LCCC
ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
February 05/09
Bible Reading of the
day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 6,1-6. He departed from
there and came to his native place, accompanied by his disciples. When the
sabbath came he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were
astonished. They said, "Where did this man get all this? What kind of wisdom has
been given him? What mighty deeds are wrought by his hands! Is he not the
carpenter, the son of Mary, and the brother of James and Joses and Judas and
Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him.
Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his native place
and among his own kin and in his own house."So he was not able to perform any
mighty deed there, apart from curing a few sick people by laying his hands on
them. He was amazed at their lack of faith. He went around to the villages in
the vicinity teaching.
Saint Bonaventure (1221-1274), Franciscan, Doctor of the Church
Meditations on the Life of Christ; Opera omnia, vol.12, p.530f.
"Where did this man get all this?... Is he not the carpenter, the son of Mary?"
When the Lord Jesus had returned to Nazareth with his parents from the Temple at
Jerusalem, he remained with them until his thirtieth year «and he was subject to
them» (Lk 2,51). There is nothing in Scripture to indicate that he accomplished
anything during that time, surprising though it seems... But pay attention and
you will see clearly that, in doing nothing, he worked wonders. Indeed, each one
of his deeds reveals his mystery. And just as what he did was with power, so
also he was silent with power and dwelt in hiddenness and obscurity with power.
The sovereign Lord, who was to teach us the way of life, began to do works of
power even from his youth, but in a way that was surprising, unrecognized and
unobtrusive, by appearing to be useless and ignorant in men's eyes and by living
in lowliness...He gave himself more and more to this way of life that all might
judge him to be base and insignificant. This had been foretold by the prophet,
speaking in his name: «I am a worm and no man» (Ps 22[21],7). Thus you see what
he did by doing nothing. He made himself despised. Do you think that to be a
small thing? For indeed, it was not he who stood in need of it, but us. I know
of nothing more difficult, nor of anything greater. They seem to me to have
reached the highest degree who, unfeignedly and with all their heart, are
sufficiently possessed of themselves as to seek nothing other than to be
despised, counted for nothing, and living in the deepest abasement. This is a
greater victory than to take a town.
Free Opinions, Releases, letters &
Special Reports
5 crucial files bothering Hezbollah/Future
News 04/02/09
Aoun kicks and is kicked
back/Future News 04/02/09
The Iranian dream that will never
come true-Future News 04/02/09
How To Talk To A Mullah (Not)-By:
Michael Ledeen/Pajamas Media
04/02/09
Iran’s Fear of a Velvet Revolution-By:
Maj. W. Thomas Smith Jr/International
Analyst Network 04/02/09
COUNTER-TERRORISM: Hezbollah Death Squads Gone Wild-Strategy
Page 04/02/09
Cultivating Lebanon's fertile no man's land-By
Marc J. Sirois 04/02/09
Where
are the protesters now that Gaza needs them more than ever?
By
The Daily Star 04/02/09
Latest News Reports From
Miscellaneous Sources for February 04/09
Michel Murr to Compete in Elections, Says He was
Victim of
Alliance
with
Aoun/Naharnet
Youssef: Bassil’s Don Quixote’s
heroism is over/future News
May
Chidiac Refuses to Betray Her Blood-Naharnet
Edde
to Aoun: Where Are Your Christian Values?-Naharnet
Israel Puts Combat
Troops on Alert to Ward off Possible Mughniyeh Revenge Attack-Naharnet
Tit-For-Tat Wrangling Between Berri and Saniora over Wiretapping-Naharnet
Gunfire at Jibril's Bekaa Base-Naharnet
Aid
Ship Leaves Cyprus for Gaza-Naharnet
Poland's Priority is NATO
Not UNIFIL-Naharnet
Hariri for Competition
Based on Integration of Arab Economies-Naharnet
Blair: Two-State Solution
Will Pave Way for Lebanon-Israel Talks-Naharnet
12 Men Plead Innocent to
Charges of Attacking Lebanese Musicians in Jordan-Naharnet
Israeli Mock Air Raids
over Iqlim Tuffah-Naharnet
Cyprus reports to UN on Iranian "arms" boat-Reuters
Siniora meets Bellemare to discuss Special
Tribunal-Daily
Star
Salameh warns against increasing budget deficit-Daily
Star
Top defense official Gilad: Israel must strive
for peace with Syria-Ha'aretz
Edde to Aoun: Where Are Your Christian Values?Naharnet
Senior Iranian Rules Out Engaging Biden at Conference-CNSNews.com
Pro-Hezbollah group claims firing 2 rockets at Israel-Xinhua
Gaza War May Be Over, but So Is Israeli Political Unity-U.S.
News & World Report
The "Gaza war": A strategic analysis-ReliefWeb
Inside an Afghan battle gone wrong (VII): What it tells us about ...Foreign
Policy
Amos Gilad: Only peace can avert collision with Syria-Ynetnews
Mitchell to press for talks between Lebanon and Israel - US officials-Daily
Star
Wiretapping center to be ready by April - Baroud-Daily
Star
Siniora meets Bellemare to discuss Special Tribunal-Daily
Star
Swiss
authorities return ancient bust to Beirut-(AFP)
Chamoun says reconstruction burdens government-Daily
Star
Iran calls for joint committee to probe fate of abducted citizens-Daily
Star
Walking the Line - Strategic Approaches to Peacebuilding in Lebanon-Daily
Star
Michel
Murr to Compete in Elections, Says He was Victim of Alliance with Aoun
Naharnet/MP Michel Murr said he would complete in the forthcoming parliamentary
elections as leader of the independent-moderate Christian list.
"The Murr election mechanism has kick-started, and we are going into the battle
at the top of an independent list that includes personalities from the Metn
province and is not related to the President (Michel Suleiman)," Murr announced
following a meeting with U.S. ambassador Michelle Sison. He confirmed that his
son, Defense Minister Elias Murr, would not run for elections set for June
7.Murr criticized policies carried out by Gen. Michel Aoun and his Free
Patriotic Movement."We were the victims of our alliance with Aoun." Beirut, 04
Feb 09, 15:44
5 crucial files bothering
Hezbollah
Bilal Yehya/Future News
Date: February 4th, 2009 Source
The Lebanese Shiite situation during the Gaza offensive and aftermath seemed to
be holding the burden of five crucial files causing sharp differences in Lebanon
and the region.
1. The legislative elections in Lebanon: as soon as some political factions
declared their intention to form a centrist bloc, independent from both March 14
and March 8 forces, the leaders of Hezbollah and AMAL movements started accusing
the “centrist politicians” of conspiring against Lebanon, and that the quest for
an independent centrist bloc to help the President during his term is nothing
but an attempt to restore powers to March 14 forces in the next elections.
The leaders of the mentioned movements believe that forming such a bloc falls in
the context of reducing Michel Aoun’s popularity among the Christians. It is
evident that Hezbollah is the “maestro” leading the orchestra which is waging
attacks against the centrist bloc in defense of their ally Michel Aoun, mainly
because Hezbollah expects that Aoun’s success in the Christian areas is a key
element for the minority to preserve the current number of deputies, especially
after its failure to form common ground among his alliances in the Sunni street,
especially in the North.
This would mean that the party would make enormous efforts in support for Aoun,
in order to preserve the current balance in the Lebanese arena, and to keep the
danger away if the Free Patriotic Movement was to experience a setback in the
areas of Jbeil, Keserwan and Metn. If this were to happen, Hezbollah would be
obliged to address the crucial Lebanese files after hiding behind Aoun who waded
the battles of Hezbollah since he signed the agreement paper three years ago.
2. Gaza offensive: during the Gaza offensive, Hezbollah did not submit any
acceptable reason for the violent attacks of Secretary General Sayyed Hasan
Nasrallah against the Arab regimes, particularly against Egypt. Nasrallah has
surprised the Arab public opinion, particularly the Egyptians with his sharp
speech violating logic, particularly when he called the Egyptian people and army
to topple the regime. The question that arises here is: who is to benefit from
the escalating speech of Nasrallah?
Certainly not in the interest of Hamas, which was facing a cruel Israeli attack
and needed all the help possible, particularly from Egypt which is considered
the lifeline of Gaza Strip. It is also true that Nasrallah’s speech embarrassed
Hamas’ leaders in front of the Egyptian regime, and all attempts to restore the
situation with Cairo went in vain. Hamas is still unable to eliminate the damage
caused by Nasrallah’s speech, which he reassured once again in his last press
conference, assuming that the Gaza offensive would be able to achieve what July
war 2006 failed to, bringing about radical changes in the Arab world.
After colliding with the reality in the Arab street, Nasrallah resorted to
accusations, according to the party’s perception; the approach of the Resistance
is the only way to restore the Palestinian’s rights. When the Gaza offensive
fails –like July war did- in producing an Arab political popular movement that
supports Hezbollah’s point of view, then the approach of resistance will
disappear, especially when this option fails to achieve any of its objectives
and becomes pointless, and then it will lose its popularity. This has frightened
Hezbollah and its Secretary General, but it seems that sharp language and sound
intensity will not change the public stance and nor the stance of the official
Arab regime.
3- The Syrian-Arab differences: in the light of reviving the Arab peace
initiative and Obama’s receiving office in the white house, several officials
insinuated at a Syrian attempt to fail this initiative. Informed sources with
the Syrian position said that the Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad prefers
bilateral negotiations with Israel because it allows the Syrian regime to use
the card of the Palestinian and Lebanese resistance. The sources confirmed that
the Syrian obstruction of the Palestinian dialogue and its interference in
Lebanon comes in this context because reaching a settlement of the internal
Palestinian crisis and the stabilization of the situation in Lebanon might deny
Damascus two cards to blackmail Washington seeking to settle the files of the
volatile region.
The sources added that the Syrian regime undermined the Saudi king’s initiative
by considering it as a step towards breaking the ice. Moreover, since then it is
trying to incite the Palestinian factions in Damascus against PLO and return
tension to the Lebanese arena.
The sources noted that “Hezbollah” hailing the Syrian- Saudi meeting was only a
façade while in fact; it launched a fierce media campaign against Saudi Arabia
and Egypt for Syria’s favor.
4- The Syrian-Iranian disparity: political analysis vary concerning the degree
of the Syrian- Iranian disparity concerning the Lebanese and regional files.
Some regarded the differences as serious enough to pile forming a strategic
separation. Other opinions regarded it as only tactical. Yet the two opinions
agree on two points:
1. Despite the information about a Syrian- Iranian difference after Damascus
entered the phase of direct negotiations with Israel, it is unlikely that a
Syrian-Iranian separation takes place on the short term.
2. The Iranian leadership places the Sunni- Shiite sensitivity in Lebanon and
the region on top of its priorities, while Damascus doesn’t mind using this
sensitivity if it contributes to the achievement of its objectives.
5-the Arab-Iranian differences: according to several Arab officials, the source
of this discrepancy is that Tehran is trying to use Arab cards to defend its
interests. It is well known that some cultural and political elites defended the
Iranian regime confirming that it did nothing wrong to the Arab world. Iran’s
defenders believe that it only filled a gap caused by the erosion of the Arab
formal system before the U.S. domination. Yet these opinions disregarded the
fact that Iran tried to fill the gap after the fall of Bagdad in the hands of
the Americans not to defy America, but to become its partner. Iran did not
justify its policies towards the Arabs. It spoke openly about having accomplices
in the Arabian Gulf, Lebanon and Iraq and confirmed that the July 2006 war
founded a new phase in the Middle East.
Aoun kicks and is kicked back
Date: February 4th, 2009 Source: Future News
Countdown to the fourth commemoration of the martyrdom of President Rafic Hariri
started, amid “March 8” attempts to distort the memory and confuse its purity
and symbolism with escalating passive speeches. Meanwhile President of the
“Future Movement” Saad Hariri is keen to call for participating in the February
14, 2009 gathering, urging people to stay away from chaos and extremism, and to
adopt dialogue as a way to meet on common ground preventing segregation and
division.
MP Saad Hariri assured in front of a delegation from the heads of civil and
social associations in Beirut “the people of Beirut are very much concerned
about this memory because of their sufferings over the past years and the
incidents of May 7”.
The coordinator of the General Secretariat of March 14 forces, Fares Souaid said
after meeting with Chief Executive of the Lebanese Forces Samir Geagea in Mehrab
“President Hariri’s martyrdom founded for national unity that led to the
departure of the Syrian army from Lebanon”.
On the other hand, MP Hariri received the Egyptian ambassador Ahmad el-Bedewi
and replied to the ongoing campaign against the moderate Arab countries, saying
“Egypt will never abandon its national responsibilities, it has always been at
the forefront in defense of the Palestinian cause and therefore needs no good
conduct certificate from any one, especially from factions that have surrendered
their decisions and fate to non-Arab willpower”.
The Tribunal...and conclusive evidence
The International Tribunal and Investigation were discussed yesterday in the
Grand Serail, where the President of the International Commission of Inquiry
into the assassination of the martyr President, Judge Daniel Bellemare briefed
PM Siniora on the latest communications and stages that have been completed for
launching the International Tribunal on the first of next March.
The “Central News Agency” quoted sources following up on the works of the
International Investigation Committee that it has worked professionally using
highly sophisticated techniques, assisted by investigators and experts in the
science of crime who had reached decisive and unequivocal evidence.
Aoun’s match
“Aoun kicks and is kicked back”, Michel Aoun started threatening the leaders of
the majority and members of the press among public astonishment and outrage.
Prominent ministerial sources believed “the person who talked from Rabieh
yesterday in front of cameras, was not Aoun but another matching person”. The
member of the “Democratic Gathering” MP Marwan Hamadeh said, “We are not among
those whose tongues and hands are cut off easily”.
The sources said, “The person who calls for trialing MP Walid Jumblatt, PM
Siniora and MP Saad Hariri because of damaging the relation with Syria, seems to
submit an unreasonable and imbalanced proposal, especially that General Aoun has
a rich hostile history concerning his relations with Syria”.
After the language of “cutting” and “crushing”, member of “Loyalty to the
Resistance” MP Ali Al-Khalil returned to adopting the speech of accusations
threatening the majority of “being a “spearhead” to execute the Resistance, and
Hezbollah will not allow this anymore”.
Escaping the confrontation
As the “knot” of the South Council budget standstill, the issue of wiretapping
still lingers. It is expected that this issue will be discussed in the second
meeting of the Parliamentary Information and Communications Committee. House
Speaker Nabih Berry prepares to initiate a step towards forming a parliamentary
commission of inquiry on the matter. The ministers of defense, interior,
justice, communications and the Prosecutor General, Judge Said Mirza, were
invited, while the leaders of the security services were excluded according to
An-Nahar newspaper.
Prominent figures from the parliamentarian majority interpreted this as “an
aspiration not to face the security realities that were discussed in the Serail
meeting”, asking, “If there was a call to establish a parliamentary commission
of inquiry, whom are they going to scrutinize if the security services did not
participate in them”.
Gemayel assures the importance of the Lebanese model for coexistence
Meanwhile, the President of the Kataeb party, former President Amin Gemayel
emphasized during his meeting with Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Vatican,
Cardinal Dominique Mamberti, the importance of the Lebanese model of
coexistence, saying, and “any quivering of this model has serious repercussions
on the Christians in Lebanon, the Orient and the world”.
May Chidiac Refuses to Betray Her Blood
Naharnet/TV anchorwoman May Chidiac announced she was quitting LBC "to avoid
betraying my bloodshed" more than three years ago when she survived a car bomb
assassination attempt. Chidiac, tears brimming in her eyes and her voice choking
with emotions, told LBC viewers Tuesday evening: "This is home, but I have
decided to put an end to my talk show because I cannot betray my blood anymore
to propitiate an unknown person who prevents guests from appearing in my show in
the last minute." Addressing "colleagues who had staged a relentless war against
me," Chidiac said: "I quit when I decide to quit after you have lost all your
battles."
"I cannot defend the killers who remain in Lebanon," she said in reference to
the unidentified culprits charged with trying to assassinate her on Sept. 25,
2005.
"I hope the international tribunal would be able to punish the criminals,"
Chidiac said in reference to the Hague-based court that would try suspects in
the Feb. 14, 2005 killing of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri and related crimes. Beirut,
04 Feb 09, 12:10
Gunfire at Jibril's Bekaa Base
Naharnet/Automatic gunfire was heard Tuesday night near the Bekaa town of Bar
Elias in areas manned by Syrian-backed Palestinian militants, the National News
Agency reported. It said sporadic gunfire was heard the entire night of
Tuesday-Wednesday in the area where Ahmed Jibril's Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC) has a base. NNA said the
crackle of automatic fire echoed specifically in the area called "Nafaq Ain al-Bayda."Last
month, al-Balad daily said PFLP-GC members have carried out a massive deployment
outside their headquarters in Luci and Sultan Yaqoub, planting land mines and
bombs to ward off against a possible Israeli landing. The militants also set up
14.5mm machine guns around the two bases, according to al-Balad. Beirut, 04 Feb
09, 12:43
Israel Puts Combat Troops on Alert to Ward off Possible Mughniyeh Revenge Attack
Naharnet/Israel ordered its outposts and combat troops on alert along the border
with Lebanon over fears Hizbullah would carry out an attack to avenge the
killing of its top commander Imad Mughniyeh, Israeli military sources said
Wednesday. A military spokesman, however, told Agence France Presse that the
army had not gone on a general state of alert in the area. On Tuesday, Israeli
Defense Minister Ehud Barak responded to threats by Hizbullah by saying any
attack would prompt a painful and beyond imagination response from Israel. "I
want to say here, on the border, that I don't recommend that Hizbullah test us
because the consequences would be more painful than one can imagine," Barak said
during a visit to the Israeli-Lebanese frontier area. Hizbullah chief Sayyed
Hassan Nasrallah vowed last week to avenge the killing of Mughniyeh in a
February 2008 car bombing in Damascus which the Shiite group blamed on Israel.
"I want to tell the Lebanese government we would hold it responsible," Barak
said, according to a statement by the defense ministry.(AFP-Naharnet) Beirut, 04
Feb 09, 13:26
Tit-For-Tat Wrangling Between Berri and Saniora over
Wiretapping
Naharnet/Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri appeared launching a tit-for-tat
campaign to counter a decision sponsored by Premier Fouad Saniora on wiretapping
of communications in line with the rule of law and national security
requirements. The parliamentary committee on media and communications is
to tackle the issue of wiretapping telephone calls on Thursday amidst efforts by
Berri to form a parliamentary investigation committee into wiretapping.
The leading daily An-Nahar said the ministers of justice, defense, interior and
telecommunications were asked to joint the parliamentary meeting along with
Attorney General Saeed Mirza. However, it noted that directors of security
agencies were not invited to the Parliamentary meeting. Sources close to the
March 14 majority were quoted by An-Nahar as asking "who would the investigation
target if directors of security agencies were not involved in the meeting?"
"Excluding directors of security agencies reflects an intention to avoid facing
security facts that were discussed during the Grand Serail meeting" on Monday,
the sources said. MP Ghazi Youssef, member of the Mustaqbal Parliamentary bloc,
said in a radio interview that Minister of Telecommunications Jebran Bassil was
"curbed by the ministerial meeting" presided over by Saniora on Monday and "he
was asked to implement the (wiretapping) law." Berri, An-Nahar said, is
marshalling members of his parliamentary bloc to attend the meeting on Thursday.
The daily As-Safir said the parliamentary committee meeting would be "more like
a general parliamentary session held behind closed doors." Berri, the report
added, has instructed all members of his parliamentary bloc to attend the
session. In an apparent effort to counter Berri's move, Mustaqbal Movement
leader Saad Hariri, who heads the largest parliamentary bloc, also instructed
all MPs to attend the session. Media reports said the confrontation over the
wiretapping law appears to be only a reflection of the real dispute between
Berri and Saniora over a 60-billion-pound budget requested by the parliament
speaker for the Council for South Lebanon that has been hindering adoption of
the state budget.
Beirut, 04 Feb 09, 09:59
Aid Ship Leaves Cyprus for Gaza
Naharnet/The Lebanese "Brotherhood Ship" sailed on Wednesday toward Gaza
carrying activists and supplies after a stopover in Cyprus, the state-run
National News Agency reported. The activists include the former Greek-Catholic
archbishop of Jerusalem, Monsignor Hilarion Capucci, who left Jerusalem in the
1970s after serving time in an Israeli jail for membership of the Palestine
Liberation Organization. Organizer Hani Suleiman told NNA that Cypriot
authorities had cleared the way for the trip after searching the vessel to
ensure transparency. Larnaca Port Manager Pampis Vassiliou said the Togo-flagged
"Tali" carrying about 60 tons of medicine and food as well as eight activists
and journalists left Cyprus for Gaza Wednesday morning after an overnight
stopover at the port.
The ship is trying to reach Gaza in defiance of an Israeli blockade. Organizers
said the trip has not been cleared by Israeli authorities, who have turned back
similar aid boats trying to reach Gaza.(AP-AFP-Naharnet) Beirut, 04 Feb 09,
11:35
Poland's Priority is NATO Not UNIFIL
Poland is to quit U.N.-flagged peacekeeping missions in Chad, Lebanon and the
Golan Heights, Defense Minister Bogdan Klich said Wednesday, citing
crisis-driven spending cuts and a strategic rethink. "These three missions will
end, notably because of budget cuts, but also because missions under United
Nations' auspices are not among Poland's priorities," Klich announced on the
Polish rolling news channel TNV24, without announcing exactly when the troops
would be withdrawn.
"NATO and EU missions are Poland's priority," he added. Poland's biggest ongoing
commitment is to the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in
Afghanistan, where it has 1,600 troops and has been considering adding 600 more.
Poland's current 400-member mission in Chad is the second-largest after France's
in the European Union's peacekeeping force there, which also operates in Central
Africa. The EU's U.N.-approved mandate expires in March and the mission is to
pass under the command of the world body. Poland also has nearly 500 troops in
Lebanon as part of the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) which is helping
to monitor the ceasefire between Israel and Hizbullah following the month-long
war in the summer of 2006. A further 360 Poles are based in the Golan Heights,
which Israel captured from Syria in a 1967 war. Cutting the missions is part of
a wider belt-tightening announced by the Polish government on Tuesday.
Warsaw aims to slash spending by 19.7 billion zlotys (4.27 billion euros, 5.56
billion dollars) due to the global financial crisis. Although Poland is expected
to avoid recession, the government has warned that economic growth could fall to
1.7 percent this year, significantly lower than the official 3.7 percent
forecast in the 2009 budget.(AFP) Beirut, 04 Feb 09, 12:48
Hariri for Competition Based on Integration of Arab
Economies
Mustaqbal Movement leader Saad Hariri on Wednesday called for "constructive
competition" between Arab economies based on integration of such structures.
Hariri made the call in an address at the opening session in Beirut of the Arab
Business Forum. He said "all indications predict that Lebanon … would not be
affected by the international financial crisis." However, Hariri added, "we
cannot claim absolute immunity as we are not capable of isolating our economy
from foreign developments." Some circles believe that the crisis reflects
failure of globalizing the economy "but I still believe that market economy is
the ideal system, but it should be surrounded by safeguards," Hariri added. He
called for "developing … cooperation between Arab states by activating and
developing joint Arab investment in the fields of tourism, agriculture,
industry, data technology, media, advertising and education to achieve real
integration." Beirut, 04 Feb 09, 11:08
Edde to Aoun: Where Are Your Christian Values?
Naharnet/National Bloc Party leader Carlos Edde on Tuesday accused Free
Patriotic Movement leader Gen. Michel Aoun of "pumping hatred into the Lebanese
people." "What is more serious is that Aoun claims to represent Christians and
vows to cut tongues and hands of brothers in humanity, only because they
disagree with him," Edde said in a statement. "Where are the Christian values in
Aoun's address, although he claims to represent Christians of the Orient?" Edde
asked.
Beirut, 03 Feb 09, 19:11
12 Men Plead Innocent to Charges of Attacking Lebanese
Musicians in Jordan
Naharnet/Twelve suspects have pleaded not guilty to charges of shooting members
of Lebanon's Saint-Esprit University's (USEK) choir, plotting terrorist attacks
on a Christian church and a cemetery in Jordan. The men -- all Jordanians of
Palestinian origin -- are on trial before a military court. If convicted, they
could be sentenced to death. The men were charged with shooting and wounding six
people, including members from the Lebanese group, making and hurling Molotov
cocktails at a cemetery and a church, and the illegal possession of weapons. The
attacks took place last July. They pleaded not guilty on Tuesday. Their trial
started last week. The prosecution alleges that the group's mastermind, Shaker
al-Khatib, was trained in Lebanon by an alleged al-Qaida member and that he
later formed a militant cell in Jordan.(AP-Naharnet) Beirut, 04 Feb 09, 10:14
Blair: Two-State Solution Will Pave Way for Lebanon-Israel Talks
Naharnet/Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said that resolving the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the "single most important thing we can do to
restore peace in the region", adding that this would pave the way for peace
between Israel and Syria on the one hand and Israel and Lebanon on the other.
Blair made his remarks Tuesday night as part of the Issam M. Fares Lecture
Series at Tufts University in Boston addressing a near-capacity crowd of
students, local officials and dignitaries from around the world. "Resolving the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the single most important thing we can do to
restore peace and stability in that region," said Blair, who is also the special
envoy of the Middle East Quartet, a group comprising the U.S., Russia, the
European Union and the United Nations that is mediating the Israeli-Palestinian
peace process. A solution to the conflict, he said, would mean that peace
negotiations "between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon will not be far"
and the impact of such peace would be felt across the region and the world.
In an indirect swipe at the former U.S. administration's policy in the Middle
East, Blair said a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was
still possible if "we, like (U.S. President Barak) Obama insist on dealing with
the issue a bit more seriously". "If we were able, in that conflict, to provide
the basis for peace… that would be the single most powerful expression of
coexistence that there could possibly be," he said.
In attendance Tuesday were President Lawrence S. Bacow, Nijad Fares,
representing the Fares family, and Leila Fawaz, Issam M. Fares, Professor of
Lebanese and Eastern Mediterranean Studies and founding director of the Fares
Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies. The audience also included Antoine
Chedid, the ambassador of Lebanon to the United States, Somerville Mayor Joseph
A. Curtatone and the consuls-general from several countries including Great
Britain, Canada, Colombia, Japan and Switzerland.
While insisting that peace in the Middle East can only be achieved through
diplomacy, Blair said that Israel's "security needs must be balanced with
encouraging progress in the West Bank". Blair remained upbeat despite Israel's
recent military offensive on the Gaza Strip that left at least 1,300 people
dead. He said that last year brought the "beginnings of hope and prosperity" to
the region; a trend he said must be pursued. He said that the conflict in Gaza
requires a "different and more creative approach, one that would guarantee the
pre-empting of extremists and would offer the people of Gaza a way out of their
misery".
Blair made an urgent appeal to achieve peace in a region long beset by violence
and conflict.
"We can't afford to let another year pass without substantial progress on this
issue," he said. "Let us start to make 2009 the year we bring peace to the
Middle East.
Speaking of global interdependence, Blair admitted that the days of Western
hegemony are long gone adding that world conflicts and challenges are "far too
complex to solve through military means alone".
Issues such as terrorism need to be tackled globally, Blair said, adding that
"not even a country as powerful as the U.S. can simply go it alone anymore".
"We live in an era of global interdependence that relies on international
alliances to confront a shared set of challenges", he said. In understanding the
culture of Islam, Blair said it is important to understand "there are two
narratives taking place. On one side are the modern Muslims who believe the
answer to their challenges is to modernize and join the 21st century". Against
the pro-modern Muslims are those who Blair said appear to be more a reaction to
the modern world. "It is an ideology not based on the Koran," Blair said, "but
an ideology based on the seventh century interpretation of the Koran."
"Terrorism is used by such extremists," Blair continued, "and is used as a
powerful weapon. It's used to destabilize and it's used to provoke." He called
for "a new level of diplomacy" since many countries of the world have become far
too interconnected. "If we are to defeat it [terrorism], we have to be prepared
to adopt a far better, more strategic vision of the future," said Blair. "One
where we see the future as shared and we cannot simply impose our views on other
people."
"We need also the language and the instances and the policies of effective
diplomacy," he continued. "We have to reach into the region in a more detailed
and articulate way than before." "The world is opening up," he said. "There is a
coming together. Do we make that coming together work or do we make that coming
together a source of friction and division that then leads to a coming apart?
"The days of Western supremacy are over," said Blair. "We cannot superimpose our
view of the world on other people". Beirut, 04 Feb 09, 11:07
The Iranian dream that will never come true
Date: February 4th, 2009 Source: Future News
The mullah’s regime in Iran is insisting on using the aggression on Gaza and
other Arab issues to pass its Persian plan. And to be fair, we should confess
that it exploited into the best possible way the Israeli aggression through
demonizing the role of the Arab countries, particularly Egypt and Saudi Arabia
who they both refuse the destructive approach.Iran has succeeded through some
Palestinian factions in downing historical causes such as the Palestinian
Liberation Organization, which has been symbolized through the call to replace
this historical political-resistance organization. The problem with the mullah’s
regime is that it gives its own explanation to Islam and wants to force
everybody to abide with. This is unacceptable and could not be overcome, as
acknowledging this fact means the death of the Palestinian cause. The Iranians
want only to use this cause as an open arena to trade their own plans and in
particular their nuclear ambitions.
The debate opened by some parties as for the Arab responsibility is out of its
place, as the Arabs never hesitated in defending the righteous and just cause of
the Palestinians, and they clearly expressed their position through the Arab
Peace Initiative approved by most of the Arab countries, then by the League of
the Muslim countries, but then Iran interfered and the problems created by
pushing some parties to incite the situation lead us to the present situation of
disagreements.
We therefore should remember the internal Palestinian divisions and whose
responsibility is it, so we can address the Egyptian and Saudi efforts to
reconcile and its outcome. In this sense, the first priority for Arabs today,
peoples and governments, is to prevent the aggressiveness of Iran on the basis
of building the Arab consensus with the Palestinian cause as a fundamental
issue, and in conformity with the Egyptian initiative.
However, no one should have the illusion that Iran will refrain from trying to
abort an Arab consensus, but the Palestinian should in return decide what they
aim to realize as for the Palestinian state and the right of return to the
refugees, and ways to achieve it, otherwise, the Persian empire will continue
its march while the Arabs will be asked to clear the way. Certainly this plan is
a dream that would never come true.
Medium-range rocket from Gaza hits Israeli city
By ARON HELLER – 6 hours ago
JERUSALEM (AP) — A medium-range rocket from Gaza landed in the Israeli city of
Ashkelon on Tuesday as delegates from the territory's militant Islamic Hamas
rulers met in Cairo for talks with Egyptian officials striving to mediate a
long-term truce with Israel.
The Grad rocket was the first of its kind to be fired at the city of 122,000
since informal cease-fires were declared separately by Israel and Hamas two
weeks ago at the end of Israel's bruising three-week-long offensive in Gaza. The
rocket landed in an open space in the middle of the city and no one was injured,
police said. The Grad is distinctive from the home-made projectiles more
commonly used by Hamas and smaller militant groups, as it is manufactured
abroad, has greater reach and carries a more powerful payload.
Defense Minister Ehud Barak pledged that if Hamas held its fire Israel would do
likewise, while violence would be met by violence.
"If there is quiet then there will be quiet," he told reporters during a tour of
northern Israel's border with Lebanon. "If it is necessary to deal another, even
stronger, blow then at the right time and in the right way an additional and
stronger blow will be dealt."
Residents of the southern Gaza town of Rafah said they received telephone
messages from the Israeli military later in the day warning them to leave their
homes ahead of an impending airstrike. The town, on the frontier with Egypt, is
a center for smuggling goods and weapons into the strip through tunnels under
the border.
The recorded messages, in Arabic, said people who work in tunnels, live near
them or are "giving logistical help to terrorists" should evacuate the area
immediately, residents said.
Israel launched its Gaza offensive on Dec. 27 to halt near-daily rocket fire
from Gaza at Israel targets. Sporadic rocket and mortar fire from Gaza has
continued, however, prompting tough warnings of reprisal from Israeli leaders.
More than a dozen rockets and mortar shells slammed into Israel on Sunday. The
following day Israel fired a missile at a car in the town of Rafah, killing a
Palestinian militant, and bombed the nearby Gaza-Egypt border, seeking to
destroy tunnels that Hamas uses to smuggle in weapons and supplies.
Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni pledged to keep hitting Hamas as long
rockets continue to be fired at Israel, and she ruled out negotiations with
Hamas.
"Terror must be fought with force and lots of force. Therefore we will strike
Hamas," she said at a security conference Monday. "If by ending the operation we
have yet to achieve deterrence, we will continue until they get the message."
Continued violence could work against Livni's government in the Feb. 10 general
election and bolster hard-line opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu, who is seen
as the front-runner.
Ashkelon was hit by nearly 100 rockets during the Gaza fighting. Following
Tuesday's rocket attack, a local parents' union called for classes to be called
off. But city officials announced that school would be open as usual.
A Hamas delegation was to meet Egyptian mediators in Cairo on Tuesday for talks
aimed at reaching a long-term cease-fire.
Hamas' top demand is opening of Gaza's borders with Israel and Egypt. The
crossings have remained sealed to all but a trickle of supplies since Hamas
seized control of Gaza in June 2007 from its rivals in another Palestinian
group.
The Hamas delegation, which includes officials from its exiled leadership in
Syria, also was to be briefed by the Egyptians about their separate meetings
with the Israelis. Hamas and Israel do not negotiate directly.
Israel does not want any deal that gives Hamas a role in controlling Gaza border
crossings out of concern that that would permit continued weapons smuggling.
Israelis feared the threat of a two-front war with Lebanon's Hezbollah militia,
which held its fire during the onslaught in Gaza. But the Israeli government
believes Hezbollah is planning an attack against Israel, or Israelis abroad, to
mark the Feb. 12 anniversary of the killing of a senior Hezbollah commander in a
car bombing the militia blames on Israel.
The Israeli National Security Agency is warning all Israelis travelling abroad
to be extra vigilant for fear of murder or kidnap attempts by Hezbollah agents.
Barak said Lebanon's government, which includes Hezbollah, could also face
retaliation if Israel is attacked.
"Hezbollah is not just a terror organization running around the hills but also
sits at the Cabinet table in Beirut," Barak said. "Therefore the Lebanese
government bears overall responsibility and any attempt to attack Israel will be
met with a response."
Phares: Iran’s Fear of a Velvet Revolution
By: Maj. W. Thomas Smith Jr.
03 Feb 2009
PRESS TV, the Iranian-government-owned English-language web and television
broadcasting company, recently published a report contending Iran's intelligence
ministry had uncovered and publicly disclosed details regarding an alleged
“’US-backed' spy ring which had plans to topple the Tehran government.”
According to the report:
“Following the arrest of four Iranian nationals on charges of plotting to
overthrow the government with Washington's support, head of the counterespionage
department in the Intelligence Ministry said Monday that the group intended to
build social and political tension in the country.”
The official, whose name was not revealed, added "organizing anti-government
public rallies and creating ethnic division in the country" were among the
tactics to be employed by the network.” [The report may be read here.]
In our ongoing conversations with Dr. Walid Phares – director of the Future of
Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies who now also
serves as secretary general of the Trans Atlantic Legislative Group on Counter
Terrorism -- we asked for his interpretation of any underlying message within
the report.
We know what the report says. What are the Iranians not saying?
DR. WALID PHARES: First, the Iranian regime has always conducted arrests among
its opposition. It has done so since coming to power in 1980. The regime has –
for all intent and purposes – physically eliminated Iranian citizens – thousands
of them – by labeling them as being "U.S.-backed" and/or "Zionist" elements
inside the country.
If you look at the archives of the various international human rights
organizations, or country reports in various foreign ministries; and of course,
if you review the information collected from the many Iranian opposition groups,
you’ll easily discover a continuous and systematic suppression of freedoms in
Iran for the last 30 years. The arrest campaigns have covered nearly every
sector of Iranian society: students, women, labor, artists, but also ethnic
minorities such as Arabs, Kurds, Baluch, Azeri and others. Also, religious
minorities such as Christians, Jews and Bahais have also been persecuted.
The news regarding arrests of Azeri ethnics in Iran is not unusual. We've been
reading open sources reports about Bahais arrests in recent weeks, as well as
arrests of Ahwaz Arabs over the past several months, and women over the last
year. So, the reports by the Iranian regime about a "U.S. conspiracy" is neither
strange nor exceptional.
W. THOMAS SMITH JR.: The Iranian press reported the unnamed intelligence
official as saying “the group” had been successful in fomenting dissent among
Azeri people in the Azerbaijan Province. Why the regime’s focus on this
province?
PHARES: This is very telling in that anti-Khomeinist sentiment is spreading in
the northwestern part of the country and among the single largest ethnic
minority in Iran. Azeris are the second group after the Persians, and they form
a contiguous group settling the entire northwestern part of Iran in what is
known as southern Azarbaijian. It is historically a part of the Azeri nation and
they speak a Turkic language. Traditionally the Iranian Azeris have been loyal
to the Iranian nation, and many among them have served in Iran's military. But
with the radicalization of the regime and the economic crisis now underway in
Iran, many ethnic minorities are protesting bad socio-economic conditions in
their areas. They mainly accuse the Mullahs in Tehran of concentrating wealth
among their own elite in the center while letting the provinces decay. The
Azeris aren't happy with the state of affairs in the so-called ‘Islamic
republic.’ Hence we're witnessing the rise of local opposition movements in
their areas. The regime responds with preemptive arrests, and of course labels
any protest as a ‘pro-American’ conspiracy: Classical Khomeinist narrative.
SMITH: Why would the Iranian press quote ‘Intelligence officials’ and not the
justice ministry?
PHARES: Because most likely when the opposition is widening, the regime
unleashes its strongest arm, the intelligence services. If anything this is an
indicator that the Azeri movement, and all other movements are getting stronger
with time.
SMITH: The report states:
“Tehran's Islamic Revolution Court sentenced the four suspects without
announcing the length of their sentence.
“‘They have confessed to trying to distance the people of Iran from the
government and introduce the United States as their sole savior,’ the court said
in a statement.
“Two of the detainees are internationally renowned doctors Arash and Kamyar
Alaei, who specialize in HIV/AIDS.
“In the Monday press conference, the top Iranian counterespionage official said
that the US intelligence agencies had resorted to ‘soft overthrow projects’ over
the past decade, as there is no international statute law against such
measures.”
What are we to deduce from such arrests?
PHARES: It means the middle class in Iranian Azarbaijian is fed up with the
Mullah regime. When the Khomeinists begin striking out at citizens – doctors as
in this case, or professors and bloggers as in other cases – we’re talking about
a serious development. When educated people are accused of political
‘incitement’ against the regime – which translates to political opposition – it
means that many more activists are mobilizing civil society, and that of course
is a red line to the regime.
SMITH: The report also mentions the U.S. having spent $32 million on “soft
overthrow projects,” a means by which the U.S. could “infiltrate elite and
expert circles” and therein gain access to information regarding national
“infrastructure, microbiological achievements, and defensive capacity.” They
also named names of Americans. Why?
PHARES: It is an act of desperation. It shows the regime is angry and wants to
send a message to the U.S. government, which by the way is preparing to open
dialogue with Tehran. By naming names and agencies, the Iranian Pasdaran
[Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] and intelligence services are sending a
message to the Obama administration telling them that if they want to open
dialogue, they will have to shut all these ‘democracy operations.’ What is
ironic is that the Bush administration was criticized for doing so little to
help the Iranian democracy movement. If indeed the Iranian regime is complaining
about $32 million spent allegedly by the U.S. on democracy activities, this is
peanuts compared to the billions of dollars spent on the war on terror and the
hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the war of ideas. This amount is
ridiculous: Yet the Iranian regime wants Washington not to spend a penny on any
program that would help democracy groups in Iran. This pressure is aimed at
preempting the Obama administration.
SMITH: The report said “Iranian intelligence operatives had been able to
infiltrate the network and ‘launch an intelligence war with the CIA by leaking
false information.’” It also said the UK and Israel were involved.
PHARES: Typical of the regime to try to frame all three governments of the U.S.,
UK, and Israel in one giant conspiracy. For by linking alleged Israeli
activities to alleged U.S. and British activities against the regime, they would
create a ‘radioactive’ environment in the region. Again, Tehran is trying to
build a big bargaining chip for the day of dialogue. Thus the Iranian
negotiators hope to be in a position of strength: Hold the high ground and lead
with other subjects before the discussion of the most relevant ones, i.e. the
nuclear issues.
SMITH: The report mentions the claim by Mohammad-Javad Zarif, the former Iranian
ambassador to the United Nations, that “the White House is taking essential
measures to orchestrate a ‘Velvet Revolution’ in Iran.”
PHARES: It is a reminder of the last decade of the Soviet Union when Soviet
citizens invited to the West were eager to learn about open and free societies.
They were often punished by Moscow for concocting revolutions against the
Communist regime. The Iranian establishment lives in the paranoia of a similar
situation. They spy on their own citizens when they travel and accuse them of
being recruited by the West. When the Khomeinists start talking about a
so-called ‘American support’ of a so-called ‘Velvet Revolution’ inside Iran, it
means they are indeed afraid that seeds have already been sown for such a
revolution. In fact, what worries the regime are not these scientific
conferences but the narrative on many Iranian web sites talking about
‘democratic revolution.’ Ali Khamenei's Pasdaran can feel the sentiment inside
Iran's civil society. Thus they want to suppress these sentiments by connecting
them to an alleged American and Western
activity.
[Dr. Phares, who has provided similar analysis to U.S. government – and who
regularly conducts Congressional and State Department as well as European
Parliament and UN Security Council briefings – has been providing exclusive
analysis to us for nearly five years.]
[The Iranian Press TV report also states: “Investigative journalist Seymour
Hersh revealed in July that U.S. Congressional leaders had secretly agreed to
President George W. Bush's $400-million funding request for a major escalation
in covert operations inside Iran.” Our sources coordinating with the Iranian
opposition groups, have informed us that members of those opposition groups “are
wondering why Hersh is leaking such information, which is in turn used by the
regime against them.”]
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. at uswriter.com.
How To Talk To A Mullah
Support Pajamas
Michael Ledeen
February 1st, 2009
Last fall, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates–a man well known for his prudence
as well as thoughtfulness–remarked on the many failed efforts by the United
States to reach some sort of modus vivendi with the Iranian regime.
Every administration since 1979 has reached out to the Iranians in one way or
another and all have failed. Some have gotten into deep trouble associated with
their failures, but the reality is the Iranian leadership has been consistently
unyielding over a very long period of time in response to repeated overtures
from the United States about having a different and better kind of relationship.
Leave aside the fact that, before becoming SecDef, Gates was one of many who
recommended “engaging” the Iranian regime in talks; things look different from
inside the Pentagon, when daily reports document the extent of Iranian evil
doing to our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the murderous activities of
their proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah. “Consistently unyielding” is a significant
understatement. The “reality,” as he puts it, is that there is no reason to
believe that the Iranians are interested in anything other than our destruction
or domination. They are our enemies, as they have proven over the past thirty
years.
Which is not to say they won’t talk. They love to talk, and they excel at
talking, which they view quite differently from the way we look at “engagement”
or “negotiations.” We seek durable agreements to resolve fundamental problems;
The Iranians are quite capable of striking temporary deals with their worst
enemies, fully intending to resume hostilities when circumstances are more
favorable.
I saw their methods at first hand. For a few months in the summer and early
autumn of 1985, I was the only American official in the room during talks with
various Iranians, including some very high-ranking ayatollahs, and I was privy
to telephone conversations with Iranian officials in the office of President Mir
Hussein Moussavi.
The circumstances certainly favored a positive result, much more so than today’s
situation (even though there are some important similarities). The Iranians were
then at war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, and they were having a rough go of it.
Iraq had the upper hand on the battlefield, and was attacking inside Iran. Iran
had hardly any night radar, and once the sun set, the Iraqis routinely bombed
Iranian targets, including the cities, which saw a nightly exodus of tens of
thousands of people swarming to the safer darkness of the countryside. The
regime was becoming more unpopular by the day, as citizens attacked government
and religious leaders in the streets. There was even open conflict between
different factions of the Revolution Guards, and there were reports of workers
walking off the oil fields.
Under the circumstances, it was not surprising that the mullahs were prepared to
deal, even with the satanic forces of Israel and the United States. The
Ayatollah Khomeini, the country’s unchallenged tyrant, had to wonder if destiny
had turned against him. Iran desperately needed help. And the Iranians had cards
to play with us, in the form of several American hostages held by Hezbollah. One
of these was particularly important, both to President Reagan and to CIA chief
William Casey: William Buckley, the station chief in Beirut. While never
admitting they controlled Buckley’s fate, the Iranians said that if the
relationship between the two countries improved, they would be as helpful as
possible in obtaining the release of the American hostages. The Americans
replied that the relationship was the central issue, but that Iran would have to
call a halt to all terrorist attacks against American targets, and moderate its
rhetoric (“Death to America!”, then, as now, was loudly chanted in the streets).
If that happened, and if Iran helped with the hostages, the United States was
prepared to sell weapons to the mullahs as a sign of good faith.
Over the course of several months, the United States sold weapons (and later
provided military intelligence), terrorist attacks ceased, and Iranian leaders
pointedly omitted America from its enemies list on major public occasions. Two
hostages dribbled out, but never Buckley, who was brutally tortured to death.
Despite numerous meetings, the relationship was certainly not improved. Each
side blamed the other, and there was plenty of blame to share, as I made clear
in a detailed account (Perilous Statecraft; An Insider’s Account of the
Iran-Contra Affair). But, for those who think they can reshape the relationship
today, a few important lessons can be learned:
–The degree of ignorance, distrust and treachery at the highest levels of the
Iranian regime is so great that the “process” on their side is almost totally
opaque. Officials do not tell one another what is going on, they threaten one
another if they suspect anyone is trying to make a deal with the Americans, and
their inability to understand the workings of the American Government is almost
limitless. Our Iran experts constantly bemoan American failure to understand
Iran, but the Iranians’ ignorance of us is often spectacular. They believed that
George H.W. Bush, not Ronald Reagan, was the most powerful man in Washington
(after all, he’d run the CIA, which runs much of the world). They did not know
who Robert McFarlane was, despite his rank as national security adviser. They
believed America controlled Saddam Hussein at will;
–They made promises they never intended to keep, such as promising to arrange
for the release of all American hostages if only sufficient arms or spare parts
were delivered to Iran. Time after time, meetings were organized on the basis of
promises that had been communicated to Washington, only to discover that the
relevant Iranian officials had not only not made the promises, but had never
been informed of them. This problem is structural, it is not just a question of
one personality or another, for it was repeated several times, involving
different intermediaries and different Iranian officials;
–The only person who really matters in Iran is the supreme leader (Khomeini at
the time, Khamenei today), but his power is so awesome that underlings are
reluctant to go to him unless they feel they are able to deliver a full package,
not just steps en route to an agreement. No bargain can be struck that way. It
takes time to work out a deal, but we can’t have any confidence that any of the
pieces have really been approved, whatever our interlocutors may say. At the end
of the process, and only then (assuming that the talks themselves have been
approved), will we get approval or rejection. For thirty years, it’s been
rejection.
It seems the Clinton Administration had similar experiences. The president and
Secretary of State Albright were so convinced that a grand bargain was within
their grasp, that they publicly apologized to the Iranians for past presumed
American sins. But Khamenei rudely brushed them aside; he was not interested in
better relations with the Great Satan. This came as a great shock to the
Americans, who had been negotiating for months, had lifted elements of the
embargo, facilitated cultural exchanges, and the like. Ken Pollack summed it up
like this:
In the Clinton Administration in 1999 and 2000, we tried, very hard, to put the
grand bargain on the table. And we tried. We made 12 separate gestures to Iran
to try to demonstrate to them that we really meant it, and we were really
willing to go the full nine yards and put all of these big carrots on the table
if the Iranians were willing to give us what we needed. And the Iranians
couldn’t.
Pollack’s choice of words is spot-on: the Iranians couldn’t. They couldn’t,
because hatred of America is the very essence of the Islamic Republic. To cease
that enmity, to call off the thirty years’ war against us, would be tantamount
to changing the nature of the regime itself. Can you imagine Hitler striking a
grand bargain with the Jews, or Mao with the bourgeoisie? It’s much the same
with the mullahs.
The only really promising element in the talks with Iranians in 1985 came from a
senior Iranian government official, who told us he and his allies wanted to work
for a better relationship with America, and understood this entailed a change in
the nature of the regime. It was never pursued, so I have no idea if he was
serious (it could well have been a deception). But he was not the supreme
leader, and he told us he knew he and his friends would have to challenge
Khomeini in order to accomplish his objective.
No doubt there are still senior Iranian officials who want better relations with
America, but they are not in a position to deliver it. To do that, they would
have to change the nature of the regime. That might be worth discussing, but
formal talks between the two governments will not involve such people. We will
be talking to representatives of the regime, and they have no interest in regime
change. To put it mildly.
We had real leverage on the Iranians back in the mid-80s, when the regime’s
leaders actively feared for their survival. Today’s mullahs also fear their own
people, and some of their internal enemies are killing mullahs and Revolutionary
Guardsmen, just as during the Iran-Iraq war. While Iran is not actively at war,
it has suffered severe setbacks on several fronts: Iraq (where its proxy al
Qaeda was defeated), Gaza (where its proxy Hamas was defeated), and even Lebanon
(where its proxy Hezbollah failed to do anything while Israel was drubbing
Hamas). Back in the mid-80s, Iran was willing to stop calling for the
destruction of America for a few months, and put a stop to the killing of
Americans by Iranian proxies. Today, the Iranians demand that America apologize
and “reform.” The terms of reference have been inverted. And sadly, the
president seems inclined to accept the inversion.
But if all we want to do is talk, they’ll certainly talk. They may not do it
publicly, but most talks between Iran and the United States have been private,
like those apparently involving former Defense Secretary Perry, and those–little
discussed in print so far–with former Ambassador William Miller. As the Iranians
see it, if we’re talking, they can continue to pursue their atomic bomb. So
talking is good for them. It’s very unlikely to be good for us.
Hezbollah Death Squads Gone Wild
February 3, 2009:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/articles/20090203.aspx
Once more Israel is taking special precautions to deal with Hezbollah terrorist
teams seeking revenge for one of their leaders killed last year. This time,
additional security personnel are being assigned to four Israeli legislators
(members of the Knesset, or parliament) who are travelling outside the country.
Six months ago, Israel began issuing specific warning to its citizens, to be
careful when travelling abroad. The warnings were prompted by Israeli
intelligence discovering a Hezbollah effort to kill or kidnap Israeli citizens
abroad. This murderous plan was apparently the desire to have revenge for the
assassination last year of Imad Mughniyeh (a senior Hezbollah leader responsible
for attacks that have killed hundreds of Israelis and Americans).
Back in February, shortly after Mughniyeh had been killed in Syria, Hezbollah
began threatening to make attacks against Israeli targets outside of Israel.
This has not been done much in the past because Hezbollah relies on fund raising
and recruiting among Moslems (especially Shia) living outside the Middle East
(especially in the West). But in the past few years, Western counter-terrorism
efforts have cracked down on both of these activities. So there is real fear
that the furor over Mughniyeh's death will encourage Hezbollah to branch out
into international terrorism. The downside of this is increased international
efforts against Hezbollah. Logic, however, does not always play with Hezbollah
and the Islamic radicals in the Iranian government who provide money and weapons
for them.
At first, it was believed that Hezbollah had thought better of going
international. Months later, Israeli intelligence began to detect signs that the
Mughniyeh revenge operation was on again. Since then, Israeli counter-terrorism
efforts have disrupted several Hezbollah murder/kidnap operations overseas.
Several other plots are being investigated. Hezbollah has apparently also
activated sleeper cells, or sent operatives, to Turkey, Europe, West Africa,
Uzbekistan, Thailand and Egypt's Sinai Desert (a popular vacation spot for
Israelis.)
Israel cooperates with local counter-terrorism officials, but will go it alone
if they believe they can get at a Hezbollah terrorist cell. The Israelis believe
that the Hezbollah groups have been ordered to at least murder some Israelis,
and to kidnap and get one or more of them back to Lebanon if possible.
Kidnapping is very difficult, and it is believed that Hezbollah does not really
expect any of its operatives to pull off something like this. Even murder is
difficult, especially now that Israeli travelers, and Israeli counter-terror
forces are on the alert for this sort of thing.
"Gaza war": A strategic analysis
Source: Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Date: 02 Feb 2009
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900SID/VDUX-7NVRHF?OpenDocument
Executive Summary
One can argue whether the fighting between Israel and Hamas in Gaza is a "war",
or should be seen as just one more tragic surge in violence in the decades-long
struggle between Israel and the Palestinians. It is, however, the first major
armed struggle between Israel and Hamas, as distinguished between Israel and the
PLO and Fatah. It also is a case study in how Israeli capabilities have changed
since the fighting with Hezbollah in 2006, and in the nature of asymmetric war
between states and non-state actors.
This report examines the war in terms of the lessons of the fighting, what it
says about the changes in Israeli tactics and capabilities and the broader
lessons it may provide for asymmetric warfare. It analyzes the fighting on the
basis of briefings in Israeli during and immediately after the fighting made
possible by a visit sponsored by Project Interchange, and using day-to-day
reporting issued by the Israeli Defense Spokesman.
The analysis reveals impressive improvements in the readiness and capability of
the Israeli Defense Forces since the fighting against the Hezbollah in 2006. It
also indicates that Israel did not violate the laws of war. It did deliberately
use decisive force to enhance regional deterrence and demonstrate that it had
restored its military edge. These, however, are legitimate military objectives
in spite of their very real humanitarian costs.
Hamas has only provided a few details on its view of the fighting, other than
ideological and propaganda statements. Any military report has to be written
largely from an Israeli perspective; although it is already clear that the IDF
did not succeed in deterring Hamas from new rocket strike on Israel or made
definitive changes in the political and military situation in Gaza. In fact, the
post conflict situation looks strikingly like the situation before the fighting
began.
The impact of the "Gaza War" on the Arab world and Israel's neighbors is far
clearer. The IDF's success may have enhanced some aspects of Israel's military
"edge" and ability to deter, but it also did much to provoke. Reactions built on
the anger caused by both the steadily deteriorating situation of the
Palestinians and the impact of civilian casualties and collateral damage – not
only in the fighting in Gaza but in Lebanon in 2006.
The end result is that it is far from certain that Israel's tactical successes
achieved significant strategic and grand strategic benefits. In practice, they
seem to have had only a marginal impact on Hamas, and their benefits may well
have been offset by the mid and long-term strategic costs of the operation in
terms of Arab and other regional reactions. Such conclusions are necessarily
uncertain, but Israel does not seem to have been properly prepared for the
political dimensions of war, or to have had any clear plan and cohesive
leadership for achieving conflict termination. Moreover, it seems to have
approached the fighting, and the Arab world, with from a strategic perspective
that will increase instability in the region and ultimately weaken Israel's
security. © The Center for Strategic & International Studies