LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
December 14/18
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.december14.18.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
You fool! This very night your life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?" So it is with those who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich towards God
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 12/16-21: 'Then he told them a parable: ‘The land of a rich man produced abundantly. And he thought to himself, "What should I do, for I have no place to store my crops?" Then he said, "I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry." But God said to him, "You fool! This very night your life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?" So it is with those who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich towards God.’

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on December 13-14/18
Aoun Meets UN Special Coordinator
Report: Aoun 'to Name' Obstructors Shall His Govt. Formation Efforts Fail
Hariri Says Will Resume Govt. Formation Efforts after London Visit
Lebanon Adopts Market Rates to Deal with Debt
Former president Amine Gemayel President: Government Formation Must Be Based on Reassuring Basis
Gemayel Submits Draft Law to Grant Expats Full Voting Power
Samy Gemayel Discusses Government Formation Proposal with Berri
Shamsi visits Hassan: UAE supports Lebanon's stability and sovereignty
Hamadeh stresses readiness to provide permission to prosecute anyone found to be involved in forging certificates whatever his ministerial post
Qabalan, Al-Shamsi discuss local, regional situation
Aoun stresses Lebanon's commitment to UNSCR 1701, despite Israeli violations
Lebanon will form government 'despite obstacles': Foreign minister
Hariri at Chatham House: A government before the end of the year –We are committed to 1701 and to the disassociation policy
MPs pour cold water on Cabinet prospects
Jihad forces cannot be tamed or appeased
The Curtain is Falling on Bibi’s Lebanese Belly-Dance

Titles For The Latest  English LCCC  Miscellaneous Reports And News published on December 13-14.18
2 killled, 2 seriously hurt in West Bank shooting attack
Pentagon: Offensive against Kurds in Syria ‘unacceptable’
UN Chief: We are witnessing beginning of the end of Yemeni crisis
Iranian activist on hunger strike dies in prison
Syria Democratic Forces escalate attacks to expel ISIS from Syria’s Hajin
Israeli forces kill Palestinian suspected over West Bank shooting
Yemen Coalition Partner UAE Welcomes Hodeida Ceasefire
UK PM Survives Confidence Vote over Brexit Deal
Ottawa Says Second Canadian Questioned in China Now 'Missing'
Renault board maintains Carlos Ghosn as CEO, says pay was legal

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on December 13-14/18
Aoun stresses Lebanon's commitment to UNSCR 1701, despite Israeli violations/The Daily Star/ December 13, 2018
Lebanon will form government 'despite obstacles': Foreign minister/Reuters/December 13/2018/
Hariri at Chatham House: A government before the end of the year –We are committed to 1701 and to the disassociation policy/December 13/2018/
MPs pour cold water on Cabinet prospects/Hussein Dakroub/The Daily Star/December 13/18
Jihad forces cannot be tamed or appeased/Ben - Dror Yemini/Ynetnews/ December 13/18
The Curtain is Falling on Bibi’s Lebanese Belly-Dance/Tony Badran/The Tablet/December 13/18
2 killled, 2 seriously hurt in West Bank shooting attack/Elisha Ben Kimon, Yishai Porat/Ynetnews/December 13/18
Iranian activist on hunger strike dies in prison/Saleh Hamid, Al Arabiya English/Thursday, 13 December 2018/
Power Politics or Principle?/Nathan J. Brown & Cassia Bardos/Diwan (Carnegia Middle East Centre)/December 13/18
Analysis/West Bank Spirals Into Violence as Hamas Ups Efforts to Orchestrate Attacks/
Amos Harel/Haaretz/December 13/18
Fawzia Zainal elected first woman Speaker of Bahraini parliament/Ismaeel Naar/Al Arabiya/December 13/2018
Pope’s visit, ‘Alliance of Virtues’ and partnership between religions/Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/December 13/2018
What is more important than vituperation between Trump and Tillerson/Mamdouh AlMuhaini/Al Arabiya/December 13/18
China’s Huawei headache: More than what meets the eye/Dr. Mohamed A. Ramady/Al Arabiya/December 13/18
Personal financial options for anticipated global economic slowdown/Walid Jawad/Al Arabiya/December 13/18
Drama, confusion and despair in divided Britain/Cornelia Meyer/Arab News/December 13/18
Where will the yellow vest ‘revolution’ end/Mohamed Chebaro/Arab News/December 13/18
Drama, confusion and despair in divided Britain/Cornelia Meyer/Arab News/December 13/18
US begins crackdown on Iran sanctions violations/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/December 13/18
The Hamas Plan to Take the West Bank/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/December 13/18
Brexit: Now What?/David Brown/Gatestone Institute/December 13/18

Latest LCCC English Lebanese & Lebanese Related News published on December 13-14/18
Aoun Meets UN Special Coordinator
Naharnet/December 13/18/President Michel Aoun held talks with the UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon Pernille Dahler Kardel on Thursday, the National News Agency reported on Thursday.
Talks have reportedly focused on the situation in South Lebanon in light of Israeli excavation works off the border. The Israeli army announced an operation on December 4 dubbed "Northern Shield" to destroy tunnels it said were dug under the border by Hizbullah.

Report: Aoun 'to Name' Obstructors Shall His Govt. Formation Efforts Fail
Naharnet/December 13/18/President Michel Aoun is seeking to resolve the government formation gridlock but reportedly insists on naming parties blamed for the obstruction if his mission fails, the pan-Arab al-Hayat daily reported on Thursday. Aoun has informed his visitors that he will seek to resolve the impasse but plans to reveal to the public and “tell the Lebanese who is obstructing the government formation process,” unnamed sources told the newspaper. The president lately has held consultations with various parties mainly Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri, Speaker Nabih Berri and the so-called six Independent Sunni MPs and others in a bid to resolve the more than six months government impasse. One of the suggestions proposed for Hizbullah's condition to allocate a ministerial seat for one of the Independent Sunni MPs, was to form a government of 24 or 18 ministers instead of 30. But the idea was not “widely” discussed mainly because previous negotiations were based on the distribution of parties’ quotas based on a 30-seat government. A parliamentary source confirmed to al-Hayat that ​​extending the government to 32 ministers has been totally disregarded. While a proposal to name an independent figure from outside the said six Sunni deputies from President Michel Aoun’s share is being considered. “The idea of ​​appointing a minister from outside the six Sunni lawmakers was deliberated, mainly that PM-designate (Saad Hariri) is decisive in rejecting any of them. Hassan Mrad, the son of MP Abdul Rahim Mrad (one of the six MPs), was mentioned here, but none of the official sources confirmed an inclination to name him,” the source told the daily on condition of anonymity. An idea of ​​forming a mini-government was also suggested on Aoun, but he considered this option as “inappropriate” in the current situation, said the daily.

Hariri Says Will Resume Govt. Formation Efforts after London Visit
Naharnet/December 13/18/Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri said from London that he will resume the efforts to resolve the government formation deadlock after he returns from his trip that kicked off on Wednesday to partake in the Lebanese-British investment forum. “We will resume work on government formation after my return to Lebanon," Hariri's press office statement said. "I am optimistic. The President of the Republic is making important contacts. I am making contacts, with (Foreign) Minister Jebran Bassil, and we are all cooperating to solve this problem. I will meet with some of the political parties when I return, to solve this issue,” said Hariri at a reception hosted in his honor by the Lebanese Ambassador Rami Mortada at the embassy, in the presence of Bassil. “Many things must be solved in Lebanon, and CEDRE (investment conference) is the means that will enable us to overcome the economic situation we are currently experiencing. We are carrying out the reforms that we have to carry out, because Lebanon cannot continue in the old way of work. We have laws that go back to 50 years, so we have to modernize them especially as the private sector today is completely different from what it was in the past,” he said. “We take time to form a government, but these complications are sometimes experienced by most democracies in the world. We have come to show the real face of Lebanon. I will work day and night for that, and for the development of our country, and President Michel Aoun and Speaker Nabih Berri are very keen to implement all of the provisions of CEDRE with the reforms it contains,” added Hariri. “I am determined to form a national unity government. There are political differences as in any democratic system. We must put our differences aside and focus on the interest of the country,” Hariri concluded.

Lebanon Adopts Market Rates to Deal with Debt
The Financial Times/Thursday 13th December 2018/Lebanon’s finance ministry and central bank have come up with a new plan to finance the debt-burdened country. But their method is set to increase its cost of financing even further, as the government starts issuing local currency debt at market rates — higher than the rates treasury bills are currently issued at — in order to attract local banks. Nearly nine months since elections in May, Beirut remains locked in political stalemate without a government, impeding fiscal reforms badly needed to alleviate economic stagnation and a ballooning public deficit. Lebanon, a small Mediterranean country with a total population estimated at about 6m, carries the world’s third highest debt-to-GDP ratio at 155 per cent. The new move agreed last week between the finance ministry and Banque du Liban (BdL) is expected to encourage local lenders, who had favoured depositing dollars at the BdL for higher interest rates, to return to buying government debt.
Read the full article at Financial Times: https://on.ft.com/2GnLD6W

Former president Amine Gemayel President: Government Formation Must Be Based on Reassuring Basis
Kataeb.org/Thursday 13th December 2018/Former president Amine Gemayel on Thursday reiterated the need to form a new government as soon as possible, saying that extra efforts must be exerted to forge the concept of good governance in Lebanon. "There is no doubt that the government must be formed as soon as possible and on a solid basis that can reassure the Lebanese people, on both national and ethical levels,” Gemayel said following meeting with Maronite Patriarch Bechara al-Rahi in Bkirki. Gemayel said that the solution to the country's problems does not lie only in the government formation, adding that the principle of good governance is still missing in Lebanon. “I am not sure that the current political authority is able to manage the CEDRE aids, namely in terms of supervision and accountability,” he added. Gemayel noted that the political settlement that was sealed ahead of the presidential vote had clear purposes, saying that the president was elected based on a specific agenda and the vote law was approved to achieve a certain goal. “A book is judged by its title. I am not surprised by what's happening nowadays because this is the result of the settlement. It was clear what everything was intended to,” he concluded.

Gemayel Submits Draft Law to Grant Expats Full Voting Power
Kataeb.org/Thursday 13th December 2018/Kataeb leader Samy Gemayel on Thursday proposed the amendment of Lebanon's electoral law, demanding that expatriates be given full and unrestricted voting power. "We submitted a draft law proposing the amendment of the electoral law in terms of allowing expats to vote for all of the 128 parliamentary seats instead of restricting their role to just six," he said in a news conference held at the Parliament. "Our objective is to link the expats to their country and get them more involved in the internal affairs. The Lebanese Diaspora must not be turned into an isolated island that has nothing to do with what's happening in the homeland," he stressed. Gemayel said that the expats' vote is liberated from the constraints that their compatriots are subject to inside Lebanon, adding that they must be engaged in the electoral process so that they can help change the course of events in their country. “We want the free people abroad to support the free people in Lebanon,” he stressed. Gemayel called on his fellow lawmakers to shore up this draft law, urging expatriates to demand their right to have a full voting power.

Samy Gemayel Discusses Government Formation Proposal with Berri
Kataeb.org/Thursday 13th December 2018/Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri on Thursday met with Kataeb leader Samy Gemayel in Ain Al-Tineh, as part of the Kataeb's tour to press the formation of a technocrat government to break the deadlock. Following the talks, Gemayel reiterated the need to form a government of non-partisan specialists so as to manage the current crisis on both economic and social levels, saying that this would preserve what is left of the country until a political consensus is reached. “Once consensus is achieved, then the neutral government can be replaced with a political one,” Gemayel added. “The important thing today is not to leave the country behind despite all the difficulties it is passing through,” he added. Gemayel said that he had also discussed with Berri the draft law he proposed to allow expats to vote for all of the 128 parliamentary seats instead of restricting their role to just six. The Kataeb chief hoped that the Parliament speaker would shore up this draft law, calling on the parliamentary blocs to help the party through this step.

Shamsi visits Hassan: UAE supports Lebanon's stability and sovereignty
Thu 13 Dec 2018/NNA - Druze Sheikh Akl Naim Hassan received at the Community House in Beirut the Ambassador of the United Arab Emirates to Lebanon, Hamad Saeed Al-Shamsi, wih talks featuring high on the overall situation and the latest developments in Lebanon and the region. Hassan stressed the major role played by the United Arab Emirates at the level of development in Lebanon.For his part, ambassador Shamsi highlighted "strong relations between the two countries," hoping for a "quick government so as to save the country," wishing Lebanon progress and prosperity.""The UAE supports everything that serves the country's stability and prosperity prospects," the ambassador stressed.

Hamadeh stresses readiness to provide permission to prosecute anyone found to be involved in forging certificates whatever his ministerial post
Thu 13 Dec 2018/NNA - Caretaker Minister of Education and Higher Learning, Marwan Hamadeh, stressed his firm stance on the prosecution of universities involved in any fraud of certificates. He said that he started the process of canceling licenses that are not completed by law except by decisions of the Council of Ministers. Hamadeh confirmed his readiness "to provide permission to prosecute anyone found to be involved in forgery, whatever his ministerial post."

Qabalan, Al-Shamsi discuss local, regional situation
Thu 13 Dec 2018/NNA - President of the Higher Islamic Shiite Council, Sheikh Abdul Amir Qabalan, received at the Council's headquarters the Ambassador of the United Arab Emirates, Hamad Saeed Al-Shamsi, with whom he reviewed the general situation in Lebanon and the region.Ambassador Shamsi handed Qabalan an invitation to participate in the meeting titled "Meeting and Recognition... Towards a State of Citizenship", which will be held on the 18th of December at Hilton - Habtoor Hotel.

Aoun stresses Lebanon's commitment to UNSCR 1701, despite Israeli violations
The Daily Star/ December 13, 2018
BEIRUT: President Michel Aoun Thursday stressed Lebanon’s commitment to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 Israeli war on Lebanon, despite Israel’s daily violations of the agreement.
“Israel continues to violate Lebanese sovereignty, averaging 150 violations monthly," a statement from the presidency quoted Aoun as saying during a meeting with Acting United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon Pernille Dahler Kardel. Aoun told Kardel that Lebanon was still waiting for the field reports that UNIFIL prepared regarding “the tunnels near the southern border, to confirm whether or not the tunnels cross the Blue Line.”Earlier this month, Israel launched an operation to find and block what it called “Hezbollah attack tunnels.” UNIFIL later confirmed the existence of two tunnels in the area amid an ongoing investigation into the Israeli claims.
The president assured Kardel that Lebanon was also following up on the issue, particularly to prevent Israel from using the allegations to disrupt southern Lebanon’s stability. He also said that Lebanon was keen on cooperating with international bodies.
Kardel meanwhile briefed Aoun on developments in the south and on UNIFIL’s work there, stressing the U.N.’s support for Lebanon. Later Thursday, Aoun received a delegation from the Research and Development Corporation to discuss the repercussions of the Syrian war on Lebanon, including to the impact of the refugee crisis. The delegation commended Aoun’s efforts to end the government formation deadlock. The president in return said Lebanon is taking the appropriate measures in light of the “difficult economic situation.”
“We are implementing infrastructural reforms to the economy. We will also launch developmental projects funded by European aid to rebuild Lebanon,” the statement quoted Aoun as saying. Aoun also addressed the number of refugees residing in Lebanon. “The number of refugees Lebanon has, in addition to Palestinian refugees, equals a third of its residents. ... Lebanon also suffers from low employment which has affected its economy,” Aoun said. The president also sent his condolences to French President Emmanuel Macron for the Strasbourg attack, stressing his solidarity with the French people and the victims’ families. A gunman shot at people near a Christmas market in Strasbourg Tuesday evening, killing three people and wounding five others.

Lebanon will form government 'despite obstacles': Foreign minister
Reuters/ Wednesday 13 Dec 2018/
Lebanon will definitely form a new government despite the obstacles, its caretaker foreign minister said on Wednesday, after President Michel Aoun intervened in the stalled process and warned of a "catastrophe" if his efforts failed. Heavily indebted and with a stagnant economy, Lebanon desperately needs a new government to implement economic reforms that are required to put its public finances on a more sustainable footing and unlock pledges of foreign aid. "Partnership between the president and the prime minister along with the national consensus will certainly lead to the formation of a new government, despite all obstacles," Gebran Bassil, Aoun's son-in-law and head of the political party he founded, told an investment conference in London. Prime Minister-designate Saad al-Hariri, also attending the conference, told reporters, said he was "always optimistic" when asked about the prospects of forming a new government following seven months of political wrangling. In Beirut, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri said he was "optimistic for the possibility of a solution soon", according to a member of parliament from his own party.
Berri believed there was now a serious effort to form a government and his optimism stemmed from Aoun's intervention in the process, the lawmeker, Ali Bazzi, said. Aoun said on Tuesday the government formation could not be resolved in the traditional way between the prime minister-designate and other parties, meaning he had to get involved. Hariri said on Twitter that the new government would be firmly committed to reforms agreed at a donor conference this year, including fiscal reforms. Agreement on the make-up of the new cabinet has met a series of obstacles as Hariri has sought to forge a deal parceling out 30 cabinet posts among rival groups according to a sectarian political system. The final hurdle has been over Sunni Muslim representation, with the powerful Iran-backed Shi'ite Muslim group Hezbollah demanding a cabinet seat for one of its Sunni allies who gained ground in the election. Analysts believe one compromise could be for Aoun to nominate one of the Hezbollah-aligned Sunnis, or a figure acceptable to them, among a group of ministers named by the president.

Hariri at Chatham House: A government before the end of the year –We are committed to 1701 and to the disassociation policy
Thu 13 Dec 2018NNA
Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri said today that “Lebanon cannot afford to continue without a government that can protect it from regional turmoil and economic downfall”, and hoped that a government will be formed before the end of the year.
He added that “we face Israeli escalation by committing to International law and resolutions, most importantly UN Security Council resolution 1701, and consider the Lebanese army as the sole defender of sovereignty”.
Addressing a large audience at Chatham House in London, during a discussion under the title “Lebanon: A vision for the Future”, Hariri reminded that his incumbent government took the decision that “Lebanon, including all political formations in government, will abide by a policy of disassociation”, adding that this policy will be maintained in the new government.
Hariri started by delivering a speech, before answering the questions of the director of Chatham House, Dr Robert Niblett, and the audience.
In his speech, he said: “I am honored and humbled to have the opportunity to address this distinguished audience, which I am also sure will be a tough audience! I thank Chatham House and Dr Robert Niblett for having me.
I am here during very complicated times, both for my country and the region.
As you may already know, we held elections in May. The first in 9 years. President Aoun and I agreed to steer the country towards economic and political stability through reforms, capital investments and strengthening our security institutions, in the respect of our constitution and our democracy.
Since May, I have spared no effort to form a National Unity government. I entered consultations in good faith to ensure fair representation in the Council of Ministers.
I am a patient man and I am willing to wait and find a solution. But this is not about me. It is about Lebanon. Our country cannot afford to continue without a government that can protect Lebanon from regional turmoil and economic downfall.
I am confident that we will reach a government soon, as all realize that the need for stability and economic growth far outweighs any political agenda.
Lebanon remains an oasis of peace and stability. We have tested civil war, long before all other countries in the region and learnt many lessons. I, for one, am adamant never to allow the return of divisions and strife.
And even though our power sharing agreement might be complicated, we have to always remember, it is the sort of agreement most countries in the region are aspiring to attain today.
Now, for the really difficult part: Lebanon is in a really, really rough neighborhood. We have to work very hard to prevent the fires from neighboring Syria to spread to our country, and to avoid the belligerent escalation the Netanyahu government seems to be embarked on.
This dual task is complicated by the presence of 1,5 million displaced Syrians, 200 thousand Palestinian refugees, and the accusations made by Israel recently.
To begin with displaced and refugee population, and to give you an order of magnitude, it is as if the UK had 33 million refugees on its territory, today. In Lebanon today, we have 4 million Lebanese and about 2 million refugees.
This has placed incredible pressure on our infrastructure, basic services and fiscal situation. We are receiving humanitarian assistance, which is welcome but still insufficient. And we are working hard to mobilize the International Community to do its part, considering Lebanon is providing a Public good to the world.
Our army and security services are on constant alert to prevent any terrorist infiltration and our national consensus stands strong in the face of extremism.
We face Israeli escalation by committing to International law and resolutions, most importantly UN Security Council resolution 1701. We consider the Lebanese army as the sole defender of sovereignty and we are engaged in a National Dialogue process to agree on a National Defense strategy, which will resume, as soon as government is formed.
In the many inter-Arab conflicts, my incumbent government has taken the decision that Lebanon, including all political formations in government, will abide by a policy of disassociation. This policy will be maintained in the new government.
The region also faces a historic source of instability, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Our position is that of Arab consensus as expressed by the League of Arab States and by the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002. Basically, we see no other solution than 2 separate States, the capital of the Palestinian state in Jerusalem and the right of return guaranteed to the Palestinian diaspora.
This last point is of particular importance to us, since our Constitution forbids the permanent implantation of refugees and our national consensus on this will remain unshakable.
I believe Lebanon has an essential role in the region. As a model of coexistence and tolerance, it is a rampart in the face of extremism. Lebanon has always been the laboratory of creativity and innovation in the Arab world.
In this era of disruptive technology and transition towards a new economy, this role will be maintained and re-invented.
My incumbent government started two years ago laying the groundwork in legislation, telecom infrastructure and education. The new government will continue on this path. And I am sure the legendary resilience, creativity and human capital of the Lebanese will do the rest”.
Question: I want to start with the economy because I think that part of your visit is to try to drum up some of the much needed investments in the country in particular in infrastructure. Could you say a word of two about where the country is on that process and how important is it to have a fully functioning government in order to be able to both attract investments and undertake some reforms?
Hariri: We have particular circumstances with 1.5 million refugees and we have had 1% of growth in Lebanon since 2014-2015.
To have quick growth and deal with unemployment of the Lebanese youth, and 75% unemployment among the refugees, we had to look outside the box. We looked at where we could invest money, create jobs quickly, increase the growth and grow our economy.
Historically, Lebanon always used Syrian manpower for all the infrastructure work that we had in the past. In the early 90s for instance we have had 600 to 800 thousand Syrians working in Lebanon in agriculture and infrastructure jobs. Therefore, our idea is to stabilize the country and make sure that our youth and our Lebanese people have enough jobs.
So we went to CEDRE and presented the 250 projects. We wanted to do reforms so we brought in the World Bank, we brought in the IMF, we sat all together, examined each project and took the advice of the IMF on how to fix our fiscal problems. We agreed in the incumbent government, before going to CEDRE, on all the reforms and on all the projects. We went to CEDRE and got the money that we asked for.
Since the elections, work did not stop. For instance, because we thought that certain reforms needed to be passed right after CEDRE, even with a caretaker government, we went to parliament and passed 5 laws of reforms. We agreed also with the Parliament Speaker that any law that has to do with CEDRE needs to go on a fast track. Usually, because of the bureaucracy we have in Lebanon, a reform law or loan from the World Bank used to take a year or two, today it takes 3 to 4 weeks. Everybody realizes in Lebanon that we cannot sustain our economy, we cannot sustain the 1.5 million refugees in Lebanon if we do not create jobs for us, for the Lebanese. And Lebanon has to change, we cannot work like we used to work 10, 15, or 20 years ago. Yesterday, in the joint parliament committees, we finally agreed on changing our commercial law that was written in 1958.
Questions: How important is resolving Syria for your economic hope in Lebanon?
Hariri: Syria represents a path for us to Iraq, to Jordan and to the Gulf. Our strategy is to invest in infrastructure, prepare Lebanon to be a platform so that big companies from Britain, the USA or the European Union would invest in Lebanon or make Lebanon a hub for them for reconstruction in Syria, in Iraq and even in Libya.
Syria represents a big market for Lebanon, and so does Iraq.
Question: In the last legislative elections, your party took a little bit of a hit, giving an element of confidence to Hezbollah to want to be more adamant in designing what a future government would look like. How likely is it that you will form a government and what kind of compromises might be needed for that to be achieved?
Hariri: I think that the government is extremely important but for me the focus is how to make CEDRE functional. Today I came to London and met with so many officials, financial institutions and businesses. We can do business in Lebanon even with a caretaker government. But the ideal thing would be to form a government. I think we are in the last 100 meters of forming the government and hopefully we should be able to form it before the end of the year.
Question: Lebanon is challenged on the foreign policy front and we are not always able to make our own decisions, but on the domestic front, who is responsible for the garbage, electricity and other problems. Who is responsible for fixing them?
Hariri: After the assassination of my father, the country went into a huge division, people were not listening to each other and not talking to each other, until I decided in 2016 to take 2 initiatives to break this division in the country. I nominated a candidate for presidency from the other side. We elected President Aoun and this mixed the cards politically.
What did the division do to Lebanon? Nothing. The problem is, if you want to blame somebody, you should blame all of us because we were politically against each other. If anybody presented a project from one side, the other side would refuse it. We all used to work on how to make sure the other fails. When we elected President Aoun, we decided to put the differences aside, especially the regional issues. Hezbollah is not going to change my mind on Iran and I am not going to change his mind on Saudi Arabia, the gulf, on what we believe in or on our alliance with Great Britain or the United States and all these countries. I am not going to change my mind about his way of dealing in the region. So we decided to put our regional differences aside and to focus on what is good for the country in the past year and a half. This is why we were able to do a budget and to agree on an electoral law. Most governments, when they do electoral laws, they do so assuming that results will be good for them. I knew the law would make me lose a bit, but I accepted for the sake of wanting the country to move forward.
My policy has always been that if we stand still, we are not going to advance. We need to compromise. What happened in the garbage and electricity is due to all our mistakes, all of us together. Now we passed a plan for energy, we passed a plan for solid waste and a strategy for telecommunication. We should have spent on fiber optics or the internet about 600 to 700 million dollars in the early 2010 but we didn’t because of our divisions, we did it in 2017 and now it’s rolled. The same thing with energy, now we are working very closely with the World Bank and the IFC to help us develop these plans. So hopefully, once we form this government, you will see a lot of these issues being resolved because we have a strategy on how to tackle these problems.
Question: Lebanon benefited from a robust banking system historically, a sector larger than in Greece or Argentina for instance. Deposit inflows are estimated at 2.4 billion dollars this year compared to 7.3 billion last year. To slow down in deposit inflows means that now they fall short of external financing requirement. Funding shortfall is estimated at 2 billion dollars in 2018, what measure would you consider introducing to increase depositors confidence in the medium term?
Hariri: There are several reasons why we have decreased deposits in Lebanese banks. First, the remittances we used to get from the Gulf states diminished because the Gulf states are also suffering from the economic situation. You have less Lebanese working there, less salaries paid in the Gulf.
We used to get remittances of about 9 billion or 8 billion from this region, they dropped down to 5. So this is one of the reasons why we get less investments.
The other is that you have higher interest rates in the world, the USA increased its interest rate up to 3.5 now. What we are doing today to increase that part of pumping money into the country, is opening up our private sector. We passed a PPP law in 2017 and all the projects we want to do will be done by BOT. Money is going to come to the country to build all these projects. You have the 11, 8 billion that was committed in CEDRE, these are specific projects studied by the World Bank. At the same time we are talking with several States, in the Arab world, Europe, and the USA to see if we can put some deposits into the Central Bank to increase dollar deposits in Lebanon. This is something we launched just a week ago. The things I said before are the plan to bring money into the country.
Question: Prime Minister, why is it taking you so long to form a government and how are you going to implement your vision and policies if 7 months after the elections, you are still struggling to form a government?
Hariri: We just organized elections, the first in 10 years. I am sure that by the end of the year we will have a government. The challenges are very hard, there are new MPs in Parliament and we need to take that into consideration. Some people want more, some people want less, this is democracy. If you look at some democracies like Belgium or Germany, it took a while to form a government. We are getting there, it’s not a regional issue, it’s an internal issue, it’s because the equation changed a little bit in parliament and some people want more. I believe that most of the obstacles were solved, there is still one obstacle and I am sure that we will be able to resolve it.
Question: Are external funders helping or not helping, in terms of their demand or need to move beyond the caretaker government? Is it helpful to have pressure from the outside on this or is it irrelevant?
Hariri: When the World Bank and other institutions push us to form a government, this is for the benefit of Lebanon. Most people today really believe in the reforms that are in CEDRE because everybody understands that we cannot do business as usual or as before, we need to change and we need to change now.
Question: Israel doesn’t need a reason, like the tunnel, to attack Lebanon. Have you discussed this possibility with the government here and what did they tell you?
Hariri: You open the news today and you see in headlines that Lebanon has tunnels that go all the way to Israel and there are allegations that Hezbollah is doing those tunnels, but have you ever heard about how many sorties Israel makes every month into Lebanon? Have you ever heard how many times did Israel entered our international waters? Do you think this is fair? You think it is fair that 150 sorties were made last month into Lebanon? You think it is fair that our national waters are penetrated ten or twenty times a month and we have occupied lands, the Shebaa Farms? For me as a government, UNSCR 1701 has to be implemented and we will not accept other than that. The Lebanese army will deal with the issue of the tunnels. But to come out blatantly and say that Lebanon is responsible for all of this, I think Israel has a lot to answer to on how many intrusions it made since the approval of the 1701. We have sent countless complaints to the United Nations, but what has been done? Nothing.
Question: Lebanon is in a unique position where you have the Lebanese Army and you also have a highly militarized militia or party, so an outside government is going to ask am I dealing with a state or am I dealing with a state within a state?
Hariri: Israel has launched wars on Lebanon in 1993, 1996, 2006 and between them attacks and assassinations. Did this weaken Hezbollah? In 2006 Hezbollah was saying that it had 10,000 missiles and Israel told the world at the time: look, Hezbollah has 10,000 missiles. Today, Hezbollah says it has 100 thousand missiles. What did the war in 2006 make to all of this? Did it make Lebanon weaker? Did it make Hezbollah weaker? This is a regional and not a Lebanese issue. This is an Iranian issue. If we want to deal with this issue, let us sit on a table and let us stop these wars and talk about how we solve these issues in the region. If we want to make peace with Israel, we have a resolution that came from the Arab League, but Netanyahu doesn’t want peace. This is what I really believe. I think Netanyahu wants a little piece of Lebanon, a little piece of Golan, a little piece of Palestine, a little piece of Jordan. Everybody went to Oslo and there was an agreement between governments and this was destroyed. The Arab League had a peace process but nothing happened. We want peace, we don’t want war and I don’t think anyone in the region wants war. I, for one who suffered from civil war and wars on my country, I agree with the Arab League peace initiative, but what does Israel want. Do they know what they want?
Question: Can you address the Mediterranean energy issue. Do you see this as a game changer and do you see it helping you with investments?
Hariri: I think it is a game changer for Lebanon, Cyprus and everyone in the region. We are countries that never had natural resources. Getting into this today can help our people in Lebanon and the region to move from one level to another, but at the same time we have to be careful on the expectations. I think we should learn from the Norwegian experience where they thought in the beginning that they have oil and gas and they jumped on investment and they almost got the country bankrupt. They told us that what saved them was when the oil jumped because of the crisis that happened in the seventies. We need to be careful, we need to invest in the right places. Lebanon opened its blocks. You have Total, Enni and Nortec that came to Lebanon and there is another round of blocks that are going to be for bids. This is completely transparent in Lebanon. We talked to BP and they are interested to invest in these blocks and you find more companies interested in investing, even American companies.
Question: You have only 5% of women in Parliament. How do you see balancing gender in parliament?
Hariri: Half of these women are in my parliamentary bloc. When we went to vote for the law, I don’t want to speak in a confessional way, but Speaker Berri who is a Shiite and me, a Sunni, were the only blocs to vote for quota in parliament, whereas all the other blocs, the Christian blocs, voted against the quota. We are working very hard to push everybody to get a quota in parliament. What we did in the government is that we put a rule that any appointment that the government will do will have a quota of women of 30 percent and in some cases 40 percent.
People in Lebanon underestimate the acceptance of the citizens to vote for women. This is a problem with the political parties and not with the people. When we held elections within my party, people who voted in places like Akkar, Dinniyeh filled the quota, while we were unable to fill it in Beirut and I had to appoint the quota myself.
Question: You mentioned Iraq today and I am aware that the foreign minister was in Baghdad and in the Kurdish region last week. Evidently, you have identified some areas of cooperation. What are these areas and what is the volume of trade between Iraq and Lebanon?
Hariri: We want to open our markets to all our Arab friends and I mentioned Iraq because I am half Iraqi also. Iraq is a big market and I think we can learn from each other a lot. The Iraqis lived the same situation that we had. In the past we didn’t focus on economic growth between these countries. We need to focus on these markets, on Morocco, Egypt and all countries. Lebanon needs to open its market and we need to penetrate the markets and this would bring benefit to Lebanon and to Iraq.
Question: You mentioned Netanyahu several times and he threatened something bad would happen. How would you react to this? And how did your relationship with Saudi Arabia evolve in the last three months?
Hariri: If Israel decides to go to war with Lebanon, they will not succeed. The only way to move forward in this region is by dialogue and peace. In the past there was a man who wanted peace in Israel, it was Rabin and he was killed. But Netanyahu doesn’t want peace. He talks about it but he promises bad things that could happen to Lebanon.
On the relationship with Saudi Arabia, I was there a month and a half ago for the conference, amidst of what was happening on the issue of Khashoggi, which I condemn, the Saudi government condemns, the whole world condemns. The Saudi government arrested those people. From day one, this issue was handled poorly. But now it is taking its course through justice. My relationship with Saudi Arabia is good and I believe that the Saudi market is a good market for Lebanon and we prepared many of agreements that we will be signing as soon as the government is formed. You will see Saudi Arabia taking some serious steps towards Lebanon and helping economically. In CEDRE, Saudi Arabia committed one billion dollars from the Saudi Development Bank. So, I think the relationship couldn’t be better.
Question: Since the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, has there been a change in the regional dynamic? The United States seems from the outside to be applying more pressure for a change in the foreign policy of Saudi Arabia. And they are putting pressure on Iran. Do you sense that there is a change in dynamic since the re-imposition of sanctions on Iran by the US?
Hariri: I think that the United States withdrawal from the JCPOA is an American decision and you can feel the sanctions in the region very bluntly. Iran is suffering economically. You can see that some exports we were getting from Iran stopped these days. Iran is facing a big challenge. But at the same time we hear new talk about ending the war in Yemen and this is good for the region. I believe in dialogue and in peace and I think the way to move forward is by dialogue and peace. But at the same time, you need to have two people willing to sit at the table and talk. My concern today is that any mistake made on the Hormuz strait is detrimental for the region. The tension is high among all these powers. Lebanon is a small country but at the same time it was able to make a little miracle after seven years of war in Syria, where we were able to push back any tension coming from Syria. Surprisingly, other than Hezbollah fighters that fought with the Syrian regime, the number of extremists that came out from Lebanon compared to other Arab nations or compared to Europe even is very minimal. It is about 150 in the past seven years. This is something that we are proud of, because we work hard with our youth to make sure that our youth doesn’t go and fight because they see the extreme atrocities that the regime did to its people in Syria.
Question: What is your message for the millions of Lebanese who left the country looking for a better future and have no hopes and can’t see the light at the end of the tunnel, giving the economic, political and internal challenges?
Second question: You always seem to be walking a very tight line and have to be compromising and be the moderate voice in the country. Are you condemned for the rest of your time as a Prime Minister to be in this position?
Hariri: Two wrongs don’t make a right. If somebody is extremist in his position, it is not right for me to be extremist in my positions. I think we should look at what benefits the country. My political ambitions are there but without a growing country and without finding jobs for the youth, it is not a position I want to be in. Saying the truth on how to deal with issues is the only way to move forward. My father was like this. He had it very hard because he had an occupying power telling him what he can do. My father couldn’t appoint one person in any position. Today it is not like this. We have come a long way. We need to understand that we actually gained our freedom after the Syrians left Lebanon. This has been a learning process for us as Lebanese because this is the first time that we are running the country. We didn’t do a good job from 2005 till 2016. We did the opposite of what should have been done. We should have sat down and talked to each other regardless of our differences. I came from a business community and I didn’t know anything about politics.
And sometimes I feel that I should have done something at this time. But now we know what we’re doing, we know how to move forward and we have a plan. I will not compromise all the time, I will compromise for the sake of the country.
The answer to the question about my message to the Lebanese: Lebanon is divided inside and my call for the Lebanese Diaspora is to forget who is in power, forget who is Saad Hariri, forget who’s the president and who’s the speaker. The Diaspora is the real power for Lebanon. They all should help Lebanon, regardless if Saad Hariri or anyone else is prime minister. We should all focus on how we can help. We should learn from others. Other nations focus on how they can help their country, regardless of who is in politics. I will give you a small example that happened with me. In 1998, my father, in a political maneuver, was kicked out of power. Prime Minister Selim Hoss was going to Saudi Arabia and at that time I was 27 years old. My natural reaction was that I need to make sure that he has a bad visit to Saudi Arabia because he was against my father. I went to tell my father that I have news, that this guy is coming to Saudi Arabia and I am looking how to undermine the visit. He said no, you should work to make it successful. We should all help Selim Hoss to be a good prime minister. This is what we all need to do in the diaspora. We should all work for Lebanon and this is my call for the diaspora. I think Lebanon today is doing the right thing. We have a plan, CEDRE is there, reforms are there and we will implement them. And if we don’t implement them punish us with your vote. If we don’t do the job, make your vote count.
Question: After the harmonious meeting at the presidential palace on Monday between the prime minister, the speaker and the president, and after and most importantly the impressive speech of the Prime minister today, do you believe that we are going to have a government? Are we going to have any clash in the south? Are we going to solve the problem between us and Syria?
Hariri: On the government, I hope that we will have a government before the end of the year. I don’t think we will have clashes in the south. I don’t think anybody wants war in Israel and anybody wants war in Lebanon. We know from our contacts with everyone in Lebanon, and this is the message we delivered to the Americans and everyone, that we don’t want any clashes so I don’t believe there will be a war. And yes Lebanon is a good place to invest and we are open to business.
Question: In Syria, what do you see is the prospect for peace and how will Lebanon cope with the return of the Hezbollah militia, unless you want them to stay there?
Hariri: I think a lot of them have come back. We believe that Hezbollah had a big force in Syria, about 15000 and now they diminished and this is what they are saying. I think they are 2000 to 3000 and this is the intelligence we have from the West also.
I think the position of the Syrian regime today is like Saddam Hussein’s position after the first Gulf war. He was moved out from Koweit, and Iraq became under the control of United Nations. Today Syria is under the Russians and you have the Americans, the Iranians, the Turks and God knows who. I think that the position of the regime is very weak. He has to listen to the Russians and unless you have a new constitution in Syria and a right representation of the people, it will still be ambiguous. About 700 thousand people were killed and there is a huge reconciliation that needs to be done in Syria. Is it going to happen? Is Assad ready to reconcile without vengeance? This is the big question mark? I don’t have the answer for that.
Question: You presented a bright vision for the future of Lebanon but it seems irrelevant to the reality given the problems in the infrastructure, like the flooded streets recently. Do you think the infrastructure is ready to attract foreign investors to Lebanon? And do you think that the Lebanese people has the right to know what happened to you when you have been forced to resign in Saudi Arabia?
Hariri: Corruption is a serious issue in Lebanon. That’s why we made sure when we went to CEDRE to have a committee to oversee a transparent process. The World Bank will work with us very closely on each of those bids. We also started moving to e-government that will clear a lot of the corruption we have in the country. What happened two weeks ago in Beirut is a disgrace and the prosecutor already arrested 3 persons. This is totally unacceptable. I really want to work with the civil society because they have a lot of good ideas. But we need to listen to each other and give each other advice and move ahead on those agendas. When we went to CEDRE, we made sure that the two biggest civil society associations came with us and we want to make sure that everything we do is transparent.
About what happened when I was in Saudi Arabia, I answered this many times. It was a wakeup call to the Lebanese. We were shooting ourselves in the foot. People needed to understand that this is something we cannot continue doing. We cannot tell the Gulf to come to Lebanon and at the same time there are political parties cursing the Gulf. I myself should not make statements about Iran and expect Iran not to answer. We need to disassociate ourselves and move away from the regional conflicts. Lebanon is too small to pay a price in these big conflicts. The big countries can afford it but we can’t.
Question: What do you expect from the Lebanese youth?
Hariri: We have a lot of startups in Lebanon and it’s all by the youth. We made a lot of facilitating laws. We are giving them incentives. We are working with a lot of associations like LIFE and IDEAS that are full of youth and we ask them to give us ideas or advice about what we need to do.
I want to say one last thing, every time I meet an official, anywhere in the world, they have friends from Lebanon or they have some people who work in their offices from Lebanon. This is something we should be proud of and this is the kind of Diaspora we need to work with us. The Lebanese, wherever they go, will thrive because they want to work and achieve. Our problem is how to make all this energy focus on the country. The only way is to create stability, security, the right environment for investment and let the Lebanese do the job. The problem is that politicians have not been letting the Lebanese do their job. We need to move away as a government and do all the legislations that the people want and then Lebanon will thrive.

MPs pour cold water on Cabinet prospects
Hussein Dakroub/The Daily Star/December 13/18
BEIRUT: A group of six Hezbollah-backed Sunni MPs cast gloom on the optimism that prevailed Wednesday regarding a potential breakthrough in the government formation impasse after meeting with President Michel Aoun. Walid Sukkarieh, one of the six lawmakers not affiliated with the Future Movement, claimed there was no solution in sight because Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri appeared to be adamant in his stance against representing the group in the new Cabinet. Meanwhile, Hariri said he was waiting for the results of an initiative Aoun launched earlier this week to resolve the crisis. He said he hoped Aoun’s consultations with various politicians would lead to positive results. “The government should have already been formed. “I am ready, the names are ready and so is the distribution of the portfolios. Everybody knows from where the disruption is coming,” Hariri told reporters on the sidelines of the Lebanon-U.K. Business and Investment Forum in London.
He was clearly referring to Hezbollah, whose insistence that the six MPs be represented in the new government has blocked the Cabinet formation. “President Aoun is holding contacts and all the Lebanese appreciate what he is doing and we are doing what should be done. “I hope that the contacts will lead to positive results.“Today I felt a positive vibe and we will remain optimistic for the country’s interest,” Hariri said. Asked about a proposal for an 18- or 24-member Cabinet instead of the planned 30-member government as a means of breaking the deadlock, he said: “All proposals are good. The country needs a government. Full stop.”Aoun’s meeting with the six lawmakers came in the context of consultations he began this week with Speaker Nabih Berri and Hariri as part of an initiative designed to end the Cabinet formation deadlock. The president has also met with a Hezbollah delegation.
Aoun’s talks are focusing on proposals to resolve the issue, which is the final obstacle holding up the formation of a government.
“No breakthrough was made in the meeting between President Aoun and the six Sunni lawmakers because the six MPs are insisting on being represented in the government, while the prime minister-designate is opposing this,” a source at Baabda Palace told The Daily Star.
The source said Aoun did not present any specific proposal to the six MPs to resolve their problem. “The talks centered on a host of ideas that are part of the president’s initiative,” he said. Although no details of Aoun’s initiative have been disclosed, the source said one of the ideas being discussed calls for representing the six MPs from the president’s share, either with one of the six or a candidate from outside their group. Asked where matters stood now after the six MPs ruled out a solution soon, the source said: “The situation is heading toward further consultations with a view to reaching a solution to the crisis.”
Sukkarieh reiterated their position on one of the six being represented in the next Cabinet.
“It is normal for us to support the president’s initiative and his continuing efforts with all the parties to reach a solution to this problem because we are all keen on Lebanon,” Sukkarieh told reporters after the meeting with Aoun at Baabda Palace. “But it does seem so far that there isn’t a solution to this issue because the prime minister-designate is still adamant on his position and he only announced that he entirely rejected recognizing the results of the [May] parliamentary elections.” “He [Hariri] is determined that the Future Movement entirely monopolize the representation of the Sunni sect, while the other sects are represented by more than one group,” he said.
Sukkarieh said the six appealed to Aoun concerning their right to be represented in the next Cabinet. “We are demanding our right and we are not attacking the others’ right. We are six allied MPs who were elected by the people. ... We have the right in a national unity government representing all the parties to be represented by a minister from the six MPs,” he said. Declaring that Aoun’s initiative has not failed and will go on, he said: “The ball is now in the premier-designate’s court because Prime Minister Hariri has refused to recognize the election results.”Prior to his meeting with the MPs, the president said he expected his consultations to yield results “in the next few days.” “We have worked on resolving the government formation crisis,” Aoun was quoted as saying in a statement released by the president’s media office.
During his weekly meeting with lawmakers at his Ain al-Tineh residence, Berri said he was optimistic there would be a breakthrough.
“Speaker Berri is optimistic and has expressed flexibility to facilitate the formation of a new government,” MP Ali Bazzi from the speaker’s parliamentary Development and Liberation bloc told reporters after the meeting. Addressing the lawmakers, Berri said he hoped that Aoun’s consultations would lead to the formation of a government soon. “We need a homogenous and coherent government to carry out its responsibilities toward a lot of challenges that we are facing on all levels,” he was quoted as saying. Caretaker Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil, who is accompanying Hariri on his visit to London, also struck an upbeat tone about the Cabinet formation. “The partnership between the president and prime minister-designate will definitely lead to the formation a new government, despite the obstacles,” Bassil said in a speech at the Lebanon-U.K. Business and Investment Forum.
As part of his consultations on the Cabinet crisis, Aoun met with a delegation from the Progressive Socialist Party’s parliamentary Democratic Gathering led by lawmaker Teymour Joumblatt.
He also met with a delegation from the Tashnag Party, led by MP Hagop Pakradounian. “We appreciate the president’s positions and we underscore our positive relationship with him,” Joumblatt said after the meeting.

Jihad forces cannot be tamed or appeased
تعليق سياسي من صحيفة يديعوت أحرونوت: لا يمكن ترويض قوى الجهاد أو استرضائها
Ben - Dror Yemini/Ynetnews/ December 13/18
حزب الله ليس فقط منظمة إرهابية دولية ، بل هو أيضا منظمة إجرامية دولية. يأتي جزء كبير من دخلها من تجارة الكوكايين
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/69936/ben-dror-yemini-ynetnews-jihad-forces-cannot-be-tamed-or-appeased-%d8%aa%d8%b9%d9%84%d9%8a%d9%82-%d8%b3%d9%8a%d8%a7%d8%b3%d9%8a-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%b5%d8%ad%d9%8a%d9%81%d8%a9-%d9%8a%d8%af%d9%8a%d8%b9/
Op-ed: It is bewildering how many believe Hamas can be appeased despite Hezbollah proving that Jihad forces need no excuse for their propagation of destruction; Hezbollah is also world's largest crime organization but Obama chose a conciliatory policy ignoring their drug smuggling, money laundering.
If Israel only eliminated the blockade of the Gaza Strip, there will be neither rockets nor tunnels. The Strip will flourish. There will be no confrontations. This argument, which is prevalent in certain circles, in the world and in Israel, should be examined against the backdrop of Operation Northern Shield.
Well, Israel is not imposing any blockade on Lebanon, which is controlled by Hezbollah. There is no historical conflict with the Lebanese people. Lebanon has even been the focal point of tourism in the Arab world for many years; great beaches, restaurants, and a dazzling nightlife — a paradise.
But Lebanon has an Iranian element: Hezbollah. And they are building a network of missiles and tunnels, just like in the south, in the context of their profound hatred for the West, including Israel and the Jews.
Turning to Hamas for a moment, we must ask: Will the Gaza Strip begin to flourish once the blockade is lifted? Will Hamas change its skin?
Hezbollah provides us with the answer. It is not about the blockade or a particular conflict, nor is it a border dispute. It is the abhorrent hatred that permeates the Jihad organizations, Sunni and Shiite alike.
After all, this happens wherever Jihad advocates gain power or take over, even in countries, and in fact, especially in countries where there is no significant presence of Americans, Jews, or Europeans. After all, Hezbollah can allow Lebanon to thrive and prosper. But it prefers to invest all its resources in the death industry.
The confrontation will come. And even assuming that Israel will be hit and suffer, and it will be hit, Lebanon will return to the Middle Ages. And despite the obvious outcome, Hezbollah continues.
It is not clear why anyone thinks that Hamas is any different from Hezbollah. That does not mean that Hamas should not be offered a generous deal on the basis of "rehabilitation in return for demilitarization." But all we have to do is look at Hezbollah, in order to know that Hamas' response is obvious.
Narcosralla
Hezbollah is not only an international terrorist organization, it is also an international criminal organization. Much of the organization's income comes from cocaine trade. President Obama, upon his election, adopted a conciliatory policy and declared intention to engage in dialogue and integrate Hezbollah into Lebanese politics.
In 2008, five years before he was appointed head of the CIA, John Brennan wrote a position paper that outlines the new appeasement policy toward Iran and Hezbollah. "The president must implement a policy of integration that encourages the moderates," he wrote.
It is possible that appeasement can work. But as far as Iran and Hezbollah are concerned, their appetite is only growing. Instead of restraint, Iran stuck its long arms throughout the Middle East, to Yemen, Syria, and total control over Lebanon through Hezbollah.
And furthermore, the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) exposed the huge drug trafficking and money laundering network of Hezbollah as part of Operation Cassandra. Hezbollah, in conjunction with Latin American drug cartels, committed crimes on American soil. But the US administration decided that appeasement is more important than combating crime and terrorism, and instructed its agencies to turn a blind eye so as not to irritate the monster and not distract from signing the nuclear agreement with Iran.
John Kelly, the man who headed the Cassandra operation, claims that "Hezbollah is one of the largest transnational crime organizations in the world." But gradually it became clear to him and the FBI agents dealing with issues related to Iran that their work was for naught. The matter was revealed last year in a detailed, worldwide report by Politico magazine, which apparently gave immunity to the monster. The Obama doctrine apparently gave immunity to the monster.
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5424922,00.html

The Curtain is Falling on Bibi’s Lebanese Belly-Dance
الستارة تسقط على الرقصة الشرقية لنيتناياهو في لبنان
Tony Badran/The Tablet/December 13/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/69955/tony-badran-the-curtain-is-falling-on-bibis-lebanese-belly-dance-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b3%d8%aa%d8%a7%d8%b1%d8%a9-%d8%aa%d8%b3%d9%82%d8%b7-%d8%b9%d9%84%d9%89-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b1%d9%82%d8%b5%d8%a9/
https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/277051/netanyahu-lebanon-hezbollah?utm_source=tabletmagazinelist&utm_campaign=89ddb1d9bc-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_13_03_48&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c308bf8edb-89ddb1d9bc-207800041
What lies beneath seven years of Israeli rhetoric about Iran?
For seven years, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stridently warned Israel’s citizens and the world of a multi-pronged Iranian threat to his nation’s security and strategic position. And there is no shortage of evidence to suggest that the Iranian threat, which Netanyahu often speaks of in openly apocalyptic terms, is as real as it is grave.
Over the past several days, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have been uncovering and neutralizing a series of attack tunnels crossing from Lebanon into Israel—an operation likely to go on for many weeks. These tunnels are part of Hezbollah’s declared military plan to infiltrate and possibly hold positions in the Galilee in the next war with Israel.
Strategically, though, the tunnels are the lesser part of the threat that is being posed to Israel by Iran and its proxies. The more pressing element is Hezbollah’s missile capability. Specifically, with Iranian assistance, Hezbollah has embarked on what Israeli officials refer to as the “missile precision project”—an effort to upgrade its large arsenal of rockets with guidance systems, increasing their accuracy, and thereby changing the severity of the threat they pose.
Iran and Hezbollah have been developing and deploying their guided missile project both in Lebanon and Syria, where, over the past seven years, the Iranians and Hezbollah have increased their military deployment and entrenchment. Iranian-led and Hezbollah forces and infrastructure are now positioned throughout Syria, in key strategic areas including along the Lebanese-Syrian and Iraqi-Syrian borders, as well as in southern Syria, near the border with Israel. It is clear that the combined threat of Iran’s positioning on Israel’s northern borders with Lebanon and Syria—as well as Gaza—is a strategic one. Just look at a map.
The question of whether Israel’s current actions to uncover and dismantle Hezbollah’s cross-border tunnels, dubbed Operation Northern Shield, is a preface to a larger action to neutralize the Iranian threat the Israeli government has been warning about is harder to answer.
Israel’s dilemma over the past decade has been whether to go to war with Hezbollah now or later, when its security environment has deteriorated even further. The Israeli government’s answer to this dilemma so far has been to continue to buy time by reducing as much as possible the growth in Hezbollah’s capabilities, which have increased notably over that time, during which Israel has enjoyed a burst of economic growth unprecedented in the country’s history.
One reason that the peace has been kept so far is the Syrian War. As the war intensified, Israel ramped up its operations targeting Hezbollah and Iranian assets and personnel inside Syrian territory, turning Syria into a cost-free kill zone for the Israel Air Force (IAF). The Russian deployment in the country in late 2015 did not stop IAF activity—nor is Russia’s recent deployment of S-300 anti-air missile batteries likely to much affect Israel’s ability or willingness to hit Iranian targets inside Syria.
There’s no question that IAF action in Syria has been effective, not just in targeting weapons shipments arriving at Damascus airport, or in transit to Lebanon, but also in hitting facilities in Syria used by Iran and Hezbollah to upgrade missile accuracy. But there was a catch to Israel’s freedom of action inside Syria: if Iran and Hezbollah had little choice but to absorb Israeli strikes in Syria, hitting targets inside Lebanon would precipitate retaliation. As Israel worked to reduce the threat from Syria, the threat from Lebanese soil therefore continued to grow.
Israel has understood and accepted this equation. With but two exceptions over the past seven years, Israel has refrained from striking inside Lebanese territory, while Lebanon never stopped being Hezbollah’s and Iran’s operational headquarters.
In early 2017, there were reports of Iran and Hezbollah having set up production and assembly facilities in Lebanon to upgrade the group’s rockets—an effort that had begun the year before. While their operations in and through Syria continued, Iran and Hezbollah amplified their project in Lebanon as well. Soon, it became routine to see reports, citing U.S. and Western intelligence sources, of Iranian flights carrying arms and components for the missile upgrade facilities in Lebanon, landing directly in Beirut Airport.
These moves are the logical result of the agreement to keep Lebanon off limits. As Israel refrained from taking action in Lebanon for the past seven years, with the expressed recognition that to do so could, or likely even would, trigger a war, Hezbollah interpreted Israel’s decision as a form of effective deterrence. Sure, Netanyahu publicized Hezbollah’s missile facilities at the United Nations in September, and warned that Israel would not let them get away with it. But as of yet, not one missile facility or Iranian plane inside Lebanon has been blown up as they have in Syria. Now, Hezbollah is pushing the envelope, stretching the limits of the prevailing equation as far as they will go.
Which brings us back to Operation Northern Shield. There are two ways to read the operation. The first possibility is that Israel is setting the stage for military action, at the diplomatic level, by highlighting Hezbollah’s activities and the failure of the United Nation Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and the Lebanese government to stop them, as well as at the military level, by neutralizing an integral part of Hezbollah’s strategy for the next conflict. Like the publicizing of the missile facilities and the Iranian flights to Beirut Airport, this is all part of the necessary preparatory work ahead of any military campaign. For instance, if UNIFIL and the Lebanese government fail to dismantle the tunnels inside Lebanon and Israel is forced to do so by itself, and Hezbollah attacks, then the political leg-work already will have been done, and the onus for any wider conflict will be on Hezbollah and Iran.
The other possibility is that the operation falls within the framework of the past seven years, meaning that it aims to diminish Hezbollah’s capabilities and thus forestall a larger conflagration. As evidence for this possibility, one could point to reports of Israel’s advance warnings to Lebanon and to Hezbollah ahead of the operation, its decision, so far, to limit the operation to the Israeli side of the border while calling on UNIFIL to handle the Lebanese side, and its reported reassurances to Lebanon about its intention to avoid any escalation. This would fall in the category of calling on “the international community” to take action before Israel is forced to, a gesture whose goal is to buy time within the existing status quo.
But it’s entirely unclear whether Israel truly believes “the international community,” or, let’s be serious, the United States, will take action, and, if so, what that action might be. It’s not as though the United States has not been aware of the Iranian flights or the missile facilities, for example. In fact, over the past seven years, “preserving Lebanon’s stability” has been the declared U.S. policy, which dovetailed with Israel and Hezbollah’s de facto agreement to sideline Lebanon and focus on Syria. By “preserving Lebanon’s stability,” the United States allowed Hezbollah to shield itself and its activities in, and from, the country.
The paradox of current U.S. policy of “preserving the stability” of a country whose politics and armed forces are directly controlled by an Iranian terror group has created an open political farce. The two pillars of Washington’s policy of “stability” in Lebanon, UNIFIL and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), have been shown to be at best an embarrassing failure. At worst, they show the institutions of the Lebanese state to be actively shielding and facilitating Hezbollah’s military build-up. Not only were the tunnels that Israel is now destroying dug literally under UNIFIL’s nose, but Beirut Airport, where the Iranian flights are landing, is guarded by the LAF.
The premise of the current U.S. policy of distinguishing between the bad Hezbollah and the good “Lebanese government,” which might have once been seen as a noble fiction, is now an open joke. But the reality is, nobody other than Israel is going to do anything about it. The approach of the past seven years—that Israel can focus its operations on Syria and avoid them in Lebanon—is reaching the end of the line, if it hasn’t expired already.
With Iran and Hezbollah holding their positions in Syria, and no longer concerned about the collapse of their Syrian client Bashar Assad, the Lebanon problem is now firmly back at center stage. Hezbollah and its Lebanese government are betting the bipartisan embrace by U.S. policymakers of the fiction of Lebanese state institutions, which in reality are controlled by and provide institutional cover for Hezbollah, will complicate any Israeli decision to act against the strategic threat being posed by Iran. On the other hand, it seems unlikely that Israel will accept a large arsenal of guided missiles controlled by Iran and targeting its major population centers and strategic sites as part of a new regional status quo.
Instead of confining itself within Hezbollah’s preferred rules of engagement, and thereby cementing the group’s dangerous delusion that it has achieved deterrence—a delusion that is likely to lead to further aggression—Israel might consider throwing the ball in Hezbollah’s court. If they think they’re immune in Lebanon, even now that the Syrian war is decided, they should think again. If Hezbollah then chooses to escalate by provoking another conflict, they would invite a devastating thrashing, along with the destruction of considerable portions of Lebanese infrastructure, all while Iran reels under sanctions.
In May, Netanyahu spelled out the choice Israel faces in clear terms: “We don’t want confrontation, but if there needs to be one, it is better now than later.” While the political and PR risks of such a conflict are very real, as are the lives of Israeli civilians, to say nothing of the Lebanese who are being used as human shields by Iran and Hezbollah, they would only worsen with a large alteration of the strategic status quo in Iran’s favor, which is likely to lead to an exponentially greater loss of life on the Israeli side of the border.
Alternately, Netanyahu might well opt to kick the can down the road one more time. But he is running out of road.
**Tony Badran, Tablet magazine’s Levant analyst, is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He tweets @AcrossTheBay.
https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/277051/netanyahu-lebanon-hezbollah?utm_source=tabletmagazinelist&utm_campaign=89ddb1d9bc-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_13_03_48&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c308bf8edb-89ddb1d9bc-207800041

Latest LCCC English Miscellaneous Reports & News published on December 13-14/18
2 killled, 2 seriously hurt in West Bank shooting attack
Elisha Ben Kimon, Yishai Porat/Ynetnews/December 13/18
All four victims in their 20s; 1 gunman shot, manhunt on for others; incident comes hours after 2 Border Police hurt in Jerusalem. Two people were killed and two more seriously wounded Thursday in a shooting attack in the West Bank, north of Jerusalem. The attack - a drive-by shooting on Route 60, a central artery that runs through the West Bank - occurred at around 11:15am, some 5km south of the West Bank settlement of Ofra, at a bus stop next to the Giv'at Asaf outpost. All four victims were in their 20s. The wounded were taken to Shaare Zedek Hospital in Jerusalem.  The Israel Defense Forces said in a statement that the gunman exited his vehicle and opened fire on soldiers and civilians standing at a bus stop at the Asaf Junction. The gunman then returned to his vehicle and fled the scene, sparking an IDF manhunt. The scene of the shooting attack in the West Bank, December 13, 2018 (Video: Tazpit). The army bolstered its troops and placed a closure on the area following the attack. The closure extends to and includes the city of Ramallah, which is the seat the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. The IDF expressed concern that the shooting could lead to copycat attacks and said it was exploring the possibility of a link between the shooting and Sunday's terror attack at the Ofra settlement.  "We are continuing our counter-terrorism activities, including securing the area and searching for the attackers from both incidents," the army said. The shooting came hours after two Border Police officers were lightly hurt in a stabbing in the Old City of Jerusalem. At around 5am, a terrorist heading from the direction of the Damascus Gate drew a knife, jumped a Jewish man on Hagai Street, and tried to stab him. After he failed to do so, he ran towards two Border Police officers who were stationed nearby and tried to stab them as well. One of them shot and killed the terrorist, a 26-year-old resident of the West Bank. A 19-year-old Border Policewoman was stabbed in her extremities and was moderately hurt. After arriving at the Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem's Ein Karem, there has been an improvement in her condition and it is now defined as light. A 21-year-old Border Policeman was lightly hurt and was taken to the Shaare Zedek Medical Center in the capital.

Pentagon: Offensive against Kurds in Syria ‘unacceptable’
AFP, Washington/Thursday, 13 December 2018/Any unilateral military action in northern Syria would be “unacceptable,” the Pentagon warned Wednesday after Turkey said it would soon launch an operation against a US-backed Kurdish militia. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey would begin the operation “within days” to target the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), which Ankara considers a “terrorist offshoot” of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). “Unilateral military action into northeast Syria by any party, particularly as US personnel may be present or in the vicinity, is of grave concern,” Pentagon spokesman Commander Sean Robertson said in a statement. “We would find any such actions unacceptable.”American forces have worked closely with the YPG under the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) alliance, which has played a key role in the war against ISIS. American forces are with the SDF east of the Euphrates as well as in the flashpoint city of Manbij, which is west of the river. “Coordination and consultation between the US and Turkey is the only approach to address issues of security concern in this area,” Robertson said. “We are committed to working closely and recently held a high level working group on Syria with our Turkish partners precisely to enhance our cooperation, coordination, and consultation.” The Pentagon has repeatedly warned that any fighting between the Turks and the SDF would be a dangerous distraction from the core US mission in Syria of fighting ISIS. “We should not and cannot allow (ISIS) to breathe at this critical point or we will jeopardize the significant gains we have made alongside our coalition partners and risk allowing (ISIS) to resurge,” Robertson said. The Pentagon on Tuesday said American observation posts in northern Syria, meant to prevent altercations between the Turkish army and the YPG, have been erected, despite Ankara’s request to scrap the move.

UN Chief: We are witnessing beginning of the end of Yemeni crisis
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English/Thursday, 13 December 2018/United Nations Secretary General, Antonio Guterres held on Thursday a press conference on the final day of UN brokered peace talks on the Yemeni crisis, which convened last Thursday in Rimbo, Sweden and ended today.
The UN Chief stressed that what have been achieved so far between the two sides is an important step for the Yemeni people, the most important of which being deals on the Yemeni cities of Taiz and Hodeidah. He added that he believes both Yemeni delegates representing the legitimate government and the Houthis achieved real development in the negotiations. He said: “We are witnessing the beginning of the end of the Yemen crisis” He further revealed that the Yemeni president Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi - whose government is internationally recognized - expressed his full support of the outcomes of Sweden peace talks. Guterres also announced reaching an agreement regarding Hodeidah city and its ports, which will improve the living standards of millions of Yemenis. A deal has also been reached on aid reaching the city of Taiz. The next round of Yemeni negotiations will be held in January 2019, as Guterres said. The UN secretary general assured that all efforts will be made to help the Yemeni people solve their problems."The deal on Hodeidah was one of the hardest things we faced, but it will have a huge influence on the humanitarian and security situation. I congratulate both delegations on reaching this deal," said Guterres. Earlier on Thursday, a UN spokeswoman told reporters that the parties to the Yemeni conflict, who held indirect negotiations, received 4 draft agreements, and are expected to put forward their respond by Thursday evening, while the outcomes of the peace talks will be presented to the UN Security Council on Friday, according to the spokeswoman.

Iranian activist on hunger strike dies in prison
Saleh Hamid, Al Arabiya English/Thursday, 13 December 2018/
Vahid Sayadi Nasiri, an Iranian political activist, who had been held in Qom Prison for criticizing Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, died on Wednesday, on 60th day of a hunger strike, Human rights group reported on Thursday. HRANA, a news agency in Iran dedicated solely to reporting on human rights issues, quoted the family of Nasiri, who is their only son, that the later was released recently from an Iranian prison only to be arrested back early last August by Qom’s intelligence unit who later on threw him in the city’s prison. According to HRANA, Nasiri was sentenced to four years and half in prison on charges of insulting Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and “propaganda against the state.” The charge stemmed from postings Nasiri made on his Facebook account. According to Nasiri’ sister, he had been on hunger strike to protest being kept in a high security section in Qom Prison and to demand being transferred to Evin Prison. Nasiri went on hunger strike in October 2018 to protest being locked up with ordinary criminals which violates Iran’s own regulations on the principle of separation of crimes. The Iranian political activist’s hunger strike affected his digestive system, leaving him unable to take any liquids due to the prison negligence, according to Nasiri family. The family added that, after their son collapsed he was transferred by the prison administration to the hospital, and informed them that he died in the hospital on Wednesday, after the deterioration of his health suddenly, asking them to collect his body for burial. During a wave of popular protests in Iran that broke out on December 28 and lasted for several months, 10 detainees died under torture, while 25 people were killed by security protesters. Iranian MP Ali Reza Rahimi, announced that the authorities arrested about 5000 people during the recent protests, which broke out in more than 100 cities in different parts of the country.

Syria Democratic Forces escalate attacks to expel ISIS from Syria’s Hajin
Juan Suez, Al Arabiya English/Thursday, 13 December 2018/The Syria Democratic Forces said that the escalated military offensive to expel ISIS extremist group’s elements from the Hajin pocket, on the eastern bank of the Euphrates River close to the Iraqi border, is a continuous operation on many fronts. Laila al-Abdullah, an official spokeswoman for the Deir al-Zour military council of SDF told Al Arabiya English that: “The military operations to expel ISIS from Hajin town are still continuing on three axes, up to the Iraqi border.”She added: “Our forces have managed to liberate hundreds of civilians stranded in areas considered a stronghold of ISIS.”The spokeswoman said that ISIS was using the civilians as human shields in the area, adding that the “clashes at the highest levels and are still going on until the moment.”She explained that ISIS elements are carrying surprise attacks against the SDF fighters who are retaliating back. In addition, the spokeswoman al-Abdullah revealed that “SDF tightened its grip on the extremist group in three axes within the town of Hajin.”According to the spokeswoman, the biggest obstacles faced by the SDF fighters, is the large number of mines planted by ISIS in areas they pulled out from, as well as the use of civilians as human shields after their detention. She pointed out that: “The battle against ISIS requires more time to end its existence,” adding that “hundreds of its members are in SDF jails, including leaders of the organization of foreign nationalities and others local leaders.”SDF forces tightened grip on ISIS in three axes within the town of Hajin, the last stronghold on the border with Iraq. (Supplied)
Official position
Last month, Syria’s Democratic Forces, resumed its offensive against ISIS in the region, 10 days after it was suspended after a Turkish bombing of Kurdish positions north of Syria. Hundreds of fighters have been brought to the Hajin pocket close to the Iraqi border, as part of SDF effort to end the presence of terrorists, estimated at 2,000 by the US-led coalition. Despite Turkey’s threats to launch a ground operation east of the Euphrates River against SDF within two days, the battle against ISIS continues in Hajin. For their part the US-backed Kurdish militia in Syria warned Wednesday that an offensive against it by Turkey would hinder the battle against ISIS, according to AFP. The warning came just hours after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Ankara would launch an operation “in the next few days” against territory held by Kurdish forces in northern Syria.The Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) partners with Washington in the fight against ISIS, but Turkey says the group is a “terrorist offshoot” of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The YPG forms the backbone of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the US-led coalition’s key ground partner in the fight against ISIS currently battling to oust extremists from their last holdout in eastern Syria. In the chaos of Syria’s brutal seven-year war, the long-oppressed Kurdish minority has carved out a semi-autonomous region in the north of the country. Ankara fears an entrenched Kurdish presence across the border will stoke separatist ambitions at home. In January, Turkish forces backed Syrian rebels to clear the YPG from its northwestern enclave of Afrin, west of the Euphrates River. The semi-autonomous administration’s executive council appealed to the United Nations, the anti-ISIS coalition and the broader international community “to take a stand against Erdogan’s aggressive plans”.“We also call on the Syrian government to take an official position against these threats,” the council said in a statement Wednesday.

Israeli forces kill Palestinian suspected over West Bank shooting
AFP, Jerusalem/Thursday, 13 December 2018/Israeli security forces on Wednesday shot dead a Palestinian suspected in the shooting of seven Israelis including a pregnant woman whose baby later died. The Shin Bet security service said in a statement that a suspect named as Salah Omar Barghouti, 29, who tried to evade capture during a raid on a West Bank village was shot and killed. The statement did not say if Barghouti was suspected of being the gunman or an accomplice. It said an unspecified number of other suspects were arrested. The Shin Bet announcement came hours after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed that those who carried out Sunday’s drive-by shooting near a Jewish settlement in the Israeli-occupied West bank would be found and brought to justice. He spoke shortly after a Jerusalem hospital announced the death of the baby boy, delivered by emergency caesarean section after his mother was shot. She was 30-weeks pregnant. “We lost a few hours ago a newborn baby, four days old,” Netanyahu said in an address to foreign media. “We will find the killers, we haven’t stopped searching. We will find them and bring them to justice,” he said.
Twitter message
The newborn was buried late Wednesday on Jerusalem’s Mount of Olives, opposite the walled Old City. US peace envoy Jason Greenblatt said in a Twitter message that the death was “absolutely heart-breaking”.“My thoughts & prayers are with the family of the baby who died today as a result of the despicable terror attack on Sunday,” he wrote. “This is an attack Hamas praised as ‘heroic’“. “The world must strongly condemn this terror and not remain silent,” Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, said in a statement. Following the attack the 21-year-old mother was reported as stable, but the Shaare Zedek hospital said Monday that her baby had taken a turn for the worse. The child died “despite the medical efforts of the premature baby unit to save him,” the hospital said on Wednesday. Palestinian attacks against Israelis occur sporadically in the West Bank. Sunday’s shooting north of Jerusalem was the most serious attack in the West Bank since October 7, when Palestinian Ashraf Naalwa shot two Israelis dead in an industrial zone for a nearby settlement.

Yemen Coalition Partner UAE Welcomes Hodeida Ceasefire
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/December 13/18/The United Arab Emirates, a key ally of Yemen's government in a Saudi-led coalition fighting the Huthi rebels, on Thursday welcomed a UN-brokered ceasefire for the battleground port city of Hodeida. "We welcome the (truce) accord reached in Sweden," UAE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash said on Twitter. He attributed the deal to military pressure by the coalition, which intervened in 2015 after the rebels seized the capital Sanaa as well as Hodeida and its vital Red Sea port. "The diplomatic progress was made possible by sustained military pressure against the Huthis along the Red Sea and around Hodeida," Gargash said. He also revealed that there were 5,000 Emirati soldiers engaged in fighting to recapture Hodeida from the rebels. UN chief Antonio Guterres, announcing the ceasefire, said the United Nations would play a "leading role" at the port.

UK PM Survives Confidence Vote over Brexit Deal
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/December 13/18/British Prime Minister Theresa May on Wednesday survived a confidence vote by her own MPs but lost the support of one third of her colleagues, signalling the battle she still faces to get her Brexit deal through parliament. May won the backing of 200 Conservative lawmakers, but 117 voted to oust her -- and only after she conceded she would step down before the 2022 election. "I'm pleased to have received the backing of my colleagues in tonight's ballot," she said outside her Downing Street office after the result was announced. "A significant number of colleagues did cast votes against me and I've listened to what they've said."She said she wanted to "get on with the job of delivering Brexit", and to see "politicians on all sides coming together". The result, announced after a secret ballot, was met with huge cheers from May's supporters gathered in parliament, while the pound rose on the news. But leading Brexit rebel Jacob Rees-Mogg, one of at least 48 Tory MPs who triggered the vote by writing a letter of no confidence in May, said it was a "terrible result". "She ought to go and see the queen and resign urgently," he told the BBC.
Brexit figurehead Nigel Farage tweeted that May "limps on to her next failure, the deal won't pass and the real crisis is close". Rees-Mogg and other eurosceptics hate the divorce deal May agreed with the EU last month, which they fear risks tying Britain to the bloc for years after Brexit on March 29. The confidence vote followed her decision on Monday to postpone a planned vote in the House of Commons on the text, because she feared a crushing defeat. She has promised to hold that vote by January 21 -- when she may yet still lose, plunging the Brexit process into fresh crisis.
Irish warning
May heads to Brussels on Thursday for a pre-planned EU summit, where she will press fellow leaders to give her something to help sell the Brexit deal to sceptical MPs. Many Conservatives, and the Northern Irish Democratic Unionists (DUP) who prop up the government, fear an arrangement to keep open the Irish border could see Britain trapped in an endless customs union with the EU. After a whistlestop tour of European capitals on Tuesday, she said on Wednesday she would continue to seek "legal and political assurances" over the temporary nature of the so-called "backstop". But while EU leaders expressed sympathy for her difficulties, they firmly rejected any attempt to renegotiate a Brexit deal that was only secured last month after 17 months of talks. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Wednesday she still "has hope for an orderly exit" but "no intention to change the exit agreement". Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar had a similar message after a call late Wednesday with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. His office said the pair "agreed to work to provide reassurance to the UK (but) the agreement cannot be reopened or contradicted".
'Enough to cling on'
MPs and ministers had rallied round May ahead of the vote, and finance minister Philip Hammond said May's victory would unite the party and "flush out the extremists". But in a private meeting with MPs before they cast their ballots, she acknowledged the weakness of her position by setting a limit on her own leadership, lawmakers said. "It is not her intention to lead the party in the 2022 general election," Solicitor General Robert Buckland told the BBC afterwards. May is now immune to further Conservative confidence votes for a year, but if defeated on her Brexit deal, her government could still face a confidence vote in parliament. Simon Hix, of the London School of Economics, said Wednesday's result was "enough to cling on, but 117 against her means the Commons arithmetic on Brexit is now even tougher". Labour's Brexit spokesman Keir Starmer said it showed the "Tory civil war... is far from over", adding: "More trouble ahead." The delays to the Brexit deal have prompted both the EU and Britain to step up preparations for the potentially disastrous scenario where there is no agreement at all.

Ottawa Says Second Canadian Questioned in China Now 'Missing'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/December 13/18/Ottawa on Thursday identified the second Canadian questioned in China as Michael Spavor, and said he has been missing since he last made contact with Canadian officials.
Spavor, who is based in China, runs the Paektu Cultural Exchange, an organisation that facilitates business, tourism and sport trips to North Korea and famously helped former NBA star Dennis Rodman visit the isolated country. His disappearance emerged days after former Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig was detained during a visit to Beijing. "We are aware that a Canadian citizen, Mr. Michael Spavor, is presently missing in China," Canadian foreign ministry spokesman Guillaume Berube told AFP in an email. "We have been unable to make contact since he let us know he was being questioned by Chinese authorities," he said. "We are working very hard to ascertain his whereabouts and we continue to raise this with the Chinese government."The arrest and disappearance of two Canadian nationals came more than a week after Ottawa infuriated Beijing by arresting Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of Chinese telecom giant Huawei, at Washington's request. Meng was released on Can$10 million (US$7.5 million) bail by a court in Vancouver on Tuesday.

Renault board maintains Carlos Ghosn as CEO, says pay was legal
Thu 13 Dec 2018/NNA - The board of the French automaker Renault said Thursday it was keeping Carlos Ghosn as its chief executive, after an internal review of his pay package found that it had conformed with French law. Ghosn has been held under arrest in Japan since November 19 on charges of financial misconduct and under-reporting his pay as head of Renault's partner Nissan, which has since sacked him as chairman. He has also been dismissed as chairman of Mitsubishi, another Renault partner. ---AFP

Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on December 13-14/18
Power Politics or Principle?
Nathan J. Brown & Cassia Bardos/Diwan (Carnegia Middle East Centre)/December 12/18
An arcane dispute between Egypt’s president and Al-Azhar is really about moral leadership in society.
After publicly squabbling over divorce law and religious language, Egypt’s presidency and its leading Islamic institution, Al-Azhar, have moved their clash to a much more arcane level. Today, they disagree over how much society is threatened by debating the authenticity of hadiths—the accounts of the statements and actions of the prophet Mohammed and the early Muslims—and their role in Islamic law.
If the subject matter is puzzling, the tensions come from a constrained but portentous struggle over the president’s and Al-Azhar’s relative roles in the moral leadership of Egyptian society. Both Ahmad al-Tayyib, the grand imam of Al-Azhar, and President ‘Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi delivered formal addresses to dignitaries assembled for the prophet’s birthday on November 19. Tayyib denounced those who questioned the authenticity of hadiths, since hadiths form the basis of much of Islamic law. While the Qur’an takes precedence, the holy book’s clearly legal statements are far fewer and sometimes more general in nature than hadiths, as Tayyib pointed out. It was not surprising that he did so, since hadiths comprise the sunnah, or the practice of the prophet and the early community that gives Sunni Islam its name. There was little with which a pious Muslim Egyptian respecting the moral and religious leadership of Al-Azhar could disagree.
But when Sisi rose, he added extemporaneous comments to his prepared text, indirectly but unambiguously rebuking Tayyib. He did not question the authenticity of hadiths (this would be a bridge he showed no interest in crossing), but he dismissed the significance of the problem. The real threat, he averred, came not from questioning hadiths, but instead from perverse interpretations of religion. “The current dilemma worldwide is not about following the sunnah or not. It is about the wrong understanding of our religion,” Sisi said, before asking: “Are those calling for the abandonment of the sunnah more wrongful than those who misinterpreted our religion?”
What was going on? Why did the president feel compelled to do battle with a figure who poses as someone above politics on an issue that would appear abstruse to most political leaders? In one sense, the dispute was political and has burst out on public occasions before as the presidency strives to consolidate its hold over the Egyptian state and society.
The Egyptian state today—however wide its reach—has come to be dominated by the presidency and security institutions. Previously autonomous state actors, such as the administrative courts, have found their wings clipped. In society, almost all leading political figures have seen their voices and influence eliminated. As Michele Dunne has written, “most Egyptians who had played important roles in public life between the mid-2000s and the 2013 coup [are] either in prison or in exile abroad in what [amounts] to a massive brain drain.” The regime has also reined in trade unions and professional associations, other past sources of independent activism in Egypt.
But Al-Azhar and the religious sector has retained something of an independent voice. This is true in a formal sense, as the institution’s leaders have blunted efforts by the state to reverse the autonomy Al-Azhar won in 2011. However, Al-Azhar’s autonomy relies on more than chains of command. Tayyib also has constituencies willing to support him. Millions of graduates of Al-Azhar’s educational institutions, members of Sufi brotherhoods and southern Egyptian tribes linked to the grand imam, and members of the religious public alienated by the regime’s 2013 violence, all will rally not to challenge the regime but to defend Tayyib’s integrity and position.
For its part, the regime has many tools to deploy that go far beyond public spats. It controls all media, so that when Al-Azhar scholars issue their opinions on religious controversies in the form of statements, media outlets can be told to ignore or delete coverage of these. This occurred recently, after the council of Al-Azhar’s senior scholars publicly attacked a Tunisian draft law granting equality in inheritance to men and women as representing a violation of very clear religious texts. Pro-regime media in Egypt may have been told not to report on the statement.
There are other tools as well. The Egyptian armed forces recently organized its tenth seminar for Al-Azhar students, which reportedly aimed to “increase the awareness of school and university students of the heroic actions of the armed forces to eliminate terrorism.” Thus, for the well-armed regime, the grand imam of Al-Azhar may be annoying (and Sisi has said as much), but he is not threatening.
So is the tension only about power politics, not principle? Actually, religion is very much at issue, and the ostensible dispute—over the significance of challenging hadiths—is quite relevant to the matter. The president is focused on perceived security threats, and is therefore calling for support in combating radical ideas, an effort he sees as being hindered by the fetters and distractions of bookishness.
For Tayyib, the sunnah is central and those who are trained in interpreting an intellectual tradition that is over one thousand years old should be accorded respect and deference. Reform is very much in order, but to the grand imam textual fidelity is a sign of piety, expertise, and righteousness, not obscurantism. Those who wish to squeeze new interpretations out of that tradition cannot abandon unambiguous Qur’anic texts or authentic hadiths.
In short, the conflict between Sisi and Tayyib is both religious and political, centering on leadership and the relative roles of civil authorities who lead the political system and religious scholars trained in textual interpretation. The president and grand imam are not engaged in a dramatic war of maneuver, but instead in a grinding war of positions, over the oversight of sermons in mosques, the issuing of fatwas, and reform of the curriculum used to train imams.
And it is this last area—what is taught—that may actually be the most important field of battle in the long term, even though the controversy is more complicated and quieter, as the regime attempts to wrest the matter out of Al-Azhar’s hands. The Ministry of Religious Endowments is pushing an initiative in which imams will be trained at the National Academy, which is attached to the presidency, rather than at Al-Azhar. The ministry recently announced that it had finished preparing its curriculums and will start training imams at the academy by the end of January 2019. The curriculums will reportedly include not only religious science but also law, politics, sociology, and psychology. That’s because officials have often criticized Al-Azhar’s training programs for including only religious science, which they say does not encourage enlightened thinking.
Going forward, the regime may have to double down on its attempts to subordinate Al-Azhar through more subtle means so as not to push directly against a still widely venerated institution in Egyptian society and the Muslim world. Tayyib’s autonomy and constituencies allow him to strike an independent voice, making periodic bouts of public tension again likely in Egyptian political and religious life. http://carnegie-mec.org/diwan/77928?lang=en

Analysis/West Bank Spirals Into Violence as Hamas Ups Efforts to Orchestrate Attacks
تحليل سياسي من الهآررتس لهاريل عاموس: الضفة الغربية تواجه تصاعداً في عمليات العنف وحماس تسعى لإدارة الهجمات
Amos Harel/Haaretz/December 13/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/69939/amos-harel-haaretz-west-bank-spirals-into-violence-as-hamas-ups-efforts-to-orchestrate-attacks-%d8%aa%d8%ad%d9%84%d9%8a%d9%84-%d8%b3%d9%8a%d8%a7%d8%b3%d9%8a-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%87%d8%a2/
Return of deadly West Bank attack could harm Israeli security coordination with Abbas’ forces ■ Spate of recent attacks could inspire copycats and lead to a cycle of revenge and retribution
In the space of a few hours overnight between Wednesday and Thursday, Israel’s security forces chalked up two successes in their manhunts in search of the perpetrators of West Bank terrorist attacks. But the Palestinian response was quick to come this time. In what appears to be a revenge attack, given its location and timing, two Israelis were killed and two injured Thursday morning in another settlers’ hitchhiking stop north of the West Bank city of Ramallah.
On Wednesday night, members of the police’s special anti-terrorism unit killed a Hamas member suspected of carrying out the drive-by shooting Sunday near the West Bank settlement of Ofra. The suspect in the attack, in which a baby was killed and six other Israeli civilians wounded, was killed north of Ramallah. Several others of those implicated in the attack were arrested. A few hours later, another force from the same police counterterrorism unit killed in the Askar refugee camp in Nablus the terrorist who had murdered two Israeli civilians in an attack in the Barkan industrial zone of the West Bank at the beginning of October.
Both of the terrorists who were killed were armed. In both cases, the assessment is that they intended to carry out additional attacks in the near future in an effort to replicate what they had already committed. The two were nabbed by members of the most highly skilled unit that carries out operations of this kind. In any event, one can assume that members of the country’s political and security leadership didn’t shed tears over the fact that what began as an operation to arrest the suspects ended with their killings.
A few hours later, another shooting attack took place, similar to the on that took place outside of Ofra Sunday. The incident may have been to revenge the killings, but the timing was meaningful too – a day before the anniversary of Hamas’ founding.
The recent series of incidents is a recipe for escalation, due to the possibility that there could be additional attempts to duplicate the success of the terrorists and generate a cycle of revenge attacks. The Israeli army has decided to reinforce its troop presence in the West Bank for the second time this week. The idea is that the additional forces would serve as a fire blanket of sorts that would prevent the fire’s spread.
At the same time, the army has sealed off Ramallah. Sensitivity with regard to the city is particularly high because it is the capital of the Palestinian Authority and the place where most of the Palestinian security forces are centered.
The investigation of Thursday morning’s incident has only just begun. The Shin Bet security service has not released extensive details on their investigations of the two terrorist attacks, which were among the most serious to be committed recently in the West Bank. In recent weeks, there has been an increase in the number of terrorist attacks involving highway shootings in the West Bank. On average, in recent months, somewhere between four and eight shootings, stabbings or car-ramming attacks have been committed there per month. In at least some of the cases, it appears that these attacks reflect a growing hybrid phenomenon that is more difficult for the security forces to deal with.
During the second intifada, which broke out in 2000, the Israeli army and the Shin Bet learned how to deal well with relatively organized terrorist infrastructure belonging to organizations such as Hamas or Islamic Jihad.
It was the endless string of arrests (and in the peak years of the conflict, sometimes assassinations) that created an effect on the ground that was dubbed “mowing the lawn,” meaning systematically hitting at the infrastructure, which prevented the groups from developing and reestablishing their knowhow. In the fall of 2015, a different phenomenon hit the West Bank and East Jerusalem, with an unprecedented extent: Attacks by lone-wolf terrorists.
Hundreds of young people, both male and female, acting on their own and without an organizational network behind them, set out to commit attacks, with kitchen knives in hand, or in the case of ramming attacks, the steering wheel of the family car. But Israel also gradually learned how to act in the face of these methods. Intensive monitoring of internet social networks used by Palestinians, in addition to effective warning talks from Palestinian Authority security forces, headed off a considerable portion of the cases in which potential terrorists would have set out on an attack.
Another phenomenon is a hybrid of sorts of the two other categories. It involves local cells, for the most part without any declared ideological affiliation, that organize based on personal or family acquaintance. Such cells are responsible for some of the recent attacks. There are instances in which those around the terrorist mobilize after the terrorist acts, to provide him cover, as apparently happened with the terrorist in the Barkan industrial zone.
But the primary risk from what has been happening in the West Bank relates to Hamas’ conduct. A Shin Bet statement issued at the end of last month about the arrest of a Hebron-area resident who had been trained as an explosives “engineer” attracted little attention in Israel. What was new in the disclosure was how the engineer was deployed.
In recent years, hundreds of attempts by Hamas leadership in the Gaza Strip and abroad to carry out attacks in Israel and the West Bank using cells in the West Bank have been foiled. The hierarchy in these cases has been clear: Saleh al-Arouri, of the Hamas military wing, who currently splits his time between Lebanon and Turkey, has led the operations, while two entities worked under him, known as the West Bank headquarters and the West Bank region. Some of their operations relied on terrorists from the West Bank who were expelled to the Gaza Strip as part of the 2011 prisoner exchange agreement for the release of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.
Hamas has not given up on the effort, but it appears to have switched approaches. The engineer who was arrested, Awis Rajoub, was deployed directly by people in the Gaza Strip, without a connection to Arouri and the Shalit deportees. The organization appears to be seeking to streamline the command hierarchy and improve its operational results. These efforts are sufficiently important for Hamas to continue to pursue them at the same time that it attempts to reach a long-term cease-fire agreement with Israel in the Gaza Strip. Gaza and the West Bank are separate matters.
Hamas’ approach has remained unchanged. A resumption of lethal terrorist attacks from the West Bank would make things difficult for Israel, harming security cooperation with the Palestinian Authority’s security services, undermining the stability of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ rule, and would certainly do damage to an orderly transfer of power to Abbas’ successors.
In the Gaza Strip, based on assessments in the Israeli intelligence community, Hamas is wary of war. The continued flow of fuel and funds to pay salaries in Gaza, financed by Qatar, is designed to help maintain relative quiet, but the possibility of an escalation in the West Bank could also seep into Gaza.
But Hamas will not achieve a long-term agreement without it being assured of the achievement of the goals that it has set for itself: a substantial easing of the blockade of the Gaza Strip, considerable improvements to the state of the civilian infrastructure there as well as maintaining its military power. Hamas does not view a deal on the return of two Israeli civilians and the body of two Israeli soldiers as an essential part of the process. From its standpoint, that’s a separate question that should be considered separately from the contacts regarding a cease-fire over an extended period.

Fawzia Zainal elected first woman Speaker of Bahraini parliament
Ismaeel Naar/Al Arabiya/December 13/2018
Bahrain’s parliament made history on Wednesday when it elected MP Fawzia Zainal as its first female Speaker of the Council of Representatives.
Zainal, who won 25 votes from the 40-member lower house chamber, became the second woman to head a parliament in the Gulf Arab region after the United Arab Emirates (UAE) made history in 2015 when it appointed Amal al-Qubaisi as president of the country’s Federal National Council (FNC).
The Supreme Council for Women in Bahrain praised the high achievement by a Bahraini woman of presiding over the parliament through direct voting and election. “I will work with my fellow MPs to implement the political, economic and social implications set out in His Majesty’s speech, and will use all the constitutional and legal instruments available that elevates our precious Kingdom of Bahrain and preserve its security, stability and advance its position in the field of sustainable and human development,” Zainal said in one her first statements as parliament Speaker.
Fawzia Zainal chairs his first session of parliament on Dec. 12, 2018. (via @sawsanalshaer)
Zainal, who contested the local elections for a third time after having come close to winning a seat in 2014 but falling short by a mere 288 votes in a run-off round in her East Riffa fourth district against her male opponent. Speaking to Al Arabiya English in the previous week, Zainal said it’s been a long time coming as she saw her support base grow over the years. “In 2006 when I first ran, the elections were crowded by political societies and gender was a main topic of discussion among voters. Over time, that became less of an issue as voters’ awareness of politics and society grew and matured where they were able to see past a candidate’s gender as a factor but rather what they could bring to the table,” she told Al Arabiya English.
Bahraini women finally broke the proverbial glass ceiling this year when six Bahraini women MPs broke their country’s record of female representation in parliament when official results on Dec. 2 confirmed that they – along with several fresh-faced independents – will make up part of the island-kingdom’s fifth legislative term. Bahrain’s Minister of Justice Shaikh Khalid bin Ali Al Khalifa said that the voter turnout was estimated at 67%. (Supplied) Sawsan Kamal, Zainab Abdul Amir, Massoma Abdul Raheem and Kaltham Al Hayki and Fatima Al Qatari will join Zainal in parliament as female MPs.
Unlike other countries in the region, Bahrain has no quota for female representation in parliament and many Bahrainis view such a system to be in contravention of Bahrain’s constitution and the National Action Charter, a document passed in 2001 that set in motion a wide range of political, social and economic reforms in the kingdom, which gained the approval of 98.4 per cent of the people in a national referendum at the time.

Pope’s visit, ‘Alliance of Virtues’ and partnership between religions
Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/December 13/2018
The history of wars between Muslims, Christians and Jews fills volumes of books. Does this history of wars and conflicts fix history on the 13th century when these wars peaked and each party committed crimes against the other?
Or do mutual human values, the language of wisdom, dialogue and pillars of tolerance erase this heavy legacy, especially since people coming together has become a reality, friendships between individuals from different religions have been enhanced by economic formulas and job markets and generations that did not drown in bitter memories have emerged? Students studying abroad visit Christians’ homes and Christians envelop cities and monuments. There is no language of hate between individuals like the case is between leaders and between entities. Hence came the UAE’s announcement that it will receive Pope Francis in February, which is unique visit in the history of the Gulf.
Few days ago, His Highness Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, visited Egypt to hand over Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb an invitation from His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE's Armed Forces, to visit the UAE and contribute to the conference dubbed The International Interfaith Meeting on Human Fraternity and which the Pope will attend. Tayeb spoke about the model of Emirati tolerance as a model that must be followed in the region. Meanwhile, in Abu Dhabi, and in parallel with announcing the visit, the Forum for Promoting Peace proposed a different rhetoric under the slogan “Alliance of Virtues – An Opportunity for Global Peace.” It was inaugurated by His Highness Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed and attended by more than 800 figures representing religions, humanitarian organizations and international human rights institutions. Muslim World League Secretary General Mohammed al-Issa spoke during the conference and emphasized that Islamic values have maintained everyone’s legitimate rights and freedoms and these values were not bestowed by humans to humans but from God. Issa said Islam does not accept harming the standard of fairness towards everyone and he separated between the practices of some people and their religious affiliations because Islam has included religious minorities in the early society by maintaining the rights of religions via a constitution known as the Charter of Medina.
Islam understands the presence of all religious as a universal inevitable norm that must be believed in as differences and diversity are part of humans’ nature, and the Quran has explicitly mentioned Christianity and Judaism. Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah also delivered a unique and renewed rhetoric that combines jurisprudential etymology and awareness in the era and its requirements. This reflected on the final statement which called for establishing a new “alliance of virtues” that includes creating a front of scholars and clerics to call for peace, reject exploiting religion in conflicts and wars, strengthen social contracts, root positive citizenship, respect all religious sanctities and strengthen international treaties. Choosing the name “Alliance of Virtues” which was the name of the charter reached between the people of Quraysh following fierce wars has its significance because dialogue between religions and enhancing tolerance among people serves the entire world and protects it from massacres, civil wars and absurd conflicts. There is no meaning for worries or sensing conspiracies during dialogue.
A dialogue cannot succeed if it’s plagued with seeking dominance and hegemony or with fearing the other and being worried of him
Christians in the Arab world
For example, in his book “We and Christians in the Arab World,” researcher Ezzeddine Inaya offers rich historical information but the conspiratorial analysis of dialogue between Muslims and Christians had content in a way that does not serve the project of enhancing peace among societies.
In a paragraph where he is talking about the stumbling dialogue between the Western Church and Islam, he wrote: “The Church’s dialogue with Islam kicked off in an intensified manner in the 60s of the past century at a time when the Islamic world was busy solidifying its feet on the ground after obnoxious colonization. At the time, the Islamic world’s capabilities in terms of knowledge was very humble and did not allow it to efficiently participate in formulating the philosophy of dialogue which the Catholic Church initiated after it was left free to act after the famous Vatican Council (1962-1965). Hence dialogue in the Islamic perspective is still in its beginnings in terms of its definition and the forms of its practice and tools. This (prevented) activating it in terms of its purposes and made the Church superior in reaping its fruit as for it, it is a pragmatic act that falls within the context of a (missionary plan).”
The Christians can talk about pragmatism brought up in conferences sponsored by Saudi Arabia and the UAE to hold dialogues between religions and promote tolerance and view this as measures to spread dawa and exploit these events to appeal to the sentiment of the Christians so they abandon their faith. These concerns do not suit efficient elite in the public sphere and who are expected to make theoretical efforts to mitigate the populist resistance against others who believe in a different religion! Dialogue must remain neutral and outside the hegemony of any party. Interlocutors do not have the right to use facts against one another. This does not produce understandings. Meeting at mutual points on the path between all parties is an essential goal of dialogue between parties that are different.
This is why the UAE has sought to balance the names of the participants and include figures from all religions and sects. The language of dialogue transcends history and takes away conspiratorial plans from the self. A dialogue cannot succeed if it’s plagued with seeking dominance and hegemony or with fearing the other and being worried of him. The survival of the elite from these two plagues are the introduction to any thoughtful understanding and solid dialogue! In his book “The Spirt of the Laws,” Montesquieu wrote: “When the legislator has believed it a duty to permit the exercise of many religions, it is necessary that he should enforce also a toleration among these religions themselves. It is necessary, then, that the laws require from the several religions, not only that they shall not embroil the state, but that they shall not raise disturbances among themselves.”

What is more important than vituperation between Trump and Tillerson
Mamdouh AlMuhaini/Al Arabiya/December 13/2018
It seems former US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is not a fan of the famous proverb: “Do not throw stone in the well you drank from.”
Tillerson has twice acted against it. The first time was when he doubted his president’s reason and morals when he still held his post (back then, he denied doing so), and the second time was when he repeated this again few days ago during a conversation session at an event in Houston.
Tillerson who is bitter due to his bad experience at the State Department and how he was sacked via a tweet said things that are well-known about Trump such as he does not like to read and prefers to watch news channels instead and hates to hear daily briefings.
However, he did say something new and it is that his boss asked him to break the law. However, he did not specify what the demands were exactly and this make the accusations insignificant and without any legal consequences.
Trump responded by saying Tillerson is dumb and lazy but these two characteristics do not apply to him. While he held his post, Tillerson was active going everywhere but without making tangible achievements. Of course, he is also one of the most prominent figures in the oil field hence he is not dumb. The drama of mutual insults has distracted people’s attention from the more important case and that is perhaps the less interesting and which is related to the differences between Trump’s first secretary of state and the second, Pompeo whom he praised a lot to enrage Tillerson.
How do they see the world and what are their political doctrines? How does Trump think and what does he want in terms of foreign policy? Trump was fiery and clear regarding domestic policy; fighting illegal immigration, decreasing high tax, protecting infiltrated borders and defending vulnerable workers. Trump appointed Mike Pompeo as secretary of state and ever since the administration has had a coherent and effective political rhetoric
Unclear speeches
In foreign policy though his speeches were less clear. They were contradictory. He worried his friends in a speech and reassured them in an interview afterwards. His appointments of officials however drew some of the features of this foreign policy.
They were traditional Republican figures who believe in the American international system, strengthening alliances with friends and combating rogue regimes. This raises a question though: If Trump thinks this way, why did he choose someone who opposes his ideas like Tillerson?
There were just guesses and assumptions regarding this question. It was said that Tillerson was not familiar with politics or diplomacy before and this seems like a point against him which Trump viewed in his favor. The untraditional president decided to choose a secretary of state who is not traditional and who carries new ideas and unexpected approaches. Others say that Tillerson was capable of exploiting his extensive relations thanks to his work in the oil industry in order to make deals with leaders who are old acquaintances and whom he has old trade ties with. And some said this strange appointment was a reward of friendship between the two men and an act of returning the favor between friends.
All these guesses evaporated in the air. It later turned out that they are not friends and what’s surprising is that Trump has not even met him before he got the job. It turned out that Tillerson does not have personal traits or strong ties that help him make diplomatic breakthroughs the Kissinger way. On the personal level, he was not friendly and charming. He actually has one facial expression that is gloomy and that does not change no matter how occasions change. What’s more important than all this is his way of thinking regarding foreign policy. It completely contradicts the approach of Trump’s administration and the doctrine of his men. He was not enthusiastic about confronting the Iranian regime and succeeded in thwarting two attempts by Trump to shred the nuclear deal. He opposed his president regarding sealing a deal with North Korea.
Hawkish figures
At the time when members of the Trump administration seemed like Republican hawkish figures who believe in the idea of the American system, Tillerson seemed like an old grumpy man who does not want anyone to dictate him what to do even if it is his boss. Due to these ideological differences, we saw the deep and public disputes between the president and Tillerson. It is probable that if Tillerson had still kept his post, we would have seen a different world where Tehran is not besieged and suffocated like it is today. This is not because he is bad or dumb or lazy like Trump said but because he sees the world from a different angle.  Afterwards, Trump appointed Mike Pompeo as secretary of state and ever since the administration has had a coherent and effective political rhetoric. Those who follow up on what Pompeo says can see that he’s not just an experienced politician but also someone who deeply believes in the traditional Republican doctrine, more than Trump who spent a great deal of his life in the world of money and business. It seems he influenced his boss and increased his knowledge and faith in this issue that’s vital and important for the stability of the world. If one analyzes Pompeo’s stances toward issues like Iran, he can realize the significance of these strong and clear positions in terms of standing in the face of the enemy and standing with friends even during critical times. All this contributed to forming the international order which collapsed after World War II and which the US along with its allies have succeeded in restoring to life and protecting for more than 70 years.

China’s Huawei headache: More than what meets the eye
Dr. Mohamed A. Ramady/Al Arabiya/December 13/2018
The arrest of Huawei Deputy Chair and CFO Meng Wangzhou in Canada, whether on US instructions or not, as there has been a White House distancing from the arrest warrant, is a new and unwelcome complicating factor in the hoped for trade war truce between the world’s largest economies.
While a Canadian court has released Ms Meng on bail, easing some pressure from China, market nervousness and a fall in global equity prices has illustrated the link between unintended political decisions and economic fortunes. How the Chinese react and respond is crucial to the unfolding events in Canada. Following the G20 Argentine meeting, President Xi Jinping presided over a crucial meeting in Zhongnanhai to discuss China’s global relations, the Buenos Aires trade summit with President Donald Trump, and the detention of the CFO of Huawei Technologies in Vancouver.
Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou was arrested by Canadian authorities on Dec. 1 at the request of the United States with Canadian Premier Trudeau stating that it was not a political decision but based on a judiciary arrest warrant. Meng faces US accusations that she misled multinational banks about Huawei’s control of a company operating in Iran, putting the banks at risk of violating U.S. sanctions and incurring severe penalties. Huawei is the world’s largest supplier of telecommunications network equipment and second-biggest maker of smartphones, with revenue of about $92 billion last year. Unlike other big Chinese technology firms, it does much of its business overseas including a strong presence in the Gulf, and the arrest of the company owner’s daughter could have ramifications on worldwide operations if not amicably resolved.
China has long felt that the US is unfair to its big tech firms - in particular Huawei, which is the closest the country has to a true Apple competitor
China’s dilemma
The Chinese face a dilemma though if they reciprocate against Apple operations in China as Apple does not just sell products to China, but makes them there. In 2017, Apple estimated that between manufacture, retail, distribution and software development it was responsible for 4.8m jobs in China and the company has opened research centres that are providing a home in China for the country’s brightest graduates. Taking punitive action is like cutting one’s nose to spite one’s face and despite real Chinese anger over the arrest and nationalistic pride to protect its citizens, this could mean Apple being spared Beijing’s retaliatory actions even if Ms Meng finds herself extradited to the US and even jailed. The Chinese feel that the issue is not really Iran banking sanctions but stifling Huawei’s impressive success against American rivals, especially Apple. The headlines in China is that Washington’s move to stifle Huawei by using Canada as a proxy will undermine itself and that banning Chinese companies like Huawei will isolate US from digital economy of the future as tech companies need each other. The fallout from her arrest will mean an even more difficult relationship for the handful of US tech giants that have found great fortune in China, in particular, Apple that relied on China for 20 percent of its revenues this past year. China has long felt that the US is unfair to its big tech firms - in particular Huawei, which is the closest thing the country has to a true Apple competitor.
While it doesn’t come close in terms of yearly revenue - $266 billion for Apple against an expected $100 billion or so for Huawei - the firm did manage to leapfrog Apple in global smartphone sales earlier this year and Huawei is now second only to Samsung, and making strong inroads in the lucrative Gulf market.
But the real success story for Huawei won’t come from smartphones, but the equipment that makes them worth having. Huawei is positioning itself as the vendor of choice for rolling out 5G technology, the next generation of mobile network, hence Chinese suspicion about the whole affair that it is to hobble Huawei.
Bizarre case
An element of face saving is required in this bizarre case as the Chinese are sticklers for protocol and felt that their leadership had been humiliated as neither Trump nor Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had informed Xi of the Huawei arrest in advance, and he was furious with both for being caught blindsided by what Beijing considers to be a pre-mediated provocation and act. In light of the arrest of Ms. Meng Wangzhou, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will as first preventive measure, certainly advise Chinese scientists, technology experts, and business people to take risk prevention measures, and for relevant departments, to reduce or even cancel some visits to the “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance countries, comprised of the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Canada’s “lawless, unreasonable, and callous misdeeds,” Xi said, have already caused serious damage to its relations with China. In a rather coincidental arrest of a former Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig in China, working since February 2017 as North East Asia senior advisor for the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based think tank that focuses on conflict reduction research, the Chinese have sent Canada a message although the Canadians have stated that the arrest of their citizen is not connected with Ms Meng’s case. Those who know China understand that nothing is pure coincidence in that country.
But the Chinese leadership did not want to burn all their bridges with America after the painstaking trade agreements in Argentina, which China also sees as benefitting its economy which has been coming under some stress from US tariffs.
At the meeting in Zhongnanhai, Xi nevertheless reinforced that China is still willing to reach a trade agreement with the U.S, and willing to import more American goods. Despite the negative impact of the Huawei incident, China will not suspend trade talks with the United States.
This does not mean that China will also give up on its basic red lines for future economic development as President Xi stressed that China must not abandon its core interests nor its high-tech development plans. China-US relations are seen to be at a major crossroads, and after the 90-day truce period, it will be up to the Trump Administration to decide whether to resume the trade war or not, in which case China will be forced to fight back. Given the fear of reciprocal visiting business executives arrests, for now President Xi is also reported to have said that China would not reciprocate to the Huawei incident by detaining American executives visiting or conducting business in China.
Long arms of the law
If, however, he added, the US were to extradite or arrest additional Chinese citizens with its allies, in what Beijing considers to be a “long arm” extension of America’s own domestic laws, Beijing would have no choice but to detain Americans unfriendly to China, and it could target both US companies and individuals who sell weapons to Taiwan. This also does not seem to be on the cards as both Chinese and U.S. officials appear to be avoiding linking her arrest to the trade dispute. President Trump also sees no benefit from this case and has said that he could intervene in the matter if he deems it necessary for the sake of higher US national interests. Speaking at a forum in Beijing the Chinese government’s top diplomat, State Councillor Wang Yi, said the government kept constant watch on the safety of Chinese citizens abroad, though did not directly mention Meng’s case but for the sake of placating Chinese public opinion he added that “for any bullying that wantonly violates the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese citizens, China will never sit idly by.”Acting against Apple and other high-tech US companies or arresting American executives might provoke President Trump to unleash a twitter barrage arguing that his America First policy and bringing jobs and manufacturing back to the US was right all along. Looking at the big picture, maybe the whole episode of the arrest of the Huawei executive is merely a side show in a battle for dominance for the future of advanced telecommunication technology and setting red markers for competitors.

Personal financial options for anticipated global economic slowdown
Walid Jawad/Al Arabiya/December 13/2018
Lean in ... the next Federal Reserve (Fed) meeting on December 19 can potentially affect your bank account - and you should take notice. If you are wondering if the Fed decision will affect people without a US bank account or living in the US altogether; the simple answer is: if it will affect people in the US, it will most likely affect the global economy. The effects of the upcoming decision will be far-reaching and deep. One of two outcomes will take place: either the Fed will raise the benchmark rate (anticipated at a quarter percent) or leave it unchanged at its current rate. The only problem is both decisions are fraught with a potentially perilous outcome. In a nutshell, the US economy has been performing well, while global economic growth is slowing down. The current US economic expansion is the second longest in its history lasting since mid-2009. As accurate as that statement may be, the winds of change are starting to shift. The latest stretch of volatile stock market performance caused the S&P to lose 1.5 percent on the year after last week's 4.6 percent drop. The largest single week drop since March. The Nasdaq and Dow Jones had a turbulent ride on Tuesday due to a number of policy and political factors. Inferring from economic data and gleaning from political dynamics is more of a skillful intuition painting a predictive picture of the future
Snapshot of factors
The US economy has been reaping the benefits of the $1.5 trillion tax cut Trump pushed through Congress last December. The accompanying boost in government spending has lead to low unemployment and prompted stronger growth has run its course and is no longer a factor. The trade wars between the US and China, the two largest world economies, is causing serious uncertainty in the market. When China signaled its willingness to lower the car tariffs down to 15 percent the market was abuzz early in the day this past Tuesday. A week earlier, the Tuesday prior, Trump send the stock market in a tailspin when he tweeted “I am a Tariff Man,” adding to the uncertainty of the outcome of trade negotiations between the two nations.  Numbers don’t lie, hindsight being 20/20 it’s easy to pontificate drawing a straight line between cause and effect. It is much harder to project into the future, especially at a time when experts are warning of an upcoming global depression. Inferring from economic data and gleaning from political dynamics is more of a skillful intuition painting a predictive picture of the future.
The numbers game
The current numbers are reflective of a volatile phase whereby big players are battling the gyrations for profits, while the rest of us are drifting in the seas of an increasingly unstable stock market. If you are a numbers person, you would be reassured by the latest low unemployment rate of 3.7 percent.
Even more reassuring is that inflation remains within the 2 percent target the Fed likes to maintain. This means that the Federal Reserves rate-setting policies have been working optimally. The current interest rate is in the target range of 2 to 2.25 percent, which is effectively balancing the US economy - an achievement that is hard to maintain.
So now, we must ask if the Fed will hike the rate by 0.25 percent in their next meeting on the 19th as predicted? Before we examine the possibilities, we need first to understand why they would change the rate up or down in the first place?
Here is the dense lesson (for those who dare/interested): short-term rates are a major tool in the Federal Reserve toolbox used to balance the US economy. The short-term rates affects the flow of cash into the economy functioning as a corrective balancer between recession and inflation.
In other words, the rate is set for the elusive goal of striking a balance between the two polar opposites: maximizing employment and keeping inflation in check. The Fed is the only body that has the authority and independence to do so.
Trump has put the Federal Reserve in his crosshairs. The US president has no authority over the Fed’s decision making regarding its benchmark interest rate. Yet, he made his views on the matter exceptionally clear tweeting his discontent of the Fed expected rate hike. Voicing his criticism is guaranteed by the First Amendment, but it doesn't make tweeting his unhappiness a good idea.
The grim outlook
The old Wall Street adage that bull markets don’t die of old age but rather get killed by the Federal Reserve sounds more like a prophecy at this point. The Federal Reserve had planned one more rate hike this year and three in the coming 2019. Increasing the rate too fast will slow down the economy risking a reversal in the trend of economic recovery. The Fed intents on keeping the current trend of low unemployment and inflation levels going. So if the Fed doesn’t hike the rate, it might signal a less than confident economic outlook. Meaning that keeping the rate unchanged will be interpreted in part as a reversal of past projection of a strong future economic performance. Not only that, but it will also come across as if the Fed is kowtowing to the president. Such a perception will rob the Fed from its credibility and perceived independence. On the other hand, if the Fed raises the rate, it might be ignoring the gathering storm on the economic horizon ensuring an unfavorable outcome for the already volatile market. The skittish market is already showing signs of a possible slow down. For the Fed to ignore the glaring sign is to apply the breaks when the market is already showing signs of sputtering. Both outcomes are less than encouraging, but this analysis is not for its own sake, it is a predictive outlook that can inform short-term financial decisions on a personal level.
Your options
Risk-averse experts suggest putting any amount of money which is not needed within the next two years in CDs or savings accounts. As for long-term investments, according to experts, individuals should not panic and leave that money in the market as long as that budget is not needed in the next five to 10 years.
I must say, it is a sad state of affairs when working men and women have to pay for Trump’s freedom of speech from their own wealth. If the president cares for the wellbeing of the nation, he will stop taking to Twitter to launch his tirades against the Fed.

Drama, confusion and despair in divided Britain
Cornelia Meyer/Arab News/December 13/18
There was a day of high drama in British politics on Wednesday. The previous night, 15 percent of Conservative Party Members of Parliament had called for a vote of no confidence in Prime Minister Theresa May. They mostly hailed from the Brexiteer camp of the party. The vote of no confidence followed on the heels of May pulling the vote on her Brexit deal that had been scheduled for Tuesday. She did so because she did not have the numbers required to pass the deal through the House. She instead endeavored to ascertain if EU leaders could give the UK assurances that would make the deal more palatable to her enemies. The optics of pulling the vote looked bad because the House felt tricked out of having its say on the withdrawal bill and the political declaration in a “meaningful vote” — whether it passed or not.
Rebels struck when the PM was on a whirlwind tour of European capitals precisely to consult with her counterparts. She even had to cancel a trip to Ireland to meet with Taoiseach Leo Varadkar in order to fight for her survival. Ireland matters because the Irish backstop is a big bone of contention. The backstop is designed to ensure that there is no hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic if the parties cannot agree on a deal after the stipulated transition period is over. The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), which props up May’s minority government, and Brexiteers oppose any arrangement that treats Northern Ireland differently from the rest of the UK.
Back to the vote of no confidence. The PM needed 159 votes and in the end got 200. But more than a third of her own MPs voted against her. She could only secure a majority by conceding that she would not be leading the party into the next election, which will take place in 2022 at the latest. May emerged victorious —just — and safe for another 12 months under her Tory party’s rules. She is, however, much weakened. The leadership challenge came at the worst possible time, as the country is facing one of the biggest challenges in its history. The agenda demands focus and keeping the eye on the ball or Britain risks inadvertently sliding into a hard Brexit, with all its consequences for the economy and society. UK politicians seem to forget that they are not the only ones in this equation. The EU Parliament and 27 EU member governments have to pass the two agreements, otherwise they cannot be ratified.
Under that scenario, supply chains risk becoming unglued and European markets would become hard to access for UK goods. The City of London would lose a lot of its pre-eminence in the financial markets. Big companies — banks, airlines, auto and defense manufacturers — would be hard hit. The NHS would face delays when importing medicines and, more importantly, would find it hard to hire nurses and doctors from abroad. The health service is already finding it difficult to attract badly needed staff from EU countries because of Brexit. The hospitality sector might also grind to a squeaking halt. Big companies do not like the uncertainty brought about by the Brexit chaos. It is, however, the SMEs who suffer the most. They do not have the wherewithal to hire the rafts of accountants, lawyers and other consultants needed to navigate through these uncertain times. They would be terribly exposed in the case of a hard Brexit.
Squabbling politicians on all sides put party and self before country. The Brexiteers find that May’s deal does not deliver the Brexit they had envisaged. Labour wants a general election in the hope that it might just win it. Liberal Democrats and other Remainers want another referendum. The DUP resents the Irish backstop, etc. The truth is that this deal is probably as good as it gets. EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and EU Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier were quite unequivocal that they could give assurances, but not reopen the negotiations. May’s weakened position might conversely help her renegotiate some parts of the withdrawal agreement — but only on the margins.
In the meantime, we have not moved one iota. The prime minister still needs to get the Brexit bill though Parliament. Whichever way one does the numbers, she fails to get a majority at this point and it is doubtful that an amended agreement will do the trick. The government has committed to presenting the Brexit agreement by Jan. 21. That is very late indeed. There is simply no time for another merry-go-round by then. UK politicians also seem to forget that they are not the only ones in this equation. The EU Parliament and 27 EU member governments have to pass the two agreements, otherwise they cannot be ratified. The EU has limited flexibility in granting an extension because the elections to the EU Parliament in May constitute a hard stop for the union, as Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl has pointed out. Her opinion matters, because Austria holds the presidency of the EU.
Into this political script Shakespeare could not have inserted more drama, Beckett more confusion nor Kafka more despair. Alas, this is not literature, it is real life. Things have got so bad that an observer who faced “the darkest hour” in 1940 said he had never seen anything this bad in British politics before. During the Second World War, the enemy was not within but sat in Berlin and Britain was able to face him with a united front.
Cornelia Meyer is a business consultant, macro-economist and energy expert. Twitter: @MeyerResources

Where will the yellow vest ‘revolution’ end?
Mohamed Chebaro/Arab News/December 13/18
Demonstrations, Paris-style, usually involve a few rubbish bins being emptied or burned on a main avenue, possibly a few cars being torched, including a police car or two. Then representatives of labor, transport or other unions meet with government representatives and a compromise is reached, leading the protests to stop. But not this time it seems. The protesters angry at a rise in fuel prices in an already over-stretched French economy have now turned up the heat on President Emmanuel Macron. The protesters, who seem to have come from across the political and social spectrum thanks to social networking, have turned their anger on the president and the perceived elitism of France’s aloof ruling class.
But just how different is this leaderless protest-turned-revolution, as some have been rushing to call it? It is modern-day, digital, cross-border activism in a complex virtual and material world. The “gilet jaunes,” or yellow vests, are an example of the immediacy and the “now factor” of digital empowerment and the “I can” notion, at the expense of “wait and see what the mayor says” or “what answer would a parliamentary review yield?” It is a manifestation of the new realities fueled by the digital virtual sphere and in a world where the role of the state as we know it is eroding.
This is a new trend in protests, the likes of which the world has never before witnessed. Though violence is condemned, the leaderless, mobile, multi-directional protests are clearly a front for many real social problems that have been neglected by the modern state, not only in France but in every country around the world, poor or rich. Of course such protests could have been mitigated and/or driven by a complex web of deceit working from afar to magnify a disconnect in an already difficult patron-client relationship between the state and its people.
It is like a new epidemic that has fallen from the sky and state institutions have no antidote to face such a threat down. In the last three or four decades, politicians in all countries —democratic, monarchist and dictatorship alike — marginalized equality and the rule of law in favor of collusion between statesmen and the financial sector. This resulted in ballooning greed.
Macron’s retreat and efforts to mend relations with the public are likely to fall on deaf ears, as the entire liberal democratic value system and government model are hanging in the balance in the very capital city that gave the world the modern capitalist but compassionate state at the end of the 18th century.
What began nearly two months ago as an online campaign against high taxes, declining living standards, a self-serving political elite and a president deemed arrogant and out of touch will saddle France and most Western countries with questions that have no easy answers. These include how to modernize without reform, how to prepare for the future and save the environment without raising taxes, and how to create an agile economy with limited compassionate vested interests overseen by a non-colluding political and financial elite that disregards the people and their right to a respectable and safe future.
Away from Europe, the reactions, especially from the Middle East, toward what has been happening in France have been a mixed bag. Some have mainly focused on questions about the role of US President Donald Trump in disrupting the European project, while others weaved a web of deceit and conspiracy theories that alluded to Russian collusion and manipulation of the protests to destabilize the rule of Macron due to his position on Ukraine and role in upholding EU sanctions against Moscow.
Macron’s retreat and efforts to mend relations with the public are likely to fall on deaf ears, as the entire liberal democratic value system and government model are hanging in the balance in the very capital city that gave the world the modern capitalist but compassionate state at the end of the 18th century.
But the most lamentable reaction was from Syrian state television, which called on Syrian refugees who had escaped the regime’s onslaught — which left cities destroyed and more than half a million dead — to take care and stay away from flashpoints in Paris and its police brutality.
In the age of fake news, manufactured elections and states meddling in other nations’ internal affairs, all of the above could be plausible and France and its disillusioned citizens could have fallen prey to this scenario or that. But none of the above could begin to answer the question of where these demonstrations are likely to end. Or how to restore confidence in state institutions and politicians, who are the elected representatives of the people and whose task it is to uphold the rule of law and good governance and safeguard the safety and wellbeing of all.
The French state, like many others in the world, desperately needs to realign its income with its expenditure. Its generous social security system model of the 1950s is no longer affordable. Macron’s government, like many others before it, is following economic recommendations to squeeze the ballooning state debts, while managing people’s expectations of continuing to have their needs met. But, just as others have tried and failed, Macron seems no different under the pressure of the yellow vests, who could, rightly or wrongly, inspire others to follow their example in other countries.
*Mohamed Chebaro is a British-Lebanese journalist with more than 25 years’ experience covering war, terrorism, defense, current affairs and diplomacy. He is also a media consultant and trainer.
Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Arab News' point-of-view

Drama, confusion and despair in divided Britain
Cornelia Meyer/Arab News/December 13/18
There was a day of high drama in British politics on Wednesday. The previous night, 15 percent of Conservative Party Members of Parliament had called for a vote of no confidence in Prime Minister Theresa May. They mostly hailed from the Brexiteer camp of the party. The vote of no confidence followed on the heels of May pulling the vote on her Brexit deal that had been scheduled for Tuesday. She did so because she did not have the numbers required to pass the deal through the House. She instead endeavored to ascertain if EU leaders could give the UK assurances that would make the deal more palatable to her enemies. The optics of pulling the vote looked bad because the House felt tricked out of having its say on the withdrawal bill and the political declaration in a “meaningful vote” — whether it passed or not.
Rebels struck when the PM was on a whirlwind tour of European capitals precisely to consult with her counterparts. She even had to cancel a trip to Ireland to meet with Taoiseach Leo Varadkar in order to fight for her survival. Ireland matters because the Irish backstop is a big bone of contention. The backstop is designed to ensure that there is no hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic if the parties cannot agree on a deal after the stipulated transition period is over. The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), which props up May’s minority government, and Brexiteers oppose any arrangement that treats Northern Ireland differently from the rest of the UK.
Back to the vote of no confidence. The PM needed 159 votes and in the end got 200. But more than a third of her own MPs voted against her. She could only secure a majority by conceding that she would not be leading the party into the next election, which will take place in 2022 at the latest. May emerged victorious —just — and safe for another 12 months under her Tory party’s rules. She is, however, much weakened.
The leadership challenge came at the worst possible time, as the country is facing one of the biggest challenges in its history. The agenda demands focus and keeping the eye on the ball or Britain risks inadvertently sliding into a hard Brexit, with all its consequences for the economy and society.
UK politicians seem to forget that they are not the only ones in this equation. The EU Parliament and 27 EU member governments have to pass the two agreements, otherwise they cannot be ratified.
Under that scenario, supply chains risk becoming unglued and European markets would become hard to access for UK goods. The City of London would lose a lot of its pre-eminence in the financial markets. Big companies — banks, airlines, auto and defense manufacturers — would be hard hit. The NHS would face delays when importing medicines and, more importantly, would find it hard to hire nurses and doctors from abroad. The health service is already finding it difficult to attract badly needed staff from EU countries because of Brexit. The hospitality sector might also grind to a squeaking halt. Big companies do not like the uncertainty brought about by the Brexit chaos. It is, however, the SMEs who suffer the most. They do not have the wherewithal to hire the rafts of accountants, lawyers and other consultants needed to navigate through these uncertain times. They would be terribly exposed in the case of a hard Brexit.
Squabbling politicians on all sides put party and self before country. The Brexiteers find that May’s deal does not deliver the Brexit they had envisaged. Labour wants a general election in the hope that it might just win it. Liberal Democrats and other Remainers want another referendum. The DUP resents the Irish backstop, etc.
The truth is that this deal is probably as good as it gets. EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and EU Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier were quite unequivocal that they could give assurances, but not reopen the negotiations. May’s weakened position might conversely help her renegotiate some parts of the withdrawal agreement — but only on the margins.
In the meantime, we have not moved one iota. The prime minister still needs to get the Brexit bill though Parliament. Whichever way one does the numbers, she fails to get a majority at this point and it is doubtful that an amended agreement will do the trick. The government has committed to presenting the Brexit agreement by Jan. 21. That is very late indeed. There is simply no time for another merry-go-round by then.
UK politicians also seem to forget that they are not the only ones in this equation. The EU Parliament and 27 EU member governments have to pass the two agreements, otherwise they cannot be ratified. The EU has limited flexibility in granting an extension because the elections to the EU Parliament in May constitute a hard stop for the union, as Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl has pointed out. Her opinion matters, because Austria holds the presidency of the EU.
Into this political script Shakespeare could not have inserted more drama, Beckett more confusion nor Kafka more despair. Alas, this is not literature, it is real life. Things have got so bad that an observer who faced “the darkest hour” in 1940 said he had never seen anything this bad in British politics before. During the Second World War, the enemy was not within but sat in Berlin and Britain was able to face him with a united front.
Cornelia Meyer is a business consultant, macro-economist and energy expert. Twitter: @MeyerResources

US begins crackdown on Iran sanctions violations
د. ماجد ربيزاده : الولايات المتحدة تبدأ ملاحقة اللذين ينتهكون العقوبات على إيران/
ملاحقة المسؤولة المالية في شركة هواوي مينغ وانتشو
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/December 13/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/69948/dr-majid-rafizadeh-us-begins-crackdown-on-iran-sanctions-violations-%d8%af-%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%ac%d8%af-%d8%b1%d8%a8%d9%8a%d8%b2%d8%a7%d8%af%d9%87-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%88%d9%84%d8%a7%d9%8a%d8%a7%d8%aa/
After the US pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, better known as the Iran nuclear deal, it re-imposed primary and secondary sanctions on the Islamic Republic. The sanctions cover various Iranian industries and sectors, including energy (gas, oil and petrochemicals), the banking system, currency, financial transactions, the automotive and construction industries, as well as mining and telecommunications and the export of electronics and computers.
A common misconception is that the US sanctions solely target American entities. In order to attract financial deals and more trade with foreign entities, the Iranian leaders have also been spreading the narrative that business with the Islamic Republic is as usual and Tehran’s transactions with foreign companies have not been impacted because the US sanctions are trivial and inconsequential.
But investors ought to be extremely cautious due to the fact that the newly re-imposed sanctions against Tehran target not only US entities but also non-American companies, firms and individuals.
Most recently, Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of Huawei, the largest telecoms equipment maker in the world, was arrested in Canada at the request of American authorities. Previously, China’s ZTE Corp pleaded guilty to breaking US sanctions against the Iranian regime.
The US Treasury Department has clearly warned that the Iran sanctions are not limited to Iranian or US entities. It gave warning when it stipulated: “Non-US, non-Iranian persons are advised to use these time periods to wind down their activities with or involving Iran that will become sanctionable at the end of the applicable wind-down period.”
The arrest of Meng is also significant for foreign investors for several other reasons. First of all, there has been a misconception that the US will not be taking serious measures against foreign entities that deal with the Iranian regime. Meng’s is the first case since the re-imposition of the US sanctions on Iran where a prominent non-American citizen has been accused of violating the sanctions.
The Trump administration is attempting to send a robust message that violations will not be tolerated. Status, position or wealth will not necessarily make foreign investors immune to the repercussions and penalties of violating US sanctions on the Iranian regime.
Investors ought to be extremely cautious due to the fact that the newly re-imposed sanctions against Tehran target not only US entities but also non-American companies, firms and individuals.
Secondly, although any non-American entities that continue to carry out transactions with the Tehran regime may believe that they are immune from US sanctions because they are not based in the US, Washington enjoys adequate financial and political leverage to pressure them. For instance, in the case of Meng, the US pressured the Canadian authorities to arrest her and start extradition proceedings.
Another risk for foreign investors dealing with the Iranian regime and violating Iran’s sanctions is that the US can ban American companies and individuals from conducting business with them. For example, when ZTE Corp breached US sanctions by exporting technology that was made in the US to Iran, Washington banned American companies from dealing with the company. The financial pressure against ZTE became significant to the extent that it agreed to pay a $1 billion fine to have the US ban removed.
The objectives behind the sanctions are to cut off the flow of funds to the Iranian regime and significantly impact its efforts to fund and sponsor terrorist and militia groups across the region. Furthermore, some targeted sanctions are aimed at restricting those Iranian officials who are blacklisted. And the sanctions are working. Despite Tehran’s efforts to dismiss them, Iranian leaders are very concerned and apprehensive as they have already witnessed the financial repercussions of the previous sanctions.
While some foreign companies and corporations are taking Iran’s sanctions lightly, others have wisely taken calculated measures. For instance, when the nuclear deal was reached, Total — one of the seven “super-major” oil companies in the world — signed a significant deal worth an estimated $5 billion to develop Iran’s South Pars, which was going to be the world’s largest natural gas field. But the French energy giant, like some other foreign companies, quit its project and took immediate action to back out of Iran’s market once the US announced that it would re-impose sanctions.
Some foreign companies may find doing business with the Iranian regime appealing because it has the largest untapped emerging market in the world, the second-largest economy in the Middle East and North Africa after Saudi Arabia, and an estimated $1 trillion-plus of purchasing power parity.
But it is important to point out that foreign firms should be extremely cautious about conducting business dealings with Iran due to the fact that the risks outweigh the benefits. Non-American individuals and companies run the risk of losing their business with the US and being subject to the sanctions.
In conclusion, the latest development highlights the fact that the US is determined and committed to pressure the Iranian regime and take action against those foreign firms and individuals that carry out business deals with Tehran in violation of its sanctions against Iran.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist. He is a leading expert on Iran and US foreign policy, a businessman and president of the International American Council. Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh
Notice/Enclosed picture: Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou arrives at a parole office with a security guard in Vancouver, British Columbia, Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2018. (The Canadian Press via AP)

The Hamas Plan to Take the West Bank
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/December 13/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13405/hamas-west-bank
Hamas and its allies are openly working and encouraging the eruption of a new anti-Israel uprising in the West Bank, and they have been emboldened by the recent failure of the UN General Assembly to adopt a US-sponsored resolution condemning Hamas and other Palestinian groups for firing rockets at Israel and inciting violence.
The Hamas-engineered attacks are not only a threat to Israeli civilians and soldiers; they also undermine the Western-funded Palestinian Authority (PA) of Mahmoud Abbas. Each "successful" attack carried out by Hamas earns it more popularity in the West Bank, at the cost of Abbas and his regime.
Now that Hamas is getting what it wants in the Gaza Strip -- millions of dollars and no war with Israel -- it is seeking to shift the attention to the West Bank, all with the help of its friends in Tehran. This has a twofold goal: to undermine or overthrow the Palestinian Authority, inflict heavy casualties on Israel, and thwart any peace plan brought forward by the US administration.
Hamas and its allies are openly working to export their "armed struggle" against Israel beyond the Gaza Strip and ultimately to take control of the West Bank. Pictured: Masked Hamas terrorists.
It is clear by now that Hamas is behind some of the recent terror attacks against Israelis in the West Bank. These attacks serve the interests of Hamas and its friends and sponsors, especially the Palestinian Islamic Jihad organization -- and Iran.
Hamas and its allies have a plan, and they are not even keeping it a secret -- to export their "armed struggle" against Israel beyond the Gaza Strip and ultimately to take control of the West Bank.
The latest terrorist attack took place on December 9 outside the West Bank settlement of Ofra, east of Ramallah. An Israeli-Canadian citizen, Amichai Ish-Ran, and this pregnant wife, Shira, were among seven people wounded in a drive-by shooting attack. The baby born prematurely as a result of the terrorist attack died on December 12, after doctors fought to save his life for close to 72 hours. Hamas, which later claimed responsibility for the attack, was the first Palestinian faction to commend the terrorists. So far, not a single Palestinian faction has come out against the attack, including Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's ruling Fatah faction.
Describing the shooting attack as a "heroic and qualitative operation," representatives of Hamas and several Palestinian factions said that it demonstrated that the Palestinian "resistance was still alive in the West Bank." They also called on Palestinians to "step up the intifada (uprising) against Israel, specifically settlers and Israel Defense Forces soldiers.
"The West Bank has taken the initiative of resisting the occupation," Hamas said in a statement published in the Gaza Strip shortly after the terrorist attack. The attack, Hamas added, "came to affirm our people's legitimate right to resist the occupation at a time when the occupation, together with Israel, had tried to criminalize our resistance."
This stance by Hamas points at two important factors; first, that Hamas and its allies are openly working and encouraging the eruption of a new anti-Israel uprising in the West Bank; and, second, that Hamas and its friends have been emboldened by the recent failure of the UN General Assembly to adopt a US-sponsored resolution condemning Hamas and other Palestinian groups for firing rockets at Israel and inciting violence.
Hamas's dream of spreading its ideology to all Palestinians is as old as its foundation 31 years ago. Hamas is not interested in ruling only the Gaza Strip. It wants the West Bank, Jerusalem, and all the land, "from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea." Hamas does not believe in negotiations or peaceful settlements. Rather, it believes that the only way to "liberate" Muslim land is through jihad. This goal is why, it says, it remains committed to the option of "armed struggle" against Israel.
As Hamas clearly states in its charter:
"The Islamic Resistance Movement strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine, for under the wing of Islam followers of all religions can coexist in security and safety where their lives, possessions and rights are concerned." (Article 6)
The Hamas charter leaves no doubt as to the methods it believes should be used to employed to solve the Israeli-Arab conflict:
"There is no solution for the Palestinian issue except through jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." (Article 13)
The Hamas charter, which is relevant today more than ever, states unambiguously that the movement "believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day. It or any part of it, should not be squandered; it, or any part of it, should not be given up. (Article 11). From here, it is easy to understand why Hamas continues to celebrate and applaud every terrorist attack against Israel, whether in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank or inside Israel proper. Hamas sees these "heroic and brave operations" as an implementation of its ideology of waging jihad to "liberate the land of Palestine." Even if the terrorists who carried out the recent shootings in the West Bank do not belong to Hamas, their attacks are completely compatible with Hamas's declared goals and ambitions, the most prominent of which is seeing Israel removed from the map.
Hamas has good reason to celebrate not only the attacks, but what it perceives as a series of "achievements" that it has gained in recent weeks. These "achievements" include the $30 million in Qatari cash grants that were delivered to Hamas in the past few weeks so that it can pay salaries and stipends to tens of thousands of its employees and supporters, as well as the failure of the UN General Assembly to adopt the anti-Hamas resolution. These two steps have left Hamas leaders laughing all the way to the next shooting attack on Israel.
The Qatari funds are being delivered to Hamas as part of unwritten understandings regarding a cease-fire in the Gaza Strip. The purpose of the funds is to help solve the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip and prevent the eruption of another major military confrontation between Hamas and Israel. Hamas, however, has thus far done nothing to stop the violence, including weekly protests that began last March along the border with Israel. On the contrary, Hamas is now saying -- and there is good reason to believe it -- that the demonstrations will continue. Hamas is also saying the that it was not required to pay any "political price" for a purported ceasefire.
The ceasefire understandings between Hamas and Israel, which were reportedly achieved through the mediation of Qatar, Egypt and the UN, are only related to the Gaza Strip, and have nothing to do with the West Bank. Because these understandings are limited to the Gaza Strip, Hamas, believes it has a green light to continue launching and directing terrorist attacks from the West Bank without being accused of violating the ceasefire.
The UN, Qatar and Egypt should have demanded that any ceasefire agreement include the West Bank, where Hamas still has several armed cells as well as significant support.
The Hamas-engineered attacks are not only a threat to Israeli civilians and soldiers; they also undermine the Western-funded Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas. Each "successful" attack carried out by Hamas earns it more popularity in the West Bank, at the cost of Abbas and his regime.
Evidently, members and friends of Hamas have interpreted the failure to adopt the US resolution as a pass from the UN and the international community to continue their "resistance" against Israel. They perceive the failure of the US administration as a "big achievement" -- one that permits the Palestinians to continue all forms of "resistance" against Israel, including the "armed struggle." It is no coincidence, then, that Hamas has responded to the debacle at the UN General Assembly by pledging to remain committed to an "armed struggle" against Israel.
Every dollar and every concession that is being made to Hamas will only increase its appetite to continue its plan to extend its control beyond the Gaza Strip. From Hamas's point of view, its plan has won legitimacy from the UN and important players in the region such as Qatar and Egypt. As long as Hamas feels that it is marching in the right direction, we are likely to see an increase in armed attacks and other forms of violence in the West Bank.
Now that Hamas is getting what it wants in the Gaza Strip -- millions of dollars and no war with Israel -- it is seeking to shift its attention to the West Bank, all with the help of its friends in Tehran. This has a twofold goal: to undermine or overthrow Abbas's Palestinian Authority, inflict heavy casualties on Israel, and thwart any peace plan brought forward by the US administration. In other words, Hamas and Iran now have their sights set on the West Bank, and this is reason not only for Israel to worry, but Abbas as well.
*Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
© 2018 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.

Brexit: Now What?
David Brown/Gatestone Institute/December 13/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13406/brexit-theresa-may
Ardent Brexiteers are increasingly despondent. Many had hoped for a vote of no confidence in Theresa May with a strong Leave-supporting leader installed in her place, prepared to take the United Kingdom out of the untransparent, unaccountable and unable-to-be-voted-out EU.
Instead, Theresa May's "deal" not to leave the EU makes the UK a vassal state, locked into the EU but without a voice. Leave voters did not vote for a "deal". They voted to take back the Britain's sovereignty.
MPs will be torn. The establishment does not want a no-deal Brexit. But their constituents -- the people who voted them to be their voice in Parliament -- do.
Politicians voting to remain in the EU would be doing it in flamboyant disregard of the will of the people -- the very people they need to be re-elected.
British Prime Minister Theresa May gives a speech in London after surviving a vote of no confidence in her Conservative Party on December 12, 2018.
Theresa May has survived a no confidence vote in her Conservative Party. She says she now has a renewed mission; "delivering the Brexit people voted for, bringing the country back together and building a country that works for everyone".
Whether she has any troops willing to follow her charge is unclear.
Just 200 Conservative MPs voted for her to stay on as leader of the party; 117 voted against. Many of those who voted for her said they will vote down her Brexit deal nonetheless.
As a result of this challenge, MPs cannot call another vote of no confidence for 12 months, meaning that Theresa May will be the woman to succeed or fail in taking Britain out of the European Union.
Many questions are still unanswered by this vote. If Parliament looks set to vote down her deal -- especially with so many in her own party apparently planning voting against her -- where on earth will Brexit go from here??
To trigger a confidence vote, 15% of Conservative MPs must submit letters of no confidence to the Chairman of the 1922 Committee, the parliamentary group of the Conservative Party in the UK House of Commons.
Once at least 48 letters were received, Sir Graham Brady, the Chairman of the 1922 Committee alerted May that there would be a vote of confidence in her continuing as party leader. May was determined to contest this vote as soon as possible. So it was scheduled for 6pm Wednesday. The process is ruthless. As a result, on the streets of the U.K., there is a great deal of sympathy for Theresa May
Abby Handbridge, a trader at Chapel Market in north London, said, "I feel really sorry for Theresa May. She's being battered by everybody and Boris Johnson has just come out with a haircut and weight loss so we know what he is looking for."Some suggested that she might resign at the news of the vote, in exasperation as much as anything else. Doubters, however, were surprised. Theresa May, in fighting form, bowled out of Number Ten to address the press. "I will contest that vote with everything I've got", she said. She then defiantly restated her priorities: "delivering the Brexit people voted for... And I stand ready to finish the job". Her win, nevertheless, was not without a huge concession to Conservative MPs. She promised that she will not lead the party into the next election in 2022.
The key message, according to deputy Tory chairman James Cleverly, was that it would be "a very, very bad time to replace the prime minister". Or it might have more like: I know you don't want me, but you need me for now. Not quite the "strong and stable" leadership she promised in her election campaign in 2017. Winning this vote has been positive in one sense for the Prime Minister. The Leave rebels who mounted this failed coup against her are now on the back foot; arguably, she no longer needs to placate them with her deal.
In addition, her dogged determination seems widely admired. She has proved to be a remarkably hard to get rid of, like some sort of ailment. Which of us could withstand the same?
Critics say she had to win by a decent margin to have any authority, yet a huge 37% of her own party are against her. She is fatally wounded. What authority is wielded by a Prime Minister surviving a no confidence vote in her own party by a narrow margin?
Ardent Brexiteers are increasingly despondent. Many had hoped for a vote of no confidence in Theresa May with a strong Leave-supporting leader installed in her place, prepared to take the United Kingdom out of the untransparent, unaccountable and unable-to-be-voted-out EU.
Instead, Theresa May's "deal" not to leave the EU makes the UK a vassal state, locked into the EU but without a voice. Leave voters did not vote for a "deal". They voted to take back the Britain's sovereignty.
At present, Britain remains perched at the edge of a cliff and unsure how it will make a descent or in which direction. Will she leave the EU with no deal, or go for a hideous climb down from Brexit: an extension of Article 50 -- which says that by law Britain will leave the EU on March 29, 2019 -- and the likelihood of a second referendum? By defeating the Brexit rebels in the vote of confidence, there is a real possibility she will now return to parliament with a deal that is even more pleasing to the Remain side. Otherwise, if her deal fails to pass through the Commons, it is possible she will allow Parliament to vote: either to keep Britain in the EU, or to leave the EU with no deal.
MPs will be torn. The establishment does not want a no-deal Brexit. They have fought it for over two years. But their constituents -- the people who voted them to be their voice in Parliament -- do. 70% of Conservative constituencies and 60% of Labour constituencies voted Leave.
Politicians voting to remain in the EU would be doing it in flamboyant disregard of the will of the people -- the very people they need to be re-elected.
Theresa May has said there will not be a second referendum whilst she is leader of the party. Recent history nevertheless suggests her words are cheap. Five times in 2016 and 2017 she said there would not be a general election -- before calling one just three months later in June 2018.
Theresa May says she has a renewed mission -- to deliver Brexit and bring the country back together. She may have won the battle, but she seems doomed to lose the war.
*David Brown is based in the United Kingdom.
© 2018 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.