New Page 5

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

Bible Quotation For Today/The Parable of the 10 bridemates, the wise five ones and the other Follish five.
Matthew 25/01-13: "Then the kingdom of heaven will be like this. Ten bridesmaids took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish, and five were wise. When the foolish took their lamps, they took no oil with them; but the wise took flasks of oil with their lamps. As the bridegroom was delayed, all of them became drowsy and slept. But at midnight there was a shout, "Look! Here is the bridegroom! Come out to meet him."Then all those bridesmaids got up and trimmed their lamps. The foolish said to the wise, "Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out."But the wise replied, "No! there will not be enough for you and for us; you had better go to the dealers and buy some for yourselves."And while they went to buy it, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went with him into the wedding banquet; and the door was shut. Later the other bridesmaids came also, saying, "Lord, lord, open to us." But he replied, "Truly I tell you, I do not know you."
Keep awake therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour.

Bible Quotation For TodayGod will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart.
First Letter to the Corinthians 04/01-08: Think of us in this way, as servants of Christ and stewards of God’s mysteries. Moreover, it is required of stewards that they should be found trustworthy. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. I do not even judge myself. I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore do not pronounce judgement before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive commendation from God. I have applied all this to Apollos and myself for your benefit, brothers and sisters, so that you may learn through us the meaning of the saying, ‘Nothing beyond what is written’, so that none of you will be puffed up in favour of one against another. For who sees anything different in you? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift? Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! Quite apart from us you have become kings! Indeed, I wish that you had become kings, so that we might be kings with you!"

LCCC Latest analysis, editorials from miscellaneous sources published on July 16-17/15
Israel: Security Asset for the United States/Shoshana Bryen/July 16, 2015
Iran Nuclear Deal: Good and Bad News for Turkey/Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute./July 16, 2015
Iran nuclear deal opens the gates of evil in the Middle East/Salman Aldosary/Asharq Al Awsat/16 July/15
Terror apologists encourage extremism/Ali Ibrahim/Asharq Al Awsat/16 July?15 Jul, 2015
Iran’s nuclear deal and us/Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
For many Arabs, Iranian centrifuges are of the least concern/Joyce Karam/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
Iran Will Cheat. Then What?/Dennis Ross/Washinton Institute/July 16/15
The Iran deal: President Obama’s legacy to the Syrian people/Iran Will Cheat. Then What?
Dennis Ross/Washinton Institute/July 16/15/Netanyahu’s ‘historic’ mistake on Iran/Chris Doyle/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
A Yemen deal? Only if Saleh or the Houthis give in/Manuel Almeida/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
Anger management: Michel Aoun and the Lebanese chaos theory/InsideLebanon/Makram Rabah/16.07.15
What's Really Wrong with the Iran Nuclear Deal/Robert Satloff/New York Daily News/July 16/15

LCCC Bulletin itles for the Lebanese Related News published on July 16-17/15
Daryan Says Eid al-Fitr Friday, Army Steps Up Security Measures for Occasion
Bank Manager 'Freed for Ransom' after Several-Day Kidnap Ordeal
Samaha Seeks to Withdraw Testimony during Retrial
Five Suspects in Police Custody after 1 Dies in Aley Dispute
Knife Attacker Kills Man in Ashrafieh after Long Car Chase
Alain Aoun Confirms Hizbullah Mediation between FPM Chief, Speaker but No Meeting Soon
Berri Says Lebanese 'Useless' in Finding Solution to Presidential Crisis
Salam Wants Neutral President to Avoid Victor-Vanquished Scenario
Report: Qatar Promised Ibrahim to Revive Hostages File
Army Ups Measures in Sidon after Revelations on al-Asir
Mayor Arrested for Shooting Dead Young Man in Baalbek
Hbaline Residents to Block Roads Saturday as Minister Says Sukleen to Keep Collecting Waste in Beirut
FPM Supporters Hand Out Flyers in Jbeil, Batroun as Convoys Roam Metn
Four Marines Killed in U.S. Military Shootings, Gunman Dead

Daryan Says Eid al-Fitr Friday, Army Steps Up Security Measures for Occasion
Naharnet/July 16/15/Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Latif Daryan on Thursday announced that Friday, July 17 is the first day of Eid al-Fitr, the Muslim holiday that marks the end of the holy fasting month of Ramadan, as the army declared that it will step up its security measures in all regions for the occasion. “We have verified according to the rules of Sharia that tomorrow, Friday ... is the first day of Eid al-Fitr,” Daryan, who heads Lebanon's highest Sunni Muslim religious authority Dar al-Fatwa, announced in a statement. He hoped Eid will bring all Lebanese and Muslims “prosperity, security and serenity.” Meanwhile, Lebanon's Higher Islamic Shiite Council and the office of the official representative in Lebanon of Iran's supreme guide Ayatollah Ali Khamenei announced that Eid will begin on Saturday.
The juristic committee of the institution of late Lebanese Shiite scholar Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah had announced that Eid would begin Friday, citing astronomical calculations. According to Muslim tradition, it is the sighting with the naked eye of the new moon that signals the start of Eid al-Fitr. The army meanwhile issued a statement announcing that heightened security measures would be taken during the days of Eid al-Fitr in all Lebanese regions. “Army units have started implementing extraordinary security measures around places of worship, key roads, shopping centers and touristic sites,” it said. “The measures involve deployment of troops, manned and mechanized patrols, and checkpoints,” the military added.

Bank Manager 'Freed for Ransom' after Several-Day Kidnap Ordeal
Naharnet/July 16/15/Mahmoud Abou Jakh, the manager of al-Mawarid bank branch in Chtaura was freed Thursday evening in return for a ransom after he was kidnapped earlier this week by unknown assailants, state-run National News Agency reported.
A $200,000 ransom was paid for the release of Abou Jakh, NNA said.He was later taken to the Ablah army barracks in the Bekaa for interrogation about his kidnap ordeal. Later on Thursday, the Army Command issued a statement saying Abou Jakh was "liberated" after a series of raids by army intelligence agents in the Bekaa border town of Brital. "He is being interrogated to unveil the circumstances of the abduction while the kidnappers are being pursued in order to be arrested and referred to the relevant judicial authorities," the army added. The man was abducted at gunpoint by unknown assailants riding a black four-wheeler near the West Bekaa town of al-Rawda. The kidnappers left Abou Jakh's Toyota behind. Earlier this month, security forces arrested the ringleader of a gang that had kidnapped a child from the town of Amchit near Jbeil, north of Beirut. Authorities also managed to recover a $50,000 ransom that had been paid to secure the release of the boy.

Samaha Seeks to Withdraw Testimony during Retrial
Naharnet/July 16/15/Former Minister Michel Samaha on Thursday sought to withdraw his testimony to the Internal Security Forces on the terrorist plot that he was convicted for in May. Samaha told the court during his retrial that he “cannot confirm his testimony to the Intelligence Branch because his mind was not clear when it raided his house” at the time of his arrest in August 2012. He said the police officers terrorized him and began shouting during his questioning. In April, Samaha admitted that he had transported explosives from Syria into Lebanon with the aim of targeting Lebanese politicians and religious figures. But the pro-Damascus politician claimed that he fell into an intelligence trap by an informant. A month later, the military court sentenced him to four-and-a-half years of hard labor and stripped him of his civil rights, drawing the anger of several politicians. Coming under pressure, Military Prosecutor Judge Saqr Saqr filed an appeal into the sentence and the Military Court of Cassation approved it. After hearing his testimony on Thursday, the judge adjourned Samaha's trial to September 17.

Five Suspects in Police Custody after 1 Dies in Aley Dispute
Naharnet/July 16/15/Five people suspected of involvement in a personal dispute that left one person dead in Aley district were handed over to the Internal Security Forces on Thursday, the state-run National News Agency reported. NNA said R.Gh. M.M. T.G., K.M. and A.Sh. were handed over to the Intelligence Branch, a day after the dispute that broke out in the town of Qabrshmoun turned into a gunfight and knife-stabbing. The five suspects are being questioned, it added. Progressive Socialist Party official Hadi Abu al-Hassan told Voice of Lebanon radio (93.3) the situation in Qabrshmoun was brought under control. The slain man Walid al-Muhtar, who hails from the nearby town of Aramoun, will be buried on Thursday, he said. NNA said Wednesday that the dispute broke out over “car drifting” in the area. At least three people were also wounded.

Knife Attacker Kills Man in Ashrafieh after Long Car Chase
Naharnet/July 16/15/A motorist chased another driver from the airport road to Ashrafieh to stab him with a knife after a dispute over traffic priority, media reports said on Thursday.
The stabbed man, 45-year-old George al-Rif, was critically injured before dying of his wounds in hospital while the assaulter, Tareq Yatim, was arrested Thursday in Ashrafieh, state-run National News Agency reported. “Army intelligence agents from the Ashrafieh department have managed to arrest Tareq Yatim, who had stabbed George al-Rif in Ashrafieh,” NNA said, noting that the victim has four children. It said al-Rif was driving on the airport road when a dispute over right of way erupted with Yatim, who kept chasing him to the Ashrafieh area in Beirut, where he dealt him several stabs to the body and head. Al-Rif succumbed to his wounds in the evening, according to NNA. MTV said Yatim has confessed to committing the attack, noting that “he has a criminal record containing charges of assault and drug abuse.” Some media reports said he was under the influence of drugs when he was arrested. LBCI television said Yatim is “a bodyguard of an influential figure in the area.”

Alain Aoun Confirms Hizbullah Mediation between FPM Chief, Speaker but No Meeting Soon
Naharnet/July 16/15/Change and Reform bloc MP Alain Aoun confirmed on Thursday a Hizbullah initiative to bridge the gap between Speaker Nabih Berri and Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun. Aoun told An Nahar daily that Hizbullah's attempt to end the rift between Berri and the FPM chief is aimed at limiting tension and discussing the speaker's call for opening an extraordinary legislative session. There have been reports in the past two days that Hizbullah launched the initiative to limit the sharp differences between Berri and Aoun over the cabinet's controversial decision-making formula and the opening of the parliamentary session. Asked about reports that efforts are underway to set up a meeting between Berri and Aoun or between the country's top four March 8 alliance leaders, the lawmaker said: “The issue hasn't been yet discussed seriously.”Parliament is in paralysis since November, when it last met to extend its own term over the failure to agree on a new electoral draft-law. Berri is insisting on holding a legislative session to approve draft-laws that he deems important. But Aoun's Change and Reform bloc and other blocs want to add to the agenda other draft-laws that they back. The cabinet members are also in a sharp dispute over its working mechanism. The paralysis is the result of the absence of a president.

Berri Says Lebanese 'Useless' in Finding Solution to Presidential Crisis
Naharnet/July 16/15/Speaker Nabih Berri has expressed regret that Lebanese officials failed to resolve the presidential crisis without the mediation of countries that have influence on Lebanon. “We the Lebanese are useless,” Berri told al-Mustaqbal daily in remarks published on Thursday. “Shahhadeen w Msharteen (We beg by putting conditions),” he said in Arabic. Baabda Palace has been vacant since President Michel Suleiman's six-year term ended in May 2014. Sharp differences between the March 8 and 14 alliances caused the vacuum, which also led to the paralysis of the parliament and disputes among cabinet members. Several envoys from countries having influence on Lebanon have failed to strike a deal on the election of a new president. “The presidential file is a Lebanese and not a foreign issue,” Berri stressed. But he hoped that an agreement between Iran, the U.S. and five other world powers would “pave way towards rapprochement between Tehran and the Gulf countries all the way to Baabda Palace.”The deal that was finalized on Tuesday aims to curb Tehran's nuclear program in exchange for billions of dollars in sanctions relief.

Salam Wants Neutral President to Avoid Victor-Vanquished Scenario
Naharnet/July 16/15/Prime Minister Tammam Salam reiterated that Lebanese lawmakers should elect a neutral president to avoid a power grab by either the March 8 or 14 alliances. Salam told BBC television in Arabic on Wednesday that there are several candidates who have popular representation, parliamentary blocs and parties. They are Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea, Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, the head of the Marada Movement, lawmaker Suleiman Franjieh, and former Kataeb Party chief ex-President Amin Gemayel, he said. Two of them are members of the March 8 alliance and the other two are from the March 14 coalition. “If any one of them wins the presidential elections, then a certain camp would emerge victorious and the other would be defeated,” he said.
But Salam warned that such a scenario would cause further tension in the country. There are six or seven other respectable personalities who are being named for the presidency. “Let's head towards that direction and avoid a victor and vanquished scenario,” he told BBC. Salam called for electing “a neutral and centrist personality who is able at this difficult stage to fill the post and return things to normal.” The country's top Christian post at Baabda Palace was left vacant after President Michel Suleiman's six-year tenure ended in May last year over sharp differences between March 8 and 14. The last electoral round was set to take place on Wednesday but Speaker Nabih Berri adjourned it to August 12 over the continued boycott of several parliamentary blocs.

Report: Qatar Promised Ibrahim to Revive Hostages File
Naharnet/July 16/15/General Security chief Maj. Gen. Abbas Ibrahim has returned from Doha with pledges to revive the prisoner exchange deal between the Lebanese authorities and jihadists who have taken Lebanese servicemen captive, al-Joumhouria newspaper reported Thursday. Ibrahim, who is the official Lebanese negotiator in the case of the troops and policemen, returned to Beirut on Wednesday after a two-day visit to Qatar. Al-Joumhouria said that Ibrahim asked the Qatari officials to revive the file of the servicemen who were taken hostage by al-Qaida-linked al-Nusra Front and Islamic State group militants in August last year. The General Security chief inquired the officials on al-Nusra Front's freeze of the prisoner exchange. Recent reports have said that the extremist group was ready for the swap which was mediated by an envoy from Qatar. The deal included the release of 16 soldiers and policemen taken by al-Nusra Front from the northeastern border town of Arsal last August in return for setting free Islamists from Lebanon's notorious main prison of Roumieh. But al-Joumhouria said that the Qatari officials promised Ibrahim to revive the file immediately after the Eid al-Fitr holidays. The IS has also taken servicemen as hostages but the negotiations with the extremist group have reached a standstill over its crippling demands.

Army Ups Measures in Sidon after Revelations on al-Asir
Naharnet/July 16/15/The Lebanese army has taken strong measures in and around the southern city of Sidon after a suspect revealed that wanted Islamist cleric Sheikh Ahmed al-Asir had moved occasionally between the city and the Palestinian refugee camp of Ain el-Hilweh. As Safir daily said Thursday that the measures were also taken over fears that militants would carry out attacks through sleeper cells in Sidon. The newspaper quoted sources as saying that the army and security forces will upgrade their measures during the Eid al-Fitr holiday which marks the end of the holy month of Ramadan and monitor the activities of suspcious individuals. Alaa al-Moghrabi known as Hatem told the military court on Tuesday that a wanted cleric had transported al-Asir from the northern city of Tripoli to Sidon from where he took him to Ain el-Hilweh. He said that on several occasions the fugitive resorted to him to move between the camp and the city of Sidon. Al-Moghrabi was arrested by the Lebanese army last month in the Majdelyoun area east of Sidon.

Mayor Arrested for Shooting Dead Young Man in Baalbek
Naharnet/July 16/15/Baalbek police arrested on Thursday Mayor Mohammed Ahmed Awada for shooting dead Ali Mohammed Youssef Awada a day earlier, the state-run National News Agency reported. NNA said that the man opened fire on 24-year-old Awada and killed him near Dar al-Amal University Hospital in Douris on Wednesday night. Awada was visiting his hospitalized brother Hussein, who was injured in the shoulder two days earlier in a dispute with the mayor's son Hussein Mohammed Ahmed Awada, the agency stated. Investigation is underway to arrest the rest of the suspects in the two assaults, NNA added.

Hbaline Residents to Block Roads Saturday as Minister Says Sukleen to Keep Collecting Waste in Beirut
Naharnet/July 16/15/Residents of the Jbeil district town of Hbaline on Thursday warned that they would block Saturday all roads leading to a controversial garbage landfill in their town, as Environment Minister Mohammed al-Mashnouq announced that the Sukleen firm will continue collecting waste in Beirut and its suburbs in the coming days. In a statement issued after a broad meeting, the so-called Hbaline Landfill Follow-Up Committee stressed that residents will not allow trucks coming from “areas outside the Jbeil district” to dump waste at the landfill. “The garbage that has been accumulating since tens of years represents a great challenge and it must be recycled,” the committee said, warning that the waste is “causing major pollution in the river's stream.”It also decried “the foul smells and the poisons that are emanating from the landfill and reaching all towns in the region, as well as the blazes that erupt every now and then at the dump.”Meanwhile, the environment minister issued a statement calling on “citizens, their political leaderships, municipal unions and the civil society to cooperate and support the implementation of the national plan for treating solid waste in Lebanon.”His remarks come on the eve of the expiry of a deadline for the closure of the Naameh landfill south of Beirut, which is threatening to plunge the country into a major garbage management crisis. “From the very first day, the cabinet of national interest was keen on devising a national plan for the treatment of solid waste and it sought to implement a decentralized system at the level of the governorates that involves six zones, in which firms selected through transparent tenders would assume the required missions,” Mashnouq clarified.
He explained that enough bidders have been found for five zones, “while no firms have submitted tenders for the capital Beirut and its suburbs, which necessitated organizing a third and final call for tenders for this region, which would be finalized within two weeks.”Noting that “the overpopulation in the capital and its suburbs does not allow establishing waste treatment centers,” the minister underlined that “this burden should be shared equally by the rest of the governorates.” He stressed that “sanitation cannot stop and it is necessary to continue the operations of waste collection, sweeping and treatment until the firms that win the tenders become ready to assume this mission.”Accordingly, “Sukleen will continue its operations in the capital and Mount Lebanon, which involve sweeping, collection, transfer and treatment but not dumping, as it is the responsibility of the municipalities and their unions to find locations for waste treatment pending the final allocation of the alternative landfills.”
On Wednesday, residents and the Democratic Gathering bloc led by MP Walid Jumblat stressed their rejection of any extension of a deadline to shut down the Naameh landfill, underlining that the Chouf, Iqlim al-Kharroub and Aley regions “will no longer be a garbage dumpster.” “July 17 will be the final date for the closure of the landfill and any extension will not be accepted. The responsibility for the repercussions does not fall on the region and its residents, but rather on the policy of procrastination and indecisiveness that was endorsed throughout the past months,” Democratic Gathering said. The crisis started looming after environmentalists warned this week that they would stop trucks from hauling waste at the landfill starting Friday, which coincides with Eid al-Fitr. The landfill that lies in the town of Naameh south of Beirut is scheduled to be closed in accordance with a government decision. The July 17 deadline for the closure of the landfill also coincides with the expiry of the contract with Sukleen, which is responsible for collecting and transporting the garbage in Beirut and Mount Lebanon. In January, the cabinet decided to delay the closure of the landfill, drawing the ire of the residents of Naameh and environmentalists. It approved the controversial decision after a long-heated debate regarding the country's plan to treat solid waste. The plan devised by al-Mashnouq decentralizes the management of solid waste, divides Lebanon into six blocks and limits the licensing of garbage collection to one contractor in maximum two blocks.

FPM Supporters Hand Out Flyers in Jbeil, Batroun as Convoys Roam Metn
Naharnet/July 16/15/Supporters of the Free Patriotic Movement staged a new motorized protest Thursday in the Northern Metn region, as FPM members distributed leaflets in Jbeil and Batroun to explain demands and mobilize the public opinion. FPM supporters gathered outside the movement's Northern Metn headquarters in Nahr el-Mot before taking off in convoys that roamed the Amaret Chalhoub, Zalka, Jal el-Dib, Antelias and Dbaye areas, state-run National News Agency reported. The protesters distributed flyers in the areas that they passed through, NNA said. “I'm Christian, I won't accept to be marginalized, I won't accept a puppet president who has no say in the equation, I won't accept an electoral law that quashes my representation, and I won't accept submissive leaders... Together we can regain our rights,” the flyer reads. Similar leaflets were handed out at the entrance of the city of Jbeil and several areas in the northern city of Batroun. On Wednesday evening, the FPM organized a motorized protest that headed from the Baouchrieh area to Ashrafieh, a week after organizing a similar demo. The protests come in the wake of a stormy cabinet session and violent street protests that left several FPM demonstrators and army troops wounded last week.
The cabinet session witnessed a heated debate on the government's mechanism of taking decisions in light of the presidential vacuum. The parties agreed to continue the thorny debate in a session that will be held after Eid al-Fitr, with Prime Minister Tammam Salam promising that it would be the first item on the agenda. “Today was a historic day for us and we're still at the beginning of our movements. We will regain everything that they usurped from us,” said FPM chief MP Michel Aoun after the session. Days before the explosive cabinet meeting, Aoun had called on his supporters to prepare for rallies to regain what he described as the “Christians' rights.” His supporters began preparing to stage anti-government rallies after the cabinet failed to discuss the appointment of high-ranking security and military officials. The FPM chief has been lobbying for the appointment of Commando Regiment commander Chamel Roukoz, his son-in-law, as army chief.

Four Marines Killed in U.S. Military Shootings, Gunman Dead
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/July 16/15/Four Marines were killed Thursday in twin shootings at U.S. military centers in the southern state of Tennessee, officials said, opening a probe into what they said was a possible act of "domestic terrorism."
At least two people were injured during the incidents in Chattanooga -- a police officer and a Marine Corps recruiter. The gunman was shot dead, city mayor Andy Berke told reporters. The incident served as an ugly reminder of other deadly shootings at U.S. military installations, including a 2009 rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 dead and a 2013 attack at the Navy Yard in Washington that left 12 dead. "It is incomprehensible to see what happened and the way that individuals who proudly serve our country were treated," Berke said, praising the quick response by law enforcement to prevent further loss of life. Bill Killian, the U.S. federal prosecutor in that part of Tennessee, said the shootings were being investigated as an "act of domestic terrorism," but officials cautioned that no one should jump to conclusions. "We are looking at every possible avenue -- whether it was terrorism, whether it was domestic, international or whether it was a simple criminal act," FBI special agent Ed Reinhold said. The Marine Corps confirmed that all four victims were killed at a Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Center. The second shooting, at the hands of the same man, occurred at a recruitment center several miles away.
'All shook up' -
Erica Wright said she witnessed the shooting at the recruiting center through the window of a hair salon two doors down.
"We heard one pop, really loud pop. So we went to the door to see what it was," Wright told CNN. "We saw a guy in a silver Mustang just unloading on the naval recruiting place."Wright said she watched in horror as the man reloaded his gun and opened fire again. He then backed up his car, pulled up to another part of the recruiting center and started shooting again. "We're all shook up," she said. "Never expected something like this."President Barack Obama was briefed about the situation, White House spokesman Eric Schultz said. Several locations in Chattanooga were placed on lockdown including a local college, area businesses and government offices. Local media published images of police officers crouching behind their cars with rifles drawn as they sought to take down the shooter.Bullet holes could be seen in the windows of the recruiting center and shell casings littered the parking lot.Senator Bob Corker, a former mayor of Chattanooga, said he was "heartbroken." "This is a difficult day for Tennesseans and our thoughts and prayers are with all affected by this tragedy," he said in a statement.

Car Bomb Explodes at Riyadh Checkpoint, Driver Killed
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/July 16/15/A car bomb exploded Thursday night at a security checkpoint in the Saudi capital Riyadh, killing the driver and wounding two policemen, the interior ministry said. The blast came with the kingdom on alert for attacks by the Islamic State group of jihadists, who have been blamed for killing policemen and for slaughtering members of the minority Shiite community. The policemen were in a "stable condition" in hospital, the interior ministry said in a statement carried by the official Saudi Press Agency. The blast went off when police manning the checkpoint on Al-Hair Road stopped the car for a routine check, said the ministry. "The driver blew up the car and killed himself," it said. Asked whether the incident was linked to the Islamic State group, General Mansour al-Turki, the interior ministry spokesman, said he was waiting for information from investigators. He told AFP the explosion happened on a road leading to al-Hair prison, a high-security facility where Islamic radicals are among those reportedly held. Thursday's explosion took place on the last day of the holy Muslim fasting month of Ramadan, while fireworks exploded around the Saudi capital before the Eid al-Fitr holiday on Friday. On successive Fridays in May two suicide bombings at mosques of the minority Shiite community in Eastern Province killed 25 people. An IS-affiliated group calling itself Najd Province -- which takes its name from the region around Riyadh -- claimed those attacks as well as another suicide bombing that killed 26 people at a Shiite mosque in Kuwait last month. Five Saudis are among 29 people charged in connection with the Kuwait bombing. In the southwestern city of Taif on July 3, a policeman was gunned down during a raid in which three people were arrested and flags of the IS group extremists found, police said earlier.
A fourth suspect was later shot dead. Saudi Arabia had released a list of 16 men wanted for alleged involvement in the mosque bombings in Eastern Province, home to most of the kingdom's Shiite minority. The Islamic State group has seized large parts of Iraq and Syria, where it has carried out numerous atrocities and inspired attacks around the world. It considers Shiites to be heretics.

Nuclear Deal Critics Wooed, Iran Leader Urges Caution
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/July 16/15/Washington and London sought Thursday to ease concerns over the Iran nuclear accord as the country's supreme leader warned that major powers are not to be trusted over its implementation. As part of an international charm offensive, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond was to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who strongly opposes the landmark accord stuck on Tuesday in Vienna between Iran and world powers led by Washington. Netanyahu has condemned it as a "historic mistake" and hinted at a possible military response. In Washington, Secretary of State John Kerry was to hold talks with Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir, whose government has also been alarmed about the deal with its regional rival. President Barack Obama confronted the critics head-on on Wednesday, saying they were at odds with "99 percent" of the world and had failed to offer any real alternative. As the freshly-inked deal was put to members of the U.N. Security Council, a combative Obama said opponents at home and abroad had offered only a path to war. "If 99 percent of the world community and the majority of nuclear experts look at this thing and they say this will prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb, and you are arguing either that it does not or that even if it does, it's temporary... then you should have some alternative," Obama said. The issue is either resolved "diplomatically, through a negotiation, or it's resolved through force. Through war. Those are the options."Obama's Republican rivals, who hope to scupper the agreement in a planned Congressional vote, have accused him of appeasement. The president has said he will veto any attempt to block the deal. The agreement, struck after two years of tough negotiations, aims to roll back Iran's nuclear program in return for lifting sanctions that have crippled its economy. Obama also addressed the concerns of Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Gulf states that the accord legitimizes what they see as Iranian interference in the oil-rich region. The agreement would not end "profound differences" with the Shiite-majority Islamic republic, he said, stressing that their alliances with Washington would remain unchanged. "Iran still poses challenges to our interests and values," the U.S. leader told reporters, citing "its support of terrorism and its use of proxies to destabilize parts of the Middle East."

Kerry to Launch Gulf Charm Offensive to Sell Iran Deal
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/July 16/15/U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry will head to the Gulf in August seeking to allay fears over the Iran nuclear deal, as Saudi Arabia Thursday warned Tehran against any further "mischief" in the region.
Back at work only days after an 18-day negotiating marathon to seal the unprecedented accord, Kerry met Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir, the beginning of a charm offensive designed to win over the many doubters in the United States and abroad. "All of us in the region want to see a peaceful resolution to Iran's nuclear program," Jubeir said after their talks. He welcomed a deal with a "robust and continuous inspections regime to make sure Iran does not violate the terms of the agreement," adding it should also have an effective and quick "snapback" mechanism that allows for sanctions to be quickly reimposed if Tehran violates Tuesday's accord. Under the deal, Iran will win relief from crippling sanctions in return for dismantling and mothballing much of its nuclear industry so it cannot quickly develop an atomic bomb. "We hope that the Iranians will use this deal in order to improve the economic situation in Iran and to improve the lot of the Iranian people, and not use it for adventures in the region," Jubeir said. But he warned "if Iran should try to cause mischief in the region we're committed to confront it resolutely." Iran stands accused of supporting Shiite Huthi rebels in Yemen who overran the capital and parts of the country, forcing the Western-backed President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi and his government into exile in Riyadh.
Saudi-led warplanes have been waging air strikes against the rebels since March, helping to force the militia into retreat with ministers from Hadi's exiled government now preparing to visit the southern city of Aden to assess the damage. Majority Sunni Gulf countries have remained wary of the US overtures to arch-foe Iran, believing the nuclear deal will only embolden Tehran's Shiite leaders. But Kerry said he will travel to the Gulf to brief leaders on the hard-won accord. "I will be meeting with the entire GCC and giving them a full briefing, download, answering any questions they have on August 3," Kerry said.The Saudi minister said the meeting with the Gulf Cooperation Council would take place in Doha.

ICC Orders Prosecutor to Reconsider Probing Israel's Gaza Flotilla Raid
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/July 16/15/The International Criminal Court on Thursday ordered its chief prosecutor to review a decision not to probe Israel's deadly raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla in 2010, saying "errors were made." Fatou Bensouda late last year dropped the investigation leading to potential prosecution into the incident in which 10 Turkish activists were killed by Israeli commandos, saying the incident was "not of sufficient gravity."
The case was first filed by the Comoros, where the activists' ship the Mavi Marmara was registered. The tiny Indian Ocean island state in January asked the Hague-based ICC's judges to review Bensouda's decision. "The Pre-Trial Chamber granted the request... and requested the Prosecutor to reconsider such a decision," the ICC said in a statement. Nine Turkish nationals died when Israeli commandos staged a botched pre-dawn raid on a six-ship flotilla seeking to bust Israel's naval blockade of the Gaza Strip on May 31, 2010. A tenth activist later died of his wounds. In her explanation in November last year, Bensouda said "the information available provides a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes were committed on board the Comorian-registered vessel the Mavi Marmara during the interception of the flotilla." "However, after carefully assessing all relevant considerations, I have concluded that the potential case(s) likely arising from an investigation into this incident would not be of 'sufficient gravity' to justify further action by the ICC," she said.
But the ICC's judges disagreed. "The Prosecutor committed material errors in her determination of the gravity of the potential case(s)," the judges said. "In particular, the Chamber identified material errors in the Prosecutor's assessment of the possibility to prosecute those persons who may bear the greatest responsibility for the identified crimes committed during the seizure of the Mavi Marmara." Bensouda must now reconsider her decision "as soon as possible and shall notify the Chamber, the Comoros and the victims... of her conclusion and the reasons for it," the judges said. Israel imposed its blockade on Gaza in 2006 after Hamas captured an Israeli soldier, and tightened it a year later when the Islamist movement consolidated control of the territory. A number of flotillas had reached Gaza prior to the May 2010 attempt. Since then, several ships manned by pro-Palestinian activists have tried to reach the shores of Gaza, but they have all been repelled by the Israeli navy.

Syria's Aleppo Suffering Three-Week 'Water Crisis'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/July 16/15/Government and rebel-held parts of Syria's Aleppo have been without safe water for nearly three weeks because the war-torn city's only pumping station is not functioning, residents said Thursday. The cause of the problem is disputed, with some residents saying a lack of fuel was the issue, but a monitor reporting that the opposition group controlling the facility had shut it down. "There is a water crisis in the whole city," said Mamun Abu Omar, head of a pro-rebel press agency. "All our water was from the Euphrates River. The pumps would bring it in, filter it, and it would reach Aleppo's residents," Abu Omar told AFP. But for the past 20 days, residents have been forced to purchase individual cisterns of unfiltered water.
"The water from these cisterns isn't healthy -- it's often uncovered and exposed to the air," Abu Omar said. According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring group, people were drawing water from wells. "Many residents have suffered cases of poisoning after drinking this water... Those who can are buying bottled water," the Britain-based monitor said. An AFP journalist in Aleppo city said the water had caused rashes and cases of poisoning among inhabitants. In a video filmed by activists, a man identified as a doctor said that residents were suffering gastrointestinal infections after drinking "unsafe" water. "Water from the wells is not safe to drink, and it's often polluted with insect waste," the man said. Once Syria's commercial hub, Aleppo city has been divided between government control in the west and rebel control in the east since shortly after clashes there began in mid-2012. Due to heavy regime bombardment of rebel-held neighborhoods and fierce clashes in the city, Aleppo's electricity infrastructure has been severely damaged.
As a result, residents and the Observatory said, the city's sole water pumping station now relies on diesel rather than electricity to distribute water. Residents told AFP that the al-Qaida-affiliated al-Nusra Front group controlling the Sleiman al-Halabi pump says it has run out of diesel to operate it. But the Observatory's Abdel Rahman said the group was trying to pressure the government to restore electricity. "They have issued a list of demands, including constant provision of fuel from the Red Crescent, but mainly they want the regime to provide electricity to all of Aleppo city," he said. Mohammed al-Khatieb, an activist speaking on the Internet from Aleppo, said an initiative by a neutral grouping of residents was trying to resolve the issue. Last month, health authorities in Aleppo province issued distress calls over severe fuel shortages resulting from a jihadist blockade. Doctors Without Borders (MSF) said a fuel blockade by the Islamic State group was hindering the work of health facilities and health organizations in Syria's north.

Saudi Says Ready to Confront Any Iran 'Mischief' in Region
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/July 16/15/Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir warned Iran Thursday to use the economic benefits of a new nuclear deal to help its people and not fund "adventures in the region.""If Iran should try to cause mischief in the region we're committed to confront it resolutely," Jubeir said after meeting U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, days after the landmark deal was struck granting Tehran sanctions relief in return for dismantling and mothballing most of its nuclear program.

How Israel Might Destroy Iran’s Nuclear Program
Daniel Pipes/ National Review/ July 16, 2015
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/421244/israel-destory-iran-nuclear-program
The Vienna deal has been signed and likely will soon be ratified, which raises the question: Will any government intervene militarily to stop the nearly inevitable Iranian nuclear buildup? Obviously it will not be the American or Russian governments or any of the other four signatories. Practically speaking, the question comes down to Israel, where a consensus holds that the Vienna deal makes an Israeli attack more likely. But no one outside the Israeli security apparatus, including myself, knows its intentions. That ignorance leaves me free to speculate as follows.
More Iran Nuclear Negotiations Democrats Hammer Iran Nuke Deal Iran Is Obama’s Vietnam The Iran Deal Is Worse Than Stupid -- It's Dishonorable Three scenarios of attack seem possible:
Airplanes. Airplanes crossed international boundaries and dropped bombs in the 1981 Israeli attack on an Iraqi nuclear installation and in the 2007 attack on a Syrian one, making this the default assumption for Iran. Studies show this to be difficult but attainable.
Special ops. These are already underway: computer-virus attacks on Iranian systems unconnected to the Internet that should be immune, assassinations of top-ranking Iranian nuclear scientists, and explosions at nuclear installations.
Presumably, Israelis had a hand in at least some of these attacks and, presumably, they could increase their size and scope, possibly disrupting the entire nuclear program. Unlike the dispatch of planes across several countries, special operations have the advantage of reaching places like Fordow, far from Israel, and of leaving little or no signature.
Nuclear weapons. This doomsday weapon, which tends to be little discussed, would probably be launched from submarines. It hugely raises the stakes and so would only be resorted to, in the spirit of “Never Again,” if the Israelis were desperate. Of these alternatives, I predict the Netanyahu government will most likely opt for the second, which is also the most challenging to pull off (especially now that the great powers promised to help the Iranians protect their nuclear infrastructure). Were this unsuccessful, it will turn to planes, with nuclear weapons as a last resort.

Iran keeps dark loss of its top general in Syria. Syrian Army starts closing in on ISIS-held Palmyra
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report July 16, 2015/Abdel Karim Rubash, Deputy Commander of the elite Al Qods Brigades and, is the most senior Iranian general to fall in battle in the more than four years of the Syrian war. His death while in command of the Syrian front is disclosed here by debkafile’s military and intelligence sources. This general had spent the best part of four years in Syria. It was he who came up with the plan to bring Hizballah fighters over from Lebanon to strengthen the Syrian military effort against the insurgency. He was also responsible for organizing the movement of Iranian-supplied arms to Hizballah via Syria. Those convoys were bombed by the Israeli air force several times. His loss is a severe blow to Iran, Syria and Hizballah, who have been bending over backwards to keep his death dark, moving him discreetly to Tehran for a funeral with full military honors on July 13. Gen. Rubash died, according to our sources, during the dogged battle the Syrian army and Hizballah have been fighting for ten days to get the rebels out of the important town of Zabadani, which commands the highway between Damascus and Beirut. We have also learned that he was killed by sniper fire during an ambush of his convoy. In their internal communications, rebel groups claimed that his death was their response to Hizballah’s ultimatum to give up and stop fighting in defense of the town. Gen. Rubash was the third Iranian general to die on the Syrian battlefield this year. On Jan. 19, Brig. Gen. Mohammad Ali Allahdadi was killed when a group of Iranian and Hizballah officers inspected the Golan and was hit by an Israeli air strike. Allahdadi was the commander of Iranian forces in South Syria. In April, Maj. Gen. Hadi Kajbaf, commander of the Iranian-Hizballah force defending Damascus, was killed near the capital. But the third death was also a major blow to the prestige of the Al Qods chief, supreme commander of Iran’s military intervention forces in the war on ISIS in Iraq and the Yemeni Houthi battles against Saudi Arabia. Rubash was put in charge of the Syrian war last month, when Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei “relieved” Soleimani of this command. In the meantime, our military sources report a major effort to recover the historic town of Palmyra (Nimrod) from the Islamic State which captured it in May. A combined force of Syrian troops plus pro-Iranian Shiite militias imported for the campaign is closing in on the town. It has come within 6 km of Palmyra and is forcing the jihadis to fall back. Its success in recovering Palmyra, if accomplished, would represent the biggest Syrian-Iranian triumph in the war on ISIS.

Obama discusses Iran deal with Saudi King Salman
By Staff writer/ Al Arabiya News/Wednesday, 16 July 2015/President Barack Obama telephoned Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdulaziz on Tuesday from Air Force One to discuss the newly completed Iran nuclear agreement, the White House said.
Saudi Arabia expressed hope Tuesday for an end to Iran's regional "interference" after a historic nuclear deal aimed at ensuring Tehran does not obtain an atomic bomb was struck. "Given that Iran is a neighbor, Saudi Arabia hopes to build with her better relations in all areas on the basis of good neighborliness and non-interference in internal affairs," said an official spokesman cited by the Saudi Press Agency. Both leaders also discussed the urgent need to stop the fighting in Yemen and ensure assistance for all Yemenis through international humanitarian channels. Obama also spoke with Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan by telephone to discuss the nuclear agreement. The United Arab Emirates welcomed the historic deal saying it could turn a “new page” for the Gulf region.
“Iran could play a (significant) role in the region if it revises its policy and stops interfering in the internal affairs of countries like Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen,” a UAE official said in the first reaction from the Gulf Arab monarchies to the Vienna accord.
Meanwhile, Egypt said it “hopes that the deal between both sides is complete and prevents an arms race in the Middle East as well as ensuring the region is free of all weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons.”Obama emphasized the United States' commitment to working with Gulf partners, such as United Arab Emirates, to counter Iran's destabilizing activities in the region. Following the calls, it was revealed that the U.S. president is sending his defense chief next week to the Middle East to reassure reassuring allies that the nuclear deal will not undermine America's commitment to their security.U.S. defense officials told Reuters that Defense Secretary Ash Carter would travel to Israel and elsewhere within the region but declined to offer details.The agreement between Iran and six major world powers could transform the Middle East, curbing sensitive Iranian nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief - and, in the process, upending assumptions about Tehran's isolation. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned Tuesday's deal as "a stunning, historic mistake."Offering a hint of his message to allies, Carter said in a statement about the Iran deal that the United States stood ready to "check Iranian malign influence". "We remain prepared and postured to bolster the security of our friends and allies in the region, including Israel," he said.
The deal
Iran and major powers agreed on a mechanism under which the U.N. nuclear watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency could get access to suspect nuclear sites in Iran within 24 days, the text of the Iran nuclear agreement said.
Iran will also be allowed to conduct research and development (R&D) with uranium for advanced centrifuges during the first 10 years of a nuclear agreement with major powers, according to the text of the deal posted on the Russian foreign ministry website.
"Iran will continue to conduct enrichment R&D in a manner that does not accumulate enriched uranium," the text of the agreement said. Tehran and the six powers had been holding marathon diplomatic negotiations at the ministerial level for more than two weeks to resolve a 12-year stand-off over Iran's nuclear program.

Iran nuclear deal should be scrutinized carefully: Khamenei
Reuters, Dubai/Wednesday, 16 July 2015/The text of a nuclear deal reached between Iran and world powers should be carefully scrutinized and legal procedures taken so the other side does not breach it, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said in his first public statements on the accord. Iran and six world powers reached a deal on Tuesday, capping more than a decade of negotiations with an agreement that could transform the Middle East. Under the deal, sanctions imposed by the United States, the European Union and the United Nations will be lifted in return for Iran agreeing long-term curbs on a nuclear program that the West has suspected was aimed at creating a nuclear bomb. In a letter to Iranian President Hassan Rowhani, Khamenei, the ultimate authority on all matters of state, wrote: “Reaching a deal is a significant step, but the text of the deal should be carefully scrutinized and the legal procedures should be taken so when the deal is ratified the other side cannot breach it.” “Some of the members of the P5+1 are not trustworthy,” he said referring to the six world powers in the letter, published by state news agency IRNA. He added: “I ask our dear nation to stay calm and united so we can preserve our national interests in a serene and sensible environment.”

Saudi prince: Iran deal worse than one with N. Korea
Saudi former chief of intelligence, Prince Bandar bin Sultan: Iran deal worse than one with N. Korea
By Staff writer /Al Arabiya News/Thursday, 16 July 2015/Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, a former ambassador to Washington, has said in an opinion piece for Elaph newspaper that the United States moved forward with the Iran nuclear deal despite predictions of the situation developing into a North Korean-style scenario. In a column published by the London-based Arabic news website Elaph, the former chief of intelligence said the nuclear deal “will wreak havoc in the Middle East,” a region already plagued by major conflicts.
“Serious pundits in the media and in politics say that President Obama’s Iran deal is ‘déjà vu’ in relation to President Clinton’s North Korean nuclear deal.” President Clinton’s decision was based on strategic foreign policy analysts, top secret national intelligence, and the desire “to save the people of North Korea from starvation,” wrote Prince Bandar, in reference to the 1994 “Agreed Framework” between North Korea and the United States that aimed to freeze the country’s nuclear power program. The agreement finally broke down in 2003 when North Korea announced its withdrawal from the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and later declared it had manufactured nuclear weapons. The country now has as many as 20 nuclear warheads, according to Chinese intelligence.
President Clinton “would not have made that decision” had he known it was based on “a major intelligence failure” and “wrong foreign policy analysis,” wrote Prince Bandar, nephew of Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz. But “President Obama made his decision to go ahead with the Iran nuclear deal fully aware that the strategic foreign policy analysis, the national intelligence information, and America’s allies in the region’s intelligence all predict not only the same outcome of the North Korean nuclear deal but worse - with the billions of dollars that Iran will have access to,” Prince Bandar stated. “It will wreak havoc in the Middle East which is already living in a disastrous environment, in which Iran is a major player in the destabilization of the region,” he continued. Why would Obama go ahead with such an agreement, “knowing what President Clinton didn’t know when he made his deal with North Korea?” questioned the former diplomat. It’s because Obama “ideologically believes what he is doing is right,” said Prince Bandar. “Everything else, that could be a disastrous result of his decision, I believe he thinks it is acceptable collateral damage,” he added. “I am convinced more than any other time that my good friend, the magnificent old fox Henry Kissinger, was correct when he said ‘America’s enemies should fear America, but America’s friends should fear America more’,” wrote Prince Bandar, quoting the former U.S. secretary of state and Nobel Peace Prize winner who served under former presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. “People in my region now are relying on God’s will, and consolidating their local capabilities and analysis with everybody else except our oldest and most powerful ally,” wrote the prince. On Tuesday, Iran and five major world powers formally concluded a deal that aimed at ensuring Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.
Iran and major powers agreed on a mechanism under which the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, could gain access to suspect nuclear sites in Iran under certain conditions, according to the text of the Iran nuclear agreement.

Barrel bombs kill 11 civilians in ISIS-held Syrian town
By AFP | Beirut/Thursday, 16 July 2015/At least 11 civilians, among them three children, were killed Thursday in regime barrel bomb attacks on a jihadist-held town in northern Syria, a monitoring group said. Government helicopters dropped the crude and indiscriminate weapons on Al-Bab, which lies in the northern province of Aleppo and is held by the extremist Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) group, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Since Saturday, at least 68 civilians have been killed in aerial attacks on the town. Observatory head Rami Abdel Rahman told AFP the “intensified air attacks by regime forces on Al-Bab are aimed at foiling ISIS efforts on multiple fronts,” including the nearby Kweyris military airport, which ISIS has besieged for more than a year. Al-Bab is strategically important because it is one of ISIS’s closest positions to regime-held parts of Aleppo, he said. In May, more than 60 civilians were killed by barrel bomb attacks on the town. Syria’s embattled regime has heavily bombarded areas in Aleppo province that have fallen out of its control. To the west, in Idlib province, an alliance of rebels and ISIS fighters carried heavily shelled the province’s last two regime-held Shiite villages for the second consecutive day. The “Army of Conquest,” an opposition coalition that includes Al-Qaeda’s Syria affiliate Al-Nusra Front, began its assault on Fuaa and Kafraya on Wednesday. “Dozens of shells fell overnight Wednesday and into Thursday morning on Fuaa and Kafraya, which are largely inhabited by Shiite Muslims,” the Observatory said.
Abdel Rahman said there were casualties but had no immediate toll. The Army of Conquest said Wednesday its attack was a response to an offensive by the army and the Lebanese Shiite movement Hezbollah on Zabadani, the last rebel-held bastion along the Syrian-Lebanese border. Clashes in Zabadani raged on Thursday, according to the Observatory, which has documented heavy shelling on the town since early July. At least 230,000 people have been killed in Syria’s multi-front conflict, which began in 2011 with anti-government protests but devolved into a civil war.

UK adds extra spy plane to fight against ISIS
Reuters, London/Thursday, 16 July 2015/Britain will send an extra spy plane to Iraq and Syria in the coming weeks to help provide surveillance in the fight against Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militants, Defense Secretary Michael Fallon said on Thursday.
Britain’s Royal Air Force (RAF) carries out regular air strikes in Iraq but has so far limited its Syrian involvement to flying surveillance missions to gather intelligence. Earlier this month, Prime Minister David Cameron asked lawmakers to consider whether Britain should also join U.S.-led air strikes in Syria. Britain is buying three Airseeker Rivet Joint surveillance aircraft from the United States, the first of which is already operating in the Middle East along with British aircraft including Reaper drones and Tornado fighter jets. “Our latest Airseeker plane will be delivered next month, seven months ahead of schedule, and will be operational shortly after that in the skies above Iraq and Syria providing essential support in the fight against ISIL (ISIS),” Fallon told a Royal United Services Institute conference in London.
Fallon likened the fight against Islamic State militants to the Battle of Britain, the 1940 air conflict between the RAF and the German Luftwaffe whose 75th anniversary is being commemorated this year. “I believe we’re fighting a new Battle of Britain. Once again, against a fascist enemy, an enemy prepared to kill its enemies and civilians alike,” he said. “The world is a darker place, darker clouds are massing on the horizon.”

U.S. bill aims to stop militants from recruiting Americans
By Mark Hosenball | Reuters, Washington/Thursday, 16 July 2015/A U.S. congressional panel approved a bill on Wednesday earmarking the first funds Congress has targeted specifically at programs to stop Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and other militant groups from recruiting Americans, congressional aides said. The bill, sponsored by Republican Representative Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security panel, would devote $10 million per year for four years starting Oct. 1 to the Homeland Security Department. The committee approved the bill by a voice vote, an aide said. It would need to be approved by the full House and the Senate before becoming law. The funds are intended to help communities and government agencies develop programs to prevent radicalization and recruitment of Americans through the Internet and other channels. During a session on Wednesday, the committee amended the original bill to include a grant program intended to fund efforts to "push back against extremist propaganda domestically," a committee aide said. The bill would set up a permanent "Office for Countering Violent Extremism" in the Homeland Security Department. At present, congressional and administration officials said the department has only a small office working on anti-extremist issues. Until now, the officials added, even though both Congress and the administration of President Barack Obama have promised extensive federal government engagement in efforts to "counter violent extremism," Congress has not set aside any money for it. While government departments have sometimes used existing funds for anti-radicalization efforts, congressional aides said the government has at most 24 full-time employees working on it. U.S. investigators say 80 percent of Americans linked to activities supporting ISIS and other militant movements have radicalized themselves over the Internet without direct contact with militants abroad. Officials have said U.S. agencies are pursuing hundreds of active counter-terrorism investigations, which touch on all 50 U.S. states. Congressional aides said the State Department has set up a special unit to monitor propaganda, including social media messaging, by ISIS and other militant groups and to craft messages intended to blunt the militants' appeal.

Israel hits Gaza after Palestinian rocket attack
AFP, Jerusalem/Thursday, 16 July 2015/Israel’s military said its aircraft struck Hamas facilities in the Gaza Strip early Thursday after Palestinians fired a rocket from the territory into southern Israel overnight. “Overnight, a rocket was fired from the Gaza Strip, targeting civilians in southern Israel,” a military statement said, adding that the rocket fell on open ground near the city of Ashkelon and no injuries were reported. “In response to this attack, Israel Air Force aircraft targeted terror infrastructure in the Gaza Strip.”
Hamas security forces said the strikes targeted a training center for the Islamic movement’s military wing at El Bureij refugee camp, in the center of the strip, and a “communications center” in the north. There were no casualties, they said in a statement.

Egypt removes jail time for journalists in anti-terror bill
AFP, Cairo/ 16 July 2015/Egypt’s cabinet has amended a draft counter-terrorism law so that journalists would be fined, rather than jailed, for contradicting the authorities’ version of any terrorist attack, the state news agency reported. The bill, which sets up new courts for terrorism trials, was proposed after Egypt’s top prosecutor died in a car bombing and 17 members of the security forces were killed by Islamist insurgents in the Sinai. It has been condemned by rights groups, with Amnesty International saying it would grant President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi “absolute powers” to crush dissent. One provision of the bill would have made it a criminal offence for journalists or others to report on terrorist attacks in a way that contradicted the official version of events, with jail terms of at least two years.
The cabinet spokesman told state news agency MENA that the article had been amended to replace the jail time with a fine of 200,000-500,000 Egyptian pounds ($25,000-$65,000). Human rights groups have accused Egyptian authorities of widespread violations since the army toppled Islamist President Mohamed Mursi in 2013 after mass protests against his rule, and say the government has rolled back freedoms won in the 2011 uprising that toppled veteran autocrat Hosni Mubarak. The government says it is protecting the country from Islamists, including Mursi’s Muslim Brotherhood and militants associated with Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), active in North Sinai, both of which it classes as terrorist groups. Rights groups say Egyptian prisons hold 40,000 political detainees.

ISIS kills Libyan commander in Benghazi
By Ayman al-Warfalli | Libya, Reuters/Thursday, 16 July 2015/Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militants said they killed a Libyan army commander in the eastern city of Benghazi on Wednesday, as a pro-government offensive against the Islamists appeared to stall.
Forces loyal to Libya's internationally recognized government have been fighting Islamist groups in the country's second-largest city for over a year, part of a wider struggle since Muammar Qaddafi was overthrown and killed in 2011. Army forces backed by armed residents have regained some of the territory in Benghazi lost last year. But critics say their air strikes and artillery have pounded parts of Benghazi into rubble without gaining much ground. New clashes erupted on Wednesday in the Lithi district, a stronghold of militant Islamists. During the fighting, Salem al-Naili, the commander of a special forces brigade, and another soldier were killed, army officials said. Four more soldiers were wounded. ISIS, which has expanded in Libya by exploiting a vacuum as two governments vie for control, claimed responsibility on social media for Naili's killing. ISIS and other militant groups have been getting support from groups in Tunisia, Algeria, Chad, Nigeria and Sudan, a top army commander told reporters after meeting with senior commanders in Marj town east of Benghazi.
Asked when the Benghazi battle would be finished, the commander, Khalifa Haftar, said: "I cannot give a date but it will be very soon." U.N. Special Envoy Bernardino Leon disputed that. "In Benghazi, clashes ... continue with neither side making significant gains," he told the U.N Security Council. The fighting for Benghazi highlights the chaos in Libya, where armed groups back two governments vying for control. The official prime minister has been based in the east since the capital, Tripoli, was seized by a rival group which set up its own government. Both sides command loose coalitions of former anti-Qaddafi rebels. After Qaddafi's ouster, the various factions split along political, regional and tribal lines.ISIS has exploited the chaos by taking over several towns, executing foreigners and launching attacks against embassies in Tripoli.

Exiled Yemeni government gradually returning to Aden: minister
Jeddah, Riyadh and Aden, Asharq Al-Awsat/July 16/15/—Yemen’s government-in-exile said it has started returning to Aden after loyalists captured most of the southern city from Houthi rebels earlier this week.The government will “gradually” relocate to Aden from its current base in Riyadh, beginning with the ministries of transport and interior, Yemen’s transport minister Badr Mubarak Ba-Salma said. This comes after forces loyal to President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, backed by Saudi-led airstrikes, captured Aden’s seaport and the Mualla district on Wednesday, one day after they pushed the Houthis from Aden’s international airport and the surrounding area. Houthis and forces aligned with ex-president Ali Abdullah Saleh entered Yemen in late March, prompting Hadi, the internationally recognized president, to flee to Saudi Arabia. On Wednesday, “elite forces” loyal to Hadi captured large parts of the Mualla district in western Aden, sources said, following clashes that caused dozens of deaths among the Houthis. Violent clashes also erupted in Aden’s central Crater district where the presidential palace is located. The capture of Aden represents the biggest setback for the Houthis who have been the target of a Saudi-led aerial campaign since late March. Ba-Salma said his ministry will return to Aden in order to secure the city’s seaports and airports and enable them to allow humanitarian aid into Yemen. “Coinciding with the clashes in the Khor Maksar, Mualla and Crater districts, [the Houthis] randomly shelled the residential areas controlled by the resistance in northern and eastern Aden with mortars and Katyusha rockets,” eyewitnesses said. The Aden offensive, dubbed “Operation Golden Arrow,” is part of a larger campaign to liberate other parts of the country from the Houthis, Ba-Salma said. The Saudi-led coalition has been coordinating on the ground with pro-Hadi fighters known as the Popular Resistance forces. Ba-Salma said government loyalists are preparing to push into the governorates of Abyan and Shabwa to the east, Ma’rib to the north, and Taiz to the west. He said his government will launch a comprehensive plan to fix the city’s infrastructure and restore services which have been suspended since the rebels entered. “The Yemeni government is doing its best to bring back hope to the people of Aden who have patiently endured all sorts of pain and hunger,” he said. Meanwhile, a Saudi military spokesman said on Wednesday the liberation of Aden comes as part of a major military campaign in coordination between the Saudi-led coalition and the Popular Resistance forces. Brig. Gen Ahmed Asiri told Asharq Al-Awsat ground military operations against the Houthis and Saleh’s followers are continuing across Yemen and will not be confined to Aden. Nasser Al-Haqbani and Mohamed Ali Mohsen contributed additional reporting from Riyadh and Aden.

Israel: Security Asset for the United States
Shoshana Bryen/July 16, 2015
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6178/israel-us-security-asset
More important than planning for combat is planning for the strengthening of democracies. We cannot make democracies out of Iraq or Libya or Syria, but when democratic countries are united, the world becomes a safer place for all. In a volatile region so vital to the U.S., where other states cannot be relied upon, it would be foolish to disengage -- or denigrate -- an ally such as Israel. The war against terrorists and the states that harbor and support them will be long and hard, and success will depend in no small measure on the allies who stand with us and with whom we stand. Perhaps you think the war is over. Perhaps you think that if Iran becomes a "friend" of the United States and the possibility of an American-led war against the Islamic Republic recedes, the need for a militarily capable ally such as Israel also recedes. Maybe the U.S. doesn't want to associate with the "militaristic" Jewish State. That's quite possible from the vantage point of July 2015 and if you think the only reason to befriend anyone is for the military advantages it brings to the relationship.
But there is a reason military-to-military cooperation between the U.S. and Israel has remained almost untouchable, and the American military proudly touts its relationship with Israel.U.S. and Israeli soldiers during the Juniper Cobra 10 joint training exercise, in Israel, Oct. 21, 2009. (Image source: Spc. Zachary R. Fehrman/Ohio National Guard Public Affairs) With the President of the United States behaving as if Iran can be an ally and a pro-Western player, it might help to recall the "quick reference guide" to the capabilities Israel brings to U.S.-Israel security cooperation, first published by JINSA in 1979, detailing that Israel has:
A secure location in a crucial part of the world
A well-developed military infrastructure
The ability to maintain, service, and repair U.S.-origin equipment
An excellent deep-water port in Haifa
Modern air facilities
A position close to sea-lanes and ability to project power over long distances
A domestic air force larger than many in Western Europe and possessing more up-to-date hardware
Multilingual capabilities, including facility in English, Arabic, French, Farsi and the languages of the (former) Soviet Union
Combat familiarity with Soviet/Russian style tactics and equipment
The ability to assist U.S. naval fleets, including common equipment
The ability to support American operations and to provide emergency air cover
A democratic political system with a strong orientation to support the United States and the NATO system.
In 1996, R&D capabilities and intelligence cooperation were added. Post 9-11, urban counterterror training was added.
Nothing has been deleted.
After the 2003 allied invasion of Iraq, American military personnel were being introduced to Israel's bomb-sniffing dogs. The U.S. wanted such dogs, but the training period is fairly long. The IDF made Israeli dogs available, but they only took commands in Hebrew. There were some interesting scenes in Baghdad.
Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey is one of many American military officers willing to praise Israel's concern for enemy civilian casualties. Dempsey sent a senior American delegation to Israel to learn tactics after last summer's Gaza war.
But more important than planning for combat is planning for the strengthening of democracies. We cannot make democracies out of Iraq or Libya or Syria, but when democratic countries are united, the world becomes a safer place for all. As I wrote in 2006,
"Israel and the United States are drawn together by common values and common threats to our well-being. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction across the Middle East and Asia, and the ballistic missile technology to deliver systems across wide areas require cooperation in intelligence, technology and security policy. Terrorism and the origins and dissemination of violent Islamic radicalism also need to be addressed multi-laterally when possible. "In a volatile region so vital to the U.S., where other states cannot be relied upon, it would be foolish to disengage -- or denigrate -- an ally such as Israel. The war against terrorists and the states that harbor and support them will be long and hard, and success will depend in no small measure on the allies who stand with us and with whom we stand."
The message was good in 1979, better in 2006 and better yet in 2015.

Iran Nuclear Deal: Good and Bad News for Turkey
Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute./July 16, 2015
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6179/iran-nuclear-deal-turkey
Iran will have a stronger hand in supporting the Shiite war against the Sunnis in the Middle East, financially, militarily and politically. Once again, Turkey is pursuing an unattainable goal: That Iran will give up its sectarian warfare but let Turkey continue to wage its own sectarian warfare. After the nuclear deal, the Turks see that their sectarian war against Shiite dominance in the region will be harder to fight. Officially, Turkey has welcomed the nuclear deal that the P5+1 bloc (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany) reached with Iran, and the lifting of sanctions on its eastern neighbor.
Ankara said that the deal 1) will contribute to the regional stability and economy; 2) will have a direct positive impact on Turkey; and 3) must be put into practice with full transparency.
Ironically, such warm welcome from Ankara put Turkey into the same line as its worst regional nemesis, the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad, who also welcomed the deal. "We are confident that the Islamic Republic of Iran will support, with greater drive, the just causes of nations, and work for peace and stability in the region and the world," Assad said in a message to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
As always, it is safer to understand the Turkish thinking on anything involving Iran from the "cautious" words in any official statement, not from the "cheerful" words.
After welcoming the nuclear deal with Iran, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu called on Iran to revise its regional policies and "abandon sectarian politics." More specifically, Cavusoglu called on Iran to revise its role in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Iran "should play a positive and constructive role. It should abandon sectarian politics and give importance to political dialogue for solutions. This is our expectation from our brother Iran," the Turkish minister said.
Where does the Iran deal leave Turkey? The short answer is: In purgatory. That is because, for the Turks, Iran is a "brotherly Muslim state" but at the same time it is, privately, "a rival and potential enemy that worships a heretical sect of Islam."
Ankara would privately welcome Tehran's developing a nuclear bomb and threatening exclusively Israel. But it knows that an Iran equipped with nuclear warheads would pose an existential security threat not only to Israel: Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt would have to line up in the queue as well, or develop their own nuclear weapons in response.
Iran is not a new regional rival to Turkey. Ostensibly, the 550 km (nearly 350 mile) border between Turkey and Iran has been one of the most stable and peaceful in the volatile Middle East. The last "official" war fought between the Ottoman Empire and Persia (under the Safavid dynasty) was in 1623-1639. That war, for the control of Mesopotamia, ended with the signing of the Treaty of Zuhab, leaving Mesopotamia in Ottoman hands, until the empire was lost in the aftermath of World War I.
The Sunni and Shiite regional powers, however, did fight a full-scale war in 1733, when the Persians wanted to take Baghdad from the Ottomans.
In 1775, Persia (under the Zand dynasty) attacked Ottoman-ruled Basra, an invasion that lasted until 1821, when another war broke out which lasted until 1823. In 1840, the Ottomans and Persians also had a major conflict over the control of what is today Iran's Khorramshar.
In more modern times, Iran, in 1930, supported Kurdish uprisings against the Republic of Turkey; they were followed by a dispute over the Turkish-Iranian border.
More recently, in the 1980s and 1990s, Turkey accused Iran of killing secular and leftist Turkish intellectuals, of trying to export its Islamist regime to Turkey (when Turkey itself was a secular country), and of supporting Kurdish militants fighting for independence from Turkey. The nuclear deal, if successfully and honestly implemented -- that is, if it stops Iran's ambitions for nuclear weapons -- will relieve Turkey: a nuclear Iran would be too dangerous a regional rival for Turkey to deal with.
Turkey's President (then prime minister) Recep Tayyip Erdogan greets Iran's President Hassan Rouhani in Ankara, June 9, 2014. (Image source: AKP). Possessing a nuclear arsenal would also significantly boost Iran's regional political clout and military influence. Therefore, the "official" Turkish welcome for the deal reflects Ankara's cheerful mood over the idea that a nightmarish Iran scenario may have been averted.
But the same deal also rings alarm bells in the Turkish capital -- hence the cautious words accompanying the official Turkish statement. The lifting of sanctions will gradually open up Iran to the international community and boost Iran's economy, possibly with billions of petro-dollars flowing in, and trade with the rest of the world flourishing -- all strengthening the "Shiite heretics." What would that mean for Turkey? Iran will have a stronger hand in supporting the Shiite war against the Sunnis in the Middle East, financially, militarily and politically. Now re-read the Turkish foreign minister's caution: "Iran should revise its regional policies and abandon sectarian politics ... It should revise its role in Syria, Iraq and Yemen ... It should play a positive and constructive role. It should abandon sectarian politics and give importance to political dialogue for solutions. This is our expectation from our brother Iran." Take out the diplomatic courtesy part, "our brother Iran." The statement is a clear but discreet expression of concern and childish hypocrisy. Once again, Turkey is asking for too much, and unfairly. It asks Iran to "revise its sectarian policies." Which means that "the Iranians should stop supporting the Shiite jihadists but the Turks should continue supporting the Sunni jihadists."And once again, Turkey is pursuing an unattainable goal: That Iran will give up its sectarian warfare but let Turkey continue to wage its own sectarian warfare. After the nuclear deal, the Turks see that their sectarian war against Shiite dominance in the region will be harder to fight.
**Burak Bekdil, based in Ankara, is a Turkish columnist for the Hürriyet Daily and a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Iran nuclear deal opens the gates of evil in the Middle East
Salman Aldosary/Asharq Al Awsat/16 July/15
As one Saudi official recently told Reuters, it would be “a happy day” for the Middle East if the nuclear deal stopped Iran gaining a nuclear arsenal. After all, no one in the region and the world will reject the deal if it succeeds in “freezing” Iran’s military nuclear program. This indeed seemed to be the case based on the details of the deal announced on Tuesday after Tehran agreed to the majority of the conditions it had previously opposed, intransigence which lead to the years-long imposition of sanctions on its economy and a freeze on its assets. The deal has increased the so-called “breakout time”—time it would take Iran to enrich enough uranium to build a nuclear weapon—to at least one year from two to three months. Although it has not thwarted Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the deal would keep Tehran under international supervision to make sure it is incapable of manufacturing nuclear weapons. The question remains, however, whether it is a good or a bad deal. In my opinion, it is a wonderful deal for the administration of US President Barack Obama, who has long fought to conclude his second term in office with a final deal with Iran. Obama even threatened the US Congress on Tuesday to veto its rejection if it decided to disapprove the deal. It is also a good deal for the Western powers who do not wish to see the Middle East’s major powers involved in a nuclear arms race that would plunge the region into further turmoil. As for Iran, it has returned to square one: Tehran has neither achieved its goal of building its own nuclear program nor benefited from its oil boom to ease the sanctions that slowed down its economic growth. In other words, Iran has suffered the most from this deal. Iran’s propaganda machine has fabricated terms not even included in the deal, promoting it as a triumph of Iran’s foreign policy. Iran’s “fifth column” in the Gulf states would probably receive the news of the deal in the same way, cheering and welcoming the so-called Iranian “triumph.”
If the deal has limited the nuclear capabilities of Iran and forced it to bow down, at least temporarily until it catches its breath, the real concern is what it will produce and whether the Iranian regime will use it as a political card. No wise person would believe that Iran will give up its policy of destabilizing the region. Similar fears have even been voiced by senior US officials, including David Patreus, the former director of the CIA, who said that the most dangerous threat facing the region comes from the Iran-backed militias rather than from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). If we show good faith in Obama’s pledges and assurances that Iran will not be given concessions at the expense of other countries in the region, Western governments will be under great pressure to make the deal succeed and therefore turn a blind eye to many of Iran’s destabilizing policies as well as Tehran’s blatant interference in the domestic affairs of its neighbors. Moreover, the West will also have to neglect Tehran’s support of extremist militias, such as Iraq’s Popular Mobilization forces, also known as the Hashid Sha’abi, that have gradually become almost part of Iraq’s military. Iran has established a policy based on the equation of fighting terrorism with terrorism amid deafening silence from the West.Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states can only welcome the nuclear deal, which in itself is supposed to close the gates of evil that Iran had opened in the region. However, the real concern is that the deal will open other gates of evil, gates which Iran mastered knocking at for years even while Western sanctions were still in place.

Terror apologists encourage extremism
Ali Ibrahim/Asharq Al Awsat/16 July?15 Jul, 2015
British Prime Minister David Cameron sparked a controversy a few weeks ago when he warned of those who preach extremist ideologies that act as incubators for terrorists, but are not directly involved in terrorism. Cameron is definitely right in the sense that the terrorist threats we are facing today are the responsibility of those who justify such acts using a variety of pretexts that led to consecutive waves of terrorism. One of the most bizarre terrorist incidents was the car bomb attack that targeted the Italian consulate in central Cairo in the early hours of Saturday. The attack killed one civilian and injured dozens as well as caused partial damage to the consulate which was closed at the time of the bombing.
In a statement posted online, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) said it was behind the attack.
It is really hard to understand the aim behind the attack and why it targeted the Italian consulate in specific. Did the perpetrators have a spare car which they wanted to detonate? Or was it an attempt by Islamists to prove their existence in the light of the Egyptian army crackdown on their positions in Sinai Peninsula?No one can verify the authenticity of statements claiming responsibility for the almost daily terrorist attacks. They could be issued by some local pro-ISIS groups that attribute the attacks to the ultra-radical group in order to add more credibility to their operations. There have been previous attempts to target tourist sites in Luxor, Egypt, but they failed after the perpetrators raised the suspicions of the authorities. In Tunisia, one attacker managed to kill dozens of tourists on a Sousse beach in a vile attack whose aim, it appears, is to deliver a blow to the country’s economy which, like that of Egypt, relies on tourism revenues. Unfortunately, such attacks cannot be easily foiled. It takes one person, such as the Tunisia beach attacker, to commit a massacre and harm tourism for months or even the entire season. The same can be said about the practice of rigging cars with explosives and detonating them near locations that represent foreign interests. The new wave of terrorism, which has been fed by regional instability particularly in Syria and Iraq, cannot be stemmed completely. But its damages can be limited. At the end of the day, terrorist attacks are the work of individuals who are ostracized by society and therefore it is easy to mobilize the public opinion against them. History shows that terrorism will eventually defeat itself. The recent terrorist attacks prove that those who justify such acts are obsessed with violence and bloodshed.

Iran’s nuclear deal and us
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
The Iranian regime is like a monster that was tied to a tree and finally set loose based on good intentions. The agreement reached between major world powers and Tehran abandons the demand to end its nuclear program, and lifts sanctions as Iran restores more than $100 billion of frozen assets. I can imagine the wide smile of disbelief of Iranian leaders, as this is a gift from the sky for almost nothing in return. The conditions Tehran set at the end were not a necessity, but it imposed them to further pressure the Americans and speed up the negotiating process by refusing the inspection of military sites and preventing investigations with Iranian scientists. Washington accepted a deal that we all know could have been better. It was all a farce that began in Tehran in a moment of fear that the regime may collapse due to sanctions, bankruptcy and domestic pressure. Most Iranian civil aircraft are no longer fit for use due to lack of maintenance and spare parts. Everything in Tehran has become eroded. An expert on Iran told me the government was ready for any deal with Washington at any cost, as what mattered was ending sanctions, especially after banning Iran from using the dollar in its transactions – the final nail in the coffin of a series of fatal sanctions. We can imagine the talk inside Tehran on how to convince the Americans that this a historical deal with conditions.
A better deal
U.S. President Barack Obama did not commit a mistake when he accepted the Iranian proposal, as the aim of sanctions was not to topple the regime but to force it to give up its nuclear military program and alter its hostile behavior. The Iranians were prepared for a real reconciliation, but Washington rushed and was afraid it would miss its chance to reach a deal, so it accepted a deal that we all know could have been better. We are not against the agreement, lifting sanctions or Western reconciliation with Iran, as this serves our interests and proves to Iranians and Arabs that everything Tehran has said in the past 30 years contradicts its current endeavor to reconcile with the Great Satan. Most importantly for us, such reconciliation ends the regional tension that has been ongoing between us and Iran since the last century. We have grown tired, and want an ending that benefits the Iranian and Arab peoples without humiliation or pain. Unfortunately, the deal fulfils Iranian clerics’ wishes as it allows Iran to keep its nuclear capabilities, and only imposes a 10-year hiatus on intensive uranium enrichment. Also, Tehran is free to resume its adventures and support extremist groups. The agreement does not include a mechanism or set of commitments to protect the region. What we fear is the deal strengthening the hawks in Tehran and therefore postponing any positive transition within or outside the regime for a decade or two. The authority of evil governments, such as Saddam Hussein’s in Iraq, Bashar al-Assad’s in Syria and Moammar Qaddafi’s in Libya, has either fallen or weakened, and the Iranian regime was afraid it will face the same fate. The agreement has fortified it, so we expect more wars and blood in the region. That is why we disagree with Washington as it could have signed a better deal that could have positively changed the region, as Iran is the official supporter of most extremist parties, from Hezbollah to Hamas to the League of the Righteous. Iran is the motive for the emergence of opposing extremist parties such as Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and its terrorist operations have expanded to include the Philippines in the far east to Argentina in the far west.

For many Arabs, Iranian centrifuges are of the least concern
Joyce Karam/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
There is no question that the comprehensive agreement reached between Iran and the P5+1 countries on Tuesday is a step forward for the Non-proliferation regime and Iran’s relations with Europe and the United States after 36 years of isolation. The deal, however, coming at the lowest point for Iranian-Arab relations, is not exclusively viewed in the region for its arms control merits but for possibly financing Tehran’s armed network of proxies regionally. In many Arab circles today, the immediate value of the agreement as a non-proliferation asset and a document that caps Iran’s nuclear program is overshadowed by Iran’s regional behavior across the Middle East The reactions to the nuclear deal in the Arab world are not a zero sum game. On the one hand, the agreement was welcomed by UAE, Saudi Arabia and Turkey as a Non-proliferation necessity in a highly combustible Middle East. Nevertheless, concerns over Iran’s destabilizing activities from Yemen to Syria and Iraq were made to U.S. President Barack Obama in phone calls with the UAE and Saudi leaders. While the nuclear agreement lifting around $150 billion in sanctions could bring a much needed relief to the Iranian people, it is not guaranteed that it would weaken the hardliners. After all, it wouldn’t be uncommon in the Middle East if Iran’s elite chose to pursue economic openness at home while funding interventionist projects abroad.
Regional distrust
In many Arab circles today, the immediate value of the agreement as a non-proliferation asset and a document that caps Iran’s nuclear program is overshadowed by Iran’s regional behavior across the Middle East. Even in the final stages of the Vienna negotiations, Jordan reportedly thwarted a terror plot backed by Iran, while Hezbollah was going deeper into Zabadani battle in Syria, and IRGC’s Qassem Suleimani photo safari continued to Fallujah. In that context, there is a sense of disillusionment by many in the Arab world in perceiving the deal as rewarding an expansionist Iran while turning a blind eye to its role in the bloodletting in Iraq and Syria. Lebanon’s outspoken leftist leader Walid Jumblatt referenced this sentiment while lambasting the agreement as a “result of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq...signed with the blood of hundreds of thousands of Syrians.” Jumblatt’s comments irrespective of their political correctness, sum up the bigger crisis for Iran in the region today, and which goes far beyond its centrifuges. A Zogby poll conducted toward the end of 2014 showed that between 74 to 88 percent of Jordanians, Egyptians, Saudis and Emiratis have negative views of Iran. That is a statistical coup from the 70 to 80 percent favorable ratings for Iran in the Arab world in 2008. In a matter of seven years, the Syrian war and Iran’s staunch support for the Assad regime has sunk its credibility in the region.
Healing the rift
Following the deal, U.S. President Barack Obama laid out the “opportunity” that the deal represents for Tehran to move in a new direction. Obama said that the “path of violence and rigid ideology, a foreign policy based on threats to attack your neighbors or eradicate Israel” leads to a “dead end” while “a different path, one of tolerance and peaceful resolution of conflict, leads to more integration.”Obama’s words and choices for Iran should be coupled with a regional strategy for his administration. The nuclear agreement creates a diplomatic space for the U.S. and Iran to initiate conversations on regional conflicts whose settlement is key to the long-term success of the deal itself. Sticking to a morally bankrupt and a lost cause in Syria with the name of Bashar al-Assad will only deepen Tehran’s regional crisis, and drain its resources while strengthening ISIS. Pursuing instability in places like Jordan, Bahrain and Lebanon will not help embracing Iran in the international community. The nuclear deal provides a window of opportunity for Iran to reexamine its regional policies, and for the U.S. to pursue a larger strategy beyond capping centrifuges. Slipping further into the path of expansionism and militia building in the Middle East will only bring more antagonism toward Iran, and prolong the status quo of conflict in the entire region.

The Iran deal: President Obama’s legacy to the Syrian people
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
It is the middle of 2015. The U.S. 2016 presidential race is already well on its way, with dozens of candidates declared. And President Obama is at the end of his last term. By now he must be having an eye on his legacy. But what will his legacy be?
Iraq and Syria are burning and there is nothing to suggest that it will get any better any time soon. Relations with Russia are at their lowest point since the end of the Cold War – and President Putin has recently announced that Russia will boost its nuclear arsenal with 40 missiles this year, just as the U.S. and NATO have bolstered defenses on the Alliance’s eastern border in the wake of the Ukraine crisis. Talk of a new Cold War is not altogether misplaced, even if the U.S. and Russia are still collaborating in some geopolitical endeavors. And Afghanistan? The Afghan government is already being forced to negotiate with the Taliban, a process which will likely lead to some kind of uncomfortable compromise –especially uncomfortable for those Western nations which have invested a decade, trillions of dollars and many, many lives into establishing a democratic, civilian administration in the country.
A better world?
Obama is not leaving behind a better world. True enough, he did not start the disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but nor can it be said that he has helped the situation very much. And with everything else going on, Obama is very close to leaving no foreign policy legacy to speak of – or certainly not one that anyone would boast about. Unless he somehow manages a significant coup – something on the scale of Nixon’s success with China. Unfortunately, it looks like Assad is likely to be one of the biggest winners of this deal, while the Syrian people will be the biggest losers
And if anything is going to serve that purpose, it will have to be the deal just announced between Iran and the U.S. (and the other members of the Group of 6): the deal will severely limit Iran’s nuclear program, while the West will lift sanctions and welcome Iran back into the international fold. Just a few years ago such a deal would have been inconceivable. But now, all the stars were perfectly aligned: Obama needed this to cement his legacy, John Kerry as Secretary of State was the best man for the negotiations – he even has Iranian family relations in his son-in-law, and all the while, the Iranian negotiator, Mohammad Javad Zarif, had studied in the U.S. and has U.S. children. If any group of people could have made this deal happen it was these people.
Human suffering
One has to be hopeful for this deal. The rivalry between Iran and the U.S. in the Middle East has produced a huge amount of human suffering over the decades – it has produced sectarian fighting, terrorism, coups d’etat, proxy wars and many other horrors. Perhaps now, in an age where the two are de facto allies and mutually dependent on each other in the fight against ISIS in the Levant, some of these fronts can be scaled down or even retired, if some measure of trust can be built between the two sides.
But we must also be weary. It is telling that that the first person to congratulate the Iranians on the deal was Bashar al-Assad. Let us not forget Iran’s role in many of the region’s conflicts and the fact that it is bankrolling many of the regimes and (terrorist) factions opposed to us in the region. Unfortunately, this deal does not also mean that everything else will now be resolved. And certainly not for the Syrian people, who are still bombed, gassed and shot at from two (or more) sides?
Unfortunately, it looks like Assad is likely to be one of the biggest winners of this deal, while the Syrian people will be the biggest losers. Lifting the sanctions is expected to lead to a boom for the Iranian economy (Western investors are already counting their returns). And as Iran will undoubtedly use some of the windfall to further extend its regional influence. Assad can expect increased financial and logistical support for his regime, as well as further subsidies to his military apparatus, as he continues to work within the Iranian sphere of influence. One fifth of the Syrian population are now refugees. And the situation now can only get worse.

Iran Will Cheat. Then What?
Dennis Ross/Washinton Institute/July 16/15
Knowing when Iran has violated the agreement is one thing; ensuring that there is a price for every transgression, no matter how small, is another. The nuclear deal with Iran will certainly be debated intensely as Congress reviews the agreement over the next 60 days. It is a complex deal with many parts. For the administration, it has blocked the Iranian pathway to a bomb for at least the next fifteen years -- and that claim has a great deal of merit given the limitations on the numbers of centrifuges, the far-reaching reduction of Iran's stockpile of low enriched uranium, the removal and redesign of the core of the heavy water reactor at Arak, and Iran's forswearing of reprocessing capabilities for this period of time.
In addition, President Obama is surely right when he declares that the deal is not about trust because there will be sweeping means to verify what is going on with the Iranian nuclear program. Indeed, the monitoring of the whole supply chain from the mining of uranium to the enriching of UF6 gas in centrifuges will make it difficult for Iran to divert materials into a covert program without us knowing about it. So there are some very important achievements in the agreement.
But there are also some important weaknesses that need to be addressed. Knowing Iran has cheated is one thing; ensuring that there is a price for every transgression -- no matter how small -- is another. The agreement provides for "snap back" sanctions, which essentially lifts the suspension of sanctions in the event of an Iranian violation. Clearly, the snap-back function is designed to deal with a major breach of the deal, particularly because Iran explicitly states in the agreement that it will stop implementing its nuclear obligations if sanctions are re-imposed. So what happens if Iran cheats along the margins? For example, if they enrich uranium to 7%, not the permitted 3.67%? The snap-back function makes little sense in this circumstance, but the Joint Commission that brings together all the negotiating parties could obviously address such an issue of non-compliance. In this case, however, Iran will likely declare it made a mistake and say it will stop doing it. Sound fine? Not really. Given Iran's track record, it will likely cheat along the margins to test the means of verification and see how it might be able to change the baseline -- and there needs to be a penalty for each such act of non-compliance, and preferably not only by the US. I say this because deterrence is going to be even more important as a result of this deal. Indeed, for me the greatest single problem with the agreement is that Iran is going to be left as a threshold nuclear state at the end of fifteen years. The agreement requires Iran to dismantle none of its enrichment infrastructure, and starting in year 15, it can have as large a nuclear program as it wants. The gap between threshold and weapons status is small and will not take long to bridge. As such, deterrence is what will matter. Iran must have no doubts that if we see it moving toward a weapon, that would trigger the use of force. Declaring that is a must even now. Proving that every transgression will produce a price will demonstrate that we mean what we say. If verification is necessary because the agreement is not built on trust, so too is building the credibility of our deterrence because Iran will be a threshold nuclear state -- one that has deferred but not given up the option of being a nuclear weapons state.
**Dennis Ross is the counselor and William Davidson Distinguished Fellow at The Washington Institute

Netanyahu’s ‘historic’ mistake on Iran
Chris Doyle/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
The Iran deal was historic. But was it a historic success or a historic mistake? Take your pick. Every international statesman, every government press release had to use the “H word.”Maybe. Many states described the 2003 deal with Libya on chemical weapons as historic too but were at war with Qaddafi less than a decade later. History is not going to judge this deal whilst the ink is still dry on the paper. History may be truly made over the year to two years following the deal, not just now.
Getting the message across
It was obvious that the Iran deal was done and dusted the moment it was indicated on July 7 that Iran wanted to conquer the world. It did not just crave a nuclear weapons arsenal but global control all under the benevolent overlordship of the supreme leader.
The bitter reality for the Israeli leader is that as hard as he had tried to prevent this outcome, he had had less influence than any major Western leader. This was not a quote from one of the supreme leader’s speeches but the supposedly seasoned analysis of none other than the Israeli prime minister, only a few months after winning his fourth Israeli election. Netanyahu stated this in public at a memorial service, and then to make sure the entire world got the message, he tweeted it from the prime minister’s official Twitter account stating: “Iran’s increasing aggression is more dangerous than that of ISIS, and the true goal of this aggression in the end is to take over the world.” For good measure, he then had it translated into Farsi and posted on his freshly created Farsi Twitter account.
It is a golden rule in politics that the level of exaggeration and hyperbole used is inversely proportional to the level of success and influence. If you are losing, hype the threat or the issue. Netanyahu was unwittingly admitting complete failure and acknowledging zero influence over the deal. He could not thwart the deal. Netanyahu’s two decades worth of alarmist warnings on Iran nuclear bomb had come to nothing. He was not enjoying his isolation, his standing ovations in Congress seemed a long way away.
Bitter reality
The bitter reality for the Israeli leader is that as hard as he had tried to prevent this outcome, he had had less influence than any major Western leader. Netanyahu was barely able to apply the brakes. He was ignored, for a politician it is the worst scenario imaginable.
But, pause for one second. Imagine an Iranian leader, in fact any leader, accusing Israel or the Jews of wanting to take over the World. Do you have to imagine? The torrents of outrage. Western leaders would be falling over themselves to get their condemnations in, with ever more excited language in a super competitive bid to outdo each other. Well so far, I can find none. Not one. The stench of hypocrisy will be smelt from Beijing to Washington. So when the Israeli prime minister alleges bizarrely that Iran is trying to do so, surely there is some level of outrage, somewhere. Did you hear President Obama expressing concern, or Prime Minister Cameron leaping to challenge his friend “Bibi.” Well not yet at least. Is there even a faint glimmer of a possibility that Netanyahu might apologize or at least delete the tweet? Probably about as much chance as he will apologize for the Gaza War last summer. This is the season for grotesquely ridiculous hyperbole and that is without including comments from Republican Presidential candidates. Cameron himself had only proclaimed on the BBC that ISIS represents an existential threat to the West. ISIS is a threat and a serious one but not even close to being an existential one to the West. (Note that Cameron focused on the West and not the very real existential threat to Syria, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon).
There is a very serious point buried in all of this. Pyromaniacs are in overdrive in the Middle East, and even infecting politicians and opinion formers further afield. Hate is a booming currency. With little concern for resolving conflicts or claiming tensions, far too many in positions of responsibility are quite happy to add fuel to the flames even as they are burning their doorsteps. What did Netanyahu hope to achieve by claiming Iran wants to take over the world? He is not even about to go to the polls so he does not have that old excuse.
Negative role
For sure, Iran’s role in the Middle East has been negative, no more so than in Syria. Its backing of the Assad regime’s crimes and brutal interference is horrific but no more than Russia’s. The post-sanctions financial bonanza for Iran could yet augment the weapons arsenals of Bashar al-Assad with fatal consequences for thousands of Syrian civilians. It could chose a different path and should be encouraged to do so. Rather than expending huge energies in crude sound bite diplomacy, it is time regional leaders started trying to make this Iran deal work, not fail. Israeli might wish to learn from the lessons of why it has become so isolated. Saudi Arabia, a more diplomatic critic of the Vienna deal, may wish to examine the positive options before taking any drastic measures.
Iran itself should refrain from investing the billions of dollars of sanctions relief into further conflict, not least in Syria. What better way to highlight a change of approach to the world than to push for a credible political deal over this century’s most devastating conflict.
This requires a major regional transformation, a colossal diplomatic effort and courage leading to deals not just on Iran but Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Palestine and Libya. Ignore any one of these conflicts and the Iran deal may mean nothing.

A Yemen deal? Only if Saleh or the Houthis give in
Manuel Almeida/Al Arabiya/16 July/15
As with the previous ceasefire in May, the truce in Yemen declared by the U.N. last Friday evening only took a couple of hours to collapse. That night and in the early hours of Saturday in the southern port city of Aden and the highland city of Taez, Houthis shelled civilian areas.The local resistance committees, who for four months have been fighting off the presence of the Houthis and the military forces loyal to former president Ali Abdullah Saleh, continued to respond. The Saudi-led coalition also swiftly resumed its aerial bombardments against positions of the Houthi-Saleh alliance across the country.Despite the ineffectiveness of the ceasefire call, there was still moderately encouraging news over the last few days: the urgent delivery of humanitarian aid proceeded in some areas and the pro-government forces and the southern resistance re-captured much of Aden, including the international airport. Tragically, Yemen is witnessing the destructive combination of two ills that plague other Arab states
Although it did not come as a surprise, how to explain yet another resounding failure of diplomacy to achieve even a ceasefire of short duration?
Political maneuvers
Back in June 2011, when Saleh was badly injured in an attack on the presidential compound, it looked like the end of the line for him. He was transported to Saudi Arabia for treatment, where he eventually signed the GCC-backed agreement that involved a transfer of power to his vice-president Abdrabbu Mansour Hadi and the abandonment of his presidential post in exchange for immunity from prosecution. But then, upon Saleh’s discrete return to Sanaa, the former president against whom Yemenis of all stripes revolted in 2011 decided his best option would be to stay in Yemen. He would use his wealth and influence among the Republican Guards and the military to resist any attempts to force him out. This decision would prove decisive for the direction events have taken.
In September last year, the Houthi take-over of the capital Sanaa revealed an alliance between Saleh and the rebel leadership headed by Abdul-Malik al-Houthi. The alliance led the two former northern enemies to put behind their backs, at least temporarily, the fact they had fought six wars between 2004 and 2011-2012 uprisings.
Emboldened by Saleh’s unexpected but powerful support and also by the ties with Iran (as well as Hezbollah), which the Islamic Republic was now ready to institutionalize, the Houthis got increasingly greedy. After dominating the capital, they placed the government of Hadi under house arrest in February after it refused to take decisions dictated by the Houthis. When Hadi fled to the former Southern capital of Aden, the Houthi-Saleh alliance went after him.
Advancing on strategic points
The Houthi-Saleh alliance also advanced on other strategic points, such as Taez and the energy-rich Marib province. Away from their northern strongholds, they were met with fierce resistance from local armed groups. This still seems to be one of the least understood aspects of the current crisis: without Saleh’s backing and the leverage he has over military units and some northern tribes, the Houthis would never be able to get this far. They would be an armed faction among others. Tragically, Yemen is witnessing the destructive combination of two ills that plague other Arab states. Like Assad in Syria, Saleh opted to spread chaos and death and bring his own country to its knees rather than capitulate. As with Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis aim to be an armed militia above the state, making use of a so-called revolutionary ideology that is nothing more than a mixture of populism and radicalism. The problem for the Houthis is that Yemen is much bigger and far more populous than Lebanon and regional identities are particularly strong. The Houthis cannot control let alone govern a place like Yemen, which would be an unacceptable scenario not only in the eyes of many Yemenis but also of the GCC states. Yet with Saleh’s assistance, the Houthis are powerful enough to paralyze any attempts to push forward a political solution.
For any truce or political agreement to have any meaningful impact, at least one of these two parties will have to give in. Either the Houthis realize what they are and what they cannot be, or Saleh or his close supporters in the General People’s Congress as well as the military recognize their strategy so far can only be a recipe for disaster.

Anger management: Michel Aoun and the Lebanese chaos theory
InsideLebanon/Makram Rabah/16.07.15
Aoun's grandstanding on behalf of Lebanese Christians seems to want to turn the clock back to before 1989 - and risks political suicide
The recent call for political mobilisation by the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) General Michel Aoun against the Lebanese government should perhaps be viewed through the lens of the chaos theory. The protagonists of the theory believe that there is a certain logic even in chaos that can yield positive results. By asking his supporters to demonstrate against the cabinet, Aoun wants to create enough chaos so as to push the country to the brink and thus bully his way to the presidency.
Strangely enough Aoun, the self-proclaimed leader of the Christians, has asked his die-hard supporters to go to the streets against the same government that includes two of his own ministers, one ironically being his own son-in-law, Gibran Bassil.
Ever since his return from his Parisian exile in 2005, Aoun has proclaimed himself to be the strongest Christian politician who has the right to speak on behalf of his community.
To many, these theatricals might appear to be yet another of the angry outbursts which Aoun has become renowned for since he was appointed interim prime minister in 1988. However, these Aoun-like antics would have gone unnoticed if the Lebanon internal/regional situation was, to say the least, less volatile.
The Lebanese Republic, as it sits, has been without a president since the office fell vacant with the end of the term of Michel Sleiman on 24 May, 2014. Since then, the Lebanese parliament has failed over 25 times to elect the next president, with Aoun and his allies Hezbollah boycotting these sessions. Aoun believes that he should be elected by the parliament unopposed and until such conditions occur it is permissible to derail the democratic process.
Aoun’s pretext for this manoeuvre stems from the fact that he has the largest Christian parliamentary bloc and thus he has the legitimacy to speak on behalf of the Maronites and consequently be elected president. Coincidently, Aoun attacked the government of Prime Minister Tamam back in May, accusing it of being “democratically ignorant” as well as refuting the constitutionality of the Lebanese parliament.
As a result of this vacancy, the national unity government of Salam had to assume the reigns of governance and manage a failed state, a lagging economy and 1.5 million Syrian refugees. Moreover, the cabinet had to deal with the precarious rise of extremist elements domestically who are incensed by Hezbollah’s involvement in the Syrian crisis.
Aoun’s recurrent or perhaps only grievance is that the Christians’ political rights have been usurped by the Sunni prime minister who now shares power with the president. Aoun, who never endorsed the Taef accord which ended the 15 years of civil war in 1989, claims that only through the pre-Taef prerogatives a strong president can rule. Prior to 1975, the president of the republic yielded unchecked constitutional powers which aggravated the sectarian divisions in the country.
While other Christian political factions - among them the Lebanese Forces and the Phalangist Party - share Aoun’s concern for the rights of Christians, none of them go as far as to disregard the Taef accord but rather ask for its proper implementation.
Primarily, this accord introduced a number of constitutional amendments and changed the power-sharing formula between the Christians and the Maronites from six-to-five to an even 50/50. Moreover, it gave the Syrian regime under the late Hafez Assad virtual control over Lebanon. The Syrian occupation alongside other internal elements prevented this accord from being implemented and thus deprived the Christians as well as a big segment of the Lebanese of their rights. This Syrian occupation would end shortly after the assassination of PM Rafik al-Hariri in 2005.
Samir Geagea, the leader of the Lebanese Forces, who has long considered to be Aoun’s arch nemesis after both sides were caught up in a bloody confrontation in 1988 known as “the War of Cancellation,” recently ended their feud by ratifying a memorandum of understanding. Both leaders, who are frontrunners for the presidency, have agreed to make peace because the Christian interest dictated a strong united Christian front. They even went as far to agree on running a commercial poll which involves a sample of 4,600 Christians to determine who amongst the Christian leaders would run for president.
While these initiatives - the call for inter-Christian dialogue and polling - do not carry any legal implications they have been received by the general public, more so the Christian constituency, as a step in the right direction. Aoun, nevertheless, opted to rock the boat of political stability by attacking the only form of legitimate governance.
The political deadlock, which characterised the country even before the presidential vacuum, dictated that the tenure of the high-ranking posts that were mainly military and security be extended. Consequently, the commander of the army, the army chief of staff and the director of the internal security forces had their retirement deferred.
The cabinet justified this move by stating that the mercurial security situation dictated so. Furthermore, following past precedent, filling these positions, especially the commander of the army, is a prerogative of the incoming president.
Aoun, however, saw things differently. Following Aoun’s logic, he declared that the cabinet has no right or pretext to defer the discharge of the current commander. Conveniently enough, Aoun, himself a former commander of the army, demanded that his other son-in-law General Shamel Roukouz, the current commander of the elite Special Forces regiment, be appointed the next commander of the LAF.
The refusal of the cabinet to accommodate Aoun’s wishes led the latter to amplify his attacks against Salam culminating in his call for a quasi-mutiny to defend the rights of the Christians and “to safeguard the role of the president”. Aoun’s crusade to reclaim 100 years of lost Christian rights transpired in a weak showing of a few hundred orange-dressed FPM supporters.
The Lebanese would amusingly watch as these “angry demonstrators” paraded through the streets of the capital with their party flags and finally clashed with the Lebanese army which prevented them from going through with a theatrical attempt to storm the Grand Serail, the headquarters of the Prime Minister of Lebanon.
Concurrently, Gibran Bassil attempted to disrupt the opening of the cabinet session by taking the floor without being recognised by the presiding officer, in this case PM Salam. Bassil accused Salam of violating the constitution and usurping the power of the president. Salam’s response to this deliberate impudence was a reprimand of these juvenile acts.
Ultimately, by endorsing these chaotic actions, Aoun wanted to portray himself as the strongest Christian leader who was not afraid to go all the way if needed. But Aoun also knew quite well that Geagea, who had opposed the FPM in an earlier riot in 2006, would this time remain idle.
Geagea’s decision to refrain from taking any action perhaps stems from the fact that Aoun’s populist rhetoric resonates with Geagea’s own supporters who equate the feebleness of the Christian political establishment to outward factors. Aoun’s allies on the other hand, mainly Hezbollah, gave their presidential candidate verbal support which at the end of the day would make his quest for the presidency yet more challenging.
While Aoun and his supporters might abide by the chaos theory, at least based on their recent actions, the road to restoring the so-called glories of the Christians lies elsewhere. Some of the Lebanese, Aoun amongst them, should realise that a return to the pre-Taef system is not only a constitutional impossibility but also pursuing it amounts to a form of political suicide - mainly because it would be sending a message to the Lebanese Muslims that they are not equal partners but rather second-class citizens. Moreover, the Lebanese Christians are missing out on a rare chance to become the mediators of the Sunni-Shia schism which has engulfed the region.
In the 15th century AD, Pope Leo X described the Maronites as being “a rose among thorns, an impregnable rock in the sea, unshaken by the waves and fury of the thundering tempest”.
The Christian political establishment, or what remains of it, has to always keep in mind that their ancestors have survived over the ages not because of brutal strength or by being thorns, but rather because of political savviness and smart positioning. Chaos can only bring on more chaos for both the Christians and the Lebanese at large.
- Makram Rabah is a PhD candidate at Georgetown University’s history department. He is the author of “A Campus at War: Student Politics at the American University of Beirut, 1967–1975” and a regular columnist for Now Lebanon.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

What's Really Wrong with the Iran Nuclear Deal
Robert Satloff/New York Daily News/July 16/15
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/whats-really-wrong-with-the-iran-nuclear-deal
Tactically, the impressively detailed Iran nuclear accord masks major flaws; strategically, it heralds a profound shift in U.S. regional strategy.
I have read every mind-numbing page of the Iran nuclear agreement. It is a serious document, negotiated by serious people. It includes a series of impressive restrictions on all aspects of Iran's nuclear program for many years, some lasting a quarter century.
But it is much more than just a technical accord. It is a strategy paper that maps Iran's emergence as a regional power, with the full blessing -- even support -- of the United States and the international community.
To start, it is important to note how far the Iran issue has evolved from the days when far-sighted lawmakers first pressed past administrations to impose sanctions on the Islamic Republic for its destabilizing nuclear program. Originally, diplomacy with Iran was supposed to be based on a straight trade-off: America (and its partners) would end nuclear-related sanctions while Iran would end its domestic nuclear program.
Then, the United States conceded to Iran the right to have its own nuclear reactors but not to develop indigenous capacity to enrich nuclear fuel, which doubles as the core element of nuclear weapons. Then, the United States conceded to Iran the right to enrich but under strict limitations. Then, the United States conceded to Iran that the strict limitations on enrichment would expire at a certain point in the future.
The result was that a deal originally conceived as trading sanctions relief for Iran's nuclear program evolved, over time, into a deal trading sanctions relief for time-limited restrictions on Iran's ambitious nuclear plans, enforced through a vigorous monitoring, verification and consequences regime. Perhaps that new, lesser deal -- one that kicks Iran's potential to be a nuclear weapons threshold state into the future -- is still in America's interest, but one should begin any analysis by recalling how far we have come from the original intent of sanctions and U.S. diplomacy.
A close reading of the text suggests that there are potentially significant gaps even in the vigor of the new regime defined by the agreement. Here are three:
When will inspectors get into suspect sites? According to my read of the agreement, Iran has a total of 24 days to delay any set of inspections. While it may take more than 24 days to scrub clean a massive underground enrichment facility, there is a lot of illicit activity that Iran can hide with 24 days notice.
What are the consequences for Iranian violations? According to my read of the agreement, there is only one penalty for any infraction, big or small -- taking Iran to the UN Security Council for the "snapback" of international sanctions. That is like saying that for any crime -- whether a misdemeanor or a felony -- the punishment is the death penalty. In the real world, that means there will be no punishments for anything less than a capital crime.
What does "snapback" mean in practice? Let's say that the UN Security Council does order the reimposition of sanctions. According to my read of the agreement, all contracts signed by Iran up until that point are grandfathered in and immune from sanctions. That means one can expect a stampede of state-to-state and private sector contracts -- some real, many hypothetical -- all designed to shield Iran from the impact of possible reimposition of sanctions, thereby weakening the impact of the punishment.
But the problem with snapback gets worse. The agreement includes a statement that Iran considers a reimposition of sanctions as freeing it from all commitments and restrictions under the deal. In other words, the violation would have to be really big for the Security Council to blow up the agreement and reimpose sanctions. That effectively gives Iran a free pass on all manner of small to mid-level violations.
These and other gaps are substantial. They deserve close scrutiny by lawmakers and clear answers from the Administration. But concerns about the agreement are much broader.
The Iran deal also includes a dramatic rollback of all "nuclear-related" sanctions -- whether imposed by the United Nations, the European Union or the United States. This includes all energy, financial, transportation and trade sanctions. Indeed, the agreement includes page after page of names of people and companies whose assets will be "unfrozen." In addition, sanctions relief includes, in year five, the lifting of the conventional arms embargo on Iran and, in year eight, the lifting of limits on delivery of ballistic missile components to Iran.
Moreover, there is a key commitment in the agreement that signatories are prohibited from "re-introducing or re-imposing the sanctions" and, later in the text, are banned from "imposing discriminatory regulatory and procedural requirements in lieu of the sanctions and restrictive measures covered by the [agreement]." Does this mean the U.S. has tied its hands on applying these sanctions against Iran for other nefarious activity, from terrorism to human rights violations? At the very least, it appears that the United States did not make clear enough its intent to preserve sanctions for these non-nuclear purposes. Indeed, Iran may believe it is the only country in the world against whom a long list of penalties can never be applied for any crime it may do. That will only invite the bad behavior we hope to prevent.
The Iran accord goes further. On top of refraining from penalizing Iran for bad behavior, the U.S. and its partners commit to assist Iran to develop in energy, finance, technology and trade. The idea that America and its allies will actually help Iran grow stronger in these areas will sound a discordant note around the Middle East, where the Tehran regime is viewed as the eminence grise behind Bashar Assad's brutal suppression of his people, the Houthi rebellion against state authority in Yemen, the creeping expansion of radical Shiite influence in Iraq and the activities of some of the most extreme Palestinian terrorist groups.
In that vein, this agreement is truly historic. It marks a potential turning point in America's engagement in the Middle East, a pivot from building regional security on a team of longtime allies who were themselves former adversaries of each other -- Israel and the Sunni Arab states -- in favor of a balance between those allies and our own longtime nemesis, Iran.
This deal does not mean that America and Iran are now partners; far from it. But it sends tremors throughout the region in laying out the potential for that partnership. And Iran doesn't have to pay for this huge strategic gain by giving up its use of terror, subversion or other problematic policies. The only payment Iran makes for this huge strategic gain is postponement of its nuclear ambitions.
Perhaps, even with all these problems, the deal will achieve what the Obama administration promised it would achieve -- to block Iran's multiple pathways to the bomb for at least the next decade. And perhaps achieving that goal is worth the many sacrifices and concessions Washington made along the way.
Before that judgment can be rendered, the administration needs to explain the apparent flaws and complications in the agreement. No less important is the need for the administration to spell out the logic of strategic balance -- or perhaps, strategic competition -- between our old allies and our potential new one that this agreement seems to imply.
**Robert Satloff is executive director of The Washington Institute.

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

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