LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
May 19/12

Bible Quotation for today/The Lord Warns the Prophet
Isaiah 10/01-04: " You are doomed! You make unjust laws that oppress my people. That is how you keep the poor from having their rights and from getting justice. That is how you take the property that belongs to widows and orphans. What will you do when God punishes you? What will you do when he brings disaster on you from a distant country? Where will you run to find help? Where will you hide your wealth? You will be killed in battle or dragged off as prisoners. Yet even so the Lord's anger will not be ended; his hand will still be stretched out to punish."

SHOCK VIDEO: Saudi Father Auctions Off Son for Suicide Mission
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/blog/detail/shock-video-saudi-father-auctions-off-son-for-suicide-mission
May 17, 2012 /Family Security Matters/An unbelievable leaked video of an auction for a suicide bomber against Syria! This takes place in a hotel conference room in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The atmosphere is festive, and the audience has children in it. But the merchandise auctioned is human flesh and blood! The video shows the father, abu-salah, attending the auction and offering his son Khaled as sacrifice.The father receives 1.5 million Riyals ($400,000) as future compensation for his son's demise in Syria. At one point in the video, the father is elated at the high bids.

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Syrian Jihadis: Real and Exaggerated/By: Aaron Y. Zelin and Andrew J. Tabler /Washington Institute/ May 18/12
Iran’s ethnic troubles/By: Guy Bechor/Ynetnews/ May 18/12
Iran’s triple mistakes in Syria, Iraq and Bahrain/By Amir Taheri/Asharq Alawsat/May 18/12

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for May 18/12
Iran's Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi: Israel should help Iranians topple regime
Netanyahu skeptical Iran would end nuclear program
Rand Paul Amendment Barring War With Iran, Syria Added To Sanctions Bill
Republicans block Iran sanctions vote
Iranian protesters denounce Saudi-Bahrain union plan
Iran flouts UN sanctions, sends arms to Syria -panel
Iran attack decision nears, Israeli elite locks down
Iran will never give up its nuclear rights, Jalili says
Panetta: US to bolster Israel's anti-rocket shield
Bahrain warns Iran against meddling in its affairs
Egypt Brotherhood flexes muscle in election stunt
Russia says action on Syria, Iran may go nuclear
Ghalioun ready to quit to save opposition unity
UN Observers Face Daunting Challenges in Syria
Student Protest in Syria Unfolds Live Online
Assad is “doomed,” Israel's Barak says
U.S. Embassy: We Learned of Mawlawi Arrest from Media, Claims of U.S. Role in Seizing Arms Ship Fabricated by Overblown Imagination
U.S. Embassy ruled out the return of Syrian army to Lebanon
Qortbawi rejects call for return of Syrian army
Geagea criticizes “militia-like” arrest of Mawlawi in Tripoli
Tripoli braces for Mawlawi decision
Lebanese northern town under Syrian gunfire
Raad: Tripoli clashes warn of dangerous consequences
Hezbollah concerned over Tripoli clashes
Man killed in Bekaa’s Aarsal during arms smuggling attempt
US envoy meets with Rifi, highlights law enforcement support for Lebanon
NNA: Assailants kidnap Lebanese citizen in West Bekaa
MPs condemn abduction of Lebanese citizen in West Bekaa
Hamadeh retorts to Eid’s remarks, says Hezbollah behind Tripoli events
Protesters react with restraint to judge’s decision to hold Mawlawi
Kahwagi urges politicians to pull gunmen from Tripoli streets

U.S. Embassy ruled out the return of Syrian army to Lebanon
May 18, 2012/Ya Libnan
The U.S. Embassy ruled out on Thursday the return of the Syrian army to Lebanon, calling on Christians to open the doors of dialogue instead of focusing on fears.
This comes in response to Rifaat Eid, the head of the Arab Democratic Party, who called on Wednesday for the return of the Syrian army to restore calm to Tripoli, which has witnessed deadly clashes between armed opponents and supporters of Syrian President Bashar Assad over the since last Saturday.
It also comes in response to the remarks of some Christian leaders like Free patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, a close ally of the Iranian and Syrian backed Hezbollah militant group and Maronite Patriarch Beshara al Rai who have been expressing concern about the fall of the Syrian regime , calling it the closest thing to democracy.
At least 11 people have been killed since the clashes began . Residents in the mostly Sunni Bab al-Tabbaneh support the Syrian uprising, while residents in the predominantly Alawite Jabal Mohsen back the Assad regime.
Eid, whose party controls Jabal Mohsen had described the cease-fire that was agreed on last Monday in Tripoli as temporary, warning of a future worst-case scenario.
“If we go to the worst-case scenario, then no one will be able to restore calm in Lebanon except through the intervention of an Arab army,” Eid told a news conference in Jabal Mohsen. “No one is capable of doing so except the Syrian army. If you ask me, I tell you I don’t mind, let it be today rather than tomorrow.”
Reaction to Eid’s remarks
Eid’s remarks outraged March 14 lawmakers who warned against the return of the Syrian Army to Lebanon.
“Someone from Jabal Mohsen disclosed yesterday, perhaps in a naïve or hateful way, the Syrian regime’s plan for Lebanon, and particularly Tripoli, when he said that the solution lies in the return of Syrian troops to Lebanon to restore order,” March 14 MP Marwan Hamade who represents the Chouf district told Asharq radio station.
“I think that Rifaat Eid has disclosed a plan to terrorize the political environment and the political class in Lebanon by spreading rumors about expected assassinations we don’t know by whom,” he said.
He accused Damascus of attempting to export “its hatred to Lebanon by sowing strife in some areas and distributing arms to some of its followers or some agents even in our cities.”
“Hezbollah and its allies and behind them, the Syrian and Iranian regimes, invaded Beirut on May 7 2008 . Today, it’s trying to target Tripoli,” he said. He was referring May 7, 2008 when Hezbollah’s gunmen briefly took over West Beirut and tried but failed to occupy Mt Lebanon.
Over a million Lebanese , Chrstians, Druze and Muslims protestd in downtown Beirut on March 14, 2005 demanding Syria's withdrawal from Lebanon. Syria withdraw in April 2005 after 29 years of military presence
March 14 MP MP Khodr Habib, who represents the Future Movement in the Akkar district , lashed out at Eid, saying that “instead of extending his hand for dialogue to end the ongoing violence … [Eid] called for the return of the Syrian tutelage army to Lebanon as the only solution to end the unrest in Tripoli.”
March 14 MP Antoine Zahra, who represents the Lebanese Forces in Batroun district , called on the government to summon Eid for questioning him over his remarks and to dismantle his militia, a call echoed by Fares Soueid, the general coordinator of the March 14 Secretariat General.Syria was forced to withdraw its troops from Lebanon in April 2005, under massive local anti-Syria protests by March 14 parties in Beirut and international pressure following the assassination of former premier Rafik Hariri.

U.S. Embassy: We Learned of Mawlawi Arrest from Media, Claims of U.S. Role in Seizing Arms Ship Fabricated by Overblown Imagination
Naharnet /17 May 2012/
Only hours after the Lebanese army intercepted the weapon-laden ship Lutfallah II off Tripoli’s coast, the Lebanese media was buzzing with reports attributed to security and political officials and claiming that the Lebanese army had received intelligence information from “major Western states,” with some saying that the U.S. was behind the intelligence tip-off.
The reports spoke of an arms shipment destined for the Syrian opposition, which Washington feared would end up in the hands of pro-Qaida gunmen practicing their activities in Syria and Lebanon – which further allowed the army to intercept the ship and seize its cargo.
And following the Lebanese General Security’s arrest of Shadi al-Mawlawi in Tripoli on charges of communicating with a terrorist organization and the angry reactions that ensued, the director general of the Lebanese General Security announced that Mawlawi was arrested following a tip-off the General Security had received from “major western powers”, concerning the activity of a Jordanian Qaida militant who had managed to infiltrate Lebanon and a Qatari national who had been financing a terrorist network.
But official sources at the U.S. Embassy in Awkar confirmed to Naharnet that although U.S. authorities sometimes coordinate with the Lebanese security and military agencies, the embassy learned about Mawlawi’s arrest from the media, stressing that any arrests are a domestic Lebanese affair that only concerns the Lebanese authorities and their security and military agencies.
Asked whether the U.S. had provided the Lebanese agencies with intelligence information and reports following concerns over the recent growth of fundamentalist and Salafist movements in Tripoli, and over the growing influence of the supporters of these movements among the ranks of the Syrian opposition in a manner that would serve the interests of al-Qaida and extremism, official U.S. sources noted that Washington is closely following the situation in Tripoli, given the unprecedented intensity of clashes which have been influenced by the events behind Syria’s border, expressing regret over the death and wounding of dozens of people in armed confrontations.
“We are concerned with what is going on in Lebanon and Syria, and concerned with the situation in Tripoli in particular and about the situation in general. Lebanon has suffered a lot over the past years and it deserves to see an end to its suffering. The U.S. is closely following the humanitarian situation caused by these developments and it supports the right of Lebanon and its people to stability, sovereignty and independence, and it hopes to see an end to the threats it is suffering due to the situation in Syria,” the sources added.
Asked about the presence of any U.S. role in the interception of the ship Lutfallah II, the sources said any such remarks are fabricated by the overblown imagination of some Lebanese. “The U.S. is helping the Lebanese army boost its capacity and capabilities, and what is important is that the army has become capable of uncovering such things,” the sources said, adding that the German unit belonging to the UNIFIL Maritime Task Force and the Lebanese navy were in charge of monitoring Lebanon’s territorial waters.
And on whether the U.S. believed that the events in Tripoli were sparked by the al-Qaida network and its supporters, the official sources at the U.S. Embassy said those who are active on the ground might have a certain point of view which does not necessarily mean that they are al-Qaida members.
The sources added: “Anyway, if al-Qaida members had managed to enter Lebanon, the Lebanese authorities would be obliged to arrest them.”
Asked about remarks by some Lebanese parties accusing Hizbullah and its allies of blowing up the situation in Tripoli to alleviate the pressure on the Syrian regime, the official sources at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut said it was not a coincidence that the clashes in Tripoli were pitting the supporters and opponents of the Syrian regime against each other, noting that the U.S. does not have any direct evidence of any role played by Hizbullah or other parties.
Addressing recent remarks by Arab Democratic Party official Rifaat Ali Eid that calm will not be restored in Tripoli except through the return of the Syrian army to Lebanon, the official sources at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut said: “The Syrian army is preoccupied with other things in Syria these days.”
“We don’t believe that the issue is on the table and we rule out such a possibility,” the sources added.
Asked whether the U.S. had sent specific messages for the Syrian regime on the need not to blow up the situation in Lebanon, the official sources at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut noted that Washington’s embassy in Damascus was closed.
“Nowadays, we don’t have much to say to the Syrian regime except for the need to stop killing their people and to step down. Naturally, Syria is receiving messages from us through certain channels, but the embassy in Lebanon is exclusively concerned with Lebanese-American relations,” the sources added.
Commenting on the Christian situation in light of events in the Arab world in general, and the situation in Syria and its repercussions on Lebanon, the official sources at the U.S. embassy in Lebanon said the future perspective of human rights and public and private freedoms requires a positive approach from Christians.
The sources called on Christians to open the doors of dialogue regarding these worrying issues, pointing out that focusing on fears overlooks a constructive solution.

Netanyahu skeptical Iran would end nuclear program
Associated Press/05.18.12/Ynetnews
Prime minister says diplomatic solution would be best option, but sees 'no evidence whatsoever that Iran is ready to end its nuclear program' . Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he is skeptical that Iran will agree to halt its nuclear program. Just days ahead of a crucial round of nuclear talks with Tehran, Netanyahu says a diplomatic solution would be the best option but "I see no evidence whatsoever that Iran is ready to end its nuclear program."The five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany are gearing up for a May 23 meeting with Iran in Baghdad.
Israel says a nuclear weapon in the hands of Iran would threaten the Jewish state's survival.
Speaking in Prague Friday, Netanyahu called it "the paramount issue of our time."
Speaking briefly after meeting Czech President Vaclav Klaus in Prague, Netanyahu called the Iranian nuclear program "the paramount issue of our time."He repeated Israeli demands to be met for the negotiations to be successful: all uranium enrichment inside Iran has to be frozen, its current stockpile of enriched uranium has to be shipped out of the country and an underground enrichment facility near the city of Qom has to be dismantled.
"When this is achieved, I'm the first one to applaud. But until then, you have to count me among the skeptics," Netanyahu said. Netanyahu did not present any ultimatums, but Israeli officials have said time is running out to avoid military action. Also the US has said it has plans in place to attack Iran if necessary to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons.
In Prague, Netanyahu accused Iran of using the talks just to "buy time, pretty much as North Korea did for years," going "from meeting to meeting with empty promises."
"It looks as though they see the talks as another opportunity to delay and deceive and buy time, pretty much as North Korea did for many years," he said.
"Iran is very good in playing this kind of chess game, and you know sometimes you have to sacrifice a pawn to save the king."

Republicans block Iran sanctions vote
May 18, 2012/Daily Star
WASHINGTON: U.S. Senate Republicans blocked new economic sanctions on Iran’s oil sector Thursday, saying they needed more time to study revisions, a surprise move that drew anger from Senate Democrats who had expected unanimous approval ahead of Iran talks on May 23. “I feel I’ve been jerked around,” Democratic leader Harry Reid said on the Senate floor after the Republican objection.
But Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said his staff did not receive a draft of the bill until late Wednesday night, and needed time to make sure it was as strong as possible.“There is no reason in the world why we can’t resolve whatever differences we have and move forward,” McConnell said. “We certainly don’t want to take a step backward, and there are members on my side of the aisle who are concerned that the way the measure is currently crafted could actually be a step in the wrong direction,” McConnell said. The sanctions are meant to shut down any financial deals with Iran’s powerful state oil and tanker enterprises, stripping the Islamic republic of crucial oil revenues. Democrats wanted to pass the proposed penalties ahead of talks between world powers and Iran next week, and had support from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a powerful pro-Israel lobby group.But Republicans sought a stronger statement in the bill that the use of U.S. military force was an option.

Iran attack decision nears, Israeli elite locks down
By Michael Stott
JERUSALEM | Thu May 17, 2012 12:39pm EDT
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A private door opens from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office in central Jerusalem directly into a long, modestly furnished, half-paneled room decorated with modern paintings by Israeli artists and a copy of Israel's 1948 declaration of independence. It contains little more than a long wooden table, brown leather chairs and a single old-fashioned white projector screen. This inner sanctum at the end of a corridor between Netanyahu's private room and the office of his top military adviser, is where one of the decade's most momentous military decisions could soon be taken: to launch an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear program.
Time for that decision is fast running out and the mood in Jerusalem is hardening.
Iran continues to enrich uranium in defiance of international pressure, saying it needs the fuel for its civilian nuclear program. The West is convinced that Tehran's real objective is to build an atomic bomb - something which the Jewish state will never accept because its leaders consider a nuclear armed-Iran a threat to its very existence.
Adding to the international pressure, U.S. ambassador to Israel Daniel Shapiro said this week American military plans to strike Iran were "ready" and the option was "fully available".
The central role Iran plays in Netanyahu's deliberations is reflected in the huge map of the Middle East hanging by the door of his office. Israel lies on one edge, with Iran taking pride of place in the centre.
Experts say that within a few months, much of Iran's nuclear program will have been moved deep underground beneath the Fordow mountain, making a successful military strike much more difficult.
LOCKDOWN
As the deadline for a decision draws nearer, the public pronouncements of Israel's top officials and military have changed. After hawkish warnings about a possible strike earlier this year, their language of late has been more guarded and clues to their intentions more difficult to discern.
"The top of the government has gone into lockdown," one official said. "Nobody is saying anything publicly. That in itself tells you a lot about where things stand."
Last week Netanyahu pulled off a spectacular political surprise, creating a coalition of national unity and delaying elections which everyone believed were inevitable. The maneuver also led to speculation that the Israeli leader wanted a broad, strong government to lead a military campaign.
The inclusion of the Iranian-born former Israeli chief of staff and veteran soldier, Gen. Shaul Mofaz, in the coalition, fuelled that speculation - even though both Mofaz and Netanyahu deny that Iran was mentioned in the coalition negotiations.
"I think they have made a decision to attack," said one senior Israeli figure with close ties to the leadership. "It is going to happen. The window of opportunity is before the U.S. presidential election in November. This way they will bounce the Americans into supporting them."
Those close to Netanyahu are more cautious, saying no assumptions should be made about an attack on Iran - an attack with such potentially devastating consequences across the volatile Middle East that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas even went so far as to predict in an interview with Reuters last week that it would be "the end of the world".
Israelis particularly fear retaliation from Iran's proxy militias - the Hezbollah guerrillas in southern Lebanon and the Hamas fighters in the Gaza Strip. Both are believed to possess large arsenals of rockets which could hit major Israeli towns and cities.
Hezbollah's deputy leader Sheikh Naim Qassem told Reuters in February that an Israeli attack on Iran would set the whole Middle East ablaze "with no limit to the fires". "Gone are the days when Israel decides to strike, and the people are silent," he said.
The Israeli Prime Minister and his key allies repeat for public consumption the mantra that economic sanctions against Iran must be given time to work and that now is not the time to speak about military options.
Top officials explain the new coalition on purely domestic grounds, saying it was needed to tackle the thorny and divisive issue of pressing Orthodox Jews into military service - in other words, that its formation has much more to do with the agenda inside Israel than abroad.
BURIED NUCLEAR STATES
Diplomats are divided. "I think the Iran thing is a red herring," said one senior Western envoy. "This is 98 percent about domestic politics". Others are less convinced.
Mofaz himself refuses to speak about military action against Iran, even in the theoretical.
A military veteran with almost 40 years' operational experience, whose office in the Israeli parliament displays a poster of Israeli warplanes flying low over the Auschwitz concentration camp, he scoffs at the idea that his Iranian descent gives him special influence on an Iran attack decision. He derides the idea any serious official in the know would talk to visiting journalists about such a sensitive military subject.
But behind the carefully evasive language of top officials, basic facts are clear. Time is running out. Iran's nuclear program - regarded by Netanyahu as an existential threat to the state of Israel - will soon be buried deep enough underground to render an Israeli attack impossible. The Jewish state's options are narrowing.
"I think they've gone into lockdown mode now," the senior Western diplomat said. "Whatever happens next, whatever they decide, we will not find out until it happens."
There are indeed those who see in Israeli posturing over Iran only bluff intended to press world powers into harsher sanctions and avoid war. Some military experts openly doubt how much damage Israel could inflict. The risk of a fiasco is big.
Perhaps the strongest clue as to Israel's real intentions is to be found in Netanyahu's private office, behind his desk. Officials say the Israeli premier was strongly influenced by his father, who died last month at the age of 102.
Benzion Netanyahu was a distinguished scholar of Jewish history and his strong sense of the past lives on in Benjamin, who laments to visitors that "most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time".
On a shelf behind Netanyahu's desk, along with pictures of his family, is a photograph of Winston Churchill. Netanyahu admires the British wartime premier because he saw the true dangers posed by Nazi Germany to the world at a time when many other politicians argued for appeasing Hitler.
The parallels with modern-day Iran are obvious and Netanyahu is explicit about the dangers he believes are posed by militant Islam: as he puts it, its convulsive power, its cult of death and its ideological zeal.
But Churchill, although eloquent on the dangers posed by the rise of Nazi Germany during the 1930s, ultimately failed to prevent Hitler's ascent to power, the world war he unleashed or the Holocaust in which six million Jews were murdered.Netanyahu, those who know him say, is determined to avoid going down in history as the man who shirked his opportunity to stop Iran going nuclear. (Additional reporting by Samia Nakhoul and Crispian Balmer; editing by Ralph Boulton)
(Created by Michael Stott)

Russia says action on Syria, Iran may go nuclear
By Gleb Bryanski
MOSCOW | Thu May 17, 2012 3:35pm EDT
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev warned on Thursday that military action against sovereign states could lead to a regional nuclear war, starkly voicing Moscow's opposition to Western intervention ahead of a G8 summit at which Syria and Iran will be discussed.
"Hasty military operations in foreign states usually bring radicals to power," Medvedev, president for four years until Vladimir Putin's inauguration on May 7, told a conference in St. Petersburg in remarks posted on the government's website.
"At some point such actions which undermine state sovereignty may lead to a full-scale regional war, even, although I do not want to frighten anyone, with the use of nuclear weapons," Medvedev said. "Everyone should bear this in mind."Medvedev gave no further explanation. Nuclear-armed Russia has said publicly that it is under no obligation to protect Syria if it is attacked, and analysts and diplomats say Russia would not get involved in military action if Iran were attacked. Russia has adamantly urged Western nations not to attack Iran to neutralize its nuclear program or intervene against the Syrian government over bloodshed in which the United Nations says its forces have killed more than 9,000 people.
Medvedev will represent Russia at the Group of Eight summit in place of Putin, whose decision to stay away from the meeting in the United States was seen as muscle-flexing in the face of the West.
Putin said previously that threats will only encourage Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Analysts have said that Medvedev also meant that regional nuclear powers such as Israel, Pakistan and India could get involved into a conflict.As president, Medvedev instructed Russia to abstain in a U.N. Security Council vote on a resolution that authorized NATO intervention in Libya, a decision Putin implicitly criticized when he likened the resolution to "medieval calls for crusades". Medvedev rebuked Putin for the remark, and some Kremlin insiders have said the confrontation over Libya was a factor in Putin's decision to return to the presidency this year instead of letting his junior partner seek a second term.
Russia has since accused NATO of overstepping its mandate under the resolution to help rebels oust long-time leader Muammar Gaddafi, and has warned it will not let anything similar happen in Syria.
Since Putin announced plans last September to seek a third presidential term and make Medvedev prime minister, Russia has vetoed two Security Council resolutions condemning Assad's government, one of which would have called on him to cede power.
Russia's G8 liaison Arkady Dvorkovich said Russia will try to influence the final version of the G8 statement at a summit in Camp David this weekend to avoid a "one-sided" approach that would favor the Syrian opposition."In the G8 final statement we would like to avoid the recommendations similar to those which were forced upon during the preparations of the U.N. Security Council resolutions," Dvorkovich said. "A one-sided signal is not acceptable for us."
Russia successfully managed to water down the part of the statement on Syria at a G8 summit in France in May 2011, removing the calls for action against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
"We believe that the United Nations is the main venue to discussing such issues," Dvorkovich said.
LAST APPEARANCE
The G8 summit is likely to be the last appearance among all the leaders of industrialized nations for Medvedev, who embraced U.S. President Barack Obama's "reset", improving strained ties between the nations.Dvorkovich said Putin's absence from the summit, the first time a Russian president has skipped one, would not affect the outcome: "All the leaders, I saw their reaction, are ready to comprehensively work with the chairman of the government (Medvedev)."
Dvorkovich said that at a bilateral meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama, Medvedev will raise opposition to attempts by some U.S. lawmakers to introduce legislation which will address human rights violations in Russia.Such legislation could take a form of the so-called Sergei Magnitsky bill, named after the Russian lawyer who died in prison in 2009. The Kremlin human rights council says he was probably beaten to death.The bill would require the United States to deny visas and freeze the assets of Russians or others with links to his detention and death as well as those who commit other human rights violations."New legislation which will address new political issues as imagined by some U.S. congressmen or senators is unacceptable," Dvorkovich said, promising a retaliation.
(Editing by Michael Roddy)

UN Observers Face Daunting Challenges in Syria
Margaret Besheer/VOA
May 17, 2012
UNITED NATIONS - The United Nations has deployed more than 200 unarmed observers to Syria who are monitoring a month-old cease-fire that appears to be in jeopardy of collapse. Increasingly, the U.N. monitors are getting caught up in the violence.
The U.N. Security Council has authorized a monitoring mission of 300 unarmed military observers to be on the ground in Syria for an initial period of only 90 days. The council has also demanded that they be given free movement in the country.
After a slow start, the mission is nearly fully deployed. But in recent days its convoys have had near-misses with roadside bombs raising questions about its ability to carry out its mandate effectively and keep its monitors safe.
U.N. Deputy Chief of Peacekeeping Edmond Mulet acknowledges the monitors are facing a very difficult situation on the ground. “They are there unarmed. There is no cease-fire. There is no peace agreement. There is no dialogue between the parties. There is urban warfare. And this is something we have never seen before. We have never placed our military observers in a situation like this," he said.
But he says despite obstacles the monitors are venturing out. “They are there to monitor a cease-fire and there is a violation of that cease-fire they have to report that, and this is what they are doing. They are reporting constantly about what they see and the attacks from one side to another, et cetera," he said.
While the Syrian government's shelling of towns has abated and there has been calm in some areas where the monitors have patrolled, they have been unable to convince both sides to cease the violence.
Richard Gowan, associate director of New York University’s Center on International Cooperation, says the observers are mainly there to open the way for the beginning of a political process. “U.N. officials are absolutely clear that this mission is a political token. It was deployed to try and create some space for the [Kofi] Annan plan to work; to act as a basis for talks between moderate opposition members and the government," he said.
Kofi Annan is the joint U.N.-Arab League envoy for Syria. He has been trying to mediate a political solution to the crisis, which is now in its 15th month and has seen more than 9,000 people killed. But so far neither side, government nor opposition, has come to the negotiating table.
Some diplomats and analysts have drawn comparisons to when the United Nations sent a force of thousands into Bosnia in 1992 to protect civilians. While the objects of the Bosnian and Syrian missions were different, both faced similar obstacles in that there was no cease-fire in place ahead of their deployment.
Richard Kauzlarich was U.S. Ambassador to Bosnia-Herzegovina in the late 1990s. He says one of the problems that plagued the Bosnian mission, known as UNPROFOR, was the parties’ unwillingness to stop fighting. “For whatever reasons, they saw war as the only solution to the political problem and UNPROFOR was given the impossible mission of trying to make peace in an environment where the people on the ground were not interested in peace," he said.
He says the United Nations may face a similar dilemma in Syria if the parties do not accept the U.N. as a presence to end the conflict and bring the government and the opposition to the negotiating table.
Mr. Annan has made it clear that the stakes are high. Last week he told the U.N. Security Council that although unacceptable human rights abuses continue and all aspects of his peace plan have not been implemented, there is no other option right now than the monitoring mission. “I also told members of the [Security] council that I believe that the U.N. supervision mission is possibly the only remaining chance to stabilize the country. And I am sure I am not telling you any secret, when I tell you that there is a profound concern that the country could otherwise descend into full civil war and the implications of that are quite frightening. We cannot allow that to happen," he said.
Given that dire assessment, there is reluctance to pull out the observers, despite the dangers. Security Council members say that the U.N. has no “Plan B” should the mission fail. So, Jeffrey Laurenti, a U.N. analyst with the Century Foundation, says the monitoring mission is likely to remain in Syria - for now. “It is a tough call on whether just to throw in towel or see this as the last best hope even if it is an ever dimming hope. I think right now the mood more generally in the international community would be to try to stick it out with them to see if this can in some way be a palliative; it is certainly not a cure," he said.
The crucial test will be whether the observers can help create the space for a political solution to the crisis. Otherwise, there is the danger that they will be trapped or simply police a crumbling cease-fire.
The Security Council will have to decide whether it makes sense to continue the mission in July when its 90-day mandate ends. Should the monitors be caught up in any more violence or become the target of attacks, that could strengthen doubts about whether the mission can help bring peace to Syria.

Rand Paul Amendment Barring War With Iran, Syria Added To Sanctions Bill
Posted: 05/17/2012 12:18 pm Updated: 05/17/2012 2:26 pm
News . NEW YORK -- The Senate is poised to consider updated legislation stepping up sanctions on Iran on Thursday, and due to persistence from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the bill will contain a provision making sure the measure is not used as an excuse to go to war with Iran or Syria.
According to a Senate Democratic leadership aide, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will ask for unanimous consent on Thursday to pass an updated version of the Johnson-Shelby Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Human Rights Act of 2012. The measure would go after Iran's mining, energy and shipping sectors and penalize U.S. parent companies for the Iran-related activities of their foreign subsidiaries.
The bill easily passed out of the Senate Banking Committee, but in March, when Reid tried to bring it up for unanimous consent, Paul blocked it in an effort to insert his amendment.
Although nothing in the sanctions bill authorizes war with Iran, Paul didn't want to take any chances. His amendment would make clear that nothing in the bill "shall be construed as a declaration of war or an authorization of use of force against Iran or Syria."
According to the Senate Democratic leadership aide, the updated legislation before the chamber on Thursday will include Paul's amendment.
It will also include a provision pushed by Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) that strengthens sanctions against companies that engage in or support censorship in Iran.
In addition, the bill strengthens human rights provisions and addresses Iran’s jamming of satellite communications. It contains non-binding language recommending that sanctions be more intensely enforced and that sanctions evasion efforts by Iran be closely monitored.
Paul had been searching for support for his amendment, and as of May 9, only Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) had signaled a possible willingness to sign on.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told The Huffington Post that he didn't see what the hold-up was. "It doesn't bother me. I don't think it's necessary, but it's okay by me," he said of Paul's amendment.
Paul's office did not immediately return a request for comment on Reid's announcement.
Ryan Grim contributed reporting.

Syrian Jihadis: Real and Exaggerated
Aaron Y. Zelin and Andrew J. Tabler /Washington Institute
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/syrian-jihadis-real-and-exaggerated
May 17, 2012
Damascus may be exaggerating the strength of the Syrian jihadi group Jabhat al-Nusra.
On May 12 a video posted to YouTube purporting to be from the Palestinian branch of the Syrian jihadi group Jabhat al-Nusra (The Victory Front; JN) claimed responsibility for the May 9 twin car bombings near a security complex in Damascus that killed more than fifty-five individuals and wounded hundreds. And, while JN appears to be a genuine extremist group, it is not clear whether it was responsible for either the attack or the video. The video raises disturbing questions about the Assad regime's possible manipulation of jihadists based on its past relationships with these groups.
Jabhat al-Nusra
The terror outfit Jabhat al-Nusra first trumpeted its existence on January 24, 2012, when it released a video through its media outlet al-Manarah al-Bayda (the White Minaret). The release directly to online global jihadi forums suggested that they were a legitimate group, which was later confirmed when a few top jihadi ideologues backed JN activities. Since January, JN has claimed responsibility for the following attacks:
February 10, Aleppo: double suicide car bombing at the Syrian security forces buildings leaves twenty-eight dead, four of them civilians.
March 17, 2012, Damascus: suicide attack against a police building and the Syrian Air Force intelligence headquarters.
April 20, 2012, Hama countryside (between the cities of Maardes and Tibat al-Imam): a car bomb targeting a Syrian military unit at the Qatr al-Nada restaurant that was allegedly responsible for a massacre in the town of al-Latamina.
April 24, 2012, Damascus: bombing of the Iranian Cultural Center in al-Marjah Square.
April 27, 2012, Damascus: suicide attack during Friday prayers in the Maydan neighborhood.
April 20-May 5, 2012, Damascus: sticky IEDs planted on cars in a series of attempted assassinations of Syrian officials.
May 5, Damascus: Two IEDs planted under trucks at the Syrian military headquarters on Revolution Street.
Although immediately after the May 9 double bombing, many speculated that JN was responsible, the May 12 video differed significantly from past JN announcements:
1.The video was first posted to YouTube, and to the jihadi forums via JN's media outlet.
2.The YouTube video claimed to be from Ibn Taymiyyah Media, a different media outlet run by freelance jihadis in the Palestinian territories (they too later released a statement denying they posted the video to YouTube, since they also first post its content to the forums).
3.The video stated it was JN's fourth statement, yet that same day JN released their seventh statement to the forums. JN's fourth statement was actually released a week earlier on May 5, under a different title.
4.The attack was claimed by JN's "Palestinian branch" -- which had not been mentioned previously in JN statements.
All of this suggests that someone may be trying to scapegoat the jihadis for the May 9 bombing. The Assad regime is the obvious suspect, but no evidence as yet supports their culpability. The regime has repeatedly alleged that the opposition's core is made up of is foreign terrorist jihadis, and it could be orchestrating these bombings to further radicalize the opposition and paint it as terrorist thugs. Another possibility is that elements within the regime, such as the Syrian secret police (mukhabarat ), aware of the number of foreign fighters who have entered Syria, are masquerading as jihadis in order to recruit foreign fighters who are then sent on missions that target civilians. Not only would this legitimate the regime's reign of terror, it provides justification for its insistence that the West, along with Arab governments and Turkey, not supply weapons to the rebels.
Syria's Growing Relations with Sunni Extremist Groups
Contrary to accounts in many media outlets that Syria's secular state is naturally at odds with Sunni extremist groups, Bashar al-Assad has actually built long-lasting, though indirect, relationships with such groups over the last decade. Leading up to and following the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, the Assad regime allowed Syrian "volunteers" to gather in front of the U.S. embassy in Damascus to board busses to Iraq, where they would "wage Jihad" against U.S. forces. When it was soon clear that more organized, better experienced extremists would be necessary, the Assad regime began allowing foreign jihadi fighters to enter Syria and transit to Iraq. The best account of this flow of foreign fighter comes from the Sinjar Documents, an al-Qaeda Iraq database captured by U.S. coalition forces in the Iraqi town of Sinjar near the Syrian border. The database lists details on hundreds of Jihadi fighters from Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Algeria (among other countries), who were able to come and go from Iraq via Syria. Around 8 percent of fighters listed in the Sinjar database were Syrian. The strict control of all points of entry by Syria's intelligence services, as well as Syrian Military Intelligence's control of eastern Syria, where Jihadi "rat lines" were set up, demonstrates the Assad regime's knowledge of, and at best malevolent neglect of -- if not cooperation with -- these groups.
The Syrian regime forged similar, murkier relationships with Fatah al-Islam, an extreme Islamist offshoot of Fatah Intifada, a Palestinian group heavily backed by Damascus. While Damascus had no official links to the organization, major questions remain about why Syrian authorities released the group's leader, Shakir al-Absi, from prison in 2006 shortly before the group broke away from Fatah Intifada. Absi had been incarcerated in Syria for the assassination of U.S. diplomat Lawrence Foley in 2002.
In a more general sense, the Assad regime encouraged extremist Sunni Islamists when convenient. For example, the regime tolerated a "spontaneous riot" by Sunni zealots outside the Danish embassy in Damascus in 2006 in protest of a Danish newspaper's publication of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed that they considered an offense to Islam. Eyewitness accounts show that the demonstration, which led to the burning of the building, was carried out with the full knowledge of the Syrian authorities.
Conclusion
Thus far, terrorist attacks have accounted for only a minuscule portion of the tactics used in the rebellion, although the May 9 attacks would indicate that terrorist attacks in Syria are on the rise in terms of number and scale. Yet the inconsistencies and discrepancies of the May 12 video raises the real possibility that the Assad regime could be manipulating the attack to its domestic and international advantage. Claims of responsibility for future attacks should be evaluated in light of where a video or claim is released (jihadi forums or YouTube), who produces it, and the consistency of the facts it contains.
Washington should emphasize the difference between extremist groups and the civil and armed opposition within Syria. Jihadi groups are active in Syria, though as a small part of groups opposing the Assad regime. But, more importantly, the responsibility for jihadi activities in Syria rests with the Assad regime; these groups' ability to operate in Syria has been boosted by the regime's historic relationships with extremist Sunni groups. Assad's brutal repression, combined with the meager assistance from the West for the opposition, has given a great boost to the jihadi narrative.
*Aaron Y. Zelin is the Richard Borrow Fellow in the Stein Program for Counterterrorism and Intelligence. Andrew J. Tabler is Senior Fellow in the Program on Arab Politics and author of the book In the Lion's Den: An Eyewitness Account of Washington's Battle with Syria.

Iran’s ethnic troubles
Guy Bechor Published: 05.18.12/Ynetnews
Op-ed: Iran’s continued existence threatened by minorities who wish to join neighboring countries
The mass executions of members of the Kurdish, Azeri and Sunni Arab minorities in Iran – usually on false charges of espionage, the spreading of blogs, porn, or merely posting photos online – attest to the immense tension faced by the country’s religious-military regime at this time. As of late, Iran’s TV broadcasts are replete with “admissions of guilt” by candidates for execution, “confessions” of spies and fabricated expressions of regret, against a backdrop of suspense thriller music. Aside from Syria, where a civil war is raging, there is no other state in the Middle East where the regime executes political activists so ostentatiously and lustfully.The regime fears a return of the protests of millions against it, as was the case in 2009, so it responds wildly in order to deter the masses. “Facebook is a Zionist espionage machine,” computer expert Ahmadinejad explained to his countrymen.
This regime knows that Iran is a country of minorities, where no one sect boasts a majority. The Persians themselves are below the 50% mark, and the other minorities are interested in joining neighboring countries and have no intention of supporting a regime that oppresses them.
The second-largest minority is the Azeri people, some 20 million citizens who make up about one-quarter of Iran’s population, including supreme leader Ali Khamenei and opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi. Many Azeris would like to be annexed by neighboring Azerbaijan, their cultural homeland. Azerbaijan too views Iran’s Azeri regions as areas belonging to it culturally.
And so, for example, in the 2009 Eurovision song contest, Azerbaijan presented a video of heritage sites, and to Iran’s amazement the clip included a site located in Iran, the Poets Tomb (Maqbaratol Shoara) near the city of Tabriz. Tehran also claims that Azeris are helping Israel’s and America’s spy agencies to hit Iranian regime targets.
Sunni-Shiite tensions growing
Another large minority are the Kurds, who engage in violent clashes with the Revolutionary Guards on a daily basis. Their dream is to desert Iran and join the great Kurdish homeland, once it’s established. Other minorities include the Tajik people, who wish to join Pakistan, and the Sunni Arabs, who dream of establishing a Sunni state within Iran to be called Ahwaz.
The regime in Tehran knows how soft its ethnic underbelly is; officials are aware of the danger of their country breaking up and disintegrating in case of a military clash. Every minority will work to promote its national objectives, at the expense of the Persians.
Meanwhile, Shiite-Sunni tensions within Iran are growing (some 33% of Iranians are Sunnis, including the Arabs and Kurds in the country) and expending into neighboring states. For example, an Iranian newspaper called for annexing Bahrain, ruled by a Sunni royal family, a move that outraged Sunni readers online as well as the miserable Bahraini government.
The possibility of Iranian disintegration is indeed the regime’s weak link, but also its strength. All minorities realize that should the government fall, the result would be chaos and even a civil war, exactly as happened in Lebanon between 1975 and 1989, and as is happening in Syria at this time.
Iranian citizens are looking at Syria and seeing themselves. This is the reason why despite the oppression and their sense of disgust with the regime, they can continue to support it as a buffer between them and a vacuum entailing ethnic slaughter.
This is where the growing economic sanctions enter the picture, further unraveling the ethnic fabric. Yet here is the paradox: As the tendency to split and disintegrate will grow, it may also reinforce the notion that there is no other choice but this regime, and that if it falls, everyone would have to fall with it. After all, they have no other place to go to.
Hence, the Iranian regime’s main weakness is also its main strength.

Iran’s triple mistakes in Syria, Iraq and Bahrain
By Amir Taheri/Asharq Alawsat
Fearing isolation as a new geopolitical landscape takes shape in the Middle East; the Khomeinist regime is still clinging to three forlorn hopes.
The first is to save the Ba’athist regime in Damascus even if that means accepting a financial burden that Iran’s crippled economy could ill afford.
The second is to prevent the re-emergence of Iraq as a viable state and a potential rival. The third is to transform the socio-political crisis in Bahrain into a power grab for itself.
In Syria, the mullahs’ strategy is to portray the uprising as a Western conspiracy to punish a regime supposed to be part of “the resistance”. The claim is that the United States and its allies wish to exclude actual or potentially unfriendly powers such as Iran, Russia and China from the region.
The mullahs hope to delay the fall of the Assad regime so that they have more time to confirm their foothold in southern Iraq, their second hope.
Emboldened by the victory of their Syrian brethren, the people of Iraq might decide that their country is potentially strong enough to avoid partial or total domination by Iran.
Tehran’s plan for Iraq is to encourage the creation of a Shi’ite enclave in the south in the name of federalism. That would enable Tehran to dominate the Shi’ite theological centre in Najaf thus pre-empting a possible challenge to the Khomeinist ideology.
It is clear that Ali Khamenei, the “Supreme Guide” of the Khomeinist regime, lacks the qualifications to be marketed as a religious leader for Iraqi Shi’ites. This is why Iranian security services are working on a scenario under which a mid-ranking mullah is cast in the role of ayatollah and marja al-taqlid (source of emulation) for Iraqi Shi’ites.
The mullah in question is Mahmoud Shahroudi who has been on the payroll of the Iranian government for three decades. Initially, he was member of a guerrilla group created by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to fight Saddam Hussein. He then started wearing a mullah’s outfit and transformed himself into a cleric. Currently, he heads an advisory committee attached to Khamenei’s office.
While Tehran is trying to annex Syria with money and arms shipments to the Assad regime, the plan for Iraq is domination through a religious network backed by paramilitary groups controlled by the IRGC.
The plan for Bahrain is, in a sense, more straightforward because it aims at the annexation of the archipelago on the basis of Iran’s historic claims.
In an editorial last Tuesday, the daily Kayhan, published by Khamenei’s office, had a front page banner headline asserting that “Bahrain Is A Piece of Iran’s Body”. The editorial claimed, “A majority of the people of Bahrain regard Bahrain as part of Iran.... It should return to its original homeland which is Iran.”
In an earlier article, the newspaper recalled the circumstances in 1970 under which Bahrain ceased to be a British protectorate to become an independent state.
In recent weeks, convening supposedly academic conferences to “prove” that Bahrain is part of Iran has become fashionable in Iranian seminaries. According to Khomeinist folklore the Shah’s decision to accept a United Nations’ “assessment mission” to decide the fate of Bahrain had been one of his “greatest treasons”.
One of Khomeini’s first acts after seizing power in 1979 was to create the so-called Bahrain Liberation Army. The group tried to invade Bahrain with a few boats but was stopped by the Iranian navy that was still controlled by Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan’s government. With the seizure of the US embassy in Tehran in November 1979 by “students” and the Iraqi invasion of Iran in September 1980 the idea of conquering Bahrain was put on the backburner.
Tehran’s intervention in Syria, Iraq and Bahrain has had a doubly negative effect.
It Syria, Iranian intervention has increased the human cost of a transition that seems inevitable. That intervention has given what is essentially a domestic struggle for power an external dimension that the Syrian people cannot control.
In Iraq, Iranian intervention has prevented the consolidation of a national consensus that had taken shape after the fall of the Ba’athist regime in 2003 and the bloody struggles of 2004-2009. Iraq is bound to end up finding its way and rebuilding the structures of a state. However, the cost of doing that has been increased by Iranian intervention.
Similarly in Bahrain, it is unlikely that a majority of Bahrainis, who are seeking greater reforms and better power sharing would want to live under Walayat al-Faqih (rule by mullah). Nor would they wish to sacrifice their national interests at the altar of a regime whose fate is under question in Iran itself.
Khamenei’s triple gamble in Syria, Iraq and Bahrain also has a negative effect on Iran’s own interests as a nation state.
As a nation, as a people, Iran has no interest in enabling the Assad regime to kill the Syrians in their own cities and villages. Nor could Iran reap any benefit from sowing dissension and violence in Iraq and preventing a national consensus in Bahrain.
Once again, in these three important cases, the interests of Iran as a nation-state do not coincide with those of Iran as a vehicle for the Khomeinist ideology.

Iran's Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi: Israel should help Iranians topple regime
Ynetnews/05.18.12/
Iran's Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi says ousting terrorist regime more effective than strike on nuke facilities
Iran's exiled crown prince and the late Shah’s older son, Reza Pahlavi, has urged Israel on Friday to help the Iranian people to topple their regime instead of threatening to attack the country in order to stop its nuclear program, Al Arabiya reported.
"If Israel wages war against Iran now, this will cause a kind of tension with the Jewish people that had not existed since the time of Cyrus the Great," he told the Dubai-based television network. Pahlavi noted that a military strike would not annihilate the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program, but would only slow it down.
"At the end of the day the priority should be, and the whole world will agree, that the entire Iranian regime has to go," he stressed.
The exiled prince warned against a US-led strike on Iran as well, equating the scenario to the Iraq war, which he said was a mistake.
'Sanctions counterproductive'
Pahlavi claimed that the US-led economic sanctions that have been imposed on Iran are counterproductive, saying the international community should take measures that support the Iranian people.
"We rarely see resistance movements that do not enjoy a degree of international support like what happened in East Europe when the Soviet Union collapsed," he said.
"Iranians have made it very clear that they do not want the current regime, but they are unarmed and will not use violence, so civil disobedience becomes the best means of confrontation. When diplomacy fails and war becomes an unfavorable option, people need to put pressure on the regime from inside."
Pahlavi said that bringing down the Iranian regime would benefit not only the Iranians but the entire world as well.
"The current regime has proven its hostility and its ability to spread terrorism and extremism."
'Ayatollah should be prosecuted'
Pahlavi also called for the prosecution of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity, noting that the case would first have to go through the UN Security Council because Iran hasn't signed the Rome Statute.
He said that while the indictment of the supreme leader should not absolve his aides who might be involved in crimes, Khamenei remains the "main culprit."
The crown prince has been residing in the US since the Islamic Revolution replaced his father's regime with a clerical one in 1978. He admitted to the downsides of his father’s rule, but stressed they were not to be compared with the cruelty of the current regime in Tehran.
"At the time of the Shah, there was a problem with taking part in politics, yet all other rights were granted to the people. Now, Iranians are stripped of their basic freedoms. Women and ethnic and religious minorities are suffering greatly."