LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
November 22/17
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias/english.november22.17.htm 

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

Bible Quotations
Hate even the clothing defiled by their flesh
The Letter from Jude /Chapter 01/17-25/But you, beloved, remember the words which have been spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. They said to you that “In the last time there will be mockers, walking after their own ungodly lusts.” These are they who cause divisions, and are sensual, not having the Spirit. But you, beloved, keep building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit. Keep yourselves in God’s love, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life. On some have compassion, making a distinction, and some save, snatching them out of the fire with fear, hating even the clothing stained by the flesh. 4 Now to him who is able to keep them‡ from stumbling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory in great joy, to God our Savior, who alone is wise, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and forever. Amen.

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on November 21-221/17
Nothingburger in Lebanon/Dr.Walid Phares DC/Face Book/November 21/17
Hariri to Return, but What Next/Agence France Presse/November 21/17/
Saudi 'Purge' a Re-Branding Attempt to Launch a 'Second Kingdom'
Haisam Hassanein and Wesam Hassanein/The Cipher Brief/November 19/17
Sunnis and Shia in Bahrain: New Survey Shows Both Conflict and Consensus
David Pollock/the Washington Institute/November 20/17
Palestinians: If You Do Not Give Us Everything, We Cannot Trust You
Bassam Tawil/Gatestone Institute/November 21/2017
Turkey Islamizes Denmark with More Mosques/Judith Bergman/Gatestone Institute/November 21/2017
On Recent Saudi Reforms: A Conversation/Nozhan Etezadosaltaneh/International Policy Digest/November 21/201
Tehran Is Winning the War for Control of the Middle East/Jonathan Spyer/Foreign Policy/November 21/17

Titles For Latest LCCC Lebanese Related News published on November 21-221/17
Nothingburger in Lebanon
Aoun: Lebanon Won't Bow, PM Return a Matter of National Duty, Dignity
Hariri Arrives in Beirut after Talks in Egypt, Cyprus
Hariri Says Rouhani Can't Tell Lebanese What to Do, Hails Bin Salman
Trump Voices Support for Lebanon in Cables to Aoun, Berri
Aoun Receives Greeting Cables from Saudi King, Crown Prince
Al Sisi contacts Aoun, highlights necessity to preserve stability
Lebanon's army chief Asks Troops For Readiness At Israel Border
ISF Intelligence Branch Arrests Five Nusra Members
Hariri Reminds of 'Lebanon First' Policy on Pierre Gemayel Anniversary
Hariri to Return, but What Next?
Gen. Aoun Orders Army to Protect Stability to Allow New 'Political Solutions'
Report: Egypt, France Seeking to Convince Saudi to 'Keep Hariri in His Post'
Hariri's Resignation Uncertain as Aoun Vows Respect for Dissociation Policy

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 21-221/17
Putin Meets Assad ahead of Syria Talks with Turkey and Iran
Car Bomb Kills 21 in Town North of Baghdad
Years of Fruitless Efforts to End Syrian Conflict
Putin Hails Assad for 'Fighting Terrorists'
Moscow Says 'Active' Syria Military Operations Nearing End
Egyptian ambassador To Israel: Chaos Will Break Out Without Peace With The Palestinians
Iran Declares 'Victory' over IS
Germany Struggles to Emerge from Crisis after Govt. Talks Collapse

Latest Lebanese Related News published on November 21-221/17
Nothingburger in Lebanon?
Dr.Walid Phares DC/Face Book/November 21/17
In discussions in Washington's circles focusing on Lebanon, there are some who believe that because of lack of strategic vision the results of the next phase after Hariri resignation, could produce a "nothingburger." The proponents of this theory argues that if the whole strategy of the next opposition is to organize for the next legislative election, and try to get a majority in parliament so that they can form a new cabinet; this path was tried before. Several times the public in Lebanon placed a majority in parliament but the cabinets formed after have succumbed to Hezbollah's pressure. There is no evidence yet that the "next opposition" will act as a real "Cedars Revolution," argue the proponents. But some believe that maybe this time it will be different. Tanshuf...

Aoun: Lebanon Won't Bow, PM Return a Matter of National Duty, Dignity
Naharnet/November 21/17/President Michel Aoun on Tuesday stressed that Lebanon “will not bow to any opinion, advice or decision pushing it towards internal strife,” noting that “those who want Lebanon’s welfare must help it immunize its unity because it is its security valve.”“Were we supposed to disregard the issue of returning our premier to his country, which was a matter of national duty that was imposed on us?… It was a matter of the dignity of a nation and its people, who showed unique national cohesion,” said Aoun in an address to the nation on the eve of Lebanon’s Independence Day.
Addressing the Arab countries, Aoun said that “dealing with Lebanon requires a lot of wisdom and prudence, and anything to the contrary would push it into a blaze.”“Despite everything that has happened, our hopes are still pinned on the Arab League, which should take an initiative based on the principles, goals and spirit of its charter, in order to preserve itself and its member states,” the president added. He also called on the international community to “safeguard stability in Lebanon through the full implementation of international justice,” lamenting that “Lebanon has dissociated itself” from regional conflicts but that “the others have not dissociated themselves or their influence from it.” “We are still wondering: from where did terrorism come into Lebanon? Who sent it? Who financed it? Who trained it? And why?” Aoun added, referring to the jihadist Islamic State and al-Nusra Front groups who were recently ousted from the eastern border region and who were responsible for several deadly bombings inside the country. Lebanon has been gripped in a political crisis since Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced a surprise resignation earlier this month from Riyadh, lambasting Iran and Hizbullah for their policies in Lebanon and the region.
The shock announcement sparked worries that Lebanon would be caught up in the spiraling tensions between Riyadh and Tehran, which back opposing political and armed groups across the region. After resigning, Hariri spent two more weeks in Saudi Arabia amid rumors he was under de facto house arrest there, before traveling to Paris on Saturday. There, he pledged he would be in Lebanon in time to mark its independence day on Wednesday. Aoun is yet to accept Hariri's resignation, which was not submitted in a formal manner.

Hariri Arrives in Beirut after Talks in Egypt, Cyprus
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 21/17/
Prime Minister Saad Hariri arrived late on Tuesday at Beirut's Rafik Hariri International Airport, returning to a country which has been reeling from his surprise resignation since he announced it from Riyadh on November 4. Hariri arrived in Beirut from Cyprus, where he met with Cypriot President Nikos Anastasides. Hariri's media office said he earlier met in Cairo with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who has sought to defuse the tensions between Hariri's sponsors in Saudi Arabia and the powerful Lebanese Hizbullah and its Iranian patrons. Hariri said he and Sisi discussed the need for "distancing oneself from regional policies," in an apparent reference to the power struggle between Saudi Arabia and Iran that has played out in Lebanon."Tomorrow we have Independence Day in Lebanon, God willing it will be for all Lebanese. Like I said in Paris, my political position will be (clarified) in Lebanon," he said.
A statement from the Egyptian presidency said Sisi "affirmed the need for all parties in Lebanon to reach a consensus... and the rejection of foreign interference in Lebanese internal affairs."
Hariri's arrival in Beirut on Tuesday evening follows two weeks of deep uncertainty after he announced his resignation on November 4 in a speech from Saudi Arabia.Sisi's office said he received a phone call from President Michel Aoun in which they discussed "the importance of preserving Lebanon's stability and elevating Lebanon's national interests."Hariri later flew from Egypt to Cyprus to meet President Anastasiades for talks on "the latest developments in Lebanon and the region," the premier's office said. Cyprus government spokesman Nicos Christodoulides tweeted that the two leaders had a "warm and fruitful" meeting. Hariri's failure to return to Lebanon since his resignation had sparked rumors he was being held in Riyadh against his will, which both he and Saudi officials have denied.Speaking after talks in Paris on Saturday with French President Emmanuel Macron, who is also seeking to broker a way out of the crisis, Hariri said he would "make known my position" once back in Beirut.
Hariri's mysterious decision to step down -- which Aoun has refused to accept while he remains abroad -- has raised fears over Lebanon's fragile democracy. In his resignation speech he accused Saudi Arabia's arch-rival Iran and Hizbullah of destabilizing Lebanon. Hariri -- whose father, former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, was killed in a 2005 car bombing blamed on Hizbullah -- took over last year as head of a shaky national unity government which includes the powerful Shiite movement. A dual Saudi citizen who has previously enjoyed Riyadh's backing, he resigned saying he feared for his life.
Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir meanwhile insisted from Madrid on Friday that "unless Hizbullah disarms and becomes a political party, Lebanon will be held hostage by Hizbullah and, by extension, Iran.”Battle for influence . Hariri's resignation was widely seen as an escalation of the battle for influence between Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran, which back opposing sides in the conflicts in Syria and Yemen. His attempt to step down also coincides with a purge of more than 200 Saudi princes, ministers and businessmen. Riyadh on Saturday recalled its ambassador to Berlin in protest at comments by Germany's Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel which were interpreted as a suggestion that Hariri acted under Saudi orders. Without mentioning Saudi Arabia directly, Gabriel had said Thursday that he shared concerns about the threat of instability and bloodshed in Lebanon and warned against "adventurism.""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," he said in the week. Germany's foreign ministry had yet to comment on the row, but in a statement it welcomed Hariri's "imminent return to Lebanon."
France, which held mandate power over Lebanon for the first half of the 20th century, plans to bring together international support for Lebanon, depending on how the situation develops. The French president has also telephoned his counterparts in the U.S. and Egypt, Donald Trump and Sisi, as well as the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman and U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to discuss "the situation in the Middle East." He and Trump "agreed on the need to work with allies to counter Hizbullah’s and Iran's destabilizing activities in the region," according to a White House statement Saturday.
However, Macron told reporters Friday that France wanted "dialogue" with Iran and aimed to "build peace… not to choose one side over another."'

Hariri Says Rouhani Can't Tell Lebanese What to Do, Hails Bin Salman
Naharnet/November 21/17/Prime Minister Saad Hariri has stressed that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani does not have the right to dictate decisions to the Lebanese, as he hailed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. “Rouhani can't tell us what to do. Iran is trying to show its strength in the region and a part of this is the propaganda that the Iranians are practicing to show that they are in control in Syria, but where is this control?” Hariri told Saudi Arabia's Arrajol magazine, in his first interview in Paris since arriving there from Riyadh.Hariri also spoke about his relation with Saudi Arabia's powerful and young crown prince. “The crown prince has a vision and only a few leaders possess a vision. Prince Mohammed bin Salman is a man of vision and he has capabilities and resolve and he is working to meet the challenges,” the premier added. Hariri, whose resignation from Saudi Arabia earlier this month caused widespread consternation, is set to return to Beirut on Wednesday as part of a deal brokered by France. After quitting he spent some two weeks holed up in Riyadh, prompting accusations from political rivals that he was being “detained” by the Saudis. Hariri strongly denied he was being held against his will and flew to Paris on the weekend to meet President Emmanuel Macron.

Trump Voices Support for Lebanon in Cables to Aoun, Berri
Naharnet/November 21/17/U.S. President Donald Trump has pledged that Washington will continue to support Lebanon's stability and sovereignty.
Trump's stance was expressed in cables greeting President Michel Aoun and Speaker Nabih Berri on Lebanon's Independence Day. In his remarks to Aoun, the U.S. leader described Lebanon as a strong partner for the United States in the fight against terrorism and violent extremism, vowing that the U.S. will carry on with supporting Lebanon's stability, independence and sovereignty. In his cable to Berri, Trump underscored that Washington greatly appreciates the cultural, familial, political and economic ties between the two countries and peoples. He also promised to stand firmly by Lebanon as it seeks to protect its stability and sovereignty. Lebanon has been gripped in a political crisis since Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced a surprise resignation earlier this month from Riyadh, lambasting Iran and Hizbullah for their policies in Lebanon and the region.The shock announcement sparked worries that Lebanon would be caught up in the spiraling tensions between Riyadh and Tehran, which back opposing political and armed groups across the region.  After resigning, Hariri spent two more weeks in Saudi Arabia amid rumors he was under de facto house arrest there, before traveling to Paris on Saturday. There, he pledged he would be in Lebanon in time to mark its independence day on Wednesday.Aoun is yet to accept Hariri's resignation, which was not submitted in a formal manner.

Aoun Receives Greeting Cables from Saudi King, Crown Prince
Naharnet/November 21/17/President Michel Aoun on Tuesday received cables greeting him on Lebanon's Independence Day from Saudi Arabia's King Salman bin Abdul Aziz and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The letters come amid high tensions between Lebanon and the kingdom over Hizbullah's role in the country and the region and in the wake of Prime Minister Saad Hariri's shock resignation from Riyadh. King Salman wished good health and happiness to the president and advancement and prosperity to the Lebanese people. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for his part wished “further advancement and prosperity for the Lebanese government and people.”

Al Sisi contacts Aoun, highlights necessity to preserve stability
Tue 21 Nov 2017/NNA - President of the republic, Michel Aoun, on Tuesday received a phone call from his Egyptian counterpart Abdul Fattah al-Sisi, with talks featuring high on latest developments. During the contact, Aoun thanked the Egyptian President for the concern he had shown in order to resolve the crisis following the sudden resignation of Prime Minister Saad Hariri. Both men highlighted the necessity to preserve political and security stability in Lebanon. They also agreed to carry on the two-pronged consultations.

Lebanon's army chief Asks Troops For Readiness At Israel Border
Jerusalem Post/November 21/17/BEIRUT - Lebanon's army chief urged "full readiness" at the southern border to face the "threats of the Israeli enemy and its violations," the army said in a tweet on Tuesday. Army Commander General Joseph Aoun called on soldiers to be ever vigilant for the "good implementation" of the UN resolution 1701 to "preserve stability" at the border with Israel. The Lebanese army is responsible for security on its side of the border under the resolution that ended the 2006 war between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah. His remarks came a day after Lebanese president Michel Aoun appeared to defend Hezbollah as necessary to resist Israel, after an Arab League statement accused the group of terrorism and noted it is part of Lebanon's coalition government. "Israeli targeting still continues and it is the right of the Lebanese to resist it and foil its plans by all available means," the President's office quoted him as saying in a Tweet. Saudi Arabia, a regional rival of Iran, opposes Hezbollah's role as a military force in Syria and has accused it of helping the Houthi group in Yemen and militants in Bahrain. "It's nonsense," a senior Israeli official, who requested anonymity, told Reuters in response to Lebanon's army commander General Joseph Aoun urging "full readiness" at the southern border to face "threats of the Israeli enemy and its violations."Separately, the Israeli military said it had been holding a drill near Israel's border with Syria since Sunday.  The Arab League met on Sunday to discuss what it called Iranian interference in Arab countries, and accused Tehran's ally Hezbollah of terrorism. Aoun said that Lebanon could not accept suggestions that its government was a partner in acts of terrorism, another Tweet quoted him as saying after meeting Arab League Secretary General Ahmed Aboul Gheit in Beirut. Aboul Gheit said in Beirut that nobody was accusing Lebanon's government of terrorism or wanted to harm Lebanon. "One of the ruling partners is accused of this... It is an indirect means of asking the Lebanese state to talk to this partner and convince them to restrain their acts on Arab land," he said. "Everyone acknowledges the particularity of the Lebanese situation." Lebanon faces a political crisis after its prime minister Saad Hariri suddenly resigned on November 4 in a statement broadcast from Saudi Arabia. His resignation statement accused Iran and Hezbollah of "sowing strife" in Arab countries.

ISF Intelligence Branch Arrests Five Nusra Members
Naharnet/November 21/17/The Internal Security Forces Intelligence Branch on Tuesday announced the arrest of five members of the jihadist al-Nusra Front group in the Mount Lebanon governorate. “As part of its efforts to detect and pursue terrorist organizations operating within Lebanese territory, and after obtaining information about the presence of terrorist cells operating in the Mount Lebanon governorate and using social media to achieve their terrorist goals, the ISF Intelligence Branch managed to arrest five al-Nusra Front members in separate raids,” an ISF statement said. It said those arrested were five Syrian young men whose ages range from 17 to 19 years. “During interrogation, they confessed to having fought alongside al-Nusra Front in Syria in the past,” the ISF added. “It turned out that they had entered Lebanon illegally using fake identification papers and that they were communicating and coordinating with Idlib-based leaders of the aforementioned group, while also using social networking websites to spread jihadist ideology and recruit a number of Syrians who live in Lebanon,” the statement said. The five suspects were later referred to the relevant judicial authorities.

Hariri Reminds of 'Lebanon First' Policy on Pierre Gemayel Anniversary
Naharnet/November 21/17/Prime Minister Saad Hariri reminded Tuesday of the March 14 camp's 'Lebanon First' slogan, on the 11th anniversary of the assassination of industry minister Pierre Gemayel. “On the anniversary of the martyrdom of the friend and brother Pierre Amin Gemayel, we reiterate our loyalty to his and our slogan: #Lebanon_First. I will never forget how loyal you were, Pierre!” Hariri tweeted.On November 21, 2006, unknown gunmen opened fired at close range on Gemayel's car in the Northern Metn district of Jdeideh, killing the then industry minister and his bodyguard, Samir Chartouni.

Hariri to Return, but What Next?
Agence France Presse/November 21/17/
Prime Minister Saad Hariri, whose resignation from Saudi Arabia earlier this month caused widespread consternation, is set to return to Beirut on Wednesday as part of a deal brokered by France. But will his resignation stand, forcing negotiations on a new government, or might he withdraw the decision? Here are some of the possible scenarios in the coming days:
Hariri's resignation stands
Under Lebanon's constitution, the president is bound to accept a prime minister's resignation however it is tendered, Lebanese constitutional expert Edmond Rizk told the AFP news agency. "The Lebanese constitution doesn't talk about the nature of a resignation. It just stipulates that if the head of government resigns, then the government has resigned," Rizk said.Such a decision automatically brings down the government, and the president then engages in consultations to select a new prime minister to form a cabinet. Although it is not outlined in the constitution, Rizk said, custom dictates that "this resignation is supposed to be submitted to the president of the republic." Hariri announced he was stepping down in a television broadcast from Riyadh on November 4, but President Michel Aoun has insisted he will not officially accept it before Hariri presents his decision in person. The shock resignation from outside the country is unprecedented in Lebanese history, and provoked wild speculation that Hariri had stepped down under Saudi pressure and was even being detained. Aoun himself accused Riyadh of holding Hariri, and reiterated that he would not consider the premier's resignation until they were able to meet.
In Paris, Hariri acknowledged he would see Aoun once back in Beirut to discuss his decision. "As you know I have resigned, and we will discuss that in Lebanon," he told reporters.
Forming a new government
If Hariri's resignation stands, consultations will need to begin on who will form a new government, just under a year after the last one was agreed.
In the interim, the resigned prime minister and cabinet continue functioning in a "caretaker" role until a new government is announced. Forming a government in Lebanon usually takes months of wrangling among the country's deeply divided political factions. On the one side is Hariri's bloc, backed by Saudi Arabia and deeply suspicious of Iranian influence in the country and the broader region.
On the other is a coalition led by Iran-backed Hizbullah, which includes Aoun and his allies. A deal between Hariri and Aoun across political lines allowed the formation of the last government in December 2016, but it came after a stalemate that left the country without a president for two-and-a-half years. The smoothest scenario would see Aoun name Hariri as prime minister again, with widespread backing from Lebanon's political class, as part of a similar deal to the 2016 settlement. "If Hariri's consultations lead to a new government, that would be a way out," said Rizk.
But a potential obstacle lies in Hariri's harsh criticism of Hizbullah, whom he blasted in his resignation statement but whose support he would need to pull together a new cabinet. If Hariri is unwilling, or unable, to form a government, Aoun could then name a different prime minister.
Hariri withdraws resignation. A final scenario, and perhaps the least destabilizing for the country, would be for Hariri to withdraw his resignation. Hariri has left the door open to this possibility, saying in his only interview since stepping down that he would be willing to "rescind the resignation" if Hizbullah withdrew from regional conflicts. He accuses Hizbullah of violating Lebanon's so-called "dissociation policy" intended to keep the country out of conflicts like that in neighboring Syria. Hizbullah is actively fighting on the side of President Bashar al-Assad in the six-year war, and also stands accused of supporting Shiite rebels against Saudi Arabia in Yemen, a charge it denies. "We need to respect the dissociation policy," Hariri said in the interview. On Monday, Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said: "All of us in Lebanon are waiting for the return of the prime minster, who for us has not resigned. "When he comes, we will see. We're open to all dialogue and discussion."

Gen. Aoun Orders Army to Protect Stability to Allow New 'Political Solutions'
Naharnet/November 21/17/Army Commander General Joseph Aoun on Tuesday ordered the army to protect stability in the country during this transitional period in order to pave the way for “reproducing the needed political solutions.”“The extraordinary political situations that Lebanon is going through require you to exercise the highest levels of awareness and vigilance, and to continuously take the measures needed to preserve security and stability,” said Gen. Aoun in an order to the army marking Lebanon's 74th Independence Day anniversary. “This stability represents firm groundwork for reproducing the needed political solutions and a bridge for transiting anew from anxiety and doubt to salvation and rescue,” Aoun added. He called on troops “not to be lenient with outlaws and the culprits of organized crime who commit attacks against citizens,” instructing them to “firmly and strongly confront any attempt to exploit the current circumstances with the aim of sowing discord and chaos or subjecting our national unity, civil peace and the interests of the Lebanese to danger.”Lebanon has been gripped in a political crisis since Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced his surprise resignation earlier this month from Riyadh, lambasting Iran and Hizbullah for their policies in Lebanon and the region. The shock announcement sparked worries that Lebanon would be caught up in the spiraling tensions between Riyadh and Tehran, which back opposing political and armed groups across the region. After resigning, Hariri spent two more weeks in Saudi Arabia amid rumors he was under de facto house arrest there, before traveling to Paris on Saturday. There, he met French President Emmanuel Macron and pledged he would be in Lebanon in time to mark its independence day on Wednesday.

Report: Egypt, France Seeking to Convince Saudi to 'Keep Hariri in His Post'
Naharnet/November 21/17/Egypt and France are mediating with Saudi Arabia to convince the kingdom to “keep Prime Minister Saad Hariri in his post,” a media report published Tuesday said. “Intensive meetings were held overnight in the Cypriot capital between French officials and Egyptian officials accompanying President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to Nicosia where he took part in an Egyptian-Cypriot-Greek summit,” al-Akhbar daily quoted diplomatic sources as saying. The sources said Paris is “pressing Hariri to stay in his post,” telling him that “changes could be introduced to enhance his situation inside the Lebanese formula,” while expressing great concern of a possible governmental vacuum that would “strongly affect Lebanon's political, security and economic stability.”“Sisi, who will receive Hariri in Cairo, supports this inclination, and negotiations are underway between Cairo, the UAE and Saudi Arabia for this purpose,” the sources added. “Cairo is counting on making use of what was issued Sunday by the council of Arab foreign ministers to convince the Saudi side that there is no alternative to the current settlement in Lebanon, and that the Lebanese, as well as Arab and foreign capitals, have showed great insistence on keeping Hariri in his post,” the sources went on to say. French President Emmanuel Macron had hosted Hariri in Paris on Saturday. Lebanon has been gripped in a political crisis since Hariri announced his surprise resignation earlier this month from Riyadh, lambasting Iran and Hizbullah for their policies in Lebanon and the region. The shock announcement sparked worries that Lebanon would be caught up in the spiraling tensions between Riyadh and Tehran, which back opposing political and armed groups across the region. After resigning, Hariri spent two more weeks in Saudi Arabia amid rumors he was under de facto house arrest there, before traveling to Paris on Saturday. There, he pledged he would be in Lebanon in time to mark its independence day on Wednesday. President Michel Aoun is yet to accept Hariri's resignation, which was not submitted in a formal manner.

Hariri's Resignation Uncertain as Aoun Vows Respect for Dissociation Policy
Naharnet/November 21/17/Ambiguity is still shrouding Prime Minister Saad Hariri's final decision on the resignation he announced on November 4 from Riyadh, with some observers saying that he will confirm it and others suggesting that he will walk back from it. Al-Akhbar newspaper quoted parties who have contacted the premier and his team in Paris as saying that Hariri is “insisting on staying in power.” Other sources have however stressed that the prime minister is obliged to confirm his resignation and to “try to impose new conditions for the formation of a new government.”President Michel Aoun is meanwhile “exerting all efforts possible to relaunch the political and constitutional process in the country, leading serious negotiations away from the media spotlight to create a climate that would keep Hariri in his post,” al-Akhbar reported. It quoted informed sources as saying that Aoun has told France and Hariri that “everything that has happened until now indicates that the political settlement is still in place.”He also told them that he can “guarantee Lebanon's commitment to the dissociation policy” and that he has the ability to “secure a stance from Hizbullah in this regard.”“Communication between Aoun and Hizbullah has involved this point and the party's leadership has expressed its openness towards anything that would embrace Hariri and facilitate his staying in his post while also discarding the excuses that Saudi Arabia is using to undermine stability,” al-Akhbar said. Hizbullah chief “Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's speech yesterday and his official rebuttal of any Hizbullah arming activities in Yemen or the Gulf countries serve this purpose,” the daily quoted the sources as saying. Lebanon has been gripped in a political crisis since Hariri announced his surprise resignation earlier this month from Riyadh, lambasting Iran and Hizbullah for their policies in Lebanon and the region. The shock announcement sparked worries that Lebanon would be caught up in the spiraling tensions between Riyadh and Tehran, which back opposing political and armed groups across the region. After resigning, Hariri spent two more weeks in Saudi Arabia amid rumors he was under de facto house arrest there, before traveling to Paris on Saturday. There, he pledged he would be in Lebanon in time to mark its independence day on Wednesday. Aoun is yet to accept Hariri's resignation, which was not submitted in a formal manner.

Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 21-221/17
Putin Meets Assad ahead of Syria Talks with Turkey and Iran
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/November 21/17/President Vladimir Putin said the Russian army had "saved Syria as a state" after meeting with leader Bashar al-Assad, as Syrian regime forces take an upper hand over rebels and the Islamic State group. Monday's talks came during an announced "working visit" by Assad to the Black Sea resort of Sochi, ahead of a summit between Putin and the leaders of Turkey and Iran on Wednesday aimed at re-booting the Syrian peace process. "As for our joint work in the fight against terrorism in Syria, this military operation is coming to an end," Putin said, according to a transcript published on the Kremlin's website. The Russian leader praised Assad and predicted terrorism would suffer an "inevitable" defeat in the country. "Thanks to the Russian army, Syria has been saved as a state. Much has been done to stabilize the situation in Syria," the transcript said. "It is in our interest to advance the political process... we don't want to look back and we are ready for dialogue with all those who want to come up with a political settlement," Assad said in translated comments. Putin said he would consult world leaders on his talks with Assad, including with U.S. president Donald Trump in a telephone call expected on Tuesday.  The Russian army's Chief of General Staff, Valery Gerasimov, told Russian news agencies that "despite the fact that there remains a raft of unresolved problems" the military stage "is coming to its logical conclusion."
Putin will Wednesday host Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Iran's Hassan Rouhani for the first in a series of summits on the peace process, ahead of parallel U.N.-led talks in Geneva set for November 28. The meeting -- the first such three-way summit between the trio -- comes as Ankara, Moscow and Tehran cooperate with increasing intensity on ending the over six-year civil war in Syria that has left 330,000 dead and millions homeless. The cooperation comes despite Turkey still officially being on an opposite side of the Syria conflict from Russia and Iran, which are key Assad backers.
"Assad's visit...shows that there was a need to relay the Syrian leadership's position on a future settlement to the Kremlin, and that (Assad) was interested in the forthcoming summit with the presidents of Iran and Turkey," said Russian political analyst Azhdar Kurtov. "It is unlikely this was just another demonstration of the Kremlin's political loyalty to Assad," he told AFP. "The open-war phase in the Syria conflict will soon be over and the question of a political solution will become more pressing than before." Russia, Iran and Turkey have backed negotiations in the Kazakh capital Astana that have brought together the representatives of the opposition and the regime seven times this year.
Relaunch direct negotiations
The talks led to the creation of four so-called "de-escalation zones" that produced a drop in violence, but sporadic fighting and bombardment has continued. Moscow is now seeking to steer the process in a political direction. The Sochi summit will help to "relaunch direct negotiations between the Syrian government and the range of the opposition", said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Moscow's military intervention in Syria from 2015 is widely seen as tipping the balance in the conflict. Since then the Syrian army has reclaimed the ancient city of Palmyra from the Islamic State group and driven rebels out of their northern bastion Aleppo. This week regime forces also ousted the IS from its last urban stronghold in the country, Albu Kamal.
Assad's fate
Previous attempts to end the war have stalled over the question of the fate of Assad. But Turkey is showing greater flexibility, even if it remains unlikely that it will officially accept the prospect of the Syrian president remaining in power, said Timur Akhmetov, a Turkey expert at the Russian International Affairs Council. "For now, to keep a say in the future political negotiations is more important for Turkey than to have Assad departed from power," he told AFP. Different factions of the Syrian opposition will meet from Wednesday in Riyadh in talks hosted by Saudi Arabia. The aim of the Saudi-backed High Negotiations Committee is to reach consensus on a strategy for talks in Geneva, which will focus on a new constitution for Syria and fresh elections.

Car Bomb Kills 21 in Town North of Baghdad
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/November 21/17/A car bomb killed at least 21 people and wounded dozens in a flashpoint town north of Baghdad on Tuesday, a security official told AFP. Tuz Khurmatu, home to a mixed Kurdish, Arab and Turkmen population, was the scene of deadly violence in mid-October when Iraqi forces retook it from Kurdish control in response to a Kurdish independence referendum.

Years of Fruitless Efforts to End Syrian Conflict
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/November 21/17/Since the start of Syria's war in 2011, numerous diplomatic attempts to halt the conflict have stumbled, mainly over the future of President Bashar al-Assad.
Here is a summary of some of key initiatives:
End of Arab solutions
In January 2012, two months after an initial bid to end the violence, leading Arab diplomats adopt a plan that would transfer power from Assad to a coalition cabinet. The Damascus government rejects the proposal, declaring "an end of Arab solutions", and vows to crush rebel movements.
Geneva I, ambiguous formula
On June 30, 2012 global powers meeting in Geneva draw up a plan that would install a transition government but does not spell out what would happen to Assad. Among those involved in the proposal are the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- plus the Arab League, Turkey and the European Union. They differ over what the plan really means, however, with the United States saying it paves the way to a "post-Assad" period.
China and Russia, allies of Assad, insist it is up to Syrians to decide their future.
Geneva II, no agreement
In January 2014 the first talks between Syrian opposition groups and the government are held in Geneva under the auspices of Russia and the United States. On February 15, after a second fruitless session, U.N. mediator Lakhdar Brahimi calls an end to the talks and resigns.
Russian involvement, Vienna plan
In September 2015 Russia becomes militarily involved in the Syria war. Its role becomes a game changer by helping Assad, whose forces have struggled against Gulf- and Western-backed rebels.
In November 2015 the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) is set up in Vienna, grouping 23 world or regional powers and multilateral organizations. They include Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and, for the first time, key regional player Iran.
The group draws up a transition outline but the question of Assad's future is still not resolved. On December 18 the U.N. Security Council unanimously adopts a resolution endorsing the Vienna peace process.
Geneva: seven fruitless rounds
In early 2016 three rounds of U.N.-supervised indirect negotiations are held in Geneva between regime and opposition groups. The parties do not talk face to face. The negotiations stall over arrangements for a transition and run up against violations on the ground of a ceasefire initiated by Washington and Moscow.
In March, May and July 2017 four other rounds of indirect talks are held, without results. A new round is scheduled for November 28 in Geneva under U.N. auspices.
Geneva overshadowed by Astana
In late 2016 Russia and Iran, who back the Syrian regime, and Turkey, which backs the rebels, take over the peace process, sidelining the United States. In late December they impose a ceasefire. In January 2017 the three sponsors organize talks in Astana, Kazakhstan, between representatives of the regime and a rebel delegation. Seven rounds of negotiations have since taken place and have reached an accord on the setting up of four "de-escalation" zones in key areas of Syria, opening the way for a decrease in violence while not ending it completely. The Turkish, Iranian and Russian presidents are scheduled to meet on Wednesday in the Russian resort of Sochi. Russia has also announced it is planning to hold a broad "Congress of Syrian National Dialogue" in Sochi, although the date has yet to be set.

Putin Hails Assad for 'Fighting Terrorists'
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/November 21/17/Russian President Vladimir Putin has congratulated Syrian counterpart Bashar al-Assad on Damascus' results in "fighting terrorist groups," the Kremlin said Tuesday. "For a start I want to congratulate you with the results that Syria is achieving in the fight against terrorist groups... the Syrian nation is going through a very serious experience and nonetheless is approaching the final, inevitable defeat of the terrorists," Putin told Assad, the Kremlin website reported.

Moscow Says 'Active' Syria Military Operations Nearing End
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/November 21/17/Russia's military chief on Tuesday said active operations in Syria were "coming to an end," echoing comments made by President Vladimir Putin during a meeting with Syrian counterpart Bashar al-Assad the day before. "The active phase of military operations in Syria is coming to an end. Despite the fact that there remains a raft of unresolved problems, that stage is coming to its logical conclusion," said Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov in comments carried by agencies.

Egyptian ambassador To Israel: Chaos Will Break Out Without Peace With The Palestinians
Jerusalem Post/November 21/17/The Egyptian ambassador is expected to address the Knesset on Tuesday on the 40th anniversary of Anwar Sadat's visit. Egyptian Ambassador to Israel Hazem Khairat urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in an interview with Army radio to take historic steps for peace, warning that without a two-state solution, chaos would break out.
“We have to be optimistic there is no other option (to two-states), without this chaos will break out everywhere, this is our last option, for you and for all of us,” Khairat said. His interview comes before a series of special ceremonies in the Knesset to mark the 40th anniversary of former Egyptian president Anwar Sadat’s visit to Jerusalem, an event that paved the way for the peace deal between the two countries. Khairat and Netanyahu are both expected to deliver speeches.
In speaking with Army Radio, Khairat referenced Sadat’s speech to the Knesset and said that those "who bear responsibility have to be brave and take fateful decisions.”
Egypt is asking the Israeli public to help its leadership arrive at an overarching and just peace, Khairat said. “Wars do not bring calm and security, peace is the only true solution,” Khairat said. A permanent peace based on two states is the only way to achieve peace." Khairat urged the Israeli public to reread Sadat’s speech and the 2002 Arab peace initiative which offers Israel normalized ties with its Arab neighbors in exchange for a return to the pre-1967 and minor land swaps. If this were to happen Israel would find herself living in peace, calm and security with her neighbors, Khairat said. He said that diplomatic ties between Israel and Egypt are strong, but the absence of a final resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has harmed the full normalization ties between the two peoples. But, the fact that the Israeli-Egyptian peace has held for 40 years shows that there is a commitment and a desire to strengthen the ties between the two countries.

Iran Declares 'Victory' over IS
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/November 21/17/
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on Tuesday declared "victory" over the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria as the jihadists cling to just a few remaining scraps of territory. Iran is one of the main international backers of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and has sent military advisers and thousands of "volunteers" to fight IS on the ground in Syria and Iraq. In a televised speech Rouhani thanked "all the fighters of Islam," supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the armed forces of Iraq and Syria for "the end of this group that brought nothing but evil, destruction, murder and savagery."He congratulated Iran's Revolutionary Guards and its foreign arm the Quds Force for a "great victory" but insisted that the "main work was accomplished by the people and armies of Syria, Iraq and Lebanon." "We helped them in accordance with our religious and Islamic duties," he said. Iranian media on Sunday and Monday showed footage of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani in the Syrian border town of Albu Kamal, reporting he personally directed operations that recaptured the jihadists' final urban bastion over the weekend. In a message released by the Revolutionary Guards, Soleimani congratulated supreme leader Khamenei on this "decisive victory" over IS. "I announce the end of this group," the statement said. He also hailed the role of Iraq's Hashed al-Shaabi paramilitary coalition -- dominated by groups backed by Tehran -- and the "decisive" role of Lebanon's Iranian-allied Hizbullah movement in the fighting in Syria. IS jihadists are currently fighting for survival in just a few pockets of remaining territory in Iraq and Syria, after losing the vast bulk of territory they seized in a lightning offensive in 2014. Neither the Syrian nor Iraqi governments have so far declared definitive victory over the group.

Germany Struggles to Emerge from Crisis after Govt. Talks Collapse
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/November 21/17/Germany's president was to start a difficult round of talks with party leaders Tuesday in a last-ditch attempt to save the EU's top economy from the political turmoil sparked by the collapse of Chancellor Angela Merkel's coalition talks. Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who takes center stage because he can call snap elections, is expected to use his diplomatic skills as a two-time former foreign minister to persuade reluctant party chiefs to return to the negotiating table. The head of state, who spoke with Merkel Monday, planned to meet with the left-leaning Greens at his Berlin Bellevue Castle and then, at 1500 GMT, with the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP), the party which pulled the pin on month-long coalition talks Monday. Its shock decision to withdraw from a potential three-way alliance has thrown the government of caretaker chancellor Angela Merkel into chaos, leaving her with only bad choices: wooing reluctant coalition partners back to the table, running a minority government, or facing new elections. "Germans are not natural fans of instability, minority governments or immediate repeat elections, to put it mildly," said Berenberg Bank chief economist Holger Schmieding on the unprecedented situation in German post-war politics. New parliament speaker Wolfgang Schaeuble, the former finance minister, opened the legislature by reminding all parties of their promise to voters to deliver a stable government, but also conceded that no-one could be forced to join a government they don't want. As Germany's usually staid and consensus-driven politics enter uncharted territory, Schaeuble, aged 75 and its longest-serving MP, stressed that it faces "a trial, not a crisis of state."He underlined that its EU neighbors "need a Germany that is capable of action". In Brussels, the European Commission made clear that "Europe will not pause during this period."
New protest party?
Sitting in the glass-domed lower house of the German Bundestag for the first time were lawmakers of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), the anti-immigration, anti-Islam and anti-Merkel protest party that is at the heart of the crisis. Its entry into parliament in September 24 elections with almost 13 percent of the vote cost Merkel's conservatives and other mainstream parties dearly, further fragmented the party political landscape and made it harder to gain a parliamentary majority. Merkel's headache was compounded when her former junior coalition partners, the center-left Social Democrats (SPD), scored a dismal election result and vowed to go into opposition, a decision they have so far refused to budge from. A subsequent four-week negotiating marathon to forge a new governing alliance dubbed "Jamaica", after the parties' colors black, yellow and green, collapsed when the FDP pulled out.
The FDP's leader Christian Lindner, 38, insisted the party had acted on principle, but most political commentators saw it as a gambit to position itself as a slightly more moderate protest party and snatch away AfD votes in fresh elections. Lindner is turning the FDP into "a bourgeois protest party that opposes a supposed left-liberal mainstream, and especially Merkel," judged Spiegel Online. "His unspoken aim is: Merkel must go," the commentary added, using a common AfD slogan.
Lame-duck government
Germany now faces weeks, if not months, of paralysis with a lame-duck government that is unlikely to take bold policy action at home or on the European stage, as the EU faces issues from Brexit to ambitious French reforms plans for the bloc. "The politics of Europe's most powerful economy -– and until recently its main anchor of stability -– has just entered a period of deep uncertainty," said Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy. To mediate in the crisis, Steinmeier was Wednesday due to meet his SPD party colleague Martin Schulz to sound out whether he would reconsider and once more team up with Merkel's bloc, a proposition the labor party chief has strongly rejected so far. His party's former labour minister Andrea Nahles has suggested the SPD would tolerate a Merkel-led minority government, but this is an unstable option Merkel has dismissed. Merkel in turn stressed Monday that if it came to fresh elections, likely not before February, she would be willing to run again, dismissing speculation that her 12-year reign is entering its twilight.

Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on November 21-221/17
Saudi 'Purge' a Re-Branding Attempt to Launch a 'Second Kingdom'
Haisam Hassanein and Wesam Hassanein/The Cipher Brief/November 19/17
Most royal family members understand that the crown prince is merely trying to stave off potential unrest, so U.S. critics should reconsider their objections to his recent moves.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) took the unprecedented step of ordering the arrest of 11 princes, dozens of former ministers and business officials, and four current ministers earlier this month. Despite the clucks of disapproval from some in D.C., President Donald Trump tweeted: "I have great confidence in King Salman and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. They know exactly what they are doing."
Why? The oil-rich monarchy finally has a guy who is willing and has the guts to take the massive responsibility of reforming and increasing the popular legitimacy of the House of Saud after decades of encouragement by successive U.S. presidents.
MbS is doing what former Egyptian and Tunisian Presidents Hosni Mubarak and Zine El-Abidine Ben Ali respectively should have done to avert their downfall. The primary reason behind the anger of the Egyptian and Tunisian people that brought down the Mubarak and Ben Ali regimes is the perception among the youth of the widespread, unchecked corruption among the ruling families and their cronies.
Toward the end of the two strongmen's rule, Egyptian and Tunisian streets were filled with stories of the prevailing corruption of Mubarak's sons and their in-laws, and the family of Ben Ali's wife and her family. Mubarak and Ben Ali have never taken any serious actions to dispel those charges.
Similarly, the Saudi streets nowadays are filled with tales of corruption stories of the royal family and its business allies. Hence, MbS correctly understands the urgency of checking the corruption of those big names in the kingdom. By doing so, he attempts to reinvent a new form of legitimacy that does not depend on the consensus among corrupt religious elites, princes and top business people. Instead, he envisions the creation of a legitimacy that can withstand the test of time.
He attempts to present a second kingdom similar to the concept of the French republics. In this second kingdom, widespread support among the young generations will be a significant factor in formulating decisions. Previously, ultraconservative religious men and elder royals were the ones who were driving the decision-making with little regard to popular sentiments.
The idea of introducing a second kingdom not tarnished with the ills of the past is, in fact, a way to rebrand the House of Saud. Unlike the conventional wisdom in DC that argues that these moves will create an internal coup against MbS, the majority of the royal family, especially the young princes, understands that MbS is merely trying to appease popular sentiments and stave off potential unrest. Additionally, those young princes understand that MbS will not be able to appoint anybody from his branch of the family once he assumes the throne, according to the Saudi succession law. MbS has used this law as a bargaining chip with the rest of the young royals.
Furthermore, many of these young royals are Western-educated and familiar with modern governance systems, unlike their fathers who have ruled Saudi Arabia until recently. These traits enable them to understand MbS's rapid moves better than many in D.C. would think.
Meanwhile, those who disagree with MbS do not possess enough power to challenge the new order that is being established. They lack their own armies and domestic constituents.
So Trump is right to embrace MbS's decisions. The irony is that the most vocal voices criticizing the president are officials from the former administration who would have called it a historical moderation of the ayatollah's regime had Tehran adopted these moves.
**Haisam Hassanein is the Glazer Fellow at The Washington Institute. Wesam Hassanein is a master's candidate at American University.

Sunnis and Shia in Bahrain: New Survey Shows Both Conflict and Consensus
David Pollock/the Washington Institute/November 20/17
David Pollock is the Kaufman Fellow at The Washington Institute, focusing on regional political dynamics and related issues.
The small but very strategic island nation of Bahrain, just off the Saudi Gulf coast, has witnessed a great deal of sectarian tension throughout much of the past decade: a Sunni-dominated monarchy and elite, often in opposition to the Shia majority of the population. The true nature and extent of this cleavage have long been shrouded in mystery and mutual polemics. But now a rare new public opinion poll, probably the only one ever to quantify these sectarian differences objectively, sheds some unaccustomed light on this obscure yet important issue.
It turns out, quite counterintuitively, that the country’s Sunni elite and Shia “street” actually hold very similar, generally positive views about coexistence, both with each other and with their Arab neighbors. They also tend to agree about the importance of good ties with Washington, and about promoting Palestinian-Israeli peace. But Bahrain’s Sunni and Shia citizens demonstrably diverge sharply in their attitudes toward Iran’s policies and proxies in the region.
The first question at stake here, however, is a deceptively simple factual one: what is the real Shia to Sunni ratio among Bahrain’s roughly 700,000 citizens? The answer, provided by this random sample of 1,000 Bahrainis, is 62 percent Shia and 38 percent Sunni. This finding confirms, in much more precise fashion, the conventional estimate of a Shia majority and Sunni minority population. Bahrain also hosts a small number of citizens of other religions, including a few Jewish families.
Despite the usual focus on sectarian differences, this survey reveals several major issues on which Bahrain’s Sunnis and Shia generally agree. Three-fourths of both sects say that “Arabs should work harder on behalf of coexistence and cooperation” between them. A narrower majority of each community, 56 percent, also agree that “right now, internal political and economic reform is more important for our country than any foreign policy issue.” And around half the country’s Sunnis and Shia alike—considerably more than in most other Arab countries polled lately— say that “we should listen to those among us who are trying to interpret Islam in a more moderate, tolerant, and modern direction.”
Other, more surprising areas of consensus concern relations with the United States, and potentially even with Israel. A mere 15 percent of either Sunnis or Shia voice a favorable view of American Mideast policy. But a much larger proportion, around half in both communities, say it is “important for our country to have good relations with the United States.” This augurs well for the future of that relationship, which includes a major American naval base, despite continuing domestic political and sectarian tensions on the island.
On a follow-up question about their desired priority for U.S. foreign policy, Bahrainis of both sects divide their votes among several regional challenges: Iran, Yemen, Palestine, and terrorism, in that order of preference. Notably, only a small minority of either sect—11 percent of Sunnis, and 16 percent of Shia—say their top priority is for the United States to “reduce its interference in the region.”
Concerning the much more remote prospect of ties with Israel, about which Bahrain’s rulers have reportedly expressed some guarded private optimism lately, the public seems to distinguish between supporting Israeli-Palestinian peace and actual overtures to the Jewish state. Two-thirds of Bahrain’s Sunni and Shia alike agree that “Arab states should play a new role in Palestinian-Israeli peace talks, offering both sides incentives to take more moderate positions.” But asked about immediate “cooperation with Israel on other issues like technology, counter-terrorism or containing Iran,” only about 15 percent of either group express a positive opinion.
On another contentious issue much closer to home, the intra-Arab dispute with neighboring Qatar, Bahrain’s Sunni and Shia publics also generally share views very similar to each other— and very different from their own government’s official position. Around two-thirds of both Sunni and Shia citizens of Bahrain oppose the current “Arab quartet” boycott of Qatar, in which Bahrain is joined with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt. Instead, three-quarters of each sectarian community want a compromise with Qatar, “in which all the parties make some concessions to each other to reach a middle ground.” Here Bahraini public opinion as a whole resembles that in the other GCC countries polled (Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, and Qatar itself)—in all of which solid majorities desire a compromise, even as their governments so far refuse. The divergence is a telling indicator of the limits of public opinion as a policy determinant in these still largely autocratic states.
These intriguing areas of consensus offer a dramatic contrast with other areas, where the views of Bahrain’s two major Muslim sects are very sharply at odds. Asked their views of Iran’s regional policies, precisely 2 percent of Bahraini Sunnis voice even a “somewhat positive” attitude. But 68 percent of their Shia compatriots view Iran’s policies favorably. Similarly, a mere 5 percent of Sunnis, but 60 percent of Shia, say it is important for Bahrain to maintain good relations with Iran. And conversely, 63 percent of the Sunnis, compared with just 23 percent of the Shia, say that “the most important issue” in the dispute with Qatar is “to find the maximum degree of Arab cooperation against Iran.”
By comparison, attitudes toward Iran’s regional allies show somewhat less divergence between Bahrain’s two major sects. Hezbollah is viewed negatively by fully 95 percent of the country’s Sunnis—but also by 62 percent of its Shia. And the Houthis of Yemen are disapproved by 90 percent of the Sunnis—and by 71 percent of the Shia as well. Conversely, the Sunni fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood, which operates openly in Bahrain, is seen favorably by 32 percent of the Sunnis there; while exactly 0 percent of Bahraini Shia express a positive opinion of that exclusionary organization.
All in all, these survey findings paint a significantly more nuanced picture of the well-known sectarian cleavage in this mixed and “politically polarized” society. On some key questions, a surprising degree of convergence is evident, despite the prevailing tensions—though not necessarily in favor of existing government policy. Iran and related issues, however, remain real bones of contention on which the Shia majority of the population clearly differs, both from official policy and from the views of the country’s ruling Sunni minority. At the same time, there is relatively little sympathy among Bahrain’s Shia for Iran’s violent militia allies in the ongoing sectarian proxy wars elsewhere in the region. The common popular desire for compromise and coexistence could, therefore, be a basis for relative stability, and perhaps ultimately even for political reconciliation.
This survey, sponsored by the Washington Institute, was conducted in August by a reputable regional commercial firm, using face-to-face, in-home interviews with a representative multi-stage geographic probability national sample of 1,000 Bahraini citizens. The statistical margin of error is approximately 3 percent. Full methodological details, including access to the raw data file, are available on request.

Palestinians: If You Do Not Give Us Everything, We Cannot Trust You
Bassam Tawil/Gatestone Institute/November 21/2017
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11402/palestinians-trump-peace-plan
The Palestinians have made up their mind: The Trump peace plan is bad for us and we will not accept it. The plan is bad because it does not force Israel to give the Palestinians everything.
If and when the Trump administration makes public its peace plan, the Palestinians will be the first to reject it, simply because it does not meet all their demands.
Trump will soon learn that for Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinians, 99% is just not enough.
The Palestinians are once again angry -- this time because the Trump administration does not seem to have endorsed their position regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Palestinians are also angry because they believe that the Trump administration does not want to force Israel to comply with all their demands.
Here is how the Palestinians see it: If you are not with us, then you must be against us. If you do not accept all our demands, then you must be our enemy and we cannot trust you to play the role of an "honest" broker in the conflict with Israel.
Last week, unconfirmed reports once again suggested that the Trump administration has been working on a comprehensive plan for peace in the Middle East. The full details of the plan remain unknown at this time.
However, what is certain -- according to the reports -- is that the plan does not meet all of the Palestinians' demands. In fact, no peace plan -- by Americans or any other party -- would be able to provide the Palestinians with everything for which they are asking.
Palestinian requirements remain as unrealistic as ever. They include, among other things, the demand that millions of Palestinian "refugees" be allowed to enter Israel. Also, the Palestinians want Israel to withdraw to indefensible borders that would bring Hamas and other groups closer to Tel Aviv.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) and its leader, 82-year-old Mahmoud Abbas, now in the twelfth year of his four-year term, continue to insist that they will accept nothing less than a sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with east Jerusalem as its capital, on the entire lands captured by Israel in the 1967 Six Day War.
Most dangerous is that even in the unlikely event that Abbas would sign some deal, another leader can come along later and legitimately say that Abbas had no authority to sign anything as his term had long since expired.
Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist terror group controlling the Gaza Strip, maintains that it will never accept the presence of Israel on "Muslim-owned" land. Hamas wants all the land Israel supposedly "took" in 1948. Translation: Hamas wants the destruction of Israel in order to establish an Islamic Caliphate where non-Muslims would be granted the status of dhimmi ("protected person").
Unlike the Palestinian Authority, Hamas deserves credit for being clear and consistent about its true goal. Since its establishment three decades ago -- and despite recent illusory hopes expressed by Western pundits -- Hamas has refused to change its ideology or soften its policy. It resolutely sticks to its stance that no Muslim is entitled to give up any part of Muslim-owned lands to non-Muslims (in this instance, Jews. The same held true for "cleansing" Turkey of Armenian and Greek non-Muslims).
The Janus-faced Palestinian Authority, on the other hand, continues to speak in multiple voices, sending conflicting messages both to its people and the international community. No one really knows whether the PA has a clear and unified strategy in dealing with Israel.
Mahmoud Abbas knows how to sound extremely nice, and often does so when he meets with Israelis and Western leaders. But when he speaks in Arabic to his own people, sometimes it is hard to distinguish Abbas from Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh.
US President Donald Trump talks with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on May 23, 2017 in Bethlehem.
Some of Abbas's top officials sound even more extreme than Hamas. Except, of course, when these soft-spoken, Western-educated Palestinian officials are dispatched to talk to Westerners. Then, all of a sudden, comes the honey.
Because the Palestinian Authority leaders and their surrogates speak in more than one voice, they send conflicting messages to the world about their actual intentions, often managing to fool everyone. Too often the world believes the messages they want to hear instead of the less-comfortable real ones.
The Palestinian Authority's contradictory messages have created the impression that it is both a peace partner and an enemy -- depending on whom you heard and when you heard him.
One thing is clear: from the Palestinian angle, there is no love lost between the US and them. From their point of view -- and this is a point of view that they have held for an exhaustingly long time -- the US is unable to play an unbiased role as a mediator in the conflict with Israel. What eats at the Palestinians is the strong and strategic alliance between the US and Israel.
The Palestinians have accused every US administration over the past four or five decades of being "biased" in favor of Israel. The Palestinians would certainly like to see the hundreds of millions of dollars in financial aid every year they receive from the US continue. Yet, no matter what the US does for the Palestinians, the Americans will always be denounced for their alleged bias in favor of Israel.
The Trump administration is about to receive a lesson in Palestinian politics. If and when the Trump administration makes public its peace plan, the Palestinians will be the first to reject it, simply because it does not meet all their demands.
Mahmoud Abbas knows that he cannot come back to his people with anything less than what he has promised his people: 100%.
The past few days have already given us indications of the Palestinian response. Here, for instance, is what Abbas's spokesman, Nabil Abu Rudaineh, had to say when he was asked to comment on reports concerning the peace plan and the US threat to close down the PLO's diplomatic mission in Washington: "The American administration has lost its ability to play the role of mediator in the region. The US can no longer be seen as the sponsor of the peace process."
Abu Rudaineh's remarks were rather more restrained than comments concerning the Trump administration made by other Palestinian officials and factions.
The PLO's chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, went as far as threatening that the Palestinians would suspend all communication with the US if the PLO's diplomatic mission is shuttered.
Of course, no one seems to take Erekat's threat seriously. Suspending contacts with the US is tantamount to suicide for the Palestinians. Without US financial and political support, the Palestinian Authority and Erekat would disappear from the scene within days. At this stage, it remains unclear whether Erekat's talk about suspending contacts with the Americans includes the refusal to accept US financial aid.
Yet, Erekat's threats should be seen in the context of growing Palestinian rage and hostility toward the Trump administration. This anger is now being translated into a rhetorical onslaught against Trump and his administration. Palestinians are now accusing the current administration of working and conspiring towards "liquidating" the Palestinian cause with the help of some Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
The Palestinians have made up their mind: the Trump peace plan is bad for us and we will not accept it. The plan is bad because it does not force Israel to give the Palestinians everything. For the Palestinians, the plan is bad because it is viewed as part of a conspiracy concocted by Jared Kushner and Saudi Arabia's crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman. The Palestinians have convinced themselves that Trump wants to "liquidate" their cause, not solve it.
Trump is about to go through the same process that President Bill Clinton experienced at Camp David 17 years ago. Then, much to the astonishment of Clinton, Yasser Arafat turned down flat an astoundingly generous offer by then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Trump will soon learn that for Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinians, 99% is just not enough.
**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.

Turkey Islamizes Denmark with More Mosques
Judith Bergman/Gatestone Institute/November 21/2017
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11400/turkey-denmark-mosques
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan clearly sees Turks living in the West as a spearhead of Islam.
"Yes, integrate yourselves into German society but don't assimilate yourselves. No one has the right to deprive us of our culture and our identity", Erdogan told Turks in Germany as early as in 2011.
This assessment of Milli Görüs, however, does not seem to bother Danish authorities, who appear to see no problems with their cities becoming Islamized by the Turks. How many more mosques will it take?
"Islam cannot be either 'moderate' or 'not moderate.' Islam can only be one thing," Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on November 9. "Recently the concept of 'moderate Islam' has received attention. But the patent of this concept originated in the West... They are now trying to pump up this idea again. What they really want to do is weaken Islam..."
Erdogan is working on strengthening Islam in the West, something he does, among other ways, by building Turkish mosques in Western countries. It is hardly surprising that he does not want the West to "weaken Islam", but at the moment there seems little risk of that happening. The establishment of Turkish mosques in Western countries appears to be proceeding apace with very little opposition. Conversely, building Western churches in Turkey is inconceivable.
Erdogan clearly sees Turks living in the West as a spearhead of Islam. "Yes, integrate yourselves into German society but don't assimilate yourselves. No one has the right to deprive us of our culture and our identity", Erdogan told Turks in Germany as early as 2011. This year, he told Turks living in the West:
"Go live in better neighborhoods. Drive the best cars. Live in the best houses. Make not three, but five children. Because you are the future of Europe. That will be the best response to the injustices against you."
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan clearly sees Turks living in the West as a spearhead of Islam. This year, he told Turks living in the West: "Go live in better neighborhoods. Drive the best cars. Live in the best houses. Make not three, but five children. Because you are the future of Europe. That will be the best response to the injustices against you." (Photo by Gokhan Sahin/Getty Images)
Erdogan is evidently working to ensure, by continuously building new mosques and expanding old ones across Europe, that Muslims will indeed be the future of the continent.
One Western country where Erdogan is ramping up Islam is Denmark. Two new Turkish mosques are about to open in the Danish cities of Roskilde and Holbæk; in the past year, two Turkish mosques opened in the cities of Fredericia and Aarhus. New Turkish mosques were opened in Ringsted and Hedehusene in 2013; and in Køge the existing mosque opened a cultural center. There are 27 Turkish mosques in Denmark; eight of them are expanding or wish to expand.
The new mosque in Roskilde, complete with minarets, is owned by Turkey's Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet). The inclusion of minarets is due to second- and third-generation Turkish immigrants, who wanted the mosque to look like a "proper mosque".
"It is a general trend in all of Europe that Diyanet is expanding physically with new mosques, and through [the mosques] also religiously, politically and culturally" said professor Samim Akgönül, of the university of Strasbourg. He has analyzed the Friday sermons that Diyanet sends to mosques all over Europe; his analyses show that the sermons are full of political and nationalistic messages favoring Erdogan's regime.
According to Tuncay Yilmaz, chairman of the board of Roskilde's Ayasofya Mosque, "Diyanet is not political, I can promise you that. Obviously they belong to the Turkish state, but they are independent of the government".
That statement is false. Diyanet is an agency of the Turkish government -- and an extremely active one. As Gatestone's Burak Bekdil has noted:
"In a briefing for a parliamentary commission, Diyanet admitted that it gathered intelligence via imams from 38 countries on the activities of suspected followers of the US-based preacher Fetullah Gülen, whom the Turkish government accused of being the mastermind of the attempted coup on July 15... Diyanet said its imams gathered intelligence and prepared reports from Abkhazia, Germany, Albania, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Switzerland, Italy, Japan, Montenegro, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Kosovo, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mongolia, Mauritania, Nigeria, Norway, Poland, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Turkmenistan and Ukraine".
In Denmark, nonetheless, the newest Turkish-state mosque was welcomed with open arms. The mayor of Roskilde, Joy Mogensen, who knew that the Turkish government owned the mosque, participated in the ceremony of laying the foundation stone in February 2016. She claims that the very fact that she and the city's bishop were invited to the ceremony meant that there were "good people" in the mosque working for "integration" -- otherwise they would not have allowed "a Christian woman like myself without a headscarf" to participate in their ceremony.
One of those people "working for integration" is the chairman of the board of the mosque, Tuncay Yilmaz, who is also a member of the Roskilde city council for the Social Democratic party. He happens to have close ties to the radical Islamic organization Milli Görüs, which runs a travel agency where Yilmaz works. He organizes their trips to Mecca. "I am not a member of that organization" Yilmaz says. "The only connection is that I work for their travel agency".
Clearly, Roskilde's mayor does not consider Yilmaz's affiliation a problem, nor does the city council. "If we had observed anything suspicious about that organization, we would have talked to him about it; but we haven't heard anything like that" said Søren Kargaard, chairman of the Social Democratics in Roskilde, when asked by journalists about Yilmaz's connection to Milli Görüs. Well, perhaps if Kargaard had bothered to look up Milli Görüs to inform himself about it, this is what he would have found, according to a 2005 report from the Middle East Quarterly:
"Germany's domestic intelligence agency, has repeatedly warned about Milli Görüş's activities, describing the group in its annual reports as a 'foreign extremist organization'. The agency also reported that 'although Milli Görüş, in public statements, pretends to adhere to the basic principles of Western democracies, abolition of the laicist government system in Turkey and the establishment of an Islamic state and social system are, as before, among its goals... As the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Landesverfassungsschutz) in Hessen notes: The threat of Islamism for Germany is posed ... primarily by Milli Görüş and other affiliated groups. They try to spread Islamist views within the boundaries of the law. Then they try to implement ... for all Muslims in Germany a strict interpretation of the Qur'an and of the Shari'a. ... Their public support of tolerance and religious freedom should be treated with caution".
This assessment, however, does not seem to bother Danish authorities, who appear to see no problems with their cities becoming Islamized by the Turks. That kind of ignorance -- or pretense of ignorance -- amounts to the dereliction of duty on the part of people such as the mayor of Roskilde and Mr. Kargaard.
How many more mosques will it take?
**Judith Bergman is a columnist, lawyer and political analyst.
© 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.

On Recent Saudi Reforms: A Conversation
Nozhan Etezadosaltaneh/International Policy Digest/November 21/2017
http://www.danielpipes.org/18048/on-recent-saudi-reforms
Is the recent Saudi permission for women to drive cars and enter a stadium to watch men in sports competitions merely a political maneuver or a real reform?
All signs point to Mohammad bin Salman, the effective ruler of Saudi Arabia, being very serious about basic changes. So, I see this as a real reform.
A Saudi woman happy to drive.
Let's discuss the reason for these reforms at this moment: Do the rulers feel at risk?
Yes, the leadership realizes the current path will lead to poverty and weakness. Avoiding that fate requires making fundamental changes in nearly every aspect of life.
Or was the Saudi decline in income what led the government to increase women's participation in the economy?
Yes, the need to bring women more into the economy is the larger implication of the permission to drive. But it's less the immediate decline in income that scares the leaders than the long term. For example: Should electric cars prevail, one estimate expects the price of oil to decline to US$10 per barrel.
Or was it the Yemen crisis and Saudi Arabia's failure to achieve its goals there?
That may have had a small role in the decision but the urgent need to change the fundamentals of Saudi life strikes me as key.
Women will be driving but many other restrictions remain in place – such as permission from a mahram (unmarriageable kin) to marry or leave country. Will the government take further steps to abolish patriarchal laws?
Yes, that is inevitable. Saudi defiance of universal modern norms, norms that prevail in all neighboring countries, has been impressive but it cannot last. Too many Saudi women and men have experienced the outside world to maintain the mahram system.
What do you think of the theory that these changes are part of a US-sponsored project to unite Saudi Arabia with other Arab countries against Iran.
That misses the point: These changes are by Saudis to save their country, not by Americans. It's time to move on beyond such conspiracy theories that assume Middle Easterners are but the play things of Westerners.
Does Trump control Salman (and, for that matter, Sisi)?
Does Saudi Arabia present a different form of Islamism than those in Iran and Turkey?
Yes, the government of these three countries each follows a distinctive Islamist tradition. The Saudi one is Hanbali and traces its origins to Ibn Taymiya and Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. The Iranian one to Ayatollahs Borujerdi and Khomeini; and the Turkish one to Said Nursi and Erdoğan.
Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman says Saudi Arabia will return to moderate Islam. But Wahhabi Islam and Salafism generally are rooted in Saudi Arabia. So, isn't MbS saying something internally contradictory? Could Saudi Arabia even in theory serve as a model of moderate Islam?
Mohammad bin Salman is referring to the changes that took place about 40 years ago, especially in the aftermath of the Iranian Revolution and Mecca mosque seizure of November 1979. In the fifty years before that, the monarchy sponsored an Islamism that by today's standards was more moderate. While MbS is using that as a reference; in fact, I expect he wants to abandon Islamism altogether. I can imagine Saudi Arabia becoming a center of moderate Islam; stranger things have occurred.
Mohammad bin Salman apparently wants to attract more foreign investment and foreign visitors to compensate for the country's decline in oil revenues. But Saudi Arabia is a conservative and traditional society, not a second Dubai, so is this achievable?
Coincidentally, I am replying to your question while in Dubai: I assure you that it too is a conservative and traditional society. But its leadership has created a dynamic, open structure in which foreigners primarily can engage in a hyper-capitalistic venture. If Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum could do this in Dubai, MbS can do it in Saudi Arabia.
For all its hyper-modern economy, Dubai remains in many ways a conservative and traditional society.
Will long–term austerity policies and cuts to subsidies increase dissatisfaction in Saudi Arabia and so, increase the likelihood of revolution?
You are pointing to the major difficulty facing MbS, namely the need to wean Saudi nationals off easy money. Whether he succeeds depends in good part on his political skills. I am skeptical that he has them.
Does Mohammad bin Salman have the necessary power to achieve his plans? How adept is he as a politician? Is he a traditional ruler or a modern dictator?
He has the power but we don't yet know how skilled he is; ask me in five years. He's a mix of traditional and modern, a traditional ruler with modern goals.
Both the Mohammad Reza Shah era in Iran and Saudi Arabia today have experienced rapid social and economic modernization as well as the opening of social space without commensurate political openness. Do you agree with the theory that KSA is therefore headed for revolution?
No, because another possibility exists, that of Singapore, post-Mao China, and the "Asian model," where the regime achieved extraordinary economic growth within a repressive polity. Perhaps the tensions will one day cause an implosion, but this unlikely mix has worked for decades with few signs of collapse. Accordingly, I do not see that the KSA is doomed to revolution; indeed, this model is working very well next door in Dubai.
Recent weeks have seen the arrest of journalists and political activists in Saudi Arabia, despite the government calling for an open social environment; is this not a contradiction?
Yes, it is. But as one sees in China, Singapore and Dubai, this model works better than anyone expected a half century ago.
More that 20 clerics have been arrested for protesting government decisions. Can the Saudi government persuade clerics to accept reforms about women and youth, or will it have to repress them?
As with journalists and human rights activists, the government will likely have to use crude force to quiet religious leaders.
How much influence does the clergy have over Saudi society? Can it or will it inspire an uprising against Saudi family?
The ulema are powerful but less so than the government. They can inspire an uprising, just as happened in Mecca in 1979, but they cannot prevail.
Nice logo, good ideas. But will it work?
Mohammad bin Salman plans to end Saudi Arabia's dependence on oil by 2030. Is this feasible or a dream?
That's a too short timetable. Saudi Arabia will still depend on hydrocarbon revenues in thirteen years. But the country can take significant steps to lessen that dependence.
Can MbS create a national Saudi identity where now exists a tribal identity?
A national Saudi identity already exists, apart from tribal identities. The modern state came into being in 1930; as so many other states have demonstrated, that's sufficient time to indoctrinate generations of youth in the existence of a national identity.
Are you optimistic about Saudi Arabia's future and reforms in the country?
The country's future is open, for the first time since the 1920s. I simply do not know enough to predict its course with confidence.

Tehran Is Winning the War for Control of the Middle East/
إيران تربح الحرب في السيطرة على الشرق الأوسط
Jonathan Spyer/Foreign Policy/November 21/17
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=60489
And there’s no indication that, despite Mohammed bin Salman’s bold moves, Saudi Arabia stands a chance of turning the tide.
Saudi Arabia appears to be on a warpath across the Middle East. The Saudi-orchestrated resignation of Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, and Saudi officials’ bellicose rhetoric after the launch of a ballistic missile targeting Riyadh from Yemen, appear to herald a new period of assertiveness against Iranian interests across the Middle East.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s sudden moves on a variety of fronts may superficially have the feel of Michael Corleone’s swift and simultaneous strikes at his family’s enemies in the closing frames of The Godfather. Unlike in the film, however, the credits are not about to roll. Rather, these are the opening moves in an ongoing contest — and it is far from clear that the 32-year-old crown prince has found a formula to reverse Iran’s advantage.
Let’s take a look at the track record so far. The confrontation between Saudi Arabia and Iran is taking place across a swath of the Middle East in which, over the last decade, states have partially ceased to function — Iraq and Lebanon — or collapsed completely, as in the case of Syria and Yemen. A war over the ruins has taken place in each country, with Riyadh and Tehran arrayed on opposing sides in all of them.
So far, in every case, the advantage is very clearly with the Iranians.So far, in every case, the advantage is very clearly with the Iranians.
In Lebanon, Hezbollah vanquished the Saudi-sponsored “March 14” alliance of political groups that aimed to constrain it. The events of May 2008, when Hezbollah seized west Beirut and areas around the capital, showed the helplessness of the Saudis’ clients when presented with the raw force available to Iran’s proxies. Hezbollah’s subsequent entry into the Syrian civil war confirmed that it could not be held in check by the Lebanese political system.
The establishment of a cabinet dominated by Hezbollah in December 2016, and the appointment of Hezbollah’s ally Michel Aoun as president two months earlier, solidified Iran’s grasp over the country. Riyadh’s subsequent withdrawal of funding to the Lebanese armed forces, and now its push for Hariri’s resignation, effectively represent the House of Saud’s acknowledgement of this reality.
In Syria, Iran’s provision of finances, manpower, and know-how to the regime of President Bashar al-Assad has played a decisive role in preventing the regime’s destruction. The Iranian mobilization of proxies helped cultivate new local militias, which gave the regime access to the manpower necessary to defeat its rivals. Meanwhile, Sunni Arab efforts to assist the rebels, in which Saudi Arabia played a large role, ended largely in chaos and the rise of Salafi groups.
In Iraq, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has developed an officially-sanctioned, independent military force in the form of the 120,000-strong Popular Mobilization Units (PMU). Not all the militias represented in the PMU are pro-Iranian, of course. But the three core Shiite groups of Kataeb Hezbollah, the Badr Organization, and Asaib Ahl al-Haq answer directly to the IRGC.
Iran also enjoys political preeminence in Baghdad. The ruling Islamic Dawa Party is traditionally pro-Iranian, while the Badr Organization controls the powerful interior ministry, which has allowed it to blur the boundaries between the official armed forces and its militias — thus allowing rebranded militiamen to benefit from U.S. training and equipment. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, has been left playing catch up: Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi visited Riyadh in late October to launch the new Saudi-Iraqi Coordination Council, the first time an Iraqi premier had made the trip in a quarter-century. But it is not clear that the Saudis have much more up their sleeve than financial inducements to potential political allies.
In Yemen, where the Saudis have tried their hand at direct military intervention, the results have been mixed. The Houthis and their allies, supported by Iran, have failed to conquer the entirety of the county and have been kept back from the vital Bab el-Mandeb Strait as a result of the 2015 Saudi intervention. But Saudi Arabia is bogged down in a costly war with no end in sight, while the extent of Iranian support to the Houthis is far more modest.
This, then, is the scorecard of the Saudi-Iranian conflict. So far, the Iranians have effectively won in Lebanon, are winning in Syria and Iraq, and are bleeding the Saudis in Yemen.
In each context, Iran has been able to establish proxies that give it political and military influence in the country. Tehran also has successfully identified and exploited seams in their enemy’s camp. For example, Tehran acted swiftly to nullify the results of the Kurdish independence referendum in September and then to punish the Kurds for proceeding with it. The Iranians were able to use their long-standing connection to the Talabani family, and the Talabanis’ rivalry with the Barzanis, to orchestrate the retreat of Talabani-aligned Peshmerga forces from Kirkuk in October — thus paving the way for the city and nearby oil reserves to be captured by its allies.
There is precious little evidence to suggest that the Saudis have learned from their earlier failuresThere is precious little evidence to suggest that the Saudis have learned from their earlier failures and are now able to roll back Iranian influence in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is no better at building up effective proxies across the Arab world, and has done nothing to enhance its military power, since Mohammed bin Salman took the reins. So far, the crown prince’s actions consist of removing the veneer of multiconfessionalism from the Lebanese government, and threatening their enemies in Yemen.
Those may be important symbolic steps, but they do nothing to provide Riyadh with the hard power it has always lacked. Rolling back the Iranians, directly or in alliance with local forces, would almost certainly depend not on the Saudis or the UAE, but on the involvement of the United States — and in the Lebanese case, perhaps Israel.
It’s impossible to say the extent to which Washington and Jerusalem are on board with such an effort. However, the statements last week by Defense Secretary James Mattis suggesting that the United States intends to stay in eastern Syria, and by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Israel will continue to enforce its security interests in Syria, suggest that these players may have a role to play.
Past Saudi behavior might encourage skepticism. Nevertheless, the Iranians here have a clearly visible Achilles’ heel. In all the countries where the Saudi-Iran rivalry has played out, Tehran has proved to have severe difficulties in developing lasting alliances outside of Shiite and other minority communities. Sunnis, and Sunni Arabs in particular, do not trust the Iranians and do not want to work with them. Elements of the Iraqi Shiite political class also have no interest of falling under the thumb of Tehran. A cunning player looking to sponsor proxies and undermine Iranian influence would find much to work with — it’s just not clear that the Saudis are that player.
Mohammed bin Salman, at least, appears to have signaled his intent to oppose Iran and its proxies across the Arab world. The game, therefore, is on. The prospects of success for the Saudis will depend on the willingness of their allies to engage alongside them, and a steep learning curve in the methods of political and proxy warfare.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/21/tehran-is-winning-the-war-for-control-of-the-middle-east-saudi-arabia/