LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
January 21/2012


Bible Quotation for today/The Parable of the Good Samaritan

Luke 10/25-37: "A teacher of the Law came up and tried to trap Jesus. Teacher, he asked, what must I do to receive eternal life? Jesus answered him, What do the Scriptures say? How do you interpret them? The man answered, Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind; and Love your neighbor as you love yourself. You are right, Jesus replied; do this and you will live.  But the teacher of the Law wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, Who is my neighbor? Jesus answered, There was once a man who was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho when robbers attacked him, stripped him, and beat him up, leaving him half dead. It so happened that a priest was going down that road; but when he saw the man, he walked on by on the other side. In the same way a Levite also came there, went over and looked at the man, and then walked on by on the other side. But a Samaritan who was traveling that way came upon the man, and when he saw him, his heart was filled with pity. He went over to him, poured oil and wine on his wounds and bandaged them; then he put the man on his own animal and took him to an inn, where he took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. Take care of him, he told the innkeeper, and when I come back this way, I will pay you whatever else you spend on him. nd when I come back this way, I will pay you whatever else you spend on him. And Jesus concluded, In your opinion, which one of these three acted like a neighbor toward the man attacked by the robbers? The teacher of the Law answered, The one who was kind to him. Jesus replied, You go, then, and do the same.


Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Great expectations/By: Michael Young/January 20/12 
The cost of the fall of al-Assad/By Tariq Alhomayed/
January 20/12 
The imam sends a satrap/By Amir Taheri/January 20/12 
Are the Arabs prepared for the new weapons of war?/By Osman Mirghani/January 20/12 
Threats against Iran are harmful/By Yoel Marcus /January 20/12 
The weak/Hazem al-Amin/January 20/12 

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for January 20/12 
Netanyahu: Iran has decided to become a nuclear state. Action needed before it is too late.
Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey in Israel, calls for bolstered communication
Top U.S. General: We have many joint interests with Israel in Middle East
UN watchdog urges full Iran cooperation in nuclear probe
Iran says information gathered by UN may have played part in scientist killing
France's Sarkozy: Military strike on Iran would trigger Middle East war
Report: Iran police close down toy shops selling Barbie dolls
Syrian opposition leader,Kamal al-Labwani seeks to counter Islamists
Arab League considers extending Syria mission
Meshal failed to pass on Arab League's message to al-Assad - Sources
France threatens to pull out of Afghanistan after troops killed
HRW urges Arabs to seek UN sanctions against Syria
Violence keeps Syria on edge, Arab mission in doubt
Out of jail, lifelong dissident joins Syria revolt
Abducted Syrian activist at risk of torture: Amnesty
Syrian town in opposition hands
Thailand officially recognizes Palestinian statehood
Iranian general says Iraq, South Lebanon “submit” to Tehran
March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid demands Hezbollah clarify Iranian general’s statements
Special Tribunal for Lebanon Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen is Setting Stage to Issue Indictments in 3 Cases Linked to Hariri’s Murder
Report: Thailand Issues Arrest Warrant against 2nd Lebanese, Sammy Paolo a Hizbullah Suspect
Report: Thailand terror suspect blames Israel's Mossad for arrest
Lebanese fingerprint records feared in Israel: report
Geagea says game over for Hezbollah, Assad out by year's end
Lebanon's Arabic press digest - Jan. 20, 2012
Jumblatt: Syria concerns me not Assad government
Labor Minister Charbel Nahhas Signs Wage Hike Decree, Refrains from Approving Transportation Allowance
Owners of Collapsed Beirut Building Charged, to be Questioned Monday
U.S. Source Hails Lebanon’s Neutrality on Syria Says Washington Playing Role in Stability

Netanyahu: Iran has decided to become a nuclear state. Action needed before it is too late.
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report/January 19, 2012/ Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared Thursday night, Jan. 19 that Iran had decided to become a nuclear state. He urged action before it was too late to stop Iran completing the construction of a nuclear weapon. His statement at the end of a visit to Holland gave Gen Martin Dempsey, on his first visit to Israel as Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, the message he will be asked to take back to President Barack Obama. It also contradicted Defense Minister Ehud Barak's statement that Tehran had not yet decided to go nuclear.
On Dec. 22, 2011, debkafile first revealed Tehran had reached a decision to go ahead and build a nuclear weapon.
Netanyahu has kept the Iranian cards close to his chest. His statement therefore caught wrong-footed the Israeli officials, including Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who in the last 48 hours had asserted that Iran had not yet decided whether to build a nuclear bomb and there was still time for US-led sanctions to work.
debkafile reported earlier Thursday:
Gen. Martin Dempsey begins his first visit to Israel as Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff amid a major falling-out between the two governments over the handling of Iran's nuclear weapon potential. debkafile's military and Washington sources confirm that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stands by the view that Iran is advancing its plans to build a nuclear bomb full speed ahead, undeterred even by the threat of harsher sanctions. Netanyahu therefore stands by his refusal of President Barack Obama's demand for a commitment to abstain from a unilateral strike on Iran's nuclear sites without prior notice to Washington.
The US president repeated this demand when he called the Israeli prime minister Thursday night Jan. 13. Netanyahu replied that, in view of their disagreement on this point, he preferred to cancel the biggest US-Israel war game ever staged due to have taken place in April. The exercise was to have tested the level of coordination between the two armies in missile defense for the contingency of a war with Iran or a regional conflict.
The prime minister was concerned that having large-scale US military forces in the country would restrict his leeway for decision-making on Iran.
In an effort to limit the damage to relations with the US administration, Defense Minister Ehud Barak struck a conciliatory note Wednesday, Jan. 18, saying, "Israel is still very far from a decision on attacking Iran's nuclear facilities."
Striking the pose of middleman, he was trying to let Washington know that there was still time for the US and Israel to reach an accommodation on whether and when a strike should take place.
debkafile's sources doubt that President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu are in any mood to respond to Barak's effort to cool the dispute. Obama needs to be sure he will not be taken by surprise by an Israel attack in the middle of his campaign for re-election, especially since he has begun taking heat on the Iranian issue.
Republican rivals are accusing him of being soft on Iran. And while the economy is the dominant election issue, a majority of Americans disapprove of his handling of Iran's nuclear ambitions by a margin of 48 to 33 percent according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll this week.
Wednesday (Thursday morning Israel time), President Obama responded by reiterating that he has been clear since running for the presidency that he will take "every step available to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."
Echoes of Barak's arguments were heard in the words of US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Wednesday night: "We are not making any special steps at this point in order to deal with the situation. Why? Because, frankly, we are fully prepared to deal with that situation now."
Panetta went on to say that Defense Minister Barak contacted him and asked to postpone the joint US-Israeli drill "for technical reasons."
Before he took off for a short trip to Holland, Netanyahu instructed Barak and IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz not to deviate in their talks with Gen. Dempsey from the position he took with the US president, namely, no commitment for advance notice to Washington about a unilateral strike against Iran.
The Israeli prime minister is convinced that, contrary to the claims by US spokesmen and media, that current sanctions are ineffective insofar as slowing Iran's advance toward a nuclear weapon and the harsher sanctions on Iran's central bank and oil exports are too slow and will take hold too late to achieve their purpose.
In any case, say Israeli officials, Washington is again signaling its willingness to go back to direct nuclear negotiations with Tehran, although past experience proved that Iran exploits diplomatic dialogue as grace time for moving forward on its nuclear ambitions.
US spokesmen denied an Iranian report that a recent letter from the US president to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei proposed opening a direct channel for talks.
Still those reports persist. American and European spokesmen were forced to deny a statement by Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi Wednesday on his arrival in Ankara that Iran and the big powers are in contact over the revival of nuclear negotiations.
Netanyahu fears that dialogue between Iran and the five powers plus Germany (the P5+1) will resume after bowing to an Iranian stipulation that sanctions be suspended for the duration of the talks. Once again, Tehran will be enabled to steal a march on the US and Israel and bring its nuclear weapon program to conclusion, unhindered by economic constraints.

The imam sends a satrap

By Amir Taheri/Asharq Alawsat
After months of hand wringing and, perhaps, internal squabbles, Iran appears to have decided to play a direct role in shaping the outcome of the struggle over Syria's future.
Several signs indicate the change in policy. For almost a year, the state-owned media had tried to appear neutral on the Syrian issue. News of the uprising was either under-played or presented in a more or less balanced way, reflecting the views both of the Baathist regime and its opponents. In recent weeks, however, the Khomeinist media have adopted a position openly hostile to the Syrian opposition. Instead, they offer a narrative that echoes the Syrian regime's claim that the uprising is a "foreign plot" and that the violence that has claimed over 5,000 lives is the work of "terrorist groups." However, the Tehran media have not deemed it fit to cover the Syrian events directly. Not a single Iranian media outlet has despatched a reporter to Syria. Two of Iran's state-owned news agencies have permanent offices in Damascus. But they, too, make no attempt at covering the nationwide revolt. The reason is that even the most mercenary journalist would not be able to put his name to the Baathist regime's brazen lies.
Another sign that Iran may have decided to heighten its profile in Damascus is the increase in arms shipments to Syria. An Iranian air cargo company, Aseman [Airlines], reports a 50 per cent increase in flights to Damascus. Although part of the "air-bridge" may be used for non-military cargo, the dramatic increase could also be related to faster gunrunning to save the Syrian regime.
There is also an increase in overland transport to Syria. While the flow of pilgrims from Iran has dwindled to a trickle, the number of trucks carrying cargo, including arms, has risen sharply. Last week, Turkey impounded four Iranian trucks on suspicion of smuggling weapons to Syria. Despite denials from Tehran, Turkey insists that this is the second time in six months that it has stopped Iranian trucks ferrying weapons to Syria. Yet another sign of Iran's greater involvement in Syria is the recent visit to Damascus of General Qassem Suleimani who commands the Qods Force (Sepah Quds), an ad hoc military unit with the official mission of "exporting revolution".
According to Tehran sources, Suleimani held a four-hour meeting with President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus to discuss "coordination of strategy to protect Syria against foreign conspiracies."
Suleimani reports directly to the "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenei. Thus, his visit might indicate that the " Supreme Guide" has seized control of policy on Syria, by-passing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Salehi. On a number of occasions, Ahmadinejad and Salehi have expressed reservations about backing the Syrian regime. It now seems that Khamenei has brushed aside those reservations. Sources in Tehran tell me that the "Supreme Guide" has decided to prevent the fall of Syria into "the camp hostile to the Islamic Republic."
Could Iran save the Syrian regime?
Of course, Iran could ease the effect of sanctions on Syria by supplying it with money and arms. It could also play a role by bolstering the Syrian regime's policy of trying to crush the revolt by killing and kidnapping. General Suleimani already has a presence in Syria with a military mission of over 600 men. He could bring in units from the Lebanese branch of Hezbollah to help Syrian forces loyal to the regime. The Qods Force has trained hundreds of Hezbollah fighters for operations outside Lebanon. Suleimani has tested some of those fighters in operations in Iraq.
Suleimani could also count on elements from the Iraqi Jaish al-Mahdi (The Amy of the Hidden Imam). Although it is supposed to have disbanded, Jaish al-Mahdi has retained its arms and maintains informal existence under Suleimani's men. Stronger support from Iran could also raise the moral of Syrian ruling elites, some of whom have began to waver in recent weeks. Some potential deserters from the Syrian security forces may decide to await the outcome of Iranian intervention before making their move.
Iranian intervention could also persuade Russia and China to continue dragging their feet over possible United Nations' intervention to stop the massacre in Syria.
More importantly, as some circles in Tehran suggest, the Islamic Republic could promote a formula under which President Assad is asked to step down so that the Baathist regime could survive in a new configuration. Despite all that, Tehran's chances of success in Damascus are slim. To start with, the Syrian armed forces have never really warmed to the Tehran-Damascus axis. Although the two countries have signed a defence pact, exchanges between Iranian and Syrian military have remained limited. Iran has more such exchanges with North Korea and Venezuela than with Syria.
Syrian elites are equally cool towards alliance with the Iranian imamate.
The Baathist Party claims to stand for a secular, non-sectarian system of government with a Socialist programme. The Iranian imamate, on the other hand, is based on religious mumbo-jumbo, sectarian superstitions, and anti-left hatred. A Syria controlled by "Walayat al-Faqih" [Guardianship of the Jurists] might not be attractive to many members of the elite in Damascus.
Even if Tehran succeeds in making Suleimani de facto Satrap of Syria, the Syrian revolt may prove more resilient than Khamenei imagines. Ahmadinejad and Salehi have understood this. This is why, in cryptic style, they have tried to put some blue water between the Baathist regime and Iran. Iran has no national interest in helping crush the Syrian uprising. Its military intervention could open the way for other nations to also send troops to Syria. Prudence dictates that Iranian policymakers take into account the possibility that the Syrian revolt may succeed in bringing about regime change in Damascus.
By trying to prevent Syria from moving to the "hostile camp", Khamenei and Suleimani may well render that inevitable.

Iranian general says Iraq, South Lebanon “submit” to Tehran
January 20, 2012 /An Iranian general said Iraq and Hezbollah-dominated South Lebanon “submit” to Tehran’s wishes. “Those two countries, in a way or another, submit to the will and the wishes of Tehran,” head of Iran’s elite al-Quds Force, Qassem Suleimani, was quoted as saying by Al-Arabiya television. He added that his country “can organize any movement that leads to the formation of Islamic governments [in Iraq and Lebanon] in order to fight imperialism.”According to Al-Arabiya, Suleimani’s remarks came during a seminar entitled “Youth and Islamic Awareness”, which was held in Tehran on Thursday. Commenting on the Syrian crisis, the general said that “the Syrian people support the government [of President Bashar al-Assad] completely.” Assad’s troops have cracked down on protests against almost five decades of Baath rule which broke out mid-March, killing over 5,400 people and triggering a torrent of international condemnation.-NOW Lebanon

March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid demands Hezbollah clarify Iranian general’s statements
January 20, 2012 /March 14 General Secretariat Fares Soueid condemned on Friday the statements of the head of Iran’s elite al-Quds Force, Qassem Suleimani and demanded that Hezbollah clarify them.
“The statements of Suleimani are rejected because they violate the sovereignty of Lebanon and puts the residents of the South in danger by making them a mail box between Iran and the US,” Soueid said in a statement issued by his office. Soueid also said that Suleimani’s statements “took off the mask of Hezbollah, which is trying to convince the Lebanese people and the world that it is a Lebanese party which works to achieve Lebanese goals.”Al-Arabiya television quoted Suleimani earlier in the day as saying that the Hezbollah-dominated South Lebanon “submits” to Tehran’s wishes.
-NOW Lebanon

Report: Thailand Issues Arrest Warrant against 2nd Lebanese, Sammy Paolo a Hizbullah Suspect
by Naharnet /..Thailand charged another Lebanese Hizbullah suspect identified as James Sammy Paolo, who is an alleged accomplice of Hussein Atris, for planning to carry out a terrorist activity.
The Criminal Court in Thailand issued on Thursday an arrest warrant against Paolo, 40, who will face the same charges as Atris, of possessing forbidden chemical substances.
Thailand Police Chief Gen. Priewpan Damapong said that the sketch of Paolo was given from a description by Atris. Paolo was Atris' housemate at the warehouse in Samut Sakhon, on the western outskirts of Bangkok, where police seized 4,000 kilograms of urea fertilizer and several gallons of liquid ammonium nitrate, according to media reports published on Friday. Bangkok Post said that police are trying to determine whether Paolo is still in Thailand and have contacted Interpol in their efforts to track him down. Priewpan told the daily that both men are accused of violating the Military Supply Act by possessing ammonium nitrate without permission. “Atris and Paolo were planning to send the chemicals to another country and had rented 10 containers from the Transport Co.,” Priewpan said.
Atris denied he is a member of Hizbullah consequently Thai police can only press a criminal charge against him where he could face up to five years in prison.
The U.S. Embassy had issued an "emergency message" last Friday warning of a possible terror threat against Americans in Bangkok, and Israel warned its citizens as well.
Thai authorities were caught off-guard by the U.S. announcement, hastily revealing they had detained a Swedish national of Lebanese origin with alleged links to Hizbullah and that intelligence indicated a plot could be carried out between Jan. 13 and 15. Details of the alleged plot remained hazy due to conflicting accounts from Thai officials, some of whom said that Thailand appeared to have been a staging ground but not the target of any attack. In Stockholm, Swedish Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Linn Duvhammar confirmed Atris has dual citizenship and said the Swedish embassy is helping him find a lawyer. He moved to Sweden in 1991 and spent 2006-09 in Lebanon before returning. Duvhammar said the man was carrying a valid Swedish passport when he was arrested, as well as an old one that had been stained.

Report: Thailand terror suspect blames Israel's Mossad for arrest
Lebanese-Swedish man Atris Hussein proclaims innocence to Swedish newspaper; says incriminating evidence found in warehouse was probably placed there by Mossad.  By The Associated Press/A Lebanese-Swedish man detained in a terror probe in Thailand has told a Swedish newspaper that he's innocent and blamed Israel's Mossad spy agency for his arrest.  The tabloid Aftonbladet on Friday said it spoke to 47-year-old Atris Hussein in a Bangkok prison where he's being held on allegations of illegally possessing explosive materials. Thai police officers escort a Lebanese suspect in Samut Sakhon province, on the outskirts of Bangkok, January 16, 2012.  Hussein was quoted as saying he is "100 percent innocent" and that "much of the material the police found in my warehouse had been placed there, probably by the Israeli security service Mossad." Thai police have said Hussein was storing the explosive materials in Bangkok before shipping them to another destination. His arrest last week was linked to U.S. and Israeli warnings of a possible terror threat in Bangkok.

Special Tribunal for Lebanon Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen is Setting Stage to Issue Indictments in 3 Cases Linked to Hariri’s Murder

by Naharnet /Special Tribunal for Lebanon Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen has made a progress in preparing the indictments in the assassination attempts of MP Marwan Hamadeh and ex-Defense Minister Elias Murr, and the murder of former Communist party leader George Hawi, Lebanese sources said Friday. The informed sources told pan-Arab daily al-Hayat that STL Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare has referred to Fransen his probe into the three cases and that the pre-trial judge is preparing the indictments pending their release. The court has already indicted four Hizbullah members in ex-Premier Rafik Hariri’s Feb. 2005 assassination. But Lebanese authorities have so far failed to arrest them.
In August, Fransen linked the three attacks on the Lebanese politicians to Hariri’s murder. According to the tribunal’s statute, a case is connected to the 2005 attack if it is of a "similar nature and gravity" and has a number of elements in common with it, such as “the criminal intent (motive), purpose behind the attacks, the nature of the victims targeted, the pattern of the attacks (modus operandi) and the perpetrators.” According to Article 1 of the statute, the tribunal has jurisdiction over attacks that occurred in Lebanon between Oct. 1, 2004 and Dec. 12, 2005 but only if their connection to the Hariri attack is determined by the pre-trial judge. Al-Hayat’s sources said that Bellemare’s expected visit to Beirut next week is not linked to the indictments that could be issued in the three cases in the coming weeks.
They stressed that he would come to Lebanon for a farewell visit to top officials, including Hamadeh, Murr and the families of Hawi and Hariri. Bellemare informed U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon last month that he will not seek reappointment to his post on Feb. 2012 due to health reasons.

Threats against Iran are harmful

By Yoel Marcus /Haaretz
When Netanyahu says sanctions against Iran are not effective, reality shows he is talking nonsense. How is it that he doesn't understand that such scornful talk endangers cooperation with America?
In the final analysis, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan was right after all. His assessment that Iran is not so close to producing a nuclear bomb was widely criticized in the government. Some even claim it was the reason the government refused to extend his term by another year. But now the defense establishment is no longer certain its panic was justified.
In Wednesday's Haaretz, Amos Harel reported Israeli intelligence claims that "Iran has not yet decided whether to make a nuclear bomb," due to a fear of instability in the regime. Under these circumstances, sanctions that are making life hard for Iran have caused its leadership to have second thoughts.
U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt was reported to have said, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." Talking less, threatening less - these are assets of a sane country. Our threats imply that what Israel is actually saying is, "Hold us back." There are limits to our ability to strike at Iran. With all due respect to ourselves, there are also limits to our military capability. We are not America, at best we are dependent on it. Sometimes our threats are exaggerated. After all, we are not the only ones who know how to threaten - Iran also knows how to use scare tactics.
"We must not exacerbate the situation," says Prof. Shlomo Avineri. This means we cannot allow criticism against us to be worse than the danger facing us - the very fact that we would be considered crazy endangers the country.
This week The New York Times columnist Roger Cohen called his column "Don't do it, Bibi," referring to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by his nickname. Cohen was talking about Israel's threats to bomb nuclear installations in Iran. "Don't go there, Mr. Netanyahu. It would be a terrible mistake" to do so before the U.S. elections, wrote Cohen. He said it would affect U.S. President Barack Obama's attitude toward Israel in the future, if he is elected for a second term. Not to mention increasing the danger of radicalization in the heart of the hot Islamic region.
Cohen is not considered a fanatical Israel-lover, in spite of his name. But that doesn't mean that what he writes does not express the feelings of the White House.
Not only are talk and threats not helpful, sometimes they are even harmful. When Netanyahu says that sanctions against Iran are not effective, reality shows he is talking nonsense. Even Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman is not behaving very wisely when he reacts to the American approach by saying, "The time has come to switch from talk to action." How is it that these two brilliant minds don't understand that with such scornful talk they are endangering the extraordinary security cooperation between Israel and America?
The belief that sanctions would not stop Iran has proved to be mistaken. The fact is that Iranian leaders are not finding it easy to take the last lethal step. We should recall that when the United States invaded Iraq in 1991, Israel was attacked by Scud missiles in revenge for the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear reactor. Thirty-nine measly Scuds caused panic in the country. Half of the residents fled the Tel Aviv area and the other half drank water and urinated in pots they had prepared in their sealed security rooms. That means that if the Americans themselves take military action against Iran, we, in any case, will also be attacked by Shahab missiles in the heart of Tel Aviv. Not only from Iran but from the bastions of Hezbollah, perhaps because of our overuse of empty threats. Even more so if we act alone.  Don't think that if the Americans attack we will continue to have a good time in Tel Aviv. During the Second Lebanon War we were not prepared for the daily shelling from the north down to Hadera. We don't have to hear the frequent scaremongering of Home Front Defense Minister Matan Vilnai to know that our ability to absorb such a blow is nothing to write home about.
There is a problematic aspect to every war scenario. In our region, the future is clouded by uncertainty. If we attack on our own, the results are liable to be disastrous. If we sit and do nothing, Iran may take action. In either case, we are liable to be attacked. The question is whether at this time, when Israel is in a hostile environment and is expressing its desire to attack, we have a leadership that can be relied on to make the right decisions.
I'm afraid we have no reason to sleep peacefully.

The cost of the fall of al-Assad

19/01/2012/By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
There are many expectations that the al-Assad regime is about to collapse, and that it is only a matter of time…expectations repeated by politicians on several levels, which have received the support of many of the Syrian people involved in the situation, but not the analysts who rejoiced at the revolutions in their own countries but denounced the Syrian revolution. However the question that must be asked here is: what is the cost of the fall of al-Assad? The press report that was published by our newspaper yesterday, in cooperation with the British newspaper “The Guardian”, addressed this question, conveying a number of viewpoints attributed to different personalities inside Syria, including Alawites, reflecting the almost unanimous conviction that it will be difficult for the al-Assad regime to continue, but everyone fears the price of its downfall. This is compounded by the al-Assad regime’s current state of weakness, with the Muslim Brotherhood recently rejecting an Iranian offer to grant the Brotherhood representation in government on the condition that al-Assad remains in power! Why would al-Assad do that if he was in a position of strength, especially as he described the Muslim Brotherhood in his latest speech as the “Devil’s Brotherhood”?
Hence, concerns over the potential costs of the fall of al-Assad must be reflected at the regional and international levels. Delaying the fall of al-Assad will entail subsequent security and economic complications, not only for Syria, but for the region as a whole. Of course, in the event of al-Assad remaining in power, the price will also be high for the Syrians and the region, specifically Turkey, as at this point al-Assad would be far more dangerous than Saddam Hussein following the liberation of Kuwait.
Therefore, simply expecting, or waiting for the al-Assad regime to collapse on its own, without any significant effort to accelerate this process from our regional states and the international community, means that the interests and stability of the region and world at large is being put at risk. This is not to mention the dangers that threaten Syria itself, and also the complications of the post al-Assad phase. Waiting for the “expected” moment of collapse is dangerous, and costly, for everyone.
The true cost of delaying the fall of al-Assad is that the Syrian crisis will deepen, and a civil war will be fuelled. As one Western diplomat said in “The Guardian”: “if you shoot at people for months, you shouldn't be surprised when they start shooting back”, and this is what is happening in Syria today.
Prolonging the life of the al-Assad regime also means further complicating the solutions for the post al-Assad phase, and it is inevitable that those who will pay the highest price will be the Turks, not the Iraqis. The Baghdad regime, for example, has concerns regarding the Syrian revolution because it could awaken the Sunni giant, particularly as the Iraqi regime is a sectarian system par excellence. Whilst the Turks are concerned about the future of Syria following the revolution, out of fear for their commercial interests and security. Ankara is not a sectarian regime, it is a democracy, and the survival of the ruling elite there depends on providing economic accomplishments to the Turkish people, rather than sectarian promises cloaked in deceptive slogans such as “resistance” and so on, along the lines of what is repeated by the al-Assad regime and Iran’s allies in the region.
Hence, it is dangerous to merely wait for the fall of the al-Assad regime without doing anything to accelerate this process. This is what those concerned with the stability of our region must be aware of, whether we are talking about the Saudis or the Turks, or even the Europeans and the Americans.

Meshal failed to pass on Arab League's message to al-Assad - Sources
20/01/2012/By Sawsan Abu-Husain and Salah Juma
Cairo, Asharq Al-Awsat – Arab sources have informed Asharq Al-Awsat that the message that Arab League Secretary-General Nabil Elaraby announced that he had given to Hamas chief Khalid Meshal to pass on to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad never reached him. During a joint-press conference held in Cairo between the Hamas chief and the Arab League Secretary-General on 6 January 2012, Elaraby announced that Meshal would be passing on a message from him to the Syrian president; however Arab sources have now revealed that the Syrian regime refused to transfer this message to the Syrian president, viewing this as “interference in internal Syrian affairs.”During the press conference, the Arab League Secretary-General had announced “I gave him [Meshal] a message today to the Syrian authorities that it is necessary to work with integrity, transparency and credibility to halt the violence that is taking place in Syria.” This was after Arab League monitors had been dispatched to the country, and a suicide bomber in Syria’s capital Damascus killed 25 people. Elaraby also told reporters that Meshal had played a key role in convincing Syria to sign the Arab League protocol. Meshal, speaking alongside Elaraby, said Hamas had been working to bring an end to the crisis in Syria through diplomacy.
However a source close to the Hamas chief informed Asharq Al-Awsat that Meshal did not try to meet with al-Assad on his return to Damascus, but instead met with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem, who he passed this message on to. According to the Arab source, Meshal’s actions in Cairo served as a source of embarrassment for the Hamas movement, not least because many senior Hamas members – including Meshal himself – live in Syria as guests of the al-Assad regime, whilst the majority of other Palestinian factions are of the view that the Palestinians should not get involved with the Syrian crisis, as this could serve as a pretext for Syrian intervention in Palestinian affairs. The Arab source also informed Asharq Al-Awsat that this message was viewed as representing interference in internal Syrian affairs, particularly as the Hamas movement is a guest in Syria, and so is in no position to get involved in Syrian affairs in this manner.
Senior Palestinian figures strongly criticized Hamas chief Khalid Meshal for his involvement in this issue, particularly PLO Executive Committee Secretary-General Yasser Abed Rabbo. Abed Rabbo stressed that Meshal had “no right to mediate on behalf of any regime – Syrian or any other". The source also revealed that this response led Hamas to stress that Meshal’s latest visit to Cairo has nothing to do with the situation in Syria, or the issue of Hamas mediation. When asked to comment on the fate of the message that Elaraby had entrusted to Hamas chief Khalid Meshal to pass on to the Syrian President, Arab League Deputy Secretary-General Ahmed Ben Helli called on everybody “not to blow this issue out of proportion” adding “I don’t want to go into any more detail [about this issue].”
As for whether Hamas chief Khalid Meshal will meet Arab League Secretary-General Nabil Elaraby during his latest visit to Cairo, Ben Helli asserted that Elaraby is in constant contact with Meshal, adding that the Arab League committee on the peace process is expected to meet either later this month or early next month.

Are the Arabs prepared for the new weapons of war?
20/01/2012
By Osman Mirghani/Asharq Alawsat
Imagine the scenario: an attack paralyzes sensitive government circles, defense systems and power grids; disrupting bank, internet and mobile services, and freezing all vital [state] infrastructure. Suddenly, the cycle of everyday life and the majority of services come to a halt. No ATMs or mobile phones work; the whole internet system breaks down, as does the electricity grid, whilst many other services either come to a complete standstill or experience a state of chaos.
Such an attack could paralyze any country and disrupt the cycle of everyday life there for hours or even days before the authorities are able to restore order, provided that they have contingency plans in place to deal with such a threat. The source of the attack might not be known for some time because the attacker may not have disclosed their identity, not to mention the fact that an attack such as this does not require a single bullet to be fired or a single missile to be launched.
If you think that this scenario could only happen in science fiction, then you should think again because a war such as this has already begun in our regions and in other places around the world. Moreover, a number of countries have begun to step up their preparations in order to confront this potential danger, by recruiting specialist units and allocating space in their defense and intelligence budgets for developing [cyber] counter-weaponry; for the purpose of protection and deterrence.
A few days ago, the [Israeli] "Jerusalem Post" newspaper revealed that the Israel Defense Force (IDF) had recruited around 300 computer experts to join up with other recruits to work in a department responsible for cyber warfare, affiliated to the military intelligence sector. This department will be tasked with encrypting and protecting army and intelligence networks against any cyber-attack launched by countries, organizations or even individuals. The department will also be assigned the task of protecting power, water and telephone networks along with the other basic services.
Interestingly, Israel also recently declared that it has begun construction on a new command center to coordinate between different military and industrial institutions, for protection against cyber-attacks. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the first step of its establishment last May, stressing that it would be allocated a large budget, because Israel “is seeking to counteract the danger of any future cyber-attacks.”
These steps reveal a new concern and they are not without foundation, because according to a number of experts, Israel itself has participated in the launch of several cyber-attacks, including the “Stuxnet” computer virus attack on an Iranian nuclear center in June 2010. The attack was considered the largest cyber-attack of its kind, as it led to considerable problems in the Iranian nuclear facility’s network, paralyzing its operations for some time. Tehran was later able to identify the virus and eliminate it from its corrupted equipment. As of yet, the true extent of the damage caused by this cyber-attack is difficult to assess. It is also important to note that nobody every claimed responsibility for this attack, although many experts believe that the US, Israel and perhaps Germany took part in the development of the Stuxnet virus, with the aim of disrupting or hampering Iran's nuclear program.
Israel's concern [about cyber-attacks] could also be attributed to recently published information suggesting that Iran has begun to strengthen its defensive and offensive efforts in the domain of cyber warfare, after being exposed to the Stuxnet virus. Iran believes that the aforementioned attack was not an isolated incident, particularly amidst perceived efforts to step up the secret war to paralyze Iran's nuclear program, either by mounting cyber-attacks, or by assassinating scientists and destroying facilities.
Furthermore, when the Obama administration announced the new US defense strategy this month, it highlighted a reductions in troop numbers, and dismissed the idea that it was preparing itself to wage two simultaneous wars, focusing on Asia with special reference to China, Iran and North Korea. This was the main pillar in the new strategy, which proposes to trim around 500 billion dollars from the US defense budget. However, there is a side to this strategy that did not receive wide media coverage, namely that the US is now concentrating on future war techniques such as mounting aerial attacks utilizing drones, as well as maximizing and expanding its cyber-warfare capabilities. These techniques do not depend on a large number of troops but rather on the quality of America’s capabilities, especially in the field of technical and cyber warfare, which will form the mainstay of future wars. The US realizes that China has come a long way in its cyber warfare developments, and there are dozens of reports holding Beijing responsible for a series of cyber-attacks that recently targeted Western countries.
For example, in mid-2011, a report was published revealing that several Western intelligence agencies suspected that China was behind a cyber-attack where anonymous "hackers" had tried to gain confidential information in order to access the email inboxes of hundreds of senior US and South Korean government officials, who held "Gmail" accounts. Even though China's government denied its involvement in any form of cyber-attack against another country, Google announced that the source of the Gmail hack had been traced back to the city of Jinan, the capital of Shandong province in Eastern China. Google confirmed that it had detected the attack and prevented it. The significance of this, the attack being traced back to Jinan, is that this city was mentioned in a report drawn up by a US congressional committee, as the city houses one of the technical reconnaissance centers supervising China's cyber espionage operations.
Cyber warfare has been a reality for some time, through methods such as hacking, phone tapping and email interception. But today this war has acquired new dimensions and capabilities as people have grown more dependent on computers and the internet in all fields of life; including the economy, banking and the military. According to the views of a number of experts at the International Conference on Cyber Security held in London in 2011, a feverish race is on to advance the capabilities of cyber warfare now that several countries have gained the power to launch destructive attacks without the need to fire a single bullet.I wonder where the Arab World stands in this turmoil. Are there any preparations and plans to confront this new intensifying danger?

Syrian opposition leader,Kamal al-Labwani seeks to counter Islamists
Prominent Sunni Muslim opposition figure Kamal al-Labwani says most Syrians want Islam to 'remain a religion, not a political party'.
By Reuters
Syria's religious and ethnic minorities need to work together with liberal Sunni Muslims to
counter the influence of Islamists in the uprising against President Bashar Assad, a prominent Sunni Muslim opposition figure said.
Kamal al-Labwani said Islam was being used to galvanize street protests against Assad and the population had grown more devout, but most Syrians still want Islam to "remain a religion, not a political party".
"The bloody repression has given the opportunity for clerics to pump Jihadist Islamist values into the street, so we have seen the emphasis on slogans such as 'God is great' and martyrdom," Labwani said.
Syria's Christian, Alawite, Ismaili and Kurdish communities, which form about 30 percent of the population, should join ranks with Sunnis opposed to mixing religion with politics, he said.
There are few accurate indicators of public opinion in Syria but many minority groups, including Assad's own Alawite sect, are reluctant to support the uprising, fearing an Islamist takeover if the president were to be toppled. Islamists made strong gains in elections following the overthrow of entrenched leaders in Egypt and Tunisia, and are also a growing influence in post-Gadhafi Libya. But Labwani said Syria's broader religious mix made that unlikely in his country.  "If we allow Islamists to take over the revolution it will be a problem (but) if we ask the rebels to deny their identity and their religion it will (also) be a problem," said Labwani, a
53-year-old physician from the town of Zabadani who left Syria after being released from a lengthy jail term in November. "The solution is to form an all-encompassing current that respects civic and individual rights." No Islamist democracy  The main Muslim Brotherhood movement and other Islamists in the opposition say they do not aim to turn Syria into an Islamic state and that they will honor democratic practices, although some secular Syrians are skeptical. "If Syria becomes a religious dictatorship, the next day you will see a crisis and the day after civil war," Labwani said. "There has been no Islamist democratic country in history, and we do not want to try to be the first."
But he said Assad's minority Alawite sect, an offshoot of Islam that has dominated the country for the last five decades, needed to take a stand against a crackdown that has killed at least 5,000 people, according to a United Nations count. "The Alawite community still has to take a clear position against the killings by the regime," he said, pointing to Syria's 300,000 Shi'ite minority whom he said have distanced themselves from Assad and continue to co-exist with Sunnis, even though Shi'ite Iran is Assad's biggest supporter.
Labwani met U.S. officials in the White House in 2005 to push for support for human rights in Syria. He was arrested upon return but was freed under an amnesty last year and fled to
Jordan. "It was impossible to stay in Syria and be publicly active in the opposition. If one appears on television one is either arrested or assassinated. I also wanted to help strengthen the Syrian National Council," Labwani said. He was referring to the main opposition group which formed in Istanbul last year and which is heavily influenced by Islamists such as the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood, which played a major role in armed opposition to Assad's late father Hafez Assad in the 1980s, has said it no longer wants an Islamist state and supports a civic democratic system in future.
But Labwani said Islamist politics must change more. "This region will not stabilize without a reformation in Islamic culture that creates an Islam compatible with liberal values and modernism and breaks the totalitarian dogmatic Islamist thinking," he said. "This project needs work," he said. "It will start in a free Syria after the revolution triumphs."

Owners of Collapsed Building Charged, to be Questioned Monday
by Naharnet /A judge charged on Friday the owners of the building that collapsed in the Beirut neighborhood of Ashrafiyeh for causing the death of 27 people due to negligence. Beirut Prosecutor Judge George Karam filed the charges against Michel and Claude Saadeh based on articles 564 and 565 of the criminal law. The judge later referred the suspects to Beirut Examining Magistrate Ghassan Owaidat who set Monday as the date for the questioning of the two. The building collapse in the area of Fassouh on Sunday has left 12 people injured. On Thursday, Ashrafiyeh MPs put the telephone hotline 03000019 in the service of the citizens, saying the incident changed their priorities and put public safety at the forefront. They also vowed to renovate the apartment block next to the collapsed building so it becomes habitable and doesn’t pose any threat to the lives of residents. The building was evacuated on Sunday for fears that it could also collapse.

France threatens to pull out of Afghanistan after troops killed

20/01/2012/PARIS, (Reuters) - France threatened on Friday to pull out early from the NATO-led war in Afghanistan after a rogue Afghan soldier opened fire on French soldiers, killing four and wounding about 15 others. The killings in the Taghab valley of Afghanistan's eastern Kapisa province were the latest in a series of incidents that have seen Afghan troops turn on their Western allies, damaging trust.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy said all French operations on the ground were being suspended and his defence minister was dispatched to clarify things on the ground in Afghanistan.
"If the security conditions are not clearly established then the question of an early return of French forces from Afghanistan will arise," said Sarkozy. France has almost 4,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of the 130,000-strong NATO-led force there. French troops mainly patrol Kapisa, an often restive province in mountains near Kabul. They are due to leave by around the end of 2013.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe told a news conference about 15 other soldiers were wounded, eight of them seriously.
NATO has been rapidly expanding the size of the Afghan security forces so that they will be able to take over all responsibility for security by the time Western combat forces leave in 2014.
Previous incidents in which Western troops were killed by Afghan colleagues have been blamed either on Taliban infiltration of the Afghan military, or on stress, indiscipline and divided loyalties within the hastily trained Afghan ranks."It's unacceptable that our soldiers are killed by our allies," Sarkozy said.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai said in a statement: "In regard to the killing of four French soldiers in Kapisa, I would like to express my deep sadness and condolences to the families of the victims as well as to the French people."The Taliban said that they could not confirm whether or not the killer was a Taliban member but signalled that such attacks were part of its strategy.
In an email statement to media, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said: "There are a number of Afghan soldiers who have an Afghan, Islamic dignity in their hearts and who have carried out a number of attacks against foreign troops."The Taliban "has skilfully placed the Taliban inside enemy ranks who have carried out attacks, however it is not clear whether the shooter (in Kapisa) belonged to the Islamic Emirate," he said, using another name that the Taliban call themselves.
Jimmie Cummings, spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Kabul, said: "There is no indication that these incidents are linked or part of any larger coordinated effort."
"INSIDER THREAT"
More than 2,500 foreign troops have died in Afghanistan since the NATO-led war began in 2001. The latest killings take the French toll to 82. The shooting was the latest in a string of attacks by "rogue" Afghan soldiers and police on their foreign partners, or by insurgents who had infiltrated security forces.Dozens of foreign soldiers have been killed in recent years by what NATO dubs the "insider threat," complicating coalition efforts to train Afghanistan's army and police force. Two French Foreign Legion soldiers and one American were killed in separate episodes of so-called "green-on-blue" shootings last month, which refer to the colours of the Afghan army and the symbol of NATO. The coalition no longer releases the number of its troops killed by Afghan soldiers.
French Defence Minister Gerard Longuet said he would report back to Sarkozy by next Tuesday after his trip to Afghanistan. Separately, six foreign soldiers were killed in a helicopter crash in southern Afghanistan on Thursday. The Taliban, which often makes exaggerated claims of military successes, said it shot the helicopter down. NATO denied this.
It was the worst crash since August last year when 30 soldiers, mostly elite U.S. navy SEAL commandos, died when their helicopter came down in eastern Afghanistan.

Labor Minister Charbel Nahhas Signs Wage Hike Decree, Refrains from Approving Transportation Allowance
by Naharnet /Labor Minister Charbel Nahhas signed on Friday the government’s decision on a wage hike decree, but he did not sign the bill on the transportation allowance because he has deemed it “illegal.”He is instead preparing a draft law concerning the transportation and education allowances to refer it to the parliament for endorsement, according to newspapers published on Friday.
A ministerial source told al-Liwaa that the cabinet adopted the Baabda Palace deal that was modified by the minister in order to “legalize” it.
The Baabda agreement was sponsored by Prime Minister Najib Miqati in December between the Economic Committees and the General Labor Confederation.
The plan sets the minimum wage at LL675,000, canceling a LL200,000 increase in wages given on January 1, 2010. The increase on brackets sets the raise on the first bracket up to LL400,000 to 100 percent , a sum that wouldn’t be less than LL375,000 while the increase on the second bracket – up to LL1.5 million- would include the first LL400,000 plus a 9 percent raise. However, Nahhas’ reservations are over the transportation allowance, which he argues, should be included in the minimum wage for the Shura council will turn down any plan that puts the allowance outside the minimum salary because such a move contradicts the labor law. But when the issue was put to vote on Wednesday at the cabinet session, his proposal won the support of 10 ministers while 19 voted against it. Sources told al-Liwaa that Nahhas would not resign, but travel outside Lebanon thus avoiding the possibility of signing the allowance decree by referring the matter to acting Labor Minister Nicolas Fattoush.
Economy Minister Nicolas Nahhas, who is loyal to Miqati, expressed satisfaction over the wage boost settlement that “ended a controversial issue.” An Nahar daily Friday quoted him as saying: “The important thing is that the people were paid their raises after we reached a formula and overcame useless disputes.”

Great expectations
Michael Young, January 20, 2012
Now Lebanon/Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and Sunni leader Saad Hariri are two Lebanese politicians who may gain politically in post-Assad Syria. We may not quite notice it yet, but a reversal of roles appears to be taking place between Lebanon and Syria. Whereas for many decades Syria greatly influenced politics in Lebanon, today a number of Lebanese politicians are lining up and waiting for the fall of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime to expand their influence in Syria. Syria’s impact long predated the deployment of its army to Lebanon in 1976. From the early years of the French Mandate, when Syrian nationalists had close allies in Beirut—such as the future prime minister, Riad al-Solh, who opposed the creation of a Lebanese republic independent of Syria—to the 1950s, when Arab nationalists in Cairo and Damascus formed the United Arab Republic, Lebanon swayed to the decisions taken by its larger neighbor.
The revolt against the Assad regime shows no signs of abating. Indeed, it is virtually impossible to imagine today that the Syrian leader will be able to put the genie back in the bottle and re-impose the authority he enjoyed a year ago. However, his collapse may take time, and it is this period that Lebanese political figures must carefully maneuver through if they seek to shape the aftermath in Syria.
Last summer, Walid Jumblatt admitted to the Syrian regime that he was anxious about Syria’s Druze. Fearing that, as a minority, they would be identified with the Alawite minority carrying out the repression, he began walking a tightrope. While several Syrian Druze notables declared their solidarity with the uprising, the community at large maintained a low profile. In turn, Jumblatt, who has substantial credibility among Syria’s Druze, became increasingly critical of Bashar al-Assad. In that way, he gambled, his positions would help shield the community from the antagonism of the Syrian opposition.
Jumblatt has a strong incentive to assert himself among his Syrian coreligionists. An estimated 300,000 Druze live in Syria. If Jumblatt were to play the dominant role among them that he has among the 200,000 or so Druze in Lebanon, he could significantly bolster the always fragile Jumblatti leadership, across Lebanon’s borders. This would provide the Lebanese Druze with demographic depth, at a time when they feel vulnerable because of the Shia expansion into areas between their mountains in Lebanon and Druze districts in Syria.
Traditionally, the Assad regimes have sought to isolate the Jumblatts, both Kamal and Walid, from Syria’s Druze. When Walid was still with the March 14 coalition, the Syrian leadership brought Wiam Wahhab to the Jebel Druze and organized grand receptions for him, as a riposte to Jumblatt. Though one should not presume that Syria’s Druze will mechanically fall into line as one behind Jumblatt, he would yet have considerable say over the community, especially as the Assads never allowed potentially powerful rivals to emerge.
And what of Syria’s Sunni community? Saad Hariri’s advocacy of the Syrian revolt also appears, somewhere, to be a bid for clout next door. Nor is such an ambition exceptionally far-fetched. Rafik Hariri was always viewed by the Assads as dangerous because of his prospective appeal—that of a strong Sunni—to Syria’s Sunnis, who had to submit to Alawite supremacy. Indeed, you can make a good case that Hariri’s assassination was motivated by the Syrian regime’s fears of precisely such a scenario, after the former prime minister decided to turn against Syria and its allies in the elections of 2005.
New leaderships will come forward in a post-Assad Syria, so it would be simplistic to assume that Jumblatt or Hariri will inevitably become paramount decision-makers there. But it’s also true that Assad’s rule has been so invasive, so intolerant of alternative power centers, in fact so cannibalistic, that once the Syrian president and his acolytes exit, a vacuum is certain to ensue. And it’s in that vacuum that the Lebanese will find golden opportunities to impose themselves.
Can Lebanese Christian leaders hope to influence their brethren in Syria? Here the situation appears more difficult. None of the Lebanese Christian leaders seems potentially attractive to Syrian Christians. Michel Aoun and Sleiman Franjieh have so defended Assad’s brutality lately that Christians in Syria would steer well away from them to better contend with a post-Assad leadership. Samir Geagea has sided with the Syrian revolt, but it’s difficult to see a rural Maronite having any allure whatsoever for Syria’s majority Orthodox communities, or for most urban Christians in general.
Syria is a complicated country, and to reduce events there to power moves by Lebanese politicians is undeniably constricting. But Lebanon is bound to have a profound impact on the Syria that will rid itself of four decades of Assad dictatorship. It’s the politicians who will seek to benefit, but it’s the democrats alone, in Lebanon and Syria, who will ensure that Syria develops into an open society.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Beirut and author of The Ghosts of Martyrs Square: An Eyewitness Account of Lebanon’s Life Struggle. He tweets @BeirutCalling.


The weak

Hazem al-Amin, January 20, 2012 /Now Lebanon
Using a dose of “asceticism” and political austerity, PM Najib Mikati is trying to trace an alternative route to the one he chose to take, the one leading only to Damascus and Tehran. The man is aware of his dire predicament and of the steepness of the way. In Turkey, he addressed parties to the Justice and Development government using the language of economy and investment. In Saudi Arabia, he sneaked in, trying to address his enemies’ enemies there claiming a simplicity, which – as he knows – is short-lived. In Washington, he sold the idea of a hypothetical confrontation that pitted him against Hezbollah against a backdrop of financing the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, and the same holds true for European capitals.
It is no secret to anyone that Mikati’s allies, Syria and Hezbollah, are facilitating his mission or, at least, are not angry at him. The tracing of alternative routes provides them as well with opportunities to take care of a lot of business in politics, not to mention the fact that their ally may achieve breakthroughs that would help them to turn down their foes. Still, Mikati’s job is made a lot more efficient by the blatant absence of his opponents. This non-political absence is filled in by the wait for events in Syria and the results of international sanctions on Iran, and allows people with limited power in terms of international relations to replace broad political and electoral representation.
Indeed, Mikati successfully breached the isolation wall that had been built around him back when Hezbollah first commissioned him with forming the government. These breaches are palpable as soon as you land in any neighboring capital. Minor though these breaches are, the resounding absence of Mikati’s rivals makes them the only alternative available to regional players who are going after playing a given role or yielding influence in Lebanon. In Ankara, some were pleased with the wish of businessman Najib Mikati to invest in Turkey. Others were impressed by offers made to Turkish companies to invest in Lebanon. In Riyadh, the man managed to talk to elites by endorsing STL financing and in Washington, some saw him as compromise and a key to stability.
Mikati has but limited capabilities with his creative “distance-keeping” policy. However, a defeat inflicted by an adversary with limited capacities and imagination is worse than one inflicted by a strong opponent. It is also indicative of the state of staggering, which is not allowing you to compete against weak people who have nothing but “barren land.”
Waiting is by no means a political action. Time – and the political factors it entails – does not go by swiftly. Absence is heavy and unfruitful, and this holds especially true if those betting on this absence are spurred by the power of the “Black Shirts” and the resourcefulness of the weak.
Speaker Nabih Berri praised the cabinet’s policy of “keeping one’s distance.” Since politics is all about action, and “distance-keeping” is all about seclusion and keeping away, the battle is easy and not fighting it is tantamount to an unannounced resignation.
*This article is a translation of the original, which appeared on the NOW Arabic site on Friday January 20, 2012