English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese,
Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For October 08/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.october08.20.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since
2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations For today
Be on guard so that your hearts are not
weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and the worries of this life, and
that day does not catch you unexpectedly, like a trap
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke
21/34-38/:”‘Be on guard so that your hearts are not weighed down with
dissipation and drunkenness and the worries of this life, and that day does not
catch you unexpectedly, like a trap. For it will come upon all who live on the
face of the whole earth. Be alert at all times, praying that you may have the
strength to escape all these things that will take place, and to stand before
the Son of Man. ’Every day he was teaching in the temple, and at night he would
go out and spend the night on the Mount of Olives, as it was called. And all the
people would get up early in the morning to listen to him in the temple.”
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials
published on October 07-08/2020
Lebanese President Sets Consultations on New Cabinet
Lebanon Foils Medicine Smuggling Via Beirut Airport
Lebanon Announces Another Record Daily Tally of Covid-19 Cases
President Aoun addressing “Alvarez & Marsal” delegation: The Lebanese are
looking forward, with interest, to the results of the forensic audit
President Aoun: “Weak state ruled by the powerful who do not value the
Constitution”
Aoun Calls Berri, His Call for Consultations 'Not Linked to French Initiative'
Miqati Nominates Hariri to Lead Techno-Political Govt.
Qassem Says No Govt. if No Respect for Parliamentary Representation
Army Chief Meets Military, Security Officials in the UK
LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun ends a two-day visit to the UK
Jumblat Reminds of Electricity File, Says Fuel Being Smuggled to Syria
Jbara Says Panic-Buying Triggered Medicines Shortage
Hezbollah is losing its ability to intimidate anyone/Michael Young/The
National/October 07/2020
How the Lebanese Sects Successively Withdrew from War/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al
Awsat/October 07/2020
Beirut’s last synagogue at risk after severe damages following port
blast/Melanie Swan/Jerusalem Post/October 07/2020
Berri said pushing for Baassiri as next Lebanese PM/The Weekly Arab/October
07/2020
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on
October 07-08/2020
Half Karabakh Population Displaced as Mediators Set
for Geneva Talks
Iran Warns 'Terrorists' near Border in Karabakh Fighting
France Accuses Turkey of 'Military Involvement' in Karabakh
Kuwaiti Emir Names Top Security Official as Crown Prince
Danes summon Iran’s envoy over reports of illegal divorces
Anti-Iran Slogans Chanted at ‘Arbaeen’ Pilgrimage in Iraq
US Official to Asharq Al-Awsat: Normalization with Assad Linked to Behavior
Change
Assad Blames Turkey for Nagorno-Karabakh Fighting
Israel Confiscates Funds Transferred by Hamas, PA to Families of Palestinian
Prisoners
Sisi Warns of Wicked Ambitions, Threats Facing Egypt
Algeria Kicks off Campaign to Rally Support for Constitutional Referendum
Yemeni Govt Warns of Sectarian Screening by Houthis Targeting Educators
Tunisian Culture Minister Sacked for ‘Siding with’ Protesters
OIC Stresses its Rejection of All Forms of Terrorism
Titles For The Latest LCCC English
analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on October
07-08/2020
Turkey Rekindles the Armenian Genocide/Raymond
Ibrahim/FrontPage Magazine/October 07/2020
The Battle of Lepanto: When Turks Skinned Christians Alive for Refusing
Islam/Raymond Ibrahim/October 07/2020
Will Washington Close its Embassy in Baghdad?/Robert Ford/Asharq Al Awsat/October
07/2020
Madrid, Marseille and Middlesbrough Highlight New Virus Problem/Ferdinando
Giugliano/Bloomberg/October 07/2020
Were Iran and the United States Really ‘On the Brink’? Observations on Gray Zone
Conflict/Michael Eisenstadt/The Washington Institute/October 07/2020
Caucasus Clash Could Endanger Israeli Oil Imports/Simon Henderson/The Washington
Institute./October 07/2020
The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on October 07-08/2020
Lebanese President Sets Consultations on New Cabinet
Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Lebanese President Michel Aoun said on Wednesday that parliamentary
consultations to choose a new prime minister will begin on Oct. 15.
The government of Hassan Diab resigned on Aug. 10 in the wake of the devastating
Beirut Port blast that killed nearly 200 people and wrecked swathes of the
capital. Mustapha Adib, the country's former ambassador to Berlin, was picked on
Aug. 31 to form a cabinet after French President Emmanuel Macron launched an
initiative, securing a consensus on naming him a PM-designate. But he quit in
late September after trying for almost a month to line up a cabinet of experts.
His resignation dealt a blow to the French plan under which the new government
would take steps to tackle corruption and implement reforms needed to trigger
billions of dollars of international aid to fix an economy that has been crushed
by a mountain of debt. But Adib's efforts stumbled in a dispute over
appointments, particularly the post of finance minister, which both Hezbollah
and Amal movement, dubbed the Shiite duo, held onto.
Macron admonished Lebanon's leaders following Adib's resignation, saying the
failed efforts amounted to a collective "betrayal", but vowed to push ahead with
his efforts. The date set by Aoun for the start of parliamentary consultations
comes just two days before Lebanon marks the first anniversary of a nationwide
protest movement demanding sweeping political reform. It was not clear if
Lebanon’s political groups have agreed on the future premier but former Prime
Minister Najib Mikati has reportedly put forward a proposal for a 20-member
cabinet consisting of 14 experts and six politicians.
Lebanon Foils Medicine Smuggling Via Beirut Airport
Beirut - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces have foiled an attempt to smuggle, through
the Rafik Hariri International airport, hundreds of boxes of medicines to Egypt.
The operation came at a time when Lebanon suffers from a shortage of medicine
supply after the Central Bank announced a plan to lift subsidies over the dollar
crisis gripping the country. Head of the Syndicate of Pharmacists Ghassan
Al-Amine told Asharq Al-Awsat that the price of medicine in Lebanon has “become
the lowest” in the region for being sold at the exchange rate of LL1,500 to $1
while in the black market the Lebanese pound has reached above LL8,000. “The low
cost of medicine makes it more vulnerable for smuggling,” Al-Amine said. On
Tuesday, the ISF said in a statement that it successfully foiled an operation to
smuggle suspicious quantities of medication to Egypt. The detainees confessed
they bought the medicines from different pharmacies in Lebanon. The ISF said it
later released the six suspects on bail. Al-Amine explained that the shortage of
medicine in the Lebanese market is not only caused by smuggling to other
countries but because Lebanon has stopped importing large quantities of
medicine. He said that in the past two months, Lebanese people started to
stockpile medicines fearing they will no longer be available or that prices will
increase after the Central Bank said it would lift subsidies by the end of
October. He said importers have only enough stocks to last for 45 days. “This is
why pharmacies are only selling medicines in small quantities,” he explained,
warning from a worsening crisis in the coming months.
Lebanon Announces Another Record Daily Tally of Covid-19 Cases
Naharnet/October 07/2020
Lebanon on Wednesday announced 1,459 new coronavirus cases -- the highest daily
tally recorded by the country since the first case was detected on February
21.It also announced nine new deaths. The new cases raise the country’s overall
tally to 48,377 while the fatalities take the death toll to 433.
Lebanon has regularly witnessed high daily tallies over the past few months and
the government on Sunday placed 111 towns and villages on lockdown in a bid to
curb the spread of the virus.
President Aoun addressing “Alvarez & Marsal” delegation:
The Lebanese are looking forward, with interest, to the results of the forensic
audit
NNA/October 07/2020
President Michel Aoun affirmed that “The Lebanese are looking forward, with
interest, to the results of the forensic audit in the financial accounts of the
Central Bank, because this audit represents one of the basic reforms that the
Lebanese Government has adopted to emerge the difficult financial and economic
conditions which Lebanon is going through”. The President’s stances came while
meeting a delegation from Alvarez & Marsal company, which will undertake the
forensic financial audit in Central Bank accounts, in the presence of Caretaker
Finance Minister, Ghazi Wazny, today at Baabda Palace. The delegation included
General Manager, Mr. James Daniel, Administrative Director, Asild Janusz Ozeib,
and Mr. Yehya Naseer. Also attending the meeting were: Former Minister, Salim
Jreisatti, Director General of the Lebanese Presidency, Dr. Antoine Choucair,
and the President’s Economic and Financial Adviser, Charbel Qordahi.President
Aoun stressed the need to reach conclusive, accurate and clear results which are
supported by documents and evidence, calling on the members of the delegation to
review evidence if they find any difficulty at work so that it can be removed
quickly. The President also recalled the obligation to adhere to the
confidentiality of work and the obtained information, wishing the delegation
success in their task and in presenting the actual results of the forensic audit
that they were assigned to undertake within the time limit which is specified in
the contract. For his part, the General Director, Mr. James Daniel, explained
the delegation’s vision of the task which was assigned to them for the forensic
audit of the BDL financial accounts and the difficulties that they might
encounter during their work. Mr. Daniel also stressed that the auditors team
adhered to the deadline given after obtaining the required information from the
Central Bank, and thanked the trust given to their company by the Lebanese
state, in forensic auditing, hoping that the work team would receive all the
required cooperation to accomplish the mission. -----Presidency Press Office
President Aoun: “Weak state ruled by the powerful who do not value the
Constitution”
NNA/October 07/2020
The President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, this morning, wrote the
following tweet: “A strong state may be ruled by powerful or ordinary rulers,
but they respect the Constitution and abide by laws, thus strengthening the
state. The weak state is definitely ruled by the strong, but they do not value
the Constitution and they ignore the laws, so they become stronger and the state
becomes weaker”.—Presidency Press Office
Aoun Calls Berri, His Call for Consultations 'Not Linked to
French Initiative'
Naharnet/October 07/2020
President Michel Aoun on Wednesday called Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and
informed him of the date of binding parliamentary consultations to name a new
premier, LBCI TV said. “Aoun will not hold any meetings prior to the
consultations and the issue might remain limited to some communication,” the TV
network added. The President’s call for consultations is “not linked to the
activation of the French initiative and it is rather the President’s duty to
call for consultations,” LBCI quoted unnamed sources as saying. “The timeframe
given to the blocs is sufficient to name the figure that will assume the
mission, seeing as the seven-day deadline might be enough to put the formation
process on the right track,” the sources added.
Miqati Nominates Hariri to Lead Techno-Political Govt.
Naharnet/October 07/2020
Ex-PM Najib Miqati on Wednesday announced that he nominates ex-PM Saad Hariri to
lead a techno-political government comprised of 14 specialists and six political
ministers of state. “Any person who interprets the political situation in the
recent period and has a centrist mindset would see the need to reconcile between
politics and technocracy,” Miqati said in an interview with LBCI television.
Asked whether he is nominated to lead the new government, the ex-PM said: “I
nominate Saad Hariri.” “But if the violations continue in the political conduct
and in the implementation of the Constitution’s stipulations, any person will
not be able to carry out a rescue process on their own,” Miqati added.
“Therefore I say that I do not accept to be a premier amid the current
situations, because I do not see prospects for success should every party
continue to tamper with the Constitution as they desire,” the former premier
went on to say. As for the fate of the binding parliamentary consultations to
name a new PM in light of the fact that the ex-PMs are yet to agree on a
candidate, Miqati said: “Why are we rushing things? We will hold intensive
meetings this week to take a unified stance, prior to the consultations that
have been scheduled for October 15.” Miqati also denied the presence of a “rift”
among the former premiers in connection with Mustafa Adib’s failed attempt to
form a new government. Asked whether Lebanon will have a new government amid the
current circumstances, Miqati said: “The government will be formed, but will
there be elements for its success? I doubt it.”
Qassem Says No Govt. if No Respect for Parliamentary
Representation
Naharnet/October 07/2020
Hizbullah deputy chief Sheikh Naim Qassem on Wednesday hinted that his party and
its allies will not accept any government format that “does not represent the
parliamentary blocs.” “The economic and social situation has become unbearable
and the people are facing the threat of the end of subsidization (of essential
goods) while the coronavirus crisis might further aggravate,” Qassem warned.
“Don’t these concerns of the people and the future of their children require the
presence of a salvation government that is at the level of this period,” he
asked. He added: “The time is not right for altering or changing the balance of
power nor for staging a coup against the results of the parliamentary elections
nor for inventing government formats that do not represent the parliamentary
blocs.”Warning that “the past months have proved that the only available
solution is designating a PM and forming a government according to the
Constitution and the mechanisms that have been in place since the Taef Accord,”
Qassem cautioned that “any disregard for this solution means keeping the country
in a state of paralysis and deterioration.”“Those who do not follow the
constitutional and legal courses would bear the responsibility,” he said. “The
rescue plan, Beirut’s reconstruction and addressing the crises require a
government that would shoulder all these burdens, and the more hands are joined
and the broadest representation is achieved in the government… the more there
will be bigger hope in reform,” Qassem went on to say. Hizbullah and its ally
Amal Movement had insisted on having a say in the appointment of Shiite
ministers during Mustafa Adib’s botched attempt to form a government in recent
weeks. Adib eventually stepped down and President Michel Aoun has scheduled
binding parliamentary consultations to pick a new premier for October 15.
Army Chief Meets Military, Security Officials in the UK
Naharnet/October 07/2020
Lebanese Army chief General Joseph Aoun visited the United Kingdom at the
invitation of his British counterpart General Nick Carter, the Lebanese Army
said in a statement Tuesday. In addition to meeting with Carter, Aoun met with
Commander of Maritime Operations for the Royal Navy Admiral Simon Asquith, the
UK PM’s foreign policy adviser David Quarrey, in addition to meetings with
high-ranking military and security officials, said the army. Discussions focused
on the Kingdom's support for the Lebanese army, and the ways to expand
partnership in combating terrorism and support the security of the land and sea
borders. Talks have also focused on the significance of the army’s role in
protecting human rights and the right to peaceful protests, in addition to
adopting transparency as a fundamental principle during the implementation of
all missions. “The Lebanese and British armies have a long and honorable history
of cooperation. During this visit we discussed the best ways to continue
strengthening our relationship in the field of defense. We continue our joint
work and training, and we will remain committed to providing support for our
friends in that region with the aim of combating extremism and enhancing border
security,” said Carter. For his part, General Aoun expressed deep gratitude to
his British counterpart for his invitation, noting the strong ties that bind the
two armies. Aoun said Lebanon appreciates the “effective UK contribution in
supporting its border security, as it aims to strengthen cooperation to continue
support for the Lebanese army in light of major challenges it faces, especially
in terms of combating terrorism and border security.”Chris Rampling, British
ambassador to Lebanon, said Aoun’s visit to the UK “comes at a sensitive time.
Many challenges are facing the Lebanese army. In recent weeks, we have witnessed
the continuing terrorist threat in Lebanon, while the economic situation has
exacerbated pressure on the Lebanese security institutions. The United Kingdom
is a friend of Lebanon, and will continue to stand by its people in difficult
times.”
LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun ends a two-day visit to
the UK
NNA/October 07/2020
During his visit to the United Kingdom at the invitation of the UK Chief of
Defence Staff General Sir Nick Carter, Lebanese Army Commander General Joseph
Aoun alongside General Sir Carter met with Rear Admiral Simon Asquith, Commander
Operations for the Royal Navy, Mr David Quarrey, the Prime Minister’s
International Affairs Adviser and Deputy National Security Adviser, and other
senior Defence and security officials. Between 2016-2020, the UK has allocated
more than $100 million to train and equip Lebanon’s military, especially
elements of the Land Border Regiments to help control illegal infiltration.
Experts from the United Kingdom have also supervised the construction of 41
border control towers and 38 advanced centers along the northern and eastern
borders, and provided 13 mobile monitoring systems. A specialized center for
training land border regiments has also been established in the Bekaa region,
where more than 8,000 of these regiments are undergoing training to carry out
security-related border operations. By the end of 2020, the UK will have
completed training of 14,000 security personnel.
Jumblat Reminds of Electricity File, Says Fuel Being Smuggled to Syria
Naharnet/October 07/2020
Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat on Wednesday lamented how the
thorny file of Lebanon’s electricity crisis has been “forgotten,” describing it
as “the main reform file.”“No one remembers the influential team, from (Samir)
Doumit to (Alaa) Khawaja to (Teddy) Rahme, to the curtailed administration to
other issues in this cave,” Jumblat tweeted. “It seems that unveiling the truth
about the amount of the waste of public funds is prohibited,” the PSP leader
decried, adding that he believes that fuel is being smuggled to Syria. “Is there
another explanation?” he asked rhetorically.
Jbara Says Panic-Buying Triggered Medicines Shortage
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
Head of Pharmaceuticals Importers Association, Karim Jbara, said on Wednesday
that people started to panic buy medicine in anticipation of a shortage after
the Central Banks’ decision to stop subsidies on main commodities including
medicine, al-Joumhouria daily reported on Wednesday.
“People started to stockpile medicine at home when they learned that the central
bank will stop subsidies on medicine,” Jbara told al-Joumhouria. He said
assuring that the general atmosphere in the central bank, the health ministry
and the government confirms that subsidies on medicine will not be halted
without an alternative plan to protect the citizens and the Lebanese health
system. With medicine shortage at most of Lebanon’s pharmacies, Jbara assured
that the stock of medicines at warehouses can support the demand each month at a
time. The shortage is "a result of panic buying. The stockpile of drugs is
available to cover people’s needs in normal times. But people have been stacking
medicines (for two and three months instead of one) at home (fearing a
shortfall)," Jbara told the daily."In the next two months, the Central Bank is
expected to end subsidies on basic goods. Since the local currency’s collapse,
the bank has been using its depleting reserves to support imports of fuel, wheat
and medicine.
Hezbollah is losing its ability to intimidate anyone
Michael Young/The National/October 07/2020
مايكل يونغ/ذي ناشيونال: حزب الله يفقد قدرته على ترهيب أي شخص
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/91090/michael-young-the-national-hezbollah-is-losing-its-ability-to-intimidate-anyone-%d9%85%d8%a7%d9%8a%d9%83%d9%84-%d9%8a%d9%88%d9%86%d8%ba-%d8%b0%d9%8a-%d9%86%d8%a7%d8%b4%d9%8a%d9%88%d9%86%d8%a7%d9%84/
Amid Lebanon's economic chaos and popular despair, there is little patience
left for the group's 'resistance' ideology.
Last week, Lebanon’s Speaker of Parliament, Nabih Berri, announced that an
agreement had been reached on a framework for negotiations with Israel to
delineate the two nations' maritime boundaries. The agreement, mediated by the
US, could allow them to resolve their dispute over offshore gas fields in the
Mediterranean.
Mr Berri is a close ally of the militant political party Hezbollah, and the fact
that he approved of the framework suggested the party had given him the go-ahead
to do so. But it didn’t make the decision any less remarkable. By agreeing to
indirect negotiations, Hezbollah implicitly acknowledged that a compromise could
be reached when it had argued that Lebanon’s rights to its offshore gas were
inviolable. That prior insistence meant, in principle, that there was nothing
over which to compromise.
Stark reality, however, has trumped ideology. Lebanon is going through a
terrible economic crisis, exacerbated by the resistance of the country’s
politicians and parties to introducing reforms that would unlock financial aid
from the International Monetary Fund. Such reforms would threaten their networks
of corruption and patronage. That is why the prospect of offshore gas reserves
represents a valuable lifeline for them, especially when Hezbollah’s and Mr
Berri’s supporters are increasingly unhappy with Lebanon's economic situation.
Hezbollah’s acceptance of negotiations between Lebanon and Israel has raised
profound questions, too. First, if Lebanon looks to natural gas as an economic
lifesaver, this could create dynamics that impose quiet collaboration with
Israel – something Hezbollah officially claims to be a nonstarter. But things
may not be so simple.
For instance, both countries will need to find a means of exporting natural gas
so that the price remains competitive internationally. That means that Israel
and Lebanon, along with Cyprus, would benefit from investing in a shared export
infrastructure, thereby reducing costs. Lebanon would have an economic incentive
to feed its gas into the EastMed Pipeline that those countries, together with
Greece, plan to complete by 2025, and which aims to transport natural gas to
Italy.
The Lebanese continue to claim that they would not allow their gas to be
exported in the same pipeline as Israeli gas. Should Beirut seek to collaborate
with the Israelis in exploiting the gas fields, this would put Lebanese
officials in a particularly awkward position – claiming that gas has a
nationality when it is being exported, but not when it is being extracted.
Competing with the EastMed Pipeline is the Trans-Anatolian Pipeline, which
crosses much of Turkey and also reaches Europe. It could represent an
alternative path for Lebanese gas. But taking a circuitous route that cuts
across northern Anatolia instead of one that is already being planned with two
of Lebanon's maritime neighbours would be an odd – and very expensive – move. In
other words, should Lebanon want to enter the gas game on the best economic
terms, dealing with Israel may be the most sensible option.
If financial realities are forcing Hezbollah to reconsider Lebanon’s
negotiations with Israel over maritime boundaries, then the country’s economic
collapse is having more pernicious implications for the party. Hezbollah’s
missile arsenal is there as a deterrent to protect Iran and its nuclear
programme from Israeli attacks. Yet to what extent is that even conceivable
today?
With over 50 per cent of the Lebanese living under the poverty line, and many of
them believing Hezbollah to be part of the corrupt political elite, a war with
Israel could turn the population decisively against the party. Worse, Lebanon
would be so devastated that the very idea of Hezbollah’s “resistance” could be
permanently discredited, with the party blamed for acting primarily to benefit
Iran instead of Lebanon.
The recent explosion in a Hezbollah arms cache in Ayn Qana in southern Lebanon
has led to speculation that it was caused by a surreptitious Israeli military
operation. This needs to be confirmed, but people in the south reportedly
believe stories of Israeli involvement, and think that Hezbollah declined to
react because the party could not afford a conflict with Israel now.
If Hezbollah is unable to retaliate against Israeli or American strikes on Iran
because of the domestic repercussions, and if it looks the other way while
Lebanon undertakes negotiations Israel, then of what value is its contract with
Tehran? The party’s strength was always its ability to impose its agenda on its
compatriots, and to threaten those who opposed it. But today, Hezbollah knows
that such methods will not work.
That doesn’t meant that Tehran has any intention of giving up on the party.
Hezbollah serves many roles besides that of a deterrent against Israel. It is a
valuable instrument of Tehran’s influence on the Mediterranean. But it’s also
true that Hezbollah’s disregard for the discontent in Lebanon, along with its
refusal to help revive the country through economic reform, has meant that it
has poisoned its own environment, limiting its margin of manoeuvre on Iran’s
behalf.
Iran’s expansion in the Arab world has produced results, but also destruction.
Tehran has played on the contradictions in places like Iraq, Yemen, Syria, the
Palestinian Territories, and Lebanon in order to advance. But its legacy is
fields of ruin. Today, Hezbollah is paying the price for this at home. The party
has taken an inflexible position in preserving the mendacious Lebanese political
class, thereby collapsing the consensus that had once protected it.
*Michael Young is a senior editor at the Carnegie Middle East Centre in Beirut
and a columnist for The National
How the Lebanese Sects Successively Withdrew from War
Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/October 07/2020
When the state of Israel was established, the event had a huge effect on the
Levant in general and Lebanon in particular.
Palestinian refugees, most of whom had been displaced by Zionist organizations,
streamed into the county with a consociational social contract, which had only
gained its independence five years prior. Independence was itself subject to
negotiations among its factions, who agreed on a compromise framework.
The conflict with Israel, in turn, swiftly became an implicit clause of this
agreement: we neither make peace nor fight. Military, we agree to an armistice;
economically, we boycott. That is: we take the path of the sum of Arab
positions. Since Maronites had the upper hand in the state, they committed to
this stance, though they gave it some special colors: sympathy with the
Palestinian victims and fear of their inflow’s impact on the sectarian
demographic balance. A degree of Christian anti-Semitic sentiments about Jews
and a degree of bigotry minced with fear towards Muslims. Lebanon’s Arab
interests were taken into consideration, as was fear of the emergence of Arab
extremism...
This changed in the late 1960s: the test Lebanon was given seemed very harsh. To
the Christians, the entity itself seemed threatened. The Palestinian
resistance’s arms called for Christian armament, especially with the 1969 “Cairo
Agreement,” which broke the state’s protective role. The Two-Year War (1975-76)
pitted the Christians against the Palestinians in a total military standoff.
With the Israeli invasion, Bashir Gemayel’s presidential election and the Sabra
and Shatila massacre, the rift culminated. The Christians were openly declaring
that they are not concerned with fighting Israel and that such wars being
launched from Lebanon threaten them with their existence. They also became
extremely vocal about having a cause of their own, independent of the
Palestinian cause and opposed to it. Later, with Michel Aoun and the
circumstances surrounding his understanding with Hezbollah, the majority of
Christians volunteered to espouse the rhetoric of resistance, but did not turn
their words into action. Actions were left to their new Shiite allies.
The Sunnis’ history with resistance is different: a blend of inherited
Islamic-Arab Nationalist rhetoric, rejection of the “artificial” Lebanese entity
and objections to “Maronite hegemony” brought about Gamal Abdel Nasser’s
glorification and a famed sympathy for Palestinian resistance. At the time, it
was said that this resistance was the “Muslims’ army” counterbalancing the army,
which soon splintered. But in 1982, under the weight of Israel’s threats, Beirut
insisted on the Palestinian militants’ exit. After that came Rafik Hariri, and
the Sunnis’ agenda changed, that of both the Beirutis and non-Beirutis. They
began to cling to a Lebanonism that emphasizes prosperity and stability. Arabism
has become more economic and financial than it is political.
Of course, paying lip service to commitment to resistance and fighting Israel
persisted. But myths can live long as myths, and they may become, in daily life,
fairy tales. And because the Shiites, with the explosion of identities, became
the ones who resist, it was necessary to remind every now and then that the
resistance originated with Abdel Nasser, not Khomeini. Thus a position
implicitly saying the following crystalized: We are the actual resistance, but
we do not want to resist any more.
Slogans about fighting Israel ceased to turn old men young. With or without
resistance, the old would remain old. Even those who may take up arms in Tripoli
or Akkar, out of desire to fight an “oppressive state” or “infidels” or other
things along these lines, do not present themselves as fighting Israel.
As for the Shiites’ experience, it began with Mousa al-Sadr in the late sixties,
when an anti-Palestinian sectarian solidarity developed against the backdrop of
armed Palestinians’ clashes with the south’s residents. Israeli military action
in retaliation to Palestinian operations led to southerners’ displacement to the
capital. The War of the Camps, in the mid-eighties, reinvigorated and solidified
this sentiment.
In turn, Hezbollah benefited from the Palestinians’ weapons rusting away and got
rid of the Lebanese parties that had been allied to them. It fought Israel again
and again, but when Israel’s occupation of the south came to an end in 2000,
Hezbollah clung to its weapons as if to declare that the weapons had other
functions. After the 2006 War, and with Resolution 1701, the battlefront with
Israel calmed down.
Two years later, it became certain that the party’s project is internal. Then,
after the Syrian revolution in 2011, the intervention in Syria demonstrated that
the party’s agenda is actually set in Tehran.
Under this state of affairs, talking about fighting Israel becomes much less
ideological and serious than it is feigned to be. Improving the community’s
position domestically and meeting regional requirements are the base, and these
objectives were achieved and are being achieved. Furthermore, when Iran or Syria
becomes incapable of supporting the resistance, the party becomes unable to
support them to the same degree.
Thus, the negotiations for demarcating the borders announce that the Shiites do
not differ from the other sects in their willingness to defuse the situation,
especially since their protracted sufferings as a result of these wars
strengthen their desire for calm.
Yes, Hezbollah may topple the latest agreement, and the party may discover, if
urgent regional circumstance called for this, that it had been duped. However,
agreeing to terms in itself initiates a new era.
The formula produced by a well-known poor rhetoric goes: “Those who do not want
to fight Israel are with Israel.” In fact, the Lebanese are in a complex
situation: they do not like Israel, and they do not want to fight it. The sects
came to this conclusion successively, sects that may fight one another, use the
bogeyman of fighting Israel to justify their arms, but they all don’t want to
fight. It is a consensus with contradictory terminology.
Beirut’s last synagogue at risk after severe damages
following port blast
Melanie Swan/Jerusalem Post/October 07/2020
More than a place of worship, it is the final memory of a once-thriving
community, which at its peak during the 1950s was around 15,000 strong.
DUBAI – Beirut’s last remaining synagogue is desperately in need of more than
$500,000 in funding to help repair the damage inflicted by the recent blast at
the port, which caused devastation across the city.
Amid the latest episode that devastated the war-torn city on August 4, much of
the once-spectacular synagogue’s ceiling collapsed in the blast. All the window
and door frames were shattered, and the Star of David also crashed to the
ground.
In a double tragedy, it happened just a few years after the restoration of the
Maghen Abraham Synagogue, a mile away from the devastated port. Having been
badly damaged during the civil war, its reopening in 2014 to a grand welcome was
attended by dignitaries from across the city’s diverse religious population.
However, it has not held services since then.
More than a place of worship, it is the final memory of a once-thriving
community, which at its peak during the 1950s was around 15,000 strong. Now, the
city’s fewer than 30 Jews pray at home, many of whom have changed their names
and keep their religious identity secret in a world which is no longer what it
once was. Nagi Zeidan, a Franco-Lebanese Christian historian and author of the
recently published The Jews of Lebanon, has been at the heart of the dying
community, having researched his latest book for 25 years. “The community badly
needs support with the repairs,” he explained.
The synagogue has been a pivotal part of the community for decades, a meeting
point for the Jews of Lebanon since its inauguration in August 1926 for politics
and religion alike. It was donated by Moshe Sasson, a Syrian Jew living in India
at the time. It was renowned as the country’s most beautiful synagogue, designed
in a classically Arab style – with its grand chandeliers, marble interiors,
colorful details and ornate coves.
“Even the Jews of Sidon who had a synagogue of their own, preferred to marry at
Maghen Abraham,” said Zeidan. “It is a place full of beautiful memories which
will forever remain in the minds of Lebanese Jews and non-Jews alike.”
Its preservation is critical to the history of Jews in the city, whose presence
in Beirut dates back to 1800, when the Levy family settled from Baghdad.
Nationally, however, Jewish history dates back more than 3,000 years, one of the
region’s oldest Jewish communities, dating back to settlement in Sidon. “This
synagogue is the only building that demonstrates the presence of the oldest
Jewish community in Lebanon among the 17 other religious communities,” Zeidan
said.
There has not been a rabbi at the synagogue since 1985, and the city’s last
surviving Jews pray at home. During the 1950s and 1960s, there were 18
synagogues around the country. Lebanon was the only Arab nation after the
creation of the State of Israel to see its Jewish population grow. It was only
after the Yom Kippur War that Jews began to leave – and rapidly.
MOSHE ZAAFARANI grew up in Beirut, and to the community, the synagogue was the
core. From charity to education, sports to music, it was the community’s beating
heart. Although he left the city when he was just 14, he said that, even now, it
holds a place deep in his heart. “I feel it needs to be preserved,” said
Zaafarani, the director of languages at the Education Ministry. “I know some
people wonder why, when nobody prays there, but I truly hope that one day, Jews
can pray there again.”
A symbol of the city’s vibrant past, it played host to all major ceremonies. As
the biggest of the city’s many synagogues, and with an emerging peace across the
region since the recent Abraham Accords, he holds hope there could still be a
place for the synagogue in the region’s Jewish life.
“It was very beautiful – and when you stepped inside, it felt special,” he
recalled. “Even those who attended other synagogues came for these big events
like weddings and funerals, so it was the one place we all gathered.” Even the
likes of the president and prime minister, in addition to other heads of
religions, would visit the synagogue and offer their respects during holy
festivals.
Now, Zaafarani hopes that Jews both in Lebanon and abroad can rally together to
support the restoration efforts. “If people want to know more, they can contact
the ILAI, the Jewish Lebanese Community in Israel,” he said.
RABBI ELIE Abadie left Beirut when he was only 10. Now based in New York, he
grew up in the synagogue community, the son of one of the community’s Beth Din
rabbis, Rabbi Abraham Abadie. He still leads lectures for the small community
remotely, as he has been during the High Holy Days.
“It represents history. It has to be saved,” he said. “To not save that
synagogue would be to erase over 2,000 years of history of Jews in Lebanon” –
though he too hopes that, one day, a community can return to pray there once
again, in the wake of the region’s burgeoning peace accords.
Jewish history is rapidly being wiped out in the country. In Sidon, in southern
Lebanon, one synagogue is currently occupied by a Palestinian family of Syrian
origin, said Zeidan, who has personally visited each landmark around the country
in his extensive research. There is also a synagogue in Bhamdoun, all but
destroyed, and the same is true in the town of Aley, where the synagogue was
destroyed many years ago.
“There is still a synagogue in Tripoli in northern Lebanon, occupied by a fabric
dyeing factory,” said Zeidan, adding that Tripoli’s Jewish cemetery has been
transformed into a glass factory and gas station. Just two Jewish cemeteries
remain – one in Beirut and the other in Sidon. Some “90% of the Jewish homes in
Sidon have been requisitioned and invaded by Lebanese,” he said. Abadie says
that those responsible for the blast should pay for the damage caused on that
tragic day. “Not just the synagogue, but all the buildings damaged that day
should be the direct responsibility of those behind the blast.”
Berri said pushing for Baassiri as next Lebanese PM
The Weekly Arab/October 07/2020
Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri met with Baassiri at parliament’s
headquarters on Friday.
BEIRUT – Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has stirred controversy by
reportedly pushing for a former central bank vice-governor who is reputed to be
close to the Americans to take over the cabinet formation process.
Lebanese political sources said the parliament speaker and Amal Movement leader
is under pressure to form a new Lebanese government by mid-October, when
Lebanese-Israeli negotiations on demarcating the borders between the two
countries are to begin.
Sources told The Arab Weekly that Berri’s moves to have former Central Bank
Vice-Governor Mohammed Baassiri nominated for the premiership were triggered by
American pressure, with Washington insisting on the need to have political cover
provided by a balanced Lebanese government for the negotiations to take place.
The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that Berri is responsive
to US demands to preserve his own interests. Members of the Berri family,
including the parliament speaker’s wife Randa, had received indications that
they could be threatened by US sanctions, sources said.
This may have prompted the Lebanese parliament speaker to meet Baassiri, who is
close to the Americans, in order to ask him if he would be willing to take on
the task of forming a new government.
Berri met with Baassiri at parliament’s headquarters on Friday. However, the
former Central Bank vice-governor denied that he was being considered for the
premiership and said their meeting would focus on Jammal Trust Bank, which has
been targeted by US sanctions, and its deposits.
Sources are divided over whether Baassiri will indeed be named as PM-designate.
Ex-MP Paula Yacoubian tweeted Saturday that “soon MPs will head to Baabda to
apparently name Mohammed Baassiri as the head of a new-old government.”
Lebanon’s MTV, meanwhile, quoted an informed source as saying that “these leaks
are baseless.”
Nidaa al-Watan newspaper reported Saturday that Baassiri “remains a serious
candidate for the premiership,” quoting sources who are “monitoring” the
situation. Baassiri’s name had previously been floated for the position, but the
Iran-backed Hezbollah movement and its political ally, Amal movement, were wary
of his connections to Washington.
Baassiri’s statements on his political future have so far been vague. On Sunday,
he said that he is “not aware” of his name being proposed for the premiership
but noted that he would accept to be “in any position that would serve
Lebanon.”“I’m not nominated for any governmental position and I’m not seeking to
become premier,” Baassiri added in an interview with al-Jadeed TV.
Baassiri explained that “he has no relationship with Hezbollah and he does not
seek to get close and communicate with the group,” saying that “Hezbollah
refused my return to the Banque du Liban (Central Bank) and placed a veto on me
as an ‘American ally in Lebanon.’”
He said there were other people who were also unhappy with his political return,
including Gebran Bassil, head of the Free Patriotic Movement, and outgoing
caretaker Prime Minister Hassan Diab.
Regarding his relationship with the United States, Baassiri explained that the
Lebanese banking sector “is a natural extension of the American banking sector,
considering that our economy is ‘dollarised’ and it is necessary to have the
best relations with the American side. As the deputy governor of the Banque du
Liban, I played the role as a facilitator for these relations.”
Baassiri pointed out that Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon Walid al-Bukhari called
him more than a month ago to request a meeting, which took place a week later
with the Central Bank governor.
While Baassiri called for the meeting with the Saudi ambassador to not be read
into, observers believe there could be a hidden message behind the statement and
that Riyadh might be supportive of him being nominated.
Baassiri was not required to reveal the meeting with the Saudi ambassador, nor
to mention that he would be ready to assume any position that serves Lebanon.
His decision to do so indicates he is leaving the door open to serving as prime
minister. Observers believe that naming Baassiri to head the government would be
another concession for the Shia camp after their agreement to engage in direct
negotiations with Israel over the demarcation of maritime and land borders, a
request that both sides have always rejected.
Berri said Saturday that the “framework agreement” to launch negotiations on
demarcating the borders between his country and Israel “is a necessary step, but
it must go together with the formation of a government.”
On Thursday, Berri announced that negotiations with Israel on demarcating the
land and sea borders will start in mid-October under the auspices of the United
Nations and the mediation of the United States, after reaching a “framework
agreement” that specifies “the course to be taken in the negotiations,” without
further details.
Lebanon’s new government must be “capable of saving the country from its
floundering crises, and implementing the detailed contents of the framework
agreement declaration,” he added, noting that the “framework agreement is an
agreement to demarcate borders, nothing more, nothing less.”
Berri stressed that “the main challenge now is to reach an agreement on the name
of the prime minister.”Amid the flurry of moves to form a new government, France
again intervened by sending its Ambassador to Beirut, Bruno Foche, to hold
meetings with numerous political figures, including Ammar al-Moussawi,
Hezbollah’s international relations official.
Sources indicated that the meeting was to calm tension between the two sides
after French President Emmanuel Macron accused the party and its ally Amal of
being responsible for wrecking the government formation process.
The accusation initially drew a harsh reaction from Hezbollah Secretary-General
Hassan Nasrallah. Last Saturday, then PM-designate Mustapha Adib quit amid
resistance to his plan to draw up a technocratic government of independents. He
had sought to shake up control of ministries, some of which have been held by
the same factions for years, including the finance post – which will have a hand
in drawing up plans for bringing the country out of its economic crisis.
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on October 07-08/2020
Half Karabakh Population Displaced as Mediators Set
for Geneva Talks
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
Clashes between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces have displaced half of the
population of the breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh region, an official said on
Wednesday, as Azerbaijan announced it would meet international mediators in
Geneva. Russian President Vladimir Putin urged an end to a "huge tragedy" that
shows no sign of abating in an interview with state-run television, as
Karabakh's main city Stepanakert was hit by new strikes. Even if the
longstanding conflict over the ethnic Armenian separatist region could not be
resolved, a ceasefire must be agreed "as quickly as possible," he said. A few
hours later Azerbaijan said Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov would visit Geneva
Thursday and meet leaders of the OSCE's Minsk group, which is jointly chaired by
diplomats from France, Russia, and the United States. The Minsk group has sought
a solution to the conflict since the 1990s. Armenia ruled out its foreign
minister Zohrab Mnatsakanyan meeting his Azerbaijani counterpart in Geneva,
however, saying "it is impossible to hold negotiations with one hand and
continue military operations with the other." Armenia's foreign minister is due
to meet Russia's top diplomat Sergei Lavrov in Moscow on Monday. The conflict
has drawn in regional powers, with French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian
warning that Turkey's backing of Azerbaijan risks fuelling the
"internationalization" of the conflict. The fighting in one of the most
combustible frozen conflicts resulting from the fall of the Soviet Union erupted
on September 27, with Azerbaijan insisting the region must return to Baku's
control.
Thousands displaced
Intermittent shelling by Azerbaijan's forces has turned Stepanakert into a ghost
town dotted with unexploded munitions and shell craters. Much of Stepanakert's
50,000-strong population has left, with those remaining hunkering down in
cellars. "According to our preliminary estimates, some 50 percent of Karabakh's
population and 90 percent of women and children -- or some 70,000-75,000 people
-- have been displaced," Karabakh's rights ombudsman Artak Beglaryan told AFP
Wednesday. Azerbaijan has accused Armenian forces of shelling civilian targets
in urban areas, including its second-largest city of Ganja. Dozens of civilians
have been confirmed killed in the fighting and the Armenian side has
acknowledged more than 300 military deaths. Azerbaijan has not admitted to any
fatalities among its troops. Azerbaijani prosecutors said 427 dwellings
populated by roughly 1,200 people had been destroyed. But Le Drian, speaking to
the French parliament, accused Azerbaijan of initiating the current conflict and
lamented "the large number of civilian victims for the sake of meagre progress"
on the ground. Nagorno-Karabakh broke away from Azerbaijan in a 1990s war that
claimed the lives of some 30,000 people. The Armenian separatists declared
independence. The region's 140,000 inhabitants are now almost exclusively
Armenians after the remaining Azerbaijanis left in the 1990s war. However, the
international community regards it as part of Azerbaijan and no state, including
Armenia itself, recognizes its independence. Sporadic fighting has erupted
frequently since a May 1994 ceasefire, most notably in 2016. But analysts say
Turkey's involvement this time has changed the landscape. Turkey has reportedly
sent pro-Ankara Syrian fighters to boost Azerbaijan forces and also
home-produced drones that have already been deployed with success in Libya and
Syria. The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says 1,200 fighters have
been sent and at least 64 have died. "The new aspect is that there is military
involvement by Turkey which risks fueling the internationalization of the
conflict," Le Drian said.
'Great danger'
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on Tuesday the world should back
Azerbaijan as the "side of those who are right", describing Armenia as the
"occupier". Russia has cordial relations and sells arms to both sides. But it
has a military base in Armenia and Yerevan is a member of a Russia-led regional
security group while Baku is not. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan told
AFP he was confident Russia would come to its aid because of the two countries'
membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization military alliance (CSTO).
Putin in his interview emphasized that Moscow would fulfil its obligations
within the CSTO, which analysts sometimes describe as a Russian NATO. But he
noted: "The hostilities, which to our great regret, continue to this day, are
not taking place on the territory of Armenia." Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman
Dmitry Peskov sounded a note of alarm over the presence of Syrian fighters,
saying it posed a "great danger and is a reason for the deep concern of Russia."
Iran's President Hassan Rouhani also said on Wednesday he would not tolerate
"terrorists from Syria and other places" near its border with Azerbaijan.
Tehran maintains cordial relations with its Christian neighbor Armenia and
distrusts Azerbaijan's military cooperation with Israel.
Iran Warns 'Terrorists' near Border in Karabakh
Fighting
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
Iran warned Wednesday it will not tolerate "terrorists" near its border with
Azerbaijan, after France and Russia raised the alarm over the deployment of
Syrian militants in the Karabakh conflict. "It is unacceptable for us that some
people want to send terrorists from Syria and other places towards regions near
our frontiers," President Hassan Rouhani said, quoted on state television. Iran
borders Armenian-held areas of Azerbaijan near Nagorno-Karabakh that have seen
fighting. Armenia and Azerbaijan have for decades been locked in a conflict over
Nagorno-Karabakh, an ethnically Armenian area which broke away from Baku in a
1990s war that cost about 30,000 lives. Heavy fighting erupted on September 27
in one of the most combustible frozen conflicts left over from the collapse of
the Soviet Union. Turkey has been accused of deploying fighters from Syria to
support Azerbaijan in Karabakh.
French President Emmanuel Macron said Ankara had sent Syrian "jihadists" to the
region, accusing Turkey of crossing a "red line". Turkey has not responded
publicly. Russia and Armenia have also said that fighters from Syria and Libya
are being deployed on the Azeri side in the conflict.
Rouhani, which has good relations with both Yerevan and Baku, reiterated
Wednesday that "occupation is in no case acceptable". "Everyone" must "accept
the reality... and respect other countries' territorial integrity", he said.
Rouhani at the same time condemned "those who, on one side or the other, pour
oil on the fire", without naming Turkey which has declared open support for
Azeri military action to reclaim the enclave. Iran has called on both Armenia
and Azerbaijan to cease hostilities and offered to facilitate talks. On
Saturday, Tehran warned against any "intrusion" after mortar fire hit Iranian
villages along the border. Fars news agency reported last Thursday that police
dispersed demonstrations in northwest Iran in support of Azerbaijan. The Islamic
republic is home to a large Azeri community, mainly in the northwest. According
to some estimates, Azeris make up 10 million of the 80-million population of
Iran, which is also home to almost 100,000 Armenians.
France Accuses Turkey of 'Military Involvement' in
Karabakh
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
France on Wednesday accused Turkey of "military involvement" on the side of
Azerbaijan in its conflict with Armenia over the breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh
region. "The new aspect is that there is military involvement by Turkey which
risks fueling the internationalization of the conflict," French Foreign Minister
Jean-Yves Le Drian told parliament. Armenia and Azerbaijan, two former Soviet
republics, have for decades been locked in a conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, an
ethnically Armenian area which broke away from Azerbaijan in a 1990s war that
cost about 30,000 lives. Heavy fighting erupted again on September 27. Both
sides blame the other for starting the latest hostilities. The conflict has
drawn in regional players, with Turkey supporting Azerbaijan and Armenia hoping
that its ally Russia, which has so far stayed on the sidelines, will step in.
Turkey has been accused of deploying fighters from Syria to support Azerbaijan
in the fighting. French President Emmanuel Macron recently claimed Ankara had
sent Syrian "jihadists" to the region, accusing Turkey of crossing a "red line".
Turkey has not responded publicly. Le Drian on Wednesday said France deplored "a
large number of civilian casualties for little territorial progress on the part
of Azerbaijan, given it is Azerbaijan that initiated the conflict." He repeated
the call for an immediate end to the fighting and a return to negotiations
"without conditions" under mediation by the so-called Minsk group co-chaired by
France, Russia and the United States.
"There will be meetings tomorrow in Geneva, other Mondays in Moscow and we hope
that this will lead to the opening of negotiations," the minister said.
Kuwaiti Emir Names Top Security Official as Crown Prince
Agence France Presse/October 07/2020
Kuwait's new emir, Sheikh Nawaf, on Wednesday named Sheikh Meshal al-Ahmad al-Jaber
Al-Sabah, a long-serving top security official, as crown prince. Sheikh Meshal,
80, has been deputy chief of the Kuwait National Guard since 2004, largely
staying out of the political scene and away from disputes within the royal
family. The Sabah ruling family "blessed" Sheikh Nawaf's decision, the official
Kuwait News Agency said Wednesday, a day ahead of a parliamentary session to
approve the choice. In recent years, the ruling family has been flaunting its
differences, with lurid accusations of corruption and political conspiracies
lodged by some of its members against others. Kuwait, unlike other Gulf states,
has a lively political life with an elected parliament that enjoys wide
legislative powers and can vote ministers out of office. Political rows often
burst into the open. Sheikh Nawaf, 83, was sworn in on September 30 after the
death of his half-brother, Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad Al-Sabah, who passed away at
the age of 91 after two months in hospital in the US. The succession comes at a
time when the oil-rich country is grappling with the hot topics of whether to
establish ties with Israel and how to respond to low crude prices amid the
coronavirus slump. Sheikh Meshal is the seventh son of the 10th Emir of Kuwait
Sheikh Ahmad al-Jaber Al-Sabah. He is considered the most powerful man in the
National Guard -- an elite corps in charge of defending the emirate's territory.
The position of chief is symbolically held by Salem al-Ali Al-Sabah, the eldest
member of the Sabah ruling family. Sheikh Meshal spent many years in the
interior ministry, where he rose through the ranks to head the department of
general investigation from 1967 until 1980 and was credited for strengthening
its function as a state security service. In 2016, he travelled abroad and
underwent a "successful operation", but details of the treatment were not
disclosed.
Danes summon Iran’s envoy over reports of illegal
divorces
NNA/AP/October 07/2020
Denmark on Wednesday summoned the Iranian ambassador over reports the diplomatic
mission had allegedly pressured Iranian women living in the Scandinavian country
to accept divorce terms drawn up by local imams. The summons follows recent
reports in Danish media about Muslim women being forced to accept divorce deals
made by imams in Denmark. A contract made by one imam said that a woman, among
other things, had to accept that if she remarried, she would lose the custody of
her children. “I take the rumors extremely seriously that the Iranian Embassy,
unsolicited, had contacted women living here to pressure them to have their
Danish divorce papers religiously validated,” said Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe
Kofod.—
Anti-Iran Slogans Chanted at ‘Arbaeen’ Pilgrimage in
Iraq
Baghdad - Karbala - Asharq Al-Awsat/October
07/2020
Dozens of people were wounded in clashes between Iraqi security forces and
anti-Iran protesters in Iraq’s southern city of Karbala Tuesday during the
annual Shiite Muslim pilgrimage of Arbaeen. Iraqi protesters clashed with
security forces outside a holy Shiite Muslim shrine in the southern city of
Karbala causing injuries to several people, a Reuters reporter said. Tuesday’s
clashes took place near the Imam Hussein shrine. The protesters were
commemorating demonstrators killed during months of anti-government and
anti-Iran unrest in 2019 in which more than 500 Iraqis died. The protesters had
marched towards the shrine, witnesses said. Some became angry because they were
not allowed into the shrine concourse, the Reuters reporter said. Security
forces then charged the protesters with batons, causing skirmishes and pushing
them back. Demonstrators retaliated against security forces attacking other
protesters over the chanting of anti-Iran slogans. A Karbala security official
said the protesters had arrived as part of a pilgrimage group, but before the
time allotted for them to tour the shrine. Part of the group grew violent and
police acted to eject them from the area, the official said. In other news,
Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi formed a committee to investigate recent
rocket and explosion attacks on diplomatic missions and convoys for the US-led
Coalition forces in Iraq, according to a communique. The committee led by Iraq’s
national security advisor Qassem al-Araji includes head of the Popular
Mobilization Forces Falih al-Fayyadh, head of national security council
Abdulghani Assadi and army’s chief of staff Abdulamir Yarallah as well as a
number of other security officers. The committee has to complete its
investigation within 30 days and provide the premier with results of the
investigation, the communique said. Al-Kazemi said during its first meeting that
"the committee is authorized to obtain any information it requests from any
party, and we expect it to come up with its results within the timeframe set for
it." Kadhimi stressed the importance of granting full information access to the
probe body. He also predicted that the committee will come up with results
within its designated timeframe.
US Official to Asharq Al-Awsat: Normalization with
Assad Linked to Behavior Change
Washington - Elie Youssef/Wednesday,0 7 October, 2020
Washington urged states not to establish diplomatic relations or economic
cooperation with Syrian President Bashar Assad before addressing the atrocities
committed by his regime against the Syrian people, a spokesperson for the US
Department of State told Asharq Al-Awsat on Tuesday. The official said Assad’s
regime was responsible for countless horrors, in addition to repeatedly using
chemical weapons against his people. The regime also invited Iranian and Russian
forces to fight on its territories, therefore, threatening neighboring countries
and the entire region, the US spokesperson explained.
“Any attempt to reestablish or improve diplomatic relations, without addressing
the atrocities committed by the regime against the Syrian people, shall damage
efforts to enhance accountability and to move towards a sustainable, peaceful
and political solution of the Syrian conflict, in line with UNSC Resolution
2254,” he said. Assad and his regime should take irreversible steps to end all
types of violence against the Syrian people and to implement UNSC Resolution
2254 or face continued diplomatic and economic isolation, the official added.
The statement came a few days after Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem
received a copy of the credentials of Turki Mahmood al-Busaidi, the
extraordinary and plenipotentiary Ambassador of Oman to Syria. Abkhazia opened
its embassy in Damascus on Tuesday and raised its flag during a ceremony
attended by Moallem and a high-ranking Abkhazian delegation that is paying a
visit to Syria, including head of presidential administration Alkhas Kvitsinia,
Foreign Minister Daur Vadimovich Kove. Abkhazia and Damascus agreed on enhancing
bilateral relations and on mutual exemption of visas for the citizens in both
countries for bearers of diplomatic and official and private passports. “The
embassy will be the cornerstone in the bilateral relations and it may be a step
to encourage others who closed their embassies in Damascus to reopen them,” the
Syrian FM said, expressing readiness to provide all support and assistance to
enable the Abkhazian ambassador perform his duties successfully. Kvitsinia
reviewed the history of relations between Abkhazia and Syria, starting with
mutual recognition in May 2018, the signature of a treaty of friendship and
cooperation, two agreements on the establishment of a joint committee for
cooperation in various fields and facilitating and developing trade and economic
cooperation between the two countries besides the establishment of diplomatic
relations at the level of embassies. Syria recognized Georgia’s two
Russian-occupied regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali as independent states back
in 2018, a step which was condemned by the international community.
Assad Blames Turkey for Nagorno-Karabakh Fighting
Damascus - London - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad accused Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of
being the main instigator in the deadliest fighting between Armenian and Azeri
forces for more than 25 years. Turkey has denied involvement in the fighting in
and around Nagorno-Karabakh, a mountain enclave that belongs to Azerbaijan under
international law but is governed by ethnic Armenians, and has dismissed
accusations that it sent mercenaries to the area. But Assad told Russian news
agency RIA: "He (Erdogan) ... was the main instigator and the initiator of the
recent conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh between Azerbaijan and Armenia." Reiterating
accusations first levelled by French President Emmanuel Macron that Turkey has
sent Syrian militants to fight in the conflict, Assad said: "Damascus can
confirm this." Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said during a visit to
Azerbaijan's capital, Baku, on Tuesday that international peace efforts had
achieved no concrete results in decades and a ceasefire alone would not end the
fighting. "The whole world now needs to understand this cannot go on like this,"
Cavusoglu said.
Israel Confiscates Funds Transferred by Hamas, PA to
Families of Palestinian Prisoners
Ramallah- Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz has signed seizure orders for Palestinian
Authority and Hamas funds and property that had been transferred to family
members of Palestinian martyrs and prisoners in Israel. According to Jerusalem
Post Newspaper, the four signed orders targeted funds transferred by both Hamas
and the PA to Palestinians serving prison sentences in Israeli, as well as to
family members of Palestinians who were killed during attacks. The orders
included the seizure of 187,000 shekels intended for the mother of a Palestinian
who rammed his car into a crowd of people, killing a settler and a foreigner in
Jerusalem in 2014. “The seizure orders, which cumulatively amount to hundreds of
thousands of shekels, were signed as part of an economic campaign by Israel
against terrorism that includes the Defense Ministry’s National Bureau for
Counter Terror Financing along with the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), the
army, police, the foreign ministry, and other bodies,” said a statement by
Gantz’s bureau. His decision comes in light of a war declared by Israel on
salaries of the families of Palestinian “martyrs and prisoners.”Israel had
earlier refused to pay the PA money that belonged to it, claiming it was using
these funds to support and encourage “terrorism.”The PA, however, rejected this
claim and said it honored Palestinian heroes. Meanwhile, the Commission of
Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs denounced these orders. It issued a statement
stressing that they are “part of the escalation to loot more money belonging to
families of the martyrs and prisoners.”It affirmed that “that these funds are
granted for these families to provide them with a minimum level of a decent life
and allow them to overcome life challenges caused by the occupation itself.” In
late 2019, then Army Chief of Staff Naftali Bennett signed a decision to
“confiscate the money transferred to 1948 prisoners and any other funds received
by their families.” The Commission urged the international community to break
its silence and act immediately to put an end to the crimes committed by the
occupation against families of the martyrs and prisoners. This silence gives the
occupation a green light to proceed and escalate with its crimes, it stressed.
Gantz previously Gantz issued a decree that would sanction banks in the West
Bank for paying salaries for Palestinian prisoners and their families.
Sisi Warns of Wicked Ambitions, Threats Facing Egypt
Cairo- Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi said, on Tuesday, that wicked designs and
threats against Egypt will never stop and will never decrease, even if their
nature changes. He stressed the importance of saving people from the dangers of
uncalculated political delusions. In a televised speech marking the 47th
anniversary of the 6 October War 1973, Sisi said that Egypt’s achievements over
the years to maintain security and stability have been remarkable, and are well
known around the world. He, however, warned against the greedy ambitions and
threats eyeing Egypt. Sisi added that maintaining the security of a large
country such as Egypt, particularly as it lies in a difficult region and
unstable world, is evidence of the Egyptian people’s uniqueness and solidity. He
also said that it reflected the ability of the armed forces and state
institutions to undertake such a mission and progress towards sustainable
development.
He vowed to continue the work towards preserving national dignity and advancing
construction, development, reconstruction, and peace. “The great October victory
taught us that the Egyptian nation is always able to rise up for its rights ...
We also learned that the Egyptian people do not waste their land and are able to
protect it,” Sisi said. "The glorious October war was not just a military battle
in which Egypt fought and achieved its greatest victory; it was, however, a real
test for the Egyptian people's ability to make the dream come true,” he noted.
The president said the victory's anniversary Egypt celebrates “is reminiscent of
the people's struggle for thousands of years.” “Inspired by the sublimity of its
past, Egypt has drawn a rightful path to follow in order to achieve its desired
goals and the people's broad hopes,” he said. In recent weeks, Egypt witnessed
staged protests in some villages on the outskirts of Cairo following a call by
the Muslim Brotherhood to demonstrate.
Algeria Kicks off Campaign to Rally Support for
Constitutional Referendum
Algiers - Boualem Goumrassa/Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October,
2020
Algerian authorities will kick off on Wednesday a political and media campaign
to win over 23.5 million Algerians to vote in favor of the constitutional
referendum, set for November 1.The state is employing all of its means and
political supporters to this end, while the opposition appears defeated,
complaining that the new constitution will be imposed on the people even though
it does not meet the demands of the protest movement. Head of the Algerian
National Independent Authority for Elections Mohamed Charfi said Tuesday: “It is
our duty to persuade the greatest number of registered voters to head to the
ballot boxes to cast their vote regardless if they support the referendum or
not.”The campaigners have until November 28 to persuade as many Algerians as
possible of their right to vote, he added. The political class is divided
between those in favor of the constitutional change and those opposed to it. The
supporters include parties that backed resigned former President Abdulaziz
Bouteflika’s run for a fifth term in office. They include the National
Liberation Front, which boasts thousands of voters who can rally support for the
constitutional change. They also include the Democratic National Rally and Rally
for Hope for Algeria (Tajamou Amel el Djazair). Significantly, the three leaders
of these parties are in jail on corruption charges.The second camp, which is
adamantly opposed to the referendum, had boycotted last year’s presidential
elections. Main parties include the Islamist Justice and Development Front,
headed by Sheikh Abdallah Djaballah, who labeled as “atheists” supporters of the
constitutional change. Other members of the camp are the Islamists of the
Movement of Society for Peace, who believe that the new constitution is a “war
on the identity and principles of Algerians.”Opponents of the change also
include the secular Rally for Culture and Democracy, which explained that the
amendments keep all of the “inflated” privileges that Bouteflika had accorded to
the political authority. The party enjoys support from Amazigh tribes, whom
observers believe will widely boycott the vote as they did the presidential
elections. The Association of Algerian Muslim Ulema on Monday expressed its
reservations over the constitutional changes, saying they “threaten the future
of the nation”, “harm the national identity” and are “vague about the position
of Islam and on freedom of worship.” It also criticized the amendments for
failing to address national unity and the discrepancy over official languages in
Algeria. President Abdelmadjid Tebboune defended the changes on Monday, saying
they achieve a balance of power among authorities, expand the freedoms on the
people, cement the people’s right to an independent judiciary, eliminate all
forms of social and economic discrimination, boost equality among the people and
provide the means to combat all forms of corruption.
Yemeni Govt Warns of Sectarian Screening by Houthis
Targeting Educators
Sanaa-/Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Houthis are planning to step up their violations against the education sector in
areas under their control by redistributing educators according to political and
sectarian profiling. This has drawn in harsh criticism and condemnation from the
Yemeni government. The internationally-recognized government in Yemen has long
accused Houthis of seeking to skew the education sector to fit their
Iran-inspired agenda. Implementing a policy of sectarianization and political
screening, Houthis are targeting educators in Sanaa and pursuing pressure
campaigns against teachers who are still showing up to work despite not being
paid in four years. Information Minister Muammar Al-Eryani warned of the
“disastrous results” of the practices carried out by Iran-backed Houthi militias
against the education sector with the start of a new school year. Houthi actions
aim at stripping the public from its will and distorting truths in the favor of
Iran’s subversive agenda in the region, Eryani said, pointing out that the group
seeks to spread chaos and violence. Future generations will pay the price of
Houthis instilling their extremist and terrorist ideology, the minister warned.
“Houthis militias started school with distorted curricula for the 1st grade to
brainwash children and falsify history, distributed political and sectarian
screening forms for teachers, and privatized public education by imposing high
fees on private schools without considering economic hardships,” Eryani tweeted.
The Houthi targeting of educators and brainwashing of students is part of the
group’s overarching scheme to undermine and destroy education in Yemen, the
minister explained. Houthis are known to have financially exploited the
privatization of free public education in Yemen to fuel its war effort. As for
sectarian screening forms educators are being forced to fill, school directors
and representatives said they were stunned by the personal information
applicants were being asked to provide. They said the forms were unprofessional
and chiefly aim to encroach on the privacy of teachers to influence their
academic performance. Houthis are keeping a close eye on educators who
especially teach history and religion courses. The group is working to fire them
and replace them with Houthi loyalists to skew the education process of future
generations.
Tunisian Culture Minister Sacked for ‘Siding with’
Protesters
Tunis - Mongi Saidani/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
Tunisian Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi dismissed on Tuesday Culture Minister
Walid al-Zaidi over his refusal to implement the government order to halt all
cultural events due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Mechichi has appointed
Tourism Minister Habib Ammar as his acting replacement. Questions have been
raised over the PM’s move, significantly after Zaidi had expressed his support
for anti-government protests. Observers wondered whether the dismissal was
linked to differences between the premier and President Kais Saeid whereby
ministers who are backed by the president are to be sacked should they stir any
tensions. They added that Zaidi’s sacking could mark the beginning of Mechichi’s
implementation of a government reshuffle demanded by the parliamentary coalition
that supports the government. The coalition is composed of the moderate Islamist
Ennahda Movement, Heart of Tunisia Party and “Dignity Coalition”. This is not
the first time that the PM attempts to relieve Zaidi, the country’s first blind
minister, from his post. Zaidi had initially refused to be appointed to the
cabinet, saying he prefers university work to politics, but Saeid insisted and
imposed his appointment in the new government. Opposition parties at the time
viewed the move as motivated by reaping electoral gains. Zaidi, in refusing to
implement the coronavirus restrictions, told a gathering of Tunisian artists on
Monday that his ministry had received no order to bar such meetings. He added
that he did not sign such an order, stressing that his ministry will not prevent
artists from carrying out their activities. In turn, protesters dismissed the
government order as another sign of its selective policy in taking decisions to
impose lockdowns due to the pandemic. They noted that the government had not
announced that it was closing cafes, restaurants, bars and other establishments
as part of the restrictions.
OIC Stresses its Rejection of All Forms of Terrorism
New York - Asharq Al-Awsat/Wednesday, 7 October, 2020
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) stressed on Tuesday the need to
combat all terrorist groups and organizations wherever they are, adding that
terrorism constitutes a flagrant violation of international law, including
international humanitarian law and human rights law. The announcement came
during the statement delivered by Saudi Arabia on behalf of the OIC Group before
the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly on “Measures to eliminate
international terrorism,” held in New York on Tuesday. Nidaa Abu Ali, First
Secretary of the Permanent Mission of Saudi Arabia to the UN, said the OIC Group
condemns terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, regardless of the
motivations, the identity of the perpetrator and the location it was committed.
“The Group reaffirms that terrorism could not be associated with any religion,
race, faith, theology, values, culture or society,” Abu Ali said, reiterating
the OIC’s respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity and political
independence of all states in accordance with the UN Charter. The Group also
strongly condemned any attempt to link Islam with terrorism to achieve narrow
interests. “The OIC firmly rejects targeting Muslim minorities during COVID-19,
blaming them for the local transmission of the virus,” Abu Ali said. She
reiterated the importance of promoting dialogue, understanding and cooperation
among religions, cultures and civilizations for peace and harmony in the world,
welcoming all regional and international initiatives and efforts to that end.
“The Group believes that it is essential to follow a comprehensive approach in
combating terrorism by addressing the root causes of terrorism, including the
unlawful use of force, aggression, foreign occupation, festering international
disputes and political marginalization and alienation,” she said. She added that
the Group believes that it is essential that Member States bolster their
cooperation and coordination with the aim of prosecuting the perpetrators of the
terrorist acts and preventing providing any finance, safe havens, assistance or
weapons to terrorist groups and organizations. She said the OIC looks forward
towards the convening of a second-high level conference under the auspices of
the UN in order to formulate joint organized response by the international
community to terrorism in all its forms.
The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on October 07-08/2020
Turkey Rekindles the Armenian Genocide
Raymond Ibrahim/FrontPage Magazine/October 07/2020
As it has done in other arenas where “extremists” are attacking moderates or
Christians—from Syria to Libya to Nigeria—Turkey is spearheading another jihad,
this time against Christian Armenia.
Context: Fighting recently erupted in the region of Nagorno-Karabakh, which
borders Armenia and Azerbaijan. Although it is ethnically Armenian, after the
dissolution of the USSR, the territory was allotted to Muslim Azerbaijan. Since
then, hostilities and skirmishes have erupted, though the current one, if not
quenched—an Azerbaijani drone was shot down above the Armenian capital and
Azerbaijan is threatening to bomb Armenia’s unsecure nuclear power plant—can
have serious consequences, including internationally.
By doing what it does best—funding, sponsoring, and transporting terrorists to
troubled regions—Turkey has exacerbated if not sparked tensions. Several reports
and testimonials, including by an independent French journalist, have confirmed
that Turkey is funneling jihadi groups that had been operating in Syria and
Libya—including the pro-Muslim Brotherhood Hamza Division, which kept naked, sex
slave women in prison—to this latest theater of conflict.
As French president Macron recently explained, “We now have information which
indicates that Syrian fighters from jihadist groups have (transited) through
Gaziantep (southeastern Turkey) to reach the Nagorno-Karabakh theatre of
operations…. It is a very serious new fact, which changes the situation.”
The “quality” of these incoming “freedom fighters”—as the Western mainstream
media, particularly during the Obama era, was wont to call them—is further
evidenced by their attempts to enforce sharia, Islamic law, on some of their
more secularized hosts in Azerbaijan.
After asking, “Why has Turkey returned to the South Caucasus 100 years [after
the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire]?” Nikol Pashinyan, Armenia’s prime
minister, answered in a statement: “To continue the Armenian Genocide.” This is
a reference to the well documented massacre of an estimated 1.5 million
Armenians, 750,000 Greeks and 300,000 Assyrians—a total of 2.5 million
Christians—slaughtered at the hands of Turks and in the name of jihad.
While Pashinyan is correct in characterizing the latest hostilities as a
reflection of Turkey’s attempt “to continue the Armenian Genocide” of the
nineteenth-twentieth centuries, in fact, the continuum of Turkic attacks on
Armenia stretch back more than a thousand years ago, when the Turks first
cleansed the Armenians from their ancient homeland, also in accordance with
jihadi ideology.
Then and now, Azerbaijanis participated. During one of the eleventh century
jihads on Armenia, the great cross of an ancient church was torn down, mocked
and desecrated, and then sent to adorn a mosque in Azerbaijan; more recently,
after hostilities erupted, Azerbaijanis surrounded the Armenian embassy in
Washington, D.C. this last summer, while chanting about jihad.
The Armenian prime minister continues:
For Turkey, however, continuing a genocidal policy is not only a means of
implementing Armenophobia, but also a pragmatic task. Armenia and the Armenians
of the South Caucasus are the last remaining obstacle on the way of continued
Turkish expansion towards the North, the North East, and the East, and the
realization of its imperialistic dream.
It is no longer merely the Karabakh issue, nor a security issue of the Armenian
people. It is now an issue of international security, and today, the Armenian
people are defending also international security, assuming what may be a new
historic mission.
In other words, he is saying that only Christian Armenia (Georgia would be
included too) stands between Turkey and some sort of unification with the many
Muslim nations to its east (the “Stans,” e.g., Turkmenistan).
Certainly Turkey’s ambitions are not to be doubted. Whether by citing history’s
most sadistic jihadis as paragons of virtue and emulation, or by transforming
the Hagia Sophia into a mosque, or by helping to destabilize moderate Muslim
governments and slaughter Christians with its jihadi militias, Turkey’s
imperialistic dreams of resuccisitating the Ottoman Empire have been
increasingly on display.
The editor-in-chief of Yeni Safak, a Turkish newspaper, recently called for as
much in an article partially titled “Turkey is a global power. Now it’s time for
Azerbaijan to rise.” After saying that Turkey had taken “a century-long hiatus”
from its “geopolitical” ambitions and its “region-builder mind that founded very
powerful empires on earth,” the Turkish daily claimed that “Our aim is not to
spread conflicts but to replace, reinstate what rightfully belongs to us. Our
aim is to keep alive and maintain our region, our people, our resources, our
identity, and belonging.”
Despite all this and as it was during Obama’s role in the “Arab Spring,” the
U.S. finds itself on the side of the jihad, even if unwittingly. “The
international community, especially the American society,” Pashinyan warned,
“should be aware that U.S.-made F-16s are being used to kill Armenians in this
conflict.” Because both the U.S. and Turkey are NATO members, Turkey is
acquiring and using against Armenians weapons from the U.S.
And so history continues to repeat itself—in all ways.
The Battle of Lepanto: When Turks Skinned Christians Alive
for Refusing Islam
Raymond Ibrahim/October 07/2020
Drawing of the torture and subsequent flaying of Marco Bragadin, for rejecting
the invitation to Islam.
Today in history, on October 7, 1571, one of the most cataclysmic clashes
between Islam and the West — one where the latter for once crushed and
humiliated the former — took place.
In 1570, Muslim Turks — in the guise of the Ottoman Empire — invaded the island
of Cyprus, prompting Pope Pius V to call for and form a “Holy League” of
maritime Catholic nation-states, spearheaded by the Spanish Empire, in 1571.
Before they could reach and relieve Cyprus, its last stronghold at Famagusta was
taken through treachery.
After promising the defenders safe passage if they surrendered, Ottoman
commander Ali Pasha — known as Müezzinzade (“son of a muezzin”) due to his pious
background — had reneged and launched a wholesale slaughter. He ordered the nose
and ears of Marco Antonio Bragadin, the fort commander, hacked off. Ali then
invited the mutilated infidel to Islam and life: “I am a Christian and thus I
want to live and die,” Bragadin responded. “My body is yours. Torture it as you
will.”
So he was tied to a chair, repeatedly hoisted up the mast of a galley, and
dropped into the sea, to taunts: “Look if you can see your fleet, great
Christian, if you can see succor coming to Famagusta!” The mutilated and
half-drowned man was then carried near to St. Nicholas Church — by now a mosque
— and tied to a column, where he was slowly flayed alive. The skin was afterward
stuffed with straw, sown back into a macabre effigy of the dead commander, and
paraded in mockery before the jeering Muslims.
News of this and other ongoing atrocities and desecrations of churches in Cyprus
and Corfu enraged the Holy League as it sailed east. A bloodbath followed when
the two opposing fleets — carrying a combined total of 600 ships and 140,000
men, more of both on the Ottoman side — finally met and clashed on October 7,
1571, off the western coast of Greece, near Lepanto. According to one
contemporary:
The greater fury of the battle lasted for four hours and was so bloody and
horrendous that the sea and the fire seemed as one, many Turkish galleys burning
down to the water, and the surface of the sea, red with blood, was covered with
Moorish coats, turbans, quivers, arrows, bows, shields, oars, boxes, cases, and
other spoils of war, and above all many human bodies, Christians as well as
Turkish, some dead, some wounded, some torn apart, and some not yet resigned to
their fate struggling in their death agony, their strength ebbing away with the
blood flowing from their wounds in such quantity that the sea was entirely
coloured by it, but despite all this misery our men were not moved to pity for
the enemy. … Although they begged for mercy they received instead arquebus shots
and pike thrusts.
The pivotal point came when the flagships of the opposing fleets, the Ottoman
Sultana and the Christian Real, crashed into and were boarded by one another.
Chaos ensued as men everywhere grappled; even the grand admirals were seen in
the fray, Ali Pasha firing arrows and Don Juan swinging broadsword and
battle-axe, one in each hand.
In the end, “there was an infinite number of dead” on the Real, whereas “an
enormous quantity of large turbans, which seemed to be as numerous as the enemy
had been, [were seen in the Sultana] rolling on the deck with the heads inside
them.” The don emerged alive, but the pasha did not.
When the central Turkish fleets saw Ali’s head on a pike in the Sultana and a
crucifix where the flag of Islam once fluttered, mass demoralization set in, and
the waterborne mêlée was soon over. The Holy League lost twelve galleys and ten
thousand men, but the Ottomans lost 230 galleys — 117 of which were captured by
the Europeans — and thirty thousand men.
It was a victory of the first order, and Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestants
rejoiced.
Ottoman commander Ali Pasha al-Müezzinzade engaging the Christian galleys
Practically speaking, however, little changed. Cyprus was not even liberated by
the Holy League. “In wrestling Cyprus from you we have cut off an arm,” the
Ottomans painfully reminded the Venetian ambassador a year later. “In defeating
our fleet [at Lepanto] you have shaved our beard. An arm once cut off will not
grow again, but a shorn beard grows back all the better for the razor.”
Even so, this victory proved that the relentless Turks, who in previous decades
and centuries had conquered much of Eastern Europe, could be stopped. Lepanto
suggested that the Turks could be defeated in a head-on clash — at least by sea,
which of late had been the Islamic powers’ latest hunting grounds. As Miguel
Cervantes, who was at the battle, has the colorful Don Quixote say: “That day …
was so happy for Christendom, because all the world learned how mistaken it had
been in believing that the Turks were invincible by sea.”
Modern historians affirm this position. According to military historian Paul K.
Davis, “More than a military victory, Lepanto was a moral one. For decades, the
Ottoman Turks had terrified Europe, and the victories of Suleiman the
Magnificent caused Christian Europe serious concern. … Christians rejoiced at
this setback for the Ottomans. The mystique of Ottoman power was tarnished
significantly by this battle, and Christian Europe was heartened.”
No matter how spectacular, however, defeat at sea could not shake what was first
and foremost a land power — so that more than a century later, in 1683, some
200,000 armed Ottomans had penetrated as far as and besieged Vienna.
But that — to say nothing of Turkey’s many other jihads down to the present — is
another story.
Historical quotes in this article were excerpted from the author’s Sword and
Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West — a book that
CAIR and its Islamist allies did everything they could to prevent the U.S. Army
War College from learning about.
Will Washington Close its Embassy in Baghdad?
Robert Ford/Asharq Al Awsat/October 07/2020
I was present at the ceremony for the opening of the new American Embassy in
Baghdad on the morning of January 5, 2009. The day was sunny but cool. Deputy
Secretary of State John Negroponte former ambassador to Iraq came from
Washington wearing a big hat because the intense Iraqi sun bothered his skin.
The American ambassador, Ryan Crocker, said the opening started a new era in
Iraq-American relations. Six days before we had returned the Republican Palace
to the Iraqi Government, and a new bilateral security agreement put the Green
Zone under Iraqi military control and started a three-year period before the
withdrawal of all American soldiers from Iraq.
President Jalal Talabani attended the ceremony and thanked the Americans for
their help creating a democratic Iraq that would “serve as a model for other
peoples.” Under white tents we ate kebabs and cakes, and we hoped for better
relations between two states that Ambassador Crocker said must treat each other
as equals. I remember that Prime Minister Maliki didn’t attend because he was
visiting Iran.
Now, almost twelve years later Washington has taken “an initial decision” to
close the embassy because of security. But in 2009 security was much worse in
Baghdad. The day of the opening ceremony four car bombs exploded in Baghdad
killing four Iraqi citizens and injuring 19. Iran-backed militias launched
rocket attacks against the American embassy every few days.
The American employees were happy to move from the Republican Palace to the new
embassy because its strong apartment buildings could withstand rockets and
mortars. It was so strong and secure that it reminded us of a big prison. After
I became the deputy ambassador a few months later in 2009 a rocket hit my house.
No one was hurt, and I still have a piece of the rocket on my bookshelf.
In October 2020 security is not worse in Baghdad but politics in Washington have
changed. The murder of American diplomatic employees in Iraq was never a
political issue between the Republican and Democratic parties. There were never
congressional committees to investigate the casualties from the embassy in Iraq
and our posts in the country.
However, in 2012 after the murder of the American ambassador in Libya, the
Republican Party used the murder as a political tool to damage the credibility
of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton before her presidential campaign. There
were twelve committees for investigations. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who
was one of the leaders in exploiting the Benghazi tragedy, is a completely
political man who wants to run for president in 2020. He does not want any
casualty or any security incident in Baghdad to be a new Benghazi the Democrats
might use against him. Bilateral relations with Iraq are a secondary concern
after his political ambitions.
Our hopes on January 5 suffered other disappointments. President Talabani called
the new embassy a symbol of the “deep affinity between the American and Iraqi
peoples”. Now at protest marches in downtown Baghdad Iraqi protesters demand the
Americans and the Iranians both leave Iraq. Maybe the protesters don’t ask for
the embassy to close but they don’t consider the existing relationship is in
Iraq’s interest. And on the American side, Ryan Crocker on January 5 told the
American media that Iraq after Saddam Hussein valued relations with the United
States and the Americans had to continue to work with Iraq with great patience
to build a strong relationship.
Now many Republicans and Democrats believe that the Arab World, including Iraq,
is less vital to American interests. In an era of the virus and economic crisis,
terrorism is a smaller threat relatively. Oil from the region is less important
and China is much more important in Washington’s opinion. In 2009 we wanted to
build a broad relationship with Iraq. Now Washington threatens to impose
financial sanctions on Iraq in 47 days if Baghdad does not take steps to reduce
its energy trade with Iran. Pompeo, more than even President Donald Trump, has
made the American relationship with Iraq not about 38 million Iraqis but rather
about maximum pressure on the ruling elite in Teheran. Eight weeks ago Iraqi PM
Mustapha Kadhimi had a good visit to Washington with new commercial deals and
mutual words of praise. What a remarkable change! I don’t know if Washington in
the end would close its embassy or impose sanctions on Iraq. And certainly, the
Americans won’t withdraw from Iraq entirely. American military operations in
Syria’s Hassakeh province require the logistics base in Erbil remain. Now
Washington threatens to close its embassy and impose sanctions. The same
American domestic political calculations about casualties and costs, and about
Iran apply also to the American presence in Syria.
Madrid, Marseille and Middlesbrough Highlight New Virus
Problem
Ferdinando Giugliano/Bloomberg/October 07/2020
Since the resurgence of the pandemic, Europe has tried to avoid imposing new
national lockdowns. Countries have preferred localized restrictions as a less
costly alternative. While such “smart” lockdowns seem like a good idea in
theory, they’re bound to stir resentment among the regions, cities and
neighborhoods that must suffer them. If targeted measures are to work,
politicians will have to win consensus.
The most egregious example is Spain, where the government has clashed with local
politicians in the Madrid area as the national authorities demanded that people
avoid all non-essential movement to halt a rise in infections. The central
government also asked to limit any meeting to no more than six people and forced
bars and restaurants to stop serving after 10pm. The region ultimately caved to
the requests, but its leaders have vowed to fight the restrictions in court.
These clashes are emerging across the rest of Europe, too. In France,
politicians in Marseille rebelled against the decision by the central government
to tighten measures in the area after a surge in cases. At the end of September
Emmanuel Macron’s administration demanded that the city’s bars and restaurants
shut for at least two weeks. Restaurants have since been allowed to reopen, but
local officials are still unhappy that other regions — such as Paris — haven’t
had the same restrictions. Michele Rubirola, the local mayor, tweeted: “I
celebrate the reopening from today of restaurants in Marseille. But it is
regrettable this decision was taken not to shut them down elsewhere.”
The UK has also chosen to impose stricter rules in some areas. It’s now illegal
for different households to mix in northern areas of England, such as Hartlepool,
Middlesbrough, Warrington and the Liverpool area. The mayor of Middlesbrough
initially “vowed to defy” the rules though later said he would comply.
There were fewer local-national skirmishes during Covid’s first wave, when most
governments locked down their entire nations. Those disagreements that occurred
often went in the opposite direction: Nicola Sturgeon, first minister of
Scotland, and Sadiq Khan, mayor of London, both criticized Boris Johnson’s
government for being too soft in its virus approach. In March, Spain’s central
government challenged in court Catalonia’s decision to enforce more draconian
restrictions than those set nationally.
But politicians now fear for the impact national lockdowns have on the economy
and people’s morale. They see tightening up the rules in specific regions when
cases spike above a certain threshold as a more accurate and effective approach.
The trouble is, defining which areas should see greater restrictions can be
contentious. In Spain, for instance, local officials in Madrid initially only
restricted movements and gatherings in a number of neighborhoods on the
outskirts of the capital city, where the virus seemed to be harder to control.
The central government then asked them to apply the same restrictions to the
rest of the city, since the region’s infection rate as a whole was out of line
with the rest of the country — prompting a revolt from the local authorities.
Disagreements over lockdowns can also turn into bitter fights when there are
differences in political color. Spain’s left-wing central government clashed
first with the pro-independence administration in Catalonia and then with the
right-wing rulers of the Madrid region. In the UK, both the Labor administration
in London and the Scottish nationalist government were the strongest critics of
Johnson’s handling of the health crisis. The risk is huge of political bias
influencing decisions that should be based on science alone.
As the second wave washes over Europe, we might well still see new national
lockdowns. If deaths surge and hospitals are overwhelmed, politicians will have
no option but to close down everything. If the situation remains relatively
under control, however, localized measures still appear a more realistic
alternative.
So local and national officials will have to work together and get buy-in from
affected regions. National governments must set out clear rules for raising the
level of restrictions in a particular area and be prepared to extend more
economic support to those facing tougher rules. Meanwhile, local politicians
must understand when a lockdown is needed — and they shouldn't complain about
lighter restrictions in regions with lower case counts. In times of crisis, a
stalemate between the center and the periphery helps no one.
Were Iran and the United States Really ‘On the Brink’?
Observations on Gray Zone Conflict
Michael Eisenstadt/The Washington Institute/October 07/2020
Tehran’s entire modus operandi is designed to pressure Washington and its allies
but avoid all-out conflict, and distorting this reality so close to a U.S.
election will only hinder an effective policy response.
A popular narrative to emerge during the past year of Iran-U.S. tensions is that
on several occasions—particularly after the killing of Islamic Revolutionary
Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani in January—Iran and the
United States were on the “brink of war.” This narrative has been promoted by
Iranian officials who encourage the belief—as part of their efforts to deter the
United States—that a local clash could easily escalate to an “all-out” war. It
has likewise been promoted by President Trump, who stated in a private talk to
TV anchors in February, with typical bravado, that war with Iran was “closer
than you thought.” And it has been promoted by a variety of journalists,
academics and think tank analysts. Yet, this widely accepted version of events
distorts reality, precludes a clear-headed understanding of Iranian and U.S.
actions, and hinders an effective policy response.
The counterpressure campaign that Iran launched in May 2019 against America’s
“maximum pressure” policy (the ostensible goal of which is a better deal with
Iran covering nuclear, regional and military issues) has relied on activities in
the “gray zone” between war and peace. These include covert or unacknowledged
attacks on petrochemical infrastructure and transportation in the Gulf, proxy
attacks on U.S. military personnel in Iraq, and clandestine cyber operations.
Indeed, Iran is perhaps the world’s foremost practitioner of gray zone
operations (although China and Russia have also long employed this modus
operandi). For nearly four decades, Americans have struggled to understand and
to respond effectively to this asymmetric “way of war.”
Actors operating in the gray zone test and probe to determine what they can get
away with. They engage in covert or unacknowledged proxy activities to preserve
deniability and avoid becoming decisively engaged with the adversary. They rely
on incremental action to create ambiguity regarding their intentions, and to
make their enemies uncertain about how to respond. And they arrange their
activities in time and space—pacing them and spacing them geographically—so that
adversary decision-makers do not feel pressured to act rashly. This enables them
to challenge stronger adversaries and advance their own agendas while managing
risk, preventing escalation and avoiding war. In gray zone competitions there is
no well-defined brink that marks the transition from peace to war. Rather, these
are murky, ambiguous, slow-motion conflicts characterized by occasional
escalatory peaks and deescalatory troughs.
Iran’s gray zone strategy works by leveraging a number of differences in the way
that Tehran and Washington think and operate. The most important of these
differences is conceptual. U.S. decision-makers have tended to conceive of war
and peace with Iran (as well as with other significant state actors such as
China and Russia) in stark, binary terms and have frequently been constrained by
fear of escalation—creating opportunities for Iran (and others) to act in the
gray zone “in between.” (The main exception here—by and large a relatively
recent one—is in the cyber domain.) By contrast, Tehran tends to see conflict as
a continuum. The key terrain in gray zone conflicts, then, is the gray matter in
the heads of those American policymakers who believe that a local clash could
somehow rapidly escalate to an all-out war. The result is often U.S. inaction,
which provides gray zone operators such as Iran greater freedom to act.
Tehran’s interest in avoiding war and its preference for operating in the gray
zone are not grounded in a transitory calculation of the regime’s interests; it
is a deeply rooted feature of the regime’s strategic culture that is reflected
in its way of war, as well as the Islamic Republic’s strategy under Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. This is one of the enduring legacies of the
Iran-Iraq War, which killed nearly a quarter-million Iranians and left the
country with still-unhealed wounds. Iran is determined to never again repeat
that experience. Likewise, for the United States, the long and costly wars in
Afghanistan and Iraq have seared in the nation’s consciousness a strong desire
to avoid future Middle Eastern “forever wars.”
Thus, Tehran’s entire modus operandi is intended to prevent escalation and avoid
war. During the first seven months of the counterpressure campaign that it
launched in spring 2019, all of Iran’s attacks were nonlethal—by design. Iranian
forces placed limpet mines on the hulls of oil tankers, targeted unmanned U.S.
reconnaissance aircraft, and conducted precision strikes against sparsely
staffed Saudi oil facilities. When these initial steps did not induce Washington
to respond militarily, or to lift or ease the economic sanctions imposed after
it left the nuclear deal with Iran in 2018, the Islamic Republic escalated in
the space left by U.S. inaction with a series of progressively larger rocket
attacks in Iraq by its Kataib Hezbollah (KH) proxy, until an American was killed
there in late December. This set in motion a series of events—a U.S.
counterstrike that killed 25 KH militiamen, violent demonstrations in front of
the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad by pro-Iran proxies (evoking dark memories of the
1979-1981 Tehran embassy hostage crisis and the 2012 murder of U.S. Amb.
Christopher Stevens by Libyan terrorists), and tweeted taunts by Khamenei that
America “cannot do a damn thing”—that prompted the United States to target
Soleimani and KH commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis in early January.
Yet, when Iran retaliated five days later with a missile strike on Al-Asad air
base, it gave advance warning to the Iraqi government so that Americans there
had time to shelter. (U.S. intelligence had also picked up warning signs of an
imminent missile strike.) Afterward, both the United States and Iran signaled
publicly that they considered the current round over, although rocket fire
against U.S. personnel and facilities in Iraq has continued since then. Khamenei
subsequently warned that the Islamic Republic “will never forget the martyrdom
of Hajj Qassem Soleimani...and will inevitably strike a similar blow against the
U.S.”This sequence of events should demonstrate that the United States and Iran
were not on the brink of war in January, for several reasons. First, events
following the killing of Soleimani indicate that risk and escalation management
were priorities for both Tehran and Washington; nothing that has happened since
alters this assessment. Second, for more than 40 years, Iran and the United
States have avoided war—despite Iranian-supported kidnappings and attacks in
Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq that have killed hundreds of Americans; clashes
at sea toward the end of the Iran-Iraq War that killed scores of Iranian
sailors; the accidental U.S. shooting down of an Iranian passenger jet in 1988
that killed all 290 passengers; and numerous other incidents. And finally, since
2017, Israel has launched hundreds of strikes on Iranian military infrastructure
in Syria, killing at least eight members of the IRGC (according to Iranian
sources), without sparking a war.
Yet, history is replete with examples of war through miscalculation—and both the
United States and Iran have each miscalculated at least once already. The U.S.
maximum pressure policy crossed an Iranian redline dating to the 1980s, which
states that if Iran cannot export oil, it will work to prevent any other Gulf
state from exporting oil either. In trying to drive Tehran’s oil exports to
zero, Washington backed Iran into a corner and incentivized it to lash out with
a military counterpressure campaign—a response for which the United States was
inexplicably unprepared. Likewise, Iran crossed a U.S. redline by killing a U.S.
citizen—and by organizing violent protests by its Iraqi proxies in front of the
U.S. Embassy in Baghdad in December 2019, it likely contributed to the U.S.
decision to target Soleimani and Muhandis. These episodes show, however, that
while miscalculations are possible, they need not spark uncontrolled escalation
or an all-out war—though it remains to be seen whether the killing of Soleimani
was a master stroke or yet another miscalculation.
There are other ways the parties could stumble into a wider conflict. Tehran
might be tempted to spring an October surprise (for example, perhaps the
assassination of a U.S. official or a humiliating military strike) to sabotage
Trump’s prospects for a second term—although this could backfire and give the
president a boost at the polls due to a rally-round-the-flag effect. It might
also provide a pretext for a tough U.S. military response. Should the president
lose reelection, Tehran might be tempted to launch a strike before Inauguration
Day as a parting shot to avenge the death of Soleimani. And should Trump win a
second term, Tehran will have to decide whether to initiate a military crisis to
catalyze diplomacy that might yield a more comprehensive deal with Washington,
or avoid provoking a triumphant and at times erratic president. But these
scenarios would all involve the limited use of force by Iran, and it seems
unlikely that Trump would suddenly abandon a core principle of his presidency
and get the United States involved in yet another Middle East “forever war” just
prior to an election, after failing in a bid for reelection or at the start of a
second term. Should Iran strike before or shortly after U.S. elections, though,
an unnerving series of ripostes remains a possibility. Some members of the
administration might even welcome an election-eve crisis with Iran.
Moreover, should Khamenei become incapacitated or pass away, IRGC hardliners
might opt for a more risk-acceptant approach toward the United States: They
might launch a spectacular attack to avenge Soleimani’s death and goad the
United States to withdraw its remaining troops from the region. The ascension of
IRGC hardliners to positions of leadership in the post-Khamenei era would likely
presage an era of heightened U.S.-Iran tensions and conflict.
Another possible path to escalation might be provided by alleged U.S. (and
Israeli) covert operations in Iran and against Iranian interests in the region.
These might include activities such as the sabotage in June 2019 of an
underwater oil pipeline off the Syrian coast used to transfer crude oil from
Iranian tankers to the refinery at Baniyas, the preflight explosion of an
Iranian satellite launch vehicle in August 2019, and a claimed attack in October
2019 on an Iranian oil tanker in the Red Sea. The United States may have also
played a role in the sabotage of Iran’s principal uranium enrichment facility at
Natanz, which reports have attributed to Israel.
In addition to these instances of apparently deliberate sabotage, there have
also been a series of fires and explosions at industrial sites throughout the
country in the past three months. Such events are quite common in Iran, due to
the country’s crumbling infrastructure and lack of a safety culture. According
to a study by the United States Institute of Peace, the number of such events
that occurred from May to mid-July of 2019 (at least 97) is about the same
number as have occurred in the same period this year (at least 83). So, while
some of these incidents might be a result of sabotage or cyberattacks, it seems
likely that most were not.
Yet, seemingly well-sourced reports from the United States and Israel bolster
the impression that the two countries may be conducting their own narrowly
focused, low-level gray zone campaigns against Iran through sabotage and
cyberattacks on nuclear infrastructure and strategic research and development
facilities. Whether this is true or not is unimportant—perceptions are what
matters. And herein lies the rub: Gray zone campaigns are generally most
successful when a degree of deniability is preserved. When officials effectively
confirm gray zone activities through media leaks or by other means—whether for
personal, political or propaganda purposes—they obviate some of the advantages
of gray zone operations. And when covert actions that humiliate the regime are
combined with further pressure on Tehran—such as U.S. efforts to snap back U.N.
sanctions in the wake of failed efforts to extend the ban on arms transfers to
Iran—the potential grows for Iran to up the ante if and when it retaliates. But
escalation—even if unlikely to lead to war—is not in the American interest, as
it risks highlighting the limits of U.S. deterrence as well as Washington’s
inability to protect its personnel and assets, its unwillingness to defend its
allies, and the degree to which it may be constrained by domestic and foreign
policy concerns. With U.S. presidential elections a little more than a month
away, there is precious little chance of negotiating a new deal with Iran at
this point. Increased pressure creates a heightened risk of escalation for
little practical gain.So, while claims that Iran and the United States were on
the “brink of war” make for dramatic headlines, they do not reflect reality. To
succeed in gray zone competitions, the vocabulary and mental models derived from
America’s conventional warfighting experience must be put aside, as they
obfuscate rather than illuminate, and preclude the kind of clarity of thought
required to avoid further escalation with Iran. At the same time, U.S.
policymakers should have learned from recent experiences with Iran not to
underestimate the adversary or to overestimate their own ability to deter
destabilizing actions. The enemy always gets a vote, and the potential gain
proffered by a contemplated course of action should be weighed against the
potential for escalation and harm to America’s reputation and credibility—as
well as to U.S. deterrence going forward.
*Michael Eisenstadt is the Kahn Fellow and director of the Military and Security
Studies Program at The Washington Institute. This article was originally
published on the Lawfare website.
Caucasus Clash Could Endanger Israeli Oil Imports
Simon Henderson/The Washington Institute./October 07/2020
Israel’s normalization agreement with the United Arab Emirates may enable Gulf
oil to make up for any break in Azerbaijani supplies, though this option could
harm its ties with Baku and Turkey.
When Armenian rockets struck the Azerbaijani city of Ganja on October 4, they
landed perilously close to a major oil pipeline. Stretching westward from
Caspian Sea fields off the shores of Baku to Georgia and Turkey, the line
eventually arrives at the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, from which tankers
transport the oil to Israel and other foreign customers.
Indeed, Azerbaijan has been a reliable supplier to Israeli refineries in Haifa
and Ashdod. And despite Turkey’s vitriolic rhetoric toward Jerusalem, Ankara has
been happy to maintain the flow, which nets it ample transit fees for both the
pipeline and shipping. In turn, Azerbaijan has developed a close diplomatic and
security relationship with Israel, from whom it has received drones and other
military equipment used in the latest hostilities. Media reports suggest that an
Azeri cargo plane carried munitions from Israel just before the fighting began.
Armenia has not taken kindly to these actions, recently recalling its ambassador
from Tel Aviv for consultations. The Tel Aviv embassy had just opened for the
first time two weeks earlier—though the two countries have had diplomatic
relations since Armenia gained independence in 1991. On October 5, President
Armen Sarkissian telephoned his Israeli counterpart Reuven Rivlin to ask that
such flights be halted, but Rivlin replied that Israeli relations with
Azerbaijan are “not aimed against any side.” The latest tensions could have
several other geopolitical ramifications as well, since both Armenia and
Azerbaijan border Iran, Armenia has a defense pact with Russia, and another
pipeline from Baku carries natural gas to Europe.
The conflict between (majority Christian) Armenia and (majority Shia Muslim)
Azerbaijan has roots in the Stalinist era, when the eponymous Soviet republics
were created. To offset the danger of anti-Moscow nationalist sentiments, their
borders were drawn to include a mix of communities in both republics. Major
fighting erupted after the Soviet collapse, when Armenians in the Azeri
territory of Nagorno-Karabakh achieved quasi-independence and made their area of
control contiguous with Armenia. The latest fighting was apparently started by
Azerbaijan and supported by Turkey; it follows skirmishes in July, during which
an Azeri general was killed.
Israel has been cultivating its alliance with the Azerbaijanis for three
decades, and the relationship has had the twin benefits of bolstering its oil
supplies and fostering productive commercial ties with Turkey. Today, Israel has
at least one plausible option for offsetting any dislocation in these supplies,
but pursuing it could jeopardize relations with both Baku and Ankara. On October
2, Israel, the UAE, and the United States announced a joint energy strategy
stemming from their landmark peace treaty. In addition to potential gas
exploration and solar energy projects, they have reportedly discussed pumping
refined Emirati oil products through the underutilized pipeline stretching from
the Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat to Ashkelon on the Mediterranean coast.
Originally built to carry Iranian oil before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the
line could have the spare capacity to replace Israel’s oil imports from
Azerbaijan.
Such a solution would be a diplomatic triumph for the UAE, which already opposes
Turkey’s involvement in the Gulf rift with Qatar and its support for the
internationally recognized government in Libya. And for Israel, being able to
purchase Emirati oil may be economically and technically attractive. Yet doing
so runs the risk of damaging its good ties with Azerbaijan and its diminished
but still-significant commercial links with Turkey.
*Simon Henderson is the Baker Fellow and director of the Bernstein Program on
Gulf and Energy Policy at The Washington Institute.