LCCC
ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
January 26/09
Bible Reading of the
day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 1,14-20. After John had been
arrested, Jesus came to Galilee proclaiming the gospel of God: This is the time
of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the
gospel. As he passed by the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew
casting their nets into the sea; they were fishermen. Jesus said to them, "Come
after me, and I will make you fishers of men." Then they abandoned their
nets and followed him. He walked along a little farther and saw James, the son
of Zebedee, and his brother John. They too were in a boat mending their nets.
Then he called them. So they left their father Zebedee in the boat along with
the hired men and followed him.
Saint Teresa Benedicta of the Cross [Edith Stein] (1891-1942), Carmelite,
martyr, co-patron of Europe
For the First Profession of Sister Miriam of Little Saint Thérèse (©Institute of
Carmelite Studies)
"So they left their father Zebedee in the boat... and followed him"
Whoever allows herself to be led like a child in the harness of holy obedience
will reach the kingdom of God that is promised to «little ones» (Mt 19,4).
Obedience led Mary, the royal daughter of the house of David, to the simple
little house of the poor carpenter of Nazareth. Obedience led both of these most
holy people away from the secure enclosure of this modest home onto the highway
and into the stable at Bethlehem. It laid the Son of God in the manger. In
freely chosen poverty the Savior and his mother wandered the streets of Judea
and Galilee and lived on the alms of the faithful. Naked and exposed, the Lord
hung on the cross and left the care of his mother to the love of his disciple.
Therefore, he demands poverty of those who would follow him. The heart must be
free of ties to earthly goods, of concern about them, dependence on them, desire
for them, if it is to belong to the divine Bridegroom exclusively.
Free Opinions, Releases, letters &
Special Reports
This Is Not a Test.By
THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN/New
York Times 25/01/09
Middle East Challenges to the Obama
Administration:The Forthcoming.By:
Dr. Walid Phares 25/01/09/International
Analyst Network
Israel’s New Military Doctrine. By:
Claude Salhani. Khaleej Times 25/01/09
Marching for Hamas. By: Denis
MacEoin/Jerusalem Post/
25/01/09
The Mind of Jihad.By Laurent
Murawiec/The
Weekly Standard/ 25.01.09
Latest News Reports From
Miscellaneous Sources for January 25/09
Riots break out in northern Lebanon prison-Monsters
and Critics.com
Hamas leader in Lebanon stresses rights to bring
weapons into Gaza-Xinhua
Arms will flow to Gaza despite security - Hamas-Reuters
Berri: Coming Elections Not Decisive But Political
Milestone-Naharnet
Mossawi: Gradual
Absorbtion of Political Forces Within Resistance-Naharnet
Raad: Resistance has
Legitimate Right to Keep and Bear Arms-Naharnet
Mitchell as US Mideast envoy
revitalizes peace process - experts-AFP
Obama envoy expected in Middle East
next week
Egypt urges serious negotiations on
Shalit/Israel News
Sfeir: Centrist Bloc Not Directed
against Aoun-Naharnet
150 Fighters from Jibril'
PFLP-GC Smuggled to Beddawi, Naameh-Naharnet
Raad: Resistance has Legitimate Right to Keep and Bear Arms-Naharnet
Row Between Berri, Saniora over Saudi Donations-Naharnet
Suleiman Committed To Dialogue, Neutral About Centrist Bloc-Naharnet
Row
Between Berri, Saniora over Saudi Donations-Naharnet
Murr Won't Meet Assad
during Damascus Visit-Naharnet
Saniora Urges Lebanese to Support Gazans in 'Any Way Possible'-Naharnet
Egypt, Hamas Discuss 'Lasting' Truce with Israel-Naharnet
Obama envoy expected in Middle East
next week-AP
Some
adversaries ready to give Obama chance-International
Herald Tribune
Sfeir: Centrist Bloc Not Directed against Aoun
Naharnet/Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir said Saturday that a centrist
parliamentary bloc is "not directed against Gen. Michel Aoun." He said the
centrist bloc is not limited to Christian sects. "It exists in all sects."Sfeir
hoped upon his return from Cairo on Saturday that Lebanese political leaders at
the national dialogue "would agree in order to get the country out this
cycle."He also hoped that peace and stability would prevail. The patriarch
headed to Egypt on Thursday to represent Pope Benedict XVI at the burial of
former head of the Coptic Catholic Church in Egypt, Cardinal Stephanos II
Ghattas. Sfeir had said that a centrist parliamentary bloc tips the balance
between right and left. Beirut, 24 Jan 09, 19:33
EU Meets Key Mideast Players
Hoping to Kick Start Peace Moves
25/01/2009
BRUSSELS (AFP) — European Union foreign ministers meet Sunday with counterparts
from the Palestinian territories, Egypt, Jordan and Turkey to study ways to get
Arab nations behind new Middle East peace moves.
At talks in Brussels, from 1700 GMT, the ministers will assess the state of the
ceasefire Gaza, where more than 1,300 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli
forces since last month, and look at ways to improve the flow of aid.
But beyond the immediate help needed by Gaza residents, the EU wants to try to
use Israel's war on Hamas to kick start long-stalled efforts to bring peace to
the region, and foster an agreement between the feuding Palestinians.
"We want to talk to the four of them about how do we get the region behind a
meaningful peace process. We need the broader support of the Arab world," an EU
diplomat said ahead of the talks. "Some of those countries are bridges to other
countries in the Arab world or the Muslim world, like Syria or Iran," the latter
accused of supplying arms to Hamas, which runs the Gaza Strip, he said. Some
5,300 people were also wounded in Israel's land, sea and air assault, Operation
Cast Lead, launched on December 27 in the impoverished coastal strip to stop
Hamas firing rockets at Israeli civilians.
Around 4,100 homes were destroyed and 17,000 damaged.
Israel lost 10 soldiers and three civilians.
The talks follow an EU meeting Wednesday with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi
Livni, where the front-runner for elections on February 10 pledged to ensure
that aid would flow back into Gaza. They will also be followed by a meeting of
the EU ministers alone in Brussels Monday, to take stock of progress and discuss
how the EU might help bolster the ceasefire, ensure aid and move toward helping
Gazans rebuild.
The EU is the biggest aid donor to the Palestinians -- offering some half a
billion euros annually in recent years -- but the 27-nation bloc has little
leverage over Israel.
In an effort to build on the week-old ceasefire, the EU is offering to boost its
monitoring mission at the Rafah Terminal on the border with Egypt, the
Palestinians' only door to the outside world. Diplomats have said the bloc would
be willing to do more if the political and security conditions are in place, by
putting personnel on other crossing points into Gaza, currently blocked by
Israel, where more goods could enter.
The EU is also looking at ways to prevent the smuggling of arms -- which Israel
claims are moving into the territory from Iran -- and some nations are prepared
to help by moving resources to the Red Sea, or the Mediterranean. France said
Friday that it was sending a frigate carrying a helicopter to international
waters off the coast of Gaza to participate in a mission against arms
trafficking.
The French warship will conduct "surveillance in international waters off Gaza,
in full cooperation with Egypt and Israel," the French president's office said.
Britain and Germany have also offered to help prevent arms smuggling, as part of
measures to shore up the fragile truce.
Suleiman Committed To Dialogue, Neutral About Centrist Bloc
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman was quoted as saying on the eve of the fourth
round of all-party talks that he was committed to dialogue and that he has
nothing to do with the centrist parliamentary bloc, which has caused controversy
in Lebanon. Suleiman said he adheres to the policy of dialogue "which provides
an opportunity for leaders to meet, thus, facilitating an atmosphere of calm."
On the controversial issue of a centrist parliamentary bloc, Suleiman reiterated
that he has "nothing to do with all that.""I will not enter the election battle.
I will neither adopt a candidate nor support another," Suleiman on Sunday was
quoted as saying. "I will not object to anyone who wins (the elections) and
wants to be later in a centrist or neutral bloc," he added. Suleiman was also
said to be considering setting up a committee to study the defense strategy
proposed by Hizbullah. Press reports said Suleiman would ask the 14 Lebanese
political leaders at the fourth dialogue session to be held at Baabda Palace on
Monday to name their representatives to a political-military teamwork in an
effort to come out with a unified vision on the defense strategy. Beirut, 25 Jan
09, 08:33
150 Fighters from Jibril' PFLP-GC Smuggled to Beddawi,
Naameh
Naharnet/About 150 fighters from Ahmed Jibril's Popular Front for the Liberation
of Palestine-General Command have reportedly been smuggled to the northern
refugee camp of Beddawi and the coastal town of Naameh south of Beirut. The
daily Al Balad on Sunday said the PFLP-GC -- which has bases in barren terrains
in east Lebanon's towns of Qossaya, Hilweh, Sultan Yaqoub, and Deir el-Ghazal --
had smuggled around 150 fighters to Beddawi camp and a tunnel in Naameh.
The newspaper, citing a security report, said the fighters were smuggled via the
northern town of Talbira in the Akkar province. It reported "unusual" PLFP-GC
activity, including setting up rocket launchers, anti-aircraft guns and planting
anti-personnel mines and anti-vehicle mines around its bases, in addition to
sending more trained fighters to back-up its forces in the region. Beirut, 25
Jan 09, 09:46
Row Between Berri, Saniora over
Saudi Donations
Naharnet/Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri is questioning the government of Prime
Minister Fouad Saniora about Saudi donations earmarked for the reconstruction of
south Lebanon. "Until this moment, the Saudi grant has been blocked to Lebanese
(citizens)," Berri on Sunday was quoted as saying.
Saniora hit back, describing Berri's statement as "inaccurate." "We are sorry to
hear not only an inaccurate statement by Speaker Nabih Berri, but (a statement
that) does not correspond to the truth," a communiqué released by Saniora's
office said. It said the Higher Relief Commission resumed the payment of aid
pledged for war-affected citizens in villages adopted by Riyadh and other
countries. Saniora's statement said the Commission is up-to-date on all its
dealings with the Council for the South and that it was paying the required
amounts, last of which was LL 20 billion distributed among 1,130 citizens.
Beirut, 25 Jan 09, 09:04
Raad: Resistance has Legitimate Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Naharnet/Head of Hizbulah's parliamentary bloc Mohammed Raad said Sunday that
the resistance has a legitimate right to keep and bear arms.
"Anyone who tries to strip us of this right would be committing a terrorist
crime and would be providing support for the terrorist Israeli enemy," Raad
said.
"We are committed to the option of resistance and defending it," he added. Raad
said that following the 2006 offensive in Lebanon and the 22-day aggression on
Gaza the "resistance proved to be the best choice to defend the rights" of the
Lebanese and Palestinian people. Commenting on U.S. President Barack Obama's
inauguration address, Raad said: "The tone of the speech would not mislead us
nor would the new U.S. president's charisma. Raad said Hizbullah was waiting to
see deeds and commitments the new U.S. Administration will make. Beirut, 25 Jan
09, 12:19
Egypt, Hamas Discuss 'Lasting' Truce with Israel
Naharnet/A Hamas team was to meet with Egypt's intelligence chief Omar Suleiman
on Sunday to try to clinch a lasting truce in war-battered Gaza, after an
Israeli negotiator held similar talks in Cairo. Suleiman, Egypt's pointman for
Palestinian-Israeli affairs, already met separately with Hamas and Israeli
officials during the 22-day offensive with an Egyptian plan to end Israel's
deadly assault. He held talks on Thursday with senior Israeli negotiator Amos
Gilad ahead of his talks on Sunday with a mixed Hamas delegation from the Gaza
Strip and Syria, exiled home of the Palestinian Islamist movement's powerful
politburo.
Egypt's state MENA news agency said Suleiman and the Hamas officials would mull
ways to turn the week-long ceasefire into a lasting truce and to end Israel's
crippling blockade of Gaza by reopening border crossings. "Egypt will discuss
with the Palestinian (Hamas) delegation ways of reaching a lasting ceasefire
agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians," a senior Egyptian official
told MENA. The official said Cairo "hopes to succeed in narrowing the
differences between the two sides" and to "step up its efforts in order to reach
a permanent ceasefire," MENA reported. The Hamas delegation includes Imad al-Alami
and Mohammed Nasser, members of the Damascus-based politburo, as well as Gaza
representatives Ayman Taha, Salah Bardawil and Jamal Abu Hashem, MENA said.
Israel launched Operation Cast Lead on December 27 with the stated aim of
halting rocket attacks from Gaza and to stop arms trafficking from Egypt, and it
has warned it would strike again if Hamas were allowed to rearm.
Hamas has also threatened to resume fighting if Israel does not reopen the
crossings into Gaza, where 1,330 Palestinians were killed during the onslaught,
almost a third of them children. Thirteen Israelis also died during the
operation. On January 6, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak proposed terms for a
ceasefire that would include putting an end to smuggling through a network of
tunnels linking Egypt and Gaza at the Rafah border.
Egypt insists that only contraband goods are trafficked through the tunnels
while arms are smuggled to the Gaza Strip by sea, but Israel believes otherwise.
"Israel considers that Egypt is in a position to confront the matter of arms
smuggling and to put an end to it," Gilad said on Saturday.
"The Egyptians understand that Hamas is a threat not only to Israel but to them
as well. Hamas is working in concert with (Egypt's opposition) the Muslim
Brotherhood and with Iran." Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak is to travel to
Washington on Tuesday to discuss the implementation of a bilateral agreement
signed on January 16 to halt arms smuggling into Gaza. The European Union is
also looking at ways to stem the flow of arms. The issue is due to be discussed
on Sunday in Brussels by EU foreign ministers and Arab counterparts including
Egypt.
France, meanwhile, has sent a frigate carrying a helicopter to the region to
conduct "surveillance in international waters off Gaza, in full cooperation with
Egypt and Israel," President Nicolas Sarkozy's office said on Friday. Egypt is
also seeking to end a protracted feud between Hamas and the Fatah faction of
secular Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, which sharpened after the Islamists
took control of Gaza in deadly street fighting in June 2007. According to MENA,
several Palestinian faction leaders are due in Cairo this week, including
veteran leader Nayef Hawatmeh of the Damascus-based Democratic Front for the
Liberation of Palestine, for reconciliation talks.(AFP) Beirut, 25 Jan 09, 12:02
Row Between Berri, Saniora over Saudi Donations
Naharnet/Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri is questioning the government of Prime
Minister Fouad Saniora about Saudi donations earmarked for the reconstruction of
south Lebanon. "Until this moment, the Saudi grant has been blocked to Lebanese
(citizens)," Berri on Sunday was quoted as saying. Saniora hit back, describing
Berri's statement as "inaccurate." "We are sorry to hear not only an inaccurate
statement by Speaker Nabih Berri, but (a statement that) does not correspond to
the truth," a communiqué released by Saniora's office said. It said the Higher
Relief Commission resumed the payment of aid pledged for war-affected citizens
in villages adopted by Riyadh and other countries. Saniora's statement said the
Commission is up-to-date on all its dealings with the Council for the South and
that it was paying the required amounts, last of which was LL 20 billion
distributed among 1,130 citizens. Beirut, 25 Jan 09, 09:04
Murr Won't Meet Assad during Damascus Visit
Naharnet/Political sources on Sunday denied that Defense Minister Elias Murr
would visit Syrian President Bashar al-Assad during his trip to Damascus next
week. The sources told the daily Al Anwar that Murr would be meeting Syrian
Defense Minister Maj. Gen. Ali Turkmani and army chief of staff Maj. Gen. Ali
Habib as well as a number of army officers. Al Anwar said Murr would discuss
with Syrian officials ways to exchange intelligence information and
strengthening security coordination between the two countries. eirut, 25 Jan 09,
10:39
Saniora Urges Lebanese to Support Gazans in 'Any Way
Possible'
Naharnet/Prime Minsiter Fouad Saniora on Saturday urged Lebanese citizens to
support the people of Gaza in "any way possible.""I call on the Lebanese to
support the Palestinian brethren in Gaza in any way possible and according to
the individual's capability," Saniora said during a Day of Solidarity with Gaza.
He also pleged to exert efforts to ensure the return of Palestinian refugees to
their homeland. On the 22-day war on Gaza, Saniora said: "The question that
presents itself: Was the problem in Gaza solved? Was the will of the Palestinian
people eradicated? Was there any progress toward a settlement?""The Israeli
enemy did not learn lessons from the past that violence brings violence,"
Saniora said, adding that the biggest favor that could be done to Israel is a
Palestinian split. Beirut, 24 Jan 09, 16:30
Obama envoy expected
in Middle East next week
By Adam Entous and Arshad Mohammed Adam Entous And Arshad Mohammed – Sat Jan 24,
GAZA/WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama plans to dispatch his Middle
East envoy to the region next week, in a quick start to the new administration's
efforts to revive Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking and shore up a shaky Gaza
truce.
Obama has taken the Middle East by surprise with the speed of his diplomatic
activism.
Western, Arab and Israeli diplomats said his envoy, former U.S. Sen. George
Mitchell, plans to meet leaders in Egypt, Israel, the occupied West Bank and
Jordan, but they ruled out direct contacts with Hamas Islamists who rule the
Gaza Strip.
A Western diplomat said Mitchell was likely to go to Saudi Arabia but said Syria
was not now on his schedule.
The trip is expected to last roughly a week and will likely include a stop in
Saudi Arabia but not Syria, one diplomat said.
Israel's refusal to fully lift its blockade of the coastal enclave following its
devastating 22-day offensive, which killed more than 1,300 Palestinians, has
thrown into doubt the future of the ceasefire and post-war reconstruction.
A Palestinian official, who is close to the truce talks taking place in Cairo,
said both Israel and Hamas would hold their fire as long as Egyptian mediation
continued.
But little tangible progress has been made thus far into turning the fragile
ceasefire into something more lasting, and diplomats said time was running out.
A February 10 Israeli election appears likely to bring to power the right-wing
Likud party, which is critical of U.S.-backed peace moves.
Israel is determined to deny Hamas any political gains from the conflict and
believes its restrictions at the border crossings will give it leverage in talks
to free Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier captured by Gaza militants in a 2006
raid.
Hamas, meanwhile, has cemented its hold on the Gaza Strip and its 1.5 million
residents, casting doubt on assertions by Israeli leaders that the group has
been severely weakened during the 22-day offensive.
Schools and the few government ministries not destroyed in the bombing, reopened
on Saturday. "Good morning! Still alive?" excited teenage girls asked each other
at the start of classes at Beach Preparatory School in Gaza city.
Hamas plans to start distributing up to 4,000 euros ($5,000) in cash to families
hard hit by Israel's offensive.
TUNNELS
Despite Western backing, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Hamas's rival, has
been prevented by Israel from bringing cash into Gaza that would allow his
Palestinian Authority to pay its workers and support those in need.
Israel said it halted the fighting in the Gaza Strip after securing commitments
from the United States, European powers and Egypt to crack down on Hamas arms
smuggling. France said on Friday it was sending a frigate to patrol
international waters off the Gaza coast, but few other concrete measures have
been announced. "We have to wait and see. It will be tested by the results," a
senior Israeli official said.
Israel believes its air strikes destroyed at least 80 percent of the smuggling
tunnels under Gaza's border with Egypt. They have been used by Hamas and
ordinary Palestinians to bring in arms and commercial goods, bypassing Israel's
blockade. Senior Israeli defense official Amos Gilad said his government was
more concerned about regulating the items being smuggled into Gaza than
destroying the tunnels themselves.
"The tunnel is not the problem. It's what they are bringing through it," Gilad
told Israel's Channel 2 television. "If the smugglers knew the cost of smuggling
Iranian rockets is 20 years in an Egyptian prison, they would beware."
The Obama administration has met with skepticism from Hamas, which won a 2006
Palestinian ballot only to be shunned by the West for refusing to renounce
violence and recognize Israel. The isolation deepened when Hamas routed Abbas's
secular Fatah to take over Gaza 18 months later.
While Obama said Gaza's border crossings should be reopened to both humanitarian
and commercial goods, he called for a "monitoring regime" that includes Abbas's
Palestinian Authority. Hamas expressed a willingness to accept the presence of
members of Abbas's presidential guard at the Rafah border crossing with Egypt,
the Palestinians' only window to the outside world that does not go through
Israel. But Hamas wants to choose which members of the presidential guard will
be stationed there, a non-starter for Israel.
Israeli officials said they were confident Obama and his envoy would shun Hamas.
That policy was spearheaded by former President George W. Bush, whom critics
accused of ignoring the conflict for too long. "There's a narrow initial focus
to the mission," a Western diplomat said, referring to Gaza. But the diplomat
added the visit would also allow Mitchell to "take the temperature" for broader
peacemaking. The diplomat said the visit illustrated Obama's determination to
show "active engagement" right from the start of his presidency. U.S. State
Department spokesman Robert Wood had no comment on Mitchell's travel plans.
(Additional reporting by Ari Rabinovitch in Jerusalem, and Douglas Hamilton and
Nidal al-Mughrabi in Gaza; Editing by Katie Nguyen)
Egypt
urges serious negotiations on Shalit
Cairo to try and convince Hamas to agree to long truce in return for commitment
to pressure Israel on lifting blockade. Kidnapped soldier issue to also be
discussed
Ali Waked Published: 01.25.09, 13:52 / Israel News
Talks between the Palestinian organizations and senior Egyptian security
officials on resuming the truce with Israel and the intra-Palestinian dialogue
were launched Sunday in Cairo. Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman and his
men were expected to try and convince the Palestinian organizations to accept a
long-term lull in exchange for a commitment to pressure Israel to take measures
aimed at opening the crossings and gradually lifting the blockade imposed on the
Gaza Strip.
Foreign Aid?
Report: US Navy to fight arms smuggling from Iran / Ynet
British Times newspaper says American naval taskforce in Gulf of Aden ordered to
hunt for suspicious Iranian ships seeking to smuggle weapons to Gaza Strip
The Egyptians were to try and convince the Palestinian organizations not to
torpedo the attempts to reach a truce, after Hamas was harshly criticized by the
Palestinian factions during the previous lull.
The Egyptians were also set to try and lay the foundations for resuming the
intra-Palestinian dialogue, and particularly the issue of reconciliation between
Fatah and Hamas, although a Fatah delegation has yet to arrive in Cairo.
The factions, on their part, were to try and make it clear to the Egyptians that
a lull without a significant removal of the siege would not last.
In its talks with the Hamas delegation, Cairo was expected to also work to
convince the movement to accept the Egyptian initiative for a truce with Israel,
and particularly launch serious negotiations on the issue of kidnapped soldier
Gilad Shalit.
Hamas was expected to make it clear that as far as its leadership is concerned,
there is no change in the list of prisoners the organization wishes to see
released and that launching the talks must be accompanied by significant Israeli
moves on the ground, aimed at lifting the siege.
Hamas was to demand a commitment on the mandate which will be given to the
international force supervising the Egypt-Gaza border area, with the movement
insisting that the force will also include Turkish troops.
They were also to demand an agreement on opening the Rafah crossing and
declaring it an Egyptian-Palestinian crossing. Hamas was expected to accept the
conditions for the reopening of the crossing, including the stationing of a
force on behalf of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the return of
international observers.
Nonetheless, the Palestinian movement was to demand that Israel will not be able
to arbitrarily enforce the closing of the crossing. Palestinian and Egyptian
sources have told Ynet that there are 5,000 people who Israel refuses to let
pass through the crossing, all of them members of Hamas and the various
Palestinian organizations.
The talks were expected to gain momentum in the coming days, particularly in
terms of the lull, and later in terms of the intra-Palestinian dialogue.
Another issue expected to be raised during the talks was the need to rebuild the
Gaza Strip following the three-week fighting and the role the Palestinian
Authority and Hamas would play in the restoration process, on the backdrop of a
recent dispute on the fundraising system and the timetable for the
reconstruction process.
Gilad Shalit was kidnapped into the Gaza Strip 945 days ago.
Middle East Challenges to the Obama Administration:The Forthcoming Crises
By: Dr. Walid Phares
24 Jan 2009
Since September 11, 2001, the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East has been
shaped by a new and dominant reality (the War on Terror), which has been a
Jihadi global campaign against democracies in many areas around the world. Since
the US and NATO intervention in Afghanistan in 2001, the challenges have been to
maintain stability and freedom in that country and in Iraq, as well as
countering the expanding influence of al Qaeda in Pakistan, the African Horn and
beyond.
In addition, since the invasion of Iraq and the acceleration of the nuclear
program by the Iranian regime, the challenge coming from Tehran is escalating.
We've witnessed Iranian involvement in Lebanon with Hezbollah and in Gaza with
Hamas. So, in short, whatever problems the Bush Administration has already
confronted, the current administration will have to address, but perhaps with
more urgency.
Iraq
The issue is not the principle of withdrawal but what would replace the
Coalition and the ability of the Iraqi Government to resist al Qaeda and Iran's
influence. There is really no new data to process for the Obama policy
architects. If Iraq is ready, the redeployment will take place as scheduled. But
if the Iraqi institutions aren't ready, there will be an al Qaeda return to the
Sunni triangle and an Iranian penetration of central and southern Iraq. Perhaps
the bet of the new administration is to strike a deal with the Iranians so that
the exit from Iraq is smooth. If this is the case, then the US redeployment will
be subject to Iran's conditions. And if so, one has to wonder what these
conditions are and what Tehran wants to impose on Washington in the region?
Already one can see the challenge, particularly in light of the Iranian race to
achieve nuclear armament.
Afghanistan
A new strategy in Afghanistan must be integrated into a regional approach
covering Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, all three under democratic governments
aimed at weakening terrorism. This is an opportunity to isolate the radicals
across the regional borders. But that needs a structure that understands the
ideological power of the terror forces.
Syria/Lebanon
The Syrian regime is a strategic ally of Iran, not an extension of it, as
Hezbollah is to the Khomeinists. But Bashar's regime is implicated in a terror
campaign against the emerging Cedars Revolution in Lebanon. Damascus has an
ideological claim over Lebanon and that cannot be undone without a massive
reform of the Baathist regime. Also, Hezbollah, which receives hundreds of
millions of dollars from Tehran, has seized more power in Beirut and further
intimidated Lebanon's fragile democracy. The question is how will the US
Administration deal with Syria and Hezbollah in the near future? If it wishes to
cut a deal with the Syrian regime, the price is clear, there are no secrets: It
is Lebanon. If it wants to engage Hezbollah, it will have to talk with the
masters in Tehran, which would bring Washington to square one in positioning
towards Iran's regime. The options regarding Lebanon and Syria are very limited
and just biding time is not a policy.
Israel/Palestinians
The Bush Administration said it would support the two state solution, but Iran's
allies in the region have obstructed the process. Can the Obama Administration
do better? It has two choices: either cut a deal with Iran to tame Hamas or
support Mahmoud Abbas in establishing the state institutions. There are no magic
solutions, but there will be strategic choices to follow.
Conclusion
In the end, the Obama response to all these challenges is going to be about who
the advisors and experts are and what are their plans. And if you examine the
situation closer -- you'd realize that the expert group which will be tasked to
help President Obama will come from or be influenced by the Middle East Studies
community. Which brings us back to the state of this field, eight years after
9/11: Is this community ready and able to provide the new president and his
administration with the appropriate advice?
******
Dr Walid Phares was a Professor of Middle East Studies at Florida Atlantic
University from 1993 to 2005 and has been teaching Global Strategies at National
Defense University since 2006. He is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for
Defense of Democracies in Washington and a Visiting Fellow at the European
Foundation for Democracy in Brussels. he is the author of numerous books
including Future Jihad and The Confrontation.
Israel’s New Military Doctrine
By: Claude Salhani
Khaleej Times
25 January 2009
The news that Israel announced a unilateral ceasefire in Gaza last weekend –
just three days before the inauguration of Barack Obama — came as no great
surprise to politicians, analysts and observers in the Lebanese capital Beirut
where I am right now.
However, the Lebanese, who like to see conspiracy theories at every street
corner might have well been onto something this time.
Still, a great sigh of relief was felt in Beirut where numerous politicians
feared that Hezbollah would try to open a second front in order to alleviate the
pressure on Hamas in Gaza. Indeed, much pressure was applied on Hezbollah by the
rest of the Lebanese political leadership to convince the Shia organisation to
avoid a repetition of the war of summer 2006.
Two prominent members of the pro-independent March 14 Movement, often referred
to as the anti-Syrian coalition, told this correspondent that Hezbollah seemed
aware of the potential consequences a new war would have on Lebanon. Samir
Geagea, the leader of the Christian Lebanese Forces and Samir Franjieh, (who
stands at completely different ends from the rest of the Franjieh clan) told
this correspondent in separate meetings in Beirut that they were fretful of the
next few days, those leading up to Obama’s inauguration on January 20.
At the same time both Geagea and Franjieh said they were confident Hezbollah,
would stay out of the current fight. But both leaders also indicated that it
does not take very much to light a fuse in Lebanon.
Since the fighting in Gaza
began three weeks ago, rockets were fired at Israel from south Lebanon on a
number of occasions. Hezbollah denied any involvement and numerous Lebanese
believe this to be the work of the Ahmad Gebril’s Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine-General Command. Yet amid this rather gloomy outlook,
Lebanese politicians see a silver lining in the dark clouds hanging over the
region.
The worldwide economic crisis affecting most Western nations is seen to be
advantageous in Beirut. With oil at its lowest in decades, selling as of last
week at $35 a barrel. Iran’s government for its part had budgeted its 2009 at
$90 a barrel.
The outcome will produce a serious financial shortfall for the Iranians. This in
turn translates as less hard cash for Iran to hand down to Hamas, Hezbollah and
other groups operating in the region, and whom Teheran supports. As a result
Hezbollah is likely to think twice about starting another round of fighting with
Israel; unlike 2006 when party members were able to walk around the southern
suburbs with bags for of cash and hand out pile of dollars (supplied by Iran) to
anyone who lost a home in the war. This allowed Hezbollah to retain its
popularity in their stronghold in Beirut’s southern suburbs.
Furthermore, reports from Israel indicate that the Israeli military is not
looking for a fight in Lebanon.
Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation in Washington, DC, told this
correspondent, “Israel doesn’t want a war with Lebanon, as it has no territorial
claims towards it. It certainly doesn’t want an escalation in South Lebanon now,
when the business in Gaza may not be over yet. However, if Hezbollah gets into
action now, the Israeli response will be massive, overwhelming and harsh.”
That syncs with what several members of Israel’s high command made public last
year, when several high ranking Israeli army generals published an outline of
their plan of retaliation against Lebanon in the event of an attempt by
Hezbollah to attack Israel.
Dubbed the “Dahiyeh Doctrine,” after the Arabic world for ‘suburb,’ in reference
to Hezbollah’s stronghold in Beirut’s southern suburbs, often simply called “Dahiyeh,”
the Israeli military said in the next war with the Lebanese Shia organisation
they would “unleash unprecedented destructive power against the terrorists’ host
nation of Lebanon.”
Speaking to the Israeli daily Yediot Ahronoth, the head of Israel’s Northern
Command, General Gadi Eisenkot, announced that his “Dahiyeh Doctrine” for
fighting Hezbollah had gained official approval. “This is not a threat,” he was
quoted as saying, “This is policy.”
Under Eisenkot’s plan, in the event of war these civilian centers from where
Hezbollah operates will be viewed exclusively as military installations. If and
when the next conflict breaks out, Israel, said a group of senior army generals,
would refrain from chasing mobile Hezbollah missile teams around southern
Lebanon.
Instead, they would “create deterrence” by punishing Lebanon and the
individual towns and villages that provide the terror group with its fighting
force and cover.
“We will wield disproportionate power against every village from which shots are
fired on Israel, and cause immense damage and destruction,” said Eisenkot. If it
were ever put into action the Dahieh Doctrine would cause massive casualties
among the Lebanese civilian population.
The Lebanese were given a pretty accurate sneak preview of what Israel’s Dahiyeh
Doctrine, if implemented, would look like during the three-week offensive on
Gaza. Watching television images beamed from the war zone it seemed that Gaza
and Beirut were interchangeable insofar as the Israeli high command was
concerned. The Dahiyeh Doctrine seemed
equally applicable to Beirut as it is to
Gaza.
**Claude Salhani is editor of the Middle East Times
The Mind of Jihad
by Laurent Murawiec
Cambridge, 2008. 350 pp.
Reviewed by Raymond Ibrahim
The Weekly Standard
January 26, 2009
http://www.meforum.org/article/2055
For some time now there has been a raging debate regarding what fuels Islamic
terrorism--whether grievances against the West have caused frustrated Muslims to
articulate their rage through an Islamist paradigm, or whether (all grievances
aside) Islam itself leads to aggression toward non-Muslims, or "infidels."
Laurent Murawiec's The Mind of Jihad offers a different perspective. Discounting
both the grievance and Islam-as-innately-violent models, Murawiec explores
certain untapped areas of research in order to show correlations between radical
Islam and any number of uniquely Western concepts and patterns, both
philosophical and historical.
While this approach is admirable, it also proves to be overly ambitious, and
thus problematic, specifically in its insistence that radical Islam is merely
the latest manifestation of phenomena rooted in the Western experience. Murawiec
is no apologist; neither, however, is he interested in examining Islam's own
peculiar Weltanschauung--as outlined by the Koran and hadith, articulated by the
ulema (theologian-scholars), and codified in sharia law--in order to better
understand the jihad.
Instead, according to Murawiec, radical Islam is an ideological heir to
Gnosticism, Manichaeism, Nazism, Marxism, and nihilism; jihadists are duplicates
of otherwise arcane characters from Christian history, such as the Millenarians.
Indeed, any number of European concepts and personages permeate The Mind of
Jihad, often presented as prominent factors contributing to the rise of radical
Islam--betraying, perhaps, the author's vast erudition concerning Western, not
Islamic, paradigms.
Again, while these are interesting observations and worthy of exploration,
Murawiec goes too far: The words "Gnosticism" and "Millenarianism" appear
prefixed to Islamic terminology and figures repeatedly; this does not help and
can distract--especially the lay reader who is trying to understand jihad within
a strictly Islamic milieu.
Consider Murawiec's millenarian thesis. He argues that jihadists are Islamic
versions of heretical Christians who, driven by "superman"/Gnostic impulses,
wrought havoc in Europe at the turn of the first millennium, often murdering and
pillaging indiscriminately. Yet the dissimilarities would appear greater. The
Millenarians were a product of an already lawless age. Modern-day jihadists are
not; they live in the modern era which, while managing to appease violent
"millenarian" tendencies in Christians, has evidently not managed to sate Muslim
impulses.
If all things are equal, why aren't modern Christians behaving like their
predecessors, whereas modern Muslims are? The response cannot be that the modern
Muslim world is in a state of dislocation and disarray: Today's Islamic world is
much more prosperous and structured than the Dark Ages in Europe, which directly
influenced the savagery of the Millenarians. Moreover, whereas the Millenarians
were anathematized as heretics, often persecuted by the Church, modern jihadists
have yet to be condemned by any serious Islamic authority. Indeed, they are
often validated by them.
After describing the jihadists' "bloodlust" and disregard for innocents as
representative of a chaotic and heretical millenarian spirit, Murawiec reveals
that Sheikh Al Azhar, the equivalent of the pope in Sunni Islam, "demanded that
the Palestinian people, of all factions, intensify the martyrdom operations
[i.e., suicide attacks] against the Zionist enemy. . . . [H]e emphasized that
every martyrdom operation against any Israelis, including children, women, and
teenagers, is a legitimate act according to [Islamic] religious law, and an
Islamic commandment." This alone is enough to dismantle the millenarian thesis
since, unlike millenarian violence, which had no scriptural/church support,
modern day jihadist violence (including "suicidal bloodlust") is backed by
Islamic law and is a commandment.
For that matter, why does Murawiec insist on examining jihad(ists) through
Christian paradigms and precedents, when Islam itself affords plenty of
both--and centuries before the Millenarian movement? Moderate Muslims often
portray al Qaeda as duplicates of the Kharijites. Breaking away from mainstream
Islam in the 7th century and slaying not infidels, but fellow Muslims accused of
apostasy, the jihadist Kharijites present a much more useful paradigm to
understanding radical Islam than anything Christian.
This, then, is the ultimate problem with The Mind of Jihad: It tries to explain
jihad by largely ignoring or minimizing Muslim precedents and doctrines in favor
of Western precedents and philosophies. This is further evident in the latter
half of the study, where the case is made that radical Islam is heavily
influenced by Nazism, communism, and the "Western" concept of revolution.
While it would be folly to deny that such concepts influenced 19th- and
20th-century Islam, overemphasizing them also implies that Islam is a passive
receptacle to the West, that it only reacts, never creates. At any rate, only
those Western ideologies comporting with Islam ever found acceptance, indicating
that the former were subsumed to the purposes of the latter, not vice versa.
Murawiec agrees: "What borrowing took place almost exclusively concerned the
authoritarian, dictatorial, and totalitarian ideologies"--aspects innate to
Islam.
But even the concepts of revolution and revolutionaries are not imports to the
Islamic world, semantic quibbling aside. Consider the life of the Islamist
leader Maududi, who was out to "re-create Islam," "politicize religion," and
whom Murawiec paints as Lenin:
A déclassé semi-intellectual with a powerful, charismatic personality sets
himself up as a figure of messianic qualities whose cosmic mission is to
establish perfection on earth on behalf of and according to the prescriptions of
God. He is the quasi-peer of the great prophetic figures, and is possessed of
extraordinary abilities. He is also possessed of a complete knowledge of how to
move the world from its present, desolate nadir to the zenith of perfection: He
is a man with a plan . . . which encompasses all aspects of life. He is in
charge of the immense bloodshed God requires for the Plan to be implemented.
While this is meant to portray Maududi as an Islamic aberration, it perfectly
describes the prophet of Islam: Muhammad. Yet if Muhammad was a "revolutionary"
who brought a "plan which encompasses all aspects of life" (sharia law) and
which requires "immense bloodshed" (jihad), is the behavior of Maududi or any
other radical--all of whom are commanded to emulate the sunna (example) of their
prophet, including by revolting against infidelity--unprecedented within the
Islamic paradigm? Modern radicals are not so much out to "re-create" Islam as to
reassert it. As for "politicizing religion," Muhammad is responsible for that.
Muhammad was a "revolutionary" who violently overthrew the "oppressive" Meccans.
His successors, the caliphs, reshaped the world through the Islamic conquests.
Even the Shia and Kharijites, who revolted against the last righteous caliph,
were "revolutionaries." Today's radicals see themselves as following in their
prophet's footsteps, trying to create the society he created through blood and
conquest, as he did.
At one point, Murawiec stresses that, according to sharia, Muslims are forbidden
from revolting against their rulers, even if the rulers are tyrannical. While
true, there is one caveat: Rulers must fully implement sharia law; if they fail,
even in part, they become infidel; and the same sharia that commands Muslims to
obey tyrants also commands them to revolt against secular rule. This is
precisely the justification jihadists use to attack "apostate" governments in
the Islamic world.
The bottom line is that "Gnostic bloodlust" finds a precedent in Muhammad, who
had 800 men decapitated after they had capitulated to him; who had no
compunction about besieging infidel cities with fire and catapults, even if
women and children were sheltered there; and who had poets, including women,
assassinated for offending him. "Suicidal nihilism" finds precedent in the Koran
and the deeds of the earliest jihadists, who actively sought martyrdom, as well
as the words of Muhammad, who said he wished to be "martyred and resurrected" in
perpetuity. Islam's "Manichean" worldview, which splits the world between good
and evil, is a product of Islamic law and jurisprudence. We need look no further
than to Islam itself to understand jihad.
That said, it cannot be denied that parallels exist between Muslims and
non-Muslims: Such is human nature, which reacts similarly to similar stimuli,
irrespective of race or creed. But this raises the question: If Christian
Millenarians, without scriptural/churchly support, behaved atrociously, how much
more can be expected of jihadists who, while sharing the same violent tendencies
inherent to all men, are further goaded by direct commandments from God and his
prophet to kill or subjugate infidels to Islam?
Short of examining how jihadists understand jihad, short of examining its
juridical and doctrinal origins, short of studying the sunna and biography of
Muhammad, short of appreciating jihad as a distinctive element in Islam; in
other words short of doing what Muslims past and present do--that is, go to
Islam's sources--we can never hope to understand "the mind of jihad."
For those readers, however, who are firmly aware of the above, Murawiec's book,
especially its detailed historical accounts, can serve to augment their
knowledge.
**Raymond Ibrahim is the associate director of the Middle East Forum and the
author of The Al Qaeda Reader.
Marching for Hamas
By: Denis MacEoin
Jerusalem Post
January 22, 2009
http://www.meforum.org/article/2056
Hamas is a bully aided by a bigger bully, Iran. And, just as strident and
threatening human bullies get away with their aggression so long as no one calls
their bluff, so Hamas has been getting away with murder and torture because the
UN and many states won't call its two-faced self-portrayal as the victim in the
piece. In the struggle to take over Gaza from Fatah, it went on a rampage that
killed hundreds of Palestinians. Even during this most recent assault, in early
January, it executed Fatah members for violating their house arrest. A few weeks
ago, Hamas determined to hurt yet more of its compatriots by introducing Islamic
hudud punishments to the Strip, from amputations and stonings, to crucifixions
and hangings.
Like all bullies, it likes to taunt its victims. It did just that for years
after Israel left Gaza, firing rockets every day into towns like Sderot or
Netivot. No one who has dismissed these rockets as harmless homemade toys has
ever had the guts to spend a few weeks in Sderot, scurrying from shelter to
shelter. And, oh yes, it also built up an arsenal (supplied by Iran) of Grad
missiles that certainly aren't anybody's toys.
Like all bullies, Hamas likes to make boastful threats. Its 1988 Covenant is
replete with them. It threatens to destroy the State of Israel by violence and
violence alone. It says it will never accept the work of conferences or
peacemakers, and only jihad will solve its problems. Meanwhile, the Palestinians
see their lives drained away in a culture that embraces death and martyrdom,
their children exposed to a steady diet of military training and preparation for
violent death as suicide bombers.
Even if the Palestinians want peace, Hamas won't let them have it, because Hamas
knows best, and jihad "is the only solution." Don't believe me, read the
Covenant. It likes nothing better than killing Jews, and the bigger bully in
Teheran thinks that's a damn fine thing too. No one says a word, because the UN
is dominated by the Islamic states, and the Western governments know where the
oil comes from, and nobody likes the Jews much anyway. The people calling for
the end of Israel while they march on the streets of London and Dublin aren't
all Muslims by any means.
There can be no greater indication of this boastfulness than what has happened
in recent days. Having taken a heavy battering from Israel, Hamas now proclaims
a "great victory," and its supporters dance in the ruined streets of Gaza, drunk
on their own demagoguery. For all its bluster, Hamas, like all bullies, is a
coward at heart. Watch those films of Hamas gunmen dragging screaming children
along with them to act as human shields, watch how they fire from behind the
little ones, knowing no Israeli soldier will fire back. And even as they put
their own children's lives at risk, they shout to high heaven that the Israelis
are Nazis and the Jews are child-killers. This blatant pornography spreads
through the Western media, and people never once ask "what does this look like
from the other side," because they are addicted to the comforting news that the
Yids are baby-killers as they'd always known, that they do poison wells, that no
Christian child is safe come Passover. Hamas has become proficient at
resurrecting the blood libel, just as its fighters use the Nazi salute, just as
their predecessor in the 1930s and '40s, Haj Amin al-Husseini, conferred with
Hitler about building death camps in Palestine and raised a division of SS
troops in Bosnia to fight for the Reich.
We watch The Diary of Anne Frank on television, and some of us attend Holocaust
Remembrance Day events, and others pay lip service to Jewish victimhood; we like
our Jews emaciated and helpless under the SS boot. But the moment real Jews
stand up and show themselves the stronger for all their deaths, it awakens an
atavistic fear, and people recoil from them. Jews in uniform, how unseemly. Jews
beating the bully, how unheard of. Jews with their own state, what upstarts.
IN MY home country of Ireland, we glamorize the great nationalist heroes who
rebelled against the bullying forces of imperial Britain in the uprising of
Easter Sunday 1916. In France, they venerate the heroes of the Resistance
against the occupying forces of Nazi Germany. In Spain, they have not ceased to
heap praise on those who fought against the forces of fascist bullies and lost.
To stand up against an enemy bent on your destruction is everywhere counted an
act of bravery. But not when it comes to Israel. In 1948 and 1967 and 1973 and
2006, Israel fought off overwhelming forces who made no secret of their plans
for an imminent massacre of the Jews. But nobody now seems to care, no one lauds
the courage the Israelis displayed, and no one praises the extraordinary
restraint they showed in victory.
In a bizarre reversal of all their commitment to human rights and the struggle
of men and women for independence and self-determination, the European Left has
chosen again and again to side with the bullies and to condemn a small nation
struggling to survive in a hostile neighborhood. It is all self-contradictory:
The Left supports gay rights, yet attacks the only country in the Middle East
where gay rights are enshrined in law. Hamas makes death the punishment for
being gay, but "we are all Hamas now." Iran hangs gays, but it is praised as an
agent of anti-imperialism, and allowed to get on with its job of stoning women
and executing dissidents and members of religious minorities. If UK Premier
Gordon Brown swore to wipe France from the face of the earth, he would become a
pariah among nations. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatens to do that to Israel and is
invited to speak to the UN General Assembly
Israel guarantees civil liberties to all its citizens, Jew or Arab alike, but it
is dubbed "an apartheid state"; Hamas, ever the bully, kills its opponents and
denies the rest the most basic rights, but we march on behalf of Hamas. The Left
prefers the bully because the bully represents a finger in the face of the
establishment? Almost no one on the Left has any understanding of militant
Islam. Their politics is a politics of gesture, where wearing a keffiyeh is cool
but understanding its symbolism is too much effort even for intellectuals.
I have personally had enough of it all. The whining double standards, the
blatant lies, the way their leaders have forced Palestinians to suffer for 60
years because peace and compromise aren't in their vocabulary and because they
won't settle for anything but total victory. Painful as it was, in the 1920s
Ireland created a republic by compromising on the status of the North. Ireland
subsequently became a prosperous country and, in due course, one of the hottest
economies in the world. When the Israelis left Gaza in 2005, they left
state-of-the-art greenhouses to form the basis for a thriving economy. Hamas
destroyed them to the last pane of glass. Why? Because they had been Jewish
greenhouses.
**The writer is the incoming editor of the leading international journal Middle
East Quarterly and the author of a blog entitled 'A Liberal Defence of Israel.'
This Is Not a Test
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: January 24, 2009 /New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/opinion/25friedman.htm
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before. “Guy walks into a bar ...” No, not that
one — this one: “This is the most critical year ever for Palestinian-Israeli
diplomacy. It is five minutes to midnight. If we don’t get diplomacy back on
track soon, it will be the end of the two-state solution.”
I’ve heard that line almost every year for the last 20, and I’ve never bought
it. Well, today, I’m buying it.
We’re getting perilously close to closing the window on a two-state solution,
because the two chief window-closers — Hamas in Gaza and the fanatical Jewish
settlers in the West Bank — have been in the driver’s seats. Hamas is busy
making a two-state solution inconceivable, while the settlers have steadily
worked to make it impossible.
If Hamas continues to obtain and use longer- and longer-range rockets, there is
no way any Israeli government can or will tolerate independent Palestinian
control of the West Bank, because a rocket from there can easily close the Tel
Aviv airport and shut down Israel’s economy.
And if the Jewish settlers continue with their “natural growth” to devour the
West Bank, it will also be effectively off the table. No Israeli government has
mustered the will to take down even the “illegal,” unauthorized settlements,
despite promises to the U.S. to do so, so it’s getting hard to see how the
“legal” settlements will ever be removed. What is needed from Israel’s Feb. 10
elections is a centrist, national unity government that can resist the blackmail
of the settlers, and the rightist parties that protect them, to still implement
a two-state solution.
Because without a stable two-state solution, what you will have is an Israel
hiding behind a high wall, defending itself from a Hamas-run failed state in
Gaza, a Hezbollah-run failed state in south Lebanon and a Fatah-run failed state
in Ramallah. Have a nice day.
So if you believe in the necessity of a Palestinian state or you love Israel,
you’d better start paying attention. This is not a test. We’re at a hinge of
history.
What makes it so challenging for the new Obama team is that Mideast diplomacy
has been transformed as a result of the regional disintegration since Oslo — in
three key ways.
First, in the old days, Henry Kissinger could fly to three capitals, meet three
kings, presidents or prime ministers and strike a deal that could hold. No more.
Today a peacemaker has to be both a nation-builder and a negotiator.
The Palestinians are so fragmented politically and geographically that half of
U.S. diplomacy is going to be about how to make peace between Palestinians, and
build their institutions, so there is a coherent, legitimate decision-making
body there — before we can make peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
Second, Hamas now has a veto over any Palestinian peace deal. It’s true that
Hamas just provoked a reckless war that has devastated the people of Gaza. But
Hamas is not going away. It is well armed and, despite its suicidal behavior of
late, deeply rooted.
The Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank will not make
any compromise deal with Israel as long as it fears that Hamas, from outside the
tent, would denounce it as traitorous. Therefore, Job 2 for the U.S., Israel and
the Arab states is to find a way to bring Hamas into a Palestinian national
unity government.
As the Middle East expert Stephen P. Cohen says, “It is not enough for Israel
that the world recognize that Hamas criminally mismanaged its responsibility to
its people. Israel’s longer-term interest is to be sure that it has a
Palestinian partner for negotiations, which will have sufficient legitimacy
among its own people to be able to sign agreements and fulfill them. Without
Hamas as part of a Palestinian decision, any Israeli-Palestinian peace will be
meaningless.”
But bringing Hamas into a Palestinian unity government, without undermining the
West Bank moderates now leading the Palestinian Authority, will be tricky. We’ll
need Saudi Arabia and Egypt to buy, cajole and pressure Hamas into keeping the
cease-fire, supporting peace talks and to give up rockets — while Iran and Syria
will be tugging Hamas the other way.
And that leads to the third new factor — Iran as a key player in
Palestinian-Israeli diplomacy. The Clinton team tried to woo Syria while
isolating Iran. President Bush tried to isolate both Iran and Syria. The Obama
team, as Martin Indyk argues in “Innocent Abroad: An Intimate Account of
American Peace Diplomacy in the Middle East,” “needs to try both to bring in
Syria, which would weaken Hamas and Hezbollah, while also engaging Iran.”
So, just to recap: It’s five to midnight and before the clock strikes 12 all we
need to do is rebuild Fatah, merge it with Hamas, elect an Israeli government
that can freeze settlements, court Syria and engage Iran — while preventing it
from going nuclear — just so we can get the parties to start talking. Whoever
lines up all the pieces of this diplomatic Rubik’s Cube deserves two Nobel
Prizes.
Pope reprieves
Holocaust-denying priest
By MATTHEW WAGNER, AP AND JTA
Jerusalem Post
In an attempt to heal a two-decade old schism, Pope Benedict XVI has lifted the
excommunications of four bishops, including one who is a Holocaust denier.
Slideshow: Pictures of the week Richard Williamson, a British bishop, was shown
in a Swedish state TV interview this week saying that historical evidence "is
hugely against 6 million Jews having been deliberately gassed."
Williamson has said that only 200,000-300,000 Jews died during World War II and
that gas chambers were a fiction.
He has also endorsed the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a notorious
anti-Semitic forgery used since the late 19th century to fuel anti-Jewish
violence, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.
Williamson is one of four bishops, all members of the Society of Saint Pius X,
which rebelled against the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.
Jewish leaders, including Rome Chief Rabbi Ricardo Di Segni, have urged Benedict
not to lift the ban.
The American Jewish Committee's director of Interreligious Affairs, Rabbi David
Rosen, said that "while the Vatican's reconciliation with the SSPX [Society of
Saint Pius X] is an internal matter of the Catholic Church, the embrace of an
open Holocaust denier is shameful, a serious blow for Jewish-Vatican relations,
and a slap in the face for the historic efforts of Pope John Paul II, who
following his predecessors, made such remarkable efforts to eradicate and combat
anti-Semitism.
"I am sure that the lifting of the excommunication was not an affirmation by the
Church of Holocaust denial. However, the failure to take into consideration his
outrageous opinions is deplorable. Williamson should not have been included in
this embrace," Rosen said.
Father David Neuhaus, professor of Bible at Bethlehem University, said on
Saturday evening that the lifting of the excommunications had nothing to do with
the "odious views" held by some of the bishops.
"Rather the pope has a burning desire to put an end to the schism in the Church.
Discussion is going inside the Church regarding the pope's attempt to bring back
into the fold ultra ultra conservatives who never accepted the reforms of
Vatican II and were illicitly consecrated. There are those in the Church he feel
that the pope is humiliating himself for men unrepentant of their views."
Neuhaus, who is also secretary-general of the Hebrew Speaking Catholic Vicariate
in the Holy Land, said the Church's position on the Holocaust was a very
sensitive issue for the local Catholic community.
"It touches on the very heart of who we are here in the Holy Land as promoters
of historical reconciliation of Jewish and Catholic relations so that Jews and
Catholics understand each other more," he said.
"I would like to be optimistic and say that the move to bring these
ultra-conservatives under the influence of the pope will force them to toe the
line with regard to the Church's contempt for Holocaust denial."
Vatican spokesman Rev. Federico Lombardi said Williamson's views had no impact
on the decision to lift the excommunication decree.
The pope's decision by no means implies "sharing [Williamson's] ideas or his
comments, which will be judged on their own," the ANSA news agency quoted
Lombardi as saying.
Marcel Lefebvre founded the Society of Saint Pius X in 1969, a breakaway
traditionalist Catholic priestly society that protests the liberalizing reforms
of the 1962-65 Second Vatican Council, particularly its allowing of mass to be
celebrated in local languages instead of Latin.
The four bishops were excommunicated in 1988 after Lefebvre consecrated them
without Rome's consent. Lefebvre was excommunicated as well.
In a statement on Saturday, the current head of the society and one of the
rehabilitated bishops, Bernard Fellay, expressed his gratitude to Benedict and
said the decree would help the entire Catholic Church.
The Society believes the Church is in crisis and blames in part the doctrinal
reforms of Vatican II, including its ecumenical outreach, for causing it.
"Our Society wishes to be always more able to help the pope to remedy the
unprecedented crisis which presently shakes the Catholic world," Fellay said.
Benedict made clear from the start of his pontificate that he wanted to
normalize relations with the Society, meeting within months of his election with
Fellay and convening cardinals to discuss bringing it back into the Vatican's
fold.
Benedict has in the past praised the society for its stance against "moral
permissiveness."
In 2007, Benedict answered one of Fellay's key demands by relaxing restrictions
on celebrating the old Latin mass. In lifting the excommunication decree, he
answered the society's second condition for beginning theological discussions
about normalizing relations.
In lifting the decrees, Benedict risked a new clash with Jews, who had already
been angered by the rehabilitation of the Latin mass because it contained a
prayer calling for their conversion.
Shimon Samuels of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Paris said he understood the
German-born pope's desire for Christian unity but said Benedict could have
excluded Williamson, whose return to the church would have a "political cost"
for the Vatican.
"I'm certain as a man who has known the Nazi regime in his own flesh, he
understands you have to be very careful and very selective," Samuels said.
While Williamson's comments may be offensive and erroneous, they are not an
excommunicable offense, said Monsignor Robert Wister, professor of church
history at the Immaculate Conception School of Theology at Seton Hall University
in New Jersey.
"To deny the Holocaust is not a heresy even though it is a lie," he said. "The
excommunication can be lifted because he is not a heretic, but he remains a
liar."
Neuhaus said in response to Wister's comments that while he might be technically
right, "William's views contradict the teaching of the Catholic Church. The pope
has been very clear on this and continues John Paul II's tradition of
inculcating total contempt for Holocaust denial and of asking whether Church
clergy did enough during the Holocaust."