English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For May 21/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.may21.20.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
‘Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 16/15-18:”‘Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation. The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: by using my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.’

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on May 20-21/2020
Seven new cases recorded in Lebanon
Aoun Tells Kubis Lebanon Keen on Calm on Southern Border
Diab to Mark 100 Days Since Govt. Confidence Vote
Ibrahim Meets Berri, Promises Solution for Illegal Border Crossings
Jumblat: There's a U.S.-Iran War in Lebanon, Sanctions Won't Weaken Hizbullah
Nasrallah: We are Closer than Ever to Liberation of Jerusalem
20 Years after Withdrawal, Israel, Hizbullah 'Brace' for War
Army Arrests Two Sudanese who Crossed into Israel, 4 Others
“Hezbollah Interests Prevented Me from Closing the Borders… And Frangieh is Right” Said Hariri Regarding Smuggling Scandals.
US arrests two men wanted by Japan over former Nissan boss Carlos Ghosn’s escape
Army arrests soldiers who assaulted ER doctor
As the poor go hungry, more Lebanese take to the streets
Hezbollah is smuggling in broad daylight as a political strategy – it won’t work/Makram Rabah/May 20/ 2020
Lebanon has only one hope to escape from total collapse - the IMF/Michael Young/The National/May 20/2020
Lebanon’s Interwoven Fantasy Worlds All Lead to War With Israel…How much should America pay to maintain the fraying fabric?/Tony Badran/The Tablet Magazine/May 20/2020
Unpaid Foreign Domestic Workers Stranded in Crisis-Hit Lebanon

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on May 20-21/2020
Researchers discover antibody that can potentially block, ‘neutralize’ coronavirus
Iraq announces arrest of possible successor to ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi
International community reprimands Israel’s annexation plans
USA Treasury Targets Procurement Networks Supporting Iran’s Missile Proliferation Programs
Venezuelans clamor for gasoline as Washington weighs response to Iran fuel shipment
Syria's warring parties agree to Geneva talks: U.N. envoy
Factions react as Rajoub says PLO decision to end Israel, US agreements ‘strategic’
Dr. Moncef Slaoui: White House’s Arab American ‘coronavirus vaccine czar’
Trump Blames Chinese 'Incompetence' for 'Mass Worldwide Killing'
Greece to Restart Tourism June 15, International Flights July 1

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on May 20-21/2020
Fears for well-being of French-Iranian academic jailed in Iran/Randa Takieddine/Arab News/May 20/2020
The Pentagon Tries to Pivot out of the Middle East—Again/John Hannah and Bradley Bowman/FDD/May 20/2020
COVID-19 Makes the Reinvigoration of American Manufacturing a National-Security Concern/Varsha Koduvayur and Greg Everett/National Review/May 20/2020
Did Pompeo’s Visit Shift the Annexation Debate in Israel and Washington?/David Makovsky/The Washington Institute/May 20/2020
Annexation delay can become an opportunity/Alistair Burt/Arab News/May 20, 2020
Why Italy is losing faith in the EU/Ranvir S. Nayar/Arab News/May 20, 2020
Israel unlikely to go ahead with annexation plan/Daoud Kuttab/Arab News/May 20, 2020

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on May 20-21/2020
Seven new cases recorded in Lebanon
Annahar/May 20/ 2020
The number of testing at the Rafiq Hariri International Airport has increased to 290, with the overall testing increasing to 1643 tests.
BEIRUT: The Ministry of Public Health announced Wednesday, May 20, seven new coronavirus cases raising the total number of cases to 961, where 684 cases are active and four are critical.
The cases were recorded as four local cases and three cases carried by returning citizens. The number of testing at the Rafiq Hariri International Airport has increased to 290, with the overall testing increasing to 1643 tests.
Beirut currently holds the largest number of cases with 162 confirmed cases, followed by El Meten district which registered 158 confirmed cases. Only 30% of the cases are travel-related while 53% of cases are due to contact with confirmed cases.

Aoun Tells Kubis Lebanon Keen on Calm on Southern Border
Naharnet/May 20/2020
President Michel Aoun on Wednesday told U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Jan Kubis that Lebanon is keen on calm on its southern border with Israel. “Lebanon, which understands the importance of preserving calm at the Blue Line on the southern Lebanese border, considers the continued aerial and territorial Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701,” Aoun told Kubis during a meeting at the Baabda Palace. “Lebanon is keen on preserving calm on the southern border through cooperation between the army and UNIFIL forces,” the president added.
Turning to the economic crisis, Aoun told the U.N. official that the massive Syrian refugee influx and the halt of exportation through Syria have burdened Lebanon with heavy economic losses estimated at $43 billion, in addition to other indirect losses.“International aid must be at the level of the damage that Lebanon has sustained since the eruption of the Syrian war,” the president noted.

Diab to Mark 100 Days Since Govt. Confidence Vote
Naharnet/May 20/2020
Prime Minister Hassan Diab will address the Lebanese on Thursday marking 100 days since his government gained the Parliament’s confidence, al-Joumhouria daily reported on Wednesday. The PM will deliver his speech on Thursday after a Cabinet meeting to be held at the Grand Serail.
The daily said that Diab has asked his ministers to prepare a report detailing the achievements they made each at his respective ministry during the 100 day time period.The reports will be presented at the Cabinet meeting first before Diab delivers his speech.

Ibrahim Meets Berri, Promises Solution for Illegal Border Crossings
Naharnet/May 20/2020
General Security chief Maj. Gen. Abbas Ibrahim held talks Wednesday with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri in Ain el-Tineh. “Of course I briefed Mr. Speaker Nabih Berri on the atmosphere of my visit to Syria and it is normal that the issue of smuggling and combating it were present in this meeting,” Ibrahim told reporters after the talks. Asked about the possibility of closing illegal border crossings through which smuggling operations are taking place, Ibrahim said: “A solution will certainly be found and soon there will be initiatives in this regard.” The General Security chief had visited Syria on Tuesday.
LBCI television said Ibrahim discussed a host of files, including smuggling, illegal border crossings and means to control the movement of individuals between the two countries amid the coronavirus crisis.
The issue of cross-border smuggling has stirred controversy in Lebanon in recent days and the Lebanese Higher Defense Council has agreed on a series of measures aimed at curbing it. Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah for his part said that ending smuggling requires cooperation between the governments and armies of the two countries.

Jumblat: There's a U.S.-Iran War in Lebanon, Sanctions Won't Weaken Hizbullah
Naharnet/May 20/2020
Progressive Socialist Party chief Walid Jumblat suggested Wednesday that there is an "economic war" between the United States and Iran on "Lebanese soil."Speaking in an English-language interview with the journalist Raghida Dergham, Jumblat revealed that he had recently warned the U.S. administration about the impact of such a war on Lebanon. He said he told Brookings Institute fellow and ex-U.S. ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman in a phone call that U.S. sanctions will not "weaken Hizbullah.""If you think that you can weaken Hizbullah by imposing sanctions on Lebanon, Hizbullah will not be weakened. We as Lebanese (will be weakened) as collateral damage," Jumblat reminisced telling Feltman.

Nasrallah: We are Closer than Ever to Liberation of Jerusalem
Naharnet/May 20/2020
Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on Wednesday announced that the “liberation of Jerusalem” is nearing.
“Today in the year 2020, and despite all the international and regional transformations and all the storms, earthquakes and sedition that have stricken our region, and due to the faith, resilience, patience, honesty, loyalty and communication among the nations and forces of the axis of resistance in our Arab and Islamic world, we find ourselves closer than ever to Jerusalem and to, God willing, its liberation,” said Nasrallah in a televised address marking Quds Day. Hizbullah's regional backer Iran does not recognize Israel and has marked Quds Day since the start of its 1979 Islamic revolution. Al-Quds is a historic Arabic name for Jerusalem, and Iran says the day is an occasion to express support for the Palestinians and emphasize the importance of Jerusalem for Muslims. “The real scene upon which any interpretation, vision or evaluation of the future must be based is the firmness, resilience, rise and growth of the resistance forces -- be them governments, nations, factions, movements, peoples or elites -- in Palestine, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon, and across our Arab and Islamic world,” Nasrallah added. “The real scene is being reflected by the statements and stances of the Zionist officials, who are scared and terrified by the victories of the axis of resistance and are stunned and disappointed by the defeat of their allies and America's allies on several fronts and in several wars and confrontations in our region,” Hizbullah's leader went on to say. He also noted that Israeli officials “are clearly expressing their extreme concern over the growth of the resistance's capabilities as to quantity, quality, manpower, armament, technical expertise, morale and every other aspect.”“We in Hizbullah, in the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon, stress our firm commitment to this (Palestinian) cause and pledge that we will carry on this path, alongside our patient, aggrieved, besieged and mujahid Palestinian people,” Nasrallah added. He pointed out that “the sacrifices and patience of the mujahideen and resistance fighters and our peoples, men, women, youngsters and elders will change all equations.”Recalling the slain commander of Iran's Quds Force, Qasem Soleimani, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Iraq earlier this year, Nasrallah pledged to honor him through “continuing this path, exerting every effort, removing every obstacle, closing ranks, uniting, showing solidarity, preparing all circumstances and paving the way for the day, which will certainly come, in which we will all pray in Jerusalem.”“Al-Aqsa Mosque will be liberated by the arms and blood of our nation's loyal sons,” he said.

20 Years after Withdrawal, Israel, Hizbullah 'Brace' for War
Associated Press/Naharnet/May 20/2020
Twenty years after Hizbullah pushed Israel's last troops from southern Lebanon, both sides are gearing up for a possible war that neither seems to want. Israeli troops are striking Hizbullah targets in neighboring Syria and drilling for what could be an invasion of Lebanon. Hizbullah is beefing up its own forces and threatening to invade Israel. The bitter enemies routinely exchange warnings and threats.
"We are preparing seriously for the next war. We're not taking any shortcuts because we understand we have to be extremely strong to defeat the enemy," said Col. Israel Friedler, an Israeli commander who has been overseeing a weeks-long exercise simulating war with Hizbullah at a base in northern Israel.
Hizbullah emerged as a ragtag guerrilla group in the 1980s, funded by Iran to battle Israeli troops occupying southern Lebanon. A protracted guerrilla war, characterized by roadside bombs and sniper attacks, eventually forced Israel to withdraw in May 2000. With the exception of an inconclusive, monthlong war in 2006, the volatile frontier has largely remained calm. Since then, Hizbullah has evolved into the most powerful military and political entity in Lebanon. The party and its allies dominate Lebanon's parliament and are the main power behind Prime Minister Hassan Diab's government.
"Domestically, Hizbullah has emerged to become the preponderant force in Lebanon," said Hilal Khashan, a political science professor at the American University in Beirut. But regionally, he said, "the position of Hizbullah is precarious" due to Israeli pressure, domestic turmoil and problems for its Iranian benefactors.The group can ill afford another massive clash with Israel. The Lebanese economy is in shambles, around half the population is now estimated to live in poverty — including in Hizbullah strongholds — and the group's finances are suffering because of U.S. sanctions imposed on it and Iran. The group also suffered heavy losses in the Syrian civil war, losing some 2,000 fighters while battling alongside the forces of Syria's President Bashar Assad. Once seen as a liberation movement, Hizbullah is now seen by many in Lebanon and the region as an Iranian pawn.
Qassim Qassir, an expert on Hizbullah, says the group has no interest in going to war but has been preparing for battle for a long time. "The battle will not be a battle of missiles only," he said, a reference that Hizbullah might try to invade parts of northern Israel.
In a region filled with adversaries, Israel considers Hizbullah to be its toughest and most immediate threat.
During the 2006 war, the group launched some 4,000 rockets into Israel, most of them unguided projectiles with limited ranges. Today, Israeli officials say Hizbullah possesses some 130,000 rockets and missiles capable of striking virtually anywhere in Israel. They say it has sophisticated anti-tank missiles, night-vision equipment and cyber warfare capabilities.Hizbullah operates along the border, in violation of the U.N. cease-fire that ended the 2006 war. It also has established a presence in southern Syria, near the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights, providing an additional front in a future war. Most critically, Israel believes Hizbullah is trying to develop and build precision-guided missiles.
Sheikh Ali Daamoush, a top Hizbullah official, claimed the Israelis are afraid of Hizbullah's missile program. "The Israelis should be worried and scared because the resistance now has the will, intention, capabilities and force to make Israel face a great defeat in any coming confrontation," he said.
That confrontation may come sooner than anticipated. Israel has acknowledged carrying out scores of airstrikes in neighboring Syria in recent years, most of them believed to have been aimed at stopping Iranian arms shipments or missile technology for Hizbullah. Syria has accused Israel of carrying out at least seven airstrikes in the past two months alone, believed to have targeted Iranian and proxy interests. Israeli warplanes and reconnaissance drones have been flying low over Lebanon on almost a daily basis in recent weeks. Israeli officials say that neither Iran's troubles — including the coronavirus crisis, plunging oil prices and U.S. sanctions — nor Lebanon's domestic problems have changed Hizbullah's behavior. They point to a recent attempt by Hizbullah to fly a drone into Israeli airspace and an incident last month in which alleged Hizbullah operatives damaged a fence along the Israeli-Lebanese frontier. In recent weeks, tens of thousands of Israeli troops have been participating in a massive exercise at the Elyakim military base. On a recent day, four Israeli tanks rumbled up to the edge of a ridge and fired powerful 120-millimeter shells streaking across the valley, scoring direct hits on targets several kilometers (miles) away. Ground troops maneuvered through a mock Lebanese village. Air force, navy and cyber units joined the drill.
Friedler, the Israeli commander, said if there is another war, Israel will have no choice but to cross the border to halt Hizbullah fire. He said battling an enemy entrenched in civilian areas is like "fighting with handcuffs on," but insisted that his troops are ready.
"It won't be easy. But without a doubt it will be much harder for them. They don't have the means to stop us," Friedler said. Hizbullah has also vowed to cross into Israel in any future war. In late 2018, Israel uncovered and later destroyed what it said was a network of cross-border tunnels. Despite these tensions, residents along Israel's northern border say that life has greatly improved since Israel withdrew from its self-declared "security zone" two decades ago. Nisim Shtern, a farmer in the northern Israeli border town of Kerem Ben Zimar, spent time in southern Lebanon as a soldier in the mid-1980s and remembers times when Katyusha rockets rained down on the area. Shtern, who grows pomegranates and wine grapes in his orchards, says day-to-day life is good, but that some residents still get jittery.

Army Arrests Two Sudanese who Crossed into Israel, 4 Others
Naharnet/May 20/2020
The Lebanese Army on Wednesday arrested two Sudanese nationals who had crossed into Israel on Tuesday. “A patrol from the Intelligence Directorate on Wednesday arrested two Sudanese nationals in the southern area of al-Qawzah after their presence there raised suspicions,” an army statement said.
“They confessed that they had crossed into the occupied Palestinian territories on Tuesday through the electronic fence near the town of Yaroun before being arrested by Israeli enemy troops, who forced them to return to Lebanese territory on Wednesday, in breach of the applicable operational measures that call for coordination with the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon,” the military added. Another patrol from the aforementioned directorate meanwhile arrested four other Sudanese in the Alma al-Shaab-Wadi Hamoul area, who were preparing to cross into Israel, the army said.
An investigation has since been launched under the supervision of the competent judicial authorities, it added. A similar incident had occurred on May 3, when Israeli forces caught five Sudanese men who crossed from south Lebanon. An Israeli military spokeswoman said it was believed the men had intended to seek work in Israel, which was home to more than 6,000 Sudanese asylum seekers as of January. The five Sudanese were also detained by the Lebanese Army upon their return across the border. Israel and Lebanon are technically at war, with Israel having fought a full-fledged war against Hizbullah in 2006. Israel also remains technically at war with Sudan, which supported hardline Islamists -- including, for a period, al-Qaida -- under former president Omar al-Bashir. In February, the leaders of both countries met in Uganda for what the Israeli prime minister's office described as talks aimed at normalizing ties.

“Hezbollah Interests Prevented Me from Closing the Borders… And Frangieh is Right” Said Hariri Regarding Smuggling Scandals.
Janoubia English/May 20/2020
Following the Hezbollah sponsored smuggling scandal across the Lebanese-Syrian borders, former Prime Minister Saad Hariri commented: “The Syrian market is important, but what it’s within a legal framework… to transform our own economy to a Syrian economy is not acceptable.” He added: “The leader of the Marada Movement, Suleiman Franjieh, is an honest man. I was actually unable to close down the borders due to strong overpowering interests between the Syrians and those working for them that include Hezbollah.” Hariri asked: “Since CEDRE is the way out, and now they admit as much, why was it obstructed and ignored?” He then answered: “We did not commit to CEDRE until the catastrophe befell. The funds pledged were around $11bn; today it is much less… Those who obstructed the implementation of the CEDRE reforms when I was Prime Minister are in themselves against reforms.” While chatting with media reporters he added: “I do not want to criticize for the sake of criticism, but it seems to me that every member in the government is speaking in opposition to the rest; especially when it comes to parties. Everyone is saying something different in regards of the economic plan…
The problem is the approach, you cannot claim that demand CEDRE while opposing the GULF and the entire international society. This issue rests in part on Hezbollah and in another on the Free Patriotic Movement who are embarrassing the Lebanese people with their handling of external affairs.” Hariri said remorsefully: “At a time the country is in great struggle, we still see officials at press conferences calling for the rights of Christians. However, we are all Lebanese; how long must we keep speaking of the rights of each sect separately?”
He concluded by saying: “It’s true, as the president of the Free Patriotic Movement Gibran Bassil said, the problem dates back to 1974 and I say to 1988. He should stop taking us back in time, because I can take him back even further. Why hasn’t an electricity regulation committee been designated? Or even a board?” Hariri stressed: “We must be realistic while negotiating with the IMF and the road ahead of us is a long-winded.”

US arrests two men wanted by Japan over former Nissan boss Carlos Ghosn’s escape
Arab News/May 20, 2020
BOSTON: US authorities on Wednesday arrested a former Special Forces soldier and another man wanted by Japan on charges that they enabled the escape of former Nissan Motor Co. boss Carlos Ghosn out of the country. Federal prosecutors in Massachusetts said that former US Green Beret Michael Taylor and his son, Peter Taylor, helped Ghosn last year flee to Lebanon to avoid trial in Japan over alleged financial wrongdoing. Japan had in January issued arrest warrants for both men along with a third, George-Antoine Zayek, in connection with facilitating the Dec. 29, 2019 escape. The Taylors are scheduled to appear by video conference before a federal judge later on Wednesday. Lawyers for the men could not be immediately identified. Ghosn fled to Lebanon, his childhood home, at the end of last year, while he was awaiting trial on charges of under-reporting earnings, breach of trust and misappropriation of company funds, all of which he denies

Army arrests soldiers who assaulted ER doctor
Najia Houssari/Arab Newsw/May 20/2020
BEIRUT: The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) arrested two soldiers on Wednesday after an attack on a doctor in the emergency room (ER) at a hospital in Tripoli, northern Lebanon, on Tuesday night. Footage obtained from surveillance cameras in the Dar Al-Shifa Hospital circulated on social media sites showing the attack on Dr. Luay Shibli by two Lebanese soldiers, who were allegedly trying to interrogate a patient the doctor was treating. Dr. Shibli refused to allow the soldiers to question the injured person as he was in a critical condition, according to the head of the hospital’s medical committee, Dr. Ahmed Al-Boush. “Although the doctor (Shibli) told the soldiers more than once that he was an ER doctor, this did not stop them from attacking him as if he were a war criminal,” Dr. Al-Boush said. The LAF said in a statement that the incident was “an individual act that does not represent the military, its ethics and principles,” and declared that it “immediately took disciplinary action against the two military personnel who attacked the doctor. They were arrested and an investigation is underway.”Condemnation of the incident was widespread, joined by multiple Lebanese doctors and medical associations. Salim Abi Saleh, the president of Tripoli Medical Association, described the incident as “unacceptable bullying” and called for “rapid” action against the assailants. Abi Saleh sent the footage of the attack to Defense Minister Zeina Akar, who rejected “any attack against the dignity of any citizen.”
The assault on Dr. Shibli was not the only violent incident to go viral in Lebanon this week. Another video clip, of a Bangladeshi worker at the RAMCO Waste Management company, caused outrage when it showed the worker, identified only as “Inayatullah,” lying on the floor and tied up with a rope.
The release of the tape followed a statement issued by Bangladeshi workers complaining of the “mistreatment” they were exposed to by the company’s management. The company, however, doubled down, describing the tape as part of a “slander” campaign against it, and calling it a form of extortion. Bangladeshi workers at the company had protested a few days ago over discrepancies in their pay. The company’s management said in a statement on Wednesday that it “worked with great effort and endeavor with the ambassador and consul of Bangladesh in Lebanon, who was briefed on the company’s dealings with its workers, especially those from Bangladesh, and a preliminary agreement was reached that resolves the workers’ demands, leading to the containment of the situation.”In Baalbek, residents and their cameras also captured further violent scenes, as two rival families came to blows, some with rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs). Four people were reportedly injured. The clashes took place in the Sharawneh neighborhood between members of two local families: The Wehbe family and the Jaafar family. “A family feud developed between the two, which led to intense gunfire using light weapons and RPGs,” the LAF said in a statement. It added that army units were deployed to intervene in the clashes, and that patrols and checkpoints had been established to contain the area. It concluded that LAF units were investigating, and pursuing those involved.

As the poor go hungry, more Lebanese take to the streets
The Arab Weekly/May 20/2020
BEIRUT-Lebanese protesters have poured back onto the streets of Beirut and other regions, prompting fears of a new “hunger revolution” that could put the country’s government to the test.
The protesters, defying a nationwide lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic, did not wait long to come back to the streets after Prime Minister Hassan Diab’s government was approved. They criticised the government’s handling of the unprecedented economic crisis that has caused the local currency to crash, their savings to plummet and prices and inflation to soar.
The collapse of the Lebanese pound, which has lost some 60% of its value in months, has had painful effects on all Lebanese citizens, gutting their purchasing power and salaries, and causing the price of basic goods to increase.
The pandemic has only compounded the country’s woes, giving the government another crisis to address and making economic recovery even more challenging.
Before the outbreak, the World Bank projected that 40% of Lebanese people would be in poverty by the end of 2020, but the unfolding reality points to to a worse situation. Even the economy minister now believes the forecast is outdated.
Since mid-March, people have only been authorised to leave their homes to buy food or medicine due to COVID-19-related restrictions. An overnight curfew enforced by security forces is also in place between 8pm and 5am.
The tough measures have not stopped angry Lebanese from taking to the streets to protest, however.
In Tripoli, one of Lebanon’s poorest cities, protesters have gathered to raise their voices against worsening hunger and increasingly desperate situations. Many said they were not able to stay at home without work or support, as the country’s economic crisis had left them with no financial recourse.
In other areas of Lebanon, including in the Bekaa (east) and west of Beirut, roads were closed as protesters gathered and urged for the ruling political class to be held responsible.
Lebanon’s economic troubles, rooted in decades of state corruption and waste, came to a head last year after capital inflows dried up and protests erupted against a ruling elite in power since the 1975-1990 civil war.
Khaled Taleb, 30, who is self-employed, says that he participated in the recent Tripoli protests because he is unable to secure food for his family.
Hamid Al-Nini, a 35-year old shop owner in Tripoli who also joined the protests, explained: “I go to the street to express the deprivation we live in. We have lost confidence in the rulers, and we will continue protesting until the government complies with our demands.”
Since October 2019, Lebanon, one of the most indebted nations in the world, has been embroiled by mass protests over the country’s deteriorating economic state. Protesters have also lashed out against the perceived corruption of Lebanon’s sectarian politicians, who have dominated the country since the 1975-90 civil war.
As the situation worsens, there are growing concerns about a potential “hunger revolution” that could bring more and more citizens to the streets.
“The protests were expected, and will increase in frequency due to the government’s failure to approved a real rescue and reform plan,” writer and political analyst Mounir El-Rabie said.
He added that “the plan submitted by the Diab government, describes the problems and crises in the country and indicates the intention to work, but the question is: How will you start?”.
“Lebanon is likely on the verge of other huge protests, in addition to many political clashes, which may be reflected in the street,” Rabie said.

Hezbollah is smuggling in broad daylight as a political strategy – it won’t work
Makram Rabah/May 20/ 2020
Borders can pose serious economic and security challenges to the most developed of nations let alone Lebanon, where the border with Syria is a constant reminder of the terrible state of affairs into which the Lebanese state has descended.
Over the past few weeks, smuggling over the Lebanese-Syrian border has visibly increased. Images have circulated over various mediums showing convoys of trucks using illegal passageways to smuggle petroleum as well as flour into Syria. Historically, smuggling across the border is common. Many border towns turned to smuggling to compensate for the deliberate neglect by Lebanon’s central government, which has failed to provide any alternative or introduce any real infrastructure to allow for agrarian or commercial development.
However, the scope and magnitude of the current smuggling operations differ from the traditional mode employed before. Now, smuggling has become a threat to Lebanon’s economic and political national security. This is particularly the case because the two main commodities being smuggled to Syria – petrol and flour – are subsidized by the Lebanese state, which is wasting hard currency to import these items into Lebanon, only for them to be smuggled into Syria.
Hezbollah allegedly sanctions, if not operates, these smuggling rings. The organization uses its control over Lebanon’s eastern border to run its elaborate military infrastructure, which provides cover and quasi-legitimacy to a number of illegal activities. While some of the ongoing smuggling does go through the Lebanon’s norther border with Syria, the majority of the smuggling takes place in the rugged terrain of the Hezbollah-controlled anti-Lebanon mountain range.
The Lebanese government has reported over 124 illegal border crossings resulting in annual losses of more than $600 million, a conservative number that downplays the massive operation conducted between Hezbollah and the Syrian regime that is said to be worth billions.
The recent smuggling operations are noticeable for their high visibility: Long convoys of trucks have been purposely parading on the Beirut-Damascus highway, having previously used backroads to enter Syria.
This begs the question: Why now?
The fact that the Lebanese government has recently started negotiations with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to arrange for a possible bailout places these smuggling activities in a much clearer perspective, and exposes Hezbollah’s sinister plot behind them.
Hezbollah has always refused to admit that its weapons and its infringement on the sovereignty of the state has created a fertile ground for lawlessness. Equally, it has refused to acknowledge that it benefits from these many acts of vice, smuggling being one of them.
In a recent televised speech, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah was quick to cheekily affirm his party’s condemnation of smuggling and claim that the best method to combat this phenomena simply requires the Lebanese state to normalize and closely coordinate with the Assad regime – otherwise trying to patrol the border is apparently futile.
Nasrallah never misses a chance to remind the Lebanese and the international community that his party and consequently its Iranian backers hold the Lebanese state hostage – a cooperating hostage, but a captive nonetheless. While Hezbollah has surprised many by publicly endorsing the IMF potential bailout, its underhanded tactics of bringing the underground smuggling rings into the open confirms its true feeling about the IMF. Hezbollah and the Assad regime cannot afford to stop the smuggling of goods in and out of Syria. And with the US Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act becoming effective, Lebanon will become even more crucial for the Assad regime and Iran to bypass sanctions. This will naturally put more pressure on Lebanon’s crumbling economy, especially on the ability of the central government to control and curb the demands on hard currency and to subsidize some of the essential supplies such as fuel, wheat and medical equipment.
The IMF and any other bail-out agency will first tackle the issue of lost state revenues. Smuggling will be therefore be a top priority, placing the IMF bailout in confrontation with Hezbollah and its various allies –who will then accuse the IMF of carrying out a Western-Israeli plot to encircle and destroy the so-called resistance. Nasrallah was clear to mention that he refuses international support to patrol the border because this will curtail Hezbollah’s ability to move in and out and rupture the organization’s lifeline with Iran.
By creating a problem and then solving it, Hezbollah hopes that it will appear as having accommodated the reforms of the cabinet of Prime Minister Hassan Diab. However, this wicked scheme is juvenilely shortsighted, as it only confirms to the general public that no reform is possible unless the Lebanese state reclaims its full sovereignty. Hezbollah’s smuggling operation and the current IMF debate are a good reminder that it is not just Iran’s tentacles in Lebanon that have ruined the country, but also the package that comes with Iranian influence: A privilege to some, but a curse to the Lebanese people.
*Makram Rabah is a lecturer at the American University of Beirut, Department of History.

Lebanon has only one hope to escape from total collapse - the IMF
Michael Young/The National/May 20/2020
It’s difficult to be optimistic in Lebanon today, but we are at a valuable new moment in the country’s history. After decades of feeding off of a rentier system, the country’s corrupt political forces realise they have killed the beast that fed them. It is “game over.” Their ability to recreate what they had before is nil.
If one dared be optimistic, it would be optimism that Lebanon has no alternative today but to rebuild everything from scratch. Even the promise of income from oil and gas was dealt a major blow recently, blocking the oligarchy’s sole way out of their financial dilemma. This interregnum creates an opening for Lebanese society partly to shape its own destiny against the political actors who impoverished them. There are two paths open for Lebanon today. There is the path of going to the International Monetary Fund and accepting a reform plan that permits the institution to disburse funds to Lebanon. Or, barring that, there is the path of bankruptcy, state collapse, chaos, possibly famine, and mass emigration.
There is simply no third way. Certainly, the politicians or leading political parties have no sincere desire to embrace reform. Nor can they afford, however, an implosion of the state, which would undermine their domination and everything they have fought to preserve since public protests began last October 17.
An IMF bailout plan is the only available key to unlocking wider foreign aid to Lebanon – namely, from the World Bank and the countries that pledged money at the CEDRE conference of 2018. Without such funds, Lebanon will not be able to feed itself within a few months, nor will it be able to import fuel or medicine. Gone is the rentier system that kept Lebanon afloat. The country was able to sustain its perennial deficits thanks to remittances from Lebanese abroad, including the Gulf countries. For a variety of reasons these started to decline in the past decade. The fact that most depositors are certain to lose a significant share of their money through a financial bail-in plan means that the willingness of Lebanese to send money home has evaporated, and this mood will endure.
Nor can the country hope to attract capital to its banking system as it once did. The lack of confidence in Lebanon and its political direction will remain a hindrance to aid from Arab countries.Both the global economic situation and the lack of confidence in the Lebanese system means that foreign support is unlikely to come. The old order is finished, and the only exit is through an organisation, the IMF, that will keep close tabs on what the government does in its reform programme, perhaps on a monthly basis.
To make matters worse for Lebanon’s oligarchy, its internal coherence is shattering amid rival accusations of corruption. Now, mendacious politicians are portraying themselves as paragons of rectitude. They are anticipating the violent public reaction to widespread destitution, years of economic struggle, children who will pay a heavy price in their education, the loss of social status and self-esteem and the overall misery that accompanies economic disintegration.
The IMF won’t reverse all that, but it is essential if Lebanon is to have any hope of doing so. The political actors finally grasp this.
Hezbollah, even if it is better prepared than others to survive the economic earthquake, needs a state with which to envelop itself. Or else it would not have worked so hard to bring a new government to office earlier this year. It must sense that a Lebanese state fragmented by economic ruin and dissension would make any Israeli attack much more likely and devastating. Nor would the party’s worth to Iran be quite as significant if all it controlled was a failed state.
Hezbollah’s ally Nabih Berri, the parliament speaker, is even more vulnerable. His supporters are mainly in the civil service, where salaries have been slashed by the depreciation of the Lebanese pound. Mr Berri’s inability to assist his followers today, and his unsavoury reputation, explain why he is so keen to arrive at a deal with the IMF.
Saad Hariri, the former prime minister, is of a similar frame of mind. He sees himself as the natural interlocutor with the international community and the Arab states on financial and economic matters. Unless Lebanon has an IMF deal in hand, Mr Hariri will have no role to play if he returns to office.
Finally, Gebran Bassil, the head of the Free Patriotic Movement, also needs a deal. He pines for the presidency now held by his father-in-law Michel Aoun. But of what value is being president if Lebanon fails to agree with the IMF and is transformed into an economic basket case on par with Venezuela - only without the oil revenues? The general view is that Lebanon’s political class is incapable of reforming, and therefore its acceptance of an IMF plan is impossible. The first part of the sentence is mostly true. But Lebanon’s political actors are also focused on their own survival, which means the second half of the sentence cannot be true. There are two roads open for Lebanon today, one leading toward reform, the other toward devastation. The political parties will grind their teeth and scheme to get as much out of the IMF as they can, but they will have to broadly accept an agreement in the end. They’ve trapped themselves and have nowhere else to go.
*Michael Young is editor of Diwan, the blog of the Carnegie Middle East programme, in Beirut

Lebanon’s Interwoven Fantasy Worlds All Lead to War With Israel…How much should America pay to maintain the fraying fabric?
Tony Badran/The Tablet Magazine/May 20/2020
طوني بدران: عوالم الخيال المتشابك في لبنان قد تؤدي جميعها إلى الحرب مع إسرائيل/كم يجب أن تدفع أمريكا للحفاظ على النسيج المترهل؟
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/86396/tony-badran-lebanons-interwoven-fantasy-worlds-all-lead-to-war-with-israel-how-much-should-america-pay-to-maintain-the-fraying-fabric-%d8%b7%d9%88%d9%86%d9%8a-%d8%a8%d8%af%d8%b1%d8%a7/
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s trip to Israel this past week involved, among other subjects of common American-Israeli interest, the matter of Iran’s so-called precision-guided missile program (PGM) in Lebanon and Syria. Pompeo’s visit was preceded by a series of alleged Israeli strikes on missile facilities in Syria, including one against a Hezbollah target.
Syria and Lebanon are key to Iran’s goal to ring Israel with missile bases, and as Levantine buffer states, both countries are fated to be theaters of conflict between stronger regional powers. Lebanon long has been a headquarters of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its local unit, Hezbollah. On top of that, Lebanon is disintegrating. What people used to refer to as Lebanon’s economy and financial sector have collapsed; the result of the structural corruption built into the sectarian political system, which is run by a terror group directed by Iran.
As Lebanon collapses, Hezbollah, with the support and supervision of its Iranian patron, is pressing ahead with its program to upgrade its stockpile of rockets. Israel has publicly pointed to sites in Beirut and in northeast Lebanon where Hezbollah has already set up production and conversion factories. Israeli operations aimed at thwarting this project are continuing and are set to increase.
The clash between Israel and Hezbollah that is being propelled by Iran’s missile building program inside Lebanon means that the fundamental assumptions of American policy toward the Lebanese pseudostate need to be revisited, as does Israel’s own increasingly unstable balancing act between its own clear security needs and a misguided American policy of propping up “Lebanese state institutions” that are controlled by Iran.
Israel’s own ostensibly “silent war” against Hezbollah appears to have more bark than bite. On April 15, a presumed Israeli drone strike targeted a Hezbollah vehicle on the Syrian-Lebanese border. The nature or identity of the intended target remains unclear. A report the day after the strike in the Kuwaiti daily Al-Jarida, which has served at times as a conduit for Israeli leaks, identified the target, this time citing an unnamed source in Tehran, as one Imad Karimi. Al-Arabiya, citing its own information, claimed Karimi was an IRGC officer. Whatever the case may be, the first drone missile missed the vehicle. This allowed for the passengers to get out and take shelter in a nearby building. In fact, according to video footage, of the incident, enough time passed between the first and second missiles that the passengers managed to return to the car and retrieve their bags from the trunk.
It’s unclear whether the target was a particular individual or the cargo in the vehicle. If the former, the strike was obviously a failure. And if the latter, it’s an open question whether the targeted cargo was still in the car when it got hit with the second missile. In other words, it’s uncertain whether the strike was successful at all.
Spin from some quarters in Israel soon followed. It claimed that the miss was deliberate. Its purpose, supposedly, was to serve as a warning; a reminder that Israel was watching Hezbollah’s activities and could strike at any time.
Ironically, this spin echoed an article published by pro-Hezbollah writers in Lebanon a week earlier. According to these circles, the vehicle didn’t contain any high-ranking officials, and therefore deliberately was not hit the first time. The intended message, according to this pro-Hezbollah reading, was to remind the group: “We see you. We know what you’re doing in Syria, and your activities are in our crosshairs. You should be deterred. Nothing, not the coronavirus nor anything else, will stop us from watching you.”
Two days after the strike, Hezbollah orchestrated a response designed to mirror the message it ascribed to the Israelis. Hezbollah units breached the border fence with Israel in three different locations. Supposedly, some of the holes cut in the fence were wide enough to pass motorcycles through. Other pro-Hezbollah writers claimed they were wider still; enough to run a vehicle through—a reference to the Hezbollah threat that, in the next war, its fighters will raid communities in northern Israel.
And that was the end of it—on the Lebanon front, that is. Alleged Israeli strikes on Iranian infrastructure in Syria have since continued apace as they have for years. But then, why the need for a “warning” and a “reminder” that Israel is watching? The explanation in the Israeli spin is that Israel is avoiding the killing of Hezbollah personnel so as to minimize the chances of escalation and the potential of full-on conflict at this juncture.
Hezbollah’s interpretation of the message shows that what the group saw was reluctance on the part of its enemy. Notably, one article in the pro-Hezbollah Al-Akhbar linked the episode explicitly to Hezbollah’s PGM capabilities. The article concluded that in spite of the fact that thwarting this capability is Israel’s priority, it is reluctant to cross a certain line.
Hezbollah’s public messaging in the aftermath of the April 15 strike augurs bad things for Lebanon. If the strike was botched, the Israeli Air Force will fine-tune its targeting next time. If it was indeed a deliberate miss, intended to convey a “warning,” the Israeli leadership is bound to see that this stunt was too clever by half and backfired. After all, Israel’s messaging on the buildup of Iranian infrastructure in Syria is that the IAF will keep bombing it until the Iranians recognize the cost and abandon their project. At the same time, if the PGM program is continuing apace in Lebanon, as the pro-Hezbollah Al-Akhbar all but admitted it was, there will be no room for wishful thinking about how to handle Israel’s problem. But the nature of the Israeli ask from Secretary Pompeo in relation to this matter is not yet clear.
There are two strands in Washington when it comes to Lebanon policy. On the one hand, there’s the view, expressed recently by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft, that the United States is committed to supporting Lebanon as a “sovereign, stable, and independent nation.” The way to do that is by “strengthening Lebanese state institutions,” namely the Lebanese Armed Forces, as a “counterweight” to Hezbollah. However, when pushed on what that actually means in practice—or to name any actions that the LAF have taken specifically against Hezbollah—the response usually comes in the form of an incoherent Dada tone poem filled with gibberish about “narrative.”
Those who espouse the “state-building” view in Washington don’t expect the LAF to do anything about the PGM. In fact, they don’t want it to do anything, for that would “destabilize” Lebanon—and prematurely destroy the LAF’s imaginary Hezbollah-fighting capabilities. Instead, the LAF’s job is to allow Hezbollah to build its rocket factories—while developing its own capabilities for a future day when it is strong enough to “take on Hezbollah”—a task for which the LAF has shown zero interest.
Meanwhile, not only is Hezbollah media talking openly about its precision-missile capability, but the group is encouraging the LAF’s deployment along the eastern border with Syria, as its Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah made clear in a speech last week. The reason for Hezbollah’s enthusiasm for the LAF deployment isn’t hard to figure out, the point of the deployment being to coordinate with the Bashar Assad regime and prevent anti-Iranian Sunni militia elements from Syria from entering Lebanon, where they might in fact target Hezbollah. In this framework, American investment in the LAF is hardly a problem for Hezbollah. If anything, it is an asset, protecting Hezbollah’s own dominance inside Lebanon and guarding the group’s flank as its fighters do battle on behalf of Iran.
The second strand of American policy recognizes that the idea that the LAF will someday use its new American weapons against Hezbollah is a pipe dream. The LAF will never address Hezbollah’s PGM program and arms buildup—because it is both politically controlled and physically constrained by the Iranian-backed terror group. Only Israel will fight Hezbollah.
The justification for the second strand of America’s “strengthen the LAF” policy is that American aid is needed in order to build a force for the day after a war between Hezbollah and Israel, in which Hezbollah—and Lebanon—will presumably come out the losers. This view is premised on the idea that such a war is inevitable. It is not premised on preserving stability inside Lebanon. If anything, it’s premised on restoring a modicum of stability following the cataclysm.
Of course, this imagined “day after” role for the LAF is just as misguided and fantastical as the idea that the LAF will actually fight Hezbollah on its own. Just because a fantasy is more modest doesn’t make it any more realistic. Only Washington policymakers could imagine that. An army that can’t and won’t fight with a command structure controlled by a foreign power isn’t going to suddenly become a forceful, unitary structure the day after Lebanon is bombed to pieces. More likely, it will fracture into its constituent pieces—Shia, Sunni, Christian—while most of its soldiers go home to care for their families.
As Lebanon disintegrates and social order frays, faulty American assumptions about the “Lebanese state” are likely to come crashing down—revealing the foolishness of the fantasies constructed by Washington policymakers looking to position themselves in internal American policy debates by wasting hundreds of millions of American taxpayer dollars.
Meanwhile, Israel is looking to stave off a future war with Hezbollah for as long as possible by taking as much preemptive action as it feels it can, while also warning about the inevitability of a conflict if “something” is not done by “someone” to stop the joint Iranian-Hezbollah missile program, which it has rightly assessed to be a strategic threat. The reality, for good or ill, is that Israeli security lies in Israel’s hands alone. It’s not anyone else’s problem. While Israeli talk is pointless, and in some cases counterproductive, the United States can help by ending the merry-go-round of fantasy about “strengthening” a Lebanese state that doesn’t exist, and let the Israelis fight Hezbollah on their own.
*Tony Badran, Tablet magazine’s Levant analyst, is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He tweets @AcrossTheBay.

Unpaid Foreign Domestic Workers Stranded in Crisis-Hit Lebanon
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/May 20/2020
A week after her Lebanese employer kicked her out without her luggage, pay or passport, all Ethiopian domestic worker Sofia wants is to go home as Lebanon begins repatriations. "My madam threw me out. She owes me six-and-a-half months salary," Sofia said, her hair draped in a red scarf.
"I want to go back to Ethiopia," said the mother of two girls, who has not seen them for almost three years. Lebanon is suffering its worst economic crisis in decades, as well as a coronavirus lockdown. Some Lebanese families have started paying their home help in the depreciating local currency, while others are now unable to pay them at all, with increasing reports of domestic workers being thrown into the street. Lebanon is to start repatriation flights from its closed airport on Wednesday, at first for Ethiopians and mostly male migrants from Egypt. Outside the Ethiopian consulate on Monday, Sofia was among dozens of Ethiopian women and Lebanese employers trying to secure seats on Wednesday's flight. But Lebanese security forces turned them away at the door, telling them to return in nine days and employers that they would have to pay for the flight. Among the crowd, Lebanese employer Eva Awad said she could no longer afford to keep her domestic helper. "We can't find dollars anymore, so she needs to go home," she said, adding that she intended to pay her maid in full.
'For sale'
Nearby, an Ethiopian woman cried next to her suitcase, saying she had not been paid in half a year, had no passport after being thrown out, and had nowhere to sleep.A member of the security forces said the consulate's shelter was full, at least until the flight out on Wednesday. Consular staff did not respond to repeated requests for comment. An estimated 250,000 domestic workers live in Lebanon, the large majority Ethiopian, many in conditions condemned by rights groups. A sponsorship system known as "kafala" excludes maids, nannies and carers from Lebanon's labour law, and leaves them at the mercy of their employers, who pay wages as low as $150 a month. With staff obtained at high fees from recruitment agencies even before being paid wages, and unhappy workers unable to resign without their employer's permission, some have likened the system to slavery. Activists say calls for help have increased in recent weeks, especially as live-in workers have been in lockdown with families. "The level of desperation has just gone through the roof. There has been a vast increase in the number of people contacting us about unpaid salaries," a case worker for activist group This is Lebanon said.
She said a number had been sent back to their agencies with few prospects for re-employment. In recent months, at least two people have posted ads to sell their foreign helper on Facebook, sparking outrage from activists and a statement from the labour ministry condemning human trafficking.
Ali al-Amine, head of the recruitment agency syndicate, said agencies had received increasing numbers of calls from employers struggling to pay salaries in dollars. "If people are employed by the Lebanese state, their income in Lebanese pounds is hardly enough for them to support themselves," he said.
But "if the contract was in dollars, we tell them they need to give her what is rightfully hers", he said. The labour ministry says it has launched a hotline. Immigration has waived fines for those who have overstayed their residency from November, a security source said.
'Thousands need food' -
After Sofia was thrown out with nothing but the clothes on her back, fellow Ethiopian worker Ala, 29, found her crying in the street and persuaded her own Lebanese employer to take her in. "There are people who are very good, who pay for your travel and treat you like family," Ala said. The non-governmental Egna Legna association has also taken in stranded women, according to founder Banchi Yimer. They will now join freelance domestic workers struggling to survive without work during the pandemic. As the lockdown started, "thousands of domestic workers and their kids needed medical and food aid", said Yimer, who used to work as a domestic helper in Lebanon but is now in Canada. In recent weeks, she and friends have raised more than $12,000 through crowdfunding to provide food and rent for hundreds of their colleagues. But Yimer is worried about the thousands they cannot reach, donations running out, and the mounting number of people being dropped at the consulate door. "I'm so scared even to sleep," she said.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on May 20-21/2020
Researchers discover antibody that can potentially block, ‘neutralize’ coronavirus
Tuqa Khalid/Al Arabiya English/Wednesday 20 May 2020
An antibody, named S309, found in the blood of a patient who recovered from SARS can potentially “block” and “neutralize” the COVID-19 coronavirus, researchers found. The virus that caused the SARS outbreak in 2003, is a distant cousin of the novel COVID-19 virus that has currently infected more 4.8 million people worldwide and claimed the lives of over 320,000 people. Visit our dedicated coronavirus site here for all the latest updates.
The coronavirus has S-proteins on its surface, constituting its crown-like appearance, according to researchers at Westlake University in China. Those S-proteins help the coronavirus to bind with the ACE2 protein in the blood, causing the infection in the human body. “If we think of the human body as a house and [COVID-19] as a robber, then ACE2 would be the doorknob of the house’s door. Once the S-protein grabs it, the virus can enter the house,” Liang Tao, a Principle Investigator at Westlake University had said back in February. The US and European researchers discovered that the S309 antibody, along with other antibodies, “further enhanced SARS-CoV-2 neutralization,” according to their paper published on Monday on the online science journal “Nature.”“The antibody is an immune signaling molecule that attaches to a viral protein called spike, which both viruses use to enter human cells. The team’s structural analysis shows that S309 binds to a location on spike that is distinct from the attachment site of some of the person’s other coronavirus-targeted antibodies,” the online science journal “Nature” said. “S309 bears the promise to be an effective countermeasure to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2,” the researchers said.

Iraq announces arrest of possible successor to ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi
The National/May 20/2020
Iraq's National Intelligence Service late on Wednesday announced it had arrested a possible successor to ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi. Agents with the service arrested Abdul Nasser Qardash, a security source told the Iraqi News Agency.
He said Qardash led ISIS's last major battle in Baghouz, Syria, which began in February 2019. No details have been provided on the circumstances of the arrest. Qardash is reported to be an Iraqi of Turkmen origin from the Telafar region near the northern Iraqi city of Mosul.
Qardash, like Al Baghdadi, had been detained in Iraq by US forces that toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003. He had served as a religious commissar for Al Qaeda before joining ISIS and welcomed Al Baghdadi in Mosul, when the city fell to the group in 2014. Al Baghdadi died in October 2019 in Idlib, Syria, after detonating a suicide vest when he fled into a tunnel as US special forces troops closed in, the US government said. He oversaw ISIS’s takeover of large areas in Iraq and Syria, ultimately announcing the establishment of a "caliphate" in Mosul on July 4.
During Al Baghdadi's tenure, the terrorist group carried out executions of civilians and enslaved religious minorities.

International community reprimands Israel’s annexation plans
Joseph Haboush/Al Arabiya English/May 20/ 2020
The international community on Wednesday lambasted Israel’s plans to annex parts of the West Bank by July, while the United States said UN Security Council statements had become “a little bit repetitive.”
Current and previous European Union members of the UNSC urged Israel against any unilateral decision to annex “any occupied Palestinian territory … contrary to international law.”
In a statement before a Security Council meeting on the Middle East, the EU members – Belgium, Estonia, France, Germany and Poland – voiced their “grave concern” of the plans announced by the new Israeli government earlier this week. Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, said that with a new government, he could apply Israeli law on Jewish settlements and the Jordan Valley in occupied West Bank “where the Jewish nation was born and rose.” During his speech to parliament, he said that it was time to apply Israeli law on the planned annexed lands to “write another great chapter in the annals of Zionism.”However, as was evident Wednesday during the UN meeting, most of the international community is against the unilateral decision.
Belgium said it was looking forward to working with the new Israeli government but warned that changes to the 1967 border would not be recognized. Marc Pecsteen de Buytswerve, Belgium’s Permanent Representative to the UN, “strongly advise[d]” Israel against any advance on the annexation. In a veiled reference to Washington, he called on the international community, “especially those with influence” to prevent the annexation, which would “risk consequences not only for Israel, but also for the wider region.”And in direct response to the US envoy at the UN, de Buytswerve said direct negotiations should be relaunched between Palestine and Israel, “but that’s why we call on all partners [to prevent] unilateral decision that would undermine or seriously hamper prospects for this.”
Speaking earlier, US ambassador to the UN Kelly Craft said that statements from Council members would “only get us so far,” recommending Palestine and Israel sit down with one another.
“This Council cannot dictate the end to this conflict. We can only encourage the parties to sit down together to determine how they wish to make progress,” Craft said. Doubling down on questioning the effectiveness of the Council, Craft said the “real problem-solving” would take place “at a table at which both the Israelis and the Palestinians are seated.”
Craft also defended US President Donald Trump’s Vision for Peace, the so-called deal of the century, calling it “realistic and implementable.” She voiced her belief that all sides want to see an end to the conflict and the need for conversation between both parties.
“But if that conviction is sincere, then we must concentrate our efforts on bringing the parties to the table – and not on Council statements that I think we all have to admit have grown a little bit repetitive.”
For their part, France said annexation was not in the interest of anyone, including the international community. Warning the Israeli government of repercussions, France declared a move toward annexation would not go forward “without consequences on the relations of the EU with Israel.”
French Ambassador Nicolas de Riviere said this would be detrimental to Israel’s role in the world. At the same time, he extended a hand to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, saying that France was ready to examine Abbas’s proposals to the Council in February. African countries also leaped to the defense of the Palestinian cause. Tunisia said it was “high time” for the international community and the Security Council to compel Israel to abide by international law. South Africa said Israel’s violations of international law could not be ignored or disregarded. It condemned what it called Israel’s exploitation of the COVID-19 pandemic to expand its “de facto annexation.”

PRESS RELEASES/U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Treasury Targets Procurement Networks Supporting Iran’s Missile Proliferation Programs
77121
August 28, 2019
WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) targeted two Iranian regime-linked networks pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13382 for engaging in covert procurement activities benefitting multiple Iranian military organizations. One network, led by Hamed Dehghan, has used a Hong Kong-based front company to evade U.S. and international sanctions and facilitate tens of millions of dollars’ worth of proliferation activities targeting U.S. technology and electronic components, for persons related to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Iranian regime’s missile program. The second network, led by Seyed Hossein Shariat, has procured various aluminum alloy products on behalf of components entities owned or controlled by Iran’s Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL).
"As the Iranian regime attempts to use complex schemes to hide its efforts to bolster its WMD program, the U.S. government will continue to thwart them at every turn," said Treasury Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Sigal Mandelker. "We urge governments worldwide to recognize the extraordinary lengths to which the regime in Tehran will go to conceal its behavior, and to ensure that their companies and financial institutions are not facilitating Iran's proliferation activities."
DEHGHAN NETWORK
Today’s designations, which was the culmination of Treasury’s close collaboration with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, target critical actors in this scheme, including two Iranian nationals, Hamed Dehghan and Hadi Dehghan. Since 2017 alone, these actors have used a network of intermediary companies, including a Hong Kong-based front company, to facilitate more than ten million dollars’ worth of proliferation-related transactions. Hamed Dehghan is the chief executive officer and chairman of Pishtazan Kavosh Gostar Boshra, LLC (PKGB), which has played a central role in this procurement network. He also has served as the general manager and chairman of the board of Ebtekar Sanat Ilya, another company leveraged by the network. Hamed Dehghan, his company Ebtekar Sanat Ilya, and Hadi Dehghan have procured more than one million dollars’ worth of military-grade electronic components for Rastafann Engineering Company (Rastafann), and have had multiple other Iranian military clientele. Rastafann was designated on October 13, 2017, pursuant to E.O. 13382 for having provided support to the IRGC and Naval Defence Missile Industry Group. The IRGC and Naval Defence Missile Industry Group were themselves designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 in 2007 and 2010, respectively. Ebtekar Sanat Ilya’s customers also include the Iran Aircraft Manufacturing Industrial Company (HESA), Shahid Bakeri Industrial Group (SBIG), and Shahid Hemmat Industrial Group (SHIG), all of which are designated pursuant to E.O. 13382. The European Union and the United Nations have both designated SBIG and SHIG. HESA is designated by the European Union. OFAC designated HESA pursuant to E.O. 13382 on September 17, 2008, for being owned or controlled by Iran’s Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL) and having provided support to the IRGC. Also designated today are Shaghayegh Akhaei, who is the general manager and a member of the board of directors of PKGB, and Mahdi Ebrahimzadeh, who has helped Hamed Dehghan with his business procuring electronic components.
HONG KONG-BASED FRONT COMPANY
Green Industries (Hong Kong) Limited is owned or controlled by Hamed Dehghan, who has used it as a front company to purchase and attempt to purchase export-controlled military end-use equipment from U.S. suppliers for Iranian entities designated by OFAC for their involvement in the Iranian regime’s weapons of mass destruction proliferation activities. The company Shafagh Senobar Yazd served as a consignee in Iran for Hamed Dehghan’s procurement network. Both companies, Green Industries (Hong Kong) Limited and Shafagh Senobar Yazd are designated pursuant to E.O. 13382.
Hamed Dehghan, Hadi Dehghan, and Ebtekar Sanat Ilya are designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 for having provided, or attempted to provide, financial, material, technological, or other support for, or goods or services in support of, Rastafann.
PKGB and Ebtekar Sanat Ilya are designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 for being owned or controlled by Hamed Dehghan. Mahdi Ebrahimzadeh and Green Industries (Hong Kong) Limited are designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 for providing, or attempting to provide, financial, material, technological or other support for, or goods or services in support of, Hamed Dehghan. Shafagh Senobar Yazd is designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 for being owned or controlled by, or having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, Hamed Dehghan. Shaghayegh Akhaei is designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 for acting for or on behalf of PKGB.
SHARIAT NETWORK
OFAC also designated Asre Sanat Eshragh Company and its owner and general manager Seyed Hossein Shariat, pursuant to E.O. 13382. Since at least 2016, Asre Sanat Eshragh Company has procured large amounts of aluminum alloy products for multiple Iranian entities, including Iran Electronic Industries (IEI) and Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO). IEI and IAIO were designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 on September 17, 2008, and December 12, 2013, respectively, for being owned or controlled by MODAFL. IEI has been listed by the European Union and the Japanese government as an entity of concern for proliferation relating to missiles and nuclear weapons, and has also been sanctioned by the governments of Australia, Canada, Norway, and Switzerland. IAIO has been sanctioned by the European Union as an entity linked to Iran’s proliferation-sensitive nuclear activities or Iran’s development of nuclear weapon delivery systems. MODAFL was designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 in 2007. The NSG is a multilateral export control regime that seeks to prevent nuclear proliferation by controlling the export of materials, equipment, and technology that can be used to manufacture nuclear weapons. Under United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231 (2015), which endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the sale, supply, or transfer to Iran of NSG-controlled items is prohibited except cases where the UN Security Council provides advance case-by-case approval, with very narrow exceptions that do not apply in the case of Asre Sanat Eshragh Company. Asre Sanat Eshragh Company is designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 for having provided, or attempted to provide, financial, material, technological, or other support for, or goods or services in support of IEI. Seyed Hossein Shariat is designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 for acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, Asre Sanat Eshragh Company.
SANCTIONS IMPLICATIONS
As a result of today’s action, all property and interests in property of these individuals that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons must be blocked and reported to OFAC. OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all dealings by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons. In addition, persons that engage in certain transactions with the persons designated today may themselves be exposed to designation. Furthermore, any foreign financial institution that knowingly facilitates a significant transaction or provides significant financial services for any of the individuals designated today could be subject to U.S. correspondent account or payable-through sanctions.
Identifying information on the entities designated today.

Venezuelans clamor for gasoline as Washington weighs response to Iran fuel shipment
Reuters/Wednesday 20 May 2020
With the United States weighing a response to a gasoline shipment from Iran to Venezuela, people waiting in line outside service stations in the country’s capital said they were eager to fill their tanks, regardless of how the fuel arrived. OPEC members Venezuela and Iran both are US adversaries. A Trump administration official said last week the shipment via five tankers - which are still underway to fuel-starved Venezuela - was “unwelcome.” For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app. Some Venezuelan opposition politicians have criticized the shipment due to concerns over socialist President Nicolas Maduro’s ties with Iran. But Franklin Luzardo, a restaurant wait-staff manager who during the coronavirus-related quarantine has been making ends meet doing deliveries, said getting gasoline is what matters.“I’m not interested in the origin,” Luzardo, 56, told Reuters Tuesday at a gas station in eastern Caracas, where he arrived Monday night. “Without gasoline, the car stops, and that’s the bread on our table.”
Gasoline shortages
Gasoline shortages have grown acute in recent months due to US pressure on suppliers, part of Washington’s “maximum pressure” campaign on Maduro, who has overseen an economic collapse and stands accused of corruption, human rights violations and rigging his 2018 re-election. Shortages have plagued Venezuela for years due to the collapse of the country’s 1.3-million-barrel-per-day refining network thanks to underinvestment and mismanagement by state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela. “We shouldn’t have had to end up importing gasoline from Iran,” said Coromoto Alvarez, 61, a retired nurse who arrived at a PDVSA gas station in Caracas’ La Bandera neighborhood at 3 a.m. Tuesday. The shortages have hindered food delivery and left doctors struggling to reach hospitals. “I don’t care if the gasoline comes from Iran, just that we get it,” said Carmen Rivero, a 35-year-old economist waiting at the La Bandera station. “Without gasoline, food distribution fails, people cannot work.”

Syria's warring parties agree to Geneva talks: U.N. envoy
GENEVA (Reuters)/May 20/2020
Opposing sides in the Syrian civil war have agreed to reconvene in Geneva for negotiations on the constitution, United Nations Special Envoy Geir Pedersen said on Tuesday, saying that it could provide the arena for bridging “deep, deep mistrust”.
After nine years of conflict in Syria, Pedersen referred to “relative calm” in the last rebel-held enclave of Idlib as an opportunity for building confidence. He urged the United States and Russia, who support opposing sides, to start talks and back the peace process.
“As soon as the pandemic situation allows, they have agreed to come to Geneva and they have agreed on an agenda for the next meeting,” Pedersen told reporters, referring to the government and opposition.
He did not give a date for the constitutional committee, which struggled to make headway last year, and said that a virtual meeting would not be possible.
“We need this to start somewhere,” he said. “The Constitutional Committee could be that arena where confidence starts to build.”
Pedersen is the fourth U.N. envoy to try to mediate peace in Syria where rebels fighting President Bashar al-Assad are holding onto a last piece of territory in the northwest.
Fighting has calmed since March when Turkey, which backs some groups opposed to Assad, agreed a ceasefire with Russia.
Pedersen said it was a “great relief” that there had not been more COVID-19 cases in the country, although warned of the risk of a wider spread. He said there had been 64 cases.
Reporting by Emma Farge; Editing by Catherine Evans and Angus MacSwan

Factions react as Rajoub says PLO decision to end Israel, US agreements ‘strategic’
Daoud Kuttab and Hazem Balousha/Arab News/May 20/2020
We have made a strategic decision and will be holding marathon meetings to work out the mechanism to implement this, Rajoub says
AMMAN/GAZA CITY: The senior Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) figure, Maj. Gen. Jibril Rajoub, has told Arab News that the decision, announced by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, to abrogate all agreements with Israel and the US was a strategic one.
Abbas made the announcement on Tuesday during a speech in Ramallah that the Palestinian Authority was absolving itself of agreements on security and administration, saying that Israel would have to take responsibility for the decision of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to annex parts of the occupied West Bank.
“We have made a strategic decision and will be holding marathon meetings to work out the mechanism to implement this,” Rajoub said. “We will continue to contribute to regional stability and global security.”
Rajoub, who is the secretary of the PLO’s main faction, Fatah, told Arab News that its central committee would hold a critically important meeting on Thursday to discuss the implementation period. “I am certain that in the place of the Oslo Accords, the role of the PLO will be enhanced and popular nonviolent struggle will be escalated.”
Asaad Abdel Rahman, a former PLO executive committee member, told Arab News: “The leadership must agree to enhance the role of the PLO — our representative body and our final refuge.” Abdel Rahman conceded that the idea of having new elections was a good idea, but said that it was not currently feasible. “You need to go with what you have now and wait for the right movement to re-energize the organization,” he said.
Abdel Rahman added that Israel had squandered the opportunity to work productively with the most moderate of all Palestinian leaders. “Abbas is the most moderate leader Israel has dealt with for decades. They are making a terrible mistake by pushing him in this direction. The Israeli piracy of our lands is nothing less than an international scandal that no one can accept.”
Anis F. Kassim, publisher of the Palestine Yearbook of International Law, told Arab News that the Palestinian leadership was in danger of losing all legitimacy by canceling agreements with Israel without having an alternative. “The leadership needs to quickly seek some way of restoring the legitimacy derived from the public, because they can no longer claim their legitimacy from the signed agreements with Israel and the US,” he warned.
“The ruling elite has lost their legitimacy; they don’t have popular support and now they have lost the Oslo Accords which gave them some legitimacy. The next time they go to collect taxes people will ask on what basis should they pay. If their decision is genuine, they need to find a way quickly to regain the support of the people.”
Kassim said that for the time being, those in power could run things like “an ad-hoc management body” but they needed either internal elections or elections for the Palestinian National Council, or both, to avoid a “legal black hole.”
Diana Buttu, former legal advisor to the Palestinian negotiating team, told Arab News that the real test would be the reaction of the global community. “It is a question of whether the world will continue to support Palestinians even without the Oslo Accords.”
Abbas’ decision, meanwhile, triggered mixed reactions in the Gaza Strip.
Hamas considered the decision in line with its stance, and called for its implementation on the ground.
“The declaration of a total break from the Oslo agreement, and the consequent security and political deals, the foremost of which is security coordination with the occupation forces, needs implementation on the ground through clear and specific steps,” a Hamas statement said.
It added: “This trend confirms the correctness of the movement’s positions and the forces of resistance from this ominous agreement 27 years ago.”
Describing negotiations as absurd, Hamas urged the Palestinian leadership to refrain from adopting further negotiation.
“Hamas believes that facing the project of annexation and the ‘Deal of the Century’ requires a national struggle at all levels through an integrated plan agreed upon by the leaders of the Palestinian factions and all popular forces,” it added.
The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) expressed support for the decision, but demanded its effective implementation.
“Translating this decision calls for a series of procedures and steps without delay, and within a specific time,” a DFLP statement said
It asked the PLO for “immediate withdrawal of the recognition of the state of Israel until it recognizes a Palestinian state as per the borders of June 4, 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital.”
Israel should also stop settlements and cancel its annexation project, it added.
Zulfkar Swirjo, a writer affiliated with the DFLP, said Abbas’s statement was not definitive, especially since the decision was not presented to all Palestinian factions.
“The statement did not touch on restoring the cohesion of the Palestinian political system, in order to confront any upcoming issues,” he said.

Dr. Moncef Slaoui: White House’s Arab American ‘coronavirus vaccine czar’
Ray Hanania/Arab News/May 20/2020
CHICAGO: Facing criticism over his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, US President Donald Trump has tapped one of the Arab American community’s brightest medical minds to find a treatment for the infection that has wreaked global havoc since December.
Dr. Moncef Mohamed Slaoui, a Moroccan-born Belgian-American scientist who has led the field in fighting viruses and was involved in the development of a vaccine against Ebola, will head a new White House initiative called “Operation Warp Speed” (OWS).
As of Tuesday, COVID-19 had claimed more than 320,000 lives and infected more than 4 million people around the world, nearly one third of them in the US. While naming Slaoui chief scientist of the vaccine effort, Trump said that OWS would help to produce 300 million doses of a vaccine by the end of the year, as well as speed up development by others.
Slaoui, 60, said that he expected to have a COVID-19 vaccine available by the end of the year. “I believe they are very credible. I also believe they are extremely challenging,” he said of efforts to achieve this goal.
Slaoui’s appointment was criticized by Democrats and sections of the news media, while praise came mainly from Arab Americans and those involved in Middle East issues.
Moncef Slaoui, the former head of GlaxoSmithKlines vaccines division, listens as U.S. President Donald Trump delivers remarks about coronavirus vaccine development in the Rose Garden of the White House on May 15, 2020. (AFP)
Among them was New York-based human-rights lawyer and national security analyst Irina Tsukerman, who wrote: “Great to see growing cooperation with Morocco & Moroccans!”
In comments to Arab News, several Arab Americans said that Slaoui’s appointment would enhance the public image of the community, particularly those in the medical profession.
“It’s good to put somebody who has experience in this field to work on the vaccine, which is where his experience is,” said Syrian-born American Dr. Firas Badin (left), medical director for oncology research at Baptist Health System in Kentucky.“It speaks for us as first- and second-generation Arab Americans and is a good reflection of the success Arab Americans have had in this country.
“It also reflects on how much Arab Americans put into this country and our contributions. Arab Americans are very educated and we can do so much to help here.“Dr. Slaoui is a good example of this hard work and how much he has achieved.”
Badin serves on the National COVID-19 Committee created by ArabAmerica.com.
He is also the founder of the Syrian American Cancer Center, a not-for-profit that helps patients with cancer in war-torn Syria.
Describing Slaoui as an excellent choice, she said that his elevation highlights the contribution of Arab American doctors.
“He has a great background in regards to developing vaccination and is additionally very qualified in molecular biology and immunology,” said Ali-Fehmi, the current chairperson of NAAMA NextGen, the branch for students and young professionals in the medical fields.
While expressing pride in Slaoui’s Arab heritage, she said that “all physicians and health care workers play an important role on the front line taking care of patients regardless of race, ethnicity or religion.”
“We are in a challenging and unprecedented times with great ramifications for everyone’s personal health,” Ali-FehmI said. “Make sure to be proactive in taking care of yourself, family and community.”
The polarized debate over Slaoui’s appointment, however, showed that not even a deadly pandemic could bring America’s warring red-blue camps together behind a Manhattan project-like effort.
“It is a huge conflict of interest for the White House’s new vaccine czar to own $10 million of stock in a company receiving government funding to develop a COVID-19 vaccine. Dr. Slaoui should divest immediately,” Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democratic presidential contender who dropped out of the race to support Trump’s rival, former Vice President Joe Biden, wrote on Twitter. Warren said that she introduced a bill specifically targeting “coronavirus corruption” to prevent White House officials working on the pandemic to profit from the COVID-19 outbreak.

Trump Blames Chinese 'Incompetence' for 'Mass Worldwide Killing'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/May 20/2020
President Donald Trump again lashed out at China Wednesday over the coronavirus pandemic, blaming Beijing for "mass Worldwide killing." The early morning tweet, which also referred to an unidentified "wacko in China," was the latest heated rhetoric from the White House, where Trump is making attacks on Beijing a centerpiece of his November reelection bid. "It was the 'incompetence of China', and nothing else, that did this mass Worldwide killing," the president tweeted.

Greece to Restart Tourism June 15, International Flights July 1
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/May 20/2020
Greece will restart its tourism season on June 15 in a key boost to the economy after the virus lockdown, Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said Wednesday, adding that international flights would resume on July 1. "The tourism period begins June 15, when seasonal hotels can reopen, and direct international flights to our tourist destinations will gradually begin July 1," Mitsotakis said in a televised address. With Greece suffering fewer than 170 COVID-19 deaths over two months into the pandemic, Mitsotakis said the country's prompt response to the virus would be a "passport of safety, credibility and health" to attract visitors. "We will win the economy war just as we won the health battle," Mitsotakis said. Tourism Minister Harry Theocharis said a list of nations resuming flights to Greece would be announced by the end of May, noting that Athens would focus on reviving a travel front "from the Balkans to the Baltic."
Bulgarians and northern Europeans including Germans will be among the first visitors, the minister said, in addition to Israelis and Cypriots. Incoming travelers will not be required to undergo virus testing or quarantine, but sample tests will be carried out in tourist areas, the minister said.
Theocharis added that 600 beds would be specifically set aside for coronavirus care on Greek islands. The country, which is still recovering from a decade-long debt crisis, badly needs tourism income that directly and indirectly accounts for over a fifth of its economy. According to the tourism ministry, Greece last year had 33 million visitors and tourism revenue of 19 billion euros ($21 billion). To increase Greece's appeal, tax on all transport will be reduced to 13 percent from the current 24 percent for the coming five months, the prime minister said. The Greek finance ministry earlier on Wednesday noted that without support measures for businesses, the country could face an economic contraction of up to 13 percent this year.

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on May 20-21/2020
Fears for well-being of French-Iranian academic jailed in Iran
Randa Takieddine/Arab News/May 20/2020
Fariba Adelkhah was sentenced on May 16 to five years for gathering and conspiring against Iran’s national security, plus one year for anti-Iranian propaganda Adelkhah’s supporters in France are concerned about the health of the 61-year-old, given that Iran has been badly hit by the COVID-19 pandemic
PARIS: Friends and supporters of French-Iranian anthropologist and academic Fariba Adelkhah, who has been jailed for six years in Iran, say that her ordeal could drag on for some time, raising fears for her health and well-being.
Adelkhah has already been held in Evin Prison, Tehran, for almost a year. She and a fellow researcher at France's Center for International Research, Frenchman Roland Marchal, were arrested in Iran in June last year. Marchal was released on March 20 in exchange for the release of an Iranian engineer detained in France over allegations that he violated US sanctions. Adelkhah initially faced a charge of espionage, which carries a death sentence, but this was dropped on Jan. 6. According to her lawyer, Saeid Dehghan, she was sentenced on May 16 to five years for gathering and conspiring against Iran’s national security, plus one year for anti-Iranian propaganda. The terms are expected to run concurrently, he added.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian condemned the sentencing and urged the Iranians to immediately release Adelkhah, who holds dual Iranian and French nationalities. “The conviction is not based on any serious or recognized fact and is therefore of a political nature,” he said.
Bernard Hourcade, the director emeritus of France’s National Council for Scientific Research and an expert on Iran, said: “Iran set Roland Marchal free and was rewarded with the release of an Iranian arms dealer held in France. As for Fariba, there are no more exchanges that need to be made, so her case could drag on. “I think they want to get rid of her and they need to find an excuse to return her to France because she is no longer useful to them. Her presence is a problem because it creates tension between France and Iran. Her imprisonment is not important enough to be used as a means of applying pressure.”There are a number of possible motives for Adelkhah’s detention beyond the possibility of prisoner exchange, Hourcade added. For example, he said, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) want to send a message that research on Iran is prohibited.
“They don’t want journalists and researchers working freely in Iran,” he said. “They don’t want foreign researchers to see what’s going on in Iran.
“Fariba and other dual nationals were able to visit Iran but they were given a clear message: you cannot work anywhere.”Adelkhah’s supporters in France are concerned about the health of the 61-year-old, given that Iran has been badly hit by the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Iran has shot itself in the foot because Adelkhah is one of the greatest researchers and her work is authoritative,” said Jean Francois Bayart, a professor at the Graduate Institute (IHEID) in Geneva, coordinator of the Fariba Adelkhah Support Group, and Adelkhah’s former boss at CERI.
“Objectively, silencing that voice is not a very smart move on Iran’s part.”He said he has known and worked with Adelkhah for 30 years, “and if there is anything that characterizes her, it is her absolute intellectual independence.”
He added: “I know Fariba very well on the political level too; she is fiercely independent and takes orders from nobody. Her writings are strictly scientific and anthropological and that is why we cannot call her a political prisoner. She has never engaged in politics in Iran, or in related political topics, but her trial is strictly political and so are the grotesque accusations.”He said that her arrest might have been an attempt by some within the Revolutionary Guards to embarrass others within the group as a result of infighting. “Another theory is that those who imprisoned (her) want to embarrass President Rouhani because they sensed that he was very embarrassed during his talks with Macron,” said Bayart.He also said there might also be hopes in Iran that Adelkhah could yet be used as a bargaining chip to secure the release of more Iranians held overseas.
After his release, the engineer exchanged for Marchal gave an interview to an Iranian TV channel, Bayart said, in which he stated he was a member of the IRGC and had been released thanks to the Corps. “During Roland Marchal’s interrogation, the Iranians did not hide the fact that they wanted to trade the engineer for him,” Bayart added.

The Pentagon Tries to Pivot out of the Middle East—Again
John Hannah and Bradley Bowman/FDD/May 20/2020
Confusion over the removal of missiles and aircraft from Saudi Arabia could invite the aggression the United States is trying to avoid.
When the U.S. Defense Department announced, on May 7, that it would withdraw two Patriot missile batteries and several fighter aircraft from Saudi Arabia, it looked like an ominous development in the tense relationship between Washington and Riyadh. Speculation was rife that it was an effort by the Trump administration to punish the kingdom for starting an oil price war that—in concert with collapsing oil demand due to the coronavirus pandemic—has wreaked havoc in the U.S. shale oil industry.
When the Pentagon announced the withdrawal of Patriot missiles and fighter aircraft, it looked like an ominous development in the U.S.-Saudi relationship.
After all, angry Republican Senators had already introduced legislation calling for a complete U.S. military withdrawal, including the Patriot batteries. There were also credible reports that Trump himself had used these threats in negotiations with Riyadh to achieve the historic April 12 deal to cut oil production by 9.7 million barrels per day in an attempt to prop up prices and save U.S. shale.
But widespread anger in Washington at Saudi Arabia—over the oil price war, over the war in Yemen, over the killing of the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi—doesn’t make the speculation correct. The withdrawal was much less about punishing the kingdom than about the Pentagon’s effort to manage its finite resources and shift many of them elsewhere from the Middle East.
But just like previous attempts to pivot, this one also comes with dangers. While withdrawing some forces from the region may be a manageable and necessary risk, pulling out too many could send the wrong message about U.S. capabilities and invite the increased regional conflict that the Pentagon most wants to avoid.
The withdrawal reverses, at least in part, a significant U.S. military buildup in the Middle East that began last year to counter the threat from Iran. Privately, U.S. officials explained that these additional deployments to Saudi Arabia were always a temporary measure to augment Saudi defense capabilities and address a spike in Iranian aggression. Once adequate arrangements were in place to close the gap in Saudi defenses, the emergency deployment was, by definition, to end.
The defensive missiles and fighter aircraft were clearly purposed to ward off threats from Iran. Following Tehran’s Sept. 14 attacks on Saudi Arabia’s Khurais oil field and Abqaiq oil processing facility, the Pentagon sent a significant number of additional military personnel and equipment to Saudi Arabia. These U.S. deployments included Patriot missile batteries to augment the kingdom’s own missile defense capabilities, which had failed to prevent Tehran’s drones and cruise missiles from attacking the world’s largest oil processing facility. The two departing Patriot batteries were guarding the oil facilities. Another two batteries guarding Prince Sultan Air Base, where U.S. forces are stationed, will reportedly stay in place for now.
If the withdrawal confused allies and unleashed speculation about the motives behind it, Washington only had itself to blame. From the Pentagon to the State Department to the White House, no one seemed prepared to provide an authoritative public explanation for the withdrawal and to underscore the United States’ commitment to regional partners. Consequently, an information vacuum emerged that was quickly filled by rumors and speculation.
If the withdrawal confused allies and unleashed speculation about the motives behind it, Washington only had itself to blame.
In an unsuccessful attempt at damage control, Pentagon spokesperson Cmdr. Sean Robertson described the withdrawal as part of a global redeployment process that “routinely circulates troops and assets to address emerging threats and maintain readiness.” In the context of an ongoing campaign of maximum pressure on Iran, however, a badly executed or poorly justified withdrawal could quickly become anything but routine. Even if there are now fewer attacks by Iran and its proxies, more than four decades of history suggest it is likely a fleeting tactical or operational pause rather than a durable and strategic change of course.
Only last month, Tehran sent 11 gunboats to harass U.S. ships in a move the U.S. Navy called “dangerous and provocative.” In March, Tehran’s proxies in Iraq launched multiple rocket attacks at bases hosting U.S. forces. And in Syria, Israel has conducted repeated strikes to counter Iran’s relentless efforts to equip Lebanon’s Hezbollah with precision munitions.
The Pentagon insists it is staying vigilant and has forces ready. The United States retains “robust in-theater capabilities, including air defense, to address any Iran-related contingencies as needed,” Robertson said. “We also maintain the capability to augment these forces on short notice.” That’s a point Washington and its regional allies should emphasize. Otherwise, Tehran could perceive the withdrawal as a waning commitment to defend U.S. partners and regional interests—inviting more of the aggression Washington wants to avoid.
Saudi sources emphasized last week that Riyadh will be deploying its own Patriot systems to backfill the departing U.S. batteries. The Saudis have used the intervening months to strengthen their defenses and conduct additional training with U.S. advisors. It clearly makes sense for the Saudis to utilize their own air defense arsenal to protect the kingdom’s vital economic assets.
Given the growing missile threats to U.S. forces, it is easy to see why the Patriots are so much in demand. In January, Iran launched 16 ballistic missiles at bases housing American troops in Iraq. The Pentagon had decided to deploy its limited inventory of Patriot systems elsewhere, so U.S. troops had no choice but to brace for impact. After the attack injured more than 100 Americans, the Pentagon finally deployed Patriots to Iraq.
The U.S. Congress and the Trump administration must ensure that sufficient air and missile defense capabilities are procured and deployed in order to avoid leaving large concentrations of U.S. personnel and equipment unprotected while they are in easy reach of a hostile regime with ample missile capability.
In the meantime, many in the Pentagon note that every deployment to the Middle East is a military asset that is not available to deter China in the Pacific. The 2018 National Defense Strategy anticipated this tension: While the strategy identified China and Russia as the Pentagon’s “principal priorities,” it also emphasized that the U.S. military must “sustain its efforts to deter and counter” Iran.
Finding the right balance to deter both Iran and China is much easier said than done, even for the world’s best military. Too many U.S. military forces in the Middle East will deprive the Pentagon of resources needed elsewhere, but too few will leave U.S. interests, personnel, and allies insufficiently protected. That could permit the resurgence of the Islamic State or invite increased aggression from Iran. Either could spark a larger conflict in the Middle East that would pull U.S. military personnel and assets needed to meet the Pentagon’s priorities in the Pacific.
Finding the right balance to deter both Iran and China is much easier said than done, even for the world’s best military.
In 2018, then-Defense Secretary James Mattis pulled four Patriot batteries and a U.S. aircraft carrier out of the Middle East for redeployment to Asia. Less than a year later, those assets and more had to be rushed back to the Gulf to counter a spike in Iranian aggression—including the precision strike on Saudi oil facilities. That should serve as a cautionary tale: If the Pentagon goes too far in withdrawing forces, expect them to be returning soon when the next crisis emerges.
*John Hannah is a senior counselor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and former national security advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney. Follow John on Twitter Bradley Bowman is the senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Follow Brad on Twitter @Brad_L_Bowman.

COVID-19 Makes the Reinvigoration of American Manufacturing a National-Security Concern
Varsha Koduvayur and Greg Everett/National Review/May 20/2020
Fortunately, an existing government entity provides a model for repatriating the production of medical supplies and other key products.
The coronavirus pandemic has once more put the dark side of globalization in the spotlight. On both sides of the aisle, there is an increasing sense that, in its current form, globalization has resulted in an over-reliance on Chinese-made goods at the expense of domestic manufacturing capacity. Senator Marco Rubio recently cited the need for “a 21st-century, pro-American industrial policy,” warning that “the depletion of America’s manufacturing sector has left us with a huge national-security vulnerability.” Senator Elizabeth Warren likewise offered vocal support for legislation aimed at limiting the quantity of Chinese-made pharmaceuticals in the United States’ drug supply. As countries close borders, cancel flights, and hoard medical supplies in a bid to defeat COVID-19, such critics are increasingly calling into question the benefits gained from open borders, global supply chains, and interconnected trade.
While skepticism toward globalization was rising even before the global pandemic, it is now clearly in the United States’ national-security interest to repatriate some manufacturing activity. In order to protect Americans from the shortages and panic-buying that have plagued the U.S. in the past few months, Washington needs a strategy to prioritize the domestic production of goods that serve a vital national-security interest. Fortunately, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) provides a model of how this can be done.
As an interagency committee chaired by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, CFIUS adjudicates in-bound investments from foreign purchasers on national-security grounds. It does this by reviewing proposed foreign acquisitions of American businesses involved in critical technologies, critical infrastructure, and personal data. The rationale behind this policy is simple: While the U.S. generally encourages the flow of goods, capital, and investment across borders, when there is a national-security interest at stake, CFIUS steps in to evaluate whether a transaction would serve it. In certain cases, it has proposed blocking such transactions altogether, as happened in 2017 when the Trump administration, upon its recommendation, stopped a Chinese-backed investment firm from acquiring a U.S.-based semiconductor company.
The weaknesses that COVID-19 has exposed in our medical-supply chains provide one powerful example of why Washington needs a CFIUS-like entity to oversee certain aspects of American manufacturing. To take one glaring example, after several countries found recent Chinese-made shipments of protective equipment, test kits, and masks to be faulty, Beijing issued new, stricter export rules in a bid to boost quality control. This in turn created a huge bottleneck of much-needed personal protective equipment — masks, surgical gowns, and ventilators — at the same time that front-line workers were struggling with a severe dearth of such equipment.
A “CFIUS for all” entity would compile a list of items deemed to be in the national-security interests of the United States, by means of an interagency-review process. The entity could encourage companies to repatriate the domestic production of these items, using incentives such as subsidies or tax breaks. It could coordinate federal efforts to buy and stockpile goods that may be necessary in a crisis, make arrangements to ramp up production of such goods during an emergency, and, as a last resort, act under Congress’s commerce-clause authority to require that American companies repatriate production of them. The law creating the new entity could be strengthened further if it expanded the scope of CFIUS’s existing power to police foreign acquisitions of such companies. While commentators have speculated on the limits of Congress’s authority in this realm, the weight of current case law on that question makes it likely that a law along these lines, with a properly drafted connection to foreign commerce, would be upheld as constitutional.
Companies often move production offshore to minimize costs for consumers and increase profit. The pandemic has demonstrated how that instinct can backfire, rendering crucial global supply chains unreliable. To some extent, this realization may lead certain companies to unwind offshore production without a push from the federal government. But a CFIUS-like entity could step in when market forces were insufficient. The end result would be that our nation was protected the next time a pandemic, a nuclear incident, or another national emergency came around.
The COVID-19 pandemic can serve as an important turning point, helping governments and multinational corporations chart a new, and healthier, course forward that emphasizes national-security concerns and breaks our current addiction to increasing consumption at all costs. Creating a CFIUS-like entity to oversee the offshoring of certain products while also expanding CFIUS’s current review authority to include acquisitions of companies that produce such goods would go a long way toward reducing the vulnerabilities that the pandemic has exposed. Even after the present danger subsides, we won’t be out of the woods: We’ll need to prepare for the next national emergency, so we aren’t caught flat-footed again. Those preparations must begin now.
Varsha Koduvayur is a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where she focuses on the Persian Gulf. Follow Varsha on Twitter @varshakoduvayur. Greg Everett is a writer and corporate lawyer based in Nashville, Tenn.

Did Pompeo’s Visit Shift the Annexation Debate in Israel and Washington?
David Makovsky/The Washington Institute/May 20/2020
The Trump administration has signaled that it won’t be bound by Netanyahu’s summer rush schedule on the issue, adding to the many foreign and domestic factors that could lead the prime minister to delay or curtail the move.
On May 18, Israel swore in its new cabinet, ending 507 days of caretaker governance punctuated by three inconclusive elections. Under the coalition deal reached by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and new defense minister Benny Gantz, a resolution to apply Israeli sovereignty to portions of the West Bank can be brought before the cabinet as soon as July 1—provided the government obtains “full agreement” from the United States for the move, conducts “international consultations,” and ensures the “preservation of existing Israeli-Arab peace treaties.” Although Washington and Jerusalem’s internal views on the matter still appear to be crystalizing, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s May 13 trip to Israel may have provided some early clues.
POMPEO SIGNALS CAUTION
Annexation was hardly the lone issue on Pompeo’s agenda when he arrived in Jerusalem. One of his main objectives was to raise U.S. concerns that Israel’s regulatory framework is not sufficiently rigorous to screen private sector technology cooperation with China, and that it needs to be more vigilant against Beijing enmeshing itself in Israeli infrastructure projects (e.g., a major desalination plant contract about to be decided). Another objective was to address Israeli concerns about Iran, including the pace of its uranium enrichment, its dangerous role in Syria, and its recent cyberattack on Israeli water facilities. (There is speculation that Jerusalem consulted Pompeo before retaliating with a May 9 cyberattack on a major Iranian port.)
Yet Pompeo also wanted to get a pulse on how Gantz and new foreign minister Gabi Ashkenazi feel about annexation, since their views differ from Netanyahu’s. Previously, Pompeo has only dealt with Netanyahu on such matters, but this visit included solo meetings with the other two leaders as well.
Thus far, Washington has remained circumspect about the details of annexation, withholding explicit approval for Israel’s July 1 timetable. Around the time of Pompeo’s visit, a White House official said on background that this date was “not sacred” for the United States, and the secretary’s recent interviews signaled that Israel should be cautious about rushing toward such a deadline. The administration’s general approach has been to avoid taking a public position at odds with Israel while still emphasizing that Jerusalem needs to navigate the issue carefully. As one senior official said on background after Pompeo’s visit, “[Israel’s] got a coalition government that has various strands. And I think it’s going to take them a while to come together with what they’re going to do.”
For now, the trip seems to have empowered the Gantz-Ashkenazi wing. Although Netanyahu could get the requisite numbers in parliament to move forward on annexation without these coalition partners, U.S. officials privately suggest that the administration wants to see broader Israeli approval of the idea beyond his base, and that support from Gantz and Ashkenazi is important.
One concern publicly expressed by both ministers is the potential Arab reaction to annexation. U.S. officials privately say they are doubtful that Washington could substantially smooth over a negative response from Jordan and other regional actors; the question is whether Pompeo’s trip sufficiently tempered Israeli expectations on that front.
Another question is whether the Trump administration’s key players are all on the same page. They agree that showing support for Israel is especially crucial in this U.S. election year, but their views on annexation are at odds. Senior advisor Jared Kushner appears to see the issue as merely an instrument for compelling the Palestinians to make a counter-offer, thereby preempting immediate, unilateral annexation and leading to negotiations under the aegis of the Trump peace plan. Some observers speculate that Pompeo has been careful to align with Kushner’s approach. Yet the U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, is ideologically supportive of the settlement movement and has called for front-loading all proposed annexations. In an interview with Israel Hayom shortly before Pompeo arrived, Friedman expressed hope that such moves could take place within weeks. He has also been known to mock the possibility of a Palestinian state, at best describing it as a very distant objective.
FACTORS THAT COULD SHAPE NETANYAHU’S THINKING
Several clues suggest that Netanyahu might not intend to immediately annex the estimated 30 percent of the West Bank allotted to Israel under the Trump plan, and that the real debate is between deferring the issue entirely or implementing a smaller annexation, perhaps encompassing some or all settlement blocs largely adjacent to Israeli urban areas. The first clue is that Netanyahu has a history of launching trial balloons, believing it is easier to assert a maximalist opening position, then measure the reaction and make concessions during subsequent bargaining. In that sense, his push for full application of sovereignty in July may just be a negotiating tactic.
Second, he did not include the pro-settler party Yamina in his coalition. Although his longstanding personal enmity toward the party’s leadership is unmistakable, he may also have excluded it to avoid constraining his maneuverability on annexation. Ironically, having Yamina publicly criticize him from the right could help him deal with foreign and domestic interlocutors pushing for concessions on the issue.
Third, in remarks made after being sworn in this week, Netanyahu listed several other issues as top priorities ahead of annexation: combatting an expected new wave of COVID-19, grappling with the pandemic’s deep economic implications, dealing with challenges from Iran, and addressing the possibility that the International Criminal Court (ICC) will launch an investigation into Israel. Netanyahu mentioned annexation as a fifth priority below all these other issues, calling it a “personal preference.”
Fourth, the ICC’s deliberations could affect Netanyahu’s annexation calculus. In the coming weeks, three international judges are expected to rule on whether the ICC prosecutor has jurisdiction to investigate Israel—a possibility that Netanyahu has described as a “strategic threat.” Will this lead him to postpone the annexation decision until the ICC issues its ruling on jurisdiction? For his part, Pompeo publicly commented on the matter a day after his visit, opposing the idea of opening an ICC investigation and threatening consequences if that happens.
Fifth, Netanyahu is usually careful to avoid head-on conceptual clashes with his security chiefs, who favor a pragmatic approach to annexation in order to preserve close ties with their Arab security counterparts. In early April, over 200 retired Israeli generals issued a joint letter highlighting the many factors Israel must consider in making its decision, including the future of the Jordan-Israel peace treaty, the risk of unrest in the West Bank, a potential halt in Palestinian Authority security cooperation with Israel, and even the possible collapse of the PA itself. These concerns were reinforced in a recent Yediot Aharonot op-ed by leading defense figure Amos Gilead, who concluded that annexation offers few benefits and considerable downsides. Indeed, when interviewed by Der Spiegel last week, Jordan’s King Abdullah indicated that any such move would trigger a “massive conflict” with Amman, echoing previous warnings by Prime Minister Omar Razzaz that Israeli annexations would freeze the peace treaty.
Sixth, Netanyahu is well aware that Europe, Israel’s largest trading partner, has been very critical of the idea. It is unclear if the EU would be able to achieve the consensus required for multilateral sanctions against Israel if annexation becomes a reality, since some Eastern European member states tend to support Jerusalem on most issues. Yet opposition from individual countries could have ripple effects beyond the bilateral level. For instance, the EU’s Horizon 2020 program has encouraged technological cooperation with Israel’s scientific community to the tune of hundreds of millions of euros’ worth of investments. But the program will soon be replaced by its successor, Horizon Europe, which requires foreign countries to obtain consensus EU support for admission.
Despite all of these factors, however, some observers point out that this is likely Netanyahu’s last term in office, and that he has committed to handing power over to Gantz in November 2021 per the terms of their rotating premiership. He may therefore believe that pushing forward with annexation sooner rather than later is his last chance to define his political legacy—particularly if President Trump is replaced by Joe Biden, who opposes the idea. In other words, urgent political stakes could conceivably lead both Netanyahu and Trump to rush the matter even in the face of negative policy consequences.
CONCLUSION
When remarking on annexation during last week’s trip, Pompeo framed the issue as one for Israel to decide—a formulation likely shaped by the sensitivities of the U.S. presidential election season. Yet evidence also suggests that he told Israeli officials Washington will not be bound by the July 1 timetable. Moreover, no international actor has articulated any policy benefits that Israel might accrue from taking unilateral action, while several governments have spelled out the downsides of such a move. Thus, while one cannot rule out Netanyahu pressing forward, it is worth questioning whether the traditionally risk-averse leader will sharply scale back the scope and timing of his proposed annexation. The answer may depend on how the international and domestic political climate takes shape in the coming weeks.
*David Makovsky is the Ziegler Distinguished Fellow at The Washington Institute, creator of the podcast Decision Points, and coauthor with Dennis Ross of the book Be Strong and of Good Courage: How Israel’s Most Important Leaders Shaped Its Destiny.

Annexation delay can become an opportunity
Alistair Burt/Arab News/May 20, 2020
It has been a busy couple of weeks of diplomatic activity in relation to the next moves on the eternal chessboard that is the Middle East peace process.
As Israel formed its new government through an agreement that confirmed progress would be made on implementing the Trump plan’s proposals, including annexation of territory, opinion elsewhere hardened against any such unilateral action. In a virtual meeting with EU foreign ministers, new EU High Representative Josep Borrell was uncompromising that the bloc “must work to discourage any possible initiative towards annexation,” and that “international law has to be upheld,” although it remains unclear what action the EU would take should annexation go ahead.
Within the region, two significant voices were heard. UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan pulled no punches in saying that such a move “is illegal, undermines opportunities for peace, and contradicts all efforts made by the international community to reach a lasting political solution in accordance with relevant international resolutions.” Meanwhile, King Abdullah of Jordan warned of “massive conflict” if Israel proceeded unilaterally. He added that annexation would undermine the peace agreement between the two countries, which has been such a vital foundation in recent years.
Those moving the Trump proposals in Israel — and we should not dismiss the strong Israeli voices against them — will probably be unfazed by comments in the EU. Europeans still struggle to be unified in relation to Israel and the peace process when they move away from easy generalities into tough policy decisions; and I would imagine that any number of statements “condemning” actions are factored in at an early stage. But more thoughtful commentators will have taken particular note of the point on international law, which is a live issue in a Europe with Russia on the border. The EU, a major trade and social partner with Israel, and often a champion of it, may have a breaking point. However, the significant regional voices are a different matter and are dismissed at peril.
Amid all this, US Secretary of State Pompeo last week paid a surprise visit to Jerusalem. My take on what emerged from the fog of diplomacy is that a note of caution has been injected into what had seemed inexorable activity. Pompeo ensured we knew that any progress would be a “decision for the Israeli government,” and an anonymous US source suggested that July 1 was “not a sacred date.” The comments of the new Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi, an ally of Benny Gantz, on taking office this week were more notable for what he said about “maintaining the peace agreements and strategic interests of the state of Israel” than its endorsement of the Trump plan as a “historic opportunity.” It seems likely that King Abdullah’s words had hit home.
And here we have the rub, and indeed the opportunity. Do these US and Israeli nuances mean we have moved into yet another phase of this interminable issue?
There is so much to risk losing now: Not only the peace bought so dearly through agreements with Jordan and Egypt, and, as is already under acute threat, the Palestinian Authority working with Israel on security, but also the efforts made, quietly or publicly, by Arab states and Israel to improve their relationships for the benefit of the region. The coronavirus pandemic has emphasized that, for most everyday people in the region, what matters is health, family and jobs. That translates, in political terms, to peace and economic progress. There is so much to gain in those terms from an awareness that the region will need to take more of its security on to its own shoulders economically, diplomatically and physically.
A note of caution has been injected into what had seemed inexorable activity.
As denying Israel’s existence now belongs to the absurd, justly resolving the issue between it and the Palestinians is key, as a region with such an outstanding issue at its core cannot function to its full capacity. If the Trump plan is an unlikely gauntlet, what is the concerted Arab response to its being thrown down? The first response was to say “no” for all the reasons we understand, which was rightly a determined effort to prevent the unilateral action that so many, including good, long-standing friends of Israel, believe would be damaging almost beyond repair. However, a further response of, “What are we going to propose instead?” is definitely lacking. A response need not concede anything in relation to the plan itself. The sense of outrage at a “negotiation” ending in a one-sided affirmation is justified but, for the sake of people weary of all their leaders and wanting, perhaps more than ever, a chance of a different future for their families, we now need to hear something more. Perhaps, therefore, this moment of hesitation provides — once again for the eternal optimists in this process — an opportunity. We should be encouraging Arab leaders to seize it.
*Alistair Burt is a former UK Member of Parliament who has twice held ministerial positions in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office — as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State from 2010 to 2013 and as Minister of State for the Middle East from 2017 to 2019. Twitter: @AlistairBurtUK

Why Italy is losing faith in the EU
Ranvir S. Nayar/Arab News/May 20, 2020
French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have proposed setting up a €500 billion ($547 billion) EU-wide relief fund in response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The funds would be disbursed as grants to the countries worst hit by the pandemic.
While many EU nations may welcome the idea, it is liable to receive a cool reception in Rome. Italians are unlikely to forget the way they were abandoned by fellow EU members as early as February 2020, when the pandemic had just begun to take hold in Italy, the first EU member country to register a large-scale explosion in the number of cases and, eventually, deaths.
By late February, the Italian government and healthcare system were struggling to handle the crisis and could have used the famed solidarity that the European Commission incessantly speaks of. The country’s healthcare system was over-stretched. There was a severe lack of both equipment — including masks and ventilators — and medical professionals, as doctors and nurses had far too many cases on their hands.
Instead of coming to Italy’s rescue by sending in material and professionals to help, however, European nations turned their backs on Italy and closed their borders, leaving Italy to manage its own crisis and violating a basic premise of the union — free movement of EU nationals all over the territory.
China stepped in and offered help as early as mid-March, just around the time when Italy was seeing a steep rise in the number of cases and deaths. It was not that the Italians had not asked for help. Indeed, PM Giuseppe Conte had appealed to fellow EU members not only for material and professionals but had also proposed that the EU launch “coronabonds” to help the worst-affected countries manage the crisis. The idea was shot down by several northern EU member states, who were fiscally more tight-fisted than their southern neighbors.
After struggling for several weeks on its own and after two months of strict lockdown, which was lifted earlier this month, Italians counted over 32,000 deaths and as much as an 8 percent drop in its GDP. The pandemic has led to millions of jobs being lost and the Italian employment rate, already one of the lowest in the EU, fell further to 58.8 percent in March, before the pandemic was full blown. The data for April and May point to even more severe damage. Italy faces its worst economic crisis since World War II.
Across the country, Italians feel that the EU has seriously let them down. A recent poll found that as many as 67 percent of Italians felt that being part of the EU was a disadvantage, a sharp jump from 47 percent in November. Even the Italian President said that by not coming to his country’s assistance in its moment of greatest need, EU nations were weakening the foundation of their own institutions. Former EU Council President Donald Tusk said that there has been a serious loss of faith in the EU among the southern members.
Now, EU member countries are trying to make up for their earlier blunders by helping with money, human resources and medical equipment. Few Italians are soon to forget that for the first six to eight weeks, the EU had abandoned one of its largest and oldest members during one of its most significant crises.
Across the country, Italians feel that the EU has seriously let them down. A recent poll found that as many as 67 percent of Italians felt that being part of the EU was a disadvantage, a sharp jump from 47 percent in November.
It would indeed take a tall claim and a lot of leeway for Macron and Merkel to convince ordinary Italians, as well as the government in Rome, that the EU’s intentions are honest. A €500 billion fund is unlikely to make Italians forget the humiliation and dangers they had to face alone.
The EU response also lays hollow the claim of solidarity and could indeed result in further mistrust as other nations fear that what happened to Italy during the pandemic might very well happen to them. If the EU is to survive as anything more than just an idea, its member states cannot afford to repeat such blunders. Otherwise, the next victim of a big crisis could very well be the union itself.
**Ranvir S. Nayar is the editor of Media India Group, a global platform based in Europe and India that encompasses publishing, communication and consultation services.

Israel unlikely to go ahead with annexation plan
Daoud Kuttab/Arab News/May 20, 2020
While the new Israeli government coalition agreement mentions passing an annexation law as early as July 1, it is looking increasingly unlikely that this will actually happen. However, annexation or not, all interested parties should redouble their efforts to end the occupation.
This is not to say annexation will never happen, nor is it to say that one should become complacent. But a level-headed political reading of the relevant elements suggests that annexation will not happen as expected and at the time suggested.
While the coalition agreement between the Likud party and the Blue and White alliance mentioned annexation, it conditioned the decision on clear criteria: The US has to acquiesce, the move should not affect peace efforts, and it should not endanger existing peace treaties. Every one of these conditions is starting to come apart.
While US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo initially said the matter was up to Tel Aviv, he didn’t speak on the issue during his surprise and short visit to Israel last week. In fact, journalists say that, if anything, Pompeo is putting on the brakes on any unilateral action. One analyst, Ofer Zalzberg of the International Crisis Group, argued that Pompeo gave Blue and White leader Benny Gantz a veto on this issue, which his Likud coalition partners had taken away from him.
Palestinians are not waiting for annexation to happen. A letter written by leftist leader Ahmad Saadat and smuggled out of his prison appears to have buried the hatchet regarding the divisions within the Palestinian national movement (although not with Hamas) and a Palestine Liberation Organization reconciliation meeting is due to take place soon. An emergency meeting of the Palestinian leadership held on Tuesday agreed on the total abrogation of all agreements the PLO has had with both Israel and the US “including security” agreements. While the details have not been fleshed out, this decision will not bode well for any expectation of discretion on the Palestinian front.
The Arab world is also not remaining silent. Not only have the Arab League’s foreign ministers opposed annexation, but Jordan’s King Abdullah has made it clear that it “would lead to a massive conflict.” In an interview with Der Spiegel, he refused to make any threats publicly but insisted Amman would “consider all options.”
However, annexation might not take place for a totally different reason. For all his bluster, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu really likes his international buddies, probably more so than most of his political partners. European leaders and UK MPs have threatened sanctions and/or the possibility of recognizing the Palestinian state on the 1967 borders.
Netanyahu is not an ideologue but a pragmatist who is fighting for his political life. He had promised annexation in order to increase his mandate in the elections. But, now that the elections are over and the far-right Yamina bloc is not even part of his coalition, Bibi, as he is called in Israel, would prefer to keep the friendship of Germany’s Angela Merkel, France’s Emmanuel Macron and others rather than some of the ultra-right-wing settlement fanatics who are pushing Israel into an international minefield.
In addition to the overwhelming Palestinian, Arab, and European opposition to annexation, loud voices from the US are also making themselves heard. Opposition to annexation has been publicly expressed by members of Congress from both parties, Washington-based think tanks, and the media, as well as by the Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. A majority of American Jews are also opposed to it.
In Israel, an overwhelming number of former security generals have publicly declared their opposition to annexation. Their arguments and experiences cannot be easily ignored. Annexation has no majority among the Israeli public. Eight American-Jewish organizations including J street and Americans for Peace Now have signed a letter opposed to unilateral annexation.
On the ground, a simple look at the future will force Israel to revisit its separation wall theory. Following annexation, would it then create another 850-kilometer-long wall at the cost of billions of dollars at a time of economic uncertainty due to the coronavirus pandemic and its associated lockdown?
Netanyahu is not an ideologue but a pragmatist who is fighting for his political life. Some argue that Israel might choose a narrower path and annex only some of the larger settlement blocks like Maale Adumim, Efrat and Ariel. This climb down would, however, not make the European, American or Jordanian responses any less debilitating. It would cause long-term rifts between Israel and its Arab neighbors and international friends for years to come. On the other hand, this “compromise” would do little to satisfy the hardcore settlers who want every single settlement, outpost and caravan built illegally in the Occupied Territories to be part of Israel, as well as the entire Jordan Valley.
The prediction that annexation will not take place in July is not wishful thinking or a call to let down the political guard. On the contrary, it is testament to the Palestinians, Arabs and Europeans’ power and influence, which should now be used not simply to stop the annexation, but to end the occupation.
Thanks to Netanyahu and Gantz, the almost-forgotten Palestinian cause is back on the front burner. It is high time that a national, regional and international strategy was implemented to end the occupation and establish an independent and democratic state of Palestine to live in peace with its neighbors.
*Daoud Kuttab is an award-winning Palestinian journalist and former Ferris Professor of Journalism at Princeton University. Twitter: @daoudkuttab