LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
January 26/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

Bible Quotations For Today

Come, everyone who thirsts, to the waters! Come, he who has no money, buy, and eat
Isaiah 55/10-13: “Come, everyone who thirsts, to the waters! Come, he who has no money, buy, and eat! Yes, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. Why do you spend money for that which is not bread? and your labor for that which doesn’t satisfy? listen diligently to me, and eat you that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness. Turn your ear, and come to me; hear, and your soul shall live: and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David. Behold, I have given him for a witness to the peoples, a leader and commander to the peoples. Behold, you shall call a nation that you don’t know; and a nation that didn’t know you shall run to you, because of Yahweh your God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for he has glorified you.” Seek Yahweh while he may be found; call you on him while he is near: let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return to Yahweh, and he will have mercy on him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” says Yahweh. “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. For as the rain comes down and the snow from the sky, and doesn’t return there, but waters the earth, and makes it bring forth and bud, and gives seed to the sower and bread to the eater; so shall my word be that goes forth out of my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing I sent it to do. For you shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing; and all the trees of the fields shall clap their hands. Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree; and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree: and it shall be to Yahweh for a name, for an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off.” God is Sovereign: Life often feels confusing. If we’re experiencing a tragedy or great turmoil, we might begin to doubt that God is in control. But these words remind us that the Lord is sovereign … even in our pain, even in our troubles. Through it all, his love is transforming us, perfecting us, completing us. James MacDonald in Gripped by the Greatness of God, explains it this way: “God’s sovereignty is first painful, then slowly powerful, and over much time seen to be profitable. It is to be studied with great sensitivity for the experiences of others and deep reverence for the One who controls the outcomes of every matter in the universe.”/

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on january 25-26/16
Are this week's Geneva talks on Syria doomed to fail/Mustafa al-Haj/Al-Monitor/January 25/16
Is Iran prepared for more Saudi surprises/Hassan Ahmadian/Al-Monitor/January 25/16
Why an Abbas departure would be bad for Israel/Uri Savir/Al-Monitor/January 25/16
Are Shiites divided over what to do about Saudi Arabia/Ali Mamouri/Al-Monitor/January 25/16
Pakistan: “Christian Girls Are Only Meant for the Pleasure of Muslim Men”/Raymond Brahim.com/Gatestone Institute/January 25/16
What Do Most of America's Voters Really Want?Is There A "Fourth Revolution" on the Horizon in America/Lawrence Kadish/ Gatestone Institute/January 25/2016
Is a ‘paradise with no people’ really a paradise/Turki Al-Dakhil/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
How Egypt is likely to mark January 25 this year/Abdallah Schleifer/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
New Saudi Arabia seen in a foreign ministry statement/Khairallah Khairallah/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
Saudi labor ministry finally addresses sponsorship system/Khaled Almaeena/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
The repercussions of nuclear deal on Iran’s policies/Raghida Dergham/Al Arabiya/January 25/16

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin for Lebanese Related News published on january 25-26/16
Correcting historical facts about Hezbollah's invasion of Beirut in 2007
Brig. Gen. Wissam Hassan's killers are ruling Lebanon
Not one day
Lebanese Swedish Employee Fatally Stabbed by Migrant in Sweden
Hizbullah, Mustaqbal Say Political Debate Must 'Preserve Civil Peace', Urge Activating Cabinet
Bassil Says Arab States Understand Lebanon's 'Neutral Stance'
Gemayel: No One Can Compel Us to Endorse a Candidate whose Objectives are Unknown
Army Repels Militants on Arsal Outskirts
Report: Bonne in Paris over Lebanese Presidential Crisis ahead of Rouhani Visit
Geagea Discusses General Situations with Wahhab in Phone Talks
Geagea, Berri in War of Words over Aoun's Candidacy
Report: Participation of FPM and Hizbullah in Cabinet Uncertain

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on january 25-26/16
Strong 6.1 quake hits Mediterranean between Morocco and Spain
Canada sends 'tough message' to Israel as a 'good friend'
Saudi FM: No plans for Iran mediation
Biden and Erdogan aim to ramp up ISIS fight
Three killed in bombing claimed by ISIS in northeast Syria
Syrian peace talks start Friday: U.N. envoy
Missile kills 11 Islamists, 5 others in Syria’s Idlib
Iranian preacher arrested over Saudi embassy attack
Yemen PM returns to Aden to reestablish govt
Bahrain jails 57 inmates for prison mutiny
Kurds accuse Syria pro-regime militia of bombings
EU confident Turkey to get 3 bn Euro refugee aid despite delay
Israel air raid targets Gaza after rocket attack
Egypt marks fifth anniversary of 2011 uprising
Tunisia police protest over pay in new test for govt
Libya’s recognized parliament rejects unity govt

Links From Jihad Watch Site for january 25-26/16
Four Iranian Christians prosecuted for “spreading Christianity”
“If…Koranic passages encourage terrorism…every Muslim would be a terrorist”
ISIS are among us, say Muslim refugees in Germany
Muslim teen who stabbed Israeli mother incited by Palestinian TV
India: Gandhi statue defaced with Islamic State slogan and threats
Pope’s envoy warns of “silent genocide” and “biggest terrorism in the world”
Islamic State in West Africa attacks 5 Nigerian villages, murders 36 people
British Leftists lead violence as they aid Muslim migrants to invade Calais
UK: New reforms give immigrants with more than one wife extra benefits
Italy: Islamic State jihadi arrested; talked of “fastening belt to reach heaven”
Hugh Fitzgerald: The Task You Have Taken Upon Yourself
UK convert to Islam joins Islamic State, family blames “right-wing” media
New Islamic State beheading video celebrates jihad murders, promises more
Sweden: Muslim migrant who beat, spat on mother deported to…Denmark
European authorities hand out cartoons telling Muslim migrants they shouldn’t assault women and gays kissing is OK
Florida Muslim pledged “allegiance to Allah,” said he would dress as The Joker and shoot his boss
UK: Muslim refugee threatened to cut out his wife’s heart because she had become “too English”

Correcting historical facts about Hezbollah's invasion of Beirut in 2007
Thawrat Al Arz/January 25/16
Al Marsad online published a piece on so-called events never mentioned before relating to the Hezbollah attack against West Beirut on May 7, 2008. The publication alleged that Dr Samir Geagea the leader of the Lebanese Forces Party contacted Mr Saad el Hariri and proposed to shut down the streets between West Beirut and East Beirut to back up Hariri and proposed to send bands of armed gunmen to fight Hezbollah militiamen inside the capital. The report alleged that Hariri refused the Geagea offer and asked him to accompany him to Doha. Our information dating from May 2008 confirms that such proposal was never made by Dr Geagea to Hariri. First there was an impossibility at the time to send within 48 hours, groups of trained armed elements by Geagea to Hariri. He doesn't have a standing paramilitary force able to mobilize in 48 hours and engage in fights with Hezbollah outside some few Christian neighborhoods. Second, the Lebanese Army had deployed a number of brigades around West Beirut for days.In addition, we know that Mr Walid Jumblat was frustrated that Dr Geagea didn't mobilize politically and on the ground to assist the Druze in the mountain as they were resisting Hezbollah fighters. More important Cedars Revolution leaders overseas had urged Dr Geagea when Hezbollah invaded to mobilize demonstrations in support of the Government and against Hezbollah. According to these leaders Geagea refused to organize demonstrations and any civil protest against Hezbollah in may 2008. His only response was to go to Doha.

Brig. Gen. Wissam Hassan's killers are ruling Lebanon
Thawrat Al Arz/Brig. Gen. Wissam al-Hassan who was chief of the Internal Security Forces Information Branch was assassinated in 2012 by Hezbollah. Before him and after him army officers, MPs and NGOs leaders were also eliminated by Iranian backed Hezbollah. No deal with any ally to Hezbollah, for the presidency or for any other office. This is a matter of national security not politics.

Not one day
Thawrat Al Arz/Many partisans are urging the frustrated public among the Lebanese Christians to give some more time to the Geagea-Aoun deal. To give it few months. And we are saying: not one day. This deal as it is must be opposed with no time given to Hezbollah to play its games. Pressures should be on Geagea and Aoun to cut ties with Hezbollah and create a free area in Lebanon. No time to other disaster experiences with Hezbollah.

Lebanese Swedish Employee Fatally Stabbed by Migrant in Sweden
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/January 25/16/Lebanese Swedish employee Alexandra Pierre Mezher has been killed at the hands of a migrant in Sweden, Lebanon's National News Agency reported on Monday. It said the 22-year-old victim hailed from the town of Qlayaa in the southern Marjeyoun district. Earlier on Monday, Agence France-Presse said a young asylum seeker stabbed and killed a female employee of the refugee center for unaccompanied minors where he was staying in western Sweden, quoting Swedish police. The 22-year-old victim was rushed to a nearby hospital but died of her wounds, police said. Police would not comment on the identity or nationality of the alleged attacker, except to say that he was a young man who was a resident of the center for 14- to 17-year-olds. He was under arrest for murder. "These kinds of calls are becoming more and more common. We're dealing with more incidents like these since the arrival of so many more refugees from abroad," police spokesman Thomas Fuxborg said. Sweden, like the rest of Europe, has been struggling with the continent's biggest migration crisis since World War II. A country of 9.8 million, Sweden took in more than 160,000 asylum seekers in 2015, which put it among the EU states with the highest proportion of refugees per capita.It has since tightened its asylum rules to curb the migrant flow.

Hizbullah, Mustaqbal Say Political Debate Must 'Preserve Civil Peace', Urge Activating Cabinet
Naharnet/January 25/16/Hizbullah and al-Mustaqbal movement stressed Monday the need to “address the points of contention” in the country in a “calm and responsible” manner and to activate the work of the paralyzed cabinet. The conferees “discussed the points of contention among the parties and means to address them through a calm and responsible political debate, in a manner that would preserve and enhance civil peace,” said a joint statement issued by the two parties after their 23rd dialogue session in Ain al-Tineh. They also agreed to “activate the work of the government and give a chance for addressing people's affairs,” the terse statement added. On Sunday, senior Hizbullah official Sheikh Nabil Qaouq strongly criticized Mustaqbal over its ties with Saudi Arabia and support for the Syrian uprising against President Bashar Assad. A Saudi-Iranian war of words has been raging for several weeks now after Riyadh executed prominent Shiite dissident Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr and angry Iranian protesters torched the Saudi embassy in Tehran. The tensions between Riyadh and Tehran have led to an exchange of tirades in Lebanon between Saudi Arabia and Iran's main allies in the country – Mustaqbal and Hizbullah.

Bassil Says Arab States Understand Lebanon's 'Neutral Stance'
Naharnet/January 25/16/Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil stressed Monday that the Arab countries have started to understand Lebanon's “neutral stance” towards the events in the region, days after al-Mustaqbal movement accused the ministry of breaching “Arab consensus.”“We are sensing understanding of Lebanon's neutral stance but sometimes this issue infuriates certain parties because each party wants to take us in a certain direction,” Bassil told reporters in Abu Dhabi on the sidelines of an Arab League consultative meeting.“In the end, this stance will protect Lebanon and its importance will be understood in the long run,” the minister added. Asked about Arab appreciation of Lebanon's so-called dissociation policy, Bassil said: “They appreciated it to a great extent, but the ongoing incitement which originated in Lebanon is creating an atmosphere in the media that is distorting the Lebanese stance and misleading public opinion.” "The Arab issues, including the Saudi-Iranian dispute, are weighing heavily on the entire Arab political life. But we believe that through its neutral stance, Lebanon can preserve its own national unity and become an effective example that can play a positive role” in the region, Bassil added.
On Friday, Lebanon's Foreign Ministry stressed that its decision to abstain from voting on a statement condemning Iran during a meeting for the world's top Muslim body was in line with Lebanon's dissociation policy as well as with the stances that were voiced during the last national dialogue session. Its clarifications come after al-Mustaqbal movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri and Mustaqbal bloc chief MP Fouad Saniora strongly criticized the decision to abstain from voting and described it as a breach of Arab consensus on supporting Saudi Arabia. The statement of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation condemned “the aggressions against the missions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in Tehran and Mashhad."It followed an extraordinary meeting requested by Saudi Arabia after protesters in Iran in early January set fire to the embassy in Tehran and a consulate in the second city of Mashhad. The violence against Riyadh's missions occurred after Saudi Arabia executed prominent dissident Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr, a driving force behind anti-government protests in the kingdom.

Gemayel: No One Can Compel Us to Endorse a Candidate whose Objectives are Unknown
Naharnet/January 25/16/Kataeb Party leader MP Sami Gemayel reiterated Monday that his party cannot elect a presidential candidate whose political agenda is not clear. “No one can compel us to endorse any candidate whose objectives are not known to us. We cannot endorse a candidate if we don't know the destination that he will take us to … That's why we have asked for clarifications,” said Gemayel after meeting National Liberal Party chief MP Dori Chamoun in Sodeco. “We are not reassured so far by any of the proposed candidates in terms of their compatibility with the sovereign and national course,” he added. Gemayel stressed however that it is important to “activate the constitutions and respect our Constitution and democracy, starting with the February 8 session” in parliament to elect a new president. “All circumstances are available for holding the presidential election, as we now have two declared candidates and one of them enjoys public support,” Gemayel noted, referring to Change and Reform bloc chief MP Michel Aoun and Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh – who both belong to the March 8 camp. “Will the parties accept to abide by democracy or will they keep evading it?” Gemayel wondered. Lebanon has been without a president since May 2014 when the term of Michel Suleiman ended without the election of successor. The blocs of Aoun and Hizbullah and some of their allies have been boycotting the electoral sessions. Al-Mustaqbal movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri launched late in 2015 a proposal to nominate Franjieh as president. Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, Hariri's ally in the March 14 camp, was a presidential candidate at the time and some observers have said that the LF leader has recently nominated Aoun for the presidency as a “reaction” to Hariri's proposal, a claim Geagea has denied. His endorsement of Aoun's bid was declared in a landmark ceremony in Maarab last Monday and it followed months of political rapprochement talks between the LF and Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement.

Army Repels Militants on Arsal Outskirts
Naharnet/January 25/16/Several militants were injured after the Lebanese army clashed with fighters trying to infiltrate Lebanon through the outskirts of the northeastern border town of Arsal, the state-run National News Agency reported on Monday. NNA said the army thwarted the attempt of the gunmen to enter Masyada and Wadi al-Hosn which lie on Arsal's outskirts after intense fighting that lasted till dawn. The troops pushed back the militants, leaving several of them injured, the agency added. The Islamic State extremist group and al-Qaida-linked al-Nusra Front are taking the porous Lebanese-Syrian border as a refuge. The gunmen clash with the army occasionally. But the major confrontation between them took place in August 2014 when they overran Arsal.

Report: Bonne in Paris over Lebanese Presidential Crisis ahead of Rouhani Visit
Naharnet/January 25/16/French Ambassador Emmanuel Bonne was in Paris on Monday to brief top officials on the result of his talks with the rival Lebanese factions on the presidential deadlock. Pan-Arab daily al-Hayat quoted an informed source as saying that Bonne will submit a report to the French Foreign Ministry, which will inform the Elysee Palace on the result of separate meetings he has held with Free Patriotic Movement founder MP Michel Aoun, Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea and Marada Movement leader lawmaker Suleiman Franjieh. Last week, Geagea withdrew from the presidential race and backed his long-time rival Aoun in an attempt to end the 20-month deadlock that left Baabda Palace vacant following the end of President Michel Suleiman's six-year term in May 2014. But several political parties refused to back down from their support for Franjieh. Bonne's briefing on the presidential crisis will likely be a major part of the discussions that will take place between French President Francois Hollande and his Iranian counterpart Hassan Rouhani during his upcoming visit to Paris, the sources said. But al-Joumhouria daily quoted diplomatic sources as saying that Iran considers Lebanon's presidential elections a local matter. Tehran believes that “Hizbullah and its allies should take the decision they deem appropriate,” said the sources. They said the Lebanese should not bet on the Hollande-Rouhani summit to achieve a breakthrough in the presidential deadlock. Rouhani's trip to Italy and France this week would be his first to Europe since the implementation of the deal curbing Tehran's nuclear activities in exchange for the lifting of punishing economic sanctions.

Geagea Discusses General Situations with Wahhab in Phone Talks
Naharnet/January 25/16/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea on Monday called Arab Tawhid Party chief ex-minister Wiam Wahhab, state-run National News Agency reported. Talks tackled the “general situations,” the agency said. The phone call follows a TV interview for Wahhab on Sunday evening during which he praised Geagea despite political rivalry. “Geagea is a political rival but he is not an enemy. He has the courage of both rivalry and reconciliation and this is something that must be appreciated,” said Wahhab. The former minister, who is close to the Syrian regime, has repeatedly hailed in recent days Geagea's nomination of Change and Reform bloc chief MP Michel Aoun for the presidency. Lebanon has been without a president since May 2014 when the term of Michel Suleiman ended without the election of successor. Al-Mustaqbal movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri launched late in 2015 a proposal to nominate Marada Movement chief MP Suleiman Franjieh as president. Geagea, Hariri's ally in the March 14 camp, was a presidential candidate at the time and some observers have said that the LF leader has nominated Aoun for the presidency as a “reaction” to Hariri's proposal, a claim Geagea has denied.
His endorsement of Aoun's bid was declared in a landmark ceremony in Maarab last Monday and it followed months of political rapprochement talks between the LF and Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement.

Geagea, Berri in War of Words over Aoun's Candidacy
Naharnet/January 25/16/Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea's support for the candidacy of Free Patriotic Movement founder MP Michel Aoun has sparked a war of words between Geagea and Speaker Nabih Berri. Berri was asked by his visitors about a recent comment made by Geagea that the ball is now in the court of Hizbullah, which should force its allies to vote for Aoun as president if it were true in its intentions to support him. “What should Hizbullah do?” the speaker wondered. “Do they want it to put a gun, a rifle or a rocket in the head of Saad Hariri, Walid Jumblat, Suleiman Franjieh and Nabih Berri to elect a certain candidate?” “Things are not done that way,” Berri said. But Geagea responded via twitter, asking "on what grounds Michel Aoun is the candidate of the March 8” alliance. The LF chief's tweet promoted a response from Berri, who said: “On the same grounds of your nomination by the March 14” alliance. The war of words came as Berri told his visitors in remarks published in newspapers on Monday that the February 8 session set for the election of a president will most likely be adjourned for lack of quorum. He ruled out the election of a new president in the upcoming session after Geagea's endorsement of Aoun's candidacy last week. Several parties, including Berri's Amal Movement, al-Mustaqbal Movement that is led by ex-PM Saad Hariri and MP Walid Jumblat's Progressive Socialist Party, have announced their support for Marada chief Suleiman Franjieh. Asked whether Hizbullah was capable of pressuring the Marada chief, who is also a lawmaker, into withdrawing from the presidential race, the speaker asked: “Why would Franjieh accept to pull out” of the race as long as he has the strongest backing? Berri had reiterated on several occasions that he would call for a parliamentary session to elect a president as soon as the Christians agree on a candidate. Last week, Geagea withdrew from the presidential race and backed his long-time rival Aoun in an attempt to end the 20-month deadlock that left Baabda Palace vacant following the end of President Michel Suleiman's six-year term in May 2014. The LF chief's support for Aoun came more than a month after Hariri struck a deal with Franjieh to back him for the presidency in return for the Mustaqbal leader to be chosen as a prime minister. The move angered both Aoun and Geagea, who announced their rapprochement last Monday. But the two officials failed to strike a deal with Marada and the Kataeb Party, the two other influential Christian parties in the country. “The Aoun-Geagea agreement is not enough,” Berri said. “How about the two other parties?” he asked. The seat of the Maronite church has stressed that “there are four powerful Christian parties and that there should be consensus among them on the next president,” Berri told his visitors. He said that he has advised two FPM officials, Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil and Education Minister Elias Abou Saab, to visit Franjieh and strike a deal with him.
Berri reiterated that the LF-FPM rapprochement is a great leap forward in inter-Christian ties but does not resolve the presidential crisis.

Report: Participation of FPM and Hizbullah in Cabinet Uncertain
Naharnet/January 25/16/The Free Patriotic Movement is said to take escalatory measures and resign from the cabinet if it finds out that activating the government's work is only meant to postpone the presidential election, An Nahar daily said on Monday. “We have fears that the issue of military appointments might be intentionally obstructed as a reaction to the candidacy of Aoun,” FPM sources told the daily. “The FPM might take escalatory measures and could even resign form the government if it finds out that the goal from reactivating the cabinet's work aims at postponing indefinitely the presidential polls,” they added.
Last week, Prime Minister Salam called the cabinet to session with 379 items on its agenda to be discussed on February 8. On the other hand, As Safir newspaper said that “an understanding has been reached with founder of the FPM Michel Aoun and that he has agreed to let ministers of the movement along with Hizbullah's to attend the session in light of an agreement reached on the military appointments that took his demands into consideration. “The return of the ministers is not linked to the fate of the position of army commander, which will see the end of the term of its current head, Gen. Jean Qahwaji, in September,” added As Safir.For his part, Salam stated that he has not been informed of any understanding regarding the thorny file of military appointments, noting that he will not include any controversial item on the agenda unless all parties agree on it, according to An Nahar. Disputes over the military appointments and the cabinet’s decision-making mechanism have been the main reasons hampering the government’s work. Ministers of the FPM and Hizbullah have been boycotting the meetings over demands to appoint specific figures in the military council. Three military council posts, reserved for a Shiite, a Greek Orthodox and a Catholic, have been vacant for the past two years.

Strong 6.1 quake hits Mediterranean between Morocco and Spain
AFP, Rabat Monday, 25 January 2016/A strong 6.1-magnitude earthquake struck early Monday in the Mediterranean between Morocco and Spain, the US Geological Survey said. The shallow quake hit at 4:22 am (0422 GMT) 62 kilometres (39 miles) north of the Moroccan city of Al Hoceima and 164 kilometres east-southeast of Gibraltar, the USGS said. It was followed by a 5.3-magnitude tremor. In its initial assessment of the quake's impact, the USGS said there was "a low likelihood of casualties and damage". Tremors were felt in the south of Spain and in the Spanish enclave of Melilla bordering Morocco, but the authorities reported no victims. "For the moment there has been only material damage and we haven't detected any that is very serious," Isidro Gonzalez, a Melilla official, told Cadena Ser radio. "Some high buildings have cracks," he said, adding that part of facades and balconies had collapsed.
Authorities in Melilla have decided to keep schools closed as a precautionary measure to review the state of the buildings. In the Malaga area in southern Spain, on the other side of the Strait of Gibraltar, many inhabitants also felt the earthquake. In February 2004 a strong 6.3 earthquake that hit near Al Hoceima killed nearly 630 people.

Canada sends 'tough message' to Israel as a 'good friend'
Ynetnews/Reuters/Published: 1.25.16, 21:51 / Israel News/FM Stephane Dion, who also criticized Palestinians' 'unhelpful' international initiatives, calls on Israel to make efforts to reduce violence, create conditions for return to talks.
OTTAWA - Canada's new Liberal government said on Monday it was delivering a "tough message" to Israel as a good friend after expressing concern about Israeli-Palestinian violence, Israeli settlements and unilateral Palestinian moves. The statement came a day after Foreign Minister Stephane Dion was criticized for saying Palestinian initiatives toward statehood in international forums and continued Israeli settlements were unhelpful. "We're steadfast allies and good friends, and good friends can occasionally deliver tough messages, but it's by no means to suggest that we're somehow retreating from any kind of support of Israel," said Joe Pickerill, Dion's spokesman. Dion on Sunday had issued a statement expressing concern about the Israeli conflict, sparking charges by the Conservative opposition that the Liberal government was being unfairly critical of Israel. "As a steadfast ally and friend to Israel, Canada calls for all efforts to be made to reduce violence and incitement and to help build the conditions for a return to the negotiating table," Dion said in the statement on Sunday. His spokesman, Joe Pickerill, elaborated on Monday by saying that Canada was not trying to create a "faux balance" by equating violence by either side, but felt the need to speak out. "We're not necessarily equating the violence by any means on both sides, but there have been issues, and we need to be in a position to point that out," Pickerill said after more than 100 days of violence between the two sides. Dion's statement drew a swift attack from the Conservative Party, which had adopted a resolutely pro-Israel policy while in power, for not laying blame "for recent terrorist rocket and knife attacks with Hamas, a listed terrorist organization in Canada."The Conservatives, who lost the October election to the Liberals, said that by omission, the statement "equates such terrorist attacks with Israeli settlement construction. This is unacceptable."

Saudi FM: No plans for Iran mediation
Saudi Gazette, Manama Monday, 25 January 2016/Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir has denied the existence of any Pakistani mediation between his country and Iran. The minister told the media on the sidelines of the first ministerial session of the Arab-India Cooperation Forum that some countries had offered to mediate and communicate ideas between Riyadh and Tehran, stressing that Iran knows what is required from it and there will not be mediation unless Iran responds positively. Over 35 years, Iran has adopted a hostile approach toward Arab countries by meddling in their internal affairs, sowing sectarian strife and backing terrorism as confirmed by numerous strong evidences, al-Jubeir said. Iran is among the terrorism-supportive countries listed by the United Nations and several states other than the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. There are governmental agencies in Iran listed as terrorist organizations.
There are also officials in Iran’s security agencies wanted for their involvement in terrorism. “Iran should change its policy and method of dealing with its neighbors on the principle of good neighborliness and refrain from interference in the internal affairs of other countries so that the path will be open to building better relations with its neighbors,” he said. This article first appeared in the Saudi Gazette on Jan. 25, 2016.

Biden and Erdogan aim to ramp up ISIS fight
Reuters, Washington Monday, 25 January 2016/The White House said Vice President Joe Biden and Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan discussed ways to deepen cooperation in the fight against ISIS in a meeting on Saturday in Istanbul. Biden and Erdogan also talked about the “importance of de-escalating recent tensions between Turkey and Iraq in a manner that respects Iraqi sovereignty,” the White House said in a statement released on Sunday.

Three killed in bombing claimed by ISIS in northeast Syria
Reuters, Beirut Monday, 25 January 2016/A bomb attack claimed by Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) killed at least three people in the city of Qamishli in the mostly Kurdish-controlled Hasaka province of northeast Syria on Sunday, a Kurdish official and a monitoring group said. The motorcycle bomb went off in a mostly Christian area and wounded another seven people, said Redur Xelil of the Kurdish YPG militia. ISIS claimed the attack in a statement posted online shortly after the incident. The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which monitors the civil war in Syria, confirmed the blast and the casualties. Twin suicide bombings also claimed by Islamic State killed and wounded dozens of people at the end of December. The militant group has carried out a number of attacks in Hasaka province, including one that killed dozens of people earlier that month. The YPG is fighting ISIS in Hasaka province with the support of U.S.-led air strikes. It has been the most effective partner on the ground in Syria for the U.S.-led coalition fighting ISIS.

Syrian peace talks start Friday: U.N. envoy
AFP | Geneva Monday, 25 January 2016/Peace talks between the warring parties in Syria, which were scheduled to open Monday, will instead begin in Geneva on Friday and last for six months, the UN’s Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura said. De Mistura told reporters that the start date was pushed back because of a “stalemate” over the make-up of the delegations, but that the invitations to the participants were expected to be sent out on Tuesday. “We are going to aim at proximity talks starting on the 29th and ongoing for six months” De Mistura said, adding that the first round was expected to last between two to three weeks. “There will be no opening ceremony,” the U.N. envoy said. Securing a ceasefire and space to deliver humanitarian aid to suffering Syrians will be among the first priorities, he added. “We are all feeling... the time has come to at least try hard to at least produce an outcome,” De Mistura told reporters. The talks will mark the first time the warring sides will take part in negotiations since January 2014, when de Mistura’s predecessor Lakhdar Brahimi hosted high-level but fruitless meetings in the Swiss cities of Montreux and Geneva, a round of talks known as Geneva II.

Missile kills 11 Islamists, 5 others in Syria’s Idlib
By AFP Beirut Monday, 25 January 2016/At least 11 Islamist fighters and five civilians were killed as a ballistic missile struck a building in northwest Syria during a meeting between rebel groups, a monitor said Monday. “Eleven fighters from (Al-Qaeda affiliate) Al-Nusra Front and other Islamist groups were killed on Sunday, along with five civilians, when a ballistic missile hit a police station being used as a court in Salqin” in Idlib province, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. The Britain-based monitoring group said it was unclear if the missile was fired by Russian or Syrian forces. The monitor said the toll could rise further because a number of people had been seriously wounded in the strike. The missile struck during a reconciliation meeting between members of Al-Nusra and the conservative Islamist militant group Ahrar al-Sham, who had exchanged fire in the town earlier the same day. The two groups are leading members of the Army of Conquest alliance, a powerful coalition that took control of Idlib province last year. Staunch regime ally Russia began an aerial campaign in Syria last September after a string of government losses, including in Idlib, and has since helped reverse some opposition momentum. Moscow says its strikes target the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militant group and other “terrorists,” but activists and opposition forces accuse it of targeting other rebels and often killing civilians. Earlier in January, Russian raids in Idlib province, which borders Turkey, killed at least 81 people, including 23 Al-Nusra fighters but also 52 civilians and prisoners. According to the Observatory, more than 1,000 civilians have been killed in Russian strikes since they were launched on September 30. The raids have also killed nearly 900 ISIS fighters, and more than 1,100 militants from other opposition groups, including Al-Nusra. Moscow has dismissed claims of civilians deaths in its operations as “absurd.” Overall, more than 260,000 people have been killed in Syria’s war which began with anti-government protests in March 2011.

Iranian preacher arrested over Saudi embassy attack
By Staff writer Al Arabiya English Monday, 25 January 2016/Iranian authorities have arrested the cleric and preacher Hassan Kurdmihan amid allegations that he lead the attack on the Saudi embassy in Tehran, following the execution of the Saudi Shiite preacher Nimr al-Nimr earlier in January. It is claimed that Kurdmihan, who is also the director of religious institutions in Tehran and Karaj, was involved in the attack that saw angry crowds set fire to the building. Member of the Iranian parliament’s national security and foreign affairs commission, Mohammadreza Mohseni Sani said Kurdmihan was arrested after returning to Iran from Syria where he had been serving in the ranks of the Revolutionary Guard fighting alongside forces loyal to Bashar al-Assad. But the Assistant of the Interior Minister for Security Affairs Hussein Dhulfaqari had previously said the “mastermind” of the embassy attack “was detained by Iranian security forces outside Iran;” without disclosing their name. Dhulfaqari added the attack on the embassy was “an operation previously planned by a group well-known for its religious activities.” Often referred to as the “young preacher,” Kurdmihan, is linked to Ansar Hezbollah and has created a number of religious committees in Tehran’s various districts. Ansar Hezbollah which was established in 1995 and receives financial support from some Revolutionary Guard leaders and other high-ranking officials. Mohseni Sani says Kurdmihan has been backed by a number of institutions, but did not disclose which they were. His arrest comes along with at least 100 others connected to the attacks on the Saudi embassy and consulate, although according to the Iranian judiciary some have already been released. Two Palestinians shot dead after stabbing two Israelis in West Bank: Police
Reuters, Jerusalem Monday, 25 January 2016/Two Palestinians were shot dead after stabbing two Israeli women on Monday in the West Bank, police said, in an emerging pattern of assaults inside Jewish settlements in the occupied territory. One of the women was in critical condition and the other sustained moderate wounds after the attack in Beit Horon, a settlement on a highway that links Jerusalem and coastal Tel Aviv and cuts through the foothills of the West Bank. "The two terrorists were killed by security forces," police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said, adding that two explosive devices were found at the scene. It was the latest incident in an almost four-month long surge of violence that has raised concern of wider escalation, a decade after the last Palestinian uprising subsided. It followed three stabbings last week inside settlements carried out by Palestinian teenagers, according to Israeli authorities. Many of the attacks on Israelis at the start of the bloodshed occurred in Jerusalem and other cities. But much of the violence has shifted to the West Bank, where settlers live adjacent to Palestinian population centres. On Saturday, a 13-year-old Palestinian girl, who according to an Israeli policewoman "had fought with her family and left home with a knife and intended to die", tried to stab a security guard at a West Bank settlement and was then shot dead by him. Since the start of October, Israeli forces have killed at least 151 Palestinians, 97 of them assailants according to authorities. Most the others have died in violent protests. Almost daily stabbings, shootings and car-ramming attacks by Palestinians have killed 25 Israelis and a U.S. citizen. Many of the Palestinian assailants have been teenagers. The identities and ages of the alleged attackers on Monday were not immediately released.
On Jan. 17, an Israeli mother of six was stabbed to death at her home in a West Bank settlement and a 15-year-old Palestinian was arrested for the attack. A day later, Israeli troops shot and wounded a 17-year-old Palestinian who had stabbed and wounded a pregnant Israeli woman in a settlement.
The bloodshed has been fuelled by various factors including frustration over the 2014 collapse of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and the growth of Jewish settlements on land Palestinians seek for an independent state.
Palestinian leaders have said that with no breakthrough on the horizon, desperate youngsters see no future ahead. Israel says young Palestinians are being incited to violence by their leaders and Islamist groups that call for Israel's destruction.

Yemen PM returns to Aden to reestablish govt
The Associated Press, Sanaa Monday, 25 January 2016/The Yemeni prime minister and his Cabinet returned on Monday to the southern port city of Aden, months after he was targeted in a suicide bombing that forced them to leave the country. Khaled Bahah's return is aimed at establishing a permanent government presence in Aden, officials in his office said. Yemen has been torn by conflict since 2014, when Houthi militias allied with a former president captured large swaths of the country, including the capital, Sanaa, which they took in September that year. In March 2015, a coalition of mainly Gulf Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia launched airstrikes against the Houthis and later, a ground operation to retake back ground from the rebels. More than 5,800 people have been killed and over 80 percent of Yemen's population is in dire need of food, water and other aid, according to the United Nations.

Bahrain jails 57 inmates for prison mutiny
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Monday, 25 January 2016/A Bahraini court on Monday has handed 15-year additional jail sentences to 57 inmates involved in a prison unrest, the public prosecution office said on Monday. The inmates were convicted of rioting and mutiny following the outbreak of unrest at the Jaw prison south of the capital Manama last March, the source said. In a statement published by Bahrain’s public prosecutor through the office’s social media accounts, the 57 inmates were involved in a riot that included “destruction of prison facilities, climbing up to the rooftops and pelting rocks at prison guards.”

Kurds accuse Syria pro-regime militia of bombings
AFP | Qamishli (Syria) Monday, 25 January 2016/Syria’s Kurds on Monday accused a pro-regime militia of being behind two deadly bomb blasts that killed nearly 20 people in the city of Qamishli in recent weeks. The statement comes a month after clashes erupted between Syrian Kurdish forces and pro-government fighters in the city in northeast Syria, where control is shared between the Kurds and the regime. A spokesperson for the Kurdish Asayish security forces said members of the National Defence Forces were behind blasts on December 31 and January 25, even though the Islamic State group claimed both attacks. “Based on our sources and evidence, and our investigations, we have confirmed that a faction within the National Defence Forces was behind the recent bombings,” Abdullah Saadun told AFP. “We have evidence, and this is the first time that we are saying the NDF is behind these blasts because we have the evidence,” he added. Saadun declined to elaborate on what evidence pointed to NDF involvement, but said the explosions were intended to “undermine security and create sedition”. The accusations, which were also made in an official Asayish statement, come after three people were killed on Sunday in a blast outside an Internet cafe in a mostly Christian part of Qamishli. That explosion followed a December 31 attack in which three blasts at restaurants in the city killed 16 people and wounded dozens more. Qamishli, in Hasakeh province, is under the shared control of the Syrian regime and Kurdish authorities, who have declared zones of “autonomous administration” across parts of north and northeast Syria. Syrian troops and seasoned Kurdish fighters have coordinated on security in Hasakeh province where ISIS militants have tried to advance. But tensions have erupted between the Asayish and the NDF, with two NDF members killed in an exchange of fire with Kurdish forces on December 17. The deaths came during several days of tensions between the NDF and Asayish, which had accused the pro-regime fighters of attacking one of their patrols.

EU confident Turkey to get 3 bn Euro refugee aid despite delay
By AFP Ankara Monday, 25 January 2016/EU foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini on Monday expressed confidence Turkey would soon receive a package of three billion euros ($3.2 bln) for mainly Syrian refugees, despite a delay of almost two months since the funds were agreed. Mogherini, leading a high-level delegation to Ankara for talks with the Turkish leadership, said discussions were ongoing on the disbursement of the funds but played down reports they were being held up by disagreements. The financial aid is the centerpiece of a deal agreed with Ankara on November 29 for the EU to step up support for Syrian and other refugees in Turkey in exchange for the Turkish authorities cutting the illegal flow of migrants to Europe. “The talks are ongoing, I am very much confident that the amount that was decided will be there in a reasonable time,” Mogherini said after talks with Turkish ministers in Ankara.
Media reports have suggested that Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, in particular, was blocking the disbursement of the funds to Turkey. But Mogherini said she wanted to play down “this dramatic approach” over the issue, emphasizing that the funds were “not pocket money.” “We are doing the preparatory work for spending this money in an appropriate way. Because again it’s not pocket money, it’s money that goes to projects,” she said. “The commission is carrying out all the assessments of the needs and projects,” Mogherini said. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu sought to also urge calm over the delay, saying: “We don’t take it personally.”“But any delay is affecting daily life of the refugees, schooling and medical needs,” he added. Turkey is currently playing host to at least 2.2 million refugees from the almost five year conflict in Syria and has repeatedly complained that the West failed to provide adequate financial help. But Brussels now wants to encourage Turkey to keep the refugees inside its territory, after hundreds of thousands of migrants crossed into the EU in 2015, creating tensions in EU societies. The November deal also gave new momentum to Turkey’s years-long push to become a member of the EU, which had long been held by disputes over Cyprus and human rights. Mogherini, along with Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn and Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid Christos Stylianides, are later due to hold talks with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. EU officials have expressed disappointment the November deal has not led to a noticeable reduction in the numbers of migrants crossing the Aegean Sea from Turkey, with boats still arriving on the Greek islands daily despite the winter weather.

Israel air raid targets Gaza after rocket attack
AFP, Jerusalem Monday, 25 January 2016/The Israeli air force targeted a Hamas military training facility in central Gaza overnight on Sunday in response to a rocket attack, the army said. A rocket was fired from the Gaza Strip Sunday night and struck southern Israel with no reports of casualties or damage, the Israeli Defense Forces said on its official Twitter account. About 30 rockets, fired from the Palestinian enclave controlled by the Islamist group Hamas, have struck Israeli territory since the end of the Gaza war in 2014, according to the Israeli army. Militant groups claiming ties with the ISIS militant group say they have been behind several rocket attacks in recent months, but Israel holds Hamas responsible for all such incidents.

Egypt marks fifth anniversary of 2011 uprising
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Monday, 25 January 2016/Egypt on Monday marked the fifth anniversary of the January 25 uprising that toppled longtime ruler Hosni Mubarak. On the eve of the anniversary, President Abdelfattah al-Sisi warned against protests and disruption to security in a speech that paid tribute to the 2011 revolution. In this still image taken from video, Egypt's Sisi said the protesters killed during the 18-day revolt had sought to revive "noble principles" and found a "new Egypt." The televised speech came amid a recent spate of arrests and a heightened security presence in the capital Cairo.
Clearly, authorities are determined that the occasion will not be marked by popular demonstrations, or militant attacks.Sisi said the 2011 uprising had deviated from its course and was forcibly hijacked for "personal gains and narrow interests," in reference to the to the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been banned and declared a terror group after Sisi, as military chief, led the ouster in July 2013 of Islamist President Mohammad Mursi, who hails from the Brotherhood. The "June 30 revolution" - a reference to the day in 2013 when millions of Egyptians demonstrated on the streets against the rule of Mursi and his Muslim Brotherhood – “corrected the course of the 2011 uprising,” Sisi said. Then Egyptian army chief Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi announced the overthrow of former President Mohammad Mursi on July 3. (File Photo: AFP) The June 30 revolution, he said, took place to "restore the free will of Egyptians and continue to realize their legitimate aspirations and deserved ambitions."Sisi, who came to office in 2014 after a landslide election win, cautioned against high expectations for democracy and freedoms. "Democratic experiences don't mature overnight, but rather through a continuing and accumulative process," he said, before emphasizing the need to exercise "responsible freedom" to avoid "destructive chaos"- rhetoric harking back to Mubarak's 29-year authoritarian rule, when he repeated assertions that gradual democratization ensures stability. "Egypt today is not the Egypt of yesterday, we are building together a modern, developed and civilian state that upholds the values of democracy and freedom," he said of the 2 ½ years since the removal of Mursi, Egypt's first freely elected president. (With The Associated Press)

Tunisia police protest over pay in new test for govt
By Tarek Amara Reuters, Tunisia Monday, 25 January 2016/Several thousand Tunisian police marched in protest to the presidential palace on Monday to demand more pay in the latest pressure on Prime Minister Habib Essid's government after a week of riots over joblessness. Tunisia's security forces are at the forefront of the country's war with Islamist militants, who have attacked army checkpoints and patrols, and launched major assaults on a tourist hotel a museum and the presidential guard last year. Chanting "Wages still in the red", and "We defend the nation, we want our rights," police officers dressed in civilian clothes marched to the presidential palace in Carthage on the outskirts of the capital Tunis. "We are looking to improve our situation like other sectors, especially as we are the frontline in defending the country," Chokri Hamada, a police union spokesman, told Reuters. "We don't have any trust in the government after all their promises." Presidential guard blocked the road near the palace where around 3,000 police gathered in peaceful protest. Tunisia's government is facing increasing challenges including a split within the ruling party Nidaa Tounes, a stubborn Islamist militancy, a weak economy and last week, an explosion of social tensions over jobs and opportunities. Thousands of young men took to the streets in Kasserine after an unemployed man committed suicide last week when he was refused a job. That sparked rioting in several cities across the country until the government declared a nationwide curfew. Tunisia has returned mostly to calm, but the protests underscored how vulnerable the North African country remains to social unrest despite the democratic transition it achieved five years after a revolt ousted autocrat Zine El-Abidine Ben Ali. The government is already under pressure from international lenders to cut public spending and trim its budget deficit as part of economic reforms meant to bolster growth and jobs. At least one policeman was killed in last week's protests, during which rioters burned police posts and stormed government buildings in more than five cities and towns in the worst unrest since the 2011 uprising against Ben Ali. France, Tunisia's former colonial ruler, last week pledged 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion) over five years to help Tunisia deal with its transition to democracy. Tunisia managed to avoid the violent after-shocks seen in other "Arab Spring" countries that toppled long-standing leaders in Egypt, Yemen and Libya. Its young democracy brought a new constitution, a political compromise between secular and Islamist parties and free elections. But economic advances have not emerged and many Tunisians worry more about jobs, high costs and lack of opportunities. Unemployment stood at 15.3 percent in 2015, up from 12 percent in 2010, due to weak growth and lower investment.

Libya’s recognized parliament rejects unity govt
Reuters, Benghazi Monday, 25 January 2016/Libya's internationally recognized parliament voted on Monday to reject a unity government proposed under a U.N.-backed plan to resolve the country's political crisis and armed conflict.
The rejection was widely expected, but signalled that mediators still face a steep challenge in winning support for a government. Of 104 members attending the session in the eastern city of Tobruk, 89 voted against an administration nominated last week, demanding a fresh proposal within 10 days. Since 2014, Libya has had two competing parliaments and governments, one based in Tripoli and the other in the east. Both are backed by loose alliances of armed groups and former rebels who helped topple Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. Western powers hope a unity government will deliver stability and be able to tackle a growing threat from Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militants. Eastern lawmakers said the proposed 32-member government had been rejected because it included too many posts. They called on the Tunis-based Presidential Council to put forward a shorter list of ministers. Lawmaker Mohamed al-Abani told Reuters that the proposed administration also did not represent the interests of the Libyan people but had been formed "according to the demands of militia leaders".Another lawmaker, Omar Tantoush, said he voted against the government because it did not "respond to current challenges". "They did not use the correct criteria in choosing ministers and the size of the government, especially now that the economy is collapsing in Libya," he said. In a second vote, 97 members of the Tobruk parliament backed the U.N.-mediated agreement that sets out a political transition or Libya and under which the Presidential Council operates. However, they rejected a clause that transfers power over military appointments to the new government. The armed forces allied to the eastern government are led by Gen Khalifa Haftar, a former Gaddafi ally who has become one of the most divisive figures among Libya's rival groups.
Many in the east see him as the future leader of a national army, but he is despised by forces allied to the government in Tripoli. Representatives from both sides of Libya's political divide signed the U.N.-backed plan in Morocco in December, but the agreement has faced stiff opposition from many members of the two parliaments and from factions on the ground. Two of the Presidential Council's nine members also refused to put their names to the proposed government when it was announced after a 48-hour delay last week.

Are this week's Geneva talks on Syria doomed to fail?
Mustafa al-Haj/Al-Monitor/January 25/16
DAMASCUS, Syria — There is no glimmer of hope for a solution to the Syrian crisis, even with the Geneva III peace talks planned for Jan. 25 between delegations of the regime and the opposition. As if the process weren't fragile enough, Army of Islam (Jaish al-Islam) political leader Mohammed Alloush was named chief negotiator for the opposition. The Russian and the Syrian governments consider the Army of Islam a terrorist organization.
Two years ago, the Geneva II Conference did not bring anything new to the table in terms of reaching a solution. The government’s delegation refused to even discuss the possibility that President Bashar al-Assad would step down and a transitional governing body would be formed. Instead, the delegation focused only on combating terrorism — a topic the regime uses to evade other subjects. The opposition and regime delegations did discuss humanitarian issues and the provision of aid to the besieged areas, but the only ensuing agreement that was ever implemented was the Madaya-Kefraya al-Fua Agreement — and action on that came only recently.
This is the general climate prevailing in Damascus regarding the third Geneva conference amid intensified international efforts to ensure the conference is held on schedule.
Staffan de Mistura, the UN special envoy to Syria, and the US State Department stressed the need for both sides to head to Geneva without setting preconditions for the peace talks, such as a cease-fire, providing humanitarian aid to the besieged regions, the need for another opposition delegation or the regime’s refusal to allow representatives of armed factions in the delegation. Yet what is happening on the ground does not reflect de Mistura's request at all. The peace talks are linked to the execution of UN conventions.
Russia had proposed creating a mixed delegation of representatives of various Syrian opposition factions to be composed of the delegation emanating from the Syria Supreme Commission for Negotiations formed at the Riyadh Conference last month and the delegation determined by Russia.
However, Moscow abandoned that proposal following a Jan. 15 meeting between Gennady M. Gatilov, Russia's deputy minister of foreign affairs, and his US counterpart, where they stressed the need for a third delegation whose members did not participate in the Riyadh conference.
This third delegation would be composed of Syrian opposition members favored by Russia. It would have the same number of members, vested with the same powers, as the Riyadh delegation in the hopes that this conference would not fail like Geneva II, where the opposition delegation was limited to members of the Syrian Coalition.
Media outlets, such as the website all4syria.info, published Jan. 15 the names of the 15 members of the delegation proposed by Moscow, including Qadri Jamil, head of the People's Will Party residing in Russia; Haytham Manna, head of the Qamh Movement; Randa Kassis, leader of the Movement for a Pluralistic Society; Amina Ossi, deputy foreign minister of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party in Syria; Samir Aita, head of the Democratic Platform; and Rim Turkmani, the president of the Madani organization. Turkmani, however, refused to participate.
Turkmani told Al-Monitor, “I completely reject the idea of having two opposition delegations. I refuse to participate in such an assortment. My name was included in these lists to divert attention from the names of other members who are more influential in terms of negotiation. … I have no influence over forces and parties on the ground. To make this clear, I sent a letter to the UN envoy and to the Russians clarifying my desire to stay away from this polarization.”
She told Al-Monitor that the civil society sector should also be represented at the negotiations as an unaffiliated observer.
In line with Turkmani’s position, Aita told all4Syria.info on Jan. 20 that he refuses to be part of an opposition delegation negotiating against another opposition delegation, preferring to avoid any new conflict among the factions. He also cited rumors about the possibility of a fourth delegation representing the civil society sector.
It should be noted that the Supreme Commission refuses the idea of ​​a third delegation and calls on Assad’s regime to take actions proving its good intentions. These actions include implementing the articles of Resolution No. 2254, which was unanimously adopted by the UN Security Council on Dec. 18 and calls for achieving a cease-fire, lifting the siege on Syrian cities and allowing access to humanitarian aid.
Riad Hijab, head of the Supreme Commission and former Syrian prime minister, said at a press conference Jan. 21 in Riyadh, “We cannot negotiate while our people starve to death and suffer shelling by internationally prohibited weapons.”
He added, “We do not want to repeat the 2014 negotiations, which lasted for two weeks, following which the regime refused to negotiate on the political transition clause. Now we focus on a clear agenda for the negotiations based on political transition, and we will only go to Geneva if the negotiations are genuine.”
The Supreme Commission announced Jan. 20 the list of members of the opposition delegation heading to Geneva. Asaad al-Zoghbi, a defected brigadier general of Assad’s regime, was appointed head of the delegation. Alloush, the representative of Jaish al-Islam, was named chief negotiator, which adds to the obstacles hindering the conference.
The Syrian news agency SANA reported Jan. 20 that Russia rejects allowing armed opposition factions to be represented at the Geneva conference. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that day, in a press conference following his meeting with his US counterpart John Kerry in Zurich, “We still believe the Jaish al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham movements are terrorist organizations. Jaish al-Islam has bombed residential areas in Damascus more than once.”
A Syrian diplomatic source told the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, “The Syrian government is serious in its quest to find political solutions to the crisis, but this cannot be disassociated from its determination to fight terrorism. We cannot negotiate with terrorists.”
Disagreements on the upcoming peace talks are not limited to disputes over the makeup of the opposition delegation. Internal disagreements within the Supreme Commission emerged Jan. 5 following the resignation of one of its most prominent members, Louay Hussein, president of the Building the Syrian State political movement, which seeks a democratic civil state in Syria.
Hussein spoke to Al-Monitor about his resignation. “The commission was formed on the basis of partisan quotas rather than through direct election of the members by the Riyadh conference. Each group chose its members in accordance with its special interests. This weakened the Supreme Commission, and my powers in this commission were significantly undermined. Mr. Riad Hijab, the commission coordinator, is issuing statements without referring to us,” he said.
Hussein tacitly voiced his objection to a statement by Hijab in which Hijab expressed condolences to Jaish al-Islam for the killing of its commander, Zahran Alloush.
Regarding the existence of a third opposition delegation, Hussein said, “The opposition should not be represented by two delegations. This will turn [the peace talks] into meetings for the exchange of views and positions.”
He stressed that the regime’s progress in Syria following the intervention of Russian forces affects the overall political process and not only the negotiations, because expectations have long been based on the balance of military forces.
Some opposition forces in Syria denounced their exclusion from the Geneva negotiations. Mahmoud Marai, head of the National Democratic Action Commission, told Al-Monitor, “Geneva II was held with the participation of the National Syrian Coalition only and it was a failure. Any meeting that excludes the various spectra of the opposition inside Syria is bound to fail.”
Majd Niazi, secretary-general of the Syria Homeland Party, denounced the composition of the opposition delegation and mocked it on her Facebook page Jan. 21. Niazi posted, “The chief negotiator of the delegation of the Syrian opposition abroad is Sheikh Mohammad Alloush (may God protect him) and he is a member of the political body of Jaish al-Islam. He will work hard (God willing) to turn Syria into the civil, secular, pluralistic and democratic state we dream of.”
These developments unfold as de Mistura announced that the negotiations may not be starting on schedule on Jan. 25. However, his office is proceeding as if they will and started to make hotel reservations for delegation members.

Is Iran prepared for more Saudi surprises?
Hassan Ahmadian/Al-Monitor/January 25/16
TEHRAN, Iran — When two rivals constantly make contradictory strategic decisions, they are bound to eventually end up in a direct confrontation. Iran and Saudi Arabia are no exception. Since 2005, both countries have made conflicting strategic decisions. For a long time, the fluidity and magnitude of the conflicts in the Middle East delayed the emergence of any direct Iranian-Saudi confrontation. However, with the emergence of the Arab Spring, the geopolitical atmosphere of the Middle East changed and the strategic conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia became deeper and more intense. While new fields of conflict emerged, the strategic conflict between Tehran and Riyadh took on obvious ideological dimensions. The two countries have gradually become two opposite poles in a spectrum of conflicts.
Over the past several years, Saudi Arabia has had to deal with an increasing number of strategic challenges. It has lost some of its allies, and it has proven incapable of managing bottom-up changes that have been taking place. Therefore, it launched a counter-revolution to contain the Arab Spring, while at the same time it pursued a policy of change when it came to its rivals. Syria has been the centerpiece of this approach, with the aim of weakening the Islamic Republic’s regional role. In competition with Riyadh, Tehran has meanwhile been supporting bottom-up change in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen with the objective of undermining the regional forces opposed to the axis between Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon’s Hezbollah movement.
In this atmosphere of conflicting strategies, conflicting ideologies have started to play a role as well. Through emphasis on the contradictory nature of various religious and sectarian identities, Saudi Arabia has sought to push minorities, including Shiite Muslims, into a corner. This addition of an ideological dimension to an existing strategic conflict has been problematic. It has resulted in Shiites confronting various authorities, including the Saudi government. Indeed, it was because of these developments that Saudi Arabia’s conflict with Yemen’s Houthi movement was once again revived. At the start of the Arab Spring, however, this problem was not a strategic priority for Saudi Arabia. At that time, Riyadh was more concerned with limiting Iran’s regional influence and presenting Iran as a sectarian phenomenon. Saudi Arabia had some success with this approach, but it had to deal with increasing challenges at the same time.
On the regional level, the confrontation between Iran and its allies with Saudi Arabia has engulfed all of the Middle East. Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen and Bahrain have been the main scenes of this clash of strategies. For a while, the existence of these battlegrounds prevented the emergence of any direct confrontation between Tehran and Riyadh. Moreover, while the strategic and ideological clash between Iran and Saudi Arabia continued, two new variables were introduced in the past year in regional equations.
The first variable is the signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which showed that the international community changed its approach toward the Islamic Republic. Although this change does not mean that the international community is in agreement with Iran’s regional policies, it nonetheless foresees a future for the Middle East in which Iran plays a role as a regional power. The United States and the European Union's insistence on Iran being present at the Syria peace talks in Vienna is a sign that the predicted future is approaching. The other variable is Russia’s military intervention in Syria, which changed the balance of the conflict in favor of the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Both of these variables clashed with Riyadh’s regional policies. Moreover, in addition, political and on-the-ground developments in 2015 did not proceed as expected by Riyadh. Iran’s participation in the Syria peace talks, the Syrian army’s advancement against Saudi-supported forces and the restarting of Yemen peace talks in Geneva in accordance with the balance of power on the ground were all developments that were not welcomed by Riyadh.
As far as Iran is concerned, however, the strategic atmosphere of the region changed for the better. The JCPOA unfettered Iran’s economic and political potentials. In the prevalent regional zero-sum game, political and battlefield developments in Syria and Yemen, as well as the advancement of Iraqi forces against the Islamic State, were viewed as gains for Iran and losses for its regional rivals. Therefore, the political developments in the region, when it comes to strategic and ideological conflicts, have resulted in relative satisfaction on Tehran’s part and dissatisfaction on Riyadh’s part. The latter has been the case to the extent that one can even talk of Riyadh’s strategic desperation in the said areas of conflict. This desperation becomes evident if one considers the way Saudi Arabia reacted to the JCPOA and its dissatisfaction with the Syria and Yemen peace talks held in Vienna and Geneva, respectively.
In an atmosphere of strategic rivalry, the challenged party has two options: compromise or orchestrate a crisis in order to change the undesired environment. Compromise occurs when the challenged player loses its ability to continue the rivalry and also when the subject and the area of conflict do not pose a threat to its existence. Saudi Arabia, however, does not fit into either of these scenarios; it has a good potential for continuing its rivalry with Iran — and even expanding it. More important, losing this strategic battle can have security and existential implications for the Saudi regime. Therefore, it is predictable that changing the atmosphere of its strategic competition with Iran is a priority for the Saudi regime.
During the past two years, there have been numerous international attempts to put the geostrategic conflicts in the Middle East back within a political framework. The Yemen and Syria peace talks are examples of such efforts, and also of how the latter has somewhat muted the sectarian aspects of regional rivalries. Desectarianizing the conflict is beneficial for Iran and Shiite communities in the region, because it helps them come out of the ideological-strategic isolation that they have been pushed into by Saudi Arabia. Indeed, developments since the emergence of the Arab Spring have demonstrated that sectarian ideological conflicts have made Iran and its allies vulnerable. Therefore, intensification of this aspect of the conflict and dragging Iran into it has the potential of changing the strategic atmosphere of the region. In such circumstances, the execution of peaceful Saudi Shiite cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr predictably led to the start of a crisis, and in spite of attempts at controlling it, a cut in diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Unlike Riyadh, which is strategically desperate and wants the regional atmosphere to change, Tehran is satisfied with the current trend in the region. Iranian strategists have decided to use their regional and international relations to defuse the pressures coming from Riyadh. Indeed, unlike for Saudi Arabia, continuation of the status quo is a desired strategy for Iran. This is why there was a consensus among the ruling Iranian political elite in opposing the attack on the Saudi Embassy. From a strategic point of view, the embassy attack was indeed a stupid and juvenile reaction that forced Iran into a setting predesigned by Saudi Arabia. This is why the Iranian administration strongly rejected it. Saudi Arabia, however, broke diplomatic relations with Iran as a result.
For now, the crisis over the embassy attack has subsided and it has not had any major strategic consequences. However, we are likely to witness similar developments in the future. Saudi Arabia is discontent with the regional situation and has a substantial potential to wreak havoc, as has been showcased in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. The crisis over the execution of Nimr and the shutting down of the Saudi Embassy shows that Riyadh is willing to use strategic surprises in order to change the atmosphere of the region.
Under these circumstances, certain media personalities who have connections to the Saudi monarch’s inner circle have discussed the possibility of Saudi Arabia going to war with Iran. In this vein, we should be ready for more surprises. Although Iran has been relatively successful in controlling the crisis that emerged following the embassy attack, it might not be possible to manage the next crisis. Considering the current situation, the major powers, and especially those who have the ability to affect the decision-making process in Riyadh, have an important role to play. Giving the Saudi strategists a free hand in dealing with al-Qaeda, the Islamic State, Yemen and Syria has proven to be disastrous. Is another great disaster on the way, or will Riyadh be contained?

Why an Abbas departure would be bad for Israel
Uri Savir/Al-Monitor/January 25/16
The Palestinian Maan News Agency published an article on Jan. 4 titled “Palestine after Abbas” by Ramzy Baroud. This is a clear indication that the prospect of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas resigning is a realistic possibility.
The rumor mill in Ramallah is working overtime as to the various scenarios for Abbas’ departure from power. Abbas represents the old guard of the Tunis leadership who, under Yasser Arafat, created the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). It’s a leadership that placed the Palestinian cause on the international agenda — first through the armed terrorist struggle against Israel and later with the Oslo Accord. This leadership succeeded in focusing world attention on the occupied territories and brought about the creation of the Palestinian Authority (PA), generating hope for independence and statehood. And it is on that hope that this leadership, and especially Abbas, disappointed the Palestinian people.
In the eyes of most Palestinians, the failed strategy of negotiation and diplomacy expresses a betrayal by the current leadership of the Palestinian national cause. According to a Dec. 14 poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, two-thirds of Palestinians are in favor of replacing Abbas.
A senior PA official told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity that there is no certainty that Abbas will indeed leave his post; moreover, Abbas actually has no intention of doing so. Nevertheless, the source admitted that the political situation of the president is unstable. Abbas is 81 years old and people want a changing of the guard. Armed struggle is more popular today in the Palestinian street than diplomacy. The economy suffers from a deep crisis given the security situation and the fatigue of the donor community.
The PA official, who is part of the president’s circle, blames the international community and part of the Arab world for letting Abbas down. He said, “International passivity is a kiss of death to Palestinian moderation.”
According to the source, the Palestinian leadership's future could be played out in various scenarios. The most likely scenario, he believes, is that Abbas will stay in power. While criticized across the board, Abbas is still viewed as the leader who enjoys the best relations with the international and Arab donor community. A second possibility would be that of changing leadership at a later stage (where Abbas stays only for the short-term). In that case, the security authorities might take over, with a possible new figurehead as president.
The PA official noted that the only outside party with a role in this possible future power struggle could be Egypt. The Egyptians may want to see an Abdel Fattah al-Sisi-like regime (led by a general) in the West Bank in order to counter Hamas.
Altogether, the PA official claimed that, in the long run, the old guard — “Tunis PLO” — regime would probably come to an end. A new leadership will emerge from Fatah grassroots in the West Bank. These new leaders would be young people who fought in the past intifadas — a leadership that would be more militant, more nationalistic, and in favor of a two-state solution without any concession to Israel. It would be an effective leadership, but with little love lost for liberal democracy.
For Israel, that would be bad news. This would most probably mean that continuation of the security cooperation would be conditioned on a short, realistic process toward a two-state solution. A personal confidante of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed very sharp criticism of Abbas. He described Abbas as a double-faced and weak person. To the world, the source claimed, Abbas speaks in a moderate language about a two-state solution. In reality, he is inciting violence by glorifying the individual terror acts. He attempts to prevent an intifada only out of self-interest. Netanyahu, he argued, sees in Abbas a rejectionist who refuses to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and a weak leader who will sooner or later be overthrown by the fundamentalists.
Despite this blatant criticism, the official admitted that Abbas is still the Israeli government’s preferred option and that the prime minister’s office is concerned about the possibility of Abbas being overthrown. Asked how the Netanyahu government would deal with an alternative leadership, he said that it would present to this new leadership the same conditions it had presented to Abbas: Without the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and an acceptance of Israel’s basic security arrangement demands, there would be no two-state solution.
Indeed, it is clear that the Netanyahu government is faced with a dichotomy: on one side, it wants a weak Abbas; on the other, it wants him to stay in power.
Netanyahu did his utmost to weaken Abbas, refusing a realistic two-state solution by significantly expanding settlement construction, releasing Hamas prisoners and not prisoners of Fatah and launching a worldwide communication campaign to depict Abbas as a terror instigator. But at the same time, privately, in the confidence of his close associates, Netanyahu prays for Abbas’ political survival.
Israel will probably soon find out that it does not work both ways.

Are Shiites divided over what to do about Saudi Arabia?
Ali Mamouri/Al-Monitor/January 25/16
Following the Jan. 2 execution of the Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr by Saudi Arabia, Shiite leaders from around the world issued statements of condolence and protest. Among the collection of stances expressed, a clear distinction could be seen between those reflecting the position of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and those following the thinking of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, leader of the Najaf Hawza. ​This distinction has been of consequence to the Saudi regime and will perhaps increase in importance with implementation of the Iranian nuclear deal and the public opposition to Nimr's execution.
Khamenei issued a statement Jan. 3 that not only condemned the execution of Nimr and hurled accusations at the Saudi regime, but also went so far as to portend its demise. “The oppressed martyr’s blood will leave its mark, and divine vengeance shall strike down Saudi politicians for their conduct in his regard,” wrote Khamenei. In contrast, Sistani avoided attacking the Saudi regime, and instead expressed solidarity with the families of the 47 people executed — four Shiites (including Nimr) and the rest Sunnis, most of them affiliated with al-Qaeda. Sistani simply stated, “We condemn and denounce what occurred and express our condolences and sympathy to their bereaved families for this great loss.”
The different approaches of the two ayatollahs reflect a divergence between two distinct Shiite philosophies with an effect on Shiite minorities living in majority-Sunni worlds. The dichotomy is also reflective of the positions taken by Khamenei and Sistani over the years in their religious capacities.
Khamenei, the political and religious leader of the largest Shiite country in the region (and the world), considers himself to be the custodian of all Muslims, not just Shiites. On his official website, he describes himself as the “Guardian of Muslims,” a characterization justified by his view that the guardianship of Muslims is a divinely mandated post, about which Muslims have no say irrespective of whether they actually accept him as their guardian.
Meanwhile, Sistani does not consider himself to be the guardian of Shiites in Iraq or anywhere else in the world. He views all Muslims as brothers. In an August 2014 meeting with Shiites from the Gulf, a question arose about professing loyalty to him. Sistani responded, “Do not sanctify anyone and refrain from giving anyone importance beyond their status or rank.” Concerning Shiite relations with other segments of society, he said, “Do not attack or criticize the sanctities and symbols of others. Let mutual respect reign between all.” In addition, Sistani criticized the revolutionary movements of the Arab Spring, considering them seditious and the cause of sectarianism, resulting in heinous crimes.
After Nimr’s execution, official websites affiliated with Khamenei were filled with sharp criticism, similar to his, targeting the Saudi regime, prophesying its imminent demise. Khamenei had also earlier criticized the Saudi regime in various speeches as the Iranian-Saudi conflict intensified in the region.
Sistani, however, has been more balanced when discussing the Saudis. In Nimr's case, Sistani chose first to focus his efforts on preventing Saudi Arabia from actually carrying out the death penalty against Nimr. In doing so, he avoided escalating and inflaming the political-sectarian conflict with the Saudi regime.
According to Saudi Shiite cleric Musa Abu Khamseen, the majority of Saudi Shiites follow Sistani and do not espouse the revolutionary approach advocated by Khamenei. They include the movement represented by Nimr, who belonged to the Shirazi school of thought, known for its religiously motivated opposition to the approach of Khamenei and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini based on political Shiism and revolutionary Islam, mixed with anti-Saudi inclinations. Nimr’s rhetoric focused on civic demands, although the lack of any meaningful redress by the Saudi regime ultimately compelled him to escalate his position and rhetoric. Saudi security forces arrested him after a speech he delivered in June 2012 and charged him with sowing sedition among Shiites.
Iran, after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, began spreading its philosophy to Saudi Arabia, giving rise to a strong anti-Saud opposition movement there, mainly through Hezbollah al-Hejaz, established in 1987. The latter initially attracted supporters from the kingdom’s predominantly Shiite Eastern Province, but collapsed in 1993 when its leadership — including Sheikh Hassan al-Saffar, known for his moderation and contacts with the Saudi regime — entered into negotiations and ultimately signed agreements with the regime concerning the return of exiled Shiite leaders.
In another sign that Shiites in eastern Saudi Arabia are not necessarily hostile toward the regime, Nimr’s brother, Mohammed al-Nimr, despite strongly condemning his brother’s execution, also condemned the storming of the Saudi Embassy in Tehran on the same day.
Sistani’s moderate stance and influence among Shiites is an important opportunity that the Saudi regime could take advantage of to provide equal civil rights to its Shiite minority and help defend against the rise of Iran-backed revolutionary movements. With the implementation of the deal on Iran's nuclear program, the balance of power is shifting in Iran's favor, making such a step urgent if it is to be taken. To strengthen its society against foreign powers, the regime must support all its components and integrate them in a united Saudi Arabia.

Pakistan: “Christian Girls Are Only Meant for the Pleasure of Muslim Men”
Raymond Brahim.com/Gatestone Institute/January 25/16
Three Christian girls in Pakistan, who rejected the advances of some wealthy Muslim young men, were recently mauled by them. One of the girls died.
Kiran Masih, 17, murdered by Muslims for refusing them sex.
London-born Chairman of the British Pakistani Christian Association (BPCA) and human rights activist, Wilson Chowdhry, who broke the story, reported that one of the men had said: “Christian girls are only meant for one thing, the [sexual] pleasure of Muslim men.”
The incident occurred on January 13 in Lahore. The three girls—aged 17, 18, and 20—were walking home after a hard day’s work. Four Muslim youths in a vehicle followed the girls and accosted them. The men “misbehaved,” yelled “suggestive and lewd comments,” and harassed the girls to get in their car for “a ride and some fun.”
The girls declined the “invitation,” adding that they were “devout Christians and did not practice sex outside of marriage.”
This caused an immediate change in the demeanour of the boys who became more aggressive and started to threaten the girls to enter the car or to be physically forced in. Terrified of the increasingly dangerous situation they were in the girls started to run in a fit of panic. This only enraged the young Muslim men further, one of them shouted out at the girls, he said: “How dare you run away from us, Christian girls are only meant for one thing, the pleasure of Muslim men.”
The Muslim men chased the girls and ran their car into them. Two girls crashed to the ground; one’s hip was broken, the other’s ribs were shattered. The youngest, Kiran Masih, aged 17, flew up in the air and crashed into the speeding car’s windshield. The Muslims, laughing and with the girl still on the windshield, accelerated. Eventually the driver slammed on the brakes, hard. The force of the stop catapulted the girl into the air. She then crashed to the ground, cracking her skull open and smashing her bones. Within minutes she was dead.
As usual, Pakistani police are reportedly “doing little to apprehend the young men and are allegedly delaying the investigative process,” said Chowdhry:
In any other nation [than Pakistan] the perpetrators would be arrested, convicted for murder and sentenced for a long term…. Violence against Christians is rarely investigated and highly unlikely to be met with justice…. Women have a low status in Pakistan, but none more so than Christian women who find themselves under the grip or terror, especially after this attack. Muslim NGO “Movement of Solidarity and Peace” state[s] that around 700 Christian women in Pakistan are abducted, raped and forced into Islamic marriage every year – that figure is almost two a day and the world does nothing.
Accounts like this — including the claim that it is a Muslim man’s right to rape Christians and other “infidels” — are common in Pakistan. (Click here for numerous examples of Christian girls—and boys—some as young as 2-years-old, who were sexually abused and slaughtered by Muslims on account of being “infidels,” or see Crucified Again, pgs. 193-198).
Some years back, while raping a 9-year-old Christian girl in Pakistan—leaving her “in shock and in the throes of a physical and psychological trauma”—her Muslim rapist told her “not to worry because he had done the same service to other young Christian girls.” Discussing this Muslim man’s justification to his child rape victim, local sources said: “It is shameful. Such incidents occur frequently. Christian girls are considered goods to be damaged at leisure. Abusing them is a right. According to the community’s mentality it is not even a crime. Muslims regard them as spoils of war.”
“Spoils of war” is correct. Here’s how the late Majid Khadduri, “internationally recognized as one of the world’s leading authorities on Islamic law and jurisprudence,” explained “spoils” in his War and Peace in the Law of Islam:
The term spoil (ghanima) is applied specifically to property acquired by force from non-Muslims. It includes, however, not only property (movable and immovable) but also persons, whether in the capacity of asra (prisoners of war) or sabi (women and children). … If the slave were a woman, the master was permitted to have sexual connection with her as a concubine.
Even in Western nations, Muslims from Pakistan believe it is their right to rape and sexually abuse “infidel” women. In Britain in 2012, nine Muslim men—eight from Pakistan—were convicted of rape and sexual exploitation of children. And just as Christians and other “infidels” in Pakistan are told before they are raped, the men regularly “told their victims that it was all right for them to be passed around for sex with dozens of men ‘because it’s what we do in our country.’”
Today, as Muslims spread into the West, what they do to “infidel” women in their adopted European countries is increasingly similar to what they do to “infidel” women in their home countries—as thousands of women in Cologne and other cities recently found out.

What Do Most of America's Voters Really Want?Is There A "Fourth Revolution" on the Horizon in America?
Lawrence Kadish/ Gatestone Institute/January 25/2016
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7294/piereson-fourth-revolution
The current political cycle reveals that many Americans are demanding unprecedented accountability from their elected leaders concerning wasteful spending and policies that have labeled our nation "The United Give Me States of America."
A growing majority of citizens want economic growth, job creation, national security and many insist on an end to policies of political correctness that prevent the education of our citizenry and, as they believe, is unraveling our basic right of freedom of speech.
Of equal concern are the prospects of ongoing terrorist acts against our nation and our allies, the unimaginable threat of a nuclear 9/11 or the global upheaval from a bankrupt America triggered by a default on our nation's unsupportable $19 trillion national debt.
In a recent conference entitled, "How to Think about Inequality," author James Piereson discussed key topics explored in his books, Shattered Consensus and The Inequality Hoax.
In Shattered Consensus, Piereson suggested that America is on the abyss of a new and historic phase of economic and political upheaval he calls the "Fourth Revolution." He cites three prior turning points in our nation's history: Jefferson's "Revolution of 1800," which created popular political parties as we know them, the Civil War and the New Deal. Piereson said he doesn't know when The "Fourth Revolution" will occur or what form it will take.
But as today's electorate respond to the rhetoric of current Presidential hopefuls one could argue that Piereson may be wrong in his timing. Between our dangerously unsustainable debt and the raw emotions of primary voters so evident in their passion for their respective candidates, we are far from the edge of Piereson's Fourth Revolution. We are in the midst of it.
James Piereson, author of the books Shattered Consensus and The Inequality Hoax.
The current political cycle reveals that many Americans are demanding unprecedented accountability from their elected leaders concerning wasteful spending and policies that have labeled our nation "The United Give Me States of America." A growing majority of citizens want economic growth, job creation, national security and many insist on an end to policies of political correctness, as they believe it is unraveling our basic right of freedom of speech.
Of equal concern are the prospects of ongoing terrorist acts against our nation and our allies, the unimaginable threat of a nuclear 9/11 or the global upheaval from a bankrupt America triggered by a default on our nation's unsupportable $19 trillion national debt. As stated previously:
In stark but simple terms, unless Americans are made aware of this financial crisis and demand accountability, the very fabric of our society will be destroyed. Interest rates and interest costs will soar and government revenues will be devoured by interest on the national debt. Eventually, most of what we spend on Social Security, Medicare, education, national defense and much more may have to come from new borrowing, if such funding can be obtained. Left unchecked, this destructive deficit-debt cycle will leave the White House and Congress with either having to default on the national debt or instruct the Treasury to run the printing presses into a policy of hyperinflation.
When there is no food on the table, when the dollar has no value, that is when demagogues like Hitler get into power.
That "Fourth Revolution" envisioned by Mr. Piereson would also need to include those in America who would seek to have our nation become a socialist state.
During his discussion, Piereson also addressed regressive taxation along with a broad range of economic and public policy issues that he covers in his companion book, The Inequality Hoax.
Piereson's presentation was well received and thanks should be offered to those who provide an important platform for some of our nation's most leading commentators and newsmakers.
**Lawrence Kadish serves on the Board of Governors of Gatestone Institute.
© 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.

Is a ‘paradise with no people’ really a paradise?
Turki Al-Dakhil/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
Which culture surprised you the most when you visited its country of origin, read about or learned of its habits?
Of course, we all have some sort of memory of a certain culture, civilization or environment as curiosity and an interest in making discoveries is intrinsic to our human nature. A friend of mine is grateful that his son attends a school which has students hailing from more than 80 nationalities. Exposure to such an environment will teach him tolerance and plurality at a young age, as well as introduce him to different types of people; their customs, habits, languages and convictions. What creates estrangement, loneliness and obscurity at an early age is planting the belief that the environment in which we live in is an accurate presentation of reality.
We cannot live alone. Accepting others and interacting with them is the most important element of co-existence
During the al-Ma'mun era in 813–833 AD, interacting with different cultures was part of the Arab and Muslim culture. Late philosopher Abu Yusuf al-Kindi, known as the “Philosopher of the Arabs,” once said: "“We should not be ashamed to acknowledge truth from whatever source it comes to us, even if it is brought to us by former generations and foreign people. For he who seeks the truth there is nothing of higher value than the truth itself; it never cheapens or debases he who reaches for it but ennobles and honors him.”
Facts and insights produced by humans belong to all of humankind, and knowledge is not affected or influenced when extracted at its source. The theme of the 46th World Economic Forum in Davos this year was about the Fourth Industrial Revolution in which robotic technology will produce major breakthroughs. We cannot live alone. Accepting others and interacting with them is the most important element of co-existence. This is why our ancestors once said: "A paradise with no people is no paradise."

How Egypt is likely to mark January 25 this year
Abdallah Schleifer/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
Egypt observes the fifth anniversary of the January 25 Tahrir uprising today. On the eve of the anniversary the country’s President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi paid tribute, in a televised speech, to those killed by security forces during the 18-day revolt against the then President Hosni Mubarak. During his address, el-Sisi sought to revive the country’s “noble principles” and work for a “new Egypt”. Urging the youth to be patient, he said that the Egyptian history will always honor them.
The banned Muslim Brotherhood called for protests. However, their ranks are now severely depleted due to massive crackdown and there is absence of senior leadership, which either languish in jail or are in exile.
Extraordinary precautions have been taken in Cairo with hundreds of homes raided over the past week resulting in a number of pre-emptive arrests and a heavier than usual presence of security forces in the streets.
I doubt the country’s liberals will get involved in any significant public protests. They oppose el-Sisi but will not ally with Muslim Brotherhood, which betrayed them by refusing to share power during former president Morsi’s one year in office. Their leaders have also not sought permits, required under a relatively new Protest Law, from the Interior Ministry three days prior to the event.
The liberal rank and file, lacking the disciplined party spirit of the Muslim Brotherhood, is aware that any anti-government protest is not likely to secure support from passersby or onlookers even for a short time before security forces disperse them quickly and violently.
More than the vulnerability of street protests, there is a greater and potentially more dangerous possibility of bombings taking place. Just last week, eight policemen were killed while attempting to enter a building in Greater Cairo on a tip off that was more likely to be a booby-trap.
President’s achievements
January 25 is as good as any date to look at what el-Sisi has achieved and what he has not, over the past year. What is obvious is that the further afield the engagement is from Egypt, the better the results for him.
Take Libya for instance. Little more than a year ago ISIS beheaded 21 Egyptian Copts in Libya. This was in retaliation to Egyptian aircraft pounding ISIS positions in Derna, a Salafi-jihadi stronghold less than a100 miles from the Egypt-Libya border. At this moment el-Sisi called on the U.N. to authorize the formation of an armed coalition that Egypt would join to intervene in Libya and take out ISIS at the request of the house of representative.
He was ignored and the official line, which was that such a coalition could not even begin to take form, much less act, until a unity government was established in Libya. The country has been struggling with two rival and warring factions amid hopeless mediation bids by the U.N. After over a year of mediated negotiations, a new authority, the Government of National Accord (GNA), came into being.
January 25 is as good as any date to look at what el-Sisi has achieved and what he has not over the years
But back at their respective home bases the two rival authorities have yet to approve the agreement. So a unity government exists but its authority does not extend beyond the hotel rooms the delegates occupy in Tunisia.
The situation in Libya, as predicted by el-Sisi a year ago, is so desperate that leading American and British generals are talking about imminent intervention. ISIS forces, swollen by a growing number of foreign volunteers, threaten the three main oil terminals in Libya and acquiring more control of Libya’s strategic Mediterranean coastline.
This past year the White House and the State Department abandoned its tenuous efforts on behalf of what remains of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and full military aid is again flowing to Cairo. But el-Sisi has not given up on developing commercial and political relationships with Russia, China and France, as alternative sources for the provision of weaponry as well as markets for Egyptian exports and investment in Egypt.
Egypt has sustained a working relation with Saudi Arabia’s King Salman, which seemed to be in trouble months ago. King Salman has committed to still more generous investment capital for Egypt even though el-Sisi has restored diplomatic relations with the Assad regime in Syria. Sisi has also counseled, in concert with Russia, that any peaceful settlement of the Syrian war that involves the immediate end of Assad’s political presence would be an invitation to ISIS to seize Damascus as the Syrian state collapsed.
Challenges ahead
However, domestic problems remain and they are severe. This past summer ISIS affiliate launched a major offensive in the northern Sinai strip seizing an important town which was only recovered after heavy fighting. In the Egyptian “mainland” there are sporadic incidents of bombings and Egypt’s Prosecutor General was assassinated.
Unemployment remains high even as there is promise of a more than a million new jobs being created when projects such as the industrial hub alongside the Second Suez Canal channel come about. The project was completed in one year by the Egyptian army engineers but the projected new capital is yet to take shape.
The most severe problem is that, with the further dramatic devaluations of the Egyptian Pound over the past year and a half, the price of essential products has soared. On the other hand, wages have not in any way kept up and the continued reduction of subsidies on electricity has added to the pressure on poor families whose purchasing power has dramatically declined because of the devaluation.
For all the human rights violations and imprisoned journalists (only China has arrested more), the Egyptian masses as well as much of the middle classes will not return to the streets over these issues. Unlike January 25, 2011 and the 18 days that followed, they now have the examples of Syria, Iraq, Libya and Yemen.
Of what can happen when lids come off too quickly: It is a form of freedom they thank God they have escaped. Their concerns are how they will be able to put food on the table tomorrow – not parliamentary elections or a less politically contorted judiciary.
Part of the answer is to dramatically reduce import of non-essential products to reduce the pressure on hard currency holdings – Egypt is an agriculture-based country that imports much if not most of its food and products like clothing, cosmetics and electronics.
The only foreign cars on the road should be those assembled here and as many of the parts used in the assembly to be manufactured here. Import-substitute industry not only reduces the demand for foreign currency; it creates jobs.
Man does not live by bread alone, but without bread he does not live.

New Saudi Arabia seen in a foreign ministry statement
Khairallah Khairallah/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
For anyone wanting to know whether a new Saudi Arabia is emerging, this can be seen in a recent statement its foreign ministry issued regarding “Iran’s hostile policies over the course of 35 years.”
For the first time ever, the country presented an accurate description supported by facts and dates of terrorist activities reportedly committed by Iran since the revolution which Ayatollah Khomeini led in 1979. The statement was long enough to address several cases. It had 58 paragraphs, each on a certain terrorist incident.
The statement, which went beyond terror operations targeting Saudi Arabia, provided accurate details of the circumstances of each attack. The statement noted that during this period, the kingdom has maintained a policy of restraint despite suffering – just as other neighboring countries have – “from the consequences of Iran’s continued aggressive policies.”
A different Saudi policy has crystallized since intervention in Bahrain was launched to end Iranian ambitions
The ministry also explained its position on the Iranian nuclear program. It maintained that Riyadh doesn’t object to this program if it is peaceful and has not opposed the nuclear deal which the West signed with Iran. It says that Saudi Arabia “publicly supported any agreement which prevents Iran from attaining nuclear arms and which includes strict and permanent inspections with the possibility of imposing sanctions on Iran again if the agreement is violated – a condition which the U.S. has imposed.”
In the end, it seems legitimate for Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region to ask a very simple question: Is Iran a normal country that wants to live with its neighbors in peace and security? Or does it consider itself a regional power with an exposed expansionist project?
The statement says Iran must determine whether it will attempt to violate international laws or whether it’s a country that respects international agreements and treaties and good neighboring principles and one that does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries.
The ministry’s statement not only targets Iran but also reminds the U.S. administration of terrorist attacks on its citizens, civilians and army personnel. Is there anyone in Washington who needs to be reminded of this and, at the same time, comprehend that the Iranian nuclear program does not sum up all of the region’s problems?
Change or the lack of it?
The American administration should ask itself a question Gulf countries are asking: “Has anything changed in Iran after it reached an agreement with the P5+1 group regarding its nuclear program?”
It is as if the U.S. administration lives in another world. It was therefore important to remind it of the 1983 U.S. embassy bombing in Beirut. Many Americans died as a result of this terrorist operation, which Iran reportedly stood behind.
What the U.S. State Department does not mention is that among those killed in the bombing were senior CIA officers in the Middle East. The most prominent of them was Bob Ames who at the time was the CIA’s Near East Director. He had previously worked in Iran and was allegedly the first to caution the Iranians of the possibility of an Iraqi attack against them in 1980.
This is at least what Kai Bird stated in his book "The Good Spy," which narrates Ames' story.
Amid Saudi Arabia’s new policies, it’s no longer possible to cover up facts, including Iran’s reported involvement in the Khobar explosions in 1996 as well as its links to terrorist organizations.
It is no longer possible to only include half the facts and take this or that party into consideration at a time when Saudi Arabia, in the era of King Salman, is under attack from different parties, primarily Iran.
Turning points
A different Saudi policy has started to crystallize ever since intervention in Bahrain was launched to end Iranian ambitions. It took a new dimension when the kingdom stood by the popular revolution in Egypt – the revolution which ousted Muslim Brotherhood from power in June 2013. Middle-ground solutions were no longer possible when it emerged that Iran was beginning to sneak into Egypt via the Brotherhood.
However the moment of real transformation came in Yemen towards the end of March 2015. King Salman and deputy crown prince Mohammad bin Salman decided to intervene to put an end to Iran’s expansionist activities in the country. All we are witnessing today is linked to the Saudi-led "Operation Decisive Storm" against Iranian-backed Houthi militias in Yemen.
Cutting ties with Iran following the raid on the Saudi embassy in Tehran, and its consulate in Mashhad, proved to be another defining moment. Operation Decisive Storm cannot end unless it achieves the desired objectives in Yemen regardless of the sacrifices being made to achieve them. In other words, Saudi Arabia and Gulf countries cannot accept Yemen as an Iranian proxy, as is the case with Lebanon.
New beginning
The Saudi foreign ministry statement came around the same time an article by Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir was published in The New York Times in response to his Iranian counterpart Mohammad Javad Zarif. The response marked the beginning of a new phase in which Riyadh does not hesitate to respond. On the other hand, the article which Zarif published revealed that his laugh is a mere mask that covers up a part of an expansionist project.
This new phase is characterized by courage and clarity. This is not just about calling a spade a spade and just restoring order in Yemen but also includes an economic policy, which harmonizes with this current phase, as well as reforms which take into account the war on terrorism, in all its forms against the Shiite and the Sunni. This is likely to be a very long war.
This war on terrorism is being waged amidst a sharp decline in oil prices, which have made the Russian economy reel. It is difficult to bet on American policies as they are characterized by a minimal realist approach and minimum comprehension of what’s happening in the Middle East.
Is there bigger proof of the extent of American naivety or bias towards Tehran than overlooking crimes which sectarian militias linked to Iran are committing in mainly Sunni-populated areas of Iraq or Syria?
Why does the American administration refuse to hear anything about, for example, what’s happening in the Iraqi Diyala province or in the Syrian town of Madaya?
We are looking at a new Middle East but we’re also looking at a new Saudi Arabia. What is certain is that the statement issued by the foreign ministry in Riyadh will not be the first of its kind.

Saudi labor ministry finally addresses sponsorship system
Khaled Almaeena/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Labor (MOL) followed up his statement on the transfer of sponsorship by launching last Monday an online legal labor consultation service called “Your Labor Consultant” as part of its obligation to ensure justice and transparency in line with the directives of the Kingdom’s leadership.
The new service, launched in Arabic and English, will be made available in other languages soon.
This is a significant development that will ensure justice and do away with the repression and the unfair treatment meted out to workers.
The program has been welcomed by expatriates and Saudis alike. The exploitation of workers has been going on for years by cruel employers and sponsors.
Red tape, bureaucracy and inefficient MOL staff should not be allowed to block the implementation of the ministry’s decision
I have lost count of the thousands of letters from desperate people who were not paid salaries for months and in some cases years, falsely declared huroub (having run away from their sponsors), forcibly made to sign statements that they had received their end-of-service benefits when they had not and subjected to mental and even physical torture. These people had no recourse to legal aid or counseling.
Minister Mufrej Al-Haqbani’s decision to correct this injustice is a step in the right direction. Prompt and precise action has been promised and wayward sponsors have been warned. However, red tape, bureaucracy and inefficient MOL staff should not be allowed to block the implementation of the minister’s decision.
The sponsorship system is a lucrative trade. There are many cases where workers have to pay money to sponsors for iqama (residence permit) renewal and exit re-entry visas and even have to work without health insurance.
Sponsorship rule
The Minister of Labor should ensure that there is strict implementation of the new transfer of sponsorship rule. He should also show empathy for those caught in official immigration raids and investigate why the documents of these unfortunate expatriate workers are not in order.
I also appeal to the minister to consider the plight of domestic workers, many of whom are locked up and are not allowed to set foot outside of the house in which they work.
They are totally at the mercy of their employers. Their phones are confiscated and many suffer from physical and mental abuse. There are many young Saudi men and women who are willing to work as volunteers to help eradicate this practice. We do not want one aggrieved expatriate working in our country.
We, in the media, assure the Minister of Labor that we are partners with him in his drive to make our country one that practices fair play and provides justice for all.

The repercussions of nuclear deal on Iran’s policies
Raghida Dergham/Al Arabiya/January 25/16
The lifting of international sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran passed as if it were a non-event. The U.N. Security Council bestowed immediate legitimacy on the move in accordance with the nuclear deal it had stamped with its seal of compliance.
Removing the freeze on Iranian assets means Tehran will obtain around $150 billion automatically, and up to $50 billion in promised investments over the next five years. According to experts, this would generate growth of up to 5 percent a year, rescuing the country from an economic crisis and enabling it to pursue internal and external projects despite falling oil prices.
Russia’s direct military intervention in Syria has relieved Iran’s budget, bearing in mind that most of Tehran’s spending on regional expansion in recent years reportedly came from the Iraqi treasury under former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
Now, after international sanctions are lifted, the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) will be able to resume their regional plans with a comfortable financial margin and also fight the battle with the moderate camp with equal comfort. The IRGC is the biggest winner, while the moderate camp led by President Rowhani and foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, in partnership with former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, will be comfortable in the next month’s elections thanks to the détente.
The Obama administration is wagering on Iranian economic prosperity to empower the moderate camp, which rarely defies the mullah-led establishment in Tehran and has hopes it would slow down Iran’s plans for regional dominance led by the IRGC hardliner camp.
There is need to think practically on the impact of lifting of sanctions on regional conflicts and the war against ISIS
However, these wagers will not materialize, at least not in the near future. Thus, they will not impact Iranian-Russian policy in Syria in support of Assad. Nor, I believe, will they lead to the dismantlement of Shiite militias in Syria and Iraq, or the wooing of Sunni support that is crucial for defeating ISIS and similar groups in both countries.
Hence, there is a need for thinking practically regarding the impact of lifting of sanctions on regional conflicts and the war against ISIS. If Washington has chosen not to undertake any action that could undermine the new relationship with Tehran, then the price to pay is much higher than it will imagine, and it might realize this only when it is too late.
The new page in U.S.-Iranian relations has become a reality that requires constructive scrutiny so that this relationship would be beneficial for both sides and the world. Caving in and complacency would otherwise be an investment in the forces of Sunni and Shiite extremism. Instead, there is now an opportunity for balance in Saudi-Iranian relations and regional balances.
Leveler called oil
Saudi-Iranian relations are not currently in a phase of accord and reconciliation. Rather, I believe, escalation reigns supreme. The new common denominator between the two countries is being affected by the drop in oil prices to below $30 per barrel.
Some believe Riyadh is against cutting production for reasons of national interests, and that there is no need to cut production to benefit Russia and Iran. Others believe one of the key reasons Riyadh insists on maintaining the same level of production is actually to undermine Iran and Russia economically, to prevent them from having a free hand in Syria.
However, oil policies are not just about Saudi-Iranian relations or the new rivalry in the oil world with the shale revolution in the United States. There are other factors in play, including China’s slowdown and the spending by oil-producing countries on direct and proxy conflicts.
Yet some oil experts believe that the collapse in oil prices will push traditional foes to set their differences aside and rescue their economies. These experts say there is no escape from accord because this is what interests require. The margin of accord will not stop at oil prices but will probably include outstanding political disputes in the region.
This logic may not apply to the IRGC in Iran, however, because its thinking is constrained by projects for regional dominance and the “export” of the Islamic revolution. The IRGC believes that given that it was able to double down at the time of isolation and sanctions, it could do much more after the sanctions have been lifted and money is flowing again.
The IRGC could come down hard on moderate forces that want to focus on economic growth and prosperity rather than military intervention, the creation of militias, and imposing costly dominance.
The battle within
The conflict in Iran between the moderates and the hardliners is not marginal, particularly on the eve of the elections scheduled for February 26. It would be crucial to slow down the unfreezing of Iranian assets and investment projects, given what’s at stake.
Instead, decision-makers such as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov must take advantage of the Saudi and Iranian need for accord to ease their disputes practically and realistically, to the benefit of both Russia and the US, who are also oil producers.
But if the U.S. and Russia have decided low oil prices are in their interest in the years ahead, things would be completely different, and there would be no need for sponsoring Saudi-Iranian accord. In that case, the Middle Eastern oil-producing nations must think about their options, whether in terms of de-escalating proxy conflicts, or in terms of thinking to alternatives to their reliance on oil.
Some economists and experts in investment and technology have an interesting view: they believe lower oil prices can accelerate necessary reforms that would ensure oil is no longer the only factor in Middle East politics and policies, especially in the Gulf.
Sobriety and realism are essential in assessing the repercussions of the Iranian nuclear deal and the impact of the lifting of sanctions on Iran, internally as well as with respect to the ambitions of regional expansion adopted by the IRGC-led hardliner camp, if not the Iranian government itself under the leadership of supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini.
Limiting oneself to wailing and astonishment, no matter how justified, is going to be pointless: it is noteworthy how Obama marketed his audacious deal with the mullahs in Tehran while Iran pressed ahead with its regional meddling, imposing its views on Iraq and creating militias, inciting in Yemen, and intervening in Syria alongside Assad in his civil war.
Realistic strategies
There is no alternative to adopting realistic strategies either to coexist with the new reality or to upend it patiently and prudently. Relying on a new U.S. president to find the magic recipe for undoing the problem is delusional and wishful thinking. Republican candidates are criticizing Obama for the nuclear deal and claim it to be a threat to U.S. interests and security.
However, they will not rush to overturn the deal or the new rapprochement with Iran, as it is now a reality. What they could do is pressure Tehran to curb its expansionist policies but this will not happen at least for a year and things could change completely by then.
Therefore, what is needed is not just de-escalation in conflicts like Syria and Yemen, but also de-escalation of tension in the media, politics, and diplomacy between Saudi and Iran. It is unacceptable to burn embassies and it is not acceptable for Iran’s foreign minister to use a tone like the one he resorted to in The New York Times, whatever his calculations may be.
It is not useful to revisit Iran’s involvement in the Khobar bombing. It is too late for this.
What all parties should focus on is how to stop the war in Syria and Yemen, and stop the descent to chaos in Libya, Iraq, and Lebanon. ISIS is an enemy of Saudi Arabia just as it is an enemy of Iran.
Iran’s upcoming elections may generate a momentum of moderation, but this moderation requires engagement by the Iranian public to voice their opposition to Iranian extremism and meddling in Arab countries, while calling for an end to sectarian escalation and economic attrition through warfare or oil prices.
Let there be a political discourse that hits a chord with people’s consciences and desire for prosperity. The pictures of men, women, and children of Madaya is a living snapshot of war crimes committed by the countries backing the regime in Damascus, which starves its people as a weapon of war, and this must awaken the consciences of the public opinion in Iran. The Iranian public wants prosperity after living in austerity imposed by sanctions and the country’s expansionist policies from Syria to Yemen and Iraq.
Perhaps the cost of proxy wars and the collapse in oil prices will drain Saudi Arabia and Iran forcing them to pursue balanced and conciliatory relations instead of confrontation. Perhaps this would bring good tidings for the Middle East and its people who aspire to have a normal life instead of an endless cycle of violence and attrition.