LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
March 12/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.march12.20.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations For today
Where the corpse is, there the vultures will gather
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 17/20-37/:”Once Jesus was
asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming, and he answered, ‘The
kingdom of God is not coming with things that can be observed; nor will they
say, “Look, here it is!” or “There it is!” For, in fact, the kingdom of God is
among you.’Then he said to the disciples, ‘The days are coming when you will
long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. They
will say to you, “Look there!” or “Look here!” Do not go, do not set off in
pursuit. For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the
other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. But first he must endure much
suffering and be rejected by this generation. Just as it was in the days of
Noah, so too it will be in the days of the Son of Man. They were eating and
drinking, and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day Noah entered
the ark, and the flood came and destroyed all of them. Likewise, just as it was
in the days of Lot: they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting
and building, but on the day that Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and sulphur
from heaven and destroyed all of them it will be like that on the day that the
Son of Man is revealed. On that day, anyone on the housetop who has belongings
in the house must not come down to take them away; and likewise anyone in the
field must not turn back. Remember Lot’s wife. Those who try to make their life
secure will lose it, but those who lose their life will keep it. I tell you, on
that night there will be two in one bed; one will be taken and the other left.
There will be two women grinding meal together; one will be taken and the other
left.’Then they asked him, ‘Where, Lord?’ He said to them, ‘Where the corpse is,
there the vultures will gather.’”
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese
Related News & Editorials published on March 11-12/2020
MoPH announces first full recovery from novel coronavirus
MTV Lebanese anchor Nabila Awad announces state of emergency, criticizes
government for politicizing coronavirus
Lebanon Bans Flights from 4 Nations, Asks Citizens to Return from 7 Others
Lebanon impose strict measures in response to coronavirus outbreak/Chiri
Choukeir/Annahar/March 11/2020
Al-Maounat Hospital: Ten staff members, one patient tested positive for
coronavirus
Lebanon Restaurants Closed over Coronavirus Fears
Lebanon Records 2nd Coronavirus Death as 8 New Cases Confirmed
Panic in Jbeil over Coronavirus after 'Person Coming from U.S. Infects 15'
Hariri Urges Officials to ‘Close Doors in Face of Coronavirus'
Facts about Lebanon's 61 Coronavirus Cases
Geagea Urges Declaration of Health Emergency
Employees of Rafik Hariri Hospital Declare Strike
Lebanese man pleads guilty in US to buying drone parts for Hezbollah
Lebanon PM Informs Diplomats of Imminent Announcement of Rescue Plan
Demeaned and no dollars: Lebanese choked by bank
controls/Withdrawals curbed to as little as $100/week.
Lebanon’s Govt. to Strengthen Financial Situation, Adopt Reform Program
Tenenti: Nepalese peacekeeper killed in transport accident in Mays al Jabal
Information Minister meets Ambassadors of EU, Germany, Japan
Kattar, Japanese ambassador tackle overall situation
Crisis Of The Iranian Order/Tony Badran/ Hoover Institution/March 11/2020
Coronavirus up-date/Roger Bejjani/Face Book/March 11/2020
Aoun receives credentials of eight new ambassadors to Lebanon, meets Chinese
Ambassador
Diab: The government has not been late in taking any measure aimed at protecting
the Lebanese
Diab discusses with visitors endeavors to advance Lebanon
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on
March 11-12/2020
Coronavirus latest: WHO declares contagion a pandemic
WHO Labels Coronavirus a 'Pandemic' as Europe Scrambles to Contain It
U.S. Considering Ban on Travelers from Europe over Virus
WHO: Iran Doing Its Best on Virus despite Lack of Equipment
Qatar Coronavirus Cases Jump by 238 in One Day
Aramco to increase crude oil supply to 13 million barrels per day
US urges Tehran to release American prisoners amid virus crisis
Iraqi Army Says 10 Rockets Hit Base Housing U.S. Personnel
US Bringing Air Defense Systems Into Iraq to Protect its Troops
Washington in Talks with NATO to Provide Turkey Military Aid in Syria
Turkey Vows Strong Military Action if Syria Truce is Broken
Turkey Proposed Joint Management of Oil Fields in Syria With Russia
Ex-Shin Bet Chief Warns of Political Assassinations
Israeli Forces Kill Palestinian Teen During West Bank Protest
Haftar, Merkel Discuss Political Solution to Libya Crisis
Yemen’s Legitimacy Holds Onto 3 References
Egypt Continues to Garner Arab Support on Nile Dam
Egypt to Take Legal Action against Rumor Promoters
Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous
sources published on March 11-12/2020
UN issues scathing indictment of Iran’s
human rights violations/Benjamin Weinthal/FDD/March 11/2020
What we know about Iran five years after Netanyahu’s speech to Congress/The
Jerusalem Post/Jacob Nagel/Yaakov Amidror/Jonathan Schachte/March 11/2020
Trade Data Shows Sanctions Have Little Impact on Iranian Pharma Imports/David
Adesnik/Saeed Ghasseminejad/FDD/March 11/2020
The Danger of Democrats' Distorting Legal Arguments Against Impeachment/Alan M.
Dershowitz/Gatestone Institute/March 11/2020
Syria Between Russia, Turkey/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/March 11/2020
Refugees on Syrian-Turkish border vulnerable to radicalization/Emily
Przyborowski/Arab News/March 11/2020
Idlib shows why NATO band should get back together/Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Arab
News/March 11/2020
Coronavirus testing our globalized defenses/Alistair Burt/Arab News/March
11/2020
The Crisis in Idlib/Dana Stroul/The Washington Institute/March 11/2020
Russia and Saudis in a knife fight over oil — but we may be the victims/Simon
Henderson/The Hill/March 11/2020
As Israel’s Kingmaker Gets Off the Fence, Gantz Gets a Boost/David Makovsky/ The
Washington Institute/March 11/2020
The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News &
Editorials published on March 11-12/2020
MoPH announces first full recovery from novel coronavirus
NNA/March 11/2020
The Ministry of Public Health announced this Wednesday the first full recovery
from the novel coronavirus. The patient had received treatment at the Rafic
Hariri University Hospital.
MTV Lebanese anchor Nabila Awad announces
state of emergency, criticizes government for politicizing coronavirus
Arab News/March 11/2020
Lebanese news presenter at MTV, Nabila Awad, called on people to act as if there
was a state of emergency in Lebanon, asking people to stay at home.
PM was criticized for taking too long to ban flights from Iran
Social media users called on the government to ‘lock down the entire country’
BEIRUT: Lebanese people took to social media on Wednesday to call on the
government and Prime Minister Hassan Diab to impose a state of emergency and a
nationwide lockdown over the coronavirus pandemic. Diab was also criticized for
taking too long to ban flights from Iran, center of one of the worst outbreaks
outside of China. One Twitter user named Jessy said: “Let us declare a state of
emergency in the country before it is too late, before we all lose a loved one,
and before it all gets out of hand!” Diab said Wednesday that Lebanon has
suspended flights from Italy, South Korea, Iran and China, the countries hit
hardest by the l coronavirus. The measures came as Lebanon announced its second
death from COVID-19 in two days. Several other users wrote “Lock down the entire
country NOW” repeatedly and used the hashtag “Declare a state of emergency” was
trending. Taking it a step further, Lebanese news presenter at MTV, Nabila Awad,
took it upon herself to tell it as it is and called on people to act as if there
was a state of emergency in Lebanon, asking people to stay at home to avoid
becoming infected. “The government today has certain considerations and does not
want to announce the state of the health emergency but here on MTV we want to
address this specific issue to our audience and ask them to act responsibly and
act as if there is a state of health emergency in Lebanon,” she said during a
news broadcast. She called on people to be “responsible” and “stay in their
homes as a type of quarantine.”
“The issue is really dangerous and from MTV we call on everyone to act as if
there is a health emergency,” she added. Social media users praised and thanked
Awad for her intervention. “It is very important to declare a state of
emergency. The headline must remain as long (as possible), do not delete it,
keep it permanently until the virus is contained. We congratulate you on this
important step,” Georges Ghorayeb said. Meanwhile, Sarah Luna Makdissy thanked
the channel and said “those who could care less about their health and wants to
wander around and keep receiving planes from Iran, they are free to do so and
endanger their lives but they are not free to infect others.”
Lebanon Bans Flights from 4 Nations, Asks Citizens to
Return from 7 Others
Naharnet/March 11/2020
Lebanon on Wednesday banned all flights from Italy, Iran, South Korea and China
as a precaution against the spread of the novel coronavirus, giving its citizens
in France, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Germany, Spain and the UK a four-day deadline to
return home.
The measures were announced by Prime Minister Hassan Diab following a meeting
for the country’s anti-coronavirus committee. “Lebanon was among the first
nations that took measures over the issue of the coronavirus and we followed up
on all cases as some voices attacked the government, especially when we
announced the closure of schools,” Diab said. “From the beginning, we took
strict and preventative measures at the airport,” he added. “We are facing a
disease that is spreading in most countries in the world and the government has
not procrastinated in taking any measures to protect the Lebanese,” Diab went on
to say. He added that he has asked public administrations and municipalities to
limit their work to the least number of employees and that he has asked
authorities to take all measures to prevent public and private gatherings. “I
have asked employers in all sectors to take measures to protect employees,” Diab
said, noting that the committee is monitoring all cases and will submit further
recommendations should the need arise. Earlier in the day, Lebanon recorded its
second death from the virus as eight more infections were confirmed, raising the
country’s overall cases to 61, the Health Ministry said. Unconfirmed Media
reports later said that seven more cases were recorded. The syndicate of the
owners of restaurants had earlier announced closure until further notice, noting
that food delivery services will remain active. Lebanon has already closed
educational institutions, sports clubs, nightclubs, pubs, fairs and other venues
as a precaution against the virus.
Lebanon impose strict measures in response to coronavirus
outbreak
Chiri Choukeir/Annahar/March 11/2020
After announcing the first death yesterday morning at the RHUH, a second death
has been recorded at the RHUH today, 55-year-old teacher Maroun Karam.
BEIRUT: A number of Lebanese districts will be put under partial
government-ordered lockdown as officials struggle to contain the spread of the
coronavirus, which has infected 68 people and killed two. With the coronavirus
spreading like wildfire across the globe, Lebanese officials have scrambled to
put a lid on the outbreak. People are no longer allowed to assemble in public;
movie theaters, gyms, computer cafes, restaurants and pubs will be closed; along
with the Casino Du Liban and similar establishments. Sports tournaments have
been postponed and cultural events canceled. Lebanon's Shiite Muslim authorities
have also suspended the Friday weekly prayers and all other gatherings in
mosques of their denomination until further notice. This decision will stay in
effect until March 25. Schools and universities are also on lockdown until
further notice. Flights with Italy, Iran, South Korea and China will stop
completely in a bid to contain the spread of coronavirus, Prime Minister Hassan
Diab said Wednesday. A scheduled flight from Iran carrying 150 people later
tonight will be the last one welcomed, according to reports. Lebanon had
reduced, but not halted, the number of flights coming from Iran, along with
other countries, and put in place additional screening measures on arrival for
passengers coming from countries experiencing outbreaks. Flights from countries
with increasing numbers of cases such as France, Egypt, Iraq, U.K., Spain and
Germany would be stopped, with Lebanese citizens having four days to return.
After this deadline, Lebanese wishing to return will have to seek consular
assistance. Back to back deaths were at Rafic Hariri University Hospital, with
the latest victim being 55-year-old teacher Maroun Karam. Karam contracted the
virus from one of his students who was traveling abroad. Given his weak immune
system, Karam passed away earlier today after infecting both his wife and
children, RHUH said. The Ministry of Health announced that 11 percent of
the cases are under the age of 20, 77 percent aged between 20 to 59 years old
and 10 percent are above the age of 60. Meanwhile, 37 percent of the cases are a
direct offshoot of cases in Egypt, the United Kingdom, Iran and Switzerland.
Al-Maounat Hospital: Ten staff members, one patient tested
positive for coronavirus
NNA/March 11/2020
In light of the exacerbation of coronavirus (COVID-19) spread, the Notre Dame de
Secours (Al-Maounat) Hospital announced in a statement this Wednesday:
"1- After conducting laboratory tests on employees who were in direct contact
with an infected patient, it was found that ten staff members had contracted the
virus.
2- All the staff members who tested positive did not show any associated
symptoms and are in good health. They were put in a specially equipped
department, and are now isolated at the hospital. They will be monitored by a
special medical and nursing team throughout their quarantine period.
3- The patient who was infected with coronavirus is still in the hospital, in
critical condition. He is being treated in one of the isolation rooms.
It is worth noting that all necessary preventive and protective measures have
been taken; an external path completely separated from the hospital entrance has
been devoted for patients suspected of contracting coronavirus. Also,
specialized teams are daily sterilizing public places and units, training
workers on methods of prevention, and taking preemptive measures at the approved
entry points."
Lebanon Restaurants Closed over Coronavirus Fears
Naharnet/March 11/2020
Lebanon’s restaurants will close as a precaution against the COVID-19
coronavirus but delivery services will remain active, their syndicate announced
on Wednesday. The syndicate said the decision was taken despite “the syndicate’s
readiness and the health precautions that have been taken” and following
“several meetings with Tourism Minister Ramzi Msharrafiyeh.”“We decided that
closure for a certain period is in everyone’s interest,” the head of the
syndicate said, calling on the tourism minister to offer the syndicate “ultimate
support” to secure the continuity of the restaurants industry after the crisis.
“We also ask banks, suppliers and the owners of properties to cooperate and take
these extraordinary circumstances into consideration,” the head of the syndicate
added. Earlier in the day, Lebanon recorded its second death from the virus as
eight more infections were confirmed, raising the country’s overall cases to 61,
the Health Ministry said. Media reports later said that seven more cases were
confirmed. Lebanon has already closed educational institutions, sports clubs,
nightclubs, pubs, fairs and other venues as a precaution against the virus. The
government’s anti-coronavirus committee will meanwhile hold a press conference
at 5:00 pm to announce further measures.
Lebanon Records 2nd Coronavirus Death as 8 New Cases
Confirmed
Naharnet/March 11/2020
Lebanon on Wednesday recorded its second death from the COVID-19 coronavirus as
eight more infections were confirmed, raising the country’s overall cases to 61.
As the National News Agency confirmed the second death, TV networks identified
the victim as 55-year-old teacher Maroun Karam. According to MTV, he was
infected by a student coming from abroad and was not suffering from any
illnesses but had a weak immune system. “He had infected his wife and two
children” prior to his death, MTV said. Al-Jadeed TV said the man died at the
state-run Rafik Hariri University Hospital after being transferred from a
hospital in Bsalim. Health Ministry Director General Dr. Walid Ammar meanwhile
announced that eight new infections have been confirmed. The National News
Agency said four of the infections were recorded at the Notre Dame des Secours
hospital in Jbeil and four others at the Hôtel-Dieu de France hospital in
Beirut. Media reports meanwhile said that Lebanese authorities are mulling the
closure of restaurants and cafes, following the recent shutting of educational
institutions, sports clubs, nightclubs, pubs, fairs and other venues.
Panic in Jbeil over Coronavirus after 'Person Coming from U.S. Infects 15'
Naharnet/March 11/2020
A person coming the United States is infected with the coronavirus and there are
15 infected people at a quarantined ward at the Notre Dame des Secours hospital
in Jbeil, Amchit municipal chief Antoine Issa told Radio Voice of Lebanon on
Wednesday.
The radio network said a state of panic is engulfing the Jbeil district, amid
calls for closing public and private institutions, restaurants, leisure places
and assembly venues.Earlier in the day, Lebanon recorded its second death from
the virus as eight more infections were confirmed, raising the country’s overall
cases to 61, the Health Ministry said. Media reports meanwhile said that
Lebanese authorities are mulling the closure of restaurants and cafes, following
the recent shutting of educational institutions, sports clubs, nightclubs, pubs,
fairs and other venues.
Hariri Urges Officials to ‘Close Doors in Face of Coronavirus'
Naharnet/March 11/2020
Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri on Wednesday urged Lebanese authorities to
“close the doors in the face of coronavirus from whichever country it may come,
brotherly, friendly, near or far.”“Let the safety of the Lebanese people prevail
over all considerations,” Hariri said in a tweet. “Lebanon is in danger like
many countries that took courageous and responsible steps, closed the airspace
and borders, putting complete areas in quarantine,” Hariri added. He concluded:
“If political and economic issues are subject to disagreements and can withstand
differences in views, the threat of the coronavirus requires no hesitation in
taking the measures that protect the safety of the citizens and residents and
prevail over any political interests and obligations.”Earlier in the day,
Lebanon recorded its second death from the virus as eight more infections were
confirmed, raising the country’s overall cases to 61, the Health Ministry said.
Media reports later said that seven more cases were confirmed. Lebanon has
closed restaurants, educational institutions, sports clubs, nightclubs, pubs,
fairs and other venues as a precaution against the virus. The government’s anti-coronavirus
committee will meanwhile hold a press conference at 5:00 pm to announce further
measures.
Facts about Lebanon's 61 Coronavirus Cases
Naharnet/March 11/2020
The Health Ministry on Wednesday released a report detailing how the country’s
61 coronavirus patients were infected and their ages. It said 37% of them came
from abroad -- Egypt, the UK, Iran and Switzerland. Fifty-eight percent were
meanwhile infected by those coming from foreign countries. “Thirteen were
infected by a patient coming from Egypt, five were infected by a patient coming
from the UK, five were infected by patients coming from Iran and three cases are
being investigated,” the report said. As for ages, 11% of them are below 20, 77%
are 20 to 59 years old and 10% are 60+.
Geagea Urges Declaration of Health Emergency
Naharnet/March 11/2020
Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea on Wednesday called for declaring a health
emergency in Lebanon and said authorities’ response to the coronavirus crisis
has been insufficient due to “political reasons.”“A serious health emergency
must be declared, especially as to providing public and private hospitals with
all the necessary equipment and taking the maximum precaution measures,” Geagea
tweeted. “It is also needed to stop all flights from countries witnessing major
disease outbreaks, especially Iran and Italy, seeing as there direct flights
from these countries to Lebanon,” Geagea added, lamenting that such a measure
should have been taken from the very beginning. “Unfortunately, the government
did not take it for the known political reasons,” he said. Earlier in the day,
Lebanon recorded its second death from the virus as eight more infections were
confirmed, raising the country’s overall cases to 61, the Health Ministry said.
Media reports meanwhile said that Lebanese authorities are mulling the closure
of restaurants and cafes, following the recent shutting of educational
institutions, sports clubs, nightclubs, pubs, fairs and other venues.
Employees of Rafik Hariri Hospital Declare Strike
Naharnet/March 11/2020
The committee of the employees and contract workers of the state-run Rafik
Hariri University Hospital on Wednesday declared an open-ended strike at a time
the hospital is leading Lebanon’s medical response against the coronavirus
epidemic. The committee said it took its decision due to “all the threats,
difficulties and hard circumstances that the hospital’s workers are going
through and the blatant carelessness of the administration and the officials
concerned.”It added that a press conference will be held at 9:00 am Thursday to
explain “the situation of employees and their daily suffering.”The committee’s
decision is likely related to wages and recompenses.
Lebanese man pleads guilty in US to buying drone parts for
Hezbollah
Agencies/March 11/2020
Issam Hamade and brother Usama Hamade alleged to have bought engines and parts
to help track and guide unmanned aircraft for terror group
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota — A Lebanese national charged with conspiring to export
drone parts and technology from the US to the Iranian-backed Hezbollah terror
group in Lebanon has pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate US
export laws.
Issam Hamade pleaded guilty Monday in federal court in Minnesota. His brother,
Usama Hamade, faces similar counts and is also charged with smuggling.
Prosecutors said the brothers acquired sophisticated technology for drones from
2009 to 2013 and illegally exported them to Hezbollah.
Issam Hamade faces up to five years in prison when sentenced next month, but
prosecutors plan to ask for 30 months, according to a plea agreement. Hamade’s
defense attorneys plan to ask for time served. He’s expected to be deported
after he serves his time.
The Hamades were arrested in February 2018 in South Africa and were extradited
to the US last fall.
According to an indictment, the parts included inertial measurement units, which
can be used to track an aircraft’s position, and digital compasses, which can be
paired with the inertial measurement units for drone guidance systems. The parts
also included a jet engine and 20 piston engines. Hezbollah is known to have
several models of drones in its arsenals, and some have been used to penetrate
Israeli airspace, including in November.
In August, Israel said it foiled a planned armed drone attack from
Iranian-backed fighters base din Syria. Hours later, two drones crashed into
Hezbollah offices in Beirut in what was thought to be a linked incident.
In the plea agreement publicly filed Tuesday, Issam Hamade admitted that his
brother arranged to purchase parts and technology from various countries,
including the US, from 2009 to 2011.
He also admitted that he transferred money from Lebanon to accounts in South
Africa at his brother’s request, knowing the money was being used to buy these
parts. The plea agreement says Hamade had reason to believe the parts and
technology were going to Syria, in violation of US export laws.
Lebanon PM Informs Diplomats of Imminent Announcement of
Rescue Plan
Beirut - Khalil Fleihan/Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
Western ambassadors, most of them Europeans, agree on giving Lebanese Prime
Minister Hassan Diab an opportunity to see how well he will be able to fulfil
his promises on a rescue plan over outstanding debts, banks, and financial and
economic reform. Sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that Diab has informed the
ambassadors, mainly those concerned with the situation in Lebanon, that the
government has “suspended” the payment of debts, pending negotiations with
creditors. He also said that the government was ready to put in place programs
to fulfill its obligations. A number of foreign ambassadors reported that
whenever they asked Diab about the rescue plan, he replied: “The plan is being
prepared and is in an advanced stage.” While one diplomat stated that the plan
would be announced on May 11, others denied discussions on “a specific date, due
to several delicate matters tackled by the government and the difficulty to deal
with them.” Diplomatic sources said that major countries were monitoring with
great concern the situation in Lebanon and underlined the need for rapid
measures to find a solution. They added that the International Support Group for
Lebanon “believes that the situation can no longer handle more stalling, and
requires urgent solutions,” including resolving a dispute on resorting to the
World Bank to pump the liquidity needed by Lebanon.
Demeaned and no dollars: Lebanese choked by bank
controls/Withdrawals curbed to as little as $100/week.
Reuters/March 11/2020
BEIRUT - Outside a bank in Lebanon's capital, dozens of people line up every
morning long before the doors open, hoping to extricate whatever little cash the
limits allow this week.
An employee announces only 15 people can get $100, everybody else must leave.
Another morning, he says the branch has no dollars today. "How can this be? A
bank that has no money," said Pauline Sawma, 28, bursting into laughter after
she tried withdrawing a sliver of her money.
"I've been here since 7 a.m. Can you imagine? Standing outside and waiting, so
that maybe they give me $200 and maybe not," she said. "You can't buy anything,
you can't travel. My microwave is broken, I can't even get it fixed." Lebanon's
financial crisis has made dollars scarce, hiked prices, slashed jobs and fuelled
unrest. Cash-strapped banks have come under fire for imposing controls after
years of funneling deposits to a dysfunctional state drowning in debt. The
controls, which kicked in four months ago without legislation, vary from one
bank to another, giving some discretion to branches to decide who gets what.
Banks have curbed withdrawals to as little as $100 a week, blocked transfers
abroad and cut card spending online or abroad. At least a dozen depositors told
Reuters the curbs got stricter every few weeks and often did not apply to
everyone in the same way. Some said their branches did not always have cash to
meet even the measly limits. Others said bankers had threatened to close
accounts of customers who tried complaining. Bank workers say they, too, have
faced growing pressure from irate depositors.
Patience running thin
The banking association could not be reached for comment. Its chairman has said
the rules seek to preserve Lebanon's wealth inside the country and that banks
have sustained big losses to secure hard currency. With patience running thin,
the government has vowed to draft a law standarizing the controls, and on
Tuesday, a public prosecutor met bankers to agree a set of rules. At two of
Lebanon's biggest banks, at least a dozen customers said they could no longer
withdraw U.S. dollars that had gone into their accounts as of January. They must
take out the funds in Lebanese pounds at the official peg, wiping more than 40%
off the value relative to the market. "They think it's okay to humiliate people
and we don't have the right to complain. It's as if we're garbage," said Sawma,
who works at a beauty parlor where she took a pay cut. When she objected about
queues, she says the manager berated her. "It's not their fault, the bank
employees. God help them," she added. "But at least respect us. Now they're
being demeaned, we're being demeaned, and the politicians live in la-la-land."
Abdelhassan Husseini, a college professor in his 60s, spent 20 years saving for
his kids. Now his architect son needs the funds to move abroad -- like many
young Lebanese graduates -- the bank won't issue the U.S. dollars, not even in a
cheque. The bank had offered him a Lebanese pound cheque instead, he said. "It's
utter humiliation. This is our money," he added, stalking out of his branch.
"One day they give you $100, another day $50. Next they're going to start taking
cash from you." In his speech declaring Lebanon could not repay its debts, Prime
Minister Hassan Diab pledged at the weekend to protect deposits. Still, such
reassurances in recent months have done little to stop Lebanese from stashing
cash at home. After witnessing the 1975-1990 civil war and moving abroad with
her husband to make a living, Hiyam al-Shami returned to spend her 60s in
Lebanon. Now their savings are trapped in the bank and their kids have
emigrated. "It's a shame, at my age, to be demeaned like this," she said. "I
wanted to live a bit here in Beirut, to see my siblings, to go out...God help us
with these rulers. I hope none of them remain, not a single one."
Lebanon’s Govt. to Strengthen Financial Situation, Adopt
Reform Program
Beirut - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
The Lebanese government underlined the necessity to strengthen the financial
situation, restructure the public debt and adopt a reform program for growth,
during a ministerial session held at the Baabda Palace and led by President
Michel Aoun. The Cabinet discussed developments in the financial and monetary
situation. Addressing the ministers, Aoun said: “In conjunction with
negotiations with Eurobond holders, the government should develop a strategy for
debt restructuring and plans to restructure banks, the central bank and
others.”Information Minister Manal Abdel Samad said Prime Minister Hassan Diab
stressed the need to strengthen the financial situation, restructure the public
debt and adopt a reform program for growth.” “We all know that currency
shortages automatically lead to a loss of value. These two factors lead to a
decline in import, and thus an economic recession and an increase in the fiscal
deficit, and of course the debt problem, which adds to the shortage of
currency,” Abdel Samad quoted Diab as saying. Measures will have repercussions
on the banking system, the minister added. “When we discover the extent of this
effect, we will initiate reforms in the banking sector and seek to restore it to
serve the real economy,” she explained, quoting the premier. The Information
minister went on to say that the package of reforms would “affect the lives of
citizens and pave the way for a better future.” “We are studying measures from
two angles: Whether Lebanon will receive external support or not… We will
protect the poorest groups by launching the social safety net because reforms
will affect growth,” she reported. The Cabinet also listened to the opinion of
international consultants and studied a number of topics. Media reports said
that following the session, the Finance and Economy ministers headed to the
Grand Serail, where they held a meeting with Diab to further discuss the
upcoming measures. On the Coronavirus, the minister stressed that the issue took
a large part of the discussion, adding that a decision on Wednesday will be
taken over halting all flights from affected countries.
Tenenti: Nepalese peacekeeper killed in transport accident
in Mays al Jabal
NNANNA/March 11/2020
UNIFIL Spokesperson Andre Tenenti announced Wednesday that a member of the
Nepalese contingent had been killed in a transport accident in the southern town
of Mays-al-Jabal. According to a statement by the UNIFIL, the peacekeeper’s
death was a result of a logistic transport accident that occurred yesterday
(Tuesday) afternoon in a Nepalese contingent base in Mays-al-Jabal. The
statement indicated that investigations were still underway to determine the
causes and circumstances of the accident.
Information Minister meets Ambassadors of EU, Germany,
Japan
NNA/March 11/2020
Minister of Information Dr. Manal Abdel Samad Najd, welcomed this Wednesday in
her office at the Ministry the Ambassador of the European Union to Lebanon,
Ralph Tarraf, with talks reportedly touching on the EU’s projects in Lebanon and
media cooperation prospects. Minister Abdel Samad later met with German
Ambassador to Lebanon, Georg Berglen, with media realtions featuring high on
their talks. The Minister also met with the Japanese Ambassador to Lebanon,
Takeshi Okubo.
Kattar, Japanese ambassador tackle overall situation
NNA/March 11/2020
Minister of Environment, Demianos Kattar, received this Wednesday in his office
at the Ministry the Japanese Ambassador to Lebanon, Takeshi Akubo, who came on a
protocol visit.
Talks between the pair reportedly touched on the overall situation and the means
of cooperation in the environmental field.
طوني بدران: أزمة النظام الإيراني
Crisis Of The Iranian Order
Tony Badran/ Hoover Institution/March 11/2020
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/84068/%d8%b7%d9%88%d9%86%d9%8a-%d8%a8%d8%af%d8%b1%d8%a7%d9%86-%d8%a3%d8%b2%d9%85%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%86%d8%b8%d8%a7%d9%85-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a5%d9%8a%d8%b1%d8%a7%d9%86%d9%8a-tony-badran-crisis-of-the-irani/
The “transnational”: this is how Qassem Soleimani, the former head of Iran’s
Qods Force, who was killed in a January U.S. missile strike in Baghdad, is
described in Hezbollah-run schools in Lebanon. Soleimani, who commanded the
militias prosecuting Iran’s wars in the region and who managed the Islamic
Republic’s realm from Iraq to Lebanon, met his end as the Iranian order in those
two countries was under severe stress, adding to the Iranian regime’s domestic
troubles as it reels under the weight of U.S. sanctions.
Iraq and Lebanon have long suffered from endemic corruption and mismanagement,
which have now resulted in failing economies. In fact, Lebanon is already in the
stage of financial and economic collapse. Beyond economic grievances, however,
the political orders both in Iraq and Lebanon are in a crisis of legitimacy. For
months, popular demonstrations have been raging against the Baghdad and Beirut
governments and the sectarian political actors who run them. This turmoil in
Iran’s Arab holdings adds another layer of pressure on top of the two-year old
widespread popular protests inside Iran.
These popular protests have revealed the vulnerabilities of the Iranian regional
project, of which Soleimani was the anchor. Likewise, they have exposed the
incoherence of U.S. policy ideas about Iran and fractured states like Iraq and
Lebanon over the course of almost two decades.
Iran is at the heart of the protests in Iraq and Lebanon. In Iraq, far more
explicitly than in Lebanon, the protests have taken aim directly at Iran and its
local agents who control the government. Iraqi protesters have defaced posters
of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and have attacked the Iranian Consulate
along with the offices of militias like the Badr Organization, ripping up
pictures of its leader as well. Slogans like “Iran out, out,” have been
characteristic of the protests. It bears underscoring that these protests have
been raging not only in Baghdad but also in majority-Shiite cities like Karbala,
Najaf, Nasiriyah and Basra.
The Lebanese protests have been more widespread in terms of sectarian geography,
encompassing both major Sunni cities like Tripoli as well as Shiite cities like
Tyre. The anti-Iran element of the Lebanese protests has been indirect. The
protests have targeted the entire political system, over which Hezbollah
presides. Their slogan, demanding the ouster of the entire sectarian political
class spares none: “all of them means all of them.” And they have not shied away
from including Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, by name: “all of them,
means all of them, and Nasrallah is one of them.”
The political orders of Iraq and Lebanon share a core feature. While both claim
the trappings and formal structures of states, these structures are, in fact,
dominated from within by parties-cum-militias commanded by the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps on the model of Hezbollah. The reaction of the wardens
of these political orders in Baghdad and Beirut has been to suppress the protest
movements. In Iraq, the death toll had exceeded 600 by end of January. While
things in Lebanon have not yet reached that level of lethality, violence against
the protests has been a centerpiece of the sectarian elite’s response from the
get-go.
This violent response, however, has not yet succeeded in snuffing out the
protests. In Iraq especially, this failure is compounded by competition among
the militia leaders, a result of the vacuum left by the elimination of the
governor of the realm, Soleimani, and of his top Iraqi lieutenant, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.
These leaders are now scrambling to claim the head position. The fractiousness
of the Iraqi Shiite scene, formerly managed by Soleimani, and the absence of a
credible figure to succeed him in that role, has led Iran to rely on Hezbollah
as a steadying hand in Iraq, even as it deals with the turmoil in Beirut.
These frailties inside the Iranian order only underscore the fantastical nature
of former president Barack Obama’s vision for Iran as the bedrock of stability
in the region. But if these protests against the political systems and
governments of Iraq and Lebanon have exposed Iran’s vulnerabilities, they have
also highlighted the incoherence of U.S. policy in these countries.
On the one hand, the Trump administration’s maximum pressure policy, a
fundamental departure from his predecessor’s strategy of realignment with Iran,
has been key in exacerbating the structural problems of the Iraqi and Lebanese
systems. Since the Lebanese banking sector was dependent on a constant inflow of
fresh dollars, the tightening of sanctions on Hezbollah over the past three
years further constrained the group’s ability to circulate the proceeds of its
global criminal enterprise through the banks. Drying up the flow of dollars
denied the corrupt Lebanese political class the ability to limp along and
accelerated the collapse.
On the other hand, the president continues to be trapped in the failed policy
framework of the Bush and Obama administrations. The frameworks of the Bush
administration’s Freedom Agenda, the counterterrorism campaigns, and the
explicitly pro-Iranian realignment strategy of the Obama administration all
invested the U.S. in the pro-Iranian political orders through the policy of
building up state institutions.
Washington is still wedded to the conceit that there are state institutions in
Iraq and Lebanon, distinct from and in opposition to Iran’s militias, and that
the U.S. needs to strengthen these institutions as the best way to roll back
Iranian influences in Baghdad and Beirut.
The protests have put the lie to this conceit. In the imagination of U.S.
policymakers, building up the “state” would establish it as the sole legitimate
actor, thereby diminishing the clout of the militias. In reality, however, the
“state” and the militias are indistinguishable. Hence, the forces beating up,
detaining, and shooting protesters in the streets were both the official
security forces and the militias. In fact, in certain cases the security
services assaulting the protesters were simply the militias in official uniform.
The “Parliamentary Police” in Beirut, for instance, is little more than
sectarian warlord and Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri’s private force — in
effect an extension of his Amal militia. The “state,” such as it is, is the
“Hezbollah state” — precisely the template which the Iranians implemented in
both Lebanon and Iraq. It is not the magic antidote to Iranian influence. It is
a vehicle for that influence.
That the people on the streets of Iraq and Lebanon are protesting these “state
institutions,” indeed the very political systems, is already testimony to the
fact that these institutions, emanating from these sectarian political orders,
have lost their legitimacy, at least among a large segment of the population.
With that, the full absurdity of the argument behind current U.S. policy, that
these institutions are the instruments with which to defeat Hezbollah’s
“narrative,” comes into focus. If the U.S. doubles down on the mantra of
propping up “state institutions,” it would mean bailing out the Iranian order,
in the face of an unprecedented popular challenge and economic crisis.
To be sure, it’s unclear, even unlikely, that these protests will lead to a
successful overhaul of the entrenched political systems of Iraq and Lebanon. But
equally unclear is how the regeneration and continued underwriting of these
systems is in any way in the U.S. interest. The U.S. ought not concern itself
with salvaging the existing pro-Iranian systems under whatever pretext, whether
it’s “strengthening state institutions,” or “contesting Iranian influence,” or
counterterrorism. Investment in “state institution-building” only relieves
pressure on Iran, as is the case with the sanctions waivers Washington continues
to extend to the Iraqi government
Rather, the model for the U.S. should be its policy during the Cold War. The
U.S. did not pour money into strengthening “state institutions” in Budapest or
Warsaw. Rather, Washington worked on bankrupting and breaking the Soviet Union,
all while lending support, moral and political, to the dissident movements in
the Soviet realm.
Likewise, the priority for the U.S. is the intensification and success of its
maximum pressure campaign against Iran. The focus should be on raising the heat
on Iran and bankrupting it, so as to severely limit its means to project power
abroad. While it is possible to envision a wide range of outcomes inside Iran,
from the weakening or collapse of the current regime to its possible
liberalization, the point of the ongoing pressure campaign is much simpler: To
raise the relative costs of the regime’s foreign adventures to levels that it
can’t sustain. Insofar as the popular protests in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon are
challenging the Islamic Republic and its political order in Baghdad and Beirut,
and thereby contributing to the pressure campaign, the U.S. ought to support the
protesters, and not the state institutions trying to suppress them.
*Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Follow him on Twitter @AcrossTheBay.
Coronavirus up-date
Roger Bejjani/Face Book/March 11/2020
WHO has projected that 60% to 70% of world population may be affected by this
new virus.
What can be done by each one of us?
1. Drink profusely throughout the day 3 liters of room temperature water.
2. Restrict touching your face only if your hands are very well washed and
before touching anything.
3. No handshakes.
4. No hugging and no kissing.
5. Keep a hold on sexual relations. Unless abstinence becomes life threatening.
6. Freeze outings to friends or restaurants etc...unless draconian precautions
are taken.
7. Work from home when possible.
8. Do not eat raw vegetables or spongy fruits such as strawberries. Eat only
grilled or cooked vegetables and skin protected fruits (oranges, mangue,
papaya...).
9. Nuts are problematic since they are not protected from humans.
10. No gyms. Do your sport outdoor.
11. Wash using soaps all items bought from supermarket prior to storing.
12. No raw meat for the time being.
13. Clean your mobile phones
Regularly and place in pocket or bag.
14. Clean the household properly.
15. Upon getting in your home, Wash your hands before touching anything or
anyone! For at least 25 seconds.
16. Most importantly: don’t panic. Be diligent but don’t panic and act in a
civil manner with people around you.
17. Don’t go to any religious or social or sport function where more than 20
persons are confined in a closed place.
18. You need to be a moron to smoke narguilé in a public place (sharing narguilé
with others).
Let’s wait for warmer weather.
Aoun receives credentials of eight new ambassadors to
Lebanon, meets Chinese Ambassador
NNA/March 11/2020
President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, received, today at Baabda
Palace, the credentials of eight Ambassadors who constitute a new batch of heads
of diplomatic missions to Lebanon.
Ambassadors are: Italian Ambassador, Nicoletta Bombardier, US Ambassador,
Dorothy Camille Shea, Slovenian Ambassador, Primoz Seligo, Ghanaian Ambassador,
Winfred Ni Okai Hammoud, South African Ambassador, Barry Phillip Gilder,
Estonian Ambassador, Miko Haljas, Zambian Ambassador, Major General Topply
Mulanbo Lubaya, and Burkina Faso Ambassador, Alassane Mone.
A ceremony was held in the presence of Foreign Affairs Minister, Nassif Hitti,
General Director of Protocol and Public Relations in the Lebanese Presidency,
Dr. Nabil Chedid, Ambassador Hani Shmaitly, and General Director of Protocol at
Foreign Affairs Ministry, Mrs. Abeer Ali. Upon the arrival of Ambassadors to the
Presidential Palace, accredited ceremonies were performed, and the Lebanese
National Anthem was played, in addition to the Anthem of the country which each
Ambassador represents, by the Lebanese Army, while flags of each state were also
raisedalongside the Lebanese flag.
Afterwards, Ambassadors saluted the flag and were then accompanied by the
Republican Guard Brigade, before entering the Ambassadors’ Salon in two rows,
where they presented their credentials to President Aoun, and introduced members
of their accompanying diplomatic missions.
While Ambassadors were leaving, the Lebanese Army Music played the Lebanese
National Anthem. Ambassadors conveyed to President Aoun, the regards of their
Presidents, and their wishes for success in his national responsibilities ,
assuring him of the work to strengthen bilateral relations between Lebanon and
their countries.
President Aoun replied by sending regards, and wishing them success in their
diplomatic missions.
Overview:
Italian Ambassador, Nicoletta Bombardiere:
Holds a BA in political science from the University of Florence.
Fluctuated in several positions in her country’s foreign ministry before being
appointed consul of Italy in South Africa between 1991 and 1995.
Held the position of first secretary of her country’s permanent mission in
Vienna, and worked as a consultant for the General Directorate of Political
Affairs in her country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Between 2000 and 2002 she held the position of Head of Section in the General
Directorate for Asian and Ukraine Affairs at the Italian Ministry of Foreign
Affairs.
Appointed economic advisor to the Italian Embassy in Cairo, and then a senior
advisor to the Italian Embassy in London.
Between 2010 and 2013, she held the position of Head of the Specialized Unit for
Afghanistan Affairs at the General Directorate of Political and Security Affairs
in her country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
From December 24, 2015 until her appointment in Beirut, she held the position of
diplomatic advisor to the Italian Ministry of Defense.
US Ambassador, Dorothy Shea:
Graduated from Virginia and Georgetown Universities and has a BA from the
National Defense Institute in Washington.
Fluent in Arabic and French and has many articles and publications on the
elements of contemporary foreign policy in a changing world.
Held several positions and worked in her country's embassies in Senegal, South
Africa and Tunisia.
Held the position of a foreign affairs analyst at the US State Department, and
worked for the Bureau of African Affairs in the same ministry.
Held the position of director of the Democracy and Human Rights Division at the
National Defense Council in Washington, and prior to her appointment in Beirut,
she served as deputy head of the US mission in Egypt.
Slovenian Ambassador, Primoz Seligo:
Graduated from the University of Ljubljana, from which he obtained a master’s
degree in international relations from the Faculty of Social Sciences, and a BA
in economics from the Faculty of Economics.
Fluctuated in several administrative and diplomatic positions, where he worked
in the Economic Affairs Department of his country's foreign ministry before he
was appointed as second secretary at the Slovenian Embassy in Moscow and then as
first secretary in Ankara.
Held the position of head of the Eastern European Department at the Foreign
Ministry before he was appointed ambassador to Ukraine, and non-resident
ambassador to Georgia and Moldova, and then to Armenia.
Held the position of head of the Eastern Europe and Central Asia Affairs
Department of the Foreign Ministry before he was appointed ambassador to Russia,
and a non-resident ambassador to the Republics of Belarus, Turkmenistan,
Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic.
Prior to his appointment in Beirut, he held the position of Head of the Public
Relations Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. - Fluent in English,
Russian, Ukrainian, Italian and Arabic.
Ghanaian Ambassador, Winfred Ni Okai Hammond:
Born in 1953
Married with four children.
South African Ambassador, Barry Gilder:
Holds a Bachelor of Arts degree and a Master of Arts in writing with
distinction.
Held various administrative and diplomatic positions since 1973.
Held the position of Director General of the Internal Affairs Department of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the position of Coordinator of Intelligence
Affairs at the Coordination Committee of the National Intelligence Services.
Headed the General Directorate of Operations at the Mapungube Institute in
Johannesburg.
Fluent in English, French and Russian.
Estonian Ambassador, Miko Hajlas:
Born in Tallinn, Estonia.
Holds a license from the Tallinn Technical Institute in the field of chemical
engineering, a license from the Diplomatic Institute in Estonia, and a license
from the Institute of International Relations in the Hague.
Fluctuated in various administrative and political positions, where he worked in
the Balkan Countries Division and the United States and Canada Affairs Division
at the Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, before he was appointed a second
secretary for political affairs at his country's embassy in Helsinki and then in
the United States of America.
Worked in the Department of Relations with the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and then as Director of
Security Affairs and the Arms Control Section of the Ministry, before he
appointed a consultant and Minister Plenipotentiary for his country to Hungary,
Croatia and Slovenia.
Appointed Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Minister of Estonia to
Turkey and the Republic of Azerbaijan.
Fluent in Estonian, English, Finnish and Russian.
Zambian Ambassador, Major General Topply Lubaya:
Holds a BA from Cambridge University, and holdsdegrees in disaster management
and the National Security Affairs Program.
Fluctuated in several administrative positions and underwent training courses,
worked in human rights training and peace-keeping.
Worked in international missions of the United Nations to Sudan and Mozambique.
Held several military positions and in various sectors before he was appointed
Deputy Chief of Staff of the Army between 2011 and 2016.
Burkina Faso Ambassador, Alassane Mone:
Holds a diploma in higher military studies from the Institute of Combat in
Paris, a master’s in specialized diplomatic education from the Institute of
Diplomatic and Strategic Sciences in Paris, and a diploma from the Institute of
Higher Military Affairs.
Held various military positions before he was appointed between 2011 and 2017 as
Secretary-General of the Ministry of National Defense and military veterans.
Holder of several medals, and followed a number of specialized and high training
courses.
Appointed extraordinary ambassador and minister plenipotentiary of his country
to the Arab Republic of Egypt, starting from September 27, 2018.
Chinese Ambassador:
President Michel Aoun met the Chinese Ambassador to Lebanon, Wang Qijan, today
at the Presidential Palace, who briefed him on latest developments in China on
combatting Corona.
Qijan said that the situation in China is now better due to the measures adopted
by authorities to restrict this disease and halt its spread, pointing out his
country’s readiness to help Lebanon in this process.
Diab: The government has not been late in taking any
measure aimed at protecting the Lebanese
NNA/March 11/2020
Prime Minister, Dr. Hassan Diab, said during the press conference held this
evening at the Grand Serail after the meeting of the Coronavirus Follow-up
Committee:
"As you may know, Lebanon was among the first countries to take tough action on
the coronavirus. From the onset, we have established a Special Committee to
follow up on the coronavirus. The Committee has followed up on all cases and
taken many bold actions.
As usual, the government was loudly attacked, especially when it took the
decision to shut down schools and universities and to adopt stringent measures
concerning flights to certain countries.
We have also taken strict measures at Rafic Hariri Airport in Beirut and have
preceded other counties of the region in taking relevant precautionary measures.
Today, we are facing a disease that is spreading all over the world. The disease
is widespread in countries with great potential, despite the action which is
being taken.
The entire world is currently facing this challenge, and the government has not
been late in taking any measures aimed at protecting the Lebanese. Nevertheless,
some have resorted to political point scoring, whereas we are all required to
rise to the level of national responsibility in this critical and sensitive
period, for protecting the Lebanese in response to the outbreak of this disease
is what is urgently required."
On the other hand, the Committee for the Follow-up of Anti-Coronavirus
Preventive Measures and Actions held a meeting this afternoon at the Grand
Serail and issued the following recommendations:
"At 16:00 hours, the Committee for the Follow-up of Anti-Coronavirus Preventive
Measures and Actions held a meeting chaired by Major General Mahmoud Al-Asmar
and attended by a representative of the President of the Republic, Dr. Walid Al-Khoury,
and the advisor of the Prime Minister, Dr. Petra Khoury, as well as other
members. The meeting resulted in the following recommendations:
At the internal level:
1. Establish a rotational shift work for public sector employees (with the
exception of all military and security services as well as medical and health
institutions) in a way that ensures continuity of work, implementation of
necessary transactions for citizens and adoption of necessary measures to
prevent overcrowding in public departments.
2. Communicate with all private institutions (except medical and health
institutions) to take measures aimed at organizing rotational shift work to a
minimum level in a way that ensures continuity of work in all productive sectors
and guarantees workers' rights.
3. Ban gatherings in public and private spaces, and close cafes, restaurants,
bars, public parks and shopping centers (except for food sales outlets) -
tourist and archaeological sites, grottoes, ski centers, leisure and amusement
facilities of all kinds, as well as clubs, public and private sports stadiums,
swimming pools, health resorts, etc.
4. Re-engage with all religious authorities in order to take maximum action to
limit gatherings in places of worship and relevant facilities.
5. Require all citizens, especially the elderly, to stay at home and go out only
for work and when absolutely necessary.
6. Require all citizens to refrain from partaking in all social events and
gatherings, both indoors and outdoors; all concerts, parties, events,
conferences and meetings of all kinds shall be cancelled.
7. Urge private hospitals to accelerate readiness.
At the external level:
1. Suspension of all flights (air, land and sea travel) to and from the
following States: Italy - South Korea - Iran - China (Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan
Province of China) for one week from the date of issuance of the present
decision.
2. Suspension of the entry by air, land or sea of all persons arriving from
countries experiencing the outbreak of the new Coronavirus (France, Egypt,
Syria, Iraq, Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom and other countries), with the
exception of diplomatic missions accredited in Lebanon, international
organizations, Lebanese citizens and members of Lebanese families who have not
yet received Lebanese citizenship or residency in Lebanon and UNIFIL, while
giving them 4 days to return to Lebanon.
3. After the expiry of the 4-day deadline, all flights from the aforementioned
countries shall be suspended, and Lebanese wishing to return have to communicate
with Lebanese embassies in relevant countries, so that the appropriate measures
can be taken at the right time in coordination with the General Directorate of
Civil Aviation (these procedures do not apply to transit passengers).
Note: After the expiry of the 4-day deadline, items 2 and 3 shall enter into
force for a period of one week as of the issuance of the relevant decision.
4. Lebanese and foreign visitors returning to Lebanon from the countries
mentioned in Items 1 and 2, who did not show symptoms of the disease, must abide
by domestic isolation for 14 days and communicate with the Ministry of Public
Health in the event of any symptoms.
Implementing Entities: All ministries, where appropriate.
The Committee shall keep its meetings open to follow up on developments and to
take appropriate action in a timely manner"
Diab discusses with visitors endeavors to advance Lebanon
NNA/March 11/2020
Prime Minister Hassan Diab met today with UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon,
Jan Kubis. After the meeting, Kubis said that during his upcoming visit to New
York, he will “brief the UN Security Council about the developments in Lebanon
and implementation of the resolution 1701 and related resolutions.”“We also
discussed the steps and progress implemented by the government in diverse areas
that are relevant to the economy and the people,” Kubis added.
PM Diab also received a delegation of Ambassadors from Latin America, headed by
the Ambassador of Mexico José Ignacio Madrazo, with Ambassadors of Argentina
Mauricio Alice, Colombia Fernando Helo, Chile Mauricio Ugalde, Uruguay Ricardo
Nario, Cuba Alexander Pellicer Moraga, Venezuela Jesús Gregorio González, and
Brazilian Chargé d’Affaires Jandyr Ferreira Dos Santos Junior. The delegation
reiterated its full support to the Lebanese Government.
PM later met with MPs Ali Darwish, Assaad Dergham, and Simon Abi Ramia, with
whom he respectively discussed coronavirus recent developments, projects in
Akkar region, and financial and economic plan. Beiruti Popular Gathering also
visited the Grand Serail on Wednesday. -- Presidency of the Council of Ministers
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News
published on March 11-12/2020
Coronavirus latest: WHO declares contagion a
pandemic
The National/March 11/2020
Arab countries step up their efforts to halt the spread of the contagion/The
World Health Organisation has officially categorised coronavirus as a pandemic.
Lebanon has announced a series of flight bans to and from Italy, Iran, South
Korea and China, while Kuwait has suspended all commercial flights. The UAE
Ministry of Health and Prevention announced on Tuesday that 15 new cases of
coronavirus had been detected in the country, bringing the total number to 74.
Meanwhile, UK health minister Nadine Dorries has tested positive for coronavirus.
On Tuesday, Italy announced that the entire country would be placed under the
same severe restrictions imposed on the “red zone” in the north, as it grapples
to contain Europe’s worst outbreak. The global death toll passed 4,280 from
119,108 reported cases, while 65,765 have recovered.
WHO declares coronavirus a pandemic?The World Health Organisation has officially
categorised coronavirus as a pandemic. "WHO has been assessing this outbreak
around the clock and we are deeply concerned both by the alarming levels of
spread and severity, and by the alarming levels of inaction," said
Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. "We have therefore made the
assessment that #COVID19 can be characterised as a pandemic." Dr Tedros said
that calling the outbreak a pandemic did not mean WHO was changing its advice
about what countries should do to combat it. He called on governments to change
the course of the outbreak by taking "urgent and aggressive action".
WHO Labels Coronavirus a 'Pandemic' as Europe Scrambles to
Contain It
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 11/2020
The World Health Organization called the new coronavirus outbreak a pandemic on
Wednesday, issuing a grim warning that the global spread and severity of the
illness was due to "alarming levels of inaction." The declaration came as Europe
faced a mounting number of cases -- including a slew of new countries clocking
first deaths -- prompting governments to roll out increasingly tough measures to
slow the rapid spread of the virus. The number of cases across the globe has
risen to more than 124,000 with 4,500 deaths, including a jump in fatalities in
Iran and Italy in particular, according to an AFP tally. The majority of cases
have been in China where the outbreak first emerged in December, but as the
number of new infections has steadied in the country, hotspots have emerged
elsewhere -- namely Italy, Iran and Spain. The head of the U.N.'s top health
body for the first time characterised the outbreak as a pandemic, meaning it is
spreading in several regions through local transmission. "We have never before
seen a pandemic sparked by a coronavirus," WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus
said Wednesday, adding that the declaration would not change the organisation's
response to the outbreak. "We're deeply concerned both by the alarming levels of
spread and severity and by the alarming levels of inaction." He did not single
out any nations for not doing enough -- or what further measures were needed --
instead calling on "countries to take urgent and aggressive action".
'No clients '
Signs of a widening European crisis emerged Wednesday, with Ireland, Albania,
Belgium, Sweden and Bulgaria registering their first deaths, while Italy clocked
more than 2,300 new cases in the last 24 hours and infections in Spain jumped by
a quarter to more than 2,100. The surge brought Europe's total number of cases
to more than 22,000, with 930 deaths, with the U.S. saying it was considering
issuing a ban on travellers from the continent. Millions of people in Italy are
grappling with a nationwide clampdown that has emptied streets, shuttered shops
and disrupted train and air travel. "There are no clients; lots of colleagues
are already staying at home with nothing to do," 59-year-old Milan taxi driver
Daniele said. The government vowed to spend up to 25 billion euros ($28 billion)
to help contain the fallout from the epidemic, including cash injections for
hard-hit hotels and restaurants and allowing families to suspend some mortgage
payments. Even places with no significant outbreaks like Poland and Ukraine
announced school closures and other restrictive measures, and Austria said it
would shut museums and halt train services to and from Italy. In the Middle
East, hard-hit Iran reported 63 new deaths, its highest single-day toll and
bringing total fatalities to 354. It has yet to impose quarantines but has
closed schools, universities and hotels and called on people not to travel.
WHO's Tedros said the country, which has 9,000 cases, was "doing its best" to
control the spread of the virus, but that it needed more supplies to cope.
Elsewhere in the region, Kuwait said it was suspending all commercial flights in
and out of the country, following suit with other travel restrictions adopted by
Gulf nations.
Sliver of hope
Offering a sliver of hope to the rest of the world, China again announced
negligible new daily infections and only a relatively small number of deaths.
Some businesses in China's Hubei province -- where the virus was first detected
in December -- were told they could restart work, reducing fears of a prolonged
disruption of supply chains. But China remains the worst-affected country with
more than 80,000 confirmed cases and over 3,000 deaths. Although Panama
confirmed its first death Tuesday, Latin America -- along with Africa and
Oceania -- has so far reported only small numbers of cases. And the United
States saw its first signs of an emergency footing with the New York city
government forming a containment zone around a suburb at the centre of an
outbreak. Some locals were unconvinced the measures would help. "It makes people
nervous to be around others, it makes people nervous to get inside into
businesses and such," Miles Goldberg, who runs a bar in the suburb of New
Rochelle, told AFP.
'Major' stimulus
Disruption to supply chains from China, flagging demand and wildly fluctuating
stock markets have sparked a series of profit warnings from companies and pushed
governments into action. The UK promised a $39 billion fiscal stimulus and the
central bank slashed its main interest rate to 0.25 percent following a similar
move by the U.S. Federal Reserve last week, intended to make borrowing cheaper
and boost economic activity. U.S. President Donald Trump has promised "major"
stimulus measures, but after bruising negotiations with sceptical lawmakers he
has so far failed to provide further details.
Wall Street stocks dove deeper into the red in afternoon trading Wednesday after
the WHO declared the coronavirus a global pandemic. While markets remain uneasy,
COVID-19 continued to rip up the schedules of musicians, sports stars and
cultural figures as governments around the world banned large gatherings.
England's top-flight football league saw its first cancellation with Wednesday's
match between Arsenal and Manchester City postponed, while E3, the world's
premier video game trade show, due to be held in June in Los Angeles, was called
off.
U.S. Considering Ban on Travelers from Europe over Virus
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 11/2020
The United States is weighing a ban on travelers from Europe to slow the spread
of the coronavirus, a senior U.S. official said Wednesday.
"The question is a live question about how to treat Europe as a whole," said Ken
Cuccinelli, the acting deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
"That is not to the level of using legal authorities to block travel yet. But it
is under consideration," he told a congressional hearing.
WHO: Iran Doing Its Best on Virus despite Lack of Equipment
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 11/2020
Iran is doing the best it can to control the spread of the coronavirus outbreak,
but needs more support, the head of the World Health Organization said
Wednesday. "Iran is doing its best... We are trying to mobilize more support for
Iran," WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told reporters in Geneva, adding
that the country needed more supplies.
Qatar Coronavirus Cases Jump by 238 in One Day
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 11/2020
The number of confirmed novel coronavirus cases in Qatar jumped by 238 to 262 on
Wednesday, the health ministry said, warning that they were likely a result of
community transmission. Qatar, which now has the most cases in the Gulf, has not
reported any fatalities but has closed universities and schools, cancelled many
public events including the MotoGP and banned travelers from 14 countries
entering the country. "The Ministry of Public Health announced today that it
recorded 238 new confirmed cases of coronavirus 2019," the ministry said in a
statement. Qatari authorities have sought to play down the prospect of a
nationwide outbreak, suggesting the latest cases were confined to a residence
linked to three expat laborers diagnosed over the weekend. "The 238 individuals
had all been under quarantine in the same residential compound where the three
people who had been diagnosed with the virus on Sunday had been staying," said
an official who declined to be named. "(They) have had limited exposure to the
wider community." Authorities expect the number of cases to rise among the group
as testing continues, he added. Many of the initial cases diagnosed in Qatar
were from a group of citizens and their foreign staff repatriated to the Gulf
country from Iran. Iran on Wednesday reported 63 new deaths from the novel
coronavirus, the highest single-day toll in the three weeks since the Islamic
republic announced the first deaths from the outbreak. The outbreak of the
coronavirus in Iran is one of the deadliest outside China, where the disease
originated. Iran is yet to officially impose quarantines but authorities have
repeatedly called on people to refrain from traveling.
Aramco to increase crude oil supply to 13 million barrels
per day
Arab News/March 11/2020
DUBAI: Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, announced on Wednesday
that it had received a directive from the Ministry of Energy to increase its
output from 12 million to 13 million barrels per day (bpd). The news comes after
a statement on Tuesday that said Aramco would increase its crude oil supply to
12.3 million bpd in April – an increase of approximately 2.5 million bpd on the
previous month. The announcement - coming in the middle of unprecedented
volatility in global energy markets - was preceded by a brief suspension of its
shares on the Tadawul (the Saudi stock exchange), at its own request, as is
required when a listed company is about to announce a “material event.” The
increase in crude production to record levels is in a bid to win market share in
the global tussle over energy prices. The move to increase output dramatically
follows notification to customers that Aramco would offer big discounts around
the world, and further ratchets up the pressure on global energy markets.
Tuesday’s announcement was followed by an immediate response by Russia, the
world’s second biggest producer, with its own output increase.
US urges Tehran to release American prisoners amid virus
crisis
Arab News/March 11/2020
WASHINGTON: The United States on Tuesday called for Iran to release all American
prisoners held in the country as the coronavirus outbreak reportedly spreads
through its prisons. “The United States will hold the Iranian regime directly
responsible for any American deaths. Our response will be decisive,” US
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement. “Reports that COVID-19 has
spread to Iranian prisons are deeply troubling and demand nothing less than the
full and immediate release of all American citizens. “Their detention amid
increasingly deteriorating conditions defies basic human decency.” Iran’s
response to the deadly coronavirus outbreak, including temporarily releasing
70,000 prisoners, was “too little, too late,” a UN rights expert said Tuesday.
Iraqi Army Says 10 Rockets Hit Base Housing U.S. Personnel
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/March 11/2020
Ten rockets hit an Iraqi military base housing U.S. soldiers near Baghdad
Wednesday, in the 22nd attack against American military interests in the country
since late October, an Iraqi military commander said. The attack against the
Taji base did not wound anyone or cause any damage, the Iraqi army said.
Previous rocket attacks targeting U.S. soldiers, diplomats and facilities in
Iraq have killed one U.S. contractor and an Iraqi soldier. None of the attacks
have been claimed, but Washington accuses pro-Iran factions of being
responsible.
US Bringing Air Defense Systems Into Iraq to
Protect its Troops
Washington - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
The head of US Central Command, US Marine General Kenneth McKenzie, said on
Tuesday that the United States was in the process of bringing air defense
systems into Iraq to protect American troops. “We are also in the process of
bringing air defense systems, ballistic missile defense systems, into Iraq in
particular, to protect ourselves against another potential Iranian attack,”
McKenzie said during a House Armed Services Committee hearing. Earlier this
year, the Pentagon said it was trying to secure permission from Iraq to take
Patriot missile defenses into the country to better defend US forces after
Iran’s Jan. 8 missile attack. During the hearing, McKenzie listed Iran as the
primary US concern in the CENTCOM area of operations, which includes the Middle
East, Afghanistan and Pakistan. “Our presence sends a clear signal about our
capabilities and our will to defend partners and US national interests,” the
general said. “Going forward, it is CENTCOM’s objective to posture forces in the
region with the operational depth to achieve a consistent state of deterrence
against Iran and be adaptable to future Iranian threats.” Iran fired ballistic
missiles at the Ain al-Asad base in western Iraq on the night of Jan. 7-8 to
retaliate for a US drone strike that killed top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani
while he was in Baghdad.
Washington in Talks with NATO to Provide Turkey Military
Aid in Syria
Washington - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
Washington is discussing with its NATO allies what they can offer Turkey in
terms of military assistance in Syria's Idlib, officials said on Tuesday. It's
also discussing measures that may be taken if Russia and the Syrian regime
breaks a ceasefire, the officials added. “We are looking at what NATO can do,”
James Jeffrey, the US special envoy for Syria, told reporters in a conference
call from Brussels where he was holding talks with allies. “Everything is on
table.”Jeffrey, who was speaking alongside the US ambassador to Turkey David
Satterfield, ruled out the use of ground troops should the ceasefire be broken
and repeated that Ankara needed to clarify its stance on purchase of the Russian
S400 Air Defence System. Earlier, Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said
he was look for "concrete support" from NATO allies in regard to Syria's
conflict. "We expect concrete support from all our allies to this struggle,"
adding that "NATO is in a critical process in which it needs to clearly show its
alliance solidarity" with Turkey.
Turkey Vows Strong Military Action if Syria Truce is Broken
Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan vowed on Wednesday that his military
would launch its harshest retaliation yet if the Syrian regime breaks a fragile
truce in the northwestern province of Idlib brokered last week. The ceasefire
arranged by Turkey and Russia halted a three-month air and ground campaign by
the Syrian regime against the opposition-held province. The Russian-backed
Syrian government offensive made significant gains in Syria's last opposition
stronghold, and Turkey sent thousands of troops across the border to reinforce
the rebels, leading to rare direct fighting between Syrian and Turkish troops.
“If those across from us don’t keep their promise, we will never shy away from
advancing on them in a much more serious way than before,” Erdogan said in his
weekly address to his AK party lawmakers. He said there had been a number of
small violations of the truce, which Turkey was monitoring carefully.
He said Turkey's priority would be the security of its troops manning a dozen
observation posts inside Idlib. Some of those posts now fall within Syrian
government-controlled territory. The posts are in place as part of a previous
cease-fire agreement reached in 2018. “The security of our observation posts is
at the top of our priorities. In the event of the smallest attack there, we not
only will retaliate, we will give a much harsher response,” Erdogan said. The
President added that Turkey was engaged in efforts to turn the cease-fire into a
more lasting truce. Speaking to reporters in parliament, Turkish Foreign
Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu acknowledged minor violations of the truce, but added
Moscow had warned Damascus to stop. Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar told
reporters that talks with a Russian delegation about the technicalities of the
truce were progressing in a "positive and constructive" manner. The delegation
arrived Tuesday. The current deal sets up a security corridor along Syria's M4
highway, running east-west in Idlib. Russian and Turkish troops are scheduled to
begin joint patrols along the M4 on March 15. The cease-fire deal also appeared
to achieve Moscow’s key goal of allowing the Syrian government to keep hold of
the strategic north-south highway known as the M5. Syrian forces had captured
its last segments in the latest offensive, which began in early December.
Turkey Proposed Joint Management of Oil Fields in Syria With Russia
Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
n counterpart Vladimir Putin to jointly manage oil fields in eastern Syria's
Deir al-Zor region, in place of the Kurdish-led forces which control them now.
"I made the offer to Putin that if he gives financial support, we can do the
construction and through the oil obtained here, we can help destroyed Syria get
on its feet," Erdogan told reporters aboard his plane back from talks in
Brussels. "Instead of terrorists benefitting here, we would have the opportunity
to rebuild Syria from the revenues of this (oil field). This will also show
who's after protecting Syria's unity and who's after seizing it," Erdogan added.
Deir al-Zor province lies to the south of a 30-km deep border zone which Turkish
troops captured in October from the Kurdish YPG, which Turkey says is a
terrorist group threatening its security. The US-backed YPG controls most of
Syria's eastern oil regions. Erdogan said Putin was evaluating the offer, which
the Turkish president said he made during talks in Moscow last week, adding that
he could make the same offer to US President Donald Trump. Russia accuses
Washington of trying to separate eastern Syrian territories to create an illegal
quasi-state there. Last year, Trump withdrew some US troops from Syria, saying
that remaining US forces would be protecting oil fields in eastern Syria. Trump
said in October that his country "should be able to take some." "What I intend
to do, perhaps, is make a deal with an ExxonMobil or one of our great companies
to go in there and do it properly," he said.
Ex-Shin Bet Chief Warns of Political Assassinations
Tel Aviv – Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
Leader and members of Joint List alliance, as well as president of Blue and
White party, Benny Gantz, are under imminent threat and a “political
assassination is definitely coming”, warned former Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin.
Diskin told a radio station that the hatred has increased severely against the
politicians who do not support the right, or who are affiliated with the
movement against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He said the situation is
more critical than it was prior to the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak
Rabin in 1995 when far-right parties issued threats and incited violence against
him.
Shin Bet must intervene immediately and provide security, and not rely on
security from private companies, as is the case today, warned Diskin. A large
number of posts were published on social media against Gantz and the Joint List
as well as the judiciary, the prosecution, and the police. The posts doubled
during the Israeli elections. On Tuesday, a video surfaced showing a large group
of students of a pre-military school in Sderot, near Gaza Strip, clobbering a
cardboard box bearing the images of Arab MK Ahmed al-Tibi. Tibi filed an
incitement compliant with the police linking the incident to comments against
him made by Netanyahu during his election campaign. “Since Netanyahu started
inciting against me and since he erased [disregarded the Joint List’s] 15 seats,
I have been receiving death threats and incitement,” he said. Tibi also
indicated that few days ago there were posts with offers to murder him, adding
that the assassination of an “Arab or Jewish politician is imminent.”
Israeli Forces Kill Palestinian Teen During West Bank
Protest
Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
A Palestinian teenager was shot dead by Israeli forces during clashes in the
occupied West Bank, the Palestinian Health Ministry announced on Wednesday.
Mohammed Hamayel, 15, "died as a result of being shot in the face with live
ammunition by the Israeli occupation" during clashes in Nablus in the northern
West Bank, a statement by the ministry said. The Israeli military said it was
responding to a “violent riot” of some 500 Palestinians, many of whom hurled
rocks at Israeli troops and set tires on fire. It said it was reviewing the
incident. "We are aware of a report regarding a killed Palestinian and several
injured. The incident will be reviewed," an Israeli army statement read.
Hundreds of Palestinians gathered in an area south of the city in response to
information that Israeli settlers would arrive and seize some land, AFP
reported. Israeli forces fired tear gas as clashes broke out since morning. They
also used live ammunition and rubber bullets to break up the demonstration. The
Israeli settlement watchdog group Peace Now said late last month that Israel is
moving forward on plans to build more than 1,700 homes for settlers in the West
Bank. The approvals came weeks after the US administration unveiled its
long-anticipated Mideast plan, which sides with Israel on many of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict’s main points of contention, according to The
Associated Press. It envisions Israel annexing parts of the West Bank, including
its 120 settlements and the 500,000 settlers who live there. It also falls short
of granting the Palestinians a state, offering them limited autonomy over
disjointed chunks of land.
Haftar, Merkel Discuss Political Solution to Libya Crisis
Cairo - Khalid Mahmoud/Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
Commander of Libyan National Army (LNA) Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar visited
Germany on Tuesday as part of his current European tour. He met with German
Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin to discuss the current situation in Libya,
according to Haftar’s office.
During the talks, Merkel stressed that there can be no military solution to the
conflict in Libya, reiterating the significance of political talks and
ceasefire. “The Chancellor stressed that there can be no military solution to
this conflict and that for this reason a ceasefire and progress in the political
process are necessary,” German government spokesman Steffen Seibert said in a
written statement. Earlier, Haftar met with French President Emmanuel Macron and
the two discussed the anti-terrorism mechanism in the region and North Africa,
as well as the peace plan in Libya, which was presented by the Libyan tribes
during their first meeting in Tarhuna recently. The leaders also discussed the
new Libyan cabinet as a government of national unity, restructuring the new
Presidential Council, and possible reduction of its members from nine to five,
with the appointment of a Misrata representative, according to Voice of Libya
radio station, affiliated with LNA’s Media Office. The radio station quoted an
informed source as saying that Macron praised LNA and Haftar’s efforts in
achieving security and stability in Libya and North Africa by combating
terrorists and countering the Turkish invasion. Meanwhile, Volcano of Anger
operation accused LNA forces of targeting two schools in a populated area in Abu
Salim, damaging both buildings and terrifying civilians. Volcano of Anger
operation is launched by forces of Government of National Accord (GNA) - led by
Fayiz al-Sarraj. Local media and residents said there were exchanged clashes
between the army and militias in several neighborhoods inside Tripoli. GNA
forces said they bombed LNA ammunition depot in Qasr bin Ghashir area, south of
Tripoli. LNA spokesman Brigadier General Ahmed al-Mesmari accused “gangs of
Tripoli” of intimidating citizens without any consideration of human rights.
Mesmari said that the gangs are supported by Turkish President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan along with thousands of terrorists of various nationalities which he
sent to Tripoli to fight security and peace.
Yemen’s Legitimacy Holds Onto 3 References
Riyadh - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
Yemeni Prime Minister Maeen Abdulmalik said on Tuesday that his country holds
onto the three references as a condition for comprehensive peace with Houthi
militias. “The path to a peace (deal) between the government and the Houthi
militants is clear but faces the obstacle of Houthi intransigence,” the PM said.
The three references are represented by the Gulf initiative, its executive
mechanism, outcomes of the national dialogue and relevant UN resolutions, mainly
resolution 2216. During a meeting he held on Tuesday with Dutch Ambassador to
Yemen Irma Marie van Duron in Riyadh, Abdulmalik noted that a key obstacle to
peace remains Iran’s ongoing financial and military support for the insurgents
in defiance of UN resolutions. Abdulmalik has in the past days held a series of
meetings with ambassadors to discuss the ongoing military escalation by the
Houthis on several fronts, and the atrocities they have committed against
civilians, namely in Al Jawf governorate. The Yemeni minister hailed "the strong
international position" that finally limited the Houthi ability to loot
humanitarian aid. The Dutch ambassador hailed the Yemeni government's efforts to
alleviate the humanitarian crisis and pledged continued support for Yemen. Last
week, Abdulmalik held talks with UN special envoy for Yemen Martin Griffiths,
who spoke about de-escalation efforts and a political solution in the country.
The Yemeni government says it fully supports the efforts made by the UN envoy
for a successful political process. However, the legitimate government accuses
the Houthis of rejecting to implement the Stockholm Agreement and of violating
the truce. “The continued Houthi determination to foil peace efforts in Yemen
proves their lack of seriousness” in resolving the country’s crisis, Saba quoted
Abdulmalik as saying last week.
Egypt Continues to Garner Arab Support on Nile Dam
Cairo - Abu Dhabi - Mohammed Abdo Hasanein and Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11
March, 2020
Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry visited the United Arab Emirates on
Tuesday where he held talks with his Emirati counterpart Sheikh Abdullah bin
Zayed Al Nahyan, as part of an Arab tour to press his country’s case in the
dispute with Ethiopia on the Nile dam.
Shoukry conveyed a message from Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to UAE
President Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan. During their meeting in Abu Dhabi,
UAE’s and Egypt’s foreign ministers reviewed bilateral relations and took stock
of the latest regional and global developments. Sheikh Abdullah highlighted the
depth of ties between the UAE and Egypt, and their firm determination to bolster
relations and cooperation to serve the interests of the brotherly peoples of
both countries. For his part, the Egyptian top diplomat praised bilateral
relations, terming them as ''distinguished'' and enjoying the support of the
leaderships of both countries. He highlighted the need for sustained efforts to
strengthen joint work and further advance bilateral cooperation. Before his stop
in Abu Dhabi, Shoukry was in Riyadh where he met with Saudi Foreign Minister
Prince Faisal bin Farhan to deliver a message to Custodian of the Two Holy
Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz on Cairo’s position on the dam that Ethiopia
is building on the Blue Nile, and the latest developments in negotiations with
Addis Ababa. The Egyptian FM had traveled to Saudi Arabia from Kuwait where he
also delivered a message to Emir Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-Sabah on the
dam dispute. Shoukry kicked off his Arab tour by visiting Jordan and Iraq first.
Following the UAE, he is expected to travel to Bahrain and Oman to garner more
Arab support for Cairo. Meanwhile, Ethiopian Foreign Minister Gedu Andargachew
held talks with Moussa Faki Mahamat, the Chairperson of the African Union
Commission, regarding the status of the ongoing talks over the Grand Ethiopian
Renaissance Dam (GERD). Andargachew reiterated that the negotiations on GERD
should be held in line with the principle of fair, equitable and reasonable
utilization of transboundary natural resources. Mahamat underlined that the
negotiation should strike a fair deal benefiting all stakeholders. Last week, a
dispute emerged between Egypt and Ethiopia over the filling and operation of the
$4 billion dam, particularly after a last round of talks in Washington failed to
reach a final agreement between the concerned parties. Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan
had expected to sign an agreement in Washington, but Ethiopia skipped the
meeting and only Egypt has initialed the deal thus far.
Egypt to Take Legal Action against Rumor Promoters
Cairo - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 11 March, 2020
The Egyptian government has announced legal measures against everyone who spread
false news or rumors related to the coronavirus or any other matter. Prime
Minister Mustafa Madbouli said Tuesday that action will be taken against all who
spread rumors with the intentions of doing public harm. Egyptian government
spokesperson Nader Saad said that the effort is in line with the government’s
plan to combat the coronavirus. Recently, rumors and false information have been
circulated on social media. “Citizens should not circulate any data or
information not issued by official authorities. Fact-checking is important in
order to avoid being subject to legal accountability,” Saad said. He confirmed
that leniency will not be shown to those who spread false news, adding that the
Health Ministry is publishing all official material on the virus. During a
Tuesday phone-in with the “Kol Youm” (Every Day) talk show on ONE satellite
channel, Health Minister Hala Zayed explained that 59 coronavirus cases have
been confirmed inside Egypt, of which 51 showed no symptoms. "So far, Egypt
detected 59 COVID-19 cases and 51 of them had no symptoms. They were discovered
through the precautionary measures and tests conducted on those on board the
Nile cruise boat or those communicating with them," the minister said. She
pointed out that compared to other countries in the region, Egypt still
maintains a low number of virus cases. The minister noted that her ministry
randomly tested 558 people, half of whom are foreigners, on Nile cruise boats
and hotels in Upper Egypt's provinces of Luxor and Aswan. "The results showed
that they all tested negative for the virus," Zayed told the press conference.
The Health Minister described Egypt's precautionary measures for combating the
virus as "strong."
Zayed clarified that there’s still no need to shut down schools in Egypt. She
asserted that her ministry was following the World Health Organization’s (WHO)
protocol in handling coronavirus cases in Egypt.
The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources
published on March 11-12/2020
UN issues scathing indictment of Iran’s human rights
violations
Benjamin Weinthal/FDD/March 11/2020
The newly released U.N. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of
human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran savaged Tehran’s failure to adhere
to basic human rights norms.
Javaid Rehman, the U.N. Rapporteur who released his report to the U.N. Human
Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, on Monday, said: “Individuals who have
called for the alleviation of economic hardships, and those who peacefully
exercise their civil and political rights in defense of human rights have faced
a harsh response. In particular, I remain deeply concerned at the arrest and
imprisonment of human rights defenders and lawyers. I received reports that
imprisoned human rights defender, Arash Sadeghi, has been denied treatment for
bone cancer and a serious arm infection.”
He added: “Prominent human rights lawyers, Nasrin Sotoudeh and Amirsalar Davoudi,
remain imprisoned for their convictions connected to their representation of
marginalized communities. Mr. Davoudi started a hunger strike last month. Labor
rights activists and journalists reporting on industrial relations have been
imprisoned for peaceful expression and assembly.”
The 21-page report, which was reviewed by Fox News, chronicles the Iranian
regime’s November violent crackdown of protestors against Tehran’s mismanagement
of the economy and rising gasoline prices.
According to the report, “the Special Rapporteur is alarmed at the reported
deaths and injuries of protesters caused by the Iranian security forces.
According to credible reports, at least 304 people, including 12 children, are
confirmed to have died; unconfirmed reports indicate that the total number of
deaths is over 400.”Protestors have also challenged the legitimacy of the
unelected Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
The report took Iran’s leaders to task for “two confirmed executions of minors”
including a boy with an “intellectual disability.”
There are 100 child offenders on death row in Iran.
Rehman was also “alarmed at the sentencing of eight environmentalists who were
arrested in January and February 2018 to lengthy prison terms, specifically to
between 4 and 10 years’ imprisonment, after being convicted of ‘collaborating
with the United States enemy state.”’
The U.N. officials said: “Conservationist Murat Tahbaz who holds Iranian,
American and British nationalities, had a 10-year sentence upheld in February
2020, despite several high ranking government officials finding no evidence he
and fellow imprisoned conservationists were involved in espionage.”
Iran’s practice of gender segregation and state-sanctioned covering of women’s
hair raised the ire of the Rehman. “Yesterday, we celebrated International
Women’s Day. The day one year ago when Yasaman Aryani, Monireh Arabshahi, and
Mojgan Keshavarz, peacefully protested on the Tehran metro against compulsory
veiling laws. This lead to their conviction and imprisonment on national
security and morality charges. “
Iran’s ambassador to the U.N., Esmaeil Baghaei Hamaneh, told the U.N. Human
Rights Council: “I should be excused for failing to find any reason to be
appreciative of the report, which is just an updated version of a yearly ritual
devised to stigmatize the Iranian nation.
“The report is inherently flawed because it is based on an innately produced
mandate and overly politicized agenda. The report is far from a faithful
reflection of Iran’s continuing progress in human rights performance.”
*Benjamin Weinthal reports on human rights in the Middle East and is a fellow at
the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Follow him on Twitter @BenWeinthal
What we know about Iran five years after Netanyahu’s speech
to Congress
The Jerusalem Post/Jacob Nagel/Yaakov Amidror/Jonathan Schachte/March 11/2020
We have five years of experience to compare the competing assessments of 2015.
Now we know that Netanyahu’s gloomy forecast has proven to be the more
prescient.
Five years ago last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed a joint
meeting of Congress about the nuclear deal then taking shape with Iran (the
JCPOA). The speech remains controversial. Deal supporters still complain that
the then-speaker of the House and the Israeli ambassador arranged the invitation
to Capitol Hill behind the back of the White House.
In Jerusalem, this complaint always seemed rather rich. The original sin (though
certainly not the last) of the American nuclear negotiations with Iran was that
they began in secret, behind Israel’s back. None of the countries that Iran
threatened most was told that talks were taking place. We were aghast to learn
from intelligence that our greatest ally was secretly bargaining with our
greatest enemy about the gravest threat facing the Jewish state. When asked
directly about the meetings, our American colleagues did not reply truthfully.
In March 2015, the JCPOA was still a few months from conclusion. Deal supporters
and opponents relied on prospective assessments – their best guesses – about the
months and years to come. Netanyahu went to Congress to present Israel’s best
guess about the implications of the JCPOA.
Netanyahu warned of three dangers stemming from the deal. First, he argued that
“Israel’s neighbors, Iran’s neighbors, know that Iran will become even more
aggressive and sponsor even more terrorism when its economy is unshackled….”
Second, leaving Iran with an expansive and expanding nuclear infrastructure
unnecessary for a peaceful energy program, as its advanced centrifuge research
and development went untouched, would put Tehran “weeks away from having enough
enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons” when the deal’s
restrictions were lifted after 10 to 15 years. Third, the deal would be “a
farewell to arms control” because Iran’s neighbors would insist on having the
same capabilities for themselves, potentially leading to a regional nuclear arms
race.
Deal advocates bet that an engaged, enriched Iran would moderate before the
deal’s restrictions would expire and was in any case obligated to forswear
nuclear weapons.
Today, we no longer have to guess. We have five years of experience to compare
to the competing assessments of 2015. Now we know that Netanyahu’s gloomy
forecast has proven to be the more prescient.
Deal proponents claim that Iran became more aggressive after US President Donald
Trump withdrew from the JCPOA. This is true, but it is also a misleading,
agenda-driven starting point. It ignores the increase in Iran’s aggression
throughout the region that accompanied the implementation of the deal. A
financially flush Qasem Soleimani (on whom the JCPOA lifted some sanctions) led
Iran’s stepped-up efforts to sow discord, terror and bloodshed in Yemen, Syria,
Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza and in the region’s waterways.
After the deal went into effect, and previously sanctioned assets were unfrozen,
Iran’s defense budget (around two-thirds of which goes to the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps) increased by an estimated 30%-40%. The funds Iran
gave to Hezbollah, Hamas and other terrorist groups climbed to nearly $1 billion
annually.
Iran continued to ignore its obligations on missile development and the export
of weapons. The Revolutionary Guards began trying to establish a permanent
military presence in Syria, from which they launched drone and missile attacks
on Israel. Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia, using Iranian missiles, accelerated.
Just two months after the deal was finalized, Russia deployed its forces
alongside those of a newly legitimized Iran in Syria.
We can speculate what would have happened if the United States had not withdrawn
from the deal in May 2018, but by then it was abundantly clear that rather than
buying Iran’s moderation, the JCPOA had funded Iran’s aggression.
Former US administration as well as former and current EU officials maintain
that the JCPOA was working. We agree that the deal was doing exactly what it was
designed to do: it allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium, while developing
increasingly advanced centrifuge technology and nuclear-capable missiles.
That’s why – before the US withdrew from the JCPOA – countries across the Middle
East began jockeying for position in anticipation of a nuclear-armed Iran: Saudi
Arabia has refused to commit not to enrich uranium. UAE officials expressed
second thoughts about their own pledge to forswear the nuclear fuel cycle.
Egypt’s and other states’ growing interest in technologies relevant for nuclear
weapons has been quieter but no less genuine. Last fall, Turkey’s president
expressed his desire to have not just the fuel cycle, but nuclear weapons
themselves.
Most dramatically, in early 2018 Israeli intelligence acquired Iran’s “atomic
archive.” Despite the promises of “robust transparency,” we now know that in the
months following the JCPOA’s conclusion, Iran accelerated its efforts to
collect, organize and hide this huge trove of materials detailing its extensive
work to develop and produce nuclear weapons. The discovery of the archive laid
bare both Iran’s long-term intentions and the JCPOA’s many flaws.
The archive materials meticulously document Iran’s nuclear weaponization
project, which was more advanced than previously understood. Yet the 159-page
JCPOA addresses weaponization in a section just half a page long and devoid of
operational language regarding inspection or penalties for violations. The
section is utterly toothless, just one of the gaping holes in the deal’s
“unprecedented inspections.” More than a year and a half after the deal was
implemented, the director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency
diplomatically said that the tools to verify this section were “limited.” Given
the elaborate operational detail in other sections of the JCPOA, it appears that
the agreement’s authors intended for this critical section to be declarative,
not enforced. The thousands of pages from the archive show just how reckless
that was.
THE ACCURACY of Netanyahu’s predictions was not the result of good intelligence,
a more profound understanding of Iran or any special diplomatic insights. He
simply recognized that the United States had moved the goalposts. Senior
administration officials continued to tell their Israeli counterparts that the
goal was to dismantle Iran’s nuclear weapons program. It had become clear,
however, that the White House’s goals were much more modest: to conclude a deal
as a legacy diplomatic achievement and to prevent Iran from getting nuclear
weapons in the short term. Solving the Iranian nuclear problem had given way to
postponing and monitoring it while it grew and gained international legitimacy.
The evidence of this policy change was gradual in coming, but ultimately
overwhelming.
There were many indications of the symbolic importance the White House
attributed to reaching a deal with Iran. In January 2014, for example, deputy
national security adviser Ben Rhodes reportedly told a group of progressive
activists, “This is probably the biggest thing president Obama will do in his
second term on foreign policy. This is healthcare for us, just to put it in
context.” Iranian nuclear negotiators reading Rhodes’s quote undoubtedly knew
how to put it in context, too: Despite all the pressure on Tehran, it was clear
that the US wanted an agreement even more than Iran needed one.
Perhaps the most damning proof of the White House’s changing priorities could be
seen in the falsehoods administration officials told us as they conceded their
most fundamental negotiating positions to the Iranians. While we were repeatedly
promised that any final deal would leave Iran with zero enriched uranium and
zero centrifuges, the president already had decided to meet the Iranian demand
for uranium enrichment. A senior White House official later came to Jerusalem
and assured Netanyahu directly that Iran’s nuclear breakout time would be
measured in years (the official emphasized the plural). Yet the JCPOA’s authors
would later boast of the one-year breakout time the agreement had dubiously
guaranteed. We had been told on many occasions, including by the president
himself, that “no deal was better than a bad deal.” Now the US negotiating team
was plunging headlong into a bad deal by America’s own standards.
The dramatic concessions made it clear to the decision-makers in Israel that the
administration had sanctified making a deal at the expense of its effectiveness.
The lies were intended to keep Israeli opposition to the deal in check until it
was too late.
All of this pointed to a deal that would not solve the Iranian nuclear
challenge, but make it someone else’s bigger problem down the road.
The president himself confirmed Israel’s assessment and its concerns, telling
NPR about a month after the speech, “What is a more relevant fear would be that,
in year 13, 14, 15, they have advanced centrifuges that can enrich uranium
fairly rapidly. And at that point, the breakout times would have shrunk almost
down to zero.” The prime minister had read it right.
The American political fallout from the speech was seen as the regrettable side
effect of a decision with life or death implications for Israel. In this sense
it was akin to Menachem Begin’s 1981 decision to destroy the Osirak reactor in
Iraq. The importance of preventing Saddam Hussein from acquiring nuclear weapons
led Begin to risk and contend with the American administration’s (and others’)
scathing criticism after the strike. Begin believed he had no choice.
Netanyahu also had no choice. After the US administration had given in to Iran’s
demands, repeatedly tried to deceive Israel and ignored the prime minister’s
private and public warnings about the direction the JCPOA was headed, he was
duty bound and morally obligated to give the speech. He had to do his utmost to
prevent further Iranian aggression and a regional arms race and most of all to
keep a regime that calls for Israel’s annihilation from acquiring the means to
turn those murderous designs into action – not just now, but for the very long
term. No responsible leader could pass up the opportunity to make a last-ditch
effort, from arguably the most important stage in the United States and even the
world, to avert what his or her country saw as a looming disaster.
At the time, deal proponents coined the catchy sound bite that the alternative
to the JCPOA was war. They were wrong about that, too. The prime minister
understood that this bad deal would make war more likely in the Middle East and
increase the danger that eventually the Iranian nuclear weapons program would
have to be destroyed by force. He knew that if that terrible day should come,
regardless of who leads Israel, he or she would have to be able to point to the
speech and say we did all we could to avoid this tragically predictable outcome.
*Jonathan Schachter was the foreign policy adviser to the prime minister of
Israel from 2015 to 2018.
*Brig.-Gen. (ret.) Prof. Jacob Nagel, a visiting senior fellow at the Foundation
for Defense of Democracies and a visiting professor on the Technion Aerospace
Engineering Faculty, was the national security adviser (acting) to the prime
minister of Israel and head of the National Security Council from 2016 to 2017.
*Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Yaakov Amidror, a distinguished fellow at JINSA’s Gemunder
Center for Defense and Strategy in Washington, DC, and a senior fellow at JISS
in Jerusalem, was the national security adviser to the prime minister of Israel
and head of the National Security Council from 2011 to 2013.
Trade Data Shows Sanctions Have Little Impact on Iranian
Pharma Imports
David Adesnik/Saeed Ghasseminejad/FDD/March 11/2020
During the first full year after the re-imposition of U.S. sanctions, total EU
exports to Iran fell by nearly half, while pharmaceutical exports fell by just
over 5 percent. Despite assertions that U.S. sanctions have worsened the
coronavirus epidemic in Iran, the data do not indicate that Iran has had
difficulty maintaining its imports of pharmaceuticals.
According to the official Eurostat database, total EU exports to Iran fell from
€8.9 billion in 2018 to €4.5 billion in 2019, while pharmaceutical exports fell
from €738 million to €698 million. Most U.S. sanctions went into effect in
November 2018, six months after the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal.
Thus, a year-on-year comparison of 2018 to 2019 provides a good, though
imperfect, approximation of the sanctions’ impact.
As required by law, U.S. sanctions on Iran have never prohibited trade in food,
medicine, or other humanitarian goods. While Iranian Foreign Minister Javad
Zarif often insists that sanctions prevent Iran from importing medicine, the
regime’s own health officials have consistently denied that this is the case.
Some have directly blamed corruption and mismanagement for the country’s
shortages.
Western media frequently report as fact that sanctions are responsible for
shortages. While acknowledging that U.S. law allows humanitarian trade, media
reports allege that Western firms’ fear of sanctions create a “chilling effect”
that creates an aversion even to legitimate transactions. Despite anecdotal
evidence of such concerns, official data provide a very different picture.
The European Union is Iran’s top source of pharmaceuticals, followed by
Switzerland. From 2000 through 2011, total EU exports to Iran rapidly increased,
rising from €5.4 billion to €10.5 billion. Total Swiss exports to Iran rose also
during that interval, from 393 million francs to 675 million, according to the
country’s official Swiss Impex database. (The value of the franc has ranged from
$0.90 to $1.10 over the past 10 years.)
The growth in pharmaceutical exports to Iran was even more rapid: EU pharma
exports increased more than five-fold to €698 million in 2011, while Swiss
pharma exports roughly tripled to 200 million francs.
Trade plummeted after the revelation of Tehran’s illicit nuclear program led to
multilateral sanctions that remained in place until the Iran nuclear deal went
into effect at the beginning of 2016. EU exports then returned to pre-sanctions
levels, reaching €10.8 billion in 2017.
While total Swiss exports were slow to recover, pharmaceutical exports to Iran
reached a new peak of 254 million francs in 2016. EU pharmaceutical exports also
achieved a new benchmark that year of €864 million. For reasons that remain
unclear, Iranian purchases of EU and Swiss pharmaceuticals fell sharply in 2017
and 2018 prior to the re-imposition of U.S. sanctions. EU exports to Iran fell
about 15 percent over two years to €738 million, while Swiss exports fell 35
percent to €164 million.
Against this backdrop, the single-digit decline in Iranian pharmaceutical
purchases in 2019 may just be noise in the data with no relationship to the
return of sanctions. Nonetheless, the U.S. Treasury Department has partnered
with the Swiss government to open a special channel for humanitarian trade with
Iran, which may help avert a potential decline in legitimate commerce. At the
end of January, the U.S. and Swiss governments announced the completion of the
first transactions through the special channel, consisting of €2.3 million of
cancer and transplant drugs.
Washington should build on this successful example of how to exert maximum
pressure on the Islamist dictatorship in Iran while demonstrating its solidarity
with the Iranian people, who are now suffering an epidemic brought on the
insecurity and deceit of their own rulers.
*David Adesnik is director of research and a senior fellow at the Foundation for
Defense of Democracies (FDD), where Saeed Ghasseminejad is senior Iran and
financial economics advisor. They both contribute to FDD’s Center on Economic
and Financial Power (CEFP). For more analysis from David, Saeed, and CEFP,
please subscribe HERE. Follow David and Saeed on Twitter @adesnik and @SGhasseminejad.
Follow FDD on Twitter @FDD and @FDD_CEFP. FDD is a Washington, DC-based,
nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
The Danger of Democrats' Distorting Legal Arguments Against
Impeachment
Alan M. Dershowitz/Gatestone Institute/March 11/2020
In response to a question whether it matters "If there were a quid pro quo," I
said that would depend on "If the quo were in some way unlawful." If the
politician's motive were "corrupt" -- for example, if he were seeking a
kickback, that would be an impeachable crime. But if his entirely lawful act had
"mixed motives," including his re-election, that would not turn a lawful act
into a crime or impeachable offense.
"Start with the media claim that defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz said a President
can do anything to further his re-election as long as he thinks it is in the
national interest. This isn't what he said. The Harvard professor said
explicitly that a President can be impeached for criminal acts." — Wall Street
Journal, Editorial, January 30, 2020.
Perhaps the most disturbing consequence of distorting the so-called "Dershowitz
doctrine" into a justification for any and all presidential actions, is that it
may create a dangerous precedent. Because of the persistent mischaracterization
of "Dershowitz doctrine," the Senate vote to acquit may be taken as a
confirmation that a president who believes his re-election is in the public
interest, can do anything he wants -- even commit serious crimes -- to help
himself get re-elected. That is not what I said or believe. Nor is it the
precedent the senators who vote for acquittal intended to establish.
It has now been a month since the Senate acquitted U.S. President Donald J.
Trump, but the lies persist. Democratic leaders and the media continue to put on
trial what they have denominated as "The Dershowitz Doctrine": namely that a
president can do anything -- even commit serious crimes -- as long as he
believes his election was in the public interest. Congressman Adam Schiff
described it as a "lawless" variation on the "Nixon" doctrine that whatever a
president does is, by definition, lawful. Senator Schumer said that under "my"
doctrine, former President Richard M. Nixon did not commit any impeachable
offense, despite evidence of his numerous crimes. (Ignoring my explicit
statement that I supported Nixon's impeachment.) Media pundits went even
further: Joe Lockhart, former Press Secretary to President Bill Clinton, accused
me of making arguments that would justify the genocides of Hitler and Stalin.
What then did I say to warrant such demonization? In response to a question
whether it matters "If there were a quid pro quo," I said that would depend on
"If the quo were in some way unlawful." If the politician's motive were
"corrupt" -- for example, if he were seeking a kickback, that would be an
impeachable crime. But if his entirely lawful act had "mixed motives," including
his re-election, that would not turn a lawful act into a crime or impeachable
offense.
I went on to say that all politicians have mixed motives for their political
actions: they act in the public interest with an eye toward their electability.
I emphasized that if a politician does something that would otherwise be legal,
the fact that he was motivated in part by personal political advantage would
not, by itself, turn his legal actions into illegal corruption. Put another way,
a self-serving political motive -- a desire to be re-elected -- is not
necessarily a "corrupt" motive. I also said that if the politician sought
anything -- a "quo" -- that was "in some way illegal," that would "make a quid
pro quo unlawful."
Indeed, the main thrust of my hour-long opening presentation was that a
president could be impeached if he committed crimes or criminal-like behavior
akin to treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors -- regardless of
his motivation.
I made this self-evident point in response to arguments by the House Managers
that mixed motives could turn innocent conduct into a crime, if any part of the
motive were corrupt, and that a motive to help one's own re-election could be
corrupt.
I never once suggested that if a politician believed that his reelection was in
the public interest, his criminal or impeachable conduct could somehow be
excused. Both the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times got it right. The
Wall Street Journal said the following:
"Start with the media claim that defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz said a President
can do anything to further his re-election as long as he thinks it is in the
national interest. This isn't what he said. The Harvard professor said
explicitly that a President can be impeached for criminal acts."
The New York Times reported on my position as follows:
"Some Democratic senators and other critics accused him of suggesting that even
Nixon was not impeachable, despite his clear crimes. But that accusation is
incompatible with Mr. Dershowitz's main argument: that an impeachable 'high
crime and misdemeanor' requires an indictable offense."
These accurate descriptions bear no relationship to the distorted
mischaracterization by Democratic politicians, media pundits and anti-Trump
academics, who should know better.
Why then the deliberate distortions? Because my actual arguments resonated with
some senators. How do I know? Because some have said so publicly, while others
have said so privately. Senator Ted Cruz has written that "[Dershowitz's]
learned insight played a critical role convincing senators." Senator James
Inhofe said: "I agree with Alan Dershowitz – a liberal Democrat – who explained
so well that more witnesses won't change the fact that President Trump did not
commit a crime or an impeachable offense." When I was arguing that all
politicians have mixed motives and that it would be dangerous to deem corrupt a
motive to be re-elected, I could see the reaction of senators in the room.
Perhaps the most disturbing consequence of distorting the so-called "Dershowitz
doctrine" into a justification for any and all presidential actions, is that it
may create a dangerous precedent. Because of the persistent mischaracterization
of the "Dershowitz doctrine," the Senate vote to acquit may be taken as a
confirmation that a president who believes his re-election is in the public
interest, can do anything he wants -- even commit serious crimes -- to help
himself get re-elected. That is not what I said or believe. Nor is it the
precedent the senators who vote for acquittal intended to establish.
*Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law Emeritus at
Harvard Law School and author of the book, Guilt by Accusation: The Challenge of
Proving Innocence in the Age of #MeToo, Skyhorse Publishing, November 2019. He
is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
© 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.
Syria Between Russia, Turkey
Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/March 11/2020
Neighboring Turkey geographically while its regime is politically subservient to
Russia is unfortunate for Syria. Adding to their miseries, the country and its
people suffer the consequences of the relationship between the neighbor and the
guardian. The consequences are most heightened and most costly when Syria
becomes the primary issue in this bilateral relationship. This is the case today
as the two factions go about using Syrians as bargaining chips.
Though with some difference, but a similar event happened in the late fifties:
NATO member Turkey deployed troops on its southern border with Syria, which had
broken the west’s monopoly on supplying Arabs with weapons and allied itself
with Moscow. Syria, whose real power at the time was in the hands of its
military officers, replied by dissolving itself in Nasserite Egypt. For three
years, Syria ceased to exist.
The relationship between Turkey and Russia is haunted by a persistent contagion,
and there are many historical examples: Since the Ottoman Empire was
established, there have been more than ten wars between the two, four in the
eighteenth century, four others in the nineteenth century, and one, a major part
of the First World War, in the twentieth century.
Making matters worse, the two countries are in the midst of deep identity
crises: Turkey is Asian and European, and Mediterranean and Middle Eastern, and
with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the confusion between Islamic and secular, democratic
and despotic was exacerbated. Russia also found, in the term “Eurasian”, a
verbal solution to a very real contradiction that splits its entire history
between Slavic-ness and European-ness. Just like Turkey, it is half democratic
and half despotic, half secular and half religious, and its president Putin is
no less arrogant than Erdogan.
These two countries, which both sprang from collapsed empires, aspire to glory
to which they lack the tools to achieve.
Woe to that who is caught between two factions that are undergoing an identity
crisis, of reconciling the past and the present and thus reconciling politics
and with the present.
With Bashar al-Assad, it's double trouble, because Syria's bargaining power with
either of these parties is almost null. Assad has turned his territory into
scorched earth, making it easier for the northern titans to deal with it as
such, adding fuel to the fire and displacing even more of its inhabitants.
However, paradoxically, the US presence is the most prominent prerequisite for
Russia and Turkey's ambitions, but it is also among the biggest obstacles to the
completion of either of the pair's plans. Turkey is far too weak to expel Russia
and monopolize influence over the region, while Russia cannot deny Turkey a
certain role and presence. This creates a shared feeling between Moscow and
Ankara that the US and Europe must be brought in; even though, each of the two
capitals has its plan.
This is precisely what was not declared in the most recent Moscow Summit between
Putin and Erdogan. According to most observers, a fragile ceasefire was the
outcome of the end. As for the secure corridor and joint patrols and so on, they
are but details meant to make up lost time. It is, then, a ceasefire agreement
between two factions who postponed firing at one another as they wait for
Washington.
Taking into consideration the balance of power between the two countries,
Moscow’s strategy for bringing in the US is incomparably more cohesive than
Turkey’s. The latter, to a large extent, is firing shots blindly: it welcomes
SS400s from Russia, going against Washington's wishes, and wants to get
anti-aircraft Patriot rockets from the US. It threatens the Kurds but gets
surprised by the US's reaction. It exaggerates its pursuit of Fethullah Gulen,
who lives in the US and is protected by the Americans. It also keeps trying to
convince Europe of the idea of a safe zone while blackmailing it with millions
of asylum seekers.
Ankara’s crisis, which Erdogan’s miserable awareness and Turkey’s position and
history collaborate to exacerbate, is that it combines opposites in a single
strategy. The Turks temporized in the past during the Second World War, saying
they were neutral and then saying that they would join the axis. At the Cairo
conference in late 1943, Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt tried to
entice back-then Turkish President Ismet Inonu to join the allies, but the
accession would wait until after the war ended. Its subsequent membership in
NATO would weaken the organization as a result of Turkey's conflict with another
member, Greece; this worsened after the Cypriot crisis of 1974. With Erdogan, in
particular, it's a NATO member and a non-Nato member, European and non-European,
all at the same time.
Overall, Syria is paying the price for the Turkish dilemma that is dealt with
stupidly and for the Russian dilemma that is dealt with smartly. The result of
this combination is burning Syria and displacing its population in cruel and
unwelcoming land.
Refugees on Syrian-Turkish border vulnerable to
radicalization
Emily Przyborowski/Arab News/March 11/2020
Turkey’s closed border with Syria may be contributing to terrorism. Ankara
shutting its border with Syria to stem the flow of refugees to, in part, prevent
terrorists from entering the country is shortsighted and ignores the larger
long-term threat of refugees at the border becoming radicalized.
As the Assad regime continues pushing into Idlib, masses of refugees are fleeing
to the Turkish border, even though it has been closed since the completion of a
border wall in 2017. According to a UN report, the violence in Idlib has
displaced at least 900,000 people since Dec. 1. On Feb. 28, Turkey began
allowing refugees, including some of its estimated 3.6 million Syrian refugees,
to cross its borders into Europe. However, Turkey has little intention of
accepting additional refugees from Idlib and has prioritized resettling them in
northern Syria. As the Assad campaign continues, refugees’ attempts to cross the
border have increased.
Turkey has responded to the increased attempts to cross the border by placing
watchtowers and barbed wire along the 2017 border wall. Turkey’s military
stationed at the border has also been known to open fire on Syrians attempting
to scale the wall. Refugees in northern Syria fear that, when the Assad regime’s
campaign reaches the border, they will have no place to flee. In large part,
Turkey is preventing Syrian refugees from crossing the border because of the
risk that terrorists will enter under the guise of being refugees, as well as
the financial weight Turkey bears from a large refugee population.
Refugees are uniquely vulnerable to radicalization and, by closing its border,
Turkey is risking a swell in terrorists right outside its door. Many of the
refugees on the Turkish border are living in overcrowded camps and makeshift
shelters. Approximately 170,000 of those refugees are living out in the open
without protection from the unforgiving winter conditions. Syrian refugees are
subject to high levels of hunger, poverty, local crime, and freezing conditions,
which are all major potential contributors to radicalization.
Generally, the dire conditions inside refugee camps can cause them to become
hotbeds for extremist ideologies and recruitment grounds for terrorist
organizations. On the Turkish border, terrorist recruiters can infiltrate the
overcrowded camps largely undetected and gain access to a high concentration of
disenfranchised and vulnerable Syrians.
The dire conditions inside refugee camps can cause them to become hotbeds for
extremist ideologies
Terrorist organizations take advantage of the vulnerability of Syrian refugees
for recruitment and mobilization purposes because these refugees feel abandoned
by their own countries, rejected by Turkey, and forgotten by the international
community. In many cases, refugees may feel as though joining a radical
organization is their best option because of the financial incentives and
guarantee of security.
Many terrorist organizations, including Daesh, have a history of capitalizing on
the desperation of refugees by offering financial incentives such as salaries to
join them. The future of the Syrian refugees is unsure, making them susceptible
to joining an organization that offers them financial security and support. Aid
agencies are struggling to deal with the mass exodus of refugees from Idlib;
food and supplies are scarce, and terrorist organizations may be offering
refugees much-needed shelter, food and other support. Prior to its loss of
territory, Daesh targeted desperate Syrians by recruiting in refugee camps, on
migration routes to Europe, and within the diaspora.
The situation is made even more critical as many members of Daesh are once again
free in Syria. According to reports, Daesh members are being released from
prisons monitored by the Syrian Democratic Forces, as family members can pay to
have them freed. Daesh supporters have also organized prison breaks and, as of
October 2019, more than 100 Daesh detainees had escaped from prisons, with their
whereabouts unknown. Daesh may now be targeting refugees on the border in order
to bolster recruitment and stage a resurgence.
Turkey may not realize that, by preventing a new influx of Syrian refugees in
order to stop a few terrorists from entering the country, it risks a growing
presence of extremists on its border, which could be a much greater threat.
• Emily Przyborowski is the Middle East Director at Askari Associates and a
non-resident fellow with the Turkish Heritage Organization. Twitter: @EmilyMPrzy
Idlib shows why NATO band should get back together
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Arab News/March 11/2020
When French President Emmanuel Macron last year declared NATO “brain dead,” he
was neither intending to be disparaging nor relishing the prospect. He was
merely observing the result of developments in the alliance in recent years.
Above all, the Trump administration’s inconsistent behavior and explicit threats
to the principle of collective defense, coupled with the White House’s deep
skepticism toward any kind of multilateralism, means that, for the first time
since the Second World War, other allies cannot automatically rely on the US to
intervene to defend them, unless America also stands to gain from doing so. But
the US has not been the only party actively working to hollow out NATO from the
inside. The other country that has repeatedly undermined the alliance, both
through rhetoric and an explicit realignment in its geopolitical stance, has
been Turkey under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. From adopting Russian weapons
and materiel to cultivating a friendship with Vladimir Putin, NATO’s easternmost
flank has raised several questions about the integrity of the alliance.
Yet now we are faced with the flashpoint of Idlib. Idlib is the last province of
Syria to resist the Assad regime. It has also been the last point of refuge
within Syria for those fleeing the regime’s onslaught in other regions. The
overwhelming majority of refugees who have not crossed the borders into Lebanon,
Jordan or Turkey have found temporary respite in Idlib. By some estimates,
Idlib’s population swelled from 1 million before the war to 3 million as Syrians
fled the carnage in Aleppo, Ghouta and elsewhere.
The Damascus regime and its Russian and Iranian allies have been pushing into
Idlib in earnest since December in an attempt to wrap up the war. In so doing,
and by using the same civilian-busting tactics and famine siege strategies they
used elsewhere, they have already displaced as many as 900,000 people — 80
percent of whom are believed to be women and children. They have been mostly
headed toward Turkey.
Turkey is already struggling to cope with the more than 3.5 million Syrians to
have arrived up to September last year and, by Ankara’s reckoning, it has
neither the economic nor political capacity to absorb more — let alone the
expected 2 to 3 million if Idlib were to fall. From Turkey’s point of view, it
is a strategic imperative, as much as for the rest of us it is a humanitarian
imperative, that the Assad onslaught is halted, and that Idlib can remain a safe
refuge for internal Syrian refugees on some kind of permanent basis.
Erdogan and Putin may have ironed out a detente, but they are at cross purposes
The Russian-Syrian assault on Idlib, and the Turkish defense of the area, has
also brought into the open a direct conflict between a NATO member and Russia.
This is especially true of the past fortnight, with between 33 and 100 Turkish
soldiers killed by Russian-backed Syrian government forces, and Turkey
retaliating hard by decimating a substantial number of Assad assets.
Curiously, since these events, Russian troops on the ground have reportedly
effectively withdrawn from front-line exposure. Turkey has also declined to
acknowledge Russia’s role in the attack on its forces and instead chosen to
focus exclusively on hitting Assad targets in its retaliation. Erdogan and Putin
last week met in Moscow and seemingly made up during a six-hour meeting, after
which they announced a cease-fire in Idlib.
As we learned before, when Turkey downed a Russian warplane in the same area in
2015, Russia is all bark but no bite when it comes to direct confrontation with
NATO troops — especially in areas near NATO borders that might trigger the
collective defense policy. And, equipment and power-wise, Turkey is able to
match up to Russia, while it would stomp over Assad’s forces on its own.
Erdogan and Putin may have ironed out a detente, but they are at cross purposes.
However, another way is possible. On this issue, it is in Turkey’s best
interest, NATO’s best interest, and the people of Idlib’s best interest, that
Ankara be able to secure Idlib from further Assad attacks, and perhaps bring the
Syrian civil war to a comprehensive truce that allows former rebels and refugees
from other areas to live in peace in Idlib, protected by Turkey — and NATO.
NATO has guaranteed support and backing to Turkey within its established
borders, but has not yet committed to aiding Ankara in establishing a safe zone
in Idlib. This can and should change. That would give Erdogan the leverage he
needs vis-a-vis Putin to demand a settlement and a conclusion to the civil war
along these lines.
After all the puff and fury from Erdogan about NATO in past years, he now needs
it. And it needs him to succeed in Idlib, for both their sakes, and especially
for the sake of the people of Idlib. This is a good opportunity to renew our
commitments to each other under NATO. We must make the most of it.
• Dr. Azeem Ibrahim is a Research Professor at the US Army War College’s
Strategic Studies Institute and Director at the Center for Global Policy in
Washington D.C. Twitter: @AzeemIbrahim
Coronavirus testing our globalized defenses
Alistair Burt/Arab News/March 11/2020
A couple of years ago, I was the minister at the Department for International
Development responsible for the UK’s contribution to global health
responsibilities, from strengthening health systems worldwide to responding to
emergencies. As part of a discussion concerning the distressing Ebola outbreak,
I asked how many public health threat signals the World Health Organization
(WHO) picked up on a regular basis. I was astonished to be told there were about
7,000 a month, of which 0.5 percent resulted in a formal risk assessment. In
2018, there were 481 new public health events — including Ebola and even the
plague — in 141 different countries. A prescient WHO report that year said:
“What disease will emerge next or where is not known. The only certainty is that
novel pathogens will emerge in some of the world’s most vulnerable countries and
regions.”
The world, or at least some parts of it, has largely been lulled into a false
sense of security over medicine and health. The ability to counteract disease
through antibiotics and the miracles of modern medicine, from vaccination to
anticipation, has made an event like we are witnessing with coronavirus almost
unthinkable. In fact, as the WHO accurately records, such things are more likely
than not. The surprising thing is not that they happen; the surprising thing is
that we appear socially unprepared.
Medical successes by 1970 suggested an almost limitless expansion of health —
for some. Infectious diseases would be, like the Spanish flu of 1918, which is
estimated to have killed some 50 million people, pure history, from which the
world had emerged. Then we began to learn about antimicrobial resistance (AMR),
through which our carelessness with the overuse of lifesavers such as
antibiotics would come back to haunt us. If we thought that nasty bugs had gone
away, we should be aware that, since 1970, some 1,500 new pathogens have been
discovered. Sooner or later, as the WHO tells us, one will get through.
I make a case, therefore, for the preparedness of international medicine; for
multilateral responses; for the efforts of the WHO in repeated reports to warn;
and for limited outbreaks to alert us to the potentially worse to come, unless
we take further action now. A defense is only as strong as its weakest link and,
if the world does not listen, then there is only so much that reports and
history can achieve.
Firstly, global health security must be a higher national priority for states
that can afford to help finance the international effort. If not addressed
successfully, the UK estimates that AMR could wipe $100 trillion off global
gross domestic product in the next 30 years, and kill 10 million people per
year.
Secondly, we need to continue efforts to strengthen health systems worldwide,
particularly in the poorest and most vulnerable states. There are parts of the
world where the advances of modern medicine are not available, where health care
is more rudimentary. This means more than responding to an outbreak, dealing
with it and moving on; it means ensuring that funds go toward a continuous
upgrade in health facilities for all.
Thirdly, we should take the chance to recognize how fragile all our systems are,
and how interdependent we have become; ironically in an age where leaders seem
willing to risk the multilateral gains of the past for demonstrative
nationalistic bombast today. A virus shines a merciless light and will expose
authoritarian, information-repressive states and the inadequacy of health care
systems in advanced countries where access is restricted alike. There should be
a reaching-out between states that are political opponents to offer medical
assistance, partly because it is the right thing to do, and partly because, as
travel patterns show, we simply cannot contain a virus at a time when travel is
vital to the global economy.
If ever there was a case to be made that “we are all in this together,” surely
it is in response to a virus that knows no political boundaries and which skips
over physical ones. COVID-19 may have its origins in China, but it is Italy — a
modern, Western, democratic state — that is in lockdown. And, who knows, if Iran
needs support in assisting its people in dealing with its outbreak, and if that
comes from the West or Arab neighbors, what political gains might spring from
that realization in terms of further awareness of our shared vulnerabilities?
COVID-19 may have its origins in China, but it is Italy — a modern, Western,
democratic state — that is in lockdown.
The world lives under the impression that modern trade routes will exist
forever, that producers of flowers and fruit in remote corners will find their
produce on supermarket shelves a continent away by tomorrow morning for mutual
benefit. Coronavirus should warn us that this may not always be the case. What
if the next pathogen to break out is more virulent than the present one, and
with a much higher mortality rate?
When this outbreak is done, as it will be, people all over the world should be
asking these questions of their leaders.
*Alistair Burt is a former UK Member of Parliament who has twice held
ministerial positions in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office — as Parliamentary
Under Secretary of State from 2010 to 2013 and as Minister of State for the
Middle East from 2017 to 2019. Twitter: @AlistairBurtUK
The Crisis in Idlib
Dana Stroul/The Washington Institute/March 11/2020
Given the near-certainty that conflict will erupt again in northwest Syria, the
United States should start planning for how it might leverage that next outbreak
to push the parties toward a political process.
The following are prepared remarks submitted to the House Subcommittee on the
Middle East, North Africa, and International Terrorism.
Chairman Deutch, Ranking Member Wilson, and distinguished members of the
Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify on this critical issue. The war
in Syria enters its tenth year this month and Idlib is the crucible of the
conflict. The outcome of this chapter of the war has implications for virtually
all strategic challenges to U.S. interests: Russia’s role in the Middle East;
counterterrorism threats; Iran’s projection of power; the Syrian refugee and IDP
crisis; and the war crimes committed not only by Assad and Iran, but also by
Russia—a member of the United Nations Security Council.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
The Trump administration’s Syria policy ostensibly remains focused on three
goals: (1) defeat ISIS, (2) remove all Iranian and Iran-backed boots from Syria,
and (3) support a viable political process to end the war under the auspices of
the UN. All of these objectives are unachievable if the regime regains control
of the province.
Counterterrorism. Assad’s symbiotic relationship with Al Qaeda is
well-established, and there is every reason to expect that if his regime regains
control of Idlib, extremist elements there will be coopted and weaponized by
Assad as leverage against Arab neighbors, Europe, and the U.S. ISIS is already
regrouping in regime-held areas, and a Russia-Iran-Assad victory in Idlib will
fan the flames of extremism in Syria, the heart of the Middle East.
Iran. A regime victory in Idlib will enable continuity in Iran’s strategy for
entrenching long-term influence in Syria. Tehran is working to minimize
disruption in its bid for long-term influence through proxies and weak
governments after the death of Commander Qassem Soleimani. Given Iran’s goal of
expelling U.S. forces from the region and Assad’s goal of retaking all Syrian
territory, it will be an easier shift from northwest Syria to northeast by the
Russia-Iran-Assad axis in order to counter the U.S. military still active east
of the Euphrates River.
Political process. A return to conflict will prompt all stakeholders to seek
military solutions rather than a political outcome at the negotiating table. The
path to a negotiated, durable solution to the war in Syria would effectively be
over if Assad, backed by Russia and Iran, continues to resist any concessions
under the UN process. Assad’s strategy of mass terror and his weaponization of
refugees is designed to force Europe and Arab governments to reintegrate him
into the international community and fund reconstruction of the Syrian state,
absent any changes in his regime.
These outcomes threaten U.S. interests in the Middle East, the security of NATO
ally Turkey, and stability in Europe. Yet Syria has not been prioritized in
Washington, and resources continue to be taken off the table, from stabilization
funds to U.S. military boots on the ground. Local, regional, and European
partners question U.S. commitment, and are looking to Moscow for leadership in
Syria.
BACKGROUND
Idlib has long held strategic importance of the province to all the stakeholders
involved in hostilities there. Idlib’s population was an estimated 1.5 million
in 2011. The UN estimates it has more than doubled over the course of the Syrian
war, as the Assad regime methodically relocated waves of Syrian civilians and
opposition fighters there from other parts of the country following local
ceasefires and “reconciliation agreements.” Essentially, Syrian civilians and
fighters faced a choice after the latter lost on the battlefield, presented to
them by Russia and Assad: submit to the regime or relocate to Idlib. These
agreements were designed to bring opposition-held areas under Assad regime
control and cleanse them of the largely Sunni population. Rather than face the
likelihood of conscription, forced disappearances, and the daily humiliations
and deprivations of regime-controlled life, hundreds of thousands of Syrians
moved to Idlib.
Concurrently, non-ISIS terrorist groups made Idlib the center of gravity for
their activities. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and Huras al-Din are both extremist
groups that have resisted Al Qaeda’s attempts to unify them despite overlapping
ideological affiliations/bents. Huras al-Din continues to plan external attacks
and is thus considered a high priority threat by the United States, while Hayat
Tahrir al-Sham established an Islamist government in Idlib whose practices have
led to the flight of humanitarian actors, violent suppression of civil society
activists, and forced conscription of children.
As part of the effort to forestall a broader Turkish military incursion into
Idlib and prevent another humanitarian crisis on Turkey’s border, President
Putin agreed with President Erdogan in September 2017 to a “de-escalation zone.”
Putin and Erdogan followed up in September 2018 with the “Sochi agreement,”
whereby Turkey would remove ‘extremist elements’ and Russia committed to prevent
further offensive operations by the Assad regime. But the Assad regime—supported
by Russian air power and Iran-aligned ground forces—launched an offensive to
retake Idlib in early 2019. Assad and his backers initially achieved only
minimal progress, largely due to push back from Turkish-supported opposition
forces and Al-Qaeda linked fighters. Turkey, already under tremendous domestic
strain from hosting 3.5 million Syrian refugees in its territory, views an
additional influx of refugees as an existential threat given its domestic
economic downturn and rise in anti-refugee sentiment.
THE CURRENT CRISIS
The Assad-Russia-Iran offensive kicked into high gear in the past three months,
causing the most severe humanitarian crisis of the entire nine-year war and
violating the terms of the Sochi agreement. The fighting reached its boiling
point on February 27, when Turkish forces were attacked with precision munitions
leading to 33 Turkish deaths and 60 injured. Though Assad’s forces were
initially blamed for the attack, the precise nature of the operation, at night,
indicates Russian Air Force—Assad regime forces lack the capability for such a
strike, especially at night. Turkey responded decisively, destroying Assad
aircraft, ground vehicles, and artillery pieces; targeting regime personnel; and
attacking the Assad’s Russian-provided air defense system. There are also
reports of Lebanese Hezbollah casualties in Idlib. The Turkish
counter-offensive, at least temporarily, shifted the military balance on the
ground against Assad and his backers Russia and Iran.
Assad regime losses and Turkish willingness to use military force prompted Putin
to seek a ceasefire agreement, rather than risk additional losses on the
battlefield. Putin is also motivated to keep Turkey oriented toward Moscow, and
not push Turkey back toward the U.S. and NATO after years of tension. Despite
Erdogan’s demonstrated willingness to use military force, the agreement
negotiated with Putin favors Assad’s territorial gains. While it provides a
temporary respite for terrorized Syrian civilians, it is unlikely to hold and
there are already reports of Assad regime violations.
The Russia-Turkey ceasefire agreement will not prevent further violence in Idlib,
fails to address the humanitarian catastrophe, and does nothing to address the
underlying causes of the Syrian civil war: the Assad regime’s brutality toward
its own people. It has already been rejected by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and Huras
al-Din, and enables a “Gaza Strip”-like situation on Turkey’s border with Syrian
civilians and Al Qaeda-linked groups pushed up against the Turkish border.
Syrians cannot return to their homes under this agreement, which perpetuates the
human suffering and instability.
The question is when—not if—violence will reignite in Idlib. Russia is both
unwilling and incapable of compelling Assad to adhere to any ceasefire or
de-escalation agreement. Although Assad should recognize the devastating losses
to what remains of his military should he restart the offensive in Idlib, Putin
is undeterred in ensuring the regime’s survival.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR U.S. POLICY
Given the near-certainty of return to conflict in Idlib, the U.S. should start
planning now for how it might leverage that next outbreak of violence to move
all parties toward a political process. Aiming for a ceasefire—which is the
administration’s current objective for Idlib—is critical, but too narrow a goal
given the strategic risk to broader U.S. interests.
This opportunity for a strategic pivot will present itself given the following
factors:
Assad’s forces suffered significant material and personnel losses at the hands
of the Turkish military in Idlib. They will be constrained in their ability to
launch new operations in other parts of Syria not under regime control. Russian
and Iranian operational support may be more tenuous given a set of black swan
events—the coronavirus, which is sweeping through Iran, and the spectacular
Russia-Saudi OPEC feud, which has collapsed oil prices—both of which are likely
to hammer the oil-dependent economies of Assad’s backers.
Assad is constrained in his ability to maintain control over areas of Syria
currently under regime control. Anti-regime opposition is stirring again in
southern Syria. This is another example of failed ‘reconciliation’ agreements
with the regime, which lacks the resources and manpower to counter the rising
insurgency in the south, and is unwilling to deliver on the commitments it made
under the terms of the reconciliation deal.
Syria’s economy continues its downward spiral, accelerated by the economic
crisis in next door Lebanon as well as the impact of the U.S.-led sanctions
regime. Additional sanctions from the Congressionally-mandated Caesar Civilian
Protection Act will come online soon, and the U.S. and Europe are still standing
together in denial of any reconstruction aid to Syria absent meaningful reforms.
The regime is economically starved, and Russia and Iran cannot bail Assad out.
The convergence of these developments offers the United States, in concert with
the United Nations, and European and Arab governments, an opportunity to use the
economic pressure and battlefield realities inside Syria to refocus on the
political process. The leverage if the U.S. remains opposed to using military
force in Syria other than to defeat ISIS is the ongoing political and economic
pressure on Assad, and increasing sanctions on his backers in Tehran and Moscow.
Easing of sanctions and discussion of reconstruction assistance should only be
on the table if the regime credibly changes its behavior, including meaningful
participation in the Geneva political process.
Leveraging this strategic window, however, will require confidence-building and
coordination with Turkey. The goal should be rapprochement on Syria policy and
driving a wedge between Ankara and Moscow. The bilateral discussion should be
expanded beyond a narrow focus on the Patriot missile defense system. It should
focus on reaching a mutually beneficial consensus with Turkey on the way forward
in Syria, including how to complete the anti-ISIS mission in northeastern Syria.
It will be counterproductive to U.S. efforts in Syria if the aperture with
Turkey is widened to encompass every problematic policy of the Turkish
government, but a pragmatic solution on Turkey’s acquisition of the Russian
S-400 system should be part of the consultations.
Other efforts that the U.S. should undertake before the Russia-Turkey ceasefire
collapses altogether include:
U.S. diplomacy at the United Nations Security Council should be supercharged
with like-minded Council members to renew full cross-border access for
humanitarian aid delivery. In January, Russia and China vetoed renewal of
Resolution 2449, which enabled cross-border humanitarian aid delivery at four
points without Assad regime approval, and the current reduced mandate expires on
July 10. With reduced cross-border access, the UN has struggled to reach Syrians
in need. According to Interaction, 70% of the population of Idlib are women and
children, and the cross-border system is the only way to deliver urgent
humanitarian assistance including food, shelter, and healthcare. The U.S.
signaled support for mitigating the humanitarian crisis in Idlib by pledging an
additional $108 million. That aid is meaningless without viable mechanisms to
deliver it in a timely manner, free of manipulation and intervention by those
responsible for the conflict.
The U.S. should sanction Russian individuals for the commission of war crimes in
Syria, and should coordinate with European allies to do the same as one step
toward accountability. The recent report by the Independent International
Commission of Inquiry specifically assigns culpability to the Russian Air Force
for the war crime of launching indiscriminate attacks in civilian areas.
Executive Order 18394, issued on October 14, 2019, provides significant latitude
to the administration to impose sanctions on Russian persons, and those that
work directly or indirectly on behalf of Russian persons, who have committed
serious human rights abuses in Syria as well as prevented efforts to promote a
political solution.
Begin consultations with Ankara on various options for support in defense of
Turkish security when the Idlib ceasefire collapses. The Turkish military
clearly defended its interests in Idlib, but Ankara will seek diplomatic and
operational demonstrations of U.S. and NATO support. Options for assisting
Turkey should be on the table—such as intelligence support but broadened to
address the unstable situation in both northwest and northeast Syria.
Dana Stroul is the Shelly and Michael Kassen Fellow at The Washington Institute.
Russia and Saudis in a knife fight over oil — but we may be
the victims
Simon Henderson/The Hill/March 11/2020
A train wreck is about to occur in the oil market, and there will be casualties.
Russia and Saudi Arabia, which previously had cooperated in making the world
market well-supplied, no longer can agree on how to share the benefits.
Today Riyadh announced it will step up output to a record 12.3 million barrels
per day in April, the vast majority of which is exported. The kingdom can’t
actually produce that amount. Daily production last week was 9.7 million
barrels, and taps just can’t be turned to suddenly produce an extra
million-plus. At least initially, the balance will come from stockpiles,
probably tankers floating at anchor in parts of the world close to important
markets.
Russia also is increasing production but its incremental volumes are smaller.
It’s a game of bluff: Who can survive longer? And we are the spectators.
The crucial factor is price. Oil was trading in the $50-per-barrel range last
week. Yesterday it slumped to the high $20/low $30 range. Each side has
strengths and weaknesses. Russia’s budget requirements can be met at a lower
price per barrel than Saudi Arabia’s. But the kingdom can produce oil much more
cheaply than Russia.
Isn’t a low oil price good for the economy of the United States and many other
countries? Well, yes, but it’s not good if you work for an oil company,
especially one of the shale oil companies that have transformed U.S. production
in recent years, making us a net exporter. Many of the shale companies are
marginal commercial operations. Some will survive, but many may not be able to
withstand a period of being unprofitable.
And, as they say, “what goes up must come down” and vice versa. The whole
purpose of the Russian and Saudi tactics is to regain a measure of control over
the market, so they can sell at the price they want. That price, almost by
definition, likely will be higher than what we, the ordinary consumers, would
like.
Such antics by Russian President Vladimir Putin perhaps are not surprising. But
aren’t the Saudis meant to be our allies? The line used to be — at least after
the crisis when Saudi Arabia shut off oil exports to the U.S. during the 1973
Arab-Israel war — that the kingdom would make sure the world economy was
adequately supplied with reasonably priced oil.
Riyadh sometimes has interpreted “reasonably priced” as “realistically priced.”
But these days, such diplomatic smoothness is gone. Yesterday the Department of
Energy issued a statement that included: “These attempts by state actors to
manipulate and shock oil markets… ” Such language may be normal in dealing with
Moscow but is new, at least publicly, for communication with Riyadh. The White
House said today that President Trump spoke with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince
Mohammad bin Salman, or MbS, on Monday about global energy markets.
When is this going to end? And how is this going to end? The “when” is difficult
to answer. It might end tomorrow if Iran were to launch another salvo of
missiles against Saudi oil installations as it did last September. But assuming
the crisis remains a simple struggle between the rival ambitions of President
Putin and MbS, Saudi Arabia’s effective leader, then expect it to be a knife
fight. Both men are ruthless and determined. One could perhaps debate who is
more cunning. I know where my money is.
Simon Henderson is the Baker Fellow and director of the Bernstein Program on
Gulf and Energy Policy at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Follow
him on Twitter @shendersongulf.
As Israel’s Kingmaker Gets Off the Fence, Gantz Gets a
Boost
David Makovsky/ The Washington Institute/March 11/2020
Although Benny Gantz’s party lost the head-to-head battle, Avigdor Liberman’s
favorable influence on the coalition math has left the general in a stronger
position—and taken some diplomatic weight off the Trump administration’s
shoulders.
Israel’s third round of elections last week seemed inconclusive at first, but
the deadlock may now be broken. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu did better
this time than in September’s round two, but his gains were insufficient to form
a new government. Potential kingmaker Avigdor Liberman jettisoned his previous
idea of getting the two top parties to join forces; instead, personal antipathy
and policy differences have led him to definitely state that he will not join
any government Netanyahu leads. Thus, while centrist Blue and White Party leader
Benny Gantz may have options to shape a new government, Netanyahu has no pathway
on his own.
In theory, the center-left bloc has the requisite number of seats for a bare
majority in the 120-member Knesset, since anti-Netanyahu forces won 62 seats. In
reality, the situation is more complex.
OPTION ONE: MINORITY GOVERNMENT
The anti-Netanyahu forces include Blue-White (33 seats), the Arab-led Joint List
(15), Labor-Meretz (7), and Liberman’s Yisrael Beitenu Party (7). The question
is whether they can coalesce into a government without the Likud Party. The
Joint List has refused to join past governments; moreover, no leading Israeli
party has invited them, and Liberman pledged during the campaign that he would
not even support tacit arrangements in which the list provides a safety net for
Gantz in crucial parliamentary no-confidence votes. Will he stick to that stance
now, or stand down and enable Gantz to form a temporary minority government in
which the Joint List is an unofficial partner? If the latter, it would be the
first minority government in Israel’s history to be sworn in from the start.
After meeting with Liberman on March 9, Gantz announced that the two leaders
would work together. They had exchanged public comments over the weekend about
common goals for a new government related to the role of religion and state,
suggesting behind-the-scenes coordination.
Going forward, Gantz could take one of two approaches, neither of which sees a
minority government as permanent. First, after he is sworn in, he could use the
minority coalition as a springboard to a wider government. Once Netanyahu
acknowledges that he has no path to form his own government, Gantz could recruit
either Likud (led by someone other than Netanyahu) or its ultraorthodox allies,
who hold 16 seats and may be willing to join in order to secure more government
funding for their institutions. The latter option would require Liberman to
abandon another pledge—that his secular party would halt the encroachment of
ultraorthodox laws. Second, Gantz could use the threat of a minority government
as a negotiating tactic to extract better terms from Netanyahu in configuring a
national unity government with a rotating premiership.
For his part, Netanyahu has begun to mobilize the public against a minority
government in order to narrow Gantz’s options. Netanyahu has claimed that if
Gantz tacitly coordinates with the Joint List, he will essentially be partnering
with elements of that coalition who have supported or failed to rule out the use
of Palestinian violence against Israel. At the center of this drama are two
right-leaning parliamentarians from Blue-White, Zvi Hauser and Yoaz Hendel, who
are known to resist a minority government and may therefore hold the balance of
power within the bloc.
The focus on a minority government is also bound to create a broader debate on
the social and political role of Arab Israelis, who form 20% of the population.
Polls show that young Arab Israelis want more integration, and Arab turnout shot
up from 59% in September to 70% last week, reaching parity with Jewish turnout.
Of course, this increase may have resulted from backlash to a provision in the
Trump peace plan that proposes gerrymandering three Arab-majority communities
northwest of the West Bank inside Israel for inclusion in a future Palestinian
state, even though the area’s 100,000 residents want to remain part of Israel.
OPTION TWO: UNITY GOVERNMENT
The fight over who takes the first rotation as prime minister is the key to
forming any unity government, since Gantz does not believe Netanyahu would honor
any agreement to step down after two years. Within a few hours of polls closing,
the incumbent claimed a “giant victory” as Likud bested Blue-White head-to-head,
increasing its total by four seats while its rival gained none. As past
elections have shown, however, what counts in the end is the ability to
galvanize a big enough coalition, not win the individual party battle—this is
likely why only one world leader (Austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz) has
congratulated Netanyahu on his ostensible win.
If there is a unity government, Netanyahu could try to press for front-loading
annexation of West Bank settlements in response to the Trump plan. Blue-White
may in turn resist this approach.
OPTION THREE: ANOTHER ELECTION
Blue-White is now considering passage of a law that a premier cannot form a
government if he is indicted. The law would likely be written to avoid charges
of retroactive legislation and come into force with the next election. But its
primary goal may be to deny Netanyahu the leverage of threatening a fourth
election, perhaps making him more amenable to compromise.
OTHER TAKEAWAYS
Diving into the voting data yields several noteworthy observations about
Israel’s current political dynamics, policy views, and campaign tactics:
Turnout. Overall voter turnout continued to grow rather than diminish with each
round: 71.3% last week vs. 69.8% in September. This may seem counterintuitive,
but it is a testament to the public believing the stakes are high.
Likud’s boost. Netanyahu’s party did much better in this round, adding 238,000
more votes since September at the expense of Liberman (who lost 47,000), the
ultraorthodox party United Torah Judaism (which lost 36,000), the pro-settler
party Yamina (which lost 20,000), and Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power), which not
only lost 64,000 votes but also failed to cross the 3.25% threshold required for
entry into parliament. Netanyahu’s numbers received a particularly notable bump
in areas near Gaza, which may suggest that his containment approach to that
territory and the de facto truce with Hamas are popular among those voters.
The Trump peace plan also seemed to help him on different levels. Politically,
it diverted headlines from his ongoing corruption indictments and allowed him to
tout his ability to shape international decisions in Israel’s favor. His pledges
to declare Israeli sovereignty over West Bank settlements won him higher support
from settler parties than ever before, with Likud’s numbers increasing as much
as 10% in most major settlements compared to September.
Blue-White gains despite itself. Gantz’s party ran a lackluster campaign but
gained close to 69,000 votes. Notwithstanding his efforts to appeal to moderate
right-wing Israelis, most of his extra votes came from other parts of the
center-left bloc—the result of a funneling effect whereby people who previously
voted for Labor or Meretz (which lost 138,000 votes) felt a need to stand with
Blue-White against Netanyahu.
United Torah Judaism. This is the first time in memory that the ultraorthodox
party’s vote tally dropped, which is interesting given the very high birthrate
among that community. Unlike in September, Likud bested United Torah even in
Jerusalem. Does this mean ultraorthodox rabbis are losing their grip over their
voters, or are such results just an aberration stemming from strong voter
affinity for Netanyahu?
U.S. POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Netanyahu’s failure to garner a majority takes some of the pressure off the
Trump administration, which was facing the prospect of having to give him the
green light to frontload West Bank annexations in order to appease the factions
that voted him back into office. Any moves of that sort would likely have
sounded the death knell for the Trump plan, perhaps even triggering unrest in
the West Bank and difficulties with the Israel-Jordan peace treaty.
The parties can now defer such issues. Although there are indications that the
White House is telling people some annexations might occur this year, multiple
senior administration officials publicly insist that the Trump plan is not an
ultimatum but rather an opening bid intended to elicit a Palestinian
counterproposal. Many Palestinians seem to hope that the plan will be rescinded
altogether if Trump is defeated in the next election, relieving them of having
to decide whether to reassess their boycott of Washington and wholesale
rejection of its latest peace proposals.
*David Makovsky is the Ziegler Distinguished Fellow at The Washington Institute
and coauthor with Dennis Ross of the book Be Strong and of Good Courage: How
Israel’s Most Important Leaders Shaped Its Destiny.