LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
January 06/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

Bible Quotations For Today
Feast of the Glorious Epiphany of our Lord
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 03/15-22: "As the people were filled with expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Messiah, John answered all of them by saying, ‘I baptize you with water; but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing-fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing-floor and to gather the wheat into his granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.’So, with many other exhortations, he proclaimed the good news to the people. But Herod the ruler, who had been rebuked by him because of Herodias, his brother’s wife, and because of all the evil things that Herod had done, added to them all by shutting up John in prison. Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased.’

Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one
Letter to Titus 02/11-15//03/01-07: "The grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all, training us to renounce impiety and worldly passions, and in the present age to live lives that are self-controlled, upright, and godly, while we wait for the blessed hope and the manifestation of the glory of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ. He it is who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds. Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one look down on you. Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarrelling, to be gentle, and to show every courtesy to everyone. For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, despicable, hating one another. But when the goodness and loving-kindness of God our Saviour appeared, he saved us, not because of any works of righteousness that we had done, but according to his mercy, through the water of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. This Spirit he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life."

Question: "Why was Jesus baptized? Why was Jesus' baptism important?"
Answer: At first glance, it seems that Jesus’ baptism has no purpose at all. John’s baptism was the baptism of repentance (Matthew 3:11), but Jesus was sinless and had no need of repentance. Even John was taken aback at Jesus’ coming to him. John recognized his own sin and was aware that he, a sinful man in need of repentance himself, was unfit to baptize the spotless Lamb of God: “I need to be baptized by You and You are coming to me?” (Matthew 3:14). Jesus replied that it should be done because “it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15).
There are several reasons why it was fitting for John to baptize Jesus at the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry. Jesus was about to embark on His great work, and it was appropriate that He be recognized publicly by His forerunner. John was the “voice crying in the wilderness” prophesied by Isaiah, calling people to repentance in preparation for their Messiah (Isaiah 40:3). By baptizing Him, John was declaring to all that here was the One they had been waiting for, the Son of God, the One he had predicted would baptize “with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11).
Jesus’ baptism also showed that He identified with sinners. His baptism symbolized the sinners’ baptism into the righteousness of Christ, dying with Him and rising free from sin and able to walk in the newness of life. His perfect righteousness would fulfill all the requirements of the Law for sinners who could never hope to do so on their own. When John hesitated to baptize the sinless Son of God, Jesus replied that it was proper to “fulfill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15). By this He alluded to the righteousness that He provides to all who come to Him to exchange their sin for His righteousness (2 Corinthians 5:21).
In addition, Jesus’ coming to John showed His approval of John's baptism, bearing witness to it, that it was from heaven and approved by God. This would be important in the future when others would begin to doubt John’s authority, particularly after his arrest by Herod (Matthew 14:3-11).
Perhaps most importantly, the occasion of the public baptism recorded for all future generations the perfect embodiment of the triune God revealed in glory from heaven. The testimony directly from heaven of the Father’s pleasure with the Son and the descending of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus (Matthew 3:16-17) is a beautiful picture of the trinitarian nature of God. It also depicts the work of the Father, Son, and Spirit in the salvation of those Jesus came to save. The Father loves the elect from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4); He sends His Son to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10); and the Spirit convicts of sin (John 16:8) and draws the believer to the Father through the Son. All the glorious truth of the mercy of God through Jesus Christ is on display at His baptism.
GotQuestions.org Home/Recommended Resources: Jesus: The Greatest Life of All by Charles Swindoll and Logos Bible Software.

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on january05-06.16.htm
What now for Lebanon and Syria/Alex Rowell/Now Lebanon/January 05/16
Iran as the defender of Christianity/Hussain Abdul-Hussain/Now Lebanon/January 05/16
The fate of Iran’s Qassem Soleimani/Diana Moukalled/Al Arabiya/January 05/16
Saudi-Iranian crisis without diplomats or mediators/Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/January 05/16
US Criminalizing Free Speech/Judith Bergman/2016 Gatestone Institute/January 05/16
US scrambles to curb damage from Saudi-Iranian fallout/Laura Rozen/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
Who is sending Iraqi fighters to Syria/Omar al-Jaffal/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
What does Khamenei think of Saudi Embassy attacks/Arash Karami/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
Five reasons so many Iranians are rushing to run for office/Ali Omidi/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
The rapid rise and fall of Turkey’s pro-Kurdish party/Mustafa Akyol/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
Shin Bet uncovers Jewish extremist plot to destroy state/Ben Caspit/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
Israeli Arabs fear stigmatization following Tel Aviv shooting/Shlomi Eldar/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
Is Turkey heading to partition/Kadri Gursel/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
Analyse, Témoignage, Hommage/Samir Frangieh

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin for Lebanese Related News published on january05-06.16.htm
Report: Hizbullah's Involvement in Regional Conflicts 'Has Not Distracted it from Israel'
Mustaqbal Slams Raad Remarks as 'Return to Rhetoric of Black Shirts, May 7'
Report: No Fear of Attack against Arab or Iranian Embassies in Beirut
Bassil Moves to Inform Security Council of 1,168 Israeli Violations in 2015
Mashnouq: Regional Cover Protecting Lebanon Starting to Diminish, Communication Won't Stop
Report: Trash Will be Exported in Less than a Month
Report: National Dialogue to Continue in Spite of Saudi-Iranian Tensions
Report: Fate of Mustaqbal-Hizbullah Dialogue to Be Set in Next 24 Hours
What now for Lebanon and Syria?

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on january05-06.16.htm
Aramco Bus Torched in Tense Saudi Eastern Province
IS Has Lost Third of Iraq-Syria Territory, Says U.S.-led Coalition
Turkey Says Ready to Help Calm Saudi-Iran Tensions
Iran Airs Footage of New Missile in Underground Bunker
Saudis back Syria talks despite Iran row
Egypt backs Saudi Arabia in spat with Iran
Gulf Arab states to hold extraordinary meeting on Iran
Bahrain Cuts All Air Links with Iran
Saudi-Iran Crisis Widens as Kuwait Recalls Envoy
Syria's Declared Chemical Arms '100% Destroyed'
Israel Returns Bodies of 3 Palestinian Attackers from Jerusalem
Rights Group Calls on Hamas to Release Journalist
Greek Flight Delayed as Israeli Passengers Protest Presence of 2 Palestinians
Suspect Held after China Bus Fire Kills 17
France begins one-year commemorations of Charlie Hebdo attack

Links From Jihad Watch Site for january05-06.16.htm 
London Mayor: Worried about Islamic jihad terror? Remember the Alhambra
Facebook swiftly removes anti- “Palestinian” material, keeps up incitement against Jews
UK Parliament will debate barring Trump from country
Cologne Mayor: Women should be more careful after Muslim mass rapes, promises “guidance” so they can “prepare”
North Carolina Muslim suspected of aiding Islamic State, Hamas and al-Qaeda busted for child porn
UK: Convert to Islam set up stall on London street to drum up support for the Islamic State
Robert Spencer in PJ Media: Roman Catholic Archdiocese of L.A. Wants ‘Greater Solidarity with Islam’
Taliban at gates of Kabul as their jihad-martyrdom suicide bombers launch new wave of attacks in Afghan capital
Islamic State murders female journalist, accusing her of being a spy
Robert Spencer in FrontPage: Trump Keeps On Being Trump In First Campaign Ad, Media Outraged
India: Muslims torch cars and loot police station over Hindu “hate speech”
Norway: Oslo Police — “We Have Lost the City”
Belgium: Muslims screaming “Allahu akbar” set Christmas tree on fire

Report: Hizbullah's Involvement in Regional Conflicts 'Has Not Distracted it from Israel'
Naharnet/January 05/16/The tensions that erupted between Hizbullah and Israel on Monday will not lead to a major conflict between the two sides, assured security sources to al-Joumhouria newspaper on Tuesday. Sources close to the party added however that “once Hizbullah vows that it will retaliate to an Israeli assault, then it will fulfill it.” “The party's involvement in Syria, its open confrontation with Saudi Arabia, and its military battle with takfiris along the border have not distracted it from its constant open front with Israel,” they stressed. “The resistance would not have targeted Israel without knowing in advance what repercussions that operation would incur,” they added. The security sources meanwhile emphasized that the “international conditions will not allow a major security violation” to occur between Lebanon and Israel. “What happened on Monday is limited to a quick and limited response” to Israel's assassination of prominent Hizbullah member Samir al-Quntar in December, they explained to al-Joumhouria. “The Shebaa operation should not be blown out of proportion,” they urged, “The situation is therefore under control and the tensions will not increase, which has been demonstrated by the calm that has pervaded the area,” they noted. Hizbullah targeted an Israeli patrol in the occupied Shebaa Farms with an explosive device on Monday, prompting Israel to shell areas in southern Lebanon. The operation was a response to the assassination of al-Quntar, who was killed in an airstrike in Syria blamed on Israel. Israel retaliated on Monday by opening artillery fire on areas in southern Lebanon. The Shebaa Farms have been under Israeli occupation since the 1967 Middle East war. Lebanon says the area is Lebanese territory, while the United Nations says it was annexed from Syria. Hizbullah has an extensive presence in Syria, where it is mostly working to bolster the regime against an uprising that began in March 2011. Hizbullah and Israel scuffle intermittently in the disputed border area between Lebanon and Israel, and the powerful Lebanese group has in the past targeted Israeli army patrols in response to strikes against its members. In January last year, it claimed an attack in the Shebaa Farms against an army patrol in apparent revenge for an Israeli strike in Syria that killed six Hizbullah fighters and a member of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards. In 2006, Israel fought a devastating war against Hizbullah that killed more than 1,200 people in Lebanon, mostly civilians, and some 160 Israelis, mostly soldiers.

Mustaqbal Slams Raad Remarks as 'Return to Rhetoric of Black Shirts, May 7'
Naharnet/January 05/16/Al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc on Tuesday described a verbal attack by Hizbullah MP Mohammed Raad against Mustaqbal movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri as a “return to the rhetoric of 'black shirts' and the May 7 coup.”“The statements of its officials have once again revealed that Hizbullah is not only seeking to torpedo any internal settlement but also to prevent the election of a new president and paralyze the work of Lebanon's constitutional institutions with an ultimate goal of ending its democratic formula,” said the bloc in a statement issued after its weekly meeting. “In this regard, the bloc condemns in the strongest terms the remarks that were voiced by Loyalty to Resistance bloc chief MP Mohammed Raad, who expressed Hizbullah's rejection of any domestic settlement on the issue of the presidential vote, in a statement that retracts recent calls by the party's secretary-general” Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Mustaqbal added. “As much as these remarks carry threats to Lebanese political figures, they also signal a return by the party to the rhetoric of 'black shirts' and the May 7, 2008 coup,” the bloc said. It was referring to Hizbullah's 2008 armed takeover of west Beirut's streets and some areas of Mt. Lebanon and the famous 2011 unarmed show of force, when black-clad Hizbullah members roamed Beirut streets -- a move the party's critics say it intimidated Druze leader MP Walid Jumblat's bloc into naming Najib Miqati for the premiership instead of Hariri. “Hizbullah wants to isolate and eliminate a large group of the Lebanese because it is standing as a firm bulwark in the face of the party's attempts to seize full control of Lebanon,” Mustaqbal added. “Raad's remarks reflect a renewed attempt to topple what's left of the hopes of the Lebanese regarding security and national and economic stability,” it said. The bloc however reassured that it will remain “keen on domestic accord with the aim of strengthening Lebanon's independence, sovereignty and democratic system.” “It will confront any attempt to keep Lebanon hostage of regional policies aimed at practicing hegemony over the country and over the Arab region,” Mustaqbal vowed. “We reiterate the call for Hizbullah to return to its Lebanese and Arab identity,” it added. Raad had waged a blistering attack on Hariri without naming him on Monday, saying “those who are suffering from bankruptcy in their exile must not find a place to return to in Lebanon in order to rob the country once again.” He also fired at Hariri's presidential initiative that involves nominating MP Suleiman Franjieh for the presidency, noting that “the issue is not about a person whom we would give the presidential post to without him having any powers to rule the country with.”“All of the powers would be usurped by the person who is entrusted with preserving the interests of this kingdom or that state,” Raad added, referring to Hariri and Saudi Arabia. The latest remarks come amid a war of words between Hizbullah and al-Mustaqbal linked to the Saudi-Iranian row that was triggered by Riyadh's execution of senior Shiite dissident Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr.

Report: No Fear of Attack against Arab or Iranian Embassies in Beirut
Naharnet/January 05/16/Despite the tensions that have erupted between Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other Arab countries, there are no fears that this dispute will spill over into Lebanon, reported al-Joumhouria newspaper on Tuesday. A security source told the daily that there are no concerns that the Iranian embassy or the embassy of any other Arab country would be targeted in wake of the tensions between Riyadh and Tehran. The necessary security measures have been taken as a precaution, it revealed. It said that the Internal Security Forces and some army units prevented a group of some 25 civilian demonstrators from approaching the Saudi embassy in Beirut on Monday. The group was warned against nearing the embassy or any other one, it added. Meanwhile, a Lebanese security and political source warned to al-Joumhouria of “the dangers of carrying out any attack against Arab Gulf diplomatic centers or missions, specifically those headquartered in Beirut.”“The consequences of such actions will not be limited to the diplomatic or political levels,” cautioned the source. This message has since been relayed to political and party officials in the country, said al-Joumhouria. A dispute erupted between Riyadh and Tehran over the weekend following the kingdom's execution of prominent Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr.The fallout saw the severing of diplomatic ties between the two countries, while several Arab countries have in turn severed their ties with Tehran.

Bassil Moves to Inform Security Council of 1,168 Israeli Violations in 2015
Naharnet/January 05/16/Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil on Tuesday instructed Lebanon's diplomats to inform the U.N. Security Council of Israel's violations of Lebanese sovereignty in the year 2015, state-run National News Agency reported. The report that will be submitted includes details about 1,168 land, aerial and maritime breaches of Lebanese sovereignty. On Monday, Israel fired dozens of shells into south Lebanon as its warplanes and reconnaissance drones staged intensive overflights over the country, in the wake of a Hizbullah bomb attack in the occupied Shebaa Farms. Hizbullah's operation was in response to an apparent Israeli air raid in Syria that killed the party's top operative Samir al-Quntar. Lebanon regularly files U.N. complaints over Israel's near-daily land, air, and sea violations of Lebanese sovereignty. Israel occupied much of southern Lebanon for 22 years between 1978 and 2000 and its invading army reached the capital Beirut in 1982. It fought a devastating war with Hizbullah in 2006 in which more than 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed in Lebanon.

Mashnouq: Regional Cover Protecting Lebanon Starting to Diminish, Communication Won't Stop
Naharnet/January 05/16/Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq warned Tuesday that the “regional cover” that “protected Lebanon in the past four years” has started to “diminish,” as he reassured that a “communication” momentum triggered by ex-PM Saad Hariri's latest initiative “will not stop.”“The regional situation is much worse than we were estimating,” Mashnouq said after a greetings visit to Maronite Archbishop of Beirut Boulos Matar in Ashrafieh. He reassured however that “ex-PM Saad Hariri's presidential initiative is aimed at stabilizing the political system and electing a president and the communication drive will not stop.”Warning that “the regional cover that protected Lebanon in the past four years from all the surrounding blazes has started to diminish,” Mashnouq called on the political forces to “perform their duties and pay attention to the domestic situation amid the ongoing tragedies in the region.”“We are certainly in a crisis now and I don't know how much it will last, and there is no doubt that MP Mohammed Raad's statement yesterday does not contribute to facilitating dialogue,” he added. “This issue is being discussed by the Mustaqbal bloc and leadership with ex-PM Saad Hariri, because dialogue requires foundations that were not present at all in Raad's remarks,” Mashnouq went on to say. He pointed out, however, that Hariri “will not stop his efforts that are aimed at protecting the Lebanese order and stability.”“The main condition for this stability is electing a president, that's why the communication drive will continue,” Mashnouq added. Raad had waged a blistering attack on Hariri on Monday without naming him, saying “those who are suffering from bankruptcy in their exile must not find a place to return to in Lebanon in order to rob the country once again.” He also fired at Hariri's presidential initiative that involves nominating MP Suleiman Franjieh for the presidency, noting that “the issue is not about a person whom we would give the presidential post to without him having any powers to rule the country with.”“All of the powers would be usurped by the person who is entrusted with preserving the interests of this kingdom or that state,” Raad added, referring to Hariri and Saudi Arabia. The latest remarks come amid a war of words between Hizbullah and al-Mustaqbal linked to the Saudi-Iranian row that was triggered by Riyadh's execution of senior Shiite dissident Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr.

Report: Trash Will be Exported in Less than a Month
Naharnet/January 05/16/The two firms that agreed to export Lebanon's trash are said to close the deal with the Lebanese government by the end of the current week after presenting a guarantee of $2.5 million each, al-Akhbar daily reported on Tuesday. “The preliminary contracts with Britain’s Chinook Urban Mining International and Holland’s Howa BV to export the waste will be signed before the end of the week,” said the daily. “The two firms are supposed to provide a guarantee worth $2.5 million each to the Lebanese government until the submission of documents of transport to whichever countries will receive the trash before signing the deal,” it added. “Everything is going well so far, and the preparation for exporting the trash have started. We expect the process to kick off in less than a month,” the daily quoted ministerial sources following up on the issue. Lebanon has been suffering from a waste management crisis since July 2015 when the Naameh landfill that receives the trash of Beirut and Mount Lebanon closed. Efforts to solve the crisis including a plan that was suggested by Agriculture Minister Akram Shehayyeb failed to reach fruition. In December, the cabinet approved an export plan after meeting with representatives of the two firms. The companies still have to sign the agreements with the countries that will receive the garbage. The exportation plan will include the newly generated trash excluding the piles that were burnt and buried. The government's failure to find alternatives led to the piling up of garbage on the streets and in random locations, which raised health and environmental concerns and sparked unprecedented street protests against the entire political class.

Report: National Dialogue to Continue in Spite of Saudi-Iranian Tensions
Naharnet/January 05/16/Solutions to local problems will be delayed in wake of the dispute between Saudi Arabia and Iran, warned al-Joumhouria newspaper on Tuesday. A prominent March 8 camp source told the daily however that “the national dialogue will continue despite everything.” “We are in need of the dialogue today more than ever,” it stressed. It added: “The political tensions in the region will increase day after day.” “There is however an implicit understanding between local sides that internal security and stability will not be affected by these developments,” stated the source. “Security benefits everyone, who should ensure that it is maintained,” continued the source. A dispute erupted between Riyadh and Tehran over the weekend following the kingdom's execution of prominent Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr.The fallout saw the severing of diplomatic ties between the two countries, while several Arab countries have in turn severed their ties with Tehran.

Report: Fate of Mustaqbal-Hizbullah Dialogue to Be Set in Next 24 Hours
Naharnet/January 05/16/The fate of the dialogue between the Mustaqbal Movement and Hizbullah has become in limbo following the flaring tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, reported various media on Tuesday.
Al-Joumhouria said that the fate of the talks will be determined within the next 24 hours even though a session had already been set for January 11. An Nahar daily however reported that the dialogue will continue despite the Saudi-Iranian dispute.Sources from the talks emphasized the need “to maintain the dialogue during this critical time.” The dialogue is being held under the sponsorship of Speaker Nabih Berri and at his Ain el-Tineh residence. It was initially kicked off in order to ease Sunni-Shiite tensions in Lebanon, among other goals.
A dispute erupted between Riyadh and Tehran over the weekend following the kingdom's execution of prominent Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr. The fallout saw the severing of diplomatic ties between the two countries, while several Arab countries have in turn severed their ties with Tehran.

What now for Lebanon and Syria?
Alex Rowell/Now Lebanon/January 05/16
As regional powers rage, solutions for presidency in Lebanon and peace in Syria look further away than ever
Supporters of Iraqi Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr wave their national flag and hold posters of prominent Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr during a demonstration in the southern Iraqi city of Basra on January 4, 2016, against Nimr
Lebanon’s Prime Minister Tammam Salam may have declared himself hopeful for positive change in 2016, but if the year continues in the vein of its first five days, he appears destined for disappointment. The execution by Saudi Arabia of leading Shiite cleric and opposition activist, Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, and the subsequent torching of the Saudi embassy in Tehran, which in turn led Riyadh and a number of its allies to sever or downgrade diplomatic relations with Iran, had by Tuesday escalated into bloodshed, with Sunni mosques bombed and a muezzin gunned down by suspected Shiite militants in Iraq; a Shiite resident of Saudi’s eastern province also fatally shot; and a reported intensification of Saudi air strikes on Shiite rebel targets in Yemen.
In Lebanon, no violence has yet broken out, but the political atmosphere has been considerably poisoned. On Sunday, Tehran ally Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah gave an extraordinarily foul-tempered speech, going far further in criticisms of Saudi Arabia than he ever has previously. Likening the “takfiri and terrorist” state to both ISIS and Israel, he accused the ruling family of being a mass-murdering agent of Western imperialism and Zionism, drawing multiple outbursts of “Death to the Saud family!” chants from the crowd. In an unabashedly sectarian analogy, he compared Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr to the Prophet’s granddaughter, Zainab bint Ali, “speaking truth to Ibn Ziad and Yazid bin Mu`awiya,” thereby overtly tying the controversy into a 1,300-year-old Sunni-Shiite conflict.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, then, officials from Hezbollah’s main Lebanese rival, the Saudi-backed Future Movement, told NOW the new state of affairs would complicate the resolution of various pressing matters, including the twenty-month-long presidential vacuum. “Of course the presidential dossier is gone now,” said Future MP Ahmad Fatfat. “There’s no solution in sight. The Party [Hezbollah] showed that they don’t want to resolve the presidency.”
In addition to Nasrallah’s tirade, Fatfat cited “outrageous” remarks made Monday by Hezbollah MP Muhammad Raad, who lashed out in a speech against Future leader and former Prime Minister MP Saad Hariri – currently residing in Jeddah – saying, “Enough debauchery and depravity and corruption and theft! The one who lives in bankruptcy in his shelter now should not find a place in Lebanon in order to plunder the country anew.” Though Raad didn’t name Hariri explicitly – only referring contemptuously to “the representative of a Gulf family” – the message was plain: a deal mooted late last year to appoint Hezbollah ally Suleiman Franjieh as president in tandem with Hariri as prime minister was now off the table.
For all the bad blood, however, Fatfat confirmed the Future Movement would still attend a dialogue session with Hezbollah scheduled for January 11 (Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah similarly confirmed his own party’s intention to attend); the latest in a series of contacts between the two factions that has seen little apparent result to date.
“We won’t stop the dialogue,” Fatfat told NOW. “But in my personal opinion, this dialogue is futile, useless and worthless.”
This approach – of maintaining prior diplomatic commitments with Iran or its allies, despite the recent dustup – appears to be consistent with Saudi policy elsewhere in the region, such as Syria, with Riyadh’s ambassador to the UN confirming Monday that Saudi will attend peace talks alongside Iran in Geneva scheduled for January 25. On this front, too, however, sources close to Riyadh say they hold little hope of palpable progress.
“We need these talks to go underway,” said Jamal Khashoggi, a veteran Saudi journalist and former advisor to then-ambassador Prince Turki al-Faisal. “But the Iranians and the Russians are trying to sabotage [them].”
Indeed, one reason why the diplomatic spat may ultimately change little on the ground is that Saudi-Iranian relations were already at historic lows before Nimr’s execution. Fears of an outbreak of sectarian conflict across the region miss the point that such conflict is already raging at unprecedented temperatures, according to Khashoggi.
“People are afraid of sectarianism, [but] we are already in the middle of sectarianism. We are way beyond the fear of going into it; we are in it,” he told NOW. “What happened [to the embassy] was just the straw that broke the relations’ back. Things were [already] really bad before.”
Nor does there appear to be much prospect of any improvement in relations in the foreseeable future, as long as fundamental disagreements over Syria and other clashes, political and ideological, persist. Asked if he expected Saudi to resume diplomatic ties with Iran soon, Khashoggi replied, “No, no, no, not at all – unless Iran changes.”
“This confrontation is not something we can negotiate; it is not a border dispute […] it is an existential thing. Somebody has to give up. We either lose, and accept Iranian domination, or we win.”
**Amin Nasr contributed reporting.

Iran as the defender of Christianity
Hussain Abdul-Hussain/Now Lebanon/January 05/16
The Islamic Republic of Iran is the Middle East’s defender of Christianity. Last week, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei paid a surprise visit to a Christian Iranian family, and said: “Our respect for Christianity is this way: In Islam, whoever denies the infallibility of Hazrat Jesus and Hazrat Mary” is not a Muslim. On a giant screen in Byblos, Lebanon, the predominantly Christian town expressed gratitude to Hezbollah and its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, for their generous donation to the erection and decoration of the town’s Christmas tree. Praising the prophet Jesus and funding Christmas trees is a smart public relations campaign that shows Iran and its armed militias across the Middle East, in contrast to some Sunni Salafist groups that prohibit Muslims from celebrating Christmas. But cozying up to Christians is one thing — safeguarding their freedom of worship is another. When leaders of the Islamic Republic talk about Christianity, they mean Christianity as dictated by Islamic teachings that — despite revering Christ — downgrade him from lord and savior to a mere infallible prophet. What Iran perceives as a sign of goodwill toward Christians is, in fact, offensive to their creed.
Then there is the problem of Iran patronizing other Muslims over how they should perceive Christianity. By saying that whoever believes this or that is not Muslim, Shiite Iran practices the same act of takfir (accusing other Muslims of being infidels) that it claims to be fighting in its war on Sunni radical groups such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS. And despite its charm offensive to win Christian hearts, Tehran still oppresses Christian communities in Iran and accuses them of attempting to corrupt Islam. In 2010, Khamenei called on the government to “deal with” house churches. That year, Iranian authorities arrested 60 Christians, including Pastor Farshid Fathi, who was released last week. In 2011, Tehran Governor Morteza Tamaddon described the arrested Christians as extremists who “penetrate the body of Islam like corrupt and deviant people.”Iran also encourages converting Christians to Islam, or restricting their religious freedom, across the region. In cities like Baghdad, where Iran’s allies dominate, Shiite militias earlier this month pasted images of the Virgin Mary with a question addressing Christian Iraqi women: “Why was Virgin Mary, Peace be Upon Her, veiled?” The Iraqi Shiite poster suggested that Mary was veiled because her attire was consistent with the “way of the prophets,” and therefore something Iraqi Christians should endorse. While the world highlights the atrocities of ISIS against non-Muslim communities in northeastern Iraq, the pressure that Iran and its allies have been applying on Christians goes unnoticed, or is sometimes depicted as Iran’s friendly treatment of Christians. In Lebanon, despite the signs of good will that Hezbollah has shown Christians since 2006, the party has played — since its inception in 1982 — a major role in displacing Christians out of predominantly Shiite towns and villages, often by imposing Islamic rules and applying pressure on non-Muslims and non-practicing Muslims alike. In Syria, Iran has projected itself as the sponsor of minorities such as Christians and Alawites, from which President Bashar Assad hails. Yet the alliance between Muslim Iran and non-Muslim Syrian minorities is likely only a temporary one that will weaken when they figure out how to beat their common enemy, the Sunni majority. Political differences between Assad and Iran are clear. While Assad tries to sell himself as the West’s best ally to beat Sunni terrorism, Iran markets itself as a replacement for Western power in the region, and accuses the West and America of secretly supporting terrorism to undermine Iran’s rising leadership. Iran’s charm offensive toward Christians is a political tactic. Like other Muslim communities intolerant of non-Muslims, Iran wants to convert Christians to Islam, or at least impose on them its own understanding of the Christian creed. The constitution of the Islamic Republic is full of articles stipulating that non-Muslim Iranians can practice their various faiths, but only in ways consistent with Islam and its teachings. This makes it impossible for Christians, and others, to worship freely in Iran, or indeed in any Middle Eastern territory where Iran’s allies rule. Iran might not be enslaving Christians like ISIS, but neither it is allowing them freedom of worship. Iran’s reverence of Jesus and Christianity, as defined by Christians, is deceptive propaganda.
**Hussain Abdul-Hussain is the Washington Bureau Chief of Kuwaiti newspaper Alrai. He tweets @hahussain

Aramco Bus Torched in Tense Saudi Eastern Province
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Saudi police said armed "troublemakers" torched a bus Tuesday in Eastern Province, which was home to Nimr al-Nimr, the prominent Shiite cleric whose execution sparked a regional crisis with Iran. A police spokesman in the Shiite-majority province in the mainly Sunni Gulf kingdom said there were no casualties in the incident. Cited by the official SPA news agency, he said four armed "troublemakers" intercepted the vehicle transporting workers in Qatif and set fire to it at gunpoint. Social media sites said the bus belonged to the Saudi oil firm Aramco. It was the second such incident in the oil-rich province since Saturday's execution of Nimr for "terrorism." Late Sunday, police came under "heavy fire" that killed one person in Nimr's home village. A virulent critic of the Saudi regime, Nimr was venerated in the kingdom's Eastern Province. His execution led to Shiite protests in several Muslim countries and attacks on Saudi diplomatic missions in Riyadh's regional rival Tehran. On Sunday Saudi Arabia broke off relations with Iran, and Bahrain and Sudan followed suit. The United Arab Emirates and Kuwait downgraded their diplomatic ties with the Islamic republic.

IS Has Lost Third of Iraq-Syria Territory, Says U.S.-led Coalition
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/The Islamic State group has lost around a third of the territory it once controlled in Iraq and Syria, according to figures provided Tuesday by the U.S.-led coalition. "In Iraq, it's about 40 percent," said Colonel Steve Warren, spokesman for the international coalition which carries out daily air raids against IS and also provides training and weapons to local forces fighting the group. "In Syria... we think it's around 20" percent, he said. When the size of the so-called caliphate IS proclaimed 18 months ago was at its largest, Iraq accounted for a slightly bigger part of it than Syria. "Taking together Iraq and Syria... they lost 30 percent of the territory they once held," Warren told reporters in Baghdad. Since taking control of Ramadi in Iraq and Palmyra in Syria in May 2015, IS has been on the back foot most of the time. A variety of Iraqi forces -- including the Kurdish peshmerga, the Shiite-dominated Popular Mobilization paramilitary force and the federal forces -- have reclaimed major urban centers, including Ramadi last week. Warren's estimate appear to differ significantly from a figure of 14 percent provided by the IHS Jane's think-tank, albeit predating the retaking of Ramadi.

Turkey Says Ready to Help Calm Saudi-Iran Tensions
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu on Tuesday said Turkey was ready to do everything it could to help calm flaring tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, after Ankara expressed alarm over the consequences of the dispute between two key Muslim powers for the region. "We expect all countries in the region to show common sense and take steps aimed at easing the tensions in the region," Davutoglu told his ruling party in a speech in Ankara. "As Turkey, we are ready to make any effort to solve the problems between the two countries," he said, without specifying what this could entail. The crisis began at the weekend when Saudi Arabia executed prominent Shiite cleric and activist Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr as well as 46 other convicts, prompting a furious reaction from Tehran. Iranian protesters then ransacked the Saudi embassy in Tehran. Riyadh, Bahrain and Sudan severed relations with Tehran while Kuwait recalled its ambassador. Davutoglu said Turkey strongly condemned attacks against embassies. "Whatever the reason, such attacks are unacceptable," he said. Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmus said late Monday that the hostility between the two major Muslim powers would only further escalate problems in a "powder keg" region. "Enough is enough. We need our peace in the region," he said. Turkey's relations with fellow mainly Sunni Muslim power Saudi Arabia have warmed considerably in recent months. Relations had been damaged by Saudi's role in the 2013 ousting of Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi, a close ally of Ankara. In December, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited Riyadh for talks with King Salman as well as key decision-makers crown prince Mohammed bin Nayef and deputy crown prince Mohammed bin Salman. Turkey and Saudi Arabia share the same vision over the conflict in Syria where they believe only the ousting of President Bashar Assad can bring an end to almost five years of civil war. As Turkish ties with Riyadh have warmed, Ankara's relations with Tehran have grown more tense, notably over Iran's role in Syria -- where the Islamic republic supports Assad's regime -- and over its burgeoning relations with Russia. But in a rare public criticism of Saudi Arabia, Kurtulmus emphasized that Turkey, which abolished the death penalty in 2004 as part of its bid to join the EU, was opposed to capital punishment.

Iran Airs Footage of New Missile in Underground Bunker
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Iran aired fresh footage Tuesday of an underground bunker that houses its latest ballistic missile, which less than a week ago prompted U.S. threats of new sanctions. State television showed parliament speaker Ali Larijani and Revolutionary Guards officers inspecting the Imad missile, which has a range of 1,700 kilometers (1,020 miles) and is at the center of a dispute over the missile program. The United States considered -- and then shelved -- imposing new sanctions following two recent missile tests which a U.N. panel said broke past resolutions aimed at stopping Tehran from developing missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. If such measures, reportedly targeting companies and individuals in Iran, Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates with alleged links to the missile program, were imposed they could jeopardize a hard-won nuclear deal due to be finally implemented within weeks. Iran's President Hassan Rouhani denounced the possible U.S. sanctions as "hostile and illegal interventions", and ordered his defense minister to expand the missile program. Larijani was quoted as saying parliament would support an enhanced missile program in a future five-year plan for the country. State media reported a test of the Imad on October 11 and also that month showed footage of an underground missile base for the first time. Tehran has always denied seeking an atomic weapon and argues that its missiles have never been designed to, nor ever would, carry a nuclear bomb. Iran's ballistic missiles were not within the remit of the nuclear talks which resulted in an accord last July when Tehran agreed to curbs on its atomic program in exchange for a lifting of economic sanctions. Although Iran's ultimate authority, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, explicitly endorsed the nuclear deal in October, he warned that new sanctions, under any pretext, would be a violation. The accord is due to come into effect on "Implementation Day", expected later this month, or soon after, when U.N. monitors sign off that Iran has applied the agreed restrictions on its nuclear activities.

Saudis back Syria talks despite Iran row
Reuters, Geneva Tuesday, 5 January 2016/Saudi Arabia signaled on Tuesday its breach in relations with Iran would not affect talks on Syria, another round of which is scheduled in Geneva this month. Riyadh and Tehran have attended previous talks and support opposing sides in the war. There is concern the rift between them could set back diplomatic efforts to bring peace. Speaking after talks in Riyadh with U.N. special envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura, Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir was quoted as saying by the official Saudi Press Agency (SPA): "The recent tensions that impacted the region negatively will not affect ... the operations that the United Nations carries out alongside the international community to achieve a political solution in Geneva soon." Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Sudan broke all ties with Iran, and the United Arab Emirates downgraded its relations on Monday after the Saudi embassy in Tehran was stormed by protesters. Kuwait recalled its ambassador to Iran on Tuesday. Restating the kingdom's position on Syria, Jubeir said Riyadh sought a solution based on the Geneva 1 communique, a 2012 document setting out guidelines for a path to peace including a transitional governing authority, SPA said. He reiterated President Bashar Al Assad would have no role in the future of Syria, SPA said. The United Nations has set a target date of Jan. 25 for the talks. But Damascus has dismissed a new opposition body formed to oversee negotiations, and the opposition wants to see confidence-building steps from President Bashar al-Assad, a demand that could complicate efforts to start talks. De Mistura, speaking after he met Jubeir and the Syrian opposition in Riyadh, said there was a clear determination on the Saudi side that current regional tensions would not have a negative impact on the momentum of the talks and on the continuation of the political process in Geneva. De Mistura did not characterize the position of the Syrian opposition at the meeting, but said: "We cannot afford to lose this momentum despite what is going on in the region." Syria's opposition has said it wants to see confidence-building steps from Damascus including a prisoner release, a halt to bombardments of towns and cities, and the lifting of blockades imposed by the government on rebel-held areas. Britain's Special Representative for Syria on Tuesday urged the government to lift sieges as a step towards ending the nearly five-year-old conflict. "Starving civilians is an inhuman tactic used by the Assad regime and their allies," Gareth Bayley said in a statement, referring to a months-long blockade in the town of Madaya, near Damascus. "Sieges must be lifted to save civilian lives and to bring Syria closer to peace ... this human tragedy underscores the need for an end to this conflict."The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has said many of Madaya's 40,000 residents are starving.

Egypt backs Saudi Arabia in spat with Iran
The Associated Press, Tehran Tuesday, 5 January 2016/Egypt's foreign minister has denounced the attacks on Saudi diplomatic missions in Iran as "unacceptable."Sameh Shoukry said during a visit to Riyadh on Tuesday that Iranian behavior following sheikh Nimr al-Nimr's execution is tantamount to "intervening in the kingdom's internal affairs."The Egyptian diplomat also reaffirmed his country's support for Saudi Arabia ahead of an upcoming meeting of foreign ministers at the Arab League that is due to discuss the Iran-Saudi spat. He says the "security of the kingdom is an integral part of Egypt's security and Egypt's security is an integral part of the kingdom's security."Saudi Arabia has supported Egypt as it struggles with a growing insurgency and economic downturn. Several Saudi allies have rallied the kingdom's side, with a number of nations following its lead in either cutting or reducing diplomatic ties with Iran. Egypt cut ties with Iran in 1989.

Gulf Arab states to hold extraordinary meeting on Iran
Reuters, Dubai Wednesday, 6 January 2016/The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) of Gulf Arab states announced on Tuesday it will hold an extraordinary meeting in Riyadh on Saturday to discuss tensions with Iran after attacks on Saudi missions there. Saudi-Iranian tensions threaten to derail efforts to end Syria's five-year-old civil war in which Saudi Arabia and its Gulf Arab allies back rebel groups against Iranian-backed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. They also cast doubts over chances for a peaceful solution in Yemen, where a Saudi-led military coalition has been bombing the Iran-allied Houthi movement for nine months. "Foreign ministers of the GCC States will hold an extraordinary meeting in Riyadh on Saturday ... to discuss the repercussions of the attack on the Embassy of Saudi Arabia in Tehran and the Saudi consulate in the Iranian city of Mashhad," GCC Secretary-General Abdullatif bin Rashid Al Zayani said in an emailed statement. Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia on Saturday executed a prominent Shi'ite cleric on terrorism charges. This led to attacks by Iranian protesters on Riyadh's embassy in Tehran and consulate in Mashhad. The kingdom responded by severing ties with Iran. Close allies Bahrain and Sudan followed suit, while the United Arab Emirates downgraded relations and Kuwait recalled its ambassador to Tehran in a diplomatic crisis that could deepen sectarian tension in the war-torn Arab world.

Bahrain Cuts All Air Links with Iran
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Saudi Arabia's Sunni-ruled but Shiite-majority ally Bahrain followed Riyadh's suit on Tuesday and cut all air links with Iran across the Gulf, official media reported. The decision comes a day after Manama broke off diplomatic relations with Tehran amid an escalating crisis between Saudi Arabia and the Islamic republic over the execution of a Shiite cleric. The official BNA news agency said on its Twitter account that the kingdom's civil aviation authority had "decided to stop flights to and from Iran."

Saudi-Iran Crisis Widens as Kuwait Recalls Envoy
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/The diplomatic crisis surrounding Saudi Arabia and Iran widened on Tuesday as Kuwait recalled its ambassador to Tehran in the face of growing international concern. Joining Riyadh and its Sunni Arab allies in taking diplomatic action, Kuwait said it was withdrawing its envoy over a weekend attack on the Saudi embassy in Tehran. Kuwait's move came after the U.N. Security Council strongly condemned the attack, carried out by protesters angry over Saudi Arabia's execution of a prominent Shiite cleric. Tensions between Saudi Arabia, the main Sunni power, and Shiite-dominated Iran have erupted this week into a full-blown diplomatic crisis, sparking widespread worries of regional instability. Iran lashed out again at Saudi Arabia for the execution on Tuesday, with President Hassan Rouhani accusing Riyadh of seeking to "cover its crime" by severing ties. "One does not respond to criticism by cutting off heads," Rouhani said, referring to the usual Saudi practice of carrying out executions with beheading by the sword. Washington and other Western powers have called for calm amid fears the dispute could raise sectarian tensions across the Middle East and derail efforts to resolve conflicts from Syria to Yemen. The Security Council joined those calls late on Monday, issuing a statement urging all sides to "take steps to reduce tensions in the region." The statement by the 15-member council condemned "in the strongest terms" the attacks which saw protesters firebomb the Saudi embassy in Tehran and its consulate in Iran's second-biggest city Masshad.
'Very serious consequences'
But the council made no mention of the event that set off the crisis -- Saudi Arabia's execution on Saturday of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a cleric and activist whose death sparked widespread protests among Shiites.Saudi Arabia cut off diplomatic ties with Tehran in protest at the attacks on Sunday and has severed air links with Iran. Some of its allies among Sunni Arab states followed suit, with Bahrain and Sudan breaking off ties and the United Arab Emirates downgrading relations on Monday. Kuwait said Tuesday the embassy attacks "represent a flagrant breach of international agreements and norms and a grave violation of Iran's international commitments". Rouhani has condemned the attacks and Tehran's mission to the U.N. vowed in a letter to the Security Council to "take necessary measures to prevent the occurrence of similar incidents in the future". Iranian officials have brushed aside the dispute, with government spokesman Mohammad Bagher Nobakht saying Tuesday it "will have no impact on Iran's national development". "It is Saudi Arabia that will suffer," he said. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called his Iranian and Saudi counterparts on Monday to urge calm as European leaders raised concerns and Moscow offered to act as an intermediary. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon also spoke by phone with the Saudi and Iranian foreign ministers to urge them to "avoid any actions that could further exacerbate the situation," Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric said. "A breakdown of relations between Riyadh and Tehran could have very serious consequences for the region," Dujarric said.
U.N. envoy holds talks
The U.N. envoy for Syria, Staffan de Mistura, rushed to Riyadh in a bid to defuse tensions and held talks with foreign diplomats there on Tuesday. De Mistura is also expected in Iran later this week and in Damascus on Saturday, according to U.N. sources. The six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) of Sunni Arab states said it would meet in Riyadh Saturday for talks on the embassy attacks, a day before the Arab League is due to hold an emergency meeting. Regional powerhouse Turkey also expressed alarm at the crisis Tuesday, with Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu saying: "We expect all countries in the region to show common sense and take steps aimed at easing the tensions in the region." He said Ankara was "ready to make any effort" to help resolve the crisis. Iran and Saudi Arabia are on opposing ends of a range of crucial Middle East issues, including the war in Syria -- where Tehran backs President Bashar Assad's regime and Riyadh supports rebel forces -- and Yemen where a Saudi-led coalition is battling Shiite insurgents. Despite the fears, Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United Nations, Abdallah al-Mouallimi, insisted the row would not have an impact on efforts to resolve regional conflicts. "From our side, it should have no effect because we will continue to work very hard to support the peace efforts in Syria and Yemen," Mouallimi told reporters. The spike in tensions comes after Iran last year secured a historic nuclear deal with world powers led by the United States, sparking major concern in longtime U.S. ally Riyadh. Nimr, one of 47 men executed on Saturday, was a driving force behind 2011 anti-government protests in eastern Saudi Arabia. He was arrested in 2012 after calling for two Saudi governorates to be separated from the kingdom. Riyadh's interior ministry at the time described him as an "instigator of sedition."

Syria's Declared Chemical Arms '100% Destroyed'
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Syria's declared chemical weapons arsenal has been completely destroyed capping more than two years of work, a global arms watchdog said Tuesday, amid concern sarin gas is still being unleashed in the country's complex civil war. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) -- which oversaw the dangerous removal and elimination of Syria's avowed stockpile -- has for months been warning of the continued use of mustard, sarin and chlorine gas in the brutal conflict. But it has avoided blaming either the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad, the rebels or the Islamic State group for the use of the weapons banned under international law. After years of denials, the regime caved to international pressure in September 2013 and agreed under a U.S.-Russia deal to hand over its toxic stockpile to the OPCW for destruction. The admission came after a sarin gas attack in August that year on rebel-held areas near Damascus that was blamed by the West and the opposition on the regime. Hundreds of civilians were killed. The removal of the weapons was the result of a historic deal which averted threatened U.S. air strikes against Damascus after the August attacks. "One hundred percent has been destroyed," Malik Ellahi, the OPCW spokesman, told AFP on Tuesday. With the U.N. Security Council poised to discuss the chemical weapons issue on Tuesday, OPCW director general Ahmet Uzumcu said: "This process closes an important chapter in the elimination of Syria's chemical weapon program." But he acknowledged the organization based in The Hague was still continuing "efforts to clarify Syria's declaration and address ongoing use of toxic chemicals as weapons in that country."In a separate report released Monday after being sent to the Security Council last week, the watchdog said it was investigating 11 incidents reported by the Syrian government in which people may have been exposed to sarin or sarin-like gas. "Further investigation would be necessary to determine when or under what circumstances such exposure might have occurred," the report said. Previous fact-finding missions by the OPCW in Syria have pointed to the use of chlorine and mustard gas.
Source of arms unknown
Both the regime and the so-called Islamic State group have been accused of using chemical weapons in the war, although it remains unclear where the arms have come from. Under the terms of a deal hammered out in Geneva in September 2013 by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, Syria finally admitted to possessing over 1,000 tons of chemical weapons and agreed to hand them over for destruction. Under the agreement, Syria's entire chemical arsenal had been due to be eliminated by June 30, 2014, and all chemical effluent by December 31, 2014. But the timetable slipped badly amid protractions by the Assad regime and complications posed by the nearly five-year civil war which has claimed more than 250,000 lives. The last remaining vestiges of the regime's declared stockpile -- some 75 cylinders of highly-corrosive hydrogen fluoride -- were destroyed by the U.S. firm Veolia at its treatment plant Port Arthur in Texas, the OPCW said. "This completes destruction of all chemical weapons declared by the Syrian Arab Republic," the OPCW said in a statement issued Monday. "The need to devise a technical solution for treating a number of cylinders in a deteriorated and hazardous condition had delayed the disposal process," it added. The first shipment of chemical weapons left Syria from its port of Latakia in January 2014. A total of 1,300 metric tonnes of chemical weapons have now been removed from Syria, with the majority neutralized on the U.S. Navy ship MV Cape Ray and turned into less harmful effluent. The OPCW's work in Syria saw it being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2013.

Israel Returns Bodies of 3 Palestinian Attackers from Jerusalem
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Israel has returned the bodies of three Palestinians killed carrying out attacks, their families said Tuesday, in the first such handover in east Jerusalem in three months of violence. Ishak Badran and Ahmed Quneibi, both from Kafr Aqeb in east Jerusalem, were buried at noon, while the body of Mohammad Said was laid to rest in a separate ceremony nearby. The three men were among dozens of Palestinian attackers carrying out stabbings, car rammings and shootings that have led to the death of 22 Israelis since October 1. At the same time, 139 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces, most while carrying out attacks. Israel had been holding the bodies of dozens of attackers, but in recent days has released all bar one from the occupied West Bank, according to Palestinian rights group Addameer. These were the first bodies of attackers from east Jerusalem, however, and security forces still have at least 11 others of Palestinians from the area, three of them under 18, according to Addameer. On October 10, 16-year-old Badran stabbed two ultra-Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem before being shot dead, while Quneibi was shot dead on October 30 after stabbing an Israeli. At Tuesday's joint funeral, the mosque in Kafr Aqeb was packed with hundreds of mourners, with the two coffins wrapped in the flag of the Islamist movement Hizbut al-Tahrir. After the funeral Palestinian flags and those of the Islamist Hamas movement were waved. Ahmad Quneibi was killed "on October 30th and was handed over early this morning at 1:00 am," his father Hamada Quneibi told AFP. The family said they paid 5,000 Israeli shekels ($1,270, 1180 euros) for the body as a deposit, on the condition it would be returned if the funeral passed off peacefully. Rafat Sub Leban, advocacy coordinator at Addameer, called on Israel to release the rest of the bodies, labeling it a "form of collective punishment."

Rights Group Calls on Hamas to Release Journalist
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Journalists and a rights group called on Hamas Tuesday to release a reporter detained by the Islamist movement in Gaza. Security services in the Hamas-run Palestinian enclave arrested 44-year-old Ayman al-Aloul, who works with the local Arab Now news agency, on Sunday night from his house in Gaza City and confiscated his private computer, according to a statement from the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. Aloul was detained in custody for 48 hours pending a decision of the prosecutor, a security source said. It was unclear on what grounds he had been detained but Ibrahim Abu Shaar, head of the Arab Now office in Gaza, said the arrest was due to Aloul's "expressions and opinions." A 27-year-old activist on social media sites, Ramzy Harzallah, was also being held after being detained on Sunday night. The Palestinian Center for Human Rights demanded the attorney general intervene and called on security services in Gaza to "respect freedom of opinion and expression."

Greek Flight Delayed as Israeli Passengers Protest Presence of 2 Palestinians
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Two passengers with Israeli documents -- Arabs according to Israeli media -- left an Aegean Airlines flight after other Israelis protested about their presence, the company said Tuesday. "An initially small group of passengers very vocally and persistently asked for two other Israeli passengers to be checked for security issues," Aegean said in a statement. The incident occurred on Sunday night, delaying the flight to Tel Aviv by over 90 minutes. Israeli media identified the two as an Israeli Arab and a Palestinian, saying the protesting passengers were Jewish. The company said only that one of the men held an Israeli passport while the other had a valid Israeli residence permit, without discussing their ethnicity. "While it is indeed unfortunate that they were possibly racially profiling the customers, indeed their fellow Israelis...safety must be first," the company said. By the time the police arrived to check the two passengers' passports, finding nothing suspicious, the outcry had spread. "It started with 3-4 people and by the end there were 60-70 people standing up, demanding that the pair disembark," a company spokesperson said. "The pilot said anyone who does not feel safe to fly should disembark, and would not be compensated." "But by that stage, the two men were in a poor state and wanted to leave themselves," the spokesperson added. Aegean said it had offered the two men overnight stay and transport on Tuesday. They were compensated for the incident and flew to Israel on an El Al flight on Monday. "We thank again the two Israeli passengers that agreed to disembark for their understanding and collaboration and we apologize for the whole episode which was indeed extremely unfortunate" Aegean said. Arab Israelis are those who remained in Israel after its 1948 creation, as well as their descendants. They account for more than 17 percent of the country's population and have full rights under law. Palestinians, however, live outside of formerly recognized Israel, with over 300,000 in occupied east Jerusalem -– the majority of whom have Israeli residence permits.

Suspect Held after China Bus Fire Kills 17
Naharnet/Agence France Presse/January 05/16/Police in China have captured a man suspected of starting a fire on a public bus that killed 17 people and injured 32 on Tuesday, state media said. Authorities cornered Ma Yongping at a construction site after flames engulfed the vehicle in Yinchuan, the capital of the remote Ningxia region, according to a post on a verified social media account of state broadcaster CCTV. Images posted online showed the bus engulfed in flames and a short video of police in yellow rain jackets gathering around the smoking and charred remains. The city's mayor told a press conference the local public security bureau was collecting DNA samples to identify the dead, according to an official social media account for the city. CCTV posted a list of the names of 32 injured ranging in age from 20 to 65, adding that eight had suffered serious injuries. Authorities did not give any indication of a motive.
There have been several cases of attacks on Chinese public transport, especially buses, in recent years. In 2013 a suicidal man started a fire on a vehicle in Xiamen in the eastern province of Fujian that killed 47 people including himself. Unverified pictures on social media Tuesday showed what appeared to be the Yinchuan suspect perched on top of a half-finished building, as though preparing to jump. Police negotiated with him for four hours before arresting him, CCTV said in a post that included a picture of a man in handcuffs being led away. The broadcaster had previously posted pictures of the 33-year-old along with personal information, including the fact that was a graduate of a technical college. It said police were "investigating and pursuing" him for his role in "a serious crime".

France begins one-year commemorations of Charlie Hebdo attack
The Associated Press, Paris Tuesday, 5 January 2016/French President Francois Hollande is honoring 17 victims killed in extremist attacks on satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, a kosher market and police a year ago this week, unveiling plaques around Paris marking violence that ushered in a tumultuous year. The ceremonies Tuesday come as Charlie Hebdo is releasing a special anniversary issue laced with obscene and offensive cartoons, its surviving artists and columnists vaunting their freedom to lampoon everyone from Muslim fundamentalists to children, politicians and Catholic priests. Families of victims joined Hollande and other dignitaries near the building where Charlie Hebdo staff were holding an editorial meeting when two heavily armed brothers stormed in Jan. 7, 2015, killing 11 people. The plaque begins: “To the memory of victims of the terrorist attack against freedom of expression.”They then paid homage to a police officer killed as he tried to chase down the fleeing gunmen. Spray-painted on the sidewalk was a message of support for the Muslim officer, reading “Je suis Ahmed,” or “I am Ahmed,” in the red, white and blue of the French flag. After the attacks, people around the world embraced the expression “Je suis Charlie” to express solidarity with the slain journalists, targeted for the paper’s caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. Hollande will later pay homage to four people killed at a kosher supermarket in an attack that revived concerns about anti-Semitism in the country with Europe’s largest Jewish community.
Charlie Hebdo’s anniversary edition accuses Islamic fundamentalists, organized religion, an irresolute government and intelligence failures for the 2015 violence in France. The widow of a bodyguard killed at Charlie Hebdo said on RTL radio Tuesday that she wants an investigation into security measures at the paper. Ingrid Brinsolaro said her husband “saw dysfunctions” and a lack of security in the office and “it was impossible to do his job correctly in these conditions.”Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said he was open to the idea of an investigation, but also defended the government’s efforts to ensure security. Also speaking on RTL radio, he said authorities have dismantled 18 recruitment networks and arrested 11 groups planning attacks, and thwarted six attacks since last spring. The country remains under a state of emergency after Nov. 13 attacks that killed 130 people, and extra security was on hand for Tuesday’s commemorations.

The fate of Iran’s Qassem Soleimani
Diana Moukalled/Al Arabiya/January 05/16
style="text-align: left;">A video was recently leaked purportedly showing Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guard's elite Quds Force, while he visited fighters in the Syrian city of Aleppo - or at least that's what the video's title claimed. Like all his photos during past year, Soleimani appeared happy with himself, smiling at all those surrounding him while promising victory in the "sacred" war which he deludes his Iranian, Iraqi and Lebanese fighters in Syria with. But in this recent appearance, the footage of Soleimani does not appear official, nor does he present himself in an official manner. Still, he is seen as a militia leader who is skilled at exhibiting whatever he wants to through leaked scenes, which can either be rejected or accepted as a presentation of the truth. But is the video new or old? Is Soleimani still alive, carrying out Iran's plans in Syria and Iraq, or has he been killed, as has been rumored by several media outlets in recent months? The man's biography has occupied international media outlets in the past year – particularly with regards to his military roles in Iraq and Syria. So, has he really been killed? If he's alive, why doesn't he make an official appearance to show the world that the rumors are not true?
Iran has a sectarian expansionist project in mind, and its claim of confronting extremism and ISIS only attracts more extremism. Little is known for sure – there is no official party that has proven or denied the death rumors. This recent video alleging Soleimani is in Aleppo adds mystery to the man's fate and the reality of his role. Here we are again, questioning the disappearance and reappearance tricks that Iran's most prominently-known man in Syria has previously mastered. It's all stories and fantasies and no accurate information. This is exactly what Iran is keen to market. The Iranian propaganda machine has become highly skilled at applying these tricks to prompt mysteries and spread rumors as it has always adopted a policy of secrecy as part of its power, expansion and influence maneuvers. Those who leaked and circulated the video purporting to show Soleimani a few days ago said this was old footage which was recently broadcast to send a message that Soleimani is alive, fighting Iran's battles and touring battlefields. Still, the true source of these images remain unclear.
A character like Qassem Soleimani displays the reality of Iran’s tampering in the affairs of troubled countries from within. The leaked video, with its improvised speeches and military and religious scenes, is merely a public declaration of an occupation. This image targets the Iranian audience as well as people outside Iran. But is spreading this image a sign of progress and power or a sign of weakness and an attempt to galvanize fighters and show that Iran is in control, especially after Russia has taken charge over official Syrian matters? In my opinion, it seems the circulation of the footage indicates more weakness than power. Their only aim is to show that Iran is in control on the ground in Syria. It's true that Iran has achieved military success in Iraq, Syria and Yemen and got the better end of the nuclear deal, but it has also proved its enmity to its surrounding neighbors and sparked a long-term sectarian snag.
Iran has a sectarian expansionist project in mind, and its claim of confronting extremism and ISIS only attracts more extremism. Fighting wars through mysteriously leaked videos may be part of a media game which the Iranian Revolutionary Guards have mastered, however it is still a weapon that ensures that divisions will ensue.

Saudi-Iranian crisis without diplomats or mediators
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/January 05/16
This is the worst phase of confrontation between Saudi Arabia and Iran in 30 years. The stances of countries in solidarity with the kingdom - such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain and Sudan - and their decisions to shut down or downgrade their diplomatic missions in Iran are of great significance to Riyadh. Tehran often resorts to violence and bullying against governments that disagree with it, while Riyadh responds via its political weight and international relations. As smoke billowed from the burnt Saudi embassy in Tehran, an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman voiced surprise that the Saudis withdrew their mission and shut down the burnt building! Speaking like he represents a peaceful Scandinavian country, he said nothing justified the Saudi decision. He said that despite the fact that the embassy building was burnt in front of Iranian police who did not intervene.
History repeating
Saudi Arabia did well to shut down its embassy in Iran and recalling its envoys, because whenever there is a crisis, the Iranians target ambassadors and diplomatic missions. Iran’s history is the worst in this regard. The Saudis in particular have bad memories of the Iranian assassination of a Saudi diplomat in Karachi. Pakistan is still demanding that the perpetrator be handed over. Iran orchestrated a bomb explosion in the Saudi embassy in Beirut. In 2011, U.S. officials uncovered an Iranian plot to assassinate Adel al-Jubeir, then-Saudi ambassador to the United States, and the perpetrators were convicted and imprisoned. Every time Iran disagrees with a country, it besieges its embassy via protests, raids, looting and attacking its employees. Abdulaziz Khoja, former Saudi ambassador to Lebanon, was subjected to threats that forced him to return home. Iranian “protestors” previously killed a Saudi employee in the embassy in Iran by throwing him off the third floor, while another Saudi diplomat was attacked and his eye gouged out. Nothing is more important than diplomats during dangerous crises, but Tehran did not give envoys the chance to work. Setting the Saudi embassy on fire was carried out by employees linked to a security apparatus and pretending to be protestors. No one believes they were protestors because this has happened repeatedly. Every time Iran disagrees with a country, it besieges its embassy via protests, raids, looting and attacking its employees.
Speculation
Despite that, there is speculation over the burning of the Saudi embassy. Was it a vengeful act following the Saudi execution of extremist preacher Nimr al-Nimr? Was it directed against Iranian President Hassan Rowhani to undermine his authority? Was the aim to sabotage dialogue between Riyadh and Tehran over Syria? In Iran, the president’s authority is always governed by conflicts, which is why other governments are always suspicious of Iranian official promises. The Saudis have been previously told they must understand the circumstances of decision-making in Iran, but for how long will they do that?
Now that bilateral ties have been severed, there are no direct diplomatic means of communication. As such, the dispute, which is already huge, will worsen and affect the region. Iran is turning the dispute into a cause of defending Shiites, but most Muslim countries are boycotting it or are upset with it, such as Indonesia and Sudan recently. Tehran has also lost its Arab allies, in which it invested for years, since its military involvement in Syria, where it is a partner in the murder of hundreds of thousands of Syrians.
This article was first published in Asharq al-Awsat on Jan. 5 , 2016.

Saudi severing ties with Iran: A proportionate response
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya/January 05/16
First, it was the Egyptian embassy, second the American embassy, later Denmark, then the British embassy was ransacked by mostly Basijis, and now, it is the turn of Saudi Arabia’s embassy to be attacked by crowds of Iranians. What kind of diplomacy is Rowhani's government referring to?
These kinds of assaults on foreign embassies and diplomats have several dimensions; they appear to be a systematic reaction as they follow strong remarks from Iran’s Supreme Leader. Iranian media outlets normally refer to these attackers as passionate young people or “followers of the Imam’s route,” rather than aggressors. In addition, it is intriguing that Iranian forces which are very quick at identifying demonstrations, are always late to act when it comes to these types of pre-organized and sophisticated attacks on embassies. Moreover, the perpetrators of these attacks generally attempt to show their loyalty to the ideals of the Supreme Leader and the Islamic Republic’s revolutionary principles. As a member of Iran’s semi-militia group, the Basiji, pointed out: “We will stand by the Supreme Leader against any country which he views as the enemy.” After the strong and provocative rhetoric from Iran’s Supreme Leader on his social media outlets and website, and after he urged “ the Muslim world” to act, an Iranian crowd, broke into the Saudi embassy chanting slogans against Saudi Arabia. They ransacked, smashed furniture and windows, and set fire to the building. Another crowd attacked the Saudi Consulate in the city of Mashhad and tore the Saudi flag. Has assaulting embassies turned into an inherent and symbolic tactic in the Islamic Republic’s political establishment to indirectly express Tehran’s rivalry towards other countries and to show disrespect to them?
A fair response
It is a totally proportionate response from Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, Adel Jubeir, to announce that Riyadh has decided to sever ties with the Islamic Republic and that Iranian diplomats have been given 48 hours to evacuate the country. In order to avoid escalation of the regional conflict, a regional leadership is needed to counterbalance Iran’s military and political interference in other countries. The Islamic Republic, which considers itself the leader of Islamic world, incited protests in other countries including Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon as well. The underlying issue which should be addressed is Iran’s escalating sectarian agenda in the region and its heightened military interventions in other Arab nations. It is incumbent on other nation-states to have a proportionate response to these issues, otherwise Tehran’s actions can escalate the regional conflict into conflagration. With the U.S. and the West turning a blind eye on the Islamic Republic’ increasing interventionist operations in the region, Tehran has been emboldened and empowered on unprecedented level.
Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps and its elite branch, the Quds force, has significantly increased their influence in various Arab nations through boots on the ground, military assistance, and Shiite proxies. Iran’s support for militia groups across the region has exponentially increased. While one country, Iran, supports approximately 25 percent of world’s designated terrorist groups, overwhelming majority of Iranian-backed groups are in the Middle East. This follows that the IRGC and Quds forces are currently the forerunners of financing, arming, and backing militia groups in the Middle East. According to the report by the State Department, even under the Presidency of the moderate, Hassan Rouhani, “Iran’s state sponsorship of terrorism worldwide remained undiminished”. Iran has not even begun taking serious actions against senior al-Qaeda leaders who are in the Islamic Republic.
Iran is assisting the Alawite regime of Assad- militarily, financially, with advisors and intelligence - against the Sunni oppositional groups. The IRGC forces are increasing their influence in Iraq fueling the Shiite vs Sunni tensions by supporting the Shiite militia groups and the Shiite ruling clerics. Tehran is interfering in Yemen's domestic affairs through their support for the Houthis. In Bahrain and Lebanon, Iranian leaders continue to influence domestic politics and incite instability by their support of Shiite groups. The nuclear deal between the P5+1 countries and the Islamic Republic will further boost Tehran’s ability to spread its influence. If the international community or a regional coalition do not take serious action, Iran will further consolidate its hegemonic influence in other nations and continue to create political realities out of its proxies, ie, the Shiite militia groups.
Due to the nuclear deal and U.S. appeasement policies towards Iran and Khamenei, the hardliners sense they are invincible and immune to any kind of robust pressure from powerful nation-states. In order to avoid escalation of the regional conflict, this necessitates a regional leadership to counterbalance Iran’s military and political interference in other countries. While Obama’s administration does not appear to show any concern about Iran’s hegemonic ambitions, and while other European nations are not going to pressure Tehran for the sake of preserving their economic interests after the nuclear deal’s implementation, other regional players ought to take the initiative. Alleviating the regional conflict will be in the interests of all regional actors, including Iran.

US Criminalizing Free Speech?
Judith Bergman/2016 Gatestone Institute/January 05/16
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7176/criminalizing-free-speech
Is this House Resolution a prelude? Has Attorney General Lynch seen the potential for someone lifting her "mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric"? And what is "anti-Muslim rhetoric" exactly? Criticizing Islam? Debating Mohammed? Discussing whether ISIS is a true manifestation of Islam? Who decides the definition of "hate speech" against Muslims?
Of all 1,149 anti-religious hate crimes reported in the United States in 2014, only 16.1% were directed against Muslims, according to the FBI. By contrast, over half of all anti-religious hate crimes were directed against Jews – 56.8%.
Why this lopsided, discriminatory House Resolution in favor of a religious group that statistically needs it the least?
Are the Attorney General and the eighty-two House Democrats out to destroy the First Amendment and introduce censorship? A House Resolution could be reintroduced later as binding legislation.
Eighty-two leading Democrats have cosponsored a House Resolution (H.Res. 569) "Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States".
The Resolution was introduced in the House of Representatives by Democrat Donald S. Beyer (Virginia) on December 17, 2015 -- a mere 15 days after Tashfeen Malik and Syed Farook gunned down 14 innocent Americans and wounded 23 in an ISIS-inspired terror attack at a Christmas party in San Bernardino, California.
The House Resolution states, "the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes and rhetoric have faced physical, verbal, and emotional abuse because they were Muslim or believed to be Muslim," and the House of Representatives "expresses its condolences for the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes."
What victims? Of all 1,149 anti-religious hate crimes reported in the United States in 2014, only 16.1% were directed against Muslims, according to the FBI. By contrast, over half of all anti-religious hate crimes were directed against Jews – 56.8%. The fewest, 8.6% of anti-religious hate crimes, were directed against Christians (Protestants and Catholics).
The Resolution goes on to denounce "...in the strongest terms the increase of hate speech, intimidation, violence, vandalism, arson, and other hate crimes targeted against mosques, Muslims, or those perceived to be Muslim."
The House Resolution singles out Muslims in the United States as an especially vulnerable religious group that needs special protection to the extent that the Resolution "urges local and Federal law enforcement authorities to work to prevent hate crimes; and to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those perpetrators of hate crimes."
The reason for the introduction of this House Resolution at this point in time makes more sense if seen in conjunction with statements made by Attorney General Loretta Lynch on December 3, at a dinner celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Muslim Advocates -- an organization that, according to its own website, has "powerful connections in Congress and the White House" and ensures that, "the concerns of American Muslims are heard by leaders at the highest levels of government." Muslim Advocates goes on to say, "As a watchdog of justice, we use the courts to bring to task those who threaten the rights of American Muslims."
At the dinner, Attorney General Lynch stated that she is concerned about an
"incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric... The fear that you have just mentioned is in fact my greatest fear as a prosecutor, as someone who is sworn to the protection of all of the American people, which is that the rhetoric will be accompanied by acts of violence. Now obviously, this is a country that is based on free speech, but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric -- or, as we saw after 9/11, violence directed at individuals who may not even be Muslims but perceived to be Muslims, and they will suffer just as much -- when we see that we will take action."
Is this House Resolution a prelude to the Attorney General taking that action? Has she seen the potential for someone lifting her "mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric"? And what is "anti-Muslim rhetoric" exactly? Criticizing Islam? Debating Mohammed? Discussing whether ISIS is a true manifestation of Islam? Who decides the definition of what is considered hate speech against Muslims?
Are the Attorney General and the eighty-two House Democrats out to destroy the First Amendment and introduce censorship?
U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch (left) said on December 3, "[W]hen we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric... when we see that we will take action.
A House Resolution could be reintroduced later as binding legislation. Americans should be deeply concerned about this. The part of the House Resolution that should most concern Americans is the urging of "local and Federal law enforcement authorities to work to prevent hate crimes; and to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those perpetrators of hate crimes."
What is a hate crime in this context? The law already prohibits violence and threats of violence, and law enforcement authorities are supposed to prosecute those -- intimidation, destruction, damage, vandalism, simple and aggravated assault. However, as this resolution includes "bigotry" and "hateful rhetoric" in its title, Americans should worry that it is those that the House Resolution is really alluding to, when it urges law enforcement authorities to prevent and prosecute hate crimes.
Why would the House of Representatives find it necessary to make such redundant statements, if not in order to redefine the concept of a hate crime?
Notably, no similar House Resolution has appeared condemning the much higher percentage of hate crimes against Jews -- over three times as many as against Muslims. As long as the House is going down the road of condemning hate crimes, why does it not even mention once the much more widespread hate crimes that American Jews are experiencing? Why does it not mention the hate crimes against Christians, which after all are only 7.5% percent fewer than those against Muslims? Why this lopsided, discriminatory House Resolution in favor of a religious group that statistically needs it the least?
The House Resolution is unsettlingly similar to the UN Human Rights Commission's Resolution 16/18, which is an attempt to establish Islamic "blasphemy laws," making criticism of religion a criminal offense. The UNHRC Resolution would apply internationally (non-binding as of yet, except, presumably, for the countries that want it to be binding), and infractions would be punishable by law. In some Islamic countries, at the moment, the punishment is death -- a sentence often handed down in trials that use questionable jurisprudence. Last year alone, a Saudi court sentenced a blogger, Raif Badawi to 1,000 lashes ("lashed very severely," the court order read) and ten years in jail. Outside of any courts, in 2015 alone, in Bangladesh, four secular bloggers on four separate occasions were hacked to death by people who apparently did not agree with what they said.
The UNHRC Resolution, originally known as "Defamation of Islam," was changed in later versions -- it would seem for broader marketability -- to "Defamation of Religions."
Long sought by the 57-member Organization of Islamic Cooperation, UNHRC Resolution 16/18 was co-sponsored by the United States, along with Pakistan. During a series of closed-door meetings over at least three years, it was spearheaded by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
"At the invitation of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton," begins the document of the US Mission in Geneva, "representatives of 26 governments and four international organizations met in Washington, D.C. on December 12-14, 2011 to discuss the implementation of United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution (UNHRC) 16/18 on 'Combating Intolerance, Negative Stereotyping and Stigmatization of, and Discrimination, Incitement to Violence and Violence Against, Persons Based on Religion or Belief.'"
UNHRC Resolution 16/18, also known as the "Istanbul Process" (where the original meeting on the topic took place), is an Orwellian document that claims to protect freedom of religion, while attempting to criminalize internationally anything that might be considered "incitement to violence." The late PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat used to tell his people, "I don't have to tell you what to do. You know what to do." Each word could be in Pat the Bunny. Would Arafat's statement be considered incitement to violence?
UNHRC Resolution 16/18 was passed on March 24, 2011, without a vote.
According to the journalist Abigail Esman, writing in Forbes:
Resolution 16/18 seeks to limit speech that is viewed as "discriminatory" or which involves the "defamation of religion" – specifically that which can be viewed as "incitement to imminent violence... [T]his latest version, which includes the "incitement to imminent violence" phrase – that is, which criminalizes speech which incites violence against others on the basis of religion, race, or national origin – has succeeded in winning US approval – despite the fact that it (indirectly) places limitations as well on speech considered "blasphemous."
In answer to a reproof -- from the U.S Department of State, no less -- Esman wrote, "By agreeing to criminalize 'incitement to violence' and to use all means at its disposal to prevent and to punish such actions, the US has – however unwittingly – enabled the OIC to use the measure against us – and other members of the free world."Many extremist Muslims, however, seem to have no problem criticizing other religions, as well as other Muslims. Some "criticize" Christians, as we have witnessed, by slitting their throats, or by burning or drowning them alive. Many extremist Muslims also seem to have no problem criticizing Jews – starting with calling them descendants of apes and pigs (Surah 5. Al-Maida, Ayah 60). Some Muslims write that all Jews should be killed:
the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).
One therefore cannot help wondering -- and one should wonder – to what extent H.Res. 569 is the "nose of the camel under the tent."As of now, H.Res. 569 has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Americans had better hope that the House Committee will see it for what it is: An attempt to destroy the First Amendment, shield Islam from criticism, and bring "Death to Free Speech."
Judith Bergman is a writer, columnist, lawyer and political analyst.
© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

US scrambles to curb damage from Saudi-Iranian fallout
Laura Rozen/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
WASHINGTON — With long-sought UN Syria peace talks set for later this month at stake as well as the wider fight against the Islamic State, Washington and its allies were scrambling Jan. 4 to try to stem the fallout from Saudi Arabia’s abrupt decision to sever diplomatic relations with Iran following attacks on the Saudi Embassy in Tehran in the wake of the Saudis’ execution of a dissident Shiite cleric.The State Department, responding to Riyadh’s Jan. 3 announcement that it was severing diplomatic relations with Iran and giving Iranian diplomats 48 hours to leave the country, urged maintaining diplomatic engagement and avoiding actions that could further inflame regional sectarian tensions.
“What we want to see is tensions caused by these executions reduced, diplomatic relations restored, so that the leadership in the region can focus on other pressing issues,” State Department spokesman John Kirby told journalists at the State Department on Jan. 4. “We have consistently urged everyone to deescalate tensions”
Secretary of State John Kerry worked the phones as he returned to Washington from a brief New Year’s vacation in Idaho, during which much of the painstaking diplomatic work he and allies had done the past five months to try to get both Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to the Syria peace table looked at risk of being destroyed. Kerry spoke with Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif on Jan. 3 and with Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir on Jan. 4, diplomatic sources said. He also spoke with UN Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura, who recently announced renewed talks between the Syrian regime and opposition would be held in Geneva on Jan. 25. De Mistura, who was traveling to Riyadh on Jan. 4 to meet with Syrian opposition representatives before heading to Iran later this week, expressed alarm that the newly emerged diplomatic crisis could set back his efforts.
The “sudden and acute crisis” in Saudi-Iranian relations “is a very worrisome development,” he told The New York Times in an email Jan. 4. “We must at all costs avoid that it produces a chain of violent consequences in the region.”
While condemning the attacks on diplomatic facilities, former senior US officials who worked on the Middle East expressed puzzlement and dismay at the Saudi decision to carry out the execution of Saudi Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr, which was certain to stoke sectarian reactions across the region at such a sensitive moment. It is “very unclear why the Saudis decided to do this now,” former Obama administration Middle East official Ilan Goldenberg told Al-Monitor by email Jan. 4. “A complete puzzle.”“The US definitely thinks that Saudi-Iranian competition is one of the most destabilizing trends right now in the region and is making it very difficult to deescalate,” Goldenberg, now director of the Middle East security program at the Center for New American Security, said. “They view it as a major impediment and challenge. And it is not clear if there is much we can do about reducing these tensions."
He added, “It remains to be seen if this kills the Syria process. But it is hard to imagine the Saudis and Iranians continuing to sit in the same room.”
“We are kind of back to square one,” Philip Gordon, the former Obama White House top Middle East adviser, told Al-Monitor on Jan. 4. “To the degree that people hopefully wanted to see the Vienna process succeed, it required that Iran and Saudi Arabia be willing to sit at the same table and talk about a cease-fire and political process. … Our approach to the region has depended on a Saudi-Iran modus vivendi. That is all blown out of the water, at least for now.”
Saudi Arabia, in carrying out the execution and severing relations with Iran, may have been trying to send messages to both domestic and international audiences about its resolve against what Riyadh perceives as Iranian expansionism in the region, but it may have miscalculated how the messages would be received, he said. “It is a sign of insecurity,” Gordon, now a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said. “I do worry that it is a miscalculation.”
“One of the things the Saudis worry about is that people [including in the US administration] come to the conclusion that Iran, while we have problems with it, could be a partner … [and] we should start working with them,” he said. “With this, the Saudis are saying, that won’t work — choose sides.”
“I don’t think the Obama administration is … going to decide, let’s double down on Saudi, pull the plug on the Iran nuclear deal and militarily intervene in Syria,” he said. “The administration feels like they have already been trying to reassure the Saudis. So how much do you need to do? … At what point does it work?”Former US Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford said the latest rupture in Saudi-Iranian relations puts a damper on already low prospects for success at the forthcoming Syria peace talks. “Chances for success at peace talks in January/February 2016 are pretty low to begin with,” Ford, now a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, said by email Jan. 4. “Neither the Russians/Iranians on one side, and [the] Turks/Saudis/Qataris on the other side appear prepared to exert serious pressure on their clients in Syria to make hard concessions that would be necessary to reach a deal this year.”
“The latest tension between the Saudis and Iranians will likely further entrench these two actors in their current policies,” Ford said. “Indeed, I would anticipate that the Saudis/Turks will boost aid to the Syrian rebels in the days ahead if they have not already done so.” “Finally, it is also important to note that American leverage with the Saudis appears limited now,” Ford added. “If the Americans were informed in advance about Sheikh Nimr's impending execution and despite Washington remonstrations the Saudis went ahead with the execution, then we have the latest example. Similarly, Washington appears to have little to no leverage with the Russians and the Iranians.”
Randa Slim of the Middle East Institute said that Saudi decision-making had always been somewhat opaque to the United States, but that the government under King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud seemed to be more in the grip of “groupthink” and lacks the moderating voices such as that of the late former Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal. “Now [decision-making in Saudi Arabia] is even more opaque and restricted to a very small group of people,” Slim told Al-Monitor. “There is more of a groupthink process going on. … And we do not have the balancing voices within that leadership group.”
Nevertheless, the United States should do what it can to step up engagement with Riyadh and Iran to try to prevent the situation from escalating, Slim advised. “I think across the board we need to use whatever leverage we [United States] have with the Saudis, with the Iranians … [and] to try to push leaders in the region who have access and who are respected by Saudi decision-makers … to use their good offices to send strong messages to the Saudis and [the] Iranians … to stop this escalation spiral in its tracks,” Slim said.

Who is sending Iraqi fighters to Syria?
Omar al-Jaffal/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
BAGHDAD — Abdullah Hamrani (a pseudonym) stood among his friends in Baghdad, filling them in on his experiences fighting in armed Iraqi Shiite factions, such as the Hezbollah al-Nujaba movement in Syria against the Islamic State (IS) and Jabhat al-Nusra
Speaking like a preacher, Hamrani gave hope to his friends who gathered to hear the latest developments in the ongoing battles in Syria since November, especially in Damascus and Aleppo. Hamrani proudly told them Shiite factions are progressing very quickly and will soon defeat their enemies. He also stressed that the sacred religious shrines in Syria are now safe from any jihadi organization's attacks.Iraq's constitution prohibits interfering in other countries' internal affairs. Iraq has denied any official involvement in sending fighters to Syria. Al-Monitor met with Hamrani in Baghdad and asked him how he made his way to Syria, how he spent his days there and what difficulties he faced.
Hamrani, who seemed reluctant to share details about his trips to Syria, said, “I go to Syria in the ordinary way. I often book a plane ticket from Baghdad to Damascus and go to Syria to join my battalion, only to return to Baghdad when I am off duty.” He would not answer all of our questions. He did not mention the name of his battalion, the faction he belongs to or how he goes to Syria when he doesn't go by plane.
Hamrani’s reticence was his way to hide what has become known and what can no longer be concealed, namely that Iraqi fighters are going to Syria. Hamrani was also trying to hide the name of the factions behind the recruitment of young Iraqi Shiites. The Nujaba radio station, affiliated with the Hezbollah al-Nujaba movement led by Shiite Sheikh Akram al-Kaabi, broadcasts an ad several times a day calling on the zealous youth wanting to “volunteer for the defense of the holy sites in Syria” to join the movement. A phone number is provided at the end of the ad. The Hezbollah al-Nujaba movement is fighting along with the Syrian army in a number of Syrian areas, particularly Aleppo, and it publishes a daily report on its website on the progress of the fighting there. The movement is also fighting in the ranks of Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units in a number of IS-controlled areas in Iraq, such as the Salahuddin province.
But a Popular Mobilization Units spokesman, Karim al-Nuri, told Al-Monitor his group is not sending fighters to Syria, as the group's activities are restricted to Iraq. The Popular Mobilization Units — a group affiliated with Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi — "has nothing to do with Shiite fighters going to Syria." Rather, he said, independent armed factions are sending fighters there. However, his statement confirms the presence of Iraqi Shiite factions fighting in Syria.Given Iraqi officials’ secrecy about the matter, any statistics regarding the number of Iraqi armed factions fighting in Syria are considered far from reliable; the number of actual fighters is impossible to ascertain.
“We have no statistics about the Iraqi fighters in Syria,” Nuri said. However, “[Iraqi] fighters, along with the Lebanese Hezbollah militants, have a great positive impact on the course of the war against IS in Syria,” he added.
In October 2013, Al-Monitor learned from a source knowledgeable about armed factions that 14 Shiite factions were fighting in Syria. Now, however, the same source would only say that “the number of [Iraqi] factions has decreased because the war on terrorism has moved here — to Iraq.”IS has been controlling a number of Iraqi cities since June 2014. The area controlled by the extremist organization is estimated to be about one-third of the country.
For more than a year, Iraq’s security forces, including the army and the police, in addition to the armed Shiite factions as well as Sunni tribes, have been fighting a bloody war on several fronts to retake control of territories from IS. Some of these battles successfully gained control of villages and regions in Diyala province north of Baghdad and several cities in Salahuddin, including Tikrit. The biggest victory, however, was achieved Dec. 28 when they regained most of Ramadi, the center of Anbar province. That victory helped renew trust in the army and police in keeping terrorism at bay. Iraqi MP Hana Turki believes the “national and religious priority is to defend the usurped Iraqi territories.”
Turki denied knowing about “volunteers fighting in Syria,” but said he is “confident that the Popular Mobilization Units has nothing to do with sending fighters to Syria.”Turki told Al-Monitor, “Some might consider that IS has entered Iraq through the Syrian Gates [the Belen Pass in the mountains of Turkey] and, therefore, it should be fought at the source.”
Hakem al-Zameli, head of the Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee, told Al-Monitor, “Despite the importance of Syria for Iraq in terms of strategic geographical position, extended borders that link it to Iraq and Iraq's security stability, efforts are concentrated to fight IS in the usurped areas of Iraq.”Whatever factions might be recruiting Iraqi fighters to go to Syria would be wise to concentrate on Iraq instead, he said. "Defending sacred sites starts in Iraq,” he added. Zameli further stressed that “calls for volunteers fighting in Syria are illegal and are punishable by law." "Article 8 of the Iraqi Constitution sets forth that Iraq shall observe the principles of a good neighbor and adhere to the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states." He did note, "However, the situation in Iraq now is exceptional.”
Zameli is known to have figures and details on the security situation because of his position. However, he said, “There are no accurate statistics or details about the numbers of Iraqi fighters in Syria.” He then categorically denied the existence of any “coordination between these factions and official [Iraqi] authorities.”

What does Khamenei think of Saudi Embassy attacks?
Arash Karami/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
After protesters who were angered at the execution of a prominent Shiite cleric stormed the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Tehran, setting fire to it, a number of Iranian officials have condemned the attack. Many Iranian media outlets also questioned the motives of the embassy attackers, who have once again caused a diplomatic crisis between Iran and a foreign country.Iranian officials condemned the execution of Nimr al-Nimr, who had advocated for more rights of Saudi Arabia’s Shiite minorities. However, many were quick to also condemn the attack on the Saudi Embassy.
President Hassan Rouhani referred to the embassy attackers as “extremists,” saying that Iran had a legal and religious duty to protect both the Saudi Embassy in Tehran and the consulate in the city of Mashhad. He called their actions “unjustifiable” and asked the judiciary and intelligence ministry to apprehend the attackers so that “this type of ugly act will be put to an end forever.” More than 40 of the attackers have already been arrested.
Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani condemned the attack, saying that it increases regional tensions and makes finding paths to solutions more difficult. Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani, the head of Iran’s judiciary, said that the attack violates Iran’s legal commitments and diminishes attention on the larger issue of Nimr’s execution. Hamid Baeidinejad, director general for political affairs at Iran’s Foreign Ministry, said that there was no doubt that the attack on the embassy was a mistake.
A number of officials, in an attempt to distance the Iranian government from the act, even suggested that the actions could be the act of “infiltrators,” a term recently being used to signify domestic agents of foreign powers. Grand Ayatollah Naser Makarem Shirazi suggested that infiltrators within the protesters intentionally attacked the embassy to create discord between Shiites and Sunnis. Justice Minister Mostafa Pourmohammadi said that given the number of warnings by the supreme leader against infiltrators, “it’s possible the latest action against the Saudi Embassy could be planned and supported by agents of infiltration.” Hard-line cleric Alireza Panahian also joined the chorus of those questioning the motives of the attackers, saying, “There are suspicions that there are hands that tried to create a sedition.”
It is doubtful that any group will take responsibility for the attack. Many officials simply refer to them as “rogue elements.” The 1979 attack on the US Embassy in Tehran was carried out by leftist students who are mostly Reformists today. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Iranian Revolution, gave his blessing after the fact. The 2011 attack on the British Embassy in Tehran resulted in its closure for four years. Nine months after that attack, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told a group of university students, “The feelings of the youth were correct, but their behavior was not correct.” That attack was supposedly carried out by Basij students, though no official took responsibility and no one was arrested.
Khamenei has so far condemned the execution of Nimr but has not commented on the embassy attack. Some media outlets quoted a 1989 Friday prayers sermon by Khamenei when he was president and a number of protesters had gathered in front of the British Embassy in response to Salman Rushdie’s novel about Islam. At the time, Khamenei had said, “I am communicating this to you as an official of the government, as a Friday prayer leader, as a cleric: Do not get close to embassies. If you do not like the policies of the British or Americans or anyone else, this is not the path for some people to climb over embassy walls and approach embassies.” He added that attacking embassies, climbing over their walls, destroying their property or setting them on fire “is certainly bad and a crime, and if someone intentionally does this it is treason.”

Five reasons so many Iranians are rushing to run for office
Ali Omidi/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
TEHRAN, Iran — Official figures released by Iran's Interior Ministry show that the number of registered candidates for the country’s parliamentary and Assembly of Experts elections next month has surged compared with previous polls, increasing by 100% and 60%, respectively. Although the Guardian Council is unlikely to approve all candidacies, the public is impatiently waiting to see whether prominent figures will get the green light. Key among these faces are Seyyed Hassan Khomeini, grandson of the Islamic Republic’s founder; Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Expediency Council chairman; and President Hassan Rouhani.The dominant conviction in political circles in Tehran, based on considerations of the political alignment of the Guardian Council and previous experiences, is that the most prominent Reformist and Nationalist candidates are likely to be disqualified. The fact that 12,123 people have signed up for the parliamentary elections — 1,434 of whom are women — and that 801 people have registered for the Assembly of Experts elections, has been of great interest to observers of Iran. This is especially the case considering the characteristics of Iran’s political parties as well as the political developments that Iran is likely to undergo in the next 10 years.
Indeed, conservatives are aware of the outcomes of a power shift in Iran. Therefore, they are quite concerned about the upcoming elections. Speculation is that if the Guardian Council approves the candidacies of Khomeini, Rafsanjani and Rouhani, this trio will be able to change the conservative face of the Assembly of Experts. Meanwhile, in the case of parliament, it appears certain that its current conservative face is about to change.
Mindful of the above, the surge in the number of registered candidates can be traced to five main motivating factors.
First is the absence of institutionalized political parties in Iran. The main and most important reason for the surge in the number of candidate registrations is that there are no real political parties in Iran. Although various political societies and factions are active and officially registered, they have been unable, for a variety of reasons, to assume an active role in society similar to that of political parties in Western Europe or North America. As long as political parties are not institutionalized in the political system of a country, each individual can be considered competent on his own. Moreover, since the norm of having political parties does not exist in Iran, some only put forth candidacies because they like the idea of going to the Ministry of Interior to register and getting the related media attention. In addition, considering the rate of unemployment and economic decline in Iran, certain educated but jobless individuals believe that becoming a member of parliament is an opportunity to gain access to better economic and political opportunities.
Second is the Reformists’ strategy. Supporters of the Rouhani administration, including Reformists, have adopted the strategy of introducing a lot of candidates in the hopes that if their leading figures are disqualified, lesser-known Reformists will be given the chance to run for parliament and pursue the Reformist agenda. This strategy is useful for mobilizing people in order to change the political makeup of parliament and the Assembly of Experts, both of which are currently dominated by non-Reformists. Prominent Reformists can of course wield more influence and be more effective compared to second- or third-rate colleagues. However, the Reformists are not going to give up easily. They are hoping to at least increase the political cost for the conservatives if the Guardian Council engages in mass disqualifications of registered candidates.
Third is the most important political turning point of Iran in the next 10 years. There is speculation that in the next decade, considering the age of Iran’s 76-year-old, ailing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country will have a new leader. Considering the authority enjoyed by the supreme leader within Iran’s political system, various groups are looking to secure their positions in the Assembly of Experts, which is tasked with selecting the next supreme leader. Rafsanjani’s proposal to establish a “leadership council” instead of a single supreme leader has been criticized by the conservatives but welcomed by the Reformists and alternative political thinkers. On the other hand, if Reformists and supporters of the Rouhani administration manage to win a majority of seats in parliament, sidelined Reformists can return to politics, and thus the atmosphere of moderation and reform long promised by Rouhani can finally be institutionalized.
Fourth is women’s rights campaigns. The surge in registered candidacies for the parliamentary elections is directly related to the rise in the number of social media campaigns. The most prominent of these online initiatives is the Campaign to Change the Male Face of Parliament. According to prominent political scientist Francis Fukuyama, all political parties are bound to capitalize on women. Iran is no exception to this. The level of education among Iranian women has steadily increased, as has their participation in society. As a result, their political and social awareness has expanded. Today, many Iranian women are aware that being politically passive is not beneficial, and that no change will occur through passivity.
Last but certainly not least is that the outcome of the latest presidential elections continues to impact Iranian politics. The 2013 presidential vote proved that by participating in elections and supporting a certain candidate, people can overcome some of their economic and political problems. Indeed, Iranians realized that by taking part in polls and electing Rouhani, they could help solve the nuclear crisis, which had been ongoing since 2003. It should not be overlooked that a majority of people believe that they can influence the politics of their country by casting their ballots.

The rapid rise and fall of Turkey’s pro-Kurdish party
Mustafa Akyol/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
Half a year ago, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) spearheaded by Selahattin Demirtas, its young, charismatic leader, was the rising star in Turkish politics. The party, with its roots in the violent Kurdish political movement dominated by the armed and illegal Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), had recast itself as a left-liberal, inclusive peacenik movement and a bulwark against President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s growing authoritarianism. As a result, it emerged from the June 7 general elections with some 13.1% of the vote, doubling its usual mandate. Since then, however, the HDP’s meteoric rise has been reversed by a meteoric fall.In the Nov. 1 snap elections, the HDP vote declined to 10.8%, resulting in the party losing 21 of the 80 parliamentary seats it had won just five months earlier. More recently, prominent voices in the mainstream, secular-liberal media who had supported Demirtas, or at least seemed sympathetic to his cause, began to oppose him and his party. Many political commentators believe the HDP “squandered” the opportunity it had created earlier in the year and will never regain it.
There is a clear and simple reason for this: In the wake of the June elections, the sluggish, yet still effective “peace process” remained ongoing between the government and the PKK. In June, however, the process collapsed, and the three-decade-old armed conflict resumed, with PKK attacks on security forces and counterterrorism responses by the government. Soon thereafter, the PKK initiated a strategy of creating “autonomous” zones in certain Kurdish towns, leading to urban warfare between its forces and government troops. The result has been a mini civil war in which more than 150 Turkish soldiers and 180 PKK fighters have died. Civilians caught in the crossfire have suffered the worst, sustaining more than 260 casualties and 750 injured, according to the Human Rights Association.
Why did the peace process fail and Turkey descend into bloodshed? Naturally, the PKK blames the government, and the government blames the PKK. I have argued mutual​ responsibility in addition to the toxic effects of the Syrian civil war spilling into Turkey. The conflict is not a war between Turkey and “the Kurds” — as often incorrectly asserted in Western media — but between Turkey and the PKK. In fact, Iraqi Kurdistan and its traditionalist leader, Massoud Barzani, find themselves closer to Ankara in this conflict than to the Marxist and “arrogant” PKK.
In any case, the collapse of the peace process has been a major calamity for Turkey, and the HDP could have played a helpful role by calling for peace and criticizing the violence on both sides. Instead, the party chose to fully ally itself with the PKK, legitimize its violence and even advocate its maximalist goal of an independent Kurdistan. That is why the HDP quickly lost its charm beyond its traditional ethno-political base.
Demirtas had orchestrated the HDP’s rise, and he also captained its fall through a series of blunders. First, he visited Moscow on Dec. 23 to meet with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and backed the Kremlin's position surrounding the Nov. 24 downing of a Russian warplane in Turkish airspace. At a time when Turkish-Russian relations were extremely tense, this love affair in Moscow was naturally perceived and slammed by the Turkish government as “treason.”
Meanwhile, also in December, Demirtas had defended the trenches dug by PKK militants in Kurdish areas and the organization's strategy of establishing “autonomy” by force. Kurds, of course, have the political right to campaign for autonomy, but fighting for it unilaterally with arms and booby-trapped barricades is something else. As noted by none other than the maverick HDP deputy Altan Tan, most Kurds do not approve of the violent campaign to establish autonomy in their name, which simply means PKK rule.
Demirtas spoke again, in Diyarbakir on Dec. 27, at the Democratic Society Congress, a Kurdish nationalist platform. He further defended the PKK trenches and called on “our people,” i.e., the Kurds, to support them. “This resistance will end with victory,” he vowed, adding that victory could well mean “Kurds having their own independent state.” His remarks, which seemed to herald an endless armed struggle until the carving of an independent Kurdistan from Turkey, sent shock waves not only through government supporters, but some liberals as well who had viewed the HDP as a political bulwark against the government. One such voice, Ahmet Hakan Coskun, a popular pundit from the daily Hurriyet, wrote of having been “fooled” by the HDP.
The official reaction from the government condemned Demirtas for “treason,” and the judiciary launched an “investigation” into the “terrorist” and “separatist” remarks by the Kurdish politician. It will be a total disaster if the investigation ends in stripping Demirtas of legal immunity and jailing him, as happened to several Kurdish deputies in the 1990s. It would mean Turkey forgetting about reforms on the Kurdish front and reverting to “Old Turkey's” authoritarianism, which will only intensify the armed conflict.
Demirtas and other HDP politicians should be able to voice their views without being threatened by the judiciary. Otherwise, the already dim hope for dragging the “Kurdish question” from armed violence into peaceful politics will be further diminished. Demirtas and his comrades must recognize the harm they have inflicted on their own political project by proving to be nothing more than the political mouthpiece of the PKK. It is likely that they will pay for this in the next elections by losing the votes of many liberal, left-wing Turks along with war-weary Kurds who just want a peaceful life, free from guns, bombs and barricades.

Shin Bet uncovers Jewish extremist plot to destroy state
Ben Caspit/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
For the first time since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Shin Bet has used what it calls “special methods” for investigating Jews. Some in the extreme right argue that these tools include torture.This is the first time such a group has been exposed in Israeli history. This religious/ultranationalist underground group's main purpose is the elimination of the State of Israel, putting an end to Zionism and fomenting regional chaos that would facilitate the establishment of a messianic Jewish kingdom in the place of Israel. The means for destroying the Jewish state, according to the doctrine of this group, is killing Arabs. The goal was to pit the Arab world and the international community against Israel, undermine the authority of the central government and create chaos that would lead to a revolt. Then, during the revolt, the reins of government would be placed in the hands of those believing in the supremacy of the Torah over democracy.
Their first acts after the coup were supposed to be to appoint a king and re-establish the biblical Judean kingdom that would conduct itself according to Jewish religious law alone. In the first stage, all the Arabs and other non-Jews would be warned to leave the territory of the kingdom immediately. In the second stage, all those refusing to leave, including women and children, would be put to death immediately. There is no place for non-Jews on Jewish holy land. Anyone who identifies a striking similarity to the rules applied by the Islamic State's caliphate does according to his own judgment. Still, at the end of the day, when religion is taken to extremes and becomes a messianic tool, this is exactly what religious extremism looks like.
An extensive investigation by the Shin Bet and police finally cracked the case and led to the disclosure of what is now called the “Revolt Group.” Its members, numbering a few dozen youths ages 15-24, call themselves the “Givonim” ("Hilltoppers"). They are responsible for the shocking murder of the Dawabsha family in the West Bank village of Douma on July 31, 2015, in the course of which three family members were burned to death in their sleep: 18-month-old Ali and his parents, Riham and Saad. Their son Mohammed, 4, was the only one to survive the inferno.
On Jan. 3, Amiram Ben Uliel, 21, from Jerusalem was indicted on three counts of murder. According to the indictment, Ben Uliel hurled a Molotov cocktail into the family home after he spray-painted the house with graffiti. Then he escaped into the darkness and walked 10 kilometers (6 miles), the same distance he had walked to get there that night. Another youngster was also indicted for his involvement in the attack. Together with these two, another six suspects were arrested, leading to the solving of a number of violent acts against Arabs that were carried out in the last two years by members of the cell. The murder in Douma was the first attack in the series that led to a loss of human life. In its wake, the penny dropped in the Shin Bet. The attorney general authorized the security services to use “special methods” of interrogation for the first time against Jews, to conduct administrative detentions and to adopt a heavy hand against Jewish terrorists. Before this, investigations of Israeli Jews were done according to Israeli law that does not permit such measures to be used, while Arab terror is investigated according to completely different laws.
In a previous article for Al-Monitor, I gave an overview of the illegal outposts in the Shiloh Valley. My assessment was that such outposts might have spawned the murderers of the Dawabsha family in Douma. This assessment has been proven true. The source of the hard-core Givonim group lies in the unruly hilltop youth scattered throughout the Shiloh Valley and the nearby Baladim Hill (another illegal outpost), all of which serve as breeding grounds for malignant religious extremism that extends its shoots throughout Judea and Samaria.
The Shin Bet seized “documents of the revolt” and others outlining the theology of the members of this sect, who were organized in compartmentalized terror cells of three to five members each. The cells operated secretly and independently of one another, and each knew nothing about the activities of other cells. Infiltrating this gang with Shin Bet agents is almost impossible, reminiscent of attempts to insert agents into extremist Islamic terror organizations.
These group members share an extremist messianic ideology. They are closely familiar with one another, grew up together and became radicalized together. They hold the rest of the world in suspicion and are well versed in interrogation and efforts to track them. They live in West Bank outposts, know how to survive in nature and find refuge in caves and abandoned structures. They are able to exist in wild territory, disconnected from civilization for many long days.
Ben Uliel grew up in the Etzion settlement bloc, the son of a Karmei Zur settlement rabbi who is viewed as moderate and statesmanlike. He lived for a period in the illegal outpost Geulat Tzion. Ben Uliel was interrogated over several weeks until he confessed to the murder of the Dawabsha family, and even reconstructed the act in front of Shin Bet interrogators in the middle of the night, in the same spot where the murder took place. Now his family and friends claim that his confession was extricated from him under torture and is therefore not admissible.
Thus, the Shin Bet faces a complicated legal battle to authorize this confession and add additional testimony such as hidden details that Ben Uliel supplied regarding the terror site and the testimony of a minor who worked with him to plan the attack.
The cracking of the “revolt cell” has sparked a fierce political controversy in Israel. The extremist right calls for making a distinction between Arab terror and Jews who perpetrate crimes and holds that torture must not be used against citizens of the state. But the vast majority of the political map supports the decision to use torture against such suspects. Even Education Minister Naftali Bennett and most of his colleagues in HaBayit HaYehudi say that “terror is terror.” They are keenly aware that these poisonous weeds who grew up in their garden plots endanger the State of Israel no less (and maybe even more) than the Arab enemy.
The group's staggering ideological doctrine is laid out in detail in a number of documents that were seized by the Shin Bet. According to them, the State of Israel — which it calls the “kingdom of malice” — “has no right to exist and we must operate to destroy it, then build a Jewish kingdom.” Members of the cell commit themselves to appoint a king who will rule over the nation and force it to obey the harshest of religious precepts. The documents contain detailed instructions on how to burn down mosques or churches and how to shift from inflicting damage and burning down Arab possessions to burning down homes with Arabs living inside. The Shin Bet identified the moment in which the group transitioned from inflicting property damage to inflicting physical harm, to create as much chaos as possible on the ground and promote their agenda.
The General Security Service assesses that there are between 30 and 40 hard-core members involved in actual acts of terror. The second tier numbers approximately 100 youths who support the ideological doctrine and are part of the terror cells scattered on the outposts and hills of Judea and Samaria. Surrounding them is another tier of several hundreds, maybe thousands, who support the general idea of replacing the State of Israel with a Judean kingdom. These members serve as a logistical network providing support to the members of the active cells.
As a result of intensive investigations by the Shin Bet over the last two years, some of the acts of violence and property damage have been solved, including the firebombing of mosques and churches, and 23 suspects detained. It is believed that the group has not been entirely apprehended and dismantled, and there are still a number of operatives at large who are willing to give their lives for the cause. After the murder in Douma, the Shin Bet focused on averting additional similar events. The security services reckon that the incident in Douma was one of the formative causes for the eruption of the Palestinian terror wave that broke out in October, about two months later. The perception that Israel hurries to solve Arab acts of terror but is not capable of subduing Jewish terror aroused much agitation among the Palestinians and also internal criticism in Israel. The Shin Bet has removed this burden from its shoulders by using all the means at its disposal. In doing so, Israel has reached a dramatic watershed in understanding the existential threats it faces — not only from its surroundings, but also from within.

Israeli Arabs fear stigmatization following Tel Aviv shooting
Shlomi Eldar/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
Israel’s Arab citizens had been hoping that the country’s Jewish population would not rush to blame their entire sector for the attack on Dizengoff Street in Tel Aviv Jan. 1, by saying that all Arabs supported this murder and terrorism. That was what they had hoped, at least, until Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared on Jan. 2 at the scene of the incident, which left two dead and seven injured.Soon after it was reported that the terrorist behind the attack was Neshat Melhem, a resident of the Arab village of Arara in Wadi Ara, northern Israel, Al-Monitor spoke with residents of his village and with people who knew him from the nearby town of Umm al-Fahm. They all tried to dispel efforts by what they called “irresponsible politicians” to use the murders to incite Israeli Jews against the Arab population. They had hoped that the very fact that it was Melhem’s father who called the police of his own accord to identify the murderer as his son, or the claim that Melhem had a history of mental illness and violence against his own family, would convince Israelis that he acted alone and on behalf of no one but himself.
Akl Khader, the principal of the school in Wadi Ara that the shooter attended, told Al-Monitor that the Melhem family is an "ordinary" Arab family and that the father is an exemplary figure in the village, who volunteers with the community police force. “Even if his son was responsible for this horrible act, there is still no reason to blame the family and certainly not the village or the entire Arab population of Israel for what happened,” Khader said.
When journalists showed up at the Melhem family’s doorstep, the father told them, “I did not teach my son to act that way, and I am sorry for what he did. When I heard about what happened, I went straight to the police and helped all of the security forces from every possible angle.” According to the suspected assailant’s father, he also appealed to acquaintances in the neighboring villages to help the security forces catch his son before he kills again.
Meanwhile, Melhem’s brother Juadat was arrested on suspicion of involvement in the attack, but no details have been released yet about how he is allegedly linked to the incident.
A resident of the village told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity, “We don’t blame the Jews for the murder of the Dawabsha family [whose home in the village of Douma was set on fire on July 31, 2015] or other incidents worthy of condemnation, so there is no reason to blame all of us for the acts of this particular individual.” But then Netanyahu arrived at the scene, and the one thing that they feared most of all became their dreaded reality.
“I am not willing for there to be two states in Israel — a state of law for most citizens and a state within a state with Islamist incitement and illegal arms that are often used in weddings, celebrations and criminal incidents,” Netanyahu said. With that, the prime minister labeled the entire Arab sector as dangerous and inciting. What he forgot to mention was that the Arabs themselves have been warning for years that too many weapons are hoarded within their communities, and that they have been begging the state to do something about the problem. They are suffering from crime-related murders almost on a daily basis, but until the violence struck in Tel Aviv, the problem had been ignored. No one has reacted or offered a solution yet.
Knesset member Issawi Frej of the Meretz Party, who resides in Kfar Kassem, said as much in an interview with Al-Monitor in January 2014: “If you don’t have a gun, you don’t exist.” He said that many Israeli Arabs are arming themselves essentially because of the predominant sense of decline in their personal security, due to the fact that the Israeli police do not enforce the law in their towns and villages. For years, the heads of Arab municipalities pleaded with the police and the Knesset to do something to address the problem, but so far nothing has come of it. Local residents, who have suffered from crime and violence, claim that the Israeli police consider it less urgent when Arabs kill each other, so they are slower to respond.
In a discussion that took place in the Knesset on Nov. 17, 2014, the heads of the Arab local councils warned about the proliferation of weapons in the Arab sector. Mazen Ghnaim, the mayor of Sakhnin, who also serves as deputy head of the High Follow-up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel, said at the meeting, “Violence is a cancer. … We all want to do our part to eradicate the problem of illegal weapons.” Knesset member Masud Ghnaim of the Joint List of predominantly Arab parties said, “There is a rift with the Arab public, because we are still treated as a security threat. But if the police were to show determination and adopt a serious attitude toward resolving these problems, we will stand alongside them.” Despite those warnings, nothing happened.
But there is one other detail that makes what Netanyahu said even more detached from reality. Melhem committed the attack with a weapon that he stole from his father. He used an Italian-made Spectre submachine gun that his father has a license for because he works for a security firm. Hence, no matter how serious the issue of the proliferation of guns in the Arab sector, it has nothing to do with the attack in Tel Aviv. In that sense, Netanyahu’s recent statement is reminiscent of what he said on the day of the last election on March 17, 2015: “Arab voters are coming out in droves to the polls. Left-wing organizations are busing them out." Once again, the prime minister’s incitement has nothing to do with the facts. He has made every Israeli Arab a suspect, if not for terrorism per se, then for supporting or encouraging it. And if not that, then for possessing an illegal weapon.
There have been dozens of knife attacks, vehicular attacks and shootings since early October 2015, but to date, the terrorists behind just three of those attacks were Israeli Arabs, and they supposedly went through a process of religious radicalization, leaving them with a worldview similar to that of the Islamic State (IS). The two previous Israeli Arab assailants were Alaa Ziwad from Umm al-Fahm, who was responsible for a stabbing and car-ramming attack near Kibbutz Gan Shmuel on Oct. 11, in which a female soldier was seriously injured, and Mohannad Khalil Salam al-Okbi from an unrecognized Bedouin village near the locality of Hura, who was behind the Oct. 18 attack in Beersheba, in which a soldier and an Eritrean asylum seeker were killed, the latter by Israelis who apparently either out of panic or anger shot him, mistakenly identifying him as the attacker.
The numbers show that this is a marginal phenomenon, limited to a few individuals, with few to no ties to their communities. The truth is that most Israeli Arabs are worried about the problem. They see it as a genuine threat that must be fought — the sooner the better.
In general, Israel’s Arab sector, which makes up about one-fifth of the country’s entire population, is in the midst of a process of secularization, much of which can be attributed to the influence of Israel’s secular Jewish population. More people in Israel’s Arab villages are leaving religion than returning to Islam. The war against the hoarding of guns, violence, the infiltration of messages from IS, poverty, discrimination and the sense of alienation that young people feel toward the Israeli establishment are all important issues for the Arab population.
Day after day, their leaders plead with the state to help them in their struggle. Instead of building bridges to the Israeli Arab community and offering them the sense of belonging that they yearn for, Netanyahu is staying true to form and doing the exact opposite.

Is Turkey heading to partition?
Kadri Gursel/Al-Monitor/January 05/16
“Red lines” have been a fixture in Ankara’s policies toward the Kurds for decades. Blurring or shifting, thinning or thickening, decreasing or increasing, myriad red lines were drawn as Ankara grappled with the painful consequences of the Kurdish problem and sought to keep it under control instead of resolving it. The more the problem became regionalized, the more the red lines crossed borders.
Another such red line was drawn in June 2015 after the People’s Protection Units (YPG), the armed wing of the Syrian Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD), seized the town of Tell Abyad on the Turkish border, which allowed it to link the Kurdish cantons of Kobani and Jazira. Ankara’s red line began from the Syrian town of Jarablus, on the western bank of the Euphrates right at the point where the river enters Syrian territory from Turkey, and runs southward along the same bank. The western side of the red line was held by the Islamic State (IS), with the 90-kilometer (56-mile) border stretch from Jarablus westward as the group’s only remaining land link with the outside world.
On the eastern side of the red line, i.e., the Euphrates’ eastern bank, the Kurdish canton of Kobani was controlled by the PYD, the Syrian extension of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which Turkey is battling on its own territory.
Ankara’s red line was meant to hold back the PYD, not IS. Conversely, if IS had managed to capture Kobani, Ankara would have hardly been annoyed, as evidenced by the partial IS invasion of the city in 2014 when the Turkish leadership showed no sign of discontent. But if the PYD was to advance to the western bank of the river to oust IS from Jarablus — thus crossing the red line — Ankara would have been very much annoyed, for Turkish decision-makers opined that the PYD was there to stay and was thus more dangerous than IS, which they saw as a temporary force in the area.
The rest of the world, however, drew the opposite conclusion from the IS-PYD comparison. In a first since World War II, all major powers were in consensus in diagnosing an urgent and immediate threat to global security, with the threat being IS. In a similar consensus, they saw the secular PYD as the only force that could successfully counter and push back this threat in northern Syria.
As a result, the red line Ankara drew in June managed to survive the world’s realities only until Dec. 25, when the Syrian Democratic Forces, a YPG-dominated coalition including Arab and other local ethnic forces, accomplished their first objective only two days after mounting an offensive against IS south of Kobani on Dec. 23, backed by US air power. The coalition took the strategically important Tishreen Dam, only 70 kilometers (43.5 miles) from the Turkish border, and then got a foothold on the Euphrates’ western bank.
The dam’s capture broke a key link on the route connecting the jihadi capital, Raqqa, to Turkey, which had gained crucial importance for IS after its loss of Tell Abyad. The alternative link for IS now — a route arching from the west of the dam lakes to the southeast — is both longer and risky. If the offensive advances to capture Manbij, a town 40 kilometers (25 miles) from the Turkish border, the territorial link between Raqqa and Turkey will be practically broken, and IS will be isolated along the 90-kilometer border stretch.
With Ankara’s red line breached, the first reaction of Turkish officials was to claim that not the PYD but Arab forces had crossed to the western bank of the Euphrates. Watching how its red lines — the product of misguided policies — lose their meaning in the face of regional realities is certainly not easy for Ankara to stomach.
For the rest of the world, meanwhile, the problem is an Ankara that constantly postpones to do its part in the struggle against IS due to its long-standing Kurdish policy, which has now become a stumbling block for everyone.
One key reason why Ankara saw the PYD as a threat greater than IS was its fear of the geopolitical risks bound to arise if a long stretch of Syrian territory along the border, running westward from Iraq, fell under the control of a Kurdish organization affiliated with the PKK, which is considered a threat to Turkey’s unity. The war against the PKK inside Turkey further magnified these risks for Ankara. Second, Ankara worried that the Kurdish cantons the PYD established would strengthen its own Kurds’ drive for autonomy. Should the Kurdish cantons win recognition as part of a political settlement in Syria, the Kurdish problem in Turkey — home to the largest Kurdish population in the Middle East — will stick out even more prominently as it dies after decades of nonsolution. In short, it was Turkey’s own Kurdish problem that forced it to draw a red line along the Euphrates’ western bank.
The Euphrates represents a separating line not only in Syria but in Turkey as well, marking the historical and geographical epicenter of the Kurdish problem, which stretches eastward from the river. Beyond the massive destruction and civilian deaths in urban areas, Ankara’s war on the PKK since July has also been destroying the emotional bridges over the Euphrates connecting the Kurdish-majority east to western Turkey.
One signal of the breaking bonds came from Diyarbakir, whose ancient Sur district has for weeks been the theater of curfews and clashes, with the security forces battling PKK militants with heavy weapons. On Dec. 26, the Democratic Society Congress (DTK), an umbrella organization for Kurdish civic society groups, convened an emergency meeting in Diyarbakir. Speaking at the gathering, Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chair of the Kurdish-dominated Peoples’ Democratic Party, said, “This resistance will lead to victory. The Kurds from now on will hold the political will in their lands. The Kurds will perhaps have an independent state, a federal state, cantons or autonomous regions.” True to style, the Turkish media highlighted Demirtas’ emphasis on an “independent state.”
The DTK stirred even more indignation in western Turkey the following day with a final declaration that announced “a decision for autonomy” for the Kurds. The 14-point declaration called for the creation of “democratic autonomous regions” across Turkey, to be governed by elected autonomous organs, running the realm of education among others. The other fields it listed for autonomous governance included health services, the courts and justice affairs, transport, energy, public order and budget management.
Though the DTK decision is hardly applicable today, it is significant for showing that autonomy will be the minimal condition the Kurdish movement will impose on any future negotiations for a settlement.
At present, however, even a cease-fire seems a distant prospect. The war will go on. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has vowed that the PKK militants will "choke in the ditches" they have dug in residential areas to keep the security forces away. Cemil Bayik, the co-chair of the PKK-dominated Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK), responded in kind last week. “No reason exists currently to end the armed struggle. Rather, the civil war in Turkey will intensify in the coming months,” he said.
The Dec. 22 mortar attack on the tarmac of Istanbul’s Sabiha Gokcen International Airport raises the specter of terrorist threats in Turkey’s big cities, emanating from the Kurdish conflict. The attack, which killed a cleaner and slightly damaged five passenger planes, was claimed by the Kurdistan Freedom Falcons (TAK), which has claimed deadly attacks on civilians, including foreign tourists, in previous years. Though the Kurdish movement rejects any links with it, TAK is believed to be nonexistent as a group, being merely a name the PKK uses as a front for terrorist attacks in urban centers. TAK’s claim of responsibility came in a statement, which described the mortar attack as a response to “the fascist assaults devastating Kurdish cities” and “the beginning of our operations in the new period.”
Turkey was ushered into 2016 with pledges of more bloodshed by both sides. In his New Year’s message, Erdogan said 3,100 terrorists “were rendered ineffective” in 2015, and “the security forces will continue to purge both mountains and cities from terrorists, inch by inch.” In its own message, the KCK vowed to keep up the war in the “metropolises” — i.e., the big cities in western Turkey — and mount “a fedayeen resistance unprecedented in the world.”
Sustaining the war between the PKK and the government forces threatens to spiral it out of control for both sides. As a result, whatever the consequences of the grave developments that would take place, Turkey’s real red lines — its borders — might be opened up for discussion.

Analyse, Témoignage, Hommage.
Samir Frangieh
a écrit :
(Lect 4 mn)
À la mémoire de Fouad Boutros, un homme qui a toujours refusé d'être « le porte-drapeau d'un seul clan, d'une seule communauté, d'une seule classe », et qui a œuvré, très tôt, à jeter les bases d'un État de droit.
Nous voilà aujourd'hui face à un État qui ne parvient même plus à assurer la continuité de ses institutions, au terme d'une période historique qui a commencé dans les années soixante, après la mise en échec de la tentative réformiste menée par Fouad Chehab et qui a été marquée par l'émergence de forces politiques communautaires qui ont succédé aux regroupements politiques traditionnels, lesquels étaient, eux, de nature transcommunautaire.
Cette communautarisation de la vie politique ne pouvait que déboucher sur la violence : violence au sein de chaque communauté pour trancher la question de savoir quel parti devait la représenter au niveau national, et violence entre les partis communautaires pour déterminer la part de chaque communauté dans le partage de l'État. Le recours aux forces étrangères pour trancher les conflits internes a été le fait de tous les partis communautaires qui se sont retrouvés, à des degrés différents, instrumentalisés par l'étranger.
Cette communautarisation de la vie politique a également eu pour effet de paralyser l'action de l'État qui s'est retrouvé incapable, à cause de la corruption et du clientélisme pratiqués au nom de la défense des « droits communautaires », d'assurer les besoins les plus élémentaires de sa société (eau, électricité, téléphone, routes, ramassage des ordures...).
Avec l'implication militaire du Hezbollah en Syrie, qui a aboli les frontières entre les deux pays, engagé l'armée libanaise dans une guerre qu'elle n'a pas choisie, et impliqué le Liban dans le conflit qui oppose sunnites et chiites à l'échelle du monde arabe, cette communautarisation de la vie politique a atteint ses limites, et cela à un moment où le monde qui nous entoure est entré en effet dans une période de bouleversements majeurs dont il est très difficile, à ce stade, de mesurer la portée.
Les acteurs de ces changements sont eux-mêmes dépassés par leur ampleur. Un mouvement extrémiste dont personne n'avait entendu parler avant 2014 résiste à des attaques menées contre lui par toutes les grandes puissances de la planète, à l'exception de la Chine, soutenues par une quarantaine d'autres États.
Cette guerre mondiale, censée mettre un terme au rêve de Daech de restaurer le califat, suscite chez ceux qui le combattent des rêves similaires. Eux aussi attendent du « futur » qu'il leur « restitue » le passé, le passé de l'Empire perse, pour les uns, de l'Empire ottoman, pour les autres, ou encore de l'empire de la sainte Russie pour les derniers venus sur le champ de bataille.
Et cette « guerre mondiale » que les grandes puissances pensaient mener loin de leurs frontières se déroule désormais à l'intérieur de leurs villes. Elles commencent aujourd'hui seulement à réaliser que le problème, comme l'a très bien expliqué Olivier Roy, ne réside pas dans une radicalisation de l'islam, mais dans une islamisation de la radicalité.
Il ne suffit plus dans cette perspective de combattre Daech pour mettre un terme à la violence car la radicalité qui se manifeste n'a pas son origine dans la religion, mais dans les inégalités qui ne cessent de croître partout dans le monde, provoquant une polarisation de la société porteuse de tous les dangers.
Que faire dans ce contexte régional et international particulièrement difficile pour éviter le pire et protéger notre pays ?
La politique telle que pratiquée aujourd'hui n'offre plus de solution. Réduite à une simple lutte pour le pouvoir entre forces communautaires, elle n'intéresse plus qu'une frange réduite des Libanais car elle n'a plus de lien avec le quotidien des gens, comme en a témoigné la campagne menée, l'été dernier, par le collectif « Vous puez ! ». Les instruments politiques utilisés (partis, programmes, modes d'action) relèvent d'ailleurs d'un autre temps.
Que pouvons-nous faire ?
Nous disposons de plusieurs cartes maîtresses dont nous n'avons jamais mesuré l'importance réelle.
La première de ces cartes est notre expérience du vivre-ensemble. Ce vivre-ensemble est la véritable richesse de ce pays, sa raison d'être dans cette région du monde. Nous n'avions pas compris l'importance de cette expérience qui ne relève pas d'un choix politique, mais d'une pratique de vie. Le Liban, et nous le découvrons aujourd'hui, est le seul pays au monde où des citoyens chrétiens et musulmans sont associés dans la gestion d'un même État. Il est aussi le seul pays dans le monde arabo-musulman où des citoyens sunnites et chiites sont également partenaires dans la gestion d'un même État.
Cette expérience est aujourd'hui d'une importance capitale dans un monde qui cherche aujourd'hui avec beaucoup de difficulté les moyens de gérer la diversité qu'engendre la mondialisation et de remédier à la dissolution du lien social qu'entraîne la crise du capitalisme.
La deuxième de ces cartes est la richesse et la diversité de notre société qui se démarque du monde politique par son dynamisme et sa modernité, et qui est porteuse de valeurs jusque-là considérées comme marginales comme la solidarité, la non-violence, l'altruisme, la gratuité, le don... Je pense aux associations humanitaires génératrices de solidarité et à toutes les initiatives en cours pour contrer la violence, du travail de mémoire à la défense des droits de l'homme, à la lutte menée contre la violence faite aux femmes, à la neutralité du Liban, au dialogue islamo-chrétien ...
Autre carte maîtresse, la présence d'une émigration capable d'influer – elle l'a fait en 2005 – sur les centres de décision et l'opinion publique des pays où elle se trouve.
Qui serait en mesure d'utiliser ces cartes pour jeter les bases d'un autre Liban ?
Tous ceux – et ils sont très nombreux – qui ont quitté leurs « prisons » identitaires, compris l'importance du lien à l'autre, cet autre qui nous forme comme nous le formons, et veulent vivre ensemble égaux dans leurs droits et leurs devoirs, et différents dans leurs multiples appartenances confessionnelles.
Pour être en mesure d'agir, ils doivent tisser des liens tout d'abord entre eux puis avec ceux qui leur ressemblent dans le monde arabe, et ceux qui en Europe rejettent les appels à la haine et recherchent les moyens de vivre ensemble.
Ils doivent surtout ne pas tomber dans « le discours de l'impuissance » et prendre conscience qu'ils sont, ici et ailleurs, largement majoritaires et peuvent, s'ils œuvrent ensemble à tisser un filet de protection pour le pays, changer le cours des évènements.
Malgré la montée aux extrêmes à laquelle nous assistons ces derniers jours, la violence n'est pas une fatalité à laquelle il faut se résigner, et l'expérience acquise depuis 1975 devrait nous permettre d'y faire face.