LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
October 19/17
Compiled &
Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias/english.october19.17.htm
News
Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations
There is nothing hidden, except to be disclosed; nor is anything secret, except
to come to light
Saint Mark 04/21-25/:"The Lord
Jesus says: ‘Is a lamp brought in to be put under the bushel basket, or under
the bed, and not on the lampstand? For there is nothing hidden, except to be
disclosed; nor is anything secret, except to come to light. Let anyone with ears
to hear listen!’ And he said to them, ‘Pay attention to what you hear; the
measure you give will be the measure you get, and still more will be given you.
For to those who have, more will be given; and from those who have nothing, even
what they have will be taken away.’"
You are God’s temple and God’s Spirit dwells in you? If anyone destroys God’s
temple, God will destroy that person. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that
temple
First Letter to the
Corinthians 03/10-23/:"According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled
master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building on it. Each
builder must choose with care how to build on it. For no one can lay any
foundation other than the one that has been laid; that foundation is Jesus
Christ. Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious
stones, wood, hay, straw the work of each builder will become visible, for the
Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will
test what sort of work each has done. If what has been built on the foundation
survives, the builder will receive a reward. If the work is burned, the builder
will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire. Do you
not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? If
anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person. For God’s temple is
holy, and you are that temple. Do not deceive yourselves. If you think that you
are wise in this age, you should become fools so that you may become wise. For
the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, ‘He catches
the wise in their craftiness’, and again, ‘The Lord knows the thoughts of the
wise, that they are futile.’ So let no one boast about human leaders. For all
things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or
death or the present or the future all belong to you, and you belong to Christ,
and Christ belongs to God.
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources
published on October 18-19/17
The USA Serves Up Kurdistan To Iran On a Silver
Platter/Bernard-Henri Lévy /Tablet /October 18/17/
Iran and America: What next/Mahan Abedin /MEM/October 18/17
Europe's New Official History Erases Christianity, Promotes Islam/Giulio Meotti/Gatestone
Institute/October 18/17
From Monty Python to Allah: London's New Mega Mosque/Judith Bergman/Gatestone
Institute/October 18/17
What the KRG’s Loss of Kirkuk Means for Iraq/Max J. Joseph/Syria Comment/October
18/17
Win-Win: How Tax Reform Will Help Defense Spending and the Economy/Peter Huessy/Gatestone
Institute/October 18/17
The Old Arab Fear Tactic That Came to Washington/Nonie Darwish/Gatestone
Institute/October 18/17
Beware of the closet Muslim Brotherhood member/Ahmad al-Farraj/Al Arabyia/October
18/17
Balanced words and a clear vision/Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabyia/October 18/17
To succeed, US needs to rediscover itself as a ‘smart power’ country/Dr. Naif
Alotaibi/Al Arabyia/October 18/17
Are Iranian people aligned with US national interests/Hamid Bahrami/Al Arabyia/October
18/17
Qatar Foreign Minister's CNBC interview/NNA/Wed 18 Oct 2017/
Titles For Latest LCCC Lebanese Related News published on
October 18-19/17
STL Appeals Chamber Rules on Pre-Trial Judge Questions on
New Indictment
Aoun receives credentials of six ambassadors, receives invitation to visit Iran
Hariri Defends Govt. Productivity, Says Sunnis 'Not Frustrated'
Hariri, Estonian Minister of Defense tackle bilateral relations
Army Commander, US Congress delegation tackle military aids
Ibrahim, Shorter tackle latest developments
Bassil, Estonian Defense Minister tackle Syrian refugee crisis
Berri, Hariri chat in wake of Parliament session
Fadallah meets IRIB delegation
US Congress delegation attends combat exercise at Hamat Air Base
PSP Affirms Commitment to 'Mountain Reconciliation'
Hariri Holds Talks with Estonian Minister of Defense
Caccia Leaves to Rome as Lebanon Mission Ends
Salameh Hits Back after Adwan Accuses BDL of Tax Evasion
Mashnouq Says Syrians Committing Less Crimes than Lebanese
Zimbabwe First Lady Sues Lebanese Mogul over Diamond Ring
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports
And News published on October 18-19/17
Iran's military chief: Israel can't violate Syria anytime
it wants
Khamenei: Iran will 'shred' nuclear deal if US quits it
Bahrain Accuses Iran of Harboring 160 'Terrorists'
Palestinian Shot While Trying to Stab Israeli Troops in W.Bank
Brigadier General Issam Zahreddine, Commander of Syrian forces, killed in Deir
al-Zor
Abadi orders the withdrawal of all military forces from Kirkuk
Iraqi Kurds postpone polls in face of crisis
Kurdish forces withdraw to June 2014 lines: Iraqi army commander
EU calls on Israel to stop plans for new West Bank settlements
SDF: Campaign against ISIS in eastern Syria to speed up
Turkey says will not submit to ‘impositions’ from United States in visa crisis
US judge blocks latest version of Trump travel ban
Latest Lebanese Related News published on
October 18-19/17
STL Appeals Chamber Rules on Pre-Trial Judge Questions
on New Indictment
Naharnet/October 18/18/The Appeals Chamber of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon
has issued a decision on 15 questions of law submitted by the Pre-Trial Judge
and pertaining to a new indictment that has been submitted by the STL
Prosecutor, the STL said on Wednesday. “The Pre-Trial Judge sought clarification
of certain aspects of the applicable law in order to examine and rule on an
indictment submitted for confirmation by the Prosecution,” an STL statement
said. In reaching this decision, the Appeals Chamber considered the oral
submissions made by the Prosecution and the Defense Office at the public hearing
held on October 11, as well as their prior written submissions. The questions
submitted by the Pre-Trial Judge related principally to the crime of criminal
association under Article 335 of the Lebanese Criminal Code and the criteria for
reviewing the indictment.
Below are key rulings of the Appeals Chamber:
1. The definition of the crime of criminal association
The Appeals Chamber clarified that the crime of criminal association is composed
of the following material elements:
(i) an agreement, oral or written, between two or more people;
(ii) a particular purpose of the agreement, being the commission of one or more
felonies against persons or property, or felonies undermining the authority of
the State, its prestige or its civil, military, financial or economic
institutions;
Regarding these material elements, the Appeals Chamber specified that under
Lebanese law it is not necessary to identify all of the members of a criminal
association, nor is it important what form the agreement takes – what matters is
the meeting of the minds of two or more persons to act collectively for the
purpose of committing the felonies mentioned in Article 335. Neither the
commission of material acts nor the identification of the means for achieving
the criminal purpose of a criminal association are required for such an
agreement to qualify as criminal association.
Regarding the intentional elements of the crime, the Appeals Chamber clarified
that criminal association requires an intention to join the association or
agreement aimed at committing one or more of the felonies mentioned in Article
335, and the knowledge that the purpose of the association or agreement is to
commit such a crime. A participant in the criminal association does not need to
know precisely the crimes intended to be committed.
2. The distinction between criminal association and conspiracy
The Appeals Chamber stated that criminal association and conspiracy, though
similar, are separate crimes under Lebanese law. While both are forms of
agreement to commit crimes, their distinctive characteristics are twofold: (1) a
criminal association can be directed at a broader range of crimes than a
conspiracy; and (2) in a conspiracy, the members have to agree on the means to
commit the crime, whereas in a criminal association they do not. The
assassination of a political figure is not an element of conspiracy or criminal
association.
The Appeals Chamber clarified that, in circumstances where the underlying
conduct is the same and can qualify as both conspiracy and criminal association,
it would not be appropriate to allow that these crimes be charged cumulatively.
This is without prejudice to the right of the Prosecution to charge these crimes
in the alternative.
3. The criteria for reviewing the indictment
The Appeals Chamber held that the Pre-Trial Judge must assess whether the
materials provided by the Prosecutor in support of the indictment demonstrate a
credible case which could, if not contradicted, be a sufficient basis to convict
the suspect on the charges in the indictment. It is irrelevant whether any
particular supporting materials have also been submitted as evidence in the
Ayyash et al. case.
Finally, the Appeals Chamber stated that the Pre-Trial Judge can only review
material that has been provided to him by the Prosecutor. He cannot take into
account, nor assess, materials that have not been submitted to him, including
material that is in the public domain. The confidential indictment was filed for
confirmation on July 21.
According to media reports, the new indictment is linked to the bomb attacks
that targeted Elias Murr, Marwan Hamadeh and George Hawi. The indictment names
“a new suspect from Hizbullah,” the reports claim. The STL was set up in 2007 to
try suspects charged with the murder of former premier Rafik Hariri, who was
killed with 22 others in a massive suicide truck bombing on the Beirut
waterfront on February 14, 2005. The tribunal later established jurisdiction
over three attacks relating to Minister Marwan Hamadeh, former Lebanese
Communist Party chief George Hawi and former defense minister Elias Murr,
deeming them of similar nature to Hariri's assassination. Five suspected members
of Hizbullah have been indicted by the court over Hariri's murder. The party has
slammed the court as an American-Israeli scheme and vowed that the suspects will
never be found. A trial in absentia opened in January 2014, but despite
international warrants for their arrest, the Hizbullah suspects are yet to
appear in court.
Aoun receives credentials of six ambassadors, receives
invitation to visit Iran
Wed 18 Oct 2017/NNA - President of the Republic, Michel Aoun, on Wednesday
underlined Lebanon's keenness to bolster ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran
in all spheres, hailing Iran's support to Lebanon at the international and
regional platforms.
President Aoun's fresh words came during his meeting at the Baabda palace with
the Director General of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB),
Abdulali Ali-Asgari, and the accompanying delegation, in presence of Iranian
Ambassador to Lebanon, Mohammad Fathali. Aoun hoped that Iran's efforts to reach
a political solution to the Syrian crisis would succeed in order to "end the
suffering of the Syrian refugees and facilitate their return to their homeland,
as well as to ease the socio-economic and security repercussions on Lebanon as a
result of this displacement." Asgari conveyed to the President the greetings of
the Supreme Leader of the Iranian Revolution, Sayed Ali Khamenei and Iranian
President, Sheikh Hassan Rouhani, wishing Lebanon further prosperity and
progress. Asgari renewed invitation to President Aoun from his Iranian
counterpart Rouhani to visit Tehran. Aoun duly accepted the invitation on a date
to be fixed later via the diplomatic channels. The Iranian official also hailed
the wise political positions adopted by Aoun, renewing Iran's support to Lebanon
and its desire to consolidate bilateral relations. Asgari also congratulated the
President on the liberation of Lebanon's outskirts from terrorist organizations.
On the other hand, Aoun received this morning, in the presence of Minister of
Foreign Affairs, Gebran Bassil, the credentials of the ambassadors of Malawi,
Panama, Albania, Lithuania, Nepal and Ethiopia.
Hariri Defends Govt. Productivity, Says Sunnis 'Not
Frustrated'
Prime Minister Saad
Hariri defended his government on Wednesday in the face of criticism from
several MPs, as he denied claims that the Sunni community in Lebanon is “frustrated.”“I
cannot accept the claim that this government is not productive because it is the
most productive government, despite the fact that it was formed less than a year
ago,” said Hariri after the end of parliamentary debate sessions on the 2017
state budget. “The government approved an electoral law, a new wage scale,
diplomatic and judicial appointments, a socio-economic council and today a state
budget,” Hariri explained. He noted that since its formation, the government has
been exerting efforts to “confront the repercussions of the Syrian refugee
crisis and to solve the electricity problem and the country's
problems.”Responding to criticism from opposition lawmakers, Hariri lamented
that “some are acting as if only today they discovered our difficult financial
situation, the refugee crisis, the electricity problem and the absence of yearly
final accounts.”“You cannot take part in previous governments and then discover
all these problems and their 'easy solutions' when you don't take part in the
new government,” the premier added, addressing some opposition MPs. Hitting back
at MPs who spoke of Sunni “frustration,” Hariri stressed that the Sunni
community in Lebanon is “not frustrated.”“I'm responsible for my words. Perhaps
some colleagues are frustrated but I call on them not to project their
frustration on the Lebanese or on an essential and founding religious community
in this country,” Hariri added. “Those who were not frustrated by the
assassination of Rafik Hariri cannot be frustrated by anything! The Lebanese
were not frustrated by the assassination of the martyr premier, they rebelled,
achieved and carried on,” the PM said.
Hariri, Estonian Minister of Defense tackle
bilateral relations
Wed 18 Oct 2017/NNA - Prime Minister Saad Hariri received on Wednesday the
Estonian Defense Minister, Juri Luik, accompanied by an official delegation, in
the presence of the Estonian Ambassador to Lebanon, Marin Mottus, and the
Honorary Consul of Estonia in Lebanon, Fuad Fadel. During the meeting, conferees
discussed the work of the Estonian battalion within the framework of the UNIFIL
force operating in southern Lebanon. They also tackled the general situation and
ways to promote bilateral relations.
Army Commander, US Congress delegation tackle
military aids
Wed 18 Oct 2017/NNA - Army Commander, General Joseph Aoun, on Wednesday met at
his Yarzeh office with a delegation from the US Congress Finance Committee, led
by Rodney Frelinghusysen, in the presence of the US Ambassador to Lebanon,
Elizabeth Richard. Talks reportedly touched on the general situation in Lebanon
and the region, in addition to the US Aids Program for the Lebanese army. Major
General Aoun then met with the visiting Estonian Defense Minister, Juri Luiq, on
top of a delegation, in the presence of Estonian Ambassador to Lebanon.
Means of military cooperation between the armies of both countries highlighted
their talks.
Ibrahim, Shorter tackle latest developments
Wed 18 Oct 2017/NNA - General Security chief, Abbas Ibrahim, on Wednesday met at
his office with British Ambassador to Lebanon, Hugo Shorter, with talks between
the pair reportedly touching on the latest local and regional developments.
Later, Major General Ibrahim met with the newly accredited Swiss Ambassador to
Lebanon, Monika Schmutz Kirgoz, who came on a courtesy visit.
Talks dwelt on the overall situation in the country and means of coordination
between the Embassy and the General Security.
Bassil, Estonian Defense Minister tackle Syrian refugee crisis
Wed 18 Oct 2017/NNA - Foreign and Expatriates Minister, Gebran Bassil, on
Wednesday afternoon met with Estonian Defense Minister, Juri Luiq, in the
presence of Estonian Honorary Consul Fouad Fadel. Talks reportedly touched on
the Syrian refugee crisis and Lebanon's stance vis-a-vis this predicament. Both
sides also discussed how Estonia can help in resolving this crisis through the
European Union system. The role undertaken by the Estonian Contingent operating
within UNIFIL in south Lebanon also highlighted their talks.
Berri, Hariri chat in wake of Parliament session
Wed 18 Oct 2017 /NNA - After the lifted parliament session, House Speaker Nabih
Berri and Prime Minister, Saad Hariri, chatted for a short while, in the
presence of Finance Minister, Ali Hassan Khalil, and MP George Adwan.
Fadallah meets IRIB delegation
Wed 18 Oct 2017/NNA - Head of the Information and Telecommunications House
committee, MP Hassan Fadlallah, on Wednesday met with a delegation comprising
head the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) Abdulali Ali-Asgari, its
members, and Iranian Ambassador to Lebanon, Mohammad Fathali. Conferees
reportedly dwelt on the relations between Iran and Lebanon on the media level,
and the means to bolster bilateral cooperation. During the meeting, Fadlallah
broached "Lebanon's particularity" pertaining to information and media,
stressing on the freedom of expression in that respect. For his part, Asgari
explained the reality of media in Iran and the role of IRIB. He also presented
his host with an invitation to visit the Islamic Republic. It is to note that
MPs Ammar Houri, Hani Qobeissi, Emile Rahme, Qassem Hashem, and Kamel Rifai
attended the meeting.
US Congress delegation attends combat exercise at Hamat Air Base
Wed 18 Oct 2017/NNA - A delegation of the US Congress Finance Committee, chaired
by Rodney Frelinghusyen, visited on Wednesday Hamat Air Base, accompanied by the
US Ambassador to Lebanon, Elizabeth Richard. The US delegation attended a combat
exercise with live ammunition, carried out by the Commando Regiment in
conjunction with the Air Force in the Hannoush shooting field. Afterwards, the
delegation listened to a briefing by the Air Force Commander on the capabilities
of the Lebanese Air Force and its various missions.
PSP Affirms Commitment to 'Mountain Reconciliation'
Naharnet/October 18/18/The Progressive Socialist Party on Wednesday stressed
keenness on preserving “reconciliation, cooperation and civil peace in the
Mountain” voicing calls to shun political rhetoric with the aim of gaining
popularity in the elections. “It is always our concern to preserve the peace
that we have established in the Mountain through the historic reconciliation,
which the Maronite Patriarch (Sfeir) has repeatedly stressed in more than one
visit to the Mountain, as well as the President of the Republic,” PSP sources
told the daily. “We have opened our hands to all and cooperated with all, and we
are still ready to cooperate and partnership with all political forces,” they
added. The sources who spoke on condition of anonymity stated: “Through all of
our political path since the end of the war until today, we have always worked
for reconciliation. Any jolt in the Mountain, God forbid, means the country is
gone.”Referring to statements made by Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil, the
sources concluded: “Let us keep the populist and electoral rhetoric away. The
Christians are more disturbed than the Druze by that rhetoric. People want to
live they do not want to open the graves of the past.” The PSP's remarks came
after comments made by Free Patriotic Movement and Minister Jebran Bassil
regarding the killings and displacement that took place in Mount Lebanon during
the civil war and the Mountain Reconciliation in 2001. Bassil had called for a
“political return to Mount Lebanon” during a visit to the Aley District town of
Rechmaya. The Minister's remarks were highly criticized by PSP and the Lebanese
Forces who argue that Bassil's rhetoric aims to “dig graves” or “build glory on
the achievements made by Patriarch Sfeir.”Several violent clashes have occurred
between Druze and Christians during the Lebanese Civil War (Mountain War).
Reconciliation between the Druze and Christian communities came to fruition on
August 8, 2001, when the Maronite Patriarch Mar Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir made a
historic visit to the Chouf and met with the Druze and Chouf leader, Walid
Jumblat.
Hariri Holds Talks with Estonian Minister of Defense
Naharnet/October 18/18/Prime Minister Saad Hariri held talks Wednesday at the
Center House with the Estonian Minister of Defense Jüri Luik. Luik was
accompanied by an official delegation and the meeting was held in the presence
of Estonian Ambassador Marin Mõttus and the Honorary Consul of Estonia in
Lebanon Fouad Fadel. The meeting focused on the work of the Estonian battalion
operating within the UNIFIL forces in south Lebanon and the situation there as
well as the bilateral relations between the two countries.
Caccia Leaves to Rome as Lebanon Mission Ends
Naharnet/October 18/18/Papal ambassador Gabriele Caccia left Beirut Wednesday
morning returning to Rome after the end of his posting in Lebanon and his
appointment as ambassador to the Vatican in the Philippines, the National News
Agency reported. The Pope has appointed Caccia as apostolic nuncio in the
Philippines, titular archbishop of Sepino. Caccia, has been Apostolic Nuncio to
Lebanon since July 16, 2009 and was consecrated bishop on September 12, 2009.
The Philippines is home to Asia’s largest Catholic population, with some 81
percent of its over 100 million population professing Roman Catholicism.
Salameh Hits Back after Adwan Accuses BDL of Tax Evasion
Naharnet/October 18/18/Lebanese Forces deputy chief MP George Adwan on Tuesday
accused Banque du Liban, Lebanon's central bank, of possible tax evasion,
drawing a swift response from BDL Governor Riad Salameh. “Controlling tax
evasion can change the financial situation in Lebanon,” Adwan said during a
parliamentary session on the 2017 state budget. “It is shocking to know that the
revenues from BDL are LBP 61 billion. We have treasury bonds worth LBP 27,000
billion and the bank is obliged to pay a billion dollars to the state treasury
from its profits that result from treasury bonds,” Adwan added. “Where is
inspection and accountability? It is nonexistent because BDL has relations that
are bigger than everyone. We are busy with taxes while BDL should pay $1 billion
every year,” the MP went on to say. He called on Finance Minister Ali Hassan
Khalil to “put us in the picture of BDL's profits throughout the past 20 years
through a detailed report.”Speaker Nabih Berri then asked Adwan to submit a
request for the formation of a parliamentary panel of inquiry and the MP said
that he would file a request within 48 hours. In remarks to LBCI television,
Salameh said BDL has submitted yearly auditing reports to the Finance Ministry
for the past 20 years. “The bank's records are subject to auditing by two
international firms that have nothing to do with BDL,” Salameh noted, stressing
that the central bank has never refrained from paying its obligations to the
state treasury.
Mashnouq Says Syrians Committing Less Crimes than Lebanese
Naharnet/October 18/18/Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq noted Tuesday that
“the rate of crimes committed by Syrian refugees is lower than the rate of
crimes committed by Lebanese citizens.”“The Syrian refugee population did not
grow this year at all,” Mashnouq added during a ceremony at the Grand Serail.
The minister also reassured that “Lebanon is one of the safest countries due to
the efforts of security forces and coordination between them.” At least one
million registered Syrian refugees live in Lebanon, almost 25 percent of its
population. Many more are believed to live unregistered, straining the country's
already fraying infrastructure.
Zimbabwe First Lady Sues Lebanese Mogul over Diamond Ring
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/October 18/18/The wife of Zimbabwean President
Robert Mugabe has sued a Lebanese businessman for failing to deliver a
$1.35-million diamond ring she ordered for her wedding anniversary, state media
reported Wednesday. "First lady Dr Grace Mugabe is suing fugitive businessman
Mr. Jamal Joseph Ahmed for $1.23 million (1.05 million euros) over a diamond
ring deal that went sour last year," The Herald newspaper said. "In breach of
the agreement, Mr. Ahmed failed to deliver the ring, triggering a legal
wrangle." In 2015, Grace Mugabe placed an order for a 100-carat diamond ring
worth $1.35 million to mark the anniversary of her wedding to the 93-year-old
leader. "The plaintiff wanted to purchase a unique diamond ring for her wedding
anniversary celebrations," said court documents seen by The Herald. "The
defendant tendered a diamond ring worth $30,000 and naturally, the plaintiff
refused to take possession of an inferior ring." Grace Mugabe demanded a refund
but Ahmed paid back just $120,000. In court documents filed last year, Ahmed
said he had offered to repay the money in installments and claimed he had
already paid back $150,000. In January Ahmed went to court to stop Grace Mugabe
from seizing his properties over the diamond ring spat. Grace Mugabe has however
denied attempting to seize Ahmed's properties, saying police had been guarding
his premises because he was wanted for alleged crimes. The Lebanese businessman
holds a Zimbabwean permanent residence permit, but no longer lives in the
southern African country. Ahmed also claimed to have received threats from
officials from Zimbabwe's spy agency -- the Central Intelligence Organization --
as well from Grace herself and a son from her first marriage, Russell Goreraza.
She has denied the allegation. Grace, 52, married Mugabe in 1996. She now heads
the ruling ZANU-PF party women's league. She has said that she has the right to
rule the country like any other Zimbabwean and is now seen to be among those
maneuvering to replace her husband.
Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on
October 18-19/17
Iran's military chief: Israel can't violate Syria anytime it wants
Reuters/Ynetnews/October
18/17/After IAF carries out retaliatory attack on Syrian SA-5 battery, Iranian
General Mohammad Baqeri makes rare visit to Damascus to 'assert and coordinate
and cooperate to confront our common enemies, the Zionists and
terrorists.'Iranian military chief of staff General Mohammad Baqeri said
Wednesday the Islamic Republic would not accept Israeli violations in Syria,
according to the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA). "It is not acceptable for
the Zionist regime to violate Syria anytime it wants," Baqeri said during a
meeting in Damascus with his Syrian counterpart, Ali Abdullah Ayyoub. Earlier
this week, the Syrian army launched an SA-5 anti-aircraft missile at Israeli Air
Force planes on a reconnaissance mission over Lebanon. In retaliation, the IAF
bomb the SA-5 battery, destroying its fire control radar. Baqeri, on a rare
visit to Syria, pledged to fight Israel and Sunni insurgents. "We are in
Damascus to assert and coordinate and cooperate to confront our common enemies,
the Zionists and terrorists," he said. "We drew up the broad lines for this
cooperation."Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu followed up the IDF's retaliation
strike against Syria on Monday by stating, "Whoever strikes at us, we strike at
them. Today they tried to harm our planes—unacceptable. "The air force acted
precisely and swiftly, destroying what needed to be destroyed. We will continue
to act in the space as much as necessary to defend Israel's security."
Khamenei: Iran will 'shred' nuclear deal if US
quits it
Reuters/Ynetnews/October 18/17/Iranian Supreme Leader says Iran will 'shred'
nuclear deal should US withdraw from it; Ayatollah welcomes support of other
Western nations, but cautions it does not suffice: 'It is unacceptable for
Europeans to join America in its bullying.' Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei said on Wednesday Tehran would stick to its 2015 nuclear deal with
world powers as long as the other signatories respected it, but would "shred it"
if the United States pulled out, state TV reported. Khamenei spoke five days
after President Donald Trump adopted a harsh new approach to Iran by refusing to
certify its compliance with the deal, reached under Trump's predecessor Barack
Obama, and saying he might ultimately terminate it. Iranian Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei said his country would 'shred' nuclear agreement if US abdicated it
Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said his country would 'shred' nuclear .The
move put Washington at odds with other parties to the accord—Britain, France,
Germany, Russia, China and the European Union—who say Washington cannot
unilaterally cancel a multilateral accord enshrined by a UN resolution. Khamenei,
Iran's highest authority, welcomed their support but said it was not sufficient.
"Europe must stand against practical measures (taken) by America," he said. If
Trump ditched the deal, "Iran will shred it". The Khorramshahr missile test.
Khamenei said Iran would not abandon its missile program. Khamenei also said
Iran was determined to continue its disputed ballistic missile program despite
the pressure from Europe and the United States to suspend it. Tehran has said it
is developing missiles solely for defensive purposes. "They must avoid
interfering in our defense program, " Khamenei said. "They (Europeans) ask why
does Iran have missiles? Why do you have missiles yourselves? Why do you have
nuclear weapons? We do not think it is acceptable for the Europeans to join
America in its bullying."'
Bahrain Accuses Iran of Harboring 160 'Terrorists'
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/October 18/18/Bahrain's interior minister accused
Iran of harbouring 160 Bahrainis convicted of terrorism and stripped of their
citizenship, in an interview published Wednesday. All 160 "fugitives" had been
stripped of citizenship in "terrorism cases" targeting Bahraini police and
security forces, Sheikh Rashed Al-Khalifa told the Arabic-language daily Asharq
Al-Awsat. He accused Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards of having trained the
group, who were convicted of attacks that killed 25 security personnel and
wounded 3,000 others, according to Asharq Al-Awsat. Bahrain, a Shiite-majority
kingdom ruled by a Sunni dynasty, has seen sporadic violence since the
repression in 2011 of a protest movement demanding a constitutional monarchy and
an elected prime minister. Authorities have since tightened their grip on
dissent, jailing hundreds of protesters and stripping a string of high-profile
activists and clerics of citizenship. Bahrain has drawn harsh criticism for its
treatment of demonstrators but maintains it does not discriminate against the
country's Shiites. The kingdom, a key US ally located across the water from
Iran, regularly accuses Shiite Iran of meddling in its internal affairs, an
allegation Tehran denies. US President Donald Trump has eased restrictions on
arms sales to Bahrain, which on Tuesday announced it had signed a $3.8 billion
deal with US company Lockheed Martin to acquire 16 upgraded F-16 fighters.
Bahrain is home to the US Navy's Fifth Fleet and a British army base is
currently under construction.
Palestinian Shot While Trying to Stab Israeli Troops in
W.Bank
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/October 18/18/A Palestinian ran
towards Israeli troops while brandishing a knife in the occupied West Bank on
Wednesday and soldiers shot and wounded him, the military said. "An assailant
armed with a knife ran towards troops adjacent to the Gush Etzion junction," an
army statement said. "In response to the immediate threat, soldiers fired shots
towards the suspect. Subsequently, the suspect was injured and taken to hospital
for medical treatment," it said. A military spokeswoman told AFP that the
attacker was a Palestinian and that no soldiers were injured. Israeli media said
the man was moderately to seriously wounded. The Gush Etzion junction is a busy
intersection near a large bloc of Israeli settlements in the southern West Bank
and the scene of repeated attacks. A wave of unrest that erupted in October 2015
has claimed the lives of at least 295 Palestinians or Arab Israelis, 51
Israelis, two Americans, two Jordanians, an Eritrean, a Sudanese and a Briton,
according to an AFP toll. The last fatal incident was the October 4 stabbing of
Israeli settler Reuven Schmerling, 70, in what the Shin Bet security service
said was "a terrorist attack". Two Palestinians from Qabatiya in the northern
West Bank were arrested as suspects. The violence, however, has largely subsided
in recent months. Israeli authorities say most of the Palestinians killed were
carrying out knife, gun or car-ramming attacks. Others were shot dead in
protests and clashes, while some were killed in Israeli air strikes on the Gaza
Strip.
Brigadier General Issam Zahreddine, Commander of Syrian
forces, killed in Deir al-Zor
Staff writer, Al Arabiya EnglishWednesday, 18 October 2017/Brigadier general of
the Republican Guard and the commander of operations in Deir al-Zor, Issam
Zahreddine, was killed in a mine explosion in the Hawija-Sakr area inside the
city of Deir al-Zor, according to Syrian media. Zahreddine played a role in the
progress made by the Syrian army forces in the city of Deir al-Zor, and the
surrounding areas, which reached strategic fields in the city. Zahreddine led
army operations against the armed opposition in Homs and Aleppo, before moving
to the eastern region to fight ISIS.
Abadi orders the withdrawal of all military forces from
Kirkuk
Staff writer, Al Arabiya EnglishWednesday, 18 October 2017/Iraqi Prime Minister
Haidar al-Abadi on Wednesday ordered the withdrawal of all armed groups in
Kirkuk, including the Popular Mobilization Militias, and the handover of
security to local police and counter-terrorism units only. Al-Abadi confirmed in
a statement that “security in Kirkuk is under the control of the local police
with the support of counter-terrorism units". In his statement, Abadi, ordered
the prevention of any armed group presence in the province and to pursue
elements that spread hatred and racism amongst the people. Popular militia
groups have been widely deployed in the city over the past two days, raising
concerns among the Kurds.
Iraqi Kurds postpone polls in face of crisis
AFP, Erbil, IraqWednesday, 18 October 2017/Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region on
Wednesday postponed presidential and legislative elections because of the
current crisis with Baghdad, its electoral commission said. The region’s
Independent High Electoral Commission said it had “decided to suspend
temporarily preparations for the elections set for November 1 because of the
current situation”. Iraqi government forces said Wednesday they had retaken from
Kurdish fighters almost all the areas disputed between Baghdad and the
autonomous Kurdistan region in response to a September independence vote.
Kurdish forces withdraw to June 2014 lines: Iraqi army
commander
Kurdish Peshmerga forces have retreated to positions they held in northern Iraq
in June 2014 in response to an Iraqi army advance into the region. (Reuters)
Reuters, BaghdadWednesday, 18 October 2017/Kurdish Peshmerga forces have
retreated to positions they held in northern Iraq in June 2014 in response to an
Iraqi army advance into the region after a Kurdish independence referendum
rejected by Baghdad, a senior Iraqi commander said on Wednesday. An Iraqi
military statement said government forces had taken control of Kurdish-held
areas of Nineveh province, which includes the major city of Mosul, on Tuesday
after the Peshmerga pulled back. The Mosul hydro-electric dam, northwest of the
city, was among the positions recaptured, it said. The Peshmerga had taken the
territory over the past three years as part of the war against ISIS militants,
filling a void left by a collapse of the Iraqi army in the face of an ISIS
offensive across much of Iraq’s north. With US backing, the Peshmerga rolled
back ISIS and took further territory outside the official Kurdish autonomous
entity, mainly in Kurdish-populated areas including oil-rich Kirkuk, claimed
historically by the Kurds. On Monday, Iraqi government forces, acting on
Baghdad’s orders to counter the Sept. 25 Kurdish referendum, retook the Kirkuk
area, just outside the boundaries of the Kurdistan Regional Government, after
the Peshmerga retreated. Baghdad government forces then retook control of all of
Nineveh. “As of today we reversed the clock back to 2014,” the Iraqi army
commander, who asked not to be identified, told Reuters. There was no immediate
comment from the Kurdish side. The Peshmerga pullback meant its forces were
deployed once again roughly along KRG boundaries. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi
ordered the recapture of Kirkuk and all other disputed areas claimed by both the
Kurdistan Regional Government and the central authorities in Baghdad in response
to the referendum. The United States sided with Abadi in rejecting the Kurds’
secessionist vote. KRG President Masoud Barzani has stood by it, saying the
overwhelming “yes” for independence “won’t be in vain” and would be pursued by
peaceful means.
EU calls on Israel to stop plans for new West Bank
settlements
Reuters, BrusselsWednesday, 18 October 2017/Israel must halt new building plans
for settler homes in the West Bank, the European Union’s foreign service said in
a statement on Wednesday, warning that such settlements threatened any future
peace deal with the Palestinians. “The European Union has requested
clarifications from Israeli authorities and conveyed the expectation that they
reconsider these decisions, which are detrimental to on-going efforts towards
meaningful peace talks,” the statement said. “All settlement activity is illegal
under international law, and it undermines the viability of the two-state
solution and the prospect for a lasting peace.”The EU maintains that the lands
Israel has occupied since the 1967 Middle East war - including the West Bank,
East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights - are not part of the internationally
recognized borders of Israel.
SDF: Campaign against ISIS in eastern Syria to speed up
Reuters, BeirutWednesday, 18 October 2017/A US-backed campaign against ISIS in
eastern Syria will accelerate now the extremist group has been defeated in its
former capital Raqqa, a spokesman for US-allied Syrian militias said on
Wednesday. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which announced the defeat at
Raqqa on Tuesday, will redeploy fighters from the city to frontlines with ISIS
in the eastern province of Deir al-Zor, Talal Silo told Reuters by telephone.
The SDF is fighting ISIS in Deir al-Zor in areas to the east of the Euphrates
River. The Syrian government, supported by the Russian air force and Iran-backed
militias, is waging a separate campaign against extremists in the province,
focused mostly in areas to the west of the river. ISIS has lost ground rapidly
there in recent weeks. The Syrian army and its allies are battling for control
of the last remaining ISIS-held areas of Deir al-Zor city, and have also
captured the town of al-Mayadin from ISIS. Silo said the Raqqa victory would
have a “positive impact” on the SDF’s campaign in Deir al-Zor because it meant
fighters could be redeployed as internal security forces take control of Raqqa.
“Most of the military forces will head towards these areas to continue the
participation in the campaign with the Deir al-Zor Military Council,” he said.
The Council is a militia leading the SDF’s campaign in the province. “This is
all to the benefit of the campaign and accelerating the end of this campaign,”
he said.
Turkey says will not submit to ‘impositions’ from United
States in visa crisis
Reuters, AnkaraWednesday, 18 October 2017/Turkey will not submit to
“impositions” from the United States over an on-going visa crisis and will
reject any conditions it cannot meet, Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on
Wednesday. A delegation from the United States is visiting Turkey in an attempt
to repair diplomatic ties between the NATO allies after both countries stopped
issuing visas to each other’s citizens this month. Washington first suspended
visa services at its missions in Turkey, after Turkish authorities detained two
Turkish nationals employed as US consular staff. The US delegation has asked
Ankara for information and evidence regarding the detained staff, private
broadcaster Haberturk reported. “We will cooperate if their demands meet the
rules of our constitution but we will not succumb to impositions and we will
reject any conditions that we cannot meet,” Cavusoglu told a news conference,
when asked about the report of requests from the US delegation. A translator at
the consulate in the southern province of Adana was arrested in May and a Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) worker was detained in Istanbul two weeks ago.
Both were detained on suspicion of links to last year’s failed coup, allegations
the United States has rejected. Haberturk said the US delegation, which arrived
in Turkey this week, laid out four conditions to solve the visa crisis,
including that Turkey must provide information about its investigations into the
detained workers, and evidence related to DEA worker Metin Topuz. President
Tayyip Erdogan’s spokesman said last week Topuz had been in contact with a
leading suspect in last year’s failed military coup. Turkish media reported
similar accusations against the translator in May. The US delegation told Ankara
that if the contacts which Turkish authorities are seeking to investigate were
undertaken on the instructions of the consulate, the employees should not have
been arrested, Haberturk said.
US judge blocks latest version of Trump travel ban
AFP, WashingtonWednesday, 18 October 2017/A US judge on Tuesday barred the White
House from implementing yet another version of Donald Trump’s controversial
executive order on immigration, hours before it was to go into full effect. The
decision by Hawaii federal judge Derrick Watson – which the White House signaled
it would appeal – marks the latest blow to Trump’s long-running efforts to
restrict entry of travelers from targeted countries into the United States.
Watson said the third rendition of the travel ban -- covering people from six
mainly Muslim countries, as well as North Korea and some officials from
Venezuela -- could not be justified under law. In his decision Watson wrote the
ban “suffers from precisely the same maladies as its predecessor: it lacks
sufficient findings that the entry of more than 150 million nationals from six
specific countries would be ‘detrimental to the interests of the United
States.’”
The ruling meant the Trump administration will again be forced to ask the
Supreme Court to decide whether his immigration orders are legal. The newest
order was announced last month to replace an expiring 90-day temporary ban on
travelers from the Muslim-majority nations of Sudan, Syria, Yemen, Iran, Somalia
and Libya.
The September decree
The September decree removed Sudan from the list, but added Chad and North Korea
for full bans and Venezuela for a ban limited to certain classes of officials.
The White House justified the measure by citing the protection of US national
security -- but critics said it appeared virtually the same as the original
order of January 27. Courts shot that version down saying it targeted Muslims,
violating the US constitutional protections for religious freedom. A second
version was only slightly adjusted and was quickly tied up in similar legal
wrangling. In June the Supreme Court accepted to review the case but let the
90-day ban go mostly into effect in the meantime. When the ban expired the court
decided there was nothing to rule on. Trump went forward with a new version with
no expiry date, tacking on North Korea and Venezuela to the list of targeted
countries and implying the updated measure did not simply target Muslim
countries.People wait for flights in advance of the incoming travel ban to the
US at John F. Kennedy airport in the Queens borough of New York City, New York,
US June 29, 2017. (reuters)
Antithetical to US laws
But Watson -- who also issued freezes on the first two attempts -- said the
order does not improve US security, since individuals who pose risks can already
be denied entry under existing law. The order “plainly discriminates based on
nationality” in a manner antithetical to US laws “and the founding principles of
this nation,” he wrote. Watson placed a freeze on the ban on travelers from the
six countries, but allowed it to be implemented on North Korea -- which sent
only a handful of people to the United States last year -- and Venezuela, where
US sanctions have also already made travel to the United States difficult for
many officials. The White House quickly rejected his argument, calling it
“dangerously flawed” and promising to fight the action. “The entry restrictions
in the proclamation apply to countries based on their inability or unwillingness
to share critical information necessary to safely vet applications, as well as a
threat assessment related to terrorism, instability, and other grave national
security concerns,” it said. “We are therefore confident that the Judiciary will
ultimately uphold the President’s lawful and necessary action and swiftly
restore its vital protections for the safety of the American people.”
Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from
miscellaneous sources published on October 18-19/17
The USA Serves Up Kurdistan To Iran On a Silver Platter
أميركا قدمت كردستان لإيران على طبق من فضة
By: Bernard-Henri Lévy /Tablet
/October 18/17
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=59595
On Monday of this week, what had been feared transpired: paramilitary units
supported by elements of the Iraqi army attacked in the vicinity of Kirkuk.
Baghdad’s putatively federal army put into action the threats of the country’s
leaders and, at the risk of ruining any chance of future coexistence with the
Kurds, responded to the peaceful referendum of Sept. 25 with a dumbfounding and
vengeful act of force.
Not long ago, it was Saddam Hussein operating with gas and deportations. And
then on Monday Saddam’s Shi’ite successors, answering to Tehran, sent tanks,
artillery, and Katyusha rockets into the oil fields that are the life blood of
Kurdistan. Today they are doing the same in the Sinjar mountains, in the
southern city of Jalawla, and in the Bashiqa area on the Plain of Nineveh, which
the Kurds only just reclaimed from ISIS.
Of course, this disaster would not have occurred had the Kurds not been
tragically divided. We know today that Baghdad’s quick victory is largely due to
what President Masoud Barzani, in a statement released on Oct. 17, called the
“treason” of several commanders loyal to the PUK, the party founded by Barzani’s
old rival, former president Talabani. The Iraqi-Iranian coalition was able to
take advantage of these dissensions, using the commanders close to Talabani as
Trojan horses to gain entry to Kirkuk and other targets. Be that as it may, the
main issue—and the real scandal—lies in the fact that the central government of
the pseudo-state of Iraq, whose sovereignty consists of little more than vague
and hollow rhetoric, have used force to crush the country’s Kurdish citizens.
And now, scandal mounts around the fact that Kurdistan’s “friends,” the
countries that for two years running relied on it to keep the Islamic State at
bay and then to defeat it, the people who swore by the Peshmerga, by its heroes
and by its dead, have, as I write these lines, responded with nothing more than
deafening silence, appearing willing to abandon to their fate the men and women
who fought so valiantly for them.
Whether one agreed or disagreed with the referendum that President Barzani
consistently described as a democratic prelude to negotiation with Baghdad, it
is completely unacceptable that the response to that referendum should be an act
of force piled onto the blockade of Irbil’s skies and borders, the relentless
economic and political pressure, and the transformation of Kurdish territory
into an open-air prison over the past three weeks.
Whether one is for or against the independence of Kurdistan; whether one favors
total independence or limited autonomy; whether one has in mind a clean break
from Iraq or one of several federal arrangements preferred by some leaders in
Irbil and Sulaimaniyah, one thing is beyond comprehension: that the world should
watch while an entire nation is seized peremptorily by the throat, attacked on
all fronts, dismembered, devastated, and humiliated.
In the face of this unprecedented act of punishment, the international community
should have immediately sounded a solemn warning to Iraq (and to its Iranian
masters and their ally of convenience, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan): Cease the aggression. Pull back the militias and the regular forces
supporting them to the lines that existed on Oct. 15.
In response to an advance aimed at choking Kurdistan’s second-largest city and
at breaking through the Peshmerga’s lines with support from Iraq’s 9th Armored
Division, the federal police, and counterterrorism units, the West—notably the
United States and France—should have called immediately for a ceasefire and
denounced this replay of Danzig in the Middle East.
And, seeing that the Iraqi forces and the militants of Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq did not
stand down, the international forces that were deployed in the area as part of
the battle against the Islamic State should have been positioned to help our
oldest and bravest ally in the region. For two years now, the Kurds have stood
against the Islamic State almost alone along a thousand-kilometer front line,
serving as the West’s rampart against barbarism.
One thing is beyond comprehension: that the world should watch while an entire
nation is seized peremptorily by the throat, attacked on all fronts,
dismembered, devastated, and humiliated. When the Iraqi army fled before the
Caliphate’s troops in the summer of 2014, it was the Kurds who held on and
retook the territory.
And if they were in Kirkuk on Monday it is, first of all, because they had been
a majority there until the Arabization imposed by Saddam Hussein, but also
because it is owing to the Kurds—and the Kurds alone—that the city did not
become a fiefdom of the Islamists like Mosul and Raqqa.
In other words, coming to their rescue was a matter of honor and justice.
On one side we had the sinister new Gang of Four (Iran, Turkey, Syria, and
Iraq), who are bound together by their hatred of democracy and human rights; on
the other we have a small but great people who aspire only to liberty, ours as
well as their own, and who harbor no aim to divide neighboring empires. What
form of blindness—or what base calculations—could have caused us to hesitate for
a second between the two?
I repeat: on one side, a clutch of dictatorships with which we, United States
and Europe, are engaged in a delicate balance of power that permits no lowering
of our guard and no concession on matters of principle; on the other, a proud
people who for a century have resisted successive attempts at subjugation and
whose crime today is to have voiced a desire to live in a society guided by the
very same principles that we in the West embrace. Who in Washington, Paris, or
London could have had any doubt? Who would have dared oppose calling the
Security Council into emergency session for a resolution to halt a war launched
by Baghdad while the corpse of the Islamic State was still twitching?
We should not have abandoned Kurdistan, the only real pole of stability in the
region.
We should not have allowed its population—nor the million and a half Christian,
Yazidi, and Arab refugees who have sought asylum among them—to be taken hostage.
This advance of Iraqi forces, and of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard that
supports them, in a part of the world where no troop movement, however
infinitesimal, escapes the eye of American satellites, would not have been
possible without the prior agreement of the U.S. State Department. And there—in
serving up Kurdistan on a silver platter to a state, Iran, that is otherwise
considered an adversary—lies an astonishing political miscalculation as well as
a glaring and appalling moral failure.
Before it is too late, let us extend a fraternal hand to this exemplary people
who, after a century of struggle, believed that they had finally glimpsed light
at the end of the tunnel.
When I say fraternal, I am thinking particularly of the United States, a nation
historically so close to Kurdistan in its struggle and whose image still burns
brightly in the hearts of Kurds of all faiths and persuasions.
***Translated from the French by Steven B. Kennedy.
**Bernard-Henri Lévy is a writer and documentary filmmaker. His Peshmerga!
(2016), a Special Selection at the 2017 Cannes Film Festival, portrayed the
struggle along the thousand-mile front line separating the Kurds from Islamic
State. His subsequent La Bataille de Mossoul (2017) explored the fight to retake
the city.
Iran and America: What next?
Mahan Abedin /MEM/October 17/17
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20171017-iran-and-america-what-next/#.WeZerzOCokc.twitter
Donald Trump’s incendiary attack
on Iran last Friday stands out as his most important action to date as US
president. Whilst his decision to decertify the landmark nuclear accord of 2015
was expected, it was Trump’s concerted effort at projecting the Islamic Republic
as darkly as possible that has raised eyebrows.
Trump’s stark depiction of Iran fits into the reductive “good and evil”
narrative which he first set out back in May. In diplomatic terms, this is the
boldest attack yet by any US president on the Islamic Republic. Inevitably it
will have profound consequences.
This article looks at the nature of Iran-US relations and Trump’s determination
to bring tensions to a head. The focus of analysis is not the nuclear accord, or
even Iran’s regional posture, but the underlying issues in Iran-US relations.
The contention is that what unfolds in the next three years will be crucial in
Iran-US relations, and may even partially settle the enmity. Either the US
grudgingly accepts Iran’s complex role in the region, or conversely Iran adapts
its policies, if not its overall approach, to grudgingly embrace a status quo
role.
Trump’s challenge
In keeping with his “America first” mantra, Donald Trump set out a list of
American grievances against Iran starting from the American hostage crisis of
1979-1980 to alleged Iranian attacks on US forces in Iraq. In diplomatic terms,
this is unoriginal stuff, not least because the Iranians have a long list of
grievances of their own which stretch back much further than 1979.
Starting with the Anglo-American engineered coup of August 1953 which overthrew
Iran’s first democratically-elected government, to American support for Iraq in
the long-running Iran-Iraq War and America’s special relationship with Israel,
Iran too has much to complain about.
But Trump’s speech went beyond diplomatic grandstanding to betray a level of
hostility, underpinned by multiple distortions and downright untruths, not shown
by any US president toward Iran since the Iranian revolution of 1979.
From fully embracing the Israeli and Saudi narrative on Iran, to simplifying the
Islamic Republic as a “corrupt dictatorship” and continually referring to it as
the “regime”, Trump’s rhetorical flourish was boundless. Moreover, his
provocative and calculated gesture of naming what Iranians refer to as the
Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf, was a clear indication that his invective
embraces the Iranian nation-state as a whole, not just the country’s ruling
system. It is worth noting that Iranians from all political backgrounds are
sensitive to any attempts at changing the name of the Persian Gulf.
Grandstanding and gesture politics aside, Trump has staked out an interesting
position by out-matching Iranian rulers in the rhetorical game. He is right to
point out that the worldview of Iran’s rulers is shaped by the slogans of “Death
to America” and “Death to Israel”. In the case of the latter Iran has been more
or less true to its word by pursuing policies which are deeply inimical to the
Jewish state.
But in the case of the US, despite what Trump appears to believe, Iran’s rulers
have gone out of their way to avoid conflict. Trump’s aggressive posture places
Iran’s rulers in a difficult position inasmuch as it throws down the ideological
gauntlet at them and exposes the gap in their rhetoric and actions.
Road to war?
Despite Trump’s aggressive posturing, and his apparent determination to destroy
the nuclear accord notwithstanding, Iran and the USA are not heading toward a
full-scale war. The prospect for war peaked three decades ago when the US
destroyed a quarter of the Iranian navy in April 1988 in the closing stages of
the Iran-Iraq War. There was another major spike in tensions, with a potential
to spark a limited inter-state conflict, a year later when pro-Iranian groups in
Lebanon hanged a member of the US marines in retaliation for the Israeli
abduction of Hezbollah leader Abdel-Karim Obeid.
One of the key reasons behind the Islamic Republic’s hostility toward the US is
the deeply-held belief in Tehran that the ultimate US policy on Iran is the
overthrow of its government. The so-called “regime change” policy is
periodically floated by US leaders and officials to intimidate the Iranians. It
was most recently suggested by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in a public
congressional hearing.
The US quest for regime change in Iran – quite apart from being hopelessly
unrealistic – speaks to Washington’s profound misunderstanding of the Islamic
Republic. Even America’s foremost veteran strategist, Henry Kissinger, displays
this misunderstanding by his quip that Iran must decide “whether it is a nation
or a cause”.
The Iranians don’t recognise a contradiction between expounding revolutionary
values whilst at the same time pursuing the national interest by conventional
means. In fact, they see it as a strength and a game changer. Thus, regionally
Iran pursues clear-eyed strategic objectives in the framework of an
ideologically-defined “Axis of Resistance”, whilst more broadly Iran uses the
full spectrum of diplomatic, intelligence and propaganda tools to advance its
interests on the global stage.
Even relatively sophisticated US analysis on Iran takes as its starting point
the utility of exploiting a putative divide between the Iranian people and their
government. No serious attention is given to the possibility that this divide
(even if we assume it exists) may not be exploitable in a strategic context, not
least because the Iranians will inevitably rally around their government in the
event of a serious confrontation with the US.
In the months and years ahead, as Iran-US tensions build up, the Islamic
Republic will skilfully alternate from revolutionary to status quo power with a
view to containing concerted US attempts at blunting Iran’s regional strategic
momentum.
Donald Trump is used to winning. In this case, he hasn’t fully reckoned with the
wily and resourceful nature of Iran’s rulers who are more than his match.
Europe's New Official History Erases Christianity, Promotes Islam
Giulio Meotti/Gatestone
Institute/October 17/17
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/?p=59597
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11188/europe-erases-christianity
"The patrons of the false Europe are bewitched by superstitions of inevitable
progress. They believe that History is on their side, and this faith makes them
haughty and disdainful, unable to acknowledge the defects in the post-national,
post-cultural world they are constructing." — The Paris Statement, signed by ten
respected European scholars.
German Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière's proposal to introduce Muslim
public holidays shows that when it comes to Islam, Europe's official
"post-Christian" secularism is simply missing in action.
A few days ago, some of Europe's most important intellectuals -- including
British philosopher Roger Scruton, former Polish Education Minister Ryszard
Legutko, German scholar Robert Spaemann and Professor Rémi Brague from the
Sorbonne in France -- issued "The Paris Statement". In their ambitious
statement, they rejected the "false Christendom of universal human rights" and
the "utopian, pseudo-religious crusade for a borderless world". Instead, they
called for a Europe based on "Christian roots", drawing inspiration from the
"Classical tradition" and rejecting multiculturalism:
"The patrons of the false Europe are bewitched by superstitions of inevitable
progress. They believe that History is on their side, and this faith makes them
haughty and disdainful, unable to acknowledge the defects in the post-national,
post-cultural world they are constructing. Moreover, they are ignorant of the
true sources of the humane decencies they themselves hold dear — as do we. They
ignore, even repudiate the Christian roots of Europe. At the same time they take
great care not to offend Muslims, who they imagine will cheerfully adopt their
secular, multicultural outlook".
In 2007, reflecting on the cultural crisis of the continent, Pope Benedict said
that Europe is now "doubting its very identity". In 2017, Europe took a further
step: creating a post-Christian pro-Islam identity. Europe's official buildings
and exhibitions have indeed been erasing Christianity and welcoming Islam.
One kind of official museum recently opened by the European Parliament, the
"House of the European History", costing 56 million euros. The idea was to
create a historical narrative of the postwar period around the pro-EU message of
unification. The building is a beautiful example of Art Deco in Brussels. As the
Dutch scholar Arnold Huijgen wrote, however, the house is culturally "empty":
"The French Revolution seems to be the birthplace of Europe; there is little
room for anything that may have preceded it. The Napoleonic Code and the
philosophy of Karl Marx receive a prominent place, while slavery and colonialism
are highlighted as the darker sides of European culture (...) But the most
remarkable thing about the House is that.as far as its account is concerned, it
is as if religion does not exist. In fact, it never existed and never impacted
the history of the continent (...) No longer is European secularism fighting the
Christian religion; it simply ignores every religious aspect in life
altogether".
The Brussels bureaucracy even deleted the Catholic roots of its official flag,
the twelve stars symbolizing the ideal of unity, solidarity and harmony among
the peoples of Europe. It was drawn by the French Catholic designer Arséne Heitz,
who apparently took his inspiration from the Christian iconography of Virgin
Mary. But the European Union's official explanation of the flag makes no mention
of these Christian roots. The European Monetary and Economic Department of the
European Commission then ordered Slovakia to redesign its commemorative coins by
eliminating the Christian Saints Cyril and Methonius. There is no mention of
Christianity in the 75,000 words of the aborted draft of the European
Constitution.
The European Commission ordered Slovakia to redesign its commemorative coins by
eliminating the Christian Saints Cyril and Methonius. German Interior Minister
Thomas de Maizière, of Angela Merkel's ruling Christian Democratic Party,
recently suggested introducing Muslim public holidays. "In places where there
are many Muslims, why can't we think about introducing a Muslim public
holiday?", he said. "The submission is moving ahead," replied Erika Steinbach,
the influential former chair of the Federation of Expellees -- Germans expelled
from various Eastern European countries during and after World War II.
Beatrix von Storch, a leading politician from Alternative for Germany Party (AfD),
just tweeted: "NO! NO! NO!". De Maizière's proposal shows that when it comes to
Islam, Europe's official "post-Christian" secularism is simply missing in
action. A few weeks ago, a European Union-funded exhibition, "Islam, It's also
our history!", was hosted in Brussels. The exhibition tracks the impact of Islam
in Europe. An official statement claims: "The historical evidence displayed by
the exhibition – the reality of an old-age Muslim presence in Europe and the
complex interplay of two civilisations that fought against each other but also
interpenetrated each other – underpins an educational and political endeavour:
helping European Muslims and non Muslims alike to better grasp their common
cultural roots and cultivate their shared citizenship".
Isabelle Benoit, a historian who helped design the exhibition, told AP: "We want
to make clear to Europeans that Islam is part of European civilisation and that
it isn't a recent import but has roots going back 13 centuries". The official
European establishment has turned its back on Christianity. The establishment
appear unaware of the extent to which the continent and its people still depend
on the moral guidance of its humanitarian values, especially at a time when
radical Islam has launched a civilization challenge to the West. "It is simply a
problem of a packing that tends to fill a 'void'", just wrote Ernesto Galli
della Loggia in the Italian daily newspaper Il Corriere della Sera. "It is
impossible to ignore that behind the packing are two great theological and
political traditions -- that of the Russian Orthodoxy and Islam -- while behind
the 'void' there is only the fading of the Christian consciousness of the
European West".
That is why it is hard to understand the "logic" behind the official European
animosity toward Christianity and its attraction to a basically totalitarian
Islam. Europe could easily be secular without being militantly anti-Christian.
It is easier to understand why thousands of Poles just took part in a mass
protest along Poland's borders to voice their opposition to "secularization and
Islam's influence", which is exactly the same as the official crazy EU credo.
During the Second World War, the Allies avoided bombing Brussels, because it was
to be the site of European rebirth. If the European elite continue with this
cultural repudiation of their Judeo-Christian-Humanistic culture, the city could
be its grave.
**Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and
author.
© 2017 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
N.B: The European Commission ordered Slovakia to redesign its commemorative
coins by eliminating the Christian Saints Cyril and Methonius. (Image sources:
Coin - European Commission; Bratislava, Slovakia - Frettie/Wikimedia Commons)
From Monty Python to Allah: London's New Mega
Mosque
Judith Bergman/Gatestone Institute/October 17/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11183/london-new-mega-mosque
"We do not know what they are preaching as [it is] all in Arabic." — A
petitioner against the Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham mosque, in the middle of
one of London's two largely Jewish areas.
"[Ayatollah Syed Mohammed Al-Shirazi]... would constantly encourage the
establishment of Hussaini centers across the world, especially in non-Islamic
countries... so we can propagate the teachings of the Ahlulbayt." — Leading
members of the Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham mosque describing its 30-year
history and why it was established.
The Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Hussaini Al-Shirazi, a leading Iranian cleric who
resides in the city of Qom, has a list of religious centers and mosques with
which he appears to be involved. Among them is the Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham
in London.
A new Shia Muslim mega mosque and Islamic center – measuring over 3,500 square
meters and with room for 3,000 people -- has opened in Golders Green, one of
only two largely Jewish areas in London. The Shia Muslim religious center,
Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham, owns the mosque.
The mosque is situated in the Hippodrome, a prominent building centrally located
in North London. The Hippodrome was built in 1913 as a 3,000-seat music hall and
for more than 30 years housed the BBC Concert Orchestra. Two episodes of the
first series of Monty Python's Flying Circus were recorded there in 1969. After
the BBC left the building in 2005, a Jewish group wanted to convert the building
into a place of worship but was rejected, because the planning applications
stipulated that the building should be used for entertainment. In March 2007, it
was purchased by an evangelical Christian center. After the church center
closed, the Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham center acquired it.
Because the building is a so-called grade II building, special permission is
needed to change the purpose of the building. The Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham
has applied to the local city council for permission to use the building as a
'place of worship'. The application is still pending-- and worship there is
therefore, strictly speaking, illegal -- but the mosque is operating
nevertheless. It apparently officially opened on September 8, and has been in
frequent use since, as is evident from the many photos shared on the Hussainiyat
Al-Rasool Al-Adham Facebook page.
A partial screenshot of a post from the Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham Facebook
page, advertising the opening of the new mega mosque.
"This is a great move for us and we are very pleased and excited to be in
Golders Green in such a diverse area. We can't wait to get to know our
neighbours and plan to welcome them at an open day sometime in December... We
will be reaching out to the local churches and synagogues so we can build strong
ties with the community," Ahmed Al-Kazemi, the spokesperson for the Hussainiyat
Al-Rasool Al-Adham mosque told the Jewish chronicle in September. It appears
unlikely that forging ties with neighbors will be a high priority, as one young
member of the mosque explained in a recent fundraising video for the new mega
mosque:
"Growing up in this country, same as any other Western country, it is very
difficult for the youth to stay on the straight path... it is very easy to stray
yourself away from the straight path because of the friends you make at school
or at work or anywhere, which is not mixed with your own people. So the
Hussainiyah [the Shia mosque] was there as a backbone to us... where if they saw
any of us doing anything wrong there would always be a person to advise you and
put you in the right path..."
In the fundraising video, leading members of the Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham
describe the 30-year history of Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham and why it was
established. An elderly cleric, not named in the video, said:
"[Ayatollah Syed Mohammed Al-Shirazi[1]] ... would constantly encourage the
establishment of Hussaini centers across the world, especially in non-Islamic
countries and thus would encourage people to travel and reside in Western
countries [at this point the cleric uses the term 'hijrah' to describe Islamic
migration into the West]. I was one of those, who were advised to reside in the
West; so we can propagate the teachings of the Ahlulbayt[2]. I arrived in London
in 1993. The Hussainiah programmes then took place in an apartment in Edgware
Road [in London], which we would attend. At the time these were organized by the
late Ayatollah Sheikh al-Garawi..."
The apartment on Edgware Road in London was subsequently exchanged for a larger
property, a former garage and car storage facility, at 120 Cricklewood Lane in
North London. After 20 years at the Cricklewood property, a younger cleric
explained, 'we were under pressure from various angles to sell the venue in
search of a more suitable space'.
Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham sold their old converted garage and warehouse for
a remarkable £4.5 million in January 2017. The property was apparently only
valued at about one tenth of that sum and properties in that area apparently
sell at a fraction of that price.
The Islamic charity that runs Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham, the Center for
Islamic Enlightenment (also known as Markaz El Tathgheef El Eslami, which has at
its stated purpose, 'to promote the advancement of the Islamic religion by all
or any of the following means: Providing religious centers for worship of the
Islamic religion, providing free booklets and supplements to followers,
advancement of education of the public concerning the Islamic religious
culture)[3] bought the prominent Hippodrome building with its central location
in the affluent and attractive suburb of Golders Green for £5.2 million in July
– not that much more than for what they had sold their old converted garage. The
identity of the extremely generous buyer of the Cricklewood property remains
unknown.
The conversion of the Hippodrome into a mega-mosque has created local protests
in Golders Green. A petition against it has been launched, signed by more than
4,000 people. According to one petitioner:
"To place a large Muslim institution in the heart of one of London's only two
Jewish communities is a highly dangerous undertaking and one that can only
result in violence and terrorism."
Another petitioner wrote: "The appearance of burkas [and] veils has changed the
area... the traffic is too much and we do not know what they are preaching as
[it is] all in Arabic".
While Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham poses as a local Islamic community that is
interested in diversity and interfaith dialogue, it would appear that it is
under the direct influence of Iran. The Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Hussaini Al-Shirazi,
a leading Iranian cleric who resides in the city of Qom, has a list of religious
centers and mosques with which he appears to be involved (they are listed as his
"Works" on his website). Among them are three centers or mosques in Canada and
one mosque in Europe: The Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham in London. Ayatollah
Sayed Sadiq Hussaini Al-Shirazi, the brother of the late Ayatollah Syed Mohammed
Al-Shirazi, is cited in the fundraising video mentioned above as the person who
"would constantly encourage the establishment of Hussaini centers across the
world, especially in non-Islamic countries and thus would encourage people to
travel and reside in Western countries".
At the end of the fundraising video, a spokesperson for the Hussainiyat Al-Rasool
Al-Adham says that the mosque is very happy with their new location and that
they expect to be there for the next "100, 200 or 300 years".
*Judith Bergman is a columnist, lawyer and political analyst.
[1] A very influential Iranian cleric and Shia Muslim scholar, who belonged to
the inner circle, at least initially, of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
[2] The Ahlulbayt are certain descendants of Mohammad, his 'household', among
them Hussain, the grandson of Muhammad. Shia Muslims frequently call their
houses of prayer and study Hussainiah centers, after Hussain.
[3] In 2014 an inquiry was opened into the charity's dealings, as it had
apparently extended a very large loan to a commercial company, Ahlbayt TV.
© 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.
What the KRG’s Loss of Kirkuk Means for Iraq
by Max J. Joseph/Syria Comment/October 17th, 2017
http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/krgs-loss-kirkuk-means-iraq/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Syriacomment+%28Syria+Comment%29
Too many takes on Kirkuk have left me cringing. From Kurds, Arabs, Westerners
and pretty much everyone else. Observing the mixture of hysteria and celebration
was profound and jarring enough to provoke me into this small piece of
commentary. This piece won’t be focused on the small details concerning
logistics and troop movements ongoing throughout the northern territories at the
time of publishing, but what I think they represent and how we got here.
As part of my MSc thesis 8 years ago or so, I wrote that Kirkuk should be under
Federal Government control and eventually given special status in accordance
with Iraqi constitutional law, satisfying all segments of its diverse
population. No part of that once relatively popular solution included the
complete fragmentation and breakdown of Kurdish security forces and a political
sundering so vast it might spell the end of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)
itself. But that’s where we are now.
Overreaching
There is no doubt that including the “disputed” territories in the unilaterally
imposed referendum is proving to be the fatal misstep (in quotes because I’ve
never accepted the “dispute”, and don’t want to dignify KRG claims on lands
belonging to Assyrians and other minorities outside of the KRI). The Barzani
family and its allies within the PUK and other, smaller proxies made the
calculation that they would have more leverage, more clout, and a tighter grip
on the aspirations of the Kurdistan Region if they delivered this particular
referendum question to the people, whatever the fallout afterwards.
Western actors made no secret of their opposition to it, nevermind regional
actors such as Turkey and Iran. Nevertheless, the referendum was confirmed the
night before its scheduled execution in all its shambolic glory. Voting patterns
betrayed endemic corruption: ballot boxes were either stuffed or shuttled away
secretly according to eyewitnesses, in keeping with previous elections and
referenda conducted by the KRG. Residents were harassed by Kurdish asayish
calling and knocking on their doors, state employees were bused to polling
stations and watched over carefully by armed soldiers.
What was meant to be an expression of the Kurdish peoples’ legitimate will was
transformed into a ploy by illegitimate KRG leaders to have more cards to play
in their negotiations with Baghdad. The miscalculation on the KRG’s part was
thinking these negotiations would even take place given the nature of the
referendum question put forward, or how much it would provide Baghdad a newfound
confidence to reject any meeting using its result as a staging ground for any
deal-making.
Kirkuk was the only thing the KRG could easily be isolated on, as opposed to
lands further north where more complications would have arisen in response to
this kind of assertive display of Federal authority. Even with these
complications however, it seems Federal Government forces are pushing further
north after their political victory in Kirkuk, with reports of peshmerga
positions being abandoned in Sinjar and the rest of the Nineveh Plain. The KRG
gambled and lost, and that was very much the Barzani family’s call. Greed is a
horrible thing, and it remains their cardinal sin.
KDP vs PUK and the Rhetoric of Treachery
A lot of statements, party-focused slander and rumours are circulating among KRG
media and Kurdish individuals in the aftermath of Kirkuk. The infighting and
self-flagellation really is something to behold. Yet, it truly boggles the mind
how this is being interpreted, especially from my vantage point (of being
underground and looking up at this mess).
Some Kurds are saying that the lack of bloodshed and violence on the part of the
peshmerga and its commanders represents a grand betrayal. That they should have
defended the city against all comers. Ex Governor Karim desperately asked
ordinary citizens to take up arms and resist before he himself fled to Erbil.
Peshmerga commanders were interviewed by KRG media and they promised “massacres”
if Kirkuk was approached by Federal forces. None of this happened, and there is
a weird air of regret and mourning wafting around the commentary on the
internet.
The relevant point here on Kirkuk remains the same for me: the city should be
administered in a fair way which represents the people of the city, and not as a
vehicle to fill the coffers of the Barzani family. Individuals aligned with the
KDP and PUK have taken to social media and declaring each other traitors. No
doubt, images of peshmerga crying after having fled can be categorized as the
anguish of terrified soldiers, of stolen hopes and dreams, and worry for family
members. But why has it even come to this? Why was it so important for the KRG
to assert itself as the sole overseers of a clearly heterogeneous city which
they could be cornered on and forced into an embarrassing withdrawal in this
way?
The KRG, dominated for years by the politically bankrupt KDP, were stubborn
enough to go ahead with the referendum in the face of almost universal
opposition. The problem was that they went one step further by incorporating
post-2014 newly conquered lands into the question. I’ve said this so many times:
acquiring leverage for expansion and not independence had always been the
purpose of the referendum. The KDP et al had calculated that they needed
ownership of Kirkuk’s oil for any prospect of independence, so expansion was the
first priority. From the peoples’ perspective, there simply is no real
independence with a black market economy controlled by autocrats. The referendum
was a heist, and Baghdad was gradually emboldened enough to foil it.
This is not meant to antagonize the rights, well-being and desire for
self-determination of the Kurdish people. All people should have equal rights
and be free to live in dignity. What is beyond doubt for me however is how
people are expected to do this under the auspices of a kleptocratic mafia? Did
Kurds really think it was possible?
“Big Picture” Nationalism
A phrase I’m sarcastically coining these days: big picture nationalism is a
brand of nationalism which whitewashes the historical and present crimes and
failures of leaders within a community (for the greater good they are hoping
for).
So many people have decried the use of Western armour and weapons deployed in
the reassertion of Federal authority in Kirkuk displacing the peshmerga, but
where was the outrage when Western weapons were used by KDP-controlled Rojava
Peshmerga units against local Yazidi fighters in Sinjar?
So many people have lamented this historic retreat from Kirkuk, but where were
the lamentations for Yazidis and Assyrians when Peshmerga disarmed and abandoned
them to ISIS in 2014, only to return years later and declare themselves their
liberators and bosses? (Is oil is more important than lives?)
So many people have demonstrated against actions targeting the Kurdish people,
but why is there so much silence in the face of an illegitimate and divisive
president with countless deaths on his head?
So many people are calling the PUK traitors when big picture nationalism entails
they probably support the whims of a family who collaborated with Saddam against
his own people after Anfal to retain power.
In the face of genocide, absolutely untold levels of corruption, and a list of
betrayals so damning nobody should be allowed back from, Barzani’s regime and
its policies still enjoy the support (albeit begrudging in many parts) of large
segments of the local Kurdish population. It seems to me that there is the vague
hope that these lands and therefore Kurdistan’s future can and should be secured
in any way possible, even if it means backing a tyrant. It is this dream of
Kurdistan first and then we can deal with Barzani’s dictatorship later, when in
reality, the only thing that is real right now is Barzani’s dictatorship. Yet a
little voice calls out: free yourself from this ghetto and perhaps greater
freedoms lie ahead.
Unless this is meaningfully addressed by the Kurdish people, dreams will remain
dreams, and wounds and divisions will deepen. When Kurds voted “yes” to
Barzani’s referendum, they weren’t voting on independence, they were voting on
the legitimacy of the actors who were administering it and their own sordid
ambitions. People know that al-Abadi can be voted out if he fails to deliver.
That is reassuring and it makes him act accordingly. Barzani has never had such
pressure, and that is a large part of why we are where are today.
The KRG: One of the Biggest Failures in Governance in Recent Memory?
Even with billions of dollars in funding and aid, weapons, mentoring, Western
hand-holding and protection, a near enough limitless output of propaganda, media
access, long-term concentrated lobbying efforts, and backing from every section
of Western society, the KRG has proven to be fundamentally inept at good
governance. After all, what has all of this time and energy produced? A
redundant parliament, shadowy institutions, fatally divided and bickering
security forces built along tribal lines— all being sucked through a fiscal
black hole. That is the sum of everyone’s investment and support.
Imagine pinning your hopes and dreams regarding the protection of Kirkuk on a
fighting force that’s dependent on already alienated foreign powers for its
salaries. Its no wonder a faction of the PUK reportedly caved to Baghdad’s
authority, setting off the unfolding domino effect in Kirkuk and the wider
region. Its no wonder Federal troops have entered unopposed into Sinjar. Its no
wonder Peshmerga are reportedly withdrawing from positions in Bashiqa and other
areas in Nineveh.
Assyrians and many other people in territories the KRG have expanded into are
literally praying for the sight of Baghdad-aligned armour rolling through their
neighbourhoods and tearing down newly installed portraits of Barzani. That is
the reality of how bad the KRG is perceived, but you wouldn’t know it because of
all of the media noise and heckling. With Baghdad, minorities are one degree of
separation from sovereign power. With the KRG, we are two degrees away, and
underneath a layer of corruption and nepotism so thick we can’t see any route up
and out.
Yes, there is relative security in the KRG, but that is because it is a police
state. Yes, you will be safe if you swear allegiance, not to a feudal king or a
lord one thousand years ago, but a political party in the information age. Yes,
you might start resenting the current regime, but you can’t criticize it and
there is no hope it will ever change. If there was any hope, the KDP would not
still be the only dominant party, and its opposition would not be as pathetic
and skeletal as they are now. Where is the alternative? Where is the anger
manifesting inward and producing change?
The Federal Government, for all its innumerable faults, is more democratic.
There is more potential to improve, to access things, to change things, and to
work towards something than there is with the tribalism and patronage systems
defining the KRG. That is backed up by democratic elections and a functioning
parliament. What remains dysfunctional today in Baghdad has more scope to be
fixed but the same cannot be said of the KRG. Minorities need strong central
government, because strong central governments are the only bodies who can
afford to decentralize. They are secure enough to do so.
Nineveh
With emerging reports of Federal forces arriving in Sinjar and Bashiqa and the
ensuing peshmerga retreat from those areas (their second mass retreat in three
years against two different forces) it still remains to be seen how far these
Federal forces will go. If they arrive in Alqosh, the besieged town in the far
north of the Nineveh Plain, there will be a joyous celebration by its residents.
Alqosh’s residents proudly waved Iraqi flags which served to protest the removal
of their mayor and imposition of the KDP stooge, Lara Yousif Zaia, as well as
make clear their position on the KRG-imposed referendum on their town (which
went ahead, returning over 4000 yes votes, despite reality on the ground
indicating no more than 400 people voted, and overwhelmingly “no”).
Asserting Federal authority back into Nineveh after years of KDP domination
represents a loosening of the noose around the necks of resident minority
groups. From being sidelined and co-opted and divided politically, having their
lands stolen, and their security totally unreliable — these groups were on the
brink of annihilation. Going forward, this arrangement should now halt, or
perhaps even reverse.
The security vacuum left by the peshmerga will now be filled by federal forces
and aligned groups— meaning for Yazidis, PMU forces aligned with the Federal
Government and for Assyrians, the Nineveh Plain Protection Units (NPU). With the
NPU, Assyrians already have in place a trained fighting force (recognized by the
US and the coalition) ready to be bolstered, equipped and expanded by the
Federal Government in our ancestral lands.
Understating how important this is does the NPU’s political mission and its
ideological foundation a disservice — this is a force of Assyrians from Nineveh
who had formed as a response to ISIS’ onslaught on their towns. They have
partaken in the liberation of Assyrian towns and villages alongside the Iraqi
Army and coalition forces, but have been cut off from the Northern Nineveh Plain
by the expanded peshmerga line which has isolated towns such as Telskuf, Alqosh,
Batnaya, and Bashiqa, where many of the NPU’s soldiers are from.
Recent events are proving that their political positioning within the Iraqi
security landscape has been astute and well-informed. Many have doubted their
alignment, their purpose and even their refusal to engage in armed conflict with
peshmerga forces encircling Assyrian towns, but this patience and pragmatism is
seemingly paying off with the reassertion of Federal authority.
Every End is a New Beginning
I say this with no real exaggeration: Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi has
played his hand masterfully. Between taking the fight to ISIS, controlling the
Hash’d al Shabi, managing relationships with Western powers as well as Turkey
and Iran, navigating the crash in oil prices, plus the fractious relationship
with the KRG, he has genuinely proven to be a very capable leader. His
re-election after four years in office looks almost a certainty now.
The KRG in had everything seemingly on its side. Any misstep by the Federal
Government would have been magnified as a disaster, but these missteps have not
transpired. What has instead come to pass has been a considered and assertive
approach by the Federal Government, even in the face of endless provocation by
the KRG and regional powers. Where people have tried to escalate matters and
call for blood, al-Abadi has called for calm and reconciliation. Consider this
for a moment: Federal forces marched into oil-rich Kirkuk (some commentators
hilariously started dubbing it “the Kurds’ Jerusalem”, or “the new Kobane”)
almost without incident. They made no secret of their intention to do this in
the days preceding and it came about as a result of political deal-making headed
by al-Abadi in the background.
I am not going to speculate on where the KRG goes from here, if it goes anywhere
at all. It just seems cruel at this stage given the deluge of rumours abound
regarding regional fractures and new alliances. What is clear is that this
crisis is one the Kurdish people must address in a room full of
mirrors — something I’m not optimistic about given an amplification of the
ruinous siege mentality cultivated by the old parties. Nevertheless, there is
nobody left to blame for this state of affairs but their own, admittedly
unelected leaders.
What many Kurds deem a betrayal, I cant help but feel relieved that very little
blood was shed. Kurdish affairs have long orbited around the bloated and
parasitical old parties and their whims. These chronic failings, which I and
others who have been attacked, derided, and mocked for repeatedly pointing out,
have been endemic and unaddressed for years. Now you can see the fruits of these
failings and how they have contributed to Iraq growing in confidence as a
sovereign state, a state many were classifying as “failed”, in the most volatile
region in the world. If the heavily maligned, “failed” Iraqi state managed to
completely outmaneuver the KRG politically and militarily, how inept must the
latter be, considering the support it has received?
As always, I return to the Assyrian perspective. For us, recent events
illustrate a resurgent Iraq, and I think (with a healthy degree of caution and
hesitation) that may be a good thing for us and our future in the country. No
doubt, it’s clear that the collapse of KRG positions in the disputed territories
has been welcomed by the vast majority of Nineveh’s residents and the worldwide
diaspora, but much hard work lies ahead in undoing a decade of hurt and neglect
by both the KRG and the Federal Government respectively. We should enter this
new epoch with open minds, but with the knowledge that things may quickly
descend into oppression and tyranny once again. We know the signs now. Call them
out ruthlessly and say “never again.”
__________________________
Max J. Joseph is an Assyrian artist and writer focusing on minority group issues
within the Middle East. His work has included presenting research within the
European Parliament detailing the security situation for minorities in the
Nineveh Plain, Iraq. He holds a BA Philosophy and an MSc International Public
Policy, where his thesis centered on addressing the Assyrian question in Iraq
post-2003.
Win-Win: How Tax Reform Will Help Defense
Spending and the Economy
Peter Huessy/Gatestone Institute/October 17/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11108/defense-spending-economy
While America's adversaries have been increasing their defense budgets and the
power of their armed forces, the United States has been doing the opposite.
Although the Senate and House Armed Services Committees passed a bill for 2018
that would exceed President Trump's defense budget request, there is still the
problem of the 2011 Budget Control Act, which caps defense spending at an
extremely low level. Modernization has been curtailed significantly.
Unfortunately, there remains a widely held assumption that unless tax reform is
"revenue-neutral," deficits will increase. The trouble with this assumption is
that although revenue-neutral tax reform may make the system more efficient or
fair, it neither increases government revenue nor generates additional
investment in the private sector. The purpose of the new tax-reform plan is to
do both: increase revenue and spur economic growth at the same time.
One crucial aspect of the new tax reform bill, unveiled by President Donald
Trump and the "Big Six" group of Republican tax negotiators at the end of
September, is the potentially positive effect it will have on the US defense
budget, which is sorely in need of an increase.
The assertion made by former President Barack Obama during his final State of
the Union address in January 2016, that the United States spends "more on our
military than the next eight nations combined," bolstered the belief that
America's national-security needs are beyond being met. However, as a recent
Heritage Foundation report reveals, such claims, which have led to the
conclusion that the United States allocates an excessive amount to the defense
budget, are "disingenuous," as they "give no consideration to the decisions
driving defense spending or the factors contributing to costs across national
economies."
As the Heritage Foundation points out, although "the U.S. military remains the
largest and most capable in the world... [t]he security environment in which in
which the U.S. military is expected to operate has grown increasingly complex,
and national defense resourcing warrants more than a solitary sentence of
discussion."
America's major military adversaries, Russia and China, pay their soldiers,
sailors and pilots far less than America pays the members of its own forces,
which enables Moscow and Beijing to spend more on weapons and research. In
addition, unlike the U.S., Russia and China are not transparent about their
defense spending at best, and lie about it at worst, with the former reportedly
"cooking its defense books," and the latter publishing nothing about its nuclear
weapons program. In addition, while America's adversaries have been increasing
their defense budgets and the power of their armed forces, the United States has
been doing the opposite. As former US Senator James Talent wrote in 2013:
"...[T]he picture isn't pretty. Congress and the president [Obama] will probably
agree to increase defense spending by a small amount, but they will probably
also take money away from future defense budgets. This will allow them to say
that they have increased defense spending while in reality the wholesale
unraveling of American power will continue."
In addition -- according to USAF Maj Gen Garrett Harencak -- during decades of a
"procurement holiday," America failed to upgrade its nuclear-deterrent
capabilities.
This is the bad news. The good news is:
"For the first time in nearly 35 years, the United States is back on track to
modernize its entire nuclear deterrent. After previously approving the building
of 12 new Columbia class submarines and a new B-21 nuclear-capable bomber, the
United States has selected two contractors to compete to build the next
land-based intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) nuclear deterrent. This
would be the first new land-based ICBM since the Peacekeeper missile was
deployed in 1986 and completes a nuclear modernization effort plan promised by
the administration."
Unfortunately, however, the defense budget as it stands is not adequate to
support the plan. Although the Senate and House Armed Services Committees passed
a bill for 2018 that would exceed President Trump's defense budget request,
there is still the problem of the 2011 Budget Control Act, which caps defense
spending at an extremely low level. Even with an upward adjustment in 2014-15,
the shortfall has remained, and modernization has been curtailed significantly.
The situation is further complicated by the current federal deficit, which
approaches $600 billion annually. With infrastructure investment requirements
and significant multiple billions now needed for hurricane relief, it is not
surprising that much of the accepted narrative is that extra money for the
military is impossible under these circumstances.
This conventional wisdom is wrong, however. Historically, tax reform has secured
more, not less, revenue for the federal government -- and the current plan would
be no different, thus enabling a restoration of military spending.
Unfortunately, there remains a widely held assumption that unless tax reform is
"revenue-neutral," deficits will increase. The trouble with this assumption is
that although revenue-neutral tax reform may make the system more efficient or
fair -- as was the aim of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 -- it neither increases
government revenue nor generates additional investment in the private sector.
The purpose of the new tax-reform plan is to do both: increase revenue and spur
economic growth at the same time. Months before it was proposed, however -- and
it has yet to be reviewed thoroughly, debated or passed by Congress -- the
Congressional Budget Office already projected an annual revenue increase of
$160-$212 billion over the next decade, even with a low 2.1% average economic
growth rate. A 3% growth rate created by tax reform would increase revenue by a
hefty $350 billion annually. This means that it would be possible to increase
defense spending by $60-70 billion per year, an increase of 11% over current
spending, which is lower than the 13.2% increase in defense spending that
Congress approved in 1997-2000 -- while the country was also undergoing welfare
reform, balancing the budget and implementing tax cuts.
To attract sufficient votes in Congress to pass the current bill,
defense-spending increases should probably be coupled with additional private
and public funding for cyber- and border-security, long-term health care
research, and nationwide infrastructure improvement.
It is time that the false notions that America neither needs an increase in
defense spending, nor can afford it, are put to rest.
**Dr. Peter Huessy is President of GeoStrategic Analysis, a defense consulting
firm he founded in 1981, as well as Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at
the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. He was also for 20 years, the
senior defense consultant at the National Defense University Foundation.
© 2017 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
The Old Arab Fear Tactic That Came to Washington
Nonie Darwish/Gatestone Institute/October 17/17
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10784/washington-arab-fear-tactic
The true threat to the US, the West, and even stable Arab governments, as Egypt
is realizing, is political Islam as furthered by groups such the Muslim
Brotherhood, ISIS, al-Qaeda and their offshoots.
This real threat has become a terrible burden to every Muslim head of state and
is behind all the political chaos, coups and revolutions currently raging
throughout the Islamic world.
In a chaotic, propaganda-prone area of the world, Qatar's Al Jazeera has always
reported sympathetically about Islamist groups and promoters of sharia, and
against moderate Arab leaders. No moderate leader could survive under such
conditions.
It is unfortunate that the tactics of the Arab media -- to accuse people of
collusion in order to silence any opposition -- have now moved into US
mainstream media regarding Trump and Russia, which the US media would apparently
like to regard as their new "enemies." This the same media that defends sharia
law and inaccurately insists that Muslim terrorists who shout "Allahu Akbar"
have "nothing to do with Islam."
Now that the note supposedly showing "collusion" between the Trump campaign and
Russia has been outed by Foreign Policy as mainly an attempted Russian hit-job
on William Browder, what is the true threat to the United States?
For months, the lawless FBI has snubbing subpoenas (is complying with subpoenas
optional?), and avoiding transparency under Special Counsel Robert Mueller[1]
and his equally lawless, crime-"challenged" "investigation." The true threat to
the United states -- if not Mueller and the FBI itself -- is not the president,
his campaign or even the Russians. Moreover, it is not exactly a news-flash that
many countries have been spying on one another for ages.
"Collusion with Russia" was just the the newest dirty word in American politics
created by anti-Trump political operatives and the media. It seems intended to
confuse the public in order to tarnish Trump's reputation and bring down his
administration. It is an extremely old ruse.
Collusion," or the "appearance of collusion," has been a common fear tactic used
by Arab media for centuries. Fear tactics are the only solution in cultures that
refuse to deal with the truth in the open.
The major red line that no citizen of a totalitarian system can ever cross is
engaging in behavior that might bring about an accusation of "collusion" --
collaboration with enemies or perceived enemies. Arab citizens have learned to
avoid any contacts, friendships, communication, shaking hands or even being in
the same room with "undesirable" enemies of the state. Try asking any Arab
diplomat on how he or she acts and feels in the presence of an Israeli official.
For decades, when Israeli officials gave speeches in the United Nations, Arabs
left the room.
In much of the Middle East, Christians, if they refrain from praising Islam and
Muslims or blame them for their oppression, get the same treatment as Jews.
In Egypt, in the days of anti-Semitic tyranny when the mere appearance of any
kind of friendship, or just being in the same room with a Jew, could mean death,
Christians always had to keep their distance from the Jews: the price to pay was
simply too high.
After a visit to the United Kingdom in my youth, after innocently telling a
journalist college friend that I had met Jews in the UK and could not believe
how nice they were, her response was: "You know what happens to those who
collude with Jews? They come back to Egypt in a box." Shortly after, when a few
of us teenagers, speaking English combined with some French and Arabic -- not
uncommon among some Cairo residents -- were stopped in a village on the way from
Cairo to Alexandria, the villagers called us Jews and the police were called. It
took a while to get out of that mess.
Reality, finally, has hit Egypt. Its enemies' list had to change in the face of
the constant challenge to the stability of moderate governments. The true threat
to stable Arab governments, as Egypt is realizing, is not Israel; it is
political Islam from groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, and so on.
This real threat has become a terrible burden to every Muslim head of state and
is behind all the political chaos, coups and revolutions currently raging
throughout the Islamic world.
After Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia, Arab nations developed the courage to
demand shutting down Al Jazeera headquarters in Qatar. In a chaotic,
propaganda-prone area of the world, Qatar's Al Jazeera has always reported
sympathetically about Islamist groups and promoters of sharia, and against
moderate Arab leaders. In an atmosphere such as that, no moderate Muslim leader
is able to bring his nation out from under the coercion of jihadist terror and
sharia tyranny.
Every Arab leader knows that to bring modernity and serious reformation would be
considered a violation of sharia. Islamists are not only feared because of their
promotion of terror, but they are also considered the guardians of sharia.
Islamic law dictates that every Muslim head of state must rule by sharia, wage
jihad against non-Muslim nations and never allow himself or his citizens to
collude with, or seek peace with, Islam's enemies. No moderate leader could
survive under such conditions.
King Salman of Saudi Arabia is to be commended for finally issuing a decree that
allows half the population of his country, women, to obtain the paperwork to
drive -- but they usually still need permission from a male guardian to leave
the home alone.
As the last thing the Muslim public is ready for is the truth, convoluted games
and accusations are the only way that many Arab leaders think they can preserve
their legitimacy. The war between moderates, who want less sharia, and
Islamists, who want full sharia, consists -- regardless of "truth" -- of winning
over the average Arab citizen and leading him to believe that they represent the
"real Islam".
All sides thereby play the game of "collusion". When Islamists accuse moderate
leaders of collusion with the West, moderates respond by accusing Islamists of
being the creation of the West. On many Arab media outlets, ISIS is the creation
of the West (as was Al-Qaeda before it).
As a moderate Arab leader, it is therefore not easy to survive without the
constant threat of an Islamist uprising. President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt
and King Abdullah of Jordan are considered moderate leaders, and many want them
to stay that way, but the pressure from Islamists is immense. Recently Sisi said
that he wants to promote a new form of fear, a "phobia against bringing down the
State." One can sympathize with his attempt to put into words the obstacles to
governing in a majority Muslim nation. Sisi seems to want to encourage Egyptians
to develop a fear of succumbing to radical propaganda that aims to bring down
moderate governments. What he seems to be telling Egyptians is that revolutions,
coups d'état and assassinations are not the solution to every problem but
rather, it is -- or should be -- the ballot box.
Egypt's President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi seems to want to encourage Egyptians to
develop a fear of succumbing to radical propaganda that aims to bring down
moderate governments. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons)
After a year of being ruled by Egypt's former President Mohamed Morsi, the
majority of Egyptians turned against the Muslim Brotherhood -- a decision that
understandably does not sit well with pro-sharia media. These, such as Al
Jazeera, are dedicated to trying to save the reputation of the Muslim
Brotherhood, sharia and Islam itself, at any cost. Their number-one enemy has
become critics of jihad and sharia, especially those who live in Western
freedom. The Arab media's "solution" to a mass defection from extremism is to
accuse moderates and critics of sharia not only of being "collaborators" with
infidels but also that they "collude" with terrorists.
The current goal of the Arab media, especially Al Jazeera, is to portray critics
of jihad and sharia, as well as apostates, as being just as bad as Islamists, if
not worse.
Because the views of the critics of sharia and jihad resonate with average
Arabs, radical Arab media outlets have no choice but to counter the enthusiasm
for modernity and freedom of the public with false accusations: that critics of
jihad and sharia are in fact colluding with terrorist groups. The Arab media
evidently see such wildly false accusations against critics of jihad as the only
way, in their minds, to save radical Islam.
Today, a segment of Egyptian society, especially the vulnerable and uneducated,
have been lulled into believing the propaganda that moderates and critics of
jihad and sharia are colluding not only with infidel enemies of Islam, but also
with radical Muslim groups such as the unpopular Muslim Brotherhood.
A prominent Egyptian magazine, Rose El Youssef, in 2007, falsely portrayed Dr.
Wafa Sultan and this author in their front-page as "alt-jihadists" --
collaborators with the Taliban and the Muslim Brotherhood. Yesterday, a close
friend in Egypt sent a warning of rumors in the Egyptian media, after the
assassination of a journalist by the Muslim Brotherhood, that the Muslim
Brotherhood has apostate "collaborators" in the West such as me. This shameless
and reckless propaganda is intended to confuse the Egyptian public about who
their true enemies and friends really are.
It is unfortunate that the tactics of the Arab media -- to accuse people of
"collusion" in order to silence any opposition -- are now moving into US
mainstream media regarding Trump and Russia, which the US media regard as their
new "enemies" -- the same media that defends sharia law, Islam and Islamic
terrorism in the West.
**Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of "Wholly Different;
Why I chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values"
[1] Like the false investigation that wrongly accused Scooter Libby of a leaking
the name of then CIA agent Valerie Plame, that they knew all the while had been
leaked by Richard Armitage.
© 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.
Beware of the closet Muslim Brotherhood member
Ahmad al-Farraj/Al Arabyia/October 18/17
Who is the ‘closet’ Brotherhood affiliate and why is he a threat to the security
of society? Before answering this question, I need to clarify that those who
infiltrate some important posts belong to this deceitful type. Their aim behind
doing so is to serve the Brotherhood’s principles and goals. The threat of
closet Brotherhood members is that they look like ordinary people and do not
dress like conservative Islamists. Their behaviour and style of conversation
does not belie their religious orientation. These figures alter their character
according to circumstances as they can pose as patriots, enlightened
intellectuals or mentors. Deep within, however, they remain true members of the
Brotherhood, who serve the group’s agenda and abide by its orders. Many may be
surprised when I use the term ‘closet-Brotherhood’. People associate commitment
to any religious group with outward appearance. This is not true with these
‘closet’ members, who do not appear religious and dress like ordinary people.
They master the role of the patriot and only those who understand the reality of
political Islam well or who’ve had a bitter experience of them can figure them
out. One of the benefits of social media is that it helps expose this category
of partisans. If we take a look at these peoples’ social media activity, we can
see their obvious contradictions which they cannot deny or hide. Before, social
media existed, their deceit remained concealed as it is their nature to keep
silent and act differently when needed. The Brotherhood has been in trouble
lately and it cannot publicly defend the Qatari regime, which is actually its
official sponsor
Authors as mercenaries
The boycott of the Qatari regime was an important development that has exposed
the truth of these intelligencers to many as they took the lead in opposing the
boycott. Some went as far as describing the patriotic journalists and authors as
mercenaries! The media, however, stood up to them and tried to show us their
true colours. The Brotherhood has been in trouble lately and it cannot publicly
defend the Qatari regime, which is actually its official sponsor. It tried to
sway the media and patriotic writers to prevent them from exposing its true
nature and schemes. If it hadn’t been for the efforts made to expose these
closet Brotherhood members, they would have continued to serve the organization
and the Qatari regime. Now that the influence of political Islam groups, mainly
the Muslim Brotherhood, has retreated, we are in a dire need of figuring out the
threats posed by its affiliate organizations, of which the most dangerous is
this hideous ‘closet’ branch. Will we do so?
Balanced words and a clear vision
Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabyia/October 18/17
I recently read a useful and rather unique article by Saudi writer and
researcher Kamel al-Khati, the son of one of the most famous traditional Shiite
clerics in eastern Saudi Arabia, the late Sheikh Abdul Hamid al-Khati. In his
article, Kamel – a man I know to be wise – describes and analyzes a secular
scientific trend. As far as I know, this man has never experienced an
Islamicized Shiite faction of any sort. Published in Saudi newspaper Okaz,
Kamel’s article was titled “Hezbollah and Arab Shiites in Gulf states.” A part
of the article said: “I recall an incident I witnessed myself in late 1979. In
that year, one of the al-Husseini rostrum khatibs [people who deliver a
religious sermon] in Qatif warned his listeners not to respond to Khomeini's
call for exporting his Islamic revolution. The khatib warned his listeners that
Khomeini and his colleagues were leading a state with interests that may clash
with interests of those of countries that Shiite Arabs hold an identity
to.”Speaking on the Khatib’s struggle Kamel wrote: “This khatib referred to
here, was one of the dignitaries of his city. He was characterized with chivalry
and a sense of honor. This khatib was subjected to social ostracism after saying
his opinion on Khomeiniism … a rumor spread about him regarding a story about
Khomeini and Ben-Gurion.”The point of saying all of this is to demand more of
the new and beneficial for a clearer vision and a more rational mind
The writer focuses on the Imam’s Line movement or the movement of those who
follow the Imam’s approach. This movement is closely linked to the Khomeini
center in Iran. The most trained and organized factions operate under
Hezbollah’s name in places such as Hezbollah al-Hejaz, Kuwait Hezbollah and Iraq
Hezbollah. Kamel gives interesting details with a refined analytical spirit. He
concludes with the following: “I claim that if you study the distribution of
political loyalties in Shiite communities in Gulf states accurately, the
statistical result will not be in Iran’s favor.”
Social belonging
This is one of the rare articles that bring out an individual with a deep social
belonging to the Saudi Shiite component with such independence, transparency and
depth.
At the intellectual Shiite Khaliji level, such independent scientific approaches
are rare. Perhaps Kuwaiti Khalil Ali Haidar was among the rare. A topic which
requires further studies and research, for scientific and ethical purposes, is
to identify the land we stand on, without getting involved in sectarian debates.
In Kuwait, there is a useful study, which assumes a journalistic approach
written by researcher Falah al-Mdaires on Kuwait’s Shiites. In Saudi Arabia, a
book by two Saudi Shiites, Mohammed al-Sadiq and Badr al-Ibrahim, called “Al
Hirak Al Sheii” [meaning The Shiite Movement] was issued during the Arab Spring.
Despite its political nature, its a worthy read. The point of saying all of
this, after commending Kamel’s article, is to demand more of the new and
beneficial for a clearer vision and a more rational mind.
To succeed, US needs to rediscover itself as a
‘smart power’ country
Dr. Naif Alotaibi/Al Arabyia/October 18/17
After the Second World War, the Cold War era between the US and the USSR lasted
four decades and ended with the total collapse and dismantling of the Soviet
Union in 1991. This epic confrontation between America and the Soviet Union was
a new kind of war with no armies or battles. Instead, the tools of ‘Soft Power’
were the dominant force in the US and gave them the upper hand in the war and
eventually led for them to win. In the 1990s, Harvard professor Joseph Nye
coined a new term ‘Soft Power’. He wrote several books describing the American
use of power in its policies and all the different variables involved, and he
made a prediction about America’s power in many of his books. He warned that the
US’s ‘soft power’ will be eliminated by the Iraqi and Afghan war and predicted
that the US’s ‘soft power” will be transferred from the West to the East with
the rise of Asian ‘soft power’ in China and India.
In this article, I will discuss the nature of the use of ‘soft power’ and how
the US utilized it in its foreign policy during the eras of George W. Bush,
Obama and Donald Trump; and how the administrations have variously used ‘hard
power’, ‘soft power’ and ‘smart power.’
Bush and use of hard power
During the administration of George W. Bush, and after the 9/11 attacks, the US
used its hard power - the US military - to avenge its fallen victims. They began
with Al-Qaeda’s stronghold of Afghanistan to catch Bin-Laden. They occupied the
country and destroyed the Taliban. Nevertheless, they did not stop there, but
soon after invaded Iraq to destroy Saddam Hussein and his regime, although they
failed to prove that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and they also failed
to find a connection between the Iraqi regime and Al-Qaeda. During these wars,
Bush used fancy terms like: ‘the axis of evil’ and ‘it’s a crusade’…etc. This
was a way to win over public opinion inside the US and ensure their support for
his wars. These wars certainly did not bring democracy to these countries but
turned the two countries into failed states (‘sectarian war’ was the term to
describe the civil wars in these countries). Furthermore, the Iraqi war bill
exceeded one trillion dollars. After these wars, the US lost its image and
popularity around the world and one poll showed that in more than 37 countries,
there was a deep decline in US popularity, and that the majority of Europeans
felt that the world became more dangerous after the Iraqi war. American culture
and values, once believed to be one of the best in the world, were under threat.
As a result, it can be said that during the Bush era, American soft power was
dramatically eroded.
Joseph Nye described these wars: “They were a great show of force but they
didn’t protect the US or make it immune to terror attacks.”
The Obama period
“Depending only on our hard power to achieve our foreign policy goals is not
practical anymore and it’s too expensive,” Joseph Nye observes. Using the
military force as a solution for conflicts had a big impact on the new American
president. He had a lot of challenges to tackle; and one of them was the huge
budget deficit that had accumulated since 2003 due to the Iraqi war. Another
challenge was the problem with real estate mortgages in 2008. The way Obama
dealt with all these challenges was to depend on the US’s ‘soft power’. His
methods were clearly felt around the globe in the more moderate US policies
towards Iraq. For example, he pulled out the majority of US troops and kept only
a small force to train the new Iraqi army. He liked diplomatic solutions to
conflicts and did not rely much on the US army to solve conflicts.
During Obama’s era, new superpowers were on the rise. Notably, China and
especially Russia, who reintroduced itself into the international theatre
through its military intervention in Syria supporting Assad’s regime. Obama’s
strategy in using soft power in a lot of crises, especially the Syrian one, was
a big mistake and it failed to bring down the Syrian regime. It even gave Russia
a political gain in Syria and the Arab region. Obama was reluctant to use the
military to bring down Assad, although the Syrian President was using chemical
weapons against his own people.
John Brennan, Obama’s advisor said: “We will use ‘soft power’, diplomatic and
economic power to defeat the extremist methods that were never used by the Bush
administration.”
One indicator showing the Obama administration’s interest in ‘soft power’, was
that a control room (situation room) was named the Soft Power Control Operations
Room. Obama used the strategy of transforming competitors into partners, and
taking into account their lack of superiority over America.
He preferred diplomatic solutions and negotiations to deal with the Iranian
nuclear threat, which infuriated US allies in the Middle East. He was the first
US president since 1979 to address the Iranian people directly and to use terms
such as the “the Islamic republic” rather than “the Iranian regime.”
After the Arab Spring, Obama tried to contain the Islamic organizations that won
the elections in the Arab world. He also promised to close Guantanamo prison and
to stop torturing terrorist suspects. It should be noted, however, that those
promises were not fulfilled.
In conclusion, we could say that Obama’s strategy in using soft power in a lot
of crises, especially the Syrian one, was a big mistake and it failed to bring
down the Syrian regime. It even gave Russia a political gain in Syria and the
Arab region. Obama was reluctant to use the military to bring down Assad,
although the Syrian President was using chemical weapons against his own people.
Trump and ‘Smart Power'
In 2017, President Trump arrived in the White House and he had one big promise
in his campaign: making America great again. The Republican Party and Trump want
to bring back the old American image as the sole super power in the world, and
they think that Obama’s policies gave the US a weak image.
In his book ‘The Future of Power’, Joseph Nye thinks that economic power is the
most important tool in a ‘smart power’ structured organization. Maybe, that is
why we would like to see Trump as a successful businessman, rather than a
politician or a political party leader. In the same book, Nye gives an advice to
his country: “if the US wishes to succeed in the 21st Century it needs to
rediscover itself as a ‘smart power’ country.”It is a little early to know what
kind of force or power Trump is going to use; although it is predicted he will
use a combination of the two (hard and soft power) or as it is also called-
‘smart power’, the first indications show Trump threatening to use power in
parallel with negotiation and diplomacy.
Are Iranian people aligned with US national
interests?
Hamid Bahrami/Al Arabyia/October 18/17
Following a week of political roller coaster, doubts and strategic calculations,
the US foreign policy team unveiled its new policy on Iran and measures to
address the catastrophic nuclear deal, better known as the JCPOA.
During a 20-minute speech on 13 October, President Trump laid out the major
points of this new policy, which include the decertification of the JCPOA and
designation of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) pursuant to the
global terrorism Executive Order (E.O.) 13224.
Aside from decertifying the nuclear deal, the announcement of President Trump
marks a major policy change that effectively ends the two-decades long failed
policy of appeasement against Iranian regime and its malignant role in four
corners of the world. In 1997, in order to satisfy Tehran’s ruling theocracy,
the then President Clinton designated Iran’s main opposition group, the PMOI/MEK
as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. This decision helped regime to spread its
hegemony and terrorism around the Middle East and the world under the pretext of
“Dialogue between Civilizations”. The regime has consistently prolonged its grip
on power by capitalizing on international conflicts, especially disagreements
between Western democracies and its allies
Now, the US policy has shifted to cut the regime’s tentacles and protect the US,
its allies and their interests in the region. Immediately after President
Trump’s speech, the EU expressed its concern over the US abandoning the JCPOA.
On the other hand, Israel and Saudi Arabia welcomed the new policy toward
Tehran. The Iranian society and community abroad for their parts looked for the
reactions on the announcement, first from the regime itself and second from the
main Iranian opposition movement, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).
A few hours after President Trump’s speech, the Iranian citizens witnessed the
so-called moderate President Hassan Rouhani’s twitchy eyes while he read his
statement which was full of deceptive lies and obvious contradictions.
End of the appeasement era
Although, expressing support for the NCRI is punishable by death in Iran as the
regime cracks down on popular dissent, a majority of Iranian social media users
shared the statement by NCRI’s President-elect Maryam Rajavi as she welcomed
“the end of the appeasement era.”
Indeed, the Iranian people always welcome any increased pressure on the Iranian
regime and specifically its brutal paramilitary force, the IRGC, which plays a
key role in suppression of civil society. Furthermore, the IRGC is the main
force behind the crippling economic corruption, which have sparked thousands of
popular anti-regime protests around the country during the last few months.
The designation of IRGC as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs) will
not only affect the regime’s vital arteries but also break the ubiquitous
repression and atmosphere of fear in Iran.
To uproot the cancer that is the IRGC, the US should concentrate its efforts
inside Iran. Nearly all of Iran’s financial systems are in IRGC’s hands, which
it utilizes to fund and arm terrorist groups, with the full knowledge of the
Rouhani government that earlier this year decided to increase its budget.
Hence, all companies and countries that trade with any section of the regime are
practically risking to fund and engage with the IRGC.
Anti-regime protests
Today, there is a significant growth of anti-regime protests across Iran, most
of them related to economic and civic demands. Considering that the Iranian
people are just weighing opportunities to overthrow the entire regime, it will
be helpful if the US highlights human rights issues and recognizes the Iranian
Resistance movement, the NCRI. Following these actions, the IRGC will get stuck
in a domestic crisis and consequently expelling it from the region will be less
expensive. The theocracy in Tehran will try to bypass sanctions and strengthen
its capabilities by exploiting the lack of a coherent Iran strategy between the
US and the EU. Indeed, the regime has consistently prolonged its grip on power
by capitalizing on international conflicts, especially disagreements between
Western democracies and its allies. In this regard, one must ask the EU
countries and European leaders why they are so eager to appease a corrupt regime
in Tehran that has no future and that only survives by persecuting its own
people and spreading terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism. What is obvious, both
the US and the Iranian people’s national interests are aligned and the EU should
know that dictators will not last forever.
Qatar Foreign Minister's CNBC interview
NNA/Wed 18
Oct 2017/
The following is the full transcript of CNBC's interview with
Qatari Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani. This
interview broadcast in Asia on Wednesday, October 18.
Interviewed by Nancy Hungerford, Anchor/Correspondent, CNBC.
Nancy Hungerford (NH): Your excellency thank you for taking the time to speak to
CNBC and here we are in Singapore. You were here as part of a delegation
promoting ties in Southeast Asia. Undoubtedly there are still questions over the
rift with your gulf allies and I just want to bring up some comments from the
Saudi foreign minister at the U.N. General Assembly just weeks ago. In fact he
talked and said specifically that Doha's practices are providing financial
support to terrorism while disseminating violent hate speech is unacceptable.
Does this sound to you like a message from a government that is ready to come to
the table and try to find an agreement here?
Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani (Al Thani): Well first of all thank you Nancy
for hosting me today. Just regarding these continuous statements and allegations
from the Saudis and from the other blockading nations toward Qatar which has
never been proven, this is something which is all of us we are against. This is
something which is related to the collective security of our region, which is a
priority for Qatar, as it's priority for them. But just throwing those
allegations without even basing them by evidence and supporting them by
evidence, is just showing inconsistency in their behavior that they don't want
to solve this issue. They started the entire issue, the entire crisis with a
cyber-attack. This cyber-attack is to create a foundation for the crisis. So if
there was a real justification for this crisis they wouldn't need to attack our
state news agency, to put a fabricated statement attributed it to the Emir in
order to launch this campaign. So we are still calling them if you have any
allegations, if you have anything any concerns need to be addressed by Qatar we
are willing to sit on the table. Show us your concerns if there is something
which needs measures being taken, it should be taken by Qatar and by other
countries because it's a collective concern for everyone.
NH: Saudi Arabia has denied that a cyber-attack was behind this issue and really
continues to be their word against yours and vice versa here so how does this
end? How are you going to eventually get an agreement?
Al Thani: Well first of all their denial actually is not true because we were
just in Riyadh two days before the cyber-attack. Why none of them has raised any
concern? Before that even a few days we were also in Riyadh at the Ministerial
Council for the Gulf for the GCC. So they never raised any concern about any
issue. We were talking about regional issues. We were discussing the future of
the GCC and none of them has raised any of those issues and those allegations.
The cyber-attack was the spark for the entire crisis. There is no doubt that
they have initiated this cyber-attack in order to create a basis for this
crisis. Now, since this crisis is taking more than four months, everybody from
our side at least we know we recognize that we want to have a solution for this
- because we see that there is no winner out of this because we have a lot of
other challenges in our region, and we don't we don't need a further crisis to
the other open war zones. All our allies and friends they want a solution for
this crisis, including the United States, even including the president of the
United States was calling to bring the leaders together in order to put an end
for all for this crisis. The Emir of Kuwait was leading the mediation, and he's
continuing his efforts, yesterday he was in Riyadh, but there is not any result
yet. This is showing a consistent behavior from the blockading nation just to
continue the crisis, disrespect and bully. This is all about -- it's nothing
about that they want to stop financing terrorism or to stop the hatred speech
while they are promoting and doing the same by promoting incitement against my
country, promoting a regime change against my country. So there are
contradictions between what they are saying as statements and what's their real
activities on the ground.
NH: You mentioned regime change. Do you think Saudi Arabia is actively looking
at ways to bring about regime change as we speak?
Al Thani: Well we see that there are officials, government officials are talking
about regime change if we see their government officials talking about
protesting and inciting people to go and protest against their government. So
it's about regime change. We see a country which is bringing back the Dark Ages
of tribes and putting them together in order to create a pressure on a connected
tribes to them in Qatar: That means that they want to destabilize this country,
so their behavior as I just mentioned is just showing that they are not willing
for a solution. They are into escalation, they are into thinking about regime
change and other things. But from Qatar's side we are intent very content in
dealing with them. We never committed against anyone. We were always calling for
dialogue; we were always calling them if there is any concern that we are going
to address. But from the other hand we don't see the same thing.
NH: In addition to the threat of regime change there have also been reports that
the UAE was looking at an invasion into Qatar perhaps with the use of
mercenaries. Also reports that Saudi could've been looking an outright invasion
as well. Do you think that U.S. President Donald Trump played a role in really
influencing Saudi Arabia not to go forward with an invasion?
Al Thani: Well since the beginning of the crisis based on our assessment we have
seen that there were some possibilities for military activity, which whether its
invasion or intervention or maybe by different means. Our allies in the United
States has been active from the beginning, trying calm down the entire situation
as well as the Emir of Kuwait - so there where everybody worked collectively in
order to deescalate the situation and really to resort to a dialogue rather than
going for escalation. Regarding the way they are dealing with the entire matter
is just showing irresponsibility to the region to regional security.
NH: When you talk about the U.S. role currently as it stands we know there have
been some mixed messages if you will between the U.S. secretary of state Rex
Tillerson who I know you've spoken with on the matter, and U.S. president Donald
Trump. Do you consider the U.S. a reliable ally in mediating this dispute?
Al Thani: Definitely, they are a reliable ally we have very strong ties with the
United States, we have we are hosting more than 11,000 U.S. soldiers, we have
the largest U.S. base in the Middle East, we are the center of command for the
Coalition for the global coalition against Daesh. There are a lot of things, and
lots of joint interests between Qatar andf the United States which make it
necessarily that this region to be stable, which makes it necessarily that both
of us are reliable allies to each other.
NH: And do you think the U.S. president and the secretary of state are aligned
on the matter?
Al Thani: Well from from our perspective what we got from the US president since
the beginning of the crisis he was calling that the situation need to be dealt
by dialogue and also during his course with the Emir, as well as the different
government agencies. The Defense Department, the State Department they were
always an advocate for the solution to our dialogue. So we we didn't see a mixed
message. If we are considering a tweet or two, is sending a mixed message, but
this is something not relevant to us. What really concerned us what's what's the
overall U.S. policy toward this crisis which has been consistent from the
beginning of the crisis to put an end to it and to solve it by dialogue.
NH: You mentioned the fact that Qatar houses is thousands of U.S. troops in fact
it's an important part of the base in the fight against terrorism against ISIS.
Do you think the battle against ISIS has suffered as a result of the conflict
taking place?
Al Thani: Definitely yes because. What can I say, 90 percent of our supplies of
food supply, medicine supply is coming through the land border and those
supplies part of it is going to the base. Second, we have the airspace which was
blocked, the airplane the airplane, the Qatari airplanes which are supporting
the logistic airplane for that for the military. They are not allowed to fly
over their skies so it's only allowed to use one path which is toward the north,
toward Iran. So this is an effect as well as our officers who were participating
in the coalition activity and the Fifth Fleet in Bahrain they've been expelled
because of this. So there are a lot of things which undermine the efforts of the
global efforts in countering daesh by this crisis by the blockade and by the
measures they have been taken against Qatar.
NH: The U.S. military has recently said it's going to suspend some drills with
Gulf allies. What impact is that having and ultimately if the U.S. military were
to say we're going to put a freeze in fact and some weapon sales and arms sales
to our Gulf allies as well would that be enough to bring the parties to the
table to talk?
Al Thani: Well we are hopeful that they don't need to do all those measures to
bring the parties to the table. We hope that wisdom will prevail. At the end by
the blockading countries and they come to the table and have direct talks with
us about whatever their concerns. But what we have seen from the last four
months now, there's a consistent systematic behavior of disrespect and bullying.
So they do whatever they want despite the demands which are coming from
different countries trying to put an end for this crisis. We hope that at the
end they will come to the dialogue and we hope that they come at the right time.
They don't even just keep keep pushing it away in order that they think that
they will make Qatar weaker, Qatar became much stronger than before the
blockade.
NH: When you talk about the reasons that Saudi Arabia may not be coming to
table, one of the big sticking points to them is your relationship with Iran.
When Qatar decided to fully restored diplomatic ties with Iran. What are you
trying to achieve here?
Al Thani: Well this accusation is entirely baseless. Now we have, we have
differences in our policies in Iran but with Iran sorry, there are differences.
But between us as the Gulf countries we have agreed on a common policy toward
Iran and it is already there and the resolutions of the GCC, which is that we
need to engage in a dialogue with Iran based on certain principles which wishes
non-intervention of each other's affairs, no undermining of security and
exportation of any revolution and revolutionary ideology or that self-avoiding
or denouncing the sectarianism. So all those principles been agreed on between
the Gulf countries and this philosophy was which Qatar stick to and still
sticking to. Our policy toward Iran remain the same and didn't change because of
the crisis. They were trying to create just a justification to legitimize their
blockade. Our restoration to our diplomatic relations with Iran. That doesn't
mean that Qatar change its policy because we will go back to the reason, the
original reason of our withdrawal of our ambassador, there was just a gesture of
solidarity with the Saudis when they attacked their diplomatic mission, which is
not exist anymore because we cannot show solidarity to a country which blockaded
our people. So that's the only thing our relation with Iran we have we are
neighbors. We have borders together. We are sharing a gas field together. We
have to overcome and bridge the gaps in our differences by dialogue. We cannot
increase the tension in the region. We have to resort to dialogue.
NH: Has the US ever expressed concerns about your support for Iran your
relationships with Iran? Because we know U.S. president Donald Trump has his
concerns with Iran that he's voiced in recent days.
Al Thani: Well there is absolutely no support to Iran and the Qatar and Iran
relationship has been very consistent since long time. We have differences as I
told you, we are opponents in what's happening in Syria. We are opponents in
what's happening in Yemen, we are opponents in what's happening in their
policies in Iraq. And when we are adversaries on those different political
battles, we are we have been frontrunner and in this we have been on the front
line in Syria. We have been the ones who are still from the beginning and we are
still the lead in the region which is vocal and advocate against Bashar al Assad
regime. So there is nothing being changed about our policy. U.S. They have their
own policy towards Iran which is represented by consent for them. Yes we
understand. But at the end, U.S. is thousand miles away from Iran. We are
neighboring border with Iran. Now after this blockade, if we have just one
pathway from the north toward Iran and the three sides east west and south is
blocaded just because of those blockading Nations decided to isolate my country
and to put in a siege. How can I assure the food supply for my country, how can
I am sure that medicine supply for my country. So there are things which are
forcing me to have to increase my bilateral ties with them. And in fact the ties
between the GCC and Iran as a group. Ninety six percent of this bilateral trade
is between Emirates and Iran. It's not between Qatar and Iran. And the 4
percent. It's ranked number four so we are fifth trade partner among the Gulf
countries and the fourth from the 4 percent which doesn't represent more than 50
million dollars. By that. So what kind of a special relation between Qatar and
Iran?
NH: Why in your opinion is Saudi Arabia making Iran a big part of the issue?
Al Thani: Well since the starting of the crisis they've been talking about Iran.
They have been talking about everything they believe that might legitimize for
them and gain sympathy to what they did to us with the West. And this is the
main reason the main driver for them. They don't want to appear for the Western
country that they did this out of wanting to just hijack the country's policies
and keep it under its guardianship, which is totally unacceptable. They want
just to show that we are doing this for the sake of the region and security why
they are undermining regional security.
NH: Let's talk about the region here in Southeast Asia. What are you hoping to
achieve on this trip?
Al Thani: Well Qatar is part of Asia, of course, and 90 percent of our exports
are coming to Asia so Asia is representing a very important market. In fact,
ASEAN countries are 50 percent of our market. So we have a continuous dialogue
with the Asian countries, which is hoping to improve and develop the
relationship and try to un-tap that potential and this relationship. Which as we
have seen is realized now in our investments, which has been dramatically
increased in the last few years in Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, China. So
Qatar investments are widespread in this region, which we believe this is the
Asia where we belong to and it represents a very high importance for us.
Singapore as well has a special status with us where we have this high level of
joint committee between the two countries. Since now for 12 years more than 46
enterprises we have realized out of this joint committee, which are two of the
major environmental projects of Qatar was conducted as a result for this
committee. So there is a lot of progress and a lot of work between Qatar and the
Asia region, Southeast Asia especially.
NH: Do you sense that some of the countries you're meeting with including in
Malaysia where I know you've just come from-- are you worried that they have
divided loyalties because we know that Saudi Arabia has been in the region as
well and made some investments in Malaysia. Do you find yourself trying to
reassure these countries that in fact they don't have to be split?
Al Thani: Well, Qatar is a matured state. We have dealt with the matter from the
beginning and we have used the high moral ground and we will never try to
pressure any country. While from the other hand Saudi and the blockading
countries they were trying to exercise whatever kind of leverage they have on
the countries especially in Africa and some countries of Southeast Asia, which
we see this as a blackmailing for nations and trying to impose something on
their sovereignty, which we don't accept. Countries which decided to join their
club without any support for the arguments, this is something up to them but it
really means that those countries are not having their full control over their
decision making process. While countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, and others
they've never been subject for this and we highly respect those responses, which
is what it should be and how it should be for sovereign nations. No country can
impose any demands or anything on another sovereign nation. So they have their
own assessment and they have to decide whether Qatar is a country which is a
reliable partner that they can work with, or Qatar is a country which is a
source of disturbance for them.
NH: I have to ask because you mentioned that pretty soon you'll be heading to
the US-- going to Washington D.C. What is the agenda for that trip. Will you be
meeting with the U.S. secretary of state or other members of the administration?
Al Thani: I'll be following up on our last meeting with President Trump which
took place in September between his highness, me and the president. And I'll be
meeting some of the U.S. officials as well as some of the congressmen and
senators in order to help to update on the situation and to follow up on matter.
The secretary of state I might meet him in the region just before my trip to the
U.S. as he might have a visit to Qatar as well.
NH: U.S. President Donald Trump is very confident that he could help bring about
a resolution very soon I think in the coming days, weeks even, is he right to be
that confident?
Al Thani: Well he was very much into the situation and he was speaking very
seriously about that. He doesn't want to see this conflict prolonging but from
the other hand as I told you we didn't see a positive response from the
blockading nations as we still see the status quo remain. We are hopeful that
things will reach to a solution and we will come to dialogue. And also we are
confident that the U.S. can play a strong role and President Trump can play a
positive role in this and in bringing all the leaders together.
NH: Your Excellency thank you very much for your time today. Thank you very
much. -- CNBC