LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
November 14/17
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias/english.november14.17.htm 

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

Bible Quotations
Don’t lay up treasures for yourselves on the earth
Matthew 06/19-23: "19 “Don’t lay up treasures for yourselves on the earth, where moth and rust consume, and where thieves break through and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consume, and where thieves don’t break through and steal;  for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.  “The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore your eye is sound, your whole body will be full of light.  But if your eye is evil, your whole body will be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!"

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on November 13-14/17
Behind the Scenes: How Lebanon's Hariri Went From Saudi Ally to Hostage/Ruters November 12/17
Analysts: Saudi Walks Back Escalation as Dramatic Moves Backfire/Associated Press/Naharnet/November 13/17
The Missile and Thwarting the ‘Major Coup’/Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 13/17
The Clash of Social Visions/David Brooks/The New York Times/Monday, 13 November, 2017
OPEC Sees a Future With Fewer Cars/Nathanial Bullard/Bloomberg/Monday, 13 November/17
Analysis Saudi Arabia's Leader Playing a High-stakes Game and Are Going Almost All In/Zvi Bar'el/Haaretz/November 13/17
The U.S. Middle East Peace Plan/Bassam Tawil/Gatestone Institute/November 13/17
U.S. Military: More Fake News from the New York Times/Peter Huessy/Gatestone Institute/November 13/17
Need to confront dangers within Lebanon rather than locating Hariri’s whereabouts/Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabiya/November 13/17
Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and the onus of preserving relationship/Hussein Shobokshi/Al Arabiya/November 13/17
Lebanon in the eye of the storm/Mohammed Al Shaikh/Al Arabiya/November 13/17

Titles For Latest LCCC Lebanese Related News published on November 13-14/17
Al-Rahi Arrives in KSA, Says Hariri's Return to Lebanon Essential
Lebanon president hails PM's pledge to return home 'soon'
Aoun Says Hariri's Remarks He May Revoke Resignation 'Positive'
Sabhan Says Riyadh 'Has Not Backtracked' after Hariri's Remarks
Hariri's TV Interview Full of Odd Moments
EU Urges 'No External Interference' in Lebanon
Berlin Urges Hariri Return, Reconciliation, End to Foreign Influence
Gemayel Urges Hariri to Return, 'Roadmap' for Hizbullah Arms
Mustaqbal Says Hariri Outlined Needed Course for Coming Period
British Embassy Holds 'Remembrance Day' Service
UK Echoes Concerns Not to 'Use Lebanon as Tool' for Proxy Conflicts
Qatari Foreign Minister Says His Country Wants a 'Stable Lebanon'
France Calls for 'Non-Interference' in Lebanon Crisis
Iran Hopes Hariri Will Return to Lebanon Soon
Zahra Says Hariri's TV Appearance Has 'Proven His Freedom'
Behind the Scenes: How Lebanon's Hariri Went From Saudi Ally to Hostage
Need to confront dangers within Lebanon rather than locating Hariri’s whereabouts
Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and the onus of preserving relationship/Hussein Shobokshi
Lebanon in the eye of the storm

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 13-14/17
Netanyahu Says Israel Operations Will Continue in Syria as Needed
Saudi Coalition Refuses to Re-Open Key Yemen Port
Iran Hunts for Survivors as Quake Kills 400 near Iraq Border
Analysts: Saudi Walks Back Escalation as Dramatic Moves Backfire
Putin and Erdogan Agree on Need to Boost Efforts for Syria Peace
Tehran Refuses to Heed Macron’s Call for Talks over Ballistic Program
Abu Dhabi: We Won’t Remain Idle in Face of Iranian Threats
Bahrain Tightens Control on Oil Facilities Following Attack
Syrian Observatory: ISIS Regains Control of Albu Kamal
Houthis Threaten Saudi Arabia's Security with 79 Iranian Ballistic Missiles
EU Approves Arms Blockade against Venezuela
North Korean Soldier Shot while Defecting to South
Egypt Arrests Man for Supporting Terrorist Elements

Latest Lebanese Related News published on November 13-14/17
Al-Rahi Arrives in KSA, Says Hariri's Return to Lebanon Essential
Associated Press/Naharnet/November 13/17/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi kicked off a trip to Saudi Arabia on Monday where he is scheduled to hold talks with King Salman bin Abdul Aziz, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Lebanon's Prime Minister Saad Hariri who has been in Riyadh since his shock resignation on Nov. 4. The patriarch was welcomed at the airport by Saudi State Minister for Gulf Affairs Thamer al-Sabhan, who is in charge of the Lebanese file. Al-Rahi said the return of Hariri back home from Saudi Arabia, where he recently announced his resignation, will restore normal life to the country that was shaken by his move. He told reporters before departing to Saudi Arabia that the Lebanese people have been "unsettled" since Hariri's resignation earlier this month, adding that he will raise the matter with the Saudi king and crown prince. Al-Rahi heads the Maronite sect, Lebanon's largest Christian community and the Middle East's largest Catholic church, which enjoys wide influence in the country. His visit is the first by a Maronite patriarch to the kingdom ever. "The Lebanese people have been waiting for him (Hariri) to return because the situation has come to a stop and the Lebanese people have been unsettled," al-Rahi said. "They (the Lebanese) will not rest until he returns so that life returns to normal." "We will carry these concerns to the king and crown prince and wish well," he said. Al-Rahi and Saudi Charge d'Affaires in Lebanon Walid al-Bukhari said the kingdom is not likely to deport Lebanese citizens as part of the current escalation with Hizbullah and Iran. The kingdom has been demanding that Hizbullah play no role in future government, accusing the group of supporting anti-Saudi Yemen rebels known as Huthis. Hizbullah and the Huthis deny that the Lebanese group is carrying out anti-Saudi activities in Yemen.Hariri's office said he met several diplomats in Riyadh on Monday including British and German ambassadors. Ecclesiastical sources told al-Joumhouria daily that Rahi “carries in his visit the concerns of Lebanon to the Saudi leadership.""When the invitation was made to the Patriarch the situation was different, so new elements and talks will be introduced to the discussions related to the post-resignation period,” the sources added. Hariri resigned as premier in a televised address broadcast from Saudi Arabia by the Al-Arabiya news network, amid reports that he is being held against his will in Riyadh. Hariri's sudden resignation announcement cited the "grip" of the Iran-backed movement Hizbullah on Lebanon, and also said he feared for his life. The shock resignation announcement raised fears that Lebanon -- split into rival camps led by Hariri and Hizbullah -- could once again descend into violence. It also raised questions about the fate of Hariri, who also holds Saudi nationality, as it coincided with the announcement in Saudi Arabia of an anti-corruption purge in which dozens of princes, ministers and businessmen have been rounded up. The Church sources added on condition of anonymity: “The Maronite Church is well aware of Riyadh's keenness on Lebanon. The Lebanese-Saudi relations have always been distinctive. All that it wishes is that relations return to normal unaffected by regional conflicts. Bkirki strongly supports the neutralization of Lebanon from wars and crises.”As questions about Hariri's fate mounted, the resigned premier made a televised appearance on Sunday and said that he will return to Lebanon "within days" and that his surprising resignation was aimed at creating a “positive shock.”

Lebanon president hails PM's pledge to return home 'soon'
AFP/November 13/17/A handout picture provided by the Lebanese photo agency Dalati and Nohra on November 10, 2017 shows Lebanese President Michel Aoun (L) meeting with Saudi charge d'affaires Walid Bukhari in Beirut +1
A handout picture provided by the Lebanese photo agency Dalati and Nohra on November 10, 2017 shows Lebanese President Michel Aoun (L) meeting with Saudi charge d'affaires Walid Bukhari in Beirut. Lebanese President Michel Aoun said on Monday he was happy to hear resigned prime minister Saad Hariri would be returning to Beirut from Saudi Arabia "soon."Hariri stepped down from his post during a televised address more than a week ago from Riyadh and has remained there, sparking rumours he was under de facto house arrest.
But he pledged during a television interview on Sunday night that he would be home within days, a development welcomed by Aoun. "I was happy with Prime Minister Hariri's announcement that he would return to Lebanon soon," Aoun said on Twitter. "I am awaiting this return to discuss with the prime minister the issue of the resignation, the reasons for it and the circumstances, issues, and concerns that need to be resolved," he added in an emailed statement. Aoun had said on Sunday that Hariri appeared to be "restricted" in his movements and demanded Riyadh clarify why he had not returned to Beirut. In Sunday's interview with his party's Future TV, Hariri, 47, said he was free to travel and would return to Lebanon in "two or three days". "I will return to Lebanon very soon to initiate the necessary constitutional procedures," he said with reference to his resignation. Aoun has yet to formally accept the premier's resignation, and it remains unclear who could replace him. Lebanese fear that a new power vacuum in their country could put it in the crosshairs of rising regional tensions between Riyadh and Tehran. A fragile balance has ruled over Lebanon since a complex political deal a year ago brought Aoun to the presidency and Hariri to the premiership. "It will still be possible to save this political settlement if the government truly and practically commits to the disassociation policy," said Samir Geagea, a Christian ally of Hariri, on Monday. "Especially when it comes to Hezbollah's withdrawal from Syria and the crises of the region," Geagea wrote on Twitter. The "disassociation policy" refers to an agreement among political factions that Lebanon would not get involved in regional conflicts. Hariri has blasted Iran and its Shiite ally Hezbollah -- an ally of Aoun and a member of the Lebanese government -- for intervening militarily in Syria and Yemen. He met on Monday in Riyadh the German and British ambassadors to the kingdom. On Monday, the head of Lebanon's minority Druze community Walid Jumblatt lauded Hariri as "a man of dialogue, a statesman". And France's Foreign Minister on Monday said his country was "worried by the situation in Lebanon" and wanted to see the government there "stabilise as quickly as possible".

Aoun Says Hariri's Remarks He May Revoke Resignation 'Positive'
Naharnet/November 13/17/President Michel Aoun on Monday said that Prime Minister Saad Hariri's remarks on the possibility of reconsidering his own resignation was a “positive” indicator. Visitors to the President at the Presidential Palace quoted Aoun as saying: “Hariri's hints that he might reconsider his resignation is something positive.” The President was also quoted as saying that the “PM's remarks show that the political settlement that supports the coalition government still stands.”Hariri made a televised interview on Sunday, one week after quitting his post as premier. Last week he resigned as premier in a televised address broadcast from Saudi Arabia by the Al-Arabiya news network amid reports that he is being held against his will in Riyadh. Hariri's 'sudden' resignation cited the "grip" of the Iran-backed movement Hizbullah on Lebanon, and also said he feared for his life. The shock resignation announcement raised fears that Lebanon -- split into rival camps led by Hariri and the Iranian-backed movement Hizbullah -- could once again descend into violence. It also raised questions about the fate of Hariri, who also holds Saudi nationality, as it coincided with the announcement in Saudi Arabia of an anti-corruption purge in which dozens of princes, ministers and businessmen have been rounded up. As questions about Hariri's fate mount, the resigned premier made a televised appearance on Sunday and said that he will return to Lebanon "within days" and that his surprising resignation was aimed at creating a “positive shock.”

Sabhan Says Riyadh 'Has Not Backtracked' after Hariri's Remarks
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 13/17/Saudi State Minister for Gulf Affairs Thamer al-Sabhan said Monday that Naharnet/November 13/17/Riyadh “has not backtracked” on its stances, when asked about the conciliatory tone that characterized Prime Minister Saad Hariri's Sunday interview. Al-Sabhan, a firebrand Saudi official who had posted several anti-Hizbullah and anti-Iran tweets in recent months, was speaking to reporters during his reception of Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi at the King Salman air base in Riyadh. Al-Rahi kicked off a landmark visit to Saudi Arabia on Monday, the first by a Maronite patriarch to the kingdom ever.In his first TV interview since he announced his surprise resignation last weekend from Riyadh, Hariri said Sunday he will return to his country from Saudi Arabia "within days" to seek a settlement with Iran-backed Hizbullah. Hariri, looking downcast and tired, denied he was being held against his will in the kingdom and said he was compelled to resign to save Lebanon from imminent dangers, which he didn't specify. He held back tears at one point and repeated several times that he resigned to create a "positive shock" and draw attention to the danger of siding with Iran in regional conflicts. Hariri sounded less belligerent in Sunday's interview than he did during the resignation announcement. A political crisis has gripped Lebanon since Hariri read his televised resignation from Saudi Arabia on Nov. 4 in which he accused Iran of meddling in Lebanon in a vicious tirade that was uncharacteristic of the usually soft-spoken premier.

Hariri's TV Interview Full of Odd Moments
Associated Press/Naharnet/November 13/17/When Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced his resignation in a televised speech from Saudi Arabia last weekend, it stunned Lebanon and created a mystery that lasted for more than a week. On Sunday, another TV appearance by Hariri was filled with bizarre moments. The Nov. 4 resignation triggered a political crisis in Lebanon, along with rumors about whether Hariri was under house arrest or being coerced to quit. Although he met with various ambassadors in the Saudi capital of Riyadh in the days that followed, no one in Lebanon was really sure what was happening to him. A much-awaited live interview was done with Hariri on Sunday night by Future TV, a channel associated with his political party. It sought to dispel those rumors, but also raised some new questions.
THE MAN IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM -
At one point during the interview, Hariri's eyes were wide open, moving to the back of the room. The camera caught a man in the back corner, behind the interviewer, who was holding what appeared to be a rolled paper. The man, whose face was outside the frame, soon disappeared but not before the camera moved back to Hariri, who was staring toward him with an angry and disgusted look. On Twitter, some Lebanese shared clips of the video and wondered if the man in the back had some kind of message for Hariri, fueling reports that the prime minister was being held against his will. Hariri and the interviewer, Paula Yacoubian, realized the moment was caught on camera. Hariri explained after the break that the man was one of his staff, telling him of the latest developments in Lebanon.
TIRED AND NEAR TEARS
After a belligerent resignation speech on Nov. 4, Hariri looked sad and tired on Sunday, at times holding back tears in the interview that went on for over an hour. He repeatedly drank water, finishing his glass and asking for more, prompting Yacoubian to hand him her own glass of water. He pleaded with her to finish the questioning after an hour has passed. "You made me tired," he said. He repeatedly said he was ready to die for Lebanon -- his father, former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, was killed by a car bomb in Beirut in 2005 -- but he added that he didn't want his children to go through that kind of ordeal. When asked about reports that he is not communicative and doesn't use his phone much, he said: "I am in a reflective state," adding that he didn't want any distractions amid a very busy schedule. His demeanor triggered a new hashtag, #UnderPressure, reflecting that people were unconvinced he was a free man.
KEEPING IT REAL
The Future TV channel had asked its viewers to share questions for Hariri under the hashtag #AskthePM in an attempt to dispel reports that the interview was pre-recorded. "I would never say it was live, if it was a recorded episode," Yacoubian said near the end of the interview. Throughout the interview, Yacoubian went to great lengths to prove the interview was live. She first read the time from her phone and then reported to Hariri developments in Lebanon, including street celebratory demonstrations. She also read a British Foreign Office statement on the air. Then, when an earthquake was reported in Iraq and Iran, she referenced it, telling Hariri it was to make sure people believed the interview was live.

EU Urges 'No External Interference' in Lebanon
Associated Press/Naharnet/November 13/17/The European Union on Monday called for an end to external interference in Lebanon, after Prime Minister Saad Hariri resigned unexpectedly, triggering rumors he was being held against his will in Saudi Arabia. Hariri sent shock waves through Lebanon when he unexpectedly quit as prime minister a week ago, though on Sunday he rejected rumors he was under de facto house arrest in Riyadh, insisting he was "free" and would return home soon. His resignation came as tensions rise between Riyadh and Tehran, which back opposing sides in power struggles from Lebanon and Syria to Yemen. The EU's diplomatic chief Federica Mogherini said that a meeting of the bloc's foreign ministers in Brussels on Monday had voiced unanimous support for Lebanon's "unity and stability.""We expect no external interference in this national agenda and we believe it is essential to avoid importing into Lebanon regional conflicts, regional dynamics, regional tensions that have to stay out of the country," Mogherini said, adding that she would meet Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil in Brussels on Tuesday.She said outside interference in Lebanon was a "current and always existing threat."

Berlin Urges Hariri Return, Reconciliation, End to Foreign Influence
Naharnet/November 13/17/German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel on Monday said there was a danger of Lebanon falling back into "political and sometimes military confrontations.""In order to prevent this we need especially the return of the current prime minister (Saad Hariri), reconciliation in the country and the prevention of influence from outside," he said."Lebanon has earned the right to decide on its fate by itself and not become a pinball of Syria or Saudi Arabia or other national interests," Gabriel said in Brussels. In his first TV interview since he announced a surprise resignation on November 4 from Riyadh, Hariri said Sunday he will return to Lebanon from Saudi Arabia "within days" to seek a settlement with Iran-backed Hizbullah and President Michel Aoun.Hariri, looking downcast and tired, denied he was being held against his will in the kingdom and said he was compelled to resign to save Lebanon from imminent dangers, which he didn't specify.

Gemayel Urges Hariri to Return, 'Roadmap' for Hizbullah Arms
Naharnet/November 13/17/Kataeb Party chief MP Sami Gemayel on Monday called on Prime Minister Saad Hariri to return to Lebanon as he urged a “roadmap” for Hizbullah's controversial arsenal of arms. “Hariri should return quickly to Lebanon to put his stances into practice from Lebanese territory regarding the constitutional or political steps that he wants to take. We want Hariri to make his steps in Lebanon and not from any other place,” Gemayel said at a press conference. “We were awaiting PM Hariri to speak so that we comment on the situation,” Gemayel noted. “PM Hariri spoke of secret information that he did not reveal and we want to know and the Lebanese want to know what he was referring to because this has to do with the future of all Lebanese,” the Kataeb leader added. Referring to Hariri's call for a new settlement, Gemayel renewed his criticism of the previous settlement that led to the election of Michel Aoun as president, Hariri's return to the Grand Serail and the formation of a coalition government. “The previous settlement ceded the country and its decision to the others and that's why we reached this dilemma,” Gemayel said. “What is needed today is a final and structural solution to the political crisis and to the manner in which the country is being run,” Kataeb's chief added. Gemayel called for “neutralizing Lebanon in the ongoing conflicts and refraining from interfering in the affairs of Arab countries.”“We will not say that we will disarm Hizbullah tomorrow but a roadmap should be devised to hand over the weapons and restore the state's sovereignty,” Gemayel added. “Hizbullah has a responsibility towards Lebanon because it's a Lebanese party and its members are Lebanese. It must understand the gravity of the situation and help itself and the Lebanese to spare the country disasters,” he went on to say. In his first TV interview since he announced a surprise resignation on November 4 from Riyadh, Hariri said Sunday he will return to Lebanon from Saudi Arabia "within days" to seek a settlement with Iran-backed Hizbullah and President Michel Aoun. Hariri, looking downcast and tired, denied he was being held against his will in the kingdom and said he was compelled to resign to save Lebanon from imminent dangers, which he didn't specify.

Mustaqbal Says Hariri Outlined Needed Course for Coming Period
Naharnet/November 13/17/Al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc expressed “great relief” Monday over Prime Minister Saad Hariri's announcement that he will return to Lebanon in the coming days, describing it as a “good signal about the nature of the coming period.”In a statement issued after an emergency meeting, the bloc said Hariri's TV interview on Sunday “outlined clearly and responsibly the course that should be pursued to pull Lebanon out of the game of regional and international axes, especially in terms of reiterating the policy of dissociation from the ongoing conflicts and wars in the region, including the rejection of all forms and tools of Iranian meddling in the affairs of all brotherly Arab countries.”The bloc also voiced full support for Hariri's stances on “the need to abide by the approach of national dialogue as a correct and constructive way to address the current domestic disputes and the reasons that pushed the country to the current crisis.”In his first TV interview since he announced his surprise resignation last weekend from Riyadh, Hariri said Sunday he will return to his country from Saudi Arabia "within days" to seek a settlement with President Michel Aoun and Iran-backed Hizbullah. Hariri, looking downcast and tired, denied he was being held against his will in the kingdom and said he was compelled to resign to save Lebanon from imminent dangers, which he didn't specify. He held back tears at one point and repeated several times that he resigned to create a "positive shock" and draw attention to the danger of siding with Iran in regional conflicts. Hariri sounded less belligerent in Sunday's interview than he did during the resignation announcement. A political crisis has gripped Lebanon since Hariri read his televised resignation from Saudi Arabia on Nov. 4 in which he accused Iran of meddling in Lebanon in a vicious tirade that was uncharacteristic of the usually soft-spoken premier.

British Embassy Holds 'Remembrance Day' Service
Naharnet/November 13/17/The British Embassy in Lebanon on Monday held a ‘Remembrance Day’ service at the Beirut Commonwealth War Grave Cemetery in honor of the soldiers who were killed during World Wars I and II, and in other conflicts. The service was attended by British Ambassador Hugo Shorter; British Defense Attaché Lt. Col. Chris Gunning; Brig.-Gen. Ali al-Hennawi, representing Lebanese Army Commander General Joseph Aoun; Lt. Col. Samer al-Beani, representing Head of the Internal Security Forces Major General Imad Othman; and Brig.- Gen. Labib Ashkouti, representing the Director General of the General Security Major General Abbas Ibrahim. Ambassadors, diplomats and military attachés of U.S., European and Commonwealth countries were present. At the end of the service, two minutes’ silence was held before Ambassador Shorter and Commonwealth Ambassadors laid wreaths on the memorial. Lebanese and Palestinian war veterans, who served with the British army in World War II, attended with their families. When asked what it meant for him to attend, 85+ year old Lebanese veteran Deeb El Hajj said: “I will not miss it for the world. This day means so much to me and brings back lots of memories.” Remembrance Sunday is marked in the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth to commemorate the contribution of British and Commonwealth military and civilian servicemen and women in the two World Wars and later conflicts. It is usually held on the nearest Sunday to November 11, which was Armistice Day -- the end of hostilities in the First World War in 1918. The Beirut War Cemetery is the final resting place of around 1,200 soldiers, most of whom were from the UK, Australia, New Zealand, India and South Africa. The war graves are supervised by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission.

UK Echoes Concerns Not to 'Use Lebanon as Tool' for Proxy Conflicts
Naharnet/November 13/17/British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson reiterated in talks with his Lebanese counterpart Jebran Bassil, the UK's support for Lebanon and that the country should not be used as a tool for proxy conflicts, a press release said on Monday. “I spoke today to Foreign Minister Bassil on the latest developments in Lebanon. I reiterated to him the United Kingdom’s full support for the sovereignty and independence of Lebanon,” said Johnson. “Prime Minister Hariri has been a good and trusted partner for the UK, and we hope that he will return to Beirut without further delay, not least in the interests of Lebanon’s political stability,” he added. Johnson emphasized that the UK “urges all parties with an interest in Lebanon to do all they can to encourage this, and to work more broadly to reduce recent tensions.”The Foreign Minister assured that the UK will continue to support the people and institutions of Lebanon at this challenging time. Tuning to the Lebanese Army's vital role he emphasized: “The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) is the only legitimate authority within Lebanon, and no militia groups or foreign forces should aim to challenge the LAF as the ultimate guarantor of the Lebanese people’s security.
“We echo the concerns of the United States and our European partners that Lebanon should not be used as a tool for proxy conflicts, and that its independence and integrity should be respected by all parties – within the country and beyond.”

Qatari Foreign Minister Says His Country Wants a 'Stable Lebanon'
Naharnet/November 13/17/Qatar’s Foreign Minister Mohamed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani said on Monday that “Lebanon’s stability should be restored as soon as possible” as he urged everyone to avoid “intervening in the country’s internal affairs.”“When President Michel Aoun and Prime Minister Saad Hariri were elected, there was hope of restoring stability to Lebanon,” he told TRT alarabiya in remarks on Monday. “Qatar wants stability, whoever is in charge. We consider Lebanon to be very sensitive due to its diversity; it shouldn’t get caught up in any conflict between countries,” he added.

France Calls for 'Non-Interference' in Lebanon Crisis
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 13/17/French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian called Monday for "non-interference" in Lebanon, after the country's prime minister announced his surprise resignation in a televised statement from Saudi Arabia. "For there to be a political solution in Lebanon, it is necessary that all of the political leaders have total freedom of movement and that non-interference is a fundamental principle," Le Drian said as he arrived for a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels. Saad Hariri sent shock waves through Lebanon when he unexpectedly quit as prime minister a week ago, but on Sunday rejected rumours he was under de facto house arrest in Riyadh, insisting he was "free" and would return home soon. His resignation came as tensions rise between Riyadh and Tehran, which back opposing sides in power struggles from Lebanon and Syria to Yemen. Le Drian said France was "worried by the situation in Lebanon" and wanted to see the government there "stabilise as quickly as possible". Other Western countries have moved to express their support for Hariri, with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson calling him a "strong partner".
Tillerson warned against "any party, within or outside Lebanon, using Lebanon as a venue for proxy conflicts or in any manner contributing to instability in that country".

Iran Hopes Hariri Will Return to Lebanon Soon
Agence France Presse/Associated Press/Naharnet/November 13/17/A spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry on Monday categorically denied interfering in Lebanon's politics, saying that his country hopes Prime Minister Saad Hariri will return to Lebanon soon. "Lebanon's internal affairs concern Lebanon, and we never intervene in the internal affairs of other countries," Bahram Ghassemi said. "Hariri's resignation was sudden and suspect, but we hope that with his interview last night, he will return to Lebanon as soon as possible so that the legal process of his resignation can be applied," he added, in quotes reported by state media. In his first TV interview since he announced his surprise resignation last weekend from Riyadh, Hariri said Sunday he will return to his country from Saudi Arabia "within days" to seek a settlement with Iran-backed Hizbullah. Hariri, looking downcast and tired, denied he was being held against his will in the kingdom and said he was compelled to resign to save Lebanon from imminent dangers, which he didn't specify. He held back tears at one point and repeated several times that he resigned to create a "positive shock" and draw attention to the danger of siding with Iran in regional conflicts. Hariri sounded less belligerent in Sunday's interview than he did during the resignation announcement. A political crisis has gripped Lebanon since Hariri read his televised resignation from Saudi Arabia on Nov. 4 in which he accused Iran of meddling in Lebanon in a vicious tirade that was uncharacteristic of the usually soft-spoken premier.

Zahra Says Hariri's TV Appearance Has 'Proven His Freedom'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 13/17/Lebanese Forces MP Antoine Zahra said on Monday that Prime Minister Saad Hariri's TV appearance on Sunday “has proven his freedom,” noting that Lebanon's Constitution “does not ban resignation from outside the country.”“There is nothing in the Constitution that bans Hariri's resignation from abroad,” Zahra said in an interview with radio VDL (93.3). He added saying that the “President has no constitutional powers to refuse the resignation.”Voicing expectations that Hariri would be designated again to form Lebanon's government he said: “Political parties have no candidate other than Hariri.”On whether Hizbullah would withdraw from its involvement in the regional crises, Zahra said it was unlikely in light of how deep the party has become to be involved in, adding “the governmental crisis will go on for months if the party does not respond,” he concluded.

Behind the Scenes: How Lebanon's Hariri Went From Saudi Ally to Hostage
Ruters Nov 12, 2017
https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/1.822206
Sources say Hariri's forced resignation was motivated by Saudi efforts to counter Iran and the leader's refusal to confront Hezbollah's power in Lebanon
From the moment Saad Hariri's plane touched down in Saudi Arabia on Friday November 3, he was in for a surprise. There was no line-up of Saudi princes or ministry officials, as would typically greet a prime minister on an official visit to King Salman, senior sources close to Hariri and top Lebanese political and security officials said. His phone was confiscated, and the next day he was forced to resign as prime minister in a statement broadcast by a Saudi-owned TV channel. The move thrust Lebanon back to the forefront of a struggle that is reshaping the Middle East, between the conservative Sunni monarchy of Saudi Arabia and Shi'ite revolutionary Iran. Their rivalry has fuelled conflicts in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, where they back opposing sides, and now risks destabilising Lebanon, where Saudi has long tried to weaken the Iran-backed Hezbollah group, Lebanon's main political power and part of the ruling coalition. 
Sources close to Hariri say Saudi Arabia has concluded that the prime minister - a long-time Saudi ally and son of late prime minister Rafik al-Hariri, who was assassinated in 2005 - had to go because he was unwilling to confront Hezbollah. 
Multiple Lebanese sources say Riyadh hopes to replace Saad Hariri with his older brother Bahaa as Lebanon's top Sunni politician. Bahaa is believed to be in Saudi Arabia and members of the Hariri family have been asked to travel there to pledge allegiance to him, but have refused, the sources say. 
"When Hariri's plane landed in Riyadh, he got the message immediately that something was wrong," a Hariri source told Reuters.
"There was no one was waiting for him."
Saudi Arabia has dismissed suggestions it forced Hariri to resign and says he is a free man. Saudi officials could not immediately be reached for comment on the circumstances of his arrival, whether his phone had been taken, or whether the Kingdom was planning to replace him with his brother. 
Hariri has given no public remarks since he resigned and no indication of when he might return to Lebanon. 
'No respect'
Hariri was summoned to the Kingdom to meet Saudi King Salman in a phone call on Thursday night, November 2. Before departing, he told his officials they would resume their discussions on Monday. He told his media team he would see them at the weekend in the Red Sea resort of Sharm al-Sheikh, where he was due to meet Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sissi on the sidelines of the World Youth Forum. Hariri went to his Riyadh home. His family made their fortune in Saudi Arabia and have long had properties there. The source close to Hariri said the Lebanese leader received a call from a Saudi protocol official on Saturday morning, who asked him to attend a meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He waited for about four hours before being presented with his resignation speech to read on television, the source said. "From the moment he arrived they (Saudis) showed no respect for the man," another senior Lebanese political source said. Hariri frequently visits Saudi Arabia. On a trip a few days earlier, Prince Mohammed bin Salman had arranged for him to see senior intelligence officials and Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer al-Sabhan, the Saudi point man on Lebanon. 
Hariri came back from that trip to Beirut "pleased and relaxed", sources in his entourage said. He posted a selfie with Sabhan, both of them smiling. He told aides he had heard "encouraging statements" from the crown prince, including a promise to revive a Saudi aid package for the Lebanese army. 
The Hariri sources say Hariri believed he had convinced Saudi officials of the need to maintain an entente with Hezbollah for the sake of Lebanon's stability. Hezbollah has a heavily armed fighting force, in addition to seats in parliament and government. Saudi-backed efforts to weaken the group in Lebanon a decade ago led to Sunni-Shi'ite clashes and a Hezbollah takeover of Beirut. 
"What happened in those meetings, I believe, is that (Hariri) revealed his position on how to deal with Hezbollah in Lebanon: that confrontation would destabilize the country. I think they didn't like what they heard," said one of the sources, who was briefed on the meetings. The source said Hariri told Sabhan not to "hold us responsible for something that is beyond my control or that of Lebanon." But Hariri underestimated the Saudi position on Hezbollah, the source said. "For the Saudis it is an existential battle. It's black and white. We in Lebanon are used to grey," the source said. 
Sabhan could not immediately be reached for comment. 
Resignation
Hariri's resignation speech shocked his team. 
Lebanese President Michel Aoun, a Hezbollah ally, told ambassadors to Lebanon that Saudi Arabia had kidnapped Hariri, a senior Lebanese official said. On Friday, France said it wanted Hariri to have "all his freedom of movement". In his speech, Hariri said he feared assassination and accused Iran and Hezbollah of sowing strife in the region. He said the Arab world would "cut off the hands that wickedly extend to it," language which one source close to him said was not typical of the Lebanese leader. Hariri's resignation came as more than 200 people, including 11 Saudi princes, current and former ministers and tycoons, were arrested in an anti-corruption purge in Saudi Arabia. Initially there was speculation Hariri was a target of that campaign because of his family's business interests.
But sources close to the Lebanese leader said his forced resignation was motivated by Saudi efforts to counter Iran. Hariri was taken to meet the Saudi king after his resignation. Footage was aired on Saudi TV. He was then flown to Abu Dhabi to meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, the Saudi crown prince's main regional ally. He returned to Riyadh and has since received Western ambassadors. Sources close to Hariri said the Saudis, while keeping Hariri under house arrest, were trying to orchestrate a change of leadership in Hariri's Future Movement by installing his elder brother Bahaa, who was overlooked for the top job when their father was killed.
The two have been at odds for years. 
In a statement, the Future Movement said it stood fully behind Hariri as its leader. Hariri aide and Interior Minister Nohad Machnouk dismissed the idea Bahaa was being positioned to replace his brother: "We are not herds of sheep or a plot of land whose ownership can be moved from one person to another. In Lebanon things happen though elections not pledges of allegiances."  Family members, aides and politicians who have contacted Hariri in Riyadh say he is apprehensive and reluctant to say anything beyond "I am fine". Asked if he is coming back, they say his normal answer is: "Inshallah" (God willin

Need to confront dangers within Lebanon rather than locating Hariri’s whereabouts
Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabiya/November 13/17
Is the real “substantial” problem in Lebanon today about the form of Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s resignation and where he resigned from? Or is it what the resignation indicates? Or, more importantly, is it the contents of the resignation speech? Hassan Nasrallah disrupted the Lebanese scene. Those who belong to his “axis,” from the Lebanese president to the speaker of parliament and those who revolve in their orbit, did the same. It’s expected for Hezbollah’s leader to evade discussing the reasons of the resignation as they condemn him and his terrorist party. Lebanese President Michel Aoun’s insistence to discuss the formalities of the resignation, how it was made and where Saad Hariri is right now is like “running forward.”
There is a Saudi determination that’s backed by Arab countries and that’s in harmony with a “decisive” American policy to prevent Iranian “malicious” activities, as the American administration led by President Trump put it. This is the point of everything. It’s something that goes beyond the shallow folkloric local Lebanese discussion of “where is Sheikh Saad?” As part of this new policy, the American administration began to pursue Iranian-Iraqi formations affiliated with the Popular Mobilization and blacklist them as terrorist. It’s doing the same in Yemen and in Syria. As for Lebanon and its “international” crisis, Nasrallah hinted during his speech that US Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson’s policy is different than Trump’s. Tillerson, however, said that the US rejects the presence or role of any militia in Lebanon. This is the stance of the “entire” American administration, beginning with Trump who announced his plan with the four aims to end Iran’s destructive role in the region.
There is a Saudi determination that’s backed by Arab countries and that’s in harmony with a “decisive” American policy to prevent Iranian “malicious” activities, as the American administration led by President Trump put it. On the economic level, Trump’s plan wants to tighten sanctions and close gaps that allow the Iranian regime to operate freely. This will greatly harm the Khomeini regime’s funds that are employed to nurture terrorist groups, like Hezbollah and the Houthi Movement. Iranian economist Lotfali Bakhshi stated that “in the shadow of the agreement between the American president, Congress and Senate in terms of Iran, there will be no means to move around the sanctions.”
Can you see that?
The issue is much more than a local Lebanese “fuss” and political fears over Hariri from those who killed March 14 figures, such as Gebran Tueni and Mohammed Chatah, and who killed his father Rafiq Hariri before them. Have we forgotten that?There’s determination to finalize the huge confrontation with Iran and its tools in the region. This determination is not limited to Saudi Arabia, though it’s among the most concerned, but it is part of international, Islamic and Arab efforts.Saudi Minister Thamer al-Sabhan warned all of the Lebanese people “to be aware of these threats before reaching the point of no return.”
The solution in Lebanon is easy, and as Samir Geagea put it, it is to “withdraw from the region’s crises.”

Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and the onus of preserving relationship
Hussein Shobokshi/Al Arabiya/November 13/17
To put things in perspective for terrorist Hassan Nasrallah, who appeared “confused” and “worried” about Saad al-Hariri, he is the same person Saad Hariri accused of killing his father Rafik al-Hariri. This rather amusing development is useful in describing the real Saudi position on Lebanon.
The new young Saudi leadership has no special relationship with Lebanon. There is no nostalgia of the past that affects its perspective of Lebanon or old friendships. The Saudi people as a whole have changed their relationship with Lebanon. They neither travel to spend their vacations in Lebanon, especially as there are other alternatives and more secure and respectable destinations like Dubai, Bahrain, Jordan, Turkey Europe, Asia and the US. They also do not go to Lebanon for education as they can travel to the whole world instead. They also no longer await a Lebanese mediator to complete their work, because Saudi people have become fluent in all languages. They can connect directly to the decision-making capitals around the world.
The Lebanese people are no longer the most experienced, knowledgeable or sought-after in the labor market. There are more accountable alternatives, from Jordan to India and countries around the world. The Lebanese media is no longer the source of real news and Saudi competencies have become noticeably qualified and many of the traditional attractions of Lebanon in Saudi Arabia have ended. Lebanon, a country, which was once known for Kahlil Gibran, is today represented by terrorist Hassan Nasrallah, and gives him the space to participate in political decision-making
National security
On the contrary, there is a prevailing view among the Saudis that Lebanon is dangerous for Saudi national security. Lebanon has become a platform for television channels attacking Saudi Arabia, military training station for terrorists and funding source for operations against Saudi Arabia.
Lebanon used to play a similar role during the 1970s, when it hosted Saudi nationals whom it called political opponents (and hosted political opponents from other countries, which resulted in a civil war that lasted more than two decades). Today, Lebanon is in a real crisis and has to confront itself. When it symbolized civil, scientific, economic, technical and educational culture, Lebanon was a truly exceptional country. It “exported” experts to the world in these areas. Lebanon, a country, which was once known for Kahlil Gibran, is today represented by terrorist Hassan Nasrallah, and gives him the space to participate in political decision-making, even exports terrorism to the region in Kuwait, Egypt, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Syria. Yet the strange proposition from the President and the media continues that Hassan Nasrallah is an opponent. Lebanon has chosen this path. It chose to “participate” in terrorism to build its future. It chose to be an evil platform against countries of the region. It chose to “ignore” the prevailing terrorism emanating from it. These were the choices Lebanon made. But when the consequences of these decisions caused death and destruction in Saudi Arabia and its allies; then Saudi Arabia has the right to defend itself.Lebanon will not find lot of supporters in Saudi Arabia calling for special connections with it. Lebanon is the one that started taking positions against Saudi Arabia. Historically, Saudi Arabia has been consistent in its position on Lebanon and has only tried to safeguard it. Taif Agreement could be described as the most famous example of this approach. Yet, the level of insults hurled against Saudi Arabia, that have been allowed in Lebanon, confirms that the country is not keen to preserve this relationship. May be this is better for both parties.

Lebanon in the eye of the storm
Mohammed Al Shaikh/Al Arabiya/November 13/17
Dealing with the snake’s head, which is the source of the poison, is better than preoccupying yourself and wasting your time trying to tackle its tail. This is the formula which Saudi Arabia, and its American ally, seems to have decided to work upon in terms of the crisis with the Iranians in general and their coup in Yemen in particular.  It seems the ballistic missile which the Iranians ordered the Houthis to fire toward Riyadh will be the straw that breaks the Iranian camel’s back as well the back of its destructive wings, primarily Hezbollah militias, in the region. Lebanon’s official government includes members of this terrorist group. The Lebanese official decisions are controlled, directed and governed by this militia. Prime Minister Saad Hariri, who resigned recently, tried to get parties allied with this militia to side with Lebanon’s internal and regional interests instead of serving Hezbollah that’s an agent to a foreign party. He has done that during his entire term as prime minister but his attempts just failed and he ended up resigning.
Hariri resignation stirred turmoil in Lebanon and made the Lebanese people see the magnitude of trouble Hezbollah has put them in. Hariri’s resignation stirred political turmoil in Lebanon and made the Lebanese people see the magnitude of the trouble which Hezbollah has put them in, especially that the repercussions began to appear after Saudi Arabia, Gulf countries and Western countries prevented their citizens from travelling to Lebanon. This implies that serious measures will be taken by major countries, primarily by the US, toward Hezbollah, which is one of Iran’s destructive wings in the region.
The question which many Lebanese people are asking is how will this confrontation shape up? Will it be a military confrontation or a confrontation via economic sanctions? It seems the military option is unlikely for now considering the consequences it will have on the region’s security and stability, and on Lebanon in particular.
Economic sanctions
Tough economic sanctions are the possible option as they can restrain Lebanese banks, especially transactions made by Lebanese expatriates, as they are important source of funding economic activities inside the country. When these banks are restrained and prevented from dealing with Hezbollah or with those allied to it, the Lebanese state will be gravely harmed. It seems Hariri expected these threats which Lebanon cannot afford to bear. He thus decided to resign and left those allied with Hezbollah and Iran to face the next storm alone. Lebanese President Michel Aoun who is allied with the militia is the one who will confront this storm and he will have to deal with this crisis. There are only two options here: Either Hezbollah stays and remains protected by the Lebanese state, while Lebanon loses its stability, or they get rid of Hezbollah, and hence get rid of Iranian influence so that Lebanon maintains its stability.
Saudi Arabia’s first enemy in the region is Iran. Saudi Arabia knows that the Houthis who staged a coup against the legitimate authority in Yemen are mere primitive fighters as the real threat comes from those standing behind them, i.e. Iran and its main wing Hezbollah. Clipping Hezbollah’s wings in Lebanon thus means clipping the mullahs’ wings in Iran. I have no doubt that the Iranians, and these militias’ leaders, along with Lebanese President Michel Aoun, are well-aware of this. How will they act? Will they be able to face this hurricane? This is what the next few months will reveal.

Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 13-14/17
Netanyahu Says Israel Operations Will Continue in Syria as Needed
Associated Press/Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 13/17/Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday that he has made it clear to the U.S. and Russia that Israel will continue with its operations in Syria. Netanyahu said he told Washington and Moscow that Israel will act according to its "security needs." Israel has largely stayed out of the war but has struck suspected weapon convoys to Hizbullah.His remarks came on the heels of an international agreement laying out principles for post-war Syria. A U.S.-Russian statement Saturday affirmed an understanding calling for "the reduction and ultimate elimination" of foreign fighters. Israel has long complained about the involvement of archenemy Iran, and its Lebanese ally Hizbullah, in Syria. It has expressed concerns of a "Shiite corridor" with land links from Iran to Lebanon, providing movement of militants and weapons across the region.
Speaking later Monday in parliament, Netanyahu said some of Israel's Arab neighbors shared its concerns. "We stand shoulder to shoulder with countries of the moderate camp in the Arab world, in the face of radical Islam, no matter where it comes from, be it Iran, the Islamic State group or elsewhere," he said, without naming the countries. "I think that this growing closeness and consultation is first and foremost good for security and ultimately for peace," he added. Sunni Muslim powerhouse Saudi Arabia has long been at loggerheads with Shiite, non-Arab Iran but friction has been growing lately as Tehran has backed Shiite Huthi rebels in Yemen. Saudi Arabia's powerful Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman accused Iran of "direct military aggression" against the kingdom by supplying the rebels with ballistic missiles. The kingdom says one was fired toward Riyadh from Yemen on November 4 but brought down by its air defenses. Iran denied any involvement."Iran knows very well, and everyone else should be aware, that we shall not agree to nor accept its military deployment in Syria," Netanyahu told parliament.

Saudi Coalition Refuses to Re-Open Key Yemen Port
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 13/17/The Saudi-led coalition will take steps in the coming 24 hours to ease the blockade on Yemen -- but will not reopen a key rebel-held port to aid shipments unless tighter inspections are put in place, Saudi Arabia's U.N. ambassador said Monday.
The coalition fighting rebels in Yemen shut down the country's land, sea and air borders a week ago in response to a missile attack by the Iran-backed Huthis that was intercepted near Riyadh.U.N. aid chief Mark Lowcock last week warned that unless the blockade is lifted, Yemen will face "the largest famine the world has seen for many decades, with millions of victims."Saudi Ambassador Abdallah al-Mouallimi told reporters that ports in government-controlled areas such as Aden, Mukalla and Mocha will be reopened, but demanded tighter restrictions on the key port of Hodeida."If the sea port of Hodeida is to be reopened, it will have to be under safe conditions that would ensure that there will be no supply of weapons and ammunitions coming through that port," Mouallimi said. The coalition has invited the United Nations to send experts to Riyadh for talks on tightening inspections. U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said it is "taking a look" at that request. The United Nations insisted its aid operations need access to the Hodeida and Saleef ports, saying that more than two-thirds of the people in need and 80 percent of all cholera cases are closest to the two ports. "The port at Aden does not have the capacity for commercial and humanitarian cargo, and unless the Red Sea ports in Hodeida and Saleef are opened immediately, the U.N. will not be able to feed 7 million people every month," said Dujarric. "Those are the ones that we need." The United Nations has listed Yemen as the world's number one humanitarian crisis, with 17 million people in need of food, seven million of whom are at risk of famine.  More than 2,000 Yemenis have died in a cholera outbreak now affecting nearly one million people. The U.N.'s World Food Program warned that current stocks of rice will run out in 111 days and wheat in 97 unless the blockade is lifted. Saudi Arabia and its allies intervened in Yemen in March 2015 to push back the Iran-backed Huthi rebels who control the capital Sanaa, and restore the government of President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi to power.

Iran Hunts for Survivors as Quake Kills 400 near Iraq Border
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 13/17/Teams of Iranian rescuers dug through rubble in a hunt for survivors Monday after a major earthquake struck the Iran-Iraq border, killing at least 421 people and injuring thousands. The 7.3-magnitude quake rocked a border area 30 kilometers (20 miles) southwest of Halabja in Iraqi Kurdistan at around 9:20 pm (1820 GMT) on Sunday, the U.S. Geological Survey said. Many people would have been at home when the quake hit in Iran's western province of Kermanshah, where authorities said it killed at least 413 people and injured 6,700. Across the border in more sparsely populated areas of Iraq, the health ministry said eight people had died and several hundred were injured. Iraq's Red Crescent reported nine dead and more than 400 injured. Iranian authorities said rescue operations had been largely completed and the government declared Tuesday a national day of mourning. As dusk approached on Monday, tens of thousands of Iranians were forced to sleep outside in the cold for a second night as authorities scrambled to provide them with aid. Some had spent Sunday night outdoors after fleeing their homes in the mountainous cross-border region, huddling around fires at dawn as authorities sent in help. "People's immediate needs are firstly tents, water and food," said the head of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards, Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari. "Newly constructed buildings... held up well, but the old houses built with earth were totally destroyed," he told state television during a visit to the affected region. Hundreds of ambulances and dozens of army helicopters reportedly joined the rescue effort after Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ordered the government and armed forces to mobilize "all their means."Like other foreign media organizations, AFP had not received authorization to visit the scene of the disaster on Monday.
Relief camps
Officials said they were setting up relief camps for the displaced. Iran's emergency services chief Pir Hossein Koolivand said landslides had cut off roads to affected villages, impeding the access of rescue workers.But by late afternoon, officials said all the roads in Kermanshah province had been re-opened, although the worst-affected town of Sar-e Pol-e Zahab remained without electricity, said state television. Officials said 22,000 tents, 52,000 blankets and tonnes of food and water had been distributed. The official IRNA news agency said 30 Red Crescent teams had been sent to the quake zone.
Collapsed walls
After initially pinning the quake's epicenter inside Iraq, the USGS then placed it across the border in Iran on Monday morning. Iran's Sar-e Pol-e Zahab, home to some 85,000 people close to the border, was the worst hit, with at least 280 dead. At dawn, buildings in the town stood disfigured, their former facades now rubble on crumpled vehicles. In an open space away from wrecked housing blocks, men and women, some wrapped in blankets, huddled around a campfire.The tremor also shook several western Iranian cities including Tabriz. Some 259,000 people live in the region, according to the most recent census. State television showed tents, blankets and food being distributed in areas struck by the temblor. In neighboring Dalahoo County, several villages were totally destroyed, an official told Tasnim agency. A Kermanshah official told ISNA agency that five historical monuments in the province suffered minor damage, but the UNESCO-listed Behistun inscription from the seventh century BC was not affected.
Windows shattered
In Iraq, the health ministry said the quake had killed seven people in the northern province of Sulaimaniyah and one in Diyala province to its south. More than 500 people were injured in both provinces and the nearby province of Kirkuk. Footage posted on Twitter showed panicked people fleeing a building in Sulaimaniyah as windows shattered at the moment the quake struck. Images from the nearby town of Darbandikhan showed walls and concrete structures that had collapsed. Nizar Abdullah spent the night with neighbors sifting through the ruins of a two-story home next door after it crumbled into concrete debris.
"There were eight people inside," the 34-year-old Iraqi Kurd said. Some family members managed to escape, but "neighbors and rescue workers pulled out the mother and one of the children dead from the rubble."
Residents flee homes in Turkey
The quake, which struck at a relatively shallow depth of 23 kilometers, was felt for about 20 seconds in Baghdad, and for longer in other provinces of Iraq, AFP journalists said. Iraqi health authorities said they treated dozens of people in the aftermath, mostly for shock. It was also felt in southeastern Turkey, an AFP correspondent said. In the town of Diyarbakir, residents were reported to have fled their homes. The quake struck along a 1,500-kilometer fault line between the Arabian and Eurasian tectonic plates, which extends through western Iran and northeastern Iraq.The area sees frequent seismic activity. In 1990, a 7.4-magnitude quake in northern Iran killed 40,000 people, injured 300,000 and left half a million homeless, reducing dozens of towns and nearly 2,000 villages to rubble in just seconds. Thirteen years later, a catastrophic quake flattened swathes of the ancient southeastern Iranian city of Bam, killing at least 31,000. Iran has experienced at least two major quake disasters since, one in 2005 that killed more than 600 and another in 2012 that left some 300 dead.

Analysts: Saudi Walks Back Escalation as Dramatic Moves Backfire
Associated Press/Naharnet/November 13/17/Saudi Arabia's dramatic moves to counter Iran in the region appear to have backfired, significantly ratcheting up regional tensions and setting off a spiral of reactions and anger that seem to have caught the kingdom off guard.
Now it's trying to walk back its escalations in Lebanon and Yemen. On Monday, the kingdom announced that the Saudi-led coalition fighting Shiite rebels in Yemen would begin reopening airports and seaports in the Arab world's poorest country, days after closing them over a rebel ballistic missile attack on Riyadh. The move came just hours after Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, who shocked the nation by announcing his resignation from the Saudi capital on Nov. 4, gave an interview in which he backed off his strident condemnation of Lebanon's Iran-backed Hizbullah, saying he would return to the country within days to seek a settlement with President Michel Aoun and Hizbullah.
The two developments suggest that Saudi Arabia's combative young crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, may be trying to pedal back from the abyss of a severe regional escalation. "This represents de-escalation by the Saudis," said Yezid Sayigh, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. "The general trend is that the Saudis are going to back off and this is largely because of the unexpected extent of international pressure, and not least of all U.S. pressure."Mohammed bin Salman, widely known by his initials, MBS, has garnered a reputation for being decisive, as well as impulsive.
At just 32 years old and with little experience in government, he has risen to power in just three years to oversee all major aspects of politics, security and the economy in Saudi Arabia. As defense minister, he is in charge of the Saudi-led war in Yemen.
He also appears to have the support of President Donald Trump and his son-in-law, senior adviser Jared Kushner, who visited the Saudi capital earlier this month.
Saudi partners in the Gulf and the Trump administration rushed to defend the kingdom publicly after a rebel Huthi missile was fired at the Saudi capital, Riyadh, from Yemen last week. A top U.S. military official also backed Saudi claims that the missile was manufactured by Iran. However, Saudi Arabia's move to tighten an already devastating blockade on Yemen in response to the missile was roundly criticized by aid groups, humanitarian workers and the United Nations, which warned that the blockade could bring millions of people closer to "starvation and death." Saudi Arabia's decision to ease the blockade after just a week suggests it bowed to the international criticism, and did not want the bad publicity of even more images of emaciated Yemeni children and elderly people circulating online and in the media. Public pressure, however, has not always worked to bring about a change in Saudi policy. The kingdom's abrupt decision, in coordination with the United Arab Emirates, to cut ties with Qatar five months ago was widely criticized as an overreach. Still, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have not backed down from their list of demands, and if anything, appear to have dug in their heels further. The kingdom accuses Qatar of backing extremists in large part due to its ties with Iran and its support of Islamist groups, an allegation that Qatar strongly denies.
While Saudi Arabia appears to have the full backing of Trump, the recent purge of top princes, officials, businessmen and military officers has raised concerns the crown prince has overextended himself. The kingdom says it has detained 201 people in the sweeping anti-corruption probe, which MBS is overseeing. The arrests raise the potential for internal strife and discord within the royal family, whose unity has been the bedrock of the kingdom for decades. The crown prince shows no sign of backing down from the purge either. The government has promised to expand its probe, and has reportedly frozen some 1,200 bank accounts. It is too early to say how Saudi Arabia will handle the crisis in Lebanon triggered by Hariri's resignation, and whether he will indeed try to reach a new settlement with Hizbullah as he announced in the interview Sunday night. But his abrupt resignation, clearly engineered by the kingdom, may have been an uncalculated step too far. The 47-year-old Saudi-aligned Hariri was summoned from Beirut to Riyadh on Nov. 3 and resigned the next day in a televised speech in which he unexpectedly tore into Iran and its Lebanese ally Hizbullah, announcing in uncharacteristically strong language that Iran's arms in the region would be "cut off." The resignation shattered a year-old coalition government that included Hizbullah members that had kept the calm and was just starting to make strides toward injecting some cash and confidence in the country's economy.
A political crisis has gripped Lebanon since, but instead of splitting the Lebanese, the manner of Hariri's resignation has provoked outrage among most. Convinced that he was forced to quit and was being held against his will, the Lebanese found rare unity around their demand that Hariri be allowed to return home. The shock resignation, seen as a rash Saudi decision to drag Lebanon back to the forefront of the Saudi-Iranian battle for regional supremacy, jolted the Middle East and also took world capitals by surprise. Already facing widespread international criticism over its crippling blockade of Yemen and skepticism over the unprecedented wave of arrests inside Saudi Arabia, the kingdom suddenly seemed like a rogue nation acting on impulse and taking the region to the brink of explosion.
If he was emboldened by the support from Trump and Kushner, the crown prince appears to have overreached.
While it took a few days, the U.S. response has been embarrassing for the kingdom. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the U.S. opposes action that would threaten the stability of Lebanon and warned other countries against using Lebanon "as a venue for proxy conflicts" -- a statement that seemed to be directed equally at Saudi Arabia and Iran.More surprisingly, the White House issued a strongly worded statement calling on all states and parties to respect Lebanon's sovereignty and constitutional processes, describing Hariri as a "trusted partner of the United States in strengthening Lebanese institutions, fighting terrorism and protecting refugees." "I think the Saudis fundamentally misjudged this... and should have known better," said Sayigh, the Carnegie analyst. "They've been relying too heavily ... on Trump's people and misjudged that the U.S. administration is not just Trump," he said.

Putin and Erdogan Agree on Need to Boost Efforts for Syria Peace
Associated Press/Naharnet/November 13/17/Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan agreed Monday on the need to boost efforts to achieve a lasting political settlement in Syria. Despite being on opposing sides of the Syrian conflict, Russia and Turkey have been working together since a 2016 reconciliation deal ended a crisis caused by the shooting down of a Russian warplane. During four hours of talks at the Black Sea resort of Sochi, in southwest Russia, the two sides agreed on the need to do more to stabilize Syria, Putin said. "We are united in the need to increase efforts to ensure the long-term stabilization (of Syria), above all to advance the process of a political settlement," the Russian leader told reporters after the meeting. "We agreed that there is now a base which allows us to focus on the political process," said Erdogan. The pair last met in Ankara in September, when they agreed to push for the creation of a "de-escalation" zone in Syria's key northern province of Idlib, in addition to others already proposed. Russia, along with Iran, is the key backer of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Moscow's military intervention in Syria is widely seen as tipping the balance in the conflict. Turkey, however, has backed the rebels seeking Assad's ouster. "Our relationship has been restored almost to its full capacity," Putin said ahead of the talks, adding that he was glad to see the Turkish leader.
Mutual need'
Their efforts have helped bring about a de-escalation of violence in parts of Syria, though fighting continues. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu told journalists earlier that Ankara was seeking a political solution to the crisis. "Without a ceasefire we cannot talk about a political solution. Now we have made a lot of achievements and we can pay more attention to the political process," he said. Moscow and Ankara have supported negotiations in Kazakhstan's capital Astana from the start of the year, which have run parallel to talks taking place in Geneva with the backing of the United Nations.
Alexei Malashenko, director of research at the Dialogue of Civilizations institute, said Putin and Erdogan had a "mutual need." "Russia, which is in a very difficult position (in Syria), simply cannot lose allies there -- they can't even lose partners, let alone allies," he told AFP.
'High opinions of themselves'
Meanwhile Erdogan is dissatisfied with the West's attitude towards him, Malashenko said, pointing to a deal Ankara has signed to buy S-400 air defense systems from Russia. The deal, reportedly worth $2 billion (1.7 billion euros), has shocked Turkey's NATO allies. "It's a meeting of two charismatic people, two people with a very high opinion of themselves, two leaders," Malashenko added, An apparent agreement at the last talks between Putin and Erdogan saw the release of two leading Crimean Tatar activists who had been sentenced by Russian authorities for their political activities in the peninsula annexed from Ukraine. Erdogan has pledged to support Crimea's Turkish-speaking Tatar minority. Russia and Turkey have a record of struggling to overcome a regional rivalry that goes back to the Ottoman Empire and the Romanov dynasty. Ties between the two countries went through their worst crisis since the end of the Cold War when the Turkish air force shot down a Russian warplane over Syria in November 2015. More than 330,000 people have been killed in Syria since the conflict began in March 2011 with anti-government protests.

Tehran Refuses to Heed Macron’s Call for Talks over Ballistic Program
Asharq Al Awsat/November 13/17/Iran’s Foreign Ministry rejected on Sunday French President Emanuel Macron’s call to hold talks on Tehran’s ballistic missile program. Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi said its missile program was defensive and unrelated to the landmark 2015 nuclear deal that put a cap on Iran's nuclear activity in exchange for sanctions relief. Macron, during a visit to Dubai on Thursday, said he was "very concerned" by Tehran's missile program after Saudi Arabia claimed it intercepted a missile fired from Yemen earlier this month. Each of Germany, Britain and France said last month that they were committed to the nuclear agreement, but the three countries stressed in a unified statement the need to confront Iran's regional activities, starting with the ballistic missiles development program. “France is fully aware of our country’s firm position that Iran’s defense affairs are not negotiable,” said Qassemi. “We have told French officials repeatedly that the nuclear deal is not negotiable and other issues will not be allowed to be added to it,” he continued, according to a statement on the ministry’s website. The United States had accused Iran on Tuesday of supplying Yemen’s Houthi coup militias with a missile that was fired into Saudi Arabia in July and called for the United Nations to hold Tehran accountable for violating two UN Security Council resolutions. More so, Saudi Arabia and allies accuse Iran of supplying missiles and other weapons to the Houthis, saying the arms were not present in Yemen before conflict broke out there in 2015. Iran denies the charges and blames the conflict on Riyadh. The US imposed unilateral sanctions on Iran in October, saying its missile tests violate a UN resolution that calls on Tehran not to undertake activities related to missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, Iranian Atomic Energy Organization spokesman Behruz Kemalundi confirmed the validity of footage referred to by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano and the shutting of over 2,000 Iranian nuclear sites. "The information on Iran's activities is confidential and should not be transferred to the IAEA," Kemalundi added. Despite his assertion, Kemalundi tried to downplay the importance of Amano's claims and ease his influence on the Iranian interior by saying that the IAEA chief's remarks were aimed at pleasing American officials.

Abu Dhabi: We Won’t Remain Idle in Face of Iranian Threats
Asharq Al Awsat/November 13/17/UAE will not remain idle under the shadow of Iran's threat, Dr. Anwar Mohammad Gargash, State Minister for Foreign Affairs, told the 4th Abu Dhabi Strategic Debate. Gargash declared that there are three factors that have the potential to provide opportunities for political progress in Yemen, Libya and Syria. There factors are: international awareness of Iranian intervention in the Arab region, huge relapse of extremist groups and flagging Qatari support to terrorism. “It is only by adopting a strategy focused primarily on achieving stability, that we will be able to alter the current trajectory. In the UAE’s view, the success of this strategy depends on there being a strong and developing Saudi Arabia, and a stable, robust Egypt,” he stated. Some participants saw that Iran’s attitude in the region mixes the offensive and defensive strategies, without having a clear vision. Other attendees, however, thought that the Iranian attitude is pretty clear but there is an absence of an Arab strategy to confront it. Noura al-Kaabi, Minister of Culture and Knowledge Development, believed that the achievements gained through soft power should be protected by hard power, using the example of the UAE’s participation in the international coalition against ISIS, which is one form of protecting the elements of soft power: moderate Islam. Dr. Ebtesam al-Ketbi, President of the Emirates Policy Center, spoke of the most prominent elements of soft power in the UAE, demonstrated by its being the only successful model of a federation in the region, in addition to its economic success, good governance, and openness to globalization and support for moderate Islam. Kaabi also shed light on the main elements of soft power in the UAE, represented by education and knowledge, media management in the 21st century, in addition to the third element of continuous training to spread skills and develop them.

Bahrain Tightens Control on Oil Facilities Following Attack
Asharq Al Awsat/November 13/17/Bahrain’s Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Deputy Supreme Commander and First Deputy Prime Minister instructed the Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Works, Municipalities Affairs and Urban Planning and the Bahrain Petroleum Company (Bapco) to continue to implement security and maintenance measures for pipeline facilities across the Kingdom. The Crown Prince also called on addressing the needs of the people affected by the terrorist incident that targeted an oil pipeline in Buri village south of Manama on Friday evening. The Ministry of the Interior transferred a number of people from the village, where the terrorist attack took place, to a shelter in order to ensure their security and safety and provide them with the necessary care. He extended gratitude to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for its prompt cooperation in response to the attack that was instrumental to restoring normal flows of oil supplies between the two countries due to the ongoing collaboration between BAPCO and Aramco. This came during the 18th meeting of the Higher Committee for Natural Resources and Economic Security, which was chaired by the Crown Prince on Sunday at Riffa Palace.
Minister of Interior Lieutenant General Sheikh Rashid bin Abdullah Al Khalifa and Minister of Oil Sheikh Mohammed bin Khalifa Al Khalifa submitted a presentation on oil pipeline security and maintenance planning in the Kingdom of Bahrain. Prince Salman bin Hamad also noted the severity of the recent terrorist attack, which was a deliberate act to undermine the security of the Kingdom. On this note, HRH commended security authorities and Bapco whose collective actions succeeded in bringing the fire under control swiftly while preventing any casualties. He concluded by praising the efforts of local residents in assisting security authorities, noting that the authorities will continue to work hard to meet their needs in the aftermath of the attack. In this context, Bapco’s Corporate Communications Head Nawaf al-Ghanim said the company stepped up its security monitoring and patrols at the company's facilities and around the pipeline immediately after the blast.

Syrian Observatory: ISIS Regains Control of Albu Kamal
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 13/17/The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights announced on Monday that ISIS had regained control of the city of Albu Kamal, their last stronghold in Syria, after setting up an ambush against Iran-backed factions. The factions had last week declared that they had seized the city and forced ISIS to withdraw. Fighters from Lebanon’s “Hezbollah” in Syria, who joined forces with Iraqi militias crossing the border into Syria, were taken by surprise by terrorists hiding inside tunnels in the heart of the city they said they had taken on Wednesday, tribal leaders, residents and the Observatory said. “Hezbollah” and the Iraqi groups had launched a ground offensive on the city, in Syria’s eastern Deir al-Zour province where the Euphrates river meets, after months of mainly heavy Russian bombardment against the city that killed dozens of civilians and caused widespread destruction. “ISIS began surprise attacks with suicide bombers and rocket attacks after the Iranian factions were duped that it had left the city,” said Qahtan Ghanam al Ali, a tribal leader in touch with relatives. The Syrian regime forces had on Thursday declared victory over ISIS. It said the capture of Albu Kamal marked the collapse of the organization’s three-year reign in the region. “These militant attacks lead to big human losses in the ranks of fighters supporting the regime,” the UK-based Observatory said. On Sunday, jets believed to be Russian intensified their third day of bombing of Albu Kamal and its outskirts, with at least 50 civilians, mostly women and children, killed since Friday, the monitor and residents said. In retaliation for their losses, Iranian factions, who were forced to withdraw shelled villages east of the city where hundreds of families who fled Albu Kamal had found temporary refuge, the monitor continued. In one air strike on the town of Sukariya, east of the city, at least 30 people were killed, mostly women and children from three families, two former residents of the city in contact with relatives said. Military experts and Syrian opposition figures say Russia has stepped up a “scorched earth” policy in the province with its aerial bombing in recent months to secure a rapid military victory at any price for its military and its allies.

Houthis Threaten Saudi Arabia's Security with 79 Iranian Ballistic Missiles
Asharq Al Awsat/November 13/17/Houthi militias launched 70 ballistic missiles targeting the security and safety of Saudi Arabia, since the launch of the operation to restore legitimacy in Yemen, according to informed sources. The sources told Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper that the militias launched 14 missiles towards Jazan, 9 towards Nejran, and the remaining 56 targeted several areas in the center, south, and west of the kingdom. Even though none of the missiles succeeded in achieving their goals and were intercepted by Royal Saudi Air Defense Forces, the continuous attacks present a direct threat on Saudi Arabia's security. Saudi Arabia officially held Iran responsible for the manufacturing of the ballistic missile launched at Riyadh few days ago, marking the most recent accusation against Tehran for smuggling missiles, dismantling, and regrouping missiles in Yemen. Official figures showed that the attacks on the kingdom killed 95 civilians and injured 828 others. They also led to the displacement of 20,310 persons from Jazan, Nejran, and Dhahran al-Janub. In addition, Houthis launched thousands of mortar rounds, artillery, and Katyusha rockets at the Saudi southern border. Houthi militias also targeted mosques and hospitals in southern areas, and according to officials data, 20 facilities had been hit directly including 15 mosques and the remaining 5 missiles damaged hospitals in Jazan, Nejran, and Dhahran al-Janub. Houthis insurgents also shelled 906 schools, 31 of which were directly targeted and 875 were evacuated because of their locations in dangerous areas, thus denying about 66,000 students from their right to have access to education. In addition, Houthis' bombs targeted 2,825 houses, 76 public facilities, 87 farms, 272 shops, and 1,397 cars.Arab Coalition to Support Legitimacy in Yemen decided to temporary close all Yemen's air, sea and land entry points while allowing humanitarian and relief aid to enter the country. Saudi-led coalition closed all entry points after Tehran's involvement in producing missiles had been proven. Iran smuggled missiles exceeding 900 kilometers in range to the Houthis militias aiming to target Saudi Arabia and its vital interests. Arab coalition considered it a direct military aggression of Iran and could amount to be considered an act of war against Saudi Arabia. It reiterated the Kingdom's right to defend its people and territory in accordance with Charter of United Nations, and it asserted Saudi's right to respond to Iran's aggression at the right time and place. Saudi-led coalition spokesman Colonel Turki al-Maliki said that the missiles provided provided by Iran to Houthis were backed by Iranian experts and with the support of Lebanese Hezbollah. The spokesperson said that those militias are trying to control Bab el-Mandeb which is a dangerous threat to the regional security and stability and international navigation. Earlier, Saudi Arabia announced a list of 40 names of militia leaders and elements responsible for planning, executing and supporting various terrorist activities by Houthi terrorist group. The Kingdom also announced financial rewards of over $430 million for information leading to their arrest or whereabouts. The list included president of Political Council Saleh Ali al-Sammad, head of Revolutionary Committee of the Houthi armed militia Mohammed Ali Abdulkarim al-Houthi, Zakaria al-Shami, Abdullah Yahya al-Hakim, Abduqalik Bader al-Houthi, Mohammed al-Atifi, Yousef Ahssan al-Madani, Abdulqader al-Shami, Abdurab Jurfan, and Yahya al-Shami where a reward of $20 million had been allocated to anyone who gives information leading to their arrest.

EU Approves Arms Blockade against Venezuela
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 13/17/In an attempt to ramp up pressure against President Nicolas Maduro, the European Union approved on Monday economic sanctions and an arms embargo against the South American country. EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels did not target any individuals in their sanctions, leaving names for a later stage in an attempt to persuade Maduro to calm the situation. In a joint statement, all 28 EU ministers said the legal basis for individual travel bans to the European Union and the freezing of any assets in the bloc “will be used in a gradual and flexible manner and can be expanded”. The weapons ban would stop sales of military equipment that could be used for repression or surveillance of Venezuelans. The EU said in a statement that the measures can be reversed depending how Maduro reacts to the demands for more democracy in the South American nation. The ministers blamed regional elections last month for deepening the South American country’s crisis. In the statement, ministers said Venezuela’s October 15 regional elections were a turning point that had hardened the bloc’s position and saying they took place amid “reported numerous irregularities”.“Everything we do it aimed at seeking dialogue between the government and the opposition to find a democratic and peaceful solution,” Spain’s Foreign Minister Alfonso Dastis told reporters at a meeting with his counterparts where the sanctions decision was taken. Spain has long pushed for sanctions on those close to Maduro, whom Washington accuses of installing a dictatorship, but the EU has been divided over whom to target. The result of last month’s elections appeared to favor Maduro’s ruling Socialists, while polls had suggested the opposition would easily win a majority. In the end it won only a handful of governorships, according to the pro-government electoral board. EU ministers will decide whom to target with sanctions at a later stage, but said they would focus on security forces and government ministers and institutions accused of human rights violations and “the non-respect of democratic principles or the rule of law”. The United States last Thursday put financial sanctions on another 10 current and former Venezuelan officials over corruption and abuse of power allegations related to Maduro's crackdown on the opposition. The Trump administration has sanctioned a growing list of Venezuelan officials, including the government's top two debt negotiators, Economy Minister Simon Zerpa and Vice President Tareck El Aissami, who is accused of being a major drug trafficker. Washington has also barred US companies from lending new money to Venezuela because of human rights abuses committed during months of anti-government protests and Maduro's efforts to squash the opposition.

North Korean Soldier Shot while Defecting to South
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 13/17/A North Korean soldier was shot and wounded by his own side Monday while defecting to South Korea at the border truce village of Panmunjom, Seoul said. The soldier was shot in the shoulder and elbow and was picked up bleeding on the South side of a portion of the border known as the Joint Security Area. It is rare for the North's troops to defect at the truce village, a major tourist attraction and the only part of the frontier where forces from the two sides come face-to-face. "Our military has taken in a North Korean soldier after he crossed from a North Korea post towards our Freedom House," Seoul's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) said in a statement, referring to a building on the South side of the village which is bisected by the borderline. An JCS official quoted by Yonhap news agency said the soldier was evacuated to a private hospital by a UN helicopter.
The official said the South's soldiers heard a gunshot and then retrieved the unarmed and bleeding soldier in the mid-afternoon. No personal details have been released but his uniform suggested he was low-ranking, Yonhap said. The JCS official said the soldier had regained consciousness but declined comment on whether his injuries were life-threatening. Over the decades since the peninsula was divided, dozens of North Korean soldiers have fled to the South through the heavily fortified Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) along the rest of the border. Two North Korean soldiers came over to the South in June after crossing the frontier. More than 30,000 North Korean civilians have fled their homeland since the two nations came into being in 1948. But it is very rare for civilians to cross the closely guarded border with the South, which is fortified with minefields and barbed wire. Most flee across the North's porous frontier with China and then move on to a third country to seek passage to South Korea.

Egypt Arrests Man for Supporting Terrorist Elements
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 13/17/A suspected individual was arrested on Sunday over charges of supporting terrorist groups, the Egyptian army said in a statement adding that a vehicle was seized for carrying huge amounts of materials used in the manufacture of improvised explosive devices.
Egypt’s Military Spokesman Tamer Rifai said, in the statement, that five persons were also detained while they were watching army forces, pointing out that the army seized during security campaigns five vehicles with large quantities of narcotics, motorcycle parts and some materials used in manufacturing explosive devices. Law enforcement forces of the Third Field Army continued efforts to raid terrorist hotbeds in Central Sinai, the spokesman added. The Egyptian army along with the police have launched a large security campaign in Sinai since 2015, under the title "The Martyr's Right". Elements from the Second and the Third Field Army have been carrying out the campaign, supported by elements from the Thunderbolt and the Rapid Intervention Forces (RPD), in order to eliminate the armed organizations spreading there. The most prominent of these organizations is Ansar Bait al-Maqdis, which pledged allegiance to ISIS in November 2014 and changed its name to Wilayat Sinai. It used to target army and police personnel in operations, which killed dozens from both sides. Meanwhile, Egypt’s Defense Minister Sidqi Sobhy and his accompanying high-profile delegation left Cairo Sunday morning heading to India, in an official visit at an invitation from his Indian counterpart. During the visit, Sobhy is expected to hold several important meetings on the field of military and security cooperation and discuss efforts between the armed forces of both countries in many fields. On the other hand, Egypt’s Armed Forces celebrated the 103rd anniversary of the First World War on Sunday. The ceremony started with a speech by Chief of the Military Research Authority Major General Reda Fad, who reviewed the Authority’s efforts in documenting Egyptian military history as well as the army’s accomplishments in the First World War. Later, the ceremony’s organizers displayed a documentary about the participation of 1000 Egyptian soldiers among the Allies on the European front as well as others in Asia and Africa. The documentary presented the participating soldiers, who were buried in Commonwealth cemeteries as well as those who obtained the Victoria Medal. An exhibition of photographs and confidential documents regarding the Egyptian army’s participation in the war, which took place between 1914 and 1918, was held on the sidelines of the ceremony.

Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on November 13-14/17
The Missile and Thwarting the ‘Major Coup’
Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 13/17
There is no mystery surrounding the identity of the missile that targeted Riyadh. Saudi Arabia announced it, the American army confirmed it and its shrapnel provides evidence. There is no room for debate or discrepancies. It is a Houthi-Iranian missile. The Houthis were simply used as an excuse to launch it. Perhaps the incident itself reveals why Saudi Arabia had to wage the war in Yemen. It felt that the purpose of the Houthi coup was setting up an Iranian representative at the head of a missile arsenal, whose first and last target is threatening the security of the Kingdom. The missile is a blatant message written in Persian. It confirms the transition from a strategy of containment and suspicious strikes to clear and open attack. It is an open violation to what can be called a red line. Saudi Arabia cannot be lenient with an attack that violates its national security, stability and image.
It is not unusual for the Iranian regime to cross red lines. It is in its nature to go against international laws on respecting the sovereignty and borders of other countries and refraining from meddling in their internal affairs. The policy of instability is based on undermining red lines and international laws.
Any quick revision of Iranian policies over the past four decades clearly reveals that the regime is addicted to violating red lines. It has claimed the right to violate this map or that against the will of local authorities. It gave itself the right to impose facts on the ground that force those authorities to accept the Iranian intervention or be made to live with it. The excuses are many, from leading the deterrence movement to defending a minority that resembles it.
No other country in the region has committed this extraordinary number of violations against the borders of others, of reversing the equations there and altering local identities as much as Iran. A regional country has never before pushed sectarian minorities that resemble it to go against their national fabric to follow Iran under various names.
This has gone beyond being a random violation to being an attempt to impose a new reality, topple the sanctity of international borders and eliminate a national army’s right to be the sole armed force in its country. Iran has granted its ally in a certain country the right to violate the decisions of its government and dictate its choices on internal and foreign policies. The people of the region’s problem with Iran is that it is a revolution that refuses to transform into a normal country or fears this transformation. A normal country resides within its borders and keeps its armed forces within its territories. A normal country respects international resolutions, treaties and norms and addresses countries near and far in acceptable terms. A normal country allows its citizen to ask its government what it has done towards development, providing job opportunities and improving living conditions.
These are questions the Chinese president, for example, can clearly answer, while the Iranian one cannot. The problem the people in the region have with Iran is that they want it to become a normal country, but it does not. The policy of “exporting the revolution” is its only constant agenda, despite some obligatory breaks and over and under the table negotiations. The policy is constant and unchanging, whether it is executed under the smiles of Mohammed Khatami or Hassan Rouhani or under the frown of Ahmadinejad. The Iranian president, regardless of elections results that are carefully cooked in the regime kitchen according to the program’s constant needs, is in the end a senior employee in the Supreme Leader’s office. He is not the final policy-maker and he does not have the right to actually object against major decisions.
The problem the people in the region have with Iran is that it is not an attractive example for others to emulate in economic or other successes. Experience has shown that the current example cannot be replicated elsewhere, especially in ethnically diverse countries. The best example of this is that the rise of Iranian power in this country or that led to the break up of maps, fragmentation of national unity and planting of factors for long-term conflicts that tear nations apart. Can we, for example, guarantee the unity of Iraq if Iran had the first and final say in Baghdad? The same question can be asked in Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. It is clear that Iran is maintaining its policy of the “major coup” and seizing any opportunity to advance. It is clear that the comprehensive Iranian attack in the region escalated and accelerated after the fall of the wall that was the regime of Saddam Hussein.
There were several stops in this “major coup” project. On the eve of the US invasion of Iraq, an Iranian-Syrian meeting of senior officials in Tehran agreed to prevent the formation of a stable government in Baghdad amid the American presence. This did not prevent Ahmadinejad from becoming the first president from the region to visit Baghdad, its “Green Zone” and pass through American checkpoints.
After the assassination of Lebanese former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, the two sides also agreed to prevent the formation of stable government in Lebanon after the Syrian troops were forced to withdraw from the country and this is indeed what happened. There is also a point that many people have forgotten. Iran played the major role in weakening the Oslo Accords and launching the series of suicide operations, fueling the second intifada in the Palestinian territories. The results were the violation of the Accords and confrontation with Yasser Arafat.
Confronted with the “major coup” project, Saudi Arabia appeared as a major obstacle due to its Arab, Islamic and international weight. This is why Saudi Arabia was a constant target in its project. When it failed to target the Kingdom through Bahrain, Iran shifted its attention to Yemen, presenting a missile arsenal to the Houthis. It is likely that Iran is greatly concerned with the new Saudi image. The image of a determined state on the internal and external scenes. The image of close ties with the US and forging strategic economic partnerships with major countries. The scene of Saudi Arabia that launched a vast internal program for economic and social transformation that has started to achieve “great strides”, as described by Egyptian President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi. This reality quickened the desire to target Saudi Arabia. The missile opened a new chapter in Saudi-Iranian and Gulf-Iranian ties. Iran is committed to the policy of reshaping the region in order to occupy the top spot there, perhaps to become the major partner of the “Great Devil.” It is clear that the new Saudi Arabia chose a new approach to contain and deter the “major coup.” The Houthi-Iranian missile left Saudi Arabia with no choice but to invest all of its capabilities and relations to thwart the “coup.”It is a battle for the future of the region and its equations.

The Clash of Social Visions
David Brooks/The New York Times/Monday, 13 November, 2017
Every tax plan is a social vision and a statement of values. The social vision embedded in the House Republican tax plan is straightforward: to take money away from affluent professionals in blue states and to pump up corporations as the engine for broad economic growth.
The plan raises taxes on affluent professionals in blue states in several ways. First, it caps the mortgage interest deduction at loan principal of $500,000 instead of $1 million. According to an analysis by Christopher Ingraham at The Washington Post, only about 2.5 percent of Americans are paying off mortgages on homes valued over $500,000. These are mostly in places like California, New York, Boston and Washington, D.C. Second, the Republican plan cuts the deduction for state and local taxes. In 2014, according to The Economist, nearly 90 percent of the benefit from this deduction flowed to those making more than $100,000 a year. Once again, this tax hike hits mostly those in high-tax blue states. Third, the bill taxes investment income earned by private universities with at least 500 students and assets not directly tied to educational objectives of more than $100,000 per student. It imposes a 20 percent excise tax on nonprofit executives who make more than $1 million. This is the beginning of the full-bore Republican assault on the private universities, which are seen as the power centers of blue America — rich, money-hoarding institutions that widen inequality and house radical left-wing ideologies.
Fourth, the bill preserves high top marginal tax rates on individual income and even raises rates in some cases on the very rich. Over the past few decades when Republicans have talked about tax reform, they have generally talked about sharply cutting the top marginal rate to 25 percent or even 15 percent. But this plan keeps the top rate at 39.6 percent. And then it throws in some peculiarities. As The Wall Street Journal noted, under the plan a married couple would face a 45.6 percent top rate on earnings between $1.2 million and $1.6 million. These changes could leave the rich paying an astonishingly high percentage of their income in taxes. Scott Sumner of EconLog calculates that when you throw in state and local taxes, rich Californians would face a tax rate of 62.7 percent. The intellectual case for general corporate tax reform is strong. Countries across the world have been cutting corporate rates. The United States now has the highest corporate rates in the O.E.C.D. and the third-highest rates in the world. Cutting those rates would attract investment, unlock money trapped abroad and increase wages for many families. Economists vary widely in their estimates, but Larry Kotlikoff of Boston University estimates, on the high end, that a lower corporate tax rate could increase working-household income by roughly $3,500 annually. The Republicans have a social vision. The Republican vision is that the corporate sector is more important to a healthy America than the professional and nonprofit sector.
What, by contrast, is the Democratic vision? Are Democrats going to spend the next few months defending the mortgage interest deduction and other tax breaks for their own rich?t could be that economic policy is becoming tribal just like everything else in our politics.

OPEC Sees a Future With Fewer Cars
Nathanial Bullard/Bloomberg/Monday, 13 November/17
Among the revelations in OPEC's just published World Oil Outlook -- including, as Gadfly’s Liam Denning has explained, long-term demand for oil and shale production -- is a notable change in the cartel's assumptions about passenger cars. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries expects 137 million fewer of them on the road in 2040 than it did just two years ago. Admittedly, OPEC still expects a lot of cars – more than two billion of them – but that's 6 percent less than what it predicted in 2015. OPEC also lowered its projection for the global electric vehicle fleet in 2040, to 235 million from 266 million -- a 12 percent drop. That's about 300 million fewer electric vehicles than my Bloomberg New Energy Finance colleagues expect in the same year.
OPEC expects smooth and steady electric-vehicle growth of 2.7 percent a year, about the same rate the market has been experiencing. Of course, it’s relatively easy (and safe) to create models that look like an extension of present market behavior; it’s much harder (and riskier) to model change.
That's not to say smart thinkers cannot imagine a weird and different future. OPEC's Outlook authors offer no explanation for why they expect fewer passenger cars. But other people's predictions and observations fill in the picture.
Consider, for example, the role that autonomous vehicles are expected to play. Alphabet subsidiary Waymo is now testing fully autonomous vans on public streets – vans with no humans at the wheel. Such vehicles are bound to have accidents, however rarely. And societies may be tempted to wait for perfection before rolling them out widely. They shouldn’t. Autonomous vehicles will mark the end of the automotive era, in the words of legendary auto industry executive Bob Lutz. And life after driving will change cityscapes and everyone's daily experiences.
Autonomous vehicles could be a boon to OPEC, or a serious problem. If falling costs for driving mean more miles logged in cars powered by internal combustion engines, then OPEC benefits regardless of the number of cars on the road. If, however, those autonomous vehicles are electric, then added miles driven leaves oil demand the same, or sends it lower. In the meantime, the ride-hailing business is already altering the flow of city traffic, even as consumer choices force change at its leading companies. Uber hasn’t recovered its market share in San Francisco and New York since a #deleteUber social media campaign was staged earlier this year. But in a fresh effort to play nice with cities and regulators, the company's new chief executive says, “We do the right thing. Period.” Uber has even open-sourced its own artificial intelligence language, though there’s an element of self-interest in doing so.
Ride-hailing companies may have a bigger role to play as governments consider legalizing marijuana. British Columbia, for one, has received 136 ‘stakeholder submissions’ with concerns or suggested guidance for regulating recreational cannabis, including two – from the BC Trucking Association and the BC Automobile Association – that recommend regulations to ensure safe driving. Finally, pedestrians in cities are looking to reclaim space from automobiles, turning loud and exhaust-filled streets into walkways and shopping arcades. London, for instance, plans to turn Oxford Street into “the world’s best outdoor shopping experience.”OPEC doesn't have a row in its Outlook spreadsheet that predicts when cars will drive themselves, but autonomous vehicles, along with greater use of shared ride-hailing services and expanded pedestrian spaces all help explain why there's good reason to expect a future with fewer cars on the road.

Analysis Saudi Arabia's Leader Playing a High-stakes Game and Are Going Almost All In
Zvi Bar'el/Haaretz/November 13/17
https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/1.822394?utm_content=%2Fmiddle-east-news%2F1.822394&utm_medium=email&utm_source=smartfocus&utm_campaign=newsletter-daily
Wave of arrests meant to show country is taking on corruption, but make investors wary
The opening shot, which was fired a week ago with the arrest of 11 Saudi princes and ministers by orders of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has been followed up by the arrests of several dozen office holders, princes and public figures – and the freezing of over 1,200 bank accounts whose owners are suspected of illegal activity such as corruption and money laundering. It is not yet clear where Prince Mohammed is heading and how many senior officials in the Saudi leadership are on the “blacklist” on which he has been working for several weeks.
The general accepted belief among pundits and analysts in the Arab countries and the West is that the purge is designed mainly to strengthen Mohammed’s status and to remove political rivals, some of whom didn’t hide their criticism of his aggressive policy. At the same time, it’s clear that even the arrest of several tycoons, bankers and politicians cannot uproot the country’s endemic corruption. There will be need for profound reform – perhaps of the type that the circles of influential conservatives will be unable to tolerate – in order to change the culture of corruption that has spread to all the government institutions and has also spilled over into the private sector.
The worrisome question at this stage, however, is whether the crown prince, who apparently expects to replace his father during Salman’s lifetime rather than to wait until his death, has taken a calculated risk. Can the kingdom, which is run as a family oligarchy, accept the initiatives of the king and his son submissively – or will it experience a political and economic intifada that at best would stop the heir, and at worst, frighteningly, would lead to the replacement of the heads of the pyramid and bring about an era of instability to the kingdom.
This uncertainty has already caused Western analysts to suggest that their clients wait at least six months before deciding on new investments in Saudi Arabia. Companies operating in Arab countries and in the West, which are connected to the huge Saudi corporations whose heads were arrested this week, hastened to reassure their shareholders – explaining that this is a matter of internal affairs that are unconnected to the conduct and activity of the corporations and don’t affect them.
But these clarifications failed to moderate the plummeting shares of the widespread holdings of billionaire Alwaleed bin Talal, who only about two weeks ago spoke at an investors’ conference in Riyadh, and told them about future plans.
Nobody imagined at the time that the speaker would find himself under arrest in the Ritz Carlton Hotel, without access to phones and television, waiting together with the other detainees to hear what the Saudi government intends to do with him.
As head of the anti-corruption committee, which was hastily formed on the eve of the arrests, Mohammed bin Salman has very broad powers that include confiscating property and restoring to the government fraudulently obtained money. Don’t hold your breath waiting for a proper legal process by which the prosecution will collect testimony and present proof of money laundering and other acts of fraud. Such evidence, if presented, would harm a huge class of Saudi businessmen, as well as foreign companies that bribe intermediaries, most of them close to the royal court, since only they can grant the tenders to those with special interests. The assumption is that several billion dollars that have been confiscated from the bank accounts of the detainees will both convey the message and line the state coffers, which are short on cash.
Since the oil crisis, which erupted in 2014 and for which Saudi Arabia was largely to blame, the kingdom has frozen over $20 billion earmarked for projects in the fields of education, medicine and transportation. It owes billions to foreign companies, with only a quarter of the debt repaid this year. The Saudi Arabia 2030 vision, which is designed to vary the sources of revenue and to reduce dependence on oil, was launched with great fanfare, but it will require huge investments, and mainly changing the Saudi economy from dependence on 10 million foreign workers, to employing Saudi workers.
The problem is that the Saudis have been accustomed to refraining from menial labor for years, while the Saudi education system is not yet built for sophisticated jobs that require advanced professional training and a high level of technological know-how. Such a revolution may be possible, but it will take years before the advent of a generation that will be able to replace the foreign technicians, engineers, programmers and administrators.
Although the kingdom’s laws impose fines on companies and businesses that employ mostly foreign workers, and the country has also legislated strict amendments when it comes to granting work permits to foreigners – the Saudization of work is still in its infancy. Even the highly publicized arrests of foreign workers and sending them back to their countries of origin did not really succeed in reducing their numbers.
Saudi Arabia has also begun a privatization plan for government companies. The most important treasure, the national oil company Aramco, will be partially offered for public sale, which should yield about $100 billion. Also on the table are proposals to sell government-owned sports clubs and part of the stock exchange, and even to build movie theaters and places of entertainment at an investment of $2.7 billion. All these things look good on paper, but it’s hard to guess how these proposals will go down with strong conservative circles and the public.
The issue is that Saudi Arabia’s plans for development and for persuading foreign investors require political stability, without which the kingdom will find it difficult to vary its sources of income. Thus, even if we assume that the wave of arrests was meant to send a message that the war against corruption and the beginning of transparency are on – it is also worrying potential investors, who still don’t know what the country will look like in a week or year from now.

The U.S. Middle East Peace Plan?
Bassam Tawil/Gatestone Institute/November 13/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11353/middle-east-peace-plan
No American or European on the face of this earth could force a Palestinian leader to sign a peace treaty with Israel that would be rejected by an overwhelming majority of his people.
Trump's "ultimate solution" may result in some Arab countries signing peace treaties with Israel. These countries anyway have no real conflict with Israel. Why should there not be peace between Israel and Kuwait? Why should there not be peace between Israel and Oman? Do any of the Arab countries have a territorial dispute with Israel? The only "problem" the Arab countries have with Israel is the one concerning the Palestinians.
The question remains: how will the Saudis and the rest of the international community respond to ongoing Palestinian rejectionism and intransigence?
Who said that Palestinians have no respect for Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab countries? They do.
Palestinians have respect for the money of their Arab brethren. The respect they lack is for the heads of the Arab states, and the regimes and royal families there.
It is important to take this into consideration in light of the growing talk about Saudi Arabia's effort to help the Trump Administration market a comprehensive peace plan for the Middle East, the details of which remain intriguingly mysterious.
Last week, the Saudis unexpectedly summoned Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas to Riyadh for talks on Trump's "ultimate solution" for the Israeli-Arab conflict, reportedly being promoted by Jared Kushner.
According to unconfirmed reports, the Saudis pressured Abbas to endorse the Trump Administration's "peace plan." Abbas was reportedly told that he had no choice but to accept the plan or resign. At this stage, it remains unclear how Abbas responded to the Saudi "ultimatum."
Last week, the Saudis unexpectedly summoned Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to Riyadh for talks on Trump's "ultimate solution" for the Israeli-Arab conflict. Abbas was reportedly told that he had no choice but to accept the plan or resign. Pictured: Abbas on a previous visit to Saudi Arabia, on February 23, 2015, meeting with Saudi King Salman.
If true, the Saudi "ultimatum" to Abbas is tantamount to asking him to sign his death warrant. Abbas cannot afford to be seen by his people as being in collusion with an American "peace plan" that does not comply completely with their demands. Abbas has repeatedly made it clear that he will not accept anything less than a sovereign Palestinian state on all the pre-1967 lands, including east Jerusalem. He has also emphasized that the Palestinians will never give up the "right of return" for millions of "refugees" to their former homes inside Israel. Moreover, Abbas has clarified that the Palestinians will not accept the presence of any Israeli in their future Palestinian state.
Abbas has done his dirty work well. He knows that he cannot come back to his people with anything less than what he promised them. He knows that his people have been radicalized to the point that they will not agree to any concessions or compromise with Israel.
And who is responsible for this radicalization? Abbas and other Palestinian leaders, who continue unendingly to tell their people through the media, discourse and mosques that any concession to Israel constitutes treason, pure and simple.
So it would be naïve to think that Saudi Arabia or any other Arab country would be able to strong-arm any Palestinian leader to accept a "peace plan" that requires the Palestinians to make concessions to Israel. Abbas may have much respect for the ambitious and savvy young crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman. This respect, however, certainly stops at the border of the political suicide – and extreme personal risk -- from Abbas's point of view.
Abbas is now caught between two choices, both disastrous: On the one hand, he needs the political backing of his Arab brothers. This is the most he can expect from the Arab countries, most of whom do not give the Palestinians a penny. It is worth noting that, by and large, the Arab countries discarded the Palestinians after the PLO and Yasser Arafat openly supported Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Kuwait was one of several Gulf countries that used to provide the Palestinians with billions of dollars a year. No more.
Since then, the Palestinians have been almost entirely dependent on American and European financial aid. It is safe to assume, then, that the US and EU have more leverage with the Palestinians than most Arab countries.
Nevertheless, no American or European on the face of this Earth could force a Palestinian leader to sign a peace treaty with Israel that would be rejected by an overwhelming majority of his people.
Trump's "ultimate solution" may result in some Arab countries signing peace treaties with Israel. These countries anyway have no real conflict with Israel. Why should there not be peace between Israel and Kuwait? Why should there not be peace between Israel and Oman? Do any of the Arab countries have a territorial dispute with Israel? The only "problem" the Arab countries have with Israel is the one concerning the Palestinians.
For now, it appears that the vast majority of Arab regimes no longer care about the Palestinians and their leaders. The Palestinians despise the Arab leaders as much as they despise each other. It is a mutual feeling. The Palestinians particularly despise any Arab leader who is aligned with the US. They do not consider the US an honest broker in the Israeli-Arab conflict. The Palestinians, in fact, view the US as being "biased" in favor of Israel, regardless of whether the man sitting in the Oval Office is a Democrat or Republican.
The Saudi crown prince is viewed by Palestinians as a US ally. His close relations with Jared Kushner are seen with suspicion not only by Palestinians, but by many other Arabs as well. Palestinian political analysts such as Faisal Abu Khadra believe that the Palestinian leadership should prepare itself to face the "mysterious" Trump "peace plan." They are skeptical that the plan would meet the demands of the Palestinians.
The Palestinians appear to be united in rejecting the Trump Administration's effort to "impose" a solution on them. They are convinced that the Americans, with the help of Saudi Arabia and some Arab countries, are working towards "liquidating" the Palestinian cause. Abbas and his rivals in Hamas now find themselves dreading the US administration's "peace plan."
Like lemmings drawn to the sea, the Palestinians seem to be marching towards yet another scenario where they "never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." The question remains: how will the Saudis and the rest of the international community respond to ongoing Palestinian rejectionism and intransigence?
**Bassam Tawil, a Muslim, is based in the Middle East.
© 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.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11353/middle-east-peace-plan

U.S. Military: More Fake News from the New York Times
Peter Huessy/Gatestone Institute/November 13/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11335/us-military-new-york-times
While it was true, for example, that the Soviets under SALT II had to dismantle many missiles, a point the New York Times emphasized, what was also true was that the remaining silos under the terms of the treaty became the homes of new, vastly more powerful missiles with far more warheads.
President Reagan pursued a strategy of peace through strength and building a strong nuclear deterrent. While simultaneously seeking major arms reductions, he modernized what was to be kept. He then in 1983 added the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), to enhance further the U.S. deterrent capability and undermine the Soviet push for first-strike threats. The Soviets had no diplomatic answer to nuclear reductions and could not economically match U.S. modernization.
Even at such low levels, the U.S. deterrent holds at risk those military assets most important to our adversaries, the destruction of which would cripple them if they attacked the United States first. Radically changing this successful formula, as the Times wants the U.S. to do, would be a reckless, dangerous mistake.
The New York Times appears convinced the United States has plans to hurl 4000 nuclear warheads at Russian cities in the event deterrence breaks down, a retaliatory threat they claim is far beyond what is needed to keep the peace. Instead, they call for a unilateral cut in our nuclear force to roughly 1000.
For some reason, the Times did not get the memo some half-century ago that the United States deterrent policy does not target an adversary's cities. Nor are the number of warheads in the American deployed nuclear arsenal anywhere near the 4000 claimed by the Times.
They were reduced by half that number in 2002 under the Moscow Treaty, and to even lower by the 2010 New START Treaty.
The Times, believing American nuclear deterrent policy is still based on burning down to the ground our adversary's cities, calls for the country to keep no more than a few hundred warheads to incinerate either Russian or Chinese cities, and roughly no more than a total of 1100 warheads to raze the cities of an expansive list of our nuclear-armed enemies.
The Times's glaring error is its failure to grasp that since the late 1960's, the United States deterrent policy with respect to the Soviet Union and now Russia has been one of retaliating against or otherwise holding at risk the military capabilities of our enemies, and moving completely away from relying upon the assured destruction of cities that had earlier been adopted as part of U.S. nuclear policy.
Targeting civilian populations with nuclear weapons has long been held by America's leaders to be both an immoral and ineffective deterrent policy. Deterrence requires holding at risk what tyrannical societies value most -- and that is their military power, not their impoverished citizens.
Despite these facts, the Times claims the alleged current American "stockpile" of 4000 warheads the U.S. now has is far too high and can safely be reduced unilaterally, as the U.S. supposedly has more than enough warheads to target the cities of all our adversaries. Here the Times is adopting the most radical position of the arms control community.
In graphic displays of ostensibly U.S. surplus warheads, the Times calculates -- absurdly -- that the United States needs precisely 1103 warheads to fire at all our adversaries to maintain deterrence, which they define as killing 25% of our adversary's populations.
The Times does acknowledge that American nuclear weapons have already been significantly reduced since the height of the Cold War. The United States has, in fact, cut its deployed, strategic, nuclear, in-the-field weapons from around 13,000 in 1991, to 1550 warheads today, a 90% reduction.
Ironically, at any one time, roughly 1000 warheads -- not the 4000 the Times conjures up -- might be on alert and be available for retaliation. There is no possible way we could launch 4000 warheads at Russia or any adversary.
To get to 4000, after the initial warheads fall to their targets, and the delivery missiles burn up in the atmosphere while returning to earth, we would have to find hundreds of missiles we do not have, place them in our empty silos and submarine launch tubes, load up more warheads and launch them again.
Can we do this? Of course not. So, what are the real facts of its deterrent capability?
The U.S. deterrent policy currently holds at risk the critical military capabilities of our adversaries. U.S. national leaders -- in this instance, President Barack Obama -- determined in the 2010 nuclear posture review and the associated guidance to America's nuclear commanders that this is what the U.S. needs for deterrence. The nuclear force the U.S. now has was determined to be necessary by the previous administration and previous Presidents. At this time, a new nuclear posture review is examining those requirements; the third such review in the past 15 years.
Moreover, the number of warheads the U.S. has deployed -- on station -- in its nuclear deterrent, flow only from the President's determination, not from some false notion that to deter adversaries, it is necessary to kill millions of people.
Ironically, writers at the Times have not always thought 1000 weapons were sufficient to deter America's adversaries or that any deployment number above that level was unnecessary. On May 2, 1982, they ran an column by Senator Gary Hart that chastised the Reagan administration for proposing major reductions in nuclear weapons, and argued that the defunct 1979 SALT II treaty between the United States and Soviet Union -- withdrawn from the Senate by the Carter administration after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan -- should nonetheless be agreed to as it would supposedly "slow Soviet acquisition of additional nuclear weapons."
As one nuclear expert has noted, the United States Senate Armed Services Committee, under the control of the Democratic majority, disagreed.
It unanimously concluded in 1979 that SALT II was not in the United States' "national security interests" -- precisely because it would not slow the build-up in Soviet nuclear weapons.
The chief criticism of the treaty, in fact, to which the Times seemed oblivious, was that SALT II would permit a destabilizing vast modernization and expansion of Soviet strategic forces, hardly the "arms control" slow-down the Times would claim was anticipated. The Times appeared to not be aware such growth was allowed, or perhaps the editors were taken in by the "arms control" propaganda of the treaty's proponents.
A Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile in its silo in Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, circa 1980. (Image source: U.S. Department of Defense)
While it is true, for example, that the Soviets under SALT II had to dismantle many missiles, a point the Times emphasized, what was also true was that the remaining silos under the terms of the treaty became the homes of new, vastly more powerful missiles with a lot more warheads. Even if the Soviets adhered to the terms of the 1979 SALT II deal, the Soviets could double the number of their strategic warheads, from 5,000 in 1979 to 9,200 by 1986 and to 12,000 by 1990.
Under the SALT framework, by the end of the Cold War, the Soviets could build more than 13,000 deployed strategic nuclear warheads, hardly characteristic of any "arms control" within the plain meaning of the term.
Reagan, on the other hand, sought real arms control -- reductions -- and spoke about it as early as 1977. As president, he persisted in pushing a strategy of peace through strength, and building a strong nuclear deterrent. While simultaneously seeking major arms reductions, he modernized what was to be kept. He then added the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in 1983, to further enhance our deterrent capability and undermine the Soviet push for first strike threats.
While the SALT treaties in 1972 and 1979 were agreements to build-up both the Soviets' and Americans' nuclear weapons to the level both had already planned to reach, the START process was a revolutionary change to build-down -- reducing while modernizing.
But most importantly, while SALT led to dangerous instabilities with very large multiple warhead missiles dominating the Soviet force, START sought to channel modernization to vastly fewer warheads and more nuclear warheads based on submarines at sea, only single warhead missiles on land, and flexible bomber rules for the only recallable -- air -- portion of the U.S. Triad.
Coupled with that was a major push to challenge the Soviets to eliminate all their SS-20 medium range INF nuclear armed missiles in Europe and Asia under a zero-zero option.
Ironically, all these ideas were opposed by the then-Soviet inspired and popular "nuclear freeze" which, at the time, the New York Times embraced.
What was the result of the Reagan revolution in strategic thinking and doctrine of peace through strength?
Did it work? Yes, the U.S. won the Cold War because President Reagan combined military reductions while pushing for modernization, including SDI. The Soviets had no diplomatic answer to nuclear reductions and could not economically match U.S. modernization.
Bertrand Russell once said that people "often defend most passionately those opinions for which they have the least factual basis". The Times certainly does. It apparently believes there is a US deterrent policy of burning cities to the ground, but the policy does not exist.
The Times supported treaties such as SALT I and II that increased warheads dramatically, but later complained such numbers were far in excessive of what was needed. Russia then labeled as unfair Reagan's proposals to reduce warhead levels that the Times said were excessive.
The United States nuclear arsenal is the smallest it has been since the early Eisenhower administration.
Even at such low levels, the U.S. deterrent holds at risk those military assets most important to our adversaries, the destruction of which would cripple them if they attacked the United States first. That ability has been the essence of American nuclear deterrent policy for at least the past half century -- and it has worked perfectly. Radically changing that successful formula, as the Times wants the U.S. to do, would be a reckless, dangerous mistake.
**Dr. Peter Huessy is President of GeoStrategic Analysis, a defense consulting firm he founded in 1981, as well as Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. He was also for 20 years, the senior defense consultant at the National Defense University Foundation.
© 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.