LCCC
ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
May 17/09
Bible Reading of the day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus
Christ according to Saint John 15:18-21. If the world hates you, realize that it
hated me first. If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but
because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world,
the world hates you. Remember the word I spoke to you, 'No slave is greater than
his master.' If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept
my word, they will also keep yours. And they will do all these things to you on
account of my name, because they do not know the one who sent me.
Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special
Reports
Third republic,” in Lebanon is a
self-destruction weapon/Future
News 16/05/09
Who would inherit Aoun’s political
legacy? That is the question/Future
News 16/05/09
Israel's Secret War With Iran. By RONEN BERGMA/Wall
Street Journal 16/05/09
Lebanon Awaiting the "Guide"-By:
Hassan Haidar 16.05.09
Hamas, Hezbollah-And the Muslim
Brotherhood? By Douglas Farah 16.05.09
Can
Obama meet the challenge of brokering an Arab-Israeli peace?
The
Daily Star 16.05.09
A New American Discourse In the Middle East That
Needs Arab Encouragement.By: Raghida Dergham 16/05/09
Latest News Reports From
Miscellaneous Sources for May
16/09
3 linked to Syria-based Qaeda leader caught in
Iraq-AFP
US Mideast Envoy Considering Syria Visit-Voice
of America
Abu Assi: no scope for coexistence
between our culture and Nasrallah’s-Future
News
Najjar: Nasrallah’s speech
provoking-Future
News
Marouni: Nasrallah’s speech asserts
weapon must be under state’s control-Future
News
Hoss: May 7 a black not glorious
day-Future
News
Army
Reopens Highway in Saadnayel Following Arrest of Homsy-Naharnet
Baroud: Presidency's Reverence Away From All Disputes-Naharnet
Nasrallah abandons Aoun for Berry-Future
News
Almustaqbal denies any connection
to Ziad Homsi-Future
News
Jumblatt insists on pacification-Future
News
Turkey's
Gul visits Syria for Middle East peace talks-(AFP)
Hamas Confirms Ties with Hezbollah-Asharq
Alawsat
US Lawmakers Look to Label Satellite Providers
Terrorists-FOXNews
Nasrallah Address Opens New
Confrontation with March 14 Forces-Naharnet
Nasrallah: Hezbollah capable of running Lebanon if it wins election-Ha'aretz
Hezbollah deputy chief: We actively support
Hamas-Ha'aretz
Nasrallah: May 7 a Glorious Day For the Resistance That Prevented Civil war-Naharnet
Ammar Pulls Out of Sidon
Race-Naharnet
Al-Mussawar: Hizbullah
Cell Recived Huge Sums of Money to carry terror Acts-Naharnet
Keserouan and Zahle Await Consensus Over Electoral Lists-Naharnet
Terror bides its time-The
Australian
Hezbollah affirms opposition will win upcoming
Lebanese elections-Xinhua
Mitchell prepares to make landmark visit to
Syria: Al-Hurra/AFP
Nasrallah hails May 7 as 'glorious day' for Resistance-Daily
Star
Telecoms minister urges authorities to probe wiretapping violations-Daily
Star
Paris
will 'stand by Sleiman' no matter who wins polls-Daily
Star
Siniora unveils $20 million Saudi grant to tackle Sidon dump issue-Daily
Star
Spanish Embassy inaugurates Shatila health center-Daily
Star
Tribunal sentences spy for Israel to 10 years in jail-Daily
Star
Head
of General Security lauds Sayyed's achievements-Daily
Star
Armed
with guitars, Irish troops promoted peace in 1980s-Daily
Star
Lebanon's WTO accession: the facts-Daily
Star
Slowdown forecast for Lebanon's economy in 2009-Daily
Star
Workers union chief slams gasoline tax as ransom-Daily
Star
Bishara stresses right of return during AUB lecture-Daily
Star
Building a new temple for wine in the Bekaa-Daily
Star
3 linked
to Syria-based Qaeda leader caught in Iraq
BAGHDAD (AFP) — Three people suspected of working with a Syria-based leader of
Al-Qaeda in Iraq have been arrested in northern Iraq, the US military said on
Saturday.
The men were arrested during joint Iraqi and US military raids on Friday and
Saturday that targeted Saad Uwayid Ubayd al-Shammari, also know as Abu Khalaf,
north of the troubled city of Mosul, a statement said.
"Iraqi and Coalition forces targeted a Syrian-based al-Qaeda in Iraq network
operating in Iraq and other AQI network cells," it said.
"The combined force was led to a residence where they captured three of Abu
Khalaf's associates."
On Thursday the US Treasury Department targeted Khalaf with an executive order
to freeze his assets under US jurisdiction.
"This terrorist is believed to be responsible for facilitating the main pipeline
of suicide bombers, as well as the flow of money, weapons, terrorists and other
resources from Syria into Iraq," US military said.
Before his position leading the foreign Qaeda network, Khalaf was second in
command of the Islamic State of Iraq in Syria, the Treasury Department said in a
statement.
The group has claimed responsibility for a number of major attacks and kidnap
campaigns, according to the department.
A similar operation in Mosul city led to the arrest of a suspected insurgent
believed to have ties to senior regional Qaeda leaders and knowledge of the
group's activities in the area.
Earlier this month US envoys raised concerns with Damascus about Islamic
fighters transiting Syria to enter Iraq.
General David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq and Afghanistan, told
Congress last month that the Al-Qaeda in Iraq pipeline through Syria had been
"reactivated."
The US military is particularly concerned about the area around Mosul, in the
northwest near the Syrian border, which officials have described as the last
bastion of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.
A week ago the President Barack Obama's administration renewed sanctions against
Syria for one year, accusing Damascus of supporting Mideast terrorism and
undermining Iraqi stability.
US Mideast Envoy Considering Syria Visit By VOA News
16 May 2009 /By VOA News
Officials said U.S. Middle East envoy George Mitchell is considering a trip to
Syria, as the Obama administration works to improve relations with Damascus.
U.S. and Syrian officials confirmed Friday that Mitchell and his team have
applied for Syrian visas for an as-yet unannounced visit to the country. But
U.S. officials caution Mitchell's schedule is uncertain and he may not end up
making the trip. If Mitchell travels to Syria, he would be the highest-level
U.S. official to visit the Middle Eastern country since U.S. President Barack
Obama took office. Acting Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman and White
House Middle East expert Daniel Shapiro traveled to Damascus last week, the same
time President Obama announced he was renewing sanctions against Syria. In
renewing the sanctions, President Obama accused Syria of supporting terrorism,
pursuing weapons of mass destruction and missile programs, and undermining U.S.
and international efforts to stabilize Iraq. But U.S. officials said the move
does not mean the new administration is abandoning efforts at boosting ties in
the hope of persuading the Damascus government to rein in militant groups and be
more supportive of regional peace efforts. Some information for this report was
provided by AFP and AP.
US Treasury Targets Syria-Based al-Qaida in Iraq Leader
By VOA News 14 May 2009
The U.S. Treasury Department is putting tight financial restrictions on the
Syria-based leader of a group linked to al-Qaida, accused of helping supply
terrorists in Iraq.
The Treasury announced Thursday it is freezing all assets held by Abu Khalaf
under U.S. jurisdiction, and is prohibiting American citizens from doing
business with him.
According to the department, Khalaf is a senior leader of al-Qaida in Iraq's
"facilitation network," which controls the flow of resources -- including
weapons, money and militants -- from Syria into Iraq. A Treasury official,
Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey, said the
department will continue to target al-Qaida-linked terrorists who "threaten the
safety of Coalition Forces and the stability of Iraq." The Treasury Department
has the authority to impose financial sanctions on foreign businesses and people
considered a threat to U.S. national security and foreign policy goals.
Israel's
Secret War With Iran
The Mossad has stunning achievements to its credit, yet the mullahs remain a
threat.
By RONEN BERGMAN/
Wall Street Journal
Those who leaf through the secret files of any intelligence service know what
grave mistakes bad intelligence can lead to. But they also know that sometimes
even excellent intelligence doesn't change a thing.
The Israeli intelligence community is now learning this lesson the hard way. It
has penetrated enemies like Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Hezbollah and Hamas. Yet
despite former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's willingness to authorize highly
dangerous operations based on this intelligence, and despite the unquestionable
success of the operations themselves, the overall security picture remains as
grim as ever.
In 2002, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon appointed his friend and former
subordinate, Gen. Meir Dagan, director of the Mossad. Gen. Dagan found the
organization lacking in imagination and shying away from operational risks. Mr.
Sharon, who knew Gen. Dagan from his days as head of a secret assassinations
unit that acted against Fatah in the Gaza Strip during the 1970s, told the
general that he wanted "a Mossad with a knife between its teeth."
Gen. Dagan transformed the Mossad from top to bottom and made the organization's
sole focus Iran's nuclear project and its ties to jihadist organizations. He put
tremendous pressure on his subordinates to execute as many operations as
possible. Moreover, he built up ties with espionage services in Europe and the
Middle East on top of Israel's long-standing relationship with the CIA.
In tandem with Gen. Dagan's Mossad revolution, other Israeli military
intelligence has also made outstanding breakthroughs. The Shin-Bet (Israel's
internal intelligence service), in cooperation with the military, has made huge
strides in its understanding of Palestinian guerilla organizations.
The results have been tremendous. During the last four years, the uranium
enrichment project in Iran was delayed by a series of apparent accidents: the
disappearance of an Iranian nuclear scientist, the crash of two planes carrying
cargo relating to the project, and two labs that burst into flames. In addition,
an Iranian opposition group in exile published highly credible information about
the details of the project, which caused Iran much embarrassment and led to
International Atomic Energy Agency inspections.
On July 12, 2006, thanks to precise intelligence, the Israeli Air Force
destroyed almost the entire stock of Hezbollah's long-range rockets stored in
underground warehouses. Hezbollah was shocked.
In July 2007, another mysterious accident occurred in a missile factory jointly
operated by Iran and Syria at a Syrian site called Al-Safir. The production line
-- which armed Scud missiles with warheads -- was shut down and many were
killed.
In September 2007, Israel destroyed a nuclear reactor built by Syria and aided
by North Korea in Dir A-Zur -- despite Syria's significant efforts to keep it a
secret. With indirect authorization from a very high ranking Israeli official,
the CIA published incriminating pictures obtained by Israel of the site before
it was bombed. These photos convinced the world that the Syrians were indeed
attempting to manufacture a nuclear bomb.
In February 2008, Hezbollah's military leader, Imad Mughniyah, was killed in
Damascus. In August of that year, Gen. Mohammed Suliman, a liaison to Hamas and
Hezbollah who participated in the Syrian nuclear project, was assassinated by a
sniper.
In December 2008, Israel initiated operation Cast Lead, which dealt Hamas a
massive blow. Most of its weapons were destroyed within days by Israeli air
strikes. (Israel also knew where the Hamas leadership was hiding, but since it
was in a hospital Mr. Olmert refused to authorize the strike.) In January 2009,
Israeli Hermes 450 drones attacked three convoys in Sudan that were smuggling
weapons from Iran to the Gaza Strip.
These are all excellent achievements, but did they change reality? Mostly not.
The destruction of the Syrian nuclear reactor seems to have put a temporary end
to President Bashar Assad's ambitions of acquiring a nuclear weapon. However,
the public humiliation caused by the site's bombing did not sway him from
supporting Hamas and Hezbollah and hosting terrorist organizations.
Even worse, the heads of Israeli intelligence are now losing sleep over recent
information showing that attempts to delay the Iranian nuclear project have
failed. Despite some technical difficulties, the Iranians are storming ahead and
may possess a nuclear bomb as early as 2010. Hezbollah, although weakened by the
2006 war and Mughniyah's assassination, has become the leading political force
in Lebanon.
On the southern front, despite the convoy bombings in Sudan, the trafficking of
weapons and ammunition into the Gaza Strip continues. Hamas's standing among
Palestinians has strengthened. And if a cease-fire is negotiated between Hamas
and Israel it would be perceived as a victory for Hamas.
The bottom line is that excellent intelligence is very important, but it can
only take you so far. In the end, it's the tough diplomatic and military
decisions made by Israeli leaders that ensure the security of the state.
**Mr. Bergman, a correspondent for the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth, is the
author of the "The Secret War With Iran" (Free Press, 2008).
Nasrallah hails May 7 as 'glorious day' for Resistance
Deadly 2008 events 'put an end to war in Beirut'
By Therese Sfeir
Daily Star staff
Saturday, May 16, 2009
BEIRUT: Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah criticized on Friday "those who
doubt the opposition's ability to run the country's affairs," saying: "The
Resistance that defeated Israel can govern a country that is 100 times larger
than Lebanon." In a live television speech during a graduation ceremony in
Beirut's southern suburbs, Nasrallah lashed out at the Lebanese judiciary and
declared May 7, 2008, which saw deadly clashes in Beirut, a "glorious day" for
the Resistance.
The comments are likely to detonate a political firestorm, after the March 14
coalition and independents have described the civil strife that erupted last May
as one of the most troubling developments in recent years.
"We have been accused of seeking to establish an empire in the region,"
Nasrallah said, vowing that it would be easy for Hizbullah and its allies to
govern Lebanon.
Nasrallah also said the opposition "welcomes partnership in the government."
"However, if we win the majority in the elections, and they [March 14 Forces] do
not want to share power with us, we won't beg them," he added.
While he highlighted the need for a strong and independent judicial authority,
Nasrallah launched a fierce attack against the institution.
"We do not have a judicial authority in Lebanon; we have judges, some of whom
are good and others are bad," he said.
"It is a shame that the Lebanese judiciary detains Israeli spies for a few
months and senior security officers for three years without trial," he added,
alluding to the four individuals released last month in the Hariri assassination
case.
Commenting on the May 2008 clashes between pro-government and opposition gunmen
in Beirut and the Chouf, and which ended with the adoption of the Doha Accord,
Nasrallah said: "I announce that May 7 was a "glorious day in the Resistance's
history.""I tell the Lebanese, in particular Sunnis and Shiites, that the May 7
events put an end to war in Beirut," he said. "The May 7 events safeguarded
Lebanon's institutions and forced all Lebanese parties to go back to the
[national] dialogue, which led to the election of President Michel Sleiman."
Nasrallah said the clashes were the result of government's attempts to dismantle
Hizbullah's telecommunications network. "The government was trying to achieve
what Israel failed to achieve" during its July 2006 war on Lebanon, he said. "We
do not want the Lebanese to forget the May 7 events, because we do not want the
foolish decisions made by the Cabinet on May 5 to be repeated." He went on to
say that the government was seeking to instigate strife between Hizbullah and
the Lebanese Army, but argued that the opposition was involved in a drive to see
the establishment of a stronger state.
"We are involved in a new phase and we should assume our responsibilities to
build a powerful and just state," he stated. "Power without justice leads to
destruction and dictatorship; and a state of justice, without power, cannot
enforce the law."The Hizbullah leader also called for the creation of a higher
national committee for abolishing sectarianism in line with the Taif Accord,
which ended the civil war. "We need a deep and serious national dialogue on the
elimination of sectarianism," he said.
Nasrallah said the opposition would reject any plans for dividing the country
into federal states. "Some political parties are hoping for divisions; they are
planning to establish federal states," he said. "But this will not happen, as we
want a united country." The Hizbullah leader also said that the party "has never
exploited the government's powers, especially after the liberation of the
occupied territories in 2000." "We do not replace the state and we have never
exerted state authority in any area," he stated. "We believe that even those who
killed and arrested us should be held accountable by the state," he added,
referring to former collaborators with Israel.
Nasrallah stressed his support for a strong Lebanese army, saying there was "no
contradiction between the existence of a powerful state and a strong
resistance." He added that the opposition was looking for the establishment of a
state that would be able to "implement true administrative reforms, achieve
decentralization and adopt an electoral law based on the representative system."
Nasrallah voiced his support for a national unity cabinet, saying: "The current
Cabinet is a national unity government and its performance is not a failure."
He ruled out claims that Hizbullah was seeking to achieve a three-way division
of political power among Christians, Sunnis and Shiites, as opposed to the
official 50-50 Christian-Muslim split. "They want to tell the Christians that
Change and Reform bloc leader MP Michel Aoun and other prominent Christian
figures forged an alliance with Hizbullah and will reduce the power of
Christians in Lebanon
Nasrallah Address Opens New Confrontation
with March 14 Forces
Naharnet/Friday's evening address by Hizbullah Secretary-General Sayed Hassan
Nasrallah opened a many wounds among March 14 Forces particularly regarding the
events of May 7 last year, ushering new political confrontation in the country.
Government sources told the daily An-Nahar on Saturday: "Nasrallah's speech
speaks for itself." Refusing to provide further comments. However, MP Samir al-Jisser
spoke to the Future News TV saying: "His speech is part of a new political
aggravation in the region on the level on Syrian-U.S. relations."
Al-Jisser denied Nasrallah's claim that residents of Akkar came down to Beirut
before May 7 fully armed saying: "if they were armed they would have appeared on
television screens but that was not the case."
The head of the 'Democratic Gathering' and leader of the Progressive Socialist
Party MP Walid Jumblat told An-Nahar: "I am more determined that ever to
maintaining calm [in the country]."Sources from within the parliamentary
majority saw that the secretary-general's address reflected "much tensions
regarding the negative aspects that surround him with his ally Gen. Michel Aoun,
and is related to what happened at the last cabinet meeting when President
Michel Suleiman called the cabinet to vote [on the issue of administrative
appointments].
Hizbullah's al-Manar TV stated that the secretary-general's appearance "ushers
in a new period that would be managed by minds that have defeated giants…he
issued a message in more than one direction internally and externally for those
that need to understand."
The Free Patriotic Movement's OTV concluded that the "other side [March 14
Forces] main concern [last May 7] was to aim against General Aoun and put us at
odds against the armed forces." The daily As-Safir said that al-Mustaqbal
Movement circles expressed surprise concerning Nasrallah's speech saying: "How
could he consider the military breaking into Beirut on May 7 a glorious day for
the resistance?"
The paper added that al-Mustaqbal is expecting a harsh response to Nasrallah's
"unacceptable" speech.
Informed sources close to the opposition told As-Safir that Nasrallah's speech
was influenced by the negative and tense political tones waged by March 14
Forces "the aim was to strike against this tone of political address and
tensions created by the other side."
The daily Pan-Arab al-Hayat said that talk of May 7 as a glorious day for the
resistance "would receive negative response by undetermined and non-allied
voters to benefit the parliamentary majority." While the daily al-Liwaa replied
saying "No Sayed Nasrallah May 7 was a bad omen and not glorious in the history
f the resistance in Lebanon."
The paper added that the secretary-general's speech returns tensions to the
streets, escalates the political tone in the country making the holding of calm
and quiet elections difficult.
Al-Liwaa described Nasrallah's speech as non-electoral but a speech of political
escalation making Lebanon a tense regional spot where the will of settlement and
conflict clash.
Former PM Najib Miqati said that for Nasrallah to consider events of May 7 a
glorious day for the resistance is a call for sorrow. This does not serve clam
in the country it rather carries the worst effect on political stability in
Lebanon. Beirut, 16 May 09, 08:33
Abu Assi:
no scope for coexistence between our culture and Nasrallah’s
Date: May 16th, 2009
Free Lebanon
Elias Abu Assi, the General Secretariat of the National Liberal Party and
candidate for the Maronite seat in Baabda district smeared Saturday the speech
of Hizbullah’s Chief Hassan Nasrallah describing it as “seditious and
totalitarian”.
Abu Assi said the speech Nasrallah gave during the graduation of Hizbullah’s
students Friday “instigated students preparing them for battle instead of
enlightening them about the values of unity”. Abu Assi said he doesn’t see any
scope for coexistence between the culture of Nasrallah and the NLP “There is a
difference between our culture and his (Nasrallah’s) culture”.
Abu Assi warned that ‘March 8’ opposition alliance perceives the President of
the Republic Michel Sleiman as a barrier and that they “will strike him when the
time is right”. He wondered what the outlook of the Free Patriotic Movement is
from Nasrallah’s tone. Abu Assi said ‘March 8’ alliance “does not seek
establishing a third government”, but that it seeks establishing a ‘Vilayat el
Faqih’.
Third republic,” a self-destruction weapon
Date: May 16th, 2009 /Future News
Obviously the opposition does not possess the guts to explain to the Lebanese
the true meaning of the “Third Republic” slogan it has adopted, and which is a
dangerous development in its policy to overthrow coexistence, the Taef Accord
and the National Charter.
The opposition attempted to keep its answers under wraps about what “change” it
calls for and what are its main contents?
Are we still talking about “the republic of understanding” sealed at MAR MICHAEL
church in 2006 that paved the way for an Irano-Syrian alliance aimed at
transforming the country into an arena for foreign conflicts?
Are we still talking about “the republic of burned tires”, about reinforcing
roadblocks and stripping the people of their civil rights by occupying their
private properties and the capital’s streets by the force of weapons? Is it the
republic of mushrooming riots that swept the heart of Beirut? Is it “May 7
republic” during which barbarian militias pointed its weapons against the
Lebanese, killing unarmed innocent civilians to take over the country?
Are we talking about the “Doha republic” based on obstructing the institutions
and all administrative appointments, where the opposition can build their
republic on the blood of the 60 Lebanese martyrs who fell in Beirut’s streets
and the mountains?
Is the opposition’s “republic of violence” the one based on the culture of
cancellation, and marginalization or on the slogan “the army is the only
solution?” to end by questioning the late Captain Samer Hanna who authorized him
to hover over this particular area?
The third republic of the opposition is a clear evidence of its future
performance in using its obstruction to paralyze the institutions and the
country.
The third republic that March 8 coalition calls for will drive the country and
its citizens to the perilous scary unknown.
Who would inherit Aoun’s political legacy? That is the
question
Date: May 16th, 2009 Source
Future News
How time flies! We shall admit that politics and the age factor are both
complementary components that require us to ask: what about the future?
The abovementioned hypothesis is what has been discussed covertly at General
Aoun’s residence at Rabieh. One of the people involved in the deliberations
revealed that the Free Patriotic Movement’ allies, especially Hizbullah and
Damascus are petrified by the idea; who would be the “lucky successor” that
would come after Aoun when he is gone, “God forbid.”
Despite the FPM’s wish to keep Aoun’s age issue under the wraps, yet it has
started to spread like wildfire. As a matter of fact age is a scientific,
biological and natural factor, but in politics it is a major ingredient to a
successful path.
A well informed source close to Syria and Hizbullah quoted senior officials
wondering how they would maintain their accomplishment of understanding within
the Christian community, if the FPM leader was gone for a certain reason.
The FPM inability to give a justifiable answer on this controversy and find the
“lucky heir” has perplexed Damascus and Hizbullah.
This problem has escalated due to the fact that Aoun is the “one man show,” and
the one and only decision maker in the FPM politics. And because he practices
his authoritarian way of government on the FPM also, his partisans are incapable
of coping and containing major changes that might occur within the party.
The source added: despite the blood relations between the General and Gebran
Bassil, he does not merit nor politically nor effectively the “second man
position.”
For an accurate description on the position he occupies in the FPM, Bassil is
notorious for being Aoun’s pampered man.
The general overwhelms his son-in-law with political gains, but makes sure not
to involve him in important files citing his influence within the "Free
Patriotic Movement" and his Christian supporters.
The aforementioned facts are the most substantial proof of the current position
of Bassil, which enables him to be the first candidate to face a devastating
defeat at the parliamentary elections in the Christian district.
Although obscurity prevails in terms of who would “carry the torch” and leads
the FPM after Aoun, it is obvious that the general is rejecting any discussions
whatsoever about his future heir.
Abu Wael (adviser to President Bashar al-Assad) was quoted as saying: “Some
people love life for power, but now we discovered that Aoun loves power for
life.” Accordingly, we construe that the legacy of the “Christian Aounist’s
phenomenon” remains unknown.
Because Aoun is suffering the fantasies of megalomaniacs and of grandiose
hubris, as well a deep chronic fear of death, Damascus and Hizbullah decided to
deal with the inheritance issue.
Although Bassil is one of the nominees, but he is illegible due to his tarnished
personal record that odds him out of the race.
Syria and Hizbullah are exerting all efforts needed to infiltrate through Aoun’s
popular base, and control it through Damascus decisions.
There are many proofs confirming this theory. During the past two years the FPM
organized dozens of trip to 250 partisans to Iran, where they met Iranian top
officials including high-ranking officers of the Revolutionary Guards, as well
as similar trips for the same known purpose to the Syrian capital, Damascus.
According to Aoun’s closest friends and relatives, the fearful general is
haunted by the idea of passing his legacy, therefore he considers enthroning one
of his three daughters.
Nasrallah abandons Aoun for Berry
Date: May 16th, 2009 Source:
Future News
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Speaker Nabih Berri and
Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun finally met secretly to discuss
the ongoing preparations for the upcoming parliamentary elections on June 7.
Nasrallah made the break last week by achieving the famous tripartite meetings
after his failure in joining both leaders on a one-list in the Jezzine district.
But apparently Nasrallah turned against Aoun, and it has become known that
Hizbullah is using Aoun to sideline Nabih Berry in the south and eventually
remove him from power. By Nasrallah choosing Nabih Berry, a member of his Shiite
sect, he would be blowing up the “memorandum of understanding” forged with the
Free Patriotic Movement leader.
Both allies issued a joint statement pledging to undergo a civilized electoral
battle, yet no one could make compromises on the Jezzine seat that remains “the
Gordian knot,” not even for the sake of Nasrallah. According to the same
sources, Nasrallah got bored after the long cold negotiations, and suddenly
interrupted the meeting saying “why don’t we resume our negotiations after the
elections, since we promised Abou Mustafa “Berry” that we support his nomination
for a new term as speaker?”
.
Jumblatt insists on pacification
Date: May 16th, 2009
Annahar- Assafir
The head of the Democratic Gathering bloc MP Walid Jumblatt said in an interview
published in as-Safir newspaper Saturday that he insists on maintaining calm at
this particular period.
The interview followed Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s fiery Friday
night speech, in which he referred to May 7 as a glorious day.
He told An-Nahar newspaper that he insists on maintaining calm, “tensions in
Lebanon are not helpful especially before the elections; therefore it is
necessary and a priority to preserve a calm atmosphere,” Jumblatt concluded.
Najjar: Nasrallah’s speech provoking
Date: May 16th, 2009 Source: LBC
Minister of Justice Ibrahim Najjar criticized Saturday yesterday’s speech of
Hizbullah’s secretary general Hassan Nasrallah and considered it a response to
the cabinet meeting 23 days ahead of the parliamentary elections. Sayed Hassan
Nasrallah’s speech is “escalating and includes inciting and provocation,” noted
Najjar, “it was a response to what happened in the cabinet meeting, which might
be a speech that paves the way for a new situation on the eve of the elections.”
Najjar expected a calm speech from Nasrallah as the interest of the Christian
popularity of its ally the Free Patriotic Movement do not like the kind of
speeches he gave.
Marouni: Nasrallah’s speech asserts weapon must be under
state’s control
Date: May 16th, 2009
Future News
Minister of Tourism Elie Marouni declared Saturday that the statement of
Hizbullah’s Chief Hassan Nasrallah regarding the 7th of May, which he described
a ‘holy day’, “asserts that weapons must be under the control of the Lebanese
authority”.Minister Marouni said Nasrallah’s speech “encouraged murder”. He
wondered if “appointing an employee or ousting General Wafik Shukair deserves
such destruction and deserves occupying Beirut.”Marouni considered that
preparing for elections is through presenting electoral programs for the future
instead of reminding the holly days filled with blood and grudge”. He warned
that Nasrallah’s speech prompts a new May 7 “especially if elections were not in
his favor”.
Hoss: May 7 a black not glorious day
Date: May 16th, 2009 Source: NNA
Former Prime Minister Salim Hoss lambasted Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed
Hassan Nasrallah for describing the bloody attacks on May 7 as glorious day.
Nasrallah declared during his address at the martyr’s complex of the southern
suburb of Beirut Friday" May 7 as a glorious day for the resistance in Lebanon,
and asserted that “it is necessary not to forget May 7 so that no one repeats
the stupidity of May 5.”
May 7, 2008 was a black day in the history of Lebanon, when the Hizbullah-led
opposition occupied west Beirut, paralyzed the country and killed dozens of
innocent unarmed civilians.
Hoss considered the Hizbullah-led resistance as an “appreciated historic
movement, but it must be pointed against Lebanon’s arch-foe, Israel’s
aggression, not against its fellow Lebanese,” he argued. He called on the
Lebanese to turn the page on painful events, and urged them for a future of
reconciliation, brotherhood and understanding in order to preserve the national
future.
Army Reopens Highway in Saadnayel Following
Arrest of Homsy
Naharnet/Lebanese army units reopened the international Zahle-Beirut highway on
Saturday following local protests by Saadnayel residents against the arrest of
their former Mayor Ziad Homsy. A Lebanese minisliray sources told Agence France
Presse (AFP)"the military arrested Homsy at his home in Saadnayel on the basis
of the ongoing investigations regarding the Israeli espionage rings. Some
residents did not understand the meaning of the arrest and reacted." In an
issued statement on Saturday the army said that things are back to normal in the
region. NBN TV quoted military sources saying Homsy's home had high level
technical satellite equipment used for espionage.
Homsy is a former mayor of Saadnayel and a current deputy mayor of the town. He
also publishes a local magazine. His attorney Khaled al-Shihimi told LBC TV "he
is a cadre in the al-Mustaqbal movement." AFP quoted an Mustaqbal official who
said the movement does not interfere in security issues left exclusively to the
judiciary.
On Wednesday a military court laid charges against six Lebanese individuals four
of whom are under arrest on espionage charges. This brings the number of
arrested individuals to 13 [with 9 Lebanese, one Palestinian and three runaways]
al charged with espionage for Israel. Beirut, 16 May 09, 12:28
Baroud: Presidency's Reverence Away From
All Disputes
Naharnet/Interior Minister Ziad Baroud expressed fears concerning the political
results of the 2009 parliamentary elections, adding to Voix Du Liban radio on
Saturday morning that the presidency's reverence is far removed from all
[political] disputes adding that some seek not to have a president in the
country running its affairs with awareness and balance.
"However, the vast majority of Lebanese view the president with much comfort,"
Baroud said.
He pointed that the greatest challenge for securing the political results of the
parliamentary elections lies in continuing the appointment of Constitutional
Council members.
"This is the only guarantee for the upcoming parliament, for this guarantee is
hindered today," Baroud said.
He added that not all issues are subject to consensus calling this "dangerous".
He said that cabinet continues to deal with the president on the basis of
consensus, stressing that the presidency should be further strengthened and
shielded "because everyone is benefiting from it."
"It is abnormal for [administrative appointment] openings to remain for three or
four years, as we also have a dire need for appointing governors to Akkar and
Baalbek-Hirmil," Baroud said.
He said that all political parties are committing election violations on
different levels "75% of vote counting stations will have alternative electric
power just in case the main power is lost, we are seeking to secure this option
to other centers as well." Beirut, 16 May 09, 11:40
Keserouan and Zahle Await Consensus Over Electoral Lists
Naharnet/The Ksereouan district continues to await the formation of an electoral
list gathering between March 14 Forces and Independent candidates. According to
the daily As-Safir the main obstacle standing in the way rests with the adopted
stance and demands of Lebanese Forces (LF) leader Samir Geagea.
Sources expressed to As-Safir its dismay regarding the delay in forming the
district's electoral list adding that this could have negative ramifications
among popular circles.
Former MP Mansour Ghanim el-Bon is expected to visit LF leader Geagea in Maarab
on Tuesday to go over the Ksereouan list.
In Zahle, Agriculture Minister Elias Skaf said that he is in no rush to form a
list [the delay is over the Sunni seat for the opposition and the Shiite seat
for March 14 Forces].
Skaf denied news that he would make changes to his intended list that could
include the Shiite and Catholic candidates in his list. As-Safir, added that
intensive negotiations are underway quietly to settle this. MP Nichola Fatoush
told As-Safiron Saturday: "The [Zahle March 14 list] is complete and you will be
introduced to the Shiite candidate tomorrow on Sunday."
Former Minister Mohsen Dalloul, maintained his silence only saying that his next
step would only be announced following the announcement by March 14 Forces,
adding he would no longer be part of March 14 following the elections. As for
Jezzine MP Samir Azar is scheduled to announce his electoral list on Saturday
afternoon. His list would run against March 14 Forces and the Free patriotic
Movement led by MP Michel Aoun. For Baabda MP Pierre Dakash is expected to
announce on Tuesday his coalition with Shiite candidate Saad Salim.
Beirut, 16 May 09, 09:39
Lebanon Awaiting the "Guide"
Fri, 15 May 2009
Hassan Haidar
A few days after the anniversary of last year’s May 7 events in Beirut, and
Hezbollah's attempt to make Beirut succumb by force to one political line,
Hezbollah's candidate in Tyre, Nawaf al-Musawi, summed up his party's way of
thinking as well as its relations with politics in general and its rivals in
particular. He said that those who criticize the party's positions, strategy,
concepts, its replacement of the State, the preeminence of its interests over
the State's interests - and its attempts to impose itself as a partner to the
State in security issues by the power of weapons and the fait accompli and as a
non-Parliament observer of its performance and caretaker of its foreign policy -
were actually completing the work of Israel which targets the resistance and its
weapons.
Commenting on the unveiled Israeli espionage networks in Lebanon, Al-Musawi
addressed the authorities saying: "When you investigate with the Israeli agent
and discover that his job is to spy on the resistance cadres to assassinate
them, and on the locations of its weapons to explode them, and if this agent
tells you that I am the ally of your ally because in your political rhetoric,
you attack the resistance and its weapons, what would you tell him?" I asked:
"What is the difference between attacking the weapons of the resistance and
criticizing its political performance?"
This is very clearly Hezbollah's concept of political action: the latter must
either defend these weapons, putting itself at their disposal or is considered a
treacherous enemy intent on covering up Israel's security action, thus
necessitating an appropriate security response. Isn't this exactly what happened
in this month last year when Hezbollah's militia took to the streets of the
capital to "discipline" those who dared to criticize it? They destroyed and
burned media outlets and killed civilians in the name of defending the
resistance.
Eliminating the difference between the "external" job of the resistance (facing
the occupation) - which should be confined to specific time and geographical
limits and should end once it achieves its goals - and between its relations
with the internal front that embraces it and represents its political cover
during the period of liberating the lands, is actually an attempt to extend its
mission – after it ended - to include all of Lebanon without any restraints.
Rooted in the totalitarian and fascist ideas to the effect that "he who does not
support us, is against us," this argument sees no need for pluralism nor any
benefit in diversity. Should we be surprised then that Hezbollah is promoting
the idea of eliminating the borders between security and politics, while it
embraces Iran and its political regime as a model and an example? There too,
newspapers are shutdown and critics are imprisoned, while the opponents are
beaten and isolated, prevented from expressing their opinions and discussing
their choices. There too, the "valli-e faqih" [the supreme ruler] prevails, a
ruler whose demands can not be rejected and his decisions can not be discussed,
a ruler who can neither be criticized nor called to account. He sets standards
for the people and institutions, asking for abidance without any complaint.
Hence, we cannot but wonder: Will we soon discover among us a "guide" if the
opposition wins the elections and monopolizes the decision-making process?
While Hezbollah endeavors to silence any voice that disagrees with its policy,
his ally Michel Aoun, on the contrary, considers silence as a conspiracy. He
fiercely attacks those who remain silent on reports about his intentions if he
wins the elections, accusing them of being partners to the conspiracy against
him. He also calls on the press to play its assumed role in defending him and
exposing the lies of his rivals. Therefore, he leaves the Lebanese people
confused between remaining silent as Hezbollah wants, and speaking up as he asks
them to do.
Hamas Confirms Ties with Hezbollah
14/05/2009
By Maya Mishlib/Beirut, Asharq Al-Awsat-
Hezbollah's Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qasim has disclosed that the
party was providing the Palestinians in Gaza "with all types of possible
support" and said in a statement to the British Financial Times: "One of the
resistance secrets is that we do not disclose details of this support but it
suffices to say that we are giving the Palestinian resistance every type of
support that can help it, every type that is possible." He refrained from
revealing whether Hezbollah was supplying Hamas with weapons or military
training and said: "We leave this to appear at the proper time." Commenting on
Qasim's statement, Hamas leader Ahmad Abdul-Hadi did not deny or confirm this
information when Asharq Al-Awsat contacted him in Beirut. He said: "The
Palestinian resistance, including Hamas, welcomes any type of support from any
of the parties that are concerned about the Palestinian people's rights." He
stressed that "there is cooperation with all the parties, including Hezbollah"
and said: "We are getting help in ways that never crosses the mind of people or
anyone." Regarding the future of the relationship with Egypt in view of Qasim's
statement, he said "the party does not make futile statements. There is
certainly some message it wants to send. Our stand is clear. We care about the
future of the relationship that binds us to fraternal Egypt and appreciate all
its efforts for the Palestinian cause. We also care about Egypt's national
security and the national security of any Arab country because out struggle is
against the Israeli enemy. Hence the talk about cells being discovered here and
there does not concern us. We stress that the problem raised with Hezbollah in
Egypt has not affected our relationship with Egypt." On the purport and timing
of this message, he said: "It is Hezbollah which answers this question."
Hamas, Hezbollah-And the Muslim Brotherhood?
By Douglas Farah/Counterterrorism
A senior Hezbollah official has now stated publicly for the first time that his
organization has been providing Hamas with "every type of support" for a long
period of time.
"We have always said that we supported the resistance in Palestine, but we have
not mentioned how or given details of such support," Naim Qassem, the deputy
leader of the Lebanese organization, said in an interview published by the
Financial Times on Wednesday. "But Egypt has now revealed that we have given
military support to Palestine. We have done so for a while, but we have not
talked about it," he continued. It is one of the secrets of the resistance that
we don't talk about the details of our support, but suffice to say that we are
giving them every type of support that could help the Palestinian resistance.
Every type that is possible," he said.
The statements are the clearest yet of the ability and desirability of Shiite
Muslim armed groups (Hezbollah) to tactically ally themselves with armed Sunni
groups (Hamas). This means the transfer of technology, lessons learned, tactics,
intelligence etc. is well advanced among groups that have long and valuable
experience in terrorism and irregular warfare.
While the intelligence community for years denied such alliances were possible,
they have long been operative. One of the key bridges between the Sunni and
Shiite world has been the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Brotherhood has mediated or attempted to mediate a host of disputes between
Shiite and Sunnis, including the unsuccessful efforts by the International
Muslim Brotherhood's Yousef Nada to negotiate an end to the Iran-Iraq war. One
of the biggest bones on contention between the MB in Iraq and the al Qaeda
groups of Zarqawi was the latter's insistence on targeting Shiite groups, while
the MB units viewed that as a far lower priority than targeting the Americans.
The understanding of the structure of the Muslim Brotherhood has often been
misunderstood in the United States, where it is often viewed as Egyptian
organization. The international structure is largely ignored. It is also worth
remembering (although it seldom is) that Hamas is, according to its own
statutes-article 2-an organic part of the Muslim Brotherhood. That means that
Hamas cannot be acting in this regard without the knowledge of its "mother
ship," the MB. My full blog is here. May 14, 2009
Nasrallah: Hezbollah capable of running Lebanon if
it wins election
By DPA
The Lebanese Shi'ite movement Hezbollah will be capable of "managing" Lebanon if
it wins the country's upcoming elections, the movement's leader Hassan Nasrallah
said on Friday.
"I tell those who are betting on the [Hezbollah-led] opposition's failure during
elections: The resistance that defeated Israel can govern a country that is 100
times larger than Lebanon," said Nasrallah, speaking at a university graduation
ceremony in Beirut.
The Hezbollah leader was apparently referring to the 2006 Second Lebanon War,
which his militant organization sparked by kidnapping two Israel Defense Forces
soldiers. Over 150 Israelis and one thousand Lebanese died during the 34-day
conflict.
He added that if the opposition won a majority in June 7 parliamentary
elections, it would not beg the current ruling majority "to be our partners in
the governing process."
A tight race is expected between the opposition and the Western-backed majority,
which Nasrallah accused of being behind the country's sectarian problems.
"We, Hezbollah, have always rejected the division of Lebanon and we shall always
maintain this," he said
A New American Discourse In the Middle East That Needs Arab Encouragement
Sat, 16 May 2009
Raghida Dergham/Al Hayat
New York - The features of the American foreign policy towards the Middle East
are getting clearer, with the beginning of the final countdown to President
Barack Obama’s address to the Arab and Islamic worlds, due in almost two weeks.
There seem to be new and different elements in the political discourse, as well
as in the chosen style and content.
A part of the most significant American messages in this regard came last week
through U.S Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice – who has the rank of
Secretary in the U.S government –during both closed and public sessions of the
Security Council, particularly with regards to Palestine and Lebanon.
The Ministerial Meeting of the Security Council last Monday – held upon a
Russian initiative – was an opportunity to launch an international initiative,
from the Security Council, in partnership with the United States. Its aim was to
inform Israel that the era, when it had been shielded from international
pressure and resolutions, is gone, and that peacemaking and the establishment of
a Palestinian state are an international responsibility that will not be left to
bilateral negotiations, as the Government of Benjamin Netanyahu would wish.
United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon redressed his previous fault in
handling the investigation into the Israeli attacks on the United Nations
facilities in the Gaza Strip, known as the Ian Martin report. Ban Ki-Moon made
one of his most important speeches concerning the Palestinian-Israeli conflict,
and the requirements of a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. Meanwhile,
Russia has reactivated its role through its presidency of the Security Council
this month and through the international conference to be held this year in
Moscow.
Furthermore, the Arab peace initiative has garnered global support, and was
described by the British Foreign Secretary as a “deposit that must have a
parallel”. Rice called for its adoption and its merger into what is expected to
become an upcoming integrated American initiative. This in itself is a shift in
U.S. policy toward the Middle East. It is noteworthy to mention here that the
previous administrations tried to evade and throw away this “hot potato”, which
would subject them to local elective pressures from domestic constituencies,
thus neglecting the issue of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict – and the
Israeli-Arab conflict – until the seventh year of their eight-year tenure in the
White House. This applies not only to George Bush’s administration but also to
the administration of Bill Clinton. Today, Barack Obama’s administration talks
about the imperativeness of solving the Palestinian issue as the focal point of
any comprehensive peace in the region. It is talking of achieving tangible
results, instead of a process of stalling and postponing called the peace
process. All of this is evidently new.
Meanwhile, Barack Obama’s administration is still under probation, and will
remain so until it proves its determination and ability to do what must be done,
rather than being contented with merely cosmetic operations or incomplete steps
that would be the most of what can be achieved.
It is necessary for Arab parties, however, and especially those that have loud
and angry voices, to contemplate and appreciate the steps being taken then
encourage them instead of blaming and denouncing them. They must also check what
they should do themselves, in order to truly help the Palestinian people and rid
them from the oppression of the occupation.
Barack Obama does not have a magic wand, but is in a position – more than anyone
else– to employ the popular support he has to intervene as a leader and directly
head the efforts to address the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. He now understands
the relationship between the Palestinian issue and the feelings of Muslims
worldwide toward the United States. He is aware that one of the most important
weapons to help him defeat Al-Qaeda and terrorism against the United States and
the world lies in the mobilization of public opinion in the Arab and Muslim
world to his side, against terrorism and Al-Qaeda. This requires a just solution
to the Palestinian issue.
However, the US president is also aware of the magnitude of the obstacles facing
this, and the difficulty of imposing solutions on Israel. Thus, he is trying to
develop an initiative broader than just a narrow solution to the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict – or the Israeli-Arab conflict. It is clear that he
has listened carefully to the proposals of King Abdullah II, who was entrusted
by moderate countries in the region to put forward their proposal in Washington.
These are the same proposals, which King Abdullah II included in his address to
Congress, and during his visit to the White House when George W. Bush was still
president about a year and a half ago. At the time, proposals did not get even a
word or a phrase of coverage in the American media.
The position that he reiterates over and over again is that peace with Israel is
based solely on a just solution to the Palestinian issue, and does not come only
as peace with 22 Arab countries, but must also be with the majority of Muslim
countries in the world. The Jordanian King consulted several important Muslim
countries and got their approval on this before he stated this position and
repeated it time and again.
What’s new in Barack Obama’s proposal is the effort to work out a comprehensive
peace, while halting the competition between the Syrian, Palestinian, and
Lebanese negotiation tracks with Israel.
Efforts are ongoing to activate all the tracks at the same time, rather than the
separate tracks competing against each other – provided that the Palestinian
track will be an integral and independent part that does not yield to bargaining
or trade-offs. In other words, there is no peace without resolving the issue of
Palestine, and no one will be allowed to disrupt the Palestinian solution and
use it to move their own tracks.
But at the same time, there will be no exclusion of the Syrian and Lebanese
tracks. Rather, work is being done to activate those at the same time,
independently from each other and without them being interconnected, in order to
reach a comprehensive, just and lasting solution.
In other words, the attempts to rally around the Palestinian track through
focusing intently on the Syrian track in the framework of the negotiations with
Israel will not be successful and will not be accepted by the Obama
administration, regardless of who is leading them in terms of US experts and
mediators, or Syrian and Israeli officials. There are also those who challenged
the parties, which said that the Syrian track is easier than the Palestinian
track and that there are numerous benefits behind separating Syria from Iran.
They pointed out that the US demands from Syria include the necessity of
suspending support to the Damascus-based Palestinian factions that roam in
Lebanon, and preventing the passage of weapons and assistance from Iran to
Hezbollah. They found that the first reading of Syria’s stances shows that it is
not ready to meet these demands.
Susan Rice’s speech before the Security Council during a closed session last
week, which was published on the website of the United Stated Mission to the
United Nations, contained significant indications on Barack Obama’s policy
towards Lebanon and Syria. She announced that the US sees no difference between
the so-called military and political wings of Hezbollah and will not be involved
with it unless it completely disarms – regardless of its relation with the
Lebanese government. She also said that the increased involvement of the US with
the regional parties and neighbors will never lead it to sacrifice Lebanon’s
sovereignty or accept any deal at its expense. This includes the important
non-negotiable task of the International Tribunal as an essential part of
putting an end to the impunity related to the political assassinations in
Lebanon.
These are the Obama administration’s strongest and clearest stances towards
Lebanon and Hezbollah, especially that Rice considered that Hezbollah’s
acknowledgement of supporting extremists in Egypt and incitement of the Egyptian
army to challenge its political leadership are acts that remind us that
Hezbollah constitutes a threat not only to Lebanon, but also to the whole
region. Rice echoed the UN Secretary General’s condemnation of the unjustified
interference of Hezbollah in the domestic affairs of a sovereign country.
Rice demanded the disarmament of Hezbollah and recalled last May’s events, when
Hezbollah elements tried to take over West Beirut through military force,
warning against the grave error of assuming the continued implementation of
Resolution 1559, as long as the militias are not disarmed. She demanded Syria to
delimit borders with Lebanon and thus put an end to the smuggling of weapons to
Hezbollah and Palestinian militias – particularly the Popular Front-General
Command and Fatah al-Intifada, which are located in Lebanon, on the border with
Syria. During her public intervention at the Ministerial Meeting, Rice
reconfirmed the US commitment to Lebanon’s sovereignty and independence and
said: “We must insist on putting an end to weapons smuggling and disarming all
militias, including Hezbollah.”
Also, the US Ambassador/Secretary addressed Israel with a new discourse
characterized by demands and insistence on the right of international
intervention for implementing the two-state solution and the establishment of
the State of Palestine alongside Israel.
She said that the United States is ready to make efforts towards making the
vision of global peace a reality, and pointed out that President Obama is
personally committed to achieving this objective, and is directly involved in
leading this issue. She affirmed that the interest of the United States does not
lie in an extended and slowed down operation but rather in real results. She
also said that the United States has made its choices and decision, and
addressed the Security Council directly, saying: “We ask you all to stand by our
side, to stand together with permanent peace.”
This is a new discourse for a US administration at the beginning of its mandate,
which supported a Russian initiative to hold a Ministerial Meeting, in order to
send the consensual message of the international community on the importance of
the two-state solution and its agreement on direct interference for the
establishment of a Palestinian state with international partnership and
participation. This caused displeasure in the ranks of the Israeli government.
It is certain that the determined and angry words of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon
were also behind Israeli displeasure: “It is time for Israel to radically change
its policies, particularly regarding its individual measures in East Jerusalem
and the rest of the West Bank – destroying homes, promoting settlement
activities, settlers’ violence, and prosecution resulting from closing passages
and building the separating wall – which in the end are related to the
settlements.” He added that Israel had always repeatedly promised to stop these
measures but had not kept its promise.
Ban Ki-moon challenged Israel’s claims that the policy of closing the Gaza Strip
weakens Hamas and affirmed that the situation in Gaza is intolerable. He
referred indirectly to Israel’s permanent evasion of peacemaking through the
claims of an absent partner or a new framework, and said that the frame for
regional peace is present and that the international community has to guarantee
the implementation of the two-state solution – or else its ‘credibility’ would
be endangered in this test.
The presidential statement that was issued after the Ministerial Meeting focused
on the commitment of the Security Council to make efforts for achieving the
objective of establishing two states – Palestine alongside Israel – and this in
itself is a new element in the US Middle-Eastern policy. It is true that at the
beginning and end of its mandate, the Bush administration introduced the issues
of the Middle East, the peace process, and a two-state solution to the UN
Security Council, becoming thus a major partner in the important resolutions
1515, 1850, and 1860. However, it is also true that no US administration has
sought a partnership with the UN Security Council at the beginning of its
mandate on the issues of the Middle East and the Arab-Israeli conflict. Hence,
it is best to encourage such an initiative rather than waste the opportunity
with accusations of treason and conspiracy.