English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For May 18/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews21/english.may18.21.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
They have lost all sensitivity and have abandoned themselves to licentiousness, greedy to practise every kind of impurity
Letter to the Ephesians 04/17-24: “Now this I affirm and insist on in the Lord: you must no longer live as the Gentiles live, in the futility of their minds. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of their ignorance and hardness of heart. They have lost all sensitivity and have abandoned themselves to licentiousness, greedy to practise every kind of impurity. That is not the way you learned Christ! For surely you have heard about him and were taught in him, as truth is in Jesus. You were taught to put away your former way of life, your old self, corrupt and deluded by its lusts, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to clothe yourselves with the new self, created according to the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on May 17- 18/2021
Ministry of Health: 201 new infections, 11 deaths
President Aoun to Sereni: Formation of a new government which achieves reforms is a priority in our political work
Presidency Press Office denies false information about the content of President Aoun’s message to President Macron
Israel shells Lebanon after failed launches toward Israeli territory
Israel Fires Shells at South Lebanon after Rocket Fire
Italian Envoy Affirms ‘Conditional’ Support for Lebanon
Diab meets Italian Deputy Foreign Minister'
Report: Hariri Delays Return to Beirut for Talks on Govt Impasse
Report: Macron, el-Sisi to Discuss Problematic Lebanon File
I Want to Study': Lebanon Crisis Cancels School for Many
Catastrophe’ looms as Lebanon crisis cancels school for many
Machnouk picks up regional signals, prepares for the post-Hariri era

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on May 17- 18/2021
Once again, US blocks UN Security Council statement on Palestine-Israel violence
US President Biden supports ceasefire in Gaza, tells Israel to protect civilians
Death toll of Israeli airstrikes on Gaza rises to 200; Dozens of children killed
Despite pressures at home and in region, US in no rush for Mideast truce
US, UAE top diplomats discuss efforts to end violence between Palestine, Israel
Biden administration meets Middle East eruption with muddled policies
Jordan under pressure with fighting next door
France hosts African leaders, announces $1.5 billion loan to Sudan
Erdogan Urges Pope to Help End Israel's 'Massacre'
U.S. President Biden to send 20 million more COVID-19 vaccine doses abroad - Bloomberg
Statement by Canada Following UN Security Council Session on the devastating violence in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza
Statement by Canada on International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia

Titles For The Latest The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on May 17- 18/2021
Audio From FDDForeign Podicy Biden’s Mission to Realign the Middle East/y Clifford D. May/Tony Badran/Michael Doran/May 17/2021
Biden’s overtures to Iran undercut US bid to end Hamas-Israel conflict/Jonathan Schanzer/New York Post/May 17/2021
Rescinding the IRGC’s Terror Designation Would Harm American Victims of Terrorism/Matthew Zweig and Richard Goldberg/Insight-FDD/May 17/2021
When the US leaves Afghanistan, the world will become less safe/Bill Roggio/New York Post/May 17/2021
Joe Biden’s Iran Policy Is One Giant Nuclear Mistake/The United States is at an inflection point. Now is the time to reverse course./Anthony Ruggiero/ The National Interest/May 17/2021
If it gets nukes, Iran could fire using cruise missiles - exclusive/Yonah Jeremy Bob/Jerusalem Post/May 17/2021
Iranians to the Biden Administration: Do Not Lift Sanctions on Iran/Hayvi Bouzo and Benjamin Weinthal/Newsweek/May 17/2021
Turkey media threatens Israel with 'Libya model' of water grab off Gaza/Seth J. Frantzman/Jerusalem PostMay 17/2021
Senior PIJ commander killed in IAF airstrike Monday afternoon/Anna Ahronheim/Jerusalem post/May 17/2021
Responsibility for the Latest Upsurge in Arab-Israeli Violence Goes to US President Joe Biden/Con Coughlin/Gatestone Institute/May 17/2021
Time to end Iran’s nuclear blackmail/Dr. Mohammed Al-Sulami/Arab News/May 17/2021
Israel-Gaza conflict only serves to benefit Hamas, Iran, Israeli far-right/Nadim Shehadi/Al Arabiya/17 May ,2021

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on May 17- 18/2021
Ministry of Health: 201 new infections, 11 deaths
NNA/May 17/2021
The Ministry of Public Health announced 201 new coronavirus infection cases, which raises the cumulative number of confirmed cases to 535954.
11 deaths have been recorded over the past 24 hours.

President Aoun to Sereni: Formation of a new government which achieves reforms is a priority in our political work
NNA/May 17/2021
President of the republic, General Michel Aoun, received Italian Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister, Mrs. Marina Sereni, today at the Presidential Palace.
President Aoun stressed that “The formation of a new government is currently a priority in our political work, despite internal and external obstacles facing this issue”. “However, we will spare no effort to reach this goal and form a government which achieving required reforms will be among the first of its tasks, in addition to completing the fight against corruption which Lebanon suffers from and accomplishing forensic audit which constitutes the real point of entry to these reforms” the President said.
In addition, President Aoun emphasized the “Need of support from countries friendly to Lebanon, especially Italy, Lebanon’s quest to recover the funds which were smuggled abroad, especially to European banks”, pointing out that “Combatting corruption restores regularity to the state’s economic structure, in all departments and institutions”.
The President also assured Mrs. Sereni that “Democratic practice in Lebanon is safeguarded despite all difficult circumstances which the country passes through, and this will be translated into the upcoming parliamentary and municipal elections, which will be held on time in 2022”. Moreover, President Aoun thanked Mrs. Sereni for the Italian support in all fields, especially after the Beirut Port explosion, and the implementation of developmental projects, in addition to the Italian participation in UNIFIL forces which Italy leads. President Aoun noted the historical relations which link Lebanon and Italy and asserted the need to activate these relations, considering Italy’s initiative to restore Sursock Museum, which was damaged by the Beirut Port explosion, as an “Additional confirmation of Italy’s cultural presence in Lebanon, which also asserts the common belief between both countries in preserving heritage and common values”. For her part, Mrs. Sereni briefed the President on Italy’s position on recent Lebanese developments, and stressed the continuation of her country’s support in current circumstances. Mrs. Sereni also emphasized the need of strengthening cooperation between both countries, in multiple fields.
Statement:
After the meeting, Mrs. Sereni made the following statement:
“Long-term historical and cultural friendships, link Italy and Lebanon. We are with the Lebanese people in these difficult times which have been exacerbated by Corona pandemic. I affirmed Italian solidarity with Lebanon, and I assured the President that it will remain as it is, through our work within the framework of the international support group, at bilateral and international levels. Italy had acted immediately in response to the emergency call, after the Beirut Port explosion. We have sent teams of experts and provided financial and first aid equipment, as well as field hospitals.
I also assured his Excellency, of Italy’s commitment to reconstruction. In this context, an agreement was signed yesterday with the UNESCO Director, to rehabilitate the Sursock Museum, where the Italian government contributes an amount of one million Euros. We assert the importance of the framework agreement which works in the name of reform, advancement and reconstruction, especially regarding accompanying Lebanon in the process of advancement while actively involving civil society and encouraging effective coordination between international donors.
During the meeting, we also agreed with President Aoun that Lebanon finds itself today in the face of many challenges, especially on financial, humanitarian and economic levels. The answer to this multidimensional crisis is one: carrying out reforms. Therefore, profound and structural reforms must be undertaken to respond to the most urgent needs of the Lebanese. These reforms cannot be postponed any longer, and require the formation of a government which assumes full authorities.
Therefore, Italy reiterates its urgent call to Lebanese political parties, to set aside their differences and prioritize the country’s supreme interest, and cooperate in order to form a new government which would put Lebanon back on the track of sustainable development and follow the paths of reform, while relaunching IMF negotiations.
Italy also supports any initiative which would contribute to overcoming the current stalemate, bearing in mind the need to protect the population and improve all living conditions. The European Union, which studies all means at its disposal, can take a balanced and effective step in this context. I also consider that it is extremely important that democratic mechanisms continue to operate regularly, and this is why I emphasized to the President the need to work according to the electoral calendar, expected in 2022.
We also discussed bilateral relations and some regional topics. It was emphasized that Italy portrays Lebanon as a key player for Middle Eastern peace and stability. It was also assured that Italy is convicted to support UNIFIL. The best proof of this is Italy’s long-term contribution in peacekeeping missions, where more than 1000 Italian soldiers serve.
The UNIFIL, under the leadership of General Stefano Del Col, continues to play a key role in maintaining stability and avoiding tensions along the Blue Line borders, especially in light of the current situation with its tensions at this stage.
We are very proud that Italian blue hats continue to be highly professional and humane at serving the cause of peace in this sensitive region, daily, side by side with local communities and the most vulnerable segments of the population”.
MP Abi Khalil:
The President also met MP, Cesar Abi Khalil, and deliberated with him the current situation and governmental affairs, in addition to the needs of Aley region. ---Presidency Press Office

Presidency Press Office denies false information about the content of President Aoun’s message to President Macron
NNA/May 17/2021
The Presidency Press Office issued the following statement:
“Nidaa Al-Watan newspaper published, in today’s issue, false information about the content of the message of the President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, to his French counterpart, President Emmanuel Macron. This false data was presented in a way which suggests that it was extracted from the text of this letter. The Presidency Press Office is concerned in emphasizing that what was published is false and was never mentioned in the presidential letter. It is rather a figment of imagination of the article’s author, who adopted an unfounded reference, so clarification was required”.

Israel shells Lebanon after failed launches toward Israeli territory
Arab News/May 17/2021
TEL AVIV/BEIRUT: Six shells were fired from Lebanon towards northern Israel on Monday but fell short of crossing the border, the Israeli military said. It said that in response, artillery was fired at "the sources of the launches" in Lebanon. A Lebanese security source said shells were heard being fired from south Lebanon and efforts were being made to identify the location. The source said about 22 shells were fired by Israeli artillery on Lebanese territory. There were no reports of casualties or damage, and the shelling did not appear to signal the opening of a new front in Israel's fighting with militants in the Gaza Strip.
The Lebanese shelling caused Israeli air raid sirens to blare near the kibbutz of Misgav Am, along Israel's northern border with Lebanon. It was the second incident of cross-border fire in the past week. On Thursday, three rockets were launched from Lebanon toward northern Israel but landed in the Mediterranean Sea, causing no damage or casualties. Israel fought a 2006 war against Hezbollah guerrillas, who have sway in southern Lebanon and advanced rockets. The border has been mostly quiet since then. Small Palestinian factions in Lebanon have fired sporadically on Israel in the past.

Israel Fires Shells at South Lebanon after Rocket Fire
Agence France Presse/May 17/2021
The Israeli army launched artillery towards Lebanon on Monday in response to rocket fire from the Lebanese side that failed to hit Israel.
"Six failed launch attempts were identified from Lebanon that did not cross into Israeli territory," the Israeli army said in a statement. "Artillery forces fired toward the sources of the launches," it added. Al-Manar TV reporter Ali Shoaib meanwhile tweeted that four rockets were fired from the forests of al-Hibbariyeh's heights -- three of which landed between Houla, Rob Tlateen, Adaisseh and al-Taybeh while the fourth hit an unidentified area. He added that, in response, Israel fired 15 155mm artillery shells, two tank shells and four flares at Lebanese border areas, adding that "total calm" was engulfing the area after the Israeli shelling.

Italian Envoy Affirms ‘Conditional’ Support for Lebanon
Naharnet/May 17/2021
Italian Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, Marina Sereni, said that Italy is willing to provide assistance for Lebanon whenever a new government is formed, the National News Agency reported on Monday. President Michel Aoun met Sereni who led an Italian delegation to Baabda Presidential Palace. She affirmed that “Italy will always stand by Lebanon’s side, and is constantly seeking to help it in all fields.”“Italy is committed to helping Lebanon, especially in terms of reconstruction. It also supports any initiative that would contribute to overcoming the current stalemate,” added Sereni. Earlier, she met caretaker Foreign Minister Charbel Wehbe where discussions focused on bilateral relations between Lebanon and Italy, and Italy’s “readiness to provide further aid to Lebanon when a rescue government is formed.”Also, conferees discussed the role of the UNIFIL especially amid the escalation in the occupied territories. Accordingly, Sereni has indicated that Italy backs “an immediate cease of violence in Palestine and the resort to dialogue to solve problems.”

Diab meets Italian Deputy Foreign Minister
NNA/May 17/2021
Caretaker Prime Minister, Hassan Diab, received at the Grand Serail the Italian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, Marina Sereni, heading a delegation that included: Italian Ambassador to Lebanon, Nicoletta Bombardiere, Deputy Director of Political Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Luca Gori, First Secretary at the Italian Embassy, Emmanuel D’Andrassi, and Sereni’s Office Director, Giuseppe Cavagna, in the presence of Prime Minister's Advisor for Diplomatic Affairs, Ambassador Gebran Soufane. The interlocutors deliberated on the need to expedite Cabinet formation and emphasized Italy's support and assistance to Lebanon in all fields. ----PCM Press Office

Report: Hariri Delays Return to Beirut for Talks on Govt Impasse
Naharnet/May 17/2021
Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri, who is currently on a trip outside Lebanon, could extend his stay abroad for another week for a series of unannounced meetings to tackle the Lebanese file, al-Joumhouria daily reported on Monday.
According to sources who were in contact with Hariri before his departure last Wednesday, on the eve of Eid al-Fitr, they said "Hariri will stay abroad for two weeks,” and that “he has a busy program of meetings within the framework of his external contacts in preparation for the post-government formation.”
Lebanon desperately needs a new government to unlock billions of dollars in aid, but bickering politicians have for nine months failed to agree on a line-up.The government resigned after a huge explosion of ammonium nitrate fertilizer at Beirut's port in August 2020 killed more than 200 people and ravaged half of the capital.

Report: Macron, el-Sisi to Discuss Problematic Lebanon File
Naharnet/May 17/2021
The Lebanese problematic situation would be one of the important files discussed by the French and Egyptian presidents in Paris on Monday, media reports said. A senior French source told al-Joumhouria daily that French President Emmanuel Macron will discuss the Lebanese file with Egyptian President Abdul Fattah el-Sisi during the latter’s visit to France to participate in the Paris conference on Sudan. “The French and Egyptian positions are identical regarding the necessity to have a government formed in Lebanon,” stated the source who spoke on condition of anonymity. El-Sisi is in Paris to partake in a conference intended to support the transitional phase in Sudan, and the summit for financing African economies. Through its Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukri, Egypt had earlier affirmed “keenness on coordinating efforts with Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri and the Lebanese political leaders, in order to spare the Lebanese people many problems shall efforts fail to form a capable government," Hariri's press office quoted Shoukri. Hariri had held telephone talks with Shoukri on Saturday, said the press office announced. The talks focused on the “crisis in Lebanon and the efforts of Hariri to form a government capable of steering the country out of its crisis,” the office added. Political leaders in the crisis-wracked Lebanon has failed to agree on a government capable of steering the country out of multiple crises.

I Want to Study': Lebanon Crisis Cancels School for Many
Agence France Presse/May 17/2021
In a camp for Syrian refugees in east Lebanon, Mohammad and his three sisters fear they will be out of school for a third consecutive year because remote learning is out of reach. "Look at my phone. How do you expect my son to study on it?" asked his father Abdel Nasser, sitting cross-legged inside the family's tent in the Bekaa Valley. "The screen is cracked... and I have no internet." Eleven-year-old Mohammad and his siblings are among tens of thousands of Syrian, Lebanese and Palestinian children who have been left for months without schooling due to coronavirus restrictions. An accelerating economic crisis means they may never return to school in what rights groups are calling an "education catastrophe", especially affecting refugees who already struggled to access learning before the pandemic. "We can't afford to buy a cellphone for everyone. We must first be able to feed our children," said their mother Shamaa. Mohammad arrived in Lebanon from Syria in 2012 -- a year into an ongoing conflict that has killed 388,000 people and displaced millions. But he wasn't enrolled in school until 2019 because Lebanon's public school system didn't open its doors to Syrian refugees until 2013, and even then only to a limited number. Mohammad's first school year coincided with the Covid-19 pandemic, which brought all classes to a halt by the second term.
"He doesn't even know how to multiply one by one," his father said.
'Hanging by a thread' -
Mohammad's older sisters Hind, Sarah and Amal -- aged 12 to 14 -- had already been in school for four years when the education ministry in March 2020 said it was shifting to online learning. "I was happy before," 14-year-old Amal said, sobbing. "I was studying Arabic, English, science and geography.
"But now my parents can't afford to give me an online education." More than 1.2 million children in Lebanon have been out of school since the country's coronavirus outbreak began last year, the UK-based charity Save the Children says. It warned last month that a large number of children may never get back into a classroom, either because they have already missed so much school or because their families can't afford to enrol them. "Education for thousands of children in Lebanon is hanging by a thread," it said.
Lebanon's economic crisis is at its worst since the 1975-1990 civil war, with more than half the local population now living in poverty. Poverty rates are even higher among Syrians, with 90 percent of families barely able to survive. Lisa Abou Khaled of the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) says this is impacting education. "Some Syrian children have had to give up their studies to work and help their families," she told AFP. Citing data from Lebanon's education ministry, she said 25,000 Syrian students should have re-enrolled or entered grade one in 2020-2021 but did not. "We think the real number is higher than that," she added, estimating that more than half of Syrian school-aged children were currently out of the classroom.
- 'Disgusted' -
The education catastrophe is also real for the tens of thousands of Lebanese who have lost jobs or seen their income slashed since the economic crisis accelerated in 2019. Inside a cramped apartment in the eastern Beirut suburb of Burj Hammoud, 11-year-old Pamela points to a keyboard -- the only thing that remains from a desktop computer destroyed during last summer's huge Beirut port explosion. The August 4 blast, which killed more than 200 people and destroyed swaths of the capital, hit Pamela's home and piled new misery on a family already brought to its knees by the financial downturn. The family couldn't afford to buy a replacement as it had become far too expensive due to the rapid devaluation of the Lebanese pound. "So I started to follow lessons on my cellphone," Pamela said.  As she has impaired vision, a small screen was already a nuisance. But then power outages lasting up to 18 hours a day also left her struggling to keep her phone alive and connected to the internet. She decided to drop out. "I was disgusted with online education, I couldn't take it anymore," she said. Her father, an out-of-work taxi driver, said he had wanted Pamela to drop out months ago. "I don't give a damn about education or this country," he said. But Pamela hasn't entirely abandoned hopes of returning to school. "I want to study so that I can get a decent job later and be able to help my parents."

Catastrophe’ looms as Lebanon crisis cancels school for many
The Arab Weekly/May 17/2021
BEKAA VALLEY, Lebanon – In a camp for Syrian refugees in east Lebanon, Mohammad and his three sisters fear they will be out of school for a third consecutive year because remote learning is out of reach. “Look at my phone. How do you expect my son to study on it?” asked his father Abdel Nasser, sitting cross-legged inside the family’s tent in the Bekaa Valley. “The screen is cracked… and I have no internet.” Eleven-year-old Mohammad and his siblings are among tens of thousands of Syrian, Lebanese and Palestinian children who have been left for months without schooling due to coronavirus restrictions. An accelerating economic crisis means they may never return to school in what rights groups are calling an “education catastrophe,” especially affecting refugees who already struggled to access learning before the pandemic. “We can’t afford to buy a cellphone for everyone. We must first be able to feed our children,” said their mother Shamaa. Mohammad arrived in Lebanon from Syria in 2012, a year into an ongoing conflict that has killed 388,000 people and displaced millions. But he wasn’t enrolled in school until 2019 because Lebanon’s public school system didn’t open its doors to Syrian refugees until 2013 and even then only to a limited number. Mohammad’s first school year coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, which brought all classes to a halt by the second term.
“He doesn’t even know how to multiply one by one,” his father said.
Thousands out of school
Mohammad’s older sisters Hind, Sarah and Amal, aged 12 to 14, had already been in school for four years when the education ministry in March 2020 said it was shifting to online learning. “I was happy before,” 14-year-old Amal said, sobbing. “I was studying Arabic, English, science and geography. “But now my parents can’t afford to give me an online education.” More than 1.2 million children in Lebanon have been out of school since the country’s coronavirus outbreak began last year, says the UK-based charity Save the Children. It warned last month that a large number of children may never get back into a classroom, either because they have already missed so much school or because their families can’t afford to enrol them. “Education for thousands of children in Lebanon is hanging by a thread,” it said. Lebanon’s economic crisis is at its worst since the 1975-1990 civil war, with more than half the local population now living in poverty. Poverty rates are even higher among Syrians, with 90 percent of families barely able to survive. Lisa Abou Khaled of the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) says this is impacting education. “Some Syrian children have had to give up their studies to work and help their families,” she said. Citing data from Lebanon’s education ministry, she said 25,000 Syrian students should have re-enrolled or entered grade one in 2020-2021 but did not in fact do so. “We think the real number is higher than that,” she added, estimating that more than half of Syrian school-aged children were currently out of the classroom.
Dashed hopes
The education catastrophe is also real for the tens of thousands of Lebanese who have lost jobs or seen their income slashed since the economic crisis accelerated in 2019. Inside a cramped apartment in the eastern Beirut suburb of Burj Hammoud, 11-year-old Pamela points to a keyboard, the only thing that remains from a desktop computer destroyed during last summer’s huge Beirut port explosion.
The August 4 blast, which killed more than 200 people and destroyed swathes of the capital, hit Pamela’s home and piled new misery on a family already brought to its knees by the financial downturn. The family couldn’t afford to buy a replacement as it had become far too expensive thanks to the rapid devaluation of the Lebanese pound. “So I started to follow lessons on my cellphone,” Pamela said. As she has impaired vision, a small screen was already a nuisance. But then power outages lasting up to 18 hours a day also left her struggling to keep her phone alive and connected to the internet.She decided to drop out. “I was disgusted with online education, I couldn’t take it anymore,” she said. Her father, an out-of-work taxi driver, said he had wanted Pamela to drop out months ago. “I don’t give a damn about education or this country,” he said.
But Pamela hasn’t entirely abandoned hopes of returning to school. “I want to study so that I can get a decent job later and be able to help my parents.”

Machnouk picks up regional signals, prepares for the post-Hariri era
The Arab Weekly/May 17/2021
BEIRUT- Lebanese political sources believe that Saudi Arabia’s changed view of Lebanese Prime Minister-designate Saad al-Hariri is behind former interior minister Nohad el-Machnouk’s call for Hariri to apologise for not being able to form a Lebanese government.
The sources revealed that Machnouk’s words are based on strong information that Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman has now taken an unfavourable position towards Hariri and that he made his view known to an Arab official he met about a month ago in Riyadh. According to Lebanese political sources, Machnouk believes that France and Russia are now withdrawing their support for Hariri’s formation of a government of “specialists”.
In this regard, the sources indicated that Russia does not want to anger Hezbollah, which is not about to break its alliance with the President of the Republic, Michel Aoun and Gebran Bassil, as they provide the needed cover for Hezbollah’s continued possession of weapons outside state control.
They add that the same applies, to some extent, to France, which, despite its strong dissatisfaction with the Aoun-Bassil duo, cannot ignore the positions of Hezbollah and its Iranian sponsors and does not want to cut communication channels with them. The sources justified Machnouk’s call for Hariri to relinquish his cabinet formation mandate by the realities on the ground. They indicate that Lebanon is heading towards a complete collapse and that it is better for Hariri not to put himself in a position where he is held responsible for the disaster that has befallen Lebanon.
The sources concluded that the former interior minister, who still represents Beirut in the Lebanese parliament, feels that the conditions are no longer suitable for the formation of a new government headed by Hariri.
They added that the opinion of the former minister, who worked for a long time with Rafik Hariri, is that Saad Hariri now faces a dead end that makes apologising a serious option in light of the insistence of the president and his son-in-law on impossible conditions that prevent him from forming a government.
Machnouk said in press statements that “if Hariri does not apologise, we will suffer for a very long time from this matter, but if he apologises, the problem will be even greater, because his apology at this stage would constitute a great shock to a segment of Lebanese society, especially his father’s supporters.”
Machnouk considered that “the political Hariri trend is afflicted with major flaws and failures after the mistake of electing Michel Aoun as president of the republic,” differently from “the nationalist Hariri trend (…) for which Rafik Hariri fought.”
Lebanese observers believe that the former interior minister picked up regional signals, especially from Saudi Arabia, pointing to the end of the bet on Hariri as a figure capable of confronting the growing influence of Hezbollah and behind it, that of Iran. Hariri has long sought to present himself as an alternative capable of playing this role. In strong statements he made in the past few years always he depicted himself as being in the opposite camp of the Shia party.
They believe that Saudi Arabia’s dissatisfaction with Hariri will determine his future position, whether on the Lebanese scene, especially within the Sunni camp, or at the regional level. They note that the regional countries that support Hariri do so within the limits of the Saudi position.
Besides the possible loss of endorsement from Saudi Arabia, although known for its steady support for the Hariri faction, Saad Hariri is also no longer France’s favourite even though Paris had in the past stood behind tasking him anew with forming the government. This change of heart is no longer a secret, especially after published reports regarding the cold atmosphere that characterised his meeting with French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. Hariri complained that Le Drian went to visit President Michel Aoun, as well as Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, while he himself had to go to the French embassy to meet the foreign minister.
It is clear that the parity established by Paris between the different Lebanese parties has replaced its favourable treatment of Hariri. This could not have happened if the French had not realised that Riyadh was not betting on Hariri anymore. This position was reflected in Le Drian’s statements before and after his last visit to Beirut. Machnouk has translated this change of mood in his new political position.
Machnouk showed in his statements that he was not satisfied with the experience of the previous governments led by Hariri and with the settlement that was concluded with the president of the republic nor with how Hariri’s presence at the head of the previous government turned into a cover serving the agendas of others at the expense of the interests of the Sunnis whom Hariri was supposed to defend.
Machnouk believes that Hariri went too far in his moves to appease Hezbollah and considered his personal interests by staying in power rather than the regional and international position towards the Shia party, which was one of the reasons for the shift in the Saudi position towards him.
Machnouk said, “The political management of the settlement during the first three years encouraged the ambitions of Aoun and Bassil and made them more eager to go beyond Taif, bypass the constitution and bring the country to a dead end, of course with major support form Hezbollah.”
He was keen to emphasise that his disagreement with Hariri is not personal, but rather a political difference, which explains his talk about forming a political front that will compete with the Future Movement.
He announced that “a group of comrades and friends, some of them old supporters of Rafik Hariri, are working to create a new front with the name of the Third Independence Movement, in order to liberate Lebanese decisions from the yoke of Iranian political occupation.”
The establishment of this front, if it were to take place, would be at the expense of the Future Movement, which is facing difficult conditions that have led to its loss of influence within the Sunni constituency itself, as well as in its national support base. The Future Movement turned into a party serving Hariri’s person more than an influential party within the internal balances of Lebanon.
The movement has also lost its ability to co-opt Sunni figures who worked in previous governments and were close to the party during the period of Rafik Hariri. Among these figures are former prime ministers who established their own club.
Those familiar with the controversy within the Future Movement’s circle of influence say that it was turned into a ruling party whose mission is to provide a political constituency for Saad Hariri, especially in the period following the conclusion of the settlement with the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement, Gebran Bassil and leading to the election of Aoun as president of the republic.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on May 17- 18/2021
Once again, US blocks UN Security Council statement on Palestine-Israel violence
Joseph Haboush, Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2021.
The draft statement obtained by Al Arabiya English urged an immediate cessation of violence and respect for international humanitarian law, “including the protection of civilians, especially children.”
As fighting between Palestinian factions and Israel entered a second week, the UN Security Council had its hopes dashed by the United States on Monday to release its first statement on the conflict that has seen an onslaught of Israeli airstrikes on what Tel Aviv says are militant targets in response to Hamas rocket attacks. Last week, the United States blocked multiple attempts by the Security Council member states to hold a public meeting on the matter. US officials hoped diplomatic efforts would lead to a ceasefire or de-escalation of tensions, but as fighting raged, it finally agreed to the first public meeting on Sunday. The latest draft statement by the Security Council, obtained by Al Arabiya English, urged an immediate cessation of violence and respect for international humanitarian law, “including the protection of civilians, especially children.”No direct mention of Hamas was included, neither was there a condemnation of rocket attacks on Israel. Sources familiar with the matter expected the US to block the release of the statement as it did not “unequivocally” condemn rocket attacks by Hamas, as Israel has demanded. “The Members of the Security Council emphasized that civilian and humanitarian facilities, including those of the UN, must be respected and protected, called on all parties to act consistently with this principle and stressed the need for immediate provision of humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian civilian population in Gaza,” the draft statement read. Egypt and Qatar have been at the center of outreach from Washington and other European capitals as they have significant influence over Palestinian factions. Egypt reportedly tried to broker a ceasefire but to no avail. The Biden administration dispatched an envoy to the region last week with the hopes of pressing both sides to make concessions and de-escalate. Hady Amr’s efforts so far have also failed to make any headway. While the Security Council draft statement welcomed international efforts, the member states expressed their concern about violence in East Jerusalem and “urged the exercise of maximum restraint, for the respect of the historic status quo at the holy sites and the right of Muslim worshippers to pray in peace at Al Aqsa mosque.”The UNSC also condemned Israeli efforts to evict Palestinian families “from homes they have lived in for generations in Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan neighborhoods in East Jerusalem and voiced opposition to unilateral actions.” Nevertheless, the Security Council called for a two-state solution where Israel and Palestine live side by side “in peace within secure and recognized borders, and urged for the intensification and acceleration of diplomatic efforts and support towards this aim.”

US President Biden supports ceasefire in Gaza, tells Israel to protect civilians
Joseph Haboush, Al Arabiya English/18 May ,2021
US President Joe Biden expressed his support for a ceasefire between Palestinian factions and Israeli forces during a phone call with Israel’s prime minister, the White House said Monday. Biden also called on Israel to “make every effort to ensure the protection of innocent civilians,” a statement from the White House read.Biden’s latest comments come after the US blocked, for a third time, a statement from the United Nations Security Council that would have called for an end to the violence. “The President expressed his support for a ceasefire and discussed US engagement with Egypt and other partners towards that end. The two leaders agreed that they and their teams would remain in close touch,” the White House said. The US president and Netanyahu have had routine phone calls since the outbreak of the violence, which entered its second week on Monday. While Biden doubled down on US support for Israel’s “right to defend itself against indiscriminate rocket attacks,” Biden also welcomed efforts to “address intercommunal violence and to bring calm to Jerusalem.”“The two leaders discussed progress in Israel’s military operations against Hamas and other terrorist groups in Gaza,” the White House said. Also on Monday, it was revealed that Biden approved the sale of $735 million worth of precision-guided weapons to Tel Aviv.

Death toll of Israeli airstrikes on Gaza rises to 200; Dozens of children killed
Tamara Abueish, Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2021
The death toll of Israeli airstrikes on Gaza rose to 200, and includes 59 children, the Palestinian Ministry of Health said on Monday, adding that the total number of injuries in the city has risen to 1,305. That number is expected to keep rising as rescue teams continue to search for people trapped underneath the rubble of destroyed buildings, according to the correspondent. Israel launched at least 70 air raids on the Gaza Strip overnight on Monday, Al Arabiya’s correspondent reported. Images and videos on social media showed fire and smoke rising above buildings in the blockaded city. Unrest in the Gaza and the West Bank entered its second week despite calls from international organizations and world leaders for a ceasefire. However, during a televised address after a security cabinet meeting on Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his country’s campaign in Gaza was continuing at “full force,” and that deterrence had to be achieved to prevent future conflict with Hamas. “We are acting now, for as long as necessary, to restore calm and quiet to you, Israel’s citizens. It will take time,” he said. Muslim countries urged Israel to halt its violations of Palestinian rights, condemning the bombings in Gaza and the West Bank and the forceful evictions of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem. “The Kingdom categorically rejects the Israeli violations against the Palestinians ... and calls for an immediate end to the Israeli escalation,” Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Prince Faisal bin Farhan said during a virtual meeting for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation on Sunday. Worldwide, pro-Palestinians held demonstrations condemning the Israeli attacks on Gaza and the West Bank and called for international interference to end the violence against Palestinian civilians.

Despite pressures at home and in region, US in no rush for Mideast truce
The Arab Weekly/May 17/2021
WASHINGTON / CAIRO - The US president said Sunday his administration is working with Palestinians and Israelis for a “sustained calm”. But despite pressures at home from US senators and from Arab allies in the region, President Joe Biden gave no signs of stepping up public pressure on Israel to agree to an immediate cease-fire. “We also believe Palestinians and Israelis equally deserve to live in safety and security and enjoy equal measure of freedom, prosperity and democracy,” he said in a pre-taped video aired at an event marking the Muslim Eid holiday on Sunday.
“My administration is going to continue to engage Palestinians and Israelis and other regional partners to work toward sustained calm.”But as battles between Israel and Gaza’s militant Hamas rulers surged to their worst levels since 2014 and the international outcry grew, the Biden administration, determined to wrench US foreign policy focus away from the Middle East and Afghanistan, has declined so far to criticise Israel’s part in the fighting or send a top-level envoy to the region. Appeals by other countries showed no sign of progress.
In Israel, Hady Amr, a deputy assistant dispatched by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to try to de-escalate the crisis, met Israeli Defence Minister Benny Gantz, who thanked the US for its support. But Amr does not have the rank, or the mandate, to push for a truce, analysts say.
Blinken himself headed out on an unrelated tour of Nordic countries, with no announced plans to stop in the Middle East in response to the crisis. In Copenhaguen, Blinken signaled Monday the US still was not joining calls for an immediate cease-fire between Israel and Gaza’s Hamas rulers.
He ticked off U.S. outreach so far to try to de-escalate hostilities in the Gaza Strip and Israel, and said he would be making more calls Monday.
“In all of these engagements we have made clear that we are prepared to lend our support and good offices to the parties should they seek a cease-fire,” Blinken said. He said he welcomed efforts by the UN— where the United States has so far blocked a proposed Security Council statement on the fighting — and other nations working for a cease-fire. “Any diplomatic initiative that advances that prospect is something that we’ll support,” he said. “And we are again willing and ready to do that. But ultimately it is up to the parties to make clear that they want to pursue a cease-fire.”
Blinken made calls from the plane to Egypt and other nations working to broker a cease-fire, telling Egypt that all parties “should de-escalate tensions and bring a halt to the violence.”
Representative Adam Schiff, Democratic chairman of the House intelligence committee, urged Biden on Sunday to step up pressure on both sides to end current fighting and revive talks to resolve Israel’s conflicts and flashpoints with the Palestinians.
“I think the administration needs to push harder on Israel and the Palestinian Authority to stop the violence, bring about a cease-fire, end these hostilities, and get back to a process of trying to resolve this long-standing conflict,” Schiff, a California Democrat, told CBS’s “Face the Nation.”
Going through the motions
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken discussed the violence in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza in phone calls with the Qatari, Egyptian and Saudi foreign ministers, the State Department said on Sunday. Blinken and Qatar’s Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani discussed “efforts to restore calm in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza in light of the tragic loss of civilian life”, the State Department said. The Qatari Foreign Ministry said in a statement that the two men discussed “the recent Israeli attacks on worshippers at the Al Aqsa Compound and the attack on the besieged Gaza Strip.”
Al-Thani stressed the “need for urgent action by the international community to stop the repeated brutal Israeli attacks against civilians in Gaza and the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque,” it added. Meanwhile, a growing group of US senators on Sunday called for a ceasefire. Democratic Senator Chris Murphy and Republican Todd Young, the senior members of a Foreign Relations panel, said in a statement: “As a result of Hamas’ rocket attacks and Israel’s response, both sides must recognise that too many lives have been lost and must not escalate the conflict further.”
Twenty-five other Democratic US senators and two independents issued a separate, similar statement urging an immediate ceasefire.
In his call with Egypt’s Sameh Shoukry, Blinken “reiterated his call on all parties to de-escalate tensions and bring a halt to the violence, which has claimed the lives of Israeli and Palestinian civilians, including children”, the State Department said in another statement.
Saudi state news agency SPA reported on Sunday that Blinken also had a phone call with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud to discuss the latest developments “in Palestine and in the region.”The US State Department said the two discussed “the ongoing efforts to calm tensions in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza and bring the current violence to an end.”Qatar’s Al-Thani also held a phone call on Sunday with Shoukry, in which they reviewed “bilateral cooperation relations and developments in Palestine,” the Qatari Foreign Ministry said in a separate statement.
The Egyptian Foreign Ministry said that the two ministers agreed on “the importance of working to reach an immediate ceasefire between the two sides, and they also agreed to continue coordination in the bilateral framework, as well as in regional and international ones, regarding what is in the interest of the Palestinian people and reaching a ceasefire,”The truce efforts by Egypt, Qatar and the United Nations have so far shown no signs of progress.
Blocking the UNSC
UN Security Council diplomats met Sunday to demand a stop to civilian bloodshed as Israeli warplanes carried out the deadliest single attacks in nearly a week of Hamas rocket barrages and Israeli airstrikes. Eight foreign ministers spoke at the Security Council session, reflecting the seriousness of the conflict, with almost all urging an end to the fighting. Palestinian and Israeli leaders both appealed for support at a UN Security Council session Sunday but little action was in sight despite the soaring violence that has cost 200 lives, with China accusing the United States of obstructionism.
The United States, Israel’s closest ally, blocked days of efforts by China, Norway and Tunisia to get the Security Council to issue a statement, including a call for the cessation of hostilities. Opening the virtual session, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called the violence “utterly appalling” and urged both Palestinian militants Hamas to stop firing rockets into Israel and the Jewish state to stop its massive air campaign on the Gaza Strip. “Fighting must stop. It must stop immediately,” Guterres said. “It has the potential to unleash an uncontainable security and humanitarian crisis and to further foster extremism, not only in the occupied Palestinian territory and Israel, but in the region as a whole,” he said. China, which holds the rotating presidency of the Security Council, said the United States had blocked its efforts for “strong action” and invited Israelis and Palestinians to come and negotiate in China.
“Regrettably, simply because of the obstruction of one country, the Security Council hasn’t been able to speak with one voice,” Foreign Minister Wang Yi said. “We call upon the United States to shoulder its due responsibilities.”
The Biden administration has insisted that it is working behind the scenes, including through a visit to the region by an envoy and that a UN statement could backfire, according to diplomats. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US ambassador to the United Nations, stopped short of insisting on an immediate ceasefire and said the Biden administration was in touch with all sides including Qatar, which has close ties with Hamas and with Egypt, which has a peace deal with Israel and borders Gaza. “The United States has made clear that we are prepared to lend our support and good offices should the parties seek a ceasefire,” she said. One diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, called the US stance “a little strange” seeing as Biden came to office vowing a return to multilateral diplomacy. “We thought that they will be eager also to show that the Council is relevant in situations like this,” the diplomat said.

US, UAE top diplomats discuss efforts to end violence between Palestine, Israel
Joseph Haboush, Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2021
The top US diplomat Monday discussed efforts to end the ongoing violence between Palestine and Israel with his Emirati counterpart, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed. “The Secretary and Foreign Minister discussed efforts to bring the current violence in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza to an end and halt the tragic loss of civilian life,” State Department Spokesman Ned Price said. Entering its second week, the renewed violence between Palestinian factions and the Israeli army has been at the center of diplomatic discussions worldwide. Washington has been engaging in backdoor diplomacy as well as releasing public statements in support of “Israel’s right to defend itself” while indirectly condemning Israel’s targeting of innocent civilians in the West Bank and Gaza. “The Secretary highlighted the importance of the UAE’s contributions towards promoting a more peaceful Middle East,” Price said after the call between Sheikh Abdullah and Blinken. UAE’s state-run Emirates News Agency reported that the two reviewed strategic relations between the UAE and the US and “the prospects of accelerating joint action between the two friendly nations to strengthen security and stability in the region.”
Sheikh Abdullah voiced his support for the recent US efforts, including those by US diplomat Hady Amr, to “reach calm, ease tension and stop the acts of violence in both Israel and Palestine.The Emirati FM said the recent peace deals between Arab and Gulf states with Israel, also known as the Abraham Accords, hold “hopes for the region’s peoples to live in peace and stability in a way that ensures sustainable development.”

Biden administration meets Middle East eruption with muddled policies
The Arab Weekly/May 17/2021
Arab mediators have delivered an American message to Hamas: Rocket attacks must stop.
WASHINGTON – During the short period since its arrival at the White House, the new US administration has learned that it cannot leave matters on their own in the Middle East and then expect them to sort themselves out. In terms of years served in Washington as vice-president during the Obama administration, Biden is a veteran. So are many officials in his administration who are seasoned foreign policy experts. Nonetheless, the first few months of the Biden presidency have betrayed dangerous naiveté in believing that inadequate US policies can somehow work out in a very turbulent region. Biden’s team cannot evade the conclusion that everyone has to go back to the drawing board. There is no dispute that domestic issues in the age of the pandemic were legitimately bound to be on top of the administration’s agenda. But experts believe there is probably a need now to reexamine Washington’s foreign policy directions. The Biden administration began its political moves in the Middle East by delving straight away into the relationship with Saudi Arabia and devoting much attention to the war in Yemen. But its main focus was on returning to the nuclear deal with Iran.
The Biden administration sought to give the impression that the Middle East was not a priority, at least for now, and that the real challenge facing the United States was that posed by its strategic competitor, China. But supposedly marginal frictions in a Jerusalem neighbourhood were sufficient to spark a rapidly-escalating war between the Palestinians and Israelis akin to the 2006 showdown between Hezbollah and Israel, with a conspicuous Iranian role. The US administration finds itself in a confused situation where it cannot ignore the escalation of the conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis, as the Israeli army seems determined to destroy what it can of the Palestinian infrastructure in Gaza, especially the military infrastructure, including Hamas’s arsenal of missiles and tunnels.
A call between US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and his Qatari counterpart, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, showed that the United States is still groping for a way to communicate and pressure Hamas, but has no clear strategy.
Some Western analysts believe the scope of the strikes by Hamas against Israel, even if a large number of the rockets were blocked by the “Iron Dome” anti-missile system, will ratchet up pressure from the Israeli public for the army to carry out a large-scale operation that could include out a ground offensive inside the Strip to prevent the reoccurrence of Hamas rocket barrages.
Political analyst Peter Beaumont wrote in The Guardian: “The relative success – from Hamas’s point of view – of its recent tactics, which have the appearance of having long been in preparation, are certain to challenge the Israeli political and security establishment to deal with a threat made suddenly very real”.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made it clear that the military operation in Gaza is still in its early stages, which puts the US administration in a delicate position: Either to keep silent and let the Israelis “complete their mission” or intervene to prevent the situation from spinning out of control.
Although the Biden administration politically benefitted from the peace agreements between Israel and non-frontline Arab countries, as part of what became known as the “Abraham Accords”, these Arab countries have levelled vehement criticism at Israeli reactions to rocket attacks even if they also criticised the attitude of Hamas. .The developments have taken the US administration by surprise. Washington was betting that the Arab-Israeli conflict will stay dormant while it moved ahead on the Iran nuclear track and readied its strategy to thwart the mounting Chinese threat.
Former Palestinian ambassador, Barakat Al-Farra, said that “the American position regarding what is happening in the Palestinian territories is so far quite ambiguous, even if Washington is the only party that can exert pressure on Israel.”
Shifting posture
Talking to The Arab Weekly, Farra added, that “US contacts are continuing to reach a ceasefire in Gaza, with the first objective to convince Tel Aviv that the cease-fire is in its interest more than that of the Palestinians, in light of the wariness about repercussions of a prolonged war on the Israeli internal front.”
He pointed out that current events could help push the US two-state option adopted by the Biden administration and reiterated recently, as Washington is convinced that peace will not be achieved unless the Palestinians achieve their rights. This is all-the-more true considering Israel’s heightened fears about the stance of Arab Israelis who could be a ticking time bomb. Martin Indyk, the former US envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, believes that “Under Biden, the US is shifting from leading to supporting in the Middle East.” Indyk, author of ” “Master of the Game: Henry Kissinger and the Art of Middle East Diplomacy” said, ” Biden is not “leading from behind”, as Obama did in Libya. He’s supporting Israel, and leading elsewhere. And it’s the only way the US will be able to maintain its pivot away from the region.” Indyk, in an overly optimistic political reading, expressed his belief that Biden’s pivot appears to have survived its first Middle Eastern test, adding that, “Hopefully by then, his local partners will have come to understand their roles in an America-supported, rather than American-led, regional order and that will make it easier for Biden to avoid being sucked back into the Middle East morass”.
The White House said Biden spoke with both Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas late on Saturday and briefed them on the US diplomatic efforts. These are complicated by the absence of contacts between the United States along with most Western powers with Hamas, as these parties consider the militant Palestinian group a terrorist organisation. Furthermore, President Abbas, whose power base is mainly in the West Bank, has no influence over Hamas in Gaza.
The United States sent a strongly-worded message to Hamas through Arab parties, explaining that the rocket attacks must stop. “There is no negotiating game here,” said a Western official familiar with the events.
Patrick Coburn, a British political analyst specialising in Middle East affairs, pointed out that the grossly disproportionate military force being used to try to solve political problems will only exacerbate them.
He said that “Holding back any such compromise between Israel and the Palestinians is that the balance of power appears to be overwhelmingly in favour of Israelis. They do not feel the need to compromise because they have total military superiority and the support of the United States and other powerful nations.” US leftist Jewish Senator Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont) exhorted the administration to play a major role in helping Israelis and Palestinians build the future, if it wanted to be a credible human rights voice on the world stage.
The head of the Palestinian and Israeli Studies Unit at the National Centre for Middle East Studies in Cairo, Tariq Fahmy, said that the US administration deals with the Palestinian situation as a regional issue, adding, “Its talk about the two-state solution is still a theoretical idea that does not include clear and specific foundations or frameworks considering the many Israeli reservations about it”.
Talking to The Arab Weekly, Fahmy explained that, “the Biden administration is moving towards a halt in the Israeli operations on Gaza, but it did not exert real pressure on the ground that would enable it to reach a tangible result, as Washington is dealing in accordance with Israel’s interests and its position reflects a degree of complicity.” He added that the US administration dispatched its envoy, Hadi Amr to the region where he held talks in Jerusalem and Ramallah. US proposals seemed to reflect a desire to mitigate the crisis, not solve it. While Washington asserts its commitment to partnership with the Palestinian Authority it rejects escalation by militant Palestinian factions and it does not want to stop the Israeli operations.

Jordan under pressure with fighting next door
The Arab Weekly/May 17/2021
AMMAN – With the escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian crisis Amman finds itself in a difficult position at home and in the region. Mounting tensions prompted Jordan’s King Abdullah to announce on Sunday that the kingdom was actively involved in intensive diplomatic efforts aimed at reaching a cease-fire agreement between Israel and Hamas. The king explained this intensive diplomacy is intended to halt what he characterised as an Israeli military escalation in the worst Israeli-Palestinian violence in years. The monarch, whose ruling family has custodianship of Muslim and Christian sites in Jerusalem, did not elaborate on the diplomatic efforts. Jordanian government officials have said the kingdom is leading a diplomatic campaign with its European and US allies to put pressure on Israel to end its air and artillery barrage on Gaza since fighting erupted last Monday. “There are intensive contacts with international parties to halt Israel’s escalation,” the monarch was quoted as saying. The creation of a Palestinian state on territory Israel captured in 1967 from Jordan that covers the West Bank and East Jerusalem was a pre-requisite for lasting peace, he said. The Israeli military says that Islamist militant group Hamas and other armed factions have fired more than 2,800 rockets from Gaza over the past week.
Earlier on Sunday, Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said Israel’s actions were pushing the region towards a wider conflict. “Israel carriesm as the existing occupation forcem responsibility for the dangerous situation in occupied Palestinian land and what it is causing in violence, killings, destruction and suffering,” Safadi said. Thousands of Jordanians, most of them of Palestinian origin, took to the streets of the capital Amman on Sunday, calling on the kingdom to scrap its peace deal with Israel. “The government should cut diplomatic ties and expel the Zionist ambassador from Amman,” said Murad al Adaylah, head of Islamic Action Front, the country’s largest opposition group. “Oh King Abdullah, open the borders,” protesters chanted. Around half of Jordan’s ten million-strong population is of Palestinian origin, including some 2.2 million Palestinian refugees registered with the United Nations. Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1994. Relations between the two neighbouring countries have remained cold with demonstrators calling often for the severing of ties with Israel.
In southern Lebanon, hundreds of demonstrators waving Palestinian flags gathered on the Lebanese side of the border with Israel for a third day.

France hosts African leaders, announces $1.5 billion loan to Sudan
The Arab Weekly/May 17/2021
PARIS--France said Monday it will lend Sudan $1.5 billion to help the African nation pay off its massive debt to the International Monetary Fund. “President Macron will confirm later today that France will provide the $1.5 billion bridge loan to clear Sudan’s arrears to the IMF,” Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said Monday at the opening of an international conference aimed at helping Sudan in its transition to democratic government. Sudan’s Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok is attending the Paris conference, seeking help in paying off a $60 billion foreign debt bill and also hoping to secure investment deals. Hamdok is pushing to rebuild and reform a crippled economy and end Sudan’s international isolation under former autocrat Omar al-Bashir, whose three decades of rule were marked by economic hardship and international sanctions. “Re-building an attractive and resilient market takes time, but today, I hope we will convince private investors that the fundamentals for business are fully there,” Le Maire said.
French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday hosts African leaders, diplomats and lenders at a summit aimed at helping Sudan after years of conflict-riven authoritarian rule and assisting other African nations deal with economic hardship and the effects of the pandemic. Several heads of state will gather in Paris to discuss investment in Sudan and negotiate its debt to help the government of Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok in the transition after the 2019 ouster of longtime strongman Omar al-Bashir. Tuesday, a summit on African economies will try to fill a financing shortfall of almost $300 billion caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. Both meetings, held in a temporary exhibition centre near the Eiffel Tower in Paris, will be a chance for Macron to show himself as a statesman on Africa whose influence goes beyond the continent’s Francophone regions. The meetings will both mark a return to in-person top-level gatherings after the Covid-19 pandemic made video conferences the norm. Among those attending both meetings will be Rwandan President Paul Kagame in a rare visit to France as Paris presses for reconciliation with Kigali after a historic report made clear French failings over the 1994 genocide. Egyptian President Abdelfattah al-Sisi is scheduled to attend the meetings making another journey to key ally France after his state visit in late 2020 enraged rights activists. Also expected is Tunisian President Kais Saied whose country faces a serious economic crisis and needs to address a severe budget shortfall.
French signals
France wants the Sudan summit to send a signal of the help African countries can receive if they embrace democracy and turn their backs on authoritarianism.
“The Sudanese transition is considered by us, but also by the entire international community, as an example of democratic transition in Africa and as such deserves special attention,” said a French presidential official who asked not to be named. The official said the summit aims to unite the international community around helping Sudan, in particular addressing its vast debt pile. IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva will be present as well as top European diplomats, including German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas and EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell. Hamdok told AFP ahead of the meeting that he hopes Sudan can help wipe out a $60 billion foreign debt bill this year by securing relief and investment deals at the Paris conference. Sudan’s debts to the Paris Club, which includes major creditor countries, are estimated to make up around 38 percent of its total $60 billion foreign debt. “We are going to the Paris conference to let foreign investors explore the opportunities for investing in Sudan,” Hamdok said. “We are not looking for grants or donations,” he added.
On debt, the conference aims to deal with arrears to international lenders before moving on to bilateral creditors, a French presidency official said. Of Sudan’s bilateral debt, about half is with Paris Club members. Some 10-14% of its external debt is commercial debt, an unusually high proportion, an IMF official said. China, a major creditor, has reduced and forgiven some debt and will push for the international community to do the same, said Hua Chunying, a foreign ministry spokeswoman. Saudi Arabia, another big creditor, has also said it will press for a broad agreement on debt.
French-African summit
Sudan was taken off Washington’s blacklist of state sponsors of terrorism in December, removing a major hurdle to foreign investment. But many challenges still lie ahead. Also attending will be President Sahle-Work Zewde of Ethiopia, whose country has been locked in a long dispute with Sudan over water resources that has sometimes threatened to erupt into open conflict. Africa has so far been less badly hit by the Covid-19 pandemic than other global regions, with a total of 130,000 dead across the continent. But the economic cost is only too apparent, and Tuesday’s France-Africa summit will focus on making up the shortfall in the funds needed for future development, a financial gap estimated by the IMF to amount to $290 billion up to 2023. Around two dozen African leaders from across the continent will attend the meeting, including Mozambique President Filipe Nyusi whose country is battling a bloody Islamist insurrection in its north.
A French presidential official said Macron and Nyusi would hold a bilateral meeting and the summit would also be a chance for the international community to coordinate efforts to help Mozambique.

Erdogan Urges Pope to Help End Israel's 'Massacre'
Agence France Presse/May 17/2021
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Monday urged Pope Francis to help end what he called Israel's "massacre" of Palestinians, which should be punished with sanctions, his office said. Erdogan told the pope in a call that "Palestinians will continue to be subjected to a massacre unless the international community punishes Israel... with sanctions", adding that the pope's messages were of "great importance to mobilise the Christian world and the international community."

U.S. President Biden to send 20 million more COVID-19 vaccine doses abroad - Bloomberg
NNA/Reuters/May 17/2021
U.S. President Joe Biden plans to send an additional 20 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines authorized in the country abroad by the end of June, Bloomberg News reported, citing a senior administration official. Biden will export vaccines from Pfizer Inc Moderna Inc or Johnson & Johnson, on top of 60 million doses from AstraZeneca Plc's vaccine he had already planned to give to other countries, Bloomberg said bloom.bg/3bA9VrP. The White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

Statement by Canada Following UN Security Council Session on the devastating violence in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza
May 16, 2021 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
Global Affairs Canada today issued the following statement:
“Canada is appalled by the ongoing violence, rising tensions, and the devastating loss of life. The toll —particularly on civilians, including women and children — has already been too great. Canada continues to express grave concerns over the escalating violence in Israel, West Bank, and Gaza. Canada joins its allies and friends in urging all parties to take steps to immediately end all violence, prevent further loss of life, protect all civilians, and de-escalate tensions. All parties must uphold international law.
“Canada reiterates the fundamental importance of protecting journalists and press freedom. Journalists and media workers are the cornerstone of any fair, strong and vibrant society and must be free to do their work without fear. Any violence against journalists is completely unacceptable, especially in volatile contexts where they are risking their lives to do their jobs. Further, it is completely unacceptable to see humanitarian workers and facilities under fire. Their safety and security must always be ensured.
“The continued indiscriminate barrage of rocket attacks fired by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad into Israel against civilians is completely unacceptable and must cease immediately. Those foreign entities which support Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad must end their material and financial support to these groups. Canada supports Israel's right to live in peace with its neighbours within secure boundaries and fully supports Israel's right to assure its own security. This right also comes with immense responsibility and obligation to act in accordance with international law. The use of force has led to significant civilian loss of life and we urge utmost restraint.
“Canada remains gravely concerned by the continued expansion of settlements, demolitions, and evictions, including the ongoing cases in Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan. These actions impact families and livelihoods, do not serve peace and are a violation of international law. Unilateral actions that prejudge the outcome of direct negotiations and further jeopardize the prospects for a two-state solution must be avoided.
“Canada is alarmed by the clashes and violence among Arab and Jewish communities in parts of Israel. We implore all authorities and citizens alike to help maintain calm, reduce tensions, and help keep the peace while respecting human rights. We stand firmly with the Israeli and Palestinian people in their right to live in peace, security, with dignity, without fear, and with their human rights respected.
“Canada has observed an increase of hatred, including antisemitism and Islamophobia, at home and around the world. It is our collective responsibility to fight hatred and condemn it in the strongest possible terms. Canada is committed to standing against hatred and discrimination in all their forms and is committed to working with our domestic and international partners to promote and defend pluralism, inclusion and human rights at home and abroad.
“Canada is committed to the goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, including the creation of a Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel. We will always stand ready to support efforts for a two-state solution.
“The loss of life in this conflict is heartbreaking. For decades, this conflict has caused much pain to both Palestinian and Israeli families and impacted the social fabric in the region. This is all the more reason for the parties to urgently find a sustainable resolution to the conflict. The spiral of violence and hatred must immediately stop. Mutual recognition and respect are the critical foundation for a lasting peace.
“Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, and with Israeli and Palestinian youth and future generations top of our mind, we urge all parties to renew their commitment to peace and security and encourage the Security Council to remain engaged on efforts to bring an end to the violence.”

Statement by Canada on International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia
May 17, 2021 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable Marc Garneau, Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Karina Gould, Minister of International Development, and the Honourable Mary Ng, Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade, today issued the following statement:
“On this International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia, we call for an end to all forms of discrimination, exclusion and violence against people based on their sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics. Human rights are universal and indivisible, and the human rights of LGBTQ2I individuals deserve the respect of all people everywhere. The promotion and protection of human rights is a core element of Canada’s foreign policy, and Canada is committed to ensuring that the rights of LGBTQ2I individuals are protected and upheld in Canada and around the world.
“Today, same-sex conduct remains criminalized in 69 countries around the world. At home and abroad, Canada is working hard to fight intolerance, foster inclusion and ensure LGBTQ2I people have access to health care, livelihoods and security. The COVID-19 pandemic is exacerbating difficulties for LGBTQ2I people, many of whom face further deterioration of their dignity and human rights and are more susceptible to violence and other abuses.
“In many countries, marginalized populations and those in vulnerable situations are experiencing rising food and shelter insecurity, health care disruptions, violence and mental health impacts, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Canada is firmly committed to supporting the international LGBTQ2I community through its feminist approach to international assistance.
“Aligned with the Feminist International Assistance Policy, Canada is committed to providing international assistance that is human rights-based and inclusive. In 2019, Canada announced $30 million in dedicated international assistance funding over 5 years and $10 million per year thereafter to advance human rights and improve socio-economic outcomes for LGBTQ2I people in developing countries. This commitment continues to support the efforts of partners and movements working with LGBTQ2I communities in developing countries.
“Canada also seeks to ensure LGBTQ2I people share in the benefits of trade through its Trade Diversification Strategy. Earlier this year, several Canadian LGBTQ2I-owned companies took part in a virtual trade mission to Colombia. It was the first-ever Canadian LGBTQ2I trade mission delivered completely virtually and to an emerging market. Canada strives to ensure ongoing free trade agreement negotiations with other countries contain progressive chapters on gender and are non-discriminatory. We also cooperate and share best practices on ending workplace discrimination through the new Global Trade and Gender Arrangement.
“Canada is committed to advancing human rights and socio-economic conditions for LGBTQ2I people, at home and around the world. Together, let us resist intolerance and discrimination and support one another in all our diversity.” Contacts

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on May 17- 18/2021
Audio From FDDForeign Podicy Biden’s Mission to Realign the Middle East//May 17/2021
Clifford D. May/Founder & President
Tony Badran/Research Fellow
Michael Doran/Hudson Institute
https://www.fdd.org/podcasts/2021/05/14/bidens-mission-to-realign-the-middle-east/
About
President Biden has been eager to rejoin the deal that President Obama concluded with Iran’s rulers in 2015 and from which President Trump withdrew three years later.
The quarrel between advocates for, and critics of, the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has been viewed as a disagreement over how best to prevent the theocrats in Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.
Michael Doran, a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, and Tony Badran, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies dissent from that view. In Tablet, they’ve written a comprehensive analysis arguing that Mr. Biden intends to both enrich and empower Iran’s rulers – while simultaneously downgrading relations with Saudi Arabia, the Gulf Arab states, Israel, and other former friends.
In other words, President Biden is attempting to establish a “new Middle Eastern order” — one that regards the Islamic Republic of Iran as America’s primary strategic partner in the region. They conclude also that President Biden has decided not to speak candidly about this dramatic change – which they call “The Realignment.”
As for latest kinetic battle between Israel and Hamas, they see that as an inevitable consequence of the Biden tilt toward Tehran. They discuss all this and more with host Cliff May.

Biden’s overtures to Iran undercut US bid to end Hamas-Israel conflict
Jonathan Schanzer/New York Post/May 17/2021
With rockets flying and violence escalating in the Gaza Strip, the Biden administration announced Wednesday that it dispatched Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Hady Amr to the region, in an effort to broker calm between Israel and the terrorist group Hamas. The likelihood of a successful mission is low. But that’s not Amr’s fault; it’s President Joe Biden’s. His Middle East foreign policy is simply out of sync with this mission.
In past conflicts, senior American officials often found ways to steer both sides to a ceasefire, even when Israel wasn’t quite satisfied with the results on the battlefield. But Jerusalem always acquiesced to Washington in the end, out of deference to the close ties between the two nations.
Given America’s foreign policy these days, it’s not clear how that will fly. Israeli officials are not exactly eager to hear America’s view of Iranian-backed terrorists like Hamas. Tensions are at a zenith, thanks to the Biden administration’s stubborn insistence that now is the time to re-enter the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — the flawed 2015 nuclear deal with Iran.
Israeli officials are unhappy not only because they see the deal as a path for Iran to gain nuclear weapons down the road, but for another reason as well: America’s role in whatever is agreed upon is very likely to include billions of dollars in cash incentives to the Islamic Republic, in exchange for temporary nuclear concessions.
The Iranian regime is one of Hamas’ top sponsors. Thus, the Biden administration is on the cusp of indirectly providing funds to Hamas, using Iran as a pass-through.
Of course, the Biden administration will deny that this is its intention. And to be fair, it probably isn’t. But it will be a byproduct of a deeply flawed and myopic policy.
Officials may attempt to explain how US money-laundering controls and intelligence could stop this from happening. But there will be no hermetic solution to prevent Iran from sending cash to Hamas. Nor is there a way to halt the flow of weapons or weapons technology that Iran will invariably build with the funds it is about to receive.
Iran is long known to have provided Hamas with entire rocket systems, rocket parts, training in assembly, cash support and other means to enhance the terrorist organization’s military capabilities over the years. In the context of the current conflict, Iran is widely believed to have provided Palestinian Islamic Jihad with a new rocket, the Badr 3.
Israeli military officials privately note that they have observed other signs of Iranian involvement in the conflict, including possibly the Shihab drone that was thought to hit the strategic Ashkelon pipeline, but they have yet to go on the record to explain.
More important is the broader question of what exactly the Biden administration wants in the Middle East. The president and his lieutenants have repeatedly asserted that they seek to extricate America from the region. In other words, Israel is about to find itself increasingly alone in an increasingly lawless Middle East.To make matters worse, this administration has pushed all its chips to the center of the table in its attempts to resurrect the JCPOA. This is a deal that will once again empower Iran, while weakening Israel and the Gulf Arab states. The Biden folks may not frame it this way, but this is tantamount to a total realignment of the Middle East. Washington thus lacks credibility in its efforts to broker an end to the current fighting between Israel and Hamas. And judging by the decision to send Amr to represent the United States, that may not even be its goal.
Diplomatic protocol dictates that Amr, who is a relatively low-ranking official, would not be the right person to speak directly with Israel’s top diplomats, military officials and politicians. Biden and his secretary of state, Tony Blinken, almost certainly understood this when they dispatched Amr to the region.
Admittedly, the Biden administration policy has had occasional bright spots. The president elected to shut down condemnations of Israel at the United Nations, providing top cover as Israel struggled to fend off salvo after salvo of Hamas rockets with its Iron Dome air-defense system.
But just as Iron Dome can’t neutralize every threat, a diplomatic shield at the UN may only help for so long. Israel is fighting a brutal war against Iran and its proxies. And the White House appears to be casting its lot with the wrong side for the long term.
*Jonathan Schanzer is senior vice president for research at Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Follow him on Twitter @JSchanzer. FDD is a nonpartisan think tank focused on foreign policy and national security issues.

Rescinding the IRGC’s Terror Designation Would Harm American Victims of Terrorism
Matthew Zweig and Richard Goldberg/Insight-FDD/May 17/2021
As part of negotiations in Vienna, Iran’s clerical regime has reportedly requested that the Biden administration rescind the U.S. government’s formal designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). If President Joe Biden agrees, he would not only relieve economic pressure on Iran’s primary terror-sponsoring organ, but would also spurn American victims of Iran-sponsored terrorism, as well as their families.
A rescission of the FTO designation would undermine U.S. national security. It would deprive wounded American warfighters and the families of those murdered of the chance to hold the IRGC accountable through civil litigation. Undermining the deterrent of criminal prosecution and civil litigation could also encourage future attacks on U.S. servicemembers.
In short, removing the IRGC from the FTO list – an ill-advised move the Biden administration already took with the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen – should provoke a bipartisan backlash on Capitol Hill and across the nation.
Background on FTO Designations and Civil Litigation
Under the Antiterrorism Act (ATA), the secretary of state has authority to designate as FTOs foreign entities that “engage in or retain the capability and intent to engage in terrorism” and that “threaten the security of United States nationals” or the “national defense, foreign relations, or economic interests of the United States.” Under the law, U.S. persons and persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction can be charged criminally if they provide material support to a terrorist or an FTO.
In 1992, Congress amended the ATA to allow victims of international terrorism to file civil suits for their injuries. In 1996, Congress went further and criminalized nearly all knowing support for FTOs, including commercial activities and humanitarian assistance. This includes any person or entity that knowingly provides “material support or resources” to a terrorist or an FTO – to include property or services, including financial services.
Designating an entity as an FTO brings far greater criminal exposure under the “material support” provision than a mere sanctions designation. Companies that do business or interact in any way with an FTO immediately face increased legal, financial, and reputational risk, pressuring them to rapidly sever those ties. The day after the IRGC’s FTO designation, for example, Instagram blocked the accounts of former IRGC Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani and several other senior IRGC leaders. Soleimani had already been designated a Specially-Designated Global Terrorist – an individual designation that did not directly influence corporate behavior.
The civil litigation risk for companies and individuals working with the IRGC is today substantial. Congress has repeatedly made it easier for American victims of terrorism to sue aiders and abettors of terrorism. In 2016, Congress expanded the ATA to provide an additional path for victims to sue – civil aiding-and-abetting and civil conspiracy liability – alongside the existing material-support threshold. In October 2018, Congress narrowed the “act of war” exception in the ATA’s civil liability provision by making it inapplicable to conflicts involving FTOs and SDGTs. Although the IRGC was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American service members in Iraq, some civil defendants have continued to assert that the “act of war” exception applies to attacks committed by the IRGC’s proxies. Going forward, if the IRGC continues to kill or injure U.S. citizens in conflict zones such as Iraq and Syria, the IRGC’s FTO designation would make it far more straightforward for the victims or their families to bring civil actions against not only the IRGC but also anyone who provided material support to the IRGC.
Impact of IRGC Designation for U.S. Victims of Terrorism
In the months before the IRGC’s FTO designation, a district court in New York dismissed a civil action against several European banks alleged to have criminally conspired with the IRGC’s agents to launder hundreds of billions of dollars through the U.S. financial system. The court held that the connection between the banks’ conduct and the acts of terrorism was too attenuated to create liability, in part because the IRGC itself was not designated as a terrorist organization at the time of the attacks and was not solely engaged in terrorism.
With the FTO designation, that defense no longer applies, particularly given the Supreme Court’s affirmation of Congress’ contention that “foreign organizations that engage in terrorist activity are so tainted by their criminal conduct that any contribution to such an organization facilitates that conduct.” Designation of the IRGC and governmental scrutiny of its economic empire paves the way for successful civil actions against banks or other companies that knowingly do business with the IRGC’s expansive business network but often escape prosecution thanks to willful blindness to the IRGC’s relationship with their business partners.A recent Supreme Court decision affirmed that victims suing the IRGC directly (thanks to an exemption to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act) may obtain retroactive punitive damages from Iran for attacks that occurred prior to the IRGC’s FTO designation. Now victims suing under the ATA may be able to attach such assets to IRGC-connected economic activity. Since the IRGC mainly operates in foreign jurisdictions beyond the reach of U.S. courts, the prime targets of ATA civil actions are foreign companies and banks proven to have knowingly transacted with the IRGC.
International shipping companies and banks that provide trade finance or otherwise knowingly process financial transactions for the IRGC or its agents may also be subject to potential civil suit in the United States, regardless of where the transactions take place. Transactions with shipping terminals and port authorities controlled by designated IRGC affiliates – such as Iranian port operator Tidewater Middle East Company, which the United States designated as an IRGC-controlled entity in 2011 – could result in exposure to civil liability.
A recission of the IRGC’s FTO designation may have far-reaching detrimental consequences for the ability of U.S. victims of Iranian terrorism to pursue their claims. Currently, there are well over $50 billion in default judgements against Iran on behalf of U.S. victims of terrorism, as well as assets in the United States identified as owned by the Government of Iran. These assets include 650 5th Avenue in New York City and $1.67 billion in assets held by the Luxembourg-based bank Clearstream SA. The Biden administration and Congress should do everything possible to enable victims to execute judgements against these assets – not undermine them.
The fact sheet accompanying the IRGC’s FTO designation confirmed that “Iran is an outlaw regime that uses terrorism as a key tool of statecraft and that the IRGC, part of Iran’s official military, has engaged in terrorist activity or terrorism since its inception 40 years ago.” This finding, which remains accurate and highly relevant, strongly supports the legal arguments of U.S. citizens and service members pursuing civil actions. It establishes a framework for supporting current civil litigants, by providing the official historical record of the IRGC’s terrorism support. This framework should not be dismantled.
What’s Next?
In its ill-conceived drive to rejoin the Iran nuclear deal, the Biden administration must not dishonor the American victims of Iran-sponsored terrorism. That means leaving the IRGC’s FTO designation in place. If anything, the administration should work with Congress on a bipartisan basis to further strengthen and clarify secondary liability under the ATA.
There is a need to act quickly in light of an April decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals that threatens to establish a much more restrictive standard for liability. Specifically, the court held that aiders and abettors cannot be held civilly liable, even for knowingly transferring tens of millions of dollars to charitable front organizations of an FTO. According to the decision, an aider and abettor of an FTO can be held liable only if the defendant is specifically informed that particular funds will be used for “terroristic purposes,” or if the plaintiffs can trace the particular funds sent by the defendant to an FTO front organization and through that organization to the particular attacks that injured them. Of course, companies that knowingly transfer funds or provide services to front groups for organizations such as the IRGC, the Islamic State, or Hamas rarely document the transactions with a notation that such services “are meant for support of terrorist acts only.”
From a policy perspective, this decision has the potential to open the floodgates for using the U.S. financial system to bankroll terrorist organizations across the globe – from the IRGC to al-Qaeda and the Islamic State – through front organizations. Now more than ever, Congress should clarify its counterterrorism statutory framework to disrupt financial support for FTOs such as the IRGC by denying them access to the U.S. financial system. Providing terror victims and their families the ability to seek compensation is an important component of this effort.
Regardless of differing views on the nuclear deal with Iran, supporting American victims of Iran-sponsored terrorism is an issue on which Republicans and Democrats should find common ground.
**Matthew Zweig is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), where Richard Goldberg is a senior advisor. They both contribute to FDD’s Iran Program and Center on Economic and Financial Power (CEFP). For more analysis from the authors, the Iran Program, and CEFP, please subscribe HERE. Follow the authors on Twitter @MatthewZweig1 and @rich_goldberg. Follow FDD on Twitter @FDD and @FDD_Iran and @FDD_CEFP. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

When the US leaves Afghanistan, the world will become less safe
Bill Roggio/New York Post/May 17/2021
Last weekend’s vicious school bombing in the Afghan capital killed more than 60 people and injured more than 150 others, most of them schoolgirls. Sadly, this was no isolated incident.
Since President Biden announced the United States would leave Afghanistan by Sept. 11, violence has soared. But it isn’t only Afghans who’ll suffer. With the return of the Taliban, a rejuvenated and dangerous al Qaeda will enjoy the same sanctuary it had over two decades ago.
The US withdrawal has emboldened the Taliban. The so-called “peace process,” which is really a capitulation, has failed. The Taliban believes it has won and is acting accordingly.
The jihadis can now say they have driven two superpowers, the Soviet Union and the United States, from Afghanistan by force.
In 2013-14, the Islamic State scored a massive propaganda victory after it seized control of large areas of Iraq and Syria. This victory sparked terror attacks in the United States, Europe and elsewhere. Now al Qaeda is poised to benefit in the same way.
The only peace Afghans can hope to see is the peace of submission to the Taliban. The group plans to install its emir, Mullah Hibatullah Akhundzada, as overall leader and impose its harsh version of Islamic law, replete with public executions, stonings, amputations and other horrors, on all Afghans.
The Afghanistan of the future will look much like the country did on Sept. 10, 2001. As the Taliban retakes large areas of the country, it will settle old scores with those who collaborated with the current Afghan government. Judges, lawyers, reporters, women’s-rights activists, politicians and others who advocated a free and democratic Afghanistan will be killed or forced to submit to the Taliban or flee the country.
Millions of refugees are likely to flood Pakistan, Iran and other countries. Those unable to leave will suffer under a brutal, repressive rule.
As the Taliban’s fortunes grow, so will al Qaeda’s. To defend the withdrawal, US officials have misled the public into believing that there has been a split between the Taliban and al Qaeda. The truth is that they are as close as ever.
After the attacks of 9/11, the Taliban refused to turn over Osama bin Laden and his cadre of terrorists, knowing full well the United States would invade and destroy the Taliban’s original emirate. Mullah Omar, the Taliban’s founder, predicted the group would ultimately prevail as the United States would tire of the fight. It took two decades, but he was right. Now his successors are ready to pick up where he left off.
Al Qaeda won’t need to return to Afghanistan because it is already there. Since the fall of the Taliban’s first emirate, al Qaeda remained embedded with the Taliban in Afghanistan and continues to fight alongside it. Al Qaeda and other terror groups operate training camps inside Afghanistan to this day. Taliban rule will allow al Qaeda to flourish.
It is understandable that Americans want out. Our political and military leaders have been feckless, promising victory but never advocating the investments necessary to achieve it.
They refused to understand the nature of the Taliban and its religious motivations for fighting. They ignored or downplayed the deep and enduring ties between the Taliban and al Qaeda. They pretended Pakistan was our ally when it has always been our enemy. They pursued a phony peace process that was destined to fail. They pretend that our adversaries — China, Russia, Iran and others — are not taking note of the defeat. One can hardly blame voters for assuming that more incompetence and deception would follow if our troops stayed on the ground.
If we leave, it should be with eyes open. We are not ending an endless war. We are just returning to the way things were. The endless jihad will continue, unchecked. The war will intensify, Afghans will suffer immensely, the Taliban will make major gains, al Qaeda will be emboldened, and the world will become less safe.Just three years after the last US troops left Iraq in 2011, our troops had to go right back to deal with the new threat posed by the Islamic State. American leaders have yet to learn the lesson of that failure.
*Bill Roggio is a senior fellow at Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Follow him on Twitter @billroggio. FDD is a nonpartisan think tank focused on foreign policy and national security issues.

Joe Biden’s Iran Policy Is One Giant Nuclear Mistake/The United States is at an inflection point. Now is the time to reverse course.
Anthony Ruggiero/ The National Interest/May 17/2021
Iran’s Supreme Leader must be pleased another American president is desperate for a nuclear deal. The United States has all the leverage, yet President Joe Biden is rushing back to the flawed 2015 nuclear agreement, even though Iran cheated from the outset. Instead, Biden should use America’s leverage to secure a deal that puts a permanent end to Tehran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons by dismantling its enrichment program.
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan explained earlier this month that the purpose of the ongoing negotiations in Vienna is to determine which “nuclear restrictions Iran will accept on its program to ensure that they can never get a nuclear weapon.” Therein lies the core problem with the accord: it will never prevent an Iranian nuke because instead of prohibiting Iran from enriching uranium and plutonium, it relies on a maze of unenforceable and eventually expiring restrictions to prevent the regime from weaponizing its enrichment program.
In light of the numerous concessions Tehran secured as part of the 2015 agreement, zero enrichment may seem like an extraordinary demand. Yet not long ago, zero enrichment was the accepted policy. In 2006, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1696, demanding that the Islamic Republic “suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development.”
Despite abandoning that position, former President Barack Obama sold the 2015 nuclear deal as ensuring “that all pathways to a bomb are cut off.” Yet enrichment itself is the pathway to a bomb. Obama touted the constraints the deal imposed on Iran’s nuclear program, yet restrictions on the production of enriched uranium end completely in 2031, less than ten years from now.
To ensure Iranian compliance, Obama said, the accord has “the most comprehensive inspection and verification regime ever negotiated to monitor a nuclear program.” He added, “The bottom line is, if Iran cheats, we can catch them—and we will.” We now know that is not true. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)—the nuclear watchdog responsible for inspections—did not know about Iran’s undeclared nuclear activities until it examined the nuclear archive Israeli agents smuggled out of Iran in 2018.
Last month, Tehran began enriching uranium to 60 percent purity, a significant step toward the 90 percent+ level needed for an atomic bomb. There is no legitimate, civilian use for this activity. Also, this level of purity is well above the 3.67 percent envisioned in the 2015 deal.
The Vienna negotiations reportedly have not led to an agreement on how Tehran will reverse these nuclear gains, especially whether the advanced centrifuges integral to this level of enrichment will be destroyed, removed from the country, or stored locally.
And there is another serious problem. The United States has a policy where it asks its allies to forgo the development of enrichment and reprocessing capabilities before they can receive any support for peaceful nuclear energy programs. This is known as the gold standard and its rationale is simple: these techniques can be used to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons.
America’s Gulf allies are starting to notice the hypocrisy of the United States asking them to adopt the gold standard while Iran keeps its enrichment program. Yousef Al Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States, noted that the UAE agreed to the gold standard in 2008, hoping it would be a model for when the U.S. negotiates with the Islamic Republic. Otaiba explained that the “problem was [U.S.] partners became . . . committed and assured to a gold standard that is safe and secure for nuclear power and [U.S.] adversaries got a better deal.”
Mohammed bin Salman, crown prince and de facto leader of Saudi Arabia, said in 2018 that if Iran develops nuclear weapons the kingdom would “follow suit as soon as possible.” The most likely path would require Riyadh to develop enrichment or reprocessing technologies.
If the UAE and Saudi Arabia pursue uranium enrichment programs, then that could set off an arms race in the Middle East.
It is not too late for Biden to reverse course. Tehran’s negotiators have pushed a maximalist position requesting the removal of nearly all sanctions. The Biden administration should walk away and use its significant leverage to push for the “longer and stronger” deal Secretary of State Antony Blinken promised. The best way to make a deal longer and stronger is for it to mandate the elimination of Iran’s enrichment program. That accord could secure the bipartisan support necessary to be ratified as a treaty by the U.S. Senate. That way, it would remain intact during the next Republican administration.
Tehran will balk, of course. It will try to convince our European allies to blame the United States for walking away. The Islamic Republic could also respond with military strikes against U.S. troops or allies in the region, but the U.S. has the upper hand militarily and can restore deterrence.
Another response would be for Tehran to ramp up its enrichment program. But Iran’s nuclear extortion has an expiration date. The explosions at the Natanz enrichment site show the fragility of the clerical regime’s prized, supposedly secure, asset. The United Kingdom, and perhaps France and Germany, will join a pressure campaign if Iran overplays its hand. A unified or U.S.-UK sanctions campaign will send the Islamic Republic a strong message that it cannot divide America and its allies. Iran will not be able to withstand another unified pressure campaign.
Just because it will be difficult to return to a zero enrichment policy doesn’t mean the United States should pursue a limited, flawed agreement instead.
The United States is at an inflection point. Now is the time to reverse course.
*Anthony Ruggiero is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), he previously served in the U.S. government for more than nineteen years, most recently as the National Security Council’s senior director for counterproliferation and biodefense. Follow Anthony on Twitter @NatSecAnthony. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

If it gets nukes, Iran could fire using cruise missiles - exclusive
Yonah Jeremy Bob/Jerusalem Post/May 17/2021
IAEA should focus on weaponization; stopping ballistic missiles is a lost cause.
If Iran gets nuclear weapons, it could potentially deliver them not only using land-based ballistic missiles, but also by ship-fired cruise missiles, one of the top Iran nuclear experts has told The Jerusalem Post.
In a new book, Iran’s Perilous Pursuit of Nuclear Weapons, obtained first exclusively by the Post, Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) president David Albright and researcher Sarah Burkhard say that “the most straightforward way to dramatically reduce Iran’s prospects of building nuclear weapons is to focus on the nuclear explosive production and nuclear weaponization pillars.”
Part of the reason that the focus should shift to IAEA inspections of weaponization, notes the book, is because realistically, “the elimination of the [nuclear] delivery system pillar is more difficult to thwart because Iran has so many options for delivering nuclear weapons, ranging from ballistic missiles to cruise missiles to ships.”
A ship-based cruise-missile nuclear-weapon option for Iran has not generally been discussed much to date.
Further, Albright writes that: “Negotiations should aim to limit ballistic missiles, but it should be recognized that eliminating this pillar in its entirety is impossible,” given years of Western complacency and Iranian progress on the issue.
Before even getting to some other powerful revelations, Albright’s book in some ways upends the entire way that the nuclear issue is viewed by Iran hawks – of which Albright is one of the more prominent in the camp.
Conventionally, the fight over US policy toward the Islamic Republic divides into those who are pro or anti returning to the 2015 nuclear deal, including lifting Trump administration-era sanctions for Tehran returning to the deal’s nuclear limitations.
While Albright has pointed out holes in the 2015 deal for years, he is also a realist.
Given the Biden administration’s posture, Albright explores how the US and other interested countries could try to head off Iran from getting a nuclear weapon even if some of its “nuclear pillars” are not blocked as much as he might hope.
Put simply, if the Biden team returns to the 2015 deal, how could Iran still be contained?
ONE OF the punch-lists of Iran critics has been that the 2015 deal did not have teeth for limiting Iran’s ballistic missile program.
Albright would have wanted this program limited years ago.
But given Iran’s progress since 2015 and Washington’s current posture, he is saying that blocking Iran on this front might be a lost cause.
He explains that the Islamic Republic has too many different kinds of ballistic missiles it can use.
Also, Albright says that Tehran could even use ship-based cruise missiles, such that putting partial limits on some ballistic missiles would be ineffectual.
Rather, he suggests that a major benefit of the 2018 Mossad raid on Tehran’s secret nuclear archive is that it gives the world powers much more insight into how to supervise and block the Iranian weaponization-efforts side of the nuclear program.
Of course, this would require a much more forceful approach by the IAEA and world powers in terms of resolving where each element of weaponization revealed by the archive is being stored, and then monitoring them all.
In some ways, this would, in and of itself, be a game-changer approach – but Albright suggests that it could be palatable given the new information and the idea that the elements being monitored have no justification to be used for anything but weaponization.
There are at least three items he cites that the IAEA would need to explore and monitor regarding Iran’s efforts.
One would be the Islamic Republic’s “maintaining the capability to use computer codes to simulate a nuclear weapons explosion. Greater use of simulations would make component testing less necessary.”
A second would be “retaining a mastery of the multipoint initiation system, e.g., the shock wave generator, including possibly having conducted a successful ‘cold test’ of a nuclear explosive with a surrogate nuclear core.”
In a May 2019 ISIS report describing some of what was revealed in the Iranian Nuclear Archive, he explained that a shock wave generator "has the purpose of uniformly initiating a spherical shell of high explosives, or the 'main charge,' which in turn compresses the nuclear core made from weapon-grade uranium to achieve a supercritical mass for a nuclear explosion."
The third item would be “having the capability to make the neutron initiator.”
In another ISIS report that month, he said that "Iran planned on using a relatively sophisticated neutron source, or initiator, to trigger a chain reaction in the weapon-grade uranium core of its nuclear weapons."
All three of these elements, if not policed by the IAEA, could help Tehran move much more swiftly to being able to explode the uranium it enriches for a nuclear bomb.
IN CONTRAST, if the IAEA gains new inspection powers over these elements exposed by the Mossad, Iran could be prevented from developing a nuclear weapon despite other major holes in the 2015 nuclear deal.
In terms of how much time Iran would need to enrich uranium to weaponizable levels, Albright explores scenarios where the currently discussed three to four months could drop to two months or even just over one month by the end of 2020.
The idea is that as the Islamic Republic enriches more uranium up from the 5% level to the 20% level and some even to the 60% level, the distance it has to cross to get to the 90% level is significantly reduced.
Despite this warning, Albright told the Post that the volume of uranium which Iran has enriched to the 60% level is quite small, and the bigger problems in reducing its time to a nuclear weapon relate to the volume of 20% enriched uranium and to advanced centrifuges like the IR-4 or IR-6.
Advanced centrifuges can enrich uranium at a much faster rate than the country’s standard IR-1, which makes up most of its nuclear program.
Another solution Albright suggests is getting Iran to agree to nuclear limits which would leave it two years from a nuclear weapon instead of one year.
This would require Tehran to roll back both its advanced centrifuge program and possibly to cut in half the number of older IR-1 centrifuges it was allowed to operate under the 2015 deal.
Though the book notes that the assassination of Iran military nuclear chief Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in November 2020 as a significant setback in managing weaponization efforts, it adds that he had prepared a whole new generation of nuclear scientists to take his place.
This accounts for how Iran can continue to present such a nuclear threat despite his loss.
The book also gives an impressive history of Iran’s nuclear program as well as tremendous depth in discussing the findings of the secret nuclear archive.

Iranians to the Biden Administration: Do Not Lift Sanctions on Iran
Hayvi Bouzo and Benjamin Weinthal/Newsweek/May 17/2021
The Biden administration is considering easing sanctions on the Iranian regime before reaching a nuclear agreement, a move that would only jeopardize the national security interests of the U.S and its Middle East allies. The Iranian people also consider such a move to be dangerous.
The Biden administration must maintain and even increase sanctions related to Iran’s support for terrorism, its ballistic missile program and ongoing human rights violations.
Some in Washington are urging the Biden administration to lift U.S. sanctions on the Islamic Republic, saying they are hurting the people in Iran. However, many Iranians advocate taking the exact opposite course.
Recently, Ahmad Obali, a Chicago-based talk show host who broadcasts to the Islamic Republic and is well-known in Iran, asked his viewers on live television: Should the U.S. sanctions be lifted or remain in place? The response was overwhelming, 48 out of 50 callers said they want the Biden administration to maintain sanctions on Iran.
The vast majority of these calls came from inside Iran. Some Iranian callers asked for the sanctions against the regime to be increased until “it’s choked.” Others said that after the Obama administration lifted the sanctions, not a single dollar went to the people.
According to a caller from Shabestar, near Tabriz, the regime used the billions of dollars received from the Obama administration to “build palaces for themselves and feed terrorists.”
Even under the “maximum pressure campaign” the U.S. continued to allow humanitarian goods, including food and medicine, to enter Iran.
The Trump administration offered direct medical assistance to Iran, after the regime’s failure in handling the global coronavirus pandemic. The Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei rejected the help, saying in a televised speech on March 22, 2020, that the U.S., “Could be giving medicines to Iran that spread the virus or cause it to remain permanently.”
The maximum pressure campaign imposed by the Trump administration succeeded in bringing the regime to the verge of economic collapse. According to the International Monetary Fund, Iran went from having $122.5 billion of accessible monetary reserves in 2018 to $4 billion in 2020. This gave the Iranian people hope that the regime was weakened and they would finally be able to realize their aspirations for freedom.
On February 1, 2021, 38 activists sent a letter to President Joe Biden, asking for his administration to maintain a maximum pressure campaign on the regime. These activists, who live in Iran, put their lives on the line to send their message. Most of the signatories have been arrested or imprisoned for peaceful political and social activism.
In the letter, the activists explained that relieving the regime of sanctions would bring nothing but an increase in its malign activities in the region.
“The regime spent billions of dollars gained from the [2015] Iran nuclear deal on exporting its totalitarian ideology by providing funds to terrorist networks, developing missile technology as offensive leverage to dominate the Persian Gulf and beyond, and causing chaos in the Middle East,” they wrote.
The signatories stressed their hope that the Biden administration would continue the U.S. maximum pressure campaign, asking for “maintaining maximum political, diplomatic and financial pressure on the regime,” and “advocacy for human rights in Iran and release of all political prisoners and those imprisoned for their personal views.”
Now the Biden administration is insisting on returning to the nuclear deal with Iran before May 22, when a key monitoring deal expires. However, this shouldn’t mean removing the sanctions on issues unrelated to Iran’s nuclear program. Though it was never implemented, this was the declared position of both former President Barack Obama and then-Vice President Joe Biden when they separately stated in 2015 that a nuclear deal should in no way prohibit Washington from enacting non-nuclear sanctions on Iran.
According to then-Vice President Biden, “Every sanction in place against any entity or individual in Iran for the support and encouragement of terrorism stays in place. Nothing changes.”
In a similar statement, Obama explained that sanctions against Iran on issues related to supporting terrorism, ballistic missiles and human rights violations should be maintained.
“[E]ven with this deal, we will continue to have profound differences with Iran – its support for terrorism and its use of proxies to destabilize parts of the Middle East. Therefore … the United States will maintain our own sanctions related to Iran’s support for terrorism, its ballistic missile program, and its human rights violations,” he said.
Iran continues to be one of the world’s biggest violators of human rights. It carries out the most executions per capita in the world; it is the No. 1 state sponsor of terrorism and it is continuously expanding its ballistic missile program. Maintaining and adding sanctions in regards to these issues would serve the national security interest of the U.S. and its allies, aid in negotiating a stronger nuclear deal and be in line with the hopes and aspirations of the Iranian people.
*Hayvi Bouzo is a Syrian-born American broadcast journalist and commentator. She is the creator and host of the TV show Middle East Rise. Follow Hayvi on Twitter @Hayvi Bouzo and on Facebook. Benjamin Weinthal is a fellow for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Follow Benjamin on Twitter @BenWeinthal. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

Turkey media threatens Israel with 'Libya model' of water grab off Gaza
Seth J. Frantzman/Jerusalem PostMay 17/2021
The concept pushed by the Turkish media, likely with support from the government, argues that Turkey can sign a deal with the Palestinians and increase support for them by sea.
Turkey’s far-right Yeni Safak newspaper argued on Monday, with a frontpage story, that Turkey might implement a “Libya model” for Israel by signing a deal with Hamas-run Gaza to get access to water and energy rights off Israel’s coast. The model is based on an agreement Turkey pushed on the embattled government of Libya in 2019 which resulted in Turkey sending Syrian mercenaries and drones to Libya in violation of an arms embargo.
The concept pushed by the Turkish media, likely with support from the government, argues that Turkey can sign a deal with the Palestinians and increase support for them by sea. This would put Israel and Turkey on a military collision course. Turkey hosts Hamas leaders and supports Hamas. Its potential plan to link Turkey and Gaza by sea would harm Israel’s gas pipeline plans with Cyprus and Greece.
The goal for Turkey was to ignore Greek and Cyprus claims to exclusive economic zones and blocks of undersea areas for energy exploration, to create a Turkish “blue motherland” grabbing all the Mediterranean around Cyprus, Greek islands and now near Israel. Turkey’s sea-grab has no precedent in international or maritime laws and norms. Nevertheless that has not stopped Turkey, empowered by the previous US administration, of sending its navy with “research vessels” to conduct energy exploration in areas usually claimed by Greece.
To understand Turkey’s goal, it is that Turkey will draw a line from the Turkish coastline directly to Gaza, ostensibly dividing the sea and creating a corridor. This would cut off Israel from Greece and the East Med pipeline that Israel, Greece and Cyprus want to build. Turkey argues that Cyprus does not exist and that Greek islands have no maritime rights around them. Greece and Cyprus view things differently, arguing much of the Mediterranean around Cyprus and Greek islands is linked to them. Cyprus has deals with Egypt and Israel and Greece and Egypt have deals and good relations.
Turkey illegally invaded Northern Cyprus in the 1970s and now wants a “two state” solution for Cyprus, potentially trying to create a second country on the island of Cyprus based around Northern Cyprus, which Turkey recognizes. This would complicate the claims at sea. But Turkey’s novel approach to the Palestinian issue takes this a step further, suggesting it could sign a deal with Hamas or the Palestinian Authority and grab control of the water off Israel, putting Turkey and Israel on a collision course. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is one of the world’s leading anti-Israel voices. He compares Israel to the Nazis and has sought sanctions against Israel during the recent conflict. His goal is to isolate Israel. He threatened the UAE against signing a peace deal with Israel. He hosts Hamas leaders with a red carpet in Istanbul and Ankara. He recently phoned Iran’s President and discussed joint work against Israel.
The “Blue Homeland” idea at sea was published by a far-right paper as a trial balloon. In Turkey all media is pro-government and critical journalists are imprisoned or have to leave the country. So this article had the stamp of approval of the ruling AKP party. It quotes Rear Admiral Cihat Yayci, the “architect” of the current Turkish Mediterranean policy. The article argues that an agreement like the one in Libya, but with the Palestinians would “increase Palestine’s international recognition” and enable real support for the Palestinians.
It would enable Turkey to contest Israel’s blockade of Gaza. Back in 2010 Turkey sent far-right Islamist IHH activists aboard the Mavi Marmara to try to break the blockade to Gaza. An Israeli command raid resulted in the deaths of ten Turks aboard the ships. Turkey would like to send its navy to Gaza. Israel is acquiring new Sa’ar 6 Corvettes to defend its Exclusive Economic Zone.
Meanwhile Hamas in Gaza has tried to build unmanned submarines and use rockets to attack gas rigs at sea off the coast of Ashkelon. This is clearly an economic war and one designed to challenge Israel’s energy goals. The article argues that Turkey signed an agreement in 2011 with Northern Cyprus. It argues that Turkey can sign deals with governments that are not recognized by the international community. This likely means Hamas. The article specifies Gaza as an entity and compares it to Taiwan.
“A position like in Libya can also be created. Here, the Israeli factor is not an obstacle to the agreement. If Palestine can become a member of the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum (East-Med), it can also sign an agreement with us. East-Med membership is an indication that Palestine is an international unit in its own right with a coast in the Eastern Mediterranean. Such an agreement could turn the game….in our favor. It will be a strategic chess move for us.” Turkey thus proposes using Palestinian membership in the gas forum to frustrate Israel’s relations with Greece and Cyprus and achieve Turkey’s goal.

Senior PIJ commander killed in IAF airstrike Monday afternoon
Anna Ahronheim/Jerusalem post/May 17/2021
The airstrikes on Hamas targets came as rocket sirens continued to blare throughout the night in Ashkelon and Beersheba, with two separate barrages being aimed at each city.
Senior Palestinian Islamic Jihad commander Hasam Abu Harbid was killed in an Israeli airstrike in the northern Gaza Strip Monday afternoon as rockets fired from the blockaded enclave continued to be fired towards southern Israel communities.
The IDF said that Abu-Harbid, who was killed in a joint operation with the Shin Bet intelligence services, commanded over the northern Gaza Strip division of the terror organization since 2019 when his predecessor Baha abu el-Atta was killed in a targeted assassination by the IDF
Abu-Harbid, who was a dominant operative in the group for the past 15 years, was behind the shooting, launching of rockets and anti-tank guided missiles that wounded Israeli civilians.
Following his killing, a salvo of rockets was launched towards Israeli communities near the border as well as Ashdod, Ashkelon and Beersheba.
Later on Monday, Israeli aircraft neutralized a squad of five Hamas operatives who were preparing to launch rockets into Israel, the IDF spokesperson reported on Monday afternoon.
Play Video
The IDF attack of the home of Hamas head Yayha Sinwar, May 16, 2021. (Credit: IDF Spokesperson"s Unit)
In addition, the spokesperson said IDF aircraft attacked another part of the Hamas' tunnels in the northern Gaza Strip, struck six underground rocket launching stations and 10 above-ground launching stations throughout the Gaza Strip.
IDF Spokesperson Brig.-Gen. Hidai Zilberman told reporters that shortly after the killing of Abu-Arbid, the military targeted a car near the Gazan beach in the northern sector of the Strip with operatives as well as an autonomous submersible naval vessel.
“We recognized preparations for a maritime attack,” Zilberman said, adding that the maritime vessel had been brought down to the beach and on its way to carry out “a terror attack in Israeli waters” when it was struck and totally destroyed. Several operatives who had been in the car were killed.
The IAF also hit hundreds of kilometers of Hamas’s “Metro” underground tunnel network for the third time overnight on Monday. Striking 15 kilometers of what it called the “C” line, the attack “was part of a broad operation by the IDF to significantly damage the underground system of terror organizations in Gaza,” it said.
Striking 15 kilometers of what it called the “C” line, the attack “was part of a broad operation by the IDF to significantly damage the underground system of terror organizations in Gaza,” it said.
The attack included 54 fighter jets that dropped some 110 precision munitions on 35 targets in 20 minutes.
IAF jets also hit nine residences they claim belonged to high ranking Hamas commanders that were used as terror infrastructure and to store weapons. The homes that were hit belonged to the Beit Hanoun battalion commander and of company commanders in Beit Hanoun, the Sabara battalion in Gaza City and the Shati battalion.
The IAF also struck military infrastructure used for command and control in the home of a Hamas operative responsible for military intelligence in Shejaiya.
The IDF also destroyed a tunnel in southern Gaza, the entrance to which was built near a kindergarten.
"This once again proves how Hamas purposely builds its military assets in the heart of civilian populations," the military said, adding that the "IDF has taken precautions to ensure minimizing damage to civilian population."
As the rockets continued to be launched, the IAF also destroyed the homes of Gaza Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar and his brother Muhammed, who is in charge of the logistics and manpower of Hamas, which “serve as significant terror infrastructure,” the IDF said in a statement.
The IAF also carried out airstrikes against several other homes, as well as the offices of Hamas Political Bureau's Planning and Development head Samah Sarag, the residence of the commander of the Hamas Zeitoun Battalion in Gaza City Youssef Abel-Wahab, and the residence of senior Hamas Military Intelligence official Ahmad Abd El Aal.
Dozens of weapon factories and storage sites in Tzabrah tel Aloha, Sheik Amodan and Gaza City were struck as well. The military says that those sites were located in the homes of Hamas naval and airborne operatives, anti-tank squads and offensive cyber units.
According to the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza, 181 people have been killed since the fighting began, including 52 children and 31 women. Another 1,200 have been injured.
ZILBERMAN ON SUNDAY deflected criticism of the military's actions in the Gaza Strip, particularly the bombing of the Al Jala building with media offices on Saturday.
“I want to see what would happen if one rocket was fired on Washington. They are firing salvos toward civilian populations,” Zilberman said when asked about the strike on the building that was home to the offices of the Associated Press and Al Jazeera in Gaza. “We are in the middle of an operation. If Hamas and PIJ think they can hide behind the media, their buildings are not something they can hide behind.”
The IDF said the building held the offices of Hamas’s military intelligence as well as other offices belonging to Palestinian Islamic Jihad. It has refused requests to reveal the evidence upon which it determined that Hamas was using the office building for terrorist activity, although it said that the US was shown the evidence and reportedly accepted it.
Expecting the fighting to continue for several more days, Zilberman warned the Israeli public to continue to seek shelter when rocket sirens are activated.
According to the spokesman, Hamas spent tens of millions of dollars on constructing this strategic asset.
“Every meter of the tunnel cost around $500 [so] one kilometer cost half a million dollars,” he said. “You can imagine what else they could have spent the money on.”
Since the beginning of operation "Guardian of the Walls," approximately 3,150 rockets have been fired from the Gaza Strip at Israeli territory as of 7:00 a.m. on Monday, of which about 460 failed launches fell in the Gaza Strip.
The Iron Dome Air Defense System has intercepted most of the rockets that would have hit populated areas in Israel, with an intercept rate of approximately 90%.
Zilberman said that the military will continue to strike this system in the coming days, as well as the multi-barreled rocket launchers that are being used by the terror groups to launch salvos towards the Jewish state.
The IDF has hit 40-45 of these launchers, which have between four and nine medium- long-range rockets that can be fired every second.
While the IAF has begun to take out these launchers over the past 36 hours, the Israeli public won’t see its effect for some time, Zilberman said.
The Jerusalem Post Staff contributed to this report.

Responsibility for the Latest Upsurge in Arab-Israeli Violence Goes to US President Joe Biden
Con Coughlin/Gatestone Institute/May 17/2021
Even Mr Trump's harshest critics had to concede that, when it came to the Middle East, the Trump era had been a success.
Prior to the latest eruption of hostilities between Israel and Palestinian militants, Mr Biden's only notable intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian issue had been to restore hundreds of millions of dollars in American aid to the Palestinians, thereby reversing the Trump administration's decision to cut aid to the Palestinian Authority over its refusal to maintain a dialogue with Washington.
Now, with Palestinian militants once more targeting Israeli civilian areas with rockets and missiles, the folly of Mr Biden's ill-advised approach to the Middle East has been exposed.... Indeed, the extent of Iran's military support for Palestinian militants was revealed by an official with the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist organisation who boasted last week: "The rockets we use to pound Tel Aviv, our weapons, and our food are provided by Iran."
Mr Biden's comment, made following a telephone discussion with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last week, that he expected the violence to end "sooner rather than later" certainly seemed to be more an expression of wishful thinking than a realistic assessment of events unfolding on the ground in Israel and the Palestinian territories.
Full responsibility for the latest upsurge in Arab-Israeli violence goes to US President Joe Biden as a result of the policies of appeasement and capitulation he has pursued in the Middle East. (Photo by T.J. Kirkpatrick/Pool/Getty Images)
Full responsibility for the latest upsurge in Arab-Israeli violence goes to US President Joe Biden as a result of the policies of appeasement and capitulation he has pursued in the Middle East.
When Mr Biden took office in January, the Middle East was enjoying one of its rare moments of optimism, mainly due to the successful approach adopted by his predecessor, President Donald J. Trump.
The Trump administration achieved a number of undisputed policy successes in the region, which included persuading several Arab and Muslim countries -- the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, Kosovo and Morocco -- to sign the Abraham Accords with Israel, thereby bringing decades of hostility to an end. In addition the Islamist supporters of ISIS were completely routed as a result of the US-led military coalition's destruction of their so-called Caliphate, while Iran's ability to undermine political stability in the Middle East had been severely curbed by the Trump administration's punitive sanctions against the regime. Even Mr Trump's harshest critics had to concede that, when it came to the Middle East, the Trump era had been a success.
Rather than building on the promising legacy he inherited from his predecessor, however, Mr Biden has instead sought to distance himself from the achievements of the Trump administration.
Prior to the latest eruption of hostilities between Israel and Palestinian militants, Mr Biden's only notable intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian issue had been to restore hundreds of millions of dollars in American aid to the Palestinians, thereby reversing the Trump administration's decision to cut aid to the Palestinian Authority over its refusal to maintain a dialogue with Washington.
Mr Biden's primary preoccupation in the Middle East has instead been to revive the flawed nuclear deal with Iran, a move which has resulted in the resumption of talks with Iranian officials in Vienna.
The renewed diplomatic negotiations over Iran's nuclear programme have taken place despite the fact the Iranian regime remains in violation of the terms of the nuclear deal agreed by President Barack Obama.
In particular Iran has continued to enrich uranium to a level well beyond that agreed in the nuclear deal to the level just below the threshold required for producing weapons-grade material, prompting fears that Tehran has resumed work on its clandestine nuclear weapons programme.
There are also mounting concerns that the Biden administration's decision to ease financial constraints on both the Palestinians and Tehran has enabled Iran to increase its military support for Hamas militants in Gaza.
Security sources, who asked not to be named, believe that Iran has been providing Hamas with military assistance for at least five years. The cooperation includes training in weapons production and operation, with Hamas militants travelling to Iran frequently to undertake specialist training, as well as visiting Iranian missile production facilities.
Iran's relations with Hamas are overseen by the elite Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, who share knowledge on Iranian missile production with their Hamas counterparts. Israeli military officials believe the close cooperation between Iran and Hamas has helped the Palestinian terrorist organisation to increase the range and effectiveness of the missiles and rockets that have been fired at Israeli towns and cities in recent days.
In such circumstances it is hardly surprising, therefore, that critics of Mr Biden's approach have led to accusations that he is appeasing Tehran in his desperation to revive the nuclear agreement.
Now, with Palestinian militants once more targeting Israeli civilian areas with rockets and missiles, the folly of Mr Biden's ill-advised approach to the Middle East has been exposed.
Many of the hundreds of missiles being fired at targets in Israel are based on the design of Iranian missiles. Indeed, the extent of Iran's military support for Palestinian militants was revealed by an official with the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist organisation who boasted last week: "The rockets we use to pound Tel Aviv, our weapons, and our food are provided by Iran."
Consequently, at the same time as the Biden administration has been trying to revive negotiations with Iran over its nuclear programme, it now transpires that Tehran has been actively supporting Palestinian terror groups as they prepared to launch their devastating assault on Israel.
The resulting violence between Israel and Palestinian militants is certainly deeply embarrassing for Mr Biden who, having sought to distance himself from the Israeli-Palestinian issue, now finds himself forced to intervene to prevent further bloodshed.
Indeed, it is now claimed that, in recent months, several pro-Western Arab governments tried to warn the Biden administration over growing tensions in Jerusalem, but they received no response from Biden officials because of their reluctance to engage on the issue.
The result is that Mr Biden now finds himself desperately looking for ways to end the violence, although his response to date has been less than convincing.
Mr Biden's comment, made following a telephone discussion with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last week, that he expected the violence to end "sooner rather than later" certainly seemed to be more an expression of wishful thinking than a realistic assessment of events unfolding on the ground in Israel and the Palestinian territories.
Certainly, if Mr Biden is really serious about ending the violence, then his time would be better spent consolidating Mr Trump's impressive Middle East legacy than wasting his energy on trying to appease the ayatollahs in Tehran.
*Con Coughlin is the Telegraph's Defence and Foreign Affairs Editor and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
© 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.

Time to end Iran’s nuclear blackmail
Dr. Mohammed Al-Sulami/Arab News/May 17/2021
Iran’s recent decision to further violate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action’s (JCPOA) uranium enrichment limit coincided with its plan to limit its nuclear inspection obligations to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Since January, Iran has produced about 65 kg of 20 percent highly enriched uranium (HEU), which can be turned into weapons-grade quality within a few weeks. Iran is way past its pre-JCPOA enrichment stockpiles in qualitative terms, while quickly amassing further quantities. With the country capable of producing nine grams of HEU per hour, President Hassan Rouhani has boasted that Iran is capable of enriching up to 90 percent purity.
Why should the world worry that Tehran is taking all these steps in a blatant manner? Iran has significantly reduced its breakout time and is dashing toward developing a nuclear bomb.
It is telling how Iran claims that it is invincible amid multifaceted threats and crises. It recently announced its alleged ability to not only reactivate the Natanz uranium enrichment facilities soon, but also produce HEU up to 60 percent purity through two cascades of more advanced centrifuges. This morale-raising announcement reflects Iran’s national pride and the importance of its nuclear program. More than a sign of capability, the announcement is an expression of a strategic objective.
The Iranian regime’s narrative of safeguarding national sovereignty and national pride does not take into account the pain inflicted by layers of sanctions imposed on the country by the US and the UN alike. Instead of being subdued, the religious establishment doubles down by adopting an aggressive posture of defiance: The more Iran is attacked and cornered, the more resilient, reactive and aggressive it will become. The US withdrawal from the JCPOA has exposed Iran’s strategic ambitions, confirming earlier assessments about its aspirations.
In its 50-year-long history, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has not proven to be a thumping success. The IAEA safeguards failed to uncover nuclear weapon programs in Iraq, Libya and South Africa. Taiwan repeatedly dodged the world with its covert nuclear program until it was eventually caught and signed the NPT. The additional safeguard system of the IAEA was put in place to inspect and verify a range of sites and employ new sets of sampling methods, but the protocol is not mandatory. As feared in the case of Iran, an aspiring nuclear country can reach a level of threat while satisfying the IAEA’s safeguard merits. Some states, like Iran, question the preferential treatment given to certain other countries in relation to enriching and managing radioactive uranium without considering their own transparency and political commitment to non-proliferation. Tehran has admitted to having a covert nuclear program before dismantling it. Despite their technological advancements due to their vast industrial base, Japan and Sweden, for instance, have acted firmly against the pursuit of nuclear weapons.
The swift decision to raise uranium enrichment up to 60 percent is evidently similar to the track followed by North Korea while being an NPT signatory. It is a separate debate if Pyongyang acquired nuclear weapons while being an NPT signatory or after exiting the treaty. Unlike Iran, North Korea does not have an expansionist and disruptive ideology.
The other question at hand is no less important: What can Iran achieve with HEU if it does not pursue a nuclear program? The NPT does not prohibit the use of nuclear energy (through smaller reactors) in submarines and ships. Hence, Tehran can remain a member of the NPT but continue to develop sophisticated nuclear reactors and amass HEU to power its submarines and, at some stage, large battleships. The IAEA forbids any use of nuclear propulsion or energy in weapon systems beyond the realm of peaceful use, so none of Iran’s missiles can be powered by small nuclear reactors, even if Tehran is able to overcome the mammoth technological challenges that even the US, Russia and China are attempting to get the better of.
The decision to raise the bar for HEU during the Vienna talks perfectly sums up Iran’s nuclear desperation. Instead of choosing to take the moral high ground at the negotiation table, it opted to justify its “victimhood” with another massive breach of the nuclear deal — the deal the meetings are intended to amend.
It is noteworthy that US policy over the last four years, coupled with Iran’s ongoing belligerency, has created a complex quagmire for global nuclear diplomacy. Since the signing of the nuclear deal in 2015, Iran’s nuclear enrichment and development activities have continued, while the deal’s sunset provision dates are fast approaching. The US returning to the JCPOA and Iran’s full compliance will not roll back the gains Tehran has made. Hence, a tense and complicated negotiation process will ensue. In the case of Washington and Tehran sticking firmly to their respective positions, the nuclear deal will be destined for the dustbin of history. In such an eventuality, not only would Iran be capable of enriching weapons-grade uranium, but it might be just a few weeks away from actually doing so.
While there appears to be much hype among the Khomeinists for defiant policies, some people are defecting due to the regime’s high-handed oppression and irrational policies. The low-profile community of defectors continues to leak vital information, while having the courage to carry out high-risk operations, ranging from smuggling the Stuxnet virus into Natanz to stealing a tranche of secret documents and smuggling them out of the country. It is also believed that these defectors informed a foreign agency about the late Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani’s whereabouts, helped to plant a sophisticated bomb to assassinate Iran’s key nuclear scientist, and transported explosives into Natanz, the highly secure uranium enrichment facility. The most recent explosion inside Natanz was not a quick sabotage act, but was meticulously timed for the day after Iran activated its more advanced centrifuges. It does not seem far-fetched to believe that some defectors might be willing to provide enriched uranium to terrorist groups in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon or elsewhere. After all, the history of smuggling radioactive material is closely tied to Iran. When the motive is not money, it is revenge.
The decision to raise the bar for highly enriched uranium during the Vienna talks perfectly sums up Iran’s nuclear desperation.
The Vienna talks must not appease Iran for its belligerent behavior. The forum must rightfully address the elephant in the room: Iran’s destabilizing and rogue behavior in the Middle East and beyond. US President Joe Biden might be keen to shift his administration’s geopolitical focus to China, but this must not happen by acting irresponsibly in one of the world’s most strategic and economically important regions. The White House must consider the risks of a covert Iranian nuclear program; its stockpiling of HEU under the NPT umbrella; increasing Iranian knowhow in designing and developing newer centrifuges; the prospect of Tehran creating smaller reactors; and, last but not least, its long-range, high-speed and heavy payload-carrying ballistic and cruise missiles. The US returning to the JCPOA against the backdrop of such Iranian aggression would further undermine the spirit of the flawed nuclear deal, which Iran’s neighbors have not found comforting.
*Dr. Mohammed Al-Sulami is President of the International Institute for Iranian Studies (Rasanah). Twitter: @mohalsulami

Israel-Gaza conflict only serves to benefit Hamas, Iran, Israeli far-right
Nadim Shehadi/Al Arabiya/17 May ,2021
The current war between Israel and Hamas is a victory for both Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” and benefits Israel’s far-right. It cannot end well for Israel, and comes at the expense of Palestinian lives, and regional peace processes.
Hamas has won this war even before it ends. It is a victory against Hamas’ Palestinian and Arab rivals, who sought peace through negotiations. Israel gifted this to Hamas by giving it the opportunity to take the moral high ground, Israel lost because it has no options itself for a good outcome.
As it stands Israel cannot stop bombing Gaza, that would be capitulation. It also cannot continue bombing Gaza, there is a limit to how many people Israel can kill with no clear objective. Killing for the sake of killing is not a strategy. Israel’s friends in the region are humiliated, its enemies triumphant. Someone needs to save Israel from itself.
Wars can result in moral and political victories even when accompanied by military defeats. The 1956 Suez War is a prime example. Gamal Abdel Nasser emerged much stronger after losing the war, and regimes dominated by colonels emulating his model of Arab nationalism sprang up throughout the region.
This is also reminiscent of the summer of 2006, when a war in Gaza was provoked by Hamas abducting an Israeli soldier and resembles the 2006 Lebanon war – triggered by Hezbollah crossing the border and the associated killing of eight Israeli soldiers and abduction of a further two. Both were accompanied by rocket attacks that caused panic in Israel, shutting down the airport and sending terrorized Israeli citizens to underground shelters amid the sound of sirens.
Israel fell into the trap on both occasions and reacted with what is euphemistically described as disproportionate violence. Both Gaza and Lebanon suffered huge destruction and civilian casualties. Hamas and Hezbollah, however, proved that armed resistance can achieve what years of negotiations could not: Israel was later forced to release hundreds of prisoners and the paralysis caused by the rocket attacks was seen as a deterrent.
Today, the optics could not have been worse for Israel. Refugees are being publicly evicted and replaced by Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem. At the center of this conflict is the Arab neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, where most of the city’s foreign consulates are located.
It is also difficult to imagine worse timing. On one of the holiest evenings of the month of Ramadan, the Israeli army stormed the al-Aqsa mosque and shot at people during prayers. Palestinians had been protesting a ban against gathering in public places, such as the Damascus Gate of the old city, during the festive evenings.The backdrop also includes an annual hate march by Israelis chanting anti-Arab slogans. This was Israel at its worse, resuscitating memories of the 1948 Nakba, a few days before its anniversary. It triggered an unprecedented wave of protests by Palestinian citizens of Israel in major cities from Lydda to Jaffa and Acre.
This was too good an opportunity to miss. Hamas gave Israel an ultimatum that Israel was obviously going to disregard and attacked with more sophisticated missiles than ever before. For the Israelis it was like a recurring nightmare, with sirens, shelters, and civilian casualties. Worst of all, Israel reacted predictably with brute force, with air raids and bombings causing heavy civilian casualties.
At the same time Hamas proceeded to declare itself the protector of the al-Aqsa mosque, the savior of refugees, and called for their right of return, all while riding the spreading wave of protests by Palestinian citizens across Israel. This was all eloquently articulated by Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, who reiterated that armed resistance is the only path to protection, and shamed both the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), and the Palestinian authority for achieving nothing through years of negotiations. He also discredited the recent Abraham Accords of normalization of relations between Arab countries and Israel, and went on a fundraising tour of Qatar and Kuwait.
For Hamas this was a win-win scenario, using the same logic as that of Iran-backed Hezbollah: That the arms of the resistance are the only protection against Israeli aggression. Its message was further legitimized by a flood of dramatic videos circulating all over the media. One showed a woman calmly pleading with a settler to give her back her home in Sheikh Jarrah. Others had apocalyptic scenes of trees catching fire around the al-Aqsa Mosque, and of soldiers attacking protestors and overturning food carts.
While Hamas may have achieved all its objectives even while the battle is still raging, it is difficult to imagine what Israel’s options are to end the war with tangible results. Israel cannot stop its operations, nor can it continue without defining achievable goals. This is the same situation if found itself in the Lebanon war of 2006 with only lose-lose scenarios.
This is also a war that affects elections on both sides. It may benefit both Hamas and Prime Minister Netanyahu. It is a perfect illustration of how radicals feed on each other and their actions mutually validate and legitimize their positions. For the far-right in Israel, it is in their interest to portray Palestinians as all being Hamas terrorists with whom negotiations are impossible. Similarly for Hamas, a figure like Netanyahu confirms that armed struggle is the only option, and that the PLO’s agenda of peace is unachievable and does not provide any protection against Israeli aggression. War ultimately benefits the warmongers and gets them votes by discrediting their internal opponents.
This could have broader regional repercussions, embarrassing the signatories of the Abraham Accords. It is a setback to any possible peace in the region. Iran and the Axis of Resistance win again, and it is a boost for Iran-backed militias in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and of course Palestine. Israel with its actions may have given them all a new lease of life.
There is, however, a major difference with the summer wars of 2006. Those with the highest stakes in this game are now from a new generation, and their aspirations are for that of a better future. They are protesting across the region against the establishment that has kept them in a state of war for over 70 years. Palestinian protests are part of that, they deserve better leadership.