of the capital. A year and a half after Iraq declared victory over ISIS, violence has fallen significantly across the country, especially in Baghdad. The United Nations mission in Iraq has stopped publishing a monthly count of deaths from violence in the country. Since Abdel Mahdi’s appointment as prime minister in October, the weekly cabinet meeting has been held outside the Green Zone, while his official meetings still take place inside the zone.

Sisi says Egypt will not accept anything against Palestinian wishes
Reuters, CairoMonday, 3 June 2019/Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, speaking about the unannounced US Mideast peace plan, said on Sunday that his country would not accept anything undesired by the Palestinians. Speaking after breaking the Ramadan fast at a hotel in Cairo, Sisi also appeared to dismiss suggestions that Egypt might make concessions as part of the US plan. The blueprint, still in draft form and billed by US President Donald Trump as the “deal of the century,” jettisons the two-state solution to ending the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, according to Palestinian and Arab sources. It envisages an expansion of Gaza into parts of northern Sinai, under Egyptian control, Palestinian officials have told Reuters. Referring to the US plan, Sisi said that “Egypt will not accept anything that the Palestinians do not want.”“You are asking what’s the story and what does Sisi have in mind, and will he give up anything to anyone,” apparently referring to reports that Egypt could be required to allow areas in Sinai adjacent to the Gaza border to be part of the deal. “Can you imagine that I would give something up. ... But, why?”Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner has been drafting the long-awaited peace plan, the economic aspects of which are to be presented at a conference in Bahrain next month. The United Nations earlier on Friday said it would not be taking part in that meeting on June 25 and 26 in Manama, AFP reported. In December 2017, US President Donald Trump broke with decades of bipartisan policy to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in a move that prompted the Palestinians to cut all contacts with his administration. Israel insists the whole of Jerusalem is its “eternal, indivisible capital.” The Palestinians demand the city’s eastern sector as the capital of their long promised state.

Trump Meets Queen of Britain after Insulting London Mayor
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 03/2019/U.S. President Donald Trump met Queen Elizabeth II at Buckingham Palace on Monday after he kicked off his state visit to Britain by branding the London mayor a "loser" and weighing in on the Brexit debate.
With the sound of a 41-gun royal salute ringing across the lawn from nearby Green Park, the queen welcomed Trump and his wife Melania before they were treated to a military guard of honour. The monarch later hosted a private lunch for the couple and showed them the royal art collection, ahead of a glittering state banquet in the evening. But the day began with controversy as, even before his plane touched down, the president lambasted London Mayor Sadiq Khan, who has been highly critical of the red carpet welcome. Trump called the mayor a "stone cold loser", adding: "Kahn reminds me very much of our very dumb and incompetent Mayor of NYC, (Bill) de Blasio, who has also done a terrible job - only half his height". "In any event, I look forward to being a great friend to the United Kingdom."
Backing for Boris
Trump's three-day visit comes at a difficult time for Britain, with Prime Minister Theresa May due to step down within weeks over her handling of her country's exit from the European Union. Trump weighed in on the divisive issue at the weekend, declaring that former foreign minister Boris Johnson would make an "excellent" new premier. In a round of British newspaper interviews, he also recommended May's successor walk away from talks with Brussels, refuse to pay Britain's agreed divorce bill and leave the EU with no deal. The UK-U.S. "special relationship" was already under strain over different approaches to Iran, the use of Chinese technology in 5G networks, climate change, and Trump's personal politics. Labour's Khan has led opposition to Trump's trip, writing a newspaper article on Sunday in which he compared the U.S. leader to European dictators from the 1930s and 1940s. "Donald Trump is just one of the most egregious examples of a growing global threat," he wrote. His spokesman called Trump's tweets "childish" and "beneath the president of the United States".
Baby Trump blimp
Trump's first official visit to Britain last year was also marked by criticism of May's Brexit strategy and there were large protests. Organisers are hoping for a repeat of the demonstrations this week and will once again fly a bright orange "baby Trump" inflatable. Amnesty International on Monday unfurled a giant banner on the bridge near the U.S. embassy reading: "Resist Racism, Resist Cruelty." Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn said the protests against Trump were "an opportunity to stand in solidarity with those he's attacked in America, around the world and in our own country."He and other opposition leaders are boycotting the state banquet, along with John Bercow, the speaker of parliament. Trump also risked causing offense by describing Meghan Markle, the new U.S. wife of the queen's grandson Prince Harry, as "nasty" for her previous criticism of him. Harry was spotted with the U.S. party at Buckingham Palace, as was Trump's daughter Ivanka, but new mother Markle is believed to have stayed away.
Special relationship
May and Trump are expected to emphasise the wider benefits of their old alliance when they hold talks with their teams at Downing Street on Tuesday. On Wednesday, they will join other world leaders in the English port of Portsmouth to commemorate 75 years since the D-Day landings, which changed the course of World War II. "Our relationship has underpinned our countries' security and prosperity for many years, and will continue to do so for generations to come," May said ahead of the visit.
May announced her resignation last month after failing to get her Brexit plan through parliament and twice delaying Britain's departure. She will formally quit as her Conservative party's leader on Friday but will stay on as caretaker prime minister while her successor is chosen. Three years after the referendum vote to leave the EU, Britain remains divided over its future.Trump recommended the new government make an abrupt break with the EU if necessary, adding that there was "tremendous potential" for trade with his country. Causing more potential embarrassment for May, Trump said he might also meet with Johnson and pro-Brexit leader Nigel Farage during his stay.

Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June 03-04/2019
Jeremy Corbyn, a Pro-Terrorist Prime Minister?
Denis MacEoin/Gatestone Institute./June 03/2019
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14299/corbyn-pro-terrorist-prime-minister
Sadly, ever since Corbyn's unexpected election as leader in 2015 and the rapid growth in the numbers of far-left members who adulate him, antisemitism has become the core identifying characteristic of the Labour Party.
The evidence for massive antisemitism and anti-Zionism (in breach of some clauses in the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Definition of Antisemitism, recognized after a long struggle by the Labour Party) within Labour ranks has been building for over two years.
"The dossier details 100,000 emails, including tens of thousands showing how Labour ignored complaints that supporters promoted anti-Semitism, the former staffers told Private Eye.... The protection of anti-Semites was on a scale and at a level that the public does not begin to understand." – Claire Ellicott, Daily Mail, May 16, 2019.
On May 16, Boris Johnson, the favourite as Theresa May's successor, announced his bid to become Tory leader. Such is the confusion that surrounds Brexit, however, that Johnson, despite his longstanding determination to see the UK leave the EU, may have as little success as May in getting a deal passed through parliament.
It is hard not to notice that the political system in the United Kingdom has been left badly broken over the past few months. Not a day goes by without fresh news about the worsening division between one half of the country that demands we leave the European Union and the other half that is campaigning for us to remain. Prime Minister Theresa May, before announcing her resignation on June 7th, has been stubborn almost to the point of lunacy. Attempts to reach a compromise deal on Brexit with the country's opposition, the Labour Party, broke down entirely after a few weeks.In local elections on May 3, the ruling Conservatives lost 1,334 council seats, with Labour (whose members had hoped to gain) losing 82. The Remain- supporting centrist party, the Liberal Democrats, did best, adding 703 seats.
The results of the European Parliament elections on May 23 showed a similar re-arrangement of national voting patterns. Nigel Farage's newly-formed Brexit Party came out best overall, but others had shocking outcomes: "out of 64 MEPs declared so far, Mr Farage's party has won 28, the Lib Dems 15, Labour 10, Greens seven, the Tories three and Plaid Cymru one." With the Tories, the governing party, faring so badly, questions about future elections loom large. The result for the Tories could not have been worse:
BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said it was the worst performance for the Conservatives since the 1830s. "If this was a first-past-the-post election, they would not have taken a single seat," she said.
The state of affairs in today's Britain has been described by the European Union and many commentators as "pathetic, incoherent, chaotic". One EU politician was deeply contemptuous – a longstanding view of Great Britain and perhaps a main reason for Brexit's popularity.
Journalists have been asking if the conservative Tory party is tearing itself apart. The magazine The Week, asked "Will there be a UK general election in 2019?": Labour has consolidated its lead over the Conservatives in opinion polls as bookies continue to suggest that a general election in 2019 is more likely than not. That would be good news for Jeremy Corbyn, who looks set to capitalise on Theresa May's failure to secure a Brexit deal, with Electoral Calculus research for The Sunday Telegraph suggesting the Tories would lose 59 seats if a general election were held now. The Electoral Calculus poll of polls, carried out between 2 and 11 April, indicates that Labour would become the largest party in the Commons, with 296 seats to the Conservatives' 259.
On May 16, Boris Johnson. the favourite as Theresa May's successor, announced his bid to become Tory leader. Such is the confusion that surrounds Brexit, however, that Johnson, despite his longstanding determination to see the UK leave the EU, may have as little success as May in getting a deal passed through parliament. Given the huge decline in support for the Conservative party, acrimonious arguments over what sort of deal to present and whether a new referendum in which the public may very well vote to remain, that possibility of a fresh general election looms yet more on the political horizon. Indeed, Corbyn himself has repeated his call another general election.
If that happens, the most likely outcome could be the emergence of the Labour Party as the winners. The most recent polls declare that would be the result. And that would make Jeremy Corbyn Prime Minister of Great Britain, with a powerful say in international affairs. That, in turn, could prove a major blow for, among other countries, the State of Israel.
Sadly, ever since Corbyn's unexpected election as leader in 2015 and the rapid growth in the numbers of far-left members who adulate him, antisemitism has become the core identifying characteristic of the Labour Party. There is no need to rehearse the many charges of anti-Jewish racism and anti-Zionist extremism that have dogged Labour under Corbyn and driven many members away. Those who have left include countless Jews, even though a majority of British Jews used to vote for the party.
It is on the antisemitism issue and Corbyn's striking failure to combat it that his unsuitability to be prime minister appears in sharpest relief. This is best illustrated in three matters that have come to attention recently.
On March 7 this year, a spokesperson for Britain's Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) announced: Having received a number of complaints regarding antisemitism in the Labour party, we believe Labour may have unlawfully discriminated against people because of their ethnicity and religious beliefs. Our concerns are sufficient for us to consider using our statutory enforcement powers. As set out in our enforcement policy, we are now engaging with the Labour party to give them an opportunity to respond. According to Dan Sabbagh, writing in The Guardian (a Labour-supporting newspaper):
The regulator's announcement followed legal complaints made by Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) and the Jewish Labour Movement last year, which have argued that the party was not compliant with equalities law. The move is the first step in an investigatory process by the EHRC, and if the regulator concludes Labour has a case to answer it could go on to open a rare full inquiry under section 20 of the Equalities Act 2006. The EHRC has only rarely taken action against political parties before. In 2010, the regulator ordered the British National party to rewrite its constitution to comply with race relations laws because the far-right party had banned black and minority ethnic Britons from becoming members. So far, the party's response to the EHRC has been pitiful. On April 21, the London Times reported that: When the EHRC began pre-enforcement proceedings against Labour last month, the party submitted a written response that is understood to ascribe the problem of anti-semitism to a "small number of individuals". That must surely be the greatest political understatement of all time. The evidence for massive antisemitism and anti-Zionism within Labour ranks has been building for more than two years. The continued presence of anti-Israel and anti-Zionist hatred stands in breach of some clauses in the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Definition of Antisemitism, reluctantly adopted in full by the Labour Party in September 2018.Writing on May 16 (a significant date, as we shall see), in the Daily Mail, Claire Ellicott notes that:
A huge dossier of leaked messages detailing Labour's handling of its anti-Semitism crisis is to be submitted to the equalities watchdog.
It contains a large body of evidence against the leadership, according to the former staffers who compiled it. The dossier details 100,000 emails, including tens of thousands showing how Labour ignored complaints that supporters promoted anti-Semitism, the former staffers told Private Eye.
They are also expected to submit copies of WhatsApp conversations from their time at Labour headquarters, as well as sworn affidavits detailing the efforts to protect Jeremy Corbyn loyalists.A source with knowledge of the material said: "The dossier is really serious. It shows a huge failure to act."
One of the organisers of the leak added: "Who is going to speak out? Everyone. The protection of anti-Semites was on a scale and at a level that the public does not begin to understand."
On the same day, however, Corbyn in person added considerably to Labour's woes when he wrote a message of support for the Nakba Day protest that was to take place the next day (May 17) in London – an annual commemoration of the self-inflicted "Disaster" that befell the Palestinians in 1948. His statement was read out to the 8,000 or so people on the march. On his Facebook page he wrote: We cannot stand by or stay silent at the continuing denial of rights and justice to the Palestinian people. The Labour Party is united in condemning the ongoing human rights abuses by Israeli forces, including the shooting of hundreds of unarmed Palestinian demonstrators in Gaza... demanding their rights.
Corbyn apparently "forgot" to mention that Israel had been "shooting" in response to more than 700 rockets that the Palestinian group, Hamas -- proscribed in the UK as a terrorist organization since 2001 -- had just that week fired into Israel, a tiny country about the size of Vancouver Island.
As if that statement were not bad enough, to make things worse, on May 17 the Hamas leadership congratulated him for the support he had given to the commemoration and to their protests and rocket attacks out of Gaza (which Corbyn defines as "demanding their rights").
Hamas also praised him for condemning "the ongoing occupation and its crimes against our people," and said that his statement "reflects an advanced moral and political position worthy of all praise and thanks."
So here we have it. A political candidate for the post of Prime Minister, under investigation by a British government body, already known for hailing Hamas (and Hezbollah) as his friends, is embraced by Hamas itself, a notorious organization that has for years been treated as a terrorist outfit by the same government he aspires to control. To describe this as ham-fisted would be generous.
Corbyn only became a front-bench politician in 2016, following changes in membership rules that allowed large numbers of far-left supporters to join the party on payment of a token £3. Until then, in the 34 years he had served as an MP, he had remained a backbencher. In all that time, he had devoted most of his energies to the promotion of revolutionary Marxism. To the present day, he remains an ideologue more than a seasoned politician. If it were to happen as a result of Britain's political chaos that he did emerge as a man with a role to play on the world stage, it would introduce a pro-terrorist ideological element into international affairs.
*Denis MacEoin PhD is a commentator on the Middle East in general and Israel in particular. He serves as a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute.
© 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.

Making Sense of the European Elections
Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute./June 03/2019
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14331/understanding-european-elections
The election results reflect a generational shift and suggest that European politics increasingly will be dominated by ideological clashes over two competing mega-issues: the fight against climate change championed by the pro-EU globalists; and the opposition to mass migration and multiculturalism led by the anti-EU national populists.
"Of the five individual political parties with the biggest representation in the new European Parliament, four are anti-European Union." — Ivan Krastev, Bulgarian analyst, The New York Times.
"The social institutions have long been dominated by sympathizers of the Greens — especially the media and education, but also the churches. That 37% of first-time voters now vote for the Greens is also a consequence of the fact that in schools green creeds are propagated as certainties of modern education.... The awareness of what market economy/capitalism is and should be has almost completely disappeared in Germany." — Rainer Zitelmann, German historian, The European.
Mainstream center-left and center-right parties — especially in Britain, France and Germany — performed poorly in European parliamentary elections held between May 23-26. The traditional centrist duopoly lost its majority in the next European Parliament, which opens on July 2 and will sit for five years, until 2024.
Most of the political vacuum left by the so-called legacy parties was filled by Greens and pro-European Union liberals. Pro-EU parties will control around 75% of the seats in the 751-seat European Parliament.
Anti-EU nationalist parties made important gains — especially in Belgium, Britain, France, Hungary, Italy and Poland — but fell short of expectations. Euroskeptic parties will hold around 25% of the seats in the next European Parliament. The election results reflect a generational shift and suggest that European politics increasingly will be dominated by ideological clashes over two competing mega-issues: the fight against climate change championed by the pro-EU globalists; and the opposition to mass migration and multiculturalism led by the anti-EU national populists.
What follows is a selection of commentary by Europeans on the future of European politics: Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, whose anti-immigration Fidesz party won 52% of votes in the European election, said that Hungarian voters want to see change in Brussels: "The Hungarian people have stated that they do not want to see European leaders who seek to organize immigration, but those who seek to stop it; they want to see people leading European institutions who respect European nations and want to protect Christian culture; and the Hungarian people want leaders for whom the interests of the European people always come first. The Hungarian people have entrusted us with the task of representing change in Brussels."
Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini, whose ruling League party won 34% percent of votes, making it the largest party in Italy, said that the election results heralded a new beginning for Europe: "It is an incredible success, not only for the League in Italy, but also for Marine Le Pen in France and Nigel Farage in England. It is the sign of a changing Europe. A new Europe has been born, a new European renaissance founded on employment, liberty and security. We have the historic mission of bringing the right to work, health, life and family back to the center of the European debate."
Writing for the New York Times, Bulgarian analyst Ivan Krastev noted that euroskeptic populist parties are now a permanent feature of Europe's political landscape: "The far right may not be dominant, but it should now be clear to everyone that this movement is not going away any time soon. Of the five individual political parties with the biggest representation in the new European Parliament, four are anti-European Union.
"Not long ago, many mainstream politicians and pundits viewed the far right as little more than a protest movement: People voted against the establishment in European elections to send a message, but no one really wanted these politicians to try their hand at governing. These parties were not seen as serious about policy; they were just playing politics. Now, there is no choice but to admit that the populist far right is becoming a permanent feature of European politics....
"The euroskeptic nationalists are not the only new force to be reckoned with in the European Parliament. Liberal and Green parties were the surprise winners of this election. Together they gained about 60 additional seats, giving them a total of 176; with this will come much political influence. Perhaps the Greens will use their success to demand that climate change become a priority for the continent....
"So these are the victors: Ecological liberals who want to preserve life on Earth and national populists who want to preserve their way of life. But what they have in common is the sense that the current trajectory of politics and society is not sustainable. They both offered change and change was in demand." Writing for National Review, the veteran observer of European affairs, John O'Sullivan, observed: "Think of these different results as a series of actions and reactions: Centrist elites pursue (failed) progressive policies that the voters increasingly resent; populists organize to oppose the elites and block or even reverse the policies; the governing elites then see these as populist attacks on democracy and themselves and go into a moral panic; their supporters in the electorate are sufficiently alarmed by these warnings to transfer their votes from the center to the populists of the Left in the smaller Green and Liberal parties; and so ad infinitum until the next European election in 2024.
"Or we could see the elections as a competition between two rising insurgent political forces — each trying not to let a good crisis go to waste: the populists using the migration crisis as an organizing principle, the Greens and the Liberals doing the same with the climate crisis. Which group will win probably depends on which crisis ultimately proves to be the more genuinely frightening one to the voters — a crisis that really seems to threaten their futures and their children's futures in the most practical everyday ways." Ralph Sina, Brussels correspondent and bureau chief for Germany's public broadcaster WDR/NDR, observed:
"This European election was decided by two questions: the refugee issue and the climate issue. The electoral victories of Marine Le Pen, Victor Orbán, Matteo Salvini and the Alternative for Germany (AfD) send a clear message: The refugee crisis is by no means history. The EU external border remains insufficiently monitored and the 10,000 additional Frontex officials promised by the European Commission are nowhere in sight. That is why the right will increasingly question the Schengen principle of open borders within the EU.
"At the same time, the future topic of climate protection is coming to the fore. Whoever does not clearly position himself loses. This applies to Christian Democrats and Social Democrats. This EU election was not a collection of national memos. It was about the future of Europe and this planet. Young Europeans, in particular, see the EU as the last chance to limit climate change to a degree that is perhaps still acceptable to people and the environment.
"The new EU Parliament must now agree on a successor to Jean-Claude Junker, one who takes both European core challenges seriously: the migration issue and climate change. And who at the same time enjoys authority among the heads of state and government. The citizens have voted in large numbers. The ball is now in the court of the next European Parliament."Ines Pohl, editor-in-chief of Deutsche Welle, Germany's public international broadcaster, wrote that the defeat of Germany's Social Democrats was so devastating that it puts Chancellor Angela Merkel's ruling coalition in danger: "The polarization between nationalists and pro-Europeans obviously motivated people to go out and vote, with many countries reporting a higher than usual turnout. Also, significantly more people under 30 voted this year than in the previous elections — further evidence that people are interested in the subject of Europe and in the question of how we want to live together. In this age bracket, the clear winners are the Greens, who were able to unequivocally claim the key issue of the future — climate protection — for themselves.
"For Germany's Social Democrats, however, this Sunday has been an absolute disaster. The oldest German democratic party fell to under 16% at European level. And that's not all: Local elections were also held on Sunday in Bremen, a federal state that the Social Democrats have governed for 73 years. No longer, though — the election was won by a CDU candidate for the very first time. "This double setback will not be without its consequences. It's evidence that the party is on its last legs, and that total reorientation is the only way it stands any chance of having a future.
"There will be arguments in Brussels over the coming days about which party gets to fill which of the leading posts. In Germany, the discussions will be more fundamental. The main question is likely to be: How much longer does this governing coalition intend to go on tormenting both itself and the country as a whole?
"Following this weekend, it's entirely possible that, after 14 years, the Merkel era will actually be brought to an end by her SPD coalition partner — and that there will be an early election later this year. It would be an election with many, many open questions, and only one certainty: Angela Merkel is not going to stand again."Writing for the Financial Times, chief foreign affairs commentator Gideon Rachman warned that a fragmented Europe risks paralysis on a range of issues:
"Those who argue that 'this [election] changes nothing' have some powerful points. Collectively, pro-EU parties will continue to dominate the European Parliament. Anti-EU parties now account for about a quarter of the seats in the parliament, up from about 20%.
"However, those who think that "this changes everything" also have evidence to point to. Eurosceptic (or Eurohostile) parties emerged as the largest in four of the six most populous EU countries: France, Italy, Britain and Poland. "One reason for this clash of interpretations is an over-focus on just one question: what does this mean for the battle between the pro-EU forces and anti-EU insurgents? But if you ask a different question — what is happening to the parties that have dominated European politics? — then a clearer trend emerges. The traditional center-left and center-right are in decline. They are losing ground not just to populist nationalists, but also to parties that appeal to an urbanized middle-class, such as the greens and liberals....
"It seems that political parties built around the class and economic structures of the 19th and 20th centuries are losing their relevance. European voters are increasingly motivated by new issues — such as climate change, identity and migration.
"The consequence is likely to be a period of political uncertainty and flux that will make it harder for the EU to act. The fact that the center-right, socialists, liberals and greens are all broadly pro-EU cannot disguise their very different views on key areas such as climate change and eurozone reform.
"One big issue to look out for is the political future of Angela Merkel, the German chancellor. Another dismal result for the SPD may persuade them to pull out of the governing coalition, so collapsing the government. Ms. Merkel will also be under pressure from within her own CDU. The party's weak electoral performance may empower Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, the chancellor's heir apparent, to push for Ms. Merkel to go sooner rather than later. Meanwhile, some in the CDU will argue for a move sharply to the right on issues such as the euro and energy policy.
"If Ms. Merkel is forced out early, the EU will have lost its dominant political figure. But even if she stays in office for another two years, the fragmentation of European politics, reflected in the European Council and the parliament, may hinder the EU reaching decisions on crucial matters, including the euro, migration, Brexit and policy on China.
"The big question underlying all this is whether the EU is gradually disintegrating, or gradually progressing towards a closer union that can defend Europe's interests." In an essay — "Deceptive Euphoria Before the Next Crisis" — published by the influential blog Tichys Einblick, German historian Ronald G. Asch wrote that a highly fragmented European Parliament will lead to more conflict between EU member states. He also predicted that German voters would come to regret voting for the Greens if radical climate policies lead to the collapse of the German industrial sectors that underpin German prosperity:
"The — supposed — disaster has failed. The evil 'populists' failed to achieve a resounding success in the EU elections.... By contrast, voter turnout increased, especially in Germany, to oppose these 'populists'.... The pro-EU parties, however, were content to simply call for the fight against evil par excellence rather than to solve the EU's real problems, which include a fundamental legitimacy deficit....
"Conflicts of interest between different EU countries will shape the work in parliament more than in the past. A potential left-to-right conflict will make it difficult to neutralize national conflicts of interest, because there are few party groups that can claim to speak for a political camp that represents all the major EU countries. Particularly paradoxical is the fact that the Green Group in the EU Parliament is the most German of all factions. The Green Group almost appears in Brussels as an EU branch of the German Greens, who actually reject all things national and would rather abolish the nation state today than tomorrow. And yet they still expect the rest of Europe's nation states to support German plans to save the world.
"Just as the euro has not created coherence within the eurozone, but rather accentuated and reinforced the differences in the competitiveness of individual European economies, the political conflicts and crises of recent years have also led to the divergence of political cultures in individual European countries, and in a very noticeable way. In Germany, as the election has shown, open criticism of the EU-European project is still an outsider position. Anyone who opposes this project is quickly regarded as a right-wing extremist.
"Most Germans believe the official legitimation narratives that the EU has suddenly ended a millennial epoch of ceaseless wars in Europe and that Germans owe their prosperity above all to European unification and the euro. In particular, younger voters categorically refuse to think about economic contexts, for example, between the rapidly rising real estate prices and the European Central Bank's low interest rate policy. But in other European countries things are different....
"Despite all the problems, during the next five years the EU is likely to embark on a more federalist course — under the motto of 'More Europe Now' — and try to shift even more powers to Brussels.... Resistance is most likely to be found in countries such as Italy, Poland and Hungary, where nationalist parties are in the government....
"By contrast, the majority of German voters doubt their own state's right to exist and will therefore support or accept further centralization in the name of peace and the fight against the climate catastrophe — as long as he or she does not feel the negative consequences too personally. The question remains: how will the same voters react if the collapse of the German auto industry results in massive job cuts, a collapse of tax revenues and a cut in social benefits? We will have to wait and see whether the current wave of excitement on which the Greens now ride will then continue, and whether voters will still respond so uncritically to everything that comes from Brussels."
Writing for The European, German historian and sociologist Rainer Zitelmann warned that the rise of the Greens should be viewed as a wake-up call: "After the elections, we will see that Germany's legacy parties — the SPD and CDU/CSU — will tell us that they need to do more to protect the climate, that this is the lesson of the outcome of the European elections. This is, of course, absurd: someone who is going in the wrong direction thinks he has to go faster now to reach the finish line.
"The CDU/CSU and the SPD have been implementing the green program for many years: switching off nuclear power plants, cutting coal, transforming the energy industry into a planned economy, etc. Recently, they have begun to reorganize the automotive industry in a planned way: so-called 'fleet targets' are imposed throughout the EU to determine which cars may and may not be produced. The strategy of adapting to the Greens and taking over their issues, however, has not led in the long term to weakening, but to strengthening the Greens: people prefer to choose the original instead of the copy.
"However, the logic of the Greens is: 'It's never enough.' If you switch off the nuclear power plants, the coal-fired power plants become the topic. Like a doomsday sect, the imminent end of the world is being propagated. And if it is always said, 'Fear is not a good guide in politics' (a standard mantra in the immigration debate), then 'panic' before the end of the world is now the dominant emotion. It's just like the 'social justice' that the Greens are now leveraging as an issue: no matter what's done, it's never enough, and still more must be done, ever more radical.
"The social institutions have long been dominated by sympathizers of the Greens — especially the media and education, but also the churches. That 37% of first-time voters now vote for the Greens is also a consequence of the fact that in schools green creeds are propagated as certainties of modern education....
"The development of the left always begins in the spiritual realm, and if you want to reverse it — which will take a long time — then that is only possible if the green ideology is opposed by something. The awareness of what market economy/capitalism is and should be has almost completely disappeared in Germany.
"The Greens are ultimately only one specific form in which anti-capitalism articulates itself. The apocalypse of the world is a pretext for reorganizing the market economy into a centrally planned economy. This will, of course, lead to severe economic upheavals — mass unemployment and economic decline. And when these consequences occur, the anti-capitalists will tell us all this is a consequence of 'unbridled markets' and now it is time to finally overcome capitalism in order to avert 'social injustice' and 'climate catastrophe' at the same time. I hope I am wrong with these grim prophecies and that reasonable entrepreneurs understand the electoral success of the Greens as a wakeup call."
*Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.
Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook
© 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.

Serious steps should be taken to confront Iran’s behavior
Dr. Mohammed Al-Sulami/Arab News/June 04/2019
In my article last week, I described the difficult options that could be put forward to respond to the Iranian regime’s behavior in the region, as well as addressing the rise in its destabilizing behavior, which is increasingly impossible to passively watch without taking serious steps in order to restrict Tehran from dangerous escalation in the region. We have reached this stage due to the signing of the nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 countries in 2015. This deeply flawed deal turned a blind eye to the concerns of many nations in the region, which are at risk because of the activities engaged in by the Iranian regime. The most dangerous aspect of this deal was that Tehran was able to sign it without any reference to its hostile behavior or to the militias sponsored by its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Also, the deal did not consider the regime’s ballistic missile program, and this effectively gave the regime a green light to continue its program without any reservations from Eastern or Western powers. This led Iran and its affiliated militias to target oil tankers in the Arabian Gulf and to hit Aramco facilities in the center of Saudi Arabia.
In light of this extremely volatile situation, we see a number of people speaking and writing about the need to avert any action against Iran that might thrust the region into a new armed conflict. This is, of course, a scenario that all parties seek to avoid, but these people have not put forward any practical suggestions, genuine options or workable solutions to confront the Iranian threat and to prevent Iran from continuing to pursue its confrontational approach.
Those showing sympathy with the Iranian regime, especially lobby groups in Europe and the US, have harshly criticized the White House’s maximum pressure strategy, which is largely focused on squeezing the Iranian economy and its oil sector in particular. But they have never asked Iran to compromise by ending its regional interference, and they have never demanded for it to dismantle its militias. Also, they have not been vocal in condemning the aggression and violations committed by the Iranian regime in the region and beyond.
How on earth can the people who blame the victim and turn a blind eye to the wrongdoings of the perpetrator become independent voices? More importantly, how dare these voices defend the position of the Iranian regime while the Iranian people at home are speaking out and making their position very clear, through the use of slogans like “No Gaza… No Lebanon,” “Shall I redeem Iran with my soul?” “Leave Syria and care for us,” and “The enemy is here.”
Those lobbies in the West that promote the regime’s narrative are doing a terrible disservice.
Those lobbies in the West that promote the regime’s narrative are doing a terrible disservice and perpetrating an unforgivable sin against the Iranians at home. They have given a green light to the regime to suppress protesters who are simply demanding a decent life and asserting that the country’s money should be spent on its people at home rather than on its proxy militias abroad. Therefore, it is in the interest of the Iranian regime and of regional stability and security, as well as in the interest of trade and competitive prices, that there should be serious steps taken to cease the subversive and terrorist operations carried out by Iran in the region. The world should predict the future scenarios resulting from the Iranian regime’s behavior unless it is forced to immediately change its approach by whatever means necessary. At the same time, this will ensure that the world will not be prompted to resort to difficult options in the future in case the appropriate steps are not taken in the required time.
The people in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and other countries will never forget the deep wounds caused by the Iranian regime and the innocent people killed due to Iran’s aggressive behavior. They will also not forget how the regime sowed the seeds of terrorism and sectarianism through the creation of numerous armed militias. These policies have negatively affected the global image of the Iranian people, although most believe that the majority of Iranian society is not supportive of the regime’s policies. The other nations of the region are, sincerely and collectively, extending a hand to Iran so that it can take genuine steps to rebuild the confidence that no longer exists between the two sides. These nations want security and stability and to play a positive role, whilst salvaging what they can of their relations with Iran.
Ultimately, nobody seeks to resort to the most difficult options or to engage in conflict, especially with neighboring countries. All governments, however, have their own positions and interests to consider, as well as the massive responsibility on their shoulders to defend their people, national interests, national security, and capabilities. This being the case, therefore, other regional policymakers are leaving all options for responding to Iran on the table and will, after studying any appropriate course of action and its ramifications, go ahead with the one that is considered to be the most appropriate and least dangerous for their countries and allies, as well as for the world and its interests.
*Dr. Mohammed Al-Sulami is Head of the International Institute for Iranian Studies (Rasanah). Twitter: @mohalsulami

Israel cannot escape International Criminal Court jurisdiction
Ramzy Baroud/Arab News/June 04/2019
The Chief Military Advocate General of the Israeli army, Sharon Afek, and the US Department of Defense General Counsel, Paul Ney, shared a platform at the International Conference on the Law of Armed Conflict, which took place in Herzliya, Israel, last week.
Their panel witnessed some of the most misconstrued interpretations of international law ever recorded. It was as if Afek and Ney were literally making up their own laws on warfare and armed conflict, with no regard to what international law actually stipulates.
Unsurprisingly, both Afek and Ney agreed on many things, including that Israel and the US are blameless in all of their military conflicts and that they will always be united against any attempt to hold them to account for war crimes by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Their tirade against the ICC mirrored the positions of their respective leaders. While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s anti-ICC position is familiar, US President Donald Trump also recently virulently expressed his contempt for the global organization and everything it represents. “Any attempt to target American, Israeli, or allied personnel for prosecution will be met with a swift and vigorous response,” Trump said in a written statement on April 12.
While Trump’s (and Netanyahu’s) divisive language is nothing new, Afek and Ney were entrusted with the difficult task of using legal language to explain their countries’ aversion to international law.
Prior to the Herzliya conference, Afek addressed the Israel Bar Association convention in Eilat on May 26. Here, too, he made some ludicrous claims as he absolved, in advance, Israeli soldiers who kill Palestinians. “A soldier who is in a life-threatening situation and acts to defend himself (or) others (he) is responsible for is receiving and will continue receiving full back-up from the Israeli army,” he said.
This assertion appears far more sinister once we remember Afek’s views on what constitutes a “life-threatening situation,” as he articulated in Herzliya a few days later. “Thousands of Gaza’s residents (try) to breach the border fence,” he said, with reference to the non-violent Great March of Return at the fence separating besieged Gaza from Israel. The Gaza protesters “are led by a terrorist organization that deliberately uses civilians to carry out attacks,” Afek said. He sees unarmed protests in Gaza as a form of terrorism, thus concurring with a statement made by then-Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman last year, when he declared that “there are no innocents in Gaza.”
Unlike democratic political systems everywhere, in Israel the occupation soldier becomes the interpreter and enforcer of the law.
Israel’s shoot-to-kill policy, however, is not confined to the Gaza Strip, as it is also implemented with the same degree of violent enthusiasm in the West Bank. “No attacker, male or female, should make it out of any attack alive,” Lieberman said in 2015. His comments have been followed implicitly, with hundreds of Palestinians killed in the West Bank and Jerusalem for allegedly trying to attack Israeli occupation soldiers or armed illegal Jewish settlers.
Unlike democratic political systems everywhere, in Israel the occupation soldier becomes the interpreter and enforcer of the law. Putting this policy into practice in Gaza is even more horrendous, as unarmed protesters are being killed by Israeli snipers from long distances. Even journalists and medics have not been spared the same tragic fate as the hundreds of civilians who have been killed since the start of the protests in March last year.
In February, the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on Gaza’s protests concluded that “it has reasonable grounds to believe that, during the Great March of Return, Israeli soldiers committed violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Some of those violations may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity, and must be immediately investigated by Israel.”
In his attack on the ICC at the Herzliya conference, Afek contended that “Israel is a law-abiding country, with an independent and strong judicial system, and there is no reason for its actions to be scrutinized by the ICC.” He went on to reprimand the ICC by urging it to focus on “dealing with the main issues for which it was founded.”
Has Afek even read the Rome Statute? The first article states that the ICC has the “power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this statute.” Article 5 elaborates on the nature of these serious crimes, referring to genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Israel has repeatedly been accused of at least two of these — war crimes and crimes against humanity — including in the UN’s February report.
Afek may argue that none of this is relevant to Israel, for it is not “a party to the Rome Statute” and, therefore, does not fall within the ICC’s legal jurisdiction. Wrong again. Article 12 of the Rome Statute allows for the ICC’s jurisdiction in two cases: First, if the state in which the alleged crime has occurred is itself a party of the statute; and, second, if the state where the crime has occurred agrees to submit itself to the jurisdiction of the court. While it is true that Israel is not a signatory of the Rome Statute, Palestine has, since 2015, agreed to submit itself to the ICC’s jurisdiction.
Moreover, in April 2015, the State of Palestine formally became a member of the ICC, thus giving the court jurisdiction to investigate crimes committed in the Occupied Territories since June 13, 2014. These crimes include human rights violations carried out during the Israeli war on Gaza in July and August of the same year.
Afek’s skewed understanding of international law went unchallenged at the Herzliya conference, as he was flanked by equally misguided interpreters of international law. However, nothing proclaimed by Israel’s top military prosecutor or his government will alter the facts: Israel’s judicial system is untrustworthy and the ICC has the legal right and moral duty to carry out the will of the international community and hold to account those responsible for war crimes anywhere, including Israel. Israel’s war crimes must not go unpunished.
*Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine Chronicle. His latest book is “The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story” (Pluto Press, London). Baroud has a Ph.D. in Palestine Studies from the University of Exeter. Twitter: @RamzyBaroud

Will Iran heed the GCC summit’s message of peace?
Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg /Arab News/June 04/2019
The nine-point statement issued at the conclusion of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) emergency summit summarized the discussions that took place prior to and at the summit, which was held in Makkah last Thursday. The summit was prompted by the attacks Iran carried out against Saudi Arabia and the UAE last month.
The response in the GCC summit was mild, despite the brazen and unprovoked nature of the attacks and their potentially grave repercussions on regional peace and stability, oil markets and the world economy.
It is therefore surprising that this measured and defensive response appears to have disturbed officials in Tehran, despite the fact it was they who precipitated the crisis.
The summit condemned the two drone attacks by the Iran-allied Houthi militias against the strategic East-West oil pipeline in Saudi Arabia. The summit communique disclosed that the Houthis have launched more than 225 ballistic missiles and 155 drones against civilian targets in the country.
The GCC also condemned the attacks on four oil tankers in UAE territorial waters. It considers these attacks to be a “grave escalation, which threatens the security and safety of maritime navigation” and “negatively impacts stability of oil markets, as well as regional and international peace and security.”
In the face of these attacks, the GCC naturally reaffirmed its solidarity with the UAE and Saudi Arabia and support for “all measures and procedures” they take to safeguard their “security, stability and territorial integrity.” It also called on the international community and international maritime organizations to shoulder their responsibility to prevent future attacks.
The next theme in the GCC summit was invoking prior commitments enshrined in the GCC Charter and Mutual Defense Treaty. It stressed the need for GCC cohesion and unity in the face of the current threats.
Contrary to expectations, the GCC’s response to Iran’s blatant provocations was mild and focused on bolstering defense and diplomacy.
More specifically, the summit discussed GCC defense policy, which is based on the principle of “integrated collective security.” Article 2 of the Mutual Defense Treaty, concluded in December 2000, states that “any aggression against one member state is an aggression on all member states, and any threat against one is a threat against all.” Article 3, citing the right of self-defense of states individually and collectively as enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, stipulates that “GCC member states commit to promptly provide the help needed by another member state if attacked, and take all necessary measures, including military force, to reverse the aggression.”
The summit’s joint communique was thus stating the obvious by invoking the mutual defense principles that are at the heart of the GCC security doctrine. GCC military integration has reached a fairly high level of sophistication, especially after completing the “unified military command” structure last November with the appointment of a general commander for the first time in its history. Military integration covers all military services — land, air and naval forces. They have developed regular training exercises and high levels of interoperability. The newly appointed general commander’s work is overseen by the Supreme Military Committee of the joint chiefs of staff, which meets regularly to assess threats, agree on responses and give mandates to the integrated command structures.
It was important for the summit to recall those arrangements, which have been agreed to and developed over the past four decades. They are all defensive in nature and coordinate closely with GCC allies and partners.
The GCC also extended a diplomatic hand to Iran. It called on Tehran to spare the region more strife by adhering to international law and rules regarding freedom of navigation and international waterways. The GCC restated its message to Iran, previously delivered in writing to its leadership, on the need to commit to the principles of international law and the UN Charter, which include respect of neighbors’ sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity. That also means refraining from the use or threat of force, and non-interference in internal affairs.
In the regional context in particular, the GCC called on Iran to listen to the logic of reason by refraining from supporting terrorist groups and sectarian militias.
The GCC also called for stronger regimes to monitor Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
Recalling the GCC-US Strategic Partnership and US bilateral agreements with individual member states, the GCC summit lauded the level of cooperation with Washington, which is intended to preserve regional security and stability. It reaffirmed its support for the US strategy toward Iran and particularly commended the recent measures taken in this regard. The US has adopted measures designed not to change the regime, but to bring Iran to the negotiating table to discuss its nuclear and ballistic missiles, its destabilizing activities throughout the region, and its support for terrorism, including its active support for Hezbollah, the Houthis of Yemen, and other violent sectarian-based groups.
Finally, the GCC summit restressed the members’ commitment to promoting global economic growth and the stability of energy markets, both of which have been threatened by Iran’s recent attacks on maritime shipping and oil installations.
Contrary to expectations, then, the GCC’s response to Iran’s blatant provocations was mild and focused on bolstering defense and diplomacy. Thus, it was rather odd that its meeting and the statement it issued afterwards was met with more provocative threats by Iran. Not just the usual belligerent mouthing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its proxies such as Hezbollah and the Houthis, but officials close to the supreme leader also joined the fray. Gen. Yahya Rahim Safavi, a senior military adviser to Ali Khamenei, said on Sunday that the US has “more than 25 military bases in the region and 20,000 troops, all of which are within the range of Iran’s missiles. The entire US fleet in the Gulf is within the range of the Sahel-Bahr missile operated by the IRGC naval forces. Their range of 300 kilometers reaches the coasts of neighboring countries as well.”
Other than perfunctory and conditional platitudes on peace and negotiations by President Hassan Rouhani and his foreign minister, the message from Iran is clear: That it has no interest in negotiations at the present time.
*Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg is the GCC Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs & Negotiation, and a columnist for Arab News. The views expressed in this piece are personal and do not necessarily represent GCC views. Twitter: @abuhamad1

How low is low?
Cornelia Meyer/Arab News/June 04/2019
Crude oil prices tested new lows last week and continued their downward slide on Monday, when Brent reached $61.06 per barrel in morning trading. Prices are 14.3 percent down month on month, and around 20 percent lower than their 2018 high.
As always, there are two forces influencing the oil price. On the one hand, there are geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, lower oil production in Iran and Venezuela, and uncertainty over Libyan and Nigerian production.
On the other hand, there are lowered growth forecasts for the global economy, which stand at 3.3 percent for 2018, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The real threat to the oil price comes from trade tensions, because less trade and increasingly localized supply chains result in lower demand for crude.
At the start of the month, the bulls won. When four oil tankers were sabotaged off the coast of the UAE, and drones damaged two pumping stations of the important East-West pipeline in Saudi Arabia, prices soared. The US sent a naval convoy to the Gulf in response, and as the rhetoric between Washington and Tehran ratcheted up, the oil price followed suit, reaching the mid-$70s per barrel by the midle of May.
Then the bears took over. As US President Donald Trump increased tensions in the trade war with China, global stock markets and the oil price fell with every instalment of new tariff threats and tweets, culminating in the US blacklisting telecoms company Huawei. This had a big impact not just on China’s economy, but also on the US tech sector. Huawei and other Chinese companies are major clients of Intel, Qualcomm and Broadcom.
Volatility would have been far higher if not for the production cuts of OPEC+, an alliance of the 15 members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and 10 allies led by Russia
Trump announced last Friday that he would impose a 5 percent tariff on Mexican imports by June 10 if the country did not do more to curb illegal immigrants entering the US. By October, the tariffs are set to rise to 25 percent if the Mexicans are unable to stem the flow from Latin America. Mexico is a vital trading partner for the US, and the supply chains of the two economies in the automotive sector are highly integrated. Trump’s move raises questions over the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which replaces the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The USMCA was signed by the three countries last November, and is awaiting ratification. Trump’s latest move apparently decouples trade from economic drivers and therefore spooked equity markets, which lost across the board. It had a devastating effect on the oil price, which fell 3 percent on Friday.
Volatility would have been far higher if not for the production cuts of OPEC+, an alliance of the 15 members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and 10 allies led by Russia. The 25 states had decided to curb production by 1.2 million barrels per day (bpd) until June.
OPEC compliance stood at an astonishing 168 percent in April, admittedly also due to Venezuelan production having fallen off a cliff and lower Iranian production due to US sanctions. Russia had been pumping too much, but quality issues in its Druzhba pipeline, which transports Russian crude to Europe, resulted in Moscow complying with its share of the cut for the first time in May. OPEC+ ministers are slated to meet at the end of June in Vienna to discuss where to go next. A lot will depend on whether geopo- litical tensions or fears over trade wars have dissipated. US production has reached an all-time high of 12.3 million bpd, and exports are on the rise. This is more than compensated by lower Venezuelan and Iranian production.
Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak is feeling pressure from several Russian producers that want to bring new capacity on stream and are not wild about production cuts. We will have to see in June and July how the Russia-OPEC friendship develops going forward.
What we can say is that volatility in the oil price would have been far higher if the safety valve of OPEC+ had not existed. The alliance allows for a quick response mechanism, putting more crude on the market when things are tight, and removing excess oil when fears over trade wars and the global economy prevail.
• Cornelia Meyer is a business consultant, macro-economist and energy expert. Twitter: @MeyerResources