Detailed Lebanese & Lebanese Related LCCC English New Bulletin For September 13/2018
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.september13.18.htm

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

Turkey's Latest Power Grab a Naval Base in Cyprus?
Debalina Ghoshal/Gatestone Institute/September 12/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12974/turkey-naval-base-cyprus
The possibility of a Turkish naval base on Cyprus does not bode well for the chances of a Cyprus reunification deal, particularly after the breakdown of the July 2017 peace talks, which were suspended when "Turkey had refused to relinquish its intervention rights on Cyprus or the presence of troops on the island." Turkey has 30,000 soldiers stationed on Cyprus, the northern part of which it has illegally occupied since 1974.
"If Greek-Turkish tensions escalate, the possibility of another ill-timed military provocation could escalate with them... Moreover, such a conflict might open up an even greater opportunity for Russian interference." — Lawrence A. Franklin.
Turkey's Naval Forces Command has "submitted a proposal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stating that Turkey should establish a naval base in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus." Pictured: The Turkish Navy frigate TCG Oruçreis. (Image source: CC-BY-SA-3.0/Brian Burnell via Wikimedia Commons)
Turkey's Naval Forces Command has "submitted a proposal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stating that Turkey should establish a naval base in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus," according to Turkey's strongly pro-Erdogan daily, Yeni Safak, which recently endorsed the proposal for the base in an article entitled, "Why Turkey should establish a naval base in Northern Cyprus."
"The base will enable the protection of Northern Cyprus' sovereignty as well as facilitate and fortify Turkey's rights and interests in the Eastern Mediterranean, preventing the occupation of sea energy fields, and strengthening Turkey's hand in the Cyprus peace process talks."
Having a naval base in northern Cyprus would also strengthen the self-proclaimed "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus," which is recognized only by Turkey. Cyprus is strategically important: a naval base there would give Turkey easier access to the Eastern Mediterranean's international trade routes and greater control over the vast undersea energy resources around Cyprus. In the past, Turkey has blocked foreign vessels from drilling for these resources; in June, Turkey began its own exploration of the island's waters for gas and oil.
This is not the first time that Turkey has set its sights on the area's resources. In 2014, Ankara dispatched surveillance vessels and warships to Cyprus's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) to search for hydrocarbons. This incident took place just before the leaders of Greece, Cyprus and Egypt deepened their an energy-cooperation, "freezing Turkey out." As soon as the accord was signed, Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades blasted "Turkey's provocative actions," saying that they "do not just compromise the peace talks [between Greek and Turkish Cypriots]... [but] also affect security in the eastern Mediterranean region."
At the time, UN-brokered reunification negotiations, which had been renewed after a long hiatus, ended unsuccessfully yet again, as a result of Turkey's search for hydrocarbons in the EEZ. According to a November 2014 report in the Guardian:
"Turkey's decision to dispatch a research vessel into disputed waters last month not only resulted in talks being broken off but has exacerbated the row over drilling rights."
The possibility of a Turkish naval base does not bode well for the chances of a Cyprus reunification deal, particularly after the breakdown of the July 2017 peace talks between Turkish-Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci and Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades. The talks were suspended when "Turkey had refused to relinquish its intervention rights on Cyprus or the presence of troops on the island." Turkey has 30,000 soldiers stationed on Cyprus, the northern part of which it has illegally occupied since 1974.
Another factor that may be contributing to the Turkish Navy's desire for a base in Cyprus is Israel. Aside from Ankara's extremely rocky relations with Jerusalem, Israel and Cyprus have been working to forge an agreement to join their electricity grids and construct a pipeline to link their gas fields to mainland Europe. Although they are in a dispute over development rights of one of these gas fields, Aphrodite, they are invested in reaching a solution that will not damage their increasingly friendly relations.
Erdogan's considerations should concern NATO, of which Turkey, surprisingly, is still a member, and the rest of the West. As Lawrence A. Franklin recently wrote for Gatestone:
"If Greek-Turkish tensions escalate, the possibility of another ill-timed military provocation could escalate with them. The ability of NATO to respond to other conflicts in the area could be affected, as well as NATO air and naval assets based in both countries. Moreover, such a conflict might open up an even greater opportunity for Russian interference."
*Debalina Ghoshal, an independent consultant specializing in nuclear and missile issues, is based in India.
© 2018 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

China's 'Digital' Totalitarian Experiment
Gordon G. Chang/Gatestone Institute/September 12/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12988/china-social-credit-system
China's "social credit" system, which will assign every person a constantly updated score based on observed behaviors, is designed to control conduct by giving the ruling Communist Party the ability to administer punishments and hand out rewards. The former deputy director of the State Council's development research center says the system should be administered so that "discredited people become bankrupt".
Officials prevented Liu Hu, a journalist, from taking a flight because he had a low score. According to the Communist Party-controlled Global Times, as of the end of April 2018, authorities had blocked individuals from taking 11.14 million flights and 4.25 million high-speed rail trips.
Chinese officials are using the lists for determining more than just access to planes and trains. "I can't buy property. My child can't go to a private school," Liu said. "You feel you're being controlled by the list all the time."
Chinese leaders have long been obsessed with what Jiang Zemin in 1995 called "informatization, automation, and intelligentization," and they are only getting started Given the capabilities they are amassing, they could, the argument goes, make defiance virtually impossible. The question now is whether the increasingly defiant Chinese people will accept President Xi's all-encompassing vision.
China's President Xi Jinping is not merely an authoritarian leader. He evidently believes the Party must have absolute control over society and he must have absolute control over the Party. He is taking China back to totalitarianism as he seeks Mao-like control over all aspects of society. (Photo by Lintao Zhang/Getty Images)
By 2020, Chinese officials plan to have about 626 million surveillance cameras operating throughout the country. Those cameras will, among other things, feed information into a national "social credit system."
That system, when it is in place in perhaps two years, will assign to every person in China a constantly updated score based on observed behaviors. For example, an instance of jaywalking, caught by one of those cameras, will result in a reduction in score.
Although officials might hope to reduce jaywalking, they seem to have far more sinister ambitions, such as ensuring conformity to Communist Party political demands. In short, the government looks as if it is determined to create what the Economist called "the world's first digital totalitarian state."
That social credit system, once perfected, will surely be extended to foreign companies and individuals.
At present, there are more than a dozen national blacklists, and about three dozen various localities have been operating experimental social credit scoring systems. Some of those systems have failed miserably. Others, such as the one in Rongcheng in Shandong province, have been considered successful.
In the Rongcheng system, each resident starts with 1,000 points, and, based upon their changing score, are ranked from A+++ to D. The system has affected behavior: incredibly for China, drivers stop for pedestrians at crosswalks.
Drivers stop at crosswalks because residents in that city have, as Foreign Policy reported, "embraced" the social credit system. Some like the system so much that they have set up micro social credit systems in schools, hospitals, and neighborhoods. Social credit systems obviously answer a need for what people in other societies take for granted.
Yet, can what works on a city level be extended across China? As technology advances and data banks are added, the small experimental programs and the national lists will eventually be merged into one countrywide system. The government has already begun to roll out its "Integrated Joint Operations Platform," which aggregates data from various sources such as cameras, identification checks, and "wifi sniffers."
So, what will the end product look like? "It will not be a unified platform where one can type in his or her ID and get a single three-digit score that will decide their lives," Foreign Policy says.
Despite the magazine's assurances, this type of system is precisely what Chinese officials say they want. After all, they tell us the purpose of the initiative is to "allow the trustworthy to roam everywhere under heaven while making it hard for the discredited to take a single step."
That description is not an exaggeration. Officials prevented Liu Hu, a journalist, from taking a flight because he had a low score. The Global Times, a tabloid that belongs to the Communist Party-owned People's Daily, reported that, as of the end of April 2018, authorities had blocked individuals from taking 11.14 million flights and 4.25 million high-speed rail trips.
Chinese officials, however, are using the lists for determining more than just access to planes and trains. "I can't buy property. My child can't go to a private school," Liu said. "You feel you're being controlled by the list all the time."
The system is designed to control conduct by giving the ruling Communist Party the ability to administer punishments and hand out rewards. And the system could end up being unforgiving. Hou Yunchun, a former deputy director of the State Council's development research center, said at a forum in Beijing in May that the social credit system should be administered so that "discredited people become bankrupt". "If we don't increase the cost of being discredited, we are encouraging discredited people to keep at it," Hou said. "That destroys the whole standard."
Not every official has such a vindictive attitude, but it appears that all share the assumption, as the dovish Zhi Zhenfeng of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences said, that "discredited people deserve legal consequences."
President Xi Jinping, the final and perhaps only arbiter in China, has made it clear how he feels about the availability of second chances. "Once untrustworthy, always restricted," the Chinese ruler says.
What happens, then, to a country where only the compliant are allowed to board a plane or be rewarded with discounts for government services? No one quite knows because never before has a government had the ability to constantly assess everyone and then enforce its will. The People's Republic has been more meticulous in keeping files and ranking residents than previous Chinese governments, and computing power and artificial intelligence are now giving China's officials extraordinary capabilities.
Beijing is almost certain to extend the social credit system, which has roots in attempts to control domestic enterprises, to foreign companies. Let us remember that Chinese leaders this year have taken on the world's travel industry by forcing hotel chains and airlines to show Taiwan as part of the People's Republic of China, so they have demonstrated determination to intimidate and punish. Once the social credit system is up and running, it would be a small step to include non-Chinese into that system, extending Xi's tech-fueled totalitarianism to the entire world.
The dominant narrative in the world's liberal democracies is that tech favors totalitarianism. It is certainly true that, unrestrained by privacy concerns, hardline regimes are better able to collect, analyze, and use data, which could provide a decisive edge in applying artificial intelligence A democratic government may be able to compile a no-fly list, but none could ever come close to implementing Xi Jinping's vision of a social credit system.
Chinese leaders have long been obsessed with what then-President Jiang Zemin in 1995 called "informatization, automation, and intelligentization," and they are only getting started. Given the capabilities they are amassing, they could, the argument goes, make defiance virtually impossible.
Technology might even make liberal democracy and free-markets "obsolete" writes Yuval Noah Harari of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the Atlantic. "The main handicap of authoritarian regimes in the 20th century — the desire to concentrate all information and power in one place — may become their decisive advantage in the 21st century," he writes.
There is no question that technology empowers China's one-party state to repress people effectively. Exhibit A for this proposition is, of course, the country's social credit system.
Yet China's communists will probably overreach. The country's experience so far with social credit systems suggests that officials are their own worst enemies. An early experiment to build such a system in Suining county in Jiangsu province was a failure:
"Both residents and state media blasted it for its seemingly unfair and arbitrary criteria, with one state-run newspaper comparing the system to the 'good citizen' certificates issued by Japan during its wartime occupation of China."
The Rongcheng system has been more successful because its scope has been relatively modest.
Xi Jinping will not be as restrained as Rongcheng's officials. He evidently believes the Party must have absolute control over society and he must have absolute control over the Party. It is simply inconceivable that he will not include in the national social credit system, when it is stitched together, political criteria. Already Chinese officials are trying to use artificial intelligence to predict anti-Party behavior.
Xi Jinping is not merely an authoritarian leader, as it is often said. He is taking China back to totalitarianism as he seeks Mao-like control over all aspects of society.
The question now is whether the increasingly defiant Chinese people will accept Xi's all-encompassing vision. In recent months, many have taken to the streets: truck drivers striking over costs and fees, army veterans marching for pensions, investors blocking government offices to get money back from fraudsters, Muslims surrounding mosques to stop demolition, and parents protesting the scourge of adulterated vaccines, among others. Chinese leaders obviously think their social credit system will stop these and other expressions of discontent.
Let us hope that China's people are not in fact discouraged. Given the breadth of the Communist Party's ambitions, everyone, Chinese or not, has a stake in seeing that Beijing's digital totalitarianism fails.
*Gordon G. Chang is the author of "The Coming Collapse of China" and a Gatestone Institute Distinguished Senior Fellow.
© 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.

Who Really Sparked the Turmoil in Basra?
Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Al Awsat/september 12/18
First, let us ask: Who is the most likely beneficiary of the sabotage of security in Basra? In response to Iranian finger-pointing, the Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, have no interest in such an action and nothing to gain.
In addition to being a neighboring border province whose security is directly linked to the security of the Gulf, Basra is an oil-producing area. If chaos erupts there and disrupts production, prices would rise, which is against the policy of such countries seeking to stabilize prices. The Americans, too, would be hurt if chaos led to a rise in oil prices, as their economy would also be affected.
Thus, the only realistic suspect is the Iranian government, which openly declares that it wants prices to rise to record levels so that chaos will engulf the world’s oil markets. Iran, in fact, sees a price rise as a “weapon of pressure” that could force the West to allow it to export oil and negotiate with it on Tehran’s own terms. Moreover, Iraqi oil companies last month signed a major contract with American oil company Chevron to develop oilfields in Basra Province, provoking anger from Tehran.
Had everyone not been preoccupied with Syria, in particular the situation in Idlib and the big upcoming battle there, Basra — both the city and the province — would have been a focal point of the world’s attention. Twelve of the city’s residents were killed because they protested against the conditions there, including the poor water supply and high pollution. The protests were a natural progression because the people there have been complaining for years about the chaos, the proliferation of militias, violence and unemployment. Now the water supply joins the list because it is no longer suitable even for animal consumption as it is too salty. To make matters even worse, the residents of Basra have suffered terrible heat this summer with little relief as a result of power cuts.
The recent protests, which were harshly and badly dealt with, resulted in the protesters turning against the Iraqi militias affiliated with Iran. They burned down the headquarters of political parties and even targeted the Iranian consulate, which has become, in the eyes of the people of Basra, a symbol of all that is evil in their province. They believe that the water crisis is a result of the siphoning off of shared water from marshlands and border areas until it became scarce and unsuitable for human consumption. Why target the consulate? It is because Iran’s official presence in Basra is much more conspicuous than it is in the rest of Iraq. Salty and polluted water caused the simmering anger of the people, who were already dissatisfied with Iraqi religious political parties and Iran, to boil over. Hostility toward these two targets, especially in Basra, is nothing new. The second-most important city in Iraq, it carried these parties on its shoulders to the government and in return was promised, more than anything else, a better future. But, since the Americans left, the situation in Basra has worsened. Water is just the final straw on a mountain of complaints. The people of Basra have been angered by Iranian militias that turned the city into their own private estate, controlling it with iron and fire.
Basra, where the plains of Mesopotamia end, was until recently the main producer of rice, millet and wheat for the entire region in southern Iraq — but now its people cannot drink from their own water sources as a result of water transfers.
Poor water supplies, like other badly managed services, are a problem in Iraq as a whole, not only in Basra. However, because the province is the government’s “purse,” and is home to the country’s only port, the chaos has scared the government, which is afraid that it might become like the “oil crescent” in Libya. It has also alarmed Iraq’s neighbors, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
Rather than exchanging blame and accusations, the Iraqi government must free Basra Province from militias, their weapons and Iranian interventions.
We know that Iran will resist all attempts to be removed from Basra but, given the chaos and protests, the authorities have no option other than to end the old situation and turn the city and the province into a region that provides not only oil to Baghdad, but also stability.
Comments

What is Bigger and Beyond the Battle for Idlib
Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/september 12/18
There seems to a consensus that the battle for Idlib province in northwest Syria will be the final one in the “Syrian War”, and the first step towards Syria’s recovery.
That could be true, but about how wars end, I would like to revisit an interesting true story I heard about the chauffeur of Field Marshall Ferdinand Foch, the Commander General of the Allied forces during WW1.
As the story goes, the villagers where Emile, the chauffeur, lived were suffering, like all the French, from the long devastating war. Counting the days and praying for an imminent end, their only source of news was none but the good old Emile. The poor villagers would wait for the day Emile arrived in the village on a short leave granted by the great General – as his rank was then. The moment he arrived, they would rush to his house and ask him what became the usual question: “Please Emile, has the General uttered a word about when this war would end?” To such question, Emile would give his usual short answer: “No, he has said nothing!”
The days passed, without any dramatic news until one day, the villagers were surprised when Emile replied: “Yes, yesterday the General spoke. He asked me: ‘Emile, when will this damned war end!’”.
Few, actually, can foresee how wars end. Many wars went on and on, and became ever more complicated, when conflicting interests intersected, alliances changed and the balance of powers between the combatants’ backers shifted.
Indeed, most of the events that the Arab East witnessed since the birth of its new entities in 1920, and more so since the end of WW2 in 1945 – when most of these entities became independent states – have left problems and causes for future conflicts.
The entities in what we call “The Fertile Crescent”, in particular, have become easy prey to, and an open arena for three regional powers (Israel, Iran and Turkey), behind which stand two global powers (the US and Russia). Ironically, the only player absent from this scene is the “landowner,” who should be the decision-maker. Yes. This absent player is the local people, some of whom have chosen to be so, when they decided to serve the interests of others, and put these interests above their own.
In the current critical period in the region’s history, political, military and demographic wars are raging, all of which are legacies being brought back from the past, when need be; either for emotional and combat mobilization, or to accord fake legitimacy to resurrect animosities, grudges, bloodshed, changing maps and displace populations.
In 1920, the borders were drawn for Iraq, Syria and Lebanon and within these entities, the political classes strived to achieve two connected goals: the first, to hold on to power; and the second, to build a “political culture” that served the positions of power which would suit their interests.
The first dominant political classes were political and tribal feudalism which emerged since 1920. Political and tribal feudal lords maintained their dominance up until the late 1930s, when the European plitical scene began to change as a result of the challenge posed by Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia to the two old mandatory powers in the region, i.e., Great Britain and France. Parallel to this changing scene in Europe, more so after the “Balfour Declaration” became known, a new political “polarization” appeared in the Arab East between pro-Nazi Germany and pro-British and French mandates, in addition, to the beginnings of Leftist movements.
The aforementioned “polarization” ended only after crushing the Rashid Ali Al-Gaylani in Iraq (1941), the defeat of Nazism (1945) and the creation of Israel (1948). The latter development was bound to change the national political landscape in the region, in favor of the military. In fact, the series of military coups in Syria began in 1949 and in turn, these ushered a marked shift in the balance of power in the West, too. The US emerged as the Western “superpower” at the expense of Great Britain and France, with the USSR, as a “rival pole” and heir to the old national and Christian Orthodox “moskovism” in the region; something that was later confirmed after the Suez Crisis in 1956.
Thus, by the early 1960s, the whole Arab East; indeed, the whole world, witnessed the birth of “Bi-Polar Superpower Politics” between the US and the USSR. Between “capitalism” and its ideological adversary... “socialism”.
In the meantime, a lot had changed in the Middle East. Ataturk’s secular Turkey which became a full member of NATO was now confronting its old enemy Russia, and being a member of CENTO (the former pro-West Baghdad Pact) it was pitted against the project of Arab Nationalism. The Pahlavi Shahs’ Iran which was also secular and pro-West, was also a member in CENTO. As for the previously “socialist” Israel, its political power gradually slipped away from Zionist socialist parties and powerful trade unions as broad coalitions of conservative biblical groups, former army generals and “money mafias” of new immigrants.
The end of “The Cold War” with the demise of the socialist Soviet alternative, gave rise to two strong trends throughout the world: The religious trend, and the nationalist – racist trend. The Arab world and Turkey were no exception, while Iran had witnessed that change earlier. The same happened later even in India, the world’s largest democracy, and the western democracies in Europe and the US, where voters rose against “globalization”, and sometimes, even against “secularism”!
Today, it would be useful to keep this background in mind, when we look at the stumbling “democratic” experiments in Iraq and Lebanon, which are virtually living under the military and intelligence sway of Iran’s “mullahs”, and the Russian-led “battle to finish off” Syria’s uprising.
It is also useful to notice Washington’s total silence towards what the current Likud leadership is doing in Israel, the ongoing conspiracy perpetrated against the Syrian people, the sinister and ambiguous relations between Washington and the two “Islamist” leaderships in Tehran and Ankara, and at the fragility of “Arab” entities which we had thought for a long time were “independent” and “homogeneous” and with populations truly wishing to peacefully coexist.

The Bank of England’s Nuclear Option for a No-Deal Brexit
Ferdinando Giugliano/Bloomberg View/september 12/18
For a staunch supporter of central bank “forward guidance,” Mark Carney changes his mind a tad too often. From when he will leave his job running the Bank of England, to when the BOE’s Monetary Policy Committee will next raise interest rates, there are plenty of examples.
Yet on one crucial subject for the British economy, Carney has been uncharacteristically consistent: Don’t rely on the Bank coming to the rescue by cutting rates in the event of a messy Brexit. The governor has said more than once that, should Britain crash out of the EU without a deal, the central bank response wouldn’t be obvious. It was easy to imagine a scenario where “policy would have to be tighter, not looser,” he told UK lawmakers on Tuesday.This might surprise some. After all, didn’t he cut interest rates and buy more government bonds after Brits voted to quit the EU in June 2016? Why act differently after a “no-deal” exit?The difference is that a disorderly departure would be much worse for the economy than the referendum result. The Brexit vote still left open the possibility of a “soft” Brexit, whereby Britain would keep a relatively frictionless arrangement with its biggest trading partner. Yet should the country crash out of the the bloc and fall back on World Trade Organization rules, it would be a nightmare for companies and investors.
Sterling hasn’t recovered from its post-referendum tumble, but no deal would inevitably push it much lower. And this wouldn’t be investors betting on various possible scenarios — as has been the case since 2016. The probable queues of lorries at Dover; the difficulties for finance firms accessing the EU market; the creation of a hard border with Ireland — these have the potential to cause a currency crisis not unlike those occurring in emerging markets such as Argentina. What would the Bank of England do under these circumstances? The post-referendum playbook may, indeed, be the wrong one. In 2016, the Bank judged that sterling would fall but stabilize relatively quickly. This would make imported goods more expensive, it reasoned, but any impact on inflation would be short-lived. The risk of an inflationary spiral was therefore small. The Bank could easily ignore a deviation from its 2 per cent inflation target, and focus on supporting the economy. But in the event of a full-blown currency crisis, the economics textbook says a central bank must deal with that first of all. It’s precisely what Argentina has tried to do by raising interest rates to 60 percent, and what Turkey is being much slower in doing. The BOE would need to prioritize keeping inflation in check over supporting a recovery. So it would have to raise interest rates, even at the cost of causing (or worsening) a recession. Even if the pound found some support, the Bank would have plenty of reasons to lift rates. A no-deal Brexit would make the UK less productive, since it would increase supply constraints on companies. “If some of the supply side were to be chewed up, then even a fall in demand would not necessarily raise the output gap and therefore put a downward pressure on inflation,” Andrew Haldane, the BOE’s chief economist, told lawmakers.
Of course, Britain is neither Argentina nor Turkey. Its institutions and economy are far stronger, which will help maintain a degree of faith in its currency. It’s possible therefore that the inflation outlook might be kept under control, allowing the Bank to prioritize a recovery.

Juhayman, Khomeini and Afghanistan
Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabiya/September 12/18
It’s been four decades – as we mark Islamic New Year, 1440 Hijri – since three incidents that were decisive phases and the repercussions of which remain with varying degrees to this day. There is still one quarter of 2018 before the year ends and it would be four Gregorian decades since these events. In February 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran was established and the Pahlavi rule was toppled under the command of politicized Shiite cleric Khomeini. In November 1979, an extremist religious group led by Juhayman stormed the Grand Mosque and seized it for around two weeks before Saudi security forces purged the Grand Mosque from terrorists. In December 1979, the Soviet Red Army invaded Afghanistan to aid the government it supported and the Afghani jihadist movement was formed. These historic events, which happened around the same time became reasons for the emergence of groups, figures and ideas and domestic and foreign policies. Each phase of history requires being looked into and researched to trace its sources and consequences, beginning with that strange year 1979 until today. For instance, it is enough to know that the Russian Communist invasion of Afghanistan was a reason that developed this idea and built the climate of “jihad” to prosper. The success of Khomeini, the revolutionary and charismatic cleric who had his ideological illusions to control Iran’s throne and “export the revolution” is the event of all events. Expelled Islamist groups later went to Afghanistan, and especially Peshawar, from Egypt and Libya. Then thousands of Gulf and Arab people traveled to fight alongside the Afghans against the Communist invasion. This was the headline. Later however part of these people joined Osama bin Laden’s and Ayman al-Zawahiri’s camps. Osama himself moved from being a helper of Afghans to a figure with an international “jihadist” project. And the rest as they say is history.
Ideological illusions
The success of Khomeini, the revolutionary, charismatic and old cleric who had his ideological illusions, along with his disciples and supporters, to control Iran’s throne and “export the revolution” is the event of all events. Its repercussions are still felt to this day as they continue to add insult to injury and exacerbate Arab wounds. As for the third of evils, the story of Juhayman and his companions, it’s only the tip of the iceberg. The mountain of fire is the story of “al-Sahwa”, i.e. political Islamized groups, in Saudi Arabia. Juhayman and his group are only a small “detail” in the details of this ailment of al-Sahwa that made Saudi Arabia ill. Today, Saudi Arabia has announced via the future’s godfather Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman that there is no turning back. Bye bye to 1979 as the entire journey has come to an end and the country has kicked off its vibrant journey toward the garden of hope – such as NEOM, projects to empower women, diversifying the economy and combating corruption. 1979 was such a year. We better contemplate it and these times over and over again.

Following 9/11 anniversary, hurricane Florence cuts Guantanamo hearings short
Phoebe Leila Barghouty/Special to Al Arabiya English/September 12/18
On the 17-year anniversary of the September 11 attacks, the week-long pre-trial hearing at Guantanamo Bay was cut short due to the anticipation severe weather from Hurricane Florence. The schedule change marks yet another major speed bump in the already slow moving Military Commissions case. Newly appointed commissions judge, Marine Colonel Keith Parrella, opened Tuesday’s session by ruling on the defense teams’ call for his disqualification from the previous day. Judge Parrella urged the court that despite the arguments from the defense, he believes he is more than qualified to assume the role. Tuesday was Parrella’s second appearance in the war court after being appointed to the role in late August. By midday, the court schedule had already been heavily altered by the unexpectedly drawn out examination of the new judge. However, in addition to addressing the call for his recusal, Judge Parrella was forced to delay proceedings even further in order to address the possibility of Hurricane Florence making landfall on the East Coast. The Category 4 hurricane is expected to ground air travel and cause severe damage along the East Coast of the United States later this week. However, it’s not only a matter of disrupted travel plans. Joint Task Force Guantanamo Bay spokeswoman, Navy Commander Anne Leanos, told Al Arabiya that the detention center itself is also taking special precautions as hurricane season looms over the Caribbean.
Destructive weather
According to Leanos, the Joint Task Force plans and prepares for destructive weather several times throughout the year. Guantanamo Bay is nestled on the southern tip of Cuba, and faces the seasonal threat of high intensity storms that build strength across the Atlantic Ocean. “We have plans and procedures in place to ensure the safety of detainees in our custody during destructive weather,” Leanos said. Though catastrophic storms such as Hurricane Irma and Hurricane Maria rocked the region in 2017, Leanos says the detention center on Guantanamo Bay has faced no significant weather-related interruptions to date. While hearing schedules and base travel are often affected during hurricane season, the Commander says operations and detainee safety remain intact despite the threat of inclement weather. “In cases of destructive weather, JTF Guantanamo maintains a supply of essential supplies including Meals Ready to Eat (MREs) for both the staff and the detainees;” Leanos said, noting that the MREs for the detainees are prepared to meet Halal standards. In anticipation of the hurricane, the 31st pre-trial hearings for the 9/11 case will close on Wednesday, instead of Friday as initially scheduled. In addition to the added cost of altered travel, a shortened hearing schedule means defense attorneys’ time with their clients is also cut short. Because of Guantanamo Bay’s remote location, attorney-client meetings are already extremely limited. It is unclear how this session’s disruptions will affect the future of the complex case. The five men charged with planning the September 11th attacks are currently held indefinitely at the high security detention center in Guantanamo Bay. All five face the death penalty. At this time, no trial date has been set.