English LCCC Newsbulletin For
Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For January 28/2022
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2021/english.january28.22.htm
News
Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Bible Quotations For today
I am the true vine, and my Father is the
vine-grower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch
that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit.
John 15/01-08/: “I am the true vine, and my Father
is the vine-grower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every
branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. You have already
been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in
you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the
vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the
branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart
from me you can do nothing. Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a
branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and
burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you
wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear
much fruit and become my disciples.”
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials
published on January 27-28/2022
President Aoun instructs competent authorities to take care of those
trapped in snow, discusses with Ambassador Al-Khazen preparations for Vatican...
Lebanon-Israel Sea Border Talks to Resume Next Week
Lebanon Finalizes Its Response to Gulf Initiative
Lebanon's Cabinet Meets Anew, to Approve State Budget on Friday
Jumblatt says Iran gains in Lebanon as Arabs ‘abandon’ it
Hariri resignation further entrenches Iranian influence in Lebanon
Hezbollah’s return to the government is a political trap/Hanin Ghaddar/Al
Arabiya/Janauary 27/2022
Iran’s interests drive the Houthis/Saleh Baidhani/The Arab Week/Janauary 27/2022
Mawlawi Says New Bid to Smuggle Drugs Out of Lebanon Foiled
Oil prices drop across Lebanon
Bassil Warns of 'Extremism' after Hariri's Withdrawal
Sami Gemayel from Dar al-Fatwa: No One Can Claim Guardianship over Any Community
U.S. and AUB Launch Nationwide Covid-19 Vaccination Campaign
Lebanon’s Regime and its Opponents’ Illusions/Hussam Itani/Asharq Al-Awsat/January,
27/2022
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on
January 27-28/2022
US warns against UAE travel; Emirati official says Houthi threats won’t
be new normal
UN Urged to Open Query Into Iran's 1988 Killings and Raisi Role
Iran State TV Hacked with Graphic Calling for Khamenei’s Death
US Senator Calls for Additional Pressure on Iran
Qatari FM to Visit Tehran on Thursday
More Than 15,000 People Displaced in New Darfur Violence
Snow Storm Brings Misery for Syrian Refugees
Attack on Iraq Parliament Speaker’s Home Sparks Anger, Condemnation
Jordanian Army: 27 Killed in Shootout with Syria Smugglers
Erdogan Says Full Iran-Turkey Gas Flow to Return in 10-15 Days
Washington Vows More Sanctions on Houthi Leaders
Russia Says U.S. Failing on Ukraine but More Talks Possible
Ukraine Leader Praises 'Constructive' Paris Talks with Russia
Canada/Statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day
Canada/Statement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs on the 30th anniversary of
Canada-Ukraine diplomatic relations
Titles For The Latest LCCC English
analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on January 27-28/2022
The Post-Post-JCPOA World/Reuel Marc Gerecht/The Dispatch/January 28/2022
Turkey: Erdoğan's Hoax Charm Offensive/Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute/January
27, 2022
The Houthis Belong on the Terrorist List: The 'Humanitarian Crisis'
Manipulation/Pete Hoekstra/Gatestone Institute/January 27, 2022
'Appeasement' of Putin Isn't So Easy to Denounce on Ukraine/Max
Hastings/Bloomberg/January, 27/2022
Biden administration must be firm with Iran-backed Houthis/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab
News/January 27, 2022
EU’s lack of unity leaves it open to extortion/Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab
News/January 27, 2022
on January 27-28/2022
President Aoun instructs competent
authorities to take care of those trapped in snow, discusses with Ambassador Al-Khazen
preparations for Vatican...
NNA/January, 27/2022
President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, followed-up, today, on the
developments of the recent snow storm which caused damage to several Lebanese
regions. The President also received reports on the work of specialized
military, security and civil apparatuses, which are dealing with the
repercussions of cutting down a number of roads, especially on rescuing citizens
trapped in their vehicles. In this context, President Aoun instructed concerned
authorities to care for residents who were besieged by snow and to secure their
urgent needs, in light of the closure of some main roads.
Former Minister Pakradouni:
President Aoun received former Minister, Karim Pakradouni, today at Baabda
Palace, and deliberated with him general affairs and recent political
developments.
Lebanese Ambassador to the Vatican:
The President met Lebanese Ambassador to the Vatican, Farid Al-Khazen, and
addressed with him relations between Lebanon and the Vatican, in addition to the
on-going preparations for Vatican’s Foreign Minister, Richard Gallagher, to
Beirut next week.
Honoring Dr. Zrazir:
President Aoun awarded historian, Dr. Fadi Zrazir, the Lebanese Order of Merit,
in appreciation to his contributions in historical and heritage fields,
especially in collecting historical medals issued from year 1840 till 2020.
It is noteworthy that these medals amounted to more than 500, and were
documented by Dr. Zrazir in a book and issued as postage stamps.
The President also praised Dr. Zrazir’s efforts, which preserved the quality of
the medals and highlighted their historical and heritage value.
For his side, Dr. Zrazir thanked President Aoun for honoring him, and
appreciated the President’s positions, since he was an Army Officer till he
became President of the Republic, and his interest in culture, science and arts,
in addition to his support for pioneers. -- Presidency Press Office
Lebanon-Israel Sea Border Talks to Resume Next Week
Naharnet/January, 27/2022
The indirect negotiations between Lebanon and
Israel over the demarcation of their maritime border will resume next week under
the sponsorship of the U.N. and the U.S., Israel and media reports said. “The
U.S.-mediated border negotiations with Lebanon will be resumed next week,”
Israeli Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz said, adding that Israel has agreed to
take part in these negotiations. This indicates that U.S. Special Envoy and
Coordinator for International Energy Affairs Amos Hochstein will soon arrive in
the region. President Michel Aoun meanwhile told U.N. Special Coordinator for
Lebanon Joanna Wronecka in a meeting in Baabda that Lebanon is “ready to resume
the negotiations for the demarcation of the southern maritime border in a manner
that preserves the Lebanese state’s rights and sovereignty.”
Lebanon Finalizes Its Response to Gulf Initiative
Naharnet/January, 27/2022
Lebanon has finalized the draft of its response to the Gulf initiative and it
has “accepted most of its articles,” Annahar newspaper reported on Thursday.
“The draft explains Hizbullah’s presence based on it being an essential
component in Lebanon and notes that the government expresses Lebanon’s stances,”
the daily said. “As for the U.N. resolutions, the draft says that Lebanon is
committed to these resolutions and that there is an international community that
must help in implementing these resolutions and preserving the Lebanese
interest,” the newspaper added. The draft also says that the Lebanese government
“welcomes the various articles of the Gulf initiative.”“Foreign Minister
Abdallah Bou Habib has prepared the draft and is carrying it to the three
presidents (Michel Aoun, Nabih Berri and Najib Miqati) to win their approval,
before carrying it with its official and final format to Kuwait,” Annahar
reported. The initiative, or paper of demands, had been carried by Kuwait’s
foreign minister to Lebanon over the weekend. The minister said it contains “a
Kuwaiti, Gulf, Arab and international message containing measures and ideas to
build confidence again with Lebanon."The measures include Lebanon's commitment
to U.N. resolutions related to Hizbullah's disarmament, according to a leaked
copy of the paper. President Aoun has reportedly stressed to foreign envoys that
he met that “the issue of Hizbullah’s arms and its regional role is not a local
issue that has to do with Lebanon alone, but rather a regional and international
issue.”
Lebanon's Cabinet Meets Anew, to Approve State Budget on Friday
Naharnet/January, 27/2022
Cabinet on Thursday held “a discussion in depth over the situation of state
administrations and the need to secure the continuity of their work” and also
tackled “the need to explain the state budget’s objectives to citizens,” the
acting information minister said. “It was decided that Cabinet resume its open
sessions tomorrow at 9am with a reading of the report that has been submitted by
the Finance Minister regarding the draft state budget. The articles will also be
discussed so that the budget can be approved in tomorrow’s session,” Abbas al-Halabi
told reporters. Noting that “the media uproar that surrounded the draft budget
is aimed at undermining confidence in the state,” Halabi said “this is only
aimed at achieving the interests of some narrow segments.”He added that Cabinet
“cannot set the Customs exchange rate,” noting that it might follow one of the
market’s exchange rates. Halabi also said that the government is mulling the
possibility of rectifying public sector wages “within the capabilities allowed
by the treasury.”Cabinet had resumed its sessions on Monday after around a
three-month suspension prompted by the boycott of Hizbullah and the Amal
Movement -- the country’s two main Shiite parties. The discussion of the state
budget itself kicked off on Tuesday.
Jumblatt says Iran gains in Lebanon as Arabs ‘abandon’
it
Reuters/ 27 January ,2022
Druze leader Walid Jumblatt said on Thursday that Iran had gained more power in
Lebanon because Arab states had abandoned the country, and that nobody could
replace Sunni leader Saad al-Hariri after his decision to step away from
politics. In an interview with broadcaster MTV, Jumblatt also stepped up his
criticism of the Iran-backed Lebanese Shia group Hezbollah, the country's
dominant party, saying Lebanon was not a rocket-launching platform, in reference
to its vast arsenal. Jumblatt said that he had agreed with Russian officials
during a recent visit to Moscow that what he described as the Arabs' abandonment
of Lebanon had given more power to Iran.
Hariri resignation further entrenches Iranian influence
in Lebanon
AP/The Arab Week/Janauary 27/2022
A decision by Sunni Muslim leader Saad al-Hariri to step away from Lebanese
politics opens the way for Shia Hezbollah to extend its already deep sway over
the country, rendering it ever more a bastion of Iranian influence on the
Mediterranean. Three times prime minister, Hariri declared on Monday he would
suspend his role in public life and boycott a general election in May, citing
Iranian influence as one of the reasons he saw little hope of positive change.
It opens a new phase in Lebanon’s sectarian politics, governed by a system of
power-sharing among its many sects and adds to the uncertainties facing a
country suffering a financial meltdown that marks the biggest threat to
stability since 1975-90 civil war. Hariri’s move will accelerate the
fragmentation of the Sunni community which his family had dominated for 30 years
with Saudi support, before Riyadh cut him off, abandoning a Lebanon policy that
had cost billions but failed to curb Hezbollah. Founded by Iran’s Revolutionary
Guards in 1982 and heavily-armed, Hezbollah has long been Lebanon’s strongest
faction, gradually establishing the country as one of several Arab states where
Iran’s Shia Islamist government wields major sway and making Lebanon a theatre
in its struggle with Gulf Arab states.
Stronger financially than most in Lebanon, Hezbollah is well positioned to
capitalise on Hariri’s retreat. A source familiar with Hezbollah’s thinking said
the group is already eyeing potential gains for its allies in the Sunni
community, typically local politicians lacking the national sway of Hariri’s
party.
But Hezbollah is also wary of new challenges, including the risk that local and
regional adversaries will seek to replace Hariri with more hawkish figures who
will seek confrontation rather than strike compromises the way he did in recent
years.Hariri’s political earthquake is set against the backdrop of an escalation
in the wider struggle between Iran and US-allied Gulf Arab states. The
Iran-aligned Houthis have launched two rocket attacks on the United Arab
Emirates this month. The UAE belongs to a Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen
that says Hezbollah is aiding the Houthis. On Saturday, a Gulf Arab envoy handed
the Lebanese government a list of conditions for thawing ties, which a Lebanese
diplomatic source said included setting a time frame for the implementation an
18-year-old UN resolution that requires Hezbollah’s disarmament. Political
sources say the demand was seen in Beirut as an escalation by Gulf states which
had expelled Lebanese ambassadors in October in a rift over criticism of the
Yemen war by a Hezbollah-aligned minister.
Delay?
The list, described by the Gulf envoy as confidence-building proposals, also
echoed Western demands for the election to be held on time. But with the Sunni
political scene in disarray, some analysts expect calls for a postponement. Many
observers believe this would suit all major players apart from Hezbollah’s
adversaries who include the Christian Lebanese Forces, a Saudi-aligned party
which hopes the majority Hezbollah won with its allies in 2018 can be
overturned. “If the big powers in Lebanon including Hezbollah think it is in
their interest to delay the elections, they will do so,” said Nabil Boumonsef,
deputy editor-in-chief at Annahar daily. If the election happens, the subsequent
horse-trading over a new government is likely to be even more difficult than
usual. This uncertainty does not bode well for the chances of government action
to tackle the economic crisis which the ruling elite has left to fester since
2019.
Hariri’s decision has turned an already complicated electoral landscape on its
head. Dozens of parliament’s 128 seats will be affected. It will not only affect
the 20 seats his Future Movement won in 2018, but many more won by other groups
in local alliances with Future. There is currently no Sunni with the kind of
country-wide network maintained by Hariri, who lost a third of his seats in 2018
but maintained his position as the leading Sunni.
‘A free hand’
One of his brothers, Bahaa, may run or back candidates, but has yet to announce
his plans. Bahaa has criticised Saad over his accommodations with Hezbollah.
Druze politician Walid Jumblatt said Hariri’s step meant “a free hand for
Hezbollah and the Iranians.” Hezbollah-allied Sunnis won seats from Future in
2018. But the situation may not be so clear cut for Hezbollah, designated a
terrorist group by the United States. For while Hariri’s early career was
defined by confrontation with Hezbollah, culminating in a brief civil war in
2008, he later made compromises that suited the group and its allies.
In his speech on Monday, Hariri said his compromises had avoided civil war. “I
am not so sure how happy Hezbollah is” with Hariri’s decision, said Heiko Wimmen
of International Crisis Group. “It is in Hezbollah’s interest to have at least
the outward appearance of a functioning political system where everyone is
involved, including the Sunnis.”
Hezbollah’s return to the government is a political trap
Hanin Ghaddar/Al Arabiya/Janauary 27/2022
After three months of boycotting cabinet sessions, Hezbollah finally announced
that it would return – with its ally, the Amal Movement - to the political
table, but with the caveat of several demands.
The issues the groups are ready to discuss are the annual budget, the IMF
negotiations, the economic rescue plan, and “all that concerns improving the
living conditions of the Lebanese,” their joint statement said. They will not
discuss and decide on the upcoming appointments, mainly the judiciary ones. That
is, of course, related to their efforts to jeopardize the investigation of the
Beirut Port Blast, headed by Judge Tarek Bitar.
Bitar is the reason why both organizations boycotted the government in the
beginning. Their return considers three main issues, none of which is a reason
to celebrate.
First, efforts by Bitar to interrogate ex-ministers have been challenged with
lawsuits, while Hezbollah and Amal have accused him of politicizing the probe.
Today, there are claims of a behind-the-scene deal that jeopardizes the
investigation.
Prime Minister Najib Mikati denies this, saying that no cabinet decisions will
hinder Bitar’s investigation. If there is an agreement, the victims are
transparency and finding justice for the victims’ families.
Although Hezbollah is blaming its allies, everybody knows that the country’s
paralysis sits entirely at its own doorstep.
The fear is the realization that its support is turning on it. Hezbollah cannot
afford this kind of disillusionment with the elections on the horizon.
Hezbollah also understands the need to revive its political standing to control
the election process. The decision to return to cabinet discussions has little
to do with the economic crisis or any desire to resolve it.
Hezbollah realizes that any risk to its majority in parliament means the
possibility of losing leverage when choosing the next president of the republic.
President Michel Aoun’s mandate expires later this year. Suppose Hezbollah’s
calculations indicate that the new parliament will not grant it the power of the
majority. In that case, it will probably try to postpone May’s election or push
to have the presidential elections sooner. The group certainly needs to
influence the cabinet to make these decisions.
Another danger linked to the election preparations is implementing policies
protecting and preserving the political elite. Reversing the plummeting
valuation of the Lebanese Lira has seen the Central Bank’s reserves plundered.
Last week, the bank’s governor Riad Salameh injected US dollars into Lebanon’s
market. However, with only $13 billion left, Salameh is spending depositors’
money lodged by members of the public that they themselves cannot access.
All of this points to Hezbollah’s willingness to drive Lebanon and the people
into the abyss economically, politically, and socially. There will be no
accountability and justice, which will result in more crime and chaos. There
will be fewer reserves in the central bank, which means the Lebanese Lira will
fall more and become increasingly worthless. In addition to the risk of
postponement, there are other significant risks to the elections, including
violations and intimidation.
There is no reason to celebrate Hezbollah’s return to the government or the
ever-diminishing value of the lira. These are strategies employed by the group
and the political and financial leadership to jeopardize justice and democracy.
The coming months are vital for this fake political party both internally and
internationally. While elections will determine the parliament and the
president, the talks taking place in Vienna between Iran and the United States
will also bear how the political environment will develop in the coming months.
Iran needs Hezbollah’s influence in Lebanon as bargaining chips for leverage in
the negotiations. Hezbollah’s active role in government might safeguard the
group’s influence and power, but it will prevent justice from prevailing.
The Lebanese opposition needs to unite to build a transparent political platform
that issues a clear message to Hezbollah that it cannot interfere with the
proper governance of the country.
The international community has to use every tool to protect Bitar’s
investigation, proper oversight of fair elections, and ensure these elections do
not occur before May.
Iran’s interests drive the Houthis
Saleh Baidhani/The Arab Week/Janauary 27/2022
There is a widely shared theory in the media that the Houthis have become
stronger after seven years of war, more so than they were at the beginning of
the conflict that erupted in 2015 after the Saudi-led Arab coalition announced
Operation Decisive Storm. But this line of thought is quite flawed and misreads
the reality of Yemen today.
Contrary to the stereotypical view that the Houthis' cross-border operations
seek to project, the latest of which was targeting the UAE with ballistic
missiles and drones, the reality is that the Houthis have turned into an Iranian
tool without any political will of their own and have become part of an external
project which draws no popular support in Yemen.
The Houthis have suffered attrition, on the military, economic and human levels
during the past seven years. They have been also morally, socially and
politically drained after they lost the largest share of their initial support
base, which was lured by misleading slogans such as the quest for justice and
the desire to quash the traditional centres of influence in Yemen, along with
siren economic slogans, which once attracted many of the poor in Yemen.
The truth of the matter, which Yemen watchers see today, is that the Houthis are
at their weakest point, able only to repeat some of their time-worn slogans,
such as describing the war which they. themselves ignited as an “aggression”
against Yemen. Meanwhile, the regions under their control are in the darkest
hour of poverty, hunger and fear.
It has become clear that the Houthis, in this disastrous phase of Yemen's
history, are drifting into foreign wars without any careful reading of the
regional and international changes that are slowly taking the situation in the
opposite direction from their own goals.
Manifestations of Houthi escalation, such as the targeting of the UAE, show the
militant group to be operating according to Iranian agendas and interests, even
when these conflict with its own interests. This is especially the case at a
time when negotiations between the West and the Iranian regime on the nuclear
agreement are at a critical juncture.
Through its most dangerous and least expensive proxy, the Houthi militias,
Tehran is seeking to blackmail the world by targeting the international
navigation corridor in the Red Sea and energy supplies in Saudi Arabia and the
UAE. The message is that accepting a nuclear Iran is less expensive than the
cost of living with the activities of its proxy militias in Yemen, Iraq,
Lebanon, Syria and even in Gaza, where the pictures of Qassem Soleimani and
Abdul-Malik al-Houthi are displayed and some Palestinians boast that they have
joined the Tehran axis.
In addition to threatening international maritime trade and global oil supplies
in the Red Sea, Iran is directly blackmailing Saudi Arabia and the UAE via the
Houthi attacks. This has been prompted by the view of both states insists that
any nuclear deal cut in Vienna will be unbalanced if it does not take into
account the security of Iran’s Arab neighbours.
In as much as it is clear that the Houthi escalation reflects the interests and
objectives of the Iranian regime at this juncture, it also seems that the timing
of these attacks coincides with developments which do not serve Houthi
interests.
The recent Houthi escalation unshackled the hands of the Arab coalition and
bestowed greater legitimacy on the intervention of Saudi Arabia and the UAE in
Yemen. This is an intervention which appears to have taken a new turn in the
form of air strikes directed at the Houthis and the advance of Yemeni ground
forces to liberate more areas. This is all the more so since role of the
southern Giants Brigade troops became even more decisive in the fighting. The
effectiveness and organisation of this force and its motivation to abort the
Houthi project have resulted in a series of quick and substantial victories and
the liberation, in record time, of three districts in the Shabwa governorate and
Rabaa district in Marib.
The intense coalition air operations against the Houthis backed by the Giants
Brigade advances on the ground appear part of a new strategy to counter the
Houthi militias, taking advantage of their recent mistakes during the seven year
war and giving the Houthis a lot more to fear.
Foremost is fear of the revival of the plan to complete the liberation of
Hodeidah governorate, which had been shelved as a result of international
pressures of 2018, which resulted in the Sweden agreement. No part of that
agreement was ever implemented on the ground and its ink melted in the waters of
the ports of Hodeidah, which the Houthis turned into military bases to launch
maritime attacks and carry out piracy and weapons smuggling.
Their actions have provided sufficient justification for cancelling the Sweden
agreement and moving towards liberating the last geographical area on the Red
Sea that is still in their grip. This would leave the Houthis prey to popular
anger, Iranian betrayal and looming international sanctions.
Mawlawi Says New Bid to Smuggle Drugs Out of Lebanon Foiled
Naharnet/January, 27/2022
Lebanese security agencies have thwarted a new attempt to smuggle
narcotics out of the country, Interior Minister Bassam al-Mawlawi announced on
Thursday. “In a new operation, security agencies have proved their insistence on
combating the trafficking of drugs out of Lebanon,” Mawlawi tweeted. “The
anti-narcotics bureau of judicial police in cooperation with the Customs’
anti-narcotics unit have managed to seize around 12 tons of drugs that were
camouflaged in boxes of juice powder,” the minister added, noting that the
narcotics had been bound for Sudan as a “first stop.”“Investigations are still
underway to inspect the content of the entire shipment and the operation’s
circumstances,” Mawlawi went on to say, while emphasizing that Lebanese
authorities “will spare no effort in thwarting all smuggling operations and
preventing harm and evil against our Arab brothers.”
Oil prices drop across Lebanon
NNA/January, 27/2022
Oil prices dropped Thursday across Lebanon as the price of gasoline (95 octanes)
has decreased by LBP 600, that of gasoline (98 octanes) by LBP 800, that of
diesel by LBP 4000, and that of LP gas by LBP 3300.
Consequently, prices are now as follows:
Gasoline (95 octanes): LBP 354600
Gasoline (98 octanes): LBP 365800
Diesel: LBP 331200
LBG: LBP 280300
Bassil Warns of 'Extremism' after Hariri's Withdrawal
Naharnet/January, 27/2022
Free Patriotic Movement chief Jebran Bassil has
noted that “a host of domestic and foreign circumstances have influenced the
decision of ex-PM Saad Hariri,” who has announced the suspension of his role in
political life. “He had been asked to do a civil war, and his rejection of this
request led to taking this decision,” Bassil said in an interview with Russia’s
RT television. “It is regrettable that Hariri has been forced to withdraw from
political life and this will lead to further extremism,” Bassil added. “We as
Lebanese must address this tension with understanding and full embracement and
we must let the Sunni community choose its representatives,” the FPM chief went
on to say. Noting that no one responded to Christians when they boycotted
elections in 1992, Bassil added that there should be no Sunni boycott. “Should
that happen, there should be a solution for the issue, and the elections must
not be postponed,” he said. Turning to the issue of the so-called Kuwaiti paper,
which reportedly contains Gulf and international demands, Bassil said the paper
is “a Gulf initiative that contains points on which the Lebanese agree.”But
“there are points that require time to be implemented, and this is a subject of
disagreement among the Lebanese,” the FPM chief added. He said that there should
be “dialogue to discuss this paper,” calling on President Michel Aoun to call
for national dialogue to discuss it. “We want to correct our relations with the
Gulf, but we don’t want to create a domestic problem,” Bassil added. He also
noted that the FPM has started a dialogue with Hizbullah to “improve the Mar
Mikhail Agreement.”
Sami Gemayel from Dar al-Fatwa: No One Can
Claim Guardianship over Any Community
Naharnet/January, 27/2022
Kataeb Party leader Sami Gemayel held talks Thursday at Dar al-Fatwa with Grand
Mufti Sheikh Abdul Latif Daryan. The Grand Mufti is “a Lebanese authority who
enjoys a patriotic conscience and deals with all the sensitive issues with a lot
of moderation and openness,” Gemayel said after the meeting. “In this critical
situation, we are interested in hearing the mufti’s viewpoint and exploring Dar
al-Fatwa’s orientations after ex-PM Saad Hariri’s step. Everyone knows that
there was an essential disagreement with him (Hariri) over the political
approach and the settlements that happened in the last period, and in his last
speech, he admitted that they were wrong,” Gemayel added. “Despite all the
disagreements with Hariri over the past years… the moderation that has been
embodied by al-Mustaqbal Movement is an essential need for the country,” Gemayel
went on to say. The policy of “renouncing violence that was adopted by each of
al-Mustaqbal Movement and Hariri is an essential point to us,” the Kataeb leader
added. He also said that “no one can claim guardianship over any street, seeing
as each citizen is free in their decision.”
U.S. and AUB Launch Nationwide Covid-19 Vaccination
Campaign
Naharnet/January, 27/2022
U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Dorothy Shea, Dr. Fadi
Sanan representing Health Minister Firass Abiad and Dr. Souha Kanj of the
American University of Beirut who represented AUB President Fadlo Khuri on
Thursday launched the Moderna Covid-19 vaccination campaign at Haykel Hospital
in Tripoli. The United States, through the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID), has recently donated over 600,000 vaccine
doses to support the Lebanese government's National Vaccination Strategy against
the Covid-19 pandemic. "USAID is working in partnership with the American
University of Beirut (AUB), with the support and supervision of the Ministry of
Public Health (MoPH), to vaccinate as many individuals as possible nationwide
and ensure the vaccines are distributed equitably, transparently, and safely,"
the U.S. Embassy said in a statement. "To achieve this goal, AUB is cooperating
with a number of hospitals, medical centers, universities and non-governmental
organizations to reach remote areas where the vaccination rate is still low. The
vaccination campaign, extending over a period of six months, will be rolled out
in the AUB Medical Center in Beirut; the Rayak Hospital in the Beqaa; and Albert
Haykel Hospital, Al-Yousif Hospital, and Nini Hospital in the North. This
campaign is open to women aged 18 and above, and men aged 25 and above," the
statement said. AUB has provided training to medical staff in partner hospitals,
universities and other organizations on the Moderna vaccine handling and
administration and will ensure the "proper communication and distribution of the
vaccines to the vaccination centers and mobile clinics." Dr. Soha Kanj,
representing the President of the American University of Beirut, said: “We thank
USAID for standing by AUB and Lebanon as we continue to defy this pandemic which
is severely affecting our beloved country.” In her remarks, U.S. Ambassador Shea
stated: “This is the largest single donation of vaccines to Lebanon... and
today’s clinic is one of many that distributes these vaccines, with a focus on
people living outside Beirut… Since the beginning of the pandemic, we have
worked alongside the American University of Beirut, NGOs, private companies, and
a consortium of ten partner hospitals across Lebanon to mitigate and respond to
the social, economic, and health-related impacts of Covid-19. The U.S.
government provided more than $100 million in Covid-related assistance to
Lebanon that ranged from personal protective equipment to mobile testing units.”
From his side, Dr. Fadi Sanan, representing the Minister of Public Health, said:
“Today we gladly received more than 600,000 doses of Moderna and J&J vaccines
donated by the U.S. Government to support the vaccination process in Lebanon.
This significant donation is one of the largest vaccine donations submitted to
the ministry of public health. We highly appreciate this initiative which
demonstrates the U.S. Government commitment.”
Lebanon’s Regime and its Opponents’ Illusions
Hussam Itani/Asharq Al-Awsat/January, 27/2022
Civil war is the magic word that should startle the Lebanese and awaken them to
the fact that what awaits them in the months ahead will be miles worse than the
crises they have seen so far. Facing these warnings of war are predictions that
the corrupt ruling clique is on the brink and a new, civil regime will emerge.
Lebanese politicians do not economize in exploiting the specter of the civil
war’s resumption. Some heap praise on themselves for distancing its poison from
the Lebanese, and some warn us about war as though it were at our gates, while
others scramble to predict the “terrifying developments” this small country will
witness.
The discourse about war’s resumption is based on the specter of the negotiations
in Vienna failing, the escalation of the war in Yemen, and Iran’s insistence on
expanding its influence in the Arab Levant.
Turbulent and bankrupt Lebanon could thus become an open arena for all forms of
account settling. The sects would be on high alert, ready to fight and battle it
out within the familiar framework in which domestic incentives are blended with
foreign powers’ incitement. That is theoretical, for now… Meanwhile, some of the
“revolutionary” groups’ supporters believe the Lebanese regime has become
totally bankrupt and that former Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s decision to step
away from political life is only the beginning of the end for the regime that
has brought the economic and political crisis up in Lebanon.
Hariri’s decision to step away from politics is no minor, fleeting development.
Although it brought back memories of when the Christians were forced to boycott
the political process after the civil war, following Michel Aoun’s exile to
France, their boycott of the 1992 elections and Samir Geagea’s imprisonment, the
situation today is radically different from that which prevailed thirty years
ago.
The most significant difference between the Christians’ marginalization at the
time and today’s Sunni decline is that there is no vision for Lebanon’s future
right now, while a reconstruction project that required a truce had been
underway at the time under Syrian - Arab - American auspices.
Calls for reconfiguring the Lebanese political system in light of the new
balance of power, with the Sunni share distributed among the victorious sects
that have shown they can withstand the horrors of the economic and political
collapse, may be premature. The country has yet to reach the bottom of the pit
that it has fallen into.
That is what is being said regarding the reformation of the political system
after deleting or amending the stipulations of the 1989 Taif Agreement. Those
making the statements have the popular base, the arms, financial power, bloody
legacy, and political mandate need to demand amendments to the country’s system
of governance after the disintegration of the Sunni sect’s leadership, which had
been a pillar of the “Taif regime.”
As for those preaching about the entire system’s imminent collapse as they await
the sight of “its corpse passing through the river,” their position is
bewildering. They derive their legitimacy from the October 17 uprising and see
it as a foundational moment establishing a new form of politics in Lebanon
diametrically opposed to everything about the current corrupt regime, starting
from its bet on the sustainability of an unproductive economy dependent on real
estate speculation and excessive debts and up to taking dictates from the Syrian
and then Iranian regional powers.
However, radical criticism of the corrupt Lebanese system that has been
subordinated by foreign powers does not necessarily mean that the critics have
the capacity to become a viable alternative.
Things in Lebanon are more complicated than that because the factors
precipitating political groups’ rise and fall go beyond the identification of
immediate interests and how to further them. An array of kinship and communal
solidarities that the “revolutionary” groups cannot speak to determine political
success. These solidarities explain the sectarian parties and movements’
resilience in the face of the disaster that began in 2019- rather, their
capacity for exploiting it and benefiting from it to draw increased support.
Civil war is the vision in the imagination of Lebanon’s traditional politicians,
who can only strive by spreading panic among their constituents and terrifying
them with narratives about the dark developments the future holds.
Nonetheless, asking how the current situation could be described is valid, as
the country is not short on sectarian and class divisions and tensions. In fact,
we are currently embroiled in what resembles a cold civil war, as every group
preoccupies itself with putting its affairs in order and surviving the sinking
ship that is Lebanon.
The Sunni community in Lebanon has historically only rarely ever been loyal to a
single leader, with the most prominent example being Rafik Hariri’s rise. This
stems from several factors. One significant reason is that, in contrast to most
of the country’s sectarian communities whose members are concentrated in certain
regions, Sunnis are scattered across many cities and peripheral areas throughout
the country. This sets the Sunni sect’s political structure apart from that of
other sects, and the same applies its ability to produce leaders who can draw
support from the majority of its members.
As for the opposition groups that cheered Hariri’s departure- seeing it as a
prelude to their electoral success- they have disappointingly demonstrated a
weak conceptualization of our country’s politics.
The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on
January 27-28/2022
US warns against UAE travel; Emirati
official says Houthi threats won’t be new normal
Joseph Haboush, Al Arabiya English/27 January
,2022
The US State Department on Thursday advised its citizens against traveling to
the UAE, warning against the threat of missile or drone attacks. Washington’s
travel advisory came after two attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis targeted Abu
Dhabi in the last week. “Do not travel to the United Arab Emirates due to
COVID-19. Reconsider travel due to the threat of missile or drone attacks,” the
State Department said on Thursday. But a senior Emirati official said that
Houthi attacks would not “be the new normal for the UAE.”“We refuse to acquiesce
to the threat of Houthi terror that targets our people and way of life,” the
official was quoted as telling AFP. “We remain one of the most secure countries
in the world, and the recent attacks have only strengthened our commitment to
safeguarding the welfare of our residents,” the official added. For its part,
the State Department said the possibility of attacks affecting US citizens and
interests in the Gulf remained “an ongoing, serious concern.” The statement
cited “rebel groups” in Yemen in an apparent reference to the Houthis. On
January 17, the Houthis launched missile attacks on Abu Dhabi, killing three
civilians and wounding a handful of others. This week, another missile attack
was launched by the Houthis, but US and Emirati air defense systems intercepted
them. “The UAE, as home to more than 200 nationalities, stands ready to defend
itself,” the official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP.
UN Urged to Open Query Into Iran's 1988 Killings and Raisi
Role
Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
Prominent former UN judges and investigators have called on UN human rights boss
Michelle Bachelet to investigate the 1988 "massacre" of political prisoners in
Iran, including the role of its current president, Ebrahim Raisi, at that time.
The open letter released on Thursday, seen by Reuters, was signed by some 460
people, including a former president of the International Criminal Court (ICC),
Sang-Hyun Song, and Stephen Rapp, a former US ambassador for global criminal
justice. Raisi, who took office in August, is under US sanctions over a past
that includes what the United States and activists say was his involvement as
one of four judges who oversaw the 1988 killings. Amnesty International has put
the number executed at some 5,000, saying in a 2018 report that "the real number
could be higher". "The perpetrators continue to enjoy impunity. They include the
current Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and judiciary chief Gholam-Hossein
Mohseni Ejei," said the open letter. Ejei succeeded Raisi as head of Iran's
judiciary. Raisi, when asked about activists' allegations that he was involved
in the killings, told a news conference in June 2021: "If a judge, a prosecutor
has defended the security of the people, he should be praised." He added: "I am
proud to have defended human rights in every position I have held so far."The
letter, organized by the British-based group Justice for Victims of the 1988
Massacre in Iran, was also sent to the UN Human Rights Council, whose 47 member
states open a five-week session on Feb. 28. Other signatories include previous
UN investigators into torture and former foreign ministers of Australia,
Belgium, Canada, Italy, Kosovo and Poland. Javaid Rehman, the UN investigator on
human rights in Iran who is due to report to the session, called in an interview
with Reuters last June for an independent inquiry into the allegations of
state-ordered executions in 1988 and the role played by Raisi as Tehran deputy
prosecutor.
Iran State TV Hacked with Graphic Calling for Khamenei’s
Death
Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
Multiple channels of Iran's state television broadcast images on Thursday
showing the leaders of an exiled dissident group and a graphic calling for the
death of the country's supreme leader, an incident that authorities described as
a hack. For several seconds, graphics flashed on screen, interrupting the
broadcast to depict the leaders of the opposition Mujahideen Khalq Organization
(MKO), Maryam and Masoud Rajavi. A man's voice could be heard chanting "Salute
to Rajavi, death to (Iranian Supreme Leader Ali) Khamenei!", according to videos
posted on social media.
Deputy IRIB (state braodcaster) chief Ali Dadi said the case was under
investigation. "Our colleagues are investigating the incident. This is an
extremely complex attack and only the owners of this technology could exploit
and damage the backdoors and features that are installed on the systems," Dadi
told state TV channel IRINN. The incident apparently marked the latest in a
series of embarrassing cyberattacks against Iran. In October, an assault on
Iran’s fuel distribution system paralyzed gas stations nationwide, leading to
long lines of angry motorists unable to get subsidized fuel for days. A
cyberattack on Iran's railway system caused chaos and train delays. Another hack
leaked footage of abuses at its notorious Evin prison.
US Senator Calls for Additional Pressure on Iran
Washington - Rana Abtar and Elie Youssef/Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January,
2022
Republican Senator Jim Risch criticized the progress of negotiations with Iran
in Vienna. In exclusive statements to Asharq Al-Awsat, he said that talks with
Tehran continued to stumble, noting that officials in the administration of
President Joe Biden “disagree about the American approach.”
The administration should intensify pressure on Iran and set a specific date for
ending negotiations, applying sanctions, imposing additional ones, and adopting
a policy of deterrence in the region, he stressed.
Risch, a senior Republican in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, considered
that the recent attacks in Al Dhafra (in the vicinity of Abu Dhabi), where US
forces are stationed, increased the need for a strong response.
If the Iranian regime refuses to come to the table, the US must be ready to
leave the negotiations, he underlined. Meanwhile, recent statements about the
nuclear negotiations reaching a “dangerous crossroads” reflect concern not only
of Washington’s allies, but also of the US negotiating team itself.
The US State Department confirmed in press statements the resignation of Richard
Nephew, the deputy US special envoy for Iran, which reflects deep differences
over the management of the nuclear talks.
While the Wall Street Journal confirmed that two other members of the
negotiating team led by Robert Malley had also withdrawn, as they insisted on a
“tougher” position with Iran, the newspaper revealed that the nuclear talks had
entered a critical stage. Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at the Institute
for Defense of Democracies in Washington and former director of the Iran
Accountability for Weapons of Mass Destruction division at the National Security
Council, said that all signs pointed to “increasing desperation” on the part of
the US team for any agreement they can get with Iran.
He told Asharq Al-Awsat that this would allow the Iranian regime to preserve
more of its nuclear gains and obtain more economic benefits at the same time.
According to Goldberg, Richard Nephew was removed from his post last month, and
the administration did not plan to announce it. He argued that Nephew’s
departure meant that he likely objected to the United States offering terms that
come in contradiction with long-term nonproliferation goals and undermine the
IAEA’s investigation into Iran’s undeclared nuclear sites, materials, and
activities. Nephew, who had called for a tougher stance in the current
negotiations, had not attended the talks in Vienna since early December,
according to the Wall Street Journal. The divisions come at a critical time,
with US and European officials warning that there were only a few weeks left to
save the 2015 deal before Iran acquired the knowledge and ability to produce
nuclear fuel that would allow it to build a nuclear bomb in no time. Among the
points of contention within the US team - informed sources said - is the
disagreement over the firmness of enforcing existing sanctions and whether
negotiations should be cut short due to the progress of Iran’s nuclear program.
Some members of the US team called for an end to negotiations with Tehran after
it reneged on most of the pledges made by the previous Iranian government, led
by President Hassan Rouhani. Others argued that it would be impossible to
restore the primary objective of the 2015 agreement, i.e. Iran remaining 12
months away from having enough nuclear fuel to build a nuclear weapon.
Qatari FM to Visit Tehran on Thursday
London, Tehran/Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
Qatari Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani will visit Tehran on
Thursday to meet with his Iranian counterpart Hossein Amirabdollahian. On
Tuesday, Al Thani held talks with Iran's Foreign Minister over the phone.
According to Qatar’s official news agency QNA, the two diplomats reviewed
bilateral relations and discussed ways of enhancing them in various fields. They
also discussed the “latest regional developments and issues of mutual
concern."Al-Thani earlier spoke over the phone with US Secretary of State Antony
Blinken. They highlighted the ongoing talks in Vienna with Western powers and
Iran aimed at reviving the historic 2015 nuclear accord. The two officials also
tapped into the latest developments in Afghanistan and reviewed the strategic
bilateral ties.
More Than 15,000 People Displaced in New Darfur Violence
Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
Renewed tribal violence near the western Sudanese city of El Geneina over the
past week has displaced more than 15,000 people, the United Nations said. The
war-weary Darfur region has seen an increase in violence recently, humanitarian
groups say, which analysts link to a peace deal signed in October 2020 that has
led to some groups to jostle for power while not adequately addressing security
concerns. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs, a personal dispute in the village of Adikong between two men from the
Masalit tribe and an unspecified Arab nomadic group sparked the conflict. Armed
nomads attacked the local market, set fire to part of the village, and killed
nine people including two children, it said. The fighting, which spilled over
into other villages, caused 11,100 people to be displaced within the El Geneina
locality, and an estimated 4,500 others to flee across the border to Chad. A
joint security force was dispatched to the area, Reuters quoted the UN statement
as saying. El Geneina and the surrounding area saw several incidents of violence
in 2021, and more than half of residents are in need of humanitarian aid
according to UN estimates.
Snow Storm Brings Misery for Syrian Refugees
Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
In Syria, days of heavy snowfall blanketed displaced persons' camps northwest
Syria where families huddled together under canvas in temperatures well below
zero Celsius (32 degrees Fahrenheit). "We've been trapped in the snow for four
days," said Abu Hussan, who lives with his family in a makeshift camp outside
the city of Jisr al-Shughur. "We have no shoes. We are soaked with water. The
children are sick and walk barefoot. They have nothing."The UN humanitarian
agency OCHA said this week that at least 227 displacement sites across the
northwest have been hit by severe winter weather since January 18. "545 tents
have been reported destroyed and 9,125 tents damaged by snowfall, floods and
winds, along with belongings of displaced people," it said, AFP reported. In
crisis-hit Lebanon, refugees and Lebanese alike struggled to secure fuel for
heating as severe weather blocked mountain roads and left Syrian refugees
shivering in flimsy tents. In the small Mediterranean country, where economic
crisis has driven more than 80 percent of the population into poverty, fuel
prices have skyrocketed after the cash-strapped government lifted subsidies last
year. Conditions have been particularly severe in the town of Arsal, high in the
mountains on the Syrian border, where Lebanese families and some 70,000 Syrian
refugees have been struggling to cope with the cold. "Most of the people can't
afford fuel for heating," Arsal mayor Basel Hujeiri told AFP. In neighboring
Jordan, heavy snowfall closed roads in the capital Amman and made driving
conditions treacherous across much of the country. Jordan's Meteorological
Department forecast more snowfall on higher ground with temperatures expected to
fall below freezing again on Thursday night. Egypt recorded its coldest winter
in a decade, with temperatures as much as seven to eight degrees below the
seasonal average. The storm whipped up waves of nearly six metres (20 feet),
disrupting shipping in the eastern Mediterranean, the meteorological office
said.
Attack on Iraq Parliament Speaker’s Home Sparks Anger,
Condemnation
Baghdad - Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
A rocket attack that targeted the house of Iraq’s parliament speaker on Tuesday
night drew widespread anger and condemnation across Iraq. The attack took place
in Mohammed al-Halbousi’s native district of Karma, sometimes spelled Garma or
al-Karmah, which is in the eastern part of Anbar province and is less than 50
kilometers west of Baghdad. Moreover, five rockets ready to be fired at the
Karma district have been seized, the intelligence agency said. “After
yesterday’s terrorist incident in the targeting of Karma district, and through
follow-up and inspection, the federal intelligence and investigation agency
detachments in the Interior Ministry were able to seize five rockets prepared to
fire at the district itself,” said a statement from the security media cell on
Wednesday. “The rockets were seized in the Area of the Tigris Arm,” it said,
adding that “the competent security services have begun to deal with them in
accordance with the procedures.”Iraqi President Barham Salih called the rocket
attack on the speaker’s home a “terrorist act.”“The attack on the residence of
the Speaker of Parliament in Anbar, which resulted in the injury of civilians,
is a reprehensible terrorist act,” Salih tweeted.
On Tuesday evening, the Iraqi army said that two civilians were injured as three
Katyusha rockets targeted Anbar province’s al-Karma region, where al-Halbousi’s
residence is located. A security source said that the rockets landed in the area
adjacent to the home of al-Halbousi.
The president considered that “the timing of the attack targets national and
constitutional entitlements,” calling for “unity and solidarity to protect civil
peace.” The rocket attack took place a few hours after the Federal Supreme Court
issued a decision that approved the parliament session held on Jan. 9, in which
al-Halbousi was elected speaker of parliament for a second term.
Jordanian Army: 27 Killed in Shootout with Syria Smugglers
Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
The Jordanian military said Thursday that troops have killed 27 suspected
smugglers attempting to enter the country from neighboring Syria. The report on
the army's website said that it had thwarted several suspected attempts to
smuggle drugs into Jordan from Syria, and that large quantities of narcotics
were sized in separate interventions that also left several people wounded. The
military said that it was “continuing to apply the newly established rules of
engagement and will strike with an iron fist and deal with force and firmness
with any infiltration or smuggling attempts to protect the borders.”Earlier this
month the military said an army officer was killed in a shootout with smugglers
along the long border it shares with Syria.
Erdogan Says Full Iran-Turkey Gas Flow to Return in
10-15 Days
Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Wednesday full gas flow from Iran
will return in 10 to 15 days after the neighbor cut supplies last week due to a
technical problem, prompting some Turkish manufacturers to halt production.In an
interview on broadcaster NTV, Erdogan said the government will subsidize
customers' electricity bills and added industry will use energy in a controlled
way. Prices of Turkish gas and electricity were hiked sharply this year.
Washington Vows More Sanctions on Houthi Leaders
Washington - Muath Alamri/Asharq Al-Awsat/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
Washington has pledged to take the “necessary steps” and use all “appropriate
tools” to hold Houthis responsible for the recent attacks against Saudi Arabia
and the UAE, and their role in protracting the conflict in Yemen, described as
the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. A sharp rhetoric is being resorted
to in US statements as well as diplomatic moves made by US officials in the
State Department and the White House. The US has also reiterated the importance
of finding a solution for Yemen according to international references,
especially UN Resolution 2216. Regarding recent statements made by US President
Joe Biden about redesignating Houthis as a terrorist organization, a US State
Department official told Asharq Al-Awsat that the revision of such a decision is
still ongoing against a backdrop of the deteriorating situation in Yemen and the
failure to establish a ceasefire. Although the official did not elaborate more
on the review steps, he stressed that Washington “is committed to improving the
humanitarian situation in Yemen.”Speaking under the condition of anonymity, the
official asserted that the US had not found a single positive role for Iran in
Yemen. If Iran wants to show that it can be a responsible actor, it must begin
by ending its interference in the conflict in Yemen, “and from this standpoint,
we have supported dialogue between it and the countries of the region in the
interest of security and stability,” the official told Asharq Al-Awsat. The US
administration will continue to work with its partners in the region to stand
against the “unfortunate Houthi attacks,” as well as continue to hold the
Houthis responsible for their “heinous actions.” As for diplomatic efforts, the
official pointed to the efforts of US Special Envoy to Yemen Tim Lenderking and
said they help in building international consensus for an immediate and
comprehensive ceasefire and a political solution. Saudi Arabia and the Yemeni
government had both announced their support for a ceasefire and the resumption
of political talks.
Moreover, the official praised Oman in helping untangle the Yemeni crisis,
describing it as a “decisive and proactive regional role.”US State Department
spokesman Ned Price said that the US administration is “taking a close look” at
the appropriate response for the Houthi attacks.
“What we will continue to do, no question about it, is to stand with the UAE,
stand with Saudi Arabia,” said Price. Speaking at a press briefing, Price
revealed that Washington will continue to work with its partners and allies to
hold Houthis accountable. “We will continue to hold the Houthis to account for
these terrorist attacks. We will do that in different ways. We have used a
number of tools already, and I suspect you will see us continue to do that in
the days and weeks ahead,” he Price. “We will not relent in designating Houthi
leaders and entities involved in military offensives that are threatening
civilians and regional stability, perpetuating the conflict, committing human
rights abuses, or violating international humanitarian law, or exacerbating the
very grave humanitarian crisis,” he added. Commenting on the steps taken by the
US administration, Norman Roule, a former official in the CIA and a current
senior advisor to the “United Against Nuclear Iran” project, said that
Washington had hoped to force the Houthis to return to negotiations for a
peaceful solution in good faith. However, the Houthi attacks and speeches
indicate a “terrorist organization.”Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Roule pointed
to Iran encouraging Houthis.
Because of this, the group has repeatedly refused diplomatic operations and
attacked dozens of civilian targets in the hope of causing great human losses.
However, Roule believes that relisting Houthis as a terrorist group will not be
easy. According to the expert, there are people in the US administration who
believe the redesignation will impede humanitarian operations and make a
political settlement out of reach. The Houthis have been more willing to
consider a political settlement when they face military setbacks, and neither
the Biden administration nor Europe is likely to support military action, “so I
don’t think the administration will be able to do much in that regard,” said
Roule. He added that the US would continue to send Lenderking to find out
whether political solutions are possible. Answering a question about the link
between nuclear talks in Vienna with Iran and Houthis, Roule explained that the
Iranians have always separated nuclear talks from regional and missile issues.
“Perhaps Tehran’s attacks on the UAE and Saudi Arabia are not related to the
talks. However, the size of the attack and the complex nature of weapons used by
the Houthis likely require some degree of Iranian support, perhaps even being
directly involved in the attacks,” said Roule. He stressed that the UAE and
Saudi Arabia are still very safe despite the recent attacks. This safety is due
to the skill of the air defense units and security services, but the
Iranian-backed Houthi attacks pose a threat to millions of expatriates living in
these countries. “This makes the Houthi attacks an attack on the international
community no less than (Al-Qaeda’s) attacks in New York,” concluded Roule.
Russia Says U.S. Failing on Ukraine but More Talks
Possible
Agence France Presse/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
Russia said Thursday that the United States was failing to address its main
security concerns over Ukraine but left the door open to further talks to ease
tensions. Relations between Russia and the West have reached their lowest point
since the Cold War after Moscow deployed tens of thousands of troops on the
border of pro-Western Ukraine, raising fears of an invasion. Russia denies any
plans to invade but last month put forward demands for wide-ranging security
guarantees from the West, including that Ukraine never be allowed to join the
U.S.-led NATO military alliance. The United States on Wednesday delivered a
reply in co-ordination with NATO allies, rejecting any ban on Ukraine, but
offering what it called a new "diplomatic path" out of the crisis. In its first
reaction to the reply, the Kremlin was unimpressed. "It cannot be said that our
views were taken into account, or that a readiness to take our concerns into
account was demonstrated," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
"Let's not rush into assessments, it takes time to analyze," he said, adding
that the documents were with President Vladimir Putin. Foreign Minister Sergei
Lavrov said Moscow's chief concern -- the potential for Ukraine to join NATO --
had been ignored, but that it would be possible to move forward on other issues.
"There was no positive response to the main question," Lavrov said in a
statement, but "there is a response which gives hope for the start of a serious
conversation on secondary questions."
'NATO's door is open'
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Wednesday that he would speak again in
the coming days to Lavrov. Blinken said the reply, which would remain
confidential, "sets out a serious diplomatic path forward should Russia choose
it". He renewed an offer on "reciprocal" measures to address mutual security
concerns, including reductions of missiles in Europe and transparency on
military drills and Western aid to Ukraine. But he made clear that the United
States would not budge on Russia's core demand that Ukraine never be allowed to
join NATO. "NATO's door is open, remains open, and that is our commitment,"
Blinken said. Russia, which has a fraught historical relationship with Ukraine,
has fuelled an insurgency in the former Soviet republic's east that has killed
more than 13,000 people since 2014. Russia that year also seized Crimea after
the overthrow of a pro-Russian government in Kyiv.
The United States has warned of severe and swift consequences if Russia invades,
including possible personal sanctions on Putin, and NATO has put 8,500 troops on
standby. "While we are hoping for and working for a good solution --
de-escalation -- we are also prepared for the worst," NATO Secretary General
Jens Stoltenberg said on Wednesday. In another bid to defuse tensions, senior
Russian and Ukrainian officials met for eight hours in Paris with
representatives of France and Germany on Wednesday.
More talks in two weeks
Dmitry Kozak, the Kremlin deputy chief of staff, said the talks were "not
simple" but that another round would take place in two weeks in Berlin. France
said after the so-called Normandy Format talks that the envoys committed to a
fragile July 2020 ceasefire in eastern Ukraine between government forces and
pro-Moscow separatists. "We need a supplementary pause. We hope that this
process will have results in two weeks," Kozak said. Ukrainian Foreign Minister
Dmytro Kuleba on Thursday hailed the talks as a positive sign. "The good news is
that advisors agreed to meet in Berlin in two weeks, which means that at least
for the next two weeks, Russia is likely to remain on a diplomatic track,"
Kuleba told reporters in Copenhagen. US President Joe Biden, who spoke with
European leaders by video-conference on Tuesday, said any Russian military
attack on Ukraine would trigger "enormous consequences" and could even "change
the world."The United States on Wednesday again encouraged its citizens to leave
Ukraine, warning an invasion could be imminent. But Ukraine's government, hoping
to prevent panic, has played down the dangers and sought to offer ways out.
Kuleba told reporters on Wednesday that the Russian troops posed "a threat to
Ukraine" but that the numbers deployed were "insufficient for a full-scale
offensive."
Ukraine Leader Praises 'Constructive' Paris Talks with
Russia
Agence France Presse/Thursday, 27 January, 2022
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Thursday hailed the outcome of talks
between senior Russian and Ukrainian officials in Paris earlier this week aimed
at finding a diplomatic solution to the conflict. Zelensky "positively assesses
the fact of the meeting, its constructive nature, as well as the intention to
continue meaningful negotiations in two weeks in Berlin," his press service said
in a statement. Envoys from Moscow and Kyiv on Wednesday agreed after talks that
all parties should observe a ceasefire in the east of Ukraine where government
forces have been battling pro-Russia separatists since 2014. "For our state, the
first priority today is to achieve stable and unconditional silence in the
Donbas," Zelensky's press service quoted him as saying, referring to the areas
in eastern Ukraine by their collective name. "The ceasefire regime must be
guaranteed and reliable, and it is the basis on which the next steps can be
taken."A 2015 ceasefire deal -- bolstered in 2020 -- helped end the worst
fighting over two separatist regions in eastern Ukraine that has claimed some
13,000 lives. A Russian troop build-up on the Ukrainian border has raised fears
the Kremlin is planning a military intervention in its pro-EU neighbor.
Canada/Statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day
January 27, 2022 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the
following statement:
“On this day, we remember the more than 6 million Jewish children, women and men
who were murdered during the Holocaust. We also remember the innumerable Roma
and Sinti, LGBTQ2 persons, persons with disabilities and dissidents who were
persecuted and killed by the Nazis and their collaborators in horrific crimes
against humanity. We remember the Holocaust survivors and all those who
courageously confronted evil, such as Raoul Wallenberg, the first person to
receive honorary Canadian citizenship, which he was awarded after having been
credited with saving 100,000 Jews in 6 months alone. He remains a great example
of how 1 person with the compassion to care and the courage to act can confront
evil, prevail and transform history.
“The Holocaust was a time of terrible suffering and injustice, and sadly, we
know that the hate and antisemitism that fuelled it are very much alive in
Canada and the world today. Canada recognizes this fact and is taking concrete
action to stop this surge of hatred.
“In November 2021, Canada renewed the position of special envoy on preserving
Holocaust remembrance and combatting antisemitism and reappointed Irwin Cotler
to continue serving in this vital role. As Canada’s representative at the
International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance [IHRA], Special Envoy Cotler will
continue to vigorously promote Holocaust remembrance and research, as well as
the international adoption of the IHRA’s working definition of antisemitism.
“Last fall, Canada also pledged to continue to fight antisemitism and hatred in
all its forms and to defend human rights and inclusion at the Malmö
International Forum on Holocaust Remembrance and Combating Antisemitism.
Canada’s pledges include commitments to counter online antisemitism through the
introduction of new legislation along with strengthening the Canada Human Rights
Act and the Criminal Code. There is simply no place for such hatred in our
country or anywhere else in the world, including online.
“Remembering the Holocaust and countering antisemitism are 2 concrete ways we
can honour the millions who suffered and died during the Shoah. Let us continue
to remember them and resist hate in all its forms.”
Canada/Statement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs on
the 30th anniversary of Canada-Ukraine diplomatic relations
January 27, 2022 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the
following statement:
“Thirty years ago today, Canada established diplomatic relations with Ukraine.
Since then, our mutual commitment to strengthening the Canada-Ukraine friendship
has never wavered.
“The history between our peoples has deep roots. For well over a century, Canada
has been home to a strong Ukrainian diaspora, today totalling more than 1.3
million. Our shared values and warm people-to-people ties have supported three
decades of strong bilateral collaboration.
“As a stalwart defender of Ukraine’s right to forge its own path, we have worked
closely together to support Ukraine’s democratic reform process and build
resilient institutions. This has never been more important than today.
“Canada is committed to safeguarding common interests with Ukraine such as
gender equality, democracy, and the rules-based international order. We will
also deepen our commercial links in support of Ukrainian and Canadian workers
and businesses through the modernization of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade
Agreement, as announced today.
“Ukrainians have demonstrated immense resilience in the face of Russian threats
and destabilizing actions. Canada is steadfast in our support of Ukraine`s
sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence and we remain committed to a
diplomatic solution.
“On January 26, Canada announced an extension and expansion of Operation
UNIFIER, the Canadian Armed Forces’ military training and capacity-building
mission in Ukraine. This extension and expansion of Canada’s military presence
in support of Ukraine will ensure that members of the CAF will continue to
provide enhanced military training and mentorship to Ukraine’s security forces
through to the end of March 2025. It was also announced that, in both Ottawa and
the Canadian Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine, Canada would increase diplomatic
resources critical for deterrence and de-escalation.
“Russia’s aggression has also impacted Ukraine’s economic stability. On January
21, Canada offered to provide a loan of up to $120 million to Ukraine - a
testament to our ongoing commitment to Ukraine’s economic resilience and
governance reforms.
“As Russian troops and equipment continue to amass in and around Ukraine, Canada
reiterates its call for de-escalation and we encourage dialogue so that a
peaceful resolution to the conflict may be found. Ukraine has the right to be
whole, free, and secure. Now more than ever, Canada stands with the government
and people of Ukraine.”
The Latest LCCC English analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on January 27-28/2022
The Post-Post-JCPOA World
Is a nuclear Iran something Republicans must now simply accept?
Reuel Marc Gerecht/The Dispatch/January 28/2022
Statements by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his minions make it clear
that the Biden administration is close to a new nuclear deal with the Islamic
Republic. Terms are not yet known, and the administration may not be
straightforward about revealing them. And understandings with the clerical
regime have a way of dissipating or being unilaterally reinterpreted by the
mullahs. The administration may not yet release billions of dollars in hard
currency and allow Iran to sell oil and repatriate funds unfettered. But the
White House, which has been signaling its unwillingness to use armed force
against the Islamic Republic yet wants to do something about the clerical
regime’s increasing stockpile of highly enriched uranium, has agreed to
something that left the supreme leader and senior Iranian officials somewhat
gleeful. Khamenei has blessed these proceedings, as he did in 2013, but with far
less back and forth that allowed him to endorse and disown proceedings that put
American and Iranian officials distastefully close to one another. It certainly
appears that he views these talks as less compromising, which isn’t a good sign.
Such optimistic good cheer undoubtedly means one thing: The White House hasn’t
demanded that Iran halt, or perhaps even slow, the development of advanced
centrifuges. The more advanced these machines are, the faster that smaller
cascades can produce highly enriched uranium. Smaller cascades are also easier
to hide or bury deep underground or within burrowed mountains. Exporting surplus
enriched uranium to Russia, which may be part of a new agreement, doesn’t mean
much when ever-more efficient centrifuges can produce bomb-grade fuel quickly.
Since Donald Trump abandoned the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2018,
Iran has produced advanced centrifuges more rapidly than the MIT-educated Ali
Salehi, the former head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, once envisioned.
For Salehi, who remains a close adviser to Khamenei, the original accord’s
sunsetting restrictions on centrifuge development dovetailed with the expected
time required to produce more efficient machines. He argued billions of dollars
in sanctions relief and trade in exchange for short-term, limited nuclear
restrictions was a win-win for Iran. Khamenei agreed. Donald Trump did, too. (It
remains unclear whether Trump primarily opposed the JCPOA because of its defects
or because Barack Obama birthed it.)
The Biden White House will likely now content itself with massive sanctions
relief in exchange for a halt to 60 percent uranium enrichment—bomb-grade is 90
percent. Biden may well allow Iran to stockpile 20 percent enriched uranium,
which is an ideal feeding stock to produce Uranium-235 quickly. Twenty percent
was prohibited under the JCPOA.
The new deal may be no more than this: The Islamic Republic becomes a nuclear
threshold state, which means it can produce a nuclear weapon when it chooses to,
and the administration crosses its fingers that Khamenei doesn’t need, for
personal, religious, or strategic reasons, to split the atom. Where the JCPOA
allowed Khamenei to extort the United States out of tens of billions of dollars
for, perhaps, a decade-long hiatus to our nuclear anxiety, the Biden
administration’s new arrangement will likely be pay-as-you-go therapy,
exchanging billions for very short-term relief. Surveillance systems will stay
as they are: Only the sites currently monitored will have International Atomic
Energy Agency cameras. No spot inspections. (In practice there weren’t any under
the JCPOA.) Possible-military-dimension questions will remain forgotten. Nothing
else—not ballistic-missile development, rogue behavior in the Middle East or
elsewhere, terrorism, cyber naughtiness, the crushing of dissent at home—will
interfere in any meaningful way with Iran’s access to oil markets, hard
currency, and trade.
Biden’s inner circle appears to believe that Tehran could have already gone
nuclear if it had really wanted to; Iran being a threshold state might not, for
them, be that alarming. Better to buy the mullahs off, gain time, and hope that
something changes to our advantage. Although the clerical regime is unlikely to
cooperate, the White House will try to spin any new deal as a continuing
diplomatic process that allows the United States and Iran more time to talk. If
Washington releases tens of billions of dollars, and through a new deal further
reduces the possibility of an Israeli military strike (the deal will be backed
by the U.S., the European Union, China, and Russia), the Iranian foreign
minister might agree to chat in the future. The White House is certainly hoping
that Israeli intelligence suggesting Tehran is still 18 to 24 months away from
completing an atomic trigger is right. More time before it becomes impossible
not to say publicly what senior officials are now willing to say privately: Iran
might already be a threshold state.
It would be fascinating to know how the Israelis estimated the needed trigger
time; analytically, it’s murky. Archival material stolen by Mossad shows the
Iranian weapons team led by Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, assassinated by Jerusalem in
2020, working on the trigger. That archive stops in 2003, when Iran shifted its
approach to the nuclear program owing to the revelations in 2002 from an Iranian
opposition group about the theocracy’s hitherto hidden nuclear ambitions and
George W. Bush’s decision to remove Saddam Hussein. As Hassan Rouhani, a former
nuclear negotiator and president, once remarked, Bush seemed “insane.” The
Islamic Republic has sometimes had a steep atomic learning curve, but it has
continuously advanced. Building the trigger can’t be camouflaged as part of a
civilian program; its development needs to have airtight security. Hence greater
caution and fear would surround this final step.
If the Israelis have a source inside Iran’s nuclear team, or a fairly recent
defector, that could explain the apparent confidence some Israeli officials have
shown about the information. Other Israeli officials, it should be said,
question this analysis, suggesting that Mossad doesn’t have human-source
information on trigger development. The Central Intelligence Agency has
apparently corroborated Mossad’s intelligence, although it doesn’t appear that
Langley has a spy inside either.
The Sins of Trump, Obama, and Biden
Trump probably didn’t change the future; he accelerated it. But for officials in
this administration who were content during the Obama presidency with Iranian
extortion and punting the nuclear football downfield, Trump’s withdrawal has
produced a big, unscoopable mess, where any subsequent deal will, perforce, be
worse than what Obama obtained.
One can sympathize. Obama didn’t completely miscast the choice before the United
States when he was trying to sell his 2015 nuclear deal to the American people.
His argument: his deal or war. The actual choices: no deal and the clerical
regime gets the nuke but America deploys a containment/regime-change policy
against it; or no deal, the mullahs get the nuke, and America essentially gives
up (Iran becomes Israel’s problem, not ours); or America goes to war to prevent
the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) from becoming custodians of
nuclear-armed ballistic missiles and we see how it all shakes out.
Obama wasn’t wrong if you expand the time frame: Eventually the United States,
and Israel, would need to decide whether they could live with the bomb at the
disposal of the IRGC, which oversees nuclear-weapons and ballistic-missile
development. Diplomacy—arms control—was always going to fail with an oil-rich,
revolutionary Islamic state. The Republican position from the 2013 Geneva
Interim Agreement to the 2015 nuclear accord, which may, even more bizarrely,
still be the Republican position today, was that increasing sanctions would
somehow drive the clerical regime back to the negotiating table where it would
forsake its nuclear and ballistic-missile aspirations—the better nuclear deal
that Obama might well have had if he’d only been tougher. Hardcore sanctions
enthusiasts even dreamed that economy-crushing measures might even asphyxiate
Iran’s regional aggression and bring on economic collapse and regime change
driven by popular revolt.
Those Republican dreams and the attendant rhetoric should have died in 2019 when
the hoped-for popular revolt—nationwide protests sparked by the drop in fuel
subsidies that became in some provinces an insurrection—were brutally put down.
There is no regime change unless the security services crack; 2019 showed
security forces deploying automatic-weapons fire. Hundreds died. Thousands were
arrested. Today some outside observers may see ripples of discontent within
Iran’s security and armed forces. But if we compare the commentary of VIP
Iranians post-2009, after the regime crushed the pro-democracy Green Movement,
to similar types post-2019, we see a striking decline in mournful ruminations
about the use of brute force. The Revolutionary Guards and their lower-class
militia-cum-police force, the Basij, who have become the frontline forces
against rebellion, have actually gotten more merciless. And in 2009 they were
harsh, deploying rape against both men and women.
Stop-the-nuke sanctions dreaming in Washington should have ended when it became
obvious by the end of the Trump presidency that Tehran had stockpiled—or figured
out how to import past sanctions—a lot of maraging steel, which is required for
the production of centrifuges, and other high-tech, nuclear-related components.
Today the Iranians have installed more than 400 IR6 centrifuges; according to
the Institute for Science and International Security, 650 IR6s can produce
enough highly enriched uranium for a bomb in one month. Even if one believes
that sanctions can bring down the regime (possible but historically dubious),
even if one believes that tougher diplomacy could have brought the theocracy to
heel (a profoundly dubious proposition), it is now simply too late. They are
within striking distance of a weapon, more than enough time before a Republican
administration might change course.
New, tougher sanctions, if they were to be implemented, could now have an
unintended, opposite effect: it could convince Tehran to go for the bomb as
quickly as possible. What would Khamenei have to lose? Although the
nuclear-weapons program’s true father is the former clerical majordomo Akbar
Hashemi-Rafsanjani, the “pragmatist” so many Western apologists extolled,
Khamenei has invested himself completely in the project. The Iranian economy has
suffered enormously because of his determination to keep it progressing. Vast
sums have been spent. As American, Israeli, French, German, and British
intelligence—all who have had access to the classified information that has been
shared among allied powers—have long known, Khamenei didn’t persist because he
wanted clean energy to back up Iran’s large oil and natural-gas reserves.
Advanced centrifuges are, among other things, sanctions killers for those who
are implementing measures to stop the clerical regime’s nuclear ambitions. The
United States might try to punish a nuclear Iran with severe sanctions, but as a
preventative diplomatic tool they have become counterproductive. And the odds
are excellent that once the Islamic Republic gets the nuke, Western unity,
already strained, won’t hold. The French, the leading non-proliferation nation
among the Europeans, are also ardent realpoliticians. They aren’t as
commercially minded as the Germans, Italians, and the British, but the Iranian
market, fairly large and underdeveloped, does beckon. Almost all EU sanctions
against the Islamic Republic are nuclear. Why have nuclear sanctions after
Tehran has the bomb? Sanctions certainly won’t make Khamenei give up the nuke
once he’s got it. The EU likely isn’t into long-term punishment of the most
culturally alluring Muslim land (never underestimate the historic pull of Persia
in European attitudes toward the Islamic Republic), which also has a lot of oil,
natural gas, and potential consumers. And Europeans just don’t see the Islamic
Republic as a threat. Even if the Iranians go nuclear, their capacity to
intimidate Europe on issues the Europeans care about is small. France and Great
Britain will always have more and better nukes. However, Middle Eastern strife,
which has produced millions of refugees eyeing the Western heartland, is a
serious menace to Europe’s political health.
And it’s easy to imagine Democrats, too, deciding a nuclear-armed Iran is
something we have to live with. They have, more or less, already accepted a
nuclear-threshold state. This modus vivendi perforce will include renewed trade.
Many Democrats, especially among progressives, are deeply uncomfortable with
sanctions as a weapon. The ruling elite never suffers; the people do. The
mullahs’ villainy just isn’t sufficient: Islamist Iran isn’t, for them,
apartheid South Africa.
Republican Options
All of this leaves Republicans in a pickle. Unlike the Democrats, they haven’t
had a coherent Iran policy. (The left’s approach may be feckless, but it is
simple and logical: Exchange money for temporary restraints on Tehran’s atomic
aspirations.) Republicans may whine that their approach might have worked if
given more time; we judge, however, policy success in this world, not an
imagined one. Under Trump no new, better deal arrived. Iranian imperialism
didn’t retreat. Massive, violent protests rocked Iran; Khamenei efficiently
crushed them. Some sanctions proponents may now try to recalibrate the rhetoric
for sanctions, aiming them more toward regime change (probably without ever
saying the radioactive phrase “regime change”), but the damage has been done.
Sanctions as a diplomatic tool are finished.
Many Republicans just refuse to take the logic of their own approach to its
ineluctable end. This was true in 2015, which is why the Republican anti-JCPOA
argument and the use of sanctions was framed around building a pressure campaign
for enhancing diplomacy—leverage to bring about a “good” nuclear deal. When
Obama and his primary polemicist, Ben Rhodes, went after Republicans as
“warmongers,” tough-minded Republicans ran for diplomatic cover. It’s now
irrelevant whether Biden’s aura of weakness whetted Iranian nuclear appetites in
ways that Trump’s unpredictable belligerence (the January 2020 assassination of
Iran’s dark lord, Qassem Suleimani, shocked the clerical regime) likely slowed
Iran’s atomic progress after the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA. And to be fair
to Biden, it took a bit of time for Tehran to start enriching to menacing
levels.
Republicans now have three choices.
1) They can try to build a consensus among themselves for military action. That
seems highly unlikely. Has anyone seen the two most hawkish Republican
senators—Lindsey Graham, who hasn’t completely given up his former ardent
embrace of American hegemony, and Tom Cotton—recommend military action now
against Iran’s nuclear sites? Cotton has made such recommendations in the past;
he was the only important Republican to do so. Today, even he seems quiescent on
the subject. As in 2015, there appears to be little Republican appetite, not in
Congress and probably not in the hinterland, for another military adventure in
the Middle East.
2) Republicans can recast a failed effort to stop Iran’s nuclearization into a
containment campaign, however feebly effected. If this is to be serious,
however, which means it lasts for years and costs more than what’s in the CIA’s
discretionary fund, it will require bipartisan support. If the Biden
administration fails to seduce the clerical regime into a new nuclear deal, then
it’s possible to imagine Republicans and Democrats agreeing to maintain
sanctions. For how long? And after Iran tests a nuclear device? Unclear.
It’s possible, though just barely, to envision some bipartisan consensus develop
on more small-scale, covert-action projects. Cyber operations would be the least
controversial, easiest, and most likely. Democratic remorse over the
CIA-supported 1953 coup against the Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mosaddeq,
and the left’s general questioning of American interventionism, makes future
bipartisan support for any large-scale covert effort against Iran, let alone
explicit regime-change operations, doubtful. And the most important part of a
containment strategy—an unrelenting willingness for the U.S. to checkmate the
Islamic Republic militarily throughout the Middle East—seems unimaginable today,
either among Democrats or Republicans. The best the Republicans might do is to
sell even more advanced weapons to the Gulf Arab states, who already have too
much weaponry and too little technical savvy and will to use them.
And last and least, 3) Republicans just give up. They would undoubtedly
surrender with different rhetoric than what Biden will likely use after a new
deal in Vienna. The American debate on Iran has already devolved into a food
fight where Democrats blame everything on Trump and Republicans decry Obama and
Biden as weak statesmen incapable of recognizing, let alone arm-twisting, the
enemy. The Democrats might well win the pointless Twitter wars, since they
aren’t wrong on the most pivotal point: A U.S. air campaign against Iranian
nuclear sites and personnel was the logical end of the right’s
anti-nuke-but-no-containment policy, and yet most JCPOA critics didn’t connect
the dots, or at least refused to in public.
If Biden can’t capitulate his way to a new deal in Vienna, then Option 2 for
Republicans seems more likely; if he can, then Option 3 rises—though Republican
rhetoric will sound as if they’d chosen Option 2.
As we get ever closer to the denouement of the nuclear standoff between the
United States and the Islamic Republic, it’s worthwhile to look back and see how
the theocracy saw its defining foe. And what former President Rouhani wrote
about possible American military strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites after
George W. Bush’s “insanity” relented, could be applied to just about everything
Washington might do against the clerical regime today.
“Buying time should be our policy,” Rouhani advised. “. . . I believe that any
type of military aggression against Iran is outside of the consensus of public
opinion in the United States. Here I mean consensus among the decisive majority
of the American people and political consensus. The Americans cannot easily
reach such a consensus.”
Washington was and is stuck. Whatever political consensus we had about the
Islamic Republic cracked during Obama’s presidency. We could see it coming with
Bill Clinton, when his administration—actually most of the Washington
foreign-policy establishment—poorly analyzed what was going to happen in Iran
when Mohammad Khatami, a wonkish, Westernized cleric with a big smile, became
president in 1997 and his May 23rd movement briefly dominated the Islamic
Republic’s intellectual life. Many thought Thermidor had arrived. Alas, it
hadn’t. Ardent believers in the Islamic revolution, led by Khamenei, hit back.
Civil society—the space that the regime gives Iranians to indulge their enormous
capacity for joie-de-vivre—shrank. It’s contracted much further. The regime has
hardened, not softened, as the distance between rulers and ruled grows.
Today it’s not clear that Iran analysis really matters much in how the Biden
administration has formulated its approach to Khamenei’s nuclear ambitions. With
Obama, it didn’t really matter much either. But the president really did
believe, at least early on, that his personal charisma could transform the
30-year enmity—progressives tend to call deep ideological and cultural hatred
between nations and peoples “misunderstandings” or “miscommunications.” He
mirror-imaged his self-perception into Middle Eastern arms control. And lots of
folks in D.C. thought Rouhani, a founding father of the Islamic Republic’s
police state, would as president somehow create a new, less antagonistic modus
vivendi between Washington and Tehran. With Khamenei and his mini-me president,
Ebrahim Raisi, at the helm, it’s probably impossible for the Biden
administration to conjure up a promising, “moderate” Iranian counterpart.
Republicans can be stupid and unnuanced about the Islamic Republic; the
crudeness with which some of them can talk about Islam could make a European
Islamophobe blush. But the American right has done better in appreciating what
the supreme leader and his men have tried to make crystal clear: They zealously
hate us.
Really only one question remains now: Will the Israelis strike? Excluding the
outside chance that the Iranian people might rise up again and terminally
convulse the Islamic Republic, only Israeli air raids, might, just possibly,
upset Khamenei’s nuclear plans. The clerical regime has displayed impressive
tenacity and ingenuity (the decision to back the construction of a clandestine
nuclear site in Syria was an especially bold move, which the Israelis
successfully countered by bombing it in 2007). We should always be able to
admire our enemies when they play a weak hand well. Even without the nuclear
achievement, Khamenei ought to be considered the most accomplished post-WWII
dictator in the Middle East. Add on the bomb, and he could rightfully look upon
Ruhollah Khomeini’s massive mausoleum, and, like Justinian within the Hagia
Sophia remembering Solomon’s Temple, he could proudly say:
“I have surpassed thee.”
*Mr. Gerecht, a former Iranian-targets officer in the Central Intelligence
Agency, is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Follow
Reuel on Twitter @ReuelMGerecht. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, non-partisan
research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
Turkey: Erdoğan's Hoax Charm Offensive
Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute/January 27, 2022
The Turks' per capita GDP has been falling for the seventh consecutive year,
from $12,500 in 2012 to slightly more than $7,000 this year. The Turkish lira
has lost more than half its value against major Western currencies in just the
past three months.
"The problem with the narrative is there is no evidence Ankara wants better ties
or is willing to do anything in which Israel benefits... It [Ankara] thus wants
'reconciliation' without actually doing anything."— Seth J. Frantzman, The
Jerusalem Post, December 5 , 2021.
Erdoğan's charm offensive to win hearts and minds in Washington, however, is not
limited to changing his aggressive course against Israel or unfriendly Gulf
states.
U.S. President Joe Biden has persistently encouraged Turkey to normalize
diplomatic relations with Armenia.... What is the hoax here? Erdoğan's move to
pretend that Turkey is now taking steps for normalization is fake. He will start
a process that he intends never to complete -- just in case other efforts might
have gone unnoticed in Washington.
The ailing Turkish economy is forcing Erdoğan to reconcile with adversaries, and
reconciliation means these adversaries will demand that Erdogan stop supporting
Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. That will be the case "in the short-term." At
the first opportunity, however, Erdogan will abandon the reconciliation and
resume his support for these terrorist groups.
Erdoğan's pragmatist-self has only appeared after 12 or so years, as he prepares
to fight for his political survival in the 2023 elections. If he feels Gulf
money and some kind of U.S. political support has bolstered the Turkish economy
sufficiently for him to win in 2023, he will take off his reconciliatory mask
and put his usual Islamist shirt back on.
The ailing Turkish economy is forcing President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to
reconcile with adversaries. He is evidently trying to win hearts and minds in
Washington while chasing money in the Gulf. At the first opportunity, however,
Erdoğan will abandon the reconciliation and resume his support for terrorist
groups.
The province of Konya in central Anatolia has historically been a bastion of
extreme conservatism and political Islam -- meaning supporters of Turkey's
Islamist strongman Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. In the presidential elections of 2018,
in this industrial city, he won 75% of the vote.
"That dominance is now threatened by an unprecedented set of challenges,"
concluded Reuters in a December report, after interviewing locals in Konya,
including industrial workers, farmers and students lamenting over rising prices
and fewer jobs.
The Turks' per capita GDP has been falling for the seventh consecutive year,
from $12,500 in 2012 to slightly more than $7,000 this year. The Turkish lira
has lost more than half its value against major Western currencies in just the
past three months.
Erdoğan started with Israel, his ideological nemesis, when he played in
November, first the jailer and then the savior of an Israeli couple, Mordy and
Natali Oknin. They were arrested and held in a Turkish jail for suspected
espionage after photographing Erdoğan's palace in Istanbul, where they were
visiting as tourists. In a well-choreographed move, the couple was released
after one week. Their friends and family had feared they would have to stay
imprisoned in a hostile country for years.
Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid released
a statement on November 18, saying, "We thank the President of Turkey and his
government for their cooperation and look forward to welcoming the couple back
home."
On the same day, Erdoğan held a rare phone conversation with his Israeli
counterpart, President Isaac Herzog. According to a statement by Turkey's
Communications Directorate, Erdoğan highlighted the significance of the two
countries' relations for the "security and stability of the Middle East" and
noted that "differences of opinion can be minimized if acted with mutual
understanding in both bilateral and regional issues."
That was Erdoğan's pragmatist-self, blinking at a hostile U.S. Congress at a
time when he felt politically weakest due to increasing poverty and
international financial isolation.
In an unusual gesture, Turkey's ambassador to Washington, Murat Mercan, wished
America's Jewish community a Happy Hanukkah. Mercan also attended a Jewish
Chabad dinner to light the Hanukkah Menorah, and pose for the cameras, in one
photo, with Levi Shemtov, vice president of the orthodox organization American
Friends of Lubavitch.
As a matter of fact, just weeks after his olive branch, on December 8, Erdogan's
Islamist-self took the stage. He said that he was open to improved relations
with Israel, but the Jewish state first had to display "more sensitive" policies
toward Palestinians: "It [Israel] needs to be sensitive toward Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa
Mosque"
"The problem with the narrative," wrote Seth J. Frantzman in The Jerusalem Post,
"is there is no evidence Ankara wants better ties or is willing to do anything
in which Israel benefits... It [Ankara] thus wants 'reconciliation' without
actually doing anything."
Although a pillar in Erdoğan's charm offensive, Israel is not the only adversary
Turkey has been trying silently to mend fences with, or trying to impress
Washington that it is doing so -- all moves come with a U.S. perspective. Hence
the sudden publicity of a Turkish-UAE reconciliation. In 2020, Erdoğan
threatened to reduce diplomatic ties with the Gulf state, after it had made
peace with Israel. Earlier, Erdoğan and his propaganda machinery had also
accused the UAE of sponsoring the failed putsch against his government in July
2016.
As Turkey's economy kept freefalling, Erdoğan, on November 24, hosted Abu Dhabi
Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan in Ankara. Turkey and the UAE
signed accords on energy and technology investments while the central banks
Turkey and the UAE signed a cooperation agreement.
The Arab Weekly quoted a Turkish official as saying, "Problems with the UAE are
now behind us. We are entering a period based fully on cooperation and mutual
benefit," and adding that the UAE's investment would ultimately be in the
billions of dollars. A few days after the Crown Prince's visit to Ankara, a UAE
delegation came to Turkey to discuss cooperation in the defense industry.
Erdoğan is evidently trying to win hearts and minds in Washington while chasing
money in the Gulf. In early December, Erdoğan was in his home away from home:
Qatar, Turkey's only Gulf ally. Erdoğan and Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad
Al Thani signed 12 MoUs across various fields including, among others, the
military, healthcare, tourism, and education sectors.
What is the message to Washington? Qatar's foreign minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin
Abdulrahman Al Thani, explained, "Qatar will work with ally Turkey and Taliban
officials to ensure that Kabul's international airport, the site of chaotic
scenes after the Taliban takeover, continues to function."
U.S. President Joe Biden evidently prefers that a NATO force run Kabul's airport
rather than paving the way for more Russian and Chinese dominance. "The
overarching motivation for Erdogan's government was to use Afghanistan to repair
ties with the Biden administration," according to a Chatham House report.
"The fact that Erdogan returned from a recent US trip to attend the opening of
the UNGA without having secured a meeting with Biden is illustrative of how much
importance the US attaches to Turkey's aspirations in Afghanistan."
Erdoğan's charm offensive to win hearts and minds in Washington, however, is not
limited to changing his aggressive course against Israel or unfriendly Gulf
states. There is speculation that his next target for Gulf reconciliation could
be Saudi Arabia. Before that, however, and totally irrelevant to his quest for
foreign cash flows, came Armenia.
Armenia is an important dossier for Biden, who, in an April 2021 statement,
became the first American president to recognize the Armenian genocide, thereby
infuriating Turkey.
Biden has persistently encouraged Turkey to normalize diplomatic relations with
Armenia, and even encouraged Erdoğan, during a meeting of the two leaders
earlier in Rome, to open Turkey's border with Armenia. So, Armenia deserves
another hoax olive branch.
What is the hoax here? Erdogan's move to pretend that Turkey is now taking steps
for normalization is fake. He will start a process that he intends never to
complete -- just in case other efforts might have gone unnoticed in Washington.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said on December 13 that Turkey and
Armenia would mutually appoint special envoys to discuss steps to normalize
ties, and added that they will also restart charter flights between Istanbul and
Yerevan. Three days later, Ankara appointed Serdar Kılıç, a former ambassador to
Washington, as its special envoy for Armenia. The appointment of special envoys
is the official start of the normalization process. The move has formally
upgraded the status of ties from "no diplomatic relations" to "normalization of
ties in progress."
Finally, someone heard Erdoğan's appealing voice in Washington. U.S. Secretary
of State Antony Blinken said that they "welcome and strongly support" the move.
UAE (and potentially Saudi) money flowing into the ailing Turkish economy will
be bad news for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood -- in the short-term. The
ailing Turkish economy is forcing Erdoğan to reconcile with adversaries, and
reconciliation means these adversaries will demand that Erdoğan stop supporting
Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. That will be the case "in the short-term." At
the first opportunity, however, Erdoğan will abandon the reconciliation and
resume his support for these terrorist groups.
Erdoğan's pragmatist-self has only appeared after 12 or so years, as he prepares
to fight for his political survival in the 2023 elections. If he feels Gulf
money and some kind of U.S. political support has bolstered the Turkish economy
sufficiently for him to win in 2023, he will take off his reconciliatory mask
and put his usual Islamist shirt back on.
*Burak Bekdil, one of Turkey's leading journalists, was recently fired from the
country's most noted newspaper after 29 years, for writing in Gatestone what is
taking place in Turkey. He is a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
© 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.
The Houthis Belong on the Terrorist List: The 'Humanitarian
Crisis' Manipulation
Pete Hoekstra/Gatestone Institute/January 27, 2022
The humanitarian situation in Yemen is indeed unbearable, but it is the Houthis
who are causing and compounding it.
If the international community wants, it can pay a ransom to the people causing
the suffering. It is a form of manipulation.... What the Houthis and similar
groups see is: Extortion works, let's keep doing it!
The Houthis are backed by Iran, just like its designated terror proxies,
Hezbollah and Hamas. All three terror groups are disruptive forces in the Middle
East, and used by Iran in its efforts to undercut U.S. influence in the region
and threaten Israel and the Gulf states.
The government of the internationally recognized Republic of Yemen also has
presented intelligence showing that the Houthis work with al-Qaeda and ISIS to
spread terror and conflict in the country.
The problem, therefore, is not just the Houthis, it is also Iran. When the
Houthis are not listed as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), Iran is
effectively invited to advance its nuclear weapons program and "export its
revolution" -- with no obstruction.
Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, al-Qaeda and ISIS are not groups that have earned the
trust of the international community to help alleviate humanitarian crises
anywhere in the world, ever.
Delay or failure to re-list the Houthis will only allow the problem to
metastasize and further spread across the Middle East -- exactly the objective
of Iran's regime. The Houthis' attacks on the UAE has shown the Iranian-backed
terror proxy's reach expanding to build fear; they have already threatened more
attacks.
How the U.S. addresses the threat posed by the Houthis will be closely watched
by Iran's friends, the Russians and the Chinese. It will be watched by Iran's
other proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas. It also will be watched closely by the
friends of the U.S., including the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Australia, the
Philippines, Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan.
Allowing the Houthis -- and Iran -- unchecked freedom to terrorize the Middle
East will only make the humanitarian crisis expand in scope and severity. Iran,
Russia and China are saber rattling. The Biden Administration needs to show it
will protect our allies, immediately redesignate the Houthis as an FTO, and make
aggression unthinkable to our adversaries – not reward them.
The humanitarian situation in Yemen is indeed unbearable, but it is the Houthis
who are causing and compounding it. The U.S. and the international community can
no longer ignore or reward the malign behavior of Iran or the Houthis. Allowing
the Houthis -- and Iran -- unchecked freedom to terrorize the Middle East will
only make the humanitarian crisis expand in scope and severity. Pictured: Houthi
forces in Sanaa, Yemen on April 8, 2021.
The U.S. and the international community can no longer ignore or reward the
malign behavior of Iran or the Houthis.
International pressure is growing to redesignate Yemen's Houthi rebels as a
Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), but pushback is emerging from humanitarian
groups who fear it could exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in Yemen. The
concerns of these groups are not unfounded, but failure to relist the Houthis
will not address the underlying, root cause of the issue -- Iran's destabilizing
effects on the Middle East executed in concert with its terrorist proxies, which
include the Houthis.
The humanitarian situation in Yemen is indeed unbearable, but it is the Houthis
who are causing and compounding it.
The Houthis, it seems, are holding the people of Yemen hostage, as bargaining
chips to dictate the terms of allowing humanitarian aid. If the Houthis are
designated as terrorists, it seems, they will not let in humanitarian aid, and
the civilians of Yemen will suffer. If the international community wants, it can
pay a ransom to the people causing the suffering. It is a form of manipulation.
It is called blackmail. Unfortunately, this kind of inverted arrangement -- high
price, low suffering -- usually ends up making humanitarian crises worse. What
the Houthis and similar groups see is: Extortion works, let's keep doing it!
Instead of rewarding the Houthis by delisting them, the U.S., the media, the
international community, and humanitarian organizations need to call them out
for their crimes against humanity, condemn them, and hold them to the harshest
account.
There is no doubt about the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Yemen. The statistics
are horrific, and the human suffering cannot be disputed. But while some are
arguing that the humanitarian crisis is the reason the Biden Administration
should not reinstate the Houthis to the FTO list, the hypothesis is wrong. In
fact, it is exactly because of the growing calamity that the U.S. must
redesignate the Houthis as an FTO.
Yemen has a poverty rate of 75%. In 2020 it reported over 200,000 cholera cases,
in a country of roughly 29 million people. The NGO Humanity & Inclusion
estimates that two-thirds of the population needs humanitarian assistance. It
also estimates that 16 million are "food insecure", 15 million lack access to
clean water, and 4 million are displaced. Staggering numbers indeed.
But these numbers highlight exactly why re-designating the Houthis as an FTO
needs to take place. The Houthis are backed by Iran, just like its designated
terror proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas. All three terror groups are disruptive
forces in the Middle East, and used by Iran in its efforts to undercut U.S.
influence in the region and threaten Israel and the Gulf states.
Iran's regime, since it came to power in 1979, has been working to spread its
influence and "export its revolution" even further. The recent drone and missile
attacks by the Houthis against civilians in the United Arab Emirates have
destabilized global oil prices and further terrorized innocents on the Arabian
Peninsula.
The government of the internationally recognized Republic of Yemen also has
presented intelligence showing that the Houthis work with al-Qaeda and ISIS to
spread terror and conflict in the country. The U.S. knows well the threat
al-Qaeda poses to the international community. The world also knows how ISIS
treated civilians under its control during the period when it governed a
self-declared Caliphate covering parts of Syria and Iraq, from roughly
2014-2017. We can never forget the pictures of individuals being hurled off
buildings or burned alive in cages.
The problem, therefore, is not just the Houthis, but also Iran. When the Houthis
are not listed as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, Iran is effectively invited
to advance its nuclear weapons program and "export its revolution" -- with no
obstruction.
Iran has a history of violence and threats against America and its allies.
Iranian agents plotted to blow up the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. in our
nation's capital. More recently, Iran plotted to kill the then U.S. Ambassador
to South Africa Lana Marks and kidnap and kill Iranian American journalist Masih
Alinejad from her Brooklyn home. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
has threatened the life of Salman Rushdie and this month released a video
depicting the assassination of former President Donald J. Trump.
Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, al-Qaeda and ISIS are not groups that have
earned the trust of the international community to help alleviate humanitarian
crises anywhere in the world, ever.
Forestalling the redesignation of the Houthis as a terrorist organization will
only worsen the situation in the short- and long-term. Delay or failure to
address the issue will only allow the problem to metastasize and further spread
across the Middle East -- exactly the objective of Iran's regime. The Houthis'
attacks on the UAE has shown the Iranian-backed terror proxy's reach expanding
to build fear; they have already threatened more attacks.
There is no expectation that redesignating the Houthis as an FTO will resolve
the issue or that humanitarian suffering in Yemen will end soon. However,
failing to list the Houthis as an FTO will not resolve the issue either. Worse,
it will only further Iran's and the Houthis' malign behavior. This issue has
been ongoing for years; the U.S. and the international community need to
confront the problem at its core. That means increasing pressure, and not
rewarding Iran or the Houthis for terrorism.
The international community greatly appreciates the role that humanitarian
organizations have played and are playing to serve those in need in Yemen. But
these groups must assist the international community in holding Iran and the
Houthis accountable for the suffering they are inflicting on the people of
Yemen.
How the U.S. addresses the threat posed by the Houthis will be closely watched
by Iran's friends, the Russians and the Chinese. It will be watched by Iran's
other proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas. It also will be watched closely by the
friends of the U.S., including the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Australia, the
Philippines, Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan. If you are beginning to see a pattern,
it is because it exists.
Allowing the Houthis -- and Iran -- unchecked freedom to terrorize the Middle
East will only make the humanitarian crisis expand in scope and severity. Iran,
Russia and China are saber rattling. The Biden Administration needs to show it
will protect our allies, immediately redesignate the Houthis as an FTO, and make
aggression unthinkable to our adversaries – not reward them.
*Peter Hoekstra was US Ambassador to the Netherlands during the Trump
administration. He served 18 years in the U.S. House of Representatives
representing the second district of Michigan and served as Chairman and Ranking
member of the House Intelligence Committee. He is currently Chairman of the
Center for Security Policy Board of Advisors.
© 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.
'Appeasement' of Putin Isn't So Easy to Denounce on
Ukraine
Max Hastings/Bloomberg/January, 27/2022
The world fears that Russian President Vladimir Putin is about to invade
Ukraine, an act of naked aggression. Many Westerners are rendered even more
afraid by recognition that there is pathetically little they can do to stop him.
No sane person believes that US President Joe Biden — the only credible leader
the Western democracies have — can or should threaten general war in response to
such a Kremlin action.
We therefore face the repugnant prospect that Putin can succeed in his likely
objective, overrunning a sufficient chunk of Ukraine to doom the rest of that
country to become a failed state, subject to Moscow’s will.
Some commentators, most of them conservatives, respond by evoking the specter of
the 1938 Munich agreement, whereby Britain and France acquiesced in Adolf
Hitler’s dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, a state then less than 20 years old
(it was born out of the wreck of the Austro-Hungarian empire after World War I).
That was a shorter history than Ukraine claims today, having secured
independence from Russia in 1991.
In almost every international crisis since the 1930s, the prospect of diplomatic
compromise has been denounced by critics as “appeasement.” In 1956, when
President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt seized the Suez Canal from its British and
French owners, UK Prime Minister Anthony Eden was fearful that if he acquiesced
in Nasser’s action, he would be denounced as a new Neville Chamberlain, the
prime minister who signed the 1938 deal. Thus, the British and French invaded
Egypt, until forced to withdraw by Washington’s wrath.
In October 1962, when President John F. Kennedy determined to blockade Cuba in
response to the Soviet deployment of ballistic missiles on the island, General
Curtis LeMay, the Air Force chief of staff, had the effrontery to tell the
president in the White House cabinet room: “This is almost as bad as the
appeasement at Munich … We’re just going to gradually drift into a war under
conditions that are at great disadvantage to us.” LeMay was demanding an
immediate bomber assault on Cuba, followed by US invasion.
In the aftermath of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, some of those who argued
against an invasion of Iraq were accused of appeasement toward Saddam Hussein.
President George W. Bush’s administration evoked the memories of both Hitler and
Winston Churchill.
Yet the great liberal commentator Walter Lippmann wrote at the height of the
Cold War: “You can’t decide these questions of life and death for the world by
epithets like appeasement. I don’t agree with the people who think we have to go
out and shed a little blood to prove we’re virile men.”
Lippmann also wrote, in September 1961: “This being the nuclear age, it is the
paramount rule of international politics that a great nuclear power should not
put another great nuclear power in a position where it must choose between
suicide and surrender.”
Throughout history, political and diplomatic realities have often demanded
passivity in the face of outrageous conduct. Japan massacred millions of Chinese
in the 1930s. That slaughter ended only when the US and its allies were provoked
into war by the December 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, and four years later
evicted Tokyo’s forces from China and Manchuria.
The West was obliged to watch in impotent horror as the Russians crushed the
anticommunist Poles in 1945, then the Hungarian rebels in 1956, then the Czechs
of the 1968 “Prague Spring.” There was also the 1959 Chinese seizure of Tibet.
The list is a long one.
The message is not that we should expect to bow to every misdeed or atrocity. It
is that the “good guys” — granted the impossibility that we can ever reach
global consensus about who these are — cannot and should not intervene
militarily whenever they see bad stuff happen.
I am just completing a book on the Cuban Missile Crisis. One of its most
important lessons is that while Kennedy played a masterly diplomatic hand, it is
most unlikely that America’s will could have prevailed — the Soviet nuclear
weapons withdrawn from Cuba — without the underpinning threat of American force.
Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and even his most hawkish generals knew that
America possessed an overwhelming superiority, both of conventional weapons in
the Caribbean region and nuclear missiles capable of destroying the Soviet
Union. US superiority of the latter was on the order of 17 to 1. And thanks to
the intelligence officer Colonel Oleg Penkovsky, who slipped his nation’s
secrets to the West, the Americans knew that the Soviets recognized their own
weakness.
Moreover, the will and solidarity of the US and its allies to confront the
Soviets remained strong in the Cold War. American presidents often found
themselves having to restrain the eagerness not only of the military brass, but
also of some ordinary citizens, to go head to head with “the Russkies.”
Today we live in an entirely different strategic environment. The bipolar Cold
War planet has been replaced by a multipolar one, in which a tenuous American
superiority persists, but is no longer unchallengeable. A well-briefed military
friend of mine believes that the Chinese are not yet quite ready for a showdown
over Taiwan, but he thinks they will seek one within a few years, confident of a
local victory.
Putin presides over a tottering society with many social and economic problems,
but his military is revitalized. He knows that Europe is divided and weak,
wholly unwilling to respond militarily to anything he does, perhaps including a
grab at the Baltic States. The head of the German navy, Admiral Kay-Achim
Schoenbach, was obliged to resign last week after claiming that the Russian
threat to Ukraine is a fantasy; that Putin seeks only “some respect.”
Britain will support military gestures by the US in the face of Russian
aggression, but the queen’s armed forces are now very small. There is no
possibility British soldiers would fight for Ukraine, even in the unlikely event
that US troops do so. Rhetorical posturing, even some saber-rattling, by the
British government reflects its own vacuity rather than serious intent.
Biden deserves more sympathy than he is currently receiving for his vacillation
on Ukraine. The old, moth-eaten allegation of appeasement is being levelled by
his foes both at home and abroad. Yet the US cannot be expected to face down
Putin alone, far less to go to war with him.
Most of America’s European “allies” — the quotation marks are emphatic — are too
fearful that the Kremlin will cut off their gas supplies to provide Washington
with meaningful backing. Europe’s attitude to serious foreign policy and
security issues is frankly decadent.
Thus, the likelihood is that if Putin attacks Ukraine, he can secure the
territory he wants without suffering serious military consequences, beyond
whatever losses the courageous Ukrainians can inflict on Russian forces.
Biden may be ill-advised to propose a summit with Putin: Such a meeting would
assume a willingness to make concessions to the Russians, of an unjustifiable
kind. In 1962, for exactly that reason, Kennedy resolutely and rightly opposed
such a meeting, which was urged by British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan.
The real challenge for the West is to summon the will to punish Putin and his
friends in the language they understand best — that of money. Economic sanctions
against Russia as a country are right, but not remotely sufficient. The only
meaningful weapon is an assault upon the fortunes and lifestyles of the
Kremlin’s gangster clique, held and invested around the world.
Western intelligence agencies know precisely who Putin’s friends and associates
are; and almost certainly also a good deal about where his own vast fortune is
garaged. Rich Russians travel constantly to the West to spend their money,
because there is much less fun to be had back home. Many own veritable palaces
in London, New York and other playgrounds. It is shameful how often Russians are
identified as political donors or cultural philanthropists in both Britain and
America: They are seeking to buy a veneer of respectability.
They should be denied this. Nobody in modern Russia gets to be big or rich — or
certainly not to stay that way — without the support of the Kremlin, which takes
its cut. Most of the wealth is, in effect, stolen from the Russian people. While
the West cannot credibly threaten war, it can promise to punish those
responsible for an attack on Ukraine by excluding them and their families from
our countries; conceivably also by impounding their wealth and properties.
Unfortunately, the democracies, and explicitly Britain, may well lack the
stomach for such action. British banks and financial institutions host many tens
of billions of Russian money. The prizes the City of London reaps from the
oligarchs are deemed too large to drive away. For all the bellicose rhetoric
from Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government, expect nothing substantial to
follow a Russian attack on Ukraine, beyond another barrage of words.
As for the US, the only party to the confrontation that matters, it seems
absolutely right to do everything possible to deter Putin, and to punish him if
he goes ahead with his cold-blooded plan to kill thousands of people, to score a
victory that shores up his unpopular domestic polity. But one should not resort
to threats, nor offer promises to the Ukrainians, that there is no intention of
fulfilling.
If you think this represents appeasement, watch the new Netflix movie “Munich:
The Edge of War,” which stars Jeremy Irons as Neville Chamberlain. The film,
based on a thriller by my friend Robert Harris, seeks to rehabilitate the
British prime minister, arguing that by cutting his 1938 deal with Hitler, he
bought vital time for Britain to re-arm before the war that he recognized was
coming. Harris makes a good additional point, that Hitler thought himself
cheated out of a military assault on Czechoslovakia that he wanted, and expected
to get. In other words, appeasement was clever.
As a historian, I do not go all the way with Harris about this. He seems right
that Britain could not realistically have fought in 1938. Beyond the debility of
the armed forces, many British people, together with those of imperial dominions
such as Canada and Australia, were not yet in the mood to fight; they had not
given up on the Nazis.
I still think that Chamberlain was a weak, foolish old man who shrank from
unwelcome realities. His worst contribution to history is that Munich gave
appeasement — which some of us would call a recognition of realities — a bad
name. My hero among historical and strategic gurus, the Oxford professor Michael
Howard, often said, “If you are dealing with foreign leaders less monstrous than
was Hitler, appeasement can be a very sensible policy.”
We must reluctantly acknowledge that both Russia’s Putin and China’s President
Xi Jinping can commit acts of aggression in their own backyards that we are
unable to prevent, and which are not worth a general war. The least the West can
do, however, unless it has altogether forfeited will and principle, is to ensure
that the Kremlin’s gangsters and their clans can no longer celebrate their
triumphs in New York or London nightclubs, on French ski slopes.
We are often reminded that tax evasion fixed Al Capone. Putin and his friends
are unlikely to go to jail. We can at least, however, seek retribution for their
crimes through their Western bank accounts.
Biden administration must be firm with Iran-backed
Houthis
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/January 27, 2022
US President Joe Biden said last week that he is considering redesignating the
Iranian-backed Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization. Without a doubt, the
Houthis’ activities and policies make it imperative that the group is returned
to the terrorist watch list.
This is a Yemeni militia that commits crimes against humanity and recruits
children for war. The Houthis also use landmines to control and kill civilians.
Human Rights Watch’s “World Report 2020” stated that “Houthi-planted landmines
across Yemen continue to harm civilians and their livelihoods. Houthi forces
have been using anti-personnel mines, improvised explosive devices, and
anti-vehicle mines along the western coast of Yemen, resulting in hundreds of
civilian deaths and injuries… Landmine use has been documented in six
governorates in Yemen since 2015. Since January 2018, at least 140 civilians,
including 19 children, have been killed by landmines in just the Hodeidah and
Taiz governorates.”
The Houthis also routinely use various methods of torture, including beating
detainees “with iron rods and rifles” and hanging them “from walls with their
arms shackled behind them.”
By removing the Houthis from the terrorist list last year and cutting off US
support for confronting the group, the Biden administration unfortunately
emboldened and empowered the Houthis and gave them a free pass. That is most
likely why the group ratcheted up its missile attacks on other countries. The
Houthis have frequently launched missile and drone attacks on Saudi Arabia and
last week they also targeted the UAE, blowing up three oil tanker trucks in Abu
Dhabi, killing three people.
After the Houthis’ designation as a terrorist group was lifted, the group’s
forces reportedly launched more than 40 drones and missiles at Saudi Arabia in
one month alone. A senior US Defense Department official told NBC News: “We’re
certainly aware of a troubling increase in Houthi cross-border attacks from a
variety of systems, including cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and (unmanned
aerial vehicles).” France, Germany, Italy and the UK also condemned the Houthi
offensive and characterized it as a “major escalation of attacks… against Saudi
Arabia.”
The Houthis also launched an explosive-laden drone at a military airbase in the
southern Saudi city of Khamis Mushayt and used a drone to attack Najran airport.
The group had previously claimed responsibility for the 2019 attacks on two
Aramco plants at the heart of the Kingdom’s oil industry — the world’s biggest
oil processing facility at Abqaiq near Dammam and the country’s second-largest
oilfield at Khurais.
By not redesignating the Houthis as a terrorist organization, the Biden
administration is also empowering the Iranian regime, which seeks to increase
its influence in Yemen through its proxy. The Houthis have been fortunate to
have the Tehran regime as such a powerful ally. Their Iranian backers will not
let them run out of ammunition.
By removing the Houthis from the terrorist list last year, the US unfortunately
emboldened and empowered the group.
The sophisticated drones and missiles that the Houthis use most likely come from
Iran, which has recognized the terror group as the official government of Yemen.
The Iranian government has long smuggled illicit weapons and technology into
Yemen. A UN report stated: “An increasing body of evidence suggests that
individuals or entities in Iran supply significant volumes of weapons and
components to the Houthis.”
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is a key supporter and sponsor of the
Houthis and has been stepping up its weapons supply to Yemen. The IRGC has used
a route across the Gulf to deliver covert arms shipments to the Houthis.
This should give the Biden administration an insight into the tactics and
long-term strategies of Iranian-trained and armed proxies across the Middle
East. Their plans are generally built on four pillars: Destabilization,
conflict, assassination, and the rejection of any solution that has Sunni or
Western origins. An example of the pursuit of these pillars was the
assassination of Yemen’s former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. In 2017, two days
after he urged a resolution to the conflict, he was killed by the Houthis.
Due to the egregious crimes against humanity committed by the Iranian-backed
Houthis, as well as the frequent drone and missile attacks they carry out, it is
incumbent on the Biden administration to redesignate the militia as an
international terrorist organization.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist.
Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh
EU’s lack of unity leaves it open to extortion
Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab News/January 27, 2022
How will the EU solve its recurring energy crisis? For the past decade, this has
been an ongoing worry and a direct threat to the bloc, yet no concrete action
has been taken to solve it. There is an inability to exit this vicious circle,
which pops up every winter and whenever the political crisis to the east flares
up.
It is unbelievable that millions of European households could today face
blackouts and not be able to keep their homes warm. It is also unbelievable that
the EU needs the US to support last-minute safeguarding measures to keep the old
continent warm with more than 50 tankers carrying liquefied natural gas. Press
reports described it as the largest US flotilla aimed at saving Europe since
D-Day in 1944. It is good to know one can rely on an ally, but these emergency
actions are extremely counterproductive in terms of broader strategic
geopolitical goals.
Without going into an energy study of Europe, a quick snapshot helps us
understand the situation. Europe relies on natural gas for a little more than 22
percent of its power generation. It is this source of energy generation that is
blamed for the current situation. This happens in winter, when some sources of
renewable power generation do not achieve their targets. Some might argue that
energy diversification strategies should be blamed. The view is that they have
been too focused on replacing petroleum products and demonizing nuclear power.
Today, this energy crisis is solely viewed through the lens of natural gas. And
so, as a quarter of the EU’s natural gas supply comes from Russia and most of it
passes through Ukraine, relations between the bloc and Moscow have been framed
as one of extortion, especially on the political side. But Russia is not to
blame, particularly when one looks at the refugee crisis. In this crisis too,
the EU is being blackmailed and threatened by other regional powers with a
direct impact on its foreign policy.
This reminds me of a saying: “To lose one donkey is an accident, to lose two is
carelessness.” And this might be just it — there is carelessness in the EU’s
lack of unity, foreign policy and security strategy focus. However, despite this
core reason, the EU keeps looking at energy only from a narrow viewpoint. This
is a crucial point, as history has proven with France and its nuclear power
generation. Nuclear accounts for 70.6 percent of its total energy production,
giving the country some independence and more capacity to act on international
files. But France cannot take on this endeavor alone, so the EU needs to break
away from the constant threats that place it in a fragile situation.
It is also not only a question of energy diversification. Indeed, the matter is
also about building and creating a true deterrence that would enable the EU to
preserve its security and empower it to protect its own interests without having
to ask for last-minute help from the US. It is important to achieve these
objectives so that it can deal with an increasingly polarized world. Beyond the
great power competition theme between the US and China, it is also a world where
regional powers are showing more assertiveness.
The bloc needs to break away from the constant threats that place it in a
fragile situation.
The EU, when it comes to foreign policy and security issues, is failing because
of its division. If we investigate the gas situation, this is symbolized by the
Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This natural gas pipeline from Russia to Germany has
been completed but it is still not operational and Brussels does not support it.
The project is a German one, with the participation of European companies such
as the France-based Engie and the UK’s Shell. This gas source is considered by
Germany as a viable option in the green transition, as well as an effective way
to bypass Ukraine.
However, for the EU, this goes against the objectives of the diversification of
sources and also of suppliers. The EU sees this project as further consolidation
of its reliance on Russia, which puts the bloc in an even more precarious
situation. In fact, some voices in the EU see Iran as a viable alternative
source of gas. Iran accounts for about 17 percent of the world’s total natural
gas reserves. This could explain the EU’s eagerness to reach a nuclear deal and
remove sanctions on Tehran. However, even if the EU could supply its homes with
Iranian gas, it would find itself in the same situation of being subject to
extortion.
Once again, it is not simply a question of energy, as the same applies to the
refugee crisis and other issues. If the EU is perceived as weak, these extortion
situations will not end. So it is an urgent necessity for the bloc to outline a
common and unique foreign policy and build a proper security and military
infrastructure to implement it and protect its member states’ interests. Only
this will empower the EU to rebalance relations.
*Khaled Abou Zahr is CEO of Eurabia, a media and tech company. He is also the
editor of Al-Watan Al-Arabi.