LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
August 25/17
Compiled &
Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias/english.august25.17.htm
News
Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to go to the LCCC Daily English/Arabic News Buletins Archieves Since
2016
Bible Quotations For
Today
What
should I compare the kingdom of God? It is like yeast that a woman took and
mixed in with three measures of flour until all of it was leavened
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 13/18-21/:"He said
therefore, ‘What is the kingdom of God like? And to what should I compare it? It
is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in the garden; it grew and
became a tree, and the birds of the air made nests in its branches.’And again he
said, ‘To what should I compare the kingdom of God? It is like yeast that a
woman took and mixed in with three measures of flour until all of it was
leavened.’"
It is for the sake of the
hope of Israel that I am bound with this chain.’
Acts of the Apostles 28/16-22/:"When we came into Rome, Paul was allowed to live
by himself, with the soldier who was guarding him. Three days later he called
together the local leaders of the Jews. When they had assembled, he said to
them, ‘Brothers, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of
our ancestors, yet I was arrested in Jerusalem and handed over to the Romans.
When they had examined me, the Romans wanted to release me, because there was no
reason for the death penalty in my case. But when the Jews objected, I was
compelled to appeal to the emperor even though I had no charge to bring against
my nation. For this reason therefore I have asked to see you and speak with you,
since it is for the sake of the hope of Israel that I am bound with this chain.’
They replied, ‘We have received no letters from Judea about you, and none of the
brothers coming here has reported or spoken anything evil about you. But we
would like to hear from you what you think, for with regard to this sect we know
that everywhere it is spoken against.’"
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources
published on August 24-25/17
Bashir Gemayel is A Dream That Will Never Die/Elias
Bejjani/August 23/17
Liberman and Bennett: Israel must safeguard own security against Iranian
presence in Syria/Ynetnews/August 24/17
Iran, not so far away/Giora Eiland/Ynetnews/August 24/17
Afghanistan has just stumped another President/Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/August
24/17
Trump, Bannon and the Republican party/Mamdouh AlMuhaini/Al Arabiya/August 24/17
Science and the ‘sinful’ eclipse/Nawar Fakhry Ezzi/Al Arabiya/August 24/17
Nothing but hammer in Trump’s Afghanistan toolbox/Walid Jawad/Al Arabiya/August
24/17
"It is Our Very Existence That is Unbearable to Jihadists"/Giulio Meotti/Gatestone
Institute/August 24/17
Strides in the Struggle for an Independent Kurdistan/Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone
Institute/August 24/17
Qatar Bans its Pilgrims, Saudi Arabia Welcomes them/Salman Al-dossary/August
24/17
Terror in Spain Shows ISIS Is Down not Out/Tobin Harshaw/Asharq Al Awsat/August
24/17
Titles For Latest LCCC Lebanese Related News published on August 24-25/17
Bashir Gemayel is A Dream That Will Never Die
Nasrallah: Hizbullah, Syrian Army Committed to Negotiating with IS on Captive
Lebanese Troops
Nasrallah promises Army Command, families of military abductees not to accept
any solution beyond revealing their sons' fate
UNIFIL Pushes Back after U.S., Israeli Criticism
Cabinet Approves Power Ships Book of Terms, Sends It to Tenders Administration
Army Advances on Last IS-Held Area, Braces for Possibly Tough Battle
Calm Engulfs Ain el-Hilweh after Palestinian Force Deployment
Aoun Moves to Beiteddine Summer Seat, Chairs Cabinet Session
Geagea, Sabhan meet
Berri meets Abu Faour, Ambassadors
Army continues to target Daesh posts, leaves behind casualties
Macron cables Jumblatt: France will continue to support Lebanon's sovereignty,
unity and stability
Future bloc meeting highlights Army's exclusive battle against terrorists
Jumblat Visits Former Ally Hariri to Mend Ties
Paris Sees No Need to Revise UNIFIL Mandate as U.N. Reportedly Snubs U.S.
Request
LIVE Day 6: Army to push on at right time: Aoun
Text of UN Resolution 1701
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports
And News published on August 24-25/17
Dutch Arrest Man after Concert Canceled over Terror Tip
Iran, Saudi to Exchange Diplomatic Visits
Bahrain dismantles cell of 10 people plotting terror operation
Iraq ministry confirms 20 sailors dead after ship sinks
Qatar envoy back in Tehran to strengthen bilateral ties
New US Afghan plan a 'futile course': Russia's Lavrov
EU citizens leaving UK pushes down net migration after Brexit vote
Latest Lebanese Related News
published on
August 24-25/17
Bashir Gemayel is A Dream That Will Never Die
Elias Bejjani/August 23/17
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=58062
It is a historical fact that patriotic, national, religious causes cannot be
killed by assassinating their founders or those who lobby for them. In fact, the
contrary usually happens.
History shows that major worldwide religions spread after the departure of their
founding leaders. Christianity, for example, spread all over the world after the
crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The Pharisees crucified Jesus, believing his death
would put an end to his new religion. They were disappointed, and Christianity
became the number one religion in the whole world. Luke 12:4 in the Holy Bible
reads, “Don’t be afraid of those who kill the body and can do nothing more.”
On August 23/1982, following in the steps of the Pharisees, Lebanon’s
collaborators joined by some regional tyrants deluded themselves into believing
that assassinating President-elect Sheik Bashir Gemayel, would also kill the
Lebanese cause. They thought killing Bashir would destroy Lebanon’s history and
identity, and sever the Lebanese from their roots.
What happened 2000 years ago, happened again in a way. History repeated itself
and the contemporary Pharisees were no more lucky than the Pharisees of the
Christ era.
Today the Lebanese cause is known worldwide and every day more Lebanese
everywhere are committing themselves to it in spite of the hardships and
difficulties.
On the annual anniversary of Bachir’s election as Lebanon’s president on August
23/1982, we renew our vows and declare again our commitment to Bashir’s cause
and dream, to our national Lebanese identity, to liberation, to basic dignity
and to holy resistance against the occupation.
Bashir’s cause is not dead. It cannot die, will never die as long as one
Lebanese remains committed to Bashir’s patriotic beliefs and loyalty to Lebanon,
to 7000 years of history and civilization … Lebanon the 10452 km2.
Bashir’s national dream for Lebanon is not dead, for no criminal can kill dreams
about freedom. Dreams are acts of intellectual imaging and portrayal of
aspirations, objectives and hopes that people endeavour to fulfill in reality.
Bashir’s dream is alive in the hearts and spirits of every patriotic Lebanese
all over the world.
Our deep-rooted Lebanese identity is unique.
It was carved by our faithful ancestors in Lebanon’s mighty mountains and
planted with sweat and blood in its holy soil throughout six thousand years of
heroism and sacrifices. Generation after generation, Lebanese have built Lebanon
and made it into a fort and oasis for freedom, and an asylum for the
persecuted…. Lebanon may not be a big country, but it is big in deeds.
For 7000 years Lebanon was successful in surviving with dignity, through
hundreds of invaders, tyrants and conquerors…all were forced to depart defamed
and in humiliation, defamed.
Bashir gave our identity worldwide dimension and made it a cause and purpose for
each and every Lebanese.
Lebanon’s liberation is the aim of every patriotic Lebanese.
Virtues of dignity and resistance are known characteristics for Lebanon and its
people.
They are deeply rooted in Lebanon’s holy soil and in the Lebanese minds, spirits
and conscience, as well as in their noble conduct and faith.
Bashir portrayed and personified wisdom, patriotic conduct, courage, national
devotion and leadership traits, all the distinctive Lebanese virtues.
He carried the liberation torch, and never abandoned the Lebanese cause, and
became its martyr.
Bashir Gemayel scared those who feared truth, justice and sainthood.
He frightened collaborators, traitors and those who never believed in Lebanon’s
history and identity.
Bashir was a nightmare for all Lebanon’s enemies when he was alive, and still is
years after his assassination.
Sheik Bashir, Sheik Bashir, 35 years after your departure, you are still in our
conscience and hearts.
Your dream is still our dream, and we are still fighting for the same cause.
Lebanon is still occupied and the 10452 km2 are not yet liberated. But in spite
of all hardships and difficulties, the torch that you carried is still held
high, and the battle rages.
By God’s will, the fight will not cease before the complete liberation of our
Lebanon, the Lebanon that you loved, cherished and worshipped.
Bashir, Bashir, you are alive. When the Pharisee’s murdered you, only your flesh
passed away. And in that moment your sanctified image was burned forever into
the hearts of your people.
Your heroism was sealed.
Bashir, you speak to the conscience of every Lebanese who believes in Lebanon
and its people. You live on in us, and in our blessed heritage.
Long Live Free Lebanon.
*This article was first published in year 2000. This above copy is slightly
modified
Nasrallah: Hizbullah, Syrian Army Committed to Negotiating
with IS on Captive Lebanese Troops
Naharnet/August 24/17/Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah
announced Thursday that his group and the Syrian army are committed to
negotiating over the captive Lebanese troops in any talks with the jihadist
Islamic State group that is currently facing offensives on both sides of the
Lebanese-Syrian border. “The Syrian army and Hizbullah have committed themselves
to have the issue of the captive troops as the first item in any negotiations
with IS. We are not acting as if there are two fronts but rather only one,
contrary to some in Lebanon,” said Nasrallah in a televised speech on the latest
developments. “The Lebanese Army Command and the families of the servicemen
should be reassured that we won't accept to overlook the case of the troops,” he
added. He noted that the Syrian leadership “will contribute positively to the
success of any agreement with IS, but it wants a request for public
coordination” from the Lebanese state. “Hizbullah fights for the Lebanese and
Syrians, because we believe that the battle cannot be segregated or
partitioned,” Nasrallah pointed out. As for the developments on the ground,
Nasrallah revealed that Hizbullah liberated 20 square kilometers of Lebanese
territory from IS' hands at the beginning of the Lebanese army's Operation Dawn
of the Outskirts. Lauding the Lebanese army's ongoing offensive against the
militants, Nasrallah said the military “did a delicate and professional job over
the past few days with the least casualty toll and material losses.”“Over 270
square kilometers have been liberated on the Syrian side of the border and only
40 square kilometers remain in IS' hands,” he added. Nasrallah also pointed out
that “the militants are very confused and are seeking any settlement and this is
intelligence information.”“But IS' leadership is not concerned with the exit of
its fighters from the region and it wants them to be killed, and this is also
intelligence information,” he added. “We will have a new victory and liberation
day and a new confirmation of the (army-people-resistance) golden equation,”
Nasrallah went on to say.
Nasrallah promises Army Command, families of military
abductees not to accept any solution beyond revealing their sons' fate
Thu 24 Aug 2017 /NNA - The Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan
Nasrallah, tackled on Thursday the latest developments on the scene, sending
heartfelt tribute to the fighters who are putting their lives in jeopardy on the
battle fronts on the Lebanese-Syrian border, thus saluting "the Lebanese Army,
the Syrian Army and the Resistance fighters, especially the martyrs and the
wounded among them.""The headlines around which the battle revolves are, on one
hand, the Lebanese dimension which consists of expulsing Daesh from the entire
Lebanese territory; from Arsal, al-Qaa and Ras Baalbek, as well as securing the
Lebanese-Syrian border, which requires sending Daesh away into the Syrian
territory so as to no longer pose a threat to the Lebanese Army," he said,
assuring that Daesh's further spread at the border would deplete the LAF and its
forces along the borderline.
"The goal is also to reveal the fate of the kidnapped soldiers," Nasrallah
stressed as well. "On the Syrian level, the target is to regain control over the
entire Western Qalamoun and end the existence of Daesh there, after mountains
and hills on the Syrian side of the border formed a threat to the Lebanese
towns, the Syrian inside and the Damascus-Homs road. When Daesh is defeated in
West Qalamoun, Homs is safe again," he said.
"The Resistance is fighting with both dimensions in mind. It is making
sacrifices out of belief in the non-division of the battle."Tackling the course
of the fight so far, the Hezbollah secretary-general said "After the marginal
work on Saturday, the Army command announced the beginning of Fajr El-Jouroud
operation. Simultaneously, an operation (...) was launched by the Resistance on
the Syrian side. What has thus far been achieved on both sides is of major
importance given the difficult geographic area and the presumed nature of the
enemy, Daesh.""The Army Command has announced the liberation of 100 km of land,
with only twenty kilometers left to battle for," he said, praising "the work of
the LAF and what it achieved at the lowest possible cost and with utmost
efficiency."He said that Daesh militants were now trapped inside a vast
operations area between Lebanon and Syria, noting that there is a precise count
of the number of militants and civilians in that besieged area. Sayyed Nasrallah
praised the psychological state of mind of the Syrian Army and the Resistance on
the fronts, and their deep-rooted belief in victory," pointing out that "it is
only a matter of time [before the battle ends]," and calling "not to set time
limits for this battle."
"The narrower the battle area, the bigger the cost, because of the presence of
civilians (...) and because Daesh uses those civilians as human shields, like it
did in Iraq."
"The Syrian leadership and the Resistance confirm that there will be no
commitment to negotiations with Daesh unless it is tied to revealing the fate of
the Lebanese soldiers abducted by the group," he announced, stressing that "the
resistance acts as though the battle was one; and on one front," promising the
Army Command and the families of the kidnapped "not to accept any solution
beyond revealing the fate of the kidnapped Lebanese military personnel."He
revealed thereon "the responsiveness of the Syrian leadership, as we were told,
but in accordance with cooperation with the Lebanese government in the next
phase."
The Sayyed explained that "the Resistance is negotiating without coordination or
mandate from the Lebanese government, apart from formalities.""We are most
likely headed towards ending it [the battle] militarily, and the reason behind
that is the mentality of the Daesh leadership abroad, unlike the group's
leadership in Qalamoun which tends towards seeking negotiation." Addressing the
Lebanese people, Nasrallah said "You are on the verge of a new victory that you
should be proud of. When this victory is achieved, we will have a
Lebanese-Syrian border safe from terrorists."
He promised to delve later into the details that reveal those who truly favored
sovereignty and thus wanted the battle to happen, and those who did not, hoping
to "overcome some of the ambiguities around this issue."Calling on some media
outlets not to surrender to foreign [US] threats that poured at them following
the coverage they provided to the Arsal battle led by Hezbollah, Nasrallah told
those outlets that failing to cover the western Qalamoun battle and everything
going on at the Syrian side of the border would strip them off of their
credibility. "This great achievement (...) is one of the results of the golden
Army-people-Resistance formula, added to it the Syrian Army," he said,
disregarding those who might be offended by his words. "The integration between
the Lebanese and Syrian fronts is what accelerated the achievement of victory.
(...) The second Liberation Day would be the day when the Lebanese-Syrian
borders are completely freed from the hegemony of the Takfiri terrorists. This
day must be in 2017, but the month and day are to be set later," he concluded.
UNIFIL Pushes Back after U.S., Israeli Criticism
Associated Press/Naharnet/August 24/17/The head of U.N. peacekeepers in Lebanon
is pushing back after U.S. and Israeli criticism of the mission, saying that his
force has no evidence that weapons are being illegally transferred and
stockpiled in the Hizbullah-dominated south. Maj. Gen. Michael Beary defended
the 10,500-strong force as the U.S. and France publicly disagreed about whether
its mandate, which expires on Aug. 31, should be beefed up to tackle Hizbullah.
U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said in a statement coinciding with Wednesday's
closed U.N. Security Council consultations on the force, known as UNIFIL, that
Hizbullah openly boasts about its weapons stockpile and publicly threatens the
destruction of neighboring Israel. "The Security Council cannot adopt a
business-as-usual approach when so much is at stake," she said. "We call on the
members of the Security Council to join us in taking real action to make UNIFIL
a stronger peacekeeping mission and to stand up against forces of terror in
Lebanon and around the region." But France's deputy U.N. ambassador Anne Guegen,
whose country is in charge of drafting the council resolution renewing the
mandate, told reporters that "it is of paramount importance for the stability of
Lebanon and the region, and in the best interest of all, that UNIFIL keeps its
mandate and is in a position to fulfill it, with the full backing and confidence
of the Security Council."
"Though the situation has remained generally calm in the south, it is also still
very fragile and volatile," she said, and all parties must uphold their
commitment to a 2004 Security Council resolution ordering all Lebanese armed
groups, including Hizbullah, to disarm and calling for the Lebanese army to
extend its authority throughout the south. Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vassily
Nebenzia told reporters after the council's discussion that the mandate should
be renewed in its present form, noting that the Lebanese government has not
asked for a change in the mandate. Asked whether there was support for the U.S.
proposal to change the mandate, he replied: "I think the majority of those who
spoke supported the renewal of the mandate as it is now."
Beary, the Irish commander who leads UNIFIL, said it has successfully maintained
the peace for more than a decade, and prevented major "misunderstandings" from
erupting between Israel and Hizbullah. "We should not be looking to upset that,"
he told The Associated Press on Wednesday aboard the Brazilian flagship for the
UNIFIL maritime force. He said his force's mandate is "viable" and has enabled
his mission to deploy south of the Litani river and along most of the
110-kilometer (68-mile) frontier between Israel and Lebanon. It also allows for
patrols and helicopter reconnaissance missions. On Wednesday, UNIFIL's Maritime
Task Force carried out a joint training exercise with the Lebanese army,
simulating an interception at sea of a ship carrying contraband. Lebanese
soldiers swooped aboard the UNIAO from a helicopter, and others boarded from two
inflatable boats to seize the illegal shipment and arrest the crew members as
UNIFIL and Lebanese officials watched. "I have no evidence, nor have I been
provided with any evidence of weapons transfers into my area of operations,"
which is confined to southern Lebanon, Beary said. "We are extremely active in
the area and if there was a large cache of weapons, we would know about it" he
added. UNIFIL is not deployed along the border with Syria. Iran is suspected of
shipping weapons to Hizbullah through Syria, where the militant group is
fighting alongside President Bashar Assad's forces. Israel has targeted
suspected convoys there with airstrikes.
Israel's Ambassador to the U.N. Danny Danon told the AP that U.N. forces should
have an increased presence in their area of operations, with more patrols and
without any restrictions on its movements. He also said the mission should be
gathering "real-time updates" about violations, saying it is often last to
report them. "If Hizbullah is able to turn civilian border towns into terrorist
outposts and increase their hostile activities along our border — all while
UNIFIL is stationed nearby — then it should be obvious to the Security Council
that significant changes are needed in the mandate," Danon said. Rear Admiral
Sergio Fernando de Amaral Chaves Jr., the commander of the maritime force, the
U.N.'s first and only naval unit, said his forces have helped deter smugglers
and improve the conditions for Lebanon's maritime economy since it deployed in
2006. He said no weapons smuggling through sea has been reported since 2012,
when in cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces, two attempts to bring arms
into Lebanon through ports were foiled.
"We are here patrolling. Helping to establish the security environment... this
is our big contribution," Chaves said.
Cabinet Approves Power Ships Book of Terms, Sends It to
Tenders Administration
Naharnet/August 24/17/The Cabinet on Thursday approved the booklet of terms and
conditions pertaining to the leasing of new power generation ships after
introducing a few amendments, referring it to the tenders administration.
President Michel Aoun said “the electricity booklet of terms was approved as
desired by the Council of Ministers.”“The deadline for submitting bids was
extended from two weeks to three weeks,” Minister Enaya Ezzeddine of the AMAL
Movement said. Minister Hussein al-Hajj Hassan of Hizbullah for his part said
“the debate was positive and all remarks were taken into consideration.” Foreign
Minister Jebran Bassil meanwhile said: “I don't want to take part in the 'lying
party' between what they say inside and what they say outside.”Several parties
had slammed the conduct of Energy Minister Cesar Abi Khalil regarding the
bidding process, arguing that it lacked transparency.
Army Advances on Last IS-Held Area, Braces for Possibly
Tough Battle
Naharnet/August 24/17/The army was on Thursday advancing on the last Islamic
State-held area in the outskirts of the eastern border town of Ras Baalbek, amid
relative calm on the fighting frontiers. Army units are continuing to dismantle
landmines, LBCI television reported. “The army has reached a number of border
points with Syria, except for the area surrounding the Mirtbayya valley, where
the IS militants who have not fled to Syria are gathered,” sources told al-Joumhouria
newspaper in remarks published Thursday. “The army forces that have reached the
border have not yet detected or met with any fighters from the Syrian army or
the other forces. The army will stop at the border and will not advance a single
inch inside Syrian territory,” the sources added. Military sources told the same
daily that the fourth stage of Operation Dawn of the Outskirts is expected to be
“the most dangerous.” “It involves liberating 20 square kilometers where a
number of terrorists are thought to be hiding... All options are on the table
and the Army Command is devising plans to deal with the fourth phase,” the
sources added.The army had announced Tuesday that it became in control of 100
out of 120 square kilometers of territory previously held by IS after capturing
several strategic hills and areas.
Calm Engulfs Ain el-Hilweh after Palestinian Force
Deployment
Naharnet/August 24/17/Calm has been engulfing the Palestinian refugee camp of
Ain el-Hilweh since Wednesday evening, after the Palestinian political
leadership managed to bolster a ceasefire that accompanied the deployment of the
Joint Palestinian Security Forces in the clashes zone, the National News Agency
said on Thursday. “Normalcy has been restored in the camp while residents are
inspecting their properties,” NNA said. A ceasefire agreement reached on
Wednesday and drafted by the Fatah Movement and the Hamas movement involved
“halting fire, the deployment of the Joint Force in the al-Tiri neighborhood
with the assistance of the National Security Forces, and considering Bilal Badr
and Bilal al-Orqoub fugitives wanted by security forces.” The truce follows
seven days of fierce clashes that pitted the Joint Force and Fatah against two
small Islamist groups led by Badr and Orqoub. Several people were killed and
wounded in the fighting.
Aoun Moves to Beiteddine Summer Seat, Chairs Cabinet
Session
Naharnet/August 24/17/President Michel Aoun arrived Thursday morning at the
Beiteddine Palace, the summer presidential seat, in a tradition Lebanese
presidents have been marking since the country's 1943 independence. The
president will preside over a Cabinet session at noon. As per protocol, a
Republican Guard platoon saluted the president and played the national anthem as
the Lebanese flag was hoisted over the palace. Aoun was welcomed by State
Minister for Presidency Affairs Pierre Raffoul, acting Mount Lebanon Governor
Mansour Daou, Chouf District Officer Marlene Qahwaji, Beiteddine Municipality
deputy chief Joseph Karam, Beiteddine mukhtar Maroun Ghayyad, in addition to
senior presidency officials and advisers. The president then moved to his office
where he held a meeting with Raffoul, the governor, the district officer, the
deputy municipal chief and the mukhtar. Roads leading to the Beiteddine Palace
had been decorated with Lebanese flags, portraits of Aoun and banners welcoming
him.
Geagea, Sabhan meet
Thu 24 Aug 2017 /NNA - Lebanese Forces Party leader, Samir Geagea, is currently
meeting in Maarab with the Minister of State for Arab Gulf Affairs at the Saudi
Foreign Ministry Thamer Al-Sabhan and an accompanying delegation.
Berri meets Abu Faour, Ambassadors
Thu 24 Aug 2017/NNAA - Speaker of the House, Nabih Berri, met, at his Ain-el-Tineh
residence on Thursday, with MP Wael Abu Faour, with whom he discussed the
current situation and latest developments. "We basically discussed the army
operation in the region of Arsal and in Ras Baalback," the lawmaker told
reporters following the meeting. "The entire Lebanese people stands behind the
army," he said. Berri later met with Azerbaijani Ambassador to Lebanon,
Aghasalim Shukurov, over the bilateral relations between the two countries.
Also, Berri held talks with Swedish Ambassador to Lebanon, Peter Semneby, who
came on a farewell visit upon the end of his diplomatic mission in Beirut.
Separately, Berri received cables from Saudi King Salman bin Abdel Aziz and
Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, as well as from the President of the Jordanian
Senate Faisal Akef al-Fayez.
Army continues to target Daesh posts, leaves behind
casualties
Thu 24 Aug 2017/ NNA - The Army Command - Orientation Directorate - issued on
Thursday the following statement: "As an annex to its previous statement, the
military armed forces continue to target the remaining posts of the terrorist
organization, Daesh, in Wadi Martabia and its surroundings, with heavy artillery
and aircraft shelling, leaving behind damages in vehicles and gathering points,
full destruction of the targeted posts and the fall of a number of dead and
wounded in terrorists' ranks."
Macron cables Jumblatt: France will continue to support
Lebanon's sovereignty, unity and stability
Thu 24 Aug 2017/NNA - President of the Democratic Gathering MP Walid Jumblatt
received a cable from French President Emmanuel Macron who thanked him for his
congratulations on his election as France's President, underlining the
"friendship between France and Lebanon" which reflects the joint adherence to
the values of coexistence, pluralism and diversity. "In the shadow of the
regional crises, France will continue to stand by Lebanon in support of its
sovereignty, unity and stability," French President told Jumblatt, adding that
"every effort is necessary to support the Lebanese armed forces in their fight
against terrorism." Macron confirmed his efforts to mobilize "the international
community for the development and prosperity of Lebanon, while the Lebanese
offer evidence of their exemplary solidarity over the issue of displaced Syrians
and thus deserve the necessary support thereon."Macron concluded his telegram to
Jumblatt by stressing that "France will continue with unswerving determination
to find a credible political solution to the Syrian conflict to address the
roots of the problem of terrorism and restore the region's stability."
Future bloc meeting highlights Army's exclusive battle
against terrorists
Thu 24 Aug 2017/NNA - The Future Parliamentary bloc held its weekly meeting
under the chairmanship of bloc head Fouad Siniora, with talks touching on the
overall situation in the country. At the end of the meeting, a statement read by
MP Ammar Houry, tackled the operation carried out b the Lebanese Army in al-Qaa
and Ras Baalbek mountains. MPs saluted the Lebanese Army's achievements in their
military operation to liberate Al-Qaa and Ras Baalbek mountains from the control
of terrorists. "The Lebanese Armed Forces have proved, once again that, with its
national will, the determination of its leadership, its officers and its
soldiers, the sacrifices of its innocent martyrs and the suffering of its
wounded, it is capable of protecting the entire homeland. The Army is determined
to restore the role of the State and the prestige of the army as one of its most
important instruments," the statement read.
"The LAF is carrying out this national battle with its free decision and firm
will, without any dictation or partnership from anyone," Future MPs stressed.
The bloc pointed out that it received with satisfaction the clear and explicit
declaration by the Army command on "the absence of coordination with any party
or in this military operation.""This declaration came as a strong response to
the allegations of some parties that seek to build legitimacy for their illegal
weapons at the expense of the nation, civil peace and the unity of the Lebanese.
(...) The basic fact that unfolds in the light of what is happening in the
region and Lebanon is the defeat of terrorists: the terrorism of Bashar al-Assad
and his Iranian allies on the one hand, and the terrorism of Daesh and extremist
groups, on the other hand." The Future bloc pointed out that "the Taif Agreement
is the only way to establish balanced Lebanese-Syrian relations based on mutual
respect for the independence, freedom and sovereignty of each of them."
Jumblat Visits Former Ally Hariri to Mend Ties
Naharnet/August 24/17/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat held
reconciliation talks overnight with Prime Minister Saad Hariri at the Center
House. The Druze leader was accompanied by his son Taimur and MP Wael Abu Faour
and the meeting was held in the presence of Minister Ghattas Khoury. “The visit
was agreed on a long time ago, but my personal circumstances and travel, and
then Sheikh Saad's travel to the U.S., have delayed it for merely technical and
personal reasons,” Jumblat told reporters. “Today we meet to evaluate the
situations in the country, which are improving,” the PSP leader added. “There
are other issues that we will discuss with Sheikh Saad – social issues and other
topics – and it is not strange that I'm at the Center House now,” Jumblat went
on to say. “We had some disputes and we have to organize them and to listen to
Sheikh Saad's suggestions,” the PSP leader added. He also promised to
“fine-tune” his tweets, some of which were the reason behind the strain in ties
between the two allies. Hariri's nomination of Michel Aoun for the presidency
and his acceptance of proportional representation were also among the points of
contention between the two leaders.
Paris Sees No Need to Revise UNIFIL Mandate as U.N.
Reportedly Snubs U.S. Request
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/August 24/17/France said Wednesday it wants the
U.N. peacekeeping mission in Lebanon to stick to its current mandate, opposing
U.S. calls to strengthen the force's authority to deal with arms movements by
Hizbullah. Turkey's official news agency meanwhile reported that the U.N.
Security Council “rejected a U.S. request to revise the mandate of the United
Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).” Anne Gueguen, France's deputy
permanent representative to the United Nations, told reporters her government
saw no need to change the 2006 Security Council resolution that sets the
mission's current mandate, which expires at the end of August. "We want to keep
the mandate as such," she said, adding that "does mean there won't be any change
in the resolution." The 10,500-strong United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon
has been in southern Lebanon since 1978, when it was charged with confirming the
withdrawal of Israeli forces from a demilitarized zone between the two
countries. After a 2006 war between Israel and Hizbullah in southern Lebanon,
the U.N. force's mandate was expanded to include keeping the peace and helping
the Lebanese army reassert its authority in the aftermath of the conflict. "We
are for a reaffirmation of its mandate and the optimal effectiveness of its
mission," the French diplomat said, speaking before closed door Security Council
consultations on renewing UNIFIL's mandate. n August 7, U.S. ambassador to the
United Nations, Nikki Haley, said UNIFIL's mandate should be enhanced to prevent
the spread of illegal weapons in southern Lebanon, which she blamed on Hizbullah
and said threatened the region's stability. "UNIFIL must increase its capacity
and commitment to investigating and reporting these violations," she said.
France, which contributes 800 troops to UNIFIL, plans to submit a resolution
extending the force's mandate for another year, Gueguen said. "UNIFIL plays a
decisive role to stabilize the south of Lebanon in a very difficult original
context and it has demonstrated a stabilizing effect in the volatile, complex
and troubled environment," she said. In a letter to the Security Council on
August 4, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he wanted to look at ways
to improve UNIFIL's efforts "regarding the illegal presence of armed personnel,
weapons or infrastructure inside its area of operations." A Security Council
vote on renewing UNIFIL's mandate is expected on August 30.
LIVE Day 6: Army to push on at right time: Aoun
The Daily Star/ August 24/2017
BEIRUT: As the Lebanese Army's offensive along the northeastern border entered
its sixth day Thursday, roughly 20 square km of Ras Baalbeck's outskirts
remained under Daesh (ISIS) control and the military gears up for a final
assault.
2:30 p.m.
Local media reported that Daesh's Emir in Lebanon Mouaffak Abu al-Sous has fled
Lebanon after requesting negotiations with the Lebanese state to reach a
settlement for their withdrawal from the border region. Authorities reportedly
rejected the request without first receiving information regarding the fate of
nine Lebanese servicemen held hostage by the militants. The news comes after a
source told The Daily Star early Thursday that Daesh had also requested talks
with Hezbollah.
2 p.m.
Prime Minister Saad Hariri reports to Cabinet on his visit to Army positions on
the outskirts of Ras Baalbeck Wednesday, according to local media.
Hariri praised the high spirits of the military personnel, as well as their
delicate work and their achievements.
"The Army is positioned in all the locations that have been liberated from
terrorists. Observation centers and fortifications will be erected, and the
Army's needs will be set based on that," reports quoted Hariri as saying.
1:30 p.m.
Army units are continuing their combat and logistics preparations on the
outskirts of Ras Baalbeck and Al-Qaa, to gear up for for the fourth phase of the
Fajr al-Joroud offensive.
“The Army artillery and its warplanes are continuing to combat what remains of
the terrorist positions and to target their gatherings and movements in Wadi
Martabya and its surrounding,” the statement said.
“The specialized Explosive Ordnance Disposal units are continuing to cut through
new roads and cleanse the liberated areas, dismantle explosive devices, booby
traps, landmines and suspicious objects that the militants left behind.”
1:20 p.m.
President Michel Aoun says that the Army's Fajr al-Joroud operation has been a
success.
"The majority of the area has been liberated and there only remains a small
space [under Daesh control] and work to liberate it will be done at the right
time," Aoun told ministers during a Cabinet session.
"The Army has received political and public support and everyone is proud of
what it’s doing," Aoun added.
The president highlighted the need to supply the Army with all it needs for
victory.
At the beginning of the session, Aoun requested that a minute of silence be
observed for those soldiers killed in the offensive.
12 p.m.
Local media report that the Army is targeting Daesh positions in the area of
operations.
9:40 a.m.
Ras Baalbeck Mayor Duraid Rahal tells The Daily Star that there was quiet
overnight Wednesday with no shelling or gunfire heard from the town around dawn
– a rarity since the fighting started Saturday morning as the Army has regularly
launched concerted pushes at first light.
Rahal suggests that the calm may be because Army units are continuing to
reposition and Explosive Ordnance Disposal units are clearing the area in
preparation for the fourth phase of the offensive. The Army has also regained
significant territory near the areas closest to Ras Baalbeck with the final
canton of Daesh ground closer to the border and some distance from the
conurbation.
9:30 a.m.
Local daily Al-Joumhouria quoted military sources as saying that the fourth
phase of the Army offensive is set to be the most dangerous yet, as Daesh
militants pulled back from now recaptured areas into the last remaining
unsecured territory that the army will have to now assail. However, the source
did tell the daily that it was possible some militants had fled to the Syrian
side of the border and therefore outside the Lebanese Army’s area of operations.
Text of UN Resolution 1701
The text of Resolution 1701, passed unanimously by the UN Security Council aimed
at ending the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
AUGUST 11, 2006
The Security Council,
Recalling all its previous resolutions on Lebanon, in particular resolutions 425
(1978), 426 (1978), 520 (1982), 1559 (2004), 1655 (2006), 1680 (2006) and 1697
(2006), as well as the statements of its president on the situation in Lebanon,
in particular the statements of 18 June, 2000, of 19 October, 2004, of 4 May
2005, of 23 January 2006 and of 30 July 2006;
Expressing its utmost concern at the continuing escalation of hostilities in
Lebanon and in Israel since Hezbollah's attack on Israel on 12 July 2006, which
has already caused hundreds of deaths and injuries on both sides, extensive
damage to civilian infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of internally
displaced persons;
Emphasising the need for an end of violence, but at the same time emphasising
the need to address urgently the causes that have given rise to the current
crisis, including by the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers;
Mindful of the sensitivity of the issue of prisoners and encouraging the efforts
aimed at urgently settling the issue of the Lebanese prisoners detained in
Israel;
Welcoming the efforts of the Lebanese prime minister and the commitment of the
government of Lebanon, in its seven-point plan, to extend its authority over its
territory, through its own legitimate armed forces, such that there will be no
weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no authority other
than that of the government of Lebanon, welcoming also its commitment to a UN
force that is supplemented and enhanced in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope
of operation, and bearing in mind its request in this plan for an immediate
withdrawal of the Israeli forces from southern Lebanon;
Determined to act for this withdrawal to happen at the earliest;
Taking due note of the proposals made in the seven-point plan regarding the
Shebaa farms area;
Welcoming the unanimous decision by the government of Lebanon on 7 August 2006
to deploy a Lebanese armed force of 15,000 troops in south Lebanon as the
Israeli army withdraws behind the Blue Line and to request the assistance of
additional forces from Unifil as needed, to facilitate the entry of the Lebanese
armed forces into the region and to restate its intention to strengthen the
Lebanese armed forces with material as needed to enable it to perform its
duties;
Aware of its responsibilities to help secure a permanent ceasefire and a
long-term solution to the conflict;
Determining that the situation in Lebanon constitutes a threat to international
peace and security;
1. Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the
immediate cessation by Hezbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by
Israel of all offensive military operations;
2. Upon full cessation of hostilities, calls upon the government of Lebanon and
Unifil as authorised by paragraph 11 to deploy their forces together throughout
the South and calls upon the government of Israel, as that deployment begins, to
withdraw all of its forces from southern Lebanon in parallel;
3. Emphasises the importance of the extension of the control of the government
of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory in accordance with the provisions of
resolution 1559 (2004) and resolution 1680 (2006), and of the relevant
provisions of the Taif Accords, for it to exercise its full sovereignty, so that
there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no
authority other than that of the government of Lebanon;
4. Reiterates its strong support for full respect for the Blue Line;
5. Also reiterates its strong support, as recalled in all its previous relevant
resolutions, for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political
independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized borders, as
contemplated by the Israeli-Lebanese General Armistice Agreement of 23 March
1949;
6. Calls on the international community to take immediate steps to extend its
financial and humanitarian assistance to the Lebanese people, including through
facilitating the safe return of displaced persons and, under the authority of
the government of Lebanon, reopening airports and harbours, consistent with
paragraphs 14 and 15, and calls on it also to consider further assistance in the
future to contribute to the reconstruction and development of Lebanon;
7. Affirms that all parties are responsible for ensuring that no action is taken
contrary to paragraph 1 that might adversely affect the search for a long-term
solution, humanitarian access to civilian populations, including safe passage
for humanitarian convoys, or the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons,
and calls on all parties to comply with this responsibility and to cooperate
with the Security Council;
8. Calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire and a long-term
solution based on the following principles and elements:
Full respect for the Blue Line by both parties;
security arrangements to prevent the resumption of hostilities, including the
establishment between the Blue Line and the Litani river of an area free of any
armed personnel, assets and weapons other than those of the government of
Lebanon and of UNIFIL as authorised in paragraph 11, deployed in this area;
Full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and of
resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), that require the disarmament of all
armed groups in Lebanon, so that, pursuant to the Lebanese cabinet decision of
July 27, 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that
of the Lebanese state;
No foreign forces in Lebanon without the consent of its government;
No sales or supply of arms and related materiel to Lebanon except as authorized
by its government;
Provision to the United Nations of all remaining maps of land mines in Lebanon
in Israel's possession;
9. Invites the secretary general to support efforts to secure as soon as
possible agreements in principle from the government of Lebanon and the
government of Israel to the principles and elements for a long-term solution as
set forth in paragraph 8, and expresses its intention to be actively involved;
10. Requests the secretary general to develop, in liaison with relevant
international actors and the concerned parties, proposals to implement the
relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680
(2006), including disarmament, and for delineation of the international borders
of Lebanon, especially in those areas where the border is disputed or uncertain,
including by dealing with the Shebaa farms area, and to present to the Security
Council those proposals within 30 days;
11. Decides, in order to supplement and enhance the force in numbers, equipment,
mandate and scope of operations, to authorize an increase in the force strength
of Unifil to a maximum of 15,000 troops, and that the force shall, in addition
to carrying out its mandate under resolutions 425 and 426 (1978):
a. Monitor the cessation of hostilities;
b. Accompany and support the Lebanese armed forces as they deploy throughout the
South, including along the Blue Line, as Israel withdraws its armed forces from
Lebanon as provided in paragraph 2;
c. Coordinate its activities related to paragraph 11 (b) with the government of
Lebanon and the government of Israel;
d. Extend its assistance to help ensure humanitarian access to civilian
populations and the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons;
e. Assist the Lebanese armed forces in taking steps towards the establishment of
the area as referred to in paragraph 8;
f. Assist the government of Lebanon, at its request, to implement paragraph 14;
12. Acting in support of a request from the government of Lebanon to deploy an
international force to assist it to exercise its authority throughout the
territory, authorizes Unifil to take all necessary action in areas of deployment
of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities, to ensure that its area
of operations is not utilised for hostile activities of any kind, to resist
attempts by forceful means to prevent it from discharging its duties under the
mandate of the Security Council, and to protect United Nations personnel,
facilities, installations and equipment, ensure the security and freedom of
movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, and, without
prejudice to the responsibility of the government of Lebanon, to protect
civilians under imminent threat of physical violence;
13. Requests the secretary general urgently to put in place measures to ensure
Unifil is able to carry out the functions envisaged in this resolution, urges
member states to consider making appropriate contributions to Unifil and to
respond positively to requests for assistance from the Force, and expresses its
strong appreciation to those who have contributed to Unifil in the past;
14. Calls upon the government of Lebanon to secure its borders and other entry
points to prevent the entry in Lebanon without its consent of arms or related
materiel and requests Unifil as authorised in paragraph 11 to assist the
government of Lebanon at its request;
15. Decides further that all states shall take the necessary measures to
prevent, by their nationals or from their territories or using their flag
vessels or aircraft;
a. the sale or supply to any entity or individual in Lebanon of arms and related
materiel of all types, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and
equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned,
whether or not originating in their territories, and;
b. the provision to any entity or individual in Lebanon of any technical
training or assistance related to the provision, manufacture, maintenance or use
of the items listed in subparagraph (a) above, except that these prohibitions
shall not apply to arms, related material, training or assistance authorised by
the government of Lebanon or by Unifil as authorised in paragraph 11;
16. Decides to extend the mandate of Unifil until 31 August 2007, and expresses
its intention to consider in a later resolution further enhancements to the
mandate and other steps to contribute to the implementation of a permanent
ceasefire and a long-term solution;
17. Requests the secretary general to report to the Council within one week on
the implementation of this resolution and subsequently on a regular basis;
18. Stresses the importance of, and the need to achieve, a comprehensive, just
and lasting peace in the Middle East, based on all its relevant resolutions
including its resolutions 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 and 338 (1973) of 22
October 1973;
19. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.
Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on
August 24-25/17
Dutch Arrest Man after Concert Canceled over Terror Tip
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/August
24/17/Dutch police said Thursday they had arrested another man after canceling a
Rotterdam concert by a U.S. rock band following a tip-off about a possible
terror threat. The man was detained before dawn in the Brabant region, police
said in a statement, adding that the driver of a van with Spanish plates
carrying gas canisters who was detained late Wednesday in Rotterdam also
remained in custody. The arrests came after last week's twin vehicle attacks in
Spain that killed 15 people, which were claimed by the Islamic State group. "A
22-year-old man from Brabant was arrested Thursday morning in the investigation
into a terrorist threat Wednesday evening in Rotterdam," police said in a
statement. It was the second arrest after that of the Spanish van driver who was
detained only hours after officials canceled a concert by Californian rock group
Allah-Las. The driver, who was "possibly driving under the influence", was
"arrested because of his driving", police said, adding that officers had found a
"number of gas canisters" in his van. The man, whom police said was a mechanic,
will be interviewed again Thursday. But Dutch authorities have cautioned there
may be no link between the van driver and the tip-off about a terror threat
which came from Spanish police.
Iran, Saudi to Exchange Diplomatic Visits
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/August 24/17/Iran and Saudi Arabia will soon
exchange diplomatic visits, Tehran said, in a possible sign of tensions easing
after the archrivals cut ties last year. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad
Zarif told local media the visits would take place after this year's hajj
pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia, which is due to start at the beginning of
September. "Visas have been delivered for the two sides. The final steps need to
be completed so our diplomats can go inspect our embassy and consulate in Saudi
Arabia and for Saudi diplomats to come inspect their embassy and consulate,"
Zarif told news agency ISNA. It would be the first exchange of diplomats between
the two countries since they cut ties in January 2016, after Iranians stormed
Saudi Arabia's embassy in Tehran in response to the execution of a prominent
Shiite cleric. There have been signs of a thaw in relations in recent months,
including an agreement to allow Iranians to participate in this year's hajj, a
pilgrimage that Muslims must perform at least once in their lifetimes if they
are able to do so.Iranians were unable to attend the hajj last year after talks
on security and logistics fell apart. Relations between Tehran and Riyadh have
been at their worst in years, with the countries trading frequent accusations of
meddling and supporting different sides in conflicts in Syria and Yemen. Zarif
urged Riyadh to reconsider its foreign policy. "Saudi Arabia's behavior goes
against its own interests. We want security and stability throughout the region
and insist on the need to fight against the dangers that threaten us all," he
said. "Saudi Arabia has not benefited from two years of war and horrific acts
against the Yemeni people, on the contrary," he said. "It's the same in Syria or
in Bahrain. We hope they will choose another path."
Bahrain dismantles cell of 10 people plotting terror operation
Staff writer, Al Arabiya
EnglishThursday, 24 August 2017/Bahrain today said that it had dismantled a
10-member cell suspected of involvement in terrorist acts, led by 31-year-old
Hussein Ali Ahmed Dawood, 31. Dawood was one of the leaders of the Saraya al-Ashtar,
the terrorist armed wing of the so-called Al-Wafaa Islamic movement, and a
fugitive from Bahrain, living in Iran. He hasbeen sentenced to life imprisonment
in three terrorist cases and is closely linked to the Iranian Revolutionary
Guards. In the operation to dismantle the cell, the Bahraini investigators came
upon a trove of incriminating information that lso led to the seizure of
explosive materials at various sites in centrally populated areas, intended to
be used for bomb-making and manufacturing of explosive devices. The authorities
found large quantities of highly explosive materials, estimated at more than 127
kg, in addition to various weapons.
Iraq ministry confirms 20 sailors dead after ship sinks
AFP, BasraThursday, 24 August 2017/The bodies of 20 Iraqi sailors have been
recovered after their ship sank following a collision off the country’s southern
coast, the transport ministry said on Thursday. The Al-Mesbar sank in Iraqi
waters on Saturday following the collision with a foreign-flagged vessel, after
which eight sailors were rescued and the bodies of four others found. The
ministry said in a statement that 16 more bodies were found when the ship was
raised on Thursday. Iraqi authorities have ordered the foreign vessel impounded
following the collision, which took place in the Khor Abdullah maritime canal
between Iraq and Kuwait.
Qatar envoy back in Tehran to strengthen bilateral ties
Reuters, DubaiThursday, 24 August 2017/Qatar said on Wednesday it decided to
return its ambassador to Tehran, more than 20 months after he was recalled in
protest over the ransacking of Saudi Arabia’s missions in Iran by demonstrators
angry at Riyadh’s execution of a Shi’ite Muslim cleric. The Qatari decision
comes amidst a row between Doha and fellow Gulf Cooperation Council members
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, which together with Egypt
accuse Qatar of supporting terrorism, a charge it denies. “Qatar announced that
its ambassador to Tehran will return to resume his diplomatic duties,” the
Qatari foreign ministry’s information office said in a statement in Arabic on
its website. It added that Doha wanted to strengthen ties in all fields with the
Islamic republic.
Boost relations
The information office also said that Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed
bin Abdulrahman al-Thani discussed “bilateral relations and means of boosting
and developing them” in a telephone call with his Iranian counterpart Javad
Zarif. Qatar recalled its ambassador to Tehran in January last year after Saudi
Arabia cut ties with the Islamic Republic, accusing it of failing to protect its
embassy in Tehran and consulate in Mashahd against demonstrators who had
ransacked them. The demonstrators were protesting Saudi Arabia’s execution of a
prominent Shi’ite Muslim cleric convicted on terrorism charges. The Qatari
foreign ministry did not say when the ambassador will return to Tehran. Iran has
allowed Qatar’s national carrier to use its airspace and sent fresh food
supplies to Doha after Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt severed ties and
cut transport and trade ties with Doha in June. In the dispute with Qatar, the
four countries have also accused Doha of cozying up to arch-foe Iran, a charge
it denies, saying other Gulf countries had even warmer ties with Tehran.
New US Afghan plan a 'futile course': Russia's Lavrov
Thu 24 Aug 2017/NA - Russia's foreign minister called the new US strategy for
Afghanistan regrettable Thursday, saying the blueprint unveiled by President
Donald Trump was a "futile course". Speaking at a press-conference in Moscow,
minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia has expressed "regret that the main focus of
the new (Afghanistan) strategy announced by Washington is regulation by methods
of force." "We are certain this is a futile course," he said, furthermore
rejecting suggestions that Moscow was behind supplying the Taliban. Trump this
week announced 4,000 new troops for deployment to Afghanistan, backtracking from
his earlier promise to end America's longest war, though other specifics of the
plan remain unclear. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson furthermore on Tuesday
suggested Moscow is arming the Taliban. "To the extent Russia is supplying arms
to the Taliban, that is a violation, obviously, of international norms," he
said. "It's not the first time we are accused of supporting and even arming the
Taliban," Lavrov said. "Not one fact has been presented" to support this.
Earlier this year, a similar allegation was made by NATO commander Curtis
Scaparrotti, who said Moscow is assisting and possibly supplying the Taliban and
its influence is growing in Afghanistan. Lavrov said Moscow only contacts the
Taliban for two things: ensuring safety of Russian citizens in Afghanistan and
pushing the Taliban to hold talks with the Afghan government. The resurgent
Taliban is an officially banned organization recognized as a terrorist group in
Russia but some Russian officials have said Moscow is exchanging information
with the group when it comes to fighting Daesh (ISIS) extremists. Moscow fought
a disastrous military campaign in Afghanistan in the 1980s which was widely
considered a factor in the Soviet Union's eventual collapse. -- AFP
EU citizens leaving UK pushes down net migration after
Brexit vote
Thu 24 Aug 2017 /NNA - Net migration to Britain fell to its lowest level in
three years in the 12 months to the end of March, with more than half the drop
caused by European Union citizens leaving and fewer arriving since the Brexit
vote. The biggest drop in the figures came from eight eastern European
countries, including Poland and Hungary, that joined the EU in 2004, leading to
a migration to Britain of many eastern Europeans hoping for better-paid jobs.
Net migration, which shows the annual difference between those moving to and
leaving the country, has been falling since Britain's June 2016 vote to exit the
European Union. According to the Office for National Statistics, it stood at
246,000 in the 12 months to the end of March, down 81,000 from the previous year
and compared with the 336,000 record number that was published just before the
Brexit referendum. Within the 246,000, some 127,000 were from the EU, down
51,000 to its lowest level since the 12 months ending December 2013, as
emigration rose and immigration fell compared to the previous 12 months. usiness
leaders said the drop in net migration was a serious concern for firms worried
about wage inflation and an inability to fill skills gaps with British workers.
"No one should celebrate these numbers," Seamus Nevin, Head of Employment and
Skills Policy at the Institute of Directors, said in a statement. "Given
unemployment is currently at its lowest level ever (4.5 percent), without the 3
million EU citizens living here the UK would have an acute labour shortage.
Signs that it is becoming a less attractive place to live and work are a
concern." According to an industry survey published on Thursday, nearly half of
businesses operating in Britain's food supply chain say EU employees are
thinking about leaving because of uncertainty around Brexit. Nearly a third said
staff had already left. The government has said it is still committed to an
election promise to reduce the numbers to the "tens of thousands", first made in
2010 and designed to reassure Britons who were worried about the impact
immigration had on public services. Many Britons cited immigration as their
reason for voting "Leave" in the referendum. Britain has said it aims to
guarantee the rights of EU citizens living in Britain and particularly important
to sectors of the economy such as construction and the food and hospitality
industries. But Migration Watch UK, an advocacy group which has long called for
immigration to be cut, said that while Thursday's figures were a positive sign,
they remained too high. "This is a step forward but it is largely good fortune,"
said Chairman Andrew Green. "This should not obscure the fact that migration
remains at an unacceptable level of a quarter of a million a year with massive
implications for the scale and nature of our society." ---Reuters
Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on August 24-25/17
Liberman and Bennett: Israel must safeguard own
security against Iranian presence in Syria/وزراء في اسرائيل يطالبون بأن تحمي
إسرائيل نفسها من الوجود الإيراني في سوريا
Moran Azulay, Shahar Chai and Alexandra Lukash/Ynetnews/August
24/17
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=58128
Def. Min.Lieberman and Edu. Min. Bennett say Israel has only
itself to rely on regarding Iran's growing power in Syria; former national
security advisor Amidror responds to Iran's suspected attempt to create 'a
corridor' from Tehran to Mediterranean by saying, 'Israel can do nothing to stop
it, but it can draw red lines in Syria and say that if they're crossed, it will
retaliate.'
Minister of Defense Avigdor Lieberman spoke Thursday morning at a conference
organized by the Israel Institute of Energy and Environment, assuring Israel
will not stand idly by as Iran entrenches its position in Syria.
"Iran, via its Revolutionary Guard, is trying to create a new reality in the
region with Iranian airforce and naval bases in Syria, with Shiite militias
numbering thousands of mercenaries and by manufacturing precise weaponry in
Lebanon," he said. "Israel does not intend to resign itself to these attempts
and will not act as onlooker from the sidelines."Minister of Education Naftali
Bennett also spoke on the matter, saying that "we'll do everything in our power
to ensure no Iranians will stand at our borders," he asserted.
Bennett also commented on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's meeting with
Russian President Vladimir Putin. "At the end of the day, whether we're turning
to the US or to Russia, we'll try to harness them but won't rely solely on
them," he stated. "Israel reserves the right to defend itself by itself,
including against the Iranians near our borders. We're always keeping up-to-date
on the processes in play here, it's one of the more vital and sensitive issues
on our plate. At the moment, as we speak, Iran is funneling Shiite and Iranian
militias into Syria."
Bennett wished to send a message to Israeli citizens. "We'll look after
ourselves," he promised. "Menachem Begin didn't allow the threat then posed by
the reactor in Iraq to build and grow, but acted to nip it in the bud.""We're
always together and always alone. That is, we always have partners and allies,
we have a political plan of action, but we've never and will never outsource
Israeli national security. All options are absolutely on the table."Bennett went
on to speak about ISIS, calling it a "tactical problem."
"It's a meaningful one, but tactical nonetheless," he said, "and you don't
sacrifice a strategic interest of preventing the creation of a Persian empire
from Tehran to the Mediterranean to solve a tactical problem."
Former Major General Yaakov Amidror, who served as the national security
advisor, also spoke about Netanyahu's meeting with Putin and the growing Iranian
threat. "Russia is one of the more important forces in determining Syria's fate,
making their meeting crucial," he said.
Amidror further commented on the Netanyahu-Putin meeting, saying, "Israel has a
lot of strength and it needs to decide whether to put it to use. If it does, it
should consider the reaction. The talk with Putin is important in order to make
the Russians understand exactly what the Israeli interest is and what we plan to
do, so they're not caught off-guard."
Amidror also weighed in on the land corridor to the Mediterranean Iran is trying
to construct by taking over Syria. "That's without a doubt a seismic shift in
the Middle East. It may actually be too big for Israel's britches. Israel can do
nothing to stop a corridor starting in Tehran, passing through Baghdad and
terminating in Damascus, but it can draw red lines in Syria and say that if
they're crossed, it will retaliate."
Amidror then added Israel should set the aforementioned red line when it comes
to Iranian presence in Syria. "We're not asking the Russians for permission," he
said, "but we have to make it clear to them where that line passes and should
decide whether we act once it's crossed—that is, the point beyond which Israel
will forcefully respond to Iranian provocations."
"In any event, it's best to keep the Russians in the picture," Amidror
continued. "It's been working rather well up until now, at least. According to
foreign publications, we've been quite active in Syria with the Russians already
present there. It should be very careful and precise, but it needs to be done."
"World media has taken Iran's words out of context"
In the past few days, Iran has threatened that in a matter of days, it will be
capable of producing enriched uranium at a level sufficient for the production
of nuclear weapons. According to Dr. Tamar Eilam Gindin , a specialist on Iran
from the Shalem Academic College and the Azari Center, the western media
distorted the Iranians' true intentions in this case.
"The media took what they said out of context," she said. "What they meant was
they're loyal to the agreement and have no intention of breaking it, but should
the US place the sanctions back on them, within five days they can have the
Fordo reactor up and running and reach twenty percent enrichment."
"And even that is a long ways off from an actual bomb," he explains, "it's
simply their previous pre-agreement ability."
"The Iranians want the nuclear agreement maintained," she assures. "The head of
the Iranian atomic agency said, 'We were able to reach this agreement with so
much effort and won't give it up so easily. But Trump is threatening to place
the sanctions back on us. You can't expect that if you threaten us with
sanctions we'll stick to our side of the agreement.'"
Iran, not so far away/إيران ليست بعيدة عن إسرائيل
Giora Eiland/Ynetnews/August 24/17
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=58132
Op-ed: With Iran seemingly gaining more and more power in Syria, Israel has to
take action to ensure Tehran will never make it to the Israel-Syrian border.
This plan must include a multi-layered approach that will enlist the US, Russia
and Syrian allies, as well as the understanding that an overt confrontation
between Israel and Iranian forces will mean nothing short of war.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Moscow visit on Wednesday can be seen to
signal a change for the worse and a significant, national security risk in the
making. The civil war in Syria is nearing an end, and it appears that the
coalition of President Bashar al-Assad, Hezbollah, Iran and Russia has won. If
this victory would lead solely to the stability of Assad's regime, Israel should
have been able to accept this. The problem is that Iran demands compensation for
the many resources it invested in the war: already the de facto ruler in Lebanon
through its control over Hezbollah, Iran is now looking to recreate a similar
power dynamic for itself in Syria.
In concrete terms, the Iranians want to establish a second Hezbollah, a force of
Shiite militias that will be deployed on the Golan Heights along the border with
Israel, and which will get its instructions from Tehran. When such a situation
occurs, any confrontation with Hezbollah will lead to a wider confrontation that
will include the Syrian arena. Moreover, Assad, who, weakened, finds himself
grateful to Iran, will be committed to helping in this endeavor. As such, a
confrontation with Hezbollah could quickly lead to a full-scale war between
Israel and Syria.
Israel's response to this dangerous possibility is limited. Countries act
according to self-interests. It will not help us explain to the American
administration or to the Russians why Iran's expansion all the way to the
Mediterranean is bad for us. Nor will it necessarily help if we explain to Putin
that strengthening of Iran's presence in Syria contradicts Russia's interests in
the long term. Communicating to all the Sunni states, and namely Turkey, Jordan
and Saudi Arabia, that Iran's establishment in Syria interferes with their own
prerogatives, won't be enough to block Iran's advancement, as these states are
too weak to manage such a feat.
The way Iran is for Israel to push a four-pronged approach. First, it needs to
convince the US to agree to a deal with Putin that would have the US cancel the
economic sanctions it has placed on Russia, while also recognizing Russia's
presence in eastern Ukraine, in return for Russia's preventing the Iran's
continued presence in Syria.
Second, Israel must make it clear to Russia that the IDF will take action to
prevent Iran from building any kind of military force of its own near the Golan
Heights border. In the past two years, Israel and Russia have managed to reach a
quiet understanding that apparently enabled the Israeli Air Force to attack
inside Syria while Russia turned a blind eye. After Russia has achieved what it
wants in Syria and has no interest in another military escalation that would
jeopardize its achievements. A firm and credible Israeli message on this issue
will oblige Putin to take it into account.
Third, Israel will have to explain to both its allies and its enemies that if
Hezbollah starts a military campaign against us, it will not be fought only
against Hezbollah alone, but as an all-out war between the countries of Israel
and Lebanon. This approach is both just and wise: it is just because the
Lebanese president has openly claimed that Hezbollah is part of Lebanon's
defensive force. And it is wise because no one, certainly not Saudi Arabia,
Europe and the US, but even Syria or Iran, would want Lebanon to be destroyed.
Fourth, it would benefit Israel to exploit the hatred of those living in the
Syrian Golan against Iran and Hezbollah. Israel can and should discreetly
strengthen its ties with these people far beyond the aid it gives to Syrians
wounded it the country's civil war. Israel has so far refrained from becoming
too involved in Syria's internal conflict, but in light of the changing reality,
the need to cultivate true allies who are close to the Golan Heights border is
growing fast.
For the first time in many years, Israel is in danger of facing a detrimental
regional development, and it is therefore warranted to dedicate all the
attention and efforts required to properly address this situation.
Afghanistan has just stumped another President
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/August 24/17
How easy it is to shout “common sense” on Twitter – and how difficult it is to
make decisions “when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office”. Something any
adult person in public life could have told you, but still seems to have come as
surprise to President Trump.
It turns out Afghanistan is not amenable to simple solutions like withdrawing
and leaving the Kabul government at the mercy of the Taliban, after all. What is
a pleasant surprise however is that not even the Trump administration is willing
to pay the price of such simple-minded and superficially populist policy.
Viewing the world from “behind the desk in the Oval Office” comes with the
benefit of having the best intelligence about what happens just about anywhere
in the world. But sitting behind that desk comes with the burden of having to
make responsible decisions based on knowledge that you cannot share with your
democratic public. Or just knowledge that your electoral base simply does not
care to delve on.
Fortunately, the White House somehow managed to make a decision in the national
interest of the United States, and in the security interest of all of its
allies, despite the fact that this will play badly with Trump’s base. And so
Trump has had to do what he criticized Obama for. Despite promising that he
would get us out of this failed war, just as Obama had promised during his
initial presidential run, he has increased troop numbers by 4,000.
If there is one thing that the most powerful army in history can do, it is to
destroy things, overthrow governments and kill enemy leaders
War failure
And let us not mince words. The Afghan war is a failure. The original aim of the
war was to remove the Taliban from power for having harboured and aided al-Qaeda
and Osama bin Laden both before 9/11 and after. In that, America and its allies
succeeded. If there is one thing that the most powerful army in history can do,
it is to destroy things, overthrow governments and kill enemy leaders.
What it cannot seem to do, what it has failed to do consistently since at least
the 90s, is to win the peace. 16 years of brutal war later, Afghanistan still
has not been persuaded to accept the peace and the political order desired by
Washington. And half of the country continues to be under Taliban control.
The Western-backed government in Kabul still cannot sit on its own feet. And the
United States will, by the looks of it, have to sustain that government in power
through its own blood and coin for as far as we can see into the future. The
United States is committed to be the military guarantor of Kabul in perpetuity.
And yet, there is no better option. We have already seen a sizeable expansion
into Afghanistan of ISIS. Things are only likely to get worse as the last
remnants of ISIS in Syria are dispersed. The Taliban are just as likely to fight
ISIS incursions as the Western-backed forces for the time being, but this is
circumstantial.
Back to square one
If ISIS forces could be directed by the Taliban outward, say, toward targeting
Western interests, there is no reason why a Taliban -dominated Afghanistan would
not harbour ISIS in the same way they harboured al-Qaeda in the 90s. If we left
the Kabul government to its own fate, we would soon be back to square one. It
would be absurd for us to trust the Taliban with our medium to long-term
interests.
Trying to overpower the Taliban again, like we have done during the “surge”, is
likely to fail for the same reason it failed last time: the Taliban are an
integral part of rural Afghan society. Every time you kill a Taliban fighter you
kill someone’s brother, or father, and you have just recruited another Taliban
fighter. It is neither sensible, nor desirable to wage war against a society
like that.
So the only alternative left, the only way to protect American and Western
interests and lives by preventing Afghanistan from becoming a terrorist haven
once again, is to do what we are doing now: maintain a force in the country to
sustain the Kabul government and destroy ISIS and other militant groups, and
manage a slow and painful low-level conflict of attrition with the Taleban.
This is not a ‘solution’. And it is deeply offensive to our natural
preconception that wars are fought to be won, and that conflicts like this need
resolution. There will continue to be loss of lives on both sides, and
unfortunately, some of those lives will be civilian lives. But as Colin Powell
famously said of Iraq, “if you break it, you own it”. And though Afghanistan was
a mess before America invaded, America owns the ways in which Afghanistan is
broken now. And America cannot fix it. The only thing it can do is continue to
pay the maintenance costs.
Trump, Bannon and the Republican party
Mamdouh AlMuhaini/Al Arabiya/August 24/17
Those who think President Donald Trump spends his time on Twitter do not see the
real scene as he’s cautiously walking on tight ropes and he’s surrounded by
enemies who are shaking these rope in an attempt to make him fall.
One of the most dangerous ropes is the internal American nationalist movement,
which played a big role in getting him to the White House. He wittingly rose
through its anger which escalated during 8 years of Obama’s rule. This white
base was thrilled when he won.
During the inauguration speech, he looked like a populist president from the
third world but he was acting right as a politician who knew well whom he was
addressing. He thanked this base and repeated the slogan “America First,” the
enthusiastic slogan, which this base alone is behind.
President Trump take this influential electoral base into consideration but this
may cause unexpected problems. Trump was recently criticized for saying there
were good people with the extremists among the racist white supremacist movement
that protested in Charlottesville in Virginia and whom one of its members rammed
into people killing a woman.
Actually, Trump at the beginning delivered a good speech condemning these racist
groups but he appeared in a press conference a day after and made this lapse. It
wasn’t a lapse in Trump’s mind though because he’s thinking about his popularity
and does not want to be viewed as someone accusing his supporters of racism.
He probably felt that his first speech would be interpreted as such and thus
affect him so he tried to correct the situation and attacked the left which is
really suffering from an unprecedented state of disobedience and intolerance.
His critics said the time is not right to attack leftist groups and the media
launched an attack describing him as a racist.
Those who make mean insults against Trump are not the Democrats and liberals but
the Republicans who think that he hijacked their party
Embarrassing facts
These critics and accusations are the last thing he’s thinking of though as he
wanted to tell his audience that he’s still their man in the White House. He’s a
frank man who says the embarrassing facts which people hate to hear and which
politicians avoid to say out of fear of the trolling media and angry people.
It’s for this base’s sake that Trump is wittingly placing his feet on the edge
of the abyss to satisfy it. This is why he said he will ban Muslims from
entering the US during the electoral campaign. Once elected, he made the
decision to ban the citizens of seven countries. This is in addition to his
statements about the wall with Mexico and the fierce war against terrorists and
illegal immigrants.
However, there is one man who had an important role in mobilizing this white
base, and it is Steve Bannon who was recently removed from his role at the White
House. Perhaps removing him will turn out to be a wrong decision that Trump
regrets in the future. Michael Flynn, the former national security advisor, made
a mistake and had to leave. He was a fierce fighter and military commander but
he was not a provoking man who pressed the psychological buttons which mobilized
people like the dangerous Bannon does.
Bannon’s exit will be read as giving up on the people who got Trump into the
White House and it will be viewed as abandoning the message that aims to shatter
the political institution with its republican and democratic aspects and break
outdated traditions. In the conversation between Trump and Bannon before the
latter was removed from his post, he promised Trump that he will defend him and
attack and the elite and the institution.
However, after he was removed, Bannon said in The Weekly Standard: “The Trump
presidency that we fought for, and won, is over.” Bannon, who returned to lead
Breitbart News as editor-in-chief, also criticized Trump’s plan to keep a bigger
number of troops in Afghanistan. (His analysis is of course wrong but he’s only
viewing the matter from the US domestic perspective.)
Bannon’s exit is a loss for Trump but the latter is also a man who has his
audience. He knows how to mobilize people and unite them. However he certainly
lost an influential and significant man. Trump also has his reasons which
explain his move and which actually reveal the second dangerous tight rope he’s
walking on.
The liberal leftist movement launched a fierce campaign against Bannon and
described him as a racist and a demon. They tried to cause problems between him
and Trump by saying that he’s the one who rules America and manages the White
House. All these were false allegations and failed attempts.
However the real conflict was inside the White House between Bannon and members
of Trump’s administration, particularly with national security advisor Mcmaster,
Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and his daughter Ivanka. The conflict between
them is ideological as there’s a deep dispute regarding the working methods. All
three have a conservative mentality with a liberal touch, unlike Bannon, the
impelled nationalist. All three believe in cooperation with the traditional
republican institutions and communicating with democracy while Bannon despises
it and believes in destroying it and replacing it.
Veteran Republicans
In the end, the team consisting of Trump’s son-in-law and daughter won against
Bannon. After the failure to repeal and replace Obamacare, Trump clearly
realized that if he wants to achieve some of the promises he made to his voters,
then he must make some concessions to the veteran Republicans and ask for their
help.
Keeping Bannon, who insults them, away is a message to get closer to them.
However, these republicans and neither Ivanka nor her husband can mobilize
people like Bannon and his fiery speech can. According to Trump, what matters
now are the achievements in cooperation with the institution he previously
mocked. The task of revolutionizing the people now falls on him.
This leads us to the third tight rope Trump is walking on, which is that of the
Republican Party which he abandoned his best man for its sake. This party which
twice failed to topple Obama despised its candidate, Trump, at the beginning and
began to run after him after he won the presidency. It is a tense relation where
deep hatred, apparent love and mutual interests mix up.
Those who make mean insults against Trump the most are not the Democrats and
liberals but the Republicans who think that he hijacked their party, trivialized
it and destroyed it to serve his interests and selfish aims. The biggest treason
came from McCain who stabbed him in the back when he surprisingly changed his
mind during voting and prevented repealing Obamacare.
Trump cooperated with the party, which he does not trust because it is the only
way to achieve any domestic progress. At the same time, he does not want his
supporters to view him as the traditional republican but as the leader who does
not care about the anger of the corrupt elite.
This is what Trump comprehends and repeatedly does. He must walk cautiously. He
does not want to separate from the people and at the same time, he does not want
to lose those who hold the key to fulfilling achievements.
These are the three tight dangerous ropes and not the media, which is actually
an easier battle for Trump. It is a clear war with clear enemies who want to get
rid of him as soon as possible or exhaust him until he is an easy prey in the
next elections against democratic competitors.
However, he is exploiting these attacks against him to increase his popularity.
This is why Trump does not restrain his punches in response to their war and he
is escalating the tone via controversial statements and tweets.
The more they crucify him on liberal television channels, the more he is loved
by the conservative supporters who view him as their messenger and savior.
Science and the ‘sinful’ eclipse
Nawar Fakhry Ezzi/Al Arabiya/August 24/17
The “heavens” and “celestial objects” have intrigued human beings on different
intellectual levels throughout history. Mathematicians, physicists and
astronomers have been interested in unraveling their scientific mysteries while
ancient cultures attempted to understand them through myths and legends.
The changes of these heavenly bodies and their movements have inspired and
evoked a wide range of emotions in people’s hearts and minds from love and
serenity to fear and lunacy that have been manifested in the great works of
poets and writers around the world.
So, imagine what happened to our ancestors when they saw the sun or the moon
suddenly darken; it must have felt apocalyptic. Some cultures considered solar
and lunar eclipses to be signs of their god’s wrath or bad omens. Other cultures
that had gods and goddesses of the sun and moon, such as the Greeks and Hindus
considered an eclipse to be the result of the action of an evil creature that
was trying to devour the god’s power.
Arabs before Islam thought that the eclipse was the universe’s way to grieve for
the death of a great person. It was illustrated in people’s reaction to the
eclipse of the sun that was witnessed in the tenth year of the Hijri calendar in
Madinah, coincidently, on the same day that Ibrahim, the son of Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him), died. They thought that the eclipse was to grieve the
Prophet’s (pbuh) tremendous loss.
However, the Prophet (pbuh) corrected their misconception by saying: “The sun
and the moon do not eclipse because of the death or life (i.e., birth) of
someone, but they are two signs amongst the signs of Allah. When you see them,
offer the prayer.” Without any available scientific explanation at the time, his
statement was devoid of any metaphysical explanation and as factual as it could
be while advising them to pray, which seems an instinctive reaction to the
darkening of their source of light.
A collaborative effort between religious leaders, educators and scientists
should be made to increase awareness among the general population
Prayer and explanation
Muslims still pray when there is an eclipse even after we learned the scientific
explanation, just like we pray five times a day according to the sun’s position
in the sky and perform voluntary fasting during the three “white” days every
month when there is a full moon. The correlation between astronomy and worship
in Islam is a whole other area of research.
In general, however, prayers offer us peace and tranquility. They equip us
emotionally and spiritually to cope with any changes in our lives while
maintaining a strong connection with our Creator that we always rely on when
every constant we depend on in this life can fade, including sunlight.
Sadly, in this time and age, some Muslims insist that an eclipse occurs as a
result of people’s sins, which is a “fact” that we learned in school and our
children are still learning in most Saudi schools in the Islamic studies
curriculum. The scientific explanation is taught in science, but this is
mentioned as the “religious” explanation of their occurrence and regarded by
many as the “true” explanation. It would be interesting to conduct a study to
find out how many of us fall into this category.
Dr. Abdullah Almisnad, associate professor of climate and geography in Qassim
University, has conducted extensive research to debunk the myth of this
correlation between an eclipse and sin supported by scientific and religious
evidence. Unfortunately, his efforts are undermined by the influence of some
religious leaders and an Islamic studies curriculum that still affirms the
relationship.
Piece of evidence
One piece of evidence that he puts forth is the precise eclipse schedule that is
calculated for years in advance. The rare and amazing solar eclipse that was
witnessed across the United States last Monday was projected 38 years ago, and
according to calculations, some parts of Saudi Arabia will witness a similar one
in 2027 and 2034, according to Dr. Almisnad.
The sun and moon are beautiful celestial objects that provide us with light,
life and tools to find time and direction. In the Holy Qur’an, when Abraham
(peace be upon him) was looking for God, he immediately looked at the sky and
started his spiritual quest in finding his Creator among the stars, moon and the
sun until he realized that as grand as those objects were, his Creator must be
bigger and more constant and reliable than these “setting” objects.
Our children should learn to follow this reasonable line of thinking in their
spirituality and learning process. We want to have future astronomers, not
astrologers, who know that these are some of God’s amazing signs, which result
from the alignment of the sun, moon and earth without sin having anything to do
with it. A collaborative effort between religious leaders, educators and
scientists should be made to increase awareness among the general population and
to rectify Islamic studies curricula to make them only teach about how to pray
when the eclipse occurs and leave the causes of the eclipse to the science
class.
Nothing but hammer in Trump’s Afghanistan toolbox
Walid Jawad/Al Arabiya/August 24/17
In a rare primetime address to the nation on Monday, US President Donald Trump
gave shape to his administration’s foreign policy approach toward Afghanistan.
In an embarrassing about-face, Trump reversed his earlier views on Afghanistan
saying that “A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including
ISIS and al-Qaeda, would instantly fill, just as happened before September 11”.
This is a departure from what presidential candidate Trump had called for during
his election campaign, “an immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan”. His stated
objective now is to fight on and win.
Targeting terrorists, not terrorism
Trump delivered his address to an audience of uniformed men and women of the
armed forces from Fort Myer near Washington, DC. His speech started with an
acknowledgment of the sacrifices made by American soldiers to preserve the
nation’s values and way of life. He pledged to give them the necessary tools and
means to complete their job in Afghanistan.
Trump tried to set clear goals for victory: “Attacking our enemies, obliterating
the ISIS, crushing al-Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over Afghanistan
and stopping mass terror attacks against America before they emerge”. The
wording might be a tad different, but these objectives were already part of the
US policy in the region during the presidential terms of George W. Bush and
Barack Obama.
Going after the terrorists is justified in the short term, yet it cannot be an
effective long term solution for eradicating global terrorism. It is essential
to first address the political causes which compel some people to choose the
path of violence against civilians as a political tool for change. Terrorists
take recourse to such tactics as they believe it is the most effective option –
if not the only one – available to them.
Trump’s approach does not draw any medium to long term vision for resolution of
conflicts not through violence but by political means. Even if the military is
able to exterminate terrorists in Afghanistan and stops providing them safe
havens in the region, it will not stop lone wolves from conducting terror
attacks. The struggle will continue unless the root causes are addressed, an
important issue that Trump neglected to address in his speech.
Trump’s approach does not draw any medium to long term vision for resolution of
conflicts not through violence but by political means
The Afghanistan quagmire
The US has been fighting in Afghanistan for over 15 years, which makes it the
longest running war in American history. US citizens are said to have limited
appetite for lengthy engagements in overseas conflict. From a strategic
standpoint, it is important for the US to finish the job that George W. Bush
started in 2001. Lack of progress on this front is undermining trust in any
plans or promise of success as the cost of war continues to mount along with the
number of US soldiers killed in the war. The history of Afghanistan provides a
lesson which the US has found difficult to learn from. In addition, terrorists
find Afghanistan’s inhospitable terrain advantageous to their cause - both
geographically and politically. For many decades, it has shown that an
unfinished engagement will only lead to deeper conflict and a disastrous
outcome.
This long term involvement is very problematic for the US as it has to reset its
policy every four to eight years in line with its presidential elections.
Considering the time constraints within which presidents have to operate, Trump
did not offer any clear benchmarks or time limits for assessing the progress of
his approach.
In the political vacuum left after US supported Afghan and foreign fighters
(collectively called the Mujahideen) defeated the Soviet army in 1989, the
country turned into a safe haven for terrorists, namely al-Qaeda. Osama bin
Laden, the terrorist group’s leader, took credit for the 9-11 attack on the US.
The moral of the story was not lost on Trump, yet he completely missed the
lesson.
“We are a partner and a friend, but we will not dictate to the Afghan people how
to live, or how to govern their own complex society. We are not nation-building
again. We are killing terrorists.”
In this statement, Trump confirmed that he could not understand the difference
between ‘supporting’ and ‘dictating’. Dictating how Afghans should manage the
affairs of their nation will not succeed, but without financial and political
support Afghanistan will not graduate from a failing state to a functioning one.
Thus, terrorism will persist.
A myopic vision
Reducing the US role in Afghanistan to a military-centred one is insufficient
for achieving the goals outlined by the president. The manner in which he sought
the assistance of Pakistan and India seemed to lack the desired diplomatic
finesse.
The influence US has on these competing nuclear powers requires a delicate
diplomatic balance. Targeting Pakistan without giving it any credit will only
cause resentment and resistance toward advancing US interests in the region.
Although Trump’s strategy appears short-sighted, it appears to be a major
political coup. Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House, is standing by the
Afghanistan plan. Indeed, political observers and experts breathed a collective
sigh of relief when Trump retracted from his pre-election call to pull out of
Afghanistan. Is it a sign of maturity, learning on the job or finally listening
to the experts? It is too soon to speculate even as Trump stuck to his speech
this time and resisted the urge to speak off the cuff.
But what we know about Trump is that he is all about taking on the next
challenge. It is a gung-ho style of governance. However, Afghanistan and the
role it plays in the region makes for a complex situation requiring level-headed
plans and decision-making. Advancing US national security is a long term
process.
The president’s job is to set the policy and step aside to allow qualified
experts to frame the appropriate strategies. In fact, foreign policy must strike
a balanced diplomatic, economic and defence strategy. It is not possible for a
solely military-backed approach to deliver an effective Afghan policy.
"It is Our Very Existence That is Unbearable to Jihadists"
Giulio Meotti/Gatestone Institute/August 24/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10894/jihadists-europe-spain-finland
The Islamist attacks against Spain, Finland and Germany unmasked the central
problem: Pacifism will not protect Europe from either Islamization or terror
attacks. Spain and Germany were, in fact, among the most reluctant countries in
Europe to take an active role in the anti-ISIS coalition.
The Spanish press did not participate in a discussion of the Mohammed cartoons;
no Spanish writer was accused of "Islamophobia" and no Spanish personality was
put under police protection for "criticizing Islam". It seemed as if Spain were
not even interested in what was at stake in Islamist attacks on Europe's very
existence. No Spanish city made headlines for having multicultural ghettos, as
in France and Britain. The attack in Barcelona should have ended this illusion.
Terrorists do not need an excuse to butcher "infidels".
The sad conclusion seems to be that that jihadists do not need a "reason" to
kill Westerners. They attack equally France, which conducts military operations
in the Middle East and North Africa, and countries such as Spain and Germany,
which are neutral.
In 24 hours, Spain suffered two major terror attacks. A jihadist cell killed 15
people in Barcelona and the seaside resort of Cambrils. In the past year,
Germany was the other European country hit hard by armed Islamists. First, a
jihadist plowed a large truck through a Christmas market in central Berlin and
murdered 12 people. Then a man wielding a knife murdered one person during an
attack at a supermarket in Hamburg.
One day after the carnage in Barcelona, another terror attack took place in
Turku, Finland. Two women were murdered in the market square of the country's
oldest city. Jihad -- in Finland?
Jihad -- in Finland? Terrorists do not need an excuse to butcher "infidels". On
August 18, an Islamic terrorist murdered two women in in Turku, Finland, during
a stabbing spree in the city's market square. Pictured: The Aura River in Turku.
(Image source: Arthur Kho Caayon/Wikimedia Commons)
The Islamist attacks against Spain, Germany and Finland unmasked the central
problem: Pacifism will not protect Europe from either Islamization or terror
attacks. Spain and Germany were, in fact, among the most reluctant countries in
Europe to take an active role in the anti-ISIS coalition.
John Vinocur of the Wall Street Journal recently defined Germany as "a country
where the army and air force basically do not fight". And Spanish politicians,
since the 2004 train bombings, have not backed U.S. and NATO operations in
countries such as Libya and Mali. Spain has been described as a "reluctant
partner" in the anti-ISIS coalition.
Spain and Germany contribute less than others to NATO's efforts. US President
Donald Trump has made clear that the existence of NATO is contingent on members
meeting their agreed-upon obligations of spending 2% of GDP on defense. Spain
spends less than half of that -- 0.91 percent. Germany does only a little better
-- at 1.19 percent. Finland never even joined NATO.
The surprise of the Finnish élite over the Turku attack was noted by The
Financial Times:
"The Nordic country of 5m people does not feature prominently in jihadi
invective against the west. Despite Finland's armed forces having occasionally
supported Nato missions in Afghanistan and Iraq, the country's longstanding
nonaligned and peaceable military status has insulated it from most blowback
from crises in the Middle East."
In 2004, al-Qaeda, for the first time, was able to effect a regime change in
Europe after committing terror atrocities on Madrid's trains. Shortly after
those bombings, Spain's election turned into a referendum on its involvement in
the Iraq War. The Socialist Party's dramatic upset victory was followed by a
withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq. Since then, Spain has been almost
non-existent in the international arena. Probably assuming that pacifism
shielded it from further attacks, Spain was regarded as "the forgotten front in
Europe's ISIS war".
The Spanish press was diligently indifferent to any debate on freedom of
expression, then, as now, under attack by Islamists in Europe. The Spanish press
did not participate in a discussion of the Mohammed cartoons; no Spanish writer
was accused of "Islamophobia", and no Spanish personality was put under police
protection for "criticizing Islam". It seemed as if Spain were not even
interested in what was at stake in Islamist attacks on Europe's very existence.
No Spanish city made headlines for having multicultural ghettos, as in France
and Britain. The attack in Barcelona should have ended this illusion. Terrorists
do not need an excuse to butcher "infidels".
Germany, the most generous country in Europe in welcoming Muslims, followed the
same fate as Spain. The German government struck a cozy deal with Turkey about
the migrants; and when a comedian, Jan Böhmermann, made a joke about a Muslim
politician, the German government allowed its legal system to put the comedian
on trial.
The sad conclusion seems to be that that jihadists do not need a "reason" to
kill Westerners. They attack equally France, which conducts military operations
in the Middle East and North Africa, and countries such as Spain and Germany,
which are neutral. It is enough for them to state, that, according to Islamic
doctrine, land once under Muslim rule is forever under Islamic rule. As Spain
("Al Andalus" for Islamists) was under Islamic rule until the Christian
Reconquista (which began in 722), and then Muslims were expelled in 1492, the
country, according to Muslim extremists, permanently belongs to Islam and
therefore must be taken back.
About the massacre in Barcelona, the French philosopher Pascal Bruckner
commented:
"no one is immune.... The picture that comes to me is that of The Plague of
Albert Camus: a scourge that falls on an innocent city. The extension of the
field of jihadist struggle is universal. The terrorists charge the whole world
for their failure. They knock where they can hit. Trying to please them is vain,
it is our very existence that is unbearable to them". To paraphrase Trotsky, you
may not be interested in fighting jihadism, but jihadism is interested in
fighting you.
**Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and
author.
© 2017 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.
Strides in the Struggle for an Independent Kurdistan
Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute/August 24/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10871/kurdistan-independence-struggle
The regional regime that is in the best position to threaten the drive for a
free Kurdish state is that of Iran.
The country that has the most to lose in the event of an independent Kurdistan
is Turkey, due to its huge population of ethnic Kurds, some of whom support the
militant Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which has battled Turkey's military for
decades. Ironically and thankfully, this combination of recently acquired combat
experience on the part of the Kurds -- plus widespread unrest in the region,
still reeling from the "Arab Spring," and the loss of Syrian and Iraqi
sovereignty over swaths of their territories -- improves the chance of a
peaceful secession of Kurdistan from Iraq.
On September 25, 2017, the people of Iraqi Kurdistan will vote overwhelmingly in
favor of establishing an independent nation-state. All ethnic groups, from Erbil
to Zakho -- and in other disputed areas claimed by the Kurdistan Regional
Government (KRG), such as Kirkuk, Sinjar and Makmoor -- are eligible to take
part in the referendum.
Although the result of the plebiscite will not be binding, it is likely to
enhance existing secessionist sentiment among the populace and increase pressure
on KRG officials.
The Kurds' dream of a separate state is more than a century old. Yet geography
and the imperialist designs of outside forces have conspired to render that goal
a nightmare. Predictably, the most vehement opposition to the establishment of
an independent state for the Kurds comes from the major powers with large
Kurdish minorities -- including Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria. Apparently fearing
that a Kurdish state would heighten irredentist sentiment among the Kurdish
minorities within their territories to merge with a "Greater Kurdistan," the
governments of these countries view any form of Kurdish independence as a
national-security threat. It is thus quite possible that one or more of the
KRG's neighbors will move militarily to prevent a Kurdish secession from Iraq.
The regional regime that is in the best position to threaten the drive for a
Kurdish Free State is that of Iran. It already employs small pro-Iranian
militias -- the Kata'ib Sayyid al-Shuhada, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq and the Badr
Organization -- on KRG territory, operating under the rubric of the Popular
Mobilization Forces (PMF). Should Iran decide to take military action to prevent
a Kurdish secession from Iraq, it will likely deploy the PMF to do so.
However, while the political and military asymmetry between Iraq's Kurdish
region and outside regional powers have seemed fixed, the historical inequality
no longer exists. Currently, in fact, no state in the region easily could crush
a determined effort by the Kurds to sever the artificial ties that have bound
them, disadvantageously, to the Arab people of Mesopotamia.
This is chiefly due to the Peshmerga ("those who defy death"), Kurdish fighters
who have become combat-hardened warriors; so much so that, with NATO air support
in August 2014, they fought the Islamic State fighters to a standstill outside
the gates of their regional capital, Erbil. In the event of a confrontation
against the Peshmerga, even the pro-Iran PMF militias would pay a heavy price.
Most of Iran's Kurds live in the western part of the Islamic Republic, in
Kordestan, West Azerbaijan and the Kermanshah provinces. Although regionally
concentrated, they are not in a position to secede from Iran, due mainly to the
efforts of Tehran's intelligence services to suppress Kurdish irredentism by
eviscerating rebel organizations. That could change, however, if Iraq's Kurds
are successful in seceding from the central government in Baghdad. For one
thing, it might buoy Iran-based Kurdish groups -- such as the Komela (Society of
Revolutionary Toilers of Kordestan), the Kurd Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI)
and the Free Life Party of Kordestan (PJAK) -- and spur them to rise up against
the regime in Tehran.
The country that has the most to lose in the event of an independent Kurdistan
is Turkey, due to its huge population of ethnic Kurds, some of whom support the
militant Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which has battled Turkey's military for
decades.
Although Turkey is also the greatest obstacle to Kurdish independence, Turkish
troops have become entangled in the Syrian civil war. They have also not
recuperated from the failed coup attempt against President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
in the summer of 2016, an act that resulted, among other things, in a massive
purge within the Turkish military.
To allay Istanbul's apprehensions that an independent Kurdish state on its
borders might energize Turkey's Kurds to seek autonomy, KRG political leaders
are likely to forswear any assistance to the PKK, at least publicly. Kurdish
spokesmen will probably also point out that Turks could benefit from a stable
Kurdistan's pledge to keep the oil flowing to Turkey from Kurdish fields around
Kirkuk.
Syria also has a Kurdish minority, making up about 10% of the general
population, most of whom reside in the north and northeast -- where they have
established the Democratic Administration of Rojava. Due to the raging civil
war, Damascus currently cannot spare the troops and resources it would take to
suppress this Kurdish enclave. Nor does the Assad regime have the current
capability to dismantle the Kurdish military opposition in Syria, particularly
the effective Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG). In additions, tens of
thousands of Syrian Kurds -- along with Syria-based Turkmen, Arabs, Assyrians
and Armenians – have banded together to form the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF),
which have been fighting ISIS, particularly in Raqaa.
Even if the Assad regime survives the bloody war, now in its sixth year, it will
be too weak initially to suppress secession from its own Kurds.
Furthermore, the Syria that eventually emerges is likely to be a good deal
smaller than its current size, which would force it to rely its Russian, Iranian
and Hezbollah allies to conquer Rojava. Such a scenario would be thick with
dangers, including a possible American military response.
Ironically and thankfully, this combination of recently-acquired combat
experience on the part of the Kurds -- plus widespread unrest in the region,
still reeling from the "Arab Spring," and the loss of Syrian and Iraqi
sovereignty over swaths of their territories -- improves the chance of a
peaceful secession of Kurdistan from Iraq.
*Dr. Lawrence A. Franklin was the Iran Desk Officer for Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld. He also served on active duty with the U.S. Army and as a Colonel in
the Air Force Reserve, where he was a Military Attaché at the U.S. Embassy in
Israel.
© 2017 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.
Qatar Bans its Pilgrims, Saudi Arabia Welcomes them
Salman Al-dossary/August 24/17
Saudi Arabia threw the ball in Qatar’s court when it agreed to send seven Saudi
airplanes to transport Qatari pilgrims directly from Doha and when it
exceptionally opened its land border for those wanting to perform Hajj.
The kingdom has firmly shut the door to the Qatari authorities’ overwhelming
desire to ban its nationals from visiting holy sites. Riyadh is aware that since
the beginning of the crisis in June, Doha has been looking for excuses to
prevent its citizens from performing the fifth pillar of Islam. Yet, Saudi
Arabia granted Qataris what hasn’t been granted to others, not even Saudis. It
didn’t request any electronic passes for the Qataris to enter Saudi territories
and they were included within the Guest Program of the Custodian of Two Holy
Mosques which usually includes politicians, leaders, scholars and ministers from
all over the world.
Riyadh is aware of the fact that Qatari pilgrims have nothing to do with their
government’s attempt to use them as a pressure “card” on Saudi Arabia.
But, what makes Qatar so desperate to ban its 1,600 pilgrims from performing the
Hajj? Why is it putting these obstacles, including not issuing landing permits
for Saudi planes?
I believe there are three reasons for Qatar’s attempt to politicize this issue.
First of all, it tried to blame Saudi Arabia internationally, thinking it can
harm it and affect its efforts in serving millions of pilgrims each year.
Surely, it was an epic fail that did not even attract its closest allies Iran or
Turkey.
A non-Muslim country like Norway was furthermore surprised that an issue like
politicization of Hajj has been discussed with it.
Second, Qatari authorities are aware that they deluded their citizens when they
warned them from attending this year’s Hajj, claiming they fear for their
safety.
Aside from the fact that it is impossible for Saudis to harass their Qatari
brothers, and that Hajj is a religious act, Qatari authorities know their
warnings and accusations will be revealed later on when the pilgrims are allowed
to attend.
Saudi Arabia is used to serving all pilgrims of all nationalities without any
discrimination. The reason for Hajj is to boost equality among all pilgrims; all
of the worshipers wear white and perform Hajj in a single place at the same time
without being able to distinguish whether they are Saudis or Qataris or
Egyptians.
The final reason is Qatar’s delusion that by politicizing Hajj it can negotiate
the severance of ties and limit the conditions set for the end of the embargo.
Doha thought it can embarrass Saudi Arabia by focusing its political, diplomatic
and media war against the Hajj season.
Yet, Doha failed to see that neither the world noticed its attempts to stir
trouble against the Hajj season, nor did its citizens believe that they are
endangering their safety by traveling to Saudi Arabia.
The 443 Qatari pilgrims who entered Saudi Arabia by land will debunk their
government’s claims once the season is over and once they return safely to their
country.
Despite its hopeless attempts, Qatari pilgrims will attend Hajj this year in
probably the biggest political and social blow to the government. The only thing
it managed to do was to cause more trouble to them; instead of heading to Saudi
Arabia by plane, the pilgrims are forced to travel by land into Saudi
territories and from there they will be transferred through Saudi planes into
Mekkah.
Unfortunately, the Hajj season of 2017 will be a shameful stigma in Qatar’s
history that will not be eradicated when the political crisis is over.
Qatari nationals will always remember that their government banned them from
Hajj, and they will recall that despite Saudi Arabia’s political disagreement
with their country, they were welcomed and well received.
Most importantly, they will also remember how the kingdom didn’t allow their
government to ban them from practicing their religious duties.
Terror in Spain Shows ISIS Is Down not Out
Tobin Harshaw/Asharq Al Awsat/August 24/17
Spaniards have long lamented that Las Ramblas, the winding main artery of
Barcelona, has devolved over the years from the tree-lined strolling place of
Catalan flaneurs into a tourist trap filled by kitsch vendors and a cheesy sex
museum. Now it will be associated with the deaths of 13 people when a van driven
by a jihadi terrorist smashed into the crowded walkway on Thursday. More than
100 people were injured. It was one of several attacks along Spain’s
Mediterranean coast, including an explosion at a house suspected of being a bomb
factory. ISIS has claimed responsibility.
In the litany of European terrorist attacks over the last three years — Paris,
Brussels, Manchester — the last three days in Spain were the least deadly. But
in terms of European security — and the threat still posed by a terrorist group
thought to be on its last legs in Syria — they are just as worrisome. And they
are also just the tip of the iceberg: Last year, Europe suffered 47 terrorist
attacks that killed 142 and injured 379. More than 90 other plots either failed
or were foiled by police and security services. Nearly all were the work of
extremists.
This data comes courtesy of a very timely report on trends in European terrorism
from Anthony Cordesman, the Arleigh A. Burke chair in Strategy at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies in Washington. While Cordesman and his team
didn’t come up with the data — the figures come from IHS-Jane’s and the
University of Maryland’s excellent center for the Study of Terrorism and
Responses to Terrorism (or Start) — their study provides crucial context of how
the threat has changed over time, particularly between 2011 and 2016. On Friday
I contacted Cordesman to see how the Catalonian attacks fit into those larger
patterns.
Tony Cordesman is the reigning polymath of the defense-policy elite. He has
written more than 50 books for both the professional and lay audiences, and in
the last year alone he has put out reports on stabilizing Iraq after ISIS; the
dollar cost of America’s current wars; China’s emerging power; key metrics and
developments in the Afghan War; the postwar rebuilding of Syria; hard choices in
the war in Yemen; the national security economics of the Middle East — well,
that only takes us back to March, but you get the idea.
Cordesman said no one who looks at the data in detail over time sees clearly
predictable patterns. If you look at trends from 1970 to 2016, you see just the
opposite: sudden shifts in patterns of violence, targets, methods of attack, and
weapons by country.
We need to remember that we never saw Sept. 11 coming in the US and largely
forced terrorist to chose other targets and methods of attack afterwards. This
isn’t a “war” you can “win” by predicting how it will change.
If you look at the data, you see all too clearly that the patterns of locations
of terrorism keep changing, and that this is an ongoing struggle that reaches
far beyond ISIS. Historically, terrorist and extremists have also always been
willing to find strange bedfellows, ranging from outside governments to drug
lords.
The real risk, however, is that some movement or figure can unite extremist and
jihadist movements on a broad enough level to be truly dangerous. The
ideological core here is a level of extremism at the far margins of Islam, just
like extremism in Israel, and Christian extremism in the US and Europe.
Historically, such movements tend to fragment and limit themselves, and there
are literally well over a hundred jihadist movements recognized by the State
Department. Some, like ISIS, al-Qaeda and the Taliban, however, are already far
larger than others. No one can predict whether a truly charismatic leader will
unify many such movements, and this is the most serious threat.
ISIS is also only a small part of the problem today. The Start database used by
the US State Department in its annual country reports on counterterrorism
indicates that ISIS was responsible for 4,343 incidents in 2011 to 2016 — from
its rise to the end of last year. This was 6.1 percent of the world total during
the same period and 7.2 percent of the total in the Middle East and North
Africa. Defeating the ISIS caliphate will not begin to defeat terrorism.
More than that, it will do nothing to reduce the causes of terrorism in the
Islamic and other parts of the world: massive population growth, economic
development and major unemployment problems, and resentment of secular
governments.
There are good reasons why almost no one actually involved in the fight against
terrorism believes this will be over in less than a couple of decades, and the
current impact of the ISIS caliphate must be kept in perspective.