English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For September 10/2022
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2021/english.september10.22.htm

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

Bible Quotations For today
Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come
Luke 17/01-04/Jesus said to his disciples: “Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble. So watch yourselves. “If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. Even if they sin against you seven times in a day and seven times come back to you saying ‘I repent,’ you must forgive them.”

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on September 09-10/2022
Israeli general readies to lead the charge against Hezbollah
US mediator says ‘very good progress’ in Lebanon-Israel maritime border talks
US negotiator arrives in Israel as maritime talks with Lebanon stall again
Reports: Hochstein says Israel ready for pre-vote deal with Lebanon
Hochstein to 'visit Doha' as Qatari firm says ready to 'explore in Block 9'
Hochstein lauds 'very good progress' in talks with Lebanese leaders
US Embassy voices optimism over Hochstein's visit to Lebanon
Energean says gas to flow 'in weeks' from Karish
Families of port blast victims storm justice ministry
Berri 'proud' to have persuaded Mikati against six state ministers
Yazbek says giving UNIFIL total freedom of movement makes it occupation force
2 bombs found near Lebanese consulate in Milan
Lebanon declares national mourning over Queen Elizabeth's death
Lebanese Delegation Heads to Iran to Acquire Fuel as 'Gift'
Sami Gemayel: We Refuse to Be Held Hostage by Hezbollah
Aoun feels let down by Hezbollah, keeps Lebanese guessing about his end of term

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on September 09-10/2022
King Charles III has long history with Canada, but must step into the spotlight
Queen Elizabeth's last hours as family dashed to deathbed
Israel won’t stand by while Iran cheats world, Mossad chief warns US
Biden Wants Other 'Options' to Block Iran Nuclear Weapons Capability if Deal Fails
Blinken says Iran moved 'backwards' in nuclear deal talks
4 Detained after Germany’s Largest Ever Heroin Seizure Traced Back to Iran
The IAEA’s Iran NPT Safeguards Report - September 2022
Mossad Chief Hands over Evidence of Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions to Washington
US Imposes Sanctions on Iran over Cyber Activities, Cyberattack on Albania
Treasury sanctions Iranian firms for drone sales to Russia
Syrian airport to resume work days after Israeli strike
Conservation plan highlights Arabs' fraught ties to Israel
Ukrainian Forces Threaten Russian Supply Lines after Breakthrough
Ukraine Army’s Breakthrough in North Threatens Russian Grip
Analysis-Ukraine blindsides Russia with northeastern thrust at supply hub
Ukraine retakes settlements in Kharkiv advance - Russian-installed official

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 09-10/2022
Actually, Why Retaliate to Israel’s Strikes?/Hussam Itani/Asharq Al-Awsat/September 09/2022
The explosion to come in Iraq/Khairallah Khairallah/The Arab Weekly/September 09/2022
'We Did That': Afghanistan a Year after the US Surrender/Afghanistan is a Terror State, Al Qaeda Is Thriving/Guy Millière/Gatestone Institute./September 09/2022
How the West Built a Russian Enemy/Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/September 09/2022
America’s Regional Integration Scheme Benefits Iran/Tony Badran/The Tablet/September 09/2022

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on September 09-10/2022
Israeli general readies to lead the charge against Hezbollah
Associated Press/September 09/2022
In his just-completed role as head of the Israeli military's Home Front command, Maj. Gen. Ori Gordin was in charge of bolstering a network of early-warning systems and shelters in case of rocket attacks. It may have been the ideal preparation for his new assignment. Gordin is set to soon take over the Northern Command -- putting him at the forefront of Israel's efforts to contain Hezbollah. At a time of heightened tensions, the Lebanese militant group is believed to possess tens of thousands of rockets and missiles capable of striking anywhere in Israel, dwarfing any threat posed by the Palestinian militant groups in Gaza that have battled Israel in recent years. To Gordin, the connection is clear: His new role will be to keep Hezbollah far away from his old one and ensure that any future fighting "not reach the civilian front." In an interview with The Associated Press, Gordin said there is "no doubt" that Israel remains the more powerful side. But he said the Hezbollah is nonetheless a potent enemy. "It can do some significant damage. I have to say that," he said. The Northern Command is considered one of the most prestigious -- and challenging -- assignments in the Israeli military. It includes not only the tense border with Lebanon, but also an array of Iranian and Iranian-backed forces in neighboring Syria. The Iran-backed Hezbollah, which recently marked the 40th year of its establishment, is at the heart of those threats. Gordin, an ex-commando and Harvard graduate with the build of a football linebacker, takes the post at a challenging time.
For months, Hezbollah has been threatening to strike Israeli natural gas platforms in the Mediterranean Sea as Israel and the Lebanese government conduct U.S.-brokered negotiations over their disputed maritime border. In July, Israel shot down three reconnaissance drones launched by Hezbollah toward the gas field. In the 2006 war, Hezbollah battled Israel to a stalemate in a month of fighting that ended with a U.N. cease-fire. Bitter memories of that fighting have made both sides wary of starting a new war. Lebanon's political and economic crisis could also deter Hezbollah. Still, the recent tensions have raised concerns in Israel about renewed fighting. The Israeli military has invested great sums in preparing for this scenario. Gordin described the Hezbollah arsenal, which is now believed to include sophisticated precision-guided missiles, as hard to fathom. Where Gaza militants can now launch some 400 rockets a day at Israel during heavy fighting, he said Hezbollah is believed to be capable of firing 10 times that amount. Even with Israel's air defenses intercepting over 90% of incoming fire, the Israeli military estimates that as many as 7,000 rockets would strike built-up areas in a future war stretching several weeks. The army does not make public its casualty estimates, but those projections indicate hundreds or even thousands of people could potentially be harmed. That is where the Home Front Command comes into play.
Founded in the wake of Iraqi Scud missile attacks on Israel during the 1991 Gulf War, the Home Front Command serves as Israel's civil defense force. It helps maintain the country's network of bomb shelters and air raid sirens and is trained to assist civilians during wars and natural disasters. Under Gordin's command, it also played a key role during the coronavirus pandemic through a large-scale contact tracing program. During a three-day flareup in early August, Gaza's Islamic Jihad militant group fired over 1,000 rockets at Israel. But there were no deaths or serious injuries on the Israeli side. Some 49 Palestinians, including at least 12 militants, were killed. Gordin said the Iron Dome rocket defense system played a key role in minimizing Israeli casualties. He also noted that the more powerful Hamas militant group stayed on the sidelines. But he said advances in the Home Front Command were key to keeping people safe. In recent years, Israel has greatly improved its ability to detect rocket launches and predict where they will land with great precision, such as a specific neighborhood of a big city. It also has developed a popular mobile phone application that alerts users of incoming rocket fire based on their location. Gordin said the app works everywhere, including outlying areas that don't have sirens.
He also said the coronavirus crisis ironically bolstered his command by increasing the military's cooperation with local authorities. Its command center is now a clearinghouse of information gleaned from both the military and local authorities. A bank of large screens tracks rocket launches, interceptions and landings in real time. A click of a button can show the locations of every police car, ambulance or fire engine in the country, along with Waze maps showing traffic patterns nationwide. Gordin said this integrated system provides a powerful tool for authorities to coordinate their work and communicate with the public. "You can't fight a war without the cooperation of the residents who live in the same area," he said. "All of these things depend on our ability to cooperate with the civilian population."

US mediator says ‘very good progress’ in Lebanon-Israel maritime border talks
Reuters, Beirut/09 September ,2022
The US mediator in a longstanding maritime border dispute between Israel and Lebanon said on Friday that the negotiations to resolve the conflict have made “very good progress.”The two countries are locked in US-mediated negotiations to delineate a shared maritime border that would help determine which oil and gas resources belong to which country and pave the way for more exploration. Amos Hochstein arrived in Lebanon early on Friday for a lightning round of talks with top officials including the president, prime minister, speaker and deputy speaker of parliament as well as security officials. For the latest headlines, “I think we’re making very good progress,” Hochstein said after meeting President Michel Aoun, deputy speaker Elias Bou Saab and General Security chief Abbas Ibrahim. He added that he was hopeful an agreement would be reached soon. Hochstein was last in Beirut in late July for meetings with Lebanese officials, saying after that visit that he looked “forward to being able to come back to the region to make the final arrangement.”At the time, a senior Israeli official told Reuters the government would present a new Israeli proposal that “includes a solution that would allow the Lebanese to develop the gas reserves in the disputed area while preserving Israel’s commercial rights.” A Lebanese official said at the time that the proposal would allow Lebanon to explore the entire Qana Prospect, an area with the potential to hold hydrocarbons and which crosses beyond Line 23. Line 23 is the maritime line that Lebanon first set as its border during negotiations, before ramping up its demands to a line further south. Exploration rights south of Line 23 would represent a concession by Israel.

US negotiator arrives in Israel as maritime talks with Lebanon stall again
Tamir Morag/Israel Hayon/September 09/2022
Amos Hochstein will afterward travel to Lebanon to meet with senior officials. US urges to resolve the matter fearing a potential military conflict between Israel and Lebanon. An official involved in the talks said that "the subject is complicated," and estimated that the final decision on whether to compromise or opt for an escalation will be up to Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah. Amos Hochstein, the US diplomat mediating talks between Beirut and Jerusalem, arrived in Israel on Thursday to meet with National Security Adviser Eyal Hulata and the Israeli negotiating team. Hochstein is expected to leave for Lebanon at the end of the week, where he will meet the country's President Michel Aoun, Prime Minister Najib Mikati, and Speaker of the Parliament Nabih Berri. Last week, in a conversation with Prime Minister Yair Lapid, President Joe Biden stressed the need to resolve the dispute. It was his first direct statement on the matter and a possible indication of growing US fear that unless the negotiations are finalized, the matter will turn into a military conflict between Lebanon and Israel. Earlier on Thursday, Energean – A London-listed oil company licensed by Israel to extract gas from a maritime field that is in part claimed by Lebanon – announced that it would begin operations within weeks.

Reports: Hochstein says Israel ready for pre-vote deal with Lebanon
Naharnet/September 09/2022
U.S. mediator Amos Hochstein denied in his meetings with Lebanese leaders on Friday the presence of any link between reaching a sea border deal and Israel’s legislative elections, Lebanese TV networks said. “He told them that the Israelis are enthusiastic to finalize the agreement weeks before the elections,” LBCI television said. A Lebanese official source meanwhile told MTV that “Lebanon’s stance is clear that there will be no extraction from the Karish field unless Lebanon is allowed to extract gas.”

Hochstein to 'visit Doha' as Qatari firm says ready to 'explore in Block 9'
Naharnet/September 09/2022
The U.S. mediator in the sea border talks between Lebanon and Israel, Amos Hochstein, will visit Doha and a Qatari firm has expressed readiness to explore for gas in Lebanon’s Block 9, MTV reported on Friday. The report came as Hochstein kicked off a visit to Lebanon to discuss the progress made in the indirect negotiations with Israel. Al-Akhbar newspaper meanwhile quoted sources concerned with the negotiations as saying that Hochstein is seeking to “reassure Lebanon” that there will be an agreement soon that meets Lebanon’s demands, while also making sure to take into consideration Israel’s needs as to formalities and timing. Hochstein is also seeking to address some details related to the work of international companies on the Israeli and Lebanese coasts in the future, the sources said. Citing information obtained from the U.S., France and Lebanon, the sources added that the U.S. side has obtained preliminary approval from Lapid’s government regarding Lebanon’s demands, in terms of agreeing to Line 23 and considering the entire Qana field to be part of Lebanon’s share. According to the same sources, Israeli PM Yair Lapid’s approval enjoys the support of Israel’s security and military institutions.

Hochstein lauds 'very good progress' in talks with Lebanese leaders
Associated Press/September 09/2022
U.S. mediator Amos Hochstein held talks Friday with Lebanese leaders over sea border demarcation and the gas dispute with Israel. “I think we’re making very good progress and I’m very hopeful that we can reach an agreement,” Hochstein said after meeting President Michel Aoun in Baabda. Hochstein later held talks with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and caretaker PM and PM-designate Najib Mikati. Deputy Speaker Elias Bou Saab and General Security chief Maj. Gen. Abbas Ibrahim accompanied Hochstein to the three meetings. Speaking at the Rafik Hariri International Airport at the end of his visit to the country, Hochstein said: "I really feel that we're making progress these last few weeks and I hope to make additional progress and materialize this for an agreement that at the end of the day will give hope and economic activity in Lebanon (and) bring stability to the region, and I think this will be good to all involved." "I'm very hopeful with what I heard today, with what we discussed today, but still more work needs to be done," the U.S. mediator said. He added that the United States is "committed to work to resolve the issues that remain to be able to see if we can reach an agreement that will benefit the people of Lebanon.""At the end of the day that's the goal that we have in mediating this dispute," Hochstein went on to say. Mikati's office said in a statement that the two discussed ideas that Hochstein brought with him, adding that Lebanese officials will study them and "give an answer soon." A Lebanese official who attended the talks told The Associated Press that the proposal put forward by the U.S. envoy gives Lebanon the right to the Qana field, which is partly in Israel's domain. A part of it stretches deep into the disputed area. The official added that the main point now is how to draw the demarcation line in a way that stretches south of Qana. In 2017, Lebanon approved licenses for an international consortium by France's Total, Italy's ENI and Russia's Novatek to move forward with offshore oil and gas development for two of 10 blocks in the Mediterranean Sea, including one that is disputed in part with neighboring Israel.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations, said that France's Total said that as soon as a deal is reached it will start exploration in the border area. Last month, Novatek announced it is withdrawing from the consortium. Lebanese media reported that a Qatari company will take over from the Russian firm. The dispute which involves competing claims over offshore gas fields escalated in June after Israel moved a production vessel near the Karish offshore field, which is partly claimed by Lebanon. Energean, the London-listed company licensed by Israel to extract gas from Karish, said on Thursday that gas would begin flowing within weeks, despite the disagreement. Lebanon and Israel, whose border is U.N.-patrolled, have no diplomatic relations. They had resumed maritime border negotiations in 2020 but the process was stalled by Beirut's claim that the map used by the United Nations in the talks needed modifying. Lebanon initially demanded 860 square kilometers in the disputed maritime area but then asked for an additional 1,430 square kilometers, including part of the Karish field. Israel claims the field lies in its waters and is not part of the disputed area subject to ongoing negotiations. A Lebanese official in mid-June said Beirut had made a new offer to Hochstein, holding back on demands for territory where Israel planned to imminently extract gas. Beirut was pushing for the country's maritime border to exclude Karish and include the nearby Qana field, instead, the official told AFP at the time. In a statement on Thursday, Energean said the "Karish project is on track to start production within weeks."Hezbollah, which launched drones towards the Karish gas field in July, had threatened attacks if Israel proceeds with gas extraction in the disputed area.

US Embassy voices optimism over Hochstein's visit to Lebanon
Naharnet/September 09/2022 
The U.S. Embassy in Beirut on Friday voiced optimism over the visit that U.S. mediator Amos Hochstein made to the country earlier in the day. “We were happy to support Special Envoy and Coordinator Hochstein’s visit to Lebanon today. We echo his optimism,” the Embassy said in a tweet. “The United States is committed to helping forge an agreement for the people of Lebanon,” the Embassy added.

Energean says gas to flow 'in weeks' from Karish
Agence France Presse/September 09/2022
A London-listed company licensed by Israel to extract gas from a maritime field that is in part claimed by Lebanon has announced that it would begin yielding output within weeks. The "assets have outperformed our expectations and our flagship Karish project is on track to start production within weeks," Energean said in a statement accompanying financial results. Israel says the Karish field is located entirely within its exclusive economic zone, but Lebanon insists that part of the field falls within its own waters. The U.S. has mediated in the dispute, which escalated in early June when Energean brought a production vessel into the field. Israel announced in early July that it had downed three unarmed drones launched by Hezbollah towards Karish. Referring to Karish, Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah warned in early August that "the hand that reaches for any of this wealth will be severed."Israel's Defense Minister Benny Gantz said late last month that any attack on its gas assets could reignite war between the two sides. The two countries resumed maritime border negotiations in 2020 but the process was stalled by Beirut's claim that the map used by the United Nations in the talks needed modifying. Lebanon initially demanded 860 square kilometers in the disputed maritime area but then asked for an additional 1,430 square kilometers, including part of the Karish offshore gas field. U.S. President Joe Biden discussed the dispute with Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid in late August, when he "emphasized the importance of concluding the maritime boundary negotiations between Israel and Lebanon in the coming weeks," according to the White House.

Families of port blast victims storm justice ministry
Naharnet/September 09/2022 
Families of the Beirut port blast victims stormed Friday the Justice Ministry, to protest a decision by caretaker Justice Minister Henri Khoury to name an alternate investigator in the Beirut port blast case. The protesters were forced to leave the building by security forces members. They couldn't manage to reach the minister's office. Dozens of relatives of the victims of the blast have been protesting since Wednesday against the decision, calling the move an attempt by the country's political class to prevent justice into one of the world's largest non-nuclear explosions. They raised banners against the politicization of the probe.

Berri 'proud' to have persuaded Mikati against six state ministers
Naharnet/September 09/2022 
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has confirmed his role in convincing Prime Minister-designate Najib Mikati to refuse to add six ministers of state to the new government. "I am proud that I was able to do so," Berri told al-Joumhouria newspaper, in remarks published Friday. Berri re-iterated that in case of a presidential vacuum, every minister will act as if he were the president. "It is not acceptable to have 30 presidents who can obstruct all matters," he said. President Michel Aoun had earlier told the daily that Mikati had accepted his proposal to add six ministers of state. "I was later surprised by his turnabout after his meeting with Berri," Aoun said.

Yazbek says giving UNIFIL total freedom of movement makes it occupation force
Naharnet/September 09/2022
A Hezbollah official on Friday sounded the alarm over the latest U.N. Security Council resolution that extended the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). “What are officials doing regarding the Security Council resolution that granted UNIFIL freedom of movement… without needing a permission from the army for its declared and undeclared patrols?” Sheikh Mohammed Yazbek said. “This contradicts with the previous agreements and this is a dangerous development that turns the (UNIFIL) forces into occupation forces whose role would be to protect the Israeli enemy through pursuing the people and the resistance,” Yazbek added. “The U.N. forces did not make a comment or a stance over hundreds of Israeli violations… If the decision was taken without the knowledge of the government and the Foreign Ministry that is a problem, and if they knew that would be a bigger problem, seeing as the decision is a conspiracy against Lebanon and its sovereignty,” the Hezbollah official went on to say. The Foreign Ministry on Wednesday noted that the resolution “contained a text that does not conform with what was mentioned in the framework agreement signed by Lebanon with the U.N.,” adding that “Lebanon has objected against the introduction of this wording.”“Accordingly, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants has requested to meet with the head of the UNIFIL mission to stress the importance of continuing permanent cooperation and coordination with the Lebanese Army in order to secure the success of the mission of U.N. forces in Lebanon,” the Ministry said. The Nidaa al-Watan newspaper reported Wednesday that Lebanon had requested the removal of “two phrases mentioned in clauses 15 and 16 in the extension resolution, which stipulate UNIFIL’s freedom of movement and the condemnation of any restriction of this freedom in the area south of the Litani River.”

2 bombs found near Lebanese consulate in Milan
Naharnet/September 09/2022 
Two handmade bombs were found Friday morning near a building in Milan where the Lebanese consulate is based, Italy’s official news agency ANSA said. The alarm was triggered after a passerby noticed a package from which two electric cables were popping out. On the package there was also a note with a writing in Arabic: “It will explode in three minutes.”According to judicial and investigative sources, one of the two bombs was detonated and Italy’s anti-terrorism authorities are investigating the matter.

Lebanon declares national mourning over Queen Elizabeth's death
Naharnet/September 09/2022
Lebanon on Friday declared national mourning over the death of Queen Elizabeth II of Britain. In a statement, caretaker PM and PM-designate Najib Mikati declared three days of national mourning from Friday to Sunday. The day of the funeral, September 18, will also be a national mourning day in Lebanon, the statement said. The mourning entails “lowering flags to half-staff on public administrations and institutions and municipalities and adjusting radio and TV programs in a manner that suits this tragic event.”British Ambassador to Lebanon Hamish Cowell meanwhile tweeted that the passing of the queen is “a moment of profound sadness.”“All of us at the British Embassy send our heartfelt condolences to The Royal Family,” he said. “We deeply appreciate the many messages of condolence from Lebanon's leaders and people & declaration of 3 days of mourning,” the ambassador added.

Lebanese Delegation Heads to Iran to Acquire Fuel as 'Gift'
Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 9 September, 2022
The Lebanese government is preparing to send a technical delegation to Iran to negotiate acquiring "free" fuel to ease the power outages crisis in the country, which now supplies only one or two hours of state-provided electricity per day. Lebanon is seeking Iranian fuel and wants to avoid US sanctions. If the deal is completed, the fuel deliveries will be the first shipments Iran sends directly to the Lebanese government, after it previously sent some to Hezbollah. Reuters quoted two Lebanese government sources as saying that Iran's ambassador to Beirut Mojtaba Amani proposed an Iranian "gift" of fuel to the Lebanese state. "We are working on this being a donation and not a purchase so that we can avoid sanctions," one of the sources said. The United States has heavily sanctioned Iran's energy sector, which means any party engaging in a financial transaction with it could be subject to secondary sanctions.
A second government source told Reuters that Amani presented the offer to the caretaker prime minister, Najib Mikati, who provided the envoy with specifications for the fuel grade needed to operate the Lebanese power stations. The source indicated that Mikati asked Energy Minister Walid Fayad to prepare a technical delegation to discuss the technical details with officials in Tehran. According to the first source, the delegation would be in Tehran in the coming days. An Iranian official told Reuters that a Lebanese delegation would be in Tehran shortly "to discuss various issues," without elaborating. "We have repeatedly expressed Iran's readiness to help Lebanon resolve its fuel crisis," the official said. Last year, Iran sent fuel to Hezbollah, shipped it to Syria, then transported it to Lebanon in trucks to avoid sanctions. The United States took no action on that last year, and the embassy had no immediate comment on the possibility of a Lebanese government delegation visiting Tehran.

Sami Gemayel: We Refuse to Be Held Hostage by Hezbollah
Beirut - Thaer Abbas/Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 9 September, 2022
The head of the Lebanese Kataeb Party, Sami Gemayel, warned against some opposition parties resorting to a settlement with Hezbollah in the upcoming presidential elections, noting that the past six years of President Michel Aoun’s reign “led to a complete collapse.”In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Gemayel said: “We have a basic problem called Hezbollah’s weapon, so let us confront it and stop this procrastination.”“We are not ready to remain hostages to Hezbollah, and for the state to remain hostage to Hezbollah’s decisions and choices that have nothing to do with Lebanon,” he added.
He also called for placing Hezbollah’s weapons on a “real dialogue table.”
The effort to agree on a single name for the presidency “depends on the ability of the opposition, parties and representatives to surpass personal interests and narrow accounts, and agree on a single strategy to fight this battle,” according to the Lebanese deputy. “For me, that's the key,” he said. “Names are not important, but the agreement on a unified strategy is… We are supposed to maintain communication with the aim of reaching a strategy…”Gemayel denied the presence of discrepancies within the opposition about the specifications of the new president. “We want a president who can be entrusted with the sovereignty of this country; a president who is reformist and capable of action, and who unites all Lebanese,” he underlined. Gemayel stressed that Hezbollah has been waging an open battle for more than 17 years, to gain control over the country. He went on to say: “In 2016, [Hezbollah] succeeded in imposing its candidate on the presidency and enforcing a settlement that was accepted by the majority of the political parties, except for us.” This led to the complete collapse of the country at the economic, social, health and education levels, according to the deputy, who asked: “Will we continue with this approach? Can Lebanon bear that Hezbollah name a new president again for the next six years? Can the Lebanese people tolerate such matters? Is it acceptable for Lebanon to remain isolated from its Arab surroundings and from the international community?”However, Gemayel underlined the presence of a “real opportunity”, but reiterated that it would require the unity of all opposition blocs. “Today, we must all have the ability to go beyond our personal considerations to achieve this goal... We [the Kataeb]… believe that our role is to serve Lebanon, not ourselves. For this, we always look to the interest of the country and the cause we are defending,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat. Nevertheless, Gemayel said he believed that it was still too early to judge the success of this movement, because serious contacts were underway. He continued: “It is true that [Hezbollah] does not have the majority, and it is also true that the opposition does not have a majority, and therefore we must be humble and communicate together, and put all special considerations aside.”He said in this regard: “We are two months away from the presidential elections. We are still deliberating together on names and discussing each of the possible scenarios to be adopted in our strategy. When we reach the last days of President Aoun’s term, then we will see what the electoral situation and balances will be like… Then we'll talk about this issue.”

Aoun feels let down by Hezbollah, keeps Lebanese guessing about his end of term
The Arab Weekly/September 09/2022
Lebanese President Michel Aoun is not concealing his bitterness at being abandoned by Hezbollah at the end of his term despite his years-long alliance with the militant party. He is refusing to be blamed for all the troubles witnessed by Lebanon during his rule.
Political analysts say that Aoun struggled but failed to find a legal formula to transfer the presidency to his son-in-law, Gebran Bassil. He was expecting support from Hezbollah in order to keep the country's presidency in the hands of the Aoun family and make sure the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), headed by Bassil, maintained its alliance with Hezbollah.But the militant Shia party seems to have had other considerations, according to experts. As it laid the blame for the many political mistakes and disasters which befell Lebanon on Aoun, Bassil and the FPM, Hezbollah was preparing the ground for transition to a new era, including new alliances within the Christian camp itself. In an interview with local newspapers, Aoun complained that, "Hezbollah did not support me on some basic issues as I had hoped and our era has paid the price for our relationship with the party."Sources say Aoun is unhappy about the way he was abandoned by his traditional ally, Hezbollah, which is sending clear signals that it prefers the head of the Marada movement, Suleiman Franjieh, to Gibran Bassil as possible president. This has been prompted by the positions taken by Franjieh, who often repeats slogans that are much to the liking of Hezbollah's Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. Franjieh is known for saying such things as, “the position of the resistance is a position of strength for Lebanon,” and for voicing belief that the party’s weapons are a fait accompli and constitute a regional issue beyond Lebanon. Hezbollah, analysts say, has reached the conclusion that Aoun has nothing more to offer, especially after the serious decline in his standing in the country.The domineering Shia party also no longer believes an alliance with Aoun's son-in-law is advisable considering the FPM's meagre results during the last elections and its loss of influence within the Christian community. Members of Aoun's entourage are also convinced Hezbollah is hindering the president's attempts to end his term in office on a high with a semblance of achievements. This was evidenced by Hezbollah's unhelpful attitude towards efforts to clinch an agreement with Israel on the demarcation of maritime borders. While the outgoing president sought to boost his standing with a breakthrough while enhancing his son-in-law's reputation and that of his movement, the militant Shia party was interfering with the negotiations in way that suggested a desire to abort the ongoing US mediation. As a fall-back option, Aoun has even suggested that France's oil and gas company, TotalEnergies, could help solve the maritime demarcation issues with Israel.
Raising questions
Experts say Aoun is not planning a smooth exit from office. He is keeping people guessing about his next step while he raises doubts about the possibility of over the reins of power, on an interim basis, to the caretaker prime minister, Najib Mikati.
“The caretaker government is not qualified to assume the prerogatives of the president if a new president cannot be elected," said Aoun.handing  He added, "This government is not qualified to take over my powers after the end of my term and I consider that it does not have the national legitimacy to replace the president of the republic. Therefore unless a president is elected or a government is formed before October 31, there will remain a question mark surrounding my next step and the decision I will take, then." It is not clear if Aoun meant to say that he may not leave office at the end of his term unless a successor was not chosen before then. From that perspective, he could become a caretaker president in the way that Mikati has been a caretaker premier. To block the extension of his term in office, a political alliance has been formed against Aoun, led by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and including Prime Minister-designate Najib Mikati, Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt and Lebanese Forces Party leader Samir Geagea. The alliance aims to prevent Lebanon from sliding into a presidential and governmental vacuum that Aoun and his son-in-law seem to be working towards, even if this exacerbates the economic and social crisis. Western donors have made clear they require political and institutional stability before supporting Lebanon's reform plans. Based on their own constitutional reading which allows for the transfer of presidential powers to the caretaker government should Aoun and the PMF seek to create a power vacuum, the alliance is downplaying the risk.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on September 09-10/2022
King Charles III has long history with Canada, but must step into the spotlight
The Canadian Press/September 09/2022
As he stood between wind-whipped Canadian flags on a podium in Iqaluit in 2017, Prince Charles recalled his official first visit to Canada's North nearly half a century earlier. "I have never forgotten the warmth of the welcome from the Inuit people, which made me feel instantly at home, as indeed I have with all Canadians on my subsequent visits," said the Royal, who drew applause from the crowd in Nunavut's capital with a halting attempt at an Inuktitut greeting. With the death of Queen Elizabeth II announced Thursday, King Charles III, as he's now known, is poised to take over as Canada's new head of state and form a new relationship with the country. On trips to Canada as prince, he has stressed a connection to Canada that stretches back decades, encompassing nineteen official visits, family trips and brief stopovers during his military service.
Most recently, Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, travelled to Canada in May as part of the celebrations of the Queen's platinum jubilee. The three-day tour was focused on climate change, literacy and reconciliation efforts with Indigenous peoples.
The jubilee tour began in St. John's, N.L., with a solemn moment of reflection on residential school deaths and ended in the North with a meeting with First Nations chiefs on climate change. Prince Charles said he was deeply moved by conversations with survivors who courageously shared their experiences at residential schools.
"I want to acknowledge their suffering and to say how much our hearts go out to them and their families,'' he said during the visit, which some considered a step forward in Crown-Indigenous relations. But a royal expert says the new King nevertheless faces a daunting challenge in establishing himself in a country that has become skeptical of the monarchy, and in a role that has been so inextricably linked to his mother in many Canadians' minds. His relationship with Canada stretches back to his first official visit in 1970, which included touring Manitoba and the Northwest Territories with other members of the Royal Family. During his more recent visits, he has been accompanied by Camilla, whose distant Canadian ancestry he has mentioned. "Every time I come to Canada … a little more of Canada seeps into my bloodstream – and from there straight to my heart," he told a crowd in Newfoundland in 2009.
Those official visits have often featured the photo ops and official ceremonies the Canadian public has come to expect from the royals — including Prince Charles feeding a polar bear named Hudson in Winnipeg, trying out DJ equipment in Toronto, playing pickup street hockey in New Brunswick and attending countless artistic performances and military ceremonies. Among the pomp and pageantry, there have been events that hint of a deeper connection. Over the years, Prince Charles' visits to Canada have often featured events and conversations centred around climate change — a domain in which he's become increasingly outspoken.In November 2021, Prince Charles urged world leaders gathered at the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, Scotland to put themselves on "a warlike footing" to reduce emissions. While Prince Charles' speech at the climate conference drew headlines, he's been delivering the same message for decades, including in Canada in 2009 when he described climate change as a "threat posed to all humanity."
"We are at a defining moment for our civilization," he told the crowd in Newfoundland.
"Unless we can all, both individually and collectively, take the actions which we now know are necessary, the future is going to be very bleak indeed."
He highlighted the issue once again during the 2017 stop in Nunavut, when he warned that global warming was "bringing rapid and damaging changes to the Arctic way of life" that had long sustained the Inuit people. Prince Charles has made several visits to Canada's north, where he was so moved by the ''matchless beauty'' of the northern lights on a visit to Whitehorse that he said he tried to capture them in a painting. More recently, he's taken a particular interest in efforts to preserve the Inuit language and culture, including issuing an invitation to an Inuit group to travel to Wales in 2016 to discuss efforts to standardize the writing system for Inuktitut. He is president of the Prince's Trust Canada, a charity which focuses on "preparing young people and members of the military and Veteran community for the transforming world of work, championing sustainable solutions for a green recovery and empowering our people and our partners to strengthen our collaborative efforts," according to its website. The eldest son of Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip was born in 1948 at Buckingham Palace and was proclaimed heir apparent at the age of three when his mother took the throne. After graduating university in 1970, he trained as a military pilot, which included a stint at a Canadian Forces Base in Gagetown, N.B. where he trained "at an exercise area in the middle of nowhere,” he would later say. Carolyn Harris, a Toronto-based historian and royal expert, believes that despite a long and seemingly genuine connection to Canada, the King will have his work cut out for him when it comes to gaining acceptance as monarch. His approval ratings have been consistently lower than those of the Queen, who was widely respected even by those who disapprove of the monarchy. As prince, he had to recover from the beating his image took in the 1990s following the messy public breakup of his marriage with his first wife Diana, and her death a few years later, as well as rumours of a more recent rift with his younger son, Harry. And while his reputation has recovered somewhat since the Diana days, the fact remains that he has spent most of his life as a King-in-waiting. "One of the challenges that Charles has faced throughout his life is that he's often been overshadowed by other members of his family: first by his parents, the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh and then by his first wife Diana, the Princess of Wales," Harris said. More recently, Charles' sons, William and Harry, and their spouses have drawn greater attention. Harris said that unlike his famous mother, who became Queen at a young age, Charles has been given greater opportunities to pursue his own interests, including some that were originally viewed as eccentric but have since turned mainstream. His early interest in issues such as organic farming and sustainable development have, improbably, earned the pinstripe-suit wearing heir to an inherited crown a reputation as a man ahead of his time. But he's also faced criticism for an enormous carbon footprint that includes frequent private jet flights.
"When he first became interested in these causes, they were seen as fairly niche, and now he's seen as having been ahead of the curve," Harris said. While he has been a more outspoken champion of some causes than his more private mother, Harris believes the pending royal transition is likely to be more about continuity than change. In recent years, the then-prince and other royals gradually took over a greater share of the Queen's duties — a move Harris believes was made to emphasize a smooth transition among the generations. Some recent opinion surveys have indicated support for the Royal Family is dropping in Canada. Opposition is strongest in Quebec, where the royals have faced protests, and it will be a tall task to convince the public to change that view, despite the King's very good grasp of French. Harris believes that the King is likely to try to cement his reign early, likely via a royal tour, but that the decision in recent years to reduce the number of working royals means Canadians will see less of him than before — at least in person. While he won't be feeding as many polar bears, Harris believes the King will maintain the trend that began during the COVID-19 pandemic, and keep in touch with Canadians via video conference.
*This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 8, 2022.
Morgan Lowrie, The Canadian Press

Queen Elizabeth's last hours as family dashed to deathbed
Naharnet/September 09/2022
It began with a short but worrying statement. Less than 48 hours after a frail but smiling Queen Elizabeth II was photographed appointing new Prime Minister Liz Truss, her doctors said they were "concerned."An unprecedented medical bulletin issued by Buckingham Palace said the 96-year-old queen was under "medical supervision" but "remained comfortable" at her Scottish retreat, Balmoral Castle. The announcement at 12:32 pm (1132 GMT) sent shockwaves through parliament, where MPs had gathered to hear Truss announce a two-year freeze on energy bills. Within minutes, the office of heir to the throne Prince Charles had announced that he and his wife Camilla, who were already staying on the Balmoral estate, had arrived at Balmoral Castle. It is believed the queen's daughter, Princess Anne, also made it to Balmoral in time as she too was in Scotland. Both are thought to have been by the queen's side when she died on Thursday afternoon. Other members of the family, however, faced a long and ultimately unsuccessful dash from London. The second in line to the throne, Prince William; the queen's other two sons, Princes Andrew and Edward; and Edwards' wife Sophie, who was particularly close to the monarch; arrived in a cold, grey Aberdeen aboard a special RAF plane late in the afternoon. William, who has now become the heir, then took the wheel of the car for the 80-kilometre (50-mile) drive to Balmoral. But by the time the grim-faced royals swept through the gate of Balmoral just after 5:00 pm, it was already too late. Around half an hour earlier, at 4:30 pm, the prime minister had been informed the queen had died that afternoon. Prince Harry, Charles' second son, meanwhile was still en route from London. Initial announcements by the couple's spokesperson said both he and his wife Meghan would travel to Balmoral. In the end Harry made the journey alone and was still in the air when the official palace announcement was made to the world at 6:30 pm.He did not arrive at Balmoral until much later. BBC royal correspondent Nicholas Witchell speculated live on air that Meghan -- who has made a string of damaging criticisms of the royal family -- did not make the journey in the end, for fear "she might not be terribly warmly welcomed." The palace statement said the queen had died "peacefully" but in line with royal tradition did not give any cause of death. Sources told the Daily Mail newspaper there had been "no chronic condition." The queen had been undertaking far less work in recent months, but on Tuesday she nevertheless met both the outgoing Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the incoming Liz Truss. The sources told the daily the queen had been in good spirits -- despite her recent and well-documented "mobility issues" -- but took a sudden turn for the worse during the night of Wednesday to Thursday.

Israel won’t stand by while Iran cheats world, Mossad chief warns US
TOI STAFF and JACOB MAGID/The Times Of Israel/September 09/2022
David Barnea wraps up Washington trip; PM’s office says Israeli spymaster shared ‘sensitive intelligence materials’ with heads of CIA, FBI, Pentagon and other top officials
Mossad chief David Barnea on Thursday wrapped up a trip to Washington for high-level talks with US officials as part of Israeli efforts against a restored nuclear deal with Iran. According to the Prime Minister’s Office, Barnea held meetings with CIA chief William Burns, FBI Director Christopher Wray, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and senior officials at the State Department.
Barnea, who left for the US on Monday, showed the officials “sensitive intelligence materials” and stressed “Israel will not be able to stand idly by while Iran continues to deceive the world,” according to a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office.
victims of terror in Jerusalem on May 3, 2022. (Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90)
Mossad chief David Barnea on Thursday wrapped up a trip to Washington for high-level talks with US officials as part of Israeli efforts against a restored nuclear deal with Iran. According to the Prime Minister’s Office, Barnea held meetings with CIA chief William Burns, FBI Director Christopher Wray, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and senior officials at the State Department.
Barnea, who left for the US on Monday, showed the officials “sensitive intelligence materials” and stressed “Israel will not be able to stand idly by while Iran continues to deceive the world,” according to a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office.
“The director of the Mossad heard from his counterparts that the US remains committed to the security of the State of Israel,” the statement added.
“The Americans emphasized that they will not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon and that they will continue to act in full cooperation with the State of Israel with regards to regional issues in the Middle East concerning the security of the State of Israel.” A White House National Security Council confirmed Barnea’s meeting with Sullivan on Wednesday. “Director Barnea has long had a pre-scheduled visit for this time,” the spokesperson told The Times of Israel, seemingly pre-empting any possible attempt to tie the talks to the Iran nuclear deal.
He added that the two discussed “a range of global and regional issues.” “We appreciate our close consultations, as always, with him and other senior Israeli officials,” the spokesperson added.
Israeli officials have stepped up contacts with American and European counterparts in recent weeks to weigh in on a possible revival of the Iran nuclear deal, as the sides appeared to be nearing an agreement. However, talks appear to have hit a snag over the past week, with Iran raising a number of demands rejected by the US and European Union. Zman Yisrael, The Times of Israel’s sister site, reported that US officials — including President Joe Biden — conveyed to Prime Minister Yair Lapid during recent talks that the restoration of the deal is off the table for now.
Israel has been pressuring the US not to reenter the 2015 nuclear accord. A senior defense official said last month that Israel had two main issues with the emerging deal: the so-called sunset clause, which would lift limitations on Iran’s nuclear program when the accord expires; and sanctions relief that would allow Iran to increase funding to its proxies. Biden took office aiming to revive the deal, which was abandoned in 2018 by his predecessor Donald Trump, who unleashed a volley of fresh sanctions on the cleric-run state. Israel has meanwhile pushed the US to prepare a military option against Iran and Biden said in July that he would be prepared to use force if necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Israel has long opposed the deal, arguing that Iran is seeking to build a nuclear bomb, and has published intelligence it says reveals the Iranian weapons program. Iran has denied any nefarious intentions and claims its program is designed for peaceful purposes, though it has recently been enriching uranium to levels that international leaders say have no civil use.
Emanuel Fabian contributed to this report.

Biden Wants Other 'Options' to Block Iran Nuclear Weapons Capability if Deal Fails
London -Paris- Tehran - Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 9 September, 2022
US President Joe Biden wants to ensure that the United States has "other available options" to ensure that Iran does not achieve nuclear weapons capability, if efforts to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal fail, a White House spokesperson said. National security spokesman John Kirby said Washington would remain active in pushing for reimplementation of the agreement, but its patience was "not eternal", reported Reuters."Even as he has fostered and encouraged and pushed for a diplomatic path, (Biden) has conveyed to the rest of the administration that he wants to make sure that we have other available options to us to potentially achieve that solid outcome of the no nuclear weapons capability for Iran," he said. On Thursday, France expressed concern over Iran's lack of cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding the undeclared nuclear sites.
Meanwhile, Iran dismissed as "baseless" Thursday a report from the UN nuclear watchdog that it was unable to certify the Iranian nuclear program as "exclusively peaceful"."The recent report... is a rehash for political purposes of baseless issues from the past," Iran Atomic Energy Organization spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi said in a statement. "Iran will present its well-founded legal responses" to the findings at the IAEA's next board of governors meeting in Vienna from September 12 to 16, he added.
In its report, the IAEA said it was "not in a position to provide assurance that Iran's nuclear program is exclusively peaceful". It said IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi was "increasingly concerned that Iran has not engaged with the agency on the outstanding safeguards issues during this reporting period and, therefore, that there has been no progress towards resolving them". The IAEA has been pressing Iran for answers on the presence of nuclear material at three undeclared sites and the issue led to a resolution that criticized Iran being passed at the June meeting of the IAEA's board of governors. Tehran, which maintains that its nuclear program is exclusively peaceful, this week again insisted that the IAEA probe would have to be concluded in order to revive the 2015 deal on its nuclear program with world powers.
In another report also issued on Wednesday, the IAEA addressed Iran's decision in June to disconnect 27 cameras allowing the agency's inspectors to monitor its nuclear activities. The removal of the cameras has had "detrimental implications for the agency's ability to provide assurance of the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program," the report said. Kamalvandi said the issue of the monitoring cameras would be addressed as part of a revived nuclear agreement.But he stressed that the United States needed to meet its obligations too by lifting the economic sanctions imposed by then president Donald Trump after he unilaterally abandoned the deal in 2018. "In order to restore the previous verification system, the parties to the agreement must abide by their commitments," Kamalvandi said. The twin IAEA reports come as Tehran and Washington exchange responses to a "final" draft agreement drawn up by European Union mediators. EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell had expressed hope that with minor modifications the draft would prove acceptable to both sides, but on Monday he said that recent exchanges had left him "less confident".Washington said last week that Tehran's latest proposed changes to the text were "not constructive" and Borrell too voiced disappointment. "The last answer I got, if the purpose is to close the deal quickly, it is not going to help it," he said. A renewed deal would see more than one million barrels of Iranian oil back on international markets, bringing new relief to consumers hit by surging prices after Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Blinken says Iran moved 'backwards' in nuclear deal talks
Agence France Presse/September 09/2022
Iran's latest reply on a nuclear deal is a step "backwards," U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Friday, insisting Washington would not rush to rejoin at any cost. European mediators last month appeared to make progress in restoring the 2015 accord as Iran largely agreed to a proposed final text.
But optimism dimmed when the United States sent a reply, to which Iran in turn responded. "In past weeks, we've closed some gaps. Iran has moved away from some extraneous demands -- demands unrelated to the JCPOA itself," Blinken told reporters, using the acronym for the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. "However, the latest response takes us backwards. And we're not about to agree to a deal that doesn't meet our bottom-line requirements," he said. "If we conclude a deal, it's only because it will advance our national security." President Joe Biden supports restoring the agreement, under which Iran will enjoy sanctions relief and again be able to sell its oil worldwide in return for tough restrictions on its nuclear program. Biden's predecessor Donald Trump trashed the agreement and instead imposed sweeping new sanctions. Diplomats say Iran has dropped a demand that Biden lift Trump's designation of the elite Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group, a key sticking point. But disputes include Iran's insistence that the UN nuclear watchdog close a probe into three undeclared sites suspected in previous nuclear work. While in Brussels, Blinken met virtually with his counterparts from Britain, France and Germany, which remain in the accord.

4 Detained after Germany’s Largest Ever Heroin Seizure Traced Back to Iran
Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 9 September, 2022
Four people were detained after police made their largest ever seizure of heroin in Germany, prosecutors said on Friday, with police confiscating some 700 kilograms (1,543 pounds) as part of an operation against a gang smuggling narcotics from Iran. The drugs were seized in the port city of Hamburg at the end of August. The detentions were made overnight on Thursday, when police searched 10 premises in the eastern cities of Dresden and Chemnitz, in Hamburg and in the Netherlands. They seized documents, laptops, storage devices, smartphones and vehicles. The detained were an unnamed 40-year-old Turkish-Serbian suspected ringleader, a 35-year-old Iranian in the Netherlands, a 54-year-old German suspected of using his firm's logistics fleet to transport drugs, and a 53-year-old Turkish go-between.One was detained in Germany, one in Spain, and two others in the Netherlands. Prosecutors are seeking the extraditions of the three who were arrested abroad, while a court in Dresden is due to decide on Friday whether the person detained in Germany should be placed under arrest.

The IAEA’s Iran NPT Safeguards Report - September 2022
David Albright, Sarah Burkhard, and Andrea Stricker/Institute Science & International Security/September 09/2022
Background
Iran has consistently violated its obligations under its comprehensive safeguards agreement (CSA), a key part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and fully account for its past and present nuclear activities.
For nearly four years, the IAEA has been investigating the presence of man-made uranium particles at three Iranian sites and was seeking information about nuclear material and activities at a fourth site. In March 2022, the IAEA found Iran in breach of its safeguards obligations for failing to declare its use of nuclear material at one of these sites, Lavisan-Shian. In June 2022, the IAEA’s 35-nation Board of Governors passed a censure resolution against Iran for non-cooperation with the IAEA with only China and Russia voting against. This analysis summarizes and assesses information in the IAEA’s latest NPT safeguards report on Iran, issued on September 7, 2022. It also provides background information on the former Iranian nuclear weapons sites under IAEA investigation.
Findings
Since the last IAEA report in June, there has been no progress or cooperation from Iran to resolve the outstanding safeguards issues. The IAEA requests “technically credible explanations” regarding the presence and origin of uranium particles detected at the three locations, as well as the “current location(s) of the nuclear material and/or of the contaminated equipment.” Thus, it is unlikely that the four locations publicly discussed by the IAEA are the only remaining sites in Iran with traces of undeclared uranium. The IAEA concludes, as of September 2022, it is “not in a position to provide assurance that Iran’s nuclear program is exclusively peaceful.” This means the IAEA cannot verify Iran’s compliance with its CSA and NPT and is implying Iran is violating both agreements.
Recommendations
It is critical for the IAEA to continue its investigation of Iran’s violations of nuclear safeguards under the NPT. Absent an immediate, marked shift in Iran’s actions, the IAEA Board of Governors should pass a resolution condemning Iran’s non-cooperation and then refer the issue to the UN Security Council.
The United States and Europe should refuse Iran’s demands to end the ongoing IAEA investigation as a condition for a revived nuclear deal under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) framework. The West should instead pressure Iran to cooperate with the IAEA by strengthening sanctions, including enacting the so-called snapback of UN sanctions, allowed in case of Iranian non-compliance with the JCPOA.
Latest NPT Safeguards Report
For nearly four years, the IAEA has been investigating the presence of man-made uranium particles at three Iranian sites and was seeking information about nuclear material and activities at a fourth site. The four sites are Turquz Abad, Varamin, Marivan, and Lavisan-Shian, previously referred to by the agency as Locations 1-4. In March 2022, the IAEA found Iran in breach of its safeguards obligations for failing to declare its use of nuclear material at Lavisan-Shian. Out of the four sites of concern, three were discussed in Iran’s Nuclear Archive.
It is unlikely that these four locations are the only remaining sites in Iran with traces of undeclared uranium. In reports and press briefings, IAEA Director General Grossi has voiced concerns about additional unknown locations from which or to which Iran may have moved nuclear material or contaminated equipment.2 Further, the IAEA may have identified additional sites it seeks to access based on information in the Nuclear Archive. The IAEA has been corroborating information in the Nuclear Archive against Iran’s mandatory declaration of nuclear material and activities, in line with the IAEA’s mandate to ensure that Iran’s declaration is correct and complete. On September 7, the Institute published the location of yet another site identified in the Nuclear Archive, where Iran may have carried out tests using uranium.3 While the site was previously known, the Institute only recently obtained the site’s coordinates from officials knowledgeable about the Nuclear Archive. The site, called Golab Dareh, is one of four known sites associated with explosive testing of nuclear weapons components and the development of associated, high-speed diagnostic equipment. It appears to be another site that may harbor traces of undeclared uranium, and there are likely others.
On March 5, 2022, the IAEA and Iran agreed to a timetable for Iran to provide the agency with information and explanations to clarify the IAEA’s discovery of man-made uranium particles at Turquz Abad, Varamin, and Marivan, a process ending with a June 2022 IAEA report. Under its legal nonproliferation obligations, Iran is bound to explain the activities that led to the use or production of this nuclear material. The IAEA noted, as in its previous report, that it “provided Iran with numerous opportunities, in different formats through exchanges and meetings in Vienna and Tehran, to clarify these issues, but without success.” By the time of the director general’s June report, Iran had failed to provide technically credible explanations and the IAEA reported Iran’s failure to comply with the agreed timetable. This led the IAEA’s 35-nation Board of Governors to pass a censure resolution against Iran at the June board meeting with only Russia and China voting against it. In its latest report, the IAEA reports no further progress or cooperation from Iran, noting, “The safeguards issues related to these three locations remained outstanding.” The report indicates, “…Despite the Agency’s stated readiness to engage with Iran without delay to resolve these issues, Iran has not engaged with the Agency. Consequently, there have been no developments in this reporting period and none of the outstanding issues have been resolved.” The director general writes that he “is increasingly concerned that Iran has not engaged with the Agency on the outstanding safeguards issues during this reporting period and, therefore, that there has been no progress towards resolving them.” The IAEA, in essence, reports that Iran is in breach of the NPT and will remain so until it cooperates. It “reiterates that unless and until Iran provides technically credible explanations for the presence of uranium particles of anthropogenic origin at three undeclared locations in Iran and informs the Agency of the current location(s) of the nuclear material and/or of the contaminated equipment, the Agency will not be able to confirm the correctness and completeness of Iran’s declarations under its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement. Therefore, the Agency is not in a position to provide assurance that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful.”
The IAEA Board of Governors, which next convenes from September 12 to 16, should pass a new censure resolution demanding Iran’s compliance with its NPT obligations. This resolution should include a stipulation that if Iran fails to cooperate by the next board meeting, the board will refer the case to the UN Security Council for countermeasures.
The United States and its European counterparts, Britain, France, and Germany (the E3), should reject Iran’s attempt to link closure of the IAEA’s investigation with renegotiation or re-implementation of the 2015 nuclear deal, known as JCPOA. Iran has demanded the parties ensure the probe’s closure prior to a new deal’s implementation. In addition, if the parties lift sanctions on Iran in the lead-up to a new deal’s re-implementation day, it is unlikely Iran will cooperate with the IAEA. Linking the JCPOA and IAEA probe could also force a showdown with Iran at the IAEA that may end with the United States and E3 voting at the board to preemptively close the IAEA investigation in order to re-implement the deal, much as they did to implement the JCPOA in 2015. Director General Grossi has stood firm, however, saying there can be no political solution to his investigation.
Member states have a second chance to uphold the NPT and send a signal to Iran, as well as other would-be proliferant states, that they will not tolerate NPT violations. Their failure to act will undermine the IAEA’s authority, lead to the NPT’s degradation, and other states seeking nuclear weapons.
IAEA/Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Joint Statement
On March 5, following a visit by Director General Grossi to Tehran, the IAEA and the AEOI released a Joint Statement to “accelerate and strengthen their cooperation and dialogue aimed at the resolution of [outstanding] issues.” The agreement aimed to resolve by the June 2022 board meeting the IAEA’s remaining questions about three undeclared Iranian sites where it found man-made uranium in 2019 and 2020. In a marked difference from the workplan leading up to the implementation of the JCPOA, the agreement did not commit the IAEA to “close” its investigation or satisfy itself with a series of joint meetings and false Iranian statements or declarations. The IAEA/Iran joint statement denied Iran the opportunity to simply “check the boxes” of a scheme without honest cooperation. As Grossi put it, “There is no artificial deadline [for concluding the investigation], there is no predefined outcome, there is no predefined name for what I am going to do.”The IAEA reported in June that pursuant to the agreed timeline, Iran provided information to the agency on March 19 described as “predominantly information that Iran had previously provided to the Agency but also included new information, which was subsequently assessed by the Agency. The information provided by Iran did not address all of the Agency’s questions.” The IAEA submitted additional questions to Iran on April 4. The IAEA and Iran met in Tehran on April 12, May 7, and May 17. During the last meeting, “Iran provided separate videos and presentations expanding on its explanations related to Locations 1, 3 and 4.” Still, the IAEA found the explanations to be not technically credible.
IAEA member states must support Grossi’s quest for answers.

Mossad Chief Hands over Evidence of Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions to Washington
Tel Aviv- Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 9 September, 2022
Mossad chief David Barnea concluded his visit to Washington, where he held talks with senior US officials and presented them with sensitive intelligence information confirming Iran’s dishonesty in its nuclear negotiations with the US and world powers, according to Tel Aviv political sources. According to evidence carried by Barnea, Iran is pushing onward with its efforts to enrich uranium and its project for nuclear armament. Barnea told US military and political officials that Israel fears that the free world has missed its chance and that Iran is on the verge of producing nuclear weapons.
The Mossad chief held meetings with CIA counterpart William Burns, FBI director Christopher Wray, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and senior officials at the State Department. “The enrichment of uranium to 60 % means that they now have the tools and can make at least one nuclear bomb,” Barnea told US officials, accusing Iran of deceiving the international community. Israeli sources said that Barnea is working alongside other Israeli officials to persuade US and European officials to harden their positions on Iran and prevent it from reaching its nuclear ambitions. Israeli officials are trying to get International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) member states to ratify a resolution against Iran considering a new report issued by the UN. The UN report had confirmed that the amount of enriched uranium that Tehran possesses may be sufficient for producing a nuclear bomb if Iran chose to continue enriching uranium to 90 %. A return to a nuclear deal with Iran is unlikely to take place before the US holds its midterm elections in November, a European diplomatic source told the Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

US Imposes Sanctions on Iran over Cyber Activities, Cyberattack on Albania
Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 9 September, 2022
The United States on Friday imposed sanctions on Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security and its minister, accusing them of being tied to a disruptive July cyberattack on Albania and engaging in other cyber activities against the United States and its allies. The move comes after Albania severed diplomatic relations with Iran on Wednesday for the same incident, ordering Iranian diplomats and embassy staff to leave within 24 hours. The US Treasury Department in a statement said the Ministry of Intelligence and Security directs several networks of cyber threat actors, including those involved in cyber espionage and ransomware attacks in support of the Iranian government. "We will not tolerate Iran’s increasingly aggressive cyber activities," the Treasury's Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, Brian Nelson, said in the statement. The ministry was already designated under US sanctions. Iran's mission to the United Nations in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Microsoft, whose cybersecurity research team helped investigate the incident, said in a blog post on Thursday that the Iranian cyber operation involved a combination of digital espionage techniques, data wiping malware and online information operations. The goal of the hackers, according to researchers, appeared to be to embarrass Albanian government officials. The July attacks temporarily disrupted government websites and other public services. Analysts say the operation was intended to punish Albania for supporting an Iranian dissident group based in the country, known as the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK). Iran has disregarded "norms of responsible peacetime state behavior in cyberspace," Secretary of State Antony Blinken added in a statement.

Treasury sanctions Iranian firms for drone sales to Russia
AMER MADHANI/WASHINGTON (AP) /September 9, 2022
The U.S. Treasury Department announced Thursday that it is levying sanctions against four Iranian companies that it says were involved in sending drones to Russia last month for use in Moscow’s war against Ukraine. Tehran-based Safiran Airport Services, Paravar Pars Company, Design and Manufacturing of Aircraft Engines, and Baharestan Kish Company were all hit with the new sanctions. “Russia is making increasingly desperate choices to continue its unprovoked war against Ukraine, particularly in the face of our unprecedented sanctions and export controls,” said Brian Nelson, under secretary of the Treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence “The United States is committed to strictly enforcing our sanctions against both Russia and Iran and holding accountable Iran and those supporting Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.” Safiran coordinates Russian military flights between Iran and Russia, including those that U.S. intelligence officials say transported Iranian unmanned aerial vehicles, personnel, and related equipment from Iran to Russia, over several days last month. Paravar Pars Company is closely associated with Iran’s powerful Revolutionary Guard Corps-controlled Imam Hossein University, and has been involved in the research, development, and production of the Iranian Shahed-171 UAV. Design and Manufacturing of Aircraft Engines is an Iranian company involved in the research, development, and production of the Iranian Shahed-171 UAV. Baharestan Kish Company oversees various defense-related projects in Iran, including the manufacturing of UAVs. The Biden administration said last week that Russia has faced technical problems with Iranian-made drones that were acquired from Tehran in August. The White House says Russian officials picked up Mohajer-6 and Shahed-series unmanned aerial vehicles over several days last month. The Biden administration says U.S. intelligence officials have determined that Russia is looking to acquire hundreds of Iranian UAVs for use in Ukraine. Earlier this week, the Pentagon confirmed that the U.S. intelligence community has determined that Russia is also in the process of purchasing rockets and artillery shells from North Korea for its ongoing fight in Ukraine. The U.S. has frequently downgraded and made public intelligence findings over the course of the grinding war in Ukraine to highlight Moscow’s difficulties in prosecuting the war. Ukraine’s smaller military has put up a stiff resistance against the militarily superior Russian forces.

Syrian airport to resume work days after Israeli strike
Associated Press/September 9, 2022
Syria's international airport in Aleppo is to resume business on Friday after the facility was put out of commission by an Israeli missile attack, the country's transport ministry said. The ministry said in a statement carried by state media that the damage has been fixed and called on airline companies to resume their flights to the city in northern Syria. Israel launched a missile attack on Tuesday night targeting Aleppo's airport for the second time in a week and all flights were diverted to the capital Damascus. The Israeli strike tore large craters in three spots on the facility's runway, satellite images analyzed Thursday by The Associated Press show. The satellite images from Planet Labs PBC taken Wednesday show the airport's single east-west runway bore three new craters. Vehicles and workers surrounded the two of the craters while the one furthest east had no traffic near it. Israel also launched airstrikes at Aleppo airport last week, damaging its runway and, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an opposition war monitor, a warehouse that likely stored a shipment of Iranian rockets. Last week's strike tore a hole in the runway and also damaged a structure close to the military side of the airfield, satellite photos analyzed by The Associated Press showed. "The airport will be working at full capacity to serve passengers and airline companies around the clock," said the Transport Ministry adding that work will resume at noon Friday (0900 GMT). On June 10, Israeli airstrikes that struck Damascus International Airport caused significant damage to infrastructure and runways and rendered the main runway unserviceable. The airport opened two weeks later following renovation work. Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes on targets inside government-controlled parts of Syria in recent years, but rarely acknowledges or discusses such operations. Israel has acknowledged, however, that it targets bases of Iran-allied militant groups, such as Lebanon's Hezbollah, which has sent thousands of fighters to support Syrian President Bashar Assad's forces.

Conservation plan highlights Arabs' fraught ties to Israel
Associated Press/September 9, 2022
Ayoub Rumeihat opened his palms to the sky in prayer as he stood among tombstones for Bedouins killed in action while serving the state of Israel. Finishing the holy words, he gazed at the distant Mediterranean Sea across a valley full of olives and oak where his community has grazed goats for generations. Rumeihat says the Bedouins, celebrated by the Israeli military for their knowledge of the land, fear the government now seeks to sever their ties to that same piece of earth. Rumeihat and his fellow Bedouins see a plan to turn their land into a wildlife corridor as an affront to their service to the country. They say it's in line with steps taken by nationalist Israeli governments against the Arab minority in recent years that have deepened a sense of estrangement and tested the community's already brittle ties to the state. The plan has sparked rare protests from Bedouins in Israel's northern Galilee region — some of the few local Arabs to embrace early Jewish settlers before Israel's creation in 1948. Many have since served in the Israeli police and military, often fighting against fellow Palestinians. "We were with you from the beginning," said Rumeihat, standing next to a tombstone engraved with a Star of David in honor of a Bedouin tracker likely killed by a Palestinian. "We are like the lemon and the olive trees. How can you uproot us?"Palestinian citizens of Israel make up 20% of the country's 9 million people. They have citizenship and can vote, and some reach the highest echelons of government and business. But they have long faced discrimination in housing, jobs and public services and face neglect at the hands of the state. Many Jewish Israelis see them as a fifth column for their solidarity with the Palestinian cause.
Within that same minority are subgroups, like the Bedouins, who have become more embedded in Israeli society through their service in the security forces. But in recent years, the Bedouins have accused Israel of belittling their service with its policies, particularly a 2018 law that defines the country as the nation state of the Jewish people. Bedouin and Druze Israelis, who both serve in the military, felt the law demoted them to second-class citizens. The community sees the wildlife corridor as another slight. It will set controls on their grazing and could limit the residents' housing options in the future.
The Bedouins have started small weekly protests with Jewish supporters in the Galilee and also in Jerusalem, outside the offices of the prime minister and the Nature and Parks Authority. The 2,600-acre (1,050-hectare) wildlife corridor is meant to allow foxes, quail and other animals to move safely around the urban landscape of Haifa, the country's third-largest city. The Bedouins call the lush ravines of the area al-Ghaba, or "forest" in Arabic.Environmentalists say wildlife corridors, which serve as safe migration zones for animals, are an important part of conservation efforts.
Uri Shanas, an ecology professor at the University of Haifa-Oranim, said the corridor was essential because the surrounding area is built up and the animals, especially the endangered mountain gazelle, require the land bridge. "The only place that it's still thriving in the world is in Israel and we are obliged to protect it," he said. Palestinian citizens of Israel have in the past accused Israeli authorities of justifying land seizures under the guise of environmental stewardship. In January, Bedouins in southern Israel staged protests against tree planting by nationalists on disputed land. And advocacy groups say many forests in Israel were planted atop the ruins of Palestinian villages emptied during the events that led to Israel's creation. A spokeswoman for the parks authority, Daniela Turgeman, said the corridor plan was crafted with local leaders in the 1980s and surveyed plants and animals. She said that it allows for controlled grazing and said there are only "a few individuals who still have objections."
The Bedouins object to the plan's omission of traditional land-use rights and reject any limits on grazing. They claim private ownership of certain parcels and total grazing rights after settling in the area over 100 years ago, buying land, planting olive groves and farms, and building homes. They also deny there was any prior consultation with the parks authority, which Turgeman said formed the plan after six recent meetings and "a joint tour" with local leaders. Guy Alon, an official with the parks authority, told Israel's Channel 13 TV in July that the wildlife corridor would benefit Jews and Arabs while respecting property rights and striking an ecological balance. For "Bedouins who come and say 'we want open spaces,' the nature reserve offers just that," he said. "Those who ask that we let them graze on the land, we respect that," he said.
After learning of the plan, three Bedouin villages filed an objection, charging the corridor didn't take into consideration private Bedouin property. The Haifa district planning committee rejected that objection, and an appeal is now being heard.
"Nature has been used as a political tool before many, many times, so for people there is no trust," said Myssana Morany, a lawyer with the Arab legal rights group Adalah, which filed the objection on the residents' behalf. She said the parks authority has dealt with the Bedouins differently than it has with other citizens, pointing to nearby examples of its plans to integrate nature reserves with existing farms and other types of land use. Environmental claims ring hollow to villagers who see ongoing construction at nearby Jewish villages as far more ecologically disruptive than grazing goats and olive groves. Fatima Khaldi, 73, sitting in her large family home in the village of Khawaldeh, said local knowledge will protect the land more than any outside expertise. "Their whole goal is to remove us and destroy our heritage."Mustafa Rumeihat, 70, a distant relative of Rumeihat, said he's worried his grandchildren won't inherit the family ties to the land. "I see myself dying of desperation," he said, shuffling downhill from his pen of two dozen goats. "When my son asks me about the land, I won't be able to answer him."

Ukrainian Forces Threaten Russian Supply Lines after Breakthrough
Asharq Al-Awsat/Friday, 9 September, 2022
Swiftly advancing Ukrainian troops were approaching the main railway supplying Russian forces in the east on Friday, after the collapse of a section of Russia's front line caused the most dramatic shift in the war's momentum since its early weeks.
In a video address, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said troops had "liberated dozens of settlements" and reclaimed more than 1,000 square km (385 square miles) of territory in Kharkiv region in the east and Kherson in the south in the past week, reported Reuters.
Zelenskiy posted a video in which Ukrainian soldiers said they had captured the eastern town of Balakliia, which lies along a stretch of front stretching south of Kharkiv, Ukraine's second largest city. The Ukrainian military said it had advanced nearly 50 km through that front after an assault that appeared to take the Russians by surprise. It was the first lightning advance of its kind reported by either side for months, in a war mainly characterized by relentless grinding frontline battles since Russia abandoned its disastrous assault on the capital Kyiv in March.
Nearly 24 hours after Ukraine announced the breakthrough on the Kharkiv front, Russia had yet to comment publicly. The Kremlin declined to comment on Friday and referred questions to the Russian military. Ukraine has not allowed independent journalists into the area to confirm the extent its advances. But Ukrainian news websites have shown pictures of troops cheering from armored vehicles as they roar past street signs bearing the names of previously Russian-held towns, and Russian forces surrendering on the side of the road. "We see success in Kherson now, we see some success in Kharkiv and so that is very, very encouraging," US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told a news conference with his Czech counterpart in Prague. The Institute for the Study of War think tank said the Ukrainians were now within just 15 km of Kupiansk, an essential junction for the main railway lines that Moscow has long relied on to supply its forces on the battlefields in the east. Since Russia's forces were defeated near Kyiv in March, Moscow has used its firepower advantage to make slow advances by bombarding towns and villages. But that tactic depends on tons of ammunition a day reaching the front line by train from western Russia. Until now, Russia had successfully fended off Ukraine's attempts to cut off that train line. The Ukrainian general staff said early on Friday retreating Russian forces were trying to evacuate wounded personnel and damaged military equipment near Kharkiv.
"Thanks to skillful and coordinated actions, the Armed Forces of Ukraine, with the support of the local population, advanced almost 50 km in three days." Tens of thousands of people have been killed, millions have been driven from their homes and Russian forces have destroyed entire cities since Moscow launched what it calls a "special military operation" in February to "disarm" Ukraine. Russia denies intentionally targeting civilians. In the latest reported strike on civilians, Ukrainian officials said Russia had hit a hospital near the international border in the northeastern Sumy region on Friday morning. Reuters could not independently confirm the report. "Russian aviation, without crossing the Ukrainian border, fired at a hospital. The premises were destroyed, there are wounded people," regional governor Dmytro Zhyvytskyi said on Telegram.
BREAKTHROUGH
The surprise Ukrainian breakthrough in the east came a week after Kyiv announced the start of a long-awaited counter-offensive hundreds of km away at the other end of the front line, in Kherson province in the south. Ukrainian officials say Russia moved thousands of troops south to respond to the Kherson advance, leaving other parts of the front line exposed and creating the opportunity for the lightning assault in the east. "We found a weak spot where the enemy wasn't ready," presidential adviser Oleksiy Arestovych said in a video posted on YouTube. Less information so far has emerged about the campaign in the south, with Ukraine keeping journalists away and releasing few details. Ukraine has been using new Western-supplied artillery and rockets to hit Russian rear positions there, with the aim of trapping thousands of Russian troops on the west bank of the wide Dnipro River and cutting them off from supplies.
Arestovych acknowledged progress in the south had not yet been as swift as the sudden breakthrough in the east. Russia's state news agency RIA quoted Russian-appointed Kherson authorities as saying some Ukrainian troops were captured during the counterattack and some Polish tanks they were using were destroyed. Reuters could not verify those reports. The United Nations accused Moscow of denying access to thousands of prisoners of war, with the head of a UN human rights monitoring team in Ukraine, Matilda Bogner, describing documented cases of torture and ill-treatment of prisoners held by Russian forces and their proxies. UN monitors had also documented incidents of torture and ill-treatment of POWs by Ukraine, which had given them unimpeded access, she said. Ukraine has said it will investigate any violations and take appropriate legal action. Moscow denies abusing prisoners. Dozens of Ukrainian troops died in a fiery blast while being held by pro-Russian authorities in July in what Kyiv called a massacre. Moscow blamed Ukrainian shelling. North of the battlefield, Russian missiles struck multiple areas in Kharkiv on Thursday, causing widespread damage and casualties, according to the regional prosecutor's office. "We are scared ... You can't get used to it, never," resident Olena Rudenko told Reuters.

Ukraine Army’s Breakthrough in North Threatens Russian Grip
Bloomberg/Marc Champion/September 9, 2022
A Ukrainian counteroffensive appears to be progressing in the north, but less so in the southern Kherson region that has attracted greater attention and Russian reinforcements.
Ukrainian officials and Russian military bloggers alike on Thursday described a counteroffensive in the north that has surprised in its speed, the first time since the war began that Ukrainian forces have been able to push past Russian defenses on a more than tactical level.
The limited breakthrough comes as Russia’s President Vladimir Putin ratchets up pressure on European energy markets. That has officials in Kyiv racing to show allies the war can be won. In the few days since the offensive began with an assault on the town of Balakliya, about 90 km (56 miles) south east of Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second largest city, units have advanced 50 km into Russian-held territory, taking 20 settlements, according to Oleksiy Hromov, a spokesman for the Ukrainian armed forces. “The enemy is partially demoralized but continues to put up resistance,” Hromov said in a briefing on Thursday. In his Thursday evening video address, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said soldiers had liberated a total of 1000 km2 (386 square miles) of occupied territory since the beginning of September. Some Ukrainian units have moved so fast they’re beyond the range of artillery support, according to pro-Kremlin Russian military blogger Alexander Kots. In Kherson, however, some Russian bloggers portrayed a much more difficult scenario for their Ukrainian foes, claiming heavy casualties and a stuttering advance -- accounts supported by wounded Ukrainian soldiers interviewed by the Washington Post.
It wasn’t possible to independently verify the claims by either Ukraine or the Russian bloggers, but they were unusually aligned.
A Ukrainian force spearheaded by 15 tanks moved on Balakliya on Tuesday, overwhelming eight nearby villages in less than a day and adding another the following day, Romanov Light, a Telegram blogger with over 56,000 followers, wrote on his channel. “An advance group of special forces flies in an armored column at speed into the center of a settlement, dismounts, suppresses everything around and then holds the settlement,” Romanov Light wrote, referring to armored personnel carriers.
In a post late Wednesday, he added the Russian air force had finally engaged, risking anti-aircraft fire to bomb Ukrainian units on the ground. By Thursday, however, the Ukrainian attack had claimed Shevchenkovo, the largest remaining town on the road east to Kupyansk, the main logistical hub for Russian forces in the region.Meanwhile, communications had been lost Thursday with Russian troops still encircled in Balakliya, Russian military correspondent Yury Kotyonok said.
While in some cases even the identities of Russian bloggers can’t be verified, those cited are closely watched by Western and independent Russian military analysts for their willingness to depart from the Kremlin script and their record in chronicling the war.
The latest daily report from the Institute for the Study of War described the gulf between the Russian Defense Ministry’s silence on Ukrainian gains and criticism from military bloggers as the most severe since a disastrous attempted river crossing by Moscow’s forces in May. It also said Ukrainian troops were within 20 km of Kupyansk and would likely take it within days.
The dismay among Russian bloggers at the turn of events was matched by hope in Kyiv.
How events develop further around Balakliya and Kupyansk is unclear, not least because Ukraine likely lacks the deep reserves needed to exploit any breakthrough to take and hold territory on a larger scale.
US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Ukraine has been using its military capabilities, including HARM missiles, well in its current operations. “They are changing the dynamics on the battlefield,” he told reporters in Prague. “We see success in Kherson, we see success in Kharkiv.”
In an article on Wednesday, Ukraine’s top commander Valery Zaluzhnyi cited bigger reserves of personnel and weapons as prerequisites for any counteroffensive capable of changing the course of war, projecting that this would happen in 2023.
Zaluzhnyi also singled out the Ukrainian position on the Izyum front in Kharkiv as particularly difficult for its forces to hold. Still, the counterattack, if it continues, could permanently threaten Kupyansk, a critical Russian transit and logistics hub for the Izyum front. Disrupting the flow of troops and supplies toward Izyum could in turn reduce the threat to Slovyansk, a key town for Russian forces to seize if they are to meet Putin’s stated goal of taking all of the Donbas region.
Already on Thursday, Kupyansk was under continual artillery fire and Kremlin forces had imposed a lock down for fear of Ukrainian saboteurs, according to Wargonzo, a much-cited and fiercely partisan Russian Telegram blog that has more than 1 million subscribers. The Kharkiv offensive has fed a more generalized gloom among many Russian commentators willing to depart from the Kremlin’s relentlessly optimistic script, disappointed by what they see as the poor performance and leadership of the Russian military. Failing a declaration of martial law and full military and economic mobilization, “I do not expect any more major successes of the (Russian) armed forces over the next 2-3 months,” Igor Girkin, a Russian blogger and reputed intelligence officer who was the first commander of pro-Russia forces in Ukraine’s Donbas region in 2014, wrote on his Telegram channel this week.
Girkin, who uses the pseudonym Strelkov, is being tried in absentia for his alleged role in the July 2014 shooting down of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, with a ruling expected in November. He has denied the accusation. His Telegram channel has 469,000 subscribers and is frequently cited by Western military analysts. Girkin described the Ukrainian offensive further south in Kherson as dangerous for Russian forces that could find themselves trapped on the West bank of the Dnipro River, but far less successful for Ukraine.
“The large losses of the advancing in people and equipment are not justified by territorial successes, not a single Russian grouping has been defeated,” Girkin wrote.
The tide could also turn in the north. While the Ukrainian advances toward Kupyansk look to be a “major breakthrough,” the Conflict Intelligence Team, a Russian research group that tracks the war, said in its daily bulletin on Thursday, “there are Russian reinforcements that have yet to be deployed.”
(Updates with comments from US Defense Secretary. An earlier version of this story corrected the timeframe in an IWS study)

Analysis-Ukraine blindsides Russia with northeastern thrust at supply hub
Tom Balmforth/KYIV/Reuters/September 9, 2022
Ukraine's rapid territorial gains have caught Russia off guard at a vulnerable section of their front line in an attack that threatens an important supply hub used by Moscow in the east, military analysts said.
The surprise advance was Ukraine's most dramatic of the war so far and came in northeastern Kharkiv region hundreds of kilometres from the southern Black Sea region of Kherson where the brunt of a Ukrainian counteroffensive was expected.
Moscow has long held around a fifth of Ukraine's territory in the south and east. It heavily reinforced its troops in the south as Kyiv talked up plans to attack there in recent months, but that left Russian forces exposed elsewhere, said Konrad Muzyka, director of the Rochan military consultancy in Poland.
After days of withholding battlefield developments, Ukraine said on Thursday that its forces had burst through Russian lines in the Kharkiv region that borders Russia, advancing up to 50 km (30 miles) and capturing dozens of settlements.
"It's an opportunistic attack that's really caught the Russian forces by surprise. It could actually become something quite significant if the Ukrainians are able to push on and take the (city) of Kupiansk," said Neil Melvin of the RUSI think tank.
Kupiansk is a rail hub on the way to the key Russian-held outpost of Izium from where Moscow has anchored some of its main operations in the partially-occupied eastern region of Donetsk whose full capture the Kremlin has prioritised.
Civilians were being evacuated from Kupiansk and Izium, a Russian-appointed local official, Vitaly Ganchev, said after Russia's defence ministry posted footage of trucks and armoured vehicles it said were heading to the Kharkiv region.
The U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War predicted Kyiv's forces would likely recapture Kupiansk within 72 hours."That (gain) would then threaten an encirclement of Russian forces in Izium, so it could become quite a blow for the Russians in Donetsk (region). There is a chance to have a strategic breakthrough on the Donetsk front," Melvin said. Ganchev said earlier that the breach was a "substantial victory" for Kyiv in a surprising acknowledgment broadcast on state television in Russia after months in which Moscow has said its "special military operation" is going to plan.
But many in the West still predict a long war of attrition. "This is likely to go on for some significant period of time," U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Friday. "President Putin has demonstrated that he will throw a lot of people into this."
'A THOUSAND CUTS'
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said in his nightly address that Ukraine had retaken more than 1,000 square km (385 sq miles) of territory in the south and east since Sept. 1.
Previously the battlefield's frontlines had not changed significantly since Russia claimed to have captured the eastern Luhansk region in early July. "The general frontline situation resembles a stalemate, but perhaps we are seeing the first signs that the balance of power is shifting towards Ukraine," Muzyka said. He said that neither Ukraine nor Russia had the manpower and equipment to conduct a large-scale, combined arms counteroffensive. "We are going to see probing attacks, limited incursions into certain areas. Depending on how they play out, we will see more movement or more advances, or counterattacks," he said. Dale Buckner, CEO of security firm Global Guardian, said "we do not believe the Ukrainians will be able to take entire sections of the Russian-occupied territory by spring of 2023, but will have limited success with smaller tactical objectives." Buckner said that Russian supply lines were now being stretched from Luhansk to Kherson, providing the opportunity for a surprise attack on the poorly defended front line in and around the Kharkiv region. "This is the first real validation of Ukraine’s ability to counterattack—but with limited success. It does change the path of the conflict moving forward. The Russians now have an expanding challenge of defending the terrain they have taken," he said. Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukraine's president, told Reuters that Ukraine had significantly stepped up attacks on Russian logistics infrastrucure and supply corridors. "We are pushing on their army in all directions, there isn't one particular one. We are using the tactic of a thousand cuts. Kharkiv, Kherson, Melitopol directions, as well as Donetsk and Luhansk – they are a priority," he said. He said Moscow's offensive had stopped and that Russia was switching to defence. "Russia is opening defence in all directions, lost at where to send their reserves. They are trying to guess where our main targets will be, and redirect their reserves, including artillery capabilities, to those directions," he said.
(Reporting by Tom Balmforth; editing by Philippa Fletcher)

Ukraine retakes settlements in Kharkiv advance - Russian-installed official
LONDON/Reuters/September 9, 2022
Ukraine has recaptured several settlements in the Kharkiv region from Russian forces in a "very sharp and rapid" advance, the Russian-installed administrator of Russian-occupied parts of the region said in a live online broadcast on Friday. "The enemy is being delayed as much as possible, but several settlements have already come under the control of Ukrainian armed formations," Vitaly Ganchev, head of the Russian-backed administration for the Kharkiv region, said on state television host Vladimir Solovyov's daily livestream. Kyiv says it has pushed up to 50 km (30 miles) past Russian lines this week and recaptured dozens of settlements in what has turned out to be a dramatic counteroffensive, and Ganchev's remarks were one of the first Russian official acknowledgements of major battlefield setbacks. "We don't know what the combat situation there is now, or what the humanitarian situation is ... But the population that is still in our settlements, of course, we propose evacuating," he said. "Just to save lives, because every settlement in Kharkiv region is under continuous shelling ... "Reserves have been brought up from Russia, and we hope to regain control of these settlements in the next few days." At the end of the interview, host Sergey Karnaukhov said: "This is frankly horrendous."Ganchev said during the interview that civilians were being evacuated from Izium, Kupiansk and Veliky Burluk, all key towns on supply roads for Russian forces trying to extend their control of the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine, and called the breach of Russian defences a "substantial victory" for Ukraine. e said the evacuation was mainly from Kupiansk and Izium, but added: "We've now received word that Veliky Burluk is under artillery fire, so people, of course, were asked to leave for safer settlements."Ganchev said he would turn for help to authorities in the Belgorod region of southern Russia if there were problems relocating the people who were evacuated. The U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War said Ukrainian forces were likely to recapture Kupiansk within 72 hours. Russia has taken control of around a fifth of Ukraine since launching its invasion in February. Moscow says what it calls a "special military operation" was necessary to defend Ukraine's Russian-speakers from persecution and prevent the West from using Ukraine to threaten Russia - allegations dismissed by Kyiv and the West as baseless pretexts for a war of aggression.
(Reporting by Reuters; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 09-10/2022
Actually, Why Retaliate to Israel’s Strikes?
Hussam Itani/Asharq Al-Awsat/September 09/2022
Much time has been spent asking, after each of Israel’s weekly airstrikes on Syrian territory: Why does the Syrian regime refrain from retaliating?
The fact is that hardly a week goes by without an Israeli airstrike on various targets in Syria, mostly those operated by the IRGC or the Lebanese and Iraqi militias that take their marching orders from it. The targeted areas range from Aleppo and its airport in the north to the regions neighboring the Golan Heights in the south. And Israel makes use of its diverse arsenal of missiles- long-range, precision, “smart,” and others, which allows the attacking planes to maintain a distance, usually firing from over Lebanese skies or the sea. The Israeli government has generally followed a strategy of claiming responsibility anonymously, with details about the strikes reported by Western journalists or unnamed sources.
The Syrian regime cast aside the threats it used to regularly make in the aftermath of every airstrike since 2012 after they became the subject of ridicule for friends and enemies alike. Moreover, the Syrian side’s lack of enthusiasm for avenging this humiliation is no secret. Israeli newspaper Haaretz did not exactly make shockwaves with its report that President Bashar al-Assad had prohibited former Quds Force Commander Qassem Soleimani, as well as his successor General Esmail Qaani, from launching attacks on Israel from Syrian territory.
Another Israeli newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth, added that Assad had asked the Russians to pressure the Israelis to refrain from striking vital Syrian facilities like the airports of Damascus and Aleppo. Both are hit by Israeli strikes as soon as any Iranian plane that the Israelis believe is delivering arms to Lebanese Hezbollah approaches. The paper has also reported that Israel had assured Assad that- even if some Syrian regime sites have been hit and this may embarrass the Syrian authorities, undermine their legitimacy in the eyes of citizens, and discredit them as a member of the Axis of Resistance- Israel has no intention of weakening his regime or his army, and they are not the targets of Israeli military operations, which seek Iranian interests. While skepticism regarding the integrity of Israeli sources is legitimate, it is major figures associated with the Axis of Resistance that encourage us to read Haaretz and Yedioth Ahronoth and reiterate their esteem for the Israeli press day and night.
The assessment of the ruling regime in Damascus regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict in general and of Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights helps explain this regime’s refusal to take any steps besides hitting “enemy targets” with air defense missiles when Israel strikes. Since the defeat of 1967, the Syrian regime has adopted a utilitarian reading of the situation, with the Baath regime declaring victory after the ceasefire and losing the Golan Heights because the war “did not bring down the progressive regime in Damascus.” This mindset continues to prevail among the current leadership 55 years after the Israelis occupied an entire Syrian province: what matters in this conflict is how it affects the stability of the regime and the privileges of its elites.
That explains Assad’s rejection of any Iranian attack targeting Israel despite the material and human costs of the Jewish state’s attacks. Escalation against a superior enemy would inevitably be met by retaliation that exacerbates the trepidation and exhaustion plaguing the regime after over a decade of the intentional and systematic destruction of mythical proportions in Syria.
Reading the memoirs of US officials who mediated the US initiative for a peace deal between Damascus and Israel unequivocally affirms this view. US diplomat Frederic Hof’s book Reaching for the Heights, which was published a few months ago, is the latest example. What matters, as far as both Assads- Hafez and Bashar- are concerned, is ensuring the regime’s survival, safeguarding its influence in neighboring countries, and making gains for elites. Decisions on war (in name only) and peace are made within the regime’s broader decision-making framework that is concerned only with its survival.
No political actor in the region is unaware of this fact. No rational observer cannot see that the regime’s “angry responses” to the Israeli airstrikes will not go beyond rhetoric. This is true regardless of how deeply humiliating, like those that put Damascus International Airport out of order time after time, these attacks can be. Syrian society is exhausted and wounded; it can hardly pick itself up. And the Arab states have grown weary of the games the regime in Damascus plays. Meanwhile, those investing in the conflict with Israel can find other arenas near and far, like the At Tanf military base, the Lebanese borders, or the negotiating table in Vienna, from which to send the messages they want to deliver and raise the number of planes sending its allied militias weapons. Why would Assad bear the costs of retaliation?

The explosion to come in Iraq
Khairallah Khairallah/The Arab Weekly/September 09/2022
The Iraqi situation does not need any more dialogue sessions to prove that nothing will save the country except a new order that does away with the anarchy of arms. The establishment of a new system seems difficult, even impossible, in light of the prevailing balances on the ground, especially given the bloody clashes that occurred recently in the “Green Zone” inside Baghdad. It is impossible to reach a new order without asking a very simple question: is Iraq still a viable country? The answer is unequivocal. There is no possible revival of a state in the world, any state, without keeping arms in the hands of the legitimate forces only, specifically the regular army and the security forces with their various branches. To put it more clearly, Iraq cannot return to being a normal, viable state with the presence of an auxiliary army, the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF). The "Hashd", as it is known, is nothing but a sectarian militia group affiliated with the "Islamic Republic" of Iran.
The task of this proxy group is to prove that Iraq belongs to Iran and no one else. What Shia leader Moqtada al-Sadr has done since the parliamentary elections of last October is advance the dangerous idea of ​​Iraqi independence from Iran. This would mean going back to the days preceding the 2003 US invasion. This is the core of the crisis that Iraq is now enduring. It is a crisis that boils down to one question: is Iraq an independent state or not? The Islamic Republic has no intention of abandoning its hold on Iraq, especially after the Revolutionary Guards have pulled all levers of power. Every Iranian knows that leaving Baghdad means, for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, leaving Tehran as well.
In nineteen years, the “Islamic Republic” has linked the fate of Iraq to its own and linked the fate of the regime in Iran to the future of Iraq. Hence, the Revolutionary Guards have no interest in stability of any kind in their western neighbour. Iran only needs more chaos in Iraq so that there will no possible rehabilitation of the Iraqi state. No one is in a better position to ensure that than the PMF, it being a copy of the Iran's “Revolutionary Guard Corps". In the absence of an understanding between Moqtada al-Sadr, and all that he represents, on the one hand, and the leaders of the “Popular Mobilisation Forces” militias and the so-called “Coordination framework” that includes parties loyal to Iran on the other, Iraq faces one single prospect. That prospect is of a new explosion greater than that witnessed in the “Green Zone,” and which was stopped by the intervention of the supreme Shia authority in Najaf, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. There is no indication that a new round of violence can be avoided, especially in light of Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Khadimi's insistence that the army remain neutral. It is clear that the premier does not want a drop of blood on his hands.
The US occupation of Iraq laid the foundation for the current tragedy. Questions that were asked before the start of the US invasion are still being asked. For example, how can a new regime be built in Iraq that will serve as a model for the region by bringing into Baghdad on the back of American tanks, Iraqi militias which fought between 1980 and 1988 alongside Iran?
The irrational logic followed by successive US administrations has led to the Iraqi of today. No one can dispute the fact that Saddam Hussein's regime was a disaster for the country, for its people and for the entire region. But what also cannot be ignored is that the US administration headed by Bush junior did not know much about Iraq and its complexities, nor about Iran for that matter. The Bush administration overlooked the desire of the "Islamic Republic" to take its revenge on Iraq and the Iraqis and the historical ambitions of Iran in Iraq. It refused to take any advice from Arab leaders.
In the year 2022, the fate of Iraq has become linked to that of the Iranian regime. There is no indication that the Revolutionary Guards want to let Iran be a normal country in the region, living in peace and security with its neighbours.
Taking into account the Iranian obsession with keeping Iraq hostage to the “Islamic Republic” while the majority of Iraqi society overwhelmingly wants to be free of Tehran’s control and the corrupt political class, we realise we are in front of a powder keg that could explode at any moment. This arises from the impossibility of reconciling two opposite concepts; the concept of a civil state with modern institutions against that of a militia state, which Iran seeks to impose upon Iraq. When will Iraq erupt again? That is the question on the minds of people in this country, which is of strategic importance from many perspectives including geographic and oil reserves, but where all political solutions seem blocked.

'We Did That': Afghanistan a Year after the US Surrender/Afghanistan is a Terror State, Al Qaeda Is Thriving
Guy Millière/Gatestone Institute./September 09/2022
Other men... may prove even more harmful than Zawahiri. Before Zawahiri was chosen, for instance, Saif al-Adel, a former Egyptian Special Forces officer, was appointed its provisional "caretaker." His name is often cited as that of the probable next leader of al-Qaeda.
In addition to al-Qaeda's having a new base in Afghanistan, the terrorist group also appears to have had, for years, a significant base in Iran.
By lifting many of these sanctions, the Biden administration has re-empowered the mullahs to finance the Islamic groups they have funded in the recent past. Al-Qaeda is clearly one of them.
After the death of Zawahiri, the Biden administration issued a press release blaming the Taliban for having allowed "Afghan territory to be used by terrorists to threaten the security of other countries". Did members of the Biden administration actually expect anything else from the Taliban and the Haqqani network?
The Biden administration also blamed the Taliban for not respecting the Doha agreement , a peace deal between the US and the Taliban.... Did the Biden administration honestly expect ruthless terrorists to honor the agreement without the US showing at least a little determination to use force if necessary?
Over the past twelve months, the Biden administration has sent hundreds of millions of dollars to Afghanistan, supposedly for humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people. How, could one not know, however, that most of the funds were embezzled by the Taliban and used to finance the Taliban regime and its terrorist activities?
The Biden administration almost never talks about Iran's financing Islamic terrorism and never mentions that the Biden administration's lifting sanctions on the regime has contributed to financing the very terrorist organizations that the US claims to be fighting.
US Special Representative for Iran Robert Malley continues to negotiate with the Iranian regime. Worse: Malley is not even the one doing the negotiating. Negotiating with Iran on behalf of America is -- Russia! The Americans are not even allowed in the room.
Moreover, all this is taking place while the US is half-heartedly helping Ukraine to defend itself against a ruthless Russian scorched earth onslaught. Malley nonetheless persists in separating the Biden administration's desire to sign a new disastrous nuclear deal from the regime's terrorist activities.
A year after the Biden administration abandoned Afghanistan to the Taliban and the Haqqani network, Afghanistan is back to being a terrorist state. It hosts and supports al-Qaeda while giving it the opportunity to organize terrorist attacks from Afghan soil.
The US, for its part, not only ran from Afghanistan a year ago, it also ran from its last watchtower in Central-South Asia, and, by not even leaving a small residual force as strongly advised, abandoned countless people be slaughtered and enabled the country to be plunged into economic collapse, chaos and starvation.
Iran, on the other hand, has been significantly strengthened. It supports al-Qaeda and now serenely threatens the United States. On August 1, the mullahs sent a message saying that Iran is building nuclear warheads that could turn New York into "hellish ruins".
August 15, 2022 saw the first anniversary of the takeover of the presidential palace in Kabul by the Taliban. It was a dismal anniversary. What happened in the past year throughout Afghanistan were countless atrocities committed by the Taliban. Pictured: Taliban fighters stand on a US-supplied Humvee military vehicle that they captured in Herat, Afghanistan on August 13, 2021. (Photo by AFP via Getty Images)
July 31st 2022. Kabul, Afghanistan. Ayman al-Zawahiri is killed by an American drone strike. His death is described as a victory against Islamic terrorism and a success for the Biden administration. Zawahiri was an Islamic terrorist, head of al-Qaeda; his death was good news. America's intelligence services showed they still could obtain precise intelligence in hostile countries and strike enemies of the United States wherever they are. Was the elimination of Zawahiri, however, really a victory against Islamic terrorism?
The US military took out Osama bin Laden, founder of al-Qaeda, in 2011 raid in Pakistan, and brought back to the US many documents to analyze the operational capacity of the terrorist organization and its various plans for attacks, many of which, thanks to that information, may have been thwarted.
Zawahiri, however, was killed by a missile launched from a drone; no documents were seized. Islamic terrorist organizations communicate little secret information, if at all, by electronic means, so physical documents are valuable to see what they are up to. The abandonment of Afghanistan a year ago, however, created conditions that make commando raids such as the one on bin Laden arguably impossible. Potentially useful documents remained in Kabul.
Worse, Zawahiri's presence in Kabul further reveals the dire consequences of the US surrender. When the United States surrendered, Kabul again became again a city where terrorist leaders could live and feel safe. The Taliban regime probably did not simply ignore the presence of Zawahiri; it may well have protected him.
In addition, that Zawahiri could live in a house belonging to a top aide to Sirajuddin Haqqani -- the leader of the Haqqani network and acting interior minister of the Taliban regime -- in an elegant district, not far from the U.S. embassy that American diplomats had to leave in a hurry, says quite a lot. The Haqqani network -- an ultra-violent terrorist group that had been independent before joining the Taliban -- enjoys a close relationship and shared ideology with al-Qaeda's leaders. The Haqqani network appears to have a predominant weight in the Taliban government, which today is even closer to al-Qaeda than the Taliban government of 2001.
While in Kabul, Zawahiri was doubtless in contact with other members of both the al-Qaeda and Haqqani networks. The result is that Kabul is once again a relatively safe haven for al-Qaeda.
Afghanistan, in fact, appears ruled by people who have ties to al-Qaeda. What becomes problematic is that the declared goal of Islamic terrorists is to spread Islam, an ambition that unfortunately includes attacking the West. It is therefore impossible to think that the members of al-Qaeda in Kabul have given up these dreams and no longer contemplate mass murder or the West's destruction. It is also impossible to imagine that the Afghan government knew nothing about any of this.
What took place in August 2021 shows that even while the American military was carrying out evacuations at Kabul Airport, the city was already under the control of the Haqqani network and other Islamic terrorists. Thirteen American service members, 11 of them Marines, paid with their lives. The situation since then has only worsened; the US leaving the Taliban billions of dollars' worth of sophisticated weapons and military vehicles also has not helped. Afghanistan today shows all the features of being a terrorist state.
On August 16, 2021, US President Joe Biden, in a seeming attempt to justify his decision to abandon Afghanistan, declared that the United States had come to Afghanistan to "make sure al Qaeda could not use Afghanistan as a base from which to attack us again. We did that", he said. A year later, however, Afghanistan is in the hands of a government close to al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda is once again firmly established in Afghanistan and again able to use it as a base from which to organize attacks against the US.
Worse, the elimination of Zawahiri is probably not even a major blow to the terrorist organization he led. Al-Qaeda is not really a structured organization. It operates, rather, as an informal network whose different branches act autonomously. The leaders can give directives and organize major attacks, but the branches of the organization also manage and carry out their own actions.
Al-Qaeda has branches almost everywhere Islam is present. Once powerful in Yemen, al-Qaeda has now weakened there; but in the Islamic Maghreb and in sub-Saharan Africa, al-Qaeda is still extremely active. It plays a major role in destabilizing Mali, Chad, Burkina Faso, and southern Algeria.
Al-Shabaab as well has carried out countless attacks in Somalia (here, here and here). Al-Shabaab attacked Kenya in 2020 and Ethiopia in 2022. In addition, Al-Shabaab collects large amounts of money through extortion and plays a major role in funding al-Qaeda's leadership.
Zawahiri had taken over the role of bin Laden, who had served mainly as a guide and a mentor. Zawahiri's legitimacy came from his having been at bin Laden's side from the beginning. He had, however, never shown any particular skill. During his leadership, however, there was no major terrorist attack against the West. He released a few recordings, but often gave no sign of life for months at a time. Analysts sometimes speculated that he was dead.
Other men also at bin Laden's side from the beginning may prove even more harmful than Zawahiri. Before Zawahiri was chosen, for instance, Saif al-Adel, a former Egyptian Special Forces officer, was appointed its provisional "caretaker." His name is often cited as that of the probable next leader of al-Qaeda. Al-Adel played a major role in several attacks, including the bombings of US embassies in Africa in 1998. In 2004, he published online a terrorism manual called "The Base of the Vanguard", detailing how to infiltrate and organize attacks in enemy countries.
Al-Adel has lived for years in Iran, a circumstance that has been presented as an obstacle to the possibility of his succeeding Zawahiri. Affiliates of al-Qaeda seem to have questioned orders coming from him because of his location in Iran. The reality, however, could be far different.
Although tensions exist between the Taliban regime in Kabul and the mullahs' regime in Iran, all available data show that Iran still plays a major role in al-Qaeda. In addition to al-Qaeda's having a new base in Afghanistan, the terrorist group also appears to have had, for years, a significant base in Iran.
In January 2021, then US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that Iran has become the new home base of al-Qaeda:
"Tehran has allowed al-Qaida to fundraise, to freely communicate with al-Qaida members around the world, and to perform many other functions that were previously directed from Afghanistan or Pakistan... As a result of this assistance, al-Qaida has centralized its leadership inside of Tehran... al-Qaeda today is operating under the hard shell of the Iranian regime's protection".
Many of the sanctions that President Donald J. Trump imposed on Iran considerably hampered the ability of the mullahs to finance the Islamic terrorist groups they had previously supported. By lifting many of these sanctions, the Biden administration has re-empowered the mullahs to finance the Islamic groups they have funded in the recent past. Al-Qaeda is clearly one of them.
After the death of Zawahiri, the Biden administration issued a press release blaming the Taliban for having allowed "Afghan territory to be used by terrorists to threaten the security of other countries". Did members of the Biden administration actually expect anything else from the Taliban and the Haqqani network?
The Biden administration also blamed the Taliban for not respecting the Doha agreement, a peace deal between the US and the Taliban stipulating that the US would withdraw from Afghanistan if the Taliban negotiated a peace agreement with the Afghan government and prevented terrorist groups from gaining a foothold in Afghanistan. Did the Biden administration honestly expect ruthless terrorists to honor the agreement without the US showing at least a little determination to use force if necessary?
Over the past year, the Biden administration has sent hundreds of millions of dollars to Afghanistan, supposedly for humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people. How could one not know, however, that most of the funds were embezzled by the Taliban and used to finance the Taliban regime and its terrorist activities?
The Biden administration almost never talks about Iran financing Islamic terrorism and never mentions that the lifting sanctions on the regime has contributed to financing the very terrorist organizations that the US claims to be fighting.
US Special Representative for Iran Robert Malley continues to negotiate with the Iranian regime. Worse: Malley is not even the one doing the negotiating. Negotiating with Iran on behalf of America is -- Russia! The Americans are not even allowed in the room.
Moreover, all this is taking place while the US is half-heartedly helping Ukraine to defend itself against a ruthless Russian scorched earth onslaught. Malley nonetheless persists in separating the Biden administration's desire to sign a new disastrous nuclear deal from the Iranian regime's terrorist activities.
A year after the Biden administration abandoned Afghanistan to the Taliban and the Haqqani network, Afghanistan is back to being a terrorist state. It hosts and supports al-Qaeda while giving it the opportunity to organize terrorist attacks from Afghan soil.
The US, for its part, not only ran from Afghanistan a year ago, it also ran from its last watchtower in Central-South Asia, and, by not even leaving a small residual force as strongly advised, abandoned countless people be slaughtered and enabled the country to be plunged into economic collapse, chaos and starvation. A recent report indicates that 78,000 Afghans who worked for the American government and applied for special visas were left behind in August 2021. The Biden administration even abandoned Americans. Thousands of Americans and green card holders have been condemned to live under constant threat. In addition, it turns out that 75% of Afghans airlifted from Kabul were not even American citizens, green card holders or Afghan Special Immigrant Visa holders.
Iran, on the other hand, has been significantly strengthened. It supports al-Qaeda and now serenely threatens the United States. On August 1, the mullahs sent a message saying that Iran is building nuclear warheads that could turn New York into "hellish ruins". The US recently arrested an Iranian operative, accused of having plotted to assassinate former National Security Adviser John Bolton and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, in addition to a separate plot to kidnap an Iranian-American journalist, Masih Alinejad. All the same, Iran's President Ebrahim Raisi plans to travel to New York for the UN General Assembly this month.
On August 12, in Chautauqua, New York, the Indian-born author Salman Rushdie was the victim of an assassination attempt by a young American Shiite Muslim of Lebanese origin. "The hand of the man who tore the neck of God's enemy must be kissed", gushed Iran's leading newspaper, Kayhan, whose editor-in-chief is appointed by Iran's Supreme Guide Ali Khamenei.
On July 19, 2022, the United Nations released a report saying that "the international context is favorable to Al-Qaida, which intends to be recognized again as the leader of global jihad".
August 15, 2022 saw the first anniversary of the takeover of the presidential palace in Kabul by the Taliban. It was a dismal anniversary. What happened in the past year throughout the country were countless atrocities committed by the Taliban.
Biden's words a year ago -- "We did that." -- fittingly describes all of this.
"It's a year later," US four-star General Jack Keane recalled , "and it's still hard to fathom what we actually did here."
"The president made a huge strategic error, in my judgment, in declaring an unconditional withdrawal with a date certain in Afghanistan, which turned out to be an unconditional surrender. And now we have the Taliban in charge doing what they were doing twenty plus years ago and that is providing sanctuary to al-Qaida.... What a debacle this decision has created. It's an accelerant for our adversaries, as we can see... Russia and Ukraine, China and Taiwan and the mischief that the Iranians are up to in the Middle East.... It's a sad situation."
*Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.
© 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.

How the West Built a Russian Enemy
Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/September 09/2022
“One would think the Tsar is back!” This is how a colleague covering the G 8 summit in Saint Petersburg in July 2006 commented after a visit by President Vladimir Putin to the facilities provided for journalists covering the “historic event.” Historic because this was the first time that Russia, admitted as a full member of the club of “great powers” in 1997, was hosting the summit. Putin wore his usual disdainful grin like the man who broke the bank in Monte Carlo. To show that Russia is back, Putin had chosen the Konstantinovsky Palace as the venue for the G8 summit. The elegant chateau had been started in 1714 by Peter The Great as a Russian answer to the Versailles Palace in France. However, like many of Peter’s other ambitious plans, it was abandoned for decades to be completed decades later as a residence for Duke Konstantin. But it was under Putin that the semi-derelict structure was revived as an architectural gem to reflect Russia’s status as a great power. No wonder the place is now called the Putin Palace. At the time of the summit journalists covering the event believed that Putin’s choice of the venue indicated his desire to realize Boris Yeltsin’s ambition to make Russia a full member of the so-called “Western” family of modern capitalist nations.With the Soviet “nightmare” over, Putin seemed to invite the West to help build the new Russia he wanted just as French and Italian architects had helped build the successive versions of the Konstantinovsky Palace. For years it seemed that Western leaders were more than prepared to help Putin achieve what Yeltsin was supposed to have dreamed.
US president George W Bush had treated Putin as a special guest, asserting that he could “trust” the Russian leader. British Prime Minister Tony Blair had ordered officials not to look too closely at the flood of Russian money flowing into London’s banks in the name of “oligarchs” linked to Putin.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel had finalized a long-standing plan to make Russia the largest source of energy for the federal republic.French President Jacques Chirac said yes to Putin’s demand for a giant Russian Orthodox church to be built in Paris. He also scrapped an old deal with Algeria to make France dependent on Russia for 20 percent of its natural gas needs. The Western powers offered other tokens of friendship to Putin, including visa waivers, lifting restrictions on investments in Russia and special arrangements for the transfer of technology. Western media admired Putin’s “strong leadership” and “vision.”Although there were early signs that Putin might not be the choirboy that Western leaders thought, they did not begin to see him as a potential enemy until his 2022 invasion of Ukraine. A few months after the St. Petersburg lovefest, Putin’s agents used radioactive isotopes to kill Alexander Litvinenko, a former KGB agent and asylum-seeker in London.
On a broader tableau, Putin started blocking NATO’s plans to gain a presence in Central Asia and Transcaucasia. Moscow helped overthrow the pro-West regime in Kyrgyzstan, acquired military bases in Armenia and Tajikistan, and clinched a $4 billion deal to supply arms to Iraq. At the same time Putin armed secessionists in Moldova and eastern Ukraine and, in August 2008, invaded Georgia to annex Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The US reacted by sending a warship on a brief tour of the Black Sea. In hindsight, it seems that Putin had worked out a careful plan to test the Western powers’ limit of tolerance as he went from one mischief to another. He conducted an exceptionally brutal war in Chechnya to crush a rebellion that Yeltsin had failed to tame. There was hardly any Western reaction. In 2010, Putin’s agents assassinated his most prominent critic, Anna Politkovskaya on 7 October which coincided with Putin’s birthday anniversary. In 2012 Putin started getting involved in the Syrian civil war on the side of President Bashar al-Assad backed by Tehran. After testing the waters Putin also cast himself as a big player in Libya in the hope of getting a chunk of it when and if it was broken into pieces. In 2015, it was the turn of Boris Nemtsov, regarded by Western powers as a potential rival to Putin, to be assassinated in front of the Kremlin.
In 2018, Russian agents carried out a poison attack in the English city of Salisbury and killed Yulia, daughter of Sergei Skripal a former KGB agent. In the meantime, French resident Emmanuel Macron had hosted Putin in a lavish banquet in the Palace of Versailles and hailed “the historic friendship” of France and Russia. Each time Putin misbehaved, Western powers reacted with bland statements, the expulsion of a few diplomats, and expressions of sympathy for Alexei Navalny, one of Tsar Vladimir’s more colorful critics. Meanwhile, Putin built a political support base in the West by financing several parties of both left and right.Putin at first seized control of chunks of Ukraine Donetsk and Luhansk and, once convinced that no one would stop him, went along and annexed the whole of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014. He also obtained a base in Syria, restoring Russia’s military presence in the Mediterranean for the first time since the fall of the Soviet Empire. His next move was to turn the Caspian Sea into a Russian lake, excluding “outsiders”, meaning the Western powers.
It is hard to know what goes on in Putin’s mind. But his favorite “philosopher” Alexander Dugin has dismissed the leaders of Western democracies as a bunch of lily-livered pansies interested in nothing but money and show-off.
Dugin’s view has been partly confirmed by Russia’s success in hiring leading Western politicians with huge salaries for bogus jobs. Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, former French Prime Minister Francois Fillon and at least 12 other premiers and ministers from Austria, Finland and Italy were among the first to jump on the Russian gravy train. One of them, let him remain un-named, told us that he didn’t regret working for Putin. “Didn't Voltaire work for Empress Catherine the Great?” he quipped. Western money, technology and, above all, greed helped Putin become in the words of US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, a threat to world peace. For two decades Western powers injected billions to revitalize Russia’s moribund economy, making Russia the world’s second-largest oil producer and helping Putin build a $600 billion war chest before launching his “Special Operations” last February.
The West played Pygmalion but Putin didn’t turn out to be the beautiful Galatea it had imagined but “the creature” that Dr. Frankenstein produced.

طوني بدران/ موقع ذي تابلت: برنامج التكامل الإقليمي الأمريكي يعود بالفائدة على إيران
America’s Regional Integration Scheme Benefits Iran
Tony Badran/The Tablet/September 09/2022
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/111809/%d8%b7%d9%88%d9%86%d9%8a-%d8%a8%d8%af%d8%b1%d8%a7%d9%86-%d9%85%d9%88%d9%82%d8%b9-%d8%b0%d9%8a-%d8%aa%d8%a7%d8%a8%d9%84%d8%aa-%d8%a8%d8%b1%d9%86%d8%a7%d9%85%d8%ac-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%aa%d9%83%d8%a7%d9%85/
The Obama-Biden doctrine means that our Mideast allies don’t have to like the Iran deal. They just have to pay for it.
Barack Obama’s realignment doctrine in the Middle East was predicated on recognizing what he dubbed Iranian “equities” and buttressing them supposedly so as to create strategic parity or “balance” between America’s onetime foes and its regional allies. In doing so, Obama’s theory went, America would no longer be drawn into Middle Eastern wars to defend allies or to deter enemies—since the very concept of friends and foes would have been turned on its head. Without the burden of a regional security alliance structure, America would be free to redefine its role and posture in the region—which, as Obama saw it, was to force an accommodation with a nuclear-armed Iran on a nuclear-armed Israel and presumably a nuclear-armed Saudi Arabia, and make them work out their own security arrangements in a no-doubt rational fashion.
The fact that every element of Obama’s realignment has been shown to have little or no grounding in the geopolitical and physical realities of the Middle East has done little to deter the former president’s Mideast team, which is also Biden’s Mideast team, from seeking to restore the tarnished luster of what was supposed to be Obama’s signature policy achievement. By paying any price to get the Iranians to resurrect a Frankenstein agreement, the Obama-Biden team will now seek to once again demonstrate that, in their version of the Middle East, mullahs fly on carpets that run forever on a drop of rosewater. And if they can’t, it will be the fault of the Israelis, the Saudis, and whoever dared to question the beauty of the emperor’s new clothes.
And so, as the Biden administration readies to revive Obama’s agreement with Iran, the terminology for the realignment has been duly updated. Ahead of his trip to the Jeddah Security and Development Summit in July, an op-ed published in The Washington Post under Biden’s byline emphasized, no less than three times, what it called an “integrated” Middle East as a core element of the administration’s regional policy. While Biden’s trip included a stop in Israel, which fostered the belief that the strategy of integration was about furthering Israeli-Arab relations within the Trump administration’s Abraham Accords framework, nothing was further from the truth—the strategic concept of the accords being antithetical to realignment, which is why the Biden administration and its various spokespeople uniformly downgrade and slight the accords at every possible turn.
As a concept within the realignment framework, “integration,” as a term of art (much like “de-escalation,” in an earlier phase), is about Iran, as the Biden op-ed makes clear: “A more secure and integrated Middle East benefits Americans in many ways. … a region that’s coming together through diplomacy and cooperation—rather than coming apart through conflict—is less likely to give rise to violent extremism that threatens our homeland or new wars that could place new burdens on U.S. military forces and their families.” Any attempt by America’s old allies to counter Iran’s subversiveness and expansionism, let alone its nuclear weapons program, threatens the United States by generating terrorism and embroils America in Israeli and Saudi Arabian wars, into which American boys would be dragged to fight. The only acceptable option is to “integrate” Iran.
The term is an elaboration on Obama’s remark that U.S. allies, namely the Saudis, needed to “find an effective way to share the neighborhood” with Iran. Put differently, in Obama’s language, integration means fostering Arab investment in Iran’s U.S.-recognized regional “equities”—meaning strong-arming Arab states to pay for Iran’s tottering Middle Eastern empire.
There was a little-noticed detail that emerged from the Jeddah summit—which supposedly occasioned Biden’s trip to Saudi Arabia in the first place—that perfectly captured the administration’s priorities and obsessions. The concluding statement of the summit covered a range of issues from energy to U.S.-Gulf relations, but of its 21 paragraphs, one stands out for its comparative length and extensive, detailed content. It is the heart of the communique, at least as its drafters were likely concerned.
It would certainly be fair to imagine that the clause in question must have covered a key issue of mutual interest, such as the Biden administration’s heavily advertised (and otherwise undetectable) desire to promote closer Saudi-Israeli ties. Or perhaps the lengthy, detailed paragraph of the communique was concerned with Iran’s nuclear program and regional subterfuge, in an effort to placate America’s old allies in the Gulf. But if you guessed either one of those options, you’re way off. Apparently, this most critical issue, deserving exhaustive diplomatic attention in the form of a paragraph twice or three times the length of all the others in the statement, is Lebanon.
Lebanon, if anything, is precisely the opposite of a top Saudi priority. In fact, the Saudi crown prince pointedly avoided any mention of Lebanon in his address at the summit, even as he brought up Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and Syria. So it wasn’t the Saudis—or, consequently, the other Arab heads of state at the summit—who imposed Lebanon as the main segment in the concluding statement. It was the Biden administration, pushing policies from which the Saudis have stayed away despite obsessive U.S. prodding.
So why does Lebanon matter so much to the Americans, if not to their Saudi hosts? The answer is that Lebanon is explicitly an Iranian holding, an economic basket case whose “government” and “army” are fronts for the Hezbollah militia that is run directly from Tehran. As such, Lebanon serves as an ideal testing ground for “regional integration,” in the sense of pushing for joint Arab and international investment in territory owned by Iran under U.S. sponsorship.
The administration’s conceit is that, with Lebanon’s financial implosion in late 2019, it is incumbent on the United States to prevent “state collapse” and “state failure,” which by any rational assessment are events that happened many decades ago, inasmuch as Lebanon could ever have been described as a “state” to begin with. Yet the Biden administration has made it its mission to throw whatever money and resources it can muster in order to prop up and stabilize the Hezbollah-controlled order in Lebanon—while involving itself at a hysterically granular level in the micromanagement of Lebanon’s hopelessly mismanaged, Iranian-dominated energy and security sectors. In its obsessive pursuit of these priorities, the administration has pressured and cajoled U.S. allies, encouraging some to violate U.S. sanctions, concocting mechanisms to allow for the circumvention of U.S. laws, and destroying the integrity of U.S. foreign assistance programs that must certify, among other things, that U.S. taxpayer funds are not being used to fund terrorists and terrorism.
The first Biden initiative, which the administration made sure to highlight with comical exaggeration in the Jeddah statement, involves subsidizing the Lebanese security sector, namely the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and, to a smaller degree, the Internal Security Forces (ISF), which comprise some 100,000 individuals in total. “The United States confirmed its intention,” the section read, “to develop a … program for the LAF and ISF” that would provide them with direct salary support.
The initiative dates back to the time when Lebanon went belly up in 2020, by which point the United States was already underwriting most of the LAF’s nonpersonnel expenditures. With this American largesse, by 2018, over 90% of Lebanon’s military expenditure was going to salaries and outrageous benefits for its bloated officer corps, amounting to 60% of total government spending on human resources in what is essentially a jobs and welfare program in the sectarian clientelist system.
After Lebanon’s total financial collapse, the Biden administration decided to pick up the rest of the LAF’s tab and charge it to the American taxpayer. The administration set as its objective what U.S. officials began referring to, in Washington-speak, as finding “creative ways” to provide cash, specifically to underwrite LAF salaries. “The Defense Department and Department of State are exploring whether there are creative ways to help the Lebanese Armed Forces offset the costs … of salaries,” said Pentagon spokeswoman Jessica McNulty in June of last year. In addition to offsetting salaries, the United States continued to underwrite the LAF’s procurement, donating all kinds of hardware that the bankrupt Lebanese could only fuel and maintain thanks to U.S. munificence or U.S.-prompted aid from other foreign donors.
The administration’s need for “creativity” is due to the fact that the administration’s desire to pay LAF salaries abused security assistance programs and clearly skirted congressional intent. The Lebanese publicized their ask of $100 million (split into two separate payments of $60 million for salaries and $40 million for supplies), in addition to existing annual U.S. assistance, which the administration was already increasing. The Biden team scrambled to oblige, quickly sending nearly $60 million in cash to its new clients by reimbursing the LAF for expenses supposedly incurred in 2018 on border security operations. The administration then pulled together an additional $47 million—a number arrived at haphazardly, no doubt—in commodities, defense articles, and services using presidential drawdown authorities. Again, the purpose of the funds was to help the LAF offset the cost of salaries.
Col. Robert Meine, the defense attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon, candidly explained this U.S.-subsidized welfare program in August 2021. The administration was both freeing up the LAF’s budget by taking on effectively all of its operational expenditures—including, Meine noted, $55 million in ammunition and weapons systems the United States handed over in June 2020. The purpose of this aid, Meine clarified, was to allow the LAF “to use the money it saved on other priorities … for soldiers on active duty as well as for retirees and their families.” Highlighting the role of the U.S. ambassador in advocating this welfare scheme, Meine added, once more employing the administration’s buzzword, “[the ambassador] is trying to lead in finding creative solutions to find ways to help the Lebanese Army, not just as an institution, but also as individuals with their families.”
According to Lebanese press reports, Ambassador Dorothy Shea informed the Lebanese of the need to provide invoices (in U.S. dollars) for their supposed operational costs, even if the invoices were deferred. It’s not difficult to see the potential for wild corruption here, especially as invoice fraud is a classic tool of money laundering.
Yet the administration would soon up the risks inherent in its scheme to subsidize a “pillar” of a pseudostate run by Hezbollah with U.S. taxpayer money. Even as the United States roped in multiple countries (Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Turkey, and a host of European states), and even involved the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in sending regular support packages covering everything from food and medicine to spare parts, Lebanese operatives and advocates in D.C. proclaimed that offsetting the cost of salaries was not good enough, amplifying the administration’s policy. America needed to send cash.
Of course, this was the administration’s objective from the outset: Prop up Lebanese “state institutions,” which are auxiliaries of Hezbollah, with American dollars to be spent in a Hezbollah-permeated market; these “institutions” can then be declared a “counterweight” (whatever that means) to Hezbollah. Sure enough, during her visit to Lebanon in October 2021, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland announced a new $67 million for the LAF, the bulk of which initially was “creatively” reprogrammed from fiscal year 2016 Foreign Military Financing (FMF) funds for Pakistan. The legality of the scheme posed a problem, which is why at first the administration did not disclose that these funds were for directly paying salaries. Even Europeans were apprehensive about the idea of sending large sums, in cash, to pay the salaries of a foreign military in a corrupt, terrorist-run country like Lebanon.
But Team Biden was well past that. As I reported for Tablet at the time, the administration notified Congress in January that it was stitching together several previous fiscal years’ worth of FMF funds and reprogramming them to supply direct “livelihood support” for the LAF (i.e., salary stipends). In other words, the administration was setting a precedent by drawing cash, from security assistance programs intended for equipment and training, and injecting this cash into a country dominated by Hezbollah and infested with terrorism finance risk, with no control over where and how the cash was spent.
Apparently, the plan didn’t sit well with some in Congress—maybe as it was a flagrant abuse of congressional intent and authorization—so the administration had to make a tactical adjustment: A U.N. agency would disburse the stipends to the LAF, so that the United States and other countries could bypass their own domestic laws prohibiting direct payment of salaries to a foreign military.
The administration then searched diligently for a precedent that involved a U.S. international security assistance account and a U.N. implementing agency. They found it in the Peacekeeping Operations-Overseas Contingency Operations (PKO-OCO) account, which had been used to provide funding for the U.N. Support Office in Somalia (UNSOS), a U.N.-authorized logistics mission that supports the African Union Mission in Somalia, even though in that case it was the European Union, not the United States, which finances troop salary allowances.
Sure enough, in May the administration sent a new notification switching the account from which it was drawing the $67 million. Never lacking in humor, the section of the notification listing what the assistance supposedly promotes, under “Partner’s Peacekeeping Capabilities,” it rather perfectly read: “not applicable.”
To make this tale of corruption all the more perfect, the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS), the U.N. agency the administration was looking to use as its pass-through mechanism, was itself caught up in a scandal. Sending cash, in hard currency, to some 80,000 unvettable individuals (plus another 20,000 ISF members) in a terror-infested environment wasn’t bad enough. For the cherry on top, they needed the U.N., that bastion of scrupulous probity, to involve its own scandal-marred agency to receive and disburse the funds.
The UNOPS scandal meant that the administration has had to pause its salaries scheme, at least temporarily. Yet the administration did manage to land one recruit: Qatar. The tiny principality had agreed ahead of the Jeddah summit to hand out $60 million in salary support to the LAF. So having pursued the Saudis for months for this purpose, and been told off every single time, the administration made sure to stick in praise for Qatar in the Lebanon section of the Jeddah summit statement. The praise for Qatar followed a commendation for the Kuwaitis over their mediation effort after the Saudis withdrew their ambassador from Lebanon, following anti-Saudi remarks by a Lebanese minister.
The administration’s message was clear: Saudi Arabia must go through the looking glass and help underwrite Lebanon, an Iranian equity.
In addition to underwriting the security sector and its associated social segment after Lebanon’s financial meltdown, the Biden team resolved to manage Lebanon’s notoriously corrupt and dysfunctional energy sector. To address power blackouts, the administration concocted a plan to facilitate the import of Egyptian natural gas by way of Jordan and Syria. If its security sector salaries scheme involved abusing congressional authorities and the potential miring of the United States in terror financing, the administration’s plan to bring in gas through Syria meant the outright violation of U.S. sanctions law prohibiting any transactions with Iran’s other client, the murderous regime of Bashar Assad in Damascus.
Yet while funneling money through Assad to aid Iran’s Lebanese satrapy was perfectly acceptable to the administration, Egypt was apprehensive at the prospect of being entangled in a scheme that would expose it to U.S. sanctions down the road. Even though Team Biden could not give Cairo credible guarantees, it continued to publicly and privately push the Egyptians to go along anyway. At first, Nuland, on a trip to Beirut during which she announced the $67 million in assistance to the LAF, offered the argument that because the gas deal “falls under the humanitarian category, no sanctions waiver would be required in this instance.” Then the State Department’s senior adviser on energy, Amos Hochstein, uttered a bunch of weasel words that said absolutely nothing: “We have determined that it is not—this kind of a transaction could be, likely is not, under—covered by the sanctions. … And as long as that remains true, there’s no issue.”
But the text of the Caesar Act of 2019 is crystal clear: It directs the president to impose sanctions on any foreign person who “knowingly engages in a significant transaction with … the Government of Syria (including any entity owned or controlled by the Government of Syria) or a senior political figure of the Government of Syria.” In response, Hochstein opined that, in fact, there was no “transaction” at all with the Syrians, and “there will be no cash payments to Syria”—which is why sanctions are not applicable, and therefore, there’s no need for a waiver. Yet in the same interview, Hochstein conceded that, as part of the deal, Assad would receive a percentage of the Egyptian gas (in addition to a separate percentage of Jordanian electricity) “as a payment.”
This kind of foolishness has gone on for months. On the one hand, the Egyptians kept demanding written guarantees from the U.S. Treasury Department, and on the other hand, the administration kept maneuvering and pushing Cairo to take the plunge, even as senior Republican senators have publicly warned the Egyptians that Caesar Act sanctions would be enforced. According to the Lebanese, the administration has reportedly also promised to dilute its conditions for providing them with the loan to finance the Egyptian-Syrian gas deal. The euphemism Team Biden has used to describe its initiative is that the United States is encouraging the region “to come together.”
U.S. leadership is redefined as twisting the arms of regional allies to foot the bill for Iran’s ongoing proxy wars in Gaza, Lebanon, the Gulf, Iraq, and Syria.
In addition to entangling America’s Arab allies, the administration has also enmeshed Israel with its energy scheme. Unlike with the import of Egyptian gas, the objective of this plan is not merely to provide relief to the people who are unfortunate enough to live in Lebanon. It is to turn Lebanon (that is to say, Hezbollah) into an energy producer and perhaps exporter. The United States decided that the pathway to this nirvana, which will no doubt cure Lebanon of its ills while turning Hezbollah into a party of peace, is the demarcation of Lebanon’s maritime border with Israel, which Washington therefore resolved to broker.
Lebanon delineated its Exclusive Economic Zone with Cyprus in 2007, but Beirut never ratified the agreement. Three years later, with the discovery of gas fields, Israel signed its own agreement with Cyprus, basing its northern boundary on the median line (with terminal Point 1) of the Cyprus-Lebanon agreement, and deposited its claim with the U.N. The Israeli line and an amended Lebanese line (with terminal Point 23) overlapped, creating a disputed 854-square-kilometer triangle.
The origin of the U.S. initiative to mediate the dispute goes back to the first Obama term. Its goal was always to simply pump money into Hezbollah-run Lebanon. The U.S. mediator at the time, Fred Hof, explained the Obama administration’s thinking behind launching the effort to resolve the dispute. In Hof’s words, the administration worried that “international energy companies would shy away from investing time and energy on Lebanese hydrocarbons, and not just in disputed areas. Capital, after all, is a coward. Israel was already extracting natural gas well to the south of the area in dispute. Lebanon desperately needed hydrocarbon revenue, but the prospect of a confrontation with a militarily superior Israel was dictating caution among global energy firms.” In other words, the point of the Obama administration’s mediation was to tip the balance in favor of Hezbollah.
Lebanese dysfunction made sure the effort went nowhere, despite the Obama administration’s persistence all throughout its second term, which involved two mediators: Hof, who proposed dividing the disputed area 55:45 in Lebanon’s favor, and his successor, Amos Hochstein. Having no bearing on anything, including Israel’s ability to produce and export gas, the matter should’ve ended there.
Only the Lebanon sickness pervades all of Washington—not just the Biden administration, but also its predecessors in the Trump State Department, and a part of the Republican caucus on the Hill, which sees “defense of Christian minorities in the Middle East” as a noble cause that can be best served by funneling money to Iranian-dominated “state institutions” in Lebanon. And so, after Lebanon’s financial collapse, the Near Eastern Affairs Bureau at the State Department under Secretary Mike Pompeo decided to revive the Obama mediation effort. Remarkably, the Lebanophiles at State had been working on it for most of the Trump administration’s term. Equally amazing is that they decided to launch the initiative a month before the November 2020 election.
Again, the explicit objective of this grotesque scheme was to pump money into Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon. At the time, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Schenker described it as “free money for a state that is in a financial crisis.” The “state,” of course, is the “Hezbollah state.” The administration’s interlocutor in Lebanon was the Shiite speaker of parliament and Hezbollah ally, Nabih Berri. Everyone involved understood that the United States was negotiating indirectly with Hezbollah, which set the parameters of the talks and had final say.
Once the Lebanese realized they wouldn’t have to deal with the Trump administration anymore and that Team Obama would soon be back in power, they bet, correctly, they’d get an even better deal. Predictably—yet somehow to the surprise of the Lebanophiles at the Pompeo State Department—the Lebanese then vastly increased the scope of their claim by several hundred kilometers, pushing all the way south to Israel’s Karish gas field, which was soon to go operational. And with that, the Lebanese showed the brain trust at State the door.
Enter Hochstein for his second act. The Biden administration’s envoy came to Beirut and told the Lebanese they could be “joining the rest of the Eastern Mediterranean in selling gas into the global market, and you become a global exporter of a product. … That’s what’s on the table.” What the Biden administration’s envoy said, in fact, is that the United States was now looking to make Hezbollah a gas player in the Eastern Mediterranean. What Team Biden wants, Hochstein elaborated, is to see multibillion-dollar investments in Hezbollah-run Lebanon: “What I want is to have Lebanon as a producer, having billion—multibillion-dollar investments from foreign companies here in Lebanon.” In case that wasn’t specific enough, these investments by “international European and American companies,” like the French TotalEnergies, would be, Hochstein noted, in “southern Lebanon”—Hezbollah’s home base. This outcome is not only “necessary,” as the State Department would later say; it was also what Hezbollah-run Lebanon “deserved,” according to Hochstein.
Between Israel and Hezbollah, Team Biden would undertake to act as an honest broker. As Hochstein put it, “maybe that’s the right role for a mediator, for both sides to think we are siding with the other.” As the administration negotiated with Hezbollah’s front men, the terror group provided Hochstein with an assist as he pressed Israel to sign a deal by September. Hochstein’s deadline was pegged to a threat from Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, that so long as Lebanon’s maritime border claim wasn’t conceded and the country remained unable to begin exploration and extraction of gas, Israel wouldn’t be allowed to either—in a reference to Energean Power, the floating production storage and offloading vessel that reached the Karish gas field in June and was set to come online in September. Nasrallah made good on his threat in the beginning of July by launching several drones at the Karish offshore rig.
Rather than end the mediation in the face of Hezbollah’s aggression, the Biden administration pressured the Israelis to de-escalate and to double down on the talks, even as the Israeli government lost its majority in the Knesset. In other words, Team Biden leveraged Hezbollah’s threat and drone operation to foist a sense of urgency on the Israelis. In fact, last week, a White House official described a maritime border deal as “a key priority” for the administration. It is such a high priority that Biden, when he finally took the call from the Israeli prime minister, whose priority is the administration’s imminent deal with Iran, the U.S. president used the call to emphasize the importance of concluding the deal “in the coming weeks.”
Moreover, the administration has encouraged the fiction that, in its bid to delineate the maritime border, it was dealing with the “government of Lebanon,” and not Hezbollah, which supposedly was trying to “undermine” the talks, even as, in reality, it was managing them.
Hezbollah’s threat, leveraged by Hochstein against Israel, was: Accede to our demands before Karish goes online or face attacks against Israeli rigs. These demands now included Israel’s full accession to the Lebanese claim, including an additional carve-out for a prospective gas field (as of yet unexplored), which extends beyond Point 23, and over which Lebanon gets exclusive control; and guarantees that Total would begin exploration immediately and without any obstacles.
The United States has been working to accommodate Hezbollah’s demands. Hochstein, who will be in Lebanon shortly, has been talking to the French about Total’s operations. In addition to the French, according to pro-Hezbollah media, the United States is looking to bring into the picture (presumably alongside France’s Total) none other than Qatar, its preferred Arab investor in Lebanon. Meanwhile, unconfirmed reports in Israeli media have claimed that the start of operations at Karish might be postponed as a result of Hezbollah’s ultimatum, so as to avoid any escalation.
Should the Israeli government cave, as appears increasingly likely, Team Biden’s gambit will have set the precedent of extracting concessions from Israel under the threat of attack leveraged by the United States on behalf of Iranian assets. Moreover, the gambit, by design, will turn Hezbollah, and consequently Iran, into a player in Eastern Mediterranean energy. To be clear, France’s investment in Lebanon, including the Total-led consortium (with Italy’s ENI and, until recently, Russia’s Novatek) that was awarded the contract to begin exploration for offshore gas, in effect is an investment in Hezbollah, as Paris has made abundantly clear it recognizes the group as the real power there. Thanks to the United States, these players now have a stake in Hezbollah territory, and are therefore necessarily in a de facto partnership with the group. The more Europeans and others invest, and the larger their stake, the better for “regionally integrating” Hezbollah-run Lebanon—as an Iranian missile base and terrorist headquarters.
The essence of the realignment doctrine was to shun the concept of shoring up a U.S.-led regional alliance system to contain Iran in favor of a new, more “balanced” regional order, in which the United States would back Iran against its former allies. U.S. leadership, according to this vision, is redefined to mean twisting the arms of regional allies not only to adapt to the American realignment, but also to foot the bill for Iran’s ongoing proxy wars against Israel from Gaza and Lebanon; against Saudi Arabia by the Houthis in Yemen; against the government of Bahrain by Iranian-sponsored terror cells; against the people of Syria by the Assad regime and IRGC-commanded militias; and against the Sunnis and other segments of the population of Iraq by the Iranian-led militias that have deeply penetrated the security services and the government.
Pay up, America demands, and foot the bill for your own destruction, as we lift sanctions on Iran. That’s regional integration. States that are too weak or delusional to refuse this kind of offer will wind up paying the bill in blood.
*Tony Badran is Tablet magazine’s Levant analyst and a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He tweets @AcrossTheBay. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.