LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
July 19/2018
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.july19.18.htm

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

Question: "What did Jesus mean when He said, 'I am the way and the truth and the life' (John 14:6)?"
GotQuestions.org
Answer: “I am the way and the truth and the life” is one of the seven “I Am” statements of Jesus. On the last night before His betrayal and death, Jesus was preparing His disciples for the days ahead. For over three years, these men had been following Jesus and learning from His teaching and example. They had placed their hopes in Him as the Messiah, the promised deliverer, yet they still didn’t understand how He was going to accomplish that deliverance. After the Last Supper, Jesus began speaking about His departure, which led to questions from His disciples.
In John 13:33, Jesus said, “My children, I will be with you only a little longer. You will look for me, and just as I told the Jews, so I tell you now: Where I am going, you cannot come.” This prompted Peter to ask where He was going (verse 36). Peter and the others did not understand that Jesus was speaking of His death and ascension to heaven. Jesus’ response was, “Where I am going, you cannot follow now, but you will follow later.” Peter was still misunderstanding and declared that he would follow Jesus anywhere and even lay down His life if necessary. As Jesus patiently continued to teach His disciples, He began speaking more plainly about heaven, describing the place He was going to prepare for them (John 14:2–3). Then Jesus said, “You know the way to the place where I am going” (verse 4). Speaking for the others, Thomas said they did not know where He was going, so how could they know how to follow Him there? It was in answer to this question that Jesus uttered one of the seven famous “I am” statements.
I am – In the Greek language, “I am” is a very intense way of referring to oneself. It would be comparable to saying, “I myself, and only I, am.” Several other times in the Gospels we find Jesus using these words. In Matthew 22:32 Jesus quotes Exodus 3:6, where God uses the same intensive form to say, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” In John 8:58, Jesus said, “Truly, truly I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am.” The Jews clearly understood Jesus to be calling Himself God because they took up stones to stone Him for committing blasphemy in equating Himself with God. In Matthew 28:20, as Jesus gave the Great Commission, He gave it emphasis by saying, “I am with you always, to the end of the age.” When the soldiers came seeking Jesus in the garden the night before His crucifixion, He told them, “I am he,” and His words were so powerful that the soldiers fell to the ground (John 18:4–6). These words reflect the very name of God in Hebrew, Yahweh, which means “to be” or “the self-existing one.” It is the name of power and authority, and Jesus claimed it as His own.
The way – Jesus used the definite article to distinguish Himself as “the only way.” A way is a path or route, and the disciples had expressed their confusion about where He was going and how they could follow. As He had told them from the beginning, Jesus was again telling them (and us) “follow me.” There is no other path to heaven, no other way to the Father. Peter reiterated this same truth years later to the rulers in Jerusalem, saying about Jesus, “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). The exclusive nature of the only path to salvation is expressed in the words “I am the way.”
The truth – Again Jesus used the definite article to emphasize Himself as “the only truth.” Psalm 119:142 says, “Your law is the truth.” In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus reminded His listeners of several points of the Law, then said, “But I say unto you . . .” (Matthew 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44), thereby equating Himself with the Law of God as the authoritative standard of righteousness. In fact, Jesus said that He came to fulfill the Law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17). Jesus, as the incarnate Word of God (John 1:1) is the source of all truth.
The life – Jesus had just been telling His disciples about His impending death, and now He was claiming to be the source of all life. In John 10:17–18, Jesus declared that He was going to lay down His life for His sheep, and then take it back again. He spoke of His authority over life and death as being granted to Him by the Father. In John 14:19, He gave the promise that “because I live, you also will live.” The deliverance He was about to provide was not a political or social deliverance (which most of the Jews were seeking), but a true deliverance from a life of bondage to sin and death to a life of freedom in eternity.
In these words, Jesus was declaring Himself the great “I Am,” the only path to heaven, the only true measure of righteousness, and the source of both physical and spiritual life. He was staking His claim as the very God of Creation, the Lord who blessed Abraham, and the Holy One who inhabits eternity. He did this so the disciples would be able to face the dark days ahead and carry on the mission of declaring the gospel to the world. Of course, we know from Scripture that they still didn’t understand, and it took several visits from their risen Lord to shake them out of their disbelief. Once they understood the truth of His words, they became changed people, and the world has never been the same.
So how do we follow Him today? The same way the disciples did long ago. They heard the words of Jesus and believed them. They took His words and obeyed them. They confessed their sins to Jesus as their Lord and God. They believed that He died to take the punishment of their sins and rose from the dead to give them new life. They followed His example and command to tell others the truth about sin, righteousness, and judgment. When we follow Him in “the way,” we can be assured of following Him all the way to heaven.
 

Is Southern Syria Heading For 'Lebanonization'?
Jonathan Spyer/Jerusalem Post/July 18, 2018
https://www.meforum.org/articles/2018/is-southern-syria-heading-for-lebanonization
The raid on the T4 base at Tiyas in southern Syria this week was, according to global media reports, the third such action by Israeli air power against this facility in the course of 2018. It is the latest move in an apparently ongoing campaign to prevent the entrenchment and consolidation (these are the words favored by Israeli officials) of the Iranian military infrastructure in Syria.
Meanwhile, the Assad regime is moving into the final stages of its offensive against the rebellion in Deraa province. Evidence has emerged of the presence of Iran-supported Shia militias among the forces operating on behalf of the regime in Deraa. The two forces whose commanders were photographed in the area are Liwa al-Zulfiqar and the Abu al-Fadl al-Abbas Brigade.
Haidar al-Jubouri, Zulfiqar’s commander, was photographed in the operations room of the Syrian Arab Army’s 4th Division in Deraa. Commanders of the Abu al-Fadl al-Abbas Brigade, meanwhile, were seen in the area of Tafas. Notably, the latter individuals were pictured in Syrian Army uniform and in conversation with Russian officers.
A number of Israeli commentators this week downplayed the significance of these revelations.
They argued that the apparently minor and limited presence of the Shia militias in the Deraa offensive was testimony to the success of Israeli diplomatic efforts to impress upon the Russians the importance of limiting the Iranian presence in the offensives in southwestern Syria.
The Israeli concern is not primarily with Deraa.
Rather, Jerusalem is watching carefully to see which forces will be involved in the regime’s advance on Quneitra province, adjoining the Israeli-controlled part of the Golan.
If the Quneitra offensive involves a mix of forces similar to that in Deraa, this will enable officials to claim that Russian pressure is working, while presumably restating Israel’s determination to continue efforts to expel Iran from Syria in its entirety.
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said this week that “the fact Iranian forces are present in Syria at all is unacceptable, and we will act against any Iranian consolidation in the area.” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, met this week with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Prior to the meeting, the Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement reiterating that “Israel will not tolerate a military presence by Iran or its proxies anywhere in Syria and that Syria must strictly abide by the 1974 Separation of Forces Agreement.”
So Israel makes clear its determination that Iran should quit Syria in its entirety, acts against specific Iranian targets, and appears to ignore or downplay those elements of the Iranian presence against which air action would have more limited or problematic application (such as pro-Iranian units integrated into the Syrian Army).
The Iranians, meanwhile, appear at present to be absorbing the blows with little apparent attempt at response, while maintaining their overall presence in Syria.
Where may all this be headed? First of all, it is important to understand the nature and dimensions of the Iranian project in Syria.
Iran’s deep alliance with Assad’s Syria goes back to the first days of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and to Hafez Assad’s support of Tehran in the Iran-Iraq War. Over the past seven years of civil war, however, the nature of the relationship has changed. Iranian provision of manpower and organization of paramilitary forces have been essential to the regime’s survival.
Tehran has invested upward of $30 billion in Syria. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has also recruited young Syrians into locally based IRGC-associated paramilitary groups (Quwaat al-Ridha, 313 battalion) and, of course, brought its paramilitary proxies onto Syrian soil, along with IRGC personnel.
This is a major, far-reaching process, resembling in its key particulars parallel projects in Lebanon and Iraq. The intention is to establish political-military structures that will serve to enable the projection of Iranian power over the long term. The Iranian expertise in this area is without parallel in the region. As a result of this approach, Tehran now dominates Lebanon and has the upper hand in Iraq. Assad’s Syria, which has an openly dictatorial system, is a different political context, of course, but the evidence suggests that the Iranians are digging in to stay.
Will the Russians act as the lever for the removal of this Iranian project? This appears to be the hope of Israeli policy-makers. But the facts would appear to indicate that Russia has neither the will, nor even the ability, to achieve this objective.
Regarding the former, on July 4, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov described US and Israeli demands for a complete Iranian withdrawal as “completely unrealistic.”
The Iranian pro-regime media is full of fear and speculation at the prospect of Russian betrayal. The Russian agenda in Syria does not directly parallel that of the Iranians (Moscow seeks good relations with all interested parties, the better to make itself the essential arbiter). But Moscow also has no interest in seeing the Iranians humiliated or their project reversed, particularly because they remain essential to the viability of Assad’s regime.
In any case, the Russian intervention in Syria has been predicated on a modest ground presence.
It is thus not clear by which mechanism Russia could seek to induce such a withdrawal, even if it wished to.
So the Iranian project in Syria is likely to continue, and Iranian- associated forces in one guise or another are likely in the period ahead to be operating close to the border with Israel. Israel, meanwhile, is likely to maintain its intelligence domination across Syria, and to continue periodically to strike at Iranian and Iranian-associated targets, in order to build deterrence and prevent the consolidation of weapons systems and deployments.
Does this sound familiar? It ought to. It is in its essentials the situation that pertains in south Lebanon and (in a far less threatening way) the Gaza Strip.
What we see here is a contest between two systems with entirely different areas of expertise. The Iranians excel in establishing and utilizing political and paramilitary clients to build power within regional spaces. They are, however, sharply deficient in conventional military skills. Israel, meanwhile, is outstanding in the fields of air warfare and intelligence, and seeks to avoid being sucked into involvement in the complex and cutthroat world of proxy warfare within Arab societies (the now soon-to-beabandoned cooperation with the rebels of Quneitra represented only a partial exception to this rule).
The likely emergent picture in Syria, as in Lebanon, is therefore the ongoing consolidation of another IRGC project, in the framework of a weakened and truncated Arab state, along with an ongoing Israeli effort to deter the masters of this project from acts of aggression, or to confine such acts to the realm of rhetoric.
Such a state of affairs is, by its nature, precarious and potentially combustible. At the same time, the Israeli system has shown considerable skill in recent years precisely in the management of comparable situations.
**Jonathan Spyer is a fellow at the Middle East Forum and a research associate at the Jerusalem Center for Strategic Studies.

Congress calls on Trump to recognize Israeli sovereignty over Golan
Bryant Harris/Al Monitor/July 18/18
ARTICLE SUMMARY
After President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, congressional Republicans are rallying around the Netanyahu government’s next big ask.
REUTERS/Ronen ZvulunAn Israeli soldier stands next to signs pointing out distances to different cities, on Mount Bental, an observation post in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights that overlooks the Syrian side of the Quneitra crossing, Israel, May 10, 2018.
President Donald Trump handed Israel a significant win when he recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and relocated the US Embassy there.
Now Republican lawmakers from his own party are putting the pressure on the administration to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Israel captured the territory from Syria during the Six-Day War in 1967 and formally annexed it in 1981.
“It would recognize the reality that the Golan Heights is part of Israel and is vital to its national security,” said Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., during a hearing of the House Oversight panel on national security he convened today to muster support for the move. “This is a policy that the president should implement and all members of Congress should support.”
The move comes as Israel is raising concerns about international moves to return the Golan Heights to Syria as Bashar al-Assad’s foes gradually acknowledge that he is unlikely to be driven from power.
“What has changed today is that with the imminent victory of the forces of President Bashar al-Assad in the sector of south Syria, new diplomatic initiatives by outside actors cannot be ruled out,” Dore Gold, a former director-general of Israel’s Foreign Affairs Ministry and ambassador to the UN who now heads the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, wrote in his written testimony to the subcommittee. “US recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights would constitute the fulfillment of a series of previous diplomatic assurances given to Israel by past administrations.”
US recognition of Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights would have little immediate impact on the ground. But some legal scholars and Democratic critics believe that recognizing the annexation would set a precedent for Israel to do the same in the West Bank.
“You cannot convert occupied territory and incorporate it into your national territory through occupation,” said Geoffrey Corn, an international law professor at the South Texas College of Law - Houston and a former army officer. “There has to be some peace agreement with settlement,” Corn added.
“There’s increasing momentum on the right in Israel to just give up on the two-state solution, annex the West Bank and allow the areas that are currently under Palestinian quasi-sovereignty to continue to function that way,” added Corn. “If that’s your ultimate goal in the West Bank, once the United States recognizes what you’ve done in the Golan Heights, it contributes to that momentum.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked Trump to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights last year after former US President Barack Obama rebuffed his request in 2015. In recent months, the Israeli government has redoubled its efforts. Israeli Intelligence Minister Yisrael Katz noted in May that the Golan Heights is currently “topping the agenda” with the United States.
When asked if Trump is open to recognizing the occupied territory as part of Israel proper, a White House spokesperson simply said, “There has been no change in our position on the Golan Heights.” The Israeli Embassy did not respond to Al-Monitor’s request for comment.
“At some point there’s nothing left to negotiate from the Israeli point of view, and I don’t know if that’s good for the Palestinians or the Israelis and I don’t think it’s good for US interests either,” Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., a House Foreign Affairs Committee member, told Al-Monitor. “I think it’s just another death blow to the peace process.”
However, Connolly also warned against returning the Golan Heights to Syria.
The annexed territory serves as invaluable strategic high ground a mere 40 miles from Damascus. As forces loyal to the Bashar al-Assad regime sweep up the remnants of the southwest Syrian opposition, the Golan Heights’ geostrategic importance has become even more prominent. The presence of Iranian-backed militias, including Hezbollah, fighting alongside regime forces has stoked fears of a direct confrontation with Israel.
“Just think how crazy it would be to say that Israel should give the Golan to Assad or some of its proxies,” DeSantis said at Tuesday’s hearing. “It would be absolute madness.”
But in 2010, before the outbreak of war in Syria, Israel contemplated doing exactly that. Netanyahu and Assad entered secret negotiations over the territory, and the Israelis were reportedly prepared to return the Golan Heights to Syria if Damascus ended its ties with Iran and Hezbollah.
“No political party in Israel could ever do it,” said Corn. “The Israeli population on the northern border suffered tremendously when Syria had the Golan Heights.”
Corn noted that Netanyahu’s renewed determination to secure US support for the Israeli annexation proves that the prime minister has abandoned the idea of abandoning the heights.
“It reinforces Israel’s position that this is not an issue that’s ever going to be on the negotiating table,” he said.
Despite the political implications, Trump’s decision is unlikely to significantly change the situation on the ground one way or the other.
“Realistically, I don’t see how it changes much in terms of the status quo,” a House aide told Al-Monitor. “Israel will just get more criticism from the international community at the UN and stuff like that because it is still the disputed territory. But I would think it would just be more of the same we saw with the [US] Embassy move.”
Found in:US PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP, SYRIA WAR SPILLOVER, ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT
**Bryant Harris is Al-Monitor's congressional correspondent. He was previously the White House assistant correspondent for Yomiuri Shimbun, Japan's largest newspaper. He has also written for Foreign Policy, Al Jazeera English and IPS News. Prior to his stint in DC, he spent two years as a US Peace Corps volunteer in Morocco. On Twitter: @brykharris_ALM, Email: bharris@al-monitor.com.

Muqtada al-Sadr and me: Chicago on the Tigris
Michael Flanagan/Al Arabiya/July 18/18/
When I requested that the State Department give me the post of Senior Rule of Law Advisor for Maysan Province during the reconstruction of Iraq, a wag there quipped that my being a politician originally from Chicago now living in Washington made me a natural expert in both financial corruption and vote fraud – you know, the perfect candidate.Last week, I allowed my enthusiasm for burgeoning Iraqi Nationalism expressed by Muqtada al-Sadr to override my usual cynicism. A mistake I will not allow again.
Al-Sadr has used and abused everyone supporting his stated dreams for Iraq just to gain power and has betrayed what could have been a huge success for Iraqis and for himself. He has all-but-discarded the members of his coalition and embraced the second largest vote bloc – the assortment of Iranian parties voting blocs and parties running under the banner Al-Fateh – and is seeking to form a pro-Iranian government. This is an express refutation of his platform while running. Al-Sadr says that he is doing this to avoid a civil war. This is quite convenient for him as the only party threatening civil war is the Sadrists. Just where exactly are we and how did we get here? If Sadr actually joins with the Iranian parties, his own coalition will likely desert him for the “old actors” as they are called and the State of Law Party and other associated parties will benefit from their defection
Dubious fire
It is a story that would make any Chicago pol giggle with admiration. First, the voter registration verification machines were destroyed. This act was accomplished by a very dubious fire just before the election having the impact of allowing everyone to cast an electronic ballot (or three if they liked!). Additionally, some of the actual physical ballot boxes in Sadr City were burned as well. Not since Emperor Nero has fire been so similarly “helpful.”The Sadr City electronic votes were so many that they almost reached the level of their previous election totals far surpassing the turnout totals for any other bloc in an otherwise very low-turnout election. The destruction of the verification machines and select ballot boxes also allowed for almost limitless fraudulent ballots from outside of Iraq including highly suspect ballots ostensibly from Peshmerga fighters. For example, one polling place in Lebanon, supposedly received over two thousand votes! The national commission empowered to make the actual count (the IHEC) is also under fire for suspected corruption and has been attacked publicly to such an extent that they have been removed from making the count and being replaced with a panel of judges to oversee the count.
With all of these rampant “irregularities” happening, the losers in the election successfully brought a bill to parliament, which will: 1) invalidate the electronic count entirely and requiring a paper ballot count to be made; and 2) make the paper ballot count to become the official count. There are several challenges to this act made by Sadr, both of the major Kurd parties and the Iraqi President among others. The decision will be handed down on Thursday of this week. Clearly, the Sadrists have never heard the political axiom: “Pigs get fat but hogs get slaughtered.” That is, small thieves will often get away with their crimes and grow fat but huge thieves will get caught and bad things will result. The Sadrist overreach here is so gross and careless that they are surely going to be caught and punished. If that were not enough, Sadr’s coalition partners make up 36 of the 54 seats his winning coalition.
Iranian parties
If Sadr actually joins with the Iranian parties, his own coalition will likely desert him for the “old actors” as they are called and the State of Law Party (al-Abadi, al-Mailiki) and other associated parties will benefit from their defection. This will leave Sadr with nothing near a majority of seats in Parliament and almost no chance to form a government. Sensing this eventual reality, current PM al-Abadi has called for all-party talks by all parties to form a government. It is certain that whatever that government is it will not have a majority in Parliament but be a consensual, grand coalition. Al-Sadr had a chance to be a great man. Instead he has chosen to be a meaningless and ridiculous pawn of secret, foreign forces. He has sold-out Iraqi Nationalism and has proven to be a thief and vote fraud. He should be prosecuted – not just for the vote fraud he and his followers have certainly committed but for betraying the love and trust of the Iraqi people. Iraqis voted for him and his coalition in droves because he promised honest leaders, an end to corruption, Iraqi Nationalism and complete freedom from foreign interests. Having procured his “victory” based on fraud, he can never deliver on these things. I am fairly certain that he never wanted to.

Iraq, 60 years on
Khairallah Khairallah/Al Arabiya/July 18/18
Iraq is currently paying the price of what was committed 60 years ago, on July 14, 1958. The current developments in South Iraq, which can expand to Baghdad cannot be separated from a history of six decades.
This history, Iraq’s modern history, began with the massacre in al-Rahab Palace where members of the royal Hashemite family were killed and it ended with the control of a group of men from the military. This paved way for the Baath Party, with all its backwardness, to attain power, then for the 2003 American invasion, which produced a system that’s failed, corrupt and backward in every field. What’s happening in South Iraq these days – on the anniversary of the 1958 military coup – is a culmination of continuous deterioration that has destroyed Iraq which has never witnessed a good day for 60 years now. The six decades since al-Rahab Palace massacre were tantamount to a nightmare that exposed what military coups can lead to and where it can take countries that were capable of being the best, and rather the best on all fronts in the region.
Shortage of electricity in Basra is only one aspect of the Iraqi tragedies which can be summed up in few simple questions: Where did the money which Iraq made from its oil go since 2003? How can all this money be spent without supplying Basra with electricity?
Iraq, thanks to its wealth and mainly its human resources, was qualified to be an economic tiger in the region if it had been allowed to develop normally away from slogans like the liberation of Palestine. However, what can be done when it had to pay the price for the Arab nationalist tide, which Gamal Abdelnasser laid the foundation for via his delusional victories?The 1958 coup was followed by military hegemony then came the wars, which Saddam Hussein caused. Afterwards there was the American invasion, which practically made Iraq under direct and indirect Iranian domination.
Years of tragedies
What can long years of consecutive tragedies lead to other than we currently see in Basra, Najaf, Nasiriyah and other cities and towns in the South? What can long years of governing by the ignorant, from the military and the Baath Party, and a corrupt regime that’s managed by sectarian instincts and militias controlled by Iran achieve? Shortage of electricity in Basra is only one aspect of the Iraqi tragedies which can be summed up in few simple questions: Where did the money which Iraq made from its oil go since 2003? How can all this money be spent without supplying Basra with electricity?
What’s happening today in Iraq is not a mere popular uprising of youths who demand electricity and job opportunities in a bankrupt country which situation deteriorates by the day. It’s a country whose voters are distributed among sectarian parties that do not possess any political or economic agendas. It’s a country where universities have become a place to practice religious rituals instead of being institutions that graduate doctors, engineers and scientists and that benefit from the technological revolution in the world.
Perhaps the most dangerous thing that Iraq witnessed in the past years is represented in tearing up whatever is left of its social fabric. Sectarian parties thus control all aspects of life and impose values that have nothing to do with what’s civilized in this world. In Iraq, there’s no longer a place for a head of a family who wants to raise his children right. There’s no longer a future except for the corrupt who work for religious parties and for hypocrites who accept that their country follows Iran.
How was Iraq 60 years ago? What has become of it now? The royal regime was definitely not perfect but it was a regime that could be developed. The Hashemite family had different values that did not include practicing violence. Back then, Iraq had values that relied on tolerance and openness to the world, specifically to the West. There were no values that were based on eliminating others just because their loyalty is doubted. The best Iraqi people were appointed to public posts regardless of their religion, sect or ethnicity. Does it make sense that a cleric who lacks political knowledge seeks to lead the country and organize its political life?
Iranian influence
There are two things which are perhaps the most dangerous in Iraq right now. The first one is the failure of the Kurds, in the light of the disastrous results of proceeding to carry out the independence referendum last September, to establish a region that’s a successful model to what Iraq can be in the future.
The second thing is Iran’s capability to use Iraq to influence oil supplies in the world. Therefore, it’s not strange that some Iraqi officials’ statements that there are “infiltrators” who are working to escalate the situation refers to people affiliated with Iran. What cannot be ignored is that Iran is going through a tough phase now amid fears of more US sanctions that will focus on its oil exports.
The hypothesis that Iran, which threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz if it was prevented from exporting its oil, wanted to direct a message to the Trump-Putin summit and that stipulates that if it’s incapable of blocking the strait then it can use the Iraqis to obstruct the export of Iraqi oil cannot be ruled out. This will greatly influence the global market and the price of the barrel of oil. Whatever the dimensions of the popular activity in South Iraq are and regardless of whether it’s in fact spontaneous, and it actually is in some parts, and regardless of whether it reaches Baghdad or not, there is a sad scene which we cannot avoid addressing. There has been a process of systematic destruction of Iraq during 60 years. It began with the mob that killed the members of the royal family, including King Faisal II. This mob later spoke of a “revolution.” How can spiteful officers, who are semi-illiterate and narrow-minded and who only believe in murder, carry out a revolution? This destruction process has not ended yet although Iran, which was the other partner in the American war on Iraq, avenged from every high-ranking pilot and officer who participated in the 1980-1988 war, worked on destroying every significant and vital Iraqi facility and directly supervised sectarian purging operations in all Iraqi cities and areas. It does not seem there is hope in the horizon for Iraq although there’s a general desire to get rid of Iranian hegemony, even among the Shiites. The worst thing is that Iran may be in a situation that enables it to exploit Iraq’s oil in its interest. It seems Iran has not yet quenched its thirst from Iraqi blood and from the gains it had made until now from the American invasion.

Charity at home and poverty in the land of plenty
Dr. Mohamed A. Ramady/Al Arabiya/July 18/18
The unequal divide between those that have and those that have not is widening across the world, putting under strain not only established political systems but endangering domestic and international security.
A rise in domestic violence levels and international refugee flows are some of the consequences of this growing wealth divide. It comes as no surprise that this widening poverty gap is not only the fate of mismanaged developing countries where kleptocracy is often rampant, but also in advanced economies.
The latest to come under scrutiny has been the United States, the world’s biggest economy and it has been an uncomfortable reading. Nikki Haley, the US ambassador to the United Nations, launched a scathing attack on the UN monitor on extreme poverty, by going on the offensive and dismissing the recent report on America that accuses Donald Trump of cruelly forcing millions of citizens into deprivation as “misleading and politically motivated”.Was Haley justified in her attack or a mere attempt to deflect attention? She accused the UN special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Philip Alston, who according to her “categorically misstated the progress the United States has made in addressing poverty … in [his] biased reporting”.She added that in her view that “it is patently ridiculous for the United Nations to examine poverty in America” when he should be focusing on other countries, presumably those that are at political loggerheads with the United States, or easy to identify countries like Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which prompted puzzlement as Mr. Alston carried out his investigation at the formal invitation of the Trump administration and such missions of the UN Rapporteur are not randomly initiated but need the cooperation of the host countries. Apparently the world’s “freest and wealthiest country on the planet” (according to Ms Haley) had no such poverty issues.
Mr. Alston made his report to a Human Rights body where the United States chair was empty as Haley had previously announced that the US was pulling out of membership of the Human Rights Council, describing it as a “cesspool of political bias”.For the sake of social stability, effective political governance can only survive in long term if there is a large degree of fairness and compassion
Receptive ear
It marked the first time that any state has withdrawn from the council since its inception in 2006. Was there a receptive ear to the report from the United States establishment? Apparently so with Democrat party politicians like Bernie Sanders. The Vermont senator had led a joint plea on the back of the UN report from 20 prominent members of Congress, including the senators Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker and Georgia representative John Lewis, calling on Trump to work with them to tackle “massive levels of deprivation and the immense suffering this deprivation causes”.While Sanders agreed with Haley that Burundi and the Democratic Republic Congo faced far worse problems, he pointedly remarked that America’s poverty was taking place “in the richest country in the history of the world and a time when wealth and income inequality is worse than at any time since the 1920s”.
He cited even more damning statistics where apparently 40 million people in the US still live in poverty, more than 30 million have no health insurance, and, more surprising to many in the world, 40 percent cannot afford $400 in an emergency. To illustrate the poverty divide in the US, he pointed out that the United States was a nation in which the top three people own more wealth than the bottom half, and that the country “can and must do much better than that”. Was Alston methodology correct in obtaining this poverty data to highlight US poverty levels? The United Nations Rapporteur carried out a 10-day tour in December 2017 of poverty hotspots in the US, from California, though Alabama and West Virginia, to Puerto Rico.
‘Dramatic change of direction’
His report did not wholly lay the blame on the Trump Administration, something that Ms Haley should have picked up, but rather concluded that though levels of hardship had been high for decades within America before Mr Trump, the current President was taking it to another level by steering the country toward a “dramatic change of direction” that was rewarding wealthy Americans through tax changes while stripping vulnerable Americans of welfare protections. When asked whether this report was really the prime reason for the US decision to withdraw from the United Nations Human Rights Council rather than the so-called biases against Israel, Alston said he had “no idea” whether his investigation had reinforced or influenced the timing of the US government’s withdrawal, but pointedly added that the move was “highly regrettable. I think it’s significant that of the 47 members of the council, only one has chosen to leave.”
In the Gulf there is also a poverty gap, as the number of young citizens unemployed is an issue, despite social security payment nets being in place for citizens deemed to be at the poverty line. A major factor of the so-called Arab Spring uprisings was the economic and social deprivation of large segments of these societies and the gap between the rich and the poor.
The Gulf anti-corruption drive has also sent a message that ill-gotten gain through connections and bribery will not be tolerated and that such practices have been a major factor in fostering a class of mega rich citizens while many other fellow citizens are struggling to make ends meet.
For the sake of social stability, effective political governance can only survive in the long term if there is a large degree of fairness and compassion, while at the same time nurturing the spirit of entrepreneurship and self-motivation to succeed in life. Poverty among plenty has a short political shelf life.

The incomplete pride of liberating Mosul
Adnan Hussein/Al Arabiya/July 18/18
Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi always speaks more effectively than he acts. His latest statement was issued to mark the occasion of the first anniversary of liberating Mosul, which was almost going to be completely destroyed. Tens of thousands of its inhabitants are still living there in terrible conditions in the city, as if they never got rid of the ISIS occupation and its dire consequences. These citizens were not at all responsible for this, but the government and the powerful political elite bear full political and moral responsibility for what happened to Mosul and other cities. They are also responsible for what preceded or followed in other Iraqi cities and areas, and it’s all due to the flagrant lack of patriotism and the fierce conflict for money and power among those entrusted with the responsibility of ruling the state. What Abadi did not and will also never say or do if he gets a second term as premier is that he will not fulfill the promise he had made to himself and that he had publicly pledged several times to fight administrative and financial corruption the same way he fought ISIS
Word without actions
Abadi said in the statement: “Today we (mark) with pride and appreciation the first anniversary of Mosul’s liberation - that eternal epic that fills the hearts of our people and that defeated ISIS which (assaulted) Mosul.” Yes, exactly, we, the Iraqis, do recall Mosul’s liberation from terrorism with pride and appreciation, but at the same time we also remember – and this is something that Mr. Abadi did not say and would never say even in 10 years – that those who are responsible of the crime of handing over Mosul and other cities to ISIS and for the resulting national catastrophe, are still not being questioned or punished. They are still free and fear nothing and nobody. Some of them even still hold positions of responsibility at the highest civil, military and security levels and no one tells them anything! What Abadi did not and will also never say or do if he gets a second term as premier is that he will not fulfill the promise he had made to himself and that he had publicly pledged several times to fight administrative and financial corruption the same way he fought ISIS. The main reason behind the ISIS catastrophe was administrative and financial corruption. It’s been a whole year after liberating Mosul and Abadi has not taken and will not take any action against corruption.This is one example of what made the head of the Integrity Commission resign from his position as he, like the rest of us, only heard words from Abadi about fighting corruption, without seeing any action.

The BBC exposes Qatar
Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabiya/July 18/18
What’s new about the latest BBC report about Qatar’s conscious and planned funding of an exquisite formation of terror groups, both Sunni and Shiite, in Iraq and Syria is that it’s issued by the BBC itself. There are also a few additional interesting details.
A total of $1 billion is the amount that the Qatari negotiator paid upon direct orders from Doha. The Qatari blessings were bestowed on a bunch of criminals from the sectarian Popular Mobilization that supports Khomeini’s Iran as part of a deal to release 28 Qataris, including members of the ruling family, who were kidnapped in Iraq in 2015. The British BBC’s report by Paul Wood included messages that he said he attained from governmental sources that confirm that Qatar received help from several parties in several countries to guarantee the release of the kidnapped.
It’s all linked together, Iran, Qatar, al-Qaeda, the Popular Mobilization, Hezbollah and the Houthis. The British BBC and the American Washington Post, and not Al Arabiya television channel or Asharq Al-Awsat daily or Alittihad daily, are who told us about the secret details of these Qatari deals
Before that, the Washington Post – this American daily, like the British BBC, is not accused of favoring Saudi Arabia or the UAE! –published the details of the deal in April 2018. BBC’s report added that Qatar’s authorities knew the identity of the terrorists they were dealing with back then, unlike what they had alleged.
Proof of terrorism funding
One of the funny details noted in the report is that a Kataib Hezbollah negotiator named Abu Mohammed took the ambassador aside and asked for $10 million for himself. The Qatari ambassador responded with Ahnaf ibn Qais’s slyness and said: "To motivate him, I also told him that I am willing to buy him an apartment in Lebanon." The Qatari generosity was not limited to the gangs of the general of Iranian terrorism Qassem Soleimani as it was rather fair and non-sectarian! The leaked documents proved that Qatar played the mediator role between the Army of Conquest (a fundamentalist Sunni faction) and Iran to implement the “four-town” agreement in Syria – the deal that’s a scandal to all its Sunni and Shiite parties and whose victims are Sunni and Shiite people in Syria’s Wadi Barada and Aleppo’s countryside. Not only that, but according to what was revealed, at some point, the kidnappers asked Qatar to leave the Arab Coalition against the Houthis in Yemen and secure the release of Iranian soldiers held prisoners by rebels in Syria. It’s all linked together, Iran, Qatar, al-Qaeda, the Popular Mobilization, Hezbollah and the Houthis. The British BBC and the American Washington Post, and not Al Arabiya television channel or Asharq Al-Awsat daily or Alittihad daily, are who told us about the secret details of these Qatari deals. We thus ask who, in general, funded the groups of strife and terror for the past 20 years in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt?
Channels like Al Hiwar Channel managed by Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood figure Azzam Al-Tamimi in London and similar figures like Sa'ad Al-Faqih: Who were watering their seeds? This question is directed to the intelligent and the rational.

How to counter Iran’s sectarian and terrorist threat
Dr. Mohammed Alsulami/Arab News/July 18/18
It is no exaggeration to say that the Iranian regime is currently surviving on two basic elements: Sectarianism and terrorism. The regime’s reliance on these two elements is not a baseless allegation or mere speculation, but a statement of fact, since both are enshrined as policy in several articles of the Iranian constitution, including articles 12 and 154.The Iranian regime is building its strategy through the use of its main tools — one of these is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which operates on two fronts, internally and beyond Iran’s borders. Internally, the IRGC, represented by the Basij forces, terrorizes the Iranian people and quickly and ruthlessly crushes any dissent. The IRGC’s overseas forces, meanwhile, can be divided into two parts. The first is its Iranian-nationality forces represented by the Quds Force and troops from the regime’s regular army. The second is the multinational sectarian militias established in Pakistan, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, India, Yemen, Nigeria and other nations to serve Iran’s interests wherever they are needed.
If we want to eradicate terrorism, reduce sectarianism and restore stability to the Middle East, we must present a comprehensive definition of terrorism that bypasses sectarian or doctrinal loyalties. Ignoring one source or perpetrator of terrorism while focusing on another can only strengthen both and increase resentment, sectarianism and terror in an endless, futile cycle of devastation.
Some describe the Iranian regime’s proxy militia Hezbollah as a state within a state. The same is true for the IRGC, which operates its own unofficial state within Iran with all the apparatuses of any state — controlling a massive military force, having de facto power over the economy and directing the country’s security forces and operations. While Hezbollah controls and supervises Beirut Airport, the IRGC controls all of Iran’s most important airports, most notably the Imam Khomeini International Airport in southern Tehran.
y address the Iranian regime, especially the IRGC and its lethal and malign activities in the region, political activists, campaigners, humanitarians and all decent people need to formulate an integrated strategy to counter the IRGC. This requires the participation of all countries interested in protecting their own interests and in supporting real regional stability and coexistence.
All nations must realize the urgent need to work together to help deactivate and eradicate Iran's terrorism and sectarianism.
The first measure is legal confrontation; raising legal actions against the Iranian regime to hold it accountable for all its violations of international treaties and conventions, and its support for terrorism and other illegal actions. The recent news of the alleged involvement of an Iranian diplomat in planning a terrorist attack in Europe is no surprise to Iranians, as the regime is regularly accused of carrying out similar assaults and assassinations of dissidents in exile — like the killing last year of the Ahwaz opposition leader Ahmed Mola, who was shot three times at point-blank range outside his home in the Netherlands. Although his killer has not been caught, the brutal murder was a textbook example of a regime assassination, with Mola regularly subjected to death threats for his political activism in exile.
Second is economic confrontation, so that Iran’s regime and Iranian companies are boycotted. The IRGC owns and controls hundreds of companies worldwide that are registered under civilian “dummy” front accounts to evade detection as part of a complex financial network. Experts suggest that these companies, which are routinely used for money laundering, should be catalogued and put under surveillance by international intelligence bodies, which should coordinate to track their illicit financial dealings and funding of terror activities. At the same time, the current contracts of international businesses with Iranian companies should be reviewed to ensure that these companies are civilian and not the economic arms of the IRGC.
Third should be a military confrontation, in which the terrorist organizations of the IRGC are targeted around the world. This specifically refers to those organizations and militias (non-state actors) associated with Iran in the Middle East and mercenaries recruited by the IRGC in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and other nations. It is necessary to emphasize that there is no difference between these militias and other extremist terror organizations such as Daesh, Al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram.
Finally, inter-state intelligence coordination and the exchange of information regarding the activities of the IRGC and its military, economic, intelligence and associated cells is needed. It is also important to closely monitor the movements of senior Iranian figures accused of involvement in terrorist operations worldwide, and to ensure that countries coordinate in extraditing those who evade justice. These figures include Ali Akbar Velayati, political adviser to the supreme leader of Iran, who was personally involved in a terrorist attack on Argentine territory in the 1990s, in which many people died.
Achieving these measures is not impossible but requires real international will and high-level coordination between the countries affected by Iran’s bloody terror activities and those not directly affected. It is essential for all nations to realize the urgent need to work together to help deactivate and eradicate terrorism and sectarianism and to eliminate non-state terror actors regionally and globally.
*Dr. Mohammed Alsulami is an expert in Iranian affairs. He received his Ph.D. from Leiden University in 2014. He is the founder and chairman of Rasanah: International Institute for Iranian Studies.