LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
May 08/12

Bible Quotation for today/Live As God Called You
01Corinthians 07/17-24: "Each of you should go on living according to the Lord's gift to you, and as you were when God called you. This is the rule I teach in all the churches. If a circumcised man has accepted God's call, he should not try to remove the marks of circumcision; if an uncircumcised man has accepted God's call, he should not get circumcised. For whether or not a man is circumcised means nothing; what matters is to obey God's commandments. Each of you should remain as you were when you accepted God's call. Were you a slave when God called you? Well, never mind; but if you have a chance to become free, use it. For a slave who has been called by the Lord is the Lord's free person; in the same way a free person who has been called by Christ is his slave. God bought you for a price; so do not become slaves of people. My friends, each of you should remain in fellowship with God in the same condition that you were when you were called.

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Remembering a Hezbollah Bloody “glorious” day/Now Lebanon/May 07/12
Bibi prepares to strike Iran/Ynetnews/May 06/12
Lebanon: Unbearable pressure/By Emad El Din Adeeb/May 07/12
Keeping a distance the Lebanese way/By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed/May 07/12
Syria’s two options: Dialogue or military intervention/By Huda Al Husseini/May 07/12

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for May 07/12
Hollande defeats Sarkozy 51.62 pct to 48.38 pct
France turns left – a rocky road ahead
DEBKAfile/ Change of French presidents weakens Western front against nuclear Iran
Sefy Hendler / The Israeli-French honeymoon is likely over
Netanyahu cabinet agrees Israeli elections to be held September 4
Barak accuses former IDF chief Ashkenazi of bribery, conspiracy
Iraq court rules to release Hezbollah prisoner
Syria holds parliament vote; opposition boycotts
Dennis Ross: Israeli leaders talk about Iran nuclear threat to motivate the world to act
Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird welcomes Shimon Peres, President of Israel
U.S. secretly released prisoners in Afghanistan: report
Saad Hariri's text speech of May 06
Lebanon's Syrian Notorious puppet, Micheal Aoun slams Jumblatt, Sleiman, says Assad in control
Lebanon's President, Suleiman Congratulates Hollande on Victory: Municipal By-Elections were Example of Democracy
Hariri says Lebanese will seek to vote out March 8 in 2013
Hariri in Doha holds talks with Qatari emir, PM
Lebanon: Sleiman, Mikati discuss Lebanon-Israel border
Lebanon: Mikati vows to protect free speech
Relatives report kidnapping of 2 Syrians in Beirut
Lebanon: Army soldiers wounded in Baalbek attack
Lebanon’s public debt reaches $53.9 billion in February
Israel rejects claims of violating Lebanese sovereign territory
EU: No intentions to establish Syrian refugee camps in Lebanon
Lebanese vote in municipal by-elections
Al-Rahi Calls for Freedom of Choice and New Social Contract
Al-Rahi Says Lebanese Role in Arab Spring Mustn't Involve Promoting Violence
UNIFIL Urges Israel to Stop Building Wall, Lebanese Officials Discuss Violations
Jumblat: They Want to Control Everything, But We'll Confront Them via Ballot Boxes

Hariri in Doha holds talks with Qatari emir, PM
May 07, 2012/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri met Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa al-Thani twice Monday during his two-day visit to the Arab country, his press office said. The Qatari emir greeted Hariri at the Amiri Diwan at 11.30 a.m. in the presence of Qatari State Minister for Foreign Affairs Dr. Khalid bin Mohammad al-Atiyyeh, chief of the Amiri Diwan Sheikh Abdullah bin Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, Hariri’s chief of staff Nader Hariri and adviser Hani Hammoud. Discussions focused on the latest regional and international developments, “particularly on the Arab level, as well as bilateral relations.” Hariri and bin Jassim later met again Monday at the Amiri Diwan. Saad Hariri arrived in Qatar’s capital Doha Sunday, where he was met by Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani who later held a dinner in honor of the Future Movement leader. After the dinner, Hariri and Bin Jassim held detailed discussions on the latest developments in the region.

Hariri says Lebanese will seek to vote out March 8 in 2013
May 06, 2012 05:48 PM The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri predicted Sunday that Lebanese would vote in the 2013 elections to remove the March 8 dominated Cabinet, which he accused of seeking to bring Lebanon back under Syrian tutelage through an elections law based on proportional representation.
“I am sure that during this crucial year, you will say every day, until elections day, especially on elections day, you will say democratically with your votes at the ballot boxes that the people want to overthrow the regime,” Hariri said in a televised speech on the occasion of Lebanon’s Press Martyrs Day. “The Lebanese will clearly say whether they want to continue in the same way with the present deterioration of economic, security and living conditions, with the regime of lies that works for the butcher of Damascus,” Hariri, who described the upcoming polls as pivotal, said.
Hariri, who along with Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt has rejected an elections law based on proportional representation, accused his rivals of seeking to bring Lebanon back under Syrian tutelage.“Some want parliamentary elections that suit the armed partisan authorities, and they promote election laws that restore regimes of tutelage and domination but with local tools this time,” Hariri said at Martyr’s Square, where in 2005 hundreds of thousands gathered and called for the end of Syria’s 29-year presence in Lebanon.
“This will not pass,” he added.
The Future Movement leader said the popular protests that had managed to force the withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon in 2005 had not been done “so that others could later come in and take over the role of this [Syrian] regime through intimidation, weapons and armed men.”
He also slammed Hezbollah over its weapons, saying they would be used to intimidate the will of the electorate.
“We succeeded in preventing them from throwing Lebanon and the Lebanese people into a civil war, [weapons] have no function other than to weaken the state and falsify the democratic will of the voters by intimidating them,” Hariri said referring to Hezbollah’s arsenal.
Hariri said his elections campaign for 2013 would be identical to 2009: No to Hezbollah’s weapons and yes to the “peaceful and democratic struggle in defense of freedom and independence.”
In his speech, aired on a large screen at Martyrs Square in Beirut where Future Movements supporters, lawmakers gathered, Hariri also slammed the government on both its domestic and foreign policies.
On the crisis of Syria, Hariri criticized the government on its dissociation policy toward developments in its neighbor.
“Some issues cannot bear a policy of disassociation like watching Syrian opposition members being kidnapped in Lebanon and handed over to the butcher of Damascus,” Hariri said, accusing the Cabinet of “barely delivering aid to thousands more refugees in the north.”
The lawmaker also accused the government of blocking aid to Syrian refuges in the Bekaa region of the country.
Hariri reiterated his support for Syrians seeking freedom and democracy in Lebanon’s neighbor and said he hoped President Bashar Assad would face international justice.
“We know that our peaceful and democratic struggle in defense of Lebanon, its sovereignty and freedom, is the same as the struggle of the Syrian people for democracy, freedom and dignity,” he said.
He also linked Martyrs Press Day with the eve of the May 7 events in 2008 when clashes broke out between pro-Hezbollah and pro-government gunmen following the decision by the government, then headed by Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, to dismantle Hezbollah’s private telecommunications network.
Eighty people were killed as a result of the clashes which raised fears of Lebanon sliding back into a civil war.
“In May 2008, the people of Beirut offered their souls, wounds and their ... dignities as a sacrifice to prevent sedition,” Hariri said.
Hariri, who heads of the opposition March 14 coalition, also touched on the Syrian parliamentary elections that will take place Monday, describing them as rigged par excellence.
"They have prepared the results in advance and filled the ballot boxes with the names of the winners," he said.
"Elections in Syria under the terror of weapons and in Lebanon they also want elections and electoral laws subject to the terror of weapons," he added.

Saad Hariri's text speech of May 06
Now Lebanon
On May 6, Future Movement leader MP Saad Hariri delivered a televised speech for the occasion of Lebanese Press Martyrs Day.
“A few years ago, Martyr Prime Minister Rafik Hariri stood in this same square to announce in front of a huge crowd of Lebanese the commemoration of Martyrs Day. He did not know that he would become one of Lebanon’s greatest martyrs, that his grave would be in this square, and that the Lebanese who gathered around his martyrdom would make this place a symbol of freedom and independence.
We meet today, and the spirit of Rafik Hariri is with us: the spirit of justice, righteousness, freedom and patience. We gather around him and around all the martyrs of Lebanon without exception.
May 6 is the day of martyrdom. It is also the day of freedom because it is the day of the martyrs of the Lebanese press and the free men who wrote with their blood the national glories of Lebanon. Near you stands an edifice of freedom that participated in the struggle for independence, and represented, through the voices of martyrs Gebran Tueni and Samir Kassir, a distinctive tribune of the Cedar Revolution and of the uprising against the security regime.
It may not be a coincidence that today is also the commemoration of the dark night…when our beloved capital Beirut and its honourable people were attacked on May 7, 2008. It is not a coincidence that May 7 is equivalent of Martyrs’ day, as Lebanon witnessed a moral massacre against Beirut, its people and its dignity.
Yes, May 7 was not a glorious day. It was a shameful day that caused the deterioration and poisoning of common life between citizens and brothers. On this day, weapons were used as a means to settle political disputes.
This rally is an occasion to announce once again that we reject that day. We reject policies of hegemony and domination. We reject intimidation through weapons and any manipulation of coexistence. We reject attempts to terrorize Beirut and its people. I say that it may not be a coincidence because there is a thin line connecting both events. In the first event, great figures from Lebanon offered their lives for the sake of Lebanon’s independence, from Al-Burj Square in May 1916 to Saint George Square in February 2005. Also, in May 2008, the people of Beirut offered their souls, wounds and their violated dignities as a sacrifice to prevent sedition, and they chose peaceful democratic civil resistance to prevent the return of the spectre of civil war.
Yes, since May 2008 the honourable people in Beirut and all over Lebanon have been making one sacrifice after the other, unfaltering in defending Lebanon, its stability and independence, in rejecting violence, weapons and the slide toward discord and in adhering to democracy as their only way to express their opinion and decision. We said in the 2009 elections, exactly one year after the black May, and we will say it again at the ballot boxes a year from now: Our choice is to reject violence and weapons. Our choice is the state that brings everyone together and which is responsible for all its citizens. Our decision is to live together in Lebanon, all religions and sects, in the framework of the Taif Accord and the constitution.
On this occasion, we say and reiterate: After the assassination of Martyr Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and the martyrs of the Cedar Revolution, we chose the path of justice, not revenge, and the path of truth, not blood. Also, after the weapons have been used in the internal blood game, and after the people’s decision has been forged, our choice was and still is to follow the path of democracy, not discord, of the ballot boxes and not the death boxes. Just as we said and reiterated that we do not hold any Lebanese community, group or category responsible for the blood of Rafik Hariri, whom we consider the martyr of all of Lebanon, we also do not hold any specific community, group or category responsible for the events of May 7, 2008. These events carried a discord that, if completed, could have been dangerous for Lebanon and all Lebanese, from all communities, groups and regions.
Remembering our martyrs, and Beirut which was martyred on May 7, 2008, is an occasion to reiterate our rejection of discord, and in particular of discord between Sunnis and Shia. It is an occasion to call for a sincere dialogue, based on the conviction – not on manoeuvre – that non-state weapons…have no function other than weakening the state and forging the democratic will of the voters by intimidating them. All this leads to the collapse of values, security and living standards, of which our people in the South and the southern suburbs of Beirut are suffering from as much as our people in Beirut, Mount Lebanon, Bekaa, the North and all of Lebanon.
When the Lebanese decided to kick the Syrian regime out of Lebanon, they did not do this so that others come later on to take over from this regime the task of intimidating them with weapons and armed men. Some want parliamentary elections that suit the armed partisan authorities, and they promote electoral laws that restore regimes of tutelage and domination but with local tools this time.
This will not pass, and we will not offer those who are manipulating the fundamentals of coexistence the opportunity to undermine the democratic regime. Tomorrow, the Syrian regime’s show is taking place, under the name of legislative elections. They are forged elections indeed. They have prepared the results in advance and filled the ballot boxes with the names of the winners and the martyrs’ votes. Elections, that no one knows how they can that take place in Homs, Rastan, Hama, Aleppo, Deir az-Zour, Jisr al-Shughur, Daraa, Edleb, Zabadani, Damascus, and in the tens or even hundreds of cities and villages encircled by devastation and murder.
Elections in Syria [will be held] under the terror of weapons. And in Lebanon, they also want elections and electoral laws subject to the terror of weapons. Our decision is to confront this conspiracy against the democratic regime and the renewed attempts to subject Lebanon to the Syrian regime and its tools.
When gibbets were erected in the Al-Burj Square on May 6, 1916 for those who were calling for independence, gibbets were also erected on the same day and for the same reason in Al-Marjeh Square in Damascus.
Today, like yesterday, as we choose here in Lebanon the path of peaceful and democratic struggle in defence of independence, sovereignty, dignity and freedom, our brothers and sisters are falling in Syria, as martyrs of freedom, dignity and democracy, killed by the brutal and blind killing machine led by the regime of Bashar al-Assad, that destroys one city after the other.
Yes, it was not a coincidence 96 years ago, and it is not a coincidence today. We know that our peaceful and democratic struggle in defending Lebanon, its sovereignty and freedom, is the same as the Syrian people’s struggle for democracy, freedom and dignity.
This is why we announced from the first moment that our choice is to stand by the Syrian people and their will to break free from the regime of oppression and corruption, that same regime that saw the end of its tutelage over Lebanon in this square on March 14, 2005, and is seeing these days the end of its tyranny over Syria and over the will of the free and honorable Syrians.
We understood, and all the Lebanese people understood, that this government is distancing itself from the loaf of bread, food safety, and the security of people and the country. But there are things that do not bear lying and fraud. The blood of the innocent does not bear lies and fraud. Belonging to Arabism does not bear lies and fraud, and believing in the human being and his right to a free and decent life does not bear lies and fraud.
These things cannot afford a declaration about distancing oneself and turning Lebanon’s diplomacy into a tool of the regime of murder and corruption in Arab and international forums. These things don’t tolerate a declaration about distancing oneself and watching Syrian opposition members being kidnapped in Lebanon and handed over to the butcher of Damascus. These things don’t bear a declaration about distancing oneself and blocking assistance to thousands of Syrians refugees in the Bekaa and barely delivering aid to thousands more refugees in the North.
One crucial year separates us from the parliamentary elections. In these elections, the Lebanese will clearly say whether they want to continue in the same way, in the deterioration of the economic, security and living conditions, with the lying regime that works for the butcher of Damascus and that left Arabism, the Arabs and their will.
I am sure that during this crucial year, you will say every day until Election Day - especially on Election Day - you will say…with your votes in the ballot boxes: the people want to overthrow the regime.”

Relatives report kidnapping of 2 Syrians in Beirut
May 07, 2012/The Daily Star /BEIRIUT: Two Syrian men traveling by land from Homs, Syria, were reported kidnapped by their relatives early Monday. According to security sources, who spoke to The Daily Star on condition of anonymity, Abdel-Baset Dalla and Abdo Dalla said their nephew Atef Dalla, 25, and his brother Abdel-Latif Dalla, 40, were kidnapped while they were driving on the road leading to and from Rafik Hariri International Law.They said they received a call from an anonymous person demanding $5,000.

Al-Rahi Says Lebanese Role in Arab Spring Mustn't Involve Promoting Violence
Naharnet/ 06 May 2012/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi on Sunday said the Lebanese “must not stand idly by concerning the events in the Arab countries,” but stressed that their role must not involve promoting violence in the countries of the Arab Spring. “We hope the Arab world will achieve the so-called Arab Spring and will meet the needs of the people at the political level and in terms of economic and social reforms,” al-Rahi said in Montreal, where he arrived on Saturday for a pastoral visit. “Of course we are looking forward for a democratic spring in the Arab world and for an Arab world that respects all public freedoms, human rights and the dignity of every individual; for an Arab world that knows how to separate between state and religion,” the patriarch added.“We are against violence and against war, which we had experienced in Lebanon and we don’t wish on anyone,” he went on to say. Al-Rahi also called on the Lebanese to “stand by their brothers in the Arab world who are seeking freedom.”

Al-Rahi Calls for Freedom of Choice and New Social Contract
Naharnet 07 May 2012/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi reiterated his call for the adoption of an electoral law that brings into power efficient people and advocated a new social contract to resolve the country’s differences.During a dinner banquet thrown in his honor by the Maronite parish in Montreal, al-Rahi said: “Lebanon is in need for a new electoral law that respects the freedom of choice of the citizen in bringing the person whom he sees as efficient and loyal to the nation.”He criticized the government for failing to fill vacant diplomatic seats. “The appointments are not being carried out because everything is politicized.”The patriarch also described the dispute last month between MPs during a three-day parliamentary session aimed at assessing the performance of the cabinet as “shameful.”
He lamented “the level that the lawmakers have reached to in their statements and thinking.”Al-Rahi said that 70 years after the Lebanese struck the National Pact deal to steer Lebanon clear of loyalties to the East and West, the country is more divided.“It is time to work for a new social contract based on the National Pact and all the differences in Lebanon because there is no loyalty but to Lebanon,” the patriarch told Lebanese community members.The new contract would help the Lebanese announce their loyalty to the nation rather than their sects and political parties, he said.

Jumblat: They Want to Control Everything, But We'll Confront Them via Ballot Boxes
Naharnet /06 May 2012/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat on Sunday hit back at Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, accusing him and his allies of seeking to “take control of all the country’s assets, of the administration, judiciary, army and economy.” Jumblat vowed to “confront them through the ballot boxes” in the upcoming parliamentary elections.
“What can I say to the one who cursed us yesterday, I will not say anything … but I’m very dismayed by those who allowed him to dig up the graves of the past, I’m very dismayed by those who do not respect my centrist position,” Jumblat said, in a clear reference to Aoun and his allies.Aoun on Saturday said “Jumblat considers himself the only rational person … But the proportional representation would reflect his real political weight.”“All your threats are lies, do whatever you want,” Aoun said, addressing Jumblat.Hitting back on Sunday during a rally organized by the PSP to honor its veterans, Jumblat said: “What do they want? Do they want to take control of all the country’s assets, of the administration, judiciary, army and economy. I don’t want to say security because there is no security. Do they want to return to the old-new slogan: the military (rule)? Do they want to take control of parliament and turn us into followers?”“What army are they talking about in the absence of a clear defense strategy?” Jumblat added, vowing to “act calmly and patiently” and stressing the importance of civil peace.“We will express our beliefs in the ballot boxes, amid a great challenge. To be or not to be,” Jumblat added.
Addressing his party’s veterans, Jumblat said: “Do you remember when you shelled the Syrian army and confronted it” during the civil war?He also saluted “the martyrs of the Phalange Party and the Lebanese Forces who fell in the Mountain War, because each of them defended Lebanon in their own way.”Jumblat said his party “paid a hefty price in order to prevent civil strife” during the May 2008 clashes. “We do not regret that and we have stressed the importance of dialogue after they abandoned it and renounced the Doha Agreement,” he added.

Remembering a “glorious” day
May 7, 2012 /Now Lebanon/A Hezbollah-allied militiaman patrols the streets of West Beirut during what has come to be known as the May events, which started on this day four years ago. (AFP photo)
Four years ago on this day, in a bid to reverse a government decision to dismantle its so-called secure telephone network and sack a sympathetic senior airport official, Hezbollah-led militiamen took to the streets of West Beirut and nearly started a civil war. The party felt threatened and lashed out because it knew it could. It was the inevitable consequence of a nation tolerating the presence of an armed militia eight years after it had served its purpose by ending Israel’s occupation of South Lebanon and two years after it had dragged the country into a needless war. We had become slaves to the lie that, without Hezbollah to protect us, we would be engulfed by a Zionist tsunami. The reality was that Lebanon had become hostage to the beast it created.
May 7, 2008 was for all intents and purposes an attempted coup in which innocent civilians died, felled by the weapons we were assured would never be used against fellow Lebanese. Although the event is a stain of shame that Hezbollah has never quite been able to erase, it did not stop Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah from describing his party’s behavior that day as “glorious.”
There can be nothing glorious in the gunning down of a mother and her child as they run for cover, and there can be nothing glorious in using the tools tolerated by a nation for so long in the name of the so-called Resistance to achieve political ends. In a twisted way it was only Hezbollah’s total superiority that stopped the country from falling into the abyss, but that has not stopped the party from using the veiled threat of that very same violence to get its way on subsequent occasions, as it did in January 2010 when it toppled the government of Saad Hariri.
And yet there are still those who defend what happened on that tragic day – and subsequent days when the violence spread to Tripoli and the mountains south of Beirut. They belong to the same school that justifies Hezbollah’s reckless adventurism that led to the 2006 war with Israel, an engagement that caused the deaths of over 1,000 Lebanese and displaced a further one million, an outcome that was called “divine.”
Today, the Lebanese government is defined by this ghastly DNA. It seeks to convince us that it is clean, that its motives are pure and its interests firmly rooted in our own. But it is nothing of the sort. Its priority is to offer any assistance to an embattled Syrian regime and maintain Iran’s regional interests. For domestic consumption, it gives us Michel Aoun, a man who styles himself as a technocrat and anti-corruption czar but who in reality is a man who craves the presidency so badly he will endorse murder to fulfill his leaky ambition. Instead of condemning the actions of May 7, 2008, Michel Aoun, Hezbollah’s Christian ally, sought to reassure his followers that his March 8 allies had told him they would not enter East Beirut. And he thinks for this we should be grateful?
But to focus on Aoun today would be to ignore the armed role played not just by Hezbollah, but also the Amal Movement and the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, who also joined in on the rampage. Across the country, as families from both sides grieve for lives lost unnecessarily, it is important that we think long and hard about what is “glorious” and what is “divine.” Both adjectives were used to describe violence, conflict and death, families ripped apart and livelihoods destroyed. Where were the divinity and the glory in all this?

Aoun slams Jumblatt, Sleiman, says Assad in control
May 06, 2012/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun launched Saturday scathing attacks on Progressive Socialist Party head MP Walid Jumblatt and President Michel Sleiman and described the “Arab Spring” as the “Arab Hell.”
“You scare away the Druze from us Jumblatt and you live on lies,” Aoun, speaking during a ceremony commemorating the seventh anniversary since his return to Lebanon from exile, told crowds of FPM supporters.
Aoun said proportional representation, an electoral system opposed by Jumblatt, would not shrink the PSP leader’s electoral weight but readjust it to its proper size.
“Jumblatt’s opposition to proportional representation is a crime committed against the people of the Chouf and proportional representation would give him his natural [political] weight,” Aoun said.
On Friday, Jumblatt criticized Aoun, describing the FPM as "useless.”
During his speech, which started at 6.45 p.m. at the Platea theatre in Jounieh, Aoun also took aim at President Michel Sleiman, saying the Lebanese leader was paralyzing state institutions.
“The crisis is not with the president but between him and himself,” Aoun said.
The FPM leader also slammed a recent visit by U.S. official Jeffery Feltman, a former ambassador to Lebanon.
“We still don’t know what Feltman’s visit was all about” Aoun said, adding that most of his meetings had been secret and hence by definition ones of “conspiracy and treason.”
Aoun also said Western states had tried to sabotage his return to Lebanon.
On May 7, 2005, the exiled general received a hero's welcome from his supporters, where just two months previously popular demonstrations led to the ouster of Syrian troops that had been stationed in Lebanon for 29 years. Aoun’s supporters compared his homecoming to General de Gaulle's historic return to Paris after the liberation from Nazi occupation.
In 1989 outgoing Lebanese President Amine Gemayel appointed the general as interim-prime minister towards the end of the country's 15 year Civil War. But Aoun overstayed his term and following more bloodshed was ousted a few months later by Syrian and Lebanese troops led by then army commander, and later President Emile Lahoud.
During his exile, Aoun led the FPM, a party that helped him attract key allies.
At the event Saturday, Aoun also defended his views on Syria, saying that after “liberation” – when Syrian troops left Lebanon in 2005 ending their years-long presence – that the best of ties were needed between Lebanon and its neighbor.
He also echoed statement’s by Maronite Patriarch Beshara Rai, saying that Syria was the closest to democracy in the region.
“Without shame I say that Syria is the closest to democracy because the citizen in Syria has the freedom in how to live his life and this is not present in the countries that try to teach of human rights.
“Do women in these countries have rights and do these countries respect the right to freedom of religious belief?” Aoun asked.
Aoun also described the “Arab Spring” as the “Arab hell.”“Can there be such a thing as freedom of thought and belief and democracy with the arrival of the Salafists to power?” Aoun asked.
The March 8 lawmaker, one of Damascus’ closest allies in the region, said the government in Syria was “fixed and we hope it will be based on democracy.”
In his nearly two-hour speech, Aoun also criticized his rivals in the March 14 camp, accusing the previous government under former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora of dissociating itself from the 2006 war between Israel and Lebanon. The FPM leader said one of the Jewish State’s aims in the war was population displacement, thereby raising the chances of conflict in the country. Voicing dismay with the West, Aoun said his party looked favorably on BRIC countries Russia, India, China, Brazil and South Africa, saying these countries belonged to several continents of different races and religions.

Iraq Court Rules to Release Hizbullah Prisoner
Naharnet/07 May 2012/
An Iraqi court on Monday declared a Hizbullah commander accused of killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq in 2007 not guilty for lack of evidence and ruled that he be set free. The case of Ali Mussa Daqduq has been a thorn in diplomatic relations between Baghdad and Washington since the American military pullout last December. U.S. terror experts have described Daqduq as among "the worst of the worst" militants who would remain a severe threat to Americans if freed. U.S. officials say he trained Shiite militias in Iraq and helped plot the 2007 killing of four American soldiers in the holy city of Karbala, about 90 kilometers south of Baghdad.Daqduq was captured late 2007 and held in U.S. custody in Iraq as officials tried to decide where to charge him. When the American military left Iraq late in December, U.S. officials were forced to hand over Daqduq to Iraqi authorities — despite fears in Washington that he would be quietly freed by the Shiite-led government in Baghdad.
"The judge found that there wasn't enough evidence to keep him in jail and ruled to set him free for lack of evidence," Daqduq's attorney, Abdul-Mahdi al-Mitairi, told The Associated Press after the three-hour trial on Monday. However, under Iraqi law the verdict will be appealed automatically so Daqduq has still not been released, al-Mitairi said. He added it was unclear when the court would decide on the appeal but it would take no more than six months. Charges against Daqduq included terrorism and forging official documents.Nine officials from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad attended the trial in Baghdad's Central Criminal Court, the lawyer added. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad did not have an immediate comment.SourceAssociated Press.

Suleiman Congratulates Hollande on Victory: Municipal By-Elections were Example of Democracy
Naharnet/07 May 2012/,President Michel Suleiman lauded on Monday the efforts of the Interior and Defense Ministries in staging the municipal by-elections on Sunday, congratulating them on their accomplishment. He said: “The elections were an example of democratic practice in Lebanon.” “They were a positive sign of rotation of power at a time where the region lacks locally elected councils,” he remarked. “We hope that the calls for democracy in the region will be met in order to place the countries on the path of real democracy,” said the president. Suleiman had held talks earlier on Monday with Prime Minister Najib Miqati on the latest local developments and Wednesday’s upcoming cabinet session. He also sent a letter of congratulations to Francois Hollande on his election as French president.
The by-elections took place without incident in various regions in Lebanon on Sunday. Interior Minister Marwan Charbel announced in a press conference at the end of the elections Sunday night that the turnout reached record numbers of 70 percent, while in others it reached 91. The minister attributed the high figures to the people’s awareness of the importance of exercising their democratic rights, hoping that Sunday’s example would be adopted in the 2013 parliamentary elections. He thanked the army and security forces for their efforts in making the electoral process a success.

Bibi prepares to strike Iran?
Published: 05.05.12/Ynetnews
Op-ed: Early elections will produce more convenient conditions for Israeli strike on Iran's nuke sites. Bringing the Israeli elections forward to September 4th of this year not only won't avert an Iran strike, but rather, in some ways may in fact advance the fight against Tehran's nuclear program. Those who think that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is heading to these elections due to weakness are wrong. The PM has a stable coalition, yet its makeup won't allow it to cope with the challenges it would have faced in the near future.The PM is in fact going to the polls in order to reinforce his political survival at a time when he needs to make tough decisions in all areas. A skilled politician, Netanyahu identified the peaking support he enjoys at this time and is quick to ride this wave before losing momentum. At this time he enjoys a backwind not only within Israel's domestic theater – conditions in the regional and global arena are also convenient.
Early elections will assist the West in its diplomatic negotiations with Iran. Netanyahu does not hide his intention to strike Tehran's nuclear sites before they become immune to attack. Hence, his decision to call early elections when his position on this issue is so clear and consistent shows confidence that Israel's public is behind him, thereby granting more credibility to the Israeli threat.
This threat is one of the most powerful ways to press Washington and Europe not to "go easy" on the Iranians during the talks; it appears that even Iran is starting to fear it. Thus far, Iranian officials tended to show contempt for the Israeli threat. Yet now they realize that an Israeli operation, regardless of its success or failure, would force them and their clients to respond. This would entangle Iran in an unwanted confrontation with the US, as Washington, especially during a presidential election campaign, would not be able to remain idle when its soldiers and regional allies are being attacked.
Diplomatic immunity Early elections have another important effect: They produce "diplomatic immunity" for Netanyahu and the Israeli government from negative US reaction should Israel decide to strike Iran.
By early September, the elections will be behind Netanyahu, and as a prime minister he won't have trouble to form a stable coalition and government that would endorse his position on an Iran strike. Meanwhile, US President Barack Obama would still be in the midst of his own election campaign. During this period, until November of this year at least, he would have trouble taking punitive measures against Israel or endorsing such steps at the UN should such proposals be made in the wake of an Israeli strike.
Hence, Israel would have at least two months of freedom to act, before winter clouds hinder the Air Force and while assuming that the US, with clenched teeth, would help Israel defend against missile retaliation by Iran and its clients (Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah) and help us on the diplomatic front. Some observers argue that this is the main consideration that prompted Netanyahu to bring the elections forward. Bringing the Israeli elections forward to September 4th of this year not only won't avert an Iran strike, but rather, in some ways may in fact advance the fight against Tehran's nuclear program. Those who think that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is heading to these elections due to weakness are wrong. The PM has a stable coalition, yet its makeup won't allow it to cope with the challenges it would have faced in the near future

Change of French presidents weakens Western front against nuclear Iran
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis May 7, 2012/Two stalwarts of the Western confrontation against a nuclear-armed Iran suffered election defeats this week: Nicolas Sarkozy was swept out of the Elysee by the Socialist leader Francois Hollande Sunday, May 6. Three days earlier, the two parties forming UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s government coalition were trounced in local elections across Britain. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who faces an election in four months, never imagined he would be left so quickly on shifting sands against the Iranian nuclear threat.
In Washington, Dennis Ross, Barack Obama’s former adviser on Iran and frequent visitor to Jerusalem with messages from the White House said Sunday, May 6, that oddly enough Israel had attacked the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981 and destroyed Syria’s nuclear facility 2007 without talk. So why were Israelis talking so much now?
Ross answered his own question by suggesting that Israeli leaders aimed at giving the world a strong motive for raising the heat on Iran and tightening sanctions so as to stop Israel going to war; then, if sanctions and diplomacy failed, no one could complain if Israel attacked Iran’s nuclear program.
Ross appears to have forgotten the rows between the US and Israel in 1981 over attacking the Iraqi reactor and how hard Ronald Reagan leaned on Menahem Begin to stop him going through with it.
But most of all, Ross was reflecting the Obama administration’s impatience with the Iran debate going back and forth between Jerusalem and Washington for two years and is determined to wash its hands of the problem for now and get on with winning the president a second term in November.
The outgoing French President Nicolas Sarkozy spoke more forcefully and frankly than any other Western leader about the real danger of a nuclear-armed Iran and accepted that it would have to be tackled by military action. He was also stood out as one of the few French leaders of recent times prepared to fight for French and Western Middle East interests.
The role of French special forces, navy and air forces, alongside US and British forces, was pivotal in the campaign to overthrow Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi. In recent weeks, he placed French units on standby in case President Obama decided to intervene in Syria. In the event, the US president pulled back from an operation that was planned to have involved Saudi and GCC armies as well.
France’s successful military showing in the Libyan war brought no political or economic rewards. Indeed, Paris shelled out a million dollars it could ill afford to pay for it. Sarkozy’s opponent Francois Hollande did not make this an issue in his campaign, but it was certainly not lost on the French voter. The French Muslim voter no doubt settled scores with Sarkozy for his ban on the veil and pro-Israeli policies and may even have cost him the presidency, although this issue too did not come to the fore in electioneering.
David Cameron, who probably spent even more on the Libyan war than Sakrozy and could afford it even less, is paying a heavy political price for the unpopular austerity measures he is clamping down on the British people to haul the country out of a deepening recession.
Iran has therefore won a handy breather on several fronts: Barack Obama is carefully avoiding any war involvement in the course of his election campaign – he even asked world leaders to give him “space”; French President Hollande needs time to find his feet, attack the declining French economy and rescue the euro. He will have no time or attention to spare in the months to come for Iran’s nuclear threat or the Syrian bloodbath.
When ten days ago, Netanyahu sent his security adviser Yaacov Amidror on a round trip to European capitals to pitch Israel’s case against Iran, he never imagined how quickly the Iranian issue would recede into irrelevance as key Western government go swept up in more pressing business and upsets.
Netanyahu announced Sunday that he would call an early election in four months, a year before it is due.
Prime minister since 2009, he is assured by every opinion poll that he is miles ahead in popularity of any Israeli politician. He told a meeting of his party Sunday, May 6, that he didn't want "a year and a half of political instability accompanied by blackmail and populism".
Currently in his element, he may feel that it is up to him now to take the initiative for preempting a nuclear Iran. And the sooner the better.

Syria holds parliament vote; opposition boycotts
07/05/2012/DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) — Syrians cast ballots Monday in parliamentary elections billed by the regime as key to President Bashar Assad's political reforms, but the opposition dismissed the vote as a sham meant to preserve his autocratic rule. The voting for Syria's 250 member parliament is unlikely to affect the course of Syria's popular uprising, which began 13 months ago with anti-Assad protests. The regime has violently cracked down on dissent and many in the opposition have armed themselves, pushing the country toward civil war.
The U.N. says more than 9,000 people have been killed in Syria's turmoil.
Polls opened at 7 a.m. and Syrian state TV showed voters lining up and dropping white ballots in large, plastic boxes. Election officials say more than 7,000 candidates are competing seats in the legislature in a country of almost 15 million eligible voters out of a population of 24 million. The elections are the first under a new constitution, adopted three months ago. The charter for the first time allows the formation of political parties to compete with Assad's ruling Baath party and limits the president to two seven-year terms.
Assad has made a series of gestures toward reform to try to allay the crisis, but his opponents say his efforts are too little, too late. He set nationwide parliamentary elections for May 7. The vote was initially to take place in March but was postponed after last month's referendum on the country's new constitution that allowed new political parties to run.
The parliament is not considered an influential body in Syria, where the real power is concentrated around Assad and a tight coterie of family and advisers. Experts say that despite the legal changes, Syria's oppressive security services keep true regime opponents from participating in politics.
Some voters said they hoped the process would bring change. Damascus voter Hind Khalil, 23, said she'd vote for some independent candidates as well as members of the new parties.
"They have fresh ideas that might bring in change," she said. "I hope that they will work for the welfare of the country and for combatting corruption and bribery."
The opposition has called the elections a farce and says it will accept nothing short of the fall of Assad's regime.
"The face of the regime will not change," said activist Mousab Alhamadee, speaking on Skype from the central city of Hama. "The regime is like a very old woman, a woman in her 70s, trying to put on makeup." Alhamadee said streets were empty and shops were closed as residents observed a general strike to protest the elections. Activists reported strikes in towns and villages throughout Syria, and some hung posters of those killed during the uprising around their neighborhoods, saying their "martyrs" are the only suitable candidates.
It is unclear if voting will take place in all parts of the country, especially in areas heavily damaged by government shelling and clashes between government troops and rebels.
The Syrian government portrays the uprising as a plot by terrorists with foreign backing to weaken the country. Some voters echoed that view.
"I have elected the newcomers because they have fresh ideas and are different from the old generation," said Damascus voter Mohammed Hassan, 25. He said those boycotting the vote were "agents of the West."World powers remain divided on how to address Syria's crisis, though all key players have endorsed a peace plan put forward by envoy Kofi Annan designed to lead to discussions on a political solution between the regime and the opposition. But that plan has been troubled from the start. A truce that was to begin on April 12 has never really taken hold. About 40 U.N. observers are currently in Syria to monitor the truce. U.N. officials hope a wider deployment of up to 300 international truce monitors will gradually calm the situation.

U.S. secretly released prisoners in Afghanistan: report
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States has been secretly releasing detainees from a military prison in Afghanistan as part of negotiations with insurgent groups, the Washington Post reported in its Monday editions. The "strategic release" program has allowed American officials over the past several years to use prisoners as bargaining chips to reduce violence in restive provinces, it said, citing U.S. officials who it said spoke on condition of anonymity. The freed detainees are often fighters who would not be released under the legal system for military prisoners in Afghanistan. They must promise to give up violence, the report said. Officials would not say whether those who have been released have later returned to attack U.S. and Afghan troops, the Post said.
Releases have come amid efforts to end the war through negotiation, which is central to the Obama administration's strategy for exiting Afghanistan, the report said.
Those efforts have yielded little to no progress in recent years. In part, they have been stymied by the unwillingness of the United States to release five prisoners from Guantanamo Bay — a gesture insurgent leaders have said they see as a precondition for peace talks, the report said. Unlike at Guantanamo, releasing prisoners from the Parwan detention center does not require congressional approval and can be done secretly, the Post said. The program's goal is to quell violence in areas where NATO is unable to ensure security. Releases are intended to produce tactical gains, the Post said.
U.S. officials would not say how many detainees have been released under the program, though they said such cases are relatively rare. The program has existed for several years.
"The Afghans have come to us with information that might strengthen the reconciliation process," the newspaper quoted U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker as saying. "Many times we do act on it."Releases through the secret program from Parwan must be approved by the top U.S. military commander and military lawyer, and are the only exceptions to the prison's judicial review board, the Post said.
It quoted one official as saying the procedure was "outside of our normal protocol," the paper said.

Lebanon: Unbearable pressure
By Emad El Din Adeeb/Asharq Alawsat
In the space of one week, two maneuvers were carried out in the Lebanese arena simultaneously: the first American, the second Iranian, each aiming to counter and undermine the interests of the other side.
A few days ago, Jeffrey D. Feltman, Assistant US Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, concluded a visit to Lebanon where he met with political figures including Christian leaders, members of the March 14th Alliance, and President Michel Suleiman. Simultaneously, the Iranian First Vice President Mohammed Reza Rahimi paid a visit to Beirut, where he met with leaders from Hezbollah and the Amal Movement, along with the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the Parliament and even President Michel Suleiman.
Following his meetings, Feltman said that it was necessary to reinforce the approach of freedom, democracy and internal solidarity in Lebanon, in order to face the challenges of the region. He added that it was necessary for Lebanon's stance towards the situation in Syria to be clear, and sympathetic with the forces demanding freedom and sovereignty there.
As for the Iranian First Vice President, he called for action to strengthen President Mikati's government, stressing that other counties should follow Lebanon's distinguished model of democracy. Rahimi also added that he was against foreign intervention in Syria, and that the Syrian President must be allowed to reach a proper political solution.
An American maneuver and an Iranian counter-maneuver are being conducted in Lebanon, and the goal is to create a situation in Lebanon for dealing with the Syrian issue.
The Americans seek to groom Lebanon to apply pressure to the critical situation Syrian by all means possible to accelerate collapse of the regime, whilst the Iranians seek to strengthen the Mikati government and its allies in order to support the Syrian regime, so as to preserve it and decelerate the speed of its downfall.
It is such an explicit and clear ploy to exploit the Lebanese arena as part of a proxy conflict against others, and using the mediation of others.
It seems as if it is Lebanon's inevitable fate to function as a "tool" for managing conflict and for settling international and regional disputes, using its soil.
It is my absolute conviction that pressure will mount upon Lebanon for it to play some role in the Syrian issue, and this will intensify gradually and simultaneously as the civil war escalates in Syria, and as we approach the moment of the regime's departure.
Between America's pressuring role to help overthrow the Syrian regime, and Iran's counter-measures to promote the pro-Assad trend, the map of internal Lebanese divisions seems as dangerous as the 17-year Lebanese civil war. The question here is: How will Lebanon maintain its cohesion under all this immense pressure, whilst it is only a few meters away from the furnace of the Syrian civil war?

“Keeping a distance” the Lebanese way
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Alawsat
Authorities in Lebanon were very enthusiastic after intercepting a ship that passed through its waters, claiming that it was carrying a cargo of weapons addressed “to the rebels in Syria”, and are now determined to hold those involved accountable. The Defense Minister vowed he would not allow investigations into the seized ship or the issue to be diluted, and the President said that he would fight the offenders. The “Lutfallah 2” cargo ship was said to have been loaded with weapons in Libya, and arrived in Lebanon by sea. Yet despite no weapon emerging or being used, the statesmen are eager to prosecute those involved.
Lebanon claims to have adopted a policy that can be found under the international dictionary definition of “keeping a distance”, when it comes to dealing with the Syrian revolution. However, this policy is practiced only to avoid condemning the crimes of the Syrian regime, and to justify staying away from the popular Syrian and Arab sense of accountability. However, the Lebanese authorities are not “distant” in as much as they are an important factor for the Syrian regime. They were not distant when they seized the Libyan cargo ship. In fact, they were doing what Turkey did when it seized the “Atlantic Cruiser” freight ship, loaded with weapons and docked in a Turkish port, where it was initially reported that Iranian weapons were found on board, on route to the Syrian regime. Yet the Turks subsequently resolved the matter and closed the case file. In contrast, Lebanon has made the cargo ship a prominent issue and is more enthusiastic about pursuing the details of the case than the al-Assad regime itself, which certainly does not pursue smugglers with the same zeal as the Lebanese officials.
Lebanon did not distance itself when a few dissident soldiers from the Syrian army fled and crossed its borders. Rather, some Lebanese elements arrested them and handed them over to the Syrian forces, where they would face the risk of being killed, thus contravening international laws. As for cases when the Lebanese authorities have distanced themselves, consider their silence regarding the Syrian and Iranian embassies abducting people on the streets of Beirut, in broad daylight. We have not heard anything from the security or military services or the presidential establishment about any effort to investigate the kidnapped Ahwazi or Syrians in Beirut.
If Lebanon had chosen to adopt the stance of “keeping a distance” and was genuinely able to do that then we would be happy, but we know that it is quite impossible to stop the combatants, whether individuals or governments, from using Lebanon’s territory and its waters. What the Lebanese authorities are doing currently is clearly biased, keeping silent about the actions of the Syrian regime and its affiliated parties that provide its means to kill, pursue and propagandize, even using state agencies and institutions in some cases. On the other hand, the Lebanese state is harnessing all its capabilities to pursue Syrian revolutionaries or restrict them, as we see in the investigations into the “Lutfallah 2” smuggling attempt, because the ship passed through a Lebanese port, until it became a matter that the President and the Defense Minister pledged to follow up.
This eagerness to please Damascus on the part of the Lebanese authorities will not come to the aid of the tottering al-Assad regime. Instead, it will anger governments working with the other side, such as the Gulf States and the West, and it will shock the majority of the Arab people, and these countries are the most important to Lebanon.
Lebanon will remain the main arena for Syrian events, regardless of their developments and how they end. If Lebanon does not want this to be the case then when it declares it has distanced itself it must actually prove it, either through refusing to cooperate with both Syrian sides, or turning a blind eye to all violations.
It is expected that the Lebanese should support change in Damascus, and support the overthrow of a regime that has exhausted and ravaged Lebanon with wars and interventions, not even hesitating to plunder the savings of its citizens and banks. The revolution in Syria in fact reflects the age old demands of the Lebanese.
The truth is that the fall of the regime in Damascus will not only liberate the Syrians, but it will also liberate Lebanon and its people.

Syria’s two options: Dialogue or military intervention
By Huda Al Husseini/Asharq Alawsat
The Syrian impasse we are witnessing is due to the fact that Syria has become accustomed to being the one that takes action, not the one that action is being taken against. It was always planning and then sending militia to carry out its plots. In Lebanon, its role was a truly "creative" one; each militia had a mission, whether we are talking about bombing, provoking confrontation or carrying out assassinations. It was always starting fires and was never interested in putting these fires out; indeed it believes that this role of putting fires out was only played by the weak, and it did not perceive itself as being weak, particularly with regards to Lebanon.
Syria also opened its borders with Iraq to allow access to all extremists, whether from Al Qaeda or from other Islamist currents, to the country. For Syria, as long as it remained the actor, whilst others were being acted upon, it continued to be the only “hero” on the scene. Syria believed that it could wrap itself in a “cloak of invisibility” and act as it pleased. Syria excelled in tightening its security grip on its own country, whilst starting fires in others. For example, the Syrian intelligence apparatus was fully aware of everything that was happening in the smallest of Lebanese districts, but completely neglected the Syrian border, therefore militia and “terrorists” were able to infiltrate the country, and this is the reason why Syria has shifted from being a successful actor, to a failed country that is subject to the actions of others.
An article published last year in the International Herald Tribune tells the story of a six-year old Bashar al-Assad entering his father’s office and seeing a bottle of perfume on the shelf. Years passed and Bashar al-Assad succeeded his father as president and upon entering the presidential office he found the same bottle of perfume unopened and in exactly the same position. Bashar al-Assad may have been deluded into thinking that Syria, like this bottle of perfume, remained in a virtual standstill and would never change, continuing on as the actor, not the acted upon.
Speaking to a western politician, he said that the situation in Syria will continue to deteriorate so long as al-Assad fails to take any political decision.
Over the past few weeks, a number of high-level US – Gulf meetings were held to discuss the situation in Syria and the Russian obstacle which is preventing Bashar al-Assad from stepping down. Among other obstacles that were discussed were the Arab League's lack of consensus with regard to international intervention and the lack of unity amongst the Syrian opposition which means that Bashar al-Assad’s successor, should his regime be toppled, is unclear. During the meeting, US and Gulf officials expressed their concern that the longer the crisis remains unsolved, the more room this grants Al Qaeda and other extremist Islamist groups to gain control of Syria.
An influential Gulf official asked about his opinion of Russian proposed the same idea which former President Bush applied to Saddam Hussein during his occupation of Kuwait. He proposed to attempt – once more – to convince the Russians of the value of a diplomatic solution by sitting down at the negotiation table in Moscow, if they are prepared to host such negotiations. However the Gulf official also warned that this idea may not be successful unless we are prepared to take the next step in case all diplomatic efforts meet with failure. This means telling the Russians that there are two possible solutions to ending the killings in Syria: either a diplomatic solution or international intervention. If they are ready to play a constructive role and act promptly towards a political solution, then intervention would not be a necessity, however if the Russian regard this as a trick, and reject the idea of a diplomatic solution...then the international community must be ready to intervene by creating a buffer zone or humanitarian corridors.
The officials present in the meeting suggested that any political dialogue must include the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, France, Britain and Turkey, apart from senior representatives of major opposition groups such as the Syrian National Council [SNC] and the Muslim Brotherhood.
During the meeting, it was evident that the US does not want to topple the entire Syrian regime, but only the leadership, or the inner circle, around the ruling al-Assad family . Those present in the meeting were of the view that discussions may in fact produce a strong military brigade that could give rise to a transitional leader.
The officials present in the US-Gulf meetings were of the view that it must be clear, especially to Russia, that there would be no open discussions at the negotiation and that if no agreement is reached, then they must move on to the other option: namely military intervention for humanitarian reasons; meaning to provide a safe haven for the Syrian people backed by an international coalition.
Reacting to the idea that the American side supposes that the Russians might not care whether Washington appreciates their contributions in this regard, particularly as Washington already believes that the Russians are determined to defeat the US in Syria, then this certainly constitutes an attitude that "involves substantial risks." Whilst the "Americans" are conscious that they must not let this happen for the sake of the international community at large, however despite this there still seems to be no agreement regarding what must be done in order to ensure this doesn’t happen.
This influential Gulf official who was present at this meeting held the opinion that they must not let Moscow win by allowing Bashar al-Assad to brutally suppress his own people without being subject to any punishment. However he stated that as the international community offered Saddam Hussein a last chance to reach a diplomatic solution in 1990, we must act similarly with Russia as well as the Syrian regime today. If the Russians decided to put forward a political proposal to rein in al-Assad – a proposal that serves their own interests whilst at the same time enabling us to coexist with him – then we would have achieved our objectives. Yet, if the Russians refuse to play the game, or presented unacceptable ideas to us and the Syrian opposition, then this would serve as a very good excuse to announce that diplomacy was unsuccessful and that Kofi Annan's mission was doomed to failure, and then take the entire issue to a different level, regardless of the approval of the UN.
As for the opinion of the Gulf States, they are of the view that al-Assad will be victorious so long as we agree to wait and fail to increase the pressure on him. Perhaps, an accident at the border that may prompt the Syrian troops to behave badly will be a scenario that Russia would hate to see happen.
Numerous meetings are being held and numerous opinions are voiced. As it became commonly known, Syria has now entered the absolute hell of being the subject of action, rather than the actor themselves. An Algerian expert told me that there are two examples that the situation in Syria may pattern itself after: Lebanon where the war toppled the state and maintained a fragile regime, or Algeria where the Islamists fought the state for 10 years, but the government remained unified and the army cohesive. Today, the Islamists are rejected by the Algerian people, and the state is still present, whilst the regime survived. It would be unwise to gamble on Turkish action, yet the Turkish Foreign Minister knew how to benefit from this bet. In his address before the Turkish parliament last week, the Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu highlighted Turkey's "pioneering" role in the Middle East. He said “a new Middle East is about to be born. We will be the owner, pioneer and the servants of this new Middle East. Turkey will be there to help Syria achieve peace. The era when we adopted the slogan 'let us wait and see' has gone, in the same manner that the time of blindly following superpowers has passed." He added that "Turkey will not participate in any policy introduced outside of Ankara. Turkey is no longer lacking confidence, nor does it wait other countries to approve its policies. Turkey now has the ‘puissance’ and even your dreams can’t and won’t reach the place where our power has come to.”
If Ahmet Davutoglu has reached this level, this means that it is not reasonable to gamble on a Turkish role because Turkey has “flown" to horizons beyond the reach of NATO or even NATO’s Chapter Five.

Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird welcomes Shimon Peres, President of Israel
May 6, 2012 - Ottawa - Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird welcomes Shimon Peres, President of Israel, upon his arrival in Canada for a state visit from May 6 to 10, 2012. This is the first official visit to Canada by Mr. Peres in his current capacity as president.Minister Baird has reiterated that Israel has no greater friend than Canada. Canada and Israel share the same values, including freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.