English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For August 03/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.august03.20.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006

Bible Quotations For today
You cross sea and land to make a single convert, and you make the new convert twice as much a child of hell as yourselves
Matthew 23/13-15: “‘But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you lock people out of the kingdom of heaven. For you do not go in yourselves, and when others are going in, you stop them. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cross sea and land to make a single convert, and you make the new convert twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.””

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on August 02-03/2020
The Pompousness, Self-Admiration and Bragging Plagues/Elias Bejjani/August 02/2020
A revolution not televised: Lebanese mock censorship of famous patriotic song during army celebration
Tough words but Israel, Hezbollah don't want new war: Experts
Aoun Accuses ‘Global Travelers’ of Incitement against Lebanon
Al-Rahi: Anyone who Cares about Lebanon Wouldn't Reject Neutrality
Israel 'Ready for All Scenarios', Report Says Not Seeking Hizbullah Conflict
Israel Expected to Maintain Alert State on Lebanon Border
Israel Sends Spy Balloon over Lebanese Town
Akar: Govt. wasn't Absent during South Incidents
Abdul Samad: Lebanon Won't Ditch West, Especially France

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on August 02-03/2020
Mina Al-Oraibi: As violence spirals, Iraq is headed for real trouble
PM’s Call for Elections Sparks Unprecedented Political Race in Iraq
UN Says Libya Crisis Could Develop to 'Regional War'
Egypt Slams Attempts to Drive Wedge between it and Kuwait
Syrian Security Forces Arrest 12 Army Officers over Makhlouf Ties
Canada/Statement by Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth on Romani Genocide Remembrance Day
Afghan Ceasefire Holds as Hundreds of Taliban Prisoners Freed
Court Orders Netanyahu's Son to Stop 'Harassing' Protest Leaders
 

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on August 02-03/2020

Iran has upper hand over Russia in Syria/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/August 02/2020
Iran regime avoids conflict as it attempts to wait out Trump/Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib/Arab News/August 02/2020
‘New’ Turkey must resolve standoff with Greece/Yasar Yakis/Arab News/August 02/2020
Turkey's Brain Drain: Why Youths See No Future There/Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute/August 02/2020
Israel’s unique methods against the Iranian threat/Benjamin Weil/Jerusalem Post/July 02/2020
Thirty years on from the invasion of Kuwait, what have we learnt?/David Mack/The National/August 02/2020
Sudan Optimistic US Will Soon Remove it from Terror List/Mohammed Amin Yassine/ Asharq Al-Awsat/August 02/2020
Germany's Bund May Be About to Lose Its Crown/Marcus Ashworth/Bloomberg/August, 02/2020
Focusing on Facebook and Google’s Monopoly Misses the Point/Noah Smith/Bloomberg/August, 02/2020
The War on Masks Is Another Lost Cause/Francis Wilkinson/Bloomberg/August, 02/2020
UNEP: What’s in a Name?/Najib Saab/Asharq Al Awsat/August 02/2020

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on August 02-03/2020

The Pompousness, Self-Admiration and Bragging Plagues
Elias Bejjani/August 02/2020
أوبئة وكوارث التكبر والتبجح وعبادة الذات

http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/89063/elias-bejjanithe-pompousness-self-admiration-and-bragging-plagues-%d8%a3%d9%88%d8%a8%d8%a6%d8%a9-%d9%88%d9%83%d9%88%d8%a7%d8%b1%d8%ab-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%aa%d9%83%d8%a8%d8%b1-%d9%88%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%aa/
We witness every day in our life especially with people who are in power or those who are rich certain disgusting evil conducts exhibited through superficiality, materialism, boasting and bragging.
These sickening people are conceited, pompous, self centered and never stop bragging as if the whole world revolves around them.
Such conducts make these individuals look so stupid and so ignorant and at the same time very difficult to be tolerated.
They isolate themselves and generate frustration and anger among those who deal with them, be family members or acquaintances.
As Christians are we allowed to brag and boast and act with self-admiration and superiority?
Of course not, because the bible instructs us to be modest, humble meek and loving.
Meanwhile God punishes the braggers and conceited as Isaiah states:
Isaiah/10:15 Should an axe brag against him who chops with it? Should a saw exalt itself above him who saws with it? As if a rod should lift those who lift it up, or as if a staff should lift up someone who is not wood.
Isaiah/10:16 Therefore the Lord, Yahweh of Armies, will send among his fat ones leanness; and under his glory a burning will be kindled like the burning of fire.
Isaiah/10:17 The light of Israel will be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame; and it will burn and devour his thorns and his briers in one day.
Isaiah/10:18 He will consume the glory of his forest, and of his fruitful field, both soul and body. It will be as when a standard bearer faints.
Isaiah/10:19 The remnant of the trees of his forest shall be few, so that a child could write their number.
Isaiah/10:33-34: “Behold, the Lord, Yahweh of Armies, will lop the boughs with terror. The tall will be cut down, and the lofty will be brought low.
Isaiah/10:34) He will cut down the thickets of the forest with iron, and Lebanon will fall by the Mighty One.

A revolution not televised: Lebanese mock censorship of famous patriotic song during army celebration
The New Arab/August 02/2020
Lebanese social media users have reacted with a mixture of anger and ridicule to the apparent censorship of the lyrics of a patriotic song during a televised celebration of Lebanese Army Day, which was celebrated on Saturday, August 1.The festivities featured a choir singing the song "Ya Beirut" by famous Lebanese soprano Majida Al-Rumi. However, one line from the song was removed. The original lyrics contained the words "revolution is born from the womb of sorrows" but this was replaced with a chorus of "la la la la la" during the festivities. Beginning in September 2019, Lebanon saw huge protests against government corruption and the ruling elite as public debt spiralled out of control. The country is now in the midst of a serious economic crisis and poverty and unemployment have increased as the Lebanese pound has plummeted in value. Social media users were quick to accuse the government of censoring Rumi's well-known lyrics. Television presenter Rania Barghout tweeted angrily at the Lebanese government: "Were you scared of the words of a song? This la la la of yours was much louder than a festival that could have passed without incident but #A_revolution_is_born_from_the_womb_of_sorrows and you can't hide behind the army for long because they will turn against you soon." The Arabic-language hashtag #A_revolution_is_born_from_the_womb_of_sorrows quickly trended on Twitter, with social media users accompanying it with pictures of huge protests in Lebanon which took place this year and last.
On the occasion of Lebanese Army Day, President Michel Aoun, who has been a frequent target of the protests, met with army commander General Joseph Aoun (no relation) and said: "Lebanon is today facing one of the fiercest wars ever, against more than one enemy, including rampant corruption, those who play with the livelihoods of citizens, those who attack the national currency, and those who start rumours to spread despair."

Tough words but Israel, Hezbollah don't want new war: Experts
The New Arab Staff & Agencies/August 02/2020
Harsh rhetoric from Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah appeared to threaten further conflict after border unrest this week, but experts predict both sides will try to avoid escalation. As the coronavirus pandemic has deepened Lebanon's economic turmoil and also rocked Israeli politics, the last thing either of the arch foes wants now is a new military conflict, they argue. Tensions spiked last Monday along the UN-demarcated Blue Line after months of relative calm when Israel said it thwarted an infiltration attempt by up to five Hezbollah gunmen, a claim denied by the Iran-backed group. Israel reported an exchange of fire that forced the "terrorists" back into Lebanon and said it fired artillery across the heavily guarded border for "defensive" purposes. The incident came a week after an alleged Israeli missile attack hit positions of Syrian regime forces and their allies south of Damascus on July 20, killing five, including a Hezbollah member. Hezbollah said at the time a response to the deadly Syria strike was "inevitable", heightening tensions. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Monday that Hezbollah was "playing with fire" and that Israel's response to the border incursion would "be very strong". Since then Israel's Army remains on "alert" to see if Hezbollah is "going to do anything else," said analyst Orna Mizrahi of the Institute for National Security Studies. However, Mizrahi, who previously served in Netanyahu's national security office, argued that a full-blown escalation now was in neither side's interest. With the pandemic wreaking havoc - especially in Lebanon, stuck in its deepest economic crisis since the 1975-1990 civil war - she argued that "both sides don't want a conflict now".
'False calm'
The last major conflict between Israel and Hezbollah broke out in 2006. A month of fighting left more than 1,200 Lebanese dead, mostly civilians, and killed 160 Israelis, mostly soldiers. The Blue Line has remained tense ever since, as an AFP team experienced on a visit last month, 10 days before the border incident. Officer Jonathan Goshen said Israeli forces could see Hezbollah "preparing for the next war".Hezbollah's military presence along the Blue Line is not immediately visible to visiting reporters, but a March report from the United Nations said the group has fighters and weapons deployed there. "The border looks calm, but it isn't," Goshen told AFP, weaving in a Jeep amid the trees near Metula, the northernmost village on the Israeli side. According to Goshen, when Israeli forces approach the Blue Line, "it's quiet for the first 10 minutes and then we see them coming all the time, trying to collect intelligence". During AFP's visit, a small group was visible moving among the fruit trees on the Lebanese side, sparking heated discussion among Israeli troops on whether they were Hezbollah or farmers. "Hezbollah!" Goshen said, before ordering his soldiers to pull back.
Avoiding 'imbroglio'
Hezbollah specialist Didier Leroy of the Royal Higher Institute for Defence also argued that the group remains primarily focused on the turmoil gripping Lebanon, which has seen protests since last year against a political system widely deemed corrupt and incompetent.
The demonstrations, which have also shaken Hezbollah strongholds, are a "significant factor" in its calculations, he said, adding that "the atmosphere in Lebanon is not favourable for a hardline anti-Israel agenda". While Israel's financial crisis is less severe, the Jewish state is struggling to contain surging coronavirus transmission while street protests over economic hardship, and against right-wing Netanyahu's leadership, have grown by the week. Nahum Barnea of the Yediot Aharonoth newspaper, one of Israel's most prominent columnists, reported that when the gunmen crossed the Blue Line, Israeli soldiers were ordered to take extraordinary steps to avoid an escalation. "What made the engagement unusual, maybe even unprecedented, was the unequivocal [do not kill] order that the IDF soldiers were given," Barnea wrote. The Israeli army declined to comment when asked by AFP if its soldiers indeed had orders to refrain from using lethal force. Barnea, in his column, argued that "the logic behind the decision is clear: killing members of the cell would have necessarily led to a day of fighting in the north, and maybe more than one day.
"The decision-makers faced the imbroglio from 2006: they didn't want to roll into the Third Lebanon War."

Aoun Accuses ‘Global Travelers’ of Incitement against Lebanon
Asharq Al-Awsat/Sunday, 2 August, 2020
President Michel Aoun accused on Saturday individuals, whom he described as “global travelers”, of creating incitement against Lebanon and its people. Without naming these individuals, he held them responsible for withholding help to the Lebanese people. In a televised address on the occasion of the 75th Army Day, he vowed that he will continue to “walk the minefield” and to exert the impossible for the sake of Lebanon’s salvation, vowing that he will never quit. “Lebanon is waging today a war of another type, probably fiercer than military wars, because it affects every Lebanese in their very living, their lifetime savings and the future of their children, while the economic and financial situation is putting strains on everyone, sparing no one,” he added. “In this war, the enemies of Lebanon are numerous. The first enemy is the rampant corruption in the institutions and in many individuals. It is resisting fiercely but the steps towards its eradication are moving slowly, but steadily,” Aoun said. “The second enemy is every person who manipulates the livelihood of the citizens to accumulate profit,” he stated. “The third enemy is every person who has contributed and is contributing to undermining our national currency to accumulate wealth.”
“The fourth enemy is every person who launches rumors to spread despair and who travels the globe, inciting against their nation and their own people, trying to withhold any assistance from them,” he remarked, while also highlighting the threat of the novel coronavirus outbreak.
“Triumphing in this war depends on us all, state and citizens alike. Each has their role, and if they carry it out properly, salvation will be possible. But there is absolutely no point in standing on the side, firing at every rescue attempt, especially among those who have shirked responsibility in the middle of the crisis,” Aoun commented. He vowed that the reform measures that have started to be implemented over public funds, putting an end to corruption and tackling suspicious files will not stop at one institution, but will cover them all. This will help restore the Lebanese people’s faith in their country and themselves before trust is restored in Lebanon, he noted.

Al-Rahi: Anyone who Cares about Lebanon Wouldn't Reject Neutrality
Naharnet/August 02/2020
Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi on Sunday said those who "truly care" about Lebanon would not reject his call for the country's neutrality. "I don't know if someone who truly cares about the welfare of Lebanon and its people, as well as its unity and return to prosperity, would reject or question this active neutrality or claim that it does not enjoy consensus or that it is hard to achieve," al-Rahi said in his Sunday Mass sermon. Shiite spiritual leaders have criticized al-Rahi's call for neutrality and suggested that it is unrealistic. In his most recent remarks on the issue, Grand Jaafarite Mufti Sheikh Ahmed Qabalan said "the issue of neutrality is impossible, not because we don't want it, but rather because it is totally infeasible."

Israel 'Ready for All Scenarios', Report Says Not Seeking Hizbullah Conflict
Naharnet/August 02/2020
The Israeli army is “ready for all scenarios” should Hizbullah stage an attack on Lebanon’s border, a spokesman said. “We deny the reports that Al-Jazeera channel has published. The IDF is ready for all scenarios,” Israeli army spokesman Avichay Adraee tweeted. Al-Jazeera had earlier quoted an Israeli military source as saying that Israel is “not seeking a confrontation with Hizbullah” because its priority is to “prevent Iran from entrenching militarily in Syria.”“We don’t have an intention to deal any preemptive strike to Hizbullah or the Lebanese state,” the source added.
The source however noted that Israel’s state of alert on Lebanon’s border “will continue as long as necessary,” warning that it will “respond forcefully to any Hizbullah attack” and that “the Lebanese state’s facilities” will be among the targets.
Tensions have surged in the Lebanese-Israeli border area since Israel killed a Hizbullah militant in an airstrike in Syria. On Monday, Israel reported a clash and shelled Lebanese border areas after accusing Hizbullah of staging an infiltration attempt. The Iran-backed group denied involvement in any activity on the border but vowed that its retaliation to the Syria raid will certainly come.

Israel Expected to Maintain Alert State on Lebanon Border
Naharnet/August 02/2020
The state of high alert on Israel's border with Lebanon is expected to protract for a significant period of time, Israeli army sources have said. "The military reinforcements of the past days are expected to remain in place," Israel's Maariv newspaper quoted the sources as saying. "This state will remain as it is until it become clear whether or not Hizbullah will try to stage another attack. Through the state of alert, Israel is also seeking to send a message that Lebanon will pay the hefty price should there be an attack," the daily added. Tensions have surged in the border area since Israel killed a Hizbullah militant in an airstrike in Syria. On Monday, Israel shelled Lebanese border areas after accusing Hizbullah of staging an infiltration attempt. The Iran-backed group denied involvement in any activity on the border but vowed that its retaliation to the Syria raid will certainly come.

Israel Sends Spy Balloon over Lebanese Town
Naharnet/August 02/2020
The Israeli army on Saturday sent a spy balloon over the Lebanese border town of Houla, Lebanon’s National News Agency said. The agency said the balloon hovered over the town for 15 minutes. Cautious calm is meanwhile engulfing the Lebanese-Israeli border, NNA added. Tensions have surged in the border area since Israel killed a Hizbullah militant in an airstrike in Syria. On Monday, Israel shelled Lebanese border areas after accusing Hizbullah of staging an infiltration attempt. The Iran-backed group denied involvement in any activity on the border but vowed that its retaliation to the Syria raid will certainly come.

Akar: Govt. wasn't Absent during South Incidents
Naharnet/August 02/2020
Deputy PM and Defense Minister Zeina Akar has stressed that the government was not "absent" during and after Monday's flare-up on the Lebanese-Israeli border. "It condemned the Israeli attacks and considered them a threat to the climate of stability in south Lebanon," Akar told al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper in remarks published Sunday. "The foreign minister also sent a letter to the U.N. in this regard," she added. Asked whether defending Lebanon has become "the military and political specialty of a group of the Lebanese," as suggested by al-Mustaqbal Movement, Akar said "certainly not.""Defending Lebanon remains one of the missions of the army, which maintains full preparedness and is fully ready to defend Lebanon and its security and stability," Akar went on to say.

Abdul Samad: Lebanon Won't Ditch West, Especially France
Naharnet/August 02/2020
Information Minister Manal Abdul Samad stressed Sunday that Lebanon "will not ditch the West, especially France." Her remarks come in the wake of the latest controversy sparked by Prime Minister Hassan Diab's criticism of the recent visit to Lebanon by French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has also suggested that Lebanon should "look east" to mend its broken economy. "Lebanon will not ditch the West, especially France, which dispatched its foreign minister to emphasize the importance of reforms," Abdul Samad said in an interview with Radio All of Lebanon. As for the government's financial rescue plan, the minister underlined that "touching depositors' accounts is a red line for the government." She added that Central Bank Governor Riad Salameh cannot alone be held responsible for the current bankruptcy. "The State, the central bank and the banks must jointly bear the losses," Abdul Samad added.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on August 02-03/2020

Mina Al-Oraibi: As violence spirals, Iraq is headed for real trouble
The National/August 02/2020
When Mustafa Al Kadhimi was approved by Iraq’s Parliament to serve as its 43rd Prime Minister in May, there was cautious optimism that he would be able to begin the process of restoring peace, stability and eventually prosperity in the country. He has since made many a bold statement and symbolic gesture to demonstrate to the world that he means business. However, following his announcement on Friday to hold early parliamentary elections on June 6, 2021, it has become evident that Mr Al Kadhimi needs a stronger mandate in order to break the political impasse that paralyses Baghdad, and to counter the foreign interference – particularly from Iran – that has stifled his attempts to enact sweeping reforms on multiple fronts. It is also important to point out that, as frustrating as the previous three months may have been for Mr Al Kadhimi’s government, the next nine are likely to be yet more testing. During this period, the Prime Minister has to deal with several medium-term challenges, including the resurgence of ISIS, the clout of Iranian-backed militia groups and the financial crisis Iraq finds itself in, due in large part to systemic corruption. A former intelligence chief, Mr Al Kadhimi has already taken steps to build an anti-ISIS coalition. He has also shown a willingness to stand up to pro-Iranian forces both on the floor of Parliament as well as in the streets. His visit last month to the Iraq-Iran border town of Mandali, which he called “a hotbed for corrupt people”, was the clearest signal to Tehran yet that its threat to Iraqi sovereignty – intrinsically linked to the corruption of Baghdad's political class – will not be tolerated.
Iraqi extremism expert Husham Al Hashimi was shot dead outside his home in Baghdad on Monday night. AFP
Mr Al Kadhimi also recognises the urgency behind the months-long protests that erupted across the country in October which – despite ebbs and flows – have shown few signs of abating. Demonstrators have risked life, limb and the coronavirus pandemic to demand jobs, better living standards and greater transparency and accountability from government. While the Prime Minister’s decision to advance the elections by almost a full year could be seen as a bold move, it is worth remembering that one of his pledges when he took office was to guide the country towards early polls that would hopefully usher in new, fresh faces. Mr Al Kadhimi has even made a call to young Iraqis to stand in the upcoming elections. Until now, independents have had little chance of success in elections dominated by political blocs with vast financial resources. Mr Al Kadhimi himself does not belong to a political party and had previously stated that he would not run in the elections. By calling early polls, however, he will have met a key demand of the protesters – provided Parliament ratifies his decision.
After decades of living through dictatorship, war, terrorism, sectarian strife, institutional corruption and constant threats to their country’s sovereignty, it is clear that the Iraqi public have had enough of the political corruption and dysfunction that plague Baghdad. And although these troubles long precede Mr Al Kadhimi’s time in office, he will know that he has now inherited them and will, therefore, be held accountable.
With little ability at the moment to assuage some of the protesters’ long-term concerns, laying the groundwork for a stronger mandate to do so next year is an important step. In the meantime, he must continue to focus his efforts on preventing any further erosion of the integrity of the state and the rule of law. Baghdad risks being tipped into a state of total lawlessness, evidenced recently by the recent killing of one of Mr Al Kadhimi’s associates, security expert Husham Al Hashimi. He must also ensure the safety and security of protesters, most of whom are ordinary Iraqis. A crucial part of this is seeing to it that justice is delivered against perpetrators of violence – including Iranian-backed militias and Mr Al Kadhimi’s own government security forces – against protesters over the past months. The forces undermining Iraqi stability, breeding fear and chipping away at national institutions, are as pervasive as they are insidious. But if the Prime Minister can preserve the state’s core institutions and make some key advancements along the way, then come election time he will have signalled to Iraqis that he is in control of his country’s destiny and can be relied on to do the top job. More importantly, he will have safeguarded the foundation needed for a stable and democratic Iraq over the long haul.

PM’s Call for Elections Sparks Unprecedented Political Race in Iraq
Baghdad – Asharq Al-Awsat/Sunday, 2 August, 2020
Hours after Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi called for general elections to be held on June 6, 2021, parliament Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi called for holding “earlier” elections. Both calls appear “unprecedented” constitutionally and politically.
Kadhimi made true on his electoral pledge to hold polls in compliance with the 2019 protest movement demands. He took everyone by surprise when he set the date of the elections, even though parliament has yet to complete the electoral law and other relevant regulations, such as determining electoral districts.
Moreover, Iraq is confronted with numerous challenges, such as the coronavirus outbreak and a stifling economic crisis sparked by the collapse in oil prices. While Kadhimi’s call is seen as justified by the protesters, several observers and experts suspect that some political powers will seek to abort the polls, despite their declared statements of support. The PM has effectively thrown the ball in parliament’s court. With the elections set, the parliament is, according to the constitution, obligated to dissolve itself. Halbousi, by calling for “earlier” elections, has in turn thrown the court in everyone’s court, including the government, the premier and political blocs and their leaders. The speaker has called for holding an open emergency session for the legislature to set the procedures to hold the elections. “Successive government have not implemented their agendas, which has prompted the continuation of popular protests,” he remarked in declaring his call for “earlier” elections. “Everyone must assume their responsibilities before the people.” A member of Halbousi’s parliamentary bloc, MP Yehya Ghazi, stated that some arrangements needed to be complete before heading to polls. Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, he highlighted legal aspects of the preparations and the need to implement article 64 of the constitution that calls for dissolving the parliament, which is seen as a main precursor to staging the elections. The parliament must be dissolved two months before the elections and such a move requires an agreement among the political blocs, he explained. Former member of the Independent High Electoral Commission, Miqdad Sharifi said that it appears that Kadhimi and Halbousi are in a form of “competition” over the elections. He explained to Asharq Al-Awsat that the PM was being pressured by political forces to hold the polls, while the blocs that represent these forces at parliament are holding back from approving the electoral law. This consequently is an “embarrassment” to the premier, he added. Furthermore, Sharifi said it was not feasible to hold the elections in June 2021 given the stifling high temperatures in Iraq at the time which would discourage voters from heading out to polls stations. “It appears to me that setting such a date was mainly aimed at pressuring blocs to approve the electoral law and not at actually holding the polls,” he speculated.

UN Says Libya Crisis Could Develop to 'Regional War'
Tripoli - Asharq Al-Awsat/Sunday, 2 August, 2020
Acting Special Representative and Head of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) Stephanie Williams warned that the Libyan people are increasingly scared that their future is being taken out of their hands by external actors, and that the risk of a regional war is rising. During her visit to London, Williams stressed in a statement that Libyans are worn out and need peace. “The Libyan people are exhausted and scared in equal measure. They are tired of war and want peace, but they fear this is not in their hands now. They want a solution and a ceasefire. The alternative to a ceasefire and an inclusive political solution is essentially the destruction of their country." "This is as much a battle between external rivals, as civil war now, in which the Libyans are losing their sovereignty,” she added. Williams also noted that external agendas could lead to a regional conflict. “With so many external actors with their own agendas, the risk of miscalculation and a regional confrontation is high.”Earlier on Thursday, Williams called on Libyans to grasp the chance of Eid al-Adha to cease the fighting as she expressed hope that forgiveness and unity among Libyans will dominate.

Egypt Slams Attempts to Drive Wedge between it and Kuwait
Cairo – Asharq Al-Awsat/Sunday, 2 August, 2020
Egypt slammed on Saturday attempts to drive a wedge between it and Kuwait, accusing some “spiteful” sides of stoking recent tensions. The Egyptian Foreign Ministry underlined the “strength of the fraternal relations between Egypt and Kuwait,” highlighting the “common struggles that saw both sides shed blood for each other.” This was an apparent reference to the October 1973 war and the 1991 Liberation of Kuwait. It added that both Cairo and Kuwait are keen on developing their relations in a manner that achieves the interests of their people, but at the same time, it “rejected and condemned recent attempts on social media to drive a wedge between the two peoples.” It slammed social media users for their attacks against religious figures and the leaderships of both countries, accusing “spiteful” sides of seeking to undermine the good relations between the two countries. The Foreign Ministry issued its statement a day after the Kuwaiti embassy in Cairo denounced social media posts that called for burning the Kuwaiti flag. “Such acts gravely harm Kuwait and are rejected by it,” it said, warning that such a development may “negatively impact fraternal ties between the two countries.”The mission added that such a “heinous act” was widely condemned among official and public circles in Kuwait and that it has carried out contacts with Egyptian officials to express its disappointment and condemnation. A video posted on YouTube and circulated on social media showed an individual offering pedestrians 500 dollars in return for their burning of a Kuwaiti flag. Everyone refused and instead expressed their respect for the relations with the Gulf country. The Kuwaiti embassy called on Egyptian authorities to take the necessary measures to deter such rejected practices and hold everyone responsible for the video to account. It urged them to put an end to practices that harm relations between the brotherly countries. Relations between Cairo and Kuwait have been strained in recent months. In July, Kuwaiti authorities arrested a citizen for slapping an Egyptian worker, which had sparked uproar on social media in Egypt.
In March, campaigns against Egyptian workers in Kuwait flooded social media over the excuse that they may have been infected by the novel coronavirus.

Syrian Security Forces Arrest 12 Army Officers over Makhlouf Ties
London - Asharq Al-Awsat/Sunday, 2 August, 2020
Syrian security services have arrested 12 officers and regime forces accused of having ties to business tycoon Rami Makhlouf, Syrian President Bashar Assad’s cousin. This took place while another eight that have been arrested under the same charges were released. “The large-scale campaign by the regime’s intelligence service is still underway, since it has been launched with the purpose of arresting several regime officers and soldiers, as well as employees working for Rami Makhlouf,” the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said in one of its reports. According to Observatory statistics, regime security services have arrested at least 51 regime officers and soldiers since the start of the campaign in mid-April. They were arrested for “dealing with foreign bodies and embezzling state funds”.Reliable sources have informed the Observatory that regime intelligence arrested nine ex-fighters of the “Al-Bostan Association”. This brings to 85 the number of managers, employees and ex-fighters arrested for their connection to Makhlouf’s businesses. They were arrested in Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, Latakia and Tartus. Earlier this week, Makhlouf revealed that he had set up a web of offshore front companies to help Assad evade Western sanctions. In a social media post blasting the government for investigating his business empire, he said authorities are expelling all investors save for warlords who have made their fortune exploiting the nine-year war in Syria. One of Syria's richest and most powerful businessmen, Makhlouf said security forces were now targeting Cham Holding, the centerpiece of a vast business portfolio much of which has been seized by the cash-strapped government. The former Assad loyalist said security forces were pursuing contracts signed by the company on suspicion he had embezzled funds abroad.
"They fabricated our embezzlement of funds and transferring it to our accounts abroad ... Stop these unjust claims and read well the contracts," Makhlouf said in a Facebook post. "These companies' role and aim is to circumvent [Western] sanctions on Cham Holding."Makhlouf, who has helped bankroll the ruling family and its supporters, brought in 70 investors nearly 15 years ago to set up Cham Holding. It is the largest Syrian company by capital and has a monopoly on key property developments.

Canada/Statement by Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth on Romani Genocide Remembrance Day
August 2, 2020 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Honourable Bardish Chagger, Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth, today issued the following statement:
“Today, we pay tribute to the more than 500,000 Romani who were murdered and persecuted during the Holocaust by the Nazis and their collaborators.
“Recognizing and commemorating the Romani genocide—also known as the Porajmos and Samudaripen—reminds us of the horrific consequences when we let intolerance and bigotry take root. We must not forget the atrocities faced by the Romani people and the harrowing stories of victims and survivors.
“Still today, Romani populations around the world continue to be subjected to racism, prejudice, violence and persecution, especially Romani women, who endure significant discrimination and social exclusion.
“As a member of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance [IHRA], Canada continues to work with others to promote greater awareness of the Romani genocide, including through the IHRA’s Committee on the Genocide of the Roma.
“During these unprecedented times, we must recall that minorities around the world continue to be marginalized. We must continue to condemn all forms of discrimination, and we must never relent in our push for a more equal and more inclusive world.”

Afghan Ceasefire Holds as Hundreds of Taliban Prisoners Freed
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/August 02/2020
A rare ceasefire between the Taliban and Afghan government appeared to hold for the third and final day on Sunday, with hundreds of militant prisoners released in a bid to bring peace talks closer. Calm prevailed across much of Afghanistan, with officials not reporting any major clashes between the two foes since the truce began on Friday to mark the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. President Ashraf Ghani and the Taliban have both indicated that long-delayed negotiations could begin straight after Eid. "This Eid feels different, parks are full with people... you almost forget that there has been a war in this country for 40 years," said Shahpoor Shadab, a resident from the eastern city of Jalalabad. In restive Zabul province, several residents recited poems calling for the ceasefire -- only the third official halt in fighting in nearly two decades of conflict -- to be made permanent. "Peace is everybody's need and aspiration," said Sardar Wali, who took part in the poetry session. "This is a great opportunity to extend the ceasefire today and start intra-Afghan talks tomorrow."Under a deal signed by the Taliban and the U.S. in February, the "intra-Afghan" talks were slated to start in March, but were delayed amid political infighting in Kabul and as a contentious prisoner swap dragged on. The deal stipulated that Kabul would free around 5,000 Taliban prisoners in return for 1,000 Afghan security personnel held captive by the Taliban. The National Security Council said Sunday that a further 300 Taliban prisoners had been released since Friday, taking the total number of insurgents freed so far to just over 4,900. Authorities however have refused to free hundreds of inmates accused of serious crimes that the insurgents had requested for release. The Taliban said they have already fulfilled their side of the exchange. Deadly violence has rocked Afghanistan since the U.S.-Taliban deal was agreed, with more than 3,500 Afghan troops killed in attacks by the insurgents, according to Ghani.

Court Orders Netanyahu's Son to Stop 'Harassing' Protest Leaders
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/August 02/2020
A court ordered Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's son on Sunday to refrain from harassing several individuals helping lead protests against his father, after he tweeted their personal addresses. Yair Netanyahu, who has caused controversy for past social media posts, was also ordered to delete the tweet and to "refrain from harassing" the individuals concerned for six months, according to a ruling from Jerusalem Magistrates' Court judge Dorit Feinstein. Reacting to the ruling, Yair Netanyahu, 29, said Feinstein had "totally ignored" evidence presented by his defense, including of threats against him by protest leaders. A bombastic defender of his father, Yair Netanyahu caused controversy in 2018 when he was recorded seemingly drunk outside a strip club talking about a natural gas deal reached by the Israeli government. He has also previously posted on Facebook about alleged conspiracies against his family. The ruling came a day after what Israeli media described as the largest protest in a decade against Netanyahu's tenure, estimating the crowd at roughly 10,000 strong. Thousands of demonstrators, mainly in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, have in recent weeks rallied against the premier's handling of the coronavirus crisis. Some have called for his resignation. Speaking before a weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday, the right-wing prime minister lashed out the media, accusing it of "fueling" rather than covering "violent demonstrations."He said Israel's media was behaving in "North Korean terms" with a lack of balance and unwavering support for "left-wing demonstrators." Some of the protesters have voiced frustration over the government's pandemic response, while others have expressed broader objections to Netanyahu's stewardship, in particular noting corruption charges against the premier, which he denies. Israel won praise for its initial response to the COVID-19 outbreak, but the government has come under criticism amid a resurgence in cases after restrictions were lifted starting in late April. Netanyahu has acknowledged that the economy was re-opened too quickly.

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on August 02-03/2020

Iran has upper hand over Russia in Syria
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/August 02/2020
On the surface, the Islamic Republic and Russia have been on the same side since the conflict in Syria erupted in March 2011. Both countries have maintained the same arguments and narrative: That the Assad government is a representative of the Syrian people and that the government is fighting illegitimate terror and militant groups. In comparison to Russia’s involvement in Syria, Iran’s interventions from the outset of the conflict — in the form of military, financial, advisory and intelligence assistance — were much more noticeable. Since the uprising began in Syria, the Iranian regime has spent an estimated $30 billion, or between $3 and $4 billion a year, to keep Bashar Assad in power. Russia did not begin deploying its armed forces in Syria until 2015, by which time the oppositional and rebel groups had captured a significant part of Syria’s territory and the Assad regime appeared to be on the verge of collapse. Russia’s intervention was mainly in the form of airstrikes, although, from 2011 to 2015, Moscow did use its leverage as a member of the UN Security Council to veto any resolution that demanded Assad resign or that excluded the Syrian government from international settlement negotiations.
Strategically and geopolitically speaking, Syria is more critical for Tehran than Moscow. Russia’s strategic interests in the Mediterranean are intertwined with the political establishment in Damascus because the Syrian port of Tartus — its second largest — houses Russia’s only naval base in the region. In addition, Syria has been purchasing arms from Moscow for decades. Nevertheless, while the Syrian regime is secular and the Iranian one is theocratic, Damascus is Iran’s most important regional proxy and disorder in Syria would throw into disarray the key pieces on Iran’s strategic game board, namely Hezbollah and Hamas. Strategically and geopolitically speaking, Syria is more critical for Tehran than Moscow.
Although they have built a formidable partnership, Tehran and Moscow have also been competing with each other to exert more influence in Syria. Assad has shrewdly played his role in maintaining the support of both countries, but Iran now appears to have won the competition because it has taken a different approach. Moscow concentrated on a top-down approach, wherein it sought to strengthen the regime in return for strategic concessions while enabling Assad to keep buying arms from Russia. On the other hand, the ruling clerics of Iran shaped Syria through both a top-down and a bottom-up approach. The bottom-up approach constitutes infiltrating the Syrian social, political and economic systems and forming militia groups and non-state actors loyal to Tehran.
No matter who rules Syria, Iran will maintain its influence in the country in the long term. For example, Iran has already signed lucrative contracts to provide electricity, obtained a license to become a major mobile phone service operator — which will allow it to keep communications in Syria under surveillance — and has received thousands of hectares of land from the Syrian regime for farming or setting up oil and gas terminals. Tehran has also been buying up more Syrian real estate and land, giving it a considerable amount of power over its neighbor.
Iran has also reportedly been altering the demographics by repopulating certain areas with Shiite families who support Hezbollah and its other militia groups in an attempt to consolidate its influence in Syria for the long term, as well as to bolster Assad’s rule. The Islamic Azad University is opening new branches in Syria, while Tehran has been building Shiite mosques and investing in expanding Shiite shrines across the country.
Iran now seems to have won its competition with Russia when it comes to strengthening Syria’s air defense systems. Iran’s armed forces chief of staff Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri last month met Syrian Defense Minister Ali Ayoub and they reached a comprehensive agreement that emphasized “the necessity of the withdrawal of all foreign armed forces having entered Syria illegally.” Bagheri said: “We will strengthen Syria’s air defense systems in order to improve military cooperation between the two countries.”
The Iranian regime has also strengthened its coalition of Shiite forces and militias, some of which invaded Syria from Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Lebanon. Many of these Shiite militias have already become the bedrock of Syria’s sociopolitical and socioeconomic infrastructures. By having military bases and personnel in Syria, it is less costly for the Iranian regime to manufacture and export weapons to its proxies in Syria’s neighboring countries, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its special operations unit known as the Quds Force have also been building a permanent military base just south of Damascus and have significant control over some Syrian airports. The regime now enjoys a military presence close to the border of a major rival — Israel. This helps Tehran in its attempts to tip the long-term regional balance of power in its favor.
Overall, Russia and Iran’s involvements in Syria have evolved from a partnership to a competition for wielding more influence. As of now, the Iranian regime clearly enjoys the upper hand.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist. Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh

Iran regime avoids conflict as it attempts to wait out Trump
Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib/Arab News/August 02/2020
Hezbollah and Israel were last week involved in clashes in the south of Lebanon. Hezbollah had reportedly fired a missile at an Israeli tank in the Shebaa Farms area. Miraculously, the skirmishes were contained in a matter of hours. The confrontation was quickly contained as the Lebanese armed forces and UN Interim Force in Lebanon interfered. Each party claimed to have foiled their opponent’s plot. In contrast with its usual rhetoric, Hezbollah did not seem willing to get into any confrontation with Israel. Is this because Iran and its proxies are exhausted from Israeli attacks in Syria and US President Donald Trump’s maximum pressure policy? Or is that Iran is simply buying time and does not want to instigate any confrontation before November’s US election?
This face-off coincided with a written proposal to end the war in Yemen by former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in which he addressed Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Ahmadinejad suggested forming a committee of respected international personalities to hold negotiations between the different Yemeni factions. He added that he was launching this initiative as a “member of the humanitarian community” who is hurt by the news he gets about Yemen. The tone was conciliatory and different from the defiant attitude Iran has previously adopted when addressing the Gulf.
It is unlikely Ahmadinejad proposed this initiative without getting the green light from the higher authorities in Iran. Nevertheless, it is a way to reach out to Saudi Arabia without publicly facing rejection, in case Crown Prince Mohammed was not receptive. In that case, Iran can always say the initiative was an individual one presented by the former president, who is not a representative of the current Iranian government. Tehran could also use a rejection as a public relations tool against the Kingdom. At the same time, if the Saudis called Iran’s bluff and accepted the initiative, this would allow the Iranians to play for time while waiting for the US presidential election.
If Biden wins, Iran might be able to sustain its project in Syria and the Levant and benefit from the lifting of sanctions.
Iran is currently under immense pressure, starting with the bombings of its positions in Syria. Israel is also suspected of being behind last month’s bombing of a nuclear reactor in Iran. The US is also intensifying its maximum pressure campaign on Iran. However, its elections are only three months away and Joe Biden, who seems to have a good chance of winning the White House, has promised to go back to the nuclear deal, which would release Iran from sanctions. If Biden follows Barack Obama, he might give Iran concessions. The former president gave the Iranians concessions on Syria in order to avoid disrupting the flow of negotiations with Tehran. He also was lax on the issue of Hezbollah and backed down from the red line he drew for Bashar Assad after Iran threatened to withdraw from negotiations. Therefore, if Biden wins, Iran might be able to sustain its project in Syria and the Levant and benefit from the lifting of sanctions. The Iranians are carpet sellers, they are good negotiators. They know how to gain time and lay low in order to get the most out of a deal. One should analyze Ahmadinejad’s offer and the skirmishes in Southern Lebanon from this perspective. It is not to Iran’s advantage to start any confrontation now. A confrontation could have two effects: A clash with any of the US’ allies will probably alienate a Biden administration from relaunching the nuclear agreement or going back to the deal, as requested by Iran. The other issue is that a war, especially if the US is involved, might have the effect of rallying Americans around the flag, which could bump up Trump’s approval rating. Trump promised to end the US’ endless wars and one main reason for him avoiding hitting mainland Iran after the Iranians shot down a drone was that he did not want to undertake an action that would damage his popularity with his base. However, a war might create a sense of emergency and threat among the American public.
The Saudis, on the other hand, have little trust in the Iranians. At the inception of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini advocated the export of the revolution, which is a direct threat to Arab Gulf states and their systems. It is unlikely that Saudi Arabia will rush to embrace Iran’s proposal as a goodwill gesture. Nevertheless, the conciliatory tone presented in the initiative is a way to tell the Saudis “let us keep calm for a while.” Iran has definitely been weakened by the fight and the sanctions. In key territories in the Levant, its proxies like Hezbollah and Iraqi groups are on shaky ground. One reason why Hezbollah avoided a confrontation with Israel in Southern Lebanon is because it knows it doesn’t want to get involved in a situation it won’t be able to handle. Iran knows its limitations and is trying to operate within them. The sanctions Trump imposed when he withdrew from the nuclear deal weakened the regime, but not to the point of it having to go down on its knees and accept the conditions he put forward to lift the sanctions. However, as the prospects of a Biden presidency grow stronger by the day, the Iranians are trying to buy time and lay low while accommodating foes and waiting for the big day — Nov. 3.
*Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib is a specialist in US-Arab relations with a focus on lobbying. She holds a PhD in politics from the University of Exeter and is an affiliated scholar with the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut.

‘New’ Turkey must resolve standoff with Greece
Yasar Yakis/Arab News/August 02/2020
A new row between Turkey and Greece broke out last week over exploration rights in the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkey issued a NAVTEX (navigational telex) — a maritime communications system that allows ships to inform other vessels about their presence in an area. Turkey issued it because one of its seismic research ships, Oruc Reis, was planning to explore for oil and gas deposits in an area that it believes to be part of its own maritime jurisdiction area. Greece was alarmed by this initiative and issued a counter-NAVTEX asking mariners to ignore Turkey’s notification. It also informed the EU, US and especially Germany and France, asking them to prevent Turkey from carrying out such exploration. The US issued a statement saying: “We urge Turkish authorities to halt any plans for operations and to avoid steps that raise tensions in the region.”
French President Emmanuel Macron, who rarely misses an opportunity to prevent any Turkish initiative in the Mediterranean, immediately denounced Ankara’s plan, saying it was “not acceptable for the maritime space of an EU member state to be violated or threatened.” He called for sanctions if Turkey started to explore the zone. Turkey announced that the exploration was due to be carried out in its continental shelf and that Greece was basing its maximalist claim on the presence of a tiny island — Kastellorizo — located about 1 nautical mile from Turkey and more than 300 nautical miles from mainland Greece. The Turks insist the Greek claim contravenes international practice, as the International Court of Justice in 2009 handed down a verdict stating that Snake Island, which belongs to Ukraine but is close to Romania, could not have any effect on the demarcation of maritime boundaries.
Amid fears of an imminent full-fledged confrontation between these two NATO allies, German Chancellor Angela Merkel had a telephone conversation with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the crisis was defused.
An exchange of polite words hardly dissimulates the deep-rooted differences between Turkey and Greece.
Presidential spokesman Ibrahim Kalin said: “Greece over-reacted to our NAVTEX as if Turkey was going to occupy Kastellorizo. The planned exploration stood about 180 kilometers away from this tiny island. Nevertheless, our president decided to postpone the exploration for one month and see what happens after.”It is unclear whether Greece’s reaction was an exaggeration or if it misread Turkey’s move, but the outcome was that Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias last week said: “We are ready for dialogue with Turkey without pressure or threat. Our only problem with Turkey is the delimitation of the continental shelf and maritime jurisdiction area.”
In turn, Kalin said: “Greece is an important neighbor for Turkey. In line with the instructions of our president, we are ready to discuss all issues: The Aegean, continental shelf, islands, airspace, research and screening efforts, and Eastern Mediterranean, along with other bilateral matters with Greece without any precondition.”However, this exchange of polite words hardly dissimulates the deep-rooted differences between Turkey and Greece.
Dendias’ contention that Greece’s only problem with Turkey is the delimitation of the continental shelf and maritime jurisdiction area is an outright denial of a plethora of other thorny issues between the two countries. These include the sovereignty of islets, uninhabited islands, rocks and geographical formations that were not transferred to Greece by international agreement; Aegean islands that were transferred to Greece on condition of keeping them demilitarized; the distinction between the delimitation of airspace over the Aegean Sea and the notice to airmen line; and the absence of reciprocity between the rights that Turkish citizens of Greek origin enjoy in Turkey and the rights of the Turkish Muslim minority in Greece. The Turkish government is taking pride in its recent move to convert the Hagia Sophia back into a mosque and claims there is now a new Turkey that efficiently defends its legitimate rights. Signing an agreement with the UN-backed Government of National Accord in Libya and the ensuing opportunity to carry out seismic exploration in offshore areas far from the country’s immediate borders has been cited as further proof of such a new and powerful Turkey.
If a concrete result could be obtained from the present standoff with Greece, the Turkish government will have every right to be proud of itself. If not, it will not be easy to sell this failure to the electorate.
*Yasar Yakis is a former foreign minister of Turkey and founding member of the ruling AK Party. Twitter: @yakis_yasar

Turkey's Brain Drain: Why Youths See No Future There
Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute/August 02/2020
SODEV, another pollster, found that 60.5% of youths supporting Erdoğan said they would prefer to live in Christian Switzerland with half the salary they would have earned in Muslim Saudi Arabia.
"These kind of social engineering efforts targeting the younger mind almost always end up with opposite results, primarily because the new generation do not like to be told what's good and what's bad for them. Freedoms for most youth are more important than prayers. This is what conservative politicians often miss." — Turkish university professor who asked not to be named.
In just the first 65 days of the COVID-19 pandemic, 510 Turks were arrested for "spreading baseless and provocative messages in social media." Before that, by the end of 2019, Turkey had banned access to 408,494 web sites, 7,000 Twitter accounts, 40,000 tweets, 10,000 YouTube videos and 6,200 Facebook accounts.
Erdoğan might sit down and ask himself: Why do the youths whom he wanted to make "devout" want to flee their Muslim country and live in "infidel" lands?
Turkey's Islamist president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, once declared his political mission as "raising devout (Muslim) generations." Recent research has shown that Turkish youths have defied Erdoğan's most ambitious social engineering project. It is not surprising that young Turks in the 21st century do not want to be strangled by the unpredictable dictates of an Islamist regime. (Photo by Adem Altan/AFP via Getty Images)
Turkey's Islamist president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, once declared his political mission as "raising devout (Muslim) generations." Research in recent years has shown that Turkish youths have defied Erdoğan's most ambitious social engineering project.
Konda, a pollster, found in 2019 that Turkish youths were less likely than the wider population to identify themselves as "religious conservative." They were less likely to fast, pray regularly or (for females) cover their hair. Ipsos, an international pollster, found that only 12% of Turks trust Islamic clerics. SODEV, another pollster, found that 60.5% of youths that support Erdoğan said they would prefer to live in Christian Switzerland with half the salary they would earn in Muslim Saudi Arabia. SODEV's study also found that 70.3% of respondents think a talented youth would never be able to get ahead in professional life without political/bureaucratic "connections," i.e., without a hidden touch of nepotism. And only 30% of them think one could freely express his opinion on social media.
There is new data suggesting that younger Turks have a Western mindset instead of "religiously conservative/devout" one, as Erdoğan hoped they would. According to one study, 72% of Turks aged 20 or younger support full membership in the European Union for Turkey. This is in sharp contrast with the official teachings of a country where the top Islamic cleric said that "children who do not read the Quran are with Satan and Satanic people."
"These kind of social engineering efforts targeting the younger mind almost always end up with opposite results, primarily because the new generation do not like to be told what's good and what's bad for them," said one Turkish university professor who asked not to be named. "Freedoms for most youth are more important than prayers. This is what conservative politicians often miss."
In 2014, a 16-year-old student was arrested for insulting Erdoğan. In 2015, a 15-year-old was detained for insulting Erdoğan. And in 2016, a young university student was arrested on charges of insulting Erdoğan and making propaganda for a terror organization -- all that for a social media message. She was arrested while in class.
It is not surprising, then, that the young Turks want to build a life for themselves not in their own country, or an Islamic country, but in countries where civil liberties are sacrosanct. In 2019, a total of 330,289 people left Turkey to live abroad. Official data shows 40.8% of those who emigrated from Turkey were between the ages of 20-34.
Seren Selvin Korkmaz, executive director of the Istanbul Political Research Institute, explained the youth brain drain to Arab News:
"Migration becomes an exit strategy from everyday struggles. In the country, youth unemployment is more than 25 percent. Many of these young people are still financially dependent on their families or are working for low wages ... Under these conditions, she explained, young people do not envision a future for themselves ... This creates a 'violence of uncertainty' for them. In addition to unemployment, authoritarian tendencies in the country — including social media bans and threats to freedom of thought — impact the youth and make them worry for their future."
In just the first 65 days of the COVID-19 pandemic, 510 Turks were arrested for "spreading baseless and provocative messages in social media." Before that, by the end of 2019, Turkey's censors had blocked access to 408,494 web sites, 7,000 Twitter accounts, 40,000 tweets, 10,000 YouTube videos and 6,200 Facebook accounts.
"This is not the country I dreamed of," said A.B., a 19-year-old student, asking for strict anonymity for fear of prosecution. "I don't feel I belong to my own country anymore. I see no sign of a free life. I will go to Europe for further studies and probably visit Turkey just for holidays."
"This is not the country I dreamed of," is perhaps the best portrayal of how a young Turk feels about the increasing democratic deficit in his homeland. There are signs that that democratic deficit will widen.
Erdoğan's ruling AKP party has submitted draft legislation to parliament that would enable the government to tighten its control on social media, prompting fears of a new era of even greater censorship. The draft bill would force social media companies with more than a million daily users in Turkey — such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube — to establish a formal presence or assign a representative in Turkey who would be accountable to Turkish authorities legally and for tax purposes. If those companies do not comply they may be fined up to millions of dollars. The law also grants authority to the Turkish government to reduce their bandwidth by 50% to 95%.
The draft bill came amid reports that Netflix has cancelled a Turkish drama on the eve of filming: its writer said that the government had blocked it because it included a gay character. Screenwriter Ece Yörenç said Netflix scrapped "If Only" after the government refused to grant it a license.
It is not surprising that young Turks in the 21st century do not want to be strangled by the unpredictable dictates of an Islamist regime. Erdoğan might sit down and ask himself: Why do the youths whom he wanted to make "devout" want to flee their Muslim country and live in "infidel" lands?
*Burak Bekdil, one of Turkey's leading journalists, was recently fired from the country's most noted newspaper after 29 years, for writing in Gatestone what is taking place in Turkey. He is a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
© 2020 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Israel’s unique methods against the Iranian threat
Benjamin Weil/Jerusalem Post/July 02/2020
The brilliance in Israel’s alleged reactions lay in how they have managed to face Iran on a number of fronts: in Iran, in Syria and in Lebanon.
For the better part of the 21st century, Israel has been trying to circumvent Iran’s regional ambitions in the Middle East to become a nuclear state and spread its military power to neighboring countries. By exploiting the disarray in Syria, Iran routinely sends convoys through Syria to arm its Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah, with precision-guided munitions (PGMs) and other equipment.
Israel has reacted by launching a political and military campaign. Usually it was the political effort that was very public while the intelligence and military activities occurred behind the scenes, however, in the past week or so we have seen a number of mysterious explosions in Iran. It is hard not to see Israeli (and American) fingerprints all over these incidents.
Israel’s intelligence is known to execute audacious missions around the world using creative methods. Look no further than breaking into and smuggling out the secret Iranian nuclear archives in 2019.
The brilliance in Israel’s alleged reactions lay in how they have managed to face Iran on a number of fronts: in Iran, in Syria and in Lebanon. Each one of them is a unique peril in and of itself, but together they comprise the big Iranian threat. Instead of applying a blanket rule for combating Iran, the Israelis broke down its military campaign into smaller components and used its flexibility and creativity to address each one in a unique form.
Israel’s target in Syria is not a Syrian sovereign one, rather it is an independent Iranian actor functioning in Syria. Israel has conducted numerous airstrikes to avoid shipments of Iranian strategic weapons from entering Lebanon. Many times, the Israel Air Force must hit a moving target while avoiding any collateral damage by inadvertently hitting Syrian state assets.
In Iran, though, Israel’s tactics are different. When facing the nuclear program in Iran, Israel is facing a sovereign country. In Iran, it is Iranian assets that are on the Israeli radar.
At first it was Iranian scientists who were disappearing mysteriously. Now Israel has shifted to exploding non-human assets: nuclear-related sites. In this case, Israel is not exercising any military option or airstrike, it is the clandestine work of the Mossad planting explosives in various locations.
Lastly, and perhaps the most unique challenge, is Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah is neither a sovereign nor independent actor. It is a semi-governmental organization.
This is why Hezbollah can be a complex and tricky actor to handle. Recognizing this, Israel has not been exhausting its military and intelligence resources against Hezbollah, using a combination of political and financial pressures.
Israel has been applying pressure on many countries to recognize Hezbollah’s political and military arms as a single terrorist organization. By doing so, it would allow financial sanctions on Hezbollah.
At the same time, there is an effort to expose Hezbollah’s revenue stream and dry up those sources of money and disrupt the flow of cash. This requires close cooperation and coordination between legal and financial agencies in a number of countries.
Whether through military, intelligence, political or financial pressure, the extent of the Iranian threat is so great, any options are welcomed. Any opportunity a country has to weaken Iran is an opportunity worth exploring.
The complexity of Iran’s network runs through sovereign, independent and semi-governmental actors. Israel has identified and deployed different methods to tackle the various threats in the Iranian value chain. It is now our time to join Israel in recognizing the full extent of Iran’s threat to the Middle East and the world.
The world must unite in extending the United Nations arms embargo on Iran later this year and not allow Russia or China to exercise their veto powers in the UN Security Council.
*The writer is the director of the Project for Israel’s National Security at the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET), an unabashedly pro-Israel and pro-American think tank and policy institute in Washington, DC. He formerly served as the international adviser to Yuval Steinitz, a member of Israel’s security cabinet and its energy minister.

Thirty years on from the invasion of Kuwait, what have we learnt?
David Mack/The National/August 02/2020
The Gulf country's liberation and its aftermath were the halcyon days of positive co-operation between the GCC and the US
When Saddam Hussein gave the order for Iraqi forces to enter Kuwait on August 1, 1990, he set off a chain of diplomatic, military and economic responses. The result was a decade-long peak of US presence and influence in the Middle East. In most respects, it was a period of positive accomplishments for the US and its regional partners.
Hussein thought he could get away with grabbing Kuwait and intimidating other governments on the Arabian Peninsula. This would have secured his ambitions for regional leadership and an influential role on the world stage.
His miscalculations cost the Iraqi people dearly. Bad judgment was only part of the problem. A dictator with minimal exposure to world politics, he was misled by circumstances that seemed to invite him to take a gamble with great potential payoff.
Following its eight-year war with Iran, Iraq calculated that a much smaller and weaker adversary would be an easy target. His hubris was bolstered by a common belief that Saudi Arabia would not invite western forces onto its territory. Hussein expected that divisions among the GCC states could paralyse their response.
The summer of 1990 was a time when the US’s willingness to play an assertive strategic role in the Middle East was in great doubt. Memories of Vietnam and Lebanon, where American forces had suffered defeats and setbacks, were fresh, and popular opinion in the US was hostile to military ventures abroad.
Washington had taken on significant strategic responsibilities in the Gulf during the final years of the Iraq-Iran War by protecting commercial shipping from Iranian attacks. Operation Earnest Will, as the effort was known, was an assertion of US power that involved strategic interaction with members of the GCC.
Earnest Will was unprecedented, but it did not commit the US or any of the GCC countries to future military co-operation. Indeed, the US military presence in the region declined considerably in the following years, and by 1990, there were only a few small naval warships in the Gulf. US President George H W Bush was widely if incorrectly viewed as indecisive, and his freedom of action to commit US military force was constrained by political opponents in Congress.
Starting in May 1990, I was a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State with responsibility for Washington’s relations with all of the Arab states east of Egypt, plus Iran. Having served in Iraq for two assignments, I understood Iraqi capabilities and resentments of the relative per-capita wealth of its Arab neighbours. I knew Saddam Hussein was ruthless and ambitious.
Having served in Iraq for two assignments, I knew Saddam Hussein was ruthless and ambitious
After three years as the US Ambassador to the UAE from 1986-1989, I was also aware of the military vulnerabilities of the GCC states at the time. Kuwait had made it clear that it preferred to minimise military co-operation with Washington, to the point that it did not welcome port calls by US Navy ships. Other Arab governments told us that the only way to deal with Saddam Hussein was through Arab diplomacy, and many had rebuffed our suggestions for consultations regarding a potential threat from Iraq.
When Iraq made public threats against Kuwait and the Emirates on July 17, 1990, the US privately warned top Iraqi officials of the consequences. At the same time, we publicly declared that we would protect our vital interests in the Gulf and were prepared to do so in co-operation with our “longstanding friends” – referring particularly to the GCC.
With one exception, the governments of the Middle East did not respond to our offer. The exception was the UAE. We began a joint military exercise with Emirati forces to protect UAE offshore oil facilities. This got Hussein’s attention, but it was far afield from Iraq. Meanwhile, neighbouring countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait were avoiding the appearance of closeness with the US, and so Hussein figured we were bluffing.
In the end, Hussein’s calculations proved false. President Bush declared that the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait would not stand, and the US gained strong support for economic sanctions from the UN and countries around the world. The governments of the GCC all engaged in military co-operation with the US, along with our other strategic partners. After initial reservations, the US Congress supported the deployment of half a million US military personnel to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait.
Drawing upon the success of Operation Desert Storm, as the US intervention was known, Mr Bush then turned his attention to economic co-operation with GCC states and to the Arab-Israeli dispute. The Madrid Conference launched a promising decade of peace-making. US prestige in the region was never so high.
What are the lessons?
Deterrence by GCC states against an external threat is strongest when they work together and with the US. Mutual interests will draw the US closer to countries that have different cultures and different politics. Co-operation will require persistent attention to those relations and respect for the views of those governments. The outcome of the mostly unilateral US invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the collapse of the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians show that the influence of Washington on events in the region fails without partnerships and careful diplomacy. Reckless leadership, whether by a regional actor or by US decision makers, can exact a heavy price.
*David Mack is a Nonresident Senior Fellow at Atlantic Council, a former US Ambassador to UAE and a senior diplomat in Iraq, Jordan, Jerusalem, Libya, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Tunisia

Sudan Optimistic US Will Soon Remove it from Terror List
Mohammed Amin Yassine/ Asharq Al-Awsat/Sunday, 2 August, 2020
Sudan’s government has welcomed statements by the United States administration on removing it from its terror list after it was designated a state sponsor of terrorism in 1993 under former US President Bill Clinton, cutting it off from financial markets and strangling its economy. In a press statement on Saturday, Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok stressed the transitional government’s adherence to continue working with US President Donald Trump’s administration to remove Sudan from the list and allows it to become part of the international community. He praised the role played by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Senator Chris Coons, a Democrat known for his interest in Africa who urged US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to “do everything" he can to support Hamdok and seize the chance “to build a new democratic partner in the region.”
On Thursday, Pompeo told the Committee he wants to delist Sudan, adding that legislation on a settlement should come before Congress “in the very, very near term.”
“There’s a chance not only for a democracy to begin to be built out, but perhaps regional opportunities that could flow from that as well,” he stressed.
On June 26, Pompeo held a phone call with Hamdok, during which they discussed means to strengthen the US-Sudan bilateral relationship and reviewed progress towards addressing the policy and statutory requirements for consideration of the rescission of Sudan’s State Sponsor of Terrorism designation.
Sudan’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Haydar Badawi Sadig, for his part, said Pompeo’s remarks indicate that his country will soon be delisted.
He told Asharq Al-Awsat that his country welcomes the US willingness to end this issue and hopes to accelerate its implementation. Sadig further pointed out that Pompeo and Coons’s keenness to remove Sudan from the terror list indicates both US executive and legislative bodies’ attempts to support the democratic transformation in Sudan. “This would constitute an opportunity and a different model in Sudan’s troubled environment and is compatible with Sudan’s aspiration to be delisted,” he noted.

Germany's Bund May Be About to Lose Its Crown
Marcus Ashworth/Bloomberg/August, 02/2020
There’s a new kid in debt town, with the closest thing so far to a true “euro bond” about to be sold in prodigious size to pay for the European Union’s new 750 billion-euro ($869 billion) pandemic fund. It will represent a challenge to Europe’s undisputed credit-market champion: the German bund. Germany’s government bonds have long been the continent’s benchmark for quality. They’re the equivalent to US Treasuries as offering the safest collateral — and are regarded essentially as risk free. But the new EU bonds, to be sold and managed by the European Commission, will provide an alternative, and one that investors will welcome. Bunds are very expensive, with yields on 10-year notes as low as the European Central Bank’s -0.5% overnight deposit rate. The Commission will doubtless offer better returns on its new issues, and the same feeling of security. German debt is priced at a premium to other euro-zone bonds, but this will probably narrow now that something else is available. While Berlin won’t be pleading poverty any time soon, it still has to pay for one of world’s biggest fiscal responses to the coronavirus crisis — estimated at 1.5 trillion euros so far. Yet Germany is the country that’s probably furthest behind in its debt issuance for the year, according to NatWest Markets strategist Giles Gale, who sees 10-year bund yields climbing into positive territory in 2020. The higher borrowing costs implied by that would have an impact.
The EU pandemic bond, meanwhile, is already winning friends before its first issue. S&P Global Ratings has described it as “a breakthrough for EU sovereign creditworthiness.” This suggests that the Commission may well retain its current AA debt rating from S&P. Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch Ratings award it AAA.
So the new bonds may gradually take over from the bund as the euro-debt benchmark. Amundi SA, the largest European investment manager, says they “should encourage foreign investors to consider the EU as a whole and not as the puzzle of single issuers.”The pandemic debt will have decent liquidity too. Citi strategist Michael Spies reckons the EU could issue nearly 200 billion euros next year. This is less than Italian, French and German plans but it’s of a serious scale. Before long there may even be derivatives related to it.
And investors will be reassured that the ECB will be able to buy these bonds as part of its quantitative-easing programs. Up to 50% of each issue can be purchased by the central bank, a higher ratio than for individual nations’ debt.
At the same time, Germany can no longer rely on its famed parsimony for propping up the value of bunds. It will raise a record 220 billion euros in new money this year, reversing years of reducing its overall debt, and it will lift its ratio of debt to gross domestic product to 77% in the process. It was less than 60% previously. The “black zero” rule — where Germany’s budget had to balance fiscal spending and tax receipts — is fast disappearing. That bund premium may no longer be so handsome if the EU upstart grabs market share.

Focusing on Facebook and Google’s Monopoly Misses the Point
Noah Smith/Bloomberg/August, 02/2020
The heads of four of the US’s biggest technology companies — Alphabet Inc., Apple Inc. Facebook Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. — appeared before Congress earlier this week to respond to criticism that they have too much market power. The hearing showed that lawmakers are beginning to understand what is and isn’t important when it comes to regulating these large businesses. And it also showed an increased focus on the most important area of antitrust policy — mergers and acquisitions and whether regulators have exercised enough vigilance.
In recent years, big tech has become ever more important to the US economy and US financial markets. The five biggest tech companies (the four that testified, plus Microsoft Corp.) now represent more than one-fifth of the market capitalization of the S&P 500. Their value has only risen in the coronavirus pandemic.
When a few companies get this big and dominant, it makes sense to think about how they might be using their size to unfairly control markets.
One typical defense against such allegations is that tech companies are not monopolies. Whether this is true depends on how markets are defined -- for example, Google is overwhelmingly dominant among search engines, but has only about a third of digital ad revenues. Facebook Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg argued that his company faces intense competition in many markets, especially from the other top tech companies.
But focusing on whether a company is a monopoly misses the point. Oligopolies, where a few big companies dominate the market, also tend to wield some degree of market power. In theory, that can allow powerful players to jack up consumer prices, underpay workers and squeeze suppliers.
In the case of Big Tech, consumer prices are generally not the issue. Services provided to consumers by Google and Facebook tend to be free, while Apple’s fat margins stem mostly from consumer willingness to pay a lot for the brand value of an iPhone. Wages are a slightly bigger concern. Big tech companies have already been caught and fined for colluding to hold down engineers’ salaries, and there has been much attention paid to Amazon’s warehouse low pay and unpleasant working conditions. But Big Tech ultimately doesn’t employ very many people, and its proven anticompetitive activities have largely involved highly paid workers. So while Big Tech wage suppression deserves to be monitored closely, it’s probably not yet a major threat to US labor markets.
A bigger worry concerns suppliers. Platform companies depend on a network of third-party companies -- merchants who sell on Amazon, websites that run Google ads, app developers who sell on Apple’s App Store and so on. The platforms’ size potentially allows them to extract a lot of value from these smaller companies, demanding a larger share of their revenue or even creating and then favoring their own competing offerings.
In the long run, as tech publisher Tim O’Reilly has argued, big tech companies would probably ossify and ultimately lose out from cannibalizing their own third-party ecosystems, but there’s always the danger that short-term profits will prove too tantalizing. Thus, it’s a good thing that Congress focused some of its attention on the need to maintain fair relationships between platforms and suppliers. Ultimately, this issue will probably have to be resolved with regulation because breaking up platform companies would eventually cause new platforms to emerge and become dominant.
Another concern is the prices that online service companies charge advertisers. By some estimates, more than half of digital ad spending now goes to either Google or Facebook, with the fastest-rising competitor being Amazon. Advertisers are the true paying customers for free online services for consumers.
This is a reason that legislators are worried about platforms buying out the competition. Facebook CEO Zuckerberg admitted in the hearing that he purchased social-networking company Instagram in 2012 as a way to head off a potential competitor. There have been allegations that the company has attempted or threatened to do the same with other young social networks, telling them that if they didn’t accept an offer, Facebook would launch a competing product and drive them out of existence.
Ultimately, that could raise prices for advertisers, if Facebook properties are the only way for them to reach social-media users. Those sorts of buyouts and buyout threats could also have a chilling effect on startup formation and economic dynamism because even the threat of competition from a dominant company can deter new entrants. Columbia Law School professor Timothy Wu has argued that such buyouts are illegal under current antitrust law.
So if there’s any case for antitrust action against Big Tech right now, it probably has to do with the acquisition of upstart competitors. Unlike most of the issues surrounding Big Tech, which are complicated and confusing because of the way online network effects change the economics of size, concern over anticompetitive mergers that jack up prices is very old and very common.
In any case, it’s a very good thing that Congress is beginning to pay more attention to the problems of industrial concentration and oligopoly in the US economy. Big Tech is obviously the most well-known and popular case, but with concentration rising across most industries, these hearings will hopefully be a jumping-off point for a broader re-examination of the value of mega-mergers and huge, dominant companies.

The War on Masks Is Another Lost Cause
Francis Wilkinson/Bloomberg/August, 02/2020
When a man in a MAGA hat was asked to put on a mask last week at a suburban Kansas City restaurant, as state law requires, he said he had an exemption. Then he lifted his shirt to reveal a holstered firearm. A customer who refused to wear a mask at a convenience store in Michigan this week stabbed a fellow customer and was later shot dead by police.
Despite the recommendations of health officials, the requirements of an increasing number of retail stores and the force of laws — or perhaps because of them — many citizens are still resisting masks. Covid-19 has spurred a tangled knot of health-care, economic and political crises. For supporters of President Donald Trump, however, those crises have produced another: a brutal rejoinder to the magical thinking that is foundational to the MAGA creed.
It’s not just randos. Georgia Governor Brian Kemp this week instituted a death-defying ban on local ordinances requiring masks — even as Covid-19 cases soar in his state. Republican Senator Ted Cruz of Texas was photographed maskless on a flight. When Trump finally modeled a mask, he received the kind of praise typically associated with opening your mouth to allow the airplane spoon of applesauce inside.
The accretion of knowledge about the virus has been halting and muddled. By contrast, the anti-mask crowd has (so far) remained emphatic and absolute. In Orange County, California, the Republican-dominated school board voted to allow schools to reopen even as neighboring Los Angeles and San Diego announced that the resurgence of Covid-19 had rendered school openings unfeasible. The board also recommended that neither students nor teachers be required to wear masks or maintain social distance.
Obviously, fanatical resistance to masks amid a lethal pandemic has little to do with the efficacy or decorum of cloth coverings. The mask has become a focus of MAGA angst. As David Frum has noted, a mask “strings an accusation from ear to ear.” It’s a facial wall, and Mexico’s not paying for this one, either.
The deaths of 135,000-and-counting Americans have altered behavior and changed opinions, including among Republicans.
“If all of us would put on a face covering now for the next four weeks to six weeks, I think we could drive this epidemic to the ground,” Dr. Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said this week. Tate Reeves, the Republican governor of Mississippi, tweeted Monday: “Right now, despite mixed messages at the beginning, it seems like masks are the best bet. They’re a hell of a lot better than widespread shut downs. Please wear one!”
Yet the partisan gap on mask use is wide. According to Gallup, 27% of Republicans say they “never” wear a mask, as do 18% of independents. Among Democrats, it’s 1%. Yes, some of those Republicans live in rural areas where mask use is largely unnecessary. But even rural residents go to stores more often than never.
The mask may prove to be the dividing line between conservatives who share a common reality with the rest of the nation and those who insist on a separatist life of conspiracy mongering and political fantasy. The freedom to spread a lethal disease is shaping up to be a 21st century Lost Cause — a struggle shrouded in myth and lies that will leave behind a gruesome toll on the battlefield.

UNEP: What’s in a Name?
Najib Saab/Asharq Al Awsat/August 02/2020
Preventing the Next Pandemic is the title of a timely report about breaking the chain of diseases transmitted between animals and humans. It warns of further outbreaks unless governments take active measures to tackle the source of the problem – which can largely be traced back to unsustainable farming and food production practices. It was surprising that some media outlets attributed this significant report to the United Nations Environment Department, a non-existent entity. After further scrutiny, it turned out that the body behind it was the United Nations Environment Programme, commonly known as UNEP. So why was UNEP, the longstanding international agency with its autonomous governing assembly that had been leading global environmental action for almost a decade, dropped from news stories?
This is one of the repercussions of an arbitrary measure imposed by former UNEP Executive Director, Erik Solheim, during his short tenure between 2016 and 2018. Without going back to the UN secretariat or UNEP governing bodies, Solheim unilaterally mandated dropping the word “Programme” from the name, changing it to "UN Environment", and banning the established acronym UNEP, even in social media domains.
Solheim seemingly had good intentions, most notably to simplify things for ordinary people who often do not understand the meaning of vague sentences and acronyms that are common to international reports. He even confided to me, in a meeting upon his appointment, that when he started his political career in Norway, he used to ask his grandmother to read the drafts of his speeches and reports, in order to amend what she could not comprehend. I was excited about his approach, as I shared his view that what primarily hinders the messages of international organizations reaching decision-makers and the public alike is their ambiguity, which prevents turning them into public policies. Solheim envisioned transforming UNEP meetings from a "dialogue of the deaf" among experts living in a virtual world and officials looking for solutions, into a dialogue that uses comprehensible language, and that would lead to measurable results. Solheim also wished to deliver environmental issues directly to the public at large, so that people would be an essential part of the change.
However, the practice did not reflect these good intentions. Bringing the environmental message directly to the people did not necessitate traveling away from UNEP headquarters in Nairobi for 529 out of 668 days – the entire length of Solheim’s tenure. Although travel irregularities was the official reason given for Solheim's forced exit, the greatest damage he did was to single-handedly change the name and identity of this deep-rooted international agency. A well-established brand name, which was built over half a century, was systematically destroyed. Despite repeated warnings that the UN Environment was an expression devoid of meaning, especially when translated to languages such as Arabic, the change was enforced by an inner circle around the director. To make matters worse, millions of dollars were wasted on re-branding across the board, from letterheads and publications to social media, including domain names and e-mail addresses. People were unable to understand whether UN Environment stood for an initiative, a department, an office, a program, or an organization. This revealed a significant deficiency in governance within the United Nations, for how could the director of an agency that is part of the Secretariat in New York pass such a radical change without the approval of the Secretariat and UNEP’s governing bodies?
Upon Solheim's departure, UNEP started to restore its original name in full, including its acronym. But it was obvious that the damage would take long to repair, as reflected in various media outlets still portraying UNEP as a department within the UN Secretariat. Would anybody have dared to switch the "United Nations Development Programme" to "United Nations Development", "Food and Agriculture Organization" to "United Nations Food and Agriculture" or "United Nations Children's Fund" to "United Nations Children"?
International agencies legally fall under two types. The specialized agencies, which are 17 autonomous international organizations governed by their member states, coordinate their work with the United Nations through negotiated agreements. Among these are the World Health Organization (WHO), the International Labor Organization (ILO) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The international programs, of which there are 14 including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), are agencies with their own governing bodies made up of country representatives, but they are subject to the rules of the UN Secretariat and their heads are appointed by the UN Secretary-General, with subsequent approval by the UN General Assembly. If the removal of the word "programme" from UNEP’s name aimed to bypass the failure to formally transform the agency into an autonomous organization, as had been attempted several times over the years, it became evident that this had only backfired by diminishing its status as a great global agency to a mere department.
The role expected of UNEP is to lead international environmental action. It was transformed from a small secretariat that included a few dozen dedicated staff when it was founded back in 1972, into a big organization today with around 1,000 employees overseeing hundreds of programs and initiatives and coordinating the work of many international environmental treaties and agreements. With the adoption of Agenda 2030, UNEP’s main task became managing the implementation of the environmental content within the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.
Instead of wasting time and effort on name change, it would have been more beneficial to focus on achieving UNEP’s mandate and strengthening its position as a pillar of environmental policy within the United Nations system. One of its most important tasks is to pursue collaboration and partnership with various international agencies by developing specific environmental initiatives led by specialized bodies, to avoid duplication and overlap with the work of other organizations. For example, matters related to food safety and security would be handled by FAO, health by the WHO, and environmental education by UNESCO.
Another UNEP priority is to constantly review international environmental conventions and agreements, comparing the set goals to actual achievements, in order to close gaps and improve performance.
Besides enhancing the scientific content of the Global Environment Outlook (GEO) issued periodically by UNEP, the science-policy aspects should be strengthened, so the report can respond better to current challenges and serve as a useful tool for changing environmental policies at the national level, not only provide abstract information and intangible ideas.
Former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said that the true measure of an organization’s success should be what it achieves, not what it promises. This requires a periodic performance appraisal, undertaken by an independent and external specialized consultant. While international funds adopt this procedure by subjecting their work to periodic review by an external consultant, this has not happened so far at the United Nations Environment Programme.
Millions spent on changing UNEP name would have been better used to conduct a comprehensive review of the agency’s work and performance, by a qualified external consultancy. This might be the most urgent task for the new UNEP leadership.
*Najib Saab is Secretary General of the Arab Forum for Environment and Development- AFED and Editor-in-Chief of Environment & Development magazine.