LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
December 25/18
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

Merry Christmas/Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests
 

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.december25.18.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
Merry Christmas/Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests
Luke/02/01-20/In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus 2 that the whole world should be enrolled. This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria. So all went to be enrolled, each to his own town. And Joseph too went up from Galilee from the town of Nazareth to Judea, to the city of David that is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. While they were there, the time came for her to have her child, and she gave birth to her firstborn son. 3 She wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. Now there were shepherds in that region living in the fields and keeping the night watch over their flock. The angel of the Lord appeared to them and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were struck with great fear. The angel said to them, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For today in the city of David a savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find an infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger.” And suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying: “Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests. “When the angels went away from them to heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let us go, then, to Bethlehem to see this thing that has taken place, which the Lord has made known to us.”So they went in haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the infant lying in the manger. When they saw this, they made known the message that had been told them about this child. All who heard it were amazed by what had been told them by the shepherds. And Mary kept all these things, reflecting on them in her heart. Then the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, just as it had been told to them.”

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on December 24-25/18
Christmas Righteous Duties and Obligation
Maronite Patriarch Blasts Procrastination as Government Formation Stalemate Lingers On
Lebanon’s Berri says some parties don’t want government formed
Speaker Berri offers Christmas well-wishes to President, cables condolences to Abdul Aziz
Berri Says 'Something Big' Blocking New Government
Hizbullah, Bassil Trade Accusations on Govt. Settlement Failure
Hapless Lebanon is stuck with Hezbollah’s tunnels
Raad: We're not back to square one
UAE Ambassador partakes in Christmas celebration: Our aim is to spread a message of love and peace
Qabalan wishes Bukhari success in his new mission
Druze Sheikh meets KSA Ambassador, pushes Arabs to fight extremism
We appreciate everything you have done Elias, Happy Holidays/ Dr.Tawfic Chamaa/December 24/18
Canadian Cleric Younus Kathrada: Congratulating Christians for Christmas is Worse than Murde
Hizbullah Opponents In Lebanon: The Organization Is Subjecting Lebanon To Iranian Patronage, Preventing Formation Of Government In Retaliation For U.S. Sanctions
Analysis/Outgoing Israeli Army Chief Sends Stark Message to Politicians: Bluster Won't Stop Terror

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on December 24-25/18
Israeli Soldiers Fire at 'Armed Suspects' in Golan
Israel dissolves parliament, to hold snap elections in April
Hamas Rejects Abbas’s Plan to Dissolve Palestinian Parliament
Pentagon: Order for US military withdrawal from Syria signed
Turkish Military Activity Near Manbij, Syria
Turkey sends military reinforcements to Syria border
Kurdistan Regional Government hands over 1,400 ISIS detainees to Iraqi govt
Two Kurdish Syrian Democratic Council delegations reach Moscow
Syria Security Chief in Egypt
Saddam Hussein’s daughter sends message to Iraqi people on his death anniversary
Iraq Fails Again to Appoint Defense, Interior Ministers
Bahrain Summons Iraqi Charge D’Affaires over Maliki’s Statements
Washington Post: Text Messages Reveal Khashoggi’s 'Problematic' Ties with Qatar
Sudanese police fire tear gas at protesting soccer fans
Historic Plot to Uproot Christians from Galilee
Egypt Announces Death of 14 Terrorists in Northern Sinai

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on December 24-25/18
Christmas Righteous Duties and Obligation/Elias Bejjani/December 25/18
Hapless Lebanon is stuck with Hezbollah’s tunnels/Mohamad Kawas/The Arab Weekly/December 24/18
Hizbullah Opponents In Lebanon: The Organization Is Subjecting Lebanon To Iranian Patronage, Preventing Formation Of Government In Retaliation
For U.S. Sanctions/C. Jacob and H. Varulkar/MEMRI/December 24/18
Analysis/Outgoing Israeli Army Chief Sends Stark Message to Politicians: Bluster Won't Stop Terror/Amos Harel/Haaretz/December 24/18
US Fed rate hike: Taking the middle road but more market turmoil/Dr. Mohamed A. Ramady/Al Arabiya/December 24/18
US Fed rate hike: Taking the middle road but more market turmoil/Dr. Mohamed A. Ramady/Al Arabiya/December 24/18
Jamal Khashoggi and The Washington Post’s op-eds/Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabiya/December 24/18
If Trump Wants to Divide Jerusalem into Three/Daniel Pipes/Dec 24, 2018
Turkey's Threats against Greece/Debalina Ghoshal/Gatestone Institute/December 24/18
Turkey Turns on America/Uzay Bulut/Gatestone Institute/December 24/18
Andrea Leadsom is Nearly Right on How to Save Brexit/Malcolm Lowe/Gatestone Institute/December 24/18
Three Men And Three Scenes/Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al-Awsat/December 24/18
Belgium Shows How Post-Truth Politics Works/Leonid Bershidsky/Bloomberg/December 24/18
Assad and al-Bashir cannot save each other/Khairallah Khairallah/The Arab Weekly/December 24/18
Christmas is about keeping hope alive, says Bethlehem mayor/Daoud Kuttab/Arab News/December 24/18
Winners and losers in Trump’s Syrian debacle/Chris Doyle/Arab News/ December 24/18


Latest LCCC English Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on December 24-25/18
Christmas Righteous Duties and Obligation
Elias Bejjani/December 25/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/70342/elias-bejjani-christmas-righteous-duties-and-obligation/
Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord. (Luke 02/11)
Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, good will toward men (Luke 02/14)
The holy birth of Jesus Christ bears numerous blessed vital values and principles including love, giving, redemption, modesty and forgiveness.
Christmas is a role model of love because God, our Father Himself is love.
Accordingly and in a bid to cleanse us from our original sin He came down from heaven, was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
This is my commandment, that you love one another, even as I have loved you. (John15/12)
There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. (John15/13)
Christmas is way of giving …God gave us Himself because He is a caring, generous, forgiving and loving and father.
Christmas embodies all principles of genuine redemption. Jesus Christ redeemed us and for our sake He joyfully was crucified, and tolerated all kinds of torture, humiliation and pain
Christmas is a dignified image of modesty ..Jesus Christ accepted to be born into a manger and to live his life on earth in an extremely simple and humble manner.
Let us continuously remind our selves that when our day comes that could be at any moment, we shall not be able to take any thing that is earthly with us for the Day of judgment except our work and acts, be righteous or evil.
Christmas is a holy act of forgiveness ….God, and because He is a loving and forgiving has Sent His Son Jesus Christ redeem to free us from the bondage of the original sin that Adam and Eve committed.
Christmas requires that we all genuinely pray and pray for those who are hurt, lonely, deserted by their beloved ones, feel betrayed, are enduring pain silently pain, suffer anguish, deprived from happiness, warmth and joy .
Christmas is ought to teach us that it is the duty of every believer to practice his/her faith not only verbally and via routine rituals, but and most importantly through actual deeds of righteousness….
Christmas’ spirit is not only rituals of decorations, festivities, gifts and joyful celebrations…But deeds in all ways and means by helping those who need help in all field and domains.
Christmas’s spirit is a calls to honour and actually abide by all Bible teachings and values.
In this realm we have a Biblical obligation to open our hearts and with love extend our hand to all those who are in need, and we are able to help him remembering always that Almighty God showered on us all sorts of graces and capabilities so we can share them with others.
Christmas is a time to hold to the Ten Commandments, foremost of which is “Honour your father and your mother”.
Christmas is a good time for us to attentively hear and positively respond to our conscience, which is the voice of God within us.
Christmas should revive in our minds and hearts the importance of fighting all kinds temptations so we do not become slaves to earthly wealth, or power of authority.
Christmas for us as patriotic and faithful Lebanese is a time to pray for the safe and dignified return of our Southern people who were forced to take refuge in Israel since the year 2000.
Christmas for each and every loving and caring Lebanese is a holy opportunity for calling loudly on all the Lebanese politicians and clergymen, as well as on the UN for the release of the thousands of Lebanese citizens who are arbitrarily and unjustly imprisoned in Syrian prisons.
Most importantly Christmas is a time for praying and working for the liberation of our dear homeland Lebanon, from the Iranian occupation.
No one should never ever lose sight for a moment or keep a blind eye on the sacrifices of our heroic righteous martyrs who willing sacrificed themselves for our homeland, identity, existence, and dignity. Our prayers goes for them on this Holy Day and for peace in each and evry country, especially in the chaotic and troubled Middle East.
May God Bless you all and shower upon you, your families, friends, and beloved ones all graces of joy, health, love, forgiveness, meekness and hope.
 

Maronite Patriarch Blasts Procrastination as Government Formation Stalemate Lingers On
Kataeb.org/December 24/18/Maronite Patriarch Bechara Al-Rahi on Monday criticized politicians for procrastinating the formation of a new government for seven months now, saying that they keep getting creative in fabricating obstacles each time solutions are supposedly reached. "They don't care for the immense financial losses incurred by the state and the Lebanese people due to this stalemate," Al-Rahi said in his annual message on Christmas eve. “Isn’t this a crime?”The patriarch noted that Lebanon still yearns for true peace as political officials are dashing the growth of the society and the state, blaming the negative and troublesome political performance for the hard economic and social crises that have driven one-third of the Lebanese under the poverty line and 30% of youth into unemployment, and opened the door to mass immigration,” Rahi noted. “Due to the rampant corruption in ministries and public administrations, and the disruption of the economic cycle, they’ve dragged the state into a dangerous situation with the increase in deficits and the public debt,” the Patriarch pointed out. “Due to the lack of seriousness and the absence of an agreement over a plan to send immigrants and refugees back to their countries, those have become a heavy burden on Lebanon's economy, society and security,” he added. The Patriarch also tackled the constant fear of a new war with Israel, deploring the absence of the state's unilateral and exclusive decision-making power. “The state does not have the right to waive to any party its right and duty to be the sole decision maker in all issues related to national security, foreign policy as well as international relations,” Al-Rahi said. “Officials are busy serving their own interests and gaining shares instead of safeguarding the state’s coexistence and the National Pact," he stressed. "They are adopting a spiteful and malicious sectarian policy in all public institutions, thus derailing the country out of the track of coexistence that we have long sought."

Lebanon’s Berri says some parties don’t want government formed
Retuers, Beirut/Monday, 24 December 2018/Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri said there are parties in Lebanon that do not want a new government to be formed, al-Akhbar newspaper reported on Monday, pointing to the depth of complications that have derailed its formation.
A deal on a new national unity government led by Prime Minister-designate Saad al-Hariri looked close last week when a mediation effort made headway towards resolving the last big problem, which surrounded Sunni Muslim representation. But new complications surfaced on Saturday. Berri told al-Akhbar: “What happened confirms there are parties that do not want the government to be born at all.”More than seven months since its last general election, Lebanon, heavily indebted and suffering from low economic growth, is in dire need of an administration to enact long-stalled reforms and put public debt on a sustainable footing.

Speaker Berri offers Christmas well-wishes to President, cables condolences to Abdul Aziz
Mon 24 Dec 2018/NNA - Speaker of the House, Nabih Berri, on Monday contacted by phone President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, and offered him Christmas well-wishes. He also offered well-wishes to Maronite Patriarch, Cardinal Mar Bechara Boutros Al-Rai, and other religious figures and dignitaries. On another level, Berri cabled the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Salman bin Abdul Aziz, to express condolences on the death of Prince Talal bin Abdul Aziz. He sent similar cables to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Prince Al-Walid bin Talal, Khalid bin Talal, and Turki bin Talal. Separately, President Berri contacted Indonesian House Speaker, Bambang Soesatyo, in solidarity with the victims of the natural disaster that had hit the country.

Berri Says 'Something Big' Blocking New Government
Naharnet/December 24/18/Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has voiced concern that “something big” might be blocking the formation of the new government as he condemned the latest fiasco that followed the nomination of Jawad Adra as a so-called consensus minister.
“I’m afraid that something big might be behind the obstruction but it is still unclear to me. It is something bigger than the issue of the Consultative Gathering and deeper than the issue of portfolios,” Berri told al-Joumhouria newspaper in remarks published Monday.
“The issue of portfolios ended long time ago and PM-designate (Saad) Hariri himself said that only the names of Hizbullah’s ministers were missing… but the past days confirmed that the matter has nothing to do with the party or its candidates, knowing that I personally have not submitted the names of the ministers of the Development and Liberation bloc,” the Speaker added. Asked whether foreign interference is blocking the new government, Berri said: “In light of what we are witnessing and what has happened, I do not rule out this possibility and the issue seems to be very big.”

Hizbullah, Bassil Trade Accusations on Govt. Settlement Failure
Naharnet/December 24/18/Hizbullah and Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Jebran Bassil are exchanging accusations over the failure of the latest bid to resolve the government formation deadlock, media reports said. “It is certain that things have gone beyond the government and its portfolios” between the two parties, a parliamentary source told An-Nahar newspaper in remarks published Monday. “There is a rift between the two parties and the President has been held responsible because he did not actively intervene from the beginning to reconcile between Hizbullah’s calculations -- which extend beyond Lebanon’s border, specifically to Syria and Iran -- and the FPM’s ambition to get a one-third veto power in cabinet,” the source added. President Michel Aoun’s tenure is “facing the threat of failure unless he takes bold and quick steps,” the source went on to say. A dispute over the political affiliation of Sunni candidate Jawad Adra has torpedoed the latest attempt to resolve the government deadlock. Adra had been initially nominated as a consensus candidate representing both Aoun and the Consultative Gathering – a grouping of six pro-Hizbullah Sunni MPs – but the Gathering later withdrew its endorsement of Adra after ambiguity surfaced over his future political alignment.

Hapless Lebanon is stuck with Hezbollah’s tunnels
Mohamad Kawas/The Arab Weekly/December 24/18
In keeping with its militia ideology, Hezbollah does not mind moving around in tunnels. It is likely to escape the quandary posed by such tunnels but Lebanon might not be that lucky.
It is hard not to see the question of Hezbollah’s tunnels as a premeditated trap cleverly laid out by Israel. Stories in the Israeli media said the country’s intelligence services knew about the tunnels for years and were monitoring their progress in northern Israel.
Israel could have easily neutralised the tunnels or blown them up secretly or publicly and basically rendered them useless for any military purposes but Israel and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu chose to turn the tunnels into a political crisis he could exploit to the fullest advantage for his party and its military options.
Netanyahu and his party are using Hezbollah’s tunnels to score points inside Israel, of course, and over Lebanon’s government and people in addition to creating a crisis for Lebanon.
There are no international agreements between Israel and the Gaza Strip. The strip is not an internationally recognised sovereign state nor is it part of the international community of the United Nations. So the war on the tunnels there has been part of the logic of confrontation that was free of the conventional constraints of making war.
Israel’s southern border with the Gaza Strip, however, is quite different from its northern border with Lebanon. From Israel’s point of view, the issue of the tunnels is simple: Israel, a state of law, is being subjected to an act of aggression by militias controlled by terrorist regimes here and there. In the eyes of Israeli and US law, Hezbollah is a “terrorist organisation,” even if some countries try to create a distinction where there is none between the so-called political and military wings of the party.
Israel is presenting itself as a victim defending itself against infiltration across its border. Israel wants the world to bear witness that a devastating terrorist attack is going to happen, coming from the territory of a sovereign state and an independent and recognised member of the international community.
In just a few minutes, precisely at the moment, Netanyahu dropped the bomb of the news of the tunnels on December 4, Hezbollah lost the tunnel network it quietly and painstakingly dug in the years after the 2006 war. The party lost its tunnels before using them and before even finishing their construction. It did not lose them by fighting a war but thanks to the militias’ naive understanding of international events and because of the wiliness of the enemy.
It is clear Israel found Hezbollah’s tunnels easy prey; so it patiently let Hezbollah move into its trap. Now Hezbollah is crippled. Thanks to Hezbollah and its tunnels, Israel has the proof it needs to have the UN Security Council absolve it of future sins against Lebanon. By the same token, and thanks to its notorious party, its crippled government and its fractured political system, all of Lebanon has been turned into a threat to Israel’s famous strategic security.
While Hezbollah can fudge about its rockets in Lebanon, it cannot deny the existence of the tunnels. The UN Interim Force in Lebanon confirmed their existence and Israeli cameras have shown them in a way that is preparing Israeli public opinion to accept the next war as a necessity. International public opinion is also being prepared to accept an eventual war as part of Israel’s right to self-defence, a right guaranteed by all international security and sovereignty laws. Hezbollah is observing total silence about Israel’s Northern Shield campaign. This silence seems to be more of an expression of confusion rather than an expression of the militia’s propensity to discretion.
Hezbollah has been using for a long time the concept of “resisting the occupation” to market itself inside the Lebanese society. It has arrogantly used the excuse of “defending the shrines” to justify its actions in Syria. It seems that the party is facing difficulties selling the story of its tunnels to its popular base. These are offensive tunnels and cannot be part of the basics of defensive actions. They can only be part of larger foreign agendas that lie outside people’s daily life. Regardless of Israel’s Machiavellian designs, the issue of the tunnels exposed the rot inside the Lebanese legitimate power system in comparison to what it was during the 2006 war under Fouad Siniora’s government. The Lebanese political system seems helpless, having no plans for countering Israel’s boisterous diplomatic and military campaigns and having simply surrendered to whatever mood is going to emerge from the international community.
Hezbollah’s silence should have given Lebanese diplomacy enough room to manoeuvre and retake the initiative of dealing with the impasse but this did not happen and it exposed grave structural impotence. The power parties are just happy that they get to nominate a minister here and another one there in a “mighty” government that is merely a puppet in Hezbollah’s hand.
Hezbollah’s tunnels have crashed. The party’s image as crucial to Lebanon’s defence has crashed with them. So now the weapons of the resistance are no longer a deterrent to aggression but rather an invitation to aggression. Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah can no longer persuade his followers and opponents that his forces “will enter Galilee and beyond Galilee in any future battle.”With Hezbollah’s fall, the shameful image of Lebanon is exposed. Beirut can only pledge to observe UN Security Council Resolution 1701 but it does not possess the keys to honour this pledge. In keeping with its militia ideology, Hezbollah does not mind moving around in tunnels. It is likely to escape the quandary posed by such tunnels but Lebanon might not be that lucky.

Raad: We're not back to square one
Mon 24 Dec 2018/NNA - MP Mohammad Raad on Monday indicated that the government formation had not returned to square one, but that there were still hurdles impeding the process."We are not saying that we're back to square one, but there still hurdles," Radd said during a seminar on Islamic-Christian coexistence upon Christmas at Aishiye Church in Jezzine. He also called for dialogue to exit the current crisis.

UAE Ambassador partakes in Christmas celebration: Our aim is to spread a message of love and peace
Mon 24 Dec 2018/NNA - UAE Ambassador to Lebanon, Hamad Saeed Al Shamsi, on Monday partook in a Christmas celebration in Keserwan’s Sheileh, an event jointly organized by the “Humanitarian Affairs and Development" and “Saint Theresa” Associations.
"The UAE leadership and people stand side-by-side with Lebanon. We have more than a 50-year long print of good deeds in Lebanon, and we seek to share with its people the joy of the holidays. This is what we learned from our wise leadership and our rulers who have spread the message of love and peace everywhere,” the UAE diplomat said in a word marking the occasion. “Drawing a smile on the faces of children is a human and moral duty, and we must be one of the first initiators as this is the essence of the moderate Islamic religion, which avoids extremism,” he added. Al-Shamsi concluded by pledging assistance on every occasion “because we have a humanitarian agenda.”“We contribute to the construction of mosques, churches, and temples because openness is a cornerstone of building societies, especially in the shadow of what the world currently endures,” the UAE Ambassador concluded.

Qabalan wishes Bukhari success in his new mission
Mon 24 Dec 2018/NNA - Head of the Supreme Islamic Shiite Council, Sheikh Abdul Amir Qabalan, on Monday welcomed at the Council's headquarters, Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon, Walid Bukhari, who paid him a protocol visit after assuming his new duties in Lebanon. During the meeting which took place in the presence of the Council’s Secretary General, Nazih Jamoul, Sheikh Qabalan wished Ambassador Bukhari success in his new mission.

Druze Sheikh meets KSA Ambassador, pushes Arabs to fight extremism
Mon 24 Dec 2018/NNA - Druze Sheikh, Naim Hassan, on Monday welcomed Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon, Walid Bukhari, who paid him an acquaintance visit upon assuming his mission as ambassador to his country in Beirut. The meeting had been an occasion for Sheikh Hassan to convey a message of appreciation to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.“The KSA has been and continues to be a key supporter of stability in Lebanon,” Hassan said, wishing the Saudi ambassador "success in his duties.”“We hope that Arabs and Muslims would join ranks and fight all the different forms of extremism, violence, and challenges that they face,” the Druze Sheikh added.

We appreciate everything you have done Elias, Happy Holidays!!
From: Dr.Tawfic Chamaa/December 24/18
events@usossm.org
Dear Elias,
On behalf of UOSSM's staff in Syria, Turkey, Jordan and all over the world, I would like to wish you and your loved ones a beautiful festive season, peaceful holidays and a wonderful New Year!
2018 has been an incredibly challenging year in Syria and globally. Wars have devastated families and left them struggling to survive day to day. Children, the elderly and the most vulnerable have not been spared from the cruelty of war.
However, 2018 was an example of humanitarian solidarity and of the tremendous compassion that exists in the world. From just a few brave staff in the field when we first started 6 years ago, UOSSM has grown to have over 2,000 staff and has been able to perform over four millions medical treatments since inception. Elias , Your support, your donation, and your solidarity will never be forgotten! Words are not enough to express our sincere gratitude to you.
We hope and dream that the conflicts will end in 2019, and people will once again be able to enjoy peace together. We are committed to serving anyone who needs our support, and continuing our path of saving lives and building hope. We therefore count on you, to remain by our side, to continue your support and enlighten our path. Thank you again for your kindness and for choosing to make a difference. Together we can change the world!
Sincerely,
Dr. Tawfik Chamaa
President, UOSSM Suisse

Canadian Cleric Younus Kathrada: Congratulating Christians for Christmas is Worse than Murder
MEMRI/December 23, 2018
During a sermon delivered at the Muslim Youth of Victoria in British Columbia, Sheikh Younus Kathrada said that Muslims must be offended when people worship Jesus. He explained that congratulating non-Muslims on Christmas and other " false festivals" is tantamount to approving of them, and that it is a far greater sin than murder, adultery, and other major sins. At the end of the sermon, Sheikh Kathrada stressed that he never calls to kill non-Muslims, who should be treated justly. The sermon wa...

Hizbullah Opponents In Lebanon: The Organization Is Subjecting Lebanon To Iranian Patronage, Preventing Formation Of Government In Retaliation For U.S. Sanctions
معارضو حزب الله في لبنان: المنظمة تخضع لبنان لرعاية إيرانية وتمنع تشكيل الحكومة انتقاماً من العقوبات الأميركية على إيران
C. Jacob and H. Varulkar/MEMRI/December 24/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/70359/c-jacob-and-h-varulkar-memri-hizbullah-opponents-in-lebanon-the-organization-is-subjecting-lebanon-to-iranian-patronage-preventing-formation-of-government-in-retaliation-for-u-s-sanctions-%D9%85/
The exposure of the tunnels dug by Hizbullah into Israeli territory – which constitute a violation of UNSC Resolution 1701 and are further evidence that the organization acts on its own initiative in disregard of the state authorities – sparked criticism against Hizbullah in Lebanon and accusations that it is putting the country at risk.[1] In fact, criticism of the organization has been mounting for several months, with voices claiming that it is using its growing military strength and political clout to impose its will on the country and take independent decisions, both on regional issues such as its involvement in the wars in Syria and Yemen, and on internal Lebanese issues such as the establishment of the future government.
Since the parliamentary elections in May 2018, Lebanese Prime Minister and Al-Mustaqbal movement leader Sa'd Al-Hariri has been trying to form a national unity government incorporating all the major political forces in Lebanon, including Hizbullah. His efforts have so far been unsuccessful, however, partly due to steep conditions presented by Hizbullah regarding the government's makeup, mainly its demand to appoint a Sunni minister from the March 8 Forces, the faction led by Hizbullah. This demand, set out by Hizbullah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah in a speech on November 10,[2] is perceived by the organization's opponents as an attempt to weaken the rival Al-Mustaqbal faction, which traditionally represents the Sunnis in Lebanon, and even to change the 1989 Taif Agreement, which ended the Lebanese civil war and distributed political, civil, and military authority in the country along sectarian lines. At the same time, this demand is also seen as an artificial excuse manufactured by Hizbullah in order to obstruct the formation of the government in retaliation for the increasing sanctions imposed by the U.S. on Hizbullah and Iran.
This political crisis, which has been ongoing for over six months, has evoked furious responses from Lebanese politicians and columnists, who accuse Hizbullah of serving Iranian interests at the expense of Lebanon's, and also of using its weapons to take over Lebanon and of subordinating it to Iranian patronage. The bleak political climate even cast a pall over Lebanon's 75th Independence Day, marked on November 22, with some calling not to celebrate it because Lebanon is not truly independent. Criticism was also directed at President Michel 'Aoun and at his son-in-law, Foreign Minister Gebral Bassil, both of them Hizbullah allies, for allowing Hizbullah to effectively control the country.
This report focuses on the recent criticism of Hizbullah in Lebanon, and on its increasing domination of the country under Iranian sponsorship.
Hizbullah's Rivals Accuse It Of Obstructing The Formation Of The Government In Retaliation For U.S. Sanctions On Iran
For more than six months since the election, Prime Minister Hariri has been holding meetings and discussions in an effort to reach an understanding with both his allies and his rivals on the makeup of the government and the distribution of portfolios – but to no avail. In early November 2018 the sides seemed to be on the verge of agreement when Hizbullah unexpectedly came up with a new condition: that a Sunni member of the March 8 Forces, led by Hizbullah, be appointed minister. Perceived by the Sunni Al-Mustaqbal faction, led by Al-Hariri, as an attempt to weaken the faction and undermine its role as the traditional representative of the Sunnis, this demand precipitated a crisis that is holding up the formation of the government until this time. On this backdrop, many political circles accused Hizbullah of deliberately sabotaging the establishment of the government and paralyzing political life in Lebanon in an attempt to impose compliance with its demands. These circles even accused Hizbullah of violating the Taif Agreement, which regulates the relations between the sects in Lebanon, and which is anchored in the Lebanese constitution.
For example, former Lebanese prime minister Fuad Al-Siniora said in November 2018: "According to what we have heard from several politicians, there is a new phenomenon of changing the Taif Agreement through practical measures. This is a strange and amazing phenomenon, because we have never heard of the constitution being changed through actions [rather than legislation]. The constitution consists of laws, so it cannot be changed [in this way]. This is an innovation by Hizbullah, which does not recognize the constitution or the law."[3]
"Hizbullah" obstructing the establishment of a "Lebanese government" (Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, London, November 26, 2018)
Former minister Ashraf Rifi said in response to Hizbullah's demand to appoint a Sunni minister from the March 8 Forces: "Hizbullah wants to control what is still left of Lebanon's decision-making, for Iran's sake... We say to Nasrallah for the thousandth time: We bow only to God and belong only to Lebanon. Do not delude yourself that by raising your voice you can intimidate the free people [of Lebanon]. Your weapons do not frighten us; we will oppose your plan as long as we live. Lebanon has been hijacked. It is imprisoned by Iran, and it is our responsibility to liberate it. We must oppose the Persian hegemony plan."[4] Former MP Fares Sou'aid likewise responded to Hizbullah's demand, saying: "Hizbullah secretary general Hassan Nasrallah has declared a revolution against the constitution and the Taif Agreement. I call on the two leaders [President 'Aoun and Prime Minister Al-Hariri] to sign an order to form the government, out of respect for the constitution. If you do so, we will support you, and if you don't, you should both resign. Remove the Iranian patronage from Lebanon."[5]
Other figures and columnists drew a connection between the delay in the formation of the government and the sanctions imposed by the U.S. on Hizbullah and its patron Iran, speculating that Hizbullah may be obstructing the establishment of the government in response to these sanctions, at Iran's behest, and that Lebanon is thus paying the price of the alliance between Hizbullah and Iran. Fuad Siniora said: "There may be external reasons [for the delay in the formation of the government], such as an Iranian request that Hizbullah be more rigid in its positions. [Furthermore,] Hizbullah may have manufactured this obstacle on its own initiative out of a wish to appear superior to all the sects and as Lebanon's landlord, in order to make use of this [image] in the international, regional and Lebanese arenas... Hizbullah is acting to impose its rule over Lebanon."[6]
Samir Geagea, head of the Lebanese Forces party, said: "For the first time in 40 years, Iran is on the defensive, due to the U.S. sanctions. The escalation [of violence] in Gaza, the impeding of the Iraqi government's activity since its establishment, and the thwarting of the efforts to form a government in Lebanon – all of these are connected to the American pressures on Iran. The establishment of the Lebanese government is not a purely internal matter, but a regional one, and if Iran benefits from obstructing its formation it will act to obstruct it."[7]
Similar claims were made in articles in the Lebanese press. 'Ali Noun, a columnist for the Al-Mustaqbal daily, wrote: "The decision to delay the formation of the government was Iranian... Iran pursues its interests at the expense of [others,] near and far, and builds up these interests upon the ruins of other [countries], and Hizbullah follows its lead, even though this time [this policy] comes not only at the expense of Lebanon and the Lebanese, but also at its own expense and the expense of its people."[8] Journalist Muhammad Qawwas wrote in a similar vein: "In light of the U.S. pressures on Iran and its proxies around the world, Hizbullah decided that a government infiltrated by its [members] is not enough, and there is need for a government it controls in an open and uncontestable manner. That is why it demands that the future government include a representative from among his [March 8] Sunnis."[9]
Journalist Paul Shaul wrote about the Iran-U.S. confrontation: "Just as [Hizbullah] joined the war on the peoples of Syria, Iraq and Yemen and the utopian [vision] of the imperialist Persian Crescent, it is now joining the war between Iran and the world, led by the U.S., at Lebanon's expense and from its territory... Trump's economic sanctions have hurt Iran and are paralyzing its economy, so why shouldn't Hizbullah punish Lebanon... [Hizbullah's current] excuse [for delaying the formation of the government] is its belated and sudden demand [to appoint] a Sunni [minister] from the March 8 Forces, [namely] one of the six [Sunni MPs] from Hizbullah's [electoral] list who won a seat in parliament. This entire artificial affair was apparently manufactured by Hizbullah... in connection with the crises in Iran. For Hizbullah is Iranian in its orientation and identity, so how can it not respect [Iran's] sovereignty and its interests in Lebanon... [?]"[10]
'Awni Al-Ka'ki, editor-in-chief of the Lebanese Al-Sharq daily, which is known for its opposition to Hizbullah, wrote: "Hizbullah has proved that it is unable to let Lebanon form a government without Iran's permission. The problem is that Iran wants to convey to the U.S. that it will not allow a Lebanese government to be formed without its consent... It wants to convey to the U.S. that it is a power in the Middle East that controls four capitals: Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sanaa...[11] Hizbullah is waiting on orders from Tehran, and when Tehran agrees it will come forward and say that it agrees [to form the government]. So it is hiding behind the [excuse of representation for Al-Mustaqbal's] Sunni rivals until the Iran-U.S. [confrontation] is decided.[12]
Al-Hayat columnist Walid Shaqir wrote that Hizbullah is forcing Lebanon into a "political tunnel": "The problem currently afflicting Lebanon is that, in addition to the military tunnels there is also a political tunnel that Hizbullah has excavated for it, namely [Hizbullah's] obstruction of the government formation... Iran and Hizbullah think they can respond to the American siege and the Israeli airstrikes in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon... with [either] political measures or military ones, as necessary. [Iran's] Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps [IRGC] does not mind that these three countries should pay the price of the American pressure on Iran..."[13]
Hizbullah Controls Lebanon By Means Of Its Weapons
Lebanese political circles, especially Christian ones, as well as columnists in the Lebanese press, also accused Hizbullah of using its weapons to do as it pleases in the country.[14] Among the critics was Saydet El-Jabal, an association established in 2006 by the Maronite Church to promote coexistence between Christians and Muslims in Lebanon. In the past months the association has released several communiques accusing Hizbullah of using its arms to impose Iranian sponsorship over Lebanon. In October the association tried to hold a conference on this topic, but hotel owners refused to rent it space, presumably fearing retaliation from Hizbullah. The association eventually held the conference at the Lebanon Press Club, and issued a statement saying as follows: "Lebanon must be an independent sovereign country free of any foreign military presence on its soil or any foreign intervention in its affairs... The legitimate [Lebanese] army is the only force authorized to possess and use arms and to defend Lebanon. Independence must necessarily be the first objective, since without it democracy, reform and development are not possible... Lebanon is experiencing a political and economic crisis that is worsening from day to day and may become an existential crisis. Therefore, we have decided to act towards [achieving the following goals]: Ending the Iranian patronage over Lebanon's military, political and national decision-making...; ending the sponsorship of the sects over the building of the state; upholding the constitution; strengthening the independent judiciary and implementing laws, especially those involving the oversight of all state authorities and institutions and their accountability. Let us restore true sovereignty and democracy in Lebanon, to ensure its survival."[15] In other statements it released in the past months the association stressed the need to form a political opposition that would act to end the Iranian patronage over Lebanon.[16]
The chair of the Kataeb Party (the Phalange), Sami Al-Gemayel, said at a conference marking the party's 82nd anniversary: "Just as the Kataeb overthrew the French patronage in 1943 and [later] the Palestinian and Syrian patronage, today they are staging a revolution against the existing situation and the endless postponing of the [task of] building the Lebanese state... Our advice to Hizbullah is to stop [its attempts to] take over the country, because nobody can do that. Hizbullah may be able to overpower the politicians, but not the entire Lebanese people... Hizbullah may be able to thwart [certain measures] for a while, but not indefinitely. We call on Hizbullah to take a courageous decision and reach out to all the Lebanese people in order to build a sovereign, free, independent and stable [Lebanese] state. [We call on it] to subject itself to the authority of the constitution and laws. If Hizbullah continues to consider itself above the other Lebanese, permitted to do what others are not, it will eventually drive the public to launch an intifada against the existing situation."[17]
Similar statements were made by Lebanese journalists. 'Aql Al-'Awit, a columnist for the Al-Nahar daily, wrote: "Hizbullah is the only [force in Lebanon] that can say and do as it pleases, and this is not because it is unique in its generation but because it possesses military force that allows it to wield considerable political power. The source of this power is [Hizbullah's] partisan, ideological and religious affiliation with an influential force in our region, namely the Islamic Republic of Iran..."[18]
Journalist Khairallah Khairallah wrote: "Lebanon's main problem is [Hizbullah's] illegal weapons, which enable the existence of a state within a state... We must act with prudence and without losing sight of our guiding [principle], which is that Hizbullah's weapons pose a danger to every Lebanese [citizen] and the future of his children, every Sunni, Shi'ite, Druze or Christian."[19]
Janoubia website editor 'Ali Al-Amin, a Shi'ite Lebanese journalist who opposes Hizbullah, wrote: "The Lebanese president, who is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, does not have even formal authority over Hizbullah's weapons, which [allow Hizbullah to wield] greater power than the state and its apparatuses, or at least to compete with them, although it has no legal authority [to do so]... No government can be formed, no elections [can be held] and no constitution [can be passed] without Hizbullah's approval, and it grants its approval only if its demands are met."[20]
On Lebanon's 75th Independence Day, marked on November 22, 2018, Lebanese officials and columnists wrote that the country cannot celebrate its independence because it has been "hijacked." Mustafa 'Aloush, a member of the Al-Mustaqbal Party's political bureau, said: "Lebanon, which Hizbullah has hijacked by force of arms, is unable to escape the circle of danger... The only solution is for Hizbullah to [either] return to the Lebanese fold or else leave Lebanon... The world must have sympathy for Lebanon and realize it has been hijacked, and that great efforts must be made to free it from its captors."[21]
Al-Mustaqbal columnist Paul Shaul wrote: "Hizbullah has replaced the Israeli occupation [of Lebanon] with two occupiers: Syria and Iran... This militia has tried to turn all of Lebanon into a canton of the rule of the jurisprudent [i.e., Iran]. But the graver problem is that the Cedar Revolution has collapsed... Where is [our] independence? Where is the unity of the state? Where is the republic? All of them are absent... Today, in 2018, Hizbullah is openly acting to turn Lebanon over to Iranian patronage."[22] 'Aql Al-'Awit wrote in a similar vein: "On the eve of Lebanon's 75th Independence Day I acknowledge that it is dying... Lebanon is not independent. Its soil is anyone's for the taking... [It] is occupied from end to end... How can we celebrate in a dying, occupied state that is not independent?!"[23]
President 'Aoun, FM Bassil Castigated For Cooperating With Hizbullah
The criticism was also directed at Lebanese President Michel 'Aoun and his son-in-law, Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil, who were accused of cooperating with Hizbullah, legitimizing its weapons and allowing it to effectively control the country. Journalist Khairallah Khairallah accused 'Aoun and Bassil of doing this out of lust for power. "What did Lebanon do," he wrote, "to deserve [these] greedy and power-hungry Christians [i.e., 'Aoun and Bassil] who think they can restore their rights using Hizbullah's weapons?... In the war [of 2006] Hizbullah defeated Lebanon, after supplying Israel with every excuse to destroy part of its infrastructure. Then it started advancing, step by step, towards a takeover of Lebanon, until it became directly involved in the war against the Syrian people."[24]
Particularly scathing in his criticism of 'Aoun was former MP Fares Sou'aid, head of the Saydet El-Jabal association, who wrote: "President 'Aoun sits on his throne in the Baabda [Presidential] palace, relying on two armies. One of them [i.e., the Lebanese army] receives its orders from the Lebanese government, while the other [i.e., Hizbullah] receives its orders from a non-Lebanese regime, namely from Iran... Today nobody knows whether Lebanon is Iranian, Eastern, Arab or Western... It is right at the center of the Iranian axis... and is under Iranian patronage. The most decisive proof [of this] is that, when [armed] clashes [broke out in October] in the Palestinian refugee camps, especially in the Mieh Mieh camp,[25] the armed Palestinian factions convened in [Hizbullah's stronghold], the Dahiya in Beirut, not at the Lebanese Army Intelligence Directorate or the State Security Intelligence Gathering Division. The President's throne is in the Baabda palace, but the [real] seat of decision-making and influence is in Bir Al-'Abd [in the Dahiya]. In 'Aoun's era, [Lebanon] exists in a state of duality: the formal [rule] is in Lebanese hands, but the [real] content and clout are in the hands of Hizbullah. And all this is under Iranian patronage.[26]
Israel's exposure of Hizbullah's missile sites and tunnels also triggered criticism of 'Aoun and Bassil, who were accused of ignoring them and covering for Hizbullah. Lebanese journalist Radwan Al-Sayyid wrote: "Hizbullah boasts of its missiles that are aimed at Israel, and Israel immediately responds by listing the location of the missile depots around the Beirut airport. [So] Lebanon's Foreign Minister [Gebran Bassil], the President's son-in-law, tours the area of the airport in the presence of the media in order to refute Israel's claims, which Hizbullah [itself] never denied."[27] Journalist 'Abd Al-Wahhab Baderkhan wrote in Al-Nahar: "Perhaps the gravest [indication] of the disintegration of the Lebanese state is that it has lost every [trace of] strategic thinking. It denies the existence of [Hizbullah's] tunnels and condemns Israel for holding it responsible for these tunnels, ignoring the advice of friendly countries. It does not say a word as Hizbullah creates facts on the ground in complete disregard of the [Lebanese] state. When Hizbullah secretary-general [Hassan Nasrallah] spoke of the advanced missiles Hizbullah had obtained, and when his deputy [Na'im Qassem] threatened that 'all of Israel is within range of our missiles,' Lebanese President Michel 'Aoun never told [us] on whose behalf these two creatures were speaking and what they were taking about."[28]
* C. Jacob is a research fellow at MEMRI; H. Varulkar is MEMRI's Director of Research.
[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No.7801, In Lebanon, Criticism Of Hizbullah's Tunnels Into Israel: Hizbullah May Drag Lebanon Into War; The Lebanese Government Must Demand That Hizbullah Stop Violating UNSC Resolution 1701, December 12, 2018.
[2] Almanar.com.lb, November 10, 2018.
[3] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), November 27, 2018.
[4] Elnashra.com, November 10, 2018.
[5] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), November 10, 2018.
[6] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), November 27, 2018.
[7] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), November 18, 2018.
[8] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), November 19, 2018.
[9] Al-Arab (London), November 7, 2018.
[10] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), November 24, 2018.
[11] This is a reference to a statement made by 'Ali Younesi, an advisor to Iranian President Hassan Rohani, on March 8, 2015. See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 5991, Advisor To Iranian President Rohani: Iran Is An Empire, Iraq Is Our Capital; We Will Defend All The Peoples Of The Region; Iranian Islam Is Pure Islam – Devoid Of Arabism, Racism, Nationalism, March 9, 2015.
[12] Al-Sharq (Lebanon), December 16, 2018.
[13] Al-Hayat (London), December 8, 2018.
[14] In early December 2018 Hizbullah demonstrated that it is willing and able to use its weapons to thwart a decision by Prime Minister Sa'd Al-Hariri. After former minister Wiam Wahhab made insulting remarks against Hariri, the latter dispatched a police force to serve him a summons for questioning. When the police force arrived at Wahhab's home, a clash erupted with his supporters and Wahhab's bodyguard was killed by police gunfire. Hizbullah, for its part, declared that it would not abandon its ally Wahhab and that if he was hurt a civil war could break out. The organization backed up its words with actions, sending troops to guard Wahhab's home and arming his associates. Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), December 3, 2018.
[15] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), October 21, 2018.
[16] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), October 29, 2018; saydetaljabal.org, November 5, 2018, December 10, 2018.
[17] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), October 24, 2018.
[18] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), November 12, 2018.
[19] Al-Arab (London), December 10, 2018.
[20] Al-Arab (London), October 23, 2018.
[21] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), November 2, 2018.
[22] Al-Arab (London), November 11, 2018.
[23] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), November 20, 2018. See MEMRI Special Dispatch No.7778, On Eve Of Its 75th Independence Day, Lebanese Journalist Laments His Country's Condition, November 28, 2018.
[24] Al-Arab (London), October 19, 2018.
[25] The reference is to an armed conflict between Fatah and the Palestinian Lebanese organization Ansar Allah, in the course of which Fatah tried to take over parts of the Mieh Mieh camp.
[26] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), October 28, 2018.
[27] Al-Ittihad (UAE), October 13, 2018.
[28] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), December 12, 2018.

Analysis/Outgoing Israeli Army Chief Sends Stark Message to Politicians: Bluster Won't Stop Terror
تحليل سيلسي من الهآرتس بقلم عاموس هاريل:رسالة رئيس الأركان الإسرائيلي المنتهية ولايته يقول للسياسيين بأن التبجح لا يوقف الإرهاب
Amos Harel/Haaretz/December 24/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/70362/amos-harel-haaretz-outgoing-israeli-army-chief-sends-stark-message-to-politicians-bluster-wont-stop-terror-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%84-%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84/
Gadi Eisenkot, who has stood up resolutely to efforts to pressure him, rebuked politicians in parting words for ‘emotional decisions’.
Gadi Eisenkot’s speech on Sunday was one of his last public appearances as the Israel Defense Forces’ chief of staff before his term ends in mid-January. He was speaking, as he does every year, at a conference in honor of former Chief of Staff Amnon Lipkin-Shahak at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya.
Two years ago, he sparked a minor storm by saying “An 18-year-old boy who is drafted isn’t everyone’s son,” a reference to both Elor Azaria, the soldier convicted of killing a Palestinian assailant who was already lying on the ground wounded, and kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit. This year as well, he didn’t bother too much with diplomatic niceties.
In recent days, senior Western defense officials, apparently including those in Israel, have heard their American counterparts’ severe frustration over U.S. President Donald Trump’s policies, and particularly his decision to withdraw American forces from Syria. Eisenkot never had to do anything as drastic as Secretary of Defense James Mattis, who resigned this weekend. But his hints about some of his conflicts with his own government in recent years sometimes sounded like an echo of Mattis’ remarks in his resignation letter.
Eisenkot said that the calls for drastic measures against West Bank Palestinians don’t help the IDF provide either actual security or a sense of security to Israelis. The idea that terror attacks would stop if Israel just used more unbridled force is mistaken, he continued.
As for recent events in the Gaza Strip, Eisenkot denied that Israel’s deterrence has collapsed. The IDF isn’t afraid to use force, he added, but it does so in a judicious manner “that will bring about a better situation the day after.”
Unusually, however, he admitted that “we haven’t managed to provide a good sense of security over the last three years” to residents of communities near Gaza. “This sense of security has been undermined by the primitive patterns of behavior the enemy developed,” he said.
Nevertheless, he added, “decisions must made sensibly, not emotionally.” This was apparently a jab at minister Naftali Bennett and former minister Avigdor Lieberman, both of whom accused the IDF of weakness in Gaza.
Eisenkot sounded as if he were summing up his term for himself. On the Palestinian front, he has consistently advocated a judicious policy, which has included refusing to follow politicians’ calls for imposing collective punishment in response to a wave of stabbing and car-ramming attacks in autumn 2015.
Toward Iran, Hezbollah and Syria, however, his policy has been utterly different. That was evident on Sunday as well, when he mentioned a series of IDF strikes on Iranian targets in Syria earlier this year and the ongoing effort to destroy Hezbollah’s cross-border tunnels from Lebanon.
These policies aren’t mutually contradictory. Eisenkot believes the IDF’s moves on both fronts serve the same goal – weakening the enemy and distancing war. In his view, a sober analysis of the threats and a controlled use of force at varying intensities are the right response to the different trends on these two distinct fronts.
In various forums recently, Eisenkot has frequently referred to his time as commander of the IDF forces in the West Bank at the height of the second intifada. His experience confronting suicide bombers there puts what Israel has faced more recently in proportion – first, the wave of lone-wolf attacks three years ago, and this month, several shooting attacks apparently perpetrated by a single Hamas cell over the course of a few days. That level of terror can’t justify the recent demands for demolishing the homes of terrorists’ families or deporting their relatives wholesale.
As if to remind us of the political conditions under which the military brass operates in the territories, on Sunday, Culture Minister Miri Regev (who is periodically invited to security cabinet meetings by the prime minister) attended the dedication of two new prefab homes in the evacuated settlement outpost of Amona – homes built on privately owned Palestinian land, in a closed military zone and without the requisite permits. In the end, she decided to speak with the media just outside the closed military zone.
Regev, who was invited by the Binyamin Regional Council, ignored Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit’s criticism of these homes. With early elections likely to be called soon, some ministers can’t be bothered with legal trivialities like that.
Throughout his term, Eisenkot has stood up resolutely to politicians’ efforts to pressure him, especially in the territories. One must hope this will still be the case as he passes the reins to his designated successor, Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi.

Latest LCCC English Miscellaneous Reports & News published on December 24-25/18
Israeli Soldiers Fire at 'Armed Suspects' in Golan
Tel Aviv- Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/Israeli soldiers fired toward what it claimed "armed suspects" who crossed the ceasefire line with Syria in the annexed Golan Heights, the army said Monday. The army said in a statement the incident occurred late Sunday near the border fence, but provided few other details. The gunmen crossed the Alpha Line, demarcating the demilitarized zone between Israel and Syria set up in 1974 as part of a UN-brokered armistice agreement. The area became a full demilitarized zone, where only UN Disengagement Observer Force and police could operate, while the rest of the buffer zone had strict limits on the number and types of military units and equipment allowed inside it. It was not clear who the suspects were, why they had infiltrated or whether any were wounded. No Israeli soldiers were injured. Israel seized much of the Golan Heights from Syria in a 1967 war and later annexed it in moves never recognized by the international community.The two countries are still technically at war.

Israel dissolves parliament, to hold snap elections in April
Reuters/Monday, 24 December 2018/Israel will hold an early general election in April, a spokesman for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday, after members of his governing coalition met to discuss differences over legislation. “The leaders of the coalition decided unanimously to dissolve parliament and go to a new election in early April,” the spokesman wrote on Twitter, quoting from a statement issued by Netanyahu’s political partners. A coalition crisis over a military conscription bill affecting exemptions from compulsory service for ultra-Orthodox Jewish men led to the decision. Netanyahu, now in his fourth term as prime minister, has been governing with a razor-thin majority of 61 seats in the 120-member parliament. He heads the right-wing Likud party. Under Israeli law, a national election had to be held by November 2019. Netanyahu’s government would remain in place until a new one is sworn in, after the April poll. A series of corruption probes against Netanyahu and pending decisions by Israel’s attorney general on whether to follow police recommendations to indict him had raised speculation he would opt to seek a public show of confidence at the ballot box.
Netanyahu has denied any wrongdoing in the cases and has given no indication he will step down if charged. The 69-year-old Israeli leader made no immediate comment after his meeting with the coalition leaders. Recent opinion polls have shown his popularity remains strong among Israelis. The likelihood of an early election increased in November after Netanyahu’s defense minister, Avigdor Lieberman, quit the government, leaving the ruling coalition with its one-seat majority. No one in Netanyahu’s Likud has made a public challenge against him, and the party is expected to close ranks around him in the coming election. Outside Likud, Yair Lapid, head of the centrist Yesh Atid opposition party, is seen as the strongest candidate to succeed Netanyahu in any upset. Lapid’s party is second to Likud in opinion polls. Israel’s former army chief, Benny Gantz, is seen as a dovish potential candidate who could tip the balance in favor of a center-left bloc, but has not yet thrown his hat in the ring. On the right, Lieberman and Naftali Bennett, head of the Jewish Home party, could both seek to lead a right-wing bloc if Likud emerges in a weaker position in an election.
Netanyahu first led Israel from 1996 to 1999, and returned in 2009. His current government has been in power since May 2015.

Hamas Rejects Abbas’s Plan to Dissolve Palestinian Parliament
Ramallah – Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/Hamas rejected on Sunday President Mahmoud Abbas’s announcement to dissolve the Palestinian parliament and hold new elections within six months. The Palestinian central electoral committee said it was prepared to hold the general polls. Hamas however, criticized Abbas, saying his move “serves his partisan interests.” Abbas said Saturday he intended to dissolve the Palestinian Legislative Council after a court decision that ordered the move and elections to be held within six months. The ruling was made by the Palestinian Constitutional Court in Ramallah, and Hamas said in a statement it rejected the decision by a court created by Abbas "to legitimize his arbitrary decisions"."Abbas should have extended his hands to (Hamas leader Ismail) Haniya's invitation to hold a joint meeting, thereby ending the Palestinian division," the statement said. "Rather, Abbas opted to ruin the Palestinian political system, maintain his unilateralism, and dissolve the legal institutions of the Palestinian people. All of this is just to serve his partisan interests."It called on Egypt, which has been seeking to reconcile Hamas and Abbas's Fatah, to block the measure. Palestinian Liberation Organization Executive Committee Secretary Saeb Erekat said that the Constitutional Court’s decision is in line with the national council’s intention to establish a united Palestinian state. He called for ending the current situation and achieving national reconciliation to “defeat the plot to impose the ‘deal of the century’ that seeks to establish a state in Gaza and autonomous rule in the West Bank.”He explained that the PLO is seeking to establish a Palestinian state, “while Hamas wants to deepen the divide and turn it into separation.”

Pentagon: Order for US military withdrawal from Syria signed
AFP, Washington/Monday, 24 December 2018/The order has been signed for the withdrawal of American troops from Syria, where they have been deployed to assist in the war against ISIS, a US military spokesperson said on Sunday. “The execute order for Syria has been signed,” the spokesperson told AFP, without providing further details. US President Donald Trump has declared the extremist group “largely defeated,” and made the surprise decision to bring US forces home -- a move that many US politicians and international allies fear is premature and would further destabilize the already devastated region. The decision -- which was followed by another to make a significant cut to the number of American troops in Afghanistan -- has prompted the resignation of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and US envoy to the international anti-ISIS coalition Brett McGurk.

Turkish Military Activity Near Manbij, Syria
Ankara- Said Abdel Razek /Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/Turkey sent reinforcements to its border with Syria, according to media outlets which reported that about 100 vehicles, including pickup trucks equipped with machine guns and weapons, were on their way to the region. The military activity comes two days after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey would postpone a planned military operation on Kurdish YPG militia in northern Syria following the US decision to withdraw its troops from Syria. The Turkish convoy headed to the southern border province of Kilis, including tanks, howitzers, machine guns and buses carrying commandos, Demiroren News Agency (DHA) reported. Part of the military equipment and personnel are to be positioned in posts along the border, while some had crossed into Syria via the district of el-Beyli, 45 km northwest of Manbij, according to the agency. Reuters could not independently verify the reason for the reinforcements and Turkish officials were not immediately available for comment. Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights told Agence-France Presse (AFP) that around 35 tanks and other heavy weapons, carried aboard tank carriers, crossed the Jarablos border crossing and headed for an area near the Sajour River, between Jarablos and Manbij, not far from the front lines where Kurdish fighters of the Manbij Military Council are stationed. An official in a local armed faction opposed to the Syrian regime confirmed the arrival of these reinforcements. The official spoke to AFP, on condition of anonymity, stating that the Turkish forces also asked the factions loyal to it to “declare the state of alert, without asking them to go to the area to which the reinforcements were sent.”
Syrian High Negotiations Commission (HNC) said it supported Turkey in filling the vacuum that would result from the US withdrawal from Syria.
Head of HNC Nasr al-Hariri urged the US to coordinate its pull-out with the national army, composed of opposition Syrian factions.“An uncoordinated US withdrawal may leave a void that would be filled by Daesh (ISIS), the Syrian regime or Iranian militias,” Hariri warned on Twitter.
Hariri's comments came hours after US President Donald Trump tweeted saying that: “On Syria, we were originally going to be there for three months, and that was seven years ago - we never left. When I became President, ISIS was going wild. Now ISIS is largely defeated and other local countries, including Turkey, should be able to easily take care of whatever remains. We’re coming home!”Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu on Sunday said nobody would be able to stop Turkey from launching an operation in the east of the Euphrates River. Cavusoglu was speaking at a press conference with Libya's foreign minister, Mohamed Taher Siala. Hinting at France, the Turkish FM criticized how some European countries received the representatives of the Kurds in Syria, stating that if these talks aimed to protect the Syrian Democratic Union Party and the PKK after the US withdrawal, they should not forget that no one can prevent us from clearing the area of East Euphrates. In the same context, Cavusoglu said it was decided to postpone operation East Euphrates so as not to disturb the withdrawal of US troops from Syria, adding that Ankara will coordinate with Washington on the withdrawal process.

Turkey sends military reinforcements to Syria border
AFP, Ankara/Monday, 24 December 2018/Turkey has sent reinforcements to the border with Syria, Turkish media reported on Monday, after Washington ordered the withdrawal of its ground forces from the war-ravaged nation. A Turkish military convoy with howitzers and artillery batteries as well as different units of the armed forces was deployed to the border district of Elbeyli in Kilis province, state news agency Anadolu reported. The military reinforcements would take place “gradually”, the private IHA news agency reported, adding that parts of the convoy had entered Syria. The deployment began over the weekend with around 100 vehicles, Hurriyet daily said, which had crossed into the Al-Bab region of northern Syria. They were headed towards Jarabulus and Manbij which is held by a US-backed Kurdish YPG militia viewed by Ankara as “terrorists” linked to Kurdish insurgents inside Turkey. Turkey was a rare ally that lauded Trump’s decision on Syria, since it will now have a freer rein to target Kurdish fighters in the country’s north who were armed and trained by the US and played a major role in the war against ISIS. Jarabulus and Al-Bab were areas captured from ISIS during Ankara’s first military operation in August 2016 which lasted until March 2017. Military reinforcements had also been sent to the Akcakale border town and Ceylanpinar district, both in the southeastern Sanliurfa province. US President Donald Trump stunned the US political establishment and allies last week when he decided to pull 2,000 troops from Syria just days after his Turkish counterpart warned Ankara would soon launch a new operation in the country’s north. Turkey conducted a second offensive with Syrian rebels against the People’s Protection Units (YPG) militia in its northwestern enclave of Afrin in January this year. The operation ended in March with the capture of the city. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned Ankara would launch a third operation against the YPG and the last remaining elements of ISIS in Syria in the coming months. Prior to Trump’s announcement, Erdogan had said the operation would be in the “next few days” but on Friday Turkey said this would be delayed to avoid “friendly fire”. American support to the YPG, under the banner of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) alliance, has long been a source of tensions between NATO allies the US and Turkey.

Kurdistan Regional Government hands over 1,400 ISIS detainees to Iraqi govt
Hassan al-Saeedy, Al Arabiya.net/Monday, 24 December 2018/After forming a joint judicial committee, Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) handed over about 1,400 detainees belonging to ISIS to the federal government in preparation for the extradition of more. Dindar Zebari, the KRG coordinator for international advocacy said in a press release that Erbil has begun handing over detainees to Baghdad, adding that they were mostly from the governorates of Anbar, Saladin, Diyala and al-Hawija. Zebari stated that the joint committee was formed with the federal government to tackle this issue, adding that all the detained individuals were investigated, but no court ruling was carried out against them by the KRG’s judiciary. Zebari said that the KRG’s processes with the arrests are clear, indicating that the investigations are based on evidence, in addition to confessions by the accused, unlike what the human Rights Watch reported that the arrests are based on forced confessions, not hard evidence. In a report published on Sunday, the Human Rights Watch said that Arab detainees serving their sentences in the Kurdistan region for their connection to ISIS face the risk of re-arrest after their release if they try to reunite with their families in areas controlled by Baghdad. In response to the report that stated that the problem stems from a lack of coordination between the separate judicial systems of the KRG and the Iraqi government, Zebari said: “A joint committee of the highest judicial authorities has been formed, headed by the heads of three appeals courts in order to exchange information.” Zebari also said that detainees are able to obtain documents proving their sentence was served in order to avoid re-arrest through lawyers, contrary to what the Human Rights Watch report said.

Two Kurdish Syrian Democratic Council delegations reach Moscow
Joan Sooz, Al Arabiya.net/Monday, 24 December 2018/Two delegations from the Syrian Democratic Council (SDC) arrived in the Russian capital and are expected to meet with Russian officials on Monday, official sources in Moscow told Al Arabiya English. “There are two Kurdish delegations that arrived in Moscow, one of them is scheduled to meet with officials from the Russian Foreign Ministry on Monday afternoon,” one of the sources said. While Kamal Akef, the spokesman of the Diplomatic Relations Center of the Democratic Society Movement, did not provide any details about the visit, he confirmed to Al Arabiya that there is an SDC delegation in Moscow, adding that “both parties did not reach an agreement yet.”High-level sources from the joint presidency of the SDC pointed out that the delegation, which arrived in Moscow “days ago” is headed by Dr. Abdul Karim Omar, the co-chair of the Foreign Relations Commission in north Syria.Moscow is the second capital after Paris, which served as a meeting point for SDC representatives since the White House last week announced the withdrawal of its military forces from Syria in a period of 60 to 100 days.
Meanwhile, sources said that another SDC delegation is headed to the Russian Khmeimim airbase. A source from Syrian Observatory for Human Rights had also confirmed that “a meeting between SDC forces and Russian authorities will happen in the coming hours in Moscow.”“The core of these meetings is to discuss the future of the area east of the Euphrates River which poses a threat to Ankara,” he added. According to the observatory, Russia made an offer to the SDC that guarantees the spread of border guards loyal to the Assad regime along the border with Turkey in areas under its control. The SDC has not yet agreed to this offer. According to sources, the SDC rejects posting more regime forces, and wants official border guards under Russian auspices. During this trip, SDC representatives are looking to reach a peaceful solution that guarantees Turkish forces will not invade areas controlled by them east of the Euphrates and west, as well as Manbij which Turkey is continuously threatening to invade.

Syria Security Chief in Egypt
Damascus- Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/Syrian security services chief Ali Mamluk held talks with Egyptian officials in Cairo over the weekend on a rare visit to the country to discuss political and security issues, Syrian state media said Sunday.
His Saturday visit came "at the invitation of" Egyptian intelligence chief Abbas Kamel, the official SANA news agency said. It came just one week after a surprise visit to Damascus by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who became the first Arab leader to visit the Syrian capital since the conflict began in March 2011. Mamluk and his Egyptian counterpart discussed topics of common concern including "political, security and counterterrorism issues", SANA said. It was the second official visit by the secretive Syrian security official to the Egyptian capital since the outbreak of Syria's seven-year war. His last trip to Cairo was in October 2016, according to SANA reporting at the time. Mamluk was appointed as the head of national security in 2012 after a major explosion in Damascus killed four top security officials. He is considered to be a key member of President Bashar al-Assad's inner circle and is blacklisted under EU sanctions. In November, France issued arrest warrants for three Syrian intelligence officials -- including Mamluk -- wanted for "complicity in acts of torture" and "complicity in war crimes" among other charges.Syria's war has killed 360,000 people and displaced millions since starting in 2011 with the brutal repression of anti-regime protests.

Saddam Hussein’s daughter sends message to Iraqi people on his death anniversary
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English/Monday, 24 December 2018/Raghad Saddam Hussein, the eldest daughter of the former Iraqi president, recorded a voice message on the 12- year anniversary of her father’s execution last Saturday, directed to the Iraqi people. “I wish you Iraqis that our vision for Iraq to be more secure and stable than what it is now,” she said. “All humanitarian and moral values have been lost, and strange ideas have disseminated here and there. Extremism has reached the extent of exploiting religion as a cover to achieve sick objectives for many parties,” she added. Raghad also condemned terrorist organizations, stating that they have carried out “inhumane and non-religious practices” in Iraq, and “undermined the Iraqi identity, destroyed civilization and tarnished a whole phase.”She added that the future will be better, and that the people will work to build “a free Iraq” that is unified and developed, and comparable to the world’s developed countries.

Iraq Fails Again to Appoint Defense, Interior Ministers
Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/Political disputes again prevented the Iraqi parliament from appointing defense, interior and justice ministers in Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi’s cabinet. Meeting in Baghdad, lawmakers did manage to fill two other vacant positions with Shaima Khalil appointed education minister and Nawfal Moussa as migration minister. Intensifying disagreements between the rival Islah and Bina blocs, led by populist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and Hadi al-Ameri, have prevented the formation of a full government of 22 ministers, said Reuters. Abdul Mahdi was confirmed as premier in October after months of political gridlock that followed an inconclusive May election. He was sworn in with only a partial cabinet and has since been trying to get a full government up and running. The post of interior minister has emerged as the biggest stumbling block over which parliament’s two biggest coalitions are arguing. Ameri’s bloc has repeatedly nominated Falih Fayadh, who once led the Popular Mobilization Forces. Sadr’s coalition has consistently rejected him. Lawmakers allied with Sadr walked out of Monday’s session when Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi put forth Fayadh’s name for a vote, as they have done several times in the last few months, thus breaking quorum and ending the session. Halbousi said he would ask Abdul Mahdi to put forward a different name next time, reported Reuters. “We walked out of the session because we strongly reject holding a vote on Falih Fayadh as interior minister. We will never show leniency and our position is firm. No vote for partisan candidates,” said lawmaker Jamal Fakhir. The deadlock over forming a cabinet has raised the prospect of further unrest as the country struggles to rebuild and recover after three years of war with ISIS.The prime minister faces the daunting task of rebuilding much of the country after that war, solving acute economic problems and coping with power and water shortages.

Bahrain Summons Iraqi Charge D’Affaires over Maliki’s Statements
Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/Bahrain summoned on Monday the deputy charge d’affaires at the Iraqi embassy to strongly condemn statements made by former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The foreign ministry said it summoned Nihad Askar to denounce Maliki’s statements as “blatant and unacceptable interference in the internal affairs of Bahrain”, state news agency (BNA) reported. Undersecretary of Regional and Gulf Cooperation Council Affairs Waheed Mubarak Sayyar brought to the Iraqi diplomat’s attention that such irresponsible statements represent a clear violation of the international conventions and principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. He condemned Maliki’s participation in the inauguration of a Baghdad office for the terrorist so-called 14th of February Youth Coalition that operates against Bahrain. He also slammed his hostile statements that represent blatant and unacceptable interference in the internal affairs of the Kingdom, said BNA. Moreover, Askar described Maliki’s attitude as a clear solidarity with those who seek to spread chaos, violence and terrorism and exhibit hatred not only towards Bahrain, but also Arab states and peoples. He stressed that the Kingdom, which always commits itself to an approach of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries, totally rejects any form of meddling in its internal affairs by any person or entity.
Askar also called on the Iraqi government to oppose such statements, refrain from hosting similar seminars and rallies for organizations classified as terrorist organizations or harboring them on its territory. He urged it to take all necessary measures to stop such interventions in order to maintain relations between Manama and Baghdad.

Washington Post: Text Messages Reveal Khashoggi’s 'Problematic' Ties with Qatar
Washington – Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/The Washington Post revealed Saturday that late Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi had cultivated ties with Qatar that reached such a level that he began receiving guidance in how to shape his articles. “Perhaps most problematic for Khashoggi were his connections to an organization funded by Qatar,” said the Post. “Text messages between Khashoggi and an executive at Qatar Foundation International show that the executive, Maggie Mitchell Salem, at times shaped the columns he submitted to The Washington Post, proposing topics, drafting material and prodding him to take a harder line against the Saudi government.”“Khashoggi also appears to have relied on a researcher and translator affiliated with the organization,” it revealed. “Editors at the Post’s opinion section, which is separate from the newsroom, said they were unaware of these arrangements, or his effort to secure Saudi funding for a think tank,” said the article. “A former US diplomat who had known Khashoggi since 2002, Salem said that any assistance she provided Khashoggi was from a friend who sought to help him succeed in the United States. She noted that Khashoggi’s English abilities were limited and said that the foundation did not pay Khashoggi nor seek to influence him on behalf of Qatar,” explained the Post. It continued: “Khashoggi’s arrival in Washington came at an auspicious time for the Post, which was seeking writers for an online section called Global Opinions. One of its editors, Karen Attiah, reached out to Khashoggi to ask him to write on the forces roiling Saudi Arabia. “Khashoggi was never a staff employee of the Post, and he was paid about $500 per piece for the 20 columns he wrote over the course of the year … As the months went on, he struggled with bouts of loneliness and stumbled into new relationships. He secretly married an Egyptian woman, Hanan El Atr, in a ceremony in suburban Virginia, though neither filled out paperwork to make it legal, and the relationship quickly fizzled.”Moreover, the Post said that Khashoggi “cultivated friendships with people with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization that he joined when he was a college student in the United States but subsequently backed away from.” The organization is banned by several regimes in the Middle East. “Khashoggi also appears to have accepted significant help with his columns. Salem, the executive at the Qatar foundation, reviewed his work in advance and in some instances appears to have proposed language, according to a voluminous collection of messages obtained by the Post. “In early August, Salem prodded Khashoggi to write about Saudi Arabia’s alliances ‘from DC to Jerusalem to rising right wing parties across Europe...bringing an end to the liberal world order that challenges their abuses at home.’ “Khashoggi expressed misgivings about such a strident tone, then asked, ‘So do you have time to write it?’“I’ll try,” she replied, although she went on to urge him to “try a draft” himself incorporating sentences that she had sent him by text. A column reflecting their discussion appeared in The Post on August 7. Khashoggi appears to have used some of Salem’s suggestions, though it largely tracks ideas that he expressed in their exchange over the encrypted app WhatsApp. “As she reviewed a draft of the 7 column, she accused him of pulling punches. ‘You moved off topic and seem to excuse Riyadh...ITS HIGHLY PROBLEMATIC.’ The next day he wrote back that he had submitted the column,” said the Post. “Other texts in the 200-page trove indicate that Salem’s organization paid a researcher who did work for Khashoggi. The foundation is an offshoot of a larger Qatar-based organization. Khashoggi also relied on a translator who worked at times for the Qatari embassy and the foundation.“Khashoggi and Salem seemed to understand how his association with a Qatar-funded entity could be perceived, reminding one another to keep the arrangement ‘discreet’.”

Sudanese police fire tear gas at protesting soccer fans
Reuters, Khartoum/Monday, 24 December 2018/Sudanese police fired tear gas after hundreds of protesters spilling out of a soccer match marched down a major road leading towards the center of the capital, Khartoum, late on Sunday, demonstrating against President Omar al-Bashir’s rule, a Reuters witness said. Amid a heavy police presence, the protesters gathered in Omdurman, just across the River Nile from central Khartoum, and chanted, “The people want the fall of the regime” and “Freedom! Freedom!”. About 4km (2.5 miles) from the stadium, security units, including elite forces, prevented them from crossing a bridge that leads towards the heart of the capital and the presidential palace.  Cities across Sudan have been shaken by five days of protests over price rises, shortages of basic commodities and a cash crisis. Protesters have repeatedly targeted the offices of Bashir’s party and called for an end to his 29-year rule. Since the demonstrations started spreading on Wednesday, police have dispersed protesters with tear gas as well as using live ammunition in some cases, residents say. Authorities have declared states of emergency and curfews in several states.Government officials have blamed the unrest on “infiltrators”. Officials and witnesses have recorded at least 12 deaths, though exact casualty figures are hard to ascertain. After the soccer match on Sunday evening, security forces had cordoned off main streets around the stadium and more than 30 trucks carrying police in riot gear were spread across the area. When the match ended, fans marched down Al Arbaeen street in Omdurman singing and chanting until they got close to the river, where they were blocked by security forces, one witness told Reuters. “They encircled them in four-wheel drives from the back and confronted them with vehicles coming from the White Nile bridge, forcing some of the protesters to enter the military hospital,” he said. Earlier on Sunday in Um Rawaba in North Kordofan state, three people were wounded as police dispersed protesters, according to a witness in the southern town. Security forces had changed tactics by moving more quickly to break up protests as soon as they started, he said. Bashir, one of the longest-serving leaders in African and the Arab world, took power in an Islamist and military-backed coup in 1989. Members of parliament this month proposed a constitutional amendment to extend term limits that would have required him to step down in 2020.                                                                    

Historic Plot to Uproot Christians from Galilee
Tel Aviv- Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/A ‘technical error’ led to uncovering a secret document from State Archives in Israel – which goes back to 70 years ago. Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion sought to evacuate Galilee from Christians, Druze, and Circassians but the foreign minister rejected this, showed the document. The document is a secret letter dated December 4, 1949, half a year after the official conclusion of the battles in Palestine. Its author was Walter Eytan, the first director general of Israel’s Foreign Ministry, and its addressee was Moshe Sharett, the foreign minister, who was in New York at the time. In the letter, Eytan reports to his boss on a plan “to expel the Arab residents of a large number of places”. He lists the villages: Fasuta, Tarshiha, Jish, Hurfeish, Rihana, Majdal and Zakariya. He noted that the plan called for the expulsion of more than 10,000 Arabs, most of them Christians, though some were Druze (Hurfeish) or Circassians (Rihana). The expulsion was to be carried out for “security reasons”, yet a destination wasn't specified. Eytan writes that Ben-Gurion had already approved the transfer of the residents “by force to other places,” but wanted the agreement of Sharett and Eliezer Kaplan, the finance minister because the cost of the operation would be about a million Israeli pounds (including the resettlement of the uprooted). The expulsion, of course, was not carried out, but in the years that followed a number of attempts were made to transfer tens of thousands of Christian Arabs from Galilee out of the country to Argentina and Brazil. For more than 25 years, up until about six months ago, the file had been open for public perusal. But now the letter (together with an eight-page letter written by Bechor-Shalom Sheetrit, Israel’s first and last minister of minorities) has been removed from the file and is no longer accessible.

Egypt Announces Death of 14 Terrorists in Northern Sinai
Cairo – Mohammed Abdo Hassanein/Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 24 December, 2018/Egypt announced Sunday the death of a 14-member terrorist cell in northern Sinai.
An Interior Ministry statement said that the national security agency was investigating the cell that was plotting a series of attacks against vital facilities and armed forces in al-Arish city in Sinai. The security forces and police managed to raid the cell’s hideout, leading to a shootout with the terrorists, leaving eight of them dead. The forces later gave chase to six more militants who fled the scene, killing all of them in a shootout. They seized several weapons and explosives in their possession. Egypt has for years been battling extremists in northern Sinai.
They grew more deadly and their attacks more frequent after the 2013 ouster of President Mohammed Morsi, of the Muslim Brotherhood. In February, the army, in cooperation with the police, launched Sinai 2018, a comprehensive operation to eliminate the terrorists in Sinai. The operation has been a success, with high-profile attacks by the extremists coming to a halt.                                                                                                     

Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on December 24-25/18
US Fed rate hike: Taking the middle road but more market turmoil
Dr. Mohamed A. Ramady/Al Arabiya/December 24/18
A beleaguered US Federal Reserve has shown its hand by announcing another 0.25 percent interest rate increase but causing stock market turmoil and uncertainty.
Dealers had been expecting one more interest rate hike in 2019 but it seems that there will be two more (instead of the earlier feared three hikes) and the new Fed messaging was enough to send stock market prices tumbling. The Dow Jones industrial average dropped 70 points after the announcement to finish the day down 1.49 percent, while the S&P 500 lost 39.2 points, or 1.54 percent.
US stocks are on course for their biggest December decline since 1931, the depths of the 1929 Great Depression. Gulf interest rates were adjusted upward accordingly as noted in an earlier article on the likelihood of further U.S interest rate rises this year.
It was a difficult decision for Fed Chairman Powell to make , as he was under tweet attacks from President Trump and unprecedented pressure from the US President to leave rates unchanged.
It is unusual for an American President to be so openly critical of an institution that is supposed to be politically neutral but President Trump is no ordinary American President and has waged a very public campaign against the Fed Chairman to halt further rate rises, calling the increases “crazy” and “foolish” and arguing the Fed’s policy was “the biggest threat” to the US economy, larger than the administration’s trade dispute with China. President Trump has gone further and last month told the Washington Post he was “not even a little bit happy” with his selection of Powell to chair the Fed. On the day the Fed was meeting to make a rate decision, Trump pressed the Fed to hold off from “making another mistake”.
For the Gulf, a further round of interest rate hikes are on the cards next year and this, along with uncertainties over global economic growth and stock market upheavals, are not going to be conducive to either stable or rising oil prices
Standing ground
Unlike the Indian Central Bank Governor who resigned over political pressure from Prime Minister Modi to change track, Fed Chairman Powell stood his ground.
Powell defended the Fed’s independence very firmly and said that “Political considerations play no role whatsoever” in the Fed’s decision, adding that the independence of the Fed is “essential” if the central bank is to do its job properly. Powell said the Fed based its decisions on the economic data it gathered and “nothing will cause us to deviate from that”.
There are rumours now circulating in Washington that President Trump is so furious about the latest rate hike that he is considering firing Chairman Powell, despite uncertain legal grounds to do so, with potentially disastrous consequences to stock market reaction.
Like many Central banks around the world, the US Federal Reserve has a mandate and this includes with helping to keep unemployment low and controlling inflation. The latest 0.25 percent rise comes as the US unemployment rate has dropped to levels unseen since 1969 and inflation has remained low.
However, Trump’s trade disputes and the threat of a government shutdown over funding his proposed border wall with Mexico have rattled investors, and stock markets have been highly volatile and Chairman Powell was quick to highlight these new uncertainties.
What also happens in the US stock market is one element in the decision, as Powell said the Fed was watching the recent volatility in the stock markets but downplayed their key factor and importance and added that “we follow markets really carefully but remember, from a macroeconomic standpoint, no one market is the single dominant indicator.”
A key issue is trying to forecast the strength of the American economy going forward and the Chairman spent time on this by stating that while the US economy remained strong overall, some “cross-currents” had emerged.
“Despite this robust economic backdrop and our expectation for healthy growth, we have seen developments that may signal some softening,” said Powell, signalling that the pace of rate increases may slow next year. That may explain the tone of Chairman Jerome Powell's somewhat more nervously delivered answers to the press.
Monetary policy
On balance, if there is a tilt to Fed monetary policy stance going forward, some believe it is towards fewer rather than more rate hikes, if even for two hikes in 2019. It will depend, as Chairman Powell tried to stress, on the incoming data and how it feeds into the forecast, especially for inflation.
Analysts continue to expect that it will probably translate into a “pause” in the quarterly pace of rate hikes that is more likely to fall in the first half rather than the second half of next year.
Chairman Powell did his best to remind everyone, perhaps including his hawkish colleagues on the FOMC – Federal Open Market Committee-of the Central Bank , in repeating what must have been a half dozen times that ”there is significant uncertainty about both the path and the ultimate destination of any further rate increases.”
But he failed in the process to provide much context to what was an intended messaging about a wider variance around the base case rate path.
One suspects the somewhat muddled messaging reflected the difficulty in straddling a split within the FOMC that seemed evident in the statement: the more hawkish Committee members may have insisted the “gradual increases” language remain in the statement to signal policy is still on a tightening path.
Dovish leaning
But a compromise with the more dovish leaning members got the phrasing softened with the “some” qualifier, as well as a slightly more conditional “judges” rather than “expects” to preface the guidance.
Indeed, despite the record late cycle fiscal stimulus to demand and what Powell noted was the best year for the economy since the crisis, inflation will still come in under target this year for the seventh year in a row, and gone altogether is any of the modest overshoot previously forecast. What will happen to underlying inflation if growth and demand does indeed slow?
But Powell never did provide a satisfactory answer or explanation for that in his press meeting. What he did expand on were other international risks that Central Bank Governors have now to content with and Powell said that while US growth remained strong, globally economic growth had become more patchy and that the Fed was carefully watching “event risks” – including Brexit – for their potential impact on the US.
But he added US financial institutions are well prepared for any outcome of the UK’s exit from the EU and that the final decision should not have major implications for the US. Say that to the more confused European Union partners who are now scrambling to set up contingencies for a hard no-Bexit deal with the UK.
The U.S markets and the Fed Chairman had not expected to close the year under such uncertainties and it seemed that Chairman Powell's honeymoon period with his less detailed, easy answers to a respectful press came to an end with the December meeting.
The confusion in the markets would seem to confirm that groping in the dark barefoot is just not the optimal metaphor for Fed policy going forward. And what's more, the tweets and attacks from the White House will no doubt get worse from here. It is going to be a difficult 2019 for Chairman Powell.
For the Gulf, a further round of interest rate hikes are on the cards next year and this, along with uncertainties over global economic growth and stock market upheavals, are not going to be conducive to either stable or rising oil prices, thus putting pressure on fiscal deficits on oil producers.

US Fed rate hike: Taking the middle road but more market turmoil
Dr. Mohamed A. Ramady/Al Arabiya/December 24/18
A beleaguered US Federal Reserve has shown its hand by announcing another 0.25 percent interest rate increase but causing stock market turmoil and uncertainty.
Dealers had been expecting one more interest rate hike in 2019 but it seems that there will be two more (instead of the earlier feared three hikes) and the new Fed messaging was enough to send stock market prices tumbling. The Dow Jones industrial average dropped 70 points after the announcement to finish the day down 1.49 percent, while the S&P 500 lost 39.2 points, or 1.54 percent.
US stocks are on course for their biggest December decline since 1931, the depths of the 1929 Great Depression. Gulf interest rates were adjusted upward accordingly as noted in an earlier article on the likelihood of further U.S interest rate rises this year.
It was a difficult decision for Fed Chairman Powell to make , as he was under tweet attacks from President Trump and unprecedented pressure from the US President to leave rates unchanged.
It is unusual for an American President to be so openly critical of an institution that is supposed to be politically neutral but President Trump is no ordinary American President and has waged a very public campaign against the Fed Chairman to halt further rate rises, calling the increases “crazy” and “foolish” and arguing the Fed’s policy was “the biggest threat” to the US economy, larger than the administration’s trade dispute with China.
President Trump has gone further and last month told the Washington Post he was “not even a little bit happy” with his selection of Powell to chair the Fed. On the day the Fed was meeting to make a rate decision, Trump pressed the Fed to hold off from “making another mistake”.
For the Gulf, a further round of interest rate hikes are on the cards next year and this, along with uncertainties over global economic growth and stock market upheavals, are not going to be conducive to either stable or rising oil prices
Standing ground
Unlike the Indian Central Bank Governor who resigned over political pressure from Prime Minister Modi to change track, Fed Chairman Powell stood his ground.
Powell defended the Fed’s independence very firmly and said that “Political considerations play no role whatsoever” in the Fed’s decision, adding that the independence of the Fed is “essential” if the central bank is to do its job properly. Powell said the Fed based its decisions on the economic data it gathered and “nothing will cause us to deviate from that”.
There are rumours now circulating in Washington that President Trump is so furious about the latest rate hike that he is considering firing Chairman Powell, despite uncertain legal grounds to do so, with potentially disastrous consequences to stock market reaction.
Like many Central banks around the world, the US Federal Reserve has a mandate and this includes with helping to keep unemployment low and controlling inflation. The latest 0.25 percent rise comes as the US unemployment rate has dropped to levels unseen since 1969 and inflation has remained low.
However, Trump’s trade disputes and the threat of a government shutdown over funding his proposed border wall with Mexico have rattled investors, and stock markets have been highly volatile and Chairman Powell was quick to highlight these new uncertainties.
What also happens in the US stock market is one element in the decision, as Powell said the Fed was watching the recent volatility in the stock markets but downplayed their key factor and importance and added that “we follow markets really carefully but remember, from a macroeconomic standpoint, no one market is the single dominant indicator.”
A key issue is trying to forecast the strength of the American economy going forward and the Chairman spent time on this by stating that while the US economy remained strong overall, some “cross-currents” had emerged.
“Despite this robust economic backdrop and our expectation for healthy growth, we have seen developments that may signal some softening,” said Powell, signalling that the pace of rate increases may slow next year. That may explain the tone of Chairman Jerome Powell's somewhat more nervously delivered answers to the press.
Monetary policy
On balance, if there is a tilt to Fed monetary policy stance going forward, some believe it is towards fewer rather than more rate hikes, if even for two hikes in 2019. It will depend, as Chairman Powell tried to stress, on the incoming data and how it feeds into the forecast, especially for inflation.
Analysts continue to expect that it will probably translate into a “pause” in the quarterly pace of rate hikes that is more likely to fall in the first half rather than the second half of next year.
Chairman Powell did his best to remind everyone, perhaps including his hawkish colleagues on the FOMC – Federal Open Market Committee-of the Central Bank , in repeating what must have been a half dozen times that ”there is significant uncertainty about both the path and the ultimate destination of any further rate increases.”
But he failed in the process to provide much context to what was an intended messaging about a wider variance around the base case rate path.
One suspects the somewhat muddled messaging reflected the difficulty in straddling a split within the FOMC that seemed evident in the statement: the more hawkish Committee members may have insisted the “gradual increases” language remain in the statement to signal policy is still on a tightening path.
Dovish leaning
But a compromise with the more dovish leaning members got the phrasing softened with the “some” qualifier, as well as a slightly more conditional “judges” rather than “expects” to preface the guidance.
Indeed, despite the record late cycle fiscal stimulus to demand and what Powell noted was the best year for the economy since the crisis, inflation will still come in under target this year for the seventh year in a row, and gone altogether is any of the modest overshoot previously forecast. What will happen to underlying inflation if growth and demand does indeed slow?
But Powell never did provide a satisfactory answer or explanation for that in his press meeting. What he did expand on were other international risks that Central Bank Governors have now to content with and Powell said that while US growth remained strong, globally economic growth had become more patchy and that the Fed was carefully watching “event risks” – including Brexit – for their potential impact on the US.
But he added US financial institutions are well prepared for any outcome of the UK’s exit from the EU and that the final decision should not have major implications for the US. Say that to the more confused European Union partners who are now scrambling to set up contingencies for a hard no-Bexit deal with the UK.
The U.S markets and the Fed Chairman had not expected to close the year under such uncertainties and it seemed that Chairman Powell's honeymoon period with his less detailed, easy answers to a respectful press came to an end with the December meeting.
The confusion in the markets would seem to confirm that groping in the dark barefoot is just not the optimal metaphor for Fed policy going forward. And what's more, the tweets and attacks from the White House will no doubt get worse from here. It is going to be a difficult 2019 for Chairman Powell.
For the Gulf, a further round of interest rate hikes are on the cards next year and this, along with uncertainties over global economic growth and stock market upheavals, are not going to be conducive to either stable or rising oil prices, thus putting pressure on fiscal deficits on oil producers.

Jamal Khashoggi and The Washington Post’s op-eds
Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabiya/December 24/18
The situation hasn’t been entirely comprehended ever since the famous American daily The Washington Post asked Saudi Journalist Jamal Khashoggi to write for it. Jamal Khashoggi is a prominent Saudi journalist who is biased toward the Muslim Brotherhood’s narrative and vision. This is not defamation; it is an objective description. Unfortunately, he was killed in a condemnable way in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Saudi authorities are investigating the murder and have since detained those accused. The case has taken a legal path and a criminal dimension following direct royal orders. Let’s leave this legal criminal path aside and focus on the political facet of the interesting role of this man, may he rest in peace. The decision of the famous daily, which is known for its extreme superiority especially in its opinion pieces, to have Jamal write for it was not driven by professional standards as much as it was “propaganda” directed against Saudi Arabia and its allies
A curious article
The decision of the famous daily, which is known for its extreme superiority especially in its opinion pieces, to have Jamal write for it was not driven by professional standards as much as it was “propaganda” directed against Saudi Arabia and its allies. This is also a description of the articles’ content, and not a false accusation. The Washington Post surprised everyone by publishing a report about Jamal’s articles on Saturday in which it said that Jamal was linked to a Qatari institution in the US.
The daily, which has spearheaded the attack on Saudi Arabia, said that when Jamal was writing for it, he exchanged letters with an executive at Qatar Foundation International called Maggie Mitchell Salem, adding that the latter used to review and sometimes write the articles, which Jamal was supposed to write himself, and send to the daily for publishing.
It’s truly a political journalistic bomb. What’s strange is that the daily which requested Jamal, who did not master the English language, to write for it is the one which exposed all this to the public. Why?
Salem said that she assisted Khashoggi as a friend and nothing more especially that his English abilities were limited! The Washington Post opinion editors insisted that they were not aware of this; otherwise, they would not have published his pieces. The reason behind this disadvantageous outrage by The Washington Post is the claim that Jamal was at the same time asking for Saudi funding to establish a media center in the US! This is also one of the strange things revealed regarding the last two years of Jamal’s life in the US.
For some, myself included, Jamal’s ties and links to the Brotherhood’s narrative and vision are no surprise as this is what the late journalist enthusiastically did. However, exposing this to the public and revealing names specifically by the daily which, from its publisher to its editor, has entirely been engaged in the fierce war against Saudi Arabia and which has exploited Jamal’s case following his death and his name and pen before his death is what is strange.
Perhaps the daily did this based on the idea that this matter is not in the hands of destiny but in its own hands. What’s ironic is the daily’s editors’ statements that if they had known that Jamal had asked for funding from Saudi Arabia, they would not have asked him to write for the daily. This translates as, funding from Qatar is normal but it’s not if it’s from Saudi Arabia – that is if the entire story is true to begin with.
May the man rest in peace. However, are there any more secrets?

If Trump Wants to Divide Jerusalem into Three
Daniel Pipes/Dec 24, 2018
Cross-posted from Israel Hayom
Israel Hayom title: "Will Trump divide Jerusalem in 3?" Plus, small differences in the text.
This article was written and published before early elections were called in Israel.
Ben Caspit in Al-Monitor has leaked details of the Trump administration's "ultimate deal" to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Citing an anonymous "senior diplomatic source," he writes that the still-secret Trump plan
includes a clear partition of Jerusalem into three sections, and "it is not about a Palestinian capital in Abu-Dis (a Palestinian village in the Jerusalem governance area) but in significant sections of East Jerusalem." According to the source, there will be two capitals in Jerusalem: the Israeli capital in West Jerusalem including control over the Western Wall and Jewish neighborhoods in the city's eastern sections, and the capital of Palestine in the eastern section. In addition will be a third region, within the Holy Basin, to be under international control.
Well, "interesting if true" should be one's first response, as prior leaks that have proved to be inaccurate. But let's suppose that this anonymous senior diplomatic source knows of what he speaks. Then what?
– Any area "under international control" idea curiously harks back to the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine's ill-fated but enduring notion of Jerusalem as a Corpus separatum. In other words, it's anachronistic.
– The idea is also wildly dangerous: imagine placing one of the world's most sensitive locations under the control of the U.N. General Assembly or the Quartet on the Middle East. Its inevitable mischief could well set off the next round of fighting.
– The Trump plan wrestles away sovereign areas of Israel and hands them to the Palestinians.
– Doing so rewards the Palestinians despite their fulfilling basically none of their prior commitments dating back to the Oslo Accords of 1993. In other words, it encourages further Palestinian bad behavior.
– Of course, making eastern Jerusalem into "the capital of Palestine" implies the U.S. government recognizes the state of "Palestine." Trump's remarks over the past year likely imply he will demand the Government of Israel recognize it too, setting off a huge debate in Israel.
– Presumably, that "Palestine" will include parts of Jerusalem, most of the West Bank, and all of Gaza. Where the borders should run in the first two areas will drive one massive argument. A second will follow when the Palestinians inevitably decide, actually, that "Palestine" includes all of Israel too.
– As Caspit points out, a proposal to divide Israel into three will roil Israeli politics and harm Netanyahu, who no longer can satisfy both his nationalist base and the U.S. president.
– As in other cases where Donald Trump follows his instincts against the Republican consensus (imposing tariffs, pulling troops from Syria), the left-wing of the Democratic party will (very faintly) applaud. This time, so will the European Union.
– In contrast, many of Trump's Israeli and Zionist admirers, including Evangelicals, will be rudely shocked by his proposal and lash out. Given prior patterns (again, tariffs and Syria), one can confidently predict what happens next: Trump responds angrily and doubles down, vaporizing the U.S.-Israel honeymoon of the past two years. Trump supporters will bitterly divide over this issue, further weakening the conservative movement and diminishing Trump's chances at re-election.
Led by Pastor John Hagee (above, meeting Pres. Trump), Christians United for Israel has over 5 million members. They will not be pleased with Jerusalem divided three ways.
In brief, if Caspit is correct about Trump proposing to divide Jerusalem into three, the consequences will be major and long lasting.
Dec. 24, 2018 addendum: The unexpected decision in Israel to hold elections in April probably means the Trump plan will be delayed by months – or more. This may not be an accident; as Michael Wilner writes in the Jerusalem Post, "the administration's desire to get on with its peace process may have factored in to [Netanyahu's] call for elections seven months earlier than necessary."

Turkey's Threats against Greece
Debalina Ghoshal/Gatestone Institute/December 24/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13469/turkey-threats-against-greece
The one issue on which Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his opposition are in "complete agreement" is the "conviction that the Greek islands are occupied Turkish territory and must be reconquered."
"So strong is this determination that the leaders of both parties have openly threatened to invade the Aegean." – Uzay Bulut, Turkish journalist.
Ankara's ongoing challenges to Greek land and sea sovereignty are additional reasons to keep it from enjoying full acceptance in Europe and the rest of the West.
In April 2017, Turkish European Affairs Minister Omer Celik claimed in an interview that the Greek Aegean island of Agathonisi (pictured) was Turkish territory. (Image source: Hans-Heinrich Hoffmann/Wikimedia Commons)
Turkey's "persistent policy of violating international law and breaching international rules and regulations" was called out in a November 14 letter to UN Secretary General António Guterres by Polly Ioannou, the deputy permanent representative of Cyprus to the UN.
Reproving Ankara for its repeated violations of Cypriot airspace and territorial waters, Ioannou wrote of Turkey's policy:
"[it] is a constant threat to international peace and security, has a negative impact on regional stability, jeopardises the safety of international civil aviation, creates difficulties for air traffic over Cyprus and prevents the creation of an enabling environment in which to conduct the Cyprus peace process."
The letter followed reports in August about Turkish violations of Greek airspace over the northeastern, central and southeastern parts of the Aegean Sea, and four instances of Turkey violating aviation norms by infringing on the Athens Flight Information Region (AFIR). Similar reports emerged in June of Turkey violating Greek AFIR by conducting unauthorized flights over the southern Aegean islets of Mavra, Levitha, Kinaros and Agathonisi.
In April 2017, Turkish European Affairs Minister Omer Celik claimed in an interview that Agathonisi was Turkish territory. A day earlier, a different Turkish minister announced that Turkey "would not allow Greece to establish a status of 'fait accompli' in the 'disputed' regions in the Aegean Sea." In December 2017, Greek Deputy Minister of Shipping Nektarios Santonirios reportedly "presented a plan to populate a number of uninhabited eastern Aegean islands to deter Turkish claims to the land."
According to a recent statement from Greece's Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
"Greek-Turkish disputes over the Aegean continental shelf date back to November 1973, when the Turkish Government Gazette published a decision to grant the Turkish national petroleum company permits to conduct research in the Greek continental shelf west of Greek islands in the Eastern Aegean.
"Since then, the repeated Turkish attempts to violate Greece's sovereign rights on the continental shelf have become a serious source of friction in the two countries' bilateral relations, even bringing them close to war (1974, 1976, 1987)."
This friction has only increased with the authoritarian rule of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, particularly since, as Uzay Bulut notes:
There is one issue on which Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and its main opposition, the Republican People's Party (CHP), are in complete agreement: The conviction that the Greek islands are occupied Turkish territory and must be reconquered. So strong is this determination that the leaders of both parties have openly threatened to invade the Aegean.
The only conflict on this issue between the two parties is in competing to prove which is more powerful and patriotic, and which possesses the courage to carry out the threat against Greece. While the CHP is accusing President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's AKP party of enabling Greece to occupy Turkish lands, the AKP is attacking the CHP, Turkey's founding party, for allowing Greece to take the islands through the 1924 Treaty of Lausanne, the 1932 Turkish-Italian Agreements, and the 1947 Paris Treaty, which recognized the islands of the Aegean as Greek territory.
This has been Turkish policy despite the fact that both Greece and Turkey have been members of NATO since 1952. Greece became a member of the European Union in 1981 -- a status that Turkey has spent decades failing to achieve, mainly due to its human-rights violations.
Recently, EU and Turkish officials met in Brussels on November 30 to discuss an intelligence-sharing agreement between the European Police Service (Europol) and Ankara. Such an agreement is reportedly one of 72 requirements that Ankara would have to meet in order to receive visa-free travel to the Schengen zone. Ankara's ongoing challenges to Greek land and sea sovereignty are additional reasons to keep it from enjoying full acceptance in Europe and the rest of the West.
*Debalina Ghoshal, an independent consultant specializing in nuclear and missile issues, is based in India.
© 2018 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Turkey Turns on America
Uzay Bulut/Gatestone Institute/December 24/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13470/turkey-turns-on-america
How interesting that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called Turkey and the U.S. "strategic partners," when he has repeatedly stated that Turkish campaigns in northern Syria are aimed at eliminating U.S.-backed Kurdish groups. Erdogan referred to these groups as "terrorists" whom Turkey is "burying in the wells that they have dug."
On December 20, Erdogan held a joint press conference with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, in which Erdogan announced that Ankara is siding with Tehran against Washington.
President Trump said Turkey "should be able to easily take care of whatever remains" of ISIS in Syria. But Turkey did not bomb or invade Syrian or Iraqi territories when ISIS invaded and took over those lands. In fact, ISIS members and supporters have been operating in Turkey, and the Turkish government has at times treated those who expose ISIS activities more harshly than ISIS supporters themselves.
The U.S. withdrawal will end up costing Americans far more in blood and treasure down the line than the small but deterrent footprint there now. The damage a withdrawal will do at this time is inestimable -- and will go down in history as Trump's legacy, just as Neville Chamberlain's is the bogus deal Hitler dangled in front of him. It would have been so much less costly in blood and treasure to defeat Hitler before he crossed the Rhine. How ironic it would be if Trump were to go down in history as one of those "losers" he so detests.
When Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government needs U.S. support or approval for actions outside of Turkey, it touts its "alliance" with America. When addressing its base in Turkey, however, it is openly hostile to the U.S. Pictured: Turkish soldiers drill at a military outpost on the Turkey/Syria border on March 2, 2017. (Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)
On December 18, the day before U.S. President Donald Trump ordered a full withdrawal of American troops from Syria -- on the grounds that the U.S. "had defeated ISIS" -- Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced that Turkey was mounting a new incursion into northern Syria.
The same day, December 18, Erdogan gave a speech in which he said: "We officially announced last week that we would start a military operation on the east of Euphrates. And we did it... We discussed these things with Mr. Trump too. He gave us positive responses... Until the last terrorist in the region becomes ineffective, we will rake through the Syrian territories inch by inch... We will breathe down their necks.
"The forces that went to Syria with the excuse of [fighting] ISIS still stay there, although such a threat no longer exists. I am saying it once again that we will not allow a terror corridor that is being tried to be established along our border. We already carried out three operations. Now it is time for the east of the Euphrates..."We carried out Operation Olive Branch in Afrin and recently [another military operation on the Iraqi Yazidi region of] Sinjar. Now we are burying the terrorists in the wells that they have dug. We have spoken with Mr. Trump. The terrorists should go to the east of Euphrates. If they don't, we will send them there because the terror corridor disturbs us. Since we and the U.S. are strategic partners, we need to do what is required."
How interesting that Erdogan called Turkey and the U.S. "strategic partners," when he has repeatedly stated that Turkish campaigns in northern Syria are aimed at eliminating the U.S.-backed Kurdish groups -- including the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) founded in 2015 and led by the People's Protection Units (YPG), which in 2014 carved out a de-facto autonomy in the region. It is these groups in particular to which Erdogan was referring as the "terrorists" whom Turkey is "burying in the wells that they have dug."
Two days later, on December 20, Erdogan held a joint press conference in Ankara with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, in which Erdogan announced that Ankara is siding with Tehran against Washington:
"We do not think that it is right for the U.S. to withdraw from the [nuclear] treaty... I would like to emphasize once again that... we think that America's decisions of sanctions against Iran endangers regional security... We will continue standing by the Iranian people in this period when pressures against Iran, which we think are unjust, are on the rise."
Rouhani added, "A third country cannot break our relations of neighborliness and brotherhood."
Anti-American statements from Erdogan and other Turkish officials are nothing new, however. Erdogan's chief military advisor, Adnan Tanrıverdi, for instance, told the pro-government newspaper, Yeni Şafak, on January 18, that since 2015, Turkey "has defeated the U.S. five times":
"1. The U.S. supported the propaganda targeting the stability in Turkey during the June 7, 2015 elections. But thanks to the sagacity of the people, [the AKP] came to power after 5 months.
"2. American support [for the PKK\Kurdistan Workers' Party] caused another trouble for Turkey through the PKK's 'self-rule' nonsense. Turkey solved this problem in 6 months.
"3. While Turkey was purging the Turkish military of the members of FETÖ [abbreviation of the 'Fethullahist Terror Organization,' supporters of the U.S.-based Islamic cleric, Fethullah Gulen, whom the Turkish government accuses of organizing the 2016 failed coup], a coup attempt took place on July 15, 2016. It was suppressed within 20 hours.
"4. The U.S. was going to surrender Jarablus [in Syria] to the terror organization PKK-PYD. Turkey noticed that and sent its soldiers to Syria and prevented that from happening.
"5. The U.S. attempted to remove Turkey's bases in Iraq, but Turkey successfully prevented that as well."
Tanrıverdi was basically boasting about his country, a NATO member, "defeating" the U.S., another NATO member, while claiming that all of Turkey's problems and military operations are America's fault.
Then, in February, Erdogan openly threatened the U.S. with an "Ottoman slap." This was in response to warnings by Lt. Gen. Paul E. Funk, commander of the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS, that if Turkey attacked those forces in northern Syria, they would "respond aggressively."
Such language was conspicuously absent in the December 7 U.S.-Turkey Joint Statement on Syria, according to which:
"Turkey and the United States share a commitment to address effectively the security concerns of both countries consistent with their obligations to one another as Allies and look forward to continued progress on issues of mutual interest regarding the ongoing crisis in Syria."
In other words, when Erdogan's government needs U.S. support or approval for actions outside of Turkey, it touts its "alliance" with America. When addressing its base in Turkey, however, it is openly hostile to the U.S.
Even more disturbing are reports that Trump said Turkey "should be able to easily take care of whatever remains" of ISIS in Syria. Turkey did not bomb or invade Syrian or Iraqi territories when ISIS invaded and took over those lands. In fact, ISIS members and supporters have been operating in Turkey, and the Turkish government has at times treated those who expose ISIS activities more harshly than ISIS supporters themselves.
For instance, an ISIS member on the Turkish government's list of wanted terrorists was released on December 19 pending trial, after she surrendered to Turkish authorities at the Turkish-Iraqi border. By contrast, a former opposition MP has been in jail since June for exposing and documenting the activities of ISIS and other jihadists across Turkey. Prosecutors have accused him, among other offenses, of "aiding a terrorist organization" and "insulting the Turkish state,".
It is one thing for Trump to want to bring U.S. soldiers home from Syria, for a number of reasons, chief among them, ceding the area to Iran and Russia. It is quite another for anyone to imagine that Turkey can serve as a substitute in the fight against terrorists, or on behalf of Western interests.
Trump is abandoning the entire eastern Mediterranean region to Turkey -- which, as part of the Muslim Brotherhood, wants to rid the region of Sunni monarchies and reconstruct the Ottoman Empire; to Russia, which wants to reconstruct the Soviet Union, and to Iran, which apparently also aspires to be the region's hegemon.
The U.S. withdrawal from Syria will end up costing Americans far more in blood and treasure down the line than the small but deterrent footprint there now. The damage a withdrawal will do at this time is inestimable -- and it will go down in history as Trump's legacy, just as Neville Chamberlain's forever is the bogus "peace for our time" deal Hitler dangled in front of him. It would have been so much less costly in blood and treasure to defeat Hitler before he crossed the Rhine.
How ironic it would be if Trump were to go down in history as one of those "losers" he so detests.
*Uzay Bulut, a Turkish journalist, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute and currently based in Washington D.C.
© 2018 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.

Andrea Leadsom is Nearly Right on How to Save Brexit
And May has two powerful cards in her hand
Malcolm Lowe/Gatestone Institute/December 24/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13461/andrea-leadsom-brexit
The whole kerfuffle over the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland – the so-called "backstop" – could be ended by making one simple addition to Article 20 of the Protocol.
The EU keeps insisting that, in order to protect Ireland, the "backstop" cannot be modified. But if that insistence leads to a no-deal Brexit, it will guarantee that Ireland suffers the very damage that the "backstop" was supposed to prevent!
Among the Conservative MPs opposed to May's deal, there is now an emerging consensus that if she can obtain convincing assurances over the "backstop" from the EU, accepting her deal may be the least bad option. This may be a turning of the tide.
If the EU refuses to give May legally binding assurances to ensure a brief application – if any – of the "backstop," it alone will be responsible and worthy of condemnation for every misery that ensues from a no-deal Brexit.
Andrea Leadsom, Leader of the British House of Commons, has proposed a solution to the problem of the Brexit "backstop".
Andrea Leadsom is the Leader of the House of Commons, that is, she is responsible for arranging government business. She has also proposed a solution to the problem of the "backstop" which is based on the same principle as our own earlier suggestion, namely, to limit the application of the "backstop" to one year renewable by mutual consent.
If there is anyone fresh to the Brexit drama, let us recall that the deal to leave the European Union negotiated by UK PM Theresa May consists of two documents, the Withdrawal Agreement (WA, 585 pages) and the Framework for the Future Relationship (FFR, 26 pages). The WA both winds up the current UK-EU relationship and defines the nature of the "transition period" from March 29 next, the day that the UK officially leaves the EU, to the end of 2020. During that transition period, the FFR is due to be turned into a full-fledged treaty defining the future trading and other relations of the two parties.
The WA has a main section (185 articles) and three Protocols on Ireland/Northern Ireland, Cyprus and Gibraltar (21, 13 and 6 articles), plus various Annexes of technical details. The first Protocol – the so-called "backstop" – is designed to cover a conceivable emergency: if the two sides are still negotiating when the transition period ends, then they will establish a temporary customs union to avoid the creation of a "hard border" between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. This arrangement will continue until the negotiations come to an end and the future relationship begins. From the moment that the WA was made public on November 14, however, it was clear from the text of the "backstop" that the UK could be trapped in this "temporary" arrangement for years on end.
The debate on approving the two documents in the UK parliament began on December 3 and was scheduled to end with votes on December 11. Speaker after speaker from May's own Conservative Party denounced the "backstop," while she stubbornly refused to entertain any change to the text. Only on December 10 did she acknowledge that the Commons would reject the WA by a large majority, including a hundred or more MPs from her own party. She then suspended the debate and undertook to return to the EU and demand assurances that the "backstop" must be time limited. That U-turn rescued her on December 12, when the Conservative MPs met and rejected by 200 to 117 a call to depose her from the leadership of her party.
What to Do About It
In our article published on December 3, it was pointed out that the whole kerfuffle over the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland could be ended by making this simple addition to Article 20 of the Protocol:
"The application of this Protocol shall end after twelve months unless the Joint Committee decides to extend its application in whole or in part. The extension shall last for a period of not more than twelve months and any further extensions shall likewise require a decision of the Joint Committee and last for a period of not more than twelve months."
(The "Joint Committee" referred to here is defined in Article 164 of the WA as a body "comprising representatives of the Union and of the United Kingdom" and "co-chaired by the Union and the United Kingdom," with the purpose of being "responsible for the implementation and application" of the WA.)
That is, if the negotiations on the FFR are making progress, then both sides will readily prolong the application of the Protocol. But if the negotiations collapse irreparably, the Protocol will automatically lapse within not more than one year.
So now Andrea Leadsom, speaking to the BBC eight days later on December 11, said:
"That might include an addendum to the Withdrawal Agreement that sets out that Parliament will vote prior to going into a backstop, should that prove necessary, and potentially that the EU parliament and UK parliament must vote every year thereafter to provide that legitimacy for the UK to stay in the backstop, should that prove necessary."
The similarity with our proposal is evident. Unfortunately, her idea is technically impossible as it stands. The WA is an international treaty. The role of the two parliaments is to ratify or reject the treaty as a whole, while the task of implementing the treaty over time belongs jointly to the two governments. That is why a Joint Committee is written into the treaty, for executing this very task.
Nonetheless, there is a way to accommodate Leadsom's wish to grant the UK parliament a say in continuing or terminating the "backstop." It is to take two steps. The first step is to amend the treaty in the way that we suggested. The second step, an internal UK procedure, is to grant Parliament the right to vote on how the government should instruct the UK representatives on the Joint Committee to act. (As to whether the EU parliament should have a similar right, that is an internal EU matter and no business of the UK.)
A Turning of the Tide?
The prospect of the UK leaving the EU on March without any deal, thus to start trading overnight on the terms of the World Trade Organization, has spurred both sides to prepare feverishly for such an outcome. The EU, for example, has announced that from March 30 UK airlines will be able to fly only from the UK to the EU, but not between EU airports. Stupidly, because that ignores the interests of Ireland's Ryanair, which is Europe's largest budget airline and the second largest European airline after the Lufthansa Group. The UK can retaliate by limiting Ryanair to flights between Ireland and the UK, thus banning Ryanair's far more numerous flights from the UK to the rest of the world.
Indeed, Ireland will suffer more than the UK itself from a sudden no-deal Brexit. First, because a "hard border" with Northern Ireland can hardly be avoided. Second, because 80% of Ireland's road traffic to the other 26 countries remaining in the EU passes via Britain and the English Channel ports. So trucks from Europe to the UK will hit one barrier at those ports, but trucks going on to Ireland will hit a second barrier and will have to guarantee somehow that none of their goods are offloaded in the UK on the way. Add to them trucks originating in or ending in the UK itself.
On December 19, the Irish government published its Contingency Action Plan for a no-deal Brexit. It states (p. 6) that a no-deal Brexit would "require an immediate focus on crisis management and possible temporary solutions" and "potentially involve severe macroeconomic, trade and sectoral impacts." Indeed:
"Due to the close economic, highly integrated and concentrated nature of the trading relationship with the UK, amongst all Member States Ireland could be the most adversely affected by the UK's withdrawal from the EU and to the greatest extent in a no deal scenario."
A long list of critical areas occupies the first 65 pages of the 137-page document. Its Annex 1 on relevant EU documents cites a warning (p. 67) in the EU's own Contingency Action Plan (November 13, 2018) that it is a matter of "unilateral measures for damage limitation" which "can only mitigate the most severe consequences of a withdrawal without an agreement." The Irish PM Leo Varadkar is hastily preparing up to 45 pieces of crisis legislation. This is the same Varadkar who has vetoed any reformulation of the "backstop," to Ireland's own evident detriment.
The EU keeps insisting that, in order to protect Ireland, the "backstop" cannot be modified. But if that insistence leads to a no-deal Brexit, it will guarantee that Ireland suffers the very damage that the "backstop" was supposed to prevent!
In the UK, there was a rush of both ministers and MPs to envisage alternatives to the WA and FFR, such as the EU's treaty with Norway or with Canada. They overlooked, first, that such a treaty cannot just be picked off the shelf but would require fresh months of detailed negotiations over hundreds of pages. The deal with Canada, for instance, was held up from October 2016 to February 2018 by opposition from the Wallonia region of Belgium. Second, that May's deal – with the exception of the "backstop" – is definitely better for the UK than those options. In particular, the Norway-style alternative has been thoroughly debunked in an article by Dominic Lawson.
Among the Conservative MPs opposed to May's deal, there is now an emerging consensus that if she can obtain convincing assurances over the "backstop" from the EU, then accepting her deal may be the least bad option. This may be a turning of the tide.
Thus Iain Duncan Smith, a former head of the Conservative Party and one who favoured May's removal over the "backstop" issue, now says: "But obviously we would like to have the EU face up to the fact that we can get a good agreement providing they're prepared to remove the backstop." Likewise, Daniel Kawczynski has said that "many deeply Eurosceptic MPs including himself were reluctantly prepared to accept" the £39 billion bill of May's deal in order to "get the deal over the line," but that "he and his colleagues would never countenance the idea of backing down when it came to the backstop."
Jacob Rees-Mogg, who led the initiative to remove May, at first said that May should nevertheless resign because 117 Conservative MPs had voted to depose her. In the meantime, however, he has congratulated May in the Commons on her re-election, announced that she now has also his confidence in view of the decision of their party, risen to support her in the Commons when she rejected a second referendum, and even defended her there when she came under attack from Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party leader. The same report adds that Steve Baker, described as "a key lieutenant in the plot to eject Mrs May," has asserted that "Eurosceptic Conservatives are clear that we accept the democratic decision of our party to have confidence in Theresa May as PM."
May and Leadsom have decided to renew the debate in Parliament on January 9 and to hold the votes in the week beginning on January 14. In the meantime, she will strive to obtain the requisite concessions from the EU, be it an amendment to the "backstop," a codicil to be added to the WA or anything else having equally strong legal force. In whatever case, there must be certainty that the "backstop" shall be temporary and that its indefinite extension shall not be used as a threat to force the UK into concessions on its future relationship with the EU.
So, now that May has ended her own unwise stubbornness, all depends on the EU ending its much more foolish stubbornness to accommodate the UK's just concerns over the "backstop." Here May should make all use of two powerful cards in her hand. One, as already described, is that a no-deal Brexit will cause the greatest harm to Ireland, the very country that the "backstop" is meant to defend.
The other card is the impudent threat of French President Emmanuel Macron, made on November 25, to precipitate and prolong the "backstop" until French fishing boats are given free access to UK coastal waters after Brexit. That is, the "backstop" is not the unimaginable remote threat claimed by the EU (and at first by May herself), but it is undeniably open to abuse by all 27 countries remaining in the EU – as well as by the European Commission itself. If the EU refuses to give May legally binding assurances to ensure a brief application – if any – of the "backstop," it alone will be responsible and worthy of condemnation for every misery that ensues from a no-deal Brexit. *Malcolm Lowe is a Welsh scholar specialized in Greek Philosophy, the New Testament and Christian-Jewish Relations.
© 2018 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.

Three Men And Three Scenes
Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al-Awsat/December 24/18
Donald Trump arrived at the White House from outside the dictionary that gave birth to his predecessors. He imposed himself on the party and won the presidency. Solo in nature, he is very impressed with his talent to forge deals. He trusts Donald Trump more than he trusts institutions. He relies on Twitter more than he does on the Pentagon Generals. Trump surprised enemies and allies alike, and the US Administration too, in his decision to fully withdraw from Syria.
Despite the enormous differences between the two countries, the two regimes and the two men, Trump’s decision reminded me of what I heard years ago from Iraqi Army Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Nizar al-Khazraji about Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. Khazraji was living in Denmark, to which he fled from Iraq. I asked him about his role in the invasion and he replied: “I was sleeping in my house the night of the events. The secretary of the general command Alaeddine Al-Jannabi contacted me asking me to go to the headquarters. When I entered his office he said: ‘We have completed the occupation of Kuwait. I asked: How? He replied: The Republican Guard, the Air Force and the military air units have completed the occupation of Kuwait. Fifteen minutes later, Defense Minister Abdul Jabbar Shanshal arrived and was informed in the same way. Imagine that the army is pushing in an adventure of this kind without the knowledge of the defense minister and the chief of staff.”
I am not comparing Trump to Saddam Hussein of course. They come from different worlds and drink from different springs. Trump’s life is not marked with heavy afflictions from Halabja and Anfal, the Kuwait invasion, or the chemical attacks against the rebels. I am also not saying that the slogan “America First” is like the slogan of “one Arab nation with an eternal message.” I just wanted to point out what a leader could do if he did not believe in the need to consult with people of experience within the state institutions.
Just days before Trump’s decision, there was increasing talk about the importance of the US military presence in East Euphrates, Manjeb and Al-Tanf. There were many analyses suggesting that the US presence provides some balance with Russia’s decisive military and political role in Syria; offers a site to intercept the Iranian flow and its attempt to expand its influence on the Syrian map; and curbs the Turkish role by providing a protective umbrella for Kurds - the last US ally in the country. The US role was also seen as a powerful reminder of the spirit of Geneva after Vladimir Putin went so far in imposing the Astana talks on the draft political solution. These considerations were behind the British, French and Italian participation in the east of the Euphrates, accompanied by the aspiration to present a “model-region” at the table of any future negotiations on the Syrian future.
All these scenarios have suddenly evaporated. Trump took the decision to withdraw. Defense Secretary General James Mattis tried to dissuade the president. The later did not change his mind and asked him to prepare withdrawal plans. Mattis has tried in vain to absorb the poison that he was forced to drink. He could not tolerate the dose, so he resigned. Mattis is a legitimate son of the US military. He skillfully managed the military presence in the east of the Euphrates and dealt the same way with Putin’s interventions and the rise of the Chinese giant. Mattis saw in the US withdrawal a military and political mistake that the Kurds would be considered as deceitful and would be seen by friends as proof that the alliance with Washington was tiring, costly and uncertain. Another man could not bear the decision. Brett McGurk, the US envoy to the global coalition fighting ISIS, resigned in protest.
Amid the preoccupation of the United States, its allies and friends with the “sudden” decision, the Kremlin president held his annual marathon press conference. What an impressive tradition! The heir of the tsars sits in front of screens and answers questions of a crowd of journalists and citizens. He sent messages to the world reaffirming that today’s Russia was different from what it was in the early 20th century. It is a unified team of ironmen, in which the defense minister does not resign and the secretary of state does not keep his bag ready for a surprise departure.
Putin can show the victorious smile although he learned at KGB about the need to hide his feelings. He went a long way in shaking the cohesion of the Western alliance and the image of America. He confirmed that the Russian pillow is comforting and able to protect allies, cover their mistakes and ensure their survival. The best proof is that the Kurds of Syria will have no other choice than to resort to the Russian Hmeimim base and perhaps to the Syrian regime itself to face Turkey’s intervention in their areas.
There is a third man and a third scene. At the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, President Xi Jinping presided over the 40th anniversary of the launching of the country’s economic opening-up policy, stressing that no one can dictate to China what it should do. The strength of Xi’s view is supported by figures. In four decades, the reform and opening-up policy has pushed hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty and turned the country into the world's second economy. The President was clear. The country will witness further reforms but under the cloak of the Communist Party. "The leadership of the Communist Party of China is the most essential feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics and the greatest advantage of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics," he said.
A simple observation of what happened in Washington, Moscow, and Beijing in the last few days shows that states and governments have to reflect on what is happening between the adults. This is not just about the present, but about the new international order, with signs of serious changes in its balance. This means security, politics, economy and the hotbeds of tension in the world.

Belgium Shows How Post-Truth Politics Works
Leonid Bershidsky/Bloomberg/December 24/18
To see how post-truth politics work, look to Belgium, a country that once went almost two years without a government. Prime Minister Charles Michel’s coalition has fallen because it signed a toothless United Nations agreement that has become a cause celebre for anti-immigrant politicians.
The document is the “Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration,” signed at a summit in Morocco this month. The US and a number of other countries, most of them in central and eastern Europe, have refused to sign.
Right-wing parties have opposed the pact, making inaccurate claims about it. They suggest it would make criticism of migration illegal, force countries to recognize all migrants as refugees, and impugn their sovereignty by imposing uniform migration policies. None of this is true: The UN simply wants nation states to be nice to migrants and makes some suggestions about how to do that without requiring any specific action. The document isn’t even binding under international law.
Yet in Belgium, the New Flemish Alliance (N-VA) — the Flemish nationalist party led by Antwerp Mayor Bart De Wever — has been adamant the government shouldn’t sign. It has dubbed the Michel cabinet, of which it was part, the “Marrakech government.”
Theo Francken, the N-VA’s Twitter star and the migration minister in the Michel cabinet, declared his party wanted “nothing to do with it” because it was “way too pro-migration.” He also alleged European courts might start issuing rulings based on the pact — a claim for which there is no supporting evidence. Last weekend, protests in Brussels against the pact turned violent. Belgium, it must be said, doesn’t have a happy history with immigration. Once a cruel, even genocidal, colonial power, it hasn’t welcomed migrants and its record of integration has been poor.
Out of a population of 12 million people, three million have a migrant background — with about half of the latter coming from other European Union member states. Those that come from other countries face significant hardship: 60 percent of non-EU immigrants are in the lowest income bracket, half live in poor housing conditions, and 70 percent of women are unemployed.
Correcting decades of policy failure is a much tougher proposition than letting fewer people in, so N-VA has focused on demanding “orderly immigration.”
Yet the end of the coalition isn’t so much about migration as about party politics.
The Michel government was an uneasy alliance of his francophone Reformist Movement and three Flemish parties, including the N-VA, which wouldn’t normally work with a Walloon party like Michel’s. Contrary to expectations of an early crisis, the cabinet has endured, presiding over steady economic growth, tax cuts, falling unemployment and shrinking deficits. The N-VA — in particular Finance Minister Johan Van Overtveldt — contributed positively to this solid performance.
But the party never wanted to be wedded to Michel’s coalition forever. Being part of it has hurt its popularity: After winning the support of 32.4 percent of voters in Flanders in the 2014 election, its share has fallen to about 28 percent in the opinion polls.
With the Reformist Movement having lost ground in Wallonia and Brussels to the Socialists and the Greens, N-VA politicians appeared to feel the time was right to quit the cabinet (which Michel will likely continue to run in a caretaker capacity until the next scheduled election in May) and campaign as an opposition force.
The migration pact was a convenient pretext. Most nationalist voters in any country simply don’t want any global deals on the issue. They’re not looking for detailed policy either. That makes it easy to use the pact as a rallying point, as right-wingers have done elsewhere. It’s just that Belgium’s government was fragile enough and ripe enough for a falling-out for these efforts to trigger a political crisis.
If the N-VA does much better in the next election thanks to its stand on the pact, the next Belgian coalition government, running a fractious country at the heart of the EU, could well turn out to be a friend of the nationalist governments of eastern Europe instead of the EU bureaucracy in Brussels. That wouldn’t be a pretty sight.

Assad and al-Bashir cannot save each other
Khairallah Khairallah/The Arab Weekly/December 24/18
The Sudanese president’s visit to Damascus will add nothing, regardless of who sent him there, be it the Russians, the Turks or the Iranians.
They really deserve each other. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir deserves Syrian President Bashar Assad and Assad deserves al-Bashir. The Sudanese president’s visit to Damascus will add nothing, regardless of who sent him there, be it the Russians, the Turks or the Iranians.
After all, what could the head of a bankrupt regime offer to a head of another bankrupt regime? Unless, of course, the Russians, who had put a plane at al-Bashir’s disposal December 16 to travel to Damascus, have something that makes them believe that it is possible to build on an illusion.
This Russian illusion is called a Syrian regime that has never had a single legitimate day of any kind since its birth.
Al-Bashir went to Damascus to lend a hand to the head of the Syrian regime, who, to stay in Damascus, gave in to all Iranian, Russian and Israeli conditions.
The issue in Syria is not about a bid for nationalism and the use of repugnant statements about Israel and its policies in the region. The issue is about an Israeli policy that explicitly protects Assad’s minority regime in Syria in exchange for its implicit acceptance of Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights.
In the end, the hullaballoo in Damascus was about two regimes that have destroyed two countries and are connected by a third one, Russia.
Russia’s problem is that it has never had a constructive role in the Middle East. What it could offer the repressive regimes in the region were only weapons to use against their own people. This is Russia’s love story with the Middle East since the days of the infamous Soviet Union.
The Soviet Union could have easily contributed to a fair settlement in the Middle East at a time when conditions for that were ripe. It chose instead to hide behind a game of non-war and non-peace, which ultimately benefited Israel.
Al-Bashir travelled to Damascus on a Russian plane and it turned out that there were two paths meeting each other. These are paths taken by al-Bashir and Assad and leading to the destruction of whatever is left of Sudan and Syria.
It is not clear what Russia wants from supporting Assad. Does it think of him as a card it could use at a certain stage? There doesn’t seem to be anyone willing to buy Russia’s Syrian card.
US officials keep reiterating that the United States is not willing to fund Syria’s reconstruction. It is becoming increasingly clear that it was Iran that had used Russia in Syria, right from the fall of 2015 when Sukhoi planes arrived at the Hmeimim Air Base near Latakia and not vice versa.
Al-Bashir will not be able to save Bashar and Bashar won’t be able to save al-Bashir. The whole matter reduces to the fact that Russia is unable to play a positive role in the Middle East.
Iran, which is seeking to sabotage the region, is taking advantage of Russia’s desire to regain some of its former role as a world’s superpower. It is this desire that sent al-Bashir to Damascus and is driving Russia forward head first.
That’s all there is. Whoever genuinely wishes to bring life back to Syria will not hesitate to admit that it is impossible to build on a regime headed by Assad, a regime that believes in fantasies such as Iran is a regional power that can play the role of the dominant state in the region and that Omar al-Bashir has become the embodiment of the concept of Arabism.

Christmas is about keeping hope alive, says Bethlehem mayor
Daoud Kuttab/Arab News/December 24/18
BETHLEHEM: Bethlehem Mayor Anton Salman said keeping hope alive was his biggest challenge.
Talking to Arab News during an exclusive interview, he expressed his wish to bring thousands of disapora Bethlehemites back to the city, but acknowledged his inability to do so “because there’s no land due to Israeli settlements.”
Following are excerpts from the interview:
Q. What is your biggest challenge as mayor of a city surrounded by walls and settlements?
A. Keeping hope alive. We do so not only as a matter of carrying the message of Christmas, but also through our daily work: Building institutions and capacity for our people is a strong form of resistance against the occupation.
In practical terms, I’d like to bring back thousands of Bethlehemites from the diaspora, but I can’t do that because there’s no land due to Israeli settlements, and because the Israelis control the population registry and many people have lost their IDs. Whether by taking land or residency rights, Israel doesn’t want us here. We tell Israel that no matter what, we’ll remain.
Q. What is the biggest obstacle for tourism in Bethlehem?
A. Israel’s monopoly over tourism, but we also have a responsibility in terms of doing more advocacy and promotion. Israel has even tried to prevent tourists from sleeping over in Bethlehem, but we’ve succeeded in bringing more people. What’s important though is not the number of visitors as much as the number of people who stay in the city. Our goal for 2019 is to increase the number of people staying in the city.
Q. Are you interested in Arab tourists? What would you like to see in terms of tourism from Arab and Muslim countries?
A. Bethlehem is the Capital of Arab Culture 2020. We’d love to have thousands of people form Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon here. Unfortunately, this isn’t possible today due to the occupation, and we know we’re losing a lot from it. We lose our potential, but our Arab sisters and brothers should know that we’ll always be waiting for them.
Has the increase in tourism accommodation improved long-term economic conditions, or is it only short-term improvements?
It’s too early to make any conclusions about this, but we can’t take Bethlehem outside the context of the economic crisis that we have in Palestine in general. In any case, we’ll keep working to improve the situation, and to make our residents feel the increase in the number of visitors in their daily lives.
Q. What do you want from the international community?
A. More deeds and less statements. It needs to hold Israel accountable for violating international law. How can a Western government claim to care about the situation of Christians in the Middle East while doing nothing about the oppression we have in Bethlehem? How come separating Bethlehem from Jerusalem with an illegal wall has been normalized by the international community? We need it to uphold its legal and moral responsibilities. That’s all we’re asking for.
Q. What are the issues on which you would like to see the Palestinian Authority (PA) doing more?
A. We have a direct relationship with the PA, and we raise our issues with it. We’d like it to better promote the potential of our city.

Winners and losers in Trump’s Syrian debacle
Chris Doyle/Arab News/December 24/18
Daesh may not be in the market for early Christmas presents but the out-of-the-blue decision of President Donald Trump to withdraw US forces from Syria is a gift unlikely to be turned down. Other beneficiaries of the president’s yuletide generosity could be Iran, Russia, Turkey and the Syrian regime.
Foreign and external interference in Syria has been rampant for the past six or so years, with little to no positive effect. The pullout of US forces will be viewed differently by the various constituencies affected. Many Syrians will always feel more comfortable with Uncle Sam outside their country than in, and following the near obliteration of Raqqa, may even celebrate. Other Syrians will fear the maelstrom of chaos and feeding frenzy that will follow.
The potential winners include many of the enemies President Trump has vowed to defeat, not least Daesh whose adherents gloated on social media. Iran can operate even more freely across Syria, reinforcing its land bridge from Tehran to Beirut. The Syrian regime will look to benefit, not least from Kurdish groups likely to reach out to it for protection from Turkish advances. A race to Raqqa may kick off again. President Putin made no secret of his support for the American move, which he will see as explicit American acceptance that Syria is Russian turf. President Erdogan of Turkey was pleasantly shocked when Trump informed him during their phone conversation, even alerting him to the dangers of a premature withdrawal. Erdogan has promised Trump to cleanse Syria of Daesh, triggering inevitable fears of a Turkish advance southwards.
Conversely, the Syrian Defense Forces, in particular the Kurds in the form of the People’s Protection Units (YPG), have been used and dumped. At some point this was going to happen given that the US has no appetite for backing Kurdish aspirations, but the speed and timing of the decision will have shocked America’s now former Kurdish allies. Trump is not the first to do this to them; he will not be the last. Those with even a vague awareness of history will recall 1991, when having encouraged Iraqi Kurds to rise up against the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the US just abandoned them to be crushed.
Trump does not do alliances and partnerships merely temporary arranged marriages of convenience, often lubricated by millions of dollars.
The Arab elements of the Syrian Defense Forces are already melting away. Many had fought for the pay, not for ideology. Syrians in Raqqa have mixed feelings; the uncertainty is scary, but many privately admit that after years of enduring rule by militias, and the current Kurdish rule of this Arab-majority city, some measure of state control could be beneficial.
Another loser will be American allies. Powerful shockwaves of unease and disquiet have permeated across the corridors of the powerful and the homes of the powerless. Across the globe many will recalculate their strategies to shield their interests from the capricious decision making in Washington and the dissonance in the Trump administration. The long telephone call between Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Trump indicates considerable Israeli unease, both at the treatment of the Kurds but also the gift to Iran. “This is a US decision and we will study its timetable, its implementation and its repercussions for us,” Netanyahu commented coldly.
But in the tally of winners and losers, the greatest loser could yet be the US. Yes, pulling back forces from a zone of protracted conflict has an upside, not least because the US has only a small presence of 2,000 troops and no strategic interest there. But the sudden and unplanned nature of this announcement risks American influence in the Middle East plummeting. Claims of wanting to annihilate Daesh and thwart Iran have been exposed as hollow soundbites.
The only way to justify intervening in both Syria and Iraq was to give the sacrifice real meaning. Exiting with the job of defeating Daesh half done risks the worst of all worlds, with blame from both those who supported and those who opposed US involvement. It is akin to taking only half a course of antibiotics, when the disease comes back even stronger and more deadly.
Trump’s claim of victory over Daesh was half hearted. He did not announce this triumph surrounded by crowds of enthusiastic applauding politicians and generals, but on Twitter and in a video. By his standards, this was ultra-low wattage.
The wattage dropped even further when Defense Secretary James Mattis stole the headlines by resigning, leaving in no doubt his disagreement with Trump. Mattis did not approve of leaving friends in the lurch.
Trump does not do alliances, and his partnerships are merely temporary arranged marriages of convenience, often lubricated by millions of dollars. Turkey and President Erdogan are back in the Trump circle — for now. President Macron of France was once a favorite, but not any more. The North Korean leader went from rocket man to being a “funny guy” who is “very smart.”
Those yet to figure this out are likely to get burned, not least as the more traditionally minded figures of the administration are tweeted out to grass. Quite what this most transactionally minded of presidents sees as the US benefit remains unclear.
*Chris Doyle is director of the London-based Council for Arab-British Understanding (CAABU). Twitter: @Doylech