LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
August 20/09

Bible Reading of the day
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew 22:1-14. Jesus again in reply spoke to them in parables, saying, The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son. He dispatched his servants to summon the invited guests to the feast, but they refused to come. A second time he sent other servants, saying, 'Tell those invited: "Behold, I have prepared my banquet, my calves and fattened cattle are killed, and everything is ready; come to the feast."'  Some ignored the invitation and went away, one to his farm, another to his business. The rest laid hold of his servants, mistreated them, and killed them. The king was enraged and sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. Then he said to his servants, 'The feast is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy to come.  Go out, therefore, into the main roads and invite to the feast whomever you find.' The servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, bad and good alike, and the hall was filled with guests. But when the king came in to meet the guests he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment. He said to him, 'My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?' But he was reduced to silence.  Then the king said to his attendants, 'Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.' Many are invited, but few are chosen."

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Is Michel Aoun a problem or a solution? By Michael Young 20/08/09
Now Lebanon: Possible rivalries overshadow accomplishments of security forces 20/08/09
Now Lebanon: The very silly season August 20, 2009
Tehran – Damascus versus Lebanon’s Democracy/Randa Takieddine/20.08.09
Gaza: Big Jihad V/S Little Jihad.By Walid Phares 20/08/09
Fear of radicalization is no reason to delay democratic reforms-The Daily Star 20/08/09
Iran may change if it is attracted by an Asia model-By Kishore Mahbubani 20/08/09

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for August 20/09
Message from Jumblat to Sfeir Stresses Commitment to Mountain's Reconciliation-Naharnet
Hariri Moves toward Talks with Opposition, Karami Says Aoun Remarks 'Provocation of Sunnis'-Naharnet
Suleiman: Internal, Not External, Obstacles to Cabinet Formation-Naharnet
Hizbullah: External Obstacles to Cabinet Lineup-Naharnet
Riyadh Denies Inter-Arab Disputes over Lebanon Government Formation-Naharnet

Lebanese Army commandos capture escaped Islamist fighter-Daily Star
Fadlallah: Cabinet formation hampered by 'Arab backing-Daily Star
Aoun refuses to 'share a meal' with Hariri-Daily Star
Lebanon on the crossroads to reform and prosperity-Daily Star
Central criminal laboratory to open at Emile Helou barracks-Daily Star
Truck drivers block Metn road to demand permits for quarries-Daily Star
Army arrests member of wanted Jund al-Sham militant near Sidon-Daily Star
Sky Bar hosts charity event to curb drunk driving-Daily Star
Chouf's Cedar Reserve lures 20,000 tourists-Daily Star
AUB draws in international crowd with language lessons-Daily Star
Group challenges women's beauty perception-Daily Star
Khamenei praises Syria's 'resistance'-(AFP)
Karameh meets Hariri: Aoun’s rhetoric provokes Sunnis/Future News
Mahfoud: Aoun fragmented the Christian society/Future News
Fouad el-Saad: we are dealing with a psychopath who needs sanatorium/Future News
Houri asks Aoun: Does the FPM lack proficient members?/Future News
Cabinet formation towards deadlocked crisis, Souaid/Future News
Fugitive behind bars…More mute politicians/Future News

Message from Jumblat to Sfeir Stresses Commitment to Mountain's Reconciliation
Naharnet/State Minister Wael Abu Faour on Thursday conveyed a message of respect from Druze leader Walid Jumblat to Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir which also stressed the Progressive Socialist Party's commitment to the recent reconciliation in the mountain. Jumblat's message "stressed commitment to the mountains' reconciliation which produced many positive results and national achievements on the level of relations among the Lebanese," Abu Faour told reporters following his meeting with Sfeir in Diman, the seat of the Maronite church in north Lebanon  "This reconciliation has become a daily reality in the mountains," he added. On the stalled Cabinet lineup, he stressed the importance to "form a government and remove all the obstacles whether they are personal, public or artificial to clear the way for the PM-designate to form a government as soon as possible." Earlier Thursday, MP Fouad al-Saad said a visit by a delegation from the Democratic Gathering bloc would "dampen the atmosphere" between Sfeir and Jumblat, stressing on the ongoing relationship between the two sides.
Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 13:17

Suleiman: Internal, Not External, Obstacles to Cabinet Formation

Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman stressed that the obstacles facing formation of a national unity government were internal and not external. As-Safir newspaper, citing Suleiman visitors, said Thursday that the President pointed that external states were "trying to assist Lebanon in the completion of a Cabinet lineup." Suleiman reportedly hinted that demands by "some local sides related to names and Cabinet portfolios were too high." The president said he has asked Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri to reactivate consultations with the various political leaders in hopes to speed up government formation. Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 09:01

Khamenei praises Syria's 'resistance'
By Agence France Presse (AFP) /Thursday, August 20, 2009
TEHRAN: Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei praised key ally Syria on Wednesday for its “resistance” in the face of world powers in a meeting with visiting Syrian President Bashar Assad, state media reported. “Syria’s most important characteristic among Arab countries is its steadfastness and resistance,” Khamenei said, noting Syria’s “excellent standing” in the region. Khamenei said “the resistance front” in the Middle East “should strengthen its cooperation and ties,” the state news agency IRNA reported.
“America’s blade has become blunter in the region,” Khamenei added. The unity between Iran and Syria is the embodiment of resistance in the region,” the supreme leader said.
Khamenei also branded as “very positive” Syria’s improved relations with Iraq and said that unity between Iran and its western neighbors, Iraq and Turkey, and with Syria would benefit the region. Assad arrived in Tehran earlier on Wednesday on a one-day visit during which he congratulated Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on his re-election, which he said was a “lesson for foreigners,” IRNA reported. “I have come here today to cordially congratulate you and the Iranian people,” Assad said, according to IRNA.
“What happened in Iran was a major event and a great lesson for foreigners, that is why they are so upset,” the Syrian president said. Assad also insisted that relations between regional allies Syria and Iran and their positions on Middle East issues should remain unchanged during Ahmadinejad’s second four-year tenure. “Iran and Syria should pursue their … policies in the region,” IRNA quoted Assad as telling AhmadinejadHe added, the report said without elaborating, that meetings between Iranian and Syrian officials are “necessary to send a message to faraway countries and those in the region as they have a weak memory and forget the lessons they learned.” Ahmadinejad for his part said “Iran and Syria are in the same trench” and insisted that the West “terribly needs the help and cooperation” of the two regional allies. “Every political event is an opportunity that we should fully exploit with each other’s help,” Ahmadinejad said, without giving further details. Ahmadinejad’s disputed re-election, which the opposition charges was the result of fraud, was met with mass protests, plunging the Islamic Republic into its worst crisis in 30 years of its existence. During the hardline president’s first term Iran faced further international isolation over his uncompromising nuclear stance and frequent verbal attacks on Israel. Assad’s trip comes after France praised Syria for helping secure the release on bail of French university teaching assistant Clotilde Reiss and an Iranian employee at the French Embassy in Tehran The two were detained for their alleged role in the riots that broke out after Ahmadinejad’s disputed re-election.
Assad last visited Iran in August 2008. – AFP

Fadlallah: Cabinet formation hampered by 'Arab backing'

Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
BEIRUT: Senior Shiite cleric Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah said on Wednesday the government formation process still needs “Arab backing to come to an end.” Fadlallah held talks on Wednesday with British ambassador Frances Guy at his residence in Haret Hreik. The meeting touched on local and regional developments and discussed the living conditions of the Arab and Muslim diaspora in the United Kingdom. The situation in Iraq and the occupied territories was also discussed. Fadlallah criticized Lebanese politicians, saying they were “still far from achieving true unity.” He said Lebanon’s “crisis of confidence” has deteriorated further, adding that the country was suffering from “more serious ills in light of recent developments.”
“This can delay the reconciliation process, which should be the precursor for nationwide reform projects,” he said. He also blamed the political stalemate on foreign intervention, saying inter-Arab reconciliation “has yet to mature.” Each Arab group is looking to acquire a role on the Lebanese scene, he explained. “The situation in Lebanon is still blurry and will become clearer once the situation on the Arab scene is clear,” the Sayyed said. “However,” he added, “Arab players don’t seem to be in a rush to make this happen.” He slammed politicians, accusing them of neglect and urged them to keep the political process moving, especially government formation. The cleric said paralysis witnessed on the Lebanese political scene, “will have drastic repercussions on the Lebanese people, who always pay the price.” He also urged the European Union to rethink its relations with the Arab and Muslim countries. He especially referred to the complications that arose between the EU and the Islamic Republic of Iran following the Iranian presidential elections. “We should remedy mistakes in accordance with the law and with an open mind,” he said. Fadlallah also stressed that it was not in Europe’s best interest to complicate its relations with Iran and that the latter was determined to adopt an open policy toward Western countries. – The Daily Star

Aoun refuses to 'share a meal' with Hariri
Berri vows to promote dialogue so that cabinet formation process reaches ‘happy ending’

Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
BEIRUT: Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun declined on Wednesday an invitation for lunch by Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri to discuss pending issues related to the government formation process. Aoun’s decision is likely to further complicate the government formation process, which kicked off eight weeks ago but has yet to bear fruit.
Obstacles faced in the formation of the cabinet were also reflected in the silence of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who refused to comment to reporters following a weekly meeting with President Michel Sleiman at the Baabda Palace on Wednesday. Sources close to Berri, however, said the speaker was determined to promote “reconciliation and dialogue” among all factions, in order to reach “a happy ending.” Speaking to reporters after the weekly meeting of his Change and Reform bloc, Aoun said he refuses to “share a meal” with those who are waging a defamation campaign in the media against him. “I follow a principle. You all remember that I had once declined MP Walid Jumblatt’s invitation to dinner because he was attacking our supporters. How can I possibly accept the invitation of someone who has been personally attacking me and insulting me in the media?” Aoun asked.
“So please allow me, I will not share a meal with them,” he said, in reference to Hariri. Aoun said his party was “under attack by opponents.”
“They don’t consider the FPM fit to join the cabinet,” he said. “It is because we are not troublemakers and cannot put with the existing corruption in the state’s structure nor can we tolerate the mafia attitude of [Lebanese political groups].” Earlier this week, Aoun had accused the premier-designate of waiting for outside instructions to form the cabinet.
The FPM leader also demanded that his son-in-law caretaker Telecommunications Minister Gebran Bassil be reappointed to his post, and asked for the FPM to be granted the Interior Ministry, or any other “key ministries.” On Wednesday, Aoun questioned the reasoning behind calls to delay deliberations until after the month of Ramadan.
Media reports on Wednesday predicted that the government would not see the light until after Ramadan. Earlier on Wednesday, the March 14 Forces issued a statement slamming Hizbullah and its ally Aoun and blaming them for the recent deadlock. The coalition said following its weekly meeting that Hizbullah had agreed on the 15-10-5 formula after Aoun’s consent, adding that the Shiite party had shown readiness to deal with any problem related to the government formation process. The agreed-upon formula grants the parliamentary majority 15 seats in cabinet, the opposition 10 and the president five. “Aoun’s demands for a key ministry are nothing but an attempt to weaken the president, the statement said.
“Therefore, the March 14 Forces believe that MP Aoun’s latest escalatory tone couldn’t have happened without Hizbullah’s consent,” it added.
The alliance reiterated its support for Hariri in his efforts to form a coalition government and called for a swift distribution of portfolios. Meanwhile, well-informed sources told the Central News Agency that Syrian-Saudi dialogue was “back on track” after having been frozen for a while. The sources added that Saudi King Abdullah tasked his son Prince Abdel-Aziz with reviving contacts with the Syrian and Lebanese administrations “in a bid to facilitate the government formation process in Lebanon, which has so far been stalled.”
The sources also said Saudi Information Minister and former ambassador to Lebanon Abdel-Aziz Khoja “recently paid an unanounced visit to Lebanon in order to help break the deadlock over the government.” Khoja met with Hariri and Jumblatt during his two-day stay, the sources said. Earlier in August, the government formation process was further complicated when Jumblatt announced his departure from the March 14 coalition. In other news, caretaker Public Works and Transport Minister Ghazi Aridi warned on Wednesday against further delay in cabinet formation in light of the ongoing Israeli threats. He called for accelerating the process, since it is “not acceptable to obstruct the government formation to fulfill personal interests,” a reference to Aoun’s demand to reappoint Bassil. Aridi stressed that all groups should make concessions.
Following a meeting with Premier-designate Hariri, caretakerYouth and Sports Minister MP Talal Arslan said on Wednesday that “neither the opposition nor the parliamentary majority want the cabinet formation to be delayed.” Arslan urged various Lebanese groups to cooperate “in order to maintain unity, partnership and stability in the country, especially given Israel’s ongoing threats.” “Both the opposition and the parliamentary majority should provide clear explanations for the delay in forming the cabinet,” he added.
Last week, Arslan demanded that his Democratic Party be represented in the upcoming cabinet with one ministerial portfolio. – The Daily Star

Army arrests member of wanted Jund al-Sham militant near Sidon

By Mohammed Zaatari /Daily Star staff
Thursday, August 20, 2009
SIDON: The Lebanese Army arrested on Tuesday one of the prominent members of the disbanded Jund al-Sham Islamist militant group who is wanted by the Lebanese judiciary for several charges. Lebanese Army Intelligence Units arrested Wissam Tahbish Wednesday afternoon as he was about to enter the Ain al-Hilweh Palestinian refugee camp, on the outskirts of the coastal city of Sidon. Well-informed military sources told The Daily Star that Tahbish, a Palestinian refugee, had left Ain al-Hilweh, “less than one year ago and headed to a European country but recently decided to return back.” The sources added that Tahbish had joined the Al-Qaeda inspired Fatah al-Islam militant group, which fought the Lebanese Army in the north Lebanon camp of Nahr al-Bared. Tahbish is the son-in-law of one of the founders of Fatah al-Islam, Sheikh Hisham Sharidi.

Chouf's Cedar Reserve lures 20,000 tourists
By Maher Zeineddine /Daily Star staff
Thursday, August 20, 2009
CHOUF: Tourism in the Chouf region this summer has been primarily environment-friendly as the region’s Cedar Reserve had recorded 20,000 visitors since the start of the summer season. The Chouf Cedar Reserve offers a special program this season dubbed “Ecotourism Package” for its tourists who come to enjoy one of UNESCO’s dec­lared biosphere reserves.
As part of the package, tourists and locals get the opportunity to discover the largest of Lebanon’s nature reserves and to experience life in the countryside.
Visitors can not only enjoy walking between the historic cedar trees but also discover the traditions, cuisine and folkloric artifacts found in neighboring villages.
Stretching from Dahr al-Baidar in the north to the Niha Mountain in the south, the reserve offers the best of Lebanon’s beautiful scenery. Hikers are able to walk from a couple of hours to five days as part of the Lebanon Mountain Trail, the first long-distance hiking trail in Lebanon.
“You can enjoy nature’s flowers and birds here and then head to a nearby village to savor a home cooked traditional meal in one of the local houses” says the reserve’s scientific coordinator Nizar Hani. Hani explains that five guest homes in the villages of Niha, Baatharan, Khraybe, Maaser and Barouk are equipped to host tourists and offer them food and shelter.
“We have organized the tours in a way to introduce visitors to the villages’ traditions, literature, poetry and artifacts,” he adds , while highlighting that one of the guest houses on the tour was built 200 years ago. The tours organized by the reserve can also be considered a useful history lesson. The village of Niha, for example, holds a fort from the time of the famous Lebanese Prince Emir Fakhreddine and the village of Barouk is the birth place of renowned poet Rachid Nakhle. “You can spend up to five days discovering the region,” says Hani, adding that 12 new artificial lakes had been built “under the care of Progressive Socialist Party leader and Chouf MP Walid Jumblatt.” The lakes can hold thousands of cubic meters of water and were able to contain 90 thousand cubic meters this year according to Hani. Development projects have been ongoing in the Chouf region and this summer’s tou­rism season has more than benefited from the artificial lakes. The number of tourists to visit the Chouf Cedar Reserve has reached 20,000 visitors and is still expected to go up to 30,000 thousand.
The reserve had witnessed a record number of 28,000 visitors in 2004 but the 18-month political deadlock between 2006 and 2008 caused that number to decrease in the following years.
“This year’s ecotourism package aims at protecting the environment and benefiting the local communities,” says Hani, who is pleased that the reserve is receiving support from the Tourism Ministry. The Chouf Cedar Reserve also collaborates with the Tourism Ministry and the Italian Embassy to promote forest fire prevention projects.

Is Michel Aoun a problem or a solution?
By Michael Young

Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
There was snickering and indignation on Monday, after Michel Aoun held a press conference to defend his son-in-law Gebran Bassil. Aoun’s vulgarity on the occasion notwithstanding, his nepotistic tendencies aside, it would be a mistake to blame him alone for the blockage in the government’s formation. The essence of the problem lies elsewhere.
The fuss being made over Bassil’s appointment is silly. Bassil is a notably unremarkable figure, despite his father-in-law’s extravagant commendations. However, nothing in Lebanon’s Constitution or political practice justifies the decision to deny him a ministerial post. Ministers are not parliamentarians and shouldn’t be obliged to meet the same criteria. To win a seat in Parliament, a candidate must usually ride the coattails of a powerful political leader. This means that governments filled with election winners also tend to be governments filled with yes-men. Is that a model we should be promoting, under the guise of enhancing legitimacy?
It would have been wiser from the start to give Aoun what he wanted, a portfolio for Bassil, and leave the Aounist movement, which had been divided over his appointment, to thrash out the consequences. Why did Saad Hariri allow himself to be trapped by what should have been a relatively minor political obstacle? Instead, the Aounists are now united behind Bassil, even those among them who dislike him, while the real reason for the delay in the Cabinet’s formation remains hidden.
The fact is that the delay is due to tensions in the relationship between Syria and Saudi Arabia, in the shadow of their uneasy reconciliation. The Syrians seek to hammer home their indispensability to any inter-Lebanese reconciliation, and they apparently still want Saad Hariri to visit Damascus before the government is finalized. The American veto of such a visit, but also Hariri’s reluctance to go along with a whitewash of his father’s assassins, evidently contributed to the cancellation of a meeting in Damascus several weeks ago between King Abdullah and Bashar Assad. Since then progress on the government has been slow, and was further hindered by Walid Jumblatt’s speech earlier this month.
In this context, the Gebran Bassil saga is a footnote, one being exploited by Aoun to raise the ante on Hariri, That is why it would have been far better for the prime minister-elect to neutralize this particular headache preemptively, by accepting Bassil and therefore perhaps avoiding the current row over handing the Aounists a sovereign ministry, which Aoun is using as leverage to shoehorn his son-in-law into the Cabinet.
It’s easy to underestimate Aoun. Rare are the major battles he has undertaken that he has won. He failed to liberate Lebanon from Syria when he headed a military government between 1988 and 1990, and he failed to defeat the Lebanese Forces afterward. Upon returning home in 2005 he scored a major victory, but then did nothing with it when he failed to become president – though he would have been uncircumventable had he remained neutral in the March 8-March 14 rivalry. And finally, he failed to win a majority in the elections last June, instead becoming a lighting rod for the growing number of Christians voting against him.
That Aoun should now be fighting so hard over Bassil is a revealing sign of how far he’s dropped. Having lost almost everywhere else, he at least wants to win the struggle over his succession. This creates an opening that Hariri and March 14 should profit from, in light of the aggressive Syrian endeavor to reimpose some sort of hegemony over Lebanon.
March 14 needs more imagination in dealing with Aoun. In the end his excessive demands are part of a bargaining ploy. Hariri has to advance gingerly when it comes to the general: he doesn’t want to alienate President Michel Sleiman or his own allies Samir Geagea and Amin Gemayel. That’s understandable, but as prime minister he will have to widen his horizons beyond March 14, while also preserving his Christian partnerships. One of the main aims of the Syrians is to break Hariri and the Sunnis off from the anti-Syrian Maronites. That is why they have threatened Gemayel, making him more responsive to engagement from Damascus; and it is why Syria’s local peons are now preparing to isolate Geagea, otherwise a much tougher nut to crack.
This situation makes it more desirable for Hariri to help facilitate inter-Christian reconciliation, which would bolster his own authority and his community’s defiance in the face of Syrian efforts to contain the Sunnis and undermine their ability to remain the backbone of opposition to some form of Syrian restoration. Such a plan is by no means easy. Since when have Sunni leaders dared play Christian politics? And with the Christians so divided, Hariri is more likely to fail than to succeed.
However, it’s equally true that Aoun is most dangerous when he feels forsaken. That’s why it’s worth determining what it is he really wants, and conceding what can be conceded in exchange for greater support from Aoun against Syrian moves weakening Lebanese sovereignty. Aoun has tried to use the Syrians to his advantage, but ultimately he has gotten very little out of them. Even his trip to Syria last year did not generate any particular warmth or long-term cooperation. Aoun may be more receptive to Hariri on the Syrian front than the general’s detractors imagine, even as his close ties with Hizbullah and Iran will doubtless limit his maneuverability.
The balance of power has shifted in Lebanon since Jumblatt’s turnaround. The Druze leader will be very careful not to alienate the Saudis, but that doesn’t mean Saad Hariri should stand pat. Political alignments are changing and it might be time to seriously investigate whether Michel Aoun would not himself welcome an opportunity to revise a political strategy that has ultimately left him empty-handed.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR.

Fear of radicalization is no reason to delay democratic reforms

By The Daily Star /Thursday, August 20, 2009
Editorial
During his visit to Washington this week, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak tried to deflect criticism of his government’s miserable track record on implementing long-promised democratic reforms. Mubarak warned through his spokesman on Tuesday that moving too quickly on democratization risks bringing extremists to power. “If Egypt falls down, many other countries will be destabilized. We know that moving too fast might give control to radicals,” he warned.
We’ve heard similar ominous predictions from Middle Eastern leaders before. The autocrats of the region have long cautioned that introducing too much democracy too quickly could have horrible ramifications Some have argued that democracy contradicts local culture or have said that it is necessary to first improve economic conditions before allowing people to vote. Many, like Mubarak, cite the example of the Palestinian territories, where the last legislative elections saw the rise of Hamas, and warn that radicals will be empowered if the people are allowed to go to the polls.
But as this regions leader’s keep changing the benchmark of “readiness” for democracy, we’re left wondering, when will it ever be the right time to embrace democratization?
Fear of radicalization is certainly not a good enough reason to continue delaying key reforms. Democratization involves more than just holding elections. It’s about fostering tolerance, allowing more freedom of speech, promoting education and bolstering the independence of institutions such as the judiciary and the press. Plenty of steps can be taken toward democratization without any risk of a country falling into the hands of extremists.
These types of reforms would bring far more benefits to Middle Eastern societies than merely quieting disgruntled populations. One of the hallmarks of contemporary life is the need of citizens to be knowledgable about their world. Business leaders need to make informed decisions on the basis of reality, not the fiction that passes as “news” in many of the region’s countries whose media outlets are suppressed or controlled by governments. Investors and entrepreneurs need to know the laws of the land, and more importantly they need reassurances that these are being applied consistently by a fair and transparent judiciary that acts without any form of political interference. A nation’s prospects of achieving prosperity are improved whenever leaders are bold enough to embrace reforms that advance democratization.
Our region unfortunately lacks such consistently courageous leadership. Instead we experience long periods of stagnation, interrupted by the occasional revolution or coup that ushers in new leaders who promise something new but end up resorting to the same old oppressive tactics. Will today’s Middle Eastern leaders yield to popular demands for better governance? Or will they dig in their heels and eventually be swept away like their predecessors?

Tehran – Damascus versus Lebanon’s Democracy
Wed, 19 August 2009
Randa Takieddine
Ever since the Iranian authorities released French hostages Clotilde Reiss and Nazak Afshar (of Iranian origin) from prison to the French Embassy in Tehran, France has praised the role of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, which led to the release. French President Nicholas Sarkozy has saluted President Bashar al-Assad, and newspapers close to Sarkozy, such as Le Figaro, which is considered his official mouthpiece, praised this role and Sarkozy’s decision to remove Syria from its isolation and disengage it, in the view of the French, from Iran.
Certainly, President al-Assad played a role in moving the two hostages from the Iranian prison to the French Embassy in Tehran, and this is very important for Sarkozy and French public opinion, while it is a humanitarian step that can only be applauded.
However, the belief that the Syrian-Iranian alliance is headed for collapse is hugely mistaken. This strong alliance has joint interests in the region; the first example of this is what is happening in Lebanon with Hizbullah and General Michel Aoun. The difficulty of forming a government and the obstacles faced by the prime minister-designate, Saad al-Hariri, are linked to the Iranian-Syrian alliance that was surprised by the results of parliamentary elections in Lebanon, which it lost. It sought to halt the country’s democratic path through the Christian ally in order to avoid a new Sunni-Shiite conflict.
Syria is aware that releasing the two French hostages is a priority for the French president. President Sarkozy can only praise the role of the President al-Assad and thank him. However, afterward, will he be able to pressure his friend President al-Assad to prompt him to solve the impasse over forming the next Lebanese Cabinet?
While Iran did not encourage a coming-together by Syria and Saudi Arabia, and Syria’s interest certainly lies in reconciliation with the Kingdom, interests shared with Iran in the region (Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine) are an obstacle in the face of Arab moderates, meaning the two biggest states in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
The only thing that distances Syria from Iran is Damascus’ reaching a stage of direct negotiations with Israel. When Syria began its talks with Israel, the Iranian leadership blamed Damascus for not informing it about the details of these negotiations. Iran was getting information from Turkey about the matter.
Since Israel and its officials do not want peace with Syria, or with the Palestinians, the Iranian-Syrian alliance is stronger during this period. The expected visit by President al-Assad to Iran will demonstrate this. He is going to congratulate his Iranian counterpart and thank him for the credit for releasing the two French hostages, which serves Syria’s interest with France and Europe. The Syrian president, with his visit, will give support to the Iranian president locally, as the result of his election was rejected due to the falsification of the majority of the Iranian people’s votes, and by a group belonging to the regime as well. The Syrian president has already affirmed to French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, during the latter’s visit to Damascus in July, that the popular demonstrations in Iran were at the instigation and encouragement of the outside world, and that the legitimacy of the president-elect is not doubted.
The situation in Lebanon today is the result of this Iranian-Syrian alliance, which blocks or hinders the country’s democratic path. Any country in the world enjoying democracy that sees one group gaining a majority in free elections cannot form a government because the losing side is blocking things in one way or another. If the premier-designate forms a government of the majority without the agreement of the opposition, we will see Lebanon facing political blackmail by the opposition, in setting up tents in the streets of Beirut and blocking life in Lebanon.
The prime minister-designate is aware of this possibility; thus, he wants true participation. However, General Aoun, who criticized the candidacy of Minister Nassib Lahoud for president on the grounds that he lost in the parliamentary elections, has forgotten what he said about the candidate of a huge majority of the Lebanese people, and now wants to impose his son-in-law, who lost in the last legislative elections, as a minister in the democratically-elected government recognized by all. Aoun’s positions and principles accommodate themselves to family ties, since he insists on seeing his son-in-law as a minister.
However, the obstacle of naming Gebran Bassil a minister could have been overcome, if Aoun’s strongest ally, Hizbullah, truly wanted to facilitate the formation of the government. This reminds us of what Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said when he visited Paris before the elections in Lebanon. He told Kouchner that “Hizbullah and its allies were going to win in the elections and you will be forced to work with us to move things along in the country.” The Iranian minister’s expectations proved to be wrong, but the Iranian regime and its Syrian partner now want to block the democratic path in the way the leadership in Iran did domestically after the presidential elections.

GAZA: BIG JIHAD V/S LITTLE JIHAD
By Walid Phares
19/08/09
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2009/08/gaza_big_jihad_vs_little_jihad.php
Hamas’ attack against a Jihadist group inside Gaza is about to provide the Palestinian Islamist organization a pass to become a “mainstream” movement, acceptable internationally as a partner in negotiations. Or at least that is what Hamas strategists think may happen as a result of crushing the minuscule militant entity known as Jund Ansar Allah (The Soldiers or the Partisans of Allah) last week. This is another murky development in the world of Jihadism, where the biggest brothers in holy war devoured the little ones, in a race between who can achieve final victory against the Kuffar (infidels). But in Gaza, these intra Jihadist slaughter fests are peculiar in as much as the “Palestine cause” is so central to the Islamist political narrative worldwide.
In November of 2008, a new group in Rafah declared itself as the ultimate Salafi Jihadist force of Palestine. After many previous attempts made previously by al Qaeda inspired factions at least since 2001, Jund Ansar Allah (JAA) led by Abel Latif Mussa, aka Abu al Nour al Maqdissi, seized the control of a local Mosque and segments of a neighborhood and launched a couple attacks against Israel as of early 2009. The JAA issued many declarations calling for “real Jihad,” ending negotiations with Fatah, the international community and opposing any type of elections and constitutional structure in Gaza other than pure Sharia. From his pulpit, Sheikh Mussa criticized Hamas’ leadership for failing the Jihad they promised to deliver, and for betraying their own constitution calling for an Islamic Emirate all over Palestine, not just in Gaza and the West Bank. Hundreds of already indoctrinated youth joined the JAA and formed the nucleus of a Jihadi milita. Their ranks were growing at an alarming rate for Hamas, which felt time came to squash them, before they became a competitive organization. The JAA was on its ballistic way to devour Hamas from the inside. It was using the same doctrines upon which Hamas was founded, grew and used to overthrew Fatah from Gaza.
After a few incidents, Hamas forces overwhelmed the headquarters of JAA killing dozens of militants. The fighting took its toll on both groups. Unverified reports said Abu Jibril Shemali, commander of Izzedine al Qassam Brigades (Hamas’ SS-like force) and Abu Abdallah al Suri, JAA’s military commander were both killed in the clashes. The founder of the Jund Ansar Allah Abdel Latif Moussa was killed during the explosion of one of his suicide bombers as he targeted advancing Hamas fighters. By now, the “Jund” has been crushed, its Mosque seized and its survivors pursued. In return JAA underground has threatened to punish Hamas leadership for their apostasy against “Allah’s true fighters.” In this is Jihad versus Jihad inside a world of indoctrinated circles of militants, one circle enjoying power, money and recognition and the smaller circle wanting to snatch it away from the most powerful. But what are lessons we need to learn from this pool of piranhas, where big Jihadi fish eat little Jihadi fish?
1. According to many commentators on al Jazeera, Hamas chose to finish up the “Jund” as a maneuver to lure the West in general -- Great Britain and the United States in particular -- into “engaging” the organization, lifting its name from terror lists and adding it to the peace process between the Palestinians and Israel. Hamas spokespersons rushed to use one term, that resonates greatly in Western ears, especially with the Obama Administration and the Brown Government, “we too are fighting the extremists, the terrorists as you are fighting them and pursuing al Qaeda,” declared Hamas English speaking communicators, hours after the combat was over. Analysts in the Arab world, shrewd enough to detect the Hamas tactical move wasn’t greedy in revealing their game: crushing an “al Qaeda” like group in Gaza would grant an immediate license to the mainstream for Hamas. One must expect sympathizing journalists, apologist academics and soon enough diplomats and envoys citing the “glorious” deeds of Hamas as evidence of fight “against terrorism.” Some savvier analysts believe many “engagement” architects in Europe and America have even suggested such a move to break the veto against Hamas. Interestingly, the US narrative lately has been underlining that there is no war against “Global Jihadsim” but only a “war against al Qaeda” only. So those in the business of Jihad, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and a plethora of other groups, can make their credential known to the West by slapping some local, little al Qaeda boys, and claiming a green card to the world of “accepted Jihadists.” Two summers ago, the Syrian regime and to an extent, Hezbollah, tried to come up with a similar model: Damascus released a copycat group in northern Lebanon, Fatah al Islam, before they claimed they beheaded the organization few months later, suggesting to Washington that Bashar can also kill al Qaeda crowds.
2. Is there a link between Hamas and the “Jund” it just sacrificed as a price for its public international image to be enhanced? In classical Western eyes, these links cannot be seen. But seasoned observers of Middle Eastern politics and Jihadi tactics can swiftly detect the equation Hamas-Jihadist factions. Firstly, the constituents of the “Jund” (JAA) are part of the larger indoctrinated pools created by Hamas. There are no differences in the basic doctrine between Hamas and JAA: they are both adepts of Jihadi Salafism. Secondly, Hamas tolerated the presence of these ultra-Jihadists in their midst for a reason, that is as long as their size was small and as long as they were allowed to grow so that they can be used tactically: either by blaming them for wild rocket launching or to crush them and cash in. Comparatively, Hamas couldn’t “tolerate” Fatah for example. By June 2007 the followers of Mahmoud Abbas were massacred in the enclave, because they were credible partners in a potential peace process and real competitors. Ghazi Hamad, a Hamas spokesperson told al Jazeera English his organization was always dialoguing with the “Jund.” Which means they had relationship with them even though Hamas was the only dominant force in Gaza. Hence there was a reason for this “tolerance” before Hamad admitted that Hamas stopped “tolerating.” Logically, the Jihadist regime in Gaza fed the little Jihadists and allowed them to grow until the time of the sacrifice came.
3. This brings us back to review the current Western re-reading of the so-called War on Terror and the decision by the Obama and Brown Administrations to let go of the counter Jihadist narrative hoping, as they said, to drive a wedge between the so-called “good Jihadists” and the “extremists.” Hamas quickly understood the message and delivered the goods promptly hoping they will be reclassified as “good Js.” Not so fast, because Hamas needs to also cater to its own Gaza indoctrinated constituencies, which were made to believe for decades that Jihad fi Sabeel Allah is the only way. Tragicomically, Hamas was trapped by a smart question fielded by an al Jazeera English anchor who was pressing their spokesperson to show the difference between Hamas and the JAA. “Don’t you think that the people you just killed are more faithful to your constitution calling for the establishment of an Islamic Emirate on all of Palestine than yourselves, who are in power now? Ghazi Hamad rushed to answer by instincts, revealing too much perhaps: “These guys wants to establish the Caliphate immediately on any part of liberated land, they are irrational; they don’t understand how Jihad works, we do.” He said Hamas knows better how to achieve victory. In my book Future Jihad, I have often argued that the Jihadists are of several strategic schools of thought: short term, medium term and long term. The difference between Hamas and the JAA is not about good or bad Jihad, as experts to Western Governments are claiming. Not at all. It is a difference about when to trigger the missile, under whose orders and within which framework of alliances. The “Jund” wants it all the time, anytime they can. Hamas wants a perfect kill, coordinated with its allies Hezbollah, Syria’s Baath and Iran’s Pasdaran. The Jund doesn’t care what the infidels in Washington and London think. Hamas cares strategically how the allies of its immediate enemy, Israel, behave. It wants to be part of the widest regional alliance against the Jewish state, while the latter loses all its allies, before D-Day is unleashed. **Dr Walid Phares is the Director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the author of The Confrontation: Winning the War against Future Jihad. He teaches Global Strategies in Washington DC

Hizbullah: External Obstacles to Cabinet Lineup

Naharnet/Hizbullah reiterated it was not acting a "mediator" between Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri and Free Patriotic Movement leader Gen. Michel Aoun in the stalled Cabinet formation. As-Safir newspaper on Thursday, citing Hizbullah sources, said the Shiite group called on Hariri to "open direct dialogue" with Aoun to discuss his demands.
"Even if Hizbullah was asked to facilitate negotiations between Hariri and Aoun, it will not succumb to pressure," one source told As-Safir.
While President Michel Suleiman believed that the obstacle to government formation was internal and not external, the Opposition made sure to express certainty about the "existence of an external knot that is delaying formation of a government." As-Safir quoted well-informed Opposition circles as asking: What prevents Hariri from presenting a "compromise formula" such as the premier-designate would reappoint Aoun's son-in-law Jebran Bassil as telecommunications minister in exchange for giving up his demand for a key Cabinet portfolio, an offer likely to be accepted by Aoun. Al-Liwaa newspaper, meanwhile, uncovered that Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah contacted Aoun prior to his latest press conference and expressed his desire "not to close the door in the face of Hariri without being obliged to abandon his demands on government formation." Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 10:03

Hariri Moves toward Talks with Opposition, Karami Says Aoun Remarks 'Provocation of Sunnis'
Naharnet/Contacts made by Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri with Opposition leaders, the first from outside the Opposition triangle – Hizbullah, AMAL and the Free Patriotic Movement -- broke the deadlock over Cabinet formation. Hariri has met with Lebanese Democratic Party leader Talal Arslan whose sources denied that the Sports and Youth Minister has delivered any letter from any political side.The sources said the Hariri-Arslan meeting at Center House on Wednesday was agreed upon in advance and before Arslan's visit to FPM leader Michel Aoun on Tuesday. Another Arslan source told pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat that it was "time to end the boycott and resume dialogue."He said Arslan accepted Hariri's invitation regardless of the political bickering between Aoun and the PM-designate. The source acknowledged that Arslan, together with leadership and supporters, "feels bitter" about the way he was treated with regards to the Cabinet lineup. Also Wednesday, Hariri discussed the political situation and obstacles facing government formation with former Prime Minister Omar Karami.The two men are scheduled to have lunch together at Hariri's mansion on Thursday. As-Safir newspaper the Hariri-Karami talks focused on the powers of the prime minister in the wake of Aoun's latest remarks. It said Hariri believed that Aoun's demands "hurt the premier-designate and his role" in achieving a government of national unity.Karami, for his part, said he believed Aoun's comments were provocation of Sunnis. "Aoun's statement about the presence of only one president for the state which is the president of the republic provokes Sunnis in Lebanon," Karami said in remarks published by As-Safir on Thursday.Hariri also met late Wednesday with Phalange party leader Amin Gemayel. Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 08:34

Aoun: I will accept Hariri’s invitation if Future stops its lies against us

August 19, 2009
Now Lebanon/Change and Reform bloc leader MP Michel Aoun held a press conference following his bloc’s weekly meeting in Rabieh on Wednesday saying that he will accept Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri’s invitation to lunch “if the Future Movement stops its lies and defamation against us.”He commended Hariri’s “calm composure,” however, accused the majority of corruption, adding that the March 14 alliance does not want the Free Patriotic Movement to be involved in the formation of the government because “the movement is against corruption.” Aoun said that he is convinced the government is being formed in foreign states, noting the cabinet formation will freeze during the month of Ramadan.“We know very well which countries do not function during Ramadan,” a reference to Saudi Arabia, stressing it is questionable that some political leaders tour the Arab countries, a reference to Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea’s recent visit to Saudi. Aoun told reporters that reappointing his son-in-law, Telecommunications Minister Gebran Bassil, in the new cabinet “is not the reason we are delaying government formation, but rather because we refuse to give into [the majority’s] requests.”He also said that the Lebanese judicial system is not doing anything to prosecute the suspects involved in the Barouq internet station incident and in illegal telecommunications networks.-NOW Staff

The very silly season

August 19, 2009
Now Lebanon
The media calls this time of year the “silly season”. Politicians in Europe and the US are on their summer recess, while news editors, desperate to fill space, are forced to run what they call “human interest” stories: “Mouse rescues cat stuck in tree” or “Villagers queue to worship turnip in the image of the Virgin Mary”.
Lebanese news gathers have had no such worries this summer. Politics is in full swing and, although Walid Jumblatt may have stolen the headlines with his stunning Damascene conversion, the horse trading over the allocation of cabinet seats has also taken top billing.
Leading the charge is Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) leader Michel Aoun, who is trying to secure a place in the new government for his son-in-law, the former telecom minister Gebran Bassil. As far as we can tell, his only achievement has been to reduce the cost of a mobile phone call, and yet his Aoun, himself no stranger to overblown historical comparisons, once compared his accomplishments to that Emir Fakhreddine II.
But the standards of today’s truly mediocre political class and Aoun’s habit to descend into hilarious hyperbole, the comparison is outlandish. Bassil, after all, was only doing his job. If today, this is enough to warrant comparisons with the good and the great of Lebanon’s past then we truly are all sunk in mediocrity.
To be fair, with the battle for cabinet seats really heating up, it is easy to see why has chosen to champion Bassil. He and outgoing Interior Minister Ziad Baroud were the star pupils of the outgoing administration. Aoun has a knack for being able to tap into the frustrations of his supporters, most of whom have hitched their fortunes to the unpredictable former army commander because he rode into town on a ticket that promised change.
Still, Aoun, who has a habit of comparing himself to the great men and women of world history, should spend less time sprinkling historical stardust on his family members and spend more time worrying about the ideas some of his allies are peddling.
Last week, Loyalty to the Resistance bloc MP Mohammad Raad warned that the proposal to appoint a cabinet of technocrats in the absence of a consensus was unworkable because such men would be unable to handle the complex political issues currently facing Lebanon.
Raad should re-examine his motives for entering public life. His statement highlights the warped priorities of Lebanon’s so-called political elite. Raad clearly believes that selecting qualified men and women, people who could start addressing the mountain of malaises Lebanon has accrued since the end of the war, would send Lebanon to hell in a hand basket; that the daily needs of Lebanese – the economy, health, education, transport, environment to name a few– are secondary to consolidating power or fawning to regional masters.
When considering his words, it is worth remembering that an oft-cited example of a post-war government actually having done something is that one can reach Rafik Hariri International Airport from the center of Beirut in just under ten minutes.
This and the new downtown are probably the only memorable achievements of any government since the end of the 1975-90 civil war (if any of our readers can list more please feel free to comment). Sure, there have been a few infrastructure projects, many subsidized by foreign governments, but the fact that 20 years later our roads are still being rebuilt, water is still rationed and electricity does not surge through the national grid 24/7 is a woeful indictment on successive administrations.
Then again Mr. Raad would say that we don’t really understand the complex issues facing Lebanon today. That takes a man of his caliber.

Possible rivalries overshadow accomplishments of security forces

August 20, 2009 /Now Lebanon
Yesterday was a bad day for criminals in Lebanon. Not only was the man behind the 1999 murder of four judges caught, but fugitive Fatah al-Islam member al-Hajj Sleiman was apprehended. The military court also issued arrest warrants against eight ISF members for negligence leading to Sleiman’s escape.
An-Nahar led with the Army Intelligence’s capture of Palestinian national Wissam Tohaibesh, supposedly the gunman who walked in to a courtroom in Saida in 1999 and shot four judges during a trial. He was caught at the entrance of the Ain al-Hilweh camp, off-limits to Lebanese army and police.
The more-covered incident of the day, however, was the arrest of Taha Ahmad al-Hajj Sleiman in the wooden area near the town of Bsalim by a Lebanese Armed Forces Commando regiment.
Sleiman had been the only one of a group of eight members of the militant Palestinian group Fatah al-Islam to escape during a breakout attempt from Roumieh Prison on Tuesday morning. The inmates apparently used tools smuggled into the prison inside hollowed-out copies of the Koran to saw off the window bars of their cell and attempted to scale the wall using a rope of tied-up blankets. The breakout attempt was foiled only after Sleiman escaped into the woods.
In the wake of the breakout, many questions began to fly about the state of Lebanon’s prison system, and about the competence and level of corruption among prison guards and officials. Interior Minister Ziad Baroud went on the defensive, shielding himself from attacks by the Lebanese media and politicians about his performance.
An-Nahar wrote today that “the Roumieh incident highlighted the deep divisions undermining the General Directorate of the Internal Security Forces amid questions regarding the method used by the Interior minister to manage the conflicts among ISF officers.”
The incident revealed an “intense rivalry” that has been simmering for years between the Lebanese army and police, the paper reported, which politicians and security leaders have been exploiting.
The paper cited conflicting reports as to which branch of the security system arrested Sleiman; the LAF had issued a statement whereby “a unit from the Commando regiment arrested Taha Sleiman,” but some media outlets have reported that Sleiman was apprehended by the ISF Intelligence.
Regardless of who was behind the arrest, prison guards who were on the job during the escape attempt are in hot water. Military Investigative Judge Maroun Zakhour issued on Wednesday arrest warrants against eight ISF members, including four officers and non-commissioned officers, who were on duty at the Roumieh Prison during Tuesday’s breakout after Judge Saqr Saqr, the government commissioner to the Military Court, filed charges against them on account of neglect.
Those charged were then handed over to Zakhour for interrogation.
ISF Director General Achraf Rifi, for his part, ordered the arrest of Prison Brigade Commander Brigadier General Elias Saadeh and the warden of Roumieh’s Building D.
-NOW Staff



 

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
August 20/09

Bible Reading of the day
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew 22:1-14. Jesus again in reply spoke to them in parables, saying, The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son. He dispatched his servants to summon the invited guests to the feast, but they refused to come. A second time he sent other servants, saying, 'Tell those invited: "Behold, I have prepared my banquet, my calves and fattened cattle are killed, and everything is ready; come to the feast."'  Some ignored the invitation and went away, one to his farm, another to his business. The rest laid hold of his servants, mistreated them, and killed them. The king was enraged and sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. Then he said to his servants, 'The feast is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy to come.  Go out, therefore, into the main roads and invite to the feast whomever you find.' The servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, bad and good alike, and the hall was filled with guests. But when the king came in to meet the guests he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment. He said to him, 'My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?' But he was reduced to silence.  Then the king said to his attendants, 'Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.' Many are invited, but few are chosen."

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Is Michel Aoun a problem or a solution? By Michael Young 20/08/09
Now Lebanon: Possible rivalries overshadow accomplishments of security forces 20/08/09
Now Lebanon: The very silly season August 20, 2009
Tehran – Damascus versus Lebanon’s Democracy/Randa Takieddine/20.08.09
Gaza: Big Jihad V/S Little Jihad.By Walid Phares 20/08/09
Fear of radicalization is no reason to delay democratic reforms-The Daily Star 20/08/09
Iran may change if it is attracted by an Asia model-By Kishore Mahbubani 20/08/09

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for August 20/09
Message from Jumblat to Sfeir Stresses Commitment to Mountain's Reconciliation-Naharnet
Hariri Moves toward Talks with Opposition, Karami Says Aoun Remarks 'Provocation of Sunnis'-Naharnet
Suleiman: Internal, Not External, Obstacles to Cabinet Formation-Naharnet
Hizbullah: External Obstacles to Cabinet Lineup-Naharnet
Riyadh Denies Inter-Arab Disputes over Lebanon Government Formation-Naharnet

Lebanese Army commandos capture escaped Islamist fighter-Daily Star
Fadlallah: Cabinet formation hampered by 'Arab backing-Daily Star
Aoun refuses to 'share a meal' with Hariri-Daily Star
Lebanon on the crossroads to reform and prosperity-Daily Star
Central criminal laboratory to open at Emile Helou barracks-Daily Star
Truck drivers block Metn road to demand permits for quarries-Daily Star
Army arrests member of wanted Jund al-Sham militant near Sidon-Daily Star
Sky Bar hosts charity event to curb drunk driving-Daily Star
Chouf's Cedar Reserve lures 20,000 tourists-Daily Star
AUB draws in international crowd with language lessons-Daily Star
Group challenges women's beauty perception-Daily Star
Khamenei praises Syria's 'resistance'-(AFP)
Karameh meets Hariri: Aoun’s rhetoric provokes Sunnis/Future News
Mahfoud: Aoun fragmented the Christian society/Future News
Fouad el-Saad: we are dealing with a psychopath who needs sanatorium/Future News
Houri asks Aoun: Does the FPM lack proficient members?/Future News
Cabinet formation towards deadlocked crisis, Souaid/Future News
Fugitive behind bars…More mute politicians/Future News

Message from Jumblat to Sfeir Stresses Commitment to Mountain's Reconciliation
Naharnet/State Minister Wael Abu Faour on Thursday conveyed a message of respect from Druze leader Walid Jumblat to Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir which also stressed the Progressive Socialist Party's commitment to the recent reconciliation in the mountain. Jumblat's message "stressed commitment to the mountains' reconciliation which produced many positive results and national achievements on the level of relations among the Lebanese," Abu Faour told reporters following his meeting with Sfeir in Diman, the seat of the Maronite church in north Lebanon  "This reconciliation has become a daily reality in the mountains," he added. On the stalled Cabinet lineup, he stressed the importance to "form a government and remove all the obstacles whether they are personal, public or artificial to clear the way for the PM-designate to form a government as soon as possible." Earlier Thursday, MP Fouad al-Saad said a visit by a delegation from the Democratic Gathering bloc would "dampen the atmosphere" between Sfeir and Jumblat, stressing on the ongoing relationship between the two sides.
Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 13:17

Suleiman: Internal, Not External, Obstacles to Cabinet Formation

Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman stressed that the obstacles facing formation of a national unity government were internal and not external. As-Safir newspaper, citing Suleiman visitors, said Thursday that the President pointed that external states were "trying to assist Lebanon in the completion of a Cabinet lineup." Suleiman reportedly hinted that demands by "some local sides related to names and Cabinet portfolios were too high." The president said he has asked Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri to reactivate consultations with the various political leaders in hopes to speed up government formation. Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 09:01

Khamenei praises Syria's 'resistance'
By Agence France Presse (AFP) /Thursday, August 20, 2009
TEHRAN: Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei praised key ally Syria on Wednesday for its “resistance” in the face of world powers in a meeting with visiting Syrian President Bashar Assad, state media reported. “Syria’s most important characteristic among Arab countries is its steadfastness and resistance,” Khamenei said, noting Syria’s “excellent standing” in the region. Khamenei said “the resistance front” in the Middle East “should strengthen its cooperation and ties,” the state news agency IRNA reported.
“America’s blade has become blunter in the region,” Khamenei added. The unity between Iran and Syria is the embodiment of resistance in the region,” the supreme leader said.
Khamenei also branded as “very positive” Syria’s improved relations with Iraq and said that unity between Iran and its western neighbors, Iraq and Turkey, and with Syria would benefit the region. Assad arrived in Tehran earlier on Wednesday on a one-day visit during which he congratulated Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on his re-election, which he said was a “lesson for foreigners,” IRNA reported. “I have come here today to cordially congratulate you and the Iranian people,” Assad said, according to IRNA.
“What happened in Iran was a major event and a great lesson for foreigners, that is why they are so upset,” the Syrian president said. Assad also insisted that relations between regional allies Syria and Iran and their positions on Middle East issues should remain unchanged during Ahmadinejad’s second four-year tenure. “Iran and Syria should pursue their … policies in the region,” IRNA quoted Assad as telling AhmadinejadHe added, the report said without elaborating, that meetings between Iranian and Syrian officials are “necessary to send a message to faraway countries and those in the region as they have a weak memory and forget the lessons they learned.” Ahmadinejad for his part said “Iran and Syria are in the same trench” and insisted that the West “terribly needs the help and cooperation” of the two regional allies. “Every political event is an opportunity that we should fully exploit with each other’s help,” Ahmadinejad said, without giving further details. Ahmadinejad’s disputed re-election, which the opposition charges was the result of fraud, was met with mass protests, plunging the Islamic Republic into its worst crisis in 30 years of its existence. During the hardline president’s first term Iran faced further international isolation over his uncompromising nuclear stance and frequent verbal attacks on Israel. Assad’s trip comes after France praised Syria for helping secure the release on bail of French university teaching assistant Clotilde Reiss and an Iranian employee at the French Embassy in Tehran The two were detained for their alleged role in the riots that broke out after Ahmadinejad’s disputed re-election.
Assad last visited Iran in August 2008. – AFP

Fadlallah: Cabinet formation hampered by 'Arab backing'

Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
BEIRUT: Senior Shiite cleric Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah said on Wednesday the government formation process still needs “Arab backing to come to an end.” Fadlallah held talks on Wednesday with British ambassador Frances Guy at his residence in Haret Hreik. The meeting touched on local and regional developments and discussed the living conditions of the Arab and Muslim diaspora in the United Kingdom. The situation in Iraq and the occupied territories was also discussed. Fadlallah criticized Lebanese politicians, saying they were “still far from achieving true unity.” He said Lebanon’s “crisis of confidence” has deteriorated further, adding that the country was suffering from “more serious ills in light of recent developments.”
“This can delay the reconciliation process, which should be the precursor for nationwide reform projects,” he said. He also blamed the political stalemate on foreign intervention, saying inter-Arab reconciliation “has yet to mature.” Each Arab group is looking to acquire a role on the Lebanese scene, he explained. “The situation in Lebanon is still blurry and will become clearer once the situation on the Arab scene is clear,” the Sayyed said. “However,” he added, “Arab players don’t seem to be in a rush to make this happen.” He slammed politicians, accusing them of neglect and urged them to keep the political process moving, especially government formation. The cleric said paralysis witnessed on the Lebanese political scene, “will have drastic repercussions on the Lebanese people, who always pay the price.” He also urged the European Union to rethink its relations with the Arab and Muslim countries. He especially referred to the complications that arose between the EU and the Islamic Republic of Iran following the Iranian presidential elections. “We should remedy mistakes in accordance with the law and with an open mind,” he said. Fadlallah also stressed that it was not in Europe’s best interest to complicate its relations with Iran and that the latter was determined to adopt an open policy toward Western countries. – The Daily Star

Aoun refuses to 'share a meal' with Hariri
Berri vows to promote dialogue so that cabinet formation process reaches ‘happy ending’

Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
BEIRUT: Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun declined on Wednesday an invitation for lunch by Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri to discuss pending issues related to the government formation process. Aoun’s decision is likely to further complicate the government formation process, which kicked off eight weeks ago but has yet to bear fruit.
Obstacles faced in the formation of the cabinet were also reflected in the silence of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who refused to comment to reporters following a weekly meeting with President Michel Sleiman at the Baabda Palace on Wednesday. Sources close to Berri, however, said the speaker was determined to promote “reconciliation and dialogue” among all factions, in order to reach “a happy ending.” Speaking to reporters after the weekly meeting of his Change and Reform bloc, Aoun said he refuses to “share a meal” with those who are waging a defamation campaign in the media against him. “I follow a principle. You all remember that I had once declined MP Walid Jumblatt’s invitation to dinner because he was attacking our supporters. How can I possibly accept the invitation of someone who has been personally attacking me and insulting me in the media?” Aoun asked.
“So please allow me, I will not share a meal with them,” he said, in reference to Hariri. Aoun said his party was “under attack by opponents.”
“They don’t consider the FPM fit to join the cabinet,” he said. “It is because we are not troublemakers and cannot put with the existing corruption in the state’s structure nor can we tolerate the mafia attitude of [Lebanese political groups].” Earlier this week, Aoun had accused the premier-designate of waiting for outside instructions to form the cabinet.
The FPM leader also demanded that his son-in-law caretaker Telecommunications Minister Gebran Bassil be reappointed to his post, and asked for the FPM to be granted the Interior Ministry, or any other “key ministries.” On Wednesday, Aoun questioned the reasoning behind calls to delay deliberations until after the month of Ramadan.
Media reports on Wednesday predicted that the government would not see the light until after Ramadan. Earlier on Wednesday, the March 14 Forces issued a statement slamming Hizbullah and its ally Aoun and blaming them for the recent deadlock. The coalition said following its weekly meeting that Hizbullah had agreed on the 15-10-5 formula after Aoun’s consent, adding that the Shiite party had shown readiness to deal with any problem related to the government formation process. The agreed-upon formula grants the parliamentary majority 15 seats in cabinet, the opposition 10 and the president five. “Aoun’s demands for a key ministry are nothing but an attempt to weaken the president, the statement said.
“Therefore, the March 14 Forces believe that MP Aoun’s latest escalatory tone couldn’t have happened without Hizbullah’s consent,” it added.
The alliance reiterated its support for Hariri in his efforts to form a coalition government and called for a swift distribution of portfolios. Meanwhile, well-informed sources told the Central News Agency that Syrian-Saudi dialogue was “back on track” after having been frozen for a while. The sources added that Saudi King Abdullah tasked his son Prince Abdel-Aziz with reviving contacts with the Syrian and Lebanese administrations “in a bid to facilitate the government formation process in Lebanon, which has so far been stalled.”
The sources also said Saudi Information Minister and former ambassador to Lebanon Abdel-Aziz Khoja “recently paid an unanounced visit to Lebanon in order to help break the deadlock over the government.” Khoja met with Hariri and Jumblatt during his two-day stay, the sources said. Earlier in August, the government formation process was further complicated when Jumblatt announced his departure from the March 14 coalition. In other news, caretaker Public Works and Transport Minister Ghazi Aridi warned on Wednesday against further delay in cabinet formation in light of the ongoing Israeli threats. He called for accelerating the process, since it is “not acceptable to obstruct the government formation to fulfill personal interests,” a reference to Aoun’s demand to reappoint Bassil. Aridi stressed that all groups should make concessions.
Following a meeting with Premier-designate Hariri, caretakerYouth and Sports Minister MP Talal Arslan said on Wednesday that “neither the opposition nor the parliamentary majority want the cabinet formation to be delayed.” Arslan urged various Lebanese groups to cooperate “in order to maintain unity, partnership and stability in the country, especially given Israel’s ongoing threats.” “Both the opposition and the parliamentary majority should provide clear explanations for the delay in forming the cabinet,” he added.
Last week, Arslan demanded that his Democratic Party be represented in the upcoming cabinet with one ministerial portfolio. – The Daily Star

Army arrests member of wanted Jund al-Sham militant near Sidon

By Mohammed Zaatari /Daily Star staff
Thursday, August 20, 2009
SIDON: The Lebanese Army arrested on Tuesday one of the prominent members of the disbanded Jund al-Sham Islamist militant group who is wanted by the Lebanese judiciary for several charges. Lebanese Army Intelligence Units arrested Wissam Tahbish Wednesday afternoon as he was about to enter the Ain al-Hilweh Palestinian refugee camp, on the outskirts of the coastal city of Sidon. Well-informed military sources told The Daily Star that Tahbish, a Palestinian refugee, had left Ain al-Hilweh, “less than one year ago and headed to a European country but recently decided to return back.” The sources added that Tahbish had joined the Al-Qaeda inspired Fatah al-Islam militant group, which fought the Lebanese Army in the north Lebanon camp of Nahr al-Bared. Tahbish is the son-in-law of one of the founders of Fatah al-Islam, Sheikh Hisham Sharidi.

Chouf's Cedar Reserve lures 20,000 tourists
By Maher Zeineddine /Daily Star staff
Thursday, August 20, 2009
CHOUF: Tourism in the Chouf region this summer has been primarily environment-friendly as the region’s Cedar Reserve had recorded 20,000 visitors since the start of the summer season. The Chouf Cedar Reserve offers a special program this season dubbed “Ecotourism Package” for its tourists who come to enjoy one of UNESCO’s dec­lared biosphere reserves.
As part of the package, tourists and locals get the opportunity to discover the largest of Lebanon’s nature reserves and to experience life in the countryside.
Visitors can not only enjoy walking between the historic cedar trees but also discover the traditions, cuisine and folkloric artifacts found in neighboring villages.
Stretching from Dahr al-Baidar in the north to the Niha Mountain in the south, the reserve offers the best of Lebanon’s beautiful scenery. Hikers are able to walk from a couple of hours to five days as part of the Lebanon Mountain Trail, the first long-distance hiking trail in Lebanon.
“You can enjoy nature’s flowers and birds here and then head to a nearby village to savor a home cooked traditional meal in one of the local houses” says the reserve’s scientific coordinator Nizar Hani. Hani explains that five guest homes in the villages of Niha, Baatharan, Khraybe, Maaser and Barouk are equipped to host tourists and offer them food and shelter.
“We have organized the tours in a way to introduce visitors to the villages’ traditions, literature, poetry and artifacts,” he adds , while highlighting that one of the guest houses on the tour was built 200 years ago. The tours organized by the reserve can also be considered a useful history lesson. The village of Niha, for example, holds a fort from the time of the famous Lebanese Prince Emir Fakhreddine and the village of Barouk is the birth place of renowned poet Rachid Nakhle. “You can spend up to five days discovering the region,” says Hani, adding that 12 new artificial lakes had been built “under the care of Progressive Socialist Party leader and Chouf MP Walid Jumblatt.” The lakes can hold thousands of cubic meters of water and were able to contain 90 thousand cubic meters this year according to Hani. Development projects have been ongoing in the Chouf region and this summer’s tou­rism season has more than benefited from the artificial lakes. The number of tourists to visit the Chouf Cedar Reserve has reached 20,000 visitors and is still expected to go up to 30,000 thousand.
The reserve had witnessed a record number of 28,000 visitors in 2004 but the 18-month political deadlock between 2006 and 2008 caused that number to decrease in the following years.
“This year’s ecotourism package aims at protecting the environment and benefiting the local communities,” says Hani, who is pleased that the reserve is receiving support from the Tourism Ministry. The Chouf Cedar Reserve also collaborates with the Tourism Ministry and the Italian Embassy to promote forest fire prevention projects.

Is Michel Aoun a problem or a solution?
By Michael Young

Daily Star staff/Thursday, August 20, 2009
There was snickering and indignation on Monday, after Michel Aoun held a press conference to defend his son-in-law Gebran Bassil. Aoun’s vulgarity on the occasion notwithstanding, his nepotistic tendencies aside, it would be a mistake to blame him alone for the blockage in the government’s formation. The essence of the problem lies elsewhere.
The fuss being made over Bassil’s appointment is silly. Bassil is a notably unremarkable figure, despite his father-in-law’s extravagant commendations. However, nothing in Lebanon’s Constitution or political practice justifies the decision to deny him a ministerial post. Ministers are not parliamentarians and shouldn’t be obliged to meet the same criteria. To win a seat in Parliament, a candidate must usually ride the coattails of a powerful political leader. This means that governments filled with election winners also tend to be governments filled with yes-men. Is that a model we should be promoting, under the guise of enhancing legitimacy?
It would have been wiser from the start to give Aoun what he wanted, a portfolio for Bassil, and leave the Aounist movement, which had been divided over his appointment, to thrash out the consequences. Why did Saad Hariri allow himself to be trapped by what should have been a relatively minor political obstacle? Instead, the Aounists are now united behind Bassil, even those among them who dislike him, while the real reason for the delay in the Cabinet’s formation remains hidden.
The fact is that the delay is due to tensions in the relationship between Syria and Saudi Arabia, in the shadow of their uneasy reconciliation. The Syrians seek to hammer home their indispensability to any inter-Lebanese reconciliation, and they apparently still want Saad Hariri to visit Damascus before the government is finalized. The American veto of such a visit, but also Hariri’s reluctance to go along with a whitewash of his father’s assassins, evidently contributed to the cancellation of a meeting in Damascus several weeks ago between King Abdullah and Bashar Assad. Since then progress on the government has been slow, and was further hindered by Walid Jumblatt’s speech earlier this month.
In this context, the Gebran Bassil saga is a footnote, one being exploited by Aoun to raise the ante on Hariri, That is why it would have been far better for the prime minister-elect to neutralize this particular headache preemptively, by accepting Bassil and therefore perhaps avoiding the current row over handing the Aounists a sovereign ministry, which Aoun is using as leverage to shoehorn his son-in-law into the Cabinet.
It’s easy to underestimate Aoun. Rare are the major battles he has undertaken that he has won. He failed to liberate Lebanon from Syria when he headed a military government between 1988 and 1990, and he failed to defeat the Lebanese Forces afterward. Upon returning home in 2005 he scored a major victory, but then did nothing with it when he failed to become president – though he would have been uncircumventable had he remained neutral in the March 8-March 14 rivalry. And finally, he failed to win a majority in the elections last June, instead becoming a lighting rod for the growing number of Christians voting against him.
That Aoun should now be fighting so hard over Bassil is a revealing sign of how far he’s dropped. Having lost almost everywhere else, he at least wants to win the struggle over his succession. This creates an opening that Hariri and March 14 should profit from, in light of the aggressive Syrian endeavor to reimpose some sort of hegemony over Lebanon.
March 14 needs more imagination in dealing with Aoun. In the end his excessive demands are part of a bargaining ploy. Hariri has to advance gingerly when it comes to the general: he doesn’t want to alienate President Michel Sleiman or his own allies Samir Geagea and Amin Gemayel. That’s understandable, but as prime minister he will have to widen his horizons beyond March 14, while also preserving his Christian partnerships. One of the main aims of the Syrians is to break Hariri and the Sunnis off from the anti-Syrian Maronites. That is why they have threatened Gemayel, making him more responsive to engagement from Damascus; and it is why Syria’s local peons are now preparing to isolate Geagea, otherwise a much tougher nut to crack.
This situation makes it more desirable for Hariri to help facilitate inter-Christian reconciliation, which would bolster his own authority and his community’s defiance in the face of Syrian efforts to contain the Sunnis and undermine their ability to remain the backbone of opposition to some form of Syrian restoration. Such a plan is by no means easy. Since when have Sunni leaders dared play Christian politics? And with the Christians so divided, Hariri is more likely to fail than to succeed.
However, it’s equally true that Aoun is most dangerous when he feels forsaken. That’s why it’s worth determining what it is he really wants, and conceding what can be conceded in exchange for greater support from Aoun against Syrian moves weakening Lebanese sovereignty. Aoun has tried to use the Syrians to his advantage, but ultimately he has gotten very little out of them. Even his trip to Syria last year did not generate any particular warmth or long-term cooperation. Aoun may be more receptive to Hariri on the Syrian front than the general’s detractors imagine, even as his close ties with Hizbullah and Iran will doubtless limit his maneuverability.
The balance of power has shifted in Lebanon since Jumblatt’s turnaround. The Druze leader will be very careful not to alienate the Saudis, but that doesn’t mean Saad Hariri should stand pat. Political alignments are changing and it might be time to seriously investigate whether Michel Aoun would not himself welcome an opportunity to revise a political strategy that has ultimately left him empty-handed.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR.

Fear of radicalization is no reason to delay democratic reforms

By The Daily Star /Thursday, August 20, 2009
Editorial
During his visit to Washington this week, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak tried to deflect criticism of his government’s miserable track record on implementing long-promised democratic reforms. Mubarak warned through his spokesman on Tuesday that moving too quickly on democratization risks bringing extremists to power. “If Egypt falls down, many other countries will be destabilized. We know that moving too fast might give control to radicals,” he warned.
We’ve heard similar ominous predictions from Middle Eastern leaders before. The autocrats of the region have long cautioned that introducing too much democracy too quickly could have horrible ramifications Some have argued that democracy contradicts local culture or have said that it is necessary to first improve economic conditions before allowing people to vote. Many, like Mubarak, cite the example of the Palestinian territories, where the last legislative elections saw the rise of Hamas, and warn that radicals will be empowered if the people are allowed to go to the polls.
But as this regions leader’s keep changing the benchmark of “readiness” for democracy, we’re left wondering, when will it ever be the right time to embrace democratization?
Fear of radicalization is certainly not a good enough reason to continue delaying key reforms. Democratization involves more than just holding elections. It’s about fostering tolerance, allowing more freedom of speech, promoting education and bolstering the independence of institutions such as the judiciary and the press. Plenty of steps can be taken toward democratization without any risk of a country falling into the hands of extremists.
These types of reforms would bring far more benefits to Middle Eastern societies than merely quieting disgruntled populations. One of the hallmarks of contemporary life is the need of citizens to be knowledgable about their world. Business leaders need to make informed decisions on the basis of reality, not the fiction that passes as “news” in many of the region’s countries whose media outlets are suppressed or controlled by governments. Investors and entrepreneurs need to know the laws of the land, and more importantly they need reassurances that these are being applied consistently by a fair and transparent judiciary that acts without any form of political interference. A nation’s prospects of achieving prosperity are improved whenever leaders are bold enough to embrace reforms that advance democratization.
Our region unfortunately lacks such consistently courageous leadership. Instead we experience long periods of stagnation, interrupted by the occasional revolution or coup that ushers in new leaders who promise something new but end up resorting to the same old oppressive tactics. Will today’s Middle Eastern leaders yield to popular demands for better governance? Or will they dig in their heels and eventually be swept away like their predecessors?

Tehran – Damascus versus Lebanon’s Democracy
Wed, 19 August 2009
Randa Takieddine
Ever since the Iranian authorities released French hostages Clotilde Reiss and Nazak Afshar (of Iranian origin) from prison to the French Embassy in Tehran, France has praised the role of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, which led to the release. French President Nicholas Sarkozy has saluted President Bashar al-Assad, and newspapers close to Sarkozy, such as Le Figaro, which is considered his official mouthpiece, praised this role and Sarkozy’s decision to remove Syria from its isolation and disengage it, in the view of the French, from Iran.
Certainly, President al-Assad played a role in moving the two hostages from the Iranian prison to the French Embassy in Tehran, and this is very important for Sarkozy and French public opinion, while it is a humanitarian step that can only be applauded.
However, the belief that the Syrian-Iranian alliance is headed for collapse is hugely mistaken. This strong alliance has joint interests in the region; the first example of this is what is happening in Lebanon with Hizbullah and General Michel Aoun. The difficulty of forming a government and the obstacles faced by the prime minister-designate, Saad al-Hariri, are linked to the Iranian-Syrian alliance that was surprised by the results of parliamentary elections in Lebanon, which it lost. It sought to halt the country’s democratic path through the Christian ally in order to avoid a new Sunni-Shiite conflict.
Syria is aware that releasing the two French hostages is a priority for the French president. President Sarkozy can only praise the role of the President al-Assad and thank him. However, afterward, will he be able to pressure his friend President al-Assad to prompt him to solve the impasse over forming the next Lebanese Cabinet?
While Iran did not encourage a coming-together by Syria and Saudi Arabia, and Syria’s interest certainly lies in reconciliation with the Kingdom, interests shared with Iran in the region (Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine) are an obstacle in the face of Arab moderates, meaning the two biggest states in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
The only thing that distances Syria from Iran is Damascus’ reaching a stage of direct negotiations with Israel. When Syria began its talks with Israel, the Iranian leadership blamed Damascus for not informing it about the details of these negotiations. Iran was getting information from Turkey about the matter.
Since Israel and its officials do not want peace with Syria, or with the Palestinians, the Iranian-Syrian alliance is stronger during this period. The expected visit by President al-Assad to Iran will demonstrate this. He is going to congratulate his Iranian counterpart and thank him for the credit for releasing the two French hostages, which serves Syria’s interest with France and Europe. The Syrian president, with his visit, will give support to the Iranian president locally, as the result of his election was rejected due to the falsification of the majority of the Iranian people’s votes, and by a group belonging to the regime as well. The Syrian president has already affirmed to French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, during the latter’s visit to Damascus in July, that the popular demonstrations in Iran were at the instigation and encouragement of the outside world, and that the legitimacy of the president-elect is not doubted.
The situation in Lebanon today is the result of this Iranian-Syrian alliance, which blocks or hinders the country’s democratic path. Any country in the world enjoying democracy that sees one group gaining a majority in free elections cannot form a government because the losing side is blocking things in one way or another. If the premier-designate forms a government of the majority without the agreement of the opposition, we will see Lebanon facing political blackmail by the opposition, in setting up tents in the streets of Beirut and blocking life in Lebanon.
The prime minister-designate is aware of this possibility; thus, he wants true participation. However, General Aoun, who criticized the candidacy of Minister Nassib Lahoud for president on the grounds that he lost in the parliamentary elections, has forgotten what he said about the candidate of a huge majority of the Lebanese people, and now wants to impose his son-in-law, who lost in the last legislative elections, as a minister in the democratically-elected government recognized by all. Aoun’s positions and principles accommodate themselves to family ties, since he insists on seeing his son-in-law as a minister.
However, the obstacle of naming Gebran Bassil a minister could have been overcome, if Aoun’s strongest ally, Hizbullah, truly wanted to facilitate the formation of the government. This reminds us of what Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said when he visited Paris before the elections in Lebanon. He told Kouchner that “Hizbullah and its allies were going to win in the elections and you will be forced to work with us to move things along in the country.” The Iranian minister’s expectations proved to be wrong, but the Iranian regime and its Syrian partner now want to block the democratic path in the way the leadership in Iran did domestically after the presidential elections.

GAZA: BIG JIHAD V/S LITTLE JIHAD
By Walid Phares
19/08/09
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2009/08/gaza_big_jihad_vs_little_jihad.php
Hamas’ attack against a Jihadist group inside Gaza is about to provide the Palestinian Islamist organization a pass to become a “mainstream” movement, acceptable internationally as a partner in negotiations. Or at least that is what Hamas strategists think may happen as a result of crushing the minuscule militant entity known as Jund Ansar Allah (The Soldiers or the Partisans of Allah) last week. This is another murky development in the world of Jihadism, where the biggest brothers in holy war devoured the little ones, in a race between who can achieve final victory against the Kuffar (infidels). But in Gaza, these intra Jihadist slaughter fests are peculiar in as much as the “Palestine cause” is so central to the Islamist political narrative worldwide.
In November of 2008, a new group in Rafah declared itself as the ultimate Salafi Jihadist force of Palestine. After many previous attempts made previously by al Qaeda inspired factions at least since 2001, Jund Ansar Allah (JAA) led by Abel Latif Mussa, aka Abu al Nour al Maqdissi, seized the control of a local Mosque and segments of a neighborhood and launched a couple attacks against Israel as of early 2009. The JAA issued many declarations calling for “real Jihad,” ending negotiations with Fatah, the international community and opposing any type of elections and constitutional structure in Gaza other than pure Sharia. From his pulpit, Sheikh Mussa criticized Hamas’ leadership for failing the Jihad they promised to deliver, and for betraying their own constitution calling for an Islamic Emirate all over Palestine, not just in Gaza and the West Bank. Hundreds of already indoctrinated youth joined the JAA and formed the nucleus of a Jihadi milita. Their ranks were growing at an alarming rate for Hamas, which felt time came to squash them, before they became a competitive organization. The JAA was on its ballistic way to devour Hamas from the inside. It was using the same doctrines upon which Hamas was founded, grew and used to overthrew Fatah from Gaza.
After a few incidents, Hamas forces overwhelmed the headquarters of JAA killing dozens of militants. The fighting took its toll on both groups. Unverified reports said Abu Jibril Shemali, commander of Izzedine al Qassam Brigades (Hamas’ SS-like force) and Abu Abdallah al Suri, JAA’s military commander were both killed in the clashes. The founder of the Jund Ansar Allah Abdel Latif Moussa was killed during the explosion of one of his suicide bombers as he targeted advancing Hamas fighters. By now, the “Jund” has been crushed, its Mosque seized and its survivors pursued. In return JAA underground has threatened to punish Hamas leadership for their apostasy against “Allah’s true fighters.” In this is Jihad versus Jihad inside a world of indoctrinated circles of militants, one circle enjoying power, money and recognition and the smaller circle wanting to snatch it away from the most powerful. But what are lessons we need to learn from this pool of piranhas, where big Jihadi fish eat little Jihadi fish?
1. According to many commentators on al Jazeera, Hamas chose to finish up the “Jund” as a maneuver to lure the West in general -- Great Britain and the United States in particular -- into “engaging” the organization, lifting its name from terror lists and adding it to the peace process between the Palestinians and Israel. Hamas spokespersons rushed to use one term, that resonates greatly in Western ears, especially with the Obama Administration and the Brown Government, “we too are fighting the extremists, the terrorists as you are fighting them and pursuing al Qaeda,” declared Hamas English speaking communicators, hours after the combat was over. Analysts in the Arab world, shrewd enough to detect the Hamas tactical move wasn’t greedy in revealing their game: crushing an “al Qaeda” like group in Gaza would grant an immediate license to the mainstream for Hamas. One must expect sympathizing journalists, apologist academics and soon enough diplomats and envoys citing the “glorious” deeds of Hamas as evidence of fight “against terrorism.” Some savvier analysts believe many “engagement” architects in Europe and America have even suggested such a move to break the veto against Hamas. Interestingly, the US narrative lately has been underlining that there is no war against “Global Jihadsim” but only a “war against al Qaeda” only. So those in the business of Jihad, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and a plethora of other groups, can make their credential known to the West by slapping some local, little al Qaeda boys, and claiming a green card to the world of “accepted Jihadists.” Two summers ago, the Syrian regime and to an extent, Hezbollah, tried to come up with a similar model: Damascus released a copycat group in northern Lebanon, Fatah al Islam, before they claimed they beheaded the organization few months later, suggesting to Washington that Bashar can also kill al Qaeda crowds.
2. Is there a link between Hamas and the “Jund” it just sacrificed as a price for its public international image to be enhanced? In classical Western eyes, these links cannot be seen. But seasoned observers of Middle Eastern politics and Jihadi tactics can swiftly detect the equation Hamas-Jihadist factions. Firstly, the constituents of the “Jund” (JAA) are part of the larger indoctrinated pools created by Hamas. There are no differences in the basic doctrine between Hamas and JAA: they are both adepts of Jihadi Salafism. Secondly, Hamas tolerated the presence of these ultra-Jihadists in their midst for a reason, that is as long as their size was small and as long as they were allowed to grow so that they can be used tactically: either by blaming them for wild rocket launching or to crush them and cash in. Comparatively, Hamas couldn’t “tolerate” Fatah for example. By June 2007 the followers of Mahmoud Abbas were massacred in the enclave, because they were credible partners in a potential peace process and real competitors. Ghazi Hamad, a Hamas spokesperson told al Jazeera English his organization was always dialoguing with the “Jund.” Which means they had relationship with them even though Hamas was the only dominant force in Gaza. Hence there was a reason for this “tolerance” before Hamad admitted that Hamas stopped “tolerating.” Logically, the Jihadist regime in Gaza fed the little Jihadists and allowed them to grow until the time of the sacrifice came.
3. This brings us back to review the current Western re-reading of the so-called War on Terror and the decision by the Obama and Brown Administrations to let go of the counter Jihadist narrative hoping, as they said, to drive a wedge between the so-called “good Jihadists” and the “extremists.” Hamas quickly understood the message and delivered the goods promptly hoping they will be reclassified as “good Js.” Not so fast, because Hamas needs to also cater to its own Gaza indoctrinated constituencies, which were made to believe for decades that Jihad fi Sabeel Allah is the only way. Tragicomically, Hamas was trapped by a smart question fielded by an al Jazeera English anchor who was pressing their spokesperson to show the difference between Hamas and the JAA. “Don’t you think that the people you just killed are more faithful to your constitution calling for the establishment of an Islamic Emirate on all of Palestine than yourselves, who are in power now? Ghazi Hamad rushed to answer by instincts, revealing too much perhaps: “These guys wants to establish the Caliphate immediately on any part of liberated land, they are irrational; they don’t understand how Jihad works, we do.” He said Hamas knows better how to achieve victory. In my book Future Jihad, I have often argued that the Jihadists are of several strategic schools of thought: short term, medium term and long term. The difference between Hamas and the JAA is not about good or bad Jihad, as experts to Western Governments are claiming. Not at all. It is a difference about when to trigger the missile, under whose orders and within which framework of alliances. The “Jund” wants it all the time, anytime they can. Hamas wants a perfect kill, coordinated with its allies Hezbollah, Syria’s Baath and Iran’s Pasdaran. The Jund doesn’t care what the infidels in Washington and London think. Hamas cares strategically how the allies of its immediate enemy, Israel, behave. It wants to be part of the widest regional alliance against the Jewish state, while the latter loses all its allies, before D-Day is unleashed. **Dr Walid Phares is the Director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the author of The Confrontation: Winning the War against Future Jihad. He teaches Global Strategies in Washington DC

Hizbullah: External Obstacles to Cabinet Lineup

Naharnet/Hizbullah reiterated it was not acting a "mediator" between Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri and Free Patriotic Movement leader Gen. Michel Aoun in the stalled Cabinet formation. As-Safir newspaper on Thursday, citing Hizbullah sources, said the Shiite group called on Hariri to "open direct dialogue" with Aoun to discuss his demands.
"Even if Hizbullah was asked to facilitate negotiations between Hariri and Aoun, it will not succumb to pressure," one source told As-Safir.
While President Michel Suleiman believed that the obstacle to government formation was internal and not external, the Opposition made sure to express certainty about the "existence of an external knot that is delaying formation of a government." As-Safir quoted well-informed Opposition circles as asking: What prevents Hariri from presenting a "compromise formula" such as the premier-designate would reappoint Aoun's son-in-law Jebran Bassil as telecommunications minister in exchange for giving up his demand for a key Cabinet portfolio, an offer likely to be accepted by Aoun. Al-Liwaa newspaper, meanwhile, uncovered that Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah contacted Aoun prior to his latest press conference and expressed his desire "not to close the door in the face of Hariri without being obliged to abandon his demands on government formation." Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 10:03

Hariri Moves toward Talks with Opposition, Karami Says Aoun Remarks 'Provocation of Sunnis'
Naharnet/Contacts made by Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri with Opposition leaders, the first from outside the Opposition triangle – Hizbullah, AMAL and the Free Patriotic Movement -- broke the deadlock over Cabinet formation. Hariri has met with Lebanese Democratic Party leader Talal Arslan whose sources denied that the Sports and Youth Minister has delivered any letter from any political side.The sources said the Hariri-Arslan meeting at Center House on Wednesday was agreed upon in advance and before Arslan's visit to FPM leader Michel Aoun on Tuesday. Another Arslan source told pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat that it was "time to end the boycott and resume dialogue."He said Arslan accepted Hariri's invitation regardless of the political bickering between Aoun and the PM-designate. The source acknowledged that Arslan, together with leadership and supporters, "feels bitter" about the way he was treated with regards to the Cabinet lineup. Also Wednesday, Hariri discussed the political situation and obstacles facing government formation with former Prime Minister Omar Karami.The two men are scheduled to have lunch together at Hariri's mansion on Thursday. As-Safir newspaper the Hariri-Karami talks focused on the powers of the prime minister in the wake of Aoun's latest remarks. It said Hariri believed that Aoun's demands "hurt the premier-designate and his role" in achieving a government of national unity.Karami, for his part, said he believed Aoun's comments were provocation of Sunnis. "Aoun's statement about the presence of only one president for the state which is the president of the republic provokes Sunnis in Lebanon," Karami said in remarks published by As-Safir on Thursday.Hariri also met late Wednesday with Phalange party leader Amin Gemayel. Beirut, 20 Aug 09, 08:34

Aoun: I will accept Hariri’s invitation if Future stops its lies against us

August 19, 2009
Now Lebanon/Change and Reform bloc leader MP Michel Aoun held a press conference following his bloc’s weekly meeting in Rabieh on Wednesday saying that he will accept Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri’s invitation to lunch “if the Future Movement stops its lies and defamation against us.”He commended Hariri’s “calm composure,” however, accused the majority of corruption, adding that the March 14 alliance does not want the Free Patriotic Movement to be involved in the formation of the government because “the movement is against corruption.” Aoun said that he is convinced the government is being formed in foreign states, noting the cabinet formation will freeze during the month of Ramadan.“We know very well which countries do not function during Ramadan,” a reference to Saudi Arabia, stressing it is questionable that some political leaders tour the Arab countries, a reference to Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea’s recent visit to Saudi. Aoun told reporters that reappointing his son-in-law, Telecommunications Minister Gebran Bassil, in the new cabinet “is not the reason we are delaying government formation, but rather because we refuse to give into [the majority’s] requests.”He also said that the Lebanese judicial system is not doing anything to prosecute the suspects involved in the Barouq internet station incident and in illegal telecommunications networks.-NOW Staff

The very silly season

August 19, 2009
Now Lebanon
The media calls this time of year the “silly season”. Politicians in Europe and the US are on their summer recess, while news editors, desperate to fill space, are forced to run what they call “human interest” stories: “Mouse rescues cat stuck in tree” or “Villagers queue to worship turnip in the image of the Virgin Mary”.
Lebanese news gathers have had no such worries this summer. Politics is in full swing and, although Walid Jumblatt may have stolen the headlines with his stunning Damascene conversion, the horse trading over the allocation of cabinet seats has also taken top billing.
Leading the charge is Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) leader Michel Aoun, who is trying to secure a place in the new government for his son-in-law, the former telecom minister Gebran Bassil. As far as we can tell, his only achievement has been to reduce the cost of a mobile phone call, and yet his Aoun, himself no stranger to overblown historical comparisons, once compared his accomplishments to that Emir Fakhreddine II.
But the standards of today’s truly mediocre political class and Aoun’s habit to descend into hilarious hyperbole, the comparison is outlandish. Bassil, after all, was only doing his job. If today, this is enough to warrant comparisons with the good and the great of Lebanon’s past then we truly are all sunk in mediocrity.
To be fair, with the battle for cabinet seats really heating up, it is easy to see why has chosen to champion Bassil. He and outgoing Interior Minister Ziad Baroud were the star pupils of the outgoing administration. Aoun has a knack for being able to tap into the frustrations of his supporters, most of whom have hitched their fortunes to the unpredictable former army commander because he rode into town on a ticket that promised change.
Still, Aoun, who has a habit of comparing himself to the great men and women of world history, should spend less time sprinkling historical stardust on his family members and spend more time worrying about the ideas some of his allies are peddling.
Last week, Loyalty to the Resistance bloc MP Mohammad Raad warned that the proposal to appoint a cabinet of technocrats in the absence of a consensus was unworkable because such men would be unable to handle the complex political issues currently facing Lebanon.
Raad should re-examine his motives for entering public life. His statement highlights the warped priorities of Lebanon’s so-called political elite. Raad clearly believes that selecting qualified men and women, people who could start addressing the mountain of malaises Lebanon has accrued since the end of the war, would send Lebanon to hell in a hand basket; that the daily needs of Lebanese – the economy, health, education, transport, environment to name a few– are secondary to consolidating power or fawning to regional masters.
When considering his words, it is worth remembering that an oft-cited example of a post-war government actually having done something is that one can reach Rafik Hariri International Airport from the center of Beirut in just under ten minutes.
This and the new downtown are probably the only memorable achievements of any government since the end of the 1975-90 civil war (if any of our readers can list more please feel free to comment). Sure, there have been a few infrastructure projects, many subsidized by foreign governments, but the fact that 20 years later our roads are still being rebuilt, water is still rationed and electricity does not surge through the national grid 24/7 is a woeful indictment on successive administrations.
Then again Mr. Raad would say that we don’t really understand the complex issues facing Lebanon today. That takes a man of his caliber.

Possible rivalries overshadow accomplishments of security forces

August 20, 2009 /Now Lebanon
Yesterday was a bad day for criminals in Lebanon. Not only was the man behind the 1999 murder of four judges caught, but fugitive Fatah al-Islam member al-Hajj Sleiman was apprehended. The military court also issued arrest warrants against eight ISF members for negligence leading to Sleiman’s escape.
An-Nahar led with the Army Intelligence’s capture of Palestinian national Wissam Tohaibesh, supposedly the gunman who walked in to a courtroom in Saida in 1999 and shot four judges during a trial. He was caught at the entrance of the Ain al-Hilweh camp, off-limits to Lebanese army and police.
The more-covered incident of the day, however, was the arrest of Taha Ahmad al-Hajj Sleiman in the wooden area near the town of Bsalim by a Lebanese Armed Forces Commando regiment.
Sleiman had been the only one of a group of eight members of the militant Palestinian group Fatah al-Islam to escape during a breakout attempt from Roumieh Prison on Tuesday morning. The inmates apparently used tools smuggled into the prison inside hollowed-out copies of the Koran to saw off the window bars of their cell and attempted to scale the wall using a rope of tied-up blankets. The breakout attempt was foiled only after Sleiman escaped into the woods.
In the wake of the breakout, many questions began to fly about the state of Lebanon’s prison system, and about the competence and level of corruption among prison guards and officials. Interior Minister Ziad Baroud went on the defensive, shielding himself from attacks by the Lebanese media and politicians about his performance.
An-Nahar wrote today that “the Roumieh incident highlighted the deep divisions undermining the General Directorate of the Internal Security Forces amid questions regarding the method used by the Interior minister to manage the conflicts among ISF officers.”
The incident revealed an “intense rivalry” that has been simmering for years between the Lebanese army and police, the paper reported, which politicians and security leaders have been exploiting.
The paper cited conflicting reports as to which branch of the security system arrested Sleiman; the LAF had issued a statement whereby “a unit from the Commando regiment arrested Taha Sleiman,” but some media outlets have reported that Sleiman was apprehended by the ISF Intelligence.
Regardless of who was behind the arrest, prison guards who were on the job during the escape attempt are in hot water. Military Investigative Judge Maroun Zakhour issued on Wednesday arrest warrants against eight ISF members, including four officers and non-commissioned officers, who were on duty at the Roumieh Prison during Tuesday’s breakout after Judge Saqr Saqr, the government commissioner to the Military Court, filed charges against them on account of neglect.
Those charged were then handed over to Zakhour for interrogation.
ISF Director General Achraf Rifi, for his part, ordered the arrest of Prison Brigade Commander Brigadier General Elias Saadeh and the warden of Roumieh’s Building D.
-NOW Staff