LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

November 14/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

 

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site

http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletin16/english.november14.16.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

I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If in my name you ask me for anything, I will do it
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint John 14/08-14/:"Philip said to him, ‘Lord, show us the Father, and we will be satisfied.’Jesus said to him, ‘Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father"? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own; but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; but if you do not, then believe me because of the works themselves. Very truly, I tell you, the one who believes in me will also do the works that I do and, in fact, will do greater works than these, because I am going to the Father. I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If in my name you ask me for anything, I will do it."

Brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter
Second Letter to the Thessalonians 02/13/17/03/01/05/:"We must always give thanks to God for you, brothers and sisters beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the first fruits for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and through belief in the truth. For this purpose he called you through our proclamation of the good news, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter. Now may our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father, who loved us and through grace gave us eternal comfort and good hope, comfort your hearts and strengthen them in every good work and word. Finally, brothers and sisters, pray for us, so that the word of the Lord may spread rapidly and be glorified everywhere, just as it is among you, and that we may be rescued from wicked and evil people; for not all have faith. But the Lord is faithful; he will strengthen you and guard you from the evil one. And we have confidence in the Lord concerning you, that you are doing and will go on doing the things that we command. May the Lord direct your hearts to the love of God and to the steadfastness of Christ." 

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on November 13-14/16
Hezbollah Has Effectively Won the Lebanese Presidency/By David Daoud/Newsweek/November 13/16
Hariri walks the tightrope again as Aoun’s prime minister/ Sami Moubayed/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
Donald Trump Boosts Europe's Anti-Establishment Movement/"What America can do we can do as well."/ Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute/November 13/16
Iran Breaches Nuclear Deal - Again. What's Next/Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/November 13/16
Trump’s first ME military action may target Iran/DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis November 12, 2016
Trump election puts Iran nuclear deal on shaky ground/Reuters/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
Trump victory heralds US Mideast policy shake-up/Thomas Seibert/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
Israel should give peace a chance/ Claude Salhani/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
Assad’s public relations offensive/James Denselow/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
Trump files: The region’s conflicts/ Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/November 13/16
On Trump-phobia/Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/November 13/16
Between candidate Trump’s promises and President Trump’s policies/ Raghida Dergham/Al Arabiya/November 13/16

Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on on November 13-14/16
Al-Rahi Urges 'Inclusive' Govt. Conforming to National Pact 'before Independence Day'
Hariri Takes Part in Beirut Marathon: 'Lebanon is Doing Well'
Gemayel Says 'No Hostility' towards Anyone, Calls Aoun 'Man of Surprises'
FPM Reportedly Refuses to Allow Hariri, Berri to Name Christian Ministers
Geagea Says FPM, Mustaqbal Back LF in Face of Govt. Participation 'Vetoes'
LF May Get 3 'Key Portfolios' in Return for Giving Up 'Sovereign Portfolio' Demand
Syrian Arrested in South on Suspicion of Belonging to IS
Derian winds up Akkar tour by meeting Daher, Merehbi and Akkar dignitaries
Future candidates win dentists' syndicate elections in Tripoli
Hezbollah Has Effectively Won the Lebanese Presidency
Hariri walks the tightrope again as Aoun’s prime minister

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on on November 13-14/16
Arab states send complaint letter against Iran to UN
Iraqi troops recapture site of Assyrian city
Iran missiles also ‘produced in Iraq, Syria’
Clashes in east Aleppo after army warning
Marked by an X: Kurds destroying Arab homes
Trump to stop funding Syrian Opposition
Israel PM calls for ministers’ restraint after Trump win
Israeli ministers approve draft bill to legalese outposts
British ambassador to Yemen writes to Al Arabiya: ‘Time for dialogue’
As battle in Mosul unfolds, ISIS looks to Pakistan for fresh recruits
Hadi: Yemenis do not want peace ‘distorted by lies’
UAE Urges More U.S. Involvement in Mideast under Trump

Links From Jihad Watch Site for on November 13-14/16
CNN pushes false narrative of Trump-inspired anti-Muslim crimewave
Hillary stokes riots, says Muslims, gays “scared to death” after election
Sting reopens Bataclan, site of jihad massacre, with “Inshallah”
California: Muslim Uber driver rapes 17-year-old passenger
Trump and America’s Real “Arab Spring” — on The Glazov Gang

Latest Lebanese Related News published on November 13-14/16
Al-Rahi Urges 'Inclusive' Govt. Conforming to National Pact 'before Independence Day'
Naharnet/November 13/16/Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi on Sunday called for the formation of an “inclusive government” before Independence Day, which will be marked on November 22. “The Lebanese want the anticipated new government to be an inclusive, consensual and effective government. A government that unites rather than divides, a government that shares responsibilities with the spirit of the National Pact and the constitution, not with the mentality of the distribution of shares or clinging to a certain ministerial portfolio,” al-Rahi said during his Sunday Mass sermon. “They hope it will be formed before Independence Day so that their joy would be complete,” al-Rahi added. President Michel Aoun's election and Saad Hariri's appointment as premier-designate have raised hopes that Lebanon can begin tackling challenges including a stagnant economy, a moribund political class and the influx of more than a million Syrian refugees. In a sign that Hariri's task ahead might not be easy, Hizbullah's MPs declined to endorse him for the prime minister post, even though his nomination was all-but-assured. Hariri is likely to struggle with his government's policy statement, which will have to make reference to Israel, as well as the war in Syria, both potential flashpoints with Hizbullah. Horsetrading is currently revolving around the distribution of key posts like the finance, defense and energy ministries.

Hariri Takes Part in Beirut Marathon: 'Lebanon is Doing Well'
Naharnet/November 13/16/Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri on Sunday took part in the “BLOM bank Beirut Marathon” during which he noted that “there is also a marathon in forming the government.”Asked if the marathon is faster than the government, Hariri said: “There is also a marathon in forming the government, they are competing for ministries.”He added: “We are looking towards the future and Lebanon is doing well.”Hariri had on Saturday evening met with a delegation representing the Beirut Marathon Association, headed by its president May Khalil. “We salute Prime Minister Hariri and we emphasize that we have full confidence that the government will be formed because Lebanon needs a period of security. We are very happy that Premier Hariri is leading this stage,” Khalil said. The number of foreign participants in this year’s marathon exceeded 3,500, representing 99 Arab and foreign countries, as the total number of participants reached 47,288.

Gemayel Says 'No Hostility' towards Anyone, Calls Aoun 'Man of Surprises'
Naharnet/November 13/16/Kataeb Party chief MP Sami Gemayel stressed Sunday that his party has no “hostile” stances towards anyone in Lebanon, while noting that President Michel Aoun “is known to be a man of surprises.”“We hope President Aoun will surprise us with heroic stances, including not allowing any group to monopolize Lebanon's foreign decisions, which must be in the hand of the State,” Gemayel said during a party ceremony in Jbeil. A war of words had recently erupted between Kataeb and the Lebanese Forces over the issue of participation in the new government. “Claims of being aggrieved are not useful today,” LF bloc MP Antoine Zahra said Friday, after Gemayel accused LF leader Samir Geagea of seeking to exclude Kataeb from the new government. “This is not the first time that we face an isolation attempt,” Gemayel lamented earlier, decrying how “Geagea does not mind to be with Hizbullah in the same government as he refuses Kataeb's participation.” Aoun's election and Saad Hariri's appointment as premier-designate have raised hopes that Lebanon can begin tackling challenges including a stagnant economy, a moribund political class and the influx of more than a million Syrian refugees. Horsetrading in the cabinet formation process is currently revolving around the distribution of key posts like the finance, defense and energy ministries.

FPM Reportedly Refuses to Allow Hariri, Berri to Name Christian Ministers
Naharnet/November 13/16/Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri is inclined to demand a “Christian share” in cabinet during his expected meeting with President Michel Aoun although the Free Patriotic Movement is insisting that Christian representation must be confined to Christian parties, a media report has said. Hariri is expected to visit the Baabda Palace in the coming hours to put Aoun in the picture of the consultations he has conducted. “Hariri will not present a preliminary line-up to Aoun but will rather brief him on the obstacles that are hindering the formation process,” al-Akhbar newspaper said. According to media reports, Hariri is insisting on getting a “significant Christian share” in the cabinet and he is expected to raise the issue with Aoun. “Negotiations with Minister Jebran Bassil reached a dead end over this point, amid insistence by the FPM that Hariri and Speaker Nabih Berri should not be given Christian seats,” the reports said.

Geagea Says FPM, Mustaqbal Back LF in Face of Govt. Participation 'Vetoes'
Naharnet/November 13/16/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea announced Sunday that some parties are trying to “isolate” the LF by putting “vetoes” on its participation in the new Cabinet. “There are three obstacles hindering the formation of the government. The first is that some political parties and leaders were not used throughout more than 25 years to a correct presidential conduct, seeing as in the past the president would be given a few ministers and the governments would be formed in Anjar, Syria and some other places,” Geagea told an LF diaspora conference in Belgium via Skype. “But we currently have a president who wants to take part in the government formation process in line with the powers vested in him by the Taef Accord,” Geagea added. “The second obstacle is that some parties have also refused to acknowledge the alliance between the LF and the Free Patriotic Movement, which has become a political force to be reckoned with, and they are finding it difficult to cope with this new situation,” the LF leader explained. He noted that another obstacle is that some parties are “dismayed” that the LF will take part in the new Cabinet. “That's why they are trying to isolate through their vetoes, but the FPM and al-Mustaqbal Movement are showing solidarity with the LF, and on the other hand the president will not tolerate this and he is committed towards us,” Geagea added. He also expressed optimism that the government “will be formed soon after resolving all obstacles.”

LF May Get 3 'Key Portfolios' in Return for Giving Up 'Sovereign Portfolio' Demand
Naharnet/November 13/16/Contacts over the past two days have indicated that the political parties are willing to show flexibility in order to reach a settlement in the cabinet formation process, especially regarding the distribution of the so-called sovereign portfolios and some important and service-related portfolios, a media report said on Sunday. “Speaker Nabih Berri may have informed Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri of his final demands regarding the portfolios he is seeking as well as the names of his candidates, knowing that it has become almost certain that the finance portfolio will stay with Minister Ali Hassan Khalil,” An Nahar newspaper reported. The foreign affairs and interior portfolios will stay with Jebran Bassil and Nouhad al-Mashnouq, it said. “Accordingly, a settlement over the Lebanese Forces' request to get a sovereign portfolio is hinging on the issue of the defense ministerial portfolio,” the daily added. “According to information obtained in the evening, the parties are mulling a solution that would give the LF three key portfolios – justice, telecommunications and energy – as well as a portfolio for a pro-LF Armenian figure, in return for giving up its demand to get a sovereign portfolio,” An Nahar said.

Syrian Arrested in South on Suspicion of Belonging to IS
Naharnet/November 13/16/A Syrian man was arrested Sunday in south Lebanon on suspicion of belonging to the extremist Islamic State group, state-run National News Agency reported. “Army intelligence agents arrested the Syrian B. N. in the al-Aqbiyeh area, al-Zahrani District, on suspicion of belonging to the IS group,” NNA said.

Derian winds up Akkar tour by meeting Daher, Merehbi and Akkar dignitaries
Sun 13 Nov 2016/NNA - Mufti of the Republic, Sheikh Abdel-Latif Derian, ended his visit on Sunday to the region of Akkar by meeting with a number of its political dignitaries and leaders, namely MP Khaled Daher and former Minister and MP Talal Merehbi. "We are very optimistic about the future, with the presidential vacuum having ended following a courageous initiative on part of Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri," said Derian. As he pointed to the needs of Akkar region and the joint efforts that ought to be invested by all sides in this region, the Mufti noted that "We are awaiting the implementation of President Aoun's oath speech, one which is based on national constants and responding to the aspirations of the Lebanese."Derian urged Hariri to form a government of national unity, in which all political sides will be represented, in order to put an end to the chaos that has affected the State's institutions, in wake of the vacuum that prevailed over the country during the past period. "We look forward to this new mandate with the election of President Michel Aoun, the naming of PM Saad Hariri to form the government, in cooperation with House Speaker Nabih Berri and all those loyal to the rise of a new mandate and uniting government, representing all Lebanese sides, for we are in need of this real solidarity and efforts to restore Lebanon to its natural course," Mufti Derian underscored.

Future candidates win dentists' syndicate elections in Tripoli
Sun 13 Nov 2016/NNA - NNA correspondent reported on Sunday that candidates of Future Movement and other independent candidates won the by-elections for three new members at Tripoli's Syndicate of Dentists.

Hezbollah Has Effectively Won the Lebanese Presidencyبفاعلية ربح حزب الله رئاسة الجمهورية اللبنانية
By David Daoud/Newsweek/November 13/16
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/11/13/david-daoudnewsweek-hezbollah-has-effectively-won-the-lebanese-presidency/
 http://www.newsweek.com/hezbollah-won-lebanese-presidency-520317
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Zarif arrived in Beirut on Tuesday to congratulate Michel Aoun on his recent election as Lebanon’s president, the highest-ranking foreign official to do so thus far. But few outside of Iran should be celebrating Lebanese democracy’s apparent success. The new occupant of Lebanon’s presidential palace in Baabda is a supporter of the Islamic Republic’s foreign policies and a staunch ally of its Lebanese Shiite proxy, Hezbollah.
With reappointed pro-Western prime minister Saad Hariri’s inability to effectively oppose the Shiite group, and a lack of credible U.S. deterrence to Iran’s regional expansionism, odds are high that Aoun’s presidency will end up serving Hezbollah and Tehran’s interests at the expense of Lebanon.
Lebanon remained without a president for the past two years, since the last president’s term expired in 2014. Forty-five consecutive parliamentary sessions to elect a successor ended in failure. Aoun was finally able to break that deadlock and clinch the presidency after unexpectedly obtaining the support of the pro-Western March 14 alliance’s two most prominent figures— Future Movement leader Saad Hariri and Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea.
But Aoun’s endorsement by these moderates should not allay concerns over his alliance with Hezbollah, nor will he now feel inclined to turn against the Shiite group. In fact, the day after Aoun took office, his Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) stressed that Hezbollah’s chief Hassan Nasrallah is their “ partner in victory.” The Party of God virtually imposed Aoun as the country’s next leader by boycotting elections unless Aoun ran unopposed and was guaranteed victory. For two years, Hezbollah held Lebanon’s politics hostage until Hariri, its chief political opponent, caved and endorsed Aoun on October 20, ushering him into the presidency.
Lebanon’s National Pact, the multi-confessional country’s unwritten power-sharing agreement, requires the president to be a Maronite Christian, with a Sunni prime minister, and Shiite speaker of parliament. The 1989 Taif Accords —which ended Lebanon’s civil war— limited the president ’s traditional constitutional powers, but Aoun will still have the capability to continue Lebanon’s national and foreign policy tilt toward Hezbollah. In fact, he has already done much to empower the Shiite group.
 In 2006, Aoun signed a Memorandum of Understanding which cemented his party’s alliance with Hezbollah, granting it outside political influence. In it, he recognized the group’s right to retain its arms, in defiance of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1559 and 1701. In fact, Hezbollah assumes a central role in Aoun’s national defense strategy. And though he has promised to enable the Lebanese Army to “be the only military force throughout Lebanon,” the former Lebanese general still envisions the Shiite group assuming the task of national defense.
He continues to stress the country’s “need [for] Hezbollah to defend the Lebanese border” against external threats (Israel) due to the national army ’s weakness. In the past Aoun has called for Israel’s destruction, and he reiterated his enmity during his inaugural address. Echoing Hezbollah ’s excuse for continuing its war against the Jewish state, Aoun warned against Israel’s greed for Lebanese land and resources and vowed to “spare no effort or resistance” in expelling the Israeli military from the Shebaa Farms.
In 2011, Aoun’s FPM, in cooperation with Hezbollah, toppled then-Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s government ahead of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon ’s expected indictments of Hezbollah members for assassinating Hariri’s father, Rafiq. The Shiite group had previously labeled the international tribunal an instrument of Israeli foreign policy.
  Aoun also supports a reformed parliamentary electoral law that would give Hezbollah more votes than any other rival party by changing the system to one of proportional representation. Lebanon’s current system grants a party all of a district’s parliamentary seats if it wins a bare majority there. Proportional representation, championed more vocally by Hezbollah since Aoun ’s election, would allot the remaining seats to the losing party. Hezbollah and its allies could then run candidates in districts where their rivals are leading by slim margins. Because the Shiite group is overwhelmingly dominant in its own areas, the pro-Hezbollah camp could thus gain more than half of the country’s 128 parliamentary seats.
  Aoun also shares Hezbollah’s pro-Iranian leanings, championing the Islamic Republic’s regional influence and assistance to “the resistance” within Lebanon. He also supports Iran and Hezbollah’s intervention in the Syrian civil war on behalf of dictator Bashar al-Assad’s embattled regime. In fact, it was his Free Patriotic Movement that led Lebanon to reject this year’s Arab League condemnation of Iranian meddling in Arab affairs and Hezbollah ’s terrorist activities, isolating Beirut from Saudi Arabia and its other Arab allies.
  Aoun’s emphasis in his inaugural address on maintaining an “independent” Lebanese foreign policy within the Arab League confirms his intention to continue Beirut’s pro-Iranian bent. And though he remained ambiguous about the Syrian conflict, Aoun called for preventing the war from reaching Lebanon, and said Beirut should assume a “preemptive and deterrent” posture towards Sunni jihadist groups. Hezbollah has read this as an endorsemen t of its activities in Syria. It is no wonder, then, that Tehran views his election as a “ victory for Nasrallah, the Resistance and Iran’s friends.” 
 Aoun’s first act as president was to reappoint Saad Hariri as prime minister. But just as Hariri was forced to endorse Hezbollah’s presidential choice, he will also have to form the next government on its terms. With its parliamentary allies, the Shiite group will force enough concessions out of Hariri, including cabinet appointments, that will allow it to determine the country’s domestic and foreign policy. With Hezbollah thus effectively controlling Lebanon, the implications for continuing U.S. military and security cooperation with Beirut are dire.
  As president, Aoun is not likely to moderate or curtail his pro-Hezbollah and Iranian policies out of a sense of debt to Geagea and Hariri’s support for his nomination. A reading to that effect mistakenly ignores Lebanon and the region’s balance of power and how Aoun finally entered office. The pro-Western duo did not willingly endorse his candidacy. Hezbollah’s obstructionism forced their acquiescence to his election, conclusively demonstrating that the Shiite group is Lebanon’s strongest force and its main power - broker.
  Now that Aoun is in office, Hariri and Geagea have nothing more to offer. Just as importantly, the United States’ receding Middle Eastern role and foreign policies have enabled the regional ascendancy of Hezbollah’s patron, Iran. If anything, the path forward for Lebanon’s new president points not in the direction of moderation, but to Tehran.
 **David Daoud is an Arabic-language research analyst at the Washington D.C.-based think tank the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. 

Hariri walks the tightrope again as Aoun’s prime minister
 Sami Moubayed/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/11/13/48606/
  Beirut - Since he entered Lebanon’s fractious politics after the assassination of his father, former prime minister Rafik Hariri, Saad Hariri, a former premier himself, has never been on good terms with Hezbol­lah or its secretary-general, Hassan Nasrallah.
  Hariri accuses them, both pri­vately and sometimes in public, of being directly responsible for kill­ing his father in a massive bombing in Beirut in February 2005.
  Hezbollah figures write Hariri off as a Saudi stooge who wasted his father’s wealth and political legacy and would never have made it to power without Saudi consent, ei­ther in 2009 or 2016.
  Although Syria’s once-formida­ble influence has declined sharply, the Syrians agree with Hezbol­lah when it comes to Hariri. Like Hezbollah, they have had to deal with him to ensure that their ally, Michel Aoun, a Maronite Catholic, became president of Lebanon.
  Neither Hezbollah nor Damas­cus, however, is content. Both are waiting for the right moment to either clip Hariri’s wings or bring him down altogether.
  It was politically painful yet per­sonally rewarding for both Aoun and Hariri to swallow the regional deal on Lebanon and both are po­litely playing by its rules of engage­ment but that might not last very long.
  Aoun, a former army command­er, wanted to become president at any price, even if that meant snug­gling up to Hezbollah, reviled by many Maronites, deeply ruining his relationship with the United States, ending his long-time ani­mosity with Damascus and accept­ing Hariri as prime minister, whom he helped topple from that post in 2011.
  The Syrians would have pre­ferred seeing their long-time Maronite ally, Suleiman Frangieh, as president but they reasoned that, because he is only 51, he could wait a while. Time was running out for the 83-year-old Aoun and Nas­rallah wanted him rewarded for his loyalty to Hezbollah.
  Aoun surpassed all expectations by living up to his alliance with Nasrallah, hammered out in Feb­ruary 2006. He stuck with it dur­ing Hezbollah’s ruinous war with Israel five months later.
  These days he insists that for the Hariri cabinet to survive, it must include a clause in its programme to “protect” Hezbollah’s insistence on retaining its supposedly mas­sive arsenal, even though other armed groups surrendered their weapons after the 1975-90 civil war.
  Hariri is prepared to set aside his dispute with Aoun to secure ap­proval for his 30-man cabinet but there are worries in Damascus and Tehran about how the relation­ship between the two will progress from there.
  Hariri is still backed by the Saudis and committed to regime change in Damascus, something that Aoun and Hezbollah adamantly oppose. Hariri is well connected to heavy­weights in the Saudi-backed Syrian opposition and insists that he will not talk to Damascus if Syrian Pres­ident Bashar Assad stays on.
  That is something that will be technically difficult for him as prime minister because of the mul­titude of overlapping issues be­tween Syria and Lebanon and the fact that Lebanon has one border with the Arab world and that hap­pens to be with Syria.
  Aoun wants to eject the 1 million Syrian war refugees from Lebanon while the March 14 coalition that Hariri heads wants them to stay as a pressure point on Damascus.
  Aoun does not mind Hezbollah’s military support for Assad in the Syrian war while Hariri wants the party’s forces pulled out — at any cost.
  At a micro level, Hariri wants some Hezbollah officials to stand trial for the assassination of his fa­ther but this is a red line for Leba­non’s new president.
  For all these reasons, Hariri op­posed Aoun’s presidential bid for years but he also did so because he wanted a weak Christian president or at least a ceremonial one who would not challenge a Sunni prime minister.
  Memories are still sharp over how much of a headache the Syri­an-backed president Emile Lahoud was for Rafik Hariri in 2003, where he blocked nearly all of the prime minister’s economic and politi­cal decisions and sat in on cabinet meetings to overshadow the prime minister.
  Much of that is likely to re-emerge now from the forced Aoun- Hariri partnership. If the prime minister becomes too loud, Hez­bollah and its allies can walk out of cabinet meetings, making them unconstitutional and forcing Hariri to resign, just as they did to him in January 2011.
 Hezbollah wants to give its allies in the Hariri cabinet veto power to smother any legislation deemed harmful to the Party of God, locally or regionally.
Earlier, this veto power was used to obstruct the UN-mandated Spe­cial Tribunal on Lebanon investi­gating Rafik Hariri’s death and any debate about Hezbollah’s arms. Now it will be used to block any ambition Hariri may have of im­posing a cabinet decision on Hez­bollah to eject them from Syria. 
 It insists Aoun reward Hezbollah figures in other parties who helped bring about his presidency.
  If Hariri accepts these people today, out of sheer necessity, it is doubtful he will be able to live with them for very long, which is exact­ly what Aoun and his allies in Teh­ran and Damascus appear to want.  

Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 13-14/16
Arab states send complaint letter against Iran to UN
 Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Sunday, 13 November 2016/Eleven Arab countries have sent a letter of complaint to the United Nations voicing their concerns of Iran’s continuous expansion of their policies in the region, Al Arabiya News channel reported.  The letter condemned Iran's role in Yemen and their support and training of Houthi militias, as well as the smuggling of arms to them. The Gulf Cooperation Council countries, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Sudan and Yemen sent the letter to Peter Thomson, the president of the UN General Assembly 71st session, and was distributed to UN state members. The letter comes in response to the false allegations which the Iranian delegation made on September 26 during the general debate of the UN General Assembly. The letter voiced concerns of Iran’s calls for a revolution, adding that Iran sponsors terrorism in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen and supports terrorist cells and groups in Bahrain, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other countries. It also said that the operation Decisive Storm was launched upon the request of the legitimate government in Yemen and slammed Iran's attempts to stir sectarian strife in the region. *This article is also available in Arabic at AlArabiya.Net.
 
Iraqi troops recapture site of Assyrian city
 Staff writer, Al Arabiya English, Sunday, 13 November 2016/Iraqi soldiers have captured Nimrud, the site of an ancient Assyrian city overrun by ISIS militants two years ago, a military statement said on Sunday.“Troops from the Ninth Armoured Division liberated Nimrud town completely and raised the Iraqi flag above its buildings,” the statement said. The town of Nimrud lies 1 km (less than 1 mile) west of the ruins of the old city.
 Fierce battles
 Iraqi forces fought fierce battles against ISIS militants on Saturday, east of Mosul, after three weeks of fighting in an operation to liberate the ISIS-held area, Al Arabiya.Net reported. Forces stormed the al-Salam neighborhood after heavy fighting with ISIS, during which dozens of militants were killed, in addition to the destruction of car bombs and heavy weapons that were found. Special operations commander Major General Maan al-Saadi also revealed that the anti-terrorism unit advanced east into Mosul, with the aid of air raids by the international coalition. Saadi also reported that have been able to evacuate civilians for a number of neighborhoods.
 South invasion
 Meanwhile, in the southern, Federal Police captain Raed Shakir confirmed that his fighters advanced to the outskirts of Albu Saif area, and awaited orders to attack ISIS militants. Governor of Nineveh province also stated that the government has begun to look at relocating displaced civilians back into regained Mosul areas.
 ISIS ‘chemical’ attack
 Amid the progress of the Iraqi forces and stationed in the south ready to storm, there have been several warnings of a possible chemical attack by ISIS. The warning comes after reports have emerged of ISIS using chemical weapons on civilians, south of Mosul. Residents in Qayyara suffered from recent chemical attacks shortly before the current offensive began in on Oct. 17, Human Rights Watch confirmed in a report on Friday. This article is also avaliable in Arabic on AlArabiya.Net.
 
Iran missiles also ‘produced in Iraq, Syria’
 Staff Writer, Al Arabiya English Sunday, 13 November 2016/Hussein Sheikh al-Islam, the advisor to the Iranian foreign affairs minister, said Iranian missiles are not only manufactured in Syria but in other countries in the region as well. He said Iran expanded its missiles’ production outside its borders due to the “increasing Israeli threats in the region.” Although he did not reveal much about the production Iranian missiles, he said Iraq is one of the countries where ballistic missiles are produced.  His statements come two days after the Iranian chief of staff said that manufacturing ballistic missiles has been carried out in Aleppo during the past years. An agency affiliated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards has recently acknowledged that Houthi militias have used Iranian missiles. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif, however, has denied the statements. Meanwhile, the Iranian opposition outside Iran called on the UN Security Council to impose strict sanctions on Mahan Air and confirmed it’s owned by the Revolutionary Guards. The opposition also said that the airliner transfers of weapons, equipment and Revolutionary Guards’ members to Syria adding that this was a flagrant violation of the UN Security Council resolutions.
 **This article is also available in arabic on AlArabiya.net
 
Clashes in east Aleppo after army warning
AFP, Aleppo Monday, 14 November 2016/Syrian government forces clashed with rebels on the outskirts of eastern Aleppo city Sunday, a monitor said, after residents received messages from the army giving opposition fighters 24 hours to leave.
 The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based monitor, and an AFP correspondent in rebel-held east Aleppo reported clashes in the Karam al-Turab neighborhood and the village of Al-Aziza just outside the city. The AFP correspondent said the fighting could be heard in much of the rebel-held east, which is surrounded by government forces and has come under repeated assault since the army announced an operation to recapture it in September. The fighting came as residents in east Aleppo received text messages warning rebels to leave within 24 hours. “Gunmen in east Aleppo, you have 24 hours only to take the decision to leave,” the message said. “Those who want to save their lives must put down their weapons and their safety will be guaranteed. After the end of this period, the planned strategic offensive will begin,” it added. Syria’s government and army have regularly sent rebels and residents in eastern Aleppo text messages warning them to leave the besieged sector.At least seven children were among 23 killed Sunday in northern Syria as pro-government forces kept up their campaign against opposition areas in the country’s north, the Associated Press reported. At least another eight were killed in a suspected airstrike on a crossing point connecting Kurdish-held areas with rebel areas in northern Aleppo province, the Kurdish security force said. The violence Sunday comes a day after government troops repelled a rebel offensive on western parts of Aleppo city launched late October. State news agency SANA said the shelling of a western Aleppo district killed four, including two women and a child. Once Syria’s economic powerhouse, Aleppo has been divided into a government-held west and rebel-held east since mid-2012. In September, the army announced an operation to recapture the east, unleashing a massive assault backed by Russian warplanes. The initial phase of the assault killed hundreds of civilians and destroyed infrastructure including hospitals. But in recent weeks, Russia has declared a series of brief truces, intended to encourage people to leave the east, although so far few have done so.  Rebels, meanwhile, have sought to break through government lines to end the siege on the east that began in July, so far without success. They have fired barrages of rockets into western Aleppo, killing dozens of civilians, including four people in the Halab al-Jadida district on Sunday. State news agency SANA said the dead included a child and two women. Seven people were killed in regime rocket fire into Salhine district in east Aleppo, the Observatory said. It said they died when a rocket hit the minibus they were in, and that the toll could rise because of the number of seriously wounded. Another person was killed in artillery fire on Sukari district in the east. More than 300,000 people have been killed in Syria since the conflict began with anti-government protests in March 2011. (With AP)
 
Marked by an X: Kurds destroying Arab homes
 Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Sunday, 13 November 2016/Security forces of Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government have unlawfully destroyed large numbers of Arab homes, and sometimes entire villages, in areas retaken from ISIS, Human Rights Watch has reported. HRW reported the atrocities in an 80-page report titled “Marked with an ‘X’: Iraqi Kurdish Forces’ destruction of villages, homes in conflict with ISIS,” and looked at destruction of homes between September 2014 and May 2016 in disputed areas of Kirkuk and Nineveh governorates. “Forcing families out of their homes and into the streets or to unsafe parts of the country is a serious violation of their rights and does nothing to strengthen Iraq’s political cohesion,” said Lama Fakih, HRW’s deputy Middle East director. A video embedded below obtained by HRW shows homes of Arabs that were evicted from the June First neighborhood of Kirkuk and demolished between October 23 and 25. In the slider below, before and after images show the extent of destruction brought on Nahrawan village.
 
Trump to stop funding Syrian Opposition
 Staff Writer, Al Arabiya English Sunday, 13 November 2016/President-elect Donald Trump will likely end military support to the Syrian Opposition – a stance that he took during his campaign trail – he said during an interview with the Wall Street Journal on Friday, claiming that “we [US] have no idea who these people are.”“I’ve had an opposite view of many people regarding Syria,” Trump told the US based paper. “My attitude was you’re fighting Syria, Syria is fighting ISIS, and you have to get rid of ISIS. Russia is now totally aligned with Syria, and now you have Iran, which is becoming powerful, because of us, is aligned with Syria.”Trump reiterated his stance by stating that if the US fights the Syrian government, it ends up “fighting Russia.”Regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Republican President-elect considers it “a war that never ends,” but he hopes to contribute to finding a solution. “That’s the ultimate deal,” Trump said. “As a deal maker, I’d like to do…the deal that can’t be made. And do it for humanity’s sake.”**This article is also avaliable in Arabic at AlArabiya.net
 
Israel PM calls for ministers’ restraint after Trump win
 AFP, Jerusalem Sunday, 13 November 2016/Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Sunday for ministers to refrain from comment on Donald Trump’s presidency after right-wing politicians said his election win put an end to a two-state solution with the Palestinians. Netanyahu has been cautious in his comments since Trump’s stunning US presidential victory on November 8, sending congratulations and pledging to work with him. But other right-wing politicians have used Trump’s win to promote their cause, with some calling for the end of the idea of a two-state solution with the Palestinians, the basis of years of negotiations. Education Minister Naftali Bennett, who heads the religious nationalist Jewish Home party, said last week “the era of a Palestinian state is over”. Netanyahu said at the start of a cabinet meeting: “President-elect Trump and I decided to meet soon in order to discuss all of the important issues on the agenda between the US and Israel. “I request that all ministers, deputy ministers and (lawmakers) allow the incoming administration to formulate -- together with us -- its policy vis-a-vis Israel and the region, through accepted and quiet channels, and not via interviews and statements.”Trump’s win is seen as likely leading to a far more favorable US policy toward Israel, though many analysts have cautioned that his thinking remains unclear and he has proven himself to be unpredictable. Netanyahu was among the first leaders Trump spoke to after his election victory. At the same time, Israel is concerned that President Barack Obama may seek a UN resolution on its conflict with the Palestinians that the Jewish state opposes before he leaves office on January 20. Obama’s administration has intensified its criticism of Israeli settlement building in the occupied West Bank. “In recent years we have wisely and responsibly managed our relations with the United States -- the greatest and most important of our allies -- and we will continue to do so in the coming months and years,” Netanyahu said. The premier also said Trump had “expressed very deep friendship for Israel, a friendship which has characterized him and, I must add, also the team around him, for many years.” The US grants Israel more than $3 billion per year in defense aid.
 
Israeli ministers approve draft bill to legalese outposts
 AFP, Jerusalem Monday, 14 November 2016/Israel’s ministerial committee for legislation on Sunday approved a controversial draft bill aimed at legalizing wildcat Jewish settlements built on private Palestinian land, parliamentary sources said. The bill must now pass through three readings in parliament and also be ratified by the supreme court before it can become law.Sunday’s vote was rushed through the ministerial committee in an attempt to prevent the evacuation of the Jewish wildcat outpost of Amona in the Israeli-occupied West Bank by the end of the year. The supreme court has ordered the evacuation of settlers from Amona and the demolition of their homes by Dec. 25. Amona, near the West Bank city of Ramallah, is home to about 40 families and was built on land privately owned by Palestinians who had petitioned the court for the outpost to be removed. The international community considers all Israeli settlements in Israeli-annexed east Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank to be illegal, whether they are authorized by the government or not. They are also seen as a major stumbling blocks to peace efforts as they are built on land the Palestinians see as part of their future state. The bill approved unanimously on Sunday stipulates that the government could order the confiscation of privately owned Palestinian land in exchange for compensation. It was at the center of a row between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who had sought to delay the vote and hardliners in his ruling right-wing Likud party. One, Education Minister Naftali Bennett who heads the religious nationalist Jewish Home party, succeeded in rallying support for the vote leading to Sunday’s endorsement of the bill. The anti-settlement Peace Now movement denounced the vote. “It is a shame: the government is backing a law that will allow the confiscation of privately owned Palestinian land in order to build settlements,” said Hagit Ofran, one of the watchdog’s leaders. According to Ofran, around 2,000 homes have been built on land owned by Palestinians in the West Bank, and therefore the draft bill could retroactively legalize these dwellings. Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit warned the ministers that he would be unable to defend the bill before the supreme court. A statement by Mandelblit said the bill “undermines private property and is contrary to Israeli law and international law,” public radio reported. Mandelblit also warned that if the bill were to become law it could spur many people to lodge official complaints with the International Criminal Court. The passing of the draft bill came just days after Bennett, who champions settlement expansion, said that the idea of a Palestinian state was over after Donald Trump’s election as US president. “Trump’s victory is an opportunity for Israel to immediately retract the notion of a Palestinian state in the center of the country, which would hurt our security and just cause,” he said on Wednesday. “The era of a Palestinian state is over,” he said. Netanyahu on Sunday urged ministers to refrain from commenting on Trump’’s presidency.
 
British ambassador to Yemen writes to Al Arabiya: ‘Time for dialogue’
 By Edmund Fitton-Brown/ Al Arabiya/November 13/16
 Last week UN Special Envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed handed over his roadmap for peace to the warring parties in Yemen. It is a product of months of negotiations between the Yemeni parties that have taken place under the eye of the UN during the past year. It is designed to reflect the concerns and aspirations of both sides and facilitate a lasting solution to a conflict which has raged for more than two years since the Houthis and forces loyal to former President Saleh took Sanaa by force from the legitimate authorities.  Of course, this roadmap is not intended to be a final version of the agreement. It is a tool designed to bridge the gap between the parties. Both sides will need to engage constructively with the UN Envoy to negotiate the details and reach a settlement. No conflict is resolved easily, and all parties will need to make some difficult compromises. But they must do so for the sake of all Yemenis. The UN estimates that the conflict has resulted in up to 10,000 Yemeni deaths. There are over 21 million in need of humanitarian assistance with 7 million facing severe food shortages. Differences must be put aside to end this horror and guarantee a better future for the people of Yemen. The roadmap is based on the UN Security Council Resolution 2216, the internationally agreed framework for a negotiated solution. The Resolution was never intended to relieve the Hadi government of its responsibility to negotiate, or to provide for the surrender of one side to the other.The terms of the roadmap would see the Houthi militia and Saleh loyalists withdraw from areas they have occupied, including the capital Sana’a and the cities of Taiz and Hodeidah. They would also be required to hand over their heavy weaponry. In return, a new Vice-President enjoying extensive national acceptability and credibility will be appointed who assumes full Presidential authority and oversees the formation of a new Government of National Unity. And it will be this Government which takes forward the political transition envisaged for Yemen back in 2012, leading to democratic elections and a new Constitution chosen by the Yemeni people. But this political transition can only occur if the Houthi militia and Saleh loyalists commit to the security measures mentioned above and show a willingness to negotiate credible and verifiable withdrawal and disarmament measures as part of an agreement. Efforts to impose a government at the barrel of a gun will lead to endless conflict. Those who block peace and recklessly prolong this conflict will be held fully responsible by the international community and the Yemeni people. The time for fighting is over. Now is the time for dialogue, negotiation and compromise. The UN Envoy and his roadmap have the full support of the international community. In one of his first acts, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson brought together US, Saudi Arabia and Emirati Foreign Ministers in London to discuss how best to support the UN process and progress peace. Four Quad meetings have been convened in as many months, alongside regular dialogue with partners in the region, including the Yemeni parties. The UN Security Council and members of the Gulf Cooperation Council agree that this is the best chance of peace for Yemen and have pledged to give their full support to the UN Envoy in delivering it. But the real decision is in the hands of the Yemeni parties to the conflict. I urge the Houthis, the Saleh loyalists and the Government of Yemen to put every effort into working with the UN Envoy and agree a lasting peace deal. The people of Yemen deserve this. The long list of demands put forward by the Houthi militia and Saleh loyalists, on top of the concessions already offered to them in the roadmap, are completely unacceptable. Let us be clear. This is not constructive engagement with the Special Envoy. This is an attempt to derail the UN process and to humiliate anyone who has opposed them. Those who block peace and recklessly prolong this conflict will be held fully responsible by the international community and the Yemeni people. The time for fighting is over. Now is the time for dialogue, negotiation and compromise.
 
As battle in Mosul unfolds, ISIS looks to Pakistan for fresh recruits
 The Associated Press, Islamabad Sunday, 13 November 2016/ISIS is increasing its presence in Pakistan, recruiting Uzbek militants, attracting disgruntled Taliban fighters and partnering with one of Pakistan’s most violent sectarian groups, according to police officers, Taliban officials and analysts. Its latest atrocity was an attack Saturday on a Sufi shrine in southwestern Pakistan that killed at least 50 people and wounded 100 others. The group said in a statement that a suicide bomber attacked the shrine with the intent of killing Shiite Muslims and issued a picture of the attacker. When ISIS circulated a photograph of one of the attackers in last month’s deadly assault on a police academy in southwestern Baluchistan province, two Taliban officials told The Associated Press that the attacker was an Uzbek, most likely a member of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. The Taliban officials, both of whom are familiar with the IMU, spoke on condition of anonymity because their leadership has banned them from talking to the media. Authorities initially said the police academy attack was orchestrated by militants hiding out in Afghanistan and blamed Pakistan’s virulently anti-Shiite group, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi. But ISIS later claimed responsibility and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi spokesman Ali Bin Sufyan said they partnered with ISIS to carry out the assault.
 
Hadi: Yemenis do not want peace ‘distorted by lies’
 Staff writer, Al Arabiya English, Sunday, 13 November 2016/Yemen’s President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi said that the people of Yemen do not want peace that is “distorted by lies” but rather a lasting and comprehensive peace plan based on ending the coup by the Houthi militias, Al Arabiya News channel reported. Hadi reiterated, in a speech to the Djibouti parliament on Saturday, that he is committed to the Gulf initiative on Yemen and what was agreed during the National Dialogue 2014, as well as the Security Council resolutions. He stated that resolution 2216 must be met, which defines the framework of the peace process in Yemen, calling for the Houthis and their allies to withdraw and hand over all weapons. “Any ideas beyond those references are a waste of time,” he said, “we do not want peace that is distorted by lies, we want a lasting and comprehensive peace plan, based on ending the coup first.” **This article is also avaliable in Arabic at AlArabiya.Net.
 
UAE Urges More U.S. Involvement in Mideast under Trump
 Agence France Presse/Naharnet/November 13/16/ The United Arab Emirates urged U.S. president-elect Donald Trump Sunday to increase his country's involvement in the Middle East and adopt an "overarching strategy" towards developments in the turmoil-hit region. "Washington's weight and influence remains more important than ever," said Anwar Gargash, minister of state for foreign affairs in the UAE, a longtime Washington ally. "Following eight years of weakened American engagement in the region, which many feel has created a disconcerting vacuum, it looks like we will have to wait a little longer until the contours of president-elect Trump's approach" becomes clearer, Gargash told politicians at an event organized by the Emirates Policy Center in Abu Dhabi.  "It is essential that there is an overarching strategy rather than isolated positions towards regional issues," he said in remarks published in English on the official WAM news agency. "In short, America's engagement is positive and its withdrawal and disengagement is counterproductive," he added. President Barack Obama's administration’s policy in withdrawing from the region has been "a recipe for unremitting chaos and violence", he said, pointing to crises in Iraq, Syria and Libya which have spiraled out of control and fueled extremism.  Breaking "this cycle of discord and instability requires difficult decisions, collective action and a continuous search for constructive solutions", Gargash said.  Under Obama, relations between Washington and Gulf Arab states turned frosty with U.S. overtures towards their regional rival Iran.  Washington and other major powers reached an agreement, which took effect in January, to lift international sanctions on Iran in exchange for guarantees that it would not pursue a nuclear weapons capability.  Obama's reluctance to become involved in Syria's deadly war and other regional conflicts that have turned increasingly bloody and seen extremists such as the Islamic State group grow has also angered Washington's historic allies in the Gulf.
 
Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on November 13-14/16
Donald Trump Boosts Europe's Anti-Establishment Movement/"What America can do we can do as well."
 Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute/November 13/16
 http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/11/13/soeren-kerngatestone-institute-donald-trump-boosts-europes-anti-establishment-movementwhat-america-can-do-we-can-do-as-well/
 https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9309/trump-europe
 "America has just liberated itself from political correctness. The American people expressed their desire to remain a free and democratic people. Now it is time for Europe. We can and will do the same!" — Geert Wilders, Dutch MP, head of the Party for Freedom (PVV), and now on trial in the Netherlands for free speech.
 "2016 is, by the looks of it, going to be the year of two great political revolutions. I thought Brexit was big but boy this looks like it is going to be even bigger." — Nigel Farage, MEP and leader of the UK Independence Party.
 "The political class is reviled across much of the West, the polling industry is bankrupt and the press just hasn't woken up to what's going on in the world." — Nigel Farage.
 "In a democracy, when the people feel ignored and despised, they will find a way to be heard. This vote is the consequence of a revolt of the middle class against a ruling elite that wants to impose what they should think." — Laurent Wauquiez, leader of the French opposition party The Republicans.
 Donald Trump's electoral victory has come as a shock to Europe's political and media establishment, which fears that the political sea change underway in the United States will energize populist parties in Europe.
 Anti-establishment politicians, many of whom are polling well in a number of upcoming European elections, are hoping Trump's rise will inspire European voters to turn out to vote for them in record numbers.
 Commenting on Trump's victory, Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders, wrote: "America has just liberated itself from political correctness. The American people expressed their desire to remain a free and democratic people. Now it is time for Europe. We can and will do the same!"
 More than a dozen elections will be held in Europe during the next twelve months, beginning with a re-run of the Austrian presidential election scheduled for December 4. Polls show that Norbert Hofer, of the anti-immigration Austrian Freedom Party, is on track to win that race.
 Also on December 4, Italians will vote in a referendum on reforming the constitution. Observers say Trump's victory will make it more difficult for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, one the few world leaders publicly to endorse Hillary Clinton, to prevail. They say Renzi's open support for Clinton will hurt Italy's relations with the United States. Renzi has said he will resign if he loses the referendum, which calls for curbing the role of the Senate. Most opinion polls show the "no" camp ahead. Renzi says the move will simplify decision-making, but opponents say it will reduce checks and balances.
 General elections are scheduled in 2017 for the Czech Republic, France, Germany and the Netherlands, EU countries where anti-establishment candidates are challenging the established order.
 Mainstream politicians and the media have sought to discredit populist leaders by branding them as neo-Nazi and xenophobic for their opposition to mass migration, multiculturalism and the rise of Islam in Europe. If Donald Trump can demonstrate that he is able to govern the United States and produce tangible results, especially by growing the economy and curbing illegal immigration, Europe's political establishment will have a much harder time stigmatizing dissenters.
 Anti-establishment politicians in Europe, such as Party for Freedom leader Geert Wilders (left) in the Netherlands and UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage (right), have embraced Donald Trump and hope his rise will inspire European voters to turn out to vote for them in record numbers.
 What follows is a selection of official European reactions to Trump's election victory. Anti-establishment politicians have embraced Trump, while establishment politicians have mostly issued pro forma congratulatory statements that are polite but formal and distant.
 Austria. The leader of the Freedom Party, Heinz-Christian Strache, congratulated Trump on Facebook. He wrote:
 "Little by little, the political left and the out-of-touch and corrupt establishment is being punished by voters and driven from power. This is a good thing, because the law comes from the people. The Austrian mainstream media, which has been campaigning against Trump for weeks and prematurely declared Hillary Clinton the victor, were embarrassed by the voting public."
 Belgium. The populist Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) party congratulated Trump and said his unexpected election victory could be repeated in Europe. Party chairman Tom Van Grieken tweeted: "U.S. election shows again how far politicians are from the people." In another tweet, he wrote: "The rise of Trump is not an isolated phenomenon. In Europe too, more and more voters want real change."
 Britain. Prime Minister Theresa May said:
 "I would like to congratulate Donald Trump on being elected the next President of the United States, following a hard-fought campaign. Britain and the United States have an enduring and special relationship based on the values of freedom, democracy and enterprise. We are, and will remain, strong and close partners on trade, security and defense."
 The leader of the UK Independence Party, Nigel Farage, who successfully campaigned for the "Brexit" referendum for Britain to leave the European Union, said Trump's victory did not surprise him. He tweeted:
 "2016 is, by the looks of it, going to be the year of two great political revolutions. I thought Brexit was big but boy this looks like it is going to be even bigger."
 He also tweeted: "I hand over the mantle to @RealDonaldTrump! Many congratulations. You have fought a brave campaign."
 Speaking to ITV, Farage said: "The political class is reviled across much of the West, the polling industry is bankrupt and the press just hasn't woken up to what's going on in the world."
 Czech Republic. President Milos Zeman said Trump's election was a victory over "media manipulation." He said:
 "I would like to cordially congratulate Donald Trump. I had, as one of few European politicians, declared public support for this candidate because I agree with his opinions on migration as well as the fight against Islamic terrorism. I appreciate Donald Trump's public demeanor. He speaks clearly, sometimes roughly, but understandably, and avoids what is sometimes called political correctness."
 European Union. European Council President Donald Tusk wrote:
 "Europe and the United States simply have no option but to cooperate as closely as possible. I listened with attention to President-elect Trump's call for American unity. And I, in turn, would like to call for European and transatlantic unity. I do not believe that any country today can be great in isolation. But I do believe that America and Europe can, should and will work together. It is in our common interest. We have to recognise that this will take major efforts from both sides. The EU is a strong and reliable partner and will remain so. We expect the same from America and its new President."
 France. President François Hollande tweeted: "The American people have expressed themselves. They elected Donald Trump. I congratulate him. I am also thinking of Hillary Clinton."
 The French Ambassador to the US, Gérard Araud, tweeted: "This is the end of an epoch. After Brexit and this vote anything is possible. The world is crumbling in front of our eyes." He later deleted the tweet.
 Former Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin said: "What's happening in the US could happen in France."
 Former Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin said: "The boundaries of reason disappeared with Brexit, the main lesson for France is that Le Pen can win."
 Laurent Wauquiez, leader of the opposition party The Republicans, said: "In a democracy, when the people feel ignored and despised, they will find a way to be heard. This vote is the consequence of a revolt of the middle class against a ruling elite that wants to impose what they should think."
 The leader of the National Front party, Marine Le Pen, tweeted: "Congratulations to the new president of the United States Donald Trump and the free American people!"
 Le Pen's father, party founder Jean-Marie Le Pen, tweeted: "Today the United States, tomorrow France."
 Germany. Chancellor Angela Merkel, who did not mention Trump by name, lectured the president-elect on values:
 "Germany and America are connected by values of democracy, freedom and respect for the law and the dignity of man, independent of origin, skin color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or political views. I offer the next president of the United States close cooperation on the basis of these values."
 Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel was less gracious. He said:
 "Trump is the harbinger of a new authoritarian and chauvinist international movement. He is also a warning for us. Our country and Europe must change if we want to counter the authoritarian international movement."
 Foreign Minister Foreign Frank-Walter Steinmeier said:
 "We hope that we are not facing greater instability in international politics. During his campaign, Trump was critical not just of Europe, but also of Germany. I believe we must prepare for American foreign policy becoming less predictable. We must prepare for a situation in which America will be tempted to make decisions on its own more often.
 "I do not want to sugarcoat it: Nothing will be easier and much will be more difficult. Just as we Germans learned a lot in the past from our American friends, we should now encourage our American friends to stay true to past partnerships and to us."
 Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen said Trump's victory was "a big shock" and "not a vote for him but rather against Washington, against the establishment." She added:
 "Of course we Europeans, as a NATO ally, know that if Donald Trump becomes president, he'll ask: What are you contributing to this alliance? But we're also wondering, what's your position on this alliance?"
 Justice Minister Heiko Maas tweeted: "The world won't end. But it will get crazier."
 The leader of the populist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party, Frauke Petry, predicted that Trump's victory would result in a political change in Europe too. On Facebook, she wrote:
 "It was high time that in the United States of America, people who feel disaffected withdrew their vote for the political establishment. While 93% of voters in Washington, DC voted for Clinton in order to retain their own power structures, the majority of voters across the country want a political new beginning, an economic recovery for the stricken middle class and an end of division in what is still the most powerful country in the world.
 "This election result is encouraging for Germany and for Europe, because Trump really has the cards for political sea-change in his hand. I congratulate Donald Trump on his election victory and on this historic chance....
 "Like Americans, citizens of Germany must have the courage to put a tick in the ballot box and not remain complacent. Their opinion counts, even if political correctness would appear to have elevated the decreed consensus to the level of a new doctrine."
 Beatrix von Storch, an AfD Member of the European Parliament, wrote:
 "Donald Trump's victory is a clear signal that citizens of the Western world want political change. This is a surprise only to the establishment. In the USA as well as Germany, citizens wish for secure borders, less globalism, and politics that focus with common sense on issues in their own country."
 Hungary. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán wrote on Facebook: "What great news. Democracy is still alive."
 Italy. The founder of the anti-establishment 5-Star Movement, Beppe Grillo, hailed Trump's victory. He wrote:
 "This is proof that these millions of demagogues are not the people, they are journalists, intellectuals, anchored to a world that no longer exists. There are similarities between these events in America and our movement.... We are going to govern and they will ask: 'But how did they do it?' They channelled the collective anger."
 The Netherlands. Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders said:
 "America regained its national sovereignty, its identity, it reclaimed its own democracy, that's why I call it a revolution.
 "Now there is a leader, despite all the negativity spread about him by the political elite and the press, that has only one concern, and that is the national interest of the voters of America who are concerned about immigration, who are concerned about the job loss as a result of globalization, who are concerned about the Islamization of their society. And he tends to say the truth and convince people that if they start moving, anything is possible, and I believe the historical event of yesterday will have an enormous effect on European politics as well.
 "The lesson for Europe is, what America can do we can do as well."
 In an essay published by Breitbart, Wilders wrote:
 "Yesterday, the American people made it quite clear that they do not want to follow in Western Europe's footsteps. They do not want to give their country away. They want to preserve their nation, their freedoms, their prosperity. They felt the time for liberation had come.
 "The American voters no longer want to be represented by politicians who do not take their concerns seriously. They felt Donald Trump was the only one who listens to them....
 "America has just liberated itself from political correctness. The American people expressed their desire to remain a free and democratic people. Now it is time for Europe. We can and will do the same!"
 Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter.
 © 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Iran Breaches Nuclear Deal - Again. What's Next?
Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/November 13/16
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9312/iran-breaches-nuclear-deal
President Obama is ignoring Iran's latest violations, and the UN and IAEA reports as well.
In fact, the administration, and State Department spokesman Mark Toner, are defending Iran on this issue, and appear willing to give critical concessions to Iran in the next round of talks in Baghdad this week.
In other words, Iranian leaders would be capable of more freely continuing their nuclear ambition without probing from the IAEA or the international community.
Iran has not yet allowed the IAEA "probes of various high-profile Iranian sites. The International Atomic Energy Agency chief Yukiya Amano is investigating whether Tehran has secretly worked on developing nuclear weapons.
Although the nuclear agreement heavily favors Iran and the main UN Security Council sanctions against Iran have already been lifted, Tehran continues to cheat and violate the terms of this weak nuclear pact.
Turning a blind eye to Iran's violations will only further empower and embolden Tehran to pursue its nuclear and hegemonic ambitions; ignore UN resolutions and international laws; scuttle US foreign policy objectives, and damage security interests.
One of the terms of the JCPOA accord, which never had any legal legitimacy and which Iran never signed, is that Iran should restrict the amount of specific nuclear materials it possesses during the nuclear deal. According to a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), however, Iran has violated the deal by holding more heavy water, used to produce nuclear weapons, than it is supposed to have.
This is not the first time Iran has violated the terms of the flimsy nuclear agreement with no consequences. In February 2016, Iran exceeded its threshold for heavy water as well. In a previous article, other violations and reports of Iran's recent cheating and breaches of the nuclear agreement are laid out.
U.S. President Barack Obama is nevertheless ignoring these latest violations, and the UN and IAEA reports as well. In fact, the administration, and State Department spokesman Mark Toner, are defending Iran on this issue, and appear willing to give critical concessions to Iran in the next round of talks in Baghdad this week.
One of the critical concessions concerns the military dimension of Iran's nuclear program, designed to develop nuclear weapons. IAEA chief Yukiya Amano is investigating whether Tehran has secretly worked on developing nuclear weapons.
The head of the UN nuclear agency flew to Iran to finally put an end to the idea that Iran has plans of developing nuclear arms. Amano pointed out that "I really think this is the right time to reach agreement." However, the IAEA and President Obama appear more than willing to close this investigation.
Closing this investigation means that there would be no monitoring of Iran's nuclear research and development, or of Iran's nuclear facilities, which have long been suspected of being used to develop nuclear weapons. In other words, Iranian leaders would be capable of more freely continuing their nuclear ambitions without probing from the IAEA or the international community.
The closure of this case will also strengthen the hold on power of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the senior cadre of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and Iran's intelligence agencies.
This is all happening while Iran has not yet allowed the IAEA "probes of various high-profile Iranian sites, including the Parchin military complex southeast of Tehran, where the agency believes Iran in 2003 ran explosive tests needed to set off a nuclear charge."
"The suspected blasts took place inside a pressure chamber. Iran has never said whether the chamber existed, but describes Parchin as a conventional military site. Iran, however, has blocked IAEA inspection requests for more than four years. A deal on Parchin could give Iran some leverage going into the Baghdad talks".
Iran is also again masterfully using hardball tactics to get more concessions. The semiofficial Fars news agency, which spreads the IRGC's agenda, said that Amano should "avoid playing for others ground."
In addition, the success of this mission in closing the investigation means that Iran's position will be significantly strengthened against the six world powers (known as P5+1: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States; plus Germany) in the next round of meetings, in Baghdad. Saeed Jalili, Iran's top nuclear negotiator said after arriving in Baghdad late Monday: "We had an agreement in Istanbul. That is the basis for the beginning of a new cooperation. We hope that the talks in Baghdad will be a kind of dialogue that will give shape to such cooperation."
Such an agreement means that despite Iran's significant clandestine nuclear activities and violations, the world powers would be announcing the nonsense that Iran's nuclear program is officially a civilian, not a military one, and that Iran's nuclear program is built for supplying power and medical applications, not developing nuclear weapons.
More importantly, it is unfathomable that despite significant evidence of Iran's clandestine activities over the last decade, and despite many revelations of Iran's secret nuclear activities which were not detected by the IAEA, the IAEA and world powers, in addition to giving more concessions to Tehran, appear willing to reach a fictional agreement that Iran never even desired to develop nuclear weapons.
If an agreement is reached in Baghdad, the remaining sanctions on some sectors of Iran's oil industry and Iranian high-level officials will be lifted. Such a move would allow Iran more easily to use the international banking system while there would be no restrictions on, or investigations of, Iran's high-profile officials who are (or were) engaged in nuclear or non-nuclear violations.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned against concessions, saying that the P5+1 should make "clear and unequivocal demands" that Iran halt all of its nuclear activities. Speaking at a conference in Jerusalem, he added:
"Iran wants to destroy Israel and it is developing nuclear weapons to fulfill that goal... Against this malicious intention, leading world powers need to display determination and not weakness. They should not make any concessions to Iran."
Although the nuclear agreement heavily favors Iran, and the main UN Security Council sanctions against Iran have already been lifted, Tehran continues to cheat and violate the terms of this weak nuclear pact. Turning a blind eye -- by President Obama and other organizations and powers -- to Iran's violations will only further empower and embolden Tehran and its Revolutionary Guards to pursue their nuclear and hegemonic ambitions; ignore UN resolutions and international laws; scuttle US foreign policy objectives, and damage security interests.
**Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, political scientists and Harvard University scholar is president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He can be reached at Dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu.
© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Trump’s first ME military action may target Iran
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis November 12, 2016
Donald Trump's ratings soar in Iranian media too
In more than one campaign speech, President elect Donald Trump declared that his number priority was “to dismantle the disastrous deal” with Iran, which he said was “the worst deal ever” He was referring to the 2015 accord negotiated with Iran by the 5P+1 (five Permanent Security Council members plus Germany), which the Obama administration presented as putting the lid on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.
Trump vowed to use force if necessary to prevent Tehran from acquiring the bomb.
So does Tehran have more to fear from Donald Trump than from Barack Obama in the way of US military intervention? They can’t be sure that he will not set out to show the world – and especially the Iranians - that under his presidency, they can no longer “mess with America.”
debkafile’s Iranian sources report that the ayatollahs are concerned enough to seriously contemplate the following scenario.
The incoming president, after he takes office in the White House on Jan. 20, will act to raise America’s lame image in the Middle East by a surgical strike against an Iranian nuclear facility. One option projected is the blowing up of the Arak heavy water plant for plutonium production at the military complex city of Arak; another would be destroying an Iranian ballistic missile base.
Trump and the Republican-ruled Congress would certainly not tolerate Iranian breaches after America coughed up $150 billion in eased sanctions and released frozen assets.
A Trump administration would be able to marshal seven arguments to justify military action:
1. On Nov. 2, a week before the presidential election, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna reported Iran in violation of the nuclear deal by producing 130.1 tons of heavy water at the Arak plant, 100kg more than allowed. In past cases, the Iranians quickly exported the excess amount. But with a new US president on the way, they may try to use it as a one-ton test of his resolve.
2. In another challenge, Iran is threatening to renege unless more economic benefits are forthcoming.
2. The nuclear restrictions imposed under the deal end in about seven years, when Iran can start going back to its weapons program.
3. Tehran never actually signed the 2014 nuclear deal in the first place. It has remained on paper on three pages as “The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action Regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Nuclear Program” announced in Lausanne on July 14, 2015 by US Secretary of State John Kerry and Iran’s Foreign Minister Muhammed Javad Zarif.
Three days later, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei commented: “Our policy will not change with regard to the arrogant US government.”
4. The document was eventually endorsed by the UN Security Council. This obliged the IAEA to follow up it its presumed commitments by inspections on the ground to confirm Iran’s compliance. However, because much of its content was kept under wraps, American and Iranian obligations have been hard to pin down.
5. The deal’s omissions are a lot clearer. Tehran is not committed to release information on its nuclear program prior to the date of the deal - including how far it had progressed towards a weapon.
6. The nuclear deal did not cover Iran’s long-range ballistic missile program, which continues to develop apace.
Ten months ago, the Obama administration tried to correct this omission by imposing fresh sanctions on Iran unless the program was curtailed. There is no information available up until now as to whether this deterrent worked.
7. US military action against Iran’s nuclear or missile programs may also serve the Trump administration to drive a wedge in the partnership between Moscow and Tehran and draw a new line in the sands of the Middle East. The Russians would certainly not step in by force in Iran’s defense, except for possibly sharing some intelligence. Moscow would be shown as failing to back its ally and therefore secure the gains Vladimir Putin managed to amass in the Middle East when Obama was president.
  
Trump election puts Iran nuclear deal on shaky ground
 Reuters/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
 WASHINGTON - Donald Trump’s election as US president raises the prospect the United States will pull out of the nuclear pact it signed last year with Iran, alienating Wash­ington from its allies and potential­ly freeing Iran to act on its suspect­ed nuclear weapons ambitions.
  US President Barack Obama’s ad­ministration touted the deal, a leg­acy foreign policy achievement, as a way to suspend Tehran’s assumed drive to develop nuclear weap­ons. In return Obama, a Democrat, agreed to lifting most economic sanctions.
  The deal, harshly opposed by Re­publicans in Congress, was reached as a political commitment rather than a treaty ratified by lawmak­ers, making it vulnerable to a new US president, such as Trump, who might disagree with its terms.
  A Republican, Trump ran for the White House opposing the deal but contradictory statements made it unclear how he would act. Trump will succeed Obama on January 20th.
  A businessman-turned-politician who has never held public office, Trump called the nuclear pact a “disaster” and “the worst deal ever negotiated” and said it could lead to a “nuclear holocaust”.
  In a speech to the pro-Israel lobby American Israel Public Affairs Com­mittee (AIPAC) in March, Trump declared that his “number one pri­ority” would be to “dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran”. He said he would have negotiated a better deal, with longer restrictions, but somewhat paradoxically, he criti­cised remaining US sanctions that prevent American companies from dealing with Iran.
  By contrast, he conceded it would be hard to destroy a deal enshrined in a UN resolution. In August 2015, he said he would not “rip up” the nuclear deal but that he would “police that contract so tough they don’t have a chance”. Iran denies ever having considered developing nuclear weapons but experts said any US violation of the deal would allow Iran to pull back from its com­mitments to curb nuclear develop­ment.
  Those commitments include re­ducing the number of centrifuges by two-thirds, capping its level of uranium enrichment well below the level needed for bomb-grade material, reducing its enriched ura­nium stockpile from around 10,000 kg to 300 kg for 15 years and sub­mitting to international inspections to verify its compliance.
  “Say goodbye to the Iran deal,” said Richard Nephew, a former US negotiator with Iran now at Colum­bia University.
  “There is very little likelihood that it stays, either because of a deliberate decision to tear it up by Trump or steps that the US takes that prompt an Iranian walk back.”
  Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokes­man of the Atomic Energy Organi­sation of Iran, was quoted as saying by Tasnim news agency: “Iran is prepared for any change.” He added that Iran would try to stand by the deal.
  The nuclear deal was divisive in Iran, with hardliners opposed to better relations with the West argu­ing that pragmatist Iranian Presi­dent Hassan Rohani was giving up too much of the country’s nuclear infrastructure for too little relief.
  Rohani said the US election re­sults would have no effect on Teh­ran’s policies, state news agency IRNA quoted him as saying.
  Some of Washington’s closest Middle East allies have been scepti­cal of the nuclear deal. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has been outright hostile. Gulf leaders say the deal emboldened Iran’s pur­suit of regional hegemony in part through support for proxy groups fuelling regional conflicts.
  Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatol­lah Ali Khamenei, whose power su­persedes that of Rohani, regularly criticises the United States and says it should not be trusted but ulti­mately assented to the terms of the deal, known as the Joint Compre­hensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
  “The big winner in the aftermath of a Trump victory is Iran’s supreme leader,” said Suzanne Maloney, a foreign policy expert at the Brook­ings Institution.
  “He will have the most cartoon­ish American enemy, he will exult in the (hopefully brief) crash of the American economy and he will be able to walk away from Iran’s obli­gations under the JCPOA while pin­ning the responsibility on Washing­ton.”
  Further complicating any Trump effort to renegotiate the deal is that it is a multilateral agreement in­volving US allies in Europe as well as fellow world powers Russia and China. European and Asian firms have been returning to Iran and making major investments there, meaning the United States would likely be alone in pulling out of the deal, possibly isolating it from its partners.
  The head of gas, renewables and power for French oil and gas com­pany Total TOTF.PA in Iran said Trump’s election would have no ef­fect on investments.
  Khamenei has promised to “set fire” to the nuclear deal if the West violates it. Iran has repeatedly complained it has not received the benefits promised. Though Euro­pean companies have been eager to explore business prospects in Iran, few deals have been enacted, in part because European banks have been reluctant to finance deals in­volving Iran.
  “As to whether he can negotiate a ‘better’ deal, it takes two (or seven) sides to agree to begin that process, something I rate as highly unlikely,” said Zachary Goldman, executive director of the Center on Law and Security at New York University and a former US Treasury official.
  “And if we walk away from the deal I think we will be in the worst of all worlds. Iran will feel freed from its commitments and we may be blamed for the deal falling apart.”
  
Trump victory heralds US Mideast policy shake-up
 Thomas Seibert/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
  WASHINGTON - The United States and the Middle East are enter­ing a new era with US President-elect Donald Trump expected to shake up key policy positions, including a decidedly pro-Israeli course and a tougher line on Iran.
  Speaking after a tumultuous election campaign dotted with vague and sometimes contradic­tory foreign policy statements, Trump said his administration would not seek adventure or con­flict abroad.
  “While we will always put Ameri­ca’s interests first, we will deal fairly with everyone… all people and all other nations,” Trump said. “We will seek common ground, not hos­tility; partnership, not conflict.”
  In the first concrete sign that Washington’s Middle East policy is in for a change, Trump invited Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for talks in the United States “at the first opportunity”, Netanyahu’s office said.
  The invitation, coming after years of estrangement between the United States and Israel, suggests that the new administration is seeking to repair ties with a crucial ally in the region.
  “Israel is the one true democ­racy and defender of human rights in the Middle East and a beacon of hope to countless people,” Trump said in a message published by the Hayom newspaper. He added that he hoped his administration would play a “significant role in helping the parties to achieve a just, lasting peace”, saying that any deal would have to be directly negotiated be­tween the two sides.
  Trump did not send a similar message to the Palestinian side.
  The president elect’s allegations that Washington’s partners in the Gulf were not paying enough for their own defence and his anti- Muslim rhetoric during the cam­paign are likely to trigger concerns among traditional Muslim US allies in the region.
  The same goes for his position on Syria. During the campaign, Trump promised he would work closer with Russia to defeat the Is­lamic State (ISIS) in Syria as quick­ly as possible but said he would not put much pressure on Syria’s President Bashar Assad, seen by the West and America’s allies in the Middle East as the man respon­sible for Syria’s war that has killed at least 400,000 people since 2011. During one of the debates during the campaign, Trump dismissed a suggestion by his running mate, Mike Pence, that the United States could use military force against the Syrian government.
  Trump also claimed he would tear up the nuclear deal between world powers and Iran, arguing that the agreement was a “disas­ter” that had made Tehran strong­er in the region. Should Trump act on his pronouncements after his inauguration on January 20th, the early phase of his presidency could see new tensions with Iran. Teh­ran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the United States would be “unwise” to abandon the nuclear deal worked out under President Barack Obama.
  Supporters of a hard line towards Iran include politicians named as contenders to fill major cabinet posts shaping future US Middle East policy. News reports said can­didates for the office of secretary of State include Newt Gingrich, a for­mer speaker of the House of Repre­sentatives, and John Bolton, a for­mer US ambassador at the United Nations. Both Gingrich and Bolton have stated opposition to the Iran deal and are strongly pro-Israel.

Israel should give peace a chance
 Claude Salhani/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
  The election of Donald Trump as president of the United States opens an opportunity for an American president to give peacemaking in the Middle East another chance.
  It has been quite a few years since the United States has tried to mediate in the Palestinian issue in any serious manner — not since US President Barack Obama’s first term in office when he attempted to find an accept­able solution to the Israeli-Pales­tinian dispute. However, Obama quickly lost interest when he realised the intricacies that dominate the crisis.
  However, with a new president comes a new opportunity. Trump, being an outsider from the traditional crop of official US peace negotiators, heads to the White House with no pre-existing baggage on that issue. He would go to negotiations with no preconditions and, it can be hoped, with no biases. And let us hope he can apply the prestige of the United States to help him convince the antagonists to adhere to the same principles.
  Trump, who has a full agenda for the first 100 days of his administration, has concentrated nearly all his efforts on domestic issues, mostly ignoring foreign politics and policies.
  The unsolved Israeli-Palestin­ian dispute lies at the root of all troubles in the region.
  Arabs and Israelis have fought, on average, one major war every decade since 1948, the date of the founding of the Jewish state in British Mandate Palestine. As wars go, most of those fought between Israel and its Arab neighbours were avoidable and unnecessary. The exception was the October 1973 war.
  Arabs and Israelis have a hard time agreeing on just about anything and that includes the name given to that war. Arabs call it the October war, or Harb Teshrin or Harb Ramadan, after the Muslim holy month that coincided with the start of hostilities. In Israel, the war is known as the Yom Kippur war, as it began on the Day of Atone­ment, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar.
  Why is this war so different and important to the Arabs? To understand the implications of the October war, one needs to examine the general mood that existed in the region after the June 1967 war, also known as the Six-Day war.
  As tensions rose in the Middle East following a series of exchanges and a threat in May 1967 from Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser to close the Strait of Tiran to Israeli shipping, a move that would have choked its southern port of Eilat. Israel launched a pre-emptive strike. Flying from the west to evade Egyptian radar, Israeli warplanes attacked Egypt’s military air­fields, decimating the country’s air force in a few hours.
  Over the course of six days of heavy fighting Israel captured the Sinai peninsula as well as the Gaza Strip, which had been under Egyptian administration. They took Arab East Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan, before turning attention to capture the Golan Heights from Syria.
  Efforts by the United States and the Soviet Union to bring about a ceasefire were eventually successful. The devastating Arab defeat on the battlefields demor­alised the Arab world.
  Before any talk of lasting peace, before Arabs and Israelis could sit face-to-face and negotiate a peaceful settlement to the conflict, morale and prestige in the Arab world needed to be lifted. The sense of defeat in the Arab world had to be erased.
  Thus, the necessity of the October war. Launched as a surprise attack by Egypt and Syria, it lasted 18 days, during which the Arab side lost more than 2,000 tanks and close to 500 warplanes. Israel lost 804 tanks and 114 planes. The cost was estimated at $20 billion — about $111.3 billion in today’s money.
  Although technically an Arab defeat, the October war was celebrated as a victory by both sides. Egypt and Syria renamed bridges and avenues and newspa­pers after the war.
  For the Arabs, the war was of particular importance as it shattered decades of belief that Israel was a military giant, an impenetrable fortress, incapable of losing a war and that its spy agency, the Mossad, was infalli­ble. It was never believed that the Arabs could prepare and launch such a large-scale operation without the Israelis knowing about it. Yet they did.
  The crossing of the Suez Canal and the taking of the Bar Lev Line was a major victory for the Egyptian Army and served as a huge morale booster for the Arab world.
  In Israel, the mood was quite different. Israeli leaders and heroes of the 1948 war of inde­pendence and of the June 1967 war were questioned by the public, which demanded to know how this could happen. Iconic fig­ures such as minister of Defence Moshe Dayan and prime minister Golda Meir were suddenly on the defensive.
  It was largely these elements, the bittersweet victories and defeats, that helped pave the way towards negotiations and an Israeli peaceful settlement with Egypt and the establishment of diplomatic and commercial relations with other Arab coun­tries. The reality that there could be no alternative to peace through negotiations began to sink in.
  The Arabs realised that Israel, despite its initial successes, could not be completely defeated but Israel realised that it could.
  Yet, despite the realisation that armed conflict would not bring about a settlement in the region, despite all the wars of the past and the tragedies unleashed by continuing wars in the region, Israel is still heavily arming, expanding settlements and hesitant to give peace with the Palestinians a real chance.
  Is it not about time Israel gave the peace option a chance? Or is it waiting for another autumn war?
 Claude Salhani is the Opinion section editor of The Arab Weekly.
 
Assad’s public relations offensive
 James Denselow/The Arab Weekly/November 13/16
  While Syria President Bashar Assad’s forces and his array of allies continue to squeeze eastern Aleppo, the regime is looking to go on a public relations offensive. In recent weeks Assad and his representatives have been appearing far more frequently on Western media outlets, includ­ing the first appearance of his wife Asma Assad in a television interview in more than eight years.
In late October, several foreign journalists were granted meet­ings with Assad and even taken to the front lines of Aleppo. However, too often the ques­tions from experienced and respected journalists fail to get through the armour of regime rhetoric.
Why is this the case? Whether addressing the BBC, the Associ­ated Press or other media, the consistency of messaging as well as a tendency to completely ignore the questions has seen the regime come out unscathed from difficult interviews. The Syrian government’s media strategy relies on a number of components and needs to be better understood for media outlets to better plan interview questions accordingly; other­wise, they risk giving Damascus a propaganda tool.
  The first thing to understand is that consistency works best with simple messaging. The vast array of opposition elements and their different ideologies, values and motivations have made it impossible to simply paint the picture of anti-Assad forces as “the good guys”.
  Also the opposition has been divided into the value-laden concepts of “moderates” and “extremists”, which has become hostage to a counteroffensive that purports to be showing “moderates” committing “extreme” acts. A diverse and complicated opposition is a stark contrast to the stately image that the regime seeks to present: that it is the state and it is fighting terrorists supported by a cabal of external actors.
  So the regime messaging is simple and consistent, what about the messengers? Bouthaina Shaaban was once a translator to former president Hafez Assad and is now a senior adviser to President Bashar Assad and one of the most frequently seen spokeswomen of the regime. Her style when being interviewed is a fascinating insight into the regime’s commu­nication strategy.
  First, she tends to speak against a backdrop of busy Damascene traffic, a sign of normality and business as usual. Then, as journalists often start off with accusatory questions such as “Why are you dropping barrel bombs?” or “Did you use chlorine on civilian targets?” her instant response is horror that the Syrian government is being unjustly accused and that she is a guest being abused by a rude media host.
  The most common tactic that Shaaban relies upon is that she is in Syria and they are not, so how dare they presume to know what they are speaking about.
  In a recent interview with the UK’s Channel Four news these tactics were evident when Shaaban explained: “I am the one living in Syria. Please don’t lecture me from London.”
  She also said that she does not “believe any of those reports” from people who are not on the ground and that the “reports are irrelevant to our reality”.
  The fact that the regime limits media access into the country and that in non-regime con­trolled areas there is no place more dangerous to be a journal­ist are irrelevant to this mode of aggressive defence.
  Bashar Assad tends to give long prerecorded interviews with big names from print and television. The interviews often come across as quasi-academic discussions as Assad talks softly at length as to the situation as he sees it. While Shaaban raises her voice and interrupts her inter­viewers, Assad is a model of calm and almost laughs off awkward questions as when he told the BBC in 2015 that “There’s no barrel bombs. We don’t have barrels.”
  So what kind of questions would disrupt regime messaging and messengers?
  The first thing to explore is a better defining of terms. What, for example, are Assad’s defini­tions of “civil war” and “terror­ism” and does he think there is such a thing as “state terrorism”?
  Another option is to question his regular excuses such as blaming Turkey and other countries for the situation. Why did he previously go on holiday with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and have good relations with Ankara? What has changed?
  It would be interesting to ask why Syria is not giving financial support to UN agencies looking after Syrian refugees and to see if Assad has any empathy or feeling for those who have been forced from the country.
  Finally, showing proof during an interview, such as rejected UN requests for aid access, could force Assad out of the bubble of his own reality.
  So far the best question I’ve seen raised was by Newsnight’s Evan Davis, who simply asked “What is the biggest mistake the regime has made?” Shaaban smiled sweetly before avoiding the question entirely.
  Davis asked the perfect question to a regime that relies on a consistent but essentially false narrative that it holds no responsibility for the tragedy that has blighted the country.

Trump files: The region’s conflicts
 Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/November 13/16
 Most American presidents have dedicated a chapter in their diaries to their role in resolving crises in the Middle East. President Barack Obama has two books which will be released. Jeffrey Goldberg, who has long accompanied Obama, is working on one of them.
 President-elect Donald Trump also confronts many conflicts in the Middle East, the number of which the US has perhaps not known since the days of Dwight Eisenhower during World War II. There are many wars and ongoing turmoil, so will Trump adopt the policy of his predecessor, Obama, and refuse to manage crises or will he resort to other proposals made by leaders of his Republican parties, such as those suggested by Senator John McCain who calls for intervening and not letting chaos and terrorism threaten the world and the security of the US? Current crises are the result of the collapse of the international balance of power which was established after WWII and as a result of the nuclear agreement with Iran.
 When he was inaugurated eight years ago, Obama launched his era with encouraging change in the Middle East but he changed his mind when the winds of change blew and chose a seat among the audience. In 2009, when he delivered two famous speeches in Istanbul and Cairo about openness and moderation, demonstrations erupted in Tehran to protest against the flawed presidential elections and calling for openness. The authorities in Tehran confronted these protests with persecution and murder and the American administration did not do anything such as tighten sanctions or impose new ones to confront the situation. Two years later, uprisings erupted in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Yemen. The administration once again adopted a stance in support of change but then it practiced the same policy of observing developments from afar. When the crises worsened, the Obama administration chose to favor Islamic groups in Tunisia, Egypt and Iraq, all at the expense of aspirational civil society.
 Escalating price
 The president-elect may sit and watch the chaos like Obama did but the price will only become higher and the threats will only expand. Wars and the activity of terrorist organizations may increase and the humanitarian disaster will worsen. The possible chaos that may erupt in Iraq threatens 10 million people. It’s also possible that millions more will be displaced from Syria, in addition to the 12 million who are currently displaced. Chaos may expand and reach stable areas. Developments have proven that the American policy of isolation towards the Syrian crisis is erroneous and it has cost the US and the world a lot.
 The president-elect may sit and watch the chaos like Obama did but the price will only become higher and the threats will only expand
 What’s noticeable regarding the current wars in Syria, Yemen and part of Iraq is that they have one thing in common and it is Iranian military intervention. Iran’s role has escalated as a result of ending the “policy of containment” which prevented the regime from expanding beyond its borders. Consecutive American governments adopted this policy in response to Iran’s foreign terrorist activity which reached Europe and Latin America. However, as a result of the nuclear agreement in favor of Iran, restraints on the latter’s foreign activities were cancelled. Instead of having Iranian celebrities who play football or music, we have generals in the Revolutionary Guards taking pictures as they participate in the fighting in conflict zones in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon.
 So will Trump’s administration draw limits on Iranian chaos or will it continue to adopt Obama’s policy of isolationism? Is it possible to revive the alliance of moderate countries with the US which used to include Gulf countries, Egypt and Jordan, as it’s been attributed to Trump’s advisors? And later, will it be possible to propose a collective project for the region to stop chaos, restore stability and prevent regional intervention? Does the president-elect desire to restore Iraq, a country in which change cost the US 4,000 American troops and a trillion dollars? Washington is expected to refuse Iran’s interventions and to insist on Iraq’s independence and sovereignty so it can become a free state that does not submit to the directions of religious clerics or the leadership of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.
 However, why do we expect Trump to reform the region when he criticized the invasion of Iraq? The reason lies in the significance of his country’s higher interests, including the ones related to economy and security. Iran, and not Washington and certainly not Baghdad, is currently reaping the fruits of that invasion. Supporting Libya’s unity and stability will prevent the collapse of North Africa, decrease threats in southern Europe and pave the way toward the openingof huge economic markets.
 During the past six years, Obama’s government tried to ignore these crises and the result is that threats were aggravated. The new administration cannot continue to adopt the same ideas which led to the worst tragedies in the region.
 *This article was first published in Asharq al-Awsat on Nov. 13, 2016.
  
On Trump-phobia
 Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/November 13/16
 Arab lamentation and some people’s grief over Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election is all due to the statements which Trump made during his election campaign. The president-elect had made statements against African Americans, Latinos, Mexicans and Muslims. However, now that he’s been elected, he will be everyone’s president and he will govern according to law.  It’s necessary to differentiate between Trump during the election campaign and Trump after being elected president.  The road to the White House has a lot of turns which obligate one to adapt to successfully achieve goals.  When it comes to election campaigns, there are certain formulas; escalation against black people gains the support of white fanatics while accusations against Muslims attract Evangelical voters. The issue is not related to an electoral agenda but was rather a pattern of propaganda against Hillary Clinton who was guaranteed the votes of the minorities. It’s all about calculations and each statement achieved a certain electoral gain. However, after victory is achieved, all this ends as they turn over a new leaf. This seems obvious from the speech which Trump delivered after he won and from the statements which he’s made since then.  Trump’s foreign policy advisor Walid Phares confirmed Trump’s desire to strengthen historical ties with Saudi Arabia and to make every effort to implement the proposal for a Gulf-American partnership in the region to confront terrorism and Iranian expansion. Phares also confirmed Trump’s desire to increase sanctions against Hezbollah and besiege it on all levels.  Trump’s foreign policy advisor Walid Phares confirmed Trump’s desire to strengthen historical ties with Saudi Arabia
 Excessive optimism or pessimism is not welcome in political realism.  Barack Obama’s presidential terms brought our region nothing but hesitance toward the Iranian axis, while flirting with it and rewarding it, and strictness toward the Gulf axis, while evading agreements. So let him go as no one will weep about his White House departure!  This article was first published in Okaz on Nov. 13, 2016.
  
Between candidate Trump’s promises and President Trump’s policies
 Raghida Dergham/Al Arabiya/November 13/16
 US President-elect Donald Trump will implement his promises of change that won him the election by papering over all the scandals that have surrounded his name on the campaign trail. However, this does not mean that he will deliver all his electoral promises, domestic or international, because there will be a huge difference between Donald the candidate and President Trump. The business tycoon who plastered the gilded letters of his name on buildings, casinos and resorts has reinvented his image from The Donald brand to the Mr. Trump brand in preparation for the world’s most powerful job. Donald Trump has taught the elites who mocked him a tough lesson and used populism to exact his revenge. He has given the protest vote a new face as he challenged the political and business establishment. Trump toppled two families that nearly became ruling dynasties, the Bushes and Clintons. He forced the major two parties, the Republican and Democratic parties, to check their assumption that they had a right to dominate the US political process and forced them to engage in serious soul searching. Trump exposed pollsters and the media, most of which sided against him by default, ashamed of the idea of a man like him becoming president. Trump relied on his arbitrariness, stunts and shock tactics to bedazzle supporters and awe opponents. Yet ultimately, Trump’s winning ticket was not the majority Electoral College votes he secured, but his profound understanding of the American people’s thirst for any kind of change. So what kind of change will the president-elect bring to the home front and the international arena? Will Trump’s presidency be autarchic, like his march to the White House had been; or will the president turn against his own character as candidate and mogul, after hearing classified national security briefings and the closely guarded secrets of the ruling establishment?
 The election practically served as a referendum on the performance of the incumbent president, Barack Obama, and on a third term for the Democrats under former secretary of state and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. It may be possible here that the involvement of Barack and Michelle Obama in Hillary’s campaign backfired in this context.
 The distrust felt toward Hillary Clinton as a result of the FBI’s investigation into her email scandals was also a key factor in the elections, along with the history of scandals and corruption allegations surrounding the Clintons.
 Some say that America’s whites decided to revolt against the election of their country’s first black president, Barack Obama, and his African and Islamic routes, by rallying behind Donald Trump’s racist, anti-Muslim and anti-Hispanic rhetoric.
 Actions speak louder than words
 If the president-elect persists in his exclusionist social and political discourse, divisions in the US will deepen and the social contract based on coexistence and equal rights could be further eroded. In that case, Donald Trump will quickly earn himself a reputation for fragmenting America and her standing, in a way that only serves to help the enemies of this longstanding democracy. It would also usher in an era of rapid American decline. And while President-elect Donald Trump’s acceptance speech was reassuring, it is the deeds not the words that will count.
 Donald Trump has explained his foreign policy priorities, many of which sidestep assumed constants of traditional US thinking
 Realistically speaking, it will be difficult for the president-elect to fulfill all his electoral promises. The plan to deport 10 million undocumented immigrants would be no picnic and building a wall with Mexico paid for by Mexico could be a pipe dream. Repealing the Affordable Healthcare Act (Obamacare), increasing interest rates, and tax cuts could instead be his top priority. Internationally, Trump’s pledge to withdraw from NAFTA and reconsider ties with NATO could have huge economic and political consequences that Trump himself may balk at at the start of his four-year term.  President-elect Donald Trump will probably not fulfill his vows to repeal the nuclear deal with Iran. But unlike Obama, he will not hold hostage his person, his principles and his policies to the deal. He will put Tehran under a microscope and will not back off before its implicit threats to suspend the deal, which he sees as unfair to US interests.
 The expected change in US-Iranian relations under Trump, however, will not be a total about-face from Obama’s policy, yet it would not be a fleeting development. Perhaps the difference between Obama’s policy, which clashed with those of the Gulf countries led by Saudi Arabia over Iran, and Trump’s policy’s is that the latter is expected to place Iran and the Gulf on equal footing in terms of US priorities.
 This doesn’t mean at all that Trump will rush to espouse the Gulf’s perspective and antagonize Iran. Rather, there will be equitable levels of non-enthusiasm and indifference shown to both sides.
 The best case scenario would be for Trump’s approach to lead to disengagement from the sectarian wars between Sunnis and Shiites. Trump has no interest in Muslims in general and may decide that previous administrations’ policies that benefited from sectarian wars are no longer needed. That is, if the establishment permits this.
 Trump’s policies in the region
 Iran will be present in Trump’s policies from the Russian and Syrian angles. Trump could be made to believe by Russia’s Putin that Iran is fighting a war on their behalf against ISIS and terrorism. If that happens, and the Gulf countries fail to prove they are real partners in the war against ISIS and terrorism, Tehran will win and gain a special position with the Trump administration and the Gulf powers will regret not having preempted this by occupying a position on the president-elect’s list of priorities. It is time the Gulf countries look past Trump’s Islamophobic rhetoric, which Tehran has not paid attention to, when developing their stance.
 Donald Trump has explained his foreign policy priorities, many of which sidestep assumed constants of traditional US thinking. But regardless of whether he will carry those pledges to the White House with him or not, it is important to analyze worst-case scenarios in order to draft better policies. Syria is a good example, but not necessarily Iraq.
 Indeed, Iraq will continue to be locked into the battle for Mosul under Trump, if it is not concluded before his inauguration, a battle that needs to be settled against ISIS under any kind of partnership.
 But the extra time between today and mid-January could see radical developments in the battle for Aleppo, whose outcome is not yet clear. Russia, Iran, and Turkey are extremely important in that battle. The biggest loser when it comes to Trump’s victory seems to be the moderate Syrian rebels, backed by Gulf countries and Turkey. However, Turkey has a different position on the Syrian battlefield, being a key player and a NATO member, as Trump proceeds to formulate his stance on the Gulf and Turkish players.
 One of the biggest concerns has to do with the relationship between Trump and Vladimir Putin, who has all but endorsed him. Putin greatly benefited from Barack Obama’s isolationism and acted arrogantly toward the US perceived decline. Trump will not accept that kind of treatment. He is proud of the America he wants to build, but not the America he inherited from Barack Obama – perceived as weak and bereft of its moral high ground that once distinguished its global leadership.
 The others’ wars that he inherits will not matter much to Donald Trump, who does not care who wins in Syria, whether Yemen’s civil wars continue, or if Iran is caught in a quagmire that loses it its regional influence. He will not fight others’ wars and in this he is similar to Obama, this is perhaps their only common trait.
 Remaining vigilant
 Until Donald Trump develops his policies and forms his administration, the world will remain vigilant for surprises from the man of surprises. There was clear upheaval following the electoral process in the markets, as the world reacted with fear towards Trump’s presidency’s anticipated isolationism and unpredictability.  The question that no one has been able to answer yet is what kind of change, inevitable under Trump, will the president-elect bring to America and her foreign relations?
 What happens to men when they take power is intriguing. Many assume the manners of their posts and divorce the modesty they had shown during the campaign. But Donald Trump never pretended to be modest, dealing with his foes with arrogance and persistently marched to the White House with a sense of overconfidence. So the hope would be for him to be ready to lead the American superpower with seriousness, modesty and soberness.
 **This article was first published in al-Hayat on Nov. 11, 2016 and translated by Karim Traboulsi.