LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

March 31/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletin16/english.march31.16.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

‘Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 16/15-18:"‘Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation. The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: by using my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.’

God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ by grace
Letter to the Ephesians 02/01-10:"You were dead through the trespasses and sins in which you once lived, following the course of this world, following the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work among those who are disobedient. All of us once lived among them in the passions of our flesh, following the desires of flesh and senses, and we were by nature children of wrath, like everyone else. But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us. even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ by grace you have been saved and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness towards us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God not the result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are what he has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life.

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on March 31/16
Why Lebanon may be closing this naval base/Esperance Ghanem/Al-Monitor/March 30/16
Alliances reshape as Lebanon’s local polls loom/Michael Young/The National/March 30/2016
Why Lebanon Cannot Pick a President/Stratfor/March 30/2016
US and Iran: Time to walk away from an abusive relationship/Baria Alamuddin/Alk Arabiya/March 30/16
Palmyra is not a war trophy/Chris Doyle/Alk Arabiya/March 30/16
Why refugees shouldn't suffer because of terror ‎attacks/Brooklyn Middleton/Alk Arabiya/March 30/16
"Excuses" for Terrorists/Douglas Murray/Gatestone Institute/March 30/16
BDS: Helping Palestinians or Promoting Hate/Sima Goel/Gatestone Institute/March 30/16
Free Speech on Trial in the Netherlands - Again/Robbie Travers/Gatestone Institute/March 30/16
President Assad: Negotiating With Present Opposition Delegation Is Pointless; The Way To End The Crisis Is Through Military Victory/MEMRI/March 30/16
Our Story with Russia/Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/March 30/16
The Deranged EgyptAir Hijacker and Insane Capitol Gunman/Mshari Al-Zaydi/Asharq Al Awsat/March 30/16

Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on March 31/16

Hariri praises “Russia’s major role in region”
Salam Slams Bassil for Doubting World's Intentions on Refugees
National Dialogue, Cabinet Sessions Adjourned as Drive to End State Security 'Marginalization' Gathers Steam
Hariri Meets Lavrov in Moscow
Syrian Nusra Member Held in South after Suspicious Activity
Jumblat Downplays Fears over Naturalization of Refugees
Report: Bank Transfers from Saudi Arabia to Lebanon Halted
Lebanese-Belgian Businessman Kidnapped in Angola
UK Foreign Secretary in Beirut for Talks with Lebanese Officials
Rivals Parties Bicker on Parliament Revival
Raad: We don't negotiate with enemy threatening us
Baroud visits Aoun: Holding municipal elections shall signal necessity to hold legislative elections next
Environment Minister Mohammad Machnouk represents Salam at Arab Banking Conference: No to naturalizing Syrians
Why Lebanon may be closing this naval base
Alliances reshape as Lebanon’s local polls loom
Why Lebanon Cannot Pick a President

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on March 31/16

Thousands of Palestinians, Arab Israelis Mark 'Land Day'
World Nations Drag Heels on Syria Refugee Resettlement
White House Says Assad Role in Syria Unity Govt. a 'Non-starter'
Turkey Military Base in Qatar 'Completed' in Two Years
Iran missile tests were ‘in defiance of’ UN
UN chief urges countries to let in more Syrian refugees
EgyptAir hijacker appears in Cyprus court
Egypt forms team to keep probing Italian student’s murder
Iraq’s Abadi vows to implement reforms
Head of Libyan unity govt arrives in Tripoli
Iraq’s Abadi vows to implement reforms

Links From Jihad Watch Site for March 31/16
Raymond Ibrahim: U.S. Ignores the Muslim Slaughter of Over 10,000 Christians and Destruction of 13,000 Churches in Nigeria

Hariri praises “Russia’s major role in region”
Now Lebanon/March 30/16./BEIRUT – Future Movement leader Saad Hariri praised Russia’s role in the Middle East during a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow. “We appreciate the major role played by Russia in the region, and we look forward to you playing a role in Lebanon as well,” the former Lebanese premier’s press office quoted him as telling Lavrov. Hariri, who arrived in Moscow on Tuesday night, also said that Beirut welcomes Russia’s “cooperation in the fight against terrorism in the region” while stressing the fraught situation along Lebanon’s border, a reference to the presence of ISIS and Al-Nusra Front around the violence-stricken town of Arsal. “We came here to consult with you and cooperate to solve the crises that confront us,” Hariri—who was accompanied on his trip by Interior Minister Nohad Machnouk—added. Although Hariri praised Russia, despite its military intervention on behalf of the Bashar al-Assad regime, the Future Movement leader reiterated his call for a political solution in Syria that would see the president relinquish power. The Sunni political leader also brought up the political impasse in Lebanon, saying that “foreign interventions” were preventing the election of a new president, a post vacant since Michel Suleiman’s term ended in May 2014. Hariri supports the election of Marada Movement leader Sleiman Franjieh to the presidency, while fellow March 14 ally Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea has thrown backing behind Michel Aoun, Hezbollah’s top Christian ally. A member of the Future Movement said in an interview Wednesday that Hariri’s visit to Russia—as well as to other countries—was focused on resolving the presidential election quagmire.“Moscow has a special relationship with those disrupting the presidential election, particularly Iran and Hezbollah. Based on that, contacts should be made to solve this crisis,” MP Ahmad Fatfat told a local radio station.
 

Salam Slams Bassil for Doubting World's Intentions on Refugees
Naharnet/March 30/16/Prime Minister Tammam Salam slammed on Wednesday Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil without naming him, accusing him of sidestepping the nation's interests by claiming that the international community was seeking to naturalize Syrians in Lebanon. “Foreign policies are made based on national interest. Lebanon's interest requires the respect for the position” of top foreign officials, said Environment Minister Mohammed al-Mashnouq, who read a speech on behalf of Prime Minister Tammam Salam. Al-Mashnouq spoke at the Arab Banking Integration Conference that was held at the Phoenicia Hotel in Beirut after Salam failed to attend it following his mother's death. “Enough dealing with national priorities as if we are in an electoral campaign,” he said. “Enough raising the stakes because the weakness in the foundations of the state has reached an alarming stage,” he said. “It is not allowed to ask for assistance from the international community and then doubt its intentions,” and “accuse it of seeking the naturalization of Syrians,” Salam stated. Such accusations harm Lebanon and its accountability, he added. Bassil snubbed U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon during his two-day visit to Beirut last week under the excuse that the international community is pressuring Lebanese authorities into giving the nationality to the displaced Syrians. Lebanon is home to more than 1 million registered Syrian refugees, or nearly a quarter of the country's 4.5 million people. Another half a million Syrians live in the country as well. But Salam reiterated that he announced to Ban the rejection of naturalization. “Lebanon with all its factions reject the naturalization of Syrians. The refugees should return to their country,” he said. Salam called for “salvaging the country and bringing back its political life.” Trying to appease Arab countries, he stressed that the Arabs still “believe in Lebanon more than the Lebanese do.”He also stressed the keenness of Lebanese on the friendship with the Gulf states after the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab League labeled Hizbullah a terrorist organization. Gulf states have also expelled Lebanese expatriates and urged their nationals to leave Lebanon. Among the speakers at the conference was Central Bank chief Riad Salameh who said that he will continue to stop the bankruptcy of any bank.“The Lebanese lira is stable,” he said. “The stability of the currency is the base of stability in the purchasing power of the Lebanese,” he stated. “We look forward to stable interests in the future,” he added. The conference aims to highlight the importance of Arab banking integration and cooperation and face the economic challenges that result from the unrest in the region. The conference is part of the activities of the Union of Arab Banks (UAB) and its long-standing mission to promote financial stability and sustainable development.

National Dialogue, Cabinet Sessions Adjourned as Drive to End State Security 'Marginalization' Gathers Steam
Naharnet/March 30/16/A national dialogue session whose discussions were set to focus on the electoral draft-law on Wednesday was adjourned following the death of Prime Minister Tammam Salam's mother. Speaker Nabih Berri, who hosts the all party-talks at Ain el-Tineh, announced late Tuesday that the session was adjourned. He did not set a new date. A cabinet session that was scheduled to be held on Thursday was also adjourned by the secretary-general of the government. Berri was set to urge Lebanon’s rival leaders during Wednesday's national dialogue session to agree on an electoral law. He was planning to review the final report of the parliamentary committee tasked with drafting the law to pressure the country’s politicians into assuming their responsibilities and ending the deadlock. But the issue was adjourned after Salam's mother passed away. The cabinet had also important issues on its agenda, including the airport security. A ministerial source told al-Liwaa daily that the government was set to discuss from outside the agenda the visit of U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon to Lebanon and the loans promised by the international community to help the country cope with the burden of Syrian refugees. The controversy on the State Security agency was also set for discussion. Christian cabinet ministers have been complaining over the alleged marginalization of the general-directorate of State Security. The directorate had sent a bill to the cabinet on March 20, 2014 asking for the creation of a six-member leadership authority under which the director-general of State Security, Maj. Gen. George Qaraa, a Catholic, would have the casting vote. But reports have said that the former secretary-general of the cabinet, Suhail Bouji, has paralyzed the plan by saying that the approval of the bill requires a draft-law to be adopted by the parliament unlike a decision made by the Shura Council. The Christian ministers are also complaining that Qaraa is being snubbed during meetings of the heads of the country's security agencies. Sources at the seat of the Maronite church in Bkirki told al-Joumhouria newspaper that the solution to the controversial issue comes through the election of a president who is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The head of state “can be fair to all sides and bring back the balance to state institutions,” they said.

Hariri Meets Lavrov in Moscow
Naharnet/March 30/16/Al-Mustaqbal Movement chief ex-PM Saad Hariri held talks on Wednesday with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, his press office said. Al-Liwaa daily quoted a Russian diplomatic source as saying that the preparations for the previously unannounced visit began almost two weeks ago as part of Russian-U.S. cooperation to come up with a roadmap to end the presidential vacuum. Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who was in Moscow last week, have agreed to contact the heads of prominent Lebanese parliamentary blocs, said the sources. They have also agreed to create diplomatic contacts with Riyadh, Tehran, the Vatican and Paris to “end the reasons that have so far delayed the election of a president,” the sources told al-Liwaa. Interfax news agency quoted Hariri as saying that Lebanon is ready for cooperation with Russia in the military and other fields.He also said Syria should remain a unified state and Syrian President Bashar Assad cannot be part of the final solution to the Syrian crisis. Hariri's press office said that the lawmaker landed in Moscow on Tuesday night. He is accompanied by Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq and his advisers Ghattas Khoury and Nader Hariri. Lebanon has been without a head of state since May 2014 when the term of President Michel Suleiman ended. The presidential race is mainly confined to Change and Reform bloc chief MP Michel Aoun and Marada leader MP Suleiman Franjieh. There is also centrist candidate MP Henri Helou. However, not a single candidate is able to garner the needed votes to be elected president. Sessions aimed at electing a head of state are being adjourned over lack of the required two-thirds quorum of the 128-member parliament.

Syrian Nusra Member Held in South after Suspicious Activity
Naharnet/March 30/16/A member of the Qaida-linked al-Nusra Front was arrested Wednesday in south Lebanon after his movements raised the suspicions of security agencies, state-run National News Agency reported. “A State Security patrol arrested Syrian national Yasser Daham al-Hadid, 25, in the town of Kfarhamam in the Shebaa region,” NNA said. “He has confessed to belonging to al-Nusra Front and fighting for it against the Islamic State group in Syria,” the agency added. “It also turned out that he has been in contact with terrorist groups and that he has been moving in a suspicious manner between Beirut and the South,” NNA said. He was referred to the relevant judicial authorities for further investigations, the agency added. Al-Nusra and the IS have both claimed responsibility for several deadly bombings in Lebanon since the Syrian conflict erupted in 2011. In August 2014, the two groups overran the northeastern border town of Arsal and engaged in deadly clashes with the Lebanese army.

Jumblat Downplays Fears over Naturalization of Refugees
Naharnet/March 30/16/Progressive Socialist Party chief MP Walid Jumblat downplayed the latest fears that arose on the possibility of naturalizing Syrian refugees in Lebanon, and stressed that we must not waste the opportunity presented by the World Bank and the United Nations to cope with the refugee burden. “I do not see (any intentions of) naturalization and I cannot find any reason for resorting to extreme theories. I believe that when the situation stabilizes in Syria, the refugees will return,” Jumblat told As Safir daily in an interview. Concerns that refugees could be naturalized in Lebanon arose after Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil warned late last week that there are indirect efforts to give the Lebanese nationality to displaced Syrians. He urged during a press conference for “the adoption of unilateral and sovereign steps, otherwise naturalization will be imposed on us,” he said. His comments triggered a series of reactions that assured the issue has not been suggested by international bodies. On the World Bank and the United Nations offer to grant funds to improve the situation of the Syrian refugees and the hosting country, Jumblat stressed the necessity “not to waste this opportunity.”The World Bank and Islamic Development Bank have signed agreements worth hundreds of millions of dollars to help Lebanon cope with the large number of Syrian refugees who were displaced by their country's civil war. The announcement was made after a meeting last week between Prime Minister Tammam Salam and visiting U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, World Bank President Jim Yong Kim and Islamic Development Bank President Ahmad Mohamed Ali al-Madani. Lebanon is home to more than 1 million registered Syrian refugees, or nearly a quarter of the country's 4.5 million people. Lebanon says that another half a million Syrians live in the country as well. On the controversial electoral law, Jumblat noted that an agreement over the issue seems not to be possible at the time being which highlights the priority to “elect a president so he would have a say in the matter.”A parliamentary committee that was set up in 2015 to devise a new electoral law was given a period of two months to reach an agreement. Disputes among the rival political parties over the matter forced parliament to extend its term the first time in 2013 and a second time in 2014.

Report: Bank Transfers from Saudi Arabia to Lebanon Halted
Naharnet/March 30/16/Bank transfers from Saudi Arabia to Lebanon have stopped as part of the measures taken by Riyadh against the country following the halt of billions of dollars of aid to the Lebanese army and security forces, al-Joumhouria daily reported on Wednesday. The newspaper quoted banking sources as saying that Lebanese banks have informed their branches about the halt of transfers. The sources said that Saudi authorities have not yet made an official announcement on the issue but are stopping money transfers for individuals and companies by asking for documents and the approval of the Saudi sponsors to send the funds. Such measures had not been implemented in the past and makes it almost impossible to transfer money, they added. Riyadh started putting pressure on Lebanon last month when it halted $4 billion of aid to the Lebanese army and security forces under the excuse that the country is siding with Iran, Hizbullah's main backer. Saudi Arabia later pressured the Gulf Cooperation Council into considering Hizbullah a terrorist organization. The move was followed by a similar step made by the Arab League, which blacklisted the party earlier this month.

Lebanese-Belgian Businessman Kidnapped in Angola
Naharnet/March 30/16/A 60-year-old Lebanese-Belgian businessman was abducted Wednesday in the southern African nation of Angola, Lebanon's state-run National News Agency reported. “Lebanese charge d'affaires in South Africa Ara Khatchadourian has informed the Foreign Ministry that he is following up with Belgium's ambassador to Angola on the issue of the kidnap of Lebanese-Belgian businessman Michel Rizk, who was abducted in Angola today,” NNA said. Rizk's captors have demanded a $500,000 ransom, the agency added.

UK Foreign Secretary in Beirut for Talks with Lebanese Officials
Naharnet/March 30/16/British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond arrived Wednesday evening in Beirut for a one-day visit, state-run National News Agency reported. “Accompanied by a delegation, Hammond arrived from London aboard a private jet for a visit that will end on Thursday evening,” NNA said. The top British diplomat is scheduled to meet with a number of Lebanese officials, the agency added. He was welcomed at the airport by Foreign Ministry protocol director Mira Daher and a team from the British embassy.

Rivals Parties Bicker on Parliament Revival
Naharnet/March 30/16/The revival of parliament legislation came back to the spotlight this week as some parliamentary blocs said they were in favor of such a move while others totally rejected it in the absence of a president. Speaker Nabih Berri is seeking to get the legislature functioning after its regular term began this month. Parliament convenes twice a year in two ordinary sessions -- the first starts mid-march until the end of May and the second from the middle of October through the end of December. But the legislature and the government have been paralyzed as a result of the vacuum at the presidential palace. The Kataeb is refusing to attend any session before the election of a president. Kataeb chief MP Sami Gemayel told As Safir daily published on Wednesday that he “cannot violate the Constitution by attending a session.”“The Constitution is clear in stating that the parliament becomes an electoral body in the absence of a president and its role lies in holding the presidential elections,” he said. Two other main Christian parties - the Free Patriotic Movement and the Lebanese Forces – are saying however that they will attend a parliamentary session only if the draft electoral law is at the top of the agenda. Change and Reform MP Ibrahim Kanaan said that officials should resolve the country's problems by electing a president and approving an electoral draft-law that rectifies the representation of all factions and then holding elections to come up with a parliament that reflects the true will of the people. “It's not acceptable to set aside the constitutionality of institutions under the excuse of necessary legislation,” he told As Safir. Al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc leader MP Fouad Saniora, however, backed the so-called necessary legislation “because we can't stop the state's wheels from turning.”Progressive Socialist Party chief MP Walid Jumblat expressed a similar viewpoint, saying “there are some vital and urgent draft-laws that need approval.” The head of the Lebanese Democratic Party, MP Talal Arslan, agreed with him, telling the newspaper that a parliamentary session is necessary. “How could some parties warn to resign from the cabinet (under the excuse) that they want to activate it and then reject the functioning of the parliament?” he asked.

Raad: We don't negotiate with enemy threatening us
Wed 30 Mar 2016/NNA - Head of Loyalty to Resistance Bloc, Mohammad Raad, said, "We, the resistance, don't negotiate with an enemy that threatens our existence, we don't even compromise at the expense of the rights of our nation. We accept challenge and we press all efforts in favor of rights. And rights will win sooner or later throughout the generations of our resistance."Raad's stance came Wednesday in an honorary event held by Lebanese International University in Nabatieh for the family of one of the university's students who fell as a martyr.
Raad explained that Hezbollah was fighting terrorism in order to ensure safety to Lebanese.


Baroud visits Aoun: Holding municipal elections shall signal necessity to hold legislative elections next
Wed 30 Mar 2016/NNA - Former Minister, Ziad Baroud, said on Thursday that the act of holding municipal elections shall signal the necessity to hold parliamentary elections "the next day". Baroud's words came in the wake of a meeting with Change and Reform Parliamentary bloc leader, Deputy General Michel Aoun, in Rabieh. "Holding Municipal elections will thwart claims that they can't be held due to security reasons. Municipal elections are a message for all those who wish to torpedo elections. Blasting municipal elections is not as easy, not to mention the difficulty of extending the municipal council's mandate," Baroud added.

Environment Minister Mohammad Machnouk represents Salam at Arab Banking Conference: No to naturalizing Syrians
Wed 30 Mar 2016/NNA - Environment Minister Mohammad Machnouk reiterated on Wednesday the Lebanese rejection of naturalization of Syrians, calling on leaders never to undermine Lebanon whatever the circumstances. Machnouk spoke at the opening of the Arab Banking Conference at the Phoenicia Hotel in Beirut. He read the speech of Prime Minister Tammam Salam, whose presence at the congress was cancelled after the death of his mother. Minister Mashnouk first tackled the visit of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the President of the World Bank and the president of the Islamic Development Bank to Lebanon. He then recalled that contracts worth USD 350 million were signed with the Islamic Development Bank, and the World Bank had provided immediate aid of USD 100 million to the education sector, not to mention the promises of interest-free credits and long-term development projects.
Machnouk particularly highlighted the importance of the visit of Mr. Ban Ki-moon, who has pledged to pursue aid for Lebanon, upon the recommendations of the London Conference. "The visit is of major importance as it confirms the interest shown by the international community to the stability of Lebanon and its commitment to help addressing the burden of Syrian refugees", he said, regretting "the statements made at the end of the visit to question the intentions of the international community and to accuse it of wanting to naturalize Syrians in Lebanon." The Minister reiterated, always in the name of Premier Salam, Lebanon's refusal to naturalizing Syrians on its soil, "the latter having to return home as soon as the reasons that led them to leave their countries are eliminated." "Let's stop scaring the Lebanese with the specter of naturalization! (...) Let's stop using national priorities as if we were in an endless election campaign. Let's put an end to bidding wars that worsen the political crisis in the country," he stressed. "Foreign policies of countries are drawn in accordance with national interests. (...) It is shameful for Lebanon to ask for help to shoulder the burden of the Syrian presence, then to question, once this aid is provided, the intentions of those who made it possible. It is also shameful to beg for support for Lebanon and the host societies of Syrians then announce that this support is to naturalize refugees. These actions undermine Lebanon, its interests and its credibility," he continued. He also cautioned against weakening the country's structure with the presidential vacuum that has lasted almost two years, calling for "awareness to save the country" and emphasizing the importance of the banking sector, "one of the strongholds of Lebanon." Machnouk did not fail at the beginning of his speech to thank the Union of Arab Banks for organizing this event in Beirut. He also paid tribute to the leaders of the Gulf Cooperation Council "and the Saudi King, for all they have done to Lebanon over the years", ensuring that the Lebanese have always been grateful for that support. In his delivered word, Central Bank Governor Riad Salameh noted that banks and financial institutions in our region are currently facing an assortment of challenges, including those resulting from the political and security situation in the Arab countries, and others caused by changes in the banking business as a result of improvised standards. Salameh also indicated that good governance, transparency and distribution of risks increased confidence in the monetary sector in Lebanon and led to the provision of liquidity in the Lebanese market, thus enabling Lebanon to provide funding for the public and private sectors. Salameh stressed that the Central Bank's policy shall continue to be based on preventing the bankruptcy of any bank regardless of its size, saying that the law related to the merging of banks helps the Central Bank to realize such an end. Minister Hakeem then inaugurated the exhibition held at the sidelines of the conference, whereby he gave a comprehensive overview of the Arab economic and banking complemntarity.The Minister highlighted the importance of Arab economic and banking complementarity in a bid to achieve stability and economic development.

Why Lebanon may be closing this naval base
Esperance Ghanem/Al-Monitor/March 30/16
There are only two Lebanese army naval bases in the country. The first is located at the port of Beirut, and the second is in Jounieh, 20 kilometers (12.5 miles) from the capital. The Beirut Naval Base, which is part of the first basin of the port of Beirut, is the country's largest and main naval base. It is at risk of destruction due to the construction of a large tourism project. The first sign pointing at the project’s implementation is the creation by the Beirut Port Authority of a new entrance to the first basin. The current entrance is known as al-Bawaba al-Shamiya. Since 1996, real estate plot No. 1506, which includes al-Bawaba al-Shamiya, has been the property of Hariri-owned Solidere, the company founded in 1994 to reconstruct the Beirut central district following the 1975-1990 civil war. Plot No. 1506 is adjacent to plot No. 1501 — the location of the naval base.
The project’s engineering drawing shows the establishment of a yacht club, stretching from the first basin, which includes plot No. 1506 and No. 1501. Alarmingly, plot No. 1501 has been the property of the Phoenicia Village, a project developed by the Kuwaiti Levant Holding Company that invested in 2006 more than $1 billion in the development project in the Beirut central district. Phoenicia Village purchased plot No. 1501 from Solidere, which is now seeking to restore it.
The project’s development requires that the army evacuate its strategic base. Yet why was a military base built on private property? The documents show that Phoenicia Village acquired the base on Oct. 10, 2007, at the end of the term of former President Gen. Emile Lahoud, during the crisis of the Cabinet, led by then-Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. The crisis was ignited on Nov. 11, 2006, following the resignation of Shiite ministers affiliated with Hezbollah and the Amal Movement and then-Environment Minister Yacoub Sarraf, who was aligned with Lahoud, after the issue was raised on the establishment of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in Rafik Hariri’s assassination, while it had not been on the Cabinet’s agenda. On that day, Lahoud delivered to Siniora a formal letter saying that the government is now considered unconstitutional and illegitimate, due to the resignation of ministers of the same sect (Shiites), and stressing that all of the government’s sessions and decisions taken following the resignation are deemed null and unconstitutional, including the purchase of plot No. 1501. Speaking to Al-Monitor, Lahoud explained that he had refuted and refused to sign all of the decrees issued by the illegitimate government in 2007. He said that former President Michel Suleiman signed them, after he was elected president in 2008 following the Doha agreement.
Lahoud added, “The Beirut Naval Base crisis is not new. It dates back to the early 1990s when late Prime Minister Hariri led his first government.”Back then, Lahoud was the commander in chief of the Lebanese army. He said, “Hariri offered me to give up to Solidere the military stations and positions located in the area stretching from ​​the first basin of the port of Beirut to Ramleh el-Bayda, including the Naval Base, Military Club and a plot of land facing it in Raouche.”Lahoud added, “Hariri had attached to his offer maps of a huge tourism project that would attract international attention. It would be primarily a yacht club that he described as the largest in the Middle East.”In exchange for abandoning military positions in Beirut, Lahoud said, “A military naval base will be established in Dbayeh and will be three times larger than that of the port of Beirut.”
Lahoud had rejected Hariri’s offer, “because the Beirut Naval Base is of a great strategic importance related to Lebanon’s national security.”He said, “The removal of the Beirut Naval Base is the first step in the [tourism] project’s implementation, which will threaten the sustainability of import and export activities via the port of Beirut. This is true particularly since it is the major commercial gateway to Lebanon, and [its removal] will prevent large commercial vessels from entering the port of Beirut for their safety.”He added, “The closure of al-Bawaba al-Shamiya will have a negative impact on the movement of the Lebanese army’s and UNIFIL’s [United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon’s] military vessels that are moored to a dock at the first basin.”
Former Minister Salim Jreissati, a former member of the Constitutional Council that follows up on the matter, told Al-Monitor, “The owners of the tourism project have missed that Decree No. 4147 of July 14, 1981, requires an empty space around any military facilities to guarantee their safety and operation. The Beirut Naval Base is one of these facilities and, therefore, the base or any part of it shall not be removed.”Jreissati said, “Siniora’s illegitimate government suggested in 2007 a dangerous circumvention and violation of the law, which consists of switching the classification of plot No. 1501 from being a public property to a private property and transferred its ownership to a private company.”He pointed out that “Phoenicia Village and Solidere lodged a lawsuit against the Lebanese army in 2010 requiring the military to evacuate the Beirut Naval Base. The lawsuit has been pending since then before the Court of First Instance in Beirut. “A single solution is available for the army. It requires that the commander in chief of the army, Gen. Jean Kahwaji, makes the decision to confiscate the Beirut Naval Base — under confiscation law No. 550, issued on Oct. 20, 2003 — to the advantage of the Lebanese army, in exchange for a financial compensation to Phoenicia Village, particularly since the decree to transfer the ownership of plot No. 1501 is initially null and is no longer valid as a result of the expiry of constitutional and legal deadlines to challenge decrees.” Between the importance of the Beirut Naval Base to national security and Phoenician Village ownership of the real estate area, the question is how will this dossier be resolved, particularly since the Beirut Port Authority had made a decision that al-Bawaba al-Shamiya would be closed starting March 28. However, Jreissati noted, “The latest information available confirms that the closure has been suspended until further notice.”
 

Alliances reshape as Lebanon’s local polls loom
Michael Young/The National/March 30/2016
Last week, Lebanon’s interior minister Nouhad Mashnouq set the dates for municipal elections. These will take place over four weekends in May, representing the first elections since 2010, when the last local polls were conducted. Parliamentary elections have twice been postponed, and Lebanon is two years overdue for a presidential election. While not the same barometer of national politics as parliamentary elections, municipal elections still reflect broader trends to an extent. That is why observers will be watching a number of things in the upcoming elections, even if the results are difficult to predict.
The first is how the alliance between the two major Christian political parties, the Lebanese Forces and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), fares. In January, Samir Geagea, the head of the Lebanese Forces, endorsed Michel Aoun, the FPM leader, for the presidency.
This dramatic reversal – Mr Geagea had long been an opponent of Mr Aoun – reshuffled the political deck in the predominantly Christian areas. This demonstration of Christian unity gained strong approval in the community, though it also worried less influential Christian parties and politicians, who felt they would be swept away by the new duopoly.
Mr Geagea’s aim in organising a rapprochement with Mr Aoun was to ensure the Lebanese Forces would gain seats in elections. In the last two parliamentary elections his party performed anaemically, because the election law gave Mr Aoun structural advantages in key voting districts. More such results, Mr Geagea feared, would have marginalised his party. Because many Christian municipalities were divided between Lebanese Forces and Aounist supporters, the probability is that the electoral lists jointly backed by them will perform well. This, in turn, will have repercussions on the national level, bolstering Mr Aoun’s claim to be the pre-eminent Christian representative which, he will insist, entitles him to be elected president. Another thing observers will be looking for is the fortunes of the former prime minister Saad Hariri and the lists he backs. Mr Hariri returned to Lebanon recently after a five-year absence. However, the prodigal son has not found things smooth.
During his years away, many officials within his movement began pursuing their own interests and political ambitions. Mr Hariri’s control over his bloc has been eroded, so that today he often seems to be striving to reimpose his writ on his followers. A notable sign was the recent decision of the pro-Hariri justice minister to resign, against Mr Hariri’s wishes. Mr Hariri’s main challenge, however, is financial. His Saudi Oger contracting firm, one of the largest in Saudi Arabia, has had major cash problems, and thousands of employees have not been paid for months. This has had negative repercussions on his social institutions and media outlets in Lebanon, where salaries have also been delayed.
Deprived of an ability to finance friendly electoral lists, Mr Hariri may see his support recede. Worse, many politicians view him as vulnerable, so they may be less willing to take his preferences into consideration. Many will be closely watching the performance of Hariri-backed lists in Beirut, Sidon and Tripoli, traditionally friendly territory for the former prime minister. The Saudis have sought to push for alliances between Lebanon’s main Sunni leaders. Mr Hariri may have to adapt by ceding ground to individuals, many of whom were politically hostile to him in the past.
An especially significant test of this strategy will come in Tripoli, where Mr Hariri must come to terms with several former rivals. They have agreed to form a coalition list of the major Sunni voting blocs, but that may be easier said than done.
Mr Hariri’s antipathy toward Najib Mikati, who replaced him as prime minister after Hizbollah unceremoniously ousted Mr Hariri in 2011, remains an obstacle. Both men would like to affirm their supremacy in Tripoli, which means more work is needed to form a unity list backed by the city’s politicians.
A third thing people will be watching is whether the public revulsion towards the political class that was visible last year will play a role in the elections. Already, in some places independent lists are being formed to oppose those supported by the major political groups. For example a “Beirut, My City" list has been announced in the capital, made up of technocrats and activists. Such efforts may appear Quixotic. However, nowhere have the politicians seemed more exposed than at the local level, where the beefs of Lebanese are felt strongest. Poor services, political bickering and local underdevelopment have all pushed people to demand that greater power be devolved to municipalities, where politicians have relatively less sway. The question after municipal elections will be whether Lebanon can postpone parliamentary and presidential elections further. Whatever else happens, the elections will be a healthy change from the deadlock of recent years. One only hopes they won’t be cancelled at the last minute.
Michael Young is a writer and editor in Beirut/On Twitter: @BeirutCalling

Why Lebanon Cannot Pick a President
Stratfor/March 30/2016
Forecast
Although Hezbollah could accept a consensus presidential candidate such as Jean Kahwaji, the commander of the Lebanese armed forces, it will do so only if it is certain that he will not get in the group's way. In the meantime, Hezbollah will continue to support presidential candidate Michel Aoun, whom it trusts to support the group's pursuit of its political and security goals. Without a consensus candidate capable of fulfilling Hezbollah's needs, Iranian-Saudi competition in the Middle East will continue to keep Lebanon from electing a president.
Analysis
Since President Michel Suleiman left office in May 2014, Lebanon's political blocs have failed 37 times to agree on his replacement. Hezbollah has been active in keeping the parties at loggerheads, refusing to support any presidential candidate who will not fully embrace the group's agenda. On top of Hezbollah's domestic agenda, the aims of its chief patron, Iran, are contributing to the organization's intransigence. Regional dynamics have traditionally influenced Lebanese politics, but the heightened competition lately between Saudi Arabia and Iran has made the political crisis in Lebanon all the more difficult to resolve.
The origins of Lebanon's predicament trace back more than a decade. In the wake of the 2005 assassination of Saudi-backed Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri, Lebanon's Sunni population joined with certain Christian allies in mass protests against Syria's occupation of Lebanon. The demonstrations became known as the Cedar Revolution, and from them, two major political coalitions emerged. On one side, Hezbollah and the rest of the Iran-supported pro-Syria camp formed the March 8 Alliance, named for the date of their protests. On the other side, the Saudi-supported anti-Syria camp formed the March 14 Alliance (in turn named for its protest date). According to Lebanon's National Pact of 1943, which distributed power among the country's Christian, Shiite and Sunni communities, the president of Lebanon must be a Christian. And while Lebanon's Shiites and Sunnis support the March 8 and March 14 alliances, respectively, its Christian community is split between the two coalitions.
Hezbollah
Within Lebanese politics, Hezbollah is a formidable presence. More than just a political party in Lebanon, Hezbollah is a para-governmental organization whose longstanding mission has been to promote a Shiite power alliance in the Middle East through an active militia. For its part in Lebanon's presidential crisis, Hezbollah has made it clear that it will only support a presidential candidate who, in turn, will support — or at least not impede — the organization in realizing its strategic objectives. Among these goals is establishing a transnational Shiite alliance with Hezbollah's chief patron, Iran, and Bashar al Assad's Syria. Syria has been an important strategic ally for Hezbollah, offering support and providing routes for the group to smuggle arms from Iran. In turn, Hezbollah, in conjunction with Tehran, has supported al Assad since 2012. Of Hezbollah's 7,000 active fighters (and 20,000 reservists), around 5,000 are currently in Syria. The group has proved instrumental in key battles in Syria, having enabled government forces to recapture the city of Qusair in June 2013. Thus, to win Hezbollah's support, Lebanese presidential candidates must at least tacitly support al Assad's administration.
Furthermore, Hezbollah's choice of president could determine whether Lebanon's military receives its backing from Saudi Arabia or from Iran. Imminent retirements within the country's military and the Sunni-dominated Internal Security Forces will soon open a number of leading positions, to be filled by presidential appointment. Saudi Arabia had hoped that giving $4 billion of military and security aid to the country would win it greater influence over the military and security leaders in these positions. After all, Riyadh promised the money in 2014 on the condition that it be used in part to contain Hezbollah. Hezbollah, on the other hand, wants sympathetic figures in the military and security services and refuses to compromise on a presidential candidate in part to block the influence of Saudi money. In fact, Hezbollah has been lobbying since 2010 for Iranian aid. Immediately after Saudi Arabia rescinded its aid because of Lebanon's refusal to support anti-Iran resolutions, Lebanese Defense Minister Samir Moqbel, from the March 8 Alliance, announced that Beirut would accept arms and military equipment from Tehran, if it extended the offer. Above all, Hezbollah aims to ensure that the next president will not interfere in the group's ability to operate as a militia within Lebanon. After Lebanon's 15-year civil war ended in 1990, Hezbollah was the only militia allowed to keep active personnel and weaponry, in view of Israel's continued presence in the country at the time. Hezbollah still considers itself Lebanon's best defense against Israel, with an arsenal of up to 100,000 missiles and rockets, including midrange missiles. For Hezbollah, maintaining the militia component of its organization is essential, and the group will only support a presidential candidate who will not undermine it. Though legislation mandating Hezbollah's disarmament would be difficult to enforce, the group is nonetheless concerned about the potential introduction of measures that could weaken its militia over time.
Finding a Candidate
With a view to its multifarious objectives, Hezbollah has steadfastly backed presidential candidate Gen. Michel Aoun. The founder of the Free Patriotic Movement, a majority-Christian party, Aoun supported Hezbollah's 2006 war against Israel and its 2008 Beirut takeover, all the while refusing to join the March 14 Alliance. More important, Aoun's support has earned Hezbollah's intervention in Syria legitimacy with mainstream Christians in Lebanon. Aoun is a prominent leader in the Christian community nationwide, and Hezbollah therefore believes he is the candidate best poised to help the group achieve its broader objectives. In fact, Hezbollah has already garnered significant support from Christians in Lebanon since signing a memorandum of understanding with Aoun in 2006. As a result of the agreement, large parts of the country's Christian community began to support Hezbollah, and Aoun became a hero in the eyes of many Shiites. Even so, Hezbollah remains unsure of its ability to influence Aoun as president, and the Hezbollah-Aoun alliance is by no means permanent. The March 14 Alliance initially proposed Samir Geagea, executive chairman of the Lebanese Forces party, as a presidential contender. But Geagea led one of the armed Christian militias during the civil war and opposes both Syria and Hezbollah. To reach a consensus in the presidential impasse, the March 14 Alliance then put forward an alternative candidate, Suleiman Frangieh. Because Frangieh was actually a part of the March 8 Alliance, as well as a close friend of both Syria's president and Hezbollah's secretary-general, the leader of the March 14 Alliance, Saad al-Hariri, believed that he could be a consensus candidate. Al-Hariri's decision to back Frangieh at the expense of Geagea's nomination was contentious, and members of the March 14 Alliance viewed it as a surrender to Hezbollah pressure. And despite the effort to find a mutually acceptable president, Hezbollah has stayed strong in its support for Aoun, insisting that it will not endorse a weak consensus candidate. Lebanon's last political crisis lasted for 18 months before the March 8 and March 14 alliances finally settled on Michel Suleiman, the commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces, as president. Suleiman emerged as a viable candidate after 2008 negotiations in Qatar under the Doha Agreement lent him credibility as an independent and capable security leader. Likewise, in an effort to end Lebanon's latest political stalemate, the March 14 alliance has suggested the current commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces, Jean Kahwaji, as the country's next president. Kahwaji is widely liked in Lebanon and has gained some traction as a consensus candidate, even earning the approval of Defense Minister Samir Moqbel, who is affiliated with Hezbollah's March 8 Alliance.
Finding Consensus
But Hezbollah's insistence on a presidential candidate who will meet all the group's criteria will prevent a presidential consensus solution in the foreseeable future. And Hezbollah's intransigence will further undermine the cohesion of the March 8 and March 14 coalitions, leading to greater political discord in Lebanon. Indeed, after the March 14 Alliance came out in support of Frangieh, its original candidate retaliated by announcing his support for Aoun. Additionally, whatever the possibility for a consensus candidate, the political and security situation in Lebanon — and in the region as a whole — ensures that Hezbollah will continue to support only presidential candidates who serve its interests. And since no president suits Hezbollah's interests as well as any consensus candidate would, Hezbollah would sooner stay in a political vacuum than compromise. Similarly, if Hezbollah decided that resolving Lebanon's political crisis was in its best interests, it would support a consensus candidate — as long as that figure did not interfere with Hezbollah's agenda. But until Hezbollah views the Lebanese political stalemate as a threat to its own goals, the group will continue to block consensus candidates in order to increase its leverage within the negotiating process. At the same time, Iran, Hezbollah's chief patron, expects the group to oppose any pro-Saudi candidate, another factor for parties to consider in grooming a successful consensus candidate. After all, Hezbollah's objectives are deeply connected to the group's relationship with Iran. Indeed, expressing concerns to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon over the waning prospects of an internal solution to the Lebanese presidential crisis, the speaker of the Lebanese parliament, a Hezbollah ally, asked Ban to engage Saudi Arabia and Iran in dialogue. Ultimately, an understanding between Iran and Saudi Arabia could be the key to ending Lebanon's political crisis.

Thousands of Palestinians, Arab Israelis Mark 'Land Day'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 30/16/Thousands of Palestinians and Arab Israelis gathered on Wednesday to commemorate the 40th anniversary of "Land Day" marking the killing of six Arab Israelis protesting plans to confiscate Arab land. In the northern Israeli town of Arraba, they waved Palestinian flags and banners that read, "The earth is the homeland" before observing a minute's silence in memory of the "martyrs" of 1976. That was the year that Israeli police and troops shot dead six Arab Israeli protesters on March 30 during mass demonstrations against plans to confiscate Arab land in Galilee. The High Follow-up Committee, the main representative organization for Arabs in Israel, had called for a strong turnout in Arraba and the southern Negev region, where about 1,000 people gathered. "Land Day is a central starting point in our struggle against racial discrimination and the policy of uprooting which was launched during the Nakba and still endures today," the committee said. Its statement was referring to the "Nakba", or "catastrophe" that befell them when Israel was established in 1948. "We are also witnessing an escalation of persecution and violence and restriction of freedoms," it added. Dozens of people also took part in similar rallies in the occupied West Bank, including Hebron and Nablus.

World Nations Drag Heels on Syria Refugee Resettlement
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 30/16/A U.N. conference aimed at securing new homes for nearly half a million Syrian refugees ended Wednesday with only marginal increases in the number of resettlement places offered. The United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR), which hosted the one-day meet, said from the outset that it did not anticipate governments would make significant new pledges at the conference in Geneva. In a statement, UNHCR noted said it remained far from its goal of having confirmed new countries of residency for 10 percent of Syria's 4.8 million refugees -- or 480,000 people -- within three years. Before the conference, world nations had offered to take in 178,000 people. On Wednesday, "states pledged modest increases in the number of resettlement and humanitarian admission places, bringing the total to date to some 185,000," a UNHCR statement said. "I am under no illusion that we are appealing for this at a very difficult time, and within a troubling context," UNHCR chief Filippo Grandi said in the statement. The Geneva meet followed a conference in London in February where nations pledged $11 billion (9.7 billion euros) to help manage one of the largest displacements of people since World War II. Aside from the nearly five million people forced to flee Syria during its five-year civil war, the U.N. estimates that another 6.6 million are internally displaced. Syria's neighbors, especially Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey have absorbed most of the refugee burden, with the U.N. repeatedly calling on wealthier nations to do their fair share. But efforts to secure resettlement spots in the West for Syria's displaced have been hampered by rising anti-migrant rhetoric voiced by some political leaders, who often site domestic security concerns as a reason to keep people out.

White House Says Assad Role in Syria Unity Govt. a 'Non-starter'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 30/16/The White House on Wednesday indicated Syrian President Bashar Assad should not be part of any transitional unity government, echoing views from regime opponents inside the war-shattered country. Responding to an interview in which Assad argued his regime should take part in a transitional government, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Assad's own participation would be a "non-starter." "I don't know whether he envisioned himself being a part of that national unity government. Obviously that would be a non-starter for us."A row over Assad's fate has helped paralyze diplomatic efforts to end the country's brutal five-year conflict. Assad told Russian state news agency RIA Novosti it would be "logical for there to be independent forces, opposition forces and forces loyal to the government represented" in the new authorities. But he pushed back against opposition demands that it should be put in place without his participation, insisting that the transitional body they are calling for is "illogical and unconstitutional.". "Neither in the Syrian constitution nor in the constitution of any other country in the world is there anything that could be called a transitional body of power," Assad said.

Turkey Military Base in Qatar 'Completed' in Two Years
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 30/16/A Turkish military base being built in Qatar will be ready within two years, Ankara's defense minister said in Doha on Wednesday. It will be the first Turkish military facility in the region, Ismet Yilmaz told journalists on the sidelines of three-day Dimdex defense and security fair in Qatar. "It (the base) will be completed within two years," said Yilmaz, adding the deal had been approved by the Turkish parliament. The deal is part of a defense agreement concluded by Qatar and Turkey in late 2014, which allows for agreement in the fields of military training and the deployment of the Turkish armed forces on Qatar's territory. "We want to achieve cooperation in the field of (military) training and exercises, and contribute to stability in the region," said Yilmaz. The defense minister said the deal was reciprocal and said there were Qatari military personnel and aircraft currently stationed in Turkey. Qatar is already home to the biggest air base in the Middle East, Al Udeid, where some 10,000 military personnel are stationed, and is the forward headquarters of United States Central Command. Qatar and Turkey are increasingly close allies, and both have backed rebels trying to overthrow Syria's President Bashar Assad.

Iran missile tests were ‘in defiance of’ UN
By Louis Charbonneau Reuters, United Nations Wednesday, 30 March 2016/By launching nuclear-capable missiles Iran has defied a United Nations Security Council resolution that endorsed last year's historic nuclear deal, the United States and its European allies said in a joint letter seen by Reuters on Tuesday.
Iran's recent ballistic tests involved missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons and were "inconsistent with" and "in defiance of" council resolution 2231, adopted last July, said the joint U.S., British, French, German letter to Spain's U.N. Ambassador Roman Oyarzun Marchesi and U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon.
The letter said the missiles used in the recent launches were "inherently capable of delivering nuclear weapons." It also asked that the Security Council discuss "appropriate responses" to Tehran's failure to comply with its obligations and urged Ban to report back on Iranian missile work inconsistent with 2231.
Spain has been assigned the task of coordinating council discussions on resolution 2231. Council diplomats have said the case for new U.N. sanctions was weak, hinging on interpretation of ambiguous language in a resolution adopted as part of a July nuclear deal to drastically restrict Iran's nuclear work. Western officials say that although the launches went against 2231, they were not a violation of the core nuclear agreement between Iran, Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States. Russia, a permanent veto-wielding council member, has made clear it does not support new U.N. sanctions on Iran. Both Russia and China had lobbied against continuing restrictions on Iran's missile program during last year's negotiations on the nuclear deal. The four powers' carefully worded letter stopped short of calling the Iranian launches a "violation" of the resolution, which "calls upon" Iran to refrain for up to eight years from activity, including launches, related to ballistic missiles designed with the capability of delivering nuclear weapons. Diplomats say key powers agree that request is not legally binding and cannot be enforced under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which deals with sanctions and authorization of military force. But Western nations, which view the language as a ban, say there is a political obligation on Iran to comply. International sanctions on Tehran were lifted in January under the nuclear deal. The commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards' missile battery said the missiles tested were designed to be able to hit U.S. ally Israel. The United States condemned the remarks and Russia said countries should not threaten each other.
The letter said the four Western powers "note with concern that Iranian military leaders have reportedly claimed these missiles are designed to be a direct threat to Israel." Several diplomats said the most Iran could expect would be a public rebuke by the Security Council. Under the nuclear deal, the reimposition of U.N. sanctions would only be triggered by violations of the agreed restrictions on Iran's atomic work. But a council rebuke could provide a legal springboard for European countries to consider new sanctions against Iran, Western diplomats said. Last week the U.S. Treasury Department blacklisted two Iranian companies for supporting Iran's ballistic missile program, and also sanctioned two British businessmen it said were helping an airline used by Iran's Revolutionary Guards. France has also suggested there could be unilateral European Union sanctions against Iran over the launches.

UN chief urges countries to let in more Syrian refugees
The Associated Press, Berlin Wednesday, 30 March 2016/UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday urged governments around the world to let in more people from Syria and “counter fear-mongering” about refugees.
Ban spoke at a one-day conference in Geneva meant to further efforts to resettle Syrian refugees. The UN refugee agency wants to find places abroad over the next three years for one-tenth of the 4.8 million Syrian refugees who are crowded into countries in the surrounding region. “I ask that countries act with solidarity, in the name of our shared humanity, by pledging new and additional pathways for the admission of Syrian refugees,” Ban told the gathering of officials from over 90 countries. “These pathways can include resettlement or humanitarian admission, family reunions, as well as labor or study opportunities.”The conference heard appeals for solidarity from the countries surrounding Syria. Turkey, which hosts some 2.7 million Syrians, said the UNHCR’s target of resettling 10 percent of the refugees in the region is a good start but not enough.To date, 179,000 places have been pledged, according to Filippo Grandi, the U.N. high commissioner for refugees. Ban said countries can benefit from accepting refugees as they can bring new skills and experience to aging workforces. “Attempts to demonize them are not only offensive; they are factually incorrect,” he said. “I call on leaders to counter fear-mongering with reassurance, and to fight inaccurate information with the truth."

EgyptAir hijacker appears in Cyprus court
Al Arabiya English with AFP Wednesday, 30 March 2016/The man accused of hijacking an EgyptAir plane and forcing it to land in Cyprus was remanded into police custody for eight days during his first court appearance on Wednesday. Police told the court in Larnaca that 58-year-old Egyptian Seif al-Din Mohamed Mostafa faces possible charges of hijacking, kidnapping people with the aim of taking them to an unknown destination, reckless and threatening behavior and offences that breach the anti-terror law. The accused did not speak in court. But as he left in a police car, he gave the victory sign to journalists attending the hearing at the courthouse, which is less than a kilometer (half a mile) away from Larnaca airport where the hijacking unfolded on Tuesday. Mostafa, who has a Cypriot ex-wife, will not face any formal charges until a later hearing and only at that point will he be expected to enter a plea. Cyprus authorities have described Mostafa as "psychologically unstable" and said the case was not "terrorism-related". He is accused of forcing the plane to divert to Larnaca airport on the island's south coast on Tuesday by threatening to detonate an explosives belt that turned out to be fake. Authorities allege that his motives were personal and related to his Cypriot ex-wife with whom he is reported to have had children.
The hijacking triggered a six-hour standoff at the airport and the closure of the main entry point for tourists to the Mediterranean resort island. Most of the 55 passengers on the plane -- originally travelling from Alexandria to Cairo -- were quickly released after it had landed.But some escaped only minutes before the standoff ended, including one uniformed man who was seen clambering out of a cockpit window and dropping to the ground. The man who was arrested after he hijacked an EgyptAir flight, which was forced to land in Cyprus on Tuesday, gestures as he is transferred by Cypriot police from a court in the city of Larnaca, Cyprus March 30, 2016. (Reuters) ‘Man of few words’ Seif El-Din Mustafa was described as a “troublemaker” by neighbors. There were several reports about Mustafa demanding to see his ex-wife, who lives in Cyprus, and that she was called in to help negotiations. Separately, it was reported that Mustafa demanded that Egypt release political prisoners for him to surrender himself and the remaining passengers and crew on board. According to Egyptian news site Ahram Online, Mustafa had made several phone calls on board “that Egyptian civil aviation minister Sherif Fathy said had showed he was not a terrorist but a man with personal and mental problems.” Speaking to Al Ahram’s Arabic site, one of Mustafa’s neighbors back in Egypt described him as a “troublemaker.”"His Cypriot wife took their children and flew back home after disagreements between them, so I expect he did all that so he could go to them," the neighbor, Um Assmaa, was reported as saying. She added that Mustafa was a "troublemaker" during the time he lived in a Cairo neighborhood, saying he once impersonated someone, prompting the police to take action. "He was a man of a few words," said Anwar, another neighbor, speaking to Al Ahram. Images of Mustafa, believed to have been taken during the hostage situation, show the fake device strapped around his waist.

Egypt forms team to keep probing Italian student’s murder
AFP, Cairo Wednesday, 30 March 2016/Egypt's state prosecutor ordered Wednesday the formation of an investigating team to probe the brutal murder of Italian student Giulio Regeni, after Rome cast doubt on Cairo's explanation of his death. Regeni, 28, disappeared in central Cairo on January 25, and his mutilated body was found nine days later on the outskirts of the capital. Last week the Egyptian police said they had identified a criminal gang linked to his murder, after killing four members and finding the PhD student's passport in the apartment of a sister of one of the slain suspects. Four people have been detained in relation to Regeni's murder, including the wife and a sister of the alleged leader of the gang. The other two are the brother and brother-in-law of the gang leader, who was killed in a shoot-out with police along with three other criminals. Rome has dismissed Cairo's explanations that the gang members, who allegedly posed as police to extort foreigners and Egyptians, were behind Regeni's death. On Wednesday, Egypt's general prosecutor ordered a team to be set up to probe the student's murder. "Given that the clues in the case of Giulio Regeni's killing were found in many different areas ... the general prosecutor ordered the formation of an investigative team from his office to continue the investigation," a statement from the prosecutor's office said. Italy's Interior Minister Angelino Alfano said on Sunday that Egypt agreed to extend the investigation after pressure from Rome. Italian media and Western diplomatic sources in Cairo have voiced suspicions that Egyptian security services were behind the murder. Regeni had been researching labour movements in Egypt, a sensitive topic, and had written articles critical of the government under a pen name. His death has threatened to hit Egypt's already struggling tourism sector, which has seen falling visitor numbers since the ouster of longtime leader Hosni Mubarak in 2011. Tourism, a cornerstone of the economy, was dealt a body blow after the October 31 bombing of a Russian airliner, claimed by the ISIS group, that killed all 224 people on board.

Iraq’s Abadi vows to implement reforms
Staff Writer, Al Arabiya English Wednesday, 30 March 2016/Iraq’s Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi vowed on Tuesday to implement governmental reforms and said that requesting reforms shouldn’t threaten the country’s security, reported Rudaw, a Kurdish news site. “I promise everyone to implement governmental reforms,” Abadi said in a televised speech. “We are investigating those who used their positions to serve their own personal benefit.”“Demanding reforms must not threaten the security and stability of the country,” he added. Abadi said that the war on ‘ISIS’ is the country’s first priority in guaranteeing safety and stability. “Victory in this war needs financial support,” the prime minster added. Promises of reforms have come after the Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and hundreds of his followers have staged a sit-in inside Baghdad’s Green Zone to pressure the government in taking action and change. Abadi is expected to replace ministers and cabinet members that were appointed under a corrupt system based off their ethno-sectarian background.

Head of Libyan unity govt arrives in Tripoli
The Associated Press, Tripoli Wednesday, 30 March 2016/The head of a U.N.-brokered Libyan unity government has arrived in the capital by sea with six deputies and set up a temporary seat of power in a naval base despite threats from rival factions. Militia commander Abdel-Rahman al-Swehli says the head of the government, Fayez Serraj, sailed in from neighboring Tunisia on Wednesday. A post on the unity government's website confirmed the arrival. The officials were prevented from flying into Tripoli by a rival government based in the capital. A third government is based in the east of the vast oil-rich country. Libya has been dominated by an array of militias since the 2011 uprising that toppled Muammar Qaddafi. Ali Abu Zakouk, the foreign minister of the rival government, says his presence is "unacceptable.

Iraq’s Abadi vows to implement reforms
Staff Writer, Al Arabiya English Wednesday, 30 March 2016/Iraq’s Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi vowed on Tuesday to implement governmental reforms and said that requesting reforms shouldn’t threaten the country’s security, reported Rudaw, a Kurdish news site. “I promise everyone to implement governmental reforms,” Abadi said in a televised speech. “We are investigating those who used their positions to serve their own personal benefit.” “Demanding reforms must not threaten the security and stability of the country,” he added. Abadi said that the war on ‘ISIS’ is the country’s first priority in guaranteeing safety and stability. “Victory in this war needs financial support,” the prime minster added. Promises of reforms have come after the Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and hundreds of his followers have staged a sit-in inside Baghdad’s Green Zone to pressure the government in taking action and change. Abadi is expected to replace ministers and cabinet members that were appointed under a corrupt system based off their ethno-sectarian background.

Iraq’s Abadi vows to implement reforms
Staff Writer, Al Arabiya English Wednesday, 30 March 2016/Iraq’s Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi vowed on Tuesday to implement governmental reforms and said that requesting reforms shouldn’t threaten the country’s security, reported Rudaw, a Kurdish news site. “I promise everyone to implement governmental reforms,” Abadi said in a televised speech. “We are investigating those who used their positions to serve their own personal benefit.”“Demanding reforms must not threaten the security and stability of the country,” he added. Abadi said that the war on ‘ISIS’ is the country’s first priority in guaranteeing safety and stability. “Victory in this war needs financial support,” the prime minster added. Promises of reforms have come after the Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and hundreds of his followers have staged a sit-in inside Baghdad’s Green Zone to pressure the government in taking action and change. Abadi is expected to replace ministers and cabinet members that were appointed under a corrupt system based off their ethno-sectarian background.

Iraq’s Abadi vows to implement reforms
Staff Writer, Al Arabiya English Wednesday, 30 March 2016/Iraq’s Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi vowed on Tuesday to implement governmental reforms and said that requesting reforms shouldn’t threaten the country’s security, reported Rudaw, a Kurdish news site. “I promise everyone to implement governmental reforms,” Abadi said in a televised speech. “We are investigating those who used their positions to serve their own personal benefit.”“Demanding reforms must not threaten the security and stability of the country,” he added. Abadi said that the war on ‘ISIS’ is the country’s first priority in guaranteeing safety and stability.“Victory in this war needs financial support,” the prime minster added. Promises of reforms have come after the Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and hundreds of his followers have staged a sit-in inside Baghdad’s Green Zone to pressure the government in taking action and change. Abadi is expected to replace ministers and cabinet members that were appointed under a corrupt system based off their ethno-sectarian background.

US and Iran: Time to walk away from an abusive relationship
Baria Alamuddin/Alk Arabiya/March 30/16
We are only a few months into the new “reset” relationship between the US and Iran and the Obama Administration is already seeming like the battered wife who refuses to recognize the bitter reality of her situation. We see the same patterns of denial: “Iran has turned over a new leaf”; “Iran has promised that it won’t do it again”; “Iran is really so sweet and gentle when you get to know him…”With each fresh humiliation, Secretary of State John Kerry is forced to resort to ever more tortuous logic to explain away why repeated broken promises are just isolated incidents and why systematic patterns of aggressive behavior, threats and abuse do not reflect the norm. We learned in recent days that a US diplomat, Chris Backemeyer, has been specifically delegated to go around US firms and convince them to engage with Iran. His “nuclear deal roadshow”, as one news agency called it, is tasked with assuring major companies that both sides are fully committed to the deal; that any future US president won’t reintroduce sanctions; and that Iran is a safe and lucrative market to invest in. Backemeyer has been bullish about the determination of all parties to go ahead with the deal, saying: “While they may think they can get a better deal, or could have gotten a better deal, walking away from one that's working isn’t wise.”
Iran’s recent testing of ballistic missiles with a potential nuclear application, in clear contravention of the agreement, certainly raises questions about Backemeyer’s assertion of 100 percent commitment from both sides. Meanwhile, other parts of the US administration have pointed the finger at Iran for a coordinated campaign of cyber¬ attacks over the past four years against US financial institutions and civil infrastructure. The Iranian individuals were working for the Revolutionary Guards and there is of course zero chance of them being held to account. “We can tell the world that hackers affiliated with the Iranian government attacked US systems, and we seek to bring them to justice for their crimes,” Assistant Attorney General John Carlin said on 24 March. Senator Charles Schumer said: “They were saying that we can damage, seriously damage, our critical infrastructure and put the lives and property of people at risk.”
The announcement of the formal implementation of the nuclear deal this January was considerably sweetened by the release of five US prisoners from Iranian jails – widely seen as hostages used to influence US policy.
Details are now emerging of a payment of nearly $2 billion that was transferred to Iran on the day these hostages were released, ostensibly in settlement of a long-standing legal dispute. However, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that this amounted to a ransom payment. This wouldn’t have been so hard to stomach if Iran hadn’t immediately rounded up and detained another batch of American hostages: Iranian-American businessman Siamak Namazi and his 80-year-old father, as well as Washington resident Nizar Zakka. So much for a new chapter of US-Iranian relations! This of course brings to mind the manner in which US naval officers as recently as January were forcibly detained while on routine patrol in the Arabian Gulf before being paraded on state TV and coerced into making humiliating apologies. All the while, Ayatollah Khamenei has kept up a non-stop onslaught of anti-American rhetoric; describing America as Iran’s “enemy par excellence”, accusing US banks and businesses of being insufficiently enthusiastic about doing business with Iran and charging his own nuclear negotiators with having caved in to US pressure.
Re-engagement
Kerry and Obama’s response has been to bend over backwards in demonstrating their absolute commitment to the deal and encouraging American re-engagement with Iran. However, one suspects that even if every US citizen were persuaded to invest their life savings in the Iranian economy, Khamenei would not shift his rhetoric one iota. This arguably means that in the face of Iranian intransigence and hostility, American displays of good intentions simply make the whole enterprise hopelessly one-sided. Obama’s belief that Iran is a state he can do business with is complicated by what has been described as Iran’s long-standing involvement in international terrorism. In 1996, Iran was said to be responsible for terrorist attacks which killed 19 US military personnel in Khobar towers in Saudi Arabia. CIA personnel have submitted testimonies about Iranian collaboration with Al-Qaeda on several prominent attacks against US interests.The announcement of the formal implementation of the nuclear deal this January was considerably sweetened by the release of five US prisoners from Iranian jails – widely seen as hostages used to influence US policy
A New York court on 9 March ruled that Iran was liable to pay over $10 billion to US victims of al-Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks in a default judgment after Iran failed to submit a defense. Evidence included the findings of the 9/11 Commission that Iran had facilitated the passage of the hijackers through Iranian territory without stamping their passports in order to ensure that these mass murderers could be granted US visas. Iran likewise hosted Al-Qaeda fighters after they fled Afghanistan in 2002. More evidence is expected to emerge. Documents recovered from Bin-Laden’s Pakistan compound reveal high levels of Iranian collusion with al-Qaeda; working together when their interests converged and agreeing not to obstruct each other’s operations. Should we be surprised that Obama’s Administration has been reluctant to disclose these documents in full?
Sanctions-relief dividend
Meanwhile, Iran is investing the sanctions-relief dividend in redoubling its onslaughts against long-standing US allies in the GCC region. Iranian support for terrorists in Bahrain has become increasingly brazen over past months, with numerous shipments of weapons and explosives originating from Iran being impounded. Most individuals linked to acts of terrorism were found to be trained by Iran and Hezbollah and many of them have sought refuge in Tehran. This has gone as far as senior figures close to the supreme leader making false claims of sovereignty over Bahrain. As recently as 20 March, the senior Revolutionary Guards commander and Khamenei-ally, General Saeed Qassimi, said in a public speech: “Iran must exert efforts to restore Bahrain as Iranian territory and make it a part of Bushehr province.”Whether arming Houthis in Yemen, supporting Assad in Syria, sponsoring sectarian cleansing in central Iraq, or using Hezbollah to undermine Lebanese sovereignty; Iran it doing its utmost to thwart US policy objectives in the Middle East, to the point of funding militias which just a few years ago were killing US troops in Iraq; yet Obama still choses to believe that the Islamic Republic is a regime that he can do business with. Simply by signing the nuclear deal, Iran has not renounced its modus operandi of exploiting terrorism, threats and aggression against its neighbours and enemies to further its agenda. With this deal, the US has simply shackled itself to a state which will dishonor its commitments at every opportunity and which lashes out at those close to it. Iran is not a bedfellow that will respond positively to America’s professions of faithfulness and good intentions. This is not a relationship which can have a Hollywood-style happy ending.

Palmyra is not a war trophy
Chris Doyle/Alk Arabiya/March 30/16
The Bride of the Desert has been fought over multiple times in her remarkable historical journey. Queen Zenobia held off the Romans until the latter sacked the city in 273. The remains of Diocletian’s Roman camp can still be seen on the edge of Palmyra.
The Timurids did likewise in 1400. Plundering and looting are part of the story of this oasis, perhaps not a surprise given that Palmyra has always been an oasis on a great trading nexus.
Today this much sought after piece of real estate has exchanged hands once again. Ten months after the hordes of ISIS somehow sneaked unnoticed by drones, satellites and spies across 130 miles of desert to take the city, it is back in the hands of the Syrian army after a tough three-week campaign albeit laced with a toxic residue of around 150 mines.
Its capture begs as many questions as its loss. Why did ISIS not blow up the remaining ruins that it had rigged? This is inspiring many to believe the rumors that a deal with elements of ISIS must have been concocted.
This prize possession, the Venice of the Sands, is once again being held up as a symbol of triumph and victory. President Assad received congratulatory phone calls from the likes of Vladimir Putin. Yet there was also a far from inaudible series of adulation from perhaps less likely sources.
Palymra encapsulates so much that is wrong with this Syria conflict. Parties want to own and exploit the past and control the future
Donald Trump, who probably would not mind plundering an avenue of Palmyrene columns for his Trump hotel empire, sees this as evidence that he is right (as ever) to promote his line that Assad is better than ISIS approach. (This from a man who has claimed that the Middle East would be better if Saddam Hussein and Mu’ammar Gaddafi were still around).
Boris Johnson, the British Mayor of London with serious ambitions for becoming Prime Minister, had his George Galloway moment. “Bravo, Mr Assad”, he boomed in his Daily Telegraph column, echoing Galloway’s infamous saluting of Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi tyrant. Praising mass murdering dictators with a penchant for chemical weapons use should end political careers not further them.
Did he forget that it was under Assad’s rule that ISIS captured Palmyra in the first place? Putin had apparently demonstrated “ruthless clarity” in his support but yet again, is this something to be lauded?
Time to celebrate? What for?
Of course, not everyone is least of all Syrians. If you trawl through the gigabytes of articles on the issue, the people of Palmyra are little better than footnotes. Does the outside world care at all? Do we know if Palmyrans they feel “liberated”? Who asks how many civilians were killed in all the fighting over the last ten months?
Boris Johnson urged Britain to pay for the restoration of Palmyra seemingly prioritizing that over rebuilding the hundreds of hospitals, schools and homes pulverized across Syria. It is a sickness of some in the West that they still crave the culture of the Orient - just without its people.
Palymra encapsulates so much that is wrong with this Syria conflict. Parties want to own and exploit the past and control the future. For the regime and ISIS it is a naked battle for power, and the outside world picks its sides and arms its proxies. Each town and village captured or “liberated” is seen as some victory as fighters pose over the ruins of their success.
Putin and Assad will parade the taking of Palmyra as exhibit A in their political solution for Syria, that the Syrian army can act as the ground troops to partner Russian or other airpower against the evil of ISIS. Who will point out that many who orchestrated ISIS’s rise to power were released from Syria’s jails. It was the conflict itself that spawned the perfect breeding ground and habitat for ISIS. The cause of the conflict cannot be resuscitated as the cure.
So for sure, let’s be relieved that a significant amount of Palmyra’s inanimate treasures has survived, perhaps as much as 80 per cent. But let us not pretend that Palmyra and its people are safe yet either shifting from being controlled by one regime to another.
ISIS exacted its own bloody retribution on the people of Palmyra but the images of Syrian soldiers happily paraded severed heads of ISIS fighters is nothing to be proud of. The ruins of Tadmur prison, blown up by ISIS, have joined the ruins of antiquity but stand testament to the regime’s own appalling record.
The great Triumphal Arch of the city lies shattered on the ground. It should be a powerful sign that there are no winners and losers in this war, that there can be no triumph after so much loss.

Why refugees shouldn't suffer because of terror ‎attacks
Brooklyn Middleton/Alk Arabiya/March 30/16
The barbarity inflicted on innocent civilians during the ISIS-executed attacks in Brussels last week should not be capitalized on as a chance to abandon the Syrian refugees fleeing similar horror.
It is undeniable that the vast majority of the hundreds of thousands of Syrians flocking to Europe have lived under the threat of indiscriminate attacks on civilians, that have killed and maim the most innocent of parties; for years, first by Bashar al-Assad’s criminal regime - the chief orchestrator of the entire conflict – and then by ISIS and other actors. Syrian civilians have been denied any semblance of safety. While cooperation among intelligence agencies across Europe is intensified and domestic security measures are elevated, the West must also remain committed to aiding refugees.
Most unfortunately, in the wake of the devastating attacks on the Belgium capital, Poland’s ruling right-wing government, led by Prime Minister Beata Szydlo, announced they would close their doors to the 7,000 refugees they had previously vowed to take in, stating Poland is suddenly “not able to accept immigrants.” Such a reversal is not merely reprehensible because the government is cynically using the Brussel attacks as an opportunity to abandon its commitment to refugees but also because it awards ISIS propaganda fodder; there is perhaps no group more in favor of the West abandoning Syrian refugees than ISIS. It should not be forgotten that three days after after ISIS viciously attacked the French capital, President Francois Hollande publicly confirmed that 30,000 refugees would still be absorbed into his country over a two-year period. The president noted, “Our country has the duty to respect this commitment." His remarks were reportedly met with standing applause. In the aftermath of such attacks, the West must follow France’s – not Poland’s – example. While cooperation among intelligence agencies across Europe is intensified and domestic security measures are elevated, the West must also remain committed to aiding refugees
The deal with Turkey
The attacks in Brussels came days after the European Union struck a deal with Turkey that ultimately seeks to halt the mass influx of refugees into Europe by immediately deporting all who enter through the Aegean Sea back to Turkish soil. The Washington Post reported that Turkey - a country which is currently engaged in renewed conflict with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and increasingly being targeted by ISIS - will receive $6.6 billion in exchange for dealing with Europe’s staggering refugee crisis. There are a myriad of issues with this arrangement, which Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has intensely and publicly criticized. In a press release announcing that it will shut down its operations in the Lesvos Transit Camp, MSF officials said they would not support a system, “that has no regard for the humanitarian or protection needs of asylum seekers and migrants.” Beyond the immediate humanitarian concerns, it is difficult to assess Turkish officials can ensure comprehensive security for the refugees being returned to Turkey in the near-term. Turkey is confronting a broad range of domestic security threats, with Kurdish and ISIS suicide bombing attacks increasingly targeting civilians and military personnel across its major urban centers. It is possible that the refugees being deported back to Turkey will be viciously targeted in such future attacks. This flawed deal should now see the EU not just economically and diplomatically supporting Ankara but also offering all available resources to help ensure the country’s security.
The horrifying attacks in Brussels were the work of depraved cowards seeking to terrorize Westerners for a long time. Recognizing that such indiscriminate killing of civilians is precisely what so many Syrian families are fleeing is the opposite of what Assad and ISIS wants – and it is precisely what we must do.

"Excuses" for Terrorists
Douglas Murray/Gatestone Institute/March 30/16
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7718/terrorists-excuses
The facts show is that all these "excuses" for terrorism are incorrect. Israel is not, for instance, carrying out the "war crimes," "apartheid" or "genocide," which propagandists have persuaded Europeans that Israel is engaged in. Israel is fighting an enemy that breaks every rule of armed conflict, and Israel responds in a manner so precise and so moral that allied nations are concerned that they will not be able to live up to the Israeli military's moral standards the next time they go to war.
Well, what a shock the rest of the world will one day have to undergo. Because if you allow an "excuse" for one false narrative of Islamic extremists, you will then have to allow it for the others. You will, for example, have to accept the word of ISIS that Belgium is a "crusader" nation, deserving to be attacked because it is involved in a "crusade."
The question is not why it took over 24 hours for the UK to find Belgian-colored lights to project in solidarity, but why after 67 years of terror, it still has not found the simple blue and white lights to project the flag of Israel onto any public place.
The day after the Brussels terror attack, landmarks in the UK were lit up in the colors of the Belgian flag. Portions of the press in Britain excoriated the country on this. Why, they asked, had the now-traditional, mawkish ceremony occurred the day after the attacks rather than on the evening of the attacks themselves? Why were we a day late with our lights when other cities had managed to do their "solidarity" gesture straightaway? Such are our times. And such are our questions.
The night after last week's terror attacks in Brussels, public buildings in Britain, such as the National Gallery in London (left) and Manchester town hall (right) were lit up with the colors of the Belgian flag.
tion in all this, it is not why it took more than 24 hours for the UK to find its Belgian-colored lights, but why after 67 years of terror, it still has not found the simple blue and white lights it would need to project the flag of Israel onto any public place.
It is not as though there haven't been plenty of opportunities. Israel's enemies have provided us with even more opportunities for light displays than have now been offered to the light-infatuated by the followers of ISIS.
You could argue that in the last seven decades, public attitudes have changed; that today futile gestures of "solidarity" are all the rage, but in generations past they were not. It might have been unheard of for any British institution to beam the colors of the Israeli flag into buildings in 1948, 1956, 1967 or 1973. But when sentimentalism came to Britain, it came in a big way. If it had not struck us by the time of the first intifada (1987-1993), it certainly had by the time of the second one (2000-2005).
During that period, thousands of Israelis were killed and wounded by Palestinian terrorists. Yet there were no projections of the Israeli flag onto public buildings. Again, during the 2006 Hezbollah War, landmarks went unlit -- the same as after each salvo of rockets launched into Israel from the Gaza Strip, freshly evacuated by Israel to allow the Arabs there to create the Singapore or Côte d'Azure of the Middle East.
When Israel is attacked, the steps of the Israeli embassies in London and other European capitals are not littered with flowers, teddy bears or candles, or scrawled notes of sympathy. Indeed, whenever Israelis are attacked and murdered, there is a response at Israel's embassies. It tends to be less teddy-obsessed; it consists more of crowds roaring in rage against Israel and having to be held back from further antagonism by the local police.
It is possible that there are those who believe Israel is simply on a different continent from Europe and that, despite being an essentially Western society, it is not one to which we feel sufficiently close. Whenever a terrorist outrage occurs in a Western capital these days, there are always those who ask why the mourning for Paris or Brussels, say, is stronger than the mourning for Ankara or Beirut.
But the Paris/Brussels question for Jerusalem rarely, if ever, gets asked. One could take the lowest road and say it is because in Israel the victims are Jews. But there is also an explanation just as true. It is that Israel is seen as different because when Israel is attacked by terrorists, it is seen by a great number of people in the West not to be an innocent victim. It is seen as a country which might have in some way brought the violence upon itself.
Supposed excuses for this view may vary, from objecting to farms on the Golan Heights to Israel's refusal to allow weapons intended to annihilate it to be poured into the Gaza Strip. Others include Israeli "settlements" in the West Bank, while at the same time disregarding that to most Palestinians all of Israel, "from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea," as they put it, is one big "settlement" -- to be exterminated, as openly set forth in both the Hamas and PLO charters. Neither charter has ever been renounced. If you look at any map of "Palestine," it is actually a map of Israel, but with "al-Quds" instead of "Jerusalem" and "Jaffa" instead of "Tel Aviv." For these Palestinians, there is, in fact, just one underlying offense: the existence of the State Israel itself.
This piece of land, however, as Canaan, the Fertile Crescent, and Judea and Samaria, has been home to the Jews for nearly 4000 years -- despite Romans, Saladin, the Ottoman Empire and the British Mandate.
What remains are facts. And what the facts show is that all these "excuses" for terrorism are incorrect. Israel is not, for instance, carrying out the "war crimes," "apartheid" or "genocide," which propagandists have persuaded Europeans that Israel is engaged in. Israel is, quite the contrary, fighting an enemy that breaks every rule of armed conflict, and Israel responds in a manner so precise and so moral (as the High Level Military Group concluded in its assessment of the 2014 Gaza conflict) that allied nations are presently concerned that they will not be able to live up to the Israeli military's moral standards the next time they go to war. Israel, like the rest of the West, is trying to find a legal and decent way to respond to an illegal and indecent set of terrorist tactics. It is also not true that Israel's enemies have some righteous territorial dispute. They already have the whole of the Gaza Strip, and if they wanted most of the West Bank, they could have had it at almost any time since 1948, including at Camp David in 2000. On each occasion, it was the Palestinians who turned down all offers -- without even proposing a counter-offer.
Even so, in the eyes of many Europeans, Israel is seen to have done something for which suicide bombers are thought to be an understandable response. Whether said or unsaid, this is the rationale that makes terror against Israel a lesser offense than terror everywhere else.
Well, what a shock the rest of the world will one day have to undergo. Because if you allow an "excuse" for one false narrative of Islamic extremists, you will then have to allow it for the others. You will, for example, have to accept the word of ISIS that Belgium is a "crusader" nation, deserving to be attacked because it is involved in a "crusade" against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). You will have to accept that for standing up to the Islamic extremists in Mali and Syria, these Islamic extremists have the right to attack the people of Belgium, France, Sierra Leone, Canada, the United States and Australia.
You will have to accept that Europeans can be killed for publishing a cartoon, simply because a foreign terrorist group says so, and then accept that the cartoonists brought it themselves.
The enemies of Israel and the enemies of the rest of the civilized world have some minor differences, but there is far more that they have in common. They are both driven not only by the same jihadist ideologies but by the insistence that their political and religious view of the world is relevant not just for them, but needs to be implemented against all of the rest of us. It may take a while to realize it, but we are all in the same boat. It also may take a while until European cities reach for the blue and white bulbs; but if we start to question where those bulbs went, we might get closer not only to understanding Israel's predicament, but to understanding the predicament that is also now our own.
**Douglas Murray is a current events analyst and commentator based in London.

BDS: Helping Palestinians or Promoting Hate?
Sima Goel/Gatestone Institute/March 30/16
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7638/bds-palestinians
Sadly, university students, unions, and those in show business who believe they are lending their energy in support of the Palestinian people might take a moment to understand that they are supporting politicians -- both from the Palestinian territories and from terrorist sponsors -- who are, in fact, using the Palestinian people as pawns in a game of chess where oil, money and power are the rewards.
Rather than promote boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS), well-meaning idealists might consider how best to assist the Palestinians, whose own leaders siphon off aid money they receive from other countries. Students might consider how to establish industries to improve the Palestinian job market, instead of boycotting Israeli companies that employ thousands of Palestinians. They might make an effort to understand the real situation and work towards promoting a lasting peace, instead of misguidedly worsening the plight of Palestinians.
Peace requires empathy; the BDS movement, with its secret aim of destroying a free and democratic nation, promotes nothing but resentment, division and hate.
The boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement is busy promoting anti-Semitism, with universities leading the charge.
Sadly, university students, unions, and those in show business who believe they are lending their energy in support of the Palestinian people might take a moment to understand that they are supporting politicians -- both from the Palestinian territories and from terrorist sponsors -- who are, in fact, using the Palestinian people as pawns in a game of chess where oil, money and power are the rewards.
Yes, you feel the pain of the Palestinians; yes, you understand their plight. But you also have seen how students can be used by political agencies. During the late 1970s, when the Shah of Iran ruled, like any dictator, he protected his own power at all costs. Freedom of expression and debate was nonexistent, causing intellectuals and university students to revolt, shouting "long live freedom." University students are young and idealistic; they support the perceived underdogs, wherever they believe them to be.
The regime that replaced the Shah, however, was even more repressive. Every aspect of the life of every Iranian was controlled and decided by the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iranians were betrayed and used. Many innocent people had lent their voices to a group that had no respect for them, but regardless used their voices to advance their own political agenda.
In Iran, students protested the Shah in the name of freedom and inadvertently helped bring Ayatollah Khomeini to power. When Khomeini imposed the hijab on all women, even Christians, Jews and others had to wear it. He controlled every aspect of every life. It was only later that so many Iranians realized they had been used, and after the fraudulent elections of 2009, gave their lives, either by imprisonment or death, trying to protest the regime they had brought into being.
While Palestinian politicians are trying to win the public relations battle, the Palestinians are the ones continually suffering.
BDS supporters are quick to point a finger at Israel for the Palestinians' misery. What they fail to recognize is the responsibility of the Palestinian leaders for corruption and failed governance. They also fail to recognize that Israel is the only functioning democracy in the Middle East, the only country in a vast region where all citizens -- Jewish, Christian and Muslim alike -- are governed equally under law and enjoy the same benefits.
Consequently, I have no have compassion for those who support the BDS movement: they are blind to what the BDS movement represents. The movement shuns improving the lives of Palestinians; it only provides legitimacy to repressive Palestinians leaders, who in many ways resemble their Iranian counterparts.
People who claim they really care about helping Palestinians would, instead of only trying to hurt Israel, consider how to assist the Palestinians, whose own leaders siphon off aid money they receive from other countries. Students might consider how to establish industries to improve the Palestinian job market, and internal human rights abuses, instead of boycotting Israeli companies that employ thousands of Palestinians. (Image source: Takver/Wikimedia Commons)
Rather than promote BDS, well-meaning idealists might consider how best to assist the Palestinians, whose own leaders siphon off aid money they receive from other countries. Students might consider how to establish industries to improve the Palestinian job market, instead of boycotting Israeli companies that employ thousands of Palestinians. They might make an effort to understand the real situation and work towards promoting a lasting peace, instead of misguidedly worsening the plight of Palestinians.
Peace requires empathy; the BDS movement, with its secret aim of destroying a free and democratic nation, promotes nothing but resentment, division and hate.
**Dr. Sima Goel lives and works in Montreal, Canada. Her memoir Fleeing the Hijab: A Jewish Woman's Escape from Iran is available in print and digital copies.

Free Speech on Trial in the Netherlands - Again
Robbie Travers/Gatestone Institute/March 30/16
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7692/wilders-free-speech-trial
Freedom of speech is the ultimate liberal value -- and it is the first value that people who wish to control us would take away.
If a court in a Western society decides to censor or punish Geert Wilders or others for non-violent speech, the court not only attacks the very humanistic values and liberal society we claim to hold dear; it brings us a step closer to totalitarianism. Even the idea of having an "acceptable" range of views is inherently totalitarian.But what does one do if immigrants prefer not to assimilate? Europeans may be faced with a painful choice: What do they want more, the humanistic values of individual freedom or an Islamized Europe?
Censorship is not a path we should wish to take. While we may rightly fear those on the political right, we would do well to fear even more the autocratic thought-police and censorship on the political left.
You are not truly a proponent of free speech unless you defend speech you dislike as fervently as speech you like.
There are many issues concerning the views of the Dutch MP, Geert Wilders, head of rapidly growing political party, the Freedom Party (Partij voor de Vrijheid, or PVV). Dutch prosecutors have charged Wilders with insulting deliberately a group of people because of their race and inciting hatred. Wilders's trial focuses on a speech he gave, in which he asked a crowd of supports whether they wanted more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. In another instance, Wilders is reported to have stated that The Hague should be "a city with fewer burdens and if possible fewer Moroccans." Wilders admits to having made the remarks.
Geert Wilders during his March 2014 speech, where he asked "Do you want more or fewer Moroccans?" (Image source: nos.nl video screenshot)
The remarks Wilders made about Moroccans, as they target only one nationality rather than immigration in general, may sound ill-judged or distasteful to some. But do Wilders's comments, that there should be fewer Moroccans, actually incite hatred or violence? His remarks do not suggest that people attack Moroccans or that people should hate Moroccans; they simply suggest that there should be lower levels of immigration from Morocco. While Wilder's comments could certainly be convincingly portrayed as preying on people's anti-immigration sentiment, does that actually make them an insult to Moroccans, or is he simply supporting policies he thinks would benefit his country? As Wilders himself said in court last week, "What if someone had said, 'Fewer Syrians?'"As a society, individuals are responsible for their actions, so if someone acts upon a distortion of Wilders's words, or is violent because of them, Wilders should not be held responsible for their actions, even if he might choose his words more carefully in the future. A line is dangerous to draw: if we start criminalizing people who have anti-immigration views, poorly expressed or not, then where do we stop?
Is it also possible that because Wilders is labelled as politically "far right," people on the political "left," instead of proposing counterarguments, would like to shut him up by branding him a "racist"?
Here are several more statements, none from Wilders; no one who said them has been prosecuted:
"We also have s*** Moroccans over here." Rob Oudkerk, a Dutch Labour Party (PvDA) politician.
"We must humiliate Moroccans." Hans Spekman, PvDA politician.
"Moroccans have the ethnic monopoly on trouble-making." Diederik Samsom, PvDA politician.
One can see that these statements by politicians of the Labour Party, which is one of the current governing parties of the Netherlands, are more inciting, condemnable statements against Moroccans than anything Wilders has said. Yet no prosecution has been initiated against these individuals.
Would it not be better to discuss a nuanced immigration policy openly, like adults, and thereby eliminate prejudice through rational argument?
Prosecuting Wilders has only emboldened the anti-immigrationists, making them less responsive to reason and discussion. Ironically, this trial has moved many left-liberals, who might be criticizing his views, instead to defend his fundamental rights.
On limiting immigration in general, some critics consider that calling for a moratorium on immigration is illiberal -- often other groups such as Christians and Yazidis might be fleeing from ISIS or other extremist Islamic organizations. Basing immigration on nationality might also bring back memories of Nazi Germany, when restrictions often were based on crude religious, ethnic and national caricatures. Other critics seem uncomfortable with calls for the dominance of "Christian, Jewish and humanist traditions" within Dutch culture. How, they ask, can one effectively police a "culture" without seemingly authoritarian restrictions on those who might not fit into it?
Still other critics argue that prohibiting the construction of new mosques restricts religious freedom, and could cause further tension with members of the Islamic community, instead of working with them to solve their conflicts with the West.
But what does one do if immigrants prefer not to assimilate?
That, for example, is not an anti-immigration argument; it is a legitimate question that needs to be answered. There are also many questions that pertain to what a society might look like if there is a tectonic demographic shift, along with a tectonic shift in culture that might accompany it.
As one commentator explained, if you have an apple pie with a few cranberries, it is still an apple pie; but if you keep adding more and more cranberries, at some point it is no longer an apple pie, it is a cranberry pie. That is what the Aztecs faced when the Spaniards arrived in South America. That is what Christianity faced in Turkey when the Muslim Turks arrived. Today, in much of the Middle East, Judaism and Christianity have virtually ceased to exist.
Hard as it might be to contemplate, Europeans might at some point be faced with a painful choice: Which do they want more, the humanistic values of individual freedom or an Islamized Europe?
Whether or not one agrees, especially with the tone, this is the dilemma Wilders has chosen to face -- before a transformation becomes so fundamental that it cannot be reversed.
Although he has come down on the side of liberal values, this is seen by critics as violating other liberal values, such as not to judge one culture superior to another.
But what should one tolerate, if the other culture advocates stoning women to death for adultery? Or, without four male witnesses attesting to the contrary, regarding rape as adultery? Or executing people for having a different sexual preference, or religion, or for leaving the religion? Or beating one's wife? Or condoning slavery? Or officially regarding women as worth half a man? Is it a humanistic, liberal value to stay silent -- to condemn at least half the population to that?
What if before the Civil War in the United States people had said, "Slavery? But that is their culture!" The British in India outlawed suttee -- a ritual in which widows are thrown live onto their husband's funeral pyre. Is it humanistic say "but that is their culture"?
These are values over which wars have been fought.
So even if many of the policies of Wilders might drastically differ even from those of this author, in a truly liberal, humanistic society, it is one's duty defend Wilders's right to express his views without fear of retribution. If we fail to do that, what we end up with is an authoritarian state in which government agencies decide which views are acceptable and which are not. We have lived through that before with the Soviet Union, and we are now living through it again with countries such as Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Pakistan and Iran. A happy picture, they are not. As history shows, as in the French or Russian or Cuban Revolutions, when one person's views are suppressed, eventually everyone's views are suppressed. Who decides on the deciders? If a court in a Western society decides to censor or punish Geert Wilders or others for non-violent speech, the court not only attacks the very humanistic values and liberal society we claim to hold dear; it brings us a step closer to totalitarianism. Even the idea of having an "acceptable" range of views is inherently totalitarian. "Acceptable" thoughts, by definition, do not need protecting. It is the "unacceptable" thoughts that do. The reason the right to freedom of speech exists is to protect the minority from the majority -- so we can openly, freely exchange opinions and have discussions.
If we wish to have any kind of democracy in more than just name, people need to able openly to challenge ideas that are considered unquestionable, even sacred, as well as people who are considered sacred. Only open discussion can have a beneficial influence by highlighting problems and shaping policy. In discussing even outlandish views, we are reaffirming our right to say them, justifying why liberal values of freedom are paramount. Freedom of speech is the ultimate liberal value -- and it is the first freedom that people who wish to control us would take away. As the historian Clare Spark wrote, "Most of European history, with the exception of England, repressed speech that was anti-authoritarian. One might think of Plato, the Spanish Inquisition, and the career of Spinoza for just a few examples."Therefore, no proponent of democracy, humanism or liberal values should call for Wilders to be punished or censored for his remarks, even if they might be thought questionably expressed. When you defend the fundamental right of another to express his view, it does not mean that you agree with the view. It does not mean that you would refrain from attacking that view if it seemed based on flawed premises -- or even if it did not. Freedom of speech means opposing someone with counterarguments, not trying to silence him.
If Wilders' views are thought to be anti-humanistic, criminalizing his right to speak freely is even more so. Criminalizing speech only harks back to Giordano Bruno, who was burned at the stake for "blasphemy," for saying there were a plurality of worlds; or to the trial of Galileo Galilei for claiming that the earth moves around the sun; or the Scopes trial, which attempted to criminalize Darwin's theory of evolution. It is restrictions on free speech that are producing many of the worst mockeries of justice today, in countries such as China, North Korea, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Russia, and Iran.
Repressing speech only dangerously hinders the liberal cause. Groups that, in an authoritarian manner, call for censorship and the suppression of debate are being allowed to thrive. We are seeing this now in America on campuses and in the authoritarian attempts to prevent voters from hearing presidential candidates by disrupting speeches. When one fails to answer difficult questions or tries to silence their proponents, instead of solving the problem of prejudice, you are in reality feeding their prejudices and allowing them to grow unchallenged.
We urgently need be concerned about laws that would make "being insulted," a criminal offense. Where does an "insult" start or stop? In addition, people who claim to be offended might just be using the law to try to silence others with whom they disagree. The culpatory aspect of these laws should probably be reconsidered, and possibly revised by the Dutch government, the United Nations in its UNHRC Resolution 16/18, and others trying to restrict free speech.
Finally, criminalizing views such as those of Wilders does not extinguish them. Yes, people might feel intimidated from raising ideas for fear of reprisals, but the suppressed ideas will continue to fester, often with an even stronger force. It is completely understandable why many are not quick to come to the aid of Wilders because they deem him an opponent. However, if there is one rallying call to those who are in doubt of whether to support Wilders, it is this: authoritarianism is our enemy, whether it comes from Islamism, or laws restricting speech. We may not like that we have to defend people we may even regard as racists or xenophobes, but if we do not defend the rights of all, then who will be next among us to have his rights eroded? Censorship is not a path we should wish to take. While we may rightly fear those on the political right, we would do well to fear even more the autocratic thought-police and censorship on the political left. Wilders should not be standing trial for what he has said. Could there be a question of the case against Wilders being political? It sure looks like that.
Robbie Travers, a political commentator and consultant, is Executive Director of Agora, former media manager at the Human Security Centre, and a law student at the University of Edinburgh.
 

President Assad: Negotiating With Present Opposition Delegation Is Pointless; The Way To End The Crisis Is Through Military Victory
MEMRI/March 30/16/ Special Dispatch No.6366
On March 25, 2016, the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar, which is close to the Syrian regime and to Hizbullah, posted statements made by Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad at the Arab and Islamic Assembly for Supporting the Resistance Option, held in Damascus on March 19-20. According to the daily, Assad rejected any possibility of reaching a political solution with the opposition delegation of the Syrian High Negotiations Committee (HNC) to the Geneva talks, saying that the real way to resolve the crisis is by defeating "terrorism" on the battlefield. It should be noted that Assad has clarified in the past that a terrorist is anyone bearing arms against the regime and that the HNC delegation, which includes representatives of armed opposition groups, is a delegation of "traitors and terrorists."[1]
These statements – made while indirect talks were taking place in Geneva between the Syrian regime and opposition delegation, mediated by UN Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura and sponsored by the U.S. and Russia – show that Assad is sticking to the hardline position he took before the start of the recent round of indirect negotiations, which commenced in Geneva on March 14. This raises doubts regarding the seriousness of the regime and the effectiveness of the talks. The same hardline position has also been evident in statements by Syrian regime officials before and during the talks. For example, on March 12, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Mu'allem said that the issues of the presidential elections and of President Assad's status in the interim stage would not be discussed in the talks at all, and that the interim stage would involve no change in Assad's status.[2]
It should be mentioned that, several hours after the publication of the Al-Akhbar report about Assad's speech, his office denied the statements that had been attributed to him.[3] The denial may stem from concerns about possible international criticism of his statements, in particular from Russia, who is a sponsor of the Geneva talks.
The following are translated excerpts from Assad's speech as reported by Al-Akhbar.[4]
The Syrian Opposition Is Managed From Turkey, Saudi Arabia And Qatar; Negotiating With It Is Pointless
"There is no chance of [reaching] political solution with this opposition. With terrorism there is no solution other than confrontation and victory. The real chance [for a solution] lies in defeating the forces of terrorism militarily and in promoting the rationale of [internal] ceasefires in Syria. As for shaping the regime, its apparatuses, its structure and its future – these are issues that only the Syrians will decide. Defeating terrorism will prepare the ground for a political solution that will be put to a referendum by the Syrian people.
"We believe in a political solution, but such a solution requires dialogue with elements capable of taking a decision. This opposition is managed from Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. It has no political plan and its components are divided on every issue. Hence, dialogue with them is pointless and there is little chance of reaching a solution with them. Today we are conducting a dialogue with (UN Envoy Staffan) de Mistura, who coordinates with the masters of [the Syrian opposition]. In practice, the dialogue is with de Mistura. The real solution lies in uniting efforts against the terrorist groups and promoting the rationale of [local] ceasefires [in Syria]. We will not dialogue with terrorism. The only solution is to defeat it militarily, and the war against it indeed continues. 62,000 people who, before the outbreak of the events [in Syria], were fugitives from justice have found shelter within terrorist groups, and we are trying to bring them back [into the fold] by means of a general amnesty. Our uncompromising campaign continues, and nothing will delay it. The goal at the moment is [recapturing] Palmyra due to its strategic importance as a key region. [Liberating] it will be a prelude to liberating other areas."
The Russian Withdrawal Is Better Described As A Downsizing Of The Russian Forces In Syria
"Our relations with Russia are excellent. Russian President Vladimir Putin is a historic leader and a true ally whom we deeply trust. He will not hesitate to take any action that serves [the cause of] Syria's unity. He handled the military and political issues with skill: he extended military aid to our army and [then], with a ceasefire, put everyone to the test [to see] who supported terror and who was against it. We have no differences with Moscow, and we had understandings with Putin from the start regarding all the possibilities. The Russian withdrawal was coordinated [with us] well in advance, and is better described as a downsizing of the Russian military forces [in Syria]. It was a downsizing of the extra strategic force that was brought in when a military confrontation with Turkey and NATO seemed likely. Once this [scenario] became less likely, the forces not necessary for our ongoing war against terror were withdrawn. The downsizing of the Russian force helped the U.S. get a better picture of Russia's role [in Syria]."
Our Situation Is Much Better Than It Was
"The military aid to our army is extensive, and the coordinated air [campaign] continues. In contrast to what the biased media constantly reiterates, our situation today is far better than it was, thanks to the help of our Russian allies, our Iranian friends and our brothers in the resistance [i.e., Hizbullah]. Our situation is better, our people are showing perseverance, and our army has an excellent national doctrine for defending Syria against terror."
The Kurdish Federation In Northern Syria Is Illusory; Partition Of Syria Is Out Of The Question
"We will defend every grain of Syrian soil, for it is the property of the Syrian people. Partitioning Syria is not an option and is not subject to discussion. This is imaginary and pointless talk. As for the aspirations of some Kurdish leaders, they are harboring illusions, or else are unfamiliar with the facts regarding the history of the Kurdish presence in Syria. After the historic defeat of the external conspiracy that targeted Syria, the U.S. and its allies are now trying to exploit the Kurdish issue to their advantage, but they will never succeed. In the region where the federation has been declared, the number of Kurdish Syrians does not exceed 23%, and that is what makes this federation an illusion."
The Arab League Does Not Serve he Arab Interest, Certainly Not The Palestinian Interest
"[The fact that] we have distanced ourselves from the Arab league does not sadden us. It always aggravated us to participate in [Arab League] summits that took decisions against our [Arab] peoples. The first time I took part in Arab League summit I discovered that it is a tool operated from the outside, aimed at thwarting any action that serves the Arab interest. In 2000, for example, instead of supporting the Palestinian intifada they supported [Saudi] King 'Abdallah's peace initiative. At every summit they left the issue of the political solution [in Palestine] on the agenda, at the expense of the Arab rights, and today they have begun declaring explicitly that they have enlisted in the service of the Zionist plan and are explicitly speaking of maintaining ties with it."
Hamas Serves Partisan And Sectarian Interests, Not Palestinian Ones; We Were Wrong To Support It
"Initially, under the influence of Turkey and the media, we made the mistake of giving first priority, in supporting the Palestinians, only to Hamas and to [its leader] Khaled Mash'al. We learned a lot from that experience, [and today we realize] that the Palestinian people and their cause are not confined to one faction – especially now that the developments since the outbreak of the so-called Arab Spring have pushed the Palestinian issue to the bottom of the Arab peoples' consciousness. We honor every Hamas resistance [fighter] who is acting against the Israeli enemy, and we will always extend our hand to them and to any new political leadership. [But] as for the current leadership, it is managed by external forces. We never imagined that any Palestinian faction would prefer partisan or sectarian interests over the interest of Palestine. Sadly, Hamas' leadership has relinquished [the interests that] help Palestine in favor of partisan or sectarian interests. Our great hope is the Palestinian intifada, its free fighters and its brave youths."
Our Relations With Egypt Are Excellent And With Many Arab States Good; There Is Secret Dialogue With Gulf States
"Our relations with Egypt are excellent and we maintain steady contact with it, for purposes of coordination. Even during the time of (previous Egyptian president Muhammad) Mursi our security coordination [with Egypt] was excellent. We understand the position of our Egyptian brethren, considering to their economic situation, and we understand the pressures they are under. Since the moment the Muslim Brotherhood took power [in Egypt] we understood the magnitude of its conspiracy against us. The ousting of Mursi by means of an impressive popular intifada reassured [both] ourselves and Egypt. Our relations with many Arab countries are good. There are countries with whom we cooperate in the fight against terror, such as Egypt and Tunisia, and there are countries with whom we are holding secret dialogue, some of them Gulf countries that suffer more [than other countries] from the Muslim Brotherhood."
Endnotes:
[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6322, In Recent Speech, Assad Expresses Confidence In Regime's Victory, Says Crisis Will Be Resolved Through War On Terror, Local Ceasefires, February 24, 2016.
[2] SANA (Syria), March 12, 2016.
[3] Champress.net, March 25, 2016.
[4] Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), March 25, 2016.

Our Story with Russia
Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/March 30/16
Despite the zeal of some ultra-nationalist Russians who shun and ignore Soviet heritage, others still feel the USSR, the mammoth that competed with the USA for the leadership of the world, was an effective tool in promoting ‘Russian’ interests, regardless of whether ‘internationalist’ Bolsheviks had intended it or not. I reckon this particular argument is still far from being settled, within Russia or outside the great country the Arabs and Muslims came to know for the first time through the travels of Ahmad Ibn Fadhlan in 922 AD, during the reign of the Abbasid caliph Al-Muqtadir, who sent with him a letter to ‘the King of the Slavs’, including the ‘Rus’ people. On the other hand, I think we as Arabs have failed to get to know the Russian people, their culture, their history as well as their interests, in spite of the fact that they have been among the most interactive ‘European’ peoples with the Arab and Muslim worlds. Without dwelling too much on the subject, it would be beneficial if we keep the following in mind:
Firstly, the Russian ‘geographic’ environment has put them sometimes in a state of positive exchange, but more frequently in a state of confrontation with both Muslims and Arabs since the armies of Islamic conquest reached the foothills of the eastern Caucasus at Derbent (Bab Al-Abwab, i.e. ‘the gate of gates’ in Arabic), and began to deal with the local population. In those days the Muslims and Arabs called the Caucasus massif the ‘Mountain of the Tongues’ (Jabal al-Alsun) denoting the multitude of languages spoken in its inaccessible valleys inhabited by different minorities without a single dominant majority. In fact, a large portion of that region is called Dagestan meaning the ‘Home or Land of mountains’. Before that, some historians linked the Jews to the Khazar people living on the northern shores of the Caspian Sea, claiming that the then King of the Khazar, already on bad terms with Christian Slavs but unwilling to accept Islam brought by invading armies from the south, decided to adopt Judaism as the religion of his people. Throughout history the lands of the ‘Rus’ witnessed several waves of invaders and settlers, perhaps the most important of which were the waves of Turkic (Altaic or Turanic) raids, which resulted in the settlement of many Turkic peoples in today’s Russia. These include the Chuvash – western Russia’s only major Christian Turkic people –, the Tatars, the Bashkirs and the ‘old Bulgars’.
Secondly, Russia remains Europe’s largest country and certainly the leading bastion of Slavic culture. Indeed, when European powers began to show interests in the Middle East, bolstered by the never severed religious connections with the holy places in Palestine, Russia was one of these powers which established a strong ecclesiastic, educational and cultural presence. This presence was best reflected in what were known as ‘Moskovian’ seminars and schools. The remains of that presence are still there despite the ‘spiritual retreat’ in the face of ‘revolutionary thought’ during the Soviet decades. I still recall during my school days in Lebanon, namely in the town of Choueifat, the strong Russian ties with the area including the marriage of Aleksei Kruglov, the last Russian consul in Palestine to a Christian Orthodox lady from Choueifat. A grandson of consul Kruglov is a very dear friend and schoolmate.
Furthermore, in a study conducted by the Syrian academic Dr Joseph Zeitoun, he mentions that Russia’s interests in the ‘Mashreq’ go back to the early 19th century during the reigns of Emperor (czar) Alexander I and his successors. Zeitoun claims that the first steps in that direction were founding convents, caravanserais and hospices to serve pilgrims and visitors to the Holy Lands, particularly Jerusalem, but also including the Syrian town of Saydnaya, not far from Damascus, due to the significance of its ‘Convent of Our Lady’, regarded by many Christians as the ‘third pilgrimage’ after Jerusalem and Bethlehem.
In the 1830s Russia’s consul in Beirut instructed his council to travel through greater Syria (Bilad Ash-Sham) and prepare a report about the overall situation of Orthodox Christians. This report in turn led the Russian Synod to ask one of its bishops to travel to Palestine in a fact finding mission. The bishop indeed prepared an extensive report about the conditions of the Orthodox Church and its people, and stressed the urgent need for a ‘spiritual, social and educational renaissance’, as well as the need to establish a large Russian mission to provide relief not only to Greater Syria but also Egypt. Actually, as a fruit of such an endeavour, the prominent Lebanese intellectual and man of letters Mikhail Naimy was one of the Syrio-Lebanese graduates of Russo-Ukrainian institutes, and so were the prominent Palestinian author and educator Khalil As-Sakakini, and three members of the Arab ‘Pen League’ of New York, Raschid Ayyub, Abdul Massih Haddad and Nasib Arida. In addition to those, there was the noted Jerusalemite intellectual and academic Bandali Al-Jouzy who studied and taught in Russia.
According to Dr Zeitoun, the first school the Russians founded in Palestine was in the village of Al-Mujaidel near the city of Nazareth in Galilee in 1882. It was soon followed by other schools in the villages of Ar-Rameh, Kufr Yassif and Ash-Shajara in 1883 and 1884.
From my own personal experience, I remember reading two good books covering Russia’s interests in the Middle East; the first ‘The Lebanon and the Lebanese’ written in the 19th century by consul Konstantin Petkovich covering the affairs of ‘Mount Lebanon’ autonomous district between 1862 and 1882 (later translated into Arabic); and the second ‘Peasant Movements in the Lebanon’ during the first half of the 19th century written later during the Soviet era by Irina M. Smilianskaya.
These two books give a clear idea about how seriously the Russians took our region, both in Imperial and Soviet periods. Yet we seem to be unable to understand the motives behind Russia’s intentions. We even do not know, or forget, that the USSR was the first country to recognise the founding of Saudi Arabia! The fact of the matter is that Russian gas never ceased to see itself a major and influential player on the world stage; let alone with regards to its often problematic historical relations with Islam and Muslim peoples, its geo-political interests in the midst of global competition, and its economic and oil concerns in a world of conflicts and integration. Today, we as Arabs need experts in Russian as well as Chinese affairs at the same level with those who have studied European and American history and cultures. This is a challenge for us, and we – very simply put – need to know about the Russians and Chinese as much as they know about us!

The Deranged EgyptAir Hijacker and Insane Capitol Gunman
Mshari Al-Zaydi/Asharq Al Awsat/March 30/16
During the course of a few days, a series of events causing alarm have taken place around the world. These events imitate terrorist acts. There was an incredibly tense atmosphere in the American capital Washington DC after a man who tried to enter the US Capitol with a gun was shot. In addition to this, a person climbing the fences of the White House prompted it to elevate the threat level to orange. Around the same time, the Times Square in New York was closed due to a suspicious package that turned out to be a rubbish bag. In another part of the world, an Egyptian man described by Cypriot and Egyptian authorities as mentally unstable and who has criminal convictions relating to fraud in Egypt hijacked a plane that was supposed to be flying from Alexandria to Cairo so that he could divert it to Larnaca in Cyprus. It appears that the man wanted reconciliation with his Cypriot wife and her children. It has also been said that he requested to meet European Union officials. After that, Egyptian security sources announced that Cairo airport had postponed an EgyptAir flight to New York because of security concerns linked to the hijacked plane. That was in Egypt. On the other side of the world, in Holland, the crisis at Schiphol airport in Amsterdam ended after it came to light that news of a passenger plane arriving from Spain being hijacked was false. The man who triggered chaos at the US Capitol turned out to be a crazy pastor named Larry Dawson who had previously disrupted Congress last October when he shouted that he was a “prophet of God”. This time, he brandished a “pellet” gun and was shot by police. Likewise, the explosive belt of the EgyptAir hijacker turned out to be fake. These events mix seriousness with amusement, laughter with tears and life with death. It seems that the succession of news, pictures and coverage of terrorist acts carried out by ISIS all around the world make it seem feasible to imitate these acts and have awakened the determination of some insane people in the world who need psychiatric care, to “borrow” this method to achieve both conceivable and inconceivable purposes. The danger of such events is that they prevent people from leading normal lives, harm the interests of ordinary people and lead to worry and concern. Unfortunately, tension engulfs the whole world due to real terrorism and events like the EgyptAir hijacking and the US Capitol disruption that imitate it. Perhaps with the passing of time, the world and the societies within it will live with the reality that real and fake terrorism has become a part of life which is wearisome for a number of reasons.