LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

June 30/16

 Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site

http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletin16/english.june30.16.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006

Click Here to go to the LCCC Daily English/Arabic News Buletins Archieves Since 2006

Bible Quotations For Today

You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew 16/13-20/:"When Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’ And they said, ‘Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’Simon Peter answered, ‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.’And Jesus answered him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.’Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah."

If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness
Second Letter to the Corinthians 11/21-30:"To my shame, I must say, we were too weak for that! But whatever anyone dares to boast of I am speaking as a fool I also dare to boast of that. Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I. Are they ministers of Christ? I am talking like a madman I am a better one: with far greater labours, far more imprisonments, with countless floggings, and often near death. Five times I have received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one.Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I received a stoning. Three times I was shipwrecked; for a night and a day I was adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from bandits, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers and sisters; in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, hungry and thirsty, often without food, cold and naked. And, besides other things, I am under daily pressure because of my anxiety for all the churches.Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to stumble, and I am not indignant? If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness."

Pope Francis's Tweet For Today
Today the Lord repeats to all pastors: follow me despite the difficulties, follow me by proclaiming the Gospel to all.
Le Seigneur aujourd’hui répète à tous les Pasteurs : Suis-moi malgré les difficultés ; suis-moi dans la prédication de l’Évangile.
يكرر الرب اليوم لكل راعٍ: اتبعني بالرغم من الصعوبات: اتبعني في إعلان الإنجيل للجميع

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June 29-30/16

Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on June 29-30/16

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June 29-30/16

Links From Jihad Watch Site for June 29-30/16
Canada: Adult Muslim migrants enrolled in high school, sexually harass teen girls, threaten teachers, cheered jihad massacre
Southern Poverty Law Center president points to “radical right terrorism”, diminishes Islamic jihad
Muslims killing Muslims in droves, but Israel and Westerners get condemned
Witness at Cruz hearing correctly accuses Muslim congressmen of Muslim Brotherhood ties, media in uproar
Obama administration refuses to tell Congress why it purged references to “Islamic terrorism” from public documents
Hillary ignores Istanbul jihad attack during town hall event, instead hits “Islamophobia”
Wegmans bakery refuses to make cake for Ex-Muslims of North America, saying it might offend Muslims
Parties vying for Muslim support could turn Malaysia into a hardline Islamic state
Jammu and Kashmir: Muslims riot, stone police, torch police vehicle after jihad terrorist killed in shootout
Video: Robert Spencer: Should we censor ourselves to avoid offending Muslims?
Reading the Qur’an during Ramadan 25: Juz Ilayhi Yuraddu
Death toll in Istanbul jihad massacre now nearing 50, the Islamic State “is behind the attack”
Islamic State throws four gay men off rooftop, taunts gays with photos of murders bearing
Gay Pride celebrators ignore the threat of jihadists and blame Republicans
Al Qaeda urges lone wolves to target whites in America to clarify its message of jihad

Latest Lebanese Related News published on June 29-30/16

Minor Earthquake Jolts Several Parts of Lebanon
Naharnet/June 29/16/A minor earthquake was felt Wednesday afternoon across several Lebanese regions, mainly Mount Lebanon and Beirut. The state-run Bhannes National Center for Geophysical Research said the epicenter of the quake was the Chouf-Deir al-Qamar area in Mount Lebanon and that it measured 4.0 on the Richter scale. The tremor occurred at 4:24 pm, the Center said. It was felt in Chouf, Sidon, Beirut and parts of the North, according to media reports. According to the Center, over 600 earthquakes with magnitudes below 3 degrees hit Lebanon each year. In 1956, a 6 degrees on the Richter scale earthquake struck Lebanon, killing 136 people and destroying 6,000 houses.

Al-Qaa Bids Farewell to Blasts Victims as Archbishop Urges Declaring Outskirts a 'Military Zone'
Naharnet/June 29/16/The restive eastern border town of al-Qaa bid farewell Wednesday to five of its sons who were killed before dawn Monday in unprecedented multiple suicide bombings, as the region's Christian spiritual leader called for turning the neighboring area of Masharii al-Qaa into a “military zone.”Faysal Aad, Joseph Lebbos, Majed Wehbe, Boulos al-Ahmar and George Fares were laid to rest at the town's cemetery after a highly emotional funeral that was held amid strict security measures. The funeral had been postponed to Wednesday over security fears, after the town was hit by two waves of attacks on Monday. Four suicide bombers targeted the town in the pre-dawn attack, killing five people and wounding 15 others, as another four bombers attacked the town in the evening and wounded 13 people. “The town of al-Qaa is Lebanon's rock and on this rock the terrorists were crushed and they entered the gateways of hell while the gateways of heaven were opened for our martyrs,” Greek Catholic Archbishop of Baalbek Elias Rahal said at the funeral.“We will remain in this land and we will not budge, even if we offer 100 martyrs everyday,” a defiant Rahal added. “We will not be intimidated by the takfiris or their bombings,” he vowed. Rahal also called on the government to “organize those who are around us,” in reference to the displaced Syrians who live in unofficial encampments outside the town. “There are 20,000 refugees who go wherever they want freely,” the archbishop warned, stressing the need for “blocking the gaps” through which the attackers might have infiltrated the town. “The Masharii al-Qaa area must be fully turned into a military zone to prevent another tragedy,” Rahal added. On Tuesday, Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq said the refugee encampments had “nothing to do” with the bombers, saying the attackers came from “their emirate in Syria,” as Army Commander General Jean Qahwaji said they included “a woman and three Syrians.”Meanwhile, the Vatican's ambassador to Lebanon Gabriele Caccia, who attended the funeral, warned that "we must never be dragged into violence."Lebanon hosts more than 1.1 million Syrians, a huge burden for the country of four million people. Several Lebanese politicians have warned about the inability of the country to bear this burden and had already called for the closure of borders after security incidents. Al-Qaa is one of several border posts separating Lebanon and war-torn Syria and is predominantly Christian although one district, Masharii al-Qaa, is mainly Sunni Muslim and home to a large number of Syrian refugees. Suicide blasts in the area have typically targeted checkpoints or military installations and rarely include more than one attacker. In August 2014, the army clashed with the Islamic State group and al-Nusra Front, al-Qaida's affiliate in Syria, in the nearby border town of Arsal.

Geagea Doubts Iran and Hizbullah Want Aoun as President
Naharnet/June 29/16/Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea said that Iran and Hizbullah might not want MP Michel Aoun to be elected as a head of state, An Nahar daily reported on Wednesday. “Aoun might be the last person that Iran and Hizbullah want as a president,” Geagea told the daily. His comments came in light of the obstructions hampering the election of a president, despite his own withdrawal from the presidential race in favor of Aoun. In January, Geagea announced his support for his rival Change and Reform bloc chief Aoun as president. On the al-Qaa bombings, Geagea condemned the attacks that targeted the northeastern town and lauded the efforts of the Lebanese army. “There is no clear explanation for the assaults against al-Qaa. But the Lebanese army and Army Commander Gen. Jean Qahwaji have proven that they are not afraid to confront the stage that the country is passing through.”Suicide bombings rocked al-Qaa Monday evening, injuring eight people, only hours after four suicide bombers killed five people and wounded 15 others in the town before dawn. In the evening violence, three suicide bombers riding motorcycles blew themselves up in the center of the predominantly Christian town, media reports said. One struck in front of a church and the two others in front of the municipality building. In the pre-dawn attack, five people were killed and fifteen others were wounded when four suicide bombers targeted the town. The suicide explosions struck at 10 minute intervals.

Geagea: Qaa Families Held Arms to Support Army
Naharnet/June 29/16/Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea stated on Wednesday that the families of the eastern town of al-Qaa armed themselves after the suicide bombings that struck their town mainly to support the Lebanese army in its fight to eradicate terrorism. “The lawful arms that you were obliged to carry after terrorism struck your doors was solely to support the legal powers in their efforts to expel assaults,” said Geagea in a televised appearance addressing families of the victims of the al-Qaa bombings. The LF leader's comments came following media reports that the Qaa residents have resorted to autonomous security and that the dwellers were encouraged to carry guns and help in the fight against attackers. Media outlets have also broadcast footage of women carrying weapons and exclaiming willingness to defend their town against attackers.“This occurrence is but an episode of a series of heroism,” he added. “Our destiny in this part of the world is to remain standing high and to remain supporters of freedom,” concluded the LF leader. Four suicide bombings rocked al-Qaa on Monday evening, injuring eight people, only hours after four suicide bombers killed five people and wounded 15 others in the town before dawn. Three suicide bombers riding motorcycles blew themselves up in the evening in the center of the predominantly Christian town. In the pre-dawn attack, five people were killed and fifteen others were wounded when four suicide bombers targeted the town. Following the attacks, Qaa's municipal chief Bashir Matar encouraged the residents to defend themselves and shoot down any stranger they deem suspicious, media reports said.

Mashnouq: Qaa Bombers Came from Raqa, Westerners May be a Target
Naharnet/June 29/16/Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq announced Wednesday that the suicide bombers who attacked the eastern border town of al-Qaa “came from Raqa,” the de facto capital of the Islamic State group in Syria, while noting that detainees recently arrested in Lebanon had confessed that the IS was seeking to “target touristic sites frequented by Westerners” in the country. “Detainees in our custody have identified seven out of the eight bombers who targeted al-Qaa,” Mashnouq said in an interview on al-Jadeed television, noting that the detainees were shown pictures of the attackers' faces.
“According to the detainees' confessions, the seven criminals came from Syria, specifically from Raqa, not from the encampments” of the Syrian refugees in al-Qaa's outskirts, the minister added. “This is not an assumption. They came to carry out this specific attack and they were not residents of al-Qaa,” he said. Four suicide bombers targeted al-Qaa in a pre-dawn attack on Monday, killing five people and wounding 15 others, as another four bombers attacked the town in the evening and wounded 13 people. Al-Qaa is one of several border posts separating Lebanon and war-torn Syria and is predominantly Christian. The neighboring area of Masharii al-Qaa is home to thousands of Syrian refugees. Commenting on the rumors about the security situation that followed al-Qaa's unprecedented and spectacular attacks, Mashnouq dismissed most of them, noting that the detainees did not mention Lebanese beaches or malls in their confessions. “The confessions reveal that the terrorist groups are trying diversify their targets, after focusing on Hizbullah's strongholds in the past, and there are ten likely targets according to the investigations,” the minister added.“Touristic sites frequented by Westerners are the locations that the terrorists were seeking to target, according to the confessions,” Mashnouq said, confirming previous media reports. He also reassured that “seven terrorist networks were busted and arrested in the past two months in Lebanon.”

Mystery militants threaten Iranian jets landing in Beirut
Now Lebanon/June 29/16/BEIRUT – A group of militants calling themselves the Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir Brigades has threatened to target Iranian aircraft “transporting military equipment” into Beirut’s Rafik Hariri International Airport. In a video released Wednesday, the hitherto unknown group—which is named after the firebrand Sunni cleric imprisoned in Lebanon—threatened to “wage Jihad from everywhere, the air, sea and land, against the mercenaries of [Hezbollah] and its masters.” The three armed and masked men in the video protested that Lebanon’s seaports and Rafik Hariri International Airport were “turned into Iranian camps managed by the mercenaries of Hezbollah.”“Let them know that every Iranian aircraft transporting military equipment to Lebanon will be targeted,” the militants declared in their bellicose speech, which was delivered in front of the “Black Standard” jihadist flag. “We promise you that we will continue the jihad for Lebanon, and for each piece and inch of it, and we will redeem every drop of our blood to free him from the devil’s party,” the group added in a further bombastic flourish. Wednesday’s video—which was released shortly before noon local time Beirut—is the first public mention of the Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir Brigades, named in honor of the jihadist preacher whose Sidon-based militant group fought a 30-hour battle with the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) in June 2013, killing 18 soldiers. Assir remains in Lebanese prison as his trial slowly makes its way through the country’s military court following his capture trying to flee Lebanon in August 2015. The cleric—who was the Imam of the Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque in Sidon’s Abra quarter—rose to prominence in 2012 for his fiery rhetoric against Hezbollah. NOW's English news desk editor Albin Szakola (@AlbinSzakola) wrote this report. Amin Nasr translated Arabic-language material.

Hizbullah Urges 'Solidarity among Regional Countries' after Istanbul Attack
Hizbullah on Wednesday condemned as a “terrorist crime” the deadly suicide blasts that rocked the Ataturk International Airport in Turkey's Istanbul, urging “real and serious solidarity among the regional countries.”“This new crime proves that terrorism does not differentiate between one region and another or one religion and another, and that it is rather targeted against everyone, everywhere,” the party said in a statement. “This terrorism is based on hatred and on deforming all the humanitarian values that must govern our world,” it added. “These condemned terrorist acts must be a reason for real and serious solidarity among the regional countries in order to confront terrorism and eradicate it from its roots,” Hizbullah urged, calling for “eliminating this danger instead of using it to achieve narrow and partisan political gains.”Suicide bombers armed with automatic rifles attacked Istanbul's main international airport on Tuesday evening, killing 41 people and wounding 239 others, including foreigners. Witnesses described scenes of terror and panic as the attackers began shooting indiscriminately and then blew themselves up at the entrance to Ataturk airport, one of Europe's busiest hubs. The assault, at the start of Turkey's crucial summer tourist season, was the latest in a wave of attacks in Istanbul and the capital Ankara over the past year, putting the country on high alert. It came a day after eight suicide bombers attacked the Lebanese border town of al-Qaa where they killed five people and wounded 28 others in an unprecedented attack. Al-Qaa and the nearby Ras Baalbek are the only two towns with a Christian majority in the predominantly Shiite Hermel region, where Hizbullah holds sway. The group has sent thousands of its fighters to Syria to bolster President Bashar Assad's forces against rebels and jihadist extremists trying to topple him. Several deadly bombings have targeted Hizbullah's strongholds in the eastern Bekaa region and Beirut's southern suburbs since the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011. Most of the attacks were claimed by extremist groups such as al-Qaida and the Islamic State. The attacks killed scores of civilians and wounded hundreds.

Berri Says Received Info of Terror Schemes against Officials, Army and UNIFIL
Naharnet/June 29/16/Speaker Nabih Berri revealed that he had received information lately indicating that terrorist groups are preparing to carry out bombing attacks in Lebanon and that he had informed the UNIFIL's leadership, An Nahar daily reported on Wednesday. Berri revealed in front of visitors that militants were planning to carry out attacks against political figures, the Lebanese army and UNIFIL forces in south Lebanon and other regions, the daily added. Berri has told the UNIFIL's leadership of the information he obtained to take the required measures, it added. He said: “The Lebanese army was able to uncover terror cells and arrest those involved.” On the al-Qaa bombings, the Speaker said: “The terror suicidal attacks constitute a new turn in targeting the Lebanese. “The terrorists have failed to achieve anything on the sovereign borders of the country and they are now trying to enter into the Lebanese society which must face that threat with unity,” remarked the Speaker. He noted that “Lebanon as a whole is targeted and not al-Qaa alone.”Four suicide bombings rocked al-Qaa on Monday evening, injuring eight people, only hours after four suicide bombers killed five people and wounded 15 others in the town before dawn. Three suicide bombers riding motorcycles blew themselves up in the evening in the center of the predominantly Christian town. In the pre-dawn attack, five people were killed and fifteen others were wounded when four suicide bombers targeted the town.

Report: Hizbullah Refuses UNIFIL Deployment on Border
Naharnet/June 29/16/Hizbullah refuses the deployment of UNIFIL forces along Lebanon's border to counter threats from the Syrian and the infiltration of militants from the war-torn country, the Saudi Okaz daily reported on Wednesday. “Hizbullah has informed political officials that it refuses the calls voiced by several ministers and leaderships demanding the deployment of UNIFIL forces along Lebanon's border with Syria,” well-informed sources told the daily. “The Party refuses the expansion of the framework of International Resolution 1701,” added the sources on condition of anonymity. On Tuesday and following the series of suicide bombings that targeted the eastern town of al-Qaa, Al-Mustaqbal Movement called on the “Lebanese government to ask the U.N., through the Security Council, to secure UNIFIL forces support for the Lebanese Army along the entire Lebanese border, in line with Articles 11, 12 and 14 of Resolution 1701 (2006).”The movement had warned against resorting to autonomous security in the wake of the unprecedented suicide attacks in al-Qaa, and suggested a call-up of army reserves or seeking the assistance of U.N. forces if necessary. Four suicide bombings rocked al-Qaa on Monday evening, injuring eight people, only hours after four suicide bombers killed five people and wounded 15 others in the town before dawn.Three suicide bombers riding motorcycles blew themselves up in the evening in the center of the predominantly Christian town. In the pre-dawn attack, five people were killed and fifteen others were wounded when four suicide bombers targeted the town. Lebanon hosts more than 1.1 million Syrians, a huge burden for the country of four million people. Several Lebanese politicians have warned about the inability of the country to bear this burden and had already called for the closure of borders after incidents. Al-Qaa is one of several border posts separating Lebanon and war-torn Syria and is predominantly Christian although one district, Masharii al-Qaa, is mainly Sunni Muslim and home to a large number of Syrian refugees. Suicide blasts in the area have typically targeted checkpoints or military installations and rarely include more than one attacker. In August 2014, the army clashed with the Islamic State group and al-Nusra Front, al-Qaida's affiliate in Syria, in the border town of Arsal.

Zahra: Qaa locals believe in military institution, security forces
Wed 29 Jun 2016/NNA - Lebanese Forces MP Antoine Zahra said in an interview with the Free Lebanon radio station that carrying weapons is rejected "as we have faith in the role of the state.""Al-Qaa locals, same as every Lebanese citizen, bet on the role of the military and security institutions to protect Lebanon," he assured, noting that yesterday's armed appearances in Qaa happened under the banner of the State. "The cowards who denounced Qaa people's right to carry arms amid terrorist threat, have never condemned this act when conducted by Hezbollah and its elements who are fighting outside the border," Zahra criticized. "In the statements I made from Qaa village, I reiterated our clinging to the role of the State institutions," the MP clarified. Underlining the importance of treating displaced Syrians in a humane way, Zahra stressed however the need to ban the entrance of any person carrying weapons. He criticized in this regard the "divided government's inability to take ideal positions on this case.""The situation needs a radical solution. We ask to regulate the displaced Syrians' affairs and control their presence because the money allotted for them is being wasted and stolen as a result of lack of control," Zahra went on. The MP regretted in this regard the impact of such incidents on the Lebanese summer and tourism season, uttering pessimism amid this shaken security situation.

Salam welcomes British Ambassador: We must not give into what terrorists attempt to achieve
Wed 29 Jun 2016/NNA - Prime Minister Tammam Salam welcomed on Wednesday at the Grand Serail the British Ambassador to Lebanon Hugo Shorter with discussions featuring high on the consequences of the U.K. referendum last week and current developments. Following the meeting, Shorter said "I have just met with Prime Minister Salam to brief him on the consequences of last week's referendum in the UK, and to discuss current events. Although leaving the EU is a fundamental change for the UK, all other fundamentals remain in place. By everybody's figures, the UK's is one of the world's top half dozen economies. We remain one of five permanent members of the UN Security Council, and a member of the G7, G20 and NATO. We are the only country in all of these groups which spends 2% of its GDP on defense and 0.7% on development assistance. I assured Prime Minister Salam that the UK remains committed to Lebanon's stability, security and prosperity. Our efforts with our Lebanese partners continue - with the Lebanese Armed Forces, the Internal Security Forces, the Ministry of Education, the Central Bank, and many others. We stand by Lebanon's side in confronting the scourge of terrorism, defending its borders, promoting jobs and livelihoods, expanding access to education and managing the impact of the Syrian civil war. We also discussed the security situation in Lebanon. I offered my condolences to the PM, and utterly condemned the horrific attacks in the village of Al Qaa. I want to express my admiration for the army and the security and emergency services which are doing such a fine job - at a hugely challenging time - protecting Lebanon. In responding to such despicable attacks, we must not give into what the terrorists are trying to achieve: spreading hatred and division. We must protect at all costs peaceful co-existence between people of different faiths.In their response, I wish political leaders and local communities both courage and moderation in defending Lebanon. That means displaying those Lebanese qualities of co-existence and tolerance which have made Lebanon a model in this region.Unity is the strongest response to those who seek to divide Lebanon."Separately, Salam welcomed the UAE Ambassador to Lebanon Mohammad SAid Al-Shamisi with talks reportedly featuring high on current situation and developments. Salam also chaired a meeting with the Traffic Safety National Council to follow up on the council's work. Interior minister Nouhad Mashnouk, Public Works and Transportation minister Ghazi Zeaiter and the Council's secretary attended the meeting. The Prime Minister also welcomed Economy minister Alain Hakim. Chatting with the Media persons, Hakim said "We neither resigned from the relation with the Premier nor from politics. We discussed current issues."

Caccia from Qaa: We should not be driven to violence
Wed 29 Jun 2016/NNA - Papal Ambassador Gabriele Caccia stressed the necessity for people not to be driven to violence but to loving and Christ's instructions.His words came Wednesday from Qaa during the funeral for the martyrs of said town.

Romanian Ambassador visits Mashnouq, applauds Army and ISF's fight against terrorism
Wed 29 Jun 2016/NNA - Minister of Interior and Municipalities Nuhad Mashnouq received on Wednesday Romania's ambassador to Lebanon Victor Mircea, and discussed with him ways of boosting joint cooperation. The Romanian Ambassador relayed to the Minister condolences on behalf of his country on the victims of the terrorist bombings that rocked the town of Qaa. Having listened to the minister's briefing on the security and political situations, Ambassador Mircea applauded the security forces and the Lebanese army's efforts in the fight against terrorism and in strengthening security and stability in Lebanon.

Bassil receives delegation of Ambassadors of Mercosur, Shorter
Wed 29 Jun 2016/NNA - Foreign Affairs Minister, Gibran Bassil, on Wednesday received at his office a delegation of the Ambassadors of the countries forming Mercosur headed by the Ambassador of Uruguay Marta Pizzanelli. The delegation informed Minister Bassil of the draft relevant to the agreement of free trade with Lebanon. Separately, Bassil received British Ambassador, Hugo Shorter, who said that he discussed with his host the outcome of the referendum in UK last week as well as recent developments in Lebanon. Shorter confirmed his country's commitment to anchor Lebanon's development, security and stability. He added that his country would always stand beside Lebanon in its war against terrorism and would always support Lebanon regarding the displaced Syrians issue.

Jumblatt, Gerard tackle refugees affairs
Wed 29 Jun 2016/NNA - "Democratic Gathering" head MP Walid Jumblatt met on Wednesday at his Clemenceau residence with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Representative in Lebanon, Mireille Girard, with talks reportedly dwelling on the situation of refugees in Lebanon.

Hariri hosts iftar banquet in honor of Beiruti dignitaries
Wed 29 Jun 2016/NNA - Former Prime Minister, Saad Hariri, held on Wednesday at the Central House an iftar banquet in honor of Beiruti figures and dignitaries, attended by the Ambassadors of Romania, Sweden, Colombia, Uruguay, Slovakia, Greece, Argentina, Venezuela, Cyprus, and Austria. The iftar banquet was also attended by the charge d'affaires of the Czech Republic, and President of the "Dialogue Party" Fouad Makhzoumi. Hariri delivered a word on the occasion, dwelling on most recent political developments in the country.

From Beirut to Britain, bigots are on the march
ALEX ROWELL/Now Lebanon/June 29/16
Whether it’s Lebanon’s Gebran Bassil, America’s Donald Trump, or Europe’s ascendant far-right, an intensifying climate of hate threatens lives worldwide
A parody image shared on social media depicts Lebanon’s Gebran Bassil with Donald Trump’s hair, with (unseen) caption: “I want to build a wall and make Syrian refugees pay for it” . In one sense, you have to hand it to Lebanon’s Free Patriotic Movement. Long before Britain’s fruitcake xenophobe Nigel Farage grew powerful enough to initiate the breakup of the European Union, and many years prior to Donald Trump dreaming up his Muslim bans and Mexico walls, the party of General Michel Aoun was pioneering the kind of scaremongering and demonization of refugees that, until really only very recently, would have condemned a politician in a Western democracy to an inglorious life in the electoral wilderness. Now that the tactic of blaming war-ravaged women and children for the corrupt misrule of the elite has gained worldwide currency, the FPM’s years of innovation ahead of the curve deserve acknowledgment.
The efforts, in particular, of Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil, Aoun’s son-in-law and nominal head of the Movement, warrant special mention. As far back as 2012, when refugees were still just arriving from the uprising-turned-civil-war next door, Bassil was calling for denying them entry at the border, which among other things would have entailed the violation of international law. This he followed up with periodic outbursts about the “danger” of the defenseless exiles, who were agents of a “pre-planned” conspiracy to “transform the political and demographic reality” of Lebanon. By September 2013, he was demanding they “be deported” back to Syria outright – this just one month after the Assad regime committed mass murder with chemical weapons on the outskirts of its capital city.
So it almost wasn’t surprising to see Bassil raise (or lower) the bar yet further on Sunday in his address to the FPM’s municipal officials, even if the complete shamelessness with which he did it still draws a whistle. Warming to his favorite theme, and almost literally pounding the pulpit, he instructed all Free Patriotic mayors to cleanse their territory of the “existence” of Syrians. “The existence of camps and gatherings of Syrian refugees in the hearts of our towns is forbidden,” he intoned, to applause. Also “forbidden” in “our towns” was the opening of shops by Syrian refugees. Should any prohibited “gatherings” of Syrians be discovered, they must be “searched” by the municipal police, he added.
It’s not every day Al-Akhbar, the Pravda of the FPM’s ally Hezbollah, has a chance to occupy the moral high ground. But even it found Bassil’s casual decreeing of 21st-century Jim Crow laws beyond the pale, saying it “approached the racism of the new fascist parties on the rise in Europe.” (That those same fascist parties share Al-Akhbar’s enthusiasm for the dictatorship in Damascus is of course the sort of Molotov-Ribbentrop contradiction on which its writers prefer not to dwell.)  This is not necessarily overstating it. The climate of hate fostered by Bassil and his cohorts has already led to habitual pogroms against refugees in recent years – some of them fatal – and it was inevitable the same would happen after Monday’s suicide bombings in Al-Qaa. By the time the interior minister announced Tuesday afternoon that the culprits had actually entered from outside Lebanese territory, and had “no link” whatsoever to Syrian refugee camps, it was already too late. Marauding thugs had left random Syrians bleeding in the streets, to the indifference of local police forces. The army, meanwhile, had stormed camps across the country, arresting over 200 refugees by way of ‘response’ to the bombings with which they had nothing to do. The FPM, in its parallel universe, issued a statement congratulating Bassil for having “anticipated the threats” and demanding authorities do yet more to “confront the threat of the Syrian refugee influx.”Now, if such irrationality and cruelty might once have seemed unthinkable in post-Berlin-Wall Europe, recent history has put paid to that. No longer is it uncommon to read of refugees being tear-gassed or even shot with rubber bullets on European soil, and the deportation of asylum seekers to Turkey, an increasingly unsafe country sharing an 800km-long border with Syria, today forms part of official EU policy. So poisonous and hysterical has hostility to immigration grown that two weeks ago the UK saw its first assassination of a politician in 26 years. “Britain first!” is what the Nazi enthusiast Thomas Mair is said to have cried out before he shot and repeatedly stabbed MP Jo Cox, a 41-year-old mother of two.
That Cox was not only a tenacious defender of immigration and advocate of Britain remaining in the EU, but also Westminster’s most principled and eloquent opponent of the Assad regime, feels tragically fitting. Across continents today, a war both political and physical is being waged against those who still believe in internationalism, in solidarity, in a common lot shared with one’s fellows of all colors and languages and birthplaces. The urgency of preventing the small-minded mediocrities leading this war from emerging victorious simply cannot be overemphasized.

Lebanon’s Christians dance with the devil
HUSSAIN ABDUL-HUSSAIN/Now Lebanon/June 29/19
A return to the era of self-security following the Al-Qaa bombings would be an unwise tacticLebanese soldiers stand guard in front of a church where a suicide bomber blew himself up the previous day in the Christian village of al-Qaa, near the Lebanon
The wave of terror that swept the predominantly Christian village of Al-Qaa, on the eastern border with Syria, prompted Christian militias that were disarmed after the end of Lebanon’s civil war in 1990 to call for rearmament. In less than 24 hours, many Christians reversed over 25 years of regret over ever having formed armed militias that undermined the Lebanese state. And since at least 2005, Christian parties have vowed to denounce non-state actors, like Hezbollah, and rally behind the state and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) as their only protector.
The Al-Qaa bombings, however, seem to have reversed the Christian position and replaced it with one built on empty bravado. While self-defense is understandable, countering terrorism is impossible through violence. If Christians do not believe the futility of going to war with terrorist groups crossing the border from Syria, they should consider the American experience. America, with the strongest military in the world, battled terrorists for a decade in Iraq, but to no avail. What America learnt is that ejecting terrorists required peeling the population away from the militants, which in turn necessitates coming to terms with the local communities.
Betting against Washington, former President George Bush entrusted the military with not only defeating the terrorists militarily, but reconnecting with local populations and winning them over. America eventually succeeded in defeating a raging insurgency, and its experiment was recorded in US military manuals.
But President Obama, with his poised, professorial yet reluctant demeanor, trashed the military’s recommendation of keeping a residual force in Iraq to maintain ties with local communities in order to ensure that terrorists did not come back. For Mr. Obama, politics trumped strategic and military considerations, and he ordered not only the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, but also a total American disengagement from Iraqi affairs. Needless to say, Obama broke Iraq after Bush had patched it up.
Now that one of Obama’s feet is outside the White House, US experts are coming up with suggestions for the coming president on how to defeat terrorism in Iraq and Syria. The most seasoned of these experts believe that the Islamic State (ISIS) will be defeated, yet these same experts think that capturing ISIS territory will not spell the end for the group. ISIS will turn from a “state” to an insurgency, which means — short of winning over the Sunnis of Syria and Iraq — terrorism will continue to ravage populated areas in Iraq, Syria and neighboring countries such as Lebanon and Turkey.
Until America replicates its 2009 effort with which it beat terrorism and stabilized Iraq, minorities such as Christians and Druze will have to fend off the terrorist danger. After the Al-Qaa attacks Christians announced their intention to reconstitute and rearm their militias from the days of civil war, perhaps with assistance from Hezbollah, which has an interest in the proliferation of non-state actors at the expense of the state, its archenemy.
The Christian reaction to the Al-Qaa bombing is dangerous, and mimics the errors that other minorities — like Bashar Assad’s Alawites — have committed by going against Syria’s majority Sunni population. Assad might think he is still the leader of Syria, but it is clear now that the man is a mere water carrier for bigger players, like Iran, Russia and America. Assad should ask Lebanese lawmaker Michel Aoun how, after two years of war and devastation, a changing international mood allowed Assad’s father to sweep Christian Lebanon in 1990 and send Aoun to 15 years in exile.
Both Christians and Alawites should learn from a much smaller minority, the Druze. In late 2014, a tank shell exploded in the predominantly Druze village of Qorneh in southwest Syria, killing several Druze. The perpetrator remained unknown, even though tanks are the weapon of choice of Assad’s army, which claimed that the vehicle that fired the shell had defected to the rebel side.
In a tribal fashion, and with instigation from pro-Assad Lebanese Druze, a few Syrian Druze took revenge by killing a number of civilians in a nearby Sunni village. Assad’s plan was working. If revenge ensued between the Druze and the Sunnis, the Druze would have jumped off the fence and joined Assad’s forces in fighting rebels. But Assad’s plan was thwarted by Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, who went out of his way to reconcile with the Sunni tribes that extend from the Syrian Golan Heights to Khaldeh, south of Beirut. As part of Jumblatt’s appeasement of Sunni clans, he promised, and delivered, the shutdown of the Naameh national dumpster located in their area. Jumblatt also toned down Druze defiance, and called on the Druze to practice their actual religion, presumably Sunni Islam. He also promised to open a mosque in Mokhtara.
During his reconciliation, some Sunnis in the Nusra Front took revenge by massacring Druze in the northern province of Idlib, which made Jumblatt double down on his appeasement. Jumblatt’s reconciliation worked, even though the Naameh dump was temporarily reopened after piled up garbage had become a national emergency throughout Lebanon. The Druze are not appeasers. Rather, they are known for being ferocious warriors, but they also choose their battles in order to avoid possible annihilation and displacement. When they think they stand a chance of winning, and when fighting is absolutely necessary, the Druze fight and often win. But when the conflict is as regional and international as the war in Syria, the Druze sit it out and appease the fighting groups to buy peace.
Druze behavior is a textbook example of minority neutrality. Bravado talk might win populist leaders favor with their followers, but choosing losing wars results in further annihilation, especially when war is one of attrition with no clear winner. The Christian reaction to Al-Qaa's bombings was the wrong choice.

The stakes remain high in Lebanon’s political gridlock
Michael Young/The National /June 29/16
Lebanon’s political deadlock appears complete, yet there has been movement in recent weeks suggesting something may be in the works. However, rather than view this as progress, there are those worried about its implications. Recently, the speaker of parliament, Nabih Berri, made a proposal that raised eyebrows. For months a parliamentary committee has been meeting to agree on an election law that would satisfy all the political forces, but has gone nowhere. Given the stalemate, Mr Berri proposed that, unless an accord was reached on a new law for parliamentary elections in 2017, Lebanon would have to agree a “package deal", similar to the Doha accord of 2008 that brought president Michel Suleiman to power. The deal, presumably, would cover the presidency, the future prime minister and an election law. Mr Berri’s scheme was seen by many of his political rivals, and more specifically the rivals of Hizbollah, with which the speaker is allied, as part of a broader plan. The party’s opponents regard the Berri proposal as a surreptitious means of establishing a forum to amend the constitution and redraw communal shares in the political system to give the Shia community more power.
While the intention may indeed be there, it is difficult to see how, in the present political and sectarian climate, any of the communities who would be expected to surrender power to the Shia would agree to such a thing. Neither the Maronites nor the Sunnis, who would probably lose in such an endeavour, will sign off on an arrangement that reduces their representation. Mr Berri is expected to advance his proposal for a package deal in July, at a series of national dialogue sessions bringing together the country’s political leaders. But, if constitutional change is indeed his objective, it’s difficult to see any agreement in a country where most major decisions are taken by consensus. In parallel to this, Hizbollah has again sought to push for the election of Michel Aoun as president. It apparently instructed one of its allies to make a statement that Mr Aoun was authorised to negotiate with Saad Hariri about Mr Hariri’s return as prime minister if he ordered his bloc to vote for Mr Aoun (parliament votes for presidents in Lebanon). Mr Hariri has an interest in coming back to office, given his dire financial situation and his political setbacks in recent months. However, he also knows that backing Mr Aoun would lose him more of his Sunni base, which loathes Mr Aoun and considers him a Hizbollah pawn. Moreover, if parliamentary elections follow next year, Mr Hariri could end up being prime minister for a short time, until someone else is named after the vote. Hizbollah and its allies have floated the idea recently that Mr Berri’s offer for a package deal could involve agreement on electing Mr Aoun as president, returning Mr Hariri as prime minister, and approving an election law that satisfies everyone. That seems difficult to conceive, given the centrality of an election law to the political future of many politicians. Mr Hariri, even if he is assured of a comeback as prime minister, cannot afford to sign off on a law of which he disapproves, that might only confirm through elections how much ground he has lost in the past five years, during which he has remained outside of Lebanon. Yet for Mr Berri’s package deal to work, Mr Hariri has to be on board. At the same time, another ally of Mr Aoun (though a Hizbollah foe), the Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, has also expressed his doubts about the speaker’s and Hizbollah’s intentions. If both Mr Geagea and Mr Hariri are opposed, it’s difficult to see Mr Berri’s plan making headway.

Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on June 29-30/16

Putin, Erdogan to meet to end tensions
Staff writer, Al Arabiya News Wednesday, 29 June 2016/Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is expected to meet with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on the sidelines of the forthcoming G20 summit in China, their first face-to-face talks for months following a bitter diplomatic row. “A meeting is planned in China during the G-20 summit in September,” a Turkish official told AFP on Wednesday speaking on condition of anonymity. The news came after Putin and Erdogan on Wednesday held their first phone call since Ankara downed one of Moscow's jets in Syria last year, both sides said, and will later meet in person. Putin said after the phone call with Erdogan that he would lift travel restrictions to Turkey. The downing of a Russian warplane in November shattered ties between the two nations and saw Moscow slap an embargo on Turkish food products and ban charter flights and the sale of package tours to the country. The Turkish president said in a statement after the call that the two leaders would “remain in contact and “meet in person” to “reinvigorate bilateral relations and fight terrorism together.”The two leaders spoke as they sought to mend ties over the November incident that saw Moscow slap sanctions on Ankara. The Kremlin said that Putin, at an event with schoolchildren in Moscow earlier on Wednesday, also expressed his sympathy over a triple suicide bombing and gun attack at Istanbul's Ataturk airport that killed at least 36 people. “President Putin expressed condolences to the Turkish people over the monstrous terrorist attack,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.The breakthrough phone call came after the Turkish strongman on Monday sent a letter to Putin that Moscow said contained an apology. Ankara has said Erdogan expressed his “regret” over the incident in the letter to Putin and asked the family of the pilot who died to “excuse us”, but has not explicitly confirmed he apologised for shooting down the plane.

Car bomb kills 10 in Kurdish-held Syrian town
AFP, Beirut Wednesday, 29 June 2016/A car bomb killed at least 10 people on Wednesday in a Syrian town near the Turkish border held by US-backed Kurdish-led forces, a monitoring group said. Another nine people were wounded in the attack in Tal Abyad, which was captured from the ISIS by the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) and allied Arab groups in June last year, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. The alliance was formalised in October 2015 into the Syrian Democratic Forces, which then seized swathes of northern and northeastern Syria from ISIS with US support.
An SDF official said the car bomb was detonated outside offices of the Kurdish autonomous administration on the town’s main street. He said nine people were killed. The Kurds and their allies have now captured most of the Turkish border areas that had been under ISIS control, depriving the militants of access routes for foreign fighters and funds. The SDF is currently fighting the jihadists in the town of Manbij, across the Euphrates River to the west, threatening what was a key staging post on one of their few remaining entry routes.

Syria civil society groups threaten to quit Geneva talks
AFP, United Nations, United States Wednesday, 29 June 2016/Twenty-four Syrian civil society groups enlisted by the United Nations to support peace talks threatened to quit Tuesday over the failure to halt fighting in the five-year war. The non-governmental organizations wrote in a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon that the mounting death toll meant their presence at the peace table was “not only meaningless, it is unnecessary.” Among the 24 signatories were the Syrian Civil Defense, known as the White Helmets, the Syrian Network for Human Rights, the Syrian Women’s Network and the UOSSM group supporting hospitals that have come under repeated attack in the country. “If a serious mechanism to protect our civilians and enforce the cessation of hostilities is not developed and implemented, we fear it will be impossible for our organization to continue our participation in the Geneva talks,” the groups wrote in the letter to Ban. While the groups are not hugely influential in the peace talks, the threat to walk out underscored growing frustration with unraveling diplomatic efforts. “After five years of conflict, our groups want a just peace, not just a peace process,” they wrote. UN envoy Staffan de Mistura earlier this year invited civil society representatives to help support the peace process, which has been deadlocked since late April when the last round ended. The UN-backed talks are aimed at reaching a political settlement to Syria’s five-year war, which has left more than 280,000 people dead and driven millions from their homes. De Mistura is due to report to the Security Council on Wednesday on the state of the peace process amid much pessimism over the prospects for progress. The envoy has yet to set a new date to resume the talks, insisting that the ceasefire reached in February must be restored and aid deliveries allowed to reach civilians in besieged areas. The 24 groups called for breaking the sieges with air drops of aid, setting up a special tribunal to try war crimes suspects and releasing detainees.

ISIS force US-backed Syrian rebels to retreat
Reuters, Amman Wednesday, 29 June 2016/US-backed Syrian rebels were forced to retreat from the outskirts of an ISIS-held town at the border with Iraq and a nearby air base on Wednesday after a counter attack by the militants, two rebel sources said. The US-backed New Syria Army rebel group had launched the attack aiming to capture the town of Al-Bukamal on Tuesday. One of the rebel sources said Islamic State fighters had encircled the rebels in a surprise ambush. The rebels had incurred heavy casualties and weapons had been seized by the militants, the source said. A spokesman of the New Syria Army, Muzahem al Saloum, confirmed they had retreated. “We have withdrawn to the outlying desert and the first stage of the campaign had ended,” Saloum told Reuters.

Aid reaches all besieged areas of Syria with latest delivery: UN
Reuters, Beirut Wednesday, 29 June 2016/Trucks carrying medical and food aid entered two blockaded towns near Damascus on Wednesday, meaning that humanitarian agencies have now reached all besieged areas of Syria this year, the United Nations said. The 38-truck convoy carried aid for some 20,000 people the UN estimates are living in the rebel-held towns of Zamalka and Irbin, which are being besieged by the government side. “Today is the first time we are able to move a joint convoy of the United Nations, the Red Cross and Syrian Red Crescent ... to these two towns since November 2012, nearly four years ago,” the UN resident and humanitarian coordinator Yacoub El Hillo told reporters before the trucks headed in.“It will mean that since the beginning of this year the UN, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Syrian Red Crescent have been able to reach all the besieged areas of Syria,” he added. The ICRC said the aid included food parcels and wheat flour, hygiene kits and medicine. The UN says there are more than half a million Syrians living in 18 areas across the country that are besieged by warring sides in the five-year conflict. Aid agencies reported deaths from starvation in government-besieged Madaya earlier this year. Hillo said the delivery to Zamalka and Irbin would last about a month, and called for sieges to be lifted and regular aid access granted. Aid agencies have repeatedly called for regular access to areas under siege, saying that one-off deliveries quickly run out and that those in need remain blockaded.

Istanbul airport attack killed 6, injured 27 Saudis: envoy
By Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Wednesday, 29 June 2016/Saudi’s ambassador to Turkey, Adel Mirdad, told Al Arabiya News Channel on Wednesday that the suicide bombing in Istanbul’s Ataturk International Airport has killed 6 Saudis and injured 27 others from the kingdom, with five citizens so far considered “missing.”Three suicide bombers opened fire at passengers with automatic rifles before blowing themselves up at Turkey’s biggest airport on Tuesday night, killing at least 41 people and wounding 239. The Saudis killed were four women and two men, Mirdad said. He said four people were from the same family, but he could not disclose further details on their identities in respect for their memory. “There was no evidence,” relating to the reported deaths of five other Saudis, so they were listed as “missing” for the time being, he said. The ambassador wished “swift recovery” for the injured, saying Saudi Arabia vehemently denounces the targeting of “innocent lives.” A Turkish official on Wednesday said an Iranian and a Ukrainian have been confirmed as the first foreign victims in the Istanbul airport suicide attack.

Iraq secures $2.7 bln US loan from for military equipment
Reuters, Baghdad Wednesday, 29 June 2016/Iraq secured a $2.7 billion loan from the United States on Wednesday to fund ammunition and maintenance of fighter jets, tanks and other military equipment for use in the war against ISIS. Baghdad will have eight and a half years, including a one-year grace period, to repay the loan, which carries a 6.45 percent interest rate, a US embassy statement said. The deal will help Iraq service its F-16 fighter jets, M1A1 tanks, armored vehicles and attack helicopters as well as maintain navy ships and systems to protect the Umm Qasr port and southern oil platforms, the embassy added. Declining global oil prices and the costs of fighting ISIS militants who seized a third of Iraq’s territory in 2014 have hit government revenues, which rely almost completely on oil exports. Iraq received its first batch of F-16s in 2015 as a part of a $65 million deal with Lockheed Martin Corp.

Message of Jozo Radoš MEP from Croatia in lead up to “Free Iran” gathering
NCRI Iran NewsظWednesday, 29 June 2016/Remarks by Jozo Radoš Former Minister of Defence of Croatia and member of the European Parliament: Dear Iranian friends, I’m happy to have this opportunity to address you a message from the European Parliament. Like many of my colleagues who have recently supported a joint initiative which has been signed by over 270 members of the European Parliament and is calling on Europe to put precondition for improvement of human rights for expanding relations with Iran. We have seen that the number of executions are going up dramatically in Iran; that only in the month of May 73 people were hanged. We, as Europeans and the democrats believe that the respect of human rights must be a part of every relations with all of the countries; especially when we deal with a country like Iran which has the highest number of executions in the world.So, I want to assure you that we will continue our support for democratic opposition in Iran under the leadership of Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, whom we met in the European parliament recently and we hope your country will be free soon.

Czech MEP Jan Zahradil in support of July 9th rally in Paris
Wednesday, 29 June 2016/NCRI - Support for the July 9th rally in Paris has come from a myriad of MPs and political figures, who support a free and just Iran. Jan Zahradil, an outspoken Czech Member of the European Parliament, who has taken up various causes of social justice has sent his support to those attending the July 9th rally in Paris, and all those who seek to see a free Iran. From his video Zahradil sides with the plight of the many Iranians who have been faced with a cruel and unresponsive regime, which only seeks out its own interests. Zahradil stated that "we can see that the society in Iran is moving [forward], however the regime stays unchanged, and its nature remains unchanged".The injustices of the regime have been arbitrary and cruel, often without proper reasoning or sentencing, and accordingly many foreign dignitaries such as Jan Zahradil have taken note of it. Mr. Zahradil has witnessed the latter atrocities undertaken by the regime and strongly opposes such abuse of power, rather he stated that "there shouldn't be any concession to the regime, until it shows signs of improvement, respect for human rights, tolerance within the society and tolerance to the opposition party". Moreover, Mr. Zahradil's advocacy in the European Parliament against human rights violations and repressive regimes has garnered him much support from his fellow MEPs, many of who are also in support of the July 9th demonstration in Paris. To follow up further with the "Free Iran" rally on July 9th rally in Paris check out: http://ncr-iran.org/en/news/iran-resistance/20526-iran-prospects-for-change-one-year-after-the-nuclear-agreement.

Dr. Nasr al-Hariri: The Gathering of Iranian Resistance in Paris on July 9 is a golden opportunity for a Free Iran
NCRI Iran NewsWednesday, 29 June 2016/Dr. Nasr al-Hariri, a top official in the opposition Syrian National Coalition, expressed solidarity with the Iranian Resistance, which is hosting a major gathering in Paris on July 9th. Dr. Nasr al-Hariri condemned the theocratic dictatorship in Iran for its export of terrorism and in particular its complicity with the Syrian dictatorship, which has massacred many of its own people. Mr. Hariri in an interview with Simay-e Azadi (Iran opposition satellite television, INTV) which was broadcast this week said: “The regime of Velayat-e faqih (absolute clerical rule) has paid billions of dollars to the Bashar al-Assad regime over six years. Iranian Revolutionary Guards have killed many people, and the war seems to be continuing in this direction. Subsequently, as the meaningless bloodshed in Syria continues, the Iranian people gain no benefit from this war that the Velayat-e faqih regime has taken part in. So, in my opinion, today the coordination between the Syrian Resistance and the Iranian Resistance is necessary in order to put an end to these criminal acts of the Velayat-e faqih regime. Instead of spending money for the welfare and livelihood of the Iranian people, it's being spent for boundless plans and programs of the Velayat-e faqih regime.” “My message to the gathering of the Iranian Resistance, which is scheduled to be held on July 9th in Paris, is that this opportunity is a golden opportunity for a national uprising against the regime. Now that the regime has entered into a war of attrition in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and a number of other countries, it is a good time to activate coordinated efforts among the resistances of all of these countries to cooperate with the Iranian Resistance. Moreover, it must be said that the life of this regime which kills its own people and drags them into a meaningless war is over!”

Robert Rochefort MEP: “Yes to supporting those who want a democratic alternative in Iran”
Wednesday, 29 June 2016/NCRI - Robert Rochefort, a Member of the European Parliament and the deputy head of the Democratic Movement Party of France, has sent a message of solidarity to the Iranian Resistance, which is hosting a major gathering in Paris on July 9th. Mr. Rochefort condemned any economic ties with the theocratic dictatorship in Iran, which has no regard for human rights. In an interview with Simay-e Azadi (Iranian opposition satellite television, INTV), Mr. Rochefort said: “I speak to you from the European Parliament here in Strasburg. Recently, 270 MEPs have signed a statement which says we should not establish relations with the regime in power in Tehran unless the condition of respect for human rights by the regime is on the table.”“This past year in many countries, including my country, France, we saw that many companies were seeking new contracts with the regime in Tehran, in the so-called ‘normalization’ of relations with the regime. This is something that is not acceptable for this Parliament, where we have gathered in defense of human rights and freedom.” “In a few days on July 9 in Paris, a large number of MEPs and other parliamentarians and representatives from around the world will side with [Iranian opposition leader Mrs. Maryam] Rajavi, other officials and all those who organize this great gathering every year, in order to show their level of support for a free Iran.” “This is what brings together both the Iranian people abroad and many other supporters. I am sure that this gathering will be a huge success and when we look at the messages of the program it's another step to show the expanding view of those who say ‘No’ to unconditional normalization of economic and trade relations with the Tehran regime and ‘Yes’ to the defense of human rights and ‘Yes’ to supporting those who want a democratic alternative in Iran. Good luck.”

Marian Harkin MEP supports Maryam Rajavi’s 10-point plan for Iran
Wednesday, 29 June 2016/NCRI - Marian Harkin, an Irish Member of the European Parliament, has expressed her concerns over human rights abuses in Iran via a video released earlier this month. Marian Harkin MEP said: “Discrimination and criminal repression against ethnic and religious minorities, arrests of critics and systematic censorship still exists [in Iran].” Harkin was one of the 270 MEPs to sign a letter insisting that the EU condition their negotiations with Iran on improvements to the dire human rights situation. Harkin, a member of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, cited the rising number of executions in Iran as a major concern; the UN calculates that Iran’s execution rate is the highest in 25 years. She said that she approved of the “progressive” ten-point plan laid out by Maryam Rajavi, President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which calls for the abolition of the death penalty and for equality between men and women. Then she spoke about the grand gathering in Paris on July 9, for all members and supporters of the Iranian Resistance. It will be attended by world leaders, policy makers, journalists and religious leaders. She said: “I would urge as many people as possible to attend that event.”

Beatriz Becerra MEP supports “Free Iran” rally for human rights
Wednesday, 29 June 2016/NCRI - A Spanish Member of the European Parliament has called for the public to attend the Iranian resistance rally in Paris next month. Beatriz Becerra, who is Vice-Chair for the European Parliament’s subcommittee on Human Rights, said that 80 million Iranian citizens are suffering serious suppression of their human rights. The “Free Iran” gathering on July 9, will highlight the lack of human rights in Iran and provide a chance for policymakers, heads of state and religious leaders to come together to try and right the problem. She said: “I would like to be there at this amazing rally that will serve as an example for the world. I would like to say also that I am very concerned about the state of human rights in Iran, especially for women.”Becerra, a member of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, is very concerned about the women in Tehran who are being targeted by more than 7,000 so-called ‘morality police’ for improper veiling. She is one of the 270 MEPs who signed a letter asking the EU to condition their trade and diplomatic relations with Iran on their improvements to human rights. She said: “I think that all the assumptions on the extension, on openness in Iran has to be under this code of human rights.”

First Aid Convoy to Two Besieged Syria Towns since 2012
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/June 29/16/A convoy of food and medicine entered two besieged Syrian towns near Damascus on Wednesday, the first aid delivered to them since 2012, the International Committee of the Red Cross told AFP. The towns of Zamalka and Erbin were the last besieged areas in Syria to receive humanitarian aid, after the UN delivered assistance to the other 16 earlier this year. The International Committee of the Red Cross said it was delivering 37 trucks of aid in partnership with the United Nations and Syrian Arab Red Crescent. The convoy includes food parcels, wheat flower, and hygiene kits for the 20,000 people living in both towns.The UN says there are 592,000 people living in 18 besieged areas in Syria. Most of them, like the residents of Zamalka and Erbin, are surrounded by government loyalists. "This is a remarkable day, because for the first time, we will be able to get a joint convoy" into Zamalka and Erbin, said the UN's top humanitarian coordinator in Syria Yaacoub El Hillo. He spoke to journalists moments before the convoy began entering the towns. "Since the beginning of the year, UN agencies, the ICRC, and the Syrian Arab Red Crescent have been able to get aid to every besieged area in Syria," Hillo said. More than 280,000 people have died since Syria's conflict erupted in March 2011 with anti-government protests.
 

Canadian FM, Statement on normalization of relations between Turkey and Israel
June 28, 2016 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable Stéphane Dion, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:
“Canada welcomes the normalization of ties between Turkey and Israel and congratulates both countries on their efforts to move forward and restore full diplomatic relations. Canada recognizes the central roles Turkey and Israel play in the region, and this encouraging rapprochement can only benefit peace and security.
“As a partner of both Turkey and Israel Canada looks forward to continued engagement with both countries bilaterally and in multilateral forums.”
Contacts
Chantal Gagnon
Press Secretary
Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs

Canada condemns terrorist attack in Turkey
June 28, 2016 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable Stéphane Dion, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:
“Canada strongly condemns the terrorist attack that took place today at Istanbul’s Atatürk Airport.
“On behalf of the Government of Canada, I offer my heartfelt condolences to the families and friends of the victims and wish a speedy recovery to the wounded.
“We stand with the Turkish people as they deal with this most recent and appalling terror attack. We reaffirm our commitment to work tirelessly in the fight against terrorism.
“Canadian citizens in Turkey requiring emergency consular assistance should contact the Consulate General of Canada in Istanbul at 90-212-385-9700 or call the Global Affairs Canada 24/7 Emergency Watch and Response Centre collect at 1-613-996-8885. An email can also be sent to sos@international.gc.ca.”
Contacts
Chantal Gagnon
Press Secretary
Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs

Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on June 29-30/16

Adviser, Dr. Walid Phares: Trump will draw back Muslim ban
By Jonathan Easley/The Hill/June 29/16
Donald Trump will draw back his proposed ban on Muslims entering the country once he’s elected president and focus instead on more precise policies meant to identify potential terrorists, his national security adviser told The Hill on Tuesday.
In recent days, conflicting reports have emerged over whether Trump intends to stand by his controversial proposal to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the country. That “suggestion,” as Trump has described it, has been condemned as bigoted by liberals and dismissed by critics as impossible to implement.
In an email exchange with The Hill, Trump’s national security adviser, Walid Phares, sought to clarify Trump’s position.
He argued that Trump’s original proposal to temporarily ban Muslims was necessary in the chaotic moments following the San Bernardino, Calif., shootings in order to “raise the issue and open a debate about it.”
Now, Phares says Trump’s concerns that terrorists are seeking to infiltrate the U.S. by posing as refugees have been confirmed by government agencies, and so Trump can be expected to take a more nuanced approach on Muslim immigration going forward.
“The Obama denial that the Jihadi attacks, including in California and Florida, were triggered by a Jihadi ideology prompted Mr. Trump to ask what is behind the infiltration and to question why the administration is not designating the radical Islamist ideology as inspirer,” Phares wrote.
“Hence, it is natural that the principle of a general ban will evolve into narrower policy suggestions during the campaign, and eventually when Mr. Trump is elected, he would direct the agencies and work with Congress to develop precise policies to detect the actual Jihadists. His statements were not against any community but warnings that the terrorists are penetrating every group they can.”
Phares said Trump is refining his proposal to hone in on the “ideology and the movements behind the terrorists,” rather than Islam writ large.
There have been conflicting signals coming out of the Trump campaign over the Muslim ban in recent days.
In December, Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our countries representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.”
At a major foreign policy address earlier this month — conducted a day after the terrorist attack in Orlando carried out by a man who pledged allegiance to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — Trump seemed to expand the ban by calling for a suspension on all immigration coming from “areas of the world where there is a proven history of terrorism.”
But Trump seemed to soften his tone while on a trip to Scotland earlier this week, during which he talked about distinguishing terrorists from “peaceful Muslims.” Trump said he wouldn’t be bothered by Scottish or British Muslims coming to the U.S.
Still, Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson argued on CNN on Monday that there had been no change in Trump’s position.
Phares, however, indicated on Tuesday that the Muslim ban will narrow going forward.
“He has been clarifying the matter over the weeks and months,” Phares wrote. “It is not that the issue is the ban but the issue is the Jihadi detection.
“If you look at international attempts to detect the threat, in Europe and the Arab world you see that many Governments are very clear as to who is behind penetration of their own countries,” he continued.
“They cite the ideology and make the distinction very clear between moderates and radical Islamists. President Obama and Secretary Clinton still refuse what most countries fighting the Jihadists do: identifying the threat and designating the ideology. That's why Mr. Trump is pushing for an identification, as most Governments worldwide are doing.”

The Imam Celebrated by the Church of Sweden: "The Jews are Behind the Islamic State!"
Ingrid Carlqvist/Gatestone Institute/June 29/16
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8322/sweden-church-imam

Translated by Maria Celander
Priests are afraid to talk about Jesus during mass. — Eva Hamberg, priest and professor, who in protest resigned from the priesthood and left the Church.
The Church of Sweden may be headed towards "Chrislam" -- a merging of Christianity and Islam. Swedish priests, noting the religious fervor among the Muslims now living in Sweden, enthusiastically take part in various interfaith projects.
"There are reliable sources from Egypt, showing that the Saudi royal family is really a Jewish family that came from Iraq to the Arabian Peninsula sometime in the 1700s. They built an army with the aid of British officers fighting the Ottoman sultanate." — Imam Awad Olwan, with whom a priest, Henrik Larsson, is cooperating in an interfaith project.
"The involvement that the Church of Sweden has shown for the vulnerability of Christian Palestinians, has been replaced with indifference to the ethnic cleansing of Christians in Syria and Iraq. In these countries, it is mostly Muslims who commit the atrocities, which is evidently enough to make the Church of Sweden concentrate on climate change and environmental issues instead." — Eli Göndör, scholar of religion.
The Church of Sweden has departed from being a strong and stern state church. In the past, Swedes were born into it and, until 1951, no one was allowed to leave the church. These days, however, it is an institution that has very little to do with Christianity or Jesus. Sweden now, according to the World Values Survey, is one of the world's most secular countries; every year a large number of Swedes leave the church.
It used to be that only atheists left the church; now it is the devout Christians that leave -- in protest against the church's increasingly questionable relationship to the Christian faith.
When, for example, the current Archbishop, Antje Jackelén, just before being appointed, participated in a question-and-answer session in the fall of 2013, and one of the questions was: "Does Jesus convey a more truthful image of God than Muhammad does?" surprisingly, the would-be archbishop did not immediately say yes, but instead involved herself in a long monologue about there being many ways to God. Evidently, this upset a lot of parishioners. A high-profile priest and professor, Eva Hamberg, resigned from the priesthood in protest and left the Church of Sweden.
"This made me leave faster," she told the Christian newspaper, Dagen. "If the future Archbishop cannot stand by the Apostles' Creed, but rather, rationalizes it, then secularization has gone too far."
Hamberg, who has conducted research on the secularization process, said that in Sweden, secularization has escalated ever faster -- even within the Church of Sweden. As an example, Hamberg said that Antje Jackelén does not believe in Immaculate Conception, but says it is a metaphor. Hamberg also said that there is a lack of reverence before the Triune God, and that the priests are afraid to talk about Jesus during mass.
"There is also a clear lack of tolerance within the Church of Sweden. The candidates [for the position of archbishop] were all very keen to talk about dialogue, and that sounds great, but it is all just empty phrases. The church leaders, in fact, persecute dissidents. If you do not agree with the ordination of women, you will not get ordained. The ceiling is incredibly low."
When Antje Jackelén won the election and became Sweden's first female Archbishop, it was time for the next shock. As her motto, she chose "God is Greater" -- "Allahu Akbar" in Arabic. Jackelén referred to 1 John 3:19-21, which says:
"This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything."
However, few believe the choice of motto is anything other than an open flirt with the Muslims of Sweden. In Islam, "Allahu Akbar" are the first words heard in every call to prayer, from every minaret around the world, and it is the cry we hear time and again in connection with Islamist suicide bombings, decapitations of non-Muslims, and terrorist attacks.
The King, Queen and Crown Princess of Sweden attend the archiepiscopal ordination of Bishop Antje Jackelén at Uppsala Cathedral, June 15, 2014. (Image source: Church of Sweden)
Archbishop Jackelén's choice of a motto was not an exception; merely the most visible sign that the Church of Sweden may be headed towards "Chrislam" -- a merging of Christianity and Islam. Swedish priests, noting the religious fervor among the Muslims now living in Sweden, enthusiastically take part in various interreligious projects. Last year, Stockholm's Bishop, Eva Brunne, suggested removing the cross from the Seamen's Church, enabling Muslims to pray there.
Gatestone Institute called her closest associate, Diocesan Priest Bo Larsson, to ask about this proposal.
Gatestone: Can the Christians in Muslim countries expect the same service in mosques?
Bo Larsson: "No, I don't think so. To Muslims, the buildings have such a holy dignity."
Gatestone: But not to Swedes?
Bo Larsson: "Apparently not. But there are already many mosques in Sweden."
Gatestone: So why the need to pray in the Seamen's Church?
Bo Larsson: "You know, it was just a suggestion. Many people on social media got it into their heads that this means Brunne is no longer a Christian, but that is not true of course."
Gatestone: So we Christians should show Muslims respect, even though they do not respect us?
Bo Larsson: "I think so. That is my opinion. I have been a priest for 40 years. We are still the largest church in Sweden, and so we must provide opportunities for Muslims and Jews."
Gatestone: "Are you saying 'If you cannot beat them, join them?'"
Bo Larsson "That is one way to look at it."
Gatestone: The Church of Sweden is known for its positive attitude towards homosexuals. Your own bishop, Eva Brunne, is openly gay. Yet you support Islam, which persecutes homosexuals?
Bo Larsson: "That is a difficult question to answer. But sure, it is terrible that gay people do not have any rights in Muslim countries and cannot live openly. Terrible."
Gatestone: And you still want to support this religion?
Bo Larsson: "There are Christians who are opposed to homosexuality, too, you know."
Gatestone: Who want to hang gays?
Bo Larsson: "No, maybe not. But I think you're oversimplifying. What we want in Sweden is a dialogue with the Muslim people."
Gatestone: Have you discussed homosexuality with Muslims?
Bo Larsson: "No."
Gatestone: Do you think you can change Islam in Sweden into a tolerant, open-minded religion?
Bo Larsson: "There are fundamentalist Christians in the United States who do not accept homosexuals."
Gatestone: But do you think there is a difference between not accepting and wanting to kill?
Bo Larsson: "I have never heard a Muslim say he wants to kill homosexuals."
"Chrislam" has gone farthest in the immigrant-heavy Stockholm suburb of Fisksätra, in which 8,000 people, speaking 100 different languages live. There, the Church of Sweden is now raising money to build a mosque -- a project named "House of God" -- next to the existing church. This is how the project is described on its official website:
"The House of God represents a desire for peace, and real work in the spirit of peace. We are building a mosque adjacent to the existing church in Fisksätra. Between the church and the mosque, a glass enclosed, joint indoor square will be built. The House of God is unique, and an example of the cooperation and religious dialogue that is so important in our time. Come join our work!"
Gatestone called Henrik Larsson, a priest and one of the founders of the House of God project. He assured us that Islam is peaceful and democratic, but then gave some other answers indicating that he may not be so enthralled by this religion after all.
"We Christians have also done some horrible things over the centuries," he said. " We have burned witches, we have colonized other countries, and sided with different armies throughout our history. I think all religions can be used in a similar way."
Gatestone: Are you saying that we live in 2016, and that they are still stuck in the 1400s?
H. Larsson: "If that. They are striving towards creating a society like the one that existed right after the Prophet Muhammad's death, and that means we are talking 600s, 700s and 800s. That is their ideal. But there is also an Islam searching for new ways, a European Islam, those who want to try to be Muslims within the democratic and secular society."
Gatestone: Many Muslims in Sweden seem not to want to adapt to Swedish culture. Look at all the rapes and sexual assaults at public swimming pools.
H. Larsson: "Yes, it is not easy for Afghan boys who have grown up in a society where women have to throw a sheet over themselves before leaving the house; of course they are marinated in an attitude towards women miles away from ours. Of course they should not be allowed to do that, but it is no wonder that there are conflicts. But they need to learn how we see men and women here in Sweden."
Henrik Larsson celebrates the imam with whom he is cooperating in the "House of God." His name is Awad Olwan, a Palestinian who came to Sweden in the 1960s. According to Henrik Larsson, Olwan is a modern Muslim, who became an imam late in life and likes democracy.
But when Gatestone called Olwan, to ask why he supported the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) in the 1970s and refused to denounce the Munich massacre at the 1972 Olympic Games, he at first pretended not to know what the PFLP was. The BBC has described it as "Combining Arab nationalism with Marxist-Leninist ideology, the PFLP saw the destruction of Israel as integral to its struggle to remove Western capitalism from the Middle East."
Olwan: "Oh, well, yes, we had a lot of different organizations back then, but forget that -- that is history now. It meant Palestine Liberation something. I really do not remember to be quite honest."
Gatestone: You refused to denounce the attack on the Jewish Olympians in Munich?
Olwan: "Yes, that's right, but that was in the 70s! I don't remember what I said then."
Gatestone: Is your attitude different now?
Olwan: "Yes, of course. It was murder and nothing else."
During our first conversation, Awad Olwan claimed to be very positive towards Jews. He said that there are no Jews in the House of God is simply because there is no Jewish congregation in Fisksätra, but that the organizers have invited a Jewish choir and are cooperating very well with them.
During our second talk, however, other thoughts emerged. When Olwan was asked some questions about the Quran and the hadith, he began cursing and saying that everything was the fault of "those f**king Mecca-Arabs."
Gatestone: Are you saying Islam is not the problem; that it is the Saudi interpretation of Islam that messes everything up?
Olwan: "Exactly! And their religion [Wahhabism] was invented by a British imperialist 200 years ago. I cannot say anything more, because then I am an anti-Semite and whatnot."
Gatestone: What is the truth about the Jews?
Olwan: "Okay, there are reliable sources from Egypt, showing that the Saudi royal family is really a Jewish family that came from Iraq to the Arabian Peninsula sometime in the 1700s. They built an army with the aid of British officers fighting the Ottoman sultanate. After that, they created the Jordanian army and so on and so on."
Gatestone: Are you saying this is the reason the Jews are so quiet?
Olwan: "Yes. I wrote in my book that the purpose of ISIS/Daesh is to shift the focus from the Arab-Israeli conflict, and make this a conflict between Sunni and Shia -- and they have succeeded. And now, they will erase the entire Middle East. You will see! It is Catholic land, Muslim land and a lot of other crap countries just to justify the existence of a Jewish state."
Gatestone: I read online that many believe it was Mossad and the Jews who started ISIS?
Olwan: "Yes, that is a common theory in the Middle East, but if you say that in the West, you are told that you are a conspiracy nut and that you have no evidence. But here's the deal: You cannot wage war against strong forces without having weapons delivered every day, you need planning and logistics. These are not f**king terrorists who have learned how to wage war on the internet, these are highly trained, highly skilled people. I have to go now."
Gatestone: Are you referring to the Jews?
Olwan: "Exactly, exactly."
Olwan is most likely a typical example of an imam who shows a conciliatory and friendly attitude towards naïve Swedish priests, but with a bit of encouragement, admits his hatred of Jews. He is, it seems, not too fond of the Church of Sweden's friendly attitude towards gays, either.
Since the Church of Sweden became one of the first Christian communions in the world to approve gay marriage in 2005, more and more priests have come out as gay. In 2009, when Eva Brunne was appointed bishop of Stockholm, tongues wagged that the church is now being ruled by the "Lesbian League." The Church of Sweden has participated in the Pride Festivals in Stockholm on many occasions, and several churches have allowed themselves be LGBT-certified. The price for this may be that the church will be forced to cut certain passages from Bible. Ulrika Westerlund, the chairperson for the RFSL (Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer Rights), has warned the church: "There are elements in religious scriptures that are used against LGBT persons. Then we have to discuss if you want this certification, we do not want you to quote these passages from the Bible."
Henrik Larsson, the priest, sees a problem with imams constantly condemning homosexuality as a sin -- an Islamic tenet that presumably can never change because Allah said it [Quran,7:80-84.IG]. "We have to hope they catch up with us there. It was not so long ago that Christianity preached the same things."
Gatestone: Do you hope and believe that Muslims can change, even though some hurl homosexuals from rooftops, hang them and flog them?
H. Larsson: "Yes, it is awful. But I believe that people are innately good at heart."
Awad Olwan does not agree with Henrik Larsson. He thinks the Church of Sweden's attitude towards homosexuality is a great sin:
"I disagree with them. Homosexuality is not good for the morals of society, and it is not what Jesus and Moses stood for. It is better if the whole thing with homosexuality in public life becomes a parenthesis."
In the meantime, as the Church of Sweden is busy developing "Chrislam," it never acknowledges that in the Middle East, Christians are being killed and effectively eradicated. In 2015, Eli Göndör, a scholar of religion, wrote in the magazine Dagens Samhälle:
"The involvement that the Church of Sweden has shown for the vulnerability of Christian Palestinians, has been replaced with indifference to the ethnic cleansing of Christians in Syria and Iraq. In these countries, it is mostly Muslims who commit the atrocities, which is evidently enough to make the Church of Sweden concentrate on climate change and environmental issues instead."
To be fair, in February 2016, the Church of Sweden did do something for the Christians of the Middle East -- it encouraged congregations and individuals to pray for them. The words Islam or Muslims were not mentioned in the appeal.
Gatestone called the Church of Sweden's information service, to ask if the prayers had helped.
"I cannot answer that," the voice on the phone said. "Can you send an e-mail with your question, and I'll ask my colleagues to get you a reply?"
**Ingrid Carlqvist is a journalist and author based in Sweden, and a Distinguished Senior Fellow of Gatestone Institute.
© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute

Turkey and Israel: Happy Together?
Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute/June 29/16
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8346/turkey-israel-together
Ironically, the futile Turkish effort to end the naval blockade of Gaza is ending in quite a different direction: Now that Turkey has agreed to send humanitarian aid through the Ashdod port, it accepts the legitimacy of the blockade.
Ostensibly, almost everyone is happy. After six years and countless rounds of secret and public negotiations Turkey and Israel have finally reached a landmark deal to normalize their downgraded diplomatic relations and ended their cold war. The détente is a regional necessity based on convergent interests: Divergent interests can wait until the next crisis.
UN chief Ban Ki-moon welcomed the deal, calling it a "hopeful signal for the stability of the region."
Secretary of State John Kerry, too, welcomed the agreement. "We are obviously pleased in the administration. This is a step we wanted to see happen," he said.
And Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thinks that the agreement to normalize relations will have a positive impact on Israel's economy. "It has also immense implications for the Israeli economy, and I use that word advisedly," Netanyahu said, in likely reference to potential deals with Turkey for the exploration and transportation of natural gas off the Israeli coast.
A few years ago, according to the official Turkish narrative, "Israel is a terrorist state and its acts are terrorist acts." Today, in the words of Turkey's Minister of the Economy, Nihat Zeybekci, "For us Israel is an important ally."
Turkey has long claimed that it would not reconcile with Israel unless its three demands have been firmly met by the Jewish state: An official apology for the killings of nine Islamists aboard the Turkish flotilla led by the Mavi Marmara which in 2010 tried to break the naval blockade of Gaza; compensation for the victims' families; and a complete removal of the blockade. In 2013, Netanyahu, under pressure from President Barack Obama, apologized for the operational mistakes during the raid on the Mavi Marmara. The two sides have also agreed on compensation worth $20 million. With the deal reached now and awaiting Israeli governmental and Turkish parliamentary approvals, the narrative on the third Turkish condition looks tricky.
Announcing the deal, Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim said that a first ship carrying over 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid from Turkey to Gaza, part of the deal between Turkey and Israel, will set out for Ashdod Port on July 1. A 200-bed Turkey-Palestine "friendship hospital" will also be put into service as soon as possible. Turkey's housing agency will engage in a development project in Gaza, too. And that is fine.
But then Yildirim claimed that the embargo on Gaza will largely be lifted under the leadership of Turkey. That is completely wrong and simply an effort to cheat, aiming at Turkey's domestic consumption. A maverick way to tell Turkey's massive Islamist voting base: "Sorry, we have failed to remove the blockade of Gaza but are trying to sell it as if we did." Even before the deal, Turkey, like other countries, was free to send humanitarian aid to Gaza through Israel's designated port of Ashdod. Now it will send aid through the same port, not directly into the Gazan shores. Hence, Netanyahu's caution that "the Israeli naval blockade of Gaza would continue after the deal."
After six tiring years of concerted efforts to isolate Israel internationally unless Jerusalem removed the naval blockade of Gaza, Turkey had to go back to where it first took off and, in embarrassment, trying to sell the deal as a major diplomatic victory. One pro-government columnist flagrantly wrote: "Ankara opened a humanitarian corridor to Gaza and accomplished the freedom flotilla's historic mission."
The ups and downs of Turkey's relations with Israel -- what comes next?
Left: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (then Prime Minister) shakes hands with then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, on May 1, 2005. Right: Erdogan shakes hands with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh on January 3, 2012.
All the same, the government's propaganda machine now spreading the message that the great power Turkey got Israel on its knees is not always working well.
"It looks like the government has given up on its principles and values. It will lose support as a result," said Ismail Bilgen, whose father was one of those killed on the Mavi Marmara. "The Justice and Development Party [AKP] enjoys great support due to its resolute principled stance on issues but this move is in total contradiction to that."
He added:
"Restoring ties in this manner is unacceptable. The Israelis are acting like the compensation is an act of benevolence on their part rather than a punishment for their crimes ... My father and his friends died trying to bring international attention to the inhumane blockade imposed on Gaza and to have it lifted. It now appears like their martyrdom will have been in vain."
Cigdem Topcuoglu, whose husband was killed aboard the Mavi Marmara, said:
"Our struggle will continue no matter what. I am against it [the normalization deal] completely ... In no way should an agreement be reached or friendship established with the Zionists calling themselves Israel, and who have blood on their hands ... Our president [Recep Tayyip Erdogan] when he met with us told us the blood of the Mavi Marmara martyrs was sacred. I hope our president doesn't concede to Israel in any way and doesn't make a deal."
Too late, too wrong. The deal will go through, and under the approving looks of Erdogan. Ironically, the futile Turkish effort to end the naval blockade of Gaza is ending in quite a different direction: Now that Turkey has agreed to send humanitarian aid through the Ashdod port, it accepts the legitimacy of the blockade.
**Burak Bekdil, based in Ankara, is a Turkish columnist for the Hürriyet Daily and a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Turkey-Israel Rapprochement
Shoshana Bryen/Gatestone Institute/June 29/16
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8347/turkey-israel-rapprochement
Israeli policy (assisted by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden) produced perhaps the best possible outcome.
The UN Secretary General's Report on the Gaza Flotilla concluded that Israel was within its rights to use force, and found the blockade of Gaza to be legal.
Turkey agreed to Israel's original condition to the flotilla ships -- aid bound for Gaza will offload in Ashdod.
Israel had also wanted to oust Hamas from Turkey -- something that may not have been accomplished. But Turkey, by agreeing to a number of humanitarian projects in Gaza, will increase its leverage over Hamas in ways that might benefit Israel.
The announcement of Turkish-Israeli rapprochement was touted first as an economic achievement for Israel. It should be noted, however, that Turkey-Israel civilian trade, as distinct from military trade, was already robust, rising from $1.5 billion in the first half of 2010 to $5.6 billion in 2015. Israel has an interest in Turkey as a customer for Israeli natural gas fields, but a number of countries -- including Russia -- also seek partnerships in natural gas.
The deal has also been linked to the resolution of three Turkish conditions arising from the "Gaza Flotilla" of 2010. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (who was prime minister at the time of the Gaza flotilla) had demanded an Israeli apology for the deaths of Turkish citizens on one of the flotilla ships, financial compensation, and the lifting of the Israel's naval blockade on Gaza. The first two were agreed to by Israel years ago. The resolution -- or non-resolution -- of the third is a window into what is really going on, which is both more, and less, than the news reports.
Critics of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu naturally blame Israel for delaying the restoration of political and presumably military ties, but, in fact, Israeli policy (assisted by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden) produced perhaps the best possible outcome.
Israel has had some success working with Sunni governments in the region -- including Saudi Arabia -- on the basis of shared opposition to ISIS and to Iranian plans for regional hegemony. Both are better done with Turkey than without. And Israel's political and military interlocutors, Russia and Egypt, needed some assurance that would ameliorate their displeasure with Turkish-Israeli reconciliation.
For Russia, there was a public apology from Erdogan for shooting down a Russian plane over Turkey, which resulted in the death of the pilot -- an act that Russian President Vladimir Putin called "a stab in the back." In an obsequious letter, Erdogan wrote,
"The Turkish side... made a great effort to recover the body of the Russian pilot... The organization of the pre-burial procedures was conducted in accordance with all religious and military procedures... Ankara has treated the family of the dead Russian pilot as if it were a Turkish family... and is ready for any initiatives to relieve the pain and severity of the damage done."
Erdogan called Russia a "friend and strategic partner."
For Egypt, there is assurance that the naval blockade of Gaza, important to Egypt's fight against ISIS and Hamas (the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood), would not be lifted. The 2010 flotilla was organized by the Hamas-related IHH "charitable group" and supported by the Erdogan government. A CIA report had linked the organization with "Iran and Algerian groups," and the IHH office in Bosnia "has been linked to Iranian operatives." As the flotilla neared the waters off Gaza, Israel broadcast orders for the ships to land in the Israeli port of Ashdod where the "humanitarian aid" for Gaza would be offloaded. Six of the seven ships did so; the Mavi Marmara did not and was boarded by Israeli commandos. In the ensuing melee, nine Turks were killed and ten Israeli commandos wounded.
The UN Secretary General's Report on the Gaza Flotilla, while criticizing the IDF for "excessive" force, nevertheless found that IDF troops faced an "organized and violent" assault from a group on the ship. It concluded that Israel was within its rights to use force and found the blockade of Gaza to be legal. Israel, therefore and in consideration of its relations with Egypt, steadfastly declined to lift the blockade.
Israel's determination resulted in Turkey agreeing to Israel's original condition to the flotilla ships: aid bound for Gaza will offload in Ashdod. As Al Jazeera reported:
"One of the interesting things that we've come to find out recently is that the material Turkey will be sending to Gaza will first land in the Israeli port of Ashdod. Obviously the third condition has not been met because if this deal stipulates that Turkey must send in materials to Ashdod, it means that the siege is still in place. Anything that is reaching Gaza must still get there via the Israeli port, meaning it requires Israel's approval."
That should mollify Egypt.
Israel had also wanted to oust Hamas from Turkey -- something that may not have been accomplished -- but Israel and Turkey will have diplomatic avenues for Israel to try to influence Turkey's support of Hamas. At the same time, Turkey, by agreeing to a number of humanitarian projects in Gaza -- through Ashdod -- will increase its leverage over Hamas in ways that might benefit Israel.
Israel had wanted to oust Hamas from Turkey -- something that may not have been accomplished in this week's deal. Pictured above: Turkish President (then Prime Minister) Recep Tayyip Erdogan (right) meeting with Hamas leaders Khaled Mashaal (center) and Ismail Haniyeh on June 18, 2013, in Ankara, Turkey. (Image source: Turkey Prime Minister's Press Office)
And the regional elephant in the room -- Israel's support for Kurdish separatism, in Iraq and Syria if not directly in Turkey -- was not addressed in the new arrangement.
What cannot be judged at this moment is the degree of commitment to the elements of the deal on the Turkish side. Israel has made its apology and agreed to the sum it will pay in damages to Turkish citizens. But Turkey has been moving toward a more stridently Islamist political and ideological posture since Erdogan's first election in 2003, offering encouragement to Islamists and jihadists of various stripes.
It may be that the combination of economic advancement and an easing of regional isolation will modify Turkey's behavior -- and Erdogan's mouth. That remains to be seen. But from Israel's point of view, its basic requirements have been met, no unacceptable conditions have been imposed, and the deal so far can be considered a diplomatic success.
**Shoshana Bryen is Senior Director of the Jewish Policy Center.
© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

A 30-year-old Saudi prince could jump-start the kingdom — or drive it off a cliff
By David Ignatius/The WAshington Post June 28/16
The tensions unsettling the Saudi royal family became clear in September, when Joseph Westphal, the U.S. ambassador to Riyadh, flew to Jiddah to meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, nominally the heir to the throne. But when he arrived, he was told that the deputy crown prince, a brash 30-year-old named Mohammed bin Salman, wanted to see him urgently.
The ambassador was redirected. The United States and the crown prince swallowed the embarrassment.
Palace intrigue is a staple of monarchies, but it is impossible to overstate how out of character such a generational power play was for the desert kingdom. Robert Lacey, in his classic 1981 book, “The Kingdom,” described the tradition of deference that has held the Saudi royal family together through feast and famine: “Deference to elders is one of the Al-Saud’s inviolable ground rules, the best corset they know to discipline the outward thrust of so many assembled appetites.”
Not anymore: Starting in January 2015 with the accession of King Salman, Saudi Arabia has been shaken by the bold reform campaign of his son, known at home and abroad by his initials, MBS. By outmaneuvering and sometimes defying his elders, the young deputy crown prince has turned the politics of this conservative, sometimes sclerotic monarchy upside down.
MBS is the kind of prince that Machiavelli might conjure. He’s a big, fast-talking young man who dominates a room with the raw, instinctive energy of a natural leader. But his hardball tactics have offended some Saudis — especially his rebuffs of Mohammed bin Nayef, his elder at 56 and his nominal superior. In addition to detouring the U.S. ambassador, MBS is said to have engineered the firing of the crown prince’s closest aide in September.
New heirs to the Saudi throne
Prince Salman became king on Jan. 22 and has moved the succession to the next generation.
Saudi internal politics are famously difficult for outsiders to understand, but it’s important now to make the effort. The Middle East is at a dangerous inflection point, with sectarian war and terrorism ripping countries at their seams. A stronger Saudi Arabia could make a big difference; a weaker one could add to the chaos. The following account is based on dozens of conversations over the past year with Saudi princes and ministers who support MBS, Saudi princes and advisers who are skeptical about MBS, and top U.S., European and Arab diplomats and intelligence experts. I’ve interviewed multiple sources for each strand of the narrative.
If “Game of Thrones” were set in the Arabian desert, it might have a plot like what has developed in Saudi Arabia over the past 18 months. Anonymous letters have circulated; whispering campaigns have swirled around the deputy crown prince and his rivals. President Obama has advised his aides to avoid any appearance of taking sides. But the president’s White House meeting on June 17 with MBS, which treated him almost like a head of state, may have cast an implicit vote of support for the reformer’s agenda.
It’s hard not to root for a young leader who seeks to transform a country whose conservatism and religious fundamentalism have been obstacles to change in the Muslim world for generations. A half-dozen prominent Saudi-watchers who have met MBS told me they think he has the potential to rebuild Saudi Arabia into a more dynamic country that’s much more able to protect its security and that of its neighbors. But many worry that he’s also capable of driving his country off a cliff with his headstrong, sometimes reckless behavior.
The stakes for the United States are enormous. For more than 50 years, the oil kingdom has been a key strategic ally, but also a continuing cause of concern. Saudi vulnerability to internal and external attack pushed huge U.S. defense spending in the Persian Gulf and fueled two Gulf wars. Saudi oil was a blessing, but sometimes, as in the 1973 oil embargo, a weapon against the United States. The kingdom was a partner against terrorism, but its “Salafist” brand of Islam inspired many of the extremists. Americans haven’t forgotten that Osama bin Laden was a Saudi and that 15 of the 19 men who carried out the 9/11 attacks were as well.
A reformer who could set Saudi Arabia on a more modern and stable path could be a game-changer for the United States and the Arabs. By appealing to disaffected Arab young people, a Saudi reformer could encourage a renaissance in a Sunni Arab world that has been shattered by civil war, terrorism and sectarian hatred. That’s the promise of MBS. The danger is that his impulsive “Prince Hal” behavior could cause Saudi Arabia to implode and make all these problems worse.
For a kingdom that has survived by hedging its bets and resisting change, MBS proposes a series of sweeping reforms. Saudi Aramco and other big, state-owned enterprises would be privatized; cinemas, museums and a “media city” would be created for a young population starving for entertainment; the power of the religious police would be curtailed; and, at some point, women would be allowed to drive.
A simple way to explain MBS’s goal is that he would like to make an inward-looking, hyper-cautious Saudi Arabia look more like the neighboring United Arab Emirates, with its dizzying skyscrapers and freewheeling market economy. MBS seems to recognize that this economic transformation won’t be possible without easing Saudi Arabia’s strict Islamic traditions. His reform blueprint, “Vision 2030,” offers a tantalizing but unspecific commitment: “Our vision is a tolerant country with Islam as its constitution and moderation as its method.”
A handout picture provided by the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) on June 7, 2016, shows Saudi Crown Prince and Minister of Interior, Prince Mohammed bin Nayef (L), and deputy crown prince and Minister of Defence, Prince Mohammed bin Salman, attending a cabinet meeting in coastal city of Jeddah. (AFP Photo/HO/SPA) (Ho/AFP/Getty Images)
But can the impulsive young prince pull it off? As deputy crown prince, he’s technically the country’s No. 3 official. He’s able to act in the name of his father, King Salman, who’s 80 and reportedly suffers from mild dementia. But the designated heir is Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, who is also interior minister and controls the Saudi internal security force (and is Salman’s nephew). Some senior princes who are uneasy about MBS’s tactics are said to have quietly rallied behind the crown prince.
Many Saudi-watchers fear that the country is nearing an open power struggle between MBS and Mohammed bin Nayef. That puts the United States in an awkward spot, as it wants to maintain good relations with both. MBS wins points as a reformer. Mohammed bin Nayef has been the United States’ most reliable counterterrorism partner for more than a decade, has survived an al-Qaeda assassination attempt and is seen by many U.S. officials as a friend and key ally. U.S. officials don’t want to choose between the two.
I first visited Saudi Arabia in January 1981. The kingdom was still traumatized by a near-revolution that had taken place 14 months before, when followers of a radical cleric named Juhayman al-Otaybi seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca for two weeks. The Saudis had put on a show of strength with a conference for Muslims in Taif, near Mecca, but their anxiety was palpable. So was the rot in the Saudi system. I wrote a series of articles for the Wall Street Journal later that year about the pervasive corruption inside the kingdom.
The inner reserve that kept Saudi Arabia together, despite its internal and external problems, was symbolized by Prince Saud al-Faisal, who served 40 years as foreign minister. I interviewed him many times over those decades and found him to be a man who would bend, but not break, when facing change.
Saud made a prophetic comment in our last conversation, in November 2011. We were talking about the unruly revolution known as the Arab Spring sweeping the region. Most Saudi officials were terrified of this revolt, but Saud was calm, even hopeful. “It is a great transformation in the Arab world,” he said. “You can never avoid what the people want, no matter what government you have. . . . We are developing. Maybe not as quick as a revolution, but we are developing in a way that’s stable.”
The courtly Saud couldn’t have imagined the whirlwind now swirling through the royal family. It was symbolic, perhaps, that a memorial gathering in Riyadh some weeks ago to honor Saud’s legacy had to accommodate the deputy crown prince. MBS reportedly had scheduled a meeting of his economic reform council for the same time as the opening of the memorial. Saud’s close family is said to have rescheduled the opening so that there wouldn’t be a conflict.
The Saudi system was built to contain internal dissent. But it’s now facing the greatest test in the kingdom’s history.
How did this Saudi political battle begin? Analysts say the family tensions were building during the reign of King Abdullah, who took the throne in 2005. Before Abdullah died on Jan. 23, 2015, some of his close advisers hoped the succession might pass to his son Mutaib, who commands the Saudi National Guard. But Salman, who was then crown prince, moved quickly (with his son’s help) to claim the crown and consolidate power.
Less than a week after taking control, Salman issued decrees that altered the balance of power in the kingdom. Two of Abdullah’s sons, Prince Turki and Prince Mishaal, were removed as governors of Riyadh and Mecca, respectively. Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the wily former ambassador to Washington who was sometimes dubbed “Bandar Bush” because of his closeness to the two Bush presidents, was ousted as national security adviser.
Salman’s lightning decrees installed Mohammed bin Nayef as deputy crown prince behind then-Crown Prince Muqrin. Perhaps more important, his son was named defense minister and chairman of a new Council for Economic and Development Affairs. MBS had his hands on both the military and economic levers of power.
“All this was planned like clockwork,” says one Saudi who watched the maneuvers from Riyadh. “It was a bloodless coup.” Within a week, two very un-Saudi things had happened: The next generation had been put in the line of succession. And the new king and his son had signaled that they were breaking with the traditional consensual politics of the al-Saud family.
MBS is something unusual in modern Saudi Arabia — a throwback to the old, rough-and-tumble politics of the desert.
Most senior princes have been educated in the West and speak fluent English. Saud al-Faisal, the longtime foreign minister who died last year, went to Princeton, and his brother Turki, the former intelligence chief, is a Georgetown graduate. MBS’s older half-brothers, Sultan and Faisal, studied at the University of Denver and Oxford, respectively. These Saudis might wear Bedouin robes, but their hearts often seem to be in the West. Perhaps that’s one reason senior princes have tried so hard to maintain support from the religious elders — to distract the public from how Western the leadership really is.
But MBS was a homegrown scamp. His father, who was known in his youth as the family fixer of the al-Saud clan, is said to see himself in this son of his third wife. Young MBS was “rapacious” in his youth, according to one close observer; Saudis tell stories about his aggressive financial deals and his passion for huge mega-yachts, where he could entertain friends. He didn’t go abroad for college, and though he understands English, he prefers to speak Arabic.
MBS had a mentor in Sheik Mohammed bin Zayed, the military leader of the UAE; he saw the young prince an energetic change agent in a country that needed dynamism. Emirati skepticism toward the Saudi old guard was captured in an October 2009 cable from Richard Olson, then U.S. ambassador to the UAE, that was disclosed by WikiLeaks: “The leadership in Abu Dhabi never misses an opportunity to let visiting senior USG officials know that they regard the Kingdom as run by cantankerous old men surrounded by advisers who believe the earth is flat.”
MBS promised something different. Sheik Mohammed’s mentoring role may also have reflected long-standing tensions with Mohammed bin Nayef and his father, who had also been interior minister. The UAE leader told a visiting American official in January 2003 that “Interior Minister Nayef’s bumbling manner suggested that ‘Darwin was right,’ ” according to another WikiLeaks cable. Nayef’s family took that as likening him to a monkey.
UAE officials encouraged MBS’s ideas about reform — and suggested some prominent consultants, such as McKinsey & Co. and Boston Consulting Group, that had provided advice for the UAE. The consultants were soon at work drafting what became ambitious proposals for reform of every Saudi ministry.
As defense minister, MBS quickly broke from Saudi Arabia’s traditional wariness of military conflict and reliance on U.S. power. Convinced that Iranian meddling in Yemen threatened the kingdom, MBS went on the offensive — and in March 2015, Saudi planes began bombing the Iran-backed Houthi rebels. The UAE helped plan the assault and sent troops and planes.
From the beginning, U.S. officials were skeptical about the Yemen war. So was Mohammed bin Nayef, who is said to have worried that the campaign might strengthen al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. But the campaign rolled forward. The defense minister also talked about sending Saudi troops to Syria, and scenario planning for such an intervention began. But the idea was quickly dropped.
MBS took a decisive step up the ladder in April 2015. A royal decree dumped Muqrin as crown prince; Mohammed bin Nayef moved up to the No. 2 spot, and MBS was installed as No. 3. This change in the official succession plan upset some members of the royal family. Although Muqrin was widely seen as an unsuitable potential king, Saudis worried about the precedent, and the possibility the succession plan might be rejiggered again to install MBS.
The changes were ratified by the Allegiance Council, a sort of House of Saud family board of directors. According to a senior Saudi official who backs MBS, the young prince got more votes from the council than did either Muqrin or Mohammed bin Nayef when their posts were ratified. But some U.S. analysts worry about attempts to steer the voting.
Whatever the vote totals, recent events suggest that the consensual family decision-making that the Allegiance Council was meant to foster is now largely broken. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Royal-family consensus often produced paralysis in the kingdom. But restless, unhappy senior princes could make trouble for MBS.
MBS has been willing to experiment, even in his dealings with Russia. When MBS visited Washington in May 2015, he told a senior U.S. official that he was suspicious of President Vladimir Putin’s machinations. But he had a chummy meeting with Putin when he visited St. Petersburg the next month. And Russia brokered a visit to Riyadh in late July by the Syrian intelligence chief, Ali Mamlouk, where MBS is said to have explored formulas for ending the Syrian civil war. Nothing resulted from the meeting.
The squeeze on Mohammed bin Nayef’s authority increased through last year, in various ways. The crown prince didn’t have his own “diwan,” the traditional gathering place where senior princes dispense favors and patronage. Instead, he shared one with the king, which meant that it was effectively controlled by MBS.
A decisive blow came in early September when Salman, at his son’s urging, fired Saad al-Jabri, who for years had been Mohammed bin Nayef’s closest adviser. A U.S. source explains what happened: Jabri was coming to the United States on a personal visit, and he decided to see his old friend John Brennan, the CIA director. He didn’t report this meeting to Salman, and when the king learned what had happened, Jabri was removed. One Arab source claims there was also documentary evidence that Jabri had secretly supported the Muslim Brotherhood, but U.S. officials dismiss that allegation as implausible.
The crown prince’s position was publicly undermined by the firing of his confidant, and friends describe him as withdrawn and somewhat passive last fall. He was also suffering from what officials vaguely describe as “health problems.” The crown prince spent six weeks in December and early January resting and recuperating in Algeria.
But Mohammed bin Nayef returned from his Algeria trip with what friends say was renewed commitment. He had worried for months that in the Yemen war, a Saudi proxy force called the al-Islah Party was, in effect, fighting alongside al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. In March, he pressed that argument harder, and it prevailed; the Saudis are said to have adjusted their strategy in Yemen to target the al-Qaeda and Islamic State extremists more effectively.
MBS’s adventure in Yemen seems to be winding down. In April, the Saudis opened negotiations with the Houthis in Kuwait. The United States has sponsored additional back-channel contacts. U.S., Saudi and European officials say that a negotiated truce is likely — not the glorious victory that MBS might have wanted, but a settlement that will stanch the bleeding in Yemen. The MBS camp boasts that the war showed that Iran is a “paper tiger.”
Can the fragile balance last, with the crown prince and deputy coexisting under an elderly, ailing king? If Salman should leave the scene, would the crown prince succeed him, as the current succession plan provides? Or would MBS try to jump the queue, with acquiescence from a pliant Allegiance Council?
Saudis don’t know the answer. In January, the rumor mill was buzzing with talk that King Salman might abdicate soon, in favor of his son. U.S. officials scrambled to assess the situation. Salman is said to have signaled that no changes in the succession plan were imminent, easing U.S. worries. Now, the rumors have started again. Last week, one Saudi in Riyadh summed things up this way: “There is high tension, and nerves are on edge.”
To appreciate the reformers’ challenge, it helps to have a clear mental picture of Saudi Arabia. This isn’t a tiny emirate like Kuwait, Bahrain or the UAE. It’s a vast sandy expanse, three times the size of Texas. Saudi citizens number more than 20 million, just a few million less than Australia. Nearly half the population is younger than 25. The CIA World Factbook estimates that unemployment among males is at more than 11 percent, while overall unemployment may be as high as 25 percent. It’s a big country, with complicated problems.
Visitors to the kingdom are often struck by the weird combination of modern and pre-modern. Riyadh is a huge city, snarled by traffic, with oversize villas for wealthy Saudis and their families. But it’s bereft of the glitz of a modern metropolis; you can’t find cinemas, nightclubs or art museums. Much of the work in Saudi businesses seems to be done by expatriates from South Asia. Among Saudis, especially the men, there’s a sense of torpor — too much time and too little to do, except eat. Saudi women are dynamic, and increasingly well educated, thanks to the late King Abdullah. But they’re largely invisible in public life.
This is the obstructed society that MBS and his advisers propose to liberate. Their reform ideas begin with the belief that unless the Saudi economy diversifies outside of the oil sector, it can’t possibly create enough jobs to satisfy its restless youth. The economy won’t boom in a country that’s constricted by reactionary clerics, so MBS and his advisers have decided they must take on the religious leadership, too.
The reform agenda is startling. The “Vision 2030” document is a slick brochure that illustrates a Saudi future that will be “vibrant,” “thriving” and “ambitious.” Details come in the 111-page “National Transformation Program” issued this month. It lists specific goals and initiatives to be achieved by 2020 in each of the kingdom’s 24 non-defense ministries and agencies.
For Saudi bureaucrats who are used to a featherbedded existence and who often assign the hard work to expats, recent months have been frantic. One minister told me that MBS drives his ministers and advisers — pushing them to work through the night to complete their agendas.
The Transformation Plan is chock full of the metrics beloved by the management consultants hired by MBS. There are 178 strategic objectives; progress will be measured by 371 “key performance indicators.” The ministries will embark on 543 new initiatives.
The metrics are highly specific: Non-oil revenue will more than triple by 2020. Water and electricity subsidies will be slashed by more than $50 billion. The percentage of Saudis with digital health records will rise from zero to 70 percent. The number of cultural events in the kingdom will rise to 400 annually from 190. The numbers describe a different country.
The biggest piece of MBS’s reform program may be his plan for partial privatization of Saudi Aramco. Supervising this transformation is Energy Minister Khalid al-Falih, a U.S.-educated technocrat who spent 30 years with Aramco and appreciates how the company created the modern Saudi Arabia. The oil giant built the first modern roads, schools, airports, television stations and even magazines. In modernizing Aramco, the kingdom is doing the equivalent of heart bypass surgery.
The world had never seen a privatization of this size: The Saudis reckon that Saudi Aramco’s valuation is between $2 trillion and $3 trillion. MBS and his advisers want to float less than 5 percent of the company to private investors, but even this tiny share could be worth more than $100 billion — which would make it far larger than any previous initial public offering.
Privatization would shake up Saudi Aramco and the welfare-state mentality spawned by the oil boom. “Our business sector has become very lazy,” says a top Saudi source. The deputy crown prince “wants the welfare society’s destruction. He wants Saudi citizens to become more self-reliant. He wants people to be less dependent on the government.”
But what about corruption? In Russia, privatizations created a class of oligarchs who have strangled the economy. Saudi officials say they will be vigilant in preventing a similar corrupting process in the kingdom. But skeptics question whether Saudi Arabia has the legal institutions and transparency to maintain rule of law. U.S. officials say that MBS himself has engaged in some questionable, non-transparent business practices.
MBS has been barnstorming in Washington, California and New York this month to promote the program. He told Silicon Valley entrepreneurs on June 22 that in pushing for change, Saudi Arabia has the benefit of authoritarian rule. “There is an advantage to quickness of decision-making, the kind of fast change that an absolute monarch can do in one step that would take a traditional democracy 10 steps,” he said, according to notes taken by one participant.
The biggest question mark is whether MBS can alter the alliance between the House of Saud and the conservative religious establishment. This pact created the Saudi state but has also enfeebled it. He has already made some moves, including a royal decree in April that blocked the power of the religious police, known as the mutaween, to arrest people.
Opinions newsletter
Thought-provoking opinions and commentary, in your inbox daily.
MBS’s advisers promise more such reforms, including more entertainment sites in the kingdom, museums that display Western art, more mixing of sexes in public places and, “very soon,” the opportunity for women to drive. But MBS also seems wary. He doesn’t want to give religious extremists an easy target by moving too quickly. He tells advisers that resistance from the religious leadership can be overcome, “but it takes courage.”Saudi Arabia will never be the pleasure dome of Dubai, let alone Paris or New York. The simple geographical fact that the kingdom hosts the two holy mosques in Mecca and Medina puts a limit on how much it can emulate the UAE. But MBS seems willing to test the limits. A prominent Arab official sums up the Saudi challenge this way: “Saudi Arabia has been accused of being too old, too slow and too backward. Finally, we have someone who’s moving forward and changing the country. We need to give him some room to operate.” The Obama administration, while careful not to take sides in the palace intrigue, seems to agree that the MBS reform agenda offers a chance for the breakthrough that Saudi Arabia needs. But U.S. officials hope that the impulsive and sometimes arrogant young prince doesn’t run so fast that he falls over — and takes the kingdom’s political stability down with him.

Who’s behind Istanbul airport attack?
Metin Gurcan/Al-Monitor/June 29/16
Over the past 12 months, 298 people have been killed and about 1,000 wounded in 17 terror attacks in Turkey. The attack at Istanbul's Ataturk Airport on the evening of June 28 was the sixth major terror attack in 2016
What made this attack different from the others was its location. This is the third airport attack in Turkey’s long history of combating terror. In 1982, the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia attacked Ankara Esenboga Airport and killed nine people, and the Kurdistan Freedom Falcons, which is affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), fired mortars at Sabiha Gokcen Airport in Istanbul in December 2015.
Last night's attack was the bloodiest and Turkey's first suicide attack at an airport.
In 2015, Ataturk Airport handled 62 million passengers. Its security measures make it one of the best-guarded airports in the world. However, the security perimeter, which had been recently expanded, created a severe breach in security, worsened by round-the-clock heavy traffic close to the arrival and departure terminals.
According to official reports, around 8:45 p.m. local time, three terrorists came to the airport in two taxis and easily reached the entrance of the international terminal. However, Al-Monitor spoke with security sources who claimed on condition of anonymity that seven people had been involved. Roughly 10 minutes after their arrival, they split into two groups and moved toward the security checkpoint at the terminal entrance. One of the attackers shouted in Turkish, “There is a bomb. It is going to explode," triggering panic among the large crowd waiting for the security checks. Then the attackers started firing randomly with their automatic rifles. The police responded. One of the attackers was wounded and blew himself up at the entrance of the terminal. Another did the same at the entrance to the parking lot across from the terminal. In the clashes and explosions that lasted about three minutes, 41 people were killed, 18 of them foreigners, most of them Saudis, Iranians and Ukranians. A total of 239 people were wounded. Although investigations are ongoing, officials including Prime Minister Binali Yildirim have pointed to the Islamic State as the perpetrator.
A pattern is emerging in the terror attacks executed by the PKK and IS. The Jan. 12 attacks in the Sultanahmet district and in Taksim Square on March 19, both targeting popular tourist areas in Istanbul, suggest that IS prefers high-profile attacks that will attract international attention by directly targeting foreign civilians, while the PKK and its proxies are more interested in influencing the Turkish public’s perceptions by attacking military-security targets. Another important distinction has been the PKK’s use of female militants.
Recently, the PKK and its proxies have refrained from using car bombs in the clashes with security forces. In addition, following a PKK attack, those responsible usually reveal their identity within 24 hours, whereas IS takes much longer to claim responsibility for an attack and give details of the operation, suggesting that last night's attack was an IS operation.
Who were the perpetrators of the latest attack in Istanbul that coincided with the second anniversary of the declaration of the IS Caliphate on June 28, 2014? Two options are plausible. One is that the attackers were members of a special team sent directly from Raqqa in Syria. The other option is that the attackers were part of a semi-autonomous Turkish network linked to IS. Security sources told Al-Monitor that at least two of the attackers were of Central Asian origin, most likely from Uzbekistan. This group's motive could have been to intimidate Ankara because of its Syrian policy choices and sharp U-turns in relations with Russia and Israel, sending Ankara the message: "Watch out. If you push us, you will pay a high price."Over the past year, IS has carried out about 10 terror attacks in Turkey, and its first attacks against civilians — instead of specific opposition groups — took place in Suruc on July 20, 2015, and more than 100 people died in Ankara on Oct. 10, 2015. There seems to have been a major change in IS' strategy against Turkey. It seems most likely that IS, which is under increasing pressure in Syria and Iraq, will shift its focus and actions to Turkey. When an attack is carried out by semi-autonomous networks that are not fully under the hierarchical command-control chain of IS, the decisions on the location, type and timing of the attack are delegated to the local network. This decentralization makes detection and prevention much more difficult for security forces.
Turkish security and intelligence bodies striving to cope with these serious developments will also be subject to public criticism, which may trigger even harsher countermeasures.

Pursuing ISIS and appeasing intellect
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/June 29/16
“What do you expect from your children? To become pianists?!” This is how one Twitter user commented on Saudi condemnation of twin brothers murdering their parents because they considered them infidels. The murder shocked a society that sanctifies family ties and puts parents before anyone else. What happened to our children? Everyone is asking this since attacks on relatives in the name of religion have increased. All these crimes are linked to the ideology of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which is communicated via the internet. Society was greatly shocked, but in the past it used to consider such incidents an exception, or describe the criminal children as mentally unstable. Official statements settled with describing them as “astray.”
Infiltration
Shocking incidents continued to occur until we realized that those promoting ISIS’s ideology, and before it al-Qaeda’s, succeeded in infiltrating difficult social circles, such as women’s societies in Saudi Arabia. Many families were shocked when their daughters or wives fled to Yemen or Syria. Many women were caught at airports trying to flee. Saudi courts tried women who were arrested for involvement in terror acts – some succeeded in traveling and accompanying fighters in Iraq and Syria. Marketing moderate Islam is more important than pursuing ISIS supporters who find fertile soil in closed societies
ISIS’s ideology found its way into a closed society, and called on sons to kill their parents because they were not performing their religious duties right. It called on military men to rebel against their leaders by convincing them that the government is infidel. Even the mufti, the country’s top cleric, was listed as a target. How did they succeed in making a young man think of killing his parents for religious reasons, or convince a woman who thinks driving and leaving the house is prohibited to fight in Syria? This is a natural result of extremist intellect that works in the shadows. Society has been discussing extremism for 20 years now, and demanded fighting it for years, but why has it failed? We must differentiate between two activities: fighting extremist intellect linked to terrorism (which has greatly succeeded), and fighting extremist intellect in general (which has greatly failed).
Crackdown
There are no more calls for jihad in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Chechnya and elsewhere due to security crackdowns. The collection of funds to support extremist organizations or groups embracing them has stopped, as have donations to these groups due to strict official supervision.This is why a Saudi extremist tweeted: “I hope our clerics open bank accounts in Kuwait and inform people of the accounts’ information [so they can transfer money] since Kuwait is better than the country of the two holy mosques or the kingdom of humanity!”His comment shows how extremists are angry due to the siege imposed on their practices, which are crimes punishable by law in Saudi Arabia. Kuwait, however, was late in pursuing suspicious donations, and is still delinquent in fighting extremist groups that collect funds and call for jihad. Three categories are being pursued, and not just in Saudi Arabia: instigators, donors and volunteers to fight. This pursuit has greatly succeeded after amending systems, criminalizing such acts and establishing specialized courts to try and punish those violating these new laws. News of these trials is reported almost every day. What remains is general extremist intellect, which says nothing about jihad and donations but speaks of sanctifying preachers, makes people hate life, makes Muslims feel disobedient and guilty, attempts to incite them against each other, and makes hating others a condition of faith.
Solution
It is impossible to issue laws and punishments against bad morals. However, it is possible to support a project that is an alternative to extremism, such as enlightening, moderate and tolerant Islam, so it becomes the only one followed and taught in the state and society. Without restoring the hijacked religion of Islam, it will be easy for ISIS to recruit children and old men as long as their ideologies have been based on extremist thoughts. Marketing moderate Islam is more important than pursuing ISIS supporters who find fertile soil in closed societies. They have managed to brainwash children and turn them against their parents, and to brainwash employees against their own state. The only cure is to adopt moderation, without which there will come a time when prisons will not be able to accommodate all murderers and extremists, and when penalties will not deter them or protect their families, societies, country and the world from their evil acts. This article was first published in Asharq al-Awsat on June 29, 2016.

Britain, EU divorce affects us too
Diana Moukalled/Al Arabiya/June 29/16
During the first hours of the British referendum on whether to remain in the EU, Google’s Britain page said on Twitter that “what is the EU?” was the second most asked question on the search engine. This little detail exposes the shock of a category of British voters regarding what they have done. British media outlets showed people celebrating the result of the vote, and some people said they voted to leave the EU to stop a refugee influx, particularly from the Middle East. However, we have also seen some shocked people who said the economic and political repercussions following the referendum made them wish they had voted differently.
Arab reaction
It seems both camps have failed to estimate the repercussions of the referendum on the future of the entire world, not just that of Britain. Fear and shock are not limited to Western countries. Arabs have taken to social media to comment on what had happened, with many voicing jealousy of Britons’ ability to vote and decide their fate. On the other hand, many - especially those who want to escape their complicated reality at home and flee to Europe - are afraid of the unknown. What is interesting regarding Arab reaction to British developments is how many have criticized the extent of local preoccupation with what is happening in the UK. This shows dereliction when estimating the size of what happened and how it directly affects us. Britain’s decision is linked to us because leaving the EU is implicitly a decision to be away from us. The interaction and preoccupation with what has happened in Britain may be an indicator to understand the effects of such affairs on our causes, and their effects on Muslims and Arabs in the West. Britain’s decision is linked to us because leaving the EU is implicitly a decision to be away from us. The enthusiasm to leave surfaced when European right-wing leaders began to voice their ambitions. Right-wing movements across Europe agree on several issues, particularly relating to immigration. Before the British referendum, we witnessed German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s policy welcoming refugees. French President Francois Hollande was one of the most enthusiastic leaders regarding Europe’s involvement in the reform process in the Middle East by helping the Syrian people topple President Bashar al-Assad. Today, Britons voted against this approach. Their decision to vote “no” is something we contributed to due to our inability to meet Europe’s openness to our causes, and to come closer to its sensitivity regarding a number of problems, primarily terrorism. We have witnessed such mad voting on several occasions, and not just during elections. Tunisia, for example, elected Ennahda Party, and Egypt elected the Muslim Brotherhood. We have often been dragged behind losing causes, motivated by negative emotional campaigns that are based on fear and fanaticism. The discussions on social networking sites will not necessarily teach lessons about what happened in Britain, but we will keep hoping that they will, especially when addressing the negativity that fear and hatred can produce if they are put to a fateful vote.
This article was first published in Asharq al-Awsat on Jun. 27, 2016

Will Libya survive as a state?
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/June 29/16
The way things are looking at the moment, the chances of Libya surviving as a unified state, even nominally, are very slim indeed. Even as the BBC is reporting on the offensive by Libyan forces against the ISIS stronghold in Sirte, the defining conflict in the country is not the one against the foreign group.
Rather, the main conflict in the country is between two competing governments. One, the so-called Government of National Accord in Tripoli is sustained with the help of Libya Dawn, an Islamist group formed out of the uprising against Gaddafi and which includes former al-Qaeda members. This is the government backed the West, and the state authority nominally recognized by the UN. The other, is based in the eastern town of Tobruk, where the democratically elected House of Representatives has resettled after they were pushed out of Tripoli by fighting between militias. They have become allies of the rebel General Haftar and his armed forces, successors to the Libyan army. General Haftar controls most of the country’s oil resources and has far superior military power. He is also backed by Russia, who helped them establish a Central Bank to rival that in Tripoli, as he busily goes about building a parallel state in the East.
In this way, Libya has become a proxy battle ground in Putin’s new Cold War in a way that is much more dangerous than even Syria. In Syria, the Obama administration and their Western allies have been sufficiently hands-off to allow Putin to intervene directly with relatively little concern over direct confrontation between Russian and Western forces. The West backed non-ISIS rebel groups, but did not send fighting forces on the ground. And the air-strikes have been targeted exclusively in ISIS-held territory. The way to minimize casualties now may well be to abandon the idea of a unified Libya altogether, and to work as quickly as possible towards a formalized division. By contrast, in Libya Western special forces are already on the ground working with the Government of National Accord against ISIS, and there are further plans for a few thousand regular troops from EU countries to be deployed in that fight. Any direct involvement by Russia may well result in the deaths of NATO personnel, which would be the largest international incident since the end of the old Cold War. On the assumption that not even Putin is crazy enough to risk that scenario – and the way in which Putin managed to keep a lid on the situation in Syria when Turkey shot down one of their fighter planes suggests very strongly that he is not – the most likely scenario for Libya is that after ISIS is dealt with the major background conflict will likely stall, and we will end up with the sort of awkward frozen conflict that we have in eastern Ukraine.
The West is unlikely to push too strongly for the re-unification of the country if it means running into Putin, and neither would Putin press too hard for his side to take over. Indeed, the evidence is that Putin is more than happy to just leave situations like this unresolved and a constant thorn in the side of the West.
The best case scenario . In the best case scenario, the two sides in the conflict would find a way to negotiate a formal division of the country between them, if they managed to keep their respective backers out of the loop for long enough so that they do not intervene to scupper such a deal. What is more likely is that we will have a fragile and tense separation that will deepen over years and decades with occasional bloodshed, like we have had in Korea. The way to minimize casualties now may well be to abandon the idea of a unified Libya altogether, and to work as quickly as possible towards a formalized division.

Brexit, a European Spring
Turki Aldakhil/Al Arabiya/June 29/16
The world was surprised by Britain’s decision to leave the EU. Analysts say repercussions are not limited to the regression of Western influence, but also the possible disintegration of the EU and the collapse of Britain’s global role. This comes as right-wing movements expand and head toward isolation rather than openness. After exiting the EU, Brits will need a visa to enter the union’s 27 countries. British families will spend more when vacationing there, due to sterling’s decreased value and EU deals allowing European airliners to work in European airspace without restraint. Leaving the EU will cause huge problems for the 1.3 million Brits living in different parts of Europe, such as Spain (319,000), Ireland (249,000), France (171,000) and Germany (100,000).Retired Brits could see their funds melt away due to sterling’s deterioration. Other problems will arise, such as border issues with Spain.Britain’s exit will also worsen problems over health insurance. These repercussions will all surface in the near future. Some say leaving the EU will benefit British society long-term, but youths are angry at the referendum result. Britain’s exit is the first nail in the coffin of the EU and the euro. It marks the beginning of a European Spring
Democracy
The lesson learnt in the Arab world from these developments is that democracy in a country such as Britain did not just emerge, and was not suddenly devised. Britain has known for centuries how to establish political theories. Whatever the result of elections or a referendum, a mature democratic process is based on a deep structure that cannot be shaken. Following the referendum, Prime Minister David Cameron said: “The British people have voted to leave the EU, and their will must be respected.” He added that the losing side, of which he is a part, must help make the decision succeed. Britain’s exit is the first nail in the coffin of the EU and the euro. It marks the beginning of a European Spring. In democracies, there is no right or wrong, only possibilities and transformations. There are voices that favor one program over another. This is what happened in Britain. There are demands for referendums on several matters. Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, who is fond of history, expects the end of Europe as we have known it since the end of World War II, and expects the continent to draw itself a different model. Perhaps the coming days will clarify the results of this change. Retreat may be the world’s slogan in the coming decades. Brexit shows that isolation is desired regardless of its cost. History has shown that what is happening in Europe is an indicator of permanent transformation that is linked to how the world is viewed and how it changes, especially during brutal crises. It is the beginning of a new era. This article was first published in Al Bayan on June 29, 2016.

Radicalization and the Grain of Sand
by Alexander H. Joffe/The Daily Caller/June 29/16
http://www.meforum.org/6093/radicalization-grain-of-sand
The story of Orlando shooter Omar Mateen, like those of countless other "homegrown" terrorists, is now familiar to the point of cliché. The parents immigrate to the West filled with hope, but their children fail to thrive. They may be successful in some things and fit in with others of their generation, but only superficially.
Sometimes they are soccer-playing, rap-aspiring, beer-drinking lads from the neighborhood, whose failures often lead first to car theft and drug dealing. Other times they are outwardly successful, but the contradictions between the terms of that success and an inner reality or aspiration become too much to bear.
Within them is a grain of sand that irritates, which forces them to seek out that which they believe is missing in themselves. It is a means of overcoming individualism, the self, and becoming part of something much larger. It is a path to meaning.
Passions begin to burn over causes, indignities, injustices; the world does not work the way is it supposed to. Visions of perfection begin to loom but the means of realization require commitment to secrecy, lies, and double lives, to violence and inflicting pain. A sense of authenticity and being whole grows until, in a flash, rage explodes outward.
The stories of most 'homegrown' Muslim terrorists are all too familiar.
The base instincts of their insecurities, misogyny, homophobia, and anti-Semitism are given useful scriptural context and legitimation by local mosque sermons. The videos they view online extol jihad with heroic visions of Muslim warriors past and present.
Sometimes outward behavior changes in ways obvious to co-workers, such as the adoption of Islamic dress, strange statements about Islamic supremacism, and complaints about Western "decadence." They become indignant when questioned or mocked by friends about their increasing religiosity.
In a search for authenticity, they make all-important visits to Saudi Arabia or the homelands of their parents, places they left as children or knew not at all, in search of answers about themselves, anxious to understand their place. But they find they belong nowhere, except in the world that ISIS claims to be remaking. And they return home with a fire in them, having either enlisted in a larger plot or with their own smoldering inside. Then the countdown begins.
There is nothing quite like this in the non-Muslim world. There have been plenty of self-radicalized Christians and Jews in the past few centuries, but few turned to terrorism and fewer still became terrorists in the name of religion.
Iconic examples of violent Jewish radicals include anarchists Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman, who attempted to murder industrialist Henry Frick, Communists like Leon Trotsky, and later members of the Weather Underground in America.
Differing interpretations of divine will.
But neither the identities nor the causes of these revolutionaries were remotely Jewish. They embraced what they thought to be the inevitable course of history and aspired to awaken the masses to a higher state of being. Jews who became radicalized overwhelming acted in the name of humanity, only rarely for the Jewish people, and almost never for the Jewish God.
The one notable exception to the universalist goals of Jewish revolutionaries is Zionism. But its goals have been more precisely ethnic and national, not religious. Apart from a few marginal groups (e.g. Gush Emunim, an underground cell that sought to blow up the Dome of the Rock decades ago) and "lone wolves" like Yaacov Teitel, Baruch Goldstein, and Yigal Amir, God's will has had little to do with Jewish radicalism.
While Jewish radicals mostly leave Judaism to join universal movements, radical Islamists embrace their religious faith and almost exclusively pursue Muslim goals, both locally (Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, etc.) and globally. No thought is given to bettering humanity, except in the sense of subjugating it to Allah.
Jewish and Christian religious authorities, with only marginal exceptions, find political violence anathema.
Judaism is not very rich source of legitimation for modern violence. Its history of conquest and domination is exclusively local and literary. It lacks Islam's traditions of earthly rewards for conquest and resulting heavenly rewards for heroic martyrdom, and there is no history of individual or mass violence to terrorize conquered populations into submission (even biblical accounts of the conquest of Canaan are sharply debated as to their morality). There is a long messianic tradition, but nothing that seeks to bring the end times through violence that ignites cataclysm.
Jewish (and Christian) religious authorities, with only marginal exceptions, find such violence anathema. Fleetingly few Jewish children are socialized to hate in ways that would spark, much less legitimize, indiscriminate violence, nor are they taught to dream of glorious days past that could again become real through such triumphs of the will.
For Jews and Christians, God's plan for this world is opaque, and the shape of the next is vague. For others, and for Muslims in particular, these plans are imprinted deep into their culture, tiny grains that when compressed too far, ignite into fireballs. Such differences are key to understanding the making of Omar Mateens.
*Alexander H. Joffe, a Shillman-Ginsburg fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a historian and archaeologist.


Mounting Tension Between Egypt, Qatar Following Sentencing Of Former President Muhammad Mursi
MEMRI/June 29/16/ Special Dispatch No.6496
On June 18, 2016, following a trial lasting almost three years,[1] an Egyptian court in Cairo sentenced former Egyptian president Muhammad Mursi to 40 years in prison on several charges, including leaking secret documents and information to Qatar and conspiring to harm Egypt's national interests as part of what has become known as the "spying for Qatar" affair. The court, under Judge Mohamed Shirin Fahmy, sentenced six other defendants to death in the same affair, including two Al-Jazeera journalists.[2]
The sentence sparked furious responses from the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and the countries that sponsor it. The two MB factions in Egypt[3] issued statements condemning it, claiming that the entire affair had been fabricated by the Al-Sisi's security apparatuses in order to take revenge upon Mursi, who is considered an emblem of purity, patriotism and sacrifice for the sake of the homeland.[4]
Turkey, which is considered an ally of the Egyptian MB and shelters many of its members, likewise issued a condemnation, which said: "We voice our deep concern over the sentence... [handed down] to President Mursi, who was elected democratically in Egypt and has been imprisoned since 2013. We condemn this and believe that the decision will not help bring peace and stability to Egypt..."[5]
Qatar, likewise considered to be a sponsor of the MB, responded with anger as well. Its foreign ministry firmly condemned the sentences, calling the charges untrue. Foreign ministry official Ahmad Al-Rumaihi said: "The sentences are hardly surprising, considering the death sentences and life imprisonment sentences that Egyptian courts have handed down in recent years to over 1,000 people, only to revoke them later..." He added that the punishments had been imposed for reasons that had nothing to do with the law and constituted a dangerous precedent in relations among Arab countries. He noted further that Qatar had headed the countries that stood beside the Egyptian people since the January 25, 2011 revolution.[6]
The Qatari response to Mursi's sentence sparked a counter-reaction from Egypt. Responding to Qatar's condemnation, Egyptian foreign ministry spokesman Ahmad Abu Zaid said that the Qatari position was not surprising, considering that Qatar had recruited its media against Egypt's people and institutions. History and the Egyptian people will not forget this injustice, he said.[7]
Egyptian MPs and media figures also slammed the condemnation issued by Qatar's foreign ministry. Talk show host Ahmad Moussa said, "Qatar is not a state, it knows neither law nor justice..."[8] Dr. 'Amr Hashem Rabi', vice president of the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, said that Qatar has played a destructive role in the region since the days of Hosni Mubarak.[9]
Reactions to the sentence appeared also in Egyptian and Qatari press articles, which reflected the dispute and the tension between the two countries over this affair. Egyptian articles condemned what they called Qatar's blunt interference in Egypt's internal affairs. Conversely, editors of Qatari dailies slammed the Al-Sisi administration and the Egyptian court system, questioning their integrity and their motives.
Mursi during the trial (Al-Ahram, Egypt, June 19, 2016)
The following are excerpts from Egyptian articles and from responses by the editors of Qatari dailies.
Egyptian Papers: Qatar Has Become An Enemy State, Must Understand There Will Be No Reconciliation With Traitors
Following the issuance of the sentences, Egyptian papers leveled harsh criticism at Qatar for "interfering" in matters of Egypt's security. The articles ridiculed Qatar and wondered if Egypt would sever its diplomatic ties with it over this affair.
Egyptian Daily Editor: The Sentence Sends A Message To Qatar's Emir – "Stay Away!"
Muhammad Amin, editor of the Egyptian daily Al-Masri Al-Yawm, wrote: "The sentence in the case of the spying [for Qatar] sends a message no only to the MB but also a special message [meant] to reach the Qatari Emir. The message to the MB is that the [Egyptian] state will not stop pursuing the movement and is not interested in holding talks [with it] or reassessing its attitude towards 'the state of the [MB] General Guide.'
"The sentence also sends a loud and clear message to the Qatari Emir, [namely], 'Stay Away!'
"Now that the sentence has been handed down, some major questions linger: Has the little Emir [of Qatar] gotten the message? How did he take it to begin with? What is the meaning of Qatar wanting to hold Egyptian documents relating to [Egypt's] national security?...
"The sentence was handed down by the criminal court on behalf of the [Egyptian] people two years after [Mursi's] gang was banished from power. Before that, the people [itself] handed down their sentence by toppling the General Guide's state in an unprecedented revolution by millions. The current sentence is the answer to the grand lie [recently circulated by the MB] that Mursi would be acquitted and restored to the presidential throne – he is not innocent and will never return!... This is all empty talk; lies spread by the MB mechanisms, including the Qatari Al-Jazeera channel. I believe that the Emir of Qatar got the message and received this sentence [while dressed] in black and as a slap in the face.
"I do not know what the Emir of Qatar was betting on, and I do not know why he contacted President Al-Sisi at every opportunity. Does he hope to ease [the tension with Egypt], like his friend, [Turkish President] Erdogan? Does he wish to set things straight after first sabotaging [the relations]? Is it conceivable that [Egypt's] political leadership should reach out to him after he spied against us and harmed our national security?
"I believe this affair means Qatar has become an 'enemy state' and can no longer be a sister country, [since] siblings to not spy on each other. I am speaking of the rash [Qatari] leadership. This leadership managed to deceive a foolish president [Mursi] in order to receive [from him] documents [pertaining to] national security. He who sells out his homeland sells out his good name and his honor, as Judge [Mohamed] Shirin Fahmy [who sentenced Mursi] said.
"The question now, [after] the crime of espionage has been proven, is will Egypt decide to sever relations with Doha? Will Egypt do this? Will it shout into the ear of the reckless Emir? Or will it back down due to Saudi Arabia and the UAE? Will it make do with the sentence [against Mursi]...? And will the criminal remain in jail for the rest of his life?
"It makes sense for Qatar to say [bad things] about the Egyptian justice system... [But] they will remain empty words, since despite all its efforts, Qatar failed to change Egypt's position in the espionage case. The justice system does not await orders and is not influenced by political instructions. Qatar's empty words are [just] bad propaganda that it has continued to spread since the fall of the [MB] gang...
"The sentence has been determined, and it conveys several messages – local, regional, and international: There is no reassessment of the attitude towards the terrorists and there will never be a reconciliation with traitors!"[10]
Judge Mohamed Shirin Fahmy at the trial (image: Jasarat.org, June 18, 2016)
Egyptian Writer: "Isn't There One Sensible Person Among 300,000 Qataris Who Would Carry Out A Coup Against The Regime?"
Al-Watan columnist Mahmoud Al-Kardousi wrote: "...The sentence of imprisonment handed down to the traitor Muhammad Mursi and his terrorist gang in the espionage case displeased Qatar. By God! Qatar, with its gas, its Al-Jazeera channel, and the American base in its territory is not worth the sash adorning [the breast of] the honorable Judge Mohamed Shirin. It has a 'foreign ministry' that insults Egypt's justice system and condemns the mentioning of its name [in the espionage affair]... By God, Qatar – which, clenched in Al-Sisi's fist would have immediately died and become a corpse – speaks of reasons that do not contribute to the fraternal ties [between the countries]. By God! Isn't there one sensible person among 300,000 Qataris who would carry out a coup against the regime and yell at the eunuchs of its royal palace: stop [interfering in Egypt's affairs]?!..." [11]
Qatari Daily Editors: The Sentence Is A Farce And A Mark Of Shame Upon Egypt's History, Court System
On the Qatari side, editors of government dailies harshly attacked Mursi's sentence and the allegations made against Qatar. They called the affair a blatant lie and a farce, and further proof that the Al-Sisi regime is a dictatorship that oppresses its people and controls its judiciary.
Al-Raya Editor: Tying Qatar To The Affair Is A "Ramadan Lie"; The Coup Regime has Turned Egypt Into A Giant Prison
Saleh Al-Kawari, editor-in-chief of the Qatari daily Al-Raya, wrote: "...Tying Qatar's name to the sentence in this baseless lawsuit is a fabricated allegation and a blatant lie, [coming] during Ramadan, [of all times]. At the very least, this can be called 'the Ramadan lie.' This is because Qatar, at which this lie was directed, is [actually] known for its help and its support for the Egyptian people and for the January 25 revolution from its first day until its victory. [Qatar] is also known [for supporting] the various administrations that came after [the revolution in Egypt], until the revolution was sadly eliminated in a military coup that banished and arrested its leaders and youths despite the will of the people and despite the results of the democratic elections that had led to the first ever elected Egyptian president and regime in [Egypt's] history.
"The sentence handed down yesterday sadly proved that the Egyptian justice system has lost its prestige, relinquished its professional honor and become a mouthpiece for the ruler in issuing or canceling sentences. In the age of the coup, the Egyptian justice system has lost all attributes of a fair justice system, which has caused a great outcry and led to the conclusion that this is an invalid, corrupt, and oppressive justice system...
"Sadly, during the coup era, and due to this totalitarian conduct and these arbitrary sentences, Egypt has become a large prison for its people. Many [members of] this suffering and helpless people, including politicians, lawyers, judges, activists, and journalists, have been sent to prison on charges that exist solely in the mind of the regime and of its worn, corrupt justice system, or [charges] manufactured and inflated to eliminate [all dissidents]...
"Everyone knows that Qatar has no connection to this unclear lawsuit... This is a purely political plot, disgraceful, explicit, and baseless...
"We do not rule out the possibility that the [Al-Sisi] coup regime will concoct further allegations against Qatar, even though we do not yet understand why Al-Sisi hates Qatar and resents it...
"Instead of obsessing over Qatar and harassing its citizens... the coup regime should have worked to reconcile with itself, admit its mistakes and the [falsity of] allegations it levels at others based purely on assumptions and without a shred of proof, and understand the danger that its policy brings upon its country. Furthermore, the regime should reconcile with its poor suffering people and work to mend the social fabric with national unity that does not distinguish between elements of society or prefer one over the other...
"We are nearing the day when this regime admits its false claims against Qatar, requests its friendship, and begs for relations with it..."[12]
Al-Sharq Editor: When This Theater Of The Absurd Reaches The Egyptian Justice System – It Is A Disaster
Jaber Al-Harmi, editor of the Qatari daily Al-Sharq, wrote: "It [might] be possible to contain all these absurd displays that we see today in Egypt's institutions– from the media to its mercenaries and magicians, its art, its culture, and its sports. But when this theater of the absurd reaches the justice system, it is a real disaster.
"Last night, former president Muhammad Mursi was sentenced [to prison] in a false affair known as 'spying for Qatar.' [Mursi was] Egypt's first elected civilian president. The army carried out a coup against him in 2013, one year after he took office, in a plot whose machinations are exposed daily...
"[This] is a despicable farce and a predetermined scenario, with actors called 'judges' who were recruited from elementary schools and placed on the stage – not in the judge's chair, since these chairs are too big for them, and it would be a disgrace for such 'dwarves' to sit in them.
"It is shameful for Egypt that those who rule it today besmirch it and its history with this superficial attitude towards all [other] countries... Shame on those who accuse an elected president who ascended via the ballot boxes of spying for a sister country that stood by the Egyptian people from the first day of the revolution in January 2011...
"[The allegation] of spying for Qatar is a mark of shame upon the brow of the current ruler of Egypt... [This ruler] recruits his mercenary media day and night to deceive the Egyptian people, who suffer greatly in their daily lives, and make them think that this [spying affair] is the most important affair and thus distract them from fateful matters related to the economy, water, corruption, the security that depends on the enemy, and Egypt's declining ratings, especially in the field of education, which place this county at the 139th place out of 140...
"Today, after the military coup led by Al-Sisi – who claimed that he did not want the job, the regime, or even a promotion in rank – Egypt is [not just] entirely dependent on other [countries], but has also been hijacked [from its citizens]. Egypt deserves better than this. If the situation persists, there will be a swift decline in many fields.
"Today Al-Sisi coordinates with Israel [before carrying out] all his military activity against the people of Sinai and using every method of oppression and murder against them... He conspires against Gaza in open coordination with the Israelis and welcomes Israeli delegations 365 days a year. Israeli officials frequently announce that their ties with Egypt have never been better, thanks to President Al-Sisi. And I wonder – who should be on trial? And who is a risk to Egyptian and Arab national security?!
"The first elected president in Egypt's history stands trial on charges of spying for Qatar – how absurd! This is a mark of shame that will continue to haunt the regime, the executive branch, the judicial branch, and those who applaud and the hired mouthpieces.
"Qatar has not been known to conspire against anyone ever, and its past is white as snow, while it is others who besiege Gaza and starve women, children, and elderly to death..."[13]
Endnotes:
[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 5507, Anticipation In Egypt On The Eve Of The Trial Of Ousted President Muhammad Mursi, November 3, 2013.
[2] Al-Watan (Egypt), June 18, 2016, Al-Ahram (Egypt), June 19, 2016.
[3] Due to internal disputes the MB recently split into two factions: the more moderate stream, called Al-Lajna Al-Idariyya, and the more extremist stream led by MB official Mahmoud 'Ezzat.
[4] Ikhwan.site, ikhwanonline.info, June 18, 2016.
[5] Rassd.com, June 19, 2016.
[6] Al-Sharq (Qatar), June 18, 2016.
[7] Al-Masri Al-Yawm (Egypt), June 19, 2016.
[8] Rassd.com, June 19, 2016.
[9] Al-Masri Al-Yawm (Egypt), June 20, 2016.
[10] Al-Masri Al-Yawm (Egypt), June 19, 2016.
[11] Al-Watan (Egypt), June 19, 2016.
[12] Al-Raya (Qatar), June 20, 2016.
[13] Al-Sharq (Qatar), June 19, 2016.