LCCC
ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
November 16/18
Compiled &
Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.november16.18.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English
news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations For today
Owe no one anything,
except to love one another; for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law
Letter to the Romans 13/08-14: "Owe no one anything, except to love one
another; for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. The commandments,
‘You shall not commit adultery; You shall not murder; You shall not steal; You
shall not covet’; and any other commandment, are summed up in this word, ‘Love
your neighbour as yourself.’ Love does no wrong to a neighbour; therefore, love
is the fulfilling of the law. Besides this, you know what time it is, how it is
now the moment for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now
than when we became believers; the night is far gone, the day is near. Let us
then lay aside the works of darkness and put on the armour of light; let us
live honourably as in the day, not in revelling and drunkenness, not in
debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarrelling and jealousy. Instead, put on
the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its
desires."
Titles For Latest LCCC
Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on
November 15-16/18
Iran must be punished for failing to comply
with financial standards/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/November 15, 2018
How Israel and Hamas ignore the will of Palestinian /Joseph Dana/Arab
News/November 15/18
World faces continued crises as it observes World War I centenary/Abdulrahman
al-Rashed/Arab News/November 15/18
Iran, sanctions and obstructing formation of governments/Radwan al-Sayed/Al
Arabiya/November 15/18
Why are conservatives letting go of Thatcherism/Hazem Saghieh/Al
Arabiya/November 15/18
Iraqi corruption reminiscent of this US state/Michael Flanagan/Al
Arabiya/November 15/18
One of Facebook’s Biggest Fans Is Angry Now/Joe Nocera/Bloomberg/November 15/18
The West Must Offer Immediate Asylum to Asia Bibi/Giulio Meotti/Gatestone
Institute/November 15/18
Why Erdoğan's Charm Offensive Falls Flat/Burak Bekdil/Gatestone
Institute/November 15/18
Why Renewed US Sanctions on Iran are Good News for Palestinians/Khaled Abu
Toameh/Gatestone Institute/November 15/18
Titles For Latest
LCCC Lebanese Related News published on November 15-16/18
Aoun Voices Satisfaction over Bkirki
Reconciliation
Berri Congratulates Rahi, Franjieh, Geagea on Reconciliation
Miqati Affirms Support for Hariri, Says ‘I Don’t Envy Him’
Bassil Meets al-Rahi, Urges All Parties to 'Cooperate to Find Solutions'
Taymour Jumblat Urges 'Communication', Meets Tony Franjieh
March 8 Sunni MPs Express ‘Adamant Right’ for Govt. Representation
Rampling Meets Othman: Our Partnership Will Remain Important to the UK
MEA Flight to Paris Diverts Route Due to Bad Weather Conditions
Kataeb leader Samy Gemayel Calls on Top Officials to Stop
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 15-16/18
Russia says militants, moderates still not
separated in Syria’s Idlib
US envoy: Fight against ISIS in Syria may end soon, Iran still a threat
Steel workers continue to strike in Ahwaz against Iran regime
Netanyahu Plots Next Moves in Israel Coalition Crisis
Netanyahu faces snap election calls after defense minister quits
Latest details of Khashoggi murder effectively wraps up the case
OPEC+ Seeks to Balance the Oil Market during Next Month Meeting
Turkey Eyes Iran Share in Iraqi Markets after US Sanctions Hit
Pound Plunges as UK Ministers Quit over Brexit Deal
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 15/18/The pound plunged again
Latest Lebanese Related News published on November 14-15/18
Aoun Voices Satisfaction over Bkirki Reconciliation
President Michel Aoun on Thursday
expressed relief over the Bkirki reconciliation between the Lebanese Forces and
the Marada Movement. “Any agreement between the Lebanese parties, especially
those who fought each other during the bloody events that rocked
Berri Congratulates
Rahi, Franjieh, Geagea on Reconciliation
Naharnet/November 15/18/Speaker Nabih Berri congratulated Maronite Patriarch
Beshara al-Rahi for sponsoring a reconciliation between Marada Movement chief
Suleiman Franjieh, and Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea that ended 40-years
of enmity, the National News Agency reported on Thursday. Berri congratulated
Rahi over the phone, and made similar congratulatory calls with Franjieh and
Geagea, NNA said. Geagea and Franjieh held a reconciliation meeting Wednesday
in Bkirki, turning the page on a 40-year-long rift between their two parties.
The meeting was sponsored by al-Rahi and held in the presence of a large number
of officials from the two parties. Describing the meeting as “great,” al-Rahi
said “all those who cherish rapprochement, dialogue and peace for the sake of
the country are pleased by this meeting today.” The rift between the two
parties dates back to the 1978 Ehden Massacre which resulted in the death of
Franjieh’s father, mother and three-year-old sister. Dozens of Marada
supporters were also killed in the carnage. Marada accuses Geagea, the LF’s
military commander in the North at the time, of leading the squad that carried
out the operation. Geagea denies the allegations, arguing that he had been
wounded and taken to hospital prior to the carnage.
Miqati Affirms Support
for Hariri, Says ‘I Don’t Envy Him’
Naharnet/November 15/18/Former PM Najib Miqati threw support behind
PM-designate Saad Hariri who has been seeking for more than six months to
line-up a government amid several obstacles hampering his mission,
al-Joumhouria daily reported on Thursday. Miqati said it is inappropriate to
deal with the PM from the logic of “accountability,” pointing out that he has
to form the government in agreement with the President who has a role of making
sure that only “competent members” join the government, Miqati said in remarks
to the newspaper. “We do not envy Hariri for the position he is in, but we
stand by his side and support him in achieving his mission. We must all work to
make the country rise,” he said.
Bassil Meets al-Rahi, Urges All Parties to 'Cooperate to Find Solutions'
Naharnet/November 15/18/Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Jebran Bassil held
talks Thursday in Bkirki with Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi after which he
urged all parties to “cooperate to find solutions” to the cabinet formation
deadlock. “Any clash, regardless of its nature, harms all Lebanese,” Bassil
said, explaining why he has launched a mediation effort aimed at resolving the
so-called Sunni obstacle that is delaying the formation of the new government.
“Over the past days, we all coordinated with the government dispute parties and
we pacified the atmosphere and now we must enter another phase which is turning
general ideas into practical ones,” Bassil added. “We call on all parties to
cooperate to find solutions based on fair representation and on general
principles that lead to a quick formation of this government,” the FPM chief
went on to say. He also emphasized that the parties cannot enter the new
government according to a “victors and losers approach.” Asked whether the new
cabinet line-up will be announced soon, Bassil said: “Pray with us.” The
government was on the verge of formation on October 29 after the Lebanese
Forces accepted the portfolios that were assigned to it but a last-minute
hurdle over the representation of pro-Hizbullah Sunni MPs surfaced. Hizbullah
has insisted that the six Sunni MPs should be given a seat in the government,
refraining from providing PM-designate Saad Hariri with the names of its own
ministers in a bid to press him. Bassil is meanwhile trying to convince the
rival parties to accept a settlement based on naming a “consensus” Sunni
minister.
Taymour Jumblat Urges 'Communication', Meets Tony Franjieh
Naharnet/November 15/18/The head of the Democratic Gathering MP Taymour Jumblat
tweeted Thursday that “it is necessary to realize the importance of keeping the
channels of communication open.”“We must maintain our belief that dialogue is
always a positive step towards overcoming all crises in order to strengthen
stability and protect the country,” he added. Also on Thursday, Jumblat met
with a Marada Movement delegation led by MP Tony Franjieh. Discussions tackled
the current political developments according to the National News Agency.
Franjieh’s father and Marada chief Suleiman Franjieh had on Wednesday held a
historic reconciliation agreement with Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea. The
meeting turned the page on a 40-year-long rift between the two parties.
March 8 Sunni MPs
Express ‘Adamant Right’ for Govt. Representation
The so-called independent Sunni MPs of March 8 insisted on their demand to be
represented in the government, as the formation of the Cabinet stumbles
further. MP Walid Sukkarieh, a deputy of a recently-formed grouping
of six pro-Hizbullah MPs, told VDL (93.3) radio station: “We adhere to our
position, we are only claiming what’s our right which we won’t abandon.”“We
represent a political approach within the Sunni community and we insist on
representing it. Al-Mustaqbal Movement and “father of the Sunnis” are not the
only ones who represent the Sunni sect,” added Sukkarieh, in reference to Prime
Minister-designate Saad Hariri’s remarks. On Tuesday, Hariri, head of
al-Mustaqbal Movemnet, described himself as “the father of Sunnis” in Lebanon,
and emphasized that he knows what “serves their interest.” In a defiant speech
the Premier accused Hizbullah of blocking the formation of the new government
for a reason that is “bigger” than the so-called Sunni representation obstacle. After
six-month of delay, the new cabinet was on the verge of formation early this
week after the Lebanese Forces accepted the portfolios that were assigned to it
but a last-minute hurdle over the representation of the so-called independent
Sunni MPs has surfaced.
Hizbullah has backed the MPs' demand and
refrained from providing Hariri with the names of its own ministers in a bid to
press him to accept giving a seat to the aforementioned Sunni grouping.
Rampling Meets Othman:
Our Partnership Will Remain Important to the
Naharnet/November 15/18/On his first official Strategic Project Management
Committee (SPMC) meeting with the Director General of the ISF Major General
Imad Othman, British Ambassador to Lebanon Chris Rampling discussed the British
Policing Support Project (BPSP) now in its third year of implementation, the
British embassy said. The Strategic Project Management Committee is chaired by
Othman and Rampling in the presence of Head of ISF Academy General Ahmed
Hajjar, Inspector General Joseph Kallas, Head of Beirut Police General Mohammed
Ayoubi, Head of Mobile Forces General Fouad Khoury, and aims to ensure
effective strategic governance and oversight of the project implementation.
Ambassador Rampling highlighted how the
MEA Flight to Paris Diverts Route Due to Bad Weather
Conditions
Kataeb.org/ Thursday 15th November 2018/Middle East Airlines (MEA) flight 209
that was heading for Paris made a landing in Brussels due to bad weather
conditions as the pilot preferred to not put the passengers' safety at risk,
sources told the Kataeb website. MEA Chairman Mohammad al-Hout confirmed to
LBCI that the flight had diverted its route due to the poor visibility caused
by heavy fog, noting that airplane will resume its flight to the Charles de
Gaulle Airport in
Kataeb leader Samy Gemayel Calls on Top Officials to Stop Lebanon's
'Haemorrhage'
Kataeb.org/ Thursday 15th November 2018/Kataeb leader Samy Gemayel on Thursday
outlined once again the importance of forming a government as soon as possible,
reiterating that a Cabinet of specialists would be the optimal option to help
address the pressing economic challenges facing the country. “We renew our call
for steering the economy clear of the political deadlock because the situation
has become unbearable,” Gemayel said during his visit to the headquarters of
the Social and Economic Council, along with other Kataeb MPs. “We
regret that the government formation talks are only based on personal interests
and partitioning, which is totally disgraceful to the people,” Gemayel said.
“We urge both President Aoun and PM-Designate Hariri to take the initiative
immediately to stop the haemorrhage that
Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from
miscellaneous sources published on November 15-16/18
Iran must be punished for failing to comply with financial standards
د.
ماجد ربيزاده: يجب معاقبة إيران لعدم إلتزامها بالمعايير المالية
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/68942/dr-majid-rafizadeh-iran-must-be-punished-for-failing-to-comply-with-financial-standards-%D8%AF-%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%AF-%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%87-%D9%8A%D8%AC%D8%A8-%D9%85%D8%B9/
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/November 15, 2018
After the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly known as the Iran
nuclear deal, was struck between the P5+1 world powers and the Islamic Republic
in 2015, the Iranian leaders enjoyed a free ride in the global financial
system. As financial restrictions were removed, the nuclear deal facilitated
the flow of additional international revenues, foreign trade, business dealings
and financial capital. But, as the regular protests in Iran have demonstrated,
the major beneficiaries of these funds were not the ordinary Iranian people,
but rather Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
(IRGC) and its elite branch the Quds Force, and Tehran’s militias and terror
groups across the Middle East.
However, the Iranian leaders’ good fortune appears to have run its course.
Several major global financial institutions are tightening their grip on the
ruling clerics in order to pressure Tehran into complying with international
standards. International Monetary Fund (IMF) spokesman Gerry Rice gave an
ultimatum to the Islamic Republic and urged it to strengthen its anti-money
laundering and anti-terrorism financing rules by February 2019.
In addition, the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which monitors
money laundering across the world, has also given Tehran a deadline to make
several reforms. Marshall Billingslea, the US Assistant Secretary for Terrorist
Financing, who currently presides over the FATF, warned that: “We expect Iran
to move swiftly to implement the commitments that it undertook at a high level
so long ago. In line with that, we expect that it will have adopted all of
these measures by February. If by February 2019 Iran has not yet done so, then
we will take further steps.”
After the nuclear deal, Iran pledged to implement the FATF’s 10 reforms in
order to bring its national laws against money laundering and the financing of
terrorism. But, as usual, the Iranian leaders’ promises were a collection of
words rather than action — with Iran having not acted on all the 10 reforms.
Although the Iranian leaders may shrug off the repercussions of not meeting
international standards, the consequences can be extremely severe.
If the Iranian regime does not meet the FATF or IMF requirements, it will be
brought back on to the international money laundering blacklist. This would
mean that many foreign investors, banks and financial institutions would be
reluctant to conduct any kind of dealings with the regime.
This would mean that many foreign investors, banks and financial
institutions would be reluctant to conduct any kind of dealings with the
regime. When we combine this with the US sanctions, which took full effect on
Nov. 4, such measures would significantly pressure the Islamic Republic and cut
off the flow of funds to the regime. Even if the Iranian leaders make promises
that they will comply with the global financial rules by February, it is
totally unrealistic to believe that the Tehran regime will fulfill such
promises in the future. This is due to the fact that money laundering and
terror financing are deeply embedded in Iran’s political and economic
structure. In fact, since 1979, terror financing has been a core pillar of
Tehran’s foreign policy and a means to achieve its regional hegemonic ambitions
and export its revolutionary principles. In other words, financing terrorism is
the raison d’etre of the Iranian regime. That is why Khamenei has repeatedly
slammed any effort by parliament to ratify treaties to comply with global
financial standards. With regards to the FATF’s requirements, Khamenei stated:
“We do not need to approve treaties, which have problems, for their positive
aspects. There is no need to accept things for some of their positive aspects
when we do not know where they are leading, and when we do know that they have
some flaws.”
Halting terror financing and money laundering would mean that the regime would
lose its ability to fund and sustain its militia groups and proxies. As a
result, the Islamic Republic, which is the top state sponsor of terrorism in
the world, will not attempt to clamp down on its terror financing.
The IMF, FATF and UN should have pressured Iran a long time ago for not
complying with the international rules on tackling terrorist financing and
money laundering. Instead of waiting for these global organizations to act,
governments and coalitions of state and non-state actors can impose targeted
sanctions aimed at holding the Iranian regime accountable. Many countries are
enduring the direct and indirect consequences of Iran’s terrorist financing,
money laundering and smuggling.
In addition, governments can impose sanctions on those entities and individuals
that are facilitating Iran’s money laundering and funding of terrorism. Many of
these entities and individuals are affiliated with the IRGC.
The Iranian regime is a threat to the global financial system. The Iranian
leaders ought to be held accountable for not complying with international rules
on tackling terrorist financing and money laundering. The blacklisting of the
Iranian regime is long overdue. The FATF, IMF and UN must immediately level
appropriate sanctions against Iran’s economy in order to cut off the flow of
funds to terror groups.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political
scientist. He is a leading expert on Iran and US foreign policy, a businessman
and president of the International American Council.
How Israel and Hamas
ignore the will of Palestinians
Joseph Dana/Arab News/November 15/18
Close to 2 million people live under siege in the Gaza Strip. The siege, which
is actually a military blockade, has lasted for more than 11 years, since Hamas
took power in the tightly packed coastal enclave. Over that period, Israel has
attempted to break Hamas’ hold on power and failed. While Israel’s official
rhetoric belies a different narrative, it has, in recent weeks, quietly engaged
Hamas in order to quell a popular rebellion that threatens the dreadful status
quo in Palestine. Now, however, Israel and Hamas are — counterintuitively —
marching toward war in order to ensure that those popular protests are taken
out of the spotlight. Sometime around this year’s Land Day holiday on March 30,
tens of thousands of people began confronting Israeli soldiers on Gaza’s
border. Sometimes armed with stones, Palestinians from all walks of life
approached the heavily fortified border on Friday afternoons after weekly
prayers. Men, women and children joined the movement as it ballooned in size.
Throughout the summer, these protesters risked everything to confront soldiers
at the border. Nearly two-thirds of Gazans are refugees or the descendants of
refugees. Thus, it is no wonder that the symbolism of Land Day and the annual
commemoration of the founding of the state of Israel was the spark for a series
of protests that became known as the “Great March of Return.”
Israel was quick to blame Hamas for the protests. Remarkably little credit was
given to ordinary Gazans for their role in this fresh struggle tactic. In fact,
the protests, which have died down dramatically but still continue to draw
thousands, represent a third force in Gaza. They began as a popular movement
organized by an exhausted people. Such protest movements are not new in
Palestine but they have all been co-opted by larger political bodies at
different times, including the Palestinian Authority (PA), Hamas and Israel.
Both Israel and Hamas — the forces with the most to lose from a genuine popular
rebellion in Gaza — have failed to engage this movement, to understand the core
motives that propel it or to evaluate its future. The protesters didn’t risk
life and limb because Hamas told them to; they confronted Israel because they
have nothing left to lose. After a decade living in crushing poverty and
isolation, the majority of Gazans are simply fed up — with everyone.
The majority of Gazans want day-to-day life in the Strip to improve, yet Israel
as the occupier is unable or unwilling to work with this majority to achieve
this simple goal.
Israel’s initial response to the protests was unsurprising, but it was swift.
It immediately responded with the type of military force that casts the
protests as a security challenge devised by Hamas tacticians. Instead of
engaging with the protesters as a civilian population with legitimate
grievances against the siege and against Hamas’ leadership, Israel viewed them
as an armed threat.
Despite killing and wounding thousands of protesters, the military response has
done little to crush the core backbone of the movement. Until this week, at
least, Israel focused on easing living conditions in Gaza. That is the most
remarkable storyline of the Great March of Return, and also the one receiving
the least coverage. With Egypt’s help, Israel and Hamas worked out an
arrangement to increase fuel imports into Gaza, pay salaries for civil servants
and approve permits for up to 5,000 Gazans to work in Israel. Even more
surprising is the fact that Israel has not renewed demands for Hamas to hand
over physical control of border crossings or tax collection to the PA, despite
loud calls from President Mahmoud Abbas. These are sticking plasters on a much
larger wound but, given the horrific humanitarian situation in Gaza, they can’t
be overlooked.
In the view of one Israeli commentator, Israel had been using indirect talks
with Hamas about ending the protests to address the concerns of the Gazan
majority. But that is a major mistake and one that reveals the terrible
political reality in Israel and Palestine. The majority of Gazans want
day-to-day life in the Strip to improve, yet Israel as the occupier is unable
or unwilling to work with this majority to achieve this simple goal. It prefers
instead to use corrupt and inefficient Palestinian interlocutors such as the PA
and Hamas to maintain its occupation.
But all these efforts will move to the backburner if the recent escalation
between Hamas and Israel intensifies. After a botched operation by Israeli
special forces last week, the cycle of Hamas rockets and Israeli airstrikes
came back to hog the headlines and virtually remove the prospect of more popular
non-violent protests along the border (the two sides agreed to an
Egyptian-mediated truce on Tuesday.)
The Great March of Return demonstrated the power of popular mobilization to
break the status quo. Or at the very least it had the potential. It has also
highlighted the degree to which Israel understands how to quell protests
through military action; the coercion of Palestinian political platforms; the
maintenance of its sophisticated matrix of control over Palestinian life; or a
combination of all three. Israel’s position of power has never been stronger,
and the suffering of the Palestinian people never more pronounced.
**Joseph Dana, based between South Africa and the Middle East, is
editor-in-chief of emerge85, a lab that explores change in emerging markets and
its global impact. Copyright: Syndication Bureau www.syndicationbureau.com
World faces continued
crises as it observes World War I centenary
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Arab News/November 15, 2018
Around half a million Arabs fought in World War I which ended 100 years ago.
Arabs fought with both camps. Arab soldiers fought and died from Sudan to the
Levant and Morocco. Some were transported by ships to Europe to serve the
combating armies.
The Ottoman Turks used around 300,000 Arabs in their armies to fight with
Germany, Austria, Hungary and Serbia, they were called central powers, against
Britain, France, the US, Russia, China and others from the Allies. Most of the
fighting was in Europe and most of those killed, whose number reached 10
million, were also in Europe. The destruction, however, reached most of the
world, including Arab countries. The authority’s greed, the illusion of
expansion and the emergence of extremist European nationalism were the reasons
behind the war.
As for Arabs, they had no causes in this war, except for the Arabs in the
countries which were under Ottoman rule and who suffered from the “humiliating
taxes” and mismanagement, especially that the Turkish rule back then was underdeveloped
and weak, and could not keep up with the industrial progress in European
colonial countries. As a result, Arab countries under Ottoman’s rule became
poor unlike the countries that were governed by the British or French empires.
At the end of WWI, Turkey itself became the first victim and the target of the
victorious countries which wanted to seize it and not just seize its Arab
colonies. Russia, Greece, Britain and France targeted Turkey. However, Mustafa
Kemal Ataturk emerged and was able to manage the battles and save most of the
Turkish Anatolia. This is what makes Ataturk the greatest figure in modern
Turkey, in addition to his modernist and industrial project.
Sykes-Picot Agreement
The management of the Arab region was transferred to European colonials who won
the war. The Sykes-Picot Agreement which was reached before the war had nothing
to do with the results, although this is what is commonly known in history.
Dividing the region came as a result of defeating the Turkish colonizer and succeeding
it in its colonies. Neither the victors nor the losers learnt from the lessons
of WW I. The nationalist intellect that dominated Europe had a major role in
feeding hostility and pushing events towards World War II in which more than 60
million people died.
Lessons from great wars are often forgotten and all that’s left from them are
military academic papers on how to mitigate losses and achieve victories.
Europe which was the reason behind the two world wars was the loser and it
finally accepted the concepts of the free market over the policy of
colonization which had its motive in securing raw material resources and
guaranteeing markets for their products, as buying one barrel of oil for $1 is
not better than a barrel of oil for $100 because it leads to the continuity of
fighting. Countries like South Korea or Sweden influenced world markets without
sending a single soldier beyond their borders. The 100th anniversary of the end
of WWI comes at a time when the world is facing more crises as a result of the
conflicts between the Russian and American powers and amid escalating
suspicions and fears due to the Chinese dragon’s expansion beyond its
territories and amid indicators of divisions within the European Union which
was based on the concept of cancelling single nationalism and on the concept of
regional unity. World wars ended but they did not die.
Iran, sanctions and
obstructing formation of governments
Radwan al-Sayed/Al Arabiya/November 15/18
It’s been days since the fourth crisis which the Iranians have caused in terms
of forming the Iraqi government or finalizing its formation. The first crisis
was replacing Abadi and they succeeded in that under the impression that the
new Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi was independent.
Abdul Mahdi submitted his credentials and repeatedly stated that Iraq is not
part of the system of sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on Iran.
Meanwhile, Abadi has stated that he can only deal with the sanctions in order
to maintain Iraq’s interests and to maintain relations with the US, which
cooperates with him in confronting terrorism and supporting the Iraqi army.
Iran fomented the second crisis over the election of the President, who has to
be a Kurd according to the quota system. The Iranians and those who support Iran
in Iraq stood against Barzani’s candidate and supported Barham Salih from the
Talbani party, after he pledged that his first decision would be to nominate
Abdul Mahdi.
I think that the problem is not in the right representation or the eligibility
of this or that Sunni, but it is that Hezbollah wants to show that it and Iran
control Lebanon, its government and even its Sunni component. The third crisis
ensued during the election of the parliamentary speaker, who has to be a Sunni
according to the quota system. A young man from Anbar was elected. He was one
of their (the Popular Mobilization) supporters when he was the governor of
Anbar. He contested elections with them, against other candidates who were
against the Popular Mobilization and the Iranians before, during and after the
elections. The fourth crisis is the ongoing row over the nomination of two men
for the interior and defense ministries. The interior ministry is part of the
Shiites’ quota and the Shiites have nominated Falih Alfayyadh, who was the
director of national security and supervisor of the Popular Mobilization. Abadi
had ousted him after the Basra developments and the Federal Court had
reinstated him to his positions. He is completely loyal to Iran and its
followers in Iraq. Muqtada al-Sadr has officially opposed his appointment
because he thinks he is not an independent figure, hence this violates the
condition of the agreement between the Shiite Islah and Binaa blocs. However,
Sadr will eventually approve his nomination, as he had done in other similar
occasions.
The position of the Defense Minister, in view of the low importance of his
position since the prime minister is the commander-in-chief, comes under the
Sunni quota. The Iranians are hence stating that the formation of the Iraqi
government would not be complete, unless it was formed according to the
conditions of the Popular Mobilization, Hadi Al-Amiri and Maliki.
Disrupting Lebanon
The second Iranian disruption is happening in Lebanon over the formation of a
government. It has been six months since Saad Hariri was appointed as prime
minister-designate and he has so far been incapable of forming a cabinet as he
has been distracted by distinguishing between his jurisdictions and the
jurisdictions of the president who issues the cabinet formation decree. Then an
inter-Christian dispute took place over the quota of the president’s party and
the Lebanese Forces Party and whether the latter should have five, four or
three ministers according to the results of the elections.
Aoun’s son-in-law won this dispute against the LF as the prime
minister-designate abandoned his ally Geagea, who had to accept the president’s
conditions in order to be part of the government. However, once the formation
of the government seemed complete, Nasrallah demanded the so-called
“independent Sunnis” to be represented in the cabinet via one minister. This is
an interference in Saad Hariri’s position and Hariri strictly rejected this and
he was supported by the president. I think that the problem is not in the right
representation or the eligibility of this or that Sunni, but it is that
Hezbollah wants to show that it and Iran control Lebanon, its government and
even its Sunni component. Hezbollah wants to say to the West that Iran has the
upper hand in Lebanon — a card up its sleeve on the sanctions issue, or else
Lebanon would collapse. The bottom line is that there can be no government in
Lebanon that does not meet the conditions of Iranian Hezbollah.
Other war theatres
The third issue where Iran wants to appear as a decision maker is Syria. The
Americans have finally appeared firm in facing off Russia and Iran. Iran has
left the issue to Russia, and had gotten closer to the Turks. The Russians are
concerned in returning the refugees to Syria and reconstruction. One of the
pressures they are using on the Europeans and Israel states: If you do not help
us, we will be forced to give Iran the opportunity to renew the war. The fourth
issue which Iran controls part of is related to Yemen. The peace calls have
been raised again. This time the US has joined those who are calling for peace
negotiations after Britain, France and Germany. Like earlier times, the Houthis
would not respond unless they realize defeat or Iran sees a benefit in it. The
fifth and last file is that of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Gaza. The Egyptians
have succeeded for the fourth or the fifth time in reducing tensions between
Hamas and Israel. However, tensions can re-emerge if the Iranian interest
required so. The Iranians made Israelis believe that they intend to appease
them in Lebanon, Syria and Gaza but this is time bound for the few next months,
or else tensions would re-emerge again on the three fronts.
The US administration was not exaggerating when it considered Iran as the top
terror sponsor in the world.
Why are conservatives
letting go of Thatcherism?
Hazem Saghieh/Al Arabiya/November 15/18
It was surprising to some observers when British Treasury Secretary Philip
Hammond announced the end of financial austerity in the annual budget and allocated
billions of pounds into the deteriorating healthcare and for reviving a number
of other social services.
Some commentators have linked this announcement to Brexit and the debate
surrounding it within the ruling British Conservative Party, especially since
the most hardline conservatives who want Britain to leave the EU are the ones
who insist the most on removing the role of the state and adhering to the
Thatcherism doctrine regarding austerity and privatization. More importantly,
as recorded by British writer Martin Kettle, the debate within the Conservative
Party was regarding the role of the state. It is well known that before the
rise of Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s, this party held on to that role, even
within limits to organize the capitalist process and prevent the destruction of
the idea of ‘one nation’ and ‘one people’. Here, the discussion goes back to
its root, to Adam Smith himself. The rise and prevalence of Thatcherism has
overlooked this dimension in capitalism in favor of hyper privatization and
austerity alone in accordance with a famous phrase said by Thatcher: “There is
no such thing as society”
This economist and great thinker whose name is associated with the principle of
free market economy is also the one who emphasized the role of the state in
protecting the nation, in the administration of justice as well as providing
the society with public services such as infrastructure, local schools and most
importantly performing its role in organizing the market. The rise and
prevalence of Thatcherism has overlooked this dimension in capitalism in favor
of hyper privatization and austerity alone in accordance with a famous phrase
said by Thatcher: “There is no such thing as society”. But what the
conservative environment is witnessing today is almost like digging that
tradition and restoring it. In this sense, Martin Kettle points out similar
positions voiced by Harold Macmillan, the conservative prime minister in the
1950s and early 1960s, when he said: “Unless we can continue this peaceful
evolution from a free capitalism to planned capitalism, or, it may be, a new
synthesis of capitalist and socialist theory, there will be little hope of
preserving the civil, democratic and cultural freedoms.”
But why now?
It has become clear, not only in Britain, but throughout Europe and the world,
that the widening of economic inequality is a major reason for the rise of
populist and ultra-nationalist movements. Similarly, the vote in favor of
Brexit was a clear indication of where the situation is headed due to this
disparity.
Conservative populists, such as former Secretary of State Boris Johnson or the
former populist leader of the UK Independence Party, Nigel Farage, rallied for
Brexit and mobilized the frustrated groups of Britons in its favor. Needless to
say, a very influential part of the British bourgeoisie, which finds its
interests in Europe, considers the Conservative Party its political home.
Meanwhile, the opposing Labor Party under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, has
managed to turn the party into the largest party in Europe in terms of
membership by benefitting from the economic crises and the political crisis of
democracy. With growing political despair hitting the youth, they finally
restored vitality that pushed them back to partisan work as embodied by
Corbyn’s party. In this sense, the recent response to the conservatives is
similar to what happened after World War II, when the “welfare state” and the
adoption of the Keynesian economic principles blocked the path of the more
extreme and radical forces. Will the British – who have a long history of
pragmatic and experimental traditions – once again demonstrate that they are
ready to be the first to review and change these dogmas, and therefore become
pioneers in dealing with populism which feeds on social inequality that is no
longer bearable or acceptable?
Iraqi corruption reminiscent of this US state
Michael Flanagan/Al Arabiya/November 15/18
In his appearance before a parliamentary panel Ali al-Alaq, the Governor of
Iraq’s Central Bank, had to answer several questions about a five-year-old
incident at a branch of the Iraq’s Central Bank, the Rafidain Bank. It seems
that at the end of 2013, the annual flooding had crept into the vaults of the
Rafidain Bank and “destroyed” mountains of dinar bank notes worth seven billion
dinars (about six million dollars).The Parliament wanted to know a little more
about this incident as the bank notes are designed to be waterproof and able to
withstand flooding (as any Iraqi who has washed his clothes with money in the
pocket can tell you). The Governor assured the Parliamentary Committee that
there was no real loss of money as the notes were destroyed and simply replaced
by the Central Bank at a cost of only a few cents per note. Somehow the
legislators were a little curious about how the notes were “destroyed.” That
they might have been damaged and replaced makes some sense, but utterly
destroyed by rainwater while in a vault is another matter entirely. Ali al-Alaq
was not the Governor of the Central Bank at that time and had little more to
offer publicly.
It is lucky that Chicago is not its own country. There is no doubt that my home
would be ranked even lower than Iraq. Chicago has a huge public debt to pension
funds and other debtors.
Iraq is ranked as the twelfth most corrupt government in the world by
Transparency International, which makes such rankings for the UN. This is
actually an improvement over having been ranked dead last just a couple of
years ago. Highly sensitive to this ranking and anxious to improve their
international rating to help Iraq, the legislators were inordinately interested
in something, which was at best was an ordinary accident and remediation and at
worst was official corruption of an almost petty nature. Considering the billions
annually looted in Iraq in official corruption – an amount which is estimated
to have climbed to over two-hundred billion dollars since the fall of Saddam –
“petty” is a word one could aptly apply to merely six million dollars’ worth of
theft. Corruption was a major issue in the late elections and all candidates
for executive and legislative offices focused on ending public theft in Iraq.
It is a hard problem but Iraq is not alone.
Corruption in Chicago
It is lucky that Chicago is not its own country. There is no doubt that my home
would be ranked even lower than Iraq. Chicago has a huge public debt to pension
funds and other debtors. The State of Illinois (in which Chicago is located)
has the highest amount of structural debt per capita in the United States. The
structural debt for just Chicagoans is sixty-seven thousand dollars per
household plus an additional forty-one thousand dollars per household for the
Illinois portion as the state tries to service its public debt as well. Unlike
the public debt of the federal government, this money must be repaid soon.
This debt was largely created by corrupt deals by politicians in Chicago with
unions and other organizations representing pensioners in Illinois promising to
give away exorbitant sums of future public money for high pensions to buy
votes. Because public officials in Illinois can have outside “employment” in
addition to their legislative salaries and often mysteriously end their public
careers as millionaires; keeping that public job is clearly lucrative and any
amount of public money that needs to be promised away to keep that job is worth
it. As Mary Frances Berry wrote for Salon a couple of years ago, “In addition,
four consecutive corrupt governors and nearly one-third of Chicago’s one
hundred alderpersons since 1973 have been convicted of corruption, mostly
involving bribes to influence government decisions or for personal financial
benefit.”
This has been going on in Chicago for decades. In fact, there is a very famous
case of election fraud in Chicago. There are many such stories but this one is
apt to this article about Iraq’s flooding. In the 1920s, a flatbed truck
holding four wards of Northside votes was heading downtown to deliver those
votes to City Hall to be counted. A sudden gust of wind and rain hit the truck
as it crossed the Chicago River. Amazingly, all of the boxes of votes blew off
of the truck, onto the road, over the guard rails and into the river. These
pieces of paper were too “destroyed.”The court eventually ruled that the voters
whose votes were destroyed were simply disenfranchised and those votes would
just not be counted at all as there was no way to exactly replicate them. This
was a controversial ruling to be sure. Oh, did I mention that in Chicago they
elect judges? I hope that the Iraqis get to the bottom of the great flood but
if they never do, I hope that they keep up their anti-corruption efforts. They
need to do better than Chicago has – and can.
One of Facebook’s Biggest Fans Is Angry Now
Joe Nocera/Bloomberg/November 15/18
“Never before has one company’s failure had such a devastating effect on the
world,” wrote the technology journalist David Kirkpatrick recently. He
continued: Racists, autocrats, and purveyors of hate and disorder have found
Facebook the perfect medium for spewing poison, normalizing it, and gaining
adherents. … Societies around the world are reeling from the consequences.
Politics and democracy are under duress. And thus far, Facebook does not have
an effective way to fight back. Kirkpatrick is hardly the first person to use
such harsh language to characterize Facebook Inc.; these days, it’s hard to
find anyone not employed by the company who’ll offer a full-throated defense.
But Kirkpatrick’s criticism falls into a special category. In 2010, he was such
a fan of Facebook that he wrote a book called “The Facebook Effect.” It
portrays the company as a positive force, while casting its founder, Mark
Zuckerberg, as an idealist, far more concerned with connecting people than with
making money. Today thoroughly disillusioned, Kirkpatrick has become one of
Facebook’s fiercest critics. Roger McNamee, the well-known tech investor, is
the other person I would put in this category. I remember McNamee telling me
years ago how proud he was to serve as a mentor to Zuckerberg; now he writes
op-ed articles describing Facebook’s business model as a threat to “public
health and democracy.”
These days, McNamee is keeping his powder dry because he has a book about
Facebook coming out in early 2019. But Kirkpatrick is under no such stricture
and, as I discovered when I visited him recently, he has thought a lot about
why the Facebook he wrote about eight years ago seems so different from the
Facebook that exists today. To my mind, Kirkpatrick’s fundamental mistake was
that, swept up in the idealism that then surrounded the company, he simply
wasn’t skeptical enough. And he acknowledges it. “I was naïve,” he told me. “I
started the book thinking that Facebook was a fantastic tool to give ordinary
people the ability to make changes politically.”
Although it was a year before the Arab Spring — the high point of
Facebook-inspired activism — there had already been lots of examples of
Facebook helping citizens who sought to challenge authority. Kirkpatrick opened
his book by listing a few: how Facebook amplified the voices of activists in
Colombia, resulting in 10 million people marching against the rebel army; and
how it made possible a 2009 protest in Iran against the outcome of a national
election. As for Zuckerberg, he was 22 when Kirkpatrick first met him. When the
journalist told him he seemed like a natural chief executive, Zuckerberg
cringed. “I never wanted to run a company,” he replied. “To me, a business is a
good vehicle for getting stuff done.”A few years later, when Kirkpatrick was
reporting the book, Zuckerberg talked often about the benefits of connecting —
and empowering — people, and almost never about making money. Is this truly
where Zuckerberg’s heart was back then? There’s no real way of knowing. Others
who were around him then heard him say many of the same things he said to
Kirkpatrick.
Thus, from Kirkpatrick’s point of view, it was never inevitable that the
downside of “connecting the world” would overwhelm the upside. Instead he
points to two key events. The first was the hiring of Google executive Sheryl
Sandberg as Facebook’s chief operating officer.
In 2008, shortly after Sandberg joined the company, Zuckerberg took a lengthy
backpacking trip, leaving her in charge. Although he had hired her primarily
because of her government experience — she had been chief of staff to Larry
Summers when he was treasury secretary — she had also built Google’s
advertising business. And Facebook was losing money. She held a series of
meetings that began with her writing on a whiteboard: “What business are we
in?” The answer, ultimately, was that Facebook was in the ad business. It would
make its money by sharing the data it collected about its users with
advertisers who sought to send them targeted ads.“She built the best business
there ever was,” Kirkpatrick told me. “But she also bears enormous culpability”
for creating a model that could easily be abused by, say, Russian interests
trying to influence an American election.
Kirkpatrick’s second event, which took place after his book was published, was
the rise of Twitter Inc. “Facebook was the first system that made people think
their stuff was protected,” he said. “You were authenticated by who you were
connected with. You only allowed your information to be seen by friends. It was
safe.”
But, he said, “when Twitter came along, Facebook felt pressure to become more
and more of a public system, so that individuals would have more and more
broadcast power, like they did on Twitter. But as they made Facebook more and
more of a public thing, they lost sight of the initial motivation, which was to
give users a space that they could control.” My own feeling is that there was a
third event that changed Facebook: the introduction of the News Feed, which,
among other things, presented users with personalized list of news stories
throughout the day. The News Feed was the vehicle through which the alt-right
and others flooded Facebook with false information. As I’ve written before, and
as Kirkpatrick reiterated when we spoke, growth was always Facebook’s priority
— even after problems began arising that required something more than a
Band-Aid to fix. Imagine if Facebook had decided against adding the News Feed.
Imagine if it stayed true to its original intentions: a place where people could
connect with their friends. Facebook would probably not be one of the world’s
most profitable companies, but it also wouldn’t be confronted with allegations
that it has become, among other things, a tool of authoritarian government. “I
wanted it to be successful and a tool of empowerment and liberation,”
Kirkpatrick told me. “And increase freedom and opportunity. And when the Arab
Spring took place, it felt like that prediction had come true.”
But, he added, “As they pursued global growth, it would seem obvious to a
well-managed company that they weren’t going to successfully operate as the
town square of 190 companies. I would have loved to have been more prescient
about every last thing that could happen. But I also think that someone who has
become a billionaire from working there is a little more responsible than me
for what happened.”
The West Must Offer
Immediate Asylum to Asia Bibi
من واجب دول الغرب أن تمنح اللجوء الفوري للمسيحية الباكستانية اسيا بيبي
Giulio Meotti/Gatestone Institute/November 15/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/68950/giulio-meotti-the-west-must-offer-immediate-asylum-to-asia-bibi-%D9%85%D9%86-%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%A8-%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%BA%D8%B1%D8%A8-%D8%A3%D9%86-%D8%AA%D9%85%D9%86%D8%AD-%D8%A7/
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13306/asia-bibi-asylum
Asia Bibi is expected to remain in Pakistan until her case is once again
"reviewed in an appeal process" ordered by the Prime Minister. Bibi's
judicial process now looks infinite. Meanwhile, thousands of Islamists fill the
Pakistani streets, calling for her execution.
Many of the values that make the West "the West" are now at stake in
her fate: freedom of expression, religious freedom, freedom of movement, the
rule of law, human dignity, and the separation of church and state. If the West
does not fight for Asia Bibi, for whom should it fight?
"If Asia Bibi is denied asylum in the UK then what the heck is the point
of the asylum system?" — Ayaan Hirsi Ali, refugee from Somalia, author and
human rights campaigner.
A London where an ISIS-supporting preacher of Pakistani descent, Anjem
Choudary, is free and comfortable, while a Pakistani Christian woman, Asia
Bibi, would be unsafe and threatened, is the end of the West as we know it.
Asia Bibi's family has struggled for eight years to save her life, first to get
her off of death row in Pakistan, where she was falsely imprisoned for
"blasphemy," and now that she has been released, to try to get asylum
for her in the West. Pictured: Eisham Masih, one of Asia Bibi's daughters, is
greeted by Pope Francis in 2015.
Asia Bibi's case looks as if it is coming from "another, medieval
world."
Her "guilt," as an "unclean" Christian, was for drinking
water from a communal well, used by Muslim neighbors. Two Muslim women alleged
that because she, a Christian, had touched the water from the well, the entire
well was now haram (forbidden by Islamic law). Bibi responded by saying "I
think Jesus would see it differently from Mohammed," that Jesus had
"died on the cross for the sins of mankind," and asked, "What
did your Prophet Muhammad ever do to save mankind?" She was accused of
insulting the Islamic prophet Muhammad and put on trial for
"blasphemy." She was told to convert to Islam or die.
Bibi spent more than eight years in a Pakistani prison, in solitary confinement,
much of that time on death row. On October 3, 2018, Pakistan's Supreme Court
acquitted her. Then, for a whole week, her fate remained unclear. After violent
protests by "hard-line Islamists call[ing] for her execution" that
"paralyzed large parts of the country for two days," the government
made "concessions" to the Islamists, and capitulated to their
demands. The government pledged not to oppose adding Bibi to a "no-fly
list," which would prevent her from leaving the country.
So, after being found not guilty and freed from prison, Bibi is still being
held against her will in Pakistan -- ostensibly for her own "safety,"
but in reality, it seems the purpose is to allow a mob to murder her more
easily. Now, amid government concerns that her departure would spur renewed
violent protests by the Islamic extremists, Bibi is apparently in an secret
location. "Fake" images on social media have been circulating,
purporting to show Asia Bibi leaving the country or out of Pakistan.
"For four days, all the Christians stayed inside, enclosed in their homes
in the principal cities of Pakistan", said Alessandro Monteduro, director
of the Italian organization Aid to the Church in Need. Meanwhile, Bibi is
expected to remain in Pakistan until her case is once again "reviewed in
an appeal process" ordered by the Prime Minister. Bibi's judicial process
now looks infinite. Meanwhile, thousands of Islamists fill the Pakistani
streets, calling for her execution.
Western countries must offer Bibi a safe haven, and pressure Pakistan's
government to free her and let her leave the country. Many of the values that
make the West "the West" are now at stake in her fate: freedom of
expression, religious freedom, freedom of movement, the rule of law, human
dignity, and the separation of church and state. The leader of the French
opposition party Les Républicaines, Laurent Waquieuz, has defined Asia Bibi's
case as a one involving "our conception of civilization in the face of
Islamist barbarism."
If the West does not fight for Asia Bibi, for whom should it fight?
After eight years of passivity and silence, some European countries are trying
to help her. Italy said it would assist Asia Bibi in obtaining asylum.
Italy's deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini told Italian media Nov. 6 that he
wants "women and children whose lives are at risk to be able to have a
secure future, in our country or in other Western countries, so I will do
everything humanly possible to guarantee that (for Asia).
"It is not permissible that in 2018 someone can risk losing their
life" for a "hypothesis of blasphemy," he added.
Salvini also noted that if given asylum in Italy, Bibi and her family would be
provided with the protection afforded to those under death threats by the
Mafia. Now, Bibi must be protected from religious mobsters.
In addition, Antonio Tajani, president of the European Parliament and a leader
in Italy's opposition party, Forza Italia, invited Asia Bibi to Strasbourg and
called "on Pakistan's authorities to issue the necessary documents".
More than 60,000 Italians signed an appeal asking their authorities to give
asylum to Asia Bibi, which said, in part:
"It is urgent that Italy, in the name of its humanistic tradition,
immediately provide Asia Bibi with all the political and diplomatic protection
she needs. Every day spent in this limbo is a risk to her life. Italy can not
remain silent and defenseless in front of the fate of Asia Bibi, a symbol of
the persecution of Christians throughout the world".
Michael Brand, a human rights expert for German Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU
party, urged that "every effort" be made so Bibi can "live in
freedom and security". Bibi's lawyer, Saiful Malook, was quoted by CNN
saying that "[a]n asylum application has been filed in the Netherlands"
for her family and her. A Dutch Foreign Ministry spokesperson was quoted as
saying "The case of Asia Bibi has the fullest attention of the Dutch
government... We are working closely and are in contact with other countries on
the matter."
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, "we are in discussions with
the Pakistani government" about taking in Bibi.
Citing the "great danger" their family faces in Pakistan, Ashiq
Masih, Bibi's husband, pleaded on November 4:
"I am requesting [U.S.] President Donald Trump to help us to leave [the
country], and I am requesting the prime minister of the U.K. help us and as far
as possible grant us freedom."
Other European countries, sadly, seem to have capitulated to the Islamists'
threats.
The Sydney Morning Herald quoted Wilson Chowdhry, of the British Pakistani
Christian Association, as saying: "The fact no offer has manifested is
shocking. Hundreds of thousands of people have rioted and called for her
death". The UK Telegraph quoted Chowdhry as saying:
"Britain was concerned about potential unrest in the country, attacks on
embassies and civilians.
"They have not offered automatic asylum, whereas several countries have
now come forward. They won't be coming to Britain. The family will definitely
not be coming to Britain."
The UK's refusal to offer asylum to Bibi is why 19 British MPs and Peers wrote
to Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, urging him to allow her to go there. Member
of Parliament John Woodcock said:
"The UK should be proud to be a sanctuary for those being persecuted
because of their religion so it would be appalling if Asia Bibi is genuinely
being denied asylum because of fears she could be targeted by Islamist
hardliners over here."
"If Asia Bibi is denied asylum in the UK then what the heck is the point
of the asylum system?" Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a refugee from Somalia, author of
four best-selling books, human rights campaigner and a former member of the
Dutch parliament tweeted from the US.
The UK gave asylum to Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani schoolgirl shot by the
Taliban. Why shouldn't Asia Bibi benefit from the same generous treatment?
Britain has protected the writer Salman Rushdie since the Iranian regime's 1989
fatwa calling for his murder. Would it not be just and worthy for the UK to
extend the same refuge and protection to this Pakistani Christian mother,
another victim of Islamic sharia law?
Speaking to AsiaNews, Joseph Nadeem, executive director of the Renaissance
Education Foundation, reported: "We have no news, we are unaware of the
contacts between the [Pakistani] government and the foreign countries".
However, he said, "there is a positive news: she was able to meet her
husband after 10 years".
If European diplomacy is at least trying to react to the horrendous limbo in
which Asia Bibi is imprisoned, most European "intellectuals', always the
first to voice their "principles", have stayed extremely quiet.
A major, rare public appeal was published only by the French newspaper Le
Figaro. More than 40 personalities, including Élisabeth and Robert Badinter,
Luc Ferry, Robert Redeker, Pierre-André Taguieff and Jean-Claude Zylberstein,
called for a mobilization to save her. These French intellectuals called Asia
Bibi's situation an "abominable and retrograde sentence worthy of a
different age than that of our modern democracies and of civilization in
general". "We are honored to advocate religious tolerance, the
plurality of ideas and, dare we also say in this circumstance, equality between
the sexes", they wrote.
In an October 22 article, Andrea Picciotti-Bayer, legal advisor for the Catholic
Association Foundation, wrote:
"It's time for all American women to focus their passion on the defense of
a Pakistani woman waiting to be hanged for... drinking from the 'wrong' cup and
speaking her mind".
Extremist Muslim vigilantes want to take "justice" into their own
hands. While Britain fears for its "security", Asia Bibi risks being
murdered.
There is a long history of such vigilante murders in Pakistan. Rashid Rehman, a
lawyer in Pakistan who was defending a university professor accused of blasphemy,
was shot dead. A Christian pastor charged with blasphemy, Zafar Bhatti, was
murdered in jail by a policeman. A judge, Arif Iqbal Bhatti, who acquitted two
individuals accused of blasphemy, was murdered in his chambers. Salman Taseer,
a brave Muslim who was governor of Pakistan's Punjab province, was murdered by
his own bodyguard, who said "he did this because Mr Taseer recently
defended the proposed amendments to the blasphemy law." Pakistan's federal
Minister for Minorities, Shahbaz Bhatti, was murdered for defending Bibi.
Recently, Asia Bibi's lawyer, Saiful Malook, fled Pakistan and is seeking
asylum in the Netherlands.
At this point, the most positive outcome for Asia Bibi's would be to follow the
example of another Pakistani Christian woman, Rimsha Masih. After
"spending months in hiding," she found asylum in Canada. To ensure
that Asia Bibi can even reach the West, however, influential people in the West
need to speak out as loudly as they can, and put all possible pressure on the Pakistani
government. As the French intellectuals who signed their appeal for Bibi
remarked, at stake in Bibi's case is not only the fate of persecuted Christians
worldwide, but also "the spirit of Enlightenment."
A London where an ISIS-supporting preacher of Pakistani descent, Anjem
Choudary, is free and comfortable, while a Pakistani Christian woman, Asia
Bibi, would be unsafe and threatened, is the end of the West as we know it.
*Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and
author.
© 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.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13306/asia-bibi-asylum
Why Erdoğan's Charm Offensive Falls Flat
Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute/November 15/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13299/erdogan-charm-offensive
"Turkey remains the world's worst jailer for the second consecutive year,
with 73 journalists behind bars, compared with 81 last year. Dozens more still
face trial, and fresh arrests take place regularly." — The Committee to
Protect Journalists, December 2017.
For Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, apparently, as for the Saudis,
there are "good journalists" and "bad journalists." He
often refers to the latter group as "terrorists" and
"traitors."
Erdoğan has tried so hard to use the murder of the Saudi journalist,
Khashoggi, for a charm offensive mission to polish his badly tarnished image in
the Western world. He is still trying hard to play the game. Sorry, Mr.
President: It just does not work.
In 2016, journalist Can Dündar (pictured), along with his colleague Erdem Gül,
was sentenced to five years in prison in Turkey for "revealing state
secrets" after a front-page story in Cumhuriyet detailed how Turkey's
security services had sent arms shipments to radical jihadis fighting in Syria.
For weeks after the October 2 disappearance of a Saudi journalist, Jamal
Khashoggi, after he entered the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, Turkish President
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has behaved like the leader of a Western democracy:
He feared there might have been a murder of the Saudi journalist, which Saudi
officials later admitted; speaking loud and louder, he asked the Saudi
authorities to bring the journalist's killers to justice; he offered them a
trial in Turkey, and asked for their extradition; he urged the House of Saud to
find and hand over to justice those who may have ordered the murder. He also
shared audio evidence of the murder with Western leaders. Yet Erdoğan's
public image in the more civilized parts of the world looks closer to that of
the Saudi royals than to any Western leader. For that, he has can only himself
to blame.
"Erdoğan championing the basic human rights of a journalist"
sounds grossly oxymoronic. In its annual report in December, the Committee to
Protect Journalists wrote:
"Turkey remains the world's worst jailer for the second consecutive year,
with 73 journalists behind bars, compared with 81 last year. Dozens more still
face trial, and fresh arrests take place regularly".
In Turkey, during the two-year state of emergency after a failed coup against
Erdoğan's government in July 2016, more than 100,000 people have been
imprisoned, including academics, lawyers, journalists and opposition
politicians. More than 50,000 people remain in prison, according to Amnesty
International, and 100,000 have been purged from government service. The
Vienna-based International Press Institute tweeted on Oct. 25: "Gruesome
nature of #Khashoggi murder should not distract from #Turkey's own persecution
of journalists".
For Erdoğan, apparently, as for the Saudis, there are "good
journalists" and "bad journalists." He often refers to the
latter group as "terrorists" and "traitors." One such
journalist is Can Dündar, former editor-in-chief of the secular, left-wing
Cumhuriyet daily. In 2016, Dündar, along with his colleague Erdem Gül, was
sentenced to five years in prison for "revealing state secrets" after
a front-page story in Cumhuriyet detailed how Turkey's security services had
sent arms shipments to radical jihadis fighting in Syria. Shortly before a
court in Ankara announced the verdict, Dündar narrowly escaped an attack by a
gunman outside the courthouse. Instead, a television reporter who was covering
the trial was injured by a stray bullet. The gunman was apparently an
Erdoğan sympathizer who confessed to having been provoked by news accusing
Dündar of high treason.
In a hearing in October the gunman was sentenced to 5,000 liras (approximately
$900). The injured journalist, Yağız Şenkal, commented:
"This fine is even smaller than what I had to pay the hospital for my
injuries."
This kind of "Islamic" justice is not unknown in Turkey. In 2007
Hrant Dink, a Turkish-Armenian journalist, was shot in the head three times by
a teenager who was caught and confessed to the killing on 'nationalist
aspirations.' During his interrogation, the killer was given a red-carpet
treatment by police officers who posed to cameras with the boy, in front of a
Turkish flag, everyone smiling, as if they were greeting a national hero. In a
2010 verdict, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Turkish state
had failed to protect the life of Dink. The ruling said: "The court took
the view that the Turkish security forces could reasonably be considered to
have been aware of the intense hostility towards Hrant Dink in nationalist
circles ... None of the three authorities informed of the planned assassination
and its imminent realisation had taken action to prevent it."
Erdoğan has tried so hard to use the murder of the Saudi journalist,
Khashoggi, for a charm offensive mission to polish his badly tarnished image in
the Western world. He is still trying hard to play the game. Sorry, Mr. President:
It just does not work.
*Burak Bekdil, one of Turkey's leading journalists, was recently fired from the
country's most noted newspaper after 29 years, for writing in Gatestone what is
taking place in Turkey. He is a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
© 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 Renewed US
Sanctions on Iran are Good News for Palestinians
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/November 15/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13300/iran-sanctions-palestinians
What the Hamas official is actually saying is that thanks to Iran's backing,
Hamas continues to hold hostage the two million residents of the Gaza Strip,
whose lives have been literally destroyed by the Hamas leaders' policies.
The message that Hamas and PIJ are sounding is: How dare the US administration
impose sanctions on Iran, the only country that is helping us in our effort to
continue our terrorist attacks against Israel?
The renewed US sanctions on Iran are good news, however, for many Arabs and
Muslims who feel threatened by Tehran's actions and rhetoric. Iran has long
been systematically working towards undermining moderate Arabs and Muslims in
the region.
The Palestinian Authority and Abbas are actually attacking a US administration
that is seeking to undermine the enemies of Abbas: Hamas and Iran. The
Palestinian Authority is, thus, aligning itself with its own enemies. The US
administration has decided to reinstate the sanctions against Tehran that were
removed under the 2015 "nuclear deal." These sanctions are part of
Washington's effort to curb Iran's missile and nuclear programs and diminish
its influence in the Middle East. Pictured: US President Donald Trump holds up
a memorandum that reinstates sanctions on Iran, at the White House on May 8,
2018. If the United States is worried about imposing harsher sanctions on Iran,
it should not give those concerns a second thought. Being unpopular with people
who do not wish you well is probably the price of true leadership.
Those who are worried, and should be worried, are Iran and its Palestinian
allies and friends.
The US administration has decided to reinstate the sanctions against Tehran
that were removed under the 2015 "nuclear deal." These sanctions are
part of Washington's effort to curb Iran's missile and nuclear programs and
diminish its influence in the Middle East.
Iran has two major allies in the Palestinian arena: Hamas and Palestinian
Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the Islamist groups that control the Gaza Strip and do not
recognize Israel's right to exist. Were it not for Iran's financial and
military support, these two Palestinian groups would long ago have lost their
grip on Gaza.
Now that the sanctions on Iran have been reinstated, Hamas and PIJ are strongly
condemning the US administration and pledging full support for Iran.
"The US sanctions are aimed at undermining security and stability in the
region," the Hamas leadership said in a statement. The sanctions, Hamas
added, are also designed to undermine Palestinian "steadfastness in the
face of American plans and schemes." Hamas, the statement continued,
"stands with the Iranian government and people in the face of this
American-Zionist arrogance."
Bizarrely, Hamas claims that it is the US sanctions, and not its own actions
and rhetoric, that undermine "security and stability in the region."
In fact, it is Iran's support for Hamas's deadly program that sabotages
security and stability in the region.
Hamas leaders often boast of Iran's support for their group and other
Palestinian armed groups in the Gaza Strip. According to Saleh Arouri, a senior
Hamas official, Iran continues to provide "major" aid to the
Palestinian "resistance" groups that are fighting against Israel.
"Iranian support for the Palestinian resistance has never stopped,"
Arouri said in a recent interview. "This support is a sign of Iran's
seriousness in confronting the Zionist entity."
What the Hamas official is actually saying is that thanks to Iran's support,
the Gaza-based Palestinian groups have been able to launch thousands of
missiles at Israel in the past decade. He is also saying that thanks to Iran's
backing, Hamas continues to hold hostage the two million residents of the Gaza
Strip, whose lives have been literally destroyed by the Hamas leaders'
policies.
The response of PIJ to the sanctions against Iran is even more surreal. In a
statement issued in the Gaza Strip, the PIJ leadership accused the US of
engaging in "thuggery and terrorism" not only against Iran, but also
against Palestinians and all Arabs and Muslims.
This charge is coming from a jihadi organization that has wounded and killed
thousands of Israelis in terrorist attacks during the past three decades.
The entire ideology and strategy of PIJ has been based on terrorism and
thuggery; its objectives have been -- and still are -- the destruction of
Israel and the establishment of a sovereign, Islamic Palestinian state.
The message that Hamas and PIJ are sounding is: How dare the US administration
impose sanctions on Iran, the only country that is helping us in our effort to
continue our terrorist attacks against Israel? How dare the US administration
impose sanctions on a country that provides us with financial, military and
political support to help us achieve our goal of destroying Israel and
replacing it with an Islamic state?
Particularly disturbing about the reactions of the Gaza-based groups to the
sanctions on Iran is the threatening nature of the tone they take towards the
US. Their fierce anti-US rhetoric can be seen as a call to Arabs and Muslims to
target American interests and citizens in the Middle East. Hamas and PIJ are
telling Arabs and Muslims, in no uncertain terms, that the Americans have
become their No. #1 enemy because they are punishing an Islamic country and
because they are obstructing plans to continue the fight against Israel.
The renewed US sanctions on Iran are good news, however, for many Arabs and
Muslims who feel threatened by Tehran's actions and rhetoric. Iran has long been
systematically working towards undermining moderate Arabs and Muslims in the
region. Iran is already meddling in the internal affairs of Iraq, Syria,
Lebanon, Yemen and the Palestinians, as well as some Gulf countries.
Many Arabs and Muslims share the view of US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who
has identified Iran as the destabilizing force in the Middle East.
Echoing the fear of Arabs and Muslims from Iran, Anwar Eshki, a retired
intelligence officer in the Saudi army and head of the Middle East Center for
Strategic and Legal Studies, wrote on Twitter that Israel was a suspected enemy
while Iran was a definite enemy. He explained that Israel had not fired a
single bullet at Saudi Arabia, while Iran kept firing missiles at the kingdom
and even at the holy city of Mecca, through the Shiite Houthi rebels in Yemen.
Arab commentator Mohammed al-Sheikh also sounded a similar sentiment: "The
Ayatollahs must wake up from their crazy messianic dream and realize that the
era of jihad wars, raids, occupations and revolution exports is over. The
Iranian leadership must understand, like the Saudi crown prince, that we live
in the 21st century and that we must work for the young generation and for
progress. The ayatollahs must return to their natural place—the mosques—and let
the statesmen take care of politics."
The US sanctions on Iran are a severe blow to Tehran's friends in Hamas and
PIJ. These terrorist groups face a hazy future as the sanctions take their toll
the economy of Iran. Weakening Hamas and PIJ will only serve the cause of peace
and stability in the Middle East. This development is good not only for Israel,
but also for the Palestinian Authority and its president, Mahmoud Abbas.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) hates Iran because of its support for its rivals
in Hamas. The Palestinian ambassador to Paris was recently quoted as saying
that Iran was funding the violent weekly protests along the border between the
Gaza Strip and Israel.
One of Abbas's senior advisors, Azzam al-Ahmed, last year accused Iran of being
fully responsible for Hamas and Fatah's ongoing dispute, which has resulted in
a split between the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Consequently, one would expect Abbas and his top aides to welcome the US
decision to reinstate the sanctions against Iran. The Palestinian Authority
leadership, however, has chosen to do no such thing. Instead of applauding the
decision, Abbas and his officials are continuing their verbal attacks on the US
administration and accusing it of promoting a peace plan aimed at "liquidating"
the Palestinian rights and cause.
Ironically, the Palestinian Authority's recurring attacks on the US
administration play into the hands of Hamas, PIJ, and even Iran.
The Palestinian Authority is actually attacking a US administration that is
seeking to undermine the enemies of Abbas: Hamas and Iran. By doing so, the
Palestinian Authority and Abbas are promoting anti-US sentiments throughout the
Middle East. The Palestinian Authority's daily attacks on the US have
radicalized countless Palestinians, who are no longer prepared to accept any
American role in the Middle East peace process.
The Palestinian Authority is, thus, aligning itself with its own enemies. Hamas
and PIJ may soon lose Iran as their number-one funder and sponsor, but they can
always rely on Abbas and his Palestinian Authority to promote their anti-US and
anti-Israel sentiments.
*Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem, is a
Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
© 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.