LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
January 28/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

Bible Quotations For Today

Falling into Temptation
01Corinthians/Chapter 10/01-18/"Now I would not have you ignorant, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food; and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ. However with most of them, God was not well pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. Don’t be idolaters, as some of them were. As it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.” Let us not commit sexual immorality, as some of them committed, and in one day twenty-three thousand fell. Let us not test Christ, as some of them tested, and perished by the serpents. Don’t grumble, as some of them also grumbled, and perished by the destroyer. Now all these things happened to them by way of example, and they were written for our admonition, on whom the ends of the ages have come. Therefore let him who thinks he stands be careful that he doesn’t fall. No temptation has taken you except what is common to man. God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted above what you are able, but will with the temptation also make the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it. Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men. Judge what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, isn’t it a sharing of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, isn’t it a sharing of the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf of bread, we, who are many, are one body; for we all partake of the one loaf of bread. Consider Israel according to the flesh. Don’t those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar"

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on january 27-28/16
Mere Lebanese Political Puppets/Elias Bejjani/January 27/16
The 1960 Parliamentary Election Law is no Federation/Tom Harb/Thawrat Al Arz/January 27/16
Disarray remains the norm in Lebanese politics/Michael Young/The National/January 27/16
Aounist unease as Hezbollah fails to rally partners behind presidency/Alex Rowell/Now Lebanon/January 27/16
The Political Revival of the Country's Christians/Bilal Y. Saab/Foreign Affairs/January 27/16
A Shi’ite genie has escaped the bottle – and is threatening Hezbollah/Yaron Friedman /Ynetnews/January 27/16
The new IDF Cyber Defense Brigade divided between two military branches/DEBKAfile/January 26, 2016
How terrorism threatens the state/Turki Al-Dakhil/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
The key to a solution in Syria is in the Gulf/Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
Rumors and wrangling over a Russian base near Turkey/Maria Dubovikova/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
Why do militants attack educational institutions/Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
For Israel, ISIS is too close for comfort - but so is Iran/Yossi Mekelberg/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
Could Iraq mediate Iran, Saudi strife/Mohammad Ali Shabani/Al-Monitor/January 27/16
Rouhani makes up for lost time in Italy/Arash Karami/Al-Monitor/January 27/16
Israeli land grab threatens Palestinian church/Ahmad Melhem/Al-Monitor/January 27/16
Is Iran deal the gateway to Israeli-Palestinian peace/Julian Pecquet/Al-Monitor/January 27/16

Lebanese Related News published on january 27-28/16
Mere Lebanese Political Puppets
The 1960 Parliamentary Election Law is no Federation...
Disarray remains the norm in Lebanese politics
Aounist unease as Hezbollah fails to rally partners behind presidency
The Political Revival of the Country's Christians
Dialogue Session Does Not Tackle Presidency as Next Round Set for Feb. 17
Jumblat Applauds 'Iran's Democracy,' Wonders if it Will Allow Lebanese Elections to Be Held
Lebanese Cabinet Marred in Controversy over Appointments, Samaha's Trial
Woman Critically Injured after Gunmen Storm Arsal Home
Amin Gemayel Says Geagea's Nomination of Aoun May Have Destroyed 'March 14 Institution'
Woman Critically Injured after Gunmen Storm Arsal Home
Gas Blaze Razes Syrian Refugee Encampment in Akkar
Lebanese Baby Diagnosed with Swine Flu
Khalil: Export File Must be Reconsidered, 'Cost too High'
Bassil Dismisses Franjieh's Remarks: We Won't Compete with Him in Parliament
Bassil, Derbas Appease Fears over Employment of Syrian Refugees
TI: Lebanon Continues to Suffer from Rampant Corruption

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on january 27-28/16
Canada's Statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day
Canada confirms lifting of Iran sanctions
Netanyahu says U.N. chief ‘encourages terror’
Iran warned U.S. warship to leave drill area
White House dropped $10 million claim in Iran prisoner deal
Rowhani: Iran didn’t ask for nude statue cover-up
Qatar names new foreign minister in cabinet reshuffle
Three soldiers killed in Turkish city as curfew expanded
ISIS ‘plans to kidnap Russian tourists’ in Turkey
Low hopes as Syrian opposition sets new terms
U.N. panel calls for global inquiry on Yemen
Saudi soldier dies in border shelling from Yemen
Eight Hamas men missing after Gaza tunnel collapse
EU considers sanctions for Libya peace ‘spoilers’
Egypt youth leader from 2011 uprising to stand trial

Links From Jihad Watch Site for january 27-28/16
Robert Spencer in FrontPage Mag: Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch: “No one defends Islam like Arab Christians”.
Sharia New York City: Muslim Uber driver attacks pregnant woman’s service dog.
Syrian refugees admitted into US since Paris jihad murders in November: 525 Muslims, 1 Christian.
Ottawa Hijab Day? — The Glazov Gang.
French documentary on jihadis gets rare ’18 and over’ rating.
Israeli woman dies after being stabbed by Muslims screaming “Allahu akbar”.
Muslims fill German refugee camp with swastikas, anti-Semitic graffiti.
Iran’s President: Insulting people’s faith not part of freedom of expression.
Denmark: Girl faces charges for protecting herself against sexual attack.
Milwaukee: Muslim plotted jihad mass murder at Masonic Temple.
Cameroon: Jihad martyrdom suicide bombers murder 32, wound dozens.
Pope Francis meets Iran’s President to boost nuke deal, Mideast peace.

Mere Lebanese Political Puppets
Elias Bejjani/January 27/16
Apparently for our Maronite rotten political leaders, it seems that all the roads they love to walk through to achieve their individual power agendas leads to Hezbollah. Accordingly, It will not be a surprise for any Lebanese who can differentiate between right and wrong and between a patriotic and a puppet to witness very soon a sort of a fishy meeting between Geagea and Nasrallah. Sadly In Lebanon, In the Iranian occupied Lebanon there is nothing any more surprising.

The 1960 Parliamentary Election Law is no Federation...
Tom Harb/Thawrat Al Arz/January 27/16/Make no mistake the so-called 1960 law which would allow members of a commuity to elect their representatives, will actually give the control of the representation of the community to those who have most money, including regional donations and create a dominant power inside each community while Lebanon as a whole is controlled by Iran and Hezbollah. If the Christians of Lebanon or any other community wants a real reprentation and a democratic one, they should establish a real federal system with local Governments and assemblies. The 1960 Law is not a federation. It is a mafia style control of each community by warlords and zaims who in turn would divide the authorities of the Government among themselves. The Lebanese Christians and other communities should call for a clear and transparent federal system not a zaims-systems.

Disarray remains the norm in Lebanese politics
Michael Young/The National/January 27/2016/
http://www.thenational.ae/article/20160127/OPINION/160129180/2340
The recent decision of Samir Geagea, the leader of the Lebanese Forces party, to back his long-standing rival Michel Aoun for the presidency has caused disarray in Lebanon’s politics. The reactions have ranged from ill-concealed hostility to silence. However, it is too soon to declare the idea of an Aoun presidency dead. We appear to be in a preliminary stage, that of negotiations as each side sees what’s in it for them. This may last several weeks. At the centre of resolving the imbroglio lies Mr Aoun’s relationship with Hizbollah. The party has said that Mr Aoun is its presidential candidate. Cynics, including Mr Geagea, assume this is only a pretext to block an election and maintain a void. Now Mr Geagea has called Hizbollah’s bluff, and the party must either support Mr Aoun or risk losing its alliance with the significant share of the Maronite community he represents.
Yet the party’s reaction to the Geagea-Aoun reconciliation was not encouraging. After Mr Geagea’s announcement, a meeting of Hizbollah parliamentarians, at which an endorsement of Mr Aoun would have been natural, was cancelled. To some this confirmed that Hizbollah’s aim is to perpetuate a vacuum and reshape the political system to protect the party’s arsenal. Hizbollah is facing a real dilemma. If it backs Mr Aoun, Hizbollah may have to deal with a man who seeks to reaffirm state authority at its expense, potentially leading to a clash between the two.
Anyway, it would have been overly optimistic for Mr Aoun to expect sudden approval of his candidacy. The norm is for politicians or parties to initially act coolly toward a serious candidate, increasing their leverage in the bargaining process for their votes (parliament elects presidents in Lebanon).
Mr Aoun himself is thought to not expect to be elected before March. If he is right and Hizbollah swings behind him, it will have to do so by pushing its Shia ally, parliament speaker Nabih Berri, to order his bloc to vote in Mr Aoun’s favour. Mr Berri’s votes and those of Hizbollah and their allies, along with those of the Aounist and Lebanese Forces blocs, would mean victory.
However, if the party fails to encourage Mr Berri to vote for Mr Aoun, the Aounists will interpret this as a sign that the party does not want a president to be elected, and lied about its intentions. But assuming Hizbollah goes along with Mr Aoun, what can he expect in discussions with political forces in the country? What are some of the demands they are likely to make of him? Hizbollah will be the major obstacle, having undermined the authority of the last president, Michel Suleiman. A credible state threatens its interests. At the very least Hizbollah will want to extract a commitment from Mr Aoun to defend the resistance and legitimise its autonomous military role. Hizbollah will also probably want Mr Aoun’s pledge to bar Saad Hariri from returning as prime minister. This will not be easy, because doing so would deny Mr Aoun vital validation from the Sunni community, through Mr Hariri’s Future bloc. Yet a compromise is not impossible if one of Mr Hariri’s colleagues is accepted by Hizbollah to lead a government.
Mr Berri, in turn, will want assurances that he will remain speaker of parliament after the next elections. He will also want to ensure that one or more of his own Christian candidates can win in the Jezzine constituency in the south, which Mr Aoun swept in 2009. This is part of the speaker’s effort to portray himself as a national, not merely a Shia, leader. Mr Hariri will also have conditions for Mr Aoun, not least his backing of an election law that would guarantee Mr Hariri regains a large bloc in parliament. The former prime minister may also insist that he alone has the standing to head a government – his ticket back to political relevance after years in effective exile. However, such a demand would squeeze Mr Aoun, forcing him to choose between Mr Hariri and Hizbollah.
Walid Jumblatt, the Druze leader, with a sizeable bloc of his own, would doubtless demand several things from Mr Aoun. Among these is a favourable election law, similar to Mr Hariri, but also a guarantee that he can name the Druse candidate in the Baabda constituency, as well as certain services-orientated ministerial portfolios to enhance his powers of patronage.These are just some of the demands Mr Aoun may hear before he can be elected. How he will manoeuvre remains unclear. But he could find that his relationship with Hizbollah is the sword ultimately cutting the myriad Gordian knots that will appear.
Michael Young is opinion editor of The Daily Star in Beirut

Aounist unease as Hezbollah fails to rally partners behind presidency
Alex Rowell/Now Lebanon/January 27/16
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/01/27/alex-rowell-aounist-unease-as-hezbollah-fails-to-rally-partners-behind-presidency/
LEBANON, Beirut : Lebanese member of parliament Michel Aoun holds a press conference following a parliament session to vote for the new Lebanese president in the parliament building in downtown Beirut on April 23, 2014
When Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea made the historic move last Monday of endorsing the presidential candidacy of his wartime nemesis, former Lebanese Armed Forces chief General Michel Aoun, the latter’s path to the presidential palace he had long coveted was supposed to be secured at last. With the stated support of both his largest Christian rival and the most powerful faction in the country, Hezbollah, the various blocs of the pro-Damascus ‘March 8’ coalition would fall into line and Aoun would be guaranteed the requisite 65 votes at parliament, with or without the backing of the anti-Damascus Future Movement and the centrist Progressive Socialist Party (PSP).
Things, however, haven’t quite turned out that way. On Monday, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri of March 8’s Amal Movement, whose parliamentary weight is equal to Hezbollah’s at 13 MPs, said he would be voting not for Aoun but rather a rival March 8 nominee, Marada Movement head MP Sleiman Franjieh. This announcement meant not only that Aoun lacked the needed votes to win, but that Franjieh – who, counter-intuitively, is also supported by the Future Movement – was actually ahead of Aoun, numerically. Asked whether his ally Hezbollah would not pressure him to vote for their declared candidate Aoun, Berri replied in irritation, “What do they want Hezbollah to do? Do they want it to put a pistol or a rifle or a rocket to the heads of [Future Movement leader] Saad al-Hariri and [PSP head] Walid Jumblatt and Sleiman Franjieh and Nabih Berri […]? The issue isn’t like that. The relationship between us as allies isn’t of that kind.” Asked further whether Franjieh couldn’t be persuaded to withdraw from the race, Berri said, “Why would Franjieh accept [that] so long as he’s the strongest candidate?”
Berri’s bombshell has sparked outrage among supporters of Aoun, whose personal relationship with the parliament speaker has long been rocky. On the O-Room web forum maintained and frequented by Aoun partisans, Berri has been slated as a “dog” and a “crook,” his party members “children of vipers,” in reaction to his perceived sabotage of Aoun’s candidacy.
Potentially more significantly, Berri’s remarks have also caused some in Aounist circles to question the sincerity of Hezbollah’s ostensible support, on the argument that – whatever Berri’s protestations – Hezbollah absolutely could persuade its March 8 allies to vote for the General if it really wanted to. Hezbollah’s critics have maintained for over a year that the Party does not in fact want the election of any president while its fight in Syria is ongoing, and has been exploiting Aoun for the so-called ‘Christian cover’ he provides them without sincerely intending to make him president. Geagea himself hinted at this Tuesday, saying, “the intentions of March 8 have become questionable.” “Whether you like it or not, the vast majority of Christians believe that the decision of M8 is in [Hezbollah’s] hand and no one believes the crap, that [Hezbollah] who is becoming a regional power, can't [hold sway over] his closest allies Berri and [Franjieh], especially in critical issues like the presidency,” said one O-Room post.
“If [Hezbollah] meant that [its] support consists only [of a] dozen MPs, than [sic] thanks [for the] support.... we don't need them because they reach nowhere... [Hezbollah] is needed where it counts, holding M8 kharyanet [pieces of shit] and bring back everyone on his toe. Or else, it's called de7ek 3al d2oun [to laugh about someone while kissing their cheeks],” said another.  Changing Berri’s mind “only takes one word [from Hezbollah] or if it takes storming the crook's place for Aoun's, so be it ;),” said a third. “Aoun suffered for [Hezbollah] and stood with it in worst times […] where's Aoun supposed dein [debt] on [Hezbollah] byenserfo [to be repaid]? Wallah 7akeh ma 3leh ghemrok? [Or is it just talk that won’t be paid?]”
Nor is the belief that Hezbollah could twist Berri’s arm held only by online forum users. Dr. Kamal Yazigi, a founding member of Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) and a professor of political science at the American University of Beirut, told NOW it was “out of the question” that Berri could vote autonomously on such “strategic matters” as the presidency. Making the same point in more diplomatic language, senior FPM official and nephew of the General, MP Alain Aoun, told NOW, “I don’t imagine Berri and Hezbollah going to an election session in opposing positions.”
Accordingly, both Alain Aoun and Yazigi believe Berri will end up voting for Aoun, and that it’s a matter of what Alain Aoun called “meetings and negotiations between the parties” at this stage.
“We know that [Berri and Hezbollah] are good allies and they will talk to each other and, somehow, after some time, reach common cause,” Aoun told NOW.
“Berri is stretching his margin of autonomy to the maximum now, probably to get a higher price, for the bargaining process,” said Yazigi. “But once Hezbollah asks him, or orders him, to vote for Aoun, he will do it.” If he doesn’t – if, in other words, the suspicions of Geagea and others in March 14 prove correct – then Aoun’s relations with Hezbollah could be severely affected, and possibly even severed, according to Yazigi. “If [Hezbollah is] not serious about [Aoun’s presidency], then it will be a very big problem for Hezbollah with Aoun this time. It’s not something light,” Yazigi told NOW. “[Aoun] will threaten [to break off the alliance], and eventually he might do it, because his supporters would be in favor of that. His supporters would realize that this alliance did not bring them much.”
“This is the big prize now, the presidency, for the supporters and especially for Aoun himself. So he’s capable of really reacting violently if the support doesn’t come.”

The Political Revival of the Country's Christians
By Bilal Y. Saab/Foreign Affairs/January 27/16
By endorsing Michel Aoun’s candidacy for president of Lebanon, Samir Geagea might have finally pulled the right string to untangle the knot of electing a new Lebanese head of state. Lebanon has been without a president—a position traditionally reserved for Maronite Christians—for nearly two years because its politicians have failed to resolve a broader political crisis that has paralyzed the country. Yet even if his move doesn’t do the trick, Geagea, in a stroke of political genius, did at least set in motion his own political ascendency among Lebanese Christians, reshuffled the national political deck, and brought political relevance back to—and, in turn, ensure self-preservation of—a long-marginalized and beleaguered Christian community.
The news was shocking even to the keenest observer of Lebanese politics. After all, the political rivalry and feud between Geagea, the head of the Lebanese Forces party, and Aoun, the Free Patriotic Movement chief, is one of the oldest and bloodiest in the country. The two Christian leaders fought bitterly during the 1975–1990 civil war, inflicting massive destruction on Christian areas and causing lasting and deep divisions among their constituencies. In October 1990, the Syrian military forced Aoun into exile in Paris for leading a failed “war of liberation” against their military presence in Lebanon. As for Geagea, he was jailed in 1994 on charges of bombing a church in Zouk Mikael that killed ten people. He was also suspected of killing Lebanese Prime Minister Rashid Karami in June 1987 and rival Christian politician Dany Chamoun along with his wife and two sons three years later. Geagea was hardly alone in committing atrocities during the war. Among warlords, only he faced extended prison; the rest were pardoned and moved on to occupy positions of power under Syrian tutelage. In June 2005, Aoun returned from France, and a month later Geagea was released from prison.
Aoun and Geagea’s parties competed fiercely in Lebanon’s post-Syria parliamentary elections. Geagea sided with the anti-Syrian March 14 coalition, which formed after the February 14, 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Aoun, in a desperate and controversial attempt to improve his chances of becoming president, joined forces with the Shi’ite Hezbollah. Yet neither Hezbollah nor March 14 were able to fulfill the presidential wishes of their respective Christian allies, and both Aoun and Geagea continued to veto each other’s candidacy, and as a result obstruct the election of a representative Christian head of state.
The physical and political confrontation between Geagea and Aoun—and the disastrous consequences it has had on the fate of Lebanese Christians—is key for understanding Geagea’s latest move. It is tempting to explain his new partnership with Aoun as a knee-jerk reaction to his Sunni ally Saad Hariri’s implicit presidential nomination of Sleiman Franjieh, another Christian rival. After all, Geagea must have felt blindsided by Hariri’s bizarre decision to support Franjieh, who is a close friend of Syrian President Bashar Assad, a man widely believed to have orchestrated the murder of Hariri’s father in addition to several other anti-Syrian Lebanese politicians. That Hariri did not bother consult with Geagea prior to proposing his initiative must have made the latter mad and disillusioned.
But it would be a mistake to limit Geagea’s brilliant political act to an emotional outburst or sudden shift of alliance. Nor did bravery or morality prompt Geagea to extend an olive branch to Aoun. Instead, this was a carefully calibrated and well-thought-out political strategy on Geagea’s part that has been in the making for at least a year. A major milestone in this process of rapprochement came in June 2015, when the two men signed a “Declaration of Intent” in Aoun’s home in Rabieh, committing the latter to strict Lebanese sovereignty principles that the March 14 coalition favors and that Hezbollah resists.
Samir Geagea, leader of the Christian Lebanese Forces, October 31, 2014.
It is not difficult to see that Geagea wants to be an omnipotent force in Lebanese Christian politics and now that the Syrians are out, his goal is very much achievable. But the only way for him to realize his vision is, ironically, by paving the way for Aoun to become president, which has been the FPM leader’s singular focus since coming back to Lebanon in 2005. The logic works like this. If Aoun becomes president, Geagea’s role as Christian kingmaker will be cemented in the eyes of Lebanese Christians and therefore, his influence within the community will dramatically increase. The majority of Lebanese Christians will see him as the man who broke the presidential deadlock, brought the Christians back to power, and forged historic intra-Christian peace for generations to come. With time, and it may not be too long due to Aoun’s old age, Geagea might be able to win the hearts and minds of his archrival’s support base, and if all goes well, possibly succeed him as president when his six-year term is over.
This all sounds promising for Geagea, except that his strategy will have to contend with the age-old Lebanese dictum that national political appointments in Lebanon are seldom, if ever, purely a domestic matter. Regional and sometimes international powers have a big say over who gets to be elected as president from the Christian Maronite community and who gets to be appointed as prime minister from the Sunni community. (The speaker of parliament position has been held by Shiite Amal leader Nabih Berri, a staunch ally of Hezbollah, since October 1992.)
The good news is that there is greater room for Lebanese politicians to maneuver now than there was in the past, due to Syria’s exit from Lebanon, the world’s preoccupation with the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS), and concern over further political vacuums in the region. Indeed, a continuously destabilized and paralyzed Lebanon hurts the anti-ISIS campaign. This doesn’t mean that the Lebanese will be able to do it on their own. It merely suggests that the two regional powers that wield the greatest influence over Lebanese national politics—Iran and Saudi Arabia—might show more flexibility toward the preferences and calculations of their surrogates—Hezbollah and Saad Hariri, respectively—in the interest of preventing the fires of regional Sunni-Shiite confrontation from reaching Lebanon.
The two main domestic parties from which Geagea and Aoun have had no definitive response are Hezbollah and Hariri’s Future Movement. Both sides have been lukewarm, neither killing nor embracing Geagea’s initiative. Hezbollah should have been thrilled with Geagea’s support for Aoun. After all, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah promised Aoun the moment he signed a memorandum of understanding with him in 2006 that he will do whatever he can to help his Christian ally win the presidency. And to his credit, despite intense regional and international pressure against his party, Aoun stuck to his alliance with Hezbollah.
But Hezbollah is now confused and a little wary about this newfound love between Aoun and Geagea. The Shiite group has never trusted Geagea, viewing him too far to the right and too close to Washington. And now that Aoun has embraced Geagea, Hezbollah is starting to wonder whether a president Aoun, having signed a “Lebanon-first” declaration of principles with his new ally, could be trusted. What if Aoun went back to his old ways of aggressively campaigning against all forms of foreign intervention and championing the cause of Lebanese non-interference in regional conflicts? Such a campaign could complicate Hezbollah’s pro-Iran agenda and involvement in the Syrian war.
Enjoy this free article from Foreign Affairs
As for Hariri, he would have to consult with Saudi Arabia, perhaps more so than Hezbollah would with Iran, to see if the kingdom can lift its veto on Aoun. Not too long ago, Hariri publicly said that he would not stand in the way of Christian solidarity and would accept a president picked by the Christians themselves and endorsed by the Maronite Church. It would serve Hariri well to stick to his words and be seen as an active supporter of Muslim-Christian peace and interfaith dialogue in a region swept by violent religious extremism.
There has been no clear word yet from Riyadh on Aoun, but the Saudis seem to be unhappy with Geagea’s torpedoing of their Franjieh plan, which allegedly was fabricated with French and American guidance. Riyadh also suspects that Doha may have had a hand in Geagea’s machinations, the former having quietly made inroads into Lebanese politics over the past few years at Saudi Arabia’s expense. But the Saudis’ views could change if they receive reassurance from Iran that an Aoun presidency would come with a Hariri premiership, assuming Hezbollah gets over its new concerns about Aoun. Should that happen, the Christians would get their strong president, the Sunnis would welcome the homecoming of their prime minister, and the Shiites would still have the house speakership, not to mention of course the almighty Hezbollah, the most potent political-military force in the country.
Of course, none of this, should it ever materialize, would solve the numerous other problems that Lebanon has had to deal with since the founding of the republic, including the lack of reform and political accountability, corruption, the failure to transition to a real democracy, and most recently and tragically, the inability to even collect garbage from the streets of Beirut. But the hope is that with this short-to-medium-term recipe for political stability, state institutions can be reactivated, a new electoral law can be negotiated, and national security can be preserved. As for Geagea, his strategy might not work—but, even then, he would emerge as a winner for engineering his own political resurrection and for strengthening Christian solidarity at a time of great peril for religious minorities in the Middle East.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/lebanon/2016-01-26/back-lebanons-future

Dialogue Session Does Not Tackle Presidency as Next Round Set for Feb. 17
Naharnet/January 27/16/A national dialogue session was held at Speaker Nabih Berri's Ain el-Tineh residence on Wednesday to address the latest developments in the country. Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh revealed after the talks that the gatherers did not address the presidential deadlock. Asked why by reporters, he replied: “Speaker Berri was the one steering discussions.”He added that he is still running for the presidency, revealing that “his house is still open” to rival candidate Change and Reform bloc chief MP Michel Aoun. Aoun was not present at the talks, but Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil represented him at the dialogue. He left without making a statement. Meanwhile, Loyalty to the Resistance bloc MP Ali Fayyad told reporters that “an agreement was reached among the gatherers” on the contentious military appointments file. Education Minister Elias Bou Saab later told al-Jadeed television that the Change and Reform bloc ministers will attend Thursday's cabinet session in wake of the agreement that was reached on the appointments. The next session of the dialogue was set for February 17. The dispute over the appointments file and the government's decision-making mechanism are two issues that had caused the Change and Reform bloc to boycott cabinet sessions. The government is scheduled to meet on Thursday.

Jumblat Applauds 'Iran's Democracy,' Wonders if it Will Allow Lebanese Elections to Be Held
Naharnet/January 27/16/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat expressed on Wednesday “admiration with the democracy in Iran,” citing the recent exclusion of the grandson of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, from contesting elections next month. The MP said via Twitter: “Given its 'democratic' record, perhaps Iran does not want the election of any MPs Henri Helou, Suleiman Franjieh, or Michel Aoun as president.” “It is strange that Khomeini's son is unwanted, but this is democracy in its highest form in the Islamic Republic,” he added sarcastically. “At this rate, what is the authority that chooses – pardon, I mean elects - the president in Lebanon?” wondered the MP. Perhaps it does not want to elect any of the Lebanese candidates, he noted, “but this is also a democratic choice based on the Iranian way.”Hassan Khomeini, a 43-year-old cleric with close ties to reformists, was not verified as having sufficient religious competence by the Guardian Council, his son Ahmad said on his Instagram account, despite "testimony from dozens of religious authorities". Khomeini had hoped to be a candidate for election to the Assembly of Experts, a powerful group of clerics which monitors the work of Iran's current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and will be responsible for selecting his successor. Jumblat continued: “I stipulated that the president should not be a state employee, meaning that the army commander has been ruled out and he doesn't even want the post.”“The Democratic Gathering reminded the public last week that Helou enjoys Christian and national credibility. They were not impressed by this, but this is our democratic opinion,” he tweeted. “It seems however some characteristics are still missing, which means that a president will not be elected at the moment. I don't know what this missing factor is,” he remarked. “At any rate, it appears that Lebanon's national dialogue has started to resemble Iran's council for diagnosing the regime,” the lawmaker said of the talks that were held at Speaker Nabih Berri's Ain el-Tineh residence in his absence. “The password to ending the presidential impasse is in the hands of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,” he added sarcastically. Some of the MP's Twitter followers criticized his absence from the dialogue table, asking him “if his failure to attend was also a form of democracy.”Jumblat's Democratic Gathering last week re-endorsed Helou as its candidate for the presidential elections. He is running alongside Change and Reform bloc leader MP Aoun and Marada Movement chief MP Franjieh. Lebanon has been without a head of state since the term of President Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014. Ongoing disputes between the rival March 8 and 14 camps over a compromise candidate have thwarted the polls. A number of officials have said that any progress in ending the deadlock hinges on a breakthrough in regional developments.

Lebanese Cabinet Marred in Controversy over Appointments, Samaha's Trial
Naharnet/January 27/16/The failure to resolve the dispute on the appointment of top military officers will likely compel the Free Patriotic Movement, Hizbullah and Tashnag Party ministers to again boycott a cabinet session scheduled to be held on Thursday. The same ministers boycotted a session that was held on January 14 because the appointment of top officers at the Military Council was not on the agenda. This week's session has 379 items on the agenda and does not include controversial issues. The cabinet has been paralyzed for months over the ongoing dispute on the appointments and the decision-making mechanism in the absence of a president. The main problem in the appointments lies on the Greek Orthodox officer, ministerial sources told An Nahar daily published on Wednesday. The ministers of the Consultative Gathering led by former President Michel Suleiman want the officer to be chosen based on the ranking list and the standards of the military institution while FPM founder MP Michel Aoun has nominated Brig. Gen. Samir al-Hajj, who comes fifth in rank. Three military council posts, reserved for a Shiite, a Greek Orthodox and a Catholic, have been vacant for the past two years. If the appointments bill was discussed from outside the agenda, then it would not be approved for failing to receive the green light of the two-thirds of the cabinet members. The eight ministers of the Consultative Gathering and Justice Minister Ashrafi Rifi will surely oppose it. The lack of consensus on the appointments is a sign that the FPM, Hizbullah and Tashnag Ministers will boycott Thursday's session, the sources said. Another controversial issue that arose last week is Rifi's attempt to transfer the trial of former Minister Michel Samaha from the Military Tribunal to the Judicial Council. Rifi was among the first officials to condemn a decision taken by the Military Tribunal earlier this month to release Samaha on bail. The ex-minister was arrested in August 2012 and charged with attempting to carry out "terrorist acts" over allegations that he and Syrian security services chief Ali Mamluk transported explosives and planned attacks and assassinations of political and religious figures in Lebanon. Samaha was sentenced in May 2015 to four-and-half years in prison, but in June the Cassation Court nullified the verdict and ordered a retrial. Sources close to Rifi were quoted on Monday as saying that the justice minister “is seriously thinking to take a decision on the suspension of his participation in the government” if obstacles were put to the approval of his bill. The same sources told An Nahar on Tuesday that Rifi will wait for the cabinet session to decide on his next step.

Woman Critically Injured after Gunmen Storm Arsal Home
Naharnet/January 27/16/A woman was critically wounded on Wednesday after gunmen broke into the house she lives in with her husband in the restive northeastern border town of Arsal, state-run National News Agency reported. “Three armed men stormed Khaled Hussein Ezzeddine's house in the al-Hosn area of the town of Arsal and opened fire,” NNA said. “His wife Kouna Ezzeddine, 20, was seriously injured in the head as a result before she was rushed to the area's al-Rayan hospital,” the agency added. Shootings have become frequent incidents in Arsal in recent years. On January 8, a member of the Internal Security Forces Intelligence Branch was assassinated outside his home in Arsal at the hands of suspected Islamic State militants. Militants from the IS and the Qaida-linked al-Nusra Front are entrenched in the town's outskirts and in other mountainous regions along the porous Lebanese-Syrian border. The Lebanese army regularly shells their positions and Hizbullah fighters have engaged in clashes with them on the Syrian side of the border.

Amin Gemayel Says Geagea's Nomination of Aoun May Have Destroyed 'March 14 Institution'
Naharnet/January 27/16/Former Kataeb Party chief and ex-Lebanese president Amin Gemayel on Wednesday slammed Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea's decision to nominate Change and Reform bloc chief MP Michel Aoun for the presidency as a mere “reaction” that might have “destroyed March 14 as an institution.”“The Maarab meeting was a reaction to (al-Mustaqbal movement leader ex-PM Saad) Hariri's nomination of (Marada Movement chief MP Suleiman) Franjieh, who is Geagea's neighbor in Bsharri, and we hope it wasn't a mere reaction,” said Gemayel in an interview with Al-Jazeera television. “We're afraid that Geagea's initiative might have destroyed March 14 as an institution,” he added. Lebanon has been without a president since May 2014 when the term of Michel Suleiman ended without the election of successor and Hariri launched late in 2015 a proposal to nominate Franjieh as president. Geagea, Hariri's ally in the March 14 camp, was a presidential candidate at the time and some observers have said that the LF leader has recently nominated Aoun for the presidency as a “reaction” to Hariri's proposal, a claim Geagea has denied. “The nominations of Franjieh and Aoun are both positive initiatives and we are not taking them lightly but the Lebanese situation cannot withstand unilateral decisions or confrontational nominations,” Gemayel stressed, echoing his party's reservations on the two men's nominations. “We would support any candidate who enjoys unanimous support but both Aoun and Franjieh have not secured unanimity in order for us to support any of them,” he added. Gemayel lamented that Aoun and Franjieh “could have proposed their nominations through an understanding with all leaders,” emphasizing that “no single party can impose their nominee on others.”“We would elect the candidate who can convince us with a platform aimed at protecting the country's sovereignty. During this difficult period and the threats that are surrounding us, it is necessary for the Lebanese to agree on a consensual president who can unify the Lebanese over a national project and who can offer reassurances,” he went on to say. Moreover, Gemayel blasted the Aoun-Geagea agreement as “a confrontational move against some components” of the Lebanese society. “This poses a major threat to Lebanon and its Christians,” Gemayel warned. “An inter-Christian agreement is important but all agreements must be in harmony with all parties in the framework of comprehensive national cooperation and understanding,” he explained.

Woman Critically Injured after Gunmen Storm Arsal Home
Naharnet/January 27/16/A woman was critically wounded on Wednesday after gunmen broke into the house she lives in with her husband in the restive northeastern border town of Arsal, state-run National News Agency reported. “Three armed men stormed Khaled Hussein Ezzeddine's house in the al-Hosn area of the town of Arsal and opened fire,” NNA said. “His wife Kouna Ezzeddine, 20, was seriously injured in the head as a result before she was rushed to the area's al-Rayan hospital,” the agency added. Shootings have become frequent incidents in Arsal in recent years. On January 8, a member of the Internal Security Forces Intelligence Branch was assassinated outside his home in Arsal at the hands of suspected Islamic State militants. Militants from the IS and the Qaida-linked al-Nusra Front are entrenched in the town's outskirts and in other mountainous regions along the porous Lebanese-Syrian border. The Lebanese army regularly shells their positions and Hizbullah fighters have engaged in clashes with them on the Syrian side of the border.

Gas Blaze Razes Syrian Refugee Encampment in Akkar
Naharnet/January 27/16/A Syrian refugee encampment was totally gutted by fire Wednesday in the northern Akkar region, state-run National News Agency reported. “Five Syrian refugee tents went up in flames in the town of Tal Hmayra in the Akkar Plain after a heater's gas cylinder exploded,” NNA said. The blaze burned the tents and the belongings of the 25 refugee tenants, including their identification documents, the agency added. The refugees have urged the relevant parties to provide them with an alternative shelter especially amid the current cold wave that is engulfing Lebanon, NNA said. More than 1.1 million Syrian refugees have fled across the border into Lebanon since March 2011, when the conflict in their country began. The influx has tested Lebanon's limited resources, prompting the government to impose unprecedented visa restrictions on Syrians in a bid to stem the number of arrivals. Hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees are scattered across the country in dozens of unofficial makeshift encampments -- shelters made of little more than plastic sheeting nailed to wooden frames. Others are living in unfinished buildings with only slightly more protection from the elements in cities including Beirut.

Lebanese Baby Diagnosed with Swine Flu
Naharnet/January 27/16/A Lebanese toddler was diagnosed with swine flu at the state hospital in the southern city of Sidon, the state-run National New Agency reported on Wednesday. The hospital's management confirmed that the 18-month-old girl was suffering from the H1N1 virus, saying she is receiving the appropriate treatment under the supervision of the health ministry. The child, who hails from the northern district of Akkar, was first admitted to Notre Dame De Secours Hospital in Jbeil on Monday after suffering from severe flu-like symptoms, said NNA. She was later taken to a private hospital in Sidon and was transferred to the state hospital, the agency added. A major outbreak of the H1N1 virus sparked a World Health Organization pandemic alert in June 2009, after it emerged from Mexico and the United States. The outbreak killed around 18,500 people in 214 countries. The alert was lifted in August 2010.

Khalil: Export File Must be Reconsidered, 'Cost too High'
Naharnet/January 27/16/Finance Minister Ali Hassan Khalil said on Wednesday that the decision to export Lebanon's trash must be reviewed in light of the huge expenses it entails and the new offer submitted by a Thai based company proposing cheaper prices to solve the eight-month long crisis. “Regardless of the serious new proposal made by New Boxer Group to export the trash at a cheaper cost than that offered by Britain’s Chinook Urban Mining International, the offer will likely be reevaluated in light of the high costs incurred on the state,” Khalil told al-Akhbar daily on Wednesday. On January 15, New Boxer Group submitted to the Lebanese government an offer to export Lebanon's trash at the cost of $85 dollars per ton instead of the $123 offered by Chinook. Khalil said that the new company is “offering cheaper prices and a deal worth studying,” but stressed instead the need to “resort to national solutions by establishing landfills and locations to treat the trash instead of exporting it.” Khalil has in that regard told head of the ministerial committee tasked with solving the trash file Agriculture Minister Akram Shehayyeb in a formal letter informing him of the need to review the offer to export the trash and the expenses it entails, the daily said. Change and Reform bloc sources following up on the file said the issue will be put for discussion during the next cabinet session to look closely at the new proposal that could save the state about $100 million dollars over the duration of the contract. Lebanon was plunged in a waste management crisis following the closure of the Naameh landfill in July 2015. Officials have for months failed to find an alternative to the dump, resulting in the accumulation of trash on the streets throughout the country. The cabinet in December approved an export plan despite reservations of the Kataeb and Change and Reform blocs. Two firms that agreed to export Lebanon's trash, Britain’s Chinook and Holland’s Howa BV, were brought down to one after Howa's announced withdrawal.

Bassil Dismisses Franjieh's Remarks: We Won't Compete with Him in Parliament
Naharnet/January 27/16/Free Patriotic Movement chief Jebran Bassil hinted Wednesday that the Change and Reform bloc and Hizbullah will not take part in any parliamentary session involving a competition over the presidential post between bloc chief MP Michel Aoun and Marada Movement leader MP Suleiman Franjieh.Bassil's statement came only hours after Franjieh boasted that his presidential bid enjoys the support of 70 out of 127 MPs and noted that only “forty” lawmakers would vote for Aoun. “I didn't know that we have started counting votes but we will not reach a stage during which we compete with Franjieh in parliament,” Bassil underlined during an interview with MTV. “During the past 34 sessions, we were sparing the country the trap of having a weak president,” Bassil added, referring to Change and Refrom and Hizbullah's boycott of electoral sessions. Lebanon has been without a president since May 2014 when the term of Michel Suleiman ended without the election of successor and al-Mustaqbal movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri launched late in 2015 a proposal to nominate Franjieh as president. Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, Hariri's ally in the March 14 camp, was a presidential candidate at the time and some observers have said that the LF leader has recently nominated Aoun for the presidency as a “reaction” to Hariri's proposal, a claim Geagea has denied. “When the majority of Christians reach an agreement, it would be difficult to disregard,” Bassil said during the interview. “Should they bypass Christian consensus, the idea of coexistence itself would become in question,” Bassil warned. He explained that “a gradual buildup led to the LF's support for General Aoun's nomination,” adding that the two parties must seek to take their agreement to a higher level. “The biggest say in the presidential issue belongs to Christians and this is a firm principle that we will not renounce,” added Bassil. Turning to Change and Reform's alliance with Hizbullah, Bassil noted that the party is still committed to its support for Aoun's presidential bid.
“Hizbullah is in the picture of our agreement with the LF and it has a great interest in it,” Bassil added.

Bassil, Derbas Appease Fears over Employment of Syrian Refugees
Associated Press/Naharnet/January 27/16/Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil and Social Affairs Minister Rashid Derbas have appeased fears that the donors conference, which is scheduled to be held in London next week, would encourage Syrian refugees to remain in Lebanon and pave way for their naturalization.
The conference has for the first time shown international commitment to consolidate economic and development projects, Bassil told An Nahar daily published on Wednesday. “We reject naturalization,” he said, adding that the projects encourage Syrians to return home when the conflict is over. Bassil told the newspaper that the foreign ministry has proposed the STEP program, which allows the short-term employment of Syrians. The project activates the economy and finds job opportunities for the Lebanese and Syrians in the agriculture and constructions sectors, he said, adding that the Syrians would put part of their salaries in private accounts which they will have access to upon their return to their country. Derbas also stressed that Lebanon rejects the naturalization of Syrians.
“We are ready to give the Syrian refugees and residents job opportunities within the law,” he told An Nahar. The comments of the ministers came over fears that the international community would encourage the displaced Syrians to remain in the host countries, such as Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan after Germany proposed creating up to 500,000 short-term jobs to help the refugees survive in the overburdened Middle Eastern states. Germany's minister for economic cooperation, Gerd Mueller, said during a visit to Jordan on Tuesday that Germany will raise the idea at next week's conference in London. The World Bank and other donors are also promoting new ideas, including interest-free development loans for the hard-hit Middle Eastern host countries. The idea was discussed at a meeting with top officials from regional host countries on Monday, ahead of the Feb. 4-5 conference, where aid agencies and regional governments are expected to seek close to $9 billion for 2016. The appeal at the conference in London would include $3.18 billion to alleviate suffering inside Syria and $5.75 billion for close to 4.3 million war refugees and their regional host countries, among them Jordan and Lebanon, according to U.N. figures. Almost 4.3 million Syrians have fled civil war since 2011 and most remain in the region, mainly in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. Some 1.2 million are registered in Lebanon and about 630,000 in Jordan, most living outside formal refugee camps. Over the past year, cuts in food and cash support for refugees — a result of severe aid shortfalls — helped trigger an exodus from the region to Europe. Hundreds of thousands of Syrians have reached Europe, many heading to Germany, because the cuts made life in host countries increasingly difficult.

TI: Lebanon Continues to Suffer from Rampant Corruption
Naharnet/January 27/16/Lebanon continues to suffer from public sector corruption despite a slight improvement since 2014, graft watchdog Transparency International (TI) said on Wednesday. Lebanon ranked 123rd with a score of 28 out of a possible 100 in 2015 in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index. The country scored 27 in 2014, it said. It was better off in 2012 with a score of 30. Denmark remained at the top of the Index, which is a closely watched global barometer, for the second consecutive year as the country perceived as least corrupt. It scored 91 points while North Korea and Somalia remained at the bottom with unchanged scores of 8. The index is based on expert opinions of public sector corruption, looking at a range of factors like whether governmental leaders are held to account or go unpunished for corruption, the perceived prevalence of bribery, and whether public institutions respond to citizens' needs. The watchdog uses data from institutions including the World Bank, the African Development Bank and business school IMD to compile the perceptions of the scale of public sector corruption. The score runs from zero, which is highly corrupt, to 100, which is very clean. Overall, two-thirds of the 168 countries studied scored below 50 and the global average was 43. Still, Transparency said it was a good sign that 64 countries improved their score while only 53 declined. The rest were unchanged.

Canada's Statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day
January 27, 2016 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable Stéphane Dion, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:
“As we mark the 71st anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp, we remember the six million Jews and the millions of other victims who were brutally murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust.
“In their honour, we must never let the worst chapter in human history be repeated or allow other violations of human rights to be tolerated. In the world we want, there is no place for racism, prejudice, violence, intolerance and persecution.
“Shoah survivors and all who have spoken about this abominable tragedy have highlighted the horror of anti-Semitism. On behalf of the survivors and in memory of those who died at the hands of a ruthless regime, we continue to work for a just, free world where all live in safety.
“This day is a poignant reminder that we must never forget and that the Holocaust’s remaining survivors must see justice served.
“It is deeply troubling that even after 71 years, victims and families still have not been compensated for assets confiscated by the Nazis. Canada reaffirms its commitment to the 2009 Terezín Declaration.”

Canada confirms lifting of Iran sanctions
Reuters, Ottawa/Montreal Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Canada has confirmed for the first time on Tuesday that it plans to lift its sanctions on Tehran and said that if Airbus is allowed to sell to Iran, then its aircraft maker Bombardier Inc. should be allowed to export there as well. “If Airbus is able to do it, why (will) Bombardier not be able to do it? In which way (is it) helping Canada, or the Iranian people, or Israel, or anyone, that Canada is hurting its own industry?” Dion said in an exchange with reporters. Asked specifically if Bombardier would be allowed to do business with Iran as soon as sanctions are lifted, Dion said: “Legitimate business, certainly.”Iran announced plans at the weekend to buy more than 160 European planes, mainly from Airbus, and Dion said reluctance to lift sanctions on the part of Canada’s Conservative opposition had helped Airbus and not Bombardier. The United States, the European Union and other major nations have already lifted some of their own punitive measures. “Canada will lift its sanctions but what Canada will maintain is our suspicion of a regime ... that must not return to (trying to obtain) nuclear weapons,” Dion told the House of Commons moments before meeting journalists. Dion also said Iran had a poor human rights record and was not a friend of Canadian allies such as Israel.
Dion said any lifting of sanctions would be done carefully in conjunction with allies, seeking to ensure nuclear and other military activity is prevented. Bombardier spokeswoman Marianella de la Barrera called Dion’s comments a positive step but said that the company was still respecting the Canadian sanctions. “We’re monitoring it very closely,” she said. “Nothing official has been communicated to us.”She said sanctions had not prevented Bombardier from speaking with Iran about its aviation needs: “It doesn’t preclude us from engaging in strategic discussions, which we are doing.”Montreal has the third-largest aerospace hub in terms of employment, following Toulouse and Seattle. Suzanne Benoit, president of Aero Montreal, which represents the aerospace sector there, said it would be excellent news for the industry if the embargo is lifted. “Right now we are not in a fair competition with Airbus because Airbus can sell to Iran.”Iran is looking to upgrade its aging fleet partly with aircraft with the same range and seats as Bombardier’s 100- to 150-seat CSeries.

Netanyahu says U.N. chief ‘encourages terror’
AFP, Jerusalem Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday accused the U.N. chief of "encouraging terror" after Ban Ki-moon spoke of Palestinian frustration at Israel's occupation and said it was natural to resist. "The comments of the U.N. Secretary General encourage terror," Netanyahu said in a statement. "There is no justification for terror." Earlier, Ban told the U.N. Security Council of the "profound sense of alienation and despair driving some Palestinians – especially young people" in the upsurge of attacks on Israelis since the start of October. "Palestinian frustration is growing under the weight of a half century of occupation and the paralysis of the peace process," he said. "As oppressed peoples have demonstrated throughout the ages, it is human nature to react to occupation, which often serves as a potent incubator of hate and extremism." Violence since October 1 has killed 159 Palestinians and 25 Israelis, as well as an American and an Eritrean, according to an AFP count. Most of the Palestinians killed since October have been attackers, while others have been shot dead by Israeli forces during protests and clashes. Ban condemned the Palestinian attacks, but said Israeli settlement building cast doubt on Israel's commitment to the goal of an independent Palestine alongside Israel. "Continued settlement activities are an affront to the Palestinian people and to the international community," he said. "They rightly raise fundamental questions about Israel's commitment to a two-state solution." Netanyahu responded that the Palestinians themselves were not working for two states. "The Palestinian murderers do not want to build a state, they want to destroy a state and they say it out loud," he said. "They want to murder Jews wherever they are and they say so out loud. They do not murder for peace and they do not murder for human rights."
Netanyahu under pressure
An Israeli woman stabbed and killed by two Palestinians in a West Bank settlement was buried on Tuesday as pressure mounted on Netanyahu's government to stem a new wave of attacks. Shlomit Krigman, 24, died overnight of wounds from Monday's attack. The two attackers, identified by Palestinian media as Ibrahim Allan, 23, and Hussein Abu Ghosh, 17, were shot dead by a security guard. It was the third attack inside a West Bank settlement since January 17, when an Israeli woman was stabbed to death by a 15-year-old Palestinian at the entrance to her home in Otniel. A day later, an Israeli woman was stabbed and wounded by a 17-year-old Palestinian in Tekoa. Before January 17, Jewish settlements built on land occupied by Israel in 1967 and considered illegal by much of the international community had been spared much of the violence. But Monday's stabbings increased domestic pressure on the Israeli government, which derives much of its support from the settler community. Netanyahu said on Monday he had instructed the army to submit a "comprehensive plan" to better ensure the security of settlements. He also announced he would revoke the work permits of the attackers' relatives, which allow them to be employed in the settlements or in Israel. The army also sealed off the Palestinian village of Beit Ur al-Tahta, home of one of the two attackers and which is close to Beit Horon, an army spokesman said.
About 400,000 Israeli settlers live alongside around 2.5 million Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. The United States, United Nations and the European Union oppose all Israeli settlement building, and consider it an obstacle to peace.
Israel's defence ministry, however, has approved the construction of 153 new settler homes in the West Bank, the Israeli settlement watchdog Peace Now said on Monday. The move marks the end of an informal construction freeze in the Palestinian territory that lasted 18 months, the NGO said. U.S.-backed peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel collapsed in April 2014 amid bitter mutual recriminations. A chief grievance of the Palestinians was Israeli settlement building on land they claim for a future state.

Iran warned U.S. warship to leave drill area
By Reuters, Dubai Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Iran’s navy on Wednesday warned a U.S. warship to leave an area of the Sea of Oman where the Iranians were holding an exercise, the Tasnim news agency said. The agency, close to the Revolutionary Guards, reported that after the warning to the vessel, it left the area instantly and “the situation returned to normal.” Iran detained 10 U.S. sailors on Jan. 12 after their boats entered its territorial waters because of what they said was a navigational error. They were quickly freed, bringing a swift end to an incident that had rattled nerves just before the expected implementation of a landmark accord between Iran and world powers. A few days later, international sanctions on Tehran were rolled back in return for its curtailment of some nuclear activities. Iran said its naval drill near the strategic Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday was to test submarines, destroyers and missile launchers. “The manoeuvre aims to show Iranian forces’ strength both in ensuring security on the seas and in defending the country’s sea borders in Hormuz Strait, Sea of Oman and north of the Indian Ocean,” Rear-Admiral Habibollah Sayyari was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA on Wednesday. Tasnim news agency reported on Wednesday that Iran had given warnings to other Western ships on Tuesday, and they had cleared the area.

White House dropped $10 million claim in Iran prisoner deal
Reuters, Washington Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Nader Modanlo was facing five more years in federal prison when he got an extraordinary offer: U.S. President Barack Obama was ready to commute his sentence as part of this month’s historic and then still-secret prisoner swap with Iran. He said no.
To sweeten the deal, the U.S. administration then dropped a claim against the Iran-born aerospace engineer for $10 million that a Maryland jury found he had taken as an illegal payment from Iran, according to interviews with Modanlo, lawyers involved and U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter.
The surrender of the U.S. claim, which has not previously been reported, could add to scrutiny of how the Obama administration clinched a prisoner deal that has drawn criticism from Republican presidential candidates and lawmakers.
A Washington-based spokesman for the Justice Department declined to comment on discussions over the $10 million, which the jury found that Modanlo was paid to help Iran launch its first satellite in 2005. Modanlo says the money was a loan from a Swiss company for a telecoms deal.
In the prisoner swap, five Americans held in Iran were released at the same time as seven Iranians charged or imprisoned in the United States were granted pardons or had their sentences commuted. The deal accompanied the Jan. 16 implementation of a landmark agreement that curbs Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.
Even after receiving the improved offer on Friday, Jan. 15, Modanlo said he didn’t budge at first. He wanted a chance to clear his name in court, he says.
"I was mostly disappointed that I have to give up my right to appeal," Modanlo, 55, told Reuters in one of his first interviews since being released.
"If they believe in their justice system why would they deprive me of it? Let them prove me wrong."
As part of their clemency agreements, all of the Iranians had to renounce any claims against the U.S. government. All but one had been accused of violating the economic sanctions the United States has enforced against Iran for decades.
Modanlo’s reluctance to accept Obama’s offer became an eleventh-hour complication to an otherwise carefully staged deal with Iran that had been negotiated in secret for months by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his Iranian counterpart.
He only agreed to accept the clemency offer on Saturday, Jan. 16 as the clock ticked toward what U.S. officials said was the final deadline, according to Modanlo and U.S. officials.
He was freed the next day from a federal prison near Richmond, Virginia. The release marked an abrupt conclusion to his case after a sprawling, decade-long investigation into Modanlo’s role in brokering Iran’s access to space technology. U.S. federal agents had pursued evidence from the suburbs of Washington to Switzerland and Russia.
Modanlo was serving the longest sentence of any of the seven Iranians and had the most extensive, established connections to Iran’s government.
He was also the only one known to have initially declined Obama’s offer, according to interviews with lawyers for the men.
An official at Iran’s interests section in Washington, Iran’s de facto embassy, testified in Modanlo’s defense at his 2013 trial. The same Iranian representative, Fariborz Jahansoozan, was instrumental in brokering the prisoner exchange in recent months, lawyers for those involved have said.
"This story is done and over with," Jahansoozan said when reached by Reuters, declining to discuss the case in detail. "Please let it go and move forward."
After two years in prison, Modanlo says he is finding that hard. "I know this cloud is going to be over my head forever," he said.
American dream soured
Modanlo grew up in northern Iran, the son of a wealthy landowner. As a child, he remembers watching the Apollo 11 mission in 1969 that put American astronauts on the moon and being inspired to become a space engineer.
Decades later, after moving to the United States and becoming a U.S. citizen, Modanlo had become a space entrepreneur with a company valued at $500 million.
He helped launch an American satellite from a Russian rocket in 1995. His company, Final Analysis, focused on the emerging field of low-orbit satellites for data services.
But a series of missteps drove the company into bankruptcy in 2001, and Modanlo was sued by a former partner, who accused him of selling missile technology to Iran.
Modanlo says U.S. authorities used the missile claim to win assistance from Switzerland in obtaining evidence against him. Raids at Modanlo’s Maryland home and office seized a truck load of documents and 120 computer hard drives but no supporting evidence for that claim, he said.
"They knew this was false. They knew I had no missile technology," he said.
The ensuing investigation uncovered documents prosecutors say showed Modanlo brokered a deal between Iran and Russia to launch the satellite in exchange for a $10 million fee. A Maryland jury convicted him of sanctions violations after a six-week trial. He was sentenced to eight years in prison.
In an appeal, Modanlo’s lawyers argued that private communications between the trial judge and prosecutors had excluded evidence that could have changed the outcome.
Robert King, one of the judges who heard Modanlo’s appeal, admonished prosecutors for that practice in an October hearing.
U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein said the evidence against Modanlo had been disclosed in court and proved "beyond any reasonable doubt that Mr. Modanlo secretly helped Iran launch a satellite for $10 million."
Modanlo said he felt certain the appeal would go his way. Then his lawyer told him that he would have to give up that appeal and be stuck with the $10 million forfeiture claim if he took the clemency offer.
"I waive my right to bring a claim against you, but your claim continues for God knows how many years against me?" Modanlo said. "After back and forth a number of times they agreed to take the $10 million off the table."
After calls from his attorneys and Iranian representatives failed to convince Modanlo to take the clemency, it was a pleading and tearful call from his sister in Iran that finally made him relent, he said.
"If it was for me, I would never have taken the deal," he said.

Rowhani: Iran didn’t ask for nude statue cover-up
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Iranian President Hassan Rowhani says Iran didn’t make any specific requests for Rome museum officials to cover up naked statues but says he nevertheless appreciated the welcome he received. Rowhani laughed Wednesday when asked at the end of a three-day visit to Italy about the statue cover-up, which made headlines in Italy and around the world. Some Italian politicians decried the “cultural submission” implied in Italy’s gesture. The Iranian president said Iran made no specific request for the cover-up, saying there were “no contacts about this” from his side. But he added: “I know that Italians are a very hospitable people, a people who try to do the most to put their guests at ease and I thank you for this.”Ahead of a joint news conference Monday with Premier Matteo Renzi, wooden panels were erected around some Roman-era statues in Rome’s Capitoline Museums. The Iranian president also told reporters on Wednesday that freedom of expression doesn’t extend to insulting other people’s faith. Rowhani said that he and Pope Francis discussed the issue during their audience at the Vatican on Tuesday. Francis was once asked about the extremist attacks on the satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo. He suggested that a violent reaction could be expected when someone’s faith is insulted, saying that anyone who insults his mother can expect to be punched. Rowhani concurred, saying “freedom of expression doesn’t mean that people can do what they want.” He made the comments hours before arriving in Paris on the next leg of his European trip. (With the Associated Press)

Qatar names new foreign minister in cabinet reshuffle
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Qatar’s emir on Wednesday ordered a cabinet reshuffle in which he named a new foreign minister, according to state news agency QNA. Foreign minister Khalid al-Attiyah was replaced with Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani. Attiyah was named state minister for defense affairs. The emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, also holds the post of defense minister.The finance and energy portfolios were kept unchanged in the cabinet reshuffle. The cabinet also wela new female minister, Qatar’s fourth in history, with the appointment of Dr. Hanan Al Kuwari, managing director of the publicly-funded Hamad Medical Corporation. The decree also merged several ministries, including communication and transport and culture, youth and sports. The public health minister was also replaced.

Three soldiers killed in Turkish city as curfew expanded
AFP, Diyarbakir Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Three Turkish soldiers were killed Wednesday in clashes with Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK) militants in Diyarbakir in southeast Turkey, the military said, as a controversial curfew order was expanded to new areas in the Kurdish-dominated city.
Kurdish militants on Wednesday attacked the security forces with rifles and rocket launchers in the central Sur district of Diyarbakir, prompting intense clashes that killed three soldiers and wounded six others, the army said in a statement. Vowing to flush out the PKK from Turkey’s urban centers, the authorities have in recent weeks enforced curfews in three locations in the southeast to back up military operations that activists say have killed dozens of civilians. A curfew measure in Sur, which has been in place since Dec. 2, has been widened to cover five more neighborhoods and a main road on Wednesday to help the security forces remove the bombs and barricades set up by the militants, local authorities said. Clutching bags of possessions and mattresses, residents of the affected areas rapidly moved to different neighborhoods to take shelter, an AFP photographer said. Curfews remain in place in the town of Cizre in Sirnak province near the Iraqi border, which was imposed on Dec. 14. A curfew in nearby Silopi was partially lifted last week. The army also said a total of 20 Kurdish rebels were killed in Cizre and Sur on Tuesday, bringing the total number of militants killed in the two towns to some 600 since the “anti-terror” operation started in December. It was not immediately possible to independently verify the figures. The operations mark a new escalation in six months of fighting with the PKK since a two-and-a-half year truce collapsed.

ISIS ‘plans to kidnap Russian tourists’ in Turkey
AFP, Moscow Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Russia’s federal tourism agency on Wednesday issued a warning that Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) were planning to abduct Russian citizens in Turkey. “According to the competent agencies, leaders of the ISIS terrorist group plan to take hostages from among Russian citizens in Turkey,” it said in a statement. “Hostages can be transferred on to territories controlled by militants to hold public executions and to be used as human shields in combat with Syrian government and coalition forces,” it added.
“Therefore we draw the attention of all independent tourists departing for Turkey to the necessity of taking all possible measures to ensure personal security.”
Turkey had been Russia’s number one foreign tourism destination for years but this came to an abrupt end following the shooting down of a Russian military plane by Turkish jets on the Syria-Turkey border in November. The warning essentially targets all remaining Russian tourists in Turkey, as organized tours by travel agencies were banned by Moscow as part of a raft of retaliatory measures in the wake of the jet downing. The incident sparked a crisis in relations between Moscow and Ankara, with the Kremlin accusing the Turkish leadership of essentially funding Islamic State jihadists. Russia reintroduced entry visas for Turks and slapped sanctions on several Turkish products. Russia has been conducting air strikes in Syria, its ally in the region since Soviet times, since September. Turkey meanwhile is part of a parallel U.S.-led coalition targeting ISIS in the country.
The two countries have lately also clashed over the guest list for Syria peace talks set for later this week, with Moscow saying they would be pointless without Syrian Kurdish group the Democratic Union Party, which Ankara considers is linked to Kurdish rebels inside Turkey. Turkish authorities have blamed ISIS for a suicide bombing in the heart of Istanbul’s tourist district earlier this month that killed 10 Germans, one of a string of deadly attacks said to be the work of the militant group.

Low hopes as Syrian opposition sets new terms
Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Expectations are increasingly becoming low especially after one of the major opposition groups in the Syrian war said Wednesday it will only attend the imminent Geneva peace talks if the sieges in the country are lifted and other conditions are met, casting further uncertainty on the talks scheduled to begin in two days. United Nations-brokered talks, now scheduled to begin on Friday, have been delayed since Monday over who will represent the opposition. In a statement released at the end of daylong meetings in Saudi Arabia late Tuesday, the Higher Negotiating Committee (HNC) referred to the “necessity of realizing genuine improvements on the ground before starting in the negotiating process.” The Saudi-backed committee is headed by Riyad Hijab, a former prime minister who defected to the opposition in 2012. It represents a coalition that includes the main political opposition group, the Syrian National Coalition, and many of the major rebel factions fighting in Syria. While the group left open the possibility of its eventual participation in the talks scheduled to begin Friday, it said it awaits a reply from the U.N. chief on its conditions. On Wednesday, HNC resumed discussions in the Saudi capital to decide whether to join peace talks in Geneva. Speaking to AFP at the venue in a luxury Riyadh hotel, HNC’s spokesman Monzer Makhous said the talks could last “perhaps all day.” “There will be no comment until they finish,” he said.
However, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov was cited by Interfax news agency as saying on Wednesday that the Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem will head a government delegation at peace talks with the country’s opposition in Geneva. Earlier, the U.N. envoy Staffan de Mistura described the start of a long term process of consultation between various parties to the conflict as not the actual peace negotiations between the warring sides.
The talks are meant to start a political process to end the conflict that began in 2011 as a largely peaceful uprising against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s rule but escalated into an all-out war after a harsh state crackdown. The plan calls for cease-fires in parallel to the talks, a new constitution and elections in a year and a half. But there have been major tensions over who would be invited to the talks, and the opposition has demanded confidence-building measures from the government on humanitarian issues.
Kurds participation
The participation of Kurds is also further delaying the process for the talks to take place especially when Turkey rejected their inclusion. Turkey, a major backer of the rebels, sees one of the main Syrian Kurdish group - the Democratic Union Party, or PYD and its YPG militia as branches of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, known as the PKK, which has waged a long insurgency against Ankara. Turkey has threatened to boycott the talks if the PYD is represented. The opposition has also accused Russia, a key backer of the Syrian government, of trying to “dictate” who from the opposition would participate. Moscow has insisted on PYD’s participation. PYD plays an important role in fighting ISIS group and is an essential part of any political settlement in Syria.
Only Syrians invited
Only Syrians have been invited to peace talks in Geneva, the UN said Wednesday, in an apparent contradiction to Turkey’s suggestion that it would be included. On Tuesday, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said Ankara would “boycott” the talks set to open on Friday if PYD, which Ankara believes is linked to militants fighting inside Turkey, was at the negotiating table.
But Khawla Mattar, a spokeswoman for de Mistura said there was “no plan to invite” non-Syrians when asked about the possible inclusion of observer delegations from Turkey, Russia, the United States or France.
She declined to comment on which parties had been given invitations, which were issued by de Mistura on Tuesday.
‘No peace talks without Kurds’
The co-leader of the Syrian Democratic Council, Haytham Manna, on Wednesday he would not take part in peace talks in Geneva unless two Kurdish leaders, Saleh Muslim and Ilham Ahmed, were also invited to participate. “I’ll go with my friends or not (at all). There is no compromise in this question,” Manna told Reuters a day after the U.N. envoy to Syria, Staffan De Mistura, sent invitations to join the talks, without including the Kurdish leaders. “We have one day and tomorrow perhaps also to negotiate all of these things with the Russians, the Americans and De Mistura’s staff. We’ll see if they accept our opinion, our view to have really a strong and representative delegation, we are ready to go.”
France: Kurds not invited
Meanwhile, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told France-Culture radio on Wednesday that the PYD was not invited and acknowledged there are several hurdles facing the talks including who will be present. “The PYD group, the Kurdish group, was causing the most problems, and Mr. de Mistura told me he had not sent them an invitation letter,” Fabius said. He said the Riyadh group should be the primary negotiator for the rebels. The Riyadh group is a broad coalition that includes several armed Islamic groups, such as the powerful Jaish al-Islam and ultraconservative Ahrar al-Sham faction, which the Russian and Syrian governments consider as terrorist groups. It does not, however, include the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) group or Nursa Front, two militant factions that control large areas of Syria and are not participating in peace talks. Deciding who among Syria’s fractured opposition should attend the talks has become the main stumbling block to the first attempt at a peace negotiation in two years. There is no sign of an end to the war pitting a range of rebel groups against President Bashar al-Assad’s government after almost five years and more than 250,000 deaths.(With agencies)

U.N. panel calls for global inquiry on Yemen
The Associated Press, United Nations Wednesday, 27 January 2016/The United Nations Security Council should consider creating an international commission of inquiry to investigate alleged human rights abuses by all sides in Yemen’s conflict, a panel of U.N. experts says. The Associated Press on Tuesday obtained a copy of the panel’s annual report, which has not been released publicly. The panel monitors U.N. sanctions. READ MORE: ‘My baby needs oxygen:’ Mother fears newborn’s death in Yemen’s Taez. The report also says civilians in the Arab world’s poorest country are suffering under tactics in the conflict that “constitute the prohibited use of starvation as a method of warfare.”A Saudi Arabia-led coalition last year launched air strikes and then a ground operation against Shiite Houthi militias allied with a former president who had captured large swaths of the country, including the capital, Sanaa. Observers have warned that the chaos is making room for militant groups like ISIS to expand.

Saudi soldier dies in border shelling from Yemen
AFP, Riyadh Wednesday, 27 January 2016/A Saudi soldier has been killed in shelling from across the border in Yemen, the interior ministry announced on Wednesday. He died on Tuesday in a strike on a border guards’ observation post in the Harth district of Jazan in the kingdom’s south, the ministry said.
Around 90 civilians and soldiers have been killed in shelling and skirmishes in Saudi border regions since March when a Saudi-led military coalition began air and ground action in Yemen against Iran-backed militias. The coalition is supporting local forces against the Houthi militias who seized territory, including the capital Sanaa, from the internationally recognized government. More than 5,800 people have been killed in Yemen since March, about half of them civilians, according to the United Nations.

Eight Hamas men missing after Gaza tunnel collapse
AFP, Gaza City, Palestinian Territories Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Eight members from the Hamas group were missing Wednesday after the collapse of a tunnel in the Gaza Strip caused by rain and flooding, a security source said. The tunnel collapsed overnight in the area of Jabalia in the north of the Palestinian enclave after several days of rainfall, the security source in the area said on condition of anonymity. “The resistance tunnel collapsed last night due to the weather and flooding,” the source said, adding that the tunnel belonged to Hamas, the Islamist movement that rules the Gaza Strip. “There were 11 resistance men inside. Three of them escaped in the first hour after the accident, but the security operation... continues to search for the eight others.”Such collapses have previously occurred in the coastal strip, which is under an Israeli blockade and has seen three wars with the Jewish state since 2008.
On Saturday, a tunnel collapse killed a 30-year-old man, according to Hamas officials. Residents said the tunnel was located in Al-Maghazi in the central Gaza Strip. In December, 14 Palestinians were rescued after being stranded for hours in a tunnel near the Egyptian border when it flooded and partially collapsed. During a 50-day conflict in 2014, Israeli warplanes destroyed a large part of the underground network of tunnels used by Gazans. At the end of 2014, Egypt began the construction of a buffer zone in the northern Sinai Peninsula, on the border with Gaza, including destroying hundreds of tunnels it says are used for smuggling weapons. Hamas has reportedly rebuilt tunnels destroyed in the 2014 conflict that Israeli officials say could be used to carry out attacks. Israel’s blockade severely restricts the movement of people and goods into and out of the enclave. Egypt’s sole border with Gaza has also remained largely closed following the 2013 overthrow of President Mohamed Mursi of the Muslim Brotherhood, effectively trapping the 1.8 million Gazans into the territory.

EU considers sanctions for Libya peace ‘spoilers’
AFP Wednesday, 27 January 2016/The EU is considering sanctions against several Libyan figures for undermining efforts to form a national unity government, a key first step towards bringing peace to the war-torn country, European sources said Tuesday. The European Union has repeatedly warned it would impose sanctions against anyone “spoiling” a Brussels-backed peace process, amid growing concerns ISIS militants could use oil-rich Libya as a springboard to attack Europe. Libya has been in turmoil since the overthrow of longtime dictator Moamer Qaddafi in 2011, with warring militias setting up administrations in the capital Tripoli, and one in Tobruk in the east which is internationally recognized. The sources said the 28-nation bloc could impose an asset freeze and travel ban against Nouri Abusahmain, who heads the Tripoli-based General National Congress, and premier Khalifa al-Ghwell. “There should be a political agreement (on sanctions) in the next few days,” one of the European sources told AFP, asking not to be named. The source said the aim is to “target the spoilers, those who undermine efforts to establish a national unity government which is essential to stabilizing Libya and giving the EU someone it can talk to about security issues, especially combatting Daesh (ISIS).”The source said Aguila Saleh, who heads the internationally-recognized parliament in Tobruk, could also be hit with sanctions. Other diplomatic sources confirmed the issue was being discussed but one suggested there was also some reluctance to adopt sanctions at this stage without United Nations backing. The situation was made more complicated after the Tobruk parliament voted Monday to reject the UN-backed unity government formed last week with the support of less than half the members of the Tripoli assembly. Lawmakers in Tobruk said the proposed government with 32 ministers was too unwieldy and should not have the power to approve top security and military positions. Officials said a new unity government would be put together within 10 days. ISIS has gradually established a presence in Libya and earlier this month tried to seize the Zueitina oil terminal on the coast. The attack, which left many people dead, showed IS had become a force to be reckoned with and stoked EU concerns that Libya is becoming a major security threat.

Egypt youth leader from 2011 uprising to stand trial
AFP, Cairo Wednesday, 27 January 2016/Egyptian youth leader Amr Ali whose now banned April 6 movement spearheaded the 2011 revolt that toppled Hosni Mubarak is to stand trial Wednesday for incitement, a judicial official said. The public prosecutor decided on Tuesday to refer Ali, the general coordinator of the movement who was arrested last September, to a criminal court, the judicial official said. He is accused of inciting a general strike and possessing leaflets, the official added. Ali is in custody, and three other defendants, currently free on bail, will be tried alongside him. Ali's lawyer, Anas Sayyed, confirmed that the trial will proceed on Wednesday, and told AFP that the maximum penalty he faces is three years in jail. In April 2014, an Egyptian court banned the April 6 youth movement, based on a complaint that accused it of defaming the country and colluding with foreign parties. Its leader Ahmed Maher was sentenced to three years in prison in December 2013 for violating a law banning all but police-sanctioned protests. And last December, authorities arrested four other April 6 movement leaders. Sherif Arubi, Mohamed Nabil, Ayman Abdel Megid and Mahmud Hesham were arrested at their homes on December 28, less than a month before the fifth anniversary of the revolution. April 6 led the January 25, 2011 uprising that ended the autocratic rule of president Mubarak. It also opposed his successor, Islamist president Mohammad Mursi who was toppled by then army chief and now President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. The group then turned on the military-installed regime when authorities cracked down on dissidents. Since the army toppled Mursi in July 2013, the authorities have cracked down on all opposition. They adopted a new law in November 2013 outlawing demonstrations that have not been given advance authorization by the police. Hundreds of Islamist protesters -- as well as dozens of secular and leftwing demonstrators -- have been jailed under the legislation. On Monday, Egyptians marked the fifth anniversary of the revolution amid tight security and a warning from the regime that demonstrations will not be tolerated. Critics have accused Sisi of restoring Mubarak's autocratic rule and betraying the hopes of those who took part in the uprising.

Yaron Friedman/Ynetnews: A Shi’ite genie has escaped the bottle – and is threatening Hezbollah/Muammar Gaddafi Was he behind the murder of Shi’ite Imam Musa al-Sadr
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/01/27/yaron-friedmanynetnews-a-shiite-genie-has-escaped-the-bottle-and-is-threatening-hezbollahmuammar-gaddafi-was-he-behind-the-murder-of-shiite-imam-musa-al-sadr/
Yaron Friedman /Ynetnews/January 27/16
The leader of the Shi'ite sector in Lebanon, Musa al-Sadr, mysteriously disappeared in Libya in the 1970s. A new book claims that the imam, who did not fit into the agenda of the Iranian revolutionary leaders, was killed by Muammar Gaddafi at the Ayatollah Khomeini's instruction.
The Sunni Saudi Arabian kingdom has never been so determined and active in the struggle against Iran and the Shiite world as it is these days. In early 2016, Saudi Arabia executed Shi'ite Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr and cut diplomatic relations with Iran, and the conflict between the two sides has only gotten worse since then.
Saudi Arabia has recently pulled out a powerful propaganda tool, one that could possibly bring about the dismantling of Hezbollah: The affair surrounding the disappearance of the Imam Musa al-Sadr, the leader of Lebanon's Shi'ite population, while he was in Libya in 1978. The Shi'ite genie the Saudis just let out of the bottle has been buried for a while. The question of his fate was raised again when Muammar Gaddafi's regime fell, but certain actors made sure to obscure any answers. Does this new information have the power to topple Hezbollah?
The improvement in the living standards and social status of Shi'ites in Lebanon in the 1960s is mainly due to one man – Musa al-Sadr. He's the one who managed to get roads leading to Shi'ite villages in south Lebanon paved and to get the villages hooked up to electricity and running water. Al-Sadr is an Iranian religious cleric of Lebanese descent who studied in the Shi'ite holy cities of Qom, Iran and Najaf, Iraq, arriving in Lebanon in the late 1950s.
Al-Sadr, a charismatic man with a lineage that reaches all the way back to the prophet Muhammad himself and the later Shi'ite imams, managed to promote the interests of the Lebanon's Shi'ites, who had been at the bottom of Lebanese society. He founded bodies that represented them politically and socially, led by the Supreme Islamic Shi'ite Council. Al-Sadr promoted the Shi'ites' representation in parliament, took care to achieve government assistance to improve their material situation, and turned them into an influential political force.
Al-Sadr's uniqueness lies in the fact that he promoted a peaceful struggle, using social protests, strikes, and demonstrations. He willingly met with leaders of other social groups, even rival ones. He will always be remembered as the outlier Muslim cleric who gave a speech in a church. Some biographers have even dubbed him the "Shi'ite Gandhi."
Al-Sadr started a hunger strike during the Lebanese Civil War in 1975, demanding that the killing stop. But the deterioration in Lebanon brought him to the decision of establishing a military body to protect the Shi'ite sector – the Amal Movement. The huge change he affected in Lebanese Shi'ites' lives brought him great admiration, and led to him being given the mystical Shi'ite title of Imam.
A misfit in the Iranian revolution's agenda
The 1970s saw al-Sadr attract increasing numbers of critics. According to his detractors, he neglected to criticize Israel and repeatedly blamed Fatah for using south Lebanese Shi'ite villages to combat the Jewish state. The Shi'ites paid the largest price for the Fatah's activities and the IDF's retaliations. It's no wonder the area's Shi'ite population was overjoyed when the IDF entered south Lebanon and drove out Fatah.
Another Iranian leader, Sheikh Hussein Fadlallah - also of Lebanese origin, who studied at Najaf – was working in parallel with al-Sadr. He attempted to spread more combative propaganda that combined the Quran with the Kalashnikov, thus planting the first seeds of what would later grow to be the Hezbollah organization. Unlike al-Sadr, Fadlallah supported the Iranian revolutionaries' ideology, headed by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Khomeini believed in violent revolution as a primary means of strengthening the Shi'ites and toppling the Iranian Shah's regime. While the Amal Movement focused on defense, Fadlallah called for taking a more aggressive stance against both the Shi'ites' rivals in Lebanon and the "Zionist devil."
Even though al-Sadr also opposed Israel, he never called for the Shi'ites to unite in a war against it, and disagreed with Fadlallah's idea of establishing Islamic clerical rule in Lebanon.
Is Khomeini behind his murder?
Al-Sadr traveled to meet different Arab leaders in the 1970s in order to gather support for his demographic. Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, whose military invaded Lebanon in 1976, gave the Amal Movement his sponsorship. In 1978, al-Sadr arrived in Libya, where he hoped to speak with its leader Muammar Gaddafi, who had his hand in the Lebanese Civil War. He disappeared there and hasn't been seen or heard from since. The assumption is that he was kidnapped, and probably murdered in a Lebanese jail. The reason for the murder of the most important Shi'ite leader in Lebanon remains a mystery to this day. Who had an interest in his death?
Is it a coincidence that Muda al-Sadr was murdered a year before Iran's Islamic Revolution? At the time of his disappearance there was a strong relationship between Gaddafi, who opposed the Shah, and the revolutionaries. Gaddafi even supported the revolution after al-Sadr's (presumed) murder, and later backed Iran in its war with Iraq.
A book recently published by American researcher Dr. Andrew Cooper of Columbia University concludes that Musa al-Sadr had secret contacts with Iranian Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and that al-Sadr both opposed the idea of a violent Iranian revolution and that of the rule of Islamic clerics ("Wilayat al-Faqih"). In addition, al-Sadr found Ayatollah Khomeini's personality at least somewhat disagreeable, even though their families were related by marriage.
The shah had planned on al-Sadr's assistance in managing the burden of negotiating and compromising with the religious opposition. According to the book, Khomeini's associates wanted to prevent these talks at any cost. While al-Sadr was visiting Libya, they asked Gaddafi to get rid of the "traitor." The request to take out al-Sadr came from Khomeini and was carried out by Gaddafi.
These revelations were quoted last month by newspapers across the Sunni world, particularly in the Saudi media. The link between Khomeini and al-Sadr's murder was confirmed by the anti-Iranian regime journalist Alireza Nourizadeh in an interview he gave to the Saudi Al-Arabiya network.
According to Nourizadeh, who is based in the UK, Khomeini's associates committed to get rid of al-Sadr because of his opposition to their path and his willingness to put up with the Shah, thus threatening the Islamic Revolution.
Nourizadeh also claimed that the proof of this accusation lies in the fact that after Khomeini came to power, Iran did nothing to investigate al-Sadr's disappearance and continued to maintain good relations with Libya while in full knowledge of the Imam's kidnapping.
Iran named one of the main streets in Tehran after the murdered former president of Egypt, Anwar Sadar. Why did they not go to the effort of naming one after a Shi'ite community leader in Lebanon who had come from Iran?
The main obstacle to the dissemination of Iran's revolutionary propaganda among Lebanon's Shi'ites was removed with al-Sadr's assassination. In 1982, after he was killed, it was the turn of the military organization he established.
In the 1980s, Hezbollah waged a battle to wipe out the Amal Movement in an attempt to gain control over the Shi'ite community. Israel's invasion of and prolonged stay in south Lebanon weakened the Amal Movement. Many young Shi'ites left the organization and joined the more extreme Hezbollah. In 1983, Hezbollah made its name as the leading Shi'ite terror organization following a massive attack in which a car bomb planted by the group killed 241 Americans at a marine base in Beirut.
At the end of the 1980s, the Amal organization lost against Hezbollah on the battlefield and after a reconciliation deal initiated by Syria, the movement disbanded. Its fighters were integrated into the Lebanese army and the organization itself turned into a parliamentary party.
Hezbollah transformed from a small organization established by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards into an army of thousands of militants, funded and supported by Iran. The hostility towards the Amal Movement and its founder was blurred by Hezbollah propaganda. Al-Sadr, too, was turned into a Khomeini supporter and a member of the armed resistance against the "Zionist enemy" by the same propaganda.
Could the revelations about the link between Iran and the murder of one of Lebanon's Shi'ite leaders topple Hezbollah and stir an internal uprising? And could this happen after Lebanon's Shi'ites have undergone three decades of brainwashing by Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Guards? One can assume that this new information about al-Sadr's murder will in the short-term be seen purely as Saudi propaganda. In the long-term, however, should Hezbollah's involvement in the Syrian civil war continue and if coffins keep arriving back in south Lebanon's villages, protests will no doubt erupt.
The Shi'ites will blame the Hezbollah leadership for dragging their community into the quagmire of the Syrian civil war. When the explosion comes, the genie of al-Sadr's execution will be out of the bottle and the truth will be spoken loud and clear: Iran has exploited and continues to exploit Shi'ite Arabs in Lebanon, in Iraq, in Bahrain and in Yemen for their own political needs.
**Dr. Yaron Friedman, Ynet's Arab world analyst, is a graduate of the Sorbonne University in Paris and a lecturer on Islam in the Department of Humanities and Arts at the Israel Institute of Technology (Technion), and at the University of Haifa's History Department. His book, "The Nusayri Alawis: An Introduction to the Religion, History and Identity of the Leading Minority in Syria," was published in 2010 by Brill-Leiden.

The new IDF Cyber Defense Brigade divided between two military branches
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report January 26, 2016
A cyber defense war room was integrated for the first time in one of Israel’s large-scale national military exercises which took place last week. When he launched the drill, IDF chief of staff, Lt. Gen, Gady Eisenkot noted the three main threats facing Israel: Hizballah’s vast missile arsenal, Palestinian terrorist attacks, and ISIS poised on two borders. He made only a cursory reference to cyber war, without elaborating.
Compared with the civilian sector, the IDF has been awarded high marks for the way it has grasped the dangers of cyber warfare, prepared for them and trained and activated personnel for the pursuit of countermeasures.
Appreciation of the peril has led the IDF to run two cyber warfare and defense divisions, one in the Military Intelligence (MI) Directorate’s elite Unit 8200 and another in its counterpart the C41 (Telecommunications and Signal) Corps.
debkafile’s military sources report that the new Cyber Defense Brigade has been given an MI brigadier general as commander
But the Achilles heel of Israel’s military system for combating the cyber threat, debkafile’s military experts note, is the division of its responsibilities between two separate branches.
Following a study led by Military Intelligence (MI) chief, Maj. Gen. Herzi Halevi, which was presented in the summer of 2015 to the chief of staff, it was decided to place the IDF cyber warfare system under a command like the air, ground and sea arms.
But instead of merging the two specialized entitities, Eisenkot decided, in the interests of keeping the peace among his generals, to leave the separate units of the MI and the Signals corps in situ - at least in the first stage.
This decision, say the experts, is bound to mar the effectiveness of IDF operations - both against hostile computer systems and in the defense of the military’s own information networks.
To function effectively, offensive and defensive operations depend on a continuous stream of intelligence from every possible open, digital and human source, for the critical task of collecting technological and operational data to define and identify the peril.
MI is naturally best qualified for clandestine work. It has access to superior intelligence sources and materials and its personnel, moreover, attracts the most technologically skilled young people, who aspire to join its ranks and are ready to stay on for careers, after their discharge from compulsory service.
The Teleprocessing and Signal Corps certainly possesses exceptional skills in communication, encryption and information networks. But devolving on this corps a section of the counter-cyber war defense system will stand in the way of the IDF’s undivided focus on the defense of its operational and administrative computer systems. It will also hamper the armed forces’ cooperation with other bodies dealing with cyber defense, such as the Shin Bet internal security service and the Mossad. They are all used to cooperating with Military Intelligence; working with a separate cyber warfare body would be a stretch.
A single IDF cyber command, had the chief of staff approved a merger, would have had the added advantage of being able to pull together the plethora of unconnected agencies set up to protect the civilian sector against the very real threat of cyber attacks, such as the National Cyber Bureau, the National Operative Cyber Defense Authority, the National Information Security Authority and the cyber warfare departments of the Israel Police and the Shin Bet.
But first, the new IDF branch must get into stride.

How terrorism threatens the state
Turki Al-Dakhil/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
There has been much analysis on the roots and repercussions of terrorism, and the means to tackle it. Terrorism poses the biggest threat to civil values and state entities. When the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) began its strategy of assassinating security officials, following in Al-Qaeda’s footsteps, its goal was to bleed out state institutions. Targeting them, as well as mosques, congregation halls during Shiite ceremonies, and certain figures is aimed at embarrassing and targeting the state, exhausting its resources, and sowing confusion and chaos. This represents the implementation of a strategy outlined in the book “Management of Savagery” by Abu Bakr Naji, a pen name of Mohammad Khalil al-Hakaymah, who wrote it in the Tora Bora mountains under the direct supervision of late Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and his successor Ayman al-Zawahiri. The Saudi Interior Ministry says the book is one of ISIS’s references, and American military colleges have translated it to study terrorism. Following the Sept. 11 attacks, Olivier Mongin wrote in Le Monde newspaper: “The clear question now is ‘do the September terror attacks represent an opportunity to achieve some sort of awareness?’ Terrorists refuse confrontations. They escape when it comes to that. All they aim to do is sow instability. Their rhetoric is a mere lie. Their hostile calls aim to serve the purpose of making victims also act like terrorists.”
Fear
Terrorism aims to undermine civil values, spread sectarianism and revive tribalism. It despises social values, patriotic concepts and humane connections. Violent organizations seek division in order to dominate where the state is absent. Fear rises as a result, and the criminal and catastrophic “management of savagery” thus begins. States are continuously tested by challenges and incidents, and if they do not strictly and determinedly confront them, they will weaken and fade away. If we take a thorough look at the testimonies of residents in ISIS strongholds in Syria and Iraq, we clearly see the extent of fear due to the terror of militias called the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU). Fear is why these residents keep silent and adapt to living under ISIS rule. It is fear that is managed through fear. The terrorism of one party justifies that of another, so life becomes hell, society becomes a jungle, and the state gets weaker by the day.
Resolve
The Gulf stance toward terrorism has become clear. An ISIS supporter in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been sentenced to death, the Al-Abdali terror cell in Kuwait has been tried, and 47 terror convicts have been executed in Saudi Arabia. The social mandate is a major part of the state’s work in order to use what German sociologist Max Weber described as a monopoly on the legitimate use of force to protect society and the state. States are continuously tested by challenges and incidents, and if they do not strictly and determinedly confront them, they will weaken and fade away. Gulf countries, which aspire to curb and eliminate terrorism, are aware of this. Encouraging the state’s work, and solidifying its concepts and institutions, falls within the context of the war on terror. Those who incite against their states in the name of revolution, rights and humanitarian appeals are only providing legal cover to terrorists.
Perhaps Tunisian President Beji Caid Essebsi's recent speech a few days ago following Tunisia's protests indicated that ISIS had a presence in these protests and some slogans raised were done so by traitors of the country .State strength is a guarantee of society’s future. Society should never be provoked by those who come with their irrational might. The most dangerous diseases that control revolutionary speeches are naivety and loss of wisdom.

The key to a solution in Syria is in the Gulf
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who has intensified his efforts in recent days to hold the promised Geneva conference, is trying to attain concessions that eventually - and following a long journey of negotiations - will lead to a political solution to the Syrian tragedy. This is a noble task, but insisting on marginalizing the real nationalistic Syrian opposition and accepting that Bashar al-Assad stay as president will only yield failure, even if a preliminary agreement is signed in the upcoming negotiations. Gulf states know it is suicide to leave Syria to the Iranian regime, which is expanding in their region like cancer
No solution can be accepted if Gulf states and Turkey do not support it, as they are the only ones that most Syrians trust because these countries have stood by them from the start of their ordeal. Therefore, the key to the solution is in the Gulf and in Turkey, not in Geneva. It does not make sense for these countries to sign and defend a deal that keeps Assad in power. Most of the Arab world will reject this because it considers him the worst criminal the region has known. Gulf states know it is suicide to leave Syria to the Iranian regime, which is expanding in their region like cancer.
U.S. complicity
Perhaps it is useful to remind Kerry what the picture looks like from the Arab angle. The United States has lifted sanctions against Iran, and granted it access to $50 billion in long-frozen assets. They are cooperating militarily in Iraq, and Washington is turning a blind eye to Tehran’s management of multinational militias fighting in Syria.The United States not only accepts to deal with the Assad regime, but also keeps silent over Iran’s forgery of the Syrian opposition, as it wants to impose a list of figures and parties that it claims are opponents of the Syrian regime, when in fact they are part of it. In other words, Assad would be negotiating with himself through them. In the history of conflict resolution, we have never known of a party telling the other party who should represent it. Even if they drag the opposition all the way to the river, they will not be able to force it to drink from it. If a deal that stipulates the formation of a unity government is signed, like Tehran hopes, it will not even be able to collect trash - let alone stop the fighting, gather arms, work on refugees’ return home and foster national reconciliation - as no one will recognize its legitimacy.
However, the Syrian people may still be forced to accept a government in which a regime they hate is included. They may do so out of their desire for peace, but it makes no sense to ask them to accept that the man who murdered more than a third of a million people continues to govern them. I rule out the possibility of Gulf governments and Turkey accepting such a solution, as they know it will only escalate war in the region.

Rumors and wrangling over a Russian base near Turkey
Maria Dubovikova/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
Rumors of Russia setting up a new military base in the Qamishli region near the Turkish border started spreading following a statement by Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. On Friday, Turkish President Erdogan, while revealing agenda for his talks with U.S. Vice President Joe Biden on Saturday, responded to these reports saying that 200 Russian personnel have started work to strengthen the runway at an air base in Qamishli. This was also widely reported by the local media.
Erdogan claimed that the establishment of a Russian base in Qamishli is threatening to Turkey and “will not be tolerated”. The article in The Times on the subject was widely quoted by the world media, including outlets in Russia. Notably, the first clue to understanding this puzzle is that Qamishli is shown as an area controlled by the Assad regime, which I believe is false and misleading to the public.
Qamishli is controlled by the Kurds and so is the area 50km from Qamishli where the U.S. has reportedly established a “secret base” to support Kurds in fight against ISIS. Even if one admits that the Russians are really establishing an airbase in Qamishli, the question is why Ankara considers this base as a threat to Turkey but not the American one, taking into account that both are supposed to support Kurds.
Apparently the moment chosen to reveal this to the media was deliberate. Most likely, the idea was to derail the preparations for Geneva talks on Syria. What endorses this view is the talk of possibility of Ankara boycotting talks in the event of Kurds participating in the negotiation process. It seems Turkey is not interested in the settlement of Syrian conflict the way the international community sees it and aspires for.
Kurdish connection
There is also a belief that Turkey will prefer to see Syria split so that the Kurdish issue is settled once and for all and gets back the land it once owned. This seems relevant as Erdogan and his regime harbor “imperialistic nostalgia” and dream about the greater Turkey.
Turkey rejects the Kurds’ strategic role in the fight against ISIS. It is clear that if Kurds become part of the Syrian solution in fight against ISIS, they will end up becoming militarily and politically stronger with powerful states as their supporters. Furthermore, Erdogan has found a way to put the Kurdish PYD, YPG, and PKK in the same list with ISIS, saying that there is no big difference between them.
Turkey seems uninterested in the settlement of Syrian conflict the way international community sees it
Turkey’s displeasure over Russia’s new base near its borders is also related to the ongoing crisis between the two countries, which started with the Su-24 incident. The country has been disappointed with the reserved response from its NATO allies on the matter and continues to attract western attention toward dispute between the two countries. It is also trying to discredit Russia at the international stage.
Turkey continues to draw red lines in Syria hoping to limit Russia’s actions and influence in the region. It has used these rumors to strengthen their military contingency on its border with Syria. News suggesting Turkish soldiers are digging trenches were awkward considering the concerns expressed have been about the air base and not a ground one. In general it should be admitted that to expect Russia to attack Turkey is inappropriate.
Erdogan’s statement was based on information by Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which was picked up by the media, which is mostly inaccurate as there is no need for Russia to establish any other military base. Russian jets reach the farthest Syrian points in just 30 minutes. The new base leads to new expenses that Russia can hardly afford amid the ongoing economic crises.
As far as Russia’s support for Kurdish fighters are concerned, it conforms to the international strategy in fight against ISIS. The new base is of no use as air support for Kurdish fighter is being successfully provided from the current one. The Syrian skies are already too overcrowded to establish new bases.
Syria talks
No country involved in Syria is interested in any incident that could have undesirable consequences regionally and globally. Russia has no interest in provoking Turkey on the ground and to give it any opportunity to blame Moscow for breaking the rules or threatening Turkish national security.
Furthermore, Russia establishing a new base in such a sensitive region would mean downgrading of its strategic position in the Syrian peace process and deepening the misunderstanding with its western counterparts, who are currently more intent on cooperation than confrontation with Russia.
In the worst case scenario, the establishment of a new base would make the Syrian peace process collapse. This would mean the conflict would be led toward a military settlement and not a political one. Russia understands these possibilities and is not interested in widening the conflict especially in the current circumstances involving the peace process.
At one level, these rumors are most likely to be part of Turkey’s clumsy maneuver in its ongoing information war with Russia. On the other hand it could be an attempt to stall the peace process should its progress is not in keeping with what Erdogan had previously imagined.

Why do militants attack educational institutions?
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
Just as we started celebrating Pakistan’s progress in the last year in cracking down on domestic terrorism, we hear about the attack on Bacha Khan University in the north-west of the country. In another brazen attack, carried out on Jan. 20, gunmen killed 19 people and injured 17. Just like the late 2014 attack on the Peshawar school, which forced the country’s leadership into the recent crackdown on militants, this attack is a highly symbolic one targeting “Western,” as opposed to Taliban, education. The university is named after a Pashtun nationalist leader who believed in non-violent struggle and would thus have been anathema to the militants’ ethos. The university provides education in English and teaches sciences to young people from this area near Afghanistan. There is no greater threat to them than people who can read Islamic history and who know how much a betrayal of Islam this latter-day jihadism is Targeting institutions providing “Western” education is a common feature for many Islamist groups. Teaching boys English and science is one thing, for example. But teaching girls anything at all is especially frowned upon. In Afghanistan, burning down girls schools has been common practice. Malala became an international symbol as a result of this mind-set. We should also not forget the other tens of thousands of girls that have been and continue to be affected by this problem.At the other end of the Islamic world, in Nigeria, we see a very similar phenomenon with Boko Haram. The militant group’s name literally means (Western) books or “Boko” are “haram” or prohibited. So “non-Islamic or Western education is forbidden,” especially for women.
No ideological dogma
But for these groups this isn’t just some ideological dogma but an obvious tactical requirement. The biggest threat to the propagation of ideas that these militants are trying to push – and to their survival in the long run – are educated young Muslims who can recognize the vacuousness and perversity of their ideology. There is no greater threat to them than people who can read Islamic history and who know how much a betrayal of Islam this latter-day jihadism is. These organizations can only be successful and survive if they have an unlimited supply of recruits who are uneducated and thus can be easily brainwashed into their little cults. That was the function of some of the madrassas in Pakistan and Afghanistan. In most cases this was the only education available to swathes of the country, especially for the children of the poorest.
I have found that this distinction does become pertinent very quickly. When I visited Pakistan almost a decade ago for some field research into militancy, I found that the leaders of some of the very large ultra conservative groups, who openly supported extremist elements, do not advocate strict Taliban education for everyone. After meeting them, I was surprised at two things. First, how good an English they spoke and how they boasted that their children are studying in the West.
One of them mentioned that his daughter was attending the University of Virginia, another mentioned Bradford in England, while another one mentioned some university in Australia. I took away two things from these meetings. The leaders of these groups are not so keen on their own children having a “proper, Islamic” education, or indeed becoming martyrs. That honour is bestowed on other people’s children, usually those from the poorest families. I also found it very surprising that they could afford to send their children to Western universities. Having worked as an academic in the U.S., I know very well that to send a couple of children to study there is not cheap, let alone for someone from a village in Pakistan. Ultimately, it is also a profoundly interesting choice. Think how many Kalashnikovs and mortar bombs you could buy for that money to fight your “holy war.” And yet, when given the opportunity, they would choose to use that money to buy Western education. Very interesting indeed.

For Israel, ISIS is too close for comfort - but so is Iran
Yossi Mekelberg/Al Arabiya/January 27/16
Since ISIS announced itself on the turbulent stage of the Middle East, in a most horrid and gruesome manner, Israel and the jihadist organization tread very carefully with one another. October last year was the first time the organization released a YouTube video threatening the Jewish state with annihilation. However, Israeli decision makers see ISIS neither as a high risk nor an immediate threat. Rhetorically Israeli leaders have found ISIS a rather useful point of reference with which to implicate and associate any other elements of militant Islam with whom they are in conflict; exploiting the obvious global revulsion toward ISIS’ actions for their own purposes. It is quite a mystery why ISIS leadership has refrained from including Israel more frequently in their propaganda. Identifying the ‘Zionist entity’, at least verbally, on their list of targets, ostensibly would not do any harm to their cause among their supporters and those who they would like to recruit. One theory is that the organization is fearful of Israel and would like to keep it out of any coalition against them.
As long as ISIS is bogged down in Syria and Iraq, Israel is bound to be less of a priority
This hypothesis was also fuelled by a recent interview with Jürgen Todenhöfer, a journalist and a former German Parliamentarian, who visited territories held by ISIS in Syria and Iraq. He claimed that prominent militants among them told him that the one country ISIS fears is Israel.
According to his account ISIS perceives U.S. and UK ground troops lacking in experience in urban guerrilla warfare and short of counter-terrorism strategies. On the other hand, they perceive Israel as a much more credible enemy, vastly experienced in such situations.
Shifting priorities
Considering that ISIS faces not only one coalition, but one led by the U.S. and another by Russia, fear of Israel might be exaggerated, even if it contains an element of truth. As long as ISIS is bogged down in intense battles in Syria and Iraq, Israel is bound to be less of a priority.
That said, in the last few months there are signs of ISIS propaganda targeting Israel as well. It indicates ISIS still considers Israel a potential ‘trump card’ which they make use of under severe military pressure and on the verge military defeat. In their YouTube video, a masked ISIS militant dressed in military fatigues and holding a rifle, threatens in Hebrew that “we will enter al-Aqsa mosque as conquerors, using our cars as bombs to strike the Jewish ramparts,” until there will not be a single Jew left in the country. For the Israelis the issue is way more multifaceted, considering the complexity and diversity of the forces and interests involved in the civil war in Syria. Until recent years Syria was potentially Israel’s most dangerous and powerful military threat. This threat no longer exists. Paradoxically, the strength of the Assad regime also guaranteed that the border between Israel and Syria was peaceful because it was also in the interest of the regime in Damascus.
Yet, as the neighbouring state from the north was disintegrating and the regime needed Iran’s help for its survival, Israeli interest in Assad staying in power lessened. Israeli Defence Minister Moshe Ya’alon put it very clearly last week that if he was to choose between Iran and ISIS he would prefer ISIS.
There is an implied admission by Ya’alon that Israel has little impact, if at all, on who will eventually gain the upper hand in Syria. Moreover, if neither of the sides is regarded as preferable for Israeli interests, then the option of both sides exhausting themselves in battle is the one Jerusalem is bound to favour.
Choosing the enemy.
For obvious reasons Israel is concerned with having Iranian Revolutionary Guard combatants so close to its border and the potential of Hezbollah growing in strength. However, its obsession with Iran, which sees only risks and never opportunities, might lead it toward underestimating the threat from ISIS. In terms of military capabilities and geographical proximity, ISIS is far from posing a serious threat at present. Nevertheless, the presence for instance of the Yarmouk Martyrs’ Brigade who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed caliph of ISIS, close to the Israeli border, is not a development that Israel can afford to ignore. Israel is concerned with having Iranian Revolutionary Guard close to its border and the potential of Hezbollah growing in strength. Moreover, on the border between Egypt and Israel in the Sinai another jihadist movement affiliated with ISIS, Wilayat Sinai, has already been involved in lethal attacks on Egyptian military targets and was allegedly behind the downing of the Russian Metrojet airplane last October. More recently, a voice recording of al-Baghdadi appeared threatening that he and his lieutenants plan to attack Israel and, more worryingly for the Jewish state, are already operating inside Israel. An unexpected verification of Baghdadi’s claim was done by the usually level-headed president of Israel, Reuven Rivlin, who said few days ago that “the Islamic State is already here, that is no longer a secret. I am not speaking about territories bordering the State of Israel, but within the State itself.” President Rivlin exaggerated the level of the support of ISIS among Arab Israelis, intending to underline the importance of improving the status and living conditions of Israeli Arab citizens. Yet, it also points to the danger of the allure of ISIS as an appealing idea as for young people, especially in societies where there are many unresolved social, political and economic issues. Concentrating solely on the challenge presented by Iran could blind Israeli decision makers from taking the need to contain the ISIS-type menace seriously enough.

Could Iraq mediate Iran, Saudi strife?
Mohammad Ali Shabani/Al-Monitor/January 27/16
Several regional states geopolitically situated between Tehran and Riyadh, including Pakistan and Oman, have expressed an interest in helping patch up the broken Iranian-Saudi relationship. However, Iraq is perhaps the most suited among the prospective mediators, for several reasons.First, discourse on the Iranian-Saudi rivalry conveys that much of it is directly related to the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, which upturned the regional power balance. Last week, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif confirmed this perspective on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, arguing that the regional instability “is caused by a panic in Saudi Arabia that believes there is a disequilibrium in our region after the fall of Saddam Hussein and after the Arab Spring.” Iraq — or at least past Iraq-related developments — has also been featured in Iranian calls for engagement. Senior Iranian officials, including Zarif, have repeatedly made reference to UN Security Council Resolution 598, which ended the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, and its provisions relating to the establishment of regional dialogue forums.
Second — despite being the scene of intense competition between Iran and regional powers, and also Iran and the United States — Iraq has over the past decade repeatedly served as a platform for dialogue. Indeed, the first direct, overt engagement between Iran and the United States after their 1980 cut in diplomatic relations was not related to the Iranian nuclear program, but to Iraq. Following Iraqi efforts, Iranian and US officials met in Baghdad in 2007. While tangible output was thin, the main achievement was the re-breaking of the taboo of Iranian-American engagement, which — following successful 2001 covert cooperation on Afghanistan — had reappeared after George W. Bush’s inclusion of Iran in the “Axis of Evil.” Indeed, just two years after the meetings in Baghdad, the first direct Iran-US discussion on the nuclear issue took place in Switzerland. Of further note, upon Iran’s request, Iraq was also host to nuclear negotiations between Iran and the six world powers in May 2012.
Third, the Iraqi government has a strong interest in avoiding becoming a more intense battleground for regional influence. On an international level, bringing Iran and Saudi Arabia together could provide Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi with a boost in the grueling fight against the Islamic State (IS), and also much-needed credit in Riyadh, Tehran, Ankara and Washington. On a domestic level, facing a formidable constellation of forces opposed to Iraqi-Saudi engagement including from his own party, Abadi could score big if he manages to help jumpstart regional dialogue. Indeed, the Iraqi government has carried out a balancing act in regard to the Jan. 2 attacks on Saudi diplomatic facilities in Iran, which ruptured relations between Riyadh and Tehran. Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari stated, “It is unjust to equate these criminals and the Islamic Republic of Iran, whose security personnel were injured while defending the Saudi Embassy and consulate,” while urging Iran to “assume its legal responsibility to prosecute the perpetrators of the attack on the Saudi Embassy and bring them to justice.”
Fourth, for Saudi Arabia, engagement with Iran via Baghdad — where it has finally restored diplomatic representation — would provide it with a unique opportunity to undermine Abadi’s fiercely anti-Saudi Shiite rivals. As former senior Saudi diplomat Abdullah al-Shammari told Al-Monitor, “If Saudi Arabia were to choose a country to be a mediator, it would choose Iraq not because it believes that the Iraqi government is neutral, but [because] Saudi Arabia is trying to find support for Dr. al-Abadi’s government to make it closer to the Gulf and Arab countries.” Shammari added, “Saudi Arabia was the first country that congratulated Prime Minister al-Abadi on Aug. 13, 2014 ... to give Iraq a priority and send the new Saudi ambassador to Baghdad to show its keenness to push bilateral relations forward.”
With Saudi Arabia having failed to win over any Middle Eastern state in its campaign to fully diplomatically isolate Iran, except in the case of Bahrain, one would believe that it would be a Saudi objective to secure a prize such as the empowerment of the most prominent Iraqi Shiite politician balancing against Iran. However, it appears that Riyadh is either not recognizing this opportunity or actively deciding not to pursue it.
Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir, who met with Jaafari on the sidelines of the Jan. 24 ministerial meeting of the Arab-India Cooperation Forum in Bahrain, said, “There will be no mediation as long as Iran does not respond positively,” insisting that Iran must stick to “non-interference in the domestic affairs of other countries.”
In addition to not taking Iraq up on its mediation offer, Saudi officials have effectively undermined potential Iraqi Shiite partners, including Abadi. On Jan. 23, Saudi Ambassador to Iraq Thamer al-Sabhan said the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units should step aside in the fight against IS in favor of the Iraqi army. He further argued that the Popular Mobilization Units are not desired in Sunni Arab and Kurdish regions, since “they are not accepted by the sons of Iraqi society.” Predictably, the Saudi ambassador was summoned by the Iraqi Foreign Ministry, while some Shiite politicians called for his expulsion. Oddly, in his Jan. 24 meeting with Jaafari, Jubeir appear to have suggested that Riyadh’s ambassador doesn’t represent Riyadh. In a statement, Baghdad said Jubeir had indicated to Jaafari that Sabhan’s comments “do not reflect the official position of the Saudi government toward Iraq.”
Ultimately, Saudi Arabia’s failure to utilize Iraq as a platform for dialogue, thereby losing an opportunity to empower potential Shiite friends in Baghdad, may be clouded by its broader view of Iran. Shammari told Al-Monitor, “Even if Riyadh gives Iraq this chance [to act as a mediator], the Iraqi government has nothing to do here because the dilemma of Saudi-Iranian relations is that Riyadh believes that the [Iranian] president and foreign minister might be sincere about having good relations with Saudi Arabia, but the Saudi file is not in their hands.” If Saudi policy truly is based on this perception, Riyadh would be wise to consider the possibility of its prophecies about Iran becoming self-fulfilling.

Rouhani makes up for lost time in Italy
Arash Karami/Al-Monitor/January 27/16
On a trip to Italy and France to boost economic times after the nuclear deal between Iran and the six world powers, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani met with Pope Francis at the Vatican. The meeting is a sign of improved European-Iranian ties as Rouhani attempts to bring his country out of economic and political isolation. During meetings with Italian officials, Rouhani emphasized his desire to recover from the era of sanctions that damaged his country’s economy and relationship with European countries.The last time an Iranian president met with the Pope was 16 years ago in 1999 when former President Mohammad Khatami met with Pope John Paul II at the Vatican. While Khatami’s “Dialogue of Civilizations” never came to full fruition, Rouhani has picked up the mantle of attempting to reduce tensions with European countries and establishing cooperation with the promise of enduring ties.
Rouhani left Tehran for Europe Jan. 25. He told reporters that his main goal would be to improve ties with countries that Iran had positive ties with before the nuclear sanctions. Iran faced nearly 10 years of increasingly more stringent UN Security Council resolutions, including United States and European Union sanctions over its nuclear program. Rouhani, who was accompanied by six of his ministers and a number of advisers, said his focus on this trip would be to expand ties in the fields of industry, universities, agriculture, tourism, and medical and environmental equipment. Rouhani’s Vice President Eshag Jahangiri remained behind in Tehran to continue negotiations with the Guardian Council over the disqualification of parliamentary candidates for the February elections. At a meeting with Italian President Sergio Mattarella, Rouhani said, “The two countries in the previous years, due to unfair and wrong sanctions, were not able to use their mutual opportunities and capacities, but now is the time to make up for that.” Mattarella said, “Various trade and industrial companies are very eager to have a presence and cooperation with Iran.” He added, “With investment and an active presence, we are looking to make up for the opportunities that the sanctions took away from Italy.”
At a press conference with Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, Rouhani again struck the theme of making up for lost time, saying, “Italy at one time was the first trade partner of Iran within the European Union. And we are certain in this new chapter cooperation between the two countries will increase.” The two leaders signed 14 documents of cooperation, including in the fields of transportation, railways, education, security, port cooperation and agriculture. Iranian Reformist media has been optimistic about Rouhani’s trip, and some encouraged the president to go even farther than Europe to improve the economic conditions of the country. An article in Ghanoon argued that the quality of technology of the West is better than the East and wrote, “Four industrial countries in Europe are competing with another, and Iran can take advantage of this competition.” However, the article cautioned that Iran “must not ignore the United States” because much of European technology comes from America. The article said that Iran must address its issues with the United States so that economic and energy relations could be established and Iran can balance its relationship with China and Russia, two countries that the author reminded readers voted in support of UN Security Council resolutions against Iran. Rouhani will next travel to France where he will meet with French President Francois Hollande.

Israeli land grab threatens Palestinian church
Ahmad Melhem/Al-Monitor/January 27/16
RAMALLAH, West Bank — Israel is continuing to annex Christian church endowments in Palestine, both covertly and blatantly. Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon recently approved the annexation of the Beit al-Baraka church compound to the Gush Etzion settlements established on Palestinian territories south of the West Bank, according to a Jan. 6 Haaretz report. Reportedly, Ya’alon was responding to pressure by Israeli settlers who are constantly breaking into the church compound under the protection of the Israel Defense Forces. These settlers claim that they bought the compound, where a fence and security cameras have been installed and the IDF prohibits anyone from entering. Meanwhile, Palestinians are organizing marches in Beit al-Baraka to protest the settlers’ control over the church. According to Palestinian officials and Christian citizens who spoke to Al-Monitor, there are eight buildings on the 10-acre church grounds, including a hospital providing medical care and services to Palestinians. The compound is owned and supervised by the Presbyterian Church in Palestine, which in turn is affiliated with the Presbyterian Church in the United States, they said.
The US Presbyterian Church had control over the Palestinian Presbyterian Church’s endowments from 1940 to 2008, when the US organization sold Beit al-Baraka church to a Swedish shell company without consulting the church’s branch in Palestine. That company then transferred ownership of the church to an association controlled by Jewish tycoon Irving Moskowitz, one of the main funders of Israeli settlements in Jerusalem. Moskowitz then transferred the lands to the settlers, who now claim they bought the compound. The Presbyterian Church in Palestine condemned the sale in an official statement issued June 17, and denied any involvement in the “suspicious deal that challenges the Presbyterian Church’s fight for the support of the Palestinian people and their national rights," saying, "The Presbyterian mission in the US does not have the authority to sell this property, and anyone who contributed to secretly selling Beit al-Baraka to settlers should be punished.”
This issue has focused attention on the Israeli government's and the settlers' confiscation or long-term leasing of land and church endowment buildings in Palestine, Jerusalem, the West Bank and the 1948 territories. Hanna Omeira, head of the Presidential Higher Committee of Church Affairs, told Al-Monitor Israel has seized numerous church endowment properties. "Some were seized from the heart of Jerusalem, like the land on which the Knesset center and the Israeli Cabinet’s headquarters were built. Moreover, wide land areas were rented, but there are no accurate statistics [for] them.”
Regarding the Palestinian Authority's (PA) efforts to deal with the diversion of Beit al-Baraka, Omeira said, “A complicated fraud operation occurred to take over Beit al-Baraka. We wrote to the mother church in the US, but it refused to cooperate. The Swedish government does not have answers about the bogus company that bought the endowments and diverted them to Israel.”
He added that the PA and the Higher Presidential Committee of Church Affairs in Palestine are investigating political and legal recourse in the case. The committee has promised to follow up on Beit al-Baraka’s case with the Swedish government and will prepare a legal case to annul the deal. In the meantime, however, Israel continues these practices.
The Beit al-Baraka case is of particular concern because of the church's location.
“This is a strategic and important area, as it is located on Highway 60," which links Israeli settlements to Palestinian communities between Jerusalem and Hebron, according to Khalil Tafakji, director of the maps and survey department of the Arab Studies Society in Jerusalem. "It will be annexed to the Gush Etzion cluster of Jewish settlements, and the noose will be tightened on the Palestinian Arroub refugee camp in a way that separates the southern West Bank from its center,” he told Al-Monitor.
In the same vein, there is a movement concerning the Greek Orthodox Church in Palestine and Jordan. A group calling itself Arab Orthodox Youth in Jordan and Palestine is speaking out against Patriarch Theophilos III of Jerusalem. The movement's organizers, who held sit-ins and marches Jan. 6, consider the patriarch “unworthy” due to actions they deem “racist against Arabs and wasteful with properties and endowments of the church that are being diverted to Israel.”
Those actions include the patriarch’s leasing to an Israeli company of almost 18 acres of land belonging to the Saint Elias Monastery south of Jerusalem. The Orthodox community believes the deal will leave the village of Beit Safafa surrounded by Israelis and allow them to expand their settlements in Jabal Abu Ghneim and Gilo.
Jalal Barham, a member of the Follow-up Committee of the Arab Orthodox High Council and head of the Arab Orthodox Cultural Club, told Al-Monitor, “The area of the Orthodox patriarchate’s endowment properties is estimated at 20% of most religious endowments in Palestine. Nobody knows how many properties and lands were rented or diverted to Israel.”
Barham continued, “We are following up on the patriarchate’s endowments that are being taken over, through the Israeli media" and institutions like the Jerusalem Municipality and its planning and land departments. "This contradicts Patriarch Theophilos’ promise on Aug. 22, 2005, before his election, to regain the lands, stop deals and conduct an engineering survey for all the church’s properties and endowments.”
Barham said the takeovers of the Beit al-Baraka and Arab Orthodox endowments are part of "a systematic policy [by] the patriarch’s advisers."
Alif Sabbagh, a member of the Central Orthodox Council in the 1948 territories, told Al-Monitor, “The patriarchate considers the Arab members of the Orthodox sect enemies, rather than partners in the endowments’ management, and forbids them from accessing any information related to these endowments.”
One radical solution to the diversions, according to Sabbagh, would be to “Arabize the spiritual leadership of all churches by appointing Arab clergy to senior church positions instead of Greek figures, and allowing them to manage [the church’s] affairs and make their own decisions.”
He said the PA "should make a strict decision stating that every Christian endowment should be under the PA’s authority, and no spiritual leader, whatever their sect, can use any property without the approval of the PA and in compliance with the interest of the Palestinian Arab members of the sect and church.”
But the PA opposes the "Arabization" of the church and sees it an issue tied to national independence. The PA believes Israel’s classification of Palestinian land as “disputed territories” would encourage it to seize more church lands if Arabs were appointed to replace Greek clergy.
The PA does, however, advocate the appointment of Arab members to high ranks in the church. Omeira said, “The PA objects to any schism within the Orthodox patriarchate and is working on opening dialogue channels between the church and its opponents to reach a solution amenable to all.”
Hanna Issa, a professor of international law and the head of the Islamic-Christian Committee, told Al-Monitor, “Confiscating church endowments in Palestine is illegal, as per international laws that forbid land confiscation in occupied territories like Palestine. But Israel is disregarding these laws and continues to take over lands and displace Christians and Muslims.”
Issa added, “These lands are Palestine’s, and they should not be sold without the approval of the PA.”

Is Iran deal the gateway to Israeli-Palestinian peace?
Julian Pecquet/Al-Monitor/January 27/16
The liberal pro-Israel group J Street aims to put $3 million behind 2016 congressional candidates who supported the nuclear deal with Iran.
J Street argues that it's crucial during this electoral cycle to demonstrate that voting in favor of diplomacy with America's foes doesn't have to be a career killer for politicians. While the debate centers on preserving the Iran deal, the group readily admits that its ulterior goal is the resumption of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.“This effort is absolutely part and parcel of efforts to change the conversation around two-state diplomacy,” J Street Political Director Ben Shnider told Al-Monitor. “This is a one-of-a-kind opportunity for us to broadcast the political incentives for taking a pro-diplomacy stance. If we can prove that it's costly politically to get in the way of effective Middle East diplomacy … we can open up space on the two-state issue as well.”Everything J Street does, Shnider said, “is undergirded by a consideration about how it will impact the conversation around two states.”
Some Democrats in Congress share a similar view.
Rep. Dan Kildee, D-Mich., is the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's Frontline program to protect vulnerable incumbents. He told J Street supporters in a Jan. 26 conference call that political fear of diplomacy was self-defeating for candidates and that Democrats should instead come up with ambitious but clear-eyed plans to address tensions in the Middle East. “Especially when we talk about a two-state outcome, I think there's this truism that candidates can't talk about these issues without getting backed into trouble,” Kildee said. “I think it's time for us to lay our strong aspirations for the region. And point to the Iran nuclear agreement, for example, as a very thorny set of questions that most thought we could not resolve through negotiations.”
Kildee went on to highlight the multilateral aspect of the Iran talks — they included France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China — as a possible template for future Middle East initiatives.
The successful negotiation of the Iran deal “does lead to the logical conclusion that we are stronger when we engage globally in the P5+1 structure,” Kildee said on the call. “The fact that we had broad international support made a big difference, because it validates I think the importance of this sort of diplomatic approach and it obfuscates what looks like domestic political differences manifesting in our foreign policy.” Peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians collapsed in 2014, with the Obama administration heaping much of the blame on Israel's continued settlement expansion in areas that the Palestinians want for a future state. Relations between  Israel and the United States further soured last year as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lobbied Congress to kill the Iran deal, to no avail.
Simultaneously, the Obama administration has shown a desire to work in tandem with the European Union in applying pressure on Israel over its settlement construction in the West Bank. The administration has refused to denounce EU labeling policies for settlement products despite vocal opposition from Congress, and US ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro angered Israelis Jan. 18 with criticism of settlement policies that mirrors that of many European nations. J Street has identified some 110 candidates that it supports, although a few are running against one another. Its top goal is to defeat Republican senators Mark Kirk and Ron Johnson in Illinois and Wisconsin, respectively, both of whom are staunch opponents of the Iran deal.
The liberal group is not taking on any Democratic incumbents, but it is backing the primary opponent to a defeated lawmaker who is hoping to make a comeback. In Illinois, J Street is supporting Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering against Brad Schneider, an Iran deal opponent who lost re-election in 2014 to Republican Bob Dold after just one term. “As a pro-Israel, pro-peace supporter, Nancy believes that the US should work with Israelis and Palestinians to arrive at a two-state solution,” the J Street Political Action Committee says on its website. “She has vocally voiced her support for the Iran Deal, while her primary opponent Brad Schneider authored an op-ed against it. Most importantly, Nancy feels that America’s relationship with Israel cannot be driven by partisan politics, but rather as a partnership among allies in democracy.”
The $3 million that J Street hopes to raise is $600,000 more than its 2014 haul and almost twice the $1.8 million it raised for the 2012 presidential cycle. It pales in comparison with pro-Israel groups on its right, however: The American Israel Public Affairs Committee raised some $20 million for its campaign against the Iran deal, while pro-Israel donors on the right spend millions every election cycle to elect lawmakers.