LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
March 23/2012

Bible Quotation for today/The Promise of the Lord's Coming
02 Peter 03/01-17:" My dear friends, this is now the second letter I have written you. In both letters I have tried to arouse pure thoughts in your minds by reminding you of these things. I want you to remember the words that were spoken long ago by the holy prophets, and the command from the Lord and Savior which was given you by your apostles. First of all, you must understand that in the last days some people will appear whose lives are controlled by their own lusts. They will make fun of you and will ask, He promised to come, didn't he? Where is he? Our ancestors have already died, but everything is still the same as it was since the creation of the world! They purposely ignore the fact that long ago God gave a command, and the heavens and earth were created. The earth was formed out of water and by water, and it was also by water, the water of the flood, that the old world was destroyed. But the heavens and the earth that now exist are being preserved by the same command of God, in order to be destroyed by fire. They are being kept for the day when godless people will be judged and destroyed. But do not forget one thing, my dear friends! There is no difference in the Lord's sight between one day and a thousand years; to him the two are the same. The Lord is not slow to do what he has promised, as some think. Instead, he is patient with you, because he does not want anyone to be destroyed, but wants all to turn away from their sins. But the Day of the Lord will come like a thief. On that Day the heavens will disappear with a shrill noise, the heavenly bodies will burn up and be destroyed, and the earth with everything in it will vanish. Since all these things will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people should you be? Your lives should be holy and dedicated to God, as you wait for the Day of God and do your best to make it come soon—the Day when the heavens will burn up and be destroyed, and the heavenly bodies will be melted by the heat. But we wait for what God has promised: new heavens and a new earth, where righteousness will be at home. And so, my friends, as you wait for that Day, do your best to be pure and faultless in God's sight and to be at peace with him. Look on our Lord's patience as the opportunity he is giving you to be saved, just as our dear friend Paul wrote to you, using the wisdom that God gave him. This is what he says in all his letters when he writes on the subject. There are some difficult things in his letters which ignorant and unstable people explain falsely, as they do with other passages of the Scriptures. So they bring on their own destruction. But you, my friends, already know this. Be on your guard, then, so that you will not be led away by the errors of lawless people and fall from your safe position. But continue to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory, now and forever! Amen.
 

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
US tells Turkey to back off Syria/By: Tony Badran/Now Lebanon/March 22/12
Washington and Jerusalem differ on Iran/By Ari Shavit/Haaretz/March 22/12
Aoun-Hezbollah ties hit a glass ceiling/By Micheal Young/March 22/12
Mullah Lavrov/By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat/March 22/12
The definition of the Shabiha/By Emad El Din Adeeb/Asharq Alawsat/March 22/12
Christians’ fears in the Arab world/By Osman Mirghani/Asharq Alawsat/March 22/12
Former Syrian VP Vice President Abdul-Halim Khaddamcalls for military intervention/By Nadia Al-Turki/Asharq Alawsat/March 22/12

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for March 22/12
Mohammed Merah is dead. He was a new breed of Iron Man terrorist
Gunman dies in hail of bullets as French siege ends
Is America's view of Iran and Hezbollah dangerously out of date?
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) warned Wednesday that there are hundreds — maybe even thousands — of Hezbollah agents inside the United States
U.N. unites on Syria, violence spills into Lebanon
Ten killed on bus fleeing Syria violence: monitors
Turkish FM Calls for Action Not Words on Syria
Syria Opposition Says U.N. Statement Gives Assad More Time to Kill
Clashes across Syria despite U.N. pressure
Hezbollah Donors, Agents Operating in U.S.
Lebanese suspect in Thailand accused of Hezbollah links denies he is a ‘terrorist’
Canada Welcomes Adoption of UN Security Council Plan for Syria
Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird  Concludes Successful Visit to Middle East
Egypt's rulers resist Muslim Brotherhood's push to open Gaza border
Sunni lawmakers accuse Iraq government of torture
Current and Former U.S. Officials Express Fears on Hizbullah Threat to Homeland Security
Report: U.S. Unblocks Military Aid to Lebanon
The Daily Star/ Lebanon's Arabic press digest - March 22, 2012 March 22, 2012
Mansour says Lebanese in Mali OK
Judge accuses Lebanese man of arming Syrian rebels
Lebanon border regions calm after Syrian gunfire, shelling
South Lebanon: Ain al-Hilweh bomb suspect identified: Lino
Lebanon: Fuel prices continue to rise
Gunmen Kidnap Lebanese Businessman in Nigeria 
One Person Arrested for Smuggling Arms to Free Syrian Army

Gunman dies in hail of bullets as French siege ends
By John Irish and Nicholas Vinocur | Reuters
TOULOUSE, France (Reuters) - A 23-year-old gunman who said al Qaeda inspired him to kill seven people in France died in a hail of bullets on Thursday as he scrambled out of a ground-floor window during a gunbattle with elite police commandos. Mohamed Merah, a Frenchman of Algerian origin, died from gunshot wounds at the end of a 30-hour standoff with police at his apartment in southern France and after confessing to killing three soldiers, three Jewish children and a rabbi.
He was firing at police as he jumped out of the window, Interior Minister Claude Gueant told reporters near the five-storey building, in a suburb of the southern city of Toulouse.
Two police commandos were injured in the operation - a dramatic climax to a siege which riveted the world after the killings shook France a month before a presidential election.
"At the moment when a video probe was sent into the bathroom, the killer came out of the bathroom, firing with extreme violence," Gueant said. "In the end, Mohamed Merah jumped from the window with his gun in his hand, continuing to fire. He was found dead on the ground."
Elite RAID commandos had been locked in a tense standoff since the early hours of Wednesday with Merah, periodically firing shots or deploying small explosives until mid-morning on Thursday to try and tire out the gunman so he could be captured.
Surrounded by some 300 police, Merah had been silent and motionless for 12 hours when the commandos opted to go inside.
Initially, he had fired through his front door at police when they swooped on his ground-floor flat on Wednesday morning, but later he negotiated with police, promising to give himself up and saying he did not want to die. He told negotiators he was trained by al Qaeda in Pakistan and killed three soldiers last week and four people at a Jewish school on Monday to avenge the deaths of Palestinian children and because of French army involvement in Afghanistan.
President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is running for re-election next month called Merah's killings terrorist attacks and announced a crackdown on people following extremist websites.
"From now on, any person who habitually consults websites that advocate terrorism or that call for hate and violence will be punished," he said in a statement. "France will not tolerate ideological indoctrination on its soil." His handling of the crisis could well impact an election race where for months he has lagged behind Socialist challenger Francois Hollande in opinion polls.
Early on Thursday, the first opinion poll since the school shooting showed Sarkozy two points ahead of Hollande in the first-round vote on April 22, although Hollande still led by eight points for a May 6 runoff.Three years of economic gloom, and a personal style many see as brash and impulsive, have made Sarkozy highly unpopular in France, but his proven strong hand in a crisis gives him an edge over a rival who has no ministerial experience. Sarkozy vowed on Wednesday that justice would be done and urged people not to seek revenge.
Merah had been under intelligence surveillance and the MEMRI Middle East think tank said he appeared to belong to a French al Qaeda branch called Fursan Al-Izza, ideologically aligned with a movement to Islamise Western states by implementing sharia law.
He boasted to police negotiators that he had brought France to its knees, and that his only regret was not having been able to carry out more killings.
French commandos had detonated three explosions just before midnight on Wednesday, flattening the main door of the building and blowing a hole in the wall, after it became clear Merah did not mean to keep a promise to turn himself in. They continued to fire shots roughly every hour, and stepped up the pace from dawn with flash grenades. "These were moves to intimidate the gunman who seems to have changed his mind and does not want to surrender," said interior ministry spokesman Pierre-Henry Brandet. He was tracked down after a no-holds-barred manhunt in France, during which presidential candidates suspended their campaigning. Immigration and Islam have been major campaign themes after Sarkozy tried to win over supporters of Le Pen, who accused the government of underestimating the threat from fundamentalism. Leaders of the Jewish and Muslim communities have called for calm, pointing out the gunman was a lone extremist.
On Thursday, far-right candidate Marine Le Pen accused Sarkozy's government of surrendering swathes of often impoverished suburban districts to Islamic fanatics, demanding that the last month of pre-election debate put the focus back on failing security.
(Additional reporting by Jean Decotte in Toulouse and Daniel Flynn in Paris; Writing by Catherine Bremer; editing by Philippa Fletcher)

Mohammed Merah is dead. He was a new breed of Iron Man terrorist
DEBKAfile Special Report March 22, 2012/ The French-born al Qaeda killer, Mohammed Merah - who shocked the world by murdering three Jewish schoolchildren and their teacher in Toulouse by shots to the head, after killing three French paratroopers - was found dead after jumping out of a window still shooting Thursday, March 22. First, he injured three police officers searching his apartment, bursting out of the bathroom firing madly.
This 23-year old Muslim extremist made history by the callousness of his murders and by forcing French police and security forces to conduct the biggest and longest siege in their history against a lone armed terrorist
Many mysteries surround the episode -both concerning the gunman and the methods used by French security to apprehend him. One applies to the official reporting of the incident and the many conflicting accounts, some of them coming from the French minister of interior Claude Guiant.
Another relates to the unnamed man who entered the killer’s apartment on a quiet Toulouse street some time Wednesday. Was he sent for some face-to-face bargaining with Merah on terms for ending the siege?
There were powerful explosions around the apartment over midnight Wednesday and sustained gunfire from various weapons just before the terrorist was officially reported to be dead. None were explained.
One reason for the dragging out the police assault on the apartment may have been that the occupant had not only barricaded himself with basic supplies of food, water, medicines and ammo, but also booby-trapped the entrance ready to strike down a large number of raiders while he remained unharmed.
The apartment may have been rigged as a fortified chamber for a long haul.
In that and other respects, he may fit the model of an Iron Man, a terrorist prototype and Salafi extremist who drives fast cars and motorbikes, enjoys the good life, is at ease with electronic gadgets and used a high tech video camera from a Formula One car to record his murderous rampage in high resolution for propaganda and posterity.
Youthful copycat admirers in jihadist circles will no doubt emulate the Merah style.
Another unanswered riddle is who bankrolled this high-end style and his operations?
One of the big questions facing the French president and security authorities is what took them so long – a day and a half - to raid the apartment? If their plan was to capture him alive to grill him for intelligence on al Qaeda networks, they failed.
Why did they not use stun grenades or a special gas to paralyze him in the initial stage or after the doors were breached? French counterterrorism units are adept in the use of a special gas designed over 40 years ago and were the first to use it.
debkafile’s counter-terror sources recall that in November. 1979, when the Saudi royal family was unable to put down a revolt against the throne, they asked urgently for a French counterterrorism unit to break the siege the rebels had laid on the Kaaba mosque in Mecca, Islam’s most sacred shrine. The unit poured gas into the ancient underground passages and forced the rebels to surrender.
debkafile reported Wednesday, March 21:
Questions are already being asked about how French intelligence and counter-terror agencies, which had held him and family members under surveillance for some time, failed to discover the deadly plans they were hatching against Jewish and Moslem targets.
Mohammed Merah said he had trained in Afghanistan and Pakistan, both of which countries he visited in 2010 and 2011. A Kandahar prison official identified him as an al Qaeda bomber who was imprisoned for three years and escaped in a mass Taliban jailbreak in 2008, only to be rearrested and sent back to France
Toulouse police hunted him down to an address 2 kilometers from the Ozar Hatorah school where he committed his murders after identifying him as the motorcyclist in black who also killed two French paratroopers and wounded a third in neighboring Montauban last Thursday.
Merah fell under police suspicion after that attack but was not arrested. He was active in the extremist Islamic organization called Forsane Alizze which was only outlawed in February although it was long identified with al Qaeda.
The terrorist called French TV stations after the attacks and said he had avenged French participation in the Afghan war, the suffering of Gaza Palestinians and the Sarkozy government’s ban on the veil in public places for Muslim women. He had videotaped his murders to further propagate their impact.
The Jewish teacher, Yonathan Sandler, 30, his sons Arieh, 3 and Gavriel, 6 and the Ozar Hatorah principal’s daughter, Miriam Monstango, aged 8, whom he shot dead Monday at the Jewish school, were laid to rest at the Har Menuhot cemetery in Jerusalem Wednesday attended by masses of people and notables.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe flew to Israel with the victims and attended the funerals as a mark of French-Israeli solidarity in the face of he terrible murders. "Never doubt our determination to fight anti-Semitism in France which violates all our values and will not be tolerated," he declared.
The dawn raid in Toulouse was accompanied by security police swoops on extremist Muslim hideouts across France.

The Daily Star/ Lebanon's Arabic press digest - March 22, 2012
Following are summaries of some of the main stories in a selection of Lebanese newspapers Thursday. The Daily Star cannot vouch for the accuracy of these reports.
Al-Joumhouria
Hezbollah approves woman's nationality [law proposal] contrary to pro-Aoun ministers’ views; Safadi distances himself from Mikati to join Bassil
Political activity Wednesday included a meeting at Parliament before midday and a Cabinet session in the afternoon.
There were satisfactory results from Parliament as it approved a draft law to reduce the prison year from 12 to 9 months and another on transport allowance.
Nonetheless, the Cabinet’s session was ordinary except for the political bickering at its start.
Al-Akhbar
Government runs away: [Proposed law granting] Lebanese women the right to pass on citizenship to children sent to committee
Cabinet has postponed debate on the right of Lebanese women to pass on citizenship to their children and has referred the draft law to a ministerial committee for further study.
Otherwise, the government approved several projects Wednesday.
While Cabinet showed full support for the Lebanese Army, Army Commander Gen. Jean Kahwaji criticized those skeptical about the discovery of a Salafist cell within army ranks.
On the other hand, the Future Movement agreed with Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea who called on the Lebanese Army to enter Ain al-Hilweh and arrest the head of the Takfiri cell accused of planning attacks against military barracks.
Not only did deputy Future Movement leader Antoine Andraous urge the Army to enter Ain al-Hilweh, he also launched a vehement campaign against Maronite Patriarch Beshara Rai, saying Rai has gone too far in his stances.
Al-Liwaa
Cabinet passes transport allowance, prison year [reduction] and Akkar development [plan]
Syrian gunfire directed at Wadi Khaled, Safadi rejects advance payment to aid refugees
Administrative body to oversee oil sector approved; symbolic strike in solidarity with Antonieh students
As soon as Lebanese Army Commander Gen. Jean Kahwaji wrapped up an inspection tour of some areas of the northeastern border, witnesses spoke of Syrian shelling Wednesday evening of the Lebanese village of al-Qaa which left one person wounded.
Separately, Cabinet has approved an administrative body to oversee the petroleum sector after a verbal clash between fuel companies and Energy Minister Gebran Bassil, who until late Wednesday night had failed to sign the fuel price list which threatens a new gasoline crisis.
In the meantime, the issue of prayers organized by Hezbollah students on the campus of Antonieh University in Baabda has received considerable attention due to its impact on the relationship between Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement, even though Hezbollah’s education department has refused to adopt the students’ action, labeling it “individual behavior.”
While the FPM chairman of the Students Affairs Committee announced full support for any decision made by the university, significantly, bodies and youth organizations from the March 14 coalition announced that they would not attend classes for one hour Thursday to protest what they called "scenes of bullying and safeguarding national unity and partnership.”
As-Safir
Cabinet approves oil committee ... appointment awaits civil service
Perhaps the dose of solidarity provided by the government to the Lebanese Army, even if late, and an inspection tour by the Lebanese Army Commander of units deployed along the northern and eastern borders with Syria have created a response to the campaign against the Lebanese Army.
The first rain came down when lawmakers took action Wednesday to allocate $100 million for part of the “Arab highway” in the Akkar region of north Lebanon.
An-Nahar
Several projects approved, but electricity remains thorny obstacle
Overnight Syrian shelling on northern border and al-Qaa
Even though the electricity issue remains thorny be it in Parliament or Cabinet, the government-ministerial day Wednesday produced a positive outcome after the approval of several vital projects.
Parliament, however, failed to pass a bill to bury high-voltage transmission lines underground in Mansourieh after a dispute broke out both in Parliament and Cabinet that resulted in an agreement to hold the bill for further study over a period of 10 days.
Meanwhile, heavy Syrian gunfire was reported overnight over the Nahr al-Kabir River accompanied by flare bombs some of which reached the Lebanese village of Bani Sakhr.
Several homes were hit by bullets but there were no reports of casualties. Several residents fled their homes near the border to stay with relatives in Wadi Khaled and Mashta Hammoud.
At the same time, residents of the area of al-Qaa spoke of heavy shelling on their town.
Al-Mustaqbal. Geagea describes Aoun’s FPM as ‘most corrupt in Lebanon’s history’ and Bassil promises fuel crisis
Parliamentary session quiet ... And Ain al-Hilweh escapes disaster
The security situation was back at the forefront after the head of the Palestinian Armed Struggle Brig. Gen. Mohammad Issa (Lino) escaped an assassination attempt when a bomb described as “extremely high tech” was discovered near his home.
Meanwhile, Energy and Water Minister Gebran Bassil brought good news by announcing that the fuel crisis was back.
"The country is headed toward a crisis – a fuel prices hike. We are on the brink of the abyss and we need to address it quickly," Bassil said.

Syria Opposition Says U.N. Statement Gives Assad More Time to Kill
by Naharnet/ 22 March 2012,
Syria's main opposition group on Thursday said a U.N. statement calling for all parties to end violence in Syria will simply give the regime more time to continue killing its own people.
"Such statements, issued amid continued killings, offer the regime the opportunity to push ahead with its repression in order to crush the revolt by the Syrian people," said Samir Nashar, member of the executive committee of the Syrian National Council. U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon said he hoped Wednesday's rare show of unity by the 15-member Security Council -- including Russia and China -- would mark a "turning point" in the crisis, in which more than 8,000 people have been killed. "I hope that this strong and united action by the council will mark a turning point in the international community's response to the crisis," Ban said on a visit to Kuala Lumpur Thursday. Russia and China, which have blocked two resolutions on Syria, backed a Western-drafted statement that called on Syrian President Bashar Assad to work toward a cessation of hostilities and a democratic transition.The council also gave a veiled warning of future international action.

Current and Former U.S. Officials Express Fears on Hizbullah Threat to Homeland Security
by Naharnet /22 March 2012, 06:18
The Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee has said Hizbullah may have hundreds of operatives based in the United States as several former officials raised fears on the rising threat of the party to U.S. security. During a hearing Wednesday with former government officials testifying, The committee’s chairman Peter King, said Hizbullah is increasingly posing a big threat to Americans."Now, as Iran moves closer to nuclear weapons, and there is increasing concern over war between Iran and Israel, we must also focus on Iran's secret operatives and their number one terrorist proxy force, Hizbullah, which we know is in America," said King. Former FBI official Chris Swecker agreed that the Lebanese party poses a real threat to the U.S. homeland security.
"While al-Qaida has gained attention and notoriety with a series of sensational attacks, Hizbullah has quietly and strategically operated below the radar screen by avoiding overt terrorist attacks in the U.S.," he said. A former drug enforcement official, Michael Braun, expressed fears on the alleged ties between Hizbullah and global drug cartels.
According to Braun, Hizbullah and members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard “are now operating and working in close proximity and collaborating with Mexican and Colombian drug trafficking cartels, not only in the Western Hemisphere, but other locations such as Guinea Bissau in West Africa.”
Former Department of Treasury official Matthew Levitt said Hizbullah has long seen the U.S. as a “cash cow,” where it has run charities and engaged in criminal activities to raise money.
Their remarks to the House Homeland Security Committee came as it heard majority preliminary investigative findings on the threat of Hizbullah and Iran to U.S. security.
The report said: “There is general consensus among dozens of experts as well as current and former law enforcement and intelligence officials interviewed by the Majority Investigative Staff that Hizbullah … is the most capable of flipping a U.S.-based fundraising cell into a lethal terror force.”
It also stressed that “most Hizbullah-linked Federal defendants have been Lebanese nationals or naturalized U.S. citizens from Lebanon,” saying “many of those charged by the Department of Justice over the past decade remain at large in Lebanon.”
The report cited around 21 cases in the U.S. against Hizbullah operatives in the past 10 years.

Report: U.S. Unblocks Military Aid to Lebanon
by Naharnet/22 March 2012,
The Obama administration decided to resume its military assistance to Lebanon although by Thursday there was not yet any official confirmation about the decision, As Safir daily said.
The chairman of the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Howard Berman, suspended a $100 million assistance to the Lebanese army in August 2010 over concerns that Hizbullah may have influence over the country's army and American-supplied weapons could be used to threaten Israel.
But As Safir said Thursday that the Obama administration in consultation with the House of Representatives agreed to send weapons and military equipment to Lebanon.
The first batch of light and medium-sized weapons could reach Lebanon soon given that the decision is only waiting for bureaucratic procedures, it said.
The newspaper added that the U.S. will also provide Lebanon with heavy weaponry at a later stage.
But As Safir stressed that by the time the daily was sent for print, there was no official confirmation or denial about the decision.
Following the 2006 summer war between Israel and Hizbullah, the army deployed in southern Lebanon — Hizbullah's heartland — for the first time in decades, with the help of U.N. peacekeepers. Since then, the U.S. has stepped up its military assistance to the Lebanese army.
It has since 2006 provided over $720 million in military aid, including assault rifles, Humvee vehicles, missile and grenade launchers and night vision goggles, in addition to training.

One Person Arrested for Smuggling Arms to Free Syrian Army
by Naharnet /Newsdesk 22 March 2012,
Military Examining Magistrate Imad al-Zain issued an arrest warrant on Thursday against a Lebanese national on charges of smuggling weapons to the Free Syrian Army, reported the National News Agency.
It said that Hussein A. was arrested after attempting to smuggle the arms through the border region of al-Qaa in the Bekaa.
Thousands of Syrians have fled to Lebanon since a revolt against the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad broke out in March last year.
Syria has mined several regions along the porous border to prevent the smuggling of weapons and infiltration of rebel fighters, activists say.
Army Commander General Jean Qahwaji visited the border area in northern and eastern Lebanon on Wednesday to review the troops and evaluate the situation on the ground.
His office said Qahwaji discussed "measures taken to secure the border and protect residents."
Shortly after his visit, Syrian troops fired rocket propelled grenades into northern Lebanon during the night, sparking panic among the local population, a security official and residents said on Thursday.
The security official said heavy machinegun fire followed by shelling erupted at around 9:00 pm (1900 GMT) from the Syrian side of the border, near the Lebanese village of Muqaybleh, prompting some residents to flee.
There were no reports of casualties.
"The Syrian troops initially fired flares and then machineguns and rocket propelled grenades," the official, who requested anonymity, told AFP.
He said at least two rockets fell inside Lebanese territory.
A local official in Muqaybleh said a number of fearful residents fled the village overnight.
"People were scared," he said, adding that no one was injured and no houses were hit.
Lebanese media also reported shelling near al-Qaa.
A local official in al-Qaa told AFP that machinegun fire was heard overnight across the border but that no shells fell inside Lebanese territory.
At least three people have been killed since October and several have been wounded when Syrian troops staging incursions into Lebanon opened fire on border villages.
Lebanon and Syria share a 330-kilometer (205-mile) border but have yet to agree on official demarcation.

Aoun-Hezbollah ties hit a glass ceiling
Thu 22 Mar 2012 /By Micheal Young
You have to wonder what Michel Aoun thought about the incident on Monday at the Maronite Antonine University, in which Shiite Muslim students prayed in front of the facility’s church. The ideals of religious coexistence aside, as a private religious institution the university did have the right to restrict such an act within its confines.
Aoun’s relationship with Hezbollah provides an interesting backdrop to the episode. Aounist students asked their Shiite comrades to respect university rules, but it was the Lebanese Forces who led the condemnation. It has been just over six years that Aoun signed an agreement with Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s secretary-general. During that period, both sides benefited. Yet, ultimately, Aoun failed to become president, which was at the heart of his calculations, and the party did little to help him in the 2008 election.
What about today? The reality is that the Aounist-Hezbollah partnership appears to have hit a glass ceiling. Both sides remain friendly. They may very well renew their electoral collaboration in 2013, though precisely how will be shaped substantially by the events in Syria. But the limits of the association are clearer than ever.
A few naïve souls once interpreted the Aounist-Hezbollah alliance as a historic reconciliation between Maronites and Shiites. Aoun represented a fundamentally new type of Christian leader, they gushed, someone who had embraced the reality of the Shiite revival. Such considerations failed to take into account that Maronites began flirting with the Shiites as far back as the early 1980s, when they sensed that the community was as hostile to the Palestinian military presence as they were. During Israel’s invasion of 1982, many Shiites openly welcomed the removal of Palestinians from the south, while a number of Amal-controlled Shiite neighborhoods in the southern suburbs of Beirut opposed the presence of Palestinian combatants.
This did not go far, partly because President Amin Gemayel never opened a serious channel to the Shiites, partly because Nabih Berri, then the community’s champion, fell under Syria’s sway. But Aoun was no maverick in looking to Hezbollah, not any more than Samir Geagea was in allying himself with the Sunni leader Saad Hariri or with the Druze leader Walid Jumblatt. Amid the shifting tectonic plates that is Lebanese politics, cross-sectarian alliances are frequent.
Unfortunately, Aoun’s and Nasrallah’s rapprochement had little impact at the social level. Christians are not any more or less friendly to Shiites than they were previously. The Christians of Hadeth, many of them solid Aounists, are even more anxious about the extension of predominantly Shiite quarters into their vicinity than they were before Aoun’s alliance with Hezbollah. The vast majority of Michel Aoun’s electors in Mount Lebanon hardly deals with Shiites at all, or in a way that reflects the Aoun-Nasrallah understanding.
That is normal, you would say. After all, why should political ties trickle down to the popular level? Absolutely true, in postwar Lebanon they have tended not to do so. Which is precisely why we should not read more into the Aounist-Shiite rapport than it merits. And the controversy over what happened at the Antoine University brought home again the regrettable chasm between the communities.
Yet even politically, Aoun and Hezbollah are drifting in separate directions. Both support the barbarous repression undertaken by Bashar Assad in Syria. Both remain hostile to March 14. However, Aoun and Nasrallah have incompatible priorities for the government, and this has led to real, if understated, tension between them.
The aim of Aoun is to use his successes in the Cabinet to consolidate his authority among Christians, possibly make a bid for the presidency in two years’ time, and eventually pave the way for a smooth succession within the Aounist movement, presumably to his son-in-law. Nasrallah’s objective is to brace Hezbollah for sudden transformations in the regional order – above all the fall of the Assad regime, but also a possible war with Israel, or even the consequences of embarrassing revelations before the Special Tribunal for Lebanon.
Aoun’s strategy inevitably leads to confrontation, since the man knows no other tactic to get his way than heightening polarization, for example threatening to bring down the government. The general is in a hurry. He wants to decide all major Christian administrative appointments; he wants to decisively weaken the Future Movement while it’s down; and he wants to assist Gibran Bassil, whose schemes are designed to exploit the monumental cash cow that is the Energy Ministry.
Nasrallah, on the contrary, seeks to calm the game. He wants the government to remain in place, and to succeed. This he made plain in a speech several weeks ago, in a patent stab at Aoun. Hezbollah doesn’t benefit from a vacuum, which may mean losing its grip on the ground, which is already evident anyway. The party is unsure about the president, Michel Sleiman, the prime minister, Najib Mikati, the Parliament speaker, Nabih Berri, and, of course, Walid Jumblatt, but it needs to keep them onside for now, to avert isolation.
That is why Hezbollah has remained neutral on administrative appointments, weakening Aoun’s hand; and it is why the party allowed Mikati to fund the special tribunal when Aoun was recklessly leading the charge against this. It is also why Nasrallah has not opposed Berri’s and Jumblatt’s maneuvering over budget legislation, even though their endorsement of a package deal to legitimize past outlays by March 14-led governments undermined Aoun’s position.
Aoun has a gift for painting himself into a corner, then screaming so others will let him out. Hezbollah used to help him, but not much anymore. The party faces existential challenges, and has little incentive to advance Aoun’s parochial agenda. The confrontation at the Antoine University will be papered over, but it stands as a useful reminder of the guardedness coloring Shiite-Christian relations, and now increasingly those between Aoun and Nasrallah.
By Micheal Young

Is America's view of Iran and Hezbollah dangerously out of date?
By Frank J. Cilluffo and Sharon Cardash & Michael Downing
Published March 20, 2012
| FoxNews.com
There's been an uptick in attempted, actual attacks on and assassinations of Israeli, Jewish, U.S., and Western targets from New Delhi to Tbilisi recently. Iran denies and dissociates itself from these incidents, but allegations against Iran and its proxies persist from multiple and varied sources
Collectively, these events form a dangerous tapestry, which should serve as spur to the United States to think carefully about its homeland security posture, and how it might best be reinforced, should these types of activities continue or escalate, with potentially serious implications for this country.
As a step in that direction, the House Homeland Security Committee will convene a hearing Wednesday on the threat posed to the U.S. homeland by Iran/Hezbollah.
Remember that Hezbollah once, not that long ago, held the mantle of deadliest terrorist organization: it killed more Americans (including 241 Marines in a single bombing in 1983) than any other terrorist organization prior to 9/11, when it was surpassed by Al Qaeda.
For the past decade, U.S. Government analysts have understandably focused on Al Qaeda, resulting in a lesser reservoir of U.S. intelligence on, and perhaps even a bit of a blind spot about, Hezbollah. Yet Hezbollah’s activities have grown global, ranging from West Africa to the Tri-Border Area of Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay.
According to the House Homeland Committee’s announcement, the witness panel (full disclosure: witness Matthew Levitt also serves as Senior Fellow at our Institute) will “focus on Iran’s primary terrorism proxies, including Hezbollah, which already has a robust network within the U.S., and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps” — against a concerning backdrop: the recently thwarted Iranian plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States; and the Director of National Intelligence’s assessment just weeks ago, that Iran is “now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States.”
Chairman King’s leadership on this matter is laudable, in part because the lenses through which the United States has historically understood and reacted to Iran and its proxies may be out of date.
Under present circumstances, characterized by a relatively high degree of tension—with Iran’s nuclear weapons program under both scrutiny and sanctions, the danger of such a lag is exacerbated, and the prospect of re-examining first principles is welcome.
Sound policy requires sound assumptions, after all. Yet we may be at risk on this count, which means that risks may materialize and surprise us, while opportunities to minimize and mitigate same may be missed.
“Redlines” are at the heart of the matter, as concerns both threat and response.
For years, a series of operating presumptions prevailed. Among them: that the United States homeland, although a venue for terrorist fundraising and criminal activity, was not itself perceived as fair game as subject of attack; that the terrorist ideologues would not tie themselves too closely to criminal counterparts; and that Shia and Sunni forces would not cooperate.
These and other assumptions no longer apply as they once may have, and the ramifications are disturbing.
Start with the convergence of crime and terror. Hezbollah’s nexus with criminal activity is, notably, greater than that of any other terrorist organization. These interconnections, including with gangs and cartels, give rise to the potential for outsourcing, and open up new avenues and networks to facilitate terrorist travel, logistics, recruitment, and operations.
The situation is not entirely without upside, however: from the point of view of U.S. intelligence and law enforcement authorities, these various points of intersection with criminal networks provide additional opportunities to exploit (for collection and other purposes).
At the same time, Shia and Sunni forces are, in fact, cooperating, notwithstanding that this may be counterintuitive or surprising to some.
Law enforcement officers confirm that ends are trumping means, as Shia members of Lebanese Hezbollah and Sunni (Saudi/Iraqi) militant forces, for example, share and complement each other’s skill sets and human resources.
Having said that, it is important not to overstate the case. Indeed, even within Shia circles, there is competition — for instance, there is debate as to who calls the shots and when, and analysts have also observed more competition than cooperation to date between Lebanese Hezbollah and the Iranian Quds Force.
The potential consequences of a reversal of this equation, however, are sufficiently potent as to bear (at minimum) red-teaming and the production of additional threat assessments, to include modalities of attack (such as cyber) and potential consequences.
Turning from capability to intent, law enforcement officials likewise have noted significant terrorist interest in and study of the range of methods and means used to smuggle narcotics and people from Mexico into the United States.
Taken in tandem with the plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington, such interest is not academic, and all it takes is one bad apple.
Once stateside, opportunities abound to blend in, plot, and plan. On the first point (integration), consider Los Angeles, which is home to the largest Iranian population outside of Iran itself. The picture becomes even more fraught when vulnerabilities are overlaid. Based on recent activity, the Los Angeles Police Department has elevated the Government of Iran and its proxies to a Tier One threat.
The city of Los Angeles contains the most active Hezbollah presence in the United States.
Jewish communities and facilities situated throughout the United States, for example, constitute relatively soft targets — and so too outside the country, as events in France this week so tragically evidence.
It doesn’t take much imagination to conjure up the flashpoints that could ensue here at home if certain actions were taken against Iran (even if not undertaken by the United States itself).
Given this convergence of threat vectors accompanied by concerning indicators of adversary intent, coupled with significant vulnerability, what can and should we do?
- Information gathering and sharing is crucial to planning and preparation: keeping eyes and ears open at home and abroad to glean indications and warnings (I&W) of attack will be fundamental, as will outreach to and partnership with state and local authorities and communities, where the rubber meets the road.
- Searching for I&W will require fresh thinking that identifies and pursues links and patterns not previously established by U.S. officials. In part, this entails hitting the beat hard, with local police tapping informants and known criminals for leads.
The flip side should be conversations with respected leaders in the community, to keep channels open, build trust, and foster mutual assistance. These discussions should take place across the board, and not just in major metropolitan centers.
- Disruption should be our determined goal — no doubt Iran and its proxies are expecting as much.
Ironically, the post-9/11 shift of U.S. law enforcement resources away from drugs and thugs toward counterterrorism may be in need of some recalibration, precisely to serve counterterrorist aims, as criminal and terrorist networks increasingly support and reinforce one another.
Lines in the sand may shift, and the maxim “never say never” is prudent philosophy.
Taking the time and making the effort now to understand Iran (its Quds Force, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Ministry of Intelligence and Security, etc.) and Hezbollah, and react accordingly, is an investment that is primed to yield substantial returns.
It is important to further peel back and comb through the lessons learned about current tactics, techniques, and procedures as manifested in the spate of recent incidents referenced above.
Refining our understandings in this way will assist with the creation and activation of domestic tripwires designed to keep us left of boom. Though attacks on the United States by Iran and or its proxies have so far been limited to U.S. interests and personnel abroad, the distinction between here and “over there” is no longer as operative as it once was.
The fronts are intertwined, and some analysts have characterized the situation overseas as a “shadow war” between Israel and Iran, with their respective proxies fighting it out, with varying degrees of competence and lethality, in settings from Baku to Bangkok.
Iran and its allies have a penchant, furthermore, for conflating the United States and our ally Israel in the context of Israeli contingency and attack plans, which provides all the more reason to adopt a careful stance, informed by the best possible intelligence, both foreign and domestic.
Now is the time to think through, and operationalize, U.S. strategy – to puncture the threat balloon before it ever goes up.
**Frank J. Cilluffo directs the George Washington University Homeland Security Policy Institute (HSPI). Sharon L. Cardash serves as HSPI’s associate director. Michael Downing is Deputy Chief and Commanding Officer of the Counterterrorism and Criminal Intelligence Bureau of the Los Angeles Police Department, and an HSPI Senior Fellow.

Peter King warns: Hezbollah agents in U.S.
By MJ LEE | 3/21/12 9:12
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) warned Wednesday that there are hundreds — maybe even thousands — of Hezbollah agents inside the United States capable of launching a terror attack if U.S.-Iran tensions continue to escalate.
“The American intelligence community … believes we are very much at risk for an attack by Iranian operatives, which would be Hezbollah, that is a terrorist-trained force in this country. It really is the ‘A’ team of international terrorism — far more sophisticated than Al Qaeda,” the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee said on CNN’s “Starting Point.”
King, whose committee is holding a hearing Wednesday to “educate” Americans and members of Congress about the threat of Iran, explained that Hezbollah has had agents and operatives inside the U.S. for many years for the purpose of fundraising and recruiting.
And while the conventional wisdom until recently has been that they were not necessarily stationed in the U.S. to carry out terrorist attacks, the Republican congressman warned Wednesday that especially given the recent tension between Israel and Iran, as well as questions surrounding Iran’s nuclear aspirations, a scenario in which Hezbollah agents mobilize an attack remains a real possibility.
“We do know that a number of them have been trained as terrorists, so the question is,how quickly they can be made operational, and would they carry out an attack?” he said. “We estimate it to be at least in the hundreds, maybe the thousands of Hezbollah agents here in this country. And again, especially if things intensify between Israel and Iran, between the United States and Iran, could Iran take preemptive action in this action through Hezbollah?”
King cited a murder plot allegedly directed by the Iranian government to kill the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. last year as a further warning sign of the potential threat that the country poses to Americans.
And if Israel attacks Iran, the congressman warned that the U.S. could certainly “find itself implicated or involved” in the crisis.
“Having said that, I don’t think we can rule out an Israeli attack,” King said. “ I think we have to keep all the pressure out there. … The fact that there can be complications is not a reason why Israel shouldn’t do it or we shouldn’t do it. We have to make sure whatever we do that it is going to work … and realize that Iran cannot be allowed to get a nuclear weapon.”
Wednesday’s congressional hearing will include witnesses from the New York Police Department and others from the intelligence community.

U.N. unites on Syria, violence spills into Lebanon
(2012-03-21) (Reuters) - By Khaled Yacoub Oweis
AMMAN (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council, including Russia and China, threw its weight on Wednesday behind efforts by Kofi Annan to end the bloody conflict in Syria, providing a rare moment of global unity in the face of the year-long crisis.
In a statement approved by all its 15 members, the council threatened Syria with unspecified "further steps" if it failed to comply with Annan's peace plan, which calls for a ceasefire and demands swift access for aid agencies.
Although the original statement was diluted at Russia's demand, editing out any specific ultimatums, the fact that all world powers signed up to the proposal dealt a serious diplomatic blow to President Bashar al-Assad as he battles a popular uprising.
"To President Assad and his regime we say, along with the rest of the international community: take this path, commit to it, or face increasing pressure and isolation," U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in Washington.
The conflict spilled over Syria's borders late on Wednesday when several shells hit the Lebanese border village of al-Qaa and nearby fields, injuring one person, residents said.
Al-Qaa, 10 km (six miles) from the Syrian border, has been the first stop for many of the 7,000 Syrian refugees who have fled fighting into Lebanon.
Refugees complain that they are pursued by Syrian forces, who have often fired across the border, but al-Qaa residents said this was the first time artillery has been used.
Adding to the pressure on Damascus, European Union governments are set to impose sanctions on Assad's wife Asma on Friday, EU diplomats said, meaning that she will no longer be able to travel to the 27-nation bloc or buy products from EU-based shops in her own name.
The sanctions, which still need formal approval from ministers, come after the British-born former investment banker became the focus of media attention when a trove of emails obtained by Britain's Guardian newspaper appeared to show her spending tens of thousands of dollars on internet shopping sprees while Syria descended into bloodletting.
At least 8,000 people have died in the revolt, according to U.N. figures. Violence has intensified in recent weeks as pro-government forces bombard rebel towns and villages, looking to sweep their lightly armed opponents out of their strongholds.
Assad's forces have chalked up a string of gains as they turned their firepower on areas held by rebels. But the fighting shows no sign of abating and analysts expect the insurgents to change their tactics and adopt guerrilla warfare.
32 KILLED ACROSS SYRIA
The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said 32 civilians were killed in Syria on Wednesday, the majority in government shelling on towns in Syria's central Homs province.
The army fired mortars into the Khalidiya district of Homs city, while artillery targeted the rebel town of Rastan, north of Homs city. Video also showed shelling of the ancient Apamea castle at Qalat Mudiq, near Hama.Opposition activists said the army used tanks, artillery and anti-aircraft guns on the Damascus suburbs of Harasta and Irbin early Wednesday, which were retaken from rebels two months ago but have seen renewed insurgency in recent days.
The official Syrian news agency SANA reported the funerals of seven security force members killed in the fighting.
Reports from Syria cannot be independently verified because officials have barred access to rights groups and journalists.
Russia and China, competing with Western powers for influence in the Middle East, previously vetoed two U.N. draft resolutions that would have condemned Damascus and have resisted calls from Western and Arab states for Assad to stand down.
But faced by growing global outrage at the bloodshed, the two countries agreed to a so-called "presidential statement". They are generally non-binding documents but do require unanimous support in the Security Council.
Russia, one of Assad's few remaining allies, praised the document as pragmatic. "The most important thing is that there are no ultimatums ... and no suggestions as to who carries more blame," Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in Berlin.
DEMANDS
The accord came a few days after Annan, a former U.N. secretary general, told the Security Council that the response by Damascus to his plans for peace were disappointing and he had urged the international community to lay aside its divisions.
His proposal, spelled out in the U.N. statement, tells the Syrian government to cease troop movements in population centers and end the use of heavy weapons in such areas.
It also calls for the government and opposition to hold talks to secure a peaceful settlement. Assad has not rejected the proposals but has challenged their feasibility and asked who can speak for the splintered opposition. The Syrian opposition plans to meet in Turkey on March 26 to try to overcome their internal feuds and plot a more coherent strategy, sources said on Wednesday.
However, they have yet to agree on who should attend the gathering, underlining doubts about their ability to act in concert, which has frustrated Arab and Western states seeking a reliable partner to unite the anti-Assad movement. The Security Council last passed a presidential statement on Syria in August 2011, but council members did reach a rare agreement on March 1 to rebuke Damascus for not letting U.N. humanitarian aid chief Valerie Amos into the country.
Shortly afterwards, Amos was allowed to visit Damascus.
Annan welcomed the U.N. support for his mediation efforts and called on Damascus to "respond positively".
The latest Council accord came after Moscow adopted a new, sharper tone with Syria, which hosts Russia's only naval base outside the former Soviet Union.
"We believe the Syrian leadership reacted wrongly to the first appearance of peaceful protests and ... is making very many mistakes," Lavrov told Russian radio on Tuesday.
France welcomed the Security Council's move and said Assad must now halt all violence and repression, allow humanitarian aid to reach everyone in need and engage in "inclusive dialogue" with the opposition to find a lasting political solution. "With this declaration the United Nations Security Council is beginning to take responsibility after months of blockage," French Foreign Ministry spokesman Bernard Valero said in Paris.
(Additional reporting by Louis Charbonneau in New York, Dominic Evans and Jamal Saidi in Beirut, Steve Gutterman in Moscow, and Olivia Rondonuwu in Jakarta, Leigh Thomas in Paris, Justyna Pawlak in Brussels; Writing by Oliver Holmes and Crispian Balmer; Editing by Mark Heinrich)
© Copyright 2012, Reuters

Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird  Concludes Successful Visit to Middle East
March 21, 2012 - Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird today concluded his two-day visit to Saudi Arabia and Qatar, where he discussed regional security issues and met with prominent business leaders.
“I was pleased to accept Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud’s invitation to discuss the situation in the Middle East,” Minister Baird said. “Saudi Arabia is an important player in the region and in the international community generally. We agreed on the need for united action to end the appalling violence in Syria perpetrated by the Assad regime and to deal with the resulting humanitarian crisis. “Prince Saud and I discussed our concerns regarding Iran’s nuclear program and its consistent refusal to abide by UN Security Council resolutions and allow full inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. We agreed that Iran is a destabilizing force in the region and that the international community has to remain united in its common interest of convincing the Iranian regime to reverse its current course and abandon any nuclear weapons program.” While in Riyadh, Baird also met with Bandar bin Mohammed Al-Aiban, President of the Saudi Human Rights Commission, and Prince Alwaleed bin Talal bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, CEO of Kingdom Holding Company. During his trip, Minister Baird travelled to Jeddah to meet with Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), at the organization’s headquarters. “The 56-member organization is an important collective voice for the Muslim world. Under Mr. Ihsanoglu’s leadership, the OIC has been an important advocate for the Syrian people,” said Baird. “It is also a vehicle for providing humanitarian assistance to those caught up in the conflict.”
“We also discussed concerns about Iran’s apparent willingness to become a nuclear threat to the peace and stability of the region.”
In Qatar, Baird opened the new Canadian embassy in Doha. He also met with H.E. Sheikh Ahmed Bin Mohammed Bin Jabr Al Thani, Minister’s Assistant for International Cooperation Affairs.
“Qatar is continuing to play a constructive role in the Middle East and has a valuable perspective to offer,” said Baird. “The opening of Canada’s new embassy in Doha is a reflection of the strong relations we enjoy with this dynamic Gulf state and demonstrates that our relationship is getting stronger.”

Canada Welcomes Adoption of UN Security Council Plan for Syria
March 21, 2012 - Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird today issued the following statement:
“I welcome the United Nations Security Council’s presidential statement today that endorsed Kofi Annan’s plan for Syria. It will ensure that humanitarian assistance will get to those who so desperately need it.“However, this is just the first step and much remains to be done. It is imperative that all countries stand firmly behind this plan and continue to put pressure on the current regime.
“The main obstacle to peace and stability in Syria remains the Assad regime and its backers who persist in killing Syrian civilians. Canada’s position has not changed: Assad must go. And the aspirations of the Syrian people to live in peace must be met.“We call on the United Nations Security Council to adopt a clear and binding resolution condemning outright the ongoing violence.“Those who continue to support the regime only share in Assad’s responsibility for the continued death and destruction that Syrians are suffering; history will be their judge. “Change will come. The Syrian people will have their day.”

Hezbollah Donors, Agents Operating in U.S.
Alana Goodman | @alanagoodman
03.21.2012 -
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/03/21/peter-king-thousands-hezbollah-donors-agents-in-us/
Of all the terror groups that pose an internal threat to the U.S., the threat from the Iran-backed Hezbollah may be the most pressing. Today House Homeland Security Committee chief Peter King is holding a hearing on the organization’s U.S.-based network. According to his findings, Hezbollah is thought to have thousands of sympathetic donors and hundreds of operatives across the country – many of them with military training:
Pinning down a reliable estimate of the number of Hezbollah operatives who now reside inside the U.S. is difficult because of their operational security expertise. But some officials estimate that, based on cases uncovered since 9/11, there are likely several thousand sympathetic donors, while operatives probably number in the hundreds. …
Many defendants were known or suspected of having military training or direct combat experience against Israeli forces. Some were quietly convicted of fraud and deported as criminal aliens without their Hezbollah background being publicly disclosed by prosecutors, the Majority’s Investigative Staff has learned
King’s hearing will no doubt be used as fodder by Iran’s sympathizers in America, who want to discourage Israel from striking the Iranian nuclear program. The New York Times has been playing up how an Israeli attack on Iran’s facilities may spark a violent backlash against the U.S. And there’s no denying that an Israeli strike could ensnare the U.S. in some form or another.
But there are greater domestic threats than a radical anti-American regime with ties to terror operatives in the U.S. For example: a radical anti-American regime with ties to terror operatives in the U.S. that also has nuclear weapons.
King said today that his findings shouldn’t be used to discourage an Israeli strike:
“There’s no doubt that if Israel does attack Iran, this is not going to be easy, it’s not going to be surgical, and again the U.S. could find itself implicated or involved in it,” said King on CNN’s “Starting Point.”
“I don’t think we can rule out an Israeli attack. I think we need to keep all the pressure out there. Sometimes the president has had mixed signals — I think in recent weeks he’s gotten more consistent to Iran. But again, the fact that there can be complications are not a reason why Israel shouldn’t do it or we shouldn’t do it,” he added.
Exactly. This is why the argument from the appease-Iran crowd is so counter-intuitive. If there’s broad concern about the threat of Hezbollah operatives in the U.S. now, why would we expect them to be less of a threat if they were backed by mullahs with nukes? Or are we just supposed to that pray Israel and our other allies don’t do anything that might offend the regime once it obtains nuclear weapons, lest its Hezbollah allies retaliate against us domestically?

Lebanese suspect in Thailand accused of Hezbollah links denies he is a ‘terrorist’
By Associated Press,March 20 | Updated: Wednesday, March 21, BANGKOK — A man who Thai police say led them to tons of bombmaking components told reporters he is not a terrorist, then pleaded not guilty Wednesday to charges of illegally possessing explosive materials. Atris Hussein, a 47-year-old Swedish citizen of Lebanese origin, is accused of possessing nearly 3,000 kilograms (6,500 pounds) of ammonium nitrate, a fertilizer that can be used to make explosives.Police say that after Hussein was arrested Jan. 12 at Bangkok’s international airport, he led them to a warehouse packed with more than four tons of fertilizer and other materials that can be used to make bombs.Thai authorities have accused Hussein of links to Hezbollah militants, but he said outside Bangkok’s Criminal Court, “I’m not terrorist.” When asked if he was worried about the prosecution, he nodded and gave a weary smile. Hussein faces up to five years in prison if convicted.Hussein’s arrest came as the U.S. and Israel warned of a terrorist threat in Bangkok against Americans and Israelis. Thai media reported at the time that the Israeli Embassy was among the targets.Thai police say the case is unrelated to a botched bomb plot that was exposed Feb. 14 when an accidental blast rocked a residential Bangkok neighborhood. Three Iranian men have been detained in connection with that explosion, and authorities have alleged Israeli diplomats were targeted and that it was connected to an attack in India against an Israeli diplomatic vehicle.Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

B’nai Brith
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
B’nai Brith Canada Says Arrest in Toulouse School Massacre 48 Hours Too Late
Toronto, 21 March 2012 - The Jewish human rights organization B’nai Brith Canada has stated that the French government’s imminent arrest of Mohammed Merah, suspected of murdering four French Jews and three French soldiers, has come too late for the victims. The organization, which regularly consults with the RCMP and CSIS on issues relating to security threats and safeguards, is questioning whether the deadly attack might have been prevented if French authorities had shifted from a policy of merely observing homegrown terrorist suspects to actively pursuing those planning to perpetrate terrorist acts.
Frank Dimant, CEO of B’nai Brith Canada, stated: “Concern is growing that these atrocities could have been prevented, since the suspect, known by authorities for his alleged terrorist activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan, had reportedly been under police surveillance for years. Western governments must transition from over-reliance on surveillance of terror suspects to active prevention strategies against would-be terrorists.“As details emerge regarding the suspect’s reported affiliations with Islamist terror networks such as Fursan Al-Izza, a French arm of al-Qaeda, what is also alarming is his apparent radicalization in France by an Islamist group, a phenomenon that has been noted in other countries, too. We are calling on the Canadian government and its security agencies to remain vigilant in confronting the ongoing threat of homegrown Islamist terror and to take strong measures to prevent continued radicalization in this country. There is a sad irony in funerals being held in Israel and France as we mark the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, a day that is supposed to celebrate an end to racial dissension.“We strongly encourage community members to immediately report all suspicious patterns to the police and to B’nai Brith Canada via its Anti-Hate Hotline at 1-800-892-BNAI (2624). For ongoing alerts sign up to Jewish Canada at www.jewishcanada.ca
“Our hearts go out to the families of the victims who were laid to rest today, to the broader French Jewish community, and the families of the murdered French soldiers.”
-30-
For more information, please contact Aaron Rosenberg, Communication Officer, at (647) 227-4404.
B’nai Brith Canada has been active in Canada since 1875 as the Jewish community’s foremost human rights agency
 

Mullah Lavrov!
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
A dangerous statement, or gaffe, was made by the Russian Foreign Ministry, by its minister Sergey Lavrov, in which he said that “if the current Syrian regime collapses, some countries in the region will want to establish Sunni rule in Syria.” It is very strange that a foreign minister would issue such a statement, particularly the Russian Foreign Minister.
This statement, or gaffe, was not made by Hassan Nasrallah or Nuri al-Maliki or Moqtada al-Sadr or even Iranian Foreign Minister Salehi or Bashar al-Assad himself, rather it was made by a secular state that is not known for falling into sectarian quicksand, particularly with regards to the language that “mullah” Lavrov used; and when we say “mullah” here, we mean one of the mullah’s of Khomeinist Tehran! However, can we look at Lavrov’s statement solely from this sectarian standpoint? I think not, for it is clear that Lavrov’s statement reflects confusion, more than fears of Sunnis!
Over the past days, the Russian Foreign Minister has issued an excessive number of statements about the situation in Syria, however all of these statements have been contradictory, with one statement criticizing Bashar al-Assad and holding him accountable for inflaming the situation by reacting wrongly to what was carried out by the Syrian people, another statement revealing that Russia wants to cooperate with the UN Security Council and others, and finally the latest statement, or gaffe, which I repeat is difficult to imagine any foreign ministry issuing, let alone the Russian foreign minister! Issuing a statement saying that some countries in the region want to establish Sunni rule in Syria is not just dangerous, this also lacks the diplomatic judgment expected from a Russian Foreign Minister. Therefore, Lavrov’s statements about Sunni rule represents evidence of Russia’s frustration at the Gulf Cooperation Council [GCC] states – and particularly Saudi Arabia – ignoring Lavrov’s contradictory statements on Syria, namely the statements that claim that Moscow has opened the door to “pressing’ the al-Assad regime – at least to those willing to believe this – however this, of course, is not true; all the while time is running out and Moscow is becoming increasingly embarrassed [of its relationship with the al-Assad regime].
I previously wrote an article summarizing the need to sit down with the Russians [Time to sit down with the Russians, 11/3/2012], particularly following Lavrov’s meeting with Arab foreign ministers in Cairo, however even if the Gulf States – or Saudi Arabia, in particular – have failed to sit down with Russia, this does not explain this shameful statement about Sunni rule in Syria. This statement serves to fuel sectarianism, in an unprecedented manner, whilst it will also be difficult to erase this statement from the region’s memory, on all levels, even if Moscow secure al-Assad’s departure from Syria. In this case, what is the difference today between what Sheikh al-Arour is saying about the al-Assad regime, and what Lavrov said about the Sunnis? Is Moscow paying attention to this?
What is certain is that even if Russia become aware of this, the damage – which is significant – has already been done, as it has become clear that there is no difference between the mullah dressed in red and the mullah dressed in black in Iran, for each is more dangerous than the other, because they are pouring oil on fire in a region that is surrounded by dynamite! Unfortunately, this is precisely what Mullah Lavrov did.

The definition of the Shabiha
By Emad El Din Adeeb/Asharq Alawsat
If you want to avoid moral or material responsibility for any error or crime, you must choose between three options: lie and stick to your permanent denial, pass the subject on to a fact-finding committee that does not reach a conclusion, or say: “let us first establish the facts”, and query the nature of the crime in the first place! What is the definition of a killer or a victim? What the ruling regime in Syria has done is all three at once: It has denied, it has called for a commission of enquiry, and it has entered into a maze of interpretations!
The regime denied that massacres were being carried out against peaceful, unarmed citizens, claiming that the violent acts were legitimate forms of self-defense, or in defense of the homeland and public interests in the face of “armed gangs” that want to destroy legitimacy for the benefit of foreign powers aspiring against Syria, the country which champions “resistance” and “opposition”.
The ruling regime in Syria announced that it would form committees to investigate any accusations or violations, and also form committees for political reform and to fight against corruption in all sectors of the state, and to enact drastic constitutional reforms.
The third procedure, and this is the crux of the point I would like to make today, is that the regime brought the Arab League, Kofi Annan, and the international community into the labyrinth of the expression favored by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad: “before we debate, let us define the concepts”!
If we said, for example: Why have the Golan Heights not been liberated yet? He would say to you “Let us first define the concept of ‘liberation’! Is a physical liberation of the land possible without liberating its sovereignty?” If we said “we want political reform”, he would reply “What do you mean by reform? Do you mean the Western style that has failed, or the Eastern European style, which is still on trial? We have no other options except the Baathist nationalist model!”
All of this nonsense has exhausted the great Syrian people, it has distorted the wonderful minds of the Syrian elite, and it has squandered the efforts and contributions of the highly active Syrian expat capitalists, present in all corners of the globe from the Gulf to Europe, and from China to Latin America.
During one of the Arab League observer mission’s meetings in Syria, when a complaint was put forward on behalf of the unarmed citizens about the role of the “Shabiha”, who were carrying out massacres against the civilians, a Baathist official began to pose the following question to the observers:
“What do you mean by ‘Shabiha’?” Are they gangs representing a third party, or are they terrorist forces trying to target the al-Assad regime? Or are they nationalist forces that have been mobilized by a conspiracy to seize governance of this country, and so they decided to go down into the streets and defend this great nation and its nationalist regime?!
Is there any way to reply politely to these questions?

US tells Turkey to back off Syria
Tony Badran, March 22, 2012
Now Lebanon/According to inside sources, during her meeting with Turkish FM Ahmet Davutoğlu last month, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Ankara not to move forward against the Syrian regime. (AFP photo)
In a previously unreported turn of events, it has now come to light that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in her meeting with Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu last month, emphatically dismissed a number of forward leaning options on Syria that the Turkish top diplomat proposed to the Obama administration.
What this means is that Washington, which at one point subcontracted its Syria policy to Ankara, has now called the Turks off the regime of Bashar al-Assad.
According to well-informed Turkish and US sources, during his meeting with Secretary Clinton, Davutoğlu put forward a set of measures, including, among others, creating a buffer zone and/or a humanitarian corridor, as well as organizing and equipping the Free Syrian Army (FSA). The secretary of state responded in no uncertain terms that the Obama administration had no interest in pursuing any of these options. In fact, according to one account, Clinton told her Turkish counterpart no less than three times, “We are not there.”
This conversation fits well with the administration’s message to other regional allies, namely Saudi Arabia, against arming the FSA and pushing Washington’s preferred policy of going through the Russians, in an attempt to reach a “political solution” to the Syrian crisis.
There were hints of Davutoğlu’s agenda on the eve of his meeting with Clinton, along with some speculation about Turkish-US consultation regarding the creation of a safe zone in northern Syria. The idea was that Turkey was prepared to move in this direction following the failure to reach an agreement with Moscow, especially as this resulted in the Assad regime escalating its violence. The brutalization of Homs in February may have also finally pushed the Turks into action.
Apparently, the Turks, much like the Saudis, were looking to the first Friends of Syria meeting in Tunis as a possible forum to bypass the Russians and begin a more muscular effort, with US backing. The Saudis found out at the meeting that no such action was forthcoming, and withdrew in frustration, while publicly voicing their preference for arming the Syrian rebels.
The Turks got their answer from Secretary Clinton well before the Tunis gathering, and, according to the Turkish sources, were dismayed at the Obama administration’s extraordinary passivity and refusal to lead.
The message conveyed to the Turks was the same one made clear to the Saudis. According to one US source, when Davutoğlu ended up asking Clinton where the administration was on the issue, her response simply repeated the mantra about the Arab League initiative and going to the Security Council again for another go at the Russians. In other words, it was more of the same.
Not surprisingly, following the meeting, the Turkish foreign ministry pulled back, stating that direct intervention “is not on our agenda at the moment.” The Turks may have finally decided that more aggressive measures are needed. However, and despite the fact that Clinton may not have objected to Turkey moving on its own, Ankara remains reluctant to lead such an endeavor on its own, especially without explicit US approval and backing. In effect, therefore, the administration was actively blocking any such move on Turkey’s part, just as it held a red light to possible Saudi and Qatari plans to arm the FSA.
However, last week, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan once again floated the idea of a buffer zone, adding that the next Friends of Syria meeting, scheduled to take place in Istanbul on April 1, would come up “with very different results,” without elaborating further.
This goes back to the statement by an unnamed US official that the Obama administration would take a passive stand toward regional states arming the FSA “at the next Friends of Syria meeting.” This reading was reflected in Turkish press commentary as well, placing emphasis on the upcoming gathering in Istanbul as a possible turning point. Similarly, there has been speculation that the Saudis, too, are waiting for the April 1 meeting before beginning their efforts to arm the FSA in earnest. The purpose of such declarations could be to pressure the US to take more aggressive action.
If this reading is correct, then it would explain the Obama administration’s eagerness to support the Kofi Annan mission, as well as its praise for the non-binding UN Security Council statement issued yesterday. Secretary Clinton hailed the statement even when it contained no mention of Assad’s departure from power, no time constraints on Annan’s mission, and no specific or credible threat of action in case of Syrian non-compliance, to say nothing of how its call for dialogue between the regime and the opposition flies in the face of the US policy of regime change.
One could ask, then, what in the statement merited such enthusiasm. But what the statement did do is buy the administration more time to continue pressing its regional allies against any military options. Whether the Saudis and the Turks will decide to proceed regardless with their plans following the next Friends of Syria meeting, remains to be seen. But the administration’s latest move certainly has limited their maneuverability.
The Obama administration’s reasoning is simple. It calculates, rather correctly, that such regional efforts will likely end up drawing the US in down the road, one way or another. President Obama wishes to nip in the bud any possibility of this happening in an election year. And so, such regional moves were opposed in order for the president not to be forced to take action he’s adamantly intent on avoiding, regardless of the consequences.
As a result, the administration has found itself in the surreal position of siding closer with Assad’s Russian ally and at cross-purposes with its own regional allies – and, most significantly, in contradiction with own stated policy of regime change in Syria.
*Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He tweets @AcrossTheBay.

Christians’ fears in the Arab world
By Osman Mirghani/Asharq Alawsat
Pope Shenouda III has passed away, having led the largest Christian denomination in the Arab world for four decades. He deservedly received widespread tributes from across Egypt, with the exception of the unexpected conduct of some MPs affiliated to the Salafist al-Nour party who chose not to attend a People’s Assembly session, in order to avoid participating in a minute’s silence for the deceased, whilst another group refused to stand for the minute’s silence, instead remaining in their seats, prompting widespread arguments among Egyptians and others. These acts, and the controversy that accompanied them, reflect a major problem that Egypt, and even the region, will face in the days to come. This is a problem concerning the status of Christians in the Arab world and the underlying concerns with the rise to power of political Islamist movements in a belt extending from Morocco, Tunisia, Libya and Sudan to Egypt. This area has the greatest population density in the Arab world, and could extend towards the Levant. There are those who believe that a change is inevitably coming in Syria and the Islamists will come to power there, with reference to the presence of Hamas in power in Gaza, the activity of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, and the Islah bloc in Yemen.
On the opposite side there is the growing influence of Hezbollah in Lebanon, the presence of Islamist parties in power in Iraq, and the Sunni-Shiite conflicts that are increasing sectarian tensions and becoming one of the greatest threats to regional security and stability. This means that the issue is not only about Christians in the region, but all religious and ethnic minorities, and it revolves around the themes of coexistence, equal rights and the concept of citizenship.
It is certainly not helpful to deny the existence of a problem relating to coexistence and tolerance, and instead resort to repeating the words that people have coexisted for hundreds, and in some cases thousands of years, and that the current tensions are the result of foreign conspiracies and hidden hands at work fueling sectarianism and minorities’ concerns. The truth is that the issue relates to an absence of democracy and the existence of authoritarian regimes ruling in many of our countries with tyranny, repression and intimidation, in addition to the absence of frank and open dialogue. All this has led, in many cases, to widespread neglect for minorities’ issues, along with their equal rights and full citizenship. At other times, minorities have been used as a trump card for certain political circumstances, which has exacerbated the problem and contributed to the tensions that exist below the surface.
Many would testify that Pope Shenouda III was an advocate of dialogue and tolerance, just as he was also a supporter of national unity and coexistence in his country, rejecting calls from some expatriate Copts for international intervention in Egypt under the pretext of protecting the Christians, who make up around 10 percent of Egypt’s population of roughly 85 million. The man also opposed the establishment of political parties based on religion, and rejected the call from some Copts in the late 1980s to establish a political party for Christians. It is true that he had his critics, claiming he was too conservative and prevented many changes in the Coptic Church to address the problems of personal status, that he was close to the regime of former President Hosni Mubarak, and that there was no announcement of the Church’s support for the Egyptian revolution, although many Copts actively participated in it and some of them even had a major role in movements such as “Kefaya” and the “April 6 Youth Movement”, which were fundamental in creating the revolutionary atmosphere. Yet all of this does not detract from the fact that Pope Shenouda III had a strong sense of nationalism and great awareness that enabled him to steer the Coptic Church away from many pitfalls, and play a substantial role in helping to quell attempts to ignite sectarian strife in Egypt, most notably in recent years, as well as the accompanying calls from some radical voices demanding foreign intervention to protect the Christians.
Pope Shenouda’s position seems remarkable if we compare it to that of the Maronite Patriarch in Lebanon, Bechara al-Rahi, who issued more than one statement controversial statement expressing his concerns about the “Arab Spring” and the repercussions of the fall of the al-Assad regime, saying that the Christians in the Levant will pay the price, on the basis that any future alliance between the Sunnis of Syria and the Sunnis of Lebanon would upset the balance in Lebanon and exacerbate tensions with the Shiites. The problem with the Patriarch’s remarks are that they suggest that the Christians’ fate is linked to authoritarian regimes and oppressive rule, and that it is in their interests for such regimes to continue, in order to protect their rights. The danger of such statements is clear and does not require explanation, and thus many members of the Maronite Church and others leapt to criticize them, reminding Patriarch al-Rahi that the Arab Christians are part of the fabric of their communities and their interests, like all other components of these communities, which are pushing towards democracy as a means of providing rights for all, safeguarding freedoms and ensuring the independence of the judiciary and free expression and belief. Even if there are concerns about political Islamist movements, these concerns do not justify a rejection of democracy and openness, nor do they justify embracing regimes that have been renounced by the people. Rather, it would be more beneficial to work with various currents to fix the imbalance inherent in Arab communities, confront extremism in all its forms, and create a climate of dialogue and moderation, alongside an atmosphere of tolerance and coexistence.
The wisdom that appears to be absent from Patriarch al-Rahi’s controversial remarks is what characterized Pope Shenouda III, and caused him to reject all that could inflame sectarian strife. Hence the al-Azhar institution lamented his death by saying that Egypt has lost Pope Shenouda III at a time of “critical circumstances where the country need the wisdom of the wise, their experience and clarity of mind”. Egypt is going through a difficult period where it needs – in practice and not in words only – wisdom and moderation, to act with a sense of nationalism and not according to partisan or ideological calculations. After the Islamists’ resounding victory – from the Brotherhood to the Salafists to the Jihadists – in the parliamentary elections, attention is now being directed at the presidential election and the new constitution, which has roused much controversy over some of its articles.
What will happen in Egypt over the coming weeks will have repercussions and will send an important signal to many in the region, especially the minorities, about the possibility of spreading an atmosphere of tolerance and coexistence and establishing the concepts of equal rights and full citizenship, so that the Arab nations can accommodate everyone.

Former Syrian VP Vice President Abdul-Halim Khaddamcalls for military intervention
By Nadia Al-Turki
Asharq Alawsat
London, Asharq Al-Awsat – Former Syrian Vice President Abdul-Halim Khaddam has appealed to Arab leaders, particularly the leaders of Gulf States who are concerned about what is happening in Syria, to support military intervention in the country. Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat during a telephone interview earlier this week, he stressed that “these [Arab] states are concerned by Syrian affairs, from a fraternal, pan-Arab, and religious perspective; therefore I urge them to take the decision to go to the West and strongly call for the formation of a military coalition to rescue the Syrian people and the region.”
He added “Failing to intervene militarily in Syria will have grave consequences on the region, and at a certain point, the people will shift to extremism and Syria will become a safe haven for all the extremists in the Arab and Islamic world; this will be more dangerous to regional and international security than the situation in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
Abdul-Halim Khaddam served as Vice President of Syria between 1984 and 2005. He was one of the most senior Sunni politicians in the country, and had previously served as Syrian Foreign Minister under President Hafez al-Assad from 1970 to 1984. He served as interim Syrian president in 2000, between the death of Hafez al-Assad and the election of his son and successor, Bashar al-Assad. He ultimately resigned from his post as Syrian Vice president in 2005, relocating to Paris, France, where he has issued statements criticizing the Bashar al-Assad regime. The Syrian parliament has brought treason charges against him and expelled him from the Baathist party. He remains the highest ranking Syrian official to have cut ties with the al-Assad regime.
In a telephone interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, the former Syrian Vice President stressed that the only real option in Syria is for an international military coalition to intervene and carry out military operations similar to what happened in Libya during the revolution there. He stressed that the only way to achieve the objectives that have been put forward by those calling for the establishment of a buffer zone is to support military intervention in Syria.
Khaddam explained that the buffer zone – which Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Ankara intends to discuss – will not solve the problem, and that "this [buffer zone] needs international military intervention to protect it, and this is something that cannot be achieved as a result of a decision by the Syrian regime or the Syrian people but rather via a decision by [international] states.”
He added “Turkey shares a border with Syria and so it can enter an area and enforce a buffer zone, but this would lead to a new border line with Turkey. This would result in the regime simply deploying its forces along the new border…thereby blocking all movement to and from this buffer zone, and negating any benefits from this.”
Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat yesterday, Khaddam stressed that it would be “impossible” for al-Assad to reconcile with the Syrian people. He said “this would be impossible after all of these crimes and after decades of suppression and sectarian tensions. After the huge number of martyrs, Bashar al-Assad cannot be accepted in Syria in any way, shape or form. However his [al-Assad’s] option – which he announced to one of his Lebanese friends – is that if he is besieged, he will flee to the coastal area [of Syria] and declare the establishment of a new state there. Furthermore, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov informed some Arab ministers that he [al-Assad] will not surrender or give in, and he would instead choose to establish a new state in the coastal area. This would mean a long war in Syria between the people who are committed to Syrian unity and the regime that fragmented national unity and is now trying to divide geographic unity.”
As for reports that al-Assad is transferring weapons and munitions to Syria’s coastal area, which is where the majority of Syria’s Alawite community are concentrated, Khaddam stressed that “more than one month ago, I announced on Al-Arabiya TV that Bashar al-Assad has taken the decision to send all the weapons that he does not use in the suppression of the Syrian people, including strategic weapons, missiles, and warplanes – most of which are being stored at Latakia airport – to the coastal region. He is preparing to establish this state. This information comes from the heart of the regime. Furthermore, he is providing military training for tens of thousands of people living in the coastal region; they will form the future army of this state.”
On al-Assad's fate and whether he would seek refuge outside Syria, Khaddam said: "He will not leave Syria. His fate will be the same as that of Muammar Gaddafi. He is not concerned about the public or the state’s needs, he is only concerned with his own needs, and the needs of those around him, including the military figures who formed the [Syrian] army during the Hafez al-Assad era and ensured that this army would be loyal to the regime and the head of the regime, and not the army of the homeland. Therefore, the needs of the people do not concern them. If he embarks on this crime of moving to the coastal area, this means that he will provide for his future needs in the area through the Russian fleet, which will provide him with food supplies and all his requirements.”
Responding to a question about Russia’s stance on Syria, and whether it is an unwavering ally of al-Assad or is merely waiting for the right deal to abandon him, the former Syrian vice president told Asharq Al-Awsat that “Russia is not loyal to Bashar al-Assad but to its international strategy. It wants to be an influential state in the Middle East, and its presence in the region means that it is in a position to besiege the West, economically, politically and via a security perspective, by controlling oil. Therefore, Russia opted to forge an alliance with Iran, whose strategy is known, which is to control the area from the Mediterranean to the borders with Afghanistan, and this includes the whole of the Arab world. Iran and Russia need this alliance and it will dominate the region as long as the Arab situation remains hesitant.”
As for the Arab stance on the situation in Syria, Khaddam stressed that “all of our hopes are tied into the Arab stance [on Syria] particularly the stance of the Gulf States, in their capacity as our partners in ensuring [regional] security and stability in the present and future. However, what happened since the beginning of the Arab revolutions was that the Arab world did not respond quickly enough to the bloody crisis, remaining silent for eight months before taking action and condemning the crimes in Syria. After the Arabs began to act, they failed to adopt options such as those adopted concerning Libya. The Syrians had hoped that the Arabs would take a strong decision and ask world superpowers to form an international military coalition to save them from this regime. This is something that has not happened. One initiative has followed another, however no such initiative has announced that the al-Assad regime is illegitimate or called for its ouster, as was the case with Libya.”
He added "The Syrians are feeling very bitter, despite the fact that good decisions have been taken, such as recalling ambassadors and closing embassies, however such measures will not topple the regime; the al-Assad regime will only be toppled by military force.”
On arming the Free Syrian Army [FSA], the former Syrian vice president said that "arming the FSA is nothing more than an unrealistic slogan, since the FSA is a group of honourable people who defected [from the Syrian army] because they did not want to kill their fellow citizen… however they do not constitute sufficient force on the ground to confront an army that possesses thousands of missiles and rockets. Therefore, it would be a big mistake to burden the FSA with a responsibility that it cannot shoulder.”
Khaddam explained "arming the FSA is good, but part of the FSA is in Turkey whilst the rest are in Syria; they can be provided with light or medium weaponry, but they cannot be armed with tanks, anti-aircraft weaponry, and artillery. These arms [light or medium weaponry] are symbolic weapons for self-defence; this would not lead to a solution in Syria, but would rather grant the regime new opportunities [to crush the revolution].”
As for the position taken by the West and its hesitation to take a military decision to resolve the Syrian crisis, Khaddam said “why did the West carry out military operations in Libya? Was this not for oil? Muammar Gaddafi was not going to drink this oil; on the contrary, we saw that he had remarkably improved his relations with the West. What is actually prompting the international community to oppose military intervention is the Arab position.” He stressed that if the Arabs had a coherent or unified stance, calling for military intervention, then they would be ready to participate in this. He explained “We will at least see a decision by the Western countries, with the exception of Russia and China, which will utilize their veto.”
Commenting on the Syrian opposition, Khaddam said “the Syrian opposition shoulders a great responsibility due to its various members and groups, and its main problem now is the Syrian National Council [SNC], whose demands and objectives have deviated from those of the Syrian people.”
He added "[SNC president] Burhan Ghalioun went to the “Friends of Syria” conference in Tunis and asked for humanitarian aid, but failed to call for military intervention. On the contrary, he said that he does not accept military intervention in Syria. This means that the SNC – which rejects military interference – is facing one of two accusations: either some of its leadership have ties to the regime, because it is the al-Assad regime that benefits from non-intervention, or they do not understand politics and cannot understand the cries of the Syrian people and their demands for the world to intervene.”
The former Syrian vice president also told Asharq Al-Awsat that “they [the SNC] have a huge responsibility; I am calling on all parties and groups in the [Syrian] opposition to unify their efforts and hold a comprehensive national conference based on the following principles: toppling the regime and holding it – and all those who committed crimes – to account, and working to establish a vision for the future of Syria based on establishing a democratic state. The SNC has lost its media glow and started to retreat, particularly since those who broke away from it and started to retreat are prominent figures, whilst others may follow. The SNC is no longer as people believe it to be, namely a representative of all, rather it is now only made up of one political clique. All of Syria is under occupation, whilst the opposition abroad has not launched the revolution. They have been abroad for years. They have sympathized with the revolution, but they remain distant to the revolution’s demands and requirements. The main requirement now is for everybody to unite to rescue the Syrian people and work to reconstruct the country…regardless of sect or ethnicity.”
As for who is influencing and swaying al-Assad, Khaddam said “Al-Assad is steered by his emotions. He is a hesitant person who listens to talk in the morning and agrees to it, then listens to contrary talk in the afternoon and also agrees to it. He has an inferiority complex because people used to say that his father was a strong figure, as was his brother Bassel, and that he is weak. Therefore, he is making very tough and cruel decisions to tell the people that ‘I am not weak and here I am killing thousands of people.’ He is the one who is making all the decisions. All the talk that this person or that person is running things behind the scenes are nothing more than rumors by the security services to prove the innocence of Bashar al-Assad.
He added “There are many similarities between Gaddafi and al-Assad; Gaddafi was very emotional and would take decisions in this state, but then when he calmed down he would make his decision in accordance with policies he had drawn up for himself. Bashar is the same, but the difference is that he only takes decisions when he is emotional, when he is not he fails to take any decision at all as a result of procrastination and thinking too much.”
Khaddam also stressed that “the security services are the main power in the country and the army is part of the security services. Hafez al-Assad established a security system that is based on the army that was loyal to him, closing the gates of the Military College to all Syrians, only allowing in those elements who were loyal, those who were personally loyal to him or who came from villages or cities that are loyal to him, whilst 90 percent of army officers come from Syria’s coastal area."
On the role of the joint UN and Arab League envoy to Syria, Khaddam said: "The efforts of [Kofi] Annan are nothing more than a sightseeing tour. Annan tried to resolve the Iraqi crisis, without any success, and he will fail to achieve any success in Syria as well, because there is a huge gap between the regime, its policies and approach, and what the international community and Arab world is demanding from it. Therefore, it is impossible for him to succeed, and I think that he will fail to implement his initiative and will ultimately withdraw. He went to Damascus and heard very tough talk from Al-Assad, and reports indicate that he was not happy with the meeting."
As for the Arab League Secretary-General stance, Khaddam said “[Nabil] Elaraby has not been balanced in his dealings with the Syrian issue. He should have submitted a report that explained and presented proposals based on clarity, openness, and transparency, which shows that this regime is a hopeless case and that the only solution is the military one. However he ruled out the military solution, and he has no right to do this!”

Washington and Jerusalem differ on Iran
By Ari Shavit/Haaretz
By the end of the year, the American guest will know. By the end of the year, we'll all know.
A week ago, a senior Israeli official had an American guest over for a late-night chat. Because the guest is intelligent and influential, the official, after offering whiskey and serving coffee, cut straight to the chase.
There's no time, the Israeli official said. By 2013, Iran will be deep inside the zone of immunity. Iran's ongoing fortification and dispersal of its strategic facilities means that by then, even if Israel does strike, Tehran's nuclear program will survive. Once that happens, all those in Israel who oppose a strike will go from arguing "not yet" to throwing up their hands and saying "it's too late." That's why it's totally clear that for Israel, 2012 is a critical year. It's either now or never.
The senior Israeli official described relations between Israel and America as excellent. Unlike in the past, there are no intelligence disputes or rhetorical gaps. From both a diplomatic and a military perspective, the Obama administration has done much more to confront Iran that the Bush administration. And the president himself, the official said, is so impressive - level-headed, tough, and on the ball. But a realistic view of the situation shows that there are understandable differences between Washington and Jerusalem on the Iranian issue. While for America, a Shi'ite bomb is a strategic problem, for Israel it's an existential problem. While America could act against Iran next year, Israel can act only this year.
Anyone who doesn't look at life through rose-colored glasses should understand that it's unrealistic to expect the U.S. president to promise the Israeli prime minister that he will stop Iran via a military operation at some point in the future. Thus precisely because of the close relationship between the two allies, Israel must be prepared to accept the fact that on this fateful issue, it must act alone, without consulting anyone.
Israel, the official said, will respect the United States and take its interests into account, but it will not wait for the United States to give it a green light to act. Nor will Israel inform the Americans of such an operation in advance.
The Israeli official said he sees Iran as a paper tiger. Its ability to carry out a direct strike on Israel's home front is limited. Its control over Hezbollah and Hamas is not total. If Lebanon allows the Shi'ite militia to attack Israel from its territory, it will end up with no power stations and no airports.
Gog and Magog? Those fears are quite exaggerated. The United States really has nothing to worry about. Since Iran's supreme concern is to avoid drawing America into the war, it will have no interest in attacking American targets. The chances that Iran will do anything against America are small, and Iran's ability to harm America is almost nil.
True, oil prices are likely to soar dramatically. But even that spike won't last for very long, because Saudi Arabia will quickly increase its output. In a few weeks, the market will calm down and businesses will be back on track. Looking back, everyone will thank Israel and recognize that in its own way, it solved a problem that the world was unable to solve.
Quietly but firmly, the Israeli official repeated the mantra that there are three parameters for an Israeli operation: ability, legitimacy, and the feeling that the knife is almost at its throat. And right now, the knife is at its throat, the official said: As far as Israel is concerned, 2012 is the year of decision.
Israel isn't bluffing, he added. Israel is telling the United States the truth.
We don't have to talk in terms of Auschwitz, but everyone must understand that the Jewish state cannot leave its fate in the hands of others. That's not why we came here. That's not why we established this state. What's at stake is a fundamental question of sovereignty. Only if we are independent and strong can we protect ourselves and be a worthy partner to our allies.
As the American guest went out into the stormy Tel Aviv night, he was agitated and upset. Had he really heard what he thought he heard? Had the senior Israeli official been telling him bald-faced lies, or had he been sharing the sensational truth?
By the end of the year, the American guest will know. By the end of the year, we'll all know.