LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
November 11/09

Bible Reading of the day
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 17:7-10. Who among you would say to your servant who has just come in from plowing or tending sheep in the field, 'Come here immediately and take your place at table'? Would he not rather say to him, 'Prepare something for me to eat. Put on your apron and wait on me while I eat and drink. You may eat and drink when I am finished'? Is he grateful to that servant because he did what was commanded? So should it be with you. When you have done all you have been commanded, say, 'We are unprofitable servants; we have done what we were obliged to do.'"

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
One Wall Falls, Another Rises/By: Walid Phares/November 10/09
The Jihadist who Infiltrated the U.S. Army’s Officer Corps. By: W. Thomas Smith, Jr./November 10/09
Saudi Arabia Deals a Blow to the Huthis, al-Qaeda and the Hypocrites/By: Jameel Theyabi/Al Hayat/November 10/09
Hezbollah and the tent/By: Tariq Alhomayed/ASHARQ ALAWSAT/November 10/09
The Brothers of Iran/By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 10/09
Lebanon: a land of unseen walls/The Daily Star/November 10/09
Close, but no cigar/Now Lebanon/November 10/09
New Opinion: Cautious optimism/Now Lebanon/November 10/09
Interview with Sami Gemayel/NNA/November 10/09

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for November 10/09
Ashkenazi: Hizbullah's Rockets Could Reach as Far as Dimona/Naharnet
Brawl Expected over Cabinet Policy Statement as Suleiman Readies for Dialogue Table/Naharnet
Hariri Faces Daunting Challenge of Appeasing Phalange, Pharaon/Naharnet
EU Hails Formation of Lebanon Cabinet/Naharnet
Lebanon Forms 'Disunity' Cabinet, Analysis/Naharnet
U.S. Supports New Lebanese Cabinet, Hopes Commitment to Resolutions/Naharnet
Global Warning against 'Massive' Israeli Attack on Lebanon/Naharnet
France Throws Weight behind New Unity Government/Naharnet
Jumblat Describes Cabinet Deal as Fruit of S-S Efforts with Iran-Turkey Help/Naharnet
Ban Welcomes New Cabinet but Stresses Implementation of 1701/Naharnet
Italy: Hariri Now Responsible for Writing a New page in Lebanese History/Naharnet
Saad Hariri's First Government Announced/Naharnet
Backgrounder: Lebanon's new cabinet lineup/Xinhua
UN chief congratulates new Lebanon gov't, calls for Hizbullah disarmament/Jerusalem Post
Naharnet Exclusive: The Government Trembles Hours From its Birth; Phalange Party, Faroun Threaten to Resign/Naharnet
Months After Vote, Lebanon Forms Government/New York Times
Hariri forms unity government in Lebanon/United Press International
Intensive Lebanese efforts give birth to triumphant national-unity Cabinet/Daily Star
Danish Embassy rattled by false bomb alarm/Daily Star
2009 remittances to Lebanon reach $7 billion/Daily Star
Head of TRA urges Lebanon's next cabinet to speed up telecom liberalization, privatization/Daily Star
HRW urges investigation into domestic worker deaths/Daily Star
Two men steal LL23 million from Coop in Msaytbeh/Daily Star
Beirut Bar Association calls for steps to protect lawyers/Daily Star
NDU conference helps foster culture of dialogue/Daily Star
Car collides into school bus, injures children/Daily Star
Road workers in Sodeco unearth old rocket/Daily Star
Several people injured in hunting accidents/Daily Star
Journalist charged with slander, insulting president/Daily Star
Stolen Lives: Lebanon suffers problem of child brides/Daily Star
Syria's Assad: If talks fail, 'resistance' will be our next option/Ha'aretz
Azzi: I will never be another Bassil/Future News
El-Zoghbi: Appointing defeated candidates a black mark in Aoun’s history/Future News

Ban Welcomes New Cabinet but Stresses Implementation of 1701
Naharnet/U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon welcomed Monday the newly formed Lebanese national unity government, and called for action on restricting weapons in the country's south from anyone except the Lebanese army and other state forces. The Secretary General expressed "satisfaction that... Lebanese political leaders have been able to reach agreement on the formation of a cabinet," Ban's spokesman said in a statement, adding that he hopes Lebanese leaders will "work together in a spirit of unity, dialogue and cooperation."
The U.N. Security Council's Resolution 1701, which ended the 34-day war between Hizbullah and Israel in 2006 and requires the removal of arms in southern Lebanon from the hands of everyone except the state security apparatus, must be adhered to, Ban said. "The Secretary-General calls on the new government of Lebanon to recommit to the full implementation of Security Council resolution 1701," Ban's spokesman said. "He also urges the new government to quickly take up the challenges that remain to consolidating both the sovereignty of Lebanon and the institutional capacity of the Lebanese state."(AFP) Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 07:35

U.S. Supports New Lebanese Cabinet, Hopes Commitment to Resolutions
Naharnet/A top U.S. official has welcomed the formation of the Lebanese unity cabinet and expressed hope that all states friendly with Lebanon would work with the new government.
The official reiterated his country's full support for the formation of a Lebanese cabinet that brings together all forces without foreign meddling. He told An Nahar daily in remarks published Tuesday that it is better to form the cabinet late than not to form it at all. As Safir newspaper, in its turn, quoted a source at the State Department as saying that the Obama administration hopes the new cabinet's policy statement would include commitment to Security Council resolutions 1559, 1680 and 1701. The source also hoped the Lebanese government would build a sovereign and stable country that is committed to peace. Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 13:45

Global Warning against 'Massive' Israeli Attack on Lebanon
Naharnet/Lebanon has reportedly received warning of a "massive" aggression Israel plans against Hizbullah, the daily An-Nahar reported Tuesday. The report by An-Nahar Washington's correspondent Khalil Flaihan said international military authorities have warned Lebanon that Israel plans to launch a massive attack targeting Hizbullah positions. It said Israel is also likely to "widen its aggression to include large areas of Lebanon" under the pretext that Hizbullah continues to receive "heavy and sophisticated weapons" via Syria. Diplomatic sources in Beirut did not rule out the possibility that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could raise the issue of the seized ship alledgedly carrying weapons for Hizbullah and the explosions that took place in Khirbit Selim and Teir Felsay as well as the Katyusha firing from the southern town of Houla. The sources pointed out that Natanyahu would exploit these incidents to accuse Hizbullah of breaching Resolution 1701 "posing a real threat to Israel's security and that its armed forces are ready for any emergency." They said the U.S. and French presidents, however, are unlikely to approve any new Israeli offensive against Lebanon. Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 08:26

France Throws Weight behind New Unity Government
Naharnet/French President Nicolas Sarkozy congratulated Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri on Monday after he formed a national unity government following four months of negotiations with his rivals. In a letter released by the Elysee palace, Sarkozy said he welcomed "this excellent news" and said the new government "meets the aspirations of the Lebanese people." "Your government will be responsible for carrying out the reforms which are much anticipated by the people of Lebanon as well as the international community," he wrote.
Sarkozy invited Hariri to come to Paris "at time of your convenience."French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner vowed to give the new government full support.
"I welcome the formation of a government of national unity in Lebanon and renew the trust and support of France for Prime Minister Saad Hariri," Kouchner said in a statement. "Saad Hariri and his government can count on the resolute support of France, which will continue its actions in favor of unity and stability, and the sovereignty and independence of Lebanon," he said.(AFP) Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 07:40

Italy: Hariri Now Responsible for Writing a New page in Lebanese History
Naharnet/Italy has welcomed the formation of the new national unity government in Lebanon and said Prime Minister Saad Hariri will now be in charge of writing a page of peace in the country's history. The formation of the cabinet is a "very positive and encouraging news for the future of Lebanon and the entire Middle East," Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said in a statement on Monday. He renewed his "full trust" in Hariri and his "goodwill."Hariri "will be responsible for writing a new page in the history of the country characterized by peace, stability and prosperity," Frattini said. Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 09:44

Ashkenazi: Hizbullah's Rockets Could Reach as Far as Dimona
Naharnet/Israeli army commander Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi warned on Tuesday that Hizbullah is currently armed with thousands of missiles, some of which could reach the southern city of Dimona. "Some of them have a range of 300 km and some of them have a range of up to 325 km," Ashkenazi told the Knesset's foreign affairs and defense committee, saying the missiles were ready for use.  Dimona houses Israel's secretive nuclear reactor. "There is a paradox – on one hand there is calm, but when you peek over the fence you can see armament and empowerment. If Hizbullah carries out a retaliatory attack for (Imad) Mughniyeh it will force Israel to respond and this will lead to deterioration," he said.
Mughniyeh was Hizbullah's military commander who was killed in a car bombing in Syria last year. The Jewish state is working to prevent weapons smuggling from several areas in the region, the Israeli army chief of staff said, noting last week's raid of the Francop vessel, aboard which Israeli soldiers allegedly found hundreds of tons of Iranian arms bound for Hizbullah.
Ashkenazi said there is a battle between radicals and moderates in the region. "This pushes Iran to radical moves and funding of terror."He said Tehran is acting "irrationally" despite being an "extremist" country. The committee discussed among other things the findings of the Israeli army investigations on Operation Cast Lead, as well as the alleged arming of Hizbullah in Lebanon. Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 13:19

Brawl Expected over Cabinet Policy Statement as Suleiman Readies for Dialogue Table
Naharnet/The new Cabinet will hold its first session Tuesday afternoon to set up a committee tasked with drafting the ministerial policy statement that is likely to stir controversy over a clause related to Hizbullah arms. The committee, once established, will head straight to the Serail to begin preparation work for drafting the Cabinet policy statement.
President Michel Suleiman has reportedly told visitors he rules out a controversy over the policy statement. "Drafting of the ministerial statement will not be a problem at all on the grounds that in parallel to Lebanon's commitment to Resolution 1701, it is the right of the people, the army and the resistance to restore their land by all means available," Suleiman was quoted as saying. His remarks were published Tuesday by several Beirut dailies.  An-Nahar daily, meanwhile, said Suleiman was preparing for a new round of dialogue table "aimed at national reconciliation and to break the political alignments." Speaker Nabih Berri, in turn, was quoted as saying that talks between Prime Minister Saad Hariri and the Opposition touched on "the stage after government formation," ruling out any dispute over the Hizbullah arms' clause. Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun also ruled out any controversy over the ministerial policy statement, stressing that issue of Hizbullah arms had "already been agreed upon." But with the Lebanese Forces, it is a different story.
LF sources told pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat that nothing is final yet as to the policy statement. "First, we must wait for the formation of the committee tasked with drafting the policy statement where each camp will say what it has to say," one LF source said. "The Lebanese Forces will not agree on any word that contradicts with Lebanon's international commitments and Security Council Resolutions," he said. "The LF, at the same time, will not support phrases like the 'disarmament of Hizbullah,'" the source added, pointing out that this issue will be discussed at the dialogue table. The source warned, however, that March 14 Christian leaders "will not be lenient in the arms issue." Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 10:11

EU Hails Formation of Lebanon Cabinet
Naharnet/The European Union welcomed Tuesday the formation of a national unity government in Lebanon, and urged all parties there and in the region to continue the process of dialogue.
The EU "encourages the new Lebanese government to carry out necessary political and economic reforms while reiterating its full support for Lebanon, its people and institutions," current EU president Sweden said. "In the interest of the stability of Lebanon and the region as a whole the presidency furthermore encourages all parties to continue the national dialogue that preceded the elections," a statement said. The reaction came after Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri formed a government of national unity on Monday, ending more than four months of tough negotiations with his Hezbollah-led rivals. In a separate statement, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana also congratulated the parties. "It is important that Lebanon has a strong, effective government as it faces the various challenges ahead," he said. "I call once again on all parties concerned, in Lebanon, in the region and in the international community, to act constructively to recognise and ensure the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Lebanon," he said. "Achieving this goal is crucial for the stability of the entire region."(AFP)
Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 14:00

El-Zoghbi: Appointing defeated candidates a black mark in Aoun’s history
Date: November 9th, 2009ظSource: MTV
Member of March 14 General Secretariat Elias El-Zoghbi considered Monday that appointing defeated candidates, which MP Michel Aoun adheres to, is terrible and the political history will record a black mark on his record forever. El-Zoghbi told MTV that this unprecedented issue achieved by Aoun is not a source of pride or honor, adding that “what is called as compromise from the majority is considered a negative mark on the political record of the minority.” He pointed that waving arms and imposing conditions under pressure and intimidation is still practiced by the minority, stressing that the other team respects the results of the elections which gives it the right to attain sovereign ministerial portfolios.
El-Zoghbi expressed his surprise that Minister of Telecoms Gibran Bassil was called to Syria to be informed of the Syrian position regarding the cabinet formation, considering that the government includes a hidden veto power and there are attempts by the opposition to insert inappropriate political manners called “norms”. March 14 General Secretariat member called to address the issue of illegitimate Hizbullah arms, refusing to say that these arms are protected by the state because it is incompatible with the 1701 international resolution, adding that the national dialogue table was formed to solve this issue and form a defense strategy. According to El-Zoghbi, the Lebanese problem is the presence of a political group which is highly affiliated by Syria, calling the new government to cease regional alterations to determine Lebanon’s location. He concluded: “the minimum of national pride is not to link the government formation to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s visit to France.

Azzi: I will never be another Bassil
Date: November 10th, 2009ظSource: LBC
Advisor to Kataeb party leader Sejaan Azzi said Monday he would not accept to be an obstacle facing cabinet formation or “another Gebran Bassil.”Azzi’s comments came in an interview with the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation.“There are two issues still under discussion. The first is related to the Kataeb representative in the cabinet. The second is concerned with the portfolio that is going to be allotted to the party,” he said. “The party has entrusted its leader Amin Gemayel with choosing the right person for the ministerial post,” he added.
“The problem is not in names but in the political orientation of the new government,” he maintained.“The Kataeb party has demanded two portfolios. Yet, since there are many candidates for ministerial posts, deliberations resulted in allotting the education portfolio to the party. Nevertheless, the developments that occurred in the past 48 hours stood in the way of confirming this issue,” he said.“The party voiced reserve over being allotted the labor portfolio not because its headquarters is located in Beirut’s southern slums but because the preceding labor ministers were part of a certain political faction (the March 8 coalition) and no Kataeb minister can change anything without becoming an assassination target,” he confirmed.“Despite its importance, the labor ministry entails many delicate files,” he added. “Hizbullah has plans for all ministries including these of education and culture, but it cannot execute these plans without consulting with the other factions,” he said. “Depicting the Kataeb party as if it is holding to the education portfolio to topple the cabinet are mere excuses,” he added.

Lebanon Forms 'Disunity' Cabinet, Analysis
Naharnet/Lebanon's new unity government will be united in name only because of unresolved deep divisions between rival parties, especially on the issue of Hizbullah's arsenal of weapons, analysts say. "The formation of this so-called unity government is but a formality," Osama Safa, head of the Lebanese Centre for Policy Studies, told AFP. "There is but one force on the ground, regardless of who won the elections," he added, referring to Hezbollah, the only Lebanese faction which has refused to disarm since the end of the country's 1975-1990 civil war. Safa and other analysts noted that the militant group, which fought a devastating war with Israel in 2006 and is considered a terrorist organization by Washington, will essentially dictate the workings of the new cabinet. "Nothing will happen unless Hezbollah agrees to it," Safa said. "They managed to get what they want, nothing can happen without them. "They impose their will through their weapons." The new government was formed late on Monday by Prime Minister Saad Hariri following more than four months of tough negotiations with the Hizbullah-led Opposition on the distribution of portfolios and the choice of ministers.
Hariri, a Sunni whose community traditionally fills the premier's seat, was asked to form a government after his coalition defeated Hizbullah and its allies in a June general election.
His 30-member Cabinet is composed of 15 seats for his coalition, 10 for Hizbullah's camp supported, and five for President Michel Suleiman appointees. "In any unity government in the world, the different parties at least agree on a program," Rafik Khoury, chief editor of the independent daily Al-Anwar, told AFP. "Here in Lebanon, they have been battling it out for five months over portfolios and they agree on nothing." Khoury predicted that the long-running political feud between Hariri's bloc and his rivals would continue, despite all the hoopla over the birth of a unity government. "Let's not kid each other, this government was formed by Bashar al-Assad and King Abdullah," he said, referring to the Syrian and Saudi heads of state.
"The rival ministers will be at each other's throats at each cabinet session," Khoury added. Lebanese media on Tuesday also warned of the pitfalls facing the new government as it gets down to business. "Government of the two trenches," read the front-page headline in the daily Al-Akhbar, which is close to the opposition. As-Safir daily, also close to the opposition, said Hariri's government mirrors all of the country's complexities and woes. "It is a government of contradictions, which either contains a time-bomb waiting to explode or will be able to rule until the end of its mandate," it said in an editorial. The major point of contention between the two camps has been Hezbollah's weapons, an issue starkly highlighted in May 2008 when the militant group staged a spectacular takeover of mainly Muslim west Beirut. The crisis, sparked by a government crackdown against Hizbullah, resulted in the deaths of more than 100 people and took the country close to another civil war. Analysts warned that a repeat of those events was possible unless the new government addresses the fundamental divisions among the rival parties. "The new cabinet will succeed in nothing unless it works to consolidate national consensus," said Fadia Kiwane, head of the political science department at Saint Joseph University. "We are already sitting on a powderkeg given the bad regional situation," she added, referring to Iran's nuclear ambitions, the Arab-Israeli conflict and the bloodshed in Iraq. "We are facing political instability and insecurity because Lebanon, whether we like it or not, is a regional battleground."(AFP) Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 13:31

Jumblat Describes Cabinet Deal as Fruit of S-S Efforts with Iran-Turkey Help
Naharnet/PSP leader Walid Jumblat described the Cabinet deal as the "fruit" of Syrian and Saudi efforts with Iran-Turkey help.
"The Syrian-Saudi rapprochement together with the support of Iran and Turkey produced a national unity government," Jumblat said in remarks published Tuesday by the daily As-Safir. "A new government was formed to fortify Lebanon and protect it fromt a possible Israeli war against Lebanon," he added. Beirut, 10 Nov 09, 11:57

Intensive Lebanese efforts give birth to triumphant national-unity Cabinet
Hariri:We turn a new page that we hope will be based on consensus and partnership
By Elias Sakr and Nafez Qawas
/Daily Star staff
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
BEIRUT: Some 135 days after being selected for the post of premier, Saad Hariri will now officially take up his duties after the approval of a 30-member cabinet Monday, following a flurry of last-minute negotiations. The government based on the 15-10-5 structure grants the majority 15 ministers, the opposition 10 and President Michel Sleiman five seats, which guarantee the president the tipping vote and denies respectively the majority and March 8 absolute majority or veto power. (Full line-up on page 2)
Sleiman received Hariri at Baabda Palace in the early evening to finalize the Cabinet line-up. After Speaker Nabih Berri joined the two men shortly afterward, the decree announcing the new ministerial team was read on live television. During the past four months, Hariri’s efforts to form a unity government with the opposition stumbled over disagreements on the distribution of portfolios and the choice of ministerial candidates. One of the major reasons behind the delay was a series of extensive deliberations by Hariri with Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) leader Michel Aoun, who insisted that his Reform and Change bloc be granted a basket of key portfolios. However, an improvement in relations between regional power brokers Syria and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks has helped ease the rift in Beirut and led eventually to a power-sharing agreement. “Finally, a government of national unity is born as we turn a new page that we hope will be based on consensus and partnership to serve Lebanon’s best interests,” Hariri told reporters after the decree signed by both him and the president was made public.
Hariri stressed that the new Cabinet should reflect consensus and establish the basis for true cooperation and partnership to meet the Lebanese people’s needs rather than turning into a “bickering table” to exchange accusations and obstruct the role of constitutional institutions.
“I trust that this new Cabinet will face the upcoming challenges and [be] a gateway for the salvation of the Lebanese people from times of chaos, emigration and crisis,” Hariri added.
The premier also underscored that the new government would launch developmental projects as well as institutional reforms to put an end to corruption and resolve the issue of the rising public debt. Political analysts believe the formation of a national-unity government embracing all political parties is the key to maintaining political and security stability in a country facing sectarian and political tensions, as well as a huge debt burden.
Following his departure from Baabda, Hariri headed forhis residence in Qoreitem, where he received delegations congratulating him on the Cabinet formation.
The president, a power broker in the new 30-member Cabinet line-up, was allotted the Interior and Defense ministries, which remained headed by Ziyad Baroud and Elias Murr, respectively, along with Ministers of State Mona Ofeish, Adnan Sayyed Hassan and Adnan Qassar.
Saad Hariri’s Lebanon First bloc named the ministers of Finance (Rayya Haffar), Information (Tarek Mitri), Education (Hussein Mneimneh), Economy (Mo­hammad Safadi) and Environment (Mohammad Rahhal), as well as the ministers sf atate Jean Hogassapian and Michel Pharaon.
Prior to the Cabinet’s formation, Hariri met with a leading Christian ally in the March 14 coalition, Phalange Party leader Amin Gemayel, while a delegation of March 14 officials paid a visit to Batroun MP Butros Harb, to urge him to take part in the Cabinet. The negotiations led to the appointment of Harb as labor minister while the Phalange Party abandoned its demand for the Education Ministry and settled for the Social Affairs portfolio, to be headed by party official Salim Sayegh. The Justice Ministry portfolio, which had earlier been demanded by Harb, was later assigned to the Lebanese Forces (LF), with current Minister Ibrahim Najjar retaining the post, while the Culture Ministry portfolio was granted to Salim Wardeh, also as part of the LF’s share in the new government  Meanwhile, Aoun’s Reform and Change bloc received the following portfolios: Telecommunications (Charbel Nahhas), Energy (Jibran Bassil), Industry (Ibrahim Dedeyan, on behalf of the Tashnag Party) and Tourism (Fadi Abboud), along with a ministry of state headed by Marada Movement official Youssef Saade.
Aoun made public his selections after a meeting in Rabieh with Hariri earlier in the day. Aoun’s ally Hizbullah re­ceived the Agriculture portfolio and Ministry of State for Administrative Development, headed by Hussein Hajj Hassan and Mo­hammad Fneish, respectively.
The Amal Movement was allotted the Foreign Ministry (Ali Shami), Sports and Youth Ministry (Ali Abdullah) and the Health Ministries (Mohammad Jawad Khalifeh).
The Progressive Socialist Party received three portfolios: Ghazi Aridi (Public Works), Akram Chehayeb (Displaced) and Wael Bou Faour (minister of state).
The Cabinet’s policy statement is not expected to necessitate prolonged negotiations since the issue of Hizbullah’s weapons is to be tackled during National Dialogue sessions, as Sleiman has announced. The cabinet is scheduled to hold its first meeting Tuesday at Baabda Palace to form a committee to draft the statement.
Separately and earlier Monday, Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir called on politicians to rise above personal interests and refrain from bickering over ministerial gains in favor of the country’s best interests.

Saad Hariri's First Government Announced
The decrees announcing Saad Hariri's first government were issued Monday night. The cabinet formed of 30 ministers was accredited by President Michel Suleiman after a meeting with Hariri that was also attended by Speaker Nabih Berri for a short period.
Government secretary-general Suheil Bawji announced three decrees issued by President Suleiman. The first for accepting Saniora's government resignation, the second for designating Hariri as Prime Minister, and the third for the names of the assigned ministers.
The ministers names announced by Bawji are as follows:
President Michel Suleiman's share: Elias al-Murr (PM Deputy and defense), Ziad Baroud (interior), Mona Afeish (state), Adnan al-Sayyed Hussein (state), Adnan al-Qassar (state).
Hizbullah's share: Hussein al-Hajj Hassan (agriculture), Mohammed Fneish (state for administrational development).
Progressive Socialist Party's share: Ghazi al-Aridi (public works), Akram Shohayeb (displaced people), Wael Abu Faour (state).
Amal Movement's share: Mohammed Jawad Khalifeh (health), Ali Abdullah (sports and youth), Ali al-Shami (foreign).
Al-Mustaqbal's share: Hassan Mneimneh (education), Tarek Metri (information), Raya al-Hassan (finance), Jean Ogassabian (state), Mohammed Rahal (environment), Michel Faroun (state).
Tripoli bloc's share: Mohammed al-Safadi (economy).
Qornet Shehwan's share: Boutros Harb (labor).
Lebanese Forces' share: Ibrahim Najjar (justice), Salim Wardeh (culture).
Phalange Party's share: Salim al-Sayegh (social affairs).
Free Patriotic Movement's share: Jebran Bassil (energy and water), Fadi Abboud (tourism), Youssef Saade (state), Charbel Nahas (telecommunications), Abraham Dedeyan (industry).
"Finally, the national unity government is borne," said Saad Hariri minutes after he was declared officially as Prime Minister of the Lebanese Government.
Hariri said the government formation came four months late, but on time to close a chapter "we don't want to go back to" and start anew under the headlines of national unity and cooperation.
"National unity means sacrifice and overcoming personal interests and those of the parties and the sects," said PM Hariri.
Lebanon's new prime minister praised Lebanon's struggle against matters not even bigger countries can endure, referring to the assassination of President Rafik Hariri followed by the Israeli offensive in 2006 and the chain of internal strife and conflict on Lebanese ground. Hariri said that trust in the perseverance of the Lebanese people made Lebanon overcome strife and the Israeli war. Hariri stressed that the new government faces challenges and priorities that include a legislative workshop, administrative improvement, fighting corruption, ending sectarianism and implementing the Taef Accord. "New government stands unified in face of Israeli threats and offers a cooperative hand to the Arab brothers," added Hariri.
PM Hariri concluded his speech by promising "to work hard (with everyone) for Lebanon". Earlier on Monday, Hariri visited Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun who provided him with the names of his candidates. Beirut, 09 Nov 09, 08:31

Naharnet Exclusive: The Government Trembles Hours From its Birth; Phalange Party, Faroun Threaten to Resign
Phalange party leadership initiated after the announcement of the new government a series of phone calls and internal dialogues as a gesture of indignation and denial to the treatment the party received in the governmental issue, well-informed Phalange Party sources told Naharnet. The Phalange party is due to take a "big" decision in the following hours by announcing the party's withdrawal from March 14 coalition. It will ask its Minister Salim al-Sayegh to resign after assigning him the Social Affairs Ministry. The sources confirmed that the decision is non-negotiable and there would be no backing down considering that the Phalange party did not receive that treatment it deserved in the government. State Minister Michel Faroun followed suit and threatened to resign from the new Cabinet for not attaining a portfolio ministry, according to exclusive information also made available to Naharnet. Beirut, 09 Nov 09, 22:05

Two Hezbollah ministers named in cabinet
Lebanon's Hariri forms unity govt with Hezbollah
Foreign reactions/Unity government
Many challenges ahead
Lebanon's PM Saad al-Hariri forms a new unity government ending more than four months of political wrangling
BEIRUT (Agencies)
Lebanon's Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri formed a new unity government late on Monday that includes two ministers from Hezbollah ending more than four months of political wrangling.
"Finally, a government of national unity is born," Hariri told reporters after a presidential decree announcing the new cabinet line-up was announced.
"We have turned a page that we don't want to go back to and opened a new page that we strive to make a page of concord and work," he said.
" I want to be honest from the start: this government can be a chance to renew faith in the state and its institutions ... or it can turn into a replay of our failures "
Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri "I want to be honest from the start: this government can be a chance to renew faith in the state and its institutions ... or it can turn into a replay of our failures."
Lebanon has been without a functioning government since Hariri led his coalition to victory in a June parliamentary election against Hezbollah and its allies.
A government acceptable to all main parties is seen as key to maintaining stability in a country facing sectarian and political tensions, as well as a huge debt burden.
Foreign reactions
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner welcomed the formation of the Lebanese government and pledged the former colonial power's support for Hariri.
"The formation of a new government was necessary to resolve the conflict that Lebanon was facing, to assure the security and stability of the country...," Kouchner said.
He urged the new government to push through economic reforms demanded by donors and implement U.N. Resolution 1701 that ended a 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah.
Hariri spent more than four months brokering a deal with the opposition. A warming of ties between the two sides' main backers Syria and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks helped ease the rift in Beirut and led eventually to a power-sharing agreement.
Unity government
" The formation of a new government was necessary to resolve the conflict that Lebanon was facing, to assure the security and stability of the country "
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner The new 30-minister cabinet includes 15 ministers from Hariri's coalition, 10 from the opposition including two Hezbollah ministers, and five, including the key interior and defense portfolios, were nominated by President Suleiman.
The president's ministers in theory hold the balance of power in cabinet, with the Hariri coalition unable to gain a simple majority and the minority unable to block key decisions as they do not hold a third plus one votes in government.
Incumbents Ziad Baroud and Elias al-Murr kept their interior and defense portfolios.
Raya Haffar al-Hassan was appointed finance minister, responsible for managing Lebanon's public debt burden, while retired university professor Ali al-Shami was named foreign minister.
Mohammed Safadi kept his job as economy minister.
Many challenges ahead
Hassan, who is close to Hariri, manages a United Nations Development Program project aimed at supporting decision-making at the office of the prime minister.
Shami, 64, was named by close Hezbollah ally Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. He will be the country's top diplomat when Lebanon takes over a seat at the United Nations Security Council at the start of next year.
The new government's first task would be to draw up a policy statement and present it to parliament for a vote of confidence.
Despite deep disagreements between the two camps on some crucial issues, such as the fate of Hezbollah's guerrilla army, the statement is expected to go smoothly and swiftly.
Hariri is then expected to visit Damascus and hold talks with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in a move set to redraw the political landscape in Lebanon.
Hariri's coalition had accused Syria of assassinating statesman Rafik al-Hariri, Saad's father, in February 2005.
Syria denies any links, but the killing forced Damascus to end its 29-year military presence in Lebanon in April 2005 and led to the formation of a special court in The Hague to investigate and prosecute the killers.
Hopes are also high that Hariri, a billionaire businessman who is close to Saudi Arabia, and his government will tackle the country's economic woes.
Hariri said he looked forward to tackling the country's economic woes, public debt and its need to modernize government institutions.

The Brothers of Iran
09/11/2009
By Tariq Alhomayed
Chief of Asharq Al-Awsat,
Today we are facing a new farce from the Muslim Brotherhood after it announced its new position which – as usual – justifies everything that serves the Iranian project in our region. The General Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mahdi Akef, issued what he described as a "call" to Saudi Arabia to stop fighting against the Huthis. Akef said that Saudi Arabia has a right to defend its territory "but" the role of Saudi Arabia, and that of its King "is much greater than this."
We do not know what can be considered a greater role than protecting Saudi Arabia and its sovereignty, maintaining [national] security and protecting [Saudi] citizens?
Therefore we believe that the Muslim Brotherhood's position towards the Huthi aggression on Saudi soil is nothing more than a continuation of the movement's positions that aim to weaken and destabilize Arab countries for the sake of extremist groups that Iran funds and supports with information and weaponry as part of their attempt to destabilize the security of our nations.
It would have been better if the General Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood had supported Saudi Arabia and its position without adding a "but" because what Riyadh is doing – particularly along the Saudi-Yemeni border – is vitally important. Riyadh is protecting its security from arms and drug smugglers, Al Qaeda elements, as well as the Huthis. This is something that calls for supporting Saudi Arabia, rather than criticism or second-guessing.
However are we surprised by the Muslim Brotherhood's position?
Of course not, for the adoption of positions calling for sedition is not something new, and we saw this during Saddam Hussein's occupation of Kuwait, as well as when Hamas marched on the Egyptian border. We have seen the Muslim Brotherhood take up this position when Hezbollah attempted to tamper with Egyptian security. The Muslim Brotherhood also adopted this same biased position following the armed coup in Lebanon carried out by the Iranian affiliated Hezbollah movement which also saw Hezbollah targeting Sunni areas of Beirut. The Muslim Brotherhood also contributed to the Sunni – Shiite reconciliation drama following this Hezbollah coup, the goal of this was to whitewash the Hezbollah movement, and distance it from the criticism that it received after it exposed its sectarian features to Lebanon.
Where were the Muslim Brotherhood and their General Guide when the Huthis were starting this military and media conflict, tampering with Saudi security, targeting Saudi border guards, and infiltrating the Saudi interior?
We did not hear any denouncements from the Muslim Brotherhood against what the Huthis were and are continuing to do along the Saudi – Yemeni border. In fact the only thing that we can recall is that Muslim Brotherhood leaders appeared in the Iranian media praising Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on his wisdom and his call for Muslim unity, whilst at the same time the Supreme Leader and [Iranian president] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad were threatening Saudi Arabia over this year's Hajj season.
The Muslim Brotherhood's "call" to Saudi Arabia is new evidence of the threat that this organization represents, and the threat of their projects, which does not include protecting our countries from Iranian tampering. The Muslim Brotherhood's position is also evidence of the extent of the alliance between them and the Iranian regime, and their role is now to confuse public opinion by issuing misleading statements. This is not surprising for somebody who said "to hell" with Egypt, therefore the Muslim Brotherhood are- deservedly – the brothers of Iran

Saudi Arabia Deals a Blow to the “Huthis”, “al-Qaeda” and the “Hypocrites”
Mon, 09 November 2009
By: Jameel Theyabi/Al Hayat
The two statements given last Saturday have reaffirmed the equal determination of both Saudi Arabia and Yemen to uproot and defeat the Huthi insurgency, and to thwart the goals of those who are behind it, and who support it with funds, arms and equipment.
The first statement was given by the Assistant Minister of Defence and Aviation His Royal Highness Prince Khaled bin Sultan, while visiting the frontlines of the battle that his country’s forces are fighting against the Huthi aggressors, and in which he said: “It has become necessary for us and for our men to deal with these rash and irresponsible actions; our soldiers have taught the evil aggressors a lesson they will never forget. They have fought well and outsmarted the enemy using the latest military techniques, which the brazen rebels did not expect”.
The second statement was given by the Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who said: “The war will never stop no matter how much money or martyrs it costs. There will be no dialogue…no let up in the battle until we bring this tyrannical, traitorous and mercenary group to an end”.
But what is the exact extent of the Huthis’ strength in Yemen, and subsequently their ability to be mischievous within the Saudi territories? How is it that Iranian weapons are finding their way to the Huthis? Is Yemen not capable of shutting down the flow of arms smuggled to its territories from Tehran?! Did the Huthi leadership not take into account the Saudi ground and air capabilities that are able to suppress their firepower? Are the Huthis’ objectives focused on destabilizing Yemen and the border with Saudi Arabia, and on dragging the latter into a war that Iran alone will benefit from?
There is no doubt that the battle is settled in advanced in favour of the Saudi armed forces, given the asymmetry of power, and even if the Huthi insurgency continues its skirmishes with tactics of guerrilla warfare as the Huthi movement is carrying out a sabotage mission by Iran’s proxy. This latter is in fact attempting to provoke Saudi Arabia into entering a battle that serves Iran’s expansionist goals, policies and ambitions, in addition to Tehran’s desire to start a crisis prior to the pilgrimage season in order to divert attention away from it, and to transform it from a religious rite to a season of political slogans.
The mere fact that the Huthis dared raid areas within Saudi Arabia, aiming their rifles and guns to kill its citizens gives the latter the full right to uproot this movement and crush its gangs, and those who are behind them and who incite them, and to punch it and kick it and put an end to this absurd charade of a regional nature.
The fact of the matter is that prudence, careful deliberation and not rushing to make any declarations before obtaining complete information are indeed some of the traditions followed in Saudi politics, as the Kingdom is a country that is ever in search for stability and peace, and that forgoes many major and minor transgressions against it. Saudi Arabia also refuses as such to be drawn into pointless conflicts, so as not to amplify problems into becoming new hotbeds for perturbations in the region. However, the Huthis have this time brought a disaster upon themselves; while those who have pushed them into such recklessness will not be of any benefit to them, Saudi Arabia will not be forgiving with those who are trying to bring chaos into its own territories, and it is its right to continue military action in order to end those pockets of rebellion, following this dangerous violation of its territory and sovereignty.
Moreover, the Saudi policy habitually avoids the methods of squabbling and haggling, which Iran likes, practices and is familiar with. Conversely, Iranian President Ahmadinejad and his henchmen called for transforming the Haj [Pilgrimage] season into an arena for bickering, sloganeering and misleading political propaganda, and then pushed the Huthi rebels to provoke a crisis on the Saudi border with Yemen, drawing the former into a battle that it does not want in order to pressure Riyadh both internally and abroad. This is in addition to Iran’s aim of exporting its internal crises to other countries in the region by triggering their proxy groups, militias and gangs to move under the umbrella of “Wilayet al Faqih” [clerical rule]. All of the above spurred the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to rise up to military action in order to secure its border, and teach the rebels a historical lesson that will eliminate this rebellious movement and burry it forever.
In fact, this Saudi military move to deter the Huthi aggressors enjoys broad popular support, which also means that no tolerance should be shown towards the establishment of a Huthi political movement based on a certain ideology and regional allegiance, and which moves according to foreign agendas and ambitions; otherwise, another nail in the coffin of the region will be struck along with Hezbollah in South Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine.
A while ago, I wrote an article about Yemen which was entitled: “Has Yemen entered Intensive Care?” following the unpleasant news about the situation there. In the article, I warned like many others that the fires of the Huthi rebels may spread to the Saudi border if no clear defensive contingency plan was put in place. This was, and still is particularly valid when riots, sabotage and clashes were taking place within Yemen, in addition to the voices among South Yemenis that are calling for secession alongside the North Yemeni Huthi rebellion. This is also not to mention the al-Qaeda members who are based in the rugged terrains of Yemen, which helps them plan their terrorist strikes from time to time, against both internal and external targets, out of the Yemeni territories.
Iran is attempting to sow discord and to destabilize the security of the countries in the region, especially in the Arab Gulf States, after having had their way in Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine. However, what is puzzling is that some of these Gulf States are still silent about this, and have not uttered a word in condemnation of the Huthi rebellion, or in supporting Saudi Arabia, as if they are afraid of the Iranian reaction. This causes such countries to have a shaky image on the Gulf States’ level, as if they are in conformity with these Iranian practices, or as if they are waiting for the ripe political moment to play a “marathon” role that they think is crucial.
What is certain in the end is that Saudi Arabia will emerge victorious from this battle, and more stable and secure; it will deal a major blow to the Huthis, to al-Qaeda and to the “hypocrites” along with those who are behind them, and who are supporting them and sympathizing with them. Nonetheless, Yemen should be more present on the security level, and in controlling the flow of smuggled arms into the hands of those extremist gangs that are operating under a purely regional vision and agenda.

Hezbollah and the tent
Monday, 09 November 2009
By: Tariq Alhomayed
ASHARQ ALAWSAT
Hezbollah issued a statement condemning the decision to suspend the broadcast of Iranian al-Alam [news] channel on satellite operators Arabsat and Nilesat. In this statement, the [Lebanese] party said "Hezbollah declares its solidarity with the Al-Alam channel and considers this [the channel's suspension] to be a violation of the freedom of speech and opinion, and calls for this issue to be treated immediately in order to ensure the preservation of public freedoms."
Hezbollah talking about freedom reminded me of a funny story that I received once in an e-mail.
A philosopher and an illiterate decided to travel to the desert and spend a day there. They erected their tent, and after a long day decided to go to sleep in the tent. After they both fell asleep, the illiterate woke up, he then woke up his philosopher friend and asked him "Look up and tell me what you see."
The philosopher looked up and said "I see stars, an innumerable number of them."
The illiterate asked him "And what does that mean?"
The philosopher said "This is evidence of the Creator's ability which can be seen here in the magnificence of this star-studded sky, and in fact if you like I can tell you what time it is now, and even what the weather will be like tomorrow."
The philosopher then turned to his illiterate friend and asked "Very well, tell me what you see."
The illiterate answered "I see that our tent has been stolen, idiot!"
This story is applicable to what Hezbollah is saying about the violation of the freedom of speech and opinion, and the necessity of preserving public freedoms. This is because Hezbollah is lecturing us about freedom that it itself is exploiting to serve the goals of establishing sectarian division and in order to threaten the preservation of Arab society. Hezbollah is arguing for freedom today, however the first thing that Hezbollah did following the 7 May Beirut coup – during which Hezbollah took control of Sunni areas in Beirut – was to use weaponry to attack the media organizations that opposed Hezbollah, not to mention intimidate Lebanese journalists.
It is strange that Hezbollah announced its support and defense of the Iranian al-Alam [news] channel on behalf of the freedoms of speech and opinion however we did not hear one word from the group about the newspapers that are being closed down every day in Iran. This is something that has been happening for years, and more than 200 newspapers have been shut down in Iran, not to mention the persecution and imprisonment of journalists in Tehran who – reflecting the demands of half of Iranian society – called for reform. This is contrary to the demands of a small group [of Iranian society] or groups who are affiliated to foreign countries, such as Hezbollah. The al-Alam [news] channel wants to convince us that it is concerned with the Arab world, whilst all that it is doing is supporting the separatists [in our region] and their armed movement against our security and stability.
The Iranian al-Alam [news] channel incites sectarianism, and is not a television station which follows the principles of professional media. The same applies to the Al-Manar television channel that belongs to Hezbollah. Both of these television stations serve as examples of media organizations that mobilize sectarianism, and this is something contrary to the concept of freedom of speech and opinion. The first condition of this – freedom – is responsibility, and this principle is based on the understanding that your freedom ends when it begins to usurp the freedom of others.
Therefore Hezbollah shedding crocodile tears about the suspension of the broadcast of Al-Alam television is similar to the talk of the philosopher under the tent. Those sympathetic to Iran's agents [in our region] are making the same mistake, and are not paying attention to the fact that the tent of stability in our region is at risk because of Iran and its agents.
*Published in the London-based ASHARQ ALAWSAT on Nov. 8, 2009.

November 10, 2009
One Wall Falls, Another Rises
By Walid Phares
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 was a benchmark that made an impression on me, as it did on millions of people around the world. The sight of thousands of East Germans pouring into West Berlin, particularly the youths who had never experienced freedom before, was a surreal scene not only for the people of Europe, but also for those of us born in the Middle East.Westerners looked with shock at the peoples of East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, and the Soviet Union surging against totalitarianism. Central Europeans stared with awe at the countries who never surrendered their liberties to Communism. Soviet propaganda told Western Europe for many years that the comrades on the other side of the Iron Curtain were happy with their status and wanted nothing to do with the West and its "bourgeois" freedoms.
During those November days twenty years ago, the free world learned that behind the wall of shame, people wanted nothing more than freedom. The apologist machine lied for decades. The Soviet peoples were similarly indoctrinated by the Marxist version of madrassas to believe that America and NATO were at war with the proletariat and were plotting to destroy the great achievements of Stalin and his successors. None of that was real, and the long-fooled citizens on both sides of the separation line came together to celebrate freedom.
The day when the Wall came down in Berlin, I and many other advocates for liberty in the greater Middle East hoped to see the wave of liberation hit our shores too. The region's peoples had been suffering from totalitarianism fully as much as the Soviet bloc's nations throughout the twentieth century. But unlike the luckier societies rising to freedom in Europe, the populations south and east of the Mediterranean had been oppressed nonstop for centuries and ignored by the international community during the Cold War.
As newly freed communities shattered the wall and burst into West Berlin to experience human freedom, all imaginable forms of oppression were striking the Arab world and Iran. In Sudan, in addition to a horrific genocide unrecognized by the United Nations, thousands of Africans were taken into slavery. In Algeria, the Berber Kabyle minority was suppressed; in Mauritania, southern blacks were living in servitude; in Egypt, Copts were assassinated; in Iraq, Kurds were gassed and Shia buried in mass graves; in Iran, minorities brutalized and youth harassed; in Libya, dissidents were tortured; the Syrian regime occupied most of Lebanon and massacred thousands of Sunnis in Hama. The list is too long to exhaustively review. We hoped the tidal wave of post-Soviet democracy would smash authoritarianism in the Middle East. How lucky were the people of Berlin, Prague, and Warsaw to live those exhilarating moments.
But the wall that came down in the heart of Germany freed only Europe. The peoples to the south weren't so lucky. Worse, another wall, thicker than the Iron Curtain, was erected to isolate oppressed populations of the region even further. Oil regimes and Jihadists had no intention to release the captive nations to freedom soon. As Soviet tanks withdrew from Eastern Europe, Syrian armor invaded East Beirut, Saddam's divisions marched into Kuwait, and political prisoners filled dozens of the Abu Ghraib prisons in the region. It took twelve years for a Western coalition to free the peoples in the region in response to 9/11. Afghans enjoyed the crumbling of the Taliban in 2001, Iraqis got rid of Saddam's Baath in 2003, and Lebanon witnessed the end of Syrian occupation in 2005. Regardless of the often uninformed debates within the West, civil societies still in chains hoped to obtain freedom: Darfur's genocide was finally recognized, women's apartheid noticed, and human rights abuses registered at last in Washington and Brussels.
However, as the world celebrates the 20th anniversary of the Berlin miracle this week, the underdogs in the Middle East are losing hope at a dizzying rate, especially as the U.S. administration, whose leadership ran on the slogan of "Hope," is engaging dictatorships and Jihadists instead of reaching out to the democrats of the region. In Cairo, President Obama pledged to abandon the struggle for democracy in the Middle East in return for acquiring the "respect" of the authoritarians. In Accra, the intervention to save Darfur was cast aside. When millions of youths demonstrated in Tehran, Washington retreated from "meddling" in this struggle for freedom. Reformers lost their U.S. donations, and instead of engaging dissidents, the Obama administration is stubbornly trying to cut deals with the oppressive forces in the region.
Hence, when the U.S. President doesn't attend Berlin's celebrations, it makes sense, as his administration is abandoning the underdogs in the Middle East. Mr. Obama has no speech to deliver in Berlin, for the next wall to be torn down is being built in the shade of the new U.S. policy.
**Dr. Walid Phares is senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and is writing a comprehensive essay on the forthcoming Middle East democracy.
Comments on "One Wall Falls, Another Rises"

The Jihadist who Infiltrated the U.S. Army’s Officer Corps
W. Thomas Smith, Jr.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.4725/pub_detail.asp
Family Security Matters
10/11/09
In the wake of last week’s Jihadist terrorist attack against a U.S. Army base in North America –specifically the attack launched by sleeper-terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan, an unfortunately commissioned U.S. Army psychiatrist and devout Muslim who, following his faith’s teaching to the letter, murdered 13 of his infidel enemies and wounded scores more at Fort Hood, Texas – numerous experts are defying politically correct convention and reiterating to an ill-informed American public what they (the experts) have been trying to get across to us since before 9/11:
The Jihadists are at war with the West. They are coming after us with every means available to them. They are capitalizing on our free institutions to do so, using corrupt media and weak politicians to facilitate their freedom of movement and disinformation campaigns. And they have infiltrated our national defense structure, a fact known to many for years and proven to all on Thursday, November 5th, six days before Veterans Day.
Chief among the outspoken experts on Jihadist terrorism (in the first few hours and days after Nov. 5) is Dr. Walid Phares, who directs the Future of Terrorism Project for the Washington, D.C.-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
According to Phares, Hasan was-and-is an indoctrinated Jihadist, who – lone wolf or not, linked to a specific Jihadist group or or not – acted with the intent to strike his enemy, America.
Responding indirectly to the current U.S. Administration's reluctance to consider Hasan’s attack an act of terrorism, Phares, writing for FOX News, says, “What the world has witnessed this week in Texas cannot be described just as a ‘horrific outburst of violence’ directed at the American military, Instead it is part of a wider ideological war, generated by radicalization and inciting individuals to perform such acts. ‘Lone wolf’ or not, organized or not, fully self-aware perpetrator or not, influenced by overseas radicals or not, this massacre of servicemen has moved America from stage to another.”
Phares predicted the rise of the domestic Jihadist threat decades ago (clearly detailed in his book, Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against America). Discussing previous attempts to attack the U.S. military inside the confines of the U.S. homeland, he told Russia Today TV: “Jihadists targeting military on U.S. soil is strategic.”
We spoke with Dr. Phares Monday.
W. THOMAS SMITH JR: Some commentators are saying it’s difficult to know what happened to Hasan; what made him tick, was he boiling inside for a while? We’ve heard commentary about the so-called “need” to be careful in our analysis. Your thoughts?
DR. WALID PHARES: What made Maj. Hasan tick is ideology. What made him attack that day at that hour is to be investigated. If our analysts, especially within the government, can't figure out what makes a Jihadist – lone wolf or not – tick, we have a problem.
The U.S. government and many in the media are confused by the fact that he adhered to an ideology and used the narrative of that ideology for years, yet he was able to conceal it for so long. If the attack had taken place in Pakistan, Egypt, or even Saudi Arabia, with the same statements made by the perpetrator, neither authorities nor citizens would ask the question. It would be a given that it is Jihadi Salafist narrative. Officials would know immediately what they were dealing with. The “caution” we are told to follow here in the U.S. is political. It is not based on reason or any scientific logic.
U.S. leaders must be precise in identifying the ideology, explain it to the public and at the same time warn citizens as regards unfair and illegal backlashes. I am not sure decision-makers are getting the best advice.
SMITH: Department of Homeland Security [DHS] Sec. Janet Napolitano says DHS officials are working with various groups around the country to thwart any possible anti-Muslim backlash following the shootings at Fort Hood. In your opinion, will there be a backlash, and is this DHS’s responsibility?
PHARES: Sec. Napolitano’s statement is shifting the debate from investigating an ideology responsible for the production of Jihadists, which is – or should be – the top national security consideration, to an unwarranted panic reaction about so-called backlashes. That's what we almost had after 9/11. Apologists for Jihadism were trying to advance the theme that a mass backlash was happening and that this should be America's top priority, shifting the debate from going after the Jihadists to fearing backlashes on the streets. The backlashes, as they were portrayed, never happened, because the American public by-and-large is mature, reasonable, and desires peace and civility.
Fact is, the more officials unwarrantedly talk about backlashes, as if they are imminent, the greater the risk of creating an environment which could make them happen. U.S. officials should instead be talking about Muslim resistance to the Jihadists. American leaders must call on all Americans, and especially Muslim-Americans to stand by their government as it uproots the Jihadi terror networks, and work on de-radicalization.
SMITH: Some media in the U.S. and the UK are linking the Fort Hood terrorist to the September 11th terrorists. Does that surprise you?
PHARES: I read the Telegraph's report about Hasan’s link to Jihadists. Well, the fingerprints of Jihadism are all over the place. Whether-or-not Hasan met or conspired with any known terrorist or radical Jihadist, is not the point. He himself was indoctrinated, and he made the decision to wage war or terror against unarmed U.S. military personnel on U.S. soil. That is enough to understand the essence of this case.
If the investigation reveals more physical links to terrorism, that should be examined thoroughly. In my analysis, any mass murder with Jihadi commitment is terrorism by all international convention. Problem is, the Administration is not likely to admit the ideological link. For if they do, it might collapse the expressed expertise of their advisors regarding “Arab and Muslim-world affairs.” The latter have pressed the Administration to abandon the ideological identification of the terrorists.
That said, I don't think this policy will last too long for the simple fact that the Jihadists are not shy, and aren’t secretive about their doctrines. They have and will let us know very openly about their commitment through their actions immersed in doctrinal statements. On the other hand, it is unfortunate, that many in the blogosphere are not focusing on the ideology, but on religion. This is actually helping the apologists – and behind them Islamist lobbies – win the day.
SMITH: Sen. Joe Lieberman announced a Senate investigation into the Fort Hood attack. Lieberman, who of course chairs the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, says there were “strong warning signs” that Hasan was an “Islamist extremist.” Your thoughts?
PHARES: Sen. Lieberman's call for an investigation of homegrown Jihadism is the only statement from the U.S. government that has made any sense so far. While the Administration is in denial and its opposition is in chaos, Lieberman's clear statement is where the response to this terrorist attack must begin.
SMITH: It’s been reported that Hasan snapped because of his imminent deployment overseas. Others have said, he was angered by racist slurs.
PHARES: Such reports are equivalent to hallucinations, not sound analysis. That’s like suggesting there is a justification for Hasan’s snapping. He doesn’t like a decision made by a superior, so he goes and shoots that superior? If he snaps because of racial slurs, he would shoot the persons who allegedly insulted him? Hasan has been making Jihadi statements for years. In the modus operandi of Jihadists, they use any prevalent politically charged issue to build on it and incite for hatred.
What made me ponder – in addition to the fact that he clearly acted within the Jihadist model – is the fact that he was cold-blooded and very focused.
I was given a document that shows Hasan applied to attend a Homeland Security Conference set at the George Washington University this year under the title, “Thinking Anew – Security Priorities for the Next Administration – Proceedings Report on the HSPI Presidential Transition Task Force (April 2008-January 2009).” He signed-on as being affiliated with the Uniformed Services University of Health Services. For someone who simply “snapped,” it is highly unlikely that he would have thoroughly researched sophisticated events like these, which were attended by an elite group within Homeland Security. In short, he could have perpetrated his Jihadi terror there. Any expert analyst will tell you that his drive was far more complex than his bloody act. All the arguments about anger, tension, and foreign policy not only do not hold water, but they are close to hallucinations. A man who participates in a high-level conference on Homeland Security of this kind, who has been active in the Jihadi ideological realm, and who massacres scores of American military personnel, is a Jihadi terrorist in fact.
SMITH: What do you make of the statements by Jihadists online, and on Facebook, etc., in support of Hasan?
PHARES: Well, that's the easiest part: This is prologue-evidence to the nature of his mission. You will see more of this with time. But going beyond this, the real questions to address are the following:
Who was he in contact with – in terms of these activities – over the past years?
Who indoctrinated him? This is inescapable and has to be discovered?
Are there other similar cases like Hasan’s that we need to be attentive to?
I hope Sen. Lieberman's initiative to investigate the matter in the Senate will be a first step. I hope we do it expeditiously before we are surprised again, dramatically by future Jihadi terrorists on U.S. soil.
SMITH: Reports describe Hasan as not exactly a conservative Muslim. Some in the media argue that “Hasan's presence at the [strip] club paints a starkly different portrait of the alleged killer from that offered by his imam and family members, who have described him as a devout Muslim, and one who had difficulty finding a wife who would wear a head scarf and would pray five times a day.”
PHARES: In fact, it is just the opposite. If anything, his visits to such a club fit perfectly the psychological sphere he was floating in as a Jihadist. It has been established that indoctrinated Jihadists often visit places they deem evil to fill themselves with a deeper hatred for the society they are at war with. We must try to understand the differences between a devout religious person and a totalitarian zombie. I will address this issue in the near future.
**W. Thomas Smith Jr. is a former U.S. Marine infantry leader and shipboard counterterrorism instructor, who writes about military/defense issues and has covered conflict in the Balkans, on the West Bank, in Iraq and Lebanon. Visit his website at uswriter.com.

Sami Gemayel
November 9, 2009
On November 8, the Lebanese National News Agency (NNA) carried the following report:
Kataeb bloc MP Sami Gemayel called on the Lebanese leaders to “sit around the dialogue table and discuss two main, separate issues: the arms of Hezbollah and the Lebanese system,” stressing the necessity to “see the staging of a national conference preceded by a Christian conference in order to start building the country we all dream of.”
Gemayel also demanded that the different sides “stop hiding behind words and proceed with the expanded administrative decentralization stipulated in the Lebanese constitution before putting the issue up for voting in the parliament,” condemning the attacks against Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir by saying, “What is happening today is a programmed and rejected violation of red lines, affecting Lebanese and Christian dignity, culture and values.”
During an interview on television, Gemayel said, “The Phalange Party is demanding the Education portfolio which it believes is key in order to rewrite the history books and ensure the mentioning of sacrifices made by all sides for Lebanon’s sake.” On the other hand, he asked Hezbollah to “bluntly announce whether or not it wishes to recognize the sacrifices of a large group within the Lebanese community, those who stood alongside Bashir Gemayel, Pierre Gemayel, Camille Chamoun and Charles Malek. Only then will the right position be adopted, since the history, identity and culture of the Christians is a red line for the Phalange Party.
There is no problem between the Christians of March 14 in regard to the government formation and the majority is entitled to have a few days to divide up the portfolios, after it took the opposition several months to do the exact same thing. The obstruction seen today is due to the non-implementation of the Lebanese system which was undermined when the results of the elections were not respected in the government formation. The majority had to choose between either accepting this equation which was imposed by the minority by use of arms and through threats of staging another May 7, or taking the country toward civil war. It thus opted to make this sacrifice in order to protect the country.
The Party is demanding the Education portfolio because it believes it is a key ministry. It is through this ministry that the decision of the Lebanese youth to stay in Lebanon is influenced. At the level of the history book, it is a priority to the party which believes that this issue should be the object of a major workshop concentrating on rewriting the Lebanese history book in a way that is fair to all and [in a way that] respects the sacrifices they made for Lebanon.”
Asked about the Ministerial Statement, he said he refuses to accept “the legitimization of the arms of the resistance, since that would allow a Lebanese faction to control the decision over war and peace,” expecting “the eruption of a governmental crisis when faced with the first challenges, especially in light of the coming internal developments in terms of appointments among other events. There is a series of red lines being violated in a programmed way. The first is the use of the arms on the domestic arena and against civilians, and the second is the Maronite Patriarchate.” On the other hand, he differentiated between his position toward the Shia sect and his position toward Hezbollah, saying, “Hezbollah is the one trying to monopolize the country and not the Shia sect. Hezbollah has also bluntly announced its ties with Iran and this is not an accusation we made against it. Therefore, one cannot blame Patriarch Sfeir for his position in this regard.”
He therefore called for a “serious and official dialogue sponsored by the president of the republic and focusing on two separate issues: the surrender of Hezbollah’s arms to the state and the crisis affecting the system and the Lebanese society. The talk about a defensive strategy falls in the context of a brainwashing operation affecting the Lebanese population over different topics. The Lebanese army is the only institution entitled to draw this strategy. We neither want a failed state nor the monopolization of power, and should find the proper system that conveys plurality by putting forward the problems while recognizing culture plurality and the rights, identity, history and culture of the other.” In this context, he accused Hezbollah of “waging a cultural war on the Lebanese and limiting the Lebanese people’s rights and freedoms by setting conditions on some foreign artists and intellectuals who wanted to visit Lebanon,” adding, “Either there is a recognition of cultural plurality or not. Hezbollah is coming up with prohibitions which it is imposing on the Lebanese people, by preventing for example the Samba Festival in Tyre and opposing the visit of Gad al-Maleh among other incidents.
If Hezbollah wants to control the curricula in certain schools, we are entitled to look into the curricula it is teaching in its own schools. No one is saying that Hezbollah is not Lebanese, but the party should stop dealing with the people by arrogance, sit with them and show it is equal to them.” Regarding the relations with the Lebanese Forces, he reiterated, “The points of divergence are so futile in comparison with the common points at the level of the strategic course and the cause,” denying the existence of relations with Deputy Michel Aoun and saying, “There are contacts with Deputy Alain Aoun and we enjoy relations with Deputy Suleiman Franjieh and the Tashnaq. This communication is helping alleviate the tensions and should therefore continue.” Asked about the relations with the Future Movement, he said, “This movement has adopted an exceptional political position and this moderation should encourage the Christians in Lebanon.”

Close, but no cigar
November 9, 2009
Now Lebanon/So, nearly five months to the day after voting ended on June 7, Lebanon’s political groupings have agreed on the portfolio distribution for a new government; now all we are waiting for are the names. This is by no means a foregone conclusion. There are already rumblings of discontent from the Kataeb and the Lebanese Forces, while on Monday Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt said that Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri would be considering the names of ministers “patiently.”
In other words, we should not hold our breath.
Still, the nation should be happy for small mercies. At least we know who’s got what…nearly. We would also like to be able to say it was worth the wait, that complex issues pertaining to Lebanon’s tortuous journey to mature statehood – Hezbollah’s weapons, the Special Tribunal on Lebanon, relations with Syria and all they involve – had to be resolved before moving forward. Sadly, this has not been the case, even though many politicians spent Sunday trying their best to gloss-over the delay and talk-up the breakthrough.
Among them was President Michel Sleiman, a man who owes his job to the May 2008 Doha Accord, an event that was supposed to diffuse the tensions that lead Lebanon to the brink of civil war earlier that month. Speaking at an event in Amchit, Sleiman said that the time spent forming the government “was not in vain, rather it was important to gather the Lebanese and rebuild trust.”
This will come as a surprise to many, if not most, Lebanese who thought the whole rebuilding trust exercise was why Fouad Siniora and his government travelled to Doha with a gun at their collective heads. The elections, and the subsequent formation of a government, were to be the defining “result” of the Doha process. Then we could all move on. Elsewhere, Development and Liberation bloc MP Ali Bazzi said that the new cabinet, due to be announced in a “few hours” would be a “victory for all Lebanese.”
But not all politicians were waxing lyrical. Compare Sleiman and Bazzi’s sound bites with a comment from Kataeb MP Sami Gemayel who confessed that Hariri accepted the current arrangement because “it was better than civil war.” It is hardly an indication that trust has been rebuilt and it certainly doesn’t indicate a victory for all Lebanese (although some might say that avoiding a war constitutes an achievement these days).
But the most worrying manifestation to have emerged from Lebanon’s political class in recent days is the earmarking of the Ministerial Statement, a document that outlines a new government’s policy and objectives, as the next area of political conflict. And let us not forget the blocking third, an odious mechanism that will in all probability snuff out any future progress on the key issues that haunt Lebanon’s national development.
No wonder many members of March 14 feel deflated by developments. In five years, the alliance has endured the bomb and the bullet. It was taken into a war it didn’t want, and it was besieged in its own seat of government before being nearly overthrown in an armed coup. Despite all this, March 14 won the parliamentary elections but has only now, nearly half a year on, been able to form a government, one it knows will be impotent on key issues. Adwan summed it up perfectly when he predicted that “we will return to the status quo.”
In the meantime, we wait.

New Opinion: Cautious optimism
November 10, 2009
Now Lebanon/
There were no delirious celebrations. There was no zaffi, no handing out of sweets, and no random volleys of fire into the night sky (as if we all realized that the last five months have been tragic enough without adding loss of life to the debit column). It was a difficult pregnancy and the new government may still prove to be problem child, but for now cautious optimism is the order of the day even though there is much ground to be made up in winning back popular confidence in the political class.
It wasn’t an auspicious beginning. Within an hour of its announcement, the Kataeb Party and Michel Pharaon had voiced their disapproval – the former wanting the Education portfolio, and the latter the Information Ministry for the Greek Catholics – while Prime Minister Saad Hariri on Monday was widely reported as having only accepted this particular formula because it is the lesser of two evils – the other being civil conflict. This was how he told it to the nation: “I want to be honest from the start; this government can be a chance to renew faith in the state and its institutions... or it can turn into a replay of our failures.”
It is a fair bet that he was referring to regional dynamics, in particular the West’s stand-off with Iran, when he spoke of replaying failures. Has Lebanon been filed away as a done deal or will it be further buffeted by the winds of conflict and internal strife?
For the time being, the nascent administration is in Hariri’s hands. It remains to be seen whether the son of the assassinated former prime minister – whose death, and its consequences, have shaped the political landscape of the previous five years – has emerged from this cabinet impasse with a reputation as a wise reader of both regional and local complexities, a man who held his nerve, or a man who ultimately surrendered too much of his June 7 election victory by bowing to one too many opposition demands.
Yet if we assume – and accept – that the current cabinet formula received regional blessing, then we must also take the position that Lebanon has a government, and there is no reason why it should not work. Hariri & Co. must now convince us of their commitment, not just of getting on with the business of government, but of seriously addressing the chronic obstacles that have denied us progress toward true statehood. It will be a hard, but not impossible, sell.
For again, if we suppose – because for the moment we must – that the opposition does not have an extra card up the presidential sleeve to invoke the blocking third, and if we also suppose – again because for the moment we must – that all parties are committed to moving forward as one to achieve Lebanon’s long list of national priorities as part of a genuine national-unity government, then Hariri can build on his father’s legacy of fulfilling Lebanon’s considerable potential.
We have waited five years. If waiting five months is the price we must pay to be able to have a genuine debate on Hezbollah’s weapons (without doubt the biggest obstacle to national development and peace), broad consensus on the Special Tribunal for Lebanon and a whole host of economic reforms – including the privatization of the electricity, telecom and water sectors – then so be it.
It is easy to speak of failure and disappointment, but we must also remember that although the path to modern statehood and a democratic ideal has been strewn with challenges, tragedies and setbacks – ones that would have killed off lesser nations – Lebanon is nonetheless still on that journey, a journey it began on March 14, 2005.
Today is a day for cautious optimism.