LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
July 20/2018
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.july20.18.htm

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

Designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Terrorist Entity
تصنيف جماعة الإخوان المسلمين ككيان إرهابي
Tom Quiggin/Gatestone Institute/July 19/2018
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/66143/tom-quiggin-gatestone-institute-designating-the-muslim-brotherhood-as-a-terrorist-entity-%d8%aa%d8%b5%d9%86%d9%8a%d9%81-%d8%ac%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%b9%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a5%d8%ae%d9%88%d8%a7%d9%86/
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12730/muslim-brotherhood-terrorist-entity
It can be said that Hamas has more than mere "ties" to the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, its own documents point out that the Muslim Brotherhood has been intrinsically tied to Hamas and the entire Palestinian situation since as early as 1948.
Rather than "helping our enemies attract more recruits," targeting the Muslim Brotherhood would weaken those organizations.
The greater point about the Muslim Brotherhood is that in its quest for domination, it is either violent or not yet violent. For this reason it should be designated as a terrorist entity.
The Congressional Subcommittee on National Security held a hearing on July 11 in Washington, DC "[t]o examine the threat of Muslim Brotherhood to the United States and its interests and how to effectively counter it."
According to the background information provided by the Subcommittee,
"The Muslim Brotherhood is a radical Islamist organization that has generated a network of affiliates in over 70 countries. The Brotherhood has been designated as a terrorist organization by multiple countries including Eygpt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. The United States has designated multiple Muslim Brotherhood affiliates as terrorist organizations, including Hamas."
Among those testifying before the Subcommitte were: Zuhdi Jasser, president and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy; Hillel Fradkin, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute; Jonathan Schanzer, senior vice president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; and the Honorable Daniel Benjamin, Norman E. McCulloch Jr. director from the John Sloan Dickey Center for International Understanding at Dartmouth University.
Perhaps the most startling testimony was that of Benjamin, who served as Ambassador-at-Large and Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the U.S. State Department under former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In his remarks to the Subcommittee, Ambassador Benjamin, whose stated position was that the Muslim Brotherhood should not be designated by the State Department as a foreign terrorist organization, advanced the belief that while Hamas has ties to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, it would be a mistake at this point to say that the group is an affiliate of the organization.
This statement was inaccurate, to say the least. The original Hamas Covenant of 1988 openly declares that the organization is one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. It also states that its foundational roots go back to 1939, to the "emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, who were members of Muslim Brotherhood," and reveals that its founding history includes the "struggle of the Palestinians and Muslim Brotherhood in the 1948 war" and the "Jihad operations of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1968 and after." As such, it can be said that Hamas has more than mere "ties" to the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, its own documents point out that the Muslim Brotherhood has been intrinsically tied to Hamas and the entire Palestinian situation since as early as 1948.
Although the provenance of the Muslim Brotherhood was officially removed from the charter during an apparent attempt to soften it for public consumption in 2017, the revised Hamas Charter nevertheless still calls for "the liberation of all of historical Palestine", said armed resistance was a means to achieve that goal, and did not recognize Israel's right to exist... and backs an armed struggle."
Ambassador Benjamin's additional claim was equally inaccurate and worrisome. He asserted that Hamas has "a history of foreign relations – including with Iran – that no other Brotherhood group would sanction," apparently suggesting that the Muslim Brotherhood would not tolerate Hamas being in close communication with Iran. In fact, the Muslim Brotherhood itself has had multiple interactions with Iran, specifically with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Nor have these interactions been simply perfunctory or diplomatic. Their purpose is and has been to establish close cooperation between Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood whenever the group is in a position of power.
In December 2012, for instance, Essam al- Haddad, the foreign affairs adviser to then-Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi -- a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood -- met in Cairo with the head of Iran's Quds Force, General Qassem Soleimani. According to a Times of London report on the meeting, the Muslim Brotherhood was looking to set up an alternative security and intelligence apparatus to serve its interests, much in the way that the IRGC was established to cater to the ayatollahs. The report also quoted one Muslim Brotherhood official as saying, "The meeting was intended to send a message to America, which is putting pressure on the Egyptian Government, that we should be allowed to have other alliances with anyone we please."
The Muslim Brotherhood's cooperation with Iran in Egypt is neither new nor a departure from its behavior elsewhere, such as in Sudan and other countries. As a 2013 Huffington Post piece described,
"When President Al-Bashir and Hassan Al-Turabi rose to power in the 1989 coup that established an Islamist state in Sudan, one of the new regime's first diplomatic initiatives was to forge an alliance with Iran, whose own Islamic revolution a decade earlier inspired Sudan's Islamists (despite the Sunni-Shia division). Five months after the coup, Bashir paid a visit to Iran and the two states' intelligence agencies signed cooperative agreements."
Al-Bashir was head of the Sudanese Islamic Movement, which was seen as the Muslim Brotherhood's Sudanese operation. His political affiliations, as listed by the Sudanese Tribune, were with the Muslim Brotherhood, the National Islamic Front and the National Congress Party.
In other words, the Muslim Brotherhood is quite capable of working with Iran and the IRGC, and thus, Hamas's interactions with Iran do not reveal anything other than a well-established pattern.
In his testimony, Ambassador Benjamin also stated that the "Egyptian Brotherhood has foresworn violence since the 1970s, and there is no compelling evidence that it has reversed course on that issue." On this point, he was partially correct. The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood did make a seemingly serious attempt to move away from violence in the 1970s. However, to say that "there is no compelling evidence that it has reversed course" is a stretch.
In his 2012 election speech, President Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate, said: "The Koran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal."
More recently, in January 2015, the Muslim Brotherhood posted a communiqué on its Arabic-language website, stating:
"Everyone must realize that we are on the verge of a new stage, which will require the power hidden within us, in order to use it to bring back the ideas of jihad. We must prepare ourselves, our wives, our sons, our daughters, and those who follow in our path for a lengthy, uncompromising jihad, in which we seek [to gain] the status of martyrs."
Ambassador Benjamin told the Subcommittee, "Unwise actions to target Muslim Brotherhood groups will only deepen the animus against America, and we should not be doing anything that helps our enemies attract more recruits."
The 2016-17 UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee report on the Muslim Brotherhood appears to contradict this. According to the report, "Parts of the Muslim Brotherhood have a highly ambiguous relationship with violent extremism. Both as an ideology and as a network it has been a rite of passage for some individuals and groups who have gone on to engage in violence and terrorism." The report also states that "membership of, association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism."
In other words, the Muslim Brotherhood is a conveyor belt that moves individuals along a path to violence and terrorism, and any association with it should be considered indicative of extremism. Thus, rather than "helping our enemies attract more recruits," targeting the Muslim Brotherhood would weaken those organizations which make up the conveyor-belt system.
The government of the United Arab Emirates concurs, with the UAE Muslim Brotherhood topping its list of officially designated terrorist organizations. Included in this list are several Muslim Brotherhood front groups, such as Islamic Relief Worldwide, CAIR USA and the Muslim American Society. Dr. Al Ketbi, chairwoman of Emirates Policy Centre, said of these groups that they "also include proxy terror actors and front organisations that give others the funding, training, and weapons to carry out terrorist acts."
Simply put, the UAE believes that targeting the Muslim Brotherhood's proxies and front organizations will weaken its efforts to raise funds and recruit new members.
The argument is about whether the Muslim Brotherhood is a violent organization or purely political. But, as the UK House of Commons report states: "Both as an ideology and as a network (the Muslim Brotherhood) has been at rite of passage for some individuals and groups who have gone on to engage in violence and terrorism."
Considerable evidence exists for this. The leader of ISIS was a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri of al Qaeda were both former Muslim Brotherhood members.
Hassan al Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, made the role of the organization clear: "It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet." Domination, of course, implies coercion, and coercion implies the use of violence.
The greater point about the Muslim Brotherhood is that in its quest for domination, it is either violent or not yet violent. For this reason it should be designated as a terrorist entity.
Tom Quiggin is a former military intelligence officer, a former intelligence contractor for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and a court appointed expert on jihadist terrorism in both the Federal and criminal courts of Canada. He is the author of SUBMISSION: The Danger of Political Islam to Canada – With a Warning to America, written with co-authors Tahir Gora, Saied Shoaaib, Jonathon Cotler, and Rick Gill with a foreword by Raheel Raza. He is also the primary contributor to the QUIGGIN REPORT podcast.
© 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.

Why Iran Supports Palestinian Terror Groups
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/July 19/2018
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12729/iran-palestinian-terrorism
The Iranian general did not offer to build the Palestinians a hospital or a school. Nor did he offer to provide financial aid to create projects that would give jobs to unemployed Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. His message to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip: Iran will give you as much money and weapons as you need as long as you are committed to the jihad (holy war) against Israel and the "big Satan," the US.
The same Hamas that is telling UN representatives that it wants to improve the living conditions of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip is the one that is reaching out its hand to Iran to receive funds and weapons.
Now, someone needs to step in and stop Iran from setting foot in the Gaza Strip and using the Palestinians as cannon fodder in Tehran's campaign against the US and Israel. How might someone do that? It is not so complicated. Any international aid to the Gaza Strip must be conditioned on ending Iran's destructive effort to recruit Palestinians groups as its soldiers. It is that simple.
While the United Nations, Israel and the US are proposing plans to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinians in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip, Iran is pledging to continue its financial and military aid to Palestinian terror groups.
Iran's meddling in the internal affairs of the Palestinians is not new. The Iranians have long been providing Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror groups with money and weapons. Were it not for Iran's support, the two groups, which do not recognize Israel's right to exist, would not have been able to remain in power in the coastal enclave.
Iran's support for the Palestinian terror groups has a twofold goal: first, to undermine the Palestinian Authority, which is headed by Mahmoud Abbas, and which Tehran sees as a pawn in the hands of the US and Israel; and second, to advance Iran's goal of destroying Israel.
Just this week, we received yet another reminder of Iran's true goal. The leader of Iran's "Islamic Revolution," Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said that the Palestinians will win over their enemies and will "see the day when the fake Zionist regime" vanishes. He said that US President Donald Trump's "evil policy" is doomed to failure.
So, Iran does not care about the harsh conditions of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Instead, its leaders are hoping that the Palestinians will live to see the day Israel is eliminated. This is also why Iran continues to support any Palestinian group that seeks to destroy Israel.
On the same day that Khamenei made his statement in Tehran, one of his senior generals, Gholamhossein Gheybparvar addressed a conference held in the Gaza Strip and Tehran simultaneously. Gheybparavar is a senior officer in Iran's Revolutionary Guards and commander of its Basij forces -- the "Mobilization Resistance Force." This force's main mission is to suppress protests against the regime in Tehran.
Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards General Gholamhossein Gheybparvar. In his speech via video conference, the Iranian general told representatives of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terror groups that he was "proud" of their "resistance" against Israel. He said that the conference, which was being held under the title, "Wet Gunpowder/Resistance Is Not Terrorism," was an expression of Arab and Islamic unity against the enemies of the Arabs and Muslims. The Iranian general said that Iran and the "axis of resistance" were not afraid of Trump's "threats."
The Palestinian terror groups said after the conference that they were encouraged by the Iranian general's pledge to support them in their fight against Israel and the US.
Khader Habib, a senior Palestinian Islamic Jihad official in the Gaza Strip, said that the Iranian-Palestinian conference was both "symbolic and significant." The conference, he said, served as a reminder that Iran continues to support the Palestinian "resistance" and would deter Israel from attacking the Gaza Strip in response to terror attacks on its citizens. The speech by the Iranian general, he added, was aimed at sending a message to the many countries to support the Palestinian "resistance" groups in the Gaza Strip. "Israel is a potential threat to the Arabs and Muslims," Habib said.
Buoyed by the Iranian backing, several speakers at the conference called for the formation of a "unified Arab-Islamic front" against Israel and the US. They also stressed that the terror attacks against Israel would continue and praised Iran for its full support for the Palestinian factions in the Gaza Strip.
By promising to continue helping the Palestinian terror groups, Iran is offering the two million residents of the Gaza Strip more bloodshed and violence. The Iranian general did not offer to build the Palestinians a hospital or a school. Nor did he offer to provide financial aid to create projects that would give jobs to unemployed Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. His message to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip: Iran will give you as much money and weapons as you need, as long as you are committed to the jihad (holy war) against Israel and the "big Satan," the US.
The Iranian message to the Palestinian terror groups came at a time when several international parties are trying to resolve the "humanitarian and economic" crisis in the Gaza Strip. These efforts are spearheaded by the UN's Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Nickolay Mladenov, who in recent weeks has been on a mission to prevent another war in the Gaza Strip.
These efforts are unlikely to succeed, however, as long as Iran continues its support of the Palestinian terror groups. Iran apparently wants to retain control over its Palestinian proxies to prevent any peace and stability between Arabs and Israel. Iran is not helping the terror groups out of love for the Palestinians, but in order to advance its goal of eliminating the "fake Zionist regime."
If anyone is worried about the Iranian meddling in the internal affairs of the Palestinians, it is Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his ruling Fatah faction. "We don't want to become a pawn in the hands of Iran," said Ra'fat Elayan, a senior Fatah official. "Iran is using Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as a maneuvering card against Israel and the US, and this will have a negative impact on the just Palestinian cause. We have repeatedly warned the two groups of the Iranian intervention in Palestinian affairs."
Meanwhile, it appears that Hamas wants to have it both ways. On the one hand, Hamas wants the international community to step in and help the people of the Gaza Strip. On the other hand, Hamas wants Iran to continue funding its terrorism. The same Hamas that is telling UN representatives that it wants to improve the living conditions of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip is the one that is reaching out its hand to Iran to receive funds and weapons.
We can take a tip from Abbas's and Fatah's anxiety: If they are worried about Iran's ongoing efforts to infiltrate the Palestinian arena, the US and the rest of the world need to find ways to stop Iran from using the Palestinians as a weapon in its battle to extend its control over more and more countries in the Middle East and carry out its deadly schemes. Iran has brought nothing but disaster to Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon and Syria. Now, someone needs to step in and stop Iran from setting foot in the Gaza Strip and using the Palestinians as cannon fodder in Tehran's campaign against the US and Israel. How might someone do that? It is not so complicated. Any international aid to the Gaza Strip must be conditioned on ending Iran's destructive effort to recruit Palestinians groups as its soldiers. It is that simple.
**Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist, is based in Jerusalem.
© 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.

The $1bn Lead Strangling Qatar
Salman Al-dossary/Asharq Al Awsat/July 19/18
A recently published BBC report revealed earth-shattering details on an astronomical ransom of $1.15 billion that Qatar paid to terror groups, later dubbed ‘scandal of the century’. Nevertheless, the news wasn’t as much of a breakthrough as the details presented by the report-- the story was already covered by world-renown newspapers such as Financial Times, The New York Times and The Washington Post. Evidence-based details, documented in both text and voice recordings, explain how far-gone terror support has spread into the Qatari state, exploiting the peninsula’s civilian and military institutions. The ransom paid by Qatar, which rewarded terror parties a staggering sum of money, virtually funds terrorism for the coming decade. It is worth mentioning that Qatari intelligence service participated in the making of the deal. However, it goes without saying that it is both natural and understandable for state intelligence agencies to face cases involving high-level abductions and negotiations with criminals. But it is inconceivable and deplorable for Qatar's foreign minister - the country's top diplomat – to go into negotiations with terrorist groups.
More so, the national civilian carrier, Qatar Airways, transporting the ransom is in its own right an abuse of public and state institutions. Report details made another shocking revelation which professes Former Emir of Qatar Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa personally financing Hezbollah, a blacklisted terror group, with $50 million. For Qatar, no lines are drawn to separate and uphold independent credibility among the country’s intelligence agencies, the ministry of foreign affairs, charities, civil aviation and the ruler. It seems that regardless of how unlawful or terror-linked the job need be done is, all Qatari state institutions, both civilian and military, are exploited and employed to serve skewed interests. All the more illuminating, the report places the deal struck with terror groups about a month and a half before Qatar’s neighbors Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt announced cutting off ties with Doha in June 2017.
Such a discovery clears out the motives behind the severing of diplomatic ties as ultimately driven by Qatar’s stifling connection to terrorism. All four countries have tolerated, resisted and sought to change Qatar’s detrimental behavior yet with no avail. Openly and persistently financing terror groups, in the same light of the region being embroiled in a fight against terrorism, delivers a clear message on Qatar’s unyielding desire to pursue subversive behavior so long it still enjoys the perks and support that comes along with being an Arab Gulf State. Given that Doha involved state institutions in financing and supporting terrorism, other countries have rightfully lost confidence in any Qatari institution, even if it takes on a civilian demeanor. The very same civilian airliner used to host and help millions of passengers travel across the region, and land in neighboring countries’ airports, is being used for terror funding purposes. Placing confidence in a system that miss a single chance on exploiting any resource lain at its feet, even civilian, to carry out personal agendas is simply outrageous. “Qatar has never supported terrorism and tolerated those who finance it,” said Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani in an interview with Fox News. The very same statesman that regurgitated such a refined statement over and over again emerges as the one who participated, planed, engineered, supervised and coordinated a record deal which saw the transfer of $1bn and $150,000 in kickbacks in full to terror groups.
He did not simply tell lies and practice the art of deceit before on a world stage, but also reflected the nature of Qatari authorities. Betting on an inflated belief in its political veracity, Qatar puppeteered itself into an inescapable noose.

Israel Better Be Prepared If Iran Gets Back to Nuke
من مصلحة إسرائيل أن تكون على استعداد في حال عادت إيران إلى النووي
Ilan Jonas/Bloomberg/July 19/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/66137/ilan-jonas-bloomberg-israel-better-be-prepared-if-iran-gets-back-to-nuke-%D9%85%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%B5%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%A9-%D8%A5%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%8A%D9%84-%D8%A3%D9%86-%D8%AA%D9%83%D9%88%D9%86/
In September 2012, standing at the podium before the United Nations General Assembly, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel made one of the forum’s more memorable appearances while holding up a placard showing a cartoon-like bomb.
“At this late hour, there is only one way to peacefully prevent Iran from getting atomic bombs — that’s by placing a clear red line on Iran’s nuclear program,” Netanyahu said. Then he drew a red line on the diagram just under the words “Final Stage.” It’s an image we should bear in mind as the fate of the Iran nuclear deal hangs in the balance. Netanyahu’s UN speech was the peak of his public diplomacy efforts to mobilize the international community to take action against Tehran’s nuclear program. The implicit threat was as clear as the red line he drew: If the world would not act, then Israel would have no choice but to carry out a military strike. With the signing of the interim nuclear deal between the global powers and Iran the following year, Netanyahu’s threat never materialized. Fast forward to today. With the possible collapse of the nuclear deal in the next few months — the result of President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from it — we may well see renewed threats by both Israel and the U.S. to use force against Iran. This is especially true if Tehran decides to resume its production and accumulation of enriched uranium in similar quantities and purity levels to what it produced prior to the deal.
An Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities remains a remote possibility. The Europeans may yet prove successful in saving the deal. Even if they don’t, the Iranians are unlikely to try and “break out” to the bomb; and even if they do, they are still more than a year away from producing enough fissile material for a single weapon. But there can be no doubt that Israel is better positioned today to carry out an effective strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, and to face the certain repercussions, than it was six years ago.
This fact should be weighed in the balance as the international community — and Iran — contemplate their response to the U.S. withdrawal from the pact.
In the early years of this decade, when the military option was being seriously considered by the Israeli government, many doubted its ability to carry out an effective strike that would cause significant damage to the Iranian nuclear program.
Unlike with the Syrian and Iraqi nuclear programs, where a single strike on a single facility was enough to eliminate both countries’ nuclear potential, the Iranian program is comprised of dozens of sites spread across the country — one bigger than France, Germany and Spain combined and located 1,000 miles away from Israel. Moreover, certain key Iranian facilities are not only protected by advanced air defense systems but are also heavily fortified. For this reason, military analysts assessed that an effective attack would require repeated waves of air strikes, possibly lasting over several days, thus requiring Israeli warplanes to travel back and forth thousands of miles in order to refuel and re-arm. That would be a challenging operation even for a superpower.
What’s more, such strikes would have set off fierce retaliation from Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy in Lebanon, including the firing of thousands of rockets and missiles with a range covering all of Israel. At the time, Israel didn’t have effective defense systems that could address this extensive missile threat. Iron Dome, which is designed to intercept rockets with a range of up to 60 miles, only entered its operational stage in 2011. Development of the David’s Sling defense system, which is designed to intercept missiles with a range of nearly 200 miles — needed for the missiles in Hezbollah’s arsenal that threaten Tel Aviv and various strategic installations and national infrastructure — was then only in its infancy.
Finally, the aftermath of any Israeli strike would have included not only in a long war with Hezbollah but also in strong diplomatic condemnations. Israel would have needed an American diplomatic umbrella to address various hostile initiatives in the U.N. Security Council, as well as urgent military assistance to be able to withstand a prolonged conflict with Hezbollah. It is far from certain that the Barack Obama administration would have provided such protection.
Today, things are very different: Israel is better positioned in every way to carry out such a strike and to deal with its aftermath.
Operationally, the warming of relations between Israel and some countries of the region over the past few years opens a whole range of possibilities to the Israeli Air Force.
Militarily, Israel has made a giant leap forward in recent years in terms of its ability to deliver more bombs, more accurately and to more targets in a given time period. On top of that, last December Israel declared its fleet of U.S.-made F-35 stealth fighters operational. The fleet is still small, just 12 warplanes, but Israel plans to have two full squadrons operational by 2024.
It is true that the Iranians have strengthened their defensive capabilities as well, receiving S-300 batteries from Russia that have been deployed around their most strategic facilities. However, Israel believes that it could overcome those defenses even without the use of its new F-35s, let alone with them.
In addition, the Trump administration — unlike the Obama White House — is likely to agree to provide Israel with “bunker-buster” bombs that would be essential to destroying key elements of the Iranian nuclear program, specifically the Fordow enrichment facility, which is buried in a mountain tens of meters underground. Israel is also better positioned today to address the aftermath of such an attack. First, it’s certain that the Trump administration would provide full protection in the Security Council, while also delivering as much materiel as necessary to sustain a long Israeli military campaign.
Second, while Israel could face significant damage as a result of heavy barrages of Hezbollah’s ever-increasing supply of missiles, the proven capabilities and wide deployment of Iron Dome batteries, along with the David’s Sling system being operational, make Israel’s preparedness significantly higher than it was a few years ago. None of this is to imply that just because Israel is now better positioned to carry out a strike on Iran means that it will inevitably do so. The chances remain low for now. There are many domestic constraints as well as international factors that could prevent Israel from eventually launching such a strike, or even make it redundant (such as international pressure forcing Iran toward restraint).
However, Israel’s enhanced capabilities do allow Netanyahu to take a more aggressive approach toward Tehran, knowing that if push comes to shove, the prospects of a strike succeeding will be significantly higher than it was when he held up that cartoon bomb at the UN.

What is Putin blackmailing Trump with?
Mamdouh AlMuhaini/Al Arabiya/July 19/18
Despite his fiery and controversial statements, American President Donald Trump knows how to stand on the edge of the abyss. This was true until three days ago when his foot slipped in the press conference with Russian President Putin.
For the first time since he’s become president, he quickly retreated and attributed the reason to not expressing himself right. He noted that he did not intend to underestimate the importance of the results, which the American intelligence revealed about the Russians’ meddling in the last presidential elections.
It’s a feigned excuse but the stubborn Trump did not tolerate the heat of the enemy and friendly fire, especially by his Republican friends. It is thus smart to quickly retreat and deprive his rivals of the massive hostile momentum which would be employed to weaken his popularity and depict him as weak, traitor and complicit. Trump admitted the meddling happened and stated that before without any enthusiasm. However, he rejects two important accusations, which the Democrats stir up. The first thing he rejects is the notion that the meddling impacted the final results, i.e. the system was thus not manipulated and he did not attain fake votes.
This is true and there isn’t any single evidence stating otherwise. The reason he repeatedly rejects this is because any acknowledgement by him means delegitimizing him as president, underestimating the importance of his victory and increasing the continuous calls to impeach him. What’s new in Trump’s case is that there is clear and frank hostility by influential figures who worked in the American intelligence or the FBI until recently and whom Trump fired
Collusion theory
The second charge he rejects is that there was collusion between him and the Russians. This accusation has been echoed since he arrived in the White House and it hasn’t been proven until now and will mostly probably never be.  All talk that Putin and the Russian intelligence have dangerous documents, which they used to blackmail Trump and make him act smoothly with Russia or act with Putin like a teenage girl in love are mere conspiracy scenarios that are good for thrillers and spy movies as none of this has been proven. An earlier report said Trump slept with prostitutes in Russia where he was organizing a beauty pageant but it turned out to be entirely fabricated.
However why does Trump appear to have this appeasing behavior with Russian President Putin? It is most probably for purely political and economic reasons. Years ago, President Barack Obama rebuked Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential nominee running against him in the elections, when he said Russia was America’s number one foe. At the time, Democrats were the ones who called the most for dialogue and rapprochement with Russia. It’s most likely that Hillary Clinton would do the same as Trump in terms of extending bridges with Russia and cooperating as much as possible to resolve problems from North Korea until Syria. This is what most former presidents did as they opened diplomatic channels with Moscow since the days of Roosevelt. Even during the peak of the Cuban missiles’ crisis, mutual letters were still exchanged between Kennedy and Khrushchev.
All the smart Democrats’ attack on Trump following his lapse would be praise if Trump belonged to their party. In the end, it’s a rough violent political partisan fight but within the limits of the acceptable.
Clear and frank hostility
What’s new in Trump’s case is that there is clear and frank hostility by influential figures who worked in the American intelligence or the FBI until recently and whom Trump fired, like James Comey who published an entire book about Trump after he was fired and described him as morally unfit to be president. During recent crisis, he posted a tweet frankly calling on people to stand by Democrats. In a text message, Peter Strzok, one of the high-ranking officials investigating Russian inference in the elections: “We’ll stop a Trump presidency”, in reply to his terrified mistress. In another text, he mocked Trump’s supporters saying they smelled bad. Former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan does not stop attacking Trump and calling for his impeachment. Following the Helsinki meeting, he has even accused Trump of high treason. There are a number of prominent disgruntled figures who make Trump be suspicious of these secret apparatus and make him believe they are tracking him. Add to that the media’s stance toward him and the picture will be clearer: A president who is underestimated and whom no one thought will win is confronting strong and influential figures in the deep-rooted institutions in Washington who frankly admit they hate him and seek to get rid of him. It is certain that this will create bitter enmity between the two sides. When he committed a mistake next to Putin, they did not hesitate and pulled out their knives but this time they will only wound him and not kill him as they hope.

Human awareness, self-consciousness and its impact on ‘fiqh’
Hassan Al Mustafa/Al Arabiya/July 19/18
In 2004, King Abdulaziz Library held a seminar under the name Islam and the Dialogue between Civilizations, which drew the participation of 120 cultural and religious figures from various countries and diverse political and intellectual streams. I had the opportunity to attend the seminar, which held many discussions and included several advanced ideas for its time. I participated in several discussions and one of my interventions focused on the fiqh (jurisprudential) position of the status of the “non-Muslim,” and the dilemma of being open to him/her and on the Islamic movements’ dual rhetoric in this regards.
I discussed how many scholars consider non-Muslims as “impure” beings, either physical or spiritual. I deemed that this fiqh position poses a real problem in our relations with others whom we look at as “inferior” whereas we are the “pure” and they are the “impure.”
My intervention provoked a response from Sheikh Abdullah bin Bayah, who refuted the notion of physical “impurity” of any human being. He strongly defended his point of view, which was quite progressive compared to many of the traditional peers and scholars.
This story can be read within the context of the contemporary understanding of texts, consequently, this understanding changes the way we look at non-Muslims, alters the way we deal with texts, and transforms them from being the erstwhile repositories of infinite permanence or having undisputed and abiding determinants into historical references related to circumstances and specific to their time of issuance. To consider texts as only one of the many sources of knowledge and fatwas, and not the only basis and the only cornerstone, results in interpretations that are completely different than past interpretations that date back to centuries ago when texts were treated by many scholars as holy and rigid and when only a few dared to question and challenge them. Man’s self-consciousness currently makes the duty of scholars even more difficult because they have to reflect upon the doctrinal system via a different mechanism and a new mindset to establish a modern code
Human rights charter
Nowadays, human being is treated with outmost respect. They are dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the human rights charter. The modern state has regulated laws to organize the public space to preserve human rights, freedom and individuality and to prevent clashes.
This centralization, which was formed in the mind and in the social, philosophical and even political reality of men, makes the contemporary modernist jurists adopt a different mentality.
Thus, they see provisions such as slavery, which were accepted in previous times as no longer acceptable as was discussed by Dr. Tawfiq Alsaif in his article entitled “The constant and the variable, once again,” published in Asharq Al-Awsat daily.
Man’s self-consciousness currently makes the duty of scholars even more difficult because they have to reflect upon the doctrinal system via a different mechanism and a new mindset to establish a modern code of provisions that provide solutions to the fiqh and legal problems faced by Muslims today – solutions which old texts do not provide despite their significance.

Houthis’ absurdity and their blind ideology
Abdullah bin Bijad Al-Otaibi/Al Arabiya/July 19/18
When a gang runs a country, the difference between the meaning of a state and the meaning of a gang becomes apparent, and this is precisely what Yemen has witnessed since the Houthi militia‘s coup against both the state and the Yemeni people.
The Houthi militia is a gang that is driven by its extremist ideology, myopic vision and petty interests, as it offers its services to the terrorist and sectarian Iranian project in the region. In addition, it does not mind distributing roles to other fundamentalist groups and parties within and outside Yemen.
These parties include those that follow the Turkish fundamentalist project allied with the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood, which is supported by Qatar.
Receding Iranian influence
A lot of indicators affirm that the Iranian regime and its imperialist expansionist project are receding, but it is not finished yet. It is expected to head towards failure in a number of affairs, whereas the strength of the moderate Arab axis led by Saudi Arabia and its allies appear to be increasing not only in Yemen but in the whole region, including Syria, Iraq, Lebanon etc. Iranian influence is also receding in the Horn of Africa, Southeastern and Central Asian countries, South America as well as other regions. Iran’s relation with terrorism, in terms of creation, export and support, has become known at the international level and can no longer be hidden or subverted. Iran has contradicted itself by declaring it has nothing to do with Houthis and then speaking on their behalf for a compromise in Yemen. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has repeatedly talked about the Iranian project, and the necessity for Iran to be focused on its domestic situation. Otherwise, it will be forced to do so and will have to give up on all dreams of expansion and imposing influence.
This is exactly what it is happening today. In fact, the Iranian regime is facing the whole world, led by the United States under President Trump. An international coalition is being formed in order to counter the Iranian regime’s terrorist and destructive policies around the world. The Houthis in Yemen are but a small gang that will cease to exist along with many groups, organizations and militias that are affiliated with Iran. The Houthis’ absurdity has been quite apparent in the battle of Hodeidah as they are incapable of resuming the tough military confrontation against the Yemeni army and the resistance, supported by Saudi Arabia, the UAE and the Arab alliance, and at the same time they are trying to distract the UN envoy with secondary issues that are not linked to the core crisis in Yemen or the reality of what is happening on the ground in Hodeidah.
This absurdity may allow Houthis to gain more time, but this is mere postponement of the decisive outcome as is evident by all indicators.
Houthis using human shields
Another example of Houthi absurdity is the use of civilians as shields in order to obstruct military advancement in Hodeidah and other areas. The use of such techniques is proper to gangs and does not pertain to the meaning of the state at all. It reflects the morality of an oppressive occupier and not the morals of the Yemeni citizens. The Houthis have learnt this technique from Iran which backs it as it has long used armed militias and terrorist organizations in order to target civilians and innocent people by killing them in the most heinous of ways through assassinations and bombings as was the case in Iraq, Lebanon and Syria. The Houthi militia is thus Iran’s tool in Yemen. “Defeat is an orphan,” and meanwhile the Houthis and its supporters in Iran, Qatar and other countries are confused as at one point Iran said that it has nothing to do with the Houthis, and denied supplying them with ballistic missiles, trainers, military commanders among others, and at another, it offers reconciliation in Yemen on behalf of the Houthis and acts as the latter’s spokesperson. This confusion is all due to defeat. Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs Adel al-Jubeir said last week that Iran’s isolation will grow and pressures on it will increase, while US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called on US’ allies to exert more pressure on Iran. This comes in line with the position of these two countries and their allies to force Iran to abandon its expansionist ambitions, destructive influence and its support of chaos and terrorism.
Meanwhile, protests and demonstrations are increasing in Iran, and the Iranian opposition abroad is gaining more strength and influence. This can only mean one thing, the decline of Iranian tide in the region.
Persecution and torture
The Houthis’ absurdity is also discernible in how they deal with Yemeni people in prisons and detention centers and in their methods of torture exhorted on Yemeni citizens of which many examples have been disclosed in recent years, the latest being published by Al Arabiya.net. i.e. the photos showing the torture of Yemeni citizen Mounir Mohammed Qayed al-Sharqi in a Houthi prison. These photographs and videos are the best evidence documenting Houthi crimes against Yemeni people. The international coalition is still granting permits to vessels entering the port of Hodeidah, ensuring the flow of goods, humanitarian aid and fuel – in response to the Yemeni people’s urgent needs and as part of the Operation Restoring Hope led by Saudi Arabia and the UAE in support of the Yemeni people – despite the Houthis’ politicization of humanitarian aid to put pressure on the tribes and cities opposed to the hijacking of the Yemeni state and despite all the misguided Western human rights organizations which are trying to condemn the legitimate Yemeni government and the Arab coalition while failing to notice the extent and magnitude of Houthi violations at all levels.
Last Thursday, Asharq Al-Awsat published the speech of Tariq Saleh during the graduation of a new brigade joining his forces. Saleh openly spoke about the Houthis’ absurdity and their ideological claims of their divine right to rule Yemen and thus cloning Iran’s guardianship of the jurist regime.
He also confirmed what everybody knows that the situation in Hodeidah or rather all of Yemen is just a matter of time. He bluntly stated: “Yemen is the origin of Arab people and belongs to its Arab nation. It has never belonged to Persia or the Sublime Porte in Istanbul. Yemen is Arabic and will remain Arabic. We belong to Yemen and not a gang.”Caution in being decisive in Yemen is mainly due to protecting the Yemeni people and their lives, preserving their capabilities and exposing the Houthis’ absurdity and practices to refute all the claims they make along with their supporters in the region and the world and to ensure their inability to undermine the Yemeni state and the Arab coalition. Khomeini assumed power in Tehran thanks to the drafts he issued on the doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih that violated Shiite jurisprudential strictures. Another example of the Houthis’ absurdity is their belief that Hussein Al-Houthi’s statements and writings would make them rulers of Yemen forever. Ideology makes one blind and deaf.

Blockchain can solve third world problems but who will bell the cat?
Ehtesham Shahid/Al Arabiya/July 19/18
“Is blockchain made of gold”? My wife’s rather amusing question during a random research turned out to be more than just comic intervention.
It raised a pertinent point though. Wouldn’t it be good if we dealt with blockchain like gold, which is traditional, time-tested and a commodity with proven value?
Blockchain is nothing of that sort though. It is not a commodity but an online database that anyone anywhere with an internet connection can use. Unlike traditional databases, owned by banks and governments, a blockchain doesn’t belong to anyone.It creates a system through which two people who don’t know each other can trade, without intermediary. In other words, it’s a network that has the potential to make middlemen redundant, banks and financial institutions irrelevant and can directly connect goods and services to consumers and markets.
In an ideal world, effective implementation of blockchain can make financial ecosystem more inclusive, enhance efficiency of health records storage, take land registration documentation to another level and enhance security in digital transactions. In other words, it is here to stay.
Using such a technology has numerous benefits but for us to move from proof of concept to scale, someone quickly needs to bell the cat
A new era?
Yelena Kensborn, an entrepreneur who believes in blockchain, calls it the “start of a new era, where items, thoughts and services can move freely and independently of each other”. Yelena has in her sights a world where everything is connected and one that seeks balance.
“We will have a more transparent society and this transparency will enable us to trust each other and the computers on a completely new level. And when this trust is established, we can do a lot and achieve great things,” she insists.
Peter Johnson, who is developing blockchain to apply to humanitarian crises, also looks at the big picture.“The money is transferred directly, with no bank or other financial intermediary taking a processing fee, and the information about the transaction is unchangeable. If everyone used such a service, there would be no need for banks or credit card companies anymore,” says Johnson.
Shahin Colombowala, Germany-based Principal Consultant at Digital, Infosys, puts things in perspective.“Basically it is taking bookkeeping and making it in a global distributed system that is tamper proof,” she says, clarifying that blockchain imitates transactions with physical objects in the real world. “So, if I gave you my 100 dollar note, I wouldn’t have it anymore and you would have it. I cannot copy the note. I cannot give you the note and say it is still in my wallet,” she makes it simple for me to understand.
Simple inferences
Here is what I deduce from all these explanations. Blockchain can address many third world challenges such as poverty, unemployment, healthcare and corruption. I am making a case for its implementation in third world countries simply because that is where it is needed the most.
Imagine the two billion poor people around the world, with no access to banking system, ending up on the highway – via their mobile phones of course – and reaping the benefits of a blockchain set-up, which connects them to their employer or consumer of their goods and services.
The same applies to small businesses that struggle to get finances through banking channels and constantly need new markets to expand and thrive. The biggest hurdle to poor and marginalized around the world is corruption where welfare funds meant for the needy routinely end up in the pockets of a few.
A transparent method that tracks allocation of funds, including foreign aid, throughout the disbursal phase will only make things easier. Already, GPS-added transparency in land registration is doing wonders in some poor countries.
Humanitarian community
A glimpse of the possibility it offers unfolded in Jordan where 10,000 refugees in a camp housing displaced Syrians were able to pay for their food by way of entitlements recorded on a blockchain-based computing platform. The World Food Program’s “Building Blocks” route revealed other benefits too. Through blockchain, the UN body aims to cut payment costs, better protect beneficiary data, control financial risks, and respond more rapidly in the wake of emergencies. All that is easier said than done though. Attempts to make blockchain mainstream has returned a mixed bag in third world countries so far. Responses have ranged from ignorance to disbelief, even utterly dismissive. The question of what happens to cyber criminals who are attracted to cryptocurrencies also remain unanswered and we are all aware of the controversies surrounding bitcoin. Using such a technology has numerous benefits but for us to move from proof of concept to scale, someone quickly needs to bell the cat. The response is sure to be different in different parts of the world. Until that happens, my little surplus cash would occasionally go toward gold chain for my wife.

Muqtada al-Sadr and me: Chicago on the Tigris
Michael Flanagan/Al Arabiya/July 19/18
When I requested that the State Department give me the post of Senior Rule of Law Advisor for Maysan Province during the reconstruction of Iraq, a wag there quipped that my being a politician originally from Chicago now living in Washington made me a natural expert in both financial corruption and vote fraud – you know, the perfect candidate.
Last week, I allowed my enthusiasm for burgeoning Iraqi Nationalism expressed by Muqtada al-Sadr to override my usual cynicism. A mistake I will not allow again.Al-Sadr has used and abused everyone supporting his stated dreams for Iraq just to gain power and has betrayed what could have been a huge success for Iraqis and for himself. He has all-but-discarded the members of his coalition and embraced the second largest vote bloc – the assortment of Iranian parties voting blocs and parties running under the banner Al-Fateh – and is seeking to form a pro-Iranian government. This is an express refutation of his platform while running. Al-Sadr says that he is doing this to avoid a civil war. This is quite convenient for him as the only party threatening civil war is the Sadrists. Just where exactly are we and how did we get here? If Sadr actually joins with the Iranian parties, his own coalition will likely desert him for the “old actors” as they are called and the State of Law Party and other associated parties will benefit from their defection
Dubious fire
It is a story that would make any Chicago pol giggle with admiration. First, the voter registration verification machines were destroyed. This act was accomplished by a very dubious fire just before the election having the impact of allowing everyone to cast an electronic ballot (or three if they liked!). Additionally, some of the actual physical ballot boxes in Sadr City were burned as well. Not since Emperor Nero has fire been so similarly “helpful.”
The Sadr City electronic votes were so many that they almost reached the level of their previous election totals far surpassing the turnout totals for any other bloc in an otherwise very low-turnout election. The destruction of the verification machines and select ballot boxes also allowed for almost limitless fraudulent ballots from outside of Iraq including highly suspect ballots ostensibly from Peshmerga fighters. For example, one polling place in Lebanon, supposedly received over two thousand votes!
The national commission empowered to make the actual count (the IHEC) is also under fire for suspected corruption and has been attacked publicly to such an extent that they have been removed from making the count and being replaced with a panel of judges to oversee the count. With all of these rampant “irregularities” happening, the losers in the election successfully brought a bill to parliament, which will: 1) invalidate the electronic count entirely and requiring a paper ballot count to be made; and 2) make the paper ballot count to become the official count. There are several challenges to this act made by Sadr, both of the major Kurd parties and the Iraqi President among others. The decision will be handed down on Thursday of this week. Clearly, the Sadrists have never heard the political axiom: “Pigs get fat but hogs get slaughtered.” That is, small thieves will often get away with their crimes and grow fat but huge thieves will get caught and bad things will result. The Sadrist overreach here is so gross and careless that they are surely going to be caught and punished. If that were not enough, Sadr’s coalition partners make up 36 of the 54 seats his winning coalition.
Iranian parties
If Sadr actually joins with the Iranian parties, his own coalition will likely desert him for the “old actors” as they are called and the State of Law Party (al-Abadi, al-Mailiki) and other associated parties will benefit from their defection. This will leave Sadr with nothing near a majority of seats in Parliament and almost no chance to form a government. Sensing this eventual reality, current PM al-Abadi has called for all-party talks by all parties to form a government. It is certain that whatever that government is it will not have a majority in Parliament but be a consensual, grand coalition.
Al-Sadr had a chance to be a great man. Instead he has chosen to be a meaningless and ridiculous pawn of secret, foreign forces. He has sold-out Iraqi Nationalism and has proven to be a thief and vote fraud. He should be prosecuted – not just for the vote fraud he and his followers have certainly committed but for betraying the love and trust of the Iraqi people. Iraqis voted for him and his coalition in droves because he promised honest leaders, an end to corruption, Iraqi Nationalism and complete freedom from foreign interests. Having procured his “victory” based on fraud, he can never deliver on these things. I am fairly certain that he never wanted to.