LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 15/2019
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.june15.19.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
God, has chosen you, because our message of the gospel came to you not in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction
First Letter to the Thessalonians 01/01-10:”Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace. We always give thanks to God for all of you and mention you in our prayers, constantly remembering before our God and Father your work of faith and labour of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ. For we know, brothers and sisters beloved by God, that he has chosen you, because our message of the gospel came to you not in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of people we proved to be among you for your sake. And you became imitators of us and of the Lord, for in spite of persecution you received the word with joy inspired by the Holy Spirit, so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. For the word of the Lord has sounded forth from you not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but in every place where your faith in God has become known, so that we have no need to speak about it. For the people of those regions report about us what kind of welcome we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols, to serve a living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath that is coming.

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on June 14-15/2019
Sleiman: Jamali 'Apologized, Lawsuit May Be Withdrawn’
Criticism after Syria Boycotts Lebanon Speech at ILO Meeting
Govt. to Convene Tuesday, Key Appointments Not on Agenda
Police Crack Down on Illegal Shops in Mount Lebanon
Lebanon Says Russia, Europe Eye Investment in Oil and Gas
Fatah delegation visits Hariri: Lebanon and Palestine cannot accept less than the Arab peace initiative
Egyptian Minister of Petroleum winds up “Middle East Energy and Political Geography” conference at Future House
Hard Labor sentence against group that fought against Lebanese army in Bhannin, Minneih
Gambling Combatting Office clamps down on Texas Poker lounge in Maameltein
'Rally for Sovereignty' delegation visits Bukhari, expresses solidarity with Kingdom
El Hassan, Bou Assi tackle S. Metn developmental affairs
Jumblatt offers condolences to Saudi Monarch on passing away of Prince Muhammed bin Mutaib
Analysis/While Hezbollah Threatens War, Israel and Lebanon Quietly Make History

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June 14-15/2019
Saudi Intercepts Five Yemen Rebel Drones in New Airport Attack
Iran behind tanker attacks, Strait of Hormuz not at risk, says Trump
Iran’s secrets for pulling off sneak attacks: Surprise, precise weapons, a new cruise missile
Trump says ready to hold talks with Iran despite tanker attacks
Russia warns against 'hasty conclusions' over tanker attacks
China Calls for 'Dialogue' after Gulf of Oman Tanker Attacks
US Says Iran Took Mine Off Tanker; Iran Denies Involvement
Iran TV Shows Rescued Crew of Attacked Tanker in 'Full Health'
Arab League chief: Iran should ‘reflect, reverse course’ in wake of Gulf of Oman attacks
Iran's Rouhani Says US 'Serious Threat to Global Stability'
Iran oil output at lowest since 1980s
UAE Says Gulf of Oman Tanker Attacks 'Dangerous Escalation'
Regime and Russia Bombardment Kills 28 in Northwest Syria
UAE Repatriates Sri Lankans in Connection with Easter Attacks
Canada plans responsible departure from Mali peacekeeping mission
World court rejects UAE claims over Qatar row
Canada condemns latest attacks on shipping tankers in Gulf of Oman

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June 14-15/2019
Analysis/While Hezbollah Threatens War, Israel and Lebanon Quietly Make History/Amos Harel/Haaretz/June 14/2019
Iran behind tanker attacks, Strait of Hormuz not at risk, says Trump/Arab News/June 14/2019
Iran’s secrets for pulling off sneak attacks: Surprise, precise weapons, a new cruise missile/DEBKAfile/June 14/2019
The Suppressed Plight of Palestinian Christians/Raymond Ibrahim/Gatestone Institute/June 14, 2019
Analysis/Oman Attack: Iran Is the Immediate, but Unlikely, Suspect/Zvi Bar'el/Haaretz/June 14/2019
Denmark's Elections/Judith Bergman/Gatestone Institute/June 14, 2019
Refugees in Turkey: Mistreated by Ankara, Ignored by the UN/Sirwan Mansouri//Gatestone Institute/June 14/ 2019
What to Expect from the U.S.-Russia Meeting in Jerusalem/Anna Borshchevskaya/The Washington Institute/June 14/2019
CAIR Settles Claim It Preyed on Fellow Muslims/Oren Litwin/The Daily Wire/June 14/2019
Iran threatened to block Hormuz. Will we now take it seriously?/Baria Alamuddin/Arab News/June 14/ 2019
Turkey slides off the American strategic map/Dr. John C. Hulsman/Arab News/June 14/ 2019

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on June 14-15/2019
Sleiman: Jamali 'Apologized, Lawsuit May Be Withdrawn’
Naharnet/June 14/2019/Head of the Constitutional Council Judge Issam Sleiman announced on Friday that MP Dima Jamali has apologized for her “defamatory” remarks about the council and that a lawsuit filed against her in that regard will likely be withdrawn. “Jamali has apologized for her previous remarks in the presence of the Council members,” Sleiman said in remarks to reporters. “In its first meeting, the Council would discuss the lawsuit filed against Jamali which is likely to be withdrawn after the apology,” he added. In April, the Council filed a lawsuit against Jamali after a leaked video showed her accusing the Council of accepting bribes to annul her parliamentary election in the northern city of Tripoli. Earlier in February, the Council invalidated the 2018 election of Jamali after an appeal filed by unsuccessful candidate Taha Naji. Naji ran on the National Dignity List led by MP Faisal Karami.

Criticism after Syria Boycotts Lebanon Speech at ILO Meeting
Naharnet/June 14/2019/Lebanon criticized on Friday the withdrawal of the Syrian delegation during Lebanon's speech at the International Labor Organization conference in Geneva a day earlier. Labor Minister Camille Abu Sleiman, who delivered Lebanon’s speech at the conference, said “the withdrawal confirms that the Syrian regime does not want to facilitate the return of refugees back to Syria.”Abu Sleiman, a minister affiliated to the Lebanese Forces, said his speech at the ILO conference reflected Lebanon's official position on the issue of Syrian displacement. The Syrian delegation to the International Labor Conference in Geneva withdrew from the chamber Thursday during a speech made by Abu Sleiman. In his speech, Abu Sleiman voiced calls for “joint efforts to secure the safe return of Syrian refugees to their homeland,” a ministry statement said. For its part, the LF (a party critical of Damascus) described the move of the Syrian delegation as an “insult to the Lebanese State and government, because Abu sleiman was delivering Lebanon’s speech and not that of the party.”“The withdrawal of the delegation is an honor for LF because it proves that the LF has succeeded in getting the Syrian army out of Lebanon based on rejection of its occupation and its insistence on the sovereignty and independence of Lebanon. But this withdrawal is an insult to Lebanon because Minister Abu Sleiman was delivering the word Lebanon and its government,” an LF statement said. The LF urged the Lebanese government to take the necessary measures and summon the Syrian ambassador to Lebanon Ali Abdul Karim Ali.

Govt. to Convene Tuesday, Key Appointments Not on Agenda
Naharnet/June 14/2019/The government will reportedly convene on Tuesday at the Grand Serail, a month since its last meeting that approved the draft of 2019 state budget. Reports said the anticipated meeting next week “will not touch on the issue of key appointments,” in the public administration, an issue that sought divisions before between various ministers. According to reports, some 50 Grade 1 public administration positions are vacant.

Police Crack Down on Illegal Shops in Mount Lebanon
Naharnet/June 14/2019/Police in Mount Lebanon forced the shut down of several stores illegally run by Syrian nationals as part of a crack down in the area, the state-run National News Agency reported on Friday. NNA said a patrol from the General Security, Information Directorate closed with red-wax a shop illegally run by Syrians that sells curtains and upholstery, and also closed a fruit and vegetable shop in the town of Ghazir- Keserwan, and a barbershop in Jbeil and a grocery store in Bourj Hammoud. The crack down targeted shops violating the legal requirements. Twenty Syrians were also detained for infiltrating Lebanese territory. They were referred to the related judicial authority.

Lebanon Says Russia, Europe Eye Investment in Oil and Gas
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 14/2019/Russian and European firms are mulling investments in Lebanon's nascent oil and gas sector as it prepares to launch offshore drilling by the end of 2019, Energy Minister Nada Boustani said. "Several big companies have visited Lebanon," she told AFP in an interview. "We are talking about Gazprom (Russia), Lukoil (Russia), and soon, the (Britain) BP firm is expected to visit," the 39-year-old minister said in her office in Beirut. "There is also interest from Total (France), ENI (Italy) and Novatek (Russia)."US firms have not yet participated in offshore bidding rounds.
But US State Department official David Satterfield told Boustani on Wednesday that Washington "has no problem with US firms participating" in the energy sector, she said, calling this a "positive step". Last year, Lebanon signed its first contract to drill for oil and gas in its waters. A consortium comprising energy giants Total, ENI and Novatek took the first two of its 10 blocks, including one disputed by neighboring Israel with which Lebanon has fought several wars. On April 5, Lebanon invited international consortia of at least three companies to bid for five more blocks by the end of January 2020.
On Thursday, Boustani wrote on Twitter that she had met with the regional head of BP who said his company was "interested in the second licensing round".Two more of the blocks now up for tender are also adjacent to Israel's waters.
'Negotiations with Israel'
Israel and Lebanon are technically at war, although the last Israeli troops withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000 after two decades of occupation. This has complicated attempts to demarcate land and maritime borders with Israel, which produces natural gas from reserves off its coast in the Mediterranean. In recent weeks, Satterfield has been mediating in indirect negotiations between the two countries over their disputed maritime border, whose delimitation could affect offshore exploration. "If we agree on entering talks with Israel, then in addition to negotiations over the maritime borders, we will also discuss ways to divide offshore oil and gas fields," Boustani said. Lebanon is set to start drilling in block 4 in December, and later in the disputed block 9. Last year, Total said it was aware of the border dispute in less than eight percent of block 9 and said it would drill away from that area. In the wider region, Lebanon is also considering agreements with other neighbours. In January, representatives of seven Mediterranean countries -- including Egypt, Cyprus and Israel -- agreed on establishing the East Med Gas Forum, a Cairo-based body that aims to create a regional gas market to benefit member states. Lebanon refused to take part in the forum because of the participation of Israel, but it has since started working on separate deals.
In April, Lebanon and Cyprus said they were working together towards a deal over adjacent oil and gas exploration zones in the Mediterranean.
Regional alliances -
"We have made way for negotiations with Cyprus and we are doing the same with Egypt," said Boustani, the youngest sitting minister in Lebanon's government. "We can't be involved where the Israelis are," she said, referring to the East Med Gas Forum. "But nothing prevents us from striking a tripartite agreement" with Cyprus and Egypt, she added.  Laury Haytayan, a Middle East oil and gas expert, says such a tripartite deal is one way for Lebanon to secure strategic regional alliances in the energy sector. Lebanon may also have to strike a deal with Syria, with which it also has a maritime border dispute.
Two of the five blocks up for bidding until January 2020 border Syrian waters, which may complicate drilling. "There is certainly room for (negotiations) with Syria, and we need to look into this very soon," Boustani said. "When the government agreed to open blocks 1 and 2 for bidding... this means that it knows a deal will be brokered" with Syria, she said. But divisions among Lebanon's political class may complicate such an agreement. Prime Minister Saad Hariri and his Future Movement refuse a normalisation with Damascus. Syrian regime backer Shiite movement Hezbollah and its Lebanese ally the Free Patriotic Movement, however, are in favour. Haytayan said Russia may take the lead in negotiations because Moscow is interested in conducting exploration works on block 2. "The Russians could mediate between Lebanon and Syria and together they will put in place a plan to share resources and outputs," she said. While many hurdles still stand in the way, Boustani says she has "big hopes for this industry"."The Lebanese will hopefully benefit from this sector soon."

Fatah delegation visits Hariri: Lebanon and Palestine cannot accept less than the Arab peace initiative
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - The President of the Council of Ministers Saad Hariri received this afternoon at the Center House Fatah Movement Central Committee member and general supervisor of the Lebanese arena Azzam al-Ahmad, accompanied by the Palestinian Ambassador to Lebanon Ashraf Dabbour, Fatah Movement Central Committee member Samir Rifai and the Secretary of Fatah and Palestinian Liberation Organization factions in Lebanon Fathi Abou al-Ardat, in the presence of the chairman of the Lebanese Palestinian Dialogue Committee Hassan Mneimneh. After the meeting, Al-Ahmad said: “We were honored to meet with Prime Minister Hariri in the framework of the permanent coordination between the Palestinian and Lebanese leadership. We discussed the political events in the region, especially those related to the Palestinian issue, which is the core problem of the region and its central cause, especially with the continued efforts of the US administration led by (US president Donald) Trump to impose its views on the Palestinian people and the Arab region, in the framework of the so-called deal of the century, in partnership with the Israeli right-wing government led by Netanyahu.”He added: “We reaffirmed the joint Palestinian-Lebanese position of rejecting the deal of the century regardless of the names it is given. Lebanon and Palestine cannot accept less than the Arab peace initiative adopted by the Arab summit in Beirut, which affirmed the establishment of an independent Palestinian state after ending the occupation with East Jerusalem as its capital, and solving the refugees issue according to UNSCR 194. This is a permanent position for Lebanon and Palestine, and any normalization of the relations is absolutely unacceptable before the implementation of the Arab peace initiative, which has become an integral part of the resolutions of international legitimacy and the road map. This was decided by the international community.”He added that the Palestinians and Lebanon would not participate in the Bahrain workshop “which will not succeed, and the boycott of Lebanon and Palestine of this workshop empties it of 90 percent of its substance”. He said: “Premier Hariri expressed his satisfaction with the ongoing dialogue between Palestinian factions and Lebanese parties and the progress achieved until now, and with the security and stability in the Palestinian camps. He also expressed his appreciation for the courage of the Palestinian man, Saber Mrad, who stood against terrorism in Tripoli and saved his Lebanese brothers.”

Egyptian Minister of Petroleum winds up “Middle East Energy and Political Geography” conference at Future House
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - Egyptian Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources, Tarek Al-Mulla, on Friday winded up the “Middle East Energy and Political Geography” conference in an evening session at the Future House. In his delivered word, Mulla underscored the great role that Egypt can play in promoting regional cooperation between countries, calling for dialogue among the countries of the region “to achieve optimal exploitation of natural resources” and “to respond to any crisis that may occur in the future. "“Regional cooperation is among Egypt's top priorities today, and in the years to come,” the Egyptian Minister affirmed.

Hard Labor sentence against group that fought against Lebanese army in Bhannin, Minneih
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - The military court, headed by Brigadier General Hussein Abdullah, on Friday issued against Ibrahim Al-Sagheer a life sentence in prison with hard labor, and sentenced Ayman Mheish to 15 years in prison with hard labor, and sentenced Omar Breis to seven years in prison with hard labor. The three sentenced men have also been stripped of their civil rights, and fined the amount of LBP one million each. The court said the aforementioned individuals had been affiliated to terrorist groups and participated in the battle that took place against the Lebanese Army in Bhannin, Minneih in October 2014, which resulted in the falling of a number of Army martyrs, as well as the wounding of many.

Gambling Combatting Office clamps down on Texas Poker lounge in Maameltein
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - The gambling combatting office of the Judicial Police Unit was informed on Friday about a group of people playing Texas Poker game, which is banned in Lebanon, inside a hotel lounge in Maameltein region. Accordingly, a unit force raided the lounge and apprehended 12 people involved. A number of those arrested are wanted as per judicial arrest warrants over drug dealing and other crimes.The lounge has been sealed with red wax. Meanwhile, investigations remain ongoing under the supervision of the competent judicial authority.

'Rally for Sovereignty' delegation visits Bukhari, expresses solidarity with Kingdom
Fri 14 Jun 2019 at 17:44 Politics/NNA - Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon, Walid Bukhari, on Friday welcomed at the Embassy in Beirut a delegation of the "Rally for Sovereignty" led by its Coordinator Naufal Daou. On emerging, speaking on behalf of the delegation, Naufal expressed the Group's "solidarity with the Saudi Kingdom and supporting its stances in the face of Iranian attacks." Naufal also voiced the Group's appreciation for "the leading and pioneering role played by the Saudi leadership in defending the vital interests of the Arab countries and the regional peace and stability in the face of the Iranian project aimed at destabilizing the region, striking its economies and impeding the growth of its peoples." During the meeting, Ambassador Bukhari briefed the delegation on the political, diplomatic and field developments witnessed in the past few days, expressing "the Kingdom's satisfaction with the political and field situations." Bukhari also highlighting the KSA's resilience and strength thanks to the wisdom and insight of the Saudi leadership, immunity of its people and the solidarity of Arab brethrens, most notably the Lebanese. The Saudi Ambassador also noted coordination with the international community to ensure regional and international stability and peace.

El Hassan, Bou Assi tackle S. Metn developmental affairs
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - Interior and Municipalities Minister, Rayya El Hassan, welcomed this Friday at her ministerial office MP Pierre Bou Assi, with talks reportedly touching on developmental and services' affairs related to the district of Baabda and southern Metn.

Jumblatt offers condolences to Saudi Monarch on passing away of Prince Muhammed bin Mutaib
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - Progressive Socialist Party head, Walid Jumblatt, on Friday cabled the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz, offering condolences on the passing away of Prince Muhammed bin Mutaib Al Saud.

Analysis/While Hezbollah Threatens War, Israel and Lebanon Quietly Make History
نعليق من الهآرتس للمحلل السياسي عاموس هاريل يتناول تهديدات حزب الله لإسرائيل بالحرب في حين تصنع إسرائيل مع لبنان التاريخ من خلال التفاوض على استخراج الغاز على الحدود بينهما
Amos Harel/Haaretz/June 14/2019
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/75794/%d8%aa%d8%b9%d9%84%d9%8a%d9%82-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%87%d8%a2%d8%b1%d8%aa%d8%b3-%d9%84%d9%84%d9%85%d8%ad%d9%84%d9%84-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b3%d9%8a%d8%a7%d8%b3%d9%8a-%d8%b9%d8%a7%d9%85%d9%88%d8%b3/
After a decade of U.S. efforts, Israel and Lebanon will begin talks to determine maritime border ■ But both Hezbollah and Israel are still preparing a potentially catastrophic conflict ■ The Israeli army 'school' for studying Hezbollah revealed for first time
Under the radar, this month Israel and Lebanon set an important milestone in their relations that could help prevent another war in the north. After almost a decade of American efforts, U.S. envoy David Satterfield persuaded the two countries to use a tripartite forum, together with the United States, to establish the maritime boundary between them.
Down the road, the deliberations are designed to let the Lebanese begin to explore for natural gas in the Mediterranean; Beirut hopes to upgrade its energy economy the way Israel did a few years ago.
The talks are due to begin at the end of this month at the UNIFIL base at Naqoura just north of the Israeli border. They will mainly be about a gas field whose boundaries the two countries disagree on. The discussion isn’t slated to include the land border, along which 13 points are still in dispute.
Beirut’s willingness to hold direct talks on the maritime boundary after years of refusing to do so is apparently based largely on economic considerations. The absorption of hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Syrian civil war has imposed a tremendous burden on Lebanon, which the discovery of natural gas could ease. Such talks wouldn’t have happened without a green light from Hezbollah, which it gave for those very reasons.
According to Israeli intelligence, Iranian financial support for Hezbollah has fallen from $1 billion annually to about $600 million due to the U.S. sanctions. The organization also recently launched a crowdfunding campaign, via billboards, with the aim of overcoming its budget crisis. Presumably Hezbollah, as a key partner in the Lebanese parliament, hopes to receive its share of a future gas deal.
The decision to hold talks to set the maritime boundary is in sharp contrast to the public rhetoric of both the Israel Defense Forces and Hezbollah, a clash that usually focuses on exchanges of threats. In a speech at the beginning of this month, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said that if a war between the United States and Iran breaks out, it will ignite a conflagration in the entire region, and Israel will pay the price.
This week the annual memorial ceremony for Israeli soldiers who died in the Second Lebanon War was held. In his speech at the ceremony, the new Northern Command chief, Amir Baram, mentioned “the incitement and screaming” in Nasrallah’s recent declarations – “all of it, I’m telling you, as a result of huge stress.”
A few days earlier, Military Intelligence chief Tamir Hayman said in a speech at a weapons exhibition in Tel Aviv: “We don’t need Nasrallah to tell us what the situation of the [Hezbollah] rocket-accuracy project is. We know where it stands better than he does.” God only knows why Israeli generals, who were kindergarteners during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, need to be dragged by Nasrallah into once again making boastful threats.
Eisenkot and the north
The speeches and newspaper articles before the third Lebanon war are all part of psychological warfare between the sides. The mutual deterrence works pretty well. It’s now nearly 13 years since the last war, a disappointing tie with many losses on both sides that has helped put off the next outbreak.
The war in 2006 surprised Hezbollah, which didn’t expect Israel to respond so massively to the abduction of soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. It also surprised Iran, with which the abduction hadn’t been coordinated in advance. On the assumption that a future decision to start a war will be taken in Tehran, more than by Hezbollah in Beirut, it seems the continued quiet also reflects the Iranian agenda.
After the war and until about 2012, Hezbollah’s huge stockpile of rockets was built up mainly to serve as an Iranian second-strike capability if Israel made a first strike on nuclear sites. When the danger to its nuclear sites receded, Tehran focused on saving the Assad regime in Syria. About a third of Hezbollah’s standing army was sent under Iranian orders to the Syrian civil war, where the organization suffered heavy losses, about 2,000 dead. In such circumstances Iran and Hezbollah had no interest in a military conflict with Israel.
Things changed over the past year. Most of Hezbollah’s troops returned after the Syrian regime’s victory in the civil war (which is still raging, in a limited way, largely in the Idlib area in the north). Still, the talks on the maritime boundary and the tremendous potential of the gas explorations are an important consideration against another military round in which the Lebanese economy would suffer severe damage. The danger of a war still exists but mainly as a derivative of other fronts: the tension between Iran and the United States in the Gulf, and Israel’s campaign against Iran’s military entrenchment in Syria.
Israel also often mentions the danger in “precision factories” for Hezbollah rockets in Lebanon, but the choice of the public channel – for example, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech at the UN General Assembly in September – shows that Israel prefers to lift the threat via diplomatic pressure. The issue also came up last month in a message conveyed by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who visited Lebanon after meetings in Israel.
The last time the tension in Lebanon threatened to boil over was December, after the IDF exposed six Hezbollah tunnels into Israel. At the end of May the army showed the media the sixth tunnel, which was dug from the Lebanese village of Ramyeh toward Zarit in the Western Galilee. This was the deepest tunnel, about 80 meters deep. Footage from inside showed that Hezbollah could have used it to send hundreds of fighters into Israel within a few hours.
The decision to destroy the tunnels, in an open operation, was entirely at the initiative of the previous army chief, Gadi Eisenkot. Between Eisenkot and the defense minister at the time, Avigdor Lieberman, a disagreement lasted several months over which problem was more urgent – the tunnels in the north or the continuing conflict with Hamas in the Gaza Strip, which sometimes escalated from violent demonstrations along the border fence to rocket fire. The move in favor of the north was depicted as a joint decision by Netanyahu and Eisenkot, which was implemented about three weeks after Lieberman resigned from the cabinet.
But in retrospect it appears that Eisenkot pushed Netanyahu into the decision. Eisenkot presented to the cabinet his proposal to deal quickly with Hezbollah’s tunnels on the margins of a different discussion, and without coordinating the proposal with Lieberman. Netanyahu quickly fell into step with Eisenkot, apparently because of the tension with Lieberman and fellow minister Naftali Bennett, and his fear of being perceived as too passive on both fronts.
Hezbollah’s doctrinal change
A senior officer in the Northern Command has told Haaretz that the operation “denied Hezbollah an important element in its future attack plan, which was supposed to surprise us. But it hasn’t stopped the organization from planning an attack or interfered with its motivation to advance the plan.”
The tunnels expressed Hezbollah’s doctrinal change in recent years: the realization that during a war, it needn’t confine itself to firing rockets into civilian areas and defending against an IDF ground maneuver. Instead, it can strike via surprise incursions. In training for this are the Radwan units, Hezbollah’s elite attack force that today numbers several thousand soldiers. These units acquired experience in the Syrian civil war and can use intelligence systems, drones and precision fire.
Though the balance of power clearly favors the IDF, the assumption is that in a war Hezbollah would for several hours or days take control of Israeli civilian areas or IDF positions along the border. Such a success would be a huge achievement in the public’s imagination, and Israel would have a hard time making people forget it, even if it subsequently wreaked destruction on southern Lebanon.
Hezbollah’s new interest in an attack will apparently also influence Israel’s preparedness. A deployment of Radwan forces would expose them to precision fire from Israel’s air and ground forces. Some of Northern Command’s plans have been updated accordingly and rely on a rapid defensive response, with the aim of exacting the highest price possible from Hezbollah’s elite force.
Destruction foretold
Recently a debate has raged in the army on the state of the ground forces. The criticisms, expressed this year forcefully by Maj. Gen. (res.) Yitzhak Brik, focused on fitness levels, the limited extent of training maneuvers (mainly in reserve units) and the quality of the technical and logistical attention to Armored Corps vehicles. But on the northern front the IDF is also dealing with a doctrinal dilemma.
The huge rocket arsenal, and alongside it Hezbollah’s defensive deployment in southern Lebanon, were also built up to overcome the Israeli advantage and make the army lose any appetite for a ground conflict. Still, in all the public statements by top IDF officers, there has been an emphasis on the need to fight on the ground deep inside Lebanon to win the next war. But maneuvering deep inside Lebanon isn’t a matter of a few days. And as the Second Lebanon war (34 days) and the 2014 Gaza war (50 days) proved, for some time now Israel hasn’t been able to shorten wars as David Ben-Gurion preached in the ‘50s.
The cost of such a move, including in the IDF’s estimates, would be the lives of hundreds of soldiers, while the Israeli home front would be hit by rockets and missiles at a scale it never experienced. It’s no secret that Israel’s antimissile systems, which do well with the rocket threat from Gaza, aren’t built to thwart Hezbollah’s entire firepower.
And when the fighting is over, there’s no certainty the Israeli public – or the neighboring countries – would see it as a knockout by the IDF. Moreover, it’s impossible to ignore the economic angle. The Israeli economy is immeasurably more advanced than Lebanon’s, but it’s more vulnerable. A prolongation of the war, which would also entail extensive damage to civilian infrastructure, could knock the Israeli economy back many years.
The implicit message from the General Staff is that the IDF will defeat Hezbollah on Lebanese territory and Israelis on the home front will have to manage until they’re told they’ve won. Fighters, wrote British historian Basil Liddell Hart, have to believe in their ability to carry out their mission. So it’s not at all remarkable that top officers believe the solution they have in hand is the suitable one for victory. Yes, the talks on the maritime boundary are good news, but the next war could be a chronicle of destruction foretold, in Israel as well as in Lebanon.
The IDF in recent years has considerably increased its “target bank” against Hezbollah. Presumably the battle would end in considerable damage to those targets. It’s harder to define the strategic aim Israel would want to achieve apart from obtaining an additional period of quiet in the north.
It also seems Israel perceives Hezbollah as one big target bank, not an enemy organization with a leadership and considerations of its own. On the fifth and even the seventh day of the war, as the air force pulverized the enemy and the tanks rumbled north, would Nasrallah raise a white flag?
These uncertainties will also affect the multiyear plan being crafted by the new chief of staff, Aviv Kochavi. This week, at a conference of top IDF officers, Kochavi reiterated his commitment to upgrade the ground forces. But implementation of the multiyear plan is expected to be delayed because of Netanyahu’s decision to hold another election, after which there will still be a need to plug the big hole in the national budget.
In the background is Security Concept 2030, which Netanyahu presented to the IDF before the last election. This still isn’t a detailed plan but it’s clear that the prime minister, who currently also is defense minister, isn’t putting his chips on the ground forces but rather on directing huge budgets to the air force, precision-fire capabilities, intelligence and cyberwar.
In this gap, between Kochavi’s plans and Netanyahu’s vision, lies some of the IDF’s problems regarding Lebanon. In a ground battle against Hezbollah, which would take place in a densely built-up area, Israel fears it wouldn’t chalk up the achievement it wanted at a price it could afford to pay.
Studying Hezbollah
At the start of the second week of the Second Lebanon War, a unit of the elite Maglan force set out to capture Givat Shaked, an old IDF position that had been abandoned with the withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000. The soldiers had received only general information about entrenchments observed on the ridge. They had no idea that Hezbollah had built an outpost based on underground bunkers.
In a battle there, two IDF soldiers and five Hezbollah fighters were killed. In retrospect, it became clear that Israeli intelligence had detailed information on Hezbollah’s capability there, including at Shaked. But the intelligence people feared a leakage of information – and the very relevant intelligence was kept in crates that weren’t opened when the war began.
For the IDF, the war was a big disappointment, a long chain of small traumas that taught lessons. One of those lessons concerns the establishment of the “Study Hall” in the Galilee Formation (the 91st Division) about six years ago. This is a kind of intelligence school on the study of Hezbollah, for all officers assigned at any given time to the Lebanon sector, or who are slated to be sent there during an emergency. Many classification restrictions have been lifted, with the aim of enabling officers to receive maximum information about the enemy.
The division’s intelligence officer, Lt. Col. Y., has told Haaretz that “the extent of the information depends on the assignment and rank of the officers. We take the raw intelligence and adapt it to the needs relevant to the commanders, without revealing its source. For us, it’s a process of maturation here, which enables more openness in transmitting the information.”
He says the risk now is opposite to what it was in 2006: “We need to be careful about flooding them with too much intelligence; instead we give the commanders the information they need. You tell the commanders: This is the infrastructure of the information, this is how you’ll use it in an emergency, and these are the information systems at your disposal. And you also notify them: Here there’s a closed window of even more classified information that will be put at your disposal only at a time of war.”
Every year the study hall, headed a veteran intelligence corps major, holds about 280 meetings with IDF officers. Every brigade commander whose unit is in Northern Command’s operational plans comes there with his officers twice a year. Officers also answer soldiers’ questions about Hezbollah. Every year, about 700 answers are sent and the study hall promises to answer every question in a few days – if the soldier is authorized to receive it.
In the coming months the IDF is slated to launch, in cooperation with a civilian company, a simulator that mimics a battle with Hezbollah (a similar system is already in operation in preparation for fighting in Gaza). “We didn’t have anything similar to this system in 2006,” the intelligence officer says.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June 14-15/2019
Saudi Intercepts Five Yemen Rebel Drones in New Airport Attack
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 14/2019/Saudi forces on Friday intercepted five drones launched by Iran-aligned Yemeni rebels, a Riyadh-led military coalition said, in a second assault on an airport in the kingdom's southwest in two days. The drones targeted Abha airport, where a rebel missile on Wednesday left 26 civilians wounded, and the nearby city of Khamis Mushait, which houses a major airbase, the coalition said in a statement released by Saudi state media. The latest raid comes amid spiralling regional tensions after Washington accused Iran of carrying out attacks that left two tankers ablaze in the Gulf of Oman, the second such incident in a month in the strategic sea lane. "The royal Saudi air defence force and air force successfully intercepted and destroyed five unmanned drone aircraft launched by Huthi militia towards Abha international airport and Khamis Mushait," the coalition statement said without reporting any casualties.The airport was operating normally with no fights disrupted, the statement added. Huthi-run Al-Masirah TV reported earlier that the Iran-aligned rebels had carried out drone attacks on Abha Airport. The rebels, who have faced persistent coalition bombing since March 2015 that has exacted a heavy civilian death toll, have stepped up missile and drone attacks across the border in recent weeks. Wednesday's missile strike hit the civil airport in the mountain resort of Abha, which is a popular summer getaway for Saudis seeking escape from the searing heat of Riyadh or Jeddah. During a media tour of the airport on Thursday, Saudi authorities said they had closed a part of the arrival lounge after the missile tore a hole in the roof and disrupted flights for several hours. The area was covered in bamboo scaffolding and littered with concrete debris and shards of broken glass, AFP saw. Two passengers, including an Indian national, who suffered mild injuries recalled pandemonium and screams after a loud explosion triggered a blaze, leaving the lounge covered in smoke.  A Saudi civil aviation official said authorities were still investigating rebel claims that they fired a cruise missile at the airport. If confirmed that would represent a major leap in the rebels' military capability, experts say. The official also confirmed that it had not been intercepted by the kingdom's Patriot anti-missile batteries. Saudi Arabia has repeatedly accused Iran of arming the rebels with sophisticated weapons, a charge Tehran denies. The coalition vowed to "take stern action" to deter the rebels and protect civilians after the missile attack, which drew international condemnation including from the European Union. The coalition intervened in support of the Yemeni government in 2015 when President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi fled into Saudi exile as the rebels closed in on his last remaining territory in and around second city Aden. Since then, the conflict has killed tens of thousands of people, many of them civilians, relief agencies say. It has triggered what the UN describes as the world's worst humanitarian crisis, with 24.1 million Yemenis -- more than two-thirds of the population -- in need of aid.

Iran behind tanker attacks, Strait of Hormuz not at risk, says Trump
Arab News/June 14/2019
WASHINGTON, DUBAI: Calling Iran “a nation of terror,” US President Donald Trump on Friday publicly accused the country of responsibility for recent attacks on oil tankers near the strategic Strait of Hormuz. Trump said Iran’s culpability was “exposed” by the US.
Britain also blamed Iran, saying no other state or non-state actor could have been responsible. British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt called on Iran to stop all forms of destabilizing activity. “These latest attacks build on a pattern of destabilizing Iranian behavior and pose a serious danger to the region,” he said. In this Powerpoint slide provided by US Central Command damage from an explosion, left, and a likely limpet mine can be seen on the hull of the civilian vessel M/V Kokuka Courageous in the Gulf of Oman, June 13, 2019, as the guided-missile destroyer USS Bainbridge (DDG 96), not pictured, approaches the damaged ship. (AFP /US NAVY)
US Central Command released footage it said shows Iran’s Revolutionary Guard removing an unexploded limpet mine from the Japanese-owned tanker Kokuka Courageous. “Iran did do it,” Trump told the “Fox and Friends” show. “You know they did it because you saw the boat. I guess one of the mines didn’t explode and it’s probably got essentially Iran written all over it.”Trump dismissed previous threats by Tehran that in case of conflict it could block the Hormuz Strait — a narrow seaway vital to the world’s oil supplies.
HIGHLIGHTS
• Britain says no other state or non-state actor could have been responsible.
• The UAE calls tanker attacks a ‘dangerous escalation.’
• UN chief Antonio Guterres calls for an independent probe.
“They’re not going to be closing it,” he said. Trump said the US has been “very tough on sanctions. They’ve been told in very strong terms we want to get them back to the table.”The black-and-white video of the Iranians alongside the Kokuka Courageous came after its crew abandoned ship after seeing the undetonated explosive on its hull, said Capt. Bill Urban, a spokesman for CENTCOM. In the video, the boat from Iran’s Revolutionary Guard pulls alongside Kokuka Courageous at 4:10 p.m. on Thursday. The Iranians reach up and grab along where the limpet mine could be seen in the photo. They then sail away. A US official said Iranian military fast-boats in the Gulf of Oman were preventing two privately owned tugboats from towing away the Norwegian-owned Front Altairan oil tanker. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for an independent investigation to establish the facts.
Guterres said he was available to mediate if the parties agreed, however he added that “at the present moment we don’t see a mechanism of dialogue possible to be in place.” Guterres said the world could not afford a major confrontation in the Gulf.
In this Powerpoint slide provided by US Central Command damage from an explosion, left, and a likely limpet mine can be seen on the hull of the civilian vessel M/V Kokuka Courageous in the Gulf of Oman, June 13, 2019, as the guided-missile destroyer USS Bainbridge (DDG 96), not pictured, approaches the damaged ship. (AFP /US NAVY)
The UAE said that the attacks just weeks after four ships were damaged off the UAE marked a “dangerous escalation.”“The attack against the tankers in the Gulf of Oman is a worrying development and a dangerous escalation,” Anwar Gargash, UAE minister of state for foreign affairs, tweeted.
In another tweet, Gargash said Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif’s “credibility (is) diminishing. Public relations is no real substitute to constructive policies. De-escalation in (the) current situation requires wise actions not empty words.”Oil prices have surged in response to the geopolitical tension. Saudi Energy Minister Khalid Al-Falih said the Kingdom was monitoring the situation with “great concern.” He “called upon the international community to assume its joint responsibility and take firm action to secure maritime traffic in the region’s waterways.”

Iran’s secrets for pulling off sneak attacks: Surprise, precise weapons, a new cruise missile
DEBKAfile/June 14/2019
https://www.debka.com/__trashed-4/
Four secret assets account for Iran’s success in pulling off half a dozen attacks on US allies in the past month, peaking in the sabotage of two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman on Thursday, June 13. Those assets are listed by DEBKAfile’s military sources
The element of surprise: Before the four tankers were sabotaged on May 12 and 14 outside the UAE port of Fujairah, no intelligence agency, whether American, Gulf Arab or Israeli, suspected this attack was coming. Intelligence data spoke of Iran activating Shiite militias to attack US military bases near the Syrian-Iraqi border, whereas four of the six hits until now targeted Gulf oil facilities and none aimed at US military targets.
Tehran managed to keep its plans hidden from the eyes of hostile spy agencies and catch them all by surprise.
High professional standards of operation: Iranian marine and special forces units assigned to these attacks were highly proficient. Attaching limpet mines to the hulls of four tankers (in May) and detonating them in precise order, undetected by US or other forces present in the region, called for top military skills. The same applied to the rockets, which were precisely guided to explode at a point close to the US embassy in Baghdad without damaging the building. It achieved its exact purpose, which was to avoid causing harm while warning the Americans that trouble was ahead. The rockets aimed at Israeli military positions on the Hermon were likewise programed to be harmless. The escalating stages: The initial attacks caused no casualties and no irreversible damage to the four tankers opposite Fujairah port. The next strikes against Saudi oil pipeline pumping stations delayed the flow through the east-west pipeline but the damage was quickly repaired. However, the June 13 attack on the two supertankers which caught fire in the Gulf of Oman was a dangerous escalation. Whereas Iranian soldiers were caught on video removing an unexploded limpet mine from the Japanese Kokuka Courageous to remove the evidence, witnesses aboard the tanker denied that the explosion was caused by mines and claimed it was caused by “flying objects.”
This incident is under investigation. Military experts maintain that whether it was caused by magnetic mines or a torpedo, the explosive must have been planted by saboteurs on fast boats or mini submarines, which crept up to the tankers undetected by the US, British or French warships patrolling this key international oil route. –
Precise weaponry: All the weapons the Iranians have used hitherto have operated faultlessly, none missing their mark. DEBKA Weekly’s military sources note that until now, no one had appreciated that Iran was in possession of a weapon systems capable of hitting a target with only a 1.5-meter margin of error. It was first discovered on Wednesday, June 12, when Yemeni Houthi rebels fired Iran’s new Soumar cruise missile at the southwestern Saudi airport of Abha, directly hitting and destroying the control tower. This incident revealed that Iran had delivered this cruise missile to the Yemen rebels, or components for assembling it, so crossing another red line. The worry in the US and Israel now is that Tehran may now decide to arm its Lebanese proxy, Hizballah with the precise Soumar cruise missile, which carries half a ton of explosives and has a range of up to 2,500 kilometers.

Trump says ready to hold talks with Iran despite tanker attacks
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday he was ready to launch talks with Iran whenever it was ready, even as he blamed Tehran for attacks on two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman. "We want to get them back to the table," Trump told Fox News in an interview. "I'm ready when they are," adding that he was in "no rush." Asked how to he planned to address Tehran and stop any further incidents, Trump said: "We'll see what happens." Thursday's attacks raised questions about shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a key commercial route, and what steps the United States may take to protect the area. U.S. officials have said the United States would defend its interests. "They're not going to be closing it. It's not going to be closed. It's not going to be closed for long," Trump said. The Trump administration has blamed Iran for the attack, citing a video made from a U.S. aircraft that it said showed Iran's Revolutionary Guards on patrol boats drawing up to one of the ships near the Strait of Hormuz after the blasts and removing an unexploded limpet mine. "Iran did do it," Trump told Fox. "It's essentially got Iran written all over it... I guess they didn't want the evidence left behind." Tehran has called to U.S. accusation alarming and wrong. The Gulf of Oman connects the Arabian Sea with the Strait of Hormuz, which then runs to the Persian Gulf.—Reuters

Russia warns against 'hasty conclusions' over tanker attacks
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - Russia warned Friday against jumping to conclusions over the attacks on two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman after U.S. President Donald Trump blamed them on Iran. “We consider it necessary to refrain from hasty conclusions," the Russian Foreign Ministry said, calling for a thorough international investigation. “We strongly condemn the attacks no matter who is behind them," the ministry said in a statement. "We are concerned by tensions in the Gulf of Oman," it said, calling on all parties to show restraint. Two vessels were struck by explosions on Thursday after passing through the Strait of Hormuz some 25 nautical miles off Iran's southern coast, the second attack in a month in the strategic shipping lane. Moscow also thanked Iran for help in rescuing 11 Russian crew members from one of the vessels, the Front Altair. Washington has blamed the attacks on Iran, with Trump saying the incident had Iran "written all over it."The latest incident raised new fears of conflict in the strategically vital waterway. Iran has denied involvement.—AFP

China Calls for 'Dialogue' after Gulf of Oman Tanker Attacks
Associated Press/Naharnet/June 14/2019/China on Friday called for dialogue after the United States accused Iran of being behind attacks on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman. "We hope that all the relevant sides can properly resolve their differences and resolve the conflict through dialogue and consultations," said foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang at a regular press briefing. "This conforms with the interests of regional countries, and also conforms with the interests of the international community," he added. The two tankers, one Norwegian- and one Japanese-owned, were set blaze in the Gulf of Oman off the coast of Iran on Thursday, escalating tensions across the region and sending world oil prices soaring. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said there was strong evidence of Iran's culpability and warned Washington would defend its forces and allies in the region. Iran's foreign ministry hit back on Friday, dismissing the accusations as "baseless". China was one of the eight global buyers allowed to import Iranian crude oil before the US ended waivers in early May. Chinese President Xi Jinping met his Iranian counterpart, Hassan Rouhani, in Kyrgyzstan on Friday, with Xi saying that Beijing supports maintaining the Iran nuclear deal, from which the United States has withdrawn, according to the official Xinhua news agency. The two leaders are in Bishkek for a previously planned summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, a regional security bloc spearheaded by China and Russia.

US Says Iran Took Mine Off Tanker; Iran Denies Involvement
Associated Press/Naharnet/June 14/2019/The U.S. military on Friday released a video it said shows Iran's Revolutionary Guard removing an unexploded limpet mine from one of the oil tankers targeted near the Strait of Hormuz, suggesting the Islamic Republic sought to remove evidence of its involvement from the scene. Iran denies being involved, accusing the U.S. instead of waging an "Iranophobic campaign" against it. The U.S. Navy rushed to assist the stricken vessels in the Gulf of Oman, off the coast of Iran, including one that was set ablaze Thursday by an explosion. The ships' operators offered no immediate explanation on who or what caused the damage against the Norwegian-owned MT Front Altair and the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous. Each was loaded with petroleum products, and the Front Altair burned for hours, sending up a column of thick, black smoke.
While Iran has denied being involved in the attack, Tehran previously used mines against oil tankers in 1987 and 1988 in the "Tanker War," when the U.S. Navy escorted ships through the region. The black-and-white footage, as well as still photographs released by the U.S. military's Central Command on Friday, appeared to show the limpet mine on the Kokuka Courageous. A Revolutionary Guard patrol boat pulled alongside the ship and removed the mine, Central Command spokesman Capt. Bill Urban said.
"The U.S. and the international community stand ready to defend our interests, including the freedom of navigation," Urban said. "The United States has no interest in engaging in a new conflict in the Middle East. However, we will defend our interests."
Iran earlier denied involvement via a statement from its mission to the United Nations.
"The U.S. economic war and terrorism against the Iranian people as well as its massive military presence in the region have been and continue to be the main sources of insecurity and instability in the wider Persian Gulf region and the most significant threat to its peace and security," the statement said.
Meanwhile in Tokyo, the owner of the Kokuka Courageous said its sailors saw "flying objects" before the attack, suggesting it wasn't damaged by mines. Company president Yutaka Katada offered no evidence for his claim, which contradicts the U.S. military account.
Katada also said crew members saw an Iranian naval ship nearby, but did not specify whether this was before or after the attacks. The suspected attacks occurred at dawn Thursday about 40 kilometers (25 miles) off the southern coast of Iran. The Front Altair, loaded with the flammable hydrocarbon mixture naphtha from the United Arab Emirates, radioed for help as it caught fire. A short time later, the Kokuka Courageous, loaded with methanol from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, also called for help.
The U.S. Navy sent a destroyer, the USS Bainbridge, to assist, said Cmdr. Joshua Frey, a 5th Fleet spokesman. He described the ships as being hit in a "reported attack," without elaborating. Thursday's attack resembled that of an attack in May targeting four oil tankers off the nearby Emirati port of Fujairah. U.S. officials similarly accused Iran of targeting the ships with limpet mines, which are magnetic and attach to the hulls of a ship. The mines disable, but don't sink, a vessel. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told journalists on Thursday that the U.S. assessment of Iran's involvement was based in part on intelligence, as well as the expertise needed for the operation. It was also based on recent incidents in the region, which the U.S. also blamed on Iran, including the use of limpet mines in the Fujairah attack, he said. He also tied Iran to a drone attack by Yemen's Iranian-backed Houthi rebels on a crucial Saudi oil pipeline around the same time.
"Taken as a whole, these unprovoked attacks present a clear threat to international peace and security, a blatant assault on the freedom of navigation and an unacceptable campaign of escalating tension by Iran," Pompeo said. He didn't elaborate and took no questions.
Iran denied being involved in the attacks last month and its foreign minister questioned the timing of Thursday's incidents, given that Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was meeting Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran.
Pompeo noted that Abe had asked Iran to enter into talks with Washington but Tehran "rejected" the overture. "The supreme leader's government then insulted Japan by attacking a Japanese-owned oil tanker just outside Iranian waters, threatening the lives of the entire crew, creating a maritime emergency," Pompeo added. At the United Nations, the Security Council held closed consultations on the tanker incidents late Thursday at the request of the United States but took no action. Tensions have escalated in the Mideast as Iran appears poised to break the 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, an accord that President Donald Trump repudiated last year. In the deal, Tehran agreed to limit its enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of crippling sanctions. Now, Iran is threatening to resume enriching uranium closer to weapons-grade levels if European nations don't offer it new terms to the deal by July 7.
Already, Iran says it quadrupled its production of low-enriched uranium. Meanwhile, U.S. sanctions have cut off opportunities for Iran to trade its excess uranium and heavy water abroad, putting Tehran on course to violate terms of the nuclear deal regardless.
Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia said early Friday its military intercepted five drones launched by Yemen's Houthi rebels targeting the kingdom, including the Abha regional airport. The kingdom said a similar attack Wednesday on the Abha airport wounded 26 people.

Iran TV Shows Rescued Crew of Attacked Tanker in 'Full Health'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 14/2019/Iran's English-language Press TV aired footage of rescued crew members of one of the two tankers attacked in the Sea of Oman Thursday, saying they are all in "full health." "This video refutes false reports by some media outlets claiming that Iran avoided helping the sailors working on the vessel," Press TV said, without elaborating on what reports it was referring to. The video begins by showing the 23 crew members of the tanker Front Altair in a room watching what seems to be Iranian state television's coverage of a speech by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. According to the official news agency IRNA, the Iranian navy rescued 44 crew members from the two tankers which caught fire off the Iranian coast and transferred them to the nearby port of Bandar-e Jask. But US Central Command said the 21 crew of the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous were picked up by a Dutch tug and transferred not to an Iranian vessel but to the destroyer USS Bainbridge. The Front Altair, owned by a company listed on the Norwegian stock exchange, was carrying naphtha from Qatar to Taiwan. "Everything is OK," said one of the vessel's "chief officers", presenting himself as Russian and thanking Iran for its "hospitality."Press TV said 11 of the crew were Russian, 11 Filipino and one Georgian. A woman was also seen in the footage with her hair and face partially covered by a veil. The US has accused Iran of being behind the tanker attacks, a claim dismissed by Tehran as "baseless".

Arab League chief: Iran should ‘reflect, reverse course’ in wake of Gulf of Oman attacks
RIYADH/Arab News/June 14/2019/Arab League chief Ahmed Aboul Gheit said on Friday that, following events in the Gulf of Oman, Iranians should “reflect, and reverse course.”Gheit said the recent developments in the Middle East region risk deepening confrontations, and urged restraint from both sides to prevent that. He said: “Sadly, we have a problem in the Middle East with a very important and large Muslim state — Iran.“Iran is pushing everyone toward a confrontation where no one would be safe if it happens,” he added.

Iran's Rouhani Says US 'Serious Threat to Global Stability'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 14/2019/Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said on Friday the United States present a serious threat to global and regional stability as tensions soar in the Gulf. "The US government over the last two years, violating all the international structures and rules and using its economic, financial and military resources, has taken an aggressive approach and presents a serious risk to stability in the region and the world," Rouhani said, in translated comments. He was speaking at a meeting in Bishkek of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation -- a Eurasian security alliance that includes China, India and Russia. Rouhani criticised the US for withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, saying Washington is forcing other parties and countries to breach a UN Security Council resolution on normalising trade contacts with Tehran. He called on the other participants in the deal to "carry out their obligations as soon as possible" so Tehran can develop its economic interests under the deal. Rouhani did not refer to the situation in the Gulf where the US has accused Iran of being behind attacks on two tankers. Iran on Friday dismissed the US charges as "baseless".

Iran oil output at lowest since 1980s
Reuters/Juune 14/2019/ LONDON/PARIS: Iran’s oil production has dropped to its lowest level since the 1980s as the full force of US sanctions weighed on exports, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said on Friday.
The US in November reimposed sanctions on exports of Iranian oil after President Donald Trump pulled out of a 2015 accord to curb Tehran’s nuclear program. Eight economies, including China and India, were granted waivers for six months — which expired at the beginning of May.
That has had a huge impact on Iran’s energy industry, with production plunging by 210,000 barrels per day (bpd) in May to 2.4 million bpd, its lowest levels since the Iran-Iraq war, the IEA said. Exports fell by 480,000 bpd to 810,000 bpd — less than a third of what it was exporting a year ago.
The IEA said sanctions have not yet completely cut off Iranian oil exports, but they have fallen drastically. It added that it was becoming difficult to determine where Iranian oil was being shipped as Iran’s national oil company shut off satellite tracking systems on its ships.
The news came as the Paris-based IEA, which coordinates the energy policies of industrial nations, revised down its global 2019 demand growth estimate by 100,000 barrels to 1.2 million bpd, but said it would climb to 1.4 million bpd for 2020.
“The main focus is on oil demand as economic sentiment weakens ... The consequences for oil demand are becoming apparent,” the IEA said in its monthly oil report. “The worsening trade outlook (is) a common theme across all regions.”
FASTFACT
480,0000
Decline of Iran’s oil exports in May, in barrels per day. The oil demand growth forecast assumes the maintenance of US and Chinese tariffs imposed on goods in 2018, but the IEA said it had not factored in further US tariffs announced in May. The IEA also attributed lackluster demand growth in the first half of the year to a slowdown in the petrochemicals industry in Europe, warmer than average weather in the northern hemisphere and stalled US gasoline and diesel demand. Demand growth was likely to pick up to 1.6 million bpd in the second half of the year on government measures to mitigate the economic slowdown and robust consumption in the non-developed world.“Stimulus packages are likely to support growth in the short term. In addition, the major central banks have stopped or slowed interest rate increases, which should support growth in (the second half of 2019) and 2020,” the IEA said. US sanctions on Iran and Venezuela, an output cut pact by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) plus its allies, fighting in Libya and attacks on tankers in the Gulf of Oman added only limited uncertainty to supply, the IEA said. Surging US supply as well as gains from Brazil, Canada and Norway would contribute to an increase in non-OPEC supply of 1.9 million bpd this year and 2.3 million bpd in 2020. The IEA’s latest monthly report comes a day after attacks on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman, which caused oil prices to briefly shoot more than 4 percent higher, in the second spate of incidents in a month in the strategic shipping lane.
With some 20 percent of the world’s oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz, a disruption to shipping could roil markets.

UAE Says Gulf of Oman Tanker Attacks 'Dangerous Escalation'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 14/2019/The United Arab Emirates said Friday that twin attacks on tankers in the Sea of Oman just weeks after four ships were damaged off the UAE coast marked a dangerous escalation". "The attack against the tankers in the Gulf of Oman is a worrying development and a dangerous escalation," the UAE minister of state for foreign affairs, Anwar Gargash, tweeted after Thursday's blasts. Gargash also condemned a Yemeni rebel missile attack which wounded 26 civilians at an airport in southwestern Saudi Arabia on Wednesday. He said the "blatant attack on civilians" was only the latest in a spate of rebel assaults "undermining the UN's political work & sending a message of continuing violence & hostility". These developments "must spur the international community to act to maintain peace and security in the region", Gargash said. "The responsibility for avoiding an escalation is collective." The two tankers, one Norwegian- and one Japanese-owned, were set blaze in the Gulf of Oman off the coast of Iran on Thursday, escalating tensions across the region and sending world oil prices soaring. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said there was strong evidence of Iran's culpability, after US Central Command said it has seen an Iranian patrol boat removing an "unexploded limpet mine" from the hull of one of the vessels. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif charged that the US administration had "immediately jumped to make allegations against Iran without a shred of factual or circumstantial evidence".He accused it of seeking to "sabotage diplomacy" as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited Tehran in a bid to ease Iran-US tensions. Thursday's incidents came a month after four oil tankers -- two Saudi, one Norwegian and one Emirati -- were damaged in still unexplained attacks off the nearby UAE port of Fujairah.

Regime and Russia Bombardment Kills 28 in Northwest Syria
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 14/2019/Regime and Russian air strikes and shelling have killed at least 28 people including seven civilians in embattled northwest Syria, a war monitor said Friday, despite a ceasefire announced by Moscow. The civilians were killed in regime air strikes and shelling on the south of Idlib province and the north of Hama province Thursday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. Russian and regime air strikes also killed 21 jihadist and Islamist fighters in the same region the same day, the Britain-based monitor added. The Idlib region of some three million people is supposed to be protected from a massive regime offensive by a buffer zone deal that Russia and Turkey signed in September. But it was never fully implemented, as jihadists refused to withdraw from a planned demilitarised zone. In January, the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham alliance led by Syria's former Al-Qaeda affiliate extended its administrative control over the region, which includes most of Idlib province as well as adjacent slivers of Latakia, Hama and Aleppo provinces. The Syrian government and Russia have upped their bombardment of the region since late April, killing more than 360 civilians, according to the Observatory. Syria's war has killed more than 370,000 people and displaced millions since it started in 2011 with the repression of anti-government protests. Russia launched a military intervention in support of the regime in 2015, helping its forces reclaim large parts of the country from opposition fighters and jihadists.

UAE Repatriates Sri Lankans in Connection with Easter Attacks
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 14/2019/Five Sri Lankans wanted in connection with the deadly Easter bombings who were arrested in Dubai were repatriated Friday, police said. Among the suspects was Mohamed Milhan, a senior leader of the National Thowheeth Jama'ath (NTJ) jihadist group which was held responsible for the April 21 bombings that killed 258 people, police said. "Officers of the Criminal Investigations Department brought the suspects back to Sri Lanka this morning," police spokesman Ruwan Gunasekera said in a statement. No further details were immediately available.
This is the second time that suspects had been arrested abroad in connection with the attacks against three churches and three luxury hotels in the country claimed by the Islamic State group. Last month, army chief Mahesh Senanayake said two suspects were arrested in Qatar and Saudi Arabia. He did not disclose the nationalities of the suspects, but official sources said they were Sri Lankans. Sri Lankan authorities have arrested just over 100 people who had links with the NTJ and its leader Zahran Hashim who was one of two suicide bombers who attacked the Shangri-La hotel in Colombo.
Sri Lanka has been under a state of emergency since the attacks which also left 45 foreign nationals dead and wounded nearly 500 people. There have been recriminations over the failure on the part of police and security forces to act on advance warnings of the impending attacks.
Top intelligence and police officers have told a parliamentary panel investigating security failures that the attack was avoidable had the authorities acted on intelligence provided by neighbouring India. India had on April 4 warned Sri Lankan authorities that a suspect in their custody had revealed detailed plans to stage a deadly attack in Sri Lanka targeting Christian churches among others. President Maithripala Sirisena, who is also the minister of defence and law and order, has sacked his intelligence chief, secured the resignation of the defence secretary and suspended the police chief after blaming them for the attacks. They in turn have said Sirisena ignored security protocols and should take the blame for the major lapses that allowed the suicide attacks.

Canada plans responsible departure from Mali peacekeeping mission
June 14, 2019 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
In July 2018, Canada joined 56 other UN Member States as a contributor to the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) to provide medical evacuation by air of injured personnel, supply transport and logistics support.
Since then, the men and women deployed under Operation PRESENCE - Mali have conducted 10 medical evacuations. Canadian helicopters have accumulated more than 3,000 flying hours, transported more than 6,400 passengers and delivered more than 370,000 pounds of cargo. This contribution has provided essential support to MINUSMA in the execution of its mission to support the implementation of the 2015 peace agreement.
In anticipation of the arrival in Mali of a Romanian helicopter rotation this year, Canada is confirming that the Air Task Force (ATF) will begin its gradual departure at the end of July and its operations will be gradually scaled down and limited to medical evacuation tasks until August 31, 2019. This is consistent with strategic advice provided by the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF).
This phased approach will ensure a smooth and efficient transition process between the Canadian and Romanian rotations. A small CAF transition team will be deployed to assist Romania in its preparations to commence operations, and Canada has offered to provide four C-17 aircraft flights to assist Romania to deploy their personnel and equipment to theatre. This approach will minimize disruption in the availability of critical capabilities to MINUSMA forces and help set up the Romanian rotation for operational success.
Setting conditions for peace is central to Canada’s work in Mali. To that end, Canada will continue its long-standing support through its development, stabilization and humanitarian programming.
Quotes
“Canada is committed to UN peacekeeping missions, which we view as a vital tool to building peace and stability around the world. Through our support to MINUSMA and other contributions in Mali and the Sahel, Canada, Romania and the United Nations are supporting the people of Mali in their fight for a lasting peace in their country.”
- Hon. Chrystia Freeland, P.C., M.P., Minister of Foreign Affairs
“Canadians can be proud of the women and men of our Air Task Force in Mali whose important work is delivering vital airlift capabilities in support of MINUSMA and demonstrates Canada’s commitment to our partners in Mali and our international allies. We will continue to work with the United Nations and Romania to facilitate a thorough handover as a responsible member of the global peace and security community.”
- Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan, Minister of National Defence
Quick facts
During the UN Peacekeeping Defence Ministerial hosted by Canada in Vancouver, British Columbia, in November 2017, Canada pledged to improve the effectiveness of UN peace operations in a number of ways, including through smart pledges, which are commitments of high-value capabilities made in partnership by two or more UN member states to answer specific, targeted needs around the world.
In March 2018, Canada committed to deploying an ATF of helicopters to MINUSMA for a period of one year. Known as Operation PRESENCE - Mali, the ATF became operational in August 2018 and is providing critical medical evacuation, logistics and transportation capability to the United Nations out of Gao, northern Mali.
To ensure that gender perspectives are taken into account through all phases of CAF operations, a gender adviser was employed to advise the ATF on gender issues.
The CAF recognizes that women’s participation is vital to achieving and sustaining peace, and that armed conflict affects men and women differently. As such, the CAF has established gender adviser positions at the strategic and operational levels, where they serve as specialist advisers to commanders for the overall integration of gender perspectives into planning, execution and evaluation.

World court rejects UAE claims over Qatar row
Fri 14 Jun 2019/NNA - The United Nations' highest court for inter-state disputes on Friday rejected a United Arab Emirates request for immediate measures against Qatar in a dispute over alleged discrimination between the Arab neighbors. In a 15-1 vote, World Court judges rejected the UAE's request for immediate action to keep Qatar from blocking access to a UAE website that allows Qataris expelled from the UAE to obtain permits to return. By not allowing access to the site, Dubai argued, Doha was aggravating the dispute.—AFP

Canada condemns latest attacks on shipping tankers in Gulf of Oman
June 14, 2019 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
Global Affairs Canada today issued the following statement:
“The Government of Canada condemns the latest attacks on shipping tankers in the Gulf of Oman.
“Canada is a trading nation dependent upon freedom of navigation and the uninterrupted passage of maritime trade. These attacks on civilian shipping are of concern to Canada and many of our international partners.
“Canada remains deeply concerned about further escalations in an already tense region. A deterioration of the situation would be counter to regional security, global trade, the rules-based international order, and the interests of Canada and the world.
“Canada is in contact with partners and closely monitoring the situation.”

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June 14-15/2019
The Suppressed Plight of Palestinian Christians
ريموند إبراهيم/معهد كايتستون: محنة الفلسطينيين المسيحيين المكبوتة
Raymond Ibrahim/Gatestone Institute/June 14, 2019
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/75782/%d8%b1%d9%8a%d9%85%d9%88%d9%86%d8%af-%d8%a5%d8%a8%d8%b1%d8%a7%d9%87%d9%8a%d9%85-%d9%85%d8%b9%d9%87%d8%af-%d9%83%d8%a7%d9%8a%d8%aa%d8%b3%d8%aa%d9%88%d9%86-%d9%85%d8%ad%d9%86%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%81/
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14358/palestinian-christians-
"Fatah regularly exerts heavy pressure on Christians not to report the acts of violence and vandalism from which they frequently suffer, as such publicity could damage the PA's image as an actor capable of protecting the lives and property of the Christian minority under its rule.... That image could have negative repercussions for the massive international, and particularly European, aid the PA receives." — Dr. Edy Cohen, Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies.
Considered another way, the bread and butter of the PA and its supporters, media and others, seems to be to portray the Palestinians as victims of unjust aggression and discrimination from Israel. This narrative could be jeopardized if the international community learned that Palestinians themselves were persecuting fellow Palestinians — solely on account of religion.
"Far more important to the Palestinian Authority than arresting those who assault Christian sites is keeping such incidents out of the mainstream media. And they are very successful in this regard. Indeed, only a handful of smaller local outlets bothered to report on these latest break-ins. The mainstream international media ignored them altogether." — Dr. Edy Cohen, Israel Today.
As Justus Reid Weiner, a lawyer and scholar well-acquainted with the region explains, "The systematic persecution of Christian Arabs living in Palestinian areas is being met with nearly total silence by the international community, human rights activists, the media and NGOs... In a society where Arab Christians have no voice and no protection it is no surprise that they are leaving."
Christianity is on the verge of disappearing in the place of its birth, including Bethlehem (pictured). According to lawyer and scholar Justus Reid Weiner, "The systematic persecution of Christian Arabs living in Palestinian areas is being met with nearly total silence by the international community, human rights activists, the media and NGOs... In a society where Arab Christians have no voice and no protection it is no surprise that they are leaving." (Image source: Daniel Case/Wikimedia Commons)
At a time when Christians throughout the Muslim world are suffering from a variety of persecution, the plight of Palestinian Christians is seldom heard.
It exists. Open Doors, a human rights group that follows the persecution of Christians, notes that Palestinian Christians suffer from a "high" level of persecution, the source of which is, in its words, "Islamic Oppression":
"Those who convert to Christianity from Islam, however, face the worst Christian persecution and it is difficult for them to safely participate in existing churches. In the West Bank they are threatened and put under great pressure, in Gaza their situation is so dangerous that they live their Christian faith in utmost secrecy....The influence of radical Islamic ideology is rising, and historical churches have to be diplomatic in their approach towards Muslims."
That said, while reports of the persecution of Christians emanate regularly from other Muslim majority regions around the world — Pakistan, Egypt, and Nigeria as three examples — little is mentioned of those Christians living under the Palestinian Authority.
Why is that? Is it because they experience significantly less persecution than their coreligionists around the Muslim world? Or is it because of their unique situation — living in a hotly contested arena with much political and media wrangling in the balance?
"The Persecution of Christians in the Palestinian Authority," a new report by Dr. Edy Cohen, published by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies on May 27, goes a long way in answering these questions.
First, it documents three recent anecdotes of persecution of Christians, none of which was reported by the so-called "mainstream media":
"On April 25, the terrified residents of the Christian village of Jifna near Ramallah ... were attacked by Muslim gunmen ... after a woman from the village submitted a complaint to the police that the son of a prominent, Fatah-affiliated leader had attacked her family. In response, dozens of Fatah gunmen came to the village, fired hundreds of bullets in the air, threw petrol bombs while shouting curses, and caused severe damage to public property. It was a miracle that there were no dead or wounded...
"The second incident occurred during the night of May 13. Vandals broke into a church of the Maronite community in the center of Bethlehem, desecrated it, and stole expensive equipment belonging to the church, including the security cameras.
"Three days later it was the turn of the Anglican church in the village of Aboud, west of Ramallah. Vandals cut through the fence, broke the windows of the church, and broke in. They desecrated it, looked for valuable items, and stole a great deal of equipment.
"According to its Facebook page, this is the sixth time the Maronite church in Bethlehem has been subjected to acts of vandalism and theft, including an arson attack in 2015 that caused considerable damage and forced the church to close for a lengthy period."
These three attacks, which occurred in the span of three weeks, fit the same pattern of abuse that Christians in other Muslim majority regions habitually experience. While the desecration and plundering of churches is prevalent, so too are Muslim mobs rising against Christian minorities, whenever the latter — perceived as dhimmis, or third-class, tolerated "citizens" who are often expected to be grateful they are tolerated at all — dare speak up for their rights, as occurred the Christian village of Jifna on April 25:
"[T]he rioters called on the [Christian] residents to pay jizya—a head tax that was levied throughout history on non-Muslim minorities under Islamic rule. The most recent victims of the jizya were the Christian communities of Iraq and Syria under ISIS rule."
Moreover, as often happens when Muslims attack Christians in Islamic nations, "Despite the [Christian] residents' cries for help" in Jifna, "the PA police did not intervene during the hours of mayhem. They have not arrested any suspects." Similarly, "no suspects were arrested" in the two church attacks.
Palestinian Christians, in short, are suffering from the same patterns of persecution — including church attacks, kidnappings and forced conversion — as their co-religionists in dozens of Muslim nations. The difference, however, is that the persecution of Palestinian Christians has "received no coverage in the Palestinian media." In fact, Cohen explains, "a full gag order was imposed in many cases":
"The only thing that interests the PA is that events of this kind not be leaked to the media. Fatah regularly exerts heavy pressure on Christians not to report the acts of violence and vandalism from which they frequently suffer, as such publicity could damage the PA's image as an actor capable of protecting the lives and property of the Christian minority under its rule. Even less does the PA want to be depicted as a radical entity that persecutes religious minorities. That image could have negative repercussions for the massive international, and particularly European, aid the PA receives."
Considered another way, the bread and butter of the PA and its supporters, media and others, seems to be to portray the Palestinians as victims of unjust aggression and discrimination from Israel. This narrative could be jeopardized if the international community learned that Palestinians themselves were persecuting fellow Palestinians — solely on account of religion. It might be hard to muster sympathy for a supposedly oppressed people when one realizes that they themselves are doing the oppressing of the minorities in their midst.
So sensitive to this potential difficulty, "PA officials exert pressure on local Christian to not report such incidents, which threaten to unmask the Palestinian Authority as yet another Middle East regime beholden to a radical Islamic ideology," Cohen writes in another report.
"Far more important to the Palestinian Authority than arresting those who assault Christian sites is keeping such incidents out of the mainstream media. And they are very successful in this regard. Indeed, only a handful of smaller local outlets bothered to report on these latest break-ins. The mainstream international media ignored them altogether."
Notably, a similar dynamic sometimes exists concerning Muslim refugees. Although West European politicians and media present them as persecuted and oppressed, in need of a welcoming hand, Muslim migrants themselves sometimes persecute and oppress Christian minorities among them — whether by terrorizing them in refugee camps, or drowning them in the Mediterranean.
The sad and simple fact, by all counts, is that Christianity is on the verge of disappearing in the place of its birth, including Bethlehem. As Justus Reid Weiner, a lawyer and scholar well-acquainted with the region, explains:
"The systematic persecution of Christian Arabs living in Palestinian areas is being met with nearly total silence by the international community, human rights activists, the media and NGOs... In a society where Arab Christians have no voice and no protection it is no surprise that they are leaving."
*Raymond Ibrahim, author of the new book, Sword and Scimitar, Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute and a Judith Rosen Friedman Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
© 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.

Analysis/Oman Attack: Iran Is the Immediate, but Unlikely, Suspect
تعليق من الهآرتس للمحليل السياسي زفي برئيل يتناول الإتهامات الفورية لإيران بضرب ناقلات النفط في خليج عمان وما رافق الإتهام من احتمالات أخرى مختلفة
Zvi Bar'el/Haaretz/June 14/2019
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/75786/75786/
U.S. officials rushed to point to Tehran, but somehow the world's leading intelligence services failed to discover who is actually behind the strike. And even if they knew, what could be done without risking all-out war?
A unnamed senior U.S. Defense Department official was quick to tell CBS that Iran was "apparently" behind the Thursday attack on two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman, followed by State Secretary Mike Pompeo who later told reported that it was his government's assessment. There's nothing new about that, but neither is it a decisive proof.
Who, then, struck the tankers? Whom does this strike serve and what can be done against such attacks?
In all previous attacks in the Gulf in recent weeks Iran was naturally taken to be the immediate suspect. After all, Iran had threatened that if it could now sell its oil in the Gulf, other countries would not be able to ship oil through it; Tehran threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, and in any case it's in the sights of the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel. But this explanation is too easy.
The Iranian regime is in the thrones of a major diplomatic struggle to persuade Europe and its allies, Russia and China, not to take the path of pulling out of the 2015 nuclear agreement. At the same time, Iran is sure that the United States is only looking for an excuse to attack it. Any violent initiative on Tehran's part could only make things worse and bring it close to a military conflict, which it must avoid.
Iran has announced it would scale back its commitments under the nuclear deal by expanding its low-level uranium enrichment and not transferring the remainder of its enriched uranium and heavy water to another country, as the agreement requires. The International Atomic Energy Agency's reports reveal that it has indeed stepped up enrichment, but not in a way that could support a military nuclear program.
It seems that alongside its diplomatic efforts, Iran prefers to threaten to harm the nuclear deal itself, responding to Washington with the same token, rather than escalate the situation to a military clash.
Other possible suspects are the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, who continue to pound Saudi targets with medium-range missiles, as was the case last week with strikes on the Abha and Jizan airports, near the Yemeni border, which wounded 26 people. The Houthis have also fired missiles at Riyadh and hit targets in the Gulf. In response, Saudi Arabia launched a massive missile strike on Houthi-controlled areas in northern Yemen.
The strike on the oil tankers may have been a response to the response, but if this is the case, it goes against Iran's policy, which seeks to neutralize any pretexts for a military clash in the Gulf. The question, therefore, is whether Iran has full control over all the actions the Houthis take, and whether the aid it gives them commits them fully to its policies, or whether they see assaults on Saudi targets as a separate, local battle, cut off from Iran's considerations.
The Houthis have claimed responsibility for some of their actions in Saudi territory in the past, and at times even took the trouble of explaining the reasons behind this assault or the other. But not this time.
Yemen also hosts large Al-Qaida cells and Islamic State outposts, with both groups having a running account with Saudi Arabia and apparently the capabilities to carry out strikes on vessels moving through the Gulf.
In the absence of confirmed and reliable information on the source of the fire, we may meanwhile discount the possibility of a Saudi or American provocation at which Iran has hinted, but such things have happened before. However, we may also wonder why some of the most sophisticated intelligence services in the world are having so much trouble discovering who actually carried out these attacks.
Thwarting such attacks with no precise intelligence is an almost impossible task, but even if the identity of those responsible for it is known, the question of how to respond to the threat would still arise.
If it turns out that Iran initiated or even carried out these attacks, American and Saudi military forces could attack its Revolutionary Guards' marine bases along the Gulf coast, block Iranian shipping in the Gulf and persuade European countries to withdraw from the nuclear deal, claiming that continuing relations with Iran would mean supporting terrorism in general, and maritime terrorism in particular.
The concern is that such a military response would lead Iran to escalate its own and openly strike American and Saudi targets in the name of self-defense and protecting its sovereignty. In that case, a large-scale war would be inevitable. But there's no certainty that U.S. President Donald Trump, who wants to extricate his forces from military involvement in the Middle East, truly seeks such a conflict, which could suck more and more American forces into this sensitive arena.
An escape route from this scenario would require intensive mediation efforts between Iran and the United States, but therein lies one major difficulty – finding an authoritative mediator that could pressure both parties. Russia or China are not suitable candidates, and ties between Washington and the European Union are acrimonious.
Supporters of the Houthi movement attend a rally to mark the 4th anniversary of the Saudi-led military intervention in Yemen's war, Sanaa, Yemen, March 26, 2019.
It seems that all sides would be satisfied if they could place responsibility for the attacks on the Houthis or other terror groups. That is not to say that the United States or Saudi Arabia have any magic solutions when it comes to the Houthis; far from it. The war in Yemen has been going on for five years now with no military resolution, and increased bombardment of concentrations of Houthi forces could only expand their efforts to show their strength. But the United States would pay none of the diplomatic or military price for assaults on the Houthis it would for a forceful violent response against Iran itself.
If sporadic, small-scale attacks raise such complex dilemmas, one can perhaps dream of an all-out war with Iran, but it is enough to look at the chaos in Iraq and Afghanistan to grow extremely cautious of the trajectory in which such dreams become a nightmare that lasts for decades.

Denmark's Elections
Judith Bergman/Gatestone Institute/June 14/ 2019
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14375/denmark-elections
A significant development in this election was that anti-immigration parties generally fared poorly.
"Many citizens wrongly think that the immigration issue is under control and that it can therefore safely be left to the Left. It is not under control... [B]y the year 2050, we will see a doubling of the Muslim population in Denmark... that would not be a problem if we had a solution for how to integrate them, but nowhere in Western Europe has a solution been found". — Kasper Støvring, author and commentator, Debatten-DR, June 6, 2019.
Another new development was that for the first time, according to a report in Jyllands Posten, Muslim voters were organized, in certain urban areas.... [A]n electoral group was set up, which, in co-operation with a mosque and various other associations, recommended that people vote for the two parties: the center-left Det Radikale Venstre and the far left Enhedslisten... Both parties have a pro-immigration stance. Det Radikale Venstre, for instance, wants to make it easier for refugees to gain permanent residence in Denmark.
Immigration policy will be one of the main challenges for the Social Democratic Party, as it attempts to form a government with the seats of Det Radikale Venstre and Enhedslisten, in addition to the Socialist People's Party.... the Social Democrats [wanted] the bulk of their policy focusing on how to reduce and control the influx of refugees and migrants, including the use of reception centers outside of Europe. In addition, their policy included making all stays for refugees in Denmark temporary, and extending border controls and reforming the Schengen cooperation so that individual countries decide when and how long they can control their own borders. Their policy also backs sending rejected asylum seekers home and tightening the laws in order to stop illegal migrants from working in Denmark.
In Denmark's general election on June 5, the Danes gave the center-left and far left parties on the political spectrum 91 seats in parliament, a majority out of the 179 available seats.
In Denmark's general election on June 5, the Danes gave the center-left and far left parties on the political spectrum -- the Social Democratic Party, Det Radikale Venstre (the Danish Social Liberal Party), Socialistisk Folkeparti (the Socialist People's Party), and Enhedslisten (the Red-Green Alliance) -- 91 seats in parliament, a majority out of the 179 available seats. In doing so, the Danes waved goodbye to the current liberal-conservative government. The largest party on the left, the Social Democratic Party with 48 seats, and led by Mette Frederiksen, is currently trying to form a government.
A significant development in this election was that anti-immigration parties generally fared poorly. Dansk Folkeparti, (the Danish People's Party), which had become the second-largest party in the 2015 elections, when it was the only party running on a strict anti-immigration platform and where it received 21% of the votes and 37 seats, was reduced to less than half, receiving only 8.7% of the votes and 16 seats. The new anti-Islamic, anti-immigration party, Stram Kurs, which campaigned on a platform of prohibiting Islam and deporting Muslims from Denmark, did not manage to cross the election threshold of 2%. It received only 1.8 % of the votes. Led by Rasmus Paludan, who became famous for demonstrating across Denmark -- where he frequently featured a "Koran stunt" in which he would either throw a Koran around, burn it or put bacon on it -- the party only managed to qualify to run in the elections a month before they took place. Finally, a new party on the right, Nye Borgerlige (the New Right) won four seats, with 2.4 % of the vote. The party ran on a platform that demanded that no more asylum seekers be allowed into the country, that foreigners must support themselves financially and that foreign criminals be deported after their first sentencing in court. The current Prime Minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, said he would not cooperate politically with either Rasmus Paludan or the New Right should they be elected to parliament.
Some Danish analysts, such as the author and commentator Kasper Støvring, estimated that Danes did not vote for the anti-immigration parties this time because, "Many citizens wrongly think that the immigration issue is under control and that it can therefore safely be left to the Left. It is not under control".
"Five years in a row," he added, "The crime rates have gone up among non-Western descendants; we have areas where the rule of law has de facto been suspended; we saw in the election campaign, that there are areas where you cannot gather and speak freely; when you go for a walk you nearly stumble on the concrete blocks [meant to protect terrorist targets] that remind us of the intrusive terror threat. These are very serious problems that do not go away... they will keep popping back because they have not been resolved... and by the year 2050 we will see a doubling of the Muslim population in Denmark... that would not be a problem if we had a solution for how to integrate them, but nowhere in Western Europe has a solution been found".
Another new development was that for the first time, according to a report in Jyllands Posten, Muslim voters were organized, in certain urban areas listed by the government as ghettos. In Gellerup, in western Aarhus, an electoral group was set up, which, in co-operation with a mosque and various other associations, recommended that people vote for the two parties: the center-left Det Radikale Venstre and the far left Enhedslisten. As a result, in Gellerup, Det Radikale Venstre went from receiving 5.1% of the vote in 2015, to 34.2% in 2019. The same trend could be seen in other ghetto-areas, such as Vollsmose, Tingbjerg and in Nørrebro, where Enhedslisten was also popular. Both parties have a pro-immigration stance. Det Radikale Venstre, for instance, wants to make it easier for refugees to gain permanent residence in Denmark. The parties gained 8.6% and 6.9% of the votes respectively, corresponding to 16 and 13 seats.
Immigration policy will be one of the main challenges for the Social Democratic Party, as it attempts to form a government with the seats of Det Radikale Venstre and Enhedslisten, in addition to the Socialist People's Party. In their election campaign, the Social Democrats made it clear that they wanted what they call a 'fair and realistic' immigration policy, with the bulk of their policy focusing on how to reduce and control the influx of refugees and migrants, including the use of reception centers outside of Europe. In addition, their policy included making all stays for refugees in Denmark temporary, and extending border controls and reforming the Schengen cooperation so that individual countries decide when and how long they can control their own borders. Their policy also backs sending rejected asylum seekers home and tightening the laws in order to stop illegal migrants from working in Denmark. Earlier this year, the Social Democrats voted for the liberal-conservative government's stricter immigration policies.
That stance might make it difficult for the Social Democrats to form a government with Det Radikale Venstre, which has said that it wants to ease Denmark's current policies on immigration. Instead of focusing on sending migrants and refugees home, Det Radikale Venstre wishes to focus on better integration. Before the elections, the leader of the Social Democrats, Mette Frederiksen, said that if she won, "The tight immigration policy, which is set by a broad majority in the Folketing [the Danish parliament], is fixed... there will be no easing of the immigration policy and there is no party or party that can make an ultimatum on this". It now remains to be seen whether Frederiksen will be able to keep her word and still form a government.
*Judith Bergman, a columnist, lawyer and political analyst, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at 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.

Refugees in Turkey: Mistreated by Ankara, Ignored by the UN
Sirwan Mansouri//Gatestone Institute/June 14/ 2019
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14368/refugees-turkey-unhcr
Turkey, which is located between the Middle East and Europe, was one of the first countries to establish a UNHCR regional office in 1960, and was given economic incentives to do so. Every year after that, the Turkish government received a large budget with which to provide aid to refugees.
The UNHCR, the organization that is supposed to advocate for the rights of refugees, has done the opposite. It has placed their care in the hands of an indifferent and hostile Turkey, which they leave to its own terrible devices.
Perhaps the UN has washed its hands of the misery of refugees in Turkey -- who have become virtual slaves -- but the rest of the international community must hold Ankara accountable for its inexcusable treatment of people who escaped danger in their countries of origin, only to be abused by the authorities that vowed -- and took money -- to protect and resettle them.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the organization that is supposed to advocate for the rights of refugees, has done the opposite. It has placed their care in the hands of an indifferent and hostile Turkey, which they leave to its own terrible devices.
Over the past half century, the Geneva-based United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has created and managed mechanisms to protect people whose lives are in danger at the hands of repressive regimes by providing them with political asylum in other countries. The war-torn Middle East has been home to the highest number of such asylum-seekers.
Turkey, which is located between the Middle East and Europe, was one of the first countries to establish a UNHCR regional office in 1960, and was given economic incentives to do so. Every year after that, the Turkish government received a large budget with which to provide aid to refugees.
With an increase in cuts to UN refugee budgets, Turkey was able to provide even less money to asylum-seekers under its auspices. When the Syrian Civil War began in 2011, a huge number of refugees flowed into Turkey from Syria and Iraq. Initially, Turkey seems to have believed that this situation could be financially lucrative, as the UN would have to increase its refugee budget for Ankara. This is not what happened, however. In fact, UN assistance to Turkish mediators, such as the Human Resources Development Fund (UNHCR) and the Association for Solidarity with Asylum Seekers and Migrants (SGDD-ASAM), was even severely reduced, and in 2018, it was cut off completely.
This has led Ankara to provide even less help than before to those refugees who arrived in Turkey prior to the war in Syria. Furthermore, many of the UNHCR quotas for the resettlement of refugees in third countries (such as in Europe), which formerly belonged to Iranians, Afghans and Iraqis, were allocated to Syrians.
Given that Turkey bars refugees from the labor market, many refugees -- including those with university degrees, have no choice but to work in menial jobs. To make matters worse, many employers take advantage of these refugees by not paying them.
Not permitted to work in the first place, these refugees do not complain to authorities, for fear of being fined or fired. The same fear of complaining goes for female refugees, who are often sexually abused by their Turkish employers.
Living in poverty and despair -- and ignored by the Turkish government and the UNHCR -- these refugees often engage in anti-social behavior, including drug addiction, theft, and sex-trafficking. Many have sold their organs. Turkish immigration offices and police, instead of helping these refugees, instill fear in them, thereby adding to their frustration.
The UNHCR, the organization that is supposed to advocate for the rights of refugees, has done the opposite. It has placed their care in the hands of an indifferent and hostile Turkey, which they leave to its own terrible devices.
The heaviest blow to non-Syrian refugees in Turkey was dealt by the UNHCR on September 9, 2018, when it announced that its "registration activities for applicants for international protection in Turkey [would end the following day], as part of the transition of refugee status determination responsibility to the Turkish Directorate General for Migration Management (DGMM)."
The UN, in other words, has delegated all registration of asylum-seekers in Turkey to Turkish immigration authorities.
Perhaps the UN has washed its hands of the misery of refugees in Turkey -- who have become virtual slaves -- but the rest of the international community must hold Ankara accountable for its inexcusable treatment of people who escaped danger in their countries of origin, only to be abused by the authorities that vowed -- and took money -- to protect and resettle them.
*Sirwan Mansouri is an Iranian Kurdish journalist based in the Middle East.
© 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.

What to Expect from the U.S.-Russia Meeting in Jerusalem
Anna Borshchevskaya/ The Washington Institute/June 14/2019
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/75790/%d9%85%d8%a7-%d9%8a%d9%85%d9%83%d9%86-%d8%aa%d9%88%d9%82%d8%b9%d9%87-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%ac%d8%aa%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%b9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a3%d9%85%d8%b1%d9%8a%d9%83%d9%8a-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b1/
Ultimately, no deal is better than a bad deal, and Moscow’s track record in Syria suggests it is both unable and unwilling to keep Iran out.
This month, Jerusalem will host a meeting between U.S. national security advisor John Bolton, Russian Security Council secretary Nikolai Patrushev, and Israeli national security advisor Meir Ben-Shabbat. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu reportedly suggested the idea when he visited President Vladimir Putin in Moscow this February, later noting, “I proposed to Trump and Putin to form a U.S.-Russia-Israel trilateral committee...to discuss the security situation in the Middle East and both of them agreed. This is unprecedented.” Similarly, the White House stated that the meeting’s purpose is “to discuss regional security issues.”
Analysts expect the talks to focus on Syria and Iran. Kremlin-controlled press outlets such as RIA Novosti have made wild claims that Washington and Israel intend to recognize dictator Bashar al-Assad’s legitimacy and lift sanctions in exchange for Moscow deterring Iranian influence in Syria. Although U.S. envoy James Jeffrey has reportedly denied that such concessions are on the table, Putin is likely looking for a deal along those lines. Even if that questionable goal falls through, he no doubt believes that his legitimacy—and therefore his regional leverage—will be enhanced simply by attending the meeting.
RUSSIA’S UNTRUSTWORTHY RECORD IN SYRIA
The string of broken ceasefires that have occurred on Russia’s watch thus far instill little confidence that Moscow will honor new agreements in Syria. According to American officials involved in past discussions toward a cessation of hostilities, the Russians are unwilling and unable to make Assad comply on that front.
During a November 2015 meeting in New York, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Secretary of State John Kerry reached an agreement on principles previously put forth in Vienna, including a cessation of hostilities and a timetable for political transition in Syria. A month later, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 2254 based on the Vienna principles. The Assad regime promptly violated all terms. When Damascus and Moscow finally implemented a ceasefire in February 2016, it collapsed within four months.
Similarly, after Russia and rebel forces in south Syria agreed to a ceasefire in July 2018, Moscow promised that Iran would withdraw its forces and proxies at least eighty-five kilometers away from Israel’s border. Yet many Iran-allied militia elements remained near the frontier, reportedly switching into Syrian military uniforms in an apparent effort to avoid Israeli airstrikes. Moreover, the agreement was unclear on whether any Iranian “advisors” would be compelled to leave. The resultant withdrawal was superficial at best and ultimately failed to diminish Iran’s presence—though it succeeded in making Moscow look as if it had tried.
If American officials have sometimes been naive about Russia’s utility in getting Iran out of Syria, certain Israeli officials may have bought into the illusion completely. Some privately claim that Putin has a “soft spot” for Israel, noting that they felt reassured when Moscow gave Israeli forces freedom of action to strike Iran-linked targets inside Syria. Even after the southern ceasefire failed to meet any of Israel’s security interests, Netanyahu announced to his cabinet this March, “President Putin and I also agreed on a common goal—the withdrawal of foreign forces that arrived in Syria after the outbreak of the civil war.”
NO DECISIVE SWAY OVER IRAN
From the start, Russia’s Syria strategy has been predicated on partnership with Iran; indeed, Moscow avoided a quagmire there in part because it could rely on Tehran’s proxies to do the heavy lifting. Over time, the war brought the partnership to unprecedented heights, with chief Iranian proxy Hezbollah learning directly from the Russian military and allegedly receiving light arms from Moscow through Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Qasem Soleimani. Hezbollah members also fought alongside Russian forces occasionally; other Shia militias did the same, as did IRGC personnel. Iran’s militias have even reportedly used Russian flags to avoid Israeli airstrikes, according to sources in Russia, Israel, and the Syrian opposition.
Since Moscow first launched its Syria intervention, Netanyahu has repeatedly and publicly told Putin that Israel has deep security concerns about Iranian expansion. Despite acknowledging these concerns, however, Putin has remained circumspect about actually doing anything to address them, at least in public. Russian media typically describe these conversations in neutral tones, though a 2017 column in the business daily Kommersant tellingly suggested that the most Putin could offer Netanyahu was “psychotherapeutic help”—that is, listening intently to his Syria concerns without taking action. Similarly, Lavrov and other officials have repeatedly emphasized that Iran is an independent actor, and that Russia alone cannot force it out of Syria.
Therefore, once the Jerusalem meeting was announced, it came as no surprise when Russian Middle East experts expressed doubts that Moscow could budge Iran. For example, Alexander Shumilin observed that Tehran will not accept any Russian attempts to roll back its influence because doing so would damage the Islamic Republic’s image, undermine its goals, and waste the copious blood and treasure it has spent in Syria. Vladimir Sazhin argued that Moscow lacked “any mechanisms that would force Tehran to change its policy in Syria.”
In short, even if Moscow wanted to push Iran out, it seems unable to do so. Diplomacy alone would not do the trick, and using military force is unfeasible. Russia may rule Syria’s skies, but Iran holds a stronger position on the ground. Putin has been careful about not getting too bogged down there, and it is difficult to imagine he would use his military to dismantle Iranian and Hezbollah weapons infrastructure.
Nor it is clear that Moscow can limit the forces Tehran deploys in Syria. A June 2018 incident is illustrative: Russia tried to get Hezbollah to leave a checkpoint in al-Qusayr and move closer to the Lebanon border, but Russian forces had to retreat instead, and Hezbollah soon fortified its presence. Likewise, the August 2018 deployment of Russian military police to the Golan Heights did not stop Hezbollah and other Iranian militias from encroaching there.
CONCLUSION
The Russia-Iran relationship has always been complex, and Tehran’s fear that Moscow might throw it under the bus remains in the background of their Syria partnership. These tensions have increased recently; in a speech earlier this month, for example, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah did not mention Russia at all, a departure from his usual practice of pronouncing Moscow an ally.
Yet it is important not to read too much into such reports or see them as signs of an upcoming split. Above all, Moscow does not want Iran to turn pro-Western, and Tehran shares the Kremlin’s broad strategic goal of reducing American influence in the region. Their specific objectives and tactics have differed at times, but they never fundamentally stood in opposition to each other.
This strategic alignment—coupled with the fact that the White House has been vague about its own goals for the Jerusalem meeting—makes it unclear what concrete results might emerge from the summit. Russia’s previous statements that it cannot get Iran out “alone” open the door for suggestions on how it could do so with outside help. Yet Moscow’s track record in Syria raises serious doubts about whether it genuinely wants to pressure Tehran and its proxies.
Accordingly, U.S. and Israeli officials should not simply take Moscow at its word in Jerusalem, nor have illusions about what it can realistically deliver. It is too early to tell what a “good deal” with Russia might look like, but any agreement reached must be based on verifiable assurances. Moreover, lifting sanctions against Russia and recognizing Assad as Syria’s legitimate leader should remain off the table. No agreement is better than a bad deal that boosts Moscow’s prestige at the expense of regional security—prestige that is already enhanced by holding this meeting in the first place.
*Anna Borshchevskaya is a senior fellow at The Washington Institute and coauthor of its recent study “Russia’s Arabic Propaganda: What It Is, Why It Matters.”

CAIR Settles Claim It Preyed on Fellow Muslims
Oren Litwin/The Daily Wire/June 14/2019
https://www.meforum.org/58725/cair-preys-on-muslims
Originally published under the title "CAIR Victimizes Fellow Muslims."
On June 4th, a long-running lawsuit against the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was finally brought to a close. After 11 long years of fighting charges of fraud and conspiracy with every trick in the book, CAIR was forced to settle after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the case must be brought to open trial. CAIR faced the risk of being socked with over a million dollars in attorney costs if it had lost. But worse for CAIR was the certainty of having its dirty laundry openly aired in court.
The case itself was shocking. In 2006, the Virginia chapter of CAIR (now defunct) hired a man named Morris Days as an lawyer, to serve local Muslims in need of legal advice. However, Days was not actually a lawyer and had never been to law school; worse, he extorted money from his Muslim clients for the supposedly pro-bono legal advice he was supposed to give them, and then proceeded to let their cases languish without action. Hundreds of Muslims were harmed; at least one of Days's clients was deported from the United States due to his incompetence.
Hundreds of Muslims were harmed by Days' incompetence.
So far, the falsehoods by Days would be a simple case of fraud perpetrated on both the unfortunate clients and on CAIR-VA, his employer. But it gets worse. The now-settled lawsuit, filed in December 2008 by the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) and backed by the support of the Middle East Forum, alleged that CAIR-VA found out about Days's extortion at least by November 2007 and his lack of a law license by March 2008—and then worked overtime to cover up his crimes against fellow Muslims, refusing to notify law enforcement and offering a small handful of the victims money in exchange for their silence.
CAIR refused to notify law enforcement about Days and offered a small handful of victims money in exchange for their silence.
The terms of the settlement are confidential, as is typical. However, the lead plaintiff's attorney, David Yerushalmi, stated: "Our clients are extremely happy with the settlement and, in fact, they are so happy, they have authorized me to declare publicly that they have no problem disclosing all of the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement if CAIR agrees. It is unlikely CAIR would agree, of course, because it is unlikely CAIR wants the public to learn the terms of the settlement."
So far, CAIR has not responded.
Which is not a surprise. Why would CAIR want to disclose details about how it victimized fellow Muslims who had come to its offices seeking help? Why would CAIR want people to know that CAIR valued its own reputation more than it valued justice for its defrauded community? Why would CAIR want people to read about just how badly its offices were run, so that a fake lawyer could fraudulently engage in shoddy law and extortion for nearly two years without interference? And why would it want people to learn about its craven refusal to accept responsibility?
CAIR brushes aside allegations of extremism by claiming it works for the welfare of all American Muslims.
Of course, people already knew about the lawsuit's allegations from court filings. Could it be that what the AFLC found during the discovery phase was even worse? If so, what kind of criminal frauds could the AFLC have uncovered?
We may never know. But CAIR could settle the question by taking up Mr. Yerushalmi's offer, and disclosing the terms of the settlement. After all, how bad could it possibly be?
CAIR brushes aside the many allegations of its extremism by claiming that it works for the welfare of all American Muslims. This lawsuit shows how hollow that claim is. When push came to shove, it appears that CAIR chose to aid and abet fraud and victimize needy Muslims rather than upholding justice and doing the right thing.
*Oren Litwin is the associate director of the Islamism in Politics project of the Middle East Forum.

Iran threatened to block Hormuz. Will we now take it seriously?
Baria Alamuddin/Arab News/June 14/ 2019
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in Tehran on June 13, hoping to ease tensions between Iran and the US. When Abe offered to convey an Iranian reply to a message from President Trump, Khamenei declined. Indeed, it appears that Khamenei’s reply at that exact moment was already being sent in the form of twin attacks against commercial tankers in the Gulf. A Norwegian-owned ship loaded with petrochemicals erupted into flames. The other targeted ship was carrying Japanese cargo (methanol) in transit to Singapore. Was this a calculated snub to Abe’s peace-making efforts?
Although US and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) officials were quick to identify Iran as the likely culprit, it is right to allow a full investigation before definitively apportioning blame. However, experts agree that four previous attacks against oil tankers last month had Iranian fingerprints, and there is only one serious suspect in the frame.
Iran has repeatedly threatened to obstruct commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Just days ago, in a fire-breathing speech, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah threatened US forces with “annihilation” and proclaimed that “the entire region will burn ... a barrel of oil will be $200 or $300.”
Nasrallah’s prediction was uncannily accurate, with oil prices rocketing within minutes of the tanker attacks. Even Mohammed Javad Zarif, Iran’s usually mild-mannered foreign minister, recently threatened that the US “cannot expect to stay safe.”
How, then, can these cheap mobsters feign outrage about fingers pointing at them when things start blowing up?
Tehran knows that its disintegrating economy cannot withstand a possible six more years of Trump. The regime appears to have concluded that offense is the best form of defense and is consequently moving toward a war-footing. Qassem Soleimani, the Quds Force commander, last month instructed proxies in Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen to prepare to target Western assets.
The Gulf of Oman attacks came the day after Iranian missiles hit a crowded arrivals hall at Abha airport, in Saudi Arabia’s southwest, causing dozens of casualties. The moderate climate of this attractive region makes it a favored summer destination for Saudi and Gulf holidaymakers. The airport was thus at its busiest. A Houthi spokesman claiming responsibility for the Abha strikes threatened to target all Saudi airports. Indeed, missiles were fired at Riyadh airport in 2017.
Such provocations are part of attempts to embroil Middle Eastern states in the conflict using Iran’s proxy armies across the region. The prospects for Iraqi stability would be bleak, indeed. There has been a recent spike in unrest in Qatif, and it is only a matter of time before Tehran stirs the pot again in Bahrain’s villages. How long before Israel joins the fray, bringing down hell and destruction on Lebanon and southwestern Syria?
The Iranian regime appears to have concluded that offense is the best form of defense and is consequently moving toward a war-footing.
Deterrence only works when it is shown to be serious. The US administration has played its hand badly, gaining a reputation for barking very loudly, but failing to bite. Khamenei was likely reassured by Trump plaintively declaring that he does not want conflict. Given that soaring oil prices could torpedo a teetering world economy, and with the US leader staking his 2020 reelection prospects on economic growth, the Gulf attacks seem calculated by Khamenei to hit Trump where it hurts. Furthermore, the attacks represent a blunt message to the world: “We can still hurt you.”
Maritime experts point out that it is impossible to fully protect civilian shipping. Hundreds of oil tankers and commercial ships are continually moving through the Hormuz chokepoint. The repeated nature of these attacks means that oil prices may remain elevated. Shipping and insurance costs could soar, with severe knock-on effects for the global economy, particularly since the afflicted companies have signaled that they will suspend Gulf operations and other corporations may follow. As was the case when Iran mined Gulf waters during the 1980s, there are also dangerous environmental consequences for fish stocks and complex ecosystems when huge tankers loaded with petroleum products are torpedoed.
Enough of Iran’s good-cop-bad-cop games: Seducing the Europeans with smiling, but impotent, Zarif and Rouhani, while Khamenei and Soleimani implement a strategy infinitely more aggressive than anything Khomeini ever dreamed up. Russia is urging negotiations to calm tensions, yet it was Moscow that opened a Pandora’s box by aiding Tehran’s expansion in Syria and elsewhere. What does Putin care that there were Russian nationals on the targeted ships?
This terrorist regime and its proxy figureheads have repeatedly and explicitly warned us that they intend to engulf the region in flames and torch the global economy. Why do we always fail to take Iran at its word? When tensions flared in May, European observers queued up to blame the Trump administration and portray this as a failure of US policy. These latest unprovoked attacks suggest that the escalation is fueled from one side only. World leaders must not sit back and wait to see what action (if any) Trump will take. This calls for a unified response by entities such as NATO, particularly as member states including Norway are involved.
Global levels of oil demand in the short term tend to be highly inelastic, meaning that relatively modest shocks in available supply can have a drastic impact on prices. With one-fifth of the world’s oil flowing through the Strait of Hormuz, Iran believes that it can hold the word’s economy to ransom and send oil prices skyrocketing.This crisis has gone way beyond previous bouts of macho posturing and saber-rattling between Tehran and Washington.
World leaders generally lack the stomach for decisive action in order to reestablish an effective containment strategy against Iran, but they may quickly discover that they have little choice when the alternatives are global economic meltdown or a prolonged and destructive regional war.
*Baria Alamuddin is an award-winning journalist and broadcaster in the Middle East and the UK. She is editor of the Media Services Syndicate and has interviewed numerous heads of state.

Turkey slides off the American strategic map
Dr. John C. Hulsman/Arab News/June 14/ 2019
While Donald Trump’s Jacksonian beliefs make him the current global disruptor-in-chief, in terms of America’s Middle East policy they paradoxically drag him back toward Washington’s traditional post-1979 stance in the region.
In complete contradiction to his nemesis Barack Obama, Trump’s White House has eschewed the former president’s revisionist strategy. Whereas Obama wanted to bring Iran in from the cold in order for the US to do less in the Middle East — the motivation for his highly contentious Iranian nuclear deal — to a man the Trump team has seen this shift as dangerous, allowing Tehran to be unfettered in its pursuit of greater regional power at the expense of the US and its allies.
Instead, Republicans of all hues have come to see the nuclear deal as strategic whistling past the graveyard of the worst sort, allowing an ostracized Iran back into the community of nations. It permitted Tehran to wait out the world, leading in the next generation to an economically far healthier Iran crossing the nuclear threshold, all without arousing international condemnation.
Trump’s more traditionalist policy has seen the majority of Middle Eastern powers revert to form: Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Israel remain close allies, even as Iran has reassumed its traditional role of enemy. But all is not as it was before Obama’s ill-fated foray into revisionism.
The fifth of the regional powers, pivotal Turkey, is no longer a US ally in the conventional sense of the term. Be it the issue of the S-400 controversy, the Syrian Kurds, drilling for natural gas off the coast of Cyprus, re-running municipal elections in Istanbul, or the Erdogan government’s increasingly anti-Western, neo-Ottoman foreign policy, the two former allies finds themselves increasingly at loggerheads.
As controversy has raged this past month over Ankara’s intended acquisition of the Russian-made S-400 missile defense system, this is merely the latest in a series of contentious issues over the past two years that makes it clear the US-Turkish relationship is not what it once was.
For Washington, Turkey has a binary choice: It can either have the S-400 or the F-35, but not both.
The story of the S-400 anti-aircraft system is about far more than armaments; it amounts to a dramatic strategic schism between Washington and Ankara. For, in addition to the S-400 system designed by the Kremlin, the Erdogan government had already committed to buying 100 US-made F-35 fighter aircraft — what amounts to the Rolls-Royce of aviation. With the delivery of the F-35s pending, Ankara has gone ahead with the S-400 purchase, with the anti-aircraft system scheduled for delivery next month, with it becoming operational in September of this year.
It is not too much to say that these dual purchases have greatly alarmed the whole of the American defense establishment. First, the US worries that Russian S-400 maintenance technicians will, over time, have access to sensitive F-35 information.
Second, Turkish adoption of a Russian-made anti-aircraft missile defense system makes a key portion of Turkey’s defense not interoperable with its other NATO allies and their equipment, creating a real barrier to the joint NATO training exercises that amount to the lifeblood of the alliance.
Third, the S-400 is a learning system, meaning that its prolonged exposure to F-35 radar systems could give the Russians the necessary data to negate the F-35’s vital stealth properties, which make it such a formidable aircraft in the first place. For Washington, Turkey has a binary choice: It can either have the S-400 or the F-35, but not both.
Reacting to what amounts to an obvious breach in the strategic partnership between the two countries, America has pursued a carrot and stick policy of leveraging the obstinate Recep Tayyip Erdogan to change his mind. In terms of letting him down easy, Washington has offered its own Patriot missile defense system as an alternative to the S-400. Erdogan has repeatedly rejected this out of hand, spurning the deal as it fails to include provisions for technology transfers to Ankara.
In terms of sticks, in August 2018, the US Senate passed (and the president signed) two bills blocking delivery of the F-35 aircraft to Turkey until it is successfully certified that Ankara will not accept delivery of the S-400 system. The Turkish president, believing Trump to be more malleable over Turkish relations than his advisers clustered in the Pentagon, has called America’s bluff, moving ahead toward a major strategic rift by refusing to cancel the S-400 order, confident that the US president will blink. So Turkish-America relations will now be predicated on what amounts to a game of high-stakes poker.
Given the extremely fragile state of the Turkish economy, any American sanctions for following through with the S-400 order could have dire economic consequences for a country that could slide into recession.
But far greater damage lies beneath the waterline. Turkey’s very Western-leaning orientation, ingrained in the Turkish elite since the days of Kemal Ataturk, will have definitively come to an end. The S-400 controversy, if not adroitly managed, could well amount to the straw that breaks the camel’s back of the once-central US-Turkish alliance.
*Dr. John C. Hulsman is the president and managing partner of John C. Hulsman Enterprises, a prominent global political risk consulting firm. He is also senior columnist for City AM, the newspaper of the City of London. He can be contacted via chartwellspeakers.com.