Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for September 14/12
Pope arrives in Lebanon amid Mideast turmoil
Hezbollah will 'easily' defend Iran against Israel
U.S. slaps new sanctions on Hezbollah chief over Syria
In largely symbolic move, U.S. sanctions Nasrallah
Israeli PM: I'm not interfering in US presidential election
Syrian rebels condemn attacks on US embassies
US police protect anti-Islam filmmaker
Clashes in Cairo ahead of mass protest
Abbas wishes Israelis a Happy New Year
Israeli military, security forces on alert for anti-US Palestinian and Israeli-Arab riots
Air raids in Aleppo as envoy meets Syria opposition
Lebanese Army detains 8 Syrians, truck full of arms
Second Turkish hostage freed, Meqdad spokesperson arrested
'Producer' of anti-Islam film says no regrets: radio
One Killed, 25 Wounded in Tripoli Protest against Anti-Islam Film
15 policemen injured in Lebanon protest over anti-Islam film
Israel Hands over Lebanese Boy to UNIFIL
Lebanon's Future Movement backs electoral law with small districts
Army Arrests Maher al-Meqdad
Abducted Turkish Driver Released in Obscure Circumstances
Geagea: Arab Spring Will Create Societies that Will Better Serve Christians' Development
Clashes in Egypt over film, protests spread
Lebanon's Arabic press digest - Sept. 14, 2012
Pope says Lebanon coexistence “example” to Mideast
Sleiman hopes pope visit to positively reflect on Lebanon
Head of Aarsal municipality denies reports of freed Syrian army members
Islamists Storm German, British Embassies in Sudan
Indonesian Protesters Say Anti-Islam Film Declares War
Producer' of Anti-Islam Film Says No Regrets

Pope arrives in Lebanon amid Mideast turmoil
September 14, 2012/By Dana Khraiche, Rima S. Aboulmona/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Pope Benedict XVI arrived in Lebanon’s capital Beirut Friday, in the third-ever visit by a Roman Catholic prelate to this Mediterranean country; the three-day sojourn comes amid a deadly conflict in Syria and violence in several Arab countries over an anti-Islam film.
Speaking to reporters on his Alitalia flight to Lebanon, the pope called for a halt to weapons imports to Syria which he said were a “grave sin.”
He also said he was not afraid to visit Lebanon and also described the Arab Spring that has already removed four long-serving dictators as "positive."
"It is the desire for more democracy, for more freedom, for more cooperation and for a renewed Arab identity," the pope said. "He warned against the risk that the push for more freedom could end intolerance for other religions.
The pope, the head of a church with over 1 billion followers, denounced religious fundamentalism calling it "a falsification of religion.”
Church bells throughout the country tolled in celebration as the pontiff walked out of the plane at Rafik Hariri International Airport in Beirut.
With a red carpet having been rolled out to meet the pope's airplane, an Airbus 320, Sleiman walked beside the pontiff to a wooden podium specially constructed for them and sat on a pair of burgundy upholstered wooden chairs.
A band played Lebanon’s national anthem and a 21-gun salute was fired in honor the pontiff, who turned 85 in April of this year.
At the podium, President Michel Sleiman expressed hope his visit would bring good to Lebanon and the region.
"We hope that your visit will bring good to Lebanon, the people of this region and their countries including Christians of the East," Sleiman, the only Christian head of state in the Middle East region, said in a speech. The pope was greeted upon his arrival at Beirut airport by Sleiman, the first lady, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Prime Minister Najib Mikati and their wives. Thirty other officials were present at the airport to welcome the pope, including Lebanon's top religious leaders and security and diplomatic figures.
“Today, Lebanon’s family with all its components and factions welcome your holiness,” Sleiman said at the podium.
“You decided to choose Lebanon as a message of love to the people of this region via the Apostolic Exhortation of the Synod of Bishops for the Middle East,” the president said.
The pope, for his part, praised Lebanon’s efforts to maintain dialogue among religions and described the country as an "example of coexistence in the Middle East and the world.”
Pope Benedict said his visit aimed at delivering the synod, which he described as a road map for Christians for years to come, and consecrating the work of the Maronite Church.
The prelate also expressed sympathy over what he described as the painful events that Lebanon has gone through as well as events in the region.
Vatican and Lebanese flags in addition to welcoming banners of all kinds lined the streets on which the pope’s motorcade will travel during his visit to Lebanon.
“We love you,” read some of the placards held by Lebanese eager to see the pope.
On the airport road, yellow Hezbollah banners bearing the pontiff’s image and the words “Welcome to the homeland of the resistance” hung from electricity pylons.
Triumphal arches were also raised on the streets along which the pope’s convoy will pass during his travel in Lebanon.
The pontiff is scheduled to visit St. Paul's Basilica in Harissa at 6 p.m.
Traffic will be prohibited on the seaside road between the Dbayyeh and Karantina bridges between 11 a.m. and 4 p.m. local time. Trucks were also banned on the streets from 6 a.m. Friday till midnight Sunday and cars will not be able to park on the route the pope takes to Harissa between 11 a.m. and 4 p.m.
Meanwhile, Beirut’s international airport said it was suspending flights Friday between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m.
Beirut looked “united,” all the way from the Beirut airport road through the suburbs, into the heart of the capital and up to Kesrouan in the Metn region and Baabda, northeast of Beirut, wrote the local newspaper An-Nahar in its front page article Friday.
Pope Benedict’s visit comes as the Syria crisis further deteriorates, with deadly clashes between government forces and rebels. It also comes as the region braces for an escalation of protests over an anti-Islam film.
Security in the country has been increased for the visit of the pope.
Some 5,000 members of a special security force that includes police and Lebanese Army troops deployed at all entrances to Beirut and in locations and routes the pope will frequent during his three-day visit, a security source told The Daily Star. The source said the security force is being supervised by the Presidential Guard Unit, which is directly in charge of the pope’s safety.
Demonstrators attacked the U.S. embassies in Sanaa, Yemen and Cairo, Egypt, and American warships headed toward Libya after the U.S. ambassador there was killed in violence sparked by the release of a film considered blasphemous to Islam.
Benedict XVI is the third pope to visit Lebanon after Paul VI in 1964 (for an airport stopover and press conference) and John Paul II in 1997.
Meanwhile in Lebanon's northern city of Tripoli, a mass protest broke out against a U.S.-made film insulting Islam’s Prophet Mohammad. During the protest, people burned the U.S. flag and ripped billboards of the pope’s visit to the country.

Pope says Lebanon coexistence “example” to Mideast
September 14, 2012 /Pope Benedict XVI, who arrived in Lebanon on Friday for a three-day visit, said the coexistence of the country's different religious communities could serve as an example to all Middle East. In his arrival speech, the pope noted that "this conviviality to which your country wishes to bear witness, will run deep only if it is founded upon a welcoming regard for the other and upon an attitude of benevolence, and if it is rooted in God, who wishes all men to be brothers.”
"The celebrated Lebanese equilibrium, which wishes to continue to be a reality, will endure through the good will and commitment of all Lebanese.”
"Only then will it serve as a model to the inhabitants of the whole region and of the entire world," he added.
The pope also said that the purpose of his visit was to reaffirm the close ties between the Vatican and Lebanon and to sign “the important” Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation of the Special Assembly for the Middle East of the Synod of Bishops.
“This visit comes as a response to [official Lebanese] visits to the Vatican and [seeks] to reaffirm the close ties between Lebanon and [the Vatican].”
“This Synod will provide hope for years to come,” he added.
Pope Benedict XVI also said that the motto of his visit will be “my peace I give you,” adding that his visit was a message of peace for the whole region and its countries “regardless of the beliefs [of their people].”The pontiff arrived in Lebanon on Friday bringing a clear message on the conflict in neighboring Syria, calling for an end to arms imports.
In remarks to reporters on his flight from Rome, he also hailed the Arab Spring, which has seen the overthrow of several dictators, and welcomed the "renewed Arab dignity" that it brought about.
Touching on a key element of his three-day visit – reconciliation between Christians and Muslims – the Holy Father derided fundamentalism as "always a falsification of religion."
-AFP/NOW Lebanon
 

Hezbollah will 'easily' defend Iran against Israel
By REUTERS 09/14/2012/J.Post/Army adviser to Tehran's supreme leader Khamenei says Lebanese group would hit back against any Israeli strike on DUBAI - An aide to Iran's supreme leader said Israel's military threats had "put Israeli citizens one step away from the cemetery" and that Lebanese Islamist group Hezbollah was ready to hit back.
Yahya Rahim-Safavi, military adviser to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the increasing threats from Israel to strike Iranian nuclear facilities were "foolish", the Iranian Students' News Agency (ISNA) reported on Friday. "The boldness and foolishness of Israeli officials in threatening the Islamic Republic, have put Israeli citizens one step away from the cemetery," he said.
"If, one day, the Israeli regime takes action against us, resistance groups, especially Hezbollah ... will respond more easily," said Safavi, a former commander in chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guards.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has made increasing hints in recent weeks that Israel could strike Iran and has criticized US President Barack Obama's position that sanctions and diplomacy should be given more time. The heightened rhetoric has stoked speculation that Israel may attack before US elections in November.
Hezbollah has said any attack on Iran would be met by strikes against Israeli and US targets in the region, even if American forces played no role in the attack.
"A decision has been taken to respond and the response will be very great," Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said in a TV interview this month.
Shi'ite Muslim Hezbollah, founded with Iranian help during Lebanon's 1975-1990 civil war, has grown from a militia into a powerful political and military force. It fought a 34-day war with Israel six years ago in which 1,200 people in Lebanon, mostly civilians, and 160 people in Israel, mostly soldiers, were killed.

Yes, Hezbollah is Iran’s army
September 14, 2012 /Now Lebanon
Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah needs to clarify his party’s role in Lebanon’s security.
Late last week, the Iranian media quoted Maj. Gen. Yahia Safawi, an aide to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as saying that Hezbollah would attack Israel if the Jewish State launched a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. “If the Zionist entity carried out any steps against us, resistance groups, particularly Hezbollah in Lebanon, given their central role in our defensive strategy, will respond,” Safawi said, reminding us that “Hezbollah has thousands of missiles” and admitting that Hezbollah’s secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah, was “a soldier of the supreme leader.”
Clearly, the most worrying part in this already worrying sentence is Safawi’s reference to Hezbollah’s “central role” in Iran’s defensive strategy. The implications of such a statement are as a profound as they are disturbing. In what is a rare admission, Tehran is making no bones about the fact that Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy militia, which takes its orders from a supreme leadership, for whom Nasrallah is a “soldier.”
This makes a mockery of the assurances given to us over the years (not that anyone really believed them) by Hezbollah and its supporters that the party and its increasingly dangerous armed wing is a purely national Resistance, an über-patriotic militia whose sole aim is to protect Lebanon from Israeli aggression. It is a myth that stems from a skillful narrative woven by the party to convince the Lebanese people that Hezbollah is predicated on dignity, patriotism and purity of arms. The reality is clearly somewhat different and rooted in a long-term, strategic regional Shiite alliance.
We have said it countless times, but clearly it needs to be restated: The nature of such an arrangement is unacceptable. Firstly, there is the obvious problem with a Lebanese political party not only having an armed wing that operates outside the offices of the state—that in itself would be bad enough—but one that also takes its orders from another country as part of a formal alliance. It’s just not right.
For then we have the equally intolerable issue of this private army potentially taking Lebanon into war on behalf of another country. Surely if people are to be killed or injured, if property and livelihoods are to be destroyed, and if that country’s reputation on the global stage might be affected, then at the very least the decision to embark upon such a venture should be made by that country’s government. Not in Lebanon, apparently.
And if we need any reminder of what can happen—albeit on a smaller scale—should this come to pass, one only has to cast one’s mind back to July 12, 2006, when Hezbollah’s bungled kidnap of Israeli soldiers prompted an Israeli response that within a month had left over 1,200 Lebanese dead, 1 million homeless and billions of dollars in damages. The scenario Safawi described would see Lebanon blown back to the Stone Age.
And yet still many Lebanese still believe that Hezbollah is crucial to Lebanon’s survival. Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun, a man whose latter career will be remembered for the shameful Christian cover he gave Hezbollah, only last week demanded that all armed groups should be disbanded…with the exception of—wait for it—Hezbollah, which is needed, he said, to oppose Israeli aggression. But what Israeli aggression? Aoun has never been lauded for his razor-sharp intellect, but surely even he knows there is a touch of the emperor’s new clothes about all this.
Hezbollah has an urgent obligation to clarify Safawi’s comments. It probably won’t, but even if Nasrallah did deign to offer an explanation as to why his masters are shamelessly admitting their control over his party’s armed wing, it would probably be baked in his usual warped logic and received wisdom.
What more is needed to convince the doubters that Hezbollah and its weapons are not only no longer a force for good but are in fact primed to sacrifice Lebanon and the Lebanese in defense of Iran’s nuclear program? Yes, it’s as simple as that. We all need to wake up and smell the coffee before it’s too late.

15 policemen injured in Lebanon protest over anti-Islam film
September 14, 2012 02/The Daily Star
TRIPOLI, Lebanon: Stick-wielding and stone-throwing demonstrators protesting an anti-Islam film clashed with Lebanese security in the northern city of Tripoli Friday, injuring 15 policemen.
Some 1,000 demonstrators marched from Tripoli’s Al-Mansouri Mosque to nearby Nour Square following Friday prayers, shouting slogans against the U.S. and Pope Benedict XVI, who began a three-day visit to Lebanon. They tore down posters and banners welcoming the pope that had been put in place by Saad Hariri’s Future Movement. The protesters also headed some 500 meters down the road to the KFC/Hardee's Tripoli branch, setting the establishment on fire. KFC/Hardee's staff are safe after having evacuated the premises during the commotion. The demonstrators also destroyed a police jeep and a still camera belonging to The Daily Star's Tripoli correspondent, Antoine Amrieh. They also confiscated the still camera of another photographer. After being dispersed by police, the protesters regrouped and targeted the Tripoli Serail. Police fired shots in the air to dissuade them from advancing.

One Killed, 25 Wounded in Tripoli Protest against Anti-Islam Film
Naharnet Newsdesk 14 September 2012/Youths on Friday attempted to storm the Tripoli Serail in protest against a film that mocks Islam. One person was killed and 25 were wounded in the ensuing clashes between the protesters and the security forces. The Lebanese army soon began to deploy in the area, said Voice of Lebanon radio. Security forces soon cordoned off the area to prevent them from heading any further, added VDL. The youths then began to pelt the building with stones, it added. VDL later reported that calm has begun to return to the city. The protesters had earlier set fire to a KFC and Hardees restaurant in the northern city. A low-budget movie, "Innocence of Muslims" in which actors have strong American accents and portrays Muslims as immoral and gratuitously violent has sparked angry and violent protests across the Muslim world. It pokes fun at the Prophet Mohammed and touches on themes of pedophilia and homosexuality, while showing him sleeping with women, talking about killing children and referring to a donkey as "the first Muslim animal."

U.S. slaps new sanctions on Hezbollah chief over Syria
September 13, 2012 /A poster showing Hezbollah chief Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah is seen attached on a building in Beirut's southern suburbs, Wednesday, July 18, 2012. (The Daily Star/Hasan Shaaban)
WASHINGTON: The United States on Thursday imposed new sanctions on Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and two other figures in the Lebanese resistance group over their support of Syrian President Bashar Assad. The U.S. Treasury move adds to measures already levied on Hezbollah, which was first designated by Washington as a terrorist group in 2001. Hezbollah has provided training, advice and logistical support to Assad's forces, and has facilitated training for them by Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards, it said. Hezbollah has also "played a substantial role" in efforts to push rebel forces from areas inside Syria, the Treasury added. "By aiding Assad's violent campaign against the Syrian people and working to support a regime that will eventually fall, Hezbollah's ongoing activity undermines regional stability and poses a direct threat to Lebanon's security," said David Cohen, Treasury under-secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. "Hezbollah's actions, overseen by Hassan Nasrallah and executed by Mustafa Badr al-Din and Talal Hamayah, clearly reveal its true nature as a terrorist and criminal organization."The U.S. sanctions forbid Americans from having or supporting any business or financial dealings with those named.

Israeli PM: I'm not interfering in US presidential election
By HERB KEINON 09/14/2012 /J.Post
In interview with the 'Post', Netanyahu says his call for US to set red lines for Iran not connected to US election. Photo: Marc Israel Sellem
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu dismissed as “completely groundless” allegations he is manufacturing a crisis with US President Barack Obama just before the November 6 American election to influence the outcome in favor of Republican candidate Mitt Romney.
Netanyahu, in a Rosh Hashana interview with The Jerusalem Post that will appear in full on Sunday, said his call for the United States and the international community to set red lines for Iran was not at all connected with the US political campaign.
“It has nothing to do with the American elections, because the Iranian nuclear program doesn’t care about the American political calendar,” the prime minister said.
“If the centrifuges stop miraculously, if they stop preparing enriched uranium to make atomic bombs, then I suppose I wouldn’t have to speak out.
“But the Iranian nuclear program proceeds unabated and they don’t care about the internal American political calendar. For me this is a policy issue, a security issue, and not a political issue,” he said.
Netanyahu characterized his post-midnight telephone call Wednesday with Obama as a “good conversation.”
“We spoke about our common goal of stopping Iran from developing its nuclear weapons program, and our desire to closely coordinate our efforts,” he related.
When asked whether Obama referred to his comments that those who do not place red lines in front of the Iranians cannot place a red light in front of Israel, Netanyahu replied that he was “not going to get into details of this discussion.
“Obviously I have my views and am not exactly shy about expressing them when I think that Israel’s vital security concerns are involved,” Netanyahu said. “This is my responsibility as the prime minister of the Jewish state. We are facing the greatest security challenge of any country on the face of the earth, and when I feel I need to speak out, I do.”
'When we have differences of opinion we don't sweep them under the rug'
Obama phoned Netanyahu past midnight Wednesday following a day when friction between Jerusalem and Washington burst into the open as Netanyahu made his comments about red lines and red lights. Just before the phone call, Israeli officials confirmed that the leaders would not be meeting during Netanyahu’s 60-hour visit to the US later this month.
Netanyahu, who described the current level of intelligence and security cooperation with the US as “very close” and “very important,” said that did not mean the two countries did not have different perspectives. “It is only natural that we do,” he said. “And when we have a difference of views we don’t have to sweep them under the rug. I believe there has to be clear limits drawn to Iran’s advance toward nuclear weapons, and that is not something I intend to be quiet about.”
On other matters, Netanyahu revealed that he has not yet spoken to Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy, though he said Israel had “many contacts with the Egyptian government, primarily through our military contacts.”He said that the new Egyptian government still needed to “decide the depth of its commitment to the peace treaty. We are deeply committed to it, I hope they will be too.”
'It's In Israel and Turkey's common interest to resume a fruitful dialogue'
The prime minister also used the interview to send a conciliatory signal to Turkey.
“We both have a border with Syria, and I am sure we both want to see a stable and peaceful Syria,” he said of Ankara. “That is a common interest. There are other common interests that come to mind. I think it is in our common interest to find a way to be able to stop – to arrest – the slide in our relationship and resume a fruitful dialogue.”
Turkish-Israeli ties nosedived after the Mavi Marmara flotilla raid in 2010, and Turkey is demanding Israel apologize for the incident, pay compensation to the families of the nine people killed, and lift the blockade of Gaza.
Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman – who has been staunchly opposed to an Israeli apology to Turkey – said two weeks ago that he “could live” with an apology similar to what the Americans gave the Pakistanis after accidentally killing two dozen Pakistani soldiers in 2011. The Americans said that were “sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military.”
Asked whether that was an apology formula currently being considered, Netanyahu replied: “It is one of them.”
He would not discuss, however, whether the Turks had backed off from their demand for Israel to lift the naval blockade of Gaza, something few believe this government would ever consider as part of a reconciliation package.

Lebanese Army detains 8 Syrians, truck full of arms
September 14, 2012/The Daily Star/BEIRUT: The Army said Friday it detained eight Syrians in east Lebanon and confiscated their truck, which contained large quantities of arms and B-7 shells. As part of its mission to control the border and prevent the smuggling of arms and gunmen along the Lebanon-Syria border, the Army said it took action after “spotting a suspicious pick-up truck in the Baalbek-Bekaa region at 2 a.m.” The Army asked called on the truck to stop, but it defied the order. The individuals on board the truck pointed their guns at the Army unit, but soldiers were able to surround the vehicle and force the armed men out of the bus. “[The Army] detained those inside, who turned out to be eight Syrian individuals. Their truck, which was confiscated, contained large amounts of arms, light and medium weaponry, ammunition, hand grenades, B-7 shells, electric detonators and communications devices,” the statement said.The detained men were referred to the appropriate judicial authority.

Israeli military, security forces on alert for anti-US Palestinian and Israeli-Arab riots
DEBKAfile Special Report September 13, 2012/In the wake of the anti-US Islamist turbulence sweeping Arab capitals, Israel has posted additional military, police and security forces in the West Bank, opposite the Gaza Strip and among Israeli Arab communities following information received that all three are preparing to stage big anti-American protests Friday, Sept. 14, which could easily spill over into Israel. debkafile: The Palestinian Authority hopes to re-direct West Bank and East Jerusalem anger against PA leaders Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayad into an anti-US channel, while Hamas is under orders from the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo to fill the streets of Gaza with protesters against the alleged anti-Muslim film produced in the US in sync with a big Brotherhood demonstration in Cairo Friday.
Several scores of Israeli Arabs, members of the extremist Northern Section of the Islamic Movement, demonstrated outside the US embassy in Tel Aviv Thursday, chanting anti-American slogans and praise for the Prophet Muhammad.
Israeli authorities are bracing for this small demonstration to swell in numbers after Friday prayers at the mosques and send large numbers of Palestinians and Israeli Muslims out on the streets to replicate the riots against the US spreading Thursday through Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Morocco and Bangladesh since the deaths of US ambassador Chris Stevens and three of his staff in a premeditated Al Qaeda attack in Benghazi Tuesday, Sept. 11.
debkafile’s Washington sources report that the anti-US ferment sweeping Arab capitals in the last three days finds Obama administration policy-makers in two minds about how it fits into the bigger picture of the Arab Spring and its aftermath. According to one interpretation, the tumult has a domestic motive, and was stirred up or exploited to weaken the new rulers thrown up by the Arab Spring while at the same time dimming US influence in the region.
This view holds that radical Islamists, ranging from Salafites to groups associated with Al Qaeda, are fanning the flames to start a process that will lead to the overthrow of the overly “moderate” Muslim Brotherhood, which is the bedrock of the relationship President Obama is striving to build between the United States and the post-revolution Arab world.
The advocates of this approach say America must maintain the flow of economic and political assistance to Brotherhood-led regimes, notably President Mohamed Morsi of Egypt, to help them stay on their feet against the violent buffeting of radical Islamists.
The other Washington camp takes the opposite line, arguing that “moderate” Islamic rulers like Morsi are in no danger at all and are in fact riding the anger of the masses over the film deriding Islam to solidify their grip on power at the expense of America’s unpopularity among Muslims.
To prove this point, they offer three examples:
1. Since becoming president, Morsi has never retracted statements he made denying al Qaeda’s responsibility for the 9/11 attacks in America. Brotherhood Secretary General Mahmoud Hussein pinned the attacks on "one of the intelligence services in America, or the Jews." The Brotherhood still stands by the conspiracy theory that the US staged the atrocity to villify Islam.
2. Morsi, who has been invited to the White House at the end of this month, refrained from condemning the murder of four US diplomats in Libya or offering the Egyptian people’s condolences to the US for its loss. He also waited 24 hours before issuing a tepid statement against the militants who stormed the US embassy in Cairo. he made no mention of the black al Qaeda flags hoisted above the US embassy in Cairo after the Stars and Stripes was torn down. Instead, the Egyptian president instructed his embassy in Washington to prepare a suit against the film’s director. That was before he turned out embarrassingly to be an Egyptian Copt.
3. Thursday, Brotherhood websites aired divergent messages on their English and Arabic sites: In English, protesters were exhorted to exercise restraint. There were also words of self-congratulation that the US embassy gates were not broken down and no Americans harmed. In Arabic, the Egyptian masses were called out to demonstrate en masse Friday against the made-in-the-USA film.
That demonstration will be carefully watched to see whether it is quiet or veers into violence and anti-American outbursts. That will be the test of Morsi’s bone fides in American eyes. However, its main importance as he sees it is as a demonstration that the Brotherhood has regained control of the streets of Cairo.
It was to show the Egyptian president that he is still on trial in Washington, that President Obama said Thursday that the US would no longer consider the Egyptian government an ally, “but we don’t consider them an enemy. …I think we are going to have to see how they respond to this incident, to see how they respond to maintaining the peace treaty with Israel.” he said.
The way ahead is unclear for Washington as well as Jerusalem. The anti-US ferment in Arab capitals may just be starting. Its next directions and duration are still imponderable. Israel prepares to celebrate the New Year next week surrounded by extreme volatility among its neighbors.

Syrian rebels condemn attacks on US embassies
By Caroline Akoum and Layal Abu Rihal
Beirut, Asharq Al-Awsat – Deputy Chief of Staff of the opposition Free Syrian Army [FSA], Colonel Aref Hamoud, condemned the attack and storming of the US embassies in Libya and Egypt. Speaking exclusively to Asharq Al-Awsat, Hamoud said “we are against such acts which insult the people’s revolutions and Arab Spring.”
As for whether he fears the rise of Al Qaeda in Syria, the FSA Deputy Chief of Staff asserted that “anything is possible after the Syrian arena has become open due to the lack of action of the international community with regards to all the massacres that are being committed by the regime.” He added “there can be no doubt that it has become a fertile ground for various groups, including extremist Salafist groups.” Hamoud stressed that “so far, these groups are a minority and are not of the same level as the Al Qaeda organization, however if the international community continue to ignore the Syrian people’s cause, there can be no doubt that such groups will appear and spread [across Syria].”
He also said that the Syrian people’s belief that the international community has forgotten about them will push them towards religion, and therefore to groups that raise the banner of religion. Colonel Hamoud called on the international community to officially recognize the FSA and fund it to allow it to be the sole body authorized to carry weapons in Syria.
For his part, Syrian National Council member Samir Satouf confirmed that Al Qaeda is present on the ground in Syria, although under a variety of different names. He informed Asharq Al-Awsat that Bashar al-Assad had been funding these Al Qaeda affiliates – with the knowledge of the West – since before the revolution.
He said “the extremist Syrian groups that are present on the ground are no different than Al Qaeda; extremism is the brother of extremism. We have information that confirms that al-Assad funded the extremists who are cooperating with Al Qaeda, and that he previously and continues to provide them with arms, which are being smuggled into Syria under the protection of Syrian security.”
Satouf asserted that the prolonging of the Syria crisis, and the international community’s inability or unwillingness to take a firm stance on this situation, will only serve to exacerbate the problems, adding that it is becoming increasingly difficult for the Syrian people to keep pace with these challenges. He warned that the continuation of this state of affairs will lead Syria towards “civil war” adding “this is something that the regime is seeking to nurture.”Commenting on the attacks on US embassies in the Arab world, Syrian Muslim Brotherhood spokesman, Zuhair Salim, told Asharq Al-Awsat that “we should not exaggerate the issue. Whenever something happens, we shouldn’t point the finger at the revolutionaries and Arab people”. He added “we, as the Muslim Brotherhood, condemn the attacks on the US embassy in Libya, and we call on the wise to take the initiative and not leave the scene for the wicked.”

Al-Qaeda flags in Cairo/By Tariq Alhomayed
Asharq Al-Awsat
http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=2&id=31049
What happened in Egypt was amazing, specifically the attack on the US Embassy in Cairo, where the American flag was burned and the al-Qaeda flag was raised, all because of what is said to be an offensive film about the Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him). The protests witnessed the participation of Islamic groups, Christians, and even so-called ultras - radical football fans.
When I say that what has happened in Egypt is amazing, the reason is simple: no one knew anything about this film that is said to be offensive to the Prophet (pbuh) until now. Even the news agency Reuters, which broadcasted news of the attack on the US Embassy in Egypt, said in its initial report: “it was not clear which film prompted the protests”! This is a puzzling matter; no one had heard about this film; no one knew its name, so is it rational to set the world on fire whenever someone launches a trivial insult towards Islam, or one of its symbols? The truth that must be told, and especially with regards to the events in Egypt, is that the matter is more complicated than an offensive film. The earlier reaction of some Egyptians, for example, towards the case of an Egyptian national accused of smuggling illegal drugs into Saudi Arabia was similar to their reaction now against the US Embassy, the only difference being that in the former example the al-Qaeda flag was not raised, nor was the Saudi flag burned, which means that the problem in Egypt is much more complicated than a strong fervor for the Islamic religion.
The real problem in Egypt, ever since the fall of former President Hosni Mubarak, lies in the adulation of a street that has no leader; in other words someone to act in accordance with the concept of a statesman and not to simply pander to the demands of the revolutionaries in the squares or social networks. Even the media crudely attempts to keep pace with the Egyptian street, where sometimes it is portrayed as the guilty defendant, and at other times it is the innocent who is found guilty without trial. This is Egypt’s illness today, and this will hamper Egypt’s march towards the future. Countries are not built on screams, chaos and revenge, but with wisdom, prudence, laws and reconciliation. Unfortunately, this is not the case in Egypt, the evidence being that those who protested against the US Embassy were Islamic, Christian and even football hooligans.
The puzzling and amazing problem is that no one knows anything about the film they are talking about. If they were aware of the film, they would see it is clearly the trivial work of an individual, or a petty extremist group. What is incomprehensible, in the case of Egypt, is how there can be this reaction, even if it stems from religious fervor, similar to the reactions of extremists in Pakistan or Afghanistan, where they burn the American flag and fly the flag of al-Qaeda? How can we demand an apology from America for a film produced by a trivial or ignorant group, and not the US administration? Would it be conceivable, for example, for the Obama administration to demand that the Egyptians, whether the government or the people, apologize for the fact that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the current leader of al-Qaeda, is an Egyptian? This is both unreasonable and unacceptable.
Therefore, we love and care for Egypt, and what is happening there means only one thing: the leaders of Egyptian public opinion must address the chaos of the Egyptian street. Intellectuals and politicians should respect their knowledge and awareness, and the same goes for the media, and they must stop trying to keep pace with the street to avoid igniting Egypt as a whole.

Asharq Al-Awsat talks to Sky News Arabia Director Nart Bouran
http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=5&id=31058
By Mohamed Nassar
Abu Dhabi, Asharq Al-Awsat – In an exclusive interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Sky News Arabia’s Director of News, Nart Bouran, spoke about the challenges of running an Arabic-language media organization in a fiercely competitive market. Bouran lauded the channel’s impartial and unbiased coverage of events, and spoke about the difficulty – and importance – of reporting some of the most prominent events to strike the region, including the Arab Spring.
Sky News Arabia is an Arabic-language news and current affairs channel that began broadcasting on 6 May 2012. Nart Bouran was hired as Sky News Arabia’s first director of News in February 2011. He previously served as Reuters’ director of television. He also served as the Director General of the Jordan Radio and Television Corporation, and Director of News for Abu Dhabi TV.
The following is the full text of the interview:
[Asharq Al-Awsat] What is your assessment of Sky News Arabia’s performance over its first 4 months of broadcast?
[Bouran] The performance has been very positive, and this is because the Sky News Arabia project is a major one by any standard, and those responsible for this had a particular view and expectations regarding content quality and broadcast from the first moment. In addition to this, we began, since the first day, to broadcast live around the clock, as well as utilize other platforms related to the channel, such as the website, mobile apps and tablets. There are challenges that accompany this; however the staff has been able – thanks to their high standards of professionalism – to overcome these.
We are looking at the past few months and the achievements that we have made as just the beginning, because the Arab scene today evaluates any media organization to a very high standard, particularly television media. We are seeking, in a constant manner, to improve, and from this standpoint we are seeking to develop and diversify our content to meet the aspirations of our Arab viewers. This is dependent on the views and comments of our viewers and the results of studies and research that we have carried out since the launch of the channel.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Does Sky News Arabia have what it takes to compete in the Arab media realm?
[Bouran] Yes, we have what it takes compete, whether in terms of the diversity and inclusiveness of our content and our promptness in reporting the news. The best example of this is that we were able, over the initial months of our broadcast, to achieve a series of accomplishments, such as broadcasting field reports, exclusive interviews and special coverage of prominent events such as the Egyptian elections, the developments on the ground in Syria as well as high-profile sporting events. We always bear in mind that our content must be important and useful for our Arab viewers, in terms of reports and special coverage of issues that concern Arab viewers everywhere and which affect their daily lives.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] What professional foundation do you rely on in your coverage of the Arab Spring?
[Bouran] The core professional foundation is to be present where the events are taking place, and if we are unable to do so for any reason, we try to deal with the news in a professional and balanced manner. This is part of an attempt to survey the views and opinions of all parties with regards to the Arab Spring events and developments. The events are always related to the people and their concerns and future, as well as obtaining numerous sources to obtain information, so that completely different viewpoints are always represented. Allow me to confirm that the most important professional foundation is for us to be at the heart of events in order to try and portray the whole picture.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Do you find any difficulty in being fair and impartial, with regards to your coverage of the Arab Spring? Would you characterize Sky News Arabia’s coverage of the Arab Spring as a success?
[Bouran] We were very successful in providing fair coverage [of the Arab Spring], however our success in this regard occasionally depends on the cooperation of all parties relevant parties, so when we want to put forward the other point of view in our coverage, the main party must cooperate. In the event of this party refusing to cooperate, we try and find an alternative to ensure that we provide a comprehensive picture of the scene, and we present this is a different manner. I believe that the issue is not about holding the stick in the middle, because we are not going to pass judgment on any side, but rather convey the views of all parties in an accurate and prompt manner.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Arab and foreign news organizations are spending huge amounts of money to ensure the excellence of their news coverage in order to attract viewers. Is Sky News Arabia able to compete with its rivals in terms of support?
[Bouran] We consider Sky News Arabia to be a business based on a long-term strategic plan, and we receive support in this regard to ensure the creation of a successful media organization, in the professional and commercial spheres. Of course support does not aim merely to strengthen the manner that we deal with the news, but also the manner in which we deliver this to the public. From the first moment, we have delivered news to our audience via a variety of different platforms including the internet, smart phones, and tablet computers. However I believe that there are other elements that constitute real support for our operations, including our media professionalism and prompt delivery of breaking news.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Usually when seeking to launch a new media project, organizations seek out established stars to front the project. This is something that Sky News Arabia largely ignored, instead utilizing newcomers to front your programs. What is the reason behind this?
[Bouran] Firstly, I do not completely agree with your premise. There can be no doubt that Sky News Arabia has a group of well-known media names who have experience in television media; however at the same time we are giving opportunities to new faces to shine, and this combination gives our channel its unique identity. When we were choosing our staff, we were keen to ensure special standards for Sky News Arabia, away from considerations of fame and celebrity. Our standards are based on media ability, presence, broadcasting style and general culture.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Have you encountered any professional obstacles – as a television news channel – in putting forward all opposing views regarding a story? How do you deal with local Emirati news?
[Bouran] We cover all news that occurs in the region, regardless of where it takes place, on the condition that this is prominent news that is of public interests. I do not think this is something that has anything to do with professional inhibition or red lines as much as it relates to the value of the news for the audience throughout the region. We deal with Emirati news in precisely the same manner that we deal with all other news.
Although our presence in the United Arab Emirates has granted us the opportunity to monitor and cover a series of political, economic, sporting and artistic events from close-up – and this is due to the UAE being a regional and occasionally international hub for many sectors –our standards are based on broadcasting what concerns the viewers.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Sky News Arabia has been praised for its coverage of the situation in Syria. Do you not fear for the safety of your journalists who are covering the events on the ground there, particularly as a number of journalists covering the Syrian crisis have been killed in the fighting?
[Bouran] Professional journalism always requires a presence at the heart of the event, and presence in dangerous places is practically part of the life of any journalist who wants to deliver the news in an impartial and expedient manner. These days, unfortunately, Syria is going through difficult circumstances, and many of its citizens are witnessing armed conflict between different parties, therefore our priority is to ensure the safety of our staff on the ground, as well as strive to provide the most comprehensive coverage of what is happening.
The issue of the safety of journalists has become a universal one, as the professional journalists that want to get to the truth are being targeted by many parties. In such cases, the responsibility is on media organizations, as it must exert a lot of administrative and logistical efforts to ensure the greatest benefit to the viewer at the least possible risk to the staff. However at the end of the day, accidents are possible, and this is something that is outside of the control of the administration of any organization. We wish for the safety of the Sky News Arabia team, and all journalists in the world, wherever they are.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Syrian state-run media has described Sky News Arabia as biased and placed you on the list of “seditious” news organizations. What is your view of this?
[Bouran] Since we began broadcasting, we have been keen to have a presence in Damascus to cover the viewpoints of all parties. We were prepared to cover the official viewpoint of the Syrian government] at any time, and have always been keen to do so, even following our absence from Damascus.
Sky News Arabia is a neutral news channel that provides the news in an immediate and balanced manner. Accusations regarding media operations are normal, for in every conflict or event there are different and contradictory viewpoints and stories, and each party is trying to confirm the veracity of its view. We do not back or support any party at the expense of the other in our news coverage; we do not have an agenda. The viewpoint that concerns us is that of the public and the public alone. Therefore we seek to convince them, via our coverage, that we are a fair channel that puts forward all points of view.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Tell our readers about your own personal experience running Sky News Arabia?
[Bouran] This was simultaneously a great challenge and opportunity. Whenever an Arab media figure is a part of a major media organization, like Sky News Arabia, he is part of the history of Arab media, particularly during this difficult and exciting time. We have witnessed many radical changes in the region. I am honored to have a presence at this channel and to be part of a staff at this media organization which focuses on delivering the news in an excellent manner to the new Arab generation. My personal experience is dependent on the level of content that we deliver, therefore I am very proud to be part of this team.

The heartless press
By Osman Mirghani/Asharq Alawsat
http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=2&id=31047
The Paralympics, which concluded in London on Sunday, were no ordinary sporting competition, they were an event to celebrate the triumph of will over disability, and the human ability to excel, create and achieve despite all obstacles, adverse conditions and restrictions. The disabled athletes who came to London and ignited the Paralympics with their passionate enthusiasm and outstanding willpower, not only said to the world “we are here”, but “we deserve a chance to prove that we are able to make a difference, accomplish and innovate”. London responded in turn, as the competitions attracted immense popularity and enthusiastic support. There was widespread public interest in the events and the achievements of the athletes, who during their victory interviews often cited the atmosphere created by the audiences in the stands. The games sent a strong message of hope that willpower can always overcome the limitations of disability, as long as society lends itself to that and gives opportunities to disabled people rather than pre-judging and excluding them.
More than 4,200 disabled athletes representing 164 countries from around the world participated in the Paralympics. They competed in 503 different categories of events covering around 20 different sports, ranging from swimming to athletics, shooting to basketball and so on. This year’s competition was not only the largest ever, but it has also been described as the most successful in the history of the Paralympic Games, a concept originally launched in Britain in 1948.
So where were the Arabs in all this?
The Arabs were present but not with the same level of intensity that they participated in the Olympic Games, which took place in London prior to the Paralympics. The Paralympics were almost absent in the Arab media domain given the supposed decline in interest and press coverage, and in many Arab media outlets the games were completely neglected. Yet it was not only the Arab media that was nearly or completely absent, many authorities also criticized the decline in international coverage of the Paralympic Games, compared to the massive attention given to the Olympics. A lot of television channels, newspapers and magazines withdrew their correspondents for financial and commercial reasons after the Olympics, some doing so out of the belief that the Paralympics would not garner the same attention from the public. Of course, some media outlets have since expressed their regret and acknowledged they were mistaken, after witnessing the strong interest and unrivalled enthusiasm shown by the public towards this year’s Paralympic Games, and after the organizing committee announced that all Paralympics tickets – over 2.5 million in total – had sold out. Large numbers also watched the games from outside the stadiums and arenas, on big screens deployed in the Olympic park and central London, while millions around the world watched on television via the coverage of a few global media outlets that had allocated large budgets and devoted their full attention to the Paralympics, thereby distinguishing themselves from others who had fallen into the trap of discrimination or disregard for people with special needs, and had completely misjudged the level of public interest.
The Arab athletes who participated in the Paralympics achieved feats that far exceeded their Olympic counterparts, winning numerous medals and breaking records in some events. Tunisia came first among the Arab and African states with 19 medals, including 9 golds, and ranked 14th overall among the 164 countries participating. Algeria finished second behind Tunisia in terms of the Arab states, with 19 medals, 4 of which were gold, followed by Egypt with 15 medals including 4 golds, Morocco with 6 medals including 3 golds, then the UAE with one gold medal and Iraq with three medals; two silvers and one bronze. Female Arab athletes won a number of events and some set world records in doing so, such as the Moroccan Najat el-Garraa, who achieved a new world record in the discus throw. They stand alongside several of their male colleagues who smashed the world records in their respective events, such as the Tunisian runner Abderrahim Zhiou, the Egyptian powerlifter Mohamed Eldib, the Algerian discus thrower Mohamed Berrahal, the Moroccan shot putter Azeddine Nouiri and his compatriot El Amin Chentouf who achieved a new world record in the 5000 meters, or the Tunisian wheelchair sprinter Walid Ktila who set a new world record in the 200 meters.
Disabled Arab athletes achieved these feats despite the fact that most complain of a lack of domestic support or interest, whereby they do not receive the same backing as their able-bodied colleagues. They claim they do not receive sufficient training and they suffer from a lack of equipment or the special arrangements that they need. Likewise, their achievements have not received any form of media coverage to rival the attention given to the Arab Olympic athletes. The Tunisian sprinter Neda Bahi, who won a gold medal at the London Paralympics, expressed these sentiments in an interview with BBC Arabic, saying that where disabled people really suffer is in the discrimination and disregard for their needs or their achievements, compared to what their able-bodied counterparts receive. She expressed her hope that people are now becoming aware and no longer discriminate against those with disabilities.
Disabled people in the Arab world undoubtedly suffer from neglect and discrimination, and are even excluded completely in some cases, because a lot of our societies do not recognize their rights or even their existence. They are deprived of their most basic rights to education and employment, and they are not looked upon with a compassionate eye that appreciates their suffering and recognizes their disability, without regarding it as a constraint preventing them from having access to decent living opportunities and being treated equally. A few states and cities have directed their attention to the disabled and their needs, such as Riyadh, which officially announced over two years ago that it had become the first disabled-friendly city in Saudi Arabia, and one hopes that all Arab cities will eventually reach this standard. There are about twenty million people with physical disabilities in the Arab world, or even more according to some statistics that suggest the victims of recent wars and conflicts further add to the number of those with disabilities. These people need to be considered equal and treated in a dignified manner. Perhaps this is the most important message to come from the Paralympics.

Succeeding despite the odds
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashid/Asharq Alawsat
http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=2&id=31055
On YouTube, his popularity now exceeds clips of famous Arab celebrities and internet stars. I do not know if a documentary like this has ever received such enormous attention from the public, or not. The story is narrated by the young man himself, as he details his fight against a severe disability that has deprived him the use of all his limbs, and how he has overcome it. He is a university graduate, a journalist, and a man with big dreams. It seems a five minute video has been enough to awaken many of those who suffer from the worst kind of disability: the disease of surrendering to failure.
“Ammar” is the name of the film, and also the name of its hero. It was produced by Bader al-Humoud and has touched the hearts of millions of people. Yet their love is not out of sympathy for Ammar Bogis the disabled, but rather their admiration for Ammar Bogis the successful, despite of everything. The story is a source of pride because he triumphed over many challenges and won the battle of his life after a difficult struggle to overcome his condition and the condition of his society.
His story, which has awakened the idle and the helpless, and likewise stoked the inspiration of the aspiring, coincided with the Paralympics in London and hence it received a mass audience. The Paralympics showcased the best disabled athletes in the world, whether blind, amputees, or those suffering from cerebral palsy and intellectual disabilities. Some of them used wheelchairs, others used walking sticks, and others used sight guides, but they all competed on the racetrack, in team sports, or horseback, in the swimming pool and elsewhere.
The message is clear to all…real disability is a lack of will, and the Paralympics were nothing other than a celebration of the successful. For example, we would see a 100 meter race between disabled athletes with prosthetic legs, running into the wind, and one would come through to win the gold medal to the amazement and admiration of the crowd.
Society’s problem is not in engaging with those inflicted with physical disabilities, because these people are often the most driven and determined. The problem lies in those inflicted with helplessness and dependency even though they are able-bodied, searching for excuses for their inactivity, and placing the blame on others. These excusers and accusers are the ones most in need of Ammar’s example so that they become aware that life is in their own court, and success is produced by their own hands. Young people should not be inflicted with the spirit of dependency, and wait for opportunities to knock at their doors, rather they should be the ones urgently beating down doors and seeking success.
If Ammar was determined to climb the stairs in spite of everything, and finished his studies and received a graduate diploma, then everyone can do so and climb the ladder like him. Like Ammar, there are also the dozens who participated in the London Paralympics and won gold medals. With these examples we can fight the worst disease in our society today, frustration, and its symptoms: feelings of helplessness, a sense of failure, and a sense of marginalization. In order to do so we must ask those we wrongly label “disabled” to come forward and lead the frustrated to the starting line.

Is the 9/11 era over?
By Mshari al-Zaydi/Asharq Alawsat
http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=2&id=31054
This week saw the 11th anniversary of 11th of September attacks on New York and Washington which changed the dynamics of the entire world and imposed overdue questions on both the Islamic world and the West. Many incidents have taken place since this landmark year, countries have fallen and others have managed to survive; groups have emerged; trends have collapsed, symbols have been buried and others have come to light. In other words, a new age has begun.
Many things have been said and written on Islam, its contents, history, and ideology, and many things have been said about the Muslim communities. Some have tried to exploit the momentum resulting from the September attacks to use for their own interests, and some have tried to mislead the compass of questions related to self-criticism in order to avoid a painful confrontation with the reality.
However, the greatest event after the first decade of the second millennium has been last year’s Arab spring, which in fact started at the end of the previous year, in December 2010 when the Tunisian fire sparked by Bouazizi, reached Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria and others. At this moment of the Arab spring, the politicized Arab trends, along with those dreaming Arab revolutionaries and the romantics who are affiliated with human rights and the democratic dream in the West applauded what was going on.
The only ones who have not paid attention to this clamor and what has been going on are Al-Qaeda and the jihadist trends since they have another story and different challenge regardless of the attempt by naive individuals to say that the Arab spring is evidence of the end of Al-Qaeda and its ideology and that the rug was pulled from under the feet of the terrorist group. This rhetoric by a number of Arab and foreign writers, as well as some icons of the Muslim Brotherhood, was to propagate a falsehood that Al-Qaeda was a nonexistent boogeyman made up by the fallen regimes. Of course, this talk proved to be both fabricated and false, and here is Egypt of the Muslim Brotherhood bitterly suffering from the jihadist in Sinai.
Recently, it was revealed that fighters affiliated with the Islamic Group in Egypt are present in Syria. Muhammad al-Zawahiri, the brother of Ayman al-Zawahiri, said a few days ago that all Muslims should go to fight in Syria since this is jihad. Muhammad al-Zawahiri was released by President Mursi along with other key jihadist figures. Also in Egypt, Sheikh Mundhir al-Shanqiti, the mufti of the Egyptian Al-Tawhid and al-Jihad Group, which is suspected to be involved in the Taba and Sharm al-Sheikh bombings, announced that he does not recognize the vow of allegiance made to Egyptian President Muhammad Mursi and the Muslim Brotherhood's governments.
Egypt’s Al-Watan newspaper quoted Al-Shanqiti as saying in a leaflet that includes a number of fatwas that this government has can prove it is not atheist, since it says that it does not seek to impose Sharia rule. Al-Shanqiti added that "the Muslim Brotherhood's governments are not expected to allow the growth of the jihadists' strength in the areas under their influence or for preparing for jihad and calling for it, but will seek with their Western allies to wipe out what they call terrorism." He pointed out that "the Muslim Brotherhood's project is not concerned with the implementation of Islam on the people's lives, but it is concerned with imposing its hegemony on the authority and penetrating into the spheres of influence." He pointed out that "the Islam, which the Muslim Brotherhood seeks to implement is a diluted and distorted Islam and the outcome of a deviant thought," and that "the assumption of power by the Muslim Brotherhood will not be an embodiment of Islam on the ground, but will be an experiment that will show the people how deviant this group is and how it is far from God's sharia, and the authority of Hamas in Gaza and Ennahda Party in Tunisia are examples of this."
You can say such thing about the jihadists in Tunisia - Tunisia's Ennahda Movement and Ghannouchi, and you can say the same about Morocco. The idea is that these groups and trends are not concerned with the issue of democracy at all. Their issue is different. The interpretation of the Muslim Brotherhood in the past is false, as well as the interpretation of some naive individuals on the left, that believe that the reason behind the creation of the jihadist trends was that no room was left for moderate Islam (that is the Muslim Brotherhood) which led these jihadist groups to stay alone in the arena. The Muslim Brotherhood may have directly or indirectly marketed this idea to the West and the East, and probably this is what interprets the clear US welcome given to the Muslim Brotherhood's rule of the concerned Arab countries; Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and probably Yemen.
We have already asked: Is this US gamble realistic, real, and guaranteed? The initial signals do not say so.
Has Al-Qaeda benefited from the Arab spring? The opposite of this question is: Has the Arab spring harmed the ideology and popularity of Al-Qaeda?
The reality says that the activities of the groups of Al-Qaeda and the jihadist trends have increased as a result of the Arab spring in particular. Now we see the horrible activities of Al-Qaeda in the Great Sahara in Africa and at present it is occupying northern Mali and has toppled the Malian Government. It is disturbing Mauritania, and is declaring the creation of its emirate, the Emirate of Ansar al-Din, and it is spreading its activities outside the Sahara and the Tuareg areas and is changing them into an area that attract and recruit for Al-Qaeda at the international level. Such an image is similar to what is going on in Yemen where it has become a haven for Al-Qaeda's activists, particularly the Saudis, in spite of the US and Yemeni campaigns.
In Afghanistan and the border strip, nothing has changed, but the evil and activities of these people have increased.
With a glance at the map, you can see that the far east of the Islamic world, in Afghanistan and Pakistan; the south and center of the Islamic world, in Yemen; and the far west of the Islamic world, the areas of the Great Sahara in Africa, have changed into focal points for Al-Qaeda's jihadist trends, and this image has taken place due to issues that have taken place before the Arab spring and as a results of some issues of the Arab spring, as the case in northern Mali, which has been influenced by the turbulent situation taking place in the Arab countries of North Africa.
The question is: What have the young men and ideologues of Al-Qaeda to do with the Arab spring? And why should the Arab spring be a reason for a retreat of these groups? I do not understand this arbitrary link. Al-Qaeda and all those who represent its ideology and options have other leanings and dreams that have nothing to do with freedom and democracy. In short words, Al-Qaeda is going ahead with its programs and approach, and will try to use all the changes taking place in its interest, and the best situation is that when the grip of the authority - any authority - becomes loose.
Does this mean that the survival of the defunct regimes has been beneficial? Of course no, but it means that the problem of Al-Qaeda, like the problems of poverty, unemployment, overpopulation are separate problems that have their own survival mechanisms, and their solution is through a cultural, social, economic, and political confrontation. What is more important is to criticize the mentality that is controlling us.
This is a confrontation that we have not carried out until now. It is not the sacking of Mubarak, the fleeing of Ben Ali, the killing of Gaddafi, or the dismissal of Saleh that will necessarily wipe out these problems in a direct way. These analyses on the elimination of Al-Qaeda as a result of the Arab spring have been mere wishes and warm dreams.
To those who dreamt and thought that the Arab spring has ended the repercussion of 11 September incidents on us, we say: You are dreaming.

How to Send Egypt a Message
Schenker and Trager /New York Daily News
September 12, 2012
The Morsi government is encouraging anti-American unrest; the Obama administration must now send a clear signal back.
The image of a black Al Qaeda flag flying above the United States Embassy in Cairo on Sept. 11 shocked Americans. It should have shaken the Egyptian Government as well. Egypt receives $1.5 billion annually from the U.S., and Washington is about to forgive $1 billion in the ailing state's debt.
But Egypt's government is charting a different course. Rather than denouncing the egregious violation of U.S. sovereignty, Egypt's ruling party, the Muslim Brotherhood, is doubling down. This Friday, the Brotherhood is slated to hold a mass demonstration just two blocks from the U.S. compound in Cairo.
In Egypt and the U.S., the attack is widely being attributed to an obscure anti-Islamic movie. But in fact, Al Gamaa Al Islamiyya, a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, announced weeks ago that it would protest in front of the U.S. Embassy on 9/11 to demand the release of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind cleric mastermind of the first World Trade Center Bombing in 1993.
No doubt, the appearance of the video led to a spike in support for the Gamaa demonstration, notably among Salafists and Egypt's infamously drugged-up soccer fans known as "Ultras."
So while the Brotherhood may not have planned the attack, the organization quickly embraced it, exploiting the crime to foment sectarian tensions and burnish its anti-American populist credentials. To wit, in its first official account of events in Arabic, the Brotherhood claimed that the anti-Islamic movie had been funded by Coptic Christians in America and praised Egyptians for "rising up for the victory of the Prophet."
A day later, the Muslim Brotherhood's Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi had not offered an apology to the U.S. Instead, according to the Egyptian daily Al Ahram, Morsi directed the Egyptian Embassy in Washington to take legal action against the film's producers.
Morsi's reticence comes as little surprise. The Muslim Brotherhood has a history of antipathy toward the U.S. and its allies. Morsi himself is a well-documented 9/11 "truther" and, under his leadership, Egypt has made unprecedented diplomatic overtures to Iran.
But the attack on the Embassy went beyond the pale. For starters, it was preventable. A terrorist organization's calls for protests outside the Embassy should have prompted the deployment of additional Egyptian security forces. Morsi's abdication of responsibility and the Muslim Brotherhood's defense of the assault should be the last straw.
Washington should present President Morsi with a choice: Either abide by international norms or preside over an Egypt increasingly threatened by economic collapse. At present, Egypt's economy is tanking as instability and violence continue to scare away both tourists and investors.
To forestall a crisis, Washington committed to forgive that $1 billion in debt, and it has ardently supported a pending $4.8 billion International Monetary Fund loan. And just this week, the Embassy in Cairo sponsored a delegation of American businessmen in Cairo to encourage U.S. investment in an Egypt that was "open for business."
All of this should be put on hold. Washington can tolerate a lot, but it cannot invest in an Egypt that refuses at a minimum to secure American diplomats. So long as the Muslim Brotherhood and the Morsi Administration insist on encouraging Salafists and soccer hooligans to target U.S. interests, the U.S. can and should impose costs for this choice.
In addition to economic repercussions, there should be diplomatic consequences for Morsi's behavior. Absent unequivocal expressions of public remorse in Arabic, U.S. officials should refuse to meet with Morsi when he visits New York in late September for the United Nations General Assembly.
Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood have never been shy about expressing their feelings to the United States, whether about 9/11 conspiracy theories, or in advocating for the release of convicted terrorist Omar Abdel Rahman. Morsi's visit to the U.S. is an opportunity for Washington to deliver a similarly unvarnished message: Inciting potentially violent protests against the United States is the act of a rogue, not an ally.
**David Schenker is director of the Program on Arab Politics at The Washington Institute. Eric Trager is the Institute's Next Generation fellow.

Obama Had Advance Knowledge of Mideast Attacks
By: Matthew Vadum on Sep 14th, 2012
Although the Obama administration had “credible” evidence of this week’s deadly Islamist attacks on U.S. missions in Libya and Egypt a full two days before they happened, no effort was made to protect U.S. government personnel, The Independent reports.
The Islamofascist offensive took place on September 11, a day of great symbolic importance to both America and the Islamic world because it was the eleventh anniversary of al Qaeda’s attacks on the World Trader Center and the Pentagon. The U.S. media, of course, seems barely aware of this symbolism because it has been focused laser-like on savagely attacking President Obama’s opponent, Republican Mitt Romney, for daring to criticize Obama’s foreign policy.
Senior diplomatic sources told the British newspaper that “the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and ‘lockdown’, under which movement is severely restricted.”
Unfortunately, there’s much more bad news. Important secret papers are missing from the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and refuges for U.S. personnel across that recently liberated North African nation are no longer considered “safe.”
The AWOL documents are sensitive enough to make Julian Assange salivate.
“Some of the missing papers from the consulate are said to list names of Libyans who are working with Americans, putting them potentially at risk from extremist groups, while some of the other documents are said to relate to oil contracts,” the paper reports.
Americans have also been subjected to the grotesque spectacle of a dead envoy’s body being dragged around Benghazi. U.S. ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and at least three other Americans were killed in a firefight at the U.S. consulate in that city. Stevens was apparently tortured and may have been sodomized by his assassins in a ritual of humiliation popular among Islamic terrorists.
Libyan leader Mohammed Magarief promptly apologized “to the United States, the people and to the whole world for what happened” in Benghazi.
Although U.S. Marines are normally stationed at the full embassy in Tripoli, for reasons unknown, no Marines were guarding the facility in Benghazi. President Obama has reportedly since dispatched a contingent of Marines to Libya.
Despite President Obama’s curious statement about Egypt, that “I don’t think we would consider them an ally, but we don’t consider them an enemy,” U.S. officials in Cairo had been counting on increasingly hostile Egyptian authorities to protect the diplomatic compound. Hillary Clinton’s State Department reportedly ordered the Marines defending the embassy in Cairo not to carry live ammunition. At the Pentagon, Marines Lt. Col. Chris Hughes denied the report, saying, “No restrictions on weapons or weapons status [had] been imposed.”
At press time anti-American protests had spread to the Gaza Strip, Tunisia, Yemen, Iraq, and Bangladesh, and were still continuing in Cairo. Egypt’s Islamist President Mohamed Morsi has condemned the Benghazi assault but his critics don’t believe he was being sincere.
Initially it was reported that the attacks in Benghazi and Cairo were spontaneous, prompted by a movie trailer on YouTube for Innocence of Muslims, which offers an unflattering portrayal of the Prophet Mohammed. This is a convincing enough cover story because Muslims have rioted over far less. Muslims not only do not tolerate unkind cinematic depictions of Mohammed, they do not tolerate any cinematic depiction of Mohammed. (Watching The Message, a Muslim-approved full-length feature film from 1977 starring Anthony Quinn, requires an unusual degree of suspension of disbelief. Mohammed is a character but he’s not shown or heard.)
But now it is unclear if such a movie actually exists. Innocence of Muslims might even turn out to be a so-called false flag operation created as a pretext for Islamist attacks on U.S. interests. Hollywood figures are reportedly unaware of the film and the actors in the 14-minute Ed Wood-quality production now claim they were misled about the storyline.
The story gets stranger. The Wall Street Journal spoke to someone who called himself Sam Bacile. Bacile claimed to be the director of the celluloid schlock. The newspaper of record said Bacile “described himself as a 52-year-old Israeli-American real-estate developer, called Islam a ‘cancer,’ and said the film had been funded by Jewish donors to the tune of $5 million.”
Bacile, it turns out, may not exist. There are no records of him in the U.S. or Israel. Bacile’s telephone number corresponds to an address in Cerritos, California, which seems to be the home of someone else. Someone who answered the phone and might reside there reportedly may or may not be a man who did time in prison for bank fraud. And so on and so on.
An under-secretary named Patrick Kennedy at the State Department said the assault in Benghazi was carefully planned. The attack might have been payback for the U.S. killing of Libyan-born Mohamed Hassan Qaid (also known as Abu Yahya al-Libi), a senior al Qaeda official. Qaid was cremated in a drone strike in Pakistan three months ago.
Then again, maybe not.
Stateside, the apoplectic Obama-worshipping media has been pounding Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney for days for speaking truth to power.
In response to perceived Muslim anger over Innocence of Muslims, the U.S. mission in Cairo released a bizarre statement Tuesday condemning “the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.”
Expressing the views of many Americans, Romney said it was “disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”
In words that will likely come back to haunt him, President Obama, the man who once mocked Cambridge, Massachusetts police by saying they “acted stupidly” by arresting Obama’s close personal friend, told “60 Minutes” that Romney’s comment wasn’t presidential. Romney has “a tendency to shoot first and aim later.” This is the same thing that unlucky Jimmy Carter said of then-challenger Ronald Reagan.
So might criticize President Obama for not seeming to care about national security issues and foreign policy.
After all, his wife, First Nanny Michelle Obama, just said that obesity is “absolutely” the greatest threat to national security.
And remember, as I reported in Subversion Inc., that this is an administration that views each September 11 not as a solemn day of remembrance but as a Kumbaya-encrusted day of rainbows and unicorns. Obama’s September 11 observance isn’t about the murder of 3,000 innocent Americans by Norman Invasion-era theocratic totalitarians. In Obama’s words, it’s about “solving today’s most pressing challenges: clean energy, energy efficiency, health care, education, economic opportunity, veterans and military families.”
At the 2009 law-signing ceremony creating the “National Day of Service and Remembrance,” President Obama said nothing about 9/11, except in passing. He said he hoped that the generation of young people “that came of age amidst the horrors of 9/11 and [Hurricane] Katrina, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, an economic crisis without precedent,” would come forward and volunteer to work for “change.” And it’s never been clear why this National Day of Service has to be held – of all the 365 days in a year – on September 11.
President Obama, an avid golfer, doesn’t even show up for many of his regular intelligence briefings. His fans suggest the president is able to fully absorb the daily terrorist threat matrix by osmosis.
As Election Day draws nearer, now Governor Romney will be given daily intelligence briefings.Chances are he’ll show up.

Christopher Stevens Feeds the Crocodile
By Daniel Greenfield/FrontPage/ Sep 14th, 2012 Winston Churchill once said, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last.” On September 11, Christopher Stevens, a career diplomat, became one of the first Americans in Libya to feed the crocodile of Ansar Al-Sharia and learned too late that while appeasers may hope to be eaten last, they are often eaten first.
Christopher Stevens was a Middle Eastern diplomat who typified the new breed going from the University of Berkeley and the Peace Corps to desks in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Syria. He taught English to Moroccan children in the Peace Corps and helped Palestinian Arabs in the East Jerusalem Consulate, which has a firm policy of pretending that Israel does not exist.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said of Christopher Stevens that he “made other people’s hopes his own” and that may serve as a fitting eulogy both for Stevens and for the disastrous foreign policy of making “other people’s hopes” our own that brought on the Arab Spring.
Stevens, like Clinton and Obama, made the hopes of Islamists his own and they repaid him for it, just as Afghans repaid America for supporting them against the Soviet Union, as Lebanon and Somalia repaid America’s peacekeeping efforts by killing American troops and on down the litany of gratitude in bombs and bullets that have come America’s way from the Muslim world.
“He risked his life to stop a tyrant, then gave his life trying to build a better Libya,” Hillary Clinton said, but if anything his murder exposed the lie that there is a better Libya now than there was before Hillary and he intervened in Libya. Clinton’s eulogy comes perilously close to conceding Stevens’ real mission and the degree of American intervention in the overthrow of Gaddafi.
Stevens was the connection between the Islamist Benghazi rebels and the Obama administration’s illegal war to overthrow Gaddafi. His mission, like the true mission of the war, was secret, and the consulate, marginally fortified and devoid of Marines, reflected that secrecy. Stevens did not think that he had anything to fear from the Islamists because they were his friends.
In the Wikileaks cables, Stevens cheerfully described fighters who saw “resistance against coalition forces in Iraq” as “an important act of ‘jihad’” and local businessmen who took pride in the number of suicide bombers who had come out of the area. For years he had walked safely in their company without understanding that he was just as much of a target as a Marine in Baghdad, but without the training, the weapons or the survival skills.
The only reason Christopher Stevens had lasted this long is that the jihadist fighters had known a useful man when they met him. And Stevens proved to be very useful, but his usefulness ended with Gaddafi’s death. Once the US successfully overthrew Gaddafi and began focusing on stabilizing Libya, Stevens ceased to be a useful idiot and became a useless nuisance. Attacks soon followed on the Benghazi consulate and on other consulates as well, but the Marines were not brought in and Stevens continued relying on local goodwill to secure his offices. It was only a matter of time until the attackers got through.
Clinton, her State Department and its media allies appear unnaturally eager to paint Christopher Stevens as an American martyr to the cause of Libyan Islamism, a kinder, gentler Rachel Corrie who willingly died so that the Islamists might have their dream of an Islamic state in Libya.
We will of course never know what was going through Christopher Stevens’ mind on September 11, 2012, as he battled the choking smoke, experiencing what so many New Yorkers had experienced on September 11, 2001. Like them, he was faced with a terrible dilemma, a choice between remaining in the fire and committing suicide by going outside.
Many in the World Trade Center chose to jump to their deaths, but Christopher Stevens chose to remain inside and die rather than face the tender mercies of his attackers. Stevens had spent enough time in Libya to have seen what the jihadist fighters did to their captives and must have known what horrors he could expect at their hands. The photos that have been released, along with claims by Libyan jihadists that they sexually assaulted his corpse, suggest that he made the right choice. And perhaps in those final moments, facing that terrible choice, Christopher Stevens finally understood the true horror of the Muslim world that he had fallen in love with as a Peace Corps volunteer.
“He was an avid student of Islam and the Middle East, and consistently strove to build the proverbial bridge between our two cultures in the face of sometimes overwhelming antagonism and bitter misunderstanding,” a friend from the diplomatic service tells us. But though Christopher Stevens may have studied Islam, he had learned very little about it, and so his final lesson was the bloody one that Westerners who never really learn what Islam is about end up receiving.
“The world needs more Chris Stevenses,” Hillary Clinton said, but does it really? Does it need more tall dead blond Americans lying bloodied in the gutters of Muslim cities? Does it need men who give up the hopes and dreams of their country to take on the dreams of their enemies without ever realizing where the fatal road of those dreams leads?
Stevens’ former Peace Corps colleague says of him, “Chris devoted his career, and life, to improving relations between the Arabic/Islamic world and the West.” That he did and he died doing it, losing whatever career or life he might have had if he had not embarked on a futile errand to make the Muslims who killed him and paraded around his body like him. And like all those who have died over the years in the same cause, the effort was to no avail.
“It’s especially tragic that Chris Stevens died in Benghazi because it is a city that he helped to save,” Obama said, repeating the same lie that he used to drag America into his illegal war. Benghazi was not in any need of saving, it was the Americans who came to Benghazi, like Chris Stevens, who needed saving.
That is the terrible blind spot in our vision which, like Christopher Stevens, tells us that we need to save the Muslims who hate us, rather than showing us that we need to save ourselves

The new Al Qaeda!
By Emad El Din Adeeb/Asharq Alawsat
The assassination of the US ambassador and three other US embassy staff in Benghazi is a terrible crime and a political disaster by any standard, not just in terms of US – Libyan relations, but Washington’s relations with the entire region. At the White House, State Department and Pentagon, there are questions being raised whether this is the thanks and gratitude they deserve from a country and people they helped, politically, financially, militarily and security-wise? Until now, we do not know the true identity of who carried out this heinous crime, however fingers are being pointed at forces comprised of remnants of the Gaddafi regime which are seeking to revenge themselves against the new Libyan government. These forces still possess liquid funds and arms hidden throughout the mountains and caves of Libya’s vast desert regions. Whilst there is also an unconfirmed theory that a section of the Al Qaeda organization, which last year transferred from Afghanistan and Pakistan to Yemen, have now secured a presence in three other territories, namely Libya, Syria and the Sinai Peninsula. It is no longer strange to see the black Al Qaeda banner being raised in Yemen or Cairo’s Tahrir Square. It is no coincidence that the assassination of the US ambassador in Benghazi and the huge protests outside the American embassy in Cairo took place on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. It is also no surprise that the Al Qaeda flag was raised outside the walls of the US embassy last week. It is no longer surprising to see, on our television screens, trucks equipped with machine guns manned by mask figures brandishing the black Al Qaeda banner. Al Qaeda, as a central organization with a unified command in charge of violence and terrorist operations throughout the world, witnessed a huge shift following the killing of its infamous leader Osama Bin Laden. Today, under Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaeda has begun to follow different approaches based on establishing branches wherever crises are taking place, securing a wide-spread international presence. It is very difficult for armies, regimes or conventional intelligence services to deal with this policy and the establishment of new Al Qaeda branches and units across the region.
This situation will create a state of turmoil and chaos that cannot be controlled, not just during the era of the Arab Spring, but following this.
The current assassination attempts against Yemeni officials following regime change, the Benghazi operation following the collapse of the Gaddafi regime and the protests outside of the US embassy after Mursi came to power, represent evidence that Al Qaeda lives on as a new chapter in the post-Arab Spring era.

Syria and Obama's five excuses for inaction
By Amir Taheri/Asharq Alawsat
As Bashar al-Assad continues to kill Syrians at an average rate of 100 a day, the Obama administration’s hesitations, deviations and tergiversations on this issue appear increasingly cynical. Obama and his supporters try to explain, and explain away, his failure to develop a credible policy on Syria by citing a number of “problems” ostensibly beyond the US president’s control.
The first “problem”, they claim, is that the Syrian opposition is divided.
Is that true? I think not.
Unity must not be confused with unanimity. No doubt, the millions who are risking their lives to fight a bloodthirsty despot do not all think the same on all issues. Nor are they all members of a single party. In a society that has suffered under one-party rule for six decades, apparent uniformity is often no more than a facade. Once that façade crumbles, society is splintered into countless slivers. In the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union, no fewer than 120 parties of all sizes emerged from the debris of Communism. Iraq after Saddam Hussein gave birth to over 200 parties.
In any case, what one hopes for Syria is a pluralist system in which people could think differently, believe differently and act differently within a freely accepted framework under the rule of law. Syria is a mosaic of ethnic and religious communities that should have a voice both in opposition and in a future Syria.
Having said all that, the Syrian opposition is united on key issues. In one voice, all parties and groups in the uprising demand that al-Assad step aside, paving the way for a transitional government. They all insist that the al-Assad system be replaced with a pluralist one with governments chosen through free elections. On a more formal basis, the Syrian opposition has created organs of unity through the Syrian National Army (SNA) and the Syrian National Council which has already been recognized as a legitimate authority by more than 30 nations. So, the claim that the US should do nothing to stop the bloodshed because the Syrian opposition is divided is manifestly false.
The second “problem” cited by Obama is that Syrians have not managed to set up “liberated zones” as was the case in Libya during the uprising to topple another Arab despot.
“Where is the Syrian Benghazi,” Obama spokesmen ask. The comparison with Libya is misplaced. Libya is a vast country with a sparse population, and, without air cover by NATO, it is unlikely that Benghazi could have held its own against Colonel Gaddafi's air force and armored divisions.
Even then, the anti-Assad forces have already set up “liberated zones” in at least five provinces. These pockets of territory are home to almost a million Syrians. A further 250,000 Syrians have fled to neighboring countries. More importantly, perhaps, the Syrian opposition has mini-Benghazis in the heart of the capital Damascus and in Aleppo, the country’s most populous city.
The third “problem”, cited by Obama apologists, is that the US cannot lead on this issue because of the Russian veto in the United Nations’ Security Council. To be sure, Russia’s views on this as on other relevant issues of international concern must be taken into account. However, one should not forget that the veto concerns only the Security Council. It does not and should not stop a range of measures approved by the General Assembly, the UN Secretary-General and the various organs of the UN. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who, one must admit, is more seriously concerned about the Syrian tragedy, says that the US will continue seeking Russian support through the Security Council. Last week she said that if disagreement with Russia continues the US would support the Syrian opposition. What this means in practice is that the Russian veto is effective beyond the Security Council and also covers aspects of US foreign policy.
The fourth "problem" claimed by Obama apologists is that the United States' European and regional allies have not done their part. Obama says he wants to “lead from behind", whatever that means, and insists that the US should play a supportive part in schemes devised and executed by allies.
Leaving aside the nonsense about “leading from behind", the claim that European and regional allies have been lethargic is patently false.
Turkey has taken high risks to support the Syrian uprising and is now paying the price by becoming a target for terrorism sponsored by Tehran and Damascus. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf states have hosted Syrian opposition groups and provided financial support. Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon have to deal with a growing number of refugees from Syria. Egypt's new President Muhammad Mursi brought the voice of the Syrian uprising to the heart of Tehran during last week's Non-Aligned Movement summit. For their part, the European Union, especially France and Great Britain, have led the way by imposing strong sanctions against the al-Assad regime and providing a range of support for the uprising.
Finally, Obama apologists cite another “problem”: the fear that al-Assad’s fall could mark the coming to power of “hardline Islamists”.
This old chestnut has been around for decades. It was used by a string of Arab despots to justify their own hold on power. Even Gaddafi marketed himself in the West as “a rampart against Islamists”. Some Western “experts” claimed that Arabs should not have freedom because if they did they would immediately choose Islamist “holy warriors” and declare Jihad on the outside world.
The truth is that wherever we have had reasonably clean pluralist elections in the Muslim world, from Indonesia to Morocco, the Islamist bogeyman set up of Western “experts” failed to attract more than a quarter of the electorate. In any case, the idea is to let Syrians choose whom they want, not whomever outsiders might prefer.
With Russia acting as big power backbone for an alliance to save al-Assad, even at the cost of killing large numbers of Syrians, Washington needs to step forward to counterbalance Moscow. A coalition of the willing seeking to save Syria from a deranged despot is already in place. It needs leadership. Whether one likes it or not, the US is still the only power capable of providing that. Obama has no excuses to shirk that responsibility.