English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese,
Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For March 05/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews21/english.march05.21.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since
2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations For today
I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels,
nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor
height, nor depth, nor any other created thing will be able to separate us from
God’s love which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 08/28-38/:”28 We know that all things work
together for good for those who love God, for those who are called according to
his purpose. For whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the
image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. Whom he
predestined, those he also called. Whom he called, those he also justified. Whom
he justified, those he also glorified. What then shall we say about these
things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who didn’t spare his own
Son, but delivered him up for us all, how would he not also with him freely give
us all things? Who could bring a charge against God’s chosen ones? It is God who
justifies. Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, yes rather, who was
raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who also makes
intercession for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Could
oppression, or anguish, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or
sword? Even as it is written, “For your sake we are killed all day long. We were
accounted as sheep for the slaughter. No, in all these things, we are more than
conquerors through him who loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death, nor
life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come,
nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing will be able to
separate us from God’s love which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on March 04-05/2021
Elias Bejjani/Visit My LCCC Web site/All That you need to know on Lebanese unfolding news and events in Arabic and English/http://eliasbejjaninews.com/
MoPH: 3369 new coronavirus cases, 53 deaths
Rahi meets German Ambassador
Israeli Minister Sticks to Iran 'Environmental Terror' Claim
Israel will defend itself if world fails to stall Iran’s nuclear plans: Benny
Gantz/"We are ready to fight," Gantz said, after showing a map with Hezbollah
targets inside Lebanon.
Report: Anger Escalates as Living Conditions Worsen in Lebanon
Lebanese Protesters Block Key Roads and Highways across Country
Bassil Accuses Hariri of 'Hijacking' New Government
Hariri's Adviser Comments on Bassil's Statement
Hariri’s Press Office: PM Waits Not for Foreign Consent on Govt
Jumblat: Bassil, His Father-in-Law, a Situation of Absurdity
Wahhab Calls Jumblat after Several Injured in Kfarhim Clash
Army Commander meets Spanish Chief of Staff
In latest political manoeuvre, Aoun’s party revives federalism
There is still hope for Lebanon despite government failures/Bahaa Hariri/Arab
News/March 04/2021
Titles For The
Latest
English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on
March 04-05/2021
Pope’s belated gesture unlikely to end Iraqi Christians’
suffering
Russia, Turkey want to save Iran nuclear deal, urge US to lift sanctions on
Israel links Iran to oil spill in new maritime attack
Rouhani estimates ‘damage’ to Iran by US sanctions since 2018 at $200 billion
Iran hails EU countries’ decision to not criticize it at IAEA over nuclear deal
Israel Still Weighing Cooperation with ICC Investigation
US VP Harris assures Israel’s Netanyahu of ‘unwavering commitment’ amid Iran
standoff
Canada/Minister of Foreign Affairs takes action on Syria’s human rights
violations
U.S. Warns of Military Response to Rocket Attack on Iraq Base
U.S., at U.N., Accuses Russia of Blocking 'Accountability' on Syria Chemical
Arms
Turkish Court Refuses to Add U.S. Report to Khashoggi Trial
New 5.9 Magnitude Quake near Greek city of Larissa
Iran Hails European Decision Not to Criticize it at IAEA
Iran Agrees to Meet U.N. Technical Experts over Uranium Find
Titles For The Latest The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on March 04-05/2021
Uniting France...President Macron deserves credit for
trying/Clifford D. May/The Washington Times/March 04/2021
Biden Risks Repeating Mistakes of the Past if He Ignores the Evidence on
Iran/Richard Goldberg/FDD/March 04/2021
Afghan security forces withdrawing from checkpoints, bases/Bill Roggio/Long War
Journal-FDD/March 04/2021
Assad Is Giving Biden Every Reason to Prioritize Syria/Aaron Y. Zelin, Oula A.
Alrifai/The Washington Institute/March 04/2021
Biden is ready for the hard power option to deal with Iran/Hazem al-Ghabra/The
Arab Weekly/March 04/2021
Arabs Warn Biden: We Do Not Want Another Obama/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone
Institute/March 04/ 2021
The International Criminal Court Violates Its Statute/Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone
Institute/March 04/ 2021
US must do more to confront the Iranian regime/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab
News/March 04/2021
Pope Francis’ visit to give hope and comfort to Iraqis of all faiths/Francesco
Bongarrà and Robert Edwards/Arab News/March 04/2021
Pope Francis can help all Arabs, not just Christians/Hussain Abdul-Hussain/Arab
News/March 04/2021
Pope Francis’ visit to Iraq shows how love will ultimately prevail/Dr. Dania
Koleilat Khatib/Arab News/March 04/2021
Can the US rely on Turkey to keep Iran in check?/Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab
News/March 04/2021
US must do more to confront the Iranian regime/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab
News/March 04/2021
Biden should capitalize now on Iran’s endemic insecurity/Sultan Althari/Al
Arabiya/04 March/2021
The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials
published on
March 04-05/2021
Elias Bejjani/Visit My LCCC Web site/All That you need to know on Lebanese unfolding news and events in Arabic and English/http://eliasbejjaninews.com/
MoPH: 3369 new coronavirus cases, 53 deaths
NNA/March 04/2021
3369 new coronavirus cases and 53 more deaths have been recorded in the past 24
hours in Lebanon, as announced by the Ministry of Public Health on Thursday.
Rahi meets German Ambassador
NNA/March 04/2021
Maronite Patriarch Beshara Rahi met Thursday in Bkerki with German Ambassador to
Lebanon, Andreas Kindl, with whom he discussed the ties between the Patriarchate
and Germany. Speaking to reporters following the meeting, the Ambassador
indicated that talks touched on Lebanon's neutrality and Rahi's call for an
international conference for Lebanon. "We are interested in the Patriarch's
idea," said Kindl, who added that further discussions would be held in that
respect.
Israeli Minister Sticks to Iran 'Environmental Terror'
Claim
Associated Press/March 04/2021
Israel's environmental protection minister on Thursday stood by her allegation
that a crude oil spill in the eastern Mediterranean last month was an
intentional attack by Iran but provided no evidence for her claim. Defense
officials remained silent about the charge by Gila Gamliel, a junior minister in
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, who on Wednesday announced that
she had concluded the Iranian government deliberately spilled tons of crude oil
into the sea in an attempt to damage Israel's marine ecosystem.Asked in an
interview on Army Radio on Thursday whether she could prove the spill was an
intentional attack, Gamliel doubled down. "To say that this isn't terrorism,
that it was an accident, is an inappropriate approach to the incident," she
said. The investigation determined the ship was smuggling oil from Iran to Syria
when the spill occurred in early February. "The fact that no one knew about the
ship that smuggled crude oil from Iran to Syria, that dumped oil and turned off
its radar is a failure that needs to be investigated," she said. She said that
Israel's Defense Ministry "had to give explanations."The ministry did not have
any immediate comment. The Israeli military, foreign ministry and prime
minister's office also have not commented on Gamliel's claims. Iranian officials
have not publicly acknowledged the allegation or responded to requests for
comment. More than 1,000 tons of tar are estimated to have washed onto Israel's
Mediterranean coastline last month, causing extensive environmental damage and
forcing the closure of beaches to the public. Israel's Nature and Parks
Authority has called the incident one of Israel's worst environmental disasters.
The clean-up is expected to take months.
On Wednesday, the Environmental Protection Ministry identified the ship it
believed was responsible for the Feb. 1 oil spill as the the Panama-flagged,
formerly Libyan-owned tanker named Emerald. Ministry officials investigating the
incident said it was unclear whether the spill was deliberate or accidental, but
said they received no warning about the incident until tar started washing up on
shore weeks later. Ami Daniel, CEO of Windward, a maritime shipping intelligence
company that was involved in the investigation, told The Associated Press that
several aspects about the Emerald's behavior -- from shutting off its
transmitters, to irregular traffic and ownership irregularities -- breached U.S.
and British standards and pointed to the vessel's involvement in smuggling oil
from Iran in violation of international sanctions. "All risk indicators are
consistent with the deceptive shipping practices at a very high likelihood that
this is an Iranian operation to provide crude oil into Syria," he said but
declined to comment on whether the spill may have been an intentional attack.
Gamliel's office declined requests for clarification. But in an English
-language statement, she said "Iran is operating terrorism by damaging the
environment."
Israel accuses archenemy Iran of developing nuclear weapons, a charge Iran
denies. Israel also cites Iran's support for hostile militant groups across the
region -- such as the Palestinian Hamas and the Lebanese Hizbullah -- and its
military presence in neighboring Syria. Israel has acknowledged carrying out
hundreds of airstrikes on targets connected to Iran and its proxies in Syria.'
Israel will defend itself if world fails to stall Iran’s
nuclear plans: Benny Gantz/"We are ready to fight," Gantz said, after showing a
map with Hezbollah targets inside Lebanon.
Joseph Haboush, Al Arabiya English/March 04/2021
Israel will not wait for the international community to stop Iran’s “nuclear
escalation,” Defense Minister Benny Gantz said Thursday, adding that Tel Aviv
was ready to act independently if needed. “Iranians are breaking everything that
was agreed with them; they are bluffing in any aspect that one can think,” Gantz
said in an interview with Fox News. US President Joe Biden has been pushing for
direct talks with Iran over the JCPOA, an acronym for the Iran nuclear deal,
signed in 2015. Former President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the agreement
and imposed heavy economic sanctions on Iran. Iran’s president says the
sanctions have cost Tehran around $200 billion. But Israel and other countries
in the region have been skeptical of a new deal that doesn’t include
consultation with Tel Aviv and the Gulf. Barack Obama did not negotiate or
include regional countries in the discussions that led to the 2015 deal. Now,
Iran is spreading its nuclear capabilities all across the country in order to
use it “God forbid, or to use it as a deterrence canopy” in the midst of
potential negotiations with the US, Gantz said. “The Iranian nuclear aspiration
must be stalled. If the world stops them before, it’s very much good. But, if
not, we must stand independently, and we must defend ourselves by ourselves,” he
warned, in an apparent reference that Israel could act without coordinating with
Washington. Gantz said Israel was constantly improvising its capabilities to
strike and defend itself.
Lebanon’s Hezbollah
Asked about the Iran-backed Hezbollah, which is based in Lebanon, Gantz said the
group had “hundreds of thousands” of missiles. The Israeli official shared what
appeared to be a classified map. “This is a map of Lebanon. What you see there
are ground forces, headquarters, launching sites, et cetera. Everything is aimed
to civilian targets, and it is being conducted from civilian infrastructure,”
Gantz alleged. Asked if the map was a target list for Israel, he said: “This is
a target map. Each one of them has been checked legally, operationally,
intelligence wise, and we are ready to fight.”Hezbollah and Israel fought to a
stalemate in 2006. Since then, both sides have greatly expanded their arsenal
and fighting capabilities. On Wednesday, Hezbollah’s deputy leader Naim Qassem
said his group was not looking for a war with Israel. Analysts fear an all-out
war between the two is inevitable. And they warn that if the Biden
administration proceeds to negotiate with Iran without coordinating with Tel
Aviv, there could be uncoordinated action against Iran and its proxies from
Israel. “Israel will go all out and do crazy ****,” if the US strikes a similar
deal to the 2015 one with Iran, a former Trump official told Al Arabiya English.
“We stopped them from doing a lot of crazy **** during our time, but I’m not
sure this administration will be able to because there won’t be coordination if
they push ahead with a deal and don’t include Israel.”
Report: Anger Escalates as Living Conditions Worsen in
Lebanon
Associated Press/March 04/2021
The anger of the Lebanese grew on Wednesday, on the second day after the
unprecedented collapse of the Lebanese pound’s value as the dollar exchange rate
hit 10,000 pounds. Protests against the worsening living crisis spread to
several Lebanese regions. Roads were blocked with barrels and burning tires in
the north, south and Bekaa region. Lebanon’s president Wednesday ordered the
central bank governor to open an investigation into currency speculation, after
the Lebanese pound plunged to record lows on the black market this week. On the
other hand, according to Asharq el-Awsat, information emerged yesterday that
efforts “succeeded” at calming the rhetoric between the Maronite Patriarchate
and Hizbullah. On Saturday, the Patriarch voiced calls for an end to a “coup
situation” against the State in Lebanon. Upon the insistence of mediators,
Hizbullah took the “initiative” to contact a member of the dialogue committee
between the two parties, requesting a close meeting. The Patriarch is expected
to reply on Friday whether he will have this meeting with Hizbullah, according
to the daily. Bickering between Lebanon's political rivals has left the country
in a stalemate for months, only worsening the economic disaster sparked by a
debt crisis and sovereign default last year. Disagreements between Aoun and
Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri have delayed the formation of the
government for more than four months.
Lebanese Protesters Block Key Roads and Highways across
Country
Associated Press/March 04/2021
Lebanese protesting the dire living conditions took to the streets Thursday
across the country, blocking vital highways and roads. In the capital,
protesters blocked the roads around Martyrs Square, sparking altercations with
motorists who were trapped in their vehicles. Security forces later intervened
to reopen the roads and contain the situation. Nearby, other protesters blocked
the major Ring highway, which connects Beirut’s east to its west, and the
neighboring Beshara al-Khoury highway. Protesters also blocked the Sport
City-Cola road with burning tires and trash bins. Outside the capital,
protesters blocked the Ghobeiri road leading to the Kuwaiti Embassy and the Furn
el-Chebbak road at the Chevrolet intersection. TV networks said army troops were
trying to reopen the Furn el-Chebbak road. Protesters also blocked the highway
linking Beirut to the South in the Jiye and Naameh areas and the highway linking
Beirut to the North in the Zalka, Jal el-Dib and Zouk areas. In the South,
protesters blocked the Adloun-Sidon highway and Sidon's eastern highway. Several
key roads were also blocked in the North and the Bekaa governorates. In a new
low, a fistfight broke out inside a supermarket in Beirut, apparently over the
purchase of subsidized powdered milk. Some supermarkets and groceries have
started setting restrictions on how much people can purchase amid limited
supplies and as panicked residents stock up on food at home. The famous
supermarket in Beirut issued a statement later saying the fistfight broke out
when a shopper attacked a branch manager who told him he cannot buy large
amounts of subsidized milk and oil without considering the restrictions. "They
are humiliating people with a bag of milk," shouted one protester at a rally on
a main highway north of Beirut. "The ruling class must go."The protests had
first erupted on Tuesday after the dollar started trading for nearly LBP 10,000
on the black market, a record high for the crisis-hit country. The development
coincided with severe power cuts across the country linked to the shortage of
foreign currency. President Michel Aoun has described the protests as
“legitimate” while asking Central Bank Governor Riad Salameh to investigate the
collapse of the local currency and expose any currency speculation operations by
individuals, institutions or banks. Lebanon has been hit by one crisis after
another, with widespread protests against the country's corrupt political class
starting in October 2019. That has been compounded by the coronavirus pandemic
and a massive explosion in Beirut's port last August that killed hundreds and
injured thousands, decimated the facility and disfigured much of the city.
Bickering between Lebanon's political rivals has left the country in a stalemate
for months, only worsening the economic disaster sparked by a debt crisis and
sovereign default last year. The government resigned days after the Beirut blast
and Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri was chosen to form a new Cabinet in
October but disagreements between him and President Michel Aoun have delayed the
formation of the new Cabinet. On Thursday, Hariri who is in the United Arab
Emirates, blamed his rivals for delays while Free Patriotic Movement chief
Jebran Bassil, a son-in-law of the president, responded by saying that Hariri
"is not ready to form a Cabinet."
Bassil Accuses Hariri of 'Hijacking' New Government
Naharnet/March 04/2021
Free Patriotic Movement chief Jebran Bassil on Thursday lashed out anew at
PM-designate Saad Hariri, blaming him for the delay in forming a new government.
“Today it became evident to the naked eye that PM-designate Saad Hariri is not
ready to form the government for known external reasons, which we had refrained
from mentioning previously in order to give extra chances,” Bassil said in a
statement released by his press office. “Based on the fallacies he mentioned in
his statement, today it becomes clear to the waiting foreign powers and the
burning interior that PM-designate Hariri has invented a new dilemma in the way
of the government’s formation,” Bassil added. Moreover, the FPM chief accused
Hariri of “withholding” the cabinet formation process and “exploiting” it in his
ongoing visits to foreign capitals. Addressing the Lebanese people, Bassil
added: “Your promised government is hijacked and it will only be possible to
recover it through the approval of foreign powers or a revolution inside the
country.”
Hariri's Adviser Comments on Bassil's Statement
Naharnet/March 04/2021
The media adviser of PM-designate Saad Hariri, Hussein al-Wajeh, commented
Thursday on a statement issued by Free Patriotic Movement chief Jebran Bassil.
“We thank Jebran Bassil for his statement, which confirms what was clear from
the very first moment to President (Michel) Aoun: a government of 18 ministers
containing three specialist, nonpartisan ministers for President Aoun if the FPM
bloc does not intend to grant confidence to the government, and additional three
ministers if his bloc commits to granting confidence,” al-Wajeh said. In another
tweet, he added: “We also thank Jebran Bassil for clearly informing the Lebanese
in his statement today that the FPM and its parliamentary bloc no longer
represent the president and that he has joined the ranks of the opposition to
the presidential tenure and the coming government.”
Hariri’s Press Office: PM Waits Not for Foreign Consent on
Govt
Naharnet/March 04/2021
Press office of PM-designate Saad Hariri on Thursday denied reports published in
al-Akhbar daily that he rejected a proposal presented by President Michel Aoun
regarding the government formation. The Press office said in a statement:
“Al-Akhbar daily published news report that Aoun informed General Security chief
Abbas Ibrahim of his willingness to accept naming five ministers in addition to
a minister from the Tashnaq party in an 18-seat cabinet in return for the
interior ministry portfolio, conditionally that MP Jebran Basisl would refrain
from granting the cabinet his vote of confidence.
The daily added that Hariri does not want to form a government before obtaining
the approval of Saudi Arabia.The media office of Prime Minister Hariri is
interested in clarifying the following: First: Prime Minister Hariri did not
receive any official words from President Aoun in this regard, which suggests
that those behind leaking such information are only aiming to move
responsibility for obstruction from President Aoun and MP Bassil to Prime
Minister Hariri. Second: Unlike Hizbullah which awaits decisions from Iran,
Hariri does not seek approval of any foreign party to form the government, not
Saudi Arabia or anyone else. Rather, he is waiting for President Aoun's approval
to form a government of specialists, with the amendments that Hariri has
proposed publicly, in his speech aired live on February 14. Third: The
conformity of this interpretation propagated by the newspaper with the words of
Hizbullah’s Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem in his televised
interview yesterday, reinforces the feeling that the party is participating in
the attempt to throw the ball of responsibility on Prime Minister Hariri, and is
maneuvering to prolong the government vacuum, waiting for Iran to start its
negotiations with the new American administration, holding on to Lebanon's
stability as one of the cards for this negotiation. Fourth: If the FPM bloc was
to block confidence vote for the government, what would the argument of the
president be in obtaining a third of the government’s members (five-plus-one out
of 18), at a time when President Aoun himself was the one who refused a
government share for the President during the era of former President Michel
Sleiman. Fifth: Why did the head of the FPM obstruct the cabinet formation for a
whole five months if its true was to block confidence and stand among the
opposition. In the end, PM Hariri affirms commitment to the specifications of a
government format he requested since the moment of his designation, in terms of
quantity and non-partisan expertise. He believes the French initiative
compliments the popular demands calling for a government capable of facing the
economic, financial and living repercussions. And curbing the collapse of the
lira and opening the way to serious reforms.”
Jumblat: Bassil, His Father-in-Law, a Situation of
Absurdity
Naharnet/March 04/2021
Progressive Socialist Party leader ex-MP Walid Jumblat criticized Lebanon’s
political parties on Thursday, mainly the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement
MP Jebran Bassil describing him as a “situation of absurdity.” “The majority (of
MPs) brought the government of Hassan Diab to later find they brought someone
not like anyone else. Jebran Bassil is a situation of absurdity like his
father-in-law (Michel Aoun), he hates everyone,” Jumblat said in an interview,
criticizing the political performance. He added: “So far, only a frail sound
came out of Samir Geagea (LF chief) calling for the resignation of the
President, while Patriarch (Beshara) el-Rahi yesterday did not urge the
President’s resignation.”Amid the crippling economic situation in the country,
the PSP leader added Lebanon “is heading to an internal chaos as the result of
the socio-economic situation. I don’t see any horizon for a civil war.”He stated
that the “poor monetary and economic performance and corruption led to economic
collapse. In the first two months of the revolution, I asked Sheikh Saad
(Hariri) and Speaker (Nabih) Berri to approve a Capital Control (law), but they
refused. We would not be in this situation if we had adopted that policy.”
Wahhab Calls Jumblat after Several Injured in Kfarhim Clash
Naharnet/March 04/2021
Arab Tawhid Party leader Wiam Wahhab held phone talks Thursday with Progressive
Socialist Party chief Walid Jumblat following a clash between supporters of
their two parties in the Chouf town of Kfarhim. Wahhab and Jumblat “stressed
that the Lebanese Army should be fully in charge of addressing the Kfarhim
incident,” emphasizing that “the security of Mt. Lebanon and its residents is a
red line,” a statement issued by the Tawhid Party said. They also underlined
that no one enjoys a political cover, the statement added. Media reports quoting
security sources have said that the clash erupted as young men loyal to Wahhab
were blocking the Kfarhim roundabout. “A clash erupted with young men who
support the PSP and the incident involved gunfire and the use of knives,” the
sources said. A young man from the Zeidan family was seriously wounded as two
young men from al-Jahliyeh were injured, the sources added, noting that a young
man from the Ghannam family escaped unharmed after being shot at.
Army Commander meets Spanish Chief of Staff
NNA/March 04/2021
Lebanese Army Commander, General Joseph Aoun, met Thursday at his Yarze office
with Spanish Chief of Defense Staff, Teodoro Esteban Lopez Calderon, who came in
the company of a military delegation. Talks reportedly featured high on the
bilateral cooperation between the Lebanese and Spanish armies.
In latest political manoeuvre, Aoun’s party revives
federalism
The Arab Weekly/March 04/2021
Observers see resuscitating the project of federalism as linked to regional
dynamics, with the FPM attempting to pre-empt any international and regional
developments by presenting this proposal, which may find an echo among some
regional players.
BEIRUT – Leaders of Lebanon’s ruling class recently renewed their calls to
modify the current political system, in an attempt to get round the country’s
crisis. This move comes at a time when the political and economic situation in
the country is worsening beyond control and threatening to create a deadlock for
the ruling elite, with no options for manoeuvre.
In recent statements, officials from the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), founded
by President Michel Aoun, argued that the current impasse was the result of a
bankrupt system that has been based on the Taif Agreement. They said the
solution lies in decentralisation or a federal system, an old proposal that was
previously presented in the 1920s and repeated in the 1980s in the midst of a
devastating civil war that the country experienced between 1975 and 1989. The
campaign to promote this proposal began again on social media to test the
public, before leaders of the Free Patriotic Movement announced their
endorsement of this project.
Representative Assaad Dargham, a member of the Strong Lebanon bloc, said
Tuesday, “Today, we prefer an expanded administrative and financial
decentralisation that guarantees the same administrative independence that
federalism too ensures.”“Our current system died and proved to be deficient in a
country that Syria was its patron, and the only party capable of resolving
disputes,” he added. The Taif Agreement is based mainly on sectarian quotas,
whereby the three presidencies are distributed among Shias, Sunnis and Maronite
Christians. This quota system also includes sovereignty institutions such as
defense, the army, and the security establishment.
Lebanese political experts say that some crisis-makers have been floating
federalism as an option. This, the experts argue, happens whenever these people
fear for their influence or want to return to the spotlight.
According to observers, the Free Patriotic Movement now feels isolated even in
its Maronite environment. This explains why the party has been resuscitating the
fantasy of creating an autonomous Christian region, hoping that by doing so, it
can break its isolation and garner the support of the Maronite community.
The head of the FPM Gebran Bassil had previously hinted that he supports the
idea of a founding conference, a proposal previously presented by Hezbollah,
which seeks to establish a project for a new system based on sectarian
triangulation (Sunnis, Shias and Christians).
Though the FPM supports the idea of holding a founding conference, it has
reservations about Hezbollah’s triangulation proposal, which includes measuring
the influence of each sect. Hezbollah’s proposal, experts say, will weaken
Christians and other sects for the benefit of Muslims.
With that idea in mind, the FPM favours projects of a federal system or an
expanded administrative and financial decentralisation.
Talk about federalism and decentralisation is not above suspicion, observers
say, especially as it comes after Maronite Patriarch Mar Beshara Boutros al-Rai
called for a UN-sponsored “international conference” in the face of Lebanon’s
economic collapse and political impasse.
Hezbollah considers that the Maronite Patriarch’s call to internationalise the
Lebanese crisis is an attempt to undermine its influence in Lebanon, and an
effort to create an international pressure to push its fighters to abandon their
weapons. Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah slammed the proposal and similar calls
from other parties, saying such moves would open the door to foreign
interference or even to an “occupation.”Some Lebanese observers say that the FPM
is trying hard to divert attention from Rai’s initiative that has so far
garnered significant support from political, popular and spiritual circles in
the country.
The Free Patriotic Movement views Rai’s initiative as an admission of the
failure of the ruling class and the country’s President Michel Aoun. The party
also fears that an international conference will cause embarrassment for its
political ally Hezbollah. Observers also say that resuscitating the project of
federalism is also linked to regional dynamics, with the FPM attempting to
pre-empt any international and regional developments by presenting this
proposal, which may find an echo among some regional players.
Observers note that the proposal of the Free Patriotic Movement is an attempt to
evade responsibility, as the core of the crisis in Lebanon today is not related
to the current system as much as it is linked to the failure of the political
elite that has held power for years.
A large part of the Lebanese public holds the political forces responsible for
corruption and mismanagement that drove the country to the brink of economic and
financial collapse.
On Tuesday, the Lebanese pound tumbled to a new low in a financial meltdown that
has fuelled poverty. The collapse of the pound, which fell to 10,000 to the
dollar, has slashed about 85% of its value in a country relying heavily on
imports. The dramatic and unprecedented collapse of the pound led to the
outbreak of protests in many parts of Lebanon, amid indications that the country
is on the verge of eruption. Observers say that this fate seems inevitable with
politicians struggling to preserve their privileges, even as the country heads
towards total collapse. Crushed under a mountain of debt, Lebanon is grappling
with a financial crisis that has wiped out jobs, raised warnings of growing
hunger and locked people out of their bank deposits.
There is still hope for Lebanon despite government failures
Bahaa Hariri/Arab News/March 04/2021
بهاء الحريري/رغم فشل الحكومة لا يزال هناك أمل للبنان
Lebanon is at boiling point. Angry protests broke out across the country this
week as the Lebanese pound fell to a historic low of 10,000 to the US dollar.
Reports suggest these protests are the worst since the pandemic started, and it
is clear why — the fall in the pound has destroyed people’s savings and is
driving rampant inflation, with the government unable to stem the tide of bad
news.
Unfortunately, these protests are nothing new. As the Lebanese economy flounders
and ordinary people suffer, it is ever more apparent that the current system is
not fit for purpose and must be replaced. There are recent reports that show
that more than 1 million Lebanese people are living below the poverty line. At a
time when it is facing ever-increasing opposition on the streets, the government
has imposed one of the strictest lockdowns in the world to contain the spread of
the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), without accompanying it with a proper
incentive plan to support the people and their businesses.
A question all Lebanese must ask themselves is whether the government’s priority
is genuinely to protect its people or merely to protect itself from being held
accountable for its failure to address the political, economic and health crises
impacting the country?
While we all hoped there would be a transparent and fair distribution of
COVID-19 vaccines that prioritized front-line workers and the elderly, corrupt
politicians have been skipping the queue and breaking the rules to get
vaccinated first. Most shocking was the fact none of these politicians seemed to
suffer from a guilty conscience, despite knowing that their reckless and
cold-hearted actions could have wider implications, even potentially leading the
World Bank to suspend its financing of the vaccines and support for Lebanon’s
COVID-19 response. They don’t see their actions as corrupt, but just a normal
part of today’s broken Lebanon. We desperately need new faces that will put
Lebanon and its citizens above their personal benefits. We have, over the last
decade, become overwhelmed by the ruling authorities’ actions that have brought
the country to its current situation. Every time we think this is the worst they
can do, they surprise us. But, the truth is, there are no depths to which they
are not prepared to sink in order to hold on to power. There are people and
organizations doing the right thing and seeking to improve the lives of the
people.
Another example is the neglected needs of Tripoli, the poorest city in Lebanon,
where the government is leaving people without financial support or incentives
amid a suffocating lockdown. Instead of listening to the peaceful people in the
street, the government illegally detained them. There is no place for violence.
But the people have a right to protest peacefully and be heard.
In parallel and because of a complaint filed by two politicians, Lebanon’s court
of cassation removed lead investigator Judge Fadi Sawan from the inquiry into
the devastating Beirut blast, further undermining an already discredited process
and ripping the hearts of the victims and their families again. This clearly
exposed the politicized judiciary and the corrupt ruling authority that is
trying to silence the activists’ voices and hide the truth. Now is the time to
call for extensive policy and legal reforms in order to ensure the independence
and impartiality of the judiciary in Lebanon.
Despite these developments, I want to underscore that there is still hope. There
are people and organizations in Lebanon doing the right thing and seeking to
improve the lives of the people.
The Lebanese state is failing to provide the necessary support for its people
and, as so often happens, private enterprises and citizens, working together,
are stepping in to support local communities. I have been honored to partner
with the Lebanese American University Medical Center, which recently announced
that it is launching a vaccination campaign to both provide the vaccine to those
in need and promote an effort to educate the country on the need to take part in
the vaccination effort. Similarly, the Lebanese Red Cross is doing vital work to
help alleviate suffering during this time and I am also proud to be doing what
little I can to assist them. Private citizens can have an impact and, in
situations like this crisis, any assistance with time or money can make a major
difference. I will be continuing to support the Lebanese people at this time.
Amid these multiple crises, I stand next to my sisters and brothers in Lebanon
who are fighting to live in dignity against the corrupt government and its
officials. There are people doing the right thing for Lebanon and I will
continue to support those who seek peace and are striving to bring people
together to solve the challenges the people of Lebanon face each and every day.
We desperately need change.
• Bahaa Hariri is the eldest son of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
Twitter: @bahaa_hariri_
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on March 04-05/2021
Pope’s belated gesture unlikely to end Iraqi Christians’
suffering
The Arab Weekly/March 04/2021
Any guarantees by Iraq’s top Shia cleric may be irrelevant given the control of
power by his Shia hardliners
BAGHDAD--The Iraqis are playing down any expectations from the upcoming meeting
that will bring together top Shia Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and Pope Francis
during his historic visit to the country.
They believe the visit is likely to receive a lot of international attention
from the perspective of tolerance and interfaith rapprochement but may not
change much of the realities on the ground due to Sistani’s limited influence on
armed Shia groups that target Christian and other minorities.
The 84-year-old pope is expected to visit the holy city of Najaf, which includes
the shrine of the first of the Shia imams, Ali bin Abi Talib.
In the holy city, which is the seat of the Shia hawza, he will be greeted by the
90-year-old Sistani, who rarely appears in public.
The direct meeting between the two men is a pivotal event for Muslims in Iraq,
of whom 60% are Shia.
Local observers say that Sistani plays a spiritual role and his political
influence is limited in light of the loyalty of religious parties and militias
to Iran. Most decisions attributed to him have been in favour of Tehran and the
figures loyal to it, including his decision in 2014 calling for the creation of
armed groups to fight ISIS.The fateful decision turned into an invaluable card
in Iran’s hands with the creation of the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF),
through which Tehran has come to dominate Iraq both politically and from a
security perspective.
As for the Christian minority, many of whose members have left Iraq, a show of
solidarity from Sistani may help stop them from being intimidated by Shia
militias, experts say. But the impact is likely to be limited and Sistani’s
guarantees to the Pope will not have much value as real decisions are made in
Tehran. Iraqi political writer Farouk Youssef believes that the pope will
experience tough moments in Iraq, considering that the historic visit is a
belated symbolic gesture towards the country’s Christians, who are in the throes
of extreme despair.
Youssef said he wishes that the pope could meet with the leaders of Iraq in
order to look the killers of Christ in the eyes instead of seeing them in
Renaissance paintings or thinking about them in his readings of the Gospel. The
Iraqi writer believes the Rome church was late in trying to save its people in
Iraq. Youssef told The Arab Weekly, “Because the pope is a cleric and a head of
state, he knows very well the type of symbolic position that the cleric
represents in the Muslim faith, and therefore he will meet Sistani as the leader
of a religious sect and will not embarrass him by addressing Iraqi political
issues, which the pope himself does not fully grasp.”
The Iraqi writer expects the pope not to dwell long on the Christians’ situation
because he knows that Sistani cannot make any decision on the issue and will not
sacrifice his standing by issuing a fatwa that will go unheeded. “The pope
understands more than others that talking about politics with Sistani is useless
in such a short time span,” he added. “Therefore, one should not expect much
from the visit, which will offer the occasion for a meeting between two men who
will not meet again.”
“This visit by the pope sends a strong political message for a figure who is
very much associated with the defence of Iraqis,” added Myriam Benraad, a French
political scientist who specialises in the Arab world.
The Argentine pope often prefers direct meetings that are a symbol of tolerance
and peace rather than delving into the theological complexities that his
predecessor, Benedict XVI, ventured into, provoking mixed reactions.
Two years ago in Abu Dhabi, Francis and leading Sunni cleric Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb,
the grand imam of Al-Azhar, signed a document on “human fraternity for world
peace.”
They made a joint call for freedom of belief, although what stands out from that
trip — the first by a pope to the Arabian Peninsula — was the image of the
leader of the world’s 1.3 billion Catholics embracing a Sunni imam.
Sunnis account for almost 90% of the world’s Muslims, Shias 10%— the majority in
Iran and Iraq. In Iraq, the population is 60% Shia and 37% Sunni.
The Abu Dhabi document called for freedom of belief and expression, advocating
full citizenship for “minorities.”
But it does not go so far to acknowledge the right to hold no belief at all, or
to convert, even drawing a parallel between “atheistic, agnostic or religious
extremism” and “fanatic extremism.”
“The text, written in Arabic by two Egyptians, is symbolically very powerful but
its contents push against open doors,” said Jean Druel, of the Dominican
Institute for Oriental Studies in Cairo.
“It deals with common issues. When Al-Azhar supports religious freedom, he means
that Christians can go to mass.
“But atheism remains incomprehensible in the Arab Muslim world.”
The pope and his emissaries avoid flashpoint issues. In Abu Dhabi, Francis
declared that religious freedom is “not limited only to freedom of worship.”
“Perfect freedom of religion is also the freedom to convert and change religion,
as many Catholics have converted to Islam or Buddhism,” said Cardinal Leonardo
Sandri, who heads the Congregation for the Oriental Churches at the Vatican,
while suggesting the subject is taboo. Nevertheless, he believes in the small
steps of dialogue towards an “open Islam,” he said.
“It takes time, but it’s possible.”
Russia, Turkey want to save Iran nuclear deal, urge US to
lift sanctions on
Tuqa Khalid, Al Arabiya English/04 March/2021
Russia and Turkey said they wanted the 2015 Iran nuclear deal to be “saved”,
urging the United States to lift sanctions on Tehran. Turkish President Tayyip
Erdogan said on Thursday that lifting US sanctions on Iran over its nuclear work
and returning to the 2015 nuclear deal will contribute to regional stability and
economic prosperity. “President Erdogan, who stated that he wished the new US
administration would abandon unilateral sanctions on Iran and lift restrictions
on the prosperity of Iranian people, said the statements on the issue in recent
days had led to a new window of opportunity,” the Turkish presidency said in a
statement last month after phone call between Erdogan and Iranian President
Hassan Rouhani. Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday the US
must take steps that demonstrate the seriousness of its intentions to return to
the Iranian nuclear deal, and there are still opportunities to save the accord
known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). “The window of
opportunity for rescuing the nuclear deal has not yet been closed. A
prerequisite is the full and consistent implementation of the 2015 comprehensive
agreements by all countries that developed and concluded them. We are working
closely with all JCPOA participants to achieve this goal,” Russian state news
agency Interfax cited Lavrov as saying. “However, not everything here depends on
us or the European participants in the Action Plan. The principal point is the
position of the Joe Biden administration on the nuclear deal. In our opinion,
Washington’s steps would contribute to unblocking the situation around Iran and
its nuclear program, which would send a signal to Tehran demonstrating the
seriousness of the US intentions to return to the JCPOA,” he added.
Washington and Tehran are locked in a standoff over reviving nuclear talks.
President Joe Biden’s administration has signaled to Iran its willingness to
return to talks to revive the nuclear deal, which Trump abandoned in 2018 and
subsequently announced additional sanctions on Iran. Biden reversed Trump’s
determination that all UN sanctions against Iran had been restored. And the
State Department eased stringent restrictions on the domestic travel of Iranian
diplomats in New York. Yet, Tehran demanded that all Trump-era sanctions on Iran
be lifted before taking any real action to return to the deal. Russia, Turkey
and Iran all have tenuous relationships with the US and face an uphill climb
with the Biden administration which announced prioritizing human rights as part
of its foreign policy. Ties between Washington and Ankara have been strained
over a host of issues including the latter’s purchase of Russian S-400 defense
systems and detainment of journalists and activists under seemingly arbitrary
terrorism charges. Recently, the US sanctioned senior Russian government
officials and Russian entities in response to Moscow’s attempt to kill
opposition leader Alexei Navalny with a nerve agent.The latest action by Biden’s
administration marks a sharp departure from former President Donald Trump’s
reluctance to confront Russian President Vladimir Putin.- With Agencies
Israel links Iran to oil spill in new maritime attack
The Arab Weekly/March 04/2021
“Our long arm will reach anyone who harms our nature, our sea or our coasts,”
said Israeli Environmental Protection Minister Gila Gamliel said.
TEL AVIV--Israel accused Iran on Wednesday of being linked to a recent oil spill
off its shores that caused major ecological damage, calling the incident
environmental terrorism. The accusation is the second in a week in which Israel
has blamed its long-time nemesis Iran of wrongdoing at sea.
The spill was caused by an oil tanker that was carrying pirated cargo from Iran
to Syria last month, Israeli Environmental Protection Minister Gila Gamliel
said. The vessel sailed through the Gulf and the Red Sea without radio contact,
switching its tracking devices back on before passing through Egypt’s Suez
Canal, Gamliel told reporters. It turned the devices off again before entering
Israeli waters in the Eastern Mediterranean, and dropped oil into the sea
between February 1-2, she said, naming the vessel as the Panama-flagged oil
tanker Emerald. “Iran is (conducting) terrorism by damaging the environment, and
(when) Iran is damaging the environment it isn’t just hurting the state of
Israel,” Gamliel said. Over 90% of Israel’s 195 kilometre Mediterranean
coastline was covered in more than 1,000 tons of black tar, the result of the
mysterious oil spill in international waters. Gamliel told reporters that the
ship responsible had “entered Israel’s exclusive economic zone and deliberately
polluted” the waters. “Our long arm will reach anyone who harms our nature, our
sea or our coasts,” Gamliel warned. There was no immediate comment from Iran.
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu blamed Tehran for an explosion aboard
an Israeli-owned ship in the Gulf of Oman last week, an accusation rejected by
Tehran. Tensions have risen in the Gulf region since the United States reimposed
sanctions on Iran in 2018 after then-President Donald Trump withdrew Washington
from a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and major powers.
Years to clean up
The oil spill blackened beaches up and down the Israeli coast, and clumps of
sticky black tar have washed up on the shores of south Lebanon and the Gaza
Strip, as well. Environmental groups are calling it an ecological disaster that
could take years to clean up. Gamliel said the vessel was “owned and operated by
a Libyan,” without identifying a person or company. Libya’s state-owned shipping
firm, the General National Maritime Transport Company, said it had owned the
vessel but sold it at an auction in December. The vessel was purchased by
Emerald Marine Ltd, a company based in the Marshall Islands, according to the
shipping database Equasis. Reuters was not immediately able to reach the company
for comment. Gamliel said the vessel turned its tracking devices back on again
upon reaching Syria on February 3, where she said it unloaded crude oil. It then
returned to Iran, where it is currently anchored, she said. Refinitiv ship
tracking data showed the vessel reported a destination of Sohar in Oman, across
the Gulf of Oman from Iran, on January 20, meaning it was around Iran’s coast at
that time. mThe ship tracking data did not show any destinations in Iran, though
it is common for vessels to conceal their movements there. The vessel reported
its position after passing through the Suez Canal on Februray 1, Refinitiv data
showed. It next reported its position with a destination of Mersin in Turkey on
Februray 3, showing a gap between February 1 and 3. The vessel did not report
any destinations in Syria, though it is also common for ships to conceal
movements there. An international convention requires merchant ships to have a
satellite tracking device on board when travelling at sea. But a ship’s captain
has the discretion to switch the transponder off under certain circumstances,
enabling them to avoid detection. The Israeli environmental protection ministry
said it had collected strong “circumstantial evidence” that this was the ship
behind the spill, though it did not have “forensic evidence.” It said it also
ruled out any other source.
Rouhani estimates ‘damage’ to Iran by US sanctions since
2018 at $200 billion
Tuqa Khalid, Al Arabiya English/04 March/2021
Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani estimated the “damages” to his country by
re-instating US sanctions under the Donald Trump administration at $200 billion.
“If the new US administration wants to make up for the mistakes of the previous
administration, we have left the path clear for them,” Rouhani said in a speech
on Thursday. “Some friends said that the US should first compensate the damages
it has done to the Iranian nation - which is of course more than $200 billion -
, but we have said that we will leave the claim for damages to the next stage
for now, but first, they have to show their good will by lifting the sanctions
and fulfilling their obligations ,” he added. Washington and Tehran are locked
in a standoff over reviving nuclear talks. President Joe Biden’s administration
has signaled to Iran its willingness to return to talks to revive the nuclear
deal, which Trump abandoned in 2018 and subsequently announced additional
sanctions on Iran. Biden reversed Trump’s determination that all UN sanctions
against Iran had been restored. And the State Department eased stringent
restrictions on the domestic travel of Iranian diplomats in New York. Yet,
Tehran demanded that all Trump-era sanctions on Iran be lifted before taking any
real action to return to the deal. The Iranian regime is trying to get more
concessions from Washington before taking any real action, especially in light
of growing pressure at home due to economic hardship worsened by the US
sanctions.
“Tehran urgently needs sanctions relief... Iran also holds its presidential
elections in June 2021 and, for the outgoing Rouhani administration, securing a
quick return to the deal would build back lost economic and political
confidence, and perhaps also impact the election outcome,” according to Sanam
Vakil, Senior Research Fellow at Middle East and North Africa Program, Chatham
House.
Iran hails EU countries’ decision to not criticize it at
IAEA over nuclear deal
Tuqa Khalid, Al Arabiya English/04 March/2021
Iran welcomed a decision by European countries not to submit a resolution
criticizing Tehran at a meeting of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency.
Britain, France and Germany had planned to introduce a resolution at the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors meeting this week
criticizing Iran for limiting the agency’s inspections and to explain breaches
of the 2015 nuclear deal. “Eventually, rationality prevailed in the board of
governors of the IAEA… as a result of extensive diplomatic efforts, the process
of issuing an anti-Iran resolution to the Governing Council was halted,” state
news agency IRNA cited Iran’s envoy Kazem Gharibabadi as saying. Iran’s Foreign
Ministry Spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said: “The new decision would save the road
to diplomacy, already opened by Iran and the IAEA, and would pave the way for
all JCPOA parties to honor their commitments in full.”The nuclear deal, known
formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, has been unravelling since
former US president Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the agreement
in 2018. President Joe Biden’s administration has signaled to Iran its
willingness to return to talks to revive the nuclear deal. He reversed Trump’s
determination that all UN sanctions against Iran had been restored. And the
State Department eased stringent restrictions on the domestic travel of Iranian
diplomats in New York. Yet, Tehran demanded that all Trump-era sanctions on Iran
be lifted before taking any real action to return to the deal.IAEA Director
General Rafael Grossi said Thursday Iran has accepted holding a series of
meetings with the UN nuclear watchdog in order to “clarify a number of
outstanding issues.”“We are going to be starting this process... with a
technical meeting which will take place in Iran at the beginning of April, which
I hope will be followed by other technical or political meetings,” Grossi told
reporters at a press conference. The new process will be aimed at clarifying
queries the IAEA has raised about the possible previous presence of nuclear
material at undeclared sites. A French diplomatic source told Reuters on
Thursday Tehran has given encouraging signs in recent days about opening
informal talks. "Things are moving in the right direction and we have had
positive signals this week and especially in last few days," the source told
reporters. "We are seeing movements we weren't seeing last weekend," he said.
- With AFP, Reuters
Israel Still Weighing Cooperation with ICC Investigation
Associated Press/March 04/2021
Israel has yet to decide whether it will cooperate with the International
Criminal Court's investigation into alleged crimes in the Palestinian
territories, a senior Justice Ministry official said Thursday. The decision by
the court's outgoing prosecutor to probe Israeli military actions and settlement
construction on lands captured in the 1967 Mideast war was announced Wednesday
and condemned by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as "the essence of
anti-Semitism and hypocrisy." Roy Schondorf, deputy attorney general for
international law, told Army Radio that the court's decision was driven by
"political agendas" and that opening an investigation was unjustified, but that
Israel has not rejected any participation outright. "The court's conduct until
now, and the prosecutor's in particular, doesn't inspire great trust in the way
the procedures will transpire," Schondorf said, adding that there was "a big
question about the value of cooperation." Wednesday's decision turns the court's
focus toward two key Israeli policies of recent years: its repeated military
operations against Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip, highlighted by a
devastating 2014 war, and its expansion of Jewish settlements in east Jerusalem
and the occupied West Bank. The Palestinian Authority, which administers
autonomous areas in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, welcomed Wednesday's move,
while the U.S. State Department said it opposed the decision to open the
investigation.
US VP Harris assures Israel’s Netanyahu of ‘unwavering
commitment’ amid Iran standoff
Tuqa Khalid, Al Arabiya English/March 05/2021
US Vice President Kamala Harris emphasized the United States’ “unwavering
commitment to Israel’s security,” in a call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu on Thursday, the White House said. She “underscored the Biden-Harris
Administration’s commitment to the US-Israel partnership,” the statement read.
“The Vice President and Prime Minister agreed on the importance of continuing
close cooperation and partnership on regional security issues, including Iran’s
nuclear program and the regime’s dangerous regional behavior,” the White House
said. President Joe Biden’s administration took steps to revive the 2015 Iran
nuclear deal which former President Donald Trump abandoned in 2018 and
subsequently announced additional sanctions on Tehran. The Iranian regime
demanded that all Trump-era sanctions on Iran be lifted before taking any real
action to return to the deal. Israel was not a party to the 2015 deal and has
longed opposed any “soft” US approaches towards its long-time foe Iran. Tel Aviv
has powerful advocates within the US Congress and Netanyahu has threatened to
take unilateral military action on Iran if he deems diplomacy a dead end, which
leaves Washington with a difficult balancing act to figure out. Earlier on
Thursday, Israel's Defense Minister Benny Gantz said Tel Aviv would not hesitate
to act independently if the international community failed to stop Iran’s
“nuclear escalation.”
- With Reuters
Canada/Minister of Foreign Affairs takes action on Syria’s human rights
violations
March 4, 2021 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs
Canada
The Honourable Marc Garneau, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today announced that
Canada has requested formal negotiations, under the United Nations Convention
Against Torture, to hold Syria accountable for the countless human rights
violations it has inflicted on the Syrian people since 2011. These violations
formed the basis of a similar request by the Netherlands in September 2020 and
have been well documented by the UN Human Rights Council’s Independent
International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, among others.
Canada has repeatedly called on the Assad regime to end the egregious human
rights abuses against its own citizens, including notably, by leading a widely
supported UN General Assembly resolution to mobilize the international community
to this effect. Despite these calls for justice, Syria has denied and ignored
demands to respect human rights. This is why Canada is taking steps to request
negotiation of its dispute under the UN Convention Against Torture. Syria must
answer for its grave breaches of international law.
Today’s action underscores Canada’s long-standing position that human rights are
non-negotiable. Syrians have lived through a decade of unspeakable suffering at
the hands of the Assad regime. A sustainable peace will only be possible once
those responsible for these abuses are held to account.
Canada will continue to work with the international community to support justice
initiatives and combat impunity for crimes committed in Syria.
Quotes
“For the last decade, the Syrian regime has inflicted brutal and shocking
attacks on its own people. It is our hope that today’s action serves to bring us
closer to truth, justice and accountability. The people of Syria deserve nothing
less.”
- Marc Garneau, Minister of Foreign Affairs
Quick facts
For 10 years, Syria’s Assad regime has committed flagrant and egregious
violations of international law, including the use of chemical weapons,
arbitrary detentions, summary executions and torture of civilians, among other
crimes.
Associated links
Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic
Canada’s response to the conflict in Syria
Canada’s Syrian strategy
U.S. Warns of Military Response to Rocket Attack on Iraq
Base
Associated Press/March 04/2021
The White House has warned that the U.S. may consider a military response to the
rocket attack on Wednesday that hit an air base in western Iraq where American
and coalition troops are housed, raising concerns this could trigger a new round
of escalating violence.
A U.S. contractor died after at least 10 rockets slammed into the base. And
while no group claimed responsibility, it was the first strike since the U.S.
bombed Iran-aligned militia targets along the Iraq-Syria border last week.
Heightened tensions with Iranian-backed militia groups in Iraq could lead to
more attacks, complicating the Biden administration's desire to open talks with
Iran over the 2015 nuclear deal, as well as the ongoing U.S. strategy to focus
more attention on Asia. Asked about the attack, President Joe Biden told
reporters, "we are following that through right now." He added, "Thank God, no
one was killed by the rocket, but one individual, a contractor, died of a heart
attack. But we're identifying who's responsible and we'll make judgments" about
a response. White House press secretary Jen Psaki suggested that the
"calculated" U.S. airstrikes last week could be a model for a military response.
Those strikes were in response to an attack on American forces in northern Iraq
earlier in February. "If we assess further response is warranted, we will take
action again in a manner and time of our choosing," Psaki said. Pentagon
spokesperson John Kirby said the U.S. contractor "suffered a cardiac episode
while sheltering" from the attack and died shortly afterward. He said there were
no service members injured and all are accounted for. British and Danish troops
also are among those stationed at the base. The U.S. airstrikes last week, which
killed one member of the Iran-aligned militia, had stoked fears of another cycle
of tit-for-tat attacks as happened more than a year ago. Those attacks included
the U.S. drone strike in January 2020 that killed Iranian Gen. Qassim Soleimani
in Baghdad and set off months of increased troops levels in the region.
The latest attack also comes two days before Pope Francis is scheduled to visit
Iraq despite concerns about security and the coronavirus pandemic. The
much-anticipated trip will include stops in Baghdad, southern Iraq and the
northern city of Irbil.
The rockets struck Ain al-Asad airbase in Anbar province early in the morning,
U.S.-led coalition spokesperson Col. Wayne Marotto said. Kirby said the rockets
were fired from east of the base, and that counter-rocket defensive systems were
used to defend forces at the base. He added that while 10 rockets hit the base,
he didn't have information on what, if any, impact the defensive systems had in
stopping any strikes. He said damage assessments were ongoing. Asked if the
attack may have come from Iranian-backed Shia militia groups, Kirby said the
U.S. can't attribute responsibility for the attack yet. He acknowledged,
however, during a Pentagon briefing, that "we have seen rocket attacks come from
Shia-backed militia groups in the past. So in that way, certainly it certainly
coincides with our past experience here."
It's the same base that Iran struck with a barrage of missiles in January of
last year in retaliation for the killing of Soleimani. Dozens of U.S. service
members suffered concussions in that strike.
The Iraqi military released a statement saying that Wednesday's attack did not
cause significant losses and that security forces had found the launch pad used
for the rockets — a truck. Video of the site shows a burning truck in a desert
area. British Ambassador to Iraq Stephen Hickey condemned the attack, saying it
undermined the ongoing fight against the Islamic State group. "Coalition forces
are in Iraq to fight Daesh at the invitation of the Iraqi government," he
tweeted, using the Arabic acronym for IS. "These terrorist attacks undermine the
fight against Daesh and destabilize Iraq."
Denmark said coalition forces at the base were helping to bring stability and
security to the country. "Despicable attacks against Ain al-Asad base in #Iraq
are completely unacceptable," Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe Kofod tweeted. The
Danish armed forces said two Danes who were at the base at the time of the
attack are unharmed. Last week's U.S. strike along the border was in response to
a spate of rocket attacks that targeted the American presence, including one
that killed a coalition contractor from the Philippines outside the Irbil
airport.
After that attack, the Pentagon said the strike was a "proportionate military
response." Marotto, the coalition spokesperson, said the Iraqi security forces
were leading an investigation into the attack.
Frequent rocket attacks in Baghdad targeting the heavily fortified Green Zone,
which houses the U.S. Embassy, during Donald Trump's presidency frustrated the
administration, leading to threats of embassy closure and escalatory strikes.
Those attacks have increased again in recent weeks, since President Joe Biden
took office, following a lull during the transition period. U.S. troops in Iraq
significantly decreased their presence in the country last year and withdrew
from several Iraqi bases to consolidate chiefly in Ain al-Asad, Baghdad and
Irbil.
U.S., at U.N., Accuses Russia of Blocking 'Accountability'
on Syria Chemical Arms
Agence France Presse/March 04/2021
The new U.S. envoy to the United Nations on Thursday accused Russia of seeking
to stymie efforts to hold the government of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad
accountable for its use of chemical weapons during its long civil war. "We all
know the Assad regime has repeatedly used chemical weapons. So why hasn't the
Syrian government been held accountable?" the ambassador, Linda
Thomas-Greenfield, told a Security Council meeting via videoconference. "The
answer is sadly simple: the Assad regime has tried to avoid accountability by
obstructing independent investigations and undermining the role and work" of the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), she said. "And the
regime's allies, in particular Russia, have also sought to block all efforts to
pursue accountability," added the U.S. diplomat, who was participating in her
first Security Council meeting since taking over as President Joe Biden's envoy.
"Russia has defended the Assad regime despite its chemical weapons attacks, it
has attacked the professional work of the OPCW, and it has undermined efforts to
hold the Assad regime accountable for its use of chemical weapons and numerous
other atrocities."
Moscow's UN envoy, Vassily Nebenzia, defended Damascus, saying: "On Russia's
advice, Syria has abided by the OPCW in good faith, and has gotten rid of its
chemical weapons arsenal" -- a claim greeted with skepticism in the West. He
also mocked Thomas-Greenfield, who holds the council's rotating presidency for
March, for being a bit wordy in what was meant to be a "brief" intervention to
start the proceedings. "We all always try to be brief, but it's not always
possible," he said before launching into what he called "a brief and useful
historical recap on Council deliberations" -- seemingly chiding
Thomas-Greenfield for being a newbie. According to the United Nations, which has
accused Assad's regime of carrying out chemical attacks against its own citizens
in the past, Damascus has for years not replied to a series of 19 questions
about its weapons installations, which could have been used to stock or produce
chemical weapons. OPCW investigators have accused Assad's regime of sarin gas
and chlorine attacks in Syria in 2017. Syria's U.N. envoy Bassam Sabbagh refuted
the U.S. accusation, insisting Damascus was in compliance with international
law. "Syria rejects this hostile and politicized argument," he said.
Turkish Court Refuses to Add U.S. Report to Khashoggi Trial
Agence France Presse/March 04/2021
A Turkish court trying 26 Saudi suspects in absentia for the murder of
journalist Jamal Khashoggi on Thursday refused to admit a US report blaming the
kingdom's crown prince for the killing. An Istanbul court is trying two close
former aides to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in a case that has gained added
attention after the delayed release last week of the declassified US report.
Khashoggi was an insider-turned-critic who wrote for The Washington Post when he
was killed and dismembered inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul after going in
to get documents for his wedding to Turkish fiancee Hatice Cengiz in October
2018. Cengiz and a German diplomat attended the third hearing in the trial.
Turkish prosecutors claim Saudi deputy intelligence chief Ahmed al-Assiri and
the royal court's media czar Saud al-Qahtani led the operation and gave orders
to a Saudi hit team.
The declassified US report said Washington had grounds to conclude that Prince
Mohammed "approved" the operations since it fit a pattern of him "using violent
measures to silence dissidents abroad". Cengiz asked the Istanbul court to add
the US report to the evidence case file. But the presiding judge rejected the
request on the grounds that it "will bring nothing" to the trial. The judge did
allow Cengiz to file a new request with prosecutors spearheading the Turkish
government's case.The US report "directly attributes responsibility to the crown
prince. Therefore, we want this to be taken into account by the court," Cengiz
told reporters after the hearing.
- Locked in a room -
Thursday's hearing took witness testimony from two Turkish employees of the
Saudi consulate -- a driver and a security guard. Driver Edip Yilmaz said he and
his colleagues were locked in a room by the consulate's security team and not
allowed to leave until further notice on the day of Khashoggi's murder. "It gave
me the impression that something abnormal was going on," the driver told the
court. Khashoggi's death and subsequent disappearance of his body has gravely
tarnished Prince Mohammed's image and plunged Riyadh into a diplomatic crisis.
The kingdom now says the 59-year-old was killed in an unauthorised operation.
Five suspects who were sentenced to death in an opaque trial in Riyadh last year
later had their sentences commuted to 20 years in jail. Relations between Ankara
and Riyadh deteriorated sharply after Khashoggi's death. But Turkey has been
taking steps to mend its relations with Saudi Arabia and refrained from
officially commenting on the declassified US report. The next hearing has been
scheduled for July 8.
New 5.9 Magnitude Quake near Greek city of Larissa
Agence France Presse/March 04/2021
A new 5.9 magnitude quake hit central Greece near the city of Larissa on
Thursday, the same region where an even stronger tremor left 11 people injured
the day before, the Athens seismological observatory said. The authorities
registered no injuries yet from the new quake, which was felt 20 kilometers (12
miles) from Elassona, near Larissa, the observatory said.
Iran Hails European Decision Not to Criticize it at IAEA
Agence France Presse/March 04/2021
Iran welcomed a decision by European nations on Thursday to scrap a planned
resolution criticizing the Islamic republic at a meeting of the U.N.'s
International Atomic Energy Agency. Britain, France and Germany had planned to
introduce a resolution at the IAEA board of governors meeting this week
criticizing Iran's suspension of some nuclear inspections. But diplomats said
the resolution, which had not yet been formally submitted to the U.N. nuclear
watchdog, would no longer be put forward. "Today's developments can keep open
the path of diplomacy initiated by Iran and the IAEA," foreign ministry
spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said. "Iran hopes the parties participating in the
agreement can seize this opportunity, with serious cooperation, to ensure the
full implementation of the agreement by all," he added. The latest moves come at
a delicate moment for diplomacy on the Iranian nuclear issue, with fragile
efforts underway to revive the ailing 2015 deal between Iran and world powers on
its nuclear program. Ahead of the meeting, the Iranian authorities had warned
the adoption of such a resolution at the IAEA could harm efforts by it and the
international community to save the accord. The deal, known formally as the
Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, has been unravelling since former U.S.
president Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the agreement in 2018.
Iran Agrees to Meet U.N. Technical Experts over Uranium
Find
Associated Press/March 04/2021
Iran has agreed to sit down with international technical experts investigating
the discovery of uranium particles at three former undeclared sites in the
country, the head of the U.N. atomic watchdog said Thursday, after months of
frustration at Tehran's lack of a credible explanation.
The agreement came as three of the remaining signatories to the 2015 nuclear
deal with Iran — France, Germany and Britain — backed off the idea of a
resolution criticizing Iran for its decision to start limiting access by
International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to current facilities.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi told reporters in Vienna it was not up to
him to say whether Iran's move to hold talks with his technical experts was
linked to the decision of the so-called E3 group, but suggested it was difficult
to separate the political side of Iran's nuclear program from the technical
side.
"It is obvious for everybody that all these matters need to have some
resolution, and when it comes to Iran — and I'm not saying anything that Iran
itself hasn't said — everything is interconnected, of course," he said.
"These are different parts of a single whole."
The E3 had floated the idea of the resolution after Iran began restricting
international inspections last week. After a last-minute trip to Tehran by
Grossi, however, some access was preserved.
Russia and China — the other members of the nuclear deal known as the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action — were reportedly against the resolution, saying it
could antagonize Iran further.
Germany's Foreign Ministry told The Associated Press it was common to "discuss
all possible options for action" ahead of such meetings, and that despite
dropping the resolution, the E3 still had concerns about Iran's "serious
violations" of the nuclear deal.
"Above all, we would like to support the Director General of the IAEA in his
efforts to start talks with Iran regarding the open safeguards issues," the
ministry said.
Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, Kazem Gharibabadi, tweeted after the decision
that "wisdom prevails" and that the E3 had prevented unnecessary tension.
Iran's Foreign Ministry applauded the move.
"Today's development can maintain the path of diplomacy opened by Iran and the
IAEA, and pave the way for full implementation of commitments by all parties to
the nuclear deal," spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said.
The nuclear deal promised Iran economic incentives in return for the curbs on
its nuclear program. President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of the deal
unilaterally in 2018, saying it needed to be renegotiated.
Since then, Iran has slowly violated the restrictions to try and pressure the
remaining nations to increase the incentives to offset new, economy-crippling
U.S. sanctions.
Before the decision to start limiting IAEA access, it had already begun
enriching more uranium than allowed and to a greater purity than permitted,
among other things.
U.S. President Joe Biden has said he is ready to join talks with Iran and world
powers to discuss a return to the deal but the violations complicate the matter,
and over the weekend Iran turned down a European Union offer to host joint
talks.
Outside the JCPOA, Grossi has also been pushing Iran for answers on three sites
where inspections had revealed traces of uranium of man-made origin, suggesting
they were once connected to Iran's nuclear program.
Grossi said that with Iran agreeing to face-to-face talks about the findings he
hoped that "we could try to go beyond the exchange of letters and messages
which, to me, seemed a lot like talking past each other on this issue, and
really try to tackle them and try to solve them."
The first meeting is to take place at the beginning of April and Grossi said he
hoped to "come to some satisfactory outcome" by the next IAEA board meeting in
June.
In his address to the board, U.S. representative Louis Bono urged Iran to
cooperate fully with the IAEA to resolve these issues.
He also called Iran's recent restrictions on IAEA inspections "troublesome and
counterproductive" and said they should be reversed.
"IAEA verification is the cornerstone of the nuclear nonproliferation regime and
the foundation on which the JCPOA is built," Bono said according to a copy of
his remarks provided by the U.S. delegation. "Iran should not undermine that
foundation at the very time we all seek a return to the deal — especially
considering that the IAEA continues to investigate a number of serious,
outstanding safeguards concerns regarding possible undeclared nuclear material
in Iran."
He said that reliable verification could not be used by Iran as a "bargaining
chip" with the U.S.
"As President Biden has made clear, the United States, in close coordination
with our allies and partners, is ready to re-engage in meaningful diplomacy to
achieve a mutual return to compliance with the JCPOA, a key achievement of
multilateral diplomacy, and a vital instrument in addressing the international
community's longstanding concerns with Iran's nuclear program," Bono said.
"We hope that Iran will agree to begin necessary discussions on a diplomatic way
forward without delay."
The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on March 04-05/2021
Uniting France...President Macron deserves credit for
trying
Clifford D. May/The Washington Times/March 04/2021
What holds a nation together? In some cases, it’s blood, soil, and language
(think Japan). In some cases, it’s a police state (think Iran). But countries
that are democratic and diverse, what we might call e pluribus unum countries,
are apt to balkanize if their citizens don’t share values and interests. French
President Emmanuel Macron has grasped that and, for the past few months, he’s
been taking steps intended to reinforce a common identity, to unite the French
nation.
“The fight against separatism” was the theme of a long and philosophical speech
he gave in October, a week after the beheading of Samuel Paty. You may recall
that Mr. Paty was a middle-school teacher who, in a class on free expression,
touched upon the controversy over cartoons of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam.
Sensitive to the possibility that such images might offend some Muslim students,
he suggested they look away when he showed one.
The parent of a student who had not been in class that day heard about the
lesson and complained on social media. Abdoulakh Anzorov, an 18-year-old
Russian-born Chechen, decided it was his religious duty to punish Mr. Paty, and
perhaps teach a lesson himself.
Mr. Macron called the brutal murder of Mr. Paty an expression of “radical
Islamism,” which he defined as “another way of organizing society which is
initially separatist, but whose ultimate goal is to take it over completely. And
this is gradually resulting in the rejection of freedom of expression, freedom
of conscience and the right to blaspheme, and in us becoming insidiously
radicalized.”
Within Islam globally, Mr. Macron said, there is a “crisis” ignited by “radical
impulses and the desire for a reinvented jihad, which means the destruction of
the Other.”
He acknowledged that the response of the French government has been inadequate.
“We’ve crowded people together according to their origins, their social
backgrounds.” He called that “ghettoization.”
A complicating factor, he added, is that France is a “country with a colonial
past and traumas it still hasn’t resolved.” This has resulted in “citizens of
immigrant origin from the Maghreb and sub-Saharan Africa revisiting their
identity through a post-colonial or anti-colonial discourse.”
“Children in the Republic who have never experienced colonization” have been led
to see themselves as France’s victims rather than France’s citizens, he said.
The lethal consequences: “We previously faced imported terrorism. We now have
what’s known as home-grown terrorism.” The most infamous example: French
citizens with links to al Qaeda murdering more than a dozen people at the
offices of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical journal that published Muhammad
caricatures.
Mr. Macron has announced a list of measures, including new legislation and
stricter law enforcement, designed to “combat Islamism.”
A bill “reinforcing republican principles,” passed one chamber of France’s
National Assembly last month and is to go to the upper house at the end of this
month.
Mr. Macron hopes to foster a “republican awakening,” “unabashed republican
patriotism,” and the strengthening of laicity (laïcité), a term that implies
secularism as a policy and attribute – the idea that the French state is neutral
regarding religion, and that French citizens refrain from prominently displaying
their religious, ethnic, or other sub-national identities in public. “Laicity is
the cement of a united France,” he said.
Because schools “are our republican crucible,” he vowed to limit “foreign
influence.” An example: a school in Seine-Saint-Denis where the children are
“greeted by women wearing the niqab. When you ask them, you find out that their
education consists of prayers and certain classes.”
Such schools prevent children from “being educated about citizenship, from
having access to culture, to our history, to our values, to the experience of
diversity that lies at the heart of the republican school system.”
Perhaps most audaciously, Mr. Macron said that “this republican reawakening”
could “build a form of Islam in our country that is compatible with
Enlightenment values. An Islam that can peacefully coexist with the Republic.”
He added: “We must help this religion to structure itself in our country so that
it is a partner of the Republic on matters of shared concern.”
He added: “Every day people want to put forward good reasons for dividing us,”
but the goal should be to “unite the nation.”
Some of President Macron’s critics say he is stigmatizing Muslims. Others accuse
him of trying to steal a march on his right-wing rivals, in particular National
Rally leader Marine Le Pen, who has been rising in the polls. I’d argue that
when mainstream politicians ignore voters’ concerns, mouthing “politically
correct” bromides instead, they only serve to empower extremists.
Will Mr. Macron accomplish his mission of melding France’s diverse and divergent
communities? I think the odds are against him. But he deserves credit for
trying.
America, too, is afflicted by separatism, an eroding sense of national
community, belonging, and purpose, coupled with hostility toward not just
nationalism but also patriotism.
Disunification may be more advanced in the U.S. than in France. Not without
reason has Mr. Macron urged that France reject “certain social science theories
imported from the United States” – a reference to the “woke” ideologies that
seek to splinter Americans into mutually antagonistic factions with weak
national identities, and strong sub-identities based not just on religion, but
also skin color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, geography, and ideology.
President Biden, like his French counterpart, has expressed a desire to bring
his divided fellow countrymen together. “I don’t see red states or blue states,”
he has said, “but only the United States.” If he’s serious about translating
that vision into reality, more than the occasional rhetorical flourish will be
required.
Clifford D. May is founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies (FDD) and a columnist for the Washington Times. Follow him on
Twitter @CliffordDMay. FDD is a nonpartisan think tank focused on foreign policy
and national security issues.
Biden Risks Repeating Mistakes of the Past if He Ignores
the Evidence on Iran
Richard Goldberg/FDD/March 04/2021
The Islamic Republic has a long track record of willfully concealing its nuclear
activities in violation of its treaty obligations
The U.N.’s nuclear chief on Monday all but accused Iran of lying to
international inspectors about the existence of undeclared nuclear material and
sites inside the country—an alarming development in an investigation that
predates America’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. The statement raises
an important question for the Biden administration: Will Iran be required to
account for its past and present clandestine nuclear work before President Joe
Biden agrees to lift U.S. sanctions? If the answer is no, Biden will be
repeating the mistakes of the past—rewarding Iranian nuclear deception,
shredding the integrity of the global nonproliferation regime, and guaranteeing
Iran continues its long-term pursuit of nuclear weapons.
Iran, a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), has a long track
record of willfully concealing its nuclear activities in violation of its treaty
obligations. In late 2002, an Iranian dissident group revealed the existence of
a secret uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and a heavy water facility at
Arak. In 2009, the Obama administration exposed another secret enrichment
facility buried deep underground near the city of Qom. In both cases, Iran
declared its nuclear activities to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
only after getting caught. The regime’s nuclear modus operandi is simple:
Conceal unless and until exposed.
The 2015 nuclear agreement—formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of
Action or JCPOA—nominally required Iran to open up about its past work on
nuclear weapons. The deal stipulated that sanctions relief and other key
benefits would not be forthcoming until Iran allowed IAEA inspectors to pursue
leads indicating Iran sought not only to enrich uranium, but to build an actual
nuclear weapon.
Iran agreed, understanding that Obama and his European partners would declare
the issue settled regardless of whether Iran allowed a serious investigation.
Unsurprisingly, the IAEA reported “ambiguities” in the answers Iran submitted
and its inspectors were prevented from visiting a suspected nuclear weapons site
until Tehran finished cleaning it up. Regardless, America lifted sanctions,
giving Iran access to tens of billions of dollars, and the U.N. Security Council
ended its prohibition on Iran’s enrichment of uranium. Iran had ostensibly come
into compliance with the NPT and abandoned its quest for nuclear weapons—or so
we thought.
In early 2018, while the United States remained a participant in the JCPOA,
Israel’s Mossad intelligence service infiltrated a storage facility near Tehran
and removed a secret nuclear weapons archive Iran had concealed from the IAEA.
Academics who have seen parts of the archive describe it as a breathtaking
curation of Iran’s work to build nuclear weapons. The regime meticulously logged
its every move—and it archived those moves for a reason.
In September 2018, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu revealed the
existence of a “secret atomic warehouse for storing massive amounts of equipment
and materiel from Iran’s secret nuclear program.” Commercial satellite imagery
of the site in the Turquzabad district of Tehran showed Iran moving containers
and later sanitizing the site. The following year, the IAEA inspected the site
and found traces of undeclared nuclear material, indicating continued violation
of the NPT.
Also in 2019, the U.S. Treasury and State Departments revealed that the founder
of Iran’s nuclear weapons program—the late Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, who was
assassinated last year in Iran—had led a secret Iranian military group, the
Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research or SPND, which employed
Iranian nuclear weapon scientists. Layered atop the existence of the nuclear
archive and possible undeclared nuclear activities, the full extent of Iranian
nuclear deception was slowly coming into focus.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi brought that picture into sharp relief this
week by announcing the agency had inspected three more sites that had never been
declared to the agency and found traces of nuclear material at two of them.
These sites may be connected to another reported secret Iranian nuclear site at
Abadeh, which Netanyahu exposed in a September 2019 press conference. As for
questions surrounding the Turquzabad site, Grossi said the IAEA was “deeply
concerned that undeclared nuclear material may have been present at this
undeclared location and that such nuclear material remains unreported by Iran.”
These revelations undermine the very core of the JCPOA and will pose serious
challenges to any attempt to resurrect the agreement. First, it’s clear now that
Iran deceived the IAEA in 2015 and never provided a complete or truthful
accounting of its undeclared nuclear activities. The Obama administration
pressed forward with the nuclear deal despite obvious red flags that Iran was
still covering up its true nuclear ambitions. Giving Iran a free pass on nuclear
deception led only to more deception. The Biden administration should not repeat
the mistakes of the past by rejoining the pact and lifting U.S. sanctions before
Iran comes clean.
Second, critical deficiencies in the JCPOA’s inspection regime are on full
display. The IAEA didn’t seem to know Iran was hiding a nuclear archive until
the Mossad announced it had stolen it. Nor did the agency seem to have any idea
Iran had a secret warehouse or other undeclared sites where nuclear material had
been stored until they were exposed by the prime minister of Israel. Most
concerning, Iran keeps its military facilities off-limits to IAEA
inspections—leaving a gaping hole in its verification regime. SPND, of course,
is a military organization.
Third, the IAEA is pulling on a thread that opened while America remained a
participant in the JCPOA. Unlike other nuclear misconduct topping the news,
including the enrichment of uranium, Iran’s nuclear deceit is not a response to
U.S. withdrawal from the deal or imposition of sanctions—it is a fundamental
breach of its nuclear obligations and commitments, including the NPT.
President Biden’s stated condition for the United States to rejoin the JCPOA is
for Iran to first return to “strict compliance” with the deal. Since the deal
was premised on Iran abandoning its nuclear weapons ambitions and coming clean
to the IAEA about its clandestine nuclear activities, the Biden administration
must demand Iran fully account for all undeclared nuclear activities, sites and
materials prior to rejoining the agreement and lifting sanctions. Otherwise, the
president will be hard-pressed to explain the U.S. national security interest in
a nuclear deal that pays Iran billions of dollars to keep its nuclear
weapons-related activities secret.
Defenders of the JCPOA argue that the nuclear archive is historical in nature
rather than a current nuclear threat. The JCPOA, by contrast, deals with the
threat in front of us: Iran’s enrichment. Don’t create an unnecessary hurdle to
resolving the threat in front of us with questions about the past, they will
say.
But Iran’s failure to disclose nuclear sites and materials is not about
history—it’s about an active breach of the NPT, which the IAEA was unable to
detect using the JCPOA’s verification regime.
Papering over Iran’s breach of its most fundamental nuclear obligations in favor
of the empty reassurances provided by a flawed nuclear agreement would be an
enormous strategic mistake—not just for the new administration’s Iran policy but
for other regimes watching across the world. To reward Iran with sanctions
relief for concealing undeclared nuclear material and activities poses a far
greater threat to the global nonproliferation regime than withdrawal from flawed
agreements.
*Richard Goldberg is a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies. He served on Capitol Hill, on the U.S. National Security Council,
as the governor of Illinois’s chief of staff, and as a Navy Reserve Intelligence
Officer. Follow him on Twitter @rich_goldberg. FDD is a Washington, DC-based,
nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
Afghan security forces withdrawing from checkpoints, bases
Bill Roggio/Long War Journal-FDD/March 04/2021
Afghan security forces have withdrawn from a number of military bases and police
checkpoints throughout the country, allowing for the Taliban to easily walk in
and expand areas it controls and contests throughout the country.
Nearly forty percent of the police checkpoints have been shut down and policemen
have been relocated elsewhere, the Ministry of the Interior confirmed.
“We have reduced the presence of police in more than 6,000 checkpoints to 113
bases and 3,700 checkpoints—the move was aimed to reduce the role of police in
war and instead to transfer the war responsibilities to the Ministry of
Defense,” Massoud Andarabi, the Minister of the Interior said, according to
TOLONews.
The Afghan military has not stepped in to make up for the withdrawal of police
forces in this rapidly deteriorating security situation.
The Taliban is now manning checkpoints on the Kunduz – Takhar highway, as well
as the Pul-i-Khumri – Mazar-i-Sharif highways, TOLONews reported.
The Afghan military confirmed that a military base in Bala Murghab was abandoned
“to avoid threats” from the Taliban. The district center fell to the Taliban on
May 27, 2019, and the Taliban has had effective control of the district since
then. Afghan military forces have been besieged at the base.
In a statement published on the Taliban’s Pashto-language version of Voice of
Jihad, the group said it was “the last base of Kabul administration” in the
district. Taliban Spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid released a video from the vacated
base in Bala Murghab.
The Taliban has remained on the offensive all across Afghanistan despite signing
a so-called peace deal with the U.S. on Feb. 29, 2020.
U.S. officials have maintained that the agreement calls for the Taliban to
“reduce violence,” however there is no explicit mention of that whatsoever in
the short, four-page document.
Instead, violence across Afghanistan has increased in the wake of the agreement.
The Taliban has been clear that it will not share power with the Afghan
government. In the Taliban’s eyes, the only acceptable outcome to the
decades-long conflict is the return of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, with
its emir, Mullah Habitulah Akhundzada as the leader. To further this goal, the
Taliban has pressed its military offensive against the Afghan government and
security forces.
The Taliban has effectively seized control of most of the districts surrounding
the provincial capitals of Baghlan (Pul-i-Khumri), Helmand Lashkar Gah),
Kandahar (Kandahar City), Kunduz (Kunduz City), and Uruzgan (Tarin Kot),
according to The New York Times.
Over the past five years, the Taliban has seized control of Kunduz City (twice),
Farah City, and Ghazni City for short periods of time. FDD’s Long War Journal
assesses that Farah City, Ghazni City and Maidan Shar, the capital of Wardak
province, are under direct Taliban threat.
*Bill Roggio is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and
the Editor of FDD’s Long War Journal. Follow him on Twitter @billroggio. FDD is
a nonpartisan think tank focused on foreign policy and national security issues.
Assad Is Giving Biden Every Reason to Prioritize Syria
Aaron Y. Zelin, Oula A. Alrifai/The Washington Institute/March 04/2021
Brief Analysis
Even if the growing regional and geopolitical stakes were not sufficient on
their own, the regime’s domestic negligence, illegitimacy, and criminality
provide ample reason to shake up Washington’s approach.
As President Biden ponders Washington’s best approach to the Syrian quandaries
that bedeviled the previous two administrations, it can confidently draw at
least one conclusion: Bashar al-Assad’s regime has abdicated all levels of
responsibility as a legitimate ruler. Part of this conclusion stems from the
regime’s vast portfolio of human rights violations; as Stephen Rapp, the former
ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues under the Obama administration,
asserted in a recent 60 Minutes segment, “We’ve got better evidence against
Assad and his clique than we had against Milosevic in Yugoslavia...Even better
than we had against the Nazis at Nuremberg.” Yet the regime has failed Syria and
its people in far more comprehensive ways as well, ensuring that
destabilization, regional spillover, and exploitation by U.S. adversaries will
only grow if the Biden administration sticks with status-quo policies.
Failed Healthcare System
The inhumane military and diplomatic steps taken by Assad and his foreign allies
over the years have brought Syria’s healthcare crisis to a head. First, Damascus
and Russia’s deliberate bombing of hospitals and other medical facilities has
destroyed infrastructure that is indispensable to public health for wide swaths
of the population. Their forces have also murdered healthcare workers—nearly
1,000 of them since the war began, according to a 2020 report by Physicians for
Human Rights.
As a result, millions of Syrians are now reliant on external humanitarian aid to
meet their healthcare needs. Here, too, the regime has failed the people, since
any aid shortfalls now pose a major health challenge. In a January 2021 UN
briefing, officials noted that of the 13 million Syrians in need of such aid,
the UN-coordinated humanitarian effort was reaching only 7.6 million. Most of
the blame for this shortfall lies with Assad and Moscow, who have prohibited
greater UN access via border crossings that the regime does not even control.
Assad’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic has only exacerbated the overall
health crisis. As of March 2, the regime claimed that Syria had suffered only
15,696 cases and 1,039 deaths. Yet these are vast underestimates—according to a
January 14 report by Syria Direct, information suppression and testing
challenges ensure that only 1.5 percent of deaths are reported. The government
has no plans to vaccinate more than 20 percent of the country this year, and
these limited supplies will no doubt be restricted to Assad’s inner circle and
core Alawite constituency.
Troubled Economy
Some observers have blamed foreign sanctions for Syria’s economic woes, and such
messaging is a key part of the regime’s propaganda efforts. Yet Assad himself
admitted on November 4 that “when the banks in Lebanon closed, we paid the
price. This is the essence of the problem.” Such statements highlight the risky
degree to which the Syrian economy is intertwined with Lebanon’s economy and
banking system, virtually guaranteeing that any financial instability across the
border will affect the situation at home.
Moreover, as a consequence of the pandemic, a UN report found that 45 percent of
Syrian families had lost at least one source of income as of December 2020,
making a bad situation much worse. Poverty and unemployment remain extremely
high, with the Red Cross reporting that 80 percent of the population lived below
the international poverty line of $1.90 per day as of June 2020.
Inflation has been a major problem as well. With the exchange rate spiraling
from 47 Syrian pounds per U.S. dollar before the war to 3,590 pounds as of last
month, inflation has averaged around 200 percent over the past year, making
basic staples brutally expensive for the average citizen.
Environmental Degradation
The regime’s deficiencies in central control and state capacity have made it
difficult to address domestic environmental challenges. Some of these failures
began under the rule of Hafiz al-Assad, Bashar’s father, such as the poorly
planned bid for food self-sufficiency that began in the 1980s but wound up
spurring a crisis in the wheat industry, causing substantial environmental
degradation, and contributing to the unrest that evolved into the 2011 uprising.
Yet more recent challenges fall entirely on his regime, which has proven unable
or unwilling to address them—and in some cases has deliberately exacerbated
them.
The list is long and growing. Last year, a report by the UN Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs blamed climate change for Syria’s
intensifying wildfires, which left eighty people hospitalized and thousands
displaced in October alone. Elsewhere, increasingly frequent and intense
droughts have plagued the agricultural sector and raised the stakes of Turkey’s
new dam construction projects—especially since Syrian groundwater aquifers were
stretched to the breaking point even a decade ago, according to a prewar report
by the Wilson Center. The country has also lost nearly 20 percent of its already
depleted forest cover since 2000. According to Syria Direct, this is partly a
result of increased illegal logging in Idlib, Latakia, and Aleppo, a trend that
surfaced after the regime shut off electricity as collective punishment against
areas that rose up against its rule. And in the central Badia steppe/desert
region, overgrazing and droughts have destroyed the smaller plants that prevent
erosion and feed livestock.
Indefinite Refugee Displacement
Assad is still the main barrier to millions of Syrian refugees returning home
from Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and other countries. Many of them fear being
arrested or killed in retribution for allegedly associating with the uprising,
or even for simply fleeing regime territory in the first place. Moreover, the
large-scale infrastructure destruction wrought by regime and Russian forces,
coupled with widespread property seizures by loyalist and Iranian/proxy
elements, have left many Syrians with no homes to return to.
Correcting Past U.S. Mistakes
Months before he was named as President Biden’s secretary of state, Antony
Blinken told Face the Nation in May 2020 that he and other members of the former
Obama administration needed to acknowledge “that we failed” on Syria policy. He
concluded, “It’s something that I will take with me for the rest of my days.
It’s something that I feel very strongly.” If the new administration is serious
about making up for these mistakes and restoring America’s global standing, it
must avoid the flawed strategic assumptions that led to them.
This includes the notion that Syria policy can be safely subsumed under—and
essentially sacrificed for—Iran nuclear negotiations. Washington should instead
operate under the converse assumption: that Syria is the fulcrum of Iran’s
regional policy, so pursuing a more active, adroit U.S. policy there can create
additional leverage against Tehran. Without the Assad regime, Iran’s entire
regional foreign policy would be undermined, since Syria is a central span in
the Iran-Iraq-Lebanon land bridge that holds the so-called “axis of resistance”
together.
To be sure, the Assad regime’s domestic negligence, mismanagement, illegitimacy,
and criminality provide sufficient reason on their own to shake up Washington’s
approach. Yet reinvigorating a serious U.S. policy toward Syria is crucial even
from a purely realpolitik, power competition perspective, if only to curb the
advance of American adversaries in Tehran and Moscow.
*Aaron Zelin is the Richard Borow Fellow at The Washington Institute.
*Oula Alrifai is a fellow in the Institute’s Geduld Program on Arab Politics.
Biden is ready for the hard power option to deal with Iran
Hazem al-Ghabra/The Arab Weekly/March 04/2021
Iran mistakenly believed that Trump’s loss in US elections would be an
opportunity to escalate and test the patience of the new leadership in
Washington.
It is clear that the US administration’s patience with Iran and its
transgressions has quickly run out. This was clearly illustrated by a strike
that US forces launched on a military base belonging to militias affiliated with
Iran at dawn, on February 16.
The direct strike, undertaken solely by the United States without the assistance
of its Israeli ally, sent a clear message to Iran, which has failed to seize the
opportunities presented to it by the administration of US President Joe Biden.
Iran mistakenly believed that the loss of former US President Donald Trump in US
elections would be an opportunity for it to escalate and test the patience of
the new leadership in Washington, which preferred early on to use its soft power
before resorting to military and economic weapons.
The strike was not an easy choice for Biden, who had strongly criticised his
predecessor’s violent approach and gone along with the American left’s view that
Trump had over-relied on the use of force against Iran.
Many Democratic members of the US Congress expressed their displeasure that the
administration had not sought their approval or even consulted them before the
strike, despite the fact that military action is part of the new US president’s
powers.
The goal of the military operation did not rise either to the level desired by
the Republicans or the hawks in the US administration after the aggressive
actions of Iran and its proxy militias, which went so far as to launch rockets
at Erbil airport where US forces are stationed and targeting the US embassy.
In an attempt by the Biden administration to achieve a kind of balance between
the right and left of the US political establishment, the strike was limited in
type and intensity. The choice was confirmed by a Pentagon statement that said
the operation sought one of the most limited targets on the list of military
options. The operation not only sends a message to Iran and its proxies in the
region, but to all of Washington’s enemies who might have seen in Biden a weak
president who would allow them to extend or ratchet up their policies during the
next four years. Tehran in particular, however, should read the Pentagon
statement carefully and attentively.
The main point is that the list of targets is ready, and the US administration
is ready to use force when necessary.
Most importantly, Iran has been given clear notice that the next target will be
less limited and the next blow more painful if it continues to challenge the
United States and its interests directly or through its militias and proxies in
the Middle East. The Iranian policy, which today has entered the stage of
escalation and gone beyond striking at Washington’s allies to targeting US
citizens and diplomats, has provided Biden with the needed green light to
exchange his soft power for hard military action just a few months after
assuming the reins of power.
The American president will not need to respond to critics from within his own
party except to point out that Iran’s missiles were a brutish response to the
greatest amount of flexibility Washington has displayed in dealing with Tehran.
Opinions differ on whether Biden and his administration were originally
convinced of the usefulness of the policy of offering opportunities to effect
tangible change in Tehran’s behaviour, but it is clear that the negative
consequences of this policy emerged quickly and forced an immediate shift in the
US’s approach.
At the same time, observers agree that the US strike may not be enough to change
Iran’s approach, which is based on aggression and support for terrorism.
Ultimately, the Biden administration may be forced to escalate its moves to
levels that go beyond those reached by Trump and include targets deep inside
Iran if Tehran’s aggression against American citizens continues.
This change in Washington’s policy places the ball undoubtedly in the court of
the Iranian leadership, which may have realised today that the rules of the game
have not changed with the transition of power in Washington.
Dialogue over the lifting of sanctions and seeking a new agreement is still
dependent on a tangible change in Iran’s behaviour towards its neighbours and
the US’s presence in the region.In the event that the Iranian regime still has
doubts about Biden’s seriousness, the next target is already determined, and US
military equipment is fully prepared for the task.
Arabs Warn Biden: We Do Not Want Another Obama
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/March 04/ 2021
خالد أبو طعمة/معهد كايتستون: العرب يحذرون بايدن من أنهم لا يريدون أوباما آخر
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/96654/khaled-abu-toameh-gatestone-institute-arabs-warn-biden-we-do-not-want-another-obama-%d8%ae%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%af-%d8%a3%d8%a8%d9%88-%d8%b7%d8%b9%d9%85%d8%a9-%d9%85%d8%b9%d9%87%d8%af-%d9%83%d8%a7%d9%8a/
The Biden administration, some Arab writers have said, “has adopted a policy of
“antagonizing allies while appeasing enemies.”
[Syrian journalist Abduljalil] Alsaeid said he believed that former Obama
administration officials, who are now part of the Biden administration, are
intentionally trying to damage US-Saudi relations.
“The Obama wing inside the ruling Democratic Party accepts the Iranian regime
and turns a blind eye to Iran’s terrorism in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon.” —
Abduljalil Alsaeid, Syrian journalist, Al-Ain, March 2, 2021.
“President Biden has the right to talk about America’s democratic values, but
why have these values not been expanded to hold Hezbollah accountable for the
recent killing of [anti-Hezbollah Lebanese publisher] Loqman Slim or the
slaughter of thousands of thousands of Syrians by pro-Iranian groups?” —
Abduljalil Alsaeid, Al-Ain, March 2, 2021.
The Biden administration was “rewarding Iranian despotism while punishing Saudi
Arabia.” — Emad El Din Adeeb, a prominent Egyptian businessman and famous
political television show host, elsharkonline com, March 3, 2021.
The Biden administration was dealing harshly with Riyadh “because of one crime,
the killing of Khashoggi, while rehabilitating Tehran, which has carried out a
million crimes worse than Khashoggi’s crime.” — Emad El Din Adeeb, al-ain.com,
March 3, 2021.
Adeeb pointed out that Iran was continuing with its human rights violations
while Saudi Arabia has in recent years embarked on large-scale reforms.
According to al-Sawafi, the release of the report on the slain Saudi journalist
was a sign that the Biden administration “stands against the aspirations of the
Saudi and Gulf people in achieving reform and stability.
“Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was right when he asserted that the
Iranian regime understands only the language of force.” — Zuhair Al-Harthi,
Saudi columnist and political activist, Al-Arabiya, February 27, 2021.
The last three years of the Obama presidency were “catastrophic in every sense
of this word,” al-Harthi said. “Will Biden fall into the same trap? Washington’s
standing declined during the Obama presidency. Will Biden repeat Obama’s fatal
mistakes? The US dealings at the time with regional issues were a source of
ridicule, as Washington delivered Iraq and Afghanistan on a golden platter to
Iran and supported the Muslim Brotherhood.” — Zuhair Al-Harthi, Al-Arabiya,
February 27, 2021.
Prominent Arab political analysts and commentators are dumbfounded that the
Biden administration has chosen to appease Iran and Islamists instead of working
with Washington’s traditional and long-time allies in the Arab world.
In a series of articles published after the release of the US intelligence
report on the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, many Arab analysts and
columnists have warned that the Biden administration was harming US interests in
the Middle East.
Some said they saw the decision to release the report as a kind of sequel to the
Obama administration’s failed policy of meddling in the internal affairs of Arab
countries.
They noted that the Saudi authorities had already punished those involved in the
2018 murder of Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. The
Biden administration, some Arab writers have said, “has adopted a policy of
“antagonizing allies while appeasing enemies.”
“The Saudi judiciary has imposed the most severe penalties on the perpetrators
of this morally and legally unacceptable act,” wrote Syrian journalist
Abduljalil Alsaeid, referring to the murder of Khashoggi. “The Saudi leadership
was keen not to politicize this case.”
Alsaeid said he believed that former Obama administration officials who are now
part of the Biden administration are intentionally trying to damage US-Saudi
relations:
“The wing of former President Barack Obama among the Biden team considers itself
in a state of hostility with Saudi Arabia because of the kingdom’s diplomacy
that succeeded in persuading former President Donald Trump to withdraw from the
ill-fated nuclear deal… The Obama wing inside the ruling Democratic Party
accepts the Iranian regime and turns a blind eye to Iran’s terrorism in Syria,
Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon.”
Alsaeid pointed out that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states are opposed to a
return to the old nuclear deal with Iran:
“The failed campaign of pressures on Saudi Arabia will ultimately produce an
unwanted American scenario, which is to antagonize allies and appease enemies…
Riyadh, like the Arab Gulf states, has very important alliances with America,
and the Saudi partnership with the US extends for long decades, and has resulted
in a serious fight against terrorism.”
President Biden, he added, “has the right to talk about America’s democratic
values, but why have these values not been expanded to hold Hezbollah
accountable for the recent killing of [anti-Hezbollah Lebanese publisher] Loqman
Slim or the slaughter of thousands of thousands of Syrians by pro-Iranian
groups?
Emad El Din Adeeb, a prominent Egyptian businessman and famous political
television show host, said that the Biden administration was “rewarding Iranian
despotism while punishing Saudi Arabia.”
The Biden administration, Adeeb warned, was dealing harshly with Riyadh “because
of one crime, the killing of Khashoggi, while rehabilitating Tehran, which has
carried out a million crimes worse than Khashoggi’s crime.”
Adeeb pointed out that Iran was continuing with its human rights violations
while Saudi Arabia has in recent years embarked on large-scale reforms.
“Freedom of expression, assembly and association are prohibited in Iran,” he
said.
“It prevents normal social life and attacks protests, private parties and
intellectual seminars. It is issues death sentences against political opponents
and practices all forms of systematic torture against detainees and prisoners.
The Iranian authorities also practice persecution and oppression against
religious minorities.”
Instead of punishing Iran, Adeeb said, “The Biden administration is seeking to
bring Iran back to the negotiating table, lift sanctions, and release its assets
while halting arms and spare parts shipments to Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the
United Arab Emirates.”
“Now Washington is revoking the terror designation of the Houthi terrorist
movement in Yemen, thereby encouraging it to increase its missile attacks
against innocent Saudi civilians and installations. Washington is now turning a
blind eye to Iran’s proxies in the region.”
Emirati writer Mohammed Khalfan Al-Sawafi said that one of the “calamities” that
the Arabs suffered during the presidency of Barack Obama was US interference in
the internal affairs of the Arab countries.
Al-Sawafi warned that Biden was repeating the “same mistake” of the Obama
administration by publishing the report about the murder of Khashoggi.
“As Arabs, we do not have any problem with regional or superpower parties
playing a role in the international arena… But we reject the interference of any
political system or administration that believes its international status and
military and financial power allow it to harm our leaders. It seems there are
certain agendas that were not completed during the Obama era, and the Biden
administration wants to take us back to the time when Biden was Vice President.
Instead of confirming the Arab’s concerns about the return of Obama’s policy to
the region, it would be appropriate [for the Biden administration] to respect
the Arab’s social and political culture, which does not accept any harm to
political and religious symbols.”
According to al-Sawafi, the release of the report on the slain Saudi journalist
was a sign that the Biden administration “stands against the aspirations of the
Saudi and Gulf people in achieving reform and stability. The Biden
administration, he added, should avoid getting itself into a situation that
could damage US relations with the Arab countries. “The Obama administration
pushed a number of Arab countries toward rapprochement with China and Russia,”
he remarked. “The Biden administration is now working on the basis of: If you
have a problem and are unable to solve it, complicate it or work against it.”
Saudi columnist Hamood Abu Talib accused the Biden administration of handing out
gifts to Iranian-backed terror groups while punishing its Arab allies, including
Saudi Arabia.
Abu Talib noted that on the same day the Biden administration announced its
intention to remove the Houthi militia from the US list of foreign terrorist
organizations, the Yemen-based terror group fired ballistic missiles and
explosive drones toward Saudi Arabia. “America is now providing free gifts to
the Houthi militia,” Abu Talib said.
“The false accusations adopted by the Biden administration against the kingdom
and the attempts to interfere with its sovereign decisions complicate the
situation and make cooperation with the kingdom more difficult. America knows
well that the kingdom plays an important pivotal role in all regional issues, in
addition to its political and economic weight and depth in the Islamic world and
its position in the Arab world, as well as its strategic partnership as a
reliable and strong ally of America for eight decades. Therefore, it would be a
great folly for the Biden administration if it continues to provoke the kingdom
or if it continues to support the Houthis and stand by and watch their attacks.”
The Saudi columnist advised the Biden administration to avoid complicating the
problems of the Middle East and “stop supporting terrorist militias that
threaten the region’s security, such as the Houthi militia that is supported by
the Iranian regime, which is the worst terrorist regime in the world.”
Another Saudi columnist and political activist, Zuhair Al-Harthi, expressed fear
that the policy of Biden in the Middle East would be similar to Obama’s
“capitulation.”
“American hesitation and inaction, interpreted by Tehran at the time [of the
Obama administration] as weakness, is what tempted it [Iran] today to think in
the same way and blackmail the new president… The new administration in the
White House is in a state of retreat and is lacking a clear vision. The Iranian
regime practiced these methods before and is applying them today with the Biden
administration in light of behavior similar to that of former President Obama.
The state of political numbness of the administration that we are witnessing
these days does not have a logical explanation, especially when comparing it to
what the administration of former President Trump did to curtail the Iranian
regime. It is important for President Biden to feel the real dangers facing the
Gulf states, the role of US allies, and the danger of enemies. Former Secretary
of State Mike Pompeo was right when he asserted that the Iranian regime
understands only the language of force. We expected Biden to employ the
sanctions that Trump re-imposed on Iran to force it to negotiate issues that
were not included in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.”
The last three years of the Obama presidency were “catastrophic in every sense
of this word,” al-Harthi said.
“Will Biden fall into the same trap? Washington’s standing declined during the
Obama presidency. Will Biden repeat Obama’s fatal mistakes? The US dealings at
the time with regional issues were a source of ridicule, as Washington delivered
Iraq and Afghanistan on a golden platter to Iran and supported the Muslim
Brotherhood.”
Egyptian writer Emile Amin also warned Biden against replicating the policies of
the Obama administration in the Middle East, especially with regards to
endorsing and “flirting with Islamic fundamentalism.” Amin said that no one in
the Arab world knows the reason behind Biden’s rush to “fall into the arms” of
Iran and Islamists.
“Looking at Washington today, and before the first hundred days of Biden’s
presidency have elapsed, it appears the US has not learned from its bad
experiences,” he wrote. “Biden’s team is very close to repeating the mistakes of
the past, especially concerning the Islamists.”
The Arabs, in short, are telling the Biden administration: The President’s first
days in office have hardly elapsed and you are already putting your relations
with your Arab allies in serious jeopardy. By blowing the Khashoggi case out of
proportion, you are losing your friends in the Middle East. By appeasing Iran,
you are emboldening Muslim terrorists. Be aware: repeating the misguided and
mistaken policies of the Obama administration will not serve US interests, but
considerably harm them.
*Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
© 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.
The International Criminal Court Violates Its Statute
Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute/March 04/ 2021
At present... the ICC renders itself irrelevant by adjudicating "national
jurisdictions" perfectly capable of doing so while refusing to adjudicate or
indict the world's worst violators of human rights.
The ICC has already provided its critics with plenty of ammunition to question
the Court's legitimacy as a consequence of additional violations of its founding
statute. Neither Israel nor the United States ratified the Rome Statute (the
ICC's founding treaty). The Court therefore has no jurisdiction whatsoever over
the state actions of either country.
State parties dissatisfied with the ICC's dismal record should be encouraged to
discontinue financial support for the Court or to withdraw altogether from the
Hague-based institution.
Meanwhile, at least four Gulf Arab states and other Muslim-majority countries
appear far more concerned, with good reason, about Iran's drive for regional
supremacy, while welcoming warming relations with Israel, which will prove a
most loyal friend.
At present, the International Criminal Court renders itself irrelevant by
adjudicating "national jurisdictions" perfectly capable of doing so, while
refusing to adjudicate or indict the world's worst violators of human rights.
The International Criminal Court (ICC), by straying far from its original
purpose, has perjured itself. The ICC was established in 1998 to bring justice
to victims of systematic atrocity in countries unable to do so. In its own
words, "The core mandate of the ICC is to act as a court of last resort with the
capacity to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war
crimes when national jurisdictions for any reason are unable or unwilling to do
so."
At present, however, the ICC renders itself irrelevant by adjudicating "national
jurisdictions" perfectly capable of doing so, while refusing to adjudicate or
indict the world's worst violators of human rights.
The Court's February 5 decision authorizing the investigation of unfounded
allegations of a pattern of human rights violations supposedly committed by
Israel Defense Force (IDF) personnel underscores the ICC's corrupted political
nature.
First, the ICC has violated its founding statute by accepting into its docket a
complaint against a sovereign state (Israel) by a non-state entity (Palestinian
plaintiffs), twisting international law to try to alchemize "Palestine" into a
state by pointing to its observer status in some UN bodies. Close but no cigar.
The Court, by trying to legitimize the Palestinian Authority's (PA) illegal
briefs, therefore only confirms the views of its critics that it merely serves
as an instrument of the Palestinian Arab propaganda war against Israel.
The Court further underscores these violations by treating Hamas as a legal
equivalent of Israel in the terrorist group's charges against the IDF in the
2014 Gaza War.
The ICC permitting non-state actor such as the Palestinian Authority to
challenge a sovereign state, Israel, is a double violation of the Court's
founding statute. It has failed to indict Syria's regime for using chemical
weapons against its own people, Iraqi militias for murdering civilians or
Iranian-supported Houthi snipers in Yemen for slaughtering children. The most
egregious omission of the ICC is its glaring failure to indict Communist China
for murdering 2.5 million people by repeatedly lying about the human-to-human
transmissibility of its COVID-19 virus, or its ongoing genocide of the Uighur
people and other non-Han minorities in China.
Dismantlement or disempowerment of the ICC can be assured if enough of its
original ratifying states decide to cancel financial support for the court or to
resign from its membership. A broad-based coalition could undo the ICC's
ostensible legitimacy. South Africa, Burundi, and the Gambia have already
resigned from the ICC after accusing the court of focusing almost entirely on
crimes against humanity perpetrated by or in African states -- possibly another
reason the ICC is nosing around for any country that is not African to indict.
To its credit, the ICC has prosecuted mass atrocities in Kenya, Uganda, Ivory
Coast, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, the Central African Republic,
Libya and Mali. The African Union has called for a mass withdrawal of the 34
African signatory states from the ICC. Perhaps opponents of the ICC could raise
the consciousness of more countries to cancel their memberships in the ICC --
particularly because of the court's silence on the reported genocide perpetrated
by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) against the Uighurs in China's Xinjiang
province.
The ICC has already provided its critics with plenty of ammunition to question
the Court's legitimacy as a consequence of additional violations of its founding
statute. Neither Israel nor the United States ratified the Rome Statute (the
ICC's founding treaty). The Court therefore has no jurisdiction whatsoever over
the state actions of either country. According to JNS:
"Germany and Hungary join the United States and other countries—such as Canada,
the Czech Republic, Austria, Australia, Brazil and Uganda, the latter five of
which filed documents with the ICC as amici curiae (outside observers) providing
information in support of Israel—condemning the ICC ruling."
These countries publicly confirm that the Court has no jurisdiction over a state
that is not party to the Rome Statute. Both the US and Israel, in their refusal
to permit the ICC to interfere in their sovereignty, are on solid legal ground.
Yet the ICC seems determined to investigate allegations of human rights
violations not only of the IDF in the Gaza, but also of US troops in
Afghanistan. The Court's impending decision ignores the reality that both the US
and Israel are rule-of-law states which already have thoroughly and impartially
investigated allegations of human rights violations by members of their armed
forces.
"Palestine" is not a state, and therefore, according to the Rome Statute, the
Palestinian Authority has no standing to press its case with the ICC.
The Court's anti-Israeli initiative comes at a moment when several Arab
countries are disengaging themselves from "the moral albatross" of being
stewards of the Palestinian drive for statehood. The United Arab Emirates,
cognizant of the mismanagement of funds by the United Nations Relief and Works
Agency (UNRWA), has decided no longer to fund this entity, which allocates
revenues for Palestinians residing in 58 camps across the Middle East.
State parties dissatisfied with the ICC's dismal record should be encouraged to
discontinue financial support for the Court or to withdraw altogether from the
Hague-based institution.
Meanwhile, at least four Gulf Arab states and other Muslim-majority countries
appear far more concerned, with good reason, about Iran's drive for regional
supremacy, while welcoming warming relations with Israel, which will prove a
most loyal friend.
*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.
US must do more to confront the Iranian regime
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/March 04/2021
د.مجيد رافزادا: مطلوب من الولايات المتحدة عمل المزيد لمواجهة النظام الإيراني
The US airstrikes against Iran-backed militia groups in Syria last week were an
informed and welcome move by the White House, but they are definitely not
adequate when it comes to confronting the Iranian regime and its widespread
militia network.
The airstrikes, which were authorized by President Joe Biden and destroyed
several facilities in eastern Syria, were carried out in response to recent
attacks by Iran-backed militias in Iraq. This military action will definitely
send a signal to the Iranian regime that any attack on US bases or personnel
will be swiftly dealt with.
When the Iranian leaders become cognizant of the fact there will be military
consequences for their attacks on US entities, they will use more restraint. For
example, when the theocratic establishment was extremely concerned that the
Trump administration might launch an attack on Tehran in its final months in
power, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei surprisingly ordered all factions of
Iraqi armed groups to stop attacking US interests in Iraq. A senior commander of
an Iranian-backed armed group involved in the attacks told Middle East Eye in
October: “Khamenei’s orders were straightforward and clear. All attacks
targeting US interests in Iraq must stop.”
In order to effectively confront the Iranian regime, the Biden administration
should refrain from sending contradictory messages, such as mixing airstrikes on
Iran-linked targets with advocating the revival of the 2015 nuclear agreement,
which will lift sanctions against the regime and help billions of dollars flow
into its treasury. Iran’s nuclear program must not be treated as separate from
the regime’s malign behavior and support for terror groups in the Middle East.
Instead, the Biden administration must carry out a comprehensive policy toward
the Iranian regime that includes, among other things, Iran’s nuclear and
ballistic missile programs, its regional interventions, assassinations and bomb
plots in other countries, including in the West, its sponsorship of militia and
terror groups across the region, and its egregious human rights violations. The
ballistic missile program, which is a pillar of Iran’s foreign policy and is
directly linked to the nuclear program, should be restricted and included as
part of any new nuclear agreement.
This means that the White House should urge the UN Security Council to impose
sanctions on Tehran if it continues to test-fire ballistic missiles in violation
of Resolution 2231. This resolution “calls upon Iran not to undertake any
activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering
nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.”
The regime has fired many ballistic missiles with impunity since signing the
nuclear deal in 2015.
In addition, the US must impose political and economic sanctions on the Iranian
officials responsible for human rights violations, just as the Trump
administration did with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is still
designated a terrorist organization. Unfortunately, Biden and his administration
have been silent in the wake of Iran’s recent shocking human rights violations,
including the rising number of executions of those who oppose the theocratic
establishment.
The Biden administration also needs to publicly announce its support for the
Iranian people, particularly the youth, who want to have an inclusive and
democratic government. Iran has a large youth population — at least 60 percent
of its citizens are aged under 30 — and they are largely disaffected and
dissatisfied with the current political establishment. The people want a
democratic system of governance where the freedoms of speech, press and assembly
are not suppressed. However, they feel they have been left alone, more than ever
before, in their attempts to achieve their goal of self-determination. The White
House needs to send a clear message that it stands with the Iranian people and
supports their aspirations.
The White House needs to send a clear message that it stands with the Iranian
people and supports their aspirations.
Siding with the Iranian population also means parting from rewarding the regime
with the nuclear deal and the lifting of sanctions, or having close political
ties with Iranian leaders. The Biden administration cannot send a contradictory
message to the Iranian people, just as the Obama administration did, by stating
that it supports their cause while at the same time sitting at the table with
Iran’s politicians, shaking hands and smiling. The Iranian people would view
such an act as a betrayal. When the US befriends the Iranian regime and empowers
it politically and economically, it is directly weakening the majority of the
Iranian people.
Finally, standing with the Iranian people means supporting and facilitating
their access to social media platforms. The Iranian government has become
skilled at censoring social media, but the US can find ways to bypass this
censorship.
Last week’s US military action against Iran-backed militias was a step in the
right direction, but it is not enough: The Biden administration must do more to
confront the predatory regime of Iran.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist.
Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh
Pope Francis’ visit to give hope and comfort to Iraqis of all faiths
Francesco Bongarrà and Robert Edwards/Arab News/March 04/2021
فرنسيسكو بونغارا وروبرت ادواردز: زيارة البابا فرنسيس للعراق تعطي الأمل والرضاء
لكل العراقيين
The first pontiff ever to set foot in Iraq will meet church leaders and members
of the country’s dwindling Christian minority
Francis will visit the shrine city of Najaf and meet with Grand Ayatollah Ali
Al-Sistani, spiritual leader of Iraq’s Shiite Muslims
ROME: Pope Francis, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, will become the first
pontiff ever to set foot in Iraq, where he hopes to encourage the dwindling
Christian community to remain in their ancient homeland while also extending a
hand of friendship to the Islamic world.
The three-day “pilgrimage” comes despite a recent spike in coronavirus cases in
Iraq and an upsurge in violence. Francis arrives just days after a rocket attack
on the Ain al-Assad base in Iraq’s western desert, which hosts US-led coalition
troops.
One civilian contractor was killed in Wednesday’s barrage, which the US has
blamed on Iran-backed militias. Benedict XVI, who resigned as pontiff eight
years ago, warned in an interview on Monday that the visit is “a dangerous trip:
for reasons of security and for coronavirus.”
Confirming the visit was still going ahead in his weekly address on Wednesday,
Francis said: “For a long time I have wanted to meet these people who have
suffered so much. I ask you to accompany this apostolic journey with your
prayers so that it may take place in the best possible way and bear the
hoped-for fruits.
“The Iraqi people are waiting for us, they were waiting for Saint John Paul II,
who was forbidden to go. One cannot disappoint a people for the second time. Let
us pray that this journey will be successful.”
This is Francis’ first trip abroad in about 15 months due to the coronavirus
pandemic and subsequent restrictions on movement. Although the 84-year-old
Argentine pontiff and his entourage have all been vaccinated against COVID-19,
no such inoculation campaign has taken place in Iraq. The majority of the
country will be under strict lockdown during his visit and movement between
provinces will be restricted.
On Tuesday, a spokesman for the pope said he would be traveling in an armored
vehicle — not his usual white ‘popemobile’ — and that he would not be meeting
crowds, except those attending Mass in the northern Kurdish city of Erbil on
Sunday.
“This is a particular situation, that’s why the transports will all be in a
closed vehicle, meaning it will be complicated to see the pope on the streets,”
Matteo Brunei, the spokesman, said in a press briefing attended by Arab News.
“There will be a number of meetings but none will be more than a few hundred
people.”
Francis touches down in Baghdad on Friday, where he will be welcomed at the
airport by Mustafa Al-Kadhimi, the Iraqi prime minister, in the first meeting
between a pope and an Iraqi PM since 2008.
He will then head to the presidential palace for a private meeting with
President Barham Salih, who will introduce him to local political and religious
authorities. Salih has met the pope in Rome on two occasions: the first time on
Nov. 24, 2018, and against on Jan. 25 last year.
In the afternoon, Francis will meet with the Christian community at the Syrian
Catholic Cathedral of Our Lady of Perpetual Help, where at least 47 Christians
died in a Daesh attack in 2010. At the church, restored in 2012, he will be
welcomed by Patriarch Joseph Younan.
Perhaps the most keenly anticipated leg of the visit falls on Saturday, when
Francis travels to Najaf, the shrine city where Imam Ali, the fourth Islamic
caliph, is buried. Here Francis will meet with the 90-year-old Grand Ayatollah
Ali Al-Sistani, the spiritual leader of Iraq’s Shiites.
Francis became the first pope to visit the Arabian Peninsula two years ago when
he met with Sunni cleric Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb, the grand imam of Al-Azhar, in
Abu Dhabi. There, the two faith leaders signed a document on “human fraternity
for world peace” and issued a joint call for freedom of belief.
* Distance Pope Francis will cover within Iraq by plane and helicopter.
Saturday’s visit to Najaf will be the first face-to-face meeting between a
Catholic pontiff and a Shiite ayatollah. The meeting at Al-Sistani’s modest home
is billed as “a courtesy visit” — so no joint declaration is expected, although
a verbal statement is likely. It will nevertheless mark a symbolic moment
whereby the pope extends a hand of friendship to the other main branch of Islam.
There are significant geopolitical undertones, however. Al-Sistani is widely
seen as a counterweight to Iran’s influence in Iraq and among Shiites as a
whole. By meeting with him, Francis is effectively recognizing Sistani as the
pre-eminent voice of Shiite Islam over his powerful rival, Iran’s Supreme Leader
Ali Khamenei.
Al-Sistani commands immense respect among Iraq’s Shiite majority. Thousands of
young men heeded his 2014 fatwa to take up arms against Daesh when the group
made lightning advances in the country’s north. His sermons, often delivered
through representatives, can have far-reaching political consequences.
A show of solidarity from Al-Sistani now might also give Iraq’s Christians a
measure of protection from Iraq’s marauding Shiite militias, which have
terrorized Christian families and prevented many from returning home from
internal displacement.
Following his meeting with Al-Sistani, Francis will visit the ancient city of Ur
in the present-day southern province of Dhi Qar, considered in the Bible to be
Abraham’s birthplace.
There, an interreligious meeting is scheduled with representatives of all faiths
present in Iraq, including the Yazidis — an ancient culture brought to brink of
annihilation by Daesh fanatics when the militant group launched a campaign of
slaughter and rape in their homeland of Sinjar in August 2014.
On Saturday afternoon, Francis will celebrate Mass in Baghdad’s Chaldean
cathedral — a first in the Chaldean rite for a pontiff of the Catholic Church —
together with Cardinal Louis Raphael Sako, patriarch of the Chaldeans.
Pope Francis said in a video message on Thursday that he wants to be seen by the
Iraqi people as a “penitent pilgrim” asking God for “forgiveness and
reconciliation after years of war and terrorism,” and for “consolation of hearts
and the healing of wounds.” More here.
On Sunday Francis will then reach Erbil, capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, where he
will be welcomed by the autonomous region’s President Nechirvan Barzani and
Prime Minister Masrour Barzani. Although security is far better in Erbil
compared to other Iraqi cities, Western targets came under rocket attack there
in mid-February.
The Sunni Muslim-majority Kurdistan Region has long been considered a sanctuary
for Iraq’s persecuted ethno-religious minorities. During the war with Daesh,
tens of thousands of Christians and Yazidis fled to hastily built displacement
camps behind Peshmerga lines. Slow reconstruction efforts and ongoing security
concerns have left many waiting impatiently to return.
From Erbil, Francis will fly by helicopter to Nineveh’s provincial capital
Mosul, which from 2014 to 2017 was the de facto capital of Daesh’s
self-proclaimed caliphate. Huge areas of the once flourishing commercial hub
were leveled in the US-led coalition’s flight to reclaim the city, and many of
its precious religious artifacts were vandalized by Daesh fanatics.
Here Francis will pray to honor the victims in the Square of the Four Churches —
Syro-Catholic, Syriac Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox and Chaldean. Francis will be
welcomed there by Mosul’s Archbishop Najib Mikhael Moussa and the local
governor.
He will then fly by helicopter to Qaraqosh, a Christian-majority city where on
Aug. 6-7, 2014, about 45,000 people were expelled by Daesh hordes. He will say
the Angelus Sunday prayer in the Church of the Immaculate Conception, which was
badly damaged by Daesh and used as a shooting range.
Mass at Franso Hariri stadium in Erbil will be Francis’ last appointment in
Iraq. He is then scheduled to fly back to Rome from Baghdad on Monday.
Pope Francis can help all Arabs, not just Christians
Hussain Abdul-Hussain/Arab News/March 04/2021
حسين عبدالله: بإمكان قداسة البابا فرنسيس مسعدة العرب وليس المسيحيين فقط
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/96656/three-english-editorials-addressing-pope-francis-visit-to-iraq-%d9%85%d9%82%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%aa-%d8%ab%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%ab%d8%a9-%d8%a8%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a5%d9%86%d9%83%d9%84%d9%8a%d8%b2%d9%8a%d8%a9/
Violence, banditry and demographic change imposed by Iran’s militias in Iraq on
Christian towns, which were once dominated and terrorized by Daesh, have become
so widespread and alarming that they prompted Pope Francis to plan a trip to
Iraq — the first of its kind for a pontiff since the rise of Christianity more
than two millennia ago.
Once a thriving community of 1.5 million people living across the country, Iraqi
Christians have been retreating to the northwestern province of Nineveh, which
has historically been one of the most diverse areas in the region and home to a
few ancient communities, including Aramaic speakers. Most historians believe
that Jesus spoke Aramaic.
Between 2014 and 2017, Daesh unleashed a wave of terror on all residents of
Iraq’s northwest, but especially on non-Muslims. The terrorist group marked
houses of Christians with the letter “N,” for Nazarene, and forced them either
to convert to Islam or pay a poll tax. And those Christians were the lucky ones.
Other minorities that were not considered to be among the “people of the book,”
such as Yazidis, faced much harsher treatment, including the enslavement of
their women.
The US led a global coalition that decimated Daesh, but Christians and other
minorities still fear going back home because the power that succeeded Daesh,
pro-Iran Shiite militias known collectively as Al-Hashd Al-Shaabi, has also been
mistreating them. In a few towns, the Christians formed their own militias to
fend off thuggery. But Christians lack the resources to man all their towns and
neighborhoods, forcing many of them to remain displaced. And, while the
Christians are away, Shiite militias have been stealing their property, either
by forging deeds or by blackmailing Christians into selling at very low prices.
The end result is that Iraqi Christians, whose number is now estimated at
150,000, are leaving the country in droves.
To empower these Christians and help them stay in their historic homeland, Pope
Francis will visit Iraq, where he plans several stops, including at Qaraqosh —
the biggest Christian city in the northwest — and at Irbil, the capital of the
autonomous Kurdistan region. The pontiff will also visit Najaf, where he will
meet with Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani. The two top clerics are expected to
sign a document calling for peace, similar to the one the pope signed with his
Sunni counterpart Grand Imam Ahmad Al-Tayyeb during his trip to the UAE in 2019.
But Pope Francis’ Middle Eastern visits, designed to promote peace and
coexistence, are not only symbolic. By meeting with Al-Sistani, the pontiff will
technically recognize the Iraqi cleric as the top Shiite authority — a
recognition that unsettles Al-Sistani’s rivals in Iran, especially Ali Khamenei,
who, despite ruling the Iranian theocracy, lacks the religious pedigree required
to overpower Najaf’s senior clerics. Perhaps Khamenei makes up for his lack of
religious prominence with his Shiite militias and their violence.
Iran’s militias have alarmed Pope Francis not only in Iraq, but also in Lebanon,
where the Maronite church is in communion with Rome, giving its patriarch,
Bechara Boutros Al-Rai, the rank of cardinal and allowing him to vote whenever
Catholicism chooses its pope. As Iran’s militia in Lebanon, Hezbollah, tightens
its grip on the country, causing lawlessness and economic freefall, the number
of Lebanese Christians has also dwindled, just like in Iraq. Hence the pope has
impressed on Al-Rai to demand that UN resolutions pertaining to Lebanon be
implemented, including the disbanding of Hezbollah and reviving of the 1949
truce with Israel.
Al-Rai’s position has not gone unnoticed with Hezbollah, whose mouthpiece
described the patriarch, without naming him, as among “the worst clerics Lebanon
has seen.” The group’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, also rebutted Al-Rai without
naming him by saying that the patriarch’s demands were “unacceptable.” The irony
is that Hezbollah’s regime of terror in Lebanon is built on the myth of
protecting the Christians and safeguarding their rights — a falsehood peddled by
President Michel Aoun, a Maronite who owes his job to the pro-Iran militia and
thus toes Hezbollah’s line to the fullest.
Pope Francis seems to understand that the government model imposed by the
Islamist government of Iran and its militias on Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and
Yemen undermines the Christian natives of these countries and pushes them away
from their ancestral lands.
So, for Levantine Christians to thrive and prosper, their states have to end
their endless war and revolutionary rhetoric. This is the crux of the problem:
Iran is trying to impose its model — where an unaccountable supreme leader and
his militia have the upper hand over a weak president and an irrelevant state —
on Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. The model failed in Iran, resulting in its
isolation and loss of capital and investment. As the economy sunk, the regime
doubled down on its populist revolutionary rhetoric and violence levels surged.
The pontiff’s Middle Eastern visits, designed to promote peace and coexistence,
are not only symbolic.
And for Christians in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq to thrive and prosper, militias
have to be disbanded and the state and its institutions — especially the
judiciary — should enforce laws and justice. When the world regains its trust in
the state, capital will flow back in, the economy will start growing, and all
citizens, including Christians, will stay in their historic homeland and put off
their migration plans.
Pope Francis gets it. He appears to understand that the survival of Levantine
Christians requires that the Iran regime and its militias be rolled back, and
that countries be restored to normality. In reaching out to his religious
counterparts like Al-Sistani, the pontiff seems to be rallying whoever he can to
push in the same direction against Iran’s mullahs. If this becomes reality, not
only will Christians thank him, but all citizens of the Arab countries suffering
uninvited Iranian intervention will do too.
*Hussain Abdul-Hussain is the Washington bureau chief of Kuwaiti daily Al-Rai
and a former visiting fellow at Chatham House in London.
Pope Francis’ visit to Iraq shows how love will ultimately prevail
Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib/Arab News/March 04/2021
دانيا قليلات خطيب: زيارة البابا فرنسيس للعراق تبين بأن السلام في النهاية هو من
يسود
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/96656/three-english-editorials-addressing-pope-francis-visit-to-iraq-%d9%85%d9%82%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%aa-%d8%ab%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%ab%d8%a9-%d8%a8%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a5%d9%86%d9%83%d9%84%d9%8a%d8%b2%d9%8a%d8%a9/
Pope Francis is visiting Najaf, which will be a moment of great significance.
Christians not only in Iraq, but all over the Arab world, are rejoicing. Since
the eruption of the so-called Arab Spring and the turbulence that came with it,
Christians have been among the most affected.
Christianity, which came out of Palestine, has been drained by wars and
conflicts in the Arab world. The first hit that Christians received in Iraq came
following the US invasion of 2003. Despite Saddam Hussein’s brutal rule,
Christians as a minority posed no threat to him. To a certain extent, they were
protected. However, the fall of the regime and the chaos that came after led to
the rise of extremist groups. Those groups posed an existential threat to
Christians in Iraq.
The West opened the doors of immigration to Christian Iraqis. This helped them
as individuals, but not as a community inside Iraq. The Christian population
started dwindling. This story repeated itself with the rise of Daesh following
the withdrawal of US troops and the start of the Syrian conflict. The
fundamentalist group started persecuting those it labeled as “infidels.” The
pre-2003 1.5 million-strong population is estimated today to have dropped to
just 300,000.
However, the visit of Pope Francis begins a new chapter not only for Christians
in Iraq but for all Eastern Christians. It is a message that the world has not
forgotten them. It is a show of support but also a call for resilience. The
message is clear: Iraq is your home, hold on to it.
While the streets of Najaf are being groomed and flags of both Iraq and Vatican
City are being erected, and while committees are being set up to organize the
visit and make sure that everything is up to standard, some spoilers are taking
umbrage. They feel resentment for several reasons. To start with, the pope
visiting Najaf is international recognition that it is the supreme marjaeya, or
reference point, for all Shiites. This tilts the balance in favor of Najaf as
opposed to Qom. Some don’t want Iraq getting international attention because
they want to keep it as their playing field. Iraq was the first Arab country to
receive a call from new US President Joe Biden. And some simply don’t want to
see the social cohesion message of Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani panning out.
Opponents of the pope’s visit have even gone to the extent of spreading rumors
that Al-Sistani has COVID-19. However, such petty and sneaky acts do not seem to
have deterred either the visitor or the host.
The pope’s imminent meeting with Al-Sistani shows support for the latter’s
philosophy and his path
The pope’s imminent meeting with Al-Sistani shows support for the latter’s
philosophy and his path. Al-Sistani represents co-existence with, acceptance of
and respect for the “other.” It is one step ahead of tolerance. The visit falls
in line with Al-Sistani’s line of thinking, which always seeks social cohesion
and fights sectarianism, despite the immense pressure he has been placed under.
For example, in the midst of a bloody Sunni-Shiite conflict, a group of Shiites
came to him and referred to Sunnis as their brothers; he corrected them by
saying: “Don’t say Sunnis are our brothers, they are ourselves.” This line of
thinking is portrayed in a poster featuring Pope Francis and Al-Sistani with
doves above their heads. The tagline says, “We are part of you and you are part
of us.” This shows the centrality of the human element in Islam, where human
dignity trumps the divisions that usually have political roots.
The London-based Al-Khoei Institute said the visit is a product of many years of
inter-religious dialogue. And a scholar from the Hawza of Najaf said it will be
of great significance to Iraq, which is the home of Abraham, the father of all
prophets.
The visit is also of great importance to the Christians of the East. It is a
message to them that they are an important and indigenous component of the
social fabric of the Arab world; that Christianity came from the East and the
East will always be its home; that there is a place for diversity and that
diversity does not mean division; and that co-existence and respect will
ultimately prevail. Haidar Al-Khoei, the foreign relations director at Al-Khoei
Institute, said: “In 2014, when (Daesh) took over Mosul, there were 17 Christian
students in the University of Mosul, today there are 863. (Daesh) were
determined to destroy Iraq’s pluralism but Iraqis are more determined to
preserve it.”
On Sunday, Pope Francis will stand in the remains of Al-Tahera Church in Mosul,
which was decimated by Daesh. This symbolic act shows that love and clemency is
stronger than hate and violence. In the end, Daesh withered away from Mosul, but
love will prevail.
• Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib is a specialist in US-Arab relations with a focus on
lobbying. She is co-founder of the Research Center for Cooperation and Peace
Building, a Lebanese NGO focused on Track II. She is also an affiliate scholar
with the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at
the American University of Beirut.
Can the US rely on Turkey to keep Iran in check?
Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab News/March 04/2021
The name Reza Zarrab probably does not ring a bell with most people. But he was
at the center of a money laundering and sanctions-evading scheme set up by the
Iranian regime with the alleged help of Turkey. He became a key witness for the
US prosecutor and is perhaps the reason why sanctions hurt Iran so deeply during
the Trump administration.
Zarrab’s case is symbolic of Turkey and Iran’s pragmatic approach to
geopolitical issues and their vision of the Arab region. Beyond such illegal
business activities, theirs is also a political deal, whereby influence and
territories are divided in a transactional way. The fact that the architect or
vehicle for this $20 billion arrangement was a small exchange shop — and a
relatively low-profile business figure — is quite interesting and worthy of a
movie. It is also very insightful as to how the networks of power, intelligence
and finance function in the Middle East, especially backstage.
Turkey and Iran have been cooperating directly and indirectly on various fronts
for the past decade at the cost of the Arab region. But one might wonder if this
opportunistic collaboration is now coming to an end. In the past year, several
incidents with global implications have shown that the two countries are more
and more in opposition to each other.
The Azeri-Armenian conflict was the most visible and revealing. As last year’s
military confrontation started, Turkey strongly supported Azerbaijan, while
Tehran was indecisive, having to choose between its Armenian ally and its local
Azeri community. It finally sided with Azerbaijan after feeling the pressure
both domestically and regionally. To add insult to injury, Turkish President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan recited an Azeri poem calling for unification across
borders, meaning Iran. This was considered by the mullahs to be a threat to the
country’s sovereignty. Erdogan later claimed he was unaware of the true meaning
of the poem, but the harm was done.
The second stage where tensions have been rising is Iraq. Turkey has launched
military actions against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which Iran has
condemned. Tehran has rejected Ankara’s military presence in Iraq. The two
countries have been squabbling diplomatically on this issue. In fact, Iran sees
Turkey’s military presence as a challenge to its control over Iraq and a
potential change in the power structure. In short, beyond the fight against the
PKK, Iran does not want to see Turkey supporting Sunni tribes that could
challenge its grip on the country. Turkey, meanwhile, accuses Iran of supporting
the PKK beyond Iraqi territory and within its own borders.
The third stage is the oldest file and is linked to the northern Iraqi border:
Syria. The same type of tension has existed for years and seems to be
increasing. However, a bigger involvement from both Russia and Israel in the
power arrangement has prevented the type of direct opposition we are witnessing
between the two countries in Iraq. But as international efforts for a political
solution in Syria increase, one can expect more quarrelling between Tehran and
Ankara.
Turkey being more assertive militarily in the entire area, from northern Syria
and northern Iraq up to Azerbaijan, hints at an impending new equilibrium
between regional and global powers and a transition to a new Greater Middle East
order. The interesting point is the absence of a direct American role in it.
So is Turkey, a NATO ally, playing the role of a US proxy for now? This is what
Russia, Iran, the Europeans, Arab countries and Israel are wondering. On the
ground, and despite some negative US declarations, Ankara seems to be serving US
interests. It opposes and contains Iran using the same methods Tehran has been
deploying in the region unchallenged for decades. It is also getting involved
with boots on the ground when the US is no longer willing or able to do so. And
it is keeping Russia in check, not only in Syria but also in Libya and, to a
limited extent, in Central Asia. It is also negotiating and cooperating with
Russia when needed while the US continues adding sanctions on Moscow.
However, Turkey is also irritating Europe and America’s Mediterranean allies,
which could be the price to pay for its new role. It is part of the redrawing of
the energy map in terms of gas supplies for the Middle East and Europe. This map
seems to be placing Turkey at the center of all routes. It is not a cause for
conflict, but it mirrors the geopolitical landscape where opposition and
deal-making follow a thin line and co-exist. This is especially true between
Iran and Turkey, but also Russia and Israel when it comes to the Mediterranean.
It is interesting to note that the Europeans are also pushing to enhance
relations with Iran and bring about a renewal of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive
Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal. Energy needs and economic interests are
pushing the Europeans in this direction. In the past year, French President
Emmanuel Macron has been much more positive toward Iran than Turkey, although
this changed slightly with the beginning of President Joe Biden’s mandate, as
Macron has called for a better dialogue with Ankara.
On the ground, and despite some negative US declarations, Ankara seems to be
serving US interests.
Biden and his administration will have to make an important decision for the
Middle East, which will impact their pursuit of the Obama-era pivot to Asia. The
White House will have to decide whether it can rely on a local proxy or ally
such as Turkey to preserve its interests and act on its behalf, or if it will
have to get involved directly. The US would definitely prefer not to get
involved directly. The American foreign policy team will need to consider
whether this would create an out-of-control monster and if other allies, both
European and Arab, would accept this new order.
This decision will most probably need to materialize as the JCPOA gets back on
track. The US administration needs Iran to refrain from increasing its
destabilizing activities in the region like it did after 2015. Today, everything
indicates that, to avoid this mistake and not get involved, the US will rely on
Turkey to keep Iran in check. If this is the case, there will be a whole new set
of confrontations and geopolitical deals between all stakeholders in the region.
*Khaled Abou Zahr is CEO of Eurabia, a media and tech company. He is also the
editor of Al-Watan Al-Arabi.
US must do more to confront the Iranian regime
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/March 04/2021
د.مجيد رافزادا: مطلوب من الولايات المتحدة عمل المزيد لمواجهة النظام الإيراني
The US airstrikes against Iran-backed militia groups in Syria last week were an
informed and welcome move by the White House, but they are definitely not
adequate when it comes to confronting the Iranian regime and its widespread
militia network.
The airstrikes, which were authorized by President Joe Biden and destroyed
several facilities in eastern Syria, were carried out in response to recent
attacks by Iran-backed militias in Iraq. This military action will definitely
send a signal to the Iranian regime that any attack on US bases or personnel
will be swiftly dealt with.
When the Iranian leaders become cognizant of the fact there will be military
consequences for their attacks on US entities, they will use more restraint. For
example, when the theocratic establishment was extremely concerned that the
Trump administration might launch an attack on Tehran in its final months in
power, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei surprisingly ordered all factions of
Iraqi armed groups to stop attacking US interests in Iraq. A senior commander of
an Iranian-backed armed group involved in the attacks told Middle East Eye in
October: “Khamenei’s orders were straightforward and clear. All attacks
targeting US interests in Iraq must stop.”
In order to effectively confront the Iranian regime, the Biden administration
should refrain from sending contradictory messages, such as mixing airstrikes on
Iran-linked targets with advocating the revival of the 2015 nuclear agreement,
which will lift sanctions against the regime and help billions of dollars flow
into its treasury. Iran’s nuclear program must not be treated as separate from
the regime’s malign behavior and support for terror groups in the Middle East.
Instead, the Biden administration must carry out a comprehensive policy toward
the Iranian regime that includes, among other things, Iran’s nuclear and
ballistic missile programs, its regional interventions, assassinations and bomb
plots in other countries, including in the West, its sponsorship of militia and
terror groups across the region, and its egregious human rights violations. The
ballistic missile program, which is a pillar of Iran’s foreign policy and is
directly linked to the nuclear program, should be restricted and included as
part of any new nuclear agreement.
This means that the White House should urge the UN Security Council to impose
sanctions on Tehran if it continues to test-fire ballistic missiles in violation
of Resolution 2231. This resolution “calls upon Iran not to undertake any
activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering
nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.”
The regime has fired many ballistic missiles with impunity since signing the
nuclear deal in 2015.
In addition, the US must impose political and economic sanctions on the Iranian
officials responsible for human rights violations, just as the Trump
administration did with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is still
designated a terrorist organization. Unfortunately, Biden and his administration
have been silent in the wake of Iran’s recent shocking human rights violations,
including the rising number of executions of those who oppose the theocratic
establishment.
The Biden administration also needs to publicly announce its support for the
Iranian people, particularly the youth, who want to have an inclusive and
democratic government. Iran has a large youth population — at least 60 percent
of its citizens are aged under 30 — and they are largely disaffected and
dissatisfied with the current political establishment. The people want a
democratic system of governance where the freedoms of speech, press and assembly
are not suppressed. However, they feel they have been left alone, more than ever
before, in their attempts to achieve their goal of self-determination. The White
House needs to send a clear message that it stands with the Iranian people and
supports their aspirations.
The White House needs to send a clear message that it stands with the Iranian
people and supports their aspirations.
Siding with the Iranian population also means parting from rewarding the regime
with the nuclear deal and the lifting of sanctions, or having close political
ties with Iranian leaders. The Biden administration cannot send a contradictory
message to the Iranian people, just as the Obama administration did, by stating
that it supports their cause while at the same time sitting at the table with
Iran’s politicians, shaking hands and smiling. The Iranian people would view
such an act as a betrayal. When the US befriends the Iranian regime and empowers
it politically and economically, it is directly weakening the majority of the
Iranian people.
Finally, standing with the Iranian people means supporting and facilitating
their access to social media platforms. The Iranian government has become
skilled at censoring social media, but the US can find ways to bypass this
censorship.
Last week’s US military action against Iran-backed militias was a step in the
right direction, but it is not enough: The Biden administration must do more to
confront the predatory regime of Iran.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist.
Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh
Biden should capitalize now on Iran’s endemic insecurity
Sultan Althari/Al Arabiya/04 March/2021
As the Biden administration enters its second month in power, its Iran policy
remains at best ambiguous, but now should be the time for Biden to act, forcing
change and building on the success of his predecessor.
Last week, the Biden administration launched air strikes on Iranian-backed
militias in eastern Syria who were involved in attacks on US personnel in Iraq.
This response ran contrary to the popular belief that the Biden administration
would turn a blind eye on Iranian aggression in hopes of resuming nuclear
diplomacy – a stance part and parcel of the Obama administration’s approach to
Tehran’s malign activity.
President Biden intended to send a clear message to the Iranian regime: “You
can’t act with impunity – be careful.”
This is a welcome development, but doesn’t tie into the administration’s broader
Iran policy. The appointment of Robert Malley – a proponent of blind realignment
with Tehran – as special envoy to Iran, delisting Iranian-backed Houthi rebels
as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO), and recent press briefings indicate a
mixed willingness to deter Tehran and counter its malign regional influence.
This confrontation is the latest episode in an escalatory saga of action between
Washington and Tehran. Politically isolated and economically suffocated, Iranian
authorities continue to attempt to save face by consistently breaching the
limits of uranium enrichment, amplifying havoc wreaked by its regional proxy
network, publicly rejecting JCPOA renegotiation, and conducting a serial
succession of lethal provocations on oil facilities and ships in the Persian
Gulf.
If history is any guide, the Iranian regime will desperately attempt to test the
Administration’s resolve a little more. How can we explain this pattern in light
of Tehran’s sclerotic economy and rising internal discontent? Put simply, a
chronic state of insecurity – one evident across ideological, economic and
political dimensions.
Iran is a revisionist, anti-status-quo power which thrives on regional
instability. Tehran’s regime and its ideological custodian, the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), are blinded by the moral imperative to export
their revolution, as enshrined in Iran’s constitution and demonstrated by its
militant regional proxy network. Resistance to the West in specific – and a
rules-based global-order more broadly – is therefore a central tenet of regime
legitimacy.
The regime’s endemic insecurity is also driven by domestic political pressure:
Iran has a presidential election in less than four months, meaning that no
Iranian official – especially hardliners – want to show weakness in the face of
crippling sanctions and American resolve. In turn, hard-liners will point to any
American concession as a sign that their ideologically driven resistance is
working.
The tight link between regime survival and domestic legitimacy makes it more
likely that the regime will choose to desperately escalate, particularly in the
short-term. Biden would be wise to reaffirm its capability and willingness to
respond to any malign activity emanating from Tehran.
Beyond ideological and political considerations, Iran’s chronic state of
insecurity is driven by what it views as a military and defense asymmetry
relative to its neighbors – a fickle claim quickly dismissed by its proven track
record of fueling regional instability.
The Biden administration should leverage its position with Iran by demonstrating
and reiterating that the US has unequivocal escalation dominance – be it
politically, economically, or militarily.
The regional landscape in 2021 is fundamentally different from the landscape in
2015: Pummeled by sanctions and popular protests, Tehran is looking for a
lifeline – the regime is in no shape to endure sustained pressure. Pressure is
extending to the regime’s proxies: Iran’s failing economy forced Hezbollah
leader Hassan Nasrallah to publicly call for donations.
Leveraging these conditions is imperative. President Biden is in an optimal
position to use pressure enacted by his predecessor to negotiate a more
comprehensive deal in consultation with regional allies – one that reflects the
fact that Iran’s support for violent militant proxies in the region is
inextricably tied to its nuclear weapons program. The bet that placing limits on
the latter would induce positive changes in the former is a failed one. Both are
intrinsically tied to Tehran’s ideological imperative to export its revolution.
It is imperative that a future deal with Iran is not premised on the same failed
bet. Any future deal must include US regional allies while effectively
addressing Iran’s destructive ballistic missile program and militant proxy
network. The regime in Tehran knows that an escalation will imperil chances of
an American return to the JCPOA. Deterring Iranian aggression and malign
activity therefore hinges on establishing a clear zero-tolerance policy to
Iranian provocations in pursuit of a stable region, free of Iran’s malign
influence.
If the past is any guide, the path forward with Iran will be fraught and
complex. We must be clear-eyed about the dismal realities animating Tehran’s
socio-economic and political situation, and leverage those conditions
accordingly. Failure to leverage American escalation dominance risks a loss of
re-established deterrence, and, on a deeper level, risks falling into the fatal
error of the Obama administration: Having a JCPOA policy instead of an Iran
policy.