LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
September 08/2019
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.september08.19.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations For today
The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; therefore, do
whatever they teach you and follow it; but do not do as they do, for they do not
practise what they teach
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew 23/01-12:”Then Jesus said
to the crowds and to his disciples, ‘The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’
seat; therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it; but do not do as they
do, for they do not practise what they teach. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to
bear, and lay them on the shoulders of others; but they themselves are unwilling
to lift a finger to move them. They do all their deeds to be seen by others; for
they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long. They love to have the
place of honour at banquets and the best seats in the synagogues, and to be
greeted with respect in the market-places, and to have people call them rabbi.
But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all
students. And call no one your father on earth, for you have one Father the one
in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one instructor,
the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. All who exalt
themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted.”
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese
Related News published on September 07-08/2019
France reiterates its support for Lebanon, calls for quick reforms
Hizbullah, PSP ‘Reconcile’ in Ain el-Tineh
Geagea Postpones Visit to Chouf
Report: LF Says ‘No More Allies’
Sayegh: Walid Jumblatt, a national leader at the rank of a Senate President
Kanaan: To face the challenges with minimal speech and increased action
Jumblatt reiterates that sole solution lies in electricity reform
Judge Jean Fahed denies rumors of his resignation
Spiteri pursues his visit to Baalbek
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports
And News published on September 07-08/2019
Iran Seizes Boat in Strait of Hormuz, Arrests Filipinos
Iran Fires up Advanced Centrifuges in Latest Nuclear Step
Iran Activates Advanced Centrifuges, Says Clock is Ticking
7 of Stena Impero's Crew in Dubai after Iran Frees them
Bushra Khalil Withdraws from Tyre by-Elections
Defense Minister Freezes Weapon Permits in Nabatieh
Satellite Images Show Iran Oil Tanker Sought by US off Syria
Netanyahu Criticized for Seeking Defense Agreement with US
Israel Strikes Hamas Targets after Gaza Rocket Attack
Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous
sources published on September 07-08/2019
France reiterates its support for Lebanon, calls for quick reforms/Georgi Azar/Annahar/September
07/2019
The U.S.-Taliban Negotiations: A Deadly Qatari Trap/Yigal Carmon/Gatestone
Institute/September 07/2019
Why appeasing Iran is the road to disaster/Sir John Jenkins/Arab News/September
07, 2019
Backed into a corner, what does Boris do now?/Cornelia Meyer/Arab News/September
07, 2019
Israel must target the real root of the problem - Iran/Gilad Sharon/Ynetnews/September
07/2019
The world failed to learn the lessons of WWII/Sever Plocker/Ynetnews/September
07/2019
Younger Palestinians More Moderate on Tactical Issues, But Not on Long-Term
Peace with Israel/David Pollock/The Washington Institute/September 07/2019
The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News
published
on September 07-08/2019
France reiterates its support for Lebanon,
calls for quick reforms
Georgi Azar/Annahar/September 07/2019
Speaking with Prime Minister Saad Hariri, French President Emmanuel Macron said
that France's is still committed to supporting "Lebanon's stability and security
and to strengthen the country's institutions.”
BEIRUT: French President Emmanuel Macron reiterated Friday his country's support
for Lebanon and expressed relief at the progress being made by the Lebanese
government to secure the CEDRE soft loan package. Speaking with Prime Minister
Saad Hariri, Macron said that France's is still committed to supporting
"Lebanon's stability and security and to strengthen the country's institutions,"
according to a statement by the premier's office. On Thursday, Hariri held
talks with the French interministerial delegate Pierre Duquesne, who's been
tasked with keeping a close eye on the government's commitment to meet the
requirements set by the international community. During his four day
visit, Duquesne held talks with top Lebanese officials and urged them to pass
the 2020 state budget on time.
Room 105: ICRC on the lookout to help answer 'Where are they now?'
Despite delays in implementing the necessary reforms, Duquesne maintained that
the $11 billion pledged by the international community are not under threat.
Lebanon must "satisfy the international community," he said, adding that "all of
Lebanon's economic indices are currently negative." Lebanon's trade deficit has
skyrocketed to $16.65 billion and the current account deficit is now estimated
at $12.44 billion. Meanwhile, the budget deficit reached 11.1 percent of GDP in
2018, or $6.25 billion; and public debt equaled 150 percent of GDP. Most
notably, Lebanon must revamp the country's power sector and decrease the
spending on state-owned Electricite Du Liban, which costs around $2 billion per
year. The French delegate also called on Lebanese officials to refrain from
viewing the possible oil and gas exploration as their holy grail, saying that
"no magic solution exists" for Lebanon's economic woes. "Some people still
believe that there is a miracle solution, a magical solution that may solve all
the problems but this does not exist," Duquesne said. Macron also called
for restraint along the southern border, after a skirmish erupted between
Hezbollah and Israel earlier this week while Hariri thanked him for his efforts
“to contain the escalation after the Israeli aggression on Beirut’s southern
suburbs." After Israel's latest breach of Lebanese airspace with two drones that
crashed over the Hezbollah stronghold of Dahyeh in the southern suburbs of
Beirut, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah vowed to retaliate. On Sunday, a
Hezbollah party hit two Israeli armored vehicles, prompting the Jewish state to
fire a barrage of missiles across the border before calm resumed. UNIFIL,
the international task force tasked with keeping the calm along the border, will
remain stationed for another 12 months after its mandate was renewed last week.
Hizbullah, PSP ‘Reconcile’ in Ain el-Tineh
Naharnet/September 07/2019
A reconciliation meeting orchestrated by Speaker Nabih Berri was held on
Saturday in Ain el-Tineh between Hizbullah and the Progressive Socialist Party.
Delegations of Hizbullah and the PSP arrived at the Speakership residence in Ain
el-Tineh after which Berri kept them for lunch. The Hizbullah delegation
comprised of political aide to Hizbullah Secretary-General Hussein Khalil, and
Head of Hizbullah's Liaison and Coordination Committee Wafiq Safa. While
Industry Minister Wael Abou Faour and ex-MP Ghazi al-Aridi represented the PSP.
Ties between the two took a negative turn since December last year and peaked
against the backdrop of PSP leader Walid Jumblat’s repeated positions on the
Syrian refugee crisis, and a license annulment to establish an industrial
complex in Ain Dara. Moreover, the June 30 Qabrshmoun deadly incident aggravated
the conflict between the two when Hizbullah showed support for Jumblat’s Druze
rival MP Talal Arslan.
Geagea Postpones Visit to Chouf
Naharnet/September 07/2019
Due to “urgent” reasons, a planned visit of Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea
to the Chouf region was postponed on Saturday, his deputy said. LF deputy chief
MP George Adwan issued a statement saying: “It has been decided to postpone the
planned visit of Dr. Geagea to Chouf for urgent reasons,” adding that the LF
leader will still “attend the dinner in Deir al-Qamar scheduled at 8:30 p.m.”
Report: LF Says ‘No More Allies’
Naharnet/September 07/2019
After appointing the last five Constitutional Council members at a Cabinet
session last month that “excluded” the Lebanese Forces, the LF stressed they
“now have no more allies except those who wish to uncover and name the corrupt,”
the Saudi Asharq al-Awsat reported on Saturday. “From now on there will be no
consideration of anyone, no allies for us but those who agree on a policy of
exposing the corrupt and name them away from any equivocation,” LF sources told
the daily on condition of anonymity. They said “there was a coup in the Cabinet
against us regarding appointments of Constitutional Council members, it has
shown that we are dealing with political forces that do not respect their
commitments, this is dangerous in politics and in the process of seeking to
build the nation we dream of.” The first five members of the 10-judge
Constitutional Council were appointed in June and the Lebanese Forces was
promised one member when the Cabinet convenes to elect the remaining five. But
in August, the Cabinet elected the five without appointing any of the candidates
put forward by the LF. LF sources added: “We are not gasping after alliances.
Let them run after us. Today we are a big political group with four government
ministers and 15 parliamentarians. Let them try to continue our isolation game
and harass us.” Controversy arose over the exclusion of the Lebanese Forces from
the membership of the Constitutional Council, with Speaker Nabih Berri blaming
“others” for failing to honor an agreement reached in parliament. “An agreement
was indeed reached in parliament during the election of the first batch of the
Council’s members,” Berri had said. An LF minister complained that ministers of
Berri and Prime Minister Saad Hariri have voted in favor of the Free Patriotic
Movement candidate, “implementing FPM chief Jebran Bassil’s desire in this
regard.”The issue revived the dispute” between Prime Minister Saad Hariri and
the LF, with LF sources describing what happened as a “coup.”
Sayegh: Walid Jumblatt, a national leader at the rank of a
Senate President
NNA - Sat 07 Sep 2019
"Democratic Gathering" Member, MP Faisal al-Sayegh, tweeted this afternoon,
saying: "Three meetings recently witnessed in Lebanon have centered on the
Progressive Socialist Party, adjusting the national compass and charting the
next political stage: nameloy PSP Chief Walid Jumblatt in Beiteddine at the
invitation of President Michel Aoun, MP Taymour Jumblatt in Laqlouq at the
invitation of Minister Gebran Bassil, and the meeting of Ministers Wael Abu
Faour and Ghazi Aridi with Hezbollah's delegation at the invitation of House
Speaker Nabih Berri..." He added: "This fruitful movement denotes a national
acknowledgement that there is no stability in Lebanon without dealing with Walid
Jumblatt, and that he cannot be besieged nor can his presence be overlooked as a
national leader at the rank of a Senate Head!"
Kanaan: To face the challenges with minimal speech and
increased action
NNA - Sat 07 Sep 2019
MP Ibrahim Kanaan pointed Saturday to the upcoming difficult period which
entails hard work and relentless efforts to be exerted, for the sake of
safeguarding Lebanon from any financial and economic losses and warding off the
dangers that threaten its stability in this regard. "There are several steps in
the coming weeks following the Baabda I and II meetings, at the financial and
economic levels," said Kanaan, pointing out that "these steps include working to
reduce the deficit and control spending, and to begin construction of factories
to produce electricity." He, thus, highlighted the need for less talk and more
action and hard work to tend to the various obstacles facing the country.
Kanaan's words came during a brunch organized by this morning by the Free
Patriotic Movement's branches in a number of Metn regions. The MP disclosed that
the work on the budget of 2020 is underway before the end of the fiscal year,
noting that employment has ceased in public administrations in order to oblige
the government to conduct a comprehensive survey and ensure the development of
the public sector."The Free Patriotic Movement that has previously fought for
liberation is struggling today for the sake of reform and building the state,"
Kanaan underscored. He added that FPM endorses the active state, the
responsibility for which must be shouldered by all components of the country as
well.
Jumblatt reiterates that sole solution lies in electricity
reform
NNA - Sat 07 Sep 2019
Progressive Socialist Party Chief, Walid Jumblatt, reminded via his Twitter
account today, saying: "As I mentioned in the past, there is only one solution,
namely through reform starting with the electricity sector which accounts for 60
percent of the deficit. Otherwise, all the opportunities available may evaporate
quickly and we would be left in destitute!"
Judge Jean Fahed denies rumors of his resignation
NNA - Sat 07 Sep 2019
President of the Supreme Judicial Council, Judge Jean Fahd, categorically denied
Saturday the news circulated by one of the news websites, about his resignation
from the presidency of the Supreme Judicial Council against the backdrop of
judicial appointments planned for next week, saying that "the news is totally
untrue."Speaking to the 'National News Agency', Fahed confirmed that he is
currenlty in the French capital, Paris, to represent the network of Francophone
Courts of Cassation as president of this network, and to represent the Lebanese
Court of Cassation, at the inauguration ceremony of the first President of the
Court of Cassation of France, newly appointed in this post.
Spiteri pursues his visit to Baalbek
NNA - Sat 07 Sep 2019 at 12:01
Papal Ambassdor to Lebanon, Joseph Spiteri, pursued on Saturday his tour in
Baalbek, by visiting the Institution of the Sisters of the Cross in Shlifa.
Spiteri then participated in a spiritual meeting at the Archdiocese in Deir al-Ahmar,
in the presence of different religious figures from varuious sects.
Speaking at the meeting, Spiteri conveyed the greetings of Pope Francis to the
Lebanese people.
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News
published on September 07-08/2019
Iran Seizes Boat in Strait of Hormuz, Arrests Filipinos
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 07/2019
Iran seized a boat and arrested 12 Filipinos as it busted a "fuel-smuggling
ring" in the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday, the semi-official news agency ISNA
reported. "A foreign tugboat was confiscated as well as 283,900 litres (75,000
gallons) of petrol worth 233.71 billion rials (about $2 million)," ISNA said,
citing the coast guard chief in the southern province of Hormozgan. "Twelve
Philippine nationals were arrested and the relevant judiciary officials are
currently taking the required legal measures," Major Hossein Dehaki was quoted
as saying. Dehaki said the group was suspected of operating a fuel-smuggling
ring and the confiscated shipment had been intercepted close to Sirik county in
the Strait of Hormuz. The seizure comes amid tensions in the Gulf after the
United States unilaterally withdrew from a nuclear deal putting curbs on Iran's
nuclear programme in return for relief from sanctions. The escalation has seen
ships mysteriously attacked, drones downed and oil tankers seized in the Strait
of Hormuz -- a chokepoint for a third of world's seaborne oil. Iran's Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps detained a "foreign tanker" in Gulf waters on July 14
for allegedly smuggling contraband fuel. "With a capacity of two million litres
and 12 foreign crew on board, the vessel was en route to deliver contraband fuel
received from Iranian boats to foreign ships," the Guards said at the time.
Maritime tracking service TankerTrackers reported the Panamanian-flagged MT Riah,
used in the strait for fuelling other vessels, had crossed into Iranian waters,
and at that point its automatic identification system stopped sending signals.
In the most high-profile seizure, the Guards impounded the British-flagged Stena
Impero tanker in the Strait of Hormuz on July 19 for breaking "international
maritime rules".Iran also seized another ship on July 31 with seven foreign crew
onboard over fuel smuggling, but it has not revealed the vessel's identity or
the nationality of its crew.
Iran Fires up Advanced Centrifuges in Latest Nuclear Step
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 07/2019
Iran has started up advanced centrifuges to boost its stockpile of enriched
uranium but will allow the UN atomic agency to continue monitoring its nuclear
programme, a spokesman said Saturday. The spokesman for Iran's Atomic Energy
Organisation said the agency had activated 20 IR-4 and 20 IR-6 centrifuges as a
third step in the Islamic republic's reduction of its commitments under a 2015
nuclear deal. "The centrifuge machines, as they are engaged in research and
development, will help with increasing the stockpile," spokesman Behrouz
Kamalvandi said. "The capacity of these machines is many times more than the
previous machines. This started as of yesterday (Friday)," he told reporters.
But Kamalvandi said Iran would allow the UN atomic agency -- the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) -- to continue monitoring its nuclear programme, as
it has done under the 2015 accord with major powers.
"Regarding the monitoring and accesses of the IAEA... so that everything is
clear (Iran's) commitments regarding transparency will be followed as before,"
he said. Iran and three European countries -- Britain, France and Germany --
have been engaged in talks to save a 2015 nuclear deal that has been unravelling
since the US withdrew from it in May last year. Iran had warned it would carry
out a third round of cuts to its commitments unless other parties to the deal
offset the effect of US sanctions in return for its continued compliance. It has
already hit back twice with countermeasures in response to the US withdrawal
from the 2015 deal, which promised it relief from sanctions in return for curbs
on its nuclear programme.On July 1, Iran said it had increased its stockpile of
enriched uranium to beyond the 300-kilogram maximum set by the deal. A week
later, it announced it had exceeded a 3.67-percent cap on the purity of its
uranium stocks.
Iran Activates Advanced Centrifuges, Says Clock is Ticking
Asharq Al-Awsat/Saturday, 7 September, 2019
Iran has begun injecting uranium gas into advanced centrifuges in violation of
its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, a spokesman said Saturday, warning that
Europe had little time left to save the agreement. President Donald Trump
withdrew America from the accord over a year ago and imposed crippling economic
sanctions on Iran. "As far as the other side does not implement their
commitments, they should not expect Iran to fulfill its commitments," said
Behrouz Kamalvandi of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. Iran cannot remain
committed to the nuclear deal unilaterally, he said. He made the remarks in a
news conference carried on live television, speaking from a podium with advanced
centrifuges standing next to him. Kamalvandi said Iran had the ability to go
beyond 20 percent enrichment of uranium. Analysts say 20 percent is just a short
technical step away from 90 percent enrichment, which is weapons-grade level.
Iran already has gone beyond the stockpile and enrichment level limits set by
the deal, which had promised sanctions relief in return for curbing the
country's nuclear program. Kamalvandi said Iran will allow the UN atomic agency
to continue monitoring its nuclear program. "Regarding the monitoring and
accesses of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency)... so that everything
is clear (Iran's) commitments regarding transparency will be followed as
before.”
Kamalvandi claimed that developing new type of centrifuges are in Iran's agenda
but there is no need to produce those machines now.
7 of Stena Impero's Crew in Dubai after Iran Frees them
London - Asharq Al-Awsat/Saturday, 7 September, 2019
Seven of the 23 crew members of the British-flagged tanker Stena Impero that was
seized by Iran in July reached Dubai on Thursday after Tehran agreed to their
release, a Russian official said. The Swedish-owned Stena Impero was detained by
Iran's Revolutionary Guards on July 19 in the Strait of Hormuz for alleged
marine violations, two weeks after Britain detained an Iranian tanker off the
territory of Gibraltar. That vessel was released in August. An official with
Russia's embassy in Tehran told Reuters that the seven crew members -- one
Russian, one Latvian and five Indian nationals -- obtained their visas in Tehran
on Wednesday and then flew to Dubai. The remaining 16 crew members will remain
onboard the ship "until the fate of the tanker itself is decided", the Russian
official said. The Stena Impero's 23 crew are of Indian, Russian, Latvian and
Filipino nationality, the vessel's Swedish owner Stena Bulk has said.
Stena Bulk separately confirmed on Thursday that the seven crew members had been
released and were traveling to a safe location. "We continue to work tirelessly
to obtain the release of the remaining crew onboard the Stena Impero and will
continue to provide all possible support to their families during this difficult
time," Erik Hanell, Stena Bulk's chief executive and president, said in a
statement. "As we have stated previously; from the information we have, there is
no current evidence the Stena Impero breached any maritime rules or
regulations."
The US Treasury Department on Thursday warned that anyone around the world who
helps fuel Iranian vessels blacklisted by Washington runs the risk of being
designated as well. US Defense Secretary Mark Esper said he currently had no
plan on his desk to seize Adrian Darya 1. “We do not talk about plans, but
currently I have no plan right now sitting on my desk to do such a thing,” Esper
told reporters in London.
Bushra Khalil Withdraws from Tyre by-Elections
Naharnet/September 07/2019
A candidate running in the Tyre parliamentary by-election race withdrew leaving
only Hizbullah’s candidate, Hassan Ezzeddine, running for the district’s vacant
seat. Bushra al-Khalil, a lawyer, said her withdrawal came at the request of
Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. She announced her decision to
reporters after meeting Hizbullah’s deputy chief Sheikh Naim Qassem on Friday.
“He informed me of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s wish to withdraw. I can’t turn down
Sayyed Hassan,” she said. Khalil and Ezzedine are the only candidates running
for Tyre’s parliament seat, left vacant after the resignation of MP Nawwaf
Mousawi. Khalil is best known as one of the legal defenders of former Iraqi
president Saddam Hussein.
Defense Minister Freezes Weapon Permits in Nabatieh
Naharnet/September 07/2019
Minister of Defense Elias Bou Saab issued a statement on Saturday freezing all
weapon permits in the southern city of Nabatieh, the State-run National News
Agency reported. The Minister's decision takes effect in Nabatieh as of
06/09/2019 through 11/09/2019, according to a statement issued by the Minister’s
office.However, the decision excluded the following:
1- Weapon permits for diplomats.
2- Weapon permits for guards of current and former ministers, deputies, heads of
political parties, spiritual leaders, and employees of foreign embassies
strictly when accompanying diplomatic figures.
3- Permits to carry magnetic weapons.
The statement also pointed out that any violation of the resolution subject the
perpetrator to penalties and prosecution.
Satellite Images Show Iran Oil Tanker Sought by US off Syria
Associated Press/Naharnet/September 07/2019
A once-detained Iranian oil tanker pursued by the U.S. appears to be off the
coast of Syria, where Tehran reportedly promised the vessel would not go when
authorities in Gibraltar agreed to release it several weeks ago, according to
satellite images obtained Saturday by The Associated Press.
The appearance of the Adrian Darya-1 in waters near Tartus comes as Iran was
prepared to Saturday to announce what further steps it had taken to move away
from its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, more than a year after President
Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from the accord.
Both events have raised tensions between Iran and the U.S. over recent months
that have seen mysterious attacks on oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz, Iran
shooting down a U.S. military surveillance drone and other incidents across the
wider Middle East. The U.S. issued a new warning of a potential threat to
shipping off of Yemen early Saturday.
The tanker Adrian Darya-1, formerly known as the Grace-1, turned off its
Automatic Identification System late Monday, leading to speculation it would be
heading to Syria. Other Iranian oil tankers have similarly turned off their
tracking beacons in the area, with analysts saying they believe crude oil ends
up in Syria in support of embattled President Bashar Assad's government.Images
obtained by The Associated Press early Saturday from Maxar Technologies appeared
to show the vessel off Syria's coast, some 2 nautical miles (3.7 kilometers) off
shore under intermittent cloud cover. Iranian and Syrian officials have not
acknowledged the vessel's presence there. There was no immediate report in
Iranian state media about the ship, though authorities earlier said the 2.1
million barrels of crude oil onboard had been sold to an unnamed buyer. The oil
on board would be worth about $130 million on the global market, but it remains
unclear who would buy the oil as they'd face the threat of U.S. sanctions. The
new images matched a black-and-white image earlier tweeted by John Bolton, the
U.S. national security adviser. "Anyone who said the Adrian Darya-1 wasn't
headed to #Syria is in denial," Bolton tweeted. "We can talk, but #Iran's not
getting any sanctions relief until it stops lying and spreading terror!"
U.S. prosecutors in federal court allege the Adrian Darya's owner is Iran's
paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, which answers only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei. On Wednesday, the U.S. imposed new sanctions on an oil shipping
network it alleged had ties to the Guard and offered up to $15 million for
anyone with information that disrupts the Guard's operations. Brian Hook, the
U.S. special envoy for Iran, also has reportedly emailed or texted captains of
Iranian oil tankers, trying to scare them into not delivering their cargo.
Meanwhile Saturday, the U.S. Transportation Department's Maritime Administration
issued a new warning to shippers about a potential threat off the coast of Yemen
in the southern Red Sea.
"A maritime threat has been reported in the Red Sea in the vicinity of Yemen,"
the warning read. "The nature of the event is potential increased hostilities
that threaten maritime security." The capital and areas of war-torn Yemen remain
held by the country's Houthi rebels, which are allied to Iran. Shipping in the
Red Sea has been targeted previously by rebel attacks. On Wednesday, a warning
went out after two small boats followed one ship in the region, but there's been
no other information about a new threat there. Cmdr. Joshua Frey, a spokesman
for the U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based 5th Fleet, said the Navy remained ready to
maintain the safety of shippers in the region. He declined to specifically
discuss the warning. The U.S. military's Central Command did not respond to a
request for comment.
Netanyahu Criticized for Seeking Defense Agreement with US
Tel Aviv - Nazir Magally/Asharq Al-Awsat/Saturday, 7 September, 2019
Several former Israeli generals, intelligence officers, and politicians have
slammed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on his attempt to conclude an
agreement on a defense treaty with the United States, which would be seen as a
push from President Donald Trump for him to win the upcoming elections.
The officials criticized Netanyahu for “harnessing strategic security issues for
his electoral interests,” noting that his surprise visit to London was a “failed
play.”According to the critics, he imposed himself on British Prime Minister
Boris Johnson for talks that lasted only 30 minutes, during which the latter sat
on the side of the chair as if he suggested that he wanted to end the meeting as
soon as possible; then, he forced a meeting with US Secretary of Defense Mark
Esper to discuss the defense treaty and the Iranian crisis. “What is meant by
joint defense? Does Netanyahu want to send our children to war in Afghanistan
with the US military ally?” the Israeli officials asked. In the past nine months
and since the 20th Knesset (parliament) was dissolved, more politicians have
broken laws in their campaigns and used security issues for partisan purposes,
Haaretz said. Sources in Tel Aviv have confirmed that Netanyahu was vigorously
seeking a “gift” from Trump to help him win the September 17 parliamentary
elections, and he insisted on a “strong security gift.”The sources stressed that
the Israeli premier discussed these issues with Esper in London. Commenting on
the matter, Israeli Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz said that such an alliance
would be limited to specific issues, such as the Iranian nuclear threat and
Iran’s long-range missiles. While he underlined Israel’s defensive capabilities,
Katz noted that such an agreement would prevent the government from having to
spend enormous resources on permanent and long-term strategies against these
threats.
Israel Strikes Hamas Targets after Gaza Rocket Attack
Asharq Al-Awsat/Saturday, 7 September, 2019
Israeli forces attacked positions belonging to Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip
after rockets were fired from the Palestinian enclave, the military said early
Saturday. Late Friday, "five projectiles were launched from the Gaza Strip
towards Israel," the army said. The projectiles hit open fields in southern
Israel, army spokesman told Agence France Presse. In response, an "aircraft and
tank struck a number of Hamas military targets in the northern Gaza Strip,
including a post and military positions," the army said in a statement. A Hamas
security source said there were no casualties resulting from the Israeli
strikes. The exchange came hours after two Palestinian teenagers were killed by
Israeli fire during clashes on the Gaza border. The Palestinians aged 14 and 17
were shot dead by Israeli forces, the Gaza health ministry said, with another 46
Palestinians wounded. The Israeli army said thousands of Palestinians took part
in the demonstrations along the border fence, which included throwing "fire
bombs and explosive devices" at soldiers. Palestinians have been holding regular
mass protests along the fortified border since March 2018.
The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous
sources published on September 07-08/2019
The U.S.-Taliban Negotiations: A Deadly Qatari Trap
Yigal Carmon/Gatestone Institute/September 07/2019
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14816/us-taliban-negotiations-qatar
One can understand President Donald Trump's wish to leave Afghanistan. There
are, however, ways to leave without losing people, respect, and allies. Mr.
Trump, instead of leaving unilaterally, while reinforcing the democratically
elected government in Kabul without boots on the ground, is unfortunately
empowering his Taliban enemy by protracted negotiations, where America makes
successive concessions and ultimately throws its Afghan allies under the bus.
Afghan officials are the first to sense that the sellout of the Kabul government
is impending, and are scurrying to defect to the Taliban (in July alone there
were 800 defections).
As opposed to what many Americans think, Qatar did the US no favors in building
the base in the mid-1990s. It needed an American base for its own
self-protection and this dependence still persists. Without this base, this
Lilliputian energy Gulliver would be taken over by its neighbors (whether
Iranian or Saudi) within a day. The US military establishment ignores this
reality to its own detriment, and behaves as if America is in Qatar's debt
rather than the reverse.
Qatar is already threatening to limit potential operations against Iran from Al-Udeid,
should they be needed, and Qatar's Tamim told Rouhani that "only countries
[placed] along the coast [of the Persian Gulf] should keep security in the
region."
This is an edited and shortened version of an article recently in MEMRI. It is
published here with the kind permission of the author.
Pictured: U.S. Marines at Camp Shorab on September 11, 2017 in Helmand Province,
Afghanistan.
What is happening in Afghanistan is already beyond grief. The United States is
negotiating with the Taliban, without the Taliban first agreeing to a cease-fire
as a precondition for talks, and although President Trump has emphatically
announced his determination to withdraw from the country, American soldiers are
still being killed (in recent days, three American servicemen died). [1]
One can understand President Donald Trump's wish to leave Afghanistan. Whether
the US can sustain its strategic and economic leadership in the context of an
isolationist policy, is a legitimate debate. This is the president's and
Congress's purview. There are, however, ways to leave without losing people,
respect, and allies. Mr. Trump, instead of leaving unilaterally, while
reinforcing the democratically elected government in Kabul without boots on the
ground, is unfortunately empowering his Taliban enemy by protracted
negotiations, where America makes successive concessions and ultimately throws
its Afghan allies under the bus.[2] Afghan officials are the first to sense that
the sellout of the Kabul government is impending, and are scurrying to defect to
the Taliban (in July alone there were 800 defections).[3]
Some enemies have no interest in anything but an American withdrawal and will
not pay anything for such a withdrawal; on the contrary, they will exact payment
for each day the Americans remain until they exit with their tails between their
legs. Apparently, the president and his administration are unable to see this.
According to leaks to the media, the Americans are trying to negotiate with the
Taliban a dialogue with the elected Kabul government. However, even if the
Taliban sign on the dotted line, our experience in the Middle East shows time
and again that there is no way to ensure that they keep their word. President
Trump insists that the Taliban promise not to attack the US following its
departure. The Taliban can definitely affix their empty signature: in the Middle
East, people use proxies. Like the Iranians, the Taliban can be seemingly
uninvolved, but 9/11 was hatched in Afghanistan by Muslim-Arab Al-Qaeda members.
Who blinded brilliant, shrewd and goal-oriented people such as President Trump
and the people around him, as they did also during his first year in office? Why
do they prefer to overlook the public announcements by the Taliban such as: "the
reason behind war... in Afghanistan is the presence of Americans forces and it
will only find an end when American forces leave Afghanistan."[4] The answer
(surprise) is Qatar, which talked the U.S. administration into this
self-destructive process. The administration bought into it on the assumption
that a country that built and hosts the CENTCOM base is therefore an ally with
shared interests and therefore its recommendations must be benevolent and bona
fide. Little do they understand -- Qatar is an enemy in allied clothing -- and
its interests are antithetical to America's.
Qatar supports every major terrorist organization: the Muslim Brotherhood (it
hosts their chief inciter for terror, Sheikh Yusef Al-Qaradawi) and its
offshoots such as Al-Qaeda and now the Taliban in order to buy protection for
the ruling Al-Thani clan. It also sustains Muslim governments antagonistic to
America such as Erdogan's Turkey. The Al-Thani family-owned Al-Jazeera news
network has for decades served as an efficient weaponized media outlet targeting
the US and its interests in the region and beyond.[5]
According to Richard A. Clarke, National Coordinator for Security and
Counter-terrorism in the Clinton and Bush (43) administrations, the previous
Qatari Emir, father of the current one, personally snatched from the Americans
an arch-terrorist named Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, (who plotted terror attacks
against America) and spirited him away from Qatar to foil his arrest by the
Americans, thus enabling him to mastermind the 9/11 attacks a few years later.
Clarke concluded: "Had the Qataris handed him over to us as requested in 1996,
the world might have been a very different place."
As opposed to what many Americans think, Qatar did the US no favors in building
the base in the mid-1990s. It needed an American base for its own
self-protection and this dependence still persists. Without this base, this
Lilliputian energy Gulliver would be taken over by its neighbors (whether
Iranian or Saudi) within a day. The US military establishment ignores this
reality to its own detriment, and behaves as if America is in Qatar's debt
rather than the reverse.
By enlisting America, Qatar protects itself.
The Qataris won President Trump's friendship the same way they purchase anything
in the West, from think tanks to World Cup competitions. They insinuated
themselves into his good graces by promising a reported $85 billion for
rehabilitating America's infrastructure. President Trump's eagerness for
American jobs and prosperity understandably fed his enthusiasm for the Qatari
emir:
"Tamim, you've been a friend of mine for a long time, before I did this
presidential thing, and we feel very comfortable with each other... Investments
that you make in the United States -- one of the largest in the world -- but the
investments that you make are very much appreciated. And I know the planes
you're buying and all of the other things you're investing in. And I view it
differently; I view it as jobs. Because for me, it's jobs. And today, we set a
new record for jobs. We're setting it almost on a daily basis."
Even more unfortunate is Qatar's ability to buy off the US military on the cheap
by expanding the Al-Udeid base on its dime to allow more comfortable housing for
the servicemen's families; so far, no American commander has arisen to challenge
the price in American blood and honor that Doha's largesse is demanding.
Instead, we get Brigadier General Daniel H. Tulley, the Al-Udeid base commander,
cluelessly saying: "It never ceases to amaze Americans how gracious our hosts
are here."
Years ago, a senior administration official explained to me why the US turns a
blind eye to Qatar's nefarious activities. "We have in the Al-Udeid base total
freedom of operations," he said. "The Al-Udeid base is like a USAFB in Alabama."
This too is no longer true; Qatar is already threatening to limit potential
operations against Iran from Al-Udeid, should they be needed, and Qatar's Tamim
told Rouhani that "only countries [placed] along the coast [of the Persian Gulf]
should keep security in the region."[6] One can imagine the Qatari ruling family
laughing in the safety of their US-protected palace, and prizing their good
fortune in having such useful idiots as allies and protectors.
Yigal Carmon is the President and founder of MEMRI [Middle East Media and
Research Institute].
[1] Belatedly, only after the continuous killing of American soldiers by the
Taliban after all signs pointed to an imminent deal, Khalilzad awoke to tell the
Taliban "violence like this must stop. Has the chief US negotiator forgotten
that the Taliban has long demanded a complete withdrawal of foreign troops in
order to "end the occupation" of Afghanistan and that there will be no ceasefire
until a US troop withdrawal?
[2] In addition to agreeing to the conduct of negotiations under fire, the US:
1. Agreed to exclude the elected Afghan government from the talks (this belies
Khalilzad's claim in footnote 3 that the US will not throw Kabul under the bus).
2. Absolved the Taliban of being a terror organization and extended this blanket
absolution to any terror organization worldwide operating within a specific
territory. 3. Agreed in principle to release 10,000 Taliban terrorists in
exchange for 3,000 abducted Afghan officials, and 4. Totally ignored the Taliban
declaration that elections are un-Islamic thus rendering a possible Taliban
signature on a clause mandating democratic dialogue with the Afghan government a
dead letter.
[3] AlemarahEnglish.com (Afghanistan), August 10, 2019. Indeed Zalmay Khalilzad,
the US negotiator with the Taliban has recently tweeted that "We will defend
Afghan forces now and after any agreement w/ the Talibs." The facts on the
ground belie such assurances. The US has acquiesced to a veritable Taliban
embassy in Doha, the ultimate brush-off to the Kabul government.
[4] AlemarahEnglish.com (Afghanistan), August 26, 2019.
[5] For a recapitulation of Qatar's double dealing featuring its weaponized
Al-Jazeera network see: MEMRI Daily Brief No. 146, Qatar The Emirate That Fools
Them All, And Its Enablers, January 18, 2018
[6] Mehrnews.com (Iran), August 12, 2019.
© 2019 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
Why appeasing Iran is the road to disaster
Sir John Jenkins/Arab News/September 07, 2019
Sometimes I wish Iran, like Brexit, would just disappear from the headlines.
Neither subject adds to what that great Englishman, Dr Johnson, called the
gaiety of nations. And their constant presence in the news simply reminds us
that something somewhere is wrong, even if we can’t agree on exactly what that
might be.There is, of course, a difference, especially if you speak to
Europeans. Many will say that Brexit is a moment of madness, that the EU needs
to stand firm in the face of outrageous British behaviour, that the Irish
backstop is a mark of the EU’s resolve not to be blackmailed or to abandon one
of its smaller member states, and that if it all goes wrong the responsibility
will be entirely British.
Yet if you talk about Iran, the mood changes. For many in the EU, Iran, which
has a 40-year record of sponsoring violence and terror internationally,
executing or assassinating those among its own citizens who disagreed with the
country’s direction of travel, subverting or suborning its neighbours, harboring
members of Al-Qaeda, attacking shipping and now refusing to cooperate with IAEA
monitoring, is simply a victim and needs to be accommodated. The real villain is
the US.
I had a baffling conversation the other day with a senior EU diplomat about the
recent case of the Iranian tanker detained in Gibraltar and the retaliatory
Iranian action in seizing the Stena Impero. In mild exasperation my former
colleague asked me why we — the British — hadn’t simply ignored the fact that
the Iranians were flouting the EU’s own prohibition on oil sales to Syria. After
all, everyone else did.
It’s hard to know where to start with all this. Britain — because in a very
close referendum a small majority wanted to leave the EU — is to be treated as a
suitable case for disciplinary action and every single word of every single
document ever signed scrutinised and enforced. But Iran — which has been one of
the central problems in international relations since 1979 (and, some would say,
before that) and has sought to export violence to the streets of Europe — is to
be given the benefit of the doubt, and any punitive EU measures simply ignored
or discreetly palliated.
You can see the same syndrome at work in a recent posting on Jadaliyya, a
website devoted to a relentlessly progressivist reading of Middle Eastern and
North African issues, which criticizes US commentators for offering their
opinions on Iran without the necessary linguistic or cultural expertise. Behind
this lies an old rivalry between universities and think-tanks. It represents
among other things a claim that understanding arises principally from linguistic
and cultural competence, and it is this that produces empathy and therefore
better policy.
Yet much Washington commentary is actually about the appropriate US policy
response to observable Iranian actions and policy pronouncements. It’s not clear
that empathy is in question here. And when Americans who do speak Persian dare
to comment, they are often attacked as administration stooges. When I myself
delivered a long piece for Policy Exchange in 2017 about the ways in which too
many supporters of political Islamism and their followers distort history, I was
actually attacked for knowing too much — but in the wrong, unpermitted way. You
can’t win.
And here we come to President Macron’s recent generous offer to Tehran to
establish a $15bn time-limited line of credit in return for full compliance with
the terms of the JCPOA. This is an elaboration of the idea on which the EU has
long been working, of providing a mechanism to allow Iran to continue to trade
with Europe without using US dollars. It is also the latest in a series of
attempted inducements offered to Iran by France and other European states to
resist the temptation to overreact to the US sanctions squeeze.
Now I’m all in favour of diplomacy. I admire the creativity, expertise and
persistence which the French have undoubtedly demonstrated, especially at a time
when a new European Commission is bedding in and politics elsewhere in the EU
are in turmoil. And there has been a degree of attempted coordination with the
US that suggests at least the possibility of collective action. But every time
Paris or the EU as a whole offer an incentive to Iran or suggest — however
quietly — that they can act as mediators between Tehran and Washington, the
Iranians do something provocative and the White House dismisses the idea. On
this occasion the Iranians announced that they were removing all restrictions on
their research activities and the enrichment of uranium.
Any sign of weakness only encourages Tehran to seek more concessions. They are
playing Europe — not the reverse. But their real goal is Washington.
President Trump, who has certainly toyed publicly with the idea of meeting
President Rouhani, has said he needs no help; a meeting will happen only if Iran
is prepared to give up its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile ambitions. And
Rouhani has said he will meet the US only as part of a multilateral process if
(essentially) Iran is allowed to do a lot of what it likes.
And this is all part of a larger picture. During Javad Zarif’s visit to Moscow a
few days ago, the Russian press announced that Moscow was prepared to hold joint
naval exercises with Tehran and allow the use of Russian ports for the shipment
of some Iranian oil exports. The Iranians have just revealed an agreement with
Beijing for an additional $280bn of Chinese investment in Iran’s energy
infrastructure. And they continue to develop an ingenious system of dark funding
for their economy through the IRGC, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Venezuela and other
parts of South America and indeed Africa.
This is all suboptimal. It reflects a degree of global political fragmentation
that is not irreversible but gives opportunists a chance to exploit. In all of
this, Europe, which needs global order to thrive, is a player — but a minor and
sometimes reluctant one, given intra-EU divisions. The big prize for Iran
remains the US. But it’s not at all clear that Tehran actually wants a deal with
Washington, certainly while it sees a chance instead to divide the US from
Europe, Russia and China. It wants instead to sow division and define the terms
of victory. In order to secure this it is willing to allow other historic
enemies — such as Russia or Turkey (where Erdogan now says he wants a nuclear
weapons capability too) — to benefit.
It may be willing to allow the Iranian energy economy to become a constituent
part of the One Belt, One Road project that leads inexorably to Chinese hegemony
across Central Asia. And — like Vladimir Putin — it is happy to exploit European
rivalries in order to exacerbate splits within the EU and accelerate a drift
away from the historic, if sometimes strained, Atlanticist posture of European
political elites. That way lies disaster. Whatever Euro-optimists may claim,
Europe needs the US as its principal partner for the foreseeable future. In all
this it is Iran that is the minor player. Yet some European policy elites still
seem to treat the issue as a choice between Iran and Washington.
It bears constant repeating that this is not the case, nor is it about Donald
Trump. There may well be profound changes afoot in US domestic politics, as they
are in different ways elsewhere. And it is hard to argue that this
administration has helped the cause of collective action with its transactional
unpredictability. But this can be exaggerated: Secretary Pompeo’s unwillingness
to sign off on a so-called peace deal in Afghanistan that allows the Taliban
essentially to do what they want perhaps sheds an interesting light on the
limits of US willingness to disengage internationally.
And what has not changed are the fundamental geopolitical realities of shared
security and economic interests and an ideological and political commonality
that has lasted centuries. Europe needs to seek to ensure the US stays engaged,
not simply abandon the central ideas of international order on which the
post-1945 world was built because they don’t like it when a President starts
behaving like the Wizard of Oz (which is pretty rich when you consider Iranian
behaviour).
And any sign of weakness only encourages Tehran to seek more concessions. They
are playing Europe — not the reverse. But their real goal is Washington. It is
always possible that negotiations between Iran and the US will resume at some
point. There are rumors of a Trump-Rouhani meeting at the UN in New York at the
end of September. But for this to happen and be productive, Tehran must be
convinced that the West will stay united.
While we wait, the wheels of war grind slowly but inexorably toward more
conflict in southern Syria and the Gulf. Even the recent black comedy about fake
Israeli casualties on the Golan was a part of this. As the Roman politician Cato
saw over 2,000 years ago, strength, resolve and unity are the only sure
guarantors of peace.
The real moral of President Macron’s $15bn is that Europe risks being side-lined
when the choices get tougher. Because when they do, it really will be a question
of who stands where, not who is willing to pay for the privilege of bribing Iran
to de-escalate and then finding it won’t. And a Europe that wants to face all
ways will find itself irrelevant.
*Sir John Jenkins is a senior fellow at Policy Exchange. Until December 2017, he
was Corresponding Director (Middle East) at the International Institute for
Strategic Studies (IISS), based in Manama, Bahrain and was a Senior Fellow at
Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. He was the British
ambassador to Saudi Arabia until January 2015
Backed into a corner, what does Boris do now?
Cornelia Meyer/Arab News/September 07, 2019
The more you think this story could not become any more twisted, the more
twisted it grows. The story, of course, is Brexit.
Having pledged on the steps of 10 Downing Street on the day he took office that
Britain would leave the EU on Oct. 31 “come what may, do or die,” British Prime
Minister Boris Johnson now finds himself in the position of having to either
break that promise or break the law.
So how has it come to this?
Johnson’s problems began with his decision to prorogue, or suspend, Parliament
for five weeks in September and October — ostensibly in preparation for the
announcement of his government’s legislative program, but in truth to sideline
Parliament and avoid scrutiny while he took Britain out of the EU without a
withdrawal deal.
The plan has backfired spectacularly, because it succeeded only in uniting a
previously fractured opposition — some of it in Johnson’s own Conservative Party
— behind legislation to thwart the prime minister.
Their proposal, which will become law on Monday, requires the prime minister to
ask the EU for a delay in the date of the UK’s departure if there is no
withdrawal agreement by Oct. 19. Having declared that he would rather “die in a
ditch” than ask for such a delay, Johnson proposed a snap general election,
expecting agreement from the opposition Labour Party, which has been demanding
just that for the past two years.
Calling an election requires a two-thirds majority in the House of Commons, and
therefore the support of Labour votes — which they refuse to supply until a
“no-deal” hard Brexit is ruled out.
Brexit uncertainty does nothing to bring the country together (even the Johnson
family itself has Boris and his father on the Brexit side and his sister Rachel
and brother Jo on the remain side). Business, above all, needs certainty.
Worse still for Johnson, having threatened to expel any Conservative MPs who
voted for the new Brexit law, he was compelled to cast out Tory grandees
including not only two former chancellors of the exchequer, Philip Hammond and
Ken Clarke, but also Sir Nicholas Soames, grandson of none other than Winston
Churchill.
What will Johnson do now? Can the opposition alliance remain united until the
end of October, or will it fall apart? Will the government, which now has a
negative majority of more than 40, move a vote of no confidence in itself? How
would the opposition react to that? We are truly in uncharted territory.
Meanwhile the uncertainty does nothing to bring the country together (even the
Johnson family itself has Boris and his father on the Brexit side and his sister
Rachel and brother Jo on the remain side). Business, above all, needs certainty.
The British Chambers of Commerce reported on Saturday that four out of 10
businesses were woefully underprepared for Brexit.
The past 10 days have taught us two things: First, Johnson repeated his
predecessor’s mistake when he declared red lines too early and too vociferously,
and now finds himself trapped on the horns of a dilemma of his own making.
Second, and more important, in an age of populism that distorts facts and thinks
little of precedent, convention and political culture, it is important to have a
written constitution supported by institutions that uphold it, such as a
constitutional court. The current system, whereby the UK constitution is an
amalgam of traditions, laws and precedent, will not do when there are leaders
willing to defy it.
Politics have gone into overdrive; the current hysteria is interesting for
pundits, but bad for the country and the economy, and above all proof of the
contempt in which people are held by the political elites.
*Cornelia Meyer is a business consultant, macro-economist and energy
expert.Twitter: @MeyerResources
Israel must target the real root of the problem - Iran
Gilad Sharon/Ynetnews/September 07/2019
Opinion: Why should Israelis sit in bomb shelters because of rockets fired by
Iranian proxies in Gaza or Lebanon? We should be taking the fight to the real
instigators in Tehran
The Iranians will fight to the last jihadist, the last Hamas man, and the last
Hezbollah fighter standing.
Only this week we had another example of this in the form of anti-tank missiles
fired by Hezbollah in Lebanon at IDF troops. But when it comes to the Iranians
themselves, it’s a whole different story; about themselves they care a great
deal.
The Iranians are behind the recent attacks on Israel from Gaza, Lebanon and
Syria, and since the attacks themselves didn’t come from Iranian territory,
we're happy enough to punish the messengers - in other words, we return fire
only to where we were attacked from.
This needs to change. Why should the people of Israel come under fire from
attacks that were originated in and funded by Iran, while the Iranians
themselves sit protected and safe in their country?
Israel is a sophisticated country; we can arrange attacks on Iranian soil from
elsewhere as well. Iran doesn’t care if it is Gaza civilians or Hezbollah
fighters who are killed by Israeli fire. They don't care about civilians, Iran's
okay if it's Gazans who pay the price, but when it comes to them and their
people it’s a different story.
But Iran needs to know, if it sponsors attacks on Israel, its people won't be
safe either. If they don’t fire at us from Iran, we won't fire at them from
Israel.
Why should IDF troops be threatened on its Lebanon and Gaza borders, while
Iran's soldiers are safe in their country? And if a citizen who lives in Sderot
has to sit in a bomb shelter, why should an Iranian citizen sit safely in his
home?
If Tel Aviv or Haifa are threatened, why should people walk freely in Tehran?
There's no shortage of Sunni militias that are at odds with Iran - you
orchestrate attacks on us, we orchestrate attacks on you, simple and
symmetrical. Israel's response to rocket fire from Gaza is weak, and is
explained away with the excuse of the threat on the northern front.
But both the southern and northern threats are essentially facing Iranian
threats, and so an attack on the source of this evil would be far more
efficient. Iranians would not be able to accept attacks on their country just as
we should not have to accept attacks on ours. No country in the world would
agree to this situation.
Those who are responsible, those who pulled the trigger and those who sent them
should pay. Hamas positions in Gaza shouldn’t be our only targets, just as an
attack on a Syrian village shouldn't be the only location where we retaliate for
a drone strike on Israeli territory. Lebanon alone should not have to pay the
price for Hezbollah aggression.
For more than 1,300 years there's been a feud between Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims.
The predominantly Shi'ite Iranians hate the Sunnis - including the predominantly
Sunni Saudis - much more then they hate us.
The Persians are an ancient and wise people with history and culture and their
idiotic policy regarding Israel is a surprising one.
You spend your money in Lebanon, Gaza and Syria all the while struggling under
harsh sanctions when you could have lived in wealth and dignity.
You understand history - no one has ever gained a single thing by messing with
the Jews.
The world failed to learn the lessons of WWII
Sever Plocker/Ynetnews/September 07/2019
Opinion: Hitler's madness, the outrageous complacency of heads of state and the
most hideous conflict humanity has ever seen claimed the lives of tens of
millions, including 6 million European Jews, but it happened because of Western
appeasement of a madman
"At 4.45 am on 1 September 1939 the German battleship Schleswig-Holstein opened
fire on the Polish garrison of the Westerplatte Fort, Danzig, in what was to
become the first military engagement of World War Two," wrote historian Richard
Aubrey in his famous book "1939."
The German invasion of Poland involved 1.5 million troops and 1500 airplanes.
The intelligence agencies of Britain, France and the U.S.relayed to their
respective governments reliable updates regarding Germany's preparations to
seize control of its neighbor, which was initially supposed to happen on August
26, but none of them did anything to prevent it.
Poland was effectively abandoned to its fate, together with the 3 million Jews
who lived within its borders.
World War II and the Holocaust that befell the world's Jewish population were
unprecedent bloodbaths in human history.
Even after 80 years, its hard to understand and digest the blind eye that was
turned towards the Nazis, Nazism and Hitler by the decision makers of the world.
They didn’t lift a finger when immediately after Hitler was elected chancellor
of Germany, he disbanded parliament and effectively turned the country to a
dictatorship. They didn’t lift a finger when in March 1935 Germany annexed
Saarland from France and they turned a blind eye when Germany passed their
anti-Semitic racial discrimination laws in Nuremberg that same year, and that's
only to name a few.
Although Britain declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939, and France
followed suit, both did nothing to backup this declaration.
The Royal Air Force settled for scattering flyers above Germany, American
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt announced in a special national broadcast
that the U.S. would remain neutral and out of the war. The Soviet Union was
paralyzed by an agreement to carve up Poland struck by Hitler and Joseph Stalin,
a pact that was signed by the countries' two foreign ministers, Molotov and
Ribbentrop on August 23, 1939.
Stalin wouldn’t have the strength to deal with Hitler either way between 1937
and 1939 - he was too busy cleansing the higher ranks of the Red Army instead of
arming it.
At any one of these historical junctures, the United Nations had the power to
stop and eliminate Hitler, or at least his wild ambition for an ever-growing
German-led Aryan empire bent on cleansing Jews from the world.
A couple of bombings of a few select targets in Berlin and other major German
cities would have been enough to restrain Hitler and his generals. Why didn’t it
happen, and what caused that complacency towards the Nazis?
The answer the historians gives us is that although the reports reaching the
West of Hitler's imperialistic and murderous ambitions were accurate, the
attitude was one of anti-war and pacifism.
In his chilling book "Appeasing Hitler," British historian Tim Bouverie quotes
the decision of Britain's Labour Party to demilitarize completely, and call for
an all-out strike should the British government decide to march to war.
The student unions at Oxford and Cambridge rallied the younger generations not
to fight for the homeland in any way.
British, France and American politicians were adamant in denying Germany's vast
armament, writes Bouverie. Not because they didn’t know about it, but because
they preferred to surrender to a few vocal opinion leaders.
Hitler picked up on this weakness, and in the run-up to invasion of Poland was
heard giving an assessment that might explain his conduct. "Our enemies are
nothing but little worms," he said.
The statesman of the West created another illusion regarding Hitler, one where
he sought only to expand Germany's rule to where German-speaking citizens were
settled, one where he would found the German Third Reich and then calm down.
And they were wrong, Hitler did not calm down as from the very beginning, he
presented himself as a super leader, one who would achieve a vision of "a world
without Jews" - the name of a book by Israeli-born historian Alon Confino.
Hitler, Confino writes, saw the Jewish people as the personification of evil and
the eternal enemy. In 1941, the madness of anti-Semitism drove him to declare
war on the Soviet Union (the bastion of Jewish communism) and on the U.S. (the
bastion of Jewish capitalism). This madness marked his eventual end.
The West's policy of appeasement towards Hitler was meant as a way to avoid war
at all costs, and ended up exacting the most horrible price humankind has ever
paid.
Between 80 to 110 million people killed - both soldiers and citizens - among
them more than 6 million Jews murdered, the most barbaric, global, savage and
disastrous war humankind has ever waged. Were the lessons learned? Is there
appeasement in the air today as well?
Younger Palestinians More Moderate on Tactical Issues, But
Not on Long-Term Peace with Israel
David Pollock/The Washington Institute/September 07/2019
A recent survey suggests an immediate opening for Washington to promote certain
reforms, but real reconciliation still looks like a distant dream.
A detailed survey in the West Bank and Gaza this summer indicates that younger
Palestinians have somewhat more moderate views than their elders on various
current issues—though not on long-term ones. Respondents age 18-30 expressed a
marginally greater interest in economic progress, internal political
breakthroughs, personal contacts with Israelis, the Trump peace plan, and
similar matters. Yet only around one-third of them said they favor permanent
peace with Israel—about the same minority percentage as respondents over 30. So
the data give no grounds to imagine that a generational shift or the mere
passage of time alone will improve the prospects for Israeli-Palestinian
reconciliation at the grassroots level.
YOUNG AND OLD SHARE MANY HARDLINE VIEWS
Among the many surprises in this poll, conducted in June-July by the Palestine
Center for Public Opinion, is the relatively high consistency of views among
younger and older Palestinians regarding a wide range of political matters. On
most of the survey’s forty questions, only a few statistically insignificant
percentage points separate the two generations, apart from some of the current
issues described above.
Overall, then, this younger generation of Palestinians appears to be neither
more moderate nor more radical than their elders, and neither more secular nor
more religious. For example, the overwhelming majority of all respondents
(nearly 90%) said that religion is important in their lives.
One modest variation in this realm concerns Gazan attitudes toward the Muslim
Brotherhood. In that territory, 54% of respondents over 30 expressed support for
the Islamist group, compared to 41% among younger adults. Similarly, 62% of
older respondents in Gaza said that Hamas should be allowed to operate freely in
the West Bank, compared to around half among the younger generation.
Also mostly consistent across generations, though by a much narrower majority,
was rejection of permanent peace with Israel. Asked if a two-state solution
should be “the end of conflict with Israel,” just 34% of young West Bank
respondents answered yes; the proportion was even lower among older residents
(25%).
In Gaza, overall opinions on this and many related issues were somewhat more
moderate, but the generational difference was reversed there: 38% of young Gazan
respondents said that a two-state solution should end the conflict, while 46% of
their elders agreed with that ideal. Similarly, while 41% of young Gazans would
recognize Israel as “the state for the Jewish people” if that would help
Palestinians obtain their own state, this figure unexpectedly rose to 56% among
older Gazans.
GAZANS LESS POLITICIZED
One startling difference did emerge from this survey—not between generations,
but between West Bankers and Gazans. Respondents were asked to what extent they
agreed or disagreed with this provocative statement: “The Palestinian-Israeli
conflict is mostly just for politicians or old people, and I simply don’t think
about it very much.” In the West Bank, only one-quarter agreed even “somewhat”
with that proposition, but in Gaza, the figure doubled to 52%. Also surprising
was the parity between younger and older residents on this seemingly age-related
question.
The explanation for these highly counterintuitive findings almost certainly lies
in the fact that Gazans have had little daily contact with Israelis since the
2005 withdrawal of soldiers and settlers. Their situation is a sharp contrast to
conditions in the West Bank, where Israeli soldiers, settlers, and checkpoints
are a constant reminder of the conflict.
YOUNGER GENERATION MORE PRAGMATIC ON SHORT-TERM ISSUES
As mentioned earlier, some significant generational differences emerged on more
immediate issues, particularly relations with Israel, with the Fatah and Hamas
governments, with other Arabs, and with the United States. First, respondents
age 18-30 were more likely to prioritize internal political reform over other
political goals, including “resistance” against Israel. Given a list of five
possible priorities, half of this age group chose “holding new elections and
making our government more effective and less corrupt.” That option scored
noticeably lower among older Palestinians: 35% in the West Bank and 38% in Gaza.
The generations also diverged a bit in their attitudes toward Washington,
especially in the West Bank. Young respondents there were somewhat less opposed
to certain U.S. policies, and somewhat less aware of others. For example, just
29% favored rejecting the Trump peace plan outright even before it is officially
released, compared to 37% of older respondents. Similarly, when asked to choose
between policy options that included “More American economic aid,” “More
pressure on Israel,” “Stay out of our affairs altogether,” and other choices,
22% of younger West Bankers selected more aid, compared to only 13% of older
respondents. Two-thirds of the younger cohort also approved another current U.S.
goal—“Looking more to other Arab states...to improve our situation”—compared to
59% of older respondents.
One generational difference stood out with particular clarity: younger West Bank
respondents were significantly more likely to say their government should stop
paying bonuses to prisoners in Israeli jails. A surprisingly high 49% agreed
with that supposedly very controversial position, compared to just 35% among the
older generation. And this is not because the younger generation is more
informed about the policy’s economic costs—in fact, just 40% of younger
respondents (versus 51% of their elders) said they had heard much about the
Taylor Force Act, the 2018 U.S. law that cut aid to the Palestinian Authority
because of bonuses paid to terrorists.
Finally, younger West Bank respondents were also comparatively moderate on a few
immediate questions of relations with Israel. The majority (62%) said they
support personal contacts with Israelis “in order to help the peace camp there”;
just half of older West Bankers agree. Likewise, 44% said they want “more jobs
with Israeli companies in the West Bank,” compared to only 32% of the older
generation.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Although public opinion is certainly not the decisive factor in Palestinian
politics, these findings suggest an immediate opening for U.S. policy—but also a
potential problem down the road. If Washington were to emphasize Palestinian
political reform, economic opportunity, dialogue with Israelis and other Arabs,
and even an end to terrorist subsidies, it would find significantly more
resonance among the younger generation than is often supposed. Over time, this
might yield some pressure on local politicians to soften their opposition to all
of those worthy objectives.
But in the longer term, majority popular opposition to permanent peace with
Israel, even among younger respondents, suggests that real reconciliation
remains a distant dream. American efforts to promote practical improvements on
the ground and encourage Israeli overtures to Palestinians and other Arabs might
soften this hardline grassroots attitude eventually. Nevertheless, the evidence
indicates that a compromise deal based mostly on goodwill is not a realistic
option anytime soon, for either the United States or any of its regional
partners.
METHODOLOGICAL NOTE
This analysis is based on a demographic breakout of data from a survey
comprising face-to-face interviews with a representative sample of 1,000 adult
Palestinians: 500 West Bankers and 500 Gazans. The survey was taken June 27-July
15 by the Palestine Center for Public Opinion, based in the West Bank town of
Beit Sahour. Sampling was achieved using standard geographic probability
methods. Interviews were conducted in Arabic by trained local staff, supervised
by experienced survey professionals using advanced, GPS-specified tablet data
entry and coding techniques, with strict assurances of confidentiality.
The author has worked in the field with these and other Palestinian pollsters
for 25 years and personally approved all of this survey’s procedural aspects,
but was not present during its fieldwork. In line with total target population
profile, half the sample was between age 18 and 30, and half was over 30. The
statistical margin of error for each territory is approximately 4%; the margin
of error for each generational subsample is naturally somewhat larger.
Additional methodological details are available on request.
*David Pollock is the Bernstein Fellow at The Washington Institute and director
of Project Fikra.