English LCCC Newsbulletin For
Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For August 20/2022
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2021/english.august20.22.htm
News Bulletin Achieves
Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations For today
You hypocrites! You know how to
interpret the appearance of earth and sky, but why do you not know how to
interpret the present time? ‘And why do you not judge for yourselves what is
right?
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint
Luke 12/49-59/:”I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were
already kindled! I have a baptism with which to be baptized, and what stress I
am under until it is completed! Do you think that I have come to bring peace to
the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division! From now on, five in one
household will be divided, three against two and two against three; they will be
divided: father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and
daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and
daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.’He also said to the crowds, ‘When you see
a cloud rising in the west, you immediately say, “It is going to rain”; and so
it happens. And when you see the south wind blowing, you say, “There will be
scorching heat”; and it happens. You hypocrites! You know how to interpret the
appearance of earth and sky, but why do you not know how to interpret the
present time? ‘And why do you not judge for yourselves what is right? Thus, when
you go with your accuser before a magistrate, on the way make an effort to
settle the case, or you may be dragged before the judge, and the judge hand you
over to the officer, and the officer throw you in prison. I tell you, you will
never get out until you have paid the very last penny.’”
Question: “Will God give me the
spiritual gift I ask for? How does God distribute spiritual gifts?”
GotQuestions.org?/August 19/2022
Answer: Romans 12:3-8 and 1 Corinthians chapter 12
make it clear that each Christian is given spiritual gifts according to the
Lord’s choice. Spiritual gifts are given for the edification of the body of
Christ (1 Corinthians 12:7, 14:12). The exact timing of the giving of these
gifts is not specifically mentioned. Most assume that spiritual gifts are given
at the time of spiritual birth (the moment of salvation). However, there are
some verses that may indicate God gives spiritual gifts later as well. Both 1
Timothy 4:14 and 2 Timothy 1:6 refer to a gift that Timothy had received at the
time of his ordination “by prophecy.” This likely indicates that one of the
elders at Timothy’s ordination spoke about a spiritual gift that Timothy would
have to enable his future ministry.
We are also told in 1 Corinthians 12:28-31 and in 1 Corinthians 14:12-13 that it
is God (not us) who chooses the gifts. These passages also indicate that not
everyone will have a particular gift. Paul tells the Corinthian believers that
if they are going to covet or long after spiritual gifts, they should strive
after the more edifying gifts, such as prophesying (speaking forth the word of
God for the building up of others). Now, why would Paul tell them to strongly
desire the “greater” gifts if they already had been given all they would be
given, and there was no further opportunity of gaining these greater gifts? It
may lead one to believe that even as Solomon sought wisdom from God in order to
be a good ruler over God’s people, so God will grant to us those gifts we need
in order to be of greater benefit to His church.
Having said this, it still remains that these gifts are distributed according to
God’s choosing, not our own. If every Corinthian strongly desired a particular
gift, such as prophesying, God would not give everyone that gift simply because
they strongly desired it. If He did, then who would serve in all of the other
functions of the body of Christ? There is one thing that is abundantly
clear—God’s command is God’s enablement. If God commands us to do something
(such as witness, love the unlovely, disciple the nations, etc.), He will enable
us to do it. Some may not be as gifted at evangelism as others, but God commands
all Christians to witness and disciple (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8). We are all
called to evangelize whether or not we have the spiritual gift of evangelism. A
determined Christian who strives to learn the Word and develop his teaching
ability may become a better teacher than one who may have the spiritual gift of
teaching, but who neglects the gift. Are spiritual gifts given to us when we
receive Christ, or are they cultivated through our walk with God? The answer is
both. Normally, spiritual gifts are given at salvation, but also need to be
cultivated through spiritual growth. Can a desire in your heart be pursued and
developed into your spiritual gift? Can you seek after certain spiritual gifts?
First Corinthians 12:31 seems to indicate that this is possible: “earnestly
desire the best gifts.” You can seek a spiritual gift from God and be zealous
after it by seeking to develop that area. At the same time, if it is not God’s
will, you will not receive a certain spiritual gift no matter how strongly you
seek after it. God is infinitely wise, and He knows through which gifts you will
be most productive for His kingdom. No matter how much we have been gifted with
one gift or another, we are all called upon to develop a number of areas
mentioned in the lists of spiritual gifts: to be hospitable, to show acts of
mercy, to serve one another, to evangelize, etc. As we seek to serve God out of
love for the purpose of building up others for His glory, He will bring glory to
His name, grow His church, and reward us (1 Corinthians 3:5-8, 12:31–14:1). God
promises that as we make Him our delight, He will give us the desires of our
heart (Psalm 37:4-5). This would surely include preparing us to serve Him in a
way that will bring us purpose and satisfaction.
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese &
Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on August 19-20/2022
President Aoun receives letter from French President Macron stressing
keenness to strengthen bilateral relations, tackles official media...
Mikati partakes in late Makari’s funeral
Sharafeddine: Mikati doesn't want Syrians' repatriation 'for own interest'
Sayyed Nasrallah: US Mediator is Wasting Time, Escalation is Inevitable If
Israeli Enemy Will Deny Lebanon’s Maritime Rights
Change'MPs to launch presidential vote initiative
Lebanese Athlete Rejects Competing with Israeli Opponent, Withdraws from Youth
MMA Championship in UAE
Report: Israel accepted Lebanon's border demands, wants guarantees from
Hezbollah
Hezbollah MP Raad: Sectarianism, Corruption in Lebanon Backed by Foreign Powers
Raad says Hezbollah 'real sovereign party' in Lebanon
Lebanon arrests grandson of Saddam's brother over Speicher massacre
Lebanon expected to record second-highest inflation rate globally in 2022
If Hezbollah does carry out its threat of war, Lebanon could end up like
Gaza/Michael Young/The National/August 19/2022
Death threats against two journalists in Lebanon highlight limits of free
speech/Nada Homsi/The National/August 19/2022
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on August 19-20/2022
Tehran Insists on Red Lines in Vienna Negotiations
Iran deal tantalizingly close but US faces new hurdles
Bolton Says Biden’s Concessions to Iran Would Border on Treason
Rushdie attack awakens old demons for Arab writers
Putin, Macron call for IAEA inspection of Ukraine nuclear plant
Russians flee huge fire at arms storage depot near Ukraine border
Russian intelligence knew that Ukrainians would not welcome Russia, but still
told the Kremlin they would, report says
A top Russian official was so sure of a quick win in Ukraine that he picked the
Kyiv apartment he wanted before the invasion started: report
Berlin police investigate Abbas' Holocaust comments
Palestinians: Israeli Troops Shot, Killed Man in West Bank
Several Killed, Injured in Market Blast North Syria
Ankara, Damascus Demand Opening Communication Channels
Iraq: Concerns over Escalating Conflict between Sadrist Movement, Coordination
Framework
German President Looks to Placate Israel with Visit after PA President’s
Statements
Palestinians: Israeli Troops Shot, Killed Man in West Bank
Saudi crown prince receives Iraq’s Wisdom Movement leader
Titles For The
Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on August 19-20/2022
Four English articles telling All Facts About the terrorist Iranian Regime, Its
criminal Fatwas and Its devious endeavors to own a nuclear bomb
Death to Blasphemers!’ Islam’s Ancient War on Critics of Muhammad/Raymond
Ibrahim/August 19/2022
The Republic of Fatwas/Mark Dubowitz &Saeed Ghasseminejad/ Newsweek/August
19/2022
Another Iran Deal? Looking Back and Looking Ahead/Jacob Nagel and Jonathan
Schanzer/Memo/August 19/2022
Security Threat: China's Interest in US Agriculture/Judith Bergman/Gatestone
Institute./August 19/2022
Turkey and the German Dream/Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/August, 19/2022
The Latest English LCCC Lebanese &
Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on August 19-20/2022
President Aoun receives letter from
French President Macron stressing keenness to strengthen bilateral relations,
tackles official media...
NNA/August 19/2022
In a letter to President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, French President,
Emmanuel Macron, asserted that he attaches “Great importance to the relations
between Lebanon and France”, and that he is keen to always work to strengthen
and develop these relations in all fields. President Macron thanked the
President for the congratulatory message he addressed to him on the occasion of
the French National Day, expressing his affection for its content and l his deep
gratitude for President Aoun's initiative.
Minister Makary:
The President Aoun met Information Minister, Ziad Makary, and discussed with him
the atmosphere of his official visit to Doha, along with Tourism Minister, Walid
Nassar.
A written message was delivered from the President of the Republic to the Emir
of the State of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, on Lebanese-Qatari
relations and existing cooperation between both countries.
Current political and government developments, in addition to matters related to
the official media institutions in the Ministry of Information and Lebanon
Television were also addressed in the meeting.
MP Jabbour:
The President received MP, Jimmy Jabbour, and deliberated with him the current
affairs and needs of the Akkar region. MP Jabbour indicated that President Aoun
assured him of his constant interest in the conditions of the Akkar region and
his keenness to meet the needs of its people and their role in Lebanese
political life, especially in the executive and legislative authorities. The
President also stressed the sacrifices made by the people of Akkar for their
country in all political, military and social fields.
Former Minister Qordahi:
President Aoun met former Minister, George Kordahi, and discussed with him
general and political developments.
Lebanonese Ambassador to Senegal:
President Aoun received Lebanon’s Ambassador to Senegal, Sami Haddad. Ambassador
Haddad briefed the President on the conditions of the Lebanese community in
Senegal, which number more than 30,000 people, and their role politically,
economically, socially and industrially. Lebanese-Senegalese relations and
ways of developing them were also deliberated. -- Presidency Press Office
Mikati partakes in late Makari’s funeral
NNA/August 19/2022
Caretaker Prime Minister, Najib Mikati, on Friday partook in the funeral
ceremony of former Deputy House Speaker, Farid Makari, at Our Lady of Balamand
church, where he placed on the deceased’s coffin a National Cedar Citation of a
Senior Officer’s rank in the name of the President of the Republic, and in
appreciation of late Makari’s contributions and successful political career.
Sharafeddine: Mikati doesn't want Syrians' repatriation
'for own interest'
Naharnet/August 19/2022
Caretaker Minister of the Displaced Issam Sharafeddine accused Friday Prime
Minister-designate Najib Mikati of not wanting to repatriate the Syrian
refugees. "Mikati doesn't want to facilitate the repatriation of the refugees,"
Sharafeddine said, adding that he and Mikati are at odds because of many
disagreements over economic issues, and not just because of the refugees case.لا
Sharafeddine also said in a radio interview that Mikati is a businessman and has
business in the west. "He does not want to upset the donor countries, even at
the expense of the Lebanese," he added.
Sharafeddine had visited Syria on Monday to discuss the refugees issue. Syrian
Minister of Local Administration Hussein Makhlouf said Syria is ready to
repatriate refugees from Lebanon, to assist them and give them all that they
need.
Mikati's advisor told al-Jadeed that Sharafeddine's visit to Syria was an
exception as he headed a delegation from a Lebanese party and that the file of
the displaced has practically returned to Social Affairs Minister Hector Hajjar.
The Social Affairs Ministry is usually in charge of the refugees' file.
Sharafeddine of the Lebanese Democratic Party was not listed on a leaked cabinet
line-up submitted by Mikati to President Michel Aoun. The line-up shuffled
between current caretaker ministers, but dismissed Sharafeddine, Economy
Minister Amin Salam, Finance Minister Youssef Khalil and Energy Minister Walid
Fayyad.
Sayyed Nasrallah: US Mediator is Wasting Time, Escalation is Inevitable If
Israeli Enemy Will Deny Lebanon’s Maritime Rights
Al-Manar English Website/August 19, 2022
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah stressed on Friday that the
destiny of the Iranian nuclear deal does not affect Lebanon’s maritime border
demarcation file, adding that the Islamic Resistance stance will not change
regardless of the outcomes of the ongoing talks between Iran and the world
powers. Addressing Hezbollah laying foundation stone ceremony of a jihadi,
touristic landmark in Bekaa’s Janta, named “The Story of the First Shot”, Sayyed
Nasrallah said,”Lebanon’s oil and gas resources and the disputable zone in
Karish will not be affected by whether the nuclear deal will be signed or
not.”Critizing the Lebanese political forces falsely accusing Hezbollah of
linking the maritime border file to the nuclear deal, Sayyed Nasrallah added
that the US mediator Amos Hochstein is wasting time and that the remaining time
is getting shorter.
“If Lebanon secures its rights, calm will be maintained; however, escalation
will be inevitable if Lebanon’s rights are denied,” his eminence added. Sayyed
Nasrallah underscored the importance of continuing exerting efforts to form the
new Lebanese government, stressing that the customs exchange rate against US
dollar in Lebanon must not be raised at once to 20,000 L.L. His eminence also
hailed the Lebanese young athlete Charbel Abou Daher who had withdrawn from an
MMA competition in UAE to avoid competing with an Israeli rival. “This heroic
stance is one of the resistance facets and confirms that the Lebanese resistance
is cross-sectarian,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, addressing Charbel and his family to
express pride of his stance.
Janta Landmark
Hezbollah Secretary General indicated that establishing a landmark in Bekaa is
the minimum way of expressing gratitude to that region and its locals, adding
that selecting Janta area for that purpose did not take a long time. Sayyed
Nasrallah narrated how, upon the Israeli invasion in 1982, Iran dispatched an
IRGC unit to help the Lebanese fight the occupation, adding that Janta hosted
the first military camps where the Islamic Resistance fighters were trained.
Sayyed Nasrallah highlighted Hezbollah Secretary General Martyr Sayyed Abbas Al-Moussawi
was among the first trainees at Janta camp.
According to Sayyed Nasrallah, Janta military camps used to be raided by the
Israeli warplanes in the 1980, which claimed several Lebanese and Iranian
martyrs. Sayyed Nasrallah underlined the spiritual, sentimental and religious
aspects of Janta military camps, noting that Hezbollah fighters used to pray,
cry and hold Ashura mourning ceremonies there. Hezbollah Secretary General
pointed out that the Party aspires to establish a landmark that reflects the
memory of the training camp, the role of Bekaa locals in fighting the terrorist
groups in Syria till reaching Lebanon’s Second Liberation, the terrorist car
bomb attacks by the militants, and the Israeli bombardment, hoping that its
economic revenues will compensate for their sacrifices during the past decades.
Sayyed Nasrallah had offered condolences on the death of the mother of the
martyr Ahmad Kassir, Fawziya Hamza, praising her patience and sacrifice as she
was the mother of martyrs. Sayyed Nasrallah also condoled and congratulated the
families of the Palestinian martyr Ibrahim Al-Nabulsi and the martyrs who were
killed in the same battle against the Israeli enemy in the occupied West Bank.
Change'MPs to launch presidential vote initiative
Naharnet/August 19/2022
The 13 MPs of the “change” bloc on Friday announced that they will launch a
“comprehensive initiative” regarding the presidential election in early
September.
“This initiative will include the political stances and the constitutional and
values-related approach that would establish a political and popular incubator
that would push for the election of a president who would contribute to
launching a salvation course for the country,” they said in a statement. The
initiative will be “a launchpad for communication with the other forces,” they
added. “MPs Michel Doueihi and Melhem Khalaf have been tasked with preparing the
document and devising the initiative in order to launch it in early September
with the beginning of the constitutional deadline” for the election of a new
president, the statement said.
Lebanese Athlete Rejects Competing with Israeli Opponent,
Withdraws from Youth MMA Championship in UAE
Al-Manar English/August 19/2022
A young Lebanese mixed martial arts fighter has announced his withdrawal from
the 2022 Youth International Mixed Martial Arts Federation (IMMAF) World
Championships in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to shun competing with an
Israeli opponent. According to media reports, Charbel Abou Daher pulled out of
the sports event in the Emirati capital city of Abu Dhabi after the draw placed
him against Israeli rival Yonatan Mak in a Youth B 48-kilogram weight class
contest.
The 2022 Youth IMMAF World Championships kicked off on August 17, and will be
wrapped up on August 20.
Report: Israel accepted Lebanon's border demands, wants
guarantees from Hezbollah
Naharnet/August 19/2022
Israel has accepted Lebanon's demands in the border demarcation file and needs
few more weeks to finalize the agreement, al-Akhbar newspaper reported. In
remarks published Friday, the daily said that Israel wants guarantees that
Hezbollah will not attack Israel gas rigs in case the agreement is not reached
by mid-September. The agreement would give Lebanon the Line 23 and all of the
Qana field, according to the report. "Israel has sent clear messages to
Hezbollah, saying that it has accepted Lebanon's demands and asking for
guarantees that Hezbollah will not attack Karish," the daily quoted informed
sources as saying. In June, Israel moved a production vessel into Karish, parts
of which are claimed by Lebanon. The move forced the Lebanese government to call
for the resumption of U.S.-mediated negotiations, and Hochstein answered the
request and visited Beirut, while Hezbollah threatened Israel against proceeding
with extraction. Lebanon is now waiting for a response from Israel after having
relayed its maritime border position to Hochstein.
Hezbollah MP Raad: Sectarianism, Corruption in Lebanon
Backed by Foreign Powers
Al-Manar English/August 19/2022
Head of Hezbollah’s Loyalty to Resistance parliamentary bloc MP Mohammad Raad
lashed out at the “rotten performance” of the sectarian system in Lebanon,
stressing that such system can neither build nor run a state. In an interview
with Al-Manar on Thursday night, MP Raad stated that the sectarianism and
corruption in Lebanon is “definitely” backed by foreign powers. In this regard,
the Hezbollah lawmaker cited when the US and the Lebanese Central Bank- along
with private banks across Lebanon- made a warning behind the scenes for a small
group of depositors to withdraw their money from the banks before the economic
crisis started in the country three years ago. On presidential election, MP Raad
stressed that Hezbollah’s approach in this regard is to abide by the Lebanese
Constitution. “As stipulated by the Constitution, parliamentary sessions aimed
at electing a new president take place two months before the end of his
predecessor’s term,” the Lebanese MP told Al-Manar’s Manar Sabbagh. “As a
parliamentary bloc we primarily adopt a stance that says the presidential
elections must be held on time.”President Michel Aoun’s term ends on October 31,
and constitutionally parliament must vote for a successor within a two-month
timeframe before that deadline.
Raad says Hezbollah 'real sovereign party' in Lebanon
Naharnet/August 19/2022
Hezbollah MP Mohammad Raad has said that Hezbollah is "the real sovereign party"
in Lebanon, a word usually used by Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea to
describe the parties that oppose Hezbollah. Many times, Geagea had called for a
"sovereign" Prime Minister and a "sovereign" President and dubbed the opposition
MPs as "sovereign." A sovereign President, for him, would be a President who can
confront Hezbollah and its allies. "The resistance is protecting the country and
the joy of victory can return to our people their dignity after all the
suffering that the authorities have inflicted on them over the years," Raad
said. He went on to say that "the system must be reconsidered," adding that his
bloc has added "a special flavor" to the legislative work in Parliament.
Lebanon arrests grandson of Saddam's brother over Speicher
massacre
Naharnet /Friday, 19 August, 2022
Lebanon’s General Security agency has arrested Abdullah Yasser Sabawi, a
grandson of Saddam Hussein’s half-brother Sabawi Ibrahim al-Tikriti, who is
accused of involvement in the 2014 Camp Speicher massacre in Iraq.
“He is accused of carrying out criminal operations that resulted in the death of
thousands of innocents, based on an Interpol warrant that has been enforced by
the relevant Lebanese security agencies,” General Security chief Maj. Gen. Abbas
Ibrahim told Iraq’s IMN TV. “We operate as per the international law, the
judiciary and the warrants of exchanging and extraditing fugitives among
nations, especially a brotherly country like Iraq,” Ibrahim added. “We in turn
reject any impunity and we support the implementation of the law without any
interferences or pressures, and this is our duty towards our people in Iraq,”
the major general added. According to media reports, Sabawi, 27, had sought
refuge in Lebanon in 2018 along with his family, after having lived in Yemen in
the wake of the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime. “Sabawi’s apartment in the
Lebanese city of Jbeil was raided on June 13 and he was arrested on charges of
collaborating with the Islamic State group, based on a request from Iraqi
authorities,” the reports said. The Camp Speicher massacre occurred on June 12,
2014, when the Islamic State group killed between 1,095 to 1,700 Iraqi cadets in
an attack on Camp Speicher in Tikrit, Iraq. At the time of the massacre, there
were between 5,000 and 10,000 unarmed cadets in the camp, and IS fighters
selected the Shiites and non-Muslims for execution. It is the second deadliest
act of terrorism in history, only surpassed by the September 11 attacks.
Lebanon expected to record second-highest inflation rate
globally in 2022
Massoud A Derhally/The National/August 19/2022
Elevated global commodities and oil prices, a higher exchange rate, and an
increase in custom tariffs and the cost of bread will further fuel inflation
Lebanon is expected to post the second-highest inflation rate in the world this
year, trailing only Sudan, according to Fitch Solutions.Inflation in the
country, which faces its worst economic crisis in more than three decades, will
average 178 per cent in 2022, up from about 155 per cent last year, Fitch said.
This is an upward revision from Fitch's previous forecast of about 156 per cent
for this year due to stronger inflationary pressures from the adjustment of
telecommunications, port and customs tariffs, it said. Inflation in the country
will drop to 60 per cent in 2023 as the effects from the removal of subsidies
will fade, Fitch said. Runaway inflation in Lebanon rose to 210 per cent in June
from the same month a year earlier, marking the 24th consecutive triple-digit
increase of the Central Administration of Statistics' Consumer Price Index since
July 2020. The index increased 9.23 per cent from May 2022.
While Inflation in the country continues unabated, it remains far from its peak
of 741 per cent towards the end of 1987, during the civil war in the country
from 1975 to 1990. Inflation will be fuelled by high global commodities and oil
prices, the continued depreciation of the Lebanese pound on the parallel market
and on Sayrafa, the electronic trading platform regulated by Banque du Liban (BDL).
"We believe that the gradual adoption of the Sayrafa exchange rate that BDL sets
daily, which currently stands at 26,100 Lebanese pounds to the US dollar,
instead of the official exchange rate of 1,507.5 pounds to the dollar, across
several sectors will feed through higher inflationary pressures," Fitch said.
The Sayrafa exchange rate, which was adopted for telecommunications tariffs from
July 1 and for port fees from August 1, 2022 will lead to "a significant
increase" in phone and internet bills as well as in the cost of imported goods
through the port, it said. Fitch expects Lebanon's parliament to approve an
adjustment to customs tariffs, which will push up the cost of imported
non-essential goods, such as tobacco and alcohol, contributing to higher
inflation.
It also expects Lebanese authorities to start reducing bread subsidies after the
removal of the majority of subsidies on basic goods in 2021, which will lead to
higher prices. "The surge in wheat prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
along with BDL’s eroding foreign currency reserves will make it more challenging
for the government to subsidise bread prices," Fitch said. "In fact, the gradual
increase in subsidised bread prices, which accelerated due to the supply
tightness in the global and domestic wheat market since Russia’s invasion of
Ukraine, led to the increase in bread prices to more than 30,000 Lebanese pounds
in August from around 14,000 Lebanese pounds in March 2022. We foresee the
upward trend in bread prices will continue, adding to the inflationary
pressures." Lebanon's economy collapsed after it defaulted on about $31 billion
of Eurobonds in March 2020, with its currency sinking more than 90 per cent
against the dollar on the black market. The country's public debt ballooned to
more than $100bn, or about 212 per cent of gross domestic product, in
2021.Lebanon has the fourth-highest debt-to-GDP ratio in the world, surpassed
only by Japan, Sudan and Greece, according to the World Bank. The country's
economy contracted about 58 per cent between 2019 and 2021, with GDP falling to
$21.8bn in 2021, from about $52bn in 2019, according to the World Bank — the
largest contraction on a list of 193 countries. Fitch also warned that "a sharp
spike in political risk due to heightened tensions with Israel over maritime
borders dispute and/or in the run-up to the presidential elections could lead to
more pronounced depreciation of the Lebanese pound on the parallel market".
Lebanon's political elite must agree on a new president by October 31, when
Michel Aoun's six-year term expires. Lebanon has historically been marred by
political impasses that have created political vacuums. Politicians have yet to
form a government three months after parliamentary elections were held, delaying
the implementation of reforms that are a prerequisite to securing $3 billion
from the International Monetary Fund. Political wrangling left the country
without a president for two and a half years until Mr Aoun's election by the
128-seat parliament in 2016. His predecessor, Michael Sleiman, was elected in
2008 after the position had been vacant for 18 months.
If Hezbollah does carry out its threat of war, Lebanon
could end up like Gaza
Michael Young/The National/August 19/2022
The mood in Lebanon was very different the last time Israel and Hezbollah fought
a major conflict
Recently, Hezbollah’s secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah, made it clear that if
Israel began drilling in its offshore Karish gas field, without Lebanon first
securing what he deemed to be its own “rights” to gas, the consequences could be
war. Not long before his comments, in early July, Hezbollah flew several drones
over Karish. While many believe that Nasrallah does not intend to carry out his
threat of war at a time of deep economic crisis in Lebanon, there was no
intention to go to war in summer 2006 either, the last time Israel and Hezbollah
fought a major conflict. Often, the need to avoid being discredited by failing
to act is enough of a motive to spark a conflagration. However, let’s assume
that a war does occur, can Hezbollah assume that the aftermath will be similar
to what happened in 2006? At the time, the party had accused its domestic
political opponents, joined in what was known as the March 14 coalition, of
having betrayed Hezbollah by trying to exploit the war to contain the party’s
actions. Once the war ended, Hezbollah mobilised its supporters to organise a
months-long sit-in near the prime minister’s office and force a change of
government that would give it veto power over cabinet decisions. Among the
things the party and its allies sought to block was a UN plan to set up a
tribunal to try suspects involved in the assassination of former Lebanese prime
minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005. Hezbollah and Syria were alleged to have
played a role in the crime.
The standoff continued until May 2008, when armed clashes between the two sides
led to what is known as the Doha Accord, which brought a new president to
office. For several years after that, the situation returned to relative
normality.
It is doubtful that a similar such situation could be replicated after any
future war. The reasons for this are many, including Israeli intentions, the
mood in Lebanon at a time of economic breakdown and the durability of Lebanon’s
social contract.
Israel has made it amply clear that a war in Lebanon will lead to the widespread
destruction of the country. Unlike 2006, when the US urged the Israelis not to
obliterate Lebanon, fearing this would undermine the government of then prime
minister Fouad Siniora, such inhibitions are unlikely in a new conflict. On the
contrary, with many countries viewing Hezbollah as a destabilising force in the
region, there may be implicit regional approval for a devastating response.
With Lebanon already facing one of the worst economic crises in recent history,
the terrible consequences of a war with Israel could send the country over the
edge. A bankrupt country would be unable to repair damaged infrastructure or
homes, so Lebanon could end up becoming a larger version of Gaza, fuelling
popular anger. In the Shiite community, which has remained loyal to Hezbollah
through thick and thin, the reaction would also be very unpredictable. In 2006,
there was money, particularly Qatari money, to immediately start rebuilding
destroyed Shiite villages and neighbourhoods. Today, little outside assistance
would be forthcoming to help the community. Parliamentary elections this year
showed there was underlying disgruntlement because of the economy. While
Hezbollah and its allies in the Amal movement won all their seats, the number of
votes in their favour went down. Independent candidates, although not Shiite,
also made breakthroughs in Hezbollah and Amal-dominated districts.
The temper in Lebanon has also changed. An increasing number of Lebanese are fed
up with the path down which Hezbollah is leading their country. No one wants to
pay a price for the party’s alliance with Iran. And increasingly, on the ground,
communities have shown a willingness to resist or take up arms against
Hezbollah, as happened last year in Khaldeh, the Druze village of Shuwayya, and
later in Ain Al Remmaneh. On the back of a ruinous war, resentment will be
generalised and this trend will only grow. Almost certainly, there will be calls
from Hezbollah’s political foes to renegotiate the relationship between the
party and the state, because Lebanon cannot afford to remain a hostage to
Hezbollah’s and Iran’s agenda.
If Hezbollah disagrees and tries to escalate against its critics, a number of
things may happen. Lebanon could enter into open conflict, or the party’s
opponents could themselves escalate and argue that if Hezbollah refuses to
integrate into the state, then the only option is separation and negotiations
over a new political arrangement in Lebanon. What makes this possible is that
Lebanon’s political system no longer works, and the social contract that has
governed the country since the end of the civil war in 1990 is hopelessly
dysfunctional in the shadow of a party that has hijacked the state. Hezbollah,
even if it is strong militarily, could not resolve such a crisis with its
weapons. If its adversaries are united, the party may be forced to re-evaluate
its national role. This would create a dilemma. Hezbollah's refusal to go down
this path would heighten the risk of civil war, while any agreement to do so
would undermine its mission on Iran’s behalf. The party's inability to resolve
this dilemma may explain why war with Israel is unlikely, but sooner or later
Hezbollah will have to resolve its problems with the rest of Lebanon.
Death threats against two journalists in Lebanon
highlight limits of free speech
Nada Homsi/The National/August 19/2022
Stakes of free-speech debate are high in nation where killings of reporters are
not unknown
When journalist Hasan Shaaban was beaten and his life threatened in the streets
of his own home town, it was for doing his job. When journalist Dima Sadek
received death threats over a provocative tweet, she knew she was pushing social
and religious boundaries — but she did not expect such a severe reaction from
figures in positions of power. Attacks against the two journalists in Lebanon
have sparked debate about media freedoms and the limits of free speech in the
country. It follows a global free speech discussion sparked last week by the
attack on author Salmon Rushdie. Mr Shaaban, a freelance photojournalist, was
documenting protests over water shortages in Beit Yahoun, in southern Lebanon.
He filmed residents of the small town — controlled by the Iran-backed Hezbollah
group — expressing frustration over the lack of water and the municipality’s
failure to provide a consistent supply.
For the past year, residents have resorted to bulk delivery to fill their tanks,
a costly and ineffective alternative. In the video he shot, an angry woman
gestures to the village around her. “We have money and weapons,” she cries. “But
we have no water!”
The footage Mr Shaaban posted went viral, angering some Hezbollah supporters in
his village who perceived it as public criticism of the powerful political
party, which administers Beit Yahoun and much of southern Lebanon.
A few days later, as Mr Shaaban was walking his dog, he was physically assaulted
by a group of more than 10 men. While being repeatedly kicked, he recognised
from his vantage point on the ground that most of his attackers were residents
of his village. Some were formally affiliated with Hezbollah, others vocal
supporters.
“It’s not like I organised the protest or anything,” Mr Shaaban told The
National. “I just took some photos.”The group continued to beat Mr Shaaban until
his neighbours in the village broke up the mob. Mr Shaaban said one of his
attackers told him: “If I see you in the village again, I’ll kill you.”Water
shortages are only one symptom of Lebanon’s prolonged and debilitating financial
collapse, considered by the World Bank to be one of the worst economic crises in
modern history. Protests over the economic situation, shortages of electricity,
water and medicine, or over the collapse of state-provided services are not
uncommon in the country. The nation’s financial ruin is blamed widely on
Lebanon’s political class, of which Hezbollah is part. Mr Shaaban asserted he
was simply documenting anger over the breakdown in services in his own village.
He reported the incident to authorities, including Hezbollah leaders in Beit
Yahoun. Representatives of the party visited his house to formally apologise:
“They came, said ‘this is unacceptable, we don't permit this kind of behaviour,
and your attackers will be punished. But, can you please take down the video?’”
Mr Shaaban refused.
The next morning he awoke to find a bullet hanging from his car window. Then,
last week, he awoke to one of his car tyres punctured and a note stabbed into
it. “Leave this village, you agent of a dog,” it said. Although the threats have
not abated, Mr Shaaban plans to continue living in his village.Death threats
against and assassinations of journalists are a systemic norm in Lebanon, says
Ayman Mhanna, head of the Beirut-based Samir Kassir Foundation and Centre for
Media and Cultural Freedom. “There’s a norm of impunity," he said. "Those who do
perpetrate these crimes don't even bother to hide their identities because they
know they are protected. “They” – culprits backed by political parties – “know
that the judiciary and Lebanese security institutions do not have the courage or
political will to enforce the law.” He is careful to emphasise that all
political parties in Lebanon, regardless of sect or affiliation, are guilty to
some extent of repressing or perpetrating attacks on free speech.
Journalists regularly targeted
State intelligence agencies also frequently target journalists and activists for
public criticism of Lebanon's ruling class, sometimes prosecuting them on
defamation charges. From October 2019 to March 2021, the Samir Kassir Eyes
Centre for Media and Cultural Freedom documented assaults on 106 media
workers.Threats against journalists by state and non-state actors have become so
prevalent in Lebanon, once considered a bastion of free speech in the Middle
East, that Human Rights Watch last year, along with 13 other international and
Lebanese organisations, created a coalition to address the suppression. Mr
Mhanna said the culture of impunity surrounding blatant crimes against
journalists is emboldened by a civil war-era policy of amnesia dictated by
Lebanon’s leaders, themselves mostly holdovers of a civil war that ended three
decades ago. A General Amnesty law was enforced in 1991, following the end of
Lebanon’s 15-year civil war. That law exempted war crimes perpetrated before
that year, allowing most militia leaders to roam free and even take political
office. “Our entire political system has been built on impunity,” Mr Mhanna
said. Prominent Lebanese-Palestinian journalist Samir Kassir, whom the
foundation is named after, was killed by a car bomb in 2005. No one was
convicted of his murder. Mr Shaaban said: “Freedom of speech and freedom of
press … they’re just slogans here. They’re meaningless."
'No human is above criticism'
Last week, journalist Dima Sadek seemed to refer to former Iranian supreme
leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and the now dead commander Qassem Suleimani
as “The Satanic Verses” on Twitter. Her tweet caused a backlash among supporters
of Hezbollah and its ally the Amal Movement, leading to a series of death
threats against her. Many openly called for her death in response to her tweet
after Jawad Nasrallah — the son of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah —
implicated her as a tool of western regimes on his social media. “To me, no
human being is above criticism,” she told The National. Politicians, journalists
and citizens from across the country weighed in on where the line between the
sanctity of religion and the freedom of artistic expression lies. Media freedom
advocates in Lebanon say the spotlight on the attack on Salman Rushdie last week
has further emboldened provocations against practitioners of free speech and
expression.
Critics of Mrs Sadek say her tweet constitutes hate speech.
Ali Barakat, a singer known as ‘Hezbollah’s nightingale’, posted a video in
response to her message, which she called a clear incitement against her. In his
video, Mr Barakat pointed out he had been charged by Lebanese authorities many
times for inciting sectarian strife: when he tweeted about the former prime
minister Rafik Hariri and insulted Saudi Arabia in a song. “Saudi Arabia is not
holy, nor is Rafik Hariri,” he said. “But Iman Khomeini, to us and to millions
of Muslims, is holy and sacred.”“Either the judiciary moves to hold her
accountable like it did to us, or there will be consequences."Mr Mhanna of the
Samir Kassir Foundation acknowledged the fine line between hate speech and free
speech.He said: “Even if it is hate speech, do you respond to hate speech with
death threats?
The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on August 19-20/2022
Tehran Insists on Red Lines in Vienna
Negotiations
London – Tehran – Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 19 August, 2022
Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said talks aimed at reviving
the 2015 nuclear deal “will enter a new phase if red lines are respected.” In
parallel, Israel called on the European parties to the agreement to send a
“sharp and clear message” to the Iranians, and to oppose Tehran’s stalling in
the negotiations. In a telephone conversation with his Omani counterpart Sayyid
Badr Albusaidi, Abdollahian said: “After receiving US’ opinions, if Iran’s
economic benefits from the agreement are ensured and our red lines are observed,
we will enter a new stage in Vienna.”He continued: “Until everything is agreed
upon, we cannot speak with certainty about reaching a good and lasting
agreement.”The Iranian foreign ministry quoted Albusaidi as saying that he hoped
for satisfactory results for the Vienna Talks with the joint cooperation of all
parties. Later on Thursday, the Omani Foreign Ministry reported that Albusaidi
made a phone call with the US special envoy for Iran affairs, Robert Malley,
during which they discussed issues of common interest and efforts to resume the
nuclear agreement. On Monday night, Tehran announced that it had submitted its
“written response to the text proposed by the European Union,” saying that an
agreement would be reached if the American answer was realistic and flexible.
The official IRNA news agency reported that the remaining points of disagreement
“revolve around three issues, in which America verbally expressed its
flexibility in two files.” But Iran insisted that those should be included in
the official text. On the other hand, the European Union and the United States
stressed that the response was subject to evaluation, and refused to specify any
time frame for a response to the Iranian package. On the sidelines of the recent
talks in Vienna, a European official said that Tehran’s request to remove the
name of the Revolutionary Guard from Washington’s list of foreign terrorist
organizations was no longer on the table. But a senior Iranian official told
Reuters that his country made proposals such as gradually lifting the sanctions
imposed on the Guard. Meanwhile, in a telephone conversation with German
Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid underlined “the need
to convey a sharp and clear message from Europe that no further concessions
should be made to the Iranians,” adding that Europe must also oppose Iran’s
procrastination method in dealing with the negotiations. Lapid reiterated
Israel’s opposition to reviving the 2015 nuclear agreement and lifting sanctions
on Iran in return for reducing its nuclear activities. Germany is directly
involved in multilateral talks to revive the historic agreement.
Iran deal tantalizingly close but US faces new hurdles
Associated Press/August 19/2022
Last week's attack on author Salman Rushdie and the indictment of an Iranian
national for plotting to murder former national security adviser John Bolton
have given the Biden administration new headaches as it attempts to negotiate a
return to the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. A resolution may be tantalizingly
close. But as the U.S. and Europe weigh Iran's latest response to an EU proposal
described as the West's final offer, the administration faces new and
potentially insurmountable domestic political hurdles to forging a lasting
agreement. Deal critics in Congress who have long vowed to blow up any pact have
ratcheted up their opposition to negotiations with a country whose leadership
has refused to rescind the death threats against Rushdie or Bolton. Iran also
vows to avenge the Trump administration's 2020 assassination of a top Iranian
general by killing former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Iran envoy Brian
Hook, both of whom remain under 24/7 taxpayer-paid security protection. Although
such threats are not covered by the deal, which relates solely to Iran's nuclear
program, they underscore deal opponents' arguments that Iran cannot be trusted
with the billions of dollars in sanctions relief it will receive if and when it
and the U.S. return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, a
signature foreign policy accomplishment of the Obama administration that
President Donald Trump withdrew from in 2018. "This is a tougher deal to sell
than the 2015 deal in that this time around there are no illusions that it will
serve to moderate Iranian behavior or lead to greater U.S.-Iran cooperation,"
said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace.
"The Iranian government stands to get tens of billions in sanctions relief, and
the organizing principle of the regime will continue to be opposition to the
United States and violence against its critics, both at home and abroad," he
said.
Iran has denied any link with Rushdie's alleged attacker, an American citizen
who was indicted for attempted murder and has pleaded not guilty in the Aug. 12
stabbing at a literary event in Western New York. But Iranian state media have
celebrated Iran's long-standing antipathy toward Rushdie since the 1988
publication of his book "The Satanic Verses," which some believe is insulting to
Islam.
Media linked to Iran's leadership have lauded the attacker for following through
on a 1989 decree, or fatwa, calling for Rushdie to be killed that was signed by
Iran's then-Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. And the man who was
charged with plotting to murder Bolton is a member of Iran's Revolutionary Guard
Corps. The Justice Department alleges the IRGC tried to pay $300,000 to people
in the United States to avenge the death of Qassam Suleimani, the head of its
elite Quds Force who was killed by a U.S. airstrike in Iraq in 2020. "I think
it's delusional to believe that a regime that you're about to enter into a
significant arms control agreement with can be depended on to comply with its
obligations or is even serious about the negotiation when it's plotting the
assassination of high-level former government officials and current government
officials," Bolton told reporters Wednesday. "It certainly looks like the attack
on Salman Rushdie had a Revolutionary Guard component," Bolton said. "We've got
to stop this artificial division when dealing with the government of Iran
between its nuclear activities on the one hand and its terrorist activities on
the other."
Others agree. "Granting terrorism sanctions relief amid ongoing terror plots on
U.S. soil is somewhere between outrageous and lunacy," said Rich Goldberg, a
former Trump administration national security council staffer and longtime deal
critic who is now a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies,
which has also lobbied against a return to the JCPOA.
While acknowledging the seriousness of the plots, administration officials
contend that they are unrelated to the nuclear issue and do nothing to change
their long-held belief that an Iran with a nuclear weapon would be more
dangerous and less constrained than an Iran without one. "The JCPOA is about the
single, central challenge we face with Iran, the core challenge, what would be
the most threatening challenge we could possibly face from Iran, and that is a
nuclear weapon," State Department spokesman Ned Price said this week. "There is
no doubt that a nuclear-armed Iran would feel an even greater degree of
impunity, and would pose an even greater threat, a far greater threat, to
countries in the region and potentially well beyond."
"Every challenge we face with Iran, whether it is its support for proxies, its
support for terrorist groups, its ballistic missiles program, its malign cyber
activities — every single one of those — would be more difficult to confront
were Iran to have a nuclear weapons program," he said. That argument, however,
will be challenged in Congress by lawmakers who opposed the 2015 deal, saying it
gave Iran a path to develop nuclear weapons by time-limiting the most onerous
restrictions on its nuclear activities. They say there's now even more tangible
evidence that Iran's malign behavior make it impossible to deal with. Two of the
most outspoken critics of the deal, Republican senators Ted Cruz of Texas and
Tom Cotton of Arkansas, have weighed in on what the Rushdie attack should mean
for the administration.
"The ayatollahs have been trying to murder Salman Rushdie for decades," Cruz
said. "Their incitement and their contacts with this terrorist resulted in an
attack. This vicious terrorist attack needs to be completely condemned. The
Biden administration must finally cease appeasing the Iranian regime.""Iran's
leaders have been calling for the murder of Salman Rushdie for decades," said
Cotton. "We know they're trying to assassinate American officials today. Biden
needs to immediately end negotiations with this terrorist regime." Under the
Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, or INARA, the administration must submit any
agreement with Iran for congressional review within five days of it being
sealed. That begins a 30-day review period during which lawmakers may weigh in
and no sanctions relief can be offered.
That timeline means that even if a deal is reached within the next week, the
administration will not be able to start moving on sanctions relief until the
end of September, just a month from crucial congressional midterm elections.
And, it will take additional time for Iran to begin seeing the benefits of such
relief because of logistical constraints. While deal critics in the current
Congress are unlikely to be able to kill a deal, if Republicans win back control
of Congress in the midterms, they may be able to nullify any sanctions relief.
"Even if Iran accepts President Biden's full capitulation and agrees to reenter
the Iran nuclear deal, Congress will never vote to remove sanctions," the GOP
minority on the House Armed Services Committee said in a tweet on Wednesday. "In
fact, Republicans in Congress will work to strengthen sanctions against Iran."
Bolton Says Biden’s Concessions to Iran Would Border on
Treason
Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 19 August, 2022
Former National Security Adviser John Bolton has said US President Joe Biden
could be making a “treasonous” deal with Iran if his administration offers
guarantees that future US presidents would be constrained from exiting a renewed
nuclear accord with Tehran. According to the Washington Times, Bolton said
Wednesday that a future Republican administration undoubtedly would seek to
overturn whatever agreement the current administration makes with Iran. He made
the assertions in an exchange with journalists in Washington amid reports that
Iranian negotiators have sought “guarantees” from the Biden administration that
Tehran would be “compensated” if an American president pulls out of whatever
deal may be reached. State Department spokesperson Ned Price said the
administration is reviewing Tehran’s response to what it called a “final text”
that the European Union circulated recently with a proposed pathway for
restoring the 2015 nuclear deal, which sought to limit Iran’s nuclear activities
in exchange for sanctions relief. The EU also said on Tuesday it was studying
Iran's response to the proposal to save the deal after Tehran called on
Washington to show flexibility. After 16 months of fitful, indirect US-Iranian
talks, with the EU shuttling between the parties, a senior EU official said on
Aug. 8 the bloc had laid down a "final" offer and expected a response within a
"very, very few weeks". Iran responded to the proposal late on Monday but none
of the parties provided any details. Washington has said it is ready to quickly
seal a deal to restore the 2015 accord on the basis of the EU proposals.
Rushdie attack awakens old demons for Arab writers
Agence France Presse/Friday, 19 August, 2022
Only ever found in incomplete, clandestine translations in Arabic, "The Satanic
Verses" could have gone largely unnoticed in the Arab world, were it not for the
Iranian religious edict against its author Salman Rushdie. Then supreme leader
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's fatwa calling for Rushdie's death, issued on
February 14, 1989, struck a nerve with Arab authors, themselves often in danger
of ruffling authoritarian feathers and "offending moral values". When the novel
came out in September 1988, sparking mass protests in India, Pakistan and
elsewhere, the Arab world was more focused on the first Palestinian intifada, or
uprising, against Israel and the Iran-Iraq war. In Britain and in Rushdie's
native India, the book attracted both praise and ire, with tens of thousands
railing against it for "insulting" the Prophet Mohammed. Part of the controversy
centered on fictional dream sequences involving the Prophet in the work of
magical realism, which the Muslim protesters decried as blasphemous.
British-Egyptian novelist Ahdaf Soueif said, however, that the real shock to
many readers of Rushdie's novel was "the language he used to describe the
Prophet". It was "the jokey, familiar language he generally used to describe his
characters -– a radical departure from the usual venerating tone people are used
to," she said.
'Right to live' -
A few days after the Iranian fatwa, a group of 40 Arabic intellectuals published
an open letter from Damascus titled "In Defense of a Writer's Right to Live".
"We are not here to defend the book, but its author and his right to live and
write," they declared, decrying a history of book burning and persecution of
writers dating back to the Middle Ages. Lebanese writer Fawwaz Traboulsi, one of
the signatories back then, reiterated the sentiment on Facebook last Sunday -- a
day after Rushdie was stabbed during a lecture in upstate New York. Rushdie, 75,
was airlifted to a nearby hospital, where he underwent emergency surgery for
life-threatening injuries. His condition remains serious but he has shown signs
of improvement. "What he wrote in the novel can in no way justify a fatwa making
his murder a religious duty," argued Traboulsi. The 1990s saw radical Islamists
assassinate thinkers including Algeria's Tahar Djaout and Egypt's Farag Foda, in
a region where regimes have often leveraged militant Islamists to keep the
political left in check.Arab literary giants –- such as Palestinians Mahmoud
Darwish and Edward Said, Lebanese Amin Maalouf and Algerian Mohammed Arkoun -–
could only respond through their writing."Only ideas can correct ideas," wrote
Egyptian Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz in 1993. The following year, Mahfouz
himself would survive a stabbing attack by two Islamists, who at their trial
admitted they had never read his work.
'Electronic fatwas' -
A day after the attack on Rushdie, Egyptian author Ezzedine Fishere tweeted
that, to him, it was Mahfouz's "stabbing all over again". More than three
decades on, the controversy has been thrown into relief once more -- now on
Twitter and in open letters online, but also through Islamist "electronic
fatwas".The internet has become the main forum for Islamists, who mostly lost
power in the region in the years after the 2011 Arab Spring revolutions as they
were deposed by secular autocrats. "It has become a lot harder for political
Islamists to get on a platform and endorse the attack on Rushdie," Egyptian
writer Sayed Mahmoud told AFP. But there has also been renewed criticism of
Rushdie from other quarters. A day after the attack, Lebanese journalist Radwan
Akil came out in support of the fatwa, saying on national TV that, although he
"would not condone an assassination attempt", he thought Rushdie had crossed a
line. "If he had insulted Christ, I would be saying the same," Akil argued,
stressing that "there are limits and taboos".
Putin, Macron call for IAEA inspection of Ukraine
nuclear plant
Agence France Presse/Friday, 19 August, 2022
Russian President Vladimir Putin and his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron
called for independent inspections at the Moscow-occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear
plant, the Kremlin said in a statement Friday. Putin "stressed that the
systematic shelling by the Ukrainian military of the territory of the
Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant creates the danger of a large-scale catastrophe
that could lead to radiation contamination of vast territories."According to the
Kremlin, both leaders called for experts of the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) to inspect the plant "as soon as possible" and "assess the real
situation on the ground." "The Russian side confirmed its readiness to provide
the Agency inspectors with the necessary assistance," the statement said. In a
separate statement, the French presidency said that Macron "supported the
dispatch of a mission of experts from the IAEA to the site under conditions
agreed by Ukraine and the United Nations". Putin and Macron will speak again "in
the coming days on this subject after talks between the technical teams and
before the deployment of the mission," according to the Elysee. The Zaporizhzhia
nuclear power plant was seized by Russian troops in March and recent fighting
around it has raised the specter of a nuclear incident comparable to Chernobyl.
Both Kyiv and Moscow have this week accused each other of preparing
"provocations" at the facility. The plant -- the biggest in Europe -- was
targeted by several strikes in recent days, increasing fears of a nuclear
disaster. Both Kyiv and Moscow have traded blame over the attacks. During the
same call -- their first in nearly three months -- Putin told Macron that Russia
was facing obstacles in the export of its food products and fertilizer. "There
are still obstacles to the mentioned Russian exports that do not contribute to
the solution of problems related to ensuring global food security," the Kremlin
said. Last month in Istanbul, Russia and Ukraine signed landmark deals with
Turkey and the United Nations that opened secure corridors for grain exports to
leave Ukraine's Black Sea ports. A similar agreement signed at the same time
allowed Russia to export its agricultural products and fertilizer despite
Western sanctions over Moscow's military intervention in Ukraine.
Russians flee huge fire at arms storage depot near
Ukraine border
Arpan Rai/The Independent/August 19, 2022
Locals of two Russian villages in the Belgorod region near the border with
Ukraine were forced to flee after a huge fire engulfed a nearby ammunition
storage depot late on Thursday, officials said. No casualties were reported in
the blaze, said Vyacheslav Gladkov, the governor of Belgorod. Residents of the
two southern Russian villages Timxonovo and Soloti, just 15 km away, were taken
to a safe distance by the district head, the governor said in a Telegram
message. Emergency services are on the scene and the cause of the fire is under
investigation, the regional governor said.
Preliminary visuals of the ammunition warehouse showed plumes of thick white
smoke emerging from the depot after the explosion. Several fire engines were
also seen parked near the site of the explosion, the video showed. The
Independent has not been able to verify the authenticity of the video shared on
social media. Kyiv did not immediately release a statement on the explosion,
which comes on the heels of a series of explosions at an ammunition depot in
Crimea on Tuesday. More than 3,000 people were evacuated after a second
suspected Ukrainian attack on the Russian-controlled peninsula. Russian
officials blamed the series of explosions on an “act of sabotage” but did not
directly pin the blame on Ukraine. Officials in Kyiv did not publicly claim
responsibility for any of the blasts, including the powerful explosion at the
Crimean air base last week in which nine Russian planes were destroyed. Moscow
later said the blast was caused by an accident. However, Ukrainian president
Volodymyr Zelensky pointed to the attacks behind enemy lines in a video address
on Tuesday night and thanked individuals “who oppose the occupiers in their
rear”. The president also cautioned people to not go anywhere near Russian
military installations and storage sites for ammunition and equipment in the
same video address. Almost six months into the Ukraine invasion, Russia has not
been able to make significant advances in the country despite making sizable
gains in the country’s east since last month. War frontlines have remained
static for weeks.
Officials in Kyiv have said they were preparing for a counter-offensive in a bid
to capture regions in the southern territory which have slipped out of their
control. On the diplomatic front, Mr Zelensky met Turkish leader Recep Tayyip
Erdogan and UN chief Antonio Guterres in a first high-level visit made by a top
representative from Turkey after Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February. The
talks, aimed at de-escalation and bringing both countries to the negotiation
table, have not reported any immediate progress. Turkey has offered to be a
“mediator and facilitator” between both the countries.
Russian intelligence knew that Ukrainians would not welcome
Russia, but still told the Kremlin they would, report says
Sinéad Baker Business Insider/August 19/ 2022
Russia's intel agency had evidence Ukrainians would fight a Russian invasion but
told the Kremlin otherwise. That's according to information obtained by The
Washington Post. One Western official said intel officials gave the Kremlin "the
sense that there would be flowers strewn in their path."Russian officials had
intelligence that Ukrainians would not welcome invasion by Russia, but
intelligence officials still told the Kremlin that they would, The Washington
Post reported. Polls conducted for Russia's security service, the FSB, before
the February 24 invasion showed that Ukrainians would oppose a Russia invasion
and that a large proportion of Ukrainians would be willing to fight, The Post
reported. But it is not clear if the FSB gave the results to the Kremlin, The
Post said. Ukrainian and Western officials told The Post that the FSB instead
repeatedly gave the Kremlin reports saying that Ukrainians would welcome the
takeover and a new, Russia-supporting government. The polls were done by
Research & Branding, a firm that The Post said has "close ties" with the FSB.
One poll in January, the month before the invasion, asked: "Are you ready to
defend Ukraine in the event of such a necessity?" Forty-eight percent of
respondents said yes, The Post said. The poll was first obtained by Ukrainian
intelligence, and then obtained by The Post. Multiple reports say that Russia
expected to seize Ukraine quickly, and that a major factor in Russia's failure
to do so was the unexpectedly high level of resistance by Ukrainians. It is not
fully clear why the FSB did not communicate what it knew to Russia's leaders.
Officials told The Post that the FSB would have wanted to please the Kremlin,
and that people who were giving the FSB information may have had their own
political or financial reasons for wanting Russia to take down Ukraine's
government. The head of the UK's intelligence agency gave a similar assessment
in March. Jeremy Fleming, the director of GCHQ, said: "We believe Putin's
advisors are afraid to tell him the truth, what's going on and the extent of
these misjudgments must be crystal clear to the regime."A senior Western
military official told The Post that the FSB's failure to capture and
communicate the reality of Ukraine's feelings fed into the missteps by Russia's
military in trying to take Ukraine.
"There was plenty of wishful thinking in the GRU and the military, but it
started with the FSB," he said. "The sense that there would be flowers strewn in
their path — that was an FSB exercise."Western intelligence also saw that Russia
had false confidence that it would be welcomed in Ukraine, the BBC reported.
One Western intelligence officer told the broadcaster: "They genuinely believed
there would be flags out to welcome them."The Post said the director of Research
& Branding did not respond to its questions. Ukraine, which borders Russia, was
once part of the Soviet Union, and Russia has repeatedly sought to portray it as
Russian territory, despite its fighting for and gaining independence in
1991.Putin has baselessly tried to portray Ukraine as a country that has never
been fully independent as part of his justification for the invasion, and has
claimed Ukraine as Russian territory. He said in February: "Let me emphasize
once again that Ukraine for us is not just a neighboring country. It is an
integral part of our own history, culture, spiritual space."
A top Russian official was so sure of a quick win in
Ukraine that he picked the Kyiv apartment he wanted before the invasion started:
report
Sinéad Baker/Business Insider/August 19, 2022
The Washington Post obtained Russian comms intercepted by Ukraine and other
countries. They include a senior officer appearing to pick the Kyiv apartment he
wanted before the invasion started. Russia was so sure of a quick win that it
picked Ukrainian accommodation for its personnel, officials said.
A top Russian security official appeared to have picked the Kyiv apartment he
wanted to live in before the Ukraine invasion even started because he was so
sure of a swift Russian victory, The Washington Post reported. Igor Kovalenko,
who was identified by Ukraine as a senior officer in the FSB, Russia's security
service, spoke to a subordinate on February 18 in an exchange that suggested he
had picked out an apartment in Ukraine's capital, according to intercepted
Russian communications seen by The Post. Russia's invasion started on February
24, six days after the conversation. Russia had expected a quick victory that
involved taking Kyiv and installing a new government, but was met with
unexpectedly staunch Ukrainian resistance. Russia retreated from Kyiv in April
and has since focused on the country's east and south.The Post reported that the
apartment was in "Kyiv's leafy Obolon neighborhood, overlooking the Dnieper
River."In the intercepted communications, Kovalenko also identified an apartment
that already had an FSB informant living in it, and asked for the address and
informant's contact details, The Post reported. The subordinate then gave him
the details, The Post reported. The communications seen by The Post were
intercepted by Ukraine and other countries' security services, the newspaper
said. Kovalenko dealt with Ukraine for years in his FSB role, The Post reported.
He is a senior officer in the FSB's Ninth Directorate of the Department of
Operational Information, which works to try keep Ukraine close to Russia. He
worked with Ukrainians who were secretly being paid by Russia, The Post said.
Ukrainian authorities told The Post that Ukraine detained and questioned the
unidentified informant when it intercepted Kovalenko's communications. Ukrainian
officials told The Post that the informant admitted the FSB told him in the days
before the invasion that he needed to leave his apartment — to pack his things,
leave Kyiv, and leave his keys behind so that he would stay safe as the invasion
began. Ukraine's security service then monitored the apartment after Ukraine
intercepted the communications, but Kovalenko did not turn up, not did any other
FSB officials, Ukrainian officials told The Post. It is not clear what happened
to the informant, whom Ukraine did not name. The Post said Kovalenko did not
respond to its requests for comment. Kovalenko went back to Russia at one point
earlier in the invasion, and then said in late May that he was going back to
Ukraine, The Post reported. Ukrainian officials told The Post that they are no
longer sure where he is. Kovalenko's confidence in picking out an apartment was
echoed by the FSB, The Post report said. Russia told multiple informants to
leave their homes in Ukraine but to leave their keys behind, The Post reported.
Ukrainian and Western officials told The Post that that Russian officials were
picking accommodation for the personnel they planned to bring into the country
as they anticipated an easy victory.
Berlin police investigate Abbas' Holocaust comments
Associated Press/Friday, 19 August, 2022
Berlin police said Friday they have launched an investigation into Palestinian
president Mahmud Abbas over his comments on the Holocaust during a recent visit
to the German capital. Police have received a complaint accusing Abbas of "relativizing
the Holocaust" and are investigating "on suspicion of inciting hatred", a police
spokeswoman told AFP. Any relevant findings will be passed to Berlin prosecutors
who will eventually decide whether a crime has been committed. At a joint press
conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Tuesday, Abbas had accused
Israel of committing "50 Holocausts" against Palestinians since 1947. Scholz did
not immediately challenge Abbas on his comments but, following widespread
criticism, tweeted on Wednesday that he was "disgusted by the outrageous
remarks" made by the Palestinian leader. In Israel, Abbas' remarks drew a hail
of condemnation from Prime Minister Yair Lapid and others. "Mahmud Abbas
accusing Israel of having committed '50 Holocausts' while standing on German
soil is not only a moral disgrace, but a monstrous lie," Lapid wrote on Twitter.
According to Germany's Bild daily, the foreign ministry believes Abbas will
benefit from diplomatic immunity because he was in Germany on an "official
visit". But Michael Kubiciel, a professor of criminal law quoted by Bild, said
Abbas could only enjoy immunity if he had been in Germany "as a representative
of another state". Germany does not recognize Palestine as a country, but
maintains diplomatic relations with the Palestinian territories.
Palestinians: Israeli Troops Shot, Killed Man in West Bank
Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 19 August, 2022
The Palestinian Health Ministry said Friday a man died after Israeli forces shot
him during an arrest raid near Nablus in the occupied West Bank. Salah Sawafta,
58, was in critical condition after a bullet hit his head in Tubas and he died
hours later, the ministry said. Sawafta was returning home after attending dawn
prayers in the village mosque as Israeli forces operated in the area, his
brother, Jehad, said. “There were clashes with youths in the area and Salah was
shot by a sniper in the head after he bought a bag of bread from a grocery and
continued his way home,” he said. The Israeli military said its troops entered
two villages to arrest Palestinians suspected of taking part in, or planning,
attacks against Israeli targets. In Tubas, Palestinians threw Molotov cocktails
and opened fire at the soldiers, who responded with fire. The military said “a
hit was identified” without elaborating. Israeli forces carry out raids in the
West Bank, including areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority, to arrest
wanted Palestinians nearly daily. The overnight operations often feature clashes
with stone-throwing Palestinians and sometimes with gunmen. Israel occupied the
West Bank in 1967 Mideast war and built dozens of settlements that became home
to about a half million Jewish settlers. The Palestinians want the West Bank,
where nearly 3 million Palestinians live under Israeli military rule, to form
the main part of their future state.
Several Killed, Injured in Market Blast North Syria
Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 19 August, 2022
A rocket attack on a crowded market in a town held by Turkey-backed opposition
fighters in northern Syria Friday killed at least nine people and wounded
dozens, an opposition war monitor and a paramedic group reported. The attack on
the town of al-Bab came days after a Turkish airstrike killed at least 11 Syrian
troops and US-backed Kurdish fighters. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights,
an opposition war monitor, blamed Syrian government forces for the shelling,
saying it was in retaliation for the Turkish airstrike. The Observatory said the
attack killed at least 10 and wounded more than 30. The opposition’s Syrian
Civil Defense, also known as White Helmets, had a lower death toll, saying nine
people, including children, were killed and 28 were wounded. The paramedic group
said its members evacuated some of the wounded and the dead bodies.
Discrepancies in casualty figures immediately after attacks are not uncommon in
Syria. Turkey has launched three major cross-border operations into Syria since
2016 and controls some territories in the north. Although the fighting has waned
over the past few years, shelling and airstrikes are not uncommon in northern
Syria that is home to the last major rebel stronghold in the country. Syria’s
conflict that began in March 2011, has killed hundreds of thousands and
displaced half the country’s pre-war population of 23 million. President Bashar
Assad’s forces now control most parts of Syria with the help of their allies,
Russia and Iran.
Ankara, Damascus Demand Opening Communication Channels
Ankara - Saeed Abdul Razzak/Friday, 19 August, 2022
Ankara and Damascus have exchanged demands for reopening contact channels and
normalizing ties, according to Turkish sources. Turkey's pro-government
newspaper “Turkiye” has alleged that Assad has five demands from Ankara, and
that the Turkish government requires the Syrian regime to “completely clear” the
Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) from its lands and to ensure the safe
return of Syrian refugees. According to the newspaper, the Syrian regime's
demands are: the transfer of Idlib's control to Damascus, the transfer of
Reyhanli-Cilvegozu border gate and Kesep border gate, trade corridor between
Cilvegözü and Damascus, the control the M4 highway between Deir ez-Zor and
Haseke, and Turkey's support with regards to the issue of Europe and US’
sanctions against the Syrian regime. In the meantime, Turkey's Homeland Party (Vatan
Party), an opposition party that has been reconciling with the government of
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, revealed that it will soon send a
delegation to Damascus to meet with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Vatan
Party Secretary- General Ozgur Bursal said that the visit to Damascus comes upon
an invitation from the Syrian regime. Bursal noted that the Vatan Party has long
been contemplating its visit to Syria. Now that the time has come, the party’s
delegation is expected to arrive in Damascus within the coming 10-15 days. The
delegation is making the visit independently and will be following its very own
programs and policies that are related to Turkey’s future. Bursal affirmed that
the Turkish government was notified on the visit. He added that the talks will
focus on strengthening cooperation between Turkey and Syria in all fields,
especially in the military and economic fields. They will also center around the
joint struggle against all fanatic and reactionary organizations, the
territorial integrity of Syria, and the safe return of refugees in Turkey to
their country.
Iraq: Concerns over Escalating Conflict between Sadrist
Movement, Coordination Framework
Baghdad – Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 19 August, 2022
Concerns have mounted in Iraq over the conflict between the Sadrist movement and
the Coordination Framework, which was further compounded by the street pressure
exerted on Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi. Photos published by the Iraqi
government showed Al-Kadhimi exhausted as he spoke with the leaders of the
political blocs during the dialogue session that the Sadrist movement boycotted.
Sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that the session did not achieve a “political
breakthrough” to end the crisis. Other sources revealed that Al-Kadhimi received
a promise from Al-Sadr's circles to participate in the dialogue session through
his representatives, as the meeting was expected to discuss the roadmap for
forming the interim government and holding the elections; but the sources added
that Al-Sadr “changed his opinion at the last minute.”Al-Kadhimi has made
repeated calls to shift the course of the crisis from the street to dialogue,
“to avoid dangerous scenarios.” However, the powerful forces in the Coordination
Framework do not seem to trust any political role assumed by the Iraqi premier.
Security and political sources said that political parties and armed groups were
planning to take to the street “to protect the regime and legitimacy.” Earlier
this week, Kataeb Hezbollah - which withdrew from Parliament and did not
participate in the sit-in organized by the Coordination Framework against the
Sadrist movement - announced that it was “ready to adopt the necessary measures
to protect the regime in accordance with the legitimate mandate.”In this regard,
fears mounted in Iraq over the way Al-Kadhimi would deal with the ongoing clash
between the two political blocs, and whether the street conflict would lead to
the division and disintegration of the official military institution.
German President Looks to Placate Israel with Visit after
PA President’s Statements
Tel Aviv - Nazir Magally/Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 19 August, 2022
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, according to an Israeli official, is
considering flying to Israel in a bid to placate the Jewish state after
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s inflammatory comments on
Tuesday, in which he claimed that Israel had carried out “50 holocausts” against
Palestinians. Steinmeier would bring with him a new and generous proposal for
the purpose of reconciliation with the families of the Israeli athletes who were
killed in the Munich massacre. On Sept. 5, 1972, members of the Israeli Olympic
team were taken hostage at the poorly secured athletes' village by Palestinian
gunmen from the Black September group. Within 24 hours, 11 Israelis, five
Palestinians and a German policeman were dead after a standoff and subsequent
rescue effort erupted into gunfire. “The president and other German officials
are outraged by Abbas’s statements; Because it caused them great embarrassment
that brought to mind the horrors of a dark history, so they are now ready to do
anything to please Israel,” an Israeli official said. “They are studying the
possibility of the German president admitting his country's shortcomings in
protecting the Israeli athletes, who were killed during the Munich Olympics 50
years ago, and declaring the government's responsibility for this failure and
its consequences,” they added. Steinmeier is considering flying to Israel in a
bid to convince the families of the Munich massacre victims to attend
commemorations in Germany after they decided they would boycott the events. The
families of the 11 Israeli athletes killed in Munich are refusing to attend
after rejecting a German compensation offer as insulting. The German government
has agreed to pay a compensation of 5.5 million euros (in addition to the 4.5
million euros it paid to these families in the past), while the families are
requesting compensation of up to about 90 million euros. Germany responded by
saying that 90 million euros was unreasonable.
Palestinians: Israeli Troops Shot, Killed Man in West Bank
Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 19 August, 2022
The Palestinian Health Ministry said Friday a man died after Israeli forces shot
him during an arrest raid near Nablus in the occupied West Bank. Salah Sawafta,
58, was in critical condition after a bullet hit his head in Tubas and he died
hours later, the ministry said. Sawafta was returning home after attending dawn
prayers in the village mosque as Israeli forces operated in the area, his
brother, Jehad, said. “There were clashes with youths in the area and Salah was
shot by a sniper in the head after he bought a bag of bread from a grocery and
continued his way home,” he said. The Israeli military said its troops entered
two villages to arrest Palestinians suspected of taking part in, or planning,
attacks against Israeli targets. In Tubas, Palestinians threw Molotov cocktails
and opened fire at the soldiers, who responded with fire. The military said “a
hit was identified” without elaborating. Israeli forces carry out raids in the
West Bank, including areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority, to arrest
wanted Palestinians nearly daily. The overnight operations often feature clashes
with stone-throwing Palestinians and sometimes with gunmen. Israel occupied the
West Bank in 1967 Mideast war and built dozens of settlements that became home
to about a half million Jewish settlers. The Palestinians want the West Bank,
where nearly 3 million Palestinians live under Israeli military rule, to form
the main part of their future state.
Saudi crown prince receives Iraq’s Wisdom Movement leader
Arab News/August 19, 2022
RIYADH: Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman received in Jeddah
Iraq’s National Wisdom Movement leader Ammar Al-Hakim, the Saudi Press Agency
reported early Friday.The pair discussed Saudi-Iraqi relations and issues of
mutual interest.Al-Hakim arrived in Jeddah on Wednesday and was received by
deputy minister of foreign affairs Waleed Al-Khuraiji. Saudi and Iraqi senior
officials attended the meeting.
The Latest LCCC English analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on August 19-20/2022
أربع مقالات باللغة الإنجليزية تحكي كل
الحقائق عن النظام الإيراني الإرهابي وعن هرطقات فتاويه الإجرامية وعن محاولاته
الخادعة لامتلاك قنبلة نووية
Four English articles telling All Facts About the terrorist Iranian Regime, Its
criminal Fatwas and Its devious endeavors to own a nuclear bomb
The Republic of Fatwas
Mark Dubowitz &Saeed Ghasseminejad/ Newsweek/August 19/2022
Another Iran Deal? Looking Back and Looking Ahead
Jacob Nagel and Jonathan Schanzer/Memo/August 19/2022
Why Iran must not be rewarded
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/August 19/2022
The fatwa on Rushdie defined Iran’s intolerance and little has changed
Jason Rezaian/The Washington Post/August 19/2022
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/111354/111354/
The Republic of Fatwas
Mark Dubowitz &Saeed Ghasseminejad/ Newsweek/August 19/2022
Death to Blasphemers!’ Islam’s Ancient War on Critics of
Muhammad
Raymond Ibrahim/August 19/2022
Last Friday, a Muslim man lunged at and repeatedly stabbed Salman Rushdie as he
was preparing to deliver a speech on a New York stage. Prosecutors said the
author was stabbed 10 times, suffering a neck wound, liver damage, a severed
nerve in his arm, and may well lose an eye. Thankfully, reports Sunday morning
indicate Rushdie is off a ventilator and able to speak.
Rushdie became internationally recognizable in 1988, following the publication
of his novel, The Satanic Verses. Because it portrayed the Muslim prophet of
Islam irreverently, the book provoked ire throughout the Muslim world,
culminating with a 1989 fatwa calling for his execution as a blasphemer by
Iran’s then supreme leader, Ayatollah Khomeini.
In other words, Friday’s assassination attempt against Rushdie has been nearly
35 years in the making and should surprise no one.
And yet, those most charged with explaining events to the rest of us, the
so-called “mainstream media,” are still and rather predictably searching for a
“motive”—not least since reporting the full truth may make Islam look “bad.”
Back in the real world, Muslim attacks on those perceived to “blaspheme” against
Islam’s prophet have a long and unvaried history that stretches straight back to
Muhammad himself. Yes, the prophet of Islam was the first Muslim to call for and
therefore legitimize the assassination of those who mocked him, saying doing so
was “God’s work.”
Thus, when Ka‘b ibn Ashraf, an elderly Jewish leader, mocked Muhammad, the
prophet exclaimed, “Who will kill this man who has hurt Allah and his
messenger?” A young Muslim named Ibn Maslama volunteered on condition that he be
allowed to deceive Ka‘b to gain his trust in order to get close enough and kill
him. Muhammad agreed, and the rest — Ibn Maslama dragged the Jew’s head back to
Muhammad to triumphant cries of “Allahu akbar!” — is history.
In another example, after Muhammad learned that Asma bint Marwan, an Arab
poetess, was making verse that portrayed him as nothing more than a murdering
bandit, he called for her assassination, exclaiming: “Will no one rid me of this
woman?” That very night, Umayr, a zealous Muslim, crept into Asma’s home while
she lay sleeping surrounded by her young children. After removing one of her
suckling babes from her breast, Umayr plunged his sword into the poetess. The
next morning at mosque, Muhammad, who was aware of the assassination, said, “You
have helped Allah and his Apostle.” Apparently feeling some remorse, Umayr
responded, “She had five sons; should I feel guilty?” “No,” the prophet
answered. “Killing her was as meaningless as two goats butting heads” (from
Muhammad’s earliest biography, Sirat Rasul Allah, p.676).
From here, it becomes clear — except, of course, to the disingenuous and
narrative driven media — why, past and present, Muslims have attacked and
slaughtered countless people accused of speaking (or writing) against Muhammad.
Validating this assertion is almost futile, as blasphemy-related stories surface
with extreme regularity (very recent examples come from nations as varied as
Greece, India, Afghanistan, and Malaysia). In my monthly Muslim Persecution of
Christians series, of which there are some 130 reports stretching back to 2011,
virtually every month features several anecdotes of Muslims attacking, possibly
murdering, Christians on the mere accusation of blasphemy.
As a recent example, a throng of Muslims stoned and burned to death Deborah
Emmanuel, a Christian college student in Nigeria, on the unsubstantiated rumor
that she had offended Muhammad. In support of her murder, one Muslim cleric
enthusiastically declared, “When you touch the prophet we become mad people….
Anyone who touches the prophet, no punishment — just kill!”
In another especially warped example from earlier this year, a Muslim woman and
her two nieces slaughtered a Christian woman in Pakistan, after a relative of
the three murderers merely dreamt that the Christian had blasphemed against
Muhammad. Between just 1990 and 2012 alone, to say nothing of the last decade,
“fifty-two people have been extra-judicially murdered on charges of blasphemy”
in Pakistan.
Nor is this matter limited to “vigilante” or overzealous Muslims. Several
Islamic nations criminalize any criticism of Muhammad. According to Section
295-C of Pakistan’s penal code, for example,
Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by
any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the
sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished
with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
What explains this phenomenon? Why don’t the followers of other religions
respond similarly to those who “blaspheme”? The answer is that few modern
religions are as fragile as Islam. Built atop a flimsy and easily collapsed pack
of cards, silencing any criticism against its founder — whose words and deeds so
easily lend themselves to constant criticism — has always been and remains
pivotal to Islam’s survival. Discussing Koran 5:33, which calls for the
crucifixion and/or mutilation of “those who wage war against Allah and His
Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] mischief,” the highly revered Ibn
Taymiyya (1263-1328) — the “Sheikh of Islam” — once wrote:
Muharaba [waging war] is of two types: physical and verbal. Waging war verbally
against Islam may be worse than waging war physically — hence the Prophet (peace
and blessings of Allah be upon him) used to kill those who waged war against
Islam verbally, while letting off some of those who waged war against Islam
physically. This ruling is to be applied more strictly after the death of the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Mischief may be caused by
physical action or by words, but the damage caused by words is many times
greater than that caused by physical action; and the goodness achieved by words
in reforming may be many times greater than that achieved by physical action. It
is proven that waging war against Allah and His Messenger (peace and blessings
of Allah be upon him) verbally is worse and the efforts on earth to undermine
religion by verbal means is more effective (Crucified Again, p. 100).
This is not merely a medieval interpretation or limited to “radical Muslims.”
Indeed, returning to the recent Rushdie stabbing, Dr. Mohammad Jafar Mahallati,
an Islamic studies academic who teaches at Oberlin College, Ohio, endorsed the
fatwa in 1989, because “all Islamic nations and countries agree with Iran that
any blasphemous statement against sacred figures should be condemned.”
Considering that Dr. Mahallati is popularly known on Oberlin campus as “the
Professor of Peace” should dispel any doubts as to how ironclad the penalty for
those who criticize Muhammad is among even his ostensibly “moderate” followers.
The Republic of Fatwas
Mark Dubowitz &Saeed Ghasseminejad/ Newsweek/August 19/2022
Last week, a Shiite American of Lebanese origin, 24-year-old Hadi Matar,
attempted to murder the Indian-born British-American author Salman Rushdie.
Matar’s social media posts display staunch support of the Islamist regime in
Iran and its Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah. Reports indicate Matar was in contact
with elements of the Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its Quds Force
terrorist arm. Matar was executing former Iranian Supreme Leader Ruhollah
Khomeini’s three-decade-old fatwa, issued as a death sentence against Rushdie
because of the author’s publication of The Satanic Verses, a work of fiction
that radical Islamists saw as an affront to Islam and the Prophet Muhammed.
Khomeini has been dead since 1989, but his fatwa is not.
The Islamic Republic is a republic of fatwas, where “mujtahids”—those who have
earned the right to issue fatwas—run or supervise the day-to-day operation of
the regime under the “Vali Faqih,” or “the guardianship of the Islamic jurist,”
the system’s chief mujtahid. Today, that is Khomeini’s successor, Iranian
supreme leader Ali Khamenei. Mujtahids review any law in the country to ensure
they do not run afoul of the Sharia law. Mujtahids dominate the judiciary. The
supreme leader’s representatives are present in every major organization and,
through fatwas, the regime governs every aspect of life in Iran, from banking to
hijabs, from foreign policy to family law.
Fatwas are not limited to geographical boundaries. Khomeini’s fatwa to murder
Rushdie, issued in 1989, was not just about Rushdie. It was about reshaping the
world outside Iran’s border through the power of fatwa, which connects a
mujtahid to any Muslim who follows him anywhere in the world. Khomeini’s
successor as supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, created armies of Shia militia groups
across the region through this relationship. It is through the power of fatwa
that Khomeini from his grave reached Hadi Matar, born and raised in America, and
inspired him to murder Rushdie.
Fatwas have shaped the history of modern Iran. In the early 19th century, Shiite
clerics issued a fatwa to force the reluctant Fath Ali Shah to enter the second
Russo-Persian war in 1826. Russia defeated Iran and imposed the treaty of
Turkmenchay on Tehran, which ceded vast areas in the southern Caucasus to
Russia. Although this fatwa did not end well, it showed the clerics they could
mobilize the masses and threaten the Shah.
Islamists wielded influence through fatwas long before the 1979 Islamic
Revolution as they fought monarchists and modernizers for power. Defeats in
foreign wars destroyed the power of the Qajar kings who had ruled Iran from 1789
to 1925. In their wake, modernizers advocated for Iran to westernize, while the
Islamists preached a return to original Islam.
The 19th century witnessed the gradual erosion of the king’s power and
confrontations between the king and the clergy. The most fateful one happened
during the reign of Muzaffar ad-Din Shah, which led to the constitutional
revolution of 1905 to 1911 and the establishment of a parliament.
During the revolution, modernizers and Islamists worked together to limit the
power of the Shah. But the honeymoon between the two groups did not last;
Islamists turned on their allies. Sheikh Fazl Allah Nouri issued a fatwa against
constitutionalism (“Mashorooteh”) and declared it “haram” or forbidden by Sharia
law. In the ensuring civil war, constitutionalists defeated the Islamists,
hanged Sheikh Fazl Allah, sent the Shah into exile, and put his son on the
throne. A key slogan of the Sheikh’s supporters: “We are followers of Quran, we
do not want Mashrooteh.” There is a highway named after the Sheikh in Tehran
today. A martyr to Islamists, he is the spiritual grandfather of the Islamic
revolution.
The fall of the Qajar dynasty and the establishment of the Pahlavi dynasty
temporarily unified the modernizers and the monarchy; marginalizing the clergy
became one of their key goals. Reza Shah created the modern school system in
Iran, breaking the clergy’s monopoly over the education system. Even more
significant was the establishment of the modern, secular judiciary in Iran. For
centuries, the clergy had played the role of judge, which had offered them
significant political and financial power. The new judiciary pushed them out.
The loss continued under Reza’s son Mohammad Reza Shah. His “White Revolution”
transferred land ownership from the landowner class, a key backer of the clergy
and the monarchy, to peasants, and gave women the right to vote.
In response, Khomeini brought his followers to the streets to force the Shah to
retreat. They failed; Khomeini was arrested and sent to exile. The Shah picked a
Baha’i as his personal doctor, Jews such as Habib Elghaniyan played a
significant role in the country’s economy, and the Shah’s sister even converted
to Catholicism, a sin punishable by death. The fatwa class was on the verge of
losing everything, but Khomeini was adamant to get it all back.
Khomeini saw the opportunity to establish his power and to return the fatwa to
its position of political and religious influence. Historically, the “Twelver
Shiite” clergy believed that the right to rule only belongs to Allah, which he
transferred to the prophet and twelve Imams. Khomeini advanced a minority view
that ultimately prevailed: in the absence of the hidden twelfth Imam, the clergy
has the right and responsibility to establish an Islamic government based on
Sharia law and executed through fatwas. The clergy’s objective is to prepare the
world for the reappearance of the hidden Imam.
Khomeini’s Islamic revolution in 1979 succeeded in reestablishing the power of
the clergy and the potency of the fatwa. For decades, his successor Ali Khamenei
has insisted that Khomeini’s fatwa against Salman Rushdie is valid. Khamenei
understands the transnational power of the fatwa. He uses it to impose his will
on how millions of Muslims think, talk, and act in lands far from Iran. This
week, a fatwa inspired an American to try and murder another American. The plot
failed. Will the next victim be so lucky?
*Mark Dubowitz is the chief executive of the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies, a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan policy institute. Saeed
Ghasseminejad is a senior Iran and financial economics advisor at FDD. Follow
them on Twitter @mdubowitz and @SGhasseminejad.
Another Iran Deal? Looking Back and Looking Ahead
Jacob Nagel and Jonathan Schanzer/Memo/August 19/2022
After multiple failed rounds of nuclear diplomacy in Vienna and Doha, talks
between Iran and the P5+1 (the United States, the United Kingdom, France,
Germany, Russia, and China) are back on in Vienna. The revived talks first hit a
snag earlier this year when Tehran raised several new demands, including the
removal of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from the State
Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) list.1 Washington initially
balked but reportedly then acquiesced to a partial solution: removing secondary
sanctions on companies doing business with the IRGC.2
“I am absolutely sincere… when I say that Iran got much more than it could
expect,” said Russian diplomat Mikhail Ulyanov back in March.3 The deal now on
the table is far better for Tehran than the one to which Ulyanov referred.
Admittedly, the regime has more than once pumped the brakes on nuclear
diplomacy. This intransigence signaled that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Islamic
Republic’s supreme leader, may not have ever wanted an agreement at all. Rather,
he may seek to prolong talks to advance the regime’s nuclear program while
avoiding harsh decisions by the Board of Governors of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA). Still, recent news out of Vienna suggests a deal may be
imminent, with even more Western concessions.
This memo chronicles Tehran’s dangerous nuclear advances in recent years, the
results of American-led diplomacy to curtail this activity, and the actions
Israel has taken both to encourage greater American leverage and to hinder
Iranian progress.
Iran’s Quest for a Nuclear Weapon
For more than three decades, Tehran has worked, with varying degrees of
intensity, to develop a full-fledged military nuclear program. Its leaders deny
this, citing a purported fatwa, or Islamic ruling, from Khamenei that abjures
nuclear weapons.4 Israel ultimately proved Iran’s assertion false in 2018, when
the Mossad exfiltrated from a Tehran warehouse a secret nuclear archive
documenting the clerical regime’s efforts to develop a nuclear weapon.5
The archive revealed that Iran’s covert nuclear weapons program, which began in
the late 1990s, was far more advanced than Western intelligence had previously
assessed. One of the documents included handwritten instructions by Iranian
leaders to the program’s directors, ordering them to design, build, and test
five 10-kiloton nuclear warheads. Attached to the document were blueprints for a
warhead and descriptions of a plan to affix it to a long-range ballistic
missile.6
The regime in Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),
which theoretically should restrict its nuclear ambitions. However, this has not
stopped Tehran from building uranium enrichment facilities and concealing them
from the IAEA, the UN body that monitors and verifies Iran’s nuclear
commitments.7
For a country to become a nuclear-threshold state, it must develop three key
components: fissile material (enriched uranium or plutonium); a weapon system to
detonate the fissile material; and a delivery system to carry the weapon. Once a
nation completes these steps, its acquisition of a nuclear weapon depends not on
technology or capability, but only on political will and timing. In such a
situation, military intervention or regime change may constitute the only means
to prevent a larger crisis.
The Iranian regime has worked for years to master all three components. But
progress has not been linear. In 2003, Tehran curtailed but did not end its
nuclear weapons development,8 likely fearing an attack by the West in the wake
of America’s invasion of Iraq. The regime may or may not have resumed those
weaponization activities. If it has, it is probably keeping a low profile,
mostly under the cover of academic work.
Nevertheless, the Islamic Republic has steadily added to its nuclear gains for
15 years and counting. In 2007, it initiated enrichment at the Natanz nuclear
site,9 which had been covert until an Iranian opposition group exposed it in
2002.10 In 2009, the United States, the United Kingdom, and France exposed
another underground enrichment site in Fordow, located in the Iranian province
of Qom.11 Months later, in 2010, the regime began enriching uranium to 20
percent purity at Natanz,12 likely to gain leverage in future negotiations.
The level of 20 percent purity is significant. While a nuclear weapon requires a
few dozen kilograms of uranium enriched to more than 93 percent, the time and
effort to enrich natural uranium to 20 percent purity accounts for the majority
of the process.
Between 2006 and 2010, the UN Security Council imposed four rounds of nuclear
and economic sanctions on the regime.13 Between 2010 and 2013, Washington
imposed additional sanctions that crippled the Iranian economy.14 Yet Tehran
defiantly continued to expand its nuclear program, ultimately amassing large
quantities of uranium enriched to 5 percent as well as a smaller amount enriched
to 20 percent.15
Israel, in turn, launched what it described as the “war between wars” — an
asymmetric “gray zone” campaign targeting Iranian assets related to Tehran’s
nuclear and conventional military capabilities. According to various sources,
this campaign included cyberattacks against Iran’s nuclear facilities.16
Fears mounted in both Washington and Tehran about a possible Israeli military
strike.17 This prompted an international effort to reach an agreement that would
halt Tehran’s program. Yet the more the West endeavored to meet Iran’s demands,
the more the regime increased them. Tehran advanced its nuclear program and
committed additional NPT violations. This was the case a decade ago. It is the
case now.
Negotiations Begin
While various initiatives to engage Tehran were reported in the decade prior,
the first serious effort to negotiate with the Iranian regime began in 2011. The
Obama administration understood the importance of securing Israeli support for
the negotiations given the threat that Iran posed to the Jewish state. The
administration sought to use confidence-building measures to reassure Israel and
other nervous Middle Eastern allies. Thus began a series of U.S. visits to meet
with senior Israeli officials. American officials said they sought an interim
deal that Iran would reject, thereby making it easier for the UN Security
Council to impose additional sanctions, possibly without the objection of Russia
and China.
Still, the Obama team argued that even if Iran accepted the interim plan, in
full or in part, the final agreement would meet Israeli demands, based on the
limitations specified by the Security Council. Jerusalem stated that the only
suitable outcome would be “zero, zero, zero.” Tehran could have no enrichment
facilities or centrifuge research and development (R&D); no plutonium, heavy
water reactors, or separation plants; and no fissile material inside Iran.
However, while one American team was building trust with Israel, secret
negotiations between the United States and Iran began in Oman in 2012.18 The
talks were led by figures now holding key positions in the Biden administration:
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and CIA Director William Burns, then
serving as the State Department’s director of policy planning and deputy
secretary of state, respectively.19 These secret negotiation laid the foundation
for both the 2013 interim agreement, formally known as the Joint Plan of Action
(JPOA), and the 2015 final agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
In exchange for minimal nuclear concessions, the JPOA granted Iran — for the
first time — a de facto authorization to enrich uranium,20 contravening multiple
Security Council resolutions. This concession directly reneged on the Obama
administration’s pledge to Israel. The agreement, designed to last six months,21
lasted two years as Iran and world powers repeatedly extended talks past
self-imposed deadlines.22 The deal effectively rewarded Tehran with cash every
month simply for negotiating. Billions of dollars in sanctions relief injected
new life into Iran’s sanctions-battered economy.23
Israel’s Warnings
With negotiations underway, Israel formed a group of experts from the Israel
Defense Forces’ Military Intelligence Directorate and Planning Directorate, the
Mossad, the National Security Council, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the
Ministry of Defense’s Political-Military Division, the Israeli Atomic Energy
Commission, and the Ministry for Strategic Affairs. While Israel was not a party
to the negotiations, the group of experts worked intensively with the world
powers negotiating with the Iranians. Jerusalem aimed to underscore the dangers
of an agreement that failed to permanently prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear
weapon.
The team of experts forwarded dozens of technical papers to the American and
other negotiators. They called for an Iranian breakout time — the time needed to
produce enough fissile material for one nuclear bomb — of at least several years
rather than merely one year (as proposed in the talks). The Israeli experts
wanted Tehran to dismantle all enrichment infrastructure and ship it out of
Iran. They called for a full disclosure of the Iranian nuclear program’s
“possible military dimensions” (PMD).
The experts also sought a complete cessation of Iranian R&D on advanced
centrifuges, as well as assurances that Iran’s Arak reactor would not be a heavy
water facility. They recommended the retention of sanctions on the Islamic
Republic for at least 20 years, if not longer. These recommendations went
largely unheeded.
A Deal Is Struck
The final round of talks lasted approximately nine consecutive weeks in 2015,
concluding with the finalized JCPOA on July 14.24 The deal gave Iran nearly
everything it wanted, primarily due to the other side’s eagerness to reach an
agreement. Communication between the Israeli experts and the U.S. negotiators
broke down. The Obama administration blamed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s
March 2015 speech to the U.S. Congress — delivered against the wishes of the
president — criticizing the emerging deal.25 But this was not the only reason.
The discussions were simply no longer productive. The American negotiators
wanted an agreement at almost any cost, and Israel’s protests were no longer
welcome.
Thus, even as Tehran continued to call for the annihilation of Israel,26 the
JCPOA provided the regime with a clear path to nuclear weapons and the ability
to acquire the necessary infrastructure. The agreement effectively enabled Iran
to become an internationally recognized and legitimate nuclear-threshold
state.27 The regime also reaped a massive financial windfall, enabling an
alarming increase in Iranian support for terrorist groups across the region —
Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthis in Yemen, among others.28
No less alarming for Israel: The JCPOA provided a template for other Middle
Eastern countries to pursue the status of a threshold state.
Moreover, UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which endorsed the agreement,
codified the JCPOA’s sunset provisions. Per the resolution, the UN arms embargo
on Iran expired in 2020 even though Tehran had repeatedly violated it by sending
weapons to violent proxies and terrorist groups in the Gaza Strip, Lebanon,
Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Bahrain.29 Resolution 2231 also removed the ban on
Iranian tests of “ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering
nuclear weapons.” The resolution merely “call[ed] upon” Tehran to halt its
missile development, and even that non-binding language will expire next year.30
Since 2015, Iran has tested dozens of ballistic missiles.
The Israeli Response
The Israeli cabinet issued a statement rejecting the deal on the day of the
JCPOA’s finalization.31 Thereafter, the Israeli government launched a campaign
to educate Congress and the broader U.S. public about the loopholes, gaps, and
other flaws in the agreement.32 It was a last-ditch effort to prevent the deal
from entering into force.
It was no use, however. Congress failed to muster the necessary votes to stop
the agreement. By the end of 2015, the IAEA prematurely closed its investigation
of the PMD of Iran’s nuclear program,33 paving the way for the JCPOA’s
implementation in January 2016. The Iranian economy soon received billions of
dollars in sanctions relief,34 enabling a conventional military buildup and a
surge in terror sponsorship worldwide.35
Apart from concealing from the IAEA the existence of a secret nuclear weapons
archive, undeclared nuclear sites, and undeclared nuclear material, Iran abided
by most of its other commitments under the deal. Tehran understood that patience
was all that was needed to ultimately gain a legitimized nuclear program along
with massive economic benefits. This calculus was upended when President Donald
Trump pulled out of the agreement in 2018.36 Before he made his final decision,
however, the administration offered the Iranians opportunities to negotiate a
more comprehensive agreement. They refused.37
Tehran treaded carefully at first but then substantially increased its
violations following the November 2020 election of President Joe Biden, who
signaled an eagerness to return to the deal and removed a credible U.S. military
threat from the equation.38
Russia, China, and Europe assert that Iran’s nuclear violations were the result
of Washington’s unilateral withdrawal.39 However, the most egregious Iranian
violations did not occur until 2021, after Biden’s election and the subsequent
renewal of negotiations.40 Tehran appeared to seek leverage for these talks.
In response, Israel has increased the intensity of its war between wars.
According to a wide range of Israeli and other sources, this campaign has
impeded Iran’s military expansion in Syria and limited the regime’s efforts to
supply its Lebanese terrorist proxy, Hezbollah, with lethal precision-guided
munitions.41 More importantly, Israel has reportedly acted against Iran’s
nuclear program, eliminating senior nuclear officials42 as well as some physical
components.43
Returning to the JCPOA
Israel’s shadow war notwithstanding, the regime’s nuclear advances have rendered
a return to the old agreement futile. Iran’s nuclear progress since 2015, and
particularly since Biden’s election, is beyond the point of containment.44 This
underscores why the original deal was a mistake. The data disclosed by the
nuclear archive,45 as well as new information obtained by IAEA inspectors since
2015,46 show that the JCPOA failed to account for the full range of Iranian
nuclear activities, including activities that preceded the agreement.47
Between the JCPOA’s finalization and America’s 2018 exit from the deal, the
Iranian regime increased uranium enrichment and added advanced centrifuges, as
permitted under the agreement.48 This enabled Iran to transition to clandestine
underground enrichment.49 The regime already had second-generation IR-2M
centrifuges operating in the Natanz underground facility, even though the JCPOA
prohibited it.50
Worse, the agreement did not bar the regime from stockpiling raw materials or
producing advanced centrifuges. This undermined optimistic calculations of
Tehran’s breakout time projected by supporters of the deal. Iran has already
mastered the enrichment technology needed to amass enough fissile material for a
weapon.
As Secretary of State Antony Blinken ceded in April 2022, Iran’s breakout time
was “down to a matter of weeks.”51 Since then, the regime’s breakout time has
reportedly dropped to near zero.52 A return to the original agreement as written
is therefore futile.
The Failures of the IAEA
The decision to close the PMD investigation was among the West’s biggest
mistakes. Today, the regime insists this issue is not open for discussion.53
Regime negotiators now demand that all IAEA investigations — new and old — be
closed or written off. This is reportedly one of the remaining sticking points
in Vienna.54
Regardless of the terms of any deal that is reached, the regime in Iran is much
closer to a bomb than previously estimated. The IAEA has only recently reached
this conclusion, thanks largely to Israeli evidence. The nuclear watchdog
appears incapable of fulfilling its mandate independently.55 This alone raises
troubling questions about the feasibility of a sustainable agreement, which
would require reliable monitoring and verification.
A fundamental aim of the 2015 deal was to establish airtight, unprecedented
inspections of Iranian nuclear sites. The IAEA’s strict inspections were
supposed to be the most effective tool in the agreement.56 Yet these
inspections, which never extended to military sites or sites connected to Iran’s
secret nuclear-military Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research,
missed the nuclear archive and all the nuclear sites and activities the IAEA
subsequently discovered thanks to the archive. In the meantime, the IAEA has
repeatedly put JCPOA violations on the back burner for the sake of preserving
the agreement.57
The IAEA director general, Rafael Grossi, has repeatedly traveled to Tehran in
an attempt to reach new understandings with the regime.58 Yet Tehran has
accelerated its nuclear activities, breaching not only the JCPOA but also the
NPT, Iran’s Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA, and the Additional
Protocol. The IAEA’s failure to address these violations has severely damaged
its credibility and could effectively end the agency’s status as an independent
body.
The Iranian Strategy
The Iranian nuclear strategy appears to be based on four assumptions. The first
is that the United States, under its current leadership, lacks the will to
attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. This view has yielded a second — and erroneous
— belief that Israel lacks sufficient capabilities to strike Iran’s nuclear
program and will not attack without American support. Third, the Islamic
Republic believes its economy can withstand Washington’s current economic
pressure, which is significantly weaker than the sanctions of past
administrations. And finally, the regime believes it faces no meaningful
internal threats to its survival. These four views explain why Tehran has not
exhibited any flexibility at the negotiating table.
JCPOA-Minus Agreement
With negotiations now at a pivotal moment, Jerusalem’s primary concern is that
Washington will agree to a “JCPOA-minus.” The White House is reportedly willing
to offer sanctions relief that goes far beyond the JCPOA’s concessions. In
particular, the Biden team has offered to lift sanctions on thousands of
individuals and entities, including Iranian banks, the supreme leader, and his
inner circle.59 Moreover, U.S. Special Envoy for Iran Rob Malley and his team,
together with some EU high officials, have explored ways to comply with the
Iranian demand to remove IRGC-related entities from the FTO list despite
promises from the White House to the contrary.60
Offering additional concessions to the regime is irresponsible, particularly
amidst a spate of regime-inspired attacks and plots on American soil.61
Moreover, Iran is already enriching uranium at 60 percent,62 manufacturing and
testing advanced centrifuges, and blocking the IAEA’s access to active nuclear
sites and other locations where violations have occurred in the past.63 Tehran
refuses to dismantle the advanced centrifuges it has produced in violation of
the 2015 agreement.64
And the clock is still ticking. In 2027, the JCPOA’s limitations on the regime’s
industrial-scale production and installation of centrifuges, including advanced
ones, will expire.65 In 2031, the deal’s restrictions on Iranian
fissile-material stockpiles and enrichment, including to weapons-grade, will
expire, too.66 Enrichment at Fordow and the building of new enrichment plants
will be permitted. The bans on processing plutonium, storing heavy water, and
constructing heavy water reactors will be lifted. Tehran will be in a position
to produce dozens of bombs.67
Toward A Better Agreement
Should the Biden administration wish to negotiate a deal that would truly
restrain Iran from attaining a nuclear weapon, it must address the three key
steps for becoming a nuclear-threshold state. The IAEA should strictly prohibit
Tehran from producing fissile materials and or possessing the technology needed
to develop a bomb. This cannot be subject to negotiation. Without such
restrictions, the Iranians will be three to five months away from a nuclear
weapon — with tacit international approval.
Additionally, while the United States and Israel have long measured Iran’s
nuclear progress in terms of breakout times, this concept is no longer helpful.
Tehran has no intention of “breaking out” to a weapon. Rather, it will “sneak
out” in undisclosed underground facilities using advanced centrifuges that
enrich at much higher speeds.
Any viable deal must force the regime to come clean about its past activities,
reopen the PMD investigations closed in 2015, and answer all questions stemming
from new findings. The United States cannot conclude a worthwhile deal if Iran
fails to confess to its past violations and fully disclose all its previous
nuclear activities.
Finally, addressing the Iranian regime’s delivery systems, primarily ballistic
missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads, requires more than weakly worded
UN resolutions. The missile-test ban, already rendered toothless in 2015, will
expire entirely in 2023. A better agreement should put a permanent stop to the
development of these missiles, even if the regime says this is non-negotiable.
Recent Iranian and American Positions
In nuclear talks over the past year, Iranian negotiators introduced several new
demands. In addition to its requirement to remove the IRGC from the FTO list,
Tehran called for guarantees for compensation in an event of another American
withdrawal.68 The regime also sought to close all the IAEA’s open files and to
end all investigations, past and present.
In effort to demonstrate it has not capitulated to the regime’s terms,
Washington made new demands: Tehran must commit to halt aggression in the
Persian Gulf, particularly by curbing the IRGC’s activities there, and to
communicate directly with Washington. The viability of such an arrangement is
questionable given the regime’s past behavior and stated goal of destabilizing
the region. Interestingly, U.S. efforts to reach a “longer and stronger” accord,
as the Biden team promised upon his election, have ended.69
An immediate concern is that the JCPOA’s restrictions will soon sunset. In 2025,
world powers will lose the “snapback” mechanism to reinstate all sanctions in
response to an Iranian nuclear violation, as stipulated in the original
agreement.70 Iran has already committed multiple violations to justify such a
move.
The neutering of the IAEA is further undermining Washington’s ability to hold
Iran to account. The IAEA has already halted its investigation of Iran’s
development of uranium metal. Three other files relevant to illicit nuclear
activity await Iranian explanations that will probably not materialize. If
Washington and Tehran reach a new agreement, the likelihood that the IAEA will
press for answers on other possible Iranian nuclear violations seems even more
remote. The United States should wield its economic leverage to require the
regime to come clean on its past activities.
Only one part of the 2015 agreement deals with the regime’s development of a
weapon system: Section T of Annex I. However, Israeli officials believe there is
a 2015 side agreement between the Russians, the Iranians, and the United States
not to enforce this section. Other side agreements may have found their way into
the recent talks in Vienna, further undermining the leverage needed to hold the
regime to account.
Most obviously, the lifting of sanctions will erode what remains of U.S. and
Western leverage to pressure the regime to end its nuclear ambitions. This was a
fatal flaw of the last agreement, and complicates the deal currently being
negotiated.
A Bipartisan Opportunity
Earlier this year, 165 House Republicans published a letter to President Biden
vowing that a new deal would meet the same fate as the JCPOA if he fails to
secure congressional support pursuant to the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review
Act.71 This law, passed in May 2015, requires the president to submit any deal
to the House and Senate for approval. Forty-nine out of 50 Republican senators
issued a similar warning in another letter.72
In light of Iran’s continued intransigence, Democrats and Republicans should be
able to agree that further concessions are a bad idea. Skeptical Democrats
should deliver the message to the White House that capitulating to Iran is
extremely dangerous.
The Head of the Octopus
Israel, for its part, is expected to intensify its asymmetric campaign,
enlisting the integrated tools and skills of multiple Israeli agencies to weaken
Iran in the economic, diplomatic, military, political, cyber, and legal arenas.
The message from Jerusalem to Tehran has been blunt: Gone are the days when the
“head of the octopus” remained untouched while the regime’s terrorist tentacles
destabilized the Middle East.73 Israel’s decision to strike Iran at home, as
opposed to merely batting its proxies, was a shift first articulated in former
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2018 updated National Security Strategy. The
essence of the strategy has since been embraced by Netanyahu’s successors, Prime
Ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid.74
The Israeli campaign also includes efforts to inform the international public,
primarily in the United States, about the dangers posed by a nuclear Iran. That
campaign has a long way to go from Israel’s perspective. The American people
largely do not understand that a nuclear-armed Iran could soon pose a threat to
the United States once the regime acquires intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Conclusion
Renewed talks and side negotiations in Vienna present Washington with a stark
choice. It can acquiesce to the regime’s demands and empower a terrorist state
with nuclear ambitions. Or it can devise a joint plan with Israel and other
Middle Eastern allies to push Iran to embrace a new and completely comprehensive
agreement. The goal must be to permanently and verifiably block the regime’s
path to a nuclear weapon. Such a deal would restore American and IAEA
credibility in the region while preventing a slide toward war.
*Brigadier General (Res.) Jacob Nagel is a senior fellow at the Foundation for
Defense of Democracies (FDD) and a visiting professor at the Technion Aerospace
Faculty. He previously served as acting national security adviser to Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and as head of Israel’s National Security Council.
Jonathan Schanzer is senior vice president for research at FDD and a former
terrorism finance analyst at the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Security Threat: China's Interest in US Agriculture
Judith Bergman/Gatestone Institute./August 19/2022
The more US agricultural technology China acquires, especially through theft, in
order to become dominant in the agritech field, the worse the US will fare when
it comes to selling its own technology, whether to China or third countries.
The specific goal is for China to be able to satisfy 95% of its demand for
agricultural machinery with equipment that is manufactured in China. According
to the USCC report, those policies, underpinned in part by technological theft,
have negatively affected US exports to China of agricultural equipment....
China has been expanding its ownership of US land over the past decade from
13,720 acres in 2010 to 352,140 acres in 2020, according to the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA).
China's largest purchase in the US agriculture sector so far has been Smithfield
Foods in 2013, the largest pork producer in the US. China's WH Group -- a
state-owned company, which began as a meatpacking business in China -- owns it
today. At the time of the sale, Smithfield had 25 U.S. plants, 460 farms, and
contracts with 2,100 producers in 12 states and the ownership of Smithfield
accounted for more than 146,000 acres of US land.
"While China's main interest in obtaining GM seeds from the United States is in
improving its crop yields, the potential weaponization of agricultural IP is
possible," the USSC warned. "... Similar to hacking a computer code, Beijing
could easily hack the code or DNA of U.S. GM seeds and conduct biowarfare by
creating some type of blight that could destroy U.S. crops... a virus or fungus
engineered to kill a GM plant could wipe out an entire crop..." — U.S.-China
Economic and Security Review Commission, Staff Research Report, May 26, 2022.
The more US agricultural technology China acquires, especially through theft, in
order to become dominant in the agritech field, the worse the US will fare when
it comes to selling its own technology, whether to China or third countries.
(Image source: iStock)
The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) recently warned
that China's interest in the agriculture of the United States poses both a
serious economic challenge and a security risk to the United States.
China sits on 7-9% percent of the world's arable land, 294 million acres, but is
home to nearly 20% (1.4 billion in 2020) of the global population (nearly 8
billion in 2022). By comparison, the US has more than 375 million acres of
arable land and a population of 329.5 million.
China has sought to resolve its dilemma of achieving food security by buying up
farmland and agricultural businesses abroad on a huge scale, including in the
United States, and by seeking to advance its own agricultural technology,
including through theft of US agricultural technology.
"The Chinese government's domestic efforts, however, are not enough to solve
China's problems, "the USSC report noted.
"Recognizing its challenges, China has also gone abroad to address its needs
through investments and acquisitions of farmland, animal husbandry, agricultural
equipment, and intellectual property (IP), particularly of GM [genetically
modified] seeds. The United States is a global leader in all of these fields,
making it a prime trading partner and often a target of China's efforts to
strengthen its agriculture sector and food security, sometimes through illicit
means. These efforts present several risks to U.S. economic and national
security. Chinese companies' acquisition of hog herds in the United States may
save China money and enhance its domestic capacity; however, this could also
reduce China's need for U.S.-sourced production and redistributes the
environmental effects of hog waste to U.S. communities. If further
consolidations and Chinese investments in U.S. agricultural assets take place,
China may have undue leverage over U.S. supply chains. China's access to U.S.
agricultural IP may also erode U.S. competitiveness in agriculture technology
that supports food production. Additionally, China's illicit acquisitions of GM
seeds provides a jumpstart to China's own development of such seeds, deprives
U.S. companies of revenue, and offers an opportunity to discover vulnerabilities
in U.S. crops."
The more US agricultural technology China acquires, especially through theft, in
order to become dominant in the agritech field, the worse the US will fare when
it comes to selling its own technology, whether to China or third countries. One
of the focus areas of the Made in China 2025 plan to become a world leader in
technology and high-tech manufacturing is agricultural machinery such as
high-end tractors and harvesters. The specific goal is for China to be able to
satisfy 95% of its demand for agricultural machinery with equipment that is
manufactured in China. According to the USCC report, those policies, underpinned
in part by technological theft, have negatively affected US exports to China of
agricultural equipment.
"In 2013, U.S. agricultural equipment sent to China totaled nearly $27 million,"
the USSC found.
"In 2015, the year the Made in China 2025 policy was introduced, exports were at
about $16 million and have since dropped to around $9 million in 2021." This has
serious implications for US competitiveness, especially because it may also
affect US exports to third countries, who may now prefer to buy their
agricultural equipment at a lower price from China, where labor costs are
minimal.
China has been expanding its ownership of US land over the past decade from
13,720 acres in 2010 to 352,140 acres in 2020, according to the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA). China's largest purchase in the US agriculture sector so
far has been Smithfield Foods in 2013, the largest pork producer in the US.
China's WH Group -- a state-owned company, which began as a meatpacking business
in China -- owns it today. At the time of the sale, Smithfield had 25 U.S.
plants, 460 farms, and contracts with 2,100 producers in 12 states and the
ownership of Smithfield accounted for more than 146,000 acres of US land. The
352,140 acres that China owns in the US -- 192,000 of them agricultural acres,
and the rest "other" land -- is a small amount compared to how much land
countries like Canada and the Netherlands own in the US. Canada, for instance,
owns 4.7 million acres, while the Netherlands owns 4.6 million acres. Canada and
the Netherlands, however, do not constitute threats to the US, nor are they
trying to dominate the world.
"The trend is what is most concerning about the almost 200,000 acres," Rep. Dan
Newhouse (R-Wash.) said.
"At first, you look at China's acreage here and think it is small, but that has
almost all been acquired in the past decade. You also have to couple the acreage
with the fact that the CCP's stated goal is to remake the world according to
their benefit. The trend is for them to continue buying our assets and it has to
stop before it becomes an even bigger problem."
The Chinese have not stopped at land, but have expanded their operations to
include livestock and grain.
"Chinese scientists have in certain cases chosen to simply steal U.S.
agriculture IP and technology rather than try to research and develop them
themselves," the USSC noted.
"Acquiring U.S. trade secrets through agricultural espionage has become a
convenient way for China to improve its agricultural output and become more
competitive in global markets. China's GM crop research, including seed
breeding, is still underdeveloped relative to the United States, which is the
largest exporter of GM crops. The growing GM crop industry in China would
greatly benefit from access to protected U.S. seed lines that take many years
and resources to develop. Agricultural IP theft could enable Chinese
agribusinesses to undercut U.S. competitors on international seed markets."
The USSC estimates that each inbred seed "can cost up to $30 million to $40
million in lab costs, field work, and trial and error."
One famous case of seed theft was successfully made by the FBI against Mo
Hailong, a Chinese national who was sent to China by the Dabeinong (DBN)
Technology Group, a company that makes feed products and is closely connected to
the Chinese government. In the US, he collected thousands of inbred corn seeds
from fields in Iowa and elsewhere owned by the Monsanto and DuPont Pioneer
companies and then shipped the seeds back to China. As part of his operations,
Hailong had also purchased two farms in Iowa and Illinois. He was sentenced to
three years in prison and a fine.
"Mo Hailong stole valuable proprietary information in the form of seed corn from
DuPont Pioneer and Monsanto in an effort to transport such trade secrets to
China," said U.S. Attorney Kevin E. VanderSchel at the time.
"Theft of trade secrets is a serious federal crime, as it harms victim companies
that have invested millions of dollars and years of work toward the development
of propriety technology. The theft of agricultural trade secrets, and other
intellectual property, poses a grave threat to our national economic security."
In a more recent case from April 2022, Xiang Haitao, a Chinese national, was
sentenced to 29 months in prison, three years of supervised release, and a
$150,000 fine after working as a scientist at the agricultural biotechnology
company Monsanto for nearly a decade. He was convicted of attempting to steal a
valuable algorithm related to farming from the company and attempting to take it
to China so that it could help accelerate technological advancements for the
Chinese government.
"The government of China does not hesitate to go after the ingenuity that drives
our economy," said Assistant Director Alan E. Kohler Jr. of the FBI's
Counterintelligence Division.
"Stealing our highly prized technology can lead to the loss of good-paying jobs
here in the United States, affecting families, and sometimes entire communities.
Our economic security is essential to our national security. That's why at the
FBI protecting our nation's innovation is both a law enforcement and a top
national security priority."
China has also made advancements in improving its livestock's genetics, simply
by buying US animals. "China has purchased millions of U.S. animals as breeding
stock, saving itself decades of time and resources on the advanced agricultural
research that goes into improving animal health and nutritional quality..." the
USSC noted. Stealing agricultural intellectual property, however, could not only
have significant negative economic consequences, but also possibly military
implications in the form of bio-warfare. "While China's main interest in
obtaining GM seeds from the United States is in improving its crop yields, the
potential weaponization of agricultural IP is possible," the USSC warned.
"...Similar to hacking a computer code, Beijing could easily hack the code or
DNA of U.S. GM seeds and conduct biowarfare by creating some type of blight that
could destroy U.S. crops... One vulnerability of GM seeds is their limited
genetic variation. Consequently, a virus or fungus engineered to kill a GM plant
could wipe out an entire crop with no genetic variation to mitigate the losses.
In a natural crop, a variety of DNA traits in the field could mitigate some
losses and ensure some of the plants survive the viral or fungal infection...
Defensive applications of synthetic biology may also be a motivation behind
China's desire to access advanced U.S. seed lines or other agricultural IP.
Perhaps indicating sentiment among Chinese scientists, Jiang Gaoming, a
researcher and professor at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, wrote an article on
U.S. biodefense efforts, exhorting other Chinese scientists to channel their
research toward China's biological defense, commenting, 'Friends, GMO experts,
your wisdom should be aimed at the enemy, not your own.'"
*Judith Bergman, a columnist, lawyer and political analyst, is a Distinguished
Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
© 2022 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.
Turkey and the German Dream
Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/August, 19/2022
It was almost exactly 20 years ago when Kemal Dervis told a group of reporters
in Ankara that in “in 20 years”, Turkey would be one of Europe’s two biggest
economies alongside Federal Germany. Shortly after that remark, however,
Dervis’s brief tenure as Turkey’s “economic miracle worker” in Prime Minister
Bulent Ecevit’s government was over. Dervis was not to become Turkey’s Ludwig
Erhard, the man who shaped West-Germany’s postwar economic revival, and Ecevit
himself soon took his own curtain call. Yet, at the time Dervis’s prediction
didn’t sound too outlandish. The radical reforms started under Turgut Ozal were
given a wider scope helping to curb runaway inflation and attracting the largest
inflow of direct foreign investment in Turkish history. The corruption that had
gangrened the state-dominated rentier economy was also brought under control
while Dervis’s clever measures saved the banking system from collapse. So, why
is Turkey today, with a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) just above half that of
Spain, still in the lower league in Europe?
Today Turkey is returning to the nightmarish inflation that it had sacrificed so
much to control. The national currency, the lira, stabilized after long yoyo
periods, is once again on a downward slope. For the third year running Turkey’s
foreign trade deficit is expanding at an unprecedented rate while unemployment
is also rising at rates unknown since the 1990s. To put it mildly, the Turkish
economy is in dire straits; a fact that a walk in Istanbul streets reveals with
shops having no or few customers, hotels that report fewer reservations, more
and more people riding bicycles because they cannot afford to fill their cars
with petrol, and crowds of job-seekers moving around parks and bazaars. The
latest estimates from the Central Bank show that the average personal debt is
above 110 percent of the annual income.
Some causes of the current crisis are conjectural. Turkey depends on energy
imports at a time when oil and gas prices are shooting up. Erhard’s economic
miracle in Germany happened when oil was priced at $2.70, the equivalent of $32
in current terms. Today, Turkey faces prices well above $100.
At the same time, Turkey, unlike “emergent” economies like Brazil has few
exportable natural resources. Still accounting for 25 percent of the GDP,
Turkey’s agriculture has been facing growing problems in European markets
because of stiffer regulations and the chill in relations with Brussels. When it
comes to exports of manufactured goods, the “dumping strategy” adopted under
Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s leadership, means that Turkish consumers pay a higher
price than foreign buyers to cover the cost of state subsidies. That in turn
adds to inflationary pressure.
Worse still, part of earnings from industrial exports is lodged in foreign banks
at a time that the flow of foreign direct investment is getting thinner. With
the global Covid crisis now in its third year, Turkey has also lost a good part
of its income from foreign tourism. In many places now most of the foreign
tourists are low-spending Russians trying to get away from the impact of the
Ukraine war.
In the past four years foreign investment, much of it from oil-rich Arab
countries, Iran and Russia, has been directed at real estate projects that
create bubbles like the ones that pushed Spain to the brink in the 1980s.
Interestingly, the Turkish diaspora, estimated to be around 12 million, is
cutting back remittances and investing less in the old homeland. The grim
economic prospect has encouraged emigration, especially by better-educated and
more skilled workers needed for new technology-based industries. This compounds
the problems created by the fall in national research and development budgets to
just above 1 percent of the GDP compared to almost 4 percent in Federal Germany
when Erhard (The Fat One) was in charge of the economy.
However, the current crisis may also have deeper political reasons. In his
wanton quest for faux-grandeur, President Erdogan has embarked on an adventurous
and costly foreign policy. He has wasted a lot of money trying to get a seat at
the top table in Libya with zilch for result.
Another costly chimera got Turkey involved in the Transcaucasian conflict, again
with no benefit to the Turkish economy. Despite Ankara’s massive support in the
war against Armenia, Azerbaijan (Baku) isn’t even ready to sell oil to Turkey
with the same discount that Russia and Iran offer.
Instead of negotiating a fair share of newly found oil and gas reserves in the
Aegean Sea with Greece, Erdogan has opted for pseudo-nationalistic
saber-rattling that drives away would-be investors.
Erdogan has also got Turkey involved in glory-chasing but costly gesticulations
in Kosovo, Northern Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Albania, not forgetting
the decades-long involvement in Northern Cyprus which has proved to be an
increasingly costly but growingly ugly mistress for the pashas. Another ugly but
expensive mistress is the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan al-Moslemeen).
Erdogan brought it under Turkish thumb at the cost of damaging ties with Doha
and by bribing the Egyptian and Tunisian leftovers of the “Brotherhood”
leadership.
Taking over the “Brotherhood” was supposed to complete Erdogan’s victory over
the Fethullah Gulen’s movement, leaving “ the Sultan” as the unchallenged
aspirant for the leadership of politicized Islam in and around the
Mediterranean.
But that is not all. Erdogan has expanded the war that Turkey has waged against
Kurds for almost half a century to parts of Iraq and Syria. For the past five
years, he has been trying to carve out a Turkish glacis in northern Syria’s
largely Kurdish region. Turkish experts believe that the adventure is costing
around $10 billion a year, almost twice what Ankara gets from Brussels to keep
Syrian refugees away from the EU dreamland. Erdogan’s obsession with getting
chunks of Syria and Iraq has prevented Turkey from playing a constructive role
in stabilizing its two neighbors one way or another. Meanwhile, corruption at
all levels is returning with a vengeance reminding many Turks of the late 1990s
when Ankara was dubbed a den of thieves.
Erdogan apologists claim that he has put himself “at the center” of the new
geostrategic “big game”. Turkey, they say, remains a member of NATO but also a
respected interlocutor for Russia. It can talk to the mullahs in Tehran and the
mandarins in Beijing. Erdogan can also sell drones to Russians and Ukrainians to
kill each other. Well, maybe. But anyone who tries to sit between two, not to
say several, chairs risks ending up between chairs right on the floor.