LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

March 13/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletin16/english.march13.16.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006

Click Here to go to the LCCC Daily English/Arabic News Buletins Archieves Since 2006

Bible Quotations For Today
The Miracle Of Healing the Bling Beggar, Bartimaeus Son Of Timaeus
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 10/46-52: "They came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho, Bartimaeus son of Timaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the roadside.
When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout out and say, ‘Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!’ Many sternly ordered him to be quiet, but he cried out even more loudly, ‘Son of David, have mercy on me!’Jesus stood still and said, ‘Call him here.’ And they called the blind man, saying to him, ‘Take heart; get up, he is calling you.’So throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus.Then Jesus said to him, ‘What do you want me to do for you?’ The blind man said to him, ‘My teacher, let me see again.’Jesus said to him, ‘Go; your faith has made you well.’ Immediately he regained his sight and followed him on the way.".

Indeed, we live as human beings, but we do not wage war according to human standards; for the weapons of our warfare are not merely human, but they have divine power to destroy strongholds.
Second Letter to the Corinthians 10/01-07:"I myself, Paul, appeal to you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ I who am humble when face to face with you, but bold towards you when I am away! I ask that when I am present I need not show boldness by daring to oppose those who think we are acting according to human standards. Indeed, we live as human beings, but we do not wage war according to human standards; for the weapons of our warfare are not merely human, but they have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle raised up against the knowledge of God, and we take every thought captive to obey Christ. We are ready to punish every disobedience when your obedience is complete. Look at what is before your eyes. If you are confident that you belong to Christ, remind yourself of this, that just as you belong to Christ, so also do we."

Question: "How, why, and when did Satan fall from heaven?"
GotQuestions.org

http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/03/12/how-why-and-when-did-satan-fall-from-heaven/
Answer: Satan’s fall from heaven is symbolically described in Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:12-18. While these two passages are referring specifically to the kings of Babylon and Tyre, they also reference the spiritual power behind those kings, namely, Satan. These passages describe why Satan fell, but they do not specifically say when the fall occurred. What we do know is this: the angels were created before the earth (Job 38:4-7). Satan fell before he tempted Adam and Eve in the Garden (Genesis 3:1-14). Satan’s fall, therefore, must have occurred somewhere after the time the angels were created and before he tempted Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Whether Satan’s fall occurred hours, days, or years before he tempted Adam and Eve in the Garden, Scripture does not specifically say.
The book of Job tells us, at least at that time, Satan still had access to heaven and to the throne of God. “One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them. The LORD said to Satan, ’Where have you come from?’ Satan answered the LORD, ‘From roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it’” (Job 1:6-7). Apparently at that time, Satan was still moving freely between heaven and earth, speaking to God directly and answering for his activities. Whether God has discontinued this access is a matter of debate. Some say Satan's access to heaven was ended at the death of Christ. Others believe Satan's access to heaven will be ended at the end times war in heaven.
Why did Satan fall from heaven? Satan fell because of pride. He desired to be God, not to be a servant of God. Notice the many “I will...” statements in Isaiah 14:12-15. Ezekiel 28:12-15 describes Satan as an exceedingly beautiful angel. Satan was likely the highest of all angels, the anointed cherub, the most beautiful of all of God's creations, but he was not content in his position. Instead, Satan desired to be God, to essentially “kick God off His throne” and take over the rule of the universe. Satan wanted to be God, and interestingly enough, that is essentially what Satan tempted Adam and Eve with in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:1-5). How did Satan fall from heaven? Actually, a fall is not an accurate description. It would be far more accurate to say God cast Satan out of heaven (Isaiah 14:15; Ezekiel 28:16-17). Satan did not fall from heaven; rather, Satan was pushed.
Recommended Resources: Angels: Elect & Evil by C. Fred Dickason and Logos Bible Software.
What's new on GotQuestions.org?

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on March 13/16
Healing the Blind Beggar, Bartimaeus Son Of Timaeus/Elias Bejjani/March 13/16

How far will the Saudis go against HezbollahéIbrahim al-Hatlani/Al-Monitor/March 12/16
The Egyptian Arab LeagueéAbdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq AlAwsat/March 12/16
Thus spake Obama, with malice toward ArabséHisham Melhem/Al Arabiya/March 12/16
When growth sows the seeds of inequality
Ehtesham Shahid/Al Arabiya/March 12/16
Why a niqab ban will be major step back for Egyptian women
Yara al-Wazir/Al Arabiya/March 12/16
Tunisia’s crucial battle for Ben Gardane
Mshari Al Thaydi/Al Arabiya/March 12/16
Sharia Law or One Law for All?
Denis MacEoin/Gatestone Institute/March 12, 2016
 

Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on March 13/16


Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on March 13/16


 

Links From Jihad Watch Site for March 13/16
Italy: Warrant issued for Muslim who said, “I will take a car with some explosives to carry out an attack against the unfaithful”.
Israelis shut down Palestinian Islamic Jihad TV station that was encouraging “Palestinians” to attack Israelis.
Gaddafi’s anti-aircraft missiles are falling into the jihadists’ hands.
Violent Left-fascists shut down Trump rally; Cruz, Rubio, Kasich blame Trump.
Video: Ex-Muslim uses Qur’an and Sunnah to answer question: Is the Islamic State Islamic?.
Is it “Christian” for Christians to Defend Themselves From Jihad? — on The Glazov Gang.
Paris: 4 Muslim teen girls arrested for planning jihad attack on concert hall.
Hamas-linked CAIR demands Trump apologize for saying “Islam hates us”.
UK: Christian youth converts to Islam, gets killed fighting for the Islamic State.
NPR touts Muhammad’s example as means to counter “extremism”.
Jonathan Power and the “Expressio Unius…”
David Wood video: Fact-checking “10 Lies You Were Told about Islam”.
UK university Islamic Society head planned drive-by murder of soldiers.

Healing the Blind Beggar, Bartimaeus Son Of Timaeus
Elias Bejjani/13 March/16

http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/03/12/elias-bejjani-healing-the-blind-beggar-bartimaeus-son-of-timaeus/

John 09:5: "While I am in the world, I am the light of the world".
We become blind not when our two eyes do not function any more and lose our vision. No, not at all, this is a physical disability that affects only our earthly body and not our Godly soul. We can overcome this physical blindness and go on with our lives, while our spiritual blindness makes us lose our eternal life and end in hell.
We actually become blind when we can not see the right and righteous tracks in life, and when we do not walk in their paths.

We actually become blind when we fail to obey God's commandments, negate His sacrifice on the cross that broke our slavery bondage from the original sin, and when we refuse to abandon and tame the instincts' of our human nature, and when we stubbornly resist after falling into the evil's temptation to rise to the Godly nature in which we were baptized with water and the holy spirit.

Meanwhile the actual blindness is not in the eyes that can not see because of physical ailments, but in the hearts that are hardened, in the consciences that are numbed and in the spirits that are defiled with sin.
Ephesians 4:29: "Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear"
When we know heart, mind and soul that God Himself, is LOVE, and when we practice, honour and feel LOVE in every word we utter and in every conduct we perform, we shall never be blind in our hearts, conscience and faith, even though when our eyes cease to perform.
In its spiritual essence and core, what does love mean and encompass? Saint Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians (13/01-07), answers this question: " "If I speak with the languages of men and of angels, but don’t have love, I have become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but don’t have love, I am nothing. If I dole out all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but don’t have love, it profits me nothing. Love is patient and is kind; love doesn’t envy. Love doesn’t brag, is not proud, doesn’t behave itself inappropriately, doesn’t seek its own way, is not provoked, takes no account of evil; doesn’t rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails"
In every community, there are individuals from all walks of life who are spiritually blind, lacking faith, have no hope, and live in dim darkness because they have distanced themselves from Almighty God and His Gospel, although their eyes are physically perfectly functional and healthy. They did not seek God's help and did not repent and ask for forgiveness, although they know that God is always waiting eerily for them to defeat the evil, get out his temptations and come to Him.

On the sixth Lenten Sunday, our Maronite Catholic Church cites and recalls with great piety Jesus' healing miracle of the blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, Bartimaeus. This amazing miracle that took place in Jerusalem near the Pool of Siloam is documented in three gospels; Mark 10/46-52, John 9/1-41, Matthew 20/:29-34.
Maronites in Lebanon and all over the world, like each and very faithful Christian strongly believe that Jesus is the holy and blessed light through which believers can see God's paths of righteousness. There is no doubt that without Jesus' light, evil darkness will prevails in peoples' hearts, souls and minds. Without Jesus' presence in our lives we definitely will preys to all kinds of evil temptations.

The Miracle: Mark 10/46-52: " They came to Jericho. As he went out from Jericho, with his disciples and a great multitude, the son of Timaeus, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the road. When he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out, and say, “Jesus, you son of David, have mercy on me!” Many rebuked him, that he should be quiet, but he cried out much more, “You son of David, have mercy on me!” Jesus stood still, and said, “Call him. ”They called the blind man, saying to him, “Cheer up! Get up. He is calling you!” He, casting away his cloak, sprang up, and came to Jesus. Jesus asked him, “What do you want me to do for you?” The blind man said to him, “Rabboni, that I may see again.” Jesus said to him, “Go your way. Your faith has made you well.” Immediately he received his sight, and followed Jesus in the way.

The son of Timaeus, Bartimaeus, the blind beggar who was born to two blind parents truly believed in Jesus. His heart, mind and spirit were all enlightened with faith and hope. Because of his strong faith he knew deep inside who actually Jesus was, and stubbornly headed towards him asking for a Godly cure. He rebelled against all those opportunist and hypocrites who out of curiosity and not faith came to see who is Jesus. He refused to listen to them when they rebuked him and tried hardly to keep him away from Jesus. He loudly witnessed for the truth and forced his way among the crowd and threw himself on Jesus' feet asking Him to open his blind eyes. Jesus was fascinated by his faith, hailed his perseverance and gave him what he asked for. He opened his eyes.

John's Gospel gives us more details about what has happened with Bartimaeus after the healing miracle of his blindness. We can see in the below verses that after his healing he and his parents were exposed to intimidation, fear, threats, and terror, but he refused to succumb or to lie, He held verbatim to all the course details of the miracle, bravely witnessed for the truth and loudly proclaimed his strong belief that Jesus who cured him was The Son Of God. His faith made him strong, fearless and courageous. The Holy Spirit came to his rescue and spoke through him.
John 9/13-12: "As Jesus was walking along, he saw a man who had been born blind. 2 His disciples asked him, “Teacher, whose sin caused him to be born blind? Was it his own or his parents' sin?” Jesus answered, “His blindness has nothing to do with his sins or his parents' sins. He is blind so that God's power might be seen at work in him. As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me; night is coming when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light for the world.” After he said this, Jesus spat on the ground and made some mud with the spittle; he rubbed the mud on the man's eyes and told him, “Go and wash your face in the Pool of Siloam.” (This name means “Sent.”) So the man went, washed his face, and came back seeing. His neighbors, then, and the people who had seen him begging before this, asked, “Isn't this the man who used to sit and beg?”
Some said, “He is the one,” but others said, “No he isn't; he just looks like him.” So the man himself said, “I am the man.” “How is it that you can now see?” they asked him. He answered, “The man called Jesus made some mud, rubbed it on my eyes, and told me to go to Siloam and wash my face. So I went, and as soon as I washed, I could see.” “Where is he?” they asked.“I don't know,” he answered.

Sadly our contemporary world hails atheism, brags about secularism and persecutes those who have faith in God and believe in Him. Where ever we live, there are opportunist and hypocrites like some of the conceited crowd that initially rebuked Bartimaeus, and tried with humiliation to keep him away from Jesus, but the moment Jesus called on him they changed their attitude and let him go through. Meanwhile believers all over the world suffer on the hands of ruthless oppressors, and rulers and men of authority like the Pharisees who refused to witness for the truth.

But despite of all the dim spiritual darkness, thanks God, there are still too many meek believers like Bartimaeus who hold to their faith no matters what the obstacles or hurdles are.

Colossians 03:12: "Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience"
Lord, enlighten our minds and hearts with your light and open our eyes to realize that You are a loving and merciful father.
Lord Help us to take Bartimaeus as a faith role model in our life.
Lord help us to defeat all kinds of sins that take us away from Your light, and deliver us all from evil temptations.
In conclusion, let us never blind ourselves from knowing where is the light and who is the light: “I came into this world for judgment, that those who don’t see may see; and that those who see may become blind.” (John 09/39)

Cabinet Approves Landfills Plan as Protesters Pledge General Strike
Naharnet/March 12/16/The cabinet approved on Saturday to establish two landfills and reactivate another one temporarily as part of a four-year plan to resolve the country’s eight-month-long waste problem despite the rejection of civil society activists who called for a general strike. Information Minister Ramzi Jreij said two landfills – in Bourj Hammoud and Nahr al-Ghadir areas – will be established, and the Naameh landfill will reopen for two months to receive waste that has accumulated in makeshift dumps.A landfill’s location in the Shouf and Aley areas will be determined later following consultations with the local municipalities, said Jreij in his press briefing. The cabinet tasked the interior ministry with drafting a bill on the incentives that should be provided to the municipalities located near the landfills at the cost of $8 million, he told reporters. It also allotted $50 million for development projects in towns that lie near the landfills, Jreij stated. He added that the waste of Beirut will be distributed to the Bourj Hammoud, Nahr al-Ghadir and Naameh dumps in addition to the Sidon incinerator. Despite the cabinet solution to the waste crisis, which erupted when the Naameh landfill was closed in July 2015, more than 2,000 of civil society activists gathered in Ashrafiyeh’s Sassine Square and then marched to Riad al-Solh Square in downtown Beirut where the Grand Serail is located. The protesters, waving Lebanese flags, shouted anti-government slogans, saying they would not accept any temporary solution to the waste problem. “There should be sustainable development,” one demonstrator said. "The final warning has been sent, and we are now in a new phase. On Monday we will paralyze the country," the protest organizers said in a statement. They pledged to hold a general strike on Monday, saying they would block roads and not attend schools and universities. They carried banners calling for the "fall of the government." Lebanon was plunged in a trash management crisis after the closure of the Naameh landfill where the waste of Beirut and Mount Lebanon was dumped. The closure resulted in the pile up of garbage on the streets throughout the country, sparking environmental and health warnings over the prolongation of the problem. Popular protests were held against the crisis last year. Prime Minister Tammam Salam told the extraordinary cabinet session, which lasted more than seven hours, that Saturday's plan is for a four-year period until a sustainable solution is found. Salam reportedly accused Kataeb ministers, who expressed reservations to the scheme, of representing civil society in the cabinet.

Islamic State Threatens Hizbullah, Lebanese Officials, Urges Christians to Convert to Islam
Naharnet/March 12/16/The Islamic State extremist group released a video in which two of its Lebanese members threaten various Lebanese officials, as well as Hizbullah. The video showed the two members urging Lebanon's Sunnis to “revolt,” while saying that Hizbullah is “the source of crime and oppression in the country.”“The Syrian regime invaded Lebanon primarily through Arab consent and secondarily through the crusaders' blessing,” they said of western officials. The video also showed images of Mustaqbal Movement leader MP Saad Hariri during a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Saudi King Salman, accusing him of purchasing millions of dollars worth of weapons for the army and security forces that “have no purpose but to kill Sunnis.”The IS accused these sides of “corruption and terror” and paving the way for Hizbullah to strengthen its grasp over Lebanon. The IS also issued a message to “the dictators of the Lebanese statelet,” which include Speaker Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Tammam Salam, and Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq. “You will not stop the arrival of the Islamic State,” the extremists warned them. “Perhaps we will cross over to Jerusalem over your remains,” threatened one of the IS members in the video. “Your constitution is that of takfir and you are being ruled by criminals,” they declared, while addressing Sunnis. “Your constitution is the Quran and the way of the Sunna, while their's is the way of the devil,” they added. Addressing Lebanon's Christians, they urged them to convert to Islam “and if they fail to do so, then they will not be able to confront the IS.”The IS video was released by the “media office of the Raqqa emirate” in Syria.

Report: All Political Powers Represented in Trash Agreement
Naharnet/March 12/16/The cabinet convened on Saturday to approve the trash management file after an agreement that was reached on Friday by a concerned ministerial panel. Ministerial sources told al-Liwaa newspaper that “all political powers are represented in the deal.”“The crisis is no longer up for debate and it can be approved by the government today,” they stressed. The deal calls for using the Bourj Hammoud and Naameh landfills and for using the Costa Brava dump. The Naameh dump, which closed in July 2015, will be reopened for a week before being permanently shut. Prime Minister Tammam Salam contacted Speaker Nabih Berri and Mustaqbal Movement chief MP Saad Hariri upon the conclusion of the ministerial panel meeting on Friday to inform them of the details of the discussions. Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq told al-Liwaa that Friday's agreement is “temporary and will last four years during which the foundations and mechanisms to reach a permanent solution for the trash disposal crisis will be reached.”These solutions include landfills, incinerators, and the generation of electricity from the garbage, he revealed. Al-Liwaa said that the cost of a ton of trash has been set at 200 dollars, adding that a total of a million tons of waste are generated per year.The estimated cost of the implementation of Friday's deal will be around 200 million dollars, excluding the incentives granted to concerned municipalities, reported the daily. Lebanon was plunged in a trash management crisis after the closure of the Naameh dump last year. The dump was dedicated to tackling Beirut and Mount Lebanon's waste. The closure resulted in the pile up of garbage on the streets throughout the country, sparking environmental and health warnings over the prolongation of the problem. Popular protests have been held against the crisis and they developed into demonstrations against the political class. The activists are scheduled to hold a protest in the afternoon on Saturday despite the progress achieved by the ministerial panel on Friday.

Muallem Says Arab League Decision on Hizbullah ‘Absurd’
Associated Press/Naharnet/March 12/16/Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said on Saturday that the Arab League’s branding of Hizbullah as a terrorist group was “shameful” and “absurd.”“The latest decision taken by the Arab League on Hizbullah is absurd,” said Muallem at a news conference he held in Damascus. “I support what the Iraqi foreign minister said about Hizbullah,” Muallem told reporters, adding “it is shameful what was said about the party.” The Arab League on Friday formally branded Hizbullah a terrorist organization, a move that raises concerns of deepening divisions among Arab countries and ramps up the pressure on the Shiite group, which is fighting on the side of Syrian President Bashar Assad. The decision came during a foreign ministers' meeting of the Arab League at the organization's seat in Cairo. The move aligns the 22-member league firmly behind Saudi Arabia and the Saudi-led bloc of six Gulf Arab nations, which made the same formal branding against Hizbullah last week. Earlier in the day, the Saudi delegation stormed out of a league meeting in protest over a speech by Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari hailing Hizbullah and Shiite militias as "resistant movements." "I only described Hizbullah as a resistant movement and rejected accusations against the Popular Mobilization Forces (a Shiite Iraqi group) and other resistant movements," al-Jaafari told the state daily Al-Ahram. There was no immediate comment from Hizbullah. On its main evening newscast, the group's al-Manar TV reported on al-Jaafari's speech at the Arab League meeting without commenting on the league designation against the party.

Report: Aoun to Escalate Rhetoric on March 14 Anniversary
Naharnet/March 12/16/Head of the Change Reform bloc MP Michel Aoun is scheduled to make a televised appearance on Tuesday to mark the March 14, 1989 anniversary, reported al-Liwaa newspaper on Saturday. Concerned sources refused to divulge the details of the speech, but they expected that the lawmaker will “escalate his rhetoric in wake of the recent stances made by Mustaqbal chief MP Saad Hariri.” Hariri had on Thursday re-asserted his commitment to the nomination of Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh as president. Aoun is also running for the position. The sources ruled out however the possibility that Aoun would go so far as to make his ministers resign from government or his MPs from parliament.He will however stress the need to hold the municipal and parliamentary elections at the same time. The Change and Reform bloc had made this proposal on Tuesday. The municipal polls are set for May 8 and the bloc said that the parliamentary ones could be staged at the same time by simply adding an additional ballot box at polling stations.

Report: Russian Ambassador Relays Moscow's Support for Franjieh's Election as President
Naharnet/March 12/16/Russia is backing the election of Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh as president, reported al-Liwaa newspaper on Saturday. Russian Ambassador to Lebanon Alexander Zasypkin relayed this stance to the lawmaker, revealed a diplomatic source. This position consequently led Change and Reform bloc chief MP Michel Aoun to cancel a scheduled trip to Russia. Aoun is also a presidential nominee. Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 without the election of a successor. Ongoing disputes between the March 8 and 14 camps have thwarted the polls. Earlier this year, Hizbullah announced that it would boycott electoral sessions unless it has guarantees that its candidate Aoun will be elected president. Al-Liwaa revealed that Franjieh had recently telephoned Mustaqbal Movement leader MP Saad Hariri to thank him for his recent political stands. Hariri had nominated Franjieh as president in an effort to end the presidential impasse. Meanwhile, Speaker Nabih Berri has been holding contacts with Hizbullah to persuade it to attend the next electoral session, which is set for March 23.

Presidential Vacuum at Center of Talks between Jumblat, Hollande in Paris
Naharnet/March 12/16/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat held talks in Paris on Friday with French President Francois Hollande and Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault, reported An Nahar daily on Saturday. Discussions tackled the latest developments in Lebanon with French officials stressing their support for the Lebanese army and institutions, as well as the need to elect a president “without delay.”Jumblat for his part focused on the need to elect a head of state, while the economic and financial situations in Lebanon should be taken into consideration. Key to resolving the crisis in the country lies in electing a president, he explained according to An Nahar. “France cannot take the role of Lebanon in any presidential initiative,” remarked the MP. Talks with Ayrault addressed the regional situation and the Syrian crisis that is destabilizing Lebanon, added the daily. The French official stressed the need to provide more support to Lebanon in light of the international meeting on Syria that was held in London in February. Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 without the election of a successor. Ongoing disputes between the March 8 and 14 camps have thwarted the polls. Earlier this year, Hizbullah announced that it would boycott electoral sessions unless it has guarantees that its candidate Change and Reform bloc leader MP Michel Aoun will be elected president.

ISF Arrests Suspected Killers of Kuwaiti Citizens
Naharnet/March 12/16/The Internal Security Forces on Friday announced the arrest of two Syrian individuals suspected of murdering two Kuwaiti citizens in the Kahale region. “A special operation by the Intelligence Branch has resulted in the arrest of two individuals suspected of having committed the crime of murdering two Kuwaiti citizens,” the ISF announced on Twitter. It identified the suspects as the Syrians A. H., 41, and S. M., 39, saying they have "confessed to committing the crime with a metallic hammer with the aim of robbery."LBCI television meanwhile reported that one of the arrested suspects is the janitor of the building where the Kuwaitis were killed. The dead bodies of the two Kuwaitis were found Thursday in the building that they own in the area of Kahale, just outside Beirut. State-run National News Agency identified the two men as Hussein Nassar, 58, and Nabil Yaaqoub al-Gharib, 56. According to MTV, the two men had intended to travel to their country on Thursday. The incident comes amid high tensions between Lebanon and the Gulf countries and Kuwait is one of the Gulf Cooperation Council states that have advised their citizens to leave Lebanon.

How far will the Saudis go against Hezbollah?
Ibrahim al-Hatlani/Al-Monitor/March 12/16
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/03/12/ibrahim-al-hatlani-how-far-will-the-saudis-go-against-hezbollah/
During the 145th session of the Arab foreign ministers meeting at the Arab League in Cairo on March 10, Bahraini Foreign Minister Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa accused Iran of smuggling weapons and explosives that have fueled sectarian strife in Arab societies and accused Lebanese Hezbollah, which Iran supports, of terrorism. His accusations came a day after the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) reaffirmed a decision it had made on March 2, designating Hezbollah a terrorist organization on the ground that its actions have destabilized security and the social peace in some Arab countries, an assertion raised by the foreign ministers of the GCC, Jordan and Morocco.
Despite media leaks about disagreement among the GCC states over Hezbollah's classification because of differences of opinion on Iran, a unanimous resolution was finally adopted, even by Oman, which had initially proposed that the designation only apply to the party’s military wing, along the lines of the approach taken by the European Union in July 2013. When asked by Al-Monitor about Oman's stance on the terrorist designation, a well-informed GCC source who requested anonymity said, “Lengthy discussions took place in the past days between GCC members concerning the wording of the resolution, with the Omanis demonstrating remarkable flexibility in this regard compared to their previous rigid position in dealing with resolutions condemning or boycotting Iran. The GCC was thus unanimous, as in general, an understanding existed therein concerning the stance vis-a-vis Hezbollah.”
In statements made Feb. 25 to Lebanon’s LBC channel, Interior Minister Nouhad Machnouk said that in 2015 Hezbollah and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps were involved in hosting and training Shiite factions from Gulf countries — in particular from Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — on Lebanese soil.
It seems these statements embarrassed Iran’s friend Oman — whose economic and political ties with Tehran have been developing, with a sea bridge expected to open in the coming days between the two countries — and hurt its chances of being able to amend the Gulf statement on Hezbollah. Muscat already faced accusations of turning a blind eye to the illicit passage across its borders of Yemen-bound Iranian personnel and arms destined to support the Houthis. It thus was not in Muscat’s interest to provoke a crisis with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Kuwait, whose leaders all believe that the politically insightful rhetoric of Hezbollah was no less dangerous than military operations targeting Gulf states. As a result, the Omanis chose to recognize its Gulf neighbors’ concerns and allow the passage of the resolution against Hezbollah, irrespective of Muscat’s level of commitment toward its implementation.
Qatar also endorsed the Hezbollah resolution despite the possible repercussions on efforts to free some of its citizens kidnapped in southern Iraq by Shiite factions Dec. 16. The Qataris, by virtue of their long relationship and experience with Islamist factions such as the Muslim Brotherhood and the Afghan Taliban, as well as the Houthis and Hezbollah, are well aware of the level of ideological loyalty within the movements of political Islam and the extent of their connections to Islamic governments, including Iran. It therefore was unlikely that Qatar — which expelled 18 Lebanese nationals in June 2013 on charges of being affiliated with Hezbollah and in September 2014 deported Brotherhood leaders in response to a request by Saudi Arabia — would sacrifice its historical relationship and interests with the Saudi state for the sake of an unpredictable party such as Hezbollah.
Stressing Qatar’s support for Saudi Arabia, a March 10 editorial in the Qatari al-Raya newspaper called the Gulf stance against Hezbollah a clear message that there is no place for the party in any Arab country, including Lebanon. Thus, Riyadh succeeded in condemning and isolating Hezbollah on the Gulf and Arab levels, making it easier to achieve its goal of discussing the Hezbollah dossier at the Islamic level during the 13th summit of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, scheduled to be held April 10-15 in Istanbul.
Furthermore, in light of Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Naaman Kortolmos’ March 4 condemnation of Hezbollah’s involvement in criminal acts in Syria, it would seem that Turkey would not object to the adoption of a resolution by Islamic states classifying Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. This would make the group's presence in Syria and other places equivalent to that of the Islamic State (IS) and allow its targeting by countries of the Islamic coalition against terrorism, which Riyadh announced the establishment of in December. Most coalition members took part in the North Thunder war games, which began Feb. 27 under the leadership of Saudi Brig. Fahd al-Mutair, the Northern Military Region commander, at King Khalid Military City, in the northeastern region of Hafr al-Batin.
Riyadh’s escalation against Hezbollah followed the Saudi media's Feb. 24 airing of a video discovered by the Yemeni army at a captured Houthi position. The footage shows a Lebanese military adviser from Hezbollah by the name of Abu Saleh talking to Houthi soldiers about conducting military and suicide attacks inside Saudi Arabia.
In addition, on Feb. 21, Saudi media outlets had announced the initiation of legal proceedings against a spy ring associated with Iranian intelligence services and consisting of two Afghans, one Iranian and 30 Saudi Shiites, whom Saudi authorities had begun pursuing and arresting in March 2013 in Mecca, Medina, Riyadh and al-Sharqiyyah. Most prominent among them is a consulting physician, who was asked by officials at the Iranian Embassy in Riyadh to write reports on the health of important Saudis receiving treatment at the King Faisal Specialist Hospital in the city. The hospital serves princes, senior officials and some private citizens who receive special permission to be seen there. Also in the ring is a Saudi security officer from the pilgrimage security force who provided information to Iran about the location of tents allocated to Saudi and non-Saudi officials and VIPs during the pilgrimage.
Saudi officials, who have long maintained that they would not abandon Lebanon, are saying in international meetings and gatherings that their problem is exclusively with Hezbollah as a military and political entity, not with the Lebanese people. It thus seems that the actions being taken by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states — including the cancellation of a military aid deal to the Lebanese army and of residency permits of Lebanese residing in the Gulf — are aimed at punishing the Lebanese political parties and figures who support Hezbollah and object to labeling it a terrorist organization. This is being done in pursuit of the further goal of pushing the Lebanese to rebel against Hezbollah. In theory, the Lebanese would direct their energies toward punishing the party and all of its agencies and officials that pose a threat to Gulf regimes and hold the party’s leadership responsible for the reckless exploitation of sectarian passions for the benefit of Iran. Riyadh's retribution will not be limited to drying up the party’s sources of financing, an effort that began in May 2015 when lists of people and companies associated with Hezbollah were classified as terrorists by Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries. Rather, it will go beyond that to pursue the party on legal grounds in international forums and degrade the disproportionate power wielded by Hezbollah relative to other Lebanese political factions.

Syria Regime Says Assad Ouster 'Red Line' ahead of Peace Talks
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 12/16/The Syrian government on Saturday said the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad remains a "red line," just two days ahead of renewed talks to put an end to the war. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said meanwhile that the indirect negotiations between the Syrian government and the opposition were likely to go ahead as planned on Monday in Geneva. The U.N.-brokered talks are the latest push by the international community to find a solution to Syria's five-year war, which has left more than 270,000 people dead. Both the government and the main opposition group, the Riyadh-based High Negotiations Committee, have agreed to attend the talks after the last round collapsed in February. But the fate of Assad would not be on the negotiating table, Syria's Foreign Minister Walid Muallem told a Damascus news conference. "We will not talk with anyone who wants to discuss the presidency... Bashar al-Assad is a red line," Muallem said. The HNC has repeatedly called for Assad's departure at the start of any transitional period. "If they continue with this approach, there's no reason for them to come to Geneva," Muallem said. He said the government's delegation would travel to Switzerland on Sunday, but would leave if the opposition did not show up within 24 hours.
FM calls for 'unity government'
U.N. peace envoy Staffan de Mistura said the meetings in Geneva would not last more than 10 days. The negotiations would cover the formation of a new government, a fresh constitution, and U.N.-monitored presidential and parliamentary elections within 18 months, the envoy said. But Muallem said that de Mistura had "no right" to discuss future presidential elections or any agenda items. "Neither he nor anyone else, whoever they may be, has the right to discuss presidential elections," insisted Muallem. "This right is exclusively for the Syrian people." Muallem said the negotiations would aim to form a "unity government" which would then appoint a committee to either write a new constitution or amend the current one. "Then we will have a referendum for the Syrian people to decide on it," he said, adding that a federal division of Syria was not an option. The opposition HNC has likewise insisted on the territorial unity of Syria, but says talks must create a "transitional governance body with full executive powers." On Saturday, de Mistura told Swiss newspaper Le Temps that although Syria's Kurds were not invited to talks, they should be given the opportunity to voice their views on a future governance structure and constitution.Regime backer Russia had called on de Mistura to include Syrian Kurdish representatives in peace talks.
80 percent drop in violence
Violence in Syria has decreased since a landmark ceasefire between the regime and rebels across parts of the country took effect two weeks ago. Brokered by the United States and Russia, who back opposing sides in the conflict, the truce appears to be largely holding although the warring sides have accused each other of violations. As he wrapped up a visit Saturday to Saudi Arabia, Kerry said that U.S. and Russian officials would meet later in the day to discuss complaints by the opposition of truce violations. "Our teams are meeting today with Russia in both Geneva and Amman, where very detailed lay downs will take place regarding these allegations," he said. Air raids by the Syrian regime killed seven civilians in rebel-held areas of second city Aleppo on Friday, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. But Kerry, who met Saudi Arabia's King Salman for talks on Syria, said that "perceived" violations of the ceasefire should not derail the U.N.-mediated peace talks. "The level of violence by all accounts has been reduced by 80 to 90 percent, which is very, very significant," he said. The U.N.'s top humanitarian officials on Friday said the truce had brought "fragile glimmers of hope" to the humanitarian situation in Syria. "Fewer bombs are falling; humanitarian access has opened up in some places; negotiators from all sides are preparing to come together and talk," the heads of aid agencies said in a joint statement. But "it is just not enough," they said, as other communities remain cut off from assistance.

Four shot at Muslim cemetery in Canada
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officers man a road block leading to a Muslim cemetery near Cochrane, Canada, on Friday (March 11, 2016). RCMP said at least three people have been shot at the cemetery just outside of Calgary. AP, Alberta Saturday, 12 March 2016/The Royal Canadian Mounted Police said four men were shot at a Muslim cemetery just outside of Calgary on Friday afternoon. Sgt. Jack Poitras said the shooting happened near Cochrane and the injured people were being treated at Calgary hospitals. A police spokeswoman at the scene said all suffered non-life-threatening injuries. Police said there was a funeral at the cemetery and a group of people remained at the site following the service. Poitras said it appears the shooting involved people who were in the group. Zouheir Osman, who is in charge of the cemetery, said a service for a 21-year-old man was taking place before the shooting. He said he left shortly before the shots were fired. Osman said he didn’t believe the shooting had anything to do with the man being remembered at the funeral.However, Calgary Imam Syed Soharwardy said he spoke with two people who attended the funeral and they suspect the shooting was gang-related. “It did not seem to be a hate crime,” Soharwardy said. “It looks like it was a turf war or gang war or some type of revenge.”The funeral was for a Pakistani man named Hamza Nazir, said Soharwardy, who knows the family. He said he doesn’t know the cause of the young man’s death. Despite police assuring the public there was no danger, a heavily armed police tactical team remained outside the Calgary Foothills Hospital on Friday evening.

Hollande Vows 'No Concessions' to Turkey on Rights, Visas in Migrant Deal
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 12/16/French President Francois Hollande said Saturday that the EU must not grant Turkey any concessions on human rights or visas in exchange for guarantees to stem the flow of migrants to Europe. "There cannot be any concessions on the matter of human rights or the criteria for visa liberalization," Hollande told reporters ahead of the resumption next week of tough negotiations between Turkey and the EU in Brussels. Under a controversial draft deal reached this week, Turkey would take back all migrants landing in Greece in a bid to reduce their incentive to pay people smugglers for dangerous crossings to the Greek islands in rickety boats. In return for every Syrian sent back from Greece, the EU would resettle one Syrian refugee from camps in Turkey -- which is hosting about 2.7 million people who have fled the conflict across the border. Turkey is also demanding six billion euros ($6.6 billion) in aid, visa-free access for its nationals within Europe's passport-free Schengen zone and for swifter action to process its bid to join the EU. The plan to expel migrants en masse from Greece has sparked international criticism, with the U.N.'s top officials on refugees and human rights questioning whether it would be legal. Officials have also expressed concern over the potential need for compromise with Ankara, as fears grow over freedom of expression and rights abuses under the rule of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Hollande spoke after meeting in Paris on Saturday with more than a dozen social democrat leaders from the EU, including Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi and German Vice-Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel.

Britain sends more troops to train Iraqis against ISIS
AFP, London Saturday, 12 March 2016/Britain said on Saturday it was sending more troops to Iraq to bolster its mission training up the armed forces taking on the Islamic State of Syria and Iraq (ISIS). Defense Secretary Michael Fallon said a further 30 troops would be deployed to provide training in logistics and bridge-building, as well as specialist medical staff. The move would take the total number of British personnel on training missions inside Iraq to 300. The additional troops are expected to be deployed to training camps at Bismayah and Taji outside Baghdad. Fallon said “solid progress” has been made in the fight against ISIS, which rules large parts of Syria and Iraq. “Now is the time to step up our training of Iraqi forces, as they prepare for operations in key cities such as Fallujah and Mosul,” he said. “Along with the trebling of UK air strikes, this underlines the crucial role our armed forces are playing in the fight against Daesh.” British jets have been striking IS targets in Iraq and Syria. On Wednesday, British Tornado and Typhoon aircraft conducted four attacks in northern and western Iraq. The day after they carried out five attacks in the same area, destroying a weapons cache and several IS fighting positions, the ministry of defense said.

Iraq PM vows retaliation after ISIS chemical attack
By AFP Baghdad Saturday, 12 March 2016/Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi vowed on Saturday to retaliate against ISIS after it launched a chemical attack on a town near Kirkuk. The suspected mustard gas attack on Taza that left a three-year-old girl dead “will not go unpunished”, the premier said in a statement. A large number of rockets were fired on Taza on Wednesday from the nearby village of Bashir, which is held by the militants. Intelligence experts are still analyzing samples but local officials believe mustard agent was used in the attack. On Saturday, an Iranian delegation visited Taza, which lies just south of the city of Kirkuk and around 220 kilometers (135 miles) north of Baghdad. Abadi promised that medical support would be provided to the town, where hundreds of people received care following the chemical attack. Hundreds of people attended the funeral on Friday of Fatima Samir, the girl who died of wounds sustained during the attack. Some of the mourners carried placards demanding protection. The Iraqi air force carried out a strike on Bashir overnight and Abadi promised a ground operation to retake the village from ISIS soon, pro-government militia commander Abu Ridha al-Najjar said. Bashir lies in an area that is officially under federal administration but is controlled by Kurdish forces that de facto expanded their autonomous region on the back of the militants' 2014 offensive. Tension has been high between Kurdish forces and Shiite militias in the area, impeding military cooperation against ISIS.

Syria talks already on shaky ground before start
By Staff Writer Al Arabiya English Saturday, 12 March 2016/Syria’s foreign minister says a government delegation will head to Geneva Sunday to take part in indirect peace talks with the opposition. Walid al-Muallem told reporters Saturday that the government team will not stay more than 24 hours in Geneva if the opposition does not show up. He insisted that the opposition delegation take part in talks at the United Nations headquarters in the Swiss city, deriding them for “spending the last round in hotels.”“Otherwise, we will not waste our time,” Muallem said. “Our delegation will leave for Geneva tomorrow... We will wait 24 hours and if no one is there, then we will return,” he told a news conference in Damascus. The talks are scheduled to begin Monday. But he said the position of president was not on the table for discussion, describing any attempt to discuss the presidency a “red line”. “We will not talk with anyone who wants to discuss the presidency... Bashar al-Assad is a red line and is the property of the Syrian people,” Muallem said. The last round of indirect talks collapsed on Feb. 3 over a Russian-backed government offensive in Aleppo. The latest talks come amid a two-week partial cease-fire that has mostly held. Muallem rejected comments made by UN envoy Staffan de Mistura, who said presidential elections will be held within 18 months. Muallem said: “Neither he nor anyone else has the right to talk about presidential elections. This is an exclusive right of the Syrian people.”But Syrian opposition official Monzer Makhous said they would ‘only accept the formation of transitional governing body in first, six-month phase of transition. And he told Al Arabiya News’ sister channel Al Hadath that Muallem was “Halting Geneva talks before they start," adding that such statements were “putting nails in coffin of Geneva." Muallem dismissed such claims saying that a “transitional period” meant moving from the existing government to another one, and from the existing constitution to another one. (With AFP, AP and Reuters)

President’s troops break siege of Yemen’s third city
By Reuters Aden Saturday, 12 March 2016/Forces loyal to Yemen’s president have broken a siege by the Iranian-allied Houthis around the strategic Yemeni city of Taiz, local fighters and residents said on Saturday, as the United States raised the possibility of a Syrian-style truce in Yemen.
At least 48 people were killed in heavy clashes in Yemen’s third biggest city, medics and local fighters said, and at least 120 were wounded. Witnesses said there were bodies scattered in the streets. Supporters of President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi, backed by a Saudi-led Arab coalition, have been trying for months to lift the siege of the southwestern city and open up supply routes. The coalition has been trying for a year to roll back gains by the Houthi militia and restore Hadi, who is currently in Saudi Arabia. The war has killed more than 6,000 people and displaced millions. The reported capture of the western entrance to Taiz, nearly half of whose 250,000 residents had been trapped since May, was hailed by the pro-Hadi Sabanew news agency as a major breakthrough. It said Hadi had telephoned the local military commander to congratulate him. The rival Houthi-run news agency, Sabanews, acknowledged heavy fighting in Taiz but said fighters from the group had killed 27 fighters loyal to Hadi. Yemeni Vice President Khaled Bahah, who is also the prime minister, told a news conference in the southern port city of Aden that the Yemeni government was preparing an aid convoy to Taiz to leave soon, but gave no further details. Bahah also said the government had prepared 1,000 men to impose security in Taiz immediately to avoid a repetition of the lawlessness that had gripped Aden after pro-Hadi forces captured the city from the Houthis in July last year. The United Nations has accused the Houthis of obstructing the delivery of humanitarian supplies to civilians in Taiz, saying residents had been living under “virtual siege”. The Houthis and troops loyal to their ally, former president Ali Abdullah Saleh, remain entrenched in much of the northern half of Yemen, including the capital Sanaa. Islamist militants have exploited the chaos to widen their influence.
Possibility of ceasefire
US Secretary of State John Kerry, who met Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir at Hafr al-Batin in northern Saudi Arabia, said they discussed the possibility of a ceasefire in Yemen similar to the arrangement that has been implemented in Syria. “We both agree that it would be desirable to see if we can find a similar approach, as we did in Syria, to try to get a ceasefire,” Kerry said, referring to the truce that has largely held for two weeks in Syria. Jubeir said Saudi Arabia believed a political settlement that would ensure the Houthis abided by common understandings reached before the Houthi capture of Sanaa would pave the way to a solution. “We reiterated to the secretary of state our commitment as expressed by the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) heads of state to embark on a long-term reconstruction and development plan for Yemen once the hostilities have ended,” Jubeir said. A delegation from the Houthis is currently in Saudi Arabia for talks on facilitating humanitarian aid to Yemen. The visit, which Yemeni officials say may be a precursor to resuming UN-sponsored peace talks in Switzerland after two unfruitful rounds last year, came after Saudi Arabia and the Houthis exchanged prisoners last week.

French state of emergency laws spark large protests in Paris
By Asma Ajroudi/Special to Al Arabiya English Saturday, 12 March 2016/Demonstrators say that thousands of people took to the streets of France's capital city Paris on Saturday to protest against the national state of emergency that has been in place since the deadly November attacks. Thousands walked through Paris on Saturday shouting “liberté” (liberty), as they demanded the removal of the state of emergency. The state of emergency was announced within a few hours of the November attacks that left 130 people dead. Under the special rules police are given unprecedented powers including conducting house raids without a warrant or judicial oversight, and allows the authorities to restrict the movements of people and vehicles at specific times and places. Camille Blanc, vice chairman of Amnesty International in France told Al Arabiya English that the state of emergency was bad for people’s basic human rights. “We don’t think this is a useful measure and it is something where there will always be some people who are discriminated against. We are really afraid about the discrimination that might take place,” she said. “Under the state of emergency more Muslim people have been discriminated against. We saw some house raids because people were Muslim.”She said in Canada they removed the state of emergency “because it served no purpose”. “So in France we are wondering why they are still pursuing this line,” Blanc added. On Feb. 16 the French government voted overwhelmingly to extend the state of emergency for three months until May. This followed a previous extension that was scheduled to end on Feb. 26. Paris police watch on as protesters marched through the French capital on Saturday, March 12. (Photo: Asma Ajroudi)Julien Molesin head of the Paris Federation Human Rights League told Al Arabiya English, they were demanding the end of the state of emergency. “We don’t want this in the constitution,” he explained. “A state of emergency should not be in the constitution, it should be a temporary measure. Putting it into the constitution presents a risk that this could become permanent.” He said that while they accepted there was a risk to France’s national security, a state of emergency was not the answer to the problem – this, he said, would not solve terrorism. Molesin said the rules gave police a number of special powers, including the right to go to people’s homes. “They can go to your home, visit it, take whatever they want during the night, without any judge’s approval,” he explained. “We have seen this happen. Some people have been placed under house arrest without any judicial authority.” Even the right to protest – something the French have done for centuries – is faced with increased restrictions, Molesin explained. He added: “At the moment we have a government that is happy for protests to take place. But if under the state of emergency the next government decides it does not like them, they only need to say that there is a threat to security and they can be stopped.”Members of the protest march suggested there were thousands in attendance - but French police told Al Arabiya English that there were hundreds. Demonstrators sit on the ground during Saturday's Paris protests (Photo: Asma Ajroudi)

UN adopts measure to confront sexual abuse by peacekeepers
AFP, United Nations, United States Saturday, 12 March 2016/The UN Security Council on Friday adopted a resolution that calls for the repatriation of entire peacekeeping units whose soldiers face allegations of sexual abuse while serving under the UN flag. It was the first time that the council has approved measures to address the rise in troubling allegations of sexual abuse by peacekeepers deployed worldwide to protect civilians in conflict. The US-drafted resolution was adopted by a vote of 14 in favor, with Egypt abstaining. The resolution, which has been under intense negotiation for a week, endorses a new UN policy of sending entire peacekeeping units back home if their soldiers face repeated allegations of sex abuse. The measure allows UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to bar a country from peacekeeping if it fails to take action against soldiers who face credible allegations. Foreign troops found guilty of sex abuse “do not deserve to serve in UN peacekeeping missions,” US Ambassador Samantha Power told the council. “To the victims of sexual exploitation and abuse, we pledge that we will do better,” she said. “We will do better to ensure that the blue helmets we send as your protectors do not become perpetrators.” Egypt, along with Russia and Senegal, had argued that the new policy amounts to collective punishment and that attention should focus on prosecuting individual perpetrators of sex crimes. Minutes before the adoption, Egypt presented an amendment that would have added criteria for deciding on a repatriation, a move Power said would have “undermined the purpose of the resolution.” That amendment was backed by Angola, Russia, China, Egypt, Venezuela but it fell short of the nine votes needed for approval in the 15-member council. Egyptian Ambassador Amr Abdellatif Aboulatta said the resolution will “negatively affect the morale of the troops and demonstrates contempt for the sacrifices of tens of thousands of peacekeeping personnel operating under extremely difficult conditions.” Egypt argued that it was up to the UN General Assembly, and not the Security Council, to take action on issues of discipline in UN peacekeeping.
Mounting allegations
Concern has been growing since the release of a UN report showing a rise in the number of allegations of sexual abuse and exploitation by peacekeepers in 10 missions, from 52 in 2014 to 69 last year. Cases of child rape by UN peacekeepers in the Central African Republic have been particularly damaging, prompting Ban to fire the mission commander in August, but the allegations have continued to surface. Under UN rules, it is up to the country that contributes the peacekeepers to investigate and prosecute any soldier accused of misconduct while serving under the UN flag. The United States had argued that too often, countries fail to investigate after they are notified by the United Nations of credible allegations against their troops. The Security Council resolution will strengthen Ban’s hand as he pushes peacekeeping nations to take sex abuse allegations seriously, diplomats say. Last year, Ban ordered troops from the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Republic of Congo to be sent home after their soldiers were accused of sexual abuse in the Central African Republic. A total of 122 countries contribute 125,000 troops and police to the UN’s peacekeeping missions worldwide.

Reports: N. Korean Submarine Missing
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 12/16/A North Korean submarine is missing, reports said Saturday, as the reclusive state issued a fresh threat of retaliation against U.S. and South Korean forces involved in joint military drills. The unknown class of vessel had been reportedly operating off the North Korean coast earlier in the week when it disappeared. A South Korean defense ministry told AFP Seoul was investigating the reports. Pentagon officials declined to comment on the matter. The U.S. military had been observing the submarine off the North's eastern coast, CNN said, citing three U.S. officials familiar with the incident. American spy satellites, aircraft and ships have been watching as the North Korean navy searched for the missing sub, the report added. The U.S. is unsure if the missing vessel is adrift or whether it has sunk, CNN reported, but officials believe it suffered a failure during an exercise. The U.S. Naval Institute (USNI) News said the submarine was presumed sunk. "The speculation is that it sank", an unidentified U.S. official was quoted as telling the USNI News. "The North Koreans have not made an attempt to indicate there is something wrong or that they require help or some type of assistance." The incident comes as tensions were further heightened on the Korean peninsular by a fresh threat from Pyongyang. The official KCNA news agency, citing a statement from military chiefs, warned of a "preemptive retaliatory strike at the enemy groups" involved in the joint U.S.-South Korean drill. Pyongyang added it planned to respond to the drills with an "operation to liberate the whole of South Korea including Seoul" with an "ultra-precision blitzkrieg".Responding to the statement, South Korea's defense ministry urged Pyongyang to stop making threats or further provocations, according to Yonhap news agency. North Korea's navy operates a fleet of some 70 submarines, most of them being rusting diesel submarines that are capable of little more than coastal defense and limited offensive capabilities. But the old, low-tech submarines still pose substantial threats to South Korean vessels. In 2010, a South Korean corvette was reportedly torpedoed by a North Korean submarine near their sea border. In August last year, Seoul said said 70 percent of the North's total submarine fleet -- or around 50 vessels -- had left their bases and disappeared from South's military radar, sparking alarm.
 

“North Thunder Drill”… Alliances Varying
Salman Aldosary/Asharq AlAwsat/March 12/16
Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum (R), Prime Minister and Vice President of the United Arab Emirates and ruler of Dubai, Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif (3rd R), Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi (4th R), and Saudi King Salman (5th R) watch the Northern Thunder exercises in Hafr Al-Batin, near Saudi Arabia’s border with Iraq, March 10, 2016. REUTERS/Saudi Press Agency/
It was a grandiose spectacle which upcoming generations will long remember; tens of thousands of soldiers and army units of 20 different nations coming in together for the first collaborative work of its kind. The occurrence took place on a 900 Km squared vast zone in northern Saudi Arabia nearing Iraqi borders. Before any other military signaling, the North Thunder military drills did not only stand to be an unprecedented military exercise, but also to send out a political message. Some understood that, others listened to it, and several others etched it into their minds.
It is the first robust memo practically sent out by regional countries, and it clearly affirms that they are capable of stopping any attempt trying to toy around with their security and stability, and a first in which no world-power nations are needed to employ the’ umbrella organization’ tactic.
The North Thunder drill has established a new balancing equation for the region. The figures computing that equation first began adding up at the launch of the Decisive Storm operation, then enhanced at Hafar Al-Batin, and finally fortified themselves with the North Thunder military drill.
I believe that four underlying statements are denoted by the North Thunder drill. The first message is directed to all those plotting to spark out chaos and to pounce down nations; to all groups and militias that have established themselves a state within a state.
Each of Hezbollah, ISIS, al-Qaeda, the Popular Mobilization Forces and all other extremist terrorist organizations are addressed when the fact of the Islamic Military Alliance not permitting the continuance of the terrorist chaos and the sapping of its nations’ security and stability is being anchored.
The second point is made to all great nations and regional historical allies, and it is that regional alliances have become of equivalent value to traditional alliances. The current state is not restricted to having regional coalitions alone functioning, not that they have weakened or are being meant to be disposed of, it is only because certain subjects require for the countries themselves to personally attend them.
However, it is not a cut-edge “take matters to our own hands” action, but more of a “resolve our own personal matters”, instead of waiting for a country like the U.S. to decide on whether we should fight terrorism or not, in its own terms, strategies and visions. It is a balance struck between preserving the great power traditional alliances, not completely abandoning them, and not solely depending on them.
As for the third message, it addressed our Gulf’s eastern bank neighboring republic, Iran. It defined that the attack is not targeted against it- the Iranian system is incapable of withstanding any direct confrontation- and attested to the drill’s strategy not being based on inducing a military confrontation.
The North Thunder’s strategy lies among the lines of fighting Iranian proxies and militias spread in the region. Thus the message depicts that all Iranian proxies and militias infiltrating countries will be sized down and cut off, not in a terror-inspired approach, which Iran is quite experienced with, rather in a tactic aligned with international law and by means of politics and military capacities.
Last but not least, the fourth message is a signal out to all the coalition-supporting nations that their countries are fully prepared and have the common military creed to confront all challenges and threats, telling them not to undermine their capabilities.
The League of Arab States (LAS) and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) have long been held responsible for the failure of facing regional challenges afflicted on nations. It could be said that all grand-scale political and economic projects instigated by the two above organizations have never succeeded. However, for the mission on forming a somewhat unified military force, it has flourished after the latest session resolved to approve it.
It is noteworthy to recognize that what the LAS and OIC have previously failed to accomplish over the past decades, has been realized by the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz within a year. The reasons behind that success are not because of Saudi Arabia’s political, military, or even economic strength; it rather is because the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia alone is capable of establishing such alliances, reinforcing and strengthening them, that is all there is to it. All Kingdom allies recognize that fact fully. Saudi Arabia is not aiming to play a role; it wants to meet the expectations posed on its part.

The Egyptian Arab League
Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq AlAwsat/March 12/16
As students from Washington, we visited Cairo in the early eighties as part of our politics lessons. I do not know why our teacher chose to visit that beautiful old building on Talaat Harb Street known as the Egyptian Diplomatic Club. There we met a number of Egyptian Foreign Ministry employees, and everything at the club suggested aristocracy and the days of the Pashas. Alan Taylor, our teacher, commented that Egyptian diplomacy remained even after the 1952 revolution.
Those who held significant political positions abroad were from elite families or had excelled in their studies. The club was a private one and was built by a French architect. It symbolises high end diplomacy; from ambassadors to chefs who are assigned to Egyptian embassies around the world. Ancient Egyptian diplomacy, just like the Diplomatic club that is one hundred years old, maintains its traditions and expertise.
Like high end diplomacy, Ahmed Aboul Gheit has a distinctive C.V. that features Egyptian diplomatic missions ranging from New York to Moscow. He was foreign minister and dealt with different issues in the region and its networks with the world and big powers.
Although some complain about Egypt’s monopoly over the Secretary General of the Arab League post, no Arab country has been able to provide a common platform for member agreement except for agreeing to the host country’s recommendations. There were no other candidates or countries that were acceptable to all. Past events reveal that the real problem is not the Secretary General himself or his post. However, it appears that the main problem is the persistence of Arab conflict. The headquarters of the Arab League, the post of Secretary General or the individual who holds this post is not a problem. Evidence for this is the fact that the former presidents of Iraq and Syria; Saddam Hussein and Hafez Al-Assad respectively, pressurised Arabs to move the Arab League’s headquarters from Egypt to Tunisia. Chedli Klibi became the Secretary General yet the Arab League made no progress.
We do not expect miracles even though Aboul Gheit, who is the best suited person to manage the League, has taken over this office. The new Secretary General realises the importance of the League, the importance of what it represents and that it can be a large, valuable and global institution if the governments of member states overcame their differences and agreed to give the League an opportunity to achieve cooperation.
The Arab League represents a huge area with resources that can make it a major power. The region has the fourth biggest global population (300 million people) and the second in the world in terms of area. The challenge is to achieve joint Arab action; Arab governments have failed to take advantage of the League’s umbrella to benefit its citizens and their countries and have reduced its role to a forum for disputes. I do not think that the new Secretary General can change this reality to a great extent as long as member governments fail to agree on proposals for common projects that lead to development and therefore stability. Dr Nabil El-Araby, the Secretary-General whose term has ended, held the position during the height of chaos and revolutions. To his credit, he was able to save the League from collapse, chaos and anarchy. The new Secretary General, Aboul Gheit, will manage the League at a time that is no less dangerous; there are growing threats from Iran, fighting raging in three Arab countries ( Syria, Libya and Yemen) and political differences between member states are at their worst.

Thus spake Obama, with malice toward Arabs…
Hisham Melhem/Al Arabiya/March 12/16
President Obama is an admirer of President Abraham Lincoln, indisputably the greatest of all American presidents. Obama draws inspiration from Lincoln’s life experiences; he frequently quotes the speeches of the eloquent Lincoln, and aspires to be a good orator like him. There are other similarities between the two presidents and their times, from their legal background to their state of origin and humble beginnings.
Both have presided over a nation divided by wars, in Lincoln’s case the greatest war and the most cataclysmic and defining moment in the nation‘s history; and in Obama’s case the two longest wars in America’s history, fought in distant and misunderstood lands. Both Presidents were hated by certain segments in society, mostly in the South and both were intensely polarizing and partisan leaders.
But while Lincoln displayed strong leadership and saw himself and acted decisively as a war President, fighting his own rearguard battles against his reluctant and indecisive Generals in the first phase of the war, Obama eschewed decisive action, resented the wars he inherited as well as his ostensible allies, acted as a reluctant Commander-in-Chief, and avoided risks because he did not want to own his decisions. Obama is a war president, in as much as the war is limited to the safe use of drones and small scale special operations.
Lincoln’s leadership qualities, and his political judgements were tested repeatedly, and in the face of war defeats, personal and familial tragedies, and political machinations against him from within and without he never lost his moral compass, or his sense of what is vital and crucial an d what is transient. Lincoln was tough as steel, politically and strategically very wise, and when he was forced to engage in hand-to-hand political combats he did not hesitate, but he was also sympathetic, authentic and deeply moral. President Obama is calculating, tactical, distant, self-absorbed, petulant, capable of being vindictive and rarely self-critical.
Obama’s cold world
Jeffrey Goldberg’s intimate portrait of President Obama reveals a man strikingly impervious to introspection, unwilling or incapable of leading a great power, and for whom multilateralism consists of leading by a committee of nations almost on par with the sole superpower in the world. Clearly Obama is building the foundations for his foreign policy legacy, but he lacks some of the most important scaffoldings. A foreign policy doctrine has to be clear and positive, and for all of his eloquent speeches about America and the world, the most memorable line is a crass one: “don’t do stupid shit”.
In my response to the article I noted that “Obama comes across as a scholar who oscillates between providing compelling analysis of the problems and trends he is confronting or anticipating, and a tireless sophist and procrastinator weaving elaborate excuses and justifications for dithering and hand-wringing”. In his conversations with Goldberg, Obama is icily cold, churlish towards his allies, and disdainful of some of his aides and cabinet members particularly his Secretary of state John Kerry, when he curtly dismissed his entreaties for a proactive role in Syria, and for not consult him or his defense secretary Chuck Hagel when he made his decision not to act on his threat to attack the Syrian regime in August 2013.
Obama goes to excruciating lengths to blame others for his failures, and for denying embarrassing setbacks in the Middle East. The portrait unintentionally looks like that of a President who is arrogant in the extreme. He is totally and absolutely in the right, and time will convince his critics that they are in the wrong. Goldberg concludes that Obama “has found world leadership wanting: global partners who often lack the vision and the will to spend political capital in pursuit of broad, progressive goals, and adversaries who are not, in his mind, as rational as he is. But what the partners and the adversaries don’t understand ‘is that history is bending in his direction”.
Denial
With few months left for him in office, President Obama can point out to some of his foreign policy achievements, such the opening to Cuba, the Iran nuclear deal, the trade agreement with Asia and the Paris climate agreement. But when the history of the Obama era is fully written, historian will note that by his actions and inactions he has contributed to the great unraveling of the Middle East.
Obama’s unwillingness to deliver on his promises and threats in Syria, and by his failure to secure a residual military presence in Iraq he had conceded the Levant and Mesopotamia to Russia and Iran. Obama, all but abandoned Europe in the face of Russia’s predations in the Ukraine, and a devastating refugee problem that could undermine the foundations of the European Union. In Asia, America’s traditional allies are watching with trepidation China’s assertive influence, backed by a belligerent military posture in the South China Sea, and a renegade nuclear North Korea.
Obama is not willing to accept partial responsibility for the chaos in Libya, although in the past he did admit to a lapse of judgment by not doing the necessary political follow up. And when he criticized himself, it was for not anticipating the shortcomings of European powers and the Libyan people. “There’s room for criticism, because I had more faith in the Europeans, given Libya’s proximity, being invested in the follow-up,” he said.
“The social order in Libya has broken down,” Obama said. “You have massive protests against Qaddafi. You’ve got tribal divisions inside of Libya.” The Libyans clearly did disappoint Obama, “the degree of tribal division in Libya was greater than our analysts had expected”. The European and Libyan shortcomings are glaring but President Obama, the leader of the International Coalition cannot escape his responsibilities.
Obama is in total denial of the enormity of Russia’s destructive military rampages in Syria and Ukraine. The president of the United States is lecturing the Russian President Vladimir Putin that his military intervention in Syria came “at enormous cost to the well-being of his own country.” Obama believes the Russians “are overextended. They’re bleeding.” This is reminiscent of the old derisive Western attitudes towards the “drunkard” and incompetent Russians. Yes, the Russians were drunkard when they defeated Napoleon, just as they were drunkard when they defeated Hitler.
The so-called Obama Doctrine is not predicated on the conviction that animated American Presidents since the Second World War, that the US is still capable of achieving great goals on its own, i.e. the Marshal Plan, the Peace Corps, and space exploration as well as providing strong leadership for the post-war strategic and economic architectures; the establishment of the NATO alliance, the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, all of which the U.S. used effectively in the Cold War against the Soviet Union. It is ironic, that King Abdullah of Jordan is quoted as saying “I think I believe in American power more than Obama does”.
Obama’s red lines
In his many conversations with Goldberg, Obama is expansive about the things and peoples he disdains in America and overseas, and they are a plenty. Obama disdains the so-called “Washington playbook” and what he describes as the foreign-policy establishment’s “credibility” fetish; the playbook, according to Obama’s exaggerated interpretation, requires the President to militarize his response to international crises. He decries what he calls according to Goldberg “the sort of credibility purchased by force”.
Obama speaks as if nations, particularly a great power can afford to lose credibility. Obama and his vice president Joseph Biden brag passionately that “big nations don’t bluff”, but clearly Putin, Ayatollah Khamenei and Assad took Obama’s measure and literally got away with mass murders in Syria, Iraq and Ukraine.
Obama complained about the Pentagon during the summer of 2013. Goldberg writes “four years earlier, the president believed, the Pentagon had “jammed” him on a troop surge for Afghanistan. Now, on Syria, he was beginning to feel jammed again.” Obama was never fully convinced that he should carry out his threat to attack Syria. The debate at times veered to the surreal. Vice President Biden, a man not known for his political wisdom, expressed his fear of the slippery slope thus: “what happens when we get a plane shot down? Do we not go in and rescue? You need the support of the American people.” A great power is immobilized by the fear of a potential loss of a pilot.
He speaks of authoritarianism in the Arab world, but spares Iran, which executes more people than any of its neighbors, and is the most rampaging state in the region
In addition to resenting the military, Obama resented the foreign policy think-tank complex. According to Goldberg “A widely held sentiment inside the White House is that many of the most prominent foreign-policy think tanks in Washington are doing the bidding of their Arab and pro-Israel funders. I’ve heard one administration official refer to Massachusetts Avenue, the home of many of these think tanks, as “Arab-occupied territory.”
Obama’s justifications of his decision not to deliver on his threat against Assad’s regime are torturous. Once again, he embellishes and distorts the views of his critics of the Syria policy “You called for Assad to go, but you didn’t force him to go. You did not invade.” This is the biggest straw man Obama uses, to which one should tell Obama: Mr. President no serious scholar or policy maker ever suggested invading Syria.
Free riders and hopeless Arabs
President Obama tells Goldberg that “free riders aggravate me”; this was a reference to European allies which are not investing in bigger military budgets, and Arab states that seek American support. Obama is eager to implement his pivot to Asia and to turn his back on the Arab world. As Goldberg noted, Libya proved to Obama that the Middle East was best avoided “There is no way we should commit to governing the Middle East and North Africa”.
According to Goldberg, President Obama sees Asia representing the future with Africa and Latin America deserving more attention, and “the Middle East is a region to be avoided, one that, thanks to America’s energy revolution,, will soon be of negligible relevance to the US economy”. The emergence of ISIS, the same group that Obama called earlier “Junior varsity”, has deepened Obama’s conviction that “the Middle East could not be fixed-not on his watch, and not for a generation to come”.
Obama sees no ray of hope in the immediate future of the Arab world, only an endless bleak desolation. While one could accept most of Obama’s gloomy diagnosis of the ills most Arab states suffer from, i.e. authoritarianism, fanaticism, and denial of basic rights, but what makes his remarks particularly jarring is their categorical nature, his implicit generalizations about the Sunni Arabs, and his lack of empathy. He speaks of authoritarianism in the Arab world, but spares Iran, which executes more people than any of its neighbors, and is the most rampaging state in the region.
Obama uses the phrase “the Middle East” but he means the Arab states, not Iran. “Right now, I don’t think that anybody can be feeling good about the situation in the Middle East”, he tells Goldberg. “You have countries that are failing to provide prosperity and opportunity for their people. You’ve got a violent, extremist ideology, or ideologies, that are turbocharged through social media. You’ve got countries that have very few civic traditions, so that as autocratic regimes start fraying, the only organizing principles are sectarian.”
He contrasts the forbidden world of the Arabs with the promising future of Southeast Asia, a region brimming with ambitious and energetic people driven by their desire to build businesses, get education and employment. In Asia, Latin America and in Africa, Obama sees young people yearning for modernity, self-improvement and material wealth. Then Obama turns incendiary “They are not thinking about how to kill Americans. What they’re thinking about is how do I get a better education? How do I create something of value?” Obama, continues his shocking comparison of young Asians and young Arabs “If we’re not talking to them,” he said, “because the only thing we’re doing is figuring out how to destroy or cordon off or control the malicious, nihilistic, violent parts of humanity, then we’re missing the boat.”
Obama’s words, will alienate many in the Arab world, and will reinforce the prevailing view that the United States is retreating from most of the region, now that it secured a nuclear deal with Iran, one of Obama’s main objectives in the region from day one. Many Arabs will look with trepidation for Obama’s remaining months at the White House. His contemptuous words will be reciprocated, and he will make it extremely hard for his successor to navigate through the wreckage he and some of his regional counterparts have created in the last few years.
To paraphrase the two great men Nietzsche and Lincoln; Thus spake Obama, with malice towards the Arabs, with charity for none…

When growth sows the seeds of inequality
Ehtesham Shahid/Al Arabiya/March 12/16
This tale of rural-urban demographic struggle comes from faraway China. And it tells us, besides many other things, how uncontrolled growth can also sow the seeds of inequality.The hukou system took roots in China in the 1950s. Initiated by the Communist Party to control population movement, hukou was designed to safeguard the country’s food supply and to prevent a surge of migration into cities. It could have achieved some of its stated objectives in the immediate term but it also gave birth to a kind of silent social disequilibrium. Hukou ensured that those with urban registrations enjoyed welfare benefits but, at the same time, withheld the same benefits from rural registration holders. This was unfolding alongside China’s meteoric rise as an economic power and a pace of urbanization unprecedented in human history. This system eventually led to the emergence of a phenomenon called chengzhongcun – or village within a city – where a large number of migrant workers lived. In effect, this also became a de facto barrier to full urban integration for many Chinese. As one would expect, high density population clusters led to social problems and made it difficult to provide security and ensure hygiene. Illegal construction started to come up and unlawful discharge of wastewater posed civic challenges. The authorities first tried eviction notices to migrants and then forced them out at their own expense. Hukou system could have achieved some of its immediate stated objectives in China but it also gave birth to a kind of silent social disequilibrium
The hukou system – often called China’s internal passport – slowly outlived its utility. The prioritization of schools, hospitals and other public services for registered residents could not have worked all the time. The watershed moment arrived in the year 2012 when the country’s urban population officially grew larger than the rural population. There was another social fallout – a new generation of children was growing in the countryside with one or no parent around for most of the year. A census done in the year 2010 counted 61 million children in this category with nearly half having no parents at home. A 2014 survey estimated that 10 million rural children had not seen their parents for more than a year.
Inevitable reform
One more transformation was taking place in China around the same time. The share of jobs from the services sector was getting larger as a result of the way the Chinese economy was shaping. The earlier generation of migrant workers, who mostly worked for factories, found accommodation easily but with the growing need for residential units China’s new economy faced yet another challenge. The system was crying for change. It was only in 2014 that the authorities started to reform the hukou system. It was announced that migrant workers from the rural areas with stable work and skills would be allowed to settle down in cities with their families. They were assured of the same rights as those registered as city dwellers. More importantly, those who registered to live in the city was given the right to keep their land in their villages. As part of this reform process, the country wants to grant hukous to 100 million migrants by 2020 in a slow and selective process. However, this number will still be less than half of the nearly 274 million migrant workers China had by 2014. The moot point is even if the authorities manage to strike the right balance, one could still wonder why such inequality was allowed in the first place.

Why a niqab ban will be major step back for Egyptian women
Yara al-Wazir/Al Arabiya/March 12/16
The past week has been eventful for women in more ways than one. As the world celebrated the International Women’s Day, the Egyptian parliament drafted a bill that may lead to a ban on the full face veil, the niqab, at all public institutions, including government buildings, public transport and government-supported hospitals. While the use of niqab is contested within the Muslim world, no government should have the right to impede on the freedom of a woman wanting to wear an item of clothing. Banning the face veil is not going to liberate women. On the contrary, it is a method of control that limits a woman’s ability to contribute to the society. This ban would exclude those who wear these veils and keep them away from going around their normal lives. Regardless of whether members of parliament agree or not, women who independently choose to wear the veil do so because it makes them feel comfortable in a country where 99.3 percent of women are sexually harassed. Banning the veil would remove this layer of comfort, in an extreme manner. Women used to it may stop contributing to the society, they may quit their jobs, stop using public transport, and may have to rely on male members of the family to take care of paperwork in government institutions. Lawmakers suggest that the veil is not a religious requirement and therefore banning it does not impede religious freedom. This is not a cohesive argument though. The law would impede on the personal freedom of individuals, which is worse than impeding an individual’s religious freedom; not everyone has a religion to be impeded upon but everyone has personal freedom.
Instead of focusing on efforts to protect women and combat sexual harassment, the government is instead attempting to exercise greater control and constrictions against women
Egyptian women have bigger battles at hand, namely the fight against sexual harassment. The United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women published a report showing that 99.3 percent of Egyptian women had experienced sexual harassment.
Instead of focusing on efforts to protect women and combat sexual harassment, the government is instead attempting to exercise greater control and constrictions against women. The draft bill would affect only a small segment of Egyptian women, as only 17 percent of them wear the veil.
I do not personally believe in wearing the veil and also do not believe in mixing black jeans with brown boots. The government shouldn’t have the right to intervene in either situation. So long as the freedom of expression of one individual does not impede on the freedom of another, the right to express should exist.
The Europe example
Across the oceans in England this week, a UKIP politician also called for ban on wearing veil in public. The difference is that UKIP, the UK’s far-right political party, is known for its outrageous and borderline racist policy suggestions that rarely make it to the parliamentary debate stage.
Ironically, the argument used by UKIP is slightly more understandable. UKIP has cited security concerns for banning the face-cover, arguing that it is difficult to identify individuals if their faces are covered.
Ultimately, the reasons cited by Egyptian lawmakers are simply not strong enough as the majority of the statements revolve around religion. The issue has been around since the era of Hosni Mubarak and was the topic of a heated debate in 2006. One must hence ask, is the Egyptian government picking up where Mubarak left? If this law does in fact go through, it will not pass because of religious rights, difficulty to communicate, or any other bogus reason claimed. If Egypt adopts the ban, it will suggest bowing down to international pressure. This will also be a poor attempt to join “progressive” European countries including France, Belgium, and the Netherlands, all of which ban the face veil in public. More than anything else, the move further marginalizes women and limits their economic participation, something the Egyptian economy certainly cannot afford.

Tunisia’s crucial battle for Ben Gardane
Mshari Al Thaydi/Al Arabiya/March 12/16
Few days ago, Tunisia set a major example when its army, police, and national guards, with the help of its people, repelled a dangerous incursion carried out by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) on Ben Gardane city near the country’s border with Libya. An ISIS battalion formed of Tunisians - most of them likely to be local residents – took to the streets and declared their control over the city. They announced the establishment of Ben Gardane state under the authority of ISIS leader al-Baghdadi. The murderers belonging to ISIS surfaced across the city, stopped passers-by and started inspecting their identity cards. They thought that this small city, linked to the exchange of goods on the border with Libya, will mark their first victory in Green Tunisia. However, things did not go according to their plan. The Tunisian state proved to be efficient, alert and decisive. Most importantly, the people of Ben Gardane took the initiative to collaborate with the Tunisian army, national guards and police against the invaders. Tunisia’s Prime Minister, Habib Essib, stated that the attacks were carried out by around 50 armed men who tried to take over three security installations and tried to establish a new state in Ben Gardane. The Tunisian interior and defense ministries announced that the security forces killed 46 terrorists in three days. Efforts are on to track ISIS remnants in the country. As many as 13 security personnel and seven civilians were killed in clashes with the terrorists.
Pressure from Libya
ISIS has been under pressure in Libya as a result of the progress made by General Khalifa Haftar-led forces, the secret US-NATO raids on its locations in Sirte and other cities as well as Sabratha near the Tunisian border. Perhaps the attempts to take over Ben Gardane was aimed at expanding the organization’s authority toward Tunisia and complicate things for NATO and the Americans. Nevertheless, Tunisians have resisted this malicious attempt. Perhaps the attempt to take over Ben Gardane was aimed at expanding the organization’s authority toward Tunisia and complicate things for NATO and the Americans
ISIS planners are seeking actively to control more than one location in the region for various reasons. They want to demonstrate the power of the terrorist organization and weaken Arab and international alliances. This is why they have tried to expand in Libya recently. Tunisia has had a unique relationship with ISIS because it has been reported that several Tunisians, whether from Europe or within Tunisia, form a large proportion of its leaders and cadres, especially in Syria and Iraq. The challenge for Tunisia is two-fold because ISIS certainly has many bases inside the country even though their strength is not known. The invasion of Ben Gardane has established this fact. However, the Tunisian state, along with its people were found to be combat-ready despite all the economic and political problems they are facing. Tunisians have achieved an important victory not only for themselves but for all Arabs and Muslims.
The battle for Ben Gardane has been a ray of light amid the dark ISIS night we have faced. Tunisia deserves support from the Arab world.

Sharia Law or One Law for All?

http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/03/12/denis-maceoingatestone-institute-sharia-law-or-one-law-for-all/

Denis MacEoin/Gatestone Institute/March 12, 2016
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7562/sharia-law

Here is the fulcrum around which so much of the problem turns: the belief that Islamic law has every right to be put into practice in non-Muslim countries, and the insistence that a parallel, if unequal, legal system can function alongside civil and criminal law codes adhered to by a majority of a country's citizens.
Salafism is a form of Islam that insists on the application of whatever was said or done by Muhammad or his companions, brooking no adaptation to changing times, no recognition of democracy or man-made laws.
The greatest expression of this failure to integrate, indeed a determined refusal to do so, may be found in the roughly 750 Muslim-dominated no-go zones in France, which the police, fire brigades, and other representatives of the social order dare not visit for fear of sparking off riots and attacks. Similar zones now exist in other European countries, notably Sweden and Germany. According to the 2011 British census there are over 100 Muslim enclaves in the country.
As millions of Muslims flow into Europe, some from Syria, others from as far away as Afghanistan or sub-Saharan Africa, several countries are already experiencing high levels of social breakdown. Several articles have chronicled the challenges posed in countries such as Sweden and Germany. Such challenges are socio-economic in nature: how to accommodate such a large influx of migrants; the rising costs of providing then with housing, food, and benefits, and the expenses incurred by increased levels of policing in the face of growing lawlessness in some areas. If migrants continue to enter European Union countries at the current rate, these costs are likely to rise steeply; some countries, such as Hungary, have already seen how greatly counterproductive and self-destructive Europe's reception of almost anyone who reaches its borders has been.
The immediate impact, however, of these new arrivals is not likely to be a simple challenge, something that may be remedied by increasing restrictions on numbers, deportations of illegal migrants, or building fences. During the past several decades, some European countries ­-- notably Britain, France, Germany, Sweden, and Denmark -- have received large numbers of Muslim immigrants, most of them through legal channels. According to a Pew report in 2010, there were over 44 million Muslims in Europe overall, a figure expected to rise to over 58 million by 2030.
The migration wave from Muslims countries that began in 2015 is likely to increase these figures by a large margin. In France, citizens of former French colonies in Morocco, Algeria, and some sub-Saharan states, together with migrants from several other Muslim countries in the Middle East and Asia, form a population estimated at several million, but reckoned to be the largest Muslim population in Europe. France is closely followed by Germany – a country now taking in very large numbers of immigrants. There are currently some 5.8 million Muslims in Germany, but this figure is widely expected to rise exponentially over the next five years or more.
The United Kingdom, at around 3 million, has the third largest Muslim population in Europe. Islam today is the second-largest religion in the country. The majority of British Muslims originally came from rural areas in Pakistan (such as Mirpur and Bangladesh's Sylhet), starting in the 1950s. Over time, many British Muslims have integrated well into the wider population. But in general, integration has proven a serious problem, especially in cities such as Bradford, or parts of London such as Tower Hamlets; and there are signs that, as time passes, assimilation is becoming harder, not easier. A 2007 report by British think tank Policy Exchange, Living Apart Together, revealed that members of the younger generation were more radical and orthodox than their fathers and grandfathers – a reversal almost certainly unprecedented within an immigrant population over three or more generations. The same pattern may be found across Europe and the United States. A visible sign of this desire to stand out from mainstream society is the steady growth in the numbers of young Muslim women wearing niqabs, burqas, and hijabs – formerly merely a tradition, but now apparently seen as an obligatory assertion of Muslim identity.
In Germany, the number of Salafists rose by 25% in the first half of 2015, according to a report from The Clarion Project. Salafism is a form of Islam that insists on the application of whatever was said or done by Muhammad or his companions, brooking no adaptation to changing times, no recognition of democracy or man-made laws. This refusal to adapt has been very well expressed by Iran's Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini:
"Islam is not constrained by time or space, for it is eternal... what Muhammad permitted is permissible until the Day of Resurrection; what he forbade is forbidden until the Day of Resurrection. It is not permissible that his ordinances be superseded, or that his teachings fall into disuse, or that the punishments [he set] be abandoned, or that the taxes he levied be discontinued, or that the defense of Muslims and their lands cease."
The greatest expression of this failure to integrate, indeed a determined refusal to do so, may be found in the roughly 750 zones urbaines sensibles in France, Muslim-dominated no-go zones, which the police, fire brigades, and other representatives of the social order dare not visit for fear of sparking off riots and attacks. Similar zones now exist in other European countries, notably Sweden and Germany.
In the UK, matters have not reached the pitch where the police and others dare not enter. But in some Muslim-dominated areas, non-Muslims may not be made welcome, especially women dressed "inappropriately." According to the 2011 British census there are over 100 Muslim enclaves in the country. "The Muslim population exceeds 85% in some parts of Blackburn," notes the scholar Soeren Kern, "and 70% in a half-dozen wards in Birmingham and Bradford." There are similarly high figures for many other British cities.
Maajid Nawaz of the anti-extremist Quilliam Foundation has spoken of the growing trend for some radical young Muslims to patrol their streets to impose a strict application of Islamic sharia law on Muslims and non-Muslims alike, in direct breach of British legal standards.
In Britain "Muslims Against the Crusaders" have recently declared an Islamic Emirates Project, in which they are seeking to enforce their brand of sharia in 12 British cities. They have named two London boroughs, Waltham Forest and Tower Hamlets, among their targets. Little surprise then that in these two boroughs hooded "Muslim patrols" have taken to the streets and begun enforcing a strict view of sharia over unsuspecting locals. The "Muslim Patrols" warn that alcohol, "immodest" dress and homosexuality are now banned. To add to these threats, all this is filmed and uploaded onto the internet. Now, in East London, some shops no longer feel free to employ uncovered women or sell alcohol without fear of violent payback.
Nawaz goes on to write: "[T]he Muslim patrols could become a lot more dangerous and, perhaps willing to maim or kill if they are joined by battle-hardened jihadis." Muslims have been beaten up for smoking during Ramadan; non-Muslims have been forced to leave for carrying alcohol on British streets.
A recent report by Raheem Kassam cites British police officers who admit that they often have to ask permission from Muslim leaders to enter certain areas, and that they are instructed not to travel to work or go into certain places wearing their uniforms.
Here is the fulcrum around which so much of the problem turns: the belief that Islamic law has every right to be put into practice in non-Muslim countries, and the insistence that a parallel, if unequal, legal system can function alongside civil and criminal law codes adhered to by a majority of a country's citizens. More than one non-Muslim has been ordered to leave "Islamic territory," and some radicals have attempted to set up "Shariah Controlled Zones," where only Islamic rules are enforced. Stickers placed on lampposts and other structures declare: "You are entering a Shariah Controlled Zone," where there can be no alcohol, no gambling, no drugs or smoking, no porn or prostitution, and even no music or concerts.
And that is not all. Soeren Kern wrote in 2011:
A Muslim group in the United Kingdom has launched a campaign to turn twelve British cities – including what it calls "Londonistan" – into independent Islamic states. The so-called Islamic Emirates would function as autonomous enclaves ruled by Islamic Sharia law and operate entirely outside British jurisprudence.
The Islamic Emirates Project, launched by the Muslims Against the Crusades group, names the British cities of Birmingham, Bradford, Derby, Dewsbury, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, Luton, Manchester, Sheffield, as well as Waltham Forest in northeast London and Tower Hamlets in East London as territories to be targeted for blanket Sharia rule.
All of this is, of course, illegal. The illegality could not be clearer. Here we see self-appointed disaffected Muslim entities, who take action to exercise the power of imposing law on the streets of European cities, and in practice the writ of Islamic law runs in many towns and cities. Not long ago, considerable numbers of Muslims from Paris and the surrounding region would enter the city and take over entire streets in order to perform the noon Friday prayer. Traffic was blocked, residents could neither enter or leave their homes, businesses had to close because customers could not reach them; and all the while, the police stood by, watching but not interfering, knowing that, if they acted to preserve the law a riot would ensue. Videos of these incidents are available online. In places where gangs of radicals operate as if they are a mafia, crimes such as honor killings, female genital mutilation (FGM), expulsion or worse of individuals considered apostates, and more, are known to take place. More commonly, many Western states are powerless to prevent forced and underage marriages, compulsory veiling, polygamy, and more.
The police, afraid of charges of racism and "Islamophobia," are reluctant to take action: In 2014 and 2015, the police and social workers turned a blind eye for years to Muslim gangs grooming, prostituting, and raping young white British teenagers in cities such as Oxford, Birmingham, Rochdale and Rotherham. Professor Alexis Jay's report on the situation in Rotherham alone showed serious failings on the part of several bodies from the police to social services. The offenses in these cases were, of course, a breach of sharia law, not an enforcement of it.[1] Yet there seems to have been an attitude, too, that Muslims are entitled to behave as they wish, and that British law enforcement is irrelevant. In the trial of nine men in Rochdale, Judge Gerald Clifton states in his sentencing that "All of you treated the victims as though they were worthless and beyond any respect – they were not part of your community or religion." This statement alone seems to illustrate the heart of this problem.
But the clash between Islamic law and national law in several European countries has focussed more than anything on the establishment of sharia councils or sharia courts. These have provoked a wider debate than even Islamic finance, now well situated within the international banking system even though it is as if Germany under the Third Reich had its own banking system in which all transactions would go exclusively to strengthening the Third Reich. In the UK this year, it has been revealed that, in order to finance extensive repairs to the House of Lords and the House of Commons, a deal has been done to use Islamic bonds. One result of this is that peers and MPs will not be allowed to have bars or to consume alcohol on their own premises.
The Sharia court debate has been particularly intense in the United Kingdom, where attempts (some successful) to introduce sharia within the legal system have been made since 2008. Speaking to the London Muslim Council in July of that year, Britain's leading judge, Lord Chief Justice Phillips, declared that he believed the introduction of sharia into the UK would be beneficial to society, provided it did not breach British law. It is that stipulation which has not been adhered to. Not many months earlier, in February, Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Britain's leading churchman -- also, as Phillips, with a seat in the House of Lords -- expressed the view that it would be appropriate for British Muslims to use sharia. He argued that "giving Islamic law official status in the UK would help achieve social cohesion because some Muslims did not relate to the British legal system." He went on to say,
"It's not as if we're bringing in an alien and rival system; we already have in this country a number of situations in which the internal law of religious communities is recognised by the law of the land ... There is a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law, as we already do with some kinds of aspects of other religious law."
That is where the debate began. Williams's call for the introduction of sharia was rejected at once by the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, and by the Conservative peer and shadow minister for community cohesion and social action, Sayeeda Warsi. Warsi, herself a Muslim, argued as follows:
"The archbishop's comments are unhelpful and may add to the confusion that already exists in our communities ... We must ensure that people of all backgrounds and religions are treated equally before the law. Freedom under the law allows respect for some religious practices. But let's be absolutely clear: all British citizens must be subject to British laws developed through parliament and the courts."
One year before, however, sharia had already entered the country. An organization called the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal had set itself up on the basis of the 1996 Arbitration Act. It allows individuals and businesses to enter into mutually agreed consultation in which a third party decides between their competing arguments. Mutual agreement is, of course, the central plank on which the legislation is based. Muslim tribunals are limited to financial and property issues. They use sharia standards for intervention, not just between Muslims, but even between non-Muslims who wish to settle disputes using sharia standards. Since 2007, the MAT has opened tribunals in Nuneaton, London, Birmingham, Bradford, and Manchester. They are all considered legal, and their rulings can be confirmed by county courts and the High Court.
Acquiescence to the regularization of sharia within UK legal processes received a major boost for a short time when, in March 2014, the Law Society issued guidance to permit high street solicitors to draw up "sharia compliant" wills, even though these might discriminate against widows, non-Muslims, female heirs, adopted children and others. When the debate grew more heated and the Law Society was severely criticized, some months later it withdrew the guidelines and apologized for having introduced them at all. It was a healthy expression of the way open debate in democratic societies achieves results.
By that time, however, there were around 85 sharia councils operating -- most of them openly, some behind the scenes, across the UK. They had all been granted recognition by the establishment. These councils are often confused with the arbitration tribunals, but are, in fact, quite different. A council (sometimes termed a court) functions as a mediation service -- also legal in British law. However, the decisions of these councils have no standing under British law. They are usually composed of a small number of elderly men with varying degrees of qualification in Islamic law, and they generally issue advice or fatwas [religious opinions] based on the rulings of one or another of the main schools of Muslim law.
It is these councils that are the greatest cause for concern, especially the limited range of matters on which they issue judgements: marriage, divorce, child custody, and inheritance. In all of these areas, the concerns rest principally on the treatment of Muslim women. Among the leading critics of Sharia on these grounds is one of the most visionary members of Britain's House of Lords, Baroness Caroline Cox.[2] The first thing she did after her elevation to the peerage was to set off in a 32-ton truck for Communist Poland, Romania, and the Soviet Union, to bring medical supplies behind the Iron Curtain. She was one of the first Western politicians to take the threat of Islamism seriously, setting out her arguments in a 2003 book, The 'West', Islam and Islamism. Is ideological Islam compatible with liberal democracy? .
This concern with Islamism and its incompatibility with secular democratic norms focuses especially on the application of sharia law within countries such as the UK, where all citizens are considered to be equal under the law. Speaking about sharia courts in 2011, Baroness Cox declared,
"We cannot sit here complacently in our red and green benches while women are suffering a system which is utterly incompatible with the legal principles upon which this country is founded... If we don't do something, we are condoning it."
Recently, she authored a report entitled, A Parallel World: Confronting the abuse of many Muslim women in Britain today, published by the Bow Group. In it, she not only describes the problems faced by many Muslim women before Sharia councils, but provides extensive testimony from women who have been discriminated against and abused by these "courts."[3]
In May 2012, Baroness Cox introduced her first Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill in the House of Lords. The bill had its second reading in October that year, but went no farther. It was backed, however, by a considerable body of evidence presented in a document, Equal and Free?, from the National Secular Society. In June, 2015, Cox introduced a modified version of the bill. It had its second reading in October, and in November it reached the committee stage. It still has to pass a few stages before it may possibly move to the House of Commons, one day perhaps to receive Royal Assent and become law. It received a very warm reception from members of the Lords, with only one dissenting opinion, that of Lord Sheikh, a Muslim peer who sees little or no fault in anything Muslims say or do. However, the government minister, Lord Faulks, argued that current civil legislation is all that is needed to guarantee justice for Muslim women.
Matters are far from as simple as the government would like them to be. Sharia law is not a cut -and-dried system that can be easily blended with Western values and statutes. There is no problem when imams or councils hand out advice on the regulations governing obligatory prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, alms-giving, the appropriateness or inappropriateness of following this or that spiritual tradition, or even whether men and women may sit together in a hall or meet without a chaperone. For pious Muslims, those are things they need to know, and although the advice they may receive on some rulings will differ according to the school of law or the cultural practices of their specific community, that has no bearing whatever on British law.
But much more goes on beneath the surface. One problem is that it is difficult if not impossible to reform sharia. Legal rulings are fossilized within one tradition or another and given permanency because they are deemed to derive from a combination of verses from the Qur'an, the sacred Traditions, or the standard books of fiqh or jurisprudence. It is, therefore, hard to restate laws on just about anything in order to accommodate a need to bring things up-to-date within terms of modern Western human rights values. Many Muslims today may be uncomfortable about the use of jihad as a rallying cry for terrorist organizations such as the Islamic State, but no single scholar or group of scholars is entitled to abolish the long-standing law of jihad. Innovation (bid'a) is tantamount to heresy, and heresy leads to excommunication and hellfire, as has been stated for centuries. The growing influence of Salafi Islam is based precisely on the grounds that any revival of the faith means going back to the practices and words of Muhammad and his companions, not forwards via reform.
In the sharia councils there appears to be no formal method for keeping records of what is said and decided on. There is next to no room for non-Muslims to sit in on proceedings, and, as a result, neither the government nor the legal fraternity has any regular means of monitoring proceedings. Even Machteld Zee, whose forthcoming book, Choosing Sharia? Multiculturalism, Islamic Fundamentalism and British Sharia Councils, will be the first academic analysis of what happens in the councils, only spent two afternoons at a council in Leyton and an afternoon at one in Birmingham. Unannounced spot checks by qualified government-appointed personnel are not permitted. There is nothing remotely like the government schools inspection body, Ofsted, which has periodically (albeit not always correctly) gone into Muslim schools. So there is really no way of knowing just what happens, apart from the testimonies of women who have reported abusive or illegal practices.
Magistrates' courts, county courts, and crown courts are all entirely transparent (except for matters dealt with in camera), full records are kept, and members of the public are free to visit and observe. The risks of allowing councils to pass judgements without there being an inspectorate to observe them are obvious. And if full records of proceedings are not kept, it will always be difficult to go back to examine a case in full should legal issues arise at a later date.
Furthermore, the British legal system has no say in the appointment of sharia council panels. There appears to be no agreed mechanism for appointments, and the source and identity of candidates remain causes for concern in several ways. There is no single range of qualifications for Muslim scholars ('ulama) or jurisprudents (fuqaha'). Most will attend some sort of madrassa [Islamic religious school], and many will sit at the feet of a particular sheikh to obtain an ijaza from him: usually this means he is given permission to teach from a book written by that sheikh. Some will finish a course of study, but there may be little coherence. Growing numbers have qualifications from UK-based madrassas, notably from the Darul-Uloom in Bury or the higher standard equivalent in Dewsbury, although there are other Darul-Ulooms in the UK. In London, the junior classes are inspected by Ofsted, others not. Bury and other madrassas belong to the radical Deobandi form of Islam (based in northern India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan). The Pakistani madrassas from which the Taliban emerged were and are Deobandi in belief. Many Saudi-funded madrassas in Pakistan have been used to recruit for jihad.
The Wahhabi-influenced Deobandis control a majority of mosques in Britain, but they are far from the only group with mosques and other institutions.[4] There are also smaller numbers of Salafi imams and scholars, many of whom come from Saudi-funded madrassas.[5]
This situation grows more complicated when one adds the larger numbers of scholars and jurisprudents emerging from colleges in Pakistan, Bangladesh and India. These tend to be very conservative and still play a major role providing imams and members of Sharia councils.
In sum, these variations in training, qualifications, linguistic abilities, and so on mean that there is no level playing field for expertise, but that there is considerable latitude with regard to the interpretation of sharia law. Very often, scholars with adherence to one branch of Islam will violently disagree with others. It is generally reckoned that sharia councils and Muslim Arbitration Tribunals are conservative, with few advocates for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in sight.
Finally, there is a less-known feature of modern sharia theory that impacts on Europe, North America, and elsewhere in the West. In classical Islamic theory, the world is divided between the Realm of Islam (Dar al-Islam), territories ruled by Islamic governments, and the Realm of War (Dar al-Harb), regions under non-Muslim control. Strictly speaking, a Muslim who finds himself living in a non-Muslim country is obliged to leave it and return to a Muslim state, usually somewhere within a Muslim empire. Strictly speaking, it is proper, even obligatory, for Muslims to live in non-Muslim countries when those countries are under Muslim rule, regardless of the size of the two populations. All the early Islamic empires had a majority of non-Muslims. Muslim expansion and imperialism meant that Muslims controlled territories where, at first, they were not in a majority. These territories were considered as Dar al-Islam. Later, when Muslims were expelled from places such as Portugal and Spain, those countries became Dar al-Harb and in the view of many Muslims, it became necessary to fight them in order to return them to Islam, as is happening with regard to Israel today.
When, in the 19th and 20th centuries, non-Muslim forces took control of Muslim lands, compromises became necessary. However, during the late 20th century and increasingly in the current one, large numbers of Muslims came to live in Western countries. With the 2015 influx of refugees into Europe, Muslims living outside Islamic territories have been faced with dilemmas about the application of sharia, especially where it conflicts with the civil laws of their host countries.
The response of many Muslim scholars has been to develop a new form of Islamic jurisprudence, fiqh al-'aqaliyyat, "jurisprudence of the minorities." This began in the 1990s, mostly through the efforts of two Muslim scholars, Shaykh Taha Jabir al-Alwani and Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Alwani is president of the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences in Ashburn, Virginia (now part of the Cordoba University), and is the founder and former president of the Fiqh Council of North America, an affiliate of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). ISNA itself has, of course, long been identified as a front organization for the hardline Muslim Brotherhood. That connection becomes more visible when one looks at Qatar-based Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the leading ideologues of the Muslim Brotherhood. Qaradawi's television program, al-Sharīʿa wa al-Ḥayāh, attracts an international following of some 60 million, and his comprehensive online fatwa site, Islam Online is consulted by millions.
The Muslim scholars Yusuf al-Qaradawi (left) and Taha Jabir al-Alwani (right) developed a new form of Islamic "jurisprudence of the minorities," which partly concerns whether non-Muslim countries with large Muslim minorities are still considered the "Realm of War."
The principles under which the jurisprudence for minorities operates are somewhat complex. Part of the debate concerns whether non-Muslim countries with large Muslim minorities are still the "Realm of War;" the notion is generally rejected. If Western states are not in a state of war with Islam, then Muslims are not obliged to leave them to seek refuge in an Islamic country. In that event, it is necessary to interpret sharia rulings to make it possible for Muslims to live in territories to which they have migrated, or in which they find themselves for limited periods, as in staying abroad to study. However, adjustments to Western ways do not permit actual change to sharia.
In 1997, the government of Qatar provided funding to establish an institution known as the European Council for Fatwa and Research, based in Dublin, Ireland. The council, whose president is Qaradawi himself, was set up under the auspices of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe, another front for the Muslim Brotherhood, with close associations to the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestinian branch, Hamas. The ECFR has 32 members, roughly half from European states, the rest from North America, North Africa, and the Gulf. Its fatwas do little to integrate sharia norms within European societies. One fatwa declares:
"Sharia cannot be amended to conform to changing human values and standards; rather, it is the absolute norm to which all human values and conduct must conform; it is the frame to which they must be referred; it is the scale on which they must be weighed."
The true significance of the ECFR and its international cast of member jurists is that it is an extra-territorial body that passes judgements, provides legal solutions, and adjudicates on all aspects of Islamic law. Its impact on national sharia courts, such as the British Muslim Arbitration Tribunal and the UK Islamic Sharia Council, cannot be calculated easily, but is certain to play an important role. If one reads the fatwas of the ECFR and the many online fatwa sites, it is clear that national sharia bodies in Western countries are operating outside the confines of British, French, and other legal systems. No European or American state can exercise full control over who serves on such councils, who influences them, and which rulings inspire their judgements.
Although the ECFR is the leading fatwa body in Europe, several other national organizations -- in France, Germany, and Norway, for example -- issue fatwas in other languages. Everywhere, the approach is much the same. Whether through conventional jurisprudence or the jurisprudence of minorities, there seems no clear path to improved assimilation of Muslims into European societies, and no accommodation of sharia law alongside Western, man-made law.
Unless reform enters the thinking of the Muslim clergy, Salafi Islam will continue to beckon Muslims to the past. Under strict sharia, the question remains: what is to become of the growing millions of newcomers for whom Western law codes are of secondary value -- for whom they are, perhaps, just an obstacle in the path towards an ultimate goal of total separation from host societies?
In Sharia Law or One Law for All, I drew attention to another level of sharia rulings that provide fatwas for numbers of British Muslims, in particular of the younger generation. These are online sites: "fatwa banks." Individuals or couples send questions to the muftis who run the sites, and receive answers in the form of fatwas that are considered authoritative. The questions and answers are preserved in galleries of rulings, which can be browsed by anyone seeking advice. The sites are by no means consistent, differing from one scholar to another. But they do provide an insight into the kinds of rulings that may be given in the sharia councils.
For example:
a Muslim woman may not marry a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam (such a woman's children will be separated from her until she marries a Muslim man)
polygamous marriage (two to four wives) is legal
a man may divorce his wife without telling her about it, provided he does not seek to sleep with her
a husband has conjugal rights over his wife, and she should normally answer his summons to have sex (but she cannot summon him for that)
a woman may not stay with her husband if he leaves Islam
non-Muslims may be deprived of their share in an inheritance
a divorce does not require witnesses (a man may divorce his wife and send her away even if no one else knows about it)
re-marriage requires the wife to marry, have sex with, and be divorced by another man
a wife has no property rights in the event of divorce (which may be initiated arbitrarily by her husband)
sharia law must override the judgements of British courts
rights of child custody may differ from those in UK law
taking up residence in a non-Muslim country except for limited reasons is forbidden
taking out insurance is prohibited, even if required by law
there is no requirement to register a marriage according to the law of the country
it is undesirable to rent an apartment belonging to a Christian church
a Muslim lawyer has to act contrary to UK law where it contradicts sharia
employment by driving a taxi is prohibited
it is allowable to be a police officer, provided one is not called upon to do anything contrary to the sharia
women are restricted in leaving their homes and driving cars
an adult woman may not marry anyone she chooses
sharia law of legitimacy contradicts the Legitimacy Act 1976
a woman may not leave her home without her husband's consent (a restriction that may constitute false imprisonment)
legal adoption is forbidden
a man may coerce his wife to have sex
a woman may not retain custody of her child after seven (for a boy) or nine (for a girl)
a civil marriage may be considered invalid
sharia law takes priority over secular law (for example, a wife may not divorce her husband in a civil court)
fighting the Americans and British is a religious duty
recommendation of severe punishments for homosexuals
a woman's recourse to fertility treatment is discouraged
a woman cannot marry without the presence and permission of a male guardian (wali)
if a woman's 'idda (three months, to determine whether or not she is pregnant) has expired and she no longer has marital relations with her husband, he is excused alimony payments
an illegitimate child may not inherit from his/her father.
Some of these fatwas advise illegal actions and others transgress human rights standards as they are applied by British courts. They show vividly just how questionable it is to permit a parallel system of law within a single national system.
**Denis MacEoin is the author of "Sharia Law or One Law for All" (London, Civitas, 2009).
[1] See Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, Umdat al-salik, trans. Nuh Ha Mim Keller as Reliance of the Traveller, Beltsville MD, 1991 and 1994, p. 595, o7.3: "As for when an aggressor is raping someone whom it is illegal for him to have sexual intercourse with, it is permissible to kill him forthwith," based on a statement from Abu'l-Hasan al-Mawardi, the famous Shafi'i jurist (972-1058).
[2] Baroness Cox was made a peer in 1982, and since then has made an astonishing contribution to humanitarian causes worldwide, travelling to far-flung zones of conflict and human rights abuse, even at great personal risk.
[3] Similar views had been expressed two years earlier, in a 2010 report by Maryam Namazie's One Law for All organization, Sharia Law for Britain: A Threat to One Law for All and Equal Rights. That report, in turn, had been preceded by a book, entitled Sharia Law or 'One Law for All'?, written by the present author for the independent think tank, Civitas (the institute for the study of civil society).
[4] Other Muslims of Pakistani origin have a Sufi-influenced Barelwi orientation, which, although it adheres to the same Hanafi law school, is constantly in conflict with the Deobandis. There are certainly more young Muslims training in the UK, and many of these experience difficulty with courses taught in Urdu, as at Bury.
[5] For fuller details, see Innes Bowen, Medina in Birmingham, Najaf in Brent: Inside British Islam, London, 2014.
© 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.