English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For September 22/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews19/english.september22.20.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
Jesus said to His Desciples: ‘Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me
Mark 09/33-37: “Then they came to Capernaum; and when he was in the house he asked them, ‘What were you arguing about on the way?’But they were silent, for on the way they had argued with one another about who was the greatest. He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, ‘Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.’ Then he took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them, ‘Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me.”

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on September 21-22/2020

Lebanon’s Michel Aoun warns the country is ‘going to hell’ if it fails to form a government
Lebanon ‘headed for hell without new government’
Lebanese PM-designate says he needs help to save French initiative
Aoun Meets Adib, Says Lebanon Faces Cabinet Crisis, No Solution on Horizon
Adib Urges Parties to Help Form Overdue Cabinet, Make French Initiative Succeed
Bulgaria Court Jails Duo for Life over 2012 Israeli Bus Bombing Blamed on Hizbullah
Maronite patriarch criticises Shia role in Lebanese political impasse
Lebanon’s Shiite Council: Rotation of First-Degree Posts
Israel Expects Direct Negotiations with Lebanon Over Gas Exploration
Trump tries to renew Israeli-Lebanese talks on Mediterranean gas fields/Tobias Siegal/Jerusalem Post/September 21/2020
Egypt, Arab League Urge Speeding Up Formation of New Lebanese Govt
UN calls on Israeli army to halt overflying Lebanese air space
Lebanon Finds 4 Bodies after Illicit Sea Crossing
Dispute Between Lebanon’s Health, Interior Ministries over Virus Cases
Lebanese-American Political Donor in Jail in Lithuania
Hassan Recommends Two-Week Total Lockdown as Virus Cases Hit 1,006
Khalil, Sawaya and Taleb Testify in Port Blast Probe
Jumblat: Aoun Has No Right to Say We're Going to Hell
Geagea: No One Wants to Target Shiites in Lebanon
Palestine Between Practices of the Past, Vision for the Future/Sam Menassa/Asharq Al Awsat/September 21/2020
On an ‘Outside’ Being Better than Another/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/September 21/2020
Is it the Fall of the Presidency or Country?/Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al Awsat/September 21/2020
Bombing in Bulgaria: Turning the Tide on Hezbollah/Toby Dershowitz and Dylan Gresik/Newsweek/September 21/2020
 

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on September 21-22/2020

US announces new sanctions on Iran defense ministry, atomic energy agency
Text of State Department press release: Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo announces the return of sanctions on Iran
UAE, Israeli Film Bodies Plan Regional Festival
Iran and Turkey are ‘serial infringers’ of UN weapons embargoes
Iran's Zarif demands US compensation before any new talks
International silence raises doubts about Haftar-Maitig oil deal
Reconciliation with Hamas too costly for Abbas to afford
US Envoy to Sponsor Political Agreement between Kurdish Parties
Turkish Lira at New Low, Central Bank Seen Sticking to Playbook
Sudan's Burhan Visits UAE for Talks Over Regional Issues
Kidnapping of Activist Sparks Protests in Iraq’s Nasiriyah
Palestinian Presidency Refrains from Criticizing Joint US-Qatari Statement
Canada/Statement by Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of International Development and Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship on International Day of Peace

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 21-22/2020

The Trump Presidency: A landmark in the History of America’s Right/Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/September 21/2020
We Really Shouldn’t Force People Back into the Office/Ferdinando Giugliano/Bloomberg/September, 21/2020
Arabs: "Palestinians Repeat the Same Mistakes"/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/September 21/2020
Strip Qatar’s Homophobic Regime of the 2022 World Cup Now/Benjamin Weinthal/FDD/September 21/2020
What remains of secularism in Tunisia/The Arab Weekly/September 21/2020

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on September 21-22/2020

Lebanon’s Michel Aoun warns the country is ‘going to hell’ if it fails to form a government
Reuters/Arab News/September 21/2020
BEIRUT: President Michel Aoun said on Monday that Lebanon faced a crisis over forming a government and proposed annulling sectarian quotas in the main cabinet ministries."As the positions have grown harder, there appears no solution on the horizon soon," Aoun said in a televised address, excerpts of which were published on the presidency Twitter feed. Aoun said if Lebanon failed to form a government it was “going to hell.”Asked whether there was any hope for breakthrough in cabinet formation, he said “there might be a miracle.”And Aoun said he proposed canceling Lebanon’s sectarian quotas for sovereign ministries. His comments followed the country's prime minister-designate who called for cooperation from all sides in the formation of a new government and for efforts to secure the immediate success of a French initiative to lift the country from crisis.
Lebanon is in the throes of an economic crisis marking the worst threat to its stability since the 1975-90 civil war. But French efforts to get its fractious leaders to agree a new government to start fixing the problems have yet to bear fruit.
The cabinet formation process has hit a logjam over the demand of Lebanon’s two dominant Shiite parties, the Iran-backed Hezbollah and its ally the Amal Movement, to name Shiite ministers in cabinet including the finance minister. All sides should cooperate for the formation of a government of specialists “capable of halting the collapse and starting work to get the country out the crises,” Prime Minister-designate Mustapha Adib said in a statement. Adib said he would spare no effort “to achieve this goal in cooperation with the president.”Last week, reports suggested Adib may resign as his efforts floundered. He had proposed switching control of ministries, some of which have been held by the same factions for years. A senior Lebanese political source said France was still working to try to find a way through the logjam.Adib is a Sunni Muslim as required by a power-sharing system that parcels out posts according to religious sects. He is backed by former Lebanese prime ministers including Saad Al-Hariri, Lebanon’s leading Sunni.The standoff spilled into the religious domain on Sunday. Lebanon’s senior Christian cleric, Maronite Patriarch Bechara Boutros Al-Rai, criticized the demands made by the main Shiite parties without naming them, asking how one sect could demand “a certain ministry.” This prompted a response from the supreme religious body of Lebanon’s Shiites which said comments by a major religious leader had distorted the truth.

Lebanon ‘headed for hell without new government’
Abbie Cheeseman/The Arab Weekly/September 21/2020
Lebanon is heading to “hell” if politicians don’t stop jockeying for their sect to retain control of key ministries and agree on a new government soon, President Michel Aoun warned on Monday as sectarian tensions rise over the formation of the new cabinet. Prime minister-designate Mustapha Adib also urged all political parties to work to make a French plan for the country succeed immediately as the deadlock over Cabinet formation drags on. Lebanon missed France’s 15-day deadline to form a crisis Cabinet last Wednesday and the government was stuck in deadlock at the weekend over who controls the Finance Ministry. “With the entrenchment of positions, no solution seems imminent,” said the 85-year-old president. Asked where the country was going without an agreement on a new administration, Mr Aoun replied starkly: “To hell, of course”.As politicians squabble over who should appoint ministers to the new administration, the country faces the worst economic crisis in its history, rapidly rising unemployment and poverty as well as the massive destruction left by a huge explosion at Beirut port on August 4 which killed at least 190 and wounded thousands.
“Any additional delay exacerbates and deepens the crisis and pushes people towards more poverty, and the state into more deficit. “I do not think that anyone can hold their conscience responsible for causing more pain to the people, who have suffered so much and still are.” Speaker of the Parliament Nabih Berri, who heads the Hezbollah-backed Shiite Amal Movement, insisted on retaining hold of the Finance Ministry after the US last week slapped sanctions on his top aide, two former Cabinet ministers and close allies of Hezbollah. Four former prime ministers, including Saad Hariri, are staunchly against the Shiite groups holding on to the ministry. In a tweet, Mr Hariri said ministries – including the finance ministry – “are not an exclusive right for any sect” and the insistence on retaining the finance ministry for one sect was undermining “the last chance to save Lebanon and the Lebanese”.Mr Adib’s French-backed efforts to form a government of experts without party loyalists have hit a wall.
The Hezbollah-allied Christian Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) set out a proposal on Saturday in which the key ministries would be distributed among minority sects such as the Druze and Alawites, rather than major groups such as Sunnis, Shiites and Maronites. Mr Adib is in favour of rotating the leadership of the ministries among the main sects. Many of the ministries have been held by the same factions for years, including the Energy Ministry, which has been held by FPM for more than 10 years. “Lebanon doesn’t have the luxury of wasting time amid the unprecedented crises that it is going through,” said Mr Adib, a Sunni Muslim who is backed by former prime ministers, including Mr Hariri. The depths of Lebanon’s economic crisis is presenting the biggest threat to the stability of the country since the 1975-1990 civil war. French President Emmanuel Macron’s road map for Lebanon set out a series of milestones to get the former French mandate out of its crises, from renewing talks with the International Monetary Fund to fixing the broken electricity sector. But the political elite, who have overseen decades of entrenched corruption that brought about these crises, have so far failed to form a Cabinet.

Lebanese PM-designate says he needs help to save French initiative
The Arab Weekly/September 21/2020
BEIRUT –Lebanon’s prime minister-designate on Monday called for cooperation from all sides in the formation of a new government and for efforts to secure the immediate success of a French initiative to lift the country from crisis. Lebanon is in the throes of an economic crisis marking the worst threat to its stability since the 1975-90 civil war. But French efforts to get its fractious leaders to agree a new government to start fixing the problems have yet to bear fruit. The cabinet formation process has hit a logjam over the demand of Lebanon’s two dominant Shia parties, the Iran-backed Hezbollah and its ally the Amal Movement, to name Shia ministers in cabinet including the finance minister. All sides should cooperate for the formation of a government of specialists “capable of halting the collapse and starting work to get the country out the crises,” Prime Minister-designate Mustapha Adib said in a statement.
Adib said he would spare no effort “to achieve this goal in cooperation with the president.”Last week, reports suggested Adib may resign as his efforts floundered. He had proposed switching control of ministries, some of which have been held by the same factions for years. A senior Lebanese political source said France was still working to try to find a way through the current logjam that prompted President Michel Aoun to propose Monday the annulling sectarian quotas in the main cabinet ministries. “As the positions have grown harder, there appears no solution on the horizon soon,” Aoun said in a televised address, excerpts of which were published on the presidency Twitter feed. Aoun said if Lebanon failed to form a government it was “going to hell.”Asked whether there was any hope for breakthrough in cabinet formation, he said “there might be a miracle.”Lebanon is in the throes of an economic crisis marking the worst threat to its stability since the 1975-90 civil war. Adib is a Sunni Muslim as required by a power-sharing system that parcels out posts according to religious sects. He is backed by former Lebanese prime ministers including Saad Hariri, Lebanon’s leading Sunni. The standoff spilled into the religious domain on Sunday. Lebanon’s senior Christian cleric, Maronite Patriarch Bechara Boutros Al-Rai, criticised the demands made by the main Shia parties without naming them, asking how one sect could demand “a certain ministry.” This prompted a response from the supreme religious body of Lebanon’s Shia, which said comments by a major religious leader had distorted the truth. Last week, reports suggested Adib may resign as his efforts floundered. He had proposed switching control of ministries, some of which have been held by the same factions for years. Aoun on Monday said Adib came for four visits but he has not been able to present any cabinet line-up.Macron prods Lebanese leaders over cabinet formation process
 

Aoun Meets Adib, Says Lebanon Faces Cabinet Crisis, No Solution on Horizon
Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
President Michel Aoun said on Monday that Lebanon faced a crisis over forming a government and proposed annulling sectarian quotas in the main cabinet ministries.
"As the positions have grown harder, there appears no solution on the horizon soon," Aoun said in a televised address, excerpts of which were published on the presidency Twitter feed. He made his remarks after receiving Prime minister-designate Mustafa Adib, who had earlier called for cooperation from all sides in the formation of a new government and for efforts to secure the immediate success of a French initiative to lift the country from crisis.
All sides should cooperate for the formation of a government of specialists “capable of halting the collapse and starting work to get the country out the crises”, Adib said in a statement. He stressed he would spare no effort “to achieve this goal in cooperation with the president”. Lebanon is in the throes of an economic crisis marking the worst threat to its stability since the 1975-90 civil war. But French efforts to get its fractious leaders to agree a new government to start fixing the problems have yet to bear fruit. The cabinet formation process has hit a logjam over the demand of Lebanon’s two dominant Shiite parties, the Iran-backed Hezbollah and its ally the Amal Movement, to name Shiite ministers in cabinet including the finance minister. Aoun said Monday Hezbollah and Amal are insisting on naming Shiite ministers, including the finance minister.
“The Lebanese constitution does not say any sect should get a certain ministry,” he added, proposing canceling sectarian quotas for sovereign ministries.Last week, reports suggested Adib may resign as his efforts floundered. He had proposed switching control of ministries, some of which have been held by the same factions for years. A senior Lebanese political source said France was still working to try to find a way through the logjam. The standoff spilled into the religious domain on Sunday. Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rai, criticized the demands made by the main Shiite parties without naming them, asking how one sect could demand “a certain ministry”. This prompted a response from the supreme religious body of Lebanon’s Shiites which said comments by a major religious leader had distorted the truth.

Adib Urges Parties to Help Form Overdue Cabinet, Make French Initiative Succeed
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 21/2020
Prime Minister-designate Mustafa Adib issued a statement on Monday urging Lebanon’s competing political parties to work towards the success of the French initiative, saying the country does not have the luxury of time amid its prevalent collapse. Adib urged them to step up and help him form a desperately needed independent government to save the crisis-hit country. “Lebanon cannot afford to waste time amid its unprecedented financial, monetary, economic, social and health crises it is going through,” said Adib in his statement. "The suffering of Lebanese, resonating across the country and through death journeys at sea, requires cooperation of all parties in order to facilitate the formation of a mission government with a specific program that political parties have previously pledged to support,” said Adib. He said the new “government composed of experts must be capable of stopping the collapse and start work to bring the country out of its crises, and restore the citizens' confidence in their country and its institutions.”“I will spare no effort to achieve this goal in cooperation with President Michel Aoun,” added Adib, urging all political parties to “immediately make the French initiative succeed without delay, which opens the road for Lebanon’s rescue and stops its quick deterioration.” The PM-designated warned the crisis could “deepen and aggravate” in case of further delay, “it will push more people into poverty, and the state towards more disability. I don’t think that anyone bears to hold their conscience responsible for causing more pain to this people who have suffered so much and still are," stated Adib. Adib is under pressure to form a fresh cabinet line-up as soon as possible so the new government can launch a raft of reforms required to unlock billions of dollars in foreign aid. Lebanon was mired in its worst economic crisis in decades and battling the novel coronavirus pandemic, even before one of the world's biggest non-nuclear explosions at the Beirut port last month. Adib's remarks came after a French-imposed deadline to form the cabinet passed last week. Adib's efforts to form a government have been effectively blocked by the two main Shiite groups in Lebanon's usual power-sharing arrangement -- Amal and Hezbollah. Observers have said their insistence to keep the finance ministry is linked to recent US sanctions against a former minister from Amal, as well as Hezbollah-linked businesses. The August 4 explosion of hundreds of tonnes of ammonium nitrate at the Beirut port killed more than 190 people, wounded thousands, and ravaged large parts of the capital.

Bulgaria Court Jails Duo for Life over 2012 Israeli Bus Bombing Blamed on Hizbullah
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 21/2020
A Bulgarian court on Monday sentenced two men to life in prison over a deadly 2012 bus bomb attack on Israeli tourists at the country's Burgas airport blamed on Hizbullah.The attack in July 2012 killed five Israelis including a pregnant woman, their Bulgarian bus driver and the Franco-Lebanese who carried the explosive, and left over 35 people injured. It was the deadliest against Israelis abroad since 2004.
Bulgarian and Israeli authorities blamed the bombing on the Lebanese Shiite movement Hizbullah, playing a part in a subsequent European Union decision to blacklist Hizbullah's military wing as a "terrorist" organisation.
Judge Adelina Ivanova sentenced the two men -- who fled Bulgaria and were tried in absentia -- to "life in jail without parole", finding them guilty of terrorism and manslaughter. The two were identified as Lebanese-Australian Meliad Farah, 31 at the time of the attack, and Lebanese-Canadian Hassan El Hajj Hassan, 24, and were charged in mid-2016 as the bomber's accomplices. A DNA analysis identified the bomber as 23-year-old Franco-Lebanese national Mohamad Hassan El-Husseini.
Airport CCTV footage showed him wandering inside the airport's arrivals hall with a backpack on his back shortly before the explosion that tore through a bus outside the terminal that was headed to Sunny Beach, a popular summer destination on the Black Sea. According to witness accounts, he tried to put his backpack inside the luggage compartment of the bus full of Israelis when it exploded.
The tourists who were killed were all in their twenties, except for a pregnant 42-year-old woman. Prosecutors were unable to determine if the explosive was triggered by the bomber or remotely detonated by one of two men, who had also helped him to assemble the explosive device.
- Hizbullah 'links' -
Prosecutor Evgenia Shtarkelova told reporters last week she "pleaded for the heaviest punishment because I consider that this terrorist act deserves to be punished in the heaviest possible way."The two men were put on trial in absentia in January 2018 for a terrorist attack and manslaughter but were never tracked down.According to an investigation into the bombing, they arrived in Bulgaria from Romania in June 2012, and left again on the evening after the attack. A public defender for Hassan, lawyer Zhanet Zhelyazkova, countered that evidence for her client's alleged complicity with the attack was "only circumstantial."
Shtarkelova however said that the nature of the explosive device, the fake US driver's licences used by the two men, their Lebanese descent and some family ties "link both defendants (...) and the attack to the terrorist organisation Hizbullah."
The investigation into the attack found that the fake licences were made by the same printer at a university in Lebanon. It also said the suspects received money from people linked to Hizbullah. In recent comments on the case, Bulgaria's chief prosecutor Ivan Geshev stressed that Hizbullah was behind the attack "in terms of logistics and financing". The prosecution confirmed that it had no clue about the two men's whereabouts and that they are still sought on an Interpol red notice.
The court ruling is still subject to appeal to a higher court.

Maronite patriarch criticises Shia role in Lebanese political impasse
The Arab Weekly/September 21/2020
“In what capacity does a sect demand a certain ministry as if it is its own, and obstruct the formation of the government, until it achieves its goals, and so causes political paralysis?” the patriarch of Lebanon’s biggest Christian community said.
BEIRUT -- Lebanon’s top Christian cleric took a swipe at leaders of the Shia Muslim community on Sunday for making demands he said were blocking the formation of a new government and causing political paralysis in a nation in deep crisis.Patriarch Bechara Boutros Al-Rai, leader of the Maronite church, did not mention Shias directly but asked how one sect can demand “a certain ministry.” Shia politicians say they must name the finance minister. Sunday’s sermon adds to tensions in a nation facing its worst crisis since a civil war ended in 1990 and where power is traditionally shared out between Muslims and Christians. Responding to the patriarch without naming him, a Shia religious council said comments by a “major religious leader” distorted the truth. France has been pushing Lebanon to form a new cabinet fast. But a deadline of September 15 that politicians told Paris they would meet has been missed amid a row over appointments, notably the finance minister, a post Shias controlled for years. Shia politicians say they must choose some posts because rivals are trying to use “foreign leverage” to push them aside. “In what capacity does a sect demand a certain ministry as if it is its own, and obstruct the formation of the government, until it achieves its goals, and so causes political paralysis?” the patriarch of Lebanon’s biggest Christian community said. He said the Taif agreement, a pact that ended the 1975-1990 civil war, did not hand specific ministries to specific sects.
Prime Minister-designate Mustapha Adib, a Sunni, wants to appoint specialists and shake up the leadership of ministries. The main Shia groups – the Amal Movement and the heavily armed, Iran-backed Hezbollah – want to pick figures for several posts, including the finance minister, a vital position as Lebanon navigates through its economic crisis. Hezbollah is being accused by anti-government protesters of siphoning off government funds to finance its presence in Syria, where, together with its patron Iran, it has been supporting Syrian President Bashar Assad in his civil war. Hezbollah – the only Lebanese group outside the military allowed to arm itself – is also accused of massing tens of thousands of rockets in the South for use against Israel. Now, the Iran-backed group also sees control over the finance ministry as one way of blocking foreign demands that Lebanon enact far-reaching reforms to solve a staggering debt and reset its collapsing economy if other countries are to come to its aid. A French roadmap for Lebanon includes the swift resumption of talks with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), as a first step for a new government to deal with a mountain of debt and fix the broken Lebanese banking sector.

Lebanon’s Shiite Council: Rotation of First-Degree Posts
Beirut- Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
The Higher Islamic Shiite Council said on Sunday that remarks voiced by a major religious leader against the Shiite sect contained “sectarian incitement, a distortion of facts, and unjust accusations”, referring to the statement of Maronite Patriarch Bechara al-Rai. “If we are demanding to keep the Finance Ministry with the Shiite sect, that is out of our keenness on national partnership in the executive authority,” the Council said in a statement. It noted that any rotation of the ministerial portfolios should be accompanied by a rotation of the so-called first-degree posts in state administrations. “The policy of elimination, isolation, and marginalization, which Imam Moussa Sadr had long warned against, cannot build a country and cannot produce a state,” the Council stressed. The statement added that the Council has called and is still calling for abolishing political sectarianism and endorsing citizenship as the standard in political action within a just state based on equality in rights and duties regardless of sectarian privileges. France has been pushing Lebanon to form a new cabinet fast. But a deadline of Sept. 15 that politicians told Paris they would meet has been missed amid a row over appointments, notably the finance minister, a post Shiites controlled for years. On Sunday, Rai criticized the Shiite duo by asking in what capacity does a sect demand a certain ministry as if it is its own ministry. “Which constitutional act permits the monopoly of a particular ministerial portfolio? We reject this monopoly because it aims to establish the hegemony of a group over the state. Our rejection is not against a specific sect,” the Patriarch said. The Shiite Council said it regrets that a corrupt political class is trying to impose its conditions in the government formation. “This political class comprises those who bet on breaking the Resistance and prolonging the war against it,” the statement added. The Council also said it considers this class responsible for the country’s current economic collapse due to its policy of share distribution, shady deals, the waste of public funds, and violations of the Constitution.
 

Israel Expects Direct Negotiations with Lebanon Over Gas Exploration
Tel Aviv - Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
Visits carried out by US Assistant Secretary of State for Middle East Affairs David Schenker to the region in recent weeks, including Beirut and West Jerusalem, aimed to revive talks between Lebanon and Israel on gas exploration, political sources in Tel Aviv and Washington said. According to the Israeli Walla website, the sources confirmed that Schenker has been shuttling between the two countries for several months as part of efforts led by US President Donald Trump’s administration to push the two sides to direct negotiations on gas reserves in the Mediterranean, which will be the first in 30 years, in case such talks occur. The sources expected the discussions to begin this year. “Schenker, who last week met with Israeli Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz … and Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi, whose ministry is a partner in communications, made a breakthrough in his recent meetings in Beirut, as the Lebanese showed remarkable flexibility,” the website wrote. Israeli and US officials attributed this progress to the changes taking place in Lebanon since the catastrophic explosion at the Beirut port. They said that the shock caused by the Aug. 4 blast, in addition to the deteriorating economic crisis, the wave of popular discontent resulting from the worsening living conditions that followed, and the expansion of internal criticism of Hezbollah, all made the US administration revive its efforts to start negotiations between the two countries. There are several border disputes between Lebanon and Israel over 13 points on the land border and a water area of 860 square kilometers in Block No. 9 in the eastern Mediterranean.The disagreement lies over the method of demarcating the maritime border.
The dispute has acquired great significance since 2009, when major natural gas deposits were discovered in the sea between Israel and Cyprus. International experts believe the disputed triangle contains 25 trillion cubic feet of gas.
At a time when Israel began to explore for gas, and actually found it in the south of this region, and began producing it in commercial quantities, Lebanon was deprived of exploiting its economic waters for bureaucratic reasons and because of the refusal to negotiate with Israel over the contentious area. According to the Israelis, the US has been trying since 2011 to mediate in the conflict, but Hezbollah has great influence in politics, and the ruling leadership in Lebanon is preventing progress, claiming that “Washington is biased in favor of Israel,” and that “Lebanon does not negotiate with Israel directly.” The criticism of Hezbollah has expanded on this position because it prevents Lebanon from exploiting natural resources, the existence of which has become certain, and which could bring about huge profits that it desperately needs. However, after the Beirut port blast, Lebanese President Michel Aoun agreed to the intervention of the US mediator, and was able to enlist Speaker Nabih Berri to his side. Even French President Emmanuel Macron spoke about the issue during his recent visit to Beirut. On Sunday, the Walla news site quoted an Israeli official, whose name was not mentioned, as saying that Schenker met with senior members of the Lebanese government and reached an understanding with them that would allow negotiations with Israel, and he informed the Israeli ministers, Steinitz and Ashkenazi, about his discussions in Beirut. The US official also presented Beirut with a modern draft of the document of principles to start negotiations, indicating that “the impression in Tel Aviv is that there is flexibility on the part of the Lebanese, and that they are ready today more than ever to enter into contacts on this issue with Israel.”

Trump tries to renew Israeli-Lebanese talks on Mediterranean gas fields
Tobias Siegal/Jerusalem Post/September 21/2020
Israel and Lebanon have a dispute over an 860 sq. km. area in the eastern Mediterranean Sea that includes several blocs rich in natural gas off the coasts of both countries. The Israel-Lebanon dispute on Mediterranean gas fields was reignited this week as the Trump administration renewed pushes for talks between the countries, according to Axios. The Trump administration is reportedly aiming to finally settle the demarcation of maritime borders, which might lead to a solution for the dispute between both countries over natural gas explorations in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. Israel and Lebanon have a dispute over an 860 sq. km. (about 332 sq. mi.) area in the eastern Mediterranean Sea that includes several blocs rich in natural gas off the coasts of both countries. Israeli and US officials told Axios that Trump is hoping to relaunch the diplomatic talks before the upcoming general elections in November.
Israel and Lebanon have failed to enter negotiations surrounding this issue for decades. Renewing the talks would be perceived as a big achievement for the White House. According to Axios, the border dispute is also the reason for the US halting its plans for natural gas exploration in the area, an endeavor that has interested several American energy companies. In 2019 there was a near breakthrough in negotiations, as then Acting US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, David M. Satterfield, presented a plan for renewing talks between Israel and Lebanon with US and UN mediation.
But that attempt eventually failed, for various reasons, including Israel's refusal for UN mediation of the talks and pressure put on the Lebanese government by Hezbollah.
But things have since changed.
Lebanon is still dealing with the devastating ramifications of the Beirut explosion, including a growing economic crisis and ongoing public criticism of Hezbollah's role in the country. This new playing field is reportedly what led the Trump administration to renew its efforts for launching negotiations.
Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs David Schenker visited Israel last week and presented Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz and Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi with an updated draft agreement for launching a new round of negotiations, according to Axios.
Currently, the biggest barrier that prevents the negotiations from taking place is the disagreement between Israel and Lebanon on the nature of mediation. While Lebanon wants both the US and the UN as mediators, Israel wants the US as the only mediator for the negotiations.

Egypt, Arab League Urge Speeding Up Formation of New Lebanese Govt
Cairo- Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit and Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry called, in two separate statements on Sunday, for speeding up the formation of the Lebanese government.
During two separate meetings with the United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon, Jan Kubis, in Cairo, the two officials underlined the need to continue “providing support” to Beirut to overcome the current challenges.
Aboul Gheit discussed with Kubis, at the headquarters of the Arab League’s General Secretariat, “the situation in Lebanon, and the efforts to overcome the deep political and economic crisis, in addition to the difficulties and obstacles hindering the formation of the new Lebanese government.” The Arab League secretary-general stressed “the importance of expediting the formation of a government that is able to meet the aspirations of the Lebanese people by starting to implement comprehensive reform.” “The delicate stage that Lebanon is currently going through requires an exceptional effort from the Lebanese leaders and politicians to reach compromises that allow the birth of a new government,” he stated. The talks also touched on efforts to prepare for a meeting of the Lebanon Support Group via video conference later this week at the invitation of United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. In the same context, Shoukry affirmed his country’s “steadfast support for the security and stability of Lebanon.”He expressed “confidence in the ability of the Lebanese people to overcome that stage and face the challenges posed by the explosion of the Beirut port.” “It is important to prioritize the Lebanese national interest in order to meet the aspirations of the Lebanese people, and to distance the country from the dangers of regional conflicts… by accelerating the formation of a government on constitutional foundations,” Shoukry added, according to a statement by the Egyptian foreign ministry.

UN calls on Israeli army to halt overflying Lebanese air space
Joseph Haboush, Al Arabiya English/Monday 21 September 2020
The United Nations called on Israel Monday to halt its violations of Lebanese airspace, after several overflights in recent days above Lebanese towns. “I have asked the [Israeli army] to stop overflying Lebanese air space,” the head of the UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon [UNIFIL] said.
Maj. Gen. Stefano Del Col added that UNIFIL had recorded a “large number” of air violations by the Israelis in recent days. Condemning the overflights, Del Col said they were violating UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which put an end to the July 2006 war between Iran-backed Hezbollah and Israel. The resolution called for all parties to disarm in order to put a permanent end to all hostilities. Hezbollah continues to possess weapons outside of the Lebanese state’s control, being the only non-state actor with weapons. UNSC Resolution 1701 also stipulates that the Lebanese army and international peacekeepers are the only two authorized parties to be present in south Lebanon. Nevertheless, Del Col criticized the Israeli aggressions as being “in contravention of our objectives.” He warned that these actions could “trigger incidents endangering the cessation of hostilities between Lebanon and Israel.”

Lebanon Finds 4 Bodies after Illicit Sea Crossing
Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
Lebanon has retrieved the bodies of four people including a child after they tried to flee the crisis-hit country by sea on an overloaded dinghy, the civil defense said Monday. A week ago, UN peacekeepers retrieved one body and rescued 36 people from a boat in trouble in international waters off the Lebanese coast. Families of the survivors said the boat had been adrift without food or water for around a week, during which time several passengers had died or jumped overboard to find help. The bodies are presumed to be from the same ill-fated crossing. Since Friday, "we have retrieved four bodies -- belonging to two Lebanese, one of whom was a child, a young Indian man and a Syrian man," Samir Yazbek, the head of the civil defense's sea rescue unit, told AFP. The bodies were found in four separate locations off the north and south coasts of the country, and the search was ongoing, he added. The UN refugee agency said last week that 25 Syrians, eight Lebanese and three people of other nationalities had been rescued from the boat. It is unclear how many men, women and children originally clambered aboard the dinghy, and therefore how many are still missing.
On Saturday, the navy said it would step up its searches within and outside Lebanon's territorial waters to find any other victims. Relatives of those who went missing from the impoverished north Lebanese city of Tripoli say the people smuggler involved in the crossing has dropped off the radar since the tragedy. They have filed three legal complaints against the man, who they say is a well-known figure in the community. A military source on Saturday said a person acting as an intermediary between passengers and the boat owner had been arrested. In recent weeks, dozens of Lebanese and Syrians have tried to make the perilous sea journey from Lebanon to the Mediterranean island of Cyprus, authorities on both sides say. The Republic of Cyprus, a European Union member, lies just 160 kilometers away.

Dispute Between Lebanon’s Health, Interior Ministries over Virus Cases
Beirut - Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
Lebanon registered a record COVID-19 cases on Sunday with the authorities reiterating their call to wear masks, maintain social distancing, avoid crowds, and take other necessary preventive measures to limit the spread of the disease. Local media outlets quoted Health Minister Hamad Hassan as recommending a total lockdown for two weeks to contain the pandemic, but Interior Minister Mohammad Fahmy said despite the need for stricter steps, such a decision is up to the Committee for Follow-up on Preventive Measures and Procedures against the novel coronavirus. In a statement issued by his office, Fahmy said “the Lebanese society is not a game at hand, to be subjected to one week of lockdown and another of reopening.”The statement also responded to a memo issued by the Health Ministry, in which it held the security forces and municipalities responsible for the failure to ensure a full lockdown last month to fight the pandemic. “Security forces, governors, municipalities and mayors, are all carrying out their duties to curb the pandemic through the information made available to them, with often lists being incomplete or released at the wrong time,” the Interior Ministry said, indirectly blaming the Health Ministry. It hoped that the Health Ministry would carry out its duties and adhere to them and the recommendations of the Interior Ministry to avoid making false accusations. On Sunday, Lebanon registered 1,006 new coronavirus infections, raising the tally since the first case was reported on February 21 to 29,303. There were also 11 deaths in the past 24 hours. Several public institutions would close on Monday after registering COVID-19 cases among employees, including the South Lebanon Water Establishment in the city of Sidon. Meanwhile, the Municipality of Tripoli's crisis cell announced in a statement that 82 new patients have been tested positive for COVID-19, taking the count to 2,290 in the region. In Koura, the crisis cell registered 14 cases, prompting the municipality to take a series of measures, including a ban on weddings and funerals, and imposing a curfew starting 8pm.

Lebanese-American Political Donor in Jail in Lithuania
Associated Press/Naharnet/September 21/2020
A dual American and Lebanese citizen charged in the U.S. with conspiring to conceal the source of more than $3.5 million in donations during the 2016 U.S. presidential election is in jail in Lithuania, police disclosed Monday. Police said Ahmad "Andy" Khawaja "performed multimillion-dollar transactions and was in possession of significant amounts of money" when arrested. His detention on Sept. 3 on an international arrest warrant was kept secret, and police confirmed it only after Monday's ruling by a court in the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius, that he should remain in jail pending extradition hearings. "The arrest was made exactly two months before the U.S. presidential elections and the detention period was also just the same two months," Khawaja lawyer Vilija Viesunaite told the 15min.lt news portal. "I would not rule out the possibility that several unusual factors had an impact on these decisions and my client's rights were violated," she was quoted as saying. Khawaja is in custody at the request of the U.S. pursuant to an indictment issued in 2019. A Justice Department spokesperson said the agency generally does not comment on extradition matters until the defendant is returned to the United States. Khawaja made his fortune in online payment processing by providing a key conduit in e-commerce for "high risk" merchants by helping route customers' credit card purchases to banks. He is the owner of an online payments company Allied Wallet Inc., and has contributed at least $6 million to Democratic and Republican candidates and groups. The donations earned Khawaja access to Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential campaign and a post-election Oval Office visit with President Donald Trump, according to a 2018 Associated Press investigation.
Court documents made public in December 2019 indicate that the indictment charged that Khawaja had aided an unnamed female candidate. Federal donor records show Khawaja gave millions of dollars to Democratic candidates, including the main political action committee supporting Clinton's campaign. He also donated $1 million to Trump's inaugural fund. He is married to a Lithuanian citizen and has property in the Baltic country.

Hassan Recommends Two-Week Total Lockdown as Virus Cases Hit 1,006
Associated Press/Naharnet/September 21/2020
Health Minister Hamad Hassan recommended a total two-week lockdown to stem the alarming rise in daily detected coronavirus infections, but authorities say it finds it difficult to impose another lockdown amid an unprecedented economic collapse.
Lebanon registered a record 1,006 cases of COVID-19 over the past 24 hours, the government announced Sunday, amid a sharp increase in infections and deaths due to the new coronavirus. The new cases registered by the Health Ministry bring the overall number of confirmed cases in Lebanon to 29,303, while deaths have reached 297 since the first case was reported in the country in late February. It was the third consecutive record-breaking day of confirmed virus cases.

Khalil, Sawaya and Taleb Testify in Port Blast Probe
Naharnet/September 21/2020
Judicial Investigator Judge Fadi Sawan on Monday heard the testimonies of ex-finance minister Ali Hassan Khalil, General Security intelligence head Munah Sawaya and caretaker PM Hassan Diab’s adviser Khodor Taleb as witnesses in the probe into the catastrophic Aug. 4 explosion at Beirut port. On Tuesday, Sawan will hear the testimonies of ex-public works minister Ghazi Aridi, Customs Higher Council chief Brig. Gen. Asaad al-Tufaili and Customs Higher Council member Gracia al-Qazzi, also as witnesses, the National News Agency said. The judicial investigator meanwhile dismissed requests for the release of a number of detainees in the case, remanding them in custody. The explosion, one of the largest non-nuclear blasts in history, killed 192 people, wounded 6,500 others and caused massive material and economic damage in the capital. More than two dozen people -- mainly customs and port officials and security officers -- have been detained in the case.

Jumblat: Aoun Has No Right to Say We're Going to Hell
Naharnet/September 21/2020
Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat on Monday voiced criticism in all directions in connection with the ongoing deadlock in the cabinet formation process. “President Michel Aoun has no right to say that we’re going to hell. I support a settlement and when the storm lashes we must bow,” Jumblat said in an interview with Lebanon’s MTV. Revealing that he had called ex-PM Saad Hariri from Paris during his visit last week, Jumblat said the talks with the former premier were not positive. He also disclosed that Speaker Nabih Berri has told him that he is facing pressures to “keep the finance ministerial portfolio with the Shiite sect.” “Neither America nor Iran wants a government” in Lebanon and “the U.S. sanctions have not weakened Hizbullah but rather Lebanon,” the PSP leader added. Warning that the French initiative for Lebanon is the “last chance,” Jumblat said Prime Minister-designate Mustafa Adib must “communicate with the parties,” while noting that “it seems that someone is telling him not to talk to anyone.”“I tell Iran and its representatives that they are blocking the last chance to save the country,” the PSP leader, referring to Tehran and Hizbullah. As for the sectarian bickering related to the row over the finance portfolio, Jumblat addressed the Higher Islamic Shiite Council and Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi by saying that “it is not the appropriate time to call for changing the Taef Accord.” Earlier in the day, Aoun had warned that the crisis-hit country could be going to "hell" if a new government was not formed, suggesting it would require a "miracle" for that to happen at this point. The stark warning comes as the country struggles to contain a spiraling economic and financial crisis that threatens to nose-dive further in the coming weeks, as well as concerns of unrest in the fragile country also witnessing a surge in coronavirus cases and deaths.

Geagea: No One Wants to Target Shiites in Lebanon
Naharnet/September 21/2020
Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea stressed Monday that “no one wants to target Shiites in Lebanon,” in connection with the ongoing row over representation in the new government. “Some are trying to depict what’s happening in the issue of the formation of the government as being targeted against Shiites, and some have gone to the extent of saying that they will not accept the elimination of an entire sect,” Geagea said in a statement. He added: “These atmospheres are totally distant from reality, seeing as no one wants to target Shiites in Lebanon. Shiites are a historic and essential component in this country and no one can or wants to eliminate an entire sect. No one is thinking of this and we will not tolerate anything of this sort.”Geagea, however, explained that the objective is to “overcome the tragedy that we have been suffering for the past months or rather years.”He added that this “tragedy” is the “distribution of shares” among the ruling political forces “at the level of the executive authority,” which according to Geagea, led to the rise of “statelets within the state” and to the “paralysis of the government and institutions as well as corruption.” “The French initiative came to present a different proposal for salvation: a government without a distribution of shares as the primary condition, and a government whose members are not named by the ruling blocs,” the LF leader said. Warning that Hizbullah and Amal Movement’s insistence on retaining the finance portfolio will push other parties to cling to the portfolios they currently hold, Geagea pointed out that such a scenario would produce a government similar to the previous ones.“Accordingly, we support the full rotation of portfolios among sects and parties, and we totally reject that the ruling blocs name ministers in the government,” the LF leader added.

Palestine Between Practices of the Past, Vision for the Future
Sam Menassa/Asharq Al Awsat/September 21/2020
Although the two peace agreements, between Israel and Bahrain and Israel and the United Arab Emirates, differ from those that previously been signed by Tel Aviv with Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestine Liberation Organization, in that the two Gulf states had not been in confrontation with Israel and economic and investment dimensions dominate the agreements, the breakthrough they manifest is of equal importance to that of the former, especially at this stage, exceptional by all standards, of the Arab world’s history.
For, in addition to the Arab Spring’s events in several countries and its fragmentation repercussions in many them, with civil conflicts combining with regional and international interference in countries such as Syria, Libya, and Yemen, the last decade has been warked by the expansion of Sunni and Shiite fundamentalism. The first can be seen in the emergence of several militant terrorist groups, such as Al Qaeda and ISIS, which wreaked havoc and devastation everywhere they went. The other is the Iranian attack on several Arab countries, where armed groups alien to their societies, were implanted. They mutinied, either penetrating or replacing the state, using it as a spearhead for its battles. It is not an overstatement to say that the dubious way in which Iran has been engaging with the Arab countries, especially the Gulf states, for more than a quarter of a century, is perhaps the primary reason for the Arab’s rush to normalize ties with Israel.
The two peace agreements between Bahrain, the UAE, and Israel portray a scene of the Arab world that can be summed up in three frames.
The first is of the Arab world, as a political unit and a regional system, is collapsing, such that most of its countries have disintegrated or become failed states, leaving only a few that maintain some form of political and economic stability. The countries’ unity as a political block is broken, and they seem incapable of forming a mutually beneficial, even fragile, political framework allowing them to agree on minimal common ground under the umbrella of the Arab League.
The second frame is of the collapse of the consensus on the Palestinian question being the entire Arab nation’s cause, whereby no party is entitled to taking a unilateral decision on the issue. The peace process between Bahrain, the UAE, and Israel is a consequence of this, and its just the beginning, as a result of the US President Donald Trump’s policy vis a vis the Arab-Israeli conflict and settling it, apparent in the deal of the century, and its general focus on economic relations and development rather than the political issue. This is the beginning of a new phase where Arab countries unilaterally normalize ties with Israel, with future steps potentially being taken by countries on the Nile Valley, the Maghreb, and the Levante, in a deviation from the slogan of that says the Palestinian issue’s settlement is to be made exclusively through Arab consensus.
This slogan would have yielded positive results had it been used prudently and if it were genuinely adopted. However, it had dire negative replications because it emerged from the totalitarian and authoritarian Arab regimes’ hijacking the Palestinian cause and their exploitation of the struggle. Internally, it was used as a rack on which they hang their failures and justify all crimes they perpetrated against their people, and externally as a bargaining chip, to achieve their authoritarian interests rather than their countries’ interests. During this phase, these regimes formed the front of resilience and confrontation with Hafez al-Assad’s regime at the top. They monopolized Palestinian and Arab decision-making, obstructing any initiatives for a settlement. On the surface, they used the pretext of the “sanctity of the cause” to argue that neither the Palestinians nor any Arab country have the right to act and determine their fate unilaterally. They insisted that instead, the decision should be united Arab. Beneath this superficial justification was apprehension about giving up a treasure that justifies their existence and the weapons they used as they please to serve their interests. After major Gulf states such as the UAE and Bahrain signed a peace with Israel, this closed circle was broken. With it, the Arab totalitarian regimes’ monopoly of Palestine decisions was a major reason many Arab peace initiatives were sabotaged.
The third frame depicts the Arab-Israeli conflict fading. First and foremost, because of internal predicaments facing most Arab countries, as well as the debilitation that now characterizes the Palestinian Authority, the massive rift between “state of Ramallah” and the “state of Gaza” and their deeply entrenched dispute. Instead of transforming the Gaza Strip, after Israel’s withdrawal, into an oasis of peace and stability and a successful economic zone that exemplifies what a Palestinian state could be, it has been transformed into what it is today, subservient to foreign powers, poor, isolated, and terrorized.
Going over these three frames of the Arab rush may evoke some to see its disadvantage only, though it has many positive aspects. Most notably, this Arab world is what our ancestors and our fathers have aspired to build from the begging to the middle of the preceding century. Saying that we do not regret its collapse is not blarney.
Most of the countries of that world have been unable, since their independence, to establish modern states because they were dominated by totalitarian and corrupt regimes, which have exploited, among other things, the Palestinian cause to drag the region into conflicts that superficially appeared to be waged against occupation, while these regimes’ aim, beneath the surface, was self-preservation. These wars did not liberate Palestine or even put Israel under pressure; rather, the regimes used them to justify oppressing their people and putting their lives on hold, under the pretext that no voice is louder than the cry of battle. Easing tensions with Israel and the path that began today with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain end the Arab-Israeli conflict’s prioritization, bringing the needs and concerns of the peoples of the region, which had been revealed by the Arab Spring revolutions, to the forefront. This does not at all imply that burying the Palestinian cause, which is a question of justice and a people’s right to their homeland. However, normalization may help to make the process of reaching a settlement more efficient than that of violence and war, mostly if the Palestinians were able to benefit from peace.
Without a doubt, there are many risks around this stage. The two peace agreements may exacerbate Iran’s sense of isolation after the blockade imposed by US sanctions and the blows it is receiving in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria, and push it to adopt more aggressive and hardline policies, especially in countries where its vassals have influence. Fears of unprecedented Iranian recklessness, which would have unforeseeably dangerous consequences, are legitimate.
The second threat is Israeli narcissism, especially with Benjamin Netanyahu, who is making decisions based on personal electoral gains rather than his country’s interests. Israeli credibility is requisite for the consolidation and fortification of peace, one which is not cold and includes economic, educational, health, and security dimensions. It also has to meet the Arab initiative with material concessions that push in the direction of a just settlement of the Palestinian question.
The third danger is the persistence of the reluctance that has characterized US policy towards the Middle East over the past decade and its endless support for Israel. Whether Donald Trump is reelected for a second term or Joe Biden wins, Washington must lay out a clear vision for its policies in the region that protects the process of normalization between Israel and Arab countries, taking Palestinian and Arab interests into account, foremost of which is the two-state solution, as well Israel’s interests.
There is a need for a unified vision today, not just of the region’s economic future, but also of how to fortify this future with responsible and just political positions that address the root causes of the issues, not manage them with painkillers. This is required if the peace process is to differ from those the past, allowing it to propel a new phase of prosperity in the region, and allow it go from living in the past to enjoying the present and looking to the future

On an ‘Outside’ Being Better than Another
Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/September 21/2020
Among the detestable aspects of the Lebanese crisis that rear their head at every defining juncture: the role of the “outside.” In line with its narrative, the axis of resistance explains that role this way: the United States and France interfere in Lebanon; rather, they play a tutelary if not colonial role. Though the page of colonialism’s history has turned, merely mentioning it calls for exclaiming “God forbid!’’
Those who make this critique do not consider the Iranians an outside player, nor are they apprehensive about other roles played by powers from the outside, like Russia’s intervention in Syria, just a stone’s throw away from Lebanon, which resulted, among other things, in rebuilding a city like Aleppo!
Let us say, then, the “outside’s role” critique does not hold since it is an “outside’s” rhetoric. That is, it has no credibility, regardless of who is making the criticism. True, national anthems and some political rhetoric condemn this role, defame it and mobilize the jargon of nationalism and pride against it, and it’s also true that ideally, there would be no outside role whatsoever. However, regardless of the utopian nationalism, everyone is equal when it comes to betting on some kind of outside.
The fact is that a small country cannot but be this way, to say nothing about a county where there is little, even non-existent, consensus, where groups have conflicting definitions of the ‘‘inside’’ itself.
For those who think that the globalization has done away with some of the national state’s functions, this inevitably entails a growth in the outside’s role, and things are moving further in this direction. And we know, in situations of tyranny, civil wars or major crises of any kind, seeking external intervention becomes a foregone conclusion. As for invoking national sovereignty to repudiate it, its only consequence is keeping things as they are: the persistence of war and tyranny.
The actual controversy then, regardless of the enthusiasm and nationalist rhetoric, is not about the outside having a role, but determining: what role and what outside?
Let’s openly say that every outside has its constituency in Lebanon, and each of the two constituencies calls itself patriotic. There is widespread support for a more significant role for the West, especially the United States and France, and not insignificant public support for a larger role for Syria and Iran, which Russia and China may complement. Support for the latter invokes two arguments, one about “the region”, that is, everything that is not Western, and another regarding the conflict with Israel.
This overview is not presented to discuss these two pretexts, but to present the arguments that correspond to them, whether explicitly or implicitly, in the narrative that entails a preference for the West.
The constituency for a more expansive role for the West is more cross-sectarian, by far, than that of the defenders of the Iranian – Syrian role. There are at least two reasons for this: one is that their attachment to the West is one to model that is easily described, whether one loves or hates it, as universal. It is a way of life before being an approach to politics. Supporters of the axis of resistance wish this model and its lifestyle for themselves, as reflected in where they hope their children emigrate and educate themselves and the choices of treatment they seek when they fall ill. As for the second reason, Western powers, in contrast to the nineteenth century, are not religious or sectarian in the same way as the Syrian and Iranian regimes.
Favoring the Iranian or Syrian role inevitably means fealty to the Iranian and Syrian regimes, particularly the two individuals who sum up their regimes and societies, Ali Khamenei and Bashar al-Assad. As for favoring a Western role, it is not contingent upon fealty for a specific Western regime, and it may be accompanied by sharp criticism of Donald Trump, Emmanuel Macron or others.
In other words: while the Iranian – Syrian model has nothing but a political system and a worshiped leader, the Western model encompasses cinema, means of transportation, literary ideas and sciences. As for the policies and the political system itself, they occupy a no more than modest position in this model.
Furthermore, a Western role does not entail immersing the Lebanese in wars and conflicts. Its politicians do not arm sectarian parties and organizations and would exclusively arm the Lebanese army. If any Western capital were asked about its vision of an ideal Lebanon, the axiomatic answer would be: a parliamentary democracy, not a system based on a single party and an absolute ruler.
On top of that, the history of our relationship with the Western model, including the construction of public administration, economic institutions and educational networks, does not resemble that of our relationship with the Iranian – Syrian model: assassinations, bombing and militias that destroyed Lebanon time after time, without benefiting the region or the Palestinians, who were used, and are being used, as a fruitful pretext.
It is indicative that the axis of resistance, ultimately, wants nothing more than to have discussions with the West, especially the United States. This is not only true for the Syrian – Iranian model’s Lebanese admirers but also applies to the model’s leaders in Tehran and Damascus, whose eyes are glued on the American elections.
This difference between the two outsides should be emphasized loudly, in repudiation of those who blackmail their opponents with accusations of “treachery” and “subservience”, but also in response to those who claim that this difference is obvious, as it should be emphasized because it is obvious.

Is it the Fall of the Presidency or Country?
Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al Awsat/September 21/2020
Sleep is tricky. It befriends you when you need to stay up late and abandons you when you need it the most.
He woke up before dawn. Something told him to go to his office. Silence prevails over the palace. Hours will pass before the place comes to life, with staff, counselors and officials flocking in. The game is no longer amusing... Lack of powers and bad luck... This is how poison seeps into power, the host of all banquets. Nothing in the office has changed. The calendar hanging on the wall grabbed his attention. It is still in the same place, clinging to the same position. The calendar is truer than loyalists and opponents, workers and advisors. It performs its mission with a boring devoutness and fatal monotony. Every day it gives up a day. It squanders the days of our life and the time of the presidential term. Everything changes in the palace. The master’s name and the faces of his servants. Topics, approaches and trends change, so do people’s emotions toward the resident of the palace and the ephemeral smiles of the ambassadors. Only the calendar throws papers into oblivion and continues to do that in a perfect and timely manner.
The calendar’s sound is strange. It changes according to time and to the listener’s ear. In the early days of a tenure, its ticking is similar to the explosion of fiery arrows in cities thirsty for celebration. Over time, the calendar loses its luster. It turns into increasingly violent bells as departure time approaches.
The calendar does not lie. The advisers did not succeed in misleading or bribing it. It has not been trained to manipulate the chapters, vocabulary of the dictionary and the constitution. The calendar says innocently and cruelly that autumn begins tomorrow. And it is right in its calculations. Autumn is one of the four seasons. It is part of nature’s cycle. The arrival of autumn is not surprising. But it is painful for it to come early, as if it is tasked with carrying out vengeance. This autumn is more dangerous than the falling of leaves, break of branches and falling rain. This autumn is more dangerous than any other.
President Michel Aoun wanders in his office.
He once thought that he was lucky. He entered the palace after an election and with an outright majority. His presidency bore the signatures of those with whom he had long clashed with: Saad Hariri and Walid Jumblatt. It also bore the signature of the party which was relentlessly hostile to him: the Lebanese Forces and its leader, Samir Geagea. His story with Nabih Berri is different. He is the friend of his ally, but chemistry has always been lacking between the two men. Each of them accepts the other as if he was forced to take a bitter bill.
He does not want to admit the role of luck. Had it not been for the blood of Rafik Hariri, the doors to return would not have been opened for him unconditionally. He had to pass the tests of Damascus and Anjar together, which would have turned him into an improved version of the head of the “Era of Complete Conformity”, General Emile Lahoud. Had it not been for Rafik Hariri’s blood, Samir Geagea would not have left his prison cell.
Today, he believes he is unlucky. How better would it have been if they were with him in the same boat when the lethal mushroom cloud appeared over the Beirut port. It would have been better if Hariri, Jumblatt and Geagea were among the passengers on the boat. Did he make a big mistake when he preferred to be separated from them rather than accept cohabitation? Did he pay the price for the inability of his son-in-law, Gebran Bassil, to maintain friendships, albeit thorny, and alliances, albeit costly?
He quickly dismisses a new thought from his mind; Attacks on his term: would it have been better if he had not returned to the palace after decades of absence? Would it have been better if he followed the example of Raymond Eddeh and preserved his freedom, image and right to reject and criticize? The calendar is merciless. Security bodies do not have the power to arrest it and prevent it from gambling with days. Only a little over two years remain of the current tenure.
For the first time, he’s afraid to think about what history can say. In the past, he was powerful and he believed that history itself summoned him to save the country. He was confident that history pushed him into exile to come back as a Fakhreddine-like figure. Today, he is no longer certain. He is no longer confident.
He almost reproaches the calendar for bringing misfortune into his days. The Lebanese woke up and discovered that the political class had plundered their bank assets and threw their savings into the unknown. They turned to the palace, to the man, who is supposed to be strong as he claimed to be. Nothing happened. A massive explosion broke out. The Lebanese discovered that half of Beirut had been destroyed and the rubble mixed with dead bodies and wounds. The largest assassination on the Mediterranean coast. The crime of ammonium nitrate is painful, shameful and humiliating. It stayed for years in the port as a booby-trapped child whose friends abandoned it and went into hiding. No one dared to open this file, and the officials’ “insolence” made them only blame others and distort the reality.
The president paid the price of accepting the administration of a quasi-state and semi-republic. He also paid the price for his involvement in the crackdown on the republic during the formation of governments and the presidential elections. He paid the price for relying on his alliance with Hezbollah and his failure to persuade his ally not to embarrass him in front of his supporters.
It’s an autumn that is harsher than any other. Never before have the Lebanese fallen from the “boats of death” on the route to Cyprus, fleeing hunger that invaded their homes. The palace has never been holed up behind sandbags for fear of the demonstrators, except in the aftermath of Hariri’s assassination. The Maronite patriarch had never condemned the policies of the Maronite president in the manner implied in the words of Patriarch al-Rai about the current situation.
The difficulties of coexistence have never been revealed in the way they do now. Bankruptcy, isolation and sanctions. Autumn appears as a ghost to a patient celebrating his first centennial - that of the “Republic of Greater Lebanon.”
What will history write? This question haunts him. Lebanon lost its port at a time when new features in the region and new balances are emerging. The country lost its currency, its prestigious universities and hospitals. It lost its reputation and image.
He passes by the pictures of his predecessors in the palace and turns away his face. What would he say to Camille Chamoun, as he was so impressed with that skillful politician? He does not want to stare at Bashir Gemayel’s picture, as he may be severely reproachful. He does not want to stop before the pictures of Elias Hrawi, Emile Lahoud and Michel Suleiman. He feels that they stole the presidency and left him in a lonely palace with a harsh calendar of only one season: Autumn.
 

Bombing in Bulgaria: Turning the Tide on Hezbollah
Toby Dershowitz and Dylan Gresik/Newsweek/September 21/2020
At 5:23 p.m. on July 18, 2012, a deadly explosion rocked Bulgaria’s Sarafavo airport near the Black Sea town of Burgas, killing five Jewish Israeli tourists and their Muslim Bulgarian bus driver. Dozens of other Israelis and Bulgarians were wounded as body parts and blood flew across the airport. After eight years, a modicum of justice for the victims may be in sight. On Monday, the country’s Specialized Criminal Court, following a trial in absentia, will likely find two Hezbollah operatives—Meliad Farah and Hassan El Hajj Hassan, for whom Interpol has wanted notices—culpable for the attack.
But justice can’t be fully served unless Hezbollah itself, which masterminded the bombing, is held accountable by Bulgaria, the European Union and the global community.
The Bulgarian government’s own exhaustive investigation, conducted in coordination with Europol, the United States, Canada, Australia and Israel after the attack, found decisive evidence that Hezbollah’s external security unit provided both logistical and financial backing for the bombing.
Bulgaria’s then-interior minister Tsvetan Tsvetanov said at the time, “There is data showing the financing and connection between Hezbollah and the two suspects.” Rob Wainwright, then-executive director of Europol, said he backed the Bulgarians’ conclusion that Hezbollah was involved.
According to investigators, the explosives used in the attack were linked to a bomb ingredient stored by Hezbollah in Cyprus: ammonium nitrate. Ammonium nitrate is the same chemical compound that produced the devastating explosion at the port of Beirut in early August. Investigations are underway in Lebanon to see if Hezbollah was connected to or sought to exploit the dangerous stockpile.
And it’s the same explosive material used by Hezbollah in the 1994 bombing of Argentina’s AMIA Jewish community center, which killed 85 Argentinians.
Ambassador Nathan Sales, U.S. coordinator for counterterrorism at the Department of State, announced on Thursday that since 2012, Hezbollah has moved and stored caches of ammonium nitrate throughout Europe, including in France, Greece, Italy, Spain and Switzerland.
“Why would Hezbollah stockpile ammonium nitrate on European soil?” Sales asked in an online event with German state secretary at the federal ministry of the interior Hans-Georg Engelke and former U.K. home secretary Sajid Javid. “The answer is clear. Hezbollah put these weapons in place so it could conduct major terrorist attacks whenever it—or its masters in Tehran—deemed necessary.”
Engelke, confirming the seizure of “ammonium nitrate, in substantial amounts, in southern Germany,” said the amount “really worried” authorities. This evidence follows the discovery of over three metric tons of ammonium nitrate in London and over eight tons in Cyprus in 2015 alone.
Bulgaria has established that Iran-backed Hezbollah bankrolled and provided logistical support for the 2012 Burgas bombing. Initially, notwithstanding evidence of Hezbollah’s role, the public defender assigned to the accused asserted, inexplicably, that no evidence of Hezbollah’s role was presented by the prosecution. But on August 31 of this year, the nation’s prosecutor general, Ivan Geshev, told the press, “It’s no secret that behind this terrorist act stands as logistics and funding, according to the supervising prosecutors and the evidence gathered by them, the Hezbollah organization.” Geshev said, however, that Bulgarian law does not permit legal entities or organizations to be indicted.
With the Bulgarian government affirming Hezbollah’s role, how will it ensure the Iranian proxy is held accountable for the terrorist attack on its soil? Will Bulgaria and the EU now join the many countries that have formally designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization—a measure that can freeze funds and assets, end fundraising, shutter front companies, and impose severe travel restrictions?
Bulgaria already has a mechanism in place to do so. Bulgaria can add Hezbollah to a list of individuals and entities subject to the Measures Against the Financing of Terrorism Act, a law adopted in 2003. Included on the country’s terrorism list are Al-Qaeda, affiliates of the Taliban, Hamas, the Izz Al-Din Al-Qassem Brigade and Palestinian Islamic Jihad among others. In 2016, Bulgaria added Farah and El Hajj Hassan to the list, even before their trial was completed.
In some ways, the Burgas case is similar to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, which prosecuted in absentia a handful of Hezbollah operatives for the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri, but did not hold Hezbollah itself accountable.
The case also resembles the downplaying of Hezbollah’s role in Operation Cedar, in which U.S.-sanctioned Mohamad Noureddine laundered money that generated criminal proceeds to fund Hezbollah’s terrorism. When Noureddine and his accomplices were tried in France, even while his illicit cash bankrolled Hezbollah’s terrorism, the court regarded it as a money-laundering case and Hezbollah evaded accountability.
Reportedly, European authorities declined to have a joint press conference with the Drug Enforcement Administration mentioning Hezbollah’s role in Operation Cedar for fear it would “offend Iran.”
These three cases raise the question of whether other governments will merely prosecute individual Hezbollah operatives but not the organization itself, allowing them to appear tough on terrorism while permitting Hezbollah’s masters to act with impunity.
Some countries in Europe, most notably France, argue that banning all of Hezbollah would destabilize Lebanon and undermine diplomatic engagement with the Lebanese government.
Governments that have designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization refute this argument. Even in the aftermath of the U.K.’s designation, contrary to what critics argued, the British government had “no problems dealing with the Lebanese government today,” said Javid. “Hezbollah is not an organization that exists to help Lebanon…. It is there to carry out the objectives of a foreign, hostile state [Iran].”
“Hezbollah is a force for instability in Lebanon. You don’t have to choose between stability and opposing Hezbollah,” Sales added.
Momentum for designating the Lebanon-based Hezbollah is building. To date, Canada, the U.K., Germany, the United States, the Netherlands, Kosovo, Israel, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, the Gulf Cooperation Council, the Arab League, Argentina, Paraguay, Honduras and Colombia have formally designated Hezbollah a terrorist entity. More recently, Lithuania has banned Hezbollah, and Serbia has announced its intent to do so.
In 2013, when it became clear Hezbollah was the mastermind behind the Burgas attack, the European Union designated what it called the “military wing” of Hezbollah. According to Sales, this “limited designation” approach has failed to dissuade Hezbollah from preparing future attacks. Even Hezbollah itself does not bifurcate the organization into “military” and “political” wings.
Whatever the verdict on Monday, Hezbollah itself must not be absolved of responsibility. It’s time to set aside politics, fear, and intimidation. Bulgarian and EU policy should reflect the reality that Hezbollah is a unitary terrorist entity and should be formally and legally designated as such with full implementation of this status. This would not only bring justice to Hezbollah’s victims. It may begin to turn the tide so that the organization is denied the funding, operational security, and legitimacy to continue its deadly actions.
*Toby Dershowitz is senior vice president for government relations and strategy at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where Dylan Gresik is a government relations analyst. FDD is a non-partisan think tank focusing on national security and foreign policy. Follow them on Twitter @tobydersh and @DylanGresik.
 

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on September 21-22/2020

US announces new sanctions on Iran defense ministry, atomic energy agency
Arab News/September 21/2020
WASHINGTON: The United States slapped additional sanctions on Iran on Monday after the Trump administration’s unilateral weekend declaration that all United Nations penalties that were eased under the 2015 nuclear deal had been restored.
The announcement comes in defiance of the world community, which has rejected U..S. legal standing to impose the international sanctions and sets the stage for an ugly showdown at the annual UN General Assembly this week.
“The United States has now restored UN sanctions on Iran,” President Donald Trump said in a statement issued shortly after he signed an executive order spelling out how the US will enforce the “snapback” of the sanctions. “My actions today send a clear message to the Iranian regime and those in the international community who refuse to stand up to Iran.”Trump’s administration named 27 people or entities that it said would be subject to UN sanctions, but the world body itself says that the decision is not up to Washington.
Speaking to reporters with fellow Cabinet secretaries at the State Department, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo then announced the administration was hitting more than two dozen Iranian individuals and institutions with penalties. Nearly all of them, however, including the Iranian defense ministry and its atomic energy agency, were already subject to US sanctions that the administration had re-imposed after Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal in 2018. Trump’s executive order mainly affects Iranian and foreign entities involved in conventional weapons and ballistic missile activity. A UN arms embargo on Iran is to expire in October under the terms of the nuclear deal, but Pompeo and others insist the snapback has rescinded its termination. The Trump administration argues that it is enforcing the UN arms embargo that Iran has violated, including through an attack on Saudi oil facilities.
Accompanied by Treasury Secretary Stephen Mnuchin, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft and national security adviser Robert O’Brien, Pompeo said the US was acting because the rest of the world is refusing to confront the Iranian threat. “We have made it very clear that every member state in the United Nations has a responsibility to enforce the sanctions,” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters when asked about European opposition.
“That certainly includes the United Kingdom, France and Germany. We will have every expectation that those nations enforce these sanctions,” he said.
“No matter where you are in the world, you will risk sanctions,” he said, warning foreign companies and officials not to do business with targeted Iranian entities.
Craft said, “As we have in the past, we will stand alone to protect peace and security.”
The administration declared on Saturday that all UN sanctions against Iran had been restored because Tehran is violating parts of the nuclear deal in which it agreed to curb its nuclear program in exchange for billions of dollars in sanctions relief.
But few UN member states believe the US has the legal standing to restore the sanctions because Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal in 2018. The US argues it retains the right to do so as an original participant in the deal and a member of the council.
The remaining world powers in the deal — France, Germany, Britain, China and Russia — have been struggling to offset the sanctions that the US re-imposed on Iran after the Trump administration left the pact, which the president said was one-sided in favor of Tehran.
Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran’s nuclear agency, said Monday that there is still a broad agreement among the international community that the nuclear pact should be preserved.
At a conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, Salehi said the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, has been “caught in a quasi-stalemate situation” since Trump pulled out in 2015.
While insisting it is not pursuing a nuclear weapon, Iran has been steadily breaking restrictions outlined in the deal on the amount of uranium it can enrich, the purity it can enrich it to, and other limitations. At the same time, Iran has far less enriched uranium and lower-purity uranium than it had before signing the deal, and it has continued to allow international inspectors into its nuclear facilities.
The United States has separately been seeking to oust Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who has increasingly sought cooperation with Iran on the oil sector.
The State Department said it was again imposing sanctions on Maduro under the executive order from Trump that is based on the UN resolution, pointing to defense transactions between Iran and the leftist Venezuelan leader.
“For nearly two years, corrupt officials in Tehran have worked with the illegitimate regime in Venezuela to flout the UN arms embargo,” Pompeo said. “Our actions today are a warning that should be heard worldwide.”Furthermore, Elliott Abrams, Washington’s envoy on Iran, said on Monday that the US is concerned about Iran’s cooperation with North Korea and will do whatever it can to prevent it, . Abrams was responding to a reporter’s question on whether the United States had seen evidence that Tehran and Pyongyang had resumed cooperation on long-range missile development.
He spoke shortly after the Trump administration slapped the new sanctions on Iran. (With Reuters, AFP and AP)

Text of State Department press release: Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo announces the return of sanctions on Iran
USA Department Of State/September 19/2020
The Return of UN Sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran
PRESS STATEMENT
MICHAEL R. POMPEO, SECRETARY OF STATE
The Trump Administration has always understood that the greatest threat to peace in the Middle East comes from Islamic Republic of Iran, whose violent efforts to spread revolution have killed thousands and upended the lives of millions of innocent people. History shows appeasement only emboldens such regimes. Thus today, the United States welcomes the return of virtually all previously terminated UN sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terror and anti-Semitism.
Sanctions are being re-imposed on Iran pursuant to the snapback process under UN Security Council resolution (UNSCR) 2231. On August 20, the United States notified the President of the Security Council of Iran’s significant non-performance of its JCPOA commitments. This notification triggered the 30-day process leading to the snapback of previously terminated UN sanctions, which became effective at 8pm Eastern Daylight Time on September 19. This means that starting today, all of the provisions of UNSCRs 1696, 1737, 1747, 1803, 1835, and 1929 that were terminated by UNSCR 2231 are back in effect. Furthermore, the measures contained in paragraphs 7, 8, and 16 to 20 of UNSCR 2231 are now terminated.
The United States took this decisive action because, in addition to Iran’s failure to perform its JCPOA commitments, the Security Council failed to extend the UN arms embargo on Iran, which had been in place for 13 years. The Security Council’s inaction would have paved the way for Iran to buy all manner of conventional weapons on October 18. Fortunately for the world, the United States took responsible action to stop this from happening. In accordance with our rights under UNSCR 2231, we initiated the snapback process to restore virtually all previously terminated UN sanctions, including the arms embargo. The world will be safer as a result.
The United States expects all UN Member States to fully comply with their obligations to implement these measures. In addition to the arms embargo, this includes restrictions such as the ban on Iran engaging in enrichment and reprocessing-related activities, the prohibition on ballistic missile testing and development by Iran, and sanctions on the transfer of nuclear- and missile-related technologies to Iran, among others. If UN Member States fail to fulfill their obligations to implement these sanctions, the United States is prepared to use our domestic authorities to impose consequences for those failures and ensure that Iran does not reap the benefits of UN-prohibited activity.
The return of sanctions today is a step toward international peace and security. The 2015 nuclear deal did not induce Iran to join “the community of nations” as promised. Instead, the mullahs took their newfound wealth and used it to foment death and destruction from Yemen to Iraq to Lebanon and Syria – a predictable outcome. Were it not for U.S. action to restore UN measures, the Iranian regime would soon be able to buy and sell weapons more freely across the globe. Because of the failures of the JCPOA, Iran is nearly five years closer to the expiration of restrictions on Iran’s uranium enrichment program and reprocessing-related activities, bringing it unacceptably close to a dangerous nuclear breakout capability. However, thanks to the snapback of UN sanctions, Iran is now obligated to suspend enrichment, reprocessing, and heavy-water-related activities. We will never let the world’s leading state sponsor of terror obtain the world’s most deadly weapon.
In the coming days, the United States will announce a range of additional measures to strengthen implementation of UN sanctions and hold violators accountable. Our maximum pressure campaign on the Iranian regime will continue until Iran reaches a comprehensive agreement with us to rein in its proliferation threats and stops spreading chaos, violence, and bloodshed.

UAE, Israeli Film Bodies Plan Regional Festival
Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
The Abu Dhabi Film Commission, the Israel Film Fund and the Jerusalem Sam Spiegel Film and Television School have signed a cooperation agreement for training and production, a joint statement said on Monday. The agreement includes plans for an annual regional film festival rotating between Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates, and Israel. The move comes after the countries agreed to establish bilateral diplomatic and trade ties, which officials have said will create significant economic opportunities. The two sides will develop training programs for film-makers from the two countries over a period of several months, which could culminate in Abu Dhabi-Israel film and television co-productions.Emirati filmmakers will have representation at the International Film Lab for the first time ever, with one UAE director invited to participate as a jury at the upcoming 2021 edition of the high-profile annual Film Lab competition, the statement said.

Iran and Turkey are ‘serial infringers’ of UN weapons embargoes
Damien McElroy/The National/September 21/2020
Prince Turki Al Faisal says there is a worldwide responsibility to uphold ban on armaments The region will bear the brunt of the divisions among international powers over proposals to maintain restraints on Turkey and Iran, a leading Saudi Arabian statesman said. Prince Turki Al Faisal, the former Saudi Arabia ambassador to the US, told The National that UN and international action was needed to address contraventions of international law.
With the UN Security Council deadlocked the international embargo on Iran importing weapons is set to lapse within weeks. Prince Turki declared there should be a worldwide consensus this does not happen.
Iran has been the major breaker of all the various United Nations Security Council resolutions on Yemen
“I think there should be worldwide responsibility. Iran has been the major breaker of all the various United Nations Security Council resolutions on Yemen, which were supposed to stop the influx of arms into the country.
“Yet they continue to send arms, other material and even money to the Houthis. And so, yes I think it is important that a very firm arms embargo should be in place.
“Yet I know that America has had a difficult time pushing that line at the United Nations Security Council.”
As European foreign ministers gathered to consider the challenges posed by Turkish manoeuvres in the eastern Mediterranean, Prince Turki spoke of the consequences of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Libya, in particular.
Turkey is ‘the major infringer’
“There is another example of arms embargo breakers in action,” he said. “Turkey has been doing that although the United Nations is passing its resolutions, preventing the export of arms to to Libya.
“Turkey is the major infringer, if you like,” he said. “On that embargo on the eastern Mediterranean I think the Europeans have their hands full.
In trying to deal with the Turkish situation. We’ve seen President [Emanuel] Macron threatening sanctions, whether it would come to it or not is the question. We still have to wait and see what other European countries are willing to go along with that.
“It’s not just the Arab world – I think it’s the whole world is concerned about that. As you know, Libya has become a hotbed for terrorists as well. So, if that issue is not checked, then we are all in the same boat. There has to be a global response to this threat.”
Prince Turki served as head of his country’s intelligence apparatus and chairs the Riyadh-based think tank the King Faisal Centre for Research and Islamic Studies.
He is also joint chairman of the Beirut Institute Summit in Abu Dhabi’s e-Policy Circles, which is hosting a weekly series of high-level discussions on the security and diplomatic challenges facing the region.
One of the opportunities under discussion at those meetings has been the Saudi Arabian engagement with Iraq as Baghdad tries to steer a new course under recently installed prime minister Mustafa Al Kadhimi.
“I think Mr Kadhimi has been sincerely trying to steer Iraq into a more amenable position towards returning to the Arab world, and shedding some of the strictures and chains if you like that have been placed on previous Iraqi governments by their connection with Iran.”
Raghida Dergham, the founder of the e-Policy Circles, said the shutdown caused by the pandemic has not blunted the appetite for region-centred platform to examine how global issues are shaping local policies.
“From the establishment of Pharaonic Egypt, the Middle East has been the hub of competition from around the world,” Prince Turki said.
“If you go through, as I mentioned, Pharaonic Egypt, if you go through the Assyrians the Akkadians, Persians, Greeks and the Romans, they’ve all had their input into the Middle East, and it’s not surprising that that continues to be the case.
“We are in the middle of it. And so we have to be aware of our interests and engage with those who share with us the search for stability and security and oppose those who want to incite instability and insecurity.”
Updated: September 21, 2020 08:06 PM

Iran's Zarif demands US compensation before any new talks
Damien McElroy/The National/September 21/2020
Foreign minister says ‘books are not closed’ on Suleimani’s death
Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif has increased the stakes in the stand-off with America by demanding compensation for the country’s current hardships from Washington's sanctions before entering negotiations. Lashing out at US President Donald Trump’s policy of “maximum pressure” on Iran as an alternative to the 2015 nuclear deal, Mr Zarif said the “damages” inflicted on Iran were wrong. “They have to be corrected,” he said, speaking to a forum organised by New York's Council on Foreign Relations. “Compensate us for our losses.”US officials said last week that all sanctions removed from Iran under the agreement had snapped back into place as a result of non-compliance by Tehran. In the run-up to the US presidential election in November, Mr Zarif said Tehran would not take a different tack if Democratic contender Joe Biden won.
“A sign of good faith is not to try to renegotiate what has already been negotiated,” he said. Mr Zarif also told Washington that Tehran had not dropped the threat of retaliation after the assassination of Quds Force commander Qassem Suleimani in Iraq in January. He said the general, who was killed in a US drone strike, was a national hero and that “the books are not closed” on the matter. Mr Zarif indicated that dual nationals in the country’s jails were up for bargaining by telling the think tank that Tehran wanted a negotiated prisoner swap. “I repeat, we can exchange all prisoners, period,” he said. Relatives of Iranian-American father and son Baquer and Siamak Namazi used the lead-up to the annual UN General Assembly meetings, which start this week, to issue a new appeal for their freedom. But Navy veteran Michael White, detained since 2018, returned home in June as part of a deal in which the US allowed Iranian-American physician Majid Taheri to visit Iran. Mr White said he contracted the coronavirus while in detention. Washington and Tehran also completed a prisoner exchange in which Iran freed Xiyue Wang, who had been held for three years on spying charges, in return for Massoud Suleimani, who faced charges of contravening US sanctions on Iran. Tehran has denied that it holds people on political grounds and has mostly accused its foreign prisoners of espionage.
 

International silence raises doubts about Haftar-Maitig oil deal
The Arab Weekly/September 21/2020
TRIPOLI – The silence of the international community, especially that of the United States and the UN mission to Libya, regarding the oil agreement between the commander-in-chief of the Libyan National Army (LNA), Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, and the Vice President of the Presidency Council, Ahmed Maitig, which provides for resuming oil pumping and exports, is raising insistent speculations about the failure of this Russia-sponsored agreement.
The Haftar-Maitig agreement was announced on Friday, but it appears that it was put on hold because of the opposition of prominent political figures in Fayez al-Sarraj’s Government of National Accord (GNA).
The Islamist-controlled National Oil Corporation (NOC) lifted the status of force majeure on oil facilities and ports it deemed safe, but said the measure would remain in effect on facilities where armed militants were present.
Recently, NOC launched a campaign aimed at exerting pressure to remove the LNA forces from the ports and oil fields, accusing it of deploying mercenary forces from Russian Wagner Group, which are the same accusations put forth by the United States and denied by Russia.
Over the past few weeks, the United States has been leading efforts to have oil production resumed in Libya.
The US Embassy in Libya published a statement confirming Haftar’s agreement to resume production, while observers viewed the Haftar-Maitig agreement as undermining the efforts led by Washington and the UN mission.
The American Enterprise Institute warned of increasing “fragmentation in both eastern and western Libya, which could lead to internal fighting between militias,” considering the “deal” to end the oil shutdowns sponsored by Russia undermines the efforts of the UN and the United States to lift the blockade on energy resources. The oil agreement, which was sponsored by Russia, eases the pressure on the LNA, which was seen as a hindrance to Libyan and international interests due to the closure of oil ports by tribes loyal to it in protest against the unfair division of oil revenues and the financing of Syrian mercenaries from these revenues, and thus makes NOC the real guilty party for stopping oil production and the deteriorating of living conditions of the Libyans.The United States wants the army to be completely removed from the vital areas of “Sirte and the oil ports” and having it withdraw to beyond the city of Ajdabiya, a proposal that Haftar rejects and which is certainly also rejected by his international allies—Russia, France and Egypt.
At the end of last August, separate statements by Fayez al-Sarraj and Parliament Speaker Aguila Saleh regarding a ceasefire spoke of arrangements to have the area of Sirte and the oil ports evacuated, paving the way for international forces and police forces from both sides to protect it.
Aguila Saleh’s silence about the Haftar-Maitiga greement was remarkable, strengthening speculations of a rivalry between him and the army general command.
The international community has sapped much of the army’s negotiation assets and tried, over the past few months, to isolate it and transfer its political weight to the Parliament Speaker Aguila Saleh.
With the exception of the expected Russian welcome, there was no reaction to the agreement signed in the Russian city of Sochi between Imraja Ghaith, Minister of Finance in the Interim Government in the East, and Ahmed Maitig, following a month-long marathon of meetings.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Interim Government in the East called on the UN mission to Libya in particular to “deal positively with this declaration.”
In a statement published on its Facebook page, the ministry invited all countries of the world, especially the UN mission to Libya, to deal “positively with this courageous declaration, and to ensure the flow of oil in accordance with the conditions agreed upon, and with the work of the joint technical committee between the Libyan parties to ensure the smooth provision of basic services (to the Libyan people).”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Interim Government indicated that the announcement contributes to solving the problem of electricity shortages resulting from the lack of fuel, considering this problem as too onerous and costly for citizens and the country’s vital institutions dependent on diesel and gas.

Reconciliation with Hamas too costly for Abbas to afford
The Arab Weekly/September 21/2020
LONDON – Palestinian political sources ruled out that an upcoming meeting this week in Turkey between leaders of Fatah and Hamas would result in reconciliation between the two warring factions.
Sources close to top Palestinian officials told The Arab Weekly that the reconciliation drive encouraged by Turkey and Qatar, after the signing of the Emirati and Bahraini normalisation agreements with Israel, would come with a price tag that neither Fatah nor Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas can afford right now. They indicated that at the top of the cost for Hamas are the demands that it relinquishes one-third of the membership in the Palestinian National Council—which is, for all intents and purposes, Fatah’s parliament—and retiring all the leading bodies represented by the PLO’s Executive Committee and Central Council. Other demands concern the Palestinian Authority and its ministries and diplomatic missions.
A Fatah delegation is expected to arrive in Turkey some time this week, headed by Jibril Rajoub, secretary of the Fatah Central Committee. Rajoub will meet with Saleh al-Arouri, deputy head of Hamas’s political bureau of Hamas, who jas been living in Istanbul for years.
Arouri fled to Turkey after being forced by Israel and Egypt to leave the West Bank because of his activities, and he is accused by the United States of funding terrorist cells in Israel and the West Bank. Turkey's move to sponsor negotiations between the two rival factions comes with its own calculations. The previous negotiations were sponsored mainly by Egypt, but this time Turkey wants to score political points by playing the role of mediator and at the same time incite public opinion against the UAE after its move to normalise relations with Israel.
All previous agreements sponsored by Egypt, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have failed to end the thirteen-year-old conflict between Fatah and Hamas. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has provided sanctuary and support to Hamas, including granting Turkish citizenship to some of its leaders, as part of his attempts to expand Turkey's influence in the region. A well-informed Palestinian source ruled out that Abbas could switch allegiances and align himself in the same axis as Hamas, the Iranian-Turkish-Qatari-Muslim Brotherhood one.
However, the source did not rule out that the meeting between Rajoub and Arouri in Turkey could be the last of Abbas’s manoeuvres and messages to his former allies in the moderate Arab camp. According to the source, the Palestinian elite controlling power and influence in Ramallah is well aware that it is in a weak position that will be secondary in the alliance with Hamas after the Gulf states, Egypt and Jordan expressed their support for the UAE's decision to normalise relations with Israel.
The same source told The Arab Weekly, “Fatah's reconciliation with Hamas means opening the door to a blockade on the Palestinian Authority and the PLO, because Hamas and Islamic Jihad are on terrorist lists, not only in the Gulf countries but in many European capitals as well.”
A Palestinian political analyst expected the failure of Turkish efforts to bring Fatah and Hamas together, stressing that there is no Palestinian reconciliation as long as Mahmoud Abbas remains president of the Palestinian Authority.
Both of the rival Palestinian organisations have gone through serious crises, with their constituencies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, especially a growing crisis of trust. Following the signing of the Emirati and Bahraini agreements with Israel, they couldn’t even draw enough people for demonstrations. In the Palestinian district of al-Khalil — with 800 thousand inhabitants—only about sixty people showed up for a demonstration, most of whom were members of the Palestinian security services, while a demonstration in Ramallah scheduled for last Friday was scrapped because less than twenty people showed up.
President Mahmoud Abbas was hoping for some financial support from Qatar after accusing the UAE and its leaders of high treason and burning Emirati flags and pictures. On September 3, he sent a member of the Fatah Central Committee, Hussein al-Sheikh, to Doha to request an urgent $300 million loan. Al-Sheikh, however, returned empty-handed but for Doha’s advice to go back to coordinating with the Israeli side to have it release the PA’s share of taxes, pointing out that an Israeli loan valued at 900 million shekels was already in the finances of the Palestinian Authority.
Palestinian political analyst Adly Sadiq said the formula sought by Hamas from the upcoming meeting in Turkey does not entail ​​ending the division on the ground.
“There is a difference between ending the division and reconciling the leaders of the two movements. The latter are practically reconciled, but the two movements are far from the idea of ​​ending the division, as none of them is ready to relinquish its powers in the areas they control either under Israeli occupation or in besieged Gaza, in favour of a politically strong national entity, and thus end the farce of the absence of single Palestinian institutions and address,” Sadiq told The Arab Weekly.
He added that the Muslim Brotherhood, with which Hamas is linked, has been optimistic reconciliation, but in reality it wants to maintain the division given that Gaza borders Egypt and the Brotherhood will not allow an end to the division to come out of Egyptian efforts, as the Brotherhood and the Turkish regime really want to use the Gaza Strip and Hamas inside it to increase Egypt's political and security concerns. Sadiq, who is a former Palestinian diplomat, expressed his belief that the meeting in Turkey will not go beyond the square of re-achieving the personal reconciliation that already exists between the leaders of the two movements, while neglecting to achieve the desired Palestinian national goal of ending the division. Politically, it won’t be harmful to have Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and Abbas publicly exchange courtesies.
It must be noted that Haniyeh's speech during the videoconference meeting in Beirut a few days ago was bitterly criticised for the speaker’s excessive praise of Abbas, since the Hamas bases, as well as Fatah's bases in Gaza, could not overlook the fact that they have been the victims of Abbas’s policies over the past decade.

US Envoy to Sponsor Political Agreement between Kurdish Parties
Hasakah- Kamal Sheikho/Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
The US Special Representative for Syria, James Jeffrey, arrived Sunday in al-Hasakah and held meetings with leaders of the Kurdish parties and the leader of the Arab-Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces, Mazloum Abdi. Kurdish sources said that Jeffrey would sponsor the signing of a political agreement and the establishment of the supreme Kurdish authority between the Syrian Democratic Union Party (PYD) and parties of the Kurdish National Council (KNC). Jeffrey's visit to the east of the Euphrates comes amid US military reinforcements after repeated clashes with Russian forces in the area. A new batch of Bradley-type combat vehicles, advanced radar systems, and 100 US soldiers were deployed in northeastern Syria. In addition, the coalition increased its flights over the region to provide air support for US and coalition forces in their battles against ISIS sleeper cells. The sources revealed that Jeffrey conveyed to the leaders of the Kurdish parties the support of the US administration, hoping to reach a political agreement between the two parties of the Kurdish movement in Syria. Jeffrey also indicated that the administration is working to mobilize the forces of the Syrian opposition, to support the US position in holding Damascus and its ally Moscow responsible for failing the political process, continuing the military operations, as well as obstructing any progress in the work of the Constitutional Committee and the implementation of the UN resolution 2254. The US State Department envoy, Zahra Bailey, recently asked the negotiating parties in the Kurdish talks to discuss the remaining outstanding issues in the third round of the talks. The sources reported that these issues include: the Kurdish council’s request to change the education plan in areas controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), and coordinating with UN agencies and UNICEF to verify certificates and previous educational stages. The issue of the return of the Rojava Peshmerga forces and how it could be deployed in the region will also be discussed during the next round of talks. Bailey requested that the issue of Kurdish interference and the relationship between the Democratic Union ruling party and the Kurdistan Workers Party in Turkey be addressed in future rounds. The issue of the council’s detainees, the absentees, recruitment, and SDF deployment in Raqqa, Deir Ezzor, and the rest of the Arab cities remained for subsequent rounds.

Turkish Lira at New Low, Central Bank Seen Sticking to Playbook
Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
The Turkish lira plumbed more record lows on Monday, touching 7.6 against the dollar, as expectations grew that the central bank would keep its key interest rate steady this week but continue to tighten credit via other measures. Analysts including those at Goldman Sachs said the bank would likely use its policy meeting on Thursday to nudge up its late liquidity window (LLW), which at 11.25% is the highest of a handful of interest rates that it controls. That could help protect the lira - which has tumbled 22% this year and lost half its value since the end of 2017 - from a more dramatic fall.
But analysts said such a move would probably only delay a formal hike to the key policy rate that has remained at 8.25% since May. The currency was at 7.5900 at 0917 GMT, 0.3% weaker than Friday’s close. It has dipped in 13 of the last 15 sessions and is among the world’s worst performers in 2020 in part due to aggressive monetary easing over the last year that left real rates deeply negative. The bank is reluctant to restrict growth just as the economy is recovering from a nearly 10% contraction in the second quarter due to the pandemic. It also expects inflation to dip, although price rises have remained stuck in double-digits. While most economists polled by Reuters expect no formal hike this week, they predict the central bank will continue to take steps to raise the weighted average cost of funding , which has climbed to 10.4% from 7.3% in two months.
Among the minority, Deutsche Bank said it expects a 200 basis-point rise in the key one-week repo rate on Thursday. But Kevin Daly at Goldman Sachs said the bank would rather likely raise the LLW to 12% given the combined pressure of depleted reserves, the hit to the tourism sector, and Turkey’s heavy external loan payment schedule through year end. Ehsan Khoman at MUFG Bank forecast a rise in LLW to 11.75%. “The main risk ... is that the authorities tighten policy too little and too late as they prefer to remain supportive of growth, a policy course which would add to the risks around the lira,” he wrote.

Sudan's Burhan Visits UAE for Talks Over Regional Issues
Khartoum- Mohammed Amin Yassine/Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
President of Sudan’s Transitional Sovereign Council Abdel Fattah al-Burhan started on Sunday a two-day official visit to the United Arab Emirates. According to a Sovereign Council statement, Burhan was accompanied by a high-level ministerial delegation and a number of experts and specialists in negotiation. He discussed with the UAE leadership the situation in his country and a number of regional issues, the statement added. The ministerial delegation, led by Justice Minister Nasredeen Abdelbari, is scheduled to hold direct talks with US officials present in the UAE. The issues to be addressed are removing Sudan from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, supporting the transitional period, writing off American debts on Sudan, and urging friendly countries to take serious steps in the debt relief process. The visit comes few days after US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued statements hinting Sudan’s delisting in late October. On August 25, Pompeo affirmed during his visit to Khartoum the US continued support for the civilian-led transitional government, pointing out that “Sudan’s removal from the list remains a critical bilateral priority for both countries.” He also raised the issue of Sudan establishing ties with Israel, yet Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok told him he had no mandate to do so. Parties within the ruling Forces of the Declaration for Freedom and Change oppose any steps to normalize relations with Israel. The transitional government has earlier pledged to pay $300 million for families of the victims of the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen and attacks on the US embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, meeting a key condition for removing the country from Washington's terrorism blacklist. In October 2019, Burhan and Hamdok discussed in a joint visit to the UAE the bilateral relations, especially economic, investment and trade, opportunities for their development in various fields, as well as developments in the political situation in Sudan. Burhan’s current visit to the UAE is the third. He first visited it in May 2019 as President of Sudan’s transitional military council. Saudi Arabia and the UAE agreed in April 2019 to send three billion dollars worth of aid, throwing a lifeline to the country’s new military leaders after protests led to the ousting of president Omar al-Bashir. The two Gulf Arab countries deposited $500 million with the Sudanese central bank and sent the rest in the form of food, medicine, and petroleum products.

Kidnapping of Activist Sparks Protests in Iraq’s Nasiriyah
Baghdad – Fadhel al-Nashmi/Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
The kidnapping of a prominent activist by unknown gunmen sparked protests in Iraq’s southern city of Nasiriyah on Sunday. One person who was with Sajjad al-Iraqi during his abduction was wounded. Protesters took to the streets soon after news of the kidnapping broke out. Demonstrators blocked bridges crossing the Euphrates River and closed down the majority of official offices in an effort to pressure local authorities and the police to uncover the whereabouts of Iraqi. Some protest activists accuse members of the tribe of slain deputy leader of the Popular Mobilization Forces, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, of being behind the abduction. Al-Muhandis was killed in the American drone strike that eliminated top Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani near Baghdad airport in January. Protesters in Nasiriyah had at the time prevented Muhandis’ funeral procession from passing through one of the city’s squares. They believe that Iraqi’s abduction was in retaliation to their blocking of the procession. Police have not named any suspects in the kidnapping. Chief of police, Hazem al-Waeli said the security forces are on complete alert to uncover the kidnappers. Activist Abdulwahhab al-Hamdani said Iraqi was among the most prominent activists in Nasiriyah and is known for his fierce criticism of all Islamic parties. He revealed to Asharq Al-Awsat that he had received several death threats, but that has not deterred his activism. A hashtag calling for Iraqi’s release trended on social media in Iraq soon after news of his kidnapping broke out. Activists demanded his release and holding the perpetrators to account. Separately, Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi announced that he was seeking to set up monuments to honor the victims of the popular anti-government protests, which erupted in October 2019. A monument will be erected at a square in each of the capital Baghdad and Nasiriyah and honor the victims who have struggled to establish a nation, he said. “History is a memory. We should seek to immortalize our historic events so that they can turn into lessons and productive actions that would establish a new phase. Plight, pain and sacrifices must turn into sources of pride for generations to come,” he added. Over 500 people have been killed and 25,000 wounded by security forces and unknown gunmen as they violently cracked down on the anti-government protesters, who had taken to the streets since October to condemn rampant corruption, poor living conditions and unemployment in Iraq.

Palestinian Presidency Refrains from Criticizing Joint US-Qatari Statement
Ramallah - Kifah Zboun/Asharq Al-Awsat/Monday, 21 September, 2020
The Palestinian presidency has distanced itself from officials criticizing a joint US-Qatari statement on the importance of returning to negotiations with Israel in line with the US vision for peace known as the “deal of the century”. Nabil Abu Rudaineh, spokesman for President Mahmoud Abbas, issued a short statement stressing that the “official Palestinian position is only released via the website of the Palestine News and Information Agency (WAFA).” Abu Rudaineh’s statement came after a number of Palestinian officials attacked Qatar. Informed sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that Abbas refused to condemn Qatar’s move and instructed officials to refrain from doing so. Abbas’ position stirred a debate on whether the joint statement adopts the US peace vision, which Palestinians are supposed to reject altogether. Last week’s statement came after the third Strategic Dialogue between the US and Qatar, co-chaired by Secretary of State Michael Pompeo and Qatari Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed Al Thani. “Both sides discussed the need to employ diplomatic means to resolve the current tensions in the Near East and Eastern Mediterranean. The two governments discussed issues of regional security, including joint efforts to defeat ISIS; working toward peace and an end to the conflicts in Libya, Syria, and Yemen; political developments in Iraq; and prospects for a negotiated resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as outlined in the US Vision for Peace.”It is not clear why the Palestinian presidency refrained from criticizing Qatar, and whether it had been promised political and financial incentives. In response to the position of the presidency, WAFA news agency deleted excerpts from the statement of PLO Executive Committee member Ahmad Majdalani, in which he attacked Qatar. Wafa initially published Majdalani's statement accusing Qatar of endorsing the Trump plan, “which is rejected by the Palestinians and the international community.” Other committee members, namely Taysir Khaled and Bassam al-Salhi, also attacked the Qatari position. Khaled denounced Doha's support for the US peace vision, and called on Qatari officials to distance themselves from the policy of covering up US aggression against Palestinian national interests and rights. He demanded Qatar to end this "collusion" with the Trump administration. Salihi said that Qatar has become the first Arab country to officially endorse the Trump peace plan. The joint US-Qatar statement is a very dangerous development that confirms the importance of expediting the implementation of all that was agreed upon in the last meeting of the Palestinian factions, according to Salhi. He stressed the importance of mobilizing the Palestinian people to confront dangers and renew the national project. A senior official from the Palestinian People’s Party, Walid al-Awad, said that Qatar’s endorsement of the Trump deal is an announcement that it has decided to join the countries that normalized relations with Israel. Prior to the presidency's statement, Hamas politburo member Musa Abu Marzouk stated that Qatar was trying to help the Palestinian people in various ways. Marzouk said that Qatar can only help the Palestinians, specifically Gazans, through talks with the occupation, noting that it is necessary that Doha communicates with Israel. His statements sparked criticism, with some stating that it was not possible to attack countries that normalize relations with Israel while justifying normalization for other states.

Canada/Statement by Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of International Development and Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship on International Day of Peace
September 21, 2020 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs; the Honourable Karina Gould, Minister of International Development; and the Honourable Marco Mendicino, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, today issued the following statement:
“Today, as we celebrate the International Day of Peace and as the United Nations marks its 75th anniversary, we are reminded that the rules-based international order offers our best hope of both achieving peace and ending this pandemic. Peaceful cooperation is behind many of our greatest successes globally, nationally and within our communities.
“Canada will continue to work with partners around the globe toward a more peaceful and inclusive world, including as chair of the UN Peacebuilding Commission, co-chair of the International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding and co-chair of the Women, Peace and Security Focal Points Network.
To achieve sustainable peace, women must be engaged in every aspect of it: from conflict prevention, peacemaking and humanitarian assistance to post-conflict recovery and state-building. Women are courageous defenders of human rights and fearless negotiators who make a difference for peace.
“Canada remains committed to working with all countries to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals to build peaceful and inclusive societies, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions. Canada will continue to stand firm against attempts to use COVID-19 to foster discrimination and exclusion.
“Today is a day to remind ourselves: in an interconnected world, it is through peace that we will achieve our potential as individuals, as societies and as a global community.”

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 21-22/2020

The Trump Presidency: A landmark in the History of America’s Right
Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/September 21/2020
The history of the US is full of exceptional events and personalities. On the other hand, there have also been many names which became hostage to historical circumstances that would redefine priorities and develop new concepts.
Since the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, many great American politicians such as Henry Clay, William Jennings Bryan, and Adlai Stevenson failed to win the Presidency; while others of lesser qualities, like John Tyler and Warren Harding, managed to occupy the White House, thanks either to certain circumstances or political deals.
Of course, there is no unanimity on rating leaders or their terms in office; as analysts may have their own political preferences and bias, while it is difficult to pass and justify judgements and excuses. Still among the leading criteria to judge the success or failure of any president is the enduring significance of his achievements or the changes he effected during his term in office.
Well, here some might point out to the fact that there were periods when certain partisan viewpoints dominated the political culture, and influenced it. As an example, we note that period when three consecutive Republicans (Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover) occupied the White House. This happened between the end of WW1 and 1933, including the Great Depression period, between the terms of two Democratic Presidents, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt.
That was a period of inward looking, strident laissez faire economics, and harsh pragmatism, as opposed to the policy of openness and international involvement of Wilson and FDR. However, the Great Depression rearranged the priorities and necessitated the New Deal in its first (1933-1934) and second (1935-1936) parts; which helped compensate the painful results of the Depression. Later on, WW2 justified cementing the social safety net, and strengthening anti-trust policies.
Indeed, after WW2, the US lived through three political climates:
1- Increased internal fear of Communist threat as a result of the ascendancy of the USSR, and the emergence of China as a Communist giant in East Asia. This fear gave rise to the extreme rightwing populist phenomenon of ‘McCarthyism’ (named after the Wisconsin senator Joseph McCarthy), with all its cultural and social repercussions.
2- The same fear was reflected on the international scene through the ‘Cold War’ that resulted in the ‘Policy of Containment’ built around three pacts or ‘belts’ created to contain the spread of the perceived Communist threat through security treaties with anti-Communist regimes. They were: SEATO in South East Asia, CENTO (formerly the Baghdad Pact) in the Middle East, and NATO in Europe.
3- In conjunction with the above, and influenced by the Korean War, the US decided to economically and industrially rehabilitate Japan, its devastated old war enemy, in order to help in confronting the rise of Communist China.
The extreme right, of which McCarthyism was the most salient example, demonized American liberals and intellectuals many of whom were ruthlessly accused of being Communist sympathizers.
Among those targeted were many Jews, Afro-Americans and members of other minorities. But in the opposite direction, a broad, progressive and liberal interest-based coalition was gaining momentum; materializing in the Civil Rights Movement, which helped turning party politics in the states of the ‘Old South’ upside down.
Historically, the Democratic Party was the stronger party in the South, but the American Civil War in which Abraham Lincoln, a Republican President, defeated the Southern Confederates, virtually decimated the Republicans, and turned the South into a Democratic bastion for many decades.
However, from the early 1950s, and later thanks to the Democrats’ nationwide support of the Civil Rights Movement, under the leadership of President John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, and the increased awareness and activism of the Afro-Americans, the situation radically changed. Conservative Southern Democrats began to leave in droves their now ‘too liberal’ party, and join the Republican Party. Indeed, the Southern states which gave the Democrats three out of their last four presidents (Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton) are now safe Republican strongholds.
This trend has continued throughout the last few decades, as the Republican Party becoming the platform of the Conservatives and right-wingers, while the Democratic Party became the natural home for Liberals and even left-leaning Socialists. This culminated in the election of Barack Obama, as the first Afro-American president, for two consecutive terms.
Yet, during the same period, a new kind of fear began to appear, fueled, in part, by Obama’s presidency and his national and international policies. But as important, were other factors:
1- The rapid advance of globalization that has shaken many Americans’ trust in the free movement of goods and services.
2- The fast growing ‘New Technologies’ with their apocalyptic threat to old jobs and practices; particularly, to unskilled labor.
3- The demographic change which is expected to turn the White Christian European-Americans majority into a minority in the US. In the meantime, the new majority is expected to consist of the Hispanics, Afro-Americans and Asian Americans; who now already form a sizable percentage of populations in the country’s three most populous states: California, Texas and Florida.
This new fear felt by White Christian European-Americans, particularly, the unskilled and lesser-educated, has recently found those who exploit, harness and market it. Then, along came Donald Trump to carry it to the highest national political platforms.
Next November’s US elections will be another test of how strong is the base created and given a political voice by this fear. It is the ideological and interest-linked base that made Trump, not made by him. This is very similar to the base of fighting ‘the Evil Empire’ that created Ronald Reagan’s legacy, and the ‘neo-con’ school that created George W Bush’s.
Before the 2016 elections, few Americans expected a Trump victory. However, when said that he can shoot someone in Fifth Avenue and still not lose, Trump showed that he knew precisely what his voters were. He knew how they think, perceive things and react; and so he knew how to talk to them and what to tell and prompt them.
This is why Trump’s opponents within the Republican Party collapsed, as proven by the successes of his candidate in most primaries, in a populist wave that made light even the threat of Covid-19 and Trump’s bad handling of the pandemic.
On the other hand, the Democratic Party, divided between traditional liberals and up and coming Leftists – who emerged with Bernie Sanders’ 2016 campaign – can do nothing but mobilize its voters to defeat Trump rather than secure victory for their candidate Joe Biden in November.

We Really Shouldn’t Force People Back into the Office
Ferdinando Giugliano/Bloomberg/September, 21/2020
The end of the summer holidays and the reopening of schools have sparked a lively debate over the future of remote working. From the US to the UK, politicians and employers are nudging workers to return to the office even though the pandemic is not over. But these requests put employees in a very awkward place — caught between fearing for their health and fearing for their job.
Following two key principles may resolve some of the tension. First, the government should have no say in this decision, so long as states can avoid new lockdowns and with the obvious exception of managing the civil service. Second, it is up to employers, in conjunction with employees, to make the call on returning to the office, and there is no point in forcing it if remote working hasn’t hurt productivity and profitability.
The first wave of the pandemic spurred a radical transformation of the work environment, as companies rushed to enable working from home. In recent months, however, officials and managers have started itching to go back to the old routines. The UK government considered launching a campaign to encourage the nation to go back to the office, and then shelved it. In the US, some executives — most notably Jamie Dimon at JPMorgan Chase & Co. — have also expressed doubts that workers can stay at home for much longer.
There are manifold reasons for such concern. Politicians are worried about the economic repercussions for town centers, especially in mega-cities such as London and New York, and for those employed in their restaurants and cafes. They may also fear for the losses accumulating in the public transport network, as the number of passengers remains relatively low. Meanwhile, employers are skeptical about whether productivity can be sustained over protracted periods of remote working. They may also be frustrated at the thought of leasing empty offices, particularly in locations with very high rents.
Still, only some of these fears are justified. Politicians should be wary of wading into what is above all a private relationship between employers and employees. If a company believes it can operate effectively while keeping employees at home, does it make sense for the government to get in the way?
Of course, local and national governments can make work decisions with regard to the public administration. If they believe strongly that remote working is ineffective, they can bring civil servants back into the office. It’s harder to make a case for telling employees in the private sector what to do.
There’s also reason for politicians to be careful: The economic pain for city centers may be an economic gain for residential neighborhoods and suburbs. We hear a lot about the restaurants that are closing around empty office blocks, but less about supermarkets that are hiring new staff elsewhere.
Employers face a different calculation. They must assess whether their organizations have managed to operate successfully without face-to-face contact. For some businesses that rely on human interactions, such as shops or restaurants, most that survived will really have no choice but to reopen the workplace.
For others, including many companies with a prevalence of white-collar workers, it is a tougher call. Edward Glaeser, an economist at Harvard University, and colleagues recently found that the transition to remote work for US businesses has been uneven, with many becoming less productive. But employees don’t appear to be working less: Raffaella Sadun, an economist at Harvard Business School, and other researchers presented evidence of an increase in the length of the average workday, by nearly an hour, and a short-term increase in workers’ email activity.
Companies will need to be mindful about their specific circumstances. If they do plan to recall employees back to the office, they’d be wise to consider the potential problems — the worst being that a worker tests positive for the virus, falls ill and potentially spreads it to coworkers. Even if a company takes all the right precautions, people will need to be quarantined and there will be many questions around contact tracing. JPMorgan is having to face this very problem, after there was a recent positive case reported in its New York City offices.
These risks present not only health issues, but can be a serious drag on productivity too. Taking a hit on the renting costs of office space might just be worth it. Deutsche Bank AG has planned to tell its employees in New York City they can work from home until mid-2021.
Since we don’t know how long the pandemic will last, we also don’t know how long companies and workers will face this workplace dilemma. For now, it’s best if politicians stay out of the way and employers stay open-minded. The new world of work presents many challenges, but some opportunities too.
 

Arabs: "Palestinians Repeat the Same Mistakes"
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/September 21/2020
At this pace, Palestinians might wake up one morning to discover that they no longer have any friends in the Arab countries at all.
"The Palestinians failed to establish their state. They failed because they did not want to establish a state. Here I mean the political leaders, some of whom still insist on repeating revolutionary phrases. The establishment of a Palestinian state will be a burden on the Palestinian leaders and will prevent them from practicing corruption.... The Palestinian Authority is no longer suitable to represent the Palestinian people." — Iraqi writer Farouk Youssef, Al-Arabiya, September 19, 2020.
"Israel did not destroy Syria; Israel did not burn Libya; Israel did not displace the people of Egypt; Israel did not destroy Libya, and Israel did not tear up Lebanon. Before you Arabs blame Israel, take a look at yourselves in the mirror. The problem is in you." — UAE Islamic cleric Wassem Yousef, Twitter, September 16, 2020.
"Palestinian leaders failed to invest in opportunities. They failed to take strategic decisions and chose [instead] to forge an alliance with Iran." — Saudi writer Yusef al-Qabalan, Al-Riyadh, September 18, 2020.
The biggest losers, of course, are again the Palestinians -- who are quickly losing the sympathy of a growing number of Arabs.
Several Palestinian factions have urged the Palestinian leadership to withdraw from the Arab League to protest the refusal of the Arab countries to condemn normalization with Israel. Earlier this month, the Arab League foreign ministers refused to endorse a Palestinian draft resolution condemning the UAE for its decision to make peace with Israel. Pictured: Arab Foreign Ministers at a meeting of the Arab League in Cairo, Egypt, on March 4, 2020.
The Palestinians have recalled their ambassadors to the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in protest of the signing of the peace deals between the two Gulf states and Israel. The Palestinians are now threatening to withdraw their envoys from any Arab country that follows suits and establishes relations with Israel.
In addition, several Palestinian factions have urged the Palestinian leadership to withdraw from the Arab League to protest the refusal of the Arab countries to condemn normalization with Israel. Earlier this month, the Arab League foreign ministers refused to endorse a Palestinian draft resolution condemning the UAE for its decision to make peace with Israel.
"The resolutions of the Arab League are mortgaged to the Zionist American administration," the factions said in a statement. "Normalization [with Israel] is a huge betrayal of the Palestinian issue and a stab to the sacrifices and pain of the Palestinians and Arabs."
The threats to pull out from the Arab League and withdraw Palestinian ambassadors from Arab countries that establish relations with Israel have sparked mockery and a flurry of critical comments in the Arab world, particularly the Gulf states. The main theme of the criticism: The Palestinian do not learn from their mistakes.
The Arab criticism, directed mostly against the leaders of the Palestinians, is yet another indication of the growing antagonism between the Palestinians and the Arab world. At this pace, Palestinians might wake up one morning to discover that they no longer have any friends in the Arab countries at all.
Many Arabs are outraged by the Palestinian threats, as well as the daily attacks on the UAE and Bahrain. These include accusations that the two Gulf states have "betrayed Al-Aqsa Mosque, Jerusalem and the Palestinian issue" by agreeing to establish relations with Israel. The Arabs are also reminding the Palestinians of the many opportunities they missed when they rejected a number of peace initiatives and plans.
Lebanese journalist Khairallah Khairallah expressed outrage over the Palestinians' labelling of the signing ceremony of the Israel-UAE-Bahrain deals at the White House as a "black day."
Khairallah pointed out that the Palestinians refer to their expulsion from Jordan in the early 1970s as "Black September." At the time, he said, a Palestinian breakaway faction by that name tried to establish a state-within-a-state in Jordan and murder Jordan's King Hussein. The king, after his defeat in the 1967 Six Day War, had allowed the PLO to establish military bases in his kingdom, presumably to attack Israel. When the Palestinians, however, tried to overthrow the Jordanian government, he expelled them to Lebanon. There, they participated in the Lebanese civil war that began in 1975 and continued launching terror attacks against Israel. In 1982, after Israel led an invasion into Lebanon, the Palestinians were again expelled -- to Tunisia.
"Fifty years after 'Black September,' or call it whatever you like, nothing has changed," Khairallah wrote.
"The Palestinian leaders are refusing to learn from past experiences. The Palestinian armed organizations have repeated Jordan's experience in Lebanon. They played a role in destroying Lebanon [during the civil war]. Would the Palestinian issue have benefited had the Palestinian organizations managed in 1970 to overthrow King Hussein?"
Khairallah noted that that former PLO leader Yasser Arafat made a "huge mistake" in 1990 when he took a stance in support of Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, which had peacefully been hosting nearly half a million Palestinian workers. After Kuwait was liberated by the US-led coalition in 1991, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, regarded as disloyal, were deported from Kuwait and other Gulf states.
"Yasser Arafat did not learn from the experiences of Jordan and Lebanon," he added.
"It was expected that Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] would have learned from the mistakes of Yasser Arafat and from the mistakes of the experiences of Jordan and Lebanon, but he took the worst of Yasser Arafat. Half a century after what Palestinians call 'Black September,' nothing has changed. The Palestinians still have the ability to make the same mistakes." (Al-Arab, September 20, 2020)
Saudi political analyst Sami al-Morshid pointed out that the Palestinian leadership has in the past rejected several peace initiatives and treaties. Each time the Palestinians do this, al-Morshid said, "they lose."
"Unfortunately, Palestinian leaders, repeat the same mistakes. They rejected the Egyptian and Jordan peace initiatives [with Israel], and they rejected US President Bill Clinton's peace initiative [at the 2000 Camp David summit]. These days, they reject President Donald Trump's peace initiative and, finally, they reject the peace initiatives of the UAE and Bahrain."
Iraqi writer Farouk Youssef said that the Palestinians' problem is that their leaders do not want a Palestinian state. "The Palestinians failed to establish their state," Youssef remarked.
'They failed because they did not want to establish a state. Here I mean the political leaders, some of whom still insist on repeating revolutionary phrases. The establishment of a Palestinian state will be a burden on the Palestinian leaders and will prevent them from practicing corruption. The Palestinians need to realize that the others were tired. The Authority is no longer suitable to represent the Palestinian people." (Al-Arabiya, September 19, 2020)
Egyptian journalist Imad Adeeb wrote that if he were the Palestinian leadership, he would have distanced himself from Qatar, Turkey and Iran. Adeeb also advised the Palestinian leaders to avoid using the language of insults and slander against Arabs:
"If I were one of the Palestinian leaders, I would have abandoned the policy intransigence and the use of the language of insult, slander, and incitement... If I were the Palestinian leadership, I would have taken advantage of the UAE peace initiative. If I were from the Palestinian leadership, I would not have played the game of Qatar, Turkey and Iran against the moderate Arab states." (Al-Watan, September 8, 2020)
Saudi writer Yusef al-Qabalan also accused Palestinian leaders of repeatedly rejecting peace initiatives over the past few decades. Noting that the Palestinians had failed to take advantage of the Arab Peace Initiative, adopted in 2002 by the Arab leaders, al-Qabalan wrote:
"The realistic choice for the Palestinian leaders was to activate that Arab initiative in all political ways at the international level. What happened? The Palestinian leaders met the peace initiatives with rhetoric of betrayal and slogans that do not achieve anything on the ground. The Palestinian leaders turned to the traffickers of their issue, such as Iran, Turkey and Qatar and lost their strongest card, which is national unity. Palestinian leaders failed to invest in opportunities. They failed to take strategic decisions and chose [instead] to forge an alliance with Iran." (Al-Riyadh, September 18, 2020)
UAE Islamic cleric Wassem Yousef, addressing the Palestinians and other Arabs who reject peace with Israel, wrote on Twitter:
"Israel did not destroy Syria; Israel did not burn Libya; Israel did not displace the people of Egypt; Israel did not destroy Libya, and Israel did not tear up Lebanon. Before you Arabs blame Israel, take a look at yourselves in the mirror. The problem is in you."
Palestinian leaders, meanwhile, are ignoring the messages and advice from their Arab brothers. The Palestinian leaders in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip do not like to be reminded of their mistakes. Moreover, they are unwilling to accept any advice, even when it comes from Arab states that used to pour billions of dollars on them. The biggest losers, of course, are again the Palestinians -- who are quickly losing the sympathy of a growing number of Arabs.
*Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
© 2020 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Strip Qatar’s Homophobic Regime of the 2022 World Cup Now
Benjamin Weinthal/FDD/September 21/2020
There is no shortage of compelling reasons to relocate the 2022 FIFA World Cup from the small Gulf country of Qatar to another host nation.
The frequently cited arguments range from Qatar bribing members of the International Federation of Association Football’s executive committee to secure the prestigious competition, according to sources including the US Justice Department, to that nation’s oppressive heat that creates impossible playing conditions to the lack of control over COVID-19 in the Gulf state.
The most pressing reason to pull the plug on the soccer World Cup in Qatar, however, is the Islamic regime’s lethal homophobic law targeting gay and lesbian sexual activity. Qatar’s statute also states that people can be incarcerated for “leading, instigating, or seducing a male in any way to commit sodomy.” It is long overdue for elite sports associations to cease rewarding nations that criminalize homosexuality.
After all, the world of sports, including in the Olympic Charter, has enshrined human rights as an animating principle for athletes.
But the head of the 2022 World Cup bid team, Hassan al-Thawadi, has set, as a condition of attending the soccer championship, the requirement that there be no public displays of same-sex affection, the BBC reported in 2013. He defended his regime’s anti-gay laws in response to a gay man who asked if he would be welcome in Qatar. Then-FIFA president Sepp Blatter, addressing the selection of Qatar in comments in 2010, went as far as to say that gays should “refrain from sexual activity” if they go to Qatar, because homosexuality is illegal in the Gulf country. He later issued an apology.
“It was not my intention and never will be my intention to go into any discrimination,” he said. But Blatter set the tone and the damage was done.
Blatter was subsequently ejected from office, facing criminal proceedings regarding “criminal mismanagement… and misappropriation.”
Rasha Younes, a researcher for Human Rights Watch’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights Program, neatly captured the insidious nature of Qatar’s response to complaints about its anti-LGBTQ posture. When the monarchy declared that “everyone is welcome,” Younes argued, the “decision to temporarily suspend local norms has the paradoxical effect of bolstering the idea that same-sex desire and gender variance are a peculiar preoccupation of outsiders.”
And despite Qatar’s insistence that “everyone is welcome” at the 2022 World Cup, that has never been the Gulf State’s posture toward foreign visitors. In 1996, according to the US Department of State’s human rights report, an American citizen there was sentenced to 90 lashes and a six-month prison term for “homosexual activity.” The following year, Qatar’s regime deported 36 gay Filipino workers.
Last November, the travel website Asher & Lyric wrote that Qatar is the second-most dangerous country for the LGBTQ community. The top 10 list of most dangerous countries for LGBTQ tourists also included the Islamic Republic of Iran, Nigeria, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and Yemen.
Asher & Lyric used the following factors to assess the dangers of each country: criminalization of LGBTQ sexual relations, the status of same-sex marriage rights, the existence of LGBTQ worker protections, legal protections against anti-LGBTQ discrimination, criminalization of hate-based violence, adoption recognition, illegal LGBTQ relationships and acts, and propaganda/ morality laws.
Unfortunately, FIFA is not the only world-class institution that has cosigned Qatar’s homophobia. This past February, Northwestern University, the highly respected Evanston, Illinois-based institution, capitulated to anti-gay hysteria in the Gulf state and canceled a music event at its Qatar campus with an openly gay singer from the Lebanese indie rock band Mashrou’ Leila.
Writing on the website of Human Rights Watch in June, Younes, the LGBTQ researcher, noted with respect to the band cancellation, “When Qatar paints LGBT rights as an imperialist agenda, it leaves LGBT people reluctant to speak out against government oppression for fear of being labeled ‘traitors,’ as many LGBT Qataris have told Human Rights Watch”
FIFA surely knew in advance of awarding the World Cup to Qatar that the Doha regime punishes homosexual acts with one to three years in prison, flogging, or execution under its Islamic Sharia law system.
Making matters worse, Qatar continues its state-sponsored homophobia unabated. The prestige of being awarded the most important world soccer competition has not influenced a change in Qatar’s anti-gay behavior.
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), a nonprofit organization based in Washington that monitors media in the Arab and Muslim world, translated a virulently homophobic June article from a media adviser to Qatar’s Foreign Ministry who argued homosexuality is a grave sin and unnatural.
In her diatribe against gays in Al Sharq, a Doha-based pro-regime daily newspaper, Qatari journalist Na’ima ’Abd al-Wahhab al-Mutawa’a wrote, “A grave issue that can already be described as a phenomenon, and which we can no longer keep silent about, is the warm attitude evident on many social networks — especially on Snapchat — toward homosexuality, [which] deviates from the nature Allah bestowed upon males and females, and toward [the phenomenon] we see in our society of young men looking like women and young women looking like men.”
The title of her article is “Keep Deviant Ideas Away from Your Children.”
Free media are nonexistent in Qatar. The emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, controls all press in the oil and gas rich monarchy.
In response to anti-gay Qatari sociologist Abd al-Aziz Khazraj al-Ansari blaming the August Beirut port explosion on Lebanese girls, homosexuals, and plastic surgery in the Eastern Mediterranean country, the famed British LGBTQ and human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell told me, “On the issue of homosexuality, Ansari should look in his own backyard of Qatar, where homosexuality is just as prevalent as in Lebanon but hidden behind a mask of hypocrisy. And, unlike racist Qatar, most Lebanese do not treat migrant workers like semi-slave labor.”
Qatar’s regime is, of course, in a state of denial about its LGBTQ community. FIFA has rewarded Qatar’s incorrigibly reactionary homophobia. There is still time for FIFA to relocate the World Cup to a country that does not criminalize homosexuality. If the tournament takes place in the Gulf state, it will only embolden Qatar’s lethal homophobic system. Britain and other countries could easily host the tournament. The time is ripe to relocate the World Cup.
*Benjamin Weinthal is a research fellow for the non-partisan Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Follow Benjamin on Twitter @BenWeinthal.

What remains of secularism in Tunisia
The Arab Weekly/September 21/2020
Secularism in Tunisia, or radicalism in the face of the religious current, is not part of a
Tunisian university professor and constitutional jurist Yadh Ben Achour has revived the debate in Tunisia about the future of political separation by calling for a “large-scale secular cultural and political movement” to counter the expansion of political Islam in Tunisia, at a time when political alliances in Tunisia no longer obeyed any logic, becoming almost absurd, to wit, the formation in 2013 of a parliamentary front that included Islamists, independent populists and MPs affiliated with the constitutional trend, that came together under the banner of Nidaa Tounes headed by the late Beji CaidEssebsi, before personal disputes and struggles for leadership split it into small groups.
In an article in the Leaders magazine, Ben Achour called for “the establishment of a large secular cultural and political movement, with clear choices and without political concessions, that transcends party ideologies and defends the gains of independence and Bourguiba’slegacy in order to defend Tunisian society and the Tunisian state against the invasion of political and constitutional Islamisation.”
Such a front would be of the order of miraculous event if we were to closely examine the state of the so-called secular political forces in Tunisia or of those that are seen as the last hope for leading the task of building a new front to confront the expansion of the Islamists.
From the outset, we find that intellectual and ideological criteria have disappeared from the current political conflict in Tunisia and replaced by fluid and convenient considerations that might lead any given politician to one day declare himself or herself as anti-Islamist and the next day become their friends. Such a situation is due primarily to the fact that secularism in Tunisia, or radicalism in the face of the religious current, is not part of a strategic intellectual project, but rather a tool for political positioning, which may require manoeuvring with escalation sometimes and de-escalation other times in order to achieve political gains.
Ironically, the main intellectual front that is supposed to compete with the Islamists in the struggle over the societal vision, namely the Tunisian left, has retreated considerably following the shock of the 2011 uprising, even though it was supposed to be the first beneficiary of the change in the country given its ideological ambitions for a radical change of reality.
The Tunisian left might have its own intellectual references, and its leaders may be said to master the intellectual tools of analysis and deconstruction, but since 2011, it has not overtly come forth with political visions and statements that would confuse the Islamists or shake their image in the country. Some go even as far as saying that the biggest mistake of the Tunisian leftist parties in post-revolution Tunisia was not to clearly demarcate themselves as a movement working for a radical change and serving the people by being close to them. Instead, they focused their strategies on one goal, and that is to counter the Islamist Ennahda Movement, which had in the end succeeded into dragging the left into useless and draining battles about details, and led it enter into unnatural alliances serving the agendas of groups that are by definition hostile to leftist ideologies.
Of course, one should always keep in mind that the left is many lefts and that each group considers itself the bearer of the most radical approach and the closest to the concerns of the common citizen. But the leftist leaders, groups and blocs that have emerged so far, and especially the conflicts that surfaced, further weakened the left and pushed it into the shadows. The best illustration of this trend was the experience of the Popular Front Party which had lost all of its 16 members of parliament in just one election cycle.
Moreover, one should not underestimate the extreme pragmatism shown by the Islamists who did not hesitate to back down on some issues and items that were in the past part of the traditional points of contention used against them in public debates. Thus, Ennahda Movement had no qualms about adopting the Tunisian Family Code (the Personal Status Code) as a common ground with the left, even though some aspects of this Code fundamentally contradict the traditional jurisprudential interpretations that Islamists usually defend, such as the legality of polygamy and illegality of adoption.
Ennahda no longer believes in the necessity of applying Sharia Law and its controversial concepts and rulings, and is keen to present itself as a conservative movement with an Islamic spirit, shedding in the process all of the controversial aspects of its past belonging to the Islamic Group Movement or the Islamic Trend Movement or even to the overall Muslim Brotherhood identity. Such a strategy has confused its ideological opponents who have let go of focusing on their fundamental intellectual opposition to the Islamist trend and became engaged in debating the details of its chameleon-like pragmatism or in discussing its daily political positions or its connections to Qatar and Turkey, basically keeping them busy searching for fixed elements and criteria that may facilitate the classification of the movement.
It is important to note that the intellectual groups that were enabled by the Tunisian revolution with the freedom to organise, express their opinions publically and in the media, and hold open meetings with the people, did not succeed in showing themselves as a radical and inclusive option, because the cultural and intellectual dimensions of the overall ideological conflict have disappeared from the public debate. Even what can be cited as examples of ideological differentiation in books, novels and other artistic production cannot be said to represent a collective vision but has to remain confined to individual attempts and visions. Most of this intellectual production, anyways, centred around personal accounts of jail experiences or intellectual assessments of past experiences, assessments that ended up being dominated by feelings of nostalgia and projections of failure and withdrawal.
So, how can we build a cultural movement that leads to clear intellectual distinctions as called for by Yadh Ben Achour?
I think that the matter needs a different vision, because the dreamy cultural change may find a place in books and biographies, but on the ground the country needs what is more important than that, and that isbuilding a steady political system and breaking off with the current hybrid political setup that Mr. Ben Achour is accused of participating in engineering. He even defended this system in his last article, saying that the problem is not with the system but in the ways it is implemented.
The parliamentary system may have succeeded in preventing the Islamists from monopolising or dominating power in Tunisia, but in return, it has disrupted everything else in the country and imprisoned political power in an endless cycle of polarisations and reactions to the point that, since 2012, no government has succeeded in implementing its ideas, programs and visions because of the ubiquitous parliamentary disputes. What’s worse is that this situation promises to remain unchanged for years to come.
Tunisia needs a smooth and uncomplicated political system that enables building alliances capable of governing so that the country can devote itself to addressing its urgent issues, and so as to block the path to the policy and practices of constantly throwing spanners in the works and standing in each other’s way. We have excellent illustrations of these destructive practices in the current disagreement between the three heads of government (the president of the republic, the prime minister and the speaker of the parliament). The worst and most tragic of this situation is what is happening now between Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi and President Kais Saeid in terms of an open struggle over appointments and controlling certain ministries.
The priority for Tunisia now is to build a political model capable of functioning and of being sustainable, so that the country can once again focus on solving its security, economic, social, financial and health crises, and to re-invigorate its external image which has been tarnished by political and partisan conflicts.
Such a goal can become the needed ground for clear political differentiation that would enable the re-emergence of a strong and revitalised opposition and force the political parties to focus on improving their performances rather than run after slogans and sell out to suspicious agendas of local and foreign lobbies. Reorienting the climate of pluralism towards this goal, based on competition and clarity, can open the way for working on intellectual and cultural pluralism and allow building a cultural movement to defend the national gains of the state and the elements of enlightenment that will be established in the future, especially as working on the cultural and intellectual dimensions will push the Islamists either to radical concessions that make the old ideas a mere memory, or to completely retract into the traditional Islamist shell of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology.
And it won’t be just the Islamists that will be affected by the issue, since everyone—leftists, nationalists and liberals included—will have to make concessions that break with the diseases of ideology, and will inevitably extend to secularism and its various aspects, bring it down to earth and involve it into building a model of pluralism that actually serves the people.
As a result, the various cultural agendas championing future-oriented enlightenment projects could be the natural consequence of improving people’s reality and building a positive social climate; otherwise, the endeavour would just be another strange diktat that would only lead to the reproduction of models of authoritarianism and despotism.