LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
January 21/10

Bible Of the Day
The Good News According to Matthew 5/33-37: “Again you have heard that it was said to them of old time, ‘You shall not make false vows, but shall perform to the Lord your vows,’ 5:34 but I tell you, don’t swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God; 5:35 nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of his feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 5:36 Neither shall you swear by your head, for you can’t make one hair white or black. 5:37 But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes’ and your ‘No’ be ‘No.’ Whatever is more than these is of the evil one."

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Syria's Financial Support for Jihad/by Matthew Levitt/Middle East Quarterly/January 20/10
Haiti: It’s not Only America’s Duty to Help/By Dr. Walid Phares/January 20/10
Zvi Bar'el: Egypt riled by Syria's increasing role in the region/Ha'aretz//January 20/10
Mitchell, bring out the sticks/The Daily Star/January 20/10
Changing the face of the region… to what?/By: Hazem Saghieh/Now Lebanon/January 20/10

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for January 20/10
Feltman: Olmert's Talks with Assad Drove Syria Out of Isolation/Naharnet
Mitchell: No U.S. Support to Any Plan Forcing Naturalization of Palestinians/Naharnet
Report: Romanian President's Brother Smuggled Taiwanese Arms to Hizbullah/Naharnet
Report: Israel to Strike Iran in March, Lebanon Could Get Involved/Naharnet
March 14 Backs Electoral Law Reform Provided No Delays/Naharnet
Stormy Cabinet Meeting over Municipal Head Jurisdiction/Naharnet
Palestinian Arms Discussed at Cabinet … Lebanon's Sovereignty Not Negotiable/Naharnet
Mottaki Slams U.N. Inaction over 4 Diplomats Kidnapped in Lebanon/Naharnet
Catholic Prelates Warn of Political, Confessional Division Among Lebanon's Christians/Naharnet
Aoun Says Abolishing Sectarianism Needs People's Will, Not Leaders' Initiatives/Naharnet
Geagea: Some Can't Keep on Acting as if Lebanon is an Abandoned Land/Naharnet
Yadlin: Hizbullah Considers World Jews Best Targets to Avenge Mughnieh's Death/Naharnet
Williams: We Intend to Redouble Efforts to Seek Israeli Pullout from Ghajar/Naharnet
Franjieh: No Disagreement within Opposition on Appointments and No Settlement at Iran, Hizbullah Expense/Naharnet
Mideast envoy: Lebanon is key to regional peace/Washington Post
Mitchell arrives in Beirut on first stop of regional tour/AFP
Cabinet postpones municipal polls/Daily Star
Abou Moussa ready for talks on weapons/Daily Star
Hariri heads for France in first visit after taking office/AFP
UN keen to prompt Israeli pullout from Ghajar/Daily Star
Lebanon's record 2009 tourism exceeds pre-Civil War figures/Daily Star
Lebanon ranks 93rd place in e-government readiness/Daily Star
Salameh: Bank sector thrives as Lebanon awaits reforms/AFP
Sidon sees flood of Lebanese drawn to touristic sites/Daily Star
Two journalists attacked while reporting on 'illegal' quarry/Daily Star
AUB team gets funding to help research control of tobacco use/Daily Star
Nasrallah thanks Bahraini group for its 'support/Daily Star
Berri hosts dinner to honor UNIFIL's Graziano/Daily Star
Najjar hears plea for law against domestic violence/Daily Star
New judge to probe 1999 murder of Sidon judges/Daily Star
Prosecutor charges 17 over counterfeit money/Daily Star
Saqr probes case of Fatah al-Islam suspects/Daily Star
Nasrallah thanks Bahraini group for its 'support'/Daily Star
Sleiman voices Lebanon's support for Iraq/Daily Star
Winter weather returns to country with a vengeance/Daily Star

Two journalists attacked while reporting on 'illegal' quarry
/Daily Star staff/Wednesday, January 20, 2010
BEIRUT: Two journalists were attacked Tuesday in Ain Dara in the Chouf while trying to report on a sand-and-rock quarry thought to be operating illegally. Environment Minister Mohammad Rahhal condemned the attack and demanded the permanent shut down of illegal quarries in Ain Dara. Journalists Rabih Mouwanes and Mounir Haydamous were reporting on the quarry and taking photographs for the environment magazine Bayaned, when an investor from the company along with several other people blocked their way. A verbal conflict erupted between the two parties but it soon developed into physical violence. The two journalists were then imprisoned in a metal warehouse and insulted before being dragged to the local police station and accused of stealing the battery of a tractor. Mouwanes called the director of the magazine, Pascale Choueiri, who immediately contacted Rahhal and Interior Minister Ziyad Baroud. The magazine also filed a lawsuit against the quarry company. Rahhal strongly condemned the attack and said its perpetrators were known and so were their motives. He asked Baroud to arrest the culprits and permanently shut down all illegal quarries in Ain Dara. “The attack is a direct message to the Environment Ministry and it will not be forgotten. It will not stop the ministry from defending the environment and natural resources,” he added. Rahhal then referred to a letter he sent Baroud on Saturday concerning the shutdown of illegal quarries. He also called on all the concerned authorities not to give out any licenses to collect construction material without the approval of the Environment Ministry. – The Daily Star


Mitchell, bring out the sticks
By The Daily Star
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Editorial
Does the White House of Barack Obama truly have an approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that’s different from those of its predecessors? According to the United States’ special envoy to the Middle East, former Senator George Mitchell, it certainly does. But for the moment, the evidence of this claim lies only with Mitchell, as we await concrete steps by the Obama administration to engineer a satisfactory conclusion to our region’s central conflict.
In a recent interview with American radio personality Charlie Rose, Mitchell relied on his long experience in politics and diplomacy to claim that the US president and secretary of state are fully committed to both the process of negotiations and the implementation of what is eventually agreed upon.
Mitchell arrived this week in a region that he himself said is very “tired,” as in exhausted, as it absorbs Washington’s latest peacemaking efforts. Whether it’s Israel or Arab states, everyone is in a weak position, which doesn’t indicate much – this weakness might mean the parties have no choice but to negotiate, or might drag their feet until they feel themselves to be stronger.
Mitchell has set down a time-frame of two years to conclude an Israeli-Palestinian deal, and told Rose he personally believed it could take even less.
After Mitchell detailed all of the carrots that Washington has to encourage a peace settlement, Rose asked about the sticks.
Mitchell cited a possible US moratorium on loan guarantees for Israel, a stick that was wielded by both American presidents with the last name of Bush.
And the envoy also reinforced the view that only the US can make a deal work, saying that “there is no entity on the face of this Earth, other than the United States government … that can create the context within which an agreement is possible and most importantly can ensure … that full implementation will occur.”
It’s not enough to describe this awesome power that can be brought to bear on the players in the Palestine-Israel conflict; Mitchell and his government will lose considerable credibility if they fail to oversee and enforce a settlement.
Mitchell drew repeated comparisons to his experience with brokering a historic peace accord in Northern Ireland, but the analogies were out of place.
Washington wasn’t the aid lifeline for Britain, nor was it a key sponsor of a Sinn Fein political entity. Here, Washington plays a dramatically more powerful role as a key ally of both Israel and the Palestinian Authority – in theory, the sticks are plentiful and powerful. The question is whether Mitchell can translate his plan of action into a reality, and convince his own government to go all the way and produce the results that a superpower, if it’s worthy of the name, should be able to deliver.

Mitchell: No U.S. Support to Any Plan Forcing Naturalization of Palestinians
Naharnet/U.S. special envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell has stressed to Lebanese officials that Washington will not make any move that would come at the expense of Lebanon. Mitchell assured Premier Saad Hariri during their meeting on Tuesday that the U.S. will not support the forced naturalization of Palestinians in Lebanon, the U.S. embassy announced.
Mitchell arrived in Beirut on Tuesday. He held talks with Hariri and Foreign Minister Ali al-Shami in the presence of his accompanying delegation that included Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Hale and Mitchell's assistant, Frederick Hoff.
On Wednesday, the envoy met with President Michel Suleiman and Speaker Nabih Berri.
The U.S. embassy statement quoted Mitchell as saying that Lebanon would play a key role in the long-term effort to build lasting and comprehensive peace and stability in the Middle East and that there would not be a lasting solution reached at Lebanon's expense.
Mitchell reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to a sovereign and independent Lebanon, the statement added.
Media reports said that the envoy discussed with Hariri latest local and regional developments and the progress made on Middle East peace. The envoy also told al-Shami that his tour to the region is aimed at giving fresh impetus to the peace process and President Barack Obama's vision of peace in the Middle East.
Mitchell acknowledged that he is facing difficulties, according to An Nahar daily. However, he vowed to continue with his "difficult" mission.
He told the Lebanese officials that he is making efforts to revive negotiations on the Palestinian-Israeli, Syrian-Israeli and Lebanese-Israeli tracks.
Mitchell also unveiled that he would visit Damascus after his talks with Suleiman and Berri. He will then head to Israel and the Palestinian territories.
Al-Shami stressed during his talks with Mitchell on Lebanon's rejection of naturalization of Palestinians and commitment to international resolutions, mainly Security Council resolution 1701.
The Lebanese foreign minister also discussed with the envoy measures taken in U.S. airports against Lebanese nationals and the U.S. House of Representatives' bill that calls for punitive measures against Middle East television networks seen as fuelling anti-American hatred, including Hizbullah's al-Manar TV.
Meanwhile, Syria's Baath newspaper said Mitchell's tour "won't change a thing" in the region. Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 08:17

Report: Israel to Strike Iran in March, Lebanon Could Get Involved
Naharnet/Diplomatic sources haven't ruled out to al-Liwaa newspaper Lebanon's involvement in a possible war between Israel and Iran. The sources told the daily that the Jewish state is planning in coordination with the U.S. to strike Iranian nuclear states next March. Israel and the U.S. will not allow Iran to put into operation its nuclear project, the diplomat said, adding that the Jewish state's seven-member inner cabinet has given the green light for the attack. The sources didn't rule out the involvement of Lebanon and the Gaza strip in the war, in response to the Israeli attack. Last week, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned Hizbullah to "avoid entering in conflict with us." "We need to constantly prepare for a change in the status quo, though we don't know when it will occur," he said. "We don't want for it to happen, and it might not, but we will not be afraid to react if we have to fight back." Top U.S. general David Petraeus also said earlier this month that Washington has developed contingency plans to address Iran's nuclear ambitions if negotiations falter. Petraeus, who heads U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) that oversees the Middle East, told CNN that Iran's nuclear facilities "certainly can be bombed," even though they are reported to be heavily fortified.
Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 09:58

Report: Romanian President's Brother Smuggled Taiwanese Arms to Hizbullah
Naharnet/The brother of Romania's president has reportedly assisted in redirecting obsolete Taiwanese weaponry to Hizbullah and another group in Africa.
Taiwan, however, dismissed on Wednesday as "groundless" Taipei-based Next Magazine's report linking Mircea Basescu, the brother of Romania's President Traian Basescu, to smuggling obsolete Taiwanese arms. The arms landed up with Hizbullah and Angola's Front for the Liberation of the Enclave of Cabinda after 1,800 tons of grenades, smoke bombs and landmines had been sent to Bulgaria for destruction, Next reported. Calling the report "groundless," the defense ministry said the Taiwanese ammunition was destroyed in Bulgaria in 2009 by Explomo Technical Services, a Singapore-based firm. "The report is based on speculation and there is no evidence to support its claims," said ministry spokesman Yu Sy-tue. "However, we will look into the matter and seek compensation if there is new evidence indicating that our contractor has violated the contract," he told AFP. Next said Basescu had rejected reports on the case in the Romanian media, while his brother had denied involvement in handling Taiwanese ammunition destined for destruction.(AFP-Naharnet) Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 11:27

Feltman: Olmert's Talks with Assad Broke Syria's Isolation, Made U.S. Cut-Off
Naharnet/Jeffrey Feltman, Assistant Secretary of U.S. State Department's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, has described as "modest at best" outcome of talks between U.S. and Syrian officials. At an event introduced by Hudson Institute in Washington, Feltman admitted that dialogue with Syria is "tough."
He said talks between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Syrian President Bashar Assad have driven Damascus out its isolation and, "consequently, the United States, not Syria, seems to be isolated." The former U.S. ambassador to Lebanon said opening new lines of communications with Damascus "does not in any way mean that we have brushed aside our concerns over Syria's policies or that we have suddenly decided to abandon our Lebanese or Iraqi partners." Feltman acknowledged that the "collapse of the global consensus" in the wake of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri's assassination and the unity of the Lebanese people which made the international community join their cause in driving Syrian forces from Lebanon "did not last long."
"Rather, it drove Syria out of its isolation," he thought. Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 07:59

March 14 Backs Electoral Law Reform Provided No Delays
Naharnet/The majority March 14 coalition has stressed the need to hold municipal polls in a timely manner, saying the alliance backs amendments put forth by Interior Minister Ziad Baroud regarding the municipal electoral law "so long as they are not taken as an excuse for delay." A leading March 14 source told pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat in remarks published Wednesday that the coalition does not mind holding municipal elections based on the current law in the event there is not much time left to make changes. March 14, however, set one condition to the municipal election law. The source said the coalition has demanded that the polls do away with a supervision committee to oversee elections and cut both fiscal and media spending.
Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 11:31

Stormy Cabinet Meeting over Municipal Head Jurisdiction
Naharnet/Citing "technical reasons," Cabinet on Tuesday decided to postpone by one month municipal elections amid a heated debate over the jurisdiction of the municipal head in the event Beirut was divided into three constituencies. Municipal polls, which are normally held in May, were rescheduled for June 2010.
Debates were not so decisive after all. Information Minister Tareq Mitri said following the meeting that Cabinet will convene again next Tuesday to pursue discussions of amendments to the municipal electoral law. The meeting was brought forward to Tuesday because of Prime Minister Saad Hariri's decision to head to Paris on a three-day official visit. Cabinet also agreed in principle to hold multi-day municipal elections in light of the logistics capabilities of the interior ministry and failure to adopt a Supervision Committee and extend the mandate of the current councils, given that the term of some of them ends next May. Amendments to the electoral law, including the election of heads of municipalities and their deputies based on a direct vote of the people as well the women's quota and adoption of proportional representation in greater cities will be discussed at an extraordinary session next Tuesday.
Regarding Beirut municipality, which will be the main focus of next Tuesday's session, An-Nahar newspaper said Hariri responded to attempts to "corner" him by confirming his support for municipal elections based on a direct majority vote and enhancing the powers of the head of municipality.
It said Hariri's position drew wide Cabinet support, particularly from Interior Minister Ziad Baroud.
As-Safir daily, however, gave a contradictory version. It said Hariri expressed reservation regarding the direct election of a mayor by the people.
Hariri, according to As-Safir, believed that direct majority vote could lead to a dispute between the mayor elected by the people and the designated governor.
It said Cabinet ministers Boutros Harb and Jean Ogassabian rejected a direct majority vote, while ministers Jebran Bassil voted in favor of such decision.
Minister of State Wael Abu Faour, in turn, raised questions about how to preserve the principle of sectarian balance in the process of electing a mayor and his deputy directly by the people.
Druze leader Walid Jumblat, for his part, voiced support for a proposal to divide Beirut into three constituencies "as is the case in all major world cities such as Paris and Istanbul."
The hot issue of administrative appointments, which was expected to top Tuesday's agenda, was not tackled.
President Michel Suleiman has reportedly stressed, in this respect, the need to adopt a "transparent procedure" to pick candidates.
Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 09:09

Palestinian Arms Discussed at Cabinet … Lebanon's Sovereignty Not Negotiable
Naharnet/The issue of Palestinian arms outside refugee camps was high on Cabinet's agenda on Tuesday amid an announcement that Lebanon's sovereignty was not negotiable.
"State sovereignty is not subject to negotiation," Information Minister Tareq Mitri said following Tuesday's Cabinet session. He said Cabinet stressed the implementation of the national dialogue resolution that calls for putting an end to weapons outside camps across Lebanon. Cabinet was obviously responding to a declaration by Fatah-Intifida's leader Abou Moussa who rejected disarmament of Palestinian factions outside refugee camps or the formation of a Palestinian committee to deal with the issue. Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 11:02

Mottaki Slams U.N. Inaction over 4 Diplomats Kidnapped in Lebanon
Naharnet/Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has criticized international organizations, including the U.N., for their inaction to determine the fate of four Iranian diplomats kidnapped in Lebanon 28 years ago. The four men were reportedly kidnapped by Lebanese militiamen at a checkpoint in northern Lebanon in July 1982, during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon at the height of the 1975-1990 civil war. Iran's Press TV quoted Mottaki as saying that Tehran held Israel directly responsible for the safety and security of the diplomats and called on all international organizations, mainly the U.N., to take necessary measures to speed up their release. He said all measures undertaken so far had failed due to the "incompetence" of international bodies and the parties involved in the issue, especially the Jewish state.The fate of the four men is vague and still unknown, Mottaki noted. Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 09:15

Catholic Prelates Warn of Political, Confessional Division Among Lebanon's Christians
Naharnet/Roman Catholic prelates have warned about divisions among Lebanon's Christians and said Christians and Muslims should work together to counter Islamic extremism in the Middle East. In a working document released ahead of a synod on the Middle East in October, the prelates said: "Extremist (Islamic) currents, clearly a threat to everyone, Christians and Muslims alike, require a treatment in common." Quoting a 2009 pastoral letter to Arab Christians, the working paper said "political Islam... seek(s) to impose an Islamic way of life on... Muslim and non-Muslim alike (and) a return to original Islam." The letter added: "In pursuit of this goal, some do not hesitate to resort to violence."
"This attitude, though primarily concerning Muslim society, has an impact on the Christian presence in the Middle East," lamented the document containing guidelines for reflection ahead of the October 10-24 synod. A number of Middle Eastern churches come under the Catholic umbrella, including Maronites, Chaldeans, Armenians and Copts.
A major problem many face in the Middle East is political conflict for example: the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories, divisions in Lebanon and the war in Iraq, the document said. "In Lebanon, Christians are deeply divided at a political and confessional level, without a commonly acceptable plan of action," the prelates said.
Christians are a small minority across the Middle East apart from Lebanon, the document noted, warning them against "isolating themselves out of fear of others (and) falling into a ghetto mentality." The 30-page document was compiled by a planning council made up of seven patriarchs from the Catholic Church's Eastern Rite, the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, Vatican officials and the heads of the Turkish and Iranian bishops conferences. "Where we note the rise of fundamentalism in many countries, we also witness the readiness of a great number of Muslims to resist this growing extremism," they said. "Speaking about and working for peace seems impossible, considering that war and violence are virtually forced upon us" in the Middle East, the prelates wrote. "The solution to conflicts rests in the hands of the stronger country in its occupying and inflicting wars on another country," they said.(AFP-Naharnet)
Beirut, 20 Jan 10, 08:45

Aoun Says Abolishing Sectarianism Needs People's Will, Not Leaders' Initiatives
Naharnet/Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun on Tuesday called for a new municipal electoral law and said that abolishing sectarianism can only be achieved through people's will. At a press conference after the weekly meeting of Change and Reform bloc, Aoun said that abolishing sectarianism cannot be achieved through the initiatives of political leaders, but rather through the will of the people. Aoun called for a new municipal electoral law and said that not amending the current law means that there is negligence to the interest of the country.
"Each party is searching for a certain formula which guarantees dominating Beirut in municipal elections," added Aoun. "We need a comprehensive law for municipal elections instead of amending some points only." Aoun added that every initiative for reform is being deemed as an attempt to cancel or postpone the elections by "some who disregard the reform content" of the initiatives. "There is no use of holding a dialogue table for the sole topic of Hizbullah's arms because there is almost a national consensus on the issue believing that according to the current circumstances, which have not been changed, the status (of the arms) can't be changed," added Aoun. On the other hand, Aoun reiterated his stance which considers that forming a committee -- to mull a mechanism for administrational appointments -- contradicts with the constitutional jurisdiction of the government in case the mechanism was not governed by a law. Beirut, 19 Jan 10, 18:50

Geagea: Some Can't Keep on Acting as if Lebanon is an Abandoned Land
Naharnet/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea on Tuesday urged the Lebanese government to take an official stance on the issue of Palestinian arms outside the camps given that "some cannot keep on acting as if Lebanon is an abandoned land without a sovereign State." "The issue of Palestinian arms outside the camps was discussed at the national dialogue table and a related resolution was adopted unanimously. (Former) premier Fouad Saniora had gathered the representatives of Palestinian factions and informed them with the resolution in preparation to its implementation," added Geagea. "Today, after 25 years from Abu Moussa's absence, we were surprised with his statement about arms outside the camps, knowing that he has no official recognition and his words mean nothing." Answering a question, Geagea said that the annual rally to commemorate the late assassinated premier Rafik Hariri on February 14 will be held as usual at Beirut's Martyrs Square, declining to confirm whether Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat would participate in the event.
Geagea commented on Speaker Nabih Berri's initiative to form the National Commission for the Abolition of Political Sectarianism by saying: "The majority of parliamentary blocs have declared clearly, and more than once, that they don't see the issue appropriate in this specific timing." Geagea added that Berri has the right to suggest what he wants, but said that the Speaker's initiative is aimed at provocation and would lead only "to increase tension in the country." LF leader expressed support for holding the municipal elections at the appointed time, fearing that some amendments are being suggested "to avoid holding the municipal elections on time." Beirut, 19 Jan 10, 17:59

Yadlin: Hizbullah Considers World Jews Best Targets to Avenge Mughnieh's Death
Naharnet/Amos Yadlin, Head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate, known as Aman, said Tuesday that "Hizbullah considers Jews and Israelis the best targets to avenge the assassination of Imad Mughnieh, as al-Qaida wants to claim the biggest number of victims." Israel Radio quoted Yadlin as saying that "Iran won't give up its nuclear program and will press forward in case it wasn't subjected to severe pressures." "Turkey strayed away from Israel due to various interests," said Yadlin, adding that the Israeli-Turkish strategic alliance has witnessed an alteration lately. Beirut, 19 Jan 10, 21:13

Williams: We Intend to Redouble Efforts to Seek Israeli Pullout from Ghajar
Naharnet/U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Michael Williams said Tuesday that the world body is seeking to redouble its efforts to guarantee a quick Israeli pullout from the northern part of the border village of Ghajar. "We intend to redouble our efforts to try and seek their withdrawal as quickly as possible from Ghajar," Williams said following talks with Foreign Minister Ali al-Shami. The pullout "is now more than three years overdue," he told reporters. He said the Jewish state should fulfill its promise of withdrawing from the Lebanese side of Ghajar "as quickly as possible." The pullout would lead to "far greater progress" on all the other issues within U.N. Security Council resolution 1701, including violations of Lebanese airspace. "The United Nations continues to call on Israel to halt" violations of resolution 1701 "in the strongest terms," he said. Williams quoted al-Shami as saying that he was very confident about Lebanon's future after the formation of the new government and the positive regional atmosphere. The foreign minister also told Williams about Turkish promises and commitments towards Lebanon, he told reporters. "I informed the minister that the United Nations is very encouraged by Lebanon's political progress," Williams added. Beirut, 19 Jan 10, 14:34

Egypt riled by Syria's increasing role in the region
By Zvi Bar'el, Haaretz Correspondent
20/01/10
What happened to the reconciliation between Syria and Egypt supposedly in the works? There had been widespread speculation in the Arab media in anticipation of the Syrian-Saudi summit meeting last Wednesday, that the Egyptian president would go to Riyadh for the Syrian-Saudi summit meeting last Wednesday, to ease the four years of bad blood (starting from the Second Lebanon War) between the two.
The rift in relations between Syria and Saudi Arabia had lasted longer than that: five years. It began after the assassination of the Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005, and ended only last October when Saudi King Abdullah mended ties with Syrian President Bashar Assad and agreed to visit Damascus.
Since then, Abdullah has been trying to persuade Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to bury the hatchet with Assad, but has been unsuccessful thus far.
As the summit approached, it seemed as if the warring sides would shake hands in the Saudi capital, but then Mubarak learned that on the eve of his departure, Assad had held a telephone conversation with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Tehran and explained to him that "Egypt would have no choice but to recognize that opposition (such as that espoused by Hamas and Hezbollah) is the only way to get things done."
That was enough for Mubarak to cancel his trip to Riyadh.
Egypt can continue being annoyed with Syria but it cannot ignore the new role Damascus has recently taken on for itself in the region. One example of this is Assad's proposal to the Saudis to mediate between them and Iran with the aim of reaching "regional reconciliation" and not merely "Arab reconciliation," which is King Abdullah's goal.
The Egyptians are scrutinizing Assad's moves warily in other arenas as well. His close relations with Turkey, declarations about establishing an Iran-Syria-Iraq-Turkey axis, strengthening of ties between Syria and Europe, particularly France, Assad's control of Hamas' decisions about Palestinian reconciliation, and the "historic reconciliation" with Lebanon which removed the threat of an international commission of inquiry into the murder of Hariri have complicated matters in Mubarak's eyes.
Instead of Syria being isolated, Egypt may find itself pushed to the side.
At the end of March, when the Arab League summit convenes in Tripoli, the heads of state will have to turn their attention to the issue of how to advance the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Should the Arab initiative be left on the table, will they have the power to bring about Palestinian reconciliation.
Is the Arab summit even still relevant, or will certain states like Saudi Arabia and Egypt continue to lead pan-Arabic policies as they have in recent years?
When Syria becomes one of the states that serves as an anchor, then Egypt's problems will become more complicated.
Egypt also returned empty handed from a recent trip to Washington. Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, and the head of intelligence, Omar Suleiman, returned some two weeks ago from the American capital without succeeding in persuading the administration there to demand a total freeze of construction in the Israeli settlements.
The Egyptian emissaries were likewise not successful in getting agreements with regard to the guarantees the Arab states are asking of the Americans.
Egypt became involved in an embarrassing public argument over this issue with Qatar of all countries. While Aboul Gheit claimed he had no idea about an Arab decision demanding American guarantees that Israel would carry out its commitments, the Qatari foreign minister declared that "everyone knows that the Arab committee that is following up the political process demanded American guarantees as far back as September."
A copy of this demand was given to every foreign minister and Qatar was "amazed" at Egypt's response, he said.
Al-Jazeera under fire
Egypt has been peeved for some time now about broadcasts from al-Jazeera which portray it as collaborating with Israel in the blockade of Gaza. According to Saudi Arabia, which has meanwhile made peace with Qatar - whose ruling family controls the TV station - al-Jazeera is presenting Riyadh as if it is fighting a war in Yemen in which it should not be involved.
The attempts in 2008 by Saudi Arabia and Egypt, together with a number of other Arab states, to formulate a binding covenant of ethics to be adopted by satellite TV channels did not succeed.
The covenant was left to die when Qatar voiced its opposition. This week, Anas el-Fiqi, the Egyptian information minister, decided to launch another initiative. Known as the Satellite Stations Authority, the new plan is meant to censor broadcasts by stations considered to be inciting against the Arab interest or against states, or to be abetting terrorism.
Syria, Qatar and Lebanon have already announced that they oppose the initiative and that they believe no TV station should be under political censorship. The opposition on the part of these three states ensures that the discussion that is supposed to take place in Cairo on January 24 between all the information ministers of the Arab states will produce a lot of hot air but few decisions.
Egypt and Saudi Arabia base their initiative on the draft law that was passed in the U.S. House of Representatives but has not yet become law, according to which the owners of satellite stations, and not merely editors and reporters, will be prosecuted if their stations help spread terrorism.
It is not clear what the definition of "spreading terrorism" or anti-American incitement will be, but the draft law mentions several possible actions that could fall under the law.
The problem is that the United States can indeed impose sanctions on the owners of such stations, but what will the Arab states do? Impose sanctions on one another? Boycott Hezbollah, which owns the al-Manaar station, or ostracize Hamas, which owns the al-Aqsa station?

Haiti: It’s not Only America’s Duty to Help
By Dr. Walid Phares
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
For almost a week, news reports have shocked the world with images of tens of thousands of Haitians dead and injured by the devastating earthquake. More images show millions of Haitians roaming the streets of Port-au-Prince seeking medical attention and food.
When nature strikes, particularly against those nations unequipped to handle a disaster, it is incumbent on the entire international community to rush for help. It’s not just the duty of the United States of America, but of all nations capable of delivering aid to do so in these crises.
Always in times such as these we see American forces and equipment displaying stunning capacities to intervene in the four corners of the planet. Everyone in the world community – from those whose life’s work it is to scorn America and everything it does to those who are on America’s sides in its fight against terror—expect American soldiers, marines and sailors to be first on the ground while US air assets are covering the stricken areas.
And soon after the drama recedes, the anti-America propaganda machines go back to business as usual: online, on satellite TV and on campuses. When it gets bad for humanity, Uncle Sam is the superman we need. When nature is calm, the Jihadists and their acolytes raise hell about infidel America.
This time we will hold everyone as responsible in the mass rescue underway. Yes America is mobilizing its resources and will always do to meet its humanitarian obligations. US resources are already establishing a humanitarian bridge to the island that happens to be very close to the mainland. Haitian Americans, many of whom I had the privilege to have in my classrooms are an amazing brand of émigrés: hard working, education seeking and society building. Their mother country has been destroyed in front of their eyes and their entire patrimony is being shattered by the disaster’s aftermath. They fully deserve the support of their chosen homeland in the most strategic way. They will definitely be at the forefront of the campaign to rescue, save, and rebuild their island.
Facing this act of nature together, we know that Americans and Haitians will partner to save the people of the oldest African descendant and independent nation in this hemisphere. But we want the rest of the international society, particularly the rich and famous to chip in.
We know that the usual helpers will extend their support: Canada, the European Union as well as Japan, India and other democracies. China, which is thrusting through markets in Africa and Latin America, seems to be willing to show support. Russia, which oil industry provides it with significant cash, must also donate generously. The Russian military, second to the US, must also display its power in humanitarian missions. Russian surface ships and submarines have been visiting Venezuela for joint exercises. It would be a good idea to send these high tonnage vessels to the shores of Haiti.
Beyond the traditional donors contributing money or technological assistance, this time we want to see the hard core critics of international interventions opening their checkbooks. Blasting Washington for deploying its fleets around the world, dictatorships in the Western Hemisphere should show compassion with the descendents of slaves in the Caribbean. Hugo Chavez, who brags about helping the disenfranchised, must donate free Petrol to the island for at least one year. Morales should join in and offer some of Bolivia’s gas resources for heating. Lula, as Brazil’s economy is booming, must extend aid and increase his country’s participation in the UN’s operations in Haiti by ten times. The Castro regime sent 70,000 soldiers to fight an African resistance in Angola during the cold war, but they sent only 90 doctors to neighboring Haiti. Cuba must be a staging ground for humanitarian assistance and send seven divisions to help rebuilding the poorest of the poorest nations.
And across the seas, the Organization of Islamic Conference must ask its members, especially its very rich ones, to foot parts of the relief and reconstruction bills. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Iran and Libya can afford to save every single family in Haiti and help them face in the future. And in humanitarian interventions there should not be conditioned religious conversion to make charity happen. Influential al Jazeera and other networks should dedicate significant portions of their debates on how best to save millions of dispossessed people in Haiti inasmuch as they focus on best to free the 300 Jihadi terrorists across the bay, in Guantanamo.
Yes, if the critics of US efforts to defend the world from terrorism would step in - for once - and put their money where their mouth is, they may help humanity. To help Haiti we will form a coalition of the willing. Those who act greedily will lose the moral ground.

Changing the face of the region… to what?
By: Hazem Saghieh, Now Lebanon
January 19, 2010
At the International and Arab Forum for Supporting the Resistance held at UNESCO Palace, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah predicted “changing the face of the region” as a result of some possible confrontation with Israel. As the nature of the case dictates, the other star attending the forum, the head of Hamas’ political office, Khaled Meshaal, delivered grandiose and epical words, but the press reserved its headlines for the Hezbollah secretary general’s speech.
If Nasrallah holds greater importance than Meshaal – as is the case – and if his war in July 2006 was more involved than Meshaal’s war in Ghaza, then the Lebanese leader’s words also possess a wider scope and greater significance.
Fine… but what did he mean by “changing the face of the region”?
There are two possible answers:
On the one hand, he could have meant spreading “the culture of the Resistance,” and on the other, he could have meant wiping Israel off the map.
The meaning of the first hypothesis is exceedingly obscure. On account of its over-generality, it does not say anything. What exactly is the “culture of the Resistance”? If it indeed is a “culture,” what then are its texts, its literature, its art? Furthermore, no one knows how far this “culture” is to be spread until it reaches it maximum extent. After all, on previous occasions, we thought that it had already been widely popularized and that the matter was finished.
As for the second hypothesis, we prefer to leave this issue to be delved into by transcendentalists, since it has gone beyond any empirical military estimation.
All that withstanding, Hezbollah’s secretary general did not discuss these two possible meanings in his recent speech, despite having alluded to them in many previous ones.
For this reason, it is necessary to ponder what Nasrallah has said in honesty on the subject on previous occasions, (and what the rest of his rhetoric, tainted with radicalism and rejectionism, has not revealed). The notion of “changing the face of the region” presses us to demand the answer to a specific question: change to what end? In what direction? In other words, is the region to become more secure or less? More sectarian and confessional or less? Oriented more to the right or more to the left? To what extents will issues such as political reform, education, the status of women, minority rights and societal freedoms be prioritized? With these issues in mind, is it rational that the face of the region is to be changed in a way in which no one has any idea how, with no one saying in what direction it is going nor clarifying what such a statement means? Responsibility, not to mention sheer curiosity, requires us to think about the direction this changing-the-face-of-the-region will take us.
In all likelihood such words are closer to poetics than anything else. The poetry might be good or maybe poor. It might be flowery or perhaps lucid. But at the end of the day, it is poetry. The danger of such poetics, in this context, is that it calls for practicing – or preaches the practice of – fantastical rhetoric most of the time, without coupling that with straightforward prose which explains the measures to be taken, the possibilities of what could happen, and the direction we are going.
The greatest fear is that a change of this kind would come to pass while those behind it do not themselves know where they are leading us… or, for that matter, where they are being led.
This article is a translation of the original, which was posted on the NOW Arabic site on Monday, January 18


Michel Aoun
January 20, 2010
On January 19, the website of the Free Patriotic Movement Tayyar.org carried the following report:
The Change and Reform bloc held its weekly meeting in Rabieh while headed by General Michel Aoun.
Following the meeting, General Aoun talked to the journalists, saying: “Today, we discussed four points which are the issues of the hour, and I believe that the government is also discussing them now.
“These issues are related to the appointment mechanism, the appointments, the municipal elections and the annulment of political sectarianism. There are other issues which we previously discussed and over which we conducted a comprehensive review. Since we do not know what the government thinks about these topics, we discussed all the possibilities in regard to the staging or postponement of the [municipal] elections but will keep them to ourselves.
"What is important however is for this issue to be settled promptly, because it is not acceptable for us not to know whether we should be preparing for these elections or not. This is at the level of the municipal election and the size of the reforms that should be introduced because municipal reforms are massive. If these reforms are to be conducted, they should not be made through minor improvements, rather than through the development of a self- monitoring apparatus, in addition to a monitoring apparatus over the self-monitoring and the state monitoring apparatuses alike.
“This is due to the fact that the latter has become like a ‘deep well’ in which complaints and violations drown and in which the papers are presented and never resurface... We now need monitors over the monitors. At the level of the appointments, we discussed the state of corruption and I showed the deputies what was said in an article by journalist Ghada Halawi who quoted Mr. Monzer al-Khatib, the former head of the civil service council who has 11 years of experience on the job, and who believed that the state of civil service “should make us weep or rebel” because the situation is impossible... It thus might be necessary to draft a new law since we are not forced to commit to the old one, in order to have a hierarchical pattern within the administration allowing the promotion of people and allowing us to learn who is the best. Now, the picture is vague and we cannot truly assess those who are in the administration, considering that the general climate which is being talked about makes one doubt himself and question whether or not he is among the good people.
“We do not have apparatuses that hold people accountable and take notes about their different actions. I believe we need new apparatuses with wider prerogatives in order to facilitate the fight against the violations and investigate these violations instead of conducting an arbitrary accountability... At this point, where is the missing link? The missing link is the will of the officials and I believe that these officials are the ministers who are heading ministries that do not practice accountability while corruption is ongoing. That is why corruption is spreading with no one dealing with it. In all the proposals we are seeing today, there is no accountability or monitoring will. Let us open the files of the second, third and fourth grade directors and the files of the ministers who were in power when the violations were committed. All violations start from the top and never from the bottom, then they go down. The cleaning should thus start from top to bottom... Once the administration is cleaned from within, we start choosing the best to put them in the first positions. In this context, I hope that you in the media will help us over this issue by writing about them and polling the people to see what they want.
“As for the mechanism, we have addressed this matter before. You know that the mechanism conflicts with the prerogatives of the Ministry. A while ago, we saw the issuance of the law defining this mechanism, but the Constitutional Council annulled it in 2001 because it conflicted with the constitutional prerogatives of the minister. Now, this mechanism is the same and if they were to apply it without a law, it will become a tutelage council exercising its prerogatives over the minister. Later on, it will be the one eliminating the candidates to keep only three of them as it was proposed. But who will defend the rights of those who were eliminated? No one other than the minister has the right to eliminate or keep a candidate and the latter proposal will only allow the minister to exercise his prerogatives partially.
"There are our reservations. Regarding the electoral law, this requires further studying and we should not settle for changing a couple of minor things. We want the work to be controlled within the municipal councils and within the monitoring apparatuses over the municipal bodies because the situation has become unbearable. All that is being said about corruption within the municipalities is the tip of the iceberg because people are only talking about what is happening to them, while many other things are happening to others.
“In the meantime, the people are paying a hefty price but are not saying anything because they merely want a decent living.”

Syria's Financial Support for Jihad
Syrian Terrorism
by Matthew Levitt
Middle East Quarterly
Winter 2010, pp. 39-48
http://www.meforum.org/2579/syria-financial-support-jihad

It costs a lot of money to run an insurgency. There are arms to buy, attacks to launch, bribes to pay. The local population has to be won over, and extensive networks have to be actively maintained, often involving members of various groups, criminal syndicates, corrupt officials, and independent operators such as local smugglers. Explosive devices have to be made, guns have to be brought in from abroad, volunteers have to be indoctrinated and trained.


U.S. soldiers patrol in an armored vehicle outside the small town of Sinjar, Iraq, near the Syrian border. In October 2007, U.S. troops found records with details of 700 foreign nationals who entered Iraq between August 2006 and August 2007. The Sinjar documents identified four members of a key terrorist facilitation and finance network operating out of Syria in support of Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Photo credit: Staff Sgt. Mike Alberts

In 2008, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an international body focused on preventing money laundering and terror financing, reported that while financing individual attacks may be relatively inexpensive when set against the damage inflicted, "maintaining a terrorist network, or a specific cell, to provide for recruitment, planning, and procurement between attacks represents a significant drain on resources. A significant infrastructure is required to sustain international terrorist networks and promote their goals over time."[1] Creating and maintaining such support and facilitation networks, FATF concluded, requires significant funds.

FATF's findings have a particular relevance to Syria where terrorist and insurgent groups have established sophisticated networks in order to facilitate the movement of foreign fighters from around the world into Iraq. While the number of foreign fighters infiltrated through Syria fluctuates, these networks are especially important since foreign fighters operating in and moving through Syria have been responsible for numerous attacks on Iraqi civilians and coalition forces. Given the primary role that Iraq and Syria both play in the Obama administration's efforts to stabilize the Middle East, it is of great importance to understand the role of Syria and Syrian-based foreign fighters in the Iraqi insurgency. There is now a wealth of information available on these fighters, on their networks, and on their economic impact.

The Syrian Connection
The Syrian government is the longest-standing member of the U.S. State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism, having been so designated in 1979.[2] In February 2008, the U.S. Treasury Department underscored the findings in a collection of documents generally known as the Sinjar records.[3] These records provide details of 700 foreign nationals who entered Iraq between August 2006 and August 2007. The records were found in October 2007 by U.S. troops at Sinjar, a small town on the Iraqi-Syrian border. The Sinjar documents identified four members of a key terrorist facilitation and finance network operating out of Syria in support of Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). The Treasury Department reported that the "Abu Ghadiyah" network, named for its leader, Badran Turki Hisham al-Mazidih, known as Abu Ghadiyah, controlled the flow of much of the money, weaponry, personnel, and other materiel that passed through Syria into Iraq for the use of AQI. According to the Treasury Department, the network "obtained false passports for foreign terrorists, provided passports, weapons, guides, safe houses, and allowances to foreign terrorists in Syria and those preparing to cross the border into Iraq."[4] Indeed, Mazidih reportedly received several hundred thousand dollars from his cousin, another member of his network, with which he facilitated travel by AQI foreign fighters and supported insurgent activity targeting the U.S. military.[5]

The Abu Ghadiyah network and others like it pump money into the local economy through the purchase of food and housing for fighters moving through safe houses. The networks additionally provide business opportunities for the local, smuggling-based economy and for bribes to local officials. The Abu Ghadiyah network reportedly maintained safe houses in Syria in Damascus and Latakia as well, investing in local economies in other parts of the country far from the Iraqi border.[6]

This has both operational and economic consequences. Foreign fighter networks in Syria, for example, have direct and indirect, and positive and negative economic consequences on the country, the government, and on various elements of the Syrian populace, from the political, social, and religious elites to locals living in towns along the Syrian-Iraqi border. There is also an impact on Iraq, as the destination for foreign fighters, and on other countries in the region as well. Developing realistic strategies to contend with these networks depends first on obtaining a broad picture of what is happening. Such a picture has to include a proper understanding of the economic impact.

Countries that host networks that expedite the movement of foreign fighters risk incurring both political and economic consequences because of such activities. Ultimately, violent extremists tolerated and supported by the host country may turn against it and come to pose a threat within the country or to the regime itself.

Following the October 26, 2008 U.S. cross-border raid which resulted in the killing of Abu Ghadiyah, Western journalists reported that the Syrian government cooperated with the United States in this raid. According to The Sunday Times, the Syrian regime was "complicit" in the raid because "Abu Ghadiyah was feared by the Syrians as an agent of Islamic fundamentalism who was hostile to the secular regime in Damascus."[7] Such cooperation demonstrates the regime's willingness to crack down on foreign fighters when they threaten Syria's internal security. Doing so on an ongoing basis, however, is another matter.

Benefits to Syria
As an extension of foreign policy, Syria's tolerance of foreign fighter networks—and certainly its more active support for Iraqi insurgents—was intended to further Syrian interests in Iraq and deliver other non-economic benefits. According to a Department of Defense report to Congress in March 2007 entitled "Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq," Syria has supported insurgents in Iraq for political purposes: "Damascus also recognizes that Islamist extremists and elements of the former Iraqi regime share Syria's desire to undermine coalition efforts in Iraq."[8]

As military analyst Anthony Cordesman notes, Damascus has undermined Iraq's political advancement "by providing both active and passive support to anti-government and anti-coalition forces."[9] In one case, then-U.S. ambassador to Syria Theodore Khattouf complained to Syrian authorities that for several months a foreign fighter sign-up station was located across the street from the U.S. embassy in Damascus. In response, Syrian officials "moved the sign-up to Damascus Fair grounds—a government owned property—where it continued its work for months more."[10] In a 2003 case, U.S. soldiers captured foreign fighters' Syrian passports. Syrian passports were provided in several instances to non-Syrians and included entry permits marked "volunteer for jihad" or "to join the Arab volunteers."[11]

That said, the huge boost to local businesses along the border with Iraq—mostly illicit, such as the smuggling of goods and persons—also benefited the Syrian regime by generating jobs and income and freeing the central government from having to invest in remote areas during difficult economic times. In the immediate term, following the fall of the Saddam regime, supporting such networks may have brought significant dividends. According to Iraqi bank records, for example, Saddam himself withdrew over a billion U.S. dollars from different accounts, and these funds were then smuggled out of the country in cash. "In Syria the money was managed by Saddam's half-brother, Sabawi Ibrahim al-Hassan al-Tikriti, the former head of the feared Mukhabarat [intelligence services]," who was considered at the time by the United States "to be the chief financial facilitator of the insurgency in Syria."[12]

Syrian authorities have periodically cracked down on smugglers and tightened control of the borders—but to little effect. On the one hand, the Syrian government, showing a clear intention of preventing illegal cross-border movement, constructed a four foot sand berm along the border and laid out fallen electricity poles in order to flip smugglers' vehicles.[13] On the other hand, U.S. intelligence officer Adam Boyd has described that for

every example of cooperation from Syria, there are an equal number of incidents that are not helpful … We just captured someone who was trying to escape into Syria and found out that he'd been arrested last November on the Syrian side after they caught him with a bunch of fake passports. But he bribed his way out and managed to get back in. … I don't know I necessarily attribute that to the government as to an individual Syrian border patrol unit.[14]

Clearly, drawing a line between a governmental blind eye and individual enterprise is not an easy task. But one must assume that the existence of such a volume of smuggling and human infiltration owes much to Syrian government collusion or even outright involvement.

The foreign fighter pipeline in Syria is believed to have benefitted the local populations on both sides of the Syrian-Iraqi border in the form of jobs, increased cash flow into the local economy, purchase of supplies, staples, and rents. One assessment of the Sinjar documents concludes that individual Syrians would earn more than $3,000 over the course of one year as a result of these activities.[15] This assumes that all thirty-nine Syrian smuggling contacts in the Sinjar records received an equal share of the cut from foreign fighters. Fifty-three of the ninety-three Syrian coordinators identified by name in the Sinjar records were paid by the fighters they transported into Iraq. Of these, Saudi fighters alone made forty-six payments, each averaging $2,535.[16]

Negatives for Syria
As a result of being listed by the United States as a state that sponsors terrorism, the Syrian regime has long been subject to a series of sanctions, including several trade-related restrictions such as bans on arms sales and control over the export of dual-use items that have both commercial and military uses, as well as prohibitions on financial aid.[17] According to the 2008 State Department Country Report, "despite acknowledged reductions in foreign fighter flows [from Syria], the scope and impact of the problem remained significant."[18]

In addition to the punitive measures associated with the Syrian status as a state sponsor of terrorism, Washington has taken other steps to try and ratchet up the economic pressure against Syria, taking into account not only Syrian support for terrorism but also a broader array of illicit activities. In terms of terrorism, one of the most important U.S. government actions was the 2006 Treasury blacklisting of the Commercial Bank of Syria—the major player in the Syrian financial sector—for its support for terrorism and other illegal ventures.[19] One reason the U.S. government listed the bank as a "primary money laundering concern" is that "Treasury investigators found that the Syrian government had paid out approximately $580 million in claims to Syrian businesses [from Iraqi government funds in Syria] without the authorization of SOMO [the Iraqi State Oil Marketing Organization], and that $262 million remained frozen in an account at the Commercial Bank of Syria."[20]

In 2003, Congress passed the Syrian Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act which, among other issues, cites as reasons for sanctioning the regime the fact that Syria allows terrorist groups to operate within its territory and permits the flow of goods and fighters into Iraq. Included among the findings in the legislation are the March 2003 statement by Syrian foreign minister Farouq al-Shara that "Syria's interest is to see the invaders defeated in Iraq"[21] and the April 2003 statement by then-secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld that "busloads" of Syrian fighters entered Iraq with "hundreds of thousands of dollars" and with leaflets offering rewards for dead American soldiers.[22]

President George W. Bush also issued several executive orders directed at Syria, which have targeted the Syrian elite for its involvement in corruption,[23] citizens for interfering in the internal affairs of Lebanon,[24] and former Iraqi regime elements for supporting the insurgency—some of whom were in Syria.[25] A number of top Syrian officials were designated by the Bush administration using executive orders or other legal authority, which enabled designation and asset freezing. In addition, in response to the Syria accountability act of 2003, Bush issued an order implementing this legislation, which restricted further trade between the two countries and prohibited Syrian aircraft from landing in the United States.[26]

There is evidence that the Syrian accountability act and subsequent financial sanctions have dissuaded U.S. and some other businesses from investing in Syria. According to one report, General Electric, Mitsubishi, and the French power company Alstom all declined to bid on a Syrian government contract for the construction of power plants.[27] Mobile telephone provider Turkcell withdrew its bid to purchase Syriatel in August 2008 after the United States sanctioned Syriatel's primary stakeholder, Rami Makhluf.[28] Sanctions have also crippled Syria Air, the state airline, by preventing the company from purchasing parts or planes for its Boeing fleet.[29] Meanwhile, U.S. sanctions under the Patriot Act against the Commercial Bank of Syria have deterred private Western banks from opening branches in Syria.[30] As Syria's energy production levels decline, sanctions have also prevented major Western energy companies from making new investments there although other foreign companies have supplanted U.S. firms. One company, Gulfsands Petroleum, reportedly moved its principal office to London in order to circumvent U.S. sanctions against its local partner, Makhluf.[31]

Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the Zarqawi Network
Al-Qaeda in Iraq has long benefited from a network of associates in Syria, which it uses to facilitate travel to Iraq. In a 2003 investigation of foreign fighter recruiters operating out of Italy, prosecutors noted that "Syria has functioned as a hub for an al-Qaida network."[32] Transcripts of operatives' conversations "paint a detailed picture of overseers in Syria coordinating the movement of recruits and money" between cells in Europe and training camps in northern Iraq run by Al-Qaeda affiliated, Kurdish Ansar al-Islam.[33] Syrian cell leaders facilitated travel for recruits and provided them with funding while European members gave false travel documents to recruits and fugitives and monitored their travel. Some of the recruits traveling to the Ansar camps stayed at the Ragdan Hotel in Aleppo for some time and later stopped in Damascus. Indeed, the Italian investigation revealed that operatives in Europe who worked for Al-Qaeda leader Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi acted on the instructions of his lieutenants in and around Damascus and Aleppo. These men included Muhammad Majid (also known as Mullah Fuad), described as the "gatekeeper in Syria for volunteers intent on reaching Iraq."[34]

In 2005, the U.S. Treasury Department designated Sulayman Khalid Darwish, who was operating out of Syria, a specially designated global terrorist for fundraising and recruiting on behalf of Zarqawi's network (the Jama'at at-Tawhid wa'l-Jihad) and Al-Qaeda. Described as a member of the Zarqawi organization's advisory (shura) council and "one of the most prominent members of the Zarqawi network in Syria," Darwish forged documents, recruited and dispatched terrorists, and raised funds for the Zarqawi network.[35]

Evidence of this network's continued presence in Syria came two years later in 2007. On December 6, the U.S. Treasury Department designated seven individuals, all based in Syria, for providing financial and operational support to the Iraqi insurgency. One individual was a member of AQI and the remaining six were former regime officials representing the Iraqi wing of the Syrian Baath party. Undersecretary of the Treasury Stuart Levey insisted, "Syria must take action to deny safe haven to those supporting violence from within its borders."[36]

While in Syria, Zarqawi reportedly planned and facilitated the October 2002 assassination of Lawrence Foley, a U.S. Agency for International Development official based in Amman, Jordan.[37] Jordanian prime minister Abu Ragheb Ali announced that the Libyan and Jordanian suspects, arrested in December in connection with the attack, received funding and instructions from Zarqawi and had intended to conduct further attacks against "foreign embassies, Jordanian officials, and some diplomatic personnel, especially Americans and Israelis." According to the Jordanian indictment, Zarqawi's group had been planning to target "American and Jewish interests as well as Jordanian security forces since 1997."[38] The captured assassin, Salem Said bin Sewid, confessed that Zarqawi provided funding and weapons for the planned assassination.[39] After the attack, "an associate of the assassin left Jordan to go to Iraq to obtain weapons and explosives for further operations" at a time when a Zarqawi-run network was operating in Baghdad.[40] The operatives were trained in Syria, supplied with weapons, and instructed to return to Jordan in order to identify a target for the attack.[41]

Benefits to Al-Qaeda in Iraq
The benefits of facilitation networks for terrorist and insurgent groups are clear: Without their support, terrorist organizations cannot function. The networks are essential elements of group efforts to finance and resource their expensive activities. As Maj. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, commander of the U.S. Army's 4th Infantry Division, noted when commenting about payments for insurgents, "When we first got here, we believed it was about $100 to conduct an attack against coalition forces, and $500 if you're successful. We now believe it's somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 if you conduct an attack, and $3,000 to $5,000 if you're successful."[42] Still, it is not the cost of any individual attack but rather the larger infrastructure costs that drive insurgent expenses. A senior intelligence officer from the Defense Intelligence Agency explained in 2005,

We believe terrorist and insurgent expenses are moderate and pose little significant restraints to armed groups in Iraq. In particular, arms and munitions costs are minimal—leaving us to judge that the bulk of the money likely goes toward international and local travel, food and lodging of fighters and families of dead fighters, bribery and pay-offs of governmental officials, families and clans; and possibly into the personal coffers of critical middle-men and prominent terrorist or insurgent leaders.[43]

While some facilitators are ideologically driven members of the group or like-minded followers, others are traditional criminal smugglers who do not differentiate between smuggling foodstuffs or foreign fighters across the Syrian-Iraqi border. A West Point review of the Sinjar documents concluded, "Large groups of people—such as foreign fighters—cross the border in remote locations, often using the same tracks and trails as the livestock smugglers. In fact, the same ring of smuggling guides will often move both livestock and human beings."[44] This untidy mix of insurgents, terrorists, professional smugglers, and corrupt government officials provides multiple opportunities for financial gain for all parties involved.

Consider the case of Fawzi al-Rawi. In late 2007, the Treasury Department designated Rawi—a leader of the Iraqi wing of the Syrian Baath party—for providing financial and material support to Zarqawi's AQI. The extent of the Syrian role in Rawi's activities is noteworthy. Rawi was appointed to his position in the Syrian Baath party by President Bashar al-Assad in 2003. According to U.S. Treasury, the Iraqi wing of the Syrian Baath party "has since provided significant funding to Iraqi insurgents at al-Rawi's direction." Indeed, Treasury noted that Rawi "is supported financially by the Syrian government and has close ties to Syrian intelligence."[45] With the authorization of the Syrian regime, Rawi twice met with a former commander of Saddam Hussein's Army of Muhammad (Jaysh Muhammad) in 2004 and told the commander his group would receive material aid from Syria. In 2005, Rawi "facilitated the provision of $300,000 to members of AQI" as well as providing AQI vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (IEDs), rifles, and suicide bombers. In meetings in Iraq with senior AQI representatives in September 2005, Rawi and AQI leaders discussed operational issues, including attacks against the U.S. embassy and assaults in the international zone.[46]

Ultimately, a truly successful insurgency can become such a successful fundraising enterprise that it controls sufficient funds to finance activities beyond the immediate area of operations. Thus, in a July 2005 letter to Zarqawi, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al-Qaeda's second in command, humbly asked the leader of AQI if he could spare "a payment of approximately one hundred thousand" because "many of the lines have been cut off."[47] Additionally, the robust network can be used to transport fighters, money, and goods to other potential jihad locales such as Lebanon, Yemen, and Somalia. The implication, of course, is that AQI was by then very well funded, the result—at least in part—of large subventions arriving via Syria.

The Way Forward
One reason AQI and other insurgents in Iraq have been so successful is because their facilitation networks have successfully raised and transferred funds, recruited and transported fighters, and procured and moved weapons and goods—mostly through Syria. Shutting down these networks and starving the insurgency of its supply of materiel, funds, and manpower is a critical component of any successful counterinsurgency campaign. But convincing and enabling Syria to take the necessary steps to shut down the smuggling pipelines will require something more than just economic sanctions. As the Obama administration pursues its engagement strategy with Syria, closing the pipelines perhaps more than anything else will provide the clearest yardstick by which to measure Syrian reciprocity to the administration's outstretched hand.

To be sure, convincing the Assad regime to forgo sponsorship of insurgent and terrorist groups as part of a policy of engagement will be difficult. Given the relatively strong return on minimal financial investment, Syrian support for insurgents and terrorists will remain an attractive option for Damascus so long as it continues to be a viable and productive means of furthering the regime's domestic and foreign policy goals. Given the financial interests of local and national officials, cracking down on established smuggling networks (which would threaten the regular payments that supplement officials' income) is no easy task. As part of its engagement strategy, Washington must develop a multifaceted approach to the problem posed by the foreign fighter networks. The following suggestions, which illustrate how this might be done, could also be used to measure the seriousness of the Syrian regime on the issue of engaging cooperatively today to create a more stable region tomorrow:

1.The United States and its allies should help provide local economies with jobs and services. Full employment and access to a better quality of services in towns and villages will act as a buffer against the losses that are sure to follow closure of the smuggling economy. This relates, in some ways, to the dilemmas posed by heroin production and smuggling in Afghanistan where the illegal revenue greatly exceeds remunerations in the local employment markets. This means that employment must be well paid, stable, and buffered against regional economic fluctuation. It also means that labor should not be ephemeral or makeshift but directed towards the development of a constantly improving local infrastructure. Employment for women may prove crucial to giving females a greater say in local issues.

2.There is a real need for an anti-corruption drive focused on cleaning up the areas of corruption (police, border officials, the public sector in general), on building on the presidential anti-corruption campaigns of 2000 and 2003, and on leading to the creation of a permanent body dedicated to an anti-corruption drive, possibly in conjunction with Transparency International.

3.The above campaign should be pursued along with a civil society campaign aimed at breaking the deeply ingrained culture in which members of the public offer bribes to people in authority, considering this as the cost of doing business.

4.Diplomatic efforts must be pursued to address the underlying policy issues that have led Syria to support insurgents and terrorists as a means of furthering its domestic and foreign policy. These efforts must include educational and comparative instruction showing how Western countries achieve greater prosperity by eliminating similar forces from public and political life.

5.Concurrent and parallel efforts should be initiated on the Syrian side of the border to match those on the Iraqi side in areas including human rights, political reconciliation, and debt relief. This will have to proceed by means of a carrot and stick approach and will depend much or entirely on cooperation from the regime.

At the end of the day, however, political and diplomatic efforts may fall short, in which case targeted financial sanctions present an attractive option. Such efforts should be focused on illicit activities, on authority figures engaged in criminal or other activities threatening regional security, and on corruption. This does not close the door on engagement, focused as it is not on the regime but on illicit conduct. Indeed, such sanctions should be combined with regional diplomacy employing several countries' efforts to cajole the Damascus regime when possible and to sanction it when necessary. Sanctions can at least increase the costs to the regime of its continued, belligerent behavior. On their own, sanctions will never solve national security problems, but when used in tandem with other elements of national power in an integrated, strategic approach, they can be very effective.

Were the shadow economy of smuggling enterprises to contract, the most critical and time-sensitive issue would be to jump-start successful, legitimate economic growth in its place. In the words of retired British army general Sir Frank Kitson, "The first thing that must be apparent when contemplating the sort of action which a government facing insurgency should take, is that there can be no such thing as a purely military solution because insurgency is not primarily a military activity."[48] If not, then what is it? In the case of Syria and Iraq, it is domestic and regional power politics in almost equal measure. But it is closely linked to economics and to the financial status of individuals and communities. By blocking foreign donations on the one hand and by providing job stability on the other, it should be possible to make real inroads into a seemingly intractable problem.

Matthew Levitt is a senior fellow and director of the Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence at The Washington Institute for Near Policy and an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies. This article is derived from a paper delivered at The Foreign Fighter Problem conference of the Foreign Policy Research Institute, July 14, 2009.

[1] "Terrorism Financing," Financial Action Task Force Secretariat, Paris, Feb. 28, 2008.
[2] "State Sponsors of Terrorism," U.S. State Department, Washington, D.C., Dec. 29, 1979.
[3] For full English translations, see "Personal Information for Foreign Fighters," Harmony Project, Combating Terrorism Center, West Point, accessed Nov. 13, 2009.
[4] "Treasury Designates Members of Abu Ghadiyah's Network," U.S. Treasury Department, Washington, D.C., Feb. 28, 2008.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Associated Press, Oct. 29, 2008.
[7] The Sunday Times (London), Nov. 2, 2008.
[8] "Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq," quarterly report to Congress, U.S. Defense Department, Washington, D.C., Mar. 2007, p. 17.
[9] Anthony H. Cordesman, "The Department of Defense Quarterly Report on Stability and Security in Iraq: The Warning Indicators," Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C., Dec. 22, 2006.
[10] David Schenker, testimony in Francis Gates, et al. v. Syrian Arab Republic, et al., U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Action No. 06-1500 (RMC), Sept. 2008.
[11] Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense, "Helping Win the War on Terror," testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Washington, D.C., Sept. 9, 2003.
[12] Richard H. Shultz Jr. and Andrea J. Dew, Insurgents, Terrorists and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006), p. 240.
[13] "U.S. Cross-Border Raid Highlights Syria's Role in Islamist Militancy," CTC Sentinel (West Point), Nov. 2008.
[14] The National ( Abu Dhabi ), Nov. 2, 2008.
[15] Clint Watts, "Countering Terrorism from the Second Foreign Fighter Glut," Small Wars Journal, May 28, 2009.
[16] Brian Fishman, ed., Bombers, Bank Accounts, and Bleedout: Al-Qai'da's Road in and out of Iraq (West Point: Harmony Project, Combating Terrorism Center, 2008), p. 85.
[17] "State Sponsors of Terrorism," Dec. 29, 1979.
[18] "Chapter 3: State Sponsors of Terrorism, County Reports on Terrorism 2008," Office of Coordinator for Counterterrorism, U.S. State Department, Apr. 30, 2008.
[19] "Treasury Designates Commercial Bank of Syria as Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering Concern," U.S. Treasury Department, May 11, 2004.
[20] "Testimony of Acting A/S Glaser on Financing the Iraqi Insurgency," U.S. Treasury Department, July 28, 2005.
[21] Syrian Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, sect. 2.31.
[22] Ibid., sect. 2.32.
[23] "Rami Makhluf Designated for Benefiting from Syrian Corruption," U.S. Treasury Department, Feb. 21, 2008.
[24] "Treasury Designates Director of Syrian Military Intelligence," U.S. Treasury Department, Jan. 18, 2006.
[25] "A/S Glaser on Financing the Iraqi Insurgency."
[26] David Schenker, "The Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003: Two Years On," testimony before the House Committee on International Relations, Washington, D.C., June 7, 2006.
[27] The New York Times, Aug. 15, 2007.
[28] "Rami Makhluf Designated."
[29] Andrew Tabler, "Global Economic Crisis Boosts Utility of U.S. Sanctions on Syria," Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Washington, D.C., Feb. 26, 2009.
[30] "Treasury Designates Commercial Bank of Syria."
[31] Jeremy M. Sharp, "Syria: Background and U.S. Relations," Congressional Research Service, Washington, D.C., Mar. 11, 2009, p. 16.
[32] Los Angeles Times, Apr. 28, 2003.
[33] Los Angeles Times, Apr. 28, 2003.
[34] Los Angeles Times, Apr. 28, 2003.
[35] "Treasury Designates Individual Financially Fueling Iraqi Insurgency, al-Qaeda," U.S. Treasury Department, Jan. 25, 2005.
[36] Associated Press, Dec. 6, 2007
[37] Secretary of State Colin Powell, remarks to the United Nations Security Council, New York, Feb. 5, 2003; "Treasury Designates Six Al-Qaida Terrorists," U.S. Treasury Department, Sept. 24, 2003.
[38] The Jordan Times (Amman), July 1, 2003.
[39] Powell, remarks to the United Nations Security Council, Feb. 5, 2003.
[40] Ibid.
[41] Jane's Intelligence Review, June 16, 2003.
[42] The New York Times, Oct. 28, 2003.
[43] Caleb Temple, Defense Intelligence Agency, quoted in GlobalSecurity.org, July 28, 2005.
[44] Fishman, Bombers, Bank Accounts, and Bleedout, p. 87.
[45] "Treasury Designates Individuals with Ties to Al Qaida, Former Regime," U.S. Treasury Department, Dec. 6, 2007.
[46] Ibid.
[47] "Letter from al-Zawahiri to al-Zarqawi," July 9, 2005, GlobalSecurity.org, accessed Oct. 7, 2009.
[48] "Section B: Counter Insurgency Operations, Part 2: The Conduct of Counter Insurgency Operations," Army Field Manual, Vol. V, Operations Other Than War, DGD&D 18/34/56 Army Code no. 71596, pts. 1, 2 (London: Prepared under the direction of the Chief of the General Staff, 1995), p. 3-1, as cited in Bruce Hoffman, Insurgency and Counterinsurgency in Iraq (Santa Monica: Rand Corporation, 2004), p. 7.