LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
December 27-28/17
Compiled &
Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias/english.december28.17.htm
News
Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations
Many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their
destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their
shame. Their mind is set on earthly things
Philippians03/01-21/:Further, my brothers and sisters, rejoice in the Lord! It
is no trouble for me to write the same things to you again, and it is a
safeguard for you. Watch out for those dogs, those evildoers, those mutilators
of the flesh. For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his
Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh—
though I myself have reasons for such confidence. If someone else thinks they
have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the
eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of
Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church;
as for righteousness based on the law, faultless. But whatever were gains to me
I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. What is more, I consider everything
a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for
whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain
Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes
from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that
comes from God on the basis of faith. I want to know Christ—yes, to know the
power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him
in his death, and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection from the dead. Not
that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I
press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers
and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one
thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I
press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward
in Christ Jesus. Following Paul’s Example All of us, then, who are mature should
take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too
God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already
attained. Join together in following my example, brothers and sisters, and just
as you have us as a model, keep your eyes on those who live as we do. For, as I
have often told you before and now tell you again even with tears, many live as
enemies of the cross of Christ. Their destiny is destruction, their god is their
stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things.
But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the
Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under
his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his
glorious body.
Make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same
love, being one
Philippians 02/01-11/:
"Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any
comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness
and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same
love, being one in spirit and of one mind. Do nothing out of selfish ambition
or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking
to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others. In your
relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who,
being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be
used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very
nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance
as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a
cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that
is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven
and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ
is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources published on December 27-28/17
Nasrallah’s Call To Tweet Against Trump’s Jerusalem
Announcement Sparks Scornful Responses On Social Media, Lebanese Press:
Nasrallah Has Become A Digital Warrior/MEMRI/December 27/17
On Israeli border, Hezbollah, Syria demand rebel surrender/Ynetnews/Reuters|/December
27/17
Five Challanges For Israel If Syrian Regime Retakes Golan Border Region/
Jerusalem Post/December 27/17/
America's growing lack of interest in the Middle East comes at its peril/Michael
Young/The National/December 27/17
DEBKAfile:Hezballah-Iranian-led force, now 5km from Israeli border/DebkaFile/December
25/17
UK: Going about Our "Normal" Lives/Douglas Murray/Gatestone Institute/December
26/2017
Palestinians: Where Have They Gone/Shoshana Bryen/Gatestone Institute/December
26/2017
Czech President Miloš Zeman: Warrior for Truth/Josef Zbořil/Gatestone
Institute/December 26/2017
We are Not out of Options on North Korea/John R. Kasich/The Washington
Post/December 27/2017
Euro-Zone Reform Proposals Don't Go Far Enough/Sony Kapoor/Bloomberg/December
27/2017
Arab Apartheid Targets Palestinians/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone
Institute/December 27/17
How to Defund the U.N./John R. Bolton/Gatestone Institute/December 27/17
Turkey: Still a U.S. Ally/Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute/December
27/17
Syria’s Future Decided without the Syrians’ Consent/Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al
Awsat/December 27/17
Titles For Latest LCCC Lebanese Related News published on
December 27-28/17
Deprivation in Lebanon unacceptable: Aoun
Aoun-Berri feud brings Lebanon ever closer to crisis
Berri Defiant on Officers Decree, Says Stance 'Not against Christians'
Hariri Says Resignation Crisis was 'Bitter', Dialogue is 'the Only Way'
Report: Saudi Arabia Accredits Lebanese Ambassador
Khalil Declines to Sign Officer Promotion Decrees amid Aoun-Berri Row
Deryan Says Saudi Arabia 'Cornerstone of Islam'
Report: Aoun-Berri Spat over Officers' Decree 'Threatens' Political Consensus
Syrian Refugees in Lebanon Drop Below One Million
Hassan Khalil comments on officer promotion decree
Berri meets deputies within Wednesday parliamentary gathering
Bazzi: Speaker Berri upholds his stance on officers' decree
Hariri, Allawi tackle general situation
Rahi receives army command delegation on festive season
Army Commander inspects military police command: For intensifying security tasks
during holidays
Geagea via Twitter: Mohammed Shatah's blood will not go in vain
On Israeli border, Hezbollah, Syria demand rebel surrender
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on December
27-28/17
Bahrain FM: Iran’s state shall remain while the
regime will be gone
UAE court sentences 13 on terror and espionage charges
Saudi crown prince meets with Turkish prime minister
Saudi king receives, holds talks with Turkish prime minister
Coalition raids kill and wound dozens of the Houthi militia in al-Jawf
Houthis seize and detain bank accounts of 1,223 Yemeni officials and citizens
Argentina judge says death of prosecutor Nisman was murder
Negotiations to Guarantee Tahrir al-Sham Evacuation from Syria’s Beit Jin
10 Hurt in Russia Supermarket Bombing
Medical Evacuations Begin from Besieged Syria Rebel Bastion
Latest Lebanese Related News published on
December 27-28/17
Deprivation in Lebanon unacceptable: Aoun
The Daily Star/December
27/17/BEIRUT: President Michel Aoun said Wednesday that he considers any
privation in any locality of Lebanon to be unacceptable, regardless of the
location, and said he would work toward developing the economy in all regions.
“I won’t accept for deprivation to remain in any Lebanese areas,” Aoun said
while meeting with a delegation of provincial representatives headed by Abdel
Hadi Mahfouz, the president the National Council of Audio and Visual Media,
according to a statement from the presidency. Aoun vowed to work toward
improving conditions and lessening the suffering of all Lebanese people by
transitioning Lebanon to a more productive economy. The president said it was
important to develop an economic system that would benefit all regions of
Lebanon. "We started by establishing and licensing industrial zones in different
districts, securing the necessary investments, and there are other steps we will
try to apply one by one," he said. The president said that two issues were
identified in the meeting as crucial to developing a civil state: eliminating
sectarianism and instead focusing on developing the skills of individuals, as
well as “developing a non-sectarian education system that focuses on the
concepts of patriotism, democracy and duties towards the state and
history."Mahfouz was quoted as saying that the meeting “represented all Lebanese
factions and achieved the idea of a just, capable and civil state,” and that the
“unifying factor among the Lebanese people should be the concept of a single
citizenship and not the sects.”He also stressed the importance of ensuring
citizens’ rights and having balanced development in every region in the country.
"The people of Akkar and other [underserved] areas in Lebanon feel forgotten,
but they are hopeful that you will be concerned with the problems facing all
citizens, especially in Baalbek-Hermel and Akkar," Mahfouz said to Aoun. Aoun
for his part assured that he is pursuing the affairs of northern regions,
including Tripoli, which was a concern of his even before becoming president,
according to the statement.
Mahfouz reportedly added that he also appreciated the president’s positions
regarding “two fundamental issues that were a turning point in Lebanese
political life: first dealing with Prime Minister Saad Hariri's resignation and
Aoun's position on Jerusalem.”Separately, Aoun Wednesday met with head of the
Central Inspection Commission Judge George Attieh, Lebanon's Ambassador to the
United Nations Amal Mudallali and Lebanon’s Ambassador to Turkey Ghassan al-Moallem.
Aoun-Berri feud brings Lebanon ever closer to crisis
Hussein Dakroub| The Daily Star/December 27/17
BEIRUT: An escalating rift between President Michel Aoun and Speaker Nabih Berri
over the signing of a controversial decree promoting a number of Army officers
flared up into a full-blown crisis Tuesday, threatening to plunge the country
into deep political uncertainty and paralyze the work of state institutions.
Responding to Aoun’s statement that the decree promoting a number of Army
officers who served under Aoun in the late 1980s when he was the Army commander
required the signing of the president and the prime minister only, Berri warned
that overriding the finance minister’s approval would place the Taif Accord on
equal power-sharing between Muslims and Christians into jeopardy.
Berri went as far as to implicitly accuse Aoun of violating the spirit of the
Taif Accord and the Constitution with regard to the country’s power-sharing
formula by signing the decree and ignoring the finance minister’s approval. A
defiant Berri also rebuffed Aoun’s call on the speaker to take the issue to the
judiciary, casting doubts about the judiciary’s role as long as the Justice
Ministry is controlled by a minister who belongs to the Free Patriotic Movement,
which was founded by the president. It was the first time in Lebanon’s modern
history that the president and the Parliament speaker found themselves engaged
in public mud-slinging over an issue that touched on the leaders’ prerogatives
as stipulated by the Taif Accord and the Constitution, an episode that threatens
to take a sectarian turn in a country that is still trying to recover from the
consequences of the devastating 1975-90 Civil War.
An official source at Baabda Palace declined to comment on Berri’s fiery
comments against the president, saying that Aoun has pointed to a solution to
the dispute by calling on the speaker to resort to the judiciary.
Asked whether ties between the president and the speaker had reached the point
of no return, the source said: “No.” Tensions between Aoun and Berri have ramped
up over the decree, which was signed by Aoun and Prime Minister Saad Hariri and
overlooked the signing of Finance Minister Ali Hasan Khalil, a key political
aide to the speaker. The decree promotes around 200 Army officers – all
Christians aside from 15 Muslims – who served with Aoun in the late 1980s when
he was Army commander, advancing their seniority and rank by one year.
Berri was reported to have been furious because the decree ignored the finance
minister’s signature and upset the sectarian balance given the fact that a large
number of Christian officers stood to benefit from the promotion while only a
few Muslim officers will benefit.
Berri, who last week said he left it to the president to tackle the decree
dispute, changed his mind Tuesday and decided to respond to what was seen as
“escalatory” views expressed by Aoun on the decree.
Aoun defended the signing of the decree, saying the promotion was the officers’
right, and, taking an indirect swipe at Berri, he said that those who took issue
with the decree can go to the judiciary to contest it.
“The decree is a right ... We tried to give [these officers] at least half of
what they have a right to by advancing their seniority and rank by one year,”
Aoun told reporters after meeting with Maronite Patriarch Beshara Rai and
attending the Christmas mass held at Bkirki Monday.
“The decree should be signed by the president and the prime minister alone,” he
said. “There is no financial burden from the decree for the finance minister to
need to sign it.”“If anyone has objections to this, let them go the judiciary. I
would be more than happy as a president if the judiciary breaks my decision,”
Aoun added.
Responding to Aoun’s comments, Berri, speaking to journalists at his Ain al-Tineh
residence said: “It caught my attention [Aoun’s] saying that ‘the decree should
be signed by the president and the prime minister alone.’ And so, may the Taif
[Accord], the Constitution, norms, the Cabinet and ministers rest in
peace.”Berri rejected Aoun’s argument that the decree did not have any financial
burden. “No, your Excellency the President, there is a financial burden from
this decree, and anyone who told you otherwise, only pretended to know. And so
[the decree] should have been presented to the Finance Ministry,” he said. Berri
lambasted the Justice Ministry, which is headed by Salim Jreissati, who belongs
to the FPM, saying only the weak resort to the judiciary.
Asked if he was ready to go to the judiciary as per Aoun’s request to contest
the decree, Berri said: “When the Justice Ministry is not affiliated [with the
FPM], I will resort to the judiciary. The weak resort to the judiciary.”Later, Jreissati hit back at Berri. “Ministries in Lebanon do not belong to
anyone, but to the nation and the symbol of the nation’s unity, which is the
president of the republic,” Jreissati told LBCI channel. He called on Berri to
review his position, saying: “Let’s all of us go to the judiciary strengthened
by right.”Berri, who earlier in the day called Aoun to congratulate him on Christmas,
again left it to the president to tackle the decree dispute. “Again, your
Excellency the President, I leave the matter to your wisdom and judgment.”
The speaker, who was reported to have been irritated by Hariri’s signing the
decree, was asked if the decree dispute might affect his relations with the
prime minister. “Ask him [Hariri],” Berri responded.
Hariri has asked Fouad Fleifel, the Cabinet’s secretary-general, to hold up the
publication of the decree in the Official Gazette until a solution is found to
the dispute.
Berri, speaking to The Daily Star at the weekend, said: “The officers’ decree is
so serious that it might lead to a review of the entire Taif Accord.”Another bone of contention between Aoun and Berri was a proposal by FPM leader
and Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil to extend expatriate voters’ registration for
next year’s parliamentary elections until Feb. 15. Berri staunchly opposes this
proposal.
Aoun sidestepped Berri’s objection, saying: “This issue can be tackled in the
Cabinet and the interior and foreign affairs ministers are discussing the matter
and they are part of a ministerial committee [tasked with implementing a new
vote law].”
Berri Defiant on Officers Decree, Says Stance 'Not against
Christians'
Naharnet/December 27/17/Speaker Nabih Berri is “still clinging to his
constitutional and legal viewpoint regarding the officers decree and whoever
tries to depict the issue as being targeted against Christians would be
mistaken,” MP Ali Bazzi of Berri's Development and Liberation bloc said.
“Speaker Berri does not approach things in this manner and maybe if his opinion
had been taken into consideration there would have been more than one solution,”
Bazzi told reporters after the Speaker's weekly meeting with lawmakers in Ain
el-Tineh. “There is no political clash, but perhaps there are parties who are
offering advices in contravention of the Constitution and the law,” Bazzi added.
Finance Minister Ali Hassan Khalil, who is also Berri's political aide,
meanwhile said that had he received the decree to sign it, “there would not have
been a constitutional problem.”Berri and Khalil have insisted that the decree,
which grants one-year seniority to a number of officers, should have carried the
finance minister's signature along with the signatures of the president and the
premier. “Anything based on something illegal would be illegal,” Khalil added,
noting that similar decrees related to the Internal Security Forces had been
referred to the finance minister and that “the Finance Ministry's role is not
restricted to expenditure but also to the impact of expenditure.”As for Berri's
statement that “only the weak would resort to the judiciary,” the minister
clarified that “Speaker Berri meant that those whose constitutional argument is
weak would resort to the judiciary.”President Michel Aoun had noted Monday that
the decree, which has sparked a row between him and Berri, is “lawful,” asking
those who have reservations to “go to the judiciary.”Ain el-Tineh sources have
meanwhile warned that the decree would tip sectarian balance in favor of
Christians in the army's highest echelons. The officers in question were
undergoing their first year of officer training at the Military Academy when
Syrian forces ousted Aoun’s military government from Baabda in 1990. They were
suspended by the pro-Damascus authorities until 1993 before they resumed their
officer training course as second-year cadets.
Hariri Says Resignation Crisis was 'Bitter', Dialogue is 'the Only Way'
Naharnet/December 27/17/Prime Minister Saad Hariri on Wednesday described his
November resignation ordeal as “one of the bitterest crises” in his political
life, while stressing that dialogue is the only possible approach in Lebanon.
“Four years have passed since the martyrdom of the brother and the comrade of
the difficult days, (slain ex-minister Mohammed Shatah), and each year I was
sensing the extent of the emptiness he has left. But this year I increasingly
felt his absence and how much I needed his wit, wisdom and firmness during one
of the bitterest crises in my political life,” said Hariri at a rally marking
Shatah's fourth assassination anniversary. “Shatah fell on the same path of late
PM Rafik Hariri. Together they walked the path of moderation and state-building
and together they were martyred in defense of the state's role,” Hariri added.
“Today Mohammed is the symbol of dialogue and this country cannot live without
dialogue,” the premier went on to say. He added: “We can challenge each other,
practice arrogance, yell at each other and fight each other, but in the end, the
country would pay the price. Dialogue remains the only way no matter the
political disputes.”Emphasizing that he and certain political parties will not
agree on a lot of issues, especially regional matters, Hariri asked: “Without
dialogue, how would the situation in the country be?”“We experienced the absence
of dialogue prior to the Taef Accord but we ended up around the same table. The
Taef Accord is doing very well because we will always defend this Constitution,”
the premier added. Hariri had shocked the Lebanese and the world on November 4
when he resigned during an unusual TV broadcast from Saudi Arabia, citing
assassination threats and blasting the policies of Iran and Hizbullah in Lebanon
and the region. After a puzzling mini-odyssey that took him to France, Egypt and
Cyprus, Hariri arrived back in Lebanon after around two weeks of absence and
then announced the reversal of his resignation after he reached an agreement
with the Hizbullah-led camp on distancing Lebanon from regional conflicts. Many
questions remain unanswered following the unprecedented scenario that saw
Lebanon's prime minister resign in a foreign country suspected of keeping him
under “house arrest” and return only after the apparent intervention of France.
And while Hariri and Riyadh seemed on a collision course with Hizbullah last
month, an apparent behind-the-scenes deal has restored the status quo.
Report: Saudi Arabia Accredits Lebanese
Ambassador
Associated Press/Naharnet/December
27/17/Saudi Arabia has accepted accreditation of Fawzi Kabbara as the new
Lebanese Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, said pan-Arab al-Hayat daily Wednesday,
after months of delay over what was perceived as a diplomatic tussle between the
two countries. The daily quoted unnamed sources at the Lebanese Foreign Ministry
who said they “received a letter from the Saudi Foreign Ministry accrediting
ambassador Fawzi Kabbara as Lebanon's ambassador to Riyadh.” Al-Hayat said the
accreditation delay was the result of administrative reasons, shunning reports
it had political grounds. Kabbara is expected to leave for Riyadh at the end of
next month to take over his duties as ambassador, it added, succeeding outgoing
ambassador Abdul Sattar Issa who remains in the post on acting capacity.
Lebanon's ambassador to Saudi Arabia and his Saudi counterpart were named months
ago, but their accreditation was delayed. The delay highlights tension between
SA and Lebanon following the bizarre, now-reversed resignation of Prime Minister
Saad Hariri from Riyadh. Lebanon's ambassador to Saudi Arabia, a member of
Hariri's political party, was named to the post in late July. Saudi Arabia named
its ambassador in September. Ambassador Walid al-Yaacoubi arrived in Lebanon in
November, but still has not been sworn in by the president and the foreign
minister, as customary. Lebanon was thrown into a political crisis after the
Nov. 4 Hariri resignation which he delivered in a televised statement read from
the Saudi capital, Riyadh. Hariri has since withdrawn his resignation and
returned home nearly three weeks later. The resignation was widely perceived as
Saudi-orchestrated, and part of the kingdom's high-stakes rivalry with Iran.
Iran is ally and backer of Hizbullah, which is a partner in the Hariri
government. The resignation was viewed as an attempt to break up that unity
government and pull the rug from under Iran's ally and destabilize the country.
Domestic support for Hariri and international mediation by France and the U.S.
helped reverse the resignation. Saudi officials, however, maintained their vocal
criticism of Hizbullah.
Khalil Declines to Sign Officer Promotion
Decrees amid Aoun-Berri Row
Naharnet/December 27/17/Finance Minister Ali Hassan Khalil refused Wednesday to
sign decrees for the promotion of some army officers, following a war of words
between President Michel Aoun and Speaker Nabih Berri over a previous decree
that granted one-year seniority to some officers.
The new decrees involve the promotion of a number of officers from the rank of
colonel to the rank of brigadier general and others from lieutenant colonel to
colonel. Khalil declined to sign the decrees after he found out that they
included officers whose names were listed in the controversial seniority decree,
media reports said. The minister has asked for clarifications from the Defense
Ministry, according to the reports. The Aoun-Berri spat broke out after the
president and Premier Saad Hariri signed a decree granting one-year seniority to
a number of officers. Berri and Khalil have insisted that the decree should have
also carried the finance minister's signature. Aoun and his aides have argued
that the decree did not require Khalil's signature because it did not contain
any “financial burden,” a point Berri and officials close to him have argued
against. Ain el-Tineh sources have meanwhile warned that the decree would tip
sectarian balance in favor of Christians in the army's highest echelons. The
officers in question were undergoing their first year of officer training at the
Military Academy when Syrian forces ousted Aoun’s military government from
Baabda in 1990. They were suspended by the pro-Damascus authorities until 1993
before they resumed their officer training course as second-year cadets.
Deryan Says Saudi Arabia 'Cornerstone of Islam'
Naharnet/December
27/17/Grand Mufti of the Republic Sheikh Abdul Latif Deryan praised Saudi Arabia
saying the “Kingdom is the cornerstone of Islam,” the State-run National News
Agency reported on Wednesday. “SA has always been keen on serving the Two Holy
Mosques. SA is keen on the present and future of Islam away from extremism and
tension,” said Deryan. Deryan's remarks came at the International Conference on
Development and Reconstruction Projects in Makkah held in Jeddah.
Report: Aoun-Berri Spat over Officers' Decree
'Threatens' Political Consensus
Naharnet/December
27/17/An aggravating political spat between President Michel Aoun and Speaker
Nabih Berri over a controversial officers' decree "threatens political
consensus" with an open crisis expected to weigh on all other political files,
al-Joumhouria daily reported on Wednesday. On Tuesday, Speaker Nabih Berri
sharply replied to President Michel Aoun's remarks on the officers' decree,
promoting a number of Army officers, bidding “farewell to the Taef Accord, the
Constitution, norms and Cabinet.” Aoun had made remarks a day earlier that the
officers' decree required the signature of the President and the Prime Minister
alone. In this regard, Berri eulogized article 54 of the Constitution, he said:
“I was told that the decree requires the signature of the President and PM
alone,” sadly we can say “farewell to the Taef, constitution and Cabinet.”
Berri's stance on Tuesday came in remarks he made to media representatives,
whereby he dwelt on the current debatable officers' decree in light of the
latest statements made by Aoun on Monday. Aoun had noted that the decree that
has sparked a row with Berri is “lawful,” asking those who have reservations to
“go to the judiciary.”In reply to remarks that the arguable officers' decree
does not entail any financial burden, Berri stressed that the decree bears such
a burden, and decried that it should have also carried the signature of Finance
Minister Ali Hassan Khalil. Ain el-Tineh sources have also warned that the
decree would tip sectarian balance in favor of Christians in the army’s highest
echelons. The officers in question were undergoing their first year of officer
training at the Military Academy when Syrian forces ousted Aoun’s military
government from Baabda in 1990. They were suspended until 1993 before they
resumed their officer training course as second-year cadets.
Syrian Refugees in Lebanon Drop Below One
Million
Naharnet/December 27/17/The number of registered Syrian refugees in Lebanon has
dropped to below one million for the first time since 2014, the United Nations
told AFP on Tuesday. As of the end of November, the UN refugee agency (UNHCR)
counted 997,905 Syrian refugees -- a vast majority of them women and children --
registered in Lebanon. "The number reached one million in April 2014, and this
is the first time it drops below that," UNHCR spokeswoman Lisa Abou Khaled told
AFP. Numbers were decreasing, Abou Khaled said, as refugees had resettled in
third countries, returned to their homes in Syria, or passed away. From 2011
until September this year, nearly 49,000 Syrians left Lebanon as part of the
United Nations' resettlement program to third countries including the United
States, Sweden, and France. Others left on their own, making the dangerous sea
journey to reach Europe. "We cannot confirm how many returned to Syria. They
don't necessarily tell us, but we know it's a few thousand in 2017," Abou Khaled
said. She said the United Nations revised its numbers on a quarterly basis to
assess who remained in Lebanon and what support they required. In December 2016,
the number of Syrian refugees in Lebanon was 1,011,366. In the first six months
of 2017, it dropped by 10,315, then again by more than 3,000 between June and
November 31. More than five million Syrians have fled the country's conflict
since 2011 to neighbouring Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon, and even higher numbers
are displaced internally. The influx has tested Lebanon, a country of just four
million that already struggled with overstretched resources. More than half of
registered Syrians in Lebanon live in extreme poverty, struggling to eke out a
living while sheltering in informal tented settlements or unfinished buildings.
Lebanese politicians have increased their calls in recent months for refugees to
return home, with large parts of the country under government control but left
in ruins.
Hassan Khalil comments on officer promotion
decree
Wed 27 Dec 2017/NNA - Finance Minister Ali Hasan Khalil said after the Wednesday
parliamentary gathering at Ain Tineh residence that "if the officer promotion
decree had been presented to the Finance Ministry, a constitutional problem
would have been evaded." Minister Khalil also pointed out that the Internal
Security promotion decree had been presented to the Finance Ministry, stressing
that the "Ministry's role is not solely confined to expenditure but also to the
impact of spending." On the recent statement by House Speaker that the "weak
resorts to judiciary", Khalil elaborated the Speaker meant that "those who have
weak argument only resort to the judiciary."
Berri meets deputies within Wednesday
parliamentary gathering
Wed 27 Dec 2017/NNA - Within the framework of Wednesday parliamentary Gathering,
Visiting deputies quoted House Speaker, Nabih Berri, as saying that "he shall
not add anything [today] to his comments he made the day before on the officers'
decree." Visiting MPs also noted: "There are many things related to the subject
yet the Speaker does not wish to speak about today." On the other hand, Speaker
Berri underlined that "the most important matter nowadays is what is currently
taking place in the occupied Palestine, and the ongoing intifada of the
Palestinian people, which requires genuine solidarity and support in the face of
the Israeli occupation." Berri also met with the Chairman of the French-Lebanese
Parliamentary Friendship Committee, MP Luick Cerrifran, and the Advisor on
Strategic Affairs and Innovation, Ahmed Shams El-Din. Talks reportedly touched
on means of bolstering parliamentary cooperation and French-Lebanese ties.
Bazzi: Speaker Berri upholds his stance on
officers' decree
Wed 27 Dec 2017/NNA - MP Ali Bazzi said in the wake of Wednesday's parliamentary
gathering that House Speaker Nabih Berri upholds his stance on the debatable
officers' decree in terms of its constitutional and legal aspect.
"Whoever attempts to portray the matter as being against the Christians is
categorically mistaken," MP Bazzi said, ruling out the presence of a political
spat in this regard.
Hariri, Allawi tackle general situation
Wed 27 Dec 2017/NNA -
Prime Minister Saad Hariri received on Wednesday evening at the Center House
Iraqi Vice President Dr. Ayad Allawi, with whom he discussed the general
situation and bilateral ties between the two countries.
Premier Hariri also met with a delegation of "Arab Khaldeh" tribe, led by Abu
Deeb Daher.
Rahi receives army command delegation on festive
season
Wed 27 Dec 2017/NNA - A delegation of the army command on Wednesday paid a visit
to Bkirki to well-wish Maronite Patriarch Cardinal Bechara Boutros Rahi on the
festive season. Patriarch Rahi also received well-wishers in Bkirki from the
various perishes across Lebanon.
Army Commander inspects military police command:
For intensifying security tasks during holidays
Wed 27 Dec 2017/NNA - Army Commander General Joseph Aoun on Wednesday morning
inspected the military police command in Al-Rihaniyeh, whereby he had firsthand
look at its various field, training and administrative activities. General Aoun
congratulated army soldiers and officers on the festive season, heaping praise
on their extraordinary efforts in controlling security, combating crimes and
implementing law and order. The army commander urged the military police to
redouble security tasks during the holidays, in order to ensure people's safety
and maintain public order.
Geagea via Twitter: Mohammed Shatah's blood will
not go in vain
Wed 27 Dec 2017/NNA - Lebanese Forces leader, Samir Geagea, on Wednesday said in
his tweet: "The blood of Mohammad Shatah did not and shall not go in vain, but
rather has fostered the cause to which we shall cling till the realization of
the state of mankind." Geagea was speaking marking the fourth commemoration of
the assassination of Minister Mohammed Shatah. "Mohammed Shatah... We shall not
forget you," he said.
On Israeli border, Hezbollah, Syria demand rebel surrender
Ynetnews/Reuters|/December
27/17
Despite repeated Israeli warnings not to approach its northern frontier, Syrians
rebels pinned down in strategic area near Israeli-Lebanese border given 72 hours
to surrender by Hezbollah and Syrian army as the two allies close in. Syrian
rebels pinned down in a strategic area where the Israeli and Lebanese borders
meet with Syria were handed an ultimatum by the Syrian army and its
Iranian-backed militia allies to either surrender or face certain military
defeat, rebels said on Tuesday. The Syrian army backed by local militias
financed and equipped by Iran alongside Druze fighters from the area have been
escalating a fierce assault against Sunni rebels in an enclave in the foothills
of Mount Hermon, close to both the Israeli and Lebanese borders. “They were
given 72 hours to surrender with fighters to go to Idlib or those who want to
stay have to reach a settlement,” said Ibrahim al-Jebawi, a Free Syrian Army
(FSA) official familiar with the situation on the ground. Another rebel official
who asked not to be named said they were told either to “surrender or a military
solution.”The rebels have now been left encircled in Beit Jin, their main
stronghold after losing strategic hills and farms around it this week after over
two months of near daily shelling and aerial strikes. Iran-backed Lebanon’s
Hezbollah’s media unit said insurgents had agreed to negotiate surrender terms
and said negotiations had already begun over their evacuation in the next few
days to rebel-held Idlib. The Syrian army has used similar tactics of pushing
opponents to rebel areas further from the Syrian capital after a twin tactic of
siege and months of strikes on residential areas. There were also more than
8,000 civilians who have been trapped in the remaining enclaves with their
plight worsening, according to rebel spokesman Sohaib Alraheel.
Israel, which Syria accuses of helping the rebels, is alarmed at the growing
Iranian military influence in the Golan Heights and has stepped up its strikes
against pro-Iranian targets inside Syria. Israel has been lobbying both big
powers to deny Iran, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and other Shi‘ite militias any
permanent bases in Syria, and to keep them away from the Golan, as they gain
ground while helping Damascus beat back Sunni-led rebels. Early this month there
was an Israeli strike on a base near Kiswah, south of Damascus, that was widely
believed to be an Iranian military compound, a Western intelligence source said.
Hezbollah’s bastion in southern Lebanon is only a few kms from the rebel
enclave, and securing a supply line from its stronghold into Syria’s Quneitra
province was a major strategic gain, rebels and defense analysts say. “Now
Hezbollah will have a bigger foothold on the Syrian side of the Golan and it is
desperate to link this area with southern Lebanon,” al-Jebawi added. Israel had
warned Hezbollah against trying to open a front in the Golan Heights and was
believed to be behind the killing a prominent commander in an air strike in 2015
whom the group later admitted had overseen a local Hezbollah presence in the
area. “This is an effort by Iran and its proxy Hezbollah to expand the lines of
engagement with Israel. The question is will Israel allow that?” said Fayez al
Dweiri, a retired Jordanian general who follows Syria closely.
Nasrallah’s Call To Tweet Against Trump’s Jerusalem Announcement Sparks Scornful
Responses On Social Media, Lebanese Press: Nasrallah Has Become A Digital
Warrior
MEMRI/December 27/17
The reactions of the Iran-led resistance axis to U.S. President Donald Trump’s
announcement recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital were characterized mainly
by calls for escalated violence, in particular against U.S. interests.[1]
However, the response of Hizbullah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah was
relatively cautious and restrained. In a speech delivered on December 7, 2017,
one day after Trump’s announcement, he expressed support for a new Palestinian
intifada, and called on the Arab and Muslim world “not to stand idly by” but
rather to “offer full moral, political, monetary, and material support, and also
aid with weapons, to the Palestinian people” – but did not promise that
Hizbullah would be participating in this intifada. He also called on people
throughout the world to respond to Trump’s move by “posting hundreds of millions
of tweets and hundreds of millions of positions on social media,” adding that
this is the duty of every man and woman worldwide and promising that it would
have real impact.[2] In another speech several days later, Nasrallah again
stressed the importance of social media activism against Trump’s move.[3]
Nasrallah’s statements provoked scornful reactions from Lebanese journalists and
politicians, and from social media users, who claimed that he had transformed
from an armed resistance fighter into a “digital warrior.” They also complained
that his reaction, as well as the reactions of Iranian officials, reflected
their helplessness and lack of real concern about the Palestinian issue.
This report reviews the responses to Nasrallah’s statements on Twitter and in
the Lebanese press.
Responses On Twitter: Nasrallah Is Defending Jerusalem With Hashtags And Tweets
Lebanese Twitter users, as well as activists associated with the Syrian
opposition, heaped scorn on Nasrallah’s call for social media action, and the
Syrians also pointed to the discrepancy between his restrained reaction in the
matter of Jerusalem and his movement’s armed involvement in Syria.
A Lebanese user calling himself “Dissident of the Party of Satan [a derogatory
name for Hizbullah]” tweeted: “The villain from the Dahia [Hizbullah’s Beirut
stronghold] has screeched. The villain Nasrallah is calling on his herd to tweet
against Trump’s position on Jerusalem! Where are your missiles that can reach
Haifa and beyond?[4] Shame on you, villain.”[5]
The following day, the same user tweeted a Hizbullah flag bearing the Twitter
icon and the slogan “Hizbullah are the Tweeters” (instead of “Hizbullah are the
Victors”), with the comment: “Jerusalem has exposed Nasrallah’s mercenary ways.
This is the new flag of the Party of Satan [Hizbullah]. The screeching of the
villain from the Dahia, Hassan Nasrallah, has confirmed what was [already]
certain: [that] Hizbullah is the creation of the Zionist-Iranian alliance.”[6]
Lebanese journalist Jerry Maher, a known opponent of Hizbullah, tweeted the day
after Nasrallah’s speech: “The terrorist Hizbullah [organization] used every
kind of weapon to confront and kill the Syrian people, but when it comes to
Jerusalem they use tweets and social media to protest and resist! Hassan
Nasrallah is soft on the Israelis but rabidly [violent] towards Sunnis!”[7]
Shi’ite Lebanese journalist ‘Ali Amin, editor of the Lebanese anti-Hizbullah
Janoubia website, posted quotes from Nasrallah’s speech under the caption
“Nasrallah: Wage Armed Resistance in Syria, and Tweet for Jerusalem!”[8]
Ahead of Nasrallah’s second speech, Nadim Koteich, another Shi’ite Lebanese
journalist who opposes Hizbullah, tweeted: “In Hassan Nasrallah’s speech this
afternoon, expect the announcement of an Instagram platform to reinforce the
arsenal of resistance axis [weapons] for confronting Israel and liberating
Jerusalem. We defend Jerusalem with the blades of our tweets.”[9]
Faysal Al-Qassem, a Syrian television host on Al-Jazeera, tweeted: “The new
slogan of the resistance [Hizbullah] and the resistance [axis] is: “Missiles for
Syria and Hashtags for Israel.”[10]
‘Alaa Sunnoufi, who identifies as a Syrian opposition activist, tweeted in
response to Nasrallah’s speech: “Now we know why there was no retaliation
against the Israeli [war]planes in the skies of Syria and Lebanon. The range of
the anti-aircraft Hashtag Ra’d-1 and Hashtag Aqsa-2 missiles is not long
enough.”[11]
Syrian journalist Majed ‘Abd Al-Noor wrote on Twitter in a similar vein:
“Breaking news: Tweet launched by Hassan Nasrallah in South Lebanon lands in
Israeli settlement”[12]
Syrian Twitter user Maher Sharaf Al-Din tweeted: “After Nasrallah demanded to
tweet in response to Trump’s decision, we are wondering: Sayyid[13] [Nasrallah],
why did you not tell your supporters to tweet at the Syrians instead of sending
them to kill, slaughter and destroy?”[14]
Responding to this tweet, a user calling himself “Hassan Nasrallah 5” posted an
image showing Twitter icons bearing names of Iranian missiles (Ra’ad-2, Zilzal,
Khaibar-3, Fajr-6, Sakher-4).[15]
Lebanese Journalists Mock Nasrallah: He Wants To Liberate Jerusalem Using
Twitter
Lebanese Journalist: Nasrallah Has Become A Digital Warrior, Attacking With
Tweets And “Likes”
As stated, criticism of Nasrallah’s speech was also expressed in the Lebanese
press. On December 12, 2017, journalist Rashed Fayed published a mocking article
in the Al-Nahar daily, in which he wrote: “The truth which cannot be camouflaged
or concealed is that the Arabs are not the only helpless nation… The Persian
nation [can] be added [to the list as well]. What Trump has done is to expose
everyone’s helplessness, the boasting of the resistance axis, and the conspiracy
of those who support [the principle of] ‘land for peace.’
“It is enough to ask: What can empty the Palestinian issue of substance more
than the pronouncement that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, [a
pronouncement] that challenges the U.N., its decisions, and the peace plan based
on two states?[16] This is the greatest and most blatant crime against the
Palestinians and their hopes since the Nakba [in 1948]. When Trump raised his
hand and held up the document of recognition, the illusion crept into [my] mind
that… this may be the chance for the resistance [axis to prove] its bravery and
for Khamenei, Nasrallah, and Hizbullah [to make good] on their threats.
“However, the surprise came when Trump’s position transformed Nasrallah into a
social media activist who is adept at sharing tweets, ‘likes,’ and so on, while
the chief advisor to the [Iranian] Jurisprudent [Ali Khamenei], Hossein Amir
Abdollahian, revealed his astrological powers when he foresaw an apocalypse for
the region. After the adherents of [Iran’s] Islamic Revolution [endlessly]
drummed into our ears that they were waiting for Israel to make a mistake so
that they could destroy it, we [recently] heard the Friday preacher in Tehran,
Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, say that ‘Iran is developing its ballistic capabilities
so as to deter its enemies, and will burn Tel Aviv and Haifa if the insane
Zionist entity tries to do something foolish one of these days.’ In other words,
Tehran is lying in wait [for Israel] so as to defend itself, not in order to
liberate Palestine… Nasrallah, who only recently boasted that he has thousands
of fighters ready to go into Syria, has forgotten that such a force could
liberate Al-Aqsa, and has become a digital warrior dispensing advice about how
to hit the Zionists of Jerusalem with tweets and text messages.
“The reactions of the resistance [axis] show us that neither [Qassem] Soleimani,
[the commander of Iran’s Qods Force, which is part of the Islamic Revolutionary
Guard Corps (IRGC)], nor [the Commander of the IRGC itself, Mohammad Ali] Al-Jaafari,
nor Abdollahian, nor [Iran’s Supreme Leader], Imam Khamenei himself, has the
capability to confront [the U.S. and Israel] with anything other than whining
and cries of ‘Death to America.’ [This,] while their adopted son in Lebanon [Nasrallah]
lashes out with his tongue and dispenses advice all around, and calls for war by
means of a new Palestinian intifada that has absolutely no need of his approval
in order to start up. And as for his speeches since 2006 about the [anticipated]
confrontation [with Israel] and about the readiness [of his organization for
it], he has basically put an end to that.
“The main thing that stands out in the reactions to Trump’s announcement… is
that the accusations of negligence, sycophancy, defeatism, and surrender that
Tehran has leveled at others constitute the ‘sole act of resistance’ carried out
by the so-called ‘resistance axis,’ from the Dahia to Tehran…”[17]
Lebanese Daily: Nasrallah Unveils A New Weapon With Which To Liberate Palestine
– Social Media
Journalist Walid Hussein wrote in the Lebanese online daily Al-Mudun:
“Nasrallah’s speech seems to have come from a different era, namely the era of
civic activism, but using modern means, namely social media. We aren’t used to
this kind of thing from the armed Hizbullah, which declares openly that it has
more than a hundred thousand missiles with which to destroy the oppressive
entity [Israel], and is always promising the ‘believers’ [to do so]. But
Nasrallah’s speech unveiled a new weapon with which to realize the dream of
regaining Palestine from the river to the sea. He called on Lebanese and Arab
citizens… to express condemnation of Donald Trump’s decision… on social media…
Nasrallah’s speech was met with an unprecedented wave of jokes from social media
activists…
“The great paradox here doesn’t lie [only] in the fact that [Hizbullah] availed
itself of the help of the [Iranian IRGC’s] Qods Force, which is armed to the
teeth, in order to ‘liberate’ Syria, but made do with the weapons of
demonstrations and tweets in order to liberate Jerusalem… The paradox [also lies
in the fact that an organization like] Hizbullah called for the use of this
non-violent weapon. [Also,] Twitter and Facebook have been blocked to users in
Iran since 2009, after the protests in response to the election of president
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad… Will Nasrallah’s speech be the trigger for the [re-]opening
of the virtual space to the Iranians, so that they will be able to take part in
the virtual campaign to liberate Jerusalem, so long as it is not yet time to
[launch] Khaibar, Ra’ad, and Shehab missiles? Or perhaps [these sites] will
remain blocked [in Iran], while the missiles remain in storage, waiting ‘for the
right place and time?
“There is additional significance to the weapon of tweets: it has put Hizbullah
in the same place as the Arab officials whom it criticizes. Hizbullah has long
criticized these [officials] for their negligence and for making do with
condemnations and declarations that do not lead to the regaining of Jerusalem…
Will the Hizbullah tweets be different from those of the Arab League, for
example, which condemns ‘the manipulation of the status of Jerusalem that leads
to instability in the region’? Does Nasrallah believe that the tweets from his
public will be more ‘destructive?'”[18]
Head Of The Independent Nasserite Movement (INM) In Lebanon: Twitter And
Facebook Are Nasrallah’s Missiles
Dr. Ziad Al-‘Ajouz, who heads the Leadership Council of the Independent
Nasserite Movement (INM), leveled similar criticism at Nasrallah in an interview
with the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassa, in which he said: “Nasrallah’s false claims
that his weapons are intended for confrontation with the Zionist enemy have
collapsed. He [apparently] believes that the road to Jerusalem passes through
Damascus, Homs, Aleppo, Iraq, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Yemen. He is laughing in the
face of the world and of our peoples. When he had to express a serious position
[about the means] to actualize his declaration about the defense of Jerusalem
after U.S. President Trump recognized it as the capital of the Zionist entity,
Hassan Nasrallah declared that today the defense of Jerusalem is to be carried
out through demonstrations and through opposing [Trump’s step] on social media.
Twitter and Facebook have become Nasrallah’s missiles for the liberation of
Jerusalem, while his ballistic missiles are reserved for attacks on Arab cities.
The great plot against the Arabs has thus been exposed. Is there any greater
moral [of this story] or evidence [to be deduced]?”[19]
1] On reactions to Trump’s announcement across the Arab world, see MEMRI Special
Dispatch No.7217,
Reactions To U.S. President Trump’s Jerusalem Announcement: Hamas, Resistance
Axis Call For Violence, Attacks On U.S. Interests; Palestinian Authority,
Moderate Arab Countries Express Restrained Condemnation, Hope For Retraction,
December 10, 2017; for Iranian reactions to Trump’s announcement, see MEMRI
Special Dispatch No.7230, Reactions In Iran To Trump’s Recognition Of Jerusalem
As Israel’s Capital: Incitement To Violence, Calls To Revive Intifada And
Destroy Israel, December 15, 2017.
[2] Almanar.com.lb, December 7, 2017.
[3] Almanar.com.lb, December 11, 2017.
[4] An allusion to Nasrallah’s speech during the 2006 Lebanon-Israel war, in
which he said that his organization’s missiles could reach Haifa and “even way,
way beyond Haifa.”
[5] Twitter.com/no_hizbollah, December 7, 2017.
[6] Twitter.com/no_hizbullah, December 8, 2017.
[7] Twitter.com/Jerrymahers, December 8, 2017.
[8] Twitter.com/alyalamine, December 8, 2017.
[9] Twitter.com/NadimKoteich, December 11, 2017.
[10] Twitter.com/Kasimf, December 7, 2017.
[11] Twitter.com/AlaaSannoufi, December 8, 2017.
[12] Twitter.com/majed_adbalnoor, December 8, 2017.
[13] A title of honor denoting people accepted as descendants of the Prophet
Muhammad.
[14] Twitter.com/mahersharafeddi, December 7, 2017.
[15] Twitter.com/HasanNasrAllah5, December 8, 2017.
[16] The reference is to the Arab Peace Initiative, which was unanimously
accepted at the 2002Arab League summit in Beirut, and endorsed by other Islamic
countries as well.
[17] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), December 12, 2017.
[18] Al-Mudun (Lebanon), December 8, 2017.
[19] Al-Siyassa (Kuwait), December 16, 2017.
Latest LCCC Bulletin For
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on December
26-27/17
Bahrain FM: Iran’s state shall remain while
the regime will be gone
Al Arabiya/December 27/2017/In a tweet posted by Bahraini Foreign Minister
Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed al-Khalifa, he said that “Iran and its followers know
who stands in the face of their despicable expansionist project, stressing that
Iran as a state will go on, but its regime will be gone”. He also added that if
his statement is considered offensive to Iran, that “it doesn’t bother him”.
“Iran and its followers know who stands in the face of their expansionist plan
and who conspires against us, God save the king and his loyal men,” the foreign
minister tweeted. “I repeat and I will not waste the opportunity, Iran shall
remain but the Islamic Republic is just a temporary status, an odd state that
will pass,” he said. “If the Islamic Republic does not like our words, let it
drink the waters of the sea and strike its head in the four walls,” using
proverbs suggesting Iran’s futile action.“We and our brothers will be closely
watching and will face its schemes,” he said.
UAE court sentences 13 on terror and espionage
charges
Al Arabiya/December
27/2017/Jail sentences ranging between 18 months to 15 years were handed out to
13 individuals by the Abu Dhabi Federal Court of Appeals on Tuesday, local media
reported. Fines of Dh50,000 ($13,615) up until Dh1 million were also issued in
cases related to the “promotion of terrorism, espionage for foreign countries
and the joining of terrorist organizations,” according to the Dubai-based Gulf
News. Among those convicted was 28-year-old Emirati, identified as H.A.M.M, who
was sentenced to 15 years for spying for Iran. The Emirati was reportedly found
guilty of sharing confidential military information to Iranian agents working at
the Iranian embassy in Abu Dhabi. The court ordered him to pay for all judicial
expenses and a confiscation of all documents and communications was placed. In
addition to this sentence, a Sudanese woman, 46, was sentenced to 10 years and
deportation for assisting the Emirati in contacting the Iranian agents. Another
Emirati man, 45, was also sentenced to 10 years in prison and was given a Dh1
million fine for supporting terrorist ideologies, such as those of ISIS in Syria
and Ansar Al Sharia in Yemen. The Emirati was further found guilty of releasing
false articles about Saudi Arabia and Egypt. The court also sentenced four
Jordanians to 10 years and each was given a Dh1 million fine for creating pages
on social media that support the ideology of terrorist organizations and
circulating information that could jeopardize the stability of the UAE,
consisting of false information on UAE foreign policy. Additionally, another
case saw a 35-year-old Emirati receive 10 years in prison and a Dh100,000 fine
after he was found guilty of espionage for Iran. He was ordered to be placed
under probation for three years after his term is served. The man’s accomplice,
a 45-year-old Bahraini was sentenced to three years and to pay Dh50,000. He was
also found guilty for insulting UAE leaders. In the final case, two Syrians were
found guilty for joining terrorist organizations ISIS and Al Nusra Front. Each
were given seven-year prison sentences, each to be followed by deportation. A
third suspect, 17-year-old Syrian received 18 months in prison.
Saudi crown prince meets with Turkish prime minister
Al Arabiya/December 27/2017/Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin
Abdulaziz with Turkey’s Prime Minister Binali Yildirim in Riyadh on Wednesday.
During the meeting, both reviewed bilateral relations between the two countries
and ways of enhancing them in addition to the latest developments in the region.
“The talks were attended by Minister of State and Cabinet's Member Dr. Musaed
bin Mohammed Al-Aiban; Minister of Commerce and Investment Dr. Majed bin
Abdullah Al-Qasabi; Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Dr. Nizar bin Obaid
Madani; Chief of General Intelligence Khalid bin Ali Al-Humaidan and Saudi
Ambassador to Turkey Engineer Waleed bin Abdulkarim Al-Khuraiji,” a statement
from Saudi Press Agency (SPA) read. On the Turkish side, the meeting was
attended by members of the delegation accompanying the visiting Prime Minister.
Saudi king receives, holds talks with Turkish prime minister
Al Arabiya/December 27/2017/Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdulaziz has
received Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim in Riyadh on Wednesday. King
Salman and PM Yildirim held talks during which they reviewed bilateral relations
between the two countries, means of enhancing them, and latest developments in
the region. “The talks were attended by Prince Faisal bin Bandar bin Abdulaziz,
Governor of Riyadh Region, Minister of State and Member of the Council of
Ministers Dr. Musaed bin Mohammed Al-Aiban, Minister of Commerce and Investment
Dr. Majed bin Abdullah Al-Qasabi, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Dr.
Nizar bin Obaid Madani, Saudi Ambassador to Turkey Engineer Walid bin Abdulkarim
Al-Khuraiji and the Chief of General Intelligence Khalid bin Ali Al-Humaidan,” a
statement on Saudi Press Agency (SPA) read. On the Turkish side, the talks were
attended by the delegation accompanying the Prime Minister.
Coalition raids kill and wound dozens of the
Houthi militia in al-Jawf
Al Arabiya/December
27/2017/Sanaa – The Yemeni army announced on Wednesday that dozens of Houthi
militia fighters have been killed and injured as a result of the intensive
coalition air raids of the Arab alliance on their positions in the province of
al-Jawf north of the country. The official website of the Yemeni army quoted a
field source as saying: “The air raids targeted sites and mechanisms of combat
and weapons storages of the militia located in the Ham camp in the directorate
of Mitoun north of the province.”According to the source, the raids led to the
deaths and injuries of the militia, in addition to the destruction of heavy
vehicles along with weapons and ammunition. He explained that other raids
targeted a gathering of militia elements in a training camp led by the Houthi
leader Abdul-Karim al-Houthi, in the valley of Soda Madhab, located between the
directorates of Burt al-Marashi and Harf Sufian. He confirmed that the raids
resulted in dozens of deaths and injuries among the Houthis. The Yemeni army,
with the assistance of coalition air forces liberated large areas in the border
province of al-Jawf with Saudi Arabia. Most notably, they took control over the
region and the Ajashr strategic camp and consolidated the Jawf and Saada, the
main stronghold of the Houthi militia in the far north of Yemen.
Houthis seize and detain bank accounts of 1,223
Yemeni officials and citizens
Al Arabiya/December
27/2017/Houthis have sent an order to seize and detain the banks accounts and
properties of more than 1,000 Yemeni officials including ministers in the
legitimate government, political activists, those against the coup, and upper
and middle party leaders. Based on these directives, the Central Bank of Yemen
in Sanaa ordered banks in the private and mixed sectors to detain a number of
bank accounts – as seen in the attached statements below. The statements,
released under the name of the “Committee for the collection and receipt of
traitors’ property (CCRTP)” and addressed to the Houthi operated Central Bank of
Yemen, included nearly 1223 names the Houthi’s have labelled as “traitors.”The
list of names starts with the Minister of Social Affairs and Labor in the
legitimate Yemeni government, Ibtihaj Abdullah al-Kamal and Yousef Hussein Mahdi.
Heading what they’ve called the CCRTP is Houthi leader and deputy minister of
interior in the illegitimate government Abdulhakim al-Khiwani. This is the first
time the CCRTP has been brought to light. The date it was established is
unknown. The committee justified its decision as being based on what it has
called the Specialized Criminal Apparatus and therefore requested the Central
Bank to circulate its decision to seize accounts and properties to all official
and private banks in accordance to the attached memo dated on December 23.
23rd of December Houthi statement. (Supplied)
Argentina judge says death of prosecutor Nisman
was murder
BUENOS AIRES (Reuters)/December 26/17/- Alberto Nisman, the Argentine prosecutor
who was found dead days after accusing former President Cristina Fernandez of
covering up Iran’s role in the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center, was
murdered, a federal judge said on Tuesday.
In a 656-page ruling, judge Julian Ercolini said there was sufficient proof to
conclude that the shot to the head that killed Nisman in January 2015 was not
self-inflicted. That marked the first time any judge has said the case was a
murder. Fernandez and others had suggested the death was a suicide, but a
prosecutor investigating the case last year recommended it be pursued as a
murder probe. “Nisman’s death could not have been a suicide,” Ercolini wrote in
Tuesday’s ruling, which also charged Diego Lagomarsino, a former employee of
Nisman‘s, with accessory to murder.
Lagomarsino has acknowledged lending Nisman the gun that killed him the day
before he was to appear before Congress to detail his allegation against
Fernandez. But he has said Nisman asked him for the gun to protect himself and
his family.Fernandez, now a senator, was indicted for treason earlier this month
over Nisman’s allegations that she worked behind the scenes to clear Iran of
blame for the attack on the AMIA Jewish center, which killed 85 people, in an
effort to normalize relations and clinch a 2013 grains-for-oil deal with Tehran.
Human rights groups and the former head of Interpol have criticized that
indictment. Tehran has denied links to the attack.
Reporting by Maximiliano Rizzi; writing by Luc Cohen, editing by G Crosse
Negotiations to Guarantee Tahrir al-Sham Evacuation from
Syria’s Beit Jin
Asharq AL-awsat/26/12/2017/The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights announced
that negotiations are ongoing in the southwestern Damascus countryside to reach
an agreement over ensuring the exit of the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham from from the
region. The plan is to transport them to the northern Idlib province. The
negotiations for the plan came after weeks of heavy rocket fire and barrel
bombing of the region by the Syrian regime, said “trusted” sources. They were
made possible recently after the regime and its allies were able to surround the
opposition factions and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham in a narrow area in the town of
Beit Jin that is close to the border with Lebanon and Israel, they added. The
regime and its Iran-backed allied were able to infiltrate the last remaining
opposition stronghold near the strategic Lebanese-Israeli border. The enclave is
the last rebel bastion left in the southwest of Damascus known as the Western
Ghouta that had since last year fallen under government control after months of
heavy bombing on civilian areas and years of siege tactics that forced rebels to
surrender. A western intelligence source confirmed rebel reports that
Iranian-backed local factions alongside commanders from the Lebanese “Hezbollah”
group were playing a major role in the ongoing battles. “The Iranian-backed
militias are trying to consolidate their sphere of influence all the way from
southwest of Damascus to the Israeli border,” said Suhaib al Ruhail, an official
from the Liwa al Furqan rebel group that operates in the area. Worried by Iran’s
expanding influence in Syria after the defeat of ISIS, Israel has in recent
weeks stepped up its strikes against suspected Iranian targets inside Syria.
Early this month there was an Israeli strike on a base near Kiswah, south of
Damascus, that was widely believed to be an Iranian military compound, a Western
intelligence source said. Israel has been lobbying Washington and Moscow to deny
Iran, “Hezbollah” and other militias any permanent bases in Syria, and to keep
them away from the Golan, as they gain ground while helping Damascus beat back
rebels. The southwest of Syria is part of a de-escalation zone in southern Syria
agreed last July between Russia and the United States, the first such
understanding between the two powers. The area has not seen Russian bombing,
unlike other ceasefire areas in Syria.
10 Hurt in Russia Supermarket Bombing
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/December 27/17/A homemade bomb blast at a
supermarket in the Russian city of Saint Petersburg injured 10 people Wednesday,
officials said. "According to preliminary information, an explosion of an
unidentified object occurred in a store," Investigative Committee spokeswoman
Svetlana Petrenko said in a statement. The blast was caused by a "homemade
explosive device with the power equivalent to 200 grammes of TNT filled with
lethal fragments," she said. "The investigation is looking at all possible
causes of what happened," she said, adding that a probe for attempted murder had
been launched."Ten people have been hospitalized, their lives are not in
danger," said the head of Saint Petersburg investigative unit Alexander Klaus,
Interfax news agency reported. An AFP correspondent at the scene observed first
responders and police as well as a car belonging the Federal Security Service
(FSB), which investigates acts of terror. Police said the blast occurred in a
supermarket northeast of the city center, with sources telling Russian agencies
that the explosive device had been placed in a storage locker. "About 6:30pm
there was the sound of a blast. As a result, several people have been injured,"
the Saint Petersburg police said, giving the incident's location. "There is no
fire. All shoppers have been evacuated," an emergencies ministry representative
told Interfax. Witness Artur Yeritsyan told TASS news agency that he heard the
blast and saw smoke in the shop, but that there were not a lot of customers at
the time, with some victims being taken away by ambulances. Russia's second city
Saint Petersburg was the target of a metro bombing in April, which lead to
fourteen deaths and dozens of people wounded. The bombing was claimed by a group
linked to al-Qaida which said it was a message to countries engaged in war with
Muslims.
Medical Evacuations Begin from Besieged Syria
Rebel Bastion
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/December 27/17/Aid workers have begun evacuating
emergency medical cases from Syria's besieged rebel bastion of Eastern Ghouta,
the Red Cross said on Wednesday, after months of waiting during which the United
Nations said at least 16 people died. Families waited in the darkness in the
rebel-held town of Douma for their loved ones to board ambulances bound for
hospitals in the capital Damascus. Under a deal with the government, five
workmen detained by the rebels during fierce clashes with the army in March were
released in exchange. Three children were among the first four patients to
leave, Red Crescent official Ahmed al-Saour told AFP. He said in total 29
seriously ill people were due to be evacuated. The first four were a girl with
haemophilia, a baby with the autoimmune disorder Guillain-Barre, a child with
leukaemia, and a man in need of a kidney transplant, he said.
Eight-year-old Ingy, the girl with haemophilia, gave a broad smile as she
boarded an ambulance, wearing a woolly hat and gloves against the cold. In
another ambulance, one-year-old Mohammed lay in the lap of a Red Crescent
worker, his mother sitting beside them in a long black cloak and a veil showing
only her eyes. "Tonight the @SYRedCrescent with @ICRC team started the
evacuation of critical medical cases from #EasternGhouta to #Damascus," the
International Committee of the Red Cross said on its Twitter account.
The Syrian American Medical Society, another medical relief organisation, said
the evacuations covered "29 critical cases, approved for medical evacuation to
Damascus. Four patients were evacuated today."It said the remainder would be
evacuated in the coming days.
The dominant rebel faction in Eastern Ghouta, Jaish al-Islam (Army of Islam),
said the rebels had agreed to free some of their prisoners in return for the
evacuations. "We have agreed to the release of a number of prisoners... in
exchange for the evacuation of the most urgent humanitarian cases," the group
said a statement. Eastern Ghouta is one of the last remaining rebel strongholds
in Syria and has been under a tight government siege since 2013, causing severe
food and medical shortages for its nearly 400,000 residents. While some food is
still grown locally, or smuggled in, humanitarian access to the region has been
limited despite regular appeals from aid agencies.
Baby among dead -Last week, Jan Egeland, the head of the UN's humanitarian
taskforce for Syria, warned that at least 16 people had died while waiting for
evacuation from Eastern Ghouta. He said a list put together several months ago
of nearly 500 civilians in desperate need of evacuation was rapidly shrinking.
"That number is going down, not because we are evacuating people, but because
they are dying," he told reporters in Geneva. "We have confirmation of 16 having
died on these lists since they were resubmitted in November, and it is probably
higher," he said, highlighting the case of a baby who died on December 14, as
the latest round of Syria peace talks in Geneva ended in failure. Egeland said
evacuations and efforts to bring aid into the region had been blocked by a lack
of authorisations from the Syrian authorities. The Eastern Ghouta region, near
the capital Damascus, is one of the last strongholds of rebels fighting the
forces of President Bashar al-Assad. It is one of four "de-escalation" zones
agreed in May in a deal brokered by government backers Russian and Iran and
rebel supporter Turkey. The agreement led to some reduction in fighting but the
government kept up its blockade and renewed its bombardment of the enclave in
mid-November. The government stands accused by its critics of using sieges of
civilians as a weapon in its war against the rebels. Rebel fighters pulled out
of second city Aleppo and third city Homs, as well as districts of Damascus,
only after prolonged blockades caused serious hardship to their families and
other civilians. More than 340,000 people have been killed and millions have
been driven from their homes since Syria's conflict erupted with anti-government
protests in 2011.
Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from
miscellaneous sources published on December
26-27/17
Five Challanges For Israel If Syrian Regime Retakes Golan Border Region
Jerusalem Post/December 27/17/
In recent weeks the Syrian regime has launched a small offensive to isolate and
retake several villages located near the Hermon.
For the last five years Israel has been on the front line of the Syrian civil
war as clashes between rebel groups and the Damascus regime of Bashar Assad
unfolded near the Golan. In the last few weeks the regime has opened a small
offensive to isolate and retake several villages located near Mount Hermon. This
is seen as the first in a series of moves that will eventually bring the regime
and its backers in Iran and Hezbollah back to the border, raising major concerns
for Israel.
The following are the major challenges:
Refugees
Rebel groups control dozens of villages that separate the area of Israeli
control on the Golan from the Syrian regime. Many of those are located in an
area covered under a cease-fire agreement signed in July by the US, Russia and
Jordan. At the moment, the rebels’ hold is most precarious on the village of
Beit Jinn and the nearby Mazra’at Beit Jinn and Mugh al-Mir, which are located
in a small finger of rebel-controlled territory near Mount Hermon. These
villages are flanked on three sides by the regime and its allies. If they fall,
which is expected to happen soon, some of the wounded and civilians from the
villages may seek shelter in Israel. This is because Israel has treated
thousands of Syrians over the past years. The total was estimated at around
3,000 by July 2017, including 1,000 children. They have not sought to remain in
Israel. That could change, however, if they cannot return to their villages, or
if they fear reprisals. The Syrian regime has attempted to “reconcile” with
villages it is retaking, encouraging locals to accept Damascus rule in return
for not being persecuted. Some of the armed rebels have been allowed to leave on
buses in agreements in other areas of Syria.
However, years of Israeli fostering relations with locals, treating them, and
sending aid across the border may have created some kind of dependency. When the
day comes that the villages fall to the regime, Israel will have to monitor what
happens closely and craft a policy for any refugees seeking a haven.
Terrorism and ISIS
Mixed in among the rebels on the Syrian side of the Golan have been elements of
Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, which was originally al-Qaida in Syria and was known as
the Nusra Front for a while. This extremist organization could pose a threat to
Israel if it felt that pressure on it by the regime might be lessened by getting
Israel involved in the conflict. The problem is that Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham does
not operate within clear boundaries and is not part of the cease-fire agreement
on the Golan. As such it can carry out operations, such as the bombing against
Druse in the village of Khadr which is controlled by the regime. Attacks on
Khadr have created controversy in Israel because Druse on the Israeli side of
the Golan feel sympathy for their co-religionists. In addition, Islamic State
controls a section of the southern Golan near Jordan. This is an ISIS affiliate
named the Khalid ibn al-Walid Army. It is also not part of the cease-fire
agreement and has spent the last years fighting the Syrian rebels. Eventually
the regime or the rebels will seek to destroy this ISIS pocket, and that will
involve battles next to Israeli forces. There has only been one Israeli clash in
the past with this ISIS group, in 2016. But changes on the ground in Syria could
encourage more.
Iran
Israel has repeatedly stressed the need to prevent Iran from establishing
permanent bases in Syria, especially anywhere near the Golan. The foreign media
outlet Asharq al-Awsat reported that Israel had requested in July via Russia
that Assad keep Iranian forces at least 40 km. away from the border.
On December 2, Syrian regime media accused Israel of bombing an Iranian base at
Kiswah, south of Damascus. This is only one of many alleged air strikes, often
reported in Syrian or other media. In November, Russia, the US and Jordan
recommitted to the southwest Syrian cease-fire. Initially Israeli media reported
that Russia had committed to expel Iranian-backed forces near the Golan, but
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov disputed those claims, describing the
Iranian presence as “legitimate.” Iran’s support has been invited by the Syrian
government. Any moves toward the Golan by the regime raise the issue of what
role Iran and its proxies are playing and increase the chance for clashes and
tensions.
Russia
In early December, President Vladimir Putin flew to Syria and announced that
Russian troops were beginning a withdrawal from Syria. Moscow has declared
victory over ISIS. Its support for the regime in 2015 was a key reason Assad
remained in power. Since then Russia has hosted conferences in Astana and Sochi
designed to seek a more peaceful resolution to the conflict. It has supported
“de-escalation” zones in Syria, one of which is in southwest Quneitra
Governorate. The idea is to freeze parts of the conflict. However, Damascus has
vowed to take back the entire country. In 2017 it made major gains in this
respect, taking back a huge swath of desert from ISIS near the Euphrates.
The question for Israel is whether Russia’s alliance with the regime will ever
come up against an Israeli redline concerning the Iranian presence.Moscow
doesn’t appear prepared to defend Iranian forces in Syria, and the reduction of
the Russian presence leads to reduced concerns. This is buoyed by the close
relationship between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Putin. However, there
may come a time with any Syrian advance near the Golan where Israel and Russia
do not see eye to eye.
The cease-fire
The truce agreement in southwest Syria was signed in early July and a Memorandum
of Principles was drawn up in early November. The cease-fire is expected to last
for many more months, at least until it is a year old. For the regime the more
serious fighting is likely to be in the north in Idlib with more extremist rebel
groups. Also, Damascus wants to recover from six years of war. It wants
international aid and support for rebuilding cities, and it still has to police
large parts of the country only recently liberated from ISIS. It has relied on
support from Iran and Hezbollah, the latter of which is also exhausted by war.
The cease-fire is the main instrument of quiet on the Golan. If the rebels or
the regime see an interest in changing it, then Israel will be on alert. At the
moment the complex situation is quiet. This includes areas where the regime is
very close to Israel, such as near Khadr. The maintenance of this quiet has been
an achievement of Israel, Syria, Russia, the US and Jordan.
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Five-challenges-for-Israel-if-Syria-returns-to-the-Golan-520144?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=27-12-2017&utm_content=five-challenges-for-israel-if-syria-returns-to-the-golan-520144
America's growing lack of interest in the Middle East comes at its peril
غياب اهتمام أميركا بالشرق الأوسط يعطي أخطاره
Michael Young/The National/December 27/17
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=61370
It is remarkable that in just nine years, the United States has lost much of the
influence it once had in the Middle East, which it had taken more than six
decades to build. Ironically, under both presidents Barack Obama and Donald
Trump, the decline has largely been voluntary, from administrations that
initially claimed they would coolly pursue US national interests.
Mr Obama couched his disinterest in the Middle East in what was termed his
“pivot to Asia”, which was effectively a pivot away from the region. Mr Trump,
in turn, has promised to reverse his predecessor’s disengagement, vowing to
contain Iran’s growing influence. However, it has been mostly words until now.
There have been few efforts to push back against Iran in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon,
or Yemen, build a united Arab front against Tehran, or move forward in
Palestinian-Israeli talks, a reality the Iranians have attempted to exploit.
During the Second World War, Washington defined a post-war role in the Middle
East at a meeting between Franklin Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz Al Saud. The
Americans sought a stable supply of oil in return for US military support for
the Kingdom. This oil-for-security arrangement was a pillar of Washington’s
regional presence until Mr Obama took a different tack as the US itself became a
major oil supplier and pursued an opening to Iran in 2015.
During the 1950s, the Eisenhower administration intervened forcefully to impose
a settlement on Britain, France and Israel in the aftermath of the Suez Crisis
of 1956. This marked the first moment of affirmation against the former colonial
powers in the region. The US focus then was on containing Soviet influence,
which involved, for a time, building ties to anti-communist Arab nationalist
regimes. That was before the US formulated the Eisenhower doctrine, offering aid
to countries threatened by armed aggression from another state.
US intervention in Lebanon in 1958, like the overthrow of Iranian prime minister
Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, was partly driven by fear that Moscow might gain
ground, even if realities in both countries were different.
Following the Arab-Israeli war of 1967, Washington took a different approach to
the Middle East. The war placed a settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict at the
centre of regional preoccupations and only the US could be the mediator. By the
end of the decade, Washington had become a major weapons supplier to Israel,
even as Egypt’s leaders came to understand that the Americans alone could secure
an Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Sinai.
The 1970s was the decade in which US supremacy would be greatly strengthened,
despite the revolution in Iran. The Soviet Union could not compete with the US
in the range of initiatives over which Washington had a say, from the
negotiations after the 1973 Arab-Israeli war to those leading up to the Camp
David Accords of 1978. Even prominent Soviet allies, such as Syria under then
president Hafez Al Assad, understood they needed to open channels to the US.
This pattern would more or less continue until 2009, when Mr Obama sought a
conceptual change towards the region. He was reacting to eight years of
president George W Bush, during which the US had engaged in several wars in the
greater Middle East, causing a major economic burden for the country. To Mr
Obama, the region had eaten up too much US time and money and he questioned the
foundations of previous US behaviour in the region.
While in office, Mr Obama engaged with the Arab world reluctantly and when he
did so, he brought a revisionist reconsideration of the past. For instance, he
undermined the security understanding with Saudi Arabia by trying to establish a
new relationship with the Iranian regime, which Riyadh viewed then, and still
does, as a regional aggressor.
In an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, Mr Obama famously said the Saudis and
Iran needed “to find an effective way to share the neighbourhood and institute
some sort of cold peace.” His efforts did not lead to the expected detente, with
Iran’s hardliners blocking progress, even as Arab allies lost faith in
Washington. Mr Trump has sought to portray himself as the anti-Obama but he
suffers from the same faults as his predecessor. Both men showed a marked lack
of interest in the Middle East, ignoring it at at their peril. With their focus
on fighting ISIL, neither outlined a coherent US strategy for the region that
would build on the strengths and ties of the past, although Mr Trump still has
time to reverse that.
This attitude has cost the US the unchallenged influence it previously enjoyed.
Now, old allies such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt aren’t hesitating to deal with
Russia. America’s isolation from negotiations over Syria’s future, like the
recent US moves in Jerusalem undermining its mediation role in prospective peace
talks, have surrendered key levers of Washington’s regional power. Why a country
with much clout should have given it all up for nothing in return remains a
mystery.
Mr Trump wants to make America great again. Mr Obama always seemed fixated on
the limits of American power. Neither could see that an unwillingness to defend
and actively redefine America’s position in a volatile Middle East would only
confirm its loss of direction in the world.
DEBKAfile:Hezballah-Iranian-led force, now 5km from Israeli border
قوات إيران وحزب الله باتوا في سوريا على بعد 5كلم من الحدود الإسرائيلية
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=61352
DebkaFile/December 25/17
The strategic Beit Jinn enclave was allowed to fall and the Syrian rebel
defenders to capitulate – without IDF intervention.
The Syrian-Hizballah-Iranian led attackers completed their capture of the Beit
Jinn enclave on Tuesday, Dec. 26, forcing the Syrian rebel defenders to
capitulate and gaining close access to Israel’s northern border and the Quneitra
pocket of the Golan. For their final push, the attackers were reinforced Sunday
by Hizballah troops from Lebanon and the Syrian army’s Golan Regiment militia.
On Monday, leaders of the rebel militia holding Beit Jinn met with Syrian and
Hizballah officers and signed the following note of surrender:
Full reconciliation is granted to militants native to the Beit Jinn region who
wish to stop fighting.
Militants who refuse the reconciliation offer are to be transported to
rebel-held areas in the Daraa and Idlib Governorates.
Militants who entered the Beit Jinn region through Israeli-controlled territory
via Daraa are to exit back to Daraa through the same route.
The Syrian Arab Army will regain control over all military sites and bases in
the Beit Jinn valley that it possessed prior to the beginning of the civil war
in 2011.
The terms of the surrender are to be implemented on Tuesday the 26th of
December, 2017.
As DEBKAfile reported on Monday, the IDF’s failure to force Druze inhabitants of
the Golan village of Hader to open up a southwesterly escape route, would force
the embattled Beit Jinn rebels to surrender and negotiate terms for their
retreat. Since there was no IDF intervention, the rebels had no option but to
bow to the terms dictated by Syrian, Hizballah and Revolutionary Guards
officers, and let them move into to positions 6km from the Golan border. No
impediment now remains in the path of the three hostile forces for heading
towards Israeli Golan. Furthermore, by allowing its allies to lose control of
Beit Jinn, Israel virtually signed away military control of the Quneitra pocket.
It may be recalled that in October 1973, the Syrian army launched its Yom Kippur
offensive for the conquest of northern Israel from this very location.
On Monday, DEBKAfile reported:
The Syrian-Hizballah-pro-Iranian force gain reinforcements from Lebanon and
Syria to complete the successful bid for Beit Jinn and close in on Israel.
The Beit Jinn enclave faces the IDF’s Mt. Hermon positions and is 11 km from the
Israeli border. Its fall is critical to the fate of the Quneitra region opposite
the Israeli Golan. Three strategic setbacks confronted Israel on Sunday, Dec. 25
in the wake of the tripartite military’s capture of Maghar Al-Mir (see attached
map) which split the Beit Jinn enclave in two.
Syrian and Hizballah forces continued to push forward east and south, while
their officers pinned the defenders, the Islamist Hayat al-Tahrir al-Sham
rebels, to the wall with an ultimatum: Hand over the fighters accused of ties
with Israel in return for a safe passage of retreat from the embattled enclave,
or face destruction.
The attackers mobilized reinforcements from a new direction – Lebanon. A column
of Hizballah forces drove in Sunday, Dec. 24, from the southern Lebanese outpost
of Chebaa and crossed into Syria to join the assault on the rebels.
Damascus, moreover, sent in the Golan Regiment militia to clinch the Beit Jinn
battle, in the expectation that its fall would also have a domino effect on
Israeli-backed rebel defenders in the entire Quneitra region of the Syrian
Golan. The Syrian army originally established this militia for pro-Assad Druze
fighters. But in the past year, it has been packed with Iranian elements linked
to the Revolutionary Guards. They established a headquarters at Khan Arnaba
north of Quneitra and 5km from the Israeli border. The Revolutionary Guards
officers’ presence in Khan Arnaba gives Iran a direct hand in the Beit Jinn
battle and its projected sequel, the fight for Quneitra right up to Israel’s
Golan border and a threat to the IDF’s Hermon position.
DEBKAfile’s military sources estimate that the only way the rebels can escape
the Syrian-Hizballah crunch is by going on the offensive against the Druze
village of Hader in order to break open an escape route to the southwest. But
the obstacle there is a pledge which Israel gave Israeli Druze leaders in
November not to allow rebel forces to attack Hader. The pledge was given in the
wake of violent Druze riots on the Golan and threats from Israeli Druze, some of
whom hold high military ranks in the IDF, to cross the border and defend Hader
themselves.
This Israeli pledge to its Druze citizens is the strongest card the Syrian,
Hizballah and Iranian forces are wielding to compel the Hayat al-Tahrir al-Sham
to surrender. After that, the three forces would move in and take up positions
in the captured Beit Jinn enclave, and gain a jumping-off pad against Israel and
its Hermon outpost. The way this affair is playing out makes naught of Israel’s
government and military leaders’ solemn vow to keep Iran and Hizballah far from
its borders.
UK: Going about Our "Normal" Lives?
Douglas Murray/Gatestone
Institute/December 26/2017
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11567/britain-terrorism-normal-lives
One of the most striking images from the night of the London Borough Market
terror attack was of drinkers being marched out of the Market under police
escort with their hands on their heads. The British public at that point looked
not like stoical, pugnacious heroes, but like a defeated army being marched into
captivity.
Contrary to all our public statements, we have become terrorised, just as the
terrorists want.
It is a glimpse into the soul of a city; and like all such ugly glimpses, we
will turn away from looking at it, rather than considering it and wondering what
it truly suggests.
Whenever Britain suffers a terrorist attack -- and it has suffered four Islamist
attacks this year alone -- the British public responds the same way.
Twelve years ago, when four suicide bombers detonated homemade bombs on the
London underground and on a red-top bus in central London, there was much talk
of "Blitz spirit". After 7/7, the media erupted with boasts of wartime echoes.
Some people who lived in London noticed a rather different atmosphere. Of course
people "got on with their lives" (what else could they do?) but in the days and
weeks after the attacks it was not really "business as usual". Especially not
after another four suicide bombers went onto the tube a fortnight later, on July
21, and attempted to repeat the exercise. Fortunately, on that occasion the
bombs failed to detonate. But during the period that ensued, it was certainly
easier than usual to get a seat on the London Underground.
Of course, political leaders relish the opportunity to accentuate and exaggerate
these echoes. If the British public are the citizens of London in the Blitz,
then the politicians are Winston Churchill. After attacks like the 2013 daytime
slaughter of Drummer Lee Rigby on the streets of London, then-Prime Minister
David Cameron stressed from the steps of Downing Street that "One of the best
ways of defeating terrorism is to go about our normal lives. And that is what we
shall all do." These themes are thought to play deep to the spirit of the
British people.
But the more this conspicuous, self-conscious egging-on of such attitudes is
stressed, the thinner it seems to get. In March, after Khalid Masood ploughed a
car across Westminster Bridge, mowing down locals and tourists, and crashed the
car and stabbed policeman Keith Palmer to death inside the gates of the Palace
of Westminster, one prominent British journalist took to the pages of the New
York Times to pour out the clichés.
"By Thursday morning, London was, if not quite back to normal, then certainly
back in business. As I traveled through the south of the city, up to Chelsea and
later over to King's Cross, Londoners really were going about their lives as on
any other day.
"This behavior reflects something deeper than conscious defiance, I think. It
would simply not occur to the 8.6 million citizens of this megalopolis to allow
one man to send them into hiding. As they say in the East End, you're having a
laugh, aren't you?"
One wonders when the author last went into an East End pub to have a pint, and
whether he honestly believes such honest cockneys still reside there?
Nevertheless, he went to boast of the "stoicism" and "ancestral pride" that
still exists there and to insist that, "The only way to proceed is -- in the
much-loved British slogan -- to keep calm and carry on." Quite why this spirit
is meant to reside in the bones of a city in which most of its current residents
(according to the last census) have arrived in the decades since the Second
World War is never clear.
Similar clichés spilled out after the suicide bombing at the Manchester Arena in
May. They came out yet again after the London Bridge attack in June. Yet one of
the most striking images from that night was of drinkers in Borough Market,
where the terrorists finished their assault, being marched out of the Market
under police escort with their hands on their heads. The British public at that
point, at any rate, looked not like stoical, pugnacious heroes, but like a
defeated army being marched into captivity. Still the clichés continued. The day
after the attack, in her address to the nation, Prime Minister Theresa May
assured the public that "Our response must be as it has always been when we have
been confronted by violence. We must come together, we must pull together."
One of the most striking images from the June 3, 2017 Borough Market terror
attack was of drinkers being marched out of the Market under police escort with
their hands on their heads. The British public at that point looked not like
stoical, pugnacious heroes, but like a defeated army being marched into
captivity. (Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)
So it is interesting to consider, beneath all the talk of business as usual, and
Blitz spirit, and keeping calm and carrying on, what, in fact, are the British
public actually feeling? Last month provided a sobering demonstration.
Early in the evening on Friday, November 24 there were reports of shots having
been fired at Oxford Circus station. A crowd stampede occurred, with people
fleeing in terror down Oxford Street and other parts of one of London's busiest
shopping areas. Terrified crowds barricaded themselves into local shops. A
celebrity singer and television presenter called Olly Murs tweeted to his
millions of followers that he was in Selfridges department store. "F**k everyone
get out of Selfridges now gun shots!! I'm inside." That was his first unwise
tweet, followed up shortly after with, "Really not sure what's happened! I'm in
the back office... but people screaming and running towards exits!"
The police announced that they were responding to events as though they were a
terrorist incident. Social media and some early national media reports said that
not only gunshots had been heard but that a vehicle had ploughed into
pedestrians on Oxford Street and that there were bodies and blood everywhere.
Within an hour, however, all this turned out to be nonsense. Not only had there
been no vehicular attack -- there had been no gunmen. Reports that the incident
may have been sparked by a gang fight rather than a terrorist attack were
themselves later quashed. The next day two men who thought they might have been
responsible for the panic voluntarily came into a police station and were
released without charge. The only casualties from the incident were 16 people
injured, one seriously, as a cause of the mass stampede out of Oxford Circus
station and through the neighbouring area.
Incidents like this one in London last month easily flow by in the news cycle,
and are easily forgotten. They will not be referred to in the speeches of any
politician and they immediately fell away from even the "News in Brief" sections
of the nation's media. But they are in fact extremely telling. They suggest that
rather than being this persistently stoical, unbending and resilient people, the
citizens of London have absorbed the lessons of the terror attacks of the last
year and the terror attacks across Europe that have occurred in the years
preceding them, in Paris and elsewhere. Contrary to all our public statements,
we have become terrorised, just as the terrorists want. So much so that a minor
altercation on an average evening can lead to a mass panic, a crowd stampede,
and terrified public figures bleating to their followers about wholly imagined
horrors. It is a glimpse into the soul of a city. And like all such ugly
glimpses, we will turn away from looking at it, rather than consider it and
wondering what it truly suggests.
**Douglas Murray, British author, commentator and public affairs analyst, is
based in London, England. His latest book, an international best-seller, is "The
Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam."
© 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.
Palestinians: Where Have They Gone?
Shoshana Bryen/Gatestone
Institute/December 26/2017
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11609/palestinians-unrwa
American funding for UNRWA is problematic itself because the organization is
inextricably intertwined with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon. This may
be the right time to review the number of Palestinian "refugees" in the world
and the world's obligation to them.
Ten years ago, in a forum on Capitol Hill, then-Rep. Mark Kirk called for an
international audit of UNRWA. Kirk admitted he was unsuccessful, despite such
accounting anomalies as a $13 million entry for "un-earmarked expenses" in an
audit conducted by UNRWA's own board.
Palestinians are the only "refugee" group that hands the status down through
generations, which is why they are governed by UNRWA; all other refugees are
under the care of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, which has a mandate to
settle refugees so they can become citizens of new countries.
Palestinian refugees are a slippery population -- but when 285,535 of them go
missing from a small country such as Lebanon, it should raise eyebrows.
UNRWA in Lebanon reports on its website that 449,957 refugees live under its
protection in 12 camps, but a survey by Lebanon's Central Administration of
Statistics, together with the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, could
only find 174,535. The Lebanese government said the others "left." Okay, maybe
they did -- Lebanon constrained them viciously, so it would make some sense.
What does NOT make sense, then, is the UN giving UNRWA a budget based on nearly
half a million people when, in fact, there are far fewer than a quarter of a
million. Who is paying and who is getting the money?
We are and they are.
The UNRWA website shows a budget of $2.41 billion combined for FY 2016 and 2017.
The U.S. provides more than $300 million to UNRWA annually, about one-quarter of
the total. In August 2017, UNRWA claimed a deficit of $126 million. A former
State Department official said the budget shortfalls are chronic but that "the
funds seemed eventually arrive" after pressing others for more money -- some of
that additional money is from the U.S.
American funding for UNRWA is problematic itself because the organization is
inextricably intertwined with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon; see here,
here and here. And specifically for Lebanon, the connection goes as far back as
2007. But stay with the "floating" population problem for a moment.
A July 2015 street celebration in Lebanon's Ain al-Hilweh camp, which is
administered by UNRWA. (Image source: Geneva Call/Flickr)
The huge discrepancy in Lebanon suggests that UNRWA may have trouble counting
refugees in the West Bank, Jordan, Gaza, and Syria as well. (We'll give them a
pass on Syria for now.) The problem is not new, but that Palestinian agencies
were running the census may help the United States overcome its own long-term
obstinacy when it comes to counting and paying.
Ten years ago, a forum on Capitol Hill, then-Rep. Mark Kirk called for an
international audit of UNRWA. Kirk admitted he was unsuccessful in generating
demand among his colleagues despite such accounting anomalies as a $13 million
entry for "un-earmarked expenses" in an audit conducted by UNRWA's own board. An
amendment to the 2006 Foreign Assistance Act had called for $2 million in
additional funds for UNRWA, specifically for an investigation of finances, but
the amendment was withdrawn at the request of the State Department.
As a Senator, Kirk offered an amendment calling for the State Department to
provide two numbers to Congress: the number of Palestinians physically displaced
from their homes in what became Israel in 1948, and the number of their
descendants administered by the UNRWA. The State Department denounced the
amendment, saying:
"This proposed amendment would be viewed around the world as the United States
acting to prejudge and determine the outcome of this sensitive issue."
Far from prejudging the outcome, a review of the number of Palestinian
"refugees" in the world and the world's obligation to them would provide an
honest basis from which to make policy.
In 1950, the UN defined Palestinian "refugees" as people displaced from
territory that had become Israel after having lived there for two years or more
-- this is distinct from every other population of refugees that must be
displaced from their long-term homes. Furthermore, Palestinians are the only
"refugee" group that hands the status down through generations, until there is a
resolution of the status of the original group -- which is why they are governed
by UNRWA; all other refugees are under the care of the UN High Commissioner for
Refugees (UNHCR), which has a mandate to settle refugees so they can become
citizens of new countries. UNRWA, naturally, produces the only population of
refugees that grows geometrically over time rather than declining as the
original refugees die and their children are no longer stateless. (See
Vietnamese refugee resettlement for an example of how this works for others.)
The original population of refugees was estimated at 711,000 in 1950. Today,
there appear to be 30-50,000 original refugees remaining, and UNRWA claims to
care for 4,950,000 of their descendants. But 285,000 of them appear to have
disappeared from Lebanon.
It has long been understood that there is an undercount of deaths in UNRWA
refugee camps -- to admit a death means UNRWA loses that member in the
accounting for the international community. It also wreaks havoc with
Palestinian insistence that there are 6 million refugees (not UNRWA's 5 million)
and that a million people are not registered, but should still have a "right of
return" to homes their parents, grandparents or great-grandparents claim to have
had inside the borders of Israel.
The numbers game also exists with people who do not live in refugee camps. The
Palestinian Authority counts as residents 400,000 Palestinians who have lived
abroad for over a year, and according to Deputy Palestinian Interior Minister
Hassan Illwi, more than 100,000 babies born abroad are registered as West Bank
residents -- both in contravention of population-counting norms. Jerusalem
Palestinians are double-counted – once as Palestinian Authority residents and
once as Israeli Palestinians. The PA, furthermore, claims zero net
out-migration; Israeli government statistics differ.
How many Palestinians would there be in these territories if a proper census was
taken? How many "refugees" would disappear from UNRWA rolls as they did in
Lebanon? How might that affect the budget?
Can we please find out?
**Shoshana Bryen is Senior Director of the Jewish Policy Center.
© 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.
Czech President Miloš Zeman: Warrior for Truth
Josef Zbořil/Gatestone
Institute/December 26/2017
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11604/milos-zeman
"If you want the unspoken truth, Islamic migration is not possible to integrate,
and it is not capable of being assimilated into European culture. " — Miloš
Zeman, President of the Czech Republic.
"This country is ours. And this country is not and can not be for all." — Miloš
Zeman.
"In my opinion, much of the guilt lies on the current leadership of the European
Union, which is totally incompetent, bureaucratic, causing the alienation of
European citizens from European institutions... We do not need censorship, we do
not need an ideological police, we do not need a new press and information
office if we are to continue living in a free and democratic society..." — Miloš
Zaman, 2016.
Czech President Miloš Zeman, it was recently said, is "a world leader guided by
principles, a man not only knows right from wrong, but has never been afraid to
voice it. " Known for his longstanding support for the US, Israel and the Jews,
he was the only European president publicly to support then-candidate Donald
Trump before the US presidential election.
The historical relationship of Czechoslovakia, later the Czech Republic, towards
Israel is most likely based on when the Czechs were overrun by Hitler in 1938,
and learned the hard way that "appeasement never works". Zeman defends the Czech
presidents' motto: "Truth prevails".
A Euro-federalist and leftist, Zeman became known to the public in August 1989,
three months before the Velvet Revolution, thanks to an article, "Prognostics
and Perestroika." In it, he criticized the totalitarian Czechoslovak régime at
that time:
"The stolen future was not shared by a society which was not planning for itself
but for which plans were being made.... Current events have already proven that
long-term [economic] lagging has not contributed to the prestige of socialism.
Also not contributing to it is a persistent unwillingness to admit its own
responsibility for this lagging... There is nothing antisocialist about
criticizing the incompetence of an uncontrollable power. On the contrary, there
is nothing socialist about tolerance or even support for that incompetence."
Thanks to this article, he was not only fired from his job, but in August 1989,
was also invited to appear on the television show Economic Notebook, where he
said:
"For the past forty years, we have dropped from tenth place in the world to
around the fortieth. In some areas, even worse. For example, in the development
of science and technology... we are today roughly at the level of Algeria or
Peru, and far below Portugal, which is considered the most undeveloped country
in Western Europe ... I explain this development by [the government's] having
taken economic decisions that were casually accepted; there was no sound
competition of alternative ideas, and even ideas that would have extremely
cautious consequences were taken without any evaluation of their effectiveness."
The ability of a chess player and the formulation of non-conformist attitudes,
subsequently guaranteed his popularity to the general public. He was elected
prime minister from 1998-2002, and in the first direct elections in 2013, he was
elected president of the Czech Republic.
As a leader from "Western civilization", he has, as in the "clash of
civilizations," long fought for women's rights, and equality for everyone. This
stance has made him a natural "anti-jihadist" who, politically incorrectly,
declares the entire Islamic civilization "anti-civilization":
"While it is possible to agree to a ban on driving a car, in all other cases,
Islamic anti-civilization unjustifiably makes women a discriminated minority and
their free development impossible."
He has also said:
"A Muslim can be defined as a Quranist, like a Nazi can be defined as a believer
in racial superiority and anti-Semitism or a Communist like a believer in the
class struggle and dictatorship of the proletariat.
"I think we can coexist with Buddhism, Hinduism, Shinto, Confucianism, but we
cannot coexist with Islam. It has anchored in its sacred texts that it must rule
the world and have unbelievers submit.
"The enemy is the anti-civilisation spreading from North Africa to Indonesia.
Two billion people live in it and it is financed partly from oil sales and
partly from drug sales."
Zeman is equally politically incorrect in criticizing his own nation. In a
speech in Slovakia, in February 2016, he said:
"In the Czech Republic there is, for example, a Vietnamese community [about
80,000] which has assimilated marvelously. Their children are studying at
universities; they speak perfect Czech. The Vietnamese are – and now I am
committing an insult to my own nation – the Vietnamese are more industrious than
the average Czech citizen. Why not admit it, when it is the truth? About 110,000
Ukrainians live here. And they are hard-working, they have overcome the language
barrier, they have integrated very well into the [greater] society. The Slovaks
I do not count, because I consider them 'our people'. Thus, we are not
xenophobic.
"Five percent of the Czech population are foreigners who are integrated into our
society. But when it comes to the term 'migration' we forget one adjective: and
that is 'Islamic migration'. Political correctness, my friends, is synonymous
with a lie. If you want the unspoken truth, Islamic migration is not possible to
integrate and is not capable of being assimilated into European culture."
Ranked first among the biggest problems for the Islamic world, by the
Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, according in its 8th OIC Observatory Report
on Islamophobia of May 2015, was, "Deploring Czech President Miloš Zeman's
Statement against Islam". Second was, "To conduct on-the-ground Post-Charlie
Hebdo Inquiries".
Zeman said: "I will not be calmed down by statements that it [Jewish Museum of
Belgium shooting] is only small marginal groups. I believe, on the contrary,
this xenophobia and this racism or anti-Semitism stem from the very nature of
the ideology on which these fanatical groups rely..."
At another conference in 2015, he stated: "You know the famous slogan: Ich bin
ein Berliner. Now, we all must say, I am a Jew. Your discrimination is our
discrimination. Your victims are our victims. But our society is too hedonistic,
too consumption-oriented, and there is the cowardice and appeasement..."
Zeman's attitude is close to that of the "father of Singapore",Lee Kuan Yew
(1923-2015), the great statesman and founder of modern Singapore, who said:
"I would say today, we can integrate all religions and races except Islam....
After 40 years of patchy economic development, many Arabs feel anger and
humiliation that their once glorious Islamic civilization has been diminished by
the West, especially America, and corrupted by its licentious culture... Muslims
want to assimilate us. It is one-way traffic and they have no confidence in
allowing choice."
The foreign policy of the Czech Republic has its own global specificities. In
addition to strongly-held pro-Israeli attitudes, it also holds a similar
position toward Syria, the US, and EU countries.
Pictured: Czech Republic President Milos Zeman (left) with Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem, Israel on October 7, 2013. (Photo by
Kobi Gideon/Israel GPO via Getty Images)
Syrian President Bashar Assad, speaking of the relationship between Syria and
the Czech Republic, said:
"So, concerning the Czech Republic, I can say that our relations were not very
good before the crisis, but during the crisis it was shown that it had a much
clearer vision than other countries.... it was able to see, analyze, and
understand what is actually happening, and by so doing, be more objective than
other European countries..."
The Czech Republic Ambassador to the United States, Hynek Kmoníček, added: "Bashar
Assad said that his relations with the Czech Republic were originally quite
bad... but in the end, it seems that Bashar Assad has moved to the Czech
position and the EU will move too".
Zeman sometimes seems to have his own global policy. He was the only president
of an EU member state who visited Moscow during the "Victory parade for the 70th
Anniversary of the End of World War II". He also, in a TV interview during his
visit to China in October 2014, said:
" We do not teach market economy or human rights or something like that.
Conversely, we try to learn. And I am in China to learn how to increase economic
growth and how to stabilize society..."
In a Christmas speech in 2015, during a discussion with uncritical "welcomers"
of about 45 % of refugees in a migration wave of 1.2 million economic migrants,
predominately from the Islamic world -- and which included hundreds of jihadist
terrorists -- Zeman said: "This country is ours. And this country is not and can
not be for all."
Again, in a Christmas speech in 2016, he said:
"In my opinion, much of the guilt lies on the current leadership of the European
Union, which is totally incompetent, bureaucratic, causing the alienation of
European citizens from European institutions and is even unable to fulfill a
fundamental task such as the protection of the external borders of the European
Union..."I know that in the context of international tension, there are
sometimes attempts to censor the internet... one who prevents others from
expressing their arguments merely proves that he himself has no arguments... We
do not need censorship, we do not need an ideological police, we do not need a
new press and information office if we are to continue living in a free and
democratic society..."Zeman describes Islam with the same raw truth as he
translates into Czech the name of the band "Pussy Riot": like a "woman's
genitals" -- not the politically correct "kitty".Zeman has warned of the willful
blindness to Islamism's "sharia-apartheid ideology," similar to what former US
federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy described for the U.S. Senate Judiciary
Committee in June 2016, when he said:
"From the standpoint of American national security, it is irrelevant whether
there is a true Islam. What matters is that there is a sharia-supremacist
construction of Islam to which millions of Muslims have adhered for
centuries...They are supported by centuries of scholarship and scriptural
literalism. We are not going to convince them that they are wrong... They do not
care what American politicians and commentators think about 'the true Islam.'
They judge themselves by their own civilization and culture principles – just as
we in the West do by ours..."Sharia supremacism, their interpretation of Islam,
is not a religion as we understand religion. It is political radicalism with a
religious veneer. Sharia supremacism is virulently anti-Western, misogynist,
anti-Semitic, and homophobic. It rejects basic tenets of Western liberalism,
including the power of people to chart their own destiny and make their own laws
in contravention of sharia. It rejects individual liberty and equality. It
brooks no separation between spiritual life and civil society. It endorses
violent jihad to implement and spread sharia. And it regards the United States,
closely trailed by Israel and Europe, as the principal enemies of Islam that
must be defeated. That is something we desperately need to understand and
highlight, not obscure and avoid...
"In 1996, I was awarded the Justice Department's highest honor for proving the
nexus between (a) jihadist commands in Islamic scripture, (b) their exploitation
by sharia jurists like the Blind Sheikh, and (c) the commission of jihadist
atrocities by the young Muslims he inflamed. Today, to say aloud what the
Clinton administration honored me for twenty years ago, is to be ostracized as
an Islamophobic bigot. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, that is no way to
protect our country. "
"Truth prevails", on the presidential flag, seems to guide Zeman. He appears to
be ambitious to find a worldwide "truth vaccination" against the hypocritical
political correctness of both the current "bureaucratic and incompetent" EU
leadership, and a "jihadistic and radical" Islam. So far the only serious
infectious disease that seems to have been completely eradicated is smallpox,
also achieved by a Czech, Karel Raška, who was awarded the Edward Jenner medal.
With increasingly louder calls for the reform of the EU, if not its total
dismantlement, one might do worse than to listen to what another father of a
modern country, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, once said:
"I have no religion, and at times I wish all religions at the bottom of the
sea... My people are going to learn the principles of democracy the dictates of
truth and the teachings of science. Superstition must go. Let them worship as
they will, every man can follow his own conscience provided it does not
interfere with sane reason or bid him act against the liberty of his fellow
men... He is a weak ruler who needs religion to uphold his government; it is as
if he would catch his people in a trap."
*Josef Zbořil, Ph.D., is Czech blogger advocating "SMART permanently sustainable
free society with citizenship 4.0."
© 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.
We are Not out of Options on North Korea
John R. Kasich/The Washington
Post/December 27/2017
With tensions continuing to build between the United States and North Korea,
there's growing talk by politicians and TV pundits that we are on the brink of
war. In truth, we shouldn't be anywhere close. This increasingly hot war of
words - including loose talk about the probability of war - does nothing to
bring us closer to where we need to be on North Korea, especially when military
options short of war remain on the table. In fact, with millions of lives at
stake, waging a war of words is a distraction from the serious task at hand. Any
kind of war - especially nuclear war - should not be an option until all other
options are exhausted. And, in the case of North Korea, there are several roads
not yet taken. First, North Korea is not, as some claim, "sanctioned-out." We
are nowhere near to applying the same type of restraints on North Korea that
were successful in bringing Iran to the negotiating table. In fact, the breadth
of sanctions we have placed on North Korea to date are far less than what was
applied in earlier crises on Russia, Syria and Iran. While our sanctions on
North Korea have clearly escalated, we still have the option to penalize and
seize the assets of North Korea's enablers in other countries that enable
Pyongyang to evade the full brunt of financial measures. We can expand our focus
on shipping and work with our allies to deny maritime insurance to the vessels
heading to or from North Korea. Last month, we targeted sanctions on 20 such
vessels. Many more North Korean vessels are active and engaged in illicit
activities beyond the small number designated by the Treasury Department. We
also can do more to expose those who use North Korean slave labor and to block
any remittances back to Kim Jong Un's regime. Second, none of this will work
without more pressure to hold the reluctant Chinese government accountable for
the commitments it has made and to target more Chinese entities that support the
North Korean government. The overwhelming majority of North Korea's trade - 90
percent - is with or facilitated by China, and despite agreed-upon UN sanctions,
much of this economic activity continues. Actions should include targeting a
greater number of Chinese banks that deal with North Korea, fining their US
subsidiaries and freezing their US assets. This year, the international banking
transaction network, known as SWIFT, moved to prevent North Korean banks from
using the global messaging system to facilitate international transactions, but
that doesn't impact Chinese banks that transact for the North Koreans. We should
consider expanding this ban to include Chinese banks with any North Korean
connections. Finally, we need to ask: Where are our allies on all of this?
Instead of threatening a bilateral war between the United States and the North
Korea, we should be working with allies - including South Korea and Japan - to
threaten increased multilateral pressure to choke the North Korean regime. While
economic sanctions have not proved to be effective yet, they have not been fully
exhausted and tested. Part of the reason the previous administration succeeded
in bringing Iran to the table - regardless of the flaws of their final deal -
was due to internationally coordinated sanctions. Thankfully, the UN Security
Council has adopted three rounds of such sanctions this year, including
significant measures last week. With millions of lives hanging in the balance,
the last thing we need is to have politicians and pundits predicting odds on the
probability of war. It's neither an accurate nor a helpful way to treat a
complex international challenge.
*Kasich, a Republican, is governor of Ohio.
Euro-Zone Reform Proposals Don't Go Far Enough
Sony Kapoor/Bloomberg/December 27/2017
Large bank failures in recent years have led to reforms that strengthen crisis
prevention and give regulators and banks the tools for dealing with crises that
do occur. Similar policy measures can be helpful in dealing with sovereign
crises -- when governments run out of money and credit. Unfortunately, the
European Commission misses the mark in its recent proposals to upgrade the euro
zone’s sovereign crisis management system. To reduce the likelihood of a bank
crisis, recent reforms have mandated that banks increase capital requirements
during economic expansions, allowing them to fall during contractions or
recessions. Governments can benefit from the counter-cyclical approach, too. It
is fine to have policies such as the EU’s Growth and Stability Pact that limit
government deficits and debt, but instead of blanket limits, these parameters
should vary depending on economic conditions, allowing higher levels during
recessions but mandating more of a buffer during better times. The EU could also
encourage the use of GDP-linked bonds issued by national governments, where the
debt payments vary inversely with growth. This mirrors the now mandatory use of
bail-in rules at banks.
Problems refinancing maturing debt in turbulent markets have often been a
trigger for bank and sovereign crises. The newly agreed Basel III accord reduces
this risk for banks by imposing a “net stable funding ratio” that limits banks’
ability to make long-term loans from short-term funds. Similarly, extending the
maturity profile for sovereign debt, so as to limit the need for refinancing in
any year to no more than, say, 10 percent of GDP worth of debt, will help
prevent sovereign crises. Short average maturity for sovereign debt put Italy
and Spain at great refinancing risk during the last crisis, which the UK, with
the longest average sovereign bond maturity, weathered much better.
Just as banks are now required to stress test their balance sheet, stress
testing national economies would make risk factors more transparent, and may
make for more responsible policymaking. Such stress tests should also be used to
encourage governments to develop contingency plans just like the living wills
that are now mandatory for all major banks. For example, governments could be
asked to publicly list the expenditures they will cut and the taxes they will
raise to get out of fiscal duress if the need arose. The natural differences
across political lines over which items to prioritize, and the transparency of
the exercise, will increase domestic ownership, engender political
accountability and help to speed up corrective action. No matter how good crisis
prevention policies look on paper, the unexpected can happen. Once a bank runs
into trouble, the challenge is to contain the crisis, stop widespread contagion,
and restore confidence: so-called mitigation. Timely and speedy liquidity
provision is crucial for sovereigns, too. Dithering over providing such
liquidity support to sovereigns intensified the euro crisis and played a role in
spreading the contagion from Greece to other euro-zone economies in 2011.
The ECB provided large liquidity support to banks in that crisis, and EU banks
were allowed to issue more than 600 billion euro ($712 billion) in
government-guaranteed bonds. Likewise, the commission’s proposed European
Monetary Fund (EMF) should mostly provide guarantees for sovereign bonds, with
the International Monetary Fund being able to chip in with liquidity support for
sovereigns where needed. This will speed up the process of aiding troubled
sovereigns as well as allow for a larger total support program. Sovereign bonds
guaranteed by the EMF could, if necessary, enjoy preferential treatment of the
kind that funding provided to firms under bankruptcy proceedings financing does
under US law. So far, there is no such provision.
Of course, mitigation efforts will sometimes fail. It was the absence of a
credible framework when that happens that helped turn Lehman’s collapse into a
global financial crisis and forced the rescue of dozens of banks. Similarly, the
absence of a framework for dealing with Greece’s sovereign debt problems caused
it to infect the whole euro zone. A special regime has now been put in place to
allow for EU banks to be recapitalized, restructured, and, if all else fails,
wound up. Distributing losses among stakeholders is central to this. Naturally,
countries cannot be wound up in the same way, but a predictable, formalized
mechanism for dealing with nonperforming sovereign debt is sorely needed. Such a
mechanism would only be credible if it is strictly independent in the same way
that regulatory authorities and bankruptcy courts are independent. Because more
than 1 trillion euro of euro-zone sovereign bonds are held by foreign
governments, and much larger amounts are held in the private sector, the EU
cannot credibly be an independent arbiter of how losses on the restructuring of
member state sovereign bonds will be shared. That role must fall to the IMF.
The EU would be foolish to ignore the ways in which the lessons from past bank
failures can be applied to preventing, mitigating and resolving a sovereign
crisis. Current proposals don’t go far enough.
Arab Apartheid Targets Palestinians
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/December 27/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11620/arab-apartheid-iraq-palestinians
Palestinians say that what they are facing in Iraq is "ethnic cleansing." The
new Iraqi law deprives Palestinians living in Iraq of their right to free
education, healthcare and to travel documents, and denies them work in state
institutions.
No one will pay any attention to the misery of the Palestinians in any Arab
country. Major media outlets around the world will barely cover the news of the
controversial Iraqi law or the displacement of thousands of Palestinian families
in Iraq. Journalists are too busy chasing a handful of Palestinian
stone-throwers near Ramallah. A Palestinian girl who punched an Israeli soldier
in the face draws more media interest than Arab apartheid against the
Palestinians.
Palestinian leaders, meanwhile care nothing about the plight of their own people
in Arab countries. They are much too busy inciting Palestinians against Israel
and Trump to pay such a paltry issue any mind at all.
Iraq has just joined the long list of Arab countries that shamelessly practice
apartheid against Palestinians. The number of Arab countries that apply
discriminatory measures against Palestinians while pretending to support the
Palestinian cause is breathtaking. Arab hypocrisy is once again on display, but
who who is looking?
The international media -- and even the Palestinians -- are so preoccupied with
US President Donald Trump's announcement on Jerusalem that the plight of
Palestinians in Arab countries is dead news. This apathy allows Arab governments
to continue with their anti-Palestinian policies because they know that no one
in the international community cares -- the United Nations is too busy
condemning Israel to do much else.
So what is the story with the Palestinians in Iraq? Earlier this week, it was
revealed that the Iraqi government has approved a new law that effectively
abolishes the rights given to Palestinians living there. The new law changes the
status of Palestinians from nationals to foreigners.
Under Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi dictator, the Palestinians enjoyed many
privileges. Until 2003, there were about 40,000 Palestinians living in Iraq.
Since the overthrow of the Saddam regime, the Palestinian population has
dwindled to 7,000.
Thousands of Palestinians have fled Iraq after being targeted by various warring
militias in that country because of their support for Saddam Hussein.
Palestinians say that what they are facing in Iraq is "ethnic cleansing."
The conditions of the Palestinians in Iraq are about to go from bad to worse.
The new law, which was ratified by Iraqi President Fuad Masum, deprives
Palestinians living in Iraq of their right to free education, healthcare and to
travel documents, and denies them work in state institutions. The new law, which
is called No. 76 of 2017, revokes the rights and privileges granted to
Palestinians under Saddam Hussein. The law went into effect recently after it
was published in the Iraqi Official Gazette No. 4466.
A new Iraqi law, recently ratified by Iraq's President Fuad Masum, effectively
abolishes the rights of Palestinians living there (free education, healthcare,
travel documents, work in state institutions), changing the status of
Palestinians from nationals to foreigners. Pictured: Iraqi President Fuad Masum
(right) meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (left) on
November 30, 2015. (Image source: Video screenshot, Office of Mahmoud Abbas)
"Instead of protecting the Palestinian refugees from daily violations and
improving their living and humanitarian conditions, the Iraqi government is
making decisions that will have a catastrophic impact on the lives of these
refugees," said Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor.
"The recurrent harassment and restrictions imposed on Palestinian refugees in
recent years have forced most of them to resort again to other countries such as
Canada, Chile, Brazil and other European countries. Due to these violations,
only about 7,000 out of 40,000 Palestinian refugees are now residing in Iraq. It
is a shame to which an end should be put."
The law means, simply, that Palestinians would rather live in Canada or Brazil
or any European country than live in an Arab country. They have more rights in
non-Arab countries than they have in Arab ones. In the former, they can at least
purchase property and enjoy healthcare and social benefits. Palestinians can
even apply for citizenship in non-Arab countries and receive it. But not in
countries such as Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. It is
easier for a Palestinian to obtain Canadian or US citizenship than to get one
from most of the Arab countries.
In a note of extreme irony, it is the Arab League that has advised its members
not to give the Palestinians citizenship. The excuse: By granting Palestinians
citizenship of Arab countries, you are denying them the "right of return" to
their former homes inside Israel. So the Arab countries want the Palestinians to
remain refugees forever by lying to them and telling them: you will one day go
back to your former villages and towns (many of which do not even exist anymore)
inside Israel.
Take, for example, the case of Amal Saker, a Palestinian woman who moved with
her family to Iraq in 1976. Although she is married to an Iraqi national, and
although her children have been granted Iraqi citizenship, she herself has not
been given Iraqi citizenship. She says that the new law will now prohibit her
from obtaining a travel document to visit her relatives outside Iraq. She and
many Palestinians are convinced that the timing of the new law -- which
coincided with Trump's announcement on Jerusalem -- is not coincidental. They
believe that the new Iraqi law is part of Trump's purported "ultimate solution"
for the Israeli-Arab conflict, which they are convinced is aimed at
"liquidating" the Palestinian cause and depriving the Palestinians of the "right
of return."
The Palestinians, in other words, are promoting a conspiracy theory according to
which some Arab countries such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, are colluding
with the Trump administration to impose a solution that is completely
unacceptable and even harmful to the Palestinians.
The Palestinians are "horrified" by the new Iraqi law, and some have begun
waging a campaign to pressure the Iraqi government to backtrack. But the
Palestinians are also aware that they are not going to win this campaign,
because they are not going to win the sympathy of the international community.
Why? Because the name of the country that passed this apartheid law is Iraq and
not Israel.
Jawad Obeidat, chairman of the Palestinian Lawyers' Syndicate, explained that
the new Iraqi law will have "grave repercussions" on the conditions and future
of Palestinians living in Iraq. "The Palestinians will now be deprived of most
of their basic rights," Obeidat said.
He added that Palestinian lawyers will be working with their Iraqi colleagues to
put pressure on the Iraqi government to rescind the new law. Obeidat appealed to
the Arab League to intervene with the Iraqi authorities to rescind the law and
stop the "injustice" towards the Palestinians in Iraq.
"The Iraqi law is unacceptable and inhumane," stated Tayseer Khaled, a senior
PLO official. He pointed out that the Iraqi authorities have failed to provide
protection to the Palestinians living in Iraq and that is why they became easy
prey for various militias that prompted many of them to flee the country during
the past 15 years. Khaled noted that many Palestinian families were forced to
live in makeshift temporary refugee camps along the borders of Syria and Jordan
after being driven from their homes. "We call on the Iraqi authorities to treat
Palestinians humanely," he said.
Iraqi leaders, however, can afford to sit back and relax in the face of
Palestinian appeals and condemnations. No one is going to pay any attention to
the misery of the Palestinians in any Arab country. Major media outlets around
the world will barely cover the news of the controversial Iraqi law or the
displacement of thousands of Palestinian families in Iraq. Journalists are too
busy chasing a handful of Palestinian stone-throwers near Ramallah. A
Palestinian girl who punched an Israeli soldier in the face draws more media
interest than Arab apartheid against the Palestinians. A protest of 35
Palestinians in the Old City of Jerusalem against Trump and Israel attracts more
photographers and reporters than a story about endemic Arab apartheid and
discrimination against the Palestinians.
The hypocrisy of the Arab countries is in full swing. While they pretend to show
solidarity with their Palestinian brothers, Arab governments work tirelessly to
ethnically cleanse them. Palestinian leaders, meanwhile care nothing about the
plight of their own people in Arab countries. They are much too busy inciting
Palestinians against Israel and Trump to pay such a paltry issue any mind at
all.
*Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist, is based in Jerusalem.
© 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.
How to Defund the U.N.
John R. Bolton/Gatestone Institute/December 27/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11622/defund-united-nations
As an assistant secretary of state in the George H.W. Bush administration, I
worked vigorously to repeal a hateful United Nations General Assembly resolution
equating Zionism with racism. Foreign diplomats frequently told me the effort
was unnecessary. My Soviet counterpart, for example, said Resolution 3379 was
only a piece of paper gathering dust on a shelf. Why stir up old controversies
years after its 1975 adoption?
We ignored the foreign objections and persisted because that abominable
resolution cast a stain of illegitimacy and anti-Semitism on the U.N. It paid
off. On Dec. 16, 1991, the General Assembly rescinded the offensive language.
Now, a quarter-century later, the U.N. has come close to repeating Resolution
3379's original sin. Last week the U.N. showed its true colors with a 128-9 vote
condemning President Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital.
This seemingly lopsided outcome obscured a significant victory and major
opportunity for the president. Thirty-five countries abstained, and 21 didn't
vote at all. Days earlier the Security Council had endorsed similar language,
14-1, defeated only by the U.S. veto. The margin narrowed significantly once Mr.
Trump threatened to penalize countries that voted against the U.S. This
demonstrated once again that America is heard much more clearly at the U.N. when
it puts its money where its mouth is. (In related news, Guatemala announced
Sunday it will move its embassy to Jerusalem, a good example for others.)
While imposing financial repercussions on individual governments is entirely
legitimate, the White House should also reconsider how Washington funds the U.N.
more broadly. Should the U.S. forthrightly withdraw from some U.N. bodies (as we
have from UNESCO and as Israel announced its intention to do on Friday)? Should
others be partially or totally defunded? What should the government do with
surplus money if it does withhold funds?
Despite decades of U.N. "reform" efforts, little or nothing in its culture or
effectiveness has changed. Instead, despite providing the body with a
disproportionate share of its funding, the U.S. is subjected to autos-da-fé on a
regular basis. The only consolation, at least to date, is that this global
virtue-signaling has not yet included burning the U.S. ambassador at the stake.
Turtle Bay has been impervious to reform largely because most U.N. budgets are
financed through effectively mandatory contributions. Under this system,
calculated by a "capacity to pay" formula, each U.N. member is assigned a fixed
percentage of each agency's budget to contribute. The highest assessment is 22%,
paid by the U.S. This far exceeds other major economies, whose contribution
levels are based on prevailing exchange rates rather than purchasing power
parity. China's assessment is just under 8%.
Why does the U.S. tolerate this? It is either consistently outvoted when setting
the budgets that determine contributions or has joined the "consensus" to avoid
the appearance of losing. Yet dodging embarrassing votes means acquiescing to
increasingly high expenditures.
The U.S. should reject this international taxation regime and move instead to
voluntary contributions. This means paying only for what the country wants — and
expecting to get what it pays for. Agencies failing to deliver will see their
budgets cut, modestly or substantially. Perhaps America will depart some
organizations entirely. This is a performance incentive the current
assessment-taxation system simply does not provide.
Start with the U.N. Human Rights Council. Though notorious for its anti-Israel
bias, the organization has never hesitated to abuse America. How many know that
earlier this year the U.N. dispatched a special rapporteur to investigate
poverty in the U.S.? American taxpayers effectively paid a progressive professor
to lecture them about how evil their country is.
The U.N.'s five regional economic and social councils, which have no concrete
accomplishments, don't deserve American funding either. If nations believe these
regional organizations are worthwhile — a distinctly dubious proposition — they
are entirely free to fund them. Why America is assessed to support them is
incomprehensible.
Next come vast swaths of U.N. bureaucracy. Most of these budgets could be
slashed with little or no real-world impact. Start with the Office for
Disarmament Affairs. The U.N. Development Program is another example.
Significant savings could be realized by reducing other U.N. offices that are
little more than self-licking ice cream cones, including many dealing with
"Palestinian" questions. The U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees
(UNRWA) could be consolidated into the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees.
Many U.N. specialized and technical agencies do important work, adhere to their
mandates and abjure international politics. A few examples: the International
Atomic Energy Agency, the Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health
Organization. They shouldn't be shuttered, but they also deserve closer
scrutiny.
Some will argue incorrectly that unilaterally moving to voluntary contributions
violates the U.N. Charter. In construing treaties, like contracts, parties are
absolved from performance when others violate their commitments. Defenders of
the assessed-contribution model would doubtless not enjoy estimating how often
the charter has been violated since 1945.
If the U.S. moved first, Japan and some European Union countries might well
follow America's lead. Elites love the U.N., but they would have a tough time
explaining to voters why they are not insisting their contributions be used
effectively, as America has. Apart from risking the loss of a meaningless
General Assembly vote — the Security Council vote and veto being written into
the Charter itself — the U.S. has nothing substantial to lose.
Thus could Mr. Trump revolutionize the U.N. system. The swamp in Turtle Bay
might be drained much more quickly than the one in Washington.
**John R. Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is Chairman of
Gatestone Institute, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and
author of "Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations
and Abroad".
**This article first appeared in The Wall Street Journal and is reprinted here
with the kind permission of the 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.
Turkey: Still a U.S. Ally?
Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute/December 27/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11610/turkey-erdogan-ally
But what of NATO? Is Turkey a reliable NATO partner? Here the picture is
Turkey of late, with the purchase of two batteries of the Russian S-400 air
defense system, appears to have taken a big step away from the NATO alliance.
The Erdogan regime's nationwide post-coup purge of civil and military personnel,
and its threatening acts against freedom of speech, such as the mass arrest of
journalists, are eviscerating the country's independent civil society
institutions. In addition, Turkey's crackdown on the activities of
non-governmental organizations in Turkey is another sign that Turkey is turning
away from democratic values shared by NATO Alliance members.
Is Turkey still a reliable ally? After repeated endorsements by the government
of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of policies inimical to U.S.
interests, the answer seems to be not really.
Erdogan recently announced he will seek United Nations support to annul
President Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital.
In addition, the Turkish Ministry of Justice has issued warrants for the arrest
of two American Turkey specialists, in effect placing a bounty of $800,000 on
their heads.
Additionally, there is the somewhat comical furor in Turkey over the adoption by
Turkish entrepreneurs of the American "Black Friday" sales concept. Several
Turkish businesses, which had attempted to increase sales by borrowing the U.S.
"Black Friday" market lure, were attacked by devout Muslims who accused store
owners of disrespecting Islam's day of prayer. The perceived insult to Islam's
Friday Prayer obligation is just another example of a widening antipathy towards
the U.S.
While the misunderstanding by Turks over "Black Friday," will likely fade
quickly, the diplomatic damage brought on by the early October arrest by
Turkey's police of a Turkish employee at the U.S. Consulate in Istanbul
allegedly for espionage is likely to be more long-lasting.
The arrest of the U.S Consulate's employee precipitated the U.S. Ambassador's
suspension on October 8, of all non-immigrant U.S. visas for Turkish citizens.
The incident underscores how bilateral relations have plummeted since Turkey's
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan first came to power.
Shortly after Erdogan was elected in 2002, Turkey appeared to start turning away
from its U.S. alliance when it refused to grant permission for U.S. troops to
cross Turkish territory into northern Iraq. Turkey's parliament, the Grand
National Assembly, voted down the request. Erdogan seems now to be focusing on
regional affairs rather than on Turkey's traditional ties to the United States
and Europe. Since Erdogan came to power, Turkey has increased its economic and
diplomatic ties to Arab states.
Turkey's Erdogan regime also is fashioning a more Islamic Turkey, a trend
especially noticeable in the field of education. As early as 2012, Erdogan
hinted at plans to Islamize Turkey's public schools when he declared to an
audience of young members of his Justice and Development Party, "We want to
raise pious generations." Since then Turkey's schools now include a curriculum
which reflects Sunni Islam doctrine.
After the failed July 15, 2016 coup against Erdogan, he exploited anti-Western
sentiment among the Turks by permitting Turkish media to publish articles that
accused U.S. General John Campbell, former Commander of NATO forces in
Afghanistan, of complicity in the abortive attempted coup. Suleyman Soylu, the
AKP's Deputy Chairman, also accused the CIA of being involved. Erdogan further
demanded that the U.S. extradite from Pennsylvania Fethullah Gülen, leader of a
Turkish opposition movement, and the person Erdogan claimed had instigated the
attempted coup.
Post-Cold War regional changes have likely altered Turkey's view of its U.S.
alliance. Perhaps it now no longer seems indispensable to Turkish national
security officers. Turkey's Syria policy, for instance, was initially aligned
with other regional Sunni Islamic states against President Bashar al-Assad's
regime. When Assad's Iranian allies helped to sustain the Assad government
however, Turkey appeared to turn a blind eye to Sunni terrorists crossing
Turkish territory into Syria. Perhaps the Turks hoped that these extremists
would strengthen the anti-Assad military forces.
Turkey's efforts to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria only took a radical turn
when Turkish territory became a virtual pipeline for the flow of foreign
fighters. Thousands of them infiltrated Turkey's borders; there, they were met
by smugglers and Sunni extremist facilitators. The facilitators then moved the
fighters to safe houses and gave the jihadists logistical support until the
combatants reached their jihadi destination in the Raqqa region. The combatants
included members of the al-Qaeda affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra Front and the Sunni
Salafist Ahrar al-Sham.
This influx of foreign jihadists seemed to place old allies Turkey and America
in a state of confrontation, as some of these terrorists remained inside Turkey.
The counterproductive cost of Turkey's intentional or careless lax border policy
struck home with an attack which left 39 dead on Istanbul's Reina Night Club.
In March 2017, Turkey began curbing the terrorist networks it had allowed into
its territory. Only then did Turkey decide to cooperate with U.S. efforts to
suppress ISIS. The Turks, however, recoiled at the Kurdish ethnicity of the
U.S.-assisted anti-ISIS Syrian Democratic Force (SDF).
Turkey is wary of any armed force of Kurds; it evidently fears that if Syria's
Kurds are able to carve out an autonomous zone for themselves, it will inflame
nationalism among Turkey's millions of Kurds. The Turks view ethnic-Kurd
fighters in Syria as an extension of the Kurdish Worker Party (PKK) which has
been fighting the Turkish government for decades. That fear could explain why
Turkish troops stood by while Syrian Kurds fought a harsh battle against Islamic
State troops in Kobane, a Kurdish town in Syria, in late 2014.
The number of instances where Turkey and U.S. interests now clash, and the
accumulated ill will that these disagreements are begetting, suggests that
Turkey is no longer a dependable ally of the United States.
Is Turkey a reliable NATO partner? Pictured: Turkish President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan stands beside Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May during the NATO
summit ceremony in Brussels, Belgium on May 25, 2017.
But what of NATO? Is Turkey a reliable NATO partner? Here the picture is more
mixed. Turkey of late, with the purchase of two batteries of the Russian S-400
air defense system, appears to have taken a big step away from the NATO
alliance. The Erdogan regime's nationwide post-coup purge of civil and military
personnel, and its threatening acts against freedom of speech, such as the mass
arrest of journalists, are eviscerating the country's independent civil society
institutions. In addition, Turkey's crackdown on the activities of
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Turkey is another sign that Turkey is
turning away from democratic values shared by NATO Alliance members.
Nevertheless, Turkey's continued membership in NATO has its advantages for both
parties. Turkey has the second largest standing army in NATO, after the United
States. U.S. aircraft are permitted to use bases in Turkey to mount bombing runs
on Mideast-based terrorists. Turkey's military complex at Incirlik houses an
estimated 90 B61 nuclear gravity bombs. Should Turkey's incipient romance with
Russia turn sour, as their historic hostility toward each other might suggest,
then Turkey's large ground force, forward deployed nuclear devices, and
sophisticated signals intelligence facilities would prove invaluable to NATO as
well as to Turkey. Furthermore, should Iran continue its regional march to
hegemony, Turkey would prove a worthy rival.
Although Turkey under Erdogan may not be a fully committed member of NATO,
Turkey in NATO -- at the moment anyhow -- is probably still better than a Turkey
out of NATO.
**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.
© 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.
Syria’s Future Decided without the Syrians’ Consent
Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/December
27/17
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=61390
After eight rounds of talks in both Geneva and Kazakhstan’s capital Astana, the
“sponsors” of Syria’s lost peace have agreed to meet, this time round, in the
Russian Black Sea resort of Sochi.
To begin with, there were differences of opinion towards the need of
negotiations taking place in Astana since there was already a UN sponsored peace
process in Geneva. More so, since there is - at least - a verbal agreement on
abiding by the outcome of “Geneva 1”; i.e., the first round of the Geneva
process, and regarding the Geneva process the gateway of the peaceful settlement
in Syria. However, in the light of emerging duplicitous stances, contradictory
evaluations, intentional recreation of new facts in the battlefield, as well as
some major players’ reversal of their original commitments, numerous “givens”
have changed.For a start, Russia went from using the “veto” (three times) to
prevent international attempts at stopping the brutal suppression of the
peaceful popular uprising to re-interpreting “Geneva”, with Iran’s and China’s
support, on the ground! Then, both Russia and Iran launched a ferocious campaign
to justify escalating their support for the Damascus regime’s war machine;
claiming that the rebel “Free Syrian Army” and other rebel groups were being
armed by foreign powers, including Turkey.
Furthermore, Russia and Iran accused Turkey of colluding with Islamist
“terrorism” –Sunni, in Moscow’s and Tehran’s definition –, and facilitating
entry of extremist terrorists to Syria via Turkey after providing them with
weapons and training. In the meantime, Ankara was repeatedly claiming that it
would not stay “idle-handed” while Syria’s Bashar al-Assad continued doing what
he was doing to his people. As for the US, Washington clearly welcomed the
Syrian uprising, early on, as it did with regard to the other uprisings of “The
Arab Spring” of 2011. American officials were soon claiming that the “Assad
regime has lost its legitimacy”, and “there was no role for Assad in Syria’s
future”. Yet, there were two apparent reservations against the Syrian uprising
from its early days, which may have contributed to the American and Western
appraisal, in general, of that uprising. First, the weird official Israeli
“silence”, and secondly, the outright opposition expressed by some Christian
Middle Eastern clergymen. Indeed, while the Israeli government was keen to keep
quiet, some media and ex-intelligence personalities were saying candidly that
the fall of a regime that had kept Israel’s northern borders since 1973 was not
in its interests. As for the Christian clergymen, namely Lebanese and Syrian,
they were saying in every Western capital they visited that “while the Assad
regime was never exemplary, any replacement would be worse”!
During this period, while the Syrian uprising and other uprisings of “The Arab
Spring” were teetering between relatively smooth change and bloody civil wars
creating “failed states”, former US President Barack Obama was planning his
radical strategy for the Middle East. He was in a hurry to establish a “new
Middle East” totally different from the one Washington was dealing with since
“the Cold War”, but particularly, since 1979. Obama’s new strategy included
winning back Iran as an ally of the US. However, unlike the old alliance with
the Shah, who was regarded as a subservient “minor ally” and a mere “link” in
its chains of containment of the former USSR; Obama saw in “revolutionary” Iran
a “partner” in the fight against the Arab “Right”, and what he considered the
“suicidal” policies of Sunni fundamentalism. Thus, the nuclear agreement (JCPOA)
signed with the Iran Mullahs, after lengthy secret negotiations, became one of
the underpinnings of Washington’s new regional policies.
In order to insure the success of the JCPOA, Obama was willing to go far; and
consequently, the Syrian uprising, regarded by Tehran as fatal threat to its
interests, became the first victim of the Obama – Khamenei deal. As suppression
and bloodshed continued in Syria, chemical weapons were used causing many to
expect that what was always warned against and claimed its usage would be a “red
line”. Yet this “red line” was not only ignored by Washington, but President
Obama went on to dismiss the ability of the rebels, hence leading the uprising
into a different stage. At this point, the regime realized, and so did Moscow
and Tehran, that Washington’s interests where somewhere else, and that it was
free to do whatever it liked. On the other hand, two developments, drastically
changed Turkey’s position: The first was Washington’s active military and
political support of the “separatist” Kurds of northern Syria under the pretext
that they were “the only force capable of confronting and defeating ISIS”, which
was indebted to international dubious attitude for its growth, expansion and
ability to destroy and displace.
The second development was Turkey’s downing a Russian fighter bomber in the late
November 2015, while in a sortie supporting Assad’s ground troops over the
Syrian – Turkish border area. Following this incident, fearing an unequal
confrontation with Russia, and realizing that despite being a NATO member
neither Washington nor NATO itself were willing to stand by it, Ankara decided
to reach an “understanding” with Moscow. In addition to the above, as Washington
pushed forward with its Kurdish option, Ankara rediscovered the anti-Kurdish
common denominator with the Iranians, which more than justified cooperation with
Tehran and sacrificing the Syrians and their uprising. Since then, after Russia
and Iran were citing the need to “fight Turkey-backed Takfiri extremists” to
justify their “occupation” of Syria, Russia, Iran and Turkey decided to work
together in pursuit of their converging interests in Syria and the Middle East.
This resulted in launching the Astana Talks, to which what has remained of armed
rebels was invited. However, what has become clear, looking at what has been
taking place on the ground, the aim of the Astana Talks was to tie up the armed
rebels, and push the “moderate” factions to fight their more “radical”
counterpart such as Al-Nusra and other Al-Qaeda like groups. Since January 23
and 24, 2017, during the eight rounds of the Astana Talks held under Russian
sponsorship and US and UN participation, the regime backed by Russia and Iran
has been imposing its combat superiority, the opposition has been forced to make
more and more concessions, and lose an increasing number of disillusioned
negotiators.
Peace in Syria is finished; and those who decide to go to Sochi do not really
represent Syria, but rather their sponsors and backers… and here is the terrible
tragedy.