English LCCC Newsbulletin For
Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For June 19/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews21/english.june19.21.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since
2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations For today
What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the human
heart conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him’
First Letter to the Corinthians 02/01-10: “When I came to you, brothers and
sisters, I did not come proclaiming the mystery of God to you in lofty words or
wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him
crucified. And I came to you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. My
speech and my proclamation were not with plausible words of wisdom, but with a
demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might rest not on
human wisdom but on the power of God. Yet among the mature we do speak wisdom,
though it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are
doome.
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials
published on June 18-19/2021
MoPH: 168 new coronavirus infections, 4 deaths
President addresses general affairs with former Minister Chakib Qortbawi
Donor nations agree to provide emergency aid to Lebanon’s army
EU’s Borrell plans Beirut talks as economic crisis fears deepen
Lebanese security forces foil drug smuggling operation to Saudi Arabia
EU sets out potential criteria for Lebanese sanctions: Reuters
Geagea ‘Shames’ Officials for Neglecting Army Essentials
Hariri, Shea Discuss Lebanon Developments
Report: In Final Push for Govt, French Envoy Visits Beirut ahead of 'Sanctions'
Israel Says Arms Smuggling Thwarted on Border with Lebanon
Report: Israel Makes First Official Position on Demarcation Talks with Lebanon
The world’s most dangerous terrorists/Hezbollah is more sophisticated than Hamas
or ISIS/David Patrikarakos/UnHerd web site/June 18/2021
Quel avenir?/Par Abdel Hamid El Ahdab, Avocat/June 18/2021
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June
18-19/2021
Question: "Is Christianity a religion or a relationship?"/GotQuestions.org/June
18/2021
Voting ends in Iran’s presidential election after two-hour extension amid low
turnout
Iran elections: Ebrahim Raisi, judge under US sanctions, set to take over
presidency
Biden says he agreed with Putin to stop Iran from getting nuclear bomb
Iranians vote for new president with hardliner slated to win
Qatar says no tangible progress on Afghanistan peace talks yet
France welcomes ‘Verbal ceasefire’ with Turkey but wants more
US suspects 4,000 cases of fraud in Iraqi refugee programme
Starvation threat haunts Syrians ahead of border crossing decision
Al-Qaeda exploiting security vacuum created by Houthi escalation
Abbas Kamel in Libya to mediate between Haftar, Debeibah
US removing anti-missile batteries from Middle East due to age, not policy shift
Canada announces new assistance for those affected by conflict in Ethiopia’s
Tigray region
Canada extends ban on non-essential travel with U.S. until July 21
Indian-Origin Man First Person of Colour to Be Named for Canada Supreme Court.
Titles For The Latest The Latest LCCC
English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June
18-19/2021
Biden Should Not Lift Sanctions
Against Iranian Presidential Candidate Ebrahim Raisi/Matthew Zweig/Policy Brief-FDD/June
18/2021
California man imprisoned in Iran is blocked from legal counsel as health
worsens, daughter says/Benjamin Weinthal/Fox News/June 18/2021
Ali Larijani, Iran’s Rejected Hardliner/Tzvi Kahn/Insight-FDD/June 18/2021
FAQ: Issues Ahead on Iran’s Nuclear Program/Mark Dubowitz/Andrea Stricker/FDD/June
18/2021
A salute to Netanyahu’s strategic leadership - opinion/David M.
Weinberg/Jerusalem Post/June 18/2021
Iran's Fake Presidential Election/Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute/June
18, 2021
Strategic Incoherence Continued: US Policy Towards Syria Under Biden/Dr.
Jonathan Spyer/The Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security/June 18/202
The Latest English LCCC Lebanese &
Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on June 18-19/2021
MoPH: 168 new coronavirus infections,
4 deaths
NNA/June 18/2021
Lebanon has recorded 168 new coronavirus cases and four deaths in the last 24
hours, as reported by the Ministry of Public Health on Friday.
President addresses general affairs with former Minister
Chakib Qortbawi
NNA/June 18/2021
President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, met former minister, Chakib
Qortbawi, today at the Presidential Palace. Latest political and economic
developments were deliberated in the meeting. -- Press Office
Donor nations agree to provide emergency aid to
Lebanon’s army
The Arab Weekly/June 18/2021
PARIS – Twenty nations agreed Thursday to provide emergency aid to the ailing
Lebanese military, a French ministry said on Thursday, noting the army is
“essential for the country’s stability.” However, the donors stopped short of
announcing tangible aid as the country’s economic and political crisis worsens.
The army is not looking for weapons but is unable to pay its troops enough to
live on. Milk, flour, medicine, fuel and spare parts were among the items on a
shopping list drawn up by the military that adds up to millions of dollars.
France’s Defence Minister Florence Parly hosted a virtual meeting on Thursday of
an international support group for Lebanon which includes the United States,
several EU member states, Gulf countries, Russia and China.
“Even if numerous countries have already provided significant bilateral
aid, the gravity of the Lebanese crisis calls for increased commitment and
coordination from everyone,” to help the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), the French
ministry said in a statement. “The LAF remain an
essential pillar of the Lebanese state” and “play a key role in maintaining
security throughout the country,” the statement added.
“Their cohesion and their professionalism remain essential to preserve
stability.” The statement added that the assistance,
which was not detailed, “cannot replace indispensable reforms that Lebanon today
imperatively needs for its stability.” Lebanon is in
desperate need of financial aid but the international community has conditioned
any such help on the formation of a new government to launch sweeping reforms.
Because of that, the latest aid will go directly to the army and not via
government channels. Lebanon has been without a fully-functioning government for
ten months since the last one stepped down after a deadly port explosion in
Beirut last summer.
Politicians have failed to agree on a new cabinet line-up even as foreign
currency cash reserves plummet, causing fuel, electricity and medicine
shortages. The World Bank has labelled the crisis one
of the world’s worst since the 1850s, with the local currency losing more than
90 percent of its value on the black market. This has
eaten away at the value of soldiers’ salaries and slashed the military’s budget
for maintenance and equipment. Already last year the army said that due to
rising prices it had scrapped meat from the meals offered to on-duty soldiers .
France, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey are among the army’s main
food donors, while Iraq and Spain have offered medical assistance. The United
States remains the biggest financial backer of the Lebanese military and has
bumped up funding for the army by $15 million for this year to $120 million.
EU’s Borrell plans Beirut talks as economic crisis fears deepen
Najia Houssari/Arab News/June 19, 2021
BEIRUT: Josep Borrell, the high representative of the EU for foreign affairs and
security policy and vice-president of the European Commission, is expected to
start a round of talks with Lebanese officials in Beirut on Saturday. This comes
days ahead of a meeting of EU officials in Brussels, called by France, to
discuss imposing sanctions on Lebanese officials accused of corruption and
political obstruction. Maj. Gen. Abbas Ibrahim, director general of the General
Security, highlighted “Russia’s constant will to stand by Lebanon and support it
on the economic and security levels.”He made his comments following talks with
Russian officials. Ibrahim added: “There should be a government, regardless of
its form, in order to find solutions to all problems in Lebanon.” He is a
prominent figure in Lebanon who often conducts foreign negotiations. Meanwhile,
the living crisis is worsening, leading to armed clashes. People are still
waiting for long hours to fill up on gasoline amid shortages of fuel, which is
subsidized by the state. The subsidy is expected to be lifted soon. But this is
dependent on the ration card for needy people, which is still being debated by
parliamentary committees. The fuel crisis sparked a clash on Friday in front of
a gas station in Tripoli, which led to a shooting, with no casualties. Also in
Tripoli, a clash in front of a supermarket led to exchanging shots, causing two
injuries. The city has the biggest percentage of struggling Lebanese, who were
impoverished further due to the collapse of the currency. For the second
consecutive day, employees of the public sector stuck to their strike which was
called for by the Public Administration Employees Association in protest against
the collapse of their purchasing power and the deterioration of economic and
living conditions. Contacts and consultations related to forming the new
government have stalled after the failure of the initiative of the Speaker of
Parliament Nabih Berri, but he has insisted that “it is still standing.”Walid
Jumblatt, president of the Progressive Socialist Party (PSP) said: “It is
impossible for some officials to keep waiting while the country’s conditions are
retreating.” Jumblatt added: “It is time for a settlement away from personal
calculations.”In the past two days, Berri had joined Prime Minister-designate
Saad Hariri in accusing President Michel Aoun and his political party of trying
to get the blocking third in the government, contrary to the constitution.
Meanwhile, Lebanese Internal Security forces announced that they “captured 16
RPG type rocket-propelled grenades, and five grenades of other types dumped in
waste containers near the House of the Druze Community in Lebanon in Beirut.”
Internal Security also declared that the “old ammunition” was removed after
being examined by its explosives experts. The identity of the party which
disposed of the ammunition remains unknown.The Anti-Narcotics Division at the
Lebanese Customs seized a large quantity of Captagon pills hidden in a container
loaded with stones, destined to be smuggled to Saudi Arabia via the port of
Beirut. “Some people implicated in the operation were arrested,” declared the
caretaker Minister of Interior Mohammed Fahmi. Speaking at the Port of Beirut,
he revealed that the shipment was destined for Jeddah.
Lebanese security forces foil drug smuggling operation to Saudi Arabia
Al Arabiya English/18 June ,2021
Millions of Captagon pills were found inside a container scheduled to depart the
Port of Beirut for Saudi Arabia, Lebanon’s interior minister said Friday. The
drugs were found in what appeared to be rocks or stones inside the container.
The foiled shipment was meant to be shipped to Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah, Mohammad
Fahmi said in televised remarks after the operation was foiled. “I ask all
countries to have trust in Lebanon the way they used to,” he said, in an
apparent reference to a recent decision by Saudi Arabia to ban certain imports
from Lebanon. In April, Saudi Arabia issued a ban on fresh produce shipments
from Lebanon after what it said was an uptick in drug smuggling from Beirut and
a lack of proper security from Lebanese security forces. Soon after, Gulf
countries supported the Saudi move and threatened to follow suit. Saudi Arabia
is consistently one of Lebanon’s top destinations for agricultural exports in
2019. Lebanese businessmen and women urged officials in Beirut to do more to
rectify the lack of proper supervision and scanning at Lebanese ports. Riyadh’s
envoy to Beirut Waleed Bukhari tweeted pictures of the foiled operation intended
to be shipped to Saudi Arabia with the hashtag in Arabic that translates to “War
on Drugs.”Ties between Lebanon and Saudi Arabia soured following the outbreak of
the Syrian war and Iran-backed Hezbollah’s public participation in the
neighboring crisis. Lebanon then refused to condemn attacks on Saudi Arabia
during Arab League meetings.
EU sets out potential criteria for Lebanese sanctions: Reuters
Reuters/18 June ,2021
Criteria for European Union sanctions being prepared for Lebanese politicians
are likely to be corruption, obstructing efforts to form a government, financial
mishandling and human rights abuses, according to a diplomatic note seen by
Reuters. Led by France, the EU is seeking to ramp up pressure on Lebanon’s
squabbling politicians after 11 months of a crisis that has left Lebanon facing
financial collapse, hyperinflation, electricity blackouts, and fuel and food
shortages. The bloc, which has been holding technical discussions on possible
measures for the last month, has yet to decide on which approach to take, but
foreign policy chief Josep Borrell is in Lebanon this weekend and will report
back to foreign ministers on Monday. As many senior Lebanese politicians have
homes, bank accounts and investments in the EU, and send their children to
universities there, a withdrawal of that access could help focus minds. Paris
says it has already taken measures to restrict entry for some Lebanese officials
it sees as blocking efforts to tackle the crisis, which is rooted in decades of
state corruption and debt, although it has not named anybody publicly. The EU
first needs to set up a sanctions regime that could then see individuals hit by
travel bans and asset freezes, although it may also decide to not list anybody
immediately. The note, which also outlines the strengths and weaknesses of
taking such a measure, focuses on four criteria. It begins with obstructing the
establishment of a government, the political process or the successful
completion of the political transition and then turns to obstructing the
implementation of urgent reforms needed to overcome the political, economic and
social crisis. Financial mishandling, which would target people, entities or
bodies believed to be responsible for the mismanagement of public finances and
the banking sector, is also a core criteria as is the violation of human rights
as a result of the economic and social crisis. “It might be argued that the lack
of political responsibility of the leadership in Lebanon is at the core of a
massive implosion of the economy,” the note reads, referring to the possible
human rights criteria. “This has led to significant suffering and has affected
the human rights of the population in Lebanon.”Such diplomatic notes are common
in EU policymaking, circulated among EU diplomats and officials, although they
are not made public. The note also says an “exit strategy” proposing benchmarks
for establishing whether the sanctions regime has served its purpose as well as
for renewing or lifting individual designations should also be put in place. How
quickly sanctions could be imposed is still unclear, but with political
divisions continuing to worsen, the bloc is likely to press ahead before the
summer holiday period. There are divisions among the 27 EU states over the
wisdom of EU sanctions, but the bloc’s two main powers, France and Germany are
in favor, which is likely to prove pivotal. A larger group of nations has yet to
specify their approach. Hungary has publicly denounced EU efforts to pressure
Lebanese politicians. A senior European official told Reuters Paris had set its
sights on sanctioning powerful Christian politician Gebran Bassil, who is
already under US sanctions.!
Geagea ‘Shames’ Officials for Neglecting Army Essentials
Naharnet/18 June ,2021
Lebanese Forces party chief Samir Geagea on Friday “shamed” President Michel
Aoun and the caretaker government of Hassan Diab for neglecting the Lebanese
army’s basic needs, after donor nations lined up Thursday to provide emergency
aid for Lebanon’s military. He said donor countries have provided help for the
military institution while they stood and watched.“A very big thank you to the
state of France and to the states that participated yesterday in the conference
to back the Lebanese army,” said Geagea on Twitter. He added: “And a great shame
on the President, and caretaker PM (Hassan Diab), and the caretaker government
for letting the army conditions reach the point where friendly countries come to
help it while they either do nothing, or do worse."On Thursday, France hosted a
virtual meeting of an international support group for Lebanon which includes the
United States, several EU member states, Gulf countries, Russia and China.
Twenty nations agreed to provide emergency aid to the ailing Lebanese military.
Milk, flour, medicine, fuel and spare parts that were among the items on a
shopping list drawn up by the military that adds up to millions of
dollars.Lebanon is in desperate need of financial aid but the international
community has conditioned any such help on the formation of a new government to
launch sweeping reforms.
Hariri, Shea Discuss Lebanon Developments
Naharnet/18 June ,2021
Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri held a meeting on Friday with U.S.
Ambassador to Lebanon Dorothy Shea at the Center House, his press office said.
The two discussed the general situation and the latest developments in Lebanon,
added the press office in a statement.Hariri’s advisers Bassem el-Shabb and
ex-minister Ghattas Khoury attended the meeting.
Report: In Final Push for Govt, French Envoy Visits Beirut
ahead of 'Sanctions'
Naharnet/18 June ,2021
French envoy Patrick Durell is expected in Beirut on Friday to push leaders in
Lebanon into forming a much-needed government, ahead of reported sanctions
France and the EU are preparing against some officials in Lebanon, An Nahar
newspaper reported on Friday.
Durell will meet with senior leaders “carrying France’s final chance” before
imposing sanctions on parties obstructing the formation of a much-needed
government in crisis-stricken Lebanon, said the daily. According to sources, the
issue of partnership between Lebanon and France on the basis of preparing
projects to be implemented according to a mechanism to begin next year, will
continue for seven years, and constitutes an important part of Durells’ visit.
They added that France is still leaving the door open in a last attempt to push
for the formation of a government in parallel with preparing for sanctions it
plans to present to the European Union soon, according to the newspaper.
Israel Says Arms Smuggling Thwarted on Border with Lebanon
Naharnet/18 June ,2021
Israeli spokesman Avichay Adraee said on Friday that Israeli troops thwarted an
alleged arms smuggling attempt on the border with Lebanon. On Twitter, Adraee
said Israeli troops allegedly spotted a suspect early in the morning carrying a
handbag near the Lebanese town of al-Mtolleh, and then another suspect came from
the Israeli side to pick it up. He added that Israeli army forces “carefully
tracked down the smuggling attempt and thwarted it."
Report: Israel Makes First Official Position on Demarcation
Talks with Lebanon
Naharnet/18 June ,2021
In a first since the launch of indirect talks with Lebanon on their disputed
maritime borders, Israel made a position expressing eagerness for “innovative
solutions to complete and bring the file to a close”, media reports said Friday.
Israeli Energy Minister Karin Elharrar told US mediator, John Desrocher, during
a meeting earlier on Wednesday that “despite Israel’s strong legal case, we are
ready to consider creative solutions to end this file,” Israeli media quoted her
as saying. She stressed that “the ongoing negotiations with Lebanon are of
paramount importance despite the recent government transition."
She also considered that the goal of the negotiations is to find a solution to
the maritime border dispute, "which will enable the development of natural
resources for the benefit of the people of the region."On Monday, Desrocher met
with Lebanese President Michel Aoun who in turn notified the American side of
Lebanon’s keenness to pursue negotiations, stressing "pressure for fair talks
without preconditions." Lebanon and Israel last year took part in indirect
US-brokered talks to discuss demarcation.But those talks stalled after Lebanon
demanded they cover a larger area, including part of the Karish gas field, where
Israel has given exploration rights to a Greek firm.
The world’s most dangerous terrorists/Hezbollah is more
sophisticated than Hamas or ISIS
David Patrikarakos/UnHerd web site/June 18/2021
ديفيد باتركراكوس/موقع انهرد: حزب الله هو اخطر المنظمات الإرهابية وتركيبته أكثر
تعقيداً من حماس وداعش
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/99848/99848/
Hezbollah is the most successful terror group in history. The Lebanese Shia
militia may not have conquered as much territory as ISIS nor attracted so many
recruits, but since its founding in 1985 it has fought Israel for almost 40
years, and it has fought it well. In May 2000, Hezbollah expelled the IDF from
the “security zone” it had occupied in South Lebanon for nearly two decades; in
2006 Hezbollah then fought it to a military stalemate. In doing so, the “Party
of God” did more than just inflict casualities on its long-standing enemy. Since
Israel’s crushing defeat of the combined Arab armies in the 1967 Six Day War, no
one thought an Arab force could do more than just terrorise or harass the
Israelis. Hezbollah proved them wrong.
When it comes to Israel, the Arab world can be divided — loosely — into blocks.
There’s the so-called “Axis of Accommodation”: states like Egypt and Jordan that
have made peace with the Jewish state, accept (officially at least) its
existence and seek to avoid future conflict. Set against them is the “Axis of
Resistance” — countries that believe all compromise to be a betrayal of
principle, centred on Iran and Syria.
It is important to understand that these are more than just opposing stances to
Israel — they are alternative modes of Middle East statecraft. As Thanassis
Cambanis observes in his rigorous book, A Privilege to Die, Hezbollah has
“convinced legions of common men and women that Israel can be defeated and
destroyed — and not just in the distant future, but soon.” Its leader Hassan
Nasrallah now regularly “reminds his millions of listeners across the Arab world
that Hezbollah and its allies — the ‘Axis of Resistance’ — have wrung more
concessions from Israel by force than the pro-Western ‘Axis of Accommodation’
has won through decades of negotiation.”
But the Middle East is riddled with militia groups allied against the West and,
specifically, Israel — not least Hamas, which recently fired hundreds of rockets
from Gaza into the country. The Iranian-controlled Shia militia organisation,
the Popular Mobilisation Front (PMF), has spent years attacking Western targets
in Iraq; in Yemen, the Houthis have battered the Saudi Army. But Hezbollah
towers above them all, both in its military efficacy and political strength.
Why? The answer lies with Ali Akbar Mohtashamipur, the Iranian cleric who died
aged 74 last week from Covid-19.
Few know more about Hezbollah — and Mohtashamipur — than Shimon Shapira, a
retired Brigadier General in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), former military
secretary to ex-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and now a fellow at
the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. “Mohtashamipur was the architect of
Hezbollah,” he tells me. “And Hezbollah changed everything.”
“Mohtashamipur was a real revolutionary, and a close associate of the founder of
the Islamic Republic [Ayatollah Ruhollah] Khomeini himself,” he continues. “It
was Khomeini who personally sent Mohtashamipur to Damascus to create a new
Shiite radical movement to rival Amal, the Lebanese Shia movement founded in
1976. Amal is secular, and the Mullahs knew it would never be what they wanted:
an Iranian arm in Lebanon.”
What the Iranians needed was a new movement, one adhering to the doctrine of the
Khomeini’s velayat-e faqih, (rule of the jurist), which holds that those best
equipped to rule are those best equipped to interpret God’s law — namely
clerics. It needed an organisation led by Ulama, Muslim clerics. From Syria,
Mohtashamipur went across the border into the city of Baalbek in Lebanon’s Baqaa
Valley. There he met with three clerics, Abbas al-Moussawi, Subhi al-Tufayli and
Mouhammad Yazbek, all men steeped in the ideology of the velayat-e faqih; all
men who would happily take orders from Khomeini, and therefore, Iran. Together
they founded Hezbollah, or “The Party of God”. Al-Moussawi would be its leader
until Israel assassinated him in 1992.
“And I’ll let you in on a secret,” Shapira adds: “This was in summer 1981 —
before Israel even entered Lebanon.” Received wisdom has it that the Lebanese
Shia became radicalised after Israeli forces moved into Lebanon in 1982 and
began occupying the country. In truth, the seeds were sown before.
If step one for Tehran was to set up an organisation ideologically devoted to
it, step two was to provide its proxy the military heft needed to become a
player. Tehran dispatched soldiers from its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)
to Lebanon, where they set up training camps in Baalbek and the surrounding
areas. Suddenly, the Israelis were facing Iranian-trained Shia fighters in
Lebanon. Things got tough. They were no longer facing just a militia group but
the direct instrument of a state.
“That’s the real strength of Hezbollah,” Shapira concludes, “and it’s the key to
understanding their success. Hezbollah is essentially an Iranian brigade in
Lebanon.”
Iran spent money and time and human resources to turn Hezbollah into a militia
of unrivalled ability in the Arab world, but that is only half the story.
Hezbollah is an army, but it is also a political party, and it is now the de
facto ruler of Lebanon. The last time I was in the country I took a trip to
South Beirut, the group’s stronghold in the capital, and here the truth of that
fact is everywhere.
To understand the Party of God you need to see the banners of Nasrallah and
Khomeini and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei dangling from lampposts and
roundabouts. You need to see the yellow flags flutter in the wind, the veiled
women scurry down narrow roads in tight, black phalanxes, and see the watchful,
bearded men on the balconies who follow your every move.
Lebanon is a multi-ethnic state with a confessional system that allocates
government office via ethnicity, religion and sect. Christians, Druze and Sunni
parties and militias all jostle for power in a state smaller than Yorkshire. But
only one group is almost pathologically well-organised; only one group hogs the
best guns. Hezbollah runs things, and it runs them well because the Islamic
Republic is a revolutionary state and it taught its Lebanese allies the tools of
politics just as much as war.
Jonathan Spyer is an Israeli journalist and Middle East analyst who was in the
IDF during the 2006 war and has long studied Hezbollah. “Iran has developed a
methodology of irregular and political warfare that is effective beyond anything
comparable in the region,” he says. “Israel is far more skilful than Iran in
most of its military capabilities. But in terms of creating training and
indoctrinating proxies, and then using that military muscle to build political
movements, they are unparalleled.”
It’s not enough to train people to shoot accurately. You also need to give them
a reason to hold a gun in the first place. And the best way to do this is not
just with an ideology — though that sits front and centre — but to construct an
apparatus around it. Hezbollah builds schools and creates youth outreach
programmes; it funds building works and the training of doctors and engineers;
it cares for the sick and the elderly. After the destruction of the 2006 Lebanon
War, when the Israelis flattened swathes of Lebanese infrastructure, Hezbollah
began distributing large amounts of cash to anyone who could prove their home
had been damaged. Known as the “Green Flood” (Al-sayl al-akhdhar), the dollars
reportedly came into Beirut from Iran via Syria.
And the young Lebanese Shia who do join Hezbollah to fight get not only
top-class training and the respect that comes with carrying a gun, but a reason
to do so, beyond the cult of martyrdom endemic across the Middle East. 30
December 1999 was the last time Hezbollah launched a suicide bomber when a
fighter drove a car bomb into an Israeli military convoy; unlike al-Qaeda and
ISIS, and (very often) Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah is interested in people who can
do more than just die.
Right now, the Party of God sits on Israel’s northern border. The extensive
combat experience Hezbollah gained fighting an ultimately successful 15-year
insurgency against Israel in Sothern Lebanon is now complemented by almost a
decade of fighting in Syria. Its soldiers are battle-hardened to a degree that
Israel’s other border enemy Hamas simply cannot match.
Seeded within its territory are an estimated 150,000 missiles (many
Iranian-made), and this is where Hezbollah’s threat becomes regional — indeed
possibly global. Through them, Iran can now strike deep into Israeli territory,
with a force that would be beyond the ability of Israel’s anti-missile system
Iron Dome. Hezbollah has become Iran’s primary means by which it can deter and
respond to Israel in the case of war.
But that’s not all. As a proxy force Hezbollah gives Iran not just an expanded
forward footprint but something almost as valuable: deniability. The Iranians
are now beginning to seed its Zulfiqar missiles in Western Iraq among their PMF
Shia militia clients — giving them another position from which to fire into
Israel.
Israelis are in no doubt that it is Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon, acting to all
intent and purposes as a forward Iranian base, that now poses the greatest
threat to national security. They are on its border and are arguably the
toughest foe Israel has ever faced. Mohtashamipur might be dead, but Spyer still
remembers 2006, “Hezbollah reminds me of what people said about the German Army
at the end of World War II: you cannot afford to take chances with them: they
will punish any lack of professionalism. You have to be at the very top of your
game, or you will pay.”
**David Patrikarakos is an author and journalist. His latest book is War in 140
characters: how social media is reshaping conflict in the 21st century.
(Hachette)
https://unherd.com/2021/06/the-worlds-most-dangerous-terrorists/?fbclid=IwAR0WtJlIHHeiWo5I-WL9TwixvjcodDf-h-AQ-_lvOLnPRSsC5O9SI39M_Uk
Quel avenir ?
Par Abdel Hamid El Ahdab, Avocat/June 18/2021
La révolution du 17 octobre 2019 fut une des étapes de l’Histoire du Liban comme
celle de Tanios Chahine et des révolutions qui la précédèrent et la succédèrent.
Toutes les révolutions passent par des étapes :
Premièrement : Elles émanent de la souffrance, de l’anxiété et du manque de
confiance dans le futur. La situation du peuple ne correspond plus à ses espoirs
et la réalité ne répond plus à ses souhaits. Le changement devient de plus en
plus urgent. Il y a une colère mêlée de provocation. Ce fut la situation au
Liban après 1970.
Deuxièmement : L’explosion résultant des circonstances entremêlées. Les chaînes
sont brisées et le système de pouvoir commence à vaciller sans pour autant
s’effondrer. C’est ce qui s’est passé le 17 octobre au Liban !
Troisièmement : La révolution où l’ancien est remplacé par le nouveau et où le
représentant de la révolution présentera les fondements d’un nouveau système.
L’explosion pris place au Liban mais n’a pas eu l’effet souhaité car il n’y
avait pas une vision politique et sociale claire.
Tout au long de l’Histoire, deux camps étaient toujours présents dans chaque
société : d’une part les jeunes qui sont éduqués, qualifiés et déterminés et
d’autre part, les forces armées qui gardent la souveraineté de l’État et la
légitimité provenant d’une « vraie Constitution ». Sûrement, ces deux camps ne
sont pas les seuls dans une société, étant donné que d’autres forces, classes et
générations y sont encore présentes et restent en état d’alerte. Mais la voix du
dialogue entre la jeune génération montante et ambitieuse et les forces armées
en charge est celle qui est entendue. Toutefois, au Liban, des forces étrangères
commencent à émerger sur la scène vu les intérêts vitaux qu’elles ont. Le
problème réside dans le ralliement de la jeune génération à un tel régime et à
son incapacité, engendrant ainsi une incapacité chez les jeunes de comprendre et
de réagir, tout en usant de l’intimidation. Ces jeunes ont un pouvoir absolu
entre leurs mains mais ont des lacunes dans leurs idées et par conséquent
manquent de perspicacité. Il est difficile de qualifier ceci de « système » car
c’est en fait une « oligarchie », une alliance entre l’argent et le pouvoir des
armes, celles de la répression en matière de sûreté. Cette oligarchie n’a rien
compris et n’a pas pu remarquer le changement qui s’opère au sein d’une société
qui est devenue plus forte que quelconque répression. D’où l’explosion.
Toutes les issues ont été bloquées devant le système ; elles ne sont désormais
que des arrangements transitoires visant à rédiger une nouvelle constitution.
L’illusion portant sur la succession héréditaire a toujours été, et reste
encore, la force directrice. Gibran Bassil succède à Aoun, comme le fils de
Housni Moubarak se préparait à succéder à son père et comme Bachar El-Assad a
succédé à son père.
Ce système, même sa présidence, a vacillé et la révolution a dû faire face au
Coronavirus. Ce vacillement a été affaibli en brisant les barrières et les
chaînes.
Nous posons la question qui ne cesse de se répéter : Que voulons-nous ?
Le peuple veut le renversement du système représenté par le président de la
république. En réalité, il n’y plus d’État car il n’y avait pas de système mais
juste une multitude d’autorités !
Cette présidence a déjà arrivé à son terme qu’Aoun démissionne ou pas car elle a
tout simplement perdu le peu de légitimité qui restait. Cette dernière a ses
caractéristiques :
a) Consentement et approbation volontaire de la part de la population, ce qui
n’est plus le cas ;
b) Statut et révérence, ce qui n’est plus le cas car ces derniers ont perdu leur
importance aux yeux des libanais et des étrangers.
c) Des lois impératives, ce qui n’est plus le cas car les responsables n’ont
plus le pouvoir de guider les gens afin qu’ils les obéissent ou obéissent les
lois qu’ils promulguent.
Personne n’a plus le pouvoir de converser avec la Communauté arabe ou la
Communauté internationale et être pris au sérieux. C’est le gendre qui négocie
au Liban ainsi qu’à l’étranger et c’est un gendre sur lequel des sanctions ont
été imposées l’isolant du monde entier. Lorsque le cabinet des conseillers
présidentiels a déclaré que Aoun délivrera un discours, j’ai pensé :
1- qu’il démissionnera :
a) après la formation du gouvernement ;
b) et après la signature du décret des nominations judiciaires qui est en
suspens chez lui depuis deux ans.
2- qu’il déclarera ne pas nominer son gendre ;
3- qu’il émettra une décision relative à sa renonciation du pouvoir et à la
condamnation des personnes responsables de l’explosion au port de Beyrouth et de
ceux qui ont volés les fonds publics ;
4- qu’il annoncera la dissolution du parlement et appellera à des élections
législatives anticipées.
Mais il resta muet !!!!!
La bataille à laquelle Michel Aoun se livre maintenant est celle de la reprise
du pouvoir après l’avoir cédé il y a quelques années à son gendre Gibran Bassil,
ce pouvoir qui a été considéré comme une propriété privée. Michel Aoun a laissé
la direction de l’État à son gendre alors que lui, il se reposait dans son grand
âge. Il a dû imaginer que son gendre transformera cette nation en désordre total
en une nation d’ordre tout simplement en demandant l’assistance de conseillers :
une nation ne peut être transformée en une propriété privée et le peuple ne peut
être transformé en des travailleurs et des employés pour eux. Nous sommes en
présence d’un peuple, d’hommes, de jeunes et d’une armée, une armée formée par
ces mêmes hommes et jeunes. Un dialogue est en cours entre les deux parties et
ce qu’il faut réaliser, c’est qu’une page est en train d’être tournée !
Si Michel Aoun choisit de rester muet alors que le Secrétaire Général de
Hezbollah Hasan Nasrallah prenne la décision d’importer l’essence et le mazout
de l’Iran, il sera tenu responsable devant l’Histoire ! Si Michel Aoun était
incapable d’apporter quelque chose de bénéfique pour le Liban quand il avait 50
ans, comment lui serait-il possible de sauver le pays à 85 ans ? Le « père de
tous » ne doit pas mettre l’armée face au peuple afin d’éviter que le Liban ne
prenne un tournant vers le pire et avec lui, toute la région ! Mais l’armée
est-elle une partie de ce système ? Sûrement non. L’armée fait partie de l’État
mais non de la classe gouvernante ou du système, car cette méthode de
gouvernement n’a plus de futur du point de vue politique ! Elle n’a plus aucune
valeur ! Elle s’est éteinte le 17 octobre du point de vue historique et a été
totalement paralysée par Hezbollah du point de vue politique.
Il se peut que les membres du pouvoir politique soient élus, mais ils sont
intégrés dans l’État afin de commander ses organes. Pour cette raison, les
organes de l’État resteront mais l’autorité chargée de leur commandement est
absente en ces temps-ci, d’où la crise ! La diminution du nombre des jeunes
manifestants dans les places publiques reflète le niveau de tolérance aux défis
qui sont bien nombreux : des banques et des usines qui ont fermées leurs portes,
un pourcentage de pauvreté atteignant les 75%, un taux de chômage dépassant les
50%, une dévalorisation des salaires et une pénurie alimentaire. Par son
entêtement et son nonchalance, le système pousse le pays vers une situation qui
peut dégénérer au pire, à un chaos destructif. Si nous observons l’état de la
rage refoulée, nous réaliserons que cette dernière peut se transformer en une
rancune qui sèmera le chaos partout !
Ces temps difficiles requièrent des hommes comme Fouad Chéhab, Raymond Eddé,
Béchir Gemayel, Saeb Salam etc.
Plusieurs juristes ont réalisé une étude sur les violations de la Constitution
par Michel Aoun ainsi que sur la haute trahison qu’il a commise conformément au
texte de la Constitution. Nous sommes sur le chemin menant à ce procès après
lequel une nouvelle ère commencera au Liban, une ère où nous apprendrons que
tout acte a des conséquences !
Ça suffit… cent ans ont passé sans que personne ne soit tenue responsable de ses
propres actes. Il est temps maintenant de tenir tous les politiciens et les
corrompus responsables de leurs actes
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous
Reports And News published on June
18-19/2021
Question: "Is Christianity a religion or a
relationship?"
GotQuestions.org/June 18/2021
Answer: Religion is “the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling
power, especially a personal God or gods.” In that respect, Christianity can be
classified as a religion. However, practically speaking, Christianity has a key
difference that separates it from other belief systems that are considered
religions. That difference is relationship.
Most religion, theistic or otherwise, is man-centered. Any relationship with God
is based on man’s works. A theistic religion, such as Judaism or Islam, holds to
the belief in a supreme God or gods; while non-theistic religions, such as
Buddhism and Hinduism, focus on metaphysical thought patterns and spiritual
“energies.” But most religions are similar in that they are built upon the
concept that man can reach a higher power or state of being through his own
efforts. In most religions, man is the aggressor and the deity is the
beneficiary of man’s efforts, sacrifices, or good deeds. Paradise, nirvana, or
some higher state of being is man’s reward for his strict adherence to whatever
tenets that religion prescribes. In that regard,
Christianity is not a religion; it is a relationship that God has established
with His children. In Christianity, God is the aggressor and man is the
beneficiary (Romans 8:3). The Bible states clearly that there is nothing man can
do to make himself right with God (Isaiah 53:6; 64:6; Romans 3:23; 6:23).
According to Christianity, God did for us what we cannot do for ourselves
(Colossians 2:13; 2 Corinthians 5:21). Our sin separates us from His presence,
and sin must be punished (Romans 6:23; Matthew 10:28; 23:33). But, because God
loves us, He took our punishment upon Himself. All we must do is accept God’s
gift of salvation through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9; 2 Corinthians 5:21). Grace is
God’s blessing on the undeserving.
The grace-based relationship between God and man is the foundation of
Christianity and the antithesis of religion. Established religion was one of the
staunchest opponents of Jesus during His earthly ministry. When God gave His Law
to the Israelites, His desire was that they “love the Lord your God with all
your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy 6:5;
Matthew 22:37). “Love” speaks of relationship. Obedience to all the other
commands had to stem from a love for God. We are able to love Him “because He
first loved us” (1 John 4:19). However, by Jesus’ time, the Jewish leaders had
made a religion out of God’s desire to live in a love relationship with them (1
Timothy 1:8; Romans 7:12). Over the years, they had perverted God’s Law into a
works-based religion that alienated people from Him (Matthew 23:13–15; Luke
11:42). Then they added many of their own rules to make it even more cumbersome
(Isaiah 29:13; Matthew 15:9). They prided themselves on their ability to keep
the Law—at least outwardly—and lorded their authority over the common people who
could never keep such strenuous rules. The Pharisees, as adept as they were at
rule-keeping, failed to recognize God Himself when He was standing right in
front of them (John 8:19). They had chosen religion over relationship.
st as the Jewish leaders made a religion out of a relationship with God,
many people do the same with Christianity. Entire denominations have followed
the way of the Pharisees in creating rules not found in Scripture. Some who
profess to follow Christ are actually following man-made religion in the name of
Jesus. While claiming to believe Scripture, they are often plagued with fear and
doubt that they may not be good enough to earn salvation or that God will not
accept them if they don’t perform to a certain standard. This is religion
masquerading as Christianity, and it is one of Satan’s favorite tricks. Jesus
addressed this in Matthew 23:1–7 when He rebuked the Pharisees. Instead of
pointing people to heaven, these religious leaders were keeping people out of
the kingdom of God.
Holiness and obedience to Scripture are important, but they are evidences of a
transformed heart, not a means to attain it. God desires that we be holy as He
is holy (1 Peter 1:16). He wants us to grow in grace and knowledge of Him (2
Peter 3:18). But we do these things because we are His children and want to be
like Him, not in order to earn His love. Christianity
is not about signing up for a religion. Christianity is about being born into
the family of God (John 3:3). It is a relationship. Just as an adopted child has
no power to create an adoption, we have no power to join the family of God by
our own efforts. We can only accept His invitation to know Him as Father through
adoption (Ephesians 1:5; Romans 8:15). When we join His family through faith in
the death and resurrection of Jesus, the Holy Spirit comes to live inside our
hearts (1 Corinthians 6:19; Luke 11:13; 2 Corinthians 1:21–22). He then empowers
us to live like children of the King. He does not ask us to try to attain
holiness by our own strength, as religion does. He asks that our old self be
crucified with Him so that His power can live through us (Galatians 2:20; Romans
6:6). God wants us to know Him, to draw near to Him, to pray to Him, and love
Him above everything. That is not religion; that is a relationship.
Voting ends in Iran’s presidential election after
two-hour extension amid low turnout
AFP/19 June ,2021
Polling stations in Iran’s presidential election closed early Saturday after
around nineteen hours of voting, the official IRNA state news agency
reported.“The election officially ended at 2:00 am (2130 GMT Friday),” election
committee spokesman Esmail Mousavi was quoted as saying, after a two-hour
extension.
Iran elections: Ebrahim Raisi, judge under US sanctions,
set to take over presidency
Reuters, Dubai/18 June ,2021
Iranians voted on Friday in a presidential election likely to be won by a
hardline judge subject to US sanctions, though many are expected to ignore the
ballot amid economic hardship and calls for a boycott by liberals at home and
abroad. With uncertainty surrounding Iran’s efforts to revive its 2015 nuclear
deal with six world powers, the turnout is being viewed by analysts as a
referendum on the leadership’s handling of an array of crises. After casting his
vote in the capital Tehran, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei urged Iranians
to cast ballots, saying “each vote counts ... come and vote and choose your
president”. The favorite to succeed Hassan Rouhani, a pragmatist prevented under
the constitution from serving a third four-year term, is hardline Ebrahim Raisi.
Raisi, who like his political patron Khamenei is an implacable critic of the
West, is under US sanctions for alleged involvement in executions of political
prisoners decades ago. “If elected, Raisi will be the first Iranian president in
recent memory to have not only been sanctioned before he has taken office, but
potentially sanctioned while being in office,” said analyst Jason Brodsky. That
fact could alarm Washington and liberal Iranians, analysts of Iranian politics
said, especially given President Joe Biden’s sharpened focus on human rights
globally. A mid-ranking figure in the hierarchy of Iran’s Shi’ite Muslim clergy,
Raisi was appointed by Khamenei to the high-profile job of judiciary chief in
2019. A few months later, the United States imposed sanctions on him for alleged
human rights violations, including the executions of political prisoners in
1980s and the suppression of unrest in 2009, events in which he played a part,
according to human rights groups. Iran has never acknowledged the mass
executions, and the 60-year-old Raisi himself has never publicly addressed
allegations about his role. State television showed long queues outside polling
stations in several cities. More than 59 million Iranians are eligible to vote.
Polls will close at 1930 GMT but can be extended for two hours. The results are
expected around midday on Saturday. A win for Raisi would confirm the political
demise of pragmatist politicians like Rouhani, weakened by the US decision to
quit the nuclear deal and reimpose sanctions in a move that stifled
rapprochement with the West. “Elections are important despite the problems and
issues ... I wish we didn’t have any of those problems since the registration
day,” said Rouhani after casting his vote, a clear reference to the rejection of
prominent moderate and conservative candidates from the race by a hardline
election body. Official opinion polls suggest turnout could be as low as 44
percent, significantly lower than in past elections.
Biden says he agreed with Putin to stop Iran from
getting nuclear bomb
The Arab Weekly/June 18/2021
GENEVA--US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed
Wednesday in Geneva to cooperate toward preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear
weapons, said the US leader at the end of the US-Russia summit.
Talking at a news conference in Geneva after his first meeting with the
Russian leader, Biden said he told Putin “how it is in the interest of both
Russia and the United States to ensure that Iran does not acquire nuclear
weapons.” “We agreed to work together there because
it’s as much interest (in) Russia’s interest as ours,” he added.
Biden said Putin asked about Afghanistan and expressed a desire that
peace and security be maintained there. Biden said he told Putin that a lot of
that will depend on him and that Putin indicated he was prepared to “help” on
Afghanistan as well as on Iran. Biden declined to go
into further detail. Biden’s administration is mounting new efforts to get Iran
to comply with the terms of a nuclear deal it had once agreed to before Biden’s
predecessor, Donald Trump, withdrew Washington from the agreement struck with
Iran by the US and other world powers in 2015.Putin also talked about preventing
a resurgence of terrorist violence in Afghanistan. Biden said it would be very
much in Russia’s interest not to see that happen.
Syria crossing
Biden also pressed Putin to drop a push to close the last international
humanitarian crossing into Syria, making clear the matter was of “significant
importance” to the US. No deal was reached to keep it
open, however.Russia is threatening to use its UN Security Council veto to close
the aid route for millions of Syrians internally displaced by that country’s
war. But the US president did not secure a commitment
from his Russian counterpart on Wednesday to renew a UN cross-border aid
operation into Syria, a senior administration official said.
Washington and several other members of the 15-member Security Council
are pushing to expand the cross-border operation, which UN aid chief Mark
Lowcock has described as a “lifeline” for some three million Syrians in the
country’s north. Russia has questioned the importance
of the long-running operation. There was “no
commitment, but we made clear that this was of significant importance for us if
there was going to be any further cooperation on Syria,” the US official said
following the meeting between Biden and Putin in Geneva.
The official described the upcoming renewal as a test of whether the
United States and Russia could work together.
The Security Council first authorised a cross-border aid operation by UN and
non-governmental organisations into Syria in 2014 at four points. Last year, it
reduced that access to one crossing point from Turkey because of opposition from
Russia and China over renewing all four.
The mandate for the operation expires on July 10. A resolution to extend council
approval needs nine votes in favour and no veto from any of the five permanent
members, Russia, China, the United States, France and Britain.
“For countless Syrians, this is a life-or-death vote,” US ambassador to
the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield told US lawmakers earlier on
Wednesday. In the past decade, the council has been
divided over how to handle Syria, with Syrian ally Russia alon with China pitted
against Western members. Russia has vetoed 16 resolutions related to Syria and
was backed by China for many of those votes.Explaining why he “thought that it
was important to continue to have problems with the president of Syria,” Biden
said, “Because he’s in violation of an international norm. It’s called a
Chemical Weapons Treaty. Can’t be trusted.”
Iranians vote for new president with hardliner slated to
win
The Arab Weekly/June 18/2021
TEHRAN – Iranians voted Friday in a presidential election in which
ultraconservative cleric Ebrahim Raisi is seen as all but certain to coast to
victory after all serious rivals were barred from running. After a lacklustre
campaign, turnout was expected to plummet to a new low in a country exhausted by
a punishing regime of US economic sanctions that has dashed hopes for a brighter
future. State-linked opinion polling and analysts put hard-line judiciary chief
Ebrahim Raisi as the dominant front-runner in a field of just four candidates.
Former Central Bank chief, Abdolnasser Hemmati, is running as the race’s
moderate candidate but hasn’t inspired the same support as outgoing President
Hassan Rouhani, who is unable under the constitution to seek a third consecutive
term of office.
If elected, Raisi would be the first serving Iranian president sanctioned by the
US government even before entering office over his involvement in the mass
execution of political prisoners in 1988, as well as his time as the head of
Iran’s internationally criticised judiciary, one of the world’s top
executioners.
It also would firmly put hard-liners in control across the Iranian government as
negotiations in Vienna continue over trying to save Tehran’s tattered nuclear
deal with world powers, as it enriches uranium to the closest point yet to
weapons-grade levels. Tensions remain high with both the US and Israel, which is
believed to have carried out a series of attacks targeting Iranian nuclear sites
and assassinating the scientist who created its military atomic programme
decades earlier.
Polls opened at 7am local time for the vote, which has seen widespread public
apathy after a panel under Khamenei barred hundreds of candidates, including
reformists and those aligned with Rouhani. Khamenei cast the ceremonial vote
from Tehran, where he urged the public to take part.
“Through the participation of the people the country and the Islamic ruling
system will win great points in the international arena, but the ones who
benefit first are the people themselves,” Khamenei said. “Go ahead, choose and
vote.”
But by mid-day, turnout appeared far lower than Iran’s last presidential
election in 2017. State television offered tight shots of polling places,
several of which seemed to have only a handful of voters in the election’s early
hours. Those passing by several polling places in Tehran said they similarly saw
few voters.
Raisi, wearing a black turban that identifies him in Shia tradition as a direct
descendant of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, voted from a mosque in southern Tehran,
waving to those gathered to cast ballots. The cleric acknowledged in comments
afterward that some may be “so upset that they don’t want to vote.”
“I beg everyone, the lovely youths and all Iranian men and women speaking any
accent or language from any region and with any political views, to go and vote
and cast their ballots,” Raisi said. There are more than 59 million eligible
voters in Iran, a nation home to over 80 million people. However, the
state-linked Iranian Student Polling Agency has estimated a turnout of just 42%,
which would be the lowest ever since the country’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Fears about a low turnout have some warning Iran may be turning away from being
an Islamic Republic, a government with elected civilian leadership overseen by a
supreme leader from its Shiite clergy, to a country more tightly governed by its
supreme leader. As supreme leader, Khamenei has final say on all matters of
state and oversees its defense and atomic programme. Any enthusiasm by voters
has been dampened by the disqualification of many hopefuls from the race and the
deep economic malaise which has sparked spiralling inflation and job losses, the
crisis deepened by the COVID pandemic.
Iranian opposition groups abroad and some dissidents at home have urged a
boycott of the vote they see as an engineered victory for Raisi, the 60-year-old
head of the judiciary, to cement ultraconservative control. Others queued to
vote at schools, mosques and community centres, some carrying Iran’s green,
white and red national flag.
1988 massacre
Iran has often pointed to voter participation for democratic legitimacy but
polls signal the turnout may drop below the 43 percent of last year’s
parliamentary election.
Results are expected around noon (0730 GMT) Saturday. If no clear winner
emerges, a runoff will be held a week later. Election placards are relatively
sparse in Tehran, dominated by those showing the austere face of frontrunner
Raisi, in his trademark black turban and clerical robe, who has been named in
Iranian media as a possible successor to Khamenei. For the exiled Iranian
opposition and rights groups, his name is indelibly associated with the mass
executions of leftists in 1988, when he was deputy prosecutor of Tehran’s
Revolutionary Court, although he has denied involvement.
The election winner will take over in August as Iran’s eighth president from
Hassan Rouhani, a relative moderate who has served the maximum of two
consecutive four-year-terms allowed under the constitution.
After casting his vote, Rouhani told the public that “elections are important no
matter what, and despite these problems we must go and vote”. He acknowledged he
would have liked to see “more people present” at the polling stations.
Ultimate political power in Iran, since its 1979 revolution toppled the
US-backed monarchy, rests with the supreme leader. But the president, as the top
official of the state bureaucracy, also wields significant influence in fields
from industrial policy to foreign affairs. Rouhani’s key achievement was the
landmark 2015 deal with world powers under which Iran agreed to limit its
nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief.
But high hopes for greater prosperity were crushed in 2018 when then-US
president Donald Trump withdrew from the accord and launched an economic and
diplomatic “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran.
Heavyweights barred
As old and new US sanctions hit Iran, trade dried up and foreign companies
bolted. The economy nosedived and spiralling prices fuelled repeated bouts of
social unrest which were put down by security forces. Iran’s ultraconservative
camp, which deeply distrusts the United States, labelled the “Great Satan” or
the “Global Arrogance” in the Islamic republic, attacked Rouhani over the
failing deal. Despite this, there is broad agreement
among all the election candidates that Iran must seek an end to the painful US
sanctions in ongoing talks in Vienna.
Out of an initial field of almost 600 hopefuls for the presidency, only seven,
all men, were approved to run by the Guardian Council, a body of 12 clerics and
jurists. Among those disqualified were conservative
former parliament speaker Ali Larijani and populist ex-president Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad. Then, two days before the election, three approved candidates
dropped out of the race. The only reformist still running is low-profile former
central bank chief Abdolnaser Hemmati, who has promised to revive the economy
but is widely blamed for the runaway inflation. “For
the first time since the foundation of the Islamic republic, the election of the
president will take place without any real competition,” wrote former French
ambassador Michel Duclos for Paris think-tank the Institut Montaigne. Tehran
blacksmith Abolfazl, aged in his 60s, told AFP of his disappointment as a
patriot who had joined the 1979 revolution. “I took
part in a revolution to choose for myself, not so others can choose for me,” he
said. “I love my country, but I do not accept these candidates.”
Qatar says no tangible progress on Afghanistan peace
talks yet
Reuters/18 June ,2021
Qatar has not yet made tangible progress with Afghan peace talks being held in
its capital Doha, Qatari Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman said in a
statement on Friday. He said the announcement of the withdrawal of US and
foreign forces from Afghanistan had added to time pressure on the talks. “Our
goal is to reach a ceasefire between the Afghan government and Taliban and
consensus on the future of the country,” Rahman said.
France welcomes ‘Verbal ceasefire’ with Turkey but wants
more
The Arab Weekly/June 18/2021
PARIS – A “verbal ceasefire” is in place between France and Turkey after months
of rancorous exchanges that strained the relations of the NATO allies, the
French foreign minister said Friday. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and
his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron met on the sidelines of the NATO summit
this week, following the rows on international crises such as Libya, Syria and
Nagorno-Karabakh that led to bitter personal diatribes from the Turkish leader.
Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told BFM television that he welcomed
the change in tone but said it had to be matched by more concrete steps from
Ankara. “There is a kind of verbal ceasefire. That’s
good but it’s not enough,” he said. “The verbal
ceasefire does not mean acts and we expect Turkey to act on sensitive subjects,”
he said, citing Libya, Syria and also the Eastern Mediterranean, where France
has backed EU members Greece and Cyprus angry over Turkish advances in the
waters. Le Drian also said France was particularly
eager to work with Turkey over Libya, where Ankara sent troops backed by
thousands of Syrian militia forces to bolster the UN-backed government. “We will
see if President Erdogan has changed more than just his words but also his
actions,” Le Drian said. Macron warned earlier this
year that Turkey would try to meddle in France’s 2022 presidential election. He
has suggested that Ankara’s unilateral moves on the international stage and its
purchase of S-400 air defence missile systems from Russia have contributed to a
“brain death” of NATO, where Turkey is a key member. A
new law against Islamist extremism the French government introduced after a
series of attacks also aroused Erdogan’s ire, with the Turkish leader accusing
France of Islamophobia. Erdogan last year said Macron needed “mental checks” and
expressed hope that France would “get rid of” Macron as soon as possible.
But there have been tentative signs of easing tensions in recent months,
with Erdogan keen to strengthen links with Turkey’s Western partners at a time
of growing economic difficulties at home compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic.
In another sign of the thaw in relations, France this week removed Turkey from
its red list of countries off-limits for non-essential travel, effectively
allowing fully-vaccinated French tourists to holiday there. At the NATO summit
in Brussels, Erdogan also held his first talks with Joe Biden as US leader,
though he indicated no plans to abandon the deployment of the Russian S-400
missiles.
US suspects 4,000 cases of fraud in Iraqi refugee
programme
The Arab Weekly/June 18/2021
WASHINGTON – US authorities pursuing a sweeping fraud investigation suspect some
4,000 Iraqis of filing fraudulent applications for resettlement in the United
States as refugees and they are re-examining cases involving more than 104,000
others, according to State Department reports. More than 500 Iraqis already
admitted as refugees have been implicated in the alleged fraud and could be
deported or stripped of their US citizenship, according to one document sent to
members of Congress. It said there was “no indication to date that any of these
500+ individuals have ties to terrorism.”
The probe,one of the biggest into refugee programme fraud in recent history, is
fuelling reservations among some in Joe Biden’s administration as they debate
whether to create a similar programme to assist Afghan refugees as American
troops withdraw after 20 years of war, US officials said. The reports show the
investigation is more far-reaching and serious than US officials have disclosed
since announcing in January a 90-day freeze of the Iraqi “Direct Access” refugee
programme. The suspension, which in April was extended indefinitely by the State
Department, followed the unsealing of an indictment accusing three foreign
nationals of fraud, records theft and money laundering.
A State Department spokesperson declined to comment on the scope of the
investigation and internal government deliberations but said the fraud scheme
did not affect security vetting of refugees. “The discovery, investigation and
prosecution of individuals involved in the scheme demonstrated the US
government’s commitment to ensuring the integrity of the programme while
upholding our humanitarian tradition,” the spokesperson said. “Those who would
seek to take advantage of America’s generosity in welcoming the most vulnerable
people will be held accountable.”The spokesperson did not give a timeline for
the investigation but said the agency would work “as quickly and thoroughly as
possible” to complete the review and make any necessary security changes.
Sponsored by the late Senator Edward Kennedy, the “Direct Access” programme was
authorised by Congress four years into the 2003-2011 US occupation of Iraq and
the sectarian bloodletting it unleashed. The programme aimed to speed
resettlement in the United States of Iraqis endangered by working for the US
government. Under pressure from lawmakers of both parties and advocacy groups,
the Biden administration is considering a similar programme for Afghans facing
Taliban retribution, according to a State Department official, a congressional
aide and a lawmaker. But there “are a lot of reservations” about expediting the
resettlement of Afghans as refugees in the United States, said the State
Department official, citing the problems with the Iraqi programme.
The official, who requested anonymity in order to discuss internal
deliberations, referenced challenges to verifying employment history and other
background information “in unstable environments.”Representative Jason Crow, a
former Army Ranger who founded a bipartisan group pressing Biden to evacuate
at-risk Afghans, said State Department officials told him the problems with the
Iraqi programme “have given people pause” about creating one for Afghans.
‘Master list’ of suspects
The Iraqi programme suspension froze the processing of more than 40,000
applications covering more than 104,000 people, 95% of them in Iraqi. All are
being re-evaluated, according to one State Department report. Officials have
built a “master list” of “companies and cases with suspected fraud as identified
by the investigation,” it said, adding that it includes more than 4,000
individuals, none of whom has been allowed to travel to the United States. The
State Department reports, the unsealed indictment and court documents do not
categorically state the alleged scheme’s purpose.
However, a State Department investigator’s federal court affidavit suggested
applicants were paying for pilfered case files that helped them pass the
screening process and consular interviews and “potentially secure admission to
the United States … when that would not otherwise have occurred.”The indictment
unsealed in January accused the suspects of stealing the digital case files of
more than 1,900 Iraqis, including highly confidential information such as work
histories, military service, accounts of persecution, security check results and
proposed US consular interview questions. “Resettlement is a very scarce and
valuable and lifesaving commodity,” said Mark Hetfield, president of HIAS, a
refugee resettlement agency. “People … are going to do anything they can to
access it.”The programme had shortened the process for Iraqi groups “of special
humanitarian concern” to obtain US refugee resettlement, dropping a requirement
that they first obtain referrals from the United Nations refugee agency.
Eligible applicants include Iraqis inside or outside Iraq in danger
because they worked for the US government, as well as certain family members.
Iraqis who worked for US-based media outlets and humanitarian groups or
organisations that received US government grants or contracts could also apply.
More than 47,570 Iraqis have been resettled in the United States through
the programme, according to one State Department document. Admissions slowed to
a trickle under Republican former President Donald Trump, who set refugee
admissions for this year at a record-low 15,000 before leaving office. The
alleged fraud ran from February 2016 until at least April 2019, according to the
indictment. The investigation began in February 2019, a State Department
document said. James Miervaldis of No One Left Behind, a non-profit organisation
that helps US-affiliated Iraqis and Afghans immigrate to the United States, said
it is not known how many have been killed, but they number in the hundreds. Most
of the threats were from Islamic State remnants and Iran-backed Shia Muslim
militias, he said. “There are still many Iraqis reaching out to us for help,”
Miervaldis said.
Starvation threat haunts Syrians ahead of border crossing
decision
The Arab Weekly/June 18/2021
IDLIB, Syria – Millions of people living in northwest Syria, many of them
displaced from elsewhere in the country’s decade-long conflict, face the threat
of starvation should the United Nations fail to approve an extension to
cross-border humanitarian operations this July. Access for cross-border aid from
Turkey was reduced last year to just one crossing point after opposition from
Russia and China, permanent Security Council members, to renewing other
crossings. A new showdown is likely next month when the operation’s mandate must
be renewed. Idlib province, Syria’s last rebel stronghold, is home to around 3
million people, more than half of whom depend on food aid.
All of that filters through the Bab al-Hawa crossing where currently
around 1,000 UN trucks enter each month through Turkey. “Right now there is a
plan for if no renewal happens and alongside our partner the World Food
Programme we are stockpiling for three months until the end of September,” said
Bassil al-Dirri, Idlib area manager for the Turkish Humanitarian Relief
Association (IYD). “But after that there will be nothing.”Hussein Mahmoud, a
displaced farmer from Syria’s Hama province who now lives in a camp in northern
Idlib, divides the basic items in a food basket he receives monthly amongst his
wife and 13 children. By mid-month, the bread, rice, lentils and other
essentials he gets as aid are nearly scarce but Mahmoud now fears this little
support that has provided a lifeline for his family might end. “If this food aid
stops, where do we go? What do we do?” he said. “Starvation is on the way.”
Surging food prices
President Bashar al-Assad has survived the foreign-supported insurgency against
him and now holds sway over around 70% of the country, helped by Russia’s
military and Iran’s Shia militias. But Turkey still controls territory in the
northwest and there are growing concerns that Russia, Assad’s ally, will veto a
decision to keep the crossing open. Should that
happen, UN coordinated aid would have to re-route operations through Damascus.
“I ask all the humanitarians in the world to stand up against Russia to not make
this happen,” said Abdelsalam al-Youssef, director of the displaced camp in
northern Idlib. “There will be a humanitarian catastrophe if it does,” he said
as he attended a rally on the issue in the camp. Some in Idlib warn of looming
price rises should basic items grow scarce as demand for staples like bread and
rice increases and supply remains limited. “Traditional trade routes can’t cope
with the needs of the market … so from an economic perspective, there will be an
insane increase in prices” Dirri said. “We are talking about basic items for
each family, not luxuries … no family can go on living without them,” he said.
Food prices in Syria have jumped by more than 200% in the last year alone, a
March assessment by the WFP found. The study found that a record 12.4 million
Syrians, more than 60% of the population, suffer from food insecurity and
hunger, double the number of 2018. Some of the country’s poorest and most
desperate, having abandoned homes and land to flee war, live in Idlib’s squalid
camps like Mahmoud. His family’s fate and millions of others now hangs on the
July 10 decision. “We are asking God first and then the authorities to please
make this continue for us,” he said.
Al-Qaeda exploiting security vacuum created by Houthi
escalation
The Arab Weekly/June 18/2021
ADEN – The Yemeni branch of Al-Qaeda has kidnapped six government security
personnel, an official said Thursday, the first incident of its kind in a long
while in a country where years of violence by Iran-aligned Houthi militias has
created a security vacuum.
A security official with the internationally-recognised government, who spoke on
condition of anonymity, said that five officers had been seized in the southern
province of Shabwa during a mission on Tuesday. “They were lured by people
claiming to belong to local tribes and in need of help,” he said. “They fell
into the trap and it turned out these people belonged to the terrorist
organisation.”The official said a sixth officer was snatched by the militants on
Wednesday and “taken to an unknown location.”
Al-Qaeda resurgence
Years of setbacks including a two-decade US drone campaign have weakened the
once-mighty Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). But with Houthi militias
escalating their offensive to capture the northern city of Marib, capital of an
oil-rich governorate of the same name, the terrorist group is seizing the
opportunity to regenerate itself. Fighting around the city since February is
creating a security void that is being exploited by the jihadists, observers
warn. Marib city is the last northern stronghold of the government which is
backed by a Saudi-led military coalition.
The Houthis control the rest of the north after years of conflict which has
plunged Yemen into the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. In March, a Yemeni
intelligence official said that the Marib battle “could be ending the maximum
pressure campaign that almost wiped out AQAP” . The group also has a bloody
track record outside Yemen. It attacked the French satirical publication Charlie
Hebdo in 2015, killing 12 and showing its ability to strike far from home.
The United States, which considers AQAP the
terror group’s most dangerous branch, has carried out a campaign of drone
strikes against its fighters in Yemen since soon after the 9/11 attacks.
Attacks on Saudi Arabia
While escalating their offensive to capture Marib, the Houthis have been
launching near daily attacks on Saudi sites, in a clear threat to the broader
regional security in the Arabian Peninsula. On Thursday, Saudi Arabia’s air
defences intercepted a drone launched by Houthis toward Khamis Mushait, home to
the main Saudi air base in the border region, Saudi state TV reported. A Houthi
spokesman said on Twitter his group launched two drones at military positions
inside the Abha International Airport, west of Khamis Mushait.
A Saudi-led military coalition intervened in Yemen in 2015 after the
Houthis ousted the country’s internationally-recognised government from Sana’a,
the capital. Oman, which has a border with Saudi Arabia and Yemen, recently
stepped up efforts to persuade the parties to agree on a ceasefire deal.
Abbas Kamel in Libya to mediate between Haftar, Debeibah
The Arab Weekly/June 18/2021
TRIPOLI – The head of the Egyptian General Intelligence Service, Major General
Abbas Kamel, on Thursday made unannounced visits to Tripoli and Benghazi, aimed
at easing the tensions between the General Commander of the Libyan National Army
(LNA), Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar and the Prime Minister of the Government of
National Unity (GNU), Abdelhamid al-Dbeibah.
Another purpose of the visit was to pass on several messages to the interim
government, particularly Cairo’s dissatisfaction with its acceptance of the
continued stay of Syrian mercenaries in Libya.
Egyptian sources told The Arab Weekly that Kamel told Libyan officials in
Tripoli that Haftar is ready to reach an understanding with the interim
government and has requested that his fate be left to the Libyan people, thus
alluding to his intent to run in the planned presidential election.
The sources explained that Kamel drew the attention of Libyan officials to the
fact that the continued presence of Turkish forces and Syrian mercenaries, as
well as the failure to disband the militias, give Haftar a good opportunity to
outbid the government, which appears content with the continued stationing of
the Turkish troops on Libyan soil. The new government
has remained silent over the statements by Turkish politicians rejecting any
calls for their forces’ withdrawal from Libya. Observers considered the lack of
official reaction to that Turkish position a form of approval of the continued
presence of their troops and mercenaries, despite the clear statements of
Foreign Minister Najlah Al-Manqoush calling for the withdrawal of absolutely all
foreign forces from Libya.
Her statements are now met with less enthusiasm in Tripoli after the
government’s failure to take a position on the issue of mercenaries, both
dispatched by Turkey to western Libya and those brought by Russia to fight
alongside the LNA (even if Moscow refuses to recognise their presence in Libya).
The Egyptian sources stressed that Kamel was expected to have urged Dbeibah to
resume his attempts at unifying the armed forces as a way to prevent the
militias from running amok, especially since Dbeibah’s disregard for the LNA and
his focus on training forces in the west suggests that he is not concerned with
the issue of unifying the military.
The prime minister’s policy also gives the Brotherhood and armed organisations
the green light to persist in their unruly behaviour, thus opening the way for
more clashes and violence.
Egypt is following closely the effort to unify the Libyan armed forces, as it
has for many years hosted, both in Cairo and Hurghada, a number of meetings of
the Libyan military towards this very end.
Last month, Dbeibah refused to attend a military parade marking the eighth
anniversary of the launch of Operation Dignity, launched to oust Islamists from
Benghazi and Derna.
At the time, observers believed his decision was a way to distance himself from
conflicts, considering that the Operation Dignity still has many detractors in
the western region. However, his attendance at the graduation of cadets from the
Volcano of Rage forces, loyal to the GNA, sent the message that he is counting
on these forces to be the core of the military institution.
This impression was reinforced by the expectation that no state budget will be
allocated to the Haftar-led LNA. This, according to observers, has been one of
the reasons for the parliament’s refusal to approve the budget.
According to the Egyptian sources, Kamel was trying to understand what is behind
the silence of the Libyan government on the Turkish determination to keep
mercenaries and Turkish forces in Libya on the grounds that they are not
foreigners, which means they expect to stay on Libyan soil with the government’s
approval. It was anticipated that Kamel would urge
Dbeibah to take serious steps on this issue before the second Berlin conference,
which will discuss the problem of foreign troops and mercenaries Experts believe
the government’s silence on Ankara’s designs can only damage the GNU’s
credibility.
The sources say Kamel stressed to the GNU that re-enacting the behaviour of the
Presidency Council of the previous Government of National Accord, by a de facto
extension of the interim authority’s tenure, will not be possible. Kamel’s
argument is that the international community is firmly determined to hold the
elections on time and Dbeibah should take steps to bring them about.
After his meeting with Dbeibah and officials in Tripoli, Kamel travelled on to
Benghazi, where he met Haftar at the headquarters of the General Command in
Al-Rajma. There Kamel underlined the importance of preparing the Libyan National
Army for the upcoming elections.
The new Libyan government is trying to reach out to all countries, especially
those actively concerned with the Libyan crisis, regardless of their past
positions towards the rival sides.
Cairo meanwhile is seeking to knock down the barriers that used to separate it
from Tripoli by lessening its previous contacts with the authorities in the east
and dealing more actively with the GNU.
This April, Egyptian Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly made an official visit to
Tripoli, accompanied by 11 ministers, to enhance cooperation between the two
neighbouring countries in a range of fields. .
Cairo had hinted last year at direct military intervention in Libya order to
counter Turkey’s attempt to control Sirte after the LNA failed in its offensive
towards Tripoli.
The withdrawal of Syrian mercenaries from Libya is one of Cairo’s key conditions
for resuming relations with Ankara. It seems that Turkish intransigence on this
particular point was a determining factors in the reported failure of the
Egyptian-Turkish talks.
But Egypt has not taken any public position on Russia’s Wagner mercenaries, who
are reportedly stationed near oil fields and in some military bases in the
south.
US removing anti-missile batteries from Middle East due
to age, not policy shift
Joseph Haboush, Al Arabiya English/18 June ,2021
Discussions by US officials to remove anti-missile batteries from countries in
the Middle East have to do with mechanical issues as opposed to a policy shift
away from traditional allies in the region, diplomats and officials said Friday.
“The Secretary of Defense directed the Commander of US Central Command to remove
from the region this summer certain forces and capabilities, primarily air
defense assets. Some of these assets will be returned to the United States for
much-needed maintenance and repair. Some of them will be redeployed to other
regions. We will not provide specific details,” Pentagon Spokesperson Commander
Jessica L. McNulty told Al Arabiya English. Biden administration officials were
quoted as telling the Wall Street Journal on Friday that eight Patriot
anti-missile batteries would be withdrawn from Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan and Saudi
Arabia as the White House looks to more pressing threats from Russia and
China.Earlier this month, the White House said it had 2,742 US forces in Saudi
Arabia and 2,976 in Jordan. It is believed there are just above 2,000 troops in
Iraq. As for Kuwait, there are close to 13,500 troops based primarily at Camp
Arifjan and Ali al-Salem Air Base, according to the State Department. Only
Germany, Japan and South Korea host more American forces than Kuwait, the State
Department says. But a Western diplomat pushed back against any perceived policy
shift and said there had been talks on the batteries dating back to the Trump
administration.
“This whole discussion is because of their age, and it’s more
maintenance-related than anything else. They’ve been sitting in the desert for
God knows how long,” the diplomat told Al Arabiya English. Officials reportedly
said that hundreds of US troops would also be pulled from several Middle Eastern
countries.
However, with the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, these forces will be
redeployed to “some of these countries in the region,” the diplomat told Al
Arabiya English. Despite the Pentagon, State Department and White House publicly
stating that Russia and China were the biggest threats to the United States,
Iran continues to warrant attention, especially as its proxies in Iraq and Yemen
continue to target US troops and allies.On Friday, presidential elections were
held in Iran as well. “Based on the results and who wins, it will be telling to
see what [US] military strategy comes out of that,” the Western diplomat said.
McNulty warned that the US maintained a “robust force posture in the region
appropriate” to any threats. “We also retain the flexibility to rapidly flow
forces back into the Middle East as conditions warrant,” the commander added in
a statement emailed to Al Arabiya English. Reassuring US allies and partners in
the region, McNulty said Washington’s commitment was “very clear” based on close
defense consultations and remaining ground, air, and naval footprint. Asked
about the move, McNulty said it was coordinated with the host nations. “It’s
about maintaining some of our high demand, low density assets so they are ready
for future requirements in the event of a contingency.”“The Defense Department
maintains tens of thousands of forces in the Middle East, representing some of
our most advanced air power and maritime capabilities, in support of US national
interests and our regional partnerships,” she said.
Canada announces new assistance for those affected by
conflict in Ethiopia’s Tigray region
June 18, 2021 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
Canada remains deeply concerned by the ongoing conflict in the Tigray region of
Ethiopia and the resulting humanitarian crisis that continues to worsen.
Today, the Honourable Marc Garneau, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the
Honourable Karina Gould, Minister of International Development, announced that
Canada is providing an additional $7 million in humanitarian funding to the
World Food Programme, the Ethiopia Humanitarian Fund, the United Nations Office
for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the International Committee of
the Red Cross to support humanitarian operations in Ethiopia.
Current assessments by the UN and local authorities indicate that 5.2 million
people in Tigray (90% of the population) now require humanitarian assistance.
This funding will help address critical food needs arising from the conflict.
The new contribution by Canada will also provide other life-saving assistance,
such as health care, support for victims of sexual violence, emergency shelters
and basic household goods, water and sanitation, and protection. It will also
support the coordination of the humanitarian response in the region.
Quotes
“Canada continues to call for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to the
conflict in Tigray. As the humanitarian situation worsens in the region, Canada
is continuing to work with its partners to meet the immediate, critical needs of
the millions of civilians affected by this crisis.”
- Marc Garneau, Minister of Foreign Affairs
“Every day that that goes by, the situation is getting worse for the millions of
people affected by the conflict in Tigray. They require urgent assistance, as
their lives have been put at risk and their livelihoods disrupted by the crisis.
Canada’s support will help provide some much-needed relief.”
- Karina Gould, Minister of International Development
Quick facts
The outbreak of the conflict between the Government of Ethiopia and the Tigray
People’s Liberation Front on November 3, 2020, has led to a rapidly
deteriorating humanitarian situation that affects both Ethiopia and neighbouring
Sudan.
Two lost growing seasons have led to catastrophic levels of food insecurity,
with the region facing a credible and increasing risk of famine.
As a result of the conflict, health infrastructure in the region has suffered
significant damage and destruction. Humanitarian and medical workers, their
means of transport and medical facilities continue to be attacked.
Associated links
Canada announces assistance for those affected by conflict in Ethiopia’s Tigray
region
Canada-Ethiopia relations
Humanitarian assistance
Canada extends ban on non-essential travel with U.S.
until July 21
NNA/Reuters/June 18/2021
Canada is extending a ban on non-essential travel with the United States until
July 21 and will soon reveal how existing COVID-19 restrictions will be relaxed,
Public Safety Minister Bill Blair said on Friday. Canada's Liberal government is
under increasing pressure from businesses and the tourism industry to ease the
ban, which was first imposed in March 2020 to help contain spread of the
coronavirus and has been renewed on a monthly basis ever since. "In coordination
with the U.S., we are extending restrictions on non-essential international
travel and with the United States until July 21st, 2021," Blair said on Twitter.
Ottawa will reveal on June 21 how it plans to start lifting the measures for
fully vaccinated Canadians and others who are currently permitted to enter
Canada, he added. Health Minister Patty Hajdu last week said the government was
preparing to lift quarantine protocols for citizens who had received their
second dose of a vaccine. The U.S. administration has created working groups
with both Mexico and Canada to discuss the restrictions. The groups held their
initial meetings this week, sources told Reuters.
Indian-Origin Man First Person of Colour to Be Named for
Canada Supreme Court.
The Quint/Fri., June 18, 2021
In a first, Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Thursday, 17 June, announced
the nomination of a person of colour to the Supreme Court. The nominee, Mahmud
Jamal, was born to an Indian family in Nairobi in 1967 and was brought up in
Britain before his family migrated to Canada in 1981, as per an AFP
report.Jamal, who has been serving as a litigator for decades, has also taught
at two of the most prestigious law universities in the Canada. He has been
serving as an Appeal judge at an Ontario Court since 2019. "He'll be a valuable
asset to the Supreme Court – and that's why, today, I'm announcing his historic
nomination to our country's highest court," the Prime Minister said. Canada is a
diversely multicultural nation, with almost a fourth of its population
identifiying as a minority. Jamal, in a job questionnaire, had indicated that
his hybrid religious and cultural upbringing, as well as his experiences in
Canada have made him cognisant of the challenges faced by immigrants and persons
belonging to minority groups. His wife, too, had immigrated to Canada from Iran
in order to evade religious persecution of the Baha'i religious minority during
the 1979 revolution. "Like many others, I experienced discrimination as a fact
of daily life. As a child and youth, I was taunted and harassed because of my
name, religion or the colour of my skin," Jamal had stated.The nominee will be
screened by the House of Commons justice committee as a formality before the
confirmation of his appointment.
(With inputs from AFP.)
The Latest The Latest LCCC English
analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June
18-19/2021
Biden Should Not Lift Sanctions Against
Iranian Presidential Candidate Ebrahim Raisi
Matthew Zweig/Policy Brief-FDD/June 18/2021
ماثيو زويك: مطلوب من الرئيس بيدن عدم رفع العقوبات عن ابراهيم رايسي المتوقع أن
يصبح رئيساً لإيران لأنه مجرم وسفاح وقاتل وإرهابي خطير
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/99851/matthew-zweig-policy-brief-fdd-biden-should-not-lift-sanctions-against-iranian-presidential-candidate-ebrahim-raisi-%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%ab%d9%8a%d9%88-%d8%b2%d9%88%d9%8a%d9%83-%d9%85%d8%b7%d9%84%d9%88/
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in congressional testimony last week that
if Iran and the United States re-enter the 2015 nuclear deal, formally known as
the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), “hundreds of sanctions [will]
remain in place, including sanctions imposed by the Trump administration.”
However, Blinken added the caveat that the Biden administration would still lift
sanctions “inconsistent with the JCPOA,” suggesting that Washington may revoke
non-nuclear sanctions on Iran as a concession for Tehran’s return to the accord.
In particular, Blinken’s statement raises the question of whether the Biden
administration will lift sanctions on Iranian judiciary chief Ebrahim Raisi, who
played a key role in the Islamic Republic’s execution of thousands of political
dissidents in 1988. Raisi, a close confidante of Iran’s supreme leader,
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is currently a leading candidate in Iran’s presidential
election, which is scheduled to take place on Friday.
Washington sanctioned Raisi in November 2019 pursuant to Executive Order 13876,
which President Donald Trump signed in June 2019. The order authorizes sanctions
against the supreme leader, the Office of the Supreme Leader, any official
appointed by him, and anyone conducting transactions with them. In particular,
the order authorizes sanctions on foreign financial institutions that knowingly
facilitate or conduct a significant transaction with any individual or entity
designated pursuant to that executive order.
Raisi has served in multiple positions in Iran’s judiciary, including as a
prosecutor, as deputy chief justice, and as attorney general. In these roles, he
helped perpetrate far-reaching punishments, including death sentences, for
political opponents.
In March 2019, Khamenei appointed Raisi to lead Iran’s judiciary, which was and
continues to be responsible for pervasive human rights abuses. That same month,
Khamenei also selected Raisi to serve as the deputy chief of the Assembly of
Experts, which chooses and oversees the selection of Iran’s supreme leader.
According to the State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
for 2020, the abuses continued under Raisi’s stewardship of the judiciary. The
report notes that the Iranian “government and its agents reportedly committed
arbitrary or unlawful killings, most commonly by execution after arrest and
trial without due process.”
Executive Order 13876 is a particularly powerful tool, as it provides for the
designation of a wide range of individuals and companies based on their status
within the supreme leader’s inner circle or affiliation with his office. This
extends to most appendages of the Iranian government.
Statements from the White House, Treasury Department, and State Department under
the Trump administration indicate that the executive order was a reaction to
Iran’s destabilizing activities in the Middle East. The sanctions are not
nuclear-related, and they are thus consistent with the JCPOA.
Since Executive Order 13876 targets malign Iranian actors and activities both
abroad and at home, its application to Raisi and to other senior Iranian
officials is a legitimate use of non-nuclear sanctions. To combat the continued
misconduct of the regime – both externally and internally – the Biden
administration should refrain from lifting any non-nuclear sanctions on Iran,
especially on Raisi.
Matthew Zweig is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD),
where he also contributes to FDD’s Iran Program and Center on Economic and
Financial Power (CEFP).
California man imprisoned in Iran is blocked from legal
counsel as health worsens, daughter says
The 66-year-old man has been detained by the Iranian
government since July 2020
Benjamin Weinthal/Fox News/June 18/2021
بنجامن وينثال/فوكس نيوز: الأميركي المعتقل اعتباطاً في السجون الإيرانية
جمشيد شارحد يمر بحالة صحية حرجة
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/99859/california-man-imprisoned-in-iran-is-blocked-from-legal-counsel-as-health-worsens-daughter-says-the-66-year-old-man-has-been-detained-by-the-iranian-government-since-july-2020-%d8%a8%d9%86%d8%ac/
State Department spokesperson expressed disgust this week with the Islamic
Republic of Iran’s refusal to release the imprisoned California resident Jamshid
Sharmahd, who is being held in Iran as his health condition worsens and without
legal counsel.
“We will work with our allies, many of which have citizens currently detained by
Iran, to seek their citizens’ release and stand up to the disgraceful practice
of using unjust detentions of foreign citizens as a political tool,” a State
Department spokesperson told Fox News on Tuesday.
The clerical regime of Iran detained the 66-year-old Sharmahd in July 2020 while
he was staying at the Premier Inn Dubai International Airport Hotel. Sharmahd’s
Parkinson’s disease and diabetes have since worsened, according to his daughter.
Iranian state TV aired video footage in August 2020 of him appearing to confess,
while blindfolded, to a 2008 terrorist attack in Shiraz, Iran, that left 14 dead
and more than 200 injured.
Gazelle Sharmahd, the software engineer’s daughter, told Fox News that after the
abduction, Iranian regime “propaganda outlets” broadcasted a “forced confession”
in which her father “admitted to a crime that he did not commit.”
The regime frequently tortures political prisoners, for example the champion
wrestler Navid Afkari, who it subsequently executed, to secure coerced
confessions.
Gazelle said her father has rejected his Iranian regime-appointed lawyer.
“Nothing they are doing is legal,” she continued. “We want our father to be
released. He was kidnapped. They have to let our lawyer and embassy see him. He
is not a dual-national.”
Regime authorities contend Sharmahd, who left Iran at age 14 for Germany, is an
Iranian citizen. Sharmahd has lived in California since 2003 and holds German
citizenship.
Gazelle said her family is “very worried” because her father has been in
“solitary confinement for 10 months, which is inhumane, especially for someone
who is 66 with Parkinson’s.”
She gave birth to a girl on Dec. 31, 2020, and said the situation is “killing
us” because her father is “not going to see her.” The baby, Jamshid’s first
grandchild, is named Kiana (“elements of nature,” i.e.: earth, wind, fire, etc.,
in Persian).
The Islamic Republic accused Sharmahd of membership in the exiled pro-secular
monarchy group Tondar, which seeks the overthrow of the radical Islamic state
founded by Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979. Tondar means “thunder” in Persian.
Gazelle said paid agents of the Islamic Republic sought to assassinate her
father in California in 2009 because of his opposition activities, including his
radio talk show.
The 2009 assassination plot garnered widespread media attention, and resulted in
the conviction of Mohammad Sadeghnia, who arranged the planned murder, according
to the Wall Street Journal.
When asked about the German government’s efforts to secure Sharmahd’s release,
the foreign ministry in Berlin told Fox News, “The federal government has
repeatedly advocated for German prisoners in Iran and will continue to do so. In
this context, we will continue to strive for consular access to the person
concerned. As a rule, however, Iran does not grant consular access to prisoners
who also have Iranian citizenship.”
The ministry added that “for reasons of privacy protection, we cannot provide
any further information on individual consular cases.”
Critics argue that Germany’s largely pro-Iranian regime policies have not helped
political prisoners.
“The German government should understand the basic duty to its citizens is to
secure release of German nationals being held hostage by the despotic Iranian
regime, as in the case of Jamshid Sharmahd. Germany is a key participant in the
Vienna [nuclear] talks and has the opportunity to demand hostage release from
the Iranians, as does the U.S. In reality, Western powers should have demanded
release of their hostages before even being willing to sit down for negotiations
with the Islamic Republic in Iran,” Ellie Cohanim, the former U.S. deputy
special envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism and who was born in Iran, told
Fox News.
The Vienna talks are being held between Iran’s regime and world powers, with the
aim to bring the U.S. and Tehran back into the highly controversial nuclear deal
that is supposed to restrict Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for economic
sanctions relief.
Germany stands to benefit from expanded trade with Tehran. Berlin has remained
Iran’s most important European business partner for decades. Chancellor Angela
Merkel’s government has not objected to the sale of German dual use technology
(military and civilian) to Iranian businesses that has been used in Iranian
chemical missiles against Syrians.
When asked whether the German government agrees with the U.S. State Department
that the detention of Sharmahd constitutes a “disgraceful practice of
using unjust detentions of foreign citizens as a political tool,” the foreign
ministry in Berlin said it does not comment on the statements of other
governments.
Gazelle Sharmahd expressed disappointment with the German responses, saying, “It
is your [the German government’s] obligation to defend your citizens.” She
welcomed the U.S. statement as “great” because the American government is
prepared to “back up” its allies. She added, however, that the State Department
has not reached out to her.
Lisa Daftari, an Iranian-American journalist and foreign policy expert, told Fox
News that the world powers involved in the atomic talks in Austria “should have
demanded that all Western hostages be freed before heading to Vienna. Leaders
from the U.S. and Germany cannot comfortably sit at the negotiating table with
the Iranian regime knowing that Jamshid Sharmahd and many others like him are
sitting in jail, being used as hostages and symbolic pawns in the mullahs’
political power plays.”
She continued, “In the name of solely focusing on Iran’s nuclear program, the
West has allowed Iran to continue getting away with its reprehensible human
rights abuses against its own people as well as its hostages and likewise,
remain the world’s greatest sponsor of terror with no retribution.”
Jason M. Brodsky, senior Middle East analyst at Iran International, a
London-based news organization, told Fox News, “It’s the responsibility of the
U.S. and Europe to prioritize these cases. I was disappointed not to see any
mention of this malign practice in the U.S.-EU statement, following the Brussels
[NATO] Summit. It was solely focused on the nuclear deal, and this sends the
wrong message to Tehran.”
The detainment of Sharmahd revealed once again the Iranian regime’s
long-standing practice of targeting dissidents active outside the country,
including the journalist Ruhollah Zam, who was abducted in 2019 and executed by
the regime in 2020.
The Iranian human rights expert Roya Boroumand, who is the co-founder of the
Washington-based Abdorrahman Boroumand Center, told Fox News, “Obviously this
abduction, that of Zam, and the disappearance of [Frood] Fouladvand before him
and the more recent assassinations outside Iran shed light on a dangerous
situation and it is urgent for democracies to be more vocal.
“Not only to convey serious concern to Iranian leaders about Jamshid Sharmahd
who is at serious risk of execution without due process, the same fate as five
alleged members of his organization, but because impunity for abductions can
only lead to more abductions of Iranians and non-Iranians,” she continued.
While Germany’s government faces accusations of passivity regarding Sharmahd’s
dire plight, some opposition parties in the Bundestag are raising their voices.
The office of the Free Democratic Party Bundestag deputy Bijan Djir-Sarai has
been contact with Gazelle and is preparing an application to open an official
inquiry about human rights in the Islamic Republic that includes her father’s
case.
A German Green party motion in September 2020 cited Sharmahd in the context of
demanding that Iran’s regime comply with international human rights norms: “The
German-Iranian Jamshid Shahrmahd, who lives in the USA, was kidnapped from Dubai
by the Iranian secret service, according to statements by his family, and forced
into Iranian custody under torture,” the motion notes.
Fox News sent press queries to the governments of Iran, the United Arab Emirates
and Oman, but no response was received by press time.
*Benjamin Weinthal reports on human rights in the Middle East and is a fellow at
the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Follow him on Twitter @BenWeinthal.
FDD is a nonpartisan think tank focused on foreign policy and national security
issues.
https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2021/06/17/california-man-imprisoned-in-iran/
Ali Larijani, Iran’s Rejected Hardliner
Tzvi Kahn/Insight-FDD/June 18/2021
It wasn’t supposed to end this way.
On May 15, Ali Larijani, the former speaker of Iran’s parliament, registered to
run for president. Ten days later, the Guardian Council – an unelected,
12-member body that determines the eligibility of presidential candidates –
announced that it approved seven of approximately 590 hopefuls who had
registered to run, not including Larijani.
Initially, Larijani took the rejection in stride. “I have done my duty before
God and the dear nation, and I am satisfied,” he wrote on Twitter on May 25.
“Thank you to all those who expressed their gratitude and I hope you will
participate in the elections for the promotion of an Islamic Iran.”
Yet now, Larijani says he wants answers. “I urge the esteemed Guardian Council …
to formally, publicly and transparently provide all the reasons behind my
disqualification,” he said in a tweet on June 12. A spokesman for the Guardian
Council responded that Iranian law does not require the body to disclose its
reasoning in public.
The council’s disqualification of Larijani, an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader,
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, constitutes a singular humiliation for a man who has
devoted his life to advancing the principles of the Islamic Revolution. While
media reports often describe him as a “moderate” or as a “moderate
conservative,” Larijani is anything but. Over the course of his career, he has
repeatedly demonized the United States and Israel, denied the Holocaust,
defended terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, vilified homosexuals, and
insisted that Iran bears the right to maintain a robust uranium enrichment
program akin to North Korea’s.
Larijani began his career as an intellectual, earning a master’s degree and
Ph.D. in Western philosophy from the University of Tehran and writing books on
the philosopher Immanuel Kant. Larijani then opted to serve in the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps for a decade. For some 30 years thereafter, he has
occupied multiple senior positions in Iran’s government.
As minister of culture and Islamic guidance from 1992 to 1994, Larijani played a
key role in promoting the regime’s Islamist ideology – and in suppressing
alternative views. The ministry forcefully vets books, museum exhibitions,
television stations, music, concerts, the fashion industry, and theatrical
performances, all of which require a permit to operate. Iranians who publicize
their work without a license frequently face imprisonment and torture.
This experience prepared Larijani well for his next job: the head of Islamic
Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), the country’s state-run media
conglomerate, which holds a near-monopoly on Iran’s television and radio
services. From 1994 to 2004, he presided over the broadcasting of regime
propaganda denouncing the Islamic Republic’s many critics. One program in
particular, Hoviyyat, Persian for “identity,” targeted progressive intellectuals
and democracy activists, denouncing them as threats to Iran’s national and
religious character. The broadcasts often served as the basis for the regime’s
arrest and imprisonment of its opponents.
Similarly, in 2003, IRIB established two Arabic-language channels in an effort
to export the regime’s revolutionary ideas. France banned one of them for airing
antisemitic and pro-Hezbollah programming.
In 2005, Larijani conducted his first campaign for president, winning approval
from the Guardian Council. But he received just 5.94 percent of the vote,
putting him in sixth place in a field of seven candidates. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
won the election, with 61.69 percent of the ballots.
Despite Larijani’s poor showing, Ahmadinejad gave him a critical position in the
new government: chief nuclear negotiator. In this capacity, Larijani adopted an
uncompromising approach, spurning repeated international demands that Tehran
halt its enrichment of uranium. During Larijani’s three years in this job, the
UN Security Council passed two resolutions imposing sanctions on Iran.
“I recommend once again that you pay attention to the conduct of North Korea,”
Larijani said in 2005. “After two years of dealings with North Korea, what have
you got? You have accepted North Korea’s nuclear technology in the field of
uranium enrichment. So accept ours now. We have no problem. We don’t want
anything else.”
Larijani repeatedly disparaged compromise. Any “concession on nuclear technology
is tantamount to treason,” he famously declared in 2007. In another well-known
avowal in 2004, Larijani contended that any Iranian halt of uranium enrichment
in exchange for European concessions would be tantamount to “giving a pearl in
exchange for candy.”
Between 2005 and 2007, Larijani served as secretary of the Supreme National
Security Council, Iran’s highest decision-making body on security-related
issues. This role made him complicit in Tehran’s illicit pursuit of nuclear
weapons as well as its regional aggression, support for terrorism, and domestic
repression.
From 2008 to 2020, Larijani served as speaker of the Majlis, Iran’s
pseudo-democratic parliament, which holds elections every four years. As it does
before presidential contests, the Guardian Council screens all parliamentary
candidates to ensure their loyalty to the Islamic Republic. In the 2020
election, the council disqualified 7,296 hopefuls out of the more than 14,500
who registered to compete.
Yet Larijani has defended Iran’s government as fundamentally democratic. “Just
take a look at the countries that have surrounded Iran,” he said in 2015, “and
you will see that Iran is like an exception. It’s a democratic country, and the
peoples’ voice and votes are respected.”
Larijani’s dubious claim is consistent with the inflammatory statements that he
routinely issued as speaker of parliament.
In 2015, Larijani called America the “great Satan.” In 2013, he dubbed Israel
the “Zionist plague.” In 2009, he asserted that there could “be different
perspectives on the Holocaust,” including the question of whether the Nazis
killed 6 million Jews.
Larijani has hailed Iran’s military support for the terrorist groups Hamas and
Hezbollah. Iran, he said in 2012, is “honored to provide the Palestinian people
with military aid, while all Arabic countries do is hold meetings.” In 2008, in
a comment directed at then-President-elect Barack Obama, Larijani said, “We are
proud of supporting Hezbollah since they are defending their homeland and you
are wrong in calling them terrorists.”
Larijani has also defended Iran’s persecution of the LGBTQ community. In
response to the European Parliament’s passage of a resolution in 2014 that calls
on Iran to halt its human rights abuses, including its discrimination on the
basis of gender or sexual orientation, Larijani said the measure amounts to
“interference in the democratic system in Iran, in [its] elections, in human
rights [issues], and in deviant sexual ideas.”
Yet Larijani’s history of loyalty to the revolution proved insufficient for the
Guardian Council to approve his bid for the presidency in 2021. While the reason
for the council’s decision remains unclear, it may be that Larijani’s record of
enforcing submission to the regime lags behind that of another candidate,
Ebrahim Raisi, the first choice and confidant of Khamenei. As a prosecutor, as
attorney general, and later as head of Iran’s judiciary, Raisi oversaw the
imprisonment, torture, and execution of countless prisoners of conscience,
including the 1988 massacre of thousands of political dissidents.
Khamenei likely wishes to see an overwhelming victory for Raisi, who now faces
three other opponents, none with Raisi’s prominence. At the same time, as the
regime faces increasing challenges to its legitimacy by a disaffected public
angered by a cratering economy and Tehran’s repression, turnout will likely be
low, thereby weakening the victor’s ability to claim a mandate. One recent poll
projected a turnout of only 41 percent.
Still, Larijani opted to serve a regime whose institutions all must bend to the
will of the supreme leader. He should not be surprised when Khamenei spurns the
people who served him most sedulously.
*Tzvi Kahn is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD),
where he contributes to FDD’s Iran Program and Center on Military and Political
Power (CMPP). For more analysis from Tzvi, the Iran Program, and CMPP, please
subscribe HERE. Follow Tzvi on Twitter @TzviKahn. Follow FDD on Twitter @FDD, @FDD_Iran,
and @FDD_CMPP. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute
focusing on national security and foreign policy.
FAQ: Issues Ahead on Iran’s Nuclear Program
Mark Dubowitz/Andrea Stricker/FDD/June 18/2021
مارك دوبويتز/أندريا ستريكر: أسئلة غالباً ما تسأل عن برنامج إيران النووي وأجوبة
عليها
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/99855/mark-dubowitz-andrea-stricker-fdd-faq-issues-ahead-on-irans-nuclear-program-%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%b1%d9%83-%d8%af%d9%88%d8%a8%d9%88%d9%8a%d8%aa%d8%b2-%d8%a3%d9%86%d8%af%d8%b1%d9%8a%d8%a7/
What is the Biden administration’s policy regarding the 2015 Iran nuclear deal,
formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)?
The Biden administration is currently negotiating a return to the JCPOA, which
61 percent of Congress, including 29 Democrats in the House and Senate, opposed
in 2015. The Biden administration plans to lift many of the sanctions imposed on
Iran by the previous administration after President Donald Trump withdrew from
the JCPOA in May 2018. The Biden policy is to end the Trump administration’s
policy of “maximum pressure” and to use diplomacy to achieve a “longer and
stronger” accord after both the United States and Tehran return to compliance.
(Biden administration officials have dropped President Joe Biden’s original
commitment to also reach a broader deal relating to Iran’s missiles and regional
behavior.) The Islamic Republic has refused all such negotiations.
What is the main problem with reviving the JCPOA?
In return for Iranian compliance with the JCPOA and the associated UN Security
Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2231, both of which have restrictions that will
expire over the next three to nine and a half years, the Biden administration
has indicated that it will lift nuclear, terrorism, missile, and other illicit
finance-related sanctions, including those restricting the Islamic Republic’s
ability to sell oil and attract investment. These sanctions target Iran’s
central bank; Iran’s national oil, tanker, and shipping companies; and six key
sectors of the Iranian economy. The Trump administration sanctioned these
targets because of their connections to terrorism, the Islamic Revolutionary
Guard Corps (IRGC), and other malign actors and activities. The clerical regime
will thus have additional funds to save its faltering economy and to arm its
proxies and militias in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and the Palestinian
territories – destabilizing the region and undermining American interests.
What parts of the JCPOA and UNSCR 2231 are expiring, and when?
In 2024, under the JCPOA, nuclear sunsets will enable Iran to deploy faster,
more advanced centrifuges to enrich uranium. With these advanced models, Tehran
will require fewer machines to produce weapons-grade uranium, making the
centrifuges easier to hide. By January 2031, the Islamic Republic can even
stockpile nuclear weapons-grade uranium. Iran’s breakout time will become so
short, and its clandestine sneak-out capabilities will be so advanced, that
world powers will be unable to stop Tehran if it moves to build atomic weapons.
JCPOA limits are already becoming obsolete today. Iran is developing important
expertise in enriching uranium to 60 percent purity – a short step from 90
percent, or weapons-grade, uranium – and is practicing a breakout and sneak-out
to nuclear weapons. Tehran is also furthering its advanced centrifuge program
and sensitive nuclear weapons-relevant processes. Iran’s technical knowledge
from these advances will not disappear even if the Biden administration
re-establishes the JCPOA.
Key provisions of UNSCR 2231 have expired or will soon expire. In 2020, Iran
gained the internationally recognized right to import and proliferate military
equipment. This enables Chinese and Russian military suppliers to sell, without
international restrictions, advanced fighter jets, battle tanks, warships,
attack helicopters, and other deadly weapons to the clerical regime. In 2023,
Iran can buy and sell missile technology and conduct missile tests, giving
Tehran access to technologies to advance its ballistic and cruise missile
programs, including its intercontinental ballistic missile program.
What is the likelihood Iran will negotiate a follow-on nuclear accord?
After receiving massive sanctions relief and the tens of billions of dollars
that will flow into its coffers, Iran will almost certainly refuse to negotiate
a longer, stronger, and broader nuclear accord or to institute a policy of
transparency regarding its nuclear program. The Islamic Republic will continue
to use nuclear blackmail – threatening to expand its nuclear program and
restrict international monitoring – whenever the United States imposes pressure.
If Tehran does agree to a new accord, it will almost certainly demand, among
other concessions, the end of all U.S. sanctions, including statutory sanctions
imposed by Congress and a U.S. primary embargo against most trade with Iran,
which has been in place for decades.
Iran will not negotiate meaningful restrictions or restrain its malign
activities unless it faces severe consequences for its misconduct. The Biden
administration’s contention that it will reimpose all the lifted sanctions if
Tehran does not agree to a “longer and stronger” deal assumes that the president
will sanction companies from America’s European and Asian allies, and that he
will face down Iranian nuclear extortion when the regime escalates its program.
Both are dubious claims given his willingness to back down to current regime
blackmail and his commitment to transatlantic comity.
Won’t it be easier to deal with Iran’s efforts to destabilize the region if its
ability to develop nuclear weapons is limited, even temporarily?
Iran escalated its regional aggression while the JCPOA was in effect from 2015
to 2018. Yet the United States and E3 (France, the United Kingdom, and Germany)
were afraid to confront Tehran, lest it withdraw from the deal. This is likely
to happen again. By contrast, the Trump administration did not back down from
targeting the Islamic Republic, despite Iran’s nuclear escalation. The U.S.
decision to kill IRGC-Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, and the Israeli
assassination of the head of Iran’s military-nuclear program, Mohsen
Fakhrizadeh, shocked the clerical regime. During the Trump administration,
Tehran did not retaliate significantly in response to the loss of its most
competent battlefield commander and the head of its nuclear weapons program. By
contrast, Tehran’s green-lighting of rocket attacks by Iran-backed Hamas and
Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the latest Gaza war suggests that the regime is
less deterred by American power under the Biden administration.
Since its key restrictions are temporary, the JCPOA effectively provides Iran
with a patient pathway to nuclear weapons. If Tehran waits for the deal’s sunset
clauses to take effect, it will have a robust nuclear program on the brink of
weaponization, legitimized by the United States and the UN Security Council.
Isn’t it true that Iran complied with the JCPOA until the United States
withdrew? Doesn’t that show that Iran will comply with a deal it considers fair?
In 2018, Israel seized files from a Tehran warehouse that document Iran’s
efforts to develop nuclear weapons, have the capability to test them, and mount
them on ballistic missiles. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the
UN nuclear watchdog, corroborated this evidence. The files indicate that until
2003, Tehran had an advanced nuclear weapons program aimed at building several
implosion nuclear devices. Under pressure, Iran then downsized and better
camouflaged the program but maintained it and kept its nuclear weapons
blueprints hidden from the IAEA.
This revelation decisively shows that from day one, the Islamic Republic was in
violation of a JCPOA provision requiring that Iran never again seek nuclear
weapons. Tehran was also in violation of its obligations under the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) not to develop nuclear weapons, a legally binding
commitment that dates to 1970. Iran should have destroyed its nuclear
weapons-related documents and transparently halted all activities related to
nuclear weaponization.
Does Iran’s nuclear program currently maintain military dimensions?
The IAEA has been unable to determine whether Iran’s nuclear weapons program
continues today. Tehran is not cooperating with IAEA inquiries into its
undeclared use of nuclear material at three covert sites and will not do so
absent international pressure. In 2015, after the JCPOA’s finalization, world
powers asked the IAEA to remove its investigation of Iran’s military nuclear
program from the agency’s agenda and to issue a “final” report on the matter. In
the report, Tehran offered partial explanations, denials, and outright lies in
response to IAEA queries, but world powers proceeded with lifting sanctions. It
was only when Iran’s archive came to light in 2018 that a new IAEA inquiry
began.
What is the IAEA investigating in Iran today?
In 2019 and 2020, the IAEA asked Iran for access to three sites related to the
nuclear archive’s revelations and questioned Iran about a fourth site. Iran
initially denied access to the three sites but relented under international
pressure. The agency found credible evidence that Iran may have used nuclear
material or carried out nuclear activities that Tehran should have declared
under its NPT safeguards obligations. Under the NPT, states must reach a
comprehensive safeguards agreement (CSA) with the IAEA and declare their use of
nuclear material and the locations where they conduct sensitive nuclear
activities.
Despite the regime’s sanitization and concealment efforts, the IAEA detected the
presence of uranium particles at all three of the accessed sites. The IAEA has
attempted to engage in a dialogue with Iran to obtain explanations for the
undeclared nuclear material, but Tehran is not cooperating, and the IAEA deems
the regime’s limited explanations “not technically credible.” Tehran is taking
an increasingly hostile tone toward the agency, calling it biased and
politicized and the archive information unfounded.
What could happen to the IAEA’s investigation in Iran if Biden re-enters the
JCPOA?
World powers may once again push the IAEA to close outstanding safeguards issues
– or at least allow the investigation to languish – to preserve the JCPOA.
Although Iran has not cooperated with the IAEA’s safeguards investigation, since
June 2020, the IAEA Board of Governors has declined to put forward a new
resolution demanding that Tehran comply with its legal obligations regarding
nonproliferation. World powers are prioritizing the JCPOA negotiations at the
expense of the nonproliferation regime.
How is the IAEA Board of Governors limited in pursuing Iranian nonproliferation
violations?
Even if the board does pass a resolution censuring Iran, the board’s principal
recourse for holding Iran accountable – referring the case to the UN Security
Council for countermeasures – is effectively blocked by UNSCR 2231. This is
because 2231 lifts all prior UN sanctions against Iran and maintains the JCPOA.
Thus, in order to pursue penalties against Iran’s nonproliferation misconduct,
world powers on the board would first have to bring down 2231 and the JCPOA, so
they will likely hesitate to refer Iran to the Security Council at all.
Further demonstrating how UNSCR 2231 and the JCPOA impede the international
community’s recourse, 2231 and the JCPOA’s so-called “sanctions snapback
mechanism” last only until October 2025, after which all prior UN resolutions
against Iran will terminate. Future UN sanctions against Iran will then require
Russian and Chinese approval, which is unlikely.
How is Iran extorting the IAEA?
Iran began unprecedented extortion of the IAEA in February 2021 when Tehran
announced it would no longer implement a set of JCPOA verification measures and
an IAEA monitoring accord called the Additional Protocol (AP). Under the JCPOA,
the Islamic Republic had agreed to provisionally implement the AP and ratify it
by 2023. The AP supplements the required CSA and strengthens the IAEA’s
verification capabilities.
The IAEA director general brokered a temporary understanding that Tehran would
continue operating IAEA video surveillance and electronic monitoring devices to
collect safeguards information at relevant nuclear facilities but would keep the
data in Iranian custody and erase it if Iran did not receive sanctions relief
within three months. As the May 2021 deadline approached, Tehran agreed to
extend the arrangement by one month, or until June 24. Iran’s threat to delete
IAEA monitoring data represents a new level of extortion and should have
received harsh censure by the IAEA board, yet the board is withholding action to
avoid disturbing the nuclear talks.
How could the JCPOA contribute to nuclear proliferation in the Middle East?
Under the JCPOA, Iran is permitted to maintain the formerly covert enrichment
program that Western intelligence services have discovered over the past two
decades – a reversal of previous UN resolutions demanding that Tehran halt all
enrichment. Past U.S. policy has been to oppose the spread of means to produce
any fissile material for nuclear weapons; America refuses to provide such
technology to allies unless they sign a “gold standard” agreement (as the United
Arab Emirates and South Korea did) pledging not to enrich uranium or reprocess
plutonium on their soil.
With shifting standards and nuclear sunsets in mind, Iran’s neighbors may seek
advanced fuel cycle capabilities. Several states may position themselves close
to the nuclear-weapon threshold, creating conditions for a nuclear arms race.
Saudi Arabia is already exploring its own fuel cycle and has made clear that it
will acquire nuclear weapons if Iran does.
Wasn’t the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign a failure, since
Iran expanded its nuclear program and carried out more provocations?
Maximum pressure had only about 18 months to take effect, but sanctions imposed
severe costs on Iran’s economy, leading to anti-regime protests. The killing of
Soleimani and Fakhrizadeh were major losses for the Islamic Republic. Israeli
sabotage also reportedly set back Tehran’s nuclear program.
The Trump administration expected the regime to escalate its nuclear program
under maximum pressure. The United States would be far better off confronting a
weakened Iran today than a much stronger Iran tomorrow, when Tehran will emerge
with a massive nuclear program (as JCPOA restrictions sunset), a more resilient
economy, and tens of billions of dollars in sanctions relief to fund its malign
activities.
How should the Biden administration proceed with Iran?
The administration should prioritize the IAEA’s investigation into Iran’s
nuclear program. The United States should not rejoin the JCPOA or lift
sanctions, thereby abandoning crucial leverage for seeking meaningful Iranian
change. Instead, America should lead efforts to pressure, contain, and constrain
the Islamic Republic while supporting the Iranian people’s efforts to replace
their clerical regime. President Ronald Reagan’s maximum pressure campaign
against the Soviet Union, a much more powerful foe with thousands of
nuclear-tipped missiles aimed at American cities, illustrates how American power
and support for anti-regime dissidents can consign a dangerous dictatorship to
the ash heap of history.
A salute to Netanyahu’s strategic leadership - opinion
David M. Weinberg/Jerusalem Post/June 18/2021
The outgoing prime minister had a grand strategy for Israel and successfully
implemented it, turning Israel into a regional powerhouse.
Whatever one thinks about Benjamin Netanyahu’s political conduct over recent
years (which led to his ignominious defeat by the Bennett-Lapid coalition), I
believe that history will recognize Netanyahu as one of the great leaders of the
State of Israel and one of the most astute global strategists of our time.
The main reason for this is that he made Israel strong, and used this strength
to anchor Israel’s independence. He advanced a total reworking of the regional
strategic architecture and attitudes toward Israel based on respect for Israel’s
strength, stability and utility in the civilizational battles against Islamist
radicalism; battles that are the grand challenges of the early 21st century.
From his earliest days in diplomacy and going back to his very first book about
Israel and the world (A Place Among the Nations), Netanyahu understood that
Israel could survive and would be respected only if it became very, very strong.
Aside from raw military power, there were two additional elements of strength
that were central to Netanyahu’s strategic thinking: economic success and
diplomatic maneuverability.
Throughout his terms as prime minister, Netanyahu acted to free the Israeli
economy from its earlier socialist shackles, to encourage entrepreneurship, and
to open the economy for international business partnerships. He knew that this
was critical for Israel’s ability to maintain its civilian and military
industries (which in turn are critical to maintaining Israel’s military power),
and to making Israel an attractive place for global investment.
In this, he succeeded beyond anybody’s wildest imaginations, drawing in the
involvement of giant global conglomerates from Intel to Chevron.
Israel’s economic attractiveness overwhelmed the nefarious Boycott, Divestment
and Sanctions movement, which sought to isolate and economically strangle
Israel. Economic success also was one of the key ingredients of last year’s
Abraham Accord peace treaties. Gulf Arab nations marveled at Israel’s
technological and economic success and pined to partner with it.
Onto this, Netanyahu layered global diplomatic outreach, aimed at developing new
political alliances and business markets for Israel – ranging from India and
China to Africa and South America. He also expanded Israel’s diplomatic ties to
Russia and Eastern Europe. All this has provided Israel with a more broad-based
diplomatic oeuvre than ever before, allowing Israel to maneuver on the global
playing field for strategic advantage.
Netanyahu did so without losing sight of the fact that the United States is and
must remain Israel’s greatest diplomatic and military ally. He stick-handled the
US-Israel relationship, with prudence I believe, through eight difficult years
of Barak Obama’s presidency and four chaotic years of Donald Trump’s presidency.
He did so without succumbing to Obama’s often-ugly pressures for perilous
withdrawals on the Palestinian front, while succeeding in obtaining additional
US military aid from Obama and important diplomatic gains from Trump (such as
the move of the embassy to Jerusalem, recognition of the Golan as Israeli
territory, the Pompeo declaration on historic Jewish settlement rights, and
more).
Throughout these challenging years, Netanyahu maintained and expanded Israel’s
diplomatic independence. The ultimate expression of this was his speech to the
US Congress in 2015 against Obama’s dangerous nuclear deal with Iran. Despite
the centrality of the US alliance for Israel, Netanyahu spoke out unambiguously
and bravely against administration policy when he felt that Israel’s most
existential security interests were at stake.
This is what the leader of a truly independent country does – the prime minister
of the first sovereign Jewish state in 2,000 years – when the chips are down.
I DOUBT THAT this was what Netanyahu was thinking about at the time, but
numerous public figures in the Arabian Gulf have told me that more than anything
else, it was Netanyahu’s defiant speech in Congress that drove their leaders
forward toward open diplomatic relations with Israel.
With the US withdrawing from its commitments in the Middle East, and Iran
threatening, these Arab leaders discovered a new strategic partner in the
independent State of Israel. They recognized that Israel is the only country in
the region engaged in concrete daily combat against the Iranians, through covert
intelligence operations and targeted strikes.
Because of the political earthquakes of the past decade (like the Arab world
meltdown and rise of ISIS) and thanks to Netanyahu’s wise diplomacy, important
actors around the world have come to accept one of Netanyahu’s central strategic
arguments: that the main “game” in the region is no longer Israel versus the
Palestinians or Israel versus the Arabs.
Instead, the main basis for defense and diplomatic activity in the Middle East
is an unofficial alliance between Israel and most of the Arabs against the
Iranians and other jihadis. It is the forces of stability and moderation against
the forces of violent and radical Islamic revolution.
It is in this context that Netanyahu’s policies on the Palestinian file need to
be viewed. Upon collapse of the Oslo process due to Palestinian rejectionism,
Netanyahu understood that Israel must prevent runaway Palestinian statehood; the
emergence of a radical state that would prolong and exacerbate conflict with
Israel instead of ending it.
He worked to dial back the unrealistic and foolhardy “international consensus”
whereby Israel was expected to swiftly broker full-fledged and effectively
separate Palestinian states in the West Bank and Gaza; especially under
Palestinian regimes that are radicalized, dictatorial and corrupt. (For a short
while, he had the praiseworthy cooperation of the Trump administration in this
regard.)
The bottom line is that whether or not they liked Netanyahu as prime minister,
allies and adversaries knew that they faced formidable and determined Israeli
leadership. US presidents Obama and Trump, Russian President Putin, German
Chancellor Merkel, Egyptian President Sisi, Turkish wannabe-sultan Erdogan, and
Palestinian and Iranian leaders, too, were forced to acknowledge Israel’s clear
security red lines and resolute diplomatic principles.
They knew that Israel was led by someone who was cautious in the use of force
but did not flinch from confrontation when truly necessary. At the very least,
this bought Israel grudging respect, and again, considerable strategic
flexibility. This allowed Israel to conduct with relative impunity a forceful
“war between wars” against Iranian and Shi’ite militias in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq
and apparently inside Iran as well, without this erupting into a comprehensive
war.
This was Netanyahu’s “grand strategy,” and it largely succeeded. It involved
steadfastness, patience, and seeing far over the horizon. It involved
positioning Israel as an anchor of sanity and a source of ingenuity in an
unstable world.
Of course, Netanyahu is no saint, and he failed to adequately address several
explosive Israeli identity issues. He has burdened the next generation of
Israeli leaders with economic inequalities, religious-secular and
Israel-Diaspora divides, legislative-legal imbalances, and democratic deficits.
But Prime Minister Bennett and Alternate Prime Minister Lapid would do well to
embrace Netanyahu’s strategic doctrines (even giving him some credit), and in so
doing lead Israel toward ever-more-robust security and diplomatic achievements.
The author is vice president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and
Security, jiss.org.il. His site is davidmweinberg.com. This article reflects his
personal views.
Iran's Fake Presidential Election
Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute/June 18, 2021
The genuine power in Iran is made up of unelected, authoritarian, religious and
fascist military elites who, for decades, have, frozen in place the
revolutionary, theocratic ideology of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The
nomination mechanism for presidential candidates is itself part of the
fraudulent process.
Past elections have either been rigged in favor the hardliners, as in today's
election, or so overshadowed by the power of the regime's deep state, that no
president is been able to effect any substantive reforms to loosen the chokehold
that the mullahs maintain on Iranian citizens.
The most likely dark horse is former Central Bank of Iran President Abdolnasser
Hemmati, a (relative) moderate.... Hemmati's biggest obstacle is the lack of
interest by the majority of Iran's electorate. They seem to have despaired of
any real change in the Islamic Republic, at least in the near future. The US
negotiating team, seemingly desperate for a deal -- any deal -- with the
mullahs, could cause far less global damage if they despaired of it, as well.
Iran's so-called presidential election today, June 18, is a fraud, a ruse for
the world to observe and seemingly domestically designed to release some pent-up
popular pressure.
Iran's presidency itself is a weak institution of weak political superstructure
which also includes the legislative branch (the majles, the sort-of equivalent
of a parliament). This highly visible but insubstantial governmental apparatus
masks the real power in Iran: the "deep state" of the Islamic Republic.
The genuine power in Iran is made up of unelected, authoritarian, religious and
fascist military elites who, for decades, have, frozen in place the
revolutionary, theocratic ideology of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The
nomination mechanism for presidential candidates is itself part of the
fraudulent process. All candidates must first be approved by the hardline and
powerful Council of Guardians (COG), which decides whether the prospective
candidate is loyal enough to Islamic revolutionary principles. Any candidate who
is judged by the appointed 12 member Council of Guardians (six mullahs, six
laymen) to be insufficiently "Islamic" or unwanted by the clergy is rejected.
Almost always, this process favors conservative hardliners, thereby serving its
intended purpose.
The office of the Supreme Leader (Rahbar), who is the titular head of the "Deep
State," is occupied by the autocratic Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. It is the Supreme
Leader who can always intervene and make known his preferences to the Council of
Guardians behind the scenes before the COG announces its final list of approved
candidates
Today's presidential election, the 13th since the 1979 revolution , will field a
list of seven candidates. According to opinion polls and Iranians, as well as
the Western media and think tanks, the odds-on favorite to win is Ebrahim Raisi,
the hardline Chief Justice of Iran and Khamenei's former student. Khamenei has
made it clear that Raisi is the candidate he favors.
As Tehran Prosecutor in 1988, he was responsible, in part, for the executions of
thousands of political prisoners. Raisi has the blood of innocents on his hands.
The majority of registered voters, as predicted by one poll, may boycott the
election. Past elections have either been rigged in favor the hardliners, as in
today's election, or so overshadowed by the power of the regime's deep state,
that no president is been able to effect any substantive reforms to loosen the
chokehold that the mullahs maintain on Iranian citizens.
Occasionally, despite the cautionary measures taken by the "deep state," a
candidate not favored by the "ton-ro" (hardliners), such as Mohammad Khatami,
was elected president, first in 1997 and again in 2001. The candidate favored by
the "deep state" and Khatami's chief opponent in the 1997 presidential election
was the conservative Speaker of the Majles (Consultative Assembly), Ali Akbar
Nateq-Nouri, but the electorate, at the last minute and in great numbers, swung
the vote in favor of Khatami who was viewed as a genuine reformer. In an upset
of major proportions, he garnered about 70% of the vote.
This scenario could repeat itself today. As a consequence of the Council of
Guardians's approval of several hardline presidential candidates, a
less-hardline nominee could emerge as the victor. The most likely dark horse is
former Central Bank of Iran President Abdolnasser Hemmati, a (relative)
moderate. Hemmati seems to have boosted his chances by directly challenging
Raisi in Iran's three nationally televised presidential debates. Additionally,
earlier this month, in an apparent appeal to female voters, his wife, Sepideh
Shabestari, courageously appeared on state television without a chador, the head
covering other candidates' wives usually wear. Hemmati boldly stated that Iran
must improve relations with the West and announced that he would be willing to
meet US President Joe Biden.
Hemmati's biggest obstacle is the lack of interest by the majority of Iran's
electorate. They seem to have despaired of any real change in the Islamic
Republic, at least in the near future. The US negotiating team, seemingly
desperate for a deal -- any deal -- with the mullahs, could cause far less
global damage if they despaired of it, as well.
*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.
© 2021 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.
Strategic Incoherence Continued: US Policy Towards Syria
Under Biden
Dr. Jonathan Spyer/The Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security/June
18/2021
On May 27, 2021, the US Administration decided not to extend the sanctions
waiver for the American oil company Delta Crescent, related to the company’s
activities in northeast Syria. The waiver, issued in December 2020, had enabled
the company to trade oil extracted there, in the area of the country controlled
by the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces.
The waiver had been initiated by the Trump Administration. The decision not to
renew it appears to reflect a desire on the part of President Joe Biden to
dismantle policies seen as ‘holdovers’ from the previous administration of
Donald Trump. Paradoxically, the broader context of the decision demonstrates a
certain continuity between the two administrations; namely, their hesitant,
erratic and often ambiguous policy regarding Syria. Beyond an inconsistently
applied desire to avoid major commitments, there seems to be an absence of any
clear strategy regarding Syria.
The effect of this is felt beyond the lands which the Kurds call “Rojava”, their
semi-independent zone in Syria. It has implications for the US position
regarding Syria as a whole, and for polices in Iraq. Recent events in northeast
Syria are part of the broader US lack of strategic clarity in the Levant and
Iraq.
The decision regarding the company does not appear to presage a major shift in
the US stance towards northeast Syria, or Syria as a whole. That is, ambiguity
appears set to remain, while no major US break with the current pattern of
deployment in Syria appears imminent. In fact, abandonment of the Trump
administration’s “maximum pressure” strategy towards Iran and its allies appears
to further detract from the coherence of US policy in northeast Syria.
The US Presence in Syria
At present, the US has around 900 troops in Syria. About 200 are deployed at the
Tanf base in the far south of the country, close to the Jordanian border. The
remainder are in northeast Syria, in the area controlled by the Autonomous
Administration of Northeast Syria (AANES), a Kurdish dominated body whose armed
forces are the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). This force works in close
cooperation with the US, though Washington does not recognize or have official
relations with the AANES.
The relationship with the SDF is the product of a notable success for US
practitioners of counter insurgency. The Obama Administration in 2014 took a
strategic decision to destroy the Sunni Islamist quasi-state established by the
Islamic State (ISIL) organization in Iraq and the Levant (Sham, in Arabic). ISIL
declared itself as a Caliphate at the al-Nuri Mosque in the Iraqi city of Mosul,
Iraq on June 29, 2014. Having set this goal and wishing to avoid a major ground
commitment of US forces, the US needed a local force with which to partner for
the ground campaign which would be necessary to destroy the ISIS quasi-state.
The Kurdish YPG (Peoples’ Protection Units) was the partner who the US
Department of Defense identified for this mission.
Since summer 2012, the YPG been in control of territories lying directly in the
face of the IS advance. It was a capable, united, non-jihadi force, as it had
established in previous combat against Sunni Islamist insurgents in such areas
as Ras al-Ain (Sere Caniye) in 2013. However, the YPG was a creation of the PKK
(Kurdish Workers Party) organization, which is on the US and EU list of terror
groups, and which is engaged in an insurgency against Turkey.
The US Department of Defense constructed the multi-ethnic Syrian Democratic
Forces in 2015 around the core of the YPG, to prevent allegations that it was
‘allying’ with the PKK or the Syrian Kurds. The SDF proved fit for purpose.
After a long and bloody campaign, the last territorial holdings of ISIS in the
lower Euphrates valley were recaptured by the SDF (with US air support) in
mid-2019. That campaign is justly held up as an example of successful US
counterinsurgency.
But the Islamic State was ultimately not the chief cause or main factor of the
ongoing instability in Iraq and Syria. Rather, it was a symptom of a larger
process in which the states in question have partially fragmented, and no longer
maintain the monopoly of violence within their borders. As a result, a series of
conflicts are taking place, largely based on forces mustered according to the
various ethno-religious elements of the populations of these countries.
Several international actors, who have accurately grasped this dynamic, are
conducting coherent proxy strategies within the space in question to acquire
power and influence within them. Most significant of these are Iran, Turkey, and
Russia. All three countries have their clients within Syria. These are, for
Iran: the Assad regime and the IRGC linked militias seeded by Teheran during the
war; for Turkey, the remnants of the Sunni Islamist insurgency against the Assad
regime in northern Syria; and for Russia, the Assad regime and the state
structures still left standing. Each of these countries are firmly and openly
committed to their clients. They are using the clients to advance their economic
and strategic interests.
By comparison, the US relationship with the SDF is partial and incoherent. Under
President Donald Trump, the waiver to Delta Crescent appears to have been
granted as part of an effort by administration officials to convince the
president that a concrete US interest (of the type he could comprehend) existed
in Syria. That was control of Syria’s oil resources, 90% of which are in the SDF
controlled area. This was to preserve the US presence in Syria, for reasons
other than oil.
Officials within the Trump Administration clearly saw a value in control of this
part of Syria, as a partial barrier to Iranian advances, and to retain some US
leverage for any future political arrangement in the country. This is the view
also of US allies Israel and of Jordan, both of whom sought to prevent the full
implementation of Trump’s decisions to withdraw troops from Syria in December
2018 and October 2019.
US relations with the SDF play a similar function to those of other external
powers with their clients in Syria. But clarity of purpose and strategic
partnership are lacking in the US case. This derives from the partial and
context specific nature of the partnership, which has now continued beyond its
initial context (the war against ISIS), but without being clearly defined.
An unnamed official speaking to The Daily Beast defined the goal of the US
presence in northeast Syria as “enduring defeat of ISIS and Al-Qaeda, an
irreversible political solution to the Syrian conflict…and the removal of all
Iranian-supported forces.” This sounds coherent and entirely positive. But it is
not clear on what mandate these goals rest and who decided upon these goals –
even if these views in fact reflect administration policy, never mind
perspectives in Congress.
It should be noted that the lack of clarity also reflects the positions of the
AANES and its associated bodies. In conversation with this author, sources close
to the AANES and SDF said that they were aware of the desire of the previous
administration to involve them in a regional effort against Iran, but that they
had no desire to be drawn into conflict with Teheran given their precarious
strategic situation.
No Withdrawal Expected
Trump’s decisions to withdraw from Syria derived from his close relations with
President Erdogan of Turkey. Biden is far more wary of Turkey. Biden appears to
have no intention of withdrawing from northeast Syria and is less likely than
his predecessor to suddenly announce major policy reversals. Assistant Secretary
of State Joey Hood visited northeast Syria, and later defined the current key US
goal as ‘“delivery of stabilization assistance to liberated areas to ensure the
enduring defeat of ISIS.”
Some regional media have suggested that the abandonment of the Delta Crescent
might be part of a quid pro quo deal, by which Russia might remove its current
objection to the use of the Yarubiya border crossing from Iraq into the AANES
controlled part of Syria. In late 2020, Moscow pressured the UN to end funding
for programs bringing aid via this crossing without permission from the regime
in Damascus. This has led to a deterioration of the humanitarian situation in
this area.
Such a rationale would explain the abandoning of the Delta Crescent waiver.
Delta Crescent was not a key lynchpin of US policy. But the stop-start, erratic
nature of US policy leads to wariness on the part of allies, who then tend to
hedge their bets by developing relations with adversaries or other forces. For
example, the AANES is currently selling oil to the Assad regime, and engaging in
a major illicit oil trade with elements based in the rival Kurdish autonomous
administration in Erbil, northern Iraq. All this takes place either against the
will of, or without reference to, the US.
The Syrian Kurds did not set hope in the Delta Crescent waiver. What they want
is a general waiver for their area related to sanctions against Syria, because
their rule should not be caught up in policies related to the crimes of the
Assad regime. But given the partial and provisional nature of Washington’s
support, any such commitment is unlikely to be forthcoming.
The US presence in northeast Syria is positive. Without it, Washington would
lose leverage in Syria, and Russia and Iran would have a stronger hand in
determining the future of the country according to their will, to the detriment
of US allies. But the tentative nature of the US commitment, as reflected in the
latest decision regarding Delta Crescent, reduces its value.
What is needed is a coherent US commitment to the support of allies and the
facing down of enemies (Iran and Sunni Islamists) – across the land space of
Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. The limited commitment in northeast Syria would form a
part of any such strategy.
However, the US determination to draw down in the Middle East, which
characterized the Obama, Trump and now Biden administrations, appears likely to
prevent the development of any such strategy.
The US presence in northeast Syria made sense as part of Trump’s policy of
maximum pressure on both Iran and Assad’s Syria. The survival of the AANES
partially blocks Iranian access to Syria, and keeps Assad deprived of both oil
and wheat resources. But since the Biden Administration appears to be abandoning
this policy and seeking rapprochement with Iran, policy regarding this area is
heading in the direction of additional incoherence.'
*Dr. Jonathan Spyer: Expert on Syria, Iraq, radical Islamic groups, and Kurds
*JISS Policy Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler
Family.