English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For April 21/2020
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

#elias_bejjani_news
 

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/eliasnews21/english.april21.21.htm
 

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

Bible Quotations For today

I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint John 06/34-40/:”They said to him, ‘Sir, give us this bread always.’Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never drive away; for I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. This is indeed the will of my Father, that all who see the Son and believe in him may have eternal life; and I will raise them up on the last day.’”

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on April 20-21/2021

Elias Bejjani/Visit My LCCC Web site/All That you need to know on Lebanese unfolding news and events in Arabic and English/http://eliasbejjaninews.com/

Ministry of Health: 1608 new infection cases, 36 deaths
Aoun meets Episcopal Committee for Christian-Islamic Dialogue, Archbishop Abdel Sater
Aoun Says 'State Must Preserve Justice for All' after Judicial Storm
Diab concludes visit to Qatar: State of Qatar demonstrated firm stance aiming at supporting Lebanon
Diab Urges Qatar to Rescue Nation Facing 'Total Collapse'
Justice Parliamentary Committee Urges Govt. to Amend Decree 6433
Strong Lebanon Bloc Says Hariri 'Has No Intention to Form Govt.'
Higher Judicial Council Refers Ghada Aoun to Judicial Inspection
Lebanon's Crisis-Hit Farmers Turn to Growing Hashish
On visit to Qatar, Diab pleads for Lebanon’s rescue
Jumblatt: Regional conflict seems to be intensifying in Lebanon
Sami Gemayel meets Longden: Elections should be held without any delay
Army commander meets Del Col, Amin Gemayel
Lebanese church patriarch wants direct talks with Hezbollah on making country ‘neutral/Natasha Turak/CNBC/April 19/2021
It's getting very lonely being Gebran Bassil/Michael Young/The National/April 20/ 2021

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on April 20-21/2021

Syrian Business Tycoon Firas Tlass: Iran, Hizbullah Have Complete Control Over Certain Areas, Military Facilities In Syria – Bashar Al-Assad Doesn't Know What Goes On There
Syria faces sanctions at chemical weapons watchdog
Scores of extremists reported killed in Russian strikes in Syria
Russia, Iran seek to bolster Assad with supplies ahead of presidential election
‘Progress’ seen in Iran talks but resolution still far away
Syria Names New Central Bank Chief
Gabi Ashkenazi: 'Iran undermining stability in entire Middle East'
Ashkenazi: World must act to stop Iran from getting future bomb
Iran says 60% enrichment meant to show nuclear prowess, is reversible
Iran sees Vienna talks moving forward, warns against excessive demands
As he struggles to form cabinet, Netanyahu seeks direct election of PM
Chad President Idriss Deby killed on frontline, son to take over
Jordan’s public prosecution ends investigation into ‘recent events threatening security’
Turkey wants to befriend Egypt, still opposes labeling Muslim Brotherhood terrorists

Titles For The Latest The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on April 20-21/2021

From Trump to Biden Monograph: Israel/Jonathan Schanzer and David May/FDD/April 20/2021
The Biden Administration’s Time for Choosing On Iran/Jacob Nagel and Mark Dubowitz/Newsweek/April 20/2021
China and Russia: The Guns of April/Gordon G. Chang/Gatestone Institute./April 20/2021
‘Iran’s economy is closer than ever to collapse,’ says expert/Daniel Snnenfeld/The Media Line/April 20/2021
Why would Israel say US is getting outplayed by Iran? - analysis/Herb Keinon/Jerusalem Post/April 20/2021
The Afghanistan Endgame Is Also A Beginning/Alberto M. Fernandez/MEMRI Daily Brief No. 27/April 20/2021
Le retrait d’Afghanistan entre impératifs et aléas/Charles Elias Chartouni/April 20/2021
Syria between two sieges/Farouk Yousef/The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
The GCC and Greece are natural partners/Dr. Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg/Arab News/April 20/2021
Op-ed by Guterres: “Climate action for people and planet : The Time is now”/NNA/April 20/2021
Turkey needs friends with Egypt top of its list/Rami Rayess/Al Arabiya/20 April ,2021
 

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on April 20-21/2021

Ministry of Health: 1608 new infection cases, 36 deaths
NNA/April 20/2021
The Ministry of Public Health announced 1608 new coronavirus infection cases, which raises the cumulative number of confirmed cases to 513006.
36 deaths have been recorded over the past 24 hours.

Aoun meets Episcopal Committee for Christian-Islamic Dialogue, Archbishop Abdel Sater
NNA/April 20/2021 
President Michel Aoun received head of the Episcopal Committee for Christian-Muslim Dialogue in Lebanon, Patriarchal Deputy General of the Syriac Catholics in Beirut, Archbishop Mar Matthias Charles Murad, on the head of a delegation on a protocol visit after Archbishop Murad’s assumption, by election, of the presidency of the Committee. The visiting delegation included President of the Antonine Order and Vice President of the Committee, Abbot Maroun Abou Jaoudeh, President of the Antonine School in North Lebanon, Father Beshara Elia Al-Antouni, Commission Representative in North Lebanon, Mr. Joseph Mahfouz, Mrs. Desira Irani, Lea Maamari and Mr. Elie Serghani.
Bishop Murad:
Archbishop Murad thanked the President for receiving the delegation, and pointed out that the visit is protocol-based to the committee emanating from the Council of Catholic Patriarchs and Bishops in Lebanon, whose aim is to build connection bridges between Christianity and Islam. Murad also stressed that the Committee puts itself at Lebanon’s disposal to conduct dialogue in these delicate circumstances which the country passes through. “The Committee continuously seeks to meet and achieve acquaintance and study in various cases, especially those which have differences in personal status laws” bishop Murad stated.
Abbot Abou Jaoudeh:
Afterwards, Abbot Abou Jaoudeh said “What encourages us for dialogue, is our work as Christians and the role of the Holy Spirit in our lives, as well as the message of His Holiness, Pope Francis, last year “We are all brothers”.
Abou Jaoudeh also stressed that a homeland is for every human being and no one should be deprived of it. “Lebanon is the country of civilizations, encounter, coexistence and authenticity. We want to live together, despite all differences, in dignity and mutual respect” Abbot Abou Jaoudeh said. Addressing President Aoun, Abbot Abou Jaoudeh said “The Lebanese need the father, and the President, and that is what you represent to Lebanon. Just as the father needs to listen to his children, the children also need to listen. We want Lebanon to be a nation with order for all, in which human beings should be special in it”.
President Aoun:
For his part, the President welcomed the delegation, and indicated that “What prevents the Lebanese from real coexistence is the absence of a unified personal status law, since without changing the current situation the Lebanese will remain groups and the required interaction will not occur”. “The fundamental change must take place particularly in this regard” President Aoun added and pointed to the continuing divergence of views in the application of several issues, especially in what is related to women. In addition, the President addressed recent judicial developments and yesterday’s demonstrations, and stressed the right of peaceful protest as a free expression away from the logic of sectarianism.
Finally, President Aoun addressed the delegation saying “The state must preserve justice for all. As for you, you must bring everyone closer to the other”.
Bishop Abdel Sater:
The President met Maronite Archbishop of Beirut, Paul Abdel Sater, and deliberated with him current social and life affairs.
The increasing needs of citizens, after the August 4th Beirut Port explosion, was also tackled.-- Presidency Press Office
 

Aoun Says 'State Must Preserve Justice for All' after Judicial Storm
Naharnet/April 20/2021
President Michel Aoun on Tuesday commented in a brief manner on the latest judicial developments in the country and the protests that accompanied them. Emphasizing on demonstrators’ “right to peaceful assembly as a free expression,” the president called on them to shun “the sectarian and confessional approach.” He also underlined that “the state must preserve justice for everyone.” State Prosecutor Ghassan Oueidat had recently removed Mount Lebanon Prosecutor Judge Ghada Aoun from an investigation into possible currency export violations. But the judge, who is believed to be close to the president, defied Oueidat’s decision and carried out two raids on the Mecattaf money exchange houses in Awkar over the weekend, accompanied by security forces. The judge was also accompanied by supporters and activists of the Free Patriotic Movement and others from the October 17 uprising. According to the company, they tried to enter the offices by force. In response, caretaker Justice Minister Marie-Claude Najm held an emergency meeting on Saturday in the presence of Oueidat, head of the High Judicial Council Judge Suhail Abboud and Judicial Inspection Authority head Judge Borkan Saad. Najem voiced anger at the incident, saying what happened indicates the “failure of the state’s institutions.” Judge Aoun had been previously accused of overstepping her position’s limits. There are several complaints against her before the Judicial Inspection Authority.

Diab concludes visit to Qatar: State of Qatar demonstrated firm stance aiming at supporting Lebanon
NNA/April 20/2021 
This is a special day in the generous Doha that has always opened its heart to the Lebanese and has never given up on Lebanon. We have deliberated with His Highness the Emir, His Excellency the Prime Minister, and Qatari officials on Arab affairs and the consequences of the absence of Arab solidarity on the Lebanese crisis. We have asserted the need for Arabs to move back into fraternity, for the region is undergoing a painful situation that requires the highest degree of coordination among brothers, with dangerous repercussions for Arab countries in particular, and which threaten our present and our future. Unfortunately, Lebanon is going through a difficult phase, lacks a unified Arab effort and a unifying role that brings Lebanese people together, urges them to achieve mutual understanding, and blocks the way to exploit their differences.
Indeed, we found in sisterly Qatar what we were looking for, as our meetings were held within a framework of unsurprising fraternity, and the State of Qatar demonstrated its firm stance aiming at supporting Lebanon and its people, and preserving Lebanon’s security and stability.—PM Press Office

Diab Urges Qatar to Rescue Nation Facing 'Total Collapse'
Agence France Presse/April 20/2021
Caretaker Prime Minister Hassan Diab called for Qatar's help during a visit to the Gulf country on Monday as Lebanon sinks deeper into economic ruin. Diab met with Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani in the evening. He also attended an iftar banquet thrown by Qatari PM Sheikh Khaled bin Abdul Aziz Al-Thani. Diab earlier with several prominent Qatari ministers and officials during the trip which Lebanese media has suggested has been mired in "secrecy." "Lebanon has reached the brink of total collapse, as a result of decades of corruption and policies that have encouraged a rentier economy at the expense of a productive economy," Diab told local media. "We knock on (Qatar's) door just as we will knock on the doors of other sister Arab countries and wait for it to open its doors for us, as did sister Qatar."Despite public outrage and international pressure to form a government so as to enact reforms needed to unlock aid pledges, wrangling over cabinet posts persists eight months after Diab's government resigned. It followed a devastating explosion at the Beirut port in August, widely blamed on official negligence. The massive portside explosion killed more than 200 people, levelling the waterfront and damaging countless buildings. A steep depreciation of the Lebanese pound along with an explosion of poverty and unemployment have eroded purchasing power and fueled anger among the population. Diab did not give any details of what aid had been requested or what would be forthcoming from Doha. "These details are owned by (Qatar's) Emir and prime minister, but I think that there are positives that will be announced," he said. It is not clear if Qatar would provide assistance before Lebanon announces a permanent government. Qatar indicated in February that it was ready to help kick-start Lebanon's flailing economy, but only if its deeply divided political class agreed on a new government. This week's three-day trip is Diab's first official visit since taking office, having canceled trips to Cairo and Baghdad. "Lebanon is in grave danger and it can no longer wait without a safety rope," Diab added in the Qatari capital. "We expect you to be on the side of this country -- Lebanon hopes that you will be a safety net to protect your Lebanese brothers." Lebanese daily An-Nahar said in an editorial ahead of the trip that "the caretaker PM surrounds the visit with secrecy."

Justice Parliamentary Committee Urges Govt. to Amend Decree 6433
Naharnet/April 20/2021
The Justice and Administration Parliamentary Committee “holds the resigned government fully responsible to convene immediately and take a decision amending Decree 6433 under penalty of constitutional accountability for dereliction of national duty,” the head of the committee, MP Georges Adwan, said on Tuesday. “We urgently call on it to do so before it’s too late and within the required deadlines, and to take all measures to inform the U.N. of Lebanon’s stance and its modifications,” Adwan added, following a meeting for the committee. The changes are “documented and verified according to science and law,” the lawmaker went on to say. The amendment of the decree would expand Lebanon’s maritime border area that is disputed with Israel by 1,430 square kilometers. Israel’s energy minister has described Lebanon’s moves as unilateral and warned that Israel would take counter-measures.

Strong Lebanon Bloc Says Hariri 'Has No Intention to Form Govt.'
Naharnet/April 20/2021  
The Strong Lebanon parliamentary bloc on Tuesday charged that Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri “has no intention to form a government,” as it said that any moves against Mt. Lebanon Prosecutor Judge Ghada Aoun would be a “crime against the Lebanese.” “The Lebanese are still waiting for the PM-designate to present a methodical cabinet format that clearly shows the distribution of portfolios to sects and to the nomination parties while respecting the standards of competence, specialty and nonpartisanship,” the bloc said in a statement issued after its weekly e-meeting. “Anything less would indicate that there is no decision to form a government in Lebanon, seeing as how can a government be formed in Lebanon without respecting the aforementioned methodology?” the bloc added. “The continued distribution of excuses about the ‘guaranteeing one-third’ and about specialists -- which are things on which there is no dispute – is only aimed at diverting attention… and this also confirms that there is no intention for form a government,” the bloc went on to say. As for the controversy over Judge Ghada Aoun’s raids on the offices of the Mecattaf money exchange firm, the bloc said preventing the judge from continuing her investigations is tantamount to “a crime against the Lebanese.”“It raises questions about the reason behind this political, judicial, media, financial and security campaign against a judge who is performing her duties,” Strong Lebanon added.

Higher Judicial Council Refers Ghada Aoun to Judicial Inspection
Naharnet/April 20/2021  
The Higher Judicial Council on Tuesday asked the Judicial Inspection Board to look into Mt. Lebanon Prosecutor Judge Ghada Aoun’s latest actions while asking her to abide by the state prosecutor’s decisions. “What is happening is not between those who want to combat corruption and penalize corrupts and those who do not want that or are preventing it,” the Council said in a statement after hearing Aoun’s testimony during a session at the Justice Palace. “What is happening is not a conflict between the state prosecutor and the Mt. Lebanon attorney general, and certainly it is not a political conflict between two movements as some are depicting it,” the Council added, while noting that the issue is “not recent nor the result of a certain file.”The Council added that the Inspection Board will question Aoun over “her breach of the obligation of reticence, her failure to honor her repeated pledges before the Council, her refrainment from appearing before the public prosecution, and her stances and behavior after the state prosecutor issued a decision redistributing tasks at the Mt. Lebanon prosecution.”The Council also reassured that any probe in any judicial file will be continued until the end by the relevant judicial authorities regardless of the identity of the judge in charge and regardless of any non-judicial considerations, urging all judges to “always honor their oaths” and to “respect the rule of law.” State Prosecutor Gahssan Oueidat had recently removed Aoun from investigations into suspected violations by the Mecattaf money exchange company. Accompanied by State Security agents, Aoun had carried out two raids on the company’s offices in Awkar last week, defying Oueidat’s decision.

Lebanon's Crisis-Hit Farmers Turn to Growing Hashish
Agence France Presse/April 20/2021
For three decades Abu Ali planted potatoes to provide for his family, but Lebanon's economic crisis has driven up production costs and forced him to swap the crop for cannabis. "It's not for the love of hashish," the 57-year-old told AFP in the eastern Baalbek region, the heart of Lebanon's illicit cannabis industry. "It's just less expensive than other crops... and allows you to live with dignity." Lebanon is in the throes of a spiraling economic crisis compounded by the coronavirus pandemic. As the value of the local currency plunges on the black market, the cost of imported fuel, seeds, fertilizers and pesticides priced in dollars has skyrocketed. More and more small farmers, who were already in dire straits before the crisis, are deciding to grow cannabis instead. "With agriculture, we were always losers," said Abu Ali, who asked to use a pseudonym over security concerns. After decades of neglect by the state, many of Abu Ali's colleagues are now indebted to banks or loan sharks and have had to sell land or property to settle dues. To avoid the same fate, Abu Ali in 2019 started cultivating hashish, or cannabis resin, which costs four times less to produce than potatoes or green beans. It also requires less water and fertilizer, while strong market demand means he can rake in a stable income for the first time in years."When we planted vegetables we couldn't even buy fuel for heating," Abu Ali said.
'Not high life'
He has dedicated two hectares (five acres) of land to hashish cultivation -- enough to produce around 100 kilograms (220 pounds) every harvest. One kilogram sells for an average of two million Lebanese pounds ($160 dollars at the black market rate), but its price could reach up to five million pounds depending on quality. "I'm not living the high life, but... I can feed and support my family," Abu Ali said. Hashish production was once limited to a few villages in the Baalbek, including Yammouneh, but its deputy mayor Hussein Shreif said it is now gaining traction across the whole region. "Many farmers have given up on growing their usual produce because of losses," he said. Cannabis, on the other hand, "costs less to produce and rakes in a profit irrespective of how much it's sold for."Lebanon is the world's fourth biggest hashish producer behind Morocco, Afghanistan and Pakistan, the United Nations said in a 2020 report. At least 40,000 hectares of land are planted with cannabis, the U.N. says, even though its sale and consumption are officially banned in Lebanon. A year ago parliament voted to legalize growing cannabis for medical use, to boost revenues for the crippled economy. However, authorities have yet to take action, even though hashish could rake in $350 million a year in revenues and up to $1 billion by the fifth year, outgoing agriculture minister Abbas Mortada told AFP. The government still needs to create a regulatory body to oversee legalization and a months-long delay in the formation of a new cabinet means it will not likely see the light anytime soon, he said. Mortada explained that he was working with international institutions and drafting plans to boost an agriculture sector that has been "neglected for decades."
'No losses' -
Agricultural production in Lebanon "declined substantially" in 2020, the U.N.'s Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) says. "It could be worse in 2021," largely because of a deeper devaluation of the pound, said FAO's Lebanon representative Maurice Saade. Over the past year, "many farmers either could not plant at all, or had to reduce their planting areas," he said. As a result, farmers are falling deeper into debt "or are using old seeds so they are getting lower yields." In partnership with the government, the FAO will be handing around 30,000 farmers a $300 voucher to help them buy supplies and agricultural equipment, he said. In the garage of a Yammouneh home, a grower who asked to be called Mohammad looked on as two workers extracted cannabis resin using a sieve. Outside, burlap bags packed with cannabis seeds lay stacked against the wall. Mohammad started growing the herb in 2018 after more than 20 years of planting potatoes. He has allotted a little more than a hectare of land to cultivating cannabis, and even receives payment in hashish from neighbors who extract water from his well. He says he has never looked back. "With potatoes, you make a profit one year and lose for three years after that," the 60-year-old said. "With hashish there are no losses.""If it weren't for growing cannabis, people wouldn't be able to eat."
 

On visit to Qatar, Diab pleads for Lebanon’s rescue
The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
DOHA – Lebanon’s caretaker Prime Minister Hassan Diab called for wealthy Qatar’s help during a visit to the Gulf country on Monday as his nation sinks deeper into economic ruin. Diab has met several prominent Qatari ministers and officials during the trip which Lebanese media has suggested has been mired in “secrecy.” “Lebanon has reached the brink of total collapse, as a result of decades of corruption and policies that have encouraged a rentier economy at the expense of a productive economy,” Diab told local media. “We knock on (Qatar’s) door just as we will knock on the doors of other sister Arab countries and wait for it to open its doors for us, as did sister Qatar.” Despite public outrage and international pressure to form a government so as to enact reforms needed to unlock aid pledges, wrangling over cabinet posts persists eight months after Diab’s government resigned. It followed a devastating explosion at the Beirut port in August, widely blamed on official negligence. The massive port-side blast killed more than 200 people, levelling the waterfront and damaging countless buildings. A steep depreciation of the Lebanese pound along with an explosion of poverty and unemployment have eroded purchasing power and fuelled anger among the population. Diab did not give any details of what aid had been requested nor what would be forthcoming from Doha. “These details are owned by (Qatar’s) Emir and prime minister, but I think that there are positives that will be announced,” he said. It is not clear if Qatar would provide assistance before Lebanon announces a permanent government. Qatar indicated in February that it was ready to help kick-start Lebanon’s flailing economy, but only if its deeply-divided political class agreed on a new government. This week’s three-day trip is Diab’s first official visit since cancelling trips to Cairo and Baghdad. “Lebanon is in grave danger and it can no longer wait without a safety rope,” Diab added in the Qatari capital. “We expect you to be on the side of this country — Lebanon hopes that you will be a safety net to protect your Lebanese brothers.” Lebanese daily An-Nahar said in an editorial ahead of the trip that “the caretaker PM surrounds the visit with secrecy.”

Jumblatt: Regional conflict seems to be intensifying in Lebanon
NNA/April 20/2021
President of the Progressive Socialist Party, Walid Jumblatt, tweeted this Tuesday: "It seems that the regional conflict is intensifying in Lebanon, which makes the local roosters fight indifferent to the reputation and sanctity of institutions. In this regard, it is imperative to fortify the army, neutralize it and support it financially and morally. The main step lies in stopping subsidies to merchants and allocate the ration cards to the citizens, before the structure should sink."

Sami Gemayel meets Longden: Elections should be held without any delay
NNA/April 20/2021
Head of the Lebanese Kateb Party, Sami Gemayel, met this Tuesday with the British embassy's Chargé d'Affaires, Martin Longden, with talks touching on the developments at the Lebanese arena and in the region. Gemayel explained to Longden, "the Kateb's vision for the next stage," stressing "the need to hold the parliamentary elections on time, without any delay," according to a statement issued by the party's media office.

Army commander meets Del Col, Amin Gemayel
NNA/April 20/2021
The Armed Forces Commander, General Joseph Aoun, received this Tuesday former President Amin Gemayel, with talks touching on the general situation in the country.He also welcomed the Commander of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, Major General Stefano Del Col, and discussed with him cooperation between the Lebanese Army and the UNIFIL.

Lebanese church patriarch wants direct talks with Hezbollah on making country ‘neutral’
Natasha Turak/CNBC/April 19/2021

البطريرك الراعي لمحطة السي أن بي سي: اطالب بحوار مباشر مع حزب الله لبحث ملف حياد لبنان

http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/98059/cnbc-lebanese-church-patriarch-wants-direct-talks-with-hezbollah-on-making-country-neutral-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a8%d8%b7%d8%b1%d9%8a%d8%b1%d9%83-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b1%d8%a7%d8%b9%d9%8a-%d9%84%d9%85%d8%ad/

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/19/lebanese-church-patriarch-wants-direct-talks-with-hezbollah-on-making-country-neutral.html

*“I assert that there has been no sincere and clear position with regards to neutrality from Hezbollah,” Patriarch Bechara Boutros Al-Rahi told CNBC’s Hadley Gamble in Beirut.
*Lebanon’s Hezbollah, which is Shiite Muslim, remains the most powerful political party and militant group in the country.
*The small Mediterranean country of 6 million has been gripped by a spiraling crisis and soaring poverty since late 2019 owing to a financial meltdown, economic mismanagement and government corruption.
Lebanese church patriarch wants direct talks with Hezbollah on making country ‘neutral’
Lebanon’s most senior Christian cleric, Patriarch Bechara Boutros Al-Rahi, called for a meeting with Iranian-backed political and paramilitary group Hezbollah as he urged neutrality in regional conflicts to save the beleaguered Middle Eastern country from further chaos.
“I assert that there has been no sincere and clear position with regards to neutrality from Hezbollah,” Al-Rahi told CNBC’s Hadley Gamble in Beirut. “And I’m waiting and I call on them to a meeting here where we talk about neutrality and all its aspects, because neutrality is in the interest of all Lebanese and first Hezbollah. Because they are Lebanese as well. So neutrality is in the interest of all.”
Lebanon’s Hezbollah, which is Shiite Muslim, remains the most powerful political party and militant group in the country. Acting as a proxy group for Iran, it is blamed by many Lebanese and foreign governments for stoking sectarian tensions and bringing violence into Lebanon.
The small Mediterranean country of 6 million has been gripped by a spiraling crisis and soaring poverty since late 2019 owing to a financial meltdown, economic mismanagement and government corruption. Its feuding sectarian leaders have failed to form a government, leaving the country without effective leadership since its last prime minister stepped down after a deadly explosion in August 2020 tore through the capital Beirut, killing hundreds and displacing thousands.
‘Today it is hell’
Many Lebanese say that the scale of the current crisis, which has seen the country’s currency lose practically all of its value, is far worse than Lebanon’s bloody civil war of 1975-1990 and that the coronavirus pandemic, which has overwhelmed its health-care system, is the least of their worries.
While opponents of Hezbollah often describe the country as held hostage by the group, they also acknowledge that confronting the heavily armed organization, which also controls Beirut’s port and airport, could result in a return to arms and renewed civil war.
And Hezbollah, whose allegiance is to Tehran rather than the Lebanese constitution, does represent a large part of Lebanon’s Shiite community.
“I haven’t heard yet directly from Hezbollah if he is against or with neutrality,” the patriarch said. “If he says ‘I’m against,’ I ask him are you against the sovereignty of Lebanon, you don’t want Lebanon to be a sovereign state on its territory? If it’s true you don’t want neutrality, you don’t want Lebanon to fulfill its role.”Lebanese politicians haven’t grasped the severity of the economic situation
“Lebanon used to be (the) Switzerland of the Middle East — today it is hell, like the president once said,” Al-Rahi said. “This is not something we can be proud of. That’s why we badly regret.”
The patriarch spoke of a “mutual defense strategy” proposed by previous presidents but that never materialized; something that would have empowered unified foreign policy actions by the Lebanese state rather than sectarian groups.
“Hezbollah shouldn’t remain free in using arms whenever and wherever he wants,” Al-Rahi said. “And shouldn’t be capable of deciding wars in Israel, in Syria, in Iraq, in Yemen, with disregard to the government, the president and the parliament. So the idea of the mutual defense strategy was raised but it wasn’t realized.”  “Hezbollah like the army or any other army in the world is not entitled to make a decision or to decide to go into war or peace, the state is the one which decides,” he added.
“But the cause of Hezbollah and the arms is much bigger than Lebanon and has to be addressed on the international level.”
Lebanon. Last week’s explosion, which killed more than 200 people and injured thousands more, is seen by many Lebanese as a deadly manifestation of government malpractice.
The patriarch added that he had met once with the group previously, but “we discussed issues that don’t have anything to do with arms, because this is something that is beyond us.”
When regional powers are at odds, Lebanon gets caught in the crosshairs. This played out in 2005, when then-Prime Minister Rafik Hariri was assassinated in a plot believed to be the work of Hezbollah and the Syrian government.
Lebanon has long been the ground where larger powers’ proxy battles for regional influence play out. It’s home to 18 different religious communities thanks to arbitrary border drawing by French generals, who established the state in 1926.
Its unique consensus government, tailored to deal with a diverse population, rests on a power-sharing structure whereby the prime minister, president and speaker of the house must come from the country’s three largest religious groups: Sunni, Maronite Christian and Shiite, respectively. Regional powers, therefore, often exert influence in the country through these various groups.
‘Iran is the source’
The patriarch described Lebanon as having asked the U.S. “not to make Lebanon a negotiating card between the U.S. and Iran when they want to settle the nuclear issue,” referring to Tehran’s controversial nuclear program.
“The issue of arms should also be addressed with Iran because Iran is the source,” he added, directly calling out Iran. “And it’s very well known that Hezbollah (is) an Iranian military force in Lebanon to combat Israel. Why should they combat Israel from Lebanon, if you want to fight Israel why do you want to use the Lebanese territory?”  Hezbollah and Israel went to war in 2006 in a 34-day conflict that saw Israeli forces launch an offensive against Lebanon in response to Hezbollah rocket attacks and the killing of Israeli soldiers. There have been back-and-forth strikes and assassinations in the years since.
“We want an international conference and also we want the Security Council to take resolutions around the arms issue and the militias that exist in Lebanon. And around the issue of Lebanon extending its sovereignty on all the Lebanese territory,” Al-Rahi said. His call for a U.N.-sponsored international conference has been slammed by Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, who previously argued it would enable foreign interference.
The issue of Lebanon’s sovereignty over its full territory, put forward at the U.N. in previous resolutions, should be addressed on a multilateral level, the patriarch stressed — “not on the internal Lebanese level.”

It's getting very lonely being Gebran Bassil
Michael Young/The National/April 20/ 2021
مايكل يونغ/ذا ناشيونال: الوحدة التي تحيط بجبران باسيل
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/98073/michael-young-the-national-its-getting-very-lonely-being-gebran-bassil-%d9%85%d8%a7%d9%8a%d9%83%d9%84-%d9%8a%d9%88%d9%86%d8%ba-%d8%b0%d8%a7-%d9%86%d8%a7%d8%b4%d9%8a%d9%88%d9%86%d8%a7%d9%84-%d8%a7/

There are several ongoing obstacles to Lebanon’s cabinet formation process, but among the more significant ones is the presidential ambition of Gebran Bassil, the head of the largest Maronite Christian party, the Free Patriotic Movement. Mr Bassil believes that if he fails to have enough ministers in the government and allows his political rivals to dominate it, he may never see the presidency.
The question is whether Mr Bassil can realistically expect to become president at all in the next election, which is in October 2022. There are really only two ways that he can hope to succeed the current president, his father in law, Michel Aoun. He either has to win a majority of votes in Parliament, or will need Hezbollah to impose him on the political class, as they did Mr Aoun in 2016.
Neither alternative seems realistic at present. Mr Bassil is far from enjoying majority support in parliament, so effective has he been in alienating a wide cross-section of the political class. As for Hezbollah, while the party may have been willing to block political life for two years to force Mr Aoun into office, Mr Bassil does not seem to enjoy the same backing. Moreover, with Lebanon collapsing financially, Hezbollah would be taking a major risk in trying that again.
Mr Bassil’s situation has not been helped by the fact that the US sanctioned him in November for his alleged corruption. Last week, the impact of this was made clear to him when a senior US official, undersecretary of state David Hale, visited Beirut and saw virtually everyone except Mr Bassil.
Just before that, the president’s son in law had received another blow, when an invitation to France to help resolve the government deadlock was cancelled because the prime minister designate, Saad Hariri, refused to see him there. Mr Bassil had hoped that a meeting with President Emmanuel Macron would win him French assistance to help resolve his sanctions problem. Instead, with a cabinet nowhere in sight, France may soon sanction him, too, for his obstructionism.
A Mr Bassil under international sanctions may not bother Hezbollah, as it would only make him more dependent on the party, but it also makes him far less acceptable as a presidential candidate domestically and internationally. Mr Bassil knows very well that without US, Arab and international approval, his chances of getting anything done were he to take office would be nil.
So what are his calculations as he continues to hold up a new government? Mr Bassil believes, perhaps rightly, that unless he has the latitude to block government decisions and even bring the government down, the majority will try to marginalise his cabinet appointees. Yet it is also clear that his efforts and those of Mr Aoun to control over a third of ministers, which would give him such leverage, are rejected by all the other political forces expected to name ministers.
Most interestingly, Mr Bassil’s staunchest rival, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, appears to have gained some leverage over Hezbollah lately. After Hezbollah’s Secretary General, Hassan Nasrallah, advised Mr Hariri a few weeks ago to form a government of “specialists” and political figures, Mr Berri and his Amal Movement put out a statement saying the contrary: that the government should be made up solely of specialists, in line with Mr Hariri’s initial intentions.
There was an interesting message in that public disagreement. Mr Berri’s supporters in the Shiite community have been hard hit by the economic crisis, as many work in the public sector. Tensions have grown between them and Hezbollah, many of whose partisans either earn in US dollars or have relatives who do. To avoid conflict, Hezbollah has given Mr Berri some leeway, which he has used to undermine Mr Bassil, who also prefers a more political cabinet.
With the influential Mr Berri on the ascendant, Mr Bassil is exposed. Moreover, his presidential prospects are tied also to Syria’s calculations. It is likely that president Bashar Al Assad would much prefer Suleiman Franjieh, a Member of Parliament, to succeed Mr Aoun rather than Mr Bassil. The reason is that, at a time when Arab states seem keen to normalise relations with Damascus, Mr Al Assad would welcome a close ally in Beirut who can help consolidate his position, particularly on the economic front.
Neither Hezbollah nor Iran can ignore Mr Al Assad’s wishes, all the more so as they both have an interest in strengthening his unsteady regime. That makes Mr Bassil’s approach of exasperating everyone and holding up a government at a time of national emergency short-sighted. He is no more corrupt than his counterparts, perhaps, but unless he engages in a major tactical reversal to try and build favourable coalitions for himself, he will likely remain unelectable.
Meanwhile, the Lebanese are nearing the point where subsidies will be lifted to save dwindling foreign currency reserves. That means they may no longer be able to feed themselves adequately in the comings months as prices explode. That Mr Bassil and other politicians are bickering at such a time is not only disgraceful, but criminal. Mr Bassil is holding the country up for a hope that may remain unfulfilled.
*Michael Young is a senior editor at the Carnegie Middle East Centre in Beirut and a Lebanon columnist for The National
 

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on April 20-21/2021

Syrian Business Tycoon Firas Tlass: Iran, Hizbullah Have Complete Control Over Certain Areas, Military Facilities In Syria – Bashar Al-Assad Doesn't Know What Goes On There
MEMRI/April 20/2021
The following is a complimentary offering from the MEMRI Iran Threat Monitor Project (ITMP). For more information, write to memri@memri.org with "ITMP Subscription" in the subject line.
Syrian business tycoon Firas Tlass said that certain areas in Syria are completely under Iranian or Hizbullah control, and that President Bashar Al-Assad does not know what is happening in those areas. He made these remarks on Al-Arabiya Network (Saudi Arabia) in an interview that aired on March 24, 2021 and on March 25, 2021. Tlass said that the areas controlled by Iran are used to bring in weapons and supplies to Hizbullah, as part of food and equipment shipments to Iranian militias active in Syria. Tlass also said that weapons and advanced missiles parts are hidden in vegetable trucks and then transferred into Hizbullah-controlled territories in southern Syria and Lebanon. He said that Iran now has complete control over the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Center, charged with creating biological and chemical weapons. Firas Tlass is the son of former Syrian Minister of Defense Mustafa Tlass.
"The Area Between Al-Qusayr And The Syria-Lebanon Border Is Under The Complete Control Of Hizbullah; Hama Airport Is Under Complete Iranian Control"
Firas Tlass: "There are areas in Syria that are controlled by Iranian officers. Al-Assad does not know and does not want to know [what goes on there]. There are some areas in the desert... The area between Al-Qusayr and the Syria-Lebanon border is under the complete control of Hizbullah.
"Hama airport is under complete Iranian control.
Planes From Iran Land In Hama Airport; "Vegetable Trucks Loaded With Weapons And Advanced Missile Parts... Reach Hizbullah, Be It In Lebanon Or In Syria"
"Planes from Iran land there. It is a small military airport. Apparently, they bring food and equipment to the Iranian militias. The planes stop at the end of the airport. The Syrians in Hama even know the exact spot where the planes stop. The weapons are transported in fruit and vegetable refrigerators.
"From the end of the tarmac the weapons are transported on to a dirt road that was prepared especially for this purpose.
"The shipment reaches the Masyaf road and from there, to Tartous, and then directly to Lebanon on the highway. If [these shipments] are known, they can be tracked by satellite, but if they do not know, they cannot. Two hundred trucks pass there every day, and they cannot detect five vegetable trucks loaded with weapons and advanced missile parts, and the [shipments] reach Hizbullah, be it in Lebanon or in Syria, because Hizbullah is now present on the ground in southern Syria. Its missile units are present on the ground in southern Syria.
"The IRGC has large offices at Damascus airport, and they know about everything that is going on there.
"Bashar Al-Assad Does Not Know What Goes On In The Jamraya [Research Center]" Where Chemical Weapons, Anthrax, And Missiles Are Developed; "Iran Is There And Is Involved With Everything"
"Bashar Al-Assad does not know what goes on in the Jamraya [research center], even though he visited the research enter before he became president.
"This research center is a significant component of the Syrian regime, because of the chemical weapons, the anthrax, and missile development.
"When Hafez Al-Assad established this research center, he was striving for a balance of terror with Israel. The research center was developing these [chemical weapons]. They did a brilliant job, I'm sad to say. The brightest Syrian scientists... They all got their training in France and in the West. There was cooperation with Germany and North Korea. Iran entered the fray only lately. The Syrian Scientific Studies Research Center..."
Interviewer: "Has Iran made its way into that research center?" Tlass: "Yes, Iran is there and is involved with everything. It wasn't so in the past. There was no Iranian involvement there before 2014-2015. "In my opinion, the Iranians took over the research center so that the Russians would not take it over instead – particularly following the joke of 'handling over the chemical weapons.' Of course only a small part of the chemical weapons was handed over, and the rest was redistributed among many depots. "Of course the Syrian chemical weapons program is operational once again, the laboratories are operational again..."

Syria faces sanctions at chemical weapons watchdog
The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
THE HAGUE--The world’s chemical weapons watchdog will decide this week whether to impose unprecedented sanctions on Syria for its alleged use of toxic arms and failure to declare its arsenal. Member states of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) will weigh a French proposal to suspend Syria’s “rights and privileges” at the body, including its ability to vote. Damascus is accused of failing to answer key questions after an OPCW probe last year found Syria attacked a rebel-held village with the nerve agent sarin and the toxic chemical chlorine in 2017.
“Syria’s refusal to faithfully deliver the requested information cannot and must not remain unanswered,” the European Union said in a joint statement to the United Nations last week. “It is now up to the international community to take appropriate action.”If approved by the meeting of the OPCW’s 193 member states at its headquarters in The Hague, it would be the first time the watchdog has used its maximum available punishment. The three-day meeting opens on Tuesday and diplomatic sources told AFP that the vote is expected on Wednesday or Thursday. Syria has rejected all the allegations and said the attacks were staged. Damascus and its ally Moscow have accused Western powers of using the OPCW for a “politicised” campaign against them.
Syria ‘to be held accountable’
Syria agreed in 2013 to join the OPCW and give up all chemical weapons, following a suspected sarin attack that killed 1,400 people in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta. But an OPCW investigation found in April last year that the Syrian air force was responsible for sarin and chlorine bombings on the village of Lataminah in 2017. Damascus then failed to comply with a 90-day deadline by the OPCW’s governing body to declare the weapons used in the attacks and reveal its remaining stocks. France in response submitted a motion backed by 46 countries calling for the regulator to freeze Syria’s rights at the watchdog. Pressure mounted on Syria last week after a second investigation released by the OPCW found that it had also carried out a chlorine bomb attack on the rebel-held town of Saraqib in 2018. World powers sparred at the United Nations last week over the issue. “I say this with gravity, it is time for the Syrian regime to be held accountable,” Nicolas de Riviere, the French ambassador to the UN, told the world body last week.“I call on all states parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention to support this draft decision.”
Unanswered questions
According to the United Nations, Damascus has for years not replied to a series of 19 questions about its weapons installations, which could have been used to stock or produce chemical weapons. The UN has also accused the regime of President Bashar al-Assad of carrying out chemical attacks against its own citizens in the past. Russia and Syria have however criticised the OPCW’s decision in 2018 to grant itself new powers to identify the perpetrators for attacks — as it did with the reports into the attacks in Lataminah and Saraqib. Previously the watchdog could only confirm whether or not chemical weapons were used, but not say by whom. Russia itself however also faces pressure at the OPCW over last year’s Novichok nerve agent poisoning of opposition figure Alexei Navalny. The OPCW has also been a backdrop for growing tensions between Russia and the West, with the Netherlands in 2018 expelling four alleged Russian spies whom it accused of trying to hack the watchdog’s computers. The organisation won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2013 for its work in destroying the world’s stocks of chemical weapons.

Scores of extremists reported killed in Russian strikes in Syria
The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
MOSCOW— The Russian military said Monday that its airstrikes killed about 200 extremists in eastern Syria. Rear Admiral Alexander Karpov, the head of the Russian military’s Reconciliation Centre in Syria, said Russian warplanes hit two extremist hideouts northeast of Palmyra. Karpov said in a statement carried by Russian news agencies that the air raid killed some 200 militants and destroyed 24 vehicles and about 500 kilogrammes of ammunition and explosives. He said the extremists’ base had served as a staging ground for terror attacks across Syria.
Russia has waged a military campaign in Syria since 2015, helping President Bashar al-Assad’s government retake control over most of the country after a devastating ten-year conflict. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported the airstrikes, saying they preceded a sweep by Russian troops and the Syrian Fifth Corps in search of Islamic State (ISIS) extremists cells in the Homs desert. The Observatory said 26 ISIS militants were killed. The Observatory speculated that the raid might have been in response to the Islamic State group’s claims that it had killed two Russian soldiers in the desert. The ground operation began Monday under the heavy air cover from Russian military helicopters.
 

Russia, Iran seek to bolster Assad with supplies ahead of presidential election
The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
Two unknown candidates are running for the presidential election in Syria.
DAMASCUS - New Russian-Iranian cooperation to secure significant oil and wheat supplies for Syria, in addition to other basic items, in the areas controlled by the regime are meant to bolster Bashar al-Assad ahead of the next presidential election now scheduled for next month.
Syrian opposition sources say that Russian warships have offered protection to Iranian ships bringing supplies to government-controlled areas in an attempt by Moscow to bolster Assad’s standing before the election, especially in the light of mounting concerns that the population would heed the calls for a voting boycott. Since the beginning of the year, Syrian activists have launched a campaign on social media, calling for a boycott of the election. Their call drew considerable attention among Syrians at home. The sources believe that the regime and its Russian and Iranian allies, are counting on the forthcoming electoral contest to ensure the continued political tenure of Assad. But wary that that the success of the boycott campaign could deal a severe blow to such efforts, they have moved to absorb popular discontent and try to convince Syrian citizens that the economic situation in their country is improving.
The sources note that among recent appeasement moves were the measures taken by the Central Bank of Syria to reduce the rate of inflation and curtail the fall of the pound against the dollar, although such steps do not appear to be more than temporary palliatives. Russian media recently revealed the existence of a Russian-Iranian-Syrian agreement to establish a joint operations room that would secure a stable flow of oil supplies, wheat and other materials to Syrian ports. The Russian Sputnik news agency reported that intensive meetings were held recently with the participation of representatives from all three countries with the aim of overcoming the effect of the US-European embargo imposed on Syria.
It pointed out that the established procedure provides for Russian warships to escort Iranian oil tankers coming to Syria as soon as they enter the Suez Canal and until they reach Syrian territorial waters. Western sanctions, which intensified with the 2019 imposition of the US Caesar Civil Protection Act, have led to the virtual economic paralysis of the Syrian regime. Observers do believe that the crisis is not only due to the sanctions but also to the attrition suffered by the regime as a result of the war as well as the repercussions of the financial crisis in Lebanon, which caused the freezing of the funds of hundreds of Syrian depositors in Lebanese banks. The Russian news agency quoted sources as saying that the supply of oil will continue during the coming period as Iranian ships are grouped at sea and escorted to Syria by the Russian naval fleet in the Mediterranean.
It explained that the new procedure has, during the past few days, allowed safe access to Syria of four Iranian tankers carrying crude oil and natural gas which were escorted by Russian warships. The sources stated that the recent tripartite coordination resulted in strategic understandings that would secure most of the needs of the Syrian market in basic commodities, adding that the benefits of this system will further materialise in the next few days.
While Assad has not yet announced his candidacy for the forthcoming presidential election, observers believe that this issue is almost settled, and that it is likely that he will unveil his bid this week. On Monday, the Supreme Constitutional Court began receiving applications from presidential candidates a day after the People’s Assembly set May 26 as the date of the next vote. To be able to officially file his or her application, each candidate must receive the support of at least 35 out of the 250 members of the People’s Assembly (parliament), where the ruling Baath Party enjoys an overwhelming majority. The official Syrian news agency SANA said that the office of the speaker of the People’s Assembly was informed by the Supreme Constitutional Court that two citizens have so far filed their candidacy for the office of president. The two candidates are not widely known. One is a former member of the People’s Assembly and the other had submitted his candidacy to the last presidential election in 2014.
According to the Syrian constitution, the Supreme Constitutional Court will continue to receive applications for a period of ten days, starting from Monday and ending April 28. One of the conditions for running for president is that the candidate must have resided in Syria continuously during the past ten years. This condition would close the door for any chance of running to any opposition figure residing outside the country. Presidential elections are held once every seven years. The upcoming election Is the second since the start of the conflict in 2011. The voting will come after government forces, with Russian and Iranian military support, regained control of large areas of the country. Some parts of Syria remain however under the control of different local factions backed by external forces and will not be included in the election. The head of the Syrian opposition coalition, Nasr al-Hariri, said Monday that “for us, these elections are a charade that basically reflects the continuation by the regime of its plans since the beginning of the current situation in Syria.” He added that these plans are carried out “by pursuit of the military solution and performance of an electoral farce that has no legal and political value, nor is there any legitimacy for this system or its elections.” For his part, the head of the Syrian Interim Government, Abd al-Rahman Mustafa, wondered, “What elections are the regime and its allies talking about as half of the people are displaced in several countries of the diaspora and in camps, and the other half live under the yoke of the regime’s rule and are suffering from hunger and poverty?” Mustafa added, “No two people disagree that the clear goal of this farce is to revive the rule Assad, who has been living in isolation for ten years, in disregard of the suffering of the people.”​​Assad won the last election, which took place in June 2014, with more than 88% of the vote. At the time, he was also challenged by two unknown candidates.

‘Progress’ seen in Iran talks but resolution still far away
The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
BERLIN--High-level talks in Vienna aimed at bringing the United States back into the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran are moving ahead with experts working on drafting proposals this week, but a solution remains “far away,” Russia’s delegate said Monday. The US unilaterally left the agreement, which promises Iran economic incentives in return for curbs on its nuclear programme, in 2018 under then President Donald Trump, who said it needed to be renegotiated and imposed crippling sanctions. In response, Iran has steadily been violating the restrictions set by the deal, by enriching uranium far past the purity allowed and stockpiling vastly larger quantities, in a thus-far unsuccessful effort to force the other countries involved to provide economic relief that would offset the American sanctions. Iran’s clerical establishment has said it will not return to strict observance of the 2015 agreement unless all sanctions reimposed or added by former President Donald Trump are rescinded first. US President Joe Biden wants to return Washington to the deal and Iran has been negotiating with the five remaining powers — Germany, France, Britain, China and Russia — for the past two weeks on how that might take place. Diplomats from the world powers have been shuttling between the Iranian delegation and an American team, which is also in Vienna but not talking directly with the Iranian side.
Two expert groups have been brainstorming solutions to the two major issues: the rollback of American sanctions on one hand and Iran’s return to compliance on the other. Now, said Russian representative Mikhail Ulyanov, “we can note with satisfaction that the negotiations (are) entering the drafting stage.”
“Practical solutions are still far away, but we have moved from general words to agreeing on specific steps towards the goal,” he wrote on Twitter. From the perception of the E3, the three western European countries involved in the talks, there is “progress and the will to move forward” in Vienna, German foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Adebahr said. “Overall, we may be, and hopefully are on a path of rapprochement,” she told reporters in Berlin. “But there are still many, many open questions.”Already on Saturday, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said that Tehran had proposed draft agreements that could be a basis for negotiations. “We think that the talks have reached a stage where parties are able to begin to work on a joint draft,” Araghchi told Iranian state television. “It seems that a new understanding is taking shape and now there is agreement over final goals.””The path is better known, but it will not be easy path,” Araghchi added. “It does not mean that differences of views have come to the end.”Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, told Fox News Sunday that the Vienna talks had been “constructive,” but he wouldn’t give specific details on the proposals. “What I will say is that the United States is not going to lift sanctions unless we have clarity and confidence that Iran will fully return to compliance with its obligations under the deal,” he said. Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh was quoted by the country’s official IRNA news agency Monday as saying that there was “some progress in the talks, but it doesn’t mean the resolution of differences.”“We think the US administration knows better than anyone that Iran’s actions are within the framework of the nuclear deal and they will be halted when the US lifts sanctions and we can verify that,” he said. The ultimate goal of the deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, is to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb, something it insists it doesn’t want to do. Iran now has enough enriched uranium to make a bomb. Challenges also remain outside of the negotiations. An attack suspected to have been carried out by Israel recently struck Iran’s Natanz nuclear site, causing an unknown amount of damage. Tehran retaliated by beginning to enrich a small amount of uranium up to 60% purity, its highest level ever. Inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency could also be disrupted without an agreement. The IAEA, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, has also been trying for months to get what it considers a credible explanation from Iran about the discovery of uranium particles at three former undeclared sites in the country. In March, Iran had agreed to host IAEA technical experts for talks on the issue, but instead those discussions started Monday in Vienna, since the Iranian experts were already on hand for the ongoing JCPOA negotiations, the IAEA said. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi has been pushing Iran for answers on the three sites where inspections had revealed traces of uranium of human-made origin, suggesting they were once connected to Iran’s nuclear programme. After Iran agreed to have its technical experts talk with those at the IAEA, Grossi said he hoped to “come to some satisfactory outcome” by the next IAEA board meeting in June.

Syria Names New Central Bank Chief
Agence France Presse/April 20/2021
President Bashar al-Assad appointed a new central bank chief on Tuesday, a week after the former governor was sacked amid Syria's spiraling economic crisis. "President Assad issues decree Number 126 for the year 2021 which appoints Mohammad Issam Hazimeh as the new governor of Syria's central bank," the presidency said in a statement. A lawyer by training, Hazimeh has served as deputy central bank governor since 2018, according to pro-government daily Al-Watan. It said he earlier held posts at the justice ministry, the Damascus Securities Exchange and the state-owned company responsible for online payments. He replaces Hazem Karfoul who was dismissed in a decree last Tuesday after three years in the post. Karfoul oversaw an accelerating economic crisis sparked by civil war and compounded by sanctions, the coronavirus pandemic and a financial crunch in neighboring Lebanon. Al-Watan last week said he was fired because of his "shortcomings" in dealing with the crisis. "He lacked the courage and responsibility to take technical measures to curb" the devaluation of the Syrian pound, it said, citing sources. Hazimeh will inherit the daunting task of stabilizing the local currency which has lost more than 98 percent of its value against the dollar on the black market. Officially valued at 1,256 to the greenback, the dollar now costs nearly 3,000 pounds on the black market. The government last month started enforcing a series of measures to stem a further drop in the pound's value.
They include new import bans and a state crackdown on unofficial money exchangers, Al-Watan said.
 

Gabi Ashkenazi: 'Iran undermining stability in entire Middle East'
Arutz Sheva/April 20 April/2021
Israeli FM Gabi Ashkenazi meets British Min. for Cabinet Office Michael Gove to speak about coronavirus management and the Iranian threat, Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi (Blue and White) on Tuesday morning met with British Minister for the Cabinet Office Michael Gove, who is also responsible for the UK government response to coronavirus. The meeting took place at the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem, during Gove's short working visit to Israel. During the meeting, the ministers discussed cooperation between the United Kingdom and Israel in the fight against coronavirus and the possibility of creating a "green travel corridor" between the countries, in light of the great progress made in Israel and the United Kingdom in their respective vaccination campaigns. The ministers also discussed bilateral and regional issues, with the main issue being Iran's malicious activity. Foreign Minister Ashkenazi asked Minister Gove to convey Israel's appreciation of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson's clear statement expressing his unequivocal opposition to the International Criminal Court's decision to open an investigation against Israel. "The fight against coronavirus is a challenge facing the entire world," Ashkenazi said. "After addressing the medical and health challenges, we must find ways to get the economy back on track as quickly as possible.""We will promote, together with the UK, mutual recognition of vaccines in order to allow tourists and business people from both countries to safely return to their routines." He added: "Iran is undermining stability in the entire Middle East and the international community must act to prevent Iran from achieving nuclear weapons capability. Not today and not in the future."

Ashkenazi: World must act to stop Iran from getting future bomb
Lahav Harkov/Jerusalem Post/April 20/2021
Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi called on world powers to ensure Iran cannot develop a nuclear weapon in the future, as indirect negotiations between Iran and the US were set to continue in Vienna on Tuesday.
“Iran is undermining the stability of the entire Middle East and the international community must act to not allow Iran to reach nuclear capabilities – not today and not in the future,” Ashkenazi said in a meeting with UK Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove, who was visiting Israel to learn about post-COVID-19 policies. The talks between the US and Iran, facilitated by the European parties to the deal – the UK, France and Germany – are meant to bring both countries back to compliance with the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which limits Iran’s ability to enrich uranium, while gradually lifting sanctions.
However, all of the JCPOA’s restrictions on uranium enrichment expire in 2030, which critics in Israel and beyond say means the agreement provides Iran a path to a nuclear weapon with an international imprimatur.
The negotiations in Vienna are for the Iran to scale back its enrichment from 60% - an unprecedented level that it reached in the last week – to the permissible 5%, as well as its other violations of the JCPOA, and for the US to lift sanctions it placed on Iran after leaving the deal in 2018.
Iran has said it will not make any concessions until all post-JCPOA sanctions are removed, while the US has said it will not lift sanctions without Iran taking serious steps towards compliance.
On Monday, Russia's Ambassador to International Organizations in Vienna Mikhail Ulyanov tweeted that the negotiators are close to drafting an agreement. "Summing up the results of 2 weeks of deliberations on JCPOA restoration we can note with satisfaction that the negotiations entered the drafting stage," Ulyanov wrote. "Practical solutions are still far away, but we have moved from general words to agreeing on specific steps towards the goal." Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh told a weekly news conference in Tehran: “We are on the right track and some progress has been made, but this does not mean that the talks in Vienna have reached the final stage.”The European Union’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, said he saw a willingness to save the 2015 deal, citing progress at the Vienna talks. “I think that both parties are really interested in reaching an agreement and they have been moving from general to more focused issues, which are clearly, on one side sanction-lifting, and on the other side, nuclear implementation issues,” he said. On Sunday, Israel’s Diplomatic-Security Cabinet held a meeting on the Iranian threat. Sources in the meeting expressed concern that the US is charging into a deal “at all costs” without addressing security concerns.US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said that the US would seek a “longer and stronger” Iran deal, with administration officials and US President Joe Biden himself mentioning possible additional elements such as limiting Iran’s ballistic missile program and its aggression across the Middle East.*Reuters contributed to this report.

Iran says 60% enrichment meant to show nuclear prowess, is reversible

Reuters/April 20/2021
"The start of 60% enrichment in Natanz was a demonstration of our technical ability," Iranian government spokesman Ali Rabiei said. Iran began enriching uranium to 60% purity in order to show its technical capacity after a sabotage attack at a nuclear plant, and the move is quickly reversible if the United States lifts sanctions, the Iranian government said on Tuesday. Talks in Vienna aimed at bringing the United States and Iran back to full compliance with a 2015 nuclear deal have been further complicated by an explosion at Iran's main uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. Iran has responded by saying it is enriching uranium to 60% fissile purity, a big step towards weapons-grade from the 20% it had previously achieved. The 2015 pact between Iran and world powers had capped the level of enrichment purity at 3.67% - suitable for generating civilian nuclear energy. Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon. "The start of 60% enrichment in Natanz was a demonstration of our technical ability to respond to terrorist sabotage at these facilities," Iranian government spokesman Ali Rabiei told reporters in Tehran. "As in previous steps (in curbing Iran's commitment to the 2015 nuclear deal), ... this measure can quickly be reversed for a return to the agreed enrichment level in the nuclear accord if other parties commit to their obligations," Rabiei said, in remarks streamed live on a state-run website.Tehran says the Natanz blast was an act of sabotage by Israel, and on Saturday Iranian authorities named a suspect. Israel has not formally commented on the incident. Iran responded to the explosion by saying it is enriching uranium to 60%.Iran and world powers have made some progress on how to revive the 2015 nuclear accord later abandoned by the United States, and an interim deal could be a way to gain time for a lasting settlement, Iranian officials said on Monday. In Jerusalem, Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi told visiting British Cabinet Office Minister Michel Gove that Iran should not be permitted to obtain a nuclear weapon."Iran is undermining stability in the entire Middle East and the international community must act to prevent Iran from achieving nuclear weapons capability. Not today and not in the future," an Israeli statement quoted Ashkenazi as saying.

Iran sees Vienna talks moving forward, warns against excessive demands
Reuters/20 April ,2021
Iran's chief negotiator said on Tuesday talks to save the 2015 nuclear accord were moving forward despite difficulties but warned Tehran would stop the negotiations if faced with "unreasonable demands" or time wasting. Iran and world powers have made headway in the Vienna talks though much more work is needed, a senior European Union official said, with meetings to resume next week after consultations in their respective capitals. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi "assessed the current trend of the talks as going forward, despite the existing difficulties and challenges," Iranian state media reported. "The Iranian delegation will stop the talks whenever the process of negotiations leads to unreasonable demands, waste of time and irrational bargaining," Araqchi was quoted as saying. "It is too early to judge the outcome or to say whether we are optimistic or pessimistic, but we think we are on the right track," Araqchi told state television. Hardline-led Iranian news agencies quoted an unnamed source as saying the United States was only planning to issue temporary waivers instead of permanently lifting sanctions, which Washington re-imposed on Tehran after withdrawing from the nuclear accord in 2018."America's intention is not to lift the sanctions completely and to be satisfied with temporary waivers on some sanctions in order to simply return to the nuclear accord so that it can use the possibility of the snapback mechanism against Iran," the Fars news agency quoted the source as saying. Under the 2015 deal, Iran agreed to curb its nuclear work in return for relief from U.S. and other sanctions. The accord includes the option of a snapback of U.N. sanctions if Iran breaches the deal, requiring Tehran to suspend all nuclear enrichment-related activities, including research development.

As he struggles to form cabinet, Netanyahu seeks direct election of PM
The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
JERUSALEM— Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is pushing for a new law to allow the direct election of the nation’s leader as a way to break the country’s two-year political deadlock. The proposal could guarantee Netanyahu another term as prime minister after he and his religious and nationalist allies failed to win a clear majority in March 23 elections. It also would allow him to stay in power while facing a lengthy corruption trial. But such a move faced a major setback after Netanyahu’s opponents wrested control of a parliamentary committee on Monday. Netanyahu has a May 4 deadline to build a governing coalition. After that, a group of small parties that oppose him hope to be able to cobble together an alternative government. “There is a solution to the political stalemate, and the vast majority of the public supports it,” Netanyahu told lawmakers from his Likud party. He said a direct vote for prime minister would avoid “assembling absurd governments” and would allow Israeli citizens to choose a leader in “snap elections, without dissolving parliament.”His opponents immediately decried the move, saying Israel does not need another election.Last month’s election was Israel’s fourth in just two years. Netanyahu was subsequently tasked by the country’s president earlier this month with building a governing coalition. He has been courting a small Islamist faction that has emerged as kingmaker and a pair of former allies who now head small rival parties. But so far he does not have a clear path to a new government.
Monday’s proposal was floated by the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, a close ally of Netanyahu’s. It calls for a one-time snap election for prime minister and the candidate who receives more than 40% of the vote would win. Netanyahu and his allies won almost half the seats in parliament, with his divided opponents taking the remainder.
The bill would require a majority of 61 members of Knesset, or parliament, to pass. Shas leader Aryeh Deri said the bill “provides a solution to a dead-end that the state of Israel is stuck in.”It remained unclear whether the bill will garner sufficient support to pass. Israel previously held three direct elections for prime minister, in 1996, 1999 and 2001. But the system was scrapped due to widespread dissatisfaction and the country reverted to its current system of elections for party lists of candidates. Opposition leader Yair Lapid wrote on Twitter that Israel “does not need another election. There were elections. They ended in the fact that for the fourth time Netanyahu doesn’t have a government.” Gideon Saar, a former Netanyahu ally-turned-rival, also opposed the bill, saying now was not the time to change the electoral system. No party has ever won an outright majority of the Knesset’s 120 seats, requiring larger factions to build sometimes unwieldy governing coalitions. In a blow to the prime minister, his opponents gained control of a powerful parliamentary committee that oversees key appointments and sets the legislative agenda until a new government is formed. With control over the Arrangements Committee, Netanyahu’s rivals will be in charge of the powerful budget and foreign affairs committees, giving them oversight over spending and security decisions. They also have raised the possibility of promoting legislation that could block Netanyahu from serving as prime minister while under indictment. In another troubling sign for Netanyahu, the Arab Islamist party Raam, which the prime minister has been courting for his coalition, supported his opponents in Monday’s vote. Netanyahu twice failed to build a governing coalition in Israel’s two 2019 elections. After the 2020 election, the longtime leader formed a unity government with his main rival in what they said was an emergency coalition to manage the coronavirus crisis. The partnership collapsed in December after months of infighting. He now seeks to hold onto power while standing trial for fraud, breach of trust and accepting bribes in three separate cases. As prime minister, Netanyahu is not legally obligated to step down from office while under indictment. He has also used his office to lead a campaign against the country’s media, law enforcement and judicial systems, claiming he is the victim of a witch hunt.

Chad President Idriss Deby killed on frontline, son to take over
The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
Deby’s 37 year old son, Mahamat Idriss Deby Itno, was named interim president.
N’DJAMENA - Chad’s President Idriss Deby, who ruled his country for more than 30 years and was an important Western ally in the fight against Islamist extremists in Africa, has been killed on the front line against rebels in the north. Deby’s 37 year old son, Mahamat Idriss Deby Itno, was named interim president by a transitional council of military officers, spokesman Azem Bermendao Agouna said in a broadcast on state television. The army also announced it had dissolved parliament but promised “free and democratic” elections after an 18-month transition period. A nightly curfew has been imposed from 6pm to 5am. Bermendao told TV viewers that the president “has just breathed his last breath defending the sovereign nation on the battlefield.” Deby, 68, came to power in a rebellion in 1990 and was one of Africa’s longest-ruling leaders, surviving numerous coup attempts and rebellions. His death was announced the day after he was declared the winner of a presidential election that would have given him a sixth term in office. Most of the opposition, which had long complained of his repressive rule, boycotted the vote. Deby, who often joined soldiers on the battlefront in his military fatigues, visited troops on the front line on Monday after rebels based across the northern frontier in Libya advanced hundreds of kilometres south toward the capital N’Djamena. “Marshal Idriss Deby Itno, as he did each time that the institutions of the republic were gravely threatened, took control of operations during the heroic combat led against the terrorist from Libya” said Bermendao, “He was wounded during the fighting and died once repatriated to N’Djamena,” adding “In the face of this worrying situation, the people of Chad must show their attachment to peace, to stability and to national cohesion.” The circumstances of Deby’s death could not immediately be independently confirmed due to the remote location of the fighting. “The National Council of Transition reassures the Chadian people that all measures have been taken to guarantee peace, security and the republican order,” Bermendao said. Deby had pushed through a new constitution in 2018 that would have allowed him to stay in power until 2033 – even as it re-instated term limits.
Deby
He took the title of Marshal last year and said before last week’s election: “I know in advance that I will win, as I have done for the last 30 years.”He was dealing with mounting public discontent over his management of Chad’s oil wealth and crackdowns on opponents.
But in the election results announced on Monday, Deby was credited with 79% of the vote, handing him a sixth term in office. Several leading opposition figures boycotted the poll. Western countries have seen Deby as an ally in the fight against Islamist extremist groups, including Boko Haram in the Lake Chad Basin and groups linked to al- Qaeda and Islamic State (ISIS) extremists in the Sahel. His death is a blow to former colonial power France, which had based its Sahel counter-terrorism operations in the Chadian capital, N’Djamena. Chad had announced in February the deployment of 1,200 troops to complement 5,100 French soldiers in the area.
Rebel losses
The rebel group Front for Change and Concord in Chad (FACT), which is based across the northern frontier with Libya, attacked a border post on election day and then advanced hundreds of kilometres south. But the Chadian military appeared to have slowed its advance about 300 km from N’Djamena. The rebels acknowledged on Monday that they suffered losses on Saturday but said they were back on the move on Sunday and Monday. Deby had joined the army in the 1970s when Chad was going through a long-running civil war. He received military training in France and returned to Chad in 1978, throwing his support behind President Hissene Habre and eventually becoming commander in chief of the armed forces. He seized power in 1990, leading a rebel army swathed in desert headgear in a three-week offensive launched from neighbouring Sudan to topple Habre, a man accused of instigating tens of thousands of political murders. FACT, a group mainly made up of the Saharan Goran people, said Sunday that it had “liberated” the Kanem region. Such claims in remote desert combat zones are difficult to verify. The group has a non-aggression pact with Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, commander of the east-based Libyan National Army. The Tibesti mountains near the Libyan frontier frequently see fighting between rebels and the army, as well as in the northeast bordering Sudan. French air strikes were needed to stop an incursion there in February 2019. In February 2008, a rebel assault reached the gates of the presidential palace before being pushed back with French backing.

Jordan’s public prosecution ends investigation into ‘recent events threatening security’
Arab News/April 20/2021
LONDON: An investigation into recent events that threatened to undermine Jordan’s security and stability has ended, the kingdom’s public prosecution said on Tuesday. Brig. Gen. Hazem Al-Majali said: “The Public Prosecution of the State Security Court has completed its investigations relating to the events that the kingdom was exposed to recently.”On April 5, Jordanian Deputy Prime Minister Ayman Safadi announced that more than a dozen individuals had been arrested on charges of undermining the security of the state. “It became clear from the investigation that it contained different and varied roles and facts for those involved, which would have constituted a clear threat to the security and stability of the kingdom,” Brig. Gen. Al-Majali added. He also said the State Security Prosecution is working on completing the final stages of the investigation and the legal procedures required to refer them to the State Security Court,” Jordanian news agency Petra reported.

Turkey wants to befriend Egypt, still opposes labeling Muslim Brotherhood terrorists
Tuqa Khalid, Al Arabiya English/20 April ,2021
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's ruling party proposed on Tuesday establishing a parliamentary friendship group with Egypt, as part of Ankara’s efforts to normalize ties with Cairo."Today we will present a motion to the parliament speaker's office to establish a friendship group between Turkey and Egypt," said Bulent Turan, the parliamentary leader of Erdogan's AKP party, the Anadolu state news agency reported.Ties between the two countries have been strained since Egypt’s army ousted Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Mursi, an ally of Erdogan, in 2013. Cairo designates the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organization. Erdogan’s Islamist-rooted AK Party supported Mursi’s short-lived Egyptian government. Many Brotherhood members and their supporters have fled to Turkey since the group's activities were banned in Egypt. Last month, Turkey said it had resumed diplomatic contacts with Egypt. However, Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on Tuesday Turkey remained opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood being declared "terrorists" by Egypt. "We are against declaring the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. It is a political movement that is trying to come to power through election," Cavusoglu told Turkish broadcaster HaberTurk.The Foreign Minister said last week Turkey will send a delegation to Egypt in early May upon an Cairo's invitation, and that he would meet his Egyptian counterpart Sameh Shoukry later.- With AFP, Reuters
 

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on April 20-21/2021

From Trump to Biden Monograph: Israel
Jonathan Schanzer and David May/FDD/April 20/2021
The Trump administration’s Israel policy notched a significant victory with the signing of the Abraham Accords, the September 2020 peace agreement between the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Israel. It was a landmark for regional stability and a wake-up call for Palestinian officials whose national project has stalled. The Palestinians now find themselves increasingly isolated in their own neighborhood. Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas began the Trump era with a May 2017 meeting at the White House, a highwater mark for the octogenarian leader. To his chagrin, the Trump administration subsequently recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in December 2017, moved the U.S. Embassy to the city in May 2018, signed a bill in August 2018 to halt economic aid to the PA until it stopped paying terrorists, and recognized Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights in March 2019. In November 2019, Secretary of State Pompeo expressed the administration’s view that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are not illegal “per se.”1 The White House also cut funding to certain Palestinian aid programs and some international organizations viewed as biased against Israel. Pundits warned that these pro-Israel moves would set the region afire, but the Arab street did not erupt in protest.2 Perhaps the only notable exception was Gaza, where Hamas continues to stoke unrest.
In January 2020, President Trump released his Israeli-Palestinian peace plan.3 The framework front-loaded benefits for Israel, such as allowing it to declare sovereignty over roughly 30 percent of the West Bank. The plan also included benefits for Palestinians, especially economic assistance. Yet to access these benefits, the Palestinians would have to put their house in order over a four-year period. If that deadline expired without meeting the Trump administration’s demands, the Israelis would have a green light to annex additional territory in the West Bank. The administration’s demands of the Palestinians included herculean efforts such as fighting corruption and reuniting Palestinian factions that have been at war since 2007. Concurrently, the Trump administration doubled down on its parallel policy of peacemaking between Israel and the Sunni Arab Gulf states. The roots of this rapprochement can be traced to the mutual fear of Iranian aggression, concerns about the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, antipathy for Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, and fear that Washington would pivot away from the region.4 The Trump administration leveraged the quiet growth of Israel-Gulf relations and pushed for a broader regional framework that ultimately matured in 2020. In October, Sudan entered into a normalization deal with Israel. Morocco followed suit in December.Early signs of normalization were apparent when Bahrain hosted the White House’s economic workshop for Palestinian prosperity in June 2019.5 In January 2020, several Arab envoys attended the unveiling of Trump’s peace plan. Others issued statements of cautious optimism.6 Meanwhile, administration officials made trips to other Arab countries to encourage normalization with Israel.
An airplane of Israel’s El Al, adorned with the word “peace” in Arabic, English, and Hebrew and flying the Emirati, America, and Israeli flags, arrives in Abu Dhabi on August 31, 2020, carrying a U.S.-Israeli delegation on the first-ever commercial flight from Israel to the United Arab Emirates.
When the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain finally normalized their ties with Israel, they presented their decision as a means of staving off Israeli annexation in the West Bank. Encouragingly, they also indicated their desire for a warm peace, unlike the cold relations that followed Israeli agreements with Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994.7 The United Arab Emirates and Bahrain emphasized their continuing support for the Palestinian cause, yet they – and perhaps a number of other countries, including Sudan and Morocco – have clearly ceased to view the Palestinian issue as a core national interest.
Israel’s military prowess, close ties with the United States, technological innovation, and other attributes have made it an attractive partner. Other Arab countries may now follow in the footsteps of the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. Forthcoming normalization deals could include Oman, Saudi Arabia, and even Qatar.
Assessment
The Trump administration, specifically Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, championed an outside-in approach to Middle East peace that prioritized peace deals with regional states over intensive negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, even if peace between the Palestinians and Israelis remained a priority. Previous administrations had attempted to create Israeli-Palestinian peace as a precursor to the normalization of Israel’s relationships in the Middle East. They failed repeatedly. The Trump team focused instead on the potential for progress elsewhere. In doing so, the United States notched significant diplomatic victories and laid the foundation for a new regional order in which the Palestinian conflict no longer dictates the course of Israeli-Arab relations.
Gulf Arab states stand to gain tremendously from Israel’s innovation, particularly in the defense and water technology sectors. Israel, meanwhile, will enjoy greater regional integration, particularly given the United Arab Emirates’ status as a commercial and transportation hub. Both sides will benefit from increased coordination to thwart Iran’s nefarious activities. The warm peace between Israel and the Gulf states could even set an example to thaw the cold Israeli-Egyptian and Israeli-Jordanian peace deals.
Of course, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict persists. The Palestinians still seek international support to pursue their strategy of intransigence, irredentism, and rejectionism. However, their leverage is eroding as acceptance of Israel becomes a regional norm. In the coming years, Abbas (or his successor) may encounter pressure from Israel’s new partners to negotiate in good faith. These new partners will likely have leverage. With a global pandemic, declining oil revenues, and numerous foreign and domestic challenges, Arab countries are already adjusting their financial support for the Palestinians. This has been reflected in an 85 percent decrease in Arab funding provided to the Palestinian Authority.8
Of course, pressure on the Palestinians may not yield fruit. Abbas (who also serves as Fatah’s chairman) is too weak to negotiate, let alone implement a deal with Israel. Abbas has ruled for a decade past the end of his allotted term as president. He refuses to name a successor despite his age and failing health. Pervasive corruption has undermined PA legitimacy. Meanwhile, the Gaza Strip is ruled by the terrorist group Hamas, which violently expelled Fatah in 2007 and is committed to Israel’s destruction. Hamas and Fatah routinely pledge unity in the cause of Palestinian statehood, yet their mutual antipathy has prevented any such deal from materializing. For sustainable peace to be achieved, the Palestinians must first get their house in order. The upside of Arab-Israel normalization is enormous, even if the Palestinians continue to refuse negotiations. Nothing short of a transformed Middle East hangs in the balance. Still, the United States must proceed cautiously. The United Arab Emirates and other countries normalizing ties with Israel have professed their desire to acquire cutting-edge American military technology previously off limits to them – the F-35 multirole aircraft is at the top of their list. However, as demonstrated by the fall of the shah in Iran in 1979 or even by the current problems with Turkey, the United States must be careful about supplying military hardware to Middle Eastern governments. Today’s friend could quickly become tomorrow’s enemy. And the United States must remain committed to Israel’s qualitative military edge.
Recommendations
Evaluate the previous administration’s policies individually and assess where successes can be amplified under new U.S. leadership. Complete reversals would stunt U.S. progress. Be open to creative thinking on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Trump’s alternative approach jolted a stagnant, decades-old peace process. The Biden administration can seize on this opportunity. Continue to encourage regional normalization and support other countries looking to benefit from both peace with Israel and upgraded ties with the United States. The White House has a tremendous opportunity to promote regional stability by uniting American allies to counter both Shiite and Sunni extremists. Assess individual countries’ needs to determine where improving their trilateral relationships with the United States and Israel could bolster regional security. This can help encourage the Palestinians to negotiate, serve as a bulwark against Iranian regional ambitions, and increase coordination among American allies. For example, the United States should: Elevate Oman’s profile with congressional visits and by sending a high-level White House delegation. The United States should also allow Oman to access International Development Finance Corporation funds for infrastructure projects, particularly in the ports of Duqm, Salalah, and Sohar. Seize on the Saudis’ waning support in Congress to encourage them to support emerging regional peace deals and make peace with Israel themselves.
Work with the Arab states that have normalized with Israel to ensure that their domestic policies, public rhetoric, and votes at the United Nations reflect these new realities. This is essential for a warm peace. Additional efforts should be made to ensure the flourishing of economic ties and cooperation across multiple fields with the countries that have already committed to peace. These efforts should serve as inducements for countries considering similar moves.
Combat the systemic anti-Israel bias that permeates the UN system. Greater scrutiny should be placed on organizations that exacerbate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, such as the UN Relief and Works Agency, which falsely inflates the number of refugees claimed by the Palestinians. Similar scrutiny should be placed on the UN Human Rights Council, which unfairly targets Israel in a disproportionate manner and ultimately undermines the stated mission of the organization. Such moves can also ultimately empower the independence of the Palestinians, which remains an important American policy objective.
Ensure that increased military support for Arab allies that make peace with Israel does not adversely affect Israel’s qualitative military edge. This is enshrined in U.S. law.
Actualize the congressional vision for a U.S.-Israel Operations-Technology Working Group.9 This will ensure that Israel’s best technology that can help the United States address specific needs is accessible to the United States earlier and in a manner that enables the United States to protect this technology from reaching the hands of adversaries. Make the restoration of aid to the PA contingent upon the PA’s commitment to U.S.-led diplomacy and halting payments to terrorists. The White House should be wary of Palestinian attempts to disguise these payments.
Prepare for a chaotic Palestinian succession. Abbas is more than a decade past the official end of his term as president. Abbas’ age, poor health, lack of legitimacy, and refusal to appoint a successor could yield a volatile succession crisis.
Notes
Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo, U.S. Department of State, “Secretary Michael R. Pompeo Remarks to the Press,” Remarks to the press, November 18, 2019. (https://www.state.gov/secretary-michael-r-pompeo-remarks-to-the-press)
Hanan Ashrawi, “Trump Is Making a Huge Mistake on Jerusalem,” The Washington Post, December 7, 2017. (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/07/opinion/trump-jerusalem-capital-palestinian.html)
The White House, “Peace to Prosperity: A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli People,” January 2020. (https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Peace-to-Prosperity-0120.pdf)
Michael Sharnoff, “Iran has driven Israel and the Gulf Arab states together,” The Washington Post, January 3, 2018. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/01/03/iran-has-driven-israel-and-the-gulf-arab-states-together)
Loveday Morris, “Kushner presents vision of a Middle East at peace but no details how to get there,” The Washington Post, June 25, 2019.

 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/trump-administration-touts-mideast-peace-plan-at-kushners-bahrain-workshop/2019/06/25/b13a0136-9692-11e9-9a16-dc551ea5a43b_story.html)

The Biden Administration’s Time for Choosing On Iran
Jacob Nagel and Mark Dubowitz/Newsweek/April 20/2021
Vienna is bustling with another round of diplomacy on the Iran nuclear file. Unlike the direct talks that resulted in the flawed 2015 Iran nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), this time the American and Iranian sides are not engaging directly.
No matter the format, the end result is hard to escape: another bad deal. A diplomatic collapse is coming, based on a familiar but wrongheaded negotiating approach by American diplomats.
This coming collapse is not hard to understand. The Biden administration is imploring the Islamic Republic of Iran to return to compliance with the JCPOA—and the regime’s talented negotiating team is playing hard to get. The talks revolve primarily around what the West should pay the world’s most prolific state sponsor of terrorism for the privilege of re-entering a faulty nuclear agreement that in 2015 granted Iran everything it wanted—namely, a patient pathway to atomic weapons and massive economic relief.
Nuclear diplomacy is fine, but it must be shaped by American leverage. That leverage is strong right now, with Iran’s accessible foreign exchange reserves down from over $120 billion in 2018 to just $4 billion. The Iranian government is running on fumes and facing an economic crisis. To make matters worse for the clerical regime, the main uranium enrichment facility at Natanz was reportedly set back by around nine months because of an explosion earlier this month. Its nuclear weaponization ambitions were also delayed significantly by the assassination last November of the longtime head of its military-nuclear program, Mohsen Fahkrizadeh. Finally, the regime is still struggling to regain its footing regionally after the Trump administration in January 2020 took out the Islamic Republic’s most talented battlefield commander, Qassem Suleimani.
All of this is leverage for Washington. And that leverage can be further enhanced by building a credible military threat to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities if the mullahs move to a bomb.
The Biden team says it seeks a “longer, stronger, broader” deal. But this is not possible unless the White House sets forth a new Iran policy that is not held hostage by the JCPOA. A rapid return to the old agreement—or even worse, an incremental return—cedes crucial leverage to Tehran. Such an approach gives the regime zero incentive to negotiate another deal. The Iranian strategy is clear: wield the threat of nuclear escalation to extort massive economic concessions in the form of American sanction relief and a return to the JCPOA. This will give the regime tens of billions of dollars and allow it to forge ahead on nuclear R&D (sadly, the regime’s advances are based on knowledge and production capabilities they gained by violating the 2015 agreement). By returning to the JCPOA, the regime can legally install advanced centrifuges, build up their enrichment capabilities and wait for key restrictions to sunset over the next two to nine years. After 2030, there will be no prohibitions on the Islamic Republic’s ability to enrich massive uranium quantities to weapon-grade.
The regime is currently enriching uranium at 60 percent and threatening to go up to 90 percent and quickly moving toward industrial-scale production capabilities—including second- and third-generation centrifuges that are more efficient in uranium enrichment. Some of these machines were already installed underground at Natanz. The explosion at Natanz and the July 2020 destruction of an advanced centrifuge assembly facility did significant damage. But these actions will only temporarily set back Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. The Islamic Republic can now produce advanced centrifuges in large quantities. Overall, the regime can enrich uranium three to ten times faster, to all levels, and in clandestine facilities.
It’s game, set, match unless the Biden administration pushes for a new deal that requires Tehran to fully account for its military-nuclear activities—now known to the world because of the Iran Nuclear Archive that Israel’s Mossad spirited out of Iran in 2018. The Iranian violations are even worse in light of the recent and detailed findings of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that the clerical regime has been hiding undisclosed nuclear materials.
In short, the IAEA’s 2015 decision—pushed by then-Secretary of State John Kerry—to close its investigation into the possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program was a serious mistake. The Archive findings and the IAEA’s discoveries from its visits of Iranian nuclear sites demonstrated that the Islamic Republic was much closer to weaponization than was previously believed. The IAEA’s failure to submit the reports outlining those findings represented one of the JCPOA’s biggest flaws. What is the point of “unprecedented” monitoring of these sites if the IAEA never established a baseline of Iran’s weaponization efforts? “Fixing” the old deal by addressing sunsets, monitoring and missiles doesn’t address today’s problems: Nuclear weaponization, including Tehran’s past activities and current violations, Iranian enrichment in underground facilities and its advanced centrifuge R&D. Even with the recent setbacks, the Islamic Republic is still hard at work on the weaponization of its nuclear program as it develops advanced centrifuges that give Tehran an easier clandestine “sneak out.” These most powerful centrifuges—with fewer machines required to weaponize uranium—are easier to hide and more difficult to detect.
Gone are the days of keeping Iran at “one year” from producing a sufficient quantity of weapon-grade uranium for a first bomb. Returning to the JCPOA allows Iran to build on its advances and to continue installing advanced enrichment and infrastructure in undisclosed new facilities. The JCPOA all but gives a green light to the regime to clandestinely accumulate the enriched uranium it needs for a bomb, or several bombs. There are new concerns, too. The regime’s advances in critical weaponization activities, like metal uranium processing, hot cells and irradiation of 20 percent-enriched materials, also must be addressed. All of this can help the regime build a nuclear weapon.
A “longer, stronger” deal must prevent Iran from being a “nuclear threshold country.” The clerical regime cannot maintain a “civilian nuclear program” in underground facilities, and it must come clean about the past. A new deal must address all three elements of Tehran’s illicit nuclear program: fissile materials, weaponization and the means of delivery. There may be time for a broader agreement that covers the regime’s support for terrorism, as well as other regional concerns. But the nuclear problem must be solved first, or we run the risk of American diplomats giving concrete nuclear concessions for unenforceable Iranian commitments to limit their other nefarious regional activities.
The U.S. can permanently cut off Iran’s pathways to nuclear weapons or collapse at the negotiating table. It’s now time for the Biden administration to choose.
**Jacob Nagel is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and a visiting professor at the Technion Aerospace faculty. He previously served as acting national security adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and as head of the National Security Council. Mark Dubowitz is FDD’s chief executive. An expert on Iran’s nuclear program and sanctions, he was sanctioned by Iran in 2019. Follow Mark on Twitter @mdubowitz. FDD is a nonpartisan think tank focused on foreign policy and national security issues.

China and Russia: The Guns of April
Gordon G. Chang/Gatestone Institute./April 20, 2021
Russian troops are massing on the Ukraine border, Chinese vessels are swarming Whitsun Reef of the Philippines in the South China Sea, and China's air force is flying almost daily through Taiwan's air-defense identification zone. Chinese troops for almost a year have been dug in deep in Indian-controlled Ladakh in the Himalayas. Two large aggressors are threatening to break apart neighbors and absorb them. American attempts to de-escalate flashpoints are seen in Russian and Chinese circles as failures of resolve.
The Global Times, an unofficial Communist Party tabloid used by Beijing to signal new policies, on April 12 posted a video of Hu Xijin, its editor-in-chief, warning that Beijing would overfly Taiwan—in other words, fly into Taiwan's sovereign airspace—to "declare sovereignty."
Chinese leaders speak provocatively because, among other reasons, they do not believe the United States or others will come to Taiwan's rescue.... In effect, China's leaders are saying they do not believe President Joe Biden would defend Taiwan. In a propaganda blast on April 8, China's regime said Taiwan "won't stand a chance" if it decides to invade the island. This Chinese self-perception of overwhelming strength is extraordinarily dangerous.... [W]e have already passed the point where just declarations and warnings will suffice. The Biden administration has yet to impose costs on China for aggressive actions jeopardizing America's security and that of allies like Japan. Chinese leaders, while hearing the mild warnings from the Biden administration, must be asking one question: "Or what?"
Vladimir Putin in 2019 said that Russia reserved the right to protect ethnic Russians outside Russia. This month, Dmitry Kozak, deputy head of Russia's presidential administration, said his country might intervene to "defend" its citizens. If it did, he suggested, Ukraine would not survive because it would not be "a shot in the leg, but in the face."The American response has not been adequate. Russians perceive Biden as feeble. "In Putin's game of brinkmanship, Biden blinked first," said journalist Konstantin Eggert to the BBC, referring to the American president proposing a meeting to his Russian counterpart. Biden's "nerves," he said, "had failed him."That assessment may be correct. In the face of threats directed at Washington by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, the U.S. Navy did not, as many had expected, send two destroyers through the Bosporus into the international waters of the Black Sea. Politico reported that "two U.S. officials familiar with the plans" said the cancellation was due to American concerns about inflaming the Russia-Ukraine situation....
the ultimate decision to stay away made it look as if the U.S. had backed down. The Dragon and the Bear appear to be coordinating moves, as they have for some time. At the very least, each is acting with an eye to what the other is doing. Once one of these aggressors makes a move, the other large state, taking advantage of the situation, will almost certainly follow. Biden also has to be concerned about Moscow or Beijing acting through proxies Iran and North Korea.
All the elements for history's next great conflict are now in place.
Russia in recent weeks has reportedly massed an estimated 85,000 troops near its border with Ukraine. The concentration of Russian forces there is the highest since 2014, when Moscow annexed Crimea.
Russian troops are massing on the Ukraine border, Chinese vessels are swarming Whitsun Reef of the Philippines in the South China Sea, and China's air force is flying almost daily through Taiwan's air-defense identification zone. Chinese troops for almost a year have been dug in deep in Indian-controlled Ladakh in the Himalayas. Two large aggressors are threatening to break apart neighbors and absorb them.
The Biden administration has issued warnings to both Moscow and Beijing, but neither looks impressed. American attempts to de-escalate flashpoints are seen in Russian and Chinese circles as failures of resolve.
At least at this moment, those adversaries are right to scoff at the new U.S. leader. The Chinese are especially bold. They describe their flights near Taiwan as "combat drills." At the same time, they are sending large ships close to Taiwan's waters. The Liaoning, their first aircraft carrier, recently steamed along the east side of the island in an especially provocative gesture. The Global Times, an unofficial Communist Party tabloid used by Beijing to signal new policies, on April 12 posted a video of Hu Xijin, its editor-in-chief, warning that Beijing would overfly Taiwan — in other words, fly into Taiwan's sovereign airspace — to "declare sovereignty." Threats like that start wars. Chinese leaders speak provocatively because, among other reasons, they do not believe the United States or others will come to Taiwan's rescue.
For decades, Washington has maintained a policy of "strategic ambiguity," not telling either Beijing or Taipei what the U.S. would do in the face of imminent conflict. This approach worked in generally peaceful times with a more cooperative Chinese leadership, but, with far more aggressive rulers in Beijing, that policy is failing. Beijing is no longer impressed by American power. China's top diplomat, Yang Jiechi, in the infamous Anchorage meeting in the middle of last month, launched into a tirade in which he told Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan that the U.S. could no longer talk to China "from a position of strength."
Beijing is openly mocking Washington. Ominously, Global Times on April 14 ran an editorial with this headline: "When Real Determination Is Lacking, the U.S. Should Maintain 'Strategic Ambiguity.'"
In effect, China's leaders are saying they do not believe President Joe Biden would defend Taiwan. The editorial, in support of this view, makes it clear that Beijing thinks the military balance of power is in its favor, even if the U.S. were willing to fight on the island republic's side. In a propaganda blast on April 8, China's regime said Taiwan "won't stand a chance" if it decides to invade the island. This Chinese self-perception of overwhelming strength is extraordinarily dangerous, of course.
It is, therefore, time to reestablish deterrence. As Joseph Bosco, a Pentagon China desk officer in the George W. Bush administration, told Gatestone this month, "Given the dramatically changed circumstances, different words are needed now."
Unfortunately, Beijing is not hearing them. True, the U.S. and Japan issued a joint leaders' statement mentioning Taiwan — the first time that has happened since 1969 — during the visit of Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga to the White House on April 16, but the words were milquetoast. At this moment, the failure to adopt appropriately robust language only adds to the perception of American weakness and underlines concerns expressed by Bosco, now a prominent China analyst, and others.
What to do? Biden should publicly declare the United States is ditching strategic ambiguity and adopting "strategic clarity," in other words, Biden should issue a clear declaration that America will defend Taiwan. Beijing has dared the president to say that; he must respond.
Moreover, we have already passed the point where just declarations and warnings will suffice. The Biden administration has yet to impose costs on China for aggressive actions jeopardizing America's security and that of allies like Japan. Chinese leaders, while hearing the mild warnings from the Biden administration, must be asking one question: "Or what?"
As China threatens Taiwan, Russia threatens Ukraine. Moscow in recent weeks has reportedly massed an estimated 85,000 troops near its border with that former Soviet republic, now an independent state. The concentration of Russian forces there is the highest since 2014, when Moscow annexed Crimea.
That year, Russia-backed soldiers took control of much of the Donetsk and Luhansk portions of Ukraine's Russian-speaking Donbas, and Moscow began issuing passports to a half million people in the Donetsk and Luhansk "People's Republics."
Vladimir Putin in 2019 said that Russia reserved the right to protect ethnic Russians outside Russia. This month, Dmitry Kozak, deputy head of Russia's presidential administration, said his country might intervene to "defend" its citizens. If it did, he suggested, Ukraine would not survive because it would not be "a shot in the leg, but in the face."
The American response has not been adequate. Russians perceive Biden as feeble. "In Putin's game of brinkmanship, Biden blinked first," said journalist Konstantin Eggert to the BBC, referring to the American president proposing a meeting to his Russian counterpart. Biden's "nerves," he said, "had failed him."
That assessment may be correct. In the face of threats directed at Washington by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, the U.S. Navy did not, as many had expected, send two destroyers through the Bosporus into the international waters of the Black Sea. Politico reported that "two U.S. officials familiar with the plans" said the cancellation was due to American concerns about inflaming the Russia-Ukraine situation.
Gregory Copley, president of the International Strategic Studies Association, told Gatestone that Turkey announced Washington's intention to sail into the Black Sea before a decision had in fact been made. Especially in light of Ankara's announcement, the ultimate decision to stay away made it look as if the U.S. had backed down. Significantly, Ukraine was disappointed by the decision.
Copley, also editor-in-chief of Defense & Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy, points out China and Russia usually test new American presidents, as do other states. What is different this time is the seriousness of their provocations.
The Dragon and the Bear appear to be coordinating moves, as they have for some time. At the very least, each is acting with an eye to what the other is doing. Once one of these aggressors makes a move, the other large state, taking advantage of the situation, will almost certainly follow. Biden also has to be concerned about Moscow or Beijing acting through proxies Iran and North Korea.
China's communist regime has a history of engaging in belligerent acts — most notably the 1962 invasion of India during the Cuban missile crisis — while others are distracted by faraway events. Consequently, war could break out on both ends of the Eurasian landmass at the same time.
All the elements for history's next great conflict are now in place.
*Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China, a Gatestone Institute distinguished senior fellow, and a member of its Advisory Board.
© 2021 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.

‘Iran’s economy is closer than ever to collapse,’ says expert

Daniel Snnenfeld/The Media Line/April 20/2021
Tehran must compromise in Vienna negotiations or face economic danger.
After a period of stagnation, the US and Iran have in recent weeks embarked on negotiations for a mutual return to compliance with the Iran nuclear deal – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Until now, Iran has played hardball, demanding that the US move first and fully lift the sanctions it had placed on business with the Islamic Republic. But Iran may not have the economic fortitude that would allow it to sustain its stubbornness and economically survive under sanctions.
In 2018, then-US President Donald Trump acted in accordance with his harsh criticism of the JCPOA and withdrew from the agreement unilaterally. He then reimposed strict economic sanctions on Iran. Importantly, these included secondary sanctions, which prohibited American companies from dealing with non-Iranian entities that had economic dealings with Iran. The JCPOA is a multilateral agreement signed under former President Barack Obama in 2015. The agreement, with Iran on the one side, and the US, European allies, China and Russia on the other, set limitations on the Iranian nuclear program, also arranging for supervision. In return, economic sanctions formerly placed on Iran were lifted.
President Joe Biden famously promised, as part of his election campaign, to return to the Iran nuclear deal. In a CNN op-ed, Biden called Trump’s “maximum pressure” policy a “boon to the regime in Iran” that allowed the Islamic Republic to come closer to developing a nuclear bomb – which Tehran says it has no intention of building. Indeed, experts are unanimous in their estimation that Iran has now made significant steps toward building a bomb. Following the American withdrawal and reimposition of sanctions, the Islamic Republic has increasingly violated its obligations under the JCPOA, enriching uranium beyond the agreement’s limitations, for example.
However, while the sanctions have failed to deter the Iranian regime from pursuing its nuclear ambitions, they have dealt a heavy blow to the country’s economy. “I believe that Iran’s economy is closer to collapse than ever. Those people who believe that Iran’s ‘resistance economy’ has worked as it was resilient to crippling sanctions are right. But the stamina is now fading away,” Dr. Mahdi Ghodsi, an economist at the Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies and an expert on the Iranian economy, told The Media Line.
Dr. Gil Feiler, an expert in Middle Eastern economies and senior researcher at Bar-Ilan University’s Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, told The Media Line, “Iran has reached a low point because of Trump’s sanctions. … The [Iranian] rial lost 50% of its worth in less than two years. Meaning that Trump’s sanctions had an immense effect,” he said. “Almost 6 million people are unemployed.”
According to an April 2021 report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), unemployment, which currently measures 10.8%, is expected to rise over the next two years.
In addition to the sanctions, Iran has been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic. Ghodsi says that “due to sanctions and COVID, Iran’s crisis is a double-edged sword that wounds the society deeper than other countries.” To makes matters worse, the country is expected to vaccinate a significant segment of its population no earlier than mid-2022, according to another IMF report.
Ghodsi points to the high inflation that has plagued the country in recent years as one indication of Iran’s economic predicament. “Annual inflation was very high (up to 50%) in the past three years,” he says, “Many people who were receiving monthly cash handouts since the time of the populist [former President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad, rose out of poverty. But because of very high annual inflation since that policy of Ahmadinejad and more strongly since the ‘maximum pressure’ campaign, that monthly cash handout is now worth perhaps 1 to 2 kilos of chicken.”
“The Iranian debt reached $254 billion,” says Feiler, pointing to another economic indicator. “That’s a huge debt and you have to remember that the Iranians aren’t living luxuriously in recent years.” The expert also adds that, for the first time since the Iranian Islamic revolution in 1979, the Islamic Republic turned to the IMF last year and asked for emergency assistance. Iran stated, it should be noted, that the requested $5 billion of assistance were intended to help it fight against the pandemic.
The Iranian economy has shrunk in recent years, experiencing almost 13% negative growth in 2018-2019, after the sanctions were put in place.
Despite all this, the Iranian economy isn’t expected to collapse in the very near future, say both experts, even if sanctions remain in place. Ghodsi says that “the Islamic Republic responded to the outside ‘maximum pressure’ [campaign] with the domestic ‘maximum suppression,’” killing hundreds of protesters in nationwide anti-government demonstrations that erupted in November 2019. The repression has helped the regime silence discontent with the economic hardship that has resulted from sanctions. “I can say that Iran’s resistance economy along with the ‘maximum suppression’ will allow the government to continue its economy,” Ghodsi said. In addition to the suppression of dissidents, Feiler points to a recent deal signed between China and the Islamic Republic, cementing a 25-year agreement to cooperate in trade, among other matters. This deal, along with other actions by countries that bypass American limitations, allows the regime the breathing room it needs to survive. However, while the Israeli expert agrees that the Iranian economy won’t collapse tomorrow, he thinks that its ability to survive with the sanctions in place is very limited. “If Trump’s sanctions would have stayed in place another four to five years, and [if] they would have tightened them even more and monitored the smuggling,” the Iranian regime would have collapsed, he says. “What Biden is going to do is throw them a lifeline.” Discontent caused by the increase in unemployment and poverty would have brought down the regime. All this creates pressure on Tehran to achieve a revival of the JCPOA, which the US and its European allies have missed, says Feiler.The Vienna expert does not speak of a political crumbling but says, “If sanctions are not removed quickly, the government may borrow again from the central bank, and the money supply will continuously grow more than the size of the economy. This may potentially lead to hyperinflation beyond control, perhaps similar to what was observed in Venezuela. Then, given the exacerbated circumstances, the ticking bomb of cyclical nationwide protests will implode into a stronger domestic uprising. Therefore, the prospects [for the Iranian regime] cannot be depicted optimistically if the sanctions are not removed.” With this danger in mind, Ghodsi says that the Iranians need “to compromise is the manner in which the US can return to the JCPOA.” Instead of demanding a full lifting of the sanctions, “while Iran’s noncompliance is still six or seven steps away from the JCPOA,” Tehran should push for a coordinated return to the agreement. Additionally, as Iran wishes to have sanctions not related to its nuclear program – such as those tied to human rights violations – removed, Ghodsi suggests that a wider agreement should be reached after a return to the nuclear deal – a path that was suggested previously but until now staunchly opposed by Tehran. Once the sanctions are out of the way, the Iranian economy is expected to flourish. “One can expect that Iran’s economy will grow by exporting oil to its level prior to the US secondary sanctions under Trump,” Ghodsi says. Agreements with other countries will also boost the economy. He cautions, however, that business with Western companies may be slower in resuming because “Western firms may still need some time to evaluate the political risks around Iran.”
“They can leap ahead” once sanctions are lifted, says Feiler, “leap politically, militarily and economically, and this will, of course, strengthen the regime.” The Iranian economy has huge potential, the Bar-Ilan expert says. However, he doesn’t view this in a positive light. The Western powers “don’t have a true understanding of the Iranian regime,” or the fact that they will be strengthening it, and thus empowering tyranny and encouraging human rights violations.

Why would Israel say US is getting outplayed by Iran? - analysis

Herb Keinon/Jerusalem Post/April 20/2021
Before looking for whom the message was intended, it is worth looking first at who was not likely the targeted audience: US President Joe Biden and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
The security cabinet met on Monday for the first time in two months to discuss the Iranian threat, as the US and Iran appeared headed toward reviving the 2015 nuclear deal that Israel opposed relentlessly and which president Donald Trump walked away from three years later.
No official statement was released after the security cabinet meeting – not even a laconic one as is sometimes the case. So what the public gleaned about that meeting came primarily from a source who attended it and told various media outlets, including The Jerusalem Post: The ministers were concerned that Washington wants an Iran deal at all costs, and the Iranians know it. The meeting included security briefings from National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat and Mossad Director Yossi Cohen. Yet the only morsel of information that was thrown to the media had to do with Israeli disappointment over how the US was conducting the negotiations. “It is not a situation in which the Americans want to stand their ground,” the official was quoted as saying. “They’re giving up more than the Iranians are asking for. Their goal is racing toward an agreement at all costs.”
“The Iranians know that the deal will be signed no matter what, so they are doing the most to maximize their gains,” the official said. “The Americans hear our concerns, but the question is whether they are even listening. It’s not clear whether we’re heading toward an escalation with Iran.”
That various media outlets got the same information – almost the exact same quotes – indicates that there was a guiding hand, that a decision was made that this was what should come out of the meeting, and that Israel wanted it known that it feels the US is getting badly outplayed by Iran in the indirect talks taking place in Vienna. When only a tiny bit of information comes out of a meeting that lasted for more than two hours, the question that needs to be asked is: “Why this?” What purpose is served by headlines reading, “Cabinet concerned Washington wants an Iran deal at all costs”? Who is the intended audience?Before seeking out for whom this message was aimed, it is worth looking first at who was not the likely targeted audience: US President Joe Biden and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
Israel has numerous channels of communication with the administration – both Cohen and Ben-Shabbat are expected to travel there in the coming weeks. So if Jerusalem has complaints about the American negotiating style, it is a safe bet that they don’t need the Israeli media to relay that displeasure through a few sentences mouthed by an anonymous source, and that these complaints have already been passed on.
So who is Israel trying to impress?
Some will argue that it is intended for the domestic audience, and that for political reasons, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is interested in putting daylight between Jerusalem and Washington on Iran to show Israelis that when it comes to Iran, he is willing and able – again – to stand up to the US administration. Some will go further and say that Netanyahu is even looking for a public dispute with the US because that could help him politically, as Israelis have shown in the past that when it comes to picking sides between the US president and their prime minister, they will rally around their prime minister.
This came out clearly in the early days of president Barack Obama’s term, when Obama pushed hard for a settlement freeze in the mistaken assumption that the Israeli public would turn on their prime minister, rather than have him risk a fight with the US over an issue – the settlements – that was not particularly popular in Israel in any regard. The move backfired, and the public circled the wagons around Netanyahu.
But it seems a stretch to believe that Netanyahu – on top of all of his other challenges – is looking now for tension with the US, especially as US understanding will be essential if the tit-for-tat exchanges with Iran over the last few weeks escalate, and as Jerusalem is facing a showdown with the International Criminal Court and will need US backing.
So if neither the administration nor the Israeli public was the intended audience, who was?
The two likeliest candidates are the US Congress and Israel’s new friends in the Gulf, namely the UAE, Bahrain and the Saudis.
As the talks continue in Vienna, the battle lines are being drawn in Washington over the wisdom of resuscitating the 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or whether it should be altered to encompass other elements of Iran’s behavior, including its ballistic-missile program and malign behavior throughout the region.
In late March, a bipartisan group of 43 senators sent a letter to Biden calling on him to widen and strengthen the deal. On the other hand, a week ago, 27 Democratic senators sent the president a letter urging him to quickly reenter the agreement on a compliance-for-compliance basis. Similar dueling letters also emanated in recent weeks from the House of Representatives.
Statements in Israel opposed to how the negotiations are being conducted could strengthen the hands of those forces in the US opposed to and working against a quick return to the nuclear deal, as these people could lean in their arguments – at least partly – on Israeli concerns.
It has become axiomatic to say that the threat of Iran is what brought Israel and the Gulf states closer together. While some say that Netanyahu’s speech to Congress against the Iran deal in 2015 hurt Israel’s position among the Democratic Party, others maintain that that speech – and Netanyahu’s willingness to make it even though it entailed butting heads with Obama – helped bring Israel closer to the Gulf countries and paved the way for the eventual signing of the Abraham Accords.
Netanyahu himself has made this argument on numerous occasions, telling the Knesset in October when he presented the Abraham Accords for a vote, that the most significant turning point in the Arab world’s interest in getting closer to Israel “was the resistance I led to the dangerous nuclear agreement with Iran… Various leaders in the region contacted me, particularly after my speech in Congress. They secretly contacted me and said how much they welcome this policy, and they gradually expressed a willingness to strengthen the relations with us.”
If this is indeed the case, or even if it is only Netanyahu’s portrayal of reality, it explains why Israel would want to say after the security cabinet meeting that it is disappointed in the way the US is conducting the negotiations: to let the Gulf countries know that they can continue to count on Jerusalem to lead the charge against a return to the JCPOA – even at the risk of once again incurring the administration’s displeasure.

The Afghanistan Endgame Is Also A Beginning
Alberto M. Fernandez/MEMRI Daily Brief No. 27/April 20/2021
Two separate propositions about Afghanistan can be and are true at the same time:
The U.S. could probably have remained in the country under the current status quo situation supporting the Afghan government for years without major loss of life, but with considerable continuing financial costs.
The American people, in a moment of rare bipartisan consensus in a divided nation, are generally glad to see an end to direct U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan, considering it a waste of time and resources.
President Biden's administration chose a poor date for a withdrawal – September 11, the 20th anniversary of the most successful terrorist attack in history, organized from Afghanistan – but it built on momentum started by the Trump administration to accelerate an American withdrawal. One can't help but think that if the Biden administration wanted to avoid using Trump's May 1 withdrawal date, November 14 would have been a better day than 9/11. November 14, 2001 is the day Kabul was taken from the Taliban, in one day, by the Afghan "National Alliance" backed by overwhelming U.S. airpower.
While there is no doubt that this is a defeat for U.S. arms, and the Taliban are seemingly confident and advancing, much depends on what happens after U.S. forces leave and when it happens. Some 10,500 U.S. and NATO troops will leave, and probably a good percentage of the 16,000 foreign contractors currently in country will depart as well.
While U.S. and allied ground forces have played an important role, it is American airpower and American money that have been key in keeping the Afghan government in power. And it was not the Americans alone; NATO troops and especially NATO member money have helped keep the Afghan National Army (ANA) in the field, even though it seems the Taliban pay better. It is testimony to Western mission creep or noble unrealistic ambitions – or both – that in addition to funding the Afghan military, ANA Trust Fund money has gone to "strengthen good governance within the Afghan security structures – and to enhance women's meaningful participation within the relevant Afghan Ministries and security institutions."[1]
Certainly, the Afghan National Army and security forces will be tested as never before. More than 60,000 government security personnel have already been killed since 2001. A comparison will be made to see whether the current Afghan government and its security forces can defend themselves (after $88 billion spent on them) and achieve some sort of stalemate or fall more quickly than the Soviet puppet Najibullah regime. Expected to fall immediately after the withdrawal of Soviet forces in 1989, that brutal secret policeman was able to hold on for more than three years after the Russians left, losing slowly. As the Soviet Union collapsed, a sudden end to Russian aid – leading to a loss of airpower and money – would contribute to Najib's fall and eventually to him hanging from a lamppost near the presidential palace. The Taliban have promised to do the same to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.[2]
Of course, the current Afghan government is nothing like the Communist dictatorship that fell in 1992. It is, first of all, not a dictatorship at all but a pseudo-democracy of sorts (also one of the world's most corrupt states).[3] Secondly, the Western-supported Afghan government is not isolated nor without friends. The Americans and NATO are not going to precipitously cut off funding to the ANA and that devastating American airpower may still be available. Neither of those substantial elements of American power are things that the Taliban can ignore but the group has weathered far more from the U.S. over the past two decades and not only survived but flourished.[4]
The best-case scenario for the U.S. is an Afghan government that is able to, more or less, keep the portions of the country it still holds.[5] It then uses that unlikely steadfastness to parlay into some sort of compromise deal with the Taliban.[6] This would be some sort of face-saving agreement that prevents what would be most embarrassing to the U.S., which is a kind of 1975 Saigon "helicopters-on-the-roof-of-the-U.S.-Embassy" scenario.[7] Such a deal could provide the U.S. with that "decent interval" a cynical Henry Kissinger saw as a goal for U.S. policy at the end of the Vietnam War: "two to three years between the withdrawal of US troops" and an enemy takeover.[8] While the Taliban have very little incentive to negotiate in earnest, they and their backers would prefer to capture something more than rubble if they take Kabul.[9]
But the most compelling element of the Afghanistan Endgame is not so much what happens to the current government, to Afghan civil society, to democracy, and to Afghan women and to human rights – all important things in and of themselves – in a new political dispensation.[10] Even very real terrorism concerns or Taliban threats against the Americans overstaying are less pertinent than the broader regional perspective.[11] The most interesting thing will be how the political-military struggle in Afghanistan can illuminate developing power politics in Eurasia within the new reality of a retreating West.
A clear Taliban victory, first and foremost, will be a victory for Pakistan, which has been so instrumental in the group's flourishing and survival for decades.[12] It would also be a setback for India, of course.
But aside from the two nuclear-armed sub-continent rivals, the role of regional powers China, Russia, Iran, and Turkey could be significant. Even the role of tiny Qatar, friendly to the Taliban, Iran, and Turkey, bears close monitoring. Will these other countries (aside from adversaries India and Pakistan) find a way to divide and share the Afghan pie, or will two or more contending sides with respective spheres of influence emerge?[13]
U.S. Secretary of State Blinken said recently that if the Taliban "have any expectation of getting any international acceptance, it's going to have to respect the rights of women and girls." That is not actually true.[14] It certainly applies to the West, but none of these regional powers make policy on the basis of women's or any other human rights. Iran may be concerned about the rights of Shi'a Hazaras (when not using them as cannon fodder in Syria), and Turkey may be interested in the rights of ethnic Afghan Uzbek/Turkmen, but these are not commitments based on rights as some sort of universal ideal.
The last time the Taliban – before 9/11 – were in power in Kabul they faced off against opposition backed by Russia, Iran, and India, who supported the Northern Alliance featuring the legendary Ahmed Shah Massoud and that hardy survivor Abdul Rashid Dostum. This round will be an early opportunity for us to see new Eurasian power politics, with a rising China working with or mediating between Pakistan, Iran and Turkey.[15] China has spoken of sending peacekeepers to Afghanistan, but this seems likely only within a context of assurances from its regional Muslim allies.[16] The Chinese are certainly not going to waste a trillion dollars there like the Americans did.[17] More than a return to the past, Afghanistan's fate may be a view toward Asia's future.
*Alberto M. Fernandez is Vice President of MEMRI.
[1] Nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/2/pdf/2102-backgrounder-ana-trust-fund.pdf, February 2021.
[2] See MEMRI JTTM report Afghan Taliban Envision Execution Of President Ashraf Ghani As They Hanged Dr. Najibullah At United Nations Office In Kabul In 1996, February 18, 2021.
[3] Ariananews.af/afghanistan-scores-dismally-on-corruption-perception-index, January 28, 2021.
[4] See MEMRI JTTM report Taliban Website: Hundreds Of Afghan Police And Administrative Officials Joined The Islamic Emirate In November 2020
[5] Longwarjournal.org/archives/2018/09/mapping-taliban-controlled-and-contested-districts-in-afghanistan-lwj-vs-us-military-assessments.php, September 8, 2018.
[6] See MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis Series No. 1532, Intra-Afghan Talks Deadlocked In Qatar, Taliban Mount Terror Attacks In 24 Afghan Provinces, Demand 'A Pure Islamic Government', October 2, 2020.
[7] Youtube.com/watch?v=wD64kYG-z5I, April 30, 2020.
[8] Historynewsnetwork.org/article/140712, accessed April 20, 2021.
[9] Youtube.com/watch?v=dOX-GWXgwM8, December 20, 2016.
[10] See MEMRI JTTM report Urdu Daily: Afghan Taliban Order Revival Of Shari'a Courts Across Afghanistan, March 11, 2021.
[11] See MEMRI JTTM report Afghan Taliban's Operational Chief Sirajuddin Haqqani Warns The Biden Administration Against Scrapping The Doha Agreement: 'We Have The Technology To Use Drones, We Have Our Own Missiles; This Time If The Mujahideen Resume Fighting, It Would Be Something [The Americans] Have Never Seen Before', March 3, 2021.
[12] Hindustantimes.com/world-news/india-afghanistan-criticise-pakistan-for-backing-taliban-meddling-in-afghan-affairs-101618586835936.html, April 16, 2021.
[13] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 9291, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov's Visit To Pakistan Showcases Improved Relations Between The Two Countries, April 19, 2021.
[14] Washingtonpost.com/national-security/biden-afghanistan-decision-foreign-policy-process/2021/04/18/e45e3fec-a05d-11eb-a774-7b47ceb36ee8_story.html, April 18, 2021.
[15] See MEMRI Daily Brief No. 256, A New Alliance Rising In The East – Turkey, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, China – And Its Enemies – The U.S. and India, February 3, 2021.
[16] Scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3129707/china-may-send-peacekeeping-force-afghanistan-after-us-troops, April 16, 2021.
[17] Bbc.com/news/world-47391821, April 16, 2021.

Le retrait d’Afghanistan entre impératifs et aléas
Charles Elias Chartouni/April 20/2021
شارل الياس شرتوني: الانسحاب الأميركي العسكري من أفغانستان بين المقتضى والمخاطر
The withdrawal from Afghanistan between imperatives and hazards

http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/98070/charles-elias-chartouni-le-retrait-dafghanistan-entre-imperatifs-et-aleas-%d8%b4%d8%a7%d8%b1%d9%84-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%8a%d8%a7%d8%b3-%d8%b4%d8%b1%d8%aa%d9%88%d9%86%d9%8a-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a7

Le retrait d’Afghanistan marque la fin d’un long épisode (2001-2021), fortement coûteux (776 milliards de dollars, dont 197.3 milliards, coûts de reconstruction du pays, 1909 soldats tués, 20.717 blessés...), aux parcours sinueux et aux objectifs mutants. Loin de correspondre aux schémas de politique étrangère de la première administration de George W. Bush (2000-2008), cette intervention infléchira non seulement les axes de politique étrangère des USA, mais ceux de la politique internationale confrontée par le défi du terrorisme islamiste et ses bornes nébuleuses. L’intervention avait pour objectif de détruire les bases opérationnelles du terrorisme islamiste planétaire, et non la reconstruction d’un État failli qui avait du mal à se remettre de la guerre avec l’Union Soviétique (1979-1989), faire avec ses conflits inter-ethniques exacerbés, et pouvoir se donner les faux-semblants d’une existence étatique. La destruction des bases opérationnelles de la Qaida, la continuation des guerres civiles inter-afghanes qui se sont greffées sur les nouveaux enjeux du terrorisme islamiste, et la reconstruction du pouvoir central n’ont pas, jusque-là, créé une dynamique de paix qui puisse mettre fin aux aléas d’une géopolitique convulsée.
Les États Unis et la coalition de l’OTAN ont mené des tâches symétriques: la destruction des réseaux et bases terroristes (al Qaida et les Taliban), la pacification et la stabilisation relative de ces espaces immenses en friche, les infrastructures du pouvoir central, et les politiques de développement intégré (institutions administrative et judiciaire, infrastructures, santé, éducation, gestion des éco-systèmes, émancipation des femmes,...), alors que, paradoxalement, la nouvelle administration s’était, d’ores et déjà, engagée, à renoncer à “la politique étrangère comme travail social”. L’assassinat d’Oussama Ben Laden au Pakistan (2 Mai, 2011) mettra fin à la figure totémique du terrorisme islamiste, mais il était loin de détruire la dynamique qu’il avait propulsée dans le monde islamique, et de sceller la réédification de l’Afghanistan sur des bases géopolitique et étatique stables. Deux décennies se sont écoulées et la tâche est loin d’être achevée, alors que les États Unis et leurs alliés se préparent à un retrait presque total qui laisse en suspens une série d’interrogations sur l’avenir de l’Afghanistan, les chances d’une paix civile, la réhabilitation du havre terroriste, et la protection des acquis qu’une politique de développement intégré a pu léguer.
La question lancinante qui n’a jamais cessé de se poser est celle de l’éventualité d’une stabilisation géopolitique au cœur d’un ordre régional hautement controversé, au croisement des clivages ethno-religieux trans-frontaliers, des politiques de puissance en situation de choc frontal ( Pakistan, Inde, Iran, Chine et Républiques islamiques d’Asie Centrale), et des segmentarités tribales. La partition de l’Afghanistan n’a cessé de buter sur la volatilité d’un ordre géopolitique aux enchevêtrements multiples, où les règlements historiques n’ont jamais donné lieu à des frontières reconnues, et la mise en place de structures étatiques stables. En contrepartie, les rivalités inter-ethniques( Pachtoune 45.4/100, Tadjik 22/ 100, Hazara 9.7/ 100, Ouzbek 8.4/ 100....) n’ont jamais pu déboucher sur des arrangements politiques négociés qui mettent terme aux guerres civiles larvées ou en cours, et aux politiques de domination en gestation continue. Le retour des Talibans au pouvoir va remettre en question la paix civile, la viabilité de l’État central, les acquis en matière de développement économique et social (plus particulièrement le statut des femmes), relancer les dynamiques souterraines des conflits inter-éthniques et des politiques de puissance à l’intérieur de l’Afghanistan et sur les interfaces trans-frontalières.
Cet État-tampon arrivera t’il à arrimer ses conditions d’existence hautement hypothétiques sur des bases stables et durables, rien n’est plus aléatoire. Le retrait des États Unis s’effectue à partir des nouvelles prémisses impulsées par la nouvelle guerre froide, les défis politique et économique posés par la Chine qui est désormais, non seulement, en quête de nouveaux marchés, mais de nouvelles configurations géopolitiques pour mettre en remorque sa politique de conquête impériale, la Russie qui essaye de remédier à ses déficits économique et démographique par des projections impériales surdimensionnées, et les avatars du terrorisme islamiste. Sinon, les dilemmes stratégiques de cette géopolitique creuse et aux contours mutants, devraient s’articuler sur des enjeux de stabilisation étatique, de paix civile, de gouvernance fonctionnelle et d’instrumentalisations politiques à géométrie variable. La controverse que la question du retrait va susciter est loin d’être finie, elle ne fait,d’ailleurs, que commencer.

Syria between two sieges
Farouk Yousef/The Arab Weekly/April 20/2021
Economic crises were part of normal life in Syria. But Syria had also a permanent food surplus. Were the crises convenient for security reasons, as they kept citizens distracted by issues far from politics and government?
That is possible, as the political system led by Hafez al-Assad and inherited by his son Bashar was by no means innocent. There is in fact no innocent political system.
However, Syria is not a rich country and it was destined to be trapped between two sieges. A mean US siege and another due to the absurd self-imposed duties dictated by the regime’s slogans of steadfastness, confrontation and resistance.
Both blockades are inter-related. Because of the regime’s adoption of a hollow project that is detached from reality, under the banner of resistance without having anything to resist, the US ended up imposing a malicious siege on it.
And because of that siege, the government’s policy deviated in the direction of a stubborn attitude that plunged the country and its inhabitants into a spiral of overbearing rhetoric that is full of empty words and is only borderline political in essence.It had in reality nothing to do with politics. It just paved the way for an internal siege that the Syrians lived under due to a condescending, arrogant authority that thinks it knows everything and deals with the people in the language of fortune tellers.
Thus, Syria would have been wronged, not because of a misunderstanding, but because of a disconnect from the truth. Neither did the United States have the measure of the Syrian regime’s size and strength, nor was the regime prepared to be humbled and abandon its phoney swagger and descend from its illusions to reality. Syria was not a threat to anyone. Had Syria been treated with the respect it deserved, its international relationships would not have deteriorated.
Hafez al-Assad was smart about maintaining some kind of balance in Syria’s relations with the outside world and was largely successful in presenting Syria as a success story. All the economic crises that the Syrians have lived through have not stopped their country from being successful in many fields.
For example, education was advanced and there was a level of financial stability. In addition to that, Syria was until 2011, considered a safe country for its citizens and visitors alike. At the level of its relationship with the fellow Arab countries , Syria’s steadfastness on common issues ensured a unified Arab position before the rest of the world. Syria was not a shadow state, but rather an active state on many levels.
Do these facts lead one to praise the father and put down the son? Certainly the ruling dogma suffered a setback once the hereditary project was declared a success. What happened next was a consecration of a huge failure that was consistent with the dilapidated, opportunistic and unethical party performance and the desire of the security services to swallow the state and dominate its decision-making positions.
In spite of his pedantic rhetoric, President Bashar al-Assad was too weak to stand in the way of partisan jockeying and the ability of the security services to invent imaginary enemies..This failure was evident to the people, who were sympathetic to the president, when he demanded the abolition of the constitutional clause granting the Baath Party the right to monopolise power and called for legal restrictions on the powers of the security services. The young president was at the time on another planet. He was not listening to the people. He was deceived by Syria’s stability based on false analyses, so he believed that the party and the security services were indeed the pillars of that stability. He did not pay attention to the fact that civil society in Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, Lattakia and other Syrian cities was miles ahead of his regime, which was one of the most backward in the region with its reliance on old methods that were so obsolete they brought the system to near extinction. Syrian society was modern while the state was old and dilapidated.
Couldn’t the United States realise this, as it insisted on imposing its siege, which inflicted heavy damage on Syrian society?
In all cases, Syria was the main victim. When many countries entered the fray of the Syrian popular protest movement and turned it into an armed revolution, it utterly crushed that victim. The issue is no longer that of the disintegration of Syria into parts but rather into particles. The Syrian state has fragmented, but Syrian society has preceded it in being torn apart. Syrians moved to diasporas and Syria has lost many of its original qualities as its society’s image withered away.
Bashar Assad is still in power, but the people of Syria have lost their homeland. Does Assad consider himself the head of a people spread over many continents?

The GCC and Greece are natural partners
Dr. Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg/Arab News/April 20/2021
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and Greece signed a memorandum of understanding this week, establishing a new format for political, economic and cultural engagement. Although ad hoc cooperation and discussions about a GCC-Greece cooperation framework had been ongoing for some time, this is the first formal accord with such a wide scope. The signing of the agreement in Riyadh on Tuesday followed a meeting between the GCC secretary-general and the Greek ministers of foreign affairs and defense at the GCC headquarters, where the new deal was discussed, as well as the modalities to implement it.
The new agreement builds on a long history of multifaceted engagement between Greece and the Gulf region that goes back millennia. Ancient Greek texts discussed the affairs of Arabia at length and expressed fascination with the mysterious peninsula. Trade and cultural exchanges flourished. Fascination with Ancient Greek philosophy and science was equally important in shaping the cultural history of the Gulf region and beyond.
The special Arab-Greek relationship has endured over the centuries, ebbing and flowing with political and economic developments. Politically, Greece has had an even-handed approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict and consistently supported Palestinian aspirations for independence, even when that position was not popular with some of its allies. On the business side of things, Greek businesses were among the first players in the boom years of the 1970s in the GCC region, and they have continued to play an important role.
During the global financial crisis of 2008-09, Greece and the GCC sought to increase their cooperation to help face the economic challenges of that period. In February 2017, in a meeting in Riyadh attended by then-President Prokopis Pavlopoulos, it was agreed to work toward formalizing cooperation between Greece and the GCC.
This year, Greece celebrates 200 years of independence and, with it, a new determination to rejuvenate traditional ties with the region. Over the past few weeks and months, it has engaged with GCC countries on political, defense and economic cooperation, and that engagement is growing.
After signing the agreement this week, the next step is to agree on a joint action plan to flesh out the outlines of cooperation. The current draft, expected to be finalized soon, covers political dialogue, trade and investment, education and training, culture and tourism, and the environment.
The proposed GCC-Greece political dialogue and consultations aim to strengthen strategic cooperation on regional security, peace and stability. This cooperation is based on mutual respect for the UN Charter and international law, which should govern relations between countries of the region. Both agree on the need to preserve and strengthen the rules-based system, whether in politics, security or trade.
On trade and investment, the two sides realize that they are starting from a relatively low point when their potential and geographical proximity are taken into consideration. Last year, because of coronavirus disease restrictions, GCC-Greece two-way trade declined to less than $2 billion — a trifle compared to the combined size of their markets, which is about $2 trillion. Looking beyond the pandemic-induced recession, they plan to boost trade and investment by strengthening links between their business communities and financial institutions, as well as by removing trade and investment impediments.
On education and professional and technical training, they plan to encourage student, faculty and scholarly exchanges and encourage their institutions to share best practices.
There is especially great potential in terms of cultural exchange and tourism. Greece has long had a sharp focus on promoting its cultural riches, with tourism representing a significant part of its economy. GCC countries are now paying more attention than ever to cultural exchanges and have ambitious designs to grow the tourism sector as part of their diversification plans. This sector is among the most promising low-hanging fruits of their cooperation.
The two sides are among the most enthusiastic advocates in the fight against climate change and for making concrete contributions to the reversal of global warming. They plan to work together to achieve that goal and improve environmental protection, including reversing the degradation of the marine environment.
This year, Greece celebrates 200 years of independence and, with it, a new determination to rejuvenate traditional ties with the region.
The renewed GCC-Greece engagement is expected to contribute significantly to preserving peace and security in the region. It will assist each party in diversifying its political and security support systems. It helps restore regional mutual understanding and re-energizes cultural ties. Economically, their cooperation is logical because of their geographical proximity and, hence, lower transport costs, as well the complementarity of their economies. As Saudi Arabia, for example, develops its Red Sea coast and opens it up for tourism, joint tours with Greek and Egyptian destinations would be a natural arrangement.
The renewed cooperation between Greece and the GCC is a natural partnership between two like-minded and complementary parties. It should not be seen as a reaction to regional rivalries or confrontations, but it can still serve to defuse regional conflicts and provide a platform to ease tensions. They believe that differences of opinion should be addressed peacefully in international forums and not allowed to destabilize the region. For example, on the eastern Mediterranean dispute, Greece and the GCC agree that international law, especially the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, provides the most appropriate globally recognized legal instrument governing maritime disputes and that the International Court of Justice is the best forum to adjudicate border conflicts.
*Dr. Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg is the GCC Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs & Negotiation, and a columnist for Arab News. The views expressed in this piece are personal and do not necessarily represent GCC views. Twitter: @abuhamad1

Op-ed by Guterres: “Climate action for people and planet : The Time is now”
NNA/April 20/2021
The following is an op-ed on climate by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres ahead of Earth Day and the U.S. convened Leaders’ Summit on Climate:
“In this pivotal year for humanity, now is the time for bold climate action.
The science is irrefutable and globally agreed: to stop the climate crisis from becoming a permanent catastrophe, we must limit global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius. To do this, we must get to net zero emissions of greenhouse gases by mid-century. Countries making up about two-thirds of the global economy have committed to do so. This is encouraging, but we urgently need every country, city, business and financial institution to join this coalition and adopt concrete plans for transitioning to net zero.
Even more urgent is for governments to match this long-term ambition with concrete actions now, as trillions of dollars are mobilized to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic. Revitalizing economies is our chance to re-engineer our future. The world has a strong framework for action: the Paris Agreement, in which all countries committed to set their own national climate action plans and strengthen them every five years. Over five years later, and with damning proof that if we don’t act we will destroy our planet, it is time for decisive and effective action as the United Nations convenes all countries in Glasgow in November for COP26. The new national plans must cut global greenhouse gas pollution by at least 45 per cent by 2030 compared to 2010 levels. Many have been presented already, and set out clearer policies to adapt to the impacts of climate change and boost access to renewable energy.
But so far, those plans achieve less than a 1 per cent cut in emissions. This is a true red alert for people and planet.
In the months ahead, beginning with the upcoming Leaders Summit hosted by the United States, governments must dramatically step up their ambitions – particularly the biggest-emitting countries that have caused the vast bulk of the crisis.
Phasing out coal from the electricity sector is the single most important step to get in line with the 1.5-degree goal. Immediate action to remove the dirtiest, most polluting fossil fuel from power sectors offers our world a fighting chance.
Global coal use in electricity generation must fall by 80 per cent below 2010 levels by 2030. This means that developed economies must commit to phase out coal by 2030; other countries must do this by 2040. There is simply no reason for any new coal plants to be built anywhere. One third of the global coal fleet is already more costly to operate than building new renewables and storage. COP26 must signal an end to coal.
As the world moves toward clean air and renewable energy, it is essential that we ensure a just transition. Workers in impacted industries and the informal sector must be supported as they move jobs or reskill. We must also unleash the vast power of women and girls to drive transformation, including as equal participants in governance and decision-making.
The countries that contributed least to climate change are suffering many of the worst impacts. Many small island nations will simply cease to exist if we don’t step up the response. The developed countries must deliver on their commitments to provide and mobilize $100 billion annually by:
• doubling current levels of climate finance;
• devoting half of all climate finance to adaptation;
• stopping the international funding of coal; and
• shifting subsidies from fossil fuels to renewable energy.
The G7 Summit in June offers the opportunity for the world’s wealthiest countries to step up and provide the necessary financial commitments that will ensure the success of COP26.
While governments must lead, decision-makers everywhere have a vital role to play. I ask all multilateral and national developments banks, by COP26, to have clear policies in place to fund the COVID recovery and the transition to resilient economies in developing countries, taking into account crippling debt levels and huge pressures on national budgets.
Many local governments and private business have committed to net zero emissions by 2050, and have engaged in significant reviews of their business models. I urge all to set ambitious targets and policies.
I encourage young people everywhere to continue to raise their voices for action to address climate change, protect biodiversity, stop humanity’s war on nature and accelerate efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
Time is running out, and there is much hard work ahead, but this no time to raise the white flag. The United Nations will keep flying our blue flag of solidarity and hope. This Earth Day and over the crucial months ahead, I urge all nations and all people to rise together to this moment.—UNIC

Turkey needs friends with Egypt top of its list
Rami Rayess/Al Arabiya/20 April ,2021
For Ankara, rapprochement with Cairo is a must. With former US President Donald Trump gone the tougher policy towards Turkey Joe Biden has adopted will force Recep Tayyip Erdogan to revive relations with old hostile countries.
The Turkish President has aimed to introduce warmth to the cold relations with the European Union and is attempting to open a new chapter with Egypt.
Relations in Cairo have deteriorated since the summer of 2013 after General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi ousted the Islamist President Mohammed Morsi. Egypt considered Ankara’s hosting of the Islamic Brotherhood leadership and providing it with a haven dangerous. Opening Egyptian opposition television networks deeply affected the bilateral relations too.
Turkey considered the Arab Spring that erupted in several Arab countries starting in Tunisia in 2010 as an opportunity for it to extend its influence to the region and the Eastern Mediterranean. It exploited the political vacuum and the turbulent transitional periods by supporting Arab Islamists, a move not welcomed by many Arabs and their leaders.
As Egypt’s relations with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates began to improve several years ago, Turkey sided with Qatar and increased collaboration in several countries, such as Syria, Libya and Yemen.
With the GCC overcoming their differences by reinitiating its political and economic ties with Doha, it is in Ankara’s best interests to review its policies. It must reach out to the Gulf States by divorcing the boycott policy that had negative repercussions for bilateral relations with these countries. Turkey’s image across the Arab world was tarnished.
The rivalry between the two nations is not limited to ideological differences and bilateral relations. Despite several complexities, strategic considerations are essential.
The two nations have a long history and culture of being deeply influential in the region. Rivalry increases when there are opposing viewpoints about regional issues.
Libya is the most recent and prominent one. Libyan territories are in Egypt’s backyard and it will challenge any Turkish troop deployment there. With Turks on its doorstep, Cairo’s antagonism will grow.
A bilateral agreement between the two states will have a positive effect to create a peaceful settlement in Libya.
In addition to these complicated issues, Turkey felt isolated when Egypt led, along with others, the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum (EMGF) which included: Cyprus, Israel, Greece, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority and Italy.
Demarcating maritime borders and allocating reserves of gas between these states is alarming for Ankara. This is a monetary fortune that Turkey will not surrender.
If it cannot reclaim its rights through a dispute, it could probably have a better chance through negotiation and rapprochement with Egypt, which is the major player in this.
Ironically, economic ties between the two countries remain active despite political tensions.
In 2018, they set a bilateral trade record with Turkish exports to Egypt amounting to $3.05 billion, an increase of 29.4 percent compared to 2017. Egyptian exports to Turkey reached $2.19 billion increasing 9.68 percent in 2017.
The free trade agreement between the two countries that was signed in 2005 remained functional despite all the differences. It is imaginable that such economic cooperation could reach new heights if relations are normalized.
In a positive gesture, Ankara has proposed to mediate between Egypt and Ethiopia about the Renaissance Dam which, in the last few months, has become a major source of tension between the two.
The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated: “Turkey and Egypt share deep-rooted economic and social ties based on mutual historical heritage. Egypt is our major commercial partner in the African continent. Turkish and Egyptian businesspersons maintain close contact and continue to realize reciprocal visits.”
A deep revision of Turkish foreign policy is underway on all fronts with the aim of reducing antagonism with international and regional players. Strategies for consideration include: reviving relations with Egypt; opening ties with Greece; seeking reconciliation with the GCC countries; and, most importantly, pursuing a new policy with Washington.
Returning to the old zero-problem policy with the surrounding states is no longer feasible for Turkey. Gradually decreasing tensions in the region will prove beneficial for Ankara and address existing rivalries simultaneously.
Improving relations with Egypt will act as a catalyst to build bonds with other countries it is estranged from.