LCCC ENGLISH DAILY 
NEWS BULLETIN
March 06/15
Bible Quotation For Today/Parable of 
the Rich Man & his abundant Crops
Luke 12/16-21: "Then he told them a parable: ‘The land of a rich man produced 
abundantly. And he thought to himself, "What should I do, for I have no place to 
store my crops?" Then he said, "I will do this: I will pull down my barns and 
build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will 
say to my soul, Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, 
drink, be merry." But God said to him, "You fool! This very night your life is 
being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?"
So it is with those who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich 
towards God.’"
Bible Quotation For Today/let God be 
proved true, as it is written, ‘So that you may be justified in your words
"Letter to the Romans 03/01-07: "What advantage has the Jew? Or what is the 
value of circumcision? Much, in every way. For in the first place the Jews were 
entrusted with the oracles of God. What if some were unfaithful? Will their 
faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Although everyone is 
a liar, let God be proved true, as it is written, ‘So that you may be justified 
in your words, and prevail in your judging.’ But if our injustice serves to 
confirm the justice of God, what should we say? That God is unjust to inflict 
wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.) By no means! For then how could God judge 
the world? But if through my falsehood God’s truthfulness abounds to his glory, 
why am I still being condemned as a sinner?"
Latest analysis, editorials from miscellaneous sources published on March 
05-06/15
From Iraq to Syria: the Genocidal Ordeal of the Assyrians/By Joseph Yacoub/March 
05/15
The Saudi king gave a prize to an Islamic scholar who says 9/11 was an 
‘inside job/The 
Washington Post/March 05/15
On Iran, Arabs deeply mistrust Obama/Michael 
Young/The Daily Star/March 05/15
Netanyahu has created a zero-sum game with the U.S/David 
Ignatius/The Daily Star/March 05/15
Syria's Iranization becoming real strategic threat for Israel/Israel 
Ziv/Ynetnews/March 05/15 
Lebanese Related News published on 
March 05-06/15
Sigrid Kaag, the United Nations special coordinator for Lebanon: Hezbollah’s 
Shebaa raid violated Resolution 1701
Salam Stresses Consensus Best Option in Decision-Making 
Salam takes tough line with Cabine
Hezbollah: Netanyahu a fox in sheep’s clothing
Hezbollah brands Netanyahu a fox in sheep’s clothing
Lebanon heading for all-inclusive package deal
Lebanese Cabinet agrees to consensual decision making
Lebanese Cabinet back on course
Kahwagi denies personal political ambitions
Row erupts over jihadi arrested in Bekaa hospital
Hezbollah urges tighter state control in suburbs: report
Jumblat Snaps Back after Threat, Says PSP Backs Revolution against 'Terrorist' 
Syrian Regime
Lebanese Army chief Jean Kahwagi denies personal political ambitions
N. Lebanon governor shuts down factory over emissions
ISF Arrests Top Fugitive Linked to ISIL 
Report: Beirut Port Official to Visit Bkirki over Controversial Basin 
Gemayel Lauds Salam's Role in Safeguarding Country, Criticizes Ongoing 
Presidential Vacuum 
Oil Exploration Awaits Political Consensus on Two Petroleum Decrees 
Mashnouq Urges Aoun to become Consensual Candidate, Slams Lack of Responsibility
France to Deliver Weapons to Lebanon Soon under Controversial Arms Deal
Mazloum Says No Maronite Summit, Dialogue Should Only Serve Presidential Polls
Russian, Chinese 'Veto' Stopping Refugees from Returning to Safe Areas in Syria
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 
March 05-06/15
IS 'Bulldozes' Ancient Assyrian City of Nimrud in Iraq
Knife-wielding attacker slashes face of US ambassador in South Korea
U.S. Ambassador Recovers from Knife Attack Praised by N. Korea 
Military pressure may be needed to oust Assad: Kerry
U.S. sees positive Iran role in Tikrit battle
Saudi FM urges coalition to face ISIS challenge on the ground
Faisal Urges Anti-IS Ground Fight as Kerry Says 'Military Pressure May be 
Needed' to Oust Assad
Regime strike kills 18 civilians in Aleppo clashes
An American administration with a grudge 
Nusra Front’s top military brass killed in Idlib
France Says Assad 'Not Credible' Partner in Fight against IS
Rebels attack regime intel HQ in Aleppo
US and Iran reach “special understanding” over Tikrit offensive: sources
Rebels attack Aleppo security building, monitor says dozens killed
Tikrit operations cause 28,000 to flee: UN
Yemen: Hadi seeks transfer of international aid to Aden
Al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria may split from organization, fight ISIS: senior 
opposition member
Egypt replaces interior minister in Cabinet
Libyan government to halt airstrikes for peace talks
Why Turkish pipeline project may harm Putin
Another Saudi Beheading Adds to 'Unprecedented' Pace
Jihad Watch Site Latest Reports
Islamic State bulldozed ancient Assyrian city of Nimrud
Robert Spencer in PJM: How The Western Intelligentsia Denies Islam’s History of 
War and Crime
Muslim beheader invokes Quran 8:12 and 47:4 to justify beheading
Canada: Parliament Hill gunman invoked jihad in video minutes before attack
DoJ hires imam who said Ayaan Hirsi Ali deserved death for leaving Islam
Main U.S.-backed Syrian rebel group disbanding, joining jihadists
Boston Marathon jihad trial: defense attorney admits “It was him”
New York City public schools to have Muslim holidays off
Canada: Police arrest three Muslims over mall threat
California Muslim charged with trying to join the Islamic State
UK: Muslims arrested for conning elderly into funding jihadis’ trips to Syria 
Sigrid Kaag, the United Nations 
special coordinator for Lebanon: Hezbollah’s Shebaa raid violated Resolution 
1701
Elise Knutsen/The Daily Star/Mar. 06, 2015
BEIRUT: Contrary to the Lebanese government’s position, the United Nations 
believes that Hezbollah violated Security Council Resolution 1701 when it 
attacked an Israeli convoy in the Shebaa Farms last month, a high-ranking U.N. 
official told The Daily Star.
Hezbollah’s launching of anti-tank missiles from Lebanon, which resulted in the 
death of two Israeli soldiers, “constitutes a serious violation of the cessation 
of hostilities between Lebanon and Israel,” said Sigrid Kaag, the United Nations 
special coordinator for Lebanon.
But Lebanese officials from both political coalitions insist Hezbollah did not 
in fact breach the resolution. Kaag spoke with Hezbollah during and after the 
crisis in January and the party told her that the attack on the Israeli convoy 
was “a carefully calibrated operation” that did not violate Resolution 1701. She 
added that the most recent Security Council report on the implementation of 1701 
which has not yet been made fully public addresses violations by both Hezbollah 
and Israel of the resolution. The report states that an investigation by UNIFIL 
found that the Israeli army had fired 20 white phosphorous mortar shells into 
Lebanon. Despite repeatedly claiming that the Israeli army will discontinue the 
use of white phosphorus, which is restricted by international law, the toxic gas 
is apparently still in use.
There is mounting concern that hostile language, “posturing, incidents or 
accidents” may inadvertently lead to a renewed conflict between Hezbollah and 
Israel, Kaag said. The international community has taken a “renewed interest” in 
Resolution 1701 and will “look at opportunities where progress may be possible 
or rather should happen,” Kaag said. She refused to specify, however, whether 
she would lobby for an official designation of the Shebaa Farms, which the U.N. 
claims is a disputed territory. When asked whether she would push for Israel’s 
withdrawal from the Lebanese village of Ghajar, Kaag replied that “stability” is 
valued by the parties involved. Israel has occupied the entire village, half of 
which lies in Lebanese territory, since 2000. The United Nations has repeatedly 
urged the Israeli government to withdraw its troops from the village. But Kaag 
suggested that liberation was unlikely, at least for now, in order to maintain 
calm along the border. Kaag, who assumed the position of special coordinator in 
mid-January, said that the situation along Lebanon’s southern border figured 
among the topics she discussed with Arab League chief Nabil Elaraby on a trip to 
Cairo earlier this week. “Obviously I wanted to have Dr. Nabil Elaraby’s take on 
the situation both on the south [and] eastern borders, a broader perspective so 
to speak,” Kaag told The Daily Star. The international community must continue 
to play an important role in helping Lebanon maintain stability, Kaag stressed.
At the Humanitarian Pledging Conference for Syria, which will be held in Kuwait 
at the end of this month, Kaag will seek to “put Lebanon on the map again.”As 
the crisis enters its fifth year, “donor fatigue” is a serious concern, Kaag 
said, but Lebanon urgently needs international support to help manage the 
refugee crisis, which has had an adverse effect on the country’s economy and 
stability. Moreover, if Syrian refugees are pushed to desperation some may 
follow “the path to radicalization and extremism.”International institutions are 
looking into new ways to keep Lebanon afloat financially, Kaag added. As a 
middle-income country with generally high social and development indicators but 
struggling with a refugee influx, the “financial architecture” of institutions 
like the World Bank needs to be flexible, she said. Echoing statements made by 
U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon, Kaag condemned the participation of Lebanese citizens in 
the Syrian conflict. There is “tremendous concern” that the Syrian conflict 
might further spill over into Lebanon, she added.
The presidential vacuum, she said “normalizes an erosion of the institutions as 
forseen by the Constitution and also by [the] Taif [Accord] ... [which] cannot 
be good for Lebanon’s interests in the mid term or long term.”
Hezbollah brands Netanyahu a fox in 
sheep’s clothing
The Daily Star/Mar. 06, 2015/BEIRUT: Hezbollah denounced Thursday Israeli Prime 
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to the U.S. Congress as “disgusting” and 
“hostile” and warned against advancing Israeli interests at the expense of the 
American people. “What is disgusting is that Netanyahu stood there like a fox in 
sheep’s clothing, calling on Iran to stop its aggressions in the Middle East,” 
Hezbollah MP Hussein Musawi said in a statement released by the party’s media 
office. Musawi described Netanyahu’s speech as “rich in its hostility toward the 
Islamic Republic of Iran,” saying that it reflected the positions of “American 
Zionist lobby groups.” Addressing the American people, the MP questioned how 
they could accept a Congress that clearly served Zionist interests and turned a 
blind eye to crimes against humanity committed by Israel. “More importantly, how 
can this population accept the fact that Israel’s interests are secured at the 
expense of the interests of American people?” he added. The MP also criticized 
some Arab rulers, especially those in the Gulf, whom he claimed had made “a 
friend” out of Netanyahu due to their shared hostility toward Iran.
Lebanese Cabinet agrees to consensual decision making
The Daily Star/Mar. 05, 2015/BEIRUT: The first Cabinet session in over two weeks 
ended Thursday, with Prime Minister Tammam Salam declaring that a consensus 
formula would replace the body's current decision-making mechanism. “Given the 
exceptional circumstances resulting from the 9-month long presidential vacuum, 
the consensus formula is given a priority in the constitution,” Salam said at 
the start of the session, according to Information Minister Ramzi Joreige. Salam 
stressed that a consensus-based decision making system remains as the “best 
option” as long as it doesn't lead to disruption in Cabinet, Joreige added. The 
information minister did not reveal any amendments to the current mechanism, 
which requires unanimous support from all 24 ministers on Cabinet decisions, but 
said that Salam would no longer “tolerate” disruptions resulting from a lack of 
quorum. The prime minister also expressed hopes that Cabinet’s one year 
anniversary would serve as an occasion for the government to reevaluate its work 
in light of the presidential void, and reiterated the urgent need to elect a 
presdient, Joreige said. Cabinet then proceeded to study delayed agenda items 
that had been postponed due to the two-week pause in Cabinet’s work. The 
three-hour long session ended with ministers agreeing on five regular agenda 
items.
According to ministerial sources, the consensus formula, which was agreed upon 
during Salam’s consultations with all blocs represented in the Cabinet, calls 
for consensus to be the basis of the government’s work. If any minister objects 
to a Cabinet decision relating to a non-exceptional matter and on which the 
majority of political blocs agree, it will not be postponed but will be 
approved, the sources said. They added that ministers who oppose any decision 
can register their reservations, something that was not applied in previous 
sessions before Salam suspended Cabinet sessions last month. In addition, the 
deal calls for all items on the agenda to obtain prior consent from all major 
political blocs so that they can be approved with the required speed, the 
sources said. The agreement also calls on ministers to avoid using Cabinet 
sessions as a platform for political duels, as was often the case in the past. 
With regard to Cabinet decrees that need the president’s signature after they 
have been signed by the prime minister, the relevant minister and the finance 
minister, they would be presented to the ministers to sign them, the sources 
said. If one or more ministers refused to sign, the Constitution would be 
applied in this case, which means that the decrees would become effective after 
15 days, the sources added.
IS 'Bulldozes' Ancient Assyrian City 
of Nimrud in Iraq
Naharnet/The Islamic State group began bulldozing the ancient Assyrian city of 
Nimrud in Iraq on Thursday, the government said, in the jihadists' latest attack 
on the country's historical heritage. IS "assaulted the historic city of Nimrud 
and bulldozed it with heavy vehicles," the tourism and antiquities ministry said 
on an official Facebook page. An Iraqi antiquities official confirmed the news, 
saying the destruction began after noon prayers on Thursday and that trucks that 
may have been used to haul away artifacts had also been spotted at the site.
"Until now, we do not know to what extent it was destroyed," the official said 
on condition of anonymity. Nimrud, which was founded in the 13th century BC, 
lies on the Tigris around 30 kilometers (18 miles) southeast of Mosul, Iraq's 
second city and the main hub of IS in the country. The destruction at Nimrud, 
one of the jewels of the Assyrian era, came a week after the jihadist group 
released a video showing militants armed with sledgehammers and jackhammers 
smashing priceless ancient artifacts at the Mosul museum.
That attack sparked widespread consternation and alarm, with some archaeologists 
and heritage experts comparing it to the 2001 demolition of the Bamiyan Buddhas 
in Afghanistan by the Taliban. In the jihadists' extreme interpretation of 
Islam, statues, idols and shrines are a corruption of the purity of the early 
Muslim faith and amount to recognizing other objects of worship than God. The 
group spearheaded a sweeping offensive last June that overran Nineveh province, 
where Mosul and Nimrud are located, and swept through much of Iraq's Sunni Arab 
heartland. Iraqi security forces and allied fighters are battling to regain 
ground from the jihadists with backing from an international anti-IS coalition 
as well as neighboring Iran. But major operations to drive IS out of Nineveh are 
likely months away, leaving the province's irreplaceable historical sites at the 
mercy of militants who have no regard for Iraq's past. SourceAgence France 
Presse
Lebanese Army chief Jean Kahwagi denies personal political 
ambitions
The Daily Star/Mar. 05, 2015/BEIRUT: Army Commander Jean Kahwagi said Thursday 
that the military does not engage in political games, stressing that his actions 
are not related to any personal interests or ambitions. “The Army is for all the 
Lebanese, it will not be part of the political struggle or a tool for anyone,” 
Kahwagi told Al-Mayadeen TV. “The Army is an institution of fighting and 
discipline without political ambitions, and its leadership does not make secret 
deals under the table.”Kahwaji played down rumors about his alleged “personal 
demand for political and official posts in the government,” saying such 
accusations are “nonsensical.”Kahwagi has often been touted as a potential 
presidential candidate. Many army commanders have been elected to the presidency 
in the past, most recently former presidents Emile Lahoud and Michel Sleiman. 
Kahwagi also stressed that the Army has been forced into the battle with 
terrorists and that it will be fought without any “political calculations.” He 
highlighted the Army’s capabilities, saying its troops have the required 
military skills to fight terrorism. “The central mission in this phase is 
protecting Lebanon against any strife and confronting terrorism,” he said. 
Kahwagi also said Arab and international actors were “serious” in their 
intentions to confront terrorism, and thanked the United States and Jordan for 
recent military aid packages to the Lebanese Army.
Lebanese Cabinet back on course
The Daily Star/Mar. 05, 2015 /Lebanon’s Cabinet appears poised to turn the 
corner after months of internal bickering produced a state of paralysis. 
Ministers from the various political factions are scheduled to convene Thursday 
for what is hoped is a productive session, after leading political factions and 
figures agreed that enough is enough. Yes, Baabda Palace has been without a 
president for nearly a year, but this vacancy shouldn’t mean that the crucially 
important executive body of the Cabinet should also disappear from the scene. 
After a long series of meetings and discussions, the country’s politicians 
appear to have realized that the standoff over the Cabinet should come to an 
end, but they should remember how the conflict started – if they return to 
attending meetings with the same mindset, the only prospect is further paralysis 
and drift. The failure to elect a president is a huge blow to Lebanon’s 
political system, but it’s the second such long spell of having no head of state 
in less than a decade. The agenda of the Cabinet, where business touches on a 
whole host of people’s “daily” issues and concerns, is more directly tied to the 
welfare of the public. Every minister has the duty and the right to object to, 
or express reservations about, the actions taken by the Cabinet, but this 
doesn’t give them the right to paralyze the executive branch. In such cases, the 
majority simply must carry the day, because obtaining the consent of 24 out of 
24 ministers is a monumentally difficult task. With the Cabinet’s backlog of 
business growing longer by the day, politicians simply must end the standoff as 
soon as possible.
N. Lebanon governor shuts down factory over emissions
Antoine Amrieh/The Daily Star/Mar. 05, 2015/BEIRUT: North Lebanon’s Governor 
ordered Thursday the closure of a peat-processing plant in the Koura district 
after residents complained about its emissions and impact on agriculture. 
Governor Ramzi Nohra, accompanied by security forces, raided the factory 
overnight in the Koura village of Bziza. “The factory operated continuously 
during the night to hide the great harm that it causes,” Nohra told The Daily 
Star. “The factory violates health standards.” The governor explained that 
factory, which extracts oil from peat, created emissions and odors that had 
caused anger among the area’s residents. “This is why we observed closely how 
this factory was being operated, and we saw that it lacks any health standards,” 
he said. “It will be immediately closed.”
A bishop from the village expressed his gratitude for the decision, saying the 
factory was originally erected against the will of the area’s residents. He 
explained that the factory had also been causing health problems and 
agricultural losses for the village’s farmers.
A municipality board member of Bziza told The Daily Star that the factory was 
not licensed by the municipality when it was created in 2008. “The factory 
received the license from former Industry Minister Ghazi Zeaiter directly, 
without us knowing how it happened,” board member Sleiman Qassas said. “The 
municipality was only notified about it [after].”Ghazi Zeaiter is the current 
Minister of Public Works and Transportation. He is affiliated with the Amal 
Movement, headed by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri.
ISF Arrests Top Fugitive Linked to ISIL
Naharnet/Police in the Bekaa Valley detained on Thursday an allegedly dangerous 
terrorist linked to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). The 
state-run National News Agency reported that Syrian national Hussein Ghurelli, 
who is linked to ISIL in the Syrian Qalamoun, was detained in a hospital in the 
Bekaa. The name of the hospital was not revealed. Ghurelli, according to NNA, 
was being treated for an injury he sustained in his head during last week's 
clashes in the northeastern border town of Ras Baalbek.
He also reportedly took part in the battles against the army in town of Arsal. 
Last week, the army targeted militant posts on the outskirts of Ras Baalbek, 
seizing two hilltop positions. The army frequently clashed with the militants in 
their hideouts near the Syria border, targeting gunmen to prevent them from 
advancing. The jihadists remain entrenched on the outskirts of Arsal on the 
porous Syrian-Lebanese border. The mountainous area along the Lebanese-Syrian 
border has long been a smuggling haven, with multiple routes into Syria that 
have been used to transport weapons and fighters.
Mazloum Says No Maronite Summit, Dialogue Should Only Serve 
Presidential Polls
Naharnet/Maronite bishop Samir Mazloum has denied that Bkirki was seeking to 
hold a summit for the rival Christian political leaders but he called for 
dialogue among different factions to focus on the election of a new president. 
“There is no such thing at this current stage,” Mazloum told al-Joumhouria 
newspaper published on Thursday about a possible summit among Free Patriotic 
Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea, the head of 
Kataeb Party, former President Amin Gemayel, and MP Suleiman Franjieh, who is 
the leader of Marada Movement. Mazloum reiterated Bkirki's call for the swift 
election of a new head of state, blaming the vacuum at Baabda Palace on several 
obstacles in state institutions. “A president should be elected as soon as 
possible to rectify the state's affairs,” he stressed. Asked about the 
resumption of cabinet sessions, the bishop said: “It is natural for the 
government to resume its meetings and to do all it can to serve the people.” 
Prime Minister Tammam Salam had suspended sessions, warning that he would not 
invite the ministers for a meeting if they did not heed his call to amend the 
controversial working mechanism that was adopted after the rival MPs failed to 
elect a successor to President Michel Suleiman last year. Earlier this week, he 
decided to call for a session on Thursday after the different factions agreed 
for consensus to be the basis of the government’s work rather than the unanimous 
support from all the ministers on cabinet decisions. But Mazloum said “nothing 
has practically changed” after the deal among the ministers.
Asked about the dialogue among different factions, the bishop told al-Joumhouria 
that Bkirki encourages talks. “But any dialogue or activity … would be short of 
reaching its objectives if it is not in favor of electing a president.” He 
expressed hope that the conferees would deal with the presidential elections as 
the most essential issue on the agenda of their talks. Hizbullah and al-Mustaqbal 
officials have been holding talks under Speaker Nabih Berri's sponsorship since 
December. Christian rivals the FPM and the LF are also engaging in dialogue to 
set the stage for a meeting between Aoun and Geagea. Both are presidential 
candidates and their rivalry is among the reasons that has left the country's 
top Christian post vacant.
Report: Beirut Port Official to Visit Bkirki over 
Controversial Basin
Naharnet /The head of the Beirut Port Authority Hassan Qoraytem is expected to 
visit Bkirki on Thursday to defend his decision to fill the controversial fourth 
basin at the port, al-Joumhouria newspaper reported. The daily said Qoraytem 
will hold talks with Bishop Boulos Sayyah, who is expected to reiterate to the 
port official that Christian parties reject the filling of the basin. The plan 
to fill it sparked controversy in December when the truckers syndicate went on 
strike over fears that the project would cause hundreds of Beirut Port 
employees, mostly truckers, to lose their jobs. The syndicate claims that the 
filling of the basin would end the role of Beirut Port and would harm the 
economy. The project will give more space to store containers. But there are 
fears that transforming the Port of Beirut into a transshipment hub would direct 
large vessels to the Port of Tripoli because the fourth basin will no longer be 
able to accept big cargo ships. The truckers later ended their strike after 
Prime Minister Tammam Salam said the work to fill the basin would freeze until 
the issue was resolved. Bkirki has again hosted a meeting for the Christian 
parties that reject the filling of the basin. The representatives of the Free 
Patriotic Movement, Kataeb Party, the Lebanese Forces, Marada Movement and the 
Tashnag said in a statement that their stance from the issue has not changed. 
According to al-Joumhouria, their statement was aimed at refuting claims that 
some of them had backed down from their position. The objective of the meeting 
was also aimed at stressing that the work stoppage at the basin did not mean the 
issue has been resolved, said the daily.
Gemayel Lauds Salam's Role in Safeguarding Country, 
Criticizes Ongoing Presidential Vacuum
Naharnet /Kataeb Party leader Amin Gemayel expressed relief over Prime Minister 
Tammam Salam's role in safeguarding the cabinet and the country's interests, 
reiterating the importance of electing a new head of state. The Christian chief 
described a meeting with Salam on Wednesday as relieving, noting that they 
discussed all matters that concern the Lebanese. “We are in agreement,” Gemayel 
said in comments published in al-Joumhouria newspaper on Thursday. Salam called 
on the cabinet to resume meetings on Thursday after differences between the 
ministers on the amendment of the mechanism prompted the premier to suspend 
sessions in the past two weeks giving way for the cabinet members to reach an 
agreement on the formula, which he wants it to be based on article 65 of the 
constitution.
The current mechanism, which was adopted after the cabinet assumed the 
prerogative of the president in accordance with the constitution, states that 
ministers should give unanimous support to the government's decisions. But it 
proved to be troublesome after some ministers resorted to veto power. Gemayel 
remarked that he underlined during the meeting the importance of electing a new 
head of state, who is the key to stability in Lebanon and the unity of 
institutions. “In the absence of the president article 65 of the constitution 
has no grounds and shouldn't be adopted,” Gemayel lamented. The article's clause 
five says: “The legal quorum for a council meeting shall be a two-thirds 
majority of its members. It shall make its decisions by consensus. If that is 
not possible, it makes its decisions by vote of the majority of attending 
members. Basic issues shall require the approval of two thirds of the members of 
the government named in the decree of its formation.” The Kataeb chief 
criticized the parliament, noting that it should only convene to elect a new 
president, saying: “Some officials shouldn't act as if the presence or absence 
of a head of state is the same.”“Priority is for electing a new president,” 
Gemayel stressed, warning that adapting to the presidential vacuum is a “serious 
and dangerous crime.”
Hezbollah urges tighter state control in suburbs: report
The Daily StarظMar. 05, 2015/BEIRUT: Hezbollah has pleaded for the government to 
stop the spread of weapons in Beirut’s southern suburbs following a number of 
armed clashes between local clans, local daily Al-Liwaa said Thursday. Citing 
well-informed sources, the report said Hezbollah has informed concerned parties 
that it can no longer bear the consequences of the proliferation of weapons in 
the southern suburbs in the wake of clashes between the Jaafar and Zeaiter clans 
in Burj al-Barajneh. Hezbollah, the report added, stressed that the government 
was the only authority that could put an end to the spread of crimes and 
contraband in the area. Al-Liwaa has also learned that Hezbollah participants in 
the dialogue with the Future Movement have called for the implementation of a 
speedy security plan for the Hezbollah-controlled suburbs, similar to the 
crackdown on outlaws in north and east Lebanon. Interior Minister Nouhad 
Machnouk reportedly informed Beirut MPs who visited him Wednesday that his 
ministry has begun examining the logistics to put the southern suburbs’ security 
plan into action. Security forces deployed for the first time in the Hezbollah 
stronghold in September 2013 as part of a plan to replace checkpoints set up by 
Hezbollah following a series of deadly car bombings that targeted the southern 
suburbs.
Military pressure may be needed to oust Assad: Kerry
Agence France Presse/Mar. 05, 2015/RIYADH: Military pressure may be needed to 
oust Syria's President Bashar Assad, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said in 
Saudi Arabia Thursday. "He's lost any semblance of legitimacy, but we have no 
higher priority than disrupting and defeating Daesh ... Ultimately a combination 
of diplomacy and pressure will be needed to bring about a political transition," 
he told reporters, adding that "military pressure may be needed."
Daesh is an Arabic acronym for ISIS, which has seized swathes of Syria and Iraq.
Jumblat Snaps Back after Threat, Says PSP Backs Revolution 
against 'Terrorist' Syrian Regime
Naharnet/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat reiterated on 
Thursday that his party backs the Syrian revolution against the terrorist regime 
of President Bashar Assad after receiving threats from a Jordanian writer. “The 
PSP holds onto its stable stance in support of the Syrian revolution against the 
regime of terror, murder and threat against the Syrian people,” Jumblat said in 
a statement, which he issued a day after al-Akhbar newspaper said the writer had 
threatened the lawmaker. The unnamed journalist had reportedly said the mainly 
Druze city of al-Swaida, which is located in southwestern Syria close to the 
Jordanian border, “would be safeguarded politically and militarily by breaking 
Walid Jumblat, the central connection in the plot.” The PSP chief described the 
writer as one of the mouthpieces of the terrorist regime in Syria, which he said 
is taking the country towards destruction. Jumblat stated that his party has not 
interfered in Syria's war and was keen on having a comprehensive confrontation 
by the people against the regime to protect the country's unity.
He said he reserved the right to take legal action against the writer “through 
Lebanon's state institutions that were and will remain our only choice.” Jumblat 
also urged Lebanon's different political factions “to reject all sorts of 
instigation and accusations which Lebanon has played a high price for.”
Saudi FM urges coalition to face ISIS challenge on the 
ground
Agence France Presse/Mar. 05, 2015/RIYADH: Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud 
al-Faisal called Thursday on the U.S.-led coalition conducting airstrikes 
against ISIS in Syria and Iraq to fight the jihadis on the ground. The kingdom, 
part of the coalition, "stresses the need to provide the military means needed 
to face this challenge on the ground," Faisal said during a press conference 
with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. Several Arab countries have joined the 
air campaign against ISIS. President Barack Obama, anxious to avoid a drawn-out 
ground war, has backed an air campaign but ruled out deploying boots on the 
ground. Meanwhile, Faisal warned of Iran's growing role in Iraq, accusing the 
Shiite-dominated Islamic republic of "taking over" its Arab neighbor through its 
aid in the fight against ISIS.
"Tikrit is a prime example of what we are worried about. Iran is taking over the 
country," Faisal said of the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's hometown. The 
U.S. military's top officer, General Martin Dempsey, said Tuesday that Iran's 
help in an Iraqi offensive to recapture Tikrit could be "a positive thing" 
providing it did not fuel added sectarianism. Sunni-dominated Saudi Arabia is 
wary of the ambitions of its arch rival across the Gulf.
The Saudi king gave a prize to an 
Islamic scholar who says 9/11 was an ‘inside job’
By Ishaan Tharoor March 4 /15/The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/03/04/the-saudi-king-gave-a-prize-to-an-islamic-scholar-who-says-911-was-an-inside-job/
Saudi King Salman, left, presented Zakir Naik, president of the Islamic Research 
Foundation in India, with the 2015 King Faisal International Prize for Service 
to Islam in Riyadh. (King Faisal Foundation via AFP)
Over the weekend, Saudi Arabia's King Salman awarded a prestigious prize to 
Zakir Naik, a televangelist and religious scholar from India, heralding him as 
"one of the most renowned non-Arabic-speaking promulgators of Islam." Naik, a 
trained doctor, founded the Peace TV channel, which supposedly reaches an 
audience of 100 million English-speaking Muslims. His popular YouTube stream 
includes videos titled "Who is deceived by the Satan, Christians or Muslims?" 
and "Does eating non-vegetarian food have any effect on the mind?"
Naik's creed is an expansive one. "Islam is the only religion that can bring 
peace to the whole of humanity," he said in a video biography aired at the 
ceremony.
The preacher is not short of controversy. His orthodox, Wahhabist views — 
affiliated closely with the Saudi state — are polarizing in India, which is home 
to a diverse set of Muslim traditions and sects. His conservatism has led him to 
make statements endorsing the use of female sex slaves and allegedly expressing 
sympathy for terrorists.
[Read: The facts, and a few myths, about Saudi Arabia's human rights record]
Earlier this year, hundreds of Sufi Muslims picketed a New Delhi event where 
Naik was speaking, demanding his arrest and accusing him of propagating a 
divisive, dangerous brand of Islam.
In a 2008 video, he claimed President George W. Bush was behind the Sept. 11 
attacks. "Even a fool will know that this was an inside job," Naik said. Years 
before, he appeared to offer tacit backing to terrorist masterminds such as 
Osama bin Laden.
"If [Bin Laden] is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I 
am with him," he said in one video. "Every Muslim should be a terrorist."
In a video in 2007, he talked about how "Jews are controlling America."
In 2010, Britain's government barred his entry into the country on grounds of 
"unacceptable behavior."
Naik's supporters argue that his comments are taken out of context, and point to 
the religious diversity of those in attendance at his mass public events.
Speaking to the New York Times earlier this week, he condemned the violence of 
militants like those from the Islamic State, but not without a caveat. "I am 
absolutely against Muslims who kill, but what is the U.S. doing?” Naik said, 
citing civilian casualties amid U.S. campaigns in the Muslim world. "Is the U.S. 
really bothered about human rights? No!"
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Saudi Arabia late Wednesday to 
consult with Salman on the status of negotiations with Iran, a Saudi foe. The 
United States' close relationship with Saudi Arabia endures despite the 
kingdom's horrific human rights record and its conspicuous role in helping 
spread the views preached by Islamic supremacists such as Naik.
Naik, who has also been feted in the neighboring United Arab Emirates, 
reportedly received a 24-karat gold medal from the Saudi king and a check for 
$200,000.
From Iraq to Syria: the Genocidal 
Ordeal of the Assyrians
By Joseph Yacoub
Posted 2015-03-05
Assyrians fleeing from Urmia, Iran in 1918 to escape the genocide by Turks.
(AINA) — The Assyrian-Chaldean community is facing dark times and a distressing 
situation. These criminal attacks, these innocent kidnappings (more than 250 
people, young people, women and older people are taken into captivity), the 
forced exile of thousands of people (more than 3000 refugees in Hassake and 
Qamishli) those martyred (more than 10 already) are a terrible shock to a 
community that has endured in the past much suffering.A new tragedy and 
collective extermination against the Assyrian-Chaldeans is once more unfolding 
before our eyes in pain and blood in Syria, since Monday February 23rd, 
following that of Iraq where the Nineveh province is still in mourning since its 
invasion by the terrorist groups of the so-called “Islamic State”, one June the 
10th and July the 17th of 2014.
With the destruction of historical monuments that date back more than 3000 years 
of history and the demolition of churches and sanctuaries by a band of nihilist 
obscurantists, the memory of a people and traces of a civilization, Mesopotamia, 
one of the cradles of humanity, that holds a tangible and intangible world 
heritage, is being erased.
These acts of vandalism have been vigorously denounced by the Director General 
of UNESCO, Irina Bokova.
Early on the morning of Monday February 23rd, the ISIS terror befell the 
Assyrian villages of Khabur, with the first persecutions having begun in 
September, with the summing of removal of crosses from churches.
See attacks on Assyrians in Syria
See Timeline of ISIS in North Iraq
The irony is that these new victims, these worthy son of Hakkari, their 
ancestral home, are precisely the children of the deported from Iraq massacres 
of 1933, themselves survivors of the 1915 genocide in the Ottoman Empire.
Syria was the third country of refuge
They live in the northeast of Syria, since 1933, on the 2 banks of the Khabur 
River in 35 villages between the towns of Hassake (which is my hometown) and Ras 
al-Ain. It is with joy that I spent my childhood and youth between Hassake and 
the Assyrian villages where I fed on the love of the Assyrian country and 
learned the pride of belonging to this people.
Who are the Assyrians?
The documents of the League of Nations (SDN), which is the UN between the wars, 
claim that the Assyrians were “driven from their mountains by Turkish forces” in 
1915 and “took refuge in Urmia, Persia, that was, at the time, in the hands of 
Russian troops.”
After 1915, a new tragedy occurred, the exodus of the Assyrian-Chaldeans of 
Persia to Iraq on the 31st of July 1918. This terrible exodus is described in 
these terms: “After traveling in the stampede 300 miles (480 km) towards the 
south-east, with their families, their livestock and their property, the 
Assyrians finally reached Hamadan, decimated by perpetual attacks of the Turks, 
Kurds and Persians on all sides. Burned by the heat of the summer, ravaged by 
typhus, dysentery, smallpox and cholera, the old and young, exhausted by fatigue 
and fever, were abandoned on the roadside, and the dead and dying marked the 
path to retreat. In the end, after losing 20,000 of them, the survivors reached 
Hamadan and made contact with the British troops.”
Fifteen years after arriving in Iraq (1918-1933), they were again victims of 
massacres that were at the time largely reflected by the international press, 
namely French.
Yet when Iraq gained independence and was admitted to the League of Nations on 
October 30th 1932, commitments were made to establish the Assyrians, who 
originated in Hakkari, as a homogeneous ethnic unity and compact group. However, 
the word “unit” was in the plural, thus maintaining the dispersion of the 
people. At the time, three key ideas summarized their demands homogeneous 
institution, administrative autonomy and right to collect taxes.
All efforts to establish the Assyrian unity had failed due to the resistance of 
the Iraqi authorities. Therefore, it was before such a state of dispersion, 
disunity and sloshing that the situation was becoming more and more critical.
Massacres took place in the village of Simmele and other localities in northern 
Iraq in August of 1933, committed by the now independent Iraqi state.
They made state of 3000 victims killed in atrocious conditions. It was then that 
a number of Assyrian mountaineers once again took the road on a forced exile to 
Syria, where they were greeted and seated in the Khabur region by the French 
authorities who then had the Mandate of Syria, entrusted by the League.
Villages cited as model
They built villages and developed agricultural land that lay fallow. They were 
cited as a model of success and loyalty to Syria.
We can mention with pride the list of major Assyrian villages built with their 
labor, estimated at 35, which is a microcosm and a reproduction that reminded 
them of the Hakkari:
Um Gargan Arbouch Tal Tal Hormuz Damshesh Tal Tal Tal Tal Maghada, Kharita, 
Alkeif Um, Um Waqfa Abu Tina, Qabr Shamiyeh, Baloaa Tal Tal Goran Shamiram Tal 
Tal Jazirah, Talaa Tal Tal Najme, Hefian Tal Tal Nasri, Baz Tal Tal Jumaa, 
Maghas Tal Tal Masas, Jadaya Tal Tal Tawil, Tamer Tal Tal Kepchi, Faidat Tal Tal 
Ahmar Tal Ruman Tahtani Tal Ruman Fokani, Brej Tal Tal Sakra, Wardiate Tal Tal 
Shamyeh.
The Khabur, a miniature of the Hakkari
What is extraordinary, from an anthropological and sociological point of view, 
is that when they arrived in the Khabur, Assyrians reproduced the structures of 
tribal organization, clan, family and religion prevailing since ancient times in 
Hakkari.
Thus, Tal Damshesh was occupied by the people of Konak, called Qotchesnaye, a 
village which was until 1915 the Patriarchal Headquarter of March Shimoun , the 
Baznaye inTal Baz and Tal Ruman Tahtani, the Talnaye in Tal Tal, the Djeloaye in 
Qabr Shamiye, the Tchalnaye in Tal Brej, the Gounouknaye in Tal Sakra and Qabr 
Shamyeh, the Mazernaye in Tal Wardiate, the Deznaye in Tal Baloaa, the Gavarnaye 
in Tal Goran and Tal Maghas, the Marbouchnaye in Tal Shamiram, the Halemnaye in 
Tal Jumaa, the Barwarnaye in Tal Masas, the Ilynnaye in Tal Jadaya, the Tiaraye 
in Tal Tamer, the Akernaye in Tal Kepchi the Mazernaye in Tal Ruman Fokani ….
The defense of their identity, ethnic, cultural and religious
This story is transmitted, since, as an intangible heritage through songs, 
illustrated by folklore, perpetuated by many poems and literary productions.
Belonging to the Assyrian Church of the East, formerly called Nestorian, grouped 
around their Patriarch (who lived in exile) and their leaders (the Maleks), they 
built churches whose names recall their saints, those they worshiped the 
country, as Saint Shalita, Saint Zaya, Saint Petion, Saint Guiwarguis, Saint 
Sarguis, Saint Bichou …and every village is composed mainly of the tribe and 
clan to which they belonged.
A knowingly planned strategy and a crime against humanity
Since the 23rd of February the situation has been extremely worrying, with 
several villages like Tal Tamer, Tal Shamiram, Tal Tawil and Tal Hormuz attacked 
by ultra radical Islamists, equipped with heavy artillery.
Misfortune has befallen this peaceful community that asks for nothing more than 
its share of life and the right to dignity and respect. Fed by a political 
ideology of hate, this is a strategy concerted and carefully prepared for the 
goal of emptying the region of its Christian population, destabilizing, sowing 
fear and spreading terror. Faced with these cruel and barbaric acts, it is 
urgent to respond by taking concrete measures to break this passivity and 
inconsistency in which the international community delights.
How did we reach this situation? What contempt of the human being and what 
decline of civilization. This address was delivered at the event for the 
Assyrians Khabur (Syria), in Sarcelles, Sunday 1 March 2015. Translated from 
French by Maguy Chiha. Joseph Yacoub is Honorary Professor (Political Science) 
from the Catholic University of Lyon. Views and opinions expressed in guest 
editorials do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of AINA.
On Iran, Arabs deeply mistrust Obama
Michael Young/The Daily Star/Mar. 05, 2015
What was striking in Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech before the U.S. House of 
Representatives Tuesday was how the Israeli prime minister exploited the Obama 
administration’s ambiguities on the broader implications of a nuclear deal with 
Iran.
While Netanyahu’s proposals for how to strengthen the nuclear accord are not 
likely to be implemented, two issues he raised cannot be readily ignored by 
President Barack Obama: How a deal might enhance Iran’s regional influence; and 
whether regional wariness with a deal could spur nuclear proliferation. Iran’s 
regional role is an issue that the U.S. has strenuously, and foolishly, sought 
to separate from the nuclear discussions. This has alarmed the Gulf states – and 
now Israel – who fear that a lifting of sanctions on Iran and a rapprochement 
with the U.S. would facilitate Iranian expansionism. The Arab states understand 
that the implications of a nuclear accord are mainly political. Having signed a 
long-awaited arrangement with Tehran, the U.S. is unlikely to turn around and 
enter into new conflicts to prevent it from widening its reach in the Arab 
world.
Indeed, there are signs that the Obama administration would do precisely the 
contrary. Obama, in a letter last October to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah 
Ali Khamenei, effectively recognized Iran’s role in Syria by reassuring him that 
coalition airstrikes against ISIS would not target Bashar Assad’s forces. 
Moreover, by affirming the parallel interests of the U.S. and Iran in combating 
ISIS, Obama defined a basis for regional cooperation with Tehran. It is 
understandable that Netanyahu’s warning fell on deaf ears at the White House. 
The relationship between Obama and the Israeli prime minister has been poor, and 
Netanyahu’s refusal to advance in negotiations with the Palestinians suggests to 
the Americans that relations with his government are a one-way street. For 
Netanyahu to then personally lobby in Washington against a major Obama 
initiative was the last straw. No wonder House Democrats were so withering in 
their criticism of him.
But whatever Netanyahu’s duplicity, the questions he raised are the same ones 
that many Arab states have, and to which Obama has offered no answers. Iranian 
influence in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinian territories and now Yemen, is 
very real, and Tehran has spent years building it up, patiently and 
deliberately.
Obama has explained his Iran policy poorly, and there is a growing sense that 
this has been intentional. Why? Because Obama’s true ambition is to reduce 
America’s role in the Middle East, and, to quote analyst Tony Badran, leave in 
its place “a new security structure, of which Iran is a principal pillar.” 
Because such a scheme is bound to anger U.S. allies in the region, Obama has 
concealed his true intentions.
From the start the administration made it a primary goal to reorient American 
attentions away from the Middle East, toward Asia. When the so-called “Arab 
Spring” began, Obama ignored its potential benefits and sought to pursue 
American disengagement. At every stage the administration worked to reduce the 
American footprint, and where that was not possible, as in Libya and Iraq, to 
define limited goals and share the burden with others. In absolute terms this 
approach is defensible. But as Badran suggests the outcome may well be an 
enhanced role for Iran, and this is something Arab states, not to mention 
Israel, will have great trouble accepting. If Obama imagines that the best way 
to advance his project is to keep mum about the outcome, he will see many more 
reactions like Netanyahu’s before long.
The Israeli prime minister is correct about one thing: If the Arabs feel 
threatened by an Iran that, ultimately, has the means of going nuclear, they 
will respond in kind by trying to develop their own nuclear capability. This 
would generate considerable instability and defeat the purpose of a nuclear 
agreement now.
In many passages Netanyahu’s speech was over the top. His credibility has been 
damaged by revelations that Israeli intelligence did not share his assessment of 
Iran’s nuclear program. There are few leaders as shameless, as annoying, as 
fraudulent. But that should not detract from the validity of some of his points. 
While many in the region might accept Obama’s choice to avert war with Iran by 
agreeing a nuclear deal, they see nothing reassuring in America’s vision of the 
aftermath.
The reality is that Obama is deeply distrusted in the Arab world. He is not a 
man who communicates much with Arab leaders or societies. His aversion to the 
region’s problems is palpable. Nor is Obama a president who immerses himself in 
the Middle East’s details. The extent of this was best illustrated by the fact 
that he never considered appointing an envoy to coordinate with regional allies 
over America’s position in the nuclear talks. Obama may get his deal with Iran, 
but he has prepared the terrain so carelessly that the consequences may be quite 
damaging. Iran is a rising power in a region where Arab states are 
disintegrating. Agreeing with Iran, if that happens, will be the easy part. Much 
tougher will be leaving in place a stable regional order. And given Obama’s 
performance until now, no one is wagering much that the U.S. will succeed in 
that.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR. He tweets @BeirutCalling.
Netanyahu has created a zero-sum game 
with the U.S.
David Ignatius/The Daily Star/Mar. 05, 2015
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lobbied powerfully against a nuclear 
agreement with Iran in a well-crafted speech to Congress Tuesday. The problem is 
that he has now created a zero-sum game with the Obama administration, in which 
either the president or the prime minister seems likely to come out a loser.
Playing for huge stakes two weeks ahead of the Israeli elections, Netanyahu gave 
what may prove to be the defining speech of his career. He opened graciously 
with praise for President Barack Obama, which made his critique of the 
administration’s diplomacy all the stronger. He warned that the planned 
agreement would create a “nuclear tinderbox” in the Mideast and “inevitably lead 
to war.”
Netanyahu’s speech deepened his divide with the White House, where the 
boisterous cheers for the Israeli prime minister on the floor of the House of 
Representatives must have sounded like a rebuke. The speech has also created a 
new dynamic that may put the Middle East even closer to the knife’s edge.
Consider the possible outcomes as the Iran negotiations head toward a March 24 
deadline: Netanyahu could “win,” and convince Congress to derail the biggest 
foreign policy initiative of Obama’s presidency. Or Obama could “win,” and push 
ahead to conclude what Netanyahu characterized as “a very bad deal.” Either 
outcome would traumatize U.S.-Israel relations and portend a poisonous final two 
years for Obama’s presidency.
Two other hard landings are possible after Netanyahu’s high-wire performance. 
Iran could balk at further concessions, walk away from negotiations and 
accelerate its nuclear program – forcing the U.S. and Israel to consider 
military action. Or Netanyahu, having bet his political future on the visit to 
Washington, could lose in the Israeli elections on March 17. That defeat may be 
less likely after Netanyahu’s deft presentation.
What’s least likely is that Tehran will bend enough to agree to Netanyahu’s 
formula.
Netanyahu’s speech didn’t offer many new ideas, but a White House senior 
official’s dismissal of it as “all rhetoric, no action” was overstated. Although 
the Israeli leader clearly rejects the deal Obama is contemplating, he argued 
that if the U.S. is determined to proceed, it should insist that the agreement 
not terminate until Iran has abandoned its aggression in the region, halted its 
terrorism and accepted Israel’s existence.
Obama hopes for just such an evolution toward postrevolutionary sanity in Tehran 
over the decadelong duration of the planned agreement, and Netanyahu is right 
that it would be good to put this in writing. But that would almost certainly be 
a deal-breaker for Tehran.
Netanyahu invoked the poet Robert Frost’s “The Road Not Taken” in arguing that 
at the approaching fork, there is one safe route. But both paths appear likely 
to have dangerous obstructions.
The most obvious problem with an Iran deal is that it would create a new breach 
with Israel. Washington and its allies would worry that Israel might take 
unilateral military action against what Netanyahu has described as an 
existential threat. A deal would also bring inevitable allegations that Iran was 
cheating. This could trigger new rounds of sanctions legislation by the U.S. 
Congress that could, in turn, lead Iran to argue that Washington was reneging – 
and result in the pact unraveling.
An agreement would also, as Netanyahu warned, mean a new era of nuclear 
proliferation in the Middle East, as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey sought to 
achieve the same “nuclear threshold” status the pact would give Iran. When the 
sunset of the agreement approaches roughly 10 years hence, and Iran is freed 
from limits, the race toward nuclear capability would accelerate across the 
region. As bad as the Mideast is now, it could get much worse.
The other path is the one where U.S. diplomacy fails. This could result from a 
hardening of the U.S. or Iranian positions, from new sanctions legislated by 
Congress, or simply the inability to bridge existing gaps. Here, again, greater 
tension is likely – with U.S. and Iranian forces at dangerously close quarters 
in the fight against ISIS militants in Iraq and Syria.
What Netanyahu did Tuesday was to raise the bar for Obama. Any deal that the 
administration signs will have to address the concerns Netanyahu voiced. Given 
what’s at stake in the Middle East, that’s probably a good thing. As 
administration officials said at the outset of negotiations, no deal is better 
than a bad one.
The Israeli prime minister’s speech, for all its divisive political 
consequences, served to sharpen the focus on what a good deal would look like.
**David Ignatius is published twice weekly by THE DAILY STAR.
Syria's Iranization becoming real 
strategic threat for Israel
Israel Ziv/Ynetnews 
Published: 03.05.15/Israel Opinion
Analysis: If Iran succeeds in its plan to nationalize Golan Heights and gain 
control of Damascus basin, Israel will wake up to a much more complicated 
regional reality; tense relationship with US administration is making things 
even more difficult. 
As the nuclear agreement between Washington and Tehran takes shape, and as Prime 
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attempts to thwart it, we should not underestimate 
the importance of the situation in Syria, which is not only exacting a bloody 
toll at a rate of more than 100 people a day, but is also becoming a strategic 
threat to Israel which is just as serious as the Iranian threat. Iran is fully 
taking the reins over the situation in Syria. The Iranians are working closely 
with President Bashar Assad, citing the "need to protect him." In practice, not 
a single military decision is implemented without them. Iran no longer trusts 
Hezbollah, whose performance so far has produced insufficient achievements.
The Revolutionary Guards commanders have taken command of the Golan Heights 
front down to the southern city of Daraa. Over 10,000 Shiite volunteers from 
Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan have been sent to Syria to fill the ranks and curb 
the rebels' major Sunni offensive towards Damascus.
This is all happening of course over the dissolving Syrian army's head and over 
Assad himself, who is turning into a puppet counting down its days and watching 
its lost country. 
Israel is watching the Iranization taking place about 10 kilometers from its 
border with great concern. Iran is in fact taking the place of the enemy from 
Damascus, which has been Israel's "most convenient" enemy for four decades. 
Washington, which wants to reach a nuclear agreement at almost all costs, is 
turning a blind eye. Moscow, which has already given up on Assad and has come to 
terms with the fact that it will likely never see the money for the weapons it 
supplied him with, is completely shutting its eyes.
Iran is implementing an extremely realistic strategy and taking advantage of the 
American disorientation in the area. It's already clear that the Western 
coalition's response is too little, too late. The United States is sticking to a 
tactic of dismantling the Islamic State by adding more and more force, but is 
completely blind to the changes in the balance of power in the region. The US is 
in fact supporting the transfer of control over Damascus to the Iranians for a 
shaky nuclear agreement, for a bargain price: Two (Damascus plus Yemen) for the 
price of one.
The Islamic State is only expanding its wingspan. While the Americans are 
striking in northern Iraq, ISIS has already expanded its activity to 10 other 
countries in the world, including north and east Africa, Yemen, Afghanistan, 
Pakistan, Indonesia, etc.
US President Barack Obama refuses to acknowledge the existence of radical 
Islamic terror ("there is Islam, and there is terrorism…") and chooses to ignore 
the fact that the Sunnis' Islamic war against the Shiites is an established 
fact. But ISIS is gaining power and influence and growing stronger in a 
geometric series as a fanatic religious and viral phenomenon. Even the attempt 
to prevent ISIS from gaining control of Libya is being led by Egypt today, not 
by any of the Western countries.
While Israel is concerned about the Iranian expansion to its northern border, 
the tense relationship with the White House is making things very difficult. 
Will the prime minister's Congress speech, over Obama's head, really stop the 
agreement or only encourage it? That's unclear. But it will definitely not 
advance the strategic understandings with the administration in Washington, 
which Israel must reach at this time. And this is a much urgent matter than the 
extent of the supervision over the nuclear program in 10 years from now.
Israel must carefully monitor the developments. On the one hand, we should avoid 
getting entangled in a war we're not part of. But on the other hand, if Iran 
succeeds in its plan to nationalize the Golan and gain control of the Damascus 
basin, Israel will wake up to a new regional reality which will be much more 
complicated than Hezbollah – a direct and broad Iranian front which Israel has 
yet to experience.
Major-General (res.) Israel Ziv served as head of the Operations Directorate 
branch in the IDF's General Staff.
Netanyahu Has Reasons To Be Worried
Dennis Ross/USA Today
March 4, 2015
Washington has left too many questions unanswered in a possible nuclear deal 
with Iran.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a strong case to the Congress about why 
he thinks the potential agreement with Iran on its nuclear program is a "very 
bad deal." Leaving aside his fears that lifting sanctions will provide Iran more 
resources to pursue trouble-making in the Middle East, the prime minister 
worries that a deal that permits Iran to be a threshold nuclear state will not 
prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons but actually pave the way for it to do 
so.
Netanyahu believes that the break-out time for producing weapons-grade uranium 
will inevitably be too short -- indeed, less than the year President Obama 
speaks about -- and that inspections of the Iranian program will necessarily be 
too limited and, in any case, promise no action in the face of violations. 
Worse, Iran will be treated like Japan or the Netherlands after the agreement 
expires in 10-15 years, permitting it to build tens of thousands of centrifuges 
and enabling it to produce a weapon at a time of its choosing.
Accepting the mantra that "no deal is better than a bad deal," Netanyahu offers 
the alternative of insisting on better terms and increasing the pressure on the 
Iranians until a more credible agreement is reached. He does not fear the 
Iranians walking away from the negotiating table because, in his words, they 
need the deal more than the U.S. and its partners.
While the Obama administration is unlikely to accept his argument that it should 
simply negotiate better and harder, it should not dismiss the concerns he raises 
about the emerging deal. Indeed, the administration argument that there is no 
better alternative than the deal it is negotiating begs the question of whether 
the prospective agreement is acceptable.
And, here, the administration needs to explain why the deal it is trying to 
conclude actually will prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons for the 
life-time of the agreement and afterwards. It needs to explain why the 
combination of the number and quality of centrifuges, their output, and the 
ship-out from Iran of enriched uranium will, in fact, ensure that the break-out 
time for the Iranians will not be less than one year. Either this combination 
adds up or it does not, but there should be an explicit answer to Netanyahu's 
charge that Iran will be able to break-out much more quickly.
Similarly, there should be an answer on how the verification regime is going to 
work to ensure that we can detect, even in a larger nuclear program, any Iranian 
violation of the agreement. The issue of verification is critical not just 
because Iran's past clandestine nuclear efforts prove it cannot be trusted but 
also because the administration has made a one year break-out time the key 
measure of success of the agreement. But we can only be certain that Iran will 
be one year away from being able to produce a bomb's supply of weapons-grade 
uranium if we can detect what they are doing when they do it.
Obviously, detection is only part of the equation. We cannot wait to determine 
what we will do about violations when they happen. Iran must know in advance 
what the consequences are for violations, particularly if we want to deter them 
in the first place. And this clearly goes to the heart of Netanyahu's concerns: 
if he had high confidence that we would impose harsh consequences in response to 
Iranian violations, including the use of force if we caught Iran dashing toward 
a weapon, he would be less fearful of the agreement he believes is going to 
emerge.
But he does not see that, and he fears as with past arms control agreements that 
we will seek to discuss violations and not respond to them until it is too late. 
So the administration should address this fear and prove it means what it says 
by spelling out different categories of violations and the consequences for each 
-- and then seek congressional authorization to empower this president and his 
successors to act on these consequences.
If applied also to Iranian moves toward a nuclear weapon after the expiration of 
the deal, the administration would truly be answering the most significant of 
the concerns that Netanyahu raised. Maybe then, this episode of U.S.-Israeli 
tension would be overcome.
**Dennis Ross, the counselor and William Davidson Distinguished Fellow at The 
Washington Institute, served as a senior Middle East advisor to President Obama 
from 2009 to 2011. This article was made possible in part by support from the 
Irwin Levy Family Program on the U.S.-Israel Strategic Relationship.