LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS
BULLETIN
October 24/08
Bible Reading of the day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to
Saint Luke 12,49-53. I have come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it
were already blazing! There is a baptism with which I must be baptized, and how
great is my anguish until it is accomplished!Do you think that I have come to
establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. From now on a
household of five will be divided, three against two and two against three; a
father will be divided against his son and a son against his father, a mother
against her daughter and a daughter against her mother, a mother-in-law against
her daughter-in-law and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law."
Free Opinions,
Releases, letters & Special Reports
Life After Death: 25 Years Ago. By:
Dr. Joseph Hitti/American
Chronicle, 22/10/08
Al Qaeda's Propaganda Aims to Affect US Election
and future Strategies.By
Walid Phares22/10/08
UN Resolution 1701: A View from the
United States. By Michael Singh October 22, 2008
A Shia affair/Non-Hezbollah voices
might be ready to emerge, as Hezbollah’s mask has fallen off. By: Hanin Ghaddar,
22/10/08
For many
reasons, alternative energy is right for Lebanon.
The Daily Star 22/10/08
Canada Free Press Arutz Sheva World Forum American Chronicle International Analyst Network, Albawaba Blog Yahoo Bejjani Blog
Latest News Reports From
Miscellaneous Sources for October
23/08
EU's Solana in Syria as ties warm-AFP
Suleiman's Optimistic Views-Naharnet
The Syrian-Lebanese embrace-International
Herald Tribune
The lasting impact of 1983 Beirut attack-Christian
Science Monitor
Berri
Wants Arab Ministerial Meeting in Mosul To Defend Christians-Naharnet
Hizbullah Denies Involvement in the Colombian Drug Trafficking Ring-Naharnet
Israel
Draws List of Former Security Officials at Risk of Hizbullah Attacks-Naharnet
EU's Solana discusses Mideast peace in Syria-Jerusalem
Post
Court rules Islamic law discriminatory-Independent
Lebanon’s Bloody Sunday-New York
Times
Paris Encourages Lebanon-Syria Border Control, Demarcation-Naharnet
Franjieh Wants Geagea to Quit
Politics after Reconciliation-Naharnet
Nasrallah-Hariri Meeting Facing Security Not Political Obstacles-Naharnet
Iran
Considering Preemptive Strike Against Israe-Naharnet
U.N.
Political Chief Hails 'Landmark' Deal to Set up Beirut-Damascus Diplomatic Ties-Naharnet
Aridi Ready to Be Held
Accountable After Beirut Floods-Naharnet
Syrian Chief of Staff:
Ties with Lebanon Will be Preserved-Naharnet
Lebanese Woman who Fled
Islamic Law Granted Asylum in UK-Naharnet
Qantar Vows to Work for
End of Israel-Naharnet
LF Accuses Franjieh of
Hindering Reconciliation-Naharnet
Confiscated Pipes Show No
Radioactive Material-Naharnet
Opposition Ministers Hint
at Boycotting Cabinet, Abu Jamra Demands Prosecution of Saniora-Naharnet
Colombian 'drug smugglers' accused of financing
Hizbullah-Daily Star
Report: Europe Fears Marine Suicide Attack From
Lebanon-MEMRI
Egyptian Source Denies Inviting Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah to Cairo-Asharq
Alawsat
Kuwait clears Shiite MPs over Hezbollah mourning-AFP
Kuwaiti court acquits Shiites of militant eulogy-International
Herald Tribune
Hezbollah Seeks Russian Arms-Intelligence
Online
Aman Almost Hoodwinked Hezbollah-Intelligence
Online
Newspaper: Hezbollah rejects any form of negotiation with Israel-Xinhua
ISRAEL: Hamas And Hezbollah Plan Final Battle-Strategy
Page
Lebanese City's Strife Reflects 2 Conflicts-Washington
Post -
Hezbollah: On the War path or seeking political domination of Lebanon?Defense
Update
Political Uncertainty Between Lebanon and Syria Continues-Vatican
Radio
Army arrests fugitive linked to terror-cell case-Daily
Star
MPs
pass new law restricting own role in staffing Constitutional Council-Daily
Star
Franjieh, Karami question value of Geagea's apology-Daily
Star
UNIFIL says attack plot may not have been aimed at peacekeepers-Daily
Star
US
says its wants to see fair and independent media in Lebanon-Daily
Star
Resistance MP rules out negotiations with Israel - report-Daily
Star
US
academics design software to 'predict' Hizbullah behavior-Daily
Star
Franjieh Wants Geagea to Quit Politics after Reconciliation
Marada Movement leader Suleiman Franjieh wants Lebanese Forces chief Samir
Geagea to "admit to his crimes, apologize publicly, then quit politics" if he
ever wants to achieve reconciliation. A Maronite League member told al-Akhbar
daily that Franjieh has demanded the formation of committees from both parties
to coordinate and solve any security breach between their partisans. He said the
committees, which must include representatives of the Maronite League and the
Maronite Patriarchate, should have powers to deal effectively with any possible
clashes. He said the Marada leader accused Geagea of not willing to broaden the
reconciliation to include other parties he committed crimes against in the past.
Franjieh accuses Geagea of committing the "Ehden massacre" in 1978 in which his
father, mother and infant sister, along with 29 other people were shot to death
in the family house in the Northern resort of Ehden.
The Maronite League member said that Geagea has ignored "the family of
assassinated Prime Minister Rashid Karami and takes lightly Dory Shamoun who
forgave Geagea for killing his brother Dany Shamoun and his family," in addition
to the families of all the victims of his past wars.
Geagea, according to the source, wanted to "use the reconciliation with Franjieh
as an example to whoever dares in the future to ask him to pay for his crimes or
to remind him of them." The Maronite League member said that Franjieh was faced
by staunch opposition to the reconciliation by families of the victims of the "Ehden
massacre." Franjieh, on Tuesday, insisted that intra-Christian reconciliation
can only be achieved "in line with our conditions … or let them wait for 30
years more."
"We are not in a hurry to present gifts to Samir Geagea or to give him a good
conduct certificate. He who needs a good conduct certificate should make
concessions to get it," he said. However, Lebanese Forces sources considered the
latest conditions put by the Marada Movement leader as hindering the process of
reconciliation. Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 10:18
Berri Wants Arab Ministerial Meeting in Mosul To Defend
Christians
Naharnet/Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri on Thursday urged Arab and Muslim
leaders to denounce attacks targeting Christians in Iraq.
"Any harm inflicted on any Arab country would target all other Arab states,"
Berri said in his appeal. He also urged the Arab league to launch a "speedy
initiative to salvage the people of Iraq, their civilization and pluralist
nature." Berri called the Arab league to sponsor a meeting in the Iraqi town of
Mosul attended by Arab Waqf (endowment) ministers" to show solidarity with Iraqi
Christians. Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 17:30
Hizbullah Denies Involvement in the Colombian Drug
Trafficking Ring
Naharnet/Hizbullah on Thursday denied involvement in the drug
trafficking and money laundering ring arrested by Colombian authorities.
Hizbullah's international relations official Nawaf Moussawi blamed the charge on
"programmed Zionist efforts to distort the image of Hizbullah as a resistance
movement and a political party." Colombian authorities said they have arrested a
drug trafficking and money-laundering ring. They said the international
operation netted three men on suspicion of sending money to Hizbullah. At least
100 suspects were arrested in Colombia and overseas on drug trafficking charges
and money laundering for Colombia's Norte del Valle cartel and outlawed
paramilitaries, in a network that stretched from South America to Asia, said a
statement by the attorney's general office. "The criminal organization used
routes through Venezuela, Panama, Guatemala, the Middle East and Europe,
bringing in cash from the sale of these substances," it said. The statement said
that among those arrested in Colombia were three people suspected of
coordinating drug smuggling to send part of their profits to groups like
Hizbullah. The alleged Hizbullah suspects were identified as Shukry Mahmoud Harb,
Ali Mohammed Abdul Rahim and Zakaria Hussein Harb.
The statement said the suspects used front companies to send drug cash overseas.
Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 17:07
Suleiman's Optimistic Views
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman on Thursday pledged that the Conference on
National Dialogue would hold its second session on Nov. 5, as originally
scheduled. Suleiman, talking to a delegation from graduates of the Lebanese
University's Media School, said reconciliatory efforts have achieved progress
"despite persisting differences." The president also expressed belief that the
forthcoming parliamentary elections would be held in the spring of 2009,
emphasizing on the "need for a national parliamentary bloc." The dialogue "is
not a waste of time," Suleiman stressed. He said expanding the list of
participants in it is "up to the 14 participants." Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 16:38
Gemayel: Phalange to Present Plan for Solving Shebaa Farms
Issue
Naharnet/Phalange party leader Amin Gemayel on Thursday said his
party would present a plan "that works on solving the Shebaa Farms issue based
on the (Lebanon-Israel) truce agreement," Gemayel said. His remarks came
following a meeting with U.N. representative to Lebanon Michael Williams. In
reference to the on-going Christian reconciliation process, Gemayel expressed
his sorrow "that some concerned parties are calling for reconciliation, while
using escalating expressions that do not secure a desired atmosphere for it to
happen." The Phalange leader called for "securing the inter-Christian
reconciliation the soonest possible away from political bickering."He affirmed
that the "election battle will pass smoothly," pointing to his comfort that the
Phalange party will do well across Lebanese regions. Gemayel also called for
"solving the ongoing bickering concerning the powers of the deputy prime
minister under the constitutional framework to give way for settling upcoming
(political) issues." Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 15:40
LF Accuses Franjieh of Hindering Reconciliation
Naharnet/Lebanese Forces (LF) sources considered the latest
conditions put by Marada Movement leader Suleiman Franjieh as hindering the
process of reconciliation."A daily follow up of Marada's positions made us come
out with a conviction that conditions, verbal attacks and stands are designed to
justify hindering this reconciliation for well-known reasons and motives," one
LF source disclosed to the pan-Arab al-Hayat daily on Wednesday. "The Lebanese
Forces are now more convinced that effective steps toward hampering this
reconciliation have become exposed," he added. The source accused Marada of "not
willing to facilitate reconciliation, and most likely didn't even wanted it
(reconciliation) from the beginning."Meanwhile, ad-Diyar newspaper said contacts
are underway between the LF and the Maronite League to prevent the situation
from any further deterioration. Beirut, 22 Oct 08, 13:49
Iran Considering Preemptive Strike Against Israel
Naharnet/Senior Tehran officials are recommending a preemptive
strike against Israel to prevent an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear reactors, a
senior Islamic Republic official told foreign diplomats two weeks ago in London,
according to the Israeli daily Haaretz. The official, Dr. Seyed G. Safavi, said
recent threats by Israeli authorities strengthened this position, but that as of
yet, a preemptive strike has not been integrated into Iranian policy, the report
said.
Safavi is head of the Research Institute of Strategic Studies in Tehran, and an
adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. The institute is directly affiliated
with Khamenei's office and with the Revolutionary Guards, and advises both on
foreign policy issues. Safavi is also the brother of Yahya Rahim Safavi, who was
the head of the Revolutionary Guards until a year ago and now is an adviser to
Khamenei, and holds significant influence on security matters in the Iranian
government.
An Israeli political official said senior Jerusalem officials were shown
Safavi's remarks, which are considered highly sensitive. The source said the
briefing in London dealt with a number of issues, primarily a potential Israeli
attack on an Iranian reactor, according to the report. Safavi said a small,
experienced group of officials is lobbying for a preemptive strike against
Israel. "The recent Israeli declarations and harsh rhetoric on a strike against
Iran put ammunition in these individuals' hands," he said. Transportation
Minister Shaul Mofaz said in June that Israel would be forced to strike the
Iranian nuclear reactor if Tehran continues to pursue its uranium enrichment
program.
Safavi said Tehran recently drafted a new policy for responding to an Israeli or
American attack on its nuclear facilities. While the previous policy called for
attacks against Israel and American interests in the Middle East and beyond, the
new policy is to target Israel alone.
He added that many Revolutionary Guard leaders want to respond to a U.S. attack
on Iranian soil by striking Israel, as they believe Israel would be partner to
any U.S. action. Safavi said that Iran's nuclear program is intended for
peaceful purposes only, and that Khamenei recently released a fatwa against the
use of weapons of mass destruction, though the contents of that religious ruling
have not yet been publicized.
Regarding dialogue with the United States and the West, Safavi said Iran's
decision would be influenced by the results of the U.S. presidential elections
next month, as well as by the Iranian presidential elections in June and the
economic situation in the Islamic Republic.
Safavi also said that a victory by U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack
Obama would pave the way for dialogue with Washington, while a John McCain
presidency would bolster Iran's extreme right, which opposes dialogue. If
conditions are favorable following the U.S. election, he said, Iran could draw
back from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's declaration that "the nuclear case is
closed," and put it back on the agenda.
Safavi said he believed that U.S. sanctions on Iran have run their course, and
that there would be no point in strengthening them. Tehran would therefore
demand "firm and significant" U.S. measures in return for stopping uranium
enrichment. He also said Ahmadinejad is not guaranteed victory in the June 2009
elections, particularly given the dire economic situation in Iran. Still,
Iranian experts believe his only real competition is former president Mohammad
Khatami, who has not yet joined the race. Safavi said the inflation rate in Iran
is similar to that before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, but that unrest among
civilians today is not as strong. This is because the current government uses
oil revenues to help the poor, he said. Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 14:43
Israel Draws List of Former Security Officials at Risk of
Hizbullah Attacks
Naharnet/Israel's intelligence community has drawn up a list of
dozens of former senior security officials who could be targeted by Hizbullah,
Israeli daily Haaretz reported on Thursday. The list was prepared in response to
Hizbullah threats to avenge the assassination of the Shiite group's top
commander Imad Mughniyeh in a car bomb blast in Damascus last February.
Hizbullah blames Israel for the killing. Haaretz quoted a senior security source
as saying that following the assassination, the Counterterrorism Bureau called
for a series of meetings to discuss a likely response by Hizbullah.
The meetings were attended by representatives of all the intelligence agencies -
the Shin Bet, the Mossad and Military Intelligence - as well as the Foreign
Ministry and the police. The main goal, the security source said, was to try to
prevent another incident like Hizbullah's abduction in 2000 of Elhanan
Tennenbaum.
The meetings resulted in a decision that every security agency should draw up a
list of former senior officials who might be vulnerable to a Hizbullah
assassination or kidnapping attempt. Each organization was asked to give the
names of retirees on whom "an attack might be viewed as equivalent in value to
the assassination of Mughniyeh," the senior source said. Each security
agency drafted a list of a few dozen names. The agencies then devised procedures
for exchanging information on subjects such as those individuals' trips abroad,
potential threats, and intelligence warnings of planned attacks, Haaretz said.
In a few cases, people on the list have been assigned protection by either
Israeli security agencies or local agencies in the countries to which they
traveled, the daily added. Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 10:28
Nasrallah-Hariri Meeting Facing Security Not Political
Obstacles
Naharnet/A meeting between Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and
Mustaqbal Movement chief Saad Hariri is facing security and not political
obstacles, sources involved in efforts to reconcile the two men told pan-Arab
daily al-Hayat. They said there were no political obstacles that prevented the
Nasrallah-Hariri reconciliation meeting particularly after a delegation from the
Loyalty to the Resistance bloc headed by MP Mohammed Raad visited Hariri at his
mansion in Qoreitem. The sources told al-Hayat in remarks published Thursday
that both Nasrallah and Hariri have security concerns, which are preventing the
two leaders to move from their locations. They said the team working to set up
the meeting are looking for a location that suits both men. The sources
confirmed that among the alternatives were Ain el-Tineh, the seat of Parliament
Speaker Nabih Berri, or another place hosted by a mutual friend. Beirut, 23 Oct
08, 09:10
U.N. Political Chief Hails 'Landmark' Deal to Set up Beirut-Damascus Diplomatic
Ties
Naharnet/The senior United Nations political official has hailed the "landmark
agreement" to establish diplomatic relations between Beirut and Damascus, but
said more efforts should be exerted to build on progress in Lebanon. Lynn
Pascoe, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, told the Security Council
on Wednesday that Lebanon and Syria on Oct. 16 signed a landmark agreement
towards the establishment of diplomatic ties. In what Pascoe described another
milestone, the Lebanese parliament passed a new electoral law, as agreed in
Doha. He called for increased talks between Israel and Syria as well as
stepped-up efforts to build on recent developments in Lebanon. Pascoe mentioned
the ongoing security incidents in the northern port city of Tripoli and said
alleged members of a terrorist cell, believed to be affiliated with
Fatah-al-Islam, were arrested on Oct. 12 by Lebanese security forces.
The situation in the area of operations of the United Nations Interim Force in
Lebanon (UNIFIL) remained tense but generally quiet, and Israeli air violations
continued at an average of 10 per day, Pascoe told the Security Council. Michael
Williams, the Special Coordinator for Lebanon, began work as of 1 October, he
added. Although Pascoe mentioned in his briefing last month's car bomb blast in
Damascus which reportedly killed 17 civilians and injured over a dozen others,
he didn't bring up the issue of Syrian troops deployment along Lebanon's
northern border. In a move he characterized as a "welcome development," the
first phase of rubble removal began on Oct. 17 one year after fighting in the
Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr al-Bared in northern Lebanon ended. He said
funding was urgently required to meet reconstruction costs and the humanitarian
needs of the displaced. Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 04:59
Lebanese Woman who Fled Islamic Law Granted Asylum in UK
Naharnet/Lebanese mother and her child who fled to Britain to
avoid being separated under their country's Islamic law should be allowed to
remain in the U.K., Britain's highest court has ruled. The divorced woman,
identified only as EM, sought asylum in Britain for herself and her 8-year-old
son after fleeing Lebanon on false papers in December 2004. She told immigration
officials her allegedly abusive ex-husband would gain custody of their child
under Lebanon's Sharia law.
While religious laws are not applied in Lebanon's criminal code, Sharia does
apply to Lebanese Muslims on civil issues such as marriage, divorce, child
custody and inheritance. Christian communities have their own religious courts.
Sharia only allows divorced mothers custody of their children until their 7th
birthday, at which point custody reverts to the father.
The mother's application was denied in 2005, but she appealed to the House of
Lords, Britain's Supreme Court. In a submission to the court made in July, human
rights group Liberty argued that the Lebanese law "amounts to a flagrant breach
of the mother's (and child's) rights." The court agreed, calling the woman a
fugitive from Sharia law. "It is ... the product of a religious and cultural
tradition that is respected and observed throughout much of the world," James
Hope, writing for the court, said in his judgment. "But by our standards the
system is arbitrary because the law permits of no exceptions to its application.
... It is discriminatory too because it denies women custody of their children
after they have reached the age of custodial transfer simply because they are
women."
Liberty said the judgment meant the woman could now stay in Britain with her
son. Her lawyer, Sanjeev Sharma, said she was due to be granted up to three
years' leave to remain in Britain, and that was likely to be renewed. Neither
the woman, 36, nor her son, now 12, have been identified, out of concern for
their safety.(AP) Beirut, 23 Oct 08, 05:25
Qantar Vows to Work for End of Israel
Three months after his release from an Israeli jail in a prisoner
swap, Samir Qantar says he is more than ever committed to working to wipe the
Jewish state off the map. "As long as there is something called Israel in this
region, the resistance must continue ... and I am totally committed to the
resistance," Qantar, 46, told AFP in an interview. "I am ready to take part in
any resistance mission."Described as a monster in Israel where he was convicted
for killing Danny Haran, his four-year-old daughter Einat and an Israeli
policeman in a notorious attack nearly three decades ago, Qantar is considered a
hero by many in Lebanon, where he was given a red carpet welcome on his release
in July. He said he now spends his days mostly in meetings linked to the
resistance and was convinced that Israel was preparing a major attack against
Lebanon. "They don't realize what we have in store for them," he said, sitting
in a seaside apartment on the outskirts of Beirut filled with medals, honorary
plaques and pictures of Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, a man he says
he idolizes. "Israel is going to suffer great losses and they will lose for
sure," he added. "The idea that Israel is an invincible, secure state has become
a myth."
He said that even if Israel withdrew from the contested Shebaa Farms territory
in south Lebanon captured in 1967, the resistance would continue with its
struggle to eliminate the Jewish state. "The resistance will end only when the
Zionist entity disappears," he vowed. Recalling the cross-border raid that
landed him in an Israeli jail in 1979, when he was just 16 years old and part of
the Palestine Liberation Front, Qantar says he has no regrets and denies killing
Haran and his daughter.
"I remember every detail of that night," he said calmly, pulling on a cigarette.
"The father kept insisting on taking his daughter with him and that delayed the
operation for about 10 minutes. "He refused to leave her behind and clutched on
to her. He was like a madman," he added. "We were not interested in the girl."
He said both were killed by Israeli fire during a fierce battle that took place
as Qantar and his fellow militants tried to flee with the two Israeli hostages.
But according to forensic evidence and witness testimony during his trial,
Qantar and his co-militants killed Haran and then battered Einat's skull with
rifle butts.
"I just wish they would give as much importance to the children killed during
the 2006 (Hizbullah) war with Israel and the Palestinian children dying every
day," Qantar said. Israeli security officials have vowed to hunt him down for
his crime but Qantar said he was not especially concerned for his safety and
realized he could never lead a "normal life" though he hoped to one day marry
and have children.
He also brushed aside persistent rumors that he may stand in next year's
parliamentary elections in Lebanon. "I don't live with the obsession that I may
get killed," he said, adding that he nonetheless had a security detail and took
precautions. As to his most searing memory of the time he spent in Israeli
jails, Qantar said it concerned a prison guard who spoke to him in Arabic. "He
told me 'listen Samir, you are a young man now but by the time you get out you
will have become a burden on society," Qantar said. "I guess my message to the
Israelis today is that they didn't manage to break me."(AFP) Beirut, 22 Oct 08,
19:03
Confiscated Pipes Show No Radioactive Material
Naharnet/Pipes confiscated from a terrorist cell at Kfar Shouba
two weeks ago contained no radioactive materials "and proved nothing," Minister
of Justice Ibrahim Najjar has revealed. Najjar affirmed at a cabinet meeting on
Tuesday that "measures taken by the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)
do not mean that they are based on the nature of this cell." Other ministers
considered this issue to constitute "a media campaign aimed at accusing Lebanon
of terrorism."
The daily An-Nahar on Wednesday said it learnt from security sources that the
pipes were made available to the National Atomic Energy Agency based on a
request made by the courts. The pipes were earlier presented for inspection to
various private laboratories.
They were found to be free of radioactive material. Police are holding the
confiscated pipes awaiting a decision by Judge Rashid Mizher whether they should
be sent to overseas laboratories for analysis for any possible germ contents.
The confiscated pipes were found in the possession of three persons in southern
Lebanon, one of whom is an inspector in the Lebanese Internal Security Forces.
Investigations have revealed that those arrested intended to carry out an
operation against UNIFIL in the south. Beirut, 22 Oct 08, 13:00
Row over deputy PM's powers divides Cabinet
Abu jamra threatens boycott unless he is heard
Daily Star staff
Thursday, October 23, 2008
BEIRUT: Chances of Christian reconciliation declined further on Wednesday as
Lebanese politicians sank deeper into debate over the powers of the deputy prime
minister.Deputy Prime Minister Issam Abu Jamra said he would boycott Cabinet sessions
until his proposal to amend the powers of his office was put on the body's
agenda. Abu Jamra walked out of Tuesday's meeting over the same issue.
In an interview with Sawt al-Ghad radio, Abu Jamra said he had submitted a
written request in this regard on September 1, but Prime Minister Fouad Siniora
"kept disregarding it and never included it on the Cabinet's agenda." "This
shows how they abase the people's value and who they represent," he said.
Abu Jamra said he hoped the issue would be put to a vote by the ministers;
otherwise, he would leave the Cabinet.
He added that the issue was first raised when the Cabinet was formed in late
June, but discussions around it were delayed at the request of President Michel
Sleiman.
Telecoms Minister Gebran Bassil, Abu Jamra's colleague in the Free Patriotic
Movement led by MP Michel Aoun, had said Tuesday that opposition ministers would
likely boycott Cabinet sessions to express solidarity with the deputy premier.
In comments to As-Safir newspaper on Wednesday, Abu Jamra said the deputy
premier "should be a real deputy to the prime minister," adding that the law
should be amended to, among other things, allow the deputy premier to head
Cabinet meetings when the prime minister is away and to exercise his powers at
the Grand Serail. He also argued that his proposal neither contradicts the
Constitution nor requires an amendment.
In separate remarks to the Central News Agency (CNA), Abu Jamra also denied that
his boycott of the Cabinet sessions was a blow to May's Doha Agreement, which
put an end to Lebanon's eight-month political stalemate and clearly specifies
that in a national unity government no resignations or boycotts ought to take
place.
In response to claims that Abu Jamra's action aimed to divert attention
following criticism of Aoun's recent trip to Iran, the deputy premier said:
"Aoun's visit to Iran had a very clear objective; I am protesting against
neglect from the part of the premier."
Former Deputy Prime Minister Issam Fares called on all groups to end disputes
over the issue. In a statement issued on Wednesday, Fares said determining the
powers of the deputy premier's office, a relatively new post traditionally
reserved for a Greek Orthodox, was "not aimed at weakening the position of the
prime minister or threatening the rights of the Sunni confession."
In comments to LBCI on Wednesday, Justice Minister Ibrahim Najjar said that the
position of the deputy prime minister was not mentioned in the Constitution.
Najjar said that he had always supported granting powers to the deputy premier,
but added that a discussion of the office's powers during Cabinet sessions
"would not solve the issue."
In a statement on Tuesday, Former Prime Minister Salim Hoss said the deputy
prime minister should not be given the right to sign decrees on behalf of the
prime minister.
The Lebanese Greek Orthodox League, however, expressed surprise at "all this
unjustified confusion around the powers of the deputy prime minister" and urged
Siniora to raise the issue in the next Cabinet session.
"Everybody knows that determining the deputy prime minister's powers and giving
him an office do not require a constitutional amendment," the league's statement
added.
Information Minister Tarek Mitri, himself a Greek Orthodox aligned with
Siniora's March 14 Forces, disagreed, saying that "determining the deputy
premier's powers is a constitutional issue that must be discussed inside the
institutions in the right time." He added that "involving the Orthodox
confession in political disputes does not serve the country."
Separately, chances of an intra-Christian thaw remained weak on Wednesday, with
Maronite League sources telling the CNA that the reconciliation between the
Lebanese Forces (LF) and the Marada Movement was "not easy to achieve."
LF sources told the CNA: "The Syrians prohibited [Marada leader and former
Interior Minister Suleiman] Franjieh to meet with us." They added that Franjieh
was "embarrassed" when the LF showed readiness toward reconciliation. However,
the sources said that contacts were still ongoing via the Maronite League.
Following a meeting with Siniora on Wednesday, LF MP Strida Geagea said the
decision of reconciliation was "not in the hands of Franjieh."
Conversely, Marada sources told the CNA the movement wanted a "strong
reconciliation" and advocated the formation of a joint committee to discuss the
reconciliation process and a final statement that would be issued afterward.
March 14 MP Mosbah Ahdab slammed what he described as "some voices that are
rejecting reconciliation."
Meanwhile, sources from Hizbullah and the Future Movement quoted by the CNA said
that security cooperation between the two groups was still under way to pave the
way for a meeting between their respective leaders, MP Saad Hariri and Sayyed
Hassan Nasrallah.
The sources added that details of the meeting "would not be disclosed until
after the meeting takes place."
On another level, Hizbullah officials told the CNA that Egypt's government had
sent several invitations for party representatives to visit that country, a
strong supporter of Future, through the Egyptian Embassy in Beirut and Foreign
Minister Ahmad Abu al-Gheith. The officials added that the party had yet to
decide on these visits.
According to Asharq al-Awsat newspaper, however, Egypt denied inviting Nasrallah
to visit Cairo
"This invitation has never been sent," an Egyptian source told the daily.
Also on Wednesday, French sources quoted by the CNA said they were satisfied
with the development of the situation in Lebanon, with regards to the
implementation of the Doha pact. They also "welcomed cautiously" the latest
developments pertaining to the establishment of diplomatic relations between
Syria and Lebanon.
French Foreign Ministry spokesperson Eric Chevalier said his country welcomed
the establishment of relations between Syria and Lebanon and encouraged both
countries to work on other pending issues, including the demarcation of their
borders and detainees.
On the security level, Sleiman has met with several key officials in the past
two days, including Internal Security Forces chief Major General Ashraf Rifi,
General Security head Major General Wafik Jezzini and State Security boss
Brigadier Elias Kaakati, according to a statement issued by the president's
office. The meetings focused on investigations into the recent Tripoli bombings
and associated security measures. - The Daily Star
Franjieh-Geagea reconciliation bid a charade - analysts
Deep enmity rooted in still-simmering memories of atrocities committed during
civil war
By Michael Bluhm
Daily Star staff
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Analysis
BEIRUT: Recent talk of reconciling Lebanon's deeply divided Christian factions
represents little more than maneuvering for electoral advantage in next year's
polls, while personal animosity and the country's fractious history will
continue to prevent any honest reconciliation among longtime rival leaders, a
number of analysts told The Daily Star on Wednesday
Moves toward reconciliation faltered gravely on Tuesday, as Marada Movement head
Suleiman Franjieh said he was "not in a hurry" to make peace with Lebanese
Forces (LF) leader Samir Geagea and would reconcile only under Marada's
conditions. Franjieh and Change and Reform Bloc head MP Michel Aoun, the March 8
alliance's leading Christian figure, have been sworn enemies of Geagea since the
1975-90 Civil War, long before Geagea wound up opposing them as part of the
March 14 camp.
However, with general elections slated for next May expected to be a hotly
contested battle, the political chiefs are using the latest talk of concord to
cover their regular need to partition voters so as to maximize personal gain and
yet keep traditional bosses in power, said Hilal Khashan, chair of the
department of political science and public administration at the American
University of Beirut.
The Christian leaders are "dividing the spoils of the system - they call it
reconciliation," Khashan said.
Geagea has his eye on one of the three Parliament seats up for grabs in the
Zghorta district, Franjieh's ancestral home, said Oussama Safa, executive
director of the Lebanese Center for Policy Studies. "Burying the hatchet with
Franjieh would probably get [Geagea] one more seat," Safa added.
Franjieh, on the other hand, wants Geagea to acknowledge the Marada chief's
status as the political leader of North Lebanon's Christians, Safa said. With
Geagea unlikely to meet that condition and Franjieh loath to cede any political
ground to Geagea, the reconciliation will probably fail to gather steam, Safa
added.
"It boils down to recognizing Franjieh's leadership of the North," Safa said.
"Right now it's not in Franjieh's interest to reconcile with Geagea, so it's not
going to happen anytime soon.""It's half-hearted from both leaders. It's not a genuine reconciliation," he
added.
On the contrary, Franjieh is working to spin the reconciliation chatter to
excite his Zghorta base against Geagea, said retired General Elias Hanna, who
teaches political science at Notre Dame University. In general, Christian
leaders of the March 8 coalition are plotting to wipe Geagea off the political
map, with the LF leader's only certain victory being the two seats from his home
district of Bsharre, Hanna added.
"Everybody wants the head of Samir Geagea," Hanna said. "They are trying to
eliminate Samir Geagea as much as possible. If there is a 1-percent chance that
[reconciliation] would help Samir Geagea, then [Franjieh] would say no. They
don't want reconciliation. Why give [Geagea] a blank check?"
"It's mainly political, concerning the coming election," Hanna added. "This is
the main issue.
The reconciliation charade will probably end with Franjieh pushing Geagea for
more and more concessions until Geagea says no, Hanna said.
However, with the bruising campaign anticipated for the 2009 parliamentary polls
and incidents already cropping up frequently in the North between Marada and LF
partisans, the leaders also hope that repeating the reconciliation mantra will
keep their supporters' passions under control, Khashan said.
"They are trying to make sure there would not be an outbreak of violence that
could be uncontrollable," he said. With the mood in the region favoring a
cooling of tensions, the reconciliation posturing might at least result in a
deal on campaign etiquette, he added.
Aside from electoral calculus, the Franjieh-Geagea reconciliation drive also
faces the towering hurdle of the killing of Franjieh's father Toni and other
family members in the 1978 Ehden massacre, the analysts said. Geagea, at that
time a member of the Phalange Party, has said he was one of those in charge of
the Ehden assault but was shot before making it to the Franjieh residence and
did not take part in the massacre.
Not only have the sides not forgotten the killings, but the slaughter was but
one of the more glaring manifestations of the antagonism that divided and still
divides various Christian factions, Khashan said.
"It happened yesterday," he added. "It's not really history. We are still living
the impact of what happened."
"I just don't see any way that Franjieh and the Lebanese Forces could find"
common ground, Khashan ssid. "The massacre reflected the depth of the divisions
between the two factions. The tensions antedated the assassination of Toni
Franjieh."
"No matter what Geagea would do, in Suleiman Franjieh's eyes he's the killer of
his father, and you don't forgive the killer of your father."
But the deep-seated enmity is not limited to Geagea and Franjieh, and so many of
the Civil War animosities continue to burn and to preclude reconciliation
because the belligerents never confronted their deeds and engaged in
reconciliation when the war ended, Khashan said.
"How could we reconcile unless the problem comes to the fore?" he asked. "We did
not resolve the past. We cannot talk about the future until we bury the past. We
did not properly bury the past.
"Not talking about the past does not eliminate it. Everybody has to admit what
happened. That's why it's easy for the Lebanese to go to the streets and fight
among themselves, because the past has not been dealt with. Having a leadership
handshake would not mean much."
Beyond the Civil War scars, hostility among Lebanon's Christian factions might
even spring from the historic basis for the country's emergence, Khashan said.
With the rugged terrain of Mount Lebanon limiting the domination of Christian
clans there by the Ottomans - and keeping the clans separated from one another -
numerous power centers became entrenched, creating a natural source for friction
among the various groups, Khashan added.
"The divisions are part of the feudal formation of leadership in Mount Lebanon,"
Khashan said. "Their pattern for leadership remained feudal."
"What people are calling reconciliation amounts to nothing more than feudal
entente or tribal entente," he added. "I can't imagine the factions in Lebanon
reconciling. This would no longer be Lebanon."
A Shia affair
Non-Hezbollah voices might be ready to emerge, as Hezbollah’s mask has fallen
off
Hanin Ghaddar,
NOW Staff , October 22, 2008
Election observers look at a Shia Lebanese woman casting her vote at a polling
station in the southern Lebanese town of Ansar on June 5, 2005 (AFP/Patrick Baz).
During the 2006 July war, Mona Fayyad, a Shia who chairs the Psychology
Department at Lebanese University, wrote an essay for the leading Lebanese daily
An-Nahar entitled “To be a Shia now.” The article stirred a public debate on the
issue of Lebanese Shia who blindly follow Hezbollah.
To be a Shia now “is to block your mind” and let Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's
supreme leader, “command you, drive you, decide for you what he wants from the
weapons of Hezbollah, and force on you a victory that is no different from
suicide,” Fayad wrote. “To be a Shia and dare to write and think such ideas
means you are a collaborator and a traitor.”
Fayad's essay gave an outlet to some of the frustration that has built up among
many Lebanese Shia. Although a largely symbolic gesture when measured against
the widespread Shia support of Hezbollah, the essay offered an idea of a Shia
mindset that is not present in the political scene in Lebanon. All this might be
changing. For despite a tradition of being guaranteed electoral victories in the
Shia areas, Hezbollah and Amal might find the 2009 elections tougher than they
think, due to the possible emergence of credible non-Hezbollah/Amal Shia
contenders.
Taking in the Shia
The huge public demonstration of March 8, 2005 saw Lebanon’s Shia community,
even those who supported Amal, drawn into Hezbollah’s orbit (a trend that would
be exacerbated after the 2006 war) and its leader, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah,
became the de facto Za’im, or leader, of the community. While Hezbollah has
succeeded to some extent in convincing the Shia that theirs is a community
predicated on resistance – in part because there is some truth to the party’s
claim to having empowered the Shia while other Lebanese sects neglected them –
they have also succeeded in isolating the community from the rest of the
Lebanese society.
During the final days of Ramadan, 2008, an Iftar was held by the Gathering of
Independent Lebanese Shia Associations in honor of Sayyed Ali al-Amin, who
appeared publicly for the first time since he was forcefully removed from his
position as mufti of the South and home in May.
In his speech, Amin noted that there are still independent Shia who continue to
resist despite all the pressure and intimidation exerted on them. “The religious
parties dominating the Shia community today are displaying a kind of pre-Islamic
or Jahiliyyeh behavior. They have transformed this community into a tribe,
wherein it is considered a sin to express any diversity of opinion and
individuality is shunned,” he said.
Divine tyranny
Hezbollah is not only in total denial of these voices, they do not hesitate to
suppress such opinions. According to its leadership, the Shia as a community
should find power in its sectarian feelings. Shiism, in this sense, should be
the nation for the Shia, instead of Lebanon.
The party’s dictatorial rhetoric and behavior indicates that they have been
trying to transform the sect into the Party of God, and woe betide any one Shia
who dares argue with Hezbollah’s “divine” decisions. Sayyed al-Amin endured a
number of attacks on his office and home, before he was removed from his
position, while Hezbollah and Amal threw stones at US Ambassador Michelle Sison
in Nabatiyeh on her way to visit Sayyed Abdallah Bitar, senior Shia cleric.
As “divergent” voices among the Shia are becoming louder, Hezbollah is becoming
more tyrannical. This behavior may reflect a degree of fear as it realizes that
it cannot implement its agenda with force alone. The region is at a critical
point, and Hezbollah might be facing a crisis if the regional dynamics did not
serve its interests. At the same time, Shia intellectuals and journalists are
critical of the party’s behavior, especially since its attempted coup on May 7.
Hezbollah is aware that the majority of the Shia, whether supportive of
Hezbollah or not, cannot endure another war, because they are the ones who pay
the price and even take the blame, as has been the case since May, with many
Shia facing isolation and alienation from fellow Lebanese. That’s why Hezbollah
cannot afford to target Israel before the 2009 parliamentary elections. If they
do, they’ll face an enormous Shia backlash.
Election vibes
There are a number of families and key figures within the Shia community that
could constitute a threat to Hezbollah’s electoral plans. The influence and
standing of the Assaad, Amin, Osseiran, Khalil, Shamseddine, Sharafeddine,
Hamadeh, Husseini and other families (all of whom have reduced their support for
Hezbollah after its Iranian agenda become obvious) is still present in the
collective memories of the Shia. So far, these clans have not constituted a
threat to Hezbollah electorally but with the enactment of the 1960 law, there is
a chance that certain anti-Hezbollah Shia politicians, such as Ahmad al-Assaad,
might create an upset.
In addition to the support he receives for the West and March 14 coalition,
Assaad will run in the constituency of Marjayoun, which has, along with a good
number of Shia who support Assaad, 23,006 Sunni and 14,080 Druze voters. There
are 74,441 Shia voters but in the absence of an electoral “settlement” and if
MPs Walid Jumblatt and Saad Hariri give Assaad the Druze and the Sunni votes,
there is a good chance that he will sneak a parliamentary seat.
It could happen. In the 2004 municipality elections, in those areas where
Hezbollah and Amal ran against each other, Hezbollah won around 40% of the votes
in Shia villages and towns, while Amal and a few independent candidates won the
rest of the votes. And in the last parliamentary elections, Hezbollah could only
win 12 out of 27 Shia seats in the parliament, which has 128 MPs, even though it
had allied with Christian, Sunni and Druze parties. Finally, although Amal
appears powerless under Hezbollah’s authority, it still enjoys vast support
within the Shia community and with regional dynamics at play (if Iran and Syria
did not share the same agenda) Amal’s voice will be loud.
Hezbollah has convinced many in the Shia community that protecting the
resistance is essential to the preservation of Shia political strength, and that
any attempt to disarm the resistance should thus be seen as an attempt at
communal disempowerment. However, the Shia who feel safe under the Hezbollah
umbrella, must be assured that when politicians, or any other public or private
figures, criticize Hezbollah, it is not a step towards re-marginalizing the
broader Shia community. For only once the Shia feel secure, and fully recognized
as an integral part of the fabric of Lebanese society, that they will be able to
stand up to the bullying and intimidation that Hezbollah has made its own.
Life After Death: 25 Years Ago.
Joseph Hitti
October 22, 2008
On the occasion of the 25th commemoration of the bombing of the US Marines
Barracks in Beirut (October 23, 1983) by Hezbollah, I am sad to admit to
reversing my position of trusting the Republicans in the aftermath of September
11, 2001. Having written the piece below in 2003, I do not want to tarnish my
respect and deep sympathy for the Marines themselves who gave their life in
serving peace in Lebanon in 1983. But unfortunately, the mood of the
transformation in US foreign policy that followed Sept. 11, 2001 has soured. In
spite of President George W. Bush´s promises of no longer cavorting to dictators
for the sake of fake stability, he and his fellow Republicans, like the former
Republican administrations of Reagan and Bush senior, have gone back to making
backroom deals with dictators, tyrants, warlords and corrupt elites in those
countries that had high hopes for genuine grassroots democracy to take hold,
like Lebanon. The US administration today is again seeking the favors of the
Syrian dictator, has accepted a modus vivendi with Hezbollah in Lebanon, has
done nothing serious to stem the Iranian and Syrian influences in Lebanon, and
is giving the Lebanese Army lip service and junk weapons instead of a serious
effort at strengthening the Lebanese army to the point where it can defeat
Hezbollah. Why, I ask, can´t the US do for Lebanon what it did for Bosnia and
Kosovo in the Balkans?
I have come to the conclusion that the US Administration has never wanted, and
does not want today, a definitive solution in Lebanon that preserves Lebanon´s
integrity and sovereignty. The interests of Lebanon are subsumed under those of
Israel, which means that a US-chaperoned Israeli-Syrian deal remains the
priority, even if at the expense of Lebanon. I honestly believe that the
original plan, the "Kissinger Plan" devised in the early 1970s by Henry
Kissinger and Richard Nixon (another Republican administration) to destabilize
Lebanon on religious grounds in order to offer the PLO a substitute country and
get Israel off the hook, is still at work. I do not believe any of the
statements by US State Department officials that there will be no deal with
Syria over Lebanon. I never believed them back when they sold Lebanon to Syria,
why should I believe them today?
Having said all that, I am not changing the text of the piece I wrote in 2003,
back when I wholeheartedly believed in the change of US policy after September
11. On the 25th commemoration of the bombing of the US Marines barracks and the
French Paratrooper Compound on October 23, 1983, I offer my gratitude and deep
respect to the soldiers themselves, but not to the leaders who sent them and
then betrayed them and their memory.
October 23, 2003
It has been 20 years this October 23d since the suicide truck bombing of the US
Marines barracks in Beirut. There is nothing sacred about the number 20 but we
humans like round numbers, and so this 20th anniversary of Islamic bombing of
the US Marines Barracks in Beirut on a Sunday morning in 1983 is more special
than, say, last year's 19th anniversary. Not that the event is less important
than the anniversary. I actually remember it every year, because it left a deep
scar in me.
But beyond the anniversaries, this year the memory has indeed a very special
place because it has mutated from one of complete, hopeless, bottomless sorrow
and sadness to one in which the sorrow, for the first time in 20 years, has in
the words of Khalil Gibran showed us its other face, its alter ego, hope! As
Khalil Gibran said "The deeper that sorrow carves into your being, the more joy
you can contain." And as the West slowly but surely makes a U-turn, comes to
terms with its often-stated but rarely practiced convictions, and begins to
seriously fight terrorism, Lebanon and the people of Lebanon cannot help but
feel gleeful. Yes, we told you so.
For 30 years the Lebanese people were alone, with bombs in their streets and
shrapnel in the bodies of their children, with massacres and destruction,
shelling, kidnapping, and sniping. They tried to tell the world that theirs was
not a civil war, but the war of terror on gentility, the war of backwardness on
civility, of anarchy on stability, of totalitarianism on democracy, of darkness
on enlightenment. They tried to tell the world that their land and their history
were, for better or for worse, the fault line where the seeds of coming wars
were being sown that will come knocking at their doors in the not so distant
future. But no one listened, even when the US Marines and the French
paratroopers were blown to shreds, or when the US ambassador Francis Meloy and
the French Ambassador Louis Delamare were gunned down in the streets of Beirut
under the watchful eyes of the Syrian "peacekeepers", or when their own
journalists, clergymen, teachers, and diplomats were being snatched off the
streets of Beirut to be chained for years in dingy basements. The world insisted
that this was a "civil war", even as every symbol of global East-meets-West
decency that Lebanon harbored for decades was being shredded to pieces through
the terror grinder of Syria, Iran, and their many proxies. Even as embassies
were being shut down, Western civilians were being evacuated, schools were being
closed, and peacekeeping armies were being blown up, it was the fault of the
Lebanese people for being so close to Palestine, and for having borders with
Israel and Syria. It was the fault of the Lebanese for being the proxy victims,
the scapegoat, the accidental actors in a play not of their making. Lebanon was
even accused of being an artificial nation, made of so many tribes - since when
was diversity a shame, and pluralism a sin? - Because its history and geography
did not allow a single group from "ethnically-cleansing" the others, or
converting them to one religion. Lebanon was a Bosnia-Herzegovina a couple of
decades too early for the sensibilities of the West to wake up from their
comfortable slumber.
And so now the hens have come home to roost. Things have changed and the tables
have been turned. For the first time in 20 years, the US Administration is
calling the Syrians occupiers. For the first time in 20 years, the US is not
running away from the suicide bombings and the acts of terror, but is pursuing
them in every far corner of the world. For the first time in 20 years, there
will be no retreat from Beirut or Baghdad, because the message is no longer
"Bomb them and they will retreat". The message today is "No matter the body bags
or the bombs, we will hound you till the end." For the first time in 20 years,
State Department did not object to an anti-Syrian piece of legislation and the
US Congress is voting a law to hold those behind the terrorists accountable for
their acts. For the first time in 20 years the West has finally recognized that
what happened in Beirut that Sunday morning had nothing to do with the
liberation of Palestine or with what Israel was doing to the Palestinian people.
Rather, that Sunday morning was a pure act of hatred, seated deep in the
civilizational clash that makes certain people afraid of the modern world. That
truck bomb was a pure act of terror, distilled of all the excuses and pretexts
that are uttered these days to justify and promote another retreat in front of
the terrorist threat. That Sunday morning bombing was a direct precursor for
that Tuesday Sept 11 bombing.
For we need to remember why the Marines came in the first place to Beirut that
year, accompanied by their Allies, the French, the Italians and the British as
the Multi-National Force (MNF). We need to remind Jacques Chirac of France that
56 of his own paratroopers were also blown up at exactly the same time as 241 US
Marines were being killed in their sleep, about half a mile away. The MNF was
not a force of occupation. The MNF was not there looking for weapons of Mass
Destruction. The MNF was not fighting any war. In fact, the soldiers of the MNF
were forbidden from loading their guns. The MNF was there to supervise the
evacuation of Yasser Arafat's PLO from Beirut, after he had declared that the
road to Palestine goes - with much looting, raping, pillaging, killing,
mass-murdering - through Beirut. And when the time came to face up to reality,
no Arab brother was there to help him out, not even the Syrians. Not even the
Saudis. And not even the Iranians. And that is why the Americans and the
Europeans had come to Beirut. To save the hide of an Arab. To save a city from
the Israeli siege that no Arab "brother", especially Syria, dared to oppose.
And so Lebanon is today the winner. Lebanon was right and everyone else was
wrong. The Lebanese people now can, but may choose to have the decency not to,
engage in academic debates and make moral judgments about the appropriateness of
invading Iraq as a component of the war against terrorism. Or the effectiveness
of targeted assassinations as a means to fight Yasser Arafat. Or whether a
country such as Israel that cannot control its Palestinians is, like Lebanon of
the 1970s and 1980s, an artificial or uncivilized country with many tribes that
just can't "sit down and agree" on how to deal with a mortal threat in its
midst. Or whether the US government's restrictions on the civil liberties of its
citizens is the moral equivalent of General Aoun's government trying to enforce
the law by shutting down the illegal harbors of the warlords along the Lebanese
coast. Or whether Syria's behavior in opening its borders to Jihadists flocking
into Iraq to fight the imperialist American crusaders is really exactly the same
as Syria's opening its borders in the early 1970s to Al-Saika, the Yarmuk
Brigades, or the Palestine Liberation Army to enter into Lebanon and destabilize
the isolationist Lebanese government and kill the indigenous crusaders of
Lebanon.
It took 30 years and September 11 for the West to comprehend what Lebanon had
gone through, place its tragedy in the right context and stop the condescending
sermonizing. Baghdad, you owe Beirut a big thank you because the US has learned
a lot from its retreat that year. The Lebanese people were alone that year, and
so were the Marines when their government withdrew in the face of their killers.
Today, they are no longer alone. Their pain is everyone's pain, and the end of
the tunnel, even if it remains distant, is now bigger and more crowded. But most
of all we owe the Marines who died in their sleep on that Sunday morning in
Beirut a huge debt. The debt of having being the accidental victims, and like
Lebanon, they were the canaries in the mine. But no one was listening then.
Today the whole world is listening.
**Joseph Hitti is an American Translators Association-certified Arabic
translator, a genomics scientist and a political commentator on Lebanon and the
Middle East. He was born and raised in Beirut, Lebanon and currently lives in
Boston. He can be reached at joehittimass@yahoo.com
Al Qaeda's Propaganda Aims to Affect US Election and future
Strategies
By Walid Phares
October 23, 2008
A recent Associated Press report and a Washington Post article reported that al
Qaeda's web sites have expressed a strategic preference of their organization
for the next President of the United States. The Washington Post analysis,
observing that multiple sites and commentaries close to the Bin Laden group
expressed a similar point of view, concluded that this indeed is al Qaeda's
agenda: that a John McCain Presidency would benefit the Jihadi goals.
A first quick reading of the site's claim may appear to be an endorsement of the
Senator from Arizona. A thorough reading of the posted material in original
Arabic, however, and an analysis of the global strategies of the Jihadist
movement along with the psychological war efforts by al Qaeda and their allies
around the world, tell us a different story and it is the antipode of the
Washington Post conclusion.
Here is my reading of the Jihadi postings:
1) Methodologically: When translating and analyzing material posted by al Qaeda
or operatives close to the group, or pretending to do so, one has to keep track
of the big strategic picture. Al Qaeda doesn't favor one American politician
over another; rather it uses images and slogans to derail the global U.S.
response to al Qaeda, regardless of who occupies the White House. It doesn't
rely on a left wing/right wing parameter.
For example, al Qaeda (and the Iranian regime) attacked Labor Prime Minister
Tony Blair because he joined the U.S. in the offensive in Iraq and praised
French Conservative President Jacques Chirac for opposing that campaign. The
Jihadists accepted support from the U.S. when they were fighting the Soviets and
are now in sync with populist Marxists in their fight against America. In short
there is a "Jihadi agenda" and what they care about is how to advance it.
2) Strategic goals: The Salafist networks, including al Qaeda, want a defeat of
U.S.-led efforts in Iraq and in Afghanistan. The Jihadi war room (part of it is
within the top tier of al Qaeda and other parts are connected to ideologues and
propagandists situated in various circles in the region and beyond) has a plan
for a McCain Administration and another plan for an Obama Administration. It
doesn't operate based on the socio-economic agendas of the two candidates but on
their assumed national security policies and beliefs.
If McCain is elected, al Qaeda knows that there will be different teams of
advisors to wage a different type of campaign. The Jihadists are very
knowledgeable about American and European intellectual debates. They also know
the thinking process of the counterterrorism teams under Obama. Hence, there is
a difference between what al Qaeda's decision-makers and their analysts know,
and what their propagandists wish to instill in the U.S. election debate. What
they state should be translated and understood only within the greater picture
of what they want to achieve.
3) Al Qaeda's propagandists operate within the realm of what the Jihadi machine
has created in terms of political culture over the years. The main ideas are
that the U.S., under President Bush, tried but failed to destroy al Qaeda;
hence, the Jihadist narrative says that any next U.S. President who continues
the policies of the Bush Administration will give victory to al Qaeda. Inserting
their arguments in the ongoing Presidential debate, this means that the
candidate who advances Bush strategies will be better for the goals of Bin
Laden. Hence the site's assertion that al Qaeda welcomes a McCain victory (in a
sarcastic style).
4) But this tactic used by the Jihadi propagandists is part of a reverse
psychology. It aims at sending a message to the American voters: if you want al
Qaeda to win, vote for McCain. The Jihadi web sites cannot state it otherwise,
such as if you want the U.S. to win, vote for Obama, because in Jihadi war
doctrines there cannot be a victory for America, under any President. Hence,
what al Qaeda seems to be attempting to achieve is to affect the perception of
the undecided voters by stating to them that the strength of McCain in the war
on terror is not really strength. Therefore, in the end, the move is aimed at
sinking the chances of the former U.S. Navy Pilot by crumbling the support among
undecided voters who might ultimately have come to his camp as late as D Day.
5) The savvy Jihadi operatives know all too well that any material they send out
in these critical days preceding the U.S. election will be picked up by the
media. They also know that any narrative that can be used by the critics of
McCain will lessen his chances on November 4, and that is why the stories were
run by AP and the Washington Post. If an "enemy" of the United States asserts
that it prefers a particular candidate in the White House, al Qaeda may cause
the voters to vote for his opponent. Therefore, the web sites’ material might be
read in fact as encouragement for U.S. voters to defeat McCain, not the other
way around. Experts in Jihadi strategies would then advance the thesis that a
McCain Administration is perceived as more dangerous to al Qaeda's long term
plans, which would be an additional 4 to 8 years of global efforts against the
Islamist movement. This is why their goal is the psychological manipulation of
the electorate.
By comparison, in October 2004, Bin Laden intervened directly via a videotape to
threaten the states that vote for a Bush reelection, just a few days before the
voting. Most probably, the tactics of the Jihadi machine had to evolve and learn
from the previous election: if you threaten Americans with retaliation if they
vote for the "tough" candidate, the voters will punish al Qaeda. But, four years
later, if you welcome the "tough" candidate as a potential failure, the
Jihadists may expect that American voters will punish the candidate, this time.
If anything, the analysts of al Qaeda may have learned that the American public
is resilient and wants success.
6) But would that mean that Bin Laden's organization prefers Senator Obama to be
in the White House instead? It is not that simple. Al Qaeda knows all too well
that the American public wants a victory over Bin Laden's network. The Jihadists
aren't interested in who would save the U.S. economy or create jobs and
opportunities in the land of the infidels. What they wish for is a rapid
withdrawal from Iraq, a mess across the Afghani-Pakistani border and, above all,
a cessation of any war of ideas against their ideology. You have to imagine al
Qaeda - or the war room behind it - as cold blooded calculators of the options,
not as emotional backers of either one of the candidates.
In 2004, they specifically affected the Spanish elections by blowing up the
trains and boosting the opposition's arguments in the media. It worked, as Prime
Minister Aznar was ousted. But this didn't mean that they considered his
successor, Zapatero, as a good guy. Al Qaeda cells are still plotting inside
Spain, and Madrid is still engaged against the Jihadists. The difference is that
there are no Spanish troops in the Sunni triangle and there is little
U.S.-Spanish cooperation internationally.
7) In the end, the Washington Post investigation is based on unofficial web
sites’ postings rather than on an Al Qaeda public announcement which can still
happen at anytime. Besides, the article rushed too quickly to a conclusion the
Jihadist propagandists wished the American mainstream to conclude. In short, if
this was a planned push by the Jihadi Salafi machine (and we don't know yet), it
succeeded in triggering a mainstream journalistic reaction about the election
debate.
When al Qaeda propagandist strikes occur, America must always respond with a
unified front. Even at the peak of dizzying exchanges between the candidates,
the two campaigns must strike back as one against the Jihadists, even if only
one camp is attacked. For the ultimate goal of the terrorists is to defeat the
United States, not one particular candidate.
****************
Dr Walid Phares is the Director of the Future Terrorism Project at the
Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and author of The Confrontation:
Winning the War against Future Jihad
UN Resolution 1701: A View from the United States
By Michael Singh
October 22, 2008
This PolicyWatch is the third in a three-part series examining the situation in
Lebanon two years after the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution
1701. This series coincides with the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Marine
barracks bombing in Lebanon on October 23, 1983, an attack that continues to
inform U.S. policymaking in Lebanon and throughout the Middle East.
Read the two companion PolicyWatches, "UN Resolution 1701: A View from Israel"
and "UN Resolution 1701: A View from Lebanon."
Two years after the 2006 Israel-Hizballah war, it is tempting to view another
conflict as inevitable: arms continue to flow, Hizballah has rebuilt and
enhanced its military strength, Lebanon remains fractured by violent political
divisions, and tensions between Iran and Israel have increased. There is,
however, cause for hope -- Lebanon's pro-sovereignty leaders have proven
courageous and resilient, and the international community has committed
significant resources to the country's institutions. If renewed conflict is to
be avoided, Lebanon, Israel, and their allies must take advantage of these
assets and redouble their efforts to enforce Resolution 1701.
Background
The July 16, 2008, return to Israel of the remains of Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad
Regev marked an end, of sorts, to a war that began almost exactly two years
earlier, when the two Israeli soldiers were captured and eight of their
colleagues killed in a brazen cross-border attack by Hizballah. Almost from the
start of the ensuing conflict, it was clear that the international effort to end
it would have to address not only the fighting on the ground but also the
dangerous dynamics that had allowed Hizballah to draw the region to the brink of
a wider conflagration. The product of this effort was Resolution 1701, which
delineated three principles -- no foreign forces, no weapons for nongovernmental
militias, and no independent authority separate from the central government --
as vital to a lasting Lebanese peace. Underlying these principles was the
recognition that while the flow of arms to terrorist groups like Hizballah is
the most immediate threat to stability in Lebanon, the true key to long-term
peace is an empowered and capable central government in Beirut.
Strengthening the Lebanese Government
The UN resolution's most basic objective, a ceasefire, was quickly achieved: the
Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and the expanded UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)
deployed throughout southern Lebanon in late 2006, and the Blue Line (the UN's
2000 border demarcation between Israel and Lebanon) has been relatively quiet
ever since. The ceasefire, however, proved to be the easy part. More difficult
was dealing with the domestic ramifications of the conflict in Lebanon --
Hizballah was emboldened and Lebanon's central government was weakened. Their
ensuing struggle for power culminated in May 2008 in a bloody street battle that
claimed sixty-five lives, eventually leading to Hizballah's temporary occupation
of Beirut.
In the Doha Agreement that followed, Hizballah gained new political power,
albeit at the cost of credibility lost in turning its weapons against its own
people. The pro-sovereignty forces, on the other hand, made painful concessions
to the opposition but in many respects stood their ground and even made gains by
electing a president, forming a government, and promulgating a strong cabinet
statement. The true test of their strength will be in how President Michel
Suleiman and Prime Minister Fouad Siniora handle ongoing discussions of
Hizballah's arms, and how the majority fares in the 2009 parliamentary
elections.
Built into the UN resolution was the recognition that the Lebanese government
would need significant international aid, and indeed it has received an influx
of economic and security assistance for the past two years. A massive increase
of U.S. assistance, which included $200 million in military aid this year, led
international efforts. Events during this period, however, have underscored that
while foreign aid can provide vital leverage to Lebanon's government, real
change must be led by the Lebanese themselves. For example, international
security assistance gave the LAF an edge in its hard-fought victory over the
radical Sunni organization Fatah al-Islam in the Nahr el-Bared refugee camp in
mid-2007. But the operation's success ultimately stemmed from the LAF's
determination and public support. Hizballah at first sought to limit the LAF's
freedom of action, but was forced to backpedal when it became clear that the
tide of public opinion supported the government.
The Challenge of Hizballah
The violence in May 2008 underscored one of the premises of Resolution 1701:
that any gains made by the Lebanese government could easily be countered by
Hizballah with massive military force. Resolution 1701 sought to constrain
Hizballah's military capability by securing Lebanon's eastern border, thus
limiting both the flow of arms and the ambitions of Iran and Syria. But the
active opposition of those regimes and the lack of robust border security
measures left the border porous, allowing Hizballah to rearm. In fact, Israeli
defense minister Ehud Barak asserted that Hizballah's arsenal of rockets has
nearly tripled since 2006.
Arms smuggling and an emboldened Hizballah pose a threat to the region that is
difficult to overstate. As a vanguard for Tehran, Hizballah frustrates progress
on regional peace and stability and acts as a proxy through which Iran can
operate without risking direct retaliation. This strategy holds true not only in
the Levant, but also throughout the Middle East -- such as Hizballah's training
of Iraqi Shiite militants -- and as far away as South America, where Hizballah
agents engage in terrorist financing and other activities. Compounding the
problem, the Iran-Syria arms pipeline supplies al-Qaeda-linked terrorist groups
in Palestinian refugee camps, as well as other Syrian proxies in the region.
Next Steps
Two years after the summer 2006 war, the need for full and effective enforcement
of Resolution 1701 remains urgent. The possibility of renewed conflict looms
large and is compounded by tensions between Iran and Israel, the potential for
Hizballah to avenge the death of Imad Mughniyeh (the military commander killed
by a February 2008 car bomb in Damascus), and the activities of terrorist groups
operating in Palestinian refugee camps, which continue to put the country at
risk.
In the short term, it is critical to stop the flow of arms to the militias that
hold Lebanon hostage. To this end, any further European moves to revive EU-Syria
relations should stipulate that Damascus cooperate in ending the flow of arms
into Lebanon. The EU should also emulate the British government's recent
designation of Hizballah as a terrorist organization. In addition, the
international community and Lebanon's regional partners should take meaningful
action to secure the Lebanese-Syrian border, or Siniora should charge UNIFIL
with that mission under the authority provided him by Resolution 1701. Finally,
measures to stop the arms before they arrive at the border should be examined in
earnest.
The long-term challenge for Lebanon's allies will be to strengthen the Lebanese
state by increasing military, diplomatic, and economic assistance to Beirut. The
Lebanese government, in turn, can demonstrate its authority by continuing to
address the country's security challenges and wresting control of the
Lebanon-Israel relationship from Hizballah and Iran by taking up Israel's offer
of bilateral talks. Hizballah and its allies may criticize such a move, but
Suleiman could justify the talks by pointing to the peace deals and ongoing
talks between Israel and its other neighbors.
For its part, Israel should recognize that effective implementation of
Resolution 1701 requires strong Lebanese civic and security institutions.
Israeli leaders should see the Lebanese government as a partner and refrain from
actions that indirectly benefit those seeking to undermine it, such as Hizballah.
While Hizballah, despite its claims of defending Lebanon, dragged Israel and
Lebanon into a war neither wanted, the Lebanese and Israeli governments should
pursue the peace that both countries need.
**Michael Singh is a Boston-based associate fellow at The Washington Institute
and former senior director for Middle East affairs on the National Security
Council.