LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
August 02/12

Bible Quotation for today/The Parable of the Weeds
Matthew 13/24-30: "The Kingdom of heaven is like this. A man sowed good seed in his field. One night, when everyone was asleep, an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. When the plants grew and the heads of grain began to form, then the weeds showed up. The man's servants came to him and said, Sir, it was good seed you sowed in your field; where did the weeds come from It was some enemy who did this, he answered. Do you want us to go and pull up the weeds? they asked him. No, he answered, because as you gather the weeds you might pull up some of the wheat along with them. Let the wheat and the weeds both grow together until harvest. Then I will tell the harvest workers to pull up the weeds first, tie them in bundles and burn them, and then to gather in the wheat and put it in my barn.

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Can sanctions stop Iran's nuke program/Ynetnews/By: Ron Ben-Yishai/August 01/12
Vali in Washington/By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat/August 01/12
The Syrian revolution uncovers scandals/By Dr. Hamad Al-Majid/Asharq Alawsat/August 01/12
The Republicans are coming/By Emad El Din Adeeb/Asharq Alawsat/August 01/12

Maronite bishops slam government, warn Lebanon might collapse
August 01, 2012 /The Daily Star
DIMAN, Lebanon: The Council of Maronite Bishops launched a scathing attack on Prime Minister Najib Mikati's government Wednesday, warning that the deteriorating economic situation and lack of decision-making could lead to Lebanon's collapse. The “deep political divisions ... lack of a clear, unified vision ... putting personal and sectarian interests before national interests ... lack of respect for the rules of democracy ... the adoption of malicious policies ... and reciprocal crippling [acts] ... lead to paralysis,” the bishops said at the end of their monthly meeting in Diman, north Lebanon.
“In the presence of the enormous dangers of collapse and failure to reach a social-national agreement, the Bishops issue a big warning – the risk that this failure could coincide with major political changes taking place in the region and could, God forbid, lead to the spark that could lead Lebanon to collapse,” said the bishops.
The bishops cited the electricity crisis, the accumulation of public debt, the worsening corruption in government institutions and the adoption of incomplete economic policies as being the main reasons behind the economic disaster. A standoff between Energy Minister Gebran Bassil and Electricite Du Liban contract workers, who are backed by Speaker Nabih Berri, has escalated in recent days.
EDL warned Monday that the country could face a nationwide blackout if contract workers do not end their “takeover” of the state-run company’s headquarters in Beirut.
The three-month strike by EDL contract workers demanding full-time employment has resulted in blackouts in recent weeks in a number of areas across Lebanon.

Lebanon's Army key to defense strategy: Sleiman
August 01, 2012/ The Daily Star
BEIRUT: President Michel Sleiman said Wednesday Lebanon was in dire need of a defense strategy that relies on the Lebanese Army. “There is a dire need for a defense strategy that depends on the Lebanese Army in confronting the Israeli enemy's plots against Lebanon,” Sleiman said during a ceremony marking Army Day. As he spoke, Israeli warplanes flew low over several areas of south Lebanon, including Sidon, provincial capital of the south. When it came to the issue of weapons, Sleiman criticized the uncontrolled presence of arms. “No to weapons that are randomly spread and yes to a flexible and open political conflict and not doctrines that torpedo freedom and others' opinion,” he said. Sleiman said the Army cannot carry out its task outside a “national environment” and admitted the need to acquire sophisticated weaponry. “There is a dire need to support the Army and supply it with sophisticated weapons,” he said.Sleiman also stressed the need to distance Lebanon from regional conflicts.
“Yes to keeping Lebanon neutral regarding the axes' political policies and regional conflicts; and no to keeping Lebanon neutral regarding its surroundings, including the Palestinian cause,” he said as Lebanon celebrated the 67th anniversary of the Lebanese Armed Forces in Fayyadieh, northeast of Beirut.
Prime Minister Najib Mikati attended the event but did not deliver a speech.
In a statement released by his press office to mark the occasion, he said that his government is close to approving a $1.6 billion plan to boost the military's capabilities.
“The government, which works to secure the needs of the army, is close to approving a four-year, comprehensive plan at a cost estimated at $1.6,” he said.
Mikati also hailed the military’s “sacrifices in defending Lebanon’s integrity, strengthening its unity, maintaining security throughout the country, defusing strife and fighting terrorism.”
For such services, Mikati added, the Lebanese Army “deserves the admiration, affection and appreciation of the Lebanese.”
Meanwhile, Kataeb MP Sami Gemayel called for providing the Army with the political support necessary to enable its members to fulfill all their national duties, stressing that the military institution is the “backbone” of the Lebanese state. “Weapons, defense and security tasks should be limited to members of the Army,” Gemayel said in a statement issued Wednesday, in which he congratulated the military on its 67th anniversary. The lawmaker also hailed the Army for its efforts in the midst of "dangerous internal and regional conditions,” calling on the Lebanese people to rally around the institution “that guarantees and preserves national security.” Lebanese Army commander Gen. Jean Kahwaji was recently subjected to a verbal attack by Future MP Moeen Merhebi, who accused him of being a “failure,” but fellow Future MP Hadi Hobeish said Monday that Merhebi's remarks do not represent the views of the Future Movement.
Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri also congratulated the Army on the 67th anniversary of its founding, according to a press release issued by his office. In the brief statement, Hariri also expressed "his hope that the Army would remain the protective shield of Lebanon's sovereignty, independence and unity."

Khamenei Warns Iran’s Top Leaders: WAR IN WEEKS
DEBKAfile DEBKA Video August 1, 2012/On July 27, just before Friday prayers, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei summoned top Iranian military chiefs for what he called “their last war council.”
“We’ll be at war within weeks,” he told the gathering, debkafile’s exclusive Iranian and intelligence sources disclose.
Present were Defense Minister General Ahmad Vahidi, Khamenei’s military adviser General Yahya Rahim-Safavi, Armed Forces Chief Major General Seyed Hassan Firuzabadi, Revolutionary Guards Corps commander General Mohammad Ali Jafari and Al Qods Brigades chief General Qassem Soleimani. The commanders of the air force, the navy and ground forces were also there.
Each of the participants was tapped to report on the readiness of his branch or sector for shouldering its contingency mission.
While retaliation had been exhaustively drilled in regular military exercises in the past year, Khamenei ordered the biggest fortification project in Iran’s history to save its nuclear program from even the mightiest of America’s super-weapons. Rocks are being gathered from afar, piled on key nuclear installations, covered with many tons of poured concrete and finally plated with steel.
That same Friday, the US Air force unveiled its new Massive Ordnance Penetrators. Each bunker buster weighs 30,000 pounds and is able to penetrate 60 feet of reinforced concrete.
Turning to retaliation, the war council endorsed a battery of paybacks for potential US and/or Israeli pre-emptive strikes against its nuclear program. They would start by announcing enhanced uranium enrichment up to 60 percent - that is close to weapons grade.
Oft-tested ballistic missiles, Shehab-3, would be loosed against Israel, Saudi Arabia and American Middle East and Gulf military installations.
Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas and Jihad Islami in Gaza stand ready to pitch in against Israel with attacks from the north and the southwest.
Saudi oil export terminals would be blown up and mines sown in the Strait of Hormuz to impede the export of one-fifth of the world’s oil.
Khamenei put before his war council a timeline of weeks for the coming conflict – September or October.

Can sanctions stop Iran's nuke program?
Published: 08.01.12/Ynetnews/Ron Ben-Yishai
Analysis: For the time being, Khamenei appears unfazed by soaring inflation, currency depreciation, price hikes and record-low oil production rate
The sanctions are exacting a heavy price from Iran and its citizens. The harshest of these is the US and EU ban on Iranian oil imports, on insuring ships that carry Iranian crude and on financial transactions with Tehran, which resulted in a significant drop in the country's revenues from the black gold. At the same time, the price of food and housing is seeing a sharp increase. The local currency is collapsing, leading to a rise in the price of imported goods. In the thriving black market for these goods, the dollar is being traded at double its official value. The citizens' expectations for additional sanctions are further exacerbating the situation.
Iran's lower classes and the urban middle class, whose members can't make ends meet and see their savings being depleted on a daily basis, are suffering most from the economic turmoil. As reported by Ynet's Dudi Cohen, citizens in northeast Iran recently protested against the sharp rise in poultry prices. In another incident, a woman was killed while waiting in line for chicken at a government distribution center. But this does not seem to faze Ali Khamenei. According to reliable information obtained by Israeli and western diplomats, Iran's supreme leader has ordered authorities to move forward with the uranium enrichment program. Khamenei believes that for the time being the sanctions are not causing significant financial distress among Iran's citizens and therefore do not endanger the regime. However, data obtained by the Foreign Ministry indicate that Iran's economy has been hit hard by the sanctions:Currency depreciation: Since the beginning of 2011, the rial has lost 60-70% of its value against the dollar. The expectation that Iran's currency will continue to depreciate as a result of the sanctions is causing major price hikes – though there does not appear to be a shortage of key commodities.
Soaring inflation: According to official data, Iran's inflation rate has fluctuated between 23% to 25% this year. Western economists who are familiar with the situation in Iran estimate that the real inflation rate has exceeded 40% and continues to rise. The prices of basic goods, such as milk and poultry, have increased by over 100%. A kilogram of beef, for example, costs $23 dollars.
Oil production at all-time low: Over the past six months Iran's crude oil production rate has dropped from 3.5 million barrels a day to 2.7 million. The UN has determined that in April alone Iran's oil production rate fell 20-40%. Experts estimate that this downward trend is continuing and that Iran will eventually produce 2 million barrels a day. Apart from stifling the Iranian economy, the sanctions are also affecting the citizens' frame of mind. For example, the Tehran Stock Exchange reacted positively to the launch of nuclear negotiations with the West in Istanbul last June, but when the negotiations collapsed, the market fell. A recent poll found that 60% of Iranians support halting the uranium enrichment program in exchange for a gradual removal of international sanctions.
Iran's economy has also suffered from a flawed subsidy policy, bad management and corruption. Iranians, including Khamanei and members of the conservative parliament, are holding President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accountable for the country's economic woes. Ahmadinejad, for his part, was able to cover up some of the economic failures through subsidies that were financed by Iran's oil export revenues.
Today the government is trying to contain the sanctions' psychological and economic effects by granting subsidies for the middle class, offering direct welfare stipends to the poor and physically repressing any attempts to protest against the regime's policy. The question is what will happen when Iran's foreign exchange reserves, which finance the subsidies and imports, shrink even more. Moreover, country's that continue to purchase Iranian oil are doing so at a discount and are paying with their local currency. India, for example, pays in rupees instead of dollars, so Iran can use this money to purchase goods mostly in India itself. The ban on insuring tankers carrying Iranian oil has led to the closure of a shipping company jointly owned by India and Iran. Iran has similar trade relations with South Korea and even China.
Iran has resorted to creative measures in an effort to bypass the sanctions. The regime in Tehran and the Revolutionary Guards are smuggling crude oil to the West with the help of Turkey and other countries.
Crude oil that is smuggled from Iran through the Kurdish region in Iraq is sold to Europe as Turkish or Iraqi oil. The Obama administration is working to put an end to this phenomenon, or at least reduce it – in part due to pressure from Israel.
The Gulf States, headed by Saudi Arabia, have contributed greatly to the success of the sanctions policy by increasing their oil production to fill the void left by the shrinking Iranian oil industry – thus preventing a rise in global oil prices.
'Sanctions not working fast enough'
Iran has also suffered from the continued drop in global oil prices, which is attributed to the recession that has hit the US, Europe and China. According to the CIA's calculations, Iran has to charge a minimum of $80 a barrel in order to pay for its imports and amass considerable foreign exchange reserves.
Iran has also a hard time storing the oil it has not been able to sell. The New York Times reported recently that Iran has been forced to store some 40 million barrels of oil that "that no one is willing to buy" because of the crippling embargo on a fleet of about 65 tankers "floating aimlessly" in the Persian Gulf.
The newspaper quoted international oil experts as saying that Iranian exports have already been reduced by at least 25% since the beginning of the year, costing Iran roughly $10 billion so far in forgone revenues. Experts estimate that in addition to the millions of oil barrels stored on the "floating storage facilities," another 10 million oil barrels are being stored on land. This predicament has forced the regime in Tehran to reduce the production rate at its oil fields– a move that will cause long term damage to the ability of these fields to produce oil.
The Americans are using these statistics to try and convince Israel to give the sanctions a chance and put the military option on the back burner. Senior Israeli officials, for their part, claim that at least a year will pass before the sanctions begin to significantly decrease Iran's foreign exchange reserves and endanger its oil industry. By then, they warn, Iran will be capable of producing enough uranium to build 5-10 nuclear warheads. This means that Iran will become a nation "on the brink" of nuclear capabilities - and in this situation an Israeli or American strike on its nuclear facilities would be futile.

State Dept. terrorism report praises Israel, counts Jewish settler attacks as terror
By Ron Kampeas · August 1, 2012
WASHINGTON (JTA) -- The U.S. State Department's annual report on terrorism said Hamas and Hezbollah continued to destabilize the Middle East and listed attacks by extremist Jewish settlers on Palestinians as "terrorist incidents."
An executive summary of the report for 2011, which was released Tuesday, highlights what the authors believe to be the report's most salient points. It is devoted to al-Qaida and opens with the assassination last year by U.S. forces of the group's founder, Osama bin Laden.
Turning to the Middle East, the summary said Hezbollah's "robust relationships with the regimes in Iran and Syria, involvement in illicit financial activity, continued engagement in international attack planning, and acquisition of increasingly sophisticated missiles and rockets continued to threaten U.S. interests in the region."
The report also said, "Meanwhile, Hamas retained its grip on Gaza, where it continued to stockpile weapons that pose a serious threat to regional stability. Moreover, Hamas and other Gaza-based groups continue to smuggle weapons, material, and people through the Sinai, taking advantage of the vast and largely ungoverned territory."
The country report on Israel was unusually robust in its praise, for the first time describing Israel as a "resolute counterterrorism partner" and noting, for instance, Israel's cooperation with the international community in tracking financing for terrorists.
The country report also unequivocally listed settler attacks on Palestinians as "terrorist incidents," scrubbing distinctions in previous reports between "settler violence" and terrorism. It listed several arson attacks on mosques that are believed to have been made by settlers.
Kahane Chai, an extremist settler group, again is listed as a designated terrorist group, as are five Palestinian groups including Hamas, Islamic Jihad and two affiliates of the Palestine Liberation Organization.
The report listed four state sponsors of terrorism: Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria.
"Iran was known to use the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) and terrorist insurgent groups to implement its foreign policy goals, provide cover for intelligence operations, and support terrorist and militant groups," it said.
The report also noted that Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups continued to headquarter in Damascus, adding that Hamas left toward the end of 2011 because of the surging unrest in Syria.
In listing American victims of terrorism last year, the report noted that one American was killed in Jerusalem on Sept. 23 and one was injured in Tel Aviv on Aug. 19.

'Iran's support for terrorism highest in decade'
By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER 08/01/2012 /J.Post/21:15
WASHINGTON – Iran’s support for terrorism and the activities of its proxy Hezbollah it at its highest level in more than a decade, according to a top US official.
“We are increasingly concerned about Iran’s support for terrorism and Hezbollah’s activities as they’ve both stepped up their level of terrorist plotting over the past year,” said Daniel Benjamin, the State Department’s coordinator for counterterrorism, in releasing the 2011 US report on global terror Tuesday. “[They] are engaging in their most active and aggressive campaigns since the 1990s.”
Related: •Panetta prepared to use 'other options' to stop Iran•PM: Sanctions have had no effect on Iran's nuclear programBriefing reporters on the report, Benjamin did not point to any specific case beyond Iran’s attempted assassination of the Saudi ambassador to the United States, but other plots against Israeli diplomats and civilians in countries as diverse as India, Thailand and Georgia are also believed to have Iranian fingerprints.
When asked directly whether Iran was involved in the bus bombing that killed six Israeli tourists and their driver in Bulgaria last month, Benjamin declined to provide an answer.
Benjamin characterized Iran as “the preeminent state sponsor of terrorism in the world,” and said the US was “deeply concerned” about Iran undertaking violent activities directly through its Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps Quds Force.
He added that when it came to dealing with Iran and Hezbollah, “We are firmly committed to working with partners and allies to counter and disrupt Iranian activities.”
He also assessed that the international community “is increasingly alert to this threat and will resist it.”
The report, which chronicles attacks and trends in countries around the world, also found a decline in terrorism globally as well as al-Qaida efforts specifically. It lists four major leaders of the organization who were killed last year in addition to Osama bin Laden.
“The loss of bin Ladin and these other key operatives puts the network on a path of decline that will be difficult to reverse,” the report states. “These successes are attributable, in large part, to global counterterrorism cooperation, which has put considerable pressure on the al-Qaida core leadership in Pakistan.”
Benjamin cautioned, however, that despite the blows to al-Qaida’s core components, affiliates continue to proliferate and improve their capabilities.
“For all the counterterrorism successes that we’ve seen against al-Qaida and its affiliates, the group and violent extremist ideology and rhetoric continue to spread in some parts of the world,” he noted.

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's Speech of August 01/12
August 1, 2012 / Now Lebanon
First, I would like to greet you during this holy month [of Ramadan]. I should also thank my brothers and sisters at the Resistance Support Association [sponsoring the Iftar his speech was broadcast for]. I would also like to congratulate the Lebanese army on the occasion of the 67th anniversary [of its founding]. We hope that Lebanese citizens would show all the support for this institution to enable it to fulfill its national role.
The credit for the victory over the Israeli army in 2000 goes to the Resistance, and not to UN Security Council Resolution 425 or the international community. The Resistance did not ask to take part in political authority, but it has asked the state to be in charge of the border area after the Israeli withdrawal [in 2000].
After the 2000, the topic of disarming Hezbollah has come to the fore. Some political parties in Lebanon have adopted this aim. We therefore faced a new struggle. It was not a military struggle, but a political one [against] an Israeli and American demand [for disarmament].
In 2004—before UN Security Council Resolution 1559 was issued—Syrian authorities were conducting negotiations regarding their presence in Lebanon. An Arab leader made an offer to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that if he wanted his troops to stay in Lebanon, and even deploy to South Lebanon, he would have to request the disarmament of Hezbollah and the Palestinian factions.
Assad, at the time, rejected the offer. Assad considers the Resistance as part and parcel of Arab national security, and for that reason he rejected the offer. Following Assad’s decision, the UN Security Council resolution [calling for Syria’s withdrawal from Lebanon] was issued.
Prior to former PM Rafik Hariri’s death, I met him several times and we discussed the issue of Hezbollah’s arms. We were in the course of building a political alliance with him. Following his death great political divisions occurred in the country. Until that time we had accepted to discuss the issue of Hezbollah’s weapons.
The 2006 agreement with the Free Patriotic Movement allowed for these discussions to take place again. We also took part in national dialogue in the hope that we were going to follow up the agreement with the FPM and reach a national agreement over the issue of the national defense strategy and the issue of Hezbollah’s arms.
During the national dialogue session I presented my argument regarding the national defense strategy and the struggle against the Israeli enemy. I also presented my views regarding Lebanon’s strong and weak points. I considered that a national defense strategy needed a strong army and a strong resistance. Former PM Salim al-Hoss said at the time that if the Lebanese army ruled over the Resistance, that would mean the end of the army since it will be annihilated by an Israeli attack. Therefore there is a need for cooperation between the army and the Resistance.
Hezbollah [was the] first [party] to present a national defense strategy proposal during national dialogue. We were very clear when we presented our proposal regarding the national defense strategy. It is therefore mean and cynical to say that we do not want to discuss this topic. The strategy we proposed was put into practice during the 2006 war against Israel, which was preceded by a national dialogue session.
After the [2008] Doha Agreement and the election of a new president we were invited to attend another national dialogue session. After several sessions, and until this moment, no one has discussed Hezbollah’s defense strategy proposal. This paper has been proposed since 2006 and no one has discussed or will discuss it either during national dialogue or outside dialogue. The only thing that is requested, and has been requested since the year 2000 is the disarmament of Hezbollah.
The other party took one decision, and it is [to call for] the disarmament of Hezbollah and nothing else. Their aim has never been [to determine] how to protect Lebanon. Some proposals were presented by the March 14 forces and they stipulate that their national defense strategy is limited to disarming Hezbollah.
We are not seeking the boycott of national dialogue, and we do not wish to undermine it. We however reject the other side using the issue of their participation as a blackmail ploy. What is happening at the moment is strictly a blackmailing campaign. If the other party’s dialogue aims was to seek a way to protect the country then their demands would be sacred, but that is not the case. Instead, your aims are to bring down the government.
If national dialogue convenes again we will not boycott it. Would the state authorities accept for Iran to provide the Lebanese army with weapons as it has already done with Hezbollah? Our political system fears the Americans.
If we handed over the weapons of the Resistance to the army where would it deploy them. The army is an organized army and would not be able to preserve these weapons in the case of an Israeli attack. Therefore, those who ask for handing over Hezbollah’s weapons to the army want the Resistance and the army to be destroyed.
We are ready to ask Iran to provide the army with weapons. We will therefore have a strong army and a strong resistance.
What is protecting Lebanon nowadays is the balance of terror with Israel. Israel now [knows] that if it attacked Lebanese [infrastructure], there will be a [like] response to its assault. Israel will be reassured once the weapons of Hezbollah are put under the control of the Lebanese state, since the decision-making mechanism of the state is ineffective and that means that the balance of terror will be undermined if the state takes charge of the Resistance arms. We need a Liberation strategy as much as a defense strategy. Kfar Shouba and the Shebaa Farms are still occupied and no one is mentioning these occupied regions anymore. We call for a liberation strategy and for discussing it at the dialogue table.If the state does not want a liberation strategy it means that the citizens could choose to be in charge of liberation themselves, since the state would not be bearing its responsibilities. Discussing a liberation strategy justifies the Resistance, while a defense strategy aims at eliminating the Resistance.
We would be eager to reach a compromise when the dialogue factions show that they are concerned with protecting Lebanon and the dignity of the Lebanese people.

Apple removes Hezbollah TV app
(Reuters) / 1 August 2012/LOS ANGELES - Apple has booted an application used by Hezbollah to stream its Al Manar Lebanon-based satellite network from the iTunes store.
A spokesman for the Anti-Defamation League told TheWrap that media monitors at his organisation sent a letter to Apple last Friday after it found the app advertised on Al-Manar’s website. Apple removed the app on Sunday

Why U.S. would get sucked into war if Israel strikes Iran
CNN/By Malou Innocent and Ehud Eilam, Global Post
Editor’s note: The following text is from Global Post, which provides views – important, moving or just odd – from around the world. The views expressed are solely those of the authors.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed that Hezbollah – the Lebanon-based, Iranian-backed, politico-military terrorist organization – was responsible for the suicide bombing in Bulgaria that killed five Israeli tourists. Amid ongoing U.S. and Israeli threats to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, the bombing raises a critical concern about any potential conflict: a very capable Hezbollah, together with Iran, would likely strike back hard – and not only in the Middle East – drawing the United States into another prolonged and bloody conflict in the Muslim world that it doesn’t need. Such a scenario should make those advocating war with Iran take pause.
War-weary Lebanese don’t want their country turning into another battleground against Israel. Hezbollah would also risk alienating its predominately Shiite political constituency. But the ideological and financial ties between top leaders in Tehran and Hezbollah could trump such considerations, especially in the event of an Israeli or Israeli-U.S. attack on fellow Muslims in Iran.
Iranian leaders – in danger of losing a vital ally in Syria – may not risk another surrogate’s fall in a confrontation with Israel. But that’s far from a sure thing. Current and former U.S. officials recently told the Washington Post that should Israel strike Iran, Hezbollah’s global network would launch more terrorist attacks. A multi-front conflict could ensue that would rope in America. If Israel starts a war with Iran it is unable to finish, Israel could leave the heavy lifting to the United States while it defends its own borders against Hezbollah.
As President Barack Obama proclaimed earlier this year, “We’ve got Israel’s back.” On the one hand, America’s historic – and expanding – cooperation with the Jewish state signifies an enduring commitment to Israel’s security. On the other hand, the unpredictable nature of any potential conflict speaks to the importance of U.S. diplomacy with Hezbollah’s patron, Iran.
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards is accused of training Hezbollah since it emerged in the early 1980s. The group eventually came into its own, launching sophisticated guerilla attacks against Israeli military units. Today, the U.S. Department of Defense estimates that Hezbollah receives $100 to $200 million annually from Tehran, as well as training, weapons, and other assistance.
More from Global Post: Police unable to identify Bulgaria bus bomb suspect
Based on the historical record, it’s unlikely that Hezbollah would remain on the sidelines. In 1996’s Operation Grapes of Wrath, the group contested Israel’s massive air and ground firepower with hundreds of rocket attacks into Israel proper. In the summer of 2006, following Hezbollah’s abduction of two Israeli soldiers, Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) launched air and ground attacks over Lebanon, and Hezbollah used real-time signals intelligence to ambush Israeli commandos, and fired more than 4,000 rockets into northern Israel, one of the most serious assaults on the Jewish state. Neither Israel nor Hezbollah scored a decisive victory. A stalemate between the Levant’s American and Iranian clients could play out again.
As Hezbollah has evolved from guerilla incursions to conventional campaigns, the group has exposed Israel’s conventional weaknesses, but also provided Israel an opportunity to correct its mistakes. Hezbollah could face massive Israeli ground and air assaults. Nevertheless, leaders in Washington and Tel Aviv also have a troubling history of underestimating their adversaries.
Indeed, rigorous accounting of Hezbollah’s current military tactics and capabilities is lacking. Last year, Hezbollah successfully unraveled the CIA’s spy network in Lebanon, identifying and capturing American spies who had infiltrated Hezbollah’s ranks. Little is known about the group since the 2006 war. U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, has suggested Syria colludes with Iran to arm Hezbollah with more potent weapons. The IDF’s assessment is that Hezbollah possesses long-range, surface-to-air missiles and Russian-made air-defense systems. Additionally, it’s estimated that the group has a firebase of over 10,000 fighters and between 60,000 to 80,000 missiles and rockets.
Hezbollah would certainly face torrential Israeli ground and air offensives. But the possibility that any conflict could result in a pyrrhic deadlock is worrying, not only for Israel, but also for America.
Over the past year, American leaders have ratcheted up tensions with Tehran while doing little to reassure Israelis reluctant to rely on America. Beating the drums of war could spell doom as a form of psychological pressure. If Israel attacks Iran and Hezbollah missiles rain down on Israeli streets, America may be pulled into conflict with a capable and resilient guerilla foe that it knows very little about.
Malou Innocent is a foreign policy analyst at the Cato Institute. Ehud Eilam formerly served in the Israeli Ministry of Defense, and specializes in the Middle East and Israeli military doctrine.

Christians Face Ongoing Battle to Legalize Churches in Algeria
By Aidan Clay
08/1/2012 Washington, D.C. (International Christian Concern) — Christians approaching a Protestant worship service near Freha, Algeria last week were told to return home by an armed mob of disgruntled neighbors. The mob had assembled outside the service and demanded the church’s immediate closure. The congregation, which meets in an unregistered house-church, is the latest group of Christians to be threatened and harassed because of their inability to quickly obtain legal status.
On July 20, a group armed with guns and knives prevented Christians affiliated with the Protestant Church of Algeria (EPA) from entering a house where services were being held in the village of El Majene, near Freha in northern Algeria. The mob accused the church’s 80 members of meeting “illegally” and launched a petition demanding the church’s immediate closure, the Algerian daily La Dépêche de Kabylie reported.
Despite permission given by the Ministry of Interior in July 2011 stating that all EPA churches are allowed to officially register their congregations, many EPA churches, including the church in El Majene, have not yet been approved. Until the registration is processed, Protestant churches are considered illegal and often face harassment by neighbors and local authorities.
“It’s possible that more churches will be closed because the registration process takes so long,” an EPA spokesman told International Christian Concern (ICC). “Without legal status, neighbors will continue to pressure the church and force Christians to leave. But, if churches have government authorization, then there will not be as many problems.”
Similar demands to close Christian worship services have threatened EPA churches before. “The same thing occurred in Tizi Ouzou when several churches were ordered to close under threats that legal action would be taken against the leaders,” said a Protestant church leader in Tizi Ouzou. “Our church also received this order in 2008, but because we resisted, the church continues to this day.”
Meanwhile, a controversial law introduced in 2006 that regulates non-Muslim worship continues to hinder the freedoms of religious minorities. Ordinance 06-03 prohibits Christians from holding services without government authorization and outlaws religious practices that conflict with the government's interpretation of Islamic law.
Algerian Christians are waiting to see whether or not the government is sincere about reforming policies that have previously violated the rights of religious minorities. While government approval to register EPA churches is a positive step forward, real change may not occur until Ordinance 06-03 is overturned.
“We are continuing efforts to repeal, or at least revise, the 2006 law,” Mustapha Krim, the President of the EPA, told ICC. “We expect the new legislation granted to the EPA to be favorable to our cause.”
According to Krim, twenty-seven EPA churches and about a dozen independent churches are allowed to apply for registration, but many have not yet been approved. The registration process for each Protestant church often takes years. Once approved, the process may see further delays as congregations are required to renew their legal status with the Ministry of Interior after four years.
Governmental pressure on churches has forced Algeria’s Christians into a corner. Churches must either adhere to the law by closing their doors until they are officially registered and deemed legal by the government, or disobey the law by continuing to worship without authorization. Most Christians have opted for the latter, believing they have no other alternative but to exercise their right to worship freely in accordance to their convictions.
“Pastors and church officials… opted for resistance by continuing to worship instead of obeying the order to close their doors,” said an EPA church member in Béjaia following an order by the governor and police commissioner to close seven Protestant churches in the province in May 2011. “They continued to meet and celebrate their religion despite the threats. If the authorities decide to close places of worship, Christians will gather in homes or cell group meetings in the open air, which is already being done in some communities. But, we believe the situation will improve.”
Although laws that discriminate against religious minorities are found in Algeria’s legal codes, the country is also a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states in Article 18 that, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion… [and] in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”

The Syrian revolution uncovers scandals
By Dr. Hamad Al-Majid/Asharq Alawsat
If the Syrian revolution triumphs, regional balances of power will fluctuate and certain alliances will be disrupted. However, the fact is that some concepts have already been shaken and exposed, most notably the concept of sectarianism. Before the outbreak of the Syrian revolution, there were those who warned against Iran preaching its Shia doctrine to promote its political expansion, or talked about a sectarian consensus between the Iranian regime and the Syrian regime - or at least a consensus that displayed elements of sectarian contamination. These early warnings, alluding to the seriousness of the Iranian strategy, were limited to the traditional and politicized Salafi currents. As for the Muslim Brotherhood and affiliated Islamists, their approach was to avoid confronting or challenging the Iranian strategy, let alone seeking to expose and undress it. It is true that they complained of a sectarian psychology within the Iranian strategy, but they refrained from any form of a clash because there were shared interests between some Brotherhood branches in Arab countries and Iran, a state which knows how to exploit the Sunni world.
Since the outbreak of the Khomeini revolution, the Iranian propaganda machine, and with it the propaganda of its allies in the region, succeeded in deceiving the Arab and Islamic people; once under the banner of Islamic unity, once in the name of fighting Israel, and once through the blackmail of material support. We saw this prominently with Hamas, but once the Syrian revolution broke out its flames burned the Islamic movement’s false parachute that had been provided by the Iranian revolution.
Even if Hamas’s leaders have remained silent about Iran’s sectarian involvement in Syria, Brotherhood factions in the rest of the Arab world have begun to talk explicitly about the Iranian plans that have been exposed by the Syrian revolution. Sheikh al-Qaradawi warned of the spread of Shiism in Egypt, and Sheikh Ghannouchi adopted a stance objecting to Shiite proselytizing in Tunisia and lent his support to al-Qaradawi’s statements. There was a clear shift in the discourse of Islamist movements who became critical of Iran, its support for Bashar al-Assad’s regime, and its clear sectarian motives. The height of this shift was the resounding statement issued by Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi, who said that Saudi Arabia was “the sponsor of the moderate Sunni Islamic project and Egypt is the protector of this project”. We do not need to consider this further to conclude that this statement is addressed primarily to Iran, which has not spared a single Sunni country from its proselytizing activities, disrupting the doctrinal unity of these countries and destroying their harmony.
The al-Azhar institution is a proud advocate of tolerance, and teaches that the [Shiite] Jaʿfari school of thought is equal with Sunni schools of thought. However, it changed the tone of its discourse after recognizing the seriousness of the Iranian octopus exporting its tainted religious ideology. Al-Azhar then supported a remarkable step to include a new article in the Egyptian constitution that prohibits and criminalizes the act of insulting the companions of the prophet or his wives. This indicates that Iran has gone too far in meddling with the Sunni world, its institutions, scholars and movements. The magic has turned against the magician, who now sees a growing awareness of its plans to spread its ideology.
Returning to the strategic shift in the stances of political Islamic movements towards Iran, and the Syrian revolution’s exposure of Iranian plans, we must take note of this with care, especially as these movements reached the top of the political pyramid in Egypt and Tunisia. If we used to warn of the danger of these political Islamic movements converging with Iran when they were in the opposition, then Arab states – particularly Saudi Arabia – must pay even more attention to this danger now that they are in power.
The blood of the Syrian martyrs is dear and precious to the hearts of the Arabs, and the damages caused by Bashar al-Assad’s fascist regime, along with the huge sacrifices being made, are catastrophic. However, on the other hand, the Syrian revolution has revealed Iran’s outrageous sectarian plans; a country that once claimed to be a supporter of the oppressed. Hence the Syrian revolution is like the Surat al-Tauba, which revealed the scandalous tricks and hypocritical methods used in the prophet’s era.

Vali in Washington
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
There appears to be a heated debate in the corridors of America’s political capital about the formation of a specific stance towards the situation in Syria, between those who see the need to intervene because the current timing is favorable, and as a matter of preparing for the post-Assad phase, and between those who believe that matters should not be pushed in order to change the existing equation in Syria, i.e. in order to remove minority Alawite rule!
It may seem to the reader that this article is both frank and provocative in terms of its use of certain terms such as “minority”, “Alawite”, “Shiite” and so on. But these descriptions are borne out of necessity, and we must call things by their proper names, because there are those who are doing this very clearly in the American media today, as part of the debate there surrounding the situation in Syria. This is what we have seen recently in a number of articles in major American newspapers, some of which seem to be the result of a “press briefing” given to senior American journalists from the US administration. The consensus between the majority of writers, in spite of their differing ideologies, has become clear, and likewise the style of media coverage is heading in one direction, particularly trying to emphasize the presence of al-Qaeda in Syria, although previous official US statements played down these claims!
The latest of these sectarian, journalistic narratives can be found in the recent article by Vali Nasr, author of the thesis “The Shia Revival”. Nasr is an American of Iranian origin, Dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and advisor to President Obama’s special envoy in Pakistan and Afghanistan. He was one of the most prominent instigators of the US invasion in Iraq, and is a staunch advocate of America’s alliance with the region’s Shiites. Nasr recently wrote an article in the New York Times entitled “Syria After the Fall”, where he adopts the persona of an Iranian living in Washington and offers not so much a political and analytical insight as a sectarian assessment.
To summarize Nasr’s piece, he called for power sharing in Syria with the consensus of Russia and Iran, because there are “more than a million Shiite Muslims in Syria”. This is a simplistic sectarian assessment, and not political analysis. Some might argue that Nasr’s proposal would be similar to the Taif Agreement, but this is also naivety, for the Taif Agreement had its reasons in Lebanon, but the Syrian composition is not the same, nor does it need sectarian quotas!
The Alawites are not Shiites, but Khomeini adopted them as such in support of Hafez al-Assad, and in order to enhance his capabilities in the region. To say that there are one million Shiites in Syria lacks accuracy, for there are no reliable statistics to support that. This is the problem we are seeing now in certain areas of the US media, particularly among sectarian researchers in their dealings with the proportion of Shiites in our region, where there is no checking or documentation on their part. However, if we assume that the “one million” figure is correct in Syria, how can it be that a researcher such as Nasr previously defended the Shiite majority in Iraq - of course they were not the majority - and their right to rule, and then returns to warn against the Sunni majority ruling in Syria, fearing for the Alawite minority, which he calls Shiite? This is simplistic sectarian analysis!
The intention here is not to respond to the claims made in Vali Nasr’s article, for that would take too long, but the objective is to alert some of our Arabs to what is being plotted in Washington by so-called researchers who enjoy prestigious status, and are close to the decision making circles of President Obama…Will anyone take notice?

The Republicans are coming
By Emad El Din Adeeb/Asharq Alawsat
The US Republican candidate Mitt Romney's visit to Israel deserves to be contemplated and its details analyzed.
The visit comes at a time when the Arab region and the Middle East are completely preoccupied with the issue of Syria and its development, as well as with the consequences of the Arab Spring earthquake that turned the region upside-down.
Romney is making the visit in order to present his credentials to Israel as a peerless friend, as well as a supporter of the concept of the Jewish state with Jerusalem as its capital, and as a supporter of the unlimited growth of Israeli military power and activity in the region.
Romney is visiting Israel as an old personal friend of “Bibi” Netanyahu – the two met nearly 20 years ago - and as a timeless supporter of the pro-Israel AIPAC lobby group, deemed highly influential in the US presidential election battle.
At the same time Barack Obama, having sensed such movements, has issued a decision preempting Romney’s travel to Tel Aviv. He has ordered to pay the Jewish state US$ 60 million in aid, and displayed his full understanding for the state of emergency recently announced by the Israeli army, in light of the situation in the region.
The Americans sense that the situation in the region is highly volatile, yet any meaningful decisions in this regard are being postponed until the presidential election is decided next November. As a result, the Syrian massacres will have to continue until November, and similarly Israel's plans to strike Iranian nuclear facilities must be put on hold until then. Furthermore, the regimes of the Arab Spring states must maintain their current internal balances until the master of the White House is decided.
At the same time, Mitt Romney's team is putting forth a set of extremely radical ideas and plans that could only be rivaled by the policies of George W. Bush administration. Romney supports Israeli plans against Iranian military powers, backs the idea of US military intervention in Syria, and is reconsidering the US stance towards the regimes of some Arab Spring states.
With Mitt Romney and his team, we are face to face with the hardline American right wing, strongly allied with the powerful finance and military-industrial community in the US.
Historically speaking, such powers have proven that whenever they rise to power, they transform all theatres of world events into inextinguishable blazing fires.
Suffice to say, the George W. Bush project in Iraq cost the US treasury nearly US$ 2 trillion, not to mention the thousands of Americans who were killed and injured. Iraq was ultimately handed over to a sectarian Shiite leadership, and Iraqi national security has strongly fallen under Iranian influence.
Romney's success will be a disaster, but likewise Obama's stay in power will be another disaster altogether!