English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For October 08/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.october08.20.htm

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

 

Bible Quotations For today
Be on guard so that your hearts are not weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and the worries of this life, and that day does not catch you unexpectedly, like a trap
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 21/34-38/:”‘Be on guard so that your hearts are not weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and the worries of this life, and that day does not catch you unexpectedly, like a trap. For it will come upon all who live on the face of the whole earth. Be alert at all times, praying that you may have the strength to escape all these things that will take place, and to stand before the Son of Man. ’Every day he was teaching in the temple, and at night he would go out and spend the night on the Mount of Olives, as it was called. And all the people would get up early in the morning to listen to him in the temple.”


Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on October 07-08/2020
Lebanese President Sets Consultations on New Cabinet
Lebanon Foils Medicine Smuggling Via Beirut Airport
Lebanon Announces Another Record Daily Tally of Covid-19 Cases
President Aoun addressing “Alvarez & Marsal” delegation: The Lebanese are looking forward, with interest, to the results of the forensic audit
President Aoun: “Weak state ruled by the powerful who do not value the Constitution”
Aoun Calls Berri, His Call for Consultations 'Not Linked to French Initiative'
Miqati Nominates Hariri to Lead Techno-Political Govt.
Qassem Says No Govt. if No Respect for Parliamentary Representation
Army Chief Meets Military, Security Officials in the UK
LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun ends a two-day visit to the UK
Jumblat Reminds of Electricity File, Says Fuel Being Smuggled to Syria
Jbara Says Panic-Buying Triggered Medicines Shortage
Hezbollah is losing its ability to intimidate anyone/Michael Young/The National/October 07/2020
How the Lebanese Sects Successively Withdrew from War/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/October 07/2020
Beirut’s last synagogue at risk after severe damages following port blast/Melanie Swan/Jerusalem Post/October 07/2020
Berri said pushing for Baassiri as next Lebanese PM/The Weekly Arab/October 07/2020

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on October 07-08/2020

Half Karabakh Population Displaced as Mediators Set for Geneva Talks
Iran Warns 'Terrorists' near Border in Karabakh Fighting
France Accuses Turkey of 'Military Involvement' in Karabakh
Kuwaiti Emir Names Top Security Official as Crown Prince
Danes summon Iran’s envoy over reports of illegal divorces
Anti-Iran Slogans Chanted at ‘Arbaeen’ Pilgrimage in Iraq
US Official to Asharq Al-Awsat: Normalization with Assad Linked to Behavior Change
Assad Blames Turkey for Nagorno-Karabakh Fighting
Israel Confiscates Funds Transferred by Hamas, PA to Families of Palestinian Prisoners
Sisi Warns of Wicked Ambitions, Threats Facing Egypt
Algeria Kicks off Campaign to Rally Support for Constitutional Referendum
Yemeni Govt Warns of Sectarian Screening by Houthis Targeting Educators
Tunisian Culture Minister Sacked for ‘Siding with’ Protesters
OIC Stresses its Rejection of All Forms of Terrorism


Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on October 07-08/2020

Turkey Rekindles the Armenian Genocide/Raymond Ibrahim/FrontPage Magazine/October 07/2020
The Battle of Lepanto: When Turks Skinned Christians Alive for Refusing Islam/Raymond Ibrahim/October 07/2020
Will Washington Close its Embassy in Baghdad?/Robert Ford/Asharq Al Awsat/October 07/2020
Madrid, Marseille and Middlesbrough Highlight New Virus Problem/Ferdinando Giugliano/Bloomberg/October 07/2020
Were Iran and the United States Really ‘On the Brink’? Observations on Gray Zone Conflict/Michael Eisenstadt/The Washington Institute/October 07/2020
Caucasus Clash Could Endanger Israeli Oil Imports/Simon Henderson/The Washington Institute./October 07/2020

 

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on October 07-08/2020

Lebanese President Sets Consultations on New Cabinet
Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Lebanese President Michel Aoun said on Wednesday that parliamentary consultations to choose a new prime minister will begin on Oct. 15.
The government of Hassan Diab resigned on Aug. 10 in the wake of the devastating Beirut Port blast that killed nearly 200 people and wrecked swathes of the capital. Mustapha Adib, the country's former ambassador to Berlin, was picked on Aug. 31 to form a cabinet after French President Emmanuel Macron launched an initiative, securing a consensus on naming him a PM-designate. But he quit in late September after trying for almost a month to line up a cabinet of experts. His resignation dealt a blow to the French plan under which the new government would take steps to tackle corruption and implement reforms needed to trigger billions of dollars of international aid to fix an economy that has been crushed by a mountain of debt. But Adib's efforts stumbled in a dispute over appointments, particularly the post of finance minister, which both Hezbollah and Amal movement, dubbed the Shiite duo, held onto.
Macron admonished Lebanon's leaders following Adib's resignation, saying the failed efforts amounted to a collective "betrayal", but vowed to push ahead with his efforts. The date set by Aoun for the start of parliamentary consultations comes just two days before Lebanon marks the first anniversary of a nationwide protest movement demanding sweeping political reform. It was not clear if Lebanon’s political groups have agreed on the future premier but former Prime Minister Najib Mikati has reportedly put forward a proposal for a 20-member cabinet consisting of 14 experts and six politicians.

Lebanon Foils Medicine Smuggling Via Beirut Airport
Beirut - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces have foiled an attempt to smuggle, through the Rafik Hariri International airport, hundreds of boxes of medicines to Egypt. The operation came at a time when Lebanon suffers from a shortage of medicine supply after the Central Bank announced a plan to lift subsidies over the dollar crisis gripping the country. Head of the Syndicate of Pharmacists Ghassan Al-Amine told Asharq Al-Awsat that the price of medicine in Lebanon has “become the lowest” in the region for being sold at the exchange rate of LL1,500 to $1 while in the black market the Lebanese pound has reached above LL8,000. “The low cost of medicine makes it more vulnerable for smuggling,” Al-Amine said. On Tuesday, the ISF said in a statement that it successfully foiled an operation to smuggle suspicious quantities of medication to Egypt. The detainees confessed they bought the medicines from different pharmacies in Lebanon. The ISF said it later released the six suspects on bail. Al-Amine explained that the shortage of medicine in the Lebanese market is not only caused by smuggling to other countries but because Lebanon has stopped importing large quantities of medicine. He said that in the past two months, Lebanese people started to stockpile medicines fearing they will no longer be available or that prices will increase after the Central Bank said it would lift subsidies by the end of October. He said importers have only enough stocks to last for 45 days. “This is why pharmacies are only selling medicines in small quantities,” he explained, warning from a worsening crisis in the coming months.


Lebanon Announces Another Record Daily Tally of Covid-19 Cases

Naharnet/October 07/2020
Lebanon on Wednesday announced 1,459 new coronavirus cases -- the highest daily tally recorded by the country since the first case was detected on February 21.It also announced nine new deaths. The new cases raise the country’s overall tally to 48,377 while the fatalities take the death toll to 433.
Lebanon has regularly witnessed high daily tallies over the past few months and the government on Sunday placed 111 towns and villages on lockdown in a bid to curb the spread of the virus.

President Aoun addressing “Alvarez & Marsal” delegation: The Lebanese are looking forward, with interest, to the results of the forensic audit
NNA/October 07/2020
President Michel Aoun affirmed that “The Lebanese are looking forward, with interest, to the results of the forensic audit in the financial accounts of the Central Bank, because this audit represents one of the basic reforms that the Lebanese Government has adopted to emerge the difficult financial and economic conditions which Lebanon is going through”. The President’s stances came while meeting a delegation from Alvarez & Marsal company, which will undertake the forensic financial audit in Central Bank accounts, in the presence of Caretaker Finance Minister, Ghazi Wazny, today at Baabda Palace. The delegation included General Manager, Mr. James Daniel, Administrative Director, Asild Janusz Ozeib, and Mr. Yehya Naseer. Also attending the meeting were: Former Minister, Salim Jreisatti, Director General of the Lebanese Presidency, Dr. Antoine Choucair, and the President’s Economic and Financial Adviser, Charbel Qordahi.President Aoun stressed the need to reach conclusive, accurate and clear results which are supported by documents and evidence, calling on the members of the delegation to review evidence if they find any difficulty at work so that it can be removed quickly. The President also recalled the obligation to adhere to the confidentiality of work and the obtained information, wishing the delegation success in their task and in presenting the actual results of the forensic audit that they were assigned to undertake within the time limit which is specified in the contract. For his part, the General Director, Mr. James Daniel, explained the delegation’s vision of the task which was assigned to them for the forensic audit of the BDL financial accounts and the difficulties that they might encounter during their work. Mr. Daniel also stressed that the auditors team adhered to the deadline given after obtaining the required information from the Central Bank, and thanked the trust given to their company by the Lebanese state, in forensic auditing, hoping that the work team would receive all the required cooperation to accomplish the mission. -----Presidency Press Office

President Aoun: “Weak state ruled by the powerful who do not value the Constitution”

NNA/October 07/2020
The President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, this morning, wrote the following tweet: “A strong state may be ruled by powerful or ordinary rulers, but they respect the Constitution and abide by laws, thus strengthening the state. The weak state is definitely ruled by the strong, but they do not value the Constitution and they ignore the laws, so they become stronger and the state becomes weaker”.—Presidency Press Office

Aoun Calls Berri, His Call for Consultations 'Not Linked to French Initiative'
Naharnet/October 07/2020
President Michel Aoun on Wednesday called Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and informed him of the date of binding parliamentary consultations to name a new premier, LBCI TV said. “Aoun will not hold any meetings prior to the consultations and the issue might remain limited to some communication,” the TV network added. The President’s call for consultations is “not linked to the activation of the French initiative and it is rather the President’s duty to call for consultations,” LBCI quoted unnamed sources as saying. “The timeframe given to the blocs is sufficient to name the figure that will assume the mission, seeing as the seven-day deadline might be enough to put the formation process on the right track,” the sources added.

Miqati Nominates Hariri to Lead Techno-Political Govt.
Naharnet/October 07/2020
Ex-PM Najib Miqati on Wednesday announced that he nominates ex-PM Saad Hariri to lead a techno-political government comprised of 14 specialists and six political ministers of state. “Any person who interprets the political situation in the recent period and has a centrist mindset would see the need to reconcile between politics and technocracy,” Miqati said in an interview with LBCI television. Asked whether he is nominated to lead the new government, the ex-PM said: “I nominate Saad Hariri.” “But if the violations continue in the political conduct and in the implementation of the Constitution’s stipulations, any person will not be able to carry out a rescue process on their own,” Miqati added. “Therefore I say that I do not accept to be a premier amid the current situations, because I do not see prospects for success should every party continue to tamper with the Constitution as they desire,” the former premier went on to say. As for the fate of the binding parliamentary consultations to name a new PM in light of the fact that the ex-PMs are yet to agree on a candidate, Miqati said: “Why are we rushing things? We will hold intensive meetings this week to take a unified stance, prior to the consultations that have been scheduled for October 15.” Miqati also denied the presence of a “rift” among the former premiers in connection with Mustafa Adib’s failed attempt to form a new government. Asked whether Lebanon will have a new government amid the current circumstances, Miqati said: “The government will be formed, but will there be elements for its success? I doubt it.”

Qassem Says No Govt. if No Respect for Parliamentary Representation
Naharnet/October 07/2020
Hizbullah deputy chief Sheikh Naim Qassem on Wednesday hinted that his party and its allies will not accept any government format that “does not represent the parliamentary blocs.” “The economic and social situation has become unbearable and the people are facing the threat of the end of subsidization (of essential goods) while the coronavirus crisis might further aggravate,” Qassem warned. “Don’t these concerns of the people and the future of their children require the presence of a salvation government that is at the level of this period,” he asked. He added: “The time is not right for altering or changing the balance of power nor for staging a coup against the results of the parliamentary elections nor for inventing government formats that do not represent the parliamentary blocs.”Warning that “the past months have proved that the only available solution is designating a PM and forming a government according to the Constitution and the mechanisms that have been in place since the Taef Accord,” Qassem cautioned that “any disregard for this solution means keeping the country in a state of paralysis and deterioration.”“Those who do not follow the constitutional and legal courses would bear the responsibility,” he said. “The rescue plan, Beirut’s reconstruction and addressing the crises require a government that would shoulder all these burdens, and the more hands are joined and the broadest representation is achieved in the government… the more there will be bigger hope in reform,” Qassem went on to say. Hizbullah and its ally Amal Movement had insisted on having a say in the appointment of Shiite ministers during Mustafa Adib’s botched attempt to form a government in recent weeks. Adib eventually stepped down and President Michel Aoun has scheduled binding parliamentary consultations to pick a new premier for October 15.

Army Chief Meets Military, Security Officials in the UK
Naharnet/October 07/2020
Lebanese Army chief General Joseph Aoun visited the United Kingdom at the invitation of his British counterpart General Nick Carter, the Lebanese Army said in a statement Tuesday. In addition to meeting with Carter, Aoun met with Commander of Maritime Operations for the Royal Navy Admiral Simon Asquith, the UK PM’s foreign policy adviser David Quarrey, in addition to meetings with high-ranking military and security officials, said the army. Discussions focused on the Kingdom's support for the Lebanese army, and the ways to expand partnership in combating terrorism and support the security of the land and sea borders. Talks have also focused on the significance of the army’s role in protecting human rights and the right to peaceful protests, in addition to adopting transparency as a fundamental principle during the implementation of all missions. “The Lebanese and British armies have a long and honorable history of cooperation. During this visit we discussed the best ways to continue strengthening our relationship in the field of defense. We continue our joint work and training, and we will remain committed to providing support for our friends in that region with the aim of combating extremism and enhancing border security,” said Carter. For his part, General Aoun expressed deep gratitude to his British counterpart for his invitation, noting the strong ties that bind the two armies. Aoun said Lebanon appreciates the “effective UK contribution in supporting its border security, as it aims to strengthen cooperation to continue support for the Lebanese army in light of major challenges it faces, especially in terms of combating terrorism and border security.”Chris Rampling, British ambassador to Lebanon, said Aoun’s visit to the UK “comes at a sensitive time. Many challenges are facing the Lebanese army. In recent weeks, we have witnessed the continuing terrorist threat in Lebanon, while the economic situation has exacerbated pressure on the Lebanese security institutions. The United Kingdom is a friend of Lebanon, and will continue to stand by its people in difficult times.”

LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun ends a two-day visit to the UK
NNA/October 07/2020
During his visit to the United Kingdom at the invitation of the UK Chief of Defence Staff General Sir Nick Carter, Lebanese Army Commander General Joseph Aoun alongside General Sir Carter met with Rear Admiral Simon Asquith, Commander Operations for the Royal Navy, Mr David Quarrey, the Prime Minister’s International Affairs Adviser and Deputy National Security Adviser, and other senior Defence and security officials. Between 2016-2020, the UK has allocated more than $100 million to train and equip Lebanon’s military, especially elements of the Land Border Regiments to help control illegal infiltration. Experts from the United Kingdom have also supervised the construction of 41 border control towers and 38 advanced centers along the northern and eastern borders, and provided 13 mobile monitoring systems. A specialized center for training land border regiments has also been established in the Bekaa region, where more than 8,000 of these regiments are undergoing training to carry out security-related border operations. By the end of 2020, the UK will have completed training of 14,000 security personnel.

Jumblat Reminds of Electricity File, Says Fuel Being Smuggled to Syria

Naharnet/October 07/2020
Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat on Wednesday lamented how the thorny file of Lebanon’s electricity crisis has been “forgotten,” describing it as “the main reform file.”“No one remembers the influential team, from (Samir) Doumit to (Alaa) Khawaja to (Teddy) Rahme, to the curtailed administration to other issues in this cave,” Jumblat tweeted. “It seems that unveiling the truth about the amount of the waste of public funds is prohibited,” the PSP leader decried, adding that he believes that fuel is being smuggled to Syria. “Is there another explanation?” he asked rhetorically.

Jbara Says Panic-Buying Triggered Medicines Shortage
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
Head of Pharmaceuticals Importers Association, Karim Jbara, said on Wednesday that people started to panic buy medicine in anticipation of a shortage after the Central Banks’ decision to stop subsidies on main commodities including medicine, al-Joumhouria daily reported on Wednesday.
“People started to stockpile medicine at home when they learned that the central bank will stop subsidies on medicine,” Jbara told al-Joumhouria. He said assuring that the general atmosphere in the central bank, the health ministry and the government confirms that subsidies on medicine will not be halted without an alternative plan to protect the citizens and the Lebanese health system. With medicine shortage at most of Lebanon’s pharmacies, Jbara assured that the stock of medicines at warehouses can support the demand each month at a time. The shortage is "a result of panic buying. The stockpile of drugs is available to cover people’s needs in normal times. But people have been stacking medicines (for two and three months instead of one) at home (fearing a shortfall)," Jbara told the daily."In the next two months, the Central Bank is expected to end subsidies on basic goods. Since the local currency’s collapse, the bank has been using its depleting reserves to support imports of fuel, wheat and medicine.
 

Hezbollah is losing its ability to intimidate anyone
Michael Young/The National/October 07/2020
مايكل يونغ/ذي ناشيونال: حزب الله يفقد قدرته على ترهيب أي شخص
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/91090/michael-young-the-national-hezbollah-is-losing-its-ability-to-intimidate-anyone-%d9%85%d8%a7%d9%8a%d9%83%d9%84-%d9%8a%d9%88%d9%86%d8%ba-%d8%b0%d9%8a-%d9%86%d8%a7%d8%b4%d9%8a%d9%88%d9%86%d8%a7%d9%84/

Amid Lebanon's economic chaos and popular despair, there is little patience left for the group's 'resistance' ideology.
Last week, Lebanon’s Speaker of Parliament, Nabih Berri, announced that an agreement had been reached on a framework for negotiations with Israel to delineate the two nations' maritime boundaries. The agreement, mediated by the US, could allow them to resolve their dispute over offshore gas fields in the Mediterranean.
Mr Berri is a close ally of the militant political party Hezbollah, and the fact that he approved of the framework suggested the party had given him the go-ahead to do so. But it didn’t make the decision any less remarkable. By agreeing to indirect negotiations, Hezbollah implicitly acknowledged that a compromise could be reached when it had argued that Lebanon’s rights to its offshore gas were inviolable. That prior insistence meant, in principle, that there was nothing over which to compromise.
Stark reality, however, has trumped ideology. Lebanon is going through a terrible economic crisis, exacerbated by the resistance of the country’s politicians and parties to introducing reforms that would unlock financial aid from the International Monetary Fund. Such reforms would threaten their networks of corruption and patronage. That is why the prospect of offshore gas reserves represents a valuable lifeline for them, especially when Hezbollah’s and Mr Berri’s supporters are increasingly unhappy with Lebanon's economic situation.
Hezbollah’s acceptance of negotiations between Lebanon and Israel has raised profound questions, too. First, if Lebanon looks to natural gas as an economic lifesaver, this could create dynamics that impose quiet collaboration with Israel – something Hezbollah officially claims to be a nonstarter. But things may not be so simple.
For instance, both countries will need to find a means of exporting natural gas so that the price remains competitive internationally. That means that Israel and Lebanon, along with Cyprus, would benefit from investing in a shared export infrastructure, thereby reducing costs. Lebanon would have an economic incentive to feed its gas into the EastMed Pipeline that those countries, together with Greece, plan to complete by 2025, and which aims to transport natural gas to Italy.
The Lebanese continue to claim that they would not allow their gas to be exported in the same pipeline as Israeli gas. Should Beirut seek to collaborate with the Israelis in exploiting the gas fields, this would put Lebanese officials in a particularly awkward position – claiming that gas has a nationality when it is being exported, but not when it is being extracted.
Competing with the EastMed Pipeline is the Trans-Anatolian Pipeline, which crosses much of Turkey and also reaches Europe. It could represent an alternative path for Lebanese gas. But taking a circuitous route that cuts across northern Anatolia instead of one that is already being planned with two of Lebanon's maritime neighbours would be an odd – and very expensive – move. In other words, should Lebanon want to enter the gas game on the best economic terms, dealing with Israel may be the most sensible option.
If financial realities are forcing Hezbollah to reconsider Lebanon’s negotiations with Israel over maritime boundaries, then the country’s economic collapse is having more pernicious implications for the party. Hezbollah’s missile arsenal is there as a deterrent to protect Iran and its nuclear programme from Israeli attacks. Yet to what extent is that even conceivable today?
With over 50 per cent of the Lebanese living under the poverty line, and many of them believing Hezbollah to be part of the corrupt political elite, a war with Israel could turn the population decisively against the party. Worse, Lebanon would be so devastated that the very idea of Hezbollah’s “resistance” could be permanently discredited, with the party blamed for acting primarily to benefit Iran instead of Lebanon.
The recent explosion in a Hezbollah arms cache in Ayn Qana in southern Lebanon has led to speculation that it was caused by a surreptitious Israeli military operation. This needs to be confirmed, but people in the south reportedly believe stories of Israeli involvement, and think that Hezbollah declined to react because the party could not afford a conflict with Israel now.
If Hezbollah is unable to retaliate against Israeli or American strikes on Iran because of the domestic repercussions, and if it looks the other way while Lebanon undertakes negotiations Israel, then of what value is its contract with Tehran? The party’s strength was always its ability to impose its agenda on its compatriots, and to threaten those who opposed it. But today, Hezbollah knows that such methods will not work.
That doesn’t meant that Tehran has any intention of giving up on the party. Hezbollah serves many roles besides that of a deterrent against Israel. It is a valuable instrument of Tehran’s influence on the Mediterranean. But it’s also true that Hezbollah’s disregard for the discontent in Lebanon, along with its refusal to help revive the country through economic reform, has meant that it has poisoned its own environment, limiting its margin of manoeuvre on Iran’s behalf.
Iran’s expansion in the Arab world has produced results, but also destruction. Tehran has played on the contradictions in places like Iraq, Yemen, Syria, the Palestinian Territories, and Lebanon in order to advance. But its legacy is fields of ruin. Today, Hezbollah is paying the price for this at home. The party has taken an inflexible position in preserving the mendacious Lebanese political class, thereby collapsing the consensus that had once protected it.
*Michael Young is a senior editor at the Carnegie Middle East Centre in Beirut and a columnist for The National


How the Lebanese Sects Successively Withdrew from War

Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/October 07/2020
When the state of Israel was established, the event had a huge effect on the Levant in general and Lebanon in particular.
Palestinian refugees, most of whom had been displaced by Zionist organizations, streamed into the county with a consociational social contract, which had only gained its independence five years prior. Independence was itself subject to negotiations among its factions, who agreed on a compromise framework.
The conflict with Israel, in turn, swiftly became an implicit clause of this agreement: we neither make peace nor fight. Military, we agree to an armistice; economically, we boycott. That is: we take the path of the sum of Arab positions. Since Maronites had the upper hand in the state, they committed to this stance, though they gave it some special colors: sympathy with the Palestinian victims and fear of their inflow’s impact on the sectarian demographic balance. A degree of Christian anti-Semitic sentiments about Jews and a degree of bigotry minced with fear towards Muslims. Lebanon’s Arab interests were taken into consideration, as was fear of the emergence of Arab extremism...
This changed in the late 1960s: the test Lebanon was given seemed very harsh. To the Christians, the entity itself seemed threatened. The Palestinian resistance’s arms called for Christian armament, especially with the 1969 “Cairo Agreement,” which broke the state’s protective role. The Two-Year War (1975-76) pitted the Christians against the Palestinians in a total military standoff.
With the Israeli invasion, Bashir Gemayel’s presidential election and the Sabra and Shatila massacre, the rift culminated. The Christians were openly declaring that they are not concerned with fighting Israel and that such wars being launched from Lebanon threaten them with their existence. They also became extremely vocal about having a cause of their own, independent of the Palestinian cause and opposed to it. Later, with Michel Aoun and the circumstances surrounding his understanding with Hezbollah, the majority of Christians volunteered to espouse the rhetoric of resistance, but did not turn their words into action. Actions were left to their new Shiite allies.
The Sunnis’ history with resistance is different: a blend of inherited Islamic-Arab Nationalist rhetoric, rejection of the “artificial” Lebanese entity and objections to “Maronite hegemony” brought about Gamal Abdel Nasser’s glorification and a famed sympathy for Palestinian resistance. At the time, it was said that this resistance was the “Muslims’ army” counterbalancing the army, which soon splintered. But in 1982, under the weight of Israel’s threats, Beirut insisted on the Palestinian militants’ exit. After that came Rafik Hariri, and the Sunnis’ agenda changed, that of both the Beirutis and non-Beirutis. They began to cling to a Lebanonism that emphasizes prosperity and stability. Arabism has become more economic and financial than it is political.
Of course, paying lip service to commitment to resistance and fighting Israel persisted. But myths can live long as myths, and they may become, in daily life, fairy tales. And because the Shiites, with the explosion of identities, became the ones who resist, it was necessary to remind every now and then that the resistance originated with Abdel Nasser, not Khomeini. Thus a position implicitly saying the following crystalized: We are the actual resistance, but we do not want to resist any more.
Slogans about fighting Israel ceased to turn old men young. With or without resistance, the old would remain old. Even those who may take up arms in Tripoli or Akkar, out of desire to fight an “oppressive state” or “infidels” or other things along these lines, do not present themselves as fighting Israel.
As for the Shiites’ experience, it began with Mousa al-Sadr in the late sixties, when an anti-Palestinian sectarian solidarity developed against the backdrop of armed Palestinians’ clashes with the south’s residents. Israeli military action in retaliation to Palestinian operations led to southerners’ displacement to the capital. The War of the Camps, in the mid-eighties, reinvigorated and solidified this sentiment.
In turn, Hezbollah benefited from the Palestinians’ weapons rusting away and got rid of the Lebanese parties that had been allied to them. It fought Israel again and again, but when Israel’s occupation of the south came to an end in 2000, Hezbollah clung to its weapons as if to declare that the weapons had other functions. After the 2006 War, and with Resolution 1701, the battlefront with Israel calmed down.
Two years later, it became certain that the party’s project is internal. Then, after the Syrian revolution in 2011, the intervention in Syria demonstrated that the party’s agenda is actually set in Tehran.
Under this state of affairs, talking about fighting Israel becomes much less ideological and serious than it is feigned to be. Improving the community’s position domestically and meeting regional requirements are the base, and these objectives were achieved and are being achieved. Furthermore, when Iran or Syria becomes incapable of supporting the resistance, the party becomes unable to support them to the same degree.
Thus, the negotiations for demarcating the borders announce that the Shiites do not differ from the other sects in their willingness to defuse the situation, especially since their protracted sufferings as a result of these wars strengthen their desire for calm.
Yes, Hezbollah may topple the latest agreement, and the party may discover, if urgent regional circumstance called for this, that it had been duped. However, agreeing to terms in itself initiates a new era.
The formula produced by a well-known poor rhetoric goes: “Those who do not want to fight Israel are with Israel.” In fact, the Lebanese are in a complex situation: they do not like Israel, and they do not want to fight it. The sects came to this conclusion successively, sects that may fight one another, use the bogeyman of fighting Israel to justify their arms, but they all don’t want to fight. It is a consensus with contradictory terminology.

Beirut’s last synagogue at risk after severe damages following port blast
Melanie Swan/Jerusalem Post/October 07/2020
More than a place of worship, it is the final memory of a once-thriving community, which at its peak during the 1950s was around 15,000 strong.
DUBAI – Beirut’s last remaining synagogue is desperately in need of more than $500,000 in funding to help repair the damage inflicted by the recent blast at the port, which caused devastation across the city.
Amid the latest episode that devastated the war-torn city on August 4, much of the once-spectacular synagogue’s ceiling collapsed in the blast. All the window and door frames were shattered, and the Star of David also crashed to the ground.
In a double tragedy, it happened just a few years after the restoration of the Maghen Abraham Synagogue, a mile away from the devastated port. Having been badly damaged during the civil war, its reopening in 2014 to a grand welcome was attended by dignitaries from across the city’s diverse religious population. However, it has not held services since then.
More than a place of worship, it is the final memory of a once-thriving community, which at its peak during the 1950s was around 15,000 strong. Now, the city’s fewer than 30 Jews pray at home, many of whom have changed their names and keep their religious identity secret in a world which is no longer what it once was. Nagi Zeidan, a Franco-Lebanese Christian historian and author of the recently published The Jews of Lebanon, has been at the heart of the dying community, having researched his latest book for 25 years. “The community badly needs support with the repairs,” he explained.
The synagogue has been a pivotal part of the community for decades, a meeting point for the Jews of Lebanon since its inauguration in August 1926 for politics and religion alike. It was donated by Moshe Sasson, a Syrian Jew living in India at the time. It was renowned as the country’s most beautiful synagogue, designed in a classically Arab style – with its grand chandeliers, marble interiors, colorful details and ornate coves.
“Even the Jews of Sidon who had a synagogue of their own, preferred to marry at Maghen Abraham,” said Zeidan. “It is a place full of beautiful memories which will forever remain in the minds of Lebanese Jews and non-Jews alike.”
Its preservation is critical to the history of Jews in the city, whose presence in Beirut dates back to 1800, when the Levy family settled from Baghdad. Nationally, however, Jewish history dates back more than 3,000 years, one of the region’s oldest Jewish communities, dating back to settlement in Sidon. “This synagogue is the only building that demonstrates the presence of the oldest Jewish community in Lebanon among the 17 other religious communities,” Zeidan said.
There has not been a rabbi at the synagogue since 1985, and the city’s last surviving Jews pray at home. During the 1950s and 1960s, there were 18 synagogues around the country. Lebanon was the only Arab nation after the creation of the State of Israel to see its Jewish population grow. It was only after the Yom Kippur War that Jews began to leave – and rapidly.
MOSHE ZAAFARANI grew up in Beirut, and to the community, the synagogue was the core. From charity to education, sports to music, it was the community’s beating heart. Although he left the city when he was just 14, he said that, even now, it holds a place deep in his heart. “I feel it needs to be preserved,” said Zaafarani, the director of languages at the Education Ministry. “I know some people wonder why, when nobody prays there, but I truly hope that one day, Jews can pray there again.”
A symbol of the city’s vibrant past, it played host to all major ceremonies. As the biggest of the city’s many synagogues, and with an emerging peace across the region since the recent Abraham Accords, he holds hope there could still be a place for the synagogue in the region’s Jewish life.
“It was very beautiful – and when you stepped inside, it felt special,” he recalled. “Even those who attended other synagogues came for these big events like weddings and funerals, so it was the one place we all gathered.” Even the likes of the president and prime minister, in addition to other heads of religions, would visit the synagogue and offer their respects during holy festivals.
Now, Zaafarani hopes that Jews both in Lebanon and abroad can rally together to support the restoration efforts. “If people want to know more, they can contact the ILAI, the Jewish Lebanese Community in Israel,” he said.
RABBI ELIE Abadie left Beirut when he was only 10. Now based in New York, he grew up in the synagogue community, the son of one of the community’s Beth Din rabbis, Rabbi Abraham Abadie. He still leads lectures for the small community remotely, as he has been during the High Holy Days.
“It represents history. It has to be saved,” he said. “To not save that synagogue would be to erase over 2,000 years of history of Jews in Lebanon” – though he too hopes that, one day, a community can return to pray there once again, in the wake of the region’s burgeoning peace accords.
Jewish history is rapidly being wiped out in the country. In Sidon, in southern Lebanon, one synagogue is currently occupied by a Palestinian family of Syrian origin, said Zeidan, who has personally visited each landmark around the country in his extensive research. There is also a synagogue in Bhamdoun, all but destroyed, and the same is true in the town of Aley, where the synagogue was destroyed many years ago.
“There is still a synagogue in Tripoli in northern Lebanon, occupied by a fabric dyeing factory,” said Zeidan, adding that Tripoli’s Jewish cemetery has been transformed into a glass factory and gas station. Just two Jewish cemeteries remain – one in Beirut and the other in Sidon. Some “90% of the Jewish homes in Sidon have been requisitioned and invaded by Lebanese,” he said. Abadie says that those responsible for the blast should pay for the damage caused on that tragic day. “Not just the synagogue, but all the buildings damaged that day should be the direct responsibility of those behind the blast.”
 

Berri said pushing for Baassiri as next Lebanese PM
The Weekly Arab/October 07/2020
Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri met with Baassiri at parliament’s headquarters on Friday.
BEIRUT – Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has stirred controversy by reportedly pushing for a former central bank vice-governor who is reputed to be close to the Americans to take over the cabinet formation process.
Lebanese political sources said the parliament speaker and Amal Movement leader is under pressure to form a new Lebanese government by mid-October, when Lebanese-Israeli negotiations on demarcating the borders between the two countries are to begin.
Sources told The Arab Weekly that Berri’s moves to have former Central Bank Vice-Governor Mohammed Baassiri nominated for the premiership were triggered by American pressure, with Washington insisting on the need to have political cover provided by a balanced Lebanese government for the negotiations to take place.
The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that Berri is responsive to US demands to preserve his own interests. Members of the Berri family, including the parliament speaker’s wife Randa, had received indications that they could be threatened by US sanctions, sources said.
This may have prompted the Lebanese parliament speaker to meet Baassiri, who is close to the Americans, in order to ask him if he would be willing to take on the task of forming a new government.
Berri met with Baassiri at parliament’s headquarters on Friday. However, the former Central Bank vice-governor denied that he was being considered for the premiership and said their meeting would focus on Jammal Trust Bank, which has been targeted by US sanctions, and its deposits.
Sources are divided over whether Baassiri will indeed be named as PM-designate. Ex-MP Paula Yacoubian tweeted Saturday that “soon MPs will head to Baabda to apparently name Mohammed Baassiri as the head of a new-old government.”
Lebanon’s MTV, meanwhile, quoted an informed source as saying that “these leaks are baseless.”
Nidaa al-Watan newspaper reported Saturday that Baassiri “remains a serious candidate for the premiership,” quoting sources who are “monitoring” the situation. Baassiri’s name had previously been floated for the position, but the Iran-backed Hezbollah movement and its political ally, Amal movement, were wary of his connections to Washington.
Baassiri’s statements on his political future have so far been vague. On Sunday, he said that he is “not aware” of his name being proposed for the premiership but noted that he would accept to be “in any position that would serve Lebanon.”“I’m not nominated for any governmental position and I’m not seeking to become premier,” Baassiri added in an interview with al-Jadeed TV.
Baassiri explained that “he has no relationship with Hezbollah and he does not seek to get close and communicate with the group,” saying that “Hezbollah refused my return to the Banque du Liban (Central Bank) and placed a veto on me as an ‘American ally in Lebanon.’”
He said there were other people who were also unhappy with his political return, including Gebran Bassil, head of the Free Patriotic Movement, and outgoing caretaker Prime Minister Hassan Diab.
Regarding his relationship with the United States, Baassiri explained that the Lebanese banking sector “is a natural extension of the American banking sector, considering that our economy is ‘dollarised’ and it is necessary to have the best relations with the American side. As the deputy governor of the Banque du Liban, I played the role as a facilitator for these relations.”
Baassiri pointed out that Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon Walid al-Bukhari called him more than a month ago to request a meeting, which took place a week later with the Central Bank governor.
While Baassiri called for the meeting with the Saudi ambassador to not be read into, observers believe there could be a hidden message behind the statement and that Riyadh might be supportive of him being nominated.
Baassiri was not required to reveal the meeting with the Saudi ambassador, nor to mention that he would be ready to assume any position that serves Lebanon. His decision to do so indicates he is leaving the door open to serving as prime minister. Observers believe that naming Baassiri to head the government would be another concession for the Shia camp after their agreement to engage in direct negotiations with Israel over the demarcation of maritime and land borders, a request that both sides have always rejected.
Berri said Saturday that the “framework agreement” to launch negotiations on demarcating the borders between his country and Israel “is a necessary step, but it must go together with the formation of a government.”
On Thursday, Berri announced that negotiations with Israel on demarcating the land and sea borders will start in mid-October under the auspices of the United Nations and the mediation of the United States, after reaching a “framework agreement” that specifies “the course to be taken in the negotiations,” without further details.
Lebanon’s new government must be “capable of saving the country from its floundering crises, and implementing the detailed contents of the framework agreement declaration,” he added, noting that the “framework agreement is an agreement to demarcate borders, nothing more, nothing less.”
Berri stressed that “the main challenge now is to reach an agreement on the name of the prime minister.”Amid the flurry of moves to form a new government, France again intervened by sending its Ambassador to Beirut, Bruno Foche, to hold meetings with numerous political figures, including Ammar al-Moussawi, Hezbollah’s international relations official.
Sources indicated that the meeting was to calm tension between the two sides after French President Emmanuel Macron accused the party and its ally Amal of being responsible for wrecking the government formation process.
The accusation initially drew a harsh reaction from Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. Last Saturday, then PM-designate Mustapha Adib quit amid resistance to his plan to draw up a technocratic government of independents. He had sought to shake up control of ministries, some of which have been held by the same factions for years, including the finance post – which will have a hand in drawing up plans for bringing the country out of its economic crisis.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on October 07-08/2020

Half Karabakh Population Displaced as Mediators Set for Geneva Talks
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
Clashes between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces have displaced half of the population of the breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh region, an official said on Wednesday, as Azerbaijan announced it would meet international mediators in Geneva. Russian President Vladimir Putin urged an end to a "huge tragedy" that shows no sign of abating in an interview with state-run television, as Karabakh's main city Stepanakert was hit by new strikes. Even if the longstanding conflict over the ethnic Armenian separatist region could not be resolved, a ceasefire must be agreed "as quickly as possible," he said. A few hours later Azerbaijan said Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov would visit Geneva Thursday and meet leaders of the OSCE's Minsk group, which is jointly chaired by diplomats from France, Russia, and the United States. The Minsk group has sought a solution to the conflict since the 1990s. Armenia ruled out its foreign minister Zohrab Mnatsakanyan meeting his Azerbaijani counterpart in Geneva, however, saying "it is impossible to hold negotiations with one hand and continue military operations with the other." Armenia's foreign minister is due to meet Russia's top diplomat Sergei Lavrov in Moscow on Monday. The conflict has drawn in regional powers, with French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian warning that Turkey's backing of Azerbaijan risks fuelling the "internationalization" of the conflict. The fighting in one of the most combustible frozen conflicts resulting from the fall of the Soviet Union erupted on September 27, with Azerbaijan insisting the region must return to Baku's control.
Thousands displaced
Intermittent shelling by Azerbaijan's forces has turned Stepanakert into a ghost town dotted with unexploded munitions and shell craters. Much of Stepanakert's 50,000-strong population has left, with those remaining hunkering down in cellars. "According to our preliminary estimates, some 50 percent of Karabakh's population and 90 percent of women and children -- or some 70,000-75,000 people -- have been displaced," Karabakh's rights ombudsman Artak Beglaryan told AFP Wednesday. Azerbaijan has accused Armenian forces of shelling civilian targets in urban areas, including its second-largest city of Ganja. Dozens of civilians have been confirmed killed in the fighting and the Armenian side has acknowledged more than 300 military deaths. Azerbaijan has not admitted to any fatalities among its troops. Azerbaijani prosecutors said 427 dwellings populated by roughly 1,200 people had been destroyed. But Le Drian, speaking to the French parliament, accused Azerbaijan of initiating the current conflict and lamented "the large number of civilian victims for the sake of meagre progress" on the ground. Nagorno-Karabakh broke away from Azerbaijan in a 1990s war that claimed the lives of some 30,000 people. The Armenian separatists declared independence. The region's 140,000 inhabitants are now almost exclusively Armenians after the remaining Azerbaijanis left in the 1990s war. However, the international community regards it as part of Azerbaijan and no state, including Armenia itself, recognizes its independence. Sporadic fighting has erupted frequently since a May 1994 ceasefire, most notably in 2016. But analysts say Turkey's involvement this time has changed the landscape. Turkey has reportedly sent pro-Ankara Syrian fighters to boost Azerbaijan forces and also home-produced drones that have already been deployed with success in Libya and Syria. The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says 1,200 fighters have been sent and at least 64 have died. "The new aspect is that there is military involvement by Turkey which risks fueling the internationalization of the conflict," Le Drian said.
'Great danger'
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on Tuesday the world should back Azerbaijan as the "side of those who are right", describing Armenia as the "occupier". Russia has cordial relations and sells arms to both sides. But it has a military base in Armenia and Yerevan is a member of a Russia-led regional security group while Baku is not. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan told AFP he was confident Russia would come to its aid because of the two countries' membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization military alliance (CSTO). Putin in his interview emphasized that Moscow would fulfil its obligations within the CSTO, which analysts sometimes describe as a Russian NATO. But he noted: "The hostilities, which to our great regret, continue to this day, are not taking place on the territory of Armenia." Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov sounded a note of alarm over the presence of Syrian fighters, saying it posed a "great danger and is a reason for the deep concern of Russia." Iran's President Hassan Rouhani also said on Wednesday he would not tolerate "terrorists from Syria and other places" near its border with Azerbaijan.
Tehran maintains cordial relations with its Christian neighbor Armenia and distrusts Azerbaijan's military cooperation with Israel.

 

Iran Warns 'Terrorists' near Border in Karabakh Fighting
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
Iran warned Wednesday it will not tolerate "terrorists" near its border with Azerbaijan, after France and Russia raised the alarm over the deployment of Syrian militants in the Karabakh conflict. "It is unacceptable for us that some people want to send terrorists from Syria and other places towards regions near our frontiers," President Hassan Rouhani said, quoted on state television. Iran borders Armenian-held areas of Azerbaijan near Nagorno-Karabakh that have seen fighting. Armenia and Azerbaijan have for decades been locked in a conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, an ethnically Armenian area which broke away from Baku in a 1990s war that cost about 30,000 lives. Heavy fighting erupted on September 27 in one of the most combustible frozen conflicts left over from the collapse of the Soviet Union. Turkey has been accused of deploying fighters from Syria to support Azerbaijan in Karabakh.
French President Emmanuel Macron said Ankara had sent Syrian "jihadists" to the region, accusing Turkey of crossing a "red line". Turkey has not responded publicly. Russia and Armenia have also said that fighters from Syria and Libya are being deployed on the Azeri side in the conflict.
Rouhani, which has good relations with both Yerevan and Baku, reiterated Wednesday that "occupation is in no case acceptable". "Everyone" must "accept the reality... and respect other countries' territorial integrity", he said. Rouhani at the same time condemned "those who, on one side or the other, pour oil on the fire", without naming Turkey which has declared open support for Azeri military action to reclaim the enclave. Iran has called on both Armenia and Azerbaijan to cease hostilities and offered to facilitate talks. On Saturday, Tehran warned against any "intrusion" after mortar fire hit Iranian villages along the border. Fars news agency reported last Thursday that police dispersed demonstrations in northwest Iran in support of Azerbaijan. The Islamic republic is home to a large Azeri community, mainly in the northwest. According to some estimates, Azeris make up 10 million of the 80-million population of Iran, which is also home to almost 100,000 Armenians.

France Accuses Turkey of 'Military Involvement' in Karabakh
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
France on Wednesday accused Turkey of "military involvement" on the side of Azerbaijan in its conflict with Armenia over the breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh region. "The new aspect is that there is military involvement by Turkey which risks fueling the internationalization of the conflict," French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told parliament. Armenia and Azerbaijan, two former Soviet republics, have for decades been locked in a conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, an ethnically Armenian area which broke away from Azerbaijan in a 1990s war that cost about 30,000 lives. Heavy fighting erupted again on September 27. Both sides blame the other for starting the latest hostilities. The conflict has drawn in regional players, with Turkey supporting Azerbaijan and Armenia hoping that its ally Russia, which has so far stayed on the sidelines, will step in. Turkey has been accused of deploying fighters from Syria to support Azerbaijan in the fighting. French President Emmanuel Macron recently claimed Ankara had sent Syrian "jihadists" to the region, accusing Turkey of crossing a "red line". Turkey has not responded publicly. Le Drian on Wednesday said France deplored "a large number of civilian casualties for little territorial progress on the part of Azerbaijan, given it is Azerbaijan that initiated the conflict." He repeated the call for an immediate end to the fighting and a return to negotiations "without conditions" under mediation by the so-called Minsk group co-chaired by France, Russia and the United States.
"There will be meetings tomorrow in Geneva, other Mondays in Moscow and we hope that this will lead to the opening of negotiations," the minister said.


Kuwaiti Emir Names Top Security Official as Crown Prince
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
Kuwait's new emir, Sheikh Nawaf, on Wednesday named Sheikh Meshal al-Ahmad al-Jaber Al-Sabah, a long-serving top security official, as crown prince. Sheikh Meshal, 80, has been deputy chief of the Kuwait National Guard since 2004, largely staying out of the political scene and away from disputes within the royal family. The Sabah ruling family "blessed" Sheikh Nawaf's decision, the official Kuwait News Agency said Wednesday, a day ahead of a parliamentary session to approve the choice. In recent years, the ruling family has been flaunting its differences, with lurid accusations of corruption and political conspiracies lodged by some of its members against others. Kuwait, unlike other Gulf states, has a lively political life with an elected parliament that enjoys wide legislative powers and can vote ministers out of office. Political rows often burst into the open. Sheikh Nawaf, 83, was sworn in on September 30 after the death of his half-brother, Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad Al-Sabah, who passed away at the age of 91 after two months in hospital in the US. The succession comes at a time when the oil-rich country is grappling with the hot topics of whether to establish ties with Israel and how to respond to low crude prices amid the coronavirus slump. Sheikh Meshal is the seventh son of the 10th Emir of Kuwait Sheikh Ahmad al-Jaber Al-Sabah. He is considered the most powerful man in the National Guard -- an elite corps in charge of defending the emirate's territory. The position of chief is symbolically held by Salem al-Ali Al-Sabah, the eldest member of the Sabah ruling family. Sheikh Meshal spent many years in the interior ministry, where he rose through the ranks to head the department of general investigation from 1967 until 1980 and was credited for strengthening its function as a state security service. In 2016, he travelled abroad and underwent a "successful operation", but details of the treatment were not disclosed.

 

Danes summon Iran’s envoy over reports of illegal divorces
NNA/AP/October 07/2020
Denmark on Wednesday summoned the Iranian ambassador over reports the diplomatic mission had allegedly pressured Iranian women living in the Scandinavian country to accept divorce terms drawn up by local imams. The summons follows recent reports in Danish media about Muslim women being forced to accept divorce deals made by imams in Denmark. A contract made by one imam said that a woman, among other things, had to accept that if she remarried, she would lose the custody of her children. “I take the rumors extremely seriously that the Iranian Embassy, unsolicited, had contacted women living here to pressure them to have their Danish divorce papers religiously validated,” said Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe Kofod.—

Anti-Iran Slogans Chanted at ‘Arbaeen’ Pilgrimage in Iraq
Baghdad - Karbala - Asharq Al-Awsat/October 07/2020
Dozens of people were wounded in clashes between Iraqi security forces and anti-Iran protesters in Iraq’s southern city of Karbala Tuesday during the annual Shiite Muslim pilgrimage of Arbaeen. Iraqi protesters clashed with security forces outside a holy Shiite Muslim shrine in the southern city of Karbala causing injuries to several people, a Reuters reporter said. Tuesday’s clashes took place near the Imam Hussein shrine. The protesters were commemorating demonstrators killed during months of anti-government and anti-Iran unrest in 2019 in which more than 500 Iraqis died. The protesters had marched towards the shrine, witnesses said. Some became angry because they were not allowed into the shrine concourse, the Reuters reporter said. Security forces then charged the protesters with batons, causing skirmishes and pushing them back. Demonstrators retaliated against security forces attacking other protesters over the chanting of anti-Iran slogans. A Karbala security official said the protesters had arrived as part of a pilgrimage group, but before the time allotted for them to tour the shrine. Part of the group grew violent and police acted to eject them from the area, the official said. In other news, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi formed a committee to investigate recent rocket and explosion attacks on diplomatic missions and convoys for the US-led Coalition forces in Iraq, according to a communique. The committee led by Iraq’s national security advisor Qassem al-Araji includes head of the Popular Mobilization Forces Falih al-Fayyadh, head of national security council Abdulghani Assadi and army’s chief of staff Abdulamir Yarallah as well as a number of other security officers. The committee has to complete its investigation within 30 days and provide the premier with results of the investigation, the communique said. Al-Kazemi said during its first meeting that "the committee is authorized to obtain any information it requests from any party, and we expect it to come up with its results within the timeframe set for it." Kadhimi stressed the importance of granting full information access to the probe body. He also predicted that the committee will come up with results within its designated timeframe.

 

US Official to Asharq Al-Awsat: Normalization with Assad Linked to Behavior Change
Washington - Elie Youssef/Wednesday,0 7 October, 2020
Washington urged states not to establish diplomatic relations or economic cooperation with Syrian President Bashar Assad before addressing the atrocities committed by his regime against the Syrian people, a spokesperson for the US Department of State told Asharq Al-Awsat on Tuesday. The official said Assad’s regime was responsible for countless horrors, in addition to repeatedly using chemical weapons against his people. The regime also invited Iranian and Russian forces to fight on its territories, therefore, threatening neighboring countries and the entire region, the US spokesperson explained.
“Any attempt to reestablish or improve diplomatic relations, without addressing the atrocities committed by the regime against the Syrian people, shall damage efforts to enhance accountability and to move towards a sustainable, peaceful and political solution of the Syrian conflict, in line with UNSC Resolution 2254,” he said. Assad and his regime should take irreversible steps to end all types of violence against the Syrian people and to implement UNSC Resolution 2254 or face continued diplomatic and economic isolation, the official added. The statement came a few days after Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem received a copy of the credentials of Turki Mahmood al-Busaidi, the extraordinary and plenipotentiary Ambassador of Oman to Syria. Abkhazia opened its embassy in Damascus on Tuesday and raised its flag during a ceremony attended by Moallem and a high-ranking Abkhazian delegation that is paying a visit to Syria, including head of presidential administration Alkhas Kvitsinia, Foreign Minister Daur Vadimovich Kove. Abkhazia and Damascus agreed on enhancing bilateral relations and on mutual exemption of visas for the citizens in both countries for bearers of diplomatic and official and private passports. “The embassy will be the cornerstone in the bilateral relations and it may be a step to encourage others who closed their embassies in Damascus to reopen them,” the Syrian FM said, expressing readiness to provide all support and assistance to enable the Abkhazian ambassador perform his duties successfully. Kvitsinia reviewed the history of relations between Abkhazia and Syria, starting with mutual recognition in May 2018, the signature of a treaty of friendship and cooperation, two agreements on the establishment of a joint committee for cooperation in various fields and facilitating and developing trade and economic cooperation between the two countries besides the establishment of diplomatic relations at the level of embassies. Syria recognized Georgia’s two Russian-occupied regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali as independent states back in 2018, a step which was condemned by the international community.

Assad Blames Turkey for Nagorno-Karabakh Fighting
Damascus - London - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad accused Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of being the main instigator in the deadliest fighting between Armenian and Azeri forces for more than 25 years. Turkey has denied involvement in the fighting in and around Nagorno-Karabakh, a mountain enclave that belongs to Azerbaijan under international law but is governed by ethnic Armenians, and has dismissed accusations that it sent mercenaries to the area. But Assad told Russian news agency RIA: "He (Erdogan) ... was the main instigator and the initiator of the recent conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh between Azerbaijan and Armenia." Reiterating accusations first levelled by French President Emmanuel Macron that Turkey has sent Syrian militants to fight in the conflict, Assad said: "Damascus can confirm this." Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said during a visit to Azerbaijan's capital, Baku, on Tuesday that international peace efforts had achieved no concrete results in decades and a ceasefire alone would not end the fighting. "The whole world now needs to understand this cannot go on like this," Cavusoglu said.


Israel Confiscates Funds Transferred by Hamas, PA to Families of Palestinian Prisoners
Ramallah- Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz has signed seizure orders for Palestinian Authority and Hamas funds and property that had been transferred to family members of Palestinian martyrs and prisoners in Israel. According to Jerusalem Post Newspaper, the four signed orders targeted funds transferred by both Hamas and the PA to Palestinians serving prison sentences in Israeli, as well as to family members of Palestinians who were killed during attacks. The orders included the seizure of 187,000 shekels intended for the mother of a Palestinian who rammed his car into a crowd of people, killing a settler and a foreigner in Jerusalem in 2014. “The seizure orders, which cumulatively amount to hundreds of thousands of shekels, were signed as part of an economic campaign by Israel against terrorism that includes the Defense Ministry’s National Bureau for Counter Terror Financing along with the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), the army, police, the foreign ministry, and other bodies,” said a statement by Gantz’s bureau. His decision comes in light of a war declared by Israel on salaries of the families of Palestinian “martyrs and prisoners.”Israel had earlier refused to pay the PA money that belonged to it, claiming it was using these funds to support and encourage “terrorism.”The PA, however, rejected this claim and said it honored Palestinian heroes. Meanwhile, the Commission of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs denounced these orders. It issued a statement stressing that they are “part of the escalation to loot more money belonging to families of the martyrs and prisoners.”It affirmed that “that these funds are granted for these families to provide them with a minimum level of a decent life and allow them to overcome life challenges caused by the occupation itself.” In late 2019, then Army Chief of Staff Naftali Bennett signed a decision to “confiscate the money transferred to 1948 prisoners and any other funds received by their families.” The Commission urged the international community to break its silence and act immediately to put an end to the crimes committed by the occupation against families of the martyrs and prisoners. This silence gives the occupation a green light to proceed and escalate with its crimes, it stressed. Gantz previously Gantz issued a decree that would sanction banks in the West Bank for paying salaries for Palestinian prisoners and their families.

Sisi Warns of Wicked Ambitions, Threats Facing Egypt
Cairo- Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi said, on Tuesday, that wicked designs and threats against Egypt will never stop and will never decrease, even if their nature changes. He stressed the importance of saving people from the dangers of uncalculated political delusions. In a televised speech marking the 47th anniversary of the 6 October War 1973, Sisi said that Egypt’s achievements over the years to maintain security and stability have been remarkable, and are well known around the world. He, however, warned against the greedy ambitions and threats eyeing Egypt. Sisi added that maintaining the security of a large country such as Egypt, particularly as it lies in a difficult region and unstable world, is evidence of the Egyptian people’s uniqueness and solidity. He also said that it reflected the ability of the armed forces and state institutions to undertake such a mission and progress towards sustainable development.
He vowed to continue the work towards preserving national dignity and advancing construction, development, reconstruction, and peace. “The great October victory taught us that the Egyptian nation is always able to rise up for its rights ... We also learned that the Egyptian people do not waste their land and are able to protect it,” Sisi said. "The glorious October war was not just a military battle in which Egypt fought and achieved its greatest victory; it was, however, a real test for the Egyptian people's ability to make the dream come true,” he noted. The president said the victory's anniversary Egypt celebrates “is reminiscent of the people's struggle for thousands of years.” “Inspired by the sublimity of its past, Egypt has drawn a rightful path to follow in order to achieve its desired goals and the people's broad hopes,” he said. In recent weeks, Egypt witnessed staged protests in some villages on the outskirts of Cairo following a call by the Muslim Brotherhood to demonstrate.

Algeria Kicks off Campaign to Rally Support for Constitutional Referendum
Algiers - Boualem Goumrassa/Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Algerian authorities will kick off on Wednesday a political and media campaign to win over 23.5 million Algerians to vote in favor of the constitutional referendum, set for November 1.The state is employing all of its means and political supporters to this end, while the opposition appears defeated, complaining that the new constitution will be imposed on the people even though it does not meet the demands of the protest movement. Head of the Algerian National Independent Authority for Elections Mohamed Charfi said Tuesday: “It is our duty to persuade the greatest number of registered voters to head to the ballot boxes to cast their vote regardless if they support the referendum or not.”The campaigners have until November 28 to persuade as many Algerians as possible of their right to vote, he added. The political class is divided between those in favor of the constitutional change and those opposed to it. The supporters include parties that backed resigned former President Abdulaziz Bouteflika’s run for a fifth term in office. They include the National Liberation Front, which boasts thousands of voters who can rally support for the constitutional change. They also include the Democratic National Rally and Rally for Hope for Algeria (Tajamou Amel el Djazair). Significantly, the three leaders of these parties are in jail on corruption charges.The second camp, which is adamantly opposed to the referendum, had boycotted last year’s presidential elections. Main parties include the Islamist Justice and Development Front, headed by Sheikh Abdallah Djaballah, who labeled as “atheists” supporters of the constitutional change. Other members of the camp are the Islamists of the Movement of Society for Peace, who believe that the new constitution is a “war on the identity and principles of Algerians.”Opponents of the change also include the secular Rally for Culture and Democracy, which explained that the amendments keep all of the “inflated” privileges that Bouteflika had accorded to the political authority. The party enjoys support from Amazigh tribes, whom observers believe will widely boycott the vote as they did the presidential elections. The Association of Algerian Muslim Ulema on Monday expressed its reservations over the constitutional changes, saying they “threaten the future of the nation”, “harm the national identity” and are “vague about the position of Islam and on freedom of worship.” It also criticized the amendments for failing to address national unity and the discrepancy over official languages in Algeria. President Abdelmadjid Tebboune defended the changes on Monday, saying they achieve a balance of power among authorities, expand the freedoms on the people, cement the people’s right to an independent judiciary, eliminate all forms of social and economic discrimination, boost equality among the people and provide the means to combat all forms of corruption.

Yemeni Govt Warns of Sectarian Screening by Houthis Targeting Educators
Sanaa-/Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Houthis are planning to step up their violations against the education sector in areas under their control by redistributing educators according to political and sectarian profiling. This has drawn in harsh criticism and condemnation from the Yemeni government. The internationally-recognized government in Yemen has long accused Houthis of seeking to skew the education sector to fit their Iran-inspired agenda. Implementing a policy of sectarianization and political screening, Houthis are targeting educators in Sanaa and pursuing pressure campaigns against teachers who are still showing up to work despite not being paid in four years. Information Minister Muammar Al-Eryani warned of the “disastrous results” of the practices carried out by Iran-backed Houthi militias against the education sector with the start of a new school year. Houthi actions aim at stripping the public from its will and distorting truths in the favor of Iran’s subversive agenda in the region, Eryani said, pointing out that the group seeks to spread chaos and violence. Future generations will pay the price of Houthis instilling their extremist and terrorist ideology, the minister warned. “Houthis militias started school with distorted curricula for the 1st grade to brainwash children and falsify history, distributed political and sectarian screening forms for teachers, and privatized public education by imposing high fees on private schools without considering economic hardships,” Eryani tweeted. The Houthi targeting of educators and brainwashing of students is part of the group’s overarching scheme to undermine and destroy education in Yemen, the minister explained. Houthis are known to have financially exploited the privatization of free public education in Yemen to fuel its war effort. As for sectarian screening forms educators are being forced to fill, school directors and representatives said they were stunned by the personal information applicants were being asked to provide. They said the forms were unprofessional and chiefly aim to encroach on the privacy of teachers to influence their academic performance. Houthis are keeping a close eye on educators who especially teach history and religion courses. The group is working to fire them and replace them with Houthi loyalists to skew the education process of future generations.
 

Tunisian Culture Minister Sacked for ‘Siding with’ Protesters
Tunis - Mongi Saidani/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Tunisian Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi dismissed on Tuesday Culture Minister Walid al-Zaidi over his refusal to implement the government order to halt all cultural events due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Mechichi has appointed Tourism Minister Habib Ammar as his acting replacement. Questions have been raised over the PM’s move, significantly after Zaidi had expressed his support for anti-government protests. Observers wondered whether the dismissal was linked to differences between the premier and President Kais Saeid whereby ministers who are backed by the president are to be sacked should they stir any tensions. They added that Zaidi’s sacking could mark the beginning of Mechichi’s implementation of a government reshuffle demanded by the parliamentary coalition that supports the government. The coalition is composed of the moderate Islamist Ennahda Movement, Heart of Tunisia Party and “Dignity Coalition”. This is not the first time that the PM attempts to relieve Zaidi, the country’s first blind minister, from his post. Zaidi had initially refused to be appointed to the cabinet, saying he prefers university work to politics, but Saeid insisted and imposed his appointment in the new government. Opposition parties at the time viewed the move as motivated by reaping electoral gains. Zaidi, in refusing to implement the coronavirus restrictions, told a gathering of Tunisian artists on Monday that his ministry had received no order to bar such meetings. He added that he did not sign such an order, stressing that his ministry will not prevent artists from carrying out their activities. In turn, protesters dismissed the government order as another sign of its selective policy in taking decisions to impose lockdowns due to the pandemic. They noted that the government had not announced that it was closing cafes, restaurants, bars and other establishments as part of the restrictions.

OIC Stresses its Rejection of All Forms of Terrorism
New York - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) stressed on Tuesday the need to combat all terrorist groups and organizations wherever they are, adding that terrorism constitutes a flagrant violation of international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law. The announcement came during the statement delivered by Saudi Arabia on behalf of the OIC Group before the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly on “Measures to eliminate international terrorism,” held in New York on Tuesday. Nidaa Abu Ali, First Secretary of the Permanent Mission of Saudi Arabia to the UN, said the OIC Group condemns terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, regardless of the motivations, the identity of the perpetrator and the location it was committed. “The Group reaffirms that terrorism could not be associated with any religion, race, faith, theology, values, culture or society,” Abu Ali said, reiterating the OIC’s respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all states in accordance with the UN Charter. The Group also strongly condemned any attempt to link Islam with terrorism to achieve narrow interests. “The OIC firmly rejects targeting Muslim minorities during COVID-19, blaming them for the local transmission of the virus,” Abu Ali said. She reiterated the importance of promoting dialogue, understanding and cooperation among religions, cultures and civilizations for peace and harmony in the world, welcoming all regional and international initiatives and efforts to that end. “The Group believes that it is essential to follow a comprehensive approach in combating terrorism by addressing the root causes of terrorism, including the unlawful use of force, aggression, foreign occupation, festering international disputes and political marginalization and alienation,” she said. She added that the Group believes that it is essential that Member States bolster their cooperation and coordination with the aim of prosecuting the perpetrators of the terrorist acts and preventing providing any finance, safe havens, assistance or weapons to terrorist groups and organizations. She said the OIC looks forward towards the convening of a second-high level conference under the auspices of the UN in order to formulate joint organized response by the international community to terrorism in all its forms.
 

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on October 07-08/2020

Turkey Rekindles the Armenian Genocide
Raymond Ibrahim/FrontPage Magazine/October 07/2020
As it has done in other arenas where “extremists” are attacking moderates or Christians—from Syria to Libya to Nigeria—Turkey is spearheading another jihad, this time against Christian Armenia.
Context: Fighting recently erupted in the region of Nagorno-Karabakh, which borders Armenia and Azerbaijan. Although it is ethnically Armenian, after the dissolution of the USSR, the territory was allotted to Muslim Azerbaijan. Since then, hostilities and skirmishes have erupted, though the current one, if not quenched—an Azerbaijani drone was shot down above the Armenian capital and Azerbaijan is threatening to bomb Armenia’s unsecure nuclear power plant—can have serious consequences, including internationally.
By doing what it does best—funding, sponsoring, and transporting terrorists to troubled regions—Turkey has exacerbated if not sparked tensions. Several reports and testimonials, including by an independent French journalist, have confirmed that Turkey is funneling jihadi groups that had been operating in Syria and Libya—including the pro-Muslim Brotherhood Hamza Division, which kept naked, sex slave women in prison—to this latest theater of conflict.
As French president Macron recently explained, “We now have information which indicates that Syrian fighters from jihadist groups have (transited) through Gaziantep (southeastern Turkey) to reach the Nagorno-Karabakh theatre of operations…. It is a very serious new fact, which changes the situation.”
The “quality” of these incoming “freedom fighters”—as the Western mainstream media, particularly during the Obama era, was wont to call them—is further evidenced by their attempts to enforce sharia, Islamic law, on some of their more secularized hosts in Azerbaijan.
After asking, “Why has Turkey returned to the South Caucasus 100 years [after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire]?” Nikol Pashinyan, Armenia’s prime minister, answered in a statement: “To continue the Armenian Genocide.” This is a reference to the well documented massacre of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians, 750,000 Greeks and 300,000 Assyrians—a total of 2.5 million Christians—slaughtered at the hands of Turks and in the name of jihad.
While Pashinyan is correct in characterizing the latest hostilities as a reflection of Turkey’s attempt “to continue the Armenian Genocide” of the nineteenth-twentieth centuries, in fact, the continuum of Turkic attacks on Armenia stretch back more than a thousand years ago, when the Turks first cleansed the Armenians from their ancient homeland, also in accordance with jihadi ideology.
Then and now, Azerbaijanis participated. During one of the eleventh century jihads on Armenia, the great cross of an ancient church was torn down, mocked and desecrated, and then sent to adorn a mosque in Azerbaijan; more recently, after hostilities erupted, Azerbaijanis surrounded the Armenian embassy in Washington, D.C. this last summer, while chanting about jihad.
The Armenian prime minister continues:
For Turkey, however, continuing a genocidal policy is not only a means of implementing Armenophobia, but also a pragmatic task. Armenia and the Armenians of the South Caucasus are the last remaining obstacle on the way of continued Turkish expansion towards the North, the North East, and the East, and the realization of its imperialistic dream.
It is no longer merely the Karabakh issue, nor a security issue of the Armenian people. It is now an issue of international security, and today, the Armenian people are defending also international security, assuming what may be a new historic mission.
In other words, he is saying that only Christian Armenia (Georgia would be included too) stands between Turkey and some sort of unification with the many Muslim nations to its east (the “Stans,” e.g., Turkmenistan).
Certainly Turkey’s ambitions are not to be doubted. Whether by citing history’s most sadistic jihadis as paragons of virtue and emulation, or by transforming the Hagia Sophia into a mosque, or by helping to destabilize moderate Muslim governments and slaughter Christians with its jihadi militias, Turkey’s imperialistic dreams of resuccisitating the Ottoman Empire have been increasingly on display.
The editor-in-chief of Yeni Safak, a Turkish newspaper, recently called for as much in an article partially titled “Turkey is a global power. Now it’s time for Azerbaijan to rise.” After saying that Turkey had taken “a century-long hiatus” from its “geopolitical” ambitions and its “region-builder mind that founded very powerful empires on earth,” the Turkish daily claimed that “Our aim is not to spread conflicts but to replace, reinstate what rightfully belongs to us. Our aim is to keep alive and maintain our region, our people, our resources, our identity, and belonging.”
Despite all this and as it was during Obama’s role in the “Arab Spring,” the U.S. finds itself on the side of the jihad, even if unwittingly. “The international community, especially the American society,” Pashinyan warned, “should be aware that U.S.-made F-16s are being used to kill Armenians in this conflict.” Because both the U.S. and Turkey are NATO members, Turkey is acquiring and using against Armenians weapons from the U.S.
And so history continues to repeat itself—in all ways.


The Battle of Lepanto: When Turks Skinned Christians Alive for Refusing Islam
Raymond Ibrahim/October 07/2020
Drawing of the torture and subsequent flaying of Marco Bragadin, for rejecting the invitation to Islam.
Today in history, on October 7, 1571, one of the most cataclysmic clashes between Islam and the West — one where the latter for once crushed and humiliated the former — took place.
In 1570, Muslim Turks — in the guise of the Ottoman Empire — invaded the island of Cyprus, prompting Pope Pius V to call for and form a “Holy League” of maritime Catholic nation-states, spearheaded by the Spanish Empire, in 1571. Before they could reach and relieve Cyprus, its last stronghold at Famagusta was taken through treachery.
After promising the defenders safe passage if they surrendered, Ottoman commander Ali Pasha — known as Müezzinzade (“son of a muezzin”) due to his pious background — had reneged and launched a wholesale slaughter. He ordered the nose and ears of Marco Antonio Bragadin, the fort commander, hacked off. Ali then invited the mutilated infidel to Islam and life: “I am a Christian and thus I want to live and die,” Bragadin responded. “My body is yours. Torture it as you will.”
So he was tied to a chair, repeatedly hoisted up the mast of a galley, and dropped into the sea, to taunts: “Look if you can see your fleet, great Christian, if you can see succor coming to Famagusta!” The mutilated and half-drowned man was then carried near to St. Nicholas Church — by now a mosque — and tied to a column, where he was slowly flayed alive. The skin was afterward stuffed with straw, sown back into a macabre effigy of the dead commander, and paraded in mockery before the jeering Muslims.
News of this and other ongoing atrocities and desecrations of churches in Cyprus and Corfu enraged the Holy League as it sailed east. A bloodbath followed when the two opposing fleets — carrying a combined total of 600 ships and 140,000 men, more of both on the Ottoman side — finally met and clashed on October 7, 1571, off the western coast of Greece, near Lepanto. According to one contemporary:
The greater fury of the battle lasted for four hours and was so bloody and horrendous that the sea and the fire seemed as one, many Turkish galleys burning down to the water, and the surface of the sea, red with blood, was covered with Moorish coats, turbans, quivers, arrows, bows, shields, oars, boxes, cases, and other spoils of war, and above all many human bodies, Christians as well as Turkish, some dead, some wounded, some torn apart, and some not yet resigned to their fate struggling in their death agony, their strength ebbing away with the blood flowing from their wounds in such quantity that the sea was entirely coloured by it, but despite all this misery our men were not moved to pity for the enemy. … Although they begged for mercy they received instead arquebus shots and pike thrusts.
The pivotal point came when the flagships of the opposing fleets, the Ottoman Sultana and the Christian Real, crashed into and were boarded by one another. Chaos ensued as men everywhere grappled; even the grand admirals were seen in the fray, Ali Pasha firing arrows and Don Juan swinging broadsword and battle-axe, one in each hand.
In the end, “there was an infinite number of dead” on the Real, whereas “an enormous quantity of large turbans, which seemed to be as numerous as the enemy had been, [were seen in the Sultana] rolling on the deck with the heads inside them.” The don emerged alive, but the pasha did not.
When the central Turkish fleets saw Ali’s head on a pike in the Sultana and a crucifix where the flag of Islam once fluttered, mass demoralization set in, and the waterborne mêlée was soon over. The Holy League lost twelve galleys and ten thousand men, but the Ottomans lost 230 galleys — 117 of which were captured by the Europeans — and thirty thousand men.
It was a victory of the first order, and Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestants rejoiced.
Ottoman commander Ali Pasha al-Müezzinzade engaging the Christian galleys
Practically speaking, however, little changed. Cyprus was not even liberated by the Holy League. “In wrestling Cyprus from you we have cut off an arm,” the Ottomans painfully reminded the Venetian ambassador a year later. “In defeating our fleet [at Lepanto] you have shaved our beard. An arm once cut off will not grow again, but a shorn beard grows back all the better for the razor.”
Even so, this victory proved that the relentless Turks, who in previous decades and centuries had conquered much of Eastern Europe, could be stopped. Lepanto suggested that the Turks could be defeated in a head-on clash — at least by sea, which of late had been the Islamic powers’ latest hunting grounds. As Miguel Cervantes, who was at the battle, has the colorful Don Quixote say: “That day … was so happy for Christendom, because all the world learned how mistaken it had been in believing that the Turks were invincible by sea.”
Modern historians affirm this position. According to military historian Paul K. Davis, “More than a military victory, Lepanto was a moral one. For decades, the Ottoman Turks had terrified Europe, and the victories of Suleiman the Magnificent caused Christian Europe serious concern. … Christians rejoiced at this setback for the Ottomans. The mystique of Ottoman power was tarnished significantly by this battle, and Christian Europe was heartened.”
No matter how spectacular, however, defeat at sea could not shake what was first and foremost a land power — so that more than a century later, in 1683, some 200,000 armed Ottomans had penetrated as far as and besieged Vienna.
But that — to say nothing of Turkey’s many other jihads down to the present — is another story.
Historical quotes in this article were excerpted from the author’s Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West — a book that CAIR and its Islamist allies did everything they could to prevent the U.S. Army War College from learning about.


Will Washington Close its Embassy in Baghdad?
Robert Ford/Asharq Al Awsat/October 07/2020
I was present at the ceremony for the opening of the new American Embassy in Baghdad on the morning of January 5, 2009. The day was sunny but cool. Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte former ambassador to Iraq came from Washington wearing a big hat because the intense Iraqi sun bothered his skin. The American ambassador, Ryan Crocker, said the opening started a new era in Iraq-American relations. Six days before we had returned the Republican Palace to the Iraqi Government, and a new bilateral security agreement put the Green Zone under Iraqi military control and started a three-year period before the withdrawal of all American soldiers from Iraq.
President Jalal Talabani attended the ceremony and thanked the Americans for their help creating a democratic Iraq that would “serve as a model for other peoples.” Under white tents we ate kebabs and cakes, and we hoped for better relations between two states that Ambassador Crocker said must treat each other as equals. I remember that Prime Minister Maliki didn’t attend because he was visiting Iran.
Now, almost twelve years later Washington has taken “an initial decision” to close the embassy because of security. But in 2009 security was much worse in Baghdad. The day of the opening ceremony four car bombs exploded in Baghdad killing four Iraqi citizens and injuring 19. Iran-backed militias launched rocket attacks against the American embassy every few days.
The American employees were happy to move from the Republican Palace to the new embassy because its strong apartment buildings could withstand rockets and mortars. It was so strong and secure that it reminded us of a big prison. After I became the deputy ambassador a few months later in 2009 a rocket hit my house. No one was hurt, and I still have a piece of the rocket on my bookshelf.
In October 2020 security is not worse in Baghdad but politics in Washington have changed. The murder of American diplomatic employees in Iraq was never a political issue between the Republican and Democratic parties. There were never congressional committees to investigate the casualties from the embassy in Iraq and our posts in the country.
However, in 2012 after the murder of the American ambassador in Libya, the Republican Party used the murder as a political tool to damage the credibility of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton before her presidential campaign. There were twelve committees for investigations. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was one of the leaders in exploiting the Benghazi tragedy, is a completely political man who wants to run for president in 2020. He does not want any casualty or any security incident in Baghdad to be a new Benghazi the Democrats might use against him. Bilateral relations with Iraq are a secondary concern after his political ambitions.
Our hopes on January 5 suffered other disappointments. President Talabani called the new embassy a symbol of the “deep affinity between the American and Iraqi peoples”. Now at protest marches in downtown Baghdad Iraqi protesters demand the Americans and the Iranians both leave Iraq. Maybe the protesters don’t ask for the embassy to close but they don’t consider the existing relationship is in Iraq’s interest. And on the American side, Ryan Crocker on January 5 told the American media that Iraq after Saddam Hussein valued relations with the United States and the Americans had to continue to work with Iraq with great patience to build a strong relationship.
Now many Republicans and Democrats believe that the Arab World, including Iraq, is less vital to American interests. In an era of the virus and economic crisis, terrorism is a smaller threat relatively. Oil from the region is less important and China is much more important in Washington’s opinion. In 2009 we wanted to build a broad relationship with Iraq. Now Washington threatens to impose financial sanctions on Iraq in 47 days if Baghdad does not take steps to reduce its energy trade with Iran. Pompeo, more than even President Donald Trump, has made the American relationship with Iraq not about 38 million Iraqis but rather about maximum pressure on the ruling elite in Teheran. Eight weeks ago Iraqi PM Mustapha Kadhimi had a good visit to Washington with new commercial deals and mutual words of praise. What a remarkable change! I don’t know if Washington in the end would close its embassy or impose sanctions on Iraq. And certainly, the Americans won’t withdraw from Iraq entirely. American military operations in Syria’s Hassakeh province require the logistics base in Erbil remain. Now Washington threatens to close its embassy and impose sanctions. The same American domestic political calculations about casualties and costs, and about Iran apply also to the American presence in Syria.

Madrid, Marseille and Middlesbrough Highlight New Virus Problem
Ferdinando Giugliano/Bloomberg/October 07/2020
Since the resurgence of the pandemic, Europe has tried to avoid imposing new national lockdowns. Countries have preferred localized restrictions as a less costly alternative. While such “smart” lockdowns seem like a good idea in theory, they’re bound to stir resentment among the regions, cities and neighborhoods that must suffer them. If targeted measures are to work, politicians will have to win consensus.
The most egregious example is Spain, where the government has clashed with local politicians in the Madrid area as the national authorities demanded that people avoid all non-essential movement to halt a rise in infections. The central government also asked to limit any meeting to no more than six people and forced bars and restaurants to stop serving after 10pm. The region ultimately caved to the requests, but its leaders have vowed to fight the restrictions in court.
These clashes are emerging across the rest of Europe, too. In France, politicians in Marseille rebelled against the decision by the central government to tighten measures in the area after a surge in cases. At the end of September Emmanuel Macron’s administration demanded that the city’s bars and restaurants shut for at least two weeks. Restaurants have since been allowed to reopen, but local officials are still unhappy that other regions — such as Paris — haven’t had the same restrictions. Michele Rubirola, the local mayor, tweeted: “I celebrate the reopening from today of restaurants in Marseille. But it is regrettable this decision was taken not to shut them down elsewhere.”
The UK has also chosen to impose stricter rules in some areas. It’s now illegal for different households to mix in northern areas of England, such as Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Warrington and the Liverpool area. The mayor of Middlesbrough initially “vowed to defy” the rules though later said he would comply.
There were fewer local-national skirmishes during Covid’s first wave, when most governments locked down their entire nations. Those disagreements that occurred often went in the opposite direction: Nicola Sturgeon, first minister of Scotland, and Sadiq Khan, mayor of London, both criticized Boris Johnson’s government for being too soft in its virus approach. In March, Spain’s central government challenged in court Catalonia’s decision to enforce more draconian restrictions than those set nationally.
But politicians now fear for the impact national lockdowns have on the economy and people’s morale. They see tightening up the rules in specific regions when cases spike above a certain threshold as a more accurate and effective approach.
The trouble is, defining which areas should see greater restrictions can be contentious. In Spain, for instance, local officials in Madrid initially only restricted movements and gatherings in a number of neighborhoods on the outskirts of the capital city, where the virus seemed to be harder to control. The central government then asked them to apply the same restrictions to the rest of the city, since the region’s infection rate as a whole was out of line with the rest of the country — prompting a revolt from the local authorities.
Disagreements over lockdowns can also turn into bitter fights when there are differences in political color. Spain’s left-wing central government clashed first with the pro-independence administration in Catalonia and then with the right-wing rulers of the Madrid region. In the UK, both the Labor administration in London and the Scottish nationalist government were the strongest critics of Johnson’s handling of the health crisis. The risk is huge of political bias influencing decisions that should be based on science alone.
As the second wave washes over Europe, we might well still see new national lockdowns. If deaths surge and hospitals are overwhelmed, politicians will have no option but to close down everything. If the situation remains relatively under control, however, localized measures still appear a more realistic alternative.
So local and national officials will have to work together and get buy-in from affected regions. National governments must set out clear rules for raising the level of restrictions in a particular area and be prepared to extend more economic support to those facing tougher rules. Meanwhile, local politicians must understand when a lockdown is needed — and they shouldn't complain about lighter restrictions in regions with lower case counts. In times of crisis, a stalemate between the center and the periphery helps no one.

Were Iran and the United States Really ‘On the Brink’? Observations on Gray Zone Conflict
Michael Eisenstadt/The Washington Institute/October 07/2020
Tehran’s entire modus operandi is designed to pressure Washington and its allies but avoid all-out conflict, and distorting this reality so close to a U.S. election will only hinder an effective policy response.
A popular narrative to emerge during the past year of Iran-U.S. tensions is that on several occasions—particularly after the killing of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani in January—Iran and the United States were on the “brink of war.” This narrative has been promoted by Iranian officials who encourage the belief—as part of their efforts to deter the United States—that a local clash could easily escalate to an “all-out” war. It has likewise been promoted by President Trump, who stated in a private talk to TV anchors in February, with typical bravado, that war with Iran was “closer than you thought.” And it has been promoted by a variety of journalists, academics and think tank analysts. Yet, this widely accepted version of events distorts reality, precludes a clear-headed understanding of Iranian and U.S. actions, and hinders an effective policy response.
The counterpressure campaign that Iran launched in May 2019 against America’s “maximum pressure” policy (the ostensible goal of which is a better deal with Iran covering nuclear, regional and military issues) has relied on activities in the “gray zone” between war and peace. These include covert or unacknowledged attacks on petrochemical infrastructure and transportation in the Gulf, proxy attacks on U.S. military personnel in Iraq, and clandestine cyber operations. Indeed, Iran is perhaps the world’s foremost practitioner of gray zone operations (although China and Russia have also long employed this modus operandi). For nearly four decades, Americans have struggled to understand and to respond effectively to this asymmetric “way of war.”
Actors operating in the gray zone test and probe to determine what they can get away with. They engage in covert or unacknowledged proxy activities to preserve deniability and avoid becoming decisively engaged with the adversary. They rely on incremental action to create ambiguity regarding their intentions, and to make their enemies uncertain about how to respond. And they arrange their activities in time and space—pacing them and spacing them geographically—so that adversary decision-makers do not feel pressured to act rashly. This enables them to challenge stronger adversaries and advance their own agendas while managing risk, preventing escalation and avoiding war. In gray zone competitions there is no well-defined brink that marks the transition from peace to war. Rather, these are murky, ambiguous, slow-motion conflicts characterized by occasional escalatory peaks and deescalatory troughs.
Iran’s gray zone strategy works by leveraging a number of differences in the way that Tehran and Washington think and operate. The most important of these differences is conceptual. U.S. decision-makers have tended to conceive of war and peace with Iran (as well as with other significant state actors such as China and Russia) in stark, binary terms and have frequently been constrained by fear of escalation—creating opportunities for Iran (and others) to act in the gray zone “in between.” (The main exception here—by and large a relatively recent one—is in the cyber domain.) By contrast, Tehran tends to see conflict as a continuum. The key terrain in gray zone conflicts, then, is the gray matter in the heads of those American policymakers who believe that a local clash could somehow rapidly escalate to an all-out war. The result is often U.S. inaction, which provides gray zone operators such as Iran greater freedom to act.
Tehran’s interest in avoiding war and its preference for operating in the gray zone are not grounded in a transitory calculation of the regime’s interests; it is a deeply rooted feature of the regime’s strategic culture that is reflected in its way of war, as well as the Islamic Republic’s strategy under Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. This is one of the enduring legacies of the Iran-Iraq War, which killed nearly a quarter-million Iranians and left the country with still-unhealed wounds. Iran is determined to never again repeat that experience. Likewise, for the United States, the long and costly wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have seared in the nation’s consciousness a strong desire to avoid future Middle Eastern “forever wars.”
Thus, Tehran’s entire modus operandi is intended to prevent escalation and avoid war. During the first seven months of the counterpressure campaign that it launched in spring 2019, all of Iran’s attacks were nonlethal—by design. Iranian forces placed limpet mines on the hulls of oil tankers, targeted unmanned U.S. reconnaissance aircraft, and conducted precision strikes against sparsely staffed Saudi oil facilities. When these initial steps did not induce Washington to respond militarily, or to lift or ease the economic sanctions imposed after it left the nuclear deal with Iran in 2018, the Islamic Republic escalated in the space left by U.S. inaction with a series of progressively larger rocket attacks in Iraq by its Kataib Hezbollah (KH) proxy, until an American was killed there in late December. This set in motion a series of events—a U.S. counterstrike that killed 25 KH militiamen, violent demonstrations in front of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad by pro-Iran proxies (evoking dark memories of the 1979-1981 Tehran embassy hostage crisis and the 2012 murder of U.S. Amb. Christopher Stevens by Libyan terrorists), and tweeted taunts by Khamenei that America “cannot do a damn thing”—that prompted the United States to target Soleimani and KH commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis in early January.
Yet, when Iran retaliated five days later with a missile strike on Al-Asad air base, it gave advance warning to the Iraqi government so that Americans there had time to shelter. (U.S. intelligence had also picked up warning signs of an imminent missile strike.) Afterward, both the United States and Iran signaled publicly that they considered the current round over, although rocket fire against U.S. personnel and facilities in Iraq has continued since then. Khamenei subsequently warned that the Islamic Republic “will never forget the martyrdom of Hajj Qassem Soleimani...and will inevitably strike a similar blow against the U.S.”This sequence of events should demonstrate that the United States and Iran were not on the brink of war in January, for several reasons. First, events following the killing of Soleimani indicate that risk and escalation management were priorities for both Tehran and Washington; nothing that has happened since alters this assessment. Second, for more than 40 years, Iran and the United States have avoided war—despite Iranian-supported kidnappings and attacks in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq that have killed hundreds of Americans; clashes at sea toward the end of the Iran-Iraq War that killed scores of Iranian sailors; the accidental U.S. shooting down of an Iranian passenger jet in 1988 that killed all 290 passengers; and numerous other incidents. And finally, since 2017, Israel has launched hundreds of strikes on Iranian military infrastructure in Syria, killing at least eight members of the IRGC (according to Iranian sources), without sparking a war.
Yet, history is replete with examples of war through miscalculation—and both the United States and Iran have each miscalculated at least once already. The U.S. maximum pressure policy crossed an Iranian redline dating to the 1980s, which states that if Iran cannot export oil, it will work to prevent any other Gulf state from exporting oil either. In trying to drive Tehran’s oil exports to zero, Washington backed Iran into a corner and incentivized it to lash out with a military counterpressure campaign—a response for which the United States was inexplicably unprepared. Likewise, Iran crossed a U.S. redline by killing a U.S. citizen—and by organizing violent protests by its Iraqi proxies in front of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad in December 2019, it likely contributed to the U.S. decision to target Soleimani and Muhandis. These episodes show, however, that while miscalculations are possible, they need not spark uncontrolled escalation or an all-out war—though it remains to be seen whether the killing of Soleimani was a master stroke or yet another miscalculation.
There are other ways the parties could stumble into a wider conflict. Tehran might be tempted to spring an October surprise (for example, perhaps the assassination of a U.S. official or a humiliating military strike) to sabotage Trump’s prospects for a second term—although this could backfire and give the president a boost at the polls due to a rally-round-the-flag effect. It might also provide a pretext for a tough U.S. military response. Should the president lose reelection, Tehran might be tempted to launch a strike before Inauguration Day as a parting shot to avenge the death of Soleimani. And should Trump win a second term, Tehran will have to decide whether to initiate a military crisis to catalyze diplomacy that might yield a more comprehensive deal with Washington, or avoid provoking a triumphant and at times erratic president. But these scenarios would all involve the limited use of force by Iran, and it seems unlikely that Trump would suddenly abandon a core principle of his presidency and get the United States involved in yet another Middle East “forever war” just prior to an election, after failing in a bid for reelection or at the start of a second term. Should Iran strike before or shortly after U.S. elections, though, an unnerving series of ripostes remains a possibility. Some members of the administration might even welcome an election-eve crisis with Iran.
Moreover, should Khamenei become incapacitated or pass away, IRGC hardliners might opt for a more risk-acceptant approach toward the United States: They might launch a spectacular attack to avenge Soleimani’s death and goad the United States to withdraw its remaining troops from the region. The ascension of IRGC hardliners to positions of leadership in the post-Khamenei era would likely presage an era of heightened U.S.-Iran tensions and conflict.
Another possible path to escalation might be provided by alleged U.S. (and Israeli) covert operations in Iran and against Iranian interests in the region. These might include activities such as the sabotage in June 2019 of an underwater oil pipeline off the Syrian coast used to transfer crude oil from Iranian tankers to the refinery at Baniyas, the preflight explosion of an Iranian satellite launch vehicle in August 2019, and a claimed attack in October 2019 on an Iranian oil tanker in the Red Sea. The United States may have also played a role in the sabotage of Iran’s principal uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, which reports have attributed to Israel.
In addition to these instances of apparently deliberate sabotage, there have also been a series of fires and explosions at industrial sites throughout the country in the past three months. Such events are quite common in Iran, due to the country’s crumbling infrastructure and lack of a safety culture. According to a study by the United States Institute of Peace, the number of such events that occurred from May to mid-July of 2019 (at least 97) is about the same number as have occurred in the same period this year (at least 83). So, while some of these incidents might be a result of sabotage or cyberattacks, it seems likely that most were not.
Yet, seemingly well-sourced reports from the United States and Israel bolster the impression that the two countries may be conducting their own narrowly focused, low-level gray zone campaigns against Iran through sabotage and cyberattacks on nuclear infrastructure and strategic research and development facilities. Whether this is true or not is unimportant—perceptions are what matters. And herein lies the rub: Gray zone campaigns are generally most successful when a degree of deniability is preserved. When officials effectively confirm gray zone activities through media leaks or by other means—whether for personal, political or propaganda purposes—they obviate some of the advantages of gray zone operations. And when covert actions that humiliate the regime are combined with further pressure on Tehran—such as U.S. efforts to snap back U.N. sanctions in the wake of failed efforts to extend the ban on arms transfers to Iran—the potential grows for Iran to up the ante if and when it retaliates. But escalation—even if unlikely to lead to war—is not in the American interest, as it risks highlighting the limits of U.S. deterrence as well as Washington’s inability to protect its personnel and assets, its unwillingness to defend its allies, and the degree to which it may be constrained by domestic and foreign policy concerns. With U.S. presidential elections a little more than a month away, there is precious little chance of negotiating a new deal with Iran at this point. Increased pressure creates a heightened risk of escalation for little practical gain.So, while claims that Iran and the United States were on the “brink of war” make for dramatic headlines, they do not reflect reality. To succeed in gray zone competitions, the vocabulary and mental models derived from America’s conventional warfighting experience must be put aside, as they obfuscate rather than illuminate, and preclude the kind of clarity of thought required to avoid further escalation with Iran. At the same time, U.S. policymakers should have learned from recent experiences with Iran not to underestimate the adversary or to overestimate their own ability to deter destabilizing actions. The enemy always gets a vote, and the potential gain proffered by a contemplated course of action should be weighed against the potential for escalation and harm to America’s reputation and credibility—as well as to U.S. deterrence going forward.
*Michael Eisenstadt is the Kahn Fellow and director of the Military and Security Studies Program at The Washington Institute. This article was originally published on the Lawfare website.

Caucasus Clash Could Endanger Israeli Oil Imports
Simon Henderson/The Washington Institute./October 07/2020
Israel’s normalization agreement with the United Arab Emirates may enable Gulf oil to make up for any break in Azerbaijani supplies, though this option could harm its ties with Baku and Turkey.
When Armenian rockets struck the Azerbaijani city of Ganja on October 4, they landed perilously close to a major oil pipeline. Stretching westward from Caspian Sea fields off the shores of Baku to Georgia and Turkey, the line eventually arrives at the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, from which tankers transport the oil to Israel and other foreign customers.
Indeed, Azerbaijan has been a reliable supplier to Israeli refineries in Haifa and Ashdod. And despite Turkey’s vitriolic rhetoric toward Jerusalem, Ankara has been happy to maintain the flow, which nets it ample transit fees for both the pipeline and shipping. In turn, Azerbaijan has developed a close diplomatic and security relationship with Israel, from whom it has received drones and other military equipment used in the latest hostilities. Media reports suggest that an Azeri cargo plane carried munitions from Israel just before the fighting began.
Armenia has not taken kindly to these actions, recently recalling its ambassador from Tel Aviv for consultations. The Tel Aviv embassy had just opened for the first time two weeks earlier—though the two countries have had diplomatic relations since Armenia gained independence in 1991. On October 5, President Armen Sarkissian telephoned his Israeli counterpart Reuven Rivlin to ask that such flights be halted, but Rivlin replied that Israeli relations with Azerbaijan are “not aimed against any side.” The latest tensions could have several other geopolitical ramifications as well, since both Armenia and Azerbaijan border Iran, Armenia has a defense pact with Russia, and another pipeline from Baku carries natural gas to Europe.
The conflict between (majority Christian) Armenia and (majority Shia Muslim) Azerbaijan has roots in the Stalinist era, when the eponymous Soviet republics were created. To offset the danger of anti-Moscow nationalist sentiments, their borders were drawn to include a mix of communities in both republics. Major fighting erupted after the Soviet collapse, when Armenians in the Azeri territory of Nagorno-Karabakh achieved quasi-independence and made their area of control contiguous with Armenia. The latest fighting was apparently started by Azerbaijan and supported by Turkey; it follows skirmishes in July, during which an Azeri general was killed.
Israel has been cultivating its alliance with the Azerbaijanis for three decades, and the relationship has had the twin benefits of bolstering its oil supplies and fostering productive commercial ties with Turkey. Today, Israel has at least one plausible option for offsetting any dislocation in these supplies, but pursuing it could jeopardize relations with both Baku and Ankara. On October 2, Israel, the UAE, and the United States announced a joint energy strategy stemming from their landmark peace treaty. In addition to potential gas exploration and solar energy projects, they have reportedly discussed pumping refined Emirati oil products through the underutilized pipeline stretching from the Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat to Ashkelon on the Mediterranean coast. Originally built to carry Iranian oil before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the line could have the spare capacity to replace Israel’s oil imports from Azerbaijan.
Such a solution would be a diplomatic triumph for the UAE, which already opposes Turkey’s involvement in the Gulf rift with Qatar and its support for the internationally recognized government in Libya. And for Israel, being able to purchase Emirati oil may be economically and technically attractive. Yet doing so runs the risk of damaging its good ties with Azerbaijan and its diminished but still-significant commercial links with Turkey.
*Simon Henderson is the Baker Fellow and director of the Bernstein Program on Gulf and Energy Policy at The Washington Institute.