LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
April 13/08

Bible Reading of the day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint John 6,60-69. Then many of his disciples who were listening said, "This saying is hard; who can accept it?"Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, "Does this shock you? What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe." Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him. And he said, "For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father." As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him. Jesus then said to the Twelve, "Do you also want to leave?" Simon Peter answered him, "Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God."

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Carter's visit to the region may provide the missing ingredient for peace-The Daily Star
Interview with Daniel Nassif,  the news director of Alhurra, the U.S.-funded Arabic satellite television news network: We Do Not Spread Propaganda for the United States"/Middle East Forum 12/04/08
No restrictions on the net.By Sami Moubayed, Gulf News 12/04/08
Is the region heading towards new war?Dr. Salim Nazzal 12/04/08

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for April 12/08
Carter's visit to the region may provide the missing ingredient for peace-The Daily Star
US says Iranian boats 'taunted' warships in Gulf waters, Iran denies confrontation-Daily Star
Opposition floats fresh ideas to untangle political logjam-Daily Star  
Delay in Mughniyeh probe results 'has irritated Iran-Daily Star
Russia reiterates support for international tribunal-Daily Star
Hizbullah slams America's attempts to cancel FPMDaily Star
Safadi stresses his Tripoli bloc's ties to March 14Daily Star
US to send $7.2 mln worth of military equipment-Daily Star
ISF begins investigations of mass grave near JbeilDaily Star
Siniora searches for breeches of law in scathing Ad-Diyar editorial-Daily Star
In Lebanon, the more things stay the same, the more they change-Daily Star  
Fadlallah laments standstill despite talk of dialogueDaily Star
EU calls on local leaders to resolve crisis-Daily Star  
Swiss official discusses 'defense politics' of Switzerland, Lebanon-Daily Star  
New homes ready for over 100 Nahr al-Bared families-Daily Star  
Aridi defends role of media amid crisis-Daily Star  
56-year-old describes 'miracle' of newborn twins-Daily Star  
Lebanese mark Civil War teetering on new abyss-AFP
Lebanese trade unions threaten general strike over wage dispute-Daily Star
Lebanon Marks Civil War Outbreak Teetering on New Precipice-Naharnet
Berri: 1960 Electoral Law in Exchange for Immediate Presidential Elections-Naharnet
Polish MEPs against Hezbollah-EuropeNews
The Ordeal of Lebanese Detainees in Syrian Jails-Naharnet
Russia Reiterates Support for Hariri Tribunal and Punishment of Culprits-Naharnet
A Settlement to the Lebanon Crisis Drops Aoun-Naharnet
Aoun for Gen. Suleiman heading Interim Cabinet!-Naharnet
Berri: 1960 Electoral Law in Exchange for Immediate Presidential Elections-Naharnet
Moussa Stresses Arab League is Still Working to End Lebanon Crisis-Naharnet
Israel's Revenge Drills-Naharnet
Lebanon Marks Civil War Outbreak Teetering on New Precipice-Naharnet
Egypt FM Heads to Washington Wednesday-Naharnet
Syria Slams Claims By Israel About Arms Smuggling-Naharnet
Israel: Hizbullah Funded Foiled Restaurant Poison Plot-Naharnet
France Denies Killing Siddiq-Naharnet
One Student Killed, Nine Wounded in School Bus Accident-Naharnet
Israel Says it is Better Prepared for Hizbullah Missiles-Naharnet
Syria Hits Back at Rice, Says U.S. Using Hariri Tribunal as 'Means of Pressure'-Naharnet
Saniora Briefs Ministers on Outcome of Arab Tour-Naharnet
Kouchner to Berri: Gates Open-Naharnet
Mufti Qabbani: Lebanon at Crossroads-Naharnet
MP Franjieh: The Problem is Between Lebanon and Syria-Naharnet
UNIFIL Erects Barbed Wire on Lebanon-Israel Border-Naharnet
Hizbullah Denies Benefiting From Cross-Bulgaria Drug Trafficking-Naharnet
Berri Accuses Saniora of Usurping Power-Naharnet

A Settlement to the Lebanon Crisis Drops Aoun
Free Patriotic Movement leader Gen. Michel Aoun could pay the price for any settlement that Syria might accept to facilitate the presidential elections, an-Nahar's Hiyam Kossaify wrote Friday.
Syria, Kossaify added, "realized seriousness of international and regional pressures prior to the Damascus summit."
After the summit, Damascus "realized the serious situation that its regime is facing for the first time since the assassination of Hizbullah's Imad Mughniyeh accompanied with escalating reports published by Arab newspapers and web sites regarding the status of the Syrian regime and President Bashar Assad's family and relatives," she added. That is why Damascus launched a "regional and international political redeployment plan accompanied by efforts and contacts with Washington launched by neutral Arab sides in order to ease the pressure on Syria," she added. "Washington and the anti-Damascus Arab Axis provided one response stressing that a solution goes through facilitating the election of a president" in Lebanon, Kossaify wrote. That is why, she explained, Damascus "invited" Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri in an effort to "relay several messages to Arab and International circles about its intention to facilitate the election of Gen. Michel Suleiman president if it achieved some sort of a settlement."
The primary indicators to a settlement in works, according to the columnist, is the request made by head of the international investigation commission into the Hariri murder to renew his mission for six months. "This does not mean that the international community would abide by the six months if Syria does not abide by its commitments," she noted. The new path would "place Aoun outside the settlement frame … that is why Hizbullah is taking time because it realizes seriousness of breaking away with Aoun," Kossaify concluded. Beirut, 11 Apr 08, 12:03

No restrictions on the net
By Sami Moubayed, Special to Gulf News
Published: April 11, 2008, 01:00
http://www.gulfnews.com/opinion/columns/region/10204568.html
When Joseph Sarkis, the Lebanese Minister of Tourism shut down several pubs in the Gemmayze neighbourhood of Beirut last week, several young Lebanese rushed to the internet to trumpet the news to friends - and media. The government argued that this was a solution to the noise, parking problem and traffic chaos. One site Blogging Beirut immediately ran the names of the 16 pubs closed down, while two petitions quickly started circulating on Facebook, first in French then English, objecting the legislation.
It is no wonder that Lebanon ranks first when it comes to internet freedoms in the Arab World. There is no censorship, and active Lebanese can go to great lengths to market their views on politics and life on the world wide web. The fact that most Lebanese are young - and are fluent with languages -makes internet use all the more easier. So does Article 13 of the Lebanese Constitution, which guarantees "freedom of expression, verbally or in writing, freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and freedom to form associations".
Internet cafes are everywhere to be found, and there are no age or ID requirements to log-on to the internet. Unlike other countries in the region, neither political sites, nor pornographic ones - not even Israeli propaganda - are proxied. The only exceptions are at schools and universities, or in some workplace, where certain sites are restricted to ensure a more productive environment. In 2005 for example, the Druze politician Wiam Wahhab filed an official complaint to the Public Prosecutor against a website that was defaming him personally. The government listened, but the website continued to operate, un-harmed.
Outlet
The internet came to Lebanon in the early 1990s, during the era of the late prime minister Rafik Harriri. The civil war had just ended and the Lebanese were hungry for an outlet to express themselves - and show just how ambitious and angry they were from all that they had been through. Harriri put his full weight behind internet usage in Lebanon, promoting it at universities, at work, in homes and initiating a project called the "Computer for Every Student and Teacher". By the time Harriri was killed in 2005, Lebanon had 550,000 internet users, with an expansion rate of 11.8 per cent. Since 2005, most websites and blogs have concentrated on promoting the March 14 line, which is pro-Saad Al Harriri and blames Syria for all of Lebanon's woes, including the assassination of his father.
This includes news sites like Ya Libnan, and blogs such as Across the Bay. Sahban Abd Rabbo, a webmaster who created several campaign sites for the Rafik Harriri team during the elections of 2000, spoke to Gulf News saying, "The internet was being used as a political tool; to win votes, to get the Rafik Harriri team back into parliament. Some deputies were enthusiastic; others, like the late Walid Eido, were enthusiastic - with reservations. The internet was just becoming useful as a political tool".
The Free Patriotic Movement of General Michel Aoun has been "wired", actively trying to get its boss into Baabda Palace, and so have his allies at Hezbollah.
Hugh Macleod, a Beirut correspondent for The Sunday Herald, commented, "Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement (of Aoun) are not succeeding to get their message across in the English-language web... failure to do so seems to indicate a lack of understanding of how powerful a tool for influencing opinions the web can be." He adds that the March 14 Coalition dominates the Lebanese internet but "content from such pro-March 14 websites is often highly unreliable and sometimes plain wrong".
Just like everything else in Lebanon, even internet users are divided. Aoun's team blog in French. Hezbollah blogs in Arabic and English. March 14 blogs in all three languages, although Arabic is least used among Lebanon's internet users. Nicholas Blanford, the Beirut-based veteran journalist and author of Killing Mr Lebanon, said, "TV, press, and word of mouth are more powerful as political tools (than blogs). As a journalist I consider blogs akin to opinion pages in newspapers. I don't read blogs for any news snippets they might publish."
Not surprisingly enough - nor do decision - makers in Lebanon. An interview on one of the popular talk shows on LBC or Future TV, an article in an-Nahhar, or a documentary on Al Manar all have much of an impact than anything published on the internet. Blogging did become trendy and powerful, however, during the Lebanon War of 2006. Hundreds of Lebanese used the internet to recount personalised stories about their lives during the 33-Israeli raid on Lebanon. Some used blogs, others turned to YouTube.
The Lebanese government created a special section at the Internal Security Department to prevent "violations" through the internet and combat "electronic crimes". Although no websites were closed, the Lebanese remember too well the case of Gaylebanon.com, which started operation in 2000. Lebanese security tried to intervene and find the names of both the owners and subscribers to the forum of homosexuals and lesbians in Lebanon. The manager of the ISP Destination Company Ziad Maghraby refused to cooperate, although he did shut down the site, yet insisted on giving no names. Both he and Kamal Al Batal, the director of the Lebanese Human Rights Organisation MIRSAD, were called to court, convicted and sentenced to three months in prison for making the case public.
Initiative
One recent initiative which aims at diverting Lebanese attention from the internal bickering that dominates political websites is that of Dania Koleilat, who has founded www.meforum.com. Aimed at monitoring international news and praising objective reporting, the website criticises - or corrects - subjective coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It also tries to lobby in favour of journalists and publications writing in favour of the Arabs and being smeared by the anti-Arab lobby.
Speaking to Gulf News, Koleilat said, "The Israeli War on Lebanon triggered this. I was watching CNN and they showed a demolished building from a distance - of course from a distance because they did not want to show the casualties that resulted from the strikes! I decided that something must be done to combat this misinformation!"
Few Lebanese bloggers share her enthusiasm for something that is not Lebanese. Will such a website with a noble cause be able to compete for visitors with juicy others that speak anti-Syrian, are filled with political commentary, and cover what ordinary Lebanese want to hear - in addition to having "sexy" titles, like Across the Bay, Beirut Blogger, or Blacksmiths of Lebanon?
***Dr Sami Moubayed is a Syrian political analyst.
Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for April 12/08

Kouchner to Berri: Gates Open
Naharnet/The state-run National News Agency, in an un attributed report, said French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner on Thursday telephoned Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to inform him that the "gates to France are always open if he wished to visit."Kouchner also underlined "his persisting support for dialogue among the Lebanese (leaders)," the report added without further elaboration.
It said Kouchner made the call while on a tour of Central Asia. Kouchner had criticized Berri for closing parliament and, in answering a question about a possible visit by the Lebanese Speaker to Paris, said the latter did not have an invitation, but can visit as a tourist. Beirut, 10 Apr 08, 18:28

Moussa Stresses Arab League is Still Working to End Lebanon Crisis
Naharnet/Secretary General Amr Moussa has reiterated that the Arab League is still exerting efforts to find a way out of the Lebanese political crisis amid growing Arab frustration over Syria's rising influence in Lebanon. The Arab League chief told reporters in Cairo on Thursday that he discussed with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Saudi King Abdullah in Sharm el Sheikh the day before the situation in Lebanon and the Middle East. He said the March 29-30 Arab League summit in Damascus has entrusted the council of Arab foreign ministers to settle Lebanon's protracted crisis. An Nahar daily on Friday quoted a source from the delegation headed by Premier Fouad Saniora to Arab countries as saying that Saudi Arabia and Egypt were increasingly frustrated over Syrian meddling in Lebanon.
The source said that the delegation had the impression upon its return to Beirut on Thursday that Arab-Arab and Arab-Iranian rifts were increasing as a result of Syria's policies in Lebanon. He said some Arab countries have informed Saniora that "they won't tolerate turning Lebanon into a bargaining chip in the hands of Syria and Iran." Beirut, 11 Apr 08, 06:06

Israel: Hizbullah Funded Foiled Restaurant Poison Plot
Naharnet/Israeli authorities have said that two Palestinians who admitted to plotting to poison customers at a restaurant near Tel Aviv were recruited by a cell financed by Hizbullah. The suspects Ahab Abu Ghial and Ans Salom, 21-year-olds from the West Bank town of Nablus, were arrested on March 19, days before they intended to carry out their plan at the restaurant where they worked, an official statement said. It said the men were recruited by a cell of Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, a militant group loosely linked to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement but that the cell was directed and financed by Hizbullah.
Beirut, 11 Apr 08, 10:11

Syria Slams Claims By Israel About Arms Smuggling
Naharnet/Syria's permanent representative to the U.N. Bashar al-Jaafari hit back at Israel's envoy who accused Damascus in a letter to the U.N. chief in February of supporting terrorism and smuggling arms into Lebanon. Israel's claims are "baseless and falsification of facts which come within the framework of a cover-up for the war and terrorism conducted by Israel on daily basis on occupied Arab territories since 1967 and for daily violations of Lebanon sovereignty and international resolutions, including 1701," Jaafari said in a letter. Jaafari said Palestinian factions in Damascus that were described in the Israeli letter as "terrorist organizations" are "refugees who were forcefully displaced from their homes and land."He described reports about "continued arms transportation across the Syria-Lebanon border" as having "political, not security motives aimed at covering up Israel's nonstop violations of Lebanon's sovereignty and Resolution 1701 and implicating Syria in that resolution." Beirut, 11 Apr 08, 13:37

Aoun for Gen. Suleiman heading Interim Cabinet!
Naharnet/Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun was quoted Friday as proposing a compromise based on appointing Army Commander Gen. Michel Suleiman head of an interim cabinet that would sponsor parliamentary elections. George al-Aaraj, representative of the so-called Liberal Tigers faction that broke away from the National Liberal party, told reporters he discussed with Aoun the idea that "Gen. Michel Suleiman, being the subject of consensus, heads a transitional government that supervises parliamentary elections." "Gen. Aoun said the idea is part of his perspective," Aaraj added, according to a report distributed by the state-run National News Agency (NNA). The non-constitutional proposal appears aimed at averting efforts aimed at facilitating the election of Suleiman president, which would drop Aoun as a major factor to any settlement. Only an elected president can appoint a head of an interim government, a post to which Aoun was appointed by ex-President Amin Gemayel when his term came to an end late in the 1980s during the civil war. The post of president went vacant on Nov. 22 when former head of state Emile Lahoud's term expired with parliament failing to elect a successor. With no president running the nation, no one has the constitutional authority to appoint an interim cabinet. Beirut, 11 Apr 08, 15:07

Lebanon Marks Civil War Outbreak Teetering on New Precipice
Naharnet/Decades after the outbreak of its civil war, Lebanon is teetering on the edge of a new conflict as a bitter political power struggle pits Muslim against Muslim and Christian against Christian. Lebanese are faced with difficult choices and deep cleavages as they commemorate on Sunday the outbreak of a war in 1975 that devastated their country for 15 years, and from which they have never fully recovered.
Little remains today of the Green Line that divided Beirut into primarily Muslim and Christian halves during the war, but there is a new psychological front reflecting a schism between Shiite and Sunni Muslims, with Christians on either side of the divide. "Sunni hates Shiite and Shiite hates Sunni, because blood has spilled between them now," says Khalil Sawan, 65, who is Sunni and owns a cafe in Beirut. Divisions between supporters of the government, backed by the West and most Arab states, and the Hezbollah-led opposition supported by Syria and Iran, have led to street clashes over the past three months that have left seven dead.
A complex arrangement rules the separation of powers to reflect the three main confessions in Lebanon -- Sunnis, Shiites and Maronite Christians. Under it, the Maronite community provides the country's president, the Sunnis its prime minister and the Shiites its speaker of parliament.
This gentleman's agreement was reached more than half a century ago when the demographics of Lebanon were strikingly different: Christians were a majority but are now a minority, while Sunnis outnumbered Shiites ... but no longer. The Shiites, with Hezbollah at the forefront, want a new arrangement and are supported by retired General Michel Aoun, a Maronite. Things look dramatically different today than in the days of the war, when young gunmen zoomed through the streets in pickups and sandbags and bunkers were a common sight among bullet-pocked high rises, chunks of their facade blown away by shelling.
"Before you knew who the enemy was," says Roger Shayeb, 51, a former member of Phalange, a Christian party. "Now your uncle, your father could be the enemy, if you're from different political parties." The recent violence has raised fears among many who clearly recall how quickly the city was transformed after the incident that ignited a war that destroyed Lebanon's image as the Switzerland of the East and left more than 150,000 dead. On April 13, 1975, conflict erupted when Christian militiamen machine-gunned a bus carrying Palestinians through Ain al-Rummaneh killing 27 passengers, hours after assailants opened fire outside a nearby church killing a Christian.
Within hours, rival clans spread throughout the city. Homes became garrisons and streets became battlefields as militias took over the streets.
"I had not thought about sects until my friends detained me," said Tareq, 51, a Shiite who was captured and held for a few hours in the Christian area where he lived just days after the bus incident. "Things quickly turned into Muslim versus Christian and I moved to Shiyah (a Muslim area a few kilometers away), a step I thought was temporary."While the older generation is disillusioned with war, there is fear that the younger one is more than willing to take up arms.
"We learned our lesson from the war, but this crazy, young generation hasn't because they didn't live it," says Basil, 54, whose Ras an-Nabaa neighborhood, which sits along the old Green Line, has seen clashes.
"It's almost as though the young are being pushed to unemployment on purpose to leave them no choice," added Basil who refused to give his last name.
Jamal, who lives on the other side of the Green Line, has a similar view. He literally blocks the doorway of his apartment to prevent his sons from getting involved in the street skirmishes that are becoming a regular event. But many youths say they are more than willing to fight.
"I am unemployed so I have nothing to lose," said Abu Aysar, 33, who would only give his nom de guerre. "You can't get by these days without being a part of a political party." Still, some insist Lebanon has learned the lessons of the past. "The political crisis going on now in the country doesn't matter," says Mohamed Darwish, 44, who has vivid memories of the hardship of war. "It's a wave. Sometimes the sea is rough and sometimes it's calm. Today it's rough."
Lebanon has been without a president since November, when Emile Lahoud stepped down at the end of his tenure. Failure to elect a new head of state is the most obvious example of the new polarity. Various groups are planning activities to mark the outbreak of the war -- including a peace march along the Green Line to urge rival clans not to draw a new one.
The march on Sunday is being organized by a coalition of non-governmental organizations. The Lebanese Association for Human Rights has also organized events, including a display of 600 toilets in a field in the centre of the capital. The display -- "Hasn't 15 years of hiding in the toilets been enough" -- is an appeal from today's generation to learn from the mistakes of its elders, said Ziad Khaled, 32, a member of the association. "We want those who lived the civil war to tell the younger ones of what awaits them if a new conflict erupts," Khaled told AFP. "We also want to forewarn our politicians that we won't follow them into a new war."(AFP)
Beirut, 11 Apr 08, 16:37

France Denies Killing Siddiq
Naharnet/France denied Thursday allegations that French agents had murdered a Syrian former intelligence officer who is a key witness in the inquiry into Lebanese ex-premier Rafik Hariri's assassination. "I formally deny these accusations," said foreign ministry spokesman Pascale Andreani when asked to comment on the claim by Imad al-Siddiq that French agents had killed his brother Mohammed Zuheir al-Siddiq. Imad charged in a Syrian newspaper interview Wednesday that "the French authorities helped facilitate the disappearance of Mohammed Zuheir al-Siddiq with the aim of his being liquidated by another party or they liquidated him themselves." Mohammed Zuheir al-Siddiq was quoted in newspaper reports in 2006 as saying that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his then Lebanese counterpart, Emile Lahoud, ordered Hariri's 2005 assassination in a massive Beirut car bombing. Siddiq, who was under an international arrest warrant requested by a Lebanese prosecutor, was detained in October 2005 in a Paris suburb in connection with the assassination. But France refused to extradite him to Lebanon because it had not been given guarantees that he would not face the death penalty if convicted, and the former intelligence agent had since been living in the Paris suburb of Chatou. But French officials said this week he had disappeared a month ago and they did not know where he was. A caller to a Kuwaiti newspaper who said he was Siddiq said Thursday that he had gone into hiding somewhere in Europe after he suffered three assassination attempts. But he said he would go to an international tribunal on Hariri's death as soon as it opened. A U.N. probe has implicated senior Syrian officials in the car bomb attack that killed Hariri, an opponent of Syria's influence on Lebanon, and 22 other people on February 14, 2005. Syria, which for three decades was the power broker in its smaller neighbor, has vehemently denied any connection with the Hariri murder.(AFP) Beirut, 10 Apr 08, 19:01

Mufti Qabbani: Lebanon at Crossroads
Naharnet/Grand Mufti Sheikh Mohammed Rashid Qabbani warned Thursday that Lebanon is at "crossroads" and urged the speedy election of Gen. Michel Suleiman President. Electing the army commander for the nation's top post should be the "launching pad for dialogue among the various Lebanese parties," the Mufti said in a statement. He urged the various Lebanese factions to "bolster national unity for it safeguards against wars from which the Lebanese have suffered."
The most senior Sunni cleric also urged the Lebanese to "benefit from Arab support, especially Saudi and Egyptian support, to settle the Lebanese crisis."
The Arab initiative, he said, "is the only settlement." Beirut, 10 Apr 08, 18:01

Daniel Nassif: "We Do Not Spread Propaganda for the United States"
Middle East Quarterly
Spring 2008, pp. 63-69
http://www.meforum.org/article/1880
Send RSS
Daniel Nassif is the news director of Alhurra, a U.S.-funded Arabic satellite television news network created in 2004, and has also been news director of its sister network, Radio Sawa, launched in 2002. Nassif was born in Lebanon in 1958. He immigrated to the United States in 1977 and finished his undergraduate and graduate studies in political science and public policy for international affairs at the University of Michigan in 1986. He currently resides in northern Virginia with his wife and two sons. Adam Pechter, deputy publisher of the Middle East Quarterly, interviewed Nassif on October 19, 2007, in Alhurra's offices in Springfield, Virginia.
Breaking into the Arab Media Market
Middle East Quarterly: How do you think that the United States is currently perceived in the Arab world? Can Alhurra make a difference in that perception? Should it try?
Daniel Nassif: We are not a gauge for a popularity contest in the Middle East. Our mission by law is to provide accurate and objective news to the region. Alhurra's role is to report U.S. policy accurately to an audience that has often not received accurate and objective reports, but our role is not to advocate policy. We provide context and analysis so that viewers can make informed decisions. We want to satisfy some of the curiosity about America that many viewers in the Middle East share. The latest political, military, and diplomatic developments tend to drive news coverage, but that does not begin to exhaust the breadth of the engagement between America and the Middle East.
MEQ: Where would you like to see the station in five, ten, and twenty years?
Nassif: Whether it is five, ten, or twenty years, my goals are the same: to make Alhurra one of the top networks in the Middle East. Alhurra has already made successful inroads in the Middle East, and I want to build on that success. Alhurra is a forum to debate issues that are taboo in the region. We want these topics to become commonplace on television networks. We have a distinct advantage because we are free to discuss any topic while other networks in the region are limited by concerns about offending their backers.
MEQ: Are you planning changes to Alhurra's content?
Nassif: We are always looking for ways to improve and strengthen Alhurra's role as a place to turn for news and information. I want to ensure that our programming menu includes the types of programs that cannot be found on state-run television channels in the region—programs that focus on issues of freedom, democracy, and human rights in the Arab world. We are in the process of producing several new programs. The latest addition to the Alhurra schedule is the new show, "Women's Views." A weekly program will bring together four lively, engaging women to discuss social and political issues that are largely regarded as taboo in the region. Each of the hosts brings her unique perspective, and they address issues such as sexual harassment, women in prison, discrimination against women, the psychological impact on women who marry at an early age, and domestic violence against women.
MEQ: What other sorts of women's programs do you air?
Nassif: In the Middle East, you are talking about an area where women do not have rights. In Saudi Arabia, they are not even allowed to drive a car. We have another program called Musawat—Arabic for "equality"—which gives women a voice to challenge traditional views about them—for instance that a woman's place is in the house raising children.
People in the Arab world tell me that Alhurra is very important because it is raising the bar. Journalists at the other Arab satellite television stations say Alhurra is opening up subjects that they would never dare cover, but if Alhurra is doing it, they are encouraged and might tell their bosses or the people who finance them that they should follow suit and have the same topics. So, Alhurra is challenging all the taboos in the Middle East.
MEQ: What would programs focusing on democracy do?
Nassif: You could have elections in Iran or in China—but they do not mean anything. You have to create the culture, and this means creating a mentality where people concede when they are defeated. People in the Middle East don't concede. If they lose, it's a conspiracy: It's Israel's fault or the United States' fault. It is better if there is an understanding that a loss in elections means the loser improves and then runs again.
MEQ: So how can Alhurra support this path?
Nassif: Don't forget that there are closed societies in the Middle East. Most people have orthodox views. They are born into societies with these views, and they grow up and die with these same views. At Alhurra, it is our job to show that there are other opinions that they should consider.
I have to believe that people are smart enough and rational enough to be able to tell distortion from fact because human beings are human beings even if they are born in different environments or different cultures. At the end, in the long term, reason will prevail. The truth will prevail.
Also at Alhurra, we show them the debate in Washington. We go beyond reporting on the decisions but take an inside look at how that decision was reached. There are many think tanks in Washington—from Brookings, to the American Enterprise Institute. We tap into these institutions extensively and interview their scholars about policy debates and current affairs.
MEQ: You ran Radio Sawa for five years. Is there a difference between your experience there and with Alhurra?
Nassif: Radio Sawa was targeted mostly to a specific audience of young people—the bulk of the population of the region—who were not being reached by Radio Sawa's predecessor. Its founders conducted extensive research about audience preferences and chose a programming format designed to reach the target audience that included news, features, and music. This entire process was a public-private partnership spearheaded by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and fusing some of the best radio broadcasters, writers, engineers, and technicians at VOA [Voice of America] with some of the top people in the private sector, including newscasters hired from the Middle East. The result was an innovative broadcast operation that is very successful in reaching its target audience and has exceeded even the expectations of its founders.
I was a part of Radio Sawa's senior management as its managing editor and its news director and have been energized by its success. Radio and television are, of course, different mediums. Television is more difficult to establish in the Middle East because of all the options available to viewers. In addition, a congressionally-funded television network—actually three networks because we broadcast separately to the Middle East, Iraq, and Europe—automatically must overcome its own set of suspicions above and beyond the difficulties of broadcasting news to an audience that is inherently suspicious about many of the things it hears from the United States. But these are not insurmountable obstacles. The experience I bring to Alhurra from my work with Sawa is not just a set of techniques and tools but a sense of hope that this new television venture will find its niche.
MEQ: The funding for Alhurra was significantly more than it was for Radio Sawa. Why is that?
Nassif: With television you need a lot more money, and it has to have breaking news. The audience will watch debates to a point, but the station will not gain a following by only airing debates. Because of all of the state-run media in the Middle East, people are naturally skeptical of the media. They want to see developments and breaking news for themselves.
MEQ: How do you address this?
Nassif: I want to make the news the best news, so people will come to us to hear stories that they do not hear on Al-Jazeera. What you have on Al-Jazeera or even at Al-Arabiya is sensationalized coverage. They take things out of context, for instance, Israeli soldiers firing on Palestinians. They concentrate on it, and they will start doing eight or ten hours of news about it without any background or second opinion. We intend to give equal time to all points of view—not to terrorists—but interesting, informative, and relevant opinions. So rarely does a show go on Alhurra without having somebody from the State Department or from Washington think tanks, refuting what stations like Al-Jazeera are saying.
MEQ: You think you can do it?
Nassif: The Middle East is not like here. In the United States, the average American does not care about politics. Sometimes, only 30 or 35 percent of eligible voters actually cast ballots. In the Arab world, people are political. When they see each other, the first thing that they talk about is politics, sometimes before they ask about the health of their families.
MEQ: You have correspondents all over?
Nassif: On any story, we will have reactions from everywhere—and now we go to Jerusalem, Cairo, Ramallah, Beirut, etc. You want to be there and tell the people the latest.
MEQ: Do you have a Jerusalem correspondent?
Nassif: Yes, and he travels with the prime minister of Israel all the time.
MEQ: How much funding does Alhurra receive from the U.S. government? Is it enough?
Nassif: Alhurra, Alhurra-Iraq, and Alhurra Europe's annual budget is about $67 million. Although Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya do not publicize their budgets, it is safe to say that both channels receive more than double what we put into three channels. I am confident that we put on a superior product with what we have. Could we use more money? Of course.
MEQ: Does Alhurra do better in some Arab-speaking markets than others? If so, why?
Nassif: When Alhurra launched almost four years ago, there was no budget for an advertising or marketing campaign. We relied mostly on promotions on Radio Sawa and word of mouth. We soon found that in the countries that can receive Radio Sawa on FM and where Radio Sawa is most popular, Alhurra thrived.
MEQ: In which countries does Alhurra do best?
Nassif: Radio Sawa and Alhurra enjoy a strong following in countries like Iraq. In fact, preliminary research in Iraq shows that more people are tuning to Alhurra than Al-Jazeera, in part because of Alhurra's commitment of a second channel, Alhurra-Iraq, providing Iraqi citizens with daily newscasts and talk shows that deal specifically with the challenges facing modern-day Iraq.
Addressing Criticism
MEQ: Alhurra is based just outside of Washington. Most of the other Arab broadcasting networks are based in the Middle East. Does Alhurra's location hurt its effectiveness or damage its legitimacy in the eyes of viewers?
Nassif: Alhurra's location in the Washington area enhances its credibility as a go-to channel for coverage of the Washington debate on U.S. policies relevant to the Middle East. There is no better way for them to plug into the U.S. debate than by tuning in Alhurra. The regional media gives some flavor of this debate, but it is often in skewed terms, lacking in nuance and one-sided. I believe that Arab viewers want to make up their own minds and are willing to be challenged with factual information that may not reflect their own starting point on any given issue. I don't expect viewers in the region to agree with everything we broadcast, but I do want them to trust in our integrity as an independent news organization. For regional news, Alhurra has correspondents throughout the Middle East enabling us also to provide comprehensive reporting from the region. In a region where seeing is believing, Alhurra needs to be more viable with its on-the-spot coverage and more aggressive in its breaking-news coverage. We are looking to expand our network of correspondents throughout the Middle East, focusing on hot spots.
MEQ: During your predecessor's tenure, several congressmen complained that it was difficult to monitor what Alhurra was broadcasting. Have you taken any steps to increase the station's transparency?
Nassif: We are all for transparency. Alhurra broadcasts on-air twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. You cannot get more transparent than that. However, the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 does not allow U.S. international broadcasting funded by the government to be broadcast within the United States. We currently have four programs that are on our website at www.Alhurra.com, so that anyone anywhere in the world can watch them. We are also looking into the possibility of live-streaming online.
MEQ: How do you respond to criticisms that the channel is "pro-American [and] boring" and "a bland Lebanese station."[1]
Nassif: I don't mind Alhurra being considered an American channel, but I would definitely not say we are boring. We are the American channel as long as it does not mean propaganda—our strength should be the American perspective—not the U.S. government's perspective. We cover all sides of the issues. Recently, we had the most extensive live coverage of the elections in Morocco, Oman, and Jordan and of the Annapolis peace conference. Rarely does a news event take place without having Alhurra there. We cover Washington comprehensively, and we go live with every important speech, statement, or congressional hearing. For instance, we broadcast a documentary series called "Americans." Crews went across America and discussed political beliefs, the struggle of African Americans, and how America became a melting pot. As for the criticism that we are a Lebanese channel, that is not the case. We cover stories throughout the Middle East and around the world. Alhurra's journalists and my colleagues are some of the finest in the Arab language press. The Middle East Broadcasting Networks[2] recruits throughout the Middle East and the United States. Its journalistic team includes professionals from Egypt, Sudan, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Syria.
MEQ: But is it the United States' job to reach out to Arab countries?
Nassif: Alhurra is in an extremely competitive market. Most notably the French, the Russians, the British have all either created networks or announced their intention to do so—everybody has an Arab satellite television station. Even the Chinese have a radio station directed to the Middle East. So everybody is in the market. America should also be a part of that market of ideas and information in the Middle East. What we want to provide the Middle East with Alhurra are accurate, objective news stories with no distortion, no disinformation. This is the best way again to counter propaganda in the area and, at the same time, we want to cover American policy in clear terms. Nothing less, nothing more. We are not there to spread propaganda for the United States. We are here to tell the Arab world what Washington is thinking.
MEQ: Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya have had a considerable head start compared to Alhurra. It would seem almost impossible for an American-backed station to compete with these regional heavyweights.
Nassif: We are not afraid of competition and are not trying to replace our competitors but welcome the fact that television viewers in the region have multiple sources of information, at present more than 200 channels. According to ACNielsen, Alhurra already has an estimated weekly reach of 20 million people, and more than 70 percent of the viewers find the news credible.
MEQ: But several polls over the last couple of years have underscored a trust gap between Alhurra and the Arab world. A Zogby International survey in June 2004 found that none of the surveyed Arabic audiences turned to Alhurra as a first choice for news, and only 3.8 percent picked it as a second choice.[3] A poll of satellite users in the greater Cairo area found that over 64 percent felt Alhurra was not a trustworthy news source while 86 percent and 67 percent considered Al-Jazeera and CNN, respectively, to be trustworthy.[4] Are these polls accurate?
Nassif: Without knowing the methodology of each of these polls, I cannot comment except to say that a poll taken in June 2004 would have been only four months after Alhurra's launch. But I will reiterate that ACNielsen—one of the most respected television research companies and using internationally accepted research methods—finds that Alhurra has a weekly reach of an estimated 20 million people. That same research finds that more than 70 percent of the viewers say Alhurra's news is credible.
MEQ: You don't think these earlier surveys are worth a hill of beans?
Nassif: These surveys were conducted in 2004, a while ago. Now we have our own polls done by ACNielsen and others. We are not in the top two, but I hope in a year or two, we will be there.
MEQ: Alhurra has been criticized for not having enough Arabic speakers in management. Does this hurt the network?
Nassif: The editorial and news staff is composed entirely of Arabic speakers.
MEQ: Testimony last May before Congress revealed that Alhurra broadcast a 68-minute call to arms against Israelis by a senior figure of the terrorist group Hezbollah;[5] deferential coverage of Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial conference; and a factually flawed piece on a splinter group of Orthodox Jews who oppose the state of Israel. Are broadcasts of this type necessary to gain trust with the Arab world?
Nassif: Absolutely not. These broadcasts were errors, not examples indicative of any editorial position. On Alhurra, we tell the story without giving an open microphone to terrorists. We can talk about a speech by Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah using a sound bite so viewers hear the most newsworthy points of his speech without airing inflammatory statements intended to play to audience emotions. Additionally, more checks have been put in place to ensure that these mistakes do not happen again. The starting point for my role at Alhurra is to prevent such mistakes from recurring.
MEQ: You don't consider it wrong to broadcast Nasrallah?
Nassif: We should not be in the business of giving the microphone to terrorists. But if Nasrallah is making news or a declaration, we are going to cover it by reporting what was said. It is not necessary to broadcast the whole speech or give him free time on Alhurra.
MEQ: Isn't there a correlation between anti-Americanism and popularity in Arabic news coverage?
Nassif: We are not in a popularity contest. It's crazy to think that we have to put on more anti-American stuff in order to be popular.
MEQ: Do you think that America will ever have a chance to win the "hearts and minds" of the Arab world as long as it supports Israel?
Nassif: Alhurra and Radio Sawa report on policy; they do not make policy. Foreign policy is the responsibility of the president, the secretary of state, and Congress. It is our responsibility to report this process thoroughly and factually.
MEQ: So where is all the criticism about Alhurra coming from? Are these critics just trying to sink what you are doing?
Nassif: Well, you have hundreds of people who are graduates of Middle East schools. When they see that there are US$67 million spent on a Middle East project, they want to have a bite there. If you do not give them a bite, they will take off. You cannot satisfy everybody.
If someone is pro-PLO, pro-Hamas, they will suggest the channel takes that point of view. Everybody wants you to think what they think or to cover the things that they want you to cover. At the end of the day, you have to make decisions about what stories to cover and what guests to have. If you don't call a particular expert or pundit, sometimes they complain or imagine a slight where none is intended.
MEQ: How do you respond to the critics who claim that the model on which Alhurra is based, Radio Free Europe, is an outdated relic of the Cold War and that unlike Soviets or Cold War Poles, Arab populations today are not shut out of free media, and therefore, we should abandon Alhurra and encourage private industry in the Arabic broadcasting market?
Nassif: The Broadcasting Board of Governors is well aware of the differences between Eastern Europe and Arab countries and designed Alhurra and Radio Sawa accordingly. But an audience that has an abundance of choices and is likely to be skeptical of, or hostile to, U.S. policies and values is not an audience that America should ignore. Many media sources in the Arab world are severely biased and lacking in professional journalistic standards. The result is seen in poll after poll. For example, one recent survey found that "only 3 percent of Pakistanis think Al-Qaeda conducted the 9/11 attacks."[6] Many people in the Arab world subscribe to the same conspiratorial beliefs. Simply getting the facts to such an audience is an enormous job.
[1] The Financial Times, Nov. 6, 2005.
[2] The nonprofit corporation that operates Alhurra.
[3] Anne Marie Baylouny, "Alhurra, The Free One: Assessing U.S. Satellite Television in the Middle East," Strategic Insights, Nov. 2005.
[4] Ibid.
[5] The New York Times, May 17, 2007.
[6] Worldpress.org, July 10, 2007.

Is the region heading towards new war?
Dr. Salim Nazzal
http://www.alarabiya.net/views/2008/04/11/48119.html
The news from Israel indicates that the Israeli front with Syria, Lebanon and probably Iran may witness dramatic new developments in the coming weeks. The current large-scale Israeli military exercises have no doubt contributed to the rumors about a near war. Otherwise, how do we explain the exercises which Israel is engaged in this week? Some observers believe that Israeli leader Ehud Olmert's downplaying of the exercises' impact was aimed more at calming the worried Israeli public which fears the falling of Arab rockets should military hostilities be resumed. Even if one accepts Olmert's assurances that Israel does not intend to attack, it is difficult to ignore the rising tensions in the past year between Syria and Israel which were increased by the Israeli air raid on a Syrian military installation last September. It is important, however, to recall that the last Israeli-Syrian war was in 1973, when Syria's initial attack succeeded in regaining the Golan Heights in the first few days, although it failed ultimately to retain them.
Some observers in Beirut have drawn a link between the exercises and the critical statements which concluded the Vinograd Report regarding the Israeli military performance during the July war. Yet while the Vinograd Report's major focus was on Israel's technical and operational mistakes, the literature of the Lebanese resistance has instead focused on the absence of morale among the Israeli soldiers contrary to the high morale of the resistance fighters. There is no doubt that Hezbollah's impressive resistance during the July war 2006 greatly helped in restoring the confidence of most Arabs in their capacity, which puts Israel, in many observers' view, in a position of seeking to restore its image as a strong state, meaning that it might use any incident to attack Syria or Lebanon.
It seems, however, that Israel's reassurances that it is not intending to attack are not being taken seriously in Syria and Lebanon, which have been carefully monitoring its military exercises. News from both countries has reported movements of three Syrian military divisions and a heightened state of alertness in Hezbollah, which has, on various occasions, made clear its readiness to deal with any fresh Israeli aggression in the same way as it did in the July 2006 war. Nasralla even mentioned in one of his speeches that any possible war with Israel may reshape the face of the whole Middle East. Naturally, wars usually shape the geopolitics of the countries involved, with the '48 and '67 wars serving as good examples. Although it is difficult to assess to what extent any coming war would affect the region, what is surely obvious to any observer that the times when destruction was visited on the Arab side alone have most certainly gone.
One possible war scenario suggested is that Israel could initially strike Iran's nuclear facilities in direct or indirect coordination with the USA. According to this scenario, this war, if it occurred would then expand to include the Syrian, Lebanese and Palestinian fronts and its results would be devastating for the whole region including the state of Israel.
The second scenario suggests that, if Hezbollah were to avenge its military leader, believed to have been assassinated by Israel, Israel might make use of this incident in the same way it did in 1982 when it used the ambiguous attack on the Israeli ambassador in London to justify launching a full scale war against the PLO in Lebanon.
However whether the war would initiate according the first scenario or the second the question is how to define war in this context. If the war to use a generalized definition is to achieve political goals what political goals Israel aims to achieve? In earlier wars such as 48, 56, 67, 78, 82 Israel troops moved to occupy Arab areas under the title of security of Israel which has been the excuse for all its wars against Arabs, and in most of these wars Israel was met with little resistance. It does not seem that future wars would take this course for various reasons, firstly, the resistance which Israeli troops would face if it tries to invade. Some military analysts go further, suggesting that in the coming war the Israeli tanks would not be able to move without encountering heavy resistance; after all, it was very effectively proven in 2006 that small anti-tank units are capable of doing more effective work than larger, more cumbersome army units used in the classical military way.
The second reason is the difficulty to hold control on more populated Arab areas as it suffers already of having to control millions of Palestinians, and the third reason is that the Israeli depth will be likely under attack a matter that has been referred to in regards to the Israeli exercises. The last war with Hezbollah undoubtedly drew the lines of any future wars which will basically be ballistic in nature. Military analysts assume that in the coming war it could be the first time the Israeli pilots flying to bomb Arab countries would not be sure of returning to a safe base or to a safe home. Political analysts assume that the coming war will not witness any absolute winners and losers, since destruction would be shared between both parties, although, taking Israel's position into consideration; it would be the political loser regardless of any result. A recent picture showing Avi Ditcher, the Israeli minister for security, running from Qassam rockets has no doubt reinforced the view that the Israeli army and probably the Zionist state itself are aging.
This makes one come to the conclusion that the Israeli expansion wars has become history for practical reasons and not because Zionism based on the philosophy of power has changed. Its aim now is to maintain its position in the near east and to force Palestinians and Arabs to give up their remands in restoring their rights as formulated by the UN resolutions. The second alternative is that Israel uses its air power to bomb Syria and Lebanon, with a political goal to “soften” the position of Syria, this too would be almost certainly retaliated and in the end Israel would probably find itself in need of another vinograd which questions not only its policy but perhaps would be the beginning of a revision to the whole Zionist ideology. The question, here, if Israel is aware that the picnic wars have become a history would it launch a war only for restoring its prestige though there is no assurance that it would achieve it? This is not an easy question to answer because we have seen in history wars that have occurred for various reasons. Yet what one must not forget that the history of the state of Israel demonstrates that it would not hesitate thanks to the American protection to launch a war if it knows that it serve its interest. (In the Zionist point view and not necessarily in the interest of the Israeli population) .The last war against Lebanon is the best example of the dog watch role which Israeli obviously played for the imperial power. And even without going into many details in this matter the major problem still lies in the Zionist mind which does not have learnt the golden lesson that the power of guns makes truce but no peace.
Yet the major question is: to what extent would the possible defeat of Israel influence the shape of the region's political geography? Would a possible defeat for Israel confirm Ben Gurion's prophecy that this will be the beginning of its end, or would it open more eyes in the state of Israel to the fact that a just peace is the only assurance for Israelis? It is perhaps early to predict what might happen but until now there is no indication that an Israeli Declerk is appearing on the political scene. The two major political thinking in the state of Israel, do not recognize the right of Palestinians for self determination though of the slight difference between the likud which still believe in the pure power and the Kadima/labor party which moved very few steps but not to the extent to recognize Palestinian rights.
Regardless of all the possible scenarios, however, it is difficult to predict what could happen in the potential war because nobody until now is sure that it is coming, but at the same time it is equally difficult to predict that it is not.
What is 100% clear is that the 60-year-old Israeli policy based on the philosophy of maintaining power over the whole region is diminishing, and it does not take any great intellectual brilliance to work out that this policy was the best recipe to feed the 10-plus major and minor regional wars in the past and will, if it is maintained, continue to feed more wars in the future.
* Dr. Salim Nazzal is a Palestinian-Norwegian historian in the Middle East, who has written extensively on social and political issues in the region.