English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For September 30/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.september30.20.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
Matthew 12/22-32: “Then they brought to him a demoniac who was blind and mute; and he cured him, so that the one who had been mute could speak and see. All the crowds were amazed and said, ‘Can this be the Son of David?’But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, ‘It is only by Beelzebul, the ruler of the demons, that this fellow casts out the demons.’He knew what they were thinking and said to them, ‘Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand.If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand?If I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your own exorcists cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges.But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come to you.Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his property, without first tying up the strong man? Then indeed the house can be plundered.Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.Therefore I tell you, people will be forgiven for every sin and blasphemy, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on September 29-30/2020

Lebanon: Shiite Duo Maintains Silence After Macron's Remarks
Israel’s Netanyahu alleges Hezbollah has ‘secret arms depot’ in Beirut
Nasrallah Says Still Keen on French Initiative but Tells Macron He's Not Lebanon's 'Ruler'
Netanyahu Warns of Hizbullah 'Missile Depot' near Jnah Gas Facilities
Mustaqbal Objects to Amnesty Law on Agenda of Wednesday Session
U.S. Senator Requests Exempting Lebanon from Caesar Act
Amal Hits Back at Macron, Voices Support for French Initiative
Fires at EDL Building and Qureitem Power Generator
Carlos Ghosn Launches Initiative to Help his Native Lebanon
Cyprus Pushed Back Migrants from Lebanon, Ignored Claims, Rights Group Says
Report: Dark Days ahead for Lebanon as Crisis Bites
Report: General Amnesty Law Tops Parliament's Session
US Senators request temporary sanctions waivers for Lebanon
HRW: Cyprus Pushed back Lebanon Migrants, Ignored Claims
Lebanon: Shia woman says she will be targeted for expressing her ‘free opinion’
Lebanon’s Amal movement ‘surprised’ by France’s Macron accusations
Canada deeply disappointed following resignation of Lebanese prime minister-designate
Defying Macron, Hezbollah says it will continue to fight Israel
Lebanese president avoids showdown with Hezbollah over Macron’s blame
The stalemate characterizes the political scene … Government consultations are suspended...
General Aoun and Siding with the Wrong Front/Jebril Elabidi/Asharq Al Awsat/September 29/2020
U.S. Officials to Mediate Israel-Lebanon Maritime Border Talks/Ehud Yaari, Simon Henderson, and Hanin Ghaddar/The Washington Institute/September 29/2020
Hezbollah fuels Lebanon's descent to civil war/Tom Rogan/Washington Examinar/September 29/2020
Lebanon awaits the US presidential elections, but will collapse faster while it waits/Hanin Ghaddar/Al Arabiya/September 29/2020
New peace deals are changing the region, Lebanon must reconsider its stance on Israel/Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya/September 29/2020
Netanyahu, in UN speech, warns of more Hezbollah peril for Beirut/Lahav Harkov/Jerusalem Post/September 29, 2020
Following Criticism, French President Macron Takes Harsher Stance: Hizbullah 'Cannot Claim To Be A Political Force Of A Democratic Country By Terrorizing' The Population With Its Weapons/MEMRI/September 29, 2020

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on September 29-30/2020

Death of Kuwait Ruler Sheikh Sabah Draws Outpour of Grief
Has Iran's nuke enrichment jumped 50-fold?
Three members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards killed in drive-by attack in southeast
Netanyahu: Preemptive strike against Iran still an option
Turkish claims of PKK fighters in Armenia absolute nonsense: Armen Sarkissian
Armenia Claims Turkish Jet Shot Down One of Its Warplanes
Iraqis decry insecurity at funerals of seven killed in anti-US attack in Baghdad
US State Department says ‘outraged’ by rocket attack in Baghdad
Joint statement by Canada and the United Kingdom on the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict
Saudi Arabia says international community must take a firm stand towards Iran
Arab World Mourns Kuwait Emir
Trump Vowed to Remove Sudan from Terrorism List, Envoy Tells Asharq Al-Awsat
Fatah Stresses Egypt’s Pivotal Role in Palestinian Reconciliation
US 'Outraged' by Baghdad Rocket Attack: Iran-Backed Militias Biggest Deterrent to Peace
All eyes might be on the Temple Mount after the UAE-Israel deal
Nissan Employee Testifies against American on Trial in Japan
 

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 29-30/2020

Trump Team Weighs New Sanctions on Iran’s Financial Sector/Nick Wadhams and Saleha Mohsin/September 29/2020
America’s military deserves timely funding from Congress/Bradley Bowman and Maj Scott D. Adamson/FDD/September 29/2020
UAE-Israel Treaty Is Far Larger Step Towards Peace Than Critics Allege/Orde Kittrie/The National Interest/September 29/2020
Trudeau Fails Canadian-Iranians/Alireza Nader/FDD/September 29/2020
China Says Killing Americans over Taiwan is 'Morally Justified'/Gordon G. Chang/Gatestone Institute/September 29/2020
Nasser Died Fifty Years Ago He Lives on in Egypt/Daniel Pipes/Washington Times/September 29/2020
The Dangerous New Iran-Qatar-Turkey-Hamas Alliance/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/September 29/2020
U.S. and China: Emerging Technologies and the Race to Control the Future/Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute/September 29/2020
Benjamin Netanyahu's full speech at the United Nations/Jerusalem Post/September 29, 2020
Brazil Busts Top Smuggler of Iranian Migrants to the U.S./Todd Bensman/The Center for Immigration Studies/September 29/2020

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on September 29-30/2020

Lebanon: Shiite Duo Maintains Silence After Macron's Remarks
Beirut- Enas Sherri/Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 29 September, 2020
French President Emmanuel Macron gave Lebanon’s politicians another four to six weeks to form a government within the framework of the French initiative and escalated his tone against Hezbollah and Amal Movement, accusing them of obstructing the cabinet’s birth. While the Shiite duo has so far maintained silence over Macron’s remarks, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah is expected to deliver a speech this Tuesday evening to explain the Shiite parties’ stance towards the recent developments. “There are no rescue options for this duo except for the one proposed in the French initiative,” Strategic Analyst Sami Nader told Asharq Al-Awsat. If the path is not corrected, “Lebanon will head to a model similar to the Venezuelan, Iranian, or Syrian experiences in terms of sanctions and international isolation,” he added.According to Nader, the Shiite duo might consider that it is buying time until the US presidential elections, but “this is a lost bet for two reasons: first, the outcome of the US elections is not guaranteed in November, nor is a change in US policy towards Hezbollah or the region if the US presidential candidate, Joe Biden, succeeded and Donald Trump left office.”
“Second, Lebanon is unable to bear the repercussions of two months of stalling in light of the exacerbating economic crisis and the decision to lift subsidies on basic materials,” he underlined. While no official position has been issued by the two parties regarding the extension of the French initiative, a member of the Development and Liberation bloc, MP Qassem Hashem, said: “The doors have not closed to a solution even through the French initiative itself.” “Clearly, we are committed to the initiative, but within the preservation of the partnership,” he added. Hashem said that the French initiative “bore many interpretations and details that are at the core of the Lebanese national balance, which cannot be touched in light of the Lebanese structure that is based on understanding.”He continued: “It is necessary to search for a settlement because there can be no government outside the balance that the customs and the constitution established.” Jaafari Mufti Sheikh Ahmed Qabalan, said Macron’s words carried “political injustice.”“What is required today is the formation of a government of national weight and not an international agency government. What French President Emmanuel Macron presented yesterday contains gross political injustice,” he said in a statement.'

Israel’s Netanyahu alleges Hezbollah has ‘secret arms depot’ in Beirut
The Associated Press/Tuesday 29 September 2020
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday accused Iran-backed Hezbollah of maintaining a “secret arms depot” in a residential neighborhood of Beirut, warning it could cause another tragic explosion in the Lebanese capital.
In an address to the UN General Assembly, Netanyahu pointed to maps purportedly showing the missile depot’s location next to a gas company and residential housing. He also showed what he said was a picture of the entrance to the depot. “Here’s where the next explosion will take place, right here,” he said.
“You’ve got to act now, you’ve got to protest this, because if this thing explodes, it’s another tragedy,” he said, addressing the Lebanese people. “You should tell them, ‘Tear these depots down.’”
Last month, a warehouse filled with nearly 3,000 tons of ammonium nitrate exploded in Beirut’s port, killing nearly 200 people, wounding thousands and causing widespread destruction in the capital
The ammonium nitrate had been stored there for several years after being removed from an impounded cargo ship. No one has yet been held accountable for the blast, which appears to have been triggered by an accidental fire.
Israel has long accused Hezbollah of storing weapons and maintaining military posts in civilian areas, especially in the southern suburbs of Beirut and southern Lebanon, both strongholds of support for the Iran-backed militant group.
The Israeli military later released maps and videos showing the site that Netanyahu had referenced as well as two other alleged missile depots it said were under residential apartment blocks. It described all three as precision-guided missile manufacturing sites.
The military provided precise locations of the alleged weapons sites, but gave no other evidence and did not say how advanced the manufacturing program is.
Netanyahu said another depot had exploded just a few days ago in the southern Lebanese village of Ain Qana, near the port city of Sidon. It is not clear what caused that explosion, which sent smoke billowing into the sky but did not cause any casualties.

Nasrallah Says Still Keen on French Initiative but Tells Macron He's Not Lebanon's 'Ruler'
Naharnet/September 29/2020
Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on Tuesday said his party is still keen on the success of the French initiative but criticized French President Emmanuel Macron over his latest remarks.
“We welcomed President Macron's role and the French initiative for helping Lebanon, but not for him to become a prosecutor, a ruler or a custodian over us. We still support the French initiative but the rhetoric must be reviewed, because national dignity was insulted two days ago,” Nasrallah said in a televised address. “If you want to know who foiled your initiative, look for the Americans who imposed sanctions and are threatening to impose more and look for King Salman’s speech at the U.N.,” Nasrallah added, addressing Macron.
“We still welcome the French initiative, but the approach that was followed last month cannot be continued,” he stressed.
Noting that a “settlement” is different than “surrender,” Nasrallah responded to remarks voiced by Macron by saying that Hizbullah “does not practice the game of terrorism and intimidation against anyone in Lebanon.”“We do not tolerate anyone addressing us with this language,” Nasrallah said, telling the French leader that Hizbullah is “not part of the corrupt political class.”“We did not go to Syria to fight civilians. We went there at the invitation of the Syrian government to fight terrorist groups. It was not us who chose war, the Zionists rather occupied our land,” he added, also in response to Macron remarks.
“What you are asking from us contradicts with democracy. You are asking the parliamentary majority to bow and cede power to the parliamentary minority,” Nasrallah said. “Our enemies and friends know that we honor our pledges,” he added. “President Macron, who accused us of intimidation, is the one who practiced the intimidation policy against the heads of parties in order to pass the government,” Nasrallah charged.
As for Mustafa Adib’s botched attempt to form a new government, Nasrallah said Hizbullah “cannot stay out of the government” because it fears for the country and its people. “We should be in the government to protect the back of the resistance, so that Lebanon does not witness a government similar to the May 5, 2008 government,” Nasrallah added, referring to Fouad Saniora’s government and its decision to dismantle Hizbullah’s military telecommunications network that year. “What if a new government decides to sell the state's assets? What if a government accepts the conditions of the IMF without any discussions,” Nasrallah said. Addressing the international community, Nasrallah said “the coercion method does not work in Lebanon, regardless of its advocates and sponsors, be them the U.S., France or Europe.”
“What was proposed last month was not a salvation government but rather a government named by the club of ex-PMs,” he charged, noting that the French initiative did not mention “the number of ministers nor a rotation of portfolios.”
He added: “Some wanted to eliminate the parliamentary blocs and the President’s powers and they sought to introduce new norms.”“The naming of ministers for all sects in Lebanon by a single person is dangerous for the country,” Nasrallah warned.
“It was not Adib who was negotiating with us over the government, but rather ex-PM Saad Hariri, and the club of ex-PMs wanted to distribute the portfolios and name the ministers alone,” he lamented. Separately, Nasrallah said that journalists would be invited to a site in the Beirut suburb of Jnah to refute allegations by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the presence of a secret missile depot there. "Whoever wants to go can go now. If Hizbullah is storing missiles in this facility then there is not enough time to remove them," Nasrallah said.
“We do not place missiles at Beirut port nor near a gas station and we know very well where we should place our missiles,” Nasrallah added. “Hizbullah is not obliged to invite journalists to any site mentioned by Netanyahu, but we are doing this now due to the sensitivity of the situation after the August 4 explosion,” he added. He also said that Netanyahu was "inciting the Lebanese people against Hizbullah as usual."
"We will allow media outlets to enter the facility so that the world knows that Netanyahu is lying," he added.

Netanyahu Warns of Hizbullah 'Missile Depot' near Jnah Gas Facilities
Naharnet/September 29/2020
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday warned that the “next explosion” in Lebanon might take place in the Beirut suburb of Jnah, where he said Hizbullah has an alleged secret arms depot.
“We all saw the terrible explosion at Beirut port last month… Two hundred people died, thousands of people were injured, and a quarter of a million people were made homeless,” said Netanyahu in an English-language virtual address at the annual U.N. General Assembly.
“Now, here is where the next explosion could take place. Right here. This is the Beirut neighborhood of Jnah. It’s right next to the international airport. And here, Hizbullah is keeping a secret arms depot. This secret arms depot, right here, is adjacent, a meter away, from a gas company,” Netanyahu explained, pointing to a huge image of the supposed neighborhood. “These are gas canisters. Right here. It’s a few meters away from a gas station. It’s fifty meters away from the gas company. Here are more gas trucks. And it’s embedded in civilian housing here, civilian housing here,” he added.
He also displayed a picture of “the entrance to Hizbullah's missile factory.” “It’s right here. This is the gas company, and this is the missile explosive depot,” Netanyahu said. Addressing “the people of Jnah,” he called on them to “act now.”
“You’ve got to protest this. Because if this thing explodes, it’s another tragedy. I say to the people of Lebanon, Israel means you no harm. But Iran does,” Netanyahu added. Warning that Iran and Hizbullah have deliberately put Lebanese civilians in “grave danger,” the Israeli PM advised Lebanese citizens to tell Iran and Hizbullah that “what they have done is unacceptable.”“You should tell them, tear these depots down,” he said. Netanyahu also pointed out that “just a few days ago, one of these depots exploded at Ain Qana in south Lebanon,” adding that this is why “the international community must insist that Hizbullah stop using Lebanon and Lebanese civilians as human shields.”

Mustaqbal Objects to Amnesty Law on Agenda of Wednesday Session
Naharnet/September 29/2020
Al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc does not agree to the current text of the general amnesty draft law that is on the agenda of Wednesday’s legislative session, the head of the bloc MP Bahia Hariri said Tuesday.
“The proposed format does not fulfill our demand and that of the relatives on ending the injustice and unfairness against a large number of detainees,” Hariri’s press office said in a statement. “Therefore, the bloc insists that the amnesty law should include a clause on slashing penalties in the format that we have proposed,” the press office added.

U.S. Senator Requests Exempting Lebanon from Caesar Act
Naharnet/September 29/2020
Member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, US Senator Jeanne Shaheen reportedly presented a request to the US Senate calling on the US administration to grant Lebanon an exemption from the Caesar Act’s repercussions, Lebanese-American lawyer Cyline Atallah said in a statement on Tuesday.
The request was signed by Shaheen and Senators Chris Murphy and Tim Kaine. The statement asked the US State Department to exempt matters of importing electricity from Syria, stressing that in order to alleviate the energy crisis in the country, rebuilding the power network is a top priority that requires regional cooperation. It also urged the US State Department to provide urgent American assistance in this issue. The US administration had granted Iraq a similar exemption, within a specific mechanism, towards Iran despite sanctions imposed on Tehran. It said a similar mechanism can be applied in Lebanon, allowing it to buy electricity from Syria during the reconstruction period, according to the statement. Lebanese ambassador to Washington, Gabriel Issa, had earlier proposed the idea of exemptions and submitted an official request to that effect to both the State Department and the US Treasury and to OFAC. Issa reportedly sought to advocate for the request in cooperation with Atallah. On her part, Atallah contacted officials at the US State Department, and parties who worked on the text of the Caesar Act. In parallel, Atallah worked with Senator Shaheen on the issue of exemptions, given the US administration's hard-line stance towards Lebanon recently.

Amal Hits Back at Macron, Voices Support for French Initiative
Naharnet/September 29/2020
The Amal Movement on Tuesday snapped back at French President Emmanuel Macron over his latest admonishing remarks, while reiterating its support for the French initiative. “The Movement maintains its stance, which is committed to and supportive of this text that reflects a national need in addition to the importance of foreign care and support for it,” the Movement’s political bureau said in a statement, referring to the text of the French initiative.
It noted that the Movement’s stance on Mustafa Adib’s designation to form a new government was “clear in supporting the formation of a capable and strong government comprising the best competencies and specialists and abiding by the reform program.”“Its stance during the formation negotiations was in line with the democratic norms that respect the stances of political blocs and do not disavow the results of parliamentary elections,” it added. In an apparent jab at ex-PMs Saad Hariri, Najib Miqati, Fouad Saniora and Tammam Salam, the Movement said some “usurped the formation process from the PM-designate, violated the democratic norms and put conditions and rules related to the rotation and distribution of portfolios that serve their own interests.”“They disregarded the truth of the French initiative and exploited it to establish a new approach in the formation of governments,” the Amal Movement charged. Commenting on Macron’s sharp-toned remarks against Amal and its ally Hizbullah, the Movement said it respects the role that the French president has played but deplores his accusations that came “distant from facts and the actual discussions with the PM-designate.”The Movement also said that is strongly rejects “the accusations that were addressed to all parties as to benefiting from and taking funds,” saying such allegations “contradict with the fact that the Movement is leading calls for accountability, inspection and the approval of laws pertaining to that.”

Fires at EDL Building and Qureitem Power Generator
Agence France Presse/September 29/2020
Two blazes erupted Tuesday in separate locations in the capital Beirut.
The first fire broke out on the first floor of the headquarters of state-run Electricite du Liban in the Mar Mikhail area, which was badly damaged by the Aug. 4 explosion at the adjacent Beirut port. The reasons behind the fire remain unknown according to the National News Agency. “Employees and Beirut Fire Brigade crews managed to contain the blaze and only material damage was recorded,” NNA said. The fire sparked alarm on social media among traumatized Lebanese who have witnessed several fires at or near the blast site since the explosion.
"Tuesday's curse #Beirut. Another Tuesday, another fire," wrote one resident on Twitter, referring to the August 4 explosion that killed more than 190 people and injured at least 6,500 others -- and which took place on a Tuesday.
Ali Najem, a spokesman for the Beirut Fire Brigade, said papers in the office had caught fire but that he was not authorized to disclose the original source of the blaze before investigations had been completed. Charbel Saleh, an EDL employee, said it was a short-circuit fire, adding that it was doused a few minutes after it ignited. At least two fires have broken out at Beirut's port since the August 4 explosion, prompting widespread anger and alarm. And on September 15, also a Tuesday, firefighters put out a blaze at a building designed by the late British-Iraqi architect Zaha Hadid that was under construction in the capital's downtown area near the port. Separately, the Directorate General of Civil Defense said Tuesday that its firefighters, assisted by the Beirut Fire Brigade, managed to put out a fire that erupted in a room containing a power generator and a diesel tank on the ground floor of a residential building in the Beirut neighborhood of Qureitem.

Carlos Ghosn Launches Initiative to Help his Native Lebanon
Associated Press/September 29/2020
Former Nissan Motor Co. Chairman Carlos Ghosn made a new public appearance in Lebanon Tuesday during which he launched an initiative with a local university to help the country that is undergoing a severe economic and financial crisis. It is Ghosn's second appearance in public since he was smuggled from Japan in late December to his ancestral Lebanon. In early January, Ghosn gave a news conference in Beirut saying he fled because he could not expect a fair trial, was subjected to unfair conditions in detention and was barred from meeting his wife under his bail conditions. Ghosn said that the initiative with the Maronite Christian Holy Spirit University of Kaslik, USEK, titled Moving Forward, aims to launch a top executive management program, a training center on new technologies and to support startups. "The objective is certainly serving this institution ... but also serving the society and the country," Ghosn said in an opening speech. "Lebanon needs to create jobs."Lebanon is mired in the country's worst economic and financial crisis in its modern history. It defaulted on paying back its debt for the first time ever in March, and the local currency has collapsed, leading to hyperinflation and soaring poverty and unemployment. Talks with the International Monetary Fund on a bailout package have stalled. Many Lebanese consider Ghosn as one of the country's heroes in diaspora who succeeded in turning troubled companies into profit making ventures. Some have suggested that Ghosn should be given a governmental post in Lebanon to get the country that is notorious for corruption and mismanagement out of its troubles. Since arriving in Lebanon, Ghosn gave interviews during which he repeatedly said he is innocent of allegations he under-reported his future income and committed a breach of trust by diverting Nissan money for his personal gain.
In January, Lebanon received the Interpol-issued wanted notice, which is a non-binding request to law enforcement agencies worldwide that they locate and provisionally arrest a fugitive. Lebanese authorities say Ghosn entered Lebanon on a valid passport, casting doubt on the possibility they would hand him over to Japan.

Cyprus Pushed Back Migrants from Lebanon, Ignored Claims, Rights Group Says
Associated Press/September 29/2020
Cypriot authorities pushed back 200 migrants and refugees arriving from Lebanon aboard boats earlier this month, ignoring their claims for asylum while in some instances using violence and coercive tactics, a human rights watchdog said on Tuesday. Human Rights Watch accused Cypriot marine police officers of beating some migrants and making threats. The group said coast guard vessels attempted to swamp migrant boats by circling them at high speed and abandoned at least one boat at sea without food or fuel. The watchdog said the accusations come from interviews with 15 Lebanese and Syrian nationals who tried to reach European Union member Cyprus after setting sail from Tripoli, Lebanon, aboard seven boats between Aug. 29 and Sept. 7. According to Human Rights Watch, witnesses and victims on two boats returned to Lebanon said that Cyprus marine police handcuffed and beat individuals who resisted being returned. The watchdog quoted one Lebanese national identified only by his first name who accused Cypriot police of using a cattle prod on him aboard a boat on Sept. 6 after he shouted at them to rescue a couple who jumped overboard. The watchdog urged Cypriot judicial authorities to carry out an investigation into the allegations and prosecute anyone found to have committed any wrongdoing. It said the European Commission should get Cyprus to respect the right of migrants to seek asylum and to not return people to a place where their safety and freedom may be at risk. "People who risk their lives and their children's lives by fleeing Lebanon by boat do so when they are truly desperate," Human Right Watch official Bill Frelick said. "They have a right to have their claims for international protection considered." Cypriot officials did not immediately return calls for comment on the report. The Cypriot government has said the ethnically split island nation is willing to offer safe haven to refugees, but has reached its limits in accepting "economic migrants." Interior Minister Nicos Nouris said earlier this month that the Cypriot government is coordinating with Lebanese authorities to take back migrants arriving from that country in line with international law.

Report: Dark Days ahead for Lebanon as Crisis Bites
Associated Press/September 29/2020
The past year has been nothing short of an earthquake for Lebanon, hit by an economic meltdown, mass protests, financial collapse, a virus outbreak and a cataclysmic explosion that virtually wiped out the country's main port.
Yet Lebanese fear even darker days are ahead.
The country's foreign reserves are drying up, the local currency is expected to spiral further out of control, and incidents of armed clashes between rival groups are escalating. Bickering politicians have been unable to form a government, putting an international bailout out of reach.
Last week, a French initiative to form a rescue government of specialists fell apart when the political factions split along familiar fault lines, deepened by the U.S.-Iran rivalry. The country risks slipping into chaos.
"Absent a major change in either side's political calculations, the coming weeks will see continued stalemate, a caretaker government that lacks the capability to implement any serious reforms, and an acceleration of the economic collapse," said Mike Azar, a former Johns Hopkins SAIS professor of finance.
French President Emmanuel Macron's plan was widely seen as a last opportunity to charter a way out of Lebanon's gravest crisis since the 1975-90 civil war. It included a six-month timeline for a small government made up of non-partisan experts to deliver reforms. Mistrustful of Lebanon's famously corrupt leaders, the West has made billions of dollars in aid contingent on those reforms.
Lebanon's politicians initially committed to the plan and named a new prime minister-designate, Moustapha Adib, who promised to deliver a Cabinet within two weeks. To avert the usual horse-trading among factions over ministries, Adib tried to pick his own names to form the government.
But the two main Shiite parties, Hezbollah and Amal, accused him of acting on behalf of their local political rivals. They insisted on naming Shiite members of the Cabinet and on keeping the Finance Ministry for their sect. Adib refused and stepped down Saturday.
For all the pressure on the factions to put aside their usual self-serving interest and jockeying, another force is in part making them dig in: escalating U.S.-Iran tensions. The Trump administration has stepped up its maximum pressure campaign on Iran and its proxy militias, including Hezbollah, ahead of the Nov. 3 U.S. elections. It slapped sanctions on two senior pro-Hezbollah politicians, including the former finance minister, in the middle of efforts to form the Cabinet. That fueled suspicions Washington was seeking to isolate Hezbollah and diminish its role in any new government. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo openly berated Macron for meeting with Hezbollah officials during his visit to Lebanon and promised a wider array of sanctions targeting the group and its local allies.
Hazem al-Amin, an anti-Hezbollah Lebanese journalist and columnist, wrote that the militant group has effectively put the Lebanese public in the middle of an "open confrontation" with the United States.
Writing in the pan-Arab news site Daraj, he said the U.S. is looking to squeeze Hezbollah before the elections, while Hezbollah is trying to wait out the Trump administration, betting on a new president.
But can Lebanon wait?
Last week, Lebanese President Michel Aoun, an ally of Hezbollah, could not have been blunter when he was asked by a reporter where Lebanon was headed if a new government is not formed. "To hell, of course," he replied. Macron, in a press conference on Sunday, said he was "ashamed" of Lebanon's political leaders and warned of "a new civil war" if they can't set aside personal and sectarian interests to unlock international aid. That aid is more sorely needed than ever, with worse still to come for Lebanese in the country's slide to the bottom.
In the next few weeks, 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.
Already, after the blow of the financial crisis, half the population is below the poverty line. Lifting subsidies will further fuel inflation and could be a trigger for food riots. Civil unrest would put the population in confrontation with demoralized security forces who — like other Lebanese — have seen their salaries decrease by up to 80% in U.S. dollar terms.
"The threat is very real. There have been a couple of security incidents over the past month that show weapons are around in abundance, and so are idle young men to wield them," said Heiko Wimmen, project director for Lebanon, Iraq and Syria with the International Crisis Group.
He said turf wars among local armed groups may become a daily occurrence in areas that are not controlled by any political actor and could scale up once groups driven by sectarian and political motivations become involved.
Meanwhile, everyday life becomes harder. A Beirut landfill is nearing maximum capacity, threatening a new trash crisis. Hospitals struggle to cope with the financial crisis amid a surge in coronavirus cases, triggering warnings of an Italy-like scenario. Medicines are harder to find. Poverty and crime are rising, along with sectarian tensions fanned by politicians seeking to hang on to their seats.
The Aug. 4 explosion at Beirut's port — blamed on the political leadership's corruption and incompetence — didn't just cause pain, death and damage. It struck yet another blow to the economy. Economic activity losses attributed to the blast damage range between $2.9 billion and 3.5 billion, the World Bank estimated. Public sector reconstruction and recovery requires some $1.8 billion to $2.2 billion — funds that are nowhere seen on the horizon.
Even if a government is formed, Lebanon will not be out of the woods. IMF negotiations failed in July because Lebanese actors could not agree among themselves. Wimmen said the core of the problem are political elites who have captured the state to wreck and plunder it.
"The bottom line is that fixing the financial sector and the budget – the two key issues that the IMF is supposed to address – will have to mean that the interest of some people who have political clout suffer, so there is a lot of potential for conflict," he said. Azar gave a similarly bleak outlook. "Given that Lebanon's economic collapse is a self-inflicted wound due to a dysfunctional political system, it is unlikely that any economic recovery will be sustainable without a fundamental rethinking of the political system," he said.
The longer it takes, the more opportunities are lost, the bigger the brain drain and the more irreversible the trend becomes. "When businesses shutter and human capital emigrates, it becomes much more difficult for an economy to recover as the drivers of such recovery would no longer exist," he said.

Report: General Amnesty Law Tops Parliament's Session
Naharnet/September 29/2020
Two controversial draft laws, a general amnesty law and lifting bank secrecy, top an agenda to be discussed by lawmakers during a two-day legislative session at the UNESCO Palace, media reports said Tuesday. Speaker Nabih Berri called lawmakers for the meeting to study and ratify around 40 draft laws and proposals on the agenda, most notably the general amnesty law. Political parties in Lebanon are divided over general amnesty, with Hizbullah and Amal Movement advocating for its approval, while the Lebanese Forces and Free Patriotic Movement express reservation.
Other draft laws and proposals will be tabled and ratified including lifting bank secrecy for public officials since 1990, when the Taef accord was agreed. Illicit enrichments and establishing a temporary unemployment fund are also listed on the agenda. Political parties are divided over what crimes should be pardoned and included in the controversial amnesty law. The law involves a pardon for Lebanese who fled to Israel after its withdrawal from the South in 2000, another for Islamists jailed over terror-related offenses and one for drug-related offenses that would benefit prisoners who hail from the Bekaa. Families of Islamist prisoners have repeatedly rallied demanding the approval of the law. Lebanon had one general amnesty after the end of the civil war in 1990.

US Senators request temporary sanctions waivers for Lebanon
Joseph Haboush, Al Arabiya English/Tuesday 29 September 2020
A group of US Senators has asked the Trump administration to grant sanctions waivers to Lebanon in order to continue importing electricity from Syria, according to a letter obtained by Al Arabiya English on Tuesday.
The three senators - Jeanne Shaheen, Tim Kaine and Chris Murphy - signed the letter that called for Lebanon to be exempt from sanctions under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, also referred to as the Caesar Act.
“While we understand the controversial aspects of this proposal, we urge you to consider Lebanon’s geography and the regional difficulties facing the small country in reviewing this request. Lebanon’s power grid is connected only to Syria, and electricity imports from other regional states must occur through Syria,” the letter said. The senators added that Lebanon previously attempted to purchase electricity through other states, like Egypt and Jordan, “however the Syrian government has not allowed these agreements to come to fruition.”
Despite being a strong advocate of sanctions against Lebanon over the role of Iran-backed Hezbollah, Shaheen is pushing ahead with calls to shield Lebanon from unintended repercussions of the Caesar Act.
The legislation, which went into effect in June, looks to cut off all forms of revenue from reaching Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and its allies. It also threatens to impose sanctions on anyone who does business with the Assad regime. Lebanon’s power stations use expensive heavy fuel, and state utility Electricite du Liban (EDL) cannot afford to provide 24-hour power, leaving consumers to rely on costly private generators.
However, Lebanon imports up to 276 megawatts of power from Syria under an agreement between Beirut and Damascus that was initially signed in 1995.
Without that potential supply, Lebanon would have to rely more heavily on the diesel generators that provide power for most of the country when state-provided electricity is cut, Marc Ayoub of the American University of Beirut previously told Al Arabiya English.
During the summer, when demand usually spikes, Ayoub said, the country might see an additional 100- to 150-megawatt power deficit if the option to import from Syria is not there. As of now, there is no option to fill that gap apart from relying on costly generators. In June, then-Prime Minister Hassan Diab called on the United Nations, the European Union, and “friendly nations to shield Lebanon from the negative repercussions of any sanctions that may be imposed on Syrians, particularly in the context of the Caesar Act.” Lebanon’s Ambassador to the US Gabriel Issa previously put forth several requests to the US administration for sanctions waivers in several sectors. “We need these waivers granted to alleviate the economic pressure on Lebanon,” a senior Lebanese diplomat told Al Arabiya English. The request submitted by the US Senators also called on the State Department to help Lebanon rehabilitate its ramshackle electricity sector, which would eventually see Beirut ease of its dependence on Syria for its power grid.
Earlier this year Shaheen threatened to slap Lebanese officials with sanctions over the detention of Lebanese-American citizen Amer Fakhoury for his role with an Israeli-backed militia in south Lebanon. But Shaheen cited the multiple waivers extensions given by the US to Iraq for continuing importing electricity from Iran.“Should an institution of similar confidence exist in Lebanon, we urge you to consider a comparable framework to allow for Lebanon’s energy purchases as the country rebuilds,” the letter said.- With Reuters

HRW: Cyprus Pushed back Lebanon Migrants, Ignored Claims
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 29 September, 2020
Cypriot authorities pushed back 200 migrants and refugees arriving from Lebanon aboard boats earlier this month, ignoring their claims for asylum while in some instances using violence and coercive tactics, a human rights watchdog said on Tuesday. Human Rights Watch accused Cypriot marine police officers of beating some migrants and making threats. The group said coast guard vessels attempted to swamp migrant boats by circling them at high speed and abandoned at least one boat at sea without food or fuel. The watchdog said the accusations come from interviews with 15 Lebanese and Syrian nationals who tried to reach European Union member Cyprus after setting sail from Tripoli, Lebanon, aboard seven boats between Aug. 29 and Sept. 7. According to Human Rights Watch, witnesses and victims on two boats returned to Lebanon said that Cyprus marine police handcuffed and beat individuals who resisted being returned. The watchdog quoted one Lebanese national identified only by his first name who accused Cypriot police of using a cattle prod on him aboard a boat on Sept. 6 after he shouted at them to rescue a couple who jumped overboard.
The watchdog urged Cypriot judicial authorities to carry out an investigation into the allegations and prosecute anyone found to have committed any wrongdoing. It said the European Commission should get Cyprus to respect the right of migrants to seek asylum and to not return people to a place where their safety and freedom may be at risk. “People who risk their lives and their children’s lives by fleeing Lebanon by boat do so when they are truly desperate,” Human Right Watch official Bill Frelick said. “They have a right to have their claims for international protection considered.”
Cypriot officials did not immediately return calls for comment on the report. The Cypriot government has said the ethnically split island nation is willing to offer safe haven to refugees, but has reached its limits in accepting “economic migrants.” Interior Minister Nicos Nouris said earlier this month that the Cypriot government is coordinating with Lebanese authorities to take back migrants arriving from that country in line with international law.

Lebanon: Shia woman says she will be targeted for expressing her ‘free opinion’
Leen Alfaisal, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday 23 September 2020
A video of a Shia Lebanese protester criticizing the government went viral on social media after she claimed that she will be targeted for what she said as soon as she returns to Dahieh, a predominantly Shia Muslim suburb south of Beirut.
“As soon as I arrive in Dahieh, I will be subjected to many things because of my free opinion – shame on them,” the protester told Sawt Beirut International.
“You are Shia and you’re protesting against us,” the woman predicted she would be told. “I am Shia and I would protest against my mother if she usurps the rights of the people,” she said as a preemptive reply.
Lebanese across the country have raged at the country’s sectarian leaders who have failed to form a government since the last cabinet stepped down in mid-August after the massive explosions at the Beirut port. The country is currently in the midst of its worst economic crisis since the 1975-1990 civil war, and around half of the population now lives below the poverty line.
Bringing her children with her to protest, the woman said that every politician in Lebanon is a “dictator” and a “war criminal,” adding that the country doesn’t need these parties, but rather needs one brave president.
Lebanon has been governed by the same ruling elite since the end of the civil war when former warlords turned in their arms, becoming politicians – Hezbollah refrained from turning in its weapons.
Emmanuel Macron, president of Lebanon’s former colonial power France who has led international efforts to offer support, also rebuked politicians after his initiative faltered when Prime Minister-designate Mustapha Adib, a Sunni Muslim named on August 31, stood down amid sectarian squabbling for ministerial posts. The ruling elite have yet to signal how they will solve the crisis in a nation where politics relies on power-sharing between Christian and Muslim sects.
Adib’s efforts to form a cabinet of non-partisan ministers ran into the sand after Lebanon’s two main Shia groups, the Amal Movement and the heavily armed, Iran-backed Hezbollah, demanded that they name several ministers, including the finance post.
With politics deadlocked and the economy crushed by debt, Lebanon’s pound took a further dive, adding to the pain of citizens, many of whom have struggled to make ends meet since the economic crisis erupted last year.
People are “dying of hunger” and “being tricked into staying silent,” the woman said, referring to the people of Dahieh, in which Iran-backed Hezbollah has the biggest influence. “Some of them can’t even afford a house,” she added.
- with Reuters

Lebanon’s Amal movement ‘surprised’ by France’s Macron accusations
Reuters/Tuesday 29 September 2020
Lebanon’s Amal movement expressed surprise on Tuesday over accusations by French President Emmanuel Macron that the Shia party triggered the collapse of talks to form a new government. Prime minister-designate Mustapha Adib quit on Saturday after failing to line up a non-partisan cabinet, dealing a blow to a French plan aimed at rallying Lebanese leaders to tackle the country’s financial meltdown. Macron admonished Lebanon’s leaders for serving their own interests ahead of their country’s, saying he was “ashamed” of their behavior. He also questioned the role Lebanon’s two main Shia groups, Amal and Hezbollah, played in obstructing the formation of government. “The movement, while it respects the role French President Macron has played, is surprised by comments he made that included accusations and holding (the Amal Movement and Hezbollah) especially responsible,” for stalling the process, Amal said in its statement. Under a French roadmap to lift Lebanon from its crisis, the new government would take steps to tackle corruption and implement reforms needed to unlock billions of dollars of foreign aid to fix an economy crushed by a huge debt. But there was deadlock over a demand by Amal and Iran-backed Hezbollah that they get to name several ministers, including the finance post.

Canada deeply disappointed following resignation of Lebanese prime minister-designate
September 28, 2020 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:
“Canada was deeply disappointed and concerned to hear about the resignation of Prime Minister-designate Mustapha Adib.
“We call on political leaders to work together and form a Government that will fully respond to the urgent and legitimate demands of its people. The Lebanese people deserve nothing less.
“Canada remains ready to further support Lebanon’s leaders with the urgent, fundamental and serious reforms necessary to put the country on a path to recovery and reconstruction.
“Impunity must stop. Reforms must be implemented. And the people of Lebanon must be heard. “

Defying Macron, Hezbollah says it will continue to fight Israel
Agencies/Times Of Israel/September 29/2020
After French leader blasts terror group for political demands that prevented formation of Lebanese government, organization says his threats of sanctions are ‘unacceptable’
Lebanon’s Hezbollah terror group on Monday rejected criticism from French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday after he panned its political machinations. And it vowed to remain committed to fighting Israel, as the country is paralyzed by its worst economic and financial crisis in decades.
Macron on Sunday accused Lebanon’s political leaders of “collective betrayal” and choosing “to favor their partisan and individual interests to the general detriment of the country,” after the resignation of Lebanon’s prime minister-designate Mustapha Adib over the weekend.
Adib’s resignation was a blow to Macron’s efforts to break a dangerous stalemate in the crisis-hit country. Macron assailed the Hezbollah group and the entire Lebanese political class Sunday, and warned of a new civil war if they can’t set aside personal and religious interests to unlock international aid and save Lebanon from economic collapse.
Lebanon’s two main Shiite parties, Hezbollah and ally Amal, led by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, had insisted on retaining the Finance Ministry in the new government and on naming all the Shiite cabinet ministers. Adib rejected those conditions and stepped down.
Macron reserved his toughest words for Hezbollah, demanding that it clarify whether it’s a democratic political force, anti-Israel militia or a tool of Iran — but also criticized Lebanese political leaders from all camps.
“The failure is theirs. I won’t take it on myself. I did the maximum I could,” he said.
Hezbollah’s Al-Manar TV blasted Macron in its main news editorial Monday night telling the French president that Hezbollah “is and will remain an army facing Israel and will keep supporting Syria and its people against extremists.”
It added that Hezbollah and its allies are not to blame for Adib’s failure in forming a cabinet, saying that Macron’s threats of possible sanctions in the future against politicians are “unjustified and unacceptable.” It asked whether Macron wants Hezbollah and its allies, who have majority seats in Parliament, to give power to groups allied with the United States.
The European Union expressed “disappointment and concern” Monday about Adib’s resignation and urged the country’s leaders to do their best to form a cabinet that meets the demands of the people.
Lebanon’s crisis was made worse by a massive explosion in Beirut in early August that killed and wounded many and caused widespread damage.
Macron has been pressing Lebanese politicians to form a cabinet made up of non-partisan specialists that can work on enacting urgent reforms to extract Lebanon from a devastating economic and financial crisis.'
The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, urged Lebanon’s leaders to “unite and do their utmost for the timely formation of a government that must be able to meet the legitimate needs and demands of the Lebanese people.”
Borrell said the new cabinet should be “committed to address Lebanon’s acute and multiple challenges — notably its humanitarian, socio-economic and financial crises, the coronavirus pandemic and the reconstruction of Beirut.”
He underlined the EU’s continued support for Lebanon and its people.
The international community has repeatedly said that Lebanon will not get financial aid before carrying out reforms to end decades of corruption and mismanagement by the ruling class that brought the tiny country to the verge of bankruptcy.
The crisis is expected to worsen as the central bank’s reserve’s are being depleted in what could force the government in the coming months to end subsidies for medicine and fuel, sharply increasing their prices.
Lebanon defaulted on paying back its debt for the first time ever in March. Talks with the International Monetary Fund on a bailout package have stalled.
The crisis has been compounded by the coronavirus pandemic and more recently by the August 4 explosion at Beirut’s port caused by the detonation of thousands of tons of ammonium nitrates. It killed nearly 200 people, injured thousands and caused losses worth billions of dollars.

Lebanese president avoids showdown with Hezbollah over Macron’s blame
The Arab Weekly/September 29/2020
Political circles believe Aoun was unwilling to confront Hezbollah and Amal because he wanted to avoid a clash between him and Hezbollah, which helped catapult him to the presidency.
Lebanese President Michel Aoun, who French President Emmanuel Macron accused of failing to fulfill his responsibilities to form a government, confirmed Monday that his country is still committed to the French initiative and put the blame on Prime Minister-designate Mustapha Adib.
Aoun, upon receiving French Ambassador to Lebanon Bruno Foucher at the end of his mission, said that he “regrets” Adib’s inability to form a government.
The Lebanese president ignored Macron’s Sunday statements focusing on the obstacles that the “Shia duo” — referring to Iran-backed Hezbollah and the Amal Movement — put in Adib’s way. The two Shia blocs insisted that they maintain control of the finance ministry, wrecking Adib’s plan to form a technocratic government.
Lebanese political circles believe Aoun was unwilling to confront Hezbollah and Amal because he wanted to avoid a clash between him and Hezbollah, which helped catapult him to the presidency.
Hezbollah and Amal, meanwhile, have remained noticeably silent, with their media arms focusing on their rejection of foreign interference in internal Lebanese affairs, in a clear reference to France and its effort to play a key role in resolving the country’s crisis.
In television interviews, former Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora referred to Iran’s role, noting that Tehran pushed Hezbollah to stubbornly reject any government that did not meet the conditions it imposed.
In particular, Siniora referred to the hardening of the Iranian position, which was reflected in Hezbollah’s positions after the US administration imposed sanctions on two former minister — Ali Hassan Khalil and Youssef Fenianos.
Political sources told The Arab Weekly that while Khalil belongs to the Amal Movement and Fenianos, a Christian, to the Marada Movement, the two ministers are considered directly affiliated with Hezbollah, with the Shia movement viewing the sanctions against them as message addressed to it.
Russia also entered the crisis yesterday with the hope of calming tensions in the country. It was announced in Beirut that Deputy Russian Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov, who is President Vladimir Putin’s personal envoy to the Middle East, had contacted Druze leader Walid Jumblatt.
Bogdanov and Jumblatt reportedly discussed the latest developments in Lebanon in light of the ongoing government crisis.
Russia affirmed “its approach in support of the need to find solutions to all thorny and sensitive issues on the national agenda through the Lebanese themselves on the basis of consensus between the main political and sectarian forces in the Lebanese Republic.”
Reports indicate that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov may visit Lebanon at the end of next October, in a message to France that the Lebanese arena will not remain open only to it and that Paris must increase pressure on political parties to ensure its initiative is successful before other initiatives gain steam.
Tehran previously announced it opposed any interference in Lebanese affairs. Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh denied that Iran had played any role in obstructing the formation of a Lebanese government headed by Adib as some Lebanese commentators had claimed.
Observers of Lebanese affairs say the limited French pressure has allowed influential politicians in the country to adopt their traditional tactic of delaying matters in order to resolve disputes through settlements, which may disrupt any French or international initiative to support Lebanon’s economy, which is conditional on political stability.
At the end of October, whether a government is formed or not, France intends to organise an international support conference for Lebanon with the United Nations, provided that humanitarian aid is sent directly to the population through non-governmental organisations on the ground and the United Nations.
On August 9, days after the Beirut port explosion killed more than 190 people, France and the United Nations organised a videoconference in which they collected some $300 million in aid.
Macron changed his mind about receiving political leaders in Paris in parallel with the support conference in order to assess the progress of his roadmap. But he said that, “by 20 days, he will bring together all the members of the international support group for Lebanon to consolidate the unity of the international community regarding the next stages.”
Lebanese authorities have refused to allow an international investigation be conducted on the explosion. According to the country’s own investigations, whose final conclusions have not yet been announced, at least 25 people have been arrested, including senior officials in charge of the port’s management and security.
During his last visit to Lebanon, the second after the port explosion, Macron announced that he would return to Beirut in December as part of a “follow-up mechanism” for the progress that would be made by the new government.
However after his initiative’s setback, it is not clear if he still intends to visit.

The stalemate characterizes the political scene … Government consultations are suspended...
Alkhalegi Today/September 29/2020
Stagnation and stagnation dominate the issue of the government, especially after the apology of Dr. Mustafa Adib, throwing the ball in everyone’s face, which led to the suspension of the French initiative indefinitely. The first round of the French initiative resulted in what could be described as the Iranian-Syrian-French “compromise”, or the clash of “Hezbollah” with Paris, which tried to contain the party, in a moment of harsh US sanctions against it, so the picture appears upside down, and Hezbollah will speak in the tongue of its secretary General Hassan Nasrallah on Macron’s initiative as a refutation and re-correction of what the party describes as fallacies.
While matters have returned to their first square, the data indicate that the country is heading towards a stalemate that prints the suspended government entitlement, and the exclusion of any solution to the crisis, at least before the date of the US presidential elections on November 3, and perhaps later until the end of the year. It was not a coincidence that the French President mentioned in his press conference linking the forces that obstructed the French initiative with the American elections, in a way that realistically gives more seriousness to fears of very costly repercussions for prolonging the duration of business in Lebanon. The evidence for this fact is that the circles close to the presidency of the republic confirmed yesterday that there is no call for binding parliamentary consultations to assign a person to form a new government in the next few days. It does not seem that setting a date for consultations will be in foreseeable time.
Propeller
So, the political situation was in place yesterday, after the political forces proceeded to evaluate the experience of appointing Dr. Mustafa Adib, which failed as a result of the high ceilings of the demands of the parties. Stages of forming a government whose first task is reforms, then reforms. In parallel with the contacts that the French president made with international and regional bodies, especially the Americans and the Saudis, to help deal with the existing crisis. However, it seems – according to follow-up official sources – that the new opportunity has allowed for the start of new proposals and ideas, including the proposal of President Najib Mikati to form a techno-political government headed by Prime Minister Saad Hariri of twenty ministers, including six politicians representing the six major sects. It is the demand that was raised during the days of forming the government of President Hassan Diab, and then the contacts to form the government of Mustafa Adib.
The sources added: Mikati’s proposal is realistic and logical that takes into account the Lebanese situation with its political and sectarian balances, and meets the French demand in Macron’s initiative to form a government by consensus between all parties, and it will be the subject of quick discussion.
The sources pointed to the suggestion made by President Aoun not to limit the four sovereign portfolios to the major sects and to make them rotating between all sects, even if it does not meet the desire of the majority of the political and parliamentary blocs. After the failure of the proposal for rotating the bags proposed by President Adeeb and former prime ministers.
Meanwhile, sources close to Hariri told Al-Akhbar that the latter had turned off his engines after Adib apologized for not forming the government last Saturday. According to the sources, Hariri sees himself in an embarrassing position, as he is unable to confront Hezbollah, nor is he able at the same time to confront Washington and Riyadh, which want him as a spearhead in the face of Hezbollah.
Nasrallah responds today
The Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, at 8:30 p.m. this evening, will determine the position on the situation that has turned into, and what President Macron announced regarding the negative impact of Hezbollah on the results of the French initiative and the apology of President Mustafa Adeeb.Sources familiar with Hezbollah’s position said that Nasrallah would publicly repeat the questions that the party’s international relations official, Ammar al-Mousawi, had posed to the French ambassador in Beirut, Bruno Fuchsia.
According to Al-Manar channel, Nasrallah will clarify the scene and place points on the letters.
The response will focus on that Hezbollah fulfills its obligations and is working in the interest of the Lebanese people, in contrast to what Macron said, that the party today “should not think that it is stronger than it is” and prove that it respects all the Lebanese, and in recent days it has clearly shown the opposite. ”
In parallel, Nidaa al-Watan pointed out that Hezbollah would not accept that Macron’s insult to him, describing him as a “militia,” would go unnoticed. Rather, he would escalate his direction in the face of the French President through Nasrallah’s appearance, during which he would “put points on letters” In the face of the campaign of slander and accusation that the French President brought against the party and the Shiite duo, “according to the expression of sources close to the duo to” Nidaa Al Watan “, explaining that Nasrallah” will restore balance to the approach of the French endeavor by stressing that Hezbollah supports the components of the French initiative, but without Considering it a “house text,” and the Lebanese have nothing but obedience and obedience. What is required is an “initiative that is not a French tutelage.”
On the other hand, Ain al-Tineh did not respond to the words of the French President, but it was reported from her circles that she was disturbed by Macron’s burden of the Shiite duo more than it should be. As for the House of the Center, he quoted circles close to him commenting on Macron’s statement that Prime Minister Saad Hariri and former heads of government have set sectarian criteria for the process of forming the government by saying that Hariri, in agreement with the former heads of government, decided to follow the rules set by the designated president that are consistent with the principle of rotation in The ministries approved by the President of the Republic, the Maronite Patriarchate, most of the representative blocs, and accordingly most of the internal parties. But when this clashed with the Shiite duo’s insistence on naming their ministers and demanding the money bag, Hariri declared a concession in the interest of the country, and Macron admitted at his conference that this matter was positive, and the French Foreign Ministry praised Hariri’s move and described it as courageous.
External echoes
Amid this internally bleak atmosphere, additional external echoes emerged that reflected the growing international monitoring of the situation in Lebanon in light of the worsening governmental, financial and economic crisis and fears of more difficult repercussions in the weeks and months.
The Russian Deputy Foreign Minister and President Putin’s special envoy in the Middle East and Africa Mikhail Bogdanov informed the Lebanese ambassador to Russia, Shawky Bou Nassar, of the desire of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to visit Lebanon at the end of October, to meet with senior officials. This came during a meeting between Bogdanov and Bounsar, in response to the latter’s request, during which an in-depth exchange of views took place on the economic and social conditions in Lebanon in light of the emerging government crisis in the country.
According to information about the meeting to the Major General, “The Russian side affirmed its permanent support for the sovereignty of the friendly Lebanese Republic, its unity, independence and the sovereignty of decisions on all matters on the internal agenda, and the need for them to be taken by the Lebanese themselves without any external interference or dictation. Practical aspects related to the further strengthening of the multifaceted Russian-Lebanese cooperation. ”
Paris dating is on the line
In view of this, the sources revealed to “Nidaa Al Watan” that Paris had requested Moscow to enter the mediation line with Tehran to explore the common spaces between the two sides on “Lebanese land”, and from this standpoint, Russian officials’ contacts with the Lebanese leaderships began during the last hours to try to explore the prospects of “the possible and the impossible. In resolving the crisis in preparation for the upcoming visit of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to Beirut.
However, the sources expected, on the other hand, that Moscow would not be able to radically turn the corners in the map of the Lebanese crisis and would not be able to seek to cool the ground of the Iranian-Western clash in the Lebanese file, pending the outcome of the US presidential elections, given that Tehran prefers to lend any A position on the Lebanese paper to “the principal, not the agent”, based on its deep-rooted conviction that Macron has been unable to present anything to it in the US sanctions file. Therefore, the Iranians are likely to keep this “card” in their grasp pending it being placed on the “Deal” table that he promised them US President Donald Trump signed a deal with Tehran upon the renewal of his mandate.
Tehran and “good intentions”
In regional and international situations, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said that Tehran and Paris are in consultation, “But of course, we do not call on any foreign government to directly interfere in Lebanon’s affairs, because we consider that any interference does not help (in the solution), It only deepens the differences.
“We will support any government, especially the French government, if it is able to proceed with that with good intentions. But we certainly distinguish between interference (on the one hand) and assistance in the internal affairs of other countries (on the other hand),” he added. Iran has a close relationship with Hezbollah, which is the most prominent political and military force in Lebanon. Khatibzadeh affirmed that Tehran “is in direct and continuous contact with various Lebanese parties, and we hope that we will be able to help solve this issue.”
Internationally, the European Union’s foreign policy official, Josep Borrell, said in a statement: The European Union views with disappointment and concern the resignation of Prime Minister-designate Mustafa Adib and the circumstances that led to his decision. He added: The leaderships in Lebanon must unite and do everything they can to quickly form the government, and that the rapid formation of the government will also be necessary to reach an urgently required agreement with the International Monetary Fund.
These were the details of the news The stalemate characterizes the political scene … Government consultations are suspended... for this day. We hope that we have succeeded by giving you the full details and information. To follow all our news, you can subscribe to the alerts system or to one of our different systems to provide you with all that is new.
It is also worth noting that the original news has been published and is available at saudi24news and the editorial team at AlKhaleej Today has confirmed it and it has been modified, and it may have been completely transferred or quoted from it and you can read and follow this news from its main source.

General Aoun and Siding with the Wrong Front
Jebril Elabidi/Asharq Al Awsat/September 29/2020
Lebanon has become fundamentally different after the ammonium nitrate explosion at Beirut port. The status quo wherein Hezbollah is a ruling force that stands above the law has become rejected in the Shiite street before the Sunni street, and by the majority of the political parties as well. The Lebanon of political sectarianism has become terrifying and is thus rejected by the people and national forces, all of whom have chanted for a Lebanon that is “unified and devoid of sectarianism”.
Removing the claws of the Hezbollah militia, which has become a subject of debate, remains the requisite to achieving the street’s demands for a Lebanon that is decontaminated from sectarianism. Nasrallah’s party, the so-called “party of god” (Hezbollah), has transformed into a force whose encroachments are not limited to Lebanon. Indeed, it has come to export chaos and havoc, and allying with it, covering up for it or facilitating its projects, is considered siding with the wrong front.
The president, General Aoun, was originally a soldier in an organized army and is the disciplined national military institution's son. So, he knows the meaning of discipline in the military sense of the word, a quality that militias whose loyalties are not to the state and its authority lack. The harmony between the Hezbollah militia and an army general of Aoun’s stature is therefore incomprehensible. It cannot be understood or explained but in the context of intersecting political interests, which may be more akin to a political adventure whose consequences had not been accounted for, especially since Aoun had accused Nasrallah’s militia of being responsible for Rafik Hariri’s assassination.
The Lebanese state has suffered from the civil war that began in the 1970s and ended with the Taif Accord, which established a power-sharing arrangement without the need for the approval of General Aoun, his party or his sect and was reached despite his refusal to sign it at the time. Consequently, today, there is no need to court the Hezbollah for political gains that end with Lebanon’s decisions being hijacked by the militia and those who stand behind it.
In courting Hezbollah, General Aoun put the presidency in the same trench as the armed militia that is not subject to the state’s authority, as demonstrated by its explicit military interventions beyond Lebanese borders, in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and even the Gaza Strip and Libya. This state of affairs makes the Lebanese state legally liable for Hezbollah’s actions, since it is a political partner that shares power with the other factions that control the Lebanese government; everything that emanates from it is considered to emanate from the Lebanese authorities.
General Aoun should have freed himself from under the cloak of Hezbollah, which seeks to rule Lebanon with an Iranian ethos, in order to avoid becoming a partner in the party’s legacy of spilling blood in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.
The Hezbollah militia has always justified its possession of weapons with the pretext of resistance, which has not achieved anything, even for Lebanon. It has only led to destruction; as Nasrallah himself admitted, this is what happened during the July war. The Shebaa Farms are still occupied, while the party’s only achievement has been exporting terrorism to neighboring countries. The Lebanese state will bear the consequences as long as the highest of its echelons of power sees Hezbollah as a political partner.
I think that General Aoun has to correct his position on the Hezbollah militia and abandon it so that Lebanon does not bear the consequences of the exploits of the party and its leader, inside and outside of Lebanon.

U.S. Officials to Mediate Israel-Lebanon Maritime Border Talks
Ehud Yaari, Simon Henderson, and Hanin Ghaddar/The Washington Institute/September 29/2020
Negotiating a dividing line would enable Beirut to fully exploit potential offshore oil and gas reserves.
After almost a decade of intensive diplomatic efforts, the United States has succeeded in brokering an agreement between Israel and Lebanon to start formal negotiations on demarcating their maritime border. Barring a last-minute change of heart in Beirut, the talks are scheduled to begin in early October after the Jewish high holidays. Under the auspices of a U.S. delegation, representatives will meet in Naqoura at the headquarters of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). A UN rapporteur will attend the sessions at Lebanon’s insistence, but his notes will not be filed at the UN due to Israel’s objection.
The breakthrough was achieved after Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Schenker visited Jerusalem and Beirut earlier this month. To overcome the parties’ persistent differences regarding the legal basis and format of negotiations, the U.S. government issued side letters that provide assurances to both countries. One unresolved issue concerns possible linkage between maritime decisions and final demarcation of their land border, especially relating to the small area that Israel calls Mount Dov, in the vicinity of Shebaa Farms on the slopes of Mount Hermon.
Israeli energy minister Yuval Steinitz was already authorized to signal Lebanon that his government is prepared to split the 860 square kilometers of contested maritime territory in a 58:42 ratio in Beirut’s favor. The Lebanese are eager for the French company Total to start drilling in Block 9 adjacent to the contested area, while Israel is preparing international tenders for drilling at the neighboring “Alon D” block.
The main Lebanese interlocutor for this process has been the Shia Muslim speaker of parliament Nabih Berri, who acted with President Michel Aoun’s consent and, presumably, Hezbollah’s tacit approval. Lebanon’s financial meltdown likely accelerated the State Department’s preparatory efforts. On the other side, Israeli officials believe that once a demarcation line is approved and Lebanon starts exploring for natural gas, the risk to Israeli offshore gas rigs will be greatly diminished.
While Egypt and Jordan have been cooperating with Israel on gas projects for some time, dealing with Lebanon has been problematic. The maritime border challenges are both legal and geological. The usual first requirement is establishing an agreed land border in order to pin down where it meets the sea. But in this case the relevant border point—Rosh Hanikra/Ras Naqoura—is still technically disputed and terminates in a towering white cliff with no beach.
Moreover, while nearby Cyprus has an agreed maritime border with Israel, its attempts to reach one with Lebanon were stymied by Turkish pressure on Beirut. In response, an irritated Nicosia decided to draw its line with Israel from the southern end of the line it had hoped to draw with Lebanon. From Beirut’s perspective, the so-called “tri-point” where the three countries’ exclusive economic zones meet is further south. This contested pizza slice of territory will therefore be discussed in the upcoming talks.
Israel has not yet drilled in the contested area, but nearby discoveries to the south have fed optimism that hydrocarbon deposits could exist in commercial quantities deep below the seabed. Although such deposits may wind up straddling any maritime border reached in the coming weeks, this complication arises in many places around the world, and legal templates exist for shared exploitation.
Considering the country’s dire financial situation, the talks are good news for Lebanon because an agreed boundary could benefit the economy in the long term. Yet these benefits may be negated if Hezbollah is permitted to maintain its current access to most of Lebanon’s key ministries, since the group and its allies would no doubt tap any oil and gas profits that materialize. On the one hand, then, it is important to shelter the maritime demarcation deal from U.S. pressure related to Lebanon’s political reform process. On the other hand, Washington needs to understand that only the corrupt political class will benefit from the deal unless serious changes are made in Lebanon’s political structure—which means supporting early elections and a new electoral law, as well as implementing the reforms stipulated during the Paris meeting last December and more recently.
Hezbollah has always been good at buying time when it is cornered. As sanctions pile up against the group, its domestic allies, and Iran, some observers in Lebanon are concerned that maritime talks may just be the latest bid to stall any real reforms and freeze further outside pressure. Washington should therefore continue its efforts to designate members of the corrupt political class and show the Lebanese people that this deal is for their benefit, not that of the Hezbollah axis.
Finally, it is important to note that the drive toward a potential maritime agreement is not part of the recent normalization process seen between Israel and other Arab states. From the perspective of Hezbollah and the current Lebanese government, maritime demarcation would not reflect any change in their attitudes toward Israel or the Blue Line land border drawn by the UN following the 2006 war. Yet it may remove at least one danger: that any future confrontation with Hezbollah will necessarily spill into Israel’s offshore gas fields.
*Ehud Yaari is a Lafer International Fellow with The Washington Institute and a veteran commentator for Israeli television.
*Simon Henderson is the Institute’s Baker Fellow and director of its Bernstein Program on Gulf and Energy Policy.
*Hanin Ghaddar is the Friedmann Fellow in the Institute’s Geduld Program on Arab Politics.

Hezbollah fuels Lebanon's descent to civil war
Tom Rogan/Washington Examinar/September 29/2020
The Lebanese Hezbollah and its Amal Movement ally are predominantly responsible for the latest failure to establish a new government in Beirut. Putting their cronyism first, the two parties have shown their hands.
The failure was formalized after Prime Minister Hassan Diab resigned this weekend. Diab concluded he would be unable to persuade Hezbollah to support his reformist efforts. This provoked President Emmanuel Macron of France to condemn the acquiescence of responsibility. "I’m ashamed of the Lebanese political leaders" and their "collective betrayal" of the people, Macron said. The French president, who has been attempting to mediate a reform process, is right to be furious. Lebanon has been caught in a state of chaos for more than a year now, with various partisan interests preferring their own retention of power to the better service of the people. But with an anemic economy and grotesque political corruption, Lebanon is in desperate need of major political reform. This concern was only exacerbated following the catastrophic Beirut port explosion in early August, which killed nearly 200 people.
As I say, Hezbollah is the primary architect of this catastrophe. Refusing to compromise on the appointment of ministers and control over the powerful Finance Ministry, Hezbollah has obstructed Diab from the reforms his nation so desperately needs. Diab's necessary priority has been a move away from crony politicians to the appointment of technocratic ministers outside of the grasp of sectarian interests. That was something Hezbollah couldn't stomach, realizing that its own militia and patronage-based political power would suffer under the light of a new democratic order. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah is due to speak on the crisis on Tuesday. But he's very unlikely to offer any new compromises. Instead, Hezbollah seems to have bet that it can wait out this situation by gambling that no one will have the resolve to demand its reform. Considering Hezbollah's manifest penchant for avoiding responsibility for its excesses, its gambit may well succeed. Predictably, Hezbollah enjoys the support of corrupt Amal leader and Speaker of the Parliament Nabih Berri in this endeavor. President Michel Aoun also deserves a significant share of the blame. The geriatric master of Lebanon's major Christian party, the Free Patriotic Movement, Aoun has thrown in his lot with Hezbollah. Were he to demand reforms, Hezbollah would quickly find itself outvoted in Parliament. Instead, Aoun has made himself Hezbollah's useful idiot.
The crisis is growing. Denied basic living standards and increasingly skeptical that peaceful politics will deliver their better future, a large swathe of the Lebanese people will find new temptation to take up arms. A new civil war is a very real possibility.

Lebanon awaits the US presidential elections, but will collapse faster while it waits
Hanin Ghaddar/Al Arabiya/September 29/2020
Hezbollah and its sponsors in Tehran realized that they do not have to make concessions in Lebanon – or anywhere else for that matter – before the US presidential elections on November 3. They would rather use the Lebanese crisis as a negotiating chip when the new administration in the US – whether a new Biden administration or another Trump one – starts new talks with Iran.
Until then, neither the initiative of French president Emmanuel Macron, nor any other regional or international initiative, could force Hezbollah to concede.
After Prime Minister-designate Mustafa Adib recused himself, Macron gave a rare and specific press conference, focused on the Lebanese crisis. Although he did not declare any punitive measures against the Lebanese political elite, he did name and shame those who hindered his initiative, namely, Hezbollah and the other Shia political party Amal.
On Sunday, Macron accused Lebanon’s leaders of betraying their promises over their failure to form a government, and he gave the country’s political class four to six weeks to implement his roadmap. Macron said the political elite in Lebanon had decided “to betray” their obligations and had committed “collective treason” by failing to form a government. But more specifically, Macron pointed at Hezbollah, warning that the group should “not think it is more powerful than it is.... It must show that it respects all the Lebanese. And in recent days, it has clearly shown the opposite.”
During the six weeks that Macron gave to the Lebanese parties to sort out the problems, the US presidential elections will have taken place, and Macron and those in Lebanon will know which administration they’ll be dealing with for the next four to eight years.
Accordingly, Macron understood that Iran will not give him any win in Lebanon and that they prefer to negotiate directly with the US after the presidential elections. Macron’s initiative has failed, and until November 3, Lebanon will enter a phase of rapid deterioration – economic, social and security deterioration – as all parties will try to increase their odds of a favorable outcome ahead of the next round of talks. Macron will focus on the humanitarian aspects, the Trump administration on more sanctions on Hezbollah and probably more of its allies, and Iran on its survival and the survival of its proxies.
If Trumps wins a second term, his Iran policy will probably be the same. Although he said he is willing to negotiate a deal with Iran, it will probably include addressing Iran’s malign activities in the region.
However, the question remains what route Biden will take if he wins. Will he pursue a strategy that will save the Iranian regime and its proxies in the region, or is this is some kind of wishful thinking by Hezbollah and its sponsors?
Biden was part of the Obama administration that signed the JCPOA with Iran, but that doesn’t mean that Biden necessarily has the same outlook or that he endorses the same Iran policy as Obama. It is too early to tell, especially given that Biden’s foreign policy team has not been formed. But the one aspect that might differentiate Biden’s Iran policy from Obama’s is the fact that Biden is not in a hurry.
When Obama decided to move on with the negotiations, he was already in his second term, and Iran was by no means in a rush to reach a deal. Iran’s economy was much better, and the regime was stronger and less challenged. So Iran was able to practice its strategy of patience and play its waiting game to secure its regional interests before agreeing to any deal brokered by the Obama administration.
Accordingly, Iran’s interests in the region and its plans of expansionism were not challenged by the deal. Iran was able to expand its powers in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen without US hindrance, until Trump’s administration came along and sanctions were imposed.
However, this time around, Iran is in the corner and does not have the luxury of time. On the other hand, Biden would be at the beginning of his first term and will be in no need to rush signing a new deal with Iran, although he might ease off some of the pressure. Biden will also have other priorities, such as the COVID-19 challenges, China, and Russia.
In Lebanon, until Hezbollah faces the reality that Lebanon is not going to be Trump’s or Biden’s priority, and that time is not on their side, Lebanon might be completely lost and become a failed state.
Meanwhile, it has become clear to all parties involved – the US, the Europeans, the French, regional powers, and all of the Lebanese, including the Shia community – that Hezbollah is the main culprit behind the failure of the French initiative, and the reason why Lebanon has collapsed. It will be very difficult to walk back from this.
*Hanin Ghaddar is the Friedmann Fellow at The Washington Institute’s Geduld Program on Arab Politics, where she focuses on Shia politics throughout the Levant.

New peace deals are changing the region, Lebanon must reconsider its stance on Israel
Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya/September 29/2020
Lebanon for a long time has been a victim of its lack of foresight and proper positioning vis-a-vis many of the problems of the region, mainly the Arab-Israeli conflict.The recent peace deals that the United Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Bahrain signed with Israel are a sober reminder to the Lebanese that their country is stuck in a political twilight zone with no recourse to examine nor engage in any discussion that could help Lebanon reposition itself once again as an attractive regional partner.
This refusal to adapt has put Lebanon at a clear disadvantage, and given that Lebanon and Israel are still technically at war, there is no chance for any kind of peace or proper closure after decades of tumult – even if such a peace would address the historical grievances of all parties involved.
While the Lebanese might be too shy – or perhaps afraid – to say it, such a peace deal with Israel is something some secretly covet. This yearning for peace in Lebanon in any form is not an indicator of lack of empathy with the Palestinians and their righteous cause, but rather stems from a deep feeling that their small country has suffered enough and has also gone beyond the call of duty and has contributed its fair share in the ongoing conflict.
Realistically, however, Lebanon’s abysmal political and economic condition mean that imagining what such a peace would look like is a futile exercise.
Today, the Lebanese state is weak and on the verge of collapse. Where any decision to pursue peace, or even war, requires total sovereignty and proper statehood, Lebanon lacks the status and ability to pursue either.
Above all, perhaps the main obstacle to beginning such a discussion is the presence of Iran-backed Hezbollah where Iran views Lebanon as a forward base in its own war with Israel. Thus, any debate or talk of pursuing peace might prompt a violent reaction from Hezbollah and its patron.
It is concerning that in the Middle East where the views on the Arab-Israeli conflict are changing rapidly and countries have shifted away from viewing the conflict in the traditional framework, Lebanon refuses to reexamine its regional role.
Lebanon has always defined itself as a bridge between East and West and as a melting pot for multi-culturalism and diversity – and more importantly as an educational, medical and business hub for the region. But now, Lebanon has lost its edge in many of these fields as the economy continues to crumble. And now, as Arab Gulf states increasingly recognize Israel, Lebanon will further slip into the background. Where Arab Gulf states have looked toward Lebanon for services it previously had no direct access to, or hired Lebanese to establish homegrown entities – such as schools, hospitals and firms – in the Arab Gulf states, those same countries may now pivot to Israel.
Lebanon can no longer rely on fraternal Arab ties to bring in business. Israel has the competitive advantage over Lebanon in many fields, and Beirut must position itself to still be in the favor of the Arab Gulf states who have clearly decided to the Arab-Israeli conflict is a thing of the past.
Back in the 1950s, Lebanon could have claimed to have an edge over Israel in the fields of education and financial services, and the vibrant Beirut port could act as a hub for the Arab states, but now this is no longer the case. The once strategic Beirut port is now destroyed or no longer strategic, and now the ports of Dubai and Haifa have a clear advantage in the field. Israel will now have access to the important free zone in Jabal Ali, which will ease its access to the Asian markets and make trade cheaper.
Perhaps the most pressing matter Lebanon must address is that there are 350,000 Lebanese working in the UAE and Bahrain who now will have to compete with Israeli talent that will now be welcome in the Gulf.
According to Lebanese law, Lebanese nationals are prohibited from interacting with Israelis in any capacity. For Lebanese working in the Gulf, they could face legal repercussions for simply working at the same firm alongside Israelis. Furthermore, given that these firms in the Gulf will also have to normalize ties with Israel, any failure of current staff to also normalize professional interpersonal relations could reflect badly on their status within the company, potentially even leading to their termination. In the IT and the medical tourism sector alone, Israel has a clear advantage over Lebanon, and with the UAE and the Bahrain market open to them, they will certainly not hold back.
Lebanon now stands at a crossroad. It must find a way to adapt to this rapid regional transformation or Lebanon will be rendered inconsequential. It is one thing for Lebanon to refuse to ride the normalization train; but it is another to refuse to jump off the train that Iran and Hezbollah are driving, bringing Lebanon further into oblivion. Beirut’s refusal to readjust its policy toward Israel is neither smart nor constructive, and claiming neutrality while actually serving as a pawn in Iran’s regional strategy is a losing game.
*Makram Rabah is a lecturer at the American University of Beirut, Department of History. His forthcoming book Conflict on Mount Lebanon: The Druze, the Maronites and Collective Memory (Edinburgh University Press) covers collective identities and the Lebanese Civil War.

Netanyahu, in UN speech, warns of more Hezbollah peril for Beirut
Lahav Harkov/Jerusalem Post/September 29, 2020
PM says ‘no doubt’ other Arab, Muslim states will sign treaties.
Hezbollah has a secret arms depot next to a gas company that could trigger yet another massive explosion in Beirut, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned in his speech to the UN General Assembly by video link on Tuesday.
“Here is where the next explosion could take place,” Netanyahu said, pointing to a map of the Janah neighborhood in Beirut, less than two months after a devastating blast at the Lebanese capital’s port killed 200 people and injured thousandsThe map showed a Hezbollah arms depot abutting gas canisters that belong to a gas company. A few meters away is a gas station, and another gas company and gas trucks are situated 50 m. away. These explosive risks are surrounded by civilian housing and are very close to the end of the runway of Beirut-Rafic Hariri International Airport.
“It’s right here. This is the gas company, and this is the missile explosive depot,” Netanyahu said.
The prime minister called on the people of Janah to “act now,” and tell Hezbollah to “tear these depots down,” warning that Hezbollah and its Iranian backers deliberately put them in danger.
“If this thing explodes, it’s another tragedy,” he added. “I say to the people of Lebanon, Israel means you no harm. But Iran does.”
Netanyahu pointed out that a Hezbollah depot in Ain Qana in south Lebanon exploded several days ago.
“The international community must insist that Hezbollah stop using Lebanon and Lebanese civilians as human shields,” he stated.
Hezbollah is working on precise missiles in a number of civilian residential areas in Lebanon, including directly under apartment buildings. The terrorist organization manufactures and stores parts of those precise missiles at the Janah site.
Another site, in the Laylaki neighborhood, is under four seven-story residential buildings, home to more than 70 families and 130 m. from a church and medical center. Yet, another such site is in the Chouaifet neighborhood, under five residential buildings that are home to 50 families and 90 m. from a mosque.
Israel and the IDF have repeatedly reported similar sites that endanger Lebanese civilians to the UN and through other diplomatic channels.
In revealing the Janah site, Netanyahu sought to call once again for the Lebanese government to get involved in what is happening in its country and protect its citizens from Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah.
Immediately after Netanyahu’s speech, Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan, called on the Security Council to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization and condemn its use of Lebanese civilians to shield its activities.
Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah claimed that the terrorist group’s munitions are not kept in civilian areas, despite Netanyahu’s claims to the commentary, during a speech on Tuesday on the Hezbollah-affiliated Al-Manar TV.
Nasrallah invited the media to visit the facility that Netanyahu referred to in his UN address, “so that the world can watch the Netanyahu lie on the air.”
Simultaneously, Hezbollah media relations announced that they were arranging a media tour of the area for Tuesday night “to learn about the reality of the situation there and to uncover the false claims of the enemy Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.”
Nasrallah claimed that Hezbollah is not placing munitions near civilian homes. “We know very well where we should put our missiles,” added the Hezbollah leader.
Netanyahu also condemned Iran, “the greatest enemy of peace in the Middle East.”
He praised US President Donald Trump for leaving the Iran nuclear deal, which he said was flawed because it did not block Iran’s path to the bomb, only restricting its nuclear program temporarily. Iran has violated those restrictions, he pointed out.
“Because of these violations, Iran will have enough enriched uranium in a few months for two nuclear bombs. And Iran has been working on a new generation of centrifuges, it’s called the IR9, which will multiply Iran’s enrichment capability fifty-fold,” Netanyahu warned.
He recounted that Israel’s European allies promised that Iranian violations “would be met with a quick and severe response,” but the UN “Security Council has done, well, absolutely nothing.”
“The Security Council also still refuses to see what was obvious to anyone who understands anything about the Middle East. Rather than curb Iran’s aggression, the nuclear deal fed and funded it... Exactly as I warned five years ago, we who live in the Middle East are suffering the consequences of that irresponsible deal,” he stated.
Netanyahu commended Trump for reinstating sanctions on Iran and ordering the strike on Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani.
“Both Arabs and Israelis are together urging tough action on Iran. And when Arabs and Israelis agree, others should pay attention,” he added.
Netanyahu opened his remarks with “two pieces of good news,” in the form of the two peace agreements Israel signed with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.
“I also have no doubt that more Arab and Muslim countries will be joining the circle of peace, soon, very soon,” he said.
These agreements highlight “the failed strategies of the past,” Netanyahu said.
“For far too long, the Palestinians effectively wielded a veto on peace between Israel and the broader Arab world,” he lamented.
Progress in the region was “held hostage to completely unrealistic Palestinian demands… [that] are complete non-starters for any responsible Israeli government,” like an Israeli withdrawal to pre-1967 lines, outsourcing Israel’s security, ethnic cleansing of tens of thousands of Jews from Judea and Samaria, or the absorption of millions of Palestinians descended from refugees of the 1948 war.
Netanyahu criticized the international community’s attempt to appease the Palestinians and behave as though their demands were realistic, strengthening an illusion.
Trump, however, chose “a path anchored in reality,” the prime minister said, including recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and of Israeli sovereignty in the Golan Heights, as well as a peace plan addressing Israel’s security needs while giving the Palestinians “a dignified realistic path forward if they make peace with Israel” – meaning a demilitarized state in 70% of the West Bank and Gaza.
Netanyahu expressed hope that Palestinian leaders will seek to join “the expanding circle of peace” between Israel and Arab states.
“When that happens, Israel will be ready,” he said. “I’d be willing to negotiate on the basis of the Trump plan to end our conflict with the Palestinians once and for all.”
*Tzvi Joffre contributed to this report.

Following Criticism, French President Macron Takes Harsher Stance: Hizbullah 'Cannot Claim To Be A Political Force Of A Democratic Country By Terrorizing' The Population With Its Weapons
MEMRI/September 29, 2020
On September 26, 2020, Lebanese acting prime minister Mustapha Adib stepped down, announcing that he was abandoning his efforts to form a new Lebanese government. The failure was the result of numerous obstacles from political elements.[1] At a press conference the following day, September 27, French President Emmanuel Macron expressed sorrow about the failure to form a government and harshly criticized Hizbullah, saying that the organization could not be a terror organization and at the same time a political power. Macron also attacked Lebanon's political elements, specifically Hizbullah and the Shi'ite Amal party, accusing them of selfishness and of betraying and violating their commitments to France, which recently unveiled a roadmap to extricate Lebanon from its political and economic crisis that was greatly exacerbated by the August 4 explosion at Beirut Port.[2]
At the press conference, Macron said: "Hizbullah cannot be at one and the same time an army fighting Israel, a militia unleashed against civilians in Syria and a respectable party in Lebanon. It must not believe it is stronger than it is and it is up to it to show that it respects all of the Lebanese. It has, in recent days, clearly shown the opposite...
"I understood that the will of Amal and Hizbullah – and this is what has happened in recent days – was to make no concessions, was NOT to honor what they explicitly told me [as they sat] around the [negotiating] table, looking into each other's eyes: [i.e.] that they agreed to a 'mission' government [and] to a roadmap of reforms...
"Hizbullah and the Shi'ites are faced today with a choice that is also historic: whether they want to choose democracy and Lebanon, or whether they want something worse... Today the matter is in the hands of Hizbullah and President [Nabih] Berri: Do YOU want the policy of 'something worse' [i.e. clashes], or do you want to integrate the Shi'ite camp into the camp of democracy and the interests of Lebanon?...
"Hizbullah has maximized its weight by using ambiguity: It is simultaneously a militia, a terrorist group, [and] a political force. The Hizbullah representatives in parliament need to clarify their position. You [Hizbullah] cannot claim to be a political force of a democratic country by terrorizing [the population] with your weapons, and you will not be able to sit around the [negotiating] table for long if you do not keep the commitments you made around the table."[3]
It is noteworthy that Macron's criticism of Hizbullah is a significantly harsher position than his previous one, that recognized Hizbullah as a legitimate Lebanese political body despite the arsenal of weapons at its disposal. This criticism was voiced following Adib's resignation, and following the harsh condemnation, heard in recent weeks in Lebanon and in the Arab world, of Macron's statement that "Hizbullah has representatives elected by the Lebanese" and "is part of the political scene,' with no mention of disarming Hizbullah – which is designated as terrorist by the U.S., the U.K., Germany, and some Arab states – or of curbing the organization's increasing control of Lebanon's state institutions.
According to the French daily Le Figaro, during his August 6 visit to Beirut Port following the explosion, Macron spoke privately with the head of Hizbullah's parliamentary bloc, Mohammed Raad – the first time any French president has openly spoken with a Hizbullah official. In the conversation, Macron stated that although "Hizbullah has representatives elected by the Lebanese" and "is part of the political scene," it must prove that it serves Lebanon's interests rather than Iran's. He added that France would not "bother" Hizbullah regarding its weapons or regarding several other issues it considers important, but that in return Hizbullah would have to "put oxygen in the system" and "agree to play the game."[4] At a September 1, 2020 press conference in Beirut, during his second visit to Lebanon since the port explosion, Macron drew a distinction between Hizbullah's "military and terrorist component" and its political branch, stating that the latter is part of the Lebanese parliament and that a solution to the Lebanese crisis requires engaging it in "sincere conversation."[5]
This French position was criticized by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who wrote in the French daily Le Figaro on September 14, 2020: "Unfortunately, France refuses to designate all of Hizbullah a terrorist organization, as other European nations have done, and has restrained EU progress on that same action. Instead, Paris maintains the fiction that there is a 'political wing' of Hizbullah, when all of it is controlled by a single terrorist – Hassan Nasrallah."[6]
Criticism of the French position and Macron's recent statements also appeared in the Lebanese and Saudi press. 'Ali Hamada, a columnist for the Lebanese daily Al-Nahar, wrote in two recent columns that if Macron's rescue plan for Lebanon does not tackle the issue of Hizbullah's weapons, not only will it fail to save the country but it will actually perpetuate Hizbullah's control over the state institutions of Lebanon as well as Iran's "occupation" of it.
Faisal 'Abbas, editor of the Saudi English-language daily Arab News, wrote that when he called Hizbullah a Lebanese party and part of the Lebanese people, Macron was forgetting that the Nazis were also an elected German party and part of the German people. The least he could have done, 'Abbas added, was to publicly demand that Hizbullah lay down its weapons and dissolve its terrorist wing, and to underscore his threat to impose sanctions against the organization. He concluded by saying that what Lebanon needs is an overhaul of its entire political system – meaning "out with the old... above all, Hizbullah themselves."
Saudi journalist Hussain 'Abdul Hussain focused on the Iranian angle. Writing on the English-language website of the Al-Arabiya network, he argued that Macron could have pressured Iran to disarm Hizbullah, but instead, like Germany and Britain, and unlike the U.S., he is choosing to appease Iran. All he could offer, wrote Hussain, was "frank, long, and repeated" conversations with Lebanon's ruling class, but that such conversations are bound to be futile given Hizbullah's domination of this ruling elite, said 'Abdul Hussain.
The following report presents translated excerpts from articles in the Lebanese and Saudi press criticizing Macron's position vis-à-vis Hizbullah.
Lebanese Journalist: Macron's Ideas Will Only Perpetuate Hizbullah's Control Over All Lebanese Government Decisions
'Ali Hamada wrote in his September 1, 2020 column in the Lebanese daily Al-Nahar: "Appointing Mustapha Adib [as Lebanese prime minister] and tasking him with forming the new government reflects a French-Iranian arrangement accepted by most members of the dominant bloc in Lebanon's parliament and political scene. This arrangement pleases Hizbullah, because it prevents the appointment of a figure who might defy [Hizbullah's] plan to take over what remains of Lebanon's state institutions...
"The great paradox is that the centennial of Lebanon's founding takes place under the aegis of [French] President Emmanuel Macron, who arrived in Lebanon with a set of ideas that will ultimately serve only to [preserve] the status quo and to perpetuate Hizbullah's control over all Lebanese government decisions and all state apparatuses, especially the security [apparatus]...
"What about the essential issues that must be raised in Lebanon's centennial? What about Hizbullah's weapons? What about implementing UN resolutions, starting with the important Resolution 1559 [calling for disarming the militias in the country]? What about this organization's control over the state's resources and institutions? What about the three-part [phrase] 'military-people-resistance,' or the [phrase] 'resisting people,' which were invented as an excuse for preserving the illegal weapons? The only thing that can be said on the centennial of the Lebanese state is that Lebanon, worryingly, appears to have somehow fallen under the patronage of an Iranian mandate that is partnered with France, just like the Syrian-U.S. mandate that preceded it 30 years ago!"[7]
A few days later, on September 5, he wrote in his column: "Macron left [Lebanon] after setting a date to revisit it, [but only] on the condition that a [new] government is formed and that rapid efforts are made to implement the French reforms. This plan did not even mention the issues that really concern Hizbullah...
"This is where the American position comes into the picture... [This position] goes much further [than France's] in terms of focusing on Hizbullah's anomalous status [as an armed party within Lebanon]. The Americans believe – and broad sectors in Lebanon believed this even earlier – that the failure to address Hizbullah's status will torpedo the economic-financial rescue plan that France is promoting. Moreover, it will leave Lebanon open to increasing Iranian influence, especially in the absence of any principled desire by the Lebanese opposition to come out against the [Iranian] occupation [of Lebanon]...
"Any plan for rescuing Lebanon from its tragic economic situation must include some clause about implementing the UN resolutions, starting with the historic Resolution 1559. Otherwise, the French initiative may collapse, due to the inability to deal with the Hizbullah situation. This is why we are concerned that Macron has actually supplied oxygen to Hizbullah and to Lebanon's current president..."[8]
Editor Of Saudi Daily: Macron, Who Says Hizbullah Is Part Of Lebanon, Should Remember That The Nazis Were Part Of Germany
Faisal 'Abbas, editor of the Saudi English-language daily Arab News, wrote in the paper on September 2: "...While the French president must be praised for his genuine concern and rapid decision to come to Lebanon’s aid in its darkest hour, I fear some of the advice he has been given may be demonstrating the accuracy of a common definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. I refer of course to Macron’s remarks during his visit to Lebanon in relation to the Iran-backed Hizbullah group.
"Hizbullah 'represents a part of the Lebanese people and is an elected party,' Macron told the U.S. news site Politico.[9] (Surely a Frenchman, of all people, should need no reminder that Adolf Hitler's Nazis were 'a part of the German people' and an elected political party.)
On Hizbullah, Macron said: 'Today there is a partnership between it and several other parties, and if we don’t want Lebanon to descend into a model in which terror would prevail at the expense of other matters, we have to educate Hizbullah and other parties about their responsibilities.'
"Really, Mr. President? How on earth do you propose to educate a party that you yourself concede has an armed, terrorist wing as well as a political one? That would be the equivalent of asking a schoolteacher to discipline a misbehaving student who came to class with a loaded gun. Such illogical statements and positions, including French support of the Iran nuclear deal, lead one to wonder whether Macron's own Middle East advisers are the ones who need to be educated on the region’s history and realities.
"As the Lebanese politician Nadim Gemayel put it on Twitter: Would you accept, Mr. President, that a French party takes up arms and interferes militarily in a European country, or declares war on countries that are allies of France?
"No one tried harder than the late [former Lebanese prime minister] Rafik Hariri to engage and absorb Hizbullah. His 'reward' was to be assassinated by a man determined by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon to be a leading figure in the 'terrorist wing' of Hizbullah – the same people who took Beirut by force in 2008 when their 'political wing' failed to do so democratically.
"'Don't ask France to come wage war against a Lebanese political force... it would be absurd and crazy,' Macron said. And of course, he is right; no one expects France – or anyone else – to put boots on the ground, or wage a war it cannot win without further devastating a country already on the brink of collapse.
"Rather, what ordinary Lebanese want, what they have been demanding since last October, is an overhaul of the whole political system. This means 'out with the old,' including Nabih Berri, parliamentary speaker since 1992; President Michel Aoun, a former warlord who allied himself with Hizbullah to obtain his position and in doing so has severely damaged the unity of Lebanese Christians, threatening those few who have not already fled the country; and above all, Hizbullah themselves...
"The very least [Macron] could have done was to publicly demand that Hizbullah lay down their weapons and dissolve their terrorist wing. But to expect the Lebanese to believe a pledge given to Macron by any politician while Hizbullah still has the upper (and armed) hand is naïve...
"As for the guarantees Macron gave, he seems to think that withholding the donations pledged to Lebanon at the Paris conference in 2018 would be enough of a deterrent. Of course, the problem with this is that it would be a punishment of the Lebanese people, as opposed to their corrupt politicians.
"Macron did speak of possible sanctions of political leaders if they don't fall into line, but it was too little, too late. If I were advising the French president, I would have made this particular statement the main talking point if he is to concede that there is no other way to deal with the current leaders.
"The French president would have had a completely different reception if he had shown that he meant business, possibly by demonstrating what could be done in terms of sanctions and asset freezes. This would have boosted confidence among the average Lebanese, who have had enough of seeing the rich and powerful escape punishment over and over again.
"Critics of a resolute and determined approach will argue that it is not the way to persuade political leaders to come to the table. The powerful counter-argument is that, so far, President Macron’s approach has been well-equipped with carrots... but woefully short of a stick."[10]
Saudi Journalist: "France Prefers To Appease Iran Rather Than Confront Its Destabilizing Activities In The Middle East, Especially In Lebanon"
Hussain 'Abdul-Hussain, a columnist for the English-language website of the Saudi Al-Arabiya network, wrote on September 3, 2020: "France's President Emmanuel Macron has taken the wrong approach in Lebanon, failing to assert French influence to pressure Iran to disarm Hizbullah and bring about real change.
"Nothing shows the toothlessness of French diplomacy in Lebanon more than Macron telling Politico that had he insisted on the popular candidate Nawaf Salam becoming Lebanon's new prime minister, France would have undermined Salam’s tenure 'because we put him in a system in which the parliament will block everything.' So weak is Macron's influence that the only thing he had to offer was to hold 'frank, long and repeated conversations with the ruling class, threatening to withhold aid and impose sanctions,' wrote Politico.[11] Even the policy of 'long conversations' assumes that the ruling class – a rubber stamp outfit for the actual ruler, Hizbullah – can actually decide on anything in the country whose economy has been in free fall.
"Macron seems unaware of the main principle of diplomacy: speak softly and carry a big stick. In the Middle East, Macron does not offer a coherent strategy that gives him enough carrots and sticks to conduct his diplomacy. Even sanctions on Lebanon’s rulers are an American tool.
"In fact, the French president had forfeited his leverage long before the Beirut port explosion, which prompted a sudden burst of French interest in Lebanon. By then, it had become common knowledge that Beirut's decisions are made in Tehran. Yet instead of formulating a policy that bargains with Iran for an independent Lebanon – leveraging Tehran's need of French support for the Iran nuclear deal for concessions in Lebanon – Macron incorrectly assumed that Lebanon could be fixed independently, like a normal state.
"Like Britain and Germany, France has endorsed a policy of appeasement toward Tehran's regime. When U.S. President Donald Trump asked that changes be made to the Iran nuclear deal, the Europeans started a mediation effort that collapsed under Iranian refusal to make any sunset clauses permanent. When America re-imposed unilateral sanctions on Iran, France and the Europeans ducked.
"Then came the expiry of the UN arms embargo on Iran. The Europeans supported America on the need to extend the embargo at the UN, but when Washington put forward a resolution to that effect before the Security Council, France, Britain and Germany voted against it.
"For some reason, perhaps lucrative contracts (such as the development of Iran's Pars oil field by French oil and gas company Total, which was dropped after Trump re-imposed U.S. sanctions), France prefers to appease Iran rather than confront its destabilizing activities in the Middle East, especially in Lebanon. When Paris concedes its leverage with Iran, it loses its power in Lebanon. Macron was correct. With his weak hand, all he could offer was long conversations.
"Macron steered clear from the real reform required to rescue Lebanon – disarming Hizbullah. The French president justified avoiding this subject by saying that he opposed whatever leads to military escalation – [using] the same excuse given by Iran apologists in Washington, who oppose anything other than concessions to Iran based on the incorrect assumption that twisting Iran's arm will certainly lead to war.
"Disarming Hizbullah is impossible with war, and only possible through Lebanese consensus despite Hizbullah's opposition. Whenever Lebanon's ruling class spoke with one voice, it achieved what had previously seemed impossible – such as ejecting Palestinian militias in 1982, and Syrian troops in 2005...
"Lebanon needs help, and Macron's attention is welcome. But help is needed for fundamental change that includes disarming Hizbullah, a gargantuan task that is only possible through convincing the ruling class that the party cannot protect their corruption anymore, but will rather bring them down with it under international pressure and sanctions. Once the oligarchs gang up on Hizbullah and sink it, the rebuilding of Lebanon from scratch, including constitutionally, fiscally and financially, becomes possible. Otherwise, by demanding early elections in a country where a militia can coerce results in its own favor, Macron is doing Hizbullah a favor by whitewashing a failing system..."[12]
[1] Aljoumhouria.com, September 26, 2020.
[2] The roadmap calls, inter alia, for taking steps to fight corruption, improve border controls, resume talks with the International Monetary Fund, pass a budget for 2021, and hold parliamentary elections. Reuters.com, September 15, 2020.
[3] Elysee.fr, September 27, 2020
[4] Le Figaro (France), September 1, 2020.
[5] France24.com, September 1, 2020.
[6] Le Figaro (France), September 14, 2020. Translation: State.gov.
https://www.state.gov/france-should-stand-with-freedom-not-tehran/
[7] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), September 1, 2020.
[8] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), September 5, 2020.
[9] These remarks were not in fact reported by Politico. As mentioned above, Macron made remarks to this effect in his August 6, 2020 conversation with Hizbullah representative Mohammed Raad and at his September 1, 2020 press conference in Beirut.
[10] Arab News (Saudi Arabia), September 2, 2020.
[11] Politico.com, September 1, 2020.
[12] English.alarabiya.net, September 3, 2020.
 

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on September 29-30/2020

Death of Kuwait Ruler Sheikh Sabah Draws Outpour of Grief
Associated Press/September 29/2020
The death of Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmed Al-Sabah, the leader of Kuwait who earned a reputation as a seasoned diplomat and a rare ruler who could cross the region's political and sectarian divides, touched off an outpouring of grief from the Arab world Tuesday. As news of his death broke, condolence messages streamed in from leaders across the region and beyond. As a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council, a regional body of Arab Gulf states, Kuwait has often charted its own course, pushing for diplomacy to resolve a bitter dispute between Qatar and other Arab states that continues to this day.
The United Arab Emirates announced a three-day mourning period and lauded Sheikh Sabah for his "wisdom, tolerance and peace," with Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the Emirates' day-to-day ruler, describing him as "a great pioneer in Gulf cooperation."
Saudi Arabia, one of Kuwait's closest allies, said that the kingdom's leadership and Saudi people share their grief with "brotherly Kuwaiti people." The Saudi royal court statement said the emir died after a journey full of achievement and generous service to his country and humanity.
"With the departure of Sheikh Sabah, we lose a wise leader who devoted his life to the service of his country and to Arab and Islamic nations," Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan wrote on Twitter.
Such was Sheikh Sabah's regional status that condolences even poured in from those locked in long-running rivalries with Kuwait's key Gulf allies. The emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, referred to Sheikh Sabah as the "father of all.""With his departure, the world has lost a beacon and symbol of humanity," he wrote. Yemen's Shiite Houthi rebels, who are battling a Saudi-led military coalition for control of the country, also offered a tribute. Mohammed Abdul-Salam, a Houthi spokesman, said the rebels "would not forget his support of peace negotiations," adding that Sheikh Sabah's "keenness to extinguish the fire of war" was appreciated by all sides.In Lebanon, where the late Kuwaiti leader played a key role in trying to end the country's ruinous 1975-90 civil war and later helped with its reconstruction, politicians offered their condolences.
"With the death of Sheikh Sabah, Lebanon has lost a great brother who stood by the Lebanese during the difficult circumstances over the past years," said a statement from Lebanese President Michel Aoun.
The U.S. Ambassador to Kuwait Alina Romanowski called Sheikh Sabah a "popular leader and special friend of the U.S." The U.S. Embassy in Kuwait said he "devoted his life to peace and regional stability."
A statement issued from Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi expressed "great sadness" over Sheikh Sabah's death, recalling the long-standing "fraternal stance" of the emir toward Egypt. He ordered Egypt's flag lowered to half-mast for three days. Jordan's royal court announced a nationwide 40-day mourning period, with the country's King Abdullah II mourning the loss "of a great brother and wise leader who loved Jordan."

Has Iran's nuke enrichment jumped 50-fold?

The Jerusalem Post/September 29/2020
This was one message of Netanyahu in his Tuesday speech to the UN.  Iran is a nuclear threat that the whole world needs to watch.Ironically, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif agree on almost the exact key statistic: that the Islamic Republic has already produced enough low-quality uranium for at least two nuclear bombs within around four months – if it were to decide to weaponize the uranium. Actually, Zarif and the International Atomic Energy Agency strangely give a slightly even worse evaluation, saying Iran has enough for even three nuclear bombs.
This was one message of Netanyahu in his Tuesday speech to the UN. But another point he made was potentially more explosive. He told the UN General Assembly: “Iran has been working on a new generation of centrifuges. It’s called the IR-9, which will multiply Iran’s enrichment capability 50-fold.” Wow. A 50-fold increase in the pace of enriching material for a nuclear bomb, combined with only a few months until breaking out to a nuclear weapon, sounds super scary. And it is a scary picture maybe a year or more down the road. But as of now, the IR-9 is not even close to working. In fact, almost all Iranian centrifuges are IR-1s or IR-2s, which it has had for years. Over the last year, Iran finally started to have some modest success with its IR-4 model. But on July 2, the key facility at Natanz for those centrifuges and the IR-9 was blown up. The Jerusalem Post has confirmed that both government and nongovernment experts view that event as delaying Tehran in advanced centrifuge development by one or two years.Then why is Netanyahu giving the impression that an Iranian nuclear weapon could be imminent?
It is all a gamble.
Netanyahu’s UN message was for the UN, Democrats and Republicans in the US, the EU, China, Russia, Arab allies and Iran itself. Multiple intelligence sources have made it clear to the Post that Israel always has and will continue to act to slow any Iranian march toward a nuclear bomb. The prime minister’s message to the world and to Iran was that this better stay on their radar screen. Israel would prefer peace deals like the ones with the UAE and Bahrain.
But if key parties ignore Israeli concerns and the Islamic Republic crosses certain redlines, Israel is watching and ready to act.

Three members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards killed in drive-by attack in southeast
AFP/Tuesday 29 September 2020
Three members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards were killed by unknown assailants on Tuesday in the country’s southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchistan, state media reported. “At 4 PM (1230 GMT) today, two cars belonging to Nikshahr county’s Basij (state-sanctioned volunteer militia) were attacked by the passengers of a Peugeot 405 while on the road,” IRNA news agency said, quoting a statement by the Guards. A Guards’ member was also wounded, it added, saying the identity of the assailants was under investigation. Sistan-Baluchistan has long been a flashpoint where Pakistan-based Baluchi separatists and extremists carry out cross-border raids. The extremist outfit Jaish al-Adl (“Army of Justice”) has in the past attacked and abducted Iranian security personnel. In one incident, 27 guards died in a suicide attack targeting a bus in the province in February 2019.Jaish al-Adl was formed in 2012 as a successor to the Sunni extremist group Jundallah (Soldiers of God), which waged a deadly insurgency for a decade before it was severely weakened by the capture and execution of its leader Abdolmalek Rigi in 2010.

Netanyahu: Preemptive strike against Iran still an option
The Jerusalem Post/September 29/2020
Gantz on coronavirus: "We didn't respond as was fit, but we will succeed this time as well." Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned that Israel has not ruled out a preemptive strike against Iran, during a memorial service on Tuesday for those who fell in the 1973 Yom Kippur War.
“A preemptive strike is a difficult thing to do,” said Netanyahu. “I know that if Iran wants to base itself in the North, we are ready to fight them. This is a direct lesson of the Yom Kippur War. We will do everything in order to protect the State of Israel; we are not ruling out a preliminary strike.” “This is the power on our side,” added the prime minister. It is “the power that brought peace with Jordan, Egypt, agreements with the UAE and Bahrain. The power that will bring peace with additional states. The power and perseverance will allow us to handle the coronavirus crisis.”
While families across the country were prevented – due to the coronavirus lockdown – from visiting the graves of loved ones who fell in war, Netanyahu was joined at the state ceremony by President Reuven Rivlin, Defense Minister and Alternative Prime Minister Benny Gantz and Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kochavi at Mount Herzl in Jerusalem
“We embrace you from afar,” Rivlin told bereaved families.
Harking back to events of 47 years ago, Rivlin reflected on how swiftly synagogues had emptied as people spontaneously went to war. In the families of those who fought and fell in the Yom Kippur War, he said, there are already grandchildren and even great-grandchildren. Rivlin called the war a decisive victory “for which we paid a terrible price. The Yom Kippur War will remain with us forever.”Alluding to Israel’s lack of preparedness at the time, Rivlin cautioned that “we must always be alert to danger” and do something about threats before they become a reality.
Rivlin warned that the “surprise that was our lot” in the war must not be forgotten or repeated in health or the economy. “The surprise that was our lot in that war must not be forgotten and must not be repeated: not in security, but also not in health or in the economy,” he said.
“I fought in the killing fields of that terrible war, and here I am today,” Rivlin said. “Almost a jubilee later, and I well remember how we won that war. In the trenches, we fought shoulder to shoulder. No one checked to see if you had peyot folded under your helmet or if you were wearing your red pad [a symbol of the Histadrut]. We stormed together, knowing that if we did not rush forward, there might not be anywhere to return to. “Our national security requires a rebuilding of the contract between the public and its elected representatives, respect for the law and obedience to guidelines, and the reconciliation of the deep rifts among the people,” the president said. “We will wake up the day after the plague,” Rivlin said. “I do not know when [this day] will arrive, but it will arrive. And when it arrives we must make sure we wake up to it as brothers to each other, responsible for one another.”
“At this time we must be goal-oriented, and the goal is to defeat the virus – to defeat it!” he said. Gantz stressed during the service that the coronavirus caught Israel unprepared, similar to the Yom Kippur War: “We didn’t respond as was fit, but we will succeed this time as well.”

Turkish claims of PKK fighters in Armenia absolute nonsense: Armen Sarkissian
Ismaeel Naar, Al Arabiya English/Wednesday 30 September 2020
Turkish claims that there are Kurdish PKK fighters present in Armenia are absolute nonsense, according to Armenian President Armen Sarkissian. Turkey can invent or pretend that there are issues with Armenia. This is absolute nonsense that there are PKK fighters in Armenia. Absolute nonsense. They are also saying that Armenians are targeting the international oil and gas pipelines in Azerbaijan. Again, a nonsense,” Sarkissian told Al Arabiya during an exclusive interview. Armenia and Azerbaijan accused one another on Tuesday of firing directly into each other's territory and rejected pressure to hold peace talks as their conflict over the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh threatened to mushroom into all-out war. Nagorno-Karabakh is a breakaway region inside Azerbaijan but run by ethnic Armenians and backed by Armenia. It broke away from Azerbaijan in a 1990s war but is not recognized by any country as an independent republic. “First of all, when Azerbaijan is speaking about occupied territories, they are speaking about republic of Nagorno-Karabakh. This is an area of historic Armenia that Armenians were living for centuries and thousands of years,” Sarkissian said.
|It is only for less than 70 years, Joseph Stalin, the Soviet leader gave that land to Azerbaijan, it became a part of Soviet Azerbaijan. Then with the end of Soviet Union, people of Nagorno-Karabakh in that Soviet Republic, there were more than 85 percent, 90 percent Armenians living always,” the Armenian president added. Dozens of people have been reported killed and hundreds wounded since clashes between Azerbaijan and ethnic Armenian forces broke out on Sunday, threatening to draw in neighbors including Azerbaijan's close ally Turkey.
Armenian President Sarkissian further accused Turkey on Tuesday of sending mercenaries and generals to Azerbaijan, adding that all Turkish claims were mere excuses. “Turkey can pretend or declare there are PKK fighters, Armenians who want to hit the pipeline. These are all excuses to have their strong presence in Azerbaijan and I think that strong presence of Turkish military in Azerbaijan is another increasing threat to Armenia,” Sarkissian said.

Armenia Claims Turkish Jet Shot Down One of Its Warplanes
Agence France Presse/September 29/2020
Armenia said Tuesday that a Turkish F-16 fighter jet had shot down one of its SU-25 warplanes after taking off from Azerbaijan amid fierce clashes over the breakaway Nagorny Karabakh region. "An Armenian SU-25 aircraft has been shot down by a Turkish F-16 warplane... which flew from Azerbaijan's territory," Armenian defense ministry spokeswoman Shushan Stepanyan wrote on Facebook, adding that the "Armenian pilot has heroically died."

Iraqis decry insecurity at funerals of seven killed in anti-US attack in Baghdad
AFP/Tuesday 29 September 2020
Mourners hit out at Iraq’s government over insecurity Tuesday, during the funerals of five children and two women killed by a wayward rocket targeting US troops stationed at Baghdad airport.
Several among the hundreds of mourners in the village of Al-Bouchaabane, a few kilometers from Baghdad airport, told AFP that some of the children were killed by the rocket as they played in front of their home late on Monday.
“This village is like a microcosm of Iraq,” one mourner said. “If the government isn’t capable of protecting us, how can it ensure the security of Iraq as a whole?”
The latest attack targeting American interests – one of around 40 since early August, and many others stretching back months – comes after Washington threatened to close its embassy and withdraw its remaining 3,000 troops from Iraq, unless the attacks cease. The fatalities represent a new stage in the standoff between Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, a head of the country’s intelligence service long seen as close to Washington, and pro-Iran armed groups that are demanding US troops leave the country. The death toll – up from an initial five, after two children died of their wounds in hospital – place these armed factions in an uncomfortable position. The public has become increasingly worn down by years of violence and armed groups holding the country to ransom. Possibly anticipating a backlash, pro-Iran social media accounts that usually laud such rocket strikes were silent in the wake of this attack. Several high-ranking officials attended the funerals in a bid to provide reassurance, but several among the hundreds of Iraqis surrounding the coffins told AFP that they feel permanently unsafe. In front of the victims’ small home, dozens of tribal chiefs received condolences close to the crater left by the rocket. Shrapnel holes were visible in walls and blood on the ground.

US State Department says ‘outraged’ by rocket attack in Baghdad
Reuters/Tuesday 29 September 2020
The United States is “outraged” by Monday’s rocket attack in the Iraqi capital Baghdad that killed five civilians, US State Department said on Tuesday, urging Iraqi authorities to take immediate action to hold the perpetrators accountable.
“We have made the point before that the actions of lawless Iran-backed militias remains the single biggest deterrent tostability in Iraq,” Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said in a statement.
On Monday, the Iraqi army said that three Iraqi children and two women from the same family were killed when a rocket targeting Baghdad airport, where US troops are stationed, fell instead on their home.
The Trump administration has warned Iraq that it will close its embassy in Baghdad if the government does not take swift and decisive action to end persistent rocket and other attacks by Iranian-backed militias and rogue armed elements on American and allied interests in the country, US, Iraqi and other officials said Monday.
 

Joint statement by Canada and the United Kingdom on the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict
September 28, 2020 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Dominic Raab, Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom, today issued the following statement: “Canada and the UK are deeply concerned by reports of large scale military action along the Line of Contact in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone. Reports of shelling of settlements and civilian casualties are deeply concerning. We call for the immediate end of hostilities, respect for the ceasefire agreement, and the protection of civilians. “Any solution to this conflict must disavow violence and involve a peaceful, negotiated resolution through the framework provided by the OSCE’s Minsk process. We support the work of the OSCE’s Minsk Group and fully support the Co-Chairs statement of yesterday.”

Saudi Arabia says international community must take a firm stand towards Iran
Reuters/Tuesday 29 September 2020
Saudi Arabia’s Cabinet reiterated the Kingdom’s position that the international community must take a firm stand towards Iran, and deal seriously against its violations related to its nuclear program, the state news agency reported in a statement early on Wednesday.
During a Cabinet session chaired virtually by Saudi Arabia’s King Salman, the Council of Ministers discussed the recent efforts undertaken by the Presidency of State Security and its employees in following up and tracking down terror elements in the Kingdom. “His Excellency Dr. Majid bin Abdullah Al-Qasabi stated that the Council touched on a number of issues about the latest developments, on the regional and international arenas, reiterating the Kingdom’s affirmation during the General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency that the international community should take a firm stance towards Iran and seriously deal with its violations related to its nuclear program,” read a statement on the Saudi Press Agency. Saudi Arabia took down this month a terrorist cell that received training by the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) in Iran, arrested 10 individuals and seized weapons and explosives, the spokesman for the presidency of the State Security said on Monday. Saudi security authorities said weapons and explosives stored at a house and a farm were seized, but did not say where the raid or the arrests last week were carried out. “Competent authorities at the presidency thwarted a terrorist cell... whose elements received military and field training on how to make explosives, at the Revolutionary Guard’s sites in Iran,” the kingdom’s State Security Presidency said late Monday. “Security investigations revealed the elements’ identities as well as two sites used by the elements to store weapons and explosives,” it said in a statement carried on official media. It said that among the items seized were improvised explosive devices (IEDs), dozens of stun guns, kilos of gunpowder and a variety of rifles and pistols.

Arab World Mourns Kuwait Emir
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 29 September, 2020
Leaders across the Arab world mourned on Tuesday the passing of Emir of Kuwait Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Jaber al-Sabah.President of the United Arab Emirates Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan mourned the death of his “brother,” declaring three days of mourning in the country, starting Tuesday. Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan said the world lost a “man of wisdom, tolerance and peace. His historic stances in service of his nation, ummah and humanity will live on for generations to come.” Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa said Sheikh Sabah leaves behind a career of “giving and accomplishments in service of his people, nation and Arab and Islamic worlds.”Bahrain declared three days of mourning. Egyptian President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi offered his condolences to the people of Kuwait, saying the Arab and Islamic nation lost a “leader of the highest orders.” Organization of Islamic Cooperation Secretary-General Yousef bin Ahmad Al-Othaimeen condoled Kuwait over its loss, saying Sheikh Sabah was one of the Kuwaiti leaders who worked on achieving its prosperity and stability. “His wisdom and ability to give and persevere helped develop the country and consolidate its national unity,” he added. “His was the voice of wisdom and moderation,” Al-Othaimeen continued, saying that he enjoyed high standing among world leaders and his political and humanitarian stances attest to that. Sheikh Sabah passed away on Tuesday. The emir had been in hospital in the United States since July following surgery for an unspecified condition in Kuwait that same month. The Kuwait cabinet declared that he will be succeeded by Crown Prince Sheikh Nawaf al-Ahmad al-Sabah.

Trump Vowed to Remove Sudan from Terrorism List, Envoy Tells Asharq Al-Awsat
Washington - Muath al-Amri/Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 29 September, 2020
Noureddine Sati, Sudan’s ambassador to the United States, said he expected that an executive order would be issued by President Donald Trump to remove Sudan from the list of countries sponsoring terrorism.
“I asked Trump about removing Sudan from the list of terrorism, and I told him that we expect good relations to be established. The president replied that his administration would use all means to remove Sudan from the list of terrorism,” Sati told Asharq Al-Awsat in an interview on Monday.
According to Sati, the issuance of an executive order by Trump to remove Sudan from the list of states sponsoring terrorism should face no obstacles. This issue is not likely to face rejection in the Congress, he noted.
The ambassador, who became the representative of his country in Washington, after a diplomatic rift of 23 years, indicated that the events of Nairobi, Dar al-Salaam and other terrorist incidents, of which Sudan is accused “are almost settled, as the Sudanese government has indebted sums of money to compensate the families of the victims.” “However, the current dilemma lies in the US Congress’ insistence on involving Sudan in the September 11 attacks,” he underlined. The ambassador continued: “There are contradictory legal details, and the disagreement of the two major parties in the US over Sudan is the major problem. This is the difficulty we are facing now, but the embassy’s legal team is following carefully on the details of the matter.”Sati stressed that his country has made considerable progress in human rights issues, combating extremism and terrorism, religious freedoms, as well as achieving peace at home and abroad. Regarding the normalization of relations between Sudan and Israel, Sati said that economic and financial assistance to the country, along with its removal from the list of countries sponsoring terrorism, were all reasons to consider the establishment of ties. However, he emphasized that the economic, psychological, social, political and historical situation in the country “is not ready” for such a move. “We cannot engage in normalization with Israel while the people are suffering from all these difficulties; but if they provide us with economic assistance, the issue of normalization will be considered,” he stated.

Fatah Stresses Egypt’s Pivotal Role in Palestinian Reconciliation
Cairo - Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 29 September, 2020
A Fatah delegation discussed in Egypt the developments of the Palestinian reconciliation process, stressing Cairo’s “pivotal” role in achieving it, days after it concluded talks with Hamas in Turkey and Qatar. Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry received Fatah Secretary-General Jibril Rajoub, and committee member Rawhi Fattouh, at the Egyptian Foreign Ministry. A statement issued by the ministry reaffirmed Egypt's steadfast stance on the Palestinian cause. It reiterated Egypt's unwavering support for the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people aimed at establishing an independent Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital in accordance with international resolutions. The Ministry affirmed Egypt's support for all efforts to achieve stability, peace and security. Spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ahmed Hafez said in a statement that the officials conveyed Palestinian appreciation for Egypt’s unwavering support. They briefed Shoukry on the latest developments and efforts to unify Palestinians, emphasizing the centrality of Egypt’s role in achieving the reconciliation. Shoukry, in turn, stressed Egypt’s support to the Palestinian leadership and people during these delicate circumstances. Hamas politburo member Hossam Badran had clarified that the intra-Palestinian talks were hosted by Turkey, and not under its auspices. He expressed his appreciation and respect to all the sponsors of the previous dialogues, adding that Palestinians are keen on maintaining good relations with all Arab and Islamic countries. Most Arab countries have welcomed the Palestinian reconciliation and there was no official objection from any state, according to Badran. He reported that the aim is to hold elections, followed by the formation of a national unity government that includes all parties.
The official added that the elections are the first step towards forming the new National Council. Badran stressed that the Fatah-Hamas talks are not a substitute for a general national dialogue, indicating that any bilateral understanding can’t be implemented without the approval of all Palestinian factions.

US 'Outraged' by Baghdad Rocket Attack: Iran-Backed Militias Biggest Deterrent to Peace
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 29 September, 2020
The United States Department of State expressed on Tuesday its “outrage” at Monday’s rocket attack in Baghdad that killed civilians, including a mother and her children. “We express our condolences to the innocent Iraqi people and their families who were victims, once again, of these ruthless acts of violence,” it said in a statement. “The Iraqi people deserve to live in safety and security, so we call on Iraqi officials to take immediate action to hold the perpetrators accountable,” it demanded. “We have made the point before that the actions of lawless Iran-backed militias remain the single biggest deterrent to stability in Iraq,” it stressed. “These militias pose an unacceptable danger to everyone in Iraq, from diplomatic officials and facilities to Iraqi activists and families,” it added.
 

All eyes might be on the Temple Mount after the UAE-Israel deal
Douglas Altabef/The Jerusalem Post/September 29/2020
Part of the avowed rationale for the accords was to create enhanced access for all Muslims to worship at al-Aqsa Mosque.
When he dedicated the Temple he built on Mount Moriah, King Solomon prayed that God’s house would be a center of prayer for all the peoples of the world.
Now, in the wake of the recent Abraham Accords – the normalization agreement entered into by Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain – the possibility exists that Solomon’s aspiration could be recreated.
Part of the avowed rationale for the accords was to create enhanced access for all Muslims to worship at al-Aqsa Mosque. This was lofty, with humanitarian intent, and a realpolitik gesture designed to discredit both the reflex accusation that Jews were somehow attacking al-Aqsa and were “Judaizing Jerusalem.”
How might this Solomonic vision occur? Quite simply by having various Emirs and Imams from the Gulf countries come to the Temple Mount to pray. Well, a bit more than that.
It would be one thing, not terribly noteworthy, for these leaders to make a ceremonial appearance at al-Aqsa. That, of course, would be a validation and proof of the benefits accruing to Muslims for entering into the accords.
However, imagine now if those same leaders were to stand on the open spaces of the Temple Mount, alongside Jewish leaders, religious and political, to pray together.
Putting aside the exact choreography and logistics, the thought and the image are nothing short of breathtaking. Talk about beating swords into plowshares! The reality of Muslims praying alongside Jews sends an unmistakable message of reconciliation and harmony that should thrill every person who is interested in peace. A logical question would likely be why this would happen in the first place. To answer that, we must first and foremost remember that this is the Middle East, where few things are straightforward or as they seem.
In that regard, we have to see the same combination of lofty intent and hard bitten political considerations operating here, as they do in the statements mentioned above about Muslims being free to worship at al-Aqsa.
Politically, each side gets to use the other for its purposes, and each side knows and approves that the other is doing so. As such, there are parallel motivations, but they both involve sticking a finger in the eye of the Wakf Islamic religious trust, and by extension the Jordanian rulers, the Hashemites.
The more historically interesting story concerns the Emirati motivations. Here we are dealing with “inside the Beltway” Muslim political/theological infighting that has been going on for more than 1,300 years.
THE ISSUE is the relative primacy of Mecca and Jerusalem for Muslims. It is well known that Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran, and its significance is based on various Hadiths, commentaries, that retrospectively grant Jerusalem significance.
The historic motivation for granting Jerusalem significance came from the Umayyad Caliphate, based in Damascus, which was involved in a primacy struggle with the leadership in Mecca. Elevating Jerusalem became a way to elevate the Umayyads in their quest to be seen as the rightful inheritors of Muhammad’s mantle.This elevation involved not only building both the Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock shrine, but in accordance with the Aqsa interpretative significance as the “furthest mosque,” one on par with the mosque in Mecca.
So there has been rivalry and some bad blood all these millennia about this, and now in a deliciously ironic twist, the Emiratis – on behalf of their cousins, the Saudis – get to strike a blow against their longtime rivals, the Hashemites of Jordan. Simply stated, by standing on the Temple Mount and praying alongside Jews, these Muslims are sending the unmistakable message to the Muslim cognoscenti of “Look. Would we EVER allow Jews to pray in the Kaaba? Or even to show up there? Of course not. Why? Because the Kaaba is of supreme holiness.”Supreme also means greater – as in greater than Jerusalem, greater than the province of the Hashemites.
So interfaith prayer not only sends a great message of tolerance to the world, but also clearly orders intra-Muslim theological priorities. For the Jews, prayer with the Muslims by definition means that Jews themselves are actually praying on the Temple Mount. This strikes an enormous blow against the Wakf-demanded and imposed status quo of no Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount. DOES ANYONE think for a second our prime minister, a vocal defender of the status quo, would decline to worship alongside Emirati leaders on the Temple Mount? Of course not. And would the Wakf or the Jordanians dare take him to task?For reasons of their own concern, Emirati leaders would help normalize the Jewish presence on the mount, and not only tolerate, but also participate in Jewish prayer. And with such a hecsher (the kosher stamp), the status of Jewish prayer on the mount might just be permanently altered.
The response to all of this might be that I have just spun a fanciful scenario replete with wishful thinking. Perhaps, but couldn’t the same be said two years ago about the Abraham Accords themselves? We are living in a time of tectonic shifts, both good and bad. The shift that I envision and hope for would be profoundly positive. King Solomon would be tickled pink to look down and see it all play out.
*The writer is the chairman of the board of Im Tirtzu and a board member of The Israel Independence Fund. He can be reached at dougaltabef@gmail.com.

Nissan Employee Testifies against American on Trial in Japan
Associated Press/September 29/2020
A Nissan employee testified Tuesday that he worked with another former Nissan executive, American Greg Kelly to find ways to pay the automaker's former chairman, Carlos Ghosn without fully disclosing his compensation.
Toshiaki Ohnuma, a star witnesses for the prosecution, described to the Tokyo District Court his job in human resources at Nissan Motor Co., where he said he handled executive compensation matters, including working with Kelly on finding ways to pay Ghosn without disclosing it.
Disclosing annual executive pay over 100 million yen (about $1 million) became a requirement in Japan from 2010. Ghosn had been getting about 10 times that. Japanese executives who get giant paychecks are rare, and Nissan was leery of public criticism over the issue. After 2014, Kelly handed over his duties dealing with pay to another Nissan executive, Hari Nada, Ohnuma said. Nada also is scheduled to be a witness for the prosecution.
"There was decided paid compensation for Mr. Ghosn but also unpaid compensation," a gray-suited Ohnuma, wearing a mask for the pandemic, told the court solemnly. He referred to Ghosn as "Ghosn-san," adding the Japanese honorific. "We worked together to consider how to avoid disclosure of the unpaid compensation," Ohnuma said of his work with Kelly. Kelly, a former Nissan executive vice president, is the only person to stand trial in what prosecutors have portrayed as a systematic plot to under-report Ghosn's compensation.
He has been charged with under-reporting Ghosn's compensation by 9.3 billion yen ($88 million) over several years. Ohnuma said he has worked at Nissan since 1982. He was the company's general manager from 2007 through March 2019.
Ghosn was arrested and charged with Kelly in November 2018. Ghosn jumped bail late last year and escaped to Lebanon, a nation that has no extradition treaty with Japan. Both Ghosn and Kelly say they are innocent.
In a statement as the trial opened earlier this month, Kelly stressed that the compensation plans were intended to be a legal way to keep Ghosn at Nissan. Famous for leading Nissan's turnaround in the late 1990s, Ghosn might have opted for other high-paying jobs.
The prosecutors for the case have told the court that a deal was made with Ohnuma and Nada. In a recent briefing to reporters, Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hiroshi Yamamoto declined comment on that, saying such deals don't have to be made public. "The prosecutors have properly charged those who needed to be charged," Yamamoto told reporters. Yokohama-based Nissan as a company was charged and pleaded guilty. It is being tried with Kelly in the same court.
The trial is expected to last about a year.
Earlier, prosecutors outlined how several people at Nissan were involved in promising Ghosn pay, exploring various methods, such as stock options, pay through overseas companies and consulting fees.
Prosecutors have not explained how trying to avoid disclosure of unpaid compensation constitutes a crime. Prosecution for falsifying financial reports is rare in Japan. The maximum penalty for Kelly, if convicted, given the multiple counts of the same charge he faces, is up to 15 years in prison or 80 million yen ($755,000) in fines, or both. The conviction rate in Japan is higher than 99%. Some members of Japan's business community have expressed alarm over the trial. Jacques Deguest, an expert on Japanese business and law, denounced it as unfair, calling it a "witch hunt," with Kelly getting singled out.
"This is dangerous for the attractiveness of Japan both for recruiting talent as well as doing business in Japan," said Deguest, who is also a consultant.
"Japan would have been better showing to the world a fair trial with all responsible people treated the same way."
 

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 29-30/2020

Trump Team Weighs New Sanctions on Iran’s Financial Sector
Nick Wadhams and Saleha Mohsin/September 29/2020
The Trump administration is considering fresh sanctions to sever Iran’s economy from the outside world except in limited circumstances, by targeting more than a dozen banks and labeling the entire financial sector off-limits, three people familiar with the matter said.
The move would effectively leave Iran -- which has seen its economy crushed by the loss of oil sales and most other trade thanks to existing American restrictions -- isolated from the global financial system, slashing the few remaining legal linkages it has and making it more dependent on informal or illicit trade.
The proposed sanctions would have two objectives, according to the people, who asked not to be identified discussing internal deliberations: close one of the few remaining financial loopholes allowing Iran’s government to earn revenue, and stymie Democrat Joe Biden’s promise to re-enter a 2015 nuclear deal if he wins the presidency in November.
The proposal is still under review and hasn’t been sent to President Donald Trump.
Under the plan, the administration would designate the Iranian financial sector under Executive Order 13902, which Trump signed in January to clamp down on mining, construction and other industries. That would not only affect banks, but also remittance processors, money-changers and the informal transfer system used frequently in the Muslim world known as hawala.
Then the administration would blacklist roughly 14 banks in Iran that have so far escaped some U.S. restrictions, under authorities designed to punish entities associated with terrorism, ballistic-missile development and human-rights abuses.
Why U.S., Other Powers Differ on Iran Nuclear Deal: QuickTake
The sanctions under consideration initially got a chilly reception from several Trump officials for fear they could complicate the provision of international humanitarian assistance to Iran, which has been hard hit by the Covid-19 outbreak and existing U.S. sanctions. But they’ve since gained more support amid a broad push from hardliners inside and outside the administration and a belief that it would be possible to mitigate the humanitarian costs, chiefly through so-called comfort letters from the Treasury Department, the people said.
A spokesperson from the Treasury Department declined to comment, as did press officials from the National Security Council and the State Department.
Iran has continued to do business with several countries including China and the United Arab Emirates, with total non-oil foreign trade reaching $24.6 billion in March-August, according to the country’s customs administration.
Venezuela and Iran Resist U.S. Sanctions With Fuel Flotilla
The country has drawn additional U.S. anger for sending gasoline and fuel additives to Venezuela, another U.S. adversary, in exchange for gold. In August, the U.S. seized the cargoes of four vessels carrying 1.1 million barrels of Iranian gasoline ostensibly headed for Venezuela. Another three tankers carrying hundreds of thousands of barrels of Iranian fuel were headed for Venezuela on Monday, ship-tracking data compiled by Bloomberg show.
Mark Dubowitz, the chief executive of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who has closely advised the Trump administration on Iran policy, floated the idea in an Aug. 25 editorial in the Wall Street Journal, arguing that protections already exist for humanitarian aid. Republican Senators Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton, who have helped push Trump to take some of the harshest actions against Iran so far, are also in favor.
How Iran’s Virus Fight Is Tied to Struggle With U.S.: QuickTake
“It has a major chilling effect on any financial entities considering doing business with Iran,” Dubowitz said in an interview. “This action would turn Iran’s financial sector radioactive.”
The move has an additional goal: embed sanctions on Iran now so that if Biden wins the election he will find it much harder to re-enter the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA. The JCPOA in 2015 gave Iran sanctions relief in exchange for limits on its nuclear program. Trump left the pact in 2018 and has reimposed a raft of sanctions, but Biden has said he would look to re-enter some sort of deal if he wins.
In a Sept. 13 CNN editorial, Biden said he would re-enter the agreement provided Iran also returned to compliance. He called the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran a failure and said the nation is closer to a nuclear weapon now than it was when Trump came to office -- despite a series of sanctions that choked its oil exports and other sectors, along with individuals.
Advocates for the new sanctions argue that the measures would be difficult to unwind because a Biden administration would need to show that Iran was no longer doing work connected to missile proliferation or terrorism. The sanctions would also add to reluctance from companies looking to weigh the risks of doing business with Iran against any potential gains.
U.S. Issues New Iran Sanctions as Others Reject Move at UN
Critics of the hardline approach say Iran is already so heavily sanctioned that one more set of restrictions won’t make much difference. Indeed, the administration introduces new sanctions against Iran on a near daily basis, including Thursday, when the Treasury Department designated two Iranian judges under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.
Despite all those moves, the Iranian regime has so far remained defiant and refused to meet with Trump officials. The U.S. has also grown increasingly isolated at the United Nations Security Council, where 13 of 14 other countries on the panel -- including several U.S. allies -- have rejected its bid to reimpose, or snap back, restrictions targeting Iran’s nuclear program.
“I’m very skeptical that there’s anything they could do at this stage that would change perceptions,” said Jarrett Blanc, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former State Department coordinator for Iran nuclear implementation under President Barack Obama. “If Joe Biden believes that it’s in the U.S. national interest to return to the JCPOA and the sanctions posture that implies, he’ll do it.”
Blanc said the remaining Iranian banks are still important for humanitarian operations and the amount of unsanctioned trade taking place is too small to make much of a difference to Iran’s economy.
‘Malign Activities’
The new proposal has also been taken up by Republican lawmakers who believe the best way to get them passed is by appealing directly to Trump. In a Sept. 17 letter, Cruz, Cotton and four other senators urged Trump to impose the sanctions and cut the banks off from the SWIFT financial messaging system. A group of 57 Congressmen followed with a near identical letter on Thursday.
“Iran’s desperate economic circumstances provide a critical opportunity for the United States to force the regime to abandon its malign activities and return to the negotiating table on your terms,” both letters said.
— With assistance by David Wainer
A U.S. proposal to almost totally sever Iran from the global financial system could sharply hinder its ability to secure supplies of food and drugs as it struggles to contain a resurgence of the worst coronavirus outbreak in the Middle East.
The Trump administration is considering targeting more than a dozen banks and labeling Iran’s entire financial sector off limits, three people familiar with the matter said on Monday. That would escalate Washington’s unsuccessful efforts to force Iran into new negotiations over its nuclear program and activities in the region, two years after the U.S. left a landmark 2015 deal and reimposed sweeping sanctions, including on vital oil exports.
“I really don’t know what to say. Access to money will definitely get even harder for us,” said Seyed Abdolreza Hejazi Farahmand, chief executive officer of Tehran-based Behestan Plasma PJS Co., which produces plasma-derived products for hemophiliacs.
Under the plan, the administration would blacklist roughly 14 banks in Iran that have so far escaped U.S. restrictions, under authorities designed to punish entities associated with terrorism, ballistic-missile development and human-rights abuses. The proposal is still under review and hasn’t been sent to President Donald Trump.
Included in the list are Saman Bank and Middle East Bank, the two remaining lenders still able to import food and pharmaceuticals into Iran. Officials at the banks, and the Central Bank of Iran, weren’t immediately available for comment.
Drug and medical supply companies in Iran are now weighing the possibility that the proposed new penalties would all but paralyze their work. That could leave companies increasingly dependent on a small network of informal money changers overseas who can execute financial transfers but who might also find themselves in Trump’s crosshairs under the new sanctions.
“So they want to completely suffocate us. Iran will be completely crushed and many people will suffer,” said Sara, a 33-year-old employee at a pharmaceutical company based in Tehran who didn’t want to be identified because of the sensitivity of speaking with foreign media.
The U.S. State Department says that humanitarian goods are exempt from current sanctions. Yet years of punitive measures imposed by the United Nations and now unilaterally by Washington have turned Iran into a pariah for most foreign banks and companies, with executives wary of infringing penalties.
Iran makes many of its drugs through a relatively sophisticated pharmaceutical research and production sector. But specialist treatments such as those for cancer or donor transplants often rely on imports. Iran reported 3,677 new cases of coronavirus on Tuesday, the second-highest daily number since the outbreak erupted in February. The death toll reached 25,986.
Venezuela Gasoline
Last year, pharmaceutical purchases from the European Union were down 15% from 2016, according to the European Commission. U.S. shipments of mostly non-sanctioned humanitarian goods dropped to $3.9 million in February -- a drop of 88% from four years earlier.
Tehran has sought to bypass sanctions, and in June the Foreign Ministry unveiled an agreement to import medical supplies from South Korea in lieu of $7 billion it owed Iran for oil. The only shipment so far announced amounted to $500,000.
Both the EU and Switzerland have tried to improve Iran’s access to non-sanctioned goods using their own trade channels, but both efforts have only managed to deliver tiny volumes of goods to Iran over the past two years.
Hardliners inside and outside the U.S. administration believe that it would be possible to mitigate the humanitarian costs of the new sanctions, chiefly through so-called comfort letters from the Treasury Department, the people said. The letters could assure banks they wouldn’t be penalized for facilitating a particular trade.
Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, who works on Iran business diplomacy and is the founder of the Bourse&Bazaar website, dismissed the idea as “hot air.”
“The proponents of this strategy are referring to those and the Swiss channel as their excuse for going forward with this incredibly maximalist and dangerous approach but they are not viable,” he said.
When Trump’s first round of banking sanctions in 2018 targeted Parsian Bank, one of the biggest commercial lenders that executed humanitarian trade, food and pharmaceutical companies had to quickly find alternatives such as Saman and MEB, Batmanghelidj said.
“If the whole sector is designated at once like this, it’s going to be very difficult for these companies to find new financial channels,” he said.
Iran has continued to do business with several countries including China and the United Arab Emirates, with total non-oil foreign trade reaching $24.6 billion in March-August, according to the country’s customs administration.
It has also drawn additional U.S. anger for sending gasoline and fuel additives to Venezuela, another U.S. adversary, in exchange for gold. On Tuesday, Iranian state TV said the first of three fuel tankers carrying gasoline for the Latin American nation had arrived.

America’s military deserves timely funding from Congress
Bradley Bowman and Maj Scott D. Adamson/FDD/September 29/2020
As the federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, the Department of Defense once again does not have an on-time authorization or full-year defense appropriation from Congress. Sadly, the use of so-called continuing resolutions has become the norm, but this approach imposes significant costs on U.S. service members and American national security.
The importance of passing the annual defense appropriation and National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is clear. Unfortunately, over the last decade, there is but a single instance in which Congress passed both before the start of the fiscal year. Congress has instead enacted continuing resolutions, which essentially copy and paste the previous year’s defense appropriation.
From fiscal year 2010 to 2019, CRs lasted on average 119 days.
During the last presidential election year, the NDAA was enacted in December, but the defense appropriation did not become law until the following May. The delay in the latter drove the DoD to operate under a CR for 217 days — roughly 60 percent of the fiscal year.
Congress’ increasingly routine reliance on CRs disregards emerging and time-sensitive Pentagon requirements and priorities. In turn, this leads to misalignment of funds, delays in modernization, and substantive decreases in buying power. Further, CRs leave defense suppliers in the dark, imposing inefficiencies and delaying vital programs.
If Congress wants to minimize program delays that are often the subject of heated congressional hearing questions, passing the NDAA and defense appropriation on time would help. After all, new programs cannot start without congressional approval that CRs usually don’t provide.
While these negative effects impact all of the services, consider the impacts of a CR on the U.S. Air Force’s ongoing operations and modernization efforts.
Should the service experience a six-month CR, it would impact 17 new starts, six production increases, and eight military construction (MILCON) projects. Notably among these are the E-11A aircraft, MH-139 helicopter, and three infrastructure projects at Tinian.
The E-11A, with Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN), enables persistent communications capability in areas where variable terrain or lacking infrastructure precludes it. The aircraft is critical to austere combat operations.
With the fleet down to three after suffering a fatal crash in January, the U.S. Air Force will be delayed in meeting increasing demands for the aircraft. This leaves U.S. forces more exposed to enemy attack in areas where communications are degraded.
The MH-139 Grey Wolf represents another critical air asset that would be delayed.
Set to replace the aging UH-1N in patrolling America’s missile fields associated with the land-based leg of the nuclear triad, the new helicopter brings better speed, range, and capacity. A CR would delay U.S. Air Force plans to procure the first eight for recapitalization efforts, and keep in place response time waivers associated with the older, slower Huey.
Finally, under a six-month CR, the U.S. Air Force would be unable to fully execute MILCON projects intended to build vital infrastructure on the strategically located Pacific island of Tinian. Delays to this construction would impede U.S. Indo-Pacific Command’s shift to a more distributed posture necessary to protect U.S. troops and deter Beijing.
As the People’s Liberation Army continues to act with an aggressive sense of urgency, a major delay in these U.S. projects would also send an unhelpful message regarding America’s commitment to the region.
Extending a CR for the duration of fiscal year 2021 would be particularly damaging. For the U.S. Air Force, it would mean delays to an additional 31 new starts, one production increase, and nine MILCON projects. And the service would lose roughly $900 million in buying power.
Halting the MILCON alone would set back fielding of key weapon systems to include the F-35, F-16, and Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD). The U.S. Air Force stated in justification documents that without the GBSD facility, “the deployment of a weapon system vital to the defense and security of the United States and its allies could be delayed.”
Viewed opposite China’s pursuit to double its nuclear warhead stockpile, stalling the aged Minuteman III’s replacement is unwise. This is especially true when considering that nuclear deterrence “underwrites every U.S. military operation around the world,” as the commander of U.S. Strategic Command put it.
As threats grow, yet another long-term CR would erode the U.S. Air Force’s combat capability, as well as its ability to conduct assigned missions and defend the nation.
The Department of Defense cannot compete effectively with China and Russia and cannot defend against serious continuing threats from Iran, North Korea, and terrorist organizations without the support of Congress. That support should start with an on-time defense authorization and appropriation each fiscal year.
*Bradley Bowman is senior director for the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where U.S. Air Force Maj. Scott Adamson is a visiting military analyst. Bowman previously served as a national security adviser in the Senate. The views expressed or implied in this commentary are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Air Force or any other U.S. government agency. Follow Bradley on Twitter @Brad_L_Bowman.

UAE-Israel Treaty Is Far Larger Step Towards Peace Than Critics Allege
Orde Kittrie/The National Interest/September 29/2020
No deal is perfect, but any improvement should not be downplayed when it makes the volatile Middle East more peaceful and win-win.
Criticism of Israel’s treaty with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been relentless. The New York Times’ Roger Cohen calls it “Trump’s Middle Eastern Mirage” and “something rotten.” A Washington Post oped calls it “a big step – in the wrong direction.” Reporting by Bloomberg describes the deal as “thin.” Middle East analyst Daniel Levy writes that the agreement is merely “the codification of an existing reality” which does “nothing by way of advancing peace in any arena.” They are wrong.
The “Treaty of Peace, Diplomatic Relations and Full Normalization Between the United Arab Emirates and the State of Israel” is a robust, legally binding peace treaty that represents a strategic pivot by the UAE. The UAE-Israel Peace Treaty commits the two countries to a relationship far warmer—and with far more intensive cooperation in economic, scientific, and social fields—than the cold peace Israel has with Egypt and Jordan (outside the security field).
The UAE’s pivot will facilitate peace between Israel and the Palestinians by showing that Arab governments and their citizens benefit more by partnering with Israel than by seeking to isolate or dismantle it. In addition, by demonstrating lost Arab League support for maximalist positions, the treaty will hopefully encourage the Palestinians to adjust their demands and accept a compromise two-state solution such as those which they rejected in the Olmert Plan of 2008 and the Clinton Plan of 2000.
In the treaty, the UAE departs in several ways from its past adherence to Arab League positions regarding Israel. Until August 29, the UAE formally participated in the League’s efforts to strangle Israel economically (through primary boycotts), of American and other firms that do business with Israel through (secondary boycotts), and of U.S. and other firms that do business with Israel (tertiary boycotts).
The UAE was included as recently as July on the U.S. Treasury’s list of countries requiring cooperation with an international boycott. Although the UAE announced in 1996 that it would enforce only the primary boycott, U.S. firms had as of August 2020 reportedly “continued to receive . . . secondary and tertiary boycott requests from the UAE.”
In contrast, the visionary UAE-Israel Peace Treaty commits the two countries “to chart together a new path to unlock the vast potential of their countries and of the region.” It declares their “shared belief that the establishment of peace and full normalization between them can help transform the Middle East by spurring economic growth, enhancing technological innovation and forging closer people-to-people relations.” In negotiating terminology, the treaty seeks to expand the pie, transforming Arab-Israeli relations from the current zero-sum conflict into win-win cooperation to achieve mutually beneficial peace and prosperity.
The Bahrain-Israel declaration signed the same day declares a similar vision but is not a treaty and is far briefer, presumably because the Bahraini breakthrough occurred just before the ceremony. A more detailed agreement will presumably follow.
The UAE-Israel Peace Treaty seeks to implement its soaring rhetoric with a remarkable list of fields in which the two countries “shall conclude bilateral agreements… at the earliest practicable date.” These include agriculture, aviation, culture, education, energy, environment, finance, healthcare, innovation, investment, “peaceful uses of outer-space,” “research and academic institutions” cooperation, science, sport, telecommunications, tourism, trade, and water.
The UAE and Israel also commit, including in the treaty’s title, to “full normalization” of relations between them. “Normalization” has a specific meaning in the Middle East. Driven by Palestinians and their supporters, many Arab states maintain “anti-normalization” laws and policies that harshly punish any citizens and residents who engage in people-to-people relations with Israelis. The punishments include imprisonment and revocation of citizenship. These anti-normalization efforts remain so problematic that they are the subject of a bill introduced in August 2020 by Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Rob Portman (R-OH).In sharp contrast with anti-normalization efforts, the UAE and Israel agreed to “forging closer people-to-people relations” and “cultivating people-to-people programs…and cultural, academic, youth, scientific and other exchanges between their peoples.”
The treaty also diverges from the traditional litany of Arab League prerequisites for even a cold peace with Israel. It does not include an Israeli commitment to refrain from annexation, despite press reports that such a commitment was central to the deal. Also, in a stark departure from the Arab Peace Initiative (API) which since 2002 has represented the Arab League’s minimum requirement for peace with Israel, the agreement makes no mention of the API, of Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967, of a Palestinian state, or of Palestinian refugees (let alone any “right of return”).
Nor does the treaty mention UN Security Council Resolution 242, which was referenced in the API, the Israel-Egypt and Israel-Jordan peace treaties, and ritualistically elsewhere for decades as the agreed international formula for resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict: Israel is to trade occupied territory for Arab peace commitments. Instead, the agreement offers a more flexible formula for peace, “a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that meets the legitimate needs and aspirations of both peoples.”
The UAE’s commitment to sweeping government to government cooperation with Israel, close people-to-people relations with Israelis, and other stark departures from the zero-sum Palestinian agenda represent a remarkable strategic pivot. The UAE’s pivot, and that of Bahrain, will hopefully spark a long-overdue peaceful revolution in relations between Israel and the rest of the Arab world, including the Palestinians. The entire region would benefit from following the UAE’s lead and transforming Arab-Israeli relations from unproductive conflict to fruitful cooperation.
*Orde Kittrie is senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and law professor at Arizona State University. He previously served for ten years as a U.S. State Department attorney. Follow him on Twitter @OrdeFK.

Trudeau Fails Canadian-Iranians
Alireza Nader/FDD/September 29/2020
Recent developments confirm that Canada has become a major hub for the Islamic Republic in Iran and its supporters, and perhaps an unsafe place for Canadian-Iranian democracy activists. On January 8, 2020, the regime shot down Ukraine Airliner Flight 752, resulting in the death of 57 Canadian-Iranians and 119 others. Despite receiving promises of justice from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government, victims’ families have instead experienced threats and intimidation by the regime and its supporters within Canada, while Ottawa continues a fruitless policy of engagement with Tehran. Other Canadian-Iranians have been openly and publicly threatened with physical harm by regime sympathizers in Toronto.
Canadian-Iranians have been warning their government about the regime’s growing presence on Canadian soil, yet their warnings appear to have fallen on deaf ears. Instead, Ottawa has chosen to look the other way as pro-regime Canadian-Iranians invest their wealth in the Canadian economy and potentially boost the Liberal party.
Canada is a top refuge for regime officials and supporters. According to Canadian-Iranian democracy activists interviewed by the author (and confirmed by public reporting), many regime officials and associates have laundered billions of dollars from Iran to Canada, bought expensive property, and settled into comfortable lives in cities such as Toronto and Vancouver. Many Iranian currency exchanges in Toronto and elsewhere facilitate the laundering of money between Iran and Canada.
Who are these regime supporters? One example is the former chairman of Bank Melli Iran, Mahmoud Reza Khavari, who flew to Canada after embezzling $2.6 billion from Iran. Canada has allowed Khavari to settle in the country; he now lives comfortably in Toronto with his family and operates several businesses, including five restaurants.
His case is not the only one. Several activists interviewed by the author state that Iranians with connections to the regime’s intelligence services live openly and often luxuriously in Canada and even travel to Iran.
Regime officials and sympathizers appear confident about their presence in Canada. For example, this year’s Shi’a religious Ashura ceremony in Toronto featured regime supporters openly threatening Canadian-Iranian democracy activists, with one man expressing vocal support for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei while threatening activists with action by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Other public events have included open support for regime officials, such as the notorious IRGC General Qassem Soleimani, assassinated by U.S. forces in January, 2020.
You are not safe from the Islamic Republic anywhere. That is a message Canadian-Iranians have received from Tehran and, in a way, from Ottawa as well. The vast majority of Canadian-Iranians have escaped a brutal regime in Iran only to be confronted by an insidious and well-established regime network in Canada.
Why won’t the Trudeau government act? Perhaps the billions of dollars in investment from regime elements outweigh the concerns of the larger Canadian-Iranian community and pro-democracy activists.
Trudeau has demanded answers from Tehran regarding the destruction of Flight 752, yet he is reluctant to apply any meaningful pressure against the regime, making his promises appear empty to Canadian-Iranians. Actions speak louder than words, and so far Canadian-Iranians have been offered only the latter.
Trudeau could have chosen to be on the right side of history by designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization and investigating regime networks in his country. But his abandonment of Canadian-Iranians is likely to become a stain on his legacy, especially if the regime in Iran falls. Canadian-Iranians, one of the most successful immigrant populations, are likely to remember those who stood beside them and those who ignored their plight in their hour of need.
*Alireza Nader is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), where he also contributes to FDD’s Iran Program. For more analysis from Alireza and the Iran Program, please subscribe HERE. Follow Alireza on Twitter @AlirezaNader. Follow FDD on Twitter @FDD and @FDD_Iran. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

China Says Killing Americans over Taiwan is 'Morally Justified'
Gordon G. Chang/Gatestone Institute/September 29/2020
Beijing is sending aircraft near Taiwan "almost every day" and directing them to approach in all four directions.
"Hu Xijin is not just urging China to commence a war to murder millions of Taiwanese, he wants China to be able to kill millions of Americans as well." — Richard D. Fisher, Jr., military analyst and senior fellow at the Virginia-based International Assessment and Strategy Center, Taipei Times, September 21, 2020. China's ruler, therefore, needs something to distract restive Chinese people as well as unhappy senior leaders. We may think that Xi Jinping should be cautious, but from where he stands, he now has incentives to start a crisis, especially if he thinks President Trump, seeking re-election, will not respond.
China has been sending large numbers of fighter aircraft and bombers into Taiwan's airspace this month. At the same time, China's ruling Communist Party is issuing threats. "They are rehearsals on taking over Taiwan," the Communist Party's Global Times newspaper stated in an editorial. Last month, the message was directed at Washington. While U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar visited Taiwan's capital, Taipei, China ordered aircraft to fly near the island. Pictured: Azar speaks at the Presidential Office in Taipei on August 10, 2020. China, violating previous understandings, has been sending large numbers of fighter aircraft and bombers into Taiwan's airspace this month.
At the same time, China's ruling Communist Party is issuing threats. The flights of military aircraft are not warnings, the Communist Party's Global Times newspaper stated in an editorial on September 18. "They are rehearsals on taking over Taiwan. What is needed is a political reason that can turn them into real battle to smash Taiwan independence forces." Fortunately, bad weather is coming. The November-through-January period is not conducive to conducting invasions across the Taiwan Strait. Nonetheless, China is clearly gearing itself for war.
Beijing calls the island "sacred" Chinese territory, but Taiwan has never been part of communist China, the "People's Republic." In fact, Taiwan has never been formally recognized as part of any Chinese state. People on the island, in survey after survey, overwhelming consider themselves "Taiwanese," not "Chinese."
Beijing nevertheless insists it has sovereignty over Taiwan, which formally calls itself the Republic of China. The People's Republic has been sending planes near Taiwan's territory to make a point.
Last month, the message was directed at Washington. While U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar visited Taiwan's capital, Taipei, China ordered aircraft to fly near the island.
This month, China's incursions have been larger. On the September 18, Beijing sent 18 aircraft across the median line, which divides the Taiwan Strait in two. The following day, 19 Chinese aircraft, including nuclear-capable H-6 bombers, flew into Taiwan airspace. The Chinese military in the past has flown H-6s on provocative "island encirclement patrols." The large incursions on the 18th were especially significant. A Chinese fighter pilot got on the radio to deny that there was a median line, which for years both sides had respected to avoid accidental contact. The pilot, breaking practice, also made a political statement, calling Taiwan a "pawn" of "foreign forces."
Analysts wondered whether the belligerent transmissions were authorized or just the act of a rogue pilot. They did not have to wait long to find out. On September 21, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin announced "there is no so-called center line in the Taiwan Strait."
Since then, the situation has deteriorated. When U.S. Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Keith Krach visited the island to attend the memorial service for former Taiwanese president Lee Teng-hui, known in China as the "godfather of Taiwan secessionism" and everywhere else as "Mr. Democracy," China's planes again flew to Taiwan's side of the median line.
Now, Beijing is sending aircraft near Taiwan "almost every day" and directing them to approach in all four directions.
At the same time, the Chinese are ramping up the rhetoric. "The U.S. and Taiwan must not misjudge the situation, or believe the exercise is a bluff," stated the same Global Times editorial. "Should they continue to make provocations, a war will inevitably break out."
"Deployment of the U.S. army to Taiwan means the start of a cross-Straits war," another editorial from the paper announced.
Ominously, Hu Xijin, the Global Times editor, wrote that China is "morally justified" to wage war on Taiwan.
"Hu Xijin is not just urging China to commence a war to murder millions of Taiwanese, he wants China to be able to kill millions of Americans as well," wrote China military analyst Richard Fisher in the Taipei Times on September 21.
Fisher, a senior fellow of the Virginia-based International Assessment and Strategy Center, told Gatestone on September 26 that Beijing "may not just yet have the overall ability to invade Taiwan," but it is "repeating dangerous military exercises" to "terrorize" Taiwan and "frighten" America.
In short, the Chinese leadership, by sending aircraft close to Taiwan, is risking an incident. In addition, as Beijing increases the chances of an encounter it is, with propaganda releases, justifying taking lives.
Why now?
One explanation is that China's leader needs a victory fast. The People's Liberation Army grabbed Indian territory in early May in Ladakh in the Himalayas while India's troops were unprepared for the surprise attack. Since late August, India has recovered lost ground and, in the process, humiliated the Chinese, who have proved incapable of counterattacking. The prospect of further advances against fierce Indian troops is not high.
Especially after India, Xi Jinping looks exposed politically. Since becoming the Communist Party's general secretary in late 2012, he has accumulated almost unprecedented power, so he now has complete accountability. There is, inconveniently for him, no one else to blame for debacles. Furthermore, he has changed China's political system by raising the costs of failure.
Xi, therefore, knows that should he fail, he could lose everything — power, freedom, assets, life.
The legitimacy of the Communist Party once depended on the continual delivery of prosperity. Now, however, Xi knows his economy, facing a wave of defaulting banks and enterprises, is stumbling. His society is also beset by a host of other problems from disease and environmental degradation, and declining demography. China, at the same time, is losing support around the world.
This is the classic case of an aggressive power facing a closing window of opportunity. China's official Xinhua News Agency in January ran a piece titled "Xi Stresses Racing Against Time to Reach Chinese Dream."
In these perilous circumstances for the Communist Party, its only sure basis of legitimacy is nationalism. Nationalism, as a practical matter, means military misadventure abroad.
China's ruler, therefore, needs something to distract restive Chinese people as well as unhappy senior leaders. We may think that Xi Jinping should be cautious, but from where he stands, he now has incentives to start a crisis, especially if he thinks President Trump, seeking re-election, will not respond.
That crisis, at least at this moment, looks as if it is going to be over Taiwan.
*Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China, a Gatestone Institute Distinguished Senior Fellow, and member of its Advisory Board.
© 2020 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.

Nasser Died Fifty Years Ago He Lives on in Egypt
Daniel Pipes/Washington Times/September 29/2020
Gamal Abdel Nasser, the charismatic ruler of Egypt, died 50 years ago today. During his eighteen years in power, 1952-70, he dominated the Middle East and, even now, he remains an intense topic of interest.
Beirut's "Al-Akhbar" announced on Sep. 24 that "A Half-Century after His Passing ... Gamal Abdel Nasser Is the Future."
According to Google's Ngram, the word "Nasserist" has steadily appeared more often in English-language books since 1970. A Lebanese newspaper article announced last week that "Nasser is the future," called him the "immortal leader," and proclaimed that he remains "a necessity to face current challenges even as his ideas and choices provide a solid bridge to deal with the future."
Reporting on Nasser's death, headlines in the New York Times succinctly conveyed both the benign, positive coverage he enjoyed among Westerners and their belief in his universal popularity among Arabs: "Blow to peace efforts seen," "U.S. officials see period of instability in Mideast," "The Arab world is grief-stricken." The real story, however, was quite different, with Nasser's rule bringing disaster to Egypt in the form of political, economic, and cultural decline.
A 34-year-old colonel when he took over through a coup d'état in 1952, Nasser was the first indigenous Egyptian to rule the country since the pharaohs. His ambitions were as immense as his ideas were delusional. He overthrew a king and installed an oppressive military rule that still endures 68 years later. He dispossessed grand landlords and small merchants alike, then chased out Levantine entrepreneurs – mainly Italians, Greeks, and Lebanese – who fueled the economy. He persecuted the small but thriving Jewish community of 75,000 to the point that it now consists of 10 (at last count) elderly women.
He aligned with the Soviet Union, industrialized Egypt along Soviet lines, and ruled with post-Stalin-like brutality. Bewitched by the mirage of bringing all Arabic-speaking countries under his control, Nasser unified with some of them and made war with others. More than anyone else, he installed anti-Zionism as the mainstay of Middle Eastern political life and transformed the Palestinian refugee issue into Palestinian irredentism. Along the way, he initiated the Six-Day War of 1967 and dispatched his armed forces to the most lopsided military defeat in recorded history.
Nasser proved to be a master artist of deceit. He pretended to become a civilian while extending the military's monopoly of power over economic, security, legislative, and judicial affairs. He imposed a socialism that administered city buses with two classes of service while enriching his cronies. His mock unity with Syria concealed a crude drive to dominate. His ostensible enmity with Islamists masked a sordid struggle for booty.
I arrived in Egypt a few months after Nasser's demise, in June 1971. It was an exciting time of witness as his successor, Anwar al-Sadat, opened up the country by cutting back on socialism, the Soviet connection, and the foreign adventures. Each day felt brighter than the one before.
And yet, Egypt has never escaped Nasser's legacy. The regime persists in a casual brutality toward dissidents and a dogged hostility to Israel that outlasts the peace treaty signed forty-one years ago. It lags economically, with retired military officers more important than ever and the country unable to feed itself or produce goods the world wants. A population of 100 million stuffs itself almost entirely into the 8 percent of Egypt that comprise the Nile Valley and Nile Delta. Constant expansion onto agricultural land and the prospect of diminished Nile River water portend future crises. Even the famed Egyptian cotton is no more.
Where Egyptians live; a nighttime NASA photograph from 2010.
Thus did Egypt slide from its old status as the foremost of twenty Arabic-speaking countries to an afterthought.
Those New York Times headlines symbolized the West's cluelessness about the deeply malign nature of Nasser's rule. Blow to peace efforts? Hardly: only post-Nasser could Sadat yank Egypt away from its debilitating confrontation with Israel. Period of instability? No, Nasser's death removed the region's most disruptive element. Arabs grief-stricken? Some, yes; but many others felt relief.
Egypt's modern history reconfirms that when a country falls into the hands of a despot, the return to normality can take a very long time. Russia, China, and Iraq provide other past examples; Venezuela, North Korea, and Iran provide more current ones.
Given Egypt's lugubrious immobility under Gamal Abdel Nasser's half-century-long shadow, I pessimistically predict that another fifty years hence, the Egypt of 2070 will yet suffer under his influence. Rulers will come, rulers will go, unable to break the boundaries he set so long ago.
Mr. Pipes (DanielPipes.org, @DanielPipes) is president of the Middle East Forum. © 2020 by Daniel Pipes. All rights reserved.
Sep. 28, 2020 addenda: (1) I include Nasser in my listing of the Middle East's most consequential politicians in the twentieth century, all of whom founded new states: Atatürk (Turkey), Ibn Saud (Saudi Arabia), David Ben Gurion (Israel), Gamal Abdel Nasser (independent Egypt), and Khomeini (Islamist Iran).
(2) Happily, the walloping in 1967 has discredited Nasser among young Egyptians, who today tend to see his rule as an "age of defeats." Inversely, the monarchy is recalled (as expressed by historian Tarek Osman) as "liberal, glamorous, cosmopolitan."
(3) Egypt's current president, Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi, confirmed how the regime remains confined by Nasser's legacy when he celebrated Nasser in 2018 as a fighter for social justice, free education, and free healthcare, and as the "leader of national independence who placed Egypt at the center of international attention."
(4) My other writings on Nasser include several book reviews:
Review of "Nasser's Blessed Movement: Egypt's Free Officers and the July Revolution," by Joel Gordon. Orbis, Spring 1993.
Review of "Nasser: The Final Years," by Abdel Magid Farid. Middle East Quarterly, June 1995.
Review of "Ike's Gamble: America's Rise to Dominance in the Middle East," by Michael Doran. Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2017.
Related Topics: Egypt, History
Related Articles:
Egypt's Sixty Years of Misery
Rethinking the Egypt-Israel "Peace" Treaty
Egypt's Phony Socialism
The above text may be reposted, forwarded, or translated so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information about its author, date, place of publication, as well as the original URL.
Copyright © 2020 Daniel Pipes, All rights reserved.

The Dangerous New Iran-Qatar-Turkey-Hamas Alliance
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/September 29/2020
Abbas has already damaged the Palestinians' relations with some Arab countries by condemning the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain for signing peace treaties with Israel.... Now it appears that the Palestinians are also headed toward ruining their relations with Egypt because of Abbas's decision to make peace with Hamas and appease Iran, Turkey and Qatar.
"Qatar has provided Hamas with more than a billion dollars since 2012... Qatar did not provide these funds out of a humanitarian standpoint and to help the residents of the Gaza Strip. The Qataris did so to help Hamas and its leaders and to enable Qatar to establish a foothold in the region." — Egyptian writer Hashem al-Fahkrani, Al-Youm7.com, September 21, 2020.
"Those who believe that Hamas's first goal is to resist Israel are mistaken. Its first and only goal is to receive money. Hamas's slogan is: Loyalty to anyone who pays the most." — Hashem al-Fahkrani.
Yet, the Palestinian leadership and the international community appear distinctly indifferent the looming danger of this newest axis of evil. For them, the only fate worse than death is normalization between the Arabs and Israel. Abbas has once again pegged his hopes and those of his people on entities that would obstruct the Palestinians and destroy Israel.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's continued rapprochement with the Iran-backed Hamas is jeopardizing the Palestinians' relations with Egypt. Abbas, however, seems determined to ignore the Egyptian warnings and is marching forward with full speed toward forming an alliance with Hamas and its masters in Iran, Qatar and Turkey.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's continued rapprochement with the Iran-backed Hamas is jeopardizing the Palestinians' relations with Egypt. Egyptian media outlets have resumed their scathing attacks on the Palestinian leadership in general, and the Islamist movement that has been ruling the Gaza Strip since 2007 in particular.
The Egyptian attacks came on the eve of a meeting in Turkey between leaders of Abbas's Fatah faction and Hamas. At the meeting, held under the auspices of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Hamas and Fatah leaders discussed ways of ending their dispute and holding long overdue Palestinian presidential and parliamentary elections.
The Fatah-Hamas meeting in Turkey took place in the context of Abbas's initiative to achieve Palestinian "national unity to confront Israeli and American schemes against the Palestinians." The reconciliation efforts are also designed to thwart normalization agreements between Israel and some Arab states.
The Egyptian attacks, focusing mostly on Hamas, are aimed at sending a warning to Abbas against joining the extremist camp led by Iran, Qatar and Turkey. In addition, the attacks are aimed at reminding Abbas and the rest of the world that Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, continues to pose a real threat to Egypt's national security.
Abbas, however, seems determined to ignore the Egyptian warnings and is marching forward with full speed toward forming an alliance with Hamas and its masters in Iran, Qatar and Turkey.
Abbas has already damaged the Palestinians' relations with some Arab countries by condemning the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain for signing peace treaties with Israel. Abbas and his senior officials have accused both Gulf countries of "stabbing the Palestinians in the back" and betraying the Palestinian cause, Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque by signing normalization accords with Israel.
A sign of the growing rift between the Palestinians and the Arab world surfaced on September 22, when Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riyad Malki announced that the Palestinians decided to "relinquish" their right to preside over the Council of the Arab League at its current session, in protest of the decision of the UAE and Bahrain to normalize relations with Israel. "Since the decision to rush after [normalization] was taken in Washington, it does not serve any purpose to exert any more effort to sway [the Arabs] against normalization, particularly since they are not the decision-makers, regretfully," Malki explained. The decision marks the beginning of a divorce process between the Palestinians and the Arab world. The Palestinian leadership has been boycotting the US administration since December 2017, when President Donald Trump announced his decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The Palestinians have also suspended their ties with Israel, including security coordination.
The Palestinians have, in addition, lost the support of several Arab countries because of their recurring condemnations of Arab governments and leaders who want to make peace with Israel.
Now it appears that the Palestinians are also headed toward ruining their relations with Egypt because of Abbas's decision to make peace with Hamas and appease Iran, Turkey and Qatar.
Egyptian journalists and writers have joined the chorus of critics in the Arab world who are accusing the Palestinian leadership of lacking a clear strategy that would serve the interests of the Palestinians. The journalists and writers have also launched a scathing attack on Hamas for its involvement in terrorism and for throwing itself into the open arms of Iran, Turkey and Qatar. According to Egyptian writer Farouk Jweideh:
"The Palestinian issue is no longer at the forefront of Arab issues, and it has retreated in international forums and behind the scenes of the United Nations, and even in the Arab League... The Palestine issue was the first Arab issue in all situations. Nobody now knows Mahmoud Abbas's future, because everyone has abandoned him."
Jweideh held Palestinian leaders responsible for the "decline" of the Palestinian issue, and in particular the conflict between Fatah and Hamas.
"No one knows how Mahmoud Abbas thinks and what the considerations of Fatah, Hamas and the rest of the Palestinian factions are... The state of confusion and disintegration that afflicted the Arab world put the leaders of Palestine in a historic deadlock. No one is standing with the Palestinian issue and people now."Egyptian writer Abdel Mun'em Said accused Turkey, Iran, Qatar and Hamas of "using history profusely, selectively and tragically to impose appropriate political and strategic choices to maintain a state of tension, hostility and conflict in the region." According to Said, the goal of the four parties is to infiltrate the Arab countries and obtain material and political gains in the region.
Egyptian broadcaster Basma Wahba noted that Hamas has a history of igniting strife in the region, with the help of Qatar and Turkey. "We lived in a great illusion that Hamas aims to fight Israel to liberate Jerusalem," Wahba said.
"It is time for people to know the truth about this movement and its sabotage goals in this region. With the backing of Qatar and Turkey, Hamas has armed militias and plays a destructive role in the region. Hamas is present and involved in every Arab country. Erdogan has used the Hamas leaders to achieve his goals in the region, and many Hamas members have acquired Turkish citizenship."
Commenting on Hamas's hypocrisy and corruption, Egyptian writer Hashem al-Fahkrani remarked:
"Those who believe that Hamas's first goal is to resist Israel are mistaken. Its first and only goal is to receive money. Hamas's slogan is: Loyalty to anyone who pays the most."
Al-Fakhrani was referring to the Qatari cash grants that have been delivered to Hamas in the past year. Noting that Hamas operates under the guidance of the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist organization, he added:
"Hamas, founded on December 15, 1987 under the name of the Islamic Resistance Movement, is one of the wings of the international organization of the Brotherhood. Hamas aims to achieve the goals of the organization without taking into account other considerations."
Al-Fakhrani pointed out that Hamas has condemned some Arab countries for normalizing their relations with Israel, while ignoring that the Qatari cash grants it receives were being delivered to the Gaza Strip with Israeli permission. "Qatar has provided Hamas with more than a billion dollars since 2012," he said.
"Qatar did not provide these funds out of a humanitarian standpoint and to help the residents of the Gaza Strip. The Qataris did so to help Hamas and its leaders and to enable Qatar to establish a foothold in the region."
Egyptian writer Mustafa Anbar denounced Hamas as a "satanic movement with a misleading history and constant support for terrorism." He accused Hamas of serving the Turkish-Qatari agenda in the region.
"Day after day, the malicious goals and intentions of Hamas are revealed through its trading with the Palestinian issue in order to achieve unlawful gains at the expense of the Palestinian people... This is the agenda of Turkey and Qatar: supporting terrorism."
Another Egyptian writer, Isra'a Ahmed Fouad, wrote that Hamas's real goals have been exposed: While its leaders seek to enrich themselves, they are working to serve Turkish ambitions in the region. Noting that Hamas has committed many crimes against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and threatened Egypt's national security, Fouad said:
"The Hamas bombing of the Ibn Taymiyyah Mosque in the city of Rafah was one of the most heinous of these crimes, as they destroyed the mosque with rocket launchers. After Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip, its members committed murders, kidnappings and torture. Its members also carried out many crimes by leaking poisonous gas into the cells of prisoners and detainees."
Fouad quoted a Palestinian security officer as saying that "shameful acts" were being carried out inside the tunnels that Hamas built on Gaza's borders with Egypt and Israel:
"In addition to smuggling operations, other immoral acts were practiced inside the tunnels, especially during the rule of the ousted [Egyptian] President Mohamed Morsi... Anyone who attempted to expose these acts was killed by Hamas. Hamas used to pump poisonous gas into the tunnels to kill those inside, and then it would claim that Israel had bombed the tunnels."
The Egyptian newspaper Sout Al-Omma accused Hamas of abandoning the Palestinian cause and aligning itself with Qatar, which poured billions of dollars into its coffers to serve its own agenda and goals in the region. The paper quoted Egyptian MP Hammam al-Adli as saying:
"[Hamas] adopts an extremist ideology and has a close relationship with Qatar, which is a suspicious relationship that takes place within the framework of supporting armed terrorist organizations and planning sabotage and terrorist operations in some Arab countries."
Hamas, he added, is serving the agenda of Qatar in return for the large financial funds that Hamas receives from the Qataris.
Another Egyptian MP, Mohammed Salim, said that Hamas has fallen into the arms of the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood organization in Qatar. Hamas, he added, "supports their malicious goals and plans in the region, and the plans of incitement against Egypt and some Arab countries to destabilize their security."
Were these allegations against Hamas published by Israel, they would have been dismissed by many in the West as "Israeli propaganda." These accusations, however, are coming from Egypt, the largest Arab country that has a shared border with the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. The Egyptians are trying to sound an alarm bell to Abbas and the rest of the world about the dangers of the Hamas-Iran-Turkey-Qatar alliance that poses a threat to security and stability in the Middle East.
Yet, the Palestinian leadership and the international community appear distinctly indifferent to the looming danger of this newest axis of evil. For them, the only fate worse than death is normalization between the Arabs and Israel. Abbas has once again pegged his hopes and those of his people on entities that would obstruct the Palestinians and destroy Israel.
*Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
© 2020 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.

U.S. and China: Emerging Technologies and the Race to Control the Future
Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute/September 29/2020
Chairman Xi seems to want to secure a commanding lead in the emerging hi-tech disciplines to create a sense of inevitability about China's rise to world domination.
Now, a Chinese physician and virologist, Dr. Yan Limeng, who fled China and is in hiding in the U.S., has said that China released the virus "intentionally" -- perhaps, one surmises, as a way of torpedoing both President Trump's prospects for re-election and his effort to alter trade deals that have favored China by $600 billion a year. Meanwhile, Twitter thoughtfully deleted Yan's clearly important account.
Ominously, China appears to be doubling down on its effort to checkmate the West's capability to use space-based systems during conflict. If China can successfully blind U.S. systems by offensive cyber operations or outright destruction of U.S. systems by anti-satellite attacks, the war-fighting advantage currently possessed by the West can be annihilated.
The costs to the US of falling behind could well prove catastrophic.
Ominously, China appears to be doubling down on its effort to checkmate the West's capability to use space-based systems during conflict. If China can successfully blind U.S. systems by offensive cyber operations or outright destruction of U.S. systems by anti-satellite attacks, the war-fighting advantage currently possessed by the West can be annihilated. Pictured: China's Long March-5 rocket, carrying an orbiter, lander and rover to Mars, lifts off from the Wenchang Space Launch Centre in Hainan Province on July 23, 2020. (Photo by Noel Celis/AFP via Getty Images)
The United States is in a "Tech War" with China, the victor will control the global dissemination of information. The winner will also write the world's rules and standards for emerging technologies in the digital economy.
Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping threw down the gauntlet to the U.S. in a May 2017 speech, where he outlined the plan for establishing a Chinese-supervised "Digital Silk Road." President Xi realizes that the information dimension of modern war is bound up with China's apparent overall objective of unseating the United States as the leader of the existing liberal democratic world order.
Xi seemingly wants to secure a commanding lead in the emerging hi-tech disciplines to create a sense of inevitability about China's rise to world domination. The U.S. still has the time, talent and resources to secure a victory over China in this contest for global leadership, provided that the U.S. has the will, self-discipline and flexibility to institute a total societal mobilization over decades.
China specialists such as Gordon Chang and policy officers in the Trump Administration have sought to educate the American public on how China came to emerge as a potent challenger to U.S. global primacy in hi-tech disciplines.[1] Many of the methods by which China rose to contender status include stealing intellectual property on a massive scale, with the collusion, sadly, of many Americans; forced transfer of entrepreneurial secrets of U.S. firms as a prerequisite to operating in the Chinese market; meticulous, long-term planning to secure China's national priorities; legal and illegal recruitment of foreign human talent, and lavish state support for Chinese hi-tech firms.
China may have unintentionally alerted the Free World to its present danger by revealing the CCP regime's true face -- not exactly the one presented by "A rising China is a ... positive ­development not only for China, but for America" -- as well as its global ambitions. China has revealed this true face by an abominable human rights record, underscored by its genocidal policy toward China's Uighur minority in Xinjiang Province. China's aggressive territorial expansion against Hong Kong and several of its Asian neighbors -- not to mention how it deliberately exported the Wuhan virus internationally while closing transportation to limit its spread within China -- has helped strip away its carefully orchestrated image as a responsible major power and has exposed a belligerent state controlled by the CCP.
Now, a Chinese physician and virologist, Dr. Yan Limeng, who fled China and is in hiding in the U.S., has said that China released the virus "intentionally" -- perhaps, one surmises, as a way of torpedoing both President Trump's prospects for re-election and his effort to alter trade deals that have favored China by $600 billion a year. Meanwhile, Twitter thoughtfully deleted Yan's clearly important account.
China's domestic implementation of advances in surveillance technology to control its own population also has contributed to the negative transformation of China's international image. The CCP has employed these advances to create a surveillance state to monitor the actions of Chinese citizens, and many countries have purchased Chinese facial recognition products. These state customers run the gamut of political systems from dictatorships to democracies.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is another emerging technology where China is making inroads on the reported U.S. lead. China has set a goal of overtaking the U.S. in AI by 2030. AI is a scientific discipline that teaches machines to imitate human actions. Such applications have enormous potential to impact the efficiency and accuracy of modern weapon systems such as missiles. AI exercises have produced results as in assisting surgery and where machines have bested world-class Chess Masters and Go enthusiasts.
Five factors contribute to breakthroughs in AI and other emerging technologies: patents, investment, hardware, talented labor and academic research. Both China and the U.S. are improving the ability of AI to capture the nuance of languages.
China has now surpassed the U.S. in the number of published scientific studies, but there is a caveat: U.S. scientific publications remain, on the whole, qualitatively superior. These studies help keep the U.S. a step ahead in basic software such as computer data management, processing and in operating system software. Another critical discipline where the U.S. maintains a clear advantage over China is semiconductor chip technology, necessary for the manufacture of various electronic devices. The Trump administration's decoupling of China's Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd from the American market has helped slow Beijing's effort to catch up to the United States in semiconductor technology. The electronic materials, chemical gases, and lithographic technology -- all components necessary for the production of the most advanced semiconductors -- can presently only be produced in Free World states such as the U.S., Japan, and the Netherlands
Perhaps the most spirited and public manifestation of the U.S.-China "Tech War" is in space. This competition may recall the drama of the "space race" between an earlier generation of superpower rivals, the United States and the Soviet Union. Rather than the US-USSR rivalry to reach the moon, the focus in the current US-China contest is in space weaponry -- and reaching Mars. China is making impressive strides in space operations by recently deploying the BeiDou constellation of 30 satellites, its rival to the U.S. Global Positioning System (GPS). China also has plans to launch its own space station as an alternative to the International Space Station that highlights global cooperation, especially between the U.S. and Russia. Ominously, China appears to be doubling down on its effort to checkmate the West's capability to use space-based systems during conflict. If China can successfully blind U.S. systems by offensive cyber operations or outright destruction of U.S. systems by anti-satellite attacks, the war-fighting advantage currently possessed by the West can be annihilated. China executed a successful anti-satellite strike as early as 2007; it showed its capability by destroying one of its own aging weather satellites.
Still another new technology with enormous potential for solving complex mathematical and scientific problems more quickly than today's computers can is quantum computing. While the U.S. claims to have created the first quantum computer, China appears to be leading in the military application of this new science.[2] China has already demonstrated the ability to create unbreakable encrypted messaging, an accomplishment that could keep other countries in the dark about planned secret Chinese military operations, such as, say, an invasion of Taiwan.[3]
The U.S. still leads China in Research and Development (R&D) spending, but Beijing has made great strides in this area as well. In order to keep pace with China's all-out effort to dominate emerging technologies, a well-disciplined, coordinated approach by the U.S. government, sort of a "Manhattan Project" in all of the key hi-tech areas, might help. The costs to the US of falling behind could well prove catastrophic.
*Dr. Lawrence A. Franklin was the Iran Desk Officer for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. He also served on active duty with the U.S. Army and as a Colonel in the Air Force Reserve.
[1] The Great U.S.-China Tech War by Gordon G. Chang. Encounter Books: New York. 2020
[2] Ibid. pp.26-27
[3] Ibid. pp.26-27.
© 2020 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.

Benjamin Netanyahu's full speech at the United Nations
Jerusalem Post/September 29, 2020
نص كلمة نيتانياهو أمام الأمم المتحدة: أقول للبنانيين إيران من يريد لكم الأذى وليس إسرائيل

To the people of Lebanon, Israel means you no harm. But Iran does."
The Middle East is not exactly renowned for producing good news, and few expected this year to be any different. You know, the pandemic is ravaging our part of the world like everywhere else.
But I am pleased to report to you that this year, I can tell you about good news from the Middle East. In fact, I can report two pieces of good news.
Earlier this month, at a White House ceremony hosted by President Trump, Israel signed historic agreements with the United Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Bahrain.
This was the first peace treaty between Israel and an Arab country in over a quarter of a century. And it was the first time peace agreements between Israel and two Arab countries were signed on the same day.
These new agreements will bring our peoples the blessings of peace and the enormous benefits that come with more trade, more investment, more commerce, transportation, tourism, increased cooperation in so many other areas.
I also have no doubt that more Arab and Muslim countries will be joining the circle of peace, soon, very soon.
This good news about peace came about because of a clear break with the failed strategies of the past.
For far too long, the Palestinians effectively wielded a veto on peace between Israel and the broader Arab world.
For decades, all progress was halted and was held hostage to completely unrealistic Palestinian demands, such as the demand that Israel withdraw to the indefensible lines of 1967 and place its security in the hands of others; or the demand that Israel expel tens of thousands of Jews from their homes, effectively committing ethnic cleansing; or the demand that Israel absorb millions of Palestinians who are descendants of refugees from a war that was launched by the Palestinians against Israel more than half a century ago.
Of course, these demands, along with many others, are complete non-starters for any responsible Israeli government. Yet for years, many in the international community have tried to appease these absurd Palestinian demands, and as a result, they have wasted time to try to advance an illusion that won't happen, instead of working for a realistic solution that could happen.
Thankfully, President Trump chose a different path to peace—a path anchored in reality.
He recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital; he recognized Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights; and he put forward a realistic peace plan that recognizes Israel’s right, addresses Israel’s security needs and provides the Palestinians with a dignified realistic path forward if they make peace with Israel.
The critics argued that each of these steps by President Trump would kill the chances for peace.
Well, they were wrong. Dead wrong.
Those steps advanced peace.
Now two Arab states have decided to make peace with Israel, and more will follow.
The expanding circle of peace will not make an agreement between Israel and the Palestinians less likely. It will make peace between Israelis and Palestinians more likely.
Palestinian leaders will increasingly realize that they no longer have a veto over peace and progress in our region, and hopefully, those leaders will ultimately decide to make peace with the Jewish state.
And when that happens, Israel will be ready.
I will be ready and I’d be willing to negotiate on the basis of the Trump plan to end our conflict with the Palestinians once and for all.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Israel and states across the Arab world not only stand together in advancing peace. We stand together in confronting the greatest enemy of peace in the Middle East—Iran.
Iran wantonly and repeatedly attacks its neighbors, and it’s terror proxies are directly involved in violence throughout the Middle East, including in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Gaza and of course, Lebanon.
We all saw the terrible explosion at Beirut port last month. The explosion happened here. This is the Beirut port.
Two hundred people died, thousands of people were injured, and a quarter of a million people were made homeless.
Now, here is where the next explosion could take place. Right here. This is the Beirut neighborhood of Janah. It’s right next to the international airport. And here, Hezbollah is keeping a secret arms depot. This secret arms depot, right here, is adjacent, a meter away, from a gas company. These are gas canisters. Right here. It’s a few meters away from a gas station. It’s fifty meters away from the gas company. Here are more gas trucks. And it’s embedded in civilian housing here, civilian housing here. For the Janah neighborhood residents this is the actual coordinates.
So I want to show you the entrance to Hezbollah's missile factory. Because that’s what it is. It’s right here. This is the gas company, and this is the missile explosive depot.
I say to the people of Janah, you’ve got to act now. You’ve got to protest this. Because if this thing explodes, it’s another tragedy.
I say to the people of Lebanon, Israel means you no harm.
But Iran does.
Iran and Hezbollah have deliberately put you and your families in grave danger.
And what you should make clear is that what they have done is unacceptable. You should tell them, tear these depots down.
Just a few days ago, one of these depots exploded at Ain Qana in south Lebanon.
And that is why the international community must insist that Hezbollah stop using Lebanon and Lebanese civilians as human shields.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We must all stand up to Iran, and President Trump deserves praise for doing exactly that.
First and foremost, I commend President Trump for withdrawing from the flawed nuclear deal with Iran.
In 2015, I stood alone among world leaders in opposing the shameful nuclear deal that was made with Iran. I opposed it because the nuclear deal did not block Iran’s path to the bomb, it actually paved its way to it. I opposed it because the deal’s restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program were only temporary and were no way tied to Iran’s change of behavior.
Now, Iran has violated even those temporary restrictions.
Because of these violations, Iran will have enough enriched uranium in a few months for two nuclear bombs.
And Iran has been working on a new generation of centrifuges, it’s called the IR9, which will multiply Iran’s enrichment capability fifty-fold.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
There is no question that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons.
The once secret nuclear archive, Israel’s agents obtained from the heart of Tehran, proves that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
In the run-up to the nuclear deal, Israel was told—especially by our European friends—that any Iranian violation would be met with a quick and severe response.
But in the face of Iran’s brazen violations, in the face of the irrefutable evidence of the nuclear archive, the Security Council has done, well, absolutely nothing.
And wedded to the failed nuclear deal, the Security Council also still refuses to see what was obvious to anyone who understands anything about the Middle East.
Rather than curb Iran’s aggression, the nuclear deal fed and funded it.
Five years ago, in removing the sanctions on Iran, the leading powers of the world opened the door of a tiger’s cage, and then they simply hoped for the best.
But instead, exactly as I warned five years ago, we who live in the Middle East are suffering the consequences of that irresponsible deal. A richer and emboldened Iran used the billions that flowed into its coffers to fuel its campaign of carnage and conquest across the region.
Thankfully, President Trump recognized the disastrous nuclear deal for what it was and he acted.
He restored US sanctions, forced countries to choose between doing business with America or doing business with Iran, and took out the world’s most dangerous terrorist, Qassem Suleimani.
And last month, when the Security Council refused to extend an arms embargo on Iran, the United States snapped back the sanctions.
While the Security Council is divided, we in the region are united.
Both Arabs and Israelis are together urging tough action on Iran. And when Arabs and Israelis agree, others should pay attention.
Israel calls upon all members of the Security Council, stand with the United States against Iran's aggression, stand with it in insisting that Iran end its nuclear weapons program once and for all, stand with the United States in confronting the greatest danger to peace in our region.
And if you do, I am confident that in the years ahead we will be able to celebrate more good news from the Middle East.
Good news for Israel.
Good news for our Arab neighbors.
And good news for the world for all those who seek peace, security and prosperity.
 

Brazil Busts Top Smuggler of Iranian Migrants to the U.S.
Todd Bensman/The Center for Immigration Studies/September 29/2020
Excerpts of article originally published under the title "Smuggler of Iranian Migrants Busted as Iran Threatens to Hit U.S. for Assassinating Top General."
In cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), on September 5 the Brazil Federal Police arrested Reza Sahami, alleged leader of a major human smuggling ring that infiltrated individuals from the Middle East (primarily Iran) into South America, the United States, and Canada.
Most Americans might still be surprised to know that Mexicans and Central Americans are not the only ones who illegally cross the U.S. southern border every year. Among the tens of thousands of migrants who jump that border every year are Iranians and plenty of migrants from Iran's neck of the woods.
Perhaps fewer Iranians will be reaching the borders now, at least for a while, due to the recent bust in Brazil of Reza Sahami, a dual citizen of Canada and Iran who was caught guiding a group of seven Iranian nationals in the city of Assis Brasil on the border of Peru. All seven Iranians possessed fraudulent or altered passports from Israel, Denmark, and Canada. ...
Brazil is prosecuting but the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations, which works in foreign posts throughout the Americas hunting special interest alien smugglers, played enough of a significant role to issue its own press announcement, which was largely ignored despite the heightened Iranian threat.
"Sahami has been smuggling criminals across international borders for over ten years," said ICE Attaché for Brazil and Bolivia Robert Fuentes in the scarcely reported September 10 ICE press statement.
Brazilian media reported that six Iranians were held for a time, then ordered to return to Iran within 15 days or face prosecution for possessing bogus Canadian and Israeli passports. It's unclear what happened to the seventh reported by ICE, though one of those captured was a child.
The Significance of Iranian Border Migrants
... As I have frequently written, Iranians are among a long list of "extra-continental migrants" or "special interest aliens (SIAs)" from around the world who present unique national security threats that American homeland security workers are obliged, if they ever can, to rule out once those travelers reach U.S. borders. ..Iranians are on the list of "special interest aliens" who pose a potential national security threat.
An intelligence community source familiar with the case tells me the Sahami organization flew Iranians into Canada on fake passports, but also had some smuggled over the southern border. It's unclear if Sahami's clients reached the United States by flying first into Canada and crossing south and, if so, how many.
But apprehension data shows that far more Iranians are apprehended at the U.S.-Canada border than at the U.S.-Mexico border. Just 197 Iranians were apprehended at or between southern border ports of entry from 2009-2019, including 15 in 2019, 27 in 2018, and 16 the year before that, according to data provided to CIS under a Freedom of Information Act request. Far more Iranians are apprehended crossing at or between U.S.-Canada ports of entry, to include 22,789 from 2008-2018, increasing from 1,523 in 2013 to 2,294 in 2018.
Regardless of whether some are flown to Canada so they can cross the American border, their steady arrivals every year at both borders demonstrate the presence and capability of long-haul smuggling organizations like the one Sahami allegedly ran and that disrupting them must now become a priority.
A Vital New Counterterrorism Partnership with Brazil
The Sahami case reinforces another important development in the American-led hunt for SIA smugglers: Brazil's reinvigorated counterterrorism collaboration under the presidency of Jair Bolsanaro. As I've written, Brazil has long served the smugglers as one of the busiest landing and staging areas for special interest alien migration due to corruption in its embassies and airports. But with Bolsanaro in office and new counterterrorism and counter-smuggling laws on Brazil's books, ICE and CBP have ramped up their presences there.
Brazilian President Jair Bolsanaro has reinvigorated counterterrorism collaboration with the United States.
The Sahami case was Brazil's second significant bust and prosecution of an international SIA smuggler alongside the Americans, though that government has assisted past American prosecutions. The first came in August 2019 when Brazilian federal police in Sao Paulo rolled up three notorious smugglers: a Somali, an Algerian, and an Iranian based in the country. As I wrote at the time of this bust, the smugglers were transporting immigrants from countries of national security concern to the U.S. southern border for years, including two Somalis arrested by the Americans for suspected terrorism.
Indeed, the Brazil-U.S. partnership appears to humming right along. In 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Brazil's federal police opened a joint pilot program inside the country's airports to identify high-risk "travelers with links to terrorism...and alien smuggling" coming and going, according to a recent State Department report. And Brazil has sent officers to work with CBP in Washington.
*Todd Bensman is a fellow at the Middle East Forum and a senior national security fellow for the Center for Immigration Studies. He previously led counterterrorism-related intelligence efforts for the Texas Intelligence and Counterterrorism Division.