Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for November 06/12
World watches as America votes
Israeli P.M: In my tenure Iran won’t develop nuclear bomb
Israeli forces on high alert after Syrian gunfire hit Israeli military jeep on Golan
Russian envoy: Syrian government-in-exile ‘provocative, harmful’
Syrian Rebels bring fight to Damascus
Seven Syrian generals defect to Turkey: report
British PM says would agree safe exit for Syria's Assad
Stray Syrian bullets hit IDF jeep on Syria border
Depleting Syria’s rights
Divisions emerge at Syria opposition conference
Iran says can build overseas arms facilities
Russia supports dialogue in Lebanon
Sleiman wishes for healthy political environment
Egypt FM in Beirut to show support for Sleiman
STL: Hasan case out of our jurisdiction
Israeli military vehicle hit by Syrian gunfire, army says
Lebanese MPs likely to pass buck on salary scale
March 14: Unseating Mikati won’t lead to power vacuum
Kataeb Party commends postponement of parliament session
Jumblatt: Dialogue, reconciliation needed to form new government
Arsal refugees fear winter, city fears escalation
Turkey denies sending Yemen weapons
Kuwaiti ruler slams “illegal” opposition protests
New Opinion: The baby and the bathwater
TV: Israel security heads halted Iran attack alert
Hurricane Sandy has struck our morality
Saudi Arabia names Prince Mohammed bin Naif as interior minister
Two Saudi border guards killed in ambush in south: TV
Profile: Saudi Interior Minister Prince Mohammed Bin Naif

The legal case against Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah
http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=453902
Mansour Bou Dagher/Now Lebanon/November 5, 2012
Now Lebanon/There are numerous crimes for which Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah could be tried in court.
Had a normal citizen done what Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah did in recent years, what would be the legal consequences of his actions? Let us consider five events he is suspected of being involved in that would carry legal ramifications in a Lebanese court.
Protecting the four suspects wanted in connection with former PM Rafiq Hariri’s 2005 assassination
On May 2, 2011, Sayyed Nasrallah delivered an address in response to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon issuing an arrest warrant for four Hezbollah militants—Salim Jamil Ayyash, Mustafa Amin Badreddine, Hussein Hassan Oneissi and Assad Hassan Sabra—on charges of involvement in former PM Rafiq Hariri’s assassination. Nasrallah said then, “I believe that not even 30 or 300 years would be enough for them to find or arrest anyone […] Therefore, do not hold the cabinet responsible for something it is incapable of achieving and for what you know that you are incapable of achieving.”
In this respect, Article 222 of the Lebanese Penal Code stipulates that “anyone who conceals someone whom s/he knows has committed a felony, or helps such a person to evade justice, is to be handed a prison sentence of three months to two years.”
Under Article 219 of the Penal Code, the sentence for those found guilty of concealment is even harsher.
The May 2008 events
Here, we move to the civil fighting between Hezbollah and its allies on the one hand, and the Future Movement and Progressive Socialist Party on the other, which led to more than 70 people being killed over almost a week. This is added to Nasrallah’s actions that led to the fighting, namely pressuring the cabinet to recant its decisions to dismantle the Resistance’s communication network and remove airport security chief Mohammad Shoucair from office.
With regard to the fighting itself, Article 308 of the Penal Code stipulates that “an aggression aiming to cause civil war or sectarian fighting by providing the Lebanese with weapons or urging them to use weapons against one another, or by urging to kill or plunder in any location(s), is punishable by a lifetime sentence of hard labor or by the death sentence if the aggression does take place.”
As for disobeying the cabinet’s decision to dismantle Hezbollah’s communication network and remove the “airport security chief” from office, this falls under Decree No. 115/L.R. dated August 12, 1932 which, as part of what it regards as undermining public peace and order, punishes disobeying laws and regulations or inciting hatred against authorities. The sentence to be handed down ranges from two months to two years of imprisonment along with a financial fine.
In addition, Article 288 of the Penal Code stipulates that “whoever breaches measures adopted by the state to preserve neutrality in times of war is liable to temporary detention.” The fighting waged by the party and its allies led to the cabinet recanting its decisions. This can be listed under measures preserving Lebanon’s neutrality in times of war, especially if the ultimate aim is to put an end to weapons outside state authority, i.e. Hezbollah’s arsenal.
The 2006 July War
“Had I known” is the now-famous expression that Sayyed Nasrallah used in a televised interview, during which he asserted that if he’d had the faintest idea that Hezbollah’s capturing Israeli soldiers would lead to the 2006 July War, he would not have undertaken the operation. (Sayyed Nasrallah was, however, keen to remind viewers of the Lebanese detainees in Israeli prisons and of Lebanon’s right to kidnap Israeli soldiers in order to liberate its own prisoners.)
On July 12, 2006, Hezbollah undertook Operation “Honest Promise,” violating the Blue Line that separates Lebanon from Israel, thus leading to the July War, which caused major loss of life and structural damage in Lebanon.
In this respect, legal provisions might be lacking, but still, Article 288 of the Penal Code punishes with temporary detention “anyone who breaches the measures taken by the Lebanese state to preserve its neutrality in times of war” as well as anyone “who undertakes actions, writings or speeches not allowed by the cabinet, and exposes Lebanon to acts of aggression, endangers its ties to a foreign state or exposes the Lebanese people to acts of revenge targeting them or their properties.”
Continuous work to extend the Resistance’s communication network on the state’s property
These works were discovered following the events that occurred in the town of Tarshish in Baabda district, where residents prevented Hezbollah from fitting its own communication network on the town’s lines, as the road is state-owned public property.
In this case, Article 737 of the Penal Code stipulates that “whoever does not have an official property deed and lays hands on a land plot or part of a land plot owned by a third party is liable to a prison sentence of one month to one year in addition to a fine ranging between 200,000 LL and 1,000,000 LL.”
A harsher sentence is dealt as per Article 257 in either of the following cases: If the act in question is accompanied by threats or violence against persons or things, or if part public roads, state properties or community properties are commandeered.
The Black Shirts
This refers to the events of January 18, 2011 following the postponement by President Michel Suleiman of the binding legislative consultations to nominate the next prime minister. Men clad in black shirts took to the streets around Beirut and other areas of the country in a show of intimidation. The event is believed to have swayed MP Walid Jumblatt to nominate current PM Najib Miqati.
Hezbollah MP Walid Succariyyeh admitted that the events that occurred on that day had been a mistake and that the person responsible for it within the party had been punished, as Hezbollah is opposed to the use of intimidation against anyone on the domestic stage.
Article 346 of the Penal Code stipulates that any gathering or convoy on public roads in order to cause rioting is banned if it numbers 20 participants and if these participants undertake actions that may undermine public calm.
Here too, Article 306 of the Penal Code stipulates that “anyone who usurps political or civil power or military command is to be punished by at least seven years of temporary detention.” While it is hard to refer to what happened as “usurpation,” it can still be described as controlling political power one way or another.
There is one last element for which Nasrallah could be held accountable: “Holding a foreign state, its army, flag or national slogan publicly in contempt, and holding the head of a foreign state, its ministers or its political representative in Lebanon in contempt.” Perpetrators are liable to a prison sentence of six months to two years in addition to a fine of 400,000 LL, albeit only based on a complaint filed by the party that incurred the damage. Here of course, we are referring to the attacks that usually target the president and secretary of state of the US as well as the US ambassador to Lebanon. As for burning and stomping the American flag, this is left up to supporters. This article is a translation of the original, which appeared on the NOW Arabic site on Tuesday October 30, 2012

STL: Hasan case out of our jurisdiction
November 06, 2012/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: The Special Tribunal for Lebanon said Monday that the case of the assassination of intelligence chief Wissam al-Hasan is not within its jurisdiction. In a question-and-answer session on Twitter, the court’s registrar, Herman von Hebel, said that the court has only jurisdiction over cases connected to the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri from October 2004 through Dec. 12, 2005. “The al-Hassan case is in the hands of the Lebanese authorities,” von Hebel said, adding that connected cases that come after those dates can only come to the STL if the Lebanese government and the United Nations decide to do so and with the consent of the U.N. Security Council. Brig. Gen. Hasan was killed in an explosion on Oct. 19. The March 14 coalition has called to have the case to be referred to the STL. Hebel also confirmed that Hasan, as head of the Information Branch of the Internal Security Forces, cooperated with the STL in the investigation of Hariri’s killing.

March 14: Unseating Mikati won’t lead to power vacuum
November 06, 2012/By Hussein Dakroub/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: The opposition March 14 bloc rejected Monday the argument held by March 8 politicians that unseating Prime Minister Najib Mikati’s government would plunge the country into instability and a power vacuum. The coalition also reiterated its demand for the formation of “a neutral salvation government” as the only way to defuse mounting political tension caused by last month’s assassination of police intelligence chief Brig. Gen. Wissam al-Hasan. The call for a Cabinet change was made by former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, head of the parliamentary Future bloc, following talks with Maronite Patriarch Beshara Rai. The demand coincided with a new appeal by President Michel Sleiman for rival political leaders to sit together at the dialogue table as the best way to overcome the current political malaise sparked by Hasan’s assassination.
“Sitting at the dialogue table and resorting to a constructive political discourse is the best way amid [the developments] in Lebanon and the region to agree on a solution for the current problems through a calm and rational dialogue,” Sleiman said during a meeting with a delegation of political parties at Baabda Palace. Referring to March 14 calls for a Cabinet change, Sleiman said in a statement released by his office: “The Cabinet issue is subject to dialogue and understanding on a change for the better that can embody national unity.”
He underlined the importance of dealing with the economic crisis with a view toward energizing the economy and helping the state consolidate stability after its success in maintaining the security situation following a car bomb that killed Hasan, his driver and a woman in the Beirut district of Ashrafieh on Oct. 19. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns telephoned Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt, expressing hope that the PSP chief would help in the formation of a new government without the country falling into a power vacuum, according to a statement released by the PSP’s media office. Jumblatt restated his previous stance that he did not object to an agreement on the formation of a new Cabinet by supporting Sleiman’s efforts to keep channels of dialogue open among the Lebanese parties, the statement said.
Sleiman has been consulting with rival leaders in an attempt to convene a National Dialogue session to explore a solution for the political crisis triggered by Hasan’s killing, including the possibility of forming a new government. The president’s attempts to resume intra-Lebanese dialogue won praise from French President Francois Hollande during his lightning visit to Beirut Sunday. Hollande pledged to protect Lebanon against threats of destabilization caused by the reverberations of the 20-month-old conflict in neighboring Syria.
However, former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, leader of the March 14 coalition, and Siniora have said that there can be no dialogue with the Hezbollah-led March 8 alliance before the government resigns.
This stance was reaffirmed Monday by Siniora, who led a delegation of Future MPs to Bkirki to congratulate Rai on his recent appointment by Pope Benedict XVI as a cardinal in the Catholic Church.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Siniora said “a positive shock” was needed through the formation of “a neutral salvation government” to defuse rising tension in the country caused by the Cabinet’s performance.
“A real solution lies in the formation of a government that can contribute toward easing internal tension,” he said. “We have seen in the past months a surge in tension that was reflected on the performance of the government and its ministers and differences among them.” Referring to the deterioration of the political, security and socio-economic situation in the wake of Hasan’s killing, Siniora said: “Matters have taken a very dangerous trend with regard to real and permanent stability desired by the Lebanese.
“We explained to Cardinal Rai our viewpoint toward what is happening in Lebanon and the dire need for an initiative that can help reduce the levels of tension and prepare for the important constitutional deadline which is holding the parliamentary elections next spring,” Siniora added. “All this requires the presence of a competent government to do this job.”
Siniora called for the formation of “a neutral salvation government” made up of unbiased people to defuse the level of political tension.
Referring to Sleiman’s call for National Dialogue, Siniora highlighted the importance of all-party talks, but accused the March 8 parties of failing to abide by decisions taken at previous Dialogue sessions, such as staying out of the conflict in Syria. “We believe that dialogue is necessary. We have never stopped following the policy of dialogue and extending hands. Our openness to the president is limitless,” he said.
In a clear allusion to Hezbollah’s alleged involvement in the fighting in Syria, Siniora said: “We attended Dialogue sessions, while simultaneously there were groups bluntly declaring they are against what we agreed on and sending gunmen and arms [to support the Syrian regime].”
He rejected the argument held by March 8 politicians that the government’s resignation would throw the country into instability and a power vacuum. “The Lebanese Constitution is clear in stating that there can be no vacuum,” Siniora said.
Arab and Western countries have voiced concerns for stability and a power vacuum in Lebanon following the opposition’s calls for the government’s resignation in the wake of Hasan’s assassination. The March 14 coalition has called on Mikati to step aside after accusing his government of complicity with the Syrian regime in Hasan’s assassination. The coalition has also announced a total boycott of the government and all Cabinet-related meetings in Parliament as part of its moves to pressure the government to resign.
However, Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea rejected the notion that the political crisis could end with the formation of a national unity Cabinet, urging Sleiman to solve the problem by addressing what he described as the “killing machine.”“A unity government does not provide stability and security [in Lebanon],” Geagea told Al-Joumhouria newspaper, arguing that such a government would “paralyze the country and cripple its institutions.”“Moreover, a unity government is a true failure that we must not seek [to re-establish],” Geagea said.
He added that Sleiman instead should solve the current crisis by addressing the root cause. “I wish [Sleiman] would dedicate his time to solving the fundamental problem, which is the killing machine, and stop it,” he said. Geagea expressed his belief that the way toward resolving the crisis in the country would be to identify the culprits behind assassinations. He again accused the Hezbollah-led March 8 parties of being behind “assassinations and political killings” that targeted mainly March 14 figures.
For his part, former Cabinet Minister Wiam Wahhab, head of the Arab Tawheed Party, rejected reported Saudi and French attempts to help in the formation of a new government in Lebanon.
“No Cabinet change except via Lebanon. It will not take place, neither from Paris nor from Riyadh. The [Cabinet] change is decided in Lebanon,” Wahhab, an ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad, told reporters after meeting Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun at his residence in Rabieh, north of Beirut.
Meanwhile, Mikati said during a visit to Bulgaria that Lebanon will not take sides in the deadly conflict in Syria. “Lebanon is firmly resolved not to take anyone’s side in Syria. This has to do with our own stability and security so Lebanon is not in any way interfering in Syria’s internal affairs,” Mikati told a news conference in Sofia with Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov.
“We hope that the international community will understand Lebanon’s position in this extremely difficult and delicate moment,” he said.
In his talks with Borisov and other Bulgarian officials, Mikati discussed ways of boosting economic cooperation between the two countries. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said in remarks published Monday that a planned visit by Mikati to France would proceed as scheduled. Fabius also told An-Nahar newspaper that Mikati’s visit was not discussed during Hollande’s visit to Beirut. Mikati is scheduled to visit Paris at the end of the month. Fabius’ remarks followed local media reports that Hollande’s visit to Beirut would annul Mikati’s trip to France.

Israeli forces on high alert after Syrian gunfire hit Israeli military jeep on Golan
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report November 5, 2012,/Tension shot up on the Israeli-Syrian Golan border Monday night, Nov. 5, after Syrian small-arms fire from 1 kilometer over the Golan border hit the jeep of the Golani Brigade’s Patrol Battalion commander on a routine border patrol. There were no injuries. The jeep was badly damaged. debkafile’s military sources: The incident occurred after a gunfight between Syrian troops and rebels over the Golan town of Quneitra ended in the town falling to the rebels.
Israeli air force planes are patrolling the Golan and Galilee skies of northern Israel after the Syrians were observed preparing aircraft and helicopters to fly to the aid of their defeated ground forces in Quneitra. After the Syrian army’s 90th Brigade was forced to retreat, Damascus is reported by Western sources about to send reinforcements over to the Golan to recover Quneitra. IDF contingents on the Golan and the Israeli-Lebanese border are high alert in case the Syrian combat spills over the border.
debkafile reported Sunday: Israeli warplanes flew over the divided Golan Sunday, Nov. 4, in a show of strength and as a deterrent against the Syrian civil war seeping across the border, debkafile’s military and Western intelligence sources report. In Paris, President Francois Hollande vowed Sunday that “France would oppose with all its strength any bid to destabilize Lebanon. Lebanon must be protected.”
He spoke regardless of the 5,000 Lebanese Shiite Hizballah fighters who have poured into Syria from their Beqaa Valley stronghold of al-Harmel to fight Bashar Assad’s war. Our sources reveal that these Lebanese fighters have now advanced 50-60 kilometers deep into southwestern Syria, up to the outskirts of the embattled town of Homs.
On the Golan, further to the east, Israel’s chief of staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz visited the IDF contingent stationed there to reinforce the message broadcast by the IAF.
Hizballah is now openly flaunting the presence of its regular troops in Syria. They are armed with heavy artillery and Chinese WS-1 multiple-launch rocket systems made in Iran. These “Katyushas,” shoot 302mm rockets at targets up to 100 kilometers away and can operate in the rugged mountain terrain of Lebanon, Syria and Israel and in harsh weather conditions, including snow.
Hizballah fighters are reported by our sources to have already used this weapon with deadly effect in a battle with Syrian rebels over the town of Quseir opposite the Lebanese Beqaa Valley. It ended in Hizbalah’s capture of the town. Coordination is tight: Hizballah forces on the ground get in touch with Iranian command headquarters in Beirut and Damascus to call up Syrian helicopters for air cover.
The Hizballah commander in Syria is Ibrahim Aqil, a veteran of the Hizballah militia and one of the most trusted by Hassan Nasrallah and Tehran.
Aqil took part in the 1983 assault on US Marines Beirut headquarters in which 241 American troops were killed, the highest death toll in a single event after World War II. In the year 2000, Aqil, then commander of the southern Lebanese front against Israel, orchestrated the kidnap from Israeli territory and murder of three Israeli soldiers, Benny Avraham, Adi Avitan and Omar Sawad.
Hizballah’s expeditionary force in Syria has been assigned three missions:
1. To seal off the routes used by the rebels to smuggle fighters and arms from Lebanon into Syria, most of which run through the Beqaa Valley. This mission is near completion.
2. To defend the clusters of Syrian Alawite and Shiite villages in the area of Hizballah control.
3. To provide a strategic reserve force for the Syrian units defending the main hubs of Syrian highways running west to east from the Mediterranean coast to the Syrian-Iraqi border and crisscrossed from north to south by the route running from the Turkish border up to Damascus. Control of these hubs makes it possible for the Syrian army to move military forces between the different warfronts at high speed.

“The planes were flying in the dark with no lights on”
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
A clip of a television interview with the Sudanese Defense Minister is currently being circulated, in which he comments on the Israeli bombing of the Yarmouk weapons factory. During the interview, when asked why his radar systems did not deal with the Israeli assault, Major General Abdel Rahim Mohammed Hussein said “what can we do…the planes were flying in the dark with no lights on”!
Here I would like to pause for a moment. I am not singling out the Sudanese Defense Minister, nor am I seeking to respond to those who criticized my article last week, entitled “Sudan: Absurdity or confrontation!”, this is merely an attempt to confirm a solitary fact, namely that the bulk of our regions ills come down to adventurism. For example, after the 2006 war in Lebanon, did Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah party, not say that if he knew the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers would lead to the war then he would not have done it?
This is the same logic that the Sudanese Defense Minister is speaking of now, who contends that the reason for his defense forces’ failure to respond to an Israeli attack is that the Israeli aircraft were “flying in the dark with no lights on”! If Sudanese defense systems cannot deal with planes with their lights out, then it is in their best interests to abandon weapons factories altogether, along with any links with Iran on their territory. This is not all, for here we must recall the statement of another Sudanese official who said that his country had become a frontline state after the Israeli assault. Yet I do not know how Sudan could live up to such a title if it cannot handle a plane turning off its lights!
It is wrong to laugh at misfortune, but the Defense Minister’s statement is a continuation of the policies that have wasted the region, its resources, and above all that the most precious thing, the lives of its people. The story does not stop with the statements of the Sudanese Defense Minister or Hassan Nasrallah. We could also cite [Muhammad Saeed] al-Sahhaf on that famous day when American troops were attacking Baghdad by land, sea and air, and as an American tank was parked close by him, when he told reporters: “Look, we have surrounded the infidels”. We could even mention the Bashar al-Assad regime, which has never tired of repeating the mantra of resistance and opposition, even though its forces have ended up fighting the Syrian people instead of the Israelis. Finally, we would have to mention [Mohamed Hassanein] Heikal’s headlines, which, during in the days of Gamal Abdel Nasser, used to read that Israeli planes were dropping like flies… There are many examples and you would need a book to list them all. We are not dealing with an unusual story, or an anomaly, rather it this a systematic defect at all levels. Even today when you talk about the Arab Spring, democracy and reform, the story of the Muslim Brotherhood immediately comes to mind. Thus, the intention here is not to advocate peace with Israel, but to say that war has certain requirements, as does peace, and both are difficult. Those who want a war should build states capable of fighting it even if Israeli planes turn their lights out, and those who want peace must also prepare because Israel, unfortunately, surpasses us in economic, educational and technological terms. Here we must remember the words of Hassan Nasrallah in an interview with Al Mayadeen television channel, when he said that Israel had open targets, such as factories and power plants, whilst electricity was sporadic in Lebanon anyway therefore it had nothing to lose! Is there anything more shameful than Nasrallah’s words here?
Please wake up and look at yourselves, even if the lights are turned off!

Hurricane Sandy has struck our morality
By Dr. Hamad Al-Majid/Asharq Alawsat
The devastation caused by Hurricane “Sandy” across the US has reached Arab shores in the form of waves of controversy and debate. On one hand, there are those who rejoiced at the disaster and took pleasure in the rising death toll, mass flooding and destroyed hones. For them, the US remains the root of all evil and therefore all Americans deserve the ordeals and catastrophes they suffer, for they must reap what they sow. On the other hand, there are those who consider Hurricane “Sandy” to be a humanitarian disaster that has befallen innocent people; people who are distanced from politics in the same manner that America is distanced geographically from the Islamic world. Yet no religion, sense of ethics or humanity would allow one to rejoice at the misfortune of others, regardless of their religion, race or country of origin. This debate essentially focuses on how we react to ordinary people who have suffered great harm. We would not have paid much attention to the extremist viewpoints were they based on personal convictions, but they actually stem from interpretations of the Sharia. As such, there is a dire need to clarify Sharia concepts with regards to dealing with the misfortune of others, and apply them practically on the ground. This is especially important in view of the fact that natural disasters are a universal norm that will continue to befall everyone. We must seek assistance from specialists with a moderate, comprehensive view, to put forth an explanation that functions as a frame of reference for the majority, not the minority, of the general public.
Without a doubt, the reason for the debate over this particular issue is that each sect, by taking matters to extremes, has failed to scrutinize the details, hence confusing right with wrong. What we find is that people resort to Sharia texts on some occasions yet abandon them at other times, as was the case with the tsunami that did great harm in Indonesia. At that time, some people went too far in their interpretations and even falsified fixed texts governing the relationship between calamities and sins, whilst others maintained that the tsunami disaster had befallen them because revealing swimwear was being sold in Indonesian shops. Some have moved on from the stage of urging misfortune upon peaceful non-Muslims and rejoicing in it, to the extent that they now say that declining to do so is itself a disavowal of Al Wala' Wal Bara' doctrine. Such people would be better off shedding light on the merciful nature of Islamic Sharia and its moral treasures. Sharia stipulates that a Muslim may interact with a non-Muslim in a humane and ethical frame of reference even in the midst of a battle, let alone at times of peace or during a natural disaster. When the Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) was asked to pray against the polytheists, he replied "I was not sent to curse; I was sent only as a mercy”. The Sharia only permits us to pray for the misfortune of others under specific circumstances, such as during a war, where the enemy might even be another Muslim. For example, given the massacres committed against the Syrian people, we can invoke God against the regime of Bashar al-Assad, his troops, media, thugs and whoever defends the atrocities he commits.

The change coming from Jordan
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Alawsat
Two weeks ago, I visited Amman. Shortly before the airplane wheels touched the runway, I was struck by a fear of entering the unknown and of moving towards a critical stage. This anxiety was compounded by the fact that a security guard was sitting on board the aircraft, a somewhat unfamiliar scene in the aviation world. The guard was sitting next to the passengers and observed us uninterruptedly throughout the journey.
Prior to my visit came the news that a group of terrorists had been arrested, having crossed the Syrian border into Jordan. Then came the details of those terrorists’ targets; shopping malls and diplomatic headquarters, most notably the US embassy. Other explosions were also to be carried out in order to divert attention.
Once again we heard the same doubts raised by those who love to promote them, arguing that governments often fabricate such terrorist plots in order to justify tightening their security grip. Yet whilst I was in Jordan, someone pointed out to me: "It would be of no benefit to the Jordanian authorities, whether politically or economically, to publicize rumors of terrorist groups targeting shopping malls and diplomatic missions, because such news would definitely tarnish our country’s image. Why would we do this?" Indeed, after the plot was exposed, the Jordanian government did not seek to tighten its security grip, thus I believe we can rule out the claim that these terrorists are fabricated.
Because Jordan is located in the midst of a highly tensioned area and is a constant target, security becomes a requirement for survival. In this part of the world, the security apparatus is the most important government authority, and it faces a truly awesome challenge. Yesterday, Jordan was Syria's gateway for vegetables and tourists, and today it is a gateway for refugees and fleeing politicians, after the Turkish route failed and the Syrian rebels were unable to secure liberated areas. It is for this reason that the Jordan’s current circumstances are unfavorable, as described by the King himself in his speech before thousands of citizens. The Jordanian borders are overcrowded with tens of thousands of refugees escaping from the Syrian hell, whilst Jordan's gas imports from Egypt have almost ceased entirely, although no one knows exactly why. Furthermore, the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan are seeking to exploit the revolutionary climate in the region in order to achieve political gains. Such pressures may have prompted Jordan to avoid getting involved in the Syrian revolution thus far, but in the end geography is stronger than any political decision. The Syrian regime failed to fully take into account Jordan’s capabilities when it displaced tens of thousands of Syrians by continuously targeting villages and cities for more than a year. The al-Assad regime was only thinking about exporting its crisis as well as intimidating its neighbors such as the Turks, the Lebanese and the Jordanians.
I met with His Majesty King Abdullah Bin al-Hussein, who still has clear vision in this cloudy part of the world, and I heard about his country's policy for dealing with not only the current situation but also the immediate future. Jordan is a stable and successful model of governance, which some regional powers are trying to destabilize. Jordan has always been known for its political and Islamic moderation, whereas the Arab Spring states – and Syria may be included here at a later stage – have all imposed stringent political Islam. Of course, we welcome all forms of moderate Islamist rule, in other words that which does not seek to exploit religion for political goals, but in our region we are used to the political Islam models along the lines of Iran.
As for the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, some thought it would be among the first states to be immersed by the flood of change in the region. They believed a state of modest economic potential could not withstand such change, but none of this has happened. Others also claimed that Jordan's stance at the beginning of the Syrian revolution was cautious because it feared the collapse of the dam – the al-Assad regime – would cause it to drown in the flood as well. Yet the recent developments, the latest being the Amman gathering that aimed to build a united Syrian opposition front, prove that Jordan is more than just a place for Syrian refugee camps, it is also a capital for the Syrian revolution. Jordan may in fact be the most successful in achieving what others have failed to do, and bring down the al-Assad regime with all its supports; Iraq, Iran and Hezbollah.

New Opinion: The baby and the bathwater
Now Lebanon/November 5, 2012
If we are to believe a report in al-Joumhouria newspaper on Monday, French President François Hollande and Saudi Arabian King Abdullah, in a meeting also attended by former Lebanese PM and Future Movement leader Saad Hariri, will not back current Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Miqati if a new government is formed.
Do the Lebanese not have a say in any of this? We should worry at the carefree way in which Lebanon’s future is always being decided by outside actors, no matter who they are. The region is already polarized between the Sunni and Shiite communities in a dangerous standoff between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Such horse-trading will only serve to entrench further the sense that foreign powers control Lebanon’s destiny and that each side of the political divide is justified in having its regional backer.
Another worrying aspect was the presence of Hariri, a man who must surely concede that his role in Lebanese political life must now be confined to the margins of Sunni politics. He is living in LaLa Land if he still feels that the Lebanese public would welcome him back with open arms and see him as their salvation. In fact, it would be scandalous if he stood for parliament in the next general elections, let alone offer himself as a candidate for the premiership. (Ditto Nayla Tueni and the rest of the absentee MPs who, by their negligence, have done their best to snuff out the flame that was March 14 and insult the intelligence of the voters who sent them to Najmeh Square).
For it is not enough to simply oppose March 8’s fiendish agenda and make all the right noises about democracy, independence, sovereignty and the sanctity of the state. March 14 members must also take seriously their roles as public servants. The recent deterioration of infrastructure and the apparent collapse of law and order during August have woken up the public to the fact that if they want a functioning, safe, peaceful and prosperous country, and if they want laws enacted, it will not happen if the people they elect to achieve these ends are nowhere to be seen.
Which brings us back to the issue of Miqati and his suitability for the premiership. When he accepted to lead the Hezbollah-dominated government in the spring of 2011, many saw him as an opportunist who would trade what was left of Lebanon’s integrity for a place in the history books.
In reality and with hindsight, he has not done a terrible job. He has advanced the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (despite the Syrian dream of killing the process altogether) and spoken out against Syrian violations of Lebanese territorial integrity. Given the fact that he has had to work with a cabinet of which Hezbollah and its obstructionist allies in the FPM are a part, he has made a decent fist of holding things together. Hollande and the rest of the international community are right to condemn the current government, which has set new standards in uselessness, but we should avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater. With the exception of former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, Miqati is arguably the best candidate we have to lead this country in troubled times. In the meantime, the Lebanese must fight to wrestle their destiny from the hands of those who see Lebanon as a strategic asset instead of a sovereign nation, and all our MPs, without exception, should show up for work.

Depleting Syria’s rights?
Hazem Saghiyeh/Now Lebanon/November 5, 2012
Right is not an eternal, inexhaustible essence, provided that such a thing as an eternal, inexhaustible essence does exist in the first place. Much like everything else, rights can be squandered and misused. The changes they initiate, the new habits they establish and the boredom they enlist are subjected to prescription, all of which leads – in turn – to the erosion and depletion of one’s right.
Palestinian rights are the most potent illustration to that. Syrian rights now seem to be heading in the same direction.
Indeed, Syria’s revolutionaries are committing an increasing number of violations, including executions, killings, kidnappings and aggressions. This diminishes Syrian rights against a backdrop of the revolution. While this does not mean that the enemies of the revolution are right in any way, it weakens the conflict’s legitimacy nonetheless.
Squandering and misusing rights partially results from the extension of the [Syrian] crisis and the inability to settle it, something for which influential world powers are to blame. Furthermore, extending the conflict with no prospects for an efficient intervention constitutes a major achievement, as it has prompted the Syrian society to acknowledge its hidden contradictions. As a result, news about violations and exactions are now racing against headlines pertaining to the conflicts pitting Arabs, Kurds, Syriacs, Sunnis and Alawis against one another. We are further taken by surprise by events that pertain to the relations between urban and rural areas and others that pertain to relations among various regions.
The [Syrian] regime is undoubtedly not the only manufacturer of these contradictions, nor did it invent them out of the blue. However, this regime has been promoting an almost-absolute equation linking its fall to the rotten state of society.
This puts the revolution before an extremely tough mission, one that is growing in difficulty as the conflict endures while ties between groups and regions are severed and hatreds pile up. This mission is, precisely, to confront this decomposition, which the Syrian regime is betting on and which he is using as a weapon in the showdown over survival. This grants the ethical dimension of the revolution an increasingly important role, knowing that “ethics” are a condition linked to what is “national” and “democratic.”
Extremist religious groups and military packs operating in total impunity are the most potent results of the decomposition on which the Syrian regime is betting, and this makes it even more pressing and efficient to confront it by disavowing these groups, their behavior and their rhetoric. If violations, kidnappings and executions are the main means to bring about [this] decomposition, then confronting these means is the best way to maintain the healthy elements in Syria’s society and, by extension, Syrian rights.
Still, all of the above is merely preaching since these propositions have yet to find the backing needed to put them on top of the agenda and promote their implementation. While waiting for the details to emerge regarding the latest political and organizational movements, it is worth noting that Syria’s rights are being depleted today. This ignites worries that we may end up caught in a vicious circle of breeding problems for which no solutions can be found.
*The article is a translation of the original, which appeared on the NOW Arabic site on Monday November 5, 2012

Egypt FM in Beirut to show support for Sleiman
November 06 2012/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohammed Kamel Amr arrived in Beirut Tuesday in a show of support for President Michel Sleiman's efforts to preserve stability following tensions sparked by the assassination of Lebanon's police intelligence chief Brig. Gen. Wissam al-Hasan.
Egyptian Ambassador to Lebanon Ashraf Hamdi said Egypt’s President Mohammed Mursi dispatched the foreign minister to Beirut “to convey a message to President Sleiman in support for the state of Lebanon and its stability.”
Amr will meet political figures from both the March 8 and March 14 coalitions “to listen to the views of the various Lebanese leaderships and movements,” Hamdi told An-Nahar daily in remarks published Tuesday.
Upon arrival at Beirut airport shortly before midday, Amr traveled to the Lebanese Forces headquarters in Maarab north of the capital for a meeting with LF leader Samir Geagea.
He is scheduled to meet with Sleiman, Prime Minister Najib Mikati, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour.
State-run National News Agency said Amr also plans to meet former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, Kataeb Party leader Amin Gemayel and Free Patriotic Movement chief Gen. Michel Aoun.
Amr's two-day visit comes only a few days after a visit to Beirut by French President Francois Hollande, who pledged France’s support for protecting Lebanon against threats of destabilization caused by the fallout of the bloody conflict in neighboring Syria.
During his brief visit Sunday, Hollande also hailed Sleiman’s efforts to preserve stability and national unity.

Profile: Saudi Interior Minister Prince Mohammed Bin Naif
06/11/2012
By Badr Al-Qahtani
Riyadh, Asharq Al-Awsat – Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz, appointed Prince Mohammed Bin Naif Bin Abdulaziz as Saudi Arabia’s tenth Interior Minister yesterday. Prince Mohammed Bin Naif takes up this ministerial portfolio during a time when the Kingdom is beset by intermittent obstacles with the objective of ensuring safety and security across the country.
The newly appointed Interior Minister is not only known as a strong opponent of Al Qaeda and terrorism, he also initiated a number of programs to rehabilitate those with extremist ideology, such as the successful Munasaha program.
Prince Mohammed Bin Naif served as Assistant Minister of Interior for Security Affairs between 1999 until 2012, during which time he worked tirelessly with security officials across the world to ensure national security and safety. America’s MSNBC network described the Saudi minister as “the General of War on Terrorism.” While US and European officials have described him as the commander of one of the most effective operations to combat terrorism in the world. His operations are based on the principle of tolerance and containing criminals and those who have gone astray, rather than abusing them. He sought to ensure that all those arrested and detained in this regard were granted their full rights and were treated equitably, whether this was trial or rehabilitation.
Prince Mohammed Bin Naif stood with his father, late Crown Prince and Interior Minister Prince Naif Bin Abdulaziz, to eliminate terrorist cells – and their sources – that sought to target Saudi Arabia with a series of attacks beginning in 2003. During this period, the Saudi Interior Ministry relentlessly pursued Al Qaeda cells and extremist ideologues across the Kingdom. Crown Prince Naif Bin Abdulaziz and Prince Mohammed Bin Naif’s success in this regard ensured that Al Qaeda elements fled Saudi Arabia for other countries following a strong crackdown and thanks to the vigilance of the Saudi authorities.
The Saudi Interior Ministry’s efforts protected the security and safety of the country and its citizens, working diligently to uncover and expose Al Qaeda terrorist plots targeting Saudi Arabia and its allies. CNN, quoting US intelligence sources speaking on the condition of anonymity, revealed that the uncovering of a 2010 Al Qaeda plot to blow up an airplane travelling to the US from Yemen was initiated by information from Saudi Arabia. A White House source, speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat on the condition of anonymity following this plot, revealed that “over many years, the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia have cooperated closely in the war on terror. The US government is in debt of the Saudi government for its assistance in this regard. We look forward to further cooperation between the two countries.”
In addition to this, the New York Times reported that “Saudi intelligence officials warned the United States in early October that Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen was planning a terrorist attack using one or more aircraft, three weeks before a plot to send parcel bombs on cargo planes was foiled at the last minute.”
Prince Mohammed Bin Naif survived an assassination attempt against him in 2009 when a militant who was supposed to be surrendering himself to the Prince blew himself up. Then Saudi Assistant Minister of Interior for Security Affairs had been trying to secure the surrender of Abdullah Bin Hassan Bin Taleh Assiri, who was included on the Interior Minstry’s list of 85 wanted suspects for terrorism related charges. Assiri claimed to be carrying a message from a number of other suspects who were seeking guarantees of safety before returning to Saudi Arabia, an operation that Prince Mohammed Bin Naif was overseeing. The now Saudi Interior Minister personally spoke to Assiri on the phone to reassure him, and even sent a private jet to pick him up. Prince Mohammed Bin Naif only suffered superficial injuries in the attack, and apart from the bomber – who was killed – there were no other serious casualties.
Prince Mohammed Bin Naif Bin Abdulaziz was born in 1959 in the city of Jeddah. He has a BA degree in Political Science and was appointed Assistant Minister of Interior for Security Affairs in 1999. He is also a member of the National Anti-Narcotics Committee and the Permanent Committee of the Economic Council.