LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
July 09/2018
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.july09.18.htm

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

Iran’s Redundant Threats against Hormuz Strait
Salman Al-dossary/Asharq Al Awsat/July 08/18
Countless are the times post-1979 when Iran threatened to close the globally vital Hormuz Strait. It is the Tehran regime officials’ go to whenever a crisis occurs, which take place often. Over the course of four decades of successive threats, Tehran did not carry through with its promise once, even during the eight-year war against Iraq and that was dubbed the tanker war. In that time the US Navy attacked Iranian ships, destroying two Iranian warships.
In return, Iran vowed it would close the strait, but did not dare do so.
Today, the same threat is being reiterated by the ultra-hardline Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which launched its latest threat yet against the Strait of Hormuz, saying that the waterway is “either for everyone or no one.”Iranian President Hassan Rouhani also on Tuesday hinted his country's ability to block freights leaving neighboring countries should the global community heed US demands to refrain from buying Iranian oil. Right after, the US said that its partners provide security for the region. Playing down Rouhani’s hints on blocking Hormuz, Iran’s head of the parliamentary national security and foreign policy committee said that the president’s statements did not mean that oil could not be exported if Iran faces inhibitions on its own oil market share. Iran's trend of making unrealized loud threats, that soon are rolled back, shows that Tehran is completely aware of consequences that may result from its decision to cut off transport and freight going through this highly strategic spot. Reality is that Iran is actually capable of closing the strait, but it goes without saying that it is impossible for it to bear the consequences of undertaking such action. Tehran knows this well and cannot afford the risk of implementing its threats--not only because closing off the strait, through which 30 percent of the world’s oil supply passes, but also because such action represents suicide for Iran. A global energy crisis caused by shutting down Hormuz Strait activity will see the pricing on oil shoot up as high as $400 a barrel.
Taking down such a vital route is a declaration of war not only against oil-exporting countries (oil tankers daily transport about 17 million barrels of oil from Iran, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Iraq) using the strait, but also against the major importers.
It is worth mentioning that it isn’t only the US, Iran’s arch foe, which imports oil, but also China and Europe.  About 80 percent of oil export passing through the strait heads over to China, Japan, India, South Korea and Singapore. China, one of Tehran’s most important economic allies, sent a strong message advising Iran to reserve from making threats on closing the strait, and call for it to devote itself into becoming a good neighbor, and learn means to coexist peacefully. The closure of the strait is the most serious threat posed to the region and is a declaration of war against all countries which import oil from the Gulf, said Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Chen Xiaodong. Had Tehran been realistically capable of controlling the strategic strait, it would have done so since the first day after its 1979 revolution. But instead, it has only been making verbal threats, that don’t echo in reality, to relieve pressures it faces from sanctions and international policy. Today, Iran is sending a message to remaining partners in the nuclear agreement after the US exit, in order to help itself escape a disastrous political and economic crisis. Gulf states rest assured that Iran cannot close down the strait, because it is simply a declaration of war against the world, and the Iranian regime is unable to do so and is unlikely to push for giving world countries an opportunity to unite against it.

International Community Ignores Genocide of Christians in Nigeria
Raymond Ibrahim/Gatestone Institute/July 08/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/65886/raymond-ibrahim-international-community-ignores-genocide-of-christians-in-nigeria-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AC%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%B9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A-%D9%8A%D8%AA%D8%AC%D8%A7%D9%87%D9%84/
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12645/christians-genocide-nigeria
This brings the death toll of Christians to more than 6,000 since the start of 2018.
"The Islamists of northern Nigeria seem determined to turn Nigeria into an Islamic Sultanate and replace Liberal Democracy with Sharia as the National Ideology. The object of course, is to supplant the Constitution with Sharia as the source of legislation." — National Christian Elders Forum, a wing of the Christian Association of Nigeria. The Nigerian government and the international community, however, have from the start done little to address the situation. This lack of participation is not surprising: they cannot even acknowledge its roots, namely, the intolerant ideology of jihad.
In what the Christian Association of Nigeria is calling a "pure genocide," 238 more Christians were killed and churches desecrated by Muslims last week in the west African nation. This brings the death toll of Christians to more than 6,000 since the start of 2018.
According to a joint statement by the Christian Association, an umbrella group of various Christian denominations, "There is no doubt that the sole purpose of these attacks is aimed at ethnic cleansing, land grabbing and forceful ejection of the Christian natives from their ancestral land and heritage."
The statement condemned the recent attacks, "where over 200 persons were brutally killed and our churches destroyed without any intervention from security agencies in spite of several distress calls made to them."
The statement adds that the majority of those 6,000 Christians massacred this year were "mostly children, women and the aged... What is happening in ... Nigeria is pure genocide and must be stopped immediately."
The details of the murder of these thousands, though seldom reported, are often grisly; many were either hacked to death or beheaded with machetes; others were burned alive (including inside locked churches or homes); and women are often sexually assaulted or raped before being slaughtered.
Both the Nigerian government and the U.S. government have long sought to present this protracted jihad as territorial clashes between the haves (apparently always Christians) and haves-not (apparently always Muslims).
In 2012, for instance, President Bill Clinton said that "inequality" and "poverty" are "what's fueling all this stuff" (the "stuff" being a reference to the ongoing Muslim slaughter of Christians in Nigeria). Former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Johnnie Carson, said after an Easter Day bombing in 2012 of a Nigerian church left 39 worshippers dead, "I want to take this opportunity to stress one key point and that is that religion is not driving extremist violence". The Obama administration reportedly agreed to spend $600 million in a USAID initiative launched to ascertain the "true causes" of unrest and violence in Nigeria -- which naturally lay in the socio-economic, supposedly never the religious, realm.
In its recent statement, however, the Christian Association of Nigeria denied these claims. After saying that those responsible for slaughtering Christians are always allowed to "go scot free" by the Nigerian government—which further portrays the attacks as "farmers/herdsmen clashes"—it inquired:
"How can it be a clash when one group [Muslims] is persistently attacking, killing, maiming, [and] destroying, and the other group [Christians] is persistently being killed, maimed and their places of worship destroyed? How can it be a clash when the herdsmen are hunting farmers in their own villages/communities and farmers are running for their lives?" On May 2, the National Christian Elders Forum -- a wing of the Christian Association, the members of which average the age of 75 and come from Nigeria's six geopolitical zones -- met with the British High Commission in an effort to receive support. (Days before the meeting, around 30 Muslim herdsmen had stormed a church during early morning Mass and murdered nearly 20 parishioners and two clergymen.) The group's executive summary of issues included:
It is clear to the Christian Elders that JIHAD has been launched in Nigeria by the Islamists of northern Nigeria led by the Fulani ethnic group [the "herdsmen"]. This Jihad is based on the Doctrine of Hate taught in Mosques and Islamic Madrasas in northern Nigeria as well as the supremacist ideology of the Fulani. Using both conventional (violent) Jihad, and stealth (civilization) Jihad, the Islamists of northern Nigeria seem determined to turn Nigeria into an Islamic Sultanate and replace Liberal Democracy with Sharia as the National Ideology. The object of course, is to supplant the Constitution with Sharia as the source of legislation.
The current 1999 Constitution is plagued with dual conflicting ideology of Democracy and Sharia. There are certain values which are non-negotiable in a pluralistic society and it seems the advocates of the Caliphate do not respect this. A dual-ideology-driven Nigeria cannot be the Nigeria of our dream. We want a Nigeria, where citizens are treated equally before the law at all levels.... Bearing in mind that Christians constitute over 50% of the Nigerian population, the goal of the Islamists is bound to create serious conflicts which if not checked is capable of escalating into another civil war. Already, the Islamists are murdering Christians with impunity and destroying vulnerable Christian places of worship and communities at an alarming and inhuman rate.
That 6,000 Christians, "mostly children, women and the aged," have been butchered in just the first six months of this year is a reminder of how violence only escalates when left unchecked. That is the story of the Muslim persecution of Christians in Nigeria.
It took three times as long (a year-and-a-half, between December 2013 to July 2015), for example, for the same Muslim herdsmen to slaughter a total of 1,484 Christians (532 men, 507 women, and 445 children), critically wound 2,388 Christians (1,069 men, 817 women, and 502 children), and burn or destroy 171 churches. The Nigerian government and the international community, however, have from the start done little to address the situation. This lack of participation is not surprising: they cannot even acknowledge its roots, namely, the intolerant ideology of jihad. As a result, the death toll of Christians has only risen -- and will likely continue to grow exponentially -- until such time that this reality is not only acknowledged but addressed. The governor of Nigeria's Anambra State, Willie Obiano (center), visits a wounded survivor of a deadly attack on St. Philip Catholic Church in Ozubulu, August 11, 2017. (Image source: Channels TV video screenshot)
**Raymond Ibrahim is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians (published by Regnery with Gatestone Institute, April 2013).
© 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.

Analysis Next Stop for Assad: The Golan Heights
زفي برال من الهآررتس: محطة الأسد الثانية ستكون مرتفعات الجولان
Zvi Bar'el/Haaretz/July 08/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/65897/zvi-barel-haaretz-analysis-next-stop-for-assad-the-golan-heights-%D8%B2%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%84-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%87%D8%A2%D8%B1%D8%B1%D8%AA%D8%B3-%D9%85%D8%AD%D8%B7/
Israel is preparing for the next stage, in which Assad forces will deploy in positions they held before the war, determined by the disengagement lines agreed upon by Israel and Syria in 1974
Russian police units, which accompanied Russian forces moving towards the Naseeb border crossing between Jordan and Syria, have set up their positions there and in some parts of the town of Daraa, the capital of the southern region of the same name. Rebel militias have begun handing over their heavy equipment to the Syrian army and if there are no new developments Assad can claim that eastern Daraa is in his hands.
Amman is starting to examine the possibility of repatriating hundreds of thousands of refugees who fled to Jordan during the war and Israel is preparing for the next stage, in which Assad forces will deploy in positions they held before the war, determined by the disengagement lines agreed upon by Israel and Syria in 1974. Between these two stages a local battle still awaits Syria in the western areas of Daraa and along its border with Jordan up to the Yarmouk River basin, where the Nusra Front forces, as well as some ISIS units, are positioned. This campaign may take many days, postponing the complete takeover of the south by Assad.
According to reports coming from Syria, Russia only partly kept its commitment to Jordan and Israel, by which Iranian and Hezbollah forces would not take part in the fighting in Daraa. Hezbollah fighters and several Iranian officers were spotted in combat areas, but overall the combat and deployment of forces in the area consisted of only Syrian and Russian forces. In the meantime, the cease-fire agreement has not kicked in yet in western Daraa. It hinges on a reply by local militias, which should arrive within the next day.
Israel is considered the party that gave the green light for the entry of Assad forces into southern Syria, following negotiations held between the commander of Russia’s policing forces, a representative of the Russian administration, Jordanian and Israeli officials. These were based on a Russian commitment to remove Iranian forces from the area, to an initial distance of 40 kilometers from the Jordanian border. Further negotiations regarding the depth of Iranian deployment in the Golan Heights will be held at a meeting between Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday, six days before the Putin-Trump summit meeting, which will deal among other issues with the nuclear accord and the situation in Syria. Israel insists that Syrian forces not cross the agreed-upon disengagement lines, but without doing so, Syria will not be able to dislodge militia units situated in the Syrian Golan area. Israel, Syria and Russia will need to find a creative solution which will prevent the entry of Syrian forces while removing the militias. One possibility is that Israel instruct the militias to leave the Golan Heights in exchange for a Syrian-Russian commitment not to harm them. Another option is that Israel agree to mixed Russian-Syrian policing units setting up a safe transit corridor for the militias and thousands of refugees who’ve recently arrived in the Golan after fleeing the fighting in Daraa.
The cease-fire agreement lays out the deployment of the Assad regime’s forces in southern Syria, completing Assad’s resumption of control over most of Syria. This agreement joins other similar ones reached in other parts of Syria, such as the negotiations between the regime and Kurdish forces and agreements made with the Druze minority in southern Syria. Military control of these areas still leaves key issues that need to be resolved before Russia can continue with the diplomatic moves it is planning, which include the establishment of a new Syrian government and the implementation of a revised constitution, formulated by Russia together with the regime, as well as the holding of elections.
In Russia’s hands
Thus, in addition to the issue of deployment of forces in the Golan, Russia will have to persuade Turkey to withdraw its forces from northern Syria, which it invaded as part of its campaign against Kurdish units and its effort to prevent Kurdish territorial contiguity in Syria. Russia will also try to create a formula for the evacuation of American troops, some of whom are in northern Syria, others in the border triangle between Jordan, Syria and Iraq, along with the evacuation of Iranian troops. This now seems to be unlikely, since Iran does not intend, at least according to its declarations, to withdraw all its forces from Syria. Tehran received support for this stance from Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, who said this week that it was unrealistic to demand a complete withdrawal of Iranian forces from Syria. This contrasts with earlier statements, including some by Putin, according to which all foreign forces would leave Syria.
One of the questions now being posed is whether Putin can tie an Iranian withdrawal from Syria to the nuclear accords. In other words, will Trump agree to soften his positions regarding this agreement in exchange for an Iranian retreat from Syria? This could pose a serious dilemma for Israel in which it has to decide which is the more concrete threat: a valid nuclear agreement, which Iran is abiding by meticulously but one which raises doubts about what happens once that accord expires, or the continued presence of Iranian forces on Syrian soil. For now this is a theoretical question but in just over a week Israel may be facing a new Russian-American honeymoon, which will force it to find an alternative strategy.
https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/syria/.premium-next-stop-for-assad-the-golan-heights-1.6247041

How can those who plant mines in Yemen be equated with those who remove them?
Hamdan Alaly/Al Arabiya/July 08/18
Yemen has a long history with mines. During the North-South conflict in the 1970s, armed groups situated in the central regions planted hundreds of thousands of mines they got from Libyan leader Muaamar Kaddafi as support for the National Front. Over the decades, some of these mines have been removed while a vast majority remains unearthed to this day, according to government statements. When the Houthi rebellion began in 2004 in the Saada governorate, mines were one of the most important weapons the Houthis relied on during their wars against the state. The Houthis have had a penchant for obtaining and manufacturing mines of various types and sizes. In fact, the militia set up a mines’ factory in the city of Saada, which was targeted by Arab coalition forces in May 2015. A few weeks ago, I visited Midi city in the province of Hajjah, which was recently fully emancipated from Houthi control. We had only one way to reach the city and we couldn’t take different routes. Mines were heavily planted in every corner within and around the city, except for areas that the engineering teams had cleared of mines. Those who visit the city and adjoining areas where the Houthis were must move in a restricted, narrow and known path in order to remain safe from the mines the Houths left behind and which has made those who resided there refrain from returning to their homes.
Mines planted by Houthis have claimed 639 lives and injured 704 others in Yemen between July 2014 and March 2018.
Hamdan Alaly
Some of the inhabitants of the city said that “many people have been killed by these mines. Even though war has ended in these areas, landmines still surround them and suffocate (their movement). There are no exceptions as (the Houthis) planted mines on roads, in heavily populated neighborhoods, farms, beaches and even inside houses.” The Houthis produced all kinds of mines, ranging from large mines that target tanks and big vehicles to small-sized ones that target individuals and which are internationally-prohibited.
Midi is not the only city riddled by the bane of Houthi mines. The Houthis have planted internationally banned mines everywhere they passed, such as in cities of Taiz, Marib, Al Bayda, Sanaa, Hodeidah, Saada, Aden, Lahij, Dhale and the rest of Hajjah. All of these areas are filled with mines. Mines are the friends of Houthi fighters wherever they set foot and Abdulmalik al-Houthi’s gift to the children and women of Yemen!
According to the latest report by the Yemeni Coalition for Monitoring Human Rights Violations, mines claimed the lives of 639 Yemenis and injured 704 people between July 2014 and March 2018. By the way, only the Houthi militias have planted mines in Yemen since the first war in 2004.
Statistics reveal that Yemen, which signed the Ottawa treaty that forbids the use of anti-personnel mines in 1997, has been booby-trapped by more than half a million mines planted by the Houthi militia in the past few years. Director of Yemen’s Executive Mine Action Center Brigadier General Amin al-Ogaili said: “Yemen has been affected by the largest mine-laying action since the end of the World War II, and today it is the foremost country in the Middle East and North Africa region that has been affected by the disasters of these widespread mines.”
Mines are the Houthis’ gift to the people. On the other hand, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is making great efforts to confront this disaster which threatens the Yemenis’ future and present, and it’s doing so via the MASAM project that was launched by King Salman Center for Relief and Humanitarian Aid and that aims to remove all forms and shapes of mines that were planted by the militias in Yemeni territories, especially in the governorates of Marib, Aden, Sanaa and Taiz. This project will be implemented with Saudi human resources and international expertise. This abundant Saudi generosity makes me, as a Yemeni, wonder whether those who plant mines and those who remove them can be deemed equal by the world.

Who will reveal the fate of Iraq’s public funds?
Adnan Hussein/Al Arabiya/July 08/18
Oil prices are rising, and they may keep going up at least until the end of the year. This means that Iraq’s budget, which was facing major deficit and which was going to be covered via foreign debts, may be able to overcome the earlier shortfall and come into surplus.
This year’s budget was based on the estimate that the price of oil will not exceed more than $46 per barrel, while the price currently stands at about $70. As US sanctions against Iran and which focus on boycotting Iran’s oil exports intensify and as the Libyan civil war continues to affect the production and export of oil, prices are expected to rise further. Moreover the level of our oil exports is also rising every month.
This is of course good news when it comes to overcoming this year’s budget deficit or even possibly making a significant surplus, in addition to the prospect of setting up a non-deficit budget for the next year. The rule is that the unspent amount should be returned to the Treasury, but we never come to know how much was not spent and how much was returned to the Treasury. What is more important though is how the Iraqi government (the current and future one) will handle this huge increase in oil revenues. It is logical that the government would inject this money into major projects that could help in getting rid of oil dependency. This government, as well as previous governments, failed to properly and correctly invest in the country’s resources.The last two governments squandered hundreds of billions of dollars on failed projects. This is in addition to increased administrative and financial corruption that greatly affected oil revenues for years thus contributing to the failure of economic projects and in further corruption and lack of transparency in governmental work, particularly in terms of expenditure. The clearest example is that the constitution stated that when the government submits its draft budget, it must submit an account’s statement for the previous year’s budget. However, no government committed to this. The issue is that the Parliament, which is supposed to represent the people, never fulfilled its duty in this regard and did not address the issue and handle it. The reason is clear and well-known; it is because most MPs were only concerned with their parties and their privileges. It is for this reason that the Iraqi public opinion stood firmly against renewing the term of the last parliament.
In addition, it is known that the governorates and the state institutions usually do not spend all of their financial allocations. The rule is that the unspent amount should be returned to the Treasury, but we never come to know how much was not spent and how much was returned to the Treasury and how much was squandered due to the huge administrative and financial corruption. Like previous governments, Haider al-Abadi’s government did not have an honorable record on the level of economy and services. It will thus do good if it concludes its term by revealing the fate of the people’s money.

Iranian people’s disaffection with the regime peaking
الدكتور مجيد رفيع زاده: استياء الشعب الإيراني من نظام الملالوي هو في ذروته
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/July 08/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/65903/dr-majid-rafizadeh-iranian-peoples-disaffection-with-the-regime-peaking-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%83%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D8%B1%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%B9-%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%87/
The Iranian people’s frustration and the protests against the clerical establishment have taken on a new and distinct character.
When the widespread uprising erupted in 2009, people mainly asked the government to count their votes. They did not chant for regime change, but demanded fair and free elections. The regime did not adequately address people’s concerns.
The vast protests in late 2017 and early 2018 reached a new level. People, particularly farmers and workers, began publicly criticizing both the moderates and hard-liners, and many Iranians demanded that the ruling clerics step down from power.
The most recent protests, which took place over the last two weeks, shared several commonalities with the demonstrations that erupted at the beginning of the year, specifically when it came to people’s economic, political, social and economic grievances, and their disenchantment with the mullahs. Chants such as “strike, strike,” “we are all together,” “let go of Syria, think about us,” “close your stalls,” and “No Gaza, No Lebanon, my life for Iran” were heard on the streets of Tehran and across several other cities and towns.
But it is worth noting that the latest protests also brought a new character to the unrest, which can be perceived as a threat to the Iranian regime.
First of all, the middle class is joining the lower socio-economic class of Iranian society. In the latest protests, many of the protesters and merchants were considered to be from the middle class. As a result, although some policy analysts and scholars may argue that only Iran’s labor class has grievances against the political system, it is evident that it is not only the poor that are suffering and are fed up with the clerical establishment.
It is also important to point out that the social and economic classes are extremely important in uprisings due to their power in directing unrest. Many historians, political scientists and social theorists agree with the notion that one of the major prerequisites for a fundamental social or political change (such as a revolution or major reform) is the rise of the middle class against the ruling political establishment.
In other words, when the middle class is economically and socially blocked from progress by the state’s apparatuses — due to political repression and the state’s controlled, monopolized and stagnant economy — vital and potentially fatal challenges will sooner or later arise against the ruling political and religious establishment, no matter how powerful the regime is.
The second significant issue is that the latest protests are concentrated in the capital, Tehran. These were the second large protests in Tehran following the 2009 Green Movement, which saw Ayatollah Ali Khamenei side with the hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad against the people’s complaints that the election was rigged at the expense of moderate candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi. Iranian leaders fear any protests in Tehran due to the fact that, historically, any fundamental change in Iran occurred when people from the capital rose up against the regime.
Iran's leaders ought to be extremely wary that the people’s disaffection with the authorities has reached perilous levels.
Third, the recent protests in the Grand Bazaar are critical because it is home to conservative and religious people, who have been the critical support and social base for the clerical establishment since 1979.
Fourth, the United States and many countries in the region, which have been negatively impacted by the Iranian regime’s aggressive and militaristic policies, are politically and economically putting pressure on Tehran, as well as sympathizing with the Iranian people’s grievances and cause.
Furthermore, many dissidents in exile are joining hands and urging the international community to hold the Iranian regime accountable and responsible for human rights violations and the suppression of basic freedoms — the freedoms of speech, assembly and the press, and cracking down on its own citizens.
For example, Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, saluted the brave protesters for their uprising against high prices, corruption and the looting of Iran's assets by the mullahs’ regime, and called on all shopkeepers, tradesmen and merchants throughout the country to support and join the protesters. “The currency crisis and unprecedented high prices, which has imposed a burdensome pressure on the overwhelming majority of the people of Iran, is the outcome of the policies of the ruling religious fascism,” she said. “From the beginning, they have wasted the assets of the Iranian people, either by spending on domestic repression, nuclear projects, export of terrorism and fundamentalism and warfare in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon and other countries in the region, or have been looted by the regime’s corrupt leaders.”
In conclusion, the Iranian leaders ought to be extremely wary that the people’s disaffection and disenchantment with the authorities have reached perilous levels. The unrest is taking on a new character with the inclusion of various socio-economic classes, including the middle and labor classes. People from cities and towns, as well as the capital, are fed up with the system. All these signs point to the potential that the hold on power of Iran’s ruling clerics is at a dangerous crossroads if the leaders don’t adequately and immediately address the people’s demands and grievances.
• 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