LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

October 29/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

 

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site

http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletin16/english.october29.16.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

You fool! This very night your life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?

Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 12/13-21/:”Someone in the crowd said to him, ‘Teacher, tell my brother to divide the family inheritance with me.’But he said to him, ‘Friend, who set me to be a judge or arbitrator over you?’And he said to them, ‘Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions.’Then he told them a parable: ‘The land of a rich man produced abundantly. And he thought to himself, “What should I do, for I have no place to store my crops?” Then he said, “I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.”But God said to him, “You fool! This very night your life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?” So it is with those who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich towards God.’

 

 The uncovering and failure of the Jews’ Conspiracy to Kill Paul

Acts of the Apostles 23/12-22/:”In the morning the Jews joined in a conspiracy and bound themselves by an oath neither to eat nor drink until they had killed Paul. There were more than forty who joined in this conspiracy. They went to the chief priests and elders and said, ‘We have strictly bound ourselves by an oath to taste no food until we have killed Paul. Now then, you and the council must notify the tribune to bring him down to you, on the pretext that you want to make a more thorough examination of his case. And we are ready to do away with him before he arrives.’Now the son of Paul’s sister heard about the ambush; so he went and gained entrance to the barracks and told Paul. Paul called one of the centurions and said, ‘Take this young man to the tribune, for he has something to report to him.’So he took him, brought him to the tribune, and said, ‘The prisoner Paul called me and asked me to bring this young man to you; he has something to tell you.’ The tribune took him by the hand, drew him aside privately, and asked, ‘What is it that you have to report to me?’ He answered, ‘The Jews have agreed to ask you to bring Paul down to the council tomorrow, as though they were going to inquire more thoroughly into his case. But do not be persuaded by them, for more than forty of their men are lying in ambush for him. They have bound themselves by an oath neither to eat nor drink until they kill him. They are ready now and are waiting for your consent.’ So the tribune dismissed the young man, ordering him, ‘Tell no one that you have informed me of this.’”

Twitter

 

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on October 28-29/16

Aoun, a Bridge for Whom?/Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Al Sharq Al Awsat/October 29/16

Hariri: I extend my hand to all factions in Lebanon/Hanan Khaled/The Daily Star/October 28/16/

Hariri: Backing Aoun aims to foil Hezbollah obstruction/Hussein Dakroub/The Daily Star/October 29/16

Aoun’s Path to Baabda: Wars and Reconciliations/Thaer Abbas/Asharq Al Awsat/October 28/18

Lebanon’s Cabinet Holds Last Session, Saudi Delegation in Beirut ahead of Presidential Polls/Asharq Al-Awsat/October 28/16

A Renewed Disruptive Opposition/Ahmad El-Assaad/ October 27, 2016/

Beginning of a ‘new era’ in Lebanon/Nayla Tueni/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

Al-Hariri's Choice Of Hizbullah Ally Aoun For Lebanese Presidency Is Another March 14 Forces Concession To Pro-Iran Axis/By: E.B. Picali and Y. Yehoshua/MEMRI/October 28/16

Subhi Al-Tufayli Criticizes Intervention In Syria, Says Shi'ites Must Reach Understanding With All Sunnis And Confront West, Russia, 'Israeli Enemy/MEMRI/October 28/16

The New Anti-Racist Racists/Douglas Murray/Gatestone Institute/October 28/16

Muslim Imperialism Reaches the United Nations/Denis MacEoin/Gatestone Institute/October 29/16

What’s next for the refugees of Calais/Yara al-Wazir/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

When ‘genocide’ unfolds in the backyard of a Nobel laureate/Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

Obama’s inheritance in the Middle East/Hisham Melhem/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

A complicated and ignorant man/Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on on October 28-29/16

 A Guide to Presidential Elections in Lebanon

Lebanon to Elect President but Divisions Run Deep

Aoun, a Bridge for Whom?

Hariri: I extend my hand to all factions in Lebanon

Aoun wins Jumblatt's support for presidency

Hariri: Backing Aoun aims to foil Hezbollah obstruction

Qaouq: Saudi Sanctions against Hizbullah have Failed to Weaken the Party

Report: Negotiaions Underway to Convince Franjieh to Withdraw from Presidential Race

Report: Hizbullah Has not Named Hariri for Premiership as Yet

Saudi Envoy Meets Hariri, Aoun, Jumblat, Geagea on 2nd Day of Lebanon Visit

Aoun’s Path to Baabda: Wars and Reconciliations

Saudi envoy Saudi Arabia’s Arab Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer al-Sabhan meets top officials during second day of visit to Lebanon

Saudi envoy meets top officials during second day of visit to Lebanon

Lebanon’s Cabinet Holds Last Session, Saudi Delegation in Beirut ahead of Presidential Polls

Rahi Welcomes Hariri as 'Man of Courage,' and Hariri Says a New Leaf Will Begin Monday

Presidential Polls Top Talks between Salam, Hariri and Franjieh

Future bloc reiterates support for Aoun to maintain Lebanon's interests

Lebanon’s kingmaker Jumblatt secures 8 votes for Aoun

A Renewed Disruptive Opposition

Beginning of a ‘new era’ in Lebanon?

Al-Hariri's Choice Of Hizbullah Ally Aoun For Lebanese Presidency Is Another March 14 Forces Concession To Pro-Iran Axis

Subhi Al-Tufayli Criticizes Intervention In Syria, Says Shi'ites Must Reach Understanding With All Sunnis And Confront West, Russia, 'Israeli Enemy

 

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on on October 28-29/16
Syrian airstrikes on Aleppo amid intense clashes

Spokesman: Iraq’s PMU to enter Syria to aid Assad after Mosul

Russia Seeks to Stop Jihadists from Fleeing Mosul

Roadside Bomb Kills 2 Soldiers, Injuries 4 Others in Sinai

Coalition Strikes Kill at Least 10 Yemen Civilians

US Says Syrian Regime Using Starvation as 'Weapon of War'

Iraq Forces Launch Operation to Cut Mosul off from Syria

Hillary Rodham Clinton: The Unloved Politician

Clinton Faces FBI Probe as Race Enters Final 10 Days

Palestinian Attacker Shot by Israeli Troops

Gaza Flotilla Raid Victims' Kin Vow Legal Battle against Israel

Iran: Protest gathering of thousands from across the country at Cyrus' tomb

Reza Akbari Monfared writes revealing letter to Asma Jahangir

Egypt’s PM in Red Sea after floods kill 18

What we know on missile launched at Makkah 

Links From Jihad Watch Site for on October 28-29/16
Northwestern University prof: Christian fundamentalism more dangerous than Islamic terrorism
HuffPo Germany: Fake passports are not a crime
Germany: Muslim children screaming “Allahu akbar” throw stones at Ethiopian priest
UK: Muslim couple on way to Syria stopped at airport, arrested by counterterror cops
UK: Muslim doctor beat teen daughter for staying at male friend’s house after Halloween party
Nigeria: Muslims murder over 800 Christians, injure over 800 more, destroy over 100 churches
Hillary Clinton accepts cash from Hamas-linked CAIR, leads 2016 list of pols getting money from Islamic supremacists
Selective outrage: Leftist, atheist critics of Islam enraged that SPLC hit list of Islam critics includes leftists and atheists
Clinton eyes Biden, who said “ISIS has nothing to do with Islam,” as her Secretary of State
Kosovo: Muslims turn Orthodox Christian chapel into public toilet
Human rights group: “ISIS controls schools in Upper Egypt”
Raymond Ibrahim: Pope Francis’ Song and Dance with Islam

Links From Christian Today Site for on October 28-29/16
 Pope Francis Accepts Invitation From South Sudan Church Leaders To Visit War-Torn Nation
ISIS Abduct 'Tens Of Thousands' To Use As Human Shields In Mosul
ISIS Genocide Must Be Punished In Court - Leading European Politicians
Three Places That Need Your Prayers This Weekend
Why Are English Cathedrals So Successful? Government Minister Begins Grand Tour To Find Out
Why Do Politicians Ignore What The Public Really Thinks About Abortion?
Lifeway Withdraws Books By Christian Author Who Says Gay People 'Are Brothers And Sisters In Christ'
Defrock Me Too, Says Colleague Of Atheist Minister Gretta Vosper
Cuba's Crackdown Continues: Pastor Under House Arrest For Loud Worship Services

Latest Lebanese Related News published on on October 28-29/16

A Guide to Presidential Elections in Lebanon

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/Lebanon's parliament is set to end more than two years of stalemate on Monday by electing a new president for a non-renewable six-year term. The post is always held by a Maronite Christian under a power-sharing agreement dating back to independence in 1943. According to the same deal, the head of parliament is always a Shiite Muslim and the prime minister a Sunni Muslim. The president plays the role of a referee, but his power has been limited in a system based on a delicate balance between Lebanon's different communities.

The vote

Speaker Nabih Berri has summoned lawmakers on October 31 for the vote, which will go ahead if a quorum of two-thirds is reached. The 128-member legislature counts 127 lawmakers at the moment after one member resigned over the summer. The successful candidate wins the vote with a majority of two-thirds in the first round, or with an absolute majority in the next rounds.

Powers curtailed

The only Christian head of state in the Arab world saw his powers curtailed after the 1989 Taef agreement to end the 1975-1990 civil war. Under the accord, which sought to balance power between Lebanon's Christian and Muslim communities, the president can no longer appoint and dismiss the prime minister or dissolve parliament. He names the premier after consulting parliament.  The president heads the armed forces, but these also come under the authority of the cabinet. He negotiates international treaties along with the prime minister, but these also need approval from government. He presides over cabinet meetings and can introduce an urgent matter to be discussed, but does not take part in any cabinet vote. If the premier agrees, the president can convene an extraordinary cabinet meeting. Forming a cabinet once elected, the president names a prime minister who is tasked with consulting Lebanon's different political parties to form a cabinet. As the constitution does not specify a timeline for this, it took the best part of a year before Prime Minister Tamam Salam's cabinet was finally approved in March 2014. But the parliament does have to hold a vote of confidence in the new cabinet within 30 days after the line-up is announced.

 

Lebanon to Elect President but Divisions Run Deep

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/Lebanon's parliament is set to end more than two years of stalemate on Monday by electing ex-general Michel Aoun as president, but the vote is unlikely to heal deep political divisions. Aoun, a Christian former army chief, is allied with the Iran-backed Hizbullah movement whose forces are fighting in Syria alongside President Bashar Assad's government. But his election has been made possible by the surprise endorsement of former prime minister Saad Hariri, a fierce opponent of Syria's government and head of a bloc that is Hizbullah's key rival and has received regional support from Saudi Arabia. So, while a deal has been made on the country's next president, analysts say Lebanon's key political blocs still disagree on almost everything else. Aoun is expected to nominate Hariri to return as prime minister, but with little consensus in the political landscape, the process of forming a government is likely to be long and arduous. "Aoun's election is not a magic wand," said Sahar Atrache, a researcher at the International Crisis Group think tank. "Certainly the presidential vacancy will end, but it doesn't solve the political crisis, or the stagnant political institutions or the major divisions over domestic and foreign issues, particularly the war in Syria," she told AFP.

'No common ground'

Under a power-sharing agreement, Lebanon's presidency is reserved for a Maronite Christian while the prime minister is a Sunni Muslim and the speaker of parliament is a Shiite Muslim.The presidency has been vacant since May 2014 when Michel Suleiman's mandate expired. Since then, parliament has held 45 failed sessions to elect a successor, each time failing to make quorum. Each session was boycotted by the 20 members of Aoun's parliamentary bloc who insisted he be elected, with Hizbullah also keeping its 13 members away as a show of support.Monday's session is expected to involve two votes, with Aoun unlikely to win the two-thirds majority necessary to avoid a second round. The additional round only requires him to win a 50 percent plus one majority, which now looks assured. The vote is set to end a void that has been seen as a reflection of a broader malaise: a divided polity with government institutions that have been impotent in the face of challenges including a garbage collection crisis. The economy meanwhile has struggled with regional and domestic instability and already strained resources have been tested by an influx of more than a million Syrian refugees. "Given what we know from history and the profiles of the personalities that have come together and the overall political climate, nothing guarantees any progress from filling the vacancy," said Carol Sharabati, a political science professor at the Jesuit University in Beirut. "We're looking at an alliance of interest, in which each party has their demands. Aoun wants the presidency at any cost, and Hariri wants to rebuild his crumbling political bloc," added Sharabati.

"Will the personal agendas of each party allow them to build a common, long-term strategy, given that their alliance is not formed on common ground?"

'Can't expect miracles'

Atrache said the agreement could not be described as a "political alliance," and said it would "prove difficult to maintain because they don't agree on how to share power."The track record of recent years does not bode well: the last government led by Hariri, between 2009 and 2011, was hamstrung by tensions with Hizbullah's bloc which eventually brought it down. And after going into self-imposed exile, Hariri's influence has waned domestically even as his personal finances have taken a hit because key backer Saudi Arabia is no longer willing to pump aid into Lebanon to shore up its influence. Last time Hariri formed a government, it took five months, and the incumbent, Tamam Salam, spent 10 months crafting a national unity cabinet, which has nonetheless proved largely impotent."We can't rule out the possibility that we'll have a president, a prime minister without a government and a suspended parliament" until the next legislative election, Sharabati said. Parliament has twice extended its mandate without holding elections because of disagreements over a new electoral law, with the next vote scheduled for mid-2017. Parliament speaker Nabih Berri, who opposes Aoun's election, has already said he expects the formation of a new government to take five to six months. But even if a government is formed, it will be full of "contradictions, and the question is whether it will be able, even partially, to restore institutions and put them back on track," said Atrache. "We can't expect miracles."

 

Aoun, a Bridge for Whom?

Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Al Sharq Al Awsat/October 29/16

It is not strange for Lebanon to have disagreements as it is the country of 17 state-acknowledged sects. The influence of this relatively small country is much larger than its size, given that its area is half of that of Kuwait, which explains the continuous regional competition on its territory and institutions since its declared independence after World War II.

Yet another chapter has been added to its difficult history, with General Michel Aoun getting closer to the presidency in the oldest republic of the Arab world. And like other states in the area, Lebanon maintains its formalities like elections, parliament and exchange of power. But ruling in Lebanon is closer to a power of the elite. Even the reign of the traditional political elite of sects has diminished when balances were formed.

Currently, the situation in Lebanon is dominated by one large party, Hezbollah, and it finally has what it has always wanted with the opposition succumbing to its will by getting Aoun to presidency after it was considered an unthinkable step.

Most Lebanese people, and others, are not satisfied with Aoun becoming a president either because of him personally or because of the domination of Hezbollah on the presidential decision. According to Taif agreement, choosing the president is limited to the Christian Maronite.

Yet, and despite all the anger and opposition, the question is: will the position of president change in the Lebanese reality and its foreign relations regardless of who resides in Baabda Palace? Is it worth objecting, or causing strife or even keeping the president’s position vacant?

The president is constrained to many limits where militias and warring political powers marginalized the state and its three presidencies.

I believe that President Aoun is the one who will need his opponents more than they need him. He is the one who should fear them after they feared him when he was in the opposition. Aoun alone won’t be able to find solutions, maintain civil peace, and rule for four comfortable years without reconciling disputes with others.

Lebanon is a grand arena for the Arab world and the region in general. It has always played the host of different regional powers.

Many fought on Lebanese soil including: Nasserites, Melkites, Arabs, Isolationists, Syrians, Palestinians, Christians, Muslims, Sunnis, Shiites, Iranians, people from the Gulf, and people from Gulf among themselves. This is the reason for its destruction and everyone’s interest in it.

Many questions will be raised through which we can predict the current situation and near future about sects and relations between opposing parties in Syria, Iran, Gulf, France, Russia, and others.

Will the president return the favor to Hezbollah for getting him to the position by enabling it to control the presidency? What can President Aoun do amid local and regional conflicts reaching their worst stages? He can do very little.

We exaggerate in our expectations from the role of the president because of all the power other Arab leaders have. In Lebanon, the capacities of the president and prime minister are limited as per the constitution and the Taif Agreement.

It is best we begin optimistic. President Aoun can suggest a reconciliation program that brings all parties closer and end the struggle that he was part of, thus becoming the best president the republic had since President Bechara el-Khoury. This is being overoptimistic. Or he could be worse than President Emile Lahoud by spurring more divisions and causing even more discord.

If Aoun wants reconciliation, he can achieve it. While if he wants to fortify Hezbollah’s position, he will be faced by the cruel Lebanese reality of the different parties that will not concede for him at the expense of their existence.

Aoun became a president for Lebanon and all Lebanese based on the “democratic” Lebanese way of doing things.

Everyone should deal with him and encourage him to be a bridge for reconciliation in spite of their opinions and reservations.

 

Hariri: I extend my hand to all factions in Lebanon

Hanan Khaled/The Daily Star/October 28/16/

BEIRUT: Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri Friday said he extends his hands to all factions in Lebanon, reiterating that his endorsement of MP Michel Aoun for the presidency was intended to work in the country's best interests.

"I want an end to vacuum. The [state's] institutions, people, environment and economy can't endure it anymore," Hariri said during a televised interview.

Hariri said he has been seeking an end to the presidential void and its repercussions for more than two years.

"I want to avoid a catastrophe," he said.

The Future Movement chief said he had been “hesitant in backing [Marada Movement chief Sleiman] Frangieh at the beginning, but he found many common points with him – and similarly now with Aoun."

"We should look ahead at the future and stop looking at the past," Hariri added.

Last week, Hariri shifted his support from Frangieh to Aoun for the presidency after a series of political consultations with various rivals in Lebanon and an international tour that led him to Moscow, Riyadh and Paris.

During the interview, Hariri described Frangieh as an "honest man," adding that he might "adopt his [Marada leader's] nomination six years later."

Hariri revealed that he had been in continuous talks with Berri since August before he made up his mind to support Aoun.

He stressed that he had no differences with Berri, who vehemently opposes Aoun and has declared he will vote against the presidential hopeful.

"Berri didn't think I was serious in my talks about Aoun. But I want vacuum to end," Hariri said, adding that he was looking to build a "real partnership" in the country between political rivals for the sake of the people.

"I am not gaining anything personally ... my ambition is not to become a prime minister or a lawmaker, but rather to continue (former Prime Minister) Rafic Hariri's journey and [maintain] the country's stability and that of the people," he said.

The ex-PM denied that he had sacrificed any of his convictions when he adopted Aoun's nomination saying, "Lebanon is more important."

He noted that his move could cause some backlash within his base, but should Aoun win, they would have "managed to triumph the election of a head of state over vacuum."

Key Future Movement members, including former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, MP Ahmad Fatfat and MP Ammar Houry, have opposed Aoun’s election as president.

But earlier Friday, the Future bloc said in a statement after its weekly meeting that it supports Aoun's presidential bid.

Hariri during the interview said that the bloc members are allowed to have different viewpoints, but in the end "the bloc is led by Hariri."

Aoun's expected election would end a more than two-year presidential vacuum, with parliament failing to elect a head of state 45 times since the term of former President Michel Sleiman expired in 2014.

Hezbollah and Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement have repeatedly refused to attend the vote sessions until they received assurances that their candidate would be elected.

The next session is scheduled for Oct. 31.

The former prime minister said his agreement with Aoun didn't include the controversial electoral law.

"Any draft law requires [agreement between] two or more parliamentary blocs to be endorsed. We (Hariri and Aoun) didn't discuss the postponement of the elections or keeping the 1960's law."

Lebanon lawmakers have been seeking to replace the current voting system, which was established in 1960, but so far they have failed to reach an agreement following several rounds of talks.

"I would be ready to take part in the parliamentary elections if they took place tomorrow. I want people to go down and vote for their convictions whether they support Hariri or not," Hariri added.

Asked about Hezbollah chief Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah's recent declaration that his party would not oppose Hariri’s return to the premiership on the condition that Aoun is elected president, the former PM said "no doubt there are difficulties and attempts to weaken Saad Hariri,” which he called “Hezbollah's main goal.”

Hezbollah and its allies toppled the Hariri-led government in 2011 when their ministers resigned.

The Future leader remained firm on his stance against Hezbollah's interference in conflicts in the region.

"I can't prevent Hezbollah from fighting outside [Lebanon] ... it didn't even consult its allies when it took part in Syria's battles," he said.

But he warned Hezbollah that "it will have to pay the price sooner or later."

"The (new) Cabinet will come to a clear decision (regarding the matter) and we reject any interference in Arab country's affairs," he said.

Hezbollah made it public that it was fighting alongside Syrian President Bashar Assad’s forces in 2013. It is one of the major forces on the ground in the conflict, which erupted in March 2011.

Hariri called on Iran to look at all the Lebanese equally and not favor a certain group to win its battles in the region.

"We wish for nothing more than good ties with Iran, but it took its decision not to tolerate certain parties in Lebanon."

Hariri vowed not to visit Syria if appointed a Prime Minister, expressing believe that theSyrian government, led by President Bashar Assad, has "collapsed."

"All Assad can do now is to continue killing, similar to any criminal. But sooner or later he will leave Syria."

He added that the region is passing through a "critical and dangerous political stage as a the terrorist ideology is hitting stability."

Turning to his personal financial crisis, the Future leader was optimistic that it would be resolved soon both in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia.

 

Aoun wins Jumblatt's support for presidency

The Daily Star/October 28, 2016 /BEIRUT: Presidential hopeful MP Michel Aoun Friday secured the support of the majority of Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblatt's parliamentary bloc for the upcoming election session. “The majority of the [Democratic Gathering ] bloc agreed to support Aoun for the presidency,” Jumblatt, the head of the bloc, told reporters. However, he said that the bloc will hold a final meeting Saturday. “Some might object but most of them [bloc members] are with his candidacy and election after 2-1/2-years of vacuum,” Jumblatt said. Jumblatt's backing guarantees Aoun major parliamentary support for the presidential election parliamentary session scheduled for Monday. He has already gained the support of the Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces, Hezbollah and some of its March 8 allies. Aoun thanked Jumblatt for his support. Ahead of his talks with Aoun, the PSP leader met with Speaker Nabih Berri, who strongly opposes the election of the Change and Reform leader. "I explained to Berri my stance from Monday's session. If there are any differences, they are mild," Jumblatt said, describing Berri as a "statesman, who is keen to protect Lebanon's stability and institutions." Aoun, accompanied by Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil, met with Prime Minister Tammam Salam at the Grand Serail ahead of his talks with Jumblatt at the latter's residence in Beirut's Clemenceau neighborhood.

A statement issued by the premiership’s press office said talks focused on recent local developments. Jumblatt's declaration means that he has dropped his support for Aoun's rival, Marada Movement leader MP Sleiman Frangieh. The meeting was held in presence of MP Henri Helou, who was nominated by Jumblatt in April 2014 for the post. A candidate needs a two-thirds majority, or 86 MPs, to be elected president in the first round of voting. But in the second round, an absolute majority, or 65 MPs, is sufficient to declare a candidate a winner.

Frangieh, a key figure in the Hezbollah-led March 8 coalition, is determined to stay in the presidential race, despite former Prime Minister Saad Hariri dropping his support in favor of Aoun. Hariri's decision was made after political consultations with various rivals in Lebanon and an international tour that led him to Moscow, Riyadh and Paris.

 

Hariri: Backing Aoun aims to foil Hezbollah obstruction

Hussein Dakroub/The Daily Star/October 29/16

BEIRUT: Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri said Friday his endorsement of MP Michel Aoun’s nomination was aimed at foiling Hezbollah’s attempts to continue with the presidential vacuum, as Lebanon witnessed an intensified flurry of meetings aimed at ensuring a smooth Parliament electoral session next week. The inter-Lebanese consultations, centering mainly on securing a big parliamentary majority for Aoun during the Parliament session set for Monday to elect a president, were backed up with daylong talks held by a Saudi envoy with top Lebanese political and religious leaders focusing on the presidential deadlock.

Meanwhile, MP Walid Jumblatt, who heads an 11-member parliamentary bloc, announced following talks with Speaker Nabih Berri and Aoun that the majority of the bloc would vote for Aoun, ensuring a big parliamentary majority for the Free Patriotic Movement founder.

“I have undertaken an initiative in the interests of the country ... I want to put an end to the vacuum. The [state] institutions, people, environment and economy can no longer endure,” Hariri said in a wide-ranging interview with LBCI Friday night.

He said his initiative last year to back Aoun’s rival, Marada Movement leader MP Sleiman Frangieh, for the presidency fizzled out because Hezbollah did not endorse it.

“The main candidate for the Iran party, Hezbollah, is vacuum ... But now with the initiative over Aoun’s [presidential bid], there are no pretexts for obstruction. This initiative will foil any attempt at continuing vacuum,” Hariri said. “The Parliament election session will be a victory against vacuum.”

Hariri said he was ready to work will all factions in the country’s best interests: “I am open to everyone and I will extend my hand to everyone.”

The Future Movement leader indicated that his endorsement of Aoun’s presidential bid had gained regional and international support, adding that the election of a new head of state would be a victory for Saudi Arabia.

“At the regional level, there is no problem [over Aoun’s election]. The international community is more keen on the election of a president in Lebanon than the Lebanese,” Hariri said. “Lebanon’s stability, the election of a president, preservation of the Taif Accord are a victory for Saudi Arabia. This is a victory not only for the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, but for Lebanon and Arab countries.”

Hariri said that in his meeting with Aoun they had agreed on many things, including the recovery of the state, the economy and preservation of the Taif Accord and keeping Lebanon neutral on regional conflicts.

Hariri, who is widely expected to be named the next prime minister after Aoun’s election, blasted Hezbollah’s deep involvement in the 5-year old war in Syria and the party’s interference in Yemen and Bahrain.

“I want to keep the Lebanese state neutral in regional struggles. The government’s decision will be clear in rejecting any interference in the affairs of any Arab country,” he said.

“I am against anything Hezbollah is doing abroad, in Syria, Yemen and Bahrain,” Hariri said, acknowledging that he is unable to stop Hezbollah from fighting alongside Syrian President Bashar Assad’s forces.

Asked whether Hezbollah would put obstacles in the way of forming a new government, Hariri said: “It’s too early to talk about the government. Let’s elect a president first.”

However, he conceded that he would face difficulties in his attempts to set up a national unity government representing the country’s leading parties.

“Hezbollah’s main goal is to weaken Saad Hariri. I know I am facing a very big challenge,” he said.

Hariri’s remarks came as Saudi Arabia’s Arab Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer al-Sabhan met Friday on the second day of his visit to Lebanon separately with Hariri and former premiers Najib Mikati and Fouad Siniora, as well as Aoun, Jumblatt, Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea and former President Amine Gemayel. He also met with Maronite Patriarch Beshara Rai in Bkirki and Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdel Latif Derian at his seat in Dar al-Fatwa in Beirut.

The Saudi official is expected to meet Saturday with Speaker Nabih Berri and Frangieh. Sabhan, however, is not expected to meet any Hezbollah officials, as Riyadh brands the party a “terrorist organization.”

Sabhan’s visit is seen as reflecting the kingdom’s tacit approval of the election of Aoun as president to end two and a half years of vacuum in the country’s top Christian post.

As widely expected, Jumblatt, the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party, said that the majority of the bloc would vote for Aoun. “The majority of the Democratic Gathering bloc and the PSP will vote for Gen. Aoun,” Jumblatt said after meeting with Aoun at his residence in Beirut’s Clemenceau area.

Jumblatt, who previously declared his support for Frangieh, said that some bloc members oppose Aoun’s nomination for the presidency, adding that the bloc would hold a final meeting Saturday.

With backing from Jumblatt’s bloc, Aoun has been assured of a big parliamentary majority for his election to the presidency after having gained the support of the Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces, Hezbollah and some of its March 8 allies.

Aoun, who was accompanied by Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil, the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement, thanked Jumblatt for his support.

“I thank Walid Beik for supporting me to the presidency post ... We will cooperate together to build Lebanon and improve the social situation and national unity,” Aoun told reporters.

Before meeting Jumblatt, Aoun, accompanied by Bassil, met with Prime Minister Tammam Salam at the Grand Serail with whom he discussed preparations for the Parliament session to elect a president.

Ahead of his talks with Aoun, Jumblatt met with Berri, who strongly opposes the FPM founder’s election to the presidency. “I explained to Speaker Berri the ins and outs of my position on Monday’s session to elect a president. Although there appear to be some differences, they are in form,” Jumblatt told reporters after the meeting with Berri at Ain al-Tineh.

Berri returned Friday from a weeklong visit to Geneva, where he attended meetings of an international union of parliaments.

 

Qaouq: Saudi Sanctions against Hizbullah have Failed to Weaken the Party

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/Senior Hizbullah official Sheikh Nabil Qaouq stressed on Saturday that the Saudi sanctions against Hizbullah have failed to weaken the party, the state-run National News Agency reported on Saturday. “The political developments and field achievements confirm the failure of the Saudi sanctions against Hizbullah, especially since Saudi Arabia wanted to weaken Hizbullah in Lebanon which has only grown stronger at the political, popular and military levels inside Lebanon and regionally,” said Qaouq. “By renewing sanctions and terrorism ranking against Hizbullah in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia is but reflecting an outrage, despair and disappointment in the face of the Resistance, because the Saudi penalties have changed nothing of Hizbullah's stances in Syria,” he went on to say. “Regardless of the pressures, we will not leave our national duty to protect our people and our nation, and we will complete the battle against takfiri terrorism, which has no choice but to be defeated in Syria, and we have no choice but to win.” added Qaouq. He concluded: “The next phase that Lebanon is approaching will emphasize the strength of the strategic alliance between Hizbullah and AMAL. Those who were betting on discord and division between the two were disappointed. “If it was not for the Army, People and Resistance equation which Lebanon renews adherence to at this stage, and without the sacrifices of the Lebanese army and the resistance that has protected Lebanon from being sacked by the Islamic State and al-Nusra Front, the Lebanese would not have had the chance to elect a president.”

 

Report: Negotiaions Underway to Convince Franjieh to Withdraw from Presidential Race

Naharnet/October 29/16/Some serious efforts are underway to convince Marada chief MP Suleiman Franjieh to withdraw his nomination from the presidential race, al-Akhbar daily reported on Saturday. The daily said that some “unnamed” parties are “testing the waters” and coordinating efforts with the Free Patriotic Movement, of presidential hopeful MP Michel Aoun, to find a way to make Franjieh withdraw his candidacy before Monday's election session. It added that the parties mediating this solution brought the subject up with Franjieh before contacting the FPM. Furthermore, some political figures keen on Franjieh's best interest, talked about the MP's possibility to withdraw if he becomes certain that the number of votes that he will obtain in the election session are less than the number obtained by Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea in 2014, added the daily. Geagea received 48 votes. Many doubt the possibility that Franjieh will not obtain this number of votes, it pointed out. Speaker Nabih Berri has summoned lawmakers on October 31 for the vote, which will go ahead if a quorum of two-thirds is reached.

The 128-member legislature counts 127 lawmakers at the moment after one member resigned over the summer. The successful candidate wins the vote with a majority of two-thirds in the first round, or with an absolute majority in the next rounds.

Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 and Hizbullah, Aoun's Change and Reform bloc and some of their allies have been boycotting the parliament's electoral sessions, stripping them of the needed quorum. Hariri had launched an initiative in late 2015 to nominate Franjieh for the presidency but his proposal was met with reservations from the country's main Christian parties as well as Hizbullah. The supporters of Aoun's presidential bid have argued that he is more eligible than Franjieh to become president due to the size of his parliamentary bloc and his bigger influence in the Christian community.

 

Report: Hizbullah Has not Named Hariri for Premiership as Yet

Naharnet/October 29/16/Hizbullah has not expressed commitment so far to name al-Mustaqbal Movement chief Saad Hariri for the premiership and the formation of the new government, as speculations believe that it could be keeping it for the last minute, Ad-Diyar daily reported on Saturday. The daily quoted Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah who had urged for a comprehensive agreement and said: “Let a comprehensive agreement with regard to the presidency, premier and the formation of a government be reached.” But the truth is that no one in Hizbullah has named Hariri so far, added Ad-Diyar. The party might be keeping the issue to the moment when the parliament consultations kick off and a premier is designated, it added. 48 hours separate us from the election of a president and Hizbullah has not yet named Hariri for the premiership.

The daily added that the issue might be linked to the number of white papers and the number of votes that Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh- the second candidate facing Hizbullah's ally MP Michel Aoun- will get during the presidential election session, upon which Hizbullah would then decide if it would name Hariri. Speaker Nabih Berri has summoned lawmakers on October 31 for the presidential vote, which will go ahead if a quorum of two-thirds is reached. The 128-member legislature counts 127 lawmakers at the moment after one member resigned over the summer. The successful candidate wins the vote with a majority of two-thirds in the first round, or with an absolute majority in the next rounds. Aoun was tipped to become president after Hariri formally endorsed him last Thursday. Reports say that the ex-prime minister Hariri had struck a deal with Aoun to endorse him in exchange for his return as premier. Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 and Hizbullah, Aoun's Change and Reform bloc and some of their allies have been boycotting the parliament's electoral sessions, stripping them of the needed quorum.Hariri had launched an initiative in late 2015 to nominate Franjieh for the presidency but his proposal was met with reservations from the country's main Christian parties as well as Hizbullah. The supporters of Aoun's presidential bid have argued that he is more eligible than Franjieh to become president due to the size of his parliamentary bloc and his bigger influence in the Christian community.

 

Saudi Envoy Meets Hariri, Aoun, Jumblat, Geagea on 2nd Day of Lebanon Visit

Naharnet/October 28/16/Saudi State Minister for Gulf Affairs Thamer al-Sabhan held talks Friday with several political leaders on the second day of an official visit to Lebanon. Sabhan's talks involved meetings with al-Mustaqbal Movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri, Progressive Socialist Party chief MP Walid Jumblat, Free Patriotic Movement founder MP Michel Aoun, Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea and Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi. The Saudi envoy did not make statements after the meetings. According to a statement issued by Geagea's office, the presidential file "was the focus of the one-hour meeting."Sabhan had held separate talks in the morning with former premiers Najib Miqati and Fouad Saniora. His talks with Saniora addressed “the political developments in Lebanon and the region and the bilateral ties between the two countries.”

Reports have said that al-Sabhan might stay in Lebanon to attend Monday's presidential election session. The Saudi minister had arrived in Lebanon Thursday evening. His Thursday activity involved meetings with Prime Minister Tammam Salam and ex-presidents Michel Suleiman and Amin Gemayel. The Saudi envoy will also meet with other Lebanese leaders in the coming hours. Quoting Saudi Embassy sources, LBCI said Thursday that Sabhan might voice a stance on the developments at the end of his visit. Al-Akhbar newspaper had reported Wednesday that Sabhan would express the kingdom's support for Hariri's presidential initiative. “The Saudi envoy will carry suggestions aimed at resolving the obstacles and lowering the level of opposition that the speaker (Nabih Berri) has showed against the agreement between Hariri and General Michel Aoun,” the sources added. Media reports have said that the “real battle” will only begin after Aoun's election as president in the October 31 session and that some parties will not facilitate the formation of a government led by Hariri. Aoun was tipped to become president after Hariri formally endorsed him last Thursday. Berri has voiced concerns over the Aoun-Hariri agreements that preceded the endorsement while openly declaring that his bloc will “vote against Aoun” and that it might “join the ranks of the opposition.” Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 and Hizbullah, Aoun's Change and Reform bloc and some of their allies have been boycotting the parliament's electoral sessions, stripping them of the needed quorum. Hariri, who is close to Saudi Arabia, had launched an initiative in late 2015 to nominate Hizbullah's ally and Marada Movement chief MP Suleiman Franjieh for the presidency but his proposal was met with reservations from the country's main Christian parties as well as Hizbullah. The supporters of Aoun's presidential bid have argued that he is more eligible than Franjieh to become president due to the size of his parliamentary bloc and his bigger influence in the Christian community.

 

Aoun’s Path to Baabda: Wars and Reconciliations
Thaer Abbas/Asharq Al Awsat/October 28/18
Christian politician and FPM founder Michel Aoun talks during a news conference in Beirut
Beirut- Change and Reform bloc chief MP Michel Aoun has not had an easy path to the presidential palace. The “impossible” was made possible by Future Movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri’s approval to back Aoun for the presidency.
The doors of Baabda Palace, which have been closed since ex-President Michel Suleiman’s tenure ended in May 2014, will open again after the parliament’s expected vote to end the presidential vacuum.
In his efforts to reach Lebanon’s top post, Aoun waged bloody and cruel wars. He also carried out reconciliations that challenge the logic of politics. The result was in his favor after the last obstacle to his path to Baabda Palace was dissipated.
Aoun’s presidential dream began in September 1989 when former President Amin Gemayel appointed him as prime minister to a six-member interim military government after the parliament failed to elect a new president.
But the country fell into more chaos as a result of the presidential vacuum and the resignation of half of the government’s members. The rival government of Prime Minister Salim al-Hoss continued to control large parts of Lebanon.
Liberation War and Syria
Aoun then moved to Baabda Palace and controlled Beirut’s eastern sector.
According to Free Patriotic Movement officials, Aoun had contacts with Syria before and after his appointment as prime minister of the interim military cabinet.
Elie Mahfoud, a former FPM official, said that Aoun had sent an envoy to meet with then Syrian President Hafez al-Assad. The message that Aoun sent to Assad was clear in asking the Syrian leader to consider him “a small officer in his army.”
He said in the message that “we should legitimize its (Syria’s) military presence in Lebanon to confront any possible attack against it.”
Despite Mahfoud’s claims, FPM sources strongly denied the presence of such a letter, telling Asharq Al-Awsat that the intentions of the people behind such rumors are known.
The sources stressed that “Aoun’s history is pure as snow.”
After all efforts failed to reach a political settlement, Aoun declared a Liberation War against Syria that failed to make huge geographic changes but led to destruction and war on both sides of the Green Line that separated East and West Beirut.
Aoun later decided to impose his authority on the rest of the Lebanese territories after he rejected the Taef Accord, which was signed by Lebanese deputies in Saudi Arabia, under an Arab and international sponsorship. But fierce fighting in East Beirut broke out in 1990 between the two sides. It was called the Elimination War.
Elimination War
Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea joined the parties that backed the implementation of the agreement, and Aoun’s military influence became limited to Baabda Palace and the southern sector of Mount Lebanon.
When Aoun refused to abide by international agreements, the Syrian regime received the “green light” to invade the general’s area of influence. On the morning of October 13, 1990, Syrian warplanes entered Beirut’s airspace for the first time to bomb the presidential palace and army bases that fell under Aoun’s control.
Syrian troops backed by Lebanese soldiers allied with President Elias Hrawi then moved from three fronts towards the areas of Aoun’s influence.
Aoun then fled to the French embassy from where he instructed his units to follow the orders of Army commander Gen. Emile Lahoud who had been appointed by the Hoss government.
He then went into exile in France.
The French Exile
During his presence in France, Aoun worked hard to end Syria’s hegemony over Lebanon. He was a main backer of the Syria Accountability Act, a bill of the United States Congress passed into law on December 12, 2003.
Resolution 1559 that was adopted by the U.N. Security Council in 2004 came against the backdrop of the Syria Accountability Act, said former MP Ghattas Khoury.
Anti-Aoun activists have recently broadcast an old voice recording in which the FPM chief describes Syria as a terrorist state and criticizes the so-called Hezbollah as an extension of the Iranian regime.
Aoun’s Return and the Era of Agreements
The confrontation between Aoun on one side and Syria and Hezbollah on the other drew to a close following the end of the neighboring country’s hegemony on Lebanon.
Syria withdrew from Lebanon after the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005, paving the way for Aoun’s return to Lebanon after a 15-year exile.
Aoun’s supporters joined the March 14 alliance that was formed during large-scale demonstrations held against Syria following Hariri’s murder. But the FPM chief surprised the public by announcing that his “problem with Syria was over. We will build the best of ties with it.”
Less than a year after his return to Lebanon, Aoun struck an understanding with Hezbollah, which is Syria’s main ally. His FPM became a de facto member of the March 8 alliance.
During the 2006 Hezbollah-Israel war, Lebanese areas whose residents are Aoun’s supporters opened their doors to the people escaping the Israeli aggression. Aoun soon became Hezbollah’s candidate for presidency. But the party’s support for the FPM chief wasn’t enough to bring him to Baabda Palace after the end of President Emile Lahoud’s term.
His dream was shattered as a result of the March 14 coalition’s strong opposition to him.
Normalization of Ties with Assad
The reconciliation with the Assad regime was culminated during a visit that Aoun made to Damascus in 2008. He considered the trip as “the end of an old stage and the beginning of a new era.”
When the term of President Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014, Aoun’s ambition to reach Baabda Palace took a strong hit as result of different alliances in the parliament.
Things became worse when the legislature’s term was extended twice. But the lawmakers of his bloc and Hezbollah MPs continued to boycott parliamentary sessions aimed at electing a new president.
Parliament’s Paralysis
Aoun and his ally Hezbollah resorted to paralysis in their confrontation with the March 14 alliance. The boycott of their MPs of the sessions set for electing a head of state caused lack of quorum at the parliament, which left the country without a president.
Saad Hariri’s agreement with Marada leader MP Suleiman Franjieh to back him for the presidency angered Geagea, who dropped out of the presidential race and announced his support for Aoun after the two sides signed a “Declaration of Intent.”
The Christian Alliance
The “Declaration of Intent” between the FPM and the LF stated the importance of abiding by an independent foreign policy that serves Lebanon’s interest and respects international law by having friendly relations with all countries, mainly Arab states, to consolidate Lebanon.
After the LF’s support for Aoun, the only obstacle left was Saad Hariri, who has the largest bloc in the parliament (33 MPs.) Despite years of counter-accusations and disputes, their paths crossed and Hariri backed Aoun’s presidential aspirations.
Aoun, who is expected to be elected on Monday, was eventually able to clinch a deal with Hariri despite accusations by the FPM chief’s critics of being “edgy and stubborn.”
He made a lot of diplomatic maneuvers to appease his staunchest foes to realize his big dream.

Saudi envoy Saudi Arabia’s Arab Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer al-Sabhan meets top officials during second day of visit to Lebanon
The Daily Star/October 28/16
BEIRUT: Saudi Arabia’s Arab Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer al-Sabhan Friday kicked off his second day of talks in Lebanon, meeting with former Prime Ministers Saad Hariri, Najib Mikati and Fouad Siniora and other officials, days ahead of next week’s presidential elections.
The convoy for the Saudi official was seen arriving at the residence of Hariri in Downtown Beirut in the afternoon, after meeting with Mikati earlier in the day.
His visit to Beirut is seen as a tacit approval of the presidential vote, which will most likely see MP Michel Aoun become Lebanon’s next head of state.
Hariri, who returned from a brief visit to Paris late Thursday, endorsed his decade-long rival Aoun for the presidency last week, finally clearing the general’s path to the country’s top Christian seat.
The meeting between the two lasted for less than an hour, before Sabhan went to meet the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party Walid Jumblatt in Beirut's Clemenceau area.
The PSP leader was said to have discussed the latest developments in Lebanon with Sabhan in the presence of his aides Health Minister Wael Abu Faour and Agriculture Minister Akram Chehayeb, according to the state-run National News Agency.
It is unclear whether the Saudi official will make any statements during his Lebanon visit.
Earlier in the morning, Sabhan met Mikati at his Beirut residence in the presence of the Saudi Charge d'Affaires Walid al-Bukhari.
"The kingdom has never been distant from Lebanon or the Lebanese (people) and in the hard times which Lebanon has faced, the kingdom was like an older brother to Lebanon," Mikati said following the meeting.
When asked by reporters over the Saudi position on the Lebanese presidency, Mikati said that Riyadh is concerned about Lebanon's stability, but does not interfere, and that it will ensure that the next head of state works for the interest of the Lebanese people.
The Saudi minister also met with leader of the Future Movement's parliamentary bloc Siniora at his Hamra office. Siniora is among the key figures in Hariri's party to oppose backing Aoun for president.
Sabhan is the highest ranking Saudi official to visit Lebanon since ties between the two countries soured in early 2015 over Hezbollah’s intervention in Syria and Yemen.
In the next two days, the Saudi official is expected to meet with Speaker Nabih Berri, presidential frontrunner Aoun, Lebanese Forces head Samir Geagea and Marada Movement leader Sleiman Frangieh. Sabhan, however, is not expected to meet any Hezbollah officials, as Riyadh brands the party a “terrorist group.”Sabhan met Thuraday with former presidents Amine Gemayel and Michel Sleiman, as well as Prime Minister Tammam Salam at the Grand Serail in Downtown Beirut.

 

Saudi envoy meets top officials during second day of visit to Lebanon
The Daily Star/October 28/16 /BEIRUT: Saudi Arabia’s Arab Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer al-Sabhan Friday kicked off his second day of talks in Lebanon, meeting with former Prime Ministers Saad Hariri, Najib Mikati and Fouad Siniora and other officials, days ahead of next week’s presidential elections.
The convoy for the Saudi official was seen arriving at the residence of Hariri in Downtown Beirut in the afternoon, after meeting with Mikati earlier in the day. His visit to Beirut is seen as a tacit approval of the presidential vote, which will most likely see MP Michel Aoun become Lebanon’s next head of state.
Hariri, who returned from a brief visit to Paris late Thursday, endorsed his decade-long rival Aoun for the presidency last week, finally clearing the general’s path to the country’s top Christian seat. The meeting between the two lasted for less than an hour, before Sabhan went to meet the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party Walid Jumblatt in Beirut's Clemenceau area. The PSP leader was said to have discussed the latest developments in Lebanon with Sabhan in the presence of his aides Health Minister Wael Abu Faour and Agriculture Minister Akram Chehayeb, according to the state-run National News Agency.
It is unclear whether the Saudi official will make any statements during his Lebanon visit. Earlier in the morning, Sabhan met Mikati at his Beirut residence in the presence of the Saudi Charge d'Affaires Walid al-Bukhari. "The kingdom has never been distant from Lebanon or the Lebanese (people) and in the hard times which Lebanon has faced, the kingdom was like an older brother to Lebanon," Mikati said following the meeting. When asked by reporters over the Saudi position on the Lebanese presidency, Mikati said that Riyadh is concerned about Lebanon's stability, but does not interfere, and that it will ensure that the next head of state works for the interest of the Lebanese people. The Saudi minister also met with leader of the Future Movement's parliamentary bloc Siniora at his Hamra office. Siniora is among the key figures in Hariri's party to oppose backing Aoun for president. Sabhan is the highest ranking Saudi official to visit Lebanon since ties between the two countries soured in early 2015 over Hezbollah’s intervention in Syria and Yemen. In the next two days, the Saudi official is expected to meet with Speaker Nabih Berri, presidential frontrunner Aoun, Lebanese Forces head Samir Geagea and Marada Movement leader Sleiman Frangieh. Sabhan, however, is not expected to meet any Hezbollah officials, as Riyadh brands the party a “terrorist group.”Sabhan met Thuraday with former presidents Amine Gemayel and Michel Sleiman, as well as Prime Minister Tammam Salam at the Grand Serail in Downtown Beirut.
 

Lebanon’s Cabinet Holds Last Session, Saudi Delegation in Beirut ahead of Presidential Polls
Asharq Al-Awsat/October 28/16
Beirut-Lebanon’s cabinet held on Thursday what it considered to be its last session before the election of a new president early next week, and the beginning of a new era. Meanwhile, the Free Patriotic Movement continued to hold meetings with political parties that are rejecting or have not yet announced their final decision concerning the candidacy of MP Michel Aoun for president. But on Thursday the head of the Kataeb Party, MP Sami Gemayel, reiterated his rejection to “participate in the current presidential deal.”Meanwhile, a Saudi delegation headed by Saudi State Minister for Arab Gulf Affairs, Thamer al-Sabhan, is in Beirut on a special visit to discuss with Lebanese officials the latest developments in the country.
Sabhan kicked off his visit by meeting with Lebanon’s Prime Minister Tammam Salam at the Grand Serail and former presidents Amin Gemayel and Michel Suleiman. According to Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency (NNA), al-Sabhan is expected to meet on Friday with Speaker Nabih Berri, and former Prime Ministers Saad Hariri, Fouad Saniora, Najib Miqati and General Michel Aoun. He will also meet heads of Lebanon’s religious sects, Democratic Gathering chief MP Walid Jumblat, Marada Movement leader and lawmaker Suleiman Franjieh and Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea.
NNA added the Saudi official might also meet with Interior Minister Nohad al-Mashnouq, and Army Commander General Jean Qahwaji. Former PM Saad Hariri is expected to host a dinner banquet in honor of the visiting official.
Before attending Thursday’s session, several ministers hoped it would be the last ahead of the election of a new president next Monday.Minister of State for Administrative Reform Nabil de Freij said: “This is the last session and we hope it will be positive.”Culture Minister Raymond Araiji, who supports the candidacy of Suleiman Franjieh for president, said: “All possibilities are open” in Monday’s electoral session. On Thursday, an FPM delegation met with candidate MP Henri Helou, who is supported by Jumblat’s Democratic Gathering bloc. Helou will likely withdraw from the presidential race after Jumblat’s expected announcement of his support for Aoun on Saturday.
The candidate said that a decision concerning the withdrawal of his candidacy would be taken after expected talks between Aoun and Jumblat and a meeting of the Democratic Gathering bloc. Helou said that the interest of the country was more important than personal interests. However, Speaker Berri and the Kataeb Party were still holding onto to their position against Aoun’s candidacy. Informed sources told the Central News Agency on Thursday that efforts exerted by the so-called Hezbollah party failed to convince Berri to vote for Aoun. Also objecting to the election of Aoun, Gemayel said in a press conference: “We hope that the Kataeb party’s fears would be dissipated and that the practice of General Michel Aoun, if elected as president, would reflect what we struggled for together, for years.”

 

Rahi Welcomes Hariri as 'Man of Courage,' and Hariri Says a New Leaf Will Begin Monday

Naharnet/October 29/16/Al-Mustaqbal Movement leader Saad Hariri urged everyone to cooperate for the well interest of Lebanon, pointing to a new leaf that will be opened on Monday after the election of a head of state to fill the longtime vacuum. “The country is on the threshold of a new phase, and I hope that everyone cooperates for the well interest of Lebanon and the Lebanese,” said Hariri after meeting Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi in Bkirki. Hailing the Patriarch Hariri said: “The Patriarch has been keen on the election of a president,” adding “we will all cooperate on Monday. Today we are heading towards a white end to open a new leaf in relations and to begin this phase together,” he said pointing to enormous challenges facing the government. For his part, Rahi received Hariri and welcomed him as saying: “Welcome you man of courage and determination,” in a clear reference to Hariri's initiative when he endorsed MP Michel Aoun for the post of president last week. Speaker Nabih Berri has summoned lawmakers on October 31 for the presidential vote, which will go ahead if a quorum of two-thirds is reached. The 128-member legislature counts 127 lawmakers at the moment after one member resigned over the summer. The successful candidate wins the vote with a majority of two-thirds in the first round, or with an absolute majority in the next rounds. Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 and Hizbullah, Aoun's Change and Reform bloc and some of their allies have been boycotting the parliament's electoral sessions, stripping them of the needed quorum. Hariri had launched an initiative in late 2015 to nominate Marada Movement MP Suleiman Franjieh for the presidency but his proposal was met with reservations from the country's main Christian parties as well as Hizbullah. The supporters of Aoun's presidential bid have argued that he is more eligible than Franjieh to become president due to the size of his parliamentary bloc and his bigger influence in the Christian community.

 

Presidential Polls Top Talks between Salam, Hariri and Franjieh

Naharnet/October 29/16/Prime Minister Tammam Salam received in separate meetings at the Grand Serail on Saturday Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh and Mustaqbal Movement chief Saad Hariri. Hariri briefed Salam on the preparations for the electoral session scheduled for Monday to elect a president. Franjieh and Hariri did not make a statement after their meetings with Salam. On Friday, Salam received presidential hopeful head of the Change and Reform bloc head MP Michel Aoun, who met with leader of the Progressive Socialist party Walid Jumblat in Clemenceau before he met the premier. Salam has not made any statement so far since Hariri's endorsement of Aoun for the top state post. Hariri formally endorsed Aoun's nomination last week. Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 and Hizbullah, Aoun's Change and Reform bloc and some of their allies have been boycotting the parliament's electoral sessions, stripping them of the needed quorum. Hariri had launched an initiative in late 2015 to nominate Franjieh for the presidency but his proposal was met with reservations from the country's main Christian parties as well as Hizbullah. The supporters of Aoun's nomination have argued that he is more eligible than Franjieh to become president due to the size of his parliamentary bloc and his bigger influence in the Christian community.


Future bloc reiterates support for Aoun to maintain Lebanon's interests

The Daily Star/October 28, 2016/BEIRUT: The Future Movement’s parliamentary bloc Friday reiterated its support for MP Michel Aoun's presidential bid, saying that it hoped his election would work in Lebanon's national interest. "The Future bloc ... [restates] its commitment to attending the upcoming [election] session to practice its right and democratic duty in voting," Tripoli MP Mohammad Kabbara said, reading the bloc's statement after a meeting between Future MPs. The statement backed former Prime Minister and Future leader Saad Hariri's nomination of Aoun, expressing hope that the election of the Change and Reform chief on Monday would "constitute a new national phase [that favors] Lebanon and the Lebanese interest."The meeting was chaired by Hariri at his Downtown Beirut residence, a statement issued by the ex-PM's press office said, where they discussed the country's domestic affairs. Hariri, who returned from a brief visit to Paris late Thursday, endorsed his decade-long rival Aoun for the presidency last week, finally clearing the general’s path to the country’s top Christian seat. Hariri’s endorsement of the Change and Reform leader has made Aoun’s arrival to the presidency almost certain, with three days to go before the Parliament session to elect a head of state. Aoun's expected election would end a more than two-year presidential vacuum. Hezbollah and Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement have repeatedly refused to attend the vote sessions until they received assurances that their candidate would be elected.
Marada Movement chief Sleiman Frangieh, whom Hariri had previously endorsed, is still in the race.
 

Lebanon’s kingmaker Jumblatt secures 8 votes for Aoun
Gulf News/Joseph A. Kechichian/October 28/16/Jumblatt will withdraw the candidacy of Henri Helou, who was nominated to block the election of Geagea in 2014
Washington: Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt informed the head of the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), Jibran Bassil, that eight deputies of his bloc — out of eleven — will vote in favour of presidential candidate Michel Aoun, according to Al Jumhuriyyah daily.
The PSP confirmed that “the final decision will be taken following a meeting between Jumblatt and Aoun, although the FPM leader was now in the lead no matter what”. Jumblatt added that the party would withdraw the candidacy of Henri Helou, who was nominated at the very last moment to block the election of the Lebanese Forces’ Samir Geagea back in 2014. Neither Helou nor Aoun for that matter presented a programme to govern the country. After a meeting with Helou, Education Minister Elias Bu Saab of the FPM hailed Helou’s position and said: “The stance that was voiced [by Helou] was responsible and it reflects a great patriotic sense and it opened the door for agreements”, which redefined convenience. After initially endorsing Helou’s nomination, Jumblatt shifted his support for pro-Syrian Marada Movement chief Sulaiman Franjieh after the latter was endorsed by former Prime Minister Saad Hariri in December 2015. Jumblatt, who honed the art of compromise and survival, saw the writing on the wall after Hariri formally endorsed Aoun, which explained his third change in as many years. Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Sulaiman ended on May 24, 2014 and Hezbollah, along with all its March 8 allies boycotted the parliament’s 45 electoral sessions, stripping them of the needed quorum. This is expected to change on October 31, when Aoun will probably gather over 85 votes — out of 128 — a majority. The sole exceptions will be the Phalange Party, Speaker Nabih Berri’s Amal Party and several independents.

A Renewed Disruptive Opposition
Ahmad El-Assaad/ October 27, 2016/The moment the signs of the end of the presidential vacuum appeared in the political horizon, economic indexes took a positive turn, and subject matter experts got a glimpse of hope of better days to come, which is what is expected to progressively crystallize over the next phase.In fact, reviving the economy and saving its different sectors was one of the reasons that pushed the political forces towards the only possible exit from this crisis, i.e. electing General Michel Aoun as President. The country is no longer able to survive without effective governing institutions, or to bear with this abnormal situation that almost toppled its entire political system, leaving catastrophic effects on economic activity as a whole. The Lebanese people’s hope is for the Opposition, which will be formed by the forces that will not be part of this settlement, to not adopt the same disruptive methods that paralyze the country and prevent reform, all of which will be key in promoting the Lebanese economy and improving people’s lives. If the future Opposition will be anything like the current automotive inspection privatization crisis, i.e. refusing to develop service, hindering people’s businesses and blocking roads, then Lebanon unfortunately will be facing a new era of continued obstruction to its progress, and of ineffectiveness – which the Lebanese people have grown tired of. Some of the people holding the reins of power today, and who have been enjoying its privileges for decades, will not easily accept to let go of the rich sources of the government, from which they’ve been drinking à gogo. Thus, the Lebanese are afraid of those same people’s reaction, i.e. to once again destroy everything that is not theirs and does not benefit them; and they probably will not hesitate to do just that.

 

Beginning of a ‘new era’ in Lebanon?

Nayla Tueni/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

Last week, Future Movement leader and MP Saad Hariri endorsed Christian leader Michel Aoun for Lebanon’s presidency. The move has sparked reactions from various quarters. In the wake of this development, we must carefully observe the activities of Ashraf Rifi, who resigned as justice minister. We must also take into account the views of those who oppose this endorsement even though they may be few in number. It is important to do this if we seek to address the worries of some people and the rejections of others voiced through social networking websites. It’s true that these are virtual world campaigns that may not have much to do with reality on the ground. In other words, these voices of dissent may not spill on to the streets but some questions are legitimate and express the views of a wide range of people.

What’s interesting is that these objections do not represent what was once called the March 14 coalition as the fiercest objection came from the other party, to what was once called the March 8 coalition. However, authorities must reveal the truth. If that doesn’t happen, then it will be akin to the country being handed over to the Iranian-Syrian axis who will either exploit presidential vacuum or influence the presidency. Officials, if they are truly responsible, must be frank with the Lebanese people and clarify what has happened in the past and what they plan for the future. If the presidency is a Lebanese affair, as it is being emphasized, then political parties must take the blame for delaying its election for two and a half years. If the presidency is a Lebanese affair, as it is being emphasized, then political parties must take the blame for delaying its election for two and a half years. They must bear responsibility for this vacuum and must be held accountable for this intentional obstruction. They should also apologize to the Lebanese people for all that this vacuum has caused.

No veil of secrecy

Agreements within political parties must not be kept secret in the interest of the public. These agreements must not just focus on sharing the booty and distributing ministerial portfolios. They shouldn’t try to control the oil and gas sector, which is a national treasure that may suffer as a result of negligence, lack of responsibility and interests of global companies. The Lebanese people have the right to know the details of the agreement between the Future Movement and the Free Patriotic Movement. They must know what angered Speaker Nabih Berri and why he objected to Hariri’s endorsement of Aoun. More importantly, isn’t it necessary for the most important candidate to appear in the media and try and convince citizens that he is the best choice? Unfortunately, the idea of a debate remains remote in our country which otherwise claims to be a democracy.

Media appearances, such as the one made by Aoun to satisfy the Sunnis, are not enough to explain his presidential program or his ambitions because executive jurisdictions have been transferred to the government. The candidate must explain his agenda so that people understand his vision and provide him with the support needed to face a fierce opposition that may obstruct him from carrying out his duties. Opposition is an important and necessary element in democratic countries. What’ more important though is for these objections to be heard and to be provided with clear answers. Overlook objections is a huge mistake as this means indifference to people’s views and implies contempt for “the great people of Lebanon.”

**This article was first published in Annahar on Oct. 24, 2016.


Al-Hariri's Choice Of Hizbullah Ally Aoun For Lebanese Presidency Is Another March 14 Forces Concession To Pro-Iran Axis

By: E.B. Picali and Y. Yehoshua/MEMRI/October 28/16
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/10/28/e-b-picali-and-y-yehoshuamemri-al-hariris-choice-of-hizbullah-ally-aoun-for-lebanese-presidency-is-another-march-14-forces-concession-to-pro-iran-axis/
Introduction
On October 31, 2016, the Lebanese parliament will convene and is expected to vote in Free Patriotic Movement leader and Hizbullah ally Michel Aoun as president of Lebanon; he is Hizbullah's sole candidate. The move follows a deal struck between Aoun and former Lebanese prime minister Sa'd Al-Hariri, leader of the Sunni Al-Mustaqbal stream, under which Aoun, if elected, will assign Al-Hariri the task of forming the next government.
This move by Al-Hariri has significant implications for the intra-Lebanese political arena and for the regional power balance. Therefore it has encountered criticism both within and outside Lebanon. This move represents a surrender by the March 14 Forces, headed by Al-Mustaqbal, to Hizbullah's will, and reinforces the position of Hizbullah's patron Iran at the expense of Saudi Arabia.
The following report reviews Al-Hariri's decision, the reactions it has encountered, and what it means for Lebanon and the region.
Hizbullah Ally Aoun Expected To Be Chosen President
On October 31, 2016, the Lebanese parliament will hold its 46th presidential selection session since Michel Suleiman's term ended two-and-a-half years ago. That session is expected to choose Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun, who is an ally of Hizbullah, as president. Aoun's selection will end a two-and-a-half-year presidential vacuum that resulted from disagreement over Suleiman's successor from among the country's opposing streams – primarily Al-Mustaqbal, led by Sa'd Al-Hariri, and Hizbullah, which together with Aoun stymied the formation of the quorum that is necessary to elect a president. The breakthrough in the talks over the selection of a president came when Al-Hariri and Aoun reached an agreement under which Al-Hariri would support Aoun's presidential candidacy and in return Aoun would task Al-Hariri with forming the new government, which would be a national unity government as stipulated in the agreement.[1] This constitutes an Al-Hariri surrender to Hizbullah, which sought an Aoun presidency. It should be mentioned that Al-Hariri's support for an overt Hizbullah ally is not unprecedented; a year ago, Al-Hariri announced his support for another ally of Hizbullah, and of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, Suleiman Frangieh, for the post of Lebanese president.[2]
Al-Hariri announced his support for Aoun in an October 20, 2016 speech, saying that by supporting him he was aiming to save Lebanon from dangerous leadership and economic crises which could, in turn, lead to a new civil war.[3]
Two days later, on October 22, Hizbullah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah announced that his party's MPs, who had been boycotting presidential selection sessions, as had MPs from other parties including Aoun's own Change and Reform bloc, would be attending the October 31 session and would be choosing Aoun. Nasrallah added that Hizbullah had no objections to Al-Hariri's serving as prime minister in the new government.
These statements by Al-Hariri and Nasrallah pave Aoun's path to the presidential palace, even though obstacles and uncertainty remain, both in Lebanon and in the region, in this matter.
Various Lebanese Elements Oppose Aoun's Appointment As President
The opposition to Aoun's appointment comes mainly from Lebanese parliamentary speaker Nabih Berri, and from Suleiman Frangieh, who is running against Aoun in the presidential race. Both Berri and Frangieh are March 8 Forces members and open Hizbullah allies. Berri even announced that he would not be part of the government that would be established under the Al-Hariri-Aoun deal, and questioned the deal's future, saying that it had been arrived at by two sides only, without taking into account the country's main political elements, himself among them. Druze leader and centrist bloc member Walid Jumblatt, who is another major Lebanese political figure, has not yet expressed a position on this matter, but it is thought that he will back Aoun.
On the other side as well, some in Al-Hariri's Al-Mustaqbal party and in the March 14 Forces in general oppose this deal. Immediately after Al-Hariri's October 20 announcement of support for Aoun, another former prime minister, Fouad Al-Siniora, the head of the Al-Mustaqbal party, (a component of Al-Hariri's broader Al-Mustaqbal stream) announced that he would not join Al-Hariri in backing Aoun for president. Al-Siniora was joined by other party members, including parliamentary vice president Farid Makari, MPs Ahmad Fatfat and Ammar Houri, Telecommunications Minister Boutros Harb of the March 14 Forces, and March 14 Forces secretary-general Fares Souaid.
Along with the opposition to an Aoun presidency within the Al-Mustaqbal party, other Sunni public figures also objected to the deal, among them Justice Minister Ashraf Rifi, former director-general of the Lebanese Internal Security Forces and a former Al-Hariri supporter. Last year, Rifi harshly attacked Al-Hariri for his support for Hizbullah and Syrian regime ally Suleiman Frangieh. On October 22, 2016, two days after Al-Hariri's announcement of his support for Aoun as president, Rifi organized an anti-Aoun protest in Tripoli called "Proud Tripoli Rejects the Candidate of Iranian Patronage." The next day, October 23, a convoy of vehicles from Akkar in the north of the country made its way to Rifi's home in Tripoli bearing posters of him and expressing support for his position on this matter. It should be mentioned that in the past year, Rifi has gradually chipped away at overall Lebanese Sunni support for Al-Hariri, as evidenced by his party's landslide victory over Al-Hariri's party in the mayoral elections in Tripoli, the city with the largest Sunni concentration in the country.
Many in the Al-Mustaqbal party, the March 14 Forces, and the Sunni public who oppose the Al-Hariri-Aoun deal see Al-Hariri's support for Aoun as yet another concession to Hizbullah and the pro-Iran axis that backs it, and to Hizbullah as an armed state within a state.[4] They accuse Al-Hariri, inter alia, of seeking to become prime minister by selling out Sunni interests and the political legacy of his father Rafiq Al-Hariri, whose 2005 assassination, when Syria was the real power in Lebanon, is thought to have been carried out by five senior Hizbullah officials.
Addressing critics of his deal, Al-Hariri explained his support for Aoun as well as his previous support for Frangieh: "I am willing to take the risks a thousand times over, just as I am willing to risk myself, my people, and my political future, to defend Lebanon and its people."[5]
Al-Hariri's Choice Of Aoun Is A Political Victory For Hizbullah
Al-Hariri's move to support the Hizbullah candidate and ally Aoun has major implication for the internal Lebanese political arena. It constitutes another successful attempt by Hizbullah to impose its wishes there and a further weakening of the country's main Sunni force, the Al-Mustaqbal party. This triumph for Hizbullah comes at a time when it is mostly preoccupied outside of Lebanon's borders, primarily with fighting alongside the Assad regime in Syria, as well as elsewhere in the Arab world as a proxy of Iran. The organization has fortified its position within Lebanon by virtue of its network of political alliances in the country, as well as by virtue of the quantity of weapons in its possession.
Ibrahim Al-Amin, head of the board of directors of the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar and a known Hizbullah supporter, argued that the March 14 Forces, including the Al-Mustaqbal stream, show "the symptoms of card-game addicts," who delude themselves that they can win and are "unwilling to give up" even when it is clear that it is Hizbullah who is actually directing events on the ground.[6]
At the same time, Hizbullah's success in pushing its own candidate through is also a result of the political weakness of its rivals, particularly the Hariri-led Al-Mustaqbal stream, who wants the premiership at nearly any cost in order to strengthen his own political status in the country and perhaps his economic status as well.
An Aoun presidency does not mean that the issues contributing to the vast schism between the sides in Lebanon will be resolved, among them the disarming of Hizbullah as demanded by the March 14 Forces – Aoun opposes the organization's disarmament.[7] As president, Hizbullah ally Aoun would be in charge of a number of security and military portfolios, aggravating the tension between the sides and jeopardizing the army's independence .
Additionally, the Al-Hariri-Aoun deal does not guarantee that Al-Hariri will actually succeed in forming a government, because of the opposition he faces both inside and outside Lebanon. The deal with Aoun could also harm Al-Hariri's status among his traditional Sunni support base, thus weakening him in the upcoming spring 2017 parliamentary elections.
An Aoun Presidency: Ramifications For The Regional Power Balance – Down With Saudi Arabia, Up With Iran
Since Lebanon's future depends on the regional political balance, with Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia the patrons of various local Lebanese political players, Al-Hariri's move has regional ramifications. His surrender to Hizbullah's wishes reflects the strengthening of Iran, which has exploited the Syrian civil war to deepen its penetration of the region and of Lebanon in particular. Electing the Hizbullah presidential candidate Aoun will definitely serve future pro-Iran interests in Lebanon at the expense of Sunni interests in Lebanon, and also at the expense of Saudi Arabia, which views itself as the protector of these interests.
Saudi Arabia has previously backed Al-Hariri's past substantial political moves even if these moves haven't always served Saudi political interests in Lebanon or elsewhere. It is still unclear whether his deal with Aoun has Saudi support, and the Lebanese press has published conflicting reports on the matter. As yet, there has been no official Saudi comment on this, but recent articles in the Saudi press indicate a lack of support for Al-Hariri's deal with Aoun. However, following a lengthy Saudi silence, Saudi Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer Sabhan, who visited Beirut on October 27 said that his country would not intervene in the selection of Lebanon's president and would support the president chosen by the Lebanese.[8]
There were also reports in the Lebanese press noting that Al-Hariri's political status in Lebanon is declining, and that the Saudis no longer consider him the sole representative of the Sunnis in Lebanon, but only one such representative.
It should be noted that in previous years, Saudi Arabia, as the leader of the Sunni world, played a key role in the selection of Lebanese presidents, as did Syria, which together with Hizbullah's patron Iran represented the resistance axis. Al-Hariri's choosing Aoun for president without full Saudi backing reflects a decline in Saudi influence in Lebanon, and in Saudi Arabia's regional status in general. In this context, a report in the Lebanese daily Al-Safir, a known supporter of the resistance axis, claims that Egypt was involved in promoting Aoun's prospects for the presidency.[9] A possible inference from this report is that Egypt is attempting to step into Saudi Arabia's shoes in Lebanon in an attempt to restore its status in the Arab world, and particularly in the Sunni world.
Articles in the daily Al-Akhbar, known for its pro-Hizbullah line, addressed the regional implications of Al-Hariri's gambit and gloated that the move reflected Saudi Arabian weakness. Al-Akhbar columnist Ghassan Saoud wrote that an Aoun presidency would be a manifestation of "Hizbullah's ability to break the international will, and the Saudi will."[10]
However, Ibrahim Al-Amin wrote in an Al-Akbar editorial that wars in the Arab region created a reality that was forcing the March 14 Forces to see the choice of Lebanese president differently, and that they needed to realize that the Saudis can no longer help them. As he usually does, he concluded his piece with implied threats, stating: "Anyone who does not want anarchy in Lebanon has no alternative but to choose Aoun for president."[11]
*E. B. Picali is a research fellow at MEMRI; Y. Yehoshua is Vice President for Research And Director of MEMRI Israel
Endntoes:
[1] One of the main political players pushing for an Aoun presidency is Samir Geagea, chairman of the Lebanese Forces. In January 2016, after a long period of talks, Geagea and Aoun, formerly bitter Christian political rivals, agreed that Geagea would support Aoun's presidential bid. One of the main reasons behind Geagea's decision to do so was Al-Hariri's previous support for the presidential candidacy of Suleiman Frangieh – a fierce rival of Geagea who had been accused of killing several members of the Frangieh family during the country's civil war.
[2] Similarly, in 2008, during another presidential interregnum, the March 14 Forces and Al-Hariri were forced to make concessions to Hizbullah, which was included in the newly formed Fouad Siniora government; this took place at the Doha conference. The most important concession won by the Hizbullah-led March 8 Forces, as stipulated in the government guidelines, was the legitimation of the Resistance (which allowed Hizbullah to operate as an independent armed force within Lebanon). Hizbullah also received enough cabinet seats to veto any government decision, and Hizbullah subsequently used this veto power against Al-Hariri's government in 2011. Hizbullah obtained these concessions following the leadership vacuum, the lengthy Hizbullah siege on central Beirut, and the violent events of May 7, 2008.
[3] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), October 21, 2016.
[4] See MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis Series Report No. 1092, Al-Mustaqbal Losing Ground As Representative Of Lebanese Sunnis, May 19, 2014.
[5] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), October 21, 2016.
[6] Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), October 24, 2016.
[7] In an interview with Al-Akhbar, Lebanese Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil, who is Aoun's son-in-law and heads the Change and Reform bloc founded by Aoun, said that Free Patriotic Movement, to which the Change and Reform bloc belongs, supports Hizbullah's retention of its weapons. Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), October 22, 2016.
[8] Al-Watan (Saudi Arabia), October 28, 2016.
[9] Al-Safir (Lebanon), October 25, 2016.
[10] Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), October 27, 2016.
[11] Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), October 24, 2016. 


Former Hizbullah Leader Subhi Al-Tufayli Criticizes Intervention In Syria, Says Shi'ites Must Reach Understanding With All Sunnis And Confront West, Russia, 'Israeli Enemy': 'Wrong To Think That Jerusalem Was In Palestine... Turns Out That Jerusalem Is In Aleppo...'

MEMRI/October 28/16
Former Hizbullah Leader Subhi Tufyli criticized the organization's intervention in Syria in a series of Friday sermons, which he posted in September and October on his YouTube account. Jerusalem is in Palestine, not in Aleppo, Sanaa, or Baghdad, he said, adding that Hizbullah must withdraw from Syria. Tufayli further said that the Shi'ites must reach an understanding with all the Sunnis "without exception" and claimed that some ISIS members who perpetrate atrocities are members of intelligence agencies trying to tarnish the image of Islam.
Following are excerpts
September 30, 2016
Subhi Al-Tufayli: "There is another group of infidels, who pretend to be Muslims. In Al-Madina, Abdallah ibn Ubayy joined the Prophet Muhammad at the mosque, but he was a hypocrite. In other words, deep inside, he was an infidel, who was fighting, day and night, against Islam, while pretending to be a Muslim. Many Arab and Islamic regimes adhere to the school of Abdallah ibn Ubayy. They are hypocrites, who purport to support the Palestinian cause and liberation, but all they really do is sow destruction.
"Abd Al-Nasser used to wear us out with [his talk about] fighting the Israeli enemy, and with his declarations that he was striving to liberate Palestine. He started wars in several places in the Arab and Islamic world. He started political battles and sent armies to fight here and there, under the slogan of making preparations to fight the Israeli enemy. His radio station would curse and malign the Israeli enemy day and night. Back then, we believed that this was all for the sake of liberating Palestine, and that the liberation of Palestine was the only thing on his mind. But in 1967, we were surprised to discover that he was in slumber, along with his entire army and all his commanders and officers. The Israeli enemy invaded Egypt before they had awoken from their slumber. We discovered that all that clamor had been a lie.
"Today, we are liberating the Arab and Islamic world, under the slogan of building a front to confront the Israeli enemy. The truth is that we may have been wrong to think that Jerusalem was in Palestine. It turns out that Jerusalem is in Aleppo... I cannot believe how anyone can turn a blind eye to our children and women lying under the rubble, following the strikes of the Russian Crusaders, who have occupied Iran for a long time. The planes striking in Aleppo may turn on you tomorrow.
"Brothers, what is happening is a great crime. Jerusalem is in Palestine, not in Aleppo. It is not in Sanaa or Baghdad. Jerusalem is in Palestine. Whoever wants to liberate Jerusalem should go to Palestine. Anyone who is fighting here and there is serving the Jews - even more than the people who sent their condolences for the death of Peres.
"There must be a reexamination! We must reach an understanding with all the Sunnis without exception. We must not be so stupid as to fight one another and let others collect the booty. We need to realize this fact. Brothers, we have pushed our people who belong to other sects to the point that they consider making peace with their rivals, in order to be able to confront their own brother, who decided to destroy them until he sees them dead. What are you doing in Syria? Withdraw! What are you doing? What is this disgrace that you are committing?"
October 14, 2016
"A few days ago, the Russian Duma declared that Russia would remain permanently in Syria, and that the Russian bases in Syria are there to stay. The Russians will not return to their country. I'd like to remind you that when the Russians first entered Syria, I called it an invasion. This is a Crusader invasion of our countries. All the Muslims must confront this invasion, and drive the invaders - Russians or others - out of their countries. Some people say: 'The Russians are here to help us.' Oh, no. They are not here to serve you. You are the servant, not they.
"I repeat: The Muslims must drive out the invaders, and especially the Russian invaders. Let no one deceive you. This is not a Sunni-Shi'ite war. It is not a war between Muslims. This is a war against Muslims - Sunnis and Shi'ites alike.
"This is not a sectarian war. It is a Western war. Whether Sunni or Shi'ite, America and Europe want us dead."
October 21, 2016
"As you know, the war against Mosul was declared these days. Many armies, weapons, and implements of war and destruction were amassed from all directions, under slogans such as 'eliminating ISIS,' 'ISIS is an epidemic,' 'ISIS is a cancer,' 'ISIS poses a danger, and we want to finish it off.' I am not disputing that ISIS has committed crimes, killing children, women, and innocent people. There is no question about this.
"But the question is whether the other side is really the enemy of ISIS. Is it doing this in order to save people from ISIS or not? We need to make up our minds about this. I have a simple question: Who founded ISIS and how? ISIS - and this is well known - was born overnight. It was born a complete state. Organizations usually start off small and gradually grow, It has been fighting for years. Where did all these weapons come from? It must have supporters and facilitators. Someone planned and then gave birth to this 'state.' Who? Who founded ISIS in Syria and Iraq? Undoubtedly, it was the Syrian regime and the Iranian regime. And who supports ISIS? Iran, America, Russia, Europe, and even Israel. They all have an interest in the existence of ISIS in Syria and Iraq.
"There are two kinds of people in the ranks of ISIS. There are people who have come, from all corners of the world, to die. Believing that they are defending Islam, and defending the downtrodden and the oppressed, these people have come to die. They don an explosives belt and kill themselves on one front or another. You cannot claim that these people have worldly agendas, for they are marching towards death. They are wrong, but their intent is true. By acting this way, they are defending people's rights. But indeed, there are also (planted) intelligence officers in this organization.
"Their job is to perpetrate ugly and revolting deeds that will make Islam and the Muslims loathsome in people's eyes, thus preparing the groundwork until people say: Let's wage war. This is why many of their deeds are inexplicable - they have nothing to do with Islam, the Muslims, or the Quran, although they were perpetrated by members of this organization in the name of Islam. How else can you explain people carrying out bombings in Baghdad, killing women and children, or doing this in Syria or Lebanon? Obviously, when I denounce these people, it does not mean that I welcome what the others are doing. The Sunnis have ISIS, but the Shi'ites also have ISIS. ISIS is not only people who kill children in Baghdad, but also people who kill children in Aleppo, in Baghdad, and everywhere. ISIS is not only the organization based in Mosul and Al-Raqqah."


Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on on October 28-29/16

Syrian airstrikes on Aleppo amid intense clashes

Associated Press, Beirut Saturday, 29 October 2016/Syrian opposition activists are reporting airstrikes and fighting on the edge of the contested northern city of Aleppo. Saturday’s fighting comes a day after Syrian rebels launched a broad offensive aiming to break a weeks-long government siege on the eastern rebel-held neighborhoods of Syria's largest city. The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said warplanes are pounding areas that insurgents captured the day before, mostly on Aleppo's western and southern edges. The Aleppo Media Center, an activist collective, reported airstrikes and artillery shelling of areas near Aleppo. Syrian state media said rebels shelled government-held western neighborhoods of Aleppo on Saturday morning wounding at least six people, including a young girl.

 

Spokesman: Iraq’s PMU to enter Syria to aid Assad after Mosul

Al Arabiya News Channel, Dubai Saturday, 29 October 2016 /Ahmed al-Assadi, a spokesman for the Iraq-sanctioned paramilitary known as Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), said on Saturday that they will fight alongside Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s forces in Syria after finishing their battle against ISIS in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, Al Arabiya News Channel reported. The Iran-funded PMU has launched an assault on ISIS west of Mosul on Saturday but reiterated that they would not enter the Sunni majority city. Jaafar al-Husseini, a spokesman for the Hezbollah Brigades, said they launched an offensive Saturday along with other large militias toward the town of Tel Afar, which had a Shiite majority before it fell to ISIS in 2014. Iranian forces are advising the fighters and Iraqi aircraft are providing airstrikes, he said. Iraq launched a massive operation to retake militant-held Mosul, its second largest city, last week. The involvement of the Shiite militias has raised concerns the battle could aggravate sectarian divisions. The Mosul offensive involves more than 25,000 soldiers, Federal Police, Kurdish fighters, Sunni tribesmen and the Shiite militias, which operate under an umbrella organization known as the Popular Mobilization Units.Iraqi Federal Police, meanwhile, has raised on Saturday the country’s flag at an ISIS southern hub in southern Mosul.

 

Russia Seeks to Stop Jihadists from Fleeing Mosul

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Friday called for cooperation to prevent Islamic State jihadists from leaving Mosul and heading to Syria during the offensive under way to recapture the Iraqi city. "We are interested in cooperation with our Iraqi colleagues to take measures to prevent the outflow of terrorists from Mosul with their weapons, which of course will exacerbate the situation in Syria," Lavrov said following talks in Moscow with his Iranian and Syrian counterparts Mohammad Javad Zarif and Walid Muallem.  "We will discuss this with the United States and other members of the coalition," he said. The offensive to recapture Iraq's second city, launched on October 17 and backed by a U.S.-led coalition, is seeing tens of thousands of Iraqi troops advance on Mosul in a bid to retake the last major Iraqi city under IS control. Russia's defense ministry last week urged the coalition not to "drive terrorists" from Iraq to Syria during the offensive, warning it of the risk of "freely roaming" IS jihadist gangs. The United States said Thursday that up to 900 IS jihadists have been killed in the offensive so far as Iraqi forces allied with Kurdish peshmerga fighters have taken a string of towns and villages in a cautious but steady advance. Western leaders have meanwhile accused Moscow of committing possible war crimes in the Syrian city of Aleppo through indiscriminate bombing in support of a brutal government offensive to retake the city's rebel-held east. The Russian defense ministry has said that neither Syrian nor Russian warplanes have bombed Aleppo for 10 days. Russia has meanwhile denied any role in deadly air strikes on a Syrian school in the rebel-held province of Idlib that killed 22 children. According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the strikes had been carried out by "warplanes -- either Russian or Syrian." Lavrov on Friday repeated Moscow's denial of involvement in the attack, saying that the defense ministry has published "information with facts that refute these claims and show the fabricated nature of this disinformation."

 

Roadside Bomb Kills 2 Soldiers, Injuries 4 Others in Sinai

Associated Press/Naharnet/October 29/16/Egyptian security officials say a roadside bomb killed two soldiers and wounded four others in the restive northeastern region of the Sinai Peninsula. The officials say the bomb struck an armored vehicle carrying soldiers to Sheikh Zuwaid near the city of el-Arish city on Saturday. The four soldiers, they said, are in a critical condition and the death toll could rise. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press. Egypt has battled Islamic extremists in Sinai for years, but the insurgency has grown deadlier and spread into the mainland since the 2013 ouster of Islamist president Mohamed Morsi. A local affiliate of the Islamic State group is the most active faction and it has claimed responsibility to the near-daily attacks there.

 

Coalition Strikes Kill at Least 10 Yemen Civilians

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/Saudi-led coalition air strikes killed at least 10 civilians in a battleground town southeast of Yemen's third city Taez on Saturday, the rebels, a medic and a loyalist official said. The rebel-controlled sabanews.net website said 10 people were killed and seven wounded when the strikes hit residential buildings in the town of Salo where clashes with government forces are raging. It said rescue workers were still recovering bodies from under the rubble. A doctor at the town's public hospital said it had received the bodies of 15 dead and was treating seven wounded. A local official loyal to the Saudi-backed government said a child and seven women were among 11 people killed when two coalition air strikes hit three adjacent homes by mistake. "All those in the houses were killed," he told AFP. The Saudi-led coalition has come under mounting international criticism for the high civilian death toll from the bombing campaign it launched in support of President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi's government in March last year. An October 8 strike that killed more than 140 people attending a funeral ceremony for the father of a rebel leader in the capital Sanaa drew condemnation even from close Western allies. The town of Salo has been the scene of fierce fighting for months as pro-Hadi forces attempt to advance towards Taez, where the government garrison is almost entirely surrounded by the rebels and dependent on a single supply line from the south. The rebels have been attempting to block the advance which would allow reinforcements to be brought up directly along the main road from the government's headquarters in second city Aden to the south. Thousands of people have been forced from their homes by the fighting. The rebel news agency said that those killed in Saturday's air strikes were among them. Nationwide, three million Yemenis have been driven from their homes since the Saudi-led intervention began.Nearly 7,000 people have been killed, most of them civilians and, more than than 35,000 wounded.

 

US Says Syrian Regime Using Starvation as 'Weapon of War'

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/The United States accused the Syrian regime Friday of using "starvation as a weapon of war" -- a war crime under the Geneva Conventions -- stepping up the rhetoric against Bashar Assad and his Russian backers. Rejecting the Kremlin claims that attacks on Aleppo have stopped, a US official told AFP "the regime has rejected UN requests to deliver aid to Eastern Aleppo -- using starvation as a weapon of war."The language mirrors the Geneva Conventions' prohibition against starving civilians "as a method of warfare." Aleppo's quarter of a million residents have been besieged and bombarded for months, prompting international outcry. Washington is currently weighing further sanctions against Syria and a push for justice at the International Criminal Court in the Hague. Officials hope that Russian President Vladimir Putin may rethink his country's participation in a war that has seen chemical weapons and barrel bombs used against civilians, if Russia is seen as an international pariah. Earlier Friday Russia failed to win re-election to the UN Human Rights Commission, a serious diplomatic blow. "We are taking steps, whether its ramping up public pressure or other forms of pressure," a second senior Obama administration official told AFP. "We are still looking at the whole arsenal of tools to make them feel the weight of international criticism, not saying that in and of itself is going to work.""But we have some indication that they don't want to be viewed -- the Russians in particular -- as being guilty of war crimes." "We've also spoken about forms of international accountability when it comes to Russian and regime actions." The Kremlin said Friday that Putin did not think it was time to resume air strikes on Aleppo after the defense ministry requested that a moratorium on bombing be lifted. Syrian rebels launched a major assault Friday aimed at linking opposition-held districts with the outside world. But a US official gave the Kremlin's claim short shrift. "Despite Russia's claims, attacks by the regime and its backers have continued in Aleppo," the official said."We continue to look at Russia's actions not their words to determine if Russia is meeting their claims about their military intervention on behalf of the Assad regime."

 

Iraq Forces Launch Operation to Cut Mosul off from Syria

Associated Press/Naharnet/October 29/16/Iraqi paramilitary forces launched an operation Saturday to cut the Islamic State group's supply lines between its Mosul bastion and neighbouring Syria, opening a new front in the nearly two-week-old offensive. Forces from the Hashed al-Shaabi, a paramilitary umbrella organisation dominated by Iran-backed Shiite militias, have largely been on the sidelines since the launch of the  operation to retake Mosul. But on Saturday they began a push on the town of Tal Afar on the western approach to the city, the only side where ground forces, which have advanced from the north, east and south, are not yet deployed. "The operation aims to cut supplies between Mosul and Raqa and tighten the siege of (IS) in Mosul and liberate Tal Afar," Hashed spokesman Ahmed al-Assadi told AFP, referring to IS's main stronghold in Syria. Assadi said the operation was launched from the Sin al-Dhaban area south of Mosul and aimed to retake the towns of Hatra and Tal Abta as well as Tal Afar. The drive toward Tal Afar could bring the fighting perilously close to the ancient city of Hatra, a UNESCO world heritage site that has already been vandalised by IS. Though it was not mentioned by name, the operation may also pass near the ruins of Nimrud, another archaeological site that has previously been attacked by IS. The involvement of Shiite militias in the Mosul operation has been a source of contention, although some of the Hashed's top commanders insist they do not plan to enter the largely Sunni city. - Advancing in Al-Shura -Iraqi Kurds and Sunni Arab politicians have opposed their involvement, as has Turkey, which has a military presence east of Mosul despite repeated demands by Baghdad for the forces to be withdrawn. Relations between the Hashed and the US-led coalition fighting IS are also tense, but the paramilitaries enjoy widespread support among members of Iraq's Shiite majority. Tal Afar was a Shiite-majority town of mostly ethnic Turkmens before the Sunni extremists of IS overran it in 2014, and its recapture is a main goal of Shiite militia forces. As the Hashed push on Tal Afar got under way, Iraq's federal police advanced into Al-Shura, an area south of Mosul with a long history as a militant bastion that has been the target of fighting for more than a week. "Federal police units raised the Iraqi flag" on a local government building in the area, federal police commander Lieutenant General Raed Shakir Jawdat said in a statement. Police are now "chasing terrorists fleeing towards the north" of the Al-Shura area, Jawdat said. The offensive operations came despite an assertion from the US-led coalition on Friday that Iraqi forces were temporarily halting their advance on Mosul for a period expected to last "a couple days.""They are pausing and repositioning, refitting and doing some back clearing," coalition spokesman Colonel John Dorrian told Pentagon reporters via videoconference. An Iraqi military statement, apparently issued in response to Dorrian's remarks on the halt, said that "military operations are continuing" and proceeding on schedule. - Rising displacement -More than 17,500 people have fled their homes toward government-held areas since the Mosul operation began, the International Organisation for Migration said on Saturday. Numbers are expected to soar as Iraqi forces close in. Civilians are suffering even more in jihadist-held territory, with the United Nations saying that there are credible reports of IS carrying out mass executions and seizing tens of thousands of people for use as human shields. IS's "depraved, cowardly strategy is to attempt to use the presence of civilians to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations", UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein said in a statement. The jihadists are "effectively using tens of thousands of women, men and children as human shields", he said. The UN cited reports indicating IS has forcibly taken civilians into Mosul, killing those who resist or who were previously members of Iraqi security forces. It said more than 250 people were executed in just two days earlier this week. The jihadists have also launched a series of diversionary attacks since the operation began, including one in the city of Kirkuk that sparked multiple days of fighting and left dozens dead. Officials said on Saturday that another such diversion, this time in the Ramadi area, west of Baghdad, had been foiled and 11 people arrested.

 

Hillary Rodham Clinton: The Unloved Politician

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/Early this year, a journalist asked Hillary Clinton if she had always been truthful with the American people. "I've always tried to," the Democratic presidential candidate replied.  Less cautious political figures would have offered an immediate and unhesitating "Yes." But Clinton, the trained lawyer, weighs her every word, always leery of falling into a trap. What she sees as an effort at sincerity, however, comes across to her detractors as troubling duplicity -- evident, they say, from her use of a private email server as secretary of state which has several times threatened to derailed her White House bid. This is the burden that Clinton continues to labor under after three decades in public life. And thus we have the Clinton paradox: she stands on the threshold of a historic victory -- as the first woman president of the United States -- while remaining one of the least popular politicians in recent American history.  This disconnect is nothing new. As long ago as 1979, the wife of then-Arkansas governor Bill Clinton was resigning herself to having the public misconstrue her actions, or take them badly. "I think that's another one of the dangers about being in public life," she told Arkansas public television in an interview that year. "One cannot live one's life based on what somebody else's image of you might be." She was too assertive for the time, too far ahead of the patriarchal society of the old South. Now she is 69, and despite herself, a Clinton worn down by years of testing, tribulation and political intrigue has become part of the establishment. "I get it that some people just don't know what to make of me," she said during her acceptance speech at the Democratic convention in Philadelphia in July. And yet by this point in her life, much of the mystery of who Hillary Clinton is has been wiped away. - Stubborn and private -Born on October 26, 1947 in Chicago, Hillary Diane Rodham grew up in the middle-class white suburb of Park Ridge as the oldest of three children.  Her father, Hugh Rodham, came from a working-class family in Scranton, Pennsylvania. As a chief petty officer in the navy during World War II, he trained sailors for service in the Pacific theater. After the war, Rodham, a Republican, founded a small but successful drapery business in Chicago. Hillary Clinton's beloved mother, Dorothy Howell, devoted herself to raising her children and was active in the neighborhood Methodist church. Hillary, always a diligent student, pursued her studies at Wellesley College, a prestigious women's school near Boston. It was her first time living away from home, and she soon found herself plunged into the day's debates over the civil-rights struggle and the Vietnam War. She eventually left her father's Republican Party to embrace the ideals of the Democratic Party.  But even among the turbulence and contestation of the 1960s, she was hardly a revolutionary. Elected student president at Wellesley, Clinton did not exactly fan the flames of conflict. Her deep-rooted centrist and pragmatic instincts -- which in the current campaign have been a target of the Democratic left wing -- were already in evidence. And so was her commitment to the cause of women and children. Her first real job -- after graduation from the highly selective law school at Yale, where she met Bill Clinton -- was for the Children's Defense Fund. After wrestling with the question -- and working for a time on the congressional committee investigating the Watergate scandal -- Hillary Clinton decided to follow her man all the way to Arkansas, stunning friends who saw this as a backwoods exile far from the excitement and opportunities of Washington.

There she became a brilliant political partner to Bill; Arkansas became a stepping stone for their move to the White House in 1993. But her efforts as first lady to reform the American healthcare system fell flat, and she withdrew for a time from the Washington microcosm that had rejected her.

A zone of privacy -Demanding respect for her private life, her effort to contain certain controversies, including the complex Whitewater real-estate scandal, merely made them worse. Her relations with the political press, which she disdained for what she saw as its obsession with the trivial, have never recovered. "I've always believed in a zone of privacy," she said in 1994, adding reluctantly: "I told a friend the other day that I feel, after resisting for a long time, I've been rezoned." Since then her relations with the voting public have passed through a series of highs and lows. Highs came when Americans sympathized with her during the worst humiliations of the Monica Lewinsky affair in 1998, and when New Yorkers elected her to the US Senate in 2000. Lows came when she voted for the Iraq war in 2002, and when she was defeated in the presidential primaries of 2008 by a young Barack Obama. Yet, another high came when he named her as America's top diplomat. Her use of a private email server, which she chose over a governmental system in an effort to protect her communications -- striving yet again for a zone of privacy -- hung over her return to politics in 2015, and reared its head again with less than two weeks to go until Election Day. Her opponents, sifting through thousands of leaked emails, say they have found the proof of her obsessive secrecy.  But Bill Maher, the sarcastic liberal talk-show host, says he discovered a different woman: "a government nerd who never stops working."

 

Clinton Faces FBI Probe as Race Enters Final 10 Days

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/Hillary Clinton embarks this weekend on the frenetic final 10 days of her White House campaign, determined to shake off renewed controversy over the FBI probe into her private emails.

The 69-year-old Democrat -- vying to become America's first female president -- is still the frontrunner to win the November 8 election over her Republican rival Donald Trump. Clinton has a clear lead in the polls, and voting has already begun in 34 of 50 states to choose a successor to President Barack Obama, who will hit the campaign trail again next week in defense of his onetime secretary of state. But her momentum was threatened Friday by a renewed eruption in a scandal that has long dogged her in the race: investigations into her use of a private email server while at the State Department. Trump gleefully seized on news that FBI agents are investigating a newly discovered group of mails sent to Clinton's private address, to see if they exposed any US secrets. The probe had been thought finished in July, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation had recommended that no charges be filed against Clinton, although it found her to have been "extremely careless" in her use of a private server. But FBI Director James Comey's letter to US lawmakers announcing that inquiries had been renewed shocked the campaign and rocked world markets.

Clinton cried foul, demanding that Comey reveal more information about the probe, and declared herself "confident" that voters, and the FBI, would conclude that she had done nothing wrong. "The American people deserve to get the full and complete facts immediately," she said. "We don't know the facts, which is why we are calling on the FBI to release all the information that it has."Clinton's defiant words came after Trump -- himself dogged by scandal over alleged sexual misconduct -- declared her unfit for office as a jubilant crowd of supporters in New Hampshire chanted: "Lock her up!"

Concern that the renewed probe would damage Clinton's formerly impressive momentum spooked the markets, with US stocks, the dollar and oil prices tumbling lower on the prospect of a close vote. - 'Appear to be pertinent' -Comey dropped his bombshell in a letter to lawmakers, revealing that "in connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation," and would take "appropriate investigative steps." Clinton's campaign was outraged and implied that Comey's intervention could be politically-tinged because, in Clinton's words, the letter was only sent to "Republican members of the House." "I'm confident, whatever they are, they will not change the conclusion reached in July," she added. According to the New York Times, the newly discovered mails emerged after agents seized electronic devices used by Clinton's closest aide, Huma Abedin, and her husband, Anthony Weiner. Weiner, a Democratic former congressman who resigned in 2011 after he was exposed for sending explicit online messages, is under investigation over allegations he sent sexual messages to a 15-year-old girl. NBC News said the newly discovered emails were sent by Abedin to Clinton from a laptop used by Weiner, whose bid to become mayor of New York foundered over similar "sexting" claims in 2013.

- 'Criminal scheme' -Meanwhile, Trump, trailing in polls both nationally and in the swing states he must win to secure the White House, seized triumphantly on the news.

"We must not let her take her criminal scheme into the Oval Office," the 70-year-old billionaire told cheering crowds at a campaign rally in Manchester, New Hampshire. "I have great respect for the fact that the FBI and the Department of Justice are now willing to have the courage to right the horrible mistake that they made," he added. Republicans on Capitol Hill also seemed jubilant over Clinton's latest travails. "Everything that has happened... is the natural, probable consequence of deciding you're going to have a rogue email system," Trey Gowdy, chairman of the congressional committee that first uncovered the existence of Clinton's private server, told Fox News late Friday. Several leading newspapers on Saturday faulted Comey for being overzealous in announcing that the FBI will be scouring the newly-discovered emails. "By revealing it, he inevitably creates a cloud of suspicion over Ms. Clinton that, if the case's history is any guide, is unwarranted," The Washington Post wrote on its editorial page Saturday. News of the probe took the shine off what should have been a good day for Clinton on Friday, with the Obama administration announcing stronger than expected economic growth numbers. Clinton was due to campaign in Miami on Saturday in the most important potential swing state in terms of electoral votes, Florida. Trump was due to make stops in Colorado and Arizona before heading to Nevada for a Sunday rally in Las Vegas. Next week, both candidates will continue to barnstorm battleground states. Trump's campaign was rocked this month by the release of 2005 footage showing him bragging about his groping women, followed by a string of accusations of sexual misconduct -- which he denies. As he faltered, Trump piled on the defiant rhetoric, claiming the allegations were part of a plot to rig the election, and threatening not to recognize the outcome if he loses.

 

Palestinian Attacker Shot by Israeli Troops

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/A Palestinian attacked Israeli troops with his car and then with a knife in the occupied West Bank before being shot and seriously wounded, the army said on Saturday. The attack happened late on Friday near the Jewish settlement of Ofra, northeast of the city of Ramallah, an army statement said. The assailant attempted to run over soldiers with his car, prompting them to open fire. He then got out of the vehicle brandishing a knife and troops fired again, seriously wounding him, the statement said. There has been a spate of car-ramming and knife attacks in Israel and the Palestinian territories, most of them in the West Bank or annexed east Jerusalem. Analysts say Palestinian frustration with the Israeli occupation and settlement-building in the West Bank, comatose peace efforts and their own fractured leadership have fed the unrest. Israel says incitement by Palestinian leaders and media is a leading cause. Human rights groups have accused Israeli security forces of using excessive and often lethal force in tackling the violence, most of which has been carried out by lone-wolf assailants, many of them young. Internal reviews by the army of two fatal shootings of attackers earlier this month found that the use of deadly force could have been avoided, public radio reported on Tuesday. Since October last year, the violence has claimed the lives of 235 Palestinians, 36 Israelis, two Americans, a Jordanian, an Eritrean and a Sudanese, according to an AFP count.

 

Gaza Flotilla Raid Victims' Kin Vow Legal Battle against Israel

Agence France Presse/Naharnet/October 29/16/The families of Turkish activists killed in a 2010 Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship say they will not drop their legal cases despite a deal between Turkey and the Jewish state. Nine Turks died when Israeli marines stormed the "Mavi Marmara", which was part of an aid flotilla to break a naval blockade of the Gaza Strip. One more died in hospital in 2014. Ties between Israel and Turkey crumbled after the raid but in June they finally agreed to end the bitter six-year row after months-long secret talks. Israel had offered an apology over the raid, permission for Turkish aid to reach Gaza through Israeli ports, and a payout of $20 million (18 million euros) to the families of those killed. Turkish officials confirmed the amount was transferred to the justice ministry account last month. Under the deal, both sides agreed that individual Israeli citizens or those acting on behalf of the  government would not be held liable. Families of the victims however say they will press on with their legal battle until the  alleged perpetrators are brought to justice. Cigdem Topcuoglu, an academic from southern Adana province, said her husband was killed as the couple embarked on the ship. "We are certainly not accepting the compensation," she told AFP in Istanbul. "They will come and kill your husband next to you and say 'take this money, keep your mouth shut and give up on the case'. Would you accept that?"

In total, there were six ships in the flotilla that were boarded in international waters about 130km (80 miles) from the Israeli coast. - Life sentences sought - After the deal with Israel, an Istanbul court on October 19 held another hearing in the trial of the four former Israeli military commanders, though it was later adjourned to December 2. Turkish prosecutors are seeking life sentences for former military chief of staff Gabi Ashkenazi, former navy chief Eliezer Marom, former military intelligence head Amos Yadlin and former air force intelligence chief Avishai Levy, who went on trial in absentia in 2012. "We have no intention to drop the lawsuits," Topcuoglu said. Human rights lawyer Rodney Dixon said the criminal case against the accused must go on "at all costs". "We are strongly supporting the case here in Turkey and our very firm plea to the court has been that they must continue with the case," he said. "The so-called agreement between Israel and Turkey is not a treaty that is enforceable. It is unlawful under international law, under the convention on human rights and Turkish law."- 'Lawlessness'-Families say they were not informed of any details about the deal with Israel and they have not received any money. Ismail Songur, whose father died in the raid, said: "Nobody from the Turkish government asked our opinion before they struck a deal. "Unfortunately the Turkish government is becoming a part of the lawlessness carried out by Israel.""Even if families of the victims accept the money, that would not affect the case," said Gulden Sonmez, one of the lawyers in the trial and also a passenger on the ship. "That is a criminal suit, not a suit for compensation. The $20 million is an ex gratia payment. It's a donation and cannot be accepted as compensation."A vocal advocate of the Palestinian cause who regularly lambasts Israeli assaults in Gaza, Turkish President Recep Tayyip in June caught many by surprise when he criticised the 2010 aid mission to Gaza, only a few days after his government reached an accord with Israel.  "Did you ask then-prime minister to deliver humanitarian aid from Turkey?" he said in comments seen as veiled criticism of the Turkish Islamic charity IHH that organised the flotilla. Bulent Yildirim, head of the IHH, said the legal case would never end. "Those who believe the case would drop will be disappointed."


Iran: Protest gathering of thousands from across the country at Cyrus' tomb

Friday, 28 October 2016 /NCRI - Today's morning, Friday, October 28, thousands of people of various cities demonstrated on the occasion of the birthday of Cyrus the Great at his tomb in Pasargad in protest at the mullahs' regime's anti-national and anti-Iranian policies. Demonstrators chanted, "freedom of thought, impossible with the mullahs" , "Iran is our homeland, Cyrus is our father", "mullahs' regime, only oppression, only war", …. Since days ago the regime had resorted to various measures in fear of this gathering; it cancelled all travel tours to Pasargad; it laid obstructions and restrictions in the path of vehicles to Pasargad; and spread rumors extensively that Pasargad was closed and nobody could go there. The regime cut internet connections in that area since October 26, and announced to the nearby inhabitants that nobody is allowed to provide residence to the guests. Furthermore, all routs leading to Pasargad were closed since this morning, and a big number of the regime's intelligence agents and plain-clothed agents at the tomb and nearby streets tried to prevent people from gathering. However, all these attempts failed to prevent this protest demonstration. Long queues of vehicles and big crowd is indication of the Iranian peoples' anger and hatred for this anti-Iranian regime. The religious fascism ruling Iran will undoubtedly be overthrown by the solidarity of the Iranian people. This regime is unable to resist before the will of the people for achieving democracy and popular soverienty. Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran/October 28, 2016

 

Reza Akbari Monfared writes revealing letter to Asma Jahangir

Friday, 28 October 2016 /NCRI - In a letter to Asma Jahangir, the UN Special Rapporteur, Reza Akbari Monfared points to some of the pressures and humiliations applied by the Iranian regime’s judiciary and prosecutor against political prisoners who want to meet their families.

The letter is as follows:

The UN Special Rapporteur, Mrs. Asma Jahangir

To inform of ‘a sly trick’

About two months ago in August 2016, I, Reza Akbari Monfared, wrote a letter to condemn the 1988 massacre and the criminal executions of my sisters and brothers. My sister, Maryam Akbari Monfared, too, wrote a similar letter, demanding that we at least be informed of the burial place of our sister and brothers. Now following these letters, due to a continuous monitoring by the Human Rights Council as well as the Special Rapporteur, Mrs. Asma Jahangir, the judiciary who avoids officially depriving me and my sister of meeting our families, has in an apparent attempt to disrespect and humiliate the political prisoners, issued new regulations and rules according to which family visits for prisoners are conditional on being handcuffed and shackled as well as wearing the prison uniform. They know that political prisoners will reject such terms as dishonorable, so they have made up such conditions to put prisoners under pressure and deprive them of their rights without being faced with human rights criticisms. For information of Human Rights Council, Mrs. Asemeh Jahangir, I and other political prisoners have not agreed to such terms. We refused to meet our families under these conditions and are ready to pay the price. Because we believe that those who should be handcuffed and shackled and be introduced to everyone while wearing prison uniforms, are the likes of Khamenei’s panegyrist (Saeid Toosi) so that people’s children are safe from his crimes, not the political prisoners who have been charged due to vindicating their rights as well as their people’s rights.”

Political prisoner Reza Akbari Monfared

 

Egypt’s PM in Red Sea after floods kill 18

Staff writer, Al Arabiya EnglishSaturday, 29 October 2016/Egypt’s Prime Minister Sherif Ismail visited the Red Sea governorate on Saturday to check damages caused by deadly rain floods that killed at least 18 people and 47 injured. The floods were caused by heavy rains in several towns in Upper Egypt and along the Red Sea coast on Wednesday and Thursday, severally affecting impoverished areas with poor infrastructure. The prime minister took a tour of the places affected by the flood in the town of Ras Gharib -150 kilometers north of Hurghada - and listened to explanations by the governor on how the affected areas would be rebuilt and what relief efforts are being accorded to victims, according to local daily Ahram Online. Six others were also killed and 24 others wounded early on Friday when two buses and three other vehicles overturned in floods on a highway in the governorate of Sohag, which lies some 500 km south of Cairo, the health ministry said. Schools in the coastal town, which is around 150 km north of Hurghada, have been indefinitely suspended due to the flooding.(With AFP)

 

What we know on missile launched at Makkah

Staff writer, Al Arabiya EnglishFriday, 28 October 2016/The Arab Coalition fighting in Yemen said on Thursday that it has intercepted a ballistic missile that hit 65 km away from Saudi Arabia's holy city of Makkah, saying it was fired by militias in Yemen.

The missile was fired from Saada province towards Makkah, the coalition said. No damage has been reported. Coalition forces confirmed that they targeted the sites where the missile was launched from in Saada and destroyed it shortly after the incident. The firing of the missile received condemnations from several countries with Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates reacting with statements condemning Iran and Houthi militias.

All you need to know about the missile

Egyptian military expert, Hisham al-Halabi revealed the type and capabilities of the missile that was launched by the Houthi militias towards Makkah.

In a statement to al-Arabiya.net, Halabi said that it was a Scud ballistic surface-to-surface rocket. The Yemeni army acquired this type of missiles from Russia, before being seized by Ali Abdullah Saleh’s militias. He stressed that operating the vehicle that carries the missile and launching it, require high technology and advanced courses and this could not possibly have been done by Houthi militias. It was clear for the expert that the missile was launched by Iranian experts or military officials belonging to ousted Saleh’s militia. The firing of the missile towards Makkah received condemnations from the Muslim world. It was intercepted by the Arab coalition forces. Halabi said that the missile has a range of more than 300 kilometers and targets facilities on the ground. He added that Saudi Arabia has anti-missile defense system that can shield the country by destroying the launched missile before reaching its target. The military expert said that Saleh’s militia detains this type of missiles, adding that there are many types: A, B, C and D. The first missile which is “A” was launched in the fifties and ranged up to more than 180 kilometers. Missile “B” was launched at the beginning of the sixties with a range of 220 km. Missile “C” was launched at the end of the sixties with a range of 280 kilometers. Missile “D” was launched in the eighties with a range of more than 300 kilometers. The accuracy, speed and range of these missiles vary. Halabi said that former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, has used these types of missiles in the war against Iran and during the first Gulf War. North Korea has developed and upgraded some of these missiles, he added. Halabi confirmed that such missiles should not worry the Saudi Kingdom because Saudi forces have the most advanced anti-missile defense systems that can destroy ballistics in the air before reaching the target and can as well destroy their bases on the ground.

Reactions and condemnations

Bahrain condemned on Friday the firing of the missile toward Makkah in a statement sent to Al Arabiya News Channel saying that "the targeting of the Holy Site presents a direct insult toward Muslims everywhere and constitutes a hate and religious crime from the militias’ part." UAE’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Abdullah bin Zayed tweeted his condemnation saying that “Iran claims itself Islamic while supporting militias firing of rockets into Makkah”. Qatar responded by saying that launching of the ballistic missile attack on Makkah hampers the efforts to resolve the Yemeni crisis peacefully. The GCC council said the Houthi attack on Makkah is “evidence of their refusal to comply with the international community and its decisions.”Kuwait on Friday said the attack violates holy Islamic sites. The Arab League said also targeting Makkah violates sanctity of Islamic sites. Jordan’s Minister of State for Media Affairs Mohammad Al-Momani said such “horrendous act” does not help what is happening on ground in Yemen, and it is provocation aimed at Muslims. Meanwhile, Egypt also denounced the “unacceptable” and “unprecedented” attack which represents a “dangerous escalation.” Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam's center of learning, in Cairo condemned the “treacherous” attack and said it cannot happen from anyone who has some faith in Islam. Also, foreign minister of the Yemeni internationally recognized government said militias launching the Makkah-bound ballistic missile is “evidence” that they do not want peace, and that they are an “Iranian tool” aimed at destroyed Yemen.


Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on on October 28-29/16

The New Anti-Racist Racists
Douglas Murray/Gatestone Institute/October 28/16
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9210/splc-racists
There is a trait campaigning groups have that is well known. Once they have achieved their objective, they continue. Usually it is because there are people with salaries at stake, pensions, perks and more.
Suddenly the SPLC seemed to spy a new fascism. The SPLC saw this new fascism in people who objected to people flying planes into skyscrapers, decapitating journalists and aid workers and blowing up the finish line of marathons.
One got the impression that it had become immensely useful for some people to be able to smear those concerned about Islamic fundamentalism, and try to make them akin to Nazis. The only other movements who find this equally useful are, of course, Islamic extremists.
Here is this "anti-racist" organisation, largely made up of white men who present themselves as being anti-racists, and yet who spend their time attacking Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a black immigrant woman. At the top of any list of "hate-groups," the SPLC must in future be sure to place itself.
The SPLC's list of "anti-Muslim activists" also includes a practising Muslim, Maajid Nawaz, one of the most principled and courageous people around calling out the extremists in his faith for their bigotry and hatred. He does so, like Hirsi Ali, at no small risk to himself.
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SLPC), based in Montgomery, Alabama, has struck again. The self-appointed boundary-markers and policemen of free discussion have issued what they call a "Field Guide" to help "guide" the media in "countering prominent anti-Muslim extremists." It is hard to know where to start with such idiocy, so let us start from the beginning.
The SPLC was founded in 1971, ostensibly to fight for civil rights among other good causes. By the end of its first decade it was targeting the KKK and other racist organisations. So far so good. But like many a campaigning organisation, they experienced the happy blow of basically winning their argument. By the 1990s, there were mercifully few racist groups in America going about unchallenged. When a member of the KKK cropped up everybody in civil society pretty much understood that here was a bad person who should not be given a free pass.
But there is an odd trait in campaigning groups that is well known. Once they have achieved their objective, they continue. Why is this so? Usually it is because there are people with salaries at stake, pensions, perks and more. Campaigning for a particular thing or against a particular thing has become their way of life and their means of earning. And so they find a way to continue. For some years, the SPLC staggered around in such a manner, as pointless and purposeless an organisation as could be imagined.
And then in the last decade something happened to this increasingly obscure institution. It is not for me to speculate why or how this happened, whether it had to do with new staff or new money, but the focus of the organisation changed. Suddenly the SPLC seemed to spy a new fascism. They did not spy it in people who flew planes into skyscrapers, decapitated American journalists and aid workers or blew up the finish line of marathons. No, the SPLC saw it somewhere else. The SPLC saw this new fascism in people who objected to people flying planes into skyscrapers, decapitating journalists and aid workers and blowing up the finish line of marathons. For the SPLC, the big threat on the horizon was not Islamists but those people who objected to Islamists -- that is, people they called "Islamophobes." In the same way, they did not seem to have any particular problem with jihad, but they developed a huge problem with people they called "counter-jihadists." To their existing lists of designated "hate-groups" they now added such people.
More honest groups might have balked at such a stance. More informed groups would have walked a thousand miles from such a stance. But the SPLC did no such thing. In fact, one got the impression that it had become immensely useful for some people to be able to smear those concerned about Islamic fundamentalism and try to make them akin to Nazis. The only other movements who find this equally useful are, of course, Islamic extremists.
The media today in America are increasingly wary of Islamic extremists. Most journalists do not want the parameters of what should be discussed dictated by Islamic fanatics. Whereas an organisation such as the SPLC, which did something good forty years ago, is the sort of institution that the media is for the time-being happy to hear from. Perhaps after this latest development that will no longer be the case.
The SPLC's latest production is disgraceful, discrediting and sloppy even by its own increasingly disgraceful, discredited and sloppy standards. For this publication, they have listed "Fifteen anti-Muslim activists," most likely in the hope that they will scare the media off inviting them on, or the wider public from being allowed to listen to them.
Among the list is Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The SPLC lists a set of allegedly outrageous things that she has said, which have appeared in such obscure and extreme venues as The Wall Street Journal and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. They mention in passing -- as though it were an incidental mishap -- that Hirsi Ali's film-making partner, Theo van Gogh, was slaughtered on an Amsterdam street by a jihadist, with a death-threat to Hirsi Ali pinned into van Gogh's dying body. But they still clearly cannot imagine why anybody would have a problem with such a thing. One wonders how the staff of the SPLC would feel if one of their colleagues was murdered in such a manner? Doubtless they would shrug it off. Yet it remains that case that here is this "anti-racist" organisation, largely made up of white men who present themselves as being anti-racists, and yet who spend their time attacking a black immigrant woman.
Hirsi Ali is of course well known for being an ex-Muslim. But the SPLC's list of "anti-Muslim activists" also includes a practising Muslim. Of course, if Maajid Nawaz were an Islamic extremist then SPLC would have nothing to say about him. But Maajid Nawaz is not an extremist -- he is one of the most principled and courageous people around calling out the extremists in his faith for their bigotry and hatred. He does so, like Hirsi Ali, at no small risk to himself. If the jihadists within Islam are ever going to be defeated, it will be because of Muslims like Nawaz, who are willing to argue for reform on liberal, progressive, pluralistic and democratic grounds.
Yet for the SPLC, this Muslim is not just not the right type of Muslim -- he is "anti-Muslim." The charges that SPLC levels against Nawaz are (this is not satire) that he has (a) co-operated with, rather than worked against, the British police (b) suggested that customers in banks should have to show their faces (c) once failed to abide by the most hardline interpretation of Islamic blasphemy law (d) once visited a strip club on his stag-night.
The Southern Poverty Law Center decided to turn itself into a racist organization, with its attacks on principled and courageous critics of radical Islamism such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali (left), a prominent ex-Muslim writer, and Maajid Nawaz (right), a moderate practising Muslim writer, radio host and politician. (Images source: Wikimedia Commons)
Who knows what lapses in personal decorum have occurred among the staff of the SPLC? Perhaps one of them once had extra-marital intercourse? Or perhaps one of them once consumed a glass of Merlot, in contravention of the hardest-line interpretations of Islamic scripture? Who knows, but who the hell would anybody else be to judge, and who the hell do the SPLC think they are? It seems that the SPLC has decided to turn itself from an anti-racist organisation into a racist one. An organisation that used to prosecute white racists has ended up attacking black and Muslim immigrants. At the top of any list of "hate-groups," the SPLC must in future be sure to place itself.
**Douglas Murray, British author, commentator and public affairs analyst, is based in London, England.
© 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.


Muslim Imperialism Reaches the United Nations

Denis MacEoin/Gatestone Institute/October 29/16

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9173/unesco-muslim-imperialism

UNESCO has joined forces with Islamic State. The fundamentalists now have a new weapon: resolutions passed by servile international bodies.

An earlier delay and the opposition of UNESCO's chief, Irina Bokova, had raised hopes that this act of jihadist, barbaric, unjust, and, frankly, arrogant supremacism might be voted down. It was not. Now a new lie was given the sanction of the world's largest and most unaccountable body whose reason for being is to preserve significant sites, not to bowdlerize them.

Lies by UNESCO to rewrite history, erasing all traces of Judaism and Christianity to favour a jihadist Islamic fancy, were already under way in 2015. UNESCO fraudulently renamed two ancient Biblical Jewish sites, Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs, as Islamic sites. Historically, Islam did not even exist until the seventh century.

This is the history of Islam, how it takes over -- with both hard jihad (violence) and soft jihad (usurping history, migration [hijrah], political and cultural infiltration), and intimidation (soft jihad with the threat of hard jihad underneath it). What is even more saddening is that often, as with this vote, it is done with the West's cooperation and voluntary submission.

Before the United Nations, with its authoritarian, anti-democratic voting blocs, finishes eradicating Western, Judeo-Christian civilization, as it is clearly trying to do, it is high time for Western democracies to run, not walk, away, before further harm comes to them too, as it surely promises to do.

UNESCO last August planned to vote on the historical status of Jerusalem's Temple Mount and its associated Western Wall. Back then, this author stated that UNESCO's plan was to deny any Jewish link to this most central of all Jewish holy sites, to trash a history going back thousands of years, and to claim the Mount and the Wall as Islamic sites.

Islam believes that it is eternal and had therefore preceded the other two great monotheisms, Judaism and Christianity, even though it was only to become visible to the world through Mohammad in the seventh century AD, but entitled to elbow out the two older religions.

Lies by UNESCO to rewrite history, erasing all traces of Judaism and Christianity to favour a jihadist Islamic fancy, were already under way in 2015. UNESCO fraudulently renamed two ancient Biblical Jewish sites, Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs -- abracadabra -- Islamic sites.

Historically, Islam did not even exist until the seventh century.

This is the history of Islam, how it takes over -- with both hard jihad (violence) and soft jihad (usurping history, migration [hijrah], political and cultural infiltration), and intimidation (soft jihad with the threat of hard jihad underneath it). What is even more saddening is that often, as with this vote, it is done with the West's cooperation and voluntary submission.

The Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron is now, according to this deeply compromised body, supposedly the "Ibrahimi Mosque," and Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem is supposedly the "Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque," even though it never could have been a mosque. As the saying goes, "calling a cat a pig does not make it one."

UNESCO's latest resolution to deny any Jewish link to Jerusalem's Temple Mount, the most central of all Jewish holy sites, is not the first time the body has tried to rewrite and falsify a history going back thousands of years. UNESCO had previously declared the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron (left) as the "Ibrahimi Mosque," and Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem (right) as the "Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque." (Images source: Wikimedia Commons)

Now a new lie has been given the sanction of the world's largest and most unaccountable body, whose reason for being is to preserve significant sites, not to bowdlerize them.

On October 13, the news was broadcast that UNESCO had passed a majority vote endorsing this rape of archaeological and Biblical history. On the following Tuesday, the resolution was endorsed by the body's executive board. If your majority, however, consists of members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (the OIC, a bloc consisting of 56 Islamic states plus "Palestine", and possibly the largest bloc at the UN), a fraudulent result such as this should probably not come as a surprise.

An earlier delay and the opposition of UNESCO's chief, Irina Bokova, had raised hopes that this act of jihadist, barbaric, unjust, and, frankly, arrogant supremacism might be voted down. It was not. Following the vote, Bokova issued a powerful statement condemning it, saying, among other things:

"The heritage of Jerusalem is indivisible, and each of its communities has a right to the explicit recognition of their history and relationship with the city. To deny, conceal or erase any of the Jewish, Christian or Muslim traditions undermines the integrity of the site, and runs counter to the reasons that justified its inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage list.

"Nowhere more than in Jerusalem do Jewish, Christian and Muslim heritage and traditions share space and interweave to the point that they support each other. These cultural and spiritual traditions build on texts and references, known by all, that are an intrinsic part of the identities and history of peoples."

Now the Christian and Jewish worlds will have to deal with the resolution's ramifications, the first of which is that all democracies would be wise immediately to abandon the United Nations, or at the very least to stop funding it, before further harm comes to them too, as it surely promises to do.

The resolution was first proposed to UNESCO by seven Muslim states (Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, and Sudan on behalf of the Palestinian Authority -- all OIC groupies -- in October 2015. Any reputable body empowered to protect ancient religious sites would have rejected it out of hand and given those responsible a dusty answer.

UNESCO's parent body, the United Nations, has over many years increasingly shown itself as untransparent, unaccountable and thoroughly disreputable -- from its $100 billion, never-prosecuted, oil-for-food embezzlement scandal exposed in 2004, to "Peacekeepers" who demand sex from children in exchange for food; to its incessant, fabricated persecution of one member state, Israel, while giving unlimited passes to the most ostentatious violators of human rights in other nations.

Before the UN, with its authoritarian, anti-democratic voting blocs, finishes eradicating Western, Judeo-Christian civilization, as it is clearly trying to do, it is high time for Western democracies to run, not walk, away.

Of UNESCO's 195 member states, 35 are fully Islamic nations, another 21 are members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and four are OIC observer states. That makes 60 who represent a bloc favourable to Muslim-inspired resolutions, yet UNESCO's Board consists of only 58 members. That board approved Resolution 19 with 33 votes in favour, six against and 17 abstentions. Ghana and Turkmenistan were absent altogether. Only six countries voted against the resolution -- the US, the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, Lithuania and Estonia. Revealingly, France, Spain, Sweden, Russia and Slovenia were among those who supported it. It is not hard to identify the source of the majority vote.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu dismissed the move as another "absurd" UN resolution:

"UNESCO ignores the unique Jewish connection to the Temple Mount, the site of two temples for 1,000 years, and the place to which Jews prayed for thousands of years... The UN is rewriting a basic part of human history and proving that there is no low to which it will not reach."

Jewish patience in the Holy Land is being tested to the limit.

UNESCO's vote is just the latest example of Muslim supremacism as expressed in the demolition, re-definition, or outright expropriation of the places of worship, shrines, and other buildings linked to other faiths -- invariably faiths that have long preceded Islam itself, including Hinduism and Buddhism, as well as Judaism and Christianity. The process began in the year 630, two years before the prophet Muhammad's death, when his forces conquered his hometown of Mecca. During a brief stay there, before returning to Medina, he ordered all of the 360 idols in the Ka'aba, and all those in private homes, to be destroyed. The Ka'aba itself, long a centre of pagan worship, was transformed overnight into the most important building of the Islamic faith, the Qibla or the spot towards which Muslims still turn in prayer five times a day. It sits at the heart of the Masjid al-Haram, the most important mosque in the Muslim world.[1]

Early Muslims did more than expropriate the building for their own purposes. They created a legend to justify their possession of the site.[2]

But the Qur'an and subsequent Muslim tradition are not content to re-establish history, bringing Abraham out of the Land of Canaan as far down as the Arabian Peninsula. They transform Abraham himself. According to the Qur'an (3:67): "Abraham was neither a Jew (yahudian) nor a Christian (nasranian), but was rather a pure worshipper of God (hanifan), a Muslim...."

This forms part of a broader enterprise. In Islamic doctrine, all true, monotheist religion has, from the beginning, been only Islam. Thus, Adam was the first Muslim and the first prophet. Abraham was a Muslim and a prophet. Moses was a Muslim and a prophet. Noah was a Muslim and a prophet. Jesus was a Muslim and a prophet. In the beginning, everyone was a Muslim and all land belonged to Islam. In the Qur'an, we read:

"Say, 'We believe in God, and in that which was sent down to us, and in that which was sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in what Moses and Jesus were given, and in what the prophets were given form their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we submit."

That last phrase reads nahnu lahu muslimun. It can be read generically, meaning "those who submit themselves to God"; or specifically to mean "We are Muslims."

The belief that all true religions involve submission to God and that, in this sense, all true religion may be defined as "Islam" (literally "submission"), may be taken as a unifying, comprehensive declaration of a universal truth, without prejudice to anyone except "idolaters" such as Hindus and Buddhists.

But this generalization was soon forgotten when Muslims found themselves in competition with the followers of other faiths: Jews in Medina, Christians throughout the Byzantine empire, or Zoroastrians in Iran. Muhammad had originally preached his religion as one in harmony with the views of the "People of the Book," the Jews and Christians who had been sent their own scriptures by God. But not long after his taking control of Medina, he turned on the city's three important Jewish tribes, expelling two, then attacking the third, the Banu Qurayza, beheading all the men and teenage males and taking the women and children as slaves. From here on, the Qur'an is rife with condemnations of the Jews as a people and of Christians as corrupters of scripture: "O believers, do not take Jews and Christians as your friends" (Qur'an 5:51)

Once Muslim armies went out to conquer Persia, Turkey, Greece, the Levant, all of North Africa, the Balkans, Hungary, Poland and then conquered Portugal, Andalusia in Southern Spain and other Christian territories, all sense of an identity with the People of the Book as, in a sense, fellow Muslims, went out the window, to be replaced by a sense of them as dhimmi or subjected people, the preservation of whose lives and property were contingent on the payment of a protection tax (the jizya) and on agreeing to live as humiliated denizens under special laws of subjugation in lands ruled by Islamic caliphates.

One consequence of this unequal relationship were countless rules, including special, marked clothing that predated the compulsory yellow Star of David that Jews were forced to wear during Hitler's Third Reich, and that churches and synagogues could not be founded, repaired, rebuilt or given prominence in competition with mosques; and there could be no audible summons to Jewish or Christian prayers.

More than that, the occupation and transformation of lands of earlier religions -- Persia, Turkey, Greece, all of North Africa and much of Eastern Europe -- proceeded apace during unstoppable Islamic conquests. In Jerusalem, two structures were erected on the Temple Mount (giving rise to the claim for UNESCO's recognition): the Al-Aqsa Mosque (Masjid al-Aqsa, "the Farthest Mosque", although no one has a clue where that might have been; very possibly in Arabia) and the Qubbat al-Sakhra, or Dome of the Rock, constructed on the alleged site of Abraham's aborted sacrifice, no longer of Isaac but now Ishmael, the progenitor of the Arabs. Both were built within the first century of Islam.

There is no need here to list all the churches converted to mosques during succeeding centuries. Most notable are the Hagia Sophia churches of the Christian Byzantine empire in Constantinople, Eregli, Nicaea, and Trebizond, refashioned as mosques after the Ottoman conquest of 1453.[3]

Today, the Islamic State has destroyed or converted churches, shrines, and other monuments (including Muslim sites) in Iraq and Syria.

Similar devastation took place under the various Islamic states in India, with something like 2000 Hindu temples destroyed to make way for mosques and other Muslim structures, while a similar fate befell others.

This extraordinary level of fanaticism is not unique to Islam (one only has to think of Oliver Cromwell and his puritans in England), but it has been far more extensive and has continued for many more centuries.

It is a totalitarian puritanism. Today's resolution against the Jewish faith must be put in this context.

Today, the Mecca and Medina of the first and second centuries of the Islamic faith have been all but wrecked, not by the Islamic State or any other radical entity, but by the Wahhabi Saudi government. In the past two decades, major historical sites in Mecca and Medina, all related to the lifetime of the Islamic Prophet Mohammad and shortly after, have been destroyed or disfigured to the point where neither city is recognizable save for the Ka'ba and the Grand Mosque in Mecca, and the Prophet's Mosque in Medina. And the two major mosques are themselves much expanded modern constructions.[4]

UNESCO has put Jewish sites with Muslim names into Muslim hands, in the heart of Israel's capital, to try slowly to destroy the Jewish state. UNESCO is not fooling anyone.

It may not be long before Christian holy places and churches in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Nazareth will also be handed over on a plate to placate the forces of Islam, fearful of what they may do not just in the Middle East, but in Europe, North America and Europe, happy to have someone finally try to eliminate those supposedly pesky Jews. All Judeo-Christian countries would be wise to pull out of the UN, or at least cease funding it -- before it is too late for them, too.

*Denis MacEoin is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute. He has just completed work on a large study of Western concerns about Islam.

[1] See William Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina, Oxford University Press, 1956, p. 69. And see Yousef Meri, Ka'aba, Oxford Bibliographies Online Research Guide, Oxford University Press, 2011

[2] There is more than one version of this tale, but it is broadly this: the Ka'aba was first built by the Prophet Adam with the help of angels, then destroyed in Noah's flood, and finally rebuilt by the Prophet Abraham and his son Ishmael. The Qur'an itself advances the story about Abraham's role:

"And [remember] when We made the House [that is, the Ka'aba] a place of visitation [a pilgrimage site] for mankind, and a sanctuary, 'Take the place of Abraham as a place of prayer.' And we made a covenant with Abraham and Ishmael, 'Purify My House for those who circumambulate, those who live there in retreat, and those who bow and prostrate." .... And [remember] when Abraham and Ishmael were raising the foundations of the House, 'Our Lord, accept it from us. Truly, You are the Hearing and the Knowing.'" [Qur'an 2: 125, 127]

[3] The former Portuguese cathedral of Tangier, now the city's Great Mosque; the Christian basilica of St. John the Baptist, captured in 634 and turned into the Great Umayyad Mosque, one of the oldest, and considered the fourth holiest site in Islam; the small Catholic Basilica of Saint Vincent of Lérins, after the Umayyad conquest demolished to make way for the Great Mosque of Córdoba (restored as a cathedral after the Renconquista in 1236). Under the Ottomans, churches in Cyprus and Hungary were replaced as mosques; and as French colonies became independent in the 20th century, many churches were converted into mosques, including the St. Philip Cathedral in Algiers, the Cathédrale Notre-Dame des Sept Douleurs in Constantine (Algeria), the Tripoli Cathedral and the Benghazi Cathedral in Libya.

[4] The vast Jannat al-Baqi cemetery, which holds so many remains of Muhammad's family, close companions and the earliest Muslim saints, has been levelled, and all domes and mausoleums turned to dust. That act followed earlier levellings by Wahhabis in 1906 and the ultra-Wahhabi Ikhwan in 1925. Those included the graves of the martyrs of the Battle of Uhud and that of Hamza, the prophet's uncle and most beloved supporter. So too the Mosque of Fatima (Muhammad's daughter), the Mosque of the Manaratayn (the twin minarets), and the cupola that marked the burial place of the prophet's incisor tooth. Medina as well, the home of Muhammad's Ethiopian wife, Maryam, where his son Ibrahim was born, has been paved over. In Mecca, the house of his first wife, Khadija, the first person to whom he divulged his mission, has been turned into public toilets. In 1998, the grave of the prophet's mother, Amina bint Wahb, was bulldozed in Abwa, after which gasoline was poured on it and set alight.

© 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.

 

What’s next for the refugees of Calais?

Yara al-Wazir/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

It has been a tumultuous week for the people of “the jungle” that is the in-situ refugee camp in Calais in France. The camp, which was established in the mid-2000s, saw its population boom from a few hundred to a few thousand – over 9000 to be exact. For months, the French government has been threatening the closure of the camp yet has not accelerated or increased the rate of support to speed the processing of refugees that arrive at the camp. As the camps population continued to grow throughout the summer, the French authorities this week announced of the closure of the camp and the clearing out of its inhabitants. As I watched the camps population board buses to leave the camp, I couldn’t help but wonder what is next for them? More importantly, what is next for a human population that refuses to open its doors to people who are in need? Worse yet, how can there be such little support for the refugees coming to Europe, when a few decades ago it was the people of Europe who were fleeing Europe on boats? The French authorities have had years to develop a system to move people out of the camp. They have had years to collaborate with the UK government to reunite people with their families in the UK and they have had years to set up an expedited transit system to process the camps population. Instead, the French authorities decided to burn the camp down and provide refugees with an option of what province they are relocated to in France as they await further processing.

In terms of offering background on the province, what lies ahead, what situation they will be in, whether they will continue to live in tents or if adequate housing, healthcare and education has been set up with them, they were not offered any information.

The phrase “beggars cannot be choosers” comes to mind, but these people are not beggars, they are not asking for money, they are asking for an opportunity to live respectfully after their houses, families and lives were burnt down in their home countries. The refugees come from countries that have suffered for decades, and in the past the French forces have participated in “bringing freedom” to their home countries, including Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. The timing of the destruction of the so-called Jungle refugee camp in Calais seems nothing more than a strategic power play by the French authorities to steer the election by making it look like they are in complete control . These three countries put together make up over 25 per cent of the camps population, according to data by the Refugee Rights research group. There seems to be very little logical reasoning in bombing another country to free its people, but not helping those who flee to the country that allegedly wants to free them.

Most reports indicate that the refugees will be moved to reception centers where their cases will be processed in approximately four months. What happens next is dependent on the outcome of their case investigations. The reality is that the amount of time it takes to respond to a humanitarian crisis depends on the amount of political power that is at stake – in this case, the French presidential election is coming up in 2017. The timing of the destruction of the so-called Jungle refugee camp in Calais seems nothing more than a strategic power play by the French authorities to steer the election by making it look like they are in complete control. This is clear in the reports and comments coming from the French media. If we take a step back and question why erasing this crisis off French soil is required for the election, we will realize that there is a portion of the population that is insensitive and bears little to no empathy with refugees. If history has taught us anything it is that there is no peace in injustice, and no rationale in hatred. Angela Merkel identified refugees to be an ideal economic opportunity and agreed to accept them; unfortunately her neighbors do not share her rational thinking. This week I am sad for the refugees whose tents were burnt down, but also disappointed in the lack of empathy shown by humanity. What would happen if you had no place to go?

 

When ‘genocide’ unfolds in the backyard of a Nobel laureate

Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

Over the years, some Nobel Peace Prize awards have raised eyebrows. Most famously, the one awarded to Barack Obama in 2009 for nothing more than suggesting that we all get along and try to fix the Middle East. Many thought at the time that this award was premature, and the fact that Obama has left the Middle East an even more chaotic and violent mess than he found it surely vindicates that thought.

But when the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Aung San Suu Kyi in 1991, nobody would have expected that we would come to question that decision. Here was an outstanding campaigner for democracy and freedom for her people in Myanmar, who chose to suffer from persecution from the military junta who ruled her country at home than to flee abroad and hide behind Western diplomatic protection.

Yet Ms Suu Kyi has become the first person to hold the dubious distinction of having a group of other Nobel Peace Prize laureates accuse her of presiding over a genocide. Desmond Tutu from South Africa, Mairead Maguire from Northern Ireland, Jody Williams from the USA, Tawakkol Karman from Yeman, Shirin Ebadi from Iran, Leymah Gbowee from Liberia, Adolfo Pérez Esquivel from Argentina and Malala Yousafzai from Pakistan have all expressed immense concern over the fate of the Rohingya minority in Myanmar, as well as Economics Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen and many other distinguished leading global moral voices. There is even a petition on change.org signed by 81,000+ individuals urging the Nobel Committee to withdraw her prize.

At every opportunity afforded to her so far, Ms Suu Kyi has failed to stand up for the Rohingya

What is maddening about the situation is that Ms Suu Kyi has already been in power for over one year after becoming leader of Myanmar in their first reasonably democratic elections in half a century, she has overwhelming popular support, and could carry just about any policy into effect she would desire, yet the situation of the Rohingya in this past year has gotten worse, not better.

Marginalized Rohingya

Marginalised for decades, refused citizenship in the country of their birth by law in contravention of the UN Charter since 1982 and the target of regular communal violence, as well as systematic state violence, over half of the 1.5-2 million Rohingya have been displaced from the country of their birth in the past four decades, while more than 140,000 languish in internal displaced persons’ camps, where they are denied healthcare and education, and from where the authorities discourage them from leaving “for their own protection.”

These conditions have triggered successive waves of emigration which have seriously strained the resources of neighbouring countries and have attracted their ire toward Myanmar. This movement of refugees culminated last year when in the spring, the regional migration crisis shortly overshadowed even the European migration crisis in the news cycle. Yet after the election of Ms Suu Kyi last November, many in the Rohingya community in Myanmar and abroad were hopeful. They trusted in the woman they affectionately call “mother” and this spring has not seen similar waves of emigration as the previous years.

But their faith seems to have been misplaced. At every opportunity afforded to her so far, Ms Suu Kyi has failed to stand up for the Rohingya and tackle those in her country who would ethnically cleanse these people. Indeed, she has chosen to perpetuate the myth that the Rohingya are a people who do not belong in Myanmar, has refused to even acknowledge their existence as an indigenous ethnic group, instead referring to them as “Bengalis” just as the most extreme nationalists do and is conspicuously failing intervene as parts of the police force and military in the local state of Rakhine have killed over 30 and displaced more than 15,000 in a fresh wave of violence in the past month.

For the past year, we have given Ms Suu Kyi the benefit of doubt, just like we gave her the benefit of the doubt before her election. We liked to hope that she knew what she was doing and that she was slowly but surely going to change the perception of the Rohingya in Myanmar so that in the longer term they could be reintegrated into mainstream society, eventually as equal members. But the evidence belies that hope. And the recent surge in state violence toward the group shows that we no longer have the luxury to wait and hope for the best. We must demand that our leaders take charge of the situation and intervene on behalf of the Rohingya, where Ms Suu Kyi will not.

 

Obama’s inheritance in the Middle East

Hisham Melhem/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

It is an old and well-established cyclical Washington ritual. Every four years, scholars, policy wonks and former officials at American think tanks labor to churn out reports and policy papers about the domestic and international challenges awaiting the new president, laden with policy recommendations and alternative options, designed in part to propel them back to power, through Washington’s infamous “revolving door.” On rare occasions, the authors of these reports get the chance to translate their proposals and recommendations into policies, but for the most part these reports are part of the intellectual exercises, debates and ideological competitions among political parties and various interest groups. These reports acquire more weight during open elections or after economic crises or following international conflicts involving the United States, when significant policy shifts, corrective approaches or even radical alternatives maybe requited.

The new president will inherit from President Obama a not so brave world where an assertive Russia is wreaking havoc in the Ukraine and Syria and an emboldened Iran is bent on putting states like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen firmly in its political orbit. At the end of Obama’s tenure, his pivot to Asia is not reassuring to America’s traditional allies (the Philippines wants to end America’s military presence in two years) and is not deterring China from intimidating the allies while controlling and militarizing disputed islands and creating exclusion zones and airspaces. An exhausted European Union is facing, in the words of Jean-Claude Juncker the EU’s highest official, “an existential crisis” brought about in part by the influx of a huge wave of refugees and migrants from the Middle East, South Asia and Africa and frequently visited by Middle Eastern inspired terrorism and increasingly susceptible to the political machinations of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Inheriting the wind

Judging by the plethora of published and soon to be published reports, and on conferences designed to provide a road map out of the Middle East wilderness for the new president, there is almost a consensus that Obama’s timid leadership style should be avoided and replaced with a more assertive approach, particularly in the Middle East to deter Russia and Iran. Even those who support the nuclear deal with Iran would hasten to say that the agreement did not moderate the Islamic Republic’s regional policies, but in fact the nuclear deal may have encouraged Tehran to be more aggressive, particularly in Syria and Yemen. And while the two-year-old international air campaign against ISIS in Iraq and Syria is finally achieving significant successes, there are ample concerns that even the liberation of Mosul will likely be a pyrrhic victory, thus deepening Iraq’s corrosive identity politics. While the primary responsibility for the fraying of the mostly majority Arab states falls on the political, intellectual and economic classes in those states, and their abject failure to create viable civil states, undergirded by political empowerment and economic development, it is also true that the US military interventions in Iraq and Libya have contributed to the unraveling of the region. Obama’s dithering and contradictory approaches to the war in Syria, his refusal to stop the atrocities committed against Syrian civilians by the Assad regime and its Iranian and Russian allies, his initial denial of ISIS’ threat and his refusal to deter Iran’s regional rampages and extract a price from Russia for its butchery in Syria and finally his abandonment of the cause of upholding human rights have created immense problems for his successor.

Syria, the new president’s problem from hell

Last week, the liberal Center for American Progress (CAP), which usually supports President Obama’s policies, issued a lengthy report titled “Leveraging US Power in the Middle East; Advocating Strengthening Regional Partnerships and in A Departure From Obama’s Policy” calling for targeted limited military action to stop the military depredations of the Assad regime and Russia against Syrian civilians. “The next administration should be prepared to use US airpower to protect civilians from regime barrel bombs and support moderate opposition elements.” And in another noted departure, the report states boldly that the nuclear agreement of 2015 “does not make Iran a regional partner for the United States” and in fact “Iran continues to pose a threat to US interests and values in the Middle East and around the world.”

The new American president will inherit a crumbling region, half of it in a state of conflagration and the other half struggling to protect itself from flames

Beyond addressing the immediate challenges of Syria and Iran, the CAP report calls for organizing a regional conference by early 2018 “on a shared long-term vision for the Middle East.” It proposes long term initiatives to “renew US engagement on pluralism, values, and universal human rights.” The report’s recommendations related to security, economic development and political empowerment are thoughtful and practical. It stresses the need for the countries of the region to own their problems and to define their security needs but not solely in a negative way as a reaction to Iran or political Islamist groups. More importantly, it calls on the next administration to “resist the temptation towards fatalism regarding the region’s political currents and reach out directly to the people of the region, particularly those who advance universal values.”

These reports are written mostly by scholars and former officials who served in former President Bill Clinton’s administration and some of their recommendations on Syria and Iran, particularly those in the CAP’s report echoes those of former Secretary of State and the Democratic nominee for the presidency Hillary Clinton. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who is co-chairing the Atlantic Council’s team working on the report with Stephen Hadley, former National Security advisor to President George W. Bush, told the Washington Post that the immediate task in Syria is to “alleviate the horrors that are being visited on the population.” Hadley went further, saying the US should strongly consider “using standoff weapons, like cruise missiles, to neutralize [Assad’s] air force so that he cannot fly.”

Not surprisingly, Iran’s apologists and the juvenile left pounced on all the authors of these reports accusing them of war mongering, just for proposing safe zones and the limited use of military force to protect Syrian civilians. Some even accused President Obama of pursuing regime change in Syria, a stupid charge that has no basis in reality. The hypocrisy of this pseudo left reaches new levels of depravity when they totally avoid any mention of Russia and the Syrian regime’s barbarism against the civilians of Syria. The total rejection of the use of American military force to protect civilians is utterly naïve and dangerous. The US invasion of Iraq was a historic blunder, but it should be used as an excuse to prevent the use of military force to protect civilians. The use of American military force in recent decades saved Kuwait from the clutches of Saddam Hussein, and protected the Iraqi Kurds from his chemical weapons. America’s air power saved countless civilian lives in Bosnia and Kosovo, in a region where the US has no security or economic interests. Even President Obama who is reluctant to use military force, beyond air power had to send Special Forces to save thousands of civilian Yazidis from the marauders of ISIS in Iraq in 2014.

The elusive deliverance

These reports and recommendations were written in anticipation of a Hillary Clinton administration. Less than ten days before the elections, Clinton is once again the target of a renewed FBI investigation into her infamous emails. Going into the last stretch of the race Clinton is still ahead of Donald Trump, but the distance between them is shrinking, although most opinion polls still point to a Clinton victory. But, if Clinton ekes out a narrow victory, and the Republicans maintained control of even one chamber of Congress, she will be hobbled for a long time by a Republican Party determined to keep her under pressure. Hillary’s first year in office will be consumed by endless squabbles with Congress regarding the approval of her cabinet and the Supreme Court vacancy. Even, without a hostile congress, a Clinton presidency will be forced to deal with Obama’s considerable unfinished domestic business, particularly the deeply flawed Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Internationally, Clinton will be preoccupied with shoring up NATO and America’s alliances in Asia. Russia, Iran and the Assad regime know that, and one would assume that they will double their aggression to finish the resistance in Aleppo. Already, it may be too late to save Aleppo, by the time Clinton is sworn in come January.

Then, there is the old nagging question about Clinton’s credibility to deliver on her promises. Publicly, Clinton has consistently called for a more muscular role against Assad, including the establishment of No Fly zones and creating safe zones on the ground to protect civilians. But in private, Clinton expresses a more cautious approach. In a closed speech in 2013 Clinton admitted that creating a No Fly zone will be difficult and will require attacking Syria’s air defense systems, which means “you are going to kill a lot of Syrians” according to a document released by WikiLeaks. Clinton also knows, that the military equation today is radically different than what it was in 2013, given Russia’s military intervention last year. At best and assuming that the stars are in perfect alignment, there is a narrowing window for Clinton to make a positive difference in the region, if important actors are either willing to cooperate or are compelled by force or the threat of force to be part of the solution.

The new American president will inherit a crumbling region, half of it in a state of conflagration and the other half struggling to protect itself from the flames. One is at a loss to sort out the numerous combatants let alone know clearly what they want ultimately from what seems to be generational struggles where only time and total exhaustion could deliver the region from its collective death wish.

 

A complicated and ignorant man

Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/October 28/16

It seems that the few days before the election of a US president can be seen as the hours which separate Hillary Clinton from entering the White House.

According to recent opinion polls, Clinton leads Donald Trump by many points. This is not due to something special about Clinton as much as it’s due to her bad competitor. Trump is a strange character who, whenever he commits a mistake, rises from it only to fall into another. Cases against him range from molestation allegations to insulting minorities and they do not end with statements that are hostile to Muslims, Mexicans and women. However, Trump going this far is a phenomenon which must be studied. He probably rose to power as a reaction to real frustration with Obama’s policies. It is not only Obama’s rivals who felt this frustration as even his supporters who voted for him, including many African-Americans, have also felt it.

Truth be told, Trump’s primary rival has been himself. He’s been the major enemy of his own campaign. Trump’s ignorance has not been simple and has been complicated. A simple ignorant man is he who acknowledges his ignorance while the complicated ignorant man is one who is not aware of his ignorance.

**This article was first published in Okaz on Oct. 29, 2016.