LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 12/17
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias/english.june12.17.htm

 News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to go to the LCCC Daily English/Arabic News Buletins Archieves Since 2016

Bible Quotations For Today
I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine-grower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint John 15/01-08/:"‘I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine-grower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples."

This Jesus is "the stone that was rejected by you, the builders; it has become the cornerstone
Acts of the Apostles 04/05-12/:'The next day their rulers, elders, and scribes assembled in Jerusalem, with Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander, and all who were of the high-priestly family. When they had made the prisoners stand in their midst, they inquired, ‘By what power or by what name did you do this?’Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, ‘Rulers of the people and elders,if we are questioned today because of a good deed done to someone who was sick and are asked how this man has been healed, let it be known to all of you, and to all the people of Israel, that this man is standing before you in good health by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead. This Jesus is "the stone that was rejected by you, the builders; it has become the cornerstone."There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved.’
 

Question: "What does it mean to take the Lord’s name in vain?"
Answer: Although many people believe taking the Lord’s name in vain refers to using the Lord’s name as a swear word, there is much more involved with a vain use of God’s name. To understand the severity of taking the Lord’s name in vain, we must first see the Lord’s name from His perspective as outlined in Scripture. The God of Israel was known by many names and titles, but the concept embodied in God’s name plays an important and unique role in the Bible. God’s nature and attributes, the totality of His being, and especially His glory are reflected in His name (Psalm 8:1). Psalm 111:9 tells us His name is “holy and awesome,” and the Lord’s prayer begins by addressing God with the phrase “hallowed be your name” (Matthew 6:9), an indication that a reverence for God and His name should be foremost in our prayers. Too often we barge into God’s presence with presumptuous “to-do lists” for Him, without being mindful of His holiness, His awesomeness, and the vast chasm that separates our nature from His. That we are even allowed to come before His throne is due only to His gracious, merciful love for His own (Hebrews 4:16). We must never take that grace for granted.
Because of the greatness of the name of God, any use of God’s name that brings dishonor on Him or on His character is taking His name in vain. The third of the Ten Commandments forbids taking or using the Lord’s name in an irreverent manner because that would indicate a lack of respect for God Himself. A person who misuses God’s name will not be held “guiltless” by the Lord (Exodus 20:7). In the Old Testament, bringing dishonor on God’s name was done by failing to perform an oath or vow taken in His name (Leviticus 19:12). The man who used God’s name to legitimize his oath, and then broke his promise, would indicate his lack of reverence for God as well as a lack of fear of His holy retribution. It was essentially the same as denying God’s existence. For believers, however, there is no need to use God’s name to legitimize an oath as we are not to take oaths in the first place, letting our “yes be yes” and our “no be no” (Matthew 5:33-37).
There is a larger sense in which people today take the Lord’s name in vain. Those who name the name of Christ, who pray in His name, and who take His name as part of their identity, but who deliberately and continually disobey His commands, are taking His name in vain. Jesus Christ has been given the name above all names, at which every knee shall bow (Philippians 2:9-10), and when we take the name “Christian” upon ourselves, we must do so with an understanding of all that signifies. If we profess to be Christians, but act, think, and speak in a worldly or profane manner, we take His name in vain. When we misrepresent Christ, either intentionally or through ignorance of the Christian faith as proclaimed in Scripture, we take the Lord’s name in vain. When we say we love Him, but do not do what He commands (Luke 6:46), we take His name in vain and are possibly identifying ourselves to be among those to whom Christ will say, “I never knew you. Away from me” in the day of judgment (Matthew 7:21-23).
The name of the Lord is holy, as He is holy. The name of the Lord is a representation of His glory, His majesty, and His supreme deity. We are to esteem and honor His name as we revere and glorify God Himself. To do any less is to take His name in vain.
*Recommended Resource: The Ten Commandments: Ethics for the Twenty-first Century by Mark F. Rooker
GotQuestions.org

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June 11-12/17
The Worst In The Region: Leaked US Cables Reveal Qatar's Role In The Mideast/Jerusalem Post/June 11/17
The Rolling Qatari Snowball/Salman Al-dossary/Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17
Islamization of Europe: Erdogan's New Muslim Political Network/Yves Mamou/Gatestone Institute/June 11/17 France: Islamic Antisemitism, French Silence/Guy Millière/Gatestone Institute/June 11/17
Qatar one of primary sources of terror funding in region/Sarah Broskivic/Al Arabiya/June 11/17
This is not a case of ‘fitna’/Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/June 11/17
Why Qatar isn’t Fidel Castro’s Cuba/Ghassan Charbel/Al Arabiya/June 11/17
Israel’s Costs vs. Its Benefits….The Six-Day War/Efraim Inbar/Middle East Quarterly/Summer 2017

Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on June 11-12/17
Documents Uncover Involvement of Qatari Charity in Lebanon’s Nahr al-Bared Unrest
50 Displaced Syrian Families Leave Lebanon’s Arsal for Home
Hariri from Baabda: Electoral Law Must be Finalized before Cabinet Session
Adwan Stresses Lebanon Will Have New Electoral Law 'on Friday'
Electoral Law Remaining Obstacles to be Resolved in 'Next Three Days
'Al-Rahi Warns against 'Parliamentary Extension, Vacuum'
Cypriot President Arrives in Lebanon on Four-Day Visit
Head of Rafik Hariri International Airport Fadi al-Hassan Reassures on Airport Security after Terror Plot Reports
Terror Suspect Arrested in Akkar's Bebnin
Army raids Sharawneh in search of wanted suspects
Khalil: Vacuum unacceptable, deliberations will continue
Machnouk: Activating death penalty for intentional murder requires political consensus
Raad says vote law will be out, no point in going back

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June 11-12/17
Mohammed bin Salman discusses with Tillerson developments in the region
Kuwait says Qatar ‘ready to understand’ Gulf concerns
Pakistan denies media reports of troop deployment to Qatar
Saudi, Bahrain, UAE announce humanitarian services for mixed Qatari families
Iran Sends Five Planes of Food to Qatar
Germany’s FM: Still a chance to defuse Qatar crisis tension
Turkey: Military base in Qatar aimed at GCC security, not any specific country
UAE minister: Only solution for Qatar is to stop supporting terrorists
Profiles of five Egyptians on the terror blacklist issued by Arab powers
ISIS Suggests Handing over Raqqa in Exchange of Safe Exit
Qatar Dispute Forces Egypt to Raise Security Alert
Hamas Voices Readiness to Leave Qatar as Haniya Visits Iran
Doha Urges Gulf Resolution, Erdogan Justifies Troop Deployment in Qatar
Iran: Kurdistan Region Indivisible Part of Iraq
Hamas Rejects Red Cross Request to Reveal Fate of Israeli Soldiers
Jordan Army Shoots Dead 5 for Approaching Border near Syria
Seif al-Islam Gadhafi Released in Libya
Tunisia Cracks Down on Suspicious Charity Group Activities
Yemen: 98 Percent of Cholera Patients Cured
Macron Looks to Cement Mandate as French Elect New Parliament

Latest Lebanese Related News published on June 10-11/17
Documents Uncover Involvement of Qatari Charity in Lebanon’s Nahr al-Bared Unrest
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Riyadh – Documents obtained by Asharq Al-Awsat prove that the Qatar-based Sheikh Eid al Thani Charity (“Eid Charity”) was involved in financing and supporting the Lebanon-based Fatah al-Islam members and had also helped in the fracture between the group and the Palestinian Fatah al-Intifada movement. Ten years ago, in May 2007, Lebanon witnessed an armed conflict at the Nahr al-Bared Palestinian refugee camp near the northern city of Tripoli when the Lebanese Army was asked to intervene in the area and control the spread of a new movement called Fatah al-Islam, which adopted the ideology of al-Qaeda. The camp witnessed bloody unrest that lasted more than three months. At least 140 Fatah al-Islam members were killed, while more than 50 civilians were killed or injured at the camp. The clashes also left at least 150 soldier casualties. Ten years after the Nahr al-Bared events, documents obtained by Asharq Al-Awsat revealed that the Eid Charity is active in Lebanon and had financially supported the Islamic Jihad in Palestine and a number of Fatah al-Islam figures. An extremist cleric, who tried to fuel sectarianism in Lebanon, manages the charity. The documents also said that the charity, operating in Lebanon under the cover of providing money and medical and food aid to the camp, had also provided money to three men designated by the Lebanese security as extremists. Some of those men were involved in the “string of attacks on American fast-food restaurants in Tripoli.” Also, the documents proved that one year prior to the Nahr al-Bared events, a member of the Eid Charity had twice visited Beirut and Tripoli and met with a number of hardline clerics to express the charity’s readiness to support them.

50 Displaced Syrian Families Leave Lebanon’s Arsal for Home
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Beirut – Over 50 Syrian families residing in the northeastern Lebanese border town of Arsal have decided to return to their war-torn country. Deputy Arsal municipal chief Rima Karnaby explained that safe passage has been provided to the refugees, whose security was provided by the Lebanese army. Some 400 people make up these 50 families. The Army Command said in a statement that its forces offered safe passage to the convoys of families after it received several requests from them to return to Syria. They were transported via 30 civilian vehicles to the Lebanese-Syrian border. From there, they headed to their town of Asal al-Ward. Syrian pro-regime media said that dozens of Syrian refugees had returned to the western al-Qalamoun region from Lebanon. Regime forces and Lebanon’s “Hezbollah” had on May 6 seized control of all western al-Qalamoun regions, linking it to al-Zabadani to the western Damascus countryside.

Hariri from Baabda: Electoral Law Must be Finalized before Cabinet Session
Naharnet /June 11/17/Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced after talks Sunday with President Michel Aoun that the new electoral law “must be finalized before the Cabinet session” that will be held Wednesday. “The atmospheres are positive and the approval of the electoral law must be expedited,” Hariri added. Baabda Palace sources have told al-Mustaqbal newspaper that the remaining hurdles are expected to be resolved “in the next three days.” “The consecutive meetings that have been held among the political parties have devised a consensual roadmap to approve the proportional representation law on which the three presidents have agreed,” the daily said. According to the aforementioned “roadmap,” the draft will face a first test in Cabinet on Wednesday before being referred to Parliament for approval by the end of the week. The draft law is fully based on the proportional representation electoral system and the parties have agreed that the polls will be held in 15 electoral districts. They are still however wrangling over the mechanism of counting votes going for so-called preferred candidates on the electoral ballots and whether it should depend on the electoral districts or the administrative districts. The Free Patriotic Movement has argued that confining the preferred vote to the smaller administrative districts would allow Christians to elect more MPs with their own votes.

Adwan Stresses Lebanon Will Have New Electoral Law 'on Friday'
Naharnet /June 11/17/Lebanese Forces deputy leader MP George Adwan has stressed that the country will have a new electoral law “on Friday.”“There will be an electoral law on Friday,” an optimistic Adwan told ad-Diyar newspaper in remarks published Sunday. Adwan has played a key role in promoting a draft electoral law fully based on the proportional representation system and 15 electoral districts. The parties have agreed on the law's general format but they are still discussing the mechanism of counting votes going for so-called preferred candidates on the electoral ballots and whether it should depend on the electoral districts or the administrative districts. “From now on, the only option is moving forward, especially that everything has been extensively discussed and there are no more issues or points that represent a serious hurdle,” Adwan added. The Cabinet is expected to approve the draft law on Wednesday and Parliament is expected to pass it during the Friday legislative session.

Electoral Law Remaining Obstacles to be Resolved in 'Next Three Days'
Naharnet /June 11/17/After the major progress that has been made in efforts to agree on a new electoral law, the remaining hurdles are expected to be resolved “in the next three days,” Baabda Palace sources said. “The next three days will represent a pivotal juncture to finalize all the pending details regarding the new law,” the sources told al-Mustaqbal newspaper in remarks published Sunday. “The consecutive meetings that have been held among the political parties have devised a consensual roadmap to approve the proportional representation law on which the three presidents have agreed,” the daily added. According to the aforementioned “roadmap,” the draft will face a first test in Cabinet on Wednesday before being referred to Parliament for approval by the end of the week. The draft law is fully based on the proportional representation electoral system and the parties have agreed that the polls will be held in 15 electoral districts. They are still however wrangling over the mechanism of counting votes going for so-called preferred candidates on the electoral ballots and whether it should depend on the electoral districts or the administrative districts. The Free Patriotic Movement has argued that confining the preferred vote to the smaller administrative districts would allow Christians to elect more MPs with their own votes.

Al-Rahi Warns against 'Parliamentary Extension, Vacuum'
Naharnet /June 11/17/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi on Sunday warned against extending parliament's term or reaching so-called parliamentary vacuum despite the latest optimism about the possibility of approving a new electoral law in Wednesday's Cabinet session. “Political officials are preoccupied with their partisan interests with the objective of maximizing gains and minimizing losses, and what's more painful is that their only concern is limited to the new electoral law while they have indefinitely suspended all the other pressing issues that are burdening citizens,” al-Rahi said in a Sunday Mass sermon in Harissa. “Despite our appreciation of all honest efforts and our wishes for them to succeed, we hope they will not reach one of two evils: open-ended extension or parliamentary vacuum,” the patriarch added. Both scenarios would be “strongly condemned and rejected,” he warned. Lebanese Forces deputy leader MP George Adwan has stressed that the country will have a new electoral law “on Friday.”Adwan has played a key role in promoting a draft electoral law fully based on the proportional representation system and 15 electoral districts. The parties have agreed on the law's general format but they are still discussing the mechanism of counting votes going for so-called preferred candidates on the electoral ballots and whether it should depend on the electoral districts or the administrative districts. The Cabinet is however expected to approve the draft law on Wednesday and Parliament is expected to pass it during the Friday legislative session.

Cypriot President Arrives in Lebanon on Four-Day Visit
Naharnet /June 11/17/Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades arrived Sunday morning in Lebanon for a four-day visit to the neighboring Mediterranean country, Lebanon's National News Agency said. The president is accompanied by his wife Andri and an official Cypriot delegation. Anastasiades was welcomed at Beirut's Rafik Hariri International Airport by State Minister for Combating Corruption Nicolas Tueini and Lebanon's Ambassador to Cyprus Youssef Sadaqa. The Cypriot president then headed to his residence place at Beirut's Phoenicia Hotel. Anastasiades has a private program for Sunday and on Monday he will hold talks with President Michel Aoun at the Baabda Palace, NNA said. The bilateral meeting between the two presidents will be followed by broad Lebanese-Cypriot talks and a press conference. Aoun will then throw a lunch banquet in honor of the visiting leader and his wife.

Head of Rafik Hariri International Airport Fadi al-Hassan Reassures on Airport Security after Terror Plot Reports
Naharnet /June 11/17/Head of Rafik Hariri International Airport Fadi al-Hassan has reassured on the airport's security situation after unconfirmed media reports said the facility was one of the targets of the terrorist Islamic State cell that has been busted by security forces in recent days.
“The reports were about intentions to stage acts of sabotage and one cannot at all say that the airport's security measures have been breached,” al-Hassan told Kuwaiti daily al-Rai in remarks published Sunday. He reassured Lebanese, Arab and foreign travelers that “all scenarios have been taken into consideration in the measures that have been taken around and inside the airport.”“The measures are in place around the clock and we are reassured about the integrated measures that have been taken to protect this vital facility and its users,” al-Hassan added. Informed sources meanwhile told al-Rai that “it would have been difficult for the IS terrorists to infiltrate into the airport and carry out what they had planned.” “In light of the possible threats, the airport has turned into a fortified fortress amid the public and clandestine security measures that rely on manpower skills and technological assets,” the sources said. “It is difficult to penetrate the consecutive security barriers outside and inside the airport, and these measures had entered into force after IS started targeting airports around the world,” the sources added. Unconfirmed media reports have said that “four Yemenis” were supposed to carry out the airport attack but that only one of them had managed to enter Lebanon before being arrested in connection with an IS plot to attack a restaurant in Beirut's southern suburbs. The four Yemenis were supposed to “enter the airport, lob hand grenades, open fire and blow up their suicide vests in order to ensure maximum casualties,” the reports said. The General Directorate of General Security had on Saturday issued a statement saying some media outlets had made “inaccurate conclusions” regarding the locations that the terrorists had intended to target and the possible scenarios. It also urged “accuracy” in the reporting of “sensitive security matters,” calling on media outlets to contribute to “bolstering the security that Lebanon is enjoying and to create a climate of reassurance among Lebanese expats and Arab and foreign tourists.”

Terror Suspect Arrested in Akkar's Bebnin
Naharnet /June 11/17/A terror suspect has been arrested in the town of Bebnin in the northern Akkar district, state-run National News Agency reported on Sunday. “A General Security intelligence force carried out a raid in the town of Bebnin where it arrested 23-year-old Syrian national Suleiman Kh.S.,” NNA said. The detainee is suspected of “belonging to a terrorist group,” the agency added. The development comes a day after General Security revealed that it has managed to thwart major terrorist attacks in the country and to dismantle a dangerous Islamic State cell comprising Palestinian, Syrian and Yemeni militants.According to the confessions of the cell's members, attacks were being plotted against a public facility, security forces, members of Lebanese political parties, a clergyman in the South, a Dahieh restaurant or gathering, and areas in Tripoli, Nabatieh and the Beirut southern suburb of al-Rihab.

Army raids Sharawneh in search of wanted suspects
Sun 11 Jun 2017/NNA - Army units raided a while ago the locality Sharawneh at the northern entrance to the city of Baalbek in search of wanted suspects, seizing a silver-colored 4-wheel drive vehicle, NNA correspondent in Baalbek reported Sunday evening.

Khalil: Vacuum unacceptable, deliberations will continue
Sun 11 Jun 2017/NNA - Finance Minister Ali Hassan Khalil Sunday deemed that reaching vacuum is unacceptable, adding "discussions are ongoing with all openness and positivity to yield an understanding agreement.""It is only a matter of days, and the issue has nothing to do with one team scoring imaginary victories over another. We have to work together for the victory of our country by passing a new vote law and holding parliamentary elections with the participation of all sides," Khalil added. "This puts us before a challenge as we debate over a new law for the parliamentary elections, one that would respond to the people's hopes and aspirations of moving on to a new political stage of real representation within the parliament," he underscored. Khalil's words came during an annual Iftar ceremony held by Kaifoun's Philanthropic Association in Kaifoun.

Machnouk: Activating death penalty for intentional murder requires political consensus
Sat 10 Jun 2017/NNA - Interior and Municipalities Minister Nuhad el-Machnouk Saturday deemed that "activating the death penalty for intentional murder necessitates political consensus."Machnouk, who visited the family of victim Roy Hamouche in Mansourieh, assured them of Prime Minister Saad Hariri's determination to pursue the issue with President Michel Aoun and House Speaker Nabih Berri, in order to deter criminals and prevent the recurrence of such a tragedy.He expressed his sympathy and solidarity with the family during their time of pain, while stressing that "the execution of Roy Hamouche's murderer is up to the judiciary to decide."The Minister conveyed the sincere condolences of both President Aoun and PM Hariri to the victim's family.

Raad says vote law will be out, no point in going back
Sat 10 Jun 2017/NNA - "Loyalty to the Resistance" Parliamentary Bloc Head, MP Mohammad Raad, Saturday reassured all those seeking a new election law that it is bound to see the light, noting that "there is no point in going back.""All are entailed to implement a voting law whose broad lines they have approved," said Raad, adding that "agreement over its details is now required, so that elections can take place in accordance with this new law."Raad's words came during a week's memorial ceremony held in the town of Arab-Salim.

Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June 11-12/17
Mohammed bin Salman discusses with Tillerson developments in the region
SPA Sunday, 11 June 2017/Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz, Second Deputy Premier and Minister of Defense, received today a telephone call from United States Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. During the conversation, they reviewed bilateral relations, latest developments in the region, and the joint efforts of the two countries in combating terrorism, extremism and financing of terrorist organizations to achieve security and stability in the region.

Kuwait says Qatar ‘ready to understand’ Gulf concerns
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Sunday, 11 June 2017/Kuwait said on Sunday that Qatar has expressed willingness to understand concerns from other Gulf states. Kuwait is acting as a mediator in the biggest diplomatic crisis in the region in years, which saw Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, plus Egypt and Yemen, on Monday announced they were cutting all ties with Qatar, accusing it of supporting extremism. The Kuwaiti foreign minister said in a statement carried by the KUNA press agency that his country is eager to resolve tension among Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Qatar within the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council. “Qataris are willing to find a solution to the current dilemma,” Foreign Minister Sabah Al Khalid Al Sabah said. "(Kuwait) affirms the readiness of the brothers in Qatar to understand the reality of the qualms and concerns of their brothers and to heed the noble endeavors to enhance security and stability," the minister added. "The state of Kuwait will not abandon its efforts and will continue its good will efforts to patch the rift and find a solution that will deal with the root cause of the causes of the dispute... in the brotherly relations," he also said. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have called on Qatar to stop supporting extremists in the region in order for diplomatic ties to be restored.

Pakistan denies media reports of troop deployment to Qatar
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Sunday, 11 June 2017/The Foreign Office denied on Sunday media reports claiming that Pakistan would send its troops to Qatar, in the wake of the Gulf-Arab diplomatic fallout. According to a Foreign Office press release, the reports in some foreign media concerning the deployment of Pakistani troops in Qatar are “completely fabricated and baseless”.“These false reports appear to be a part of a malicious campaign aimed at creating misunderstanding between Pakistan and brotherly Muslim countries in the Gulf,” stated the Foreign Office spokesman, according to the press release. Some foreign media publications recently claimed that Pakistan would deploy 20,000 troops in Qatar, following Turkey’s decision to allow its troops to be deployed at a Turkish military base in the Gulf country facing isolation.

Saudi, Bahrain, UAE announce humanitarian services for mixed Qatari families
By Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Sunday, 11 June 2017/Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain on Sunday announced the provision of humanitarian services for mixed Qatari families. In a statement, the official news agency WAM provided a phone number for Emirati-Qatari families to call and be in touch with authorities regarding these services. The WAM statement said that the UAE views the Qatari people as an “extension of the UAE.”The Saudi press agency also provided a number for Saudi-Qatari families, and the Bahraini press agency did the same for Bahraini-Qatari families. Last week, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain cut diplomatic, economic and trade ties with Qatar, accusing the Gulf state of sponsoring terrorism.

Iran Sends Five Planes of Food to Qatar
Agence France Presse/Naharnet /June 11/17/Iran has sent five planes of food to Qatar, Iran's national carrier told AFP on Sunday, days after Gulf countries cut off air and other transport links to the emirate. "So far five planes carrying perishable food items such as fruit and vegetables have been sent to Qatar, each carrying around 90 tons of cargo, while another plane will be sent today," Iran Air spokesman Shahrokh Noushabadi said. "We will continue deliveries as long as there is demand" from Qatar, Noushabadi added, without mentioning if these deliveries were exports or aid. Three ships loaded with 350 tons of food were also set to leave an Iranian port for Qatar, the Tasnim news agency quoted a local official as saying. The port of Dayyer is Iran's closest port to Qatar. In the biggest diplomatic crisis in the region in years, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, plus Egypt and Yemen, on Monday announced they were cutting all ties with Qatar, accusing it of supporting extremism. Iran has urged Qatar and neighboring Gulf countries to engage in dialogue to resolve their dispute. The Islamic republic has also opened its airspace to about 100 more Qatari flights a day, after Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates banned Qatari planes from their airpace. The new flights have increased Iranian air traffic by 17 percent, the official state news agency has reported.

Germany’s FM: Still a chance to defuse Qatar crisis tension
Al Arabiya English and Agencies Saturday, 10 June 2017/The dispute between Qatar and other Arab states could lead to war, German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel told a newspaper on Saturday, adding that he still saw a chance to defuse the tension. “There is a danger that this dispute could lead to war,” Gabriel told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, citing what he called a “dramatic” harshness in relations between allied and neighboring countries in the Gulf. Gabriel said personal talks this week with his counterparts from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, and phone calls with the foreign ministers of Iran and Kuwait underscored his concerns. “After my talks this week, I know how serious the situation is, but I believe there are also good chances to make progress.”Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain on Friday designated as terrorists dozens of people and groups with links to Qatar, after severing diplomatic relations with Qatar on Monday. The four states accuse Qatar of supporting extremist Islamist militants and Iran. (With Reuters)

Turkey: Military base in Qatar aimed at GCC security, not any specific country
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Saturday, 10 June 2017/Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu says its military base in Qatar aimed at security of gulf region, not any specific country. Cavusoglu’s statements come after Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalid paid a visit to Istanbul on Saturday to discuss recent developments in the region. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed that he hoped the dispute with Qatar should be resolved before end Ramadan, according to Cavusoglu. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed that he hoped the dispute with Qatar should be resolved before end Ramadan, according to Cavusoglu. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain on Friday designated as terrorists dozens of people and groups with links to Qatar, after severing diplomatic relations with Qatar on Monday.
The four states accuse Qatar of supporting extremist Islamist militants and Iran.

UAE minister: Only solution for Qatar is to stop supporting terrorists
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Saturday, 10 June 2017/UAE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash has said that Qatar’s only solution to solving its current situation with Gulf and Muslim states is to change course from supporting terrorist and extremist groups. In a series of tweets on Saturday, Gargash said that while diplomacy is the only way forward, the “process can only work following clear indication that Qatar will stop support and finance of extremism and terrorism”. “Duplicitous policies supporting Islamic militancy and extremism have been disastrous for region. Resulting in radicalization, chaos and violence,” he tweeted. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain on Friday designated as terrorists dozens of people and groups with links to Qatar, after severing diplomatic relations with Qatar on Monday. The four states accuse Qatar of supporting extremist Islamist militants and Iran.

Profiles of five Egyptians on the terror blacklist issued by Arab powers
Ashraf Abd al-Hameed, Al Arabiya.net Sunday, 11 June 2017/The names of five Egyptians with terrorist links to Qatar, that were part of a blacklist drawn up by Arab powers last week, have been revealed by Al Arabiya on Sunday.
The list of Qatar-linked terrorists issued by Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt and Bahrain had collectively designated 59 individuals and 12 institution that have financed terrorist organization and received support from Qatar.
Here are five Egyptians, among a total of 26, involved in acts of terrorism:
1.Yahya Aqil Salman Aqeel
Number 40 on the list.
Born in the North Sinai governorate where he is a prominent leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. He has a significant role in transferring mandates from the Qatari leaders to members of Bait al-Maqdis organizations and other terrorist cells in North Sinai. He also transfers money for them to carry out the operations.
He has various connections with terrorist leaders in North Sinai and was transferring information about several vital buildings in North Sinai to these leaders.
2.Ayman Mahmoud Sadeq Rifat/Number 46 on the list.
Ayman was born on February 15, 1970 in the Giza governorate. He is a banker who is on the list. He was a member of the Egyptian parliament during the Muslim Brotherhood’s rule.
He is accused of overseeing the transfer and remittance of funds to terrorist cells that carry out operations, and of disrupting state institutions and planning demonstrations against the regime.
3. Mohamed Saad Abdel Muttalib Abdo Al-Razaki/Number 48 on the list.
His mission was to manage the properties and assets of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Following his escape to Qatar, he was prevented from using all of his bank accounts and deposits, while his properties and assets were detained. His name was listed on Egypt’s terrorist blacklist.
The charges against him include financing the Muslim Brotherhood, inciting violence, financing terrorist attacks on the Brotherhood's special cells and the Hasm group.
4. Abdel Rahman Mohamed Shokry Abdel Rahman/Number 42 on the list.
He was born in the city of Wasiti in the Beni Suef governorate. He is a friend of Muslim Brotherhood General Guide Mohammed Badie.
He is a major defendant in the burning of 36 public and private establishments in Beni Suef during the period following the Rabaa massacre. He is sentenced in absentia to life imprisonment in a military trial for the burning of government facilities.
5. Ahmed Fouad Ahmed Gad Beltagy/Number 49 on the list.
He is a radiologist from the Fayoum governorate and owner of the Sama Scan Center in Fayoum. He was listed because of his terrorism case number 7184 in 2015.
Ahmed was a leader in the Muslim Brotherhood and is accused of funding their terrorist operations in Fayoum.

ISIS Suggests Handing over Raqqa in Exchange of Safe Exit
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Beirut – The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) achieved on Saturday new advances in Raqqa by controlling new positions in the west, north and east of the city following fierce battles with ISIS militants. Meanwhile, reports said a tribal delegation representing the terrorist organization in Raqqa was currently conducting talks with the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) in Tal Abyad to hand over the city in exchange of a safe exit of the militants. Activists operating in Raqqa said: “A delegation from a tribal council linked to ISIS left the city of Raqqa on Friday to Ain Issa town to negotiate with SDF forces.” Abu Mohammad al-Raqqawi, an activist in the Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently said on Saturday: “We have received information about ongoing talks taking place in the countryside of Tal Abyad between a delegation linked to ISIS and the PYD to discuss the possibility of stopping the attack on Raqqa.”He asserted that the tribal delegation carries an initiative stipulating the handing over of the city to SDF forces in exchange for the safe exit ofmilitants from the city towards the Damascus suburbs and Deir Ezzor. Separately, an uneasy calm prevailed on Saturday in the Syrian desert only hours after an announcement that regime forces and their affiliated groups have reached the Iraqi border. However, Maghawir al-Thawra army denied those reports and asserted that Bashar Assad’s regime forces were still 40 kilometers away from al-Zakaf military camp. The army also accused the regime forces of coordinating with ISIS militants with an aim to reach the border. A spokesperson from Maghawir al-Thawra told Asharq Al-Awsat: “We and the International Coalition have warned regime forces to stay 55 to 75 kilometers away from the camp or else they would be treated in the proper manner.”

Qatar Dispute Forces Egypt to Raise Security Alert
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Cairo – A number of countries in the region could be faced with a new terrorist wave after they severed diplomatic ties with Qatar, warned media aide to the Egyptian Interior Minister warned Tariq Atiya. “The security agencies have raised their alert level throughout the country in anticipation of any revenge terrorist attacks,” he revealed. Several Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt, cut ties with Qatar after accusing it of supporting terrorist groups. They also blacklisted dozens of individuals with ties with Qatar, including prominent Egyptian cleric Youssef al-Qardawi, who resides in Doha. Atiya explained that heightened security alert was taken after Interior Minister Majdi Abdul Ghaffar held a meeting with his security aides and heads of security agencies to prepare a plan to confront the expected threats. Egypt has since the ouster of former President Mohammed Morsi in 2013 witnessed terrorist attacks by armed groups that are linked to the banned Muslim Brotherhood. Morsi is a member of the movement. The terrorists had in recent months targeted churches and Christian gatherings, leaving scores of casualties. The attacks were claimed by ISIS that is active in northern Sinai. A state of emergency was declared in April in wake of twin ISIS bombings against Coptic churches. In 2013, Qatar openly backed the Muslim Brotherhood after Morsi was overthrown. It also refused to deem it a terrorist group and opposed handing over dozens of its members who are wanted by Egyptian authorities.

Hamas Voices Readiness to Leave Qatar as Haniya Visits Iran
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Ramallah – The Hamas movement announced that its officials and affiliates were ready to leave the Qatari capital Doha in what appears to be a precursor to the movement lessening its presence there. Hamas justified its decision by saying that it wants to avoid Arab disputes, calling for ending them with dialogue. At the same time, Hamas politburo chief Ismail Haniya was preparing to travel to Iran soon as part of a tour that includes other countries that have not been revealed, said the movement’s foreign affairs official Osama Hamdan. Politburo member Moussa Abou Marzouq said that Hamas will not be a side in the inter-Arab disputes because it is committed to the central Palestinian cause. He made his remarks after holding talks in Lebanon with Speaker Nabih Berri. “We will not clash with any side and we will not meddle in affairs, regardless of the circumstances and developments,” he added. “We also do not want anyone to have differences over backing the Palestinian cause. We will persevere against these changes,” he vowed. Abou Marzouq’s comments come at a time when Hamas is enduring great pressure given that it is hosted by Qatar that recently saw a number of Arab countries sever diplomatic ties with it over its backing of terrorism. Hamas found itself in the eye of the storm after Qatar was accused of funding the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood groups. In this light, Hamdan said that Hamas does not mind easing the pressure off Qatar, saying the decision to have its officials leave the emirate was linked to the recent elections results in the movement. Among the officials who left Qatar was Saleh al-Aaroury. Israeli Minister Avigdor Lieberman said that he has arrived in Lebanon with two other Hamas leaders in order to bolster ties with “Hezbollah” and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to work against Israel. Efforts should be exerted on the Lebanese government to make him leave the country, added the minister. Beirut is one of the capitals that Hamas has placed as an option should it leave Qatar. Hamas has a good presence in Lebanon that has witnessed attempts in the past to create rapprochement between the movement and Iran through “Hezbollah”.

Doha Urges Gulf Resolution, Erdogan Justifies Troop Deployment in Qatar
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Moscow, Ankara, London – While Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Bahrain welcomed US President Donald Trump’s statements on the importance of Qatar halting its support of terrorism, Qatari Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani asserted that the Gulf Cooperation Council is the most appropriate venue for resolving the crises. He added that the discord is solved by dialogue, emphasizing that the GCC is the best place for such talks. The Qatari response was declared during a joint conference by the Qatari foreign minister and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, in Moscow. Lavrov called on Saturday for dialogue between Qatar and the countries boycotting it, offering his country’s mediation in the crisis. He urged settling any discord through dialogue. He said that Mscow is “ready to try to do everything in its power” to help resolve the crisis and added that unity is needed to fight terrorism. “For us, unity is clearly necessary for maximum effect on this front,” he said. Meanwhile on Saturday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan hosted Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa and urged that the dispute be resolved by the end of the holy month of Ramadan.The Turkish president held discussions with the Bahraini foreign minister for around an hour, in the presence of Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. The purpose of the troop deployment in the Turkish military base in Qatar “is to help foster security and stability across the Gulf,” Cavusoglu said. He added that Turkey would continue its efforts to resolve the dispute as Qatar faces isolation imposed by fellow Arab states over its alleged support for terrorism.

Iran: Kurdistan Region Indivisible Part of Iraq
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Tehran, Erbil – Iran voiced on Saturday its opposition to the independence referendum in Iraqi Kurdistan Region that was called for by Kurdish authorities earlier this week. It joins the Iraqi government and Turkey who have both rejected the vote.“Iran’s principal position is to support the territorial integrity of Iraq,” foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi said. “The Kurdistan region is part of the Iraqi republic and unilateral decisions outside the national and legal framework, especially the Iraqi constitution… can only lead to new problems.” Iraqi Kurdish leaders announced on Wednesday that they will organize an independence referendum on September 25, not only in their three-province autonomous region but also in other historically Kurdish-majority areas they have long sought to incorporate in it. Iran worries about separatism among its own Kurds, most of whom live in areas along the border with Iraq. Rebels of the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI) and the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK) launch sporadic attacks into Iran from rear-bases in Iraq, triggering sometimes deadly clashes with the security forces. After an upsurge attacks in 2011, Iranian troops launched a cross-border incursion, forcing KDPI to retreat deeper into Iraq. “Today, Iraq more than ever needs peace and national unity and differences between Erbil and Baghdad must be resolved within the framework of dialogue and in compliance with Iraq’s constitution,” said Ghasemi. Head of the Kurdistan Region Masoud Barzani had held talks with Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Abadi on Saturday to discuss the latest political, security and economic developments in Iraq. A statement from Abadi’s office said that the two sides stressed in their telephone call the need to continue high-level coordination between military forces in order to complete the liberation of remaining areas and destroy the ISIS terrorist group. They also underlined the importance of maintaining unity that will fortify field victories.

Hamas Rejects Red Cross Request to Reveal Fate of Israeli Soldiers
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Ramallah – Hamas has rejected a request by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to reveal the fate of Israeli soldiers that have gone missing in the movement-controlled Gaza Strip. Hamas spokesman Abdul Latif al-Qanou said: “The case of Israeli soldier prisoners is in the hands of the movement and it alone takes decisions over this issue.” “It will not comply with such demands from the Red Cross,” he added. The ICRC had called on Hamas to respect it commitments to International Humanitarian Law in regards to its Israeli soldiers. It had demanded that the movement submit a report on their fate. Head of the ICRC delegation in Israel Jacques de Maio said that regardless if the prisoners were civilians or soldiers, they are all protected by International Humanitarian Law. “The fate of the people who were imprisoned while they were alive should be known and they should be treated humanely,” he stressed. He also said that the remains of the deceased should be respected and returned to their loved ones. The dispute between Hamas and the ICRC comes at a time of tensions between the movement and the United Nations in wake of the discovery of a Hamas tunnel below two UN-schools in Gaza. The UN Relief and Works Agency condemned these tunnels “in the strongest possible terms,” submitting a complaint to Hamas in Gaza. No students or staff members will be allowed to enter the schools until the problem is resolved. UNRWA said that the existence of the tunnels violates all UN privileges and immunities that are granted to it by International Humanitarian Law. Hamas for its part rejected the UNRWA statement, saying that the movement is not performing any “resistance operations” near the schools. It stressed that Hamas’ policy is based on respecting UNRWA institutions, vital facilities and public institutions and keeping them away from resistance acts. It condemned the UNRWA claims, saying: “These rumors will be exploited by the Israeli occupation to justify its crimes and encourage it to target civilians.”

Jordan Army Shoots Dead 5 for Approaching Border near Syria
Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/The Jordanian army announced on Sunday that its forces shot dead five people who were approaching their position from the Syrian side of the border. The border guards killed the individuals who were coming from Tanf, a Syrian desert town where US special forces training rebels are based. The Jordanian army said it destroyed a car and two motorbikes in the incident. The army statement did not give any details of the identity of the men and whether they were smugglers or militants in the area where Jordan’s northeastern borders meet both Iraq and Syria.The statement however said that before the shooting, a convoy of nine cars had approached from the Tanf area but fled after the army fired warning shots. The town has been a flashpoint in recent weeks as militias backed by Iran have tried to get near the US garrison, prompting US coalition jets to strike back. Tanf lies near the strategic Damascus-Baghdad highway that was once a major weapons supply route for Iranian weapons into Syria. ISIS militants launched a suicide attack last April on the heavily defended base in which the Pentagon said an estimated 20-30 ISIS fighters were involved. US jets bombed the militants in the hit and run attack. Staunch US ally Jordan has also been threatened by the militants. Moscow on Wednesday condemned the US-led coalition strike on pro-regime fighters in Tanf as an “act of aggression” that targeted the most effective forces battling “terrorists” in the war-torn country. “It was an act of aggression which breaches the territorial sovereignty of Syria and intentionally or not targeted those forces that are the most effective in fighting the terrorists on the ground,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said. The US-led coalition on Tuesday said it had destroyed a unit of pro-regime forces in Syria as they advanced near an area where coalition commandos have been training and advising rebels. A group of about 60 pro-regime forces moved into the area with a tank, artillery, anti-aircraft weapons and armed technical vehicles, the coalition said in a statement. They posed a threat to the coalition forces at the Tanf Garrison, it added. The assault marks the second time in less than a month that coalition forces have attacked pro-regime forces as they headed toward the garrison inside a supposed “deconfliction zone” claimed by the US.

Seif al-Islam Gadhafi Released in Libya
/Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17/Tripoli – Seif al-Islam Gadhafi, the son of former Libyan leader Moammar, was released from captivity, Libyan sources revealed. The Abu Bakr al-Sadiq Brigade, a militia that controls the town of Zintan in western Libya, said Seif al-Islam was freed late on Friday, under an amnesty law promulgated by the parliament based in the country’s east during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. “He is now free and has left the city of Zintan,” the group said in a statement on its Facebook page. He has since left Zintan, but his destination was not revealed. The group hoped that all political prisoners would be included in this pardon. Seif al-Islam had been held in Zintan since November 2011. In response to an email from AFP, Seif al-Islam’s lawyer at the International Criminal Court, Karim Khan, said: “I am not able to confirm or deny any matters at this moment in time.” Previous reports of Seif al-Islam’s release have proven false.His mother and some of his siblings fled to Algeria after the revolution and eventually settled in Oman. Seif al-Islam, 44, is the second of Gadhafi’s eight children, the eldest son of his second wife Safiya.

Tunisia Cracks Down on Suspicious Charity Group Activities
/Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17Tunis – The Tunisian authorities have given all charity organizations in the country a month to submit a statement on the foreign donations and grants that they receive. The Tunisian government of Prime Minister Yousef Chahed is seeking through this measure to crack down on the suspicious activities of several of these groups. It will also resort to the central bank and finance ministry to inspect the financial accounts of the organizations. The Interior Ministry has meanwhile been tasked with monitoring any suspicious acts, especially in regards to funding terrorism.
The organizations are obligated to submit their data to the government before the July 10 deadline. The Tunisian government decision is taking place simultaneously with a campaign it is waging against businessmen and smugglers who had been accused of corruption. The government estimates that around 20,000 charities operate in the country. Seventy percent of them were formed after 2011. In 2014, only 200 organizations disclosed the sources of their financing.
The government for its part only grants minimal funding for these groups.

Yemen: 98 Percent of Cholera Patients Cured
/Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17London – Yemen’s Minister of Public Health and Population Dr. Nasir Baoum said that no matter how much cholera is treated, the disease cannot disappear completely given the poor sanitary conditions in the country. A statistical medical report shared between world health organizations showed however that around 98 percent of infected and suspicious cases were cured.Yemeni officials accused Houthi and Saleh militias of manipulating the number of cholera deaths in Yemen. According to a Saudi official, a meeting was held in Riyadh and witnessed Yemeni officials’ complaint over the exploitation of the disease through including deaths of natural causes with deaths from cholera. Baoum confirmed such reports, saying that the necessary measures have been taken to monitor the patients, adding that reports issued by Houthis should not be trusted. “Yemeni President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi was the first to show interest in this issue and he pleaded with the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud to intervene and these efforts in combating the disease were fruitful,” said Baoum told Asharq Al-Awsat. King Salman Center for Relief and Humanitarian Aid (KSRelief) spokesman Dr. Samer al- Jutaili told Asharq Al-Awsat that according to the World Health Organization (WHO) the cholera death rate is 0.8 percent. He added: “We adopted the intervention plan put by the WHO to fight cholera and contain it.”

Macron Looks to Cement Mandate as French Elect New Parliament
Agence France Presse/Naharnet /June 11/17/A month after Emmanuel Macron's election as French president, voters returned to the polls Sunday for the first round of a parliamentary vote expected to give him a comfortable majority. Turnout was markedly down, reflecting a sense of resignation among Macron's opponents faced with polls showing the 39-year-old set to sweep the board, buoyed by a deep desire for political renewal. After nine hours of voting to elect the members of the National Assembly, only 40.75 percent of the electorate had cast a ballot -- one of the lowest levels in the first round of a parliamentary poll in six decades. Macron has enjoyed a political honeymoon since he beat far-right candidate Marine Le Pen to become France's youngest-ever president on May 7. He has won praise for appointing a balanced cabinet that straddles the left-right divide and taking a leading role in Europe's fight-back against U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from a global climate accord. But in order to push through the ambitious labor, economic and social reforms he promised on the campaign trail he needs a clear majority in parliament. A host of opinion polls show that his untested year-old Republique en Marche (Republic on the Move, REM) party could take 30 percent of the first-round vote, putting it on track to secure a landslide in next Sunday's run-off round. The center-right Republicans and the Socialists fear heavy losses after their candidates failed to reach the presidential run-off for the first time in France's postwar history. Some predictions indicate REM could win as many as 400 seats in the 577-seat chamber, with voters seeking to give the new president a strong mandate. The party is already leading in 10 of 11 French overseas constituencies, which held their first-round vote last weekend. On Sunday, Macron posed for selfies with well-wishers after voting in the northern resort of Le Touquet where he and his 64-year-old wife Brigitte have a home.
Few MPs are expected to be elected in the first round.
If no candidate wins over 50 percent, the two top-placed contenders go into the second round -- along with any other candidate who garners at least 12.5 percent of registered voters. Polling stations in the largest cities are open until 8:00 pm (1800 GMT) with exit polls released immediately afterwards. More than 50,000 police were on patrol in a country still jittery after a wave of jihadist attacks that have killed more than 230 people since 2015. In the latest incident, a 40-year-old self-radicalized Algerian was shot and wounded after he attacked a policeman with a hammer outside Paris's Notre Dame cathedral on Tuesday.
Political novices
Macron, who had never held elected office before becoming president, has run novices seeking to emulate his success in around 200 constituencies -- part of his bid to inject new blood in French politics. They include Marie Sara, a retired bullfighter, who is taking on Gilbert Collard, a senior member of Le Pen's National Front in southern France. The Socialists' demise could come into sharp focus if its leader Jean-Christophe Cambadelis, 65, is ousted from his Paris seat by REM junior minister Mounir Mahjoubi, who is just 33. Macron is also trying to usher in an era of cleaner politics. His government's first bill proposes to ban lawmakers from employing family members or performing consultancy work while in office. The measures follow the scandal that destroyed the presidential bid of Republicans candidate Francois Fillon, who has been charged over payments to his wife and two of his children for suspected fake jobs as parliamentary assistants.
Fillon denies the charges.
Two parties, Le Pen's National Front and the small centrist MoDem party, an REM ally, are meanwhile under investigation over alleged expenses fraud at the European Parliament. One of Macron's ministers who is running for re-election in Brittany, Richard Ferrand, is also being probed over a property deal involving his girlfriend.
'The only opposition'
Le Pen's party looks set to struggle to win the 15 seats it would need to form a parliamentary group, a result that would be another deep disappointment after her defeat by Macron. But this week she struck a bullish note, telling AFP in the northern town of Henin-Beaumont where she is running for a seat, that with other parties likely to agree to work with Macron, "we will be the only opposition force."The radical-left France Insoumise (France Unbowed) party of Jean-Luc Melenchon is also hoping to perform strongly. Macron has urged voters to back his reform proposals including an overhaul of the rigid rules governing the job market, blamed by many economists for holding back growth. The president was economy minister in the Socialist government that began loosening the labor laws last year, sparking mass demonstrations that lasted for months.

Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June 11-12/17
الأسوأ في المنطقة: تسريب اميركي لبرقيات تبين دور قطر في الشرق الأوسط
 The Worst In The Region: Leaked US Cables Reveal Qatar's Role In The Mideast
Jerusalem Post/June 11/17
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/The-worst-in-the-region-Leaked-US-cables-reveal-Qatars-role-in-Mideast-496481
In 2007, then-Palestinian Authority prime minister Salam Fayyad told the US Treasury’s under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence Stuart Levey that Qatar provides “more support to fundamentalists than Kuwait or Saudi Arabia.”
Qatar was “willfully bad,” Fayyad said.
Saudi FM to Qatar: Enough is enough, stop supporting Hamas, other terror groups
Middle Israel: The sheikhdom that roared
It is one of many reports about Qatar’s support for Hamas and other groups across the Middle East that antagonized Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates 10 years ago that are revealed in State Department cables under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
In 2010, WikiLeaks published 251,287 leaked diplomatic cables, mostly from 2003 to 2010. These include cables marked “secret” and “confidential” from embassies and consulates in the Middle East. Of them, 536 reference both Qatar and Hamas, and 70 relate to Qatar and terrorism financing. They paint a picture of high-level interest in Qatar’s role in the region.
In 2009, a cable from then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton inquired about Qatar’s relations with Iran and Iran’s interest in Gaza.
They also show that Saudi Arabia and five other Muslim countries that broke relations with Doha last week, had long-standing disputes with Qatar.
The cables reveal numerous concerns among US allies that Qatar was hosting extremists.
In 2007, Indonesian officials warned the US about Qatar-based Islamist preacher Yusuf al-Qaradawi, saying his Al Jazeera program condones suicide bombings. A cable from the US Embassy in Algiers noted that Algeria was also worried about Qatar’s hosting of Qaradawi. In 2009, an official in Abu Dhabi told the Americans Qatar was “part of the Muslim Brotherhood” and warned against its policies.
After Hamas won the January 2006 Palestinian Authority legislative elections, cables reference Qatar’s interest in the Israel-Palestinian conflict. A March 27 cable says Qatar pays $3 million monthly to the PA. “Hamas does not have a major base of support in Qatar, despite the fact that [it then leader] Khaled Mashaal resided in Doha in the late 1990s,” an August cable notes.
Meir Dagan, then head of the Mossad, was quoted as telling a delegation led by Sen. Joseph Lieberman that Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas had a good relationship with Qatar but that the US should be wary of Hamas’s relations with the Muslim Brotherhood.
When John Kerry visited Qatar in 2010, prior to becoming secretary of state, the Emir of Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani told Kerry that the US had pressured Qatar to get Hamas to participate in Palestinian elections.
The emir claimed he warned US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice that Hamas would win the elections. After Hamas won, the Bush administration asked Qatar to cut off financial assistance to Hamas and its government, which Doha refused. When Hamas was isolated in Gaza, Fayyad told the Americans in 2007 that Qatar was using charities to move funds to the Strip. Some of these organizations may have been the same as those that appear on a list sent from the US Embassy in Israel to Washington in 2008, including the Charitable Qatar Society and Palestine Qatar Committee for Relief in Palestine.
In a 2008 assessment by US ambassador to Qatar Joseph LeBaron, the diplomat indicated that while the government in Doha did not support terrorism, “Qatar’s citizens can, however, support terrorism financially, and the capacity of the Qataris to do so may outstrip the ability of the government to stop it.”
Qatar was an “inconsistent partner in combating terrorist financing.” This was made clear in a December 2009 cable to Doha relating to the interagency Illicit Finance Task Force which noted that it was not worth trying to disrupt finance for terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan when the US was trying to stop Qatar from supporting Hamas. “Qatar has adopted a largely passive approach to cooperating with the US against terrorist financing.
Qatar’s overall level of CT [counterterrorism] cooperation with the US is considered the worst in the region.”
The US cables reference Qatar’s connections to Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Syria. While Qatar told the Americans it wanted to play a helpful role in the Israel-Palestinian peace process and said Hamas supported a two-state solution, Doha also hosted meetings with Iran’s president, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and others.
Qatar pursued a two-pronged policy; after 2007 it held frequent conversations with Hamas officials such as Khaled Mashaal, Mahmoud al-Zahar and Ismail Haniyeh, while also telling the Americans it would welcome a way to smooth over relations with Israel. Qatar had hosted an Israeli trade office from the 1990s to 2009.
Qataris claimed in 2010 to Kerry that Hamas was prepared to accept Israel’s right to exist. This would mark a change from 2009 when the US ambassador met with the PLO ambassador to Qatar, Munir Abdulla Ghannam, and was informed; “Hamas would reject any working relationship with Fatah, given that many in Hamas view the concession of any Muslim land as an affront to Islam.”
The cables reveal US pressure on Qatar going back more than a decade to crack down on terrorism financing and relations with Hamas. They highlight that Qatar’s desire to be a regional player “rubs many of its neighbors the wrong way.” Jordan was annoyed at Qatar for “playing an outsized regional role,” for instance.
For US diplomats, the desire to pressure Qatar was tempered by arms sales, expanding US military and educational presence in the emirate, and even a yearning to be portrayed positively on Al Jazeera, which diplomats claimed reached 60 million viewers in 2010.
The current US policy on Qatar, condemning it for terrorism finance while trying to work closely with the emirate, reflects the indecision that has plagued decades of relations in the Gulf

The Rolling Qatari Snowball
Salman Al-dossary/Asharq Al Awsat/June 11/17
Because Gulf warnings to the fellow neighbor were incessant for 21 years and the violation of pledges and agreements continued, confusion still prevails in Doha following the storm of cutting ties by neighboring countries and several others.
Qatar deemed this (sovereign) measure a hostile one, then it repeated the same old statements of diplomacy and dialogue, before turning to its friend Iran and also resorted to the forces of its ally Turkey. In another occasion, its ambassador in Washington said Qatar was ready to fix mistakes “should they be proven”.
In this way, Qatari diplomacy is wrapping the noose around its neck without taking any actual step that proves its positive approach towards the crisis that it caused because Doha is still adopting its former tactic of stalling without realizing that time is quickly running up.
Interestingly, Doha has not yet processed the real disaster it is experiencing. Following the reaction of the ties-cut decision and the designation of some Qatari citizens and institutions on the terrorism list, here comes another disaster, which is undermined by Doha. The real catastrophe is when the president of the most powerful country in the world openly accuses you of supporting terrorism, while your media and team deceive you by telling you that there is nothing to worry about. They are so disconnected from the reality as to describe the meeting between Trump and Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad Al Thani as “warm and friendly”!
The clear and painful truth is that Doha does not want to see is that Trump declared frankly: “The nation of Qatar, unfortunately, has historically been a financer of terrorism at a very high level.” He added that it is time to call on Qatar to stop the funding.
Although Washington singled out Qatar in 2014 as a state that is lenient on terrorism funding, this time the message was delivered differently in its timing and type by a president whose main goal is to fight terrorism – unlike his predecessor Barack Obama. This is a crystal clear political message that the worse is yet to come for Qatar whether from regional countries, the US or even other countries that will join the attempt to end its connection with terrorism.
Washington’s stricter stance on Qatar indicates that the White House supports the decision of Arab-Gulf countries to isolate Qatar or as the American channel CBC said, the US administration has finalized its position on Qatar through siding with Saudi Arabia and other Arab and Islamic countries that are committed to fighting terrorism.
Yet until this moment, Qatar does not want to take an open strategic decision to stop the funding and support of terrorist groups because it has deemed the whole affair a political one. Is Qatar aware of the mounting crisis due to its insistence on avoiding the truth instead of regaining the initiative and quickly solving its problems?!
Six days after the ties-cut, Qatari reactions have all focused on reinforcing the concept of conspiracy against it. I don’t know what Qatar has for Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and US to conspire against it. There is no single reason that would make these countries abandon their causes – and they are many – and focus on conspiring against Qatar!
The only proven conspiracy we have is the one in which its former emir and prime minister sought with Gadhafi to divide Saudi Arabia and fuel a revolt there. If Qatar is sincere in its wish to avoid strife, then it should change its behavior, build confidence and restore its credibility.
All it should do is revise its regional policies so that they become more moderate, like other countries. However, playing the victim and launching nationalist slogans will not stop the rolling snowball.
What Qatar will pay today to correct its attitude is much less than what it will pay later. The longer it takes to acknowledge and correct the problem, the greater the dues become in the 21 years of unpaid taxes.

Islamization of Europe: Erdogan's New Muslim Political Network
Yves Mamou/Gatestone Institute/June 11/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10509/france-islamic-party
What is notable is that France's new Muslim party, the Equality and Justice Party (PEJ), is an element of a network of political parties built by Turkey's President Erdogan and AKP to influence each country of Europe, and to influence Europe through its Muslim population.
What is their program? The classic one for an Islamic party: abolishing the founding secularist law of 1905, which established the separation of church and state; mandatory veils for schoolgirls; and community solidarity (as opposed to individual rights) as a priority. All that is wrapped in the not-so-innocent flag of the necessity to "fight against Islamophobia", a concept invented to shut down the push-back of all people who might criticize Islam before they can even start.
"[The Islamist party's] purpose is to conquer the world, not just have a mandate. Its mechanics were already established.... Islamists took power in the name of democracy, then suspended democracy by using their power.... Convert the clothes, the body, the social links, the arts, nursing homes, schools, songs and culture, then, they just wait for the fruit to fall in the turban... An Islamist party is an open trap: you cannot let it in. If you refuse it, your country switches to a dictatorship, but if you accept it, you are at risk of submission...." — Kamel Daoud, Algerian writer, in Le Point, 2015.
In the legislative elections that will take place June 11 and 18 in France, political parties are finalizing preparations: choosing their candidates, and printing posters and stickers. Business as usual? Not really.
One newcomer arose in the political spectrum: a Muslim party, the Parti Egalité Justice ("Equality and Justice Party"; PEJ). What is notable is that PEJ is an element of a network of political parties built by Trukey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP), to influence each country of Europe, and to influence Europe through its Muslim population.
PEJ: A Pro-Erdogan Party in France
The PEJ was created in 2015 in Strasbourg, the de facto capital of eastern France, on the border with Germany. PEJ has already approved 68 candidates -- not enough to cover the whole territory but enough to compete efficiently in districts where Turkish and Muslim populations are strongly represented. French citizens of Turkish origin are estimated to represent 600,000 people in France, out of a Muslim population estimated at 5-15 million, but official statistics do not exist.
Another Muslim party, "Français et Musulmans" ("French and Muslims"), is also quietly preparing to erupt on the political scene of the French legislative elections. "Français et Musulmans" originates from L'Union des Organisations Islamiques de France (UOIF) which has been rebaptized "Muslims of France". "Français et Musulmans" is the French branch of Muslim Brotherhood.
The PEJ, is the first party in France established by Turks. PEJ already participated in elections of the Provincial General Assembly in March 2015, but was eliminated in the first round. According to the magazine Marianne: "PEJ is closely connected to Council for justice, equality and peace (Cojep), an international NGO which represents, everywhere it is based, an anchor for AKP", the party of Turkey's president, Recep Tayip Erdogan. According to L'Express "many managers of PEJ are also in charge in Cojep".
What is their program? The classic one for an Islamist party: abolishing the founding secularist law of 1905, which established the separation of church and state; veils mandatory for schoolgirls in public schools; halal food for all schools; support for Palestinians; and community solidarity (as opposed to individual rights) as a priority. All that is wrapped in the not-so-innocent flag of the necessity to "fight against Islamophobia", a concept invented to shut down the push-back of all people who might criticize Islam before they can even start.
According to the magazine Marianne, Mine Gunbay, responsible for women's rights in the city council of Strasbourg, fearlessly and tirelessly denounced the metamorphosis of Strasbourg into "political laboratory of the AKP". Strasbourg is the city where Erdogan was authorized by former president Hollande to hold an electoral rally in October 2015. Legally.
Another noteworthy Turkish move in France is the probable nomination of Ahmet Ogras, the representative of Turkish Islam in France, as next president of the Conseil français du culte musulman ("French Council of Muslim worship", CFCM). Ahmet Ogras is known for his good relationship with Erodgan's AKP party. CFCM is the legal structure built by French politicians to have a single Muslim talking-partner. Until now, all presidents of CFCM were of Algerian or Moroccan origin.
Austria
In Austria, in 2016, "Turkish citizens" founded the New Movement for the Future (NBZ) party. The goal of the party is to give Turks a voice in politics across Austria. The NBZ Chairman, Adnan Dinçer, explained that the rise of extremist right-wing parties have caused them to work faster. "Political actors are making decisions about the minorities working here, but we are not involved in this decision-making mechanism," he said. The NBZ makes it clear that they support controversial Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and condemn the "Gülen movement", which the Turkish government claims carried out a coup attempt in July 2016.
Netherlands
Denk, a party founded by Tunahan Kuzu and Selçuk Öztürk in March 2017, became the first-ever ethic minority party in the Dutch parliament. The party, apparently a mouthpiece for Turkish president Erdogan, won three seats in the recent election, which was focused on immigration.
Party leader Tunahan Kuzu said: "This is the beginning of a new chapter in our history. The new Netherlands has given a vote in the House."
Bulgaria
The Muslim population of Bulgaria is made up of Turks (Sunni), some Shi'ites, Bulgarians and Roma, who together represent 7-8% of the total population. In Bulgaria, there are three Muslim political parties, in which most of the members are Turkish and Muslim.
One of these parties is The Movement for Rights and Freedoms (HÖH), founded in 1990 by Ahmet Doğan. In 2014, HÖH was represented by 38 people in the 240-member parliament and had four MEPs in the European Parliament (EP).
HÖH, which made a coalition with the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), thus has a say in the country's administration, even though leadership changed after a 2013 assassination attempt against Doğan.
Because Erdogan was not satisfied with HÖH, he has worked to create other pro-Turkish parties in Bulgaria.
Germany
Many Germans of Turkish descent have chosen to invest in German established political parties and influence them from within. Some, however, are trying to influence policy from without.
The Allianz Deutscher Demokraten ("Alliance of German Democrats", ADD) is a small party founded by Remzi Aru, evidently as a reaction to the German Parliament's recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
ADD is friendly toward Erdogan and has been trying to establish an electoral base within immigrant and Muslim communities. Its leaders nevertheless had difficulty collecting the 1,000 signatures necessary to participate in the May 2017 North Rhine-Westphalia state election.
Another Muslim-German party is the Bündnis für Innovation und Gerechtigkeit ("Alliance for Innovation and Justice", BIG), which has existed since 2010, but without much success.
German law prohibits foreign funding of political parties, and a party of Turks would have to fulfill a certain range of obligations to get its certification as an official political party.
The Islamist Trap
An Islamist party in a democracy is, according the Algerian writer, Kamel Daoud, "a trap". Especially in France. In an op-ed published in Le Point in 2015, he writes:
"An Islamic party in France? What a fascinating political object: one cannot refuse it, but one cannot accept it. Nothing better summarizes the situation as a French trap... If France says Yes, she submits in the long term. An Islamic party is an Islamist party by a natural slope.... By definition. Its purpose is to conquer the world, not just to have a mandate. Its mechanics were already established.... Islamists took power in the name of democracy, then suspended democracy by using their power. At best. At worse, Islamists opted for the approach of the crab that keeps its claws behind his back: no political ambitions, but a millenary ambition in the mind: convert the clothes, the body, the social links, the arts, nursing homes, schools, songs and culture, then, they just wait for the fruit to fall in the turban... An Islamist party is an open trap: you cannot let it in. If you refuse it, your country switches to a dictatorship, but if you accept it, you are at risk of submission....
"As soon as it bursts onto the political scene, the same consequences appear as in Algeria, Egypt, Pakistan, the Sahel or Tunisia: it divides the country between Eradicators (those who want to eradicate the Islamists) and Reconcilers (those who advocate dialogue with Islamist monologue) and the Fatalists (those who are waiting for something good to happen)."
As a fine political analyst, Kamel Daoud knows -- and everybody knows with him -- that nobody in France has the solution to confront the Islamist problem. The only question is: who will win? Reconcilers or Eradicators? One thing is sure for now, Reconcilers are in power for the next five years.
Another thing is sure: the first veiled woman elected as a Member of Parliament will trigger a civilizational that which has no equivalent in French history.
**Yves Mamou, based in France, worked for two decades as a journalist for Le Monde.
© 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.

France: Islamic Antisemitism, French Silence
Guy Millière/Gatestone Institute/June 11/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10513/france-islamic-antisemitism
The files of the National Bureau for Vigilance Against Antisemitism (BNVCA) document that all of the anti-Semitic attacks committed in France for more than two decades came from Muslims and Islamists.The French authorities know this, but choose to hide it and look in another direction.
None of the French organizations supposedly combating anti-Semitism talks about Muslim anti-Semitism: therefore, none of them combats it.
A survey carried out for the Institut Montaigne a few months ago showed that anti-Semitism is widespread among French Muslims. Apparently, 27% of them (50% of those under 25 years old) support the ideas of the Islamic State (ISIS).
Paris, April 4, 2017, 4:00 am. A Malian Muslim named Kobili Traore breaks into the apartment of one of his neighbors, Sarah Halimi. He knows she is a Jew. In the past, He has repeatedly uttered anti-Semitic insults at her. Halimi and her family had filed complaints and asked the police to intervene. Each time, the police respond that Traore has not committed a criminal act, and that they did not want to be accused of anti-Muslim prejudice.
That day, Traore decides to go from words to deeds. He beats Halimi violently. He tortures her. She screams. Neighbors call the police. This time the police do something -- but not enough.
When they arrive at Halimi's door, they hear Traore shouting Allahu Akbar, and shaytan ("demon"). In a jarring breach of duty, they decide to run away. They walk out of the building and call for reinforcements.
The reinforcements arrive more than an hour later, at 5:30 am. It is too late. Halimi had been thrown out the window by Traore a few minutes earlier. She is dead. Her body lies on the sidewalk three floors below. It is clearly an anti-Semitic murder committed by a Muslim who invoked the name of Allah.
Traore is arrested and says that the Quran commanded him to kill, but he is not thrown in jail. Instead, he is sent to a psychiatric hospital. He is still there. Almost no one in the French media talks about what happened; they still have not. The few journalists who broke the wall of silence described the killing as a "random crime" committed by a "madman". None of them says that the murderer is a Muslim who invoked the name of Allah and that his victim was a Jew.
Three days later, a rally is organized by Jewish leaders at the scene of the crime. Only Jews come. They are greeted by insults similar to those made against Halimi before her slaying. Bottles and metal objects are thrown at them from nearby buildings.
Members of Halimi's family ask the authorities for an explanation, and demand to see the psychiatric report established at the time of Traore's internment. They receive no reply. Joel Mergui, President of the Consistory, the institution charge of the Jewish religion in France, presses charges. Halimi's sister places the case in the hands of a famous lawyer, Gilles-William Goldnadel, president of France-Israel. In an op-ed published in Le Figaro, Goldnadel emphasizes that "the killer has the classic profile of the usual Islamic criminal". He adds that Traore "had no psychiatric history". He notes that the murder occurred shortly before the French presidential election, and any mention of an antisemitic Islamic murder at that time would probably not have served the interests of Emmanuel Macron, the candidate supported by the Muslim Brotherhood in France. Goldnadel points out that a "political choice" was made by the French authorities.
Now that Emmanuel Macron is president, the political choice seems to remains the same.
The murder of Sarah Halimi is not the first anti-Semitic murder Islamic committed in France in recent years. Twelve years ago, Ilan Halimi was abducted, tortured for three weeks, then savagely murdered by a gang led by an Ivorian Muslim, Youssouf Fofana. In March 2012, Mohamed Merah, a French jihadist who trained in Afghanistan, shot dead Rabbi Jonathan Sandler, his two sons, Aryeh, 6, and Gabriel, 3, and Miriam Monsonego, 8, in a Jewish school courtyard in Toulouse. In January 2015, in a kosher supermarket east of Paris, Amedy Coulibaly, a man who had pledged allegiance to the Islamic state, murdered four men: Philippe Braham, Yohan Cohen, Yoav Hattab, and François-Michel Saada.
Each time, the anti-Semitic and Islamic character of the murders was almost completely erased by the French media.
Ilan Halimi's murderers have been described as "teenagers adrift", looking for easy money. Mohamed Merah was originally depicted as a young man frustrated at not being able to join the French army. Amedy Coulibaly was presented as a petty criminal who slipped abruptly towards "radicalization".
The French authorities declare that they mercilessly fight anti-Semitism, but the only anti-Semitism they seem to fight or even denounce is the one emanating from the far-right. During the French presidential election campaign, the Front National and Marine Le Pen were obsessively presented as an absolute danger for French Jews and used as straw-men. Marine Le Pen is not beyond reproach, but she was the only candidate who dared to connect the dots and say that anti-Semitism is rising sharply among French Muslims and leads to murder. Evidence shows that far-right anti-Semitism in France is dying. The files of the National Bureau for Vigilance Against Antisemitism (BNVCA) document that all of the anti-Semitic attacks committed in France for more than two decades came from Muslims and Islamists. The French authorities know this, but choose to hide it and look in another direction.
None of the French organizations supposedly combatting anti-Semitism talks about Muslim anti-Semitism: therefore, none of them combats it. Talking about Muslim anti-Semitism on French territory can lead one to criminal court. This is what happened recently to intellectuals such as Georges Bensoussan and Pascal Bruckner, among others. The Collective against Islamophobia in France (CCIF) tracks all "Islamically incorrect" statements, asks for penalties and is often successful at getting them. Even organizations that pretend to fight anti-Semitism sometimes join the CCIF in fighting someone who points out Muslim anti-Semitism.
Islamic anti-Semitism is such a taboo in France that a documentary on the subject, produced by the Franco-German TV channel ARTE, was cancelled when the station's directors were informed of its contents. ARTE's executives were expecting a denunciation of "fascists". When they saw that the maker of the documentary, Joachim Schroeder and Sophie Hafner, spoke about the omnipresent hatred for Jews in the "suburbs of Islam," they said that the product delivered was not the one they had ordered, and threw it in the garbage. As the film is the property of ARTE, it will never be shown.
A week before the French presidential election, Emmanuel Macron went to the Holocaust Memorial in Paris and used the visit to outmaneuver his opponent, Marine Le Pen, and to denounce the "anti-Semitism that killed Jews in Europe" seven decades ago. He did not denounce the anti-Semitism that kills Jews in France today. He did not do it before being elected. He still has not. He probably will never do it. He knows there is nothing to be gained. He needs the support of the Muslim electorate. He does not want to lose it. The Jewish vote in France has no weight; it does not count.
A survey carried out for the Institut Montaigne a few months ago showed that anti-Semitism is widespread among French Muslims. Apparently, 27% of them (50% of those under 25 years old) support the ideas of the Islamic State (ISIS): those aspects of the survey have barely been mentioned anywhere. Columnist Ivan Rioufol spoke about them recently in a televised debate. A complaint was immediately filed against him.
A petition signed by 16 writers, journalists and academics, made public on June 2, asked that more exposure be given the murder of Sarah Halimi. The French Ministry of Justice said that the psychiatrists concluded that the murderer was not responsible for his actions at the time of the events and that maybe he did not even intend to kill. He will spend two or three years in a psychiatric institution, then will be released.
The district of Paris where Sarah Halimi lived is a no-go zone, like nearly 600 other districts in France. Most Jews who still live in France have left the no-go zones and avoid entering them, as do most other French. Sarah Halimi did not leave. She suffered terrible consequences. She was, those who knew her agree, a sweet woman, but she was a Jew at a time when it is unsafe to be a Jew in France.
Jews who have the financial means to leave France, leave in increasing numbers. Jews who do not have the financial means to leave know that they have to be careful wherever they are in France. If they live in or near an Islamized neighborhood, they understand that they must quickly be able to collect their belongings and flee: their lives are at stake and no one will help them if a jihadist murderer comes to murder them.
**Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.
© 2017 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Qatar one of primary sources of terror funding in region
Sarah Broskivic/Al Arabiya/June 11/17
Tension rose gradually between Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt. The four countries decided to sever their diplomatic relations with Doha, close all ports to the transportation coming to and from Qatar and prevent the crossing of Qatari transport in the territory, airspace and territorial waters. Qatari diplomatic missions were given 48 hours to leave. These new tensions came against what was published by the Qatari News Agency from the statements of the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, criticizing the US President Donald Trump’s policies towards Iran, saying: “There is no wisdom in standing against Iran.”In the controversial statement, Sheikh Tamim defended Hamas, Hezbollah and the Muslims Brotherhood. The Gulf countries such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia responded by blocking Qatari satellite channels, websites and newspapers. As per the recent escalations, the controversial relationship between Qatar and terrorism attracted worldwide attention.
Taliban headquarters and relations with al-Qaeda
In October 2016, Taliban stated that its political bureau in Qatar was the sole authorized venue for negotiations on its behalf, although the office was formally closed in 2013. There is no doubt that a number of members of Taliban stayed in Qatar. Osama Bin Laden’s agent, the dissident Jamal Abdul-Fadel, moved to the United States in 1996 and testified that Osama bin Laden told him in 1993 that the Qatar Charity Association, now known as Qatar Charity, was one of al-Qaeda’s main sources of funding. According to the US Department of Defense, the infamous al-Qaeda agent Khalid Sheikh Mohammed moved to Qatar in 1993 in response to a proposal by Qatari Minister of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs Abdullah bin Khalid bin Hamad al-Thani, a prominent member of the ruling family. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who fought alongside Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abdullah Azzam, was able to find a job at Qatar’s Ministry of Water and Electricity, to become later the mastermind of the September 11, 2001, attacks.
The current scenario
Despite its small space, a number of US officials consider Qatar as the primary source of private donations to the extremists groups in Syria and Iraq. Perhaps, the most common case is the one that put Abdel Rahman al-Naimi, a Qatari national, on the list of names sponsoring terrorism by the United States, the United Nations and the European Union because of his funding for al-Qaeda militants. Naimi is probably still a free man in Qatar because there is no news of official charges against him. In addition, Al Naimi has been appointed as the Director of the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies, which is likely to receive government support. The current director of the center, Azmi Bishara, received Qatari nationality having fled his country after being suspected of selling the secrets of Israeli security to the Hezbollah. In 2014, David Weinberg, senior researcher at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington, published a report entitled ‘Qatar and the funding of Terrorism’, referring to a number of terrorism funding issues that Qatar has been focusing on over the past decade, in which its policies failed to impose control. In addition to terrorism and the general Political Islam’s empty slogans, it is undeniable that dozens of dissidents, opponents, militiamen and influential religious men from all over the Arab world reside in Qatar. The other GCC countries have repeatedly expressed their frustration at Doha giving sanctuary to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists. With regard to the Muslim Brotherhood, tensions reached its highest level in March 2014 when Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates withdrew their ambassadors from Doha for eight months. Since this diplomatic crisis, Qatar has reduced its support for Islamic thinkers within its borders, but is still far from adopting an approach that restricts their activities.
Qatar in Europe
Interestingly, Qatar is well known for its funding of the largest number of projects in the West, especially those involving religious affairs. One of the most controversial issues in France is the suburban issue. In 2011, prominent Muslim figures met with some of the residents of those suburbs that are predominantly inhabited by Muslims. They discuss the situation in those areas characterized by a high proportion of Muslim immigrants living in poor neighborhoods, where the unemployment rate among youth exceeds 20 percent. One of the outcomes of those discussions was Qatar’s investment in these neighborhoods through the signing of some agreements with the Qatari ambassador. This decision was followed by deep skepticism, which is inevitable. In his study entitled ‘The suburbs of the Republic. (Banlieue de la Republique), the French political science specialist Gilles Kipel warned that Qatari investments would not achieve financial returns: “They are buying influence.”According to reliable data, Qatari investments are around $22 billion, not just on the suburbs of the capital. Firstly, as David Weinberg points out, it is hard to imagine that people living outside Qatar know more than Qataris about illegal funding, so more efforts must be exerted not to give safe haven to terrorists and Islamists. Secondly, Western governments should be aware of the ideological motivations that might be behind the investment of a foreign country in local neighborhoods, so as to avoid turning them into areas to spread extremism more than they are now.

This is not a case of ‘fitna’
Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/June 11/17
“Fitna” (or “strife”) generally means the mix up between right and wrong. Throughout history, this concept included wars in earlier centuries that historians, linguists and people of faith knew as the “years of strife.” It was historically categorized on this basis. There are books that specialized in strife among Prophet Mohammed’s companions in the earlier centuries of Islamic history. However, this meaning does not always apply to the conflict between good and evil. With every war that Saudi Arabia engages in against enemies, some people who perhaps sympathize in secret with the enemy begin promoting the concept of strife where it does not belong and ideologically involve it. This is the least suspicious tool used to defend enemies. They therefore defend the enemy by bringing up strife to spare themselves from publicizing their affiliations. This is the weakest degree of faith. Standing by your country is not a case of strife but is at the core of religion and patriotism and is based on pure loyalty and allegiance.

Why Qatar isn’t Fidel Castro’s Cuba
Ghassan Charbel/Al Arabiya/June 11/17
Countries with modest geographic stretch often are tempted by large-scale roles — the small country syndrome, whereby investing in rogue policy comes to compensate for what has been denied by limited territory.
Sooner or later, these countries cave into temptation found in playing dangerous strings affecting neighboring states, believing that doing so buys them more security or larger cut in regional politics.
Normally, countries are always engaged in enhancing and polishing the roles they play in larger arenas, but it is conditioned that engagement is made with transparency and through over-the-table legitimate interactions. Taking backdoors and mobilizing unwritten policy to reform the general status quo is an approach fraught with danger and is genuinely frowned upon.
‘Small’ here is by no means used for derogatory purposes. It merely reflects facts dictated by geography. I myself happen to be a national from a country, Lebanon, which is small and fragile at the same time.
Over time, massive role-playing which once was decided based on population densities, army size, location changed.
Any country which can secure strategic influence or what is known as ‘soft power,’ a heard media platform and hefty income from rich resources can easily book itself a starring role in regional politics.
Nasser’s legacy
Egypt’s second President Gamal Abdel Nasser led a legacy on defying borders in the name of pan-Arab unity, in hopes of redrawing regional contours. Such history had opened up the doors for many rulers to strive for hegemony.
The Nasser experience has inspired the likes of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi. It remains to be said that Libya had paid highly for Gaddafi’s obsession with biting off more than what his country can chew.
But to weigh in different political playgrounds and countries, you first need to get involved. Swaying rulers, legal parties or organizations is crucial in outlining a country’s ability to mediate for or impede change.
Some countries have been pushed to a fragile breaking point so much that foreign players are an unavoidable touchstone to push for a truce, manage a hostage situation or even establish an understanding with extremists.
The method to Qatar’s madness raised many questions. Is it Doha’s right to exploit strategic influence to punish Egyptians for determining their fate? Is it right that Doha gets to choose what warring party in Libya retains the upper-hand over the other? Or for it to give an advantage to one Palestinian party?
In the Cold War, a small nation dotted with tobacco fields called Cuba filled in as a catalyst for US-Soviet confrontation, which would had been a devastating military standoff to say the least.
Cuban Missile Crisis
What came to be known as the Cuban Missile Crisis later ended by the US ensuring that the regime of Fidel Castro will no longer be challenged in exchange for Cuba uninstalling nuclear-armed Soviet missiles.
For years, Uncle Sam did not get over what happened in Cuba.
Supporting anti-US uprisings and revolutions in Latin America and Africa, Castro was increasingly fixated on doing anything to trouble the US.
But Castro’s long journey ended as he returned to the ‘small country complex’ after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Same could be said about Libya’s notorious dictator, Qaddafi—the mad-driven policy of the Libyan leader was so far committed that he ordered the Lockerbie bombing which killed 243 passengers and 16 crew members in Scotland.
Nestled on the Arabian Peninsula’s northeastern coast, gas-rich Qatar had fallen for the bait of political pre-eminence and gone to extremes. Having rebellious dreams, it began to feed its desire to reshape regional politics.
For years on, we heard rumors of a Syria-Qatar-Turkey axis replacing the Syria-Saudi-Egypt axis, but such a venture is far too volatile and risky for it to carry the day — excerpts of historical roles played by each country in the region can aid in clarifying that ambiguity.
Qatar’s regional role can be understood through the ‘Doha Agreement,’ which mediated for a political crisis in Lebanon after Hezbollah militants invaded and took control of western Beirut, weighing in on the Palestinian Authority to ensure Hamas’ slice of the cake, and its state-funded Al Jazeera media company broadcasting videotapes for al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
The messages for Osama were aired at the wrong time and place, with poverty, public frustration, unemployment, and ancient hatreds.
Arab Spring uprisings
Then came Arab Spring uprisings during which Qatari leadership dived deeper into its attempt at changing the region. Doha’s fingerprints were found all over the conflict map, whether it be in Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen.
Qatar had clearly bet on the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) rise to power in the Egyptian version of the Arab Spring uprisings. Not only that, but it refused to cut its losses when it was clear that a MB agenda and reality are two different things.
In its desire to establish communication channels with everyone, Qatar fell victim to a vicious paradox of hosting a US air base while nurturing ties with blacklisted terror groups.
The chance of moderate mindsets prevailing was slashed by Qatar’s approach in the Arab Spring countries.
It is safe to say that Qatar’s approach largely targeted Saudi and Egyptian roles, especially that Doha chose to support anti-Gulf opposition whether it be home-grown or foreign.
Doha’s animosity is evident in its persistent attempts to burn its neighbor’s fences down.
The method to Qatar’s madness raised many questions. Is it Doha’s right to exploit strategic influence to punish Egyptians for determining their fate? Is it right that Doha gets to choose what warring party in Libya retains the upper-hand over the other? Or for it to give an advantage to one Palestinian party?
It is also worth considering that grievances of Qatar’s destabilizing interferences come at a time when Iran – without hesitation - endeavors on ripping the region apart with unprecedented sectarian strife.
Neighbor states of Qatar have had their fill of its presumptuous policy. This peninsula state can no longer play an efficient and positive role in the six-state Gulf Cooperation Council so long that it is chasing Cuba-styled dreams.
It remains to be said that all what Arab states boycotting Qatar demand is that it falls back in line with its natural role, for it to reflect Cuba which fit its geographic mold, and not Castro’s rogue Cuba.

Israel’s Costs vs. Its Benefits….The Six-Day Warأكلاف وفوائد حرب الأيام الستة اسرائيلياً
Efraim Inbar/Middle East Quarterly/Summer 2017
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=56174
The June 1967 war was a major watershed in Israel’s political history. The astounding military victory was a key factor in driving parts of the Arab world to confront the reality of Jewish statehood. The war’s territorial acquisitions, by contrast, are often seen as a mixed blessing. For although these gains gave birth to the land-for-peace formula (commonly associated with Security Council resolution 242 of November 1967), which led to the historic March 1979 Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, Israel’s continued control of the Golan Heights and the West Bank has put it under persistent international pressure. The fiftieth anniversary of the war offers an auspicious vantage point for rethinking the pros and cons of retaining these territories.
Military and Strategic Importance
There is little doubt that the foremost gain attending Israel’s 1967 victory lies in the transformation of the international discourse about the country’s future borders, with the June 1967 line (or the Green Line) becoming the starting point for any such discussion. This represents a sea change for Israel, whose neighbors had previously refused to accept its very existence, let alone its initial borders.
The highly restrictive borders delineated by the U.N. partition resolution of November 1947 have almost entirely dropped off the international agenda, their only residual remnant being the international refusal to recognize West Jerusalem (internationalized by the resolution along the city’s eastern part) as Israel’s capital. Also overlooked are the repeated Arab attempts to slash Israel’s pre-1967 territory, notably through the annexation by Egypt and Jordan of the Negev region, some 60 percent of Israel’s territory, an idea that received occasional favorable hearing in London and Washington.[1]
Israeli territorial acquisitions following the Six-Day War. Control of the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley, and Sinai gave Israel far better military lines of defense than it had before 1967.
The massive political and diplomatic achievement by Israel notwithstanding, the war’s territorial acquisitions entailed a string of important military and strategic advantages. Control of the Golan Heights and the Jordan Valley, for one, gives Israel far better military lines of defense than it had before 1967. The current Golan border is the watershed line of the region, allowing the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to hold the high ground with its clear defensive advantages. Nor is there any other line on the Golan to which Israel could withdraw while maintaining its topographical edge. The top of the cliffs that mark the western edge of the heights, sometimes mentioned as a possible line of withdrawal, would prevent the Syrians from having direct view into Israel, but it is no higher than the terrain to the east.
In addition, the IDF’s presence on Mount Hermon enables the gathering of intelligence on goings-on in nearby Syrian areas and even further into the country. The claim that spy planes and satellites can replace the Hermon’s intelligence value is only partially true as these measures have limited intelligence-gathering capabilities compared to the unlimited capabilities of the Hermon station. Moreover, there are weapon systems for downing airplanes and destroying satellites while it is exceedingly difficult to down a mountain. The presence of Israeli military forces just 60 kilometers from Damascus also has a deterrent value as it is far easier to attack the Syrian capital from the Golan Heights than from the Green Line. Indeed, the IDF’s advance on Damascus in the October 1973 war was among the reasons why Syria agreed to end the war. Conversely, without Israel’s defense line on the Golan, the Syrians would have managed to invade its territory at the beginning of that war—for the first time since the 1948 war—with tragic consequences for the Jewish state. Instead, the security margins provided by the Golan allowed the IDF to contain the Syrian offensive, to regroup, and to move onto the counterattack.
The Allon Plan recommended partitioning the West Bank between Israel and Jordan as well as giving the Jewish state control of the strategically important Jordan Valley. Jordan’s King Hussein rejected the plan.
The demilitarization arrangements in the Sinai Peninsula, which served to stabilize Egyptian-Israeli strategic relations and paved the road to their historic peace treaty, are hardly applicable to the Golan given the marked size difference between the two arenas: a 200-kilometer-deep demilitarized zone in Sinai compared to the Golan’s maximum width of 24 kilometers. It is far harder to launch a surprise attack in Sinai than on the Golan.
The security rationale for Israel’s continued control of the Jordan Valley is a similar case in point. Even a cursory glance at the map shows that there are very few approaches from the east (that is, from Jordan) to the West Bank’s hilly terrain, and from there, to the center of Israel. There is also a very large topographical difference between the Jordan Valley and Israel’s watershed line, which runs north-south through Jerusalem, some 20 kilometers from the valley. The Jordan Valley lies some 250-400 meters below sea level while the hilltops are some 700-800 meters above sea level—an elevation difference of at least 1,000 meters. In the event of an attack from the east, an armored column would need to make a steep 20-kilometer climb with only a handful of armored-accessible routes. As long as the defending forces can hold the entrances to these routes, any such invasion can readily be rebuffed. This was the strategic logic behind the Allon plan of the late 1960s, which also made eminent demographic sense given that the Jordan Valley is almost entirely empty of Palestinian population.[2]
Israel’s eastern border is its most important due to its proximity to the country’s main population centers. The aerial distance from the Jordan River to Jerusalem is 20 kilometers, and to Tel Aviv, 80 kilometers; the distance from the pre-1967 Green Line to the Mediterranean Sea is at its narrowest some 16 kilometers. The Tel Aviv-Jerusalem-Haifa triangle, containing most of Israel’s population and the bulk of its industrial and economic infrastructure, is very close to the Jordan River and a stone’s throw from the Green Line. This is a wholly different case from the borders with Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon, hence the eastern border’s great strategic importance, and hence the indispensability of an easily defensible border. The importance of keeping the border as far away as possible from the country’s heartland has become even more pronounced over the past two decades when the coastal plane’s economic and industrial centrality has steadily increased despite predictions of a more decentralized population due to developments in communication and transportation that brought the periphery closer to the center.
It would be a strategic mistake to allow a foreign presence in Jerusalem that might threaten Israel’s control of its most valuable west-east route.
No less important is the preservation of Israel’s control of the area known as Greater Jerusalem. As a quick glance at the map can easily reveal, Jerusalem, which is populated by a Jewish majority, marks the only intersection of the watershed line through which IDF forces can move from the center of the country to meet an invasion from Jordan. Of particular importance is the corridor from Jerusalem to Maale Adummim and down to the Jordan Valley. Hence it would be a grave strategic mistake to allow a foreign presence in Jerusalem that might threaten Israel’s control of its most valuable west-east route. Moreover, the Greater Jerusalem area is highly elevated, giving the IDF valuable intelligence gathering capabilities toward the east, south, and north.
The historical, religious, and cultural importance of Jerusalem—the Temple Mount in particular—for the Jewish people goes without saying, yet lies beyond the scope of this article. It is clear, however, that territorial concessions in Jerusalem are likely to be viewed as a victory for Islam and to fuel extremist sentiments throughout the Muslim and Arab worlds. It is also true that Israeli control of the holy Jewish sites (and the holy Christian sites for that matter) guarantees free and uninterrupted access and freedom of worship—in stark contrast to the Palestinian attitude toward their religious minorities, let alone to Jewish holy sites under their control, such as the synagogue in Jericho or Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus.
Israel’s military control of the West Bank also has an important role in fighting Palestinian terrorism. Regrettably, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has not only failed to meet its obligations to combat terrorism and to disarm all terror groups in the territories under its jurisdiction, as required by the Oslo accords of the 1990s, but has also abetted and actively perpetrated anti-Israel terrorism, especially during the Arafat years. The need for Israeli control was clearly demonstrated by Operation Defensive Shield of March-April 2002 and the subsequent Israeli recapture of some PA-held territory, which allowed the IDF to destroy terror infrastructures and to restore the intelligence capabilities vital for fighting terrorism. While Israel has withdrawn from most of these territories, the IDF continues to enjoy certain freedom of movement throughout the West Bank, entering many areas on a regular basis and, as a consequence, thwarting numerous terror attacks. In terms of counterterrorism, this is a major boon that prevents terrorists from blowing up themselves and Israeli citizens in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem; indeed, the past decade has seen a substantial reduction in the number of suicide bombings on Israeli soil. This reduction is largely due to Israel’s offensive activities, such as preemptive arrests and targeted killings, with the newly erected security fence playing a secondary role in curbing Palestinian terror attacks.[3]
The limited cooperation between the IDF and the PA security forces, developed after Arafat’s death in November 2004, hardly suffices to prevent terrorism from areas under the PA’s control. Quite the reverse in fact: Contrary to its “moderate” international image, the PA under Mahmoud Abbas remains as active a source of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish incitement as it was under Arafat, continuing to encourage terror, if with lesser intensity than before.[4] In the absence of a reliable and peaceable Palestinian partner, there can be no breakthrough toward mutual reconciliation. Relinquishing military control of the West Bank in the absence of a peace-seeking
Palestinian leadership is all the more dangerous given the massive difficulties in recapturing this territory in the not unlikely eventuality that the newly established Palestinian state would become a fully-fledged terrorist entity as has happened in Gaza following the Israeli withdrawal.[5]
Standard Strategic Misconceptions
It has, of course, been argued, notably by the late Shimon Peres, that territory has lost its importance in the age of missiles. This claim may have some merit but is historically shortsighted and strategically misconceived. Throughout history, generations of warfare have produced dramatic technological changes that resulted in equally dramatic vicissitudes in the fortunes of defensive or offensive postures. Thus, for example, the walls and castles of the medieval age improved defensive capabilities for some 500-600 years until the arrival of a new technology—the cannon—put an end to these measures and ushered in a new military reality. While missile attacks on population centers (in themselves an unequivocal war crime) are undeniably difficult to contend with, there has been immense investment in missile defense technology, some of which is already operational and effective, such as Israel’s Arrow and Iron Dome systems.
During the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, thousands of Palestinians fled the fighting to Jordan. It is estimated that three million people of Palestinian ancestry reside in the Hashemite kingdom..
Likewise, the conventional assumptions about the Arab world’s political realities and their implications for regional security hardly hold water. It has been claimed, for instance, that given the Jordanian regime’s historically less hostile attitude to Israel and its longstanding (albeit covert) objection to the creation of a Palestinian state, there is no need for Israel to retain control of the Jordan Valley. Yet, just as King Hussein jumped on the pan-Arab bandwagon shortly before the outbreak of the 1967 war—after Israel had saved his life on a number of occasions—so his son King Abdullah may well be tempted into a future adventure, however unlikely this may seem at the moment.
Nor is it possible to predict with any certainty whether and for how long the Hashemite dynasty will be able to withstand the challenge of radical Islam or the creation of a Palestinian state, which may readily incite the kingdom’s marginalized Palestinian population against its monarchical rulers. The attempt by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to topple the Hashemite regime in the autumn of 1970 backfired in grand style. Given the substantial increase in Jordan’s Palestinian population since then, and with the aid and support of a fully-fledged Palestinian state, especially if ruled by the more militant and effective Hamas, they may well achieve this goal in the future, thus creating a vast Palestinian state on both sides of the Jordan River.[6]
Similarly, the expectations that a newly-established Palestinian state will meet its contractual peace obligations and refrain from siding with Israel’s enemies in future military confrontations, let alone refrain from wholesale anti-Israel terrorism, run counter to the Palestinian modus operandi during the past twenty-four years, as well as the relentless Palestinian commitment to Israel’s destruction in flagrant violation of their contractual obligations in the Oslo accords.[7]
The presence of U.N. peacekeeping forces in Arab-Israeli conflict areas has proved totally useless.
Recurring suggestions for stationing international forces on the Golan Heights and in the Jordan Valley as a means to allay Israel’s security concerns are equally misconceived. As consistently shown on several past occasions, the presence of U.N. peacekeeping forces in Arab-Israeli conflict areas proved totally useless. In May 1967, these forces were instantaneously withdrawn from the Egyptian-Israeli border where they had served as a buffer between the two sides the moment President Nasser demanded their removal. Likewise, in September 2014, U.N. forces were evacuated from the Golan Heights as fighting in the Syrian civil war intensified. In Lebanon, the peacekeeping force deployed since the late 1970s (U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon) failed to prevent countless clashes between Israel and the PLO, then between Israel and Hezbollah. Nor did it manage to prevent the Islamist terror group from rebuilding its military infrastructure after the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war as required by Security Council Resolution 1701 of August 11, 2006.
The permanent deployment of U.S. peacekeeping forces offers no greater assurances. Washington quickly withdrew its forces from confrontation zones when the going got tough (Lebanon 1984, Somalia 1993, etc.), and its recent unhappy experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq are hardly conducive to a future, long-term commitment of U.S. troops to one of the region’s longest running conflicts.
No less importantly, a major part of Israel’s strategic value for the United States, and Western nations more generally, lies in its ability to defend itself on its own against any local (and at times external) enemies. This capability stands in marked contrast to the West’s Arab clients, which often needed large-scale foreign intervention on their behalf (Moscow’s 1970 intervention in the Egyptian-Israeli war of attrition and in the ongoing Syrian civil war; the U.S.-led liberation of Kuwait, etc.). Predicating a significant part of Israel’s security on international protection will largely erode this strategic edge.
Israel Must Retain the West Bank and the Golan
The above discussion underscores Israel’s dire need for secure borders, resistant to changes in military technology and regional political upheavals. A policy that fails to take into account worst-case scenarios would be highly irresponsible. As political scientist Yehezkel Dror often remarked, in the Middle East, there is a high probability for improbable scenarios. In these circumstances, Israel’s improved defensive, intelligence, and deterrent capabilities, thanks to its current borders, have a strong stabilizing effect on its relations with the neighboring Arab states by expanding its security margins and reducing its need for preventive or preemptive strikes, which entail domestic and foreign political costs.
The presence of Israeli military forces just 60 kilometers from Damascus has a major deterrent value. Nothing that Syria can offer would outweigh for Israel the detrimental effects of relinquishing the Golan Heights.
Continuing to hold on to the territories entails additional advantages. To begin with, it underscores Israel’s ability to resist persistent Arab and international pressure for withdrawal—a highly important demonstration of strength in a region where crude force constitutes the main instrument of political discourse, both domestically and externally, and where military might, in its different forms, is the most respected political currency. The fact that, despite recurrent international criticism and myriad anti-Israel U.N. resolutions, the Jewish state has managed to retain its control of the territories has also demonstrated its political and diplomatic stamina. The foremost supportive factor in this respect has been Washington’s continued support for the Israeli demand for an Arab attitudinal change before there can be any real progress toward peace. This support has been rendered all the more important over the past decades as the United States became the “only remaining superpower” following the Soviet Union’s collapse—a position it continues to hold despite the foreign policy setbacks of the Obama years.
Israel’s continued control of the territories offers the best, perhaps the only, chance of Palestinian-Israeli peace.
Above all, and contrary to the conventional mis-conception, Israel’s continued control of the territories offers the best, perhaps the only chance of Palestinian-Israeli peace. Given the categorical Arab rejection of the idea of Jewish statehood on the one hand, and the preeminence of physical force in Middle Eastern political culture on the other, Israel’s presence in the territories constitutes a permanent reminder of Arab impotence and the futility of sustaining the conflict.
It was indeed the grudging realization that Israel would not be destroyed by force of arms that drove some of its Arab enemies to the negotiating table. Egypt received the entire Sinai Peninsula only after concluding a fully-fledged peace treaty with Israel while the PLO was given control over the Gaza Strip and the vast majority of the West Bank’s Palestinian population (and some 40 percent of the area’s territory) after signing the Oslo accords, whereby it undertook to eschew violence, terrorism, and incitement. That the organization failed to abide by its contractual obligations, with Gaza becoming an unreconstructed terrorist entity under Hamas’s rule, affords further proof, if such were needed, of the West Bank’s critical importance for Israel’s future security.
The Costs of Continued Control
After the 1967 war, the international community seemed to accept Israel’s permanent retention of some of its territorial acquisitions as vividly illustrated by Security Council Resolution 242, which provided for the “[w]ithdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict.” The absence of the definite article “the” before “territories”—which, had it been included, would have required a complete Israeli withdrawal—was no accident but rather reflected an awareness of the existential threat posed by its pre-1967 boundaries. Indeed, the resolution envisaged this partial withdrawal to take place not as a unilateral move but as part of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace that would allow every state in the region “to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.”[8] And while the resolution’s intent has been misrepresented over the years by the Arabs and their international champions supposedly to demand Israel’s complete withdrawal from the territories, the notion that this will take place within the framework of a Palestinian-Israeli peace agreement has remained intact. There is no international demand (apart from those of the PA and its staunchest allies) for a unilateral withdrawal without a political quid pro quo and some security arrangements.
Thus far, the cost of retaining the West Bank and the Golan Heights has not been particularly high. This should allow Israel to conduct negotiations over the future of these territories in a considered and patient fashion from a position of strength. For one thing, time clearly works in Israel’s favor: Since its establishment sixty-nine years ago, the Jewish state has steadily grown stronger and more advanced while its Arab adversaries have correspondingly become weaker.[9] For another thing, the frenzied rush to far-reaching territorial concessions—by Ehud Barak in the Camp David and Taba summits (July 2000 and January 2001) and Ehud Olmert in the Annapolis conference (November 2007)—has proved highly counterproductive, further fueling Palestinian rejectionism and triggering the longest and bloodiest war of terror (euphemized as al-Aqsa Intifada) since the 1948 war. This, in turn, persuaded most Israelis that they had no real peace partner and that the establishment of a Palestinian state was a rather hypothetical possibility so long as no such partner existed. The future status of the Golan Heights, which Barak was equally keen to surrender, only to be flatly rebuffed by President Hafez Assad, has also been rendered largely irrelevant by the ongoing Syrian civil war.
Indeed, as far as Syria is concerned, the cost of retaining the Golan has been strikingly low. Since 1974, Damascus has scrupulously observed the October 1973 ceasefire agreement and the border has been conspicuously quiet. This status quo suits Israel well, being strategically placed on the Golan, which unlike the West Bank is very sparsely populated (mostly by Druze, some of whom are Israeli citizens) hence poses no demographic problem. Furthermore, since the onset of the twenty-first century, Syria has been regionally and internationally isolated due to its intervention in Lebanon and special relationship with Tehran. As a result, its claim for the Golan has gone largely unheeded and its (however timid) hopes for retaking this territory by force have been dashed by the absence of a reliable war ally for this daunting undertaking. Apparently cognizant of its inability to occupy the Golan on its own, Damascus has concentrated on developing its defensive capabilities and expanding its long-range missiles arsenal, mainly designed to deter an Israeli aggression.
The key to Israel’s acceptance by the region will not be found in Damascus.
Since 2011, Syria has been ravaged by civil war, whose end is nowhere in sight. Nor is it clear whether the country will be able to retain its unitary form or instead disintegrate along ethnic and confessional lines. Yet even if Damascus were to weather the storm, it has little to offer in exchange for a peace treaty with Israel. The key to Israel’s acceptance by the region is not to be found in Damascus: It is a historical process that has been in the making since Egypt signed the first disengagement agreement with Israel in the wake of the October 1973 war, subsequently expanding to Jordan, the Gulf states, and the Maghreb states. Syria has long since lost its veto power over other Arab states’ contacts with Israel. Moreover, it is unlikely to expect Damascus to cut ties with Tehran, its ally since the late 1970s and foremost savior of the Bashar al-Assad regime. Indeed, repeated U.S. efforts since the mid-1970s to extricate Syria from the radical camp have come to naught. It is also difficult to see Damascus severing relations with terror organizations, notably Hezbollah, which serves as an avenue of influence over Lebanon. At the end of the day, Lebanon is far more important to Syria than the Golan.
In short, it seems that nothing that Syria can offer would outweigh the detrimental effects of relinquishing the Golan Heights as part of a peace treaty, especially since it has never been clear whether Syria is interested in peace as Israel understands it.[10] Rather, it appears more interested in negotiations over a treaty with Israel with the process itself being more important than the outcome. Negotiations can protect Damascus from what it fears most: Israeli or U.S. aggression.
The Turkish-Syrian context may be instructive. Ankara’s conflict with Damascus was similar to Israel’s, revolving as it did on disagreements over water, terrorism, and territory. Eventually, the Syrians decided at the end of the 1990s to acquiesce in Ankara’s water policy regarding the Euphrates, to stop supporting Kurdish terrorism against Turkey, and to drop their demands for the return of the Alexandretta district. Damascus’s acceptance of Ankara’s terms was above all a result of its marked military inferiority. Israel should similarly make the most of its superiority over Syria.
Hamas’s victory in the 2006 parliamentary elections, its violent takeover of the Gaza Strip, and the growing influence in Palestinian society of other Islamist groups cast serious doubts about the Palestinians’ readiness to end their hundred-year conflict with the Zionist movement.
In the West Bank, the situation is different, largely because of the demographic issue and its political implications. As noted above, the PLO/PA behavior since the conclusion of the Oslo accords inspires little confidence in its peaceable intentions. Hamas’s sweeping victory in the 2006 parliamentary elections, its violent takeover of the Gaza Strip a year later, and the growing influence in Palestinian society of other Islamist groups cast serious doubts about the Palestinians’ readiness in the foreseeable future to end their hundred-year conflict with the Zionist movement.
By contrast, and given the broad unanimity in Israel about the necessity of separation from the Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza, Jerusalem should keep open the option for a territorial compromise that would allow the establishment of an independent Palestinian entity along the lines of the Allon plan. Of course, there is no certainty that such an entity will actually be established in view of the Palestinians’ massive state-building inadequacies over the past twenty-four years. They have most glaringly failed to meet the Weberian test of state building—maintaining state monopoly over the means of violence—by consciously enabling the existence of various armed militias that have spread widespread mayhem and chaos (or fawda, as they call it).
If the Palestinians are politically incapable of engaging in state building, then it might be helpful to place them under the tutelage of the neighboring Arab states—Egypt in Gaza, Jordan in the West Bank. Of course, neither state is particularly keen on shouldering this daunting task; yet precisely for this reason, Israel should strive to ensure that the solution to the Palestinian problem is not placed solely at its doorstep.
The time seems ripe for such a change. The ongoing Arab upheavals and the surge of jihadist Islam make the world far less captivated by the Palestinian illusion with many states prepared to consider alternative solutions to the problem. Even among the Arabs, there are growing voices that question the centrality of the Palestinian issue.[11] In these circumstances, recurrent Israeli suggestions for unilateral withdrawal, born of the yearning for the resumption of the peace process, cannot be more misconceived. If the Gaza experience teaches anything, it is that a unilateral withdrawal without ironclad guarantees against the transformation of the evacuated territory into a terrorist hotbed is an assured recipe for disaster.
In the absence of a worthy partner capable of effective control of the prospective Palestinian entity—and as long as Jordan or Egypt would not assume any role in managing Palestinian affairs—Israel will need to continue to deal with a weak and corrupt Palestinian Authority for some time to come. In this respect, it should be noted that even in the worst-case scenario that the PA would initiate another war of terror, its economic implications for Israel will be rather negligible. During the 1987-93 intifada and the “al-Aqsa Intifada,” only 5-10 percent of the national security budget was allocated to fighting terrorism. The use of infantry units, in contrast to naval and air formations, is relatively cheap.[12] This is a “small war” of the type that requires limited investment of resources. Nor has the diplomatic cost of the two intifadas been particularly high. The negative views, in which Israel’s continued control of the West Bank are held throughout the international system, have had only peripheral effect, certainly as long as Washington is willing to accept the status quo.
The truth of the matter is that the Palestinians’ unhappy situation is primarily self-inflicted. Rather than promote a real quest for independence and state and nation building, Palestinian leaders, from the 1920s to the present day, have driven their hapless subjects from one disaster to another while lining their pockets from the proceeds of this misery.[13] Keenly aware of this reality, most Israelis resent paying the price by being forced into an unsatisfactory agreement that would imperil their national security, indeed the very existence of their state. This is all the more so since the launch of the September 2000 Palestinian war of terror—seen by most Israelis not as a war of choice but one that has been forced on Israel. According to many public opinion surveys, Israel’s majority Jewish population displays great resilience to the difficult tests attending “small wars.”
The military struggle against the Palestinians is bound to determine the country’s eastern border, which must run along the Jordan River.
In the absence of a peace agreement, it is crucial for Israel to stick to its guns, so to speak. The military struggle against the Palestinians is bound to determine the country’s eastern border, which must run along the Jordan River. Moreover, the conflict with the Palestinians may also shape the future security arrangements in the West Bank in the event of a partial withdrawal from these areas. It would be a major mistake to view the “small war” with the Palestinians as unimportant or as a distraction from the IDF’s ability to concentrate on more dangerous scenarios. The IDF’s current tasks regarding the Palestinians are part and parcel of its overall duties, and it needs to develop the necessary organizational and conceptual flexibility for effectively coping with this challenge, which, in the final account, touches the core of Israel’s existential problems.
Conclusion
Israel’s control of the Golan Heights and the West Bank has many advantages, which in turn outweigh the attendant costs of holding onto these territories. While Israel can agree that the West Bank’s densely populated areas (designated as areas A and B by the Oslo accords) where most of the Palestinian population lives, could become an independent political entity or be annexed
to Jordan as part of a bilateral peace agreement, maintaining military control over the area west of the Jordan River is essential for its national security (and for Jordanian security for that matter). Unfortunately, there is no room for a territorial compromise on the Golan Heights. Losing this territory would entail grave security threats, and there is nothing Syria has to offer to compensate for this loss.
***Efraim Inbar is a professor emeritus of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and founding director of its Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies (1993-2016).
[1] Ilan Asia, Moked Hasichsuch. Hamaavak al Hanegev, 1947-1956 (Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi and Ben-Gurion University, 1994).
[2] See, for example, Yigal Allon, “Israel: The Case for Defensible Borders,” Foreign Affairs, Oct. 1976, pp. 38-53.
[3] Hillel Frisch, “Motivation or Capabilities? Israeli Counterterrorism against Palestinian Suicide-bombings and Violence,” Journal of Strategic Studies, Oct. 2006, pp. 843-69.
[4] Yossi Kuperwasser, Incentivizing Terrorism: Palestinian Authority Allocations to Terrorists and their Families (Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs [JCPA], Feb. 2017); idem, “The West Must Insist that the Palestinians Change Their Narrative,” JCPA, Sept. 5, 2016
[5] Author interview with Maj. Gen. Gershon Hacohen, Ramat Gan, Aug. 28, 2016.
[6] Mudar Zahran, “Jordan Is Palestinian,” Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2012, pp. 3-12.
[7] Efraim Karsh, “Why the Oslo Process Doomed Peace,” Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2016.
[8] “Resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967,” S/RES/242 (1967), U.N. Security Council, New York, art. 1(i), (ii).
[9] Efraim Inbar, “Time Favors Israel. The Resilient Jewish State,” Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2013, pp. 3-13.
[10] Daniel Pipes, “Assad Isn’t Interested,” DanielPipes.org, Aug. 29, 1999.
[11] See, for example, Barney Breen-Portnoy, “Saudi Journalist to Palestinians: Armed Resistance to Israel Is Futile, Arab World Has Lost Interest in Your Cause,” The Algemeiner (Brooklyn), Jan. 27, 2017.
[12] Efraim Inbar, “Israel’s Small War: The Military Response to the Intifada,” Armed Forces & Society, Fall 1991, p. 37.
[13] Efraim Karsh, “Palestinian Leaders Don’t Want an Independent State,” Middle East Quarterly, Summer 2014.
http://www.meforum.org/6727/israel-costs-vs-its-benefits?utm_source=Middle+East+Forum&utm_campaign=9338350dd9-inbar_efraim_2017_06_11&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_086cfd423c-9338350dd9-33831725