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/Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without realizing it
Luke 11/42-46: "‘But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and herbs of all kinds, and neglect justice and the love of God; it is these you ought to have practised, without neglecting the others.Woe to you Pharisees! For you love to have the seat of honour in the synagogues and to be greeted with respect in the market-places. Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without realizing it.’One of the lawyers answered him, ‘Teacher, when you say these things, you insult us too.’ And he said, ‘Woe also to you lawyers! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not lift a finger to ease them."

Bible Quotation For Today/So the word of the Lord grew mightily and prevailed.
Acts of the Apostles 19/11-22: "God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, so that when the handkerchiefs or aprons that had touched his skin were brought to the sick, their diseases left them, and the evil spirits came out of them. Then some itinerant Jewish exorcists tried to use the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had evil spirits, saying, ‘I adjure you by the Jesus whom Paul proclaims.’ Seven sons of a Jewish high priest named Sceva were doing this. But the evil spirit said to them in reply, ‘Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?’Then the man with the evil spirit leapt on them, mastered them all, and so overpowered them that they fled out of the house naked and wounded. When this became known to all residents of Ephesus, both Jews and Greeks, everyone was awestruck; and the name of the Lord Jesus was praised. Also many of those who became believers confessed and disclosed their practices. A number of those who practised magic collected their books and burned them publicly; when the value of these books was calculated, it was found to come to fifty thousand silver coins. So the word of the Lord grew mightily and prevailed. Now after these things had been accomplished, Paul resolved in the Spirit to go through Macedonia and Achaia, and then to go on to Jerusalem. He said, ‘After I have gone there, I must also see Rome.’ So he sent two of his helpers, Timothy and Erastus, to Macedonia, while he himself stayed for some time longer in Asia."

LCCC Latest analysis, editorials from miscellaneous sources published on July 21-22/15
Full transcript of Al Arabiya interview with Secretary of State John Kerry /Al Arabiya/July 21/15
What Choices after the Iran Nuclear Deal/Eyad Abu Shakra/ASharq Al Awsat/ July 21/15
Iran Deal: Europe’s Chief Negotiator Sympathized with Iran/George Igler/Gatestone Institute/July 21/15
Islamic State Is Not Islamic, Sex Grooming Gangs, Sharia Sportswear One Month of Islam in Britain, June 2015/Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute/July 21/15
Paving the Egyptian road with a shovel and a rifle/Abdel Latif el-Menawy/Al Arabia/21 July/15
Idle militant minds are the devil’s workshop/Khaled Almaeena/Al Arabiya/21 July/15
A short rope of hope for war-shattered Libya/Claudia Gazzini/Al Arabiya/21 July/15
Egyptian Columnist, Imad Al-Din Adib, Compares Iranian Nuclear Agreement To Munich Agreement/ MEMRI/July 21/15
Former Jordanian Information Minister, Saleh Al-Qallab: The Arabs, Because Of Their Helplessness, Are Responsible For Iran's Expansion In The Region/MEMRI/July 21/15
Netanyahu switches tactics for blocking Iran nuclear deal. Iranian Guards chief: We will never accept it/DEBKAfile/July 21/15
Michael Oren Interviewed by Daniel Pipes/A discussion reveals how Obama purposefully broke the historic US-Israel alliance FrontPageMag.com/July 21/15

LCCC Bulletin itles for the Lebanese Related News published on July 21-22/15
Badreddine among 3 Hizbullah Officials Sanctioned by U.S. over Syria Role
Arrest Warrant Issued for Tareq Yatim over George al-Rif's Murder
Dozens Dead in Zabadani Clashes on Lebanese-Syrian Border
Pentagon Chief Meets Israel PM to Discuss Tensions over Iran Deal
Pentagon Chief Tries to Assure Israel over Hizbullah after Iran Deal
Report: Fabius Tasked to Discuss Baabda Vacuum during Tehran Visit
Officials: 'No Solution, No Settlement' on Cabinet Crisis
Geagea Blames Iran for Baabda Vacuum
Aoun's Bloc Says PM Put 'Veto' on Top 4 Presidential Hopefuls, Govt. Has 'No Role' in Waste Crisis
Jumblat Says Hollande Stressed French Support during Elysee Meeting
Mashnouq Adamant to Implement his Plan as Garbage Piles Up
Army Arrests August 2014 Arsal Battles Suspect
Lebanese Man Dies in Self-immolation
Aoun Says No Objective to Topple Cabinet

LCCC Bulletin Miscellaneous Reports And News published on July 21-22/15
Monitor: Syria Rebels Rain Rockets on Shiite Villages
Violence as Burundi Votes with President Seeking Re-election
Anti-Hamas Gaza Jihadists Threaten Rocket Fire on Israel
Turkey PM Says Suspect Identified over Suicide Bombing
Kuwait DNA Tests Violate Right to Privacy, Says HRW
First U.N. Aid Ship in 4 Months Docks in Yemen's Aden
Anti-ISIS coalition intensifies strikes in Syria, Iraq
Syria extremists rain rockets on Shiite villages in Idlib
Emirati officer killed in Yemen operation
French foreign minister says will visit Iran 'next week'
Iranian FM defends nuclear deal in parliament
GCC secretary-general condemns Iran’s ‘clear contradictions’
Canada Condemns Attack in Turkey

Badreddine among 3 Hizbullah Officials Sanctioned by U.S. over Syria Role
Naharnet /21 July/15/The U.S. imposed sanctions Tuesday on three senior Hizbullah officials, including Mustafa Badreddine, over their alleged military role in Syria. “The U.S. Department of the Treasury today imposed sanctions against a set of key Hizbullah leaders, military officials, and an associate in Lebanon, further exposing and targeting Hizbullah's active support to the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad and Hizbullah's terrorist activities,” a statement said. It identified the three officials as Mustafa Badreddine, Fu'ad Shukr and Ibrahim Aqil. The Treasury also imposed sanctions against “Hizbullah facilitator” Abdul Nour Shaalan for “acting for or on behalf of Hizbullah.” “All assets of these four individuals that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are frozen, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them,” it said. The Treasury said Tuesday's designations “are the latest in a series of actions the U.S. government is taking against Hizbullah for its violent terrorist activities and its support to the Assad regime's attacks against the Syrian people.” Its most recent related action took place in June 2015 with the designation of alleged Hizbullah front companies and facilitators. "As these designations make clear, the United States will continue to aggressively target Hizbullah for its terrorist activities worldwide as well as its ongoing support to Assad's ruthless military campaign in Syria," said Adam J. Szubin, Acting Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. "We will pursue all of Hizbullah's revenue sources, whether charitable fundraising, criminal proceeds, or state sponsorship," he added. The U.S. Treasury statement noted that Hizbullah “began providing military support, including training, advice, and extensive logistical aid, to the Assad regime and pro-regime militias at the start of the Syrian conflict in early 2011.” “Hizbullah has coordinated its military support with senior officials in the Assad regime. Under the direction of Hizbullah Secretary-General (Sayyed) Hassan Nasrallah, Hizbullah escalated its military aid to the Government of Syria in mid-2012,” it added. One of five Hizbullah suspects being tried by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon over their alleged role in the 2005 assassination of ex-PM Rafik Hariri, Mustafa Badreddine is “assessed to be responsible for Hizbullah's military operations in Syria since 2011, including the movement of Hizbullah fighters from Lebanon to Syria,” the Treasury said. “Since September 2011, strategic coordination was handled between Assad and Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah on a weekly basis, with Badreddine accompanying Nasrallah during the meetings in Damascus,” it added. “Since 2012, Badreddine coordinated Hizbullah military activities in Syria. Badreddine led Hizbullah ground offensives in the Syrian town of al-Qusayr in February 2013, and in May 2013 the Free Syrian Army (FSA) confirmed that Badreddine was leading Hizbullah's operations in al-Qusayr,” the Treasury went on to say. As for Ibrahim Aqil and Fouad Shukr, the Treasury said they serve on “Hizbullah's highest military body, the Jihad Council” and have played “a vital role in Hizbullah's military campaign in Syria.” Meanwhile, Abdul Nour Shaalan, “a businessman with close ties to Hizbullah leadership, has been Hizbullah's point person for the procurement and transshipment of weapons and materiel for the group and its Syrian partners for at least 15 years,” the Treasury alleged. It said Shaalan has been critical in keeping Hizbullah supplied with weapons, including small arms, since the start of the Syrian conflict. “Shaalan ensures items purchased for Hizbullah personnel in Syria make it through customs. In 2014, Shaalan used his business cover to hide weapons-related materiel in Syria for Hizbullah,” the Treasury claimed. “In 2010, Shaalan was at the center of brokering a business deal involving Hizbullah, Syrian officials, and companies in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine regarding the purchase and sale of weapons,” it added.

Arrest Warrant Issued for Tareq Yatim over George al-Rif's Murder
Naharnet /An arrest warrant was issued Tuesday for a detainee accused of stabbing to death a 45-year-old man over a traffic dispute, in a case that shocked the country after a graphic video of the incident went viral on social media. “Beirut Examining Magistrate George Rizk issued an arrest warrant for the detainee Tareq Yatim in the case of George al-Rif's murder, as he postponed his decision until tomorrow regarding the detainee Lina Haidar, after both were interrogated,” state-run National News Agency reported. The arrest warrant was based on “the lawsuit filed by the public prosecution and articles 549 and 222 of the Penal Code,” NNA said. Yatim has been charged with “premeditated homicide” according to Article 549, the agency noted. Yatim was arrested Thursday by army intelligence agents in Ashrafieh. He dealt al-Rif several stabs in Ashrafieh after a long car chase that started on the airport road after the two got into a right of way dispute. Some media reports said Yatim was under the influence of drugs when he committed the crime Wednesday evening and also when he was arrested. According to reports, the man has a long criminal record. Identified by the media as a bodyguard of SGBL Bank chairman Antoun Sehnaoui, Yatim was among the group that beat up a valet parking attendant in 2009 outside the Sofitel Le Gabriel Beirut Hotel in Ashrafieh, OTV said. He was arrested over the incident before being eventually released. In 2012, Yatim was among those who attacked and opened fire at a motorcycle repair shop in Sidd al-Baouchrieh, killing Elie Numan and wounding two others, OTV said. According to LBCI television, Wednesday's knife man and his group were also involved in a 2010 shooting at the Maison Blanche nightclub in Beirut. Mazen Zein and Sami al-Maamari were wounded in that incident. Yatim was involved in a 2012 incident at the Zahrat el-Ihsan School in Ashrafieh, LBCI said. It said the man and his associates beat up sports instructor Elie Farah and ripped off his ear after he did not allow a schoolgirl not donning sportswear from taking part in his class.

Dozens Dead in Zabadani Clashes on Lebanese-Syrian Border
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/21 July/15/Almost 70 fighters have been killed in the two-week-old battle between pro-government forces and Islamist rebels for control of Zabadani on Syria's border with Lebanon, a monitoring group said Monday. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said 46 rebels and 21 members of Hizbullah fighting on the government side have died since pro-regime forces entered the town of Zabadani on July 4. It did not give a figure for Syrian army losses in and around Zabadani, which lies north of Damascus and in February 2012 became the first town to fall into rebel hands. According to the Britain-based Observatory, regime aircraft have dropped 600 barrel bombs since the launch of the government offensive to recapture the town. Regime forces have seized control of a hilltop overlooking the south of Zabadani.

Pentagon Chief Meets Israel PM to Discuss Tensions over Iran Deal
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/21 July/15/U.S. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter met Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday to try to ease tensions over the Iran nuclear deal, as the Israeli leader urged lawmakers in Washington to reject the hard-won agreement. The two men greeted each other with a long handshake before entering the meeting that lasted nearly two hours, making no comment about the tensions over the nuclear accord that Netanyahu has harshly condemned. Their meeting came on the final day of Carter's visit to Israel, the first stop on a regional tour aimed at reassuring U.S. allies in the region who have concerns over the Iran deal. On Monday, Carter met with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon and signaled the United States was ready to boost military cooperation with the Jewish state. He also toured the country's northern border with Lebanon for an assessment of the threat Israel says Hizbullah poses. Iran is accused of supporting militants in the region, including Israeli enemies Hizbullah and Hamas, and Israel argues that the expected lifting of sanctions under the nuclear accord will allow it to boost its help for such groups. Carter on Monday sought to address Israel's worries that the nuclear deal with its arch-foe Iran meant Washington was shifting its focus in the region, saying Israel remained "the bedrock of American strategy in the Middle East". Under the July 14 agreement, Iran has agreed to dismantle or mothball much of its nuclear industry in return for an easing and eventual lifting of sanctions. World powers have called it an historic opportunity to set relations with Iran on a new path. Netanyahu has argued however that it is not enough to keep the Islamic republic from obtaining nuclear weapons that could be used to target Israel. He has said that military force remains on the table to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, although experts say unilateral strikes by Israel appear highly unlikely for now. Carter has noted that the deal does not preclude the use of military force to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, although the agreement is designed to resolve the issue diplomatically. The United States currently grants Israel about $3 billion a year in military aid in addition to spending on other projects, such as the Iron Dome missile defense system. There have been suggestions that the assistance could be increased due to the Iran agreement. The U.S. Congress has 60 days to review the accord and Netanyahu has been urging lawmakers to reject it, including in a series of television interviews with U.S. networks.
He angered President Barack Obama by appearing before Congress in March to denounce the deal being negotiated with Iran.

Pentagon Chief Tries to Assure Israel over Hizbullah after Iran Deal
Associated Press/Naharnet/21 July/15/On a hilltop lookout near Israel's border with Lebanon, U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter offered personal assurances Monday that the U.S. will help Israel counter Iranian support for Hizbullah. He called it one example of how the U.S. can support the Jewish state in the aftermath of the Iran nuclear deal. Carter visited Hussein Lookout, with a sweeping view of the border as well as the Golan Heights, in an effort to emphasize U.S. concern about a range of threats that face Israel. These include tens of thousands of short-, medium- and longer-range Hizbullah rockets and missiles in southern Lebanon that could hit Israeli villages and cities. "Hizbullah is sponsored of course by Iran, which is why the United States will continue to help Israel counter Iranian malign influence in the region," Carter told reporters after receiving an Israeli security briefing in the area. Carter hit the same theme later at a joint news conference in Tel Aviv with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon. They used the appearance to make a public show of unity at a low point in U.S.-Israeli relations heavily strained by Israeli's opposition to the Iran deal. The agreement, reached between U.S.-led world powers and Iran, puts limits on Iran's nuclear program in exchange for lifting crippling economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic. Israeli leaders have complained that the deal does nothing to address Iran's support for hostile anti-Israel groups like Hizbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. They also say the deal does not have sufficient safeguards to prevent Iran from reaching the capability to make nuclear weapons. Yaalon warmly praised Carter's track record of support for Israel, while acknowledging the split over the Iran deal. "We greatly disagree when it comes to the agreement with Iran and fear for the future in the aftermath of its signing," Yaalon said. "Yet we discuss this issue in a fully open manner, alongside many other issues of great importance."He called the relationship with the United States a "core pillar" of Israel's defense, and Carter promised that the Obama administration would not waver from an "ironclad commitment" to ensuring Israel's military edge in the region. He said that next year Israel will become the first U.S. ally to fly the new U.S. F-35 warplane.
Carter acknowledged tensions over the Iran deal.
"Friends can disagree about whether it will work," he said, "and we will be watching Iran very closely to see. But there's no disagreement about the ultimate objective. We cannot let Iran have nuclear weapons. And there's no disagreement about the threats Israel sees every day from Iran's destabilizing activities, from terrorists like Hizbullah and Hamas and (the Islamic State group.)" Carter said Israel can count on the U.S. to do whatever is necessary to ensure its security, and he ticked off a list of areas in which the two countries are cooperating, including missile defense. "If more is needed in the future, then we will do more," he said.Yaalon said he sees no way Syria can be pieced back together after the chaos of four years of civil war that have drawn numerous extremists groups inside its borders, including the Islamic State. "Chronic instability is going to characterize Syria for quite a long time," he said, adding that Israel is not taking sides there but is determined to act in the event it sees the introduction of chemical weapons or transfers of certain weapons to Hizbullah from Iran. Since the civil war started in 2011, Israel is believed to have carried out a number of airstrikes on suspected shipments of advanced missiles believed to be intended for Hizbullah. Yaalon suggested that more will, indeed, be required. He said Israel believes Iran will be strengthened by the nuclear deal, and that Iranian proxies like Hizbullah "are going to get more money" as a result. He also said the civil war in Syria adds to instability on Israel's borders. Carter is to meet Tuesday with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has called the Iran deal a mistake of historic proportions. Afterward the U.S. defense chief will fly to Jordan to consult with government officials there and visit a base used in the war against the Islamic State group.

Report: Fabius Tasked to Discuss Baabda Vacuum during Tehran Visit
Naharnet/21 July/15/ French President Francois Hollande has tasked Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius to discuss with Iranian authorities Lebanon's presidential deadlock, pan-Arab daily al-Hayat reported on Tuesday. The newspaper said Hollande informed Fabius that he should discuss with Iranian officials later this month the importance of ending the presidential vacuum. Baabda Palace has been vacant since President Michel Suleiman's six-year term ended in May last year. Differences between the March 8 and 14 alliance officials have thwarted attempts by the parliament to elect a successor. Fabius said Tuesday he would visit Iran "next week", after the historic deal on its nuclear program. Although Fabius did not provide more precise details, his aides told Agence France Presse that the trip would likely take place next Wednesday. "I will be there next week," Fabius told French radio.

Officials: 'No Solution, No Settlement' on Cabinet Crisis
Naharnet/21 July/15/The cabinet is set to meet on Thursday but its bickering parties have not yet reached a settlement to avoid a growing crisis, government officials told al-Mustaqbal daily. The officials, who were not identified, said: “So far, there is no solution, nor a proposal, nor any settlement.” “The only clear thing until now is what Prime Minister (Tammam) Salam is telling all those asking him about Thursday's session that he would open the door wide open to the members of the cabinet to express their viewpoints on the government's working mechanism,” the officials told the newspaper in remarks published Tuesday. Salam has also said that he would move to the discussion of other items on the agenda when he feels the discussions have reached a dead-end. The cabinet crisis grew earlier this month when a dispute erupted between Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil, who is a Free Patriotic Movement official, over the cabinet's decision-making mechanism. The tension between Salam and Bassil was accompanied by a protest by FPM supporters near the Grand Serail where the session was underway. The FPM, which is led by MP Michel Aoun, accuses the premier of infringing on the Christian president's powers in the absence of a head of state. The failure to elect a successor to President Michel Suleiman after the end of his six-year term in May last year caused the paralysis of the parliament and divisions among cabinet members.

Geagea Blames Iran for Baabda Vacuum
Naharnet/21 July/15/ Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea, a candidate for the country's top Christian post, has accused Iran of causing Lebanon's presidential deadlock. “Iran is responsible for the obstruction of the presidential elections in Lebanon,” Geagea told pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat in an interview published on Tuesday. He accused Tehran of using Hizbullah, which “receives orders beyond” Lebanon's “borders,” to thwart the polls. The interview was carried out after Geagea held talks with Saudi King Salman on Sunday. The LF chief also met on Monday with al-Mustaqbal Movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri in Jeddah. Baabda Palace has been vacant since President Michel Suleiman's six-year tenure ended in May 2014. Asked by his interviewer about his latest talks with his rival Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Michel Aoun, Geagea said the meeting ended a 30-year rivalry. “That would help us turn the page of the past and open a new page,” he said. “We have made a single political step which is the importance of approving an electoral law,” Geagea told Asharq al-Awsat. “We are working for our agreement to include other clauses although we know that there is a lot of work ahead of us.”The rivalry between Geagea and Aoun, who is also a presidential candidate, are partly to be blamed for the Baabda vacuum.
On the cabinet crisis, the LF leader said: “The government needs a minimum level of harmony so that (it achieves) consensus” among its members. “But it is incapable of doing so because it is deformed,” said Geagea, whose party does not have representatives in the cabinet.

Aoun's Bloc Says PM Put 'Veto' on Top 4 Presidential Hopefuls, Govt. Has 'No Role' in Waste Crisis
Naharnet/21 July/15/The Change and Reform parliamentary bloc lashed out Tuesday at Prime Minister Tammam Salam, accusing him of putting a “veto” on the presidential nominations of the top four Christian leaders – Michel Aoun, Samir Geagea, Amin Gemayel and Suleiman Franjieh. “Who gave PM Tammam Salam the right to veto the presidential nominations of the strongest four Christians?” said the bloc in a statement issued after its weekly meeting, which was recited by former Labor Minister Salim Jreissati. “Some parties have accused us of extremism. We are extremists when it comes to the National Pact, the Constitution and the law,” the bloc added. It said there are "national contracts" between the country's components -- referring to Lebanon's religious communities – and noted that “no one has the right to breach them or modify them unilaterally.”“We're the ones whose rights are encroached upon in the parliament's structure and the executive authority,” the bloc underlined. Turning to Thursday's much-anticipated cabinet session, Change and Reform emphasized that the meeting is “dedicated to the debate over the mechanism” through which the government is supposed to take its decisions amid the current presidential vacuum. “We must return to the constitutional approach that is based on consensus in the cabinet in the event of a presidential void,” the bloc underscored. As for the growing waste management crisis, Change and Reform accused certain parties of seeking to “use it for political pressure to maintain their monopolization of power.”“The government has no role in this file and the cabinet has fully played its role in this regard. The environment minister must take the necessary measures to resolve the issue without being selective regarding the issue of the landfills' locations,” it added. As for the issue of the appointments of senior security and military officials, which is a key point of contention, the bloc declared that it “will not tolerate further marginalization in the issue of appointments.” Defense Minister Samir “Moqbel said he has 'launched consultations with the Druze leaders over the army chief of staff post',” Change and Reform added. “Where are the consultations with the community to which he belongs? This is exactly what we are complaining of. Where is the role of our (Christian) component -- which was one of the founders of the Lebanese equation -- regarding the top posts in the state?” it lamented. The FPM, which has been staging street protests in recent weeks, is accusing Salam of infringing on the Christian president's powers in the absence of a head of state. During a stormy cabinet session on July 9, a deal was reached to make the debate over the decision-taking mechanism the first item on Thursday's agenda.

Jumblat Says Hollande Stressed French Support during Elysee Meeting
Naharnet/21 July/15/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat said French President Francois Hollande has informed him and his son that Paris will always back Lebanon. “Never forget that France will always be by your side and the side of Lebanon,” Jumblat quoted Hollande as saying. The PSP chief and his son Taymour visited the French president at the Elysee Palace on Monday after Hollande wanted to meet the young Jumblat. The MP told al-Liwaa newspaper published on Tuesday that Hollande stressed the continued “personal friendship” with them. He said that the Elysee meeting focused on the situation in Lebanon, the cabinet crisis and attempts to hold an extraordinary legislative session. The talks also focused on Lebanon's economic situation amid the paralysis of state institutions, Jumblat told the daily. He expressed regret that some Lebanese politicians turned the country into a “lost opportunity.”

Mashnouq Adamant to Implement his Plan as Garbage Piles Up
Naharnet/21 July/15/Environment Minister Mohammed al-Mashnouq vowed on Tuesday to resolve the waste management problem by implementing a plan proposed by him after the closure of the Naameh landfill sparked an environmental crisis. Al-Mashnouq told al-Akhbar newspaper that he would start on Tuesday to take practical measures to implement the plan to transport the waste to several regions as a temporary solution pending the launching of tenders on the establishment of new landfills. “I will not wait for the session of the cabinet,” which is set to discuss the crisis on Thursday, he said. Al-Mashnouq ruled out the transport of waste to countries outside Lebanon because of its high cost. “Garbage is on the streets and needs a quick solution,” he said. Last week, the minister asked municipalities to dispose of their own waste, but his call has drawn mixed reactions. The Naameh landfill that lies south of Beirut was closed last Friday in accordance with a government decision. The closure caused trash to spill out of dumpsters after Sukleen, which is responsible for collecting and transporting the garbage in Beirut and Mount Lebanon, failed to dispose of waste following the landfill's closure. Sukleen said it can no longer fill up its premises with accumulated trash. Al-Mashnouq said following a meeting for the parliamentary environment committee on Tuesday that Sukleen can no longer find a place to stash waste. “All municipalities should help find a solution to this problem,” he said. MP Marwan Hamadeh, who heads the committee, announced his support for the minister's plan to create landfills in several areas and for each region to treat its waste. “The environment committee's meetings will be open-ended pending a solution” to the waste management crisis, Hamadeh said.

Army Arrests August 2014 Arsal Battles Suspect
Naharnet/21 July/15/The Lebanese army said on Tuesday that it has arrested a Lebanese man in the northeastern border town of Arsal overnight on charges of participating in attacks on army bases last year. A military communique said Hassan Mohammed Chahine was apprehended “for participating along with others in attacks on army bases during the Arsal clashes in August 2014.” The deadly gunbattles erupted after jihadists from al-Nusra Front and the Islamic State extremist group overran the town. The militants took with them hostages from the army and police and later executed four of them. The rest remain in captivity on Arsal's outskirts in the Syrian region of Qalamoun. The army communique said that a military unit also arrested in the area of Deir Ashash Syrian national Mohammed Mustafa Derbas on suspicion of committing terrorist acts. Derbas was driving a car with a fake license plate and was carrying a fake ID, it said. The two suspects were referred to the appropriate authorities, the communique added.

Lebanese Man Dies in Self-immolation
Naharnet/21 July/15/A Lebanese man died on Thursday after setting himself on fire in Beirut's southern suburbs, the state-run National News Agency reported. NNA said Ahmed Mohammed Issa, 22, went to the roof of his house that lies in the area of al-Ramel al-Ali and sprayed himself with flammable material. Issa then set himself alight and died on the spot, the agency added. NNA did not mention the reason behind his act. But MTV said Issa is a drug addict.
He self-immolated after taking drugs and jumped from the roof of the four-storey building, it added.

Aoun Says No Objective to Topple Cabinet
Naharnet/21 July/15/Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun said on Tuesday that his party does not intend to topple Prime Minister Tammam Salam's government. “Toppling the cabinet led by Tammam Salam is not among the objectives that we are currently working for,” Aoun told Iran's state news agency IRNA. “Our priority is to object from within the cabinet and continue our street movements,” he said. Aoun reiterated that the FPM ministers would object the discussion of any item before dealing with the cabinet's decision-making mechanism. “Issues such as waste management have been previously discussed by the government and the involved ministers can implement such decisions without stirring them” on Thursday, he said. The cabinet has several items on its agenda and is set to discuss Lebanon's waste management problem in addition to its working mechanism. The government crisis grew earlier this month when a dispute broke out between Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil, who is Aoun's son-in-law, and Salam. Bassil accused Salam of infringing on the Christian president's powers in the absence of a head of state. Despite the dispute, the FPM clinched a deal to discuss the government's decision-making mechanism that was taken as a result of the absence of a president since May 2014. But the government has other items on its agenda and an environmental crisis that erupted over the weekend will likely be thoroughly discussed. The Naameh landfill that lies south of Beirut was closed last Friday in accordance with a government decision. The closure caused trash to spill out of dumpsters after Sukleen, which is responsible for collecting and transporting the garbage in Beirut and Mount Lebanon, failed to dispose of waste following the landfill's closure. Sukleen said it can no longer fill up its premises with accumulated trash.

Monitor: Syria Rebels Rain Rockets on Shiite Villages
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/21 July/15/Syrian rebels, including al-Qaida-affiliated fighters, have fired hundreds of rockets and mortar shells on two besieged Shiite-majority villages in the northwestern province of Idlib, a monitor said Tuesday.
At least seven people were reported killed in the shelling by the Army of Conquest alliance on the regime-held villages of Fuaa and Kafraya on Monday and Tuesday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. It was unclear if the victims were civilians or government troops, the Britain-based monitor said. Hundreds more were wounded in the bombardment. Fighting continued around the two villages on Tuesday, with opposition forces including al-Qaida affiliate Al-Nusra Front battling regime forces and fighters from Hizbullah. Al-Nusra, like many of Syria's extremist groups, considers Shiite Muslims to be heretical. The escalating clashes prompted concern in Damascus, where pro-regime militiamen and their families from the two villages held demonstrations asking to be sent there to defend them. Most of Idlib province, including its provincial capital, is now held by fighters from the Army of Conquest and other rebel groups after a sweeping offensive earlier this year. Fuaa and Kafraya are among the few remaining outposts of regime control in the province, and are now completely besieged. The Army of Conquest began an attack against the villages on July 15, saying it was retaliation for a regime offensive on Zabadani, the last rebel-held bastion along Syria's border with Lebanon, earlier this month. It said the attack would "give you a taste in the north of what our people are tasting in Zabadani".

Violence as Burundi Votes with President Seeking Re-election
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/21 July/15/Burundians voted Tuesday amid gunfire and grenade blasts, with President Pierre Nkurunziza widely expected to win a third consecutive term despite international condemnation and thousands of people fleeing feared violence. At least two people -- a policeman and a civilian -- were killed in a string of explosions and gunfire overnight Monday, with blasts and shootings heard as polls opened shortly after dawn in the capital Bujumbura, the epicentre of three months of anti-government protests. Willy Nyamitwe, Nkurunziza's chief communications advisor, condemned the attacks as "terrorist acts" aimed at "intimidating voters". Opposition and civil society groups have denounced Nkurunziza's candidacy as unconstitutional and a violation of a peace deal that ended a dozen years of civil war and ethnic massacres in 2006. Around 3.8 million Burundians are eligible to vote between 06:00 (0400 GMT) and 16:00 (1300 GMT). U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urged calm, calling on all sides to "refrain from any acts of violence that could compromise the stability of Burundi and the region." Critics fear a win by the incumbent will be a hollow victory, leaving him ruling over a deeply divided nation.
"Despite a facade of pluralism, this is an election with only one candidate, where Burundians already know the outcome," said Thierry Vircoulon from the International Crisis Group, a think-tank that has warned the situation has all the ingredients to kick-start renewed civil war. With the elections denounced by the opposition as a sham, the 51-year-old president -- a former rebel, born-again Christian and football fanatic -- is facing no serious competition.
Explosions, gunfire
Anti-Nkurunziza protests have been violently repressed, leaving at least 100 dead since late April. Independent media has been shut down and many opponents have fled -- joining an exodus of over 150,000 ordinary Burundians who fear their country may again be engulfed by widespread violence. Doctors Without Borders (MSF) said Monday around a thousand people were fleeing each day into Tanzania, crossing the border "through the forest ... many travelling in the dark on foot and without belongings."In mid-May, rebel generals attempted to overthrow Nkurunziza in a coup. After that failed they launched a rebellion in the north of the country. Last-ditch crisis talks mediated by Uganda broke down on Sunday. "The government has opted to isolate itself and go ahead with pseudo-elections," said Leonce Ngendakumana, a prominent opposition figure, after talks collapsed. "They have refused to save Burundi from sliding into an abyss," said another opposition figure, Jean Minani. A poor and landlocked former Belgian colony, Burundi is situated in the heart of central Africa's troubled Great Lakes region. Analysts say renewed conflict in the country could reignite ethnic Hutu-Tutsi violence and bring another humanitarian disaster on the region. The conflict also risks drawing in neighbouring states -- much like in the war-torn east of Democratic Republic of Congo.
The last civil war in Burundi left at least 300,000 dead. Nkurunziza's CNDD-FDD party scored a widely-expected landslide win in parliamentary polls held on May 29 that were boycotted by the opposition and condemned internationally as neither free nor fair.
U.N. electoral observers -- the only international monitors in Tuesday's polls -- said the last round of voting took place in a "climate of widespread fear and intimidation."The results of parliamentary polls took a week to be announced. The presidential elections are likely to be seen in the same light, diplomats said, meaning Nkurunziza -- whose nation is heavily aid-dependent -- will probably also face international isolation.

Anti-Hamas Gaza Jihadists Threaten Rocket Fire on Israel
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/21 July/15/Jihadists in the Gaza Strip have threatened to fire rockets at Israel in response to a Hamas crackdown on extremists in the Palestinian territory. The threat came in reaction to the arrest of militants suspected of targeting members of Hamas' armed wing Sunday with a series of bombings. "The Salafists have decided to respond to these crimes and these blows dealt by Hamas by pointing rockets towards the occupation (Israel) and carrying out reprisals," said a statement released online late Monday.
Hamas police arrested a dozen "mujahedeen" after Sunday's explosions, which destroyed five cars. The jihadist statement accused Gaza's rulers of staging the blasts as an excuse to crack down on Salafist extremists. "The results will be catastrophic, will benefit no one, and it will be Hamas who shoulders the responsibility," it said. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu holds Hamas responsible for any rocket fire at Israel from the coastal enclave. The military struck Hamas facilities in Gaza last week after militants fired a rocket into southern Israel. Hamas is engaged in a power struggle with smaller extremist groups, including Salafists in Gaza, which is home to 1.8 million people and has been ravaged by three wars with Israel in six years. On Sunday, five near-simultaneous explosions targeted members of the armed branches of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, another Islamist group. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the blasts that rocked an area in Gaza City. A series of such attacks in recent months is suspected to have been carried out by Salafists, some of whom claim links with the Islamic State group, although experts have expressed doubts over whether there are any true ties between them. Gazans who have gone to fight with IS in Syria recently released a video calling for Hamas to be toppled. Salafist groups have claimed in recent weeks that around 100 of their members or supporters were behind bars. They also criticise Hamas for what they see as its lack of zeal in enforcing Islamic law as well as for its truce with Israel since last year's war in Gaza.

Turkey PM Says Suspect Identified over Suicide Bombing
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/21 July/15/Turkey said on Tuesday it had identified a suspect over a devastating suicide bombing on the border with Syria blamed on Islamic State jihadists, as the government rushed to bolster security on the porous frontier.
Thirty-two people were killed and more than 100 wounded on Monday when a bomb ripped through a crowd of young socialist activists in a mainly Kurdish region preparing to take aid over the border into Syria. The attack in Suruc was one of the deadliest in Turkey in recent years and the first time the government has directly accused the IS group of carrying out an act of terror on Turkish soil.
Graphic images of the carnage in a cultural center shocked the country, with the press publishing front page photos of the mutilated corpses of the activists lying on the ground covered in pages from broadsheet newspapers. "One suspect has been identified. All the (suspect's) links internationally and domestically are being investigated," Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said in televised comments. He added there was a "high probability" the attack was caused by a suicide bomber with connections to IS jihadists.
"We expect this investigation to be concluded as soon as possible," he said. Davutoglu said the death toll had risen to 32 and that 29 injured victims were still in hospital. "What is necessary will be done against whomever responsible for (the attack)," said Davutoglu.
"This is an attack that targeted Turkey."With little precise information disclosed, some Turkish press reports suggested the suicide bomber was a woman while others said it was a man dressed as a woman.
The Hurriyet daily said Turkey's intelligence agency had previously warned the government that seven IS members -- three of them women -- had crossed into the country in recent weeks with the aim of carrying out attacks. The IS group, which has claimed swathes of territory in Syria and Iraq right up to the Turkish border, has so far not claimed the Suruc bombing. But Davutoglu said Turkey was taking steps to improve border security, which has long been criticized by its Western partners. He said the cabinet would discuss Wednesday an "action plan" on border security and the government will then take the "necessary measures". "Conflicts abroad should not be allowed to spread to Turkey," he said. Turkey has long been accused by its Western partners of not doing enough to halt the rise of IS and even colluding with the group, allegations it vehemently denies. So far, Turkey has not played a full role in the U.S.-led coalition against IS and been wary of backing the jihadists' Kurdish opponents, saying the priority is the ousting of Syrian President Bashar Assad. But Davutoglu said the government had "never had any direct or indirect connection with any terrorist organization".
Ankara has in the last weeks appeared to take a harder line against the IS group, rounding up dozens of suspected members in Istanbul and other cities. Nihat Ali Ozcan, security expert at Ankara-based TEPAV think-tank, said the Suruc attack showed the confrontation between IS and Kurdish groups within Syria was "spilling over to Turkish soil". "The attack could trigger ideological, ethnic and political faultlines in Turkey," he told AFP. Funeral ceremonies for the dead took place in the nearby city of Gaziantep Tuesday amid harrowing scenes as the victims' relatives clutched the coffins of their loved ones. The activists from the Federation of Socialist Youth Associations (SGDF) had arrived in Suruc to take part in a rebuilding mission for Kobane, which Kurdish forces had retaken from IS earlier this year. Pictures posted on social media showed the toys they had planned to take over for the children of Kobane. Just before the attack, they had been photographed seated at tables enjoying breakfast and tea. The identities of 30 of the victims have now been confirmed by the authorities. Hundreds of pro-Kurdish activists took to the streets of Turkish cities on Monday night to protest against the attacks and government policy on Syria, with police in Istanbul using water cannon to disperse the rally. The leader of the pro-Kurdish Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) Selahattin Demirtas called on people to join an international rally against "IS barbarism" in Istanbul at the weekend. The governor of the region of Sanliurfa where Suruc is located announced that public rallies had been banned as a security precaution. Dozens of people were killed in October in nationwide protests across Turkey against the government's perceived lack of support for Kurds battling IS jihadists.

Kuwait DNA Tests Violate Right to Privacy, Says HRW
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/21 July/15/A new Kuwaiti law imposing mandatory DNA tests on citizens and foreigners violates the right to personal privacy and should be amended, Human Rights Watch said Tuesday. Parliament endorsed the law in early July, less than a week after an Islamic State jihadist blew himself up in a Shiite mosque in Kuwait killing 26 people and wounding more than 200 others. The new counter-terrorism law has made Kuwait the only country to demand nationwide compulsory DNA testing, HRW said.
"Many measures could potentially be useful in protecting against terrorist attacks, but potential usefulness is not enough to justify a massive infringement on human rights," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at the New York-based HRW. The legislation calls on the interior ministry to establish a database on all Kuwait's 1.3 million citizens and 2.9 million foreign residents. Under the law, people who refuse to give samples for the test face one year in jail and a fine of up to $33,000. Those who provide fake samples can be jailed for seven years. DNA gathering systems like the one Kuwait intends to apply have been outlawed by the European Court of Human Rights, several U.S. domestic courts and others on the grounds of privacy rights, HRW said. "To serve the interests of Kuwaiti national security and comply with Kuwait’s obligations under international human rights law, the bill should be amended and narrowed extensively," it said. Kuwait has charged 29 men and women in connection with the mosque bombing and their trial is scheduled to start on August 4.

First U.N. Aid Ship in 4 Months Docks in Yemen's Aden
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/21 July/15/A U.N. aid ship docked Tuesday in Yemen's devastated port city of Aden bringing desperately needed relief supplies after four months of clashes between rebels and loyalist fighters. The humanitarian aid arrived as forces loyal to exiled President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi pressed on with operations to tighten their control over the southern city. "This is the first boat carrying the U.N. flag to dock in Aden since the war began" in late March, provincial governor Nayef al-Bakri told reporters at the port. The World Food Program, which chartered the ship, had tried repeatedly to deliver aid to the port city but failed because of security concerns. The governor said another ship, like the first carrying humanitarian aid from the United Arab Emirates, was expected to arrive later the same day. Vessels sent by the UAE managed to reach Aden in May but not under the UN flag. A humanitarian ceasefire declared by the United Nations earlier this month failed to take hold. The WFP had described the truce as the "final hope" to deliver desperately needed aid. The WFP had delivered aid ahead of the truce to the rebel-controlled Hodeida port in western Yemen, but the insurgents did not allow an aid convoy to travel to Aden. The United Nations had warned then that the impoverished country was just "one step away from famine."
More than 21.1 million people -- over 80 percent of Yemen's population -- need aid, with 13 million facing food shortages.The United Nations says the conflict has killed more than 3,640 people, around half of them civilians, since late March. Over the past week, forces loyal to Hadi have recaptured most of Aden from Huthi Shiite rebels and their allies. Loyalists made their advances across the city backed by warplanes from a Saudi-led Arab coalition that mounted a bombardment campaign against the rebels late March. Transport Minister Badr Basalmeh told journalists Monday that a UAE technical team had arrived to repair the control tower and passenger terminal at Aden international airport, heavily damaged in clashes before rebel forces were driven out
Car bomb near Shiite mosque
On Tuesday, the UAE said an officer in its armed forces was killed in coalition operations, without giving details. He was the third Emirati killed in Yemen's conflict. The coalition has never acknowledged putting boots on the ground in Yemen, but loyalists have been reinforced in Aden by forces freshly trained by the coalition. Exiled Prime Minister Khaled Bahah declared the city to be "liberated" last Friday, although rebels pockets have fought on in some districts.
Rebel bombardment on Sunday killed 57 civilians in the Dar Saad neighborhood on northern Aden, according to local health chief Al-Khader Laswar. The rebels have overrun much of the Sunni-majority country, aided by their allies among forces loyal to ousted president Ali Abdullah Saleh. In rebel-controlled Sanaa, a car bombing near a Shiite mosque on Monday claimed by the Islamic State jihadist group killed four people, the Shiite rebels said. The Sunni extremists of IS have carried out a string of deadly attacks against Shiite targets in Yemen since March. The Huthis, who overran Sanaa last September, also lost 11 fighters in other attacks in the capital on Monday night, medics and witnesses said. Six were killed in a shooting at a checkpoint near the central bank. Five were killed in a car bombing against a police station.

Anti-ISIS coalition intensifies strikes in Syria, Iraq
By Staff writer | Al Arabiya News/Tuesday, 21 July 2015/The United States and its allies targeted Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militants with nine air strikes in Syria and 14 in Iraq on Sunday, the U.S. military said on Monday. In Syria, the strikes hit tactical units and fighting positions near Aleppo, Hasakah and Kobane, and minefields near Raqqa, the Combined Joint Task Force said in a statement. U.S. President Barack Obama said last week the coalition was intensifying its campaign in northern Syria. In Iraq, the air strikes destroyed tactical units, vehicles and fighting positions near eight cities, including Mosul, Fallujah and Ramadi, it added. The strikes began in Iraq in August 2014, after ISIS captured Mosul and launched an offensive that seized areas of the country's western desert, threatening to approach Baghdad. The campaign was later extended to Syria after President Barack Obama vowed to "degrade and ultimately destroy" the ISIS threat through strikes and increased support for Iraqi and Kurdish forces. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Iraq include the U.S., Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Syria include the U.S., Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

Syria extremists rain rockets on Shiite villages in Idlib
By AFP | Beirut/Tuesday, 21 July 2015/Syrian extremists, including al-Qaeda-affiliated fighters, have fired hundreds of rockets and mortar shells on two besieged Shiite-majority villages in the northwestern province of Idlib, a monitor said Tuesday. At least seven people were reported killed in the shelling by the Army of Conquest alliance on the regime-held villages of Fua’a and Kafrayya on Monday and Tuesday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. It was unclear if the victims were civilians or government troops, the Britain-based monitor said. Hundreds more were wounded in the bombardment. Fighting continued around the two villages on Tuesday, with opposition forces including Al-Qaeda affiliate Al-Nusra Front battling regime forces and fighters from Lebanon's Shiite Hezbollah movement. Al-Nusra, like many of Syria's extremist groups, considers Shiite Muslims to be heretical. Infographic: Syria extremists’ shelling The escalating clashes prompted concern in Damascus, where pro-regime militiamen and their families from the two villages held demonstrations asking to be sent there to defend them. Most of Idlib province, including its provincial capital, is now held by fighters from the Army of Conquest and other extremist groups after a sweeping offensive earlier this year. Fua’a and Kafrayya are among the few remaining outposts of regime control in the province, and are now completely besieged. The Army of Conquest began an attack against the villages on July 15, saying it was retaliation for a regime offensive on Zabadani, the last extremist-held bastion along Syria's border with Lebanon, earlier this month. It said the attack would "give you a taste in the north of what our people are tasting in Zabadani".

Emirati officer killed in Yemen operation
By Staff writer | Al Arabiya News/Tuesday, 21 July 2015/an Emirati officer was killed while taking part in ‘Operation Restoring Hope’ aimed at restoring the legitimacy of Yemen's president, the country's news agency (WAM) reported Tuesday. The officer, who was named as Lieutenant Abdul Aziz Sarhan Saleh Al Kaabi, was killed while performing his duty, the agency said without giving further details. The Saudi Arabian-led military coalition has been conducting airstrikes in Yemen since March, in what was known as Operation Decisive Storm. Operation Decisive Storm ended in April and was replaced by Operation Restoring Hope, which was aimed at reviving political talks and achieve humanitarian goals such as repatriating foreign nationals and providing aid.

French foreign minister says will visit Iran 'next week'
By AFP | Paris/Tuesday, 21 July 2015/France’s Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Tuesday he would visit Iran “next week”, after the historic deal on its nuclear programme. Although Fabius did not provide more precise details, his aides told AFP that the trip would likely take place next Wednesday. “I will be there next week,” Fabius told French radio. “My colleague (Mohammad Javad Zarif) invited me. I was invited before but didn`t go, but now I think everything is in place for me to go,” he said, adding that he would also hold talks with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. Fabius’s trip will be hot on the heels of a similar visit from German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel, who was the first top Western official to visit the country since world powers and Tehran struck a nuclear deal after years of negotiations. Gabriel, who is also Chancellor Angela Merkel`s deputy and energy minister, embarked on a three-day trip with a small delegation of representatives from companies and industry groups. Western powers are scrambling to get their feet in the door in Iran`s economy after the long-delayed nuclear pact. France used to have a strong presence in Iran before the sanctions went into effect, with Peugeot and Renault being major players in the Iranian auto industry and energy giant Total heavily involved in the oil sector. But two-way trade has fallen from four billion euros ($4.4 billion) in 2004 to just 500 million euros in 2013, according to French statistics. The French employers` federation, MEDEF, is due to visit Iran in September to try to kick start ties. Some 107 representatives from the body travelled to Iran early last year, triggering anger in the US which said it was still too early to do business with Tehran.

Iranian FM defends nuclear deal in parliament
By Staff writer | Al Arabiya News/Tuesday, 21 July 2015/Iran’s foreign minister defended the nuclear deal he reached with world powers after criticism from hardliners, telling the conservative-dominated parliament on Tuesday that most if not all of the country’s conditions had been respected. “We don’t say the deal is totally in favour of Iran. Any negotiation is a give and take. We have definitely shown some flexibility,” the minister, Mohammed Javad Zarif said. “I tell you as I told the Supreme Leader, we did our best to preserve most of the red lines, if not all,” Zarif said, referring to arch-conservative cleric Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the last word on all high matters of state. Iran's landmark nuclear deal reached with world powers last week is heading to the country's parliament so that Iranian lawmakers can review it. Under Iran's constitution, parliament has a right to reject any deal - even one negotiated by the foreign ministry. However, it's not clear this time whether there will be a vote by lawmakers on the deal or whether they will simply discuss it and possibly express concerns about it. On Monday, the U.N. Security Council unanimously endorsed the deal to rein in Iran's nuclear program and authorized measures leading to the end of U.N. sanctions.

GCC secretary-general condemns Iran’s ‘clear contradictions’
By Staff writer | Al Arabiya News/Tuesday, 21 July 2015/The Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Abdel Latif al-Zayani, has expressed his surprise at the “clear contradiction” evident in the position of Iran’s Supreme Leader and that of its President regarding the country’s relationship with Arab states, the Saudi Press Agency reported Monday.On Saturday, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, said after the signing of a historic nuclear agreement with world powers that the deal does not imply any wider shift in Tehran's policies in the Middle East. Iran’s pragmatist President, Hassan Rouhani, struck a more conciliatory note than Khamenei on Saturday. Following a phone call with the ruler of the Gulf Arab state of Qatar on Saturday, Rouhani said the nuclear agreement would improve Iran's relations with its neighbors. “No doubt, a deal will lead Iran to closer relations w/ neighbors, esp Qatar,” Rouhani said on Twitter. Abdel Latif al-Zayani said that Khamenei’s statements are not helping “to build confidence” that would improve “cooperative relations based on the principles of good neighborliness and non-interference in [other country’s] internal affairs.” Al-Zayani described the statements as an “unacceptable interference that is against international conventions.” He added that all GCC countries “will continue to protect their own interests” and that they will maintain their “positions” to ensure “stability and security in the region.”Under the landmark agreement reached last week, sanctions will be gradually removed in return for Iran accepting long-term curbs on a nuclear program that the West suspected of creating a nuclear bomb. Iran always denied it aimed to produce nuclear bombs.

Canada Condemns Attack in Turkey
July 21, 2015 - Ottawa, Ontario - Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada
The Honourable Rob Nicholson, P.C., Q.C., M.P. for Niagara Falls, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:
“Canada strongly condemns the attack that took place yesterday at a municipal cultural centre in Suruç in Turkey’s southeastern province of anlurfa.
“On behalf of all Canadians, I extend my deepest sympathies to the families and friends of those who lost their lives and to those injured in the attack.
“Canada stands with the Turkish people at this difficult time and remains a committed partner in the global struggle against terrorism in all its forms.”

Full transcript of Al Arabiya interview with Secretary of State John Kerry
Here is the full transcript of Al Arabiya News Channel’s Nadia Bilbassy-Charters interview with Secretary of State John Kerry. (Al Arabiya)
By Staff writer | Al Arabiya News
Tuesday, 21 July 2015
Here is the full transcript of Al Arabiya News Channel’s Nadia Bilbassy-Charters interview with Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday.
Read also: Exclusive: Kerry slams ‘disturbing’ Khamenei speech
Read also: Watch full Al Arabiya interview with Secretary of State John Kerry
AL ARABIYA: Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for your time.
SECRETARY KERRY: My pleasure. Thank you.
AL ARABIYA: You are about to meet your GCC counterparts. What are you going to tell them that they have not heard from you before about the agreement?
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I am going to go through in great detail all of the ways in which this agreement, in fact, makes the Gulf states and the region safer. I will also discuss with them at great length the things that the United States of America is going to do, working with them, in order to push back against the terror and counterterrorism efforts and other activities in the region that are very alarming to them.
So I think it will be very reassuring. I think it will be specific and detailed. But most importantly, it’s a chance for them to ask me any misgivings they have or any questions they have about the agreement itself.
AL ARABIYA: I mean, to be blunt, sir, many people in the region, especially your allies, they worry about asymmetrical war with Iran through the proxies than how many centrifuges you have dismantled. Can the United States stop the nefarious activities of Iran in four Arab capitals?
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me ask you a question.
AL ARABIYA: Please.
SECRETARY KERRY: Is it better to push back against those activities against an Iran with a nuclear weapon or an Iran without one? Obviously, without one. So you have to begin somewhere.
We have begun at the most critical place vis-a-vis Israel, the region, and the potential of the nuclear arms race with a nuclear weapon. But we have not for an instant stopped focusing on counterterrorism, on the nefarious activities, particularly proxies. And we think there is a great deal more that the region can do to deal with proxies. And that’s a lot of conversation that we’re going to be having in some detail, not just in my meeting, but over a period of time.
AL ARABIYA: So what – how are you going to help them? I mean, some will say Iran with cash, $100 billion that’s going to go – part of it to the Revolutionary Guard, it’s going to go to Soleimani, and it’s going to fund Hizballah and Houthis and Assad regime. So I mean, you understand this point. So what exactly -
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I do understand it. But let me ask you something.
AL ARABIYA: What are you going to offer them?
SECRETARY KERRY: Let me ask you a simple question: Who has more cash? Saudi Arabia and the Emirates and Qatar, or Iran?
AL ARABIYA: Yeah, but –
SECRETARY KERRY: I think we know.
AL ARABIYA: — they don’t fund activities in the region. That’s the difference.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, maybe they need to become more proactive in pushing back against activities so people understand they don’t have a free playing field on which to deal.
The point I’m making is that $100 billion is nothing compared to what gets spent every year in the region. Iran’s military budget is $15 billion. The Gulf states’ military budget is $130 billion. So I am saying – we are saying in the United States we think things can be done far more effectively to push back against proxy activities. And most importantly, we would like to encourage people to find an alternative to any of these activities, and we believe there are ways to try to bring about a different set of relationships and, ultimately, absolutely protect the region’s security and interests.
AL ARABIYA: So you don’t think that Iran can pose a threat to the Gulf allies through conventional weapons now?
SECRETARY KERRY: Obviously, there are a lot of conventional weapons in the region. But my belief, and I think President Obama’s belief and our military assessments, our intelligence assessments are that if they organize themselves correctly, all of the Arab States have an untapped potential that is very, very significant to be able to push back against any of these activities. And I am convinced that, with the right kind of effort, we can find a very different set of arrangements that begin to give people comfort that they really don’t need to fear that the agreement itself is going to change anything.
The agreement gets rid of the nuclear weapon potential. But if we do the right things in all of these other sectors, then I believe the Gulf states and the region can feel much more secure than they do today. Obviously, we have to end all of these proxy initiatives, and there are ways to do that.
AL ARABIYA: Now, since you have this agreement, you have political capital. Can you exercise some kind of pressure or exert some kind of pressure on Iran, who has immense influence over the Assad regime, to try to have some kind of a political process where Assad is not part of it? Do you think you will be able to do that? Are we going to see Geneva 3
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I can’t speak to Iran because we –
AL ARABIYA: But you can have – put some pressure on them.
SECRETARY KERRY: We negotiated with Iran on the nuclear, not on all these other issues.
AL ARABIYA: Sure.
SECRETARY KERRY: But President Rouhani indicated in his comments welcoming the agreement that he would be interested in seeing a different set of relationships in the region. And I have been working very closely with our friends in Saudi Arabia, with former Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal – God rest his soul – and with the current foreign minister and with the crown princes. We’ve been talking about ways in which we might try to approach Syria and we’ve been talking with the Russians. And I had several conversations – one with President Putin, several with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov – about how we might try to deal more effectively with Syria.
So my hope is that something could change with Syria if we could all begin to coordinate and bring our best thoughts to the table.
AL ARABIYA: Without President Assad, of course? You said that.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I don’t see – yes, without President – and ultimately, ultimately, without him, because I don’t see how the violence stops or the foreign fighters stop pouring with President Assad there. It’s very hard to see how the war stops as long as President Assad remains the magnet who is attracting all of these foreign fighters.
AL ARABIYA: The Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei said – made a statement. They were very negative. And he basically is saying that he want to stay at war with the United States, et cetera, and he will still support the proxies. How do you read his statements?
SECRETARY KERRY: I don’t know how to interpret it at this point in time, except to take it at face value, that that’s his policy. But I do know that often comments are made publicly and things can evolve that are different. If it is the policy, it’s very disturbing, it’s very troubling, and we’ll have to wait and see. But that’s one of the reasons for my meeting with all of the Gulf States; it’s one of the reasons for our being very attentive to guaranteeing the security of the region. And we are not kidding when we talk about the importance of pushing back against extremism, against support for terrorism and proxies who are destabilizing other countries. It’s unacceptable.
AL ARABIYA: So in this case, do you trust that President Rouhani is able to implement the agreement?
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I – none of this agreement is based on trust. It’s based on specific steps that have to be implemented, specific timetables. And we will measure this agreement by its implementation. So it’s not a question of trust. It’s a question of when we reach a certain point in time, certain things have to happen. Obviously, Congress has to review this over 60 days and nothing begins to be implemented until that process is over.
AL ARABIYA: Right. So that would be the road map, we’re waiting for Congress. What if they rejected it? Would the President veto, as he said?
SECRETARY KERRY: Absolutely.
AL ARABIYA: And when you take it back, this is the people representative that they vetoing a very important –
SECRETARY KERRY: That’s our constitutional system. For some of them, it’s a vote they can take knowing the President will veto, so we’ll see what happens.
AL ARABIYA: Right. Do you think that, after 15 years, that Iran might pursue a military nuclear ambition in this domain?
SECRETARY KERRY: I think this: Iran has said it won’t, but again, it’s not words that matter, it’s not a statement; it’s acts, it’s actions that you have to measure. And what I do know is that there are very specific inspection and accountability measures that are part of the agreement forever – not for 15 years or 20 years, but forever. Iran has to live by what’s called the Additional Protocol, which provides additional access. Iran has to live by agreements it made with us in this agreement that go to 25 years and for lifetime. So I believe that whatever Iran does, that these years of transformation of their program are going to provide insight to the program and accountability over that program, and we will know what Iran is doing. Iran is limited in its stockpile, in its enrichment, and many other things.
So, what our intelligence community tells us is this is not based on a wish or based on a hope or a prayer; this is based on the structure of the agreement which will allow inspections, which will allow us to know what is happening well after 15 years.
AL ARABIYA: Do you think they will cheat?
SECRETARY KERRY: I have no idea. I’m not going to accuse somebody of cheating before somebody does, but I will tell you that this agreement is built so that you’re not surprised, so that you know you have the mechanisms in place to prevent it.
AL ARABIYA: My time is running out. I have one final question about Yemen. How long does the military campaign can go the way it is before both the Houthis and President Hadi can sit down the negotiate a political –
SECRETARY KERRY: I don’t know. You have to ask them. I mean, we’re urging the Hadi government and we’ve urged the Houthis, through some of their friends, to try to sit down as soon as possible. We think that this is only subject to come kind of political resolution, and we’re urging all of the backers behind the different parties, whether it’s Iranian or Saudi or Emirati or whoever, we urge them to try to engage with the United Nations because the people, broadly, of Yemen are obviously suffering enormously at what is happening there.
But last time we tried to have a pause, the Houthis didn’t keep the pause. They moved people, they attacked, they did different things, so they’ve given people a lot of reason to be suspect of their intentions. Obviously, it would be better to have a political resolution, but you have to have people willing to sit down and negotiate.
AL ARABIYA: Great. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
SECRETARY KERRY: My pleasure. Thank you so much.
AL ARABIYA: Thank you. Thank you.

What Choices after the Iran Nuclear Deal?
Eyad Abu Shakra/ASharq Al Awsat
Tuesday, 21 Jul, 2015
Most Arab commentary and analysis about the nuclear deal agreed by the P5+1 with Iran focused on its political aftershocks on the Arab World. It was obvious to most analysts and commentators that what looked like a long TV soap opera had two “star” actors: Iran and the United States; the other countries involved were more or less “extras” whose task was nothing more than to give the deal a façade of international legitimacy.
All along the real dialogue was taking place between Washington and Tehran. And all those involved realized this fact without having to spell it out.
What was especially interesting, in addition to the “length” of the soap opera and claims that there was no guarantee of success, was Washington’s insistence that the negotiations were limited to Iran’s nuclear program, without touching on other political regional problems; and repeating—at the highest level—that the two were separate issues.
It is interesting since regional objections to Iran’s nuclear program have never highlighted the geological–seismic dangers of having nuclear installations in a country prone to devastating earthquakes like Iran—although raising such an issue is worthwhile, more so after the Fukushima disaster in northern Japan. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries would be absolutely right to be concerned about possible leaks from the coastal Bushehr nuclear plant.
In fact, in November 2013, an earthquake with a magnitude of 6.3 struck Bushehr province. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) estimated that 80,000 people experienced strong tremors while several million felt light shaking. The earthquake was felt in many countries around the Gulf, including Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. At least 37 people were killed and an estimated 850 injured as a result of the earthquake.
What really worries the Arab Middle Eastern countries, however, is the nuclear program’s military use in the service of Tehran’s regional policies. These worries are shared by these countries, as well as Israel, and probably Turkey too. But what has been heard and read from top American officials, led by President Barack Obama, points to Washington’s willingness to accept a “nuclear Iran” in the foreseeable future; and what has been achieved is linked to the two elements of trust and goodwill.
At this point one might argue that trust and goodwill are necessary in politics, but are not sufficient in the absence of solid guarantees. Indeed, the long history of dealing with Iran’s nuclear program has neither encouraged trust nor shown any aspect of goodwill. Even after the approval of the deal the chants “death to America” and “death to Israel” were resonating in the streets of Tehran in response to rousing Eid sermons. As this was taking place against the US and Israel, the speeches and actions against the Arab states were much more sinister and belligerent.
Parallel to the wars being overseen by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, Tehran’s media—including those in Arabic—are engaged in unabated anti-Arab campaigns of incitement, vilification, and false accusations, intensifying Sunni–Shi’ite sectarian tensions and provoking racial, local, and tribal animosities.
In spite of Washington’s apparent keenness to reassure, first the Israelis and then the Arabs, that the nuclear deal will not adversely affect there relations with the US, any wise observer can feel that the element of trust is no more, and that pre-deal relations are different from post-deal ones.
Why have we reached this stage? And is the current situation irreversible?
The most likely answer to the first question is that what have brought us to where we are now are President Obama’s political convictions.
The US president, a man with a clear-cut ideological identity, is fully convinced he is doing the right thing. He is less influenced by his assistants and advisers than his predecessor President George W. Bush, who was very much the “influenced” party by the Neocons, who had a comprehensive viewpoint of politics and an active and effective team that was then implementing this viewpoint throughout the decision-making positions in Bush’s administration.
The nuclear deal, the subsequent opening of doors to Iran, and the eventual normalization of relations with it, are very much Obama’s brainchild. Thus, expecting any change from his side between now and November 2016 would be absurd.
Coming to the second question—on whether the deal is now final and irreversible—well, I believe the answer will come from Iran and not the US. Much will depend on how Iran handles the deal, given the nature of its regime, its power structure, its political “dualism,” the internal power struggle between its competing wings, its contradictory doublespeak, and the limits to its maneuvering.
This regime, as I am told by someone who knows it more than I do, knows what it desires but not necessarily the best way to achieve it. Indeed, the opposite is true, because being overconfident, the regime infrequently goes overboard, tries to be too clever, and refuses to respect its commitments. Some observers believe Obama’s unreserved enthusiasm for the deal may encourage Tehran to exploit every detail and any opportunity to gain additional political, strategic, and financial concessions without fear of being thwarted.
In the meantime, Washington is now working hard to “market” the deal through a kind of PR campaign, directly as well as through international friends such as the UK, who are attempting to sugarcoat the deal for Israel. Regarding the Arab countries, however, they are now awaiting the outcome as “the War against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria” suddenly takes center stage, while post-1920 political entities are facing collapse under the welter of escalating religious and sectarian conflicts.
For some reasons of its own the Obama administration has chosen to separate the technicalities of the nuclear deal from the political environment that surrounds and interacts with it.
Yet the people of the Middle East, despite the many problems afflicting them, still possess a good historical memory and enough survival instinct.
This means they will try to acclimatize with an unhappy period with minimum losses. But if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has so far succeeded in bringing his message to the American public thanks to Israel’s powerful friends in Washington, the Arabs can only depend on themselves and defend and cement their national unity.

Iran Deal: Europe’s Chief Negotiator Sympathized with Iran
George Igler/Gatestone Institute/July 21, 2015
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6188/iran-deal-mogherini
“Islam belongs in Europe… I am not afraid to say that political Islam should be part of the picture.” — Federica Mogherini.
Under the treaties establishing the EU, there are no democratic checks on figures such as Mogherini or on the enormous power they wield.
“It was Hamas’s strategy, not illegal Israeli action — as this report shamefully alleges without a shred of evidence — that was the reason why over 1,000 civilians died in Gaza.” — Col. Richard Kemp.
As a result of the border policies imposed by Mogherini, ISIS’s scheme to augment such a migrant flow with jihadists is now being accomplished.
Mogherini, the official responsible for the EU’s borders represents a sheltered elite, convinced that the solution to problems in the Middle East and North Africa is importing their populations into Europe.
Given the capitulation to Iran’s geopolitical ambitions represented by the agreement reached in Vienna on July 14, a spotlight is likely to fall on the pivotal role played by Europe’s chief diplomat.
Few guessed that while stating the “security of the world” was at stake during negotiations with the Islamic Republic of Iran, Federica Mogherini also felt “political Islam” should be a part of Europe’s future.
The European Union’s unelected High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy made her pro-Islamist remarks in a speech delivered last month in Brussels.
While heading up Europe’s combined delegation in the Austrian capital, and purportedly tasked with staving off Iran’s nuclear capabilities, Mogherini, a former member of the Italian Communist Youth Federation, also took to tweeting in Arabic.
The assertions made by Mogherini to the Islam in Europe conference, before she left for Vienna, reveal the thinking of a key figure behind the dangerous concessions given to Iran as a result of its continued intransigence and the West’s continued surrender to it.
It should therefore surprise no one that Syria’s President Assad has congratulated Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on his “great victory” in negotiations from which the Jewish state — which had the most to lose based on Iran’s constant threats to obliterate it — was excluded.
As talks progressed, the Supreme Leader of Iran was pictured trampling on an Israeli flag, with the accompanying caption on Khamenei’s official website reading: “The Zionist regime is condemned to vanish.”
Mogherini first gained notoriety after her statement to the United Nations Security Council on May 11, during which she dismissed pushbacks against the flood of migrants illegally crossing the Mediterranean.
As a consequence of the border policies of the European Commission, of which Mogherini is also Vice-President, the number of immigrants pouring into Europe by land has now exceeded those crossing by sea.
Local authorities in Hungary are struggling to cope with refugee camps filled with rioting migrants shouting “Allahu Akbar!” (Arabic for “Allah is Greater!”).
There seems no recognition of the generosity of a nation that is exhausting its resources to give Muslims asylum from conflict.
The speech given by Mogherini in Brussels on June 24 demonstrates why she believes that the growing migration crisis her actions have orchestrated should be welcomed:
“Islam holds a place in our Western societies. Islam belongs in Europe. It holds a place in Europe’s history, in our culture, in our food and — what matters most — in Europe’s present and future. Like it or not, this is the reality.”
She continued:
“We need to show some humble respect for diversity. Diversity is the core feature of our European history, and it is our strength. … We need to understand diversity, understand complexity. … For this reason I am not afraid to say that political Islam should be part of the picture.” Under the treaties establishing the EU, there are no democratic checks on figures such as Mogherini or on the enormous power they wield. Only representatives elected to the European Parliament can quiz members of the European Commission.
There is also no democratic way for MEPs to repeal any of the laws applied across the EU, authored by the commission’s bureaucrats, or to fire any of its officials.
Regrettably, Mogherini’s speech chose not to delve into which aspects of the “diversity” represented by “political Islam” Europe should embrace: The subhuman status afforded to non-Muslims such as Christians and Jews, perhaps; or the death sentence faced by Muslims who seek to leave Islam or reform it? Or maybe the codified inferiority of females, or the view that democracy, made by man and not Allah is illegitimate, or that it is permissible to counter free speech with violence?
Mogherini’s speech in Brussels — added to the July 3 vote at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) of several European nations in favor of a resolution condemning Israel for war crimes — also highlight a grim reality when viewed in the context of the West’s concessions to Iran.
While political leaders in Europe seek to placate their Muslim populations, Israel is faced with even fewer reliable allies on the world stage as the prospect of a nuclear Iran looms larger.
The UNHRC’s resolution targeting Israel had been prompted by a UNHRC report into last year’s Gaza conflict, during which the Israeli Defense Force had sought to protect the country’s population against constant and indiscriminate rocket attacks.
In an address on June 29, Britain’s Col. Richard Kemp urged the UNHRC to deal with the reality of events in Gaza last summer:
“Hamas sought to cause large numbers of casualties among their own people, in order to bring international condemnation against Israel, especially from the United Nations. … It was Hamas’s strategy, not illegal Israeli action as this report shamefully alleges without a shred of evidence, that was the reason why over 1,000 civilians died in Gaza.”
With only the US voting against the resulting “anti-Israeli manifesto” it was nevertheless endorsed by European nations including France, Germany, the UK, Ireland, and the Netherlands.
As a consequence of several international treaties, these countries and 23 others have unified executive authority on issues of foreign policy into the institutions of the European Union.
To those arguing with the EU’s head of security policy that, “more Muslims in Europe will be the end of Europe,” Mogherini has a curt answer:
“These people are not just mistaken about Muslims: these people are mistaken about Europe – that is my core message – they have no clue what Europe and the European identity are.”
Claiming that “Islam is a victim,” Mogherini went on to stress that the “caliphate” declared last year by ISIS under the name of the Islamic State, represents “an unprecedented attempt to pervert Islam.”
Led by “caliph” Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in February ISIS announced its intention to export 500,000 migrants to Europe to create chaos. As his nom de guerre suggests, the PhD in Islamic Studies possessed by Dr. Ibrahim al-Badri comes from the city where the Koran was compiled.
Federica Mogherini’s claim to have a better grasp of political Islam stems from an undergraduate paper she once authored on the subject.
As a result of the border policies imposed by Mogherini, the president of the EU’s judicial cooperation agency, Michèle Coninsx, confirmed on July 6 that ISIS’s scheme to augment such a migrant flow with jihadists is now being accomplished.
It is hard not to conclude that the official responsible for the EU’s borders represents a sheltered elite, convinced that the solution to problems in the Middle East and North Africa is importing their populations into Europe.
Using an Arabic euphemism to describe the Islamic State, Mogherini’s speech concluded:
“Western media like to refer to Da’esh with the word ‘medieval’. This does not help much to understand the real nature of the threat we are facing. Da’esh is something completely new.”
The EU’s chief representative to the talks in Vienna could have done with visiting the museum located on the city’s Karlsplatz. There can be found the following demand for surrender, issued against the Viennese, which post-dates the medieval period by two centuries:
“We order you to wait for us at your residences in the city so we can decapitate you. It will be a pleasure for me to publicly establish my religion and to pursue your crucified god. I will put your sacred priests to the plough and rape your nuns. Forsake your religion or else I will give the order to consume you with fire.”
It was authored by the Muslim caliph reigning in 1683.
When it comes to political Islam, Federica Mogherini is evidently incapable of differentiating between behaviors that are “completely new,” and those that form an established pattern.
That failure makes the diplomatic surrender to the Islamic Republic of Iran, being portrayed by President Obama as a path to a “more hopeful world,” easier to comprehend.
The West’s negotiations were conducted with a millenarian Shi’ite theocracy that calls for the annihilation of America and Israel.
George Igler is a political analyst in the City of London and the Director of the Discourse Institute.

Islamic State Is Not Islamic, Sex Grooming Gangs, Sharia Sportswear One Month of Islam in Britain, June 2015
Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute
July 21, 2015
"We simply can't have a situation where different rules apply to families from different family backgrounds. The law of the land should apply equally regardless of the heritage of the children involved." — Conservative MP Philip Hollobone.
Observers say that Pastor McConnell's prosecution is one of a growing number of examples in which British authorities -- who routinely ignore incendiary speech by Muslim extremists -- are using hate speech laws to silence Christians, but not others.
"It [Islam] doesn't seem to be a bit accommodating at all in understanding everybody else's religions." — UK Independence Party MP David McNarry.
"Opposing 'Sharia courts' is not racism or 'Islamophobic'; it is a defense of the rights of all citizens, irrespective of their beliefs and background to be governed by democratic means under the principle of one law for all." — One Law for All.
What follows is a summary of Islam and Islam-related issues in Britain during June 2015, categorized into four broad themes: 1) Islamic extremism; 2) British multiculturalism; 3) Islamic Sharia law; and 4) Muslim integration.
1. Islamic Extremism and Syria-Related Threats
A new report on surveillance warned that Britain is facing an "unprecedented" threat from hundreds of battle-hardened jihadists who have been trained in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. The report said there are now more Britons trained in terrorism than at any point in recent memory.
More than 700 Britons are believed to have travelled to Syria and Iraq, over half of whom are thought to have since returned home, where they pose a significant threat to national security.
Addressing a security conference in Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia, on June 19, Prime Minister David Cameron called on Muslims to speak out against the "poisonous ideology" of Islamism that is radicalizing young British Muslims.
Prominent Muslims quickly pounced on Cameron's remarks. Former Conservative Party co-chair Sayeeda Warsi, writing in the Guardian, argued that Cameron's "misguided emphasis" on "Muslim community complicity" would "at best fall on deaf ears, at worst further alienate" British Muslims.
Labour MP Yasmin Querishi said that British Muslims should not have to apologize for the radicalization of British Muslims. "It feels absolutely awful," she said. "I'm getting really tired of having to apologise."
Yousif Al-Khoei, of the London-based Center for Academic Shia Studies, described Cameron's comments as "unhelpful." He said: "If the government is serious about tackling ISIS they really need to take serious steps to tackle rampant Islamophobia -- and we are actually recruiting more youths by targeting religion and targeting the people."
Also in June, three sisters and their nine young children from Bradford, West Yorkshire, who failed to return home from an Islamic pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia, were thought to have joined the Islamic State in Syria.
Khadija Dawood, 30, Sugra Dawood, 34, and Zohra Dawood, 33, whose children are aged between three and 15, are believed to have used British social welfare benefits to pay for the trip, which cost upwards of £13,000 (€18,700; $20,000). Friends said the women took their children to war-torn Syria because they did not want them to grow up in England.
Two of the women's husbands, Mohammed Shoaib and Akhtar Iqbal, blamed British police for "actively encouraging and promoting" the radicalization of the three sisters through "oppressive police surveillance."
On June 13, Talha Asmal, a 17-year-old from Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, who ran away from home in April to join the Islamic State, is believed to have become Britain's youngest suicide bomber when he blew himself up during an assault on an Iraqi oil refinery. Friends described Asmal as an "ordinary Yorkshire lad." That may be true in more ways than one: Dewsbury, a quaint former mill town, has been linked to more than a dozen Islamic extremists, including Mohammad Sidique Khan, the mastermind of the July 7, 2005 London bombings.
Talha Asmal, a 17-year-old from Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, became Britain's youngest suicide bomber in June, when he attacked an Iraqi oil refinery with a car-bomb.
On June 14, Thomas Evans, a 25-year-old British Muslim convert from Buckinghamshire, was killed fighting while in Kenya for Al-Qaeda affiliate al-Shabaab.
On June 11, a 22-year-old female refugee from Iraq was sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison for tweeting messages that encouraged terrorism. Alaa Esayed, from Kennington, South London, was sentenced at the Old Bailey after pleading guilty to encouraging terrorism and disseminating a terrorist publication. She posted more than 45,000 tweets in Arabic on an open account to her 8,240 followers between June 2013 and May 2014, with many tweets encouraging violent jihad. Her account, which included a profile image of a woman in a burka and holding a Kalashnikov, was listed by Al-Qaeda as among the 66 most important jihadi accounts.
On June 4, Mohammed Rehman, 24, from Reading and Sana Ahmed Khan, 23, from Wokingham, were charged with preparing for acts of terrorism in the UK. Both are accused of buying chemicals to manufacture explosive devices and of researching and downloading instructions for carrying out a terrorist attack, including a copy of the Al-Qaeda Inspire Magazine containing a guide on "how to make a bomb in the kitchen of your mom." They are also accused of having tested explosive devices.
England's chief inspector of education and head of the school's regulator Ofsted, Sir Michael Wilshaw, said that the teaching of British values is central to stopping British teenagers from joining the Islamic State and other extremist groups. Speaking on the LBC talk radio station on June 16, Wilshaw said:
"It's really important that all schools, be they faith or non-faith schools, whether in mono-cultural communities or not, to teach British values -- the importance of tolerance and understanding other cultures and faiths.
"And if they don't do that, if they don't promote tolerance, then we will mark them down and we will fail them as we have done in some cases."
Pakistani Islamic scholar Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri said that every Muslim student in Britain should be required to take counter-extremism lessons at school to prevent radicalization. Speaking on BBC Radio Four's Today program on June 22, Tahir-ul-Qadri argued that lessons on "peace," "counter-terrorism" and "de-radicalization" should be made part of the national curriculum in state schools. "We should try to influence the generations -- whether second or third of fourth -- to always be peaceful and always condemn the act of extremism, act of terrorism wherever it is."
The head of the anti-radicalization group Inspire, Sara Khan, told the Guardian that teachers in Britain are afraid of reporting suspected Islamist extremism among their students out of fear of being labelled "Islamophobic."
Meanwhile, PM Cameron repeated his assertion that the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam. During an interview with BBC Radio 4's "Today" program on June 29 -- just days after a jihadist with links to the Islamic State killed 38 people (including 30 Britons) at a beach resort in Tunisia -- Cameron rebuked the BBC for referring to the Islamic State by its name. He said:
"I wish the BBC would stop calling it 'Islamic State' because it is not an Islamic state. What it is is an appalling, barbarous regime. It is a perversion of the religion of Islam, and, you know, many Muslims listening to this program will recoil every time they hear the words 'Islamic State.'"
Separately, more than 100 MPs signed a June 25 letter to the BBC's director general calling on the broadcaster to begin using the term "Daesh" when referring to the Islamic State. The letter, which was drafted by Rehman Chishti, a Pakistani-born Conservative MP, stated:
"The use of the titles: Islamic State, ISIL and ISIS gives legitimacy to a terrorist organization that is not Islamic nor has it been recognized as a state and which a vast majority of Muslims around the world finds despicable and insulting to their peaceful religion."
The BBC, which routinely refers to Muslims as "Asians" to comply with the politically correct norms of British multiculturalism, has held its ground. It said:
"No one listening to our reporting could be in any doubt what kind of organization this is. We call the group by the name it uses itself, and regularly review our approach. We also use additional descriptions to help make it clear we are referring to the group as they refer to themselves, such as 'so-called Islamic State.'"
2. British Multiculturalism
In June it emerged that police in Birmingham knew that Muslim sex grooming gangs were targeting children outside the city's schools but did not alert the public out of fears of being accused of "Islamophobia." A confidential report obtained under the Freedom of Information Act showed that police were worried about "community tensions" if the abuse from predominantly Pakistani grooming gangs was made public. The report said:
"A high level of organised criminality has now been evidenced both across the force area and regionally, with multiple offenders working together to identify, groom and abuse victims.
"There is strong evidence in the vast majority of all cases that the victims are enticed, stupefied or controlled by alcohol and a mixture of controlled drugs.
"The predominant offender profile of Pakistani Muslim males ... combined with the predominant victim profile of white females has the potential to cause significant community tensions."
In Rotherham, South Yorkshire, two current or former Rotherham town councilors are among up to 300 men suspected of grooming and sexually exploiting girls as young as 12, according to the National Crime Agency. Detectives believe there are at least 1,400 victims, largely vulnerable white girls. Most of the perpetrators are South Asian Muslims. As in Birmingham, authorities in Rotherham have been accused of refusing to act for fear of upsetting Muslim sensibilities.
Also in South Yorkshire, a three-year-old girl was made a ward of court in order to protect her from being forced to undergo genital mutilation. A High Court judge issued a ruling banning the toddler's family from taking her out of the UK or trying to obtain a passport for her. Anyone who breaks the order could face up to 14 years in prison.
The ruling came as David Cameron ordered a crackdown on female genital mutilation (FGM) ahead of the summer holidays, when many Muslim girls are taken abroad to have the procedure performed on them. Nearly 4,000 new cases of FGM have been identified in England since September 2014, when the government began collecting data. Although the practice was banned in the UK in 1985, there has never been a successful prosecution.
On June 10, a 34-year-old Muslim businessman from Cardiff was the first person in the UK to be prosecuted under forced marriage laws that entered into effect in June 2014. The man, who was not identified for legal reasons, was jailed for 16 years after admitting to making a 25-year-old woman marry him under duress. The man, who was already married, "systematically" raped his victim for months, threatened to go public with hidden camera footage of her in the shower unless she became his wife, and threatened to kill members of her family if she told anyone of the abuse. He was sentenced to four years for the forced marriage, 12 months for bigamy and 12 months for voyeurism to run concurrently with the 16-year rape sentence.
In Leyton, East London, the Barclay Primary School banned Muslim pupils from fasting during Ramadan, arguing that the tradition can be harmful to the health of young children. In a letter to parents, the school's principal described how children "fainted" and "became ill" during last year's festival after going without food or water for "18 hours, a significant amount of time for a child." The letter said school officials had consulted experts in Islamic law before implementing the ban: "We are reliably informed that in Islamic Law, children are not required to fast during Ramadan, only being required to do so when they become adults." The move was criticized by local Muslims, who said the school should not "blanket enforce" its own rules when it comes to religion.
On June 8, High Court judge Anna Pauffley said in a ruling that police and social workers, when investigating allegations of physical abuse, should make special allowances for immigrants who "slap and hit" their children because they come from a "different cultural context." She was referring to a case in which an Indian man allegedly beat his wife and seven-year-old son. Pauffley said: "Within many communities newly arrived in this country, children are slapped and hit for misbehavior in a way which at first excites the interest of child protection professionals."
The Children's Act 2004 makes it illegal for parents in England and Wales to discipline children if blows lead to bruising, swelling, cuts, grazes or scratches. The offense carries up to five years in prison. Conservative MP Philip Hollobone said:
"We simply can't have a situation where different rules apply to families from different family backgrounds. The law of the land should apply equally regardless of the heritage of the children involved. Children with Indian heritage deserve the same protection in law as white British children. ... I really do wonder sometimes whether judges in our senior courts have adequate training for some of the cases that come before them."
Also in June, a British judge ruled that a terrorism suspect did not have to wear an electronic tracker because it violates his human rights. The suspect, a 39-year-old Somali-born Islamic preacher who is accused of radicalizing young British Muslims, said he thought that MI5 had placed a bomb inside the bracelet, and that wearing the monitoring device was making him "delusional." The judge, Mr. Justice Collins, ruled this amounted to a breach of Article 3 of the Human Rights Act, which is meant to prohibit torture.
In Belfast, Muslim students and staff at Queen's University complained about the lack of prayer rooms on campus and said they had no alternative but to pray in corridors and other public areas. They said dedicated prayer or quiet rooms are available in many other universities and public buildings, including airports and hospitals. The university said it would review its amenities.
Speaking on the BBC Radio Ulster's Talkback program, the former leader of the UK Unionist Party, Bob McCartney, said Queen's University was "a non-denominational, non-religious educational institution. He added: "For the university to accept that it has a duty to provide, and presumably pay for, facilities for a particular religion to exercise its rituals would, in my view, constitute a precedent that could give rise to future difficulties."
UK Independence Party MP David McNarry said British society was at risk of being "swamped" by the constant demands of Islam and questioned whether Christians in a Muslim country would be afforded the same consideration. "Society could end up being swamped in terms of having to make room for Islam," he said. "It doesn't seem to be a bit accommodating at all in understanding everybody else's religions."
In Manchester, thousands of people signed an online petition to protest a proposal to turn a Roman Catholic chapel at North Manchester General Hospital into a Muslim prayer room. There already are two Muslim prayer rooms in the hospital but one, for men, does not have washing facilities. Father Ged Murphy said: "We are not against the Muslim community having a prayer room, but don't see the sense in taking away a chapel that is serving one community to serve another."
Meanwhile, London Assembly member Murad Qureshi revealed that Scotland Yard has spent at least £1 million (€1.4 million; $1.5 million) policing rallies led by British-born Islamist preacher Anjem Choudary over the past year. Qureshi, who lives near the Regent's Park Mosque, requested the figures from Mayor Boris Johnson, and said the cost was one reason why some demonstrations should be banned. Qureshi said:
"They are astonishing amounts and it highlights the cost both to the Met [Metropolitan Police Service] and local communities. I think some of these rallies should have been stopped before they went ahead. The Met should do this.
"There is no doubt the cost in policing him [Choudary] London-wide is almost certainly £1 million. I suggest next time they also pick up the bill if they want to demonstrate so eagerly.
"This is the cost of one man's right to protest which I think the Met has interpreted to the extreme. I don't want to get in the way of people's democratic right to protest, but he's abusing it."
While Choudary enjoys taxpayer-funded police protection for his incendiary sermons, an evangelical Christian pastor in Belfast faces prosecution for making "grossly offensive" remarks about Islam. James McConnell, 78, faces up to six months in prison for delivering a sermon in which he described Islam as "heathen" and "satanic." The message was streamed live on the Internet, and a Muslim group called the police to complain.
According to Northern Ireland's Public Prosecution Service (PPS), McConnell violated the 2003 Communications Act by "sending, or causing to be sent, by means of a public electronic communications network, a message or other matter that was grossly offensive."
Observers say that McConnell's prosecution is one of a growing number of examples in which British authorities -- who routinely ignore incendiary speech by Muslim extremists -- are using hate speech laws to silence Christians, but not others.
3. Islamic Sharia Law
The government's proposed Counter Extremism Bill will not include a crackdown on Islamic Sharia law, even though Home Secretary Theresa May had earlier promised that it would. The policy change sparked anger from people concerned about the presence of a parallel legal system based on Islamic principles. Keighley MP Kris Hopkins said: "I don't think there is a place for Sharia law in this country. That's what I believe is right. I can respect different judicial systems in other countries, but in Britain we have one judicial system -- and that's the one I recognize."
An anti-Sharia group called "One Law for All" issued a statement on June 15 calling on Britain's new government to abolish Islamic Sharia courts, which they described as "kangaroo courts that deliver highly discriminatory and second-rate forms of 'justice.'" The statement said: "Though the 'Sharia courts' have been touted as people's right to religion, they are in fact, effective tools of the far-right Islamist movement whose main aim is to restrict and deny rights, particularly those of women and children.
"Opposing 'Sharia courts' is not racism or 'Islamophobic'; it is a defense of the rights of all citizens, irrespective of their beliefs and background to be governed by democratic means under the principle of one law for all. What amounts to racism is the idea that minorities can be denied rights enjoyed by others through the endorsement of religious based 'justice' systems which operate according to divine law that is by its very nature immune from state scrutiny."
The British Veterinary Association (BVA) on June 9 said that British shoppers have a right to know whether their meat has been slaughtered according to Islamic law. The call came after a European Commission survey revealed that 72% of consumers favor the labelling of halal (Arabic for permissible) meat.
An EU directive requires animals to be stunned before they are slaughtered, but Britain has been granted an exemption. The religious slaughter of goats and sheep is commonplace in Britain, and some of the meat is sold into the general market. According to the BVA, "transparency is vital to maintain confidence in the food chain."
House of Fraser, a British department store group with over 60 stores across the United Kingdom and Ireland, launched a new line of Sharia-compliant sportswear for Muslim women. The collection includes unitard bodysuits and lightweight hijabs (Islamic headscarves) for women to wear during aerobics and swimming. The move is aimed at encouraging headscarf-wearing Muslim women to exercise. According to Marie Claire, a monthly magazine for women, only 30% of all women in Britain exercise, but for Muslim women, that figure drops to 18%. The magazine says that many Muslim women do not participate in sports "because of the risk that their headscarves could become loose and fall off."
Tesco, the supermarket chain, apologized for selling smoky bacon flavored Pringles potato chips as part of a Ramadan promotion. The chips were positioned under a Ramadan banner at a branch of the supermarket in Liverpool Street, London. They were removed after Muslims complained. On Twitter, one Muslim described it as "stupidity at its best" while another tweeted: "Please tell me this is a joke."
Meanwhile, a Morrison's supermarket in West London was criticized for selling pork products next to a promotional sticker celebrating Ramadan. A Muslim human rights lawyer, Shoaib M Khan, who spotted the misplaced sticker on a freezer, said it was a "disappointing gaffe." He added: "If you're going to do something like that [Ramadan display] you need to do it properly. I wasn't offended but other Muslims might have been. They need to be careful about this sort of thing."
4. Muslim Integration
In Ilford, Essex, a Muslim woman lost a legal battle to wear an Islamic jilbab, a flowing head-to-toe gown, at a nursery because it posed a "tripping hazard" for children and staff. Tamanna Begum wore a jilbab during an interview for an apprenticeship at Barley Lane Montessori Day Nursery, which provides day care to children aged two months and over. The manager said she could have the internship if she agreed to wear a slightly shorter jilbab that did not extend over her feet.
Rather than showing up for her first day of work, Begum filed a claim for discrimination because of her "ethnic or cultural background." She said she had been "insulted" by the manager's request, and claimed that it would be "against her morals and beliefs" to wear a shorter garment.
Judge Daniel Serota upheld a previous ruling by the East London employment tribunal that the gown was "reasonably regarded as a tripping hazard." He also noted that Begum was only asked to wear a shorter version of the jilbab rather than being banned from wearing the religious garment at all.
In Newham, East London, three 19-year-old female college students threatened to file a lawsuit against their school, Newham Sixth Form College, after they were suspended for complaining about "Islamophobia." Tahyba Ahmed, Sumayyah Ashraf and Humayra Tasnim say they are being discriminated against after they sent a "round-robin" email to hundreds of students and staff, in which they criticized a decision by the school to cancel a discussion about anti-Muslim attitudes in society by a panel of invited guests.
Lawyers for the girls warned that the college faces legal action if the girls are not reinstated. The school dismissed the threats, saying that the girls were suspended not because of Islamophobia but because they broke the school's email rules, which require prior permission before round-robin messages can be sent.
In Stoke-on-Trent, the managers of a water park were accused of skirting rules aimed at preventing companies from religious discrimination by planning a women-only night aimed at Muslims, with bikinis banned. Visitors to the forthcoming event WaterWorld have been told they must cover up with "Islamically appropriate" attire at the event, that female-only lifeguards will patrol the pool and that the center will provide a prayer room. Staff will also guard the front entrance to "make sure that no males enter the facility." Conservative MP Philip Hollobone said: "I imagine there would be a lot of outrage if the boot was on the other foot and swimmers were told they had to dress appropriately in respect of Christians. I don't see how this is different."
In Micheldever, a village in Hampshire, England, a 23-year-old Muslim man demanded that Zizzi, an Italian restaurant chain, pay him £5,000 (€7,000; $7,800) in compensation after he found a piece of pepperoni in a meal at their branch in Winchester. Karim Kazane was halfway through a carne picante, advertised as containing beef and chicken, when he discovered the meat banned under Islam. "I have lost trust in eating out completely and never would trust to eat anywhere but home again, because I believe Zizzi have taken that social freedom, once had, away," Kazane said.
Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter.
Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6198/islamic-state-sex-grooming-uk

Paving the Egyptian road with a shovel and a rifle
Abdel Latif el-Menawy/Al Arabia/Tuesday, 21 July 2015
What the Egyptian army is doing in Sinai has relieved Egyptians and assured them that their sons are capable of protecting their borders and deterring any state, organization or group plotting to harm Egyptian territories. Egyptians must have been reassured when they saw president Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi visit soldiers and check on them, conveying a very important message as he wore his military uniform. They must have also been reassured when they heard him say on Saturday that the soldiers present in Sinai represent only 1% of the Egyptian army, in response to statements that the entire army has been involved in Sinai and that its capabilities are being drained. This is a psychological war that must not affect the people’s unity.
The Egyptians are aware that there is a war being led against them and that the state is using its entire apparatus to combat terrorism which is arming itself with strong media outlets, propaganda campaigns and exploitation of social media networks in order to spread fear and desperation. The Egyptian army, however, confronted this by stating facts and responding to all misleading reports. The Egyptians are also aware that this war is protracted and will not end overnight and that it will require time until we can win it. Some may think the solution is to resume raids and shell militias in Sinai until the last standing terrorist desecrating Sinai is eliminated. However there’s actually a second path that we must also take in order to eradicate terrorism and extremism and that is the path of progress, construction and work for a better future and for fighting ignorance and poverty which helped create all this extremism and allowed extremist parties to brainwash and recruit people.
The solution is development and construction. The revolutionary spirit we need is a revolution against bureaucracy, administrative obstacles and attempts to discourage investments. Terrorism aims to take the country backwards and these obstacles are preventing Egypt from progressing and are thus powerful factors that help terrorism achieve its destructive aims. I believe that president Sisi is aware of Egypt’s need for development as we’ve recently heard of governmental meetings in regards to developing Sinai. He’s also aware that the real war is that of construction. However the government and executive administrations must operate as a factor that helps and facilitates the construction process and must not be an obstacle in the path of a better future. Turn wishes into visions
The current aim is to turn these wishes into visions and to then transform these visions into executable plans and then provide the necessary tools to implement them. The most important step is to work on eliminating the real obstacles which are preventing the country from going forward. Planting real hope among people is the way to salvation. Some say the best defense is a good offense, and I say that in our case, the best means to confront terrorism is to actively progress, and this can be achieved by creating a real developmental atmosphere where the Egyptians’ motive is the hope for a better future. Maybe we must all borrow the slogan “One hand builds and the other holds arms” and let it shine our way as this is the real path to defending Egypt’s present and future and it’s the only way for Sinai, and rather the entire of Egypt, to become free of terrorism and extremism. There’s no solution except by building but we must pave the way for this and facilitate the building process for whoever wants to help us as this is the only way to move forward.

Idle militant minds are the devil’s workshop
Khaled Almaeena/Al Arabiya/Tuesday, 21 July 2015
Saudi Arabia’s arrest of 431 suspected militants from nine nationalities came as a relief; they will go a long way to prevent further attacks on innocents. In the past few days there have been two incidents where young extremists killed their blood relatives. One killed his father before being shot by security forces and the other blew himself up at a checkpoint after murdering his maternal uncle. What makes these young people become violent killers? It is no use blaming only outside forces or ISIS for youth going astray. These people become deviants because of various factors, the most important being a negative upbringing and neglect by parents.
Creative thinking to build moral fibers
There is also the schooling factor where there is too much emphasis placed on rote and rituals rather than character building. Add to that the absence of role models in the society. Some abuse their position of authority by acting venomously in the open, while the cowards prefer the anonymity of the social media. The total lack of extracurricular activities keeps the youth bored and idle. Educational institutions do not provide the means to harness the energies of our young. No school plays, theaters, hobby workshops, or even just plain social work, planned and guided by schools that could help strengthen their moral fiber. The lack of creative thinking leaves a vacuum in the minds of the youth making them easy prey for extremist teachers, imams and social media manipulators who are out there in abundance spewing hatred and inciting the gullible against people of other sects or even viewpoints.Some abuse their position of authority by acting venomously in the open, while the cowards prefer the anonymity of the social media to disgorge their sullied and evil thoughts.
History will never forgive us
These are the merchants of death and they should be stopped. Sadly, I still see their deadly poison spread across social media and it continues at a dangerous pace. The proverb that “an idle mind is the devil’s workshop” is coming home to roost, and we as a society have failed to cater to our young by not directing them to character-building activities. Forget these functions where senior officials come and pay lip service to the youth. What we need are school activities, sports facilities, debates involving the others, adventure games and imaginative and innovative activities that spur interaction. We need initiatives to promote healthy bodies and creative minds. I believe government schools should include qualified teachers from the West and the East so that Saudi teachers can learn from their experience and exchange ideas to implement a modern education that can cater to the needs of the 21st century students. We should also cater to the needs of teachers and give them incentives and show them more respect. Saudi teachers are by and large frustrated and underpaid. Unless teachers are encouraged to invent, innovate and given a free hand to impart knowledge within the parameters of the curricula, education would be in the same rut led by teachers devoid of motivation. Meanwhile the business community should also bear responsibility in addressing the needs of the youth. Businesses should build sports facilities, parks, and other youth related centers instead of focusing only on malls that are mushrooming everywhere in the country. Saudi Arabia has been built with great sacrifices. It is the land of the Two Holy Mosques and should be a haven of peace, light and progress for all. History will not forgive us if we fail to protect this sacred land.

A short rope of hope for war-shattered Libya
Claudia Gazzini/Al Arabiya
Tuesday, 21 July 2015
Libyans hoping for an end to the conflict that has ripped their country into two warring halves can take some hope from the preliminary framework agreement signed at the U.N.-led talks in the Moroccan coastal resort town of Skhirat on July 11.
Everybody knows how hard it will be to bring this agreement to life, notably because one side refuses to accept it without amendments. Libya remains chaotic and fragmented since July 2014, with two rival sets of parliaments, governments and military coalitions. Islamic State and other extremists are expanding to fill the security void.
But before dismissing Libya’s chances of exiting its current mess, it is worth considering the hopeful signs the accord represents for Libyans wishing to end their year-old war. As International Crisis Group’s 16 July assessment of the talks put it, “the incomplete consensus secured in Skhirat is an achievement, although a very limited one”.
Firstly, under the leadership of U.N. Special Representative Bernardino León, 18 out of the 22 participants of the U.N.-facilitated Libyan Political Dialogue signed the preliminary framework agreement. The Political Dialogue includes four representatives from each parliament – the internationally recognised House of Representatives (HoR) in Tobruk elected in June 2014 and its predecessor, the General National Congress (GNC) in Tripoli – as well as members who are boycotting these two sides and a number of independents, mainly former bureaucrats.
Lack of agreement will only raise risks of further military escalation in the capital
The Skhirat agreement also has a goal that is broadly understood and supported in Libya: the creation of a consensus-based national unity government (“Government of National Accord”) that would have wide powers to govern from its seat in Tripoli, including foreign and security policy and oversight of state finances and institutions.
Thirdly, the signing ceremony included six mayors, including from the country’s three main cities (Tripoli, Benghazi and Misrata), and representatives of two main political parties, the liberal-leaning National Forces Alliance (Tahaluf al-Quwwat al-Wataniya) and the Muslim Brotherhood-led Justice & Construction Party (Adala wa Binaa).
Other negotiating tracks, representing municipal councils, political parties and women, also signalled their backing, as did Libya’s neighbours and those regional and international actors that support the dialogue and peace process.
Avenues of compromise are still open, and it’s not surprising that the Tripoli-based GNC didn’t sign the accord, even though some may have been frustrated by the hard-line stances of their president, Nuri Abu Sahmein. The GNC are a significant constituency, and the new State Council offered to their members was endowed little clear power. Meanwhile their HoR rivals in Tobruk got sole legislative authority and a one-year extension in office.
There are opposing views about whether the text can still be amended before it is considered final, but clearly everything should be done to get both the Tobruk HoR and the Tripoli GNC on the same page. The fact that no actual text was attached to the two pages of signatures collected in Skhirat is testament to a level of ambiguity on the part of the U.N. and some delegates as to what will be the final version.
Fair composition of and clear responsibilities for a new State Council could, for instance, be set out in an annex to the framework agreement. These could perhaps include the right for consultative State Council oversight of House of Representatives’ legislation, and a provision that any vote of confidence or no confidence for the future cabinet be made by consensus between the two bodies.
What is unrealistic for the two main parties is to hope that without the other one on board there can be any national unity government. Indeed, lack of agreement will only raise risks of further military escalation in the capital, since security forces from the Tripoli faction control access to all government and state institutions there, including the Central Bank and the National Oil Corporation.
Good reasons to hurry
Going forward, the U.N.-led process would benefit from modification. It needs to shift the parties to face-to-face talks, since the previous format in which the parties negotiated individually with the U.N. team threw up too many surprises. Each side would need to empower its delegation to negotiate rather than serve as a mere conduit for proposals requiring approval at every stage.
There are good reasons to hurry. ISIS and other jihadist groups have spread their presence in Libya dramatically since 2014, taking control of several towns in the Gulf of Sirte and attacking targets in areas controlled by both of the two main camps. Prolonged strife will only worsen the migrant and refugee crisis in the Mediterranean. The mandate of Bernardino León – the architect of the talks - is currently scheduled to expire in September, and the HoR’s term of office ends in October 2015.
Even as negotiators sharpen their pencils to tackle these and other difficult issues – for instance, ensuring that the negotiations have a proper security track, that regional powers are fully involved, and that they agree on how to select a consensus Prime Minister - armed groups back home are oiling their weapons. It is critical for all involved in the process to remember and build on the Skhirat’s achievements, which may be limited but remain the best bet to prevent Libya’s further collapse.

Egyptian Columnist, Imad Al-Din Adib, Compares Iranian Nuclear Agreement To Munich Agreement
MEMRI/July 21, 2015 Special Dispatch No.6111
'Imad Al-Din Adib, a columnist for the Egyptian daily Al-Watan, has harshly criticized what he called the "pathetic" agreement arrived at by the U.S.-led P5+1 and Iran, arguing that it allows Iran to produce a nuclear bomb after it expires and disregards Iran's regional policy that harms its neighbors. According to Adib, the Obama administration is mistaken in its assessment that lifting sanctions on Iran will lead to democratization and political reforms in the country, because the resultant influx of cash to Iran will be channeled to increasing tensions in the region. He also compared the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with the 1938 Munich Agreement signed by British prime minister Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler, adding that many historians viewed the Munich agreement as the cause of Hitler's megalomania.
'Imad Al-Din Adib (Source: Twitter.com/adeeb_emad)
Following are excerpts from Adib's column:
"Many professors of modern history believe that British prime minister Chamberlain was the main reason for Hitler's megalomania. These [professors] maintain that... it was Chamberlain, who always preferred a policy of containment and appeasement, and who refrained from stern policy and confrontation at all costs, that, by signing the pathetic [Munich] Agreement with Hitler, gave the latter [a sense] of power and a stubborn desire for control.
"History is [now] repeating itself; this pathetic agreement between Chamberlain and Hitler is back again, in the form of a nuclear agreement between Iran and the superpowers. The greatest powers have signed an agreement that reduces and slows Iran's nuclear uranium enrichment [but] does not halt it, in return for $120 billion [to] Tehran.
"The astonishing thing, which no one has pointed out, is that even if Iran complies to the letter with the 85 sections of the agreement, the agreement itself, once its 10-year duration is up, allows [Iran] to produce a nuclear bomb in the 11th year. Iran, after 26 months of grueling negotiations, has sold 'air' to the superpowers.
"The main mistake in the Obama administration's reasoning is its assessment that lifting the economic and trade embargo on Iran will lead to a revival of the entire Iranian economy, and thus to political reforms and a transition to democracy.
"What the American administration did not realize is that [Iran's] clerical dictatorship will funnel this money to investment in political plans outside Iran, in conflict zones such as Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Bab Al-Mandeb [Straits], Africa, and Pakistan.
"The American administration [also] did not realize that the regime of clerics in Tehran, which is above the rule of experts, economists, and civil [leaders], has spent insane sums on all these extremist and terrorist programs in the region, as the Iranian economy plummeted in the shadow of an unprecedented international boycott. We must ask: If this is what they did in the shadow of this boycott, what will they do with this influx of funds?!
"Another strange thing is that the nuclear agreement includes not one single clause or reference to Iran's conduct as a country in the region, or to its policy towards its neighbors.
"It is as if they told Iran: Take 120 billion [dollars] and do as you please."[1]
Endnote: [1] Al-Watan (Egypt), July 16, 2015.

Former Jordanian Information Minister, Saleh Al-Qallab: The Arabs, Because Of Their Helplessness, Are Responsible For Iran's Expansion In The Region
MEMRI/July 21, 2015 Special Dispatch No.6110
In his June 13, 2015 column in the official Jordanian daily Al-Rai, former information minister Saleh Al-Qallab blamed the Arabs for Iran's expansion in the region from Iraq to Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. It is this helplessness and silence in the face of Iraq's occupation by Iran, he wrote, that has led to the current situation, in which Iran is occupying several Arab countries. After occupying Iraq, Iran is now striving to divide Syria and to establish there a pro-Shi'ite mini-state, he said, and this could impact the entire region. He concluded by calling on the Arabs to foment internal wars in Iran in order to thwart its regional sectarian plans.
Saleh Al-Qallab (Source: Yemen-press.com, April 16, 2015)
The following are excerpts from Al-Qallab's column:
"Despite the many important issues with which the Arabs are preoccupied, there is no justification for the fact that Syria is being torn apart in this way, as they watch from the sidelines... even though they know that the division of this central country will impact not [just] its neighbors, but the entire Arab region. If they do not act swiftly before time runs out, this collapse will have a domino effect...
"The Arabs, both nearby and distant, have shown grave weakness by distancing themselves from Iraq after it was occupied in 2003. Iran was the one who benefited from this, when it hastened to fill this vacuum until it gradually occupied that entire Arab country. [Today,] removing [Iran] from [Iraq] will involve a years-long effort, and require a unified Arab position, because those who have been harmed [by the Iranian occupation] include not only the Iraqi people, but the entire Arab ummah.
"Had the Arabs not remained silent regarding Iran's expansion to Iraq and its occupation of it [which continues] to this day, Iran would not have been able to continue to expand and occupy Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon in the same way. The Iranians interpreted this [Arab] silence as impotence, and went so far as to speak of the subordination of four Arab capitals – Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut, and Sana'a – under the Iranian capital Tehran.[1]
"All the Arabs heard... Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Al-Miqdad's [June 13, 2015] boast that the Assad regime relied on support from Iran and its forces in order to maintain its steadfastness. It is clear that [Iranian] President Hassan Rohani's statement that Iran would continue to support the Syrian regime to the end remains in force, and reverberates across the Arab [countries]. This support, which is frequently reiterated by Iran, is [actually] support for Iran's [own] vital interests in that country and in the Arab region – not support for [the interests of] Syria or the Syrian regime. "Syria is marching towards division and disintegration. Bashar Al-Assad, who has submitted to Iran's wishes... is clinging to his seat until the end, while the Syrian people, who have lost hundreds of thousands of their sons and whose cities, villages, and towns have all been destroyed, cannot agree to any compromise or solution that will leave this regime in place. This pulling in two opposite directions [by the regime and by the people] will ultimately lead to [Syria's] division and to the emergence of the sectarian mini-state that the Iranians seek – one that complements the Hizbullah state and will reach from Damascus to Latakia...
"Therefore, in the absence of a serious Arab position to pressure Iran by causing it to be preoccupied with internal conflicts like those with which the Arabs were preoccupied during [the recent period, which was] the most difficult and dangerous period in their modern history, we will surely soon awaken [to a reality of] more than one Syrian mini-state, and, ultimately, find that our region has become a sectarian crazy-quilt. This is precisely what Israel wants and what it has aspired to from the time of its founding."
Endnote:[1] See MEMRI TV Clip No. 4530, "Iranian Analyst Mohammad Sadeq Al-Hosseini: Saudi Arabia Is on the Verge of Extinction; We Are the New Sultans of the Mediterranean, the Gulf, and the Red Sea,"September 24, 2014.

Netanyahu switches tactics for blocking Iran nuclear deal. Iranian Guards chief: We will never accept it
DEBKAfile Special Report July 21, 2015
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has switched tactics for his struggle against the nuclear deal between Iran and world powers. The accord was unanimously endorsed Monday, July 20, by the UN Security Council and European Union in the first step towards winding down sanctions. debkafile’s Washington and Jerusalem sources report that the prime minister has turned aside from his effort to persuade a majority of US lawmakers to thumbs-down on the deal by vetoing a presidential veto. He realized that his chances of success were slim. Netanyahu plans instead to put before the US Congress a proposal for new laws to specify in detail the issues on which Iranian violations would make US administration penalties mandatory. This legislation would spell out the penalties and their duration.
Netanyahu recently confided to his advisers that he has become less concerned with the number of Democratic senators who might vote against the nuclear accord, and a lot more about the content of the separate transactions the powers have signed with Iran, including secret annexes which the administration signed off on and has not disclosed to the American public.
All these contracts, including the arrangement with the International Atomic Energy Agency-IAEA, are, Netanyahu notes, couched in “extremely economical terms” – general enough to give Tehran plenty of room for maintaining that its breaches are legitimate.
A key example of this is the item on monitoring Iran’s nuclear facilities. President Barack Obama and administration officials emphasize tirelessly that inspections will be deeper and more extensive than ever before, and no nuclear activity will escape the notice of US intelligence. But, according to the prime minister, the deal with the IAEA and the secret annexes of the Vienna accord open the door for Iran to conduct covert activity which US intelligence would not be obliged to report.
Furthermore, a key clause in the main body of the deal (Part 10 on page 142) includes a promise by the US (et al) “to safeguard Iran's nuclear plants and facilities against terrorist attacks, outside disruption, or sabotage.”
This commitment obviates the US pledge to leave the military option on the table. But most of all, it ties Israel’s hands for crippling a covert Iranian nuclear weapons program by permitting Tehran to invoke this clause.
It is these lacunae in the nuclear deal which Netanyahu seeks to plug by means of new, precise US congressional legislation.
debkafile’s sources note that such legislature would be the US Congress’s answer to the law the Iranian Majlis adopted on June 23 - and the Guardian Council a day later - whereby the nuclear accords signed in Vienna would go into force only if all sanctions were lifted forthwith. Then, too, the foreign minister would be required to report to the Iranian parliament every six months on the performance of the six world powers which signed the deal in complying with their commitments under the accord.
Last Sunday, July 12, two days before the Vienna accord was signed, President Hassan Rouhani issued an executive order under the heading “Nuclear Achievements Act” for Iran’s Foreign Ministry and its Nuclear Energy Agency AEOI to implement… the Majlis resolution. In other words, for Tehran, the entire Vienna package is still up in the air, held in abeyance for the world powers to obey the condition laid down by the Iranian parliament.
Tehran was also quick to negate the unanimous UN Security Council resolution and its endorsement by European Union foreign ministers, which mandated the gradual lifting of sanctions in pace with Iran’s compliance – not forthwith as stipulated by the Majlis.
To make sure this situation was clearly understood, with no ifs or buts, Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps commander Mohammed Ali Jafari stepped forward Monday, July 20, and announced: “Some of the points inserted in the draft (UN resolution) are clearly in contradiction to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s major red lines and violate them, particularly regarding arms capabilities, and we’ll never accept it.”
He designated the most “critical red line” as being the “maintaining and upgrading of Iran’s defense capabilities.”
Since Tehran views the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles a “defense capability,” Jafari’s words were a warning to the world powers that Iran’s ICBM program was inviolable. The prime minister advises US Congress to match the Iranian parliament by pursuing the opposite tactic. Whereas, Iran’s lawmakers, instead of endorsing the Vienna nuclear deal, enacted measures for circumventing it, US lawmakers must give it teeth to block Iranian evasions.

Michael Oren Interviewed by Daniel Pipes
A discussion reveals how Obama purposefully broke the historic US-Israel alliance FrontPageMag.com
June 24, 2015
(1) This interview took place at the Free Library of Philadelphia. FrontPageMag.com
transcribed it and I edited it. The transcript does not include the question-and-answer period but the video does.
(2) The video is available to watch here.
(3) About the alarm that goes off at the very end: As Amb. Oren was answering my final question, a buzzer went off, we could not continue talking, the event organizer came on the stage to announce that the library had to be evacuated immediately, and the video camera suddenly shuts off. This unceremonious conclusion, fortunately, was just a drill and no one or property were harmed.
(4) The transcript has been edited for clarity and brevity.
Daniel Pipes: I am delighted to be here with Michael Oren.
I’ll admit that when I began reading his book, Ally: My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide, a very well-written account of his four-plus years as Israeli ambassador to the United States, I started at the beginning, as one tends to do with books, so I had no idea of the news bombshells that lay ahead. (Laughter)
The first inkling came to me when I read a column by John Podhoretz, who suggested that “the annals of diplomatic history” had never witnessed “anything quite like this astonishing account” that “makes news on almost every page.” Indeed, the next few days saw a furor over the book and its related three articles. “Borderline hysteria” is how one Israeli journalist, Ben Caspit, summarized the Obama administration’s response.
Because of the enormous attention the book has attracted, I will make the assumption that you, the audience, know something about its contents, and I will focus my questions on specific issues regarding three topics: US-Israel relations, the response to the book, and Barack Obama.
Michael: You portray two principles governing historic US-Israel relations—no daylight and no surprises. You argue these have been broken since 2009 and you hope they’ll be quickly reasserted. But do you really see this as possible in the year and a half left of Obama’s administration? Or do you only hope for this after he leaves office?
Michael Oren: The US-Israel relationship is not static but has evolved. We fought the ’67 war with French bullets, not American ones. Beginning in the 1980s, in the middle Reagan years. these two principles, no surprises and no daylight, began to coalesce. What I mean by them?
No surprises: if the United States is going to set out a major new policy position on issues related to the Middle East and Israel’s security, it will give us an advance draft of the speech or paper to give us a chance to look at it, give our comments.
No daylight: the two governments will differ over settlements, Jerusalem, and a lot of other issues. But we keep these differences behind closed doors, not display them in public where our mutual enemies will discern the distance between us and will insinuate themselves between us.
Obama and Oren in the Oval Office.
I can’t say that these two principles were always honored; we did surprise one another; there was occasional daylight. But these were the historic twin pillars of our alliance. Starting in 2009, however, the new Obama Administration as a matter of policy decided it would not preserve these two pillars.
On surprises, the rupture isn’t a matter of debate. For example, the president went to Cairo in June 2009 and gave a very long speech (twice as long as his first inaugural address) which served as the foundational document of his administration’s positions on the Middle East. It also touched on many issues vital to Israel’s security, such as America’s relationship with what Obama called the Muslim world, particularly the outreach to Iran and Iran’s right to nuclear energy. Although it had amazing and far-reaching ramifications for Israel, we in the embassy never saw a draft of it, we had no warning of it. And that was just one of many such speeches.
As for daylight, the president openly said, “Look at the past eight years [a reference to the George W. Bush administration]. During those eight years, there was no space between us and Israel, and what did we get from that? When there is no daylight, Israel just sits on the sidelines, and that erodes our credibility with the Arab states.” Turns out, he put daylight between the two countries on other issues too, like Iran.
These two pillars were jettisoned and they must be restored. It’s not only in the interest of the United States and Israel but, given the immense chaos in the Middle East, it’s important for that region as well. Indeed, it’s needed for the wellbeing of the world. Why? Because everybody looks at the US-Israel bond. Whether jihadist or Japanese, the globe looks at the way the United States treats its Israeli ally as a litmus test of its ability to rely on the United States.
Therefore, the two pillars need to be restored. Whether that’s possible in the year and a half remaining of this presidency, I don’t know. All I can say is, I hope so. My book is an ardent and impassioned call to bring this relationship back from the brink, which we’ve reached, and restore it.
Daniel Pipes: Along with the problems you just delineated, all in the know agree that the US-Israel military relationship is better than ever. How is this possible, what’s the logic behind it?
Michael Oren: True, it is better than ever. The cooperation on weapons development, on military aid—which is close to $4 billion a year (75 percent of it spent in the United States)—joint maneuvers, ports of call, and intelligence sharing are indeed superb right now.
Why so? Because the Obama administration distinguishes between diplomatic daylight and security daylight and it calculated that the closer relations are in the security field, the greater leeway it has to put daylight in the diplomatic field. This amounts to a very interesting intellectual exercise, one that did not work.
Middle Easterners simply do not distinguish between diplomatic and security daylight. In the Middle East, daylight is daylight. Daylight in our area of the world, where the sun is very strong, can be blinding and searing. What most Middle Easterners saw over the course of the last six-plus years was the United States and Israel drifting quite far apart in spite of increased security cooperation.
By the way, if you define security relationship more broadly, things look differently. If you include the fact that the United States negotiated for seven months with the Iranians—and that has a certain impact on our security—without even telling us, you can’t say the security relationship is better than ever.
Daniel Pipes: You mentioned being unaware of US-Iranian discussions, yet, the president has said that he and his administration have consistently shared information with Israel. True?
Michael Oren: We had a longstanding, intimate dialog with the United States on the Iranian nuclear program which I was privileged to take part in. The Americans were very candid. We looked at the same data and often derived the same conclusions. But we were unaware of the content of that secret track taking place in the Persian Gulf.
Daniel Pipes: You quote former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel waking you up early one morning and yelling, “I don’t like this eff-ing excrement.” (Laughter) On another occasion, the deputy secretary of state, the number-two man in the State Department, Tom Nides, screamed at you, “You don’t want that eff-ing UN to collapse because of your eff-ing conflict with the Palestinians.”
Michael Oren: You understand, if we were in Israel, we’d have no problem actually saying this word? (Laughter) So American. (Laughter)
Daniel Pipes: My question: Is this really the state of diplomacy today? (Laughter)
Michael Oren: Yes. (Laughter) Yes, it is funny. As an aside, Ally went through seven security vettings by the State of Israel: the military censor, two departments within the Defense Ministry, the Mossad, and others. They were very good; believe me, it’s amazing there’s actually a book.
I was never a diarist, I never before wrote a book in the first person. Making that transformation was profound for me and not at all easy. But when I took this job, my wife Sally gave me a little diary and said, “Hey, you may want to jot down a few things.” I replied, “Nah, I don’t believe in diaries.”
Then, soon after that, Rahm Emanuel calls me at 2 o’clock in the morning and says—can I say this? “I don’t like this fucking shit.” (Laughter) And it’s like 2 o’clock in the morning. And I said, “Well, I don’t like this fucking shit, either.” And it begins from there. (Laughter) So I wrote this incident into my diary. The diary is not classified; you’re not going to find secrets in there. But it did provide a lot of color and depth to the book.
Tom Nides—poor Tom Nides. That line, “UNESCO teaches Holocaust studies, for chrissakes. You want to cut off fucking Holocaust studies?” gets quoted a lot as evidence of Nides’ animus against the State of Israel. But it’s just the opposite: Tom Nides is a great friend of mine and of the State of Israel. In Washington, that’s just the way people talk.
One story I didn’t include in the book, from a high-ranking member of the administration, a very sweet, young man, who says to me something like, “We’re getting out of fucking Iraq, because we’ve fucking had it with the fucking Iraqis. And we’re coming fucking home.” And then he looks at me and says, “Why am I talking like this?” (Laughter)
Daniel Pipes: Did you get “special” treatment because you’re a born American? Had you been from another country, and not a native American, would you have been treated the same way?
Michael Oren: No I wouldn’t have. This is the flip side of the special US-Israel relationship.
It was also part of my special relationship with people like Rahm Emanuel, who I’d known for a long time before I got into office. Rahm’s father had fought in the Irgun, in the Israeli War of Independence. (Hence, his name, Rahm, or thunder.) Rahm had a deli accident when he was 16 and sliced off the top part of a finger. According to Obama, when he lost the top part of that finger, he lost half of his vocabulary. (Laughter) I used to get that finger, all the time.
But when Rahm left the White House and went off to be the mayor of Chicago, I viewed it as a loss for me because he was somebody I could call in the middle of the night. Yes, I was going to get that language. Even though we had serious policy disagreements sometimes, I know he cared passionately about Israel. He was a proud Jew, proud of his father. That created a link that couldn’t be broken by policy differences.
Emanuel and Oren in the mayor of Chicago’s office.
The same thing’s true with Dennis Ross (who doesn’t talk like Rahm). Dennis was that rare Washington Middle East expert who wasn’t, as we say in Washington-speak, stove-piped. Which means, you know, you go to somebody who’s an expert in Lebanon between 1976 and 1977, that’s what they know. (Laughter) Dennis was the only person I knew in Washington who saw the entire region and also saw it historically. He saw it vertically and horizontally. And he had a personal memory too, having been involved in peacemaking for 30 years. When he left, there was another huge loss.
Daniel Pipes: I’d like to try out two favorite theories of mine on you. First: Noting that the government of Israel tends to give away too much when relations are really warm between Jerusalem and Washington, I believe that low-level tensions between the two governments are actually good.
Michael Oren: Here I’d beg to disagree. Historically, Israelis make concessions when we feel secure. In his first meeting with American Jewish leaders, as I quoted earlier, Obama said that he’s going to put daylight between Israel and the United States because when there is no daylight, Israel “just sits on the sidelines.”
Interesting observation, but empirically wrong. During the Bush years, for example, there was no daylight, so Israelis felt secure. As a result, Israel yanked up 21 settlements from Gaza in 2005. It made a full offer of Palestinian statehood to Mahmud Abbas in 2008: all of Gaza, most of the West Bank, half of Jerusalem. At the height of the second intifada in 2002, Israeli support for a two-state solution was exactly zero; by the time I came onboard in 2009, the intifada was behind us and 70 percent of Israelis supported a two-state solution.
So, when we feel secure, we make more concessions. Strangely enough, the person who understood this best was Richard Nixon: give them support, they’ll make concessions.
Daniel Pipes: That was my point.
Michael Oren: Okay. I’m sorry.
Daniel Pipes: I’m saying when US-Israel relations are flourishing, Israelis hand things over. For example, the Philadelphi Corridor in 2007, but that was a mistake. Therefore, I don’t mind seeing—
Michael Oren: Oh, you want a little low-level tension, so we don’t give in.
Daniel Pipes: Exactly.
Michael Oren: Well, I can’t argue with that.
But my responsibility as ambassador was to try to get us on the same page. They were coming to us and asking us to do many very difficult things: “We demand a settlement freeze on the West Bank, a building freeze in eastern Jerusalem, a final-status map for the Palestinians.” Take the map issue: every time we gave the Palestinians a map, they put it in their pocket, walked away, and came back two years later saying, “Okay, let’s start negotiating from the map you gave us last time.” So, we didn’t want to give them another map, although the administration demanded we do so.
I would say all the time to the administration, “Rather than threaten us, try love.” That was always my line, “Try love, try love.” Because Israelis make concession when we feel secure. That’s not just Israelis, it’s human nature.
Daniel Pipes: Second theory: there used to be a consensus, say in the 1980s, between Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, on Israel. It’s falling apart, with conservatives ever more friendly to Israel and liberals ever cooler to Israel. From the anecdotes in your book, it sounds like you agree with this analysis, correct?
Michael Oren: My anecdotes point to the challenges we faced from certain segments of the American electorate. American opinion on Israel is a little like what physicists say about the universe—it’s expanding and contracting at the same time. If you look at all the polls, support for Israel in this country keeps on going up. Even last summer, at the height of Gaza war with the terrible images coming out of Gaza, American support for Israel went up. When I left Washington, something like 74 percent of Americans defined themselves, to one degree or another, as pro-Israel. Crazy! We were right behind Sweden and Canada, which is amazing, considering all the bad press we get.
On the other hand, if you break these statistics down demographically by ethnic group, age group, and party affiliation, the picture’s a lot less sanguine.
I’ve lived in Israel for close to 40 years. Yes, I’ve come back and even taught at various universities. But for the first time in 2009, I returned for an extended period. I had a Rip Van Winkle experience, as though I’d woken after 25 years and didn’t recognize my own village. America had transformed demographically.
America is no longer a white majority population. There are more single-parent families than two-parent families. There was one Jewish judge on the Supreme Court and the rest basically WASPs; now, there’s not a single WASP on the Supreme Court but three Jews and six Catholics. The populations growing the most and having greater political influence, especially the Hispanics, lack a traditional attachment to Israel.
Because many Israeli leaders, including our prime minister and defense minister, had been educated in America in the ’70s or ’80s; they remembered a different America. So, I had to tell them, “Guys, the America you remember … it ain’t there anymore.”
I saw Obama’s election in 2008 as the symptom of a transformative moment. I’m no prophet but I told Israeli leaders back in 2009 that we have to plan for a two-term president because these changes are permanent. The election of 2012 was much more significant than 2008; it confirmed that the changes are permanent and that Israel has to adjust to them.
Israel has a paramount strategic interest in preserving support for Israel as a bipartisan issue; we should never become the monopoly of one party. This has become increasingly challenging because Israel’s experience with terror moved it significantly to the right even as America moved to the left. Israel became more traditional; America less traditional. I had to grapple and try to bridge this reality. Did I succeed entirely? Obviously not. Can we give it up? We cannot. We have to keep on reaching out.
Daniel Pipes: Turning to responses to your book—American officials have been incensed by Ally. Secretary of State John Kerry‘s spokesman said that it is “absolutely inaccurate and false.” Your former counterpart, the US ambassador to Israel, Daniel Shapiro, said, “I can say as an ambassador that sometimes ambassadors have a very limited view of the conversations between the leaders, and his description does not reflect the truth about what happened.” Oddly, Shapiro says he doesn’t know anything and therefore you don’t know anything. Your response?
Criss-crossing ambassadors: Daniel Shapiro and Michael Oren.
Michael Oren: It’s a strange remark for one ambassador to say about another ambassador. In the past week and a half, I’ve been called a moneygrubbing politician, delusional, and some other choice words. But all these ad hominem attacks aside, nobody’s taking on the book substantively. I tell a story in 400 pages and virtually no one says the facts are faulty: that, say, the Americans did not negotiate for seven months without telling us or that the administration did not cancel flights to Ben Gurion Airport in mid-2014. No one says I just imagined these events.
I think part of the reaction I’ve received from people in government—notice people in government, not people out of government—has been an oversensitivity to the issues I’m trying to raise.
Which brings me to my reason to bring the book out now. June is a terrible time to bring out a nonfiction book. It’s already summer reading, when you bring out Jaws. (In this spirit, I told Random House we should change the name of the book to Jews.) (Laughter) People will read it on the beach! They won’t go in the water! You bring out a book like this in October or November to take part in Jewish book month in November and jump on the Christmas-Hanukkah book season.
Also, I’m in the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, which means I can’t promote the book as I should. I previously went on two-month book tours, which I cannot do with this one.
Nonetheless, I brought it out now because in the next week or so there is liable to be an agreement signed between the United States, other permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany, with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The State of Israel—not just my party, not just the prime minister—views this as a terrible deal, one that deeply endangers us. I would be derelict if I did not tell this story right now. The book had to come out now to trigger the precise conversation we’re having tonight. What do they expect from us—to go silently into that night of the signing of this agreement? The Jewish people can’t do that.
Daniel Pipes: Let’s turn to the last of the three topics: the American president. What do you better think explains Obama’s approach to the Middle East and the world: a grand strategy or improvising responses as things happen?
Michael Oren: Barack Obama—as all presidents—came into the White House with a worldview. His happens to be very challenging for the State of Israel. It does not include the notion of American exceptionalism or American leadership. Instead, it prefers a collegial approach to crisis management and world affairs. It implies a certain recoiling from the use of military might and a heavy reliance on international organizations, like the UN, that are not always so friendly to the State of Israel.
Some of us wake up in the morning and say a little berakhah [blessing] that the greatest democracy in the world just happens also to be the greatest military power. It’s a wonderful thing. In this light, one of the most illuminating remarks I ever heard Barack Obama make was at the nuclear security summit in 2010, where he said—these words are engraved on my soul, “Whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower.” Think about that for a second. That was very revealing about the president’s attitude toward military might. Would John Kennedy have said that? Would Bill Clinton? George W. Bush?
And then there are Obama’s positions on our specific issues, such as his outreach to the Muslim world. I thought it perfectly fine, indeed, it’s in our interest, that America improves relations with Muslims—so long as it’s not at our expense. The unprecedented support for the Palestinian cause and the reconciliation with Iran, are very problematic for us, however.
This worldview has collided with reality and the result looks like patchwork. Intervention against Qaddafi but nonintervention against Assad. Sort of implicitly cooperating with Shiite forces against ISIS in Iraq but kind-of resisting what Saudi Arabia is doing in Yemen against ISIS and definitely opposing what Egypt is doing against ISIS in Libya. I can go on.
After almost five years of unprecedented turmoil, violence, and disappointment in the Middle East, that worldview has remained mostly impermeable to change

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