LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
May 01/16
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletin16/english.may01.16.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
For where two or three are gathered in my
name, I am there among them
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew
18/18-22:"Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven,
and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again, truly I tell
you, if two of you agree on earth about anything you ask, it will be done for
you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am
there among them.’Then Peter came and said to him, ‘Lord, if another member of
the church sins against me, how often should I forgive? As many as seven
times?’Jesus said to him, ‘Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven
times."
Do all things without murmuring and arguing,so that you may be blameless and
innocent, children of God without blemish
Letter to the Philippians 02/12-18:"Therefore, my beloved, just
as you have always obeyed me, not only in my presence, but much more now in my
absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who
is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
Do all things without murmuring and arguing, so that you may be blameless and
innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse
generation, in which you shine like stars in the world. It is by your holding
fast to the word of life that I can boast on the day of Christ that I did not
run in vain or labour in vain .But even if I am being poured out as a libation
over the sacrifice and the offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with
all of you and in the same way you also must be glad and rejoice with me.
Pope Francis's Tweet
For Today
Work is proper to the human person and expresses the dignity of being created in
the image of God
Travailler est le propre de la personne humaine. Cela exprime sa dignité d’être
créée à l’image de Dieu
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on May 01/16
Britain? Moderates? How's That Again/Douglas Murray/Gatestone Institute/April
30/16
The Missing Link in the Debate about US Middle East Strategy/Middle East
Briefing/April 30/16
Splits Inside the White House about Syria while the Road Forward is Clear to
All/Middle East Briefing/April 30/16
US-GCC: Another Step towards NATO’s Role in Gulf Security/Middle East
Briefing/April 30/16
Mohammed Ben Salman Opens Saudi Arabia’s Road to the Future/Middle East
Briefing/April 30/16
The world cannot let Aleppo be slaughtered before our eyes/Brooklyn Middleton/Al
Arabiya/April 30/16
How long can Aleppo endure destruction/Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/April
30/16
Does Erdogan want his own Islamic state/Mustafa Akyol/Al-Monitor/April 30/16
Egypt must preserve its lifeline by tackling the water crisis now/Ehtesham
Shahid/Al Arabiya/April 30/16
The Ghassanid Imperial Titles/Michael Peschka/The Royal Herald/April 30/16
Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on May 01/16
Arrival of Holy light flame from
Christ's tomb to Beirut
Yazigi prays for peace in his Easter message
Hariri Meets Davutoglu a Day after Meeting Erdogan
Jumblat: I Don't Mind Aoun for Presidency if Franjieh Withdraws
Report: Hariri Calls on Aoun to 'Meet Halfway' on Presidential Issue
Lebanese Army Arrests Fugitive in Baalbek Raids
Kaag Discusses Lebanon Crisis with Russian Officials
Tripoli Police Arrest Hackers over Cyber Theft
Brother of Interior Minister Falls to His Death from Balcony
Lebanese Army Possess Reconnaissance Planes to Deter Border Infiltrations
Lebanese Army shells militants in Arsal outskirts
Chamoun marking 'April 26' Commemoration: We have not forgotten the ugliness and
destruction of the Syrian Army
Hariri calls on Beirutis to vote massively
Aoun can reach presidency if Frangieh withdraws: Jumblatt
Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on May 01/16
Orthodox Christians commemorate Good
Friday in Jerusalem
Qatar Requests 'Emergency' Arab League Meet on Syria
UN proposal demands combatants protect hospitals and doctors
Syrian opposition: Stop Aleppo violence
Canadian-run Syrian clinic was evacuated before strike on hospital
Yemen foes begin direct talks to resolve key issues
Yemen govt forces seize Qaeda-held military camp
Muslim prayer hall set on fire on French island of Corsica
Six dead as Sudan army, insurgents clash in Kordofan: rebels
Italy merchant ship rescues 26 migrants off Libya, others feared missing
400 German protesters shouting ‘refugees can stay, Nazis must go’ arrested
Bombed Brussels airport departure hall to partly reopen Sunday
Russia defends intercept of US reconnaissance plane over Baltic
Turkish warplanes hit PKK targets in rural areas
Turkish leaders proudly remember Ottoman WWI victory in Iraq
ISIS claims deadly Baghdad bombing
Iraqi protesters storm Baghdad’s parliamen
Big win for Rowhani’s allies in Iran election second round
Iran ranks 190 out of 199 for press freedoms - watchdog
Rouhani’s record on workers’ rights in Iran
26 government bodies in Iran involved in suppression of women
Links From
Jihad Watch Site for
May 01/16
Obama pursuing under-the-radar ways to bring in more Muslim
migrants
Muslim inmates boo Paris jihadi for not going through with suicide bombing
Pakistan: Muslim guns down his wife to salvage his family’s honor
Swedish asylum centers: Muslims threaten to slaughter Christians
Robert Spencer speaks in Calgary, Leftists and Islamic supremacists outraged
Bangladesh: Muslims hack to death Hindu accused of criticizing Muhammad
Nigeria: Muslims slaughter 40 people, burn church
Australia: Jihad murderer makes Islamic State gesture in court
Germany: Muslim teens admit bombing Sikh temple; one was in deradicalization
program
Iran to build seven new nuclear plants by 2020
Austria: Muslim teen gets 20 months for Islamic State propaganda
Arrival of Holy
light flame from Christ's tomb to Beirut
Sat 30 Apr 2016/NNA - The Holy light flame from the tomb of Jesus Christ arrived
shortly at Beirut International Airport, to be taken to St. George Cathedral in
downtown Beirut. It is to note that this Torch, borne from the tomb of Christ in
Jerusalem, was carried by Amman's Metropolitan Bishop, Benedict, to Jordan, who
in turn passed it on to Fathers Naji Shiban and Nectarious Khairallah, who
brought it to Lebanon for believers to receive its blessings.MP Ghassan Mkheiber
was at the Airport to welcome the Torch's arrival, along with a crowd of priests
and faithful believers.
Yazigi prays for peace in his
Easter message
Sat 30 Apr 2016/NNA - Patriarch of Antioch and All the East for the Greek
Orthodox, Patriarch John X Yazigi, said in his Easter message on Saturday that
one must remember on this festive occasion those who are in the line of fire and
suffering from violence, while the world watches on. He prayed that Christ would
spread peace all over the world, especially to the "tortured East.""We pray
today that the rhetoric of reason and peace prevails over that to takfirism and
violence. We pray that God gives peace to Syria and stability to Lebanon."
Yazigi also prayed for the two abducted bishops of Aleppo, stating that their
absence remained an open-wound and a smudge of shame on those who did nothing to
help find them.
Hariri Meets Davutoglu a Day
after Meeting Erdogan
Naharnet/April 30/16/Al-Mustaqbal movement chief MP Saad Hariri held a meeting
on Saturday with Turkish Prime Minister Ahmed Davutoglu where talks focused on
the developments in the region and Lebanon, his media office reported. After the
meeting Hariri said: “We discussed the situation in Lebanon and the region
particularly the violations of the recent armistice agreement in Syria. There is
no doubt that everyone is on alert at this stage.”He then added: “Davutoglu will
visit Lebanon soon as part of a tour to the region and as a show of support for
Lebanon.”The meeting took place at the Ataturk Airport in the presence of Deputy
PM of Turkey, Ministers of Education and Health and Hariri's Advisor Ghattas
Khoury. Talks focused on the situation in Lebanon and the region. It also
completed talks that Hariri started a day earlier with Turkish President Recep
Tayyib Edogan. On Friday Hariri met with Erdogan in Istanbul and talks
highlighted Ankara's role in the region and Iran's “negative” one. He said: “We
seek good ties with Tehran, but its negative meddling in the affairs of the
countries of the region are preventing us from achieving this goal.” “We believe
that Turkey can play a major role in reaching stability in the region,” he
added. Hariri explained to Erdogan the ongoing vacuum in the presidency and
stressed that the country is suffering because of the large number of refugees.
Erdogan explained that his country is also tolerating the burden of refugees.
“We therefore agreed to cooperate to push the international community to assist
us more in this issue,” Hariri revealed. The MP had traveled to Turkey late
Thursday night.
Jumblat: I Don't Mind Aoun
for Presidency if Franjieh Withdraws
Naharnet/April 30/16/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat stated
on Saturday that he does not oppose the election of MP Michel Aoun for the top
state post if his March 8 ally MP Suleiman Franjieh withdraws from the race. “I
don't oppose the election of Aoun for the presidency if the national interest
requires, and if Franjieh withdraws from the race. The most important thing is
to elect a president,” Jumblat told news website elaph in an interview. However
the Democratic Gathering bloc leader stressed that the matter is not in his
hands. On the chances of Marada chief Franjieh to reach the Baabda Palace,
Jumblat said: “There are real chances for Franjieh, Aoun and for the candidate
of the Democratic Gathering bloc Henri Helou. “However it all depends on certain
political circumstances which are not available at the time being.”Lebanon's top
Christian post has been vacant for around two years now since the term of
President Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014. Conflicts among various political
camps have thwarted attempts to end the vacuum.
Report: Hariri Calls on Aoun
to 'Meet Halfway' on Presidential Issue
Naharnet/April 30/16/Al-Mustaqbal
movement chief MP Saad Hariri voiced calls on founder of the Free Patriotic
Movement MP Michel Aoun to find a middle ground on the issue of the presidential
election in a bid to cross the difficult stage that Lebanon is witnessing and
help end the vacuum at the top state post, al-Joumhouria daily reported on
Saturday. Hariri has conveyed a message to Aoun early this week, urging him “not
to depend on some changes that have been frequently circulated by his friends
because they are unfounded,” informed sources told the daily on condition of
anonymity. The sources added that Hariri's message carried “a clear advice
emphasizing the need to stop preaching to these changes as soon as possible and
to reconsider the strategy adopted.”
It also carried an invitation “to meet in a middle ground in order to cross into
the election of a president who brings the Lebanese together instead of dividing
them.”Lebanon has been without a president since the May 2014 when the term of
President Michel Suleiman ended. Conflicts among the rival March 8 and March 14
alliances have thwarted attempts to end the vacuum. Reports circulated recently
claimed that a proposal has emerged to elect Aoun as president for a temporary
period of two years.
Lebanese Army Arrests
Fugitive in Baalbek Raids
Naharnet/April 30/16/The Lebanese army arrested a fugitive on Saturday during
raids that it carried out in the area of al-Sharawneh in Baalbek, the National
News Agency reported. At 6:00 am the army raided Sharawneh neighborhood in
search for fugitives from the Zoaiter family. It succeeded in arresting Faysal
Zoaiter after a brief exchange of fire but no causalities were reported.
Kaag Discusses Lebanon Crisis
with Russian Officials
Naharnet/April 30/16/U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Sigrid Kaag has
discussed with top Russian officials Lebanon's political crisis and developments
in the region, her press office said on Saturday. Kaage met in Moscow on Friday
with Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov and other senior Russian
officials, it said. Discussions focused on the developments in Lebanon and the
region, and their impact on the country's stability and security. Kaag
underscored the need to achieve progress on the implementation of Security
Council Resolution 1701, said the statement.“The critical importance of
effective and functioning institutions of state, and the urgency to resolve the
presidential vacuum were equally amongst the key themes discussed,” it said.
Lebanon has been without a head of state since the term of President Michel
Suleiman ended in May 2014. The vacuum at Baabda Palace has paralyzed state
institutions, namely the parliament.Kaag’s visit to Moscow is part of her
ongoing consultations with key stakeholders on Lebanon's stability and security,
it added.
Tripoli Police Arrest Hackers
over Cyber Theft
Naharnet/April 30/16/Tripoli police arrested on Saturday four individuals said
to have been hacking online accounts and involved in cyber heist, the Internal
Security Forces said via its Twitter account. “The police in the northern city
of Tripoli arrested four professional hackers on charges of stealing money,” the
tweet said. The detained were identified as M.Aa., A.F., S.M., N.Aa.
Brother of Interior Minister
Falls to His Death from Balcony
Naharnet/April 30/16/The brother of Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq has
died on Saturday after falling from the third floor balcony of his family house
in Ras al-Nabaa in Beirut, the National News Agency said on Saturday. “Ziad al-Mashnouq,
60, the brother of the interior minster died after falling from the balcony of
his house in Ras al-Nabaa,” NNA said. He died immediately. Reports said that the
body of the deceased was transferred to the American University of Beirut
Medical Center in Hamra.
They also said that Ziad suffers from high blood pressure and diabetes.
Lebanese Army Possess
Reconnaissance Planes to Deter Border Infiltrations
Naharnet/April 30/16/The United Stated provided Lebanon with sophisticated
reconnaissance airplanes that enabled its army to closely monitor the mobility
of militants on the outskirts of Lebanese regions, the Voice of Lebanon radio
(93.3) said on Saturday. The planes enable the army to prevent the militants
from infiltrating the porous Lebanese border with Syria, reports said. It added
that this type of planes have enabled the army recently to monitor the reactions
of armed groups after the killing of a top Islamic State group in army raids.
The Lebanese army killed on Thursday IS figure Nayef al-Shaalan and his
bodyguard during a raid on the outskirts of the northeastern border down of
Arsal. The dead official goes by nom de guerre of Abou Fawz, and his bodyguard
as Ahmed Mroueh. Their death came during a special operation carried out by the
military in Wadi al-Hosn during which troops arrested another bodyguard named
Mohammed Mousalli and several others, NNA said. The army has been battling
extremists near the border with Syria since the IS and al-Qaida-linked al-Nusra
Front overran Arsal in August 2014.
Lebanese Army shells militants in Arsal outskirts
Sat 30 Apr 2016/NNA - Lebanese army units are currently targeting with heavy
artillery shells and 107-rocket bombs armed militants in the outskirts of Arsal,
causing injuries in the ranks of said groups, NNA correspondent in Baalbek
reported Saturday evening.
Chamoun marking 'April 26'
Commemoration: We have not forgotten the ugliness and destruction of the Syrian
Army
Sat 30 Apr 2016/NNA - "Free Liberals Party" marked on Saturday the 11th
commemoration of April 26, the date that witnessed the withdrawal of Syrian
troops from Lebanon, in a ceremony organized at el-Qalaa Monastery in Beit Mery,
in presence of several political figures and dignitaries. In his word on the
occasion, Party Head Dori Chamoun said that "we have not forgotten the ugly and
destructive practices of the Syrian Army against all sects in Lebanon."Chamoun
stressed that "we ought to know which Lebanon we wish to build, for we do not
want a Lebanon that is committed to the welfare of others over its own
interests."He urged all citizens who really love their country to "abandon their
seats behind their television sets and participate with various parties willing
to build Lebanon, once again, the State that we truly desire!"For his part,
Kataeb Party Head Sami Gemayel stressed on the relation that links the Kataeb
and Free Liberals Parties together, a "constructive relation based on correct
choices in defense of Lebanon, its freedom, sovereignty and independence.""We do
not want Daesh nor Bashar nor Syria nor Arabs nor Iran, but rather Lebanon,
first and foremost," Gemayel underscored. He added: "This country deserves all
sacrifices, so enough of making us choose between bad and worse alternatives!"
Hariri calls on Beirutis to
vote massively
Sat 30 Apr 2016/NNA - Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri urged Saturday all
Beirutis to vote extensively in the municipal elections on May 8 "to tell
everyone that we are here and nobody will get us out of Beirut." "There is no
doubt that the last period was difficult, but there will be a new council, which
includes qualified people and has a good program," Hariri indicated, speaking
before a large delegation of Beirut citizens who visited him at the "House of
Center". He stressed that "the Beirutis List will give priority to citizens of
Beirut for employment within the municipality, and will implement many
development projects."
"Ramlet el-Baida Beach will remain the coast of Beirutis and nothing will change
in this regard," Hariri went on, adding that "Rafic Hariri purchased it for this
reason and it will remain the coast of all Beirutis".
Aoun can reach presidency if
Frangieh withdraws: Jumblatt
The Daily Star/Apr. 30, 2016/BEIRUT: Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid
Jumblatt Saturday said that he does not oppose the election of Michel Aoun as
president if the latter's ally Sleiman Frangieh backs down on his candidacy. "I
don't mind the election of (Change and Reform bloc head MP) Aoun as head of
state if the national interest requires that and if (Marada Movement chief MP)
Frangieh pulls out from the race," Jumblatt said in an interview with
Arabic-language news website, elaph.com. He emphasized that the crucial matter
is to end the presidential void, pointing out that the decision is out of his
hands. Jumblatt said that all presidential candidates, his bloc's Democratic
Gathering candidate MP Henry Helou, Aoun, and Frangieh, have the same chances to
reach the Baabda Palace. "It all depends on the political circumstances" which
are not ripe currently, the PSP chief added. Sharp political differences between
rivals exacerbated the presidential void in Lebanon. The country has been
without a head of state since the tenure of President Michel Sleiman ended in
May 2014. Future Movement leader Saad Hariri pitted Frangieh for the presidency
against his rival, Aoun, who is supported by Hezbollah, some of its March 8
allies and the Lebanese Forces. Frangieh’s presidential bid is also backed by
Speaker Nabih Berri, Jumblatt and some independent lawmakers.
Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on May 01/16
Orthodox Christians commemorate Good Friday in Jerusalem
AFP, Jerusalem Saturday, 30
April 2016/Thousands of Orthodox Christians from across the globe marked Good
Friday with a procession through Jerusalem’s Old City, retracing the steps Jesus
Christ is believed to have taken on the day of his crucifixion. The pilgrims,
some carrying crosses and others praying, retraced the 14 Stations of the Cross
and walked to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre where Jesus Christ is believed to
be buried. Hundreds of Israeli security forces were deployed inside the walled
Old City, and around the church, which is in Israeli-annexed east Jerusalem, an
AFP journalist said. Their presence was to regulate the flow of worshippers
through the narrow streets rather than to calm fears of potential violence,
despite weeks of renewed tensions between Israelis and Palestinians.Crowds of
pilgrims queued to enter the Holy Sepulchre, many scribbling prayers on pieces
of paper which they planned to recite inside the church. “We pray for the whole
community,” Otyrba Ilona, 36, told AFP, explaining she came in a group of 40
people from Abkhazia, a separatist region of Georgia in the Caucasus. “The
Georgian Church does not give us our independence. All here are praying for it,”
she said. Dragan Ilic, 35, who had travelled from Switzerland and was among a
group of around 50 Serbians, kept his prayer secret. But, like all the others,
he said the visit was incredibly important to him. Thousands of pilgrims came
from Egypt, which is the only Arab country besides Jordan to have diplomatic
relations with Israel even if the ties are often strained. “This pilgrimage is
not an obligation. But it is the dream of all (Coptic Christian) Egyptians,”said
Christina Salama, who came with her parents. The majority of the Christians in
the Holy Land belong to the Orthodox faith but traditionally do not play a major
part in the procession. Eastern and Western Christians mark Easter according to
different calendars.
Qatar Requests 'Emergency' Arab
League Meet on Syria
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/April 30/16/Doha has requested an "emergency"
meeting of Arab League envoys to discuss deadly Syrian regime air raids on the
war-ravaged city of Aleppo, the official Qatar News Agency reported Saturday.
Qatar’s permanent envoy at the Cairo-based pan-Arab body has requested holding
"a meeting to discuss the dangerous escalation in the city of Aleppo and the
Syrian regime forces’ massacres against civilians" there, said the statement on
QNA. The request comes after Russia said it will not ask the Syrian regime it
backs to halt air raids on Aleppo, capital of the northern province of the same
name and a key battleground in the five-year Syria war. Some 250 civilians have
been killed in Syrian regime air raids since April 22 or in army and rebel
crossfire that has intensified despite a truce which came into force on February
27, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Regional heavyweight
Saudi Arabia late on Friday "strongly" condemned the raids and urged the Syrian
regime's allies "to take all measures needed to stop these attacks and all
crimes carried out by (President) Bashar al-Assad and his supporters against the
Syrian people.""Through this criminal act, the tyrant of Damascus Bashar
al-Assad, affirms that he is not serious in responding to the demands of the
international community or in moving ahead with the ongoing talks to peacefully
resolve the Syrian crisis," said a Saudi foreign ministry official in a
statement on the SPA news agency.
A new round of U.N.-backed peace talks is set to start on May 10 in Geneva.
Qatar and Saudi Arabia support Syrian rebels fighting Assad's Russian- and
Iranian-backed regime in a conflict which has killed more than 270,000 people
since it began in March 2011.
Another Gulf state, the United Arab Emirates, made similar remarks Saturday
urging an end to violence and urging the U.N. Security Council to help end the
bloodshed. The UAE voiced its "deep concern" over the "Syrian government forces'
immoral targeting of hospitals and medical services," in a foreign ministry
statement on news agency WAM. "This unjustified escalation against civilians"
could derail the political process and the ceasefire, it warned. A total of four
medical facilities were hit in Aleppo Friday on both sides of the front line,
according to the International Committee of the Red Cross. A Syrian regime raid
on Wednesday hit a hospital supported by Doctors Without Borders and the Red
Cross as well as nearby housing, killing 30 people.
UN proposal demands
combatants protect hospitals and doctors
The Associated Press, United Nations Saturday, 30 April 2016/A proposed UN
resolution that supporters hope will be adopted next week demands that all
parties to conflicts protect medical workers, hospitals and medical facilities
against violence and attacks — and face justice if they don’t. The draft
resolution circulated Friday expresses deep concern that the number of attacks
is increasing despite obligations under international law that combatants
protect medical staff and facilities as well as the sick and wounded. New
Zealand’s UN Ambassador Gerard van Bohemen, a co-author of the resolution, said
Wednesday’s bombing of an important hospital in the Syrian city of Aleppo that
killed more than 50 people including patients and staff “sadly demonstrates why
the resolution is so timely.”“We need to shine a light and make clear the
international community’s utter rejection of such practices,” he told The
Associated Press on Friday. “Perpetrators of these attacks need to be held to
account.”Van Bohemen said the resolution “sends a strong message that this
emerging and sickening tactic of modern warfare — attacks on medical workers and
hospitals — are breaches of international law and will not be tolerated.”
New Zealand’s UN Mission said the Security Council will vote on the resolution
on Tuesday and members will be briefed by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the
presidents of Doctors Without Borders and the International Committee of the Red
Cross.
The resolution — also drafted by elected Security Council members Spain, Egypt,
Japan and Uruguay — would strongly condemn all violence, attacks and threats
against the wounded and sick, medical personnel and medical facilities. It
reminds all governments and fighters that under international law any
intentional attack against hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are
collected is a war crime, and so are attacks intentionally directed against
buildings, vehicles and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva
Conventions including a red cross. The proposed resolution demands that all
parties to armed conflicts facilitate “safe and unimpeded passage” for medical
workers. It strongly condemns “the prevailing impunity” for attacks and abuses
against medical staff and facilities and strongly urges governments to conduct
independent investigations of all violations. The draft asks the
secretary-general to promptly provide the Security Council with recommendations
on measures to prevent attacks on medical staff, vehicles and facilities.
Syrian opposition: Stop
Aleppo violence
Staff write, Al Arabiya English Saturday, 30 April 2016/The main Western-backed
Syrian opposition group on Saturday urged the international community to stop
what they called “regime aggression” in Syria’s second city of Aleppo. The
government of embattled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “has been trying to
impose a political solution outside international law and the framework of
Geneva peace talks,” the Syrian National Coalition’s President Anas al-Abdah
said at a news conference. The opposition chief accused Assad’s government of
“war crimes,” adding that a strike on a hospital in on Thursday had killed 65
people, most of them women and children. The past week has seen a spike in
fighting which has left more than 200 people dead in Aleppo, according to the
Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Despite a truce which came into force on
February 27, what was once Syria's economic powerhouse has become the scene of
some of the worst fighting in a conflict which has killed more than 270,000
people in the past five years.However, earlier on Satuirday Moscow's foreign
ministry said Russia will not ask the Syrian regime to halt air raids on the
war-ravaged city of Aleppo, because it believes they are helping to combat
militant groups. “No, we are not going to put pressure on (Damascus) because one
must understand that the situation in Aleppo is part of this fight against the
terrorist threat,” Foreign deputy foreign minister Gennady Gatilov told the
Interfax news agency. Nearly 30 air strikes hit rebel-held areas of Syria’s
northern city of Aleppo on Saturday and the total number of people killed by the
warring sides after nine straight days of bombardment reached nearly 250, a
monitoring group said. However, a temporary “regime of calm” announced by the
Syrian army late on Friday appeared to have taken hold in two other areas
blighted by recent fighting, in the northwest coastal province Latakia and
outskirts of the capital Damascus. The Syrian government said the “regime of
calm” - from which a military source said Aleppo had been exempted - was an
attempt to salvage a wider ceasefire deal reached in February. The February
truce, brokered by Washington and Moscow, has all but collapsed in fighting that
has intensified, particularly in and around Aleppo as peace talks in Geneva have
crumbled. At least five people were killed in Aleppo early on Saturday in the
latest round of air strikes, which were believed to have been carried out by
Syrian government warplanes, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. The
British-based monitoring group put the civilian death toll in government and
rebel bombardments of neighborhoods in Aleppo since April 22 at nearly 250.This
figure included around 140 people killed by government-aligned forces in air
strikes and shelling of rebel-held areas, including 19 children, it said.
Insurgent shelling of government-held areas killed 96 people, including 21
children. Aleppo, Syria’s largest city before the war, has been divided for
years between rebel and government zones. Full control would be the most
important prize for President Bashar al-Assad, who has been fighting to keep
hold of his country throughout a five-year civil war.
‘A bit quieter’
Observatory director Rami Abdulrahman said government-held areas of Aleppo were
“a bit quieter today”, but that shells fired by rebels were still intermittently
hitting. “There aren’t clashes in Latakia, there aren’t clashes in Ghouta
(Damascus suburbs),” only some lower-level violence between rival rebel groups
outside Damascus, Abdulrahman said. A resident of Western Ghouta, which is under
government siege, said shelling appeared to have ceased around the capital in
the hours after the start of the “regime of calm” at 1 a.m. (2200 GMT on
Friday). “Until now there has been no military activity and no sound of
bombardments in nearby areas, no sound of shelling or of warplanes,” the
resident, Maher Abu Jaafar, told Reuters via internet messenger. “It’s the
opposite of last night, when there was a lot of bombing and the sounds of
rockets and shells.”A Friday statement from the Syrian army did not explain what
military or non-military action a “regime of calm” would entail.It said it would
last for 24 hours in Eastern Ghouta and Damascus and for 72 hours in areas of
the northern Latakia countryside. The United Nations has called on Moscow and
Washington to help restore the ceasefire to prevent the complete collapse of
talks aimed at ending a conflict in which more than 250,000 people have been
killed and millions displaced. (With AFP, Reuters)
Canadian-run Syrian clinic
was evacuated before strike on hospital
Reuters Saturday, 30 April 2016/A Canadian-run health care center in Aleppo,
Syria that was hit by an air strike on Friday had been evacuated in the wake of
another bombing at a hospital earlier this week, a spokesman for the non-profit
group that operated it said. “After the hospital bombing three days ago, they’ve
evacuated all the medical centers,” said Avi D’Souza, media coordinator for
UOSSM-Canada, which operates the Al Marjeh Primary Health Care Centre. “There
wasn’t anybody there at the time - thank God.” Global Affairs Canada, the
country’s foreign department, condemned the attacks in a statement. Minister of
International Development and La Francophonie Marie-Claude Bibeau said in the
same statement Canadians are “outraged” and the attacks violate international
humanitarian law. Air strikes on rebel-held areas of Aleppo and shelling of
government-held areas of the city resumed on Friday, after a brief dawn lull
following seven days of violence, a war monitor, a civil defense worker and
Syrian state media said. Watch: Video shows Russian fighters striking civilian
areas in Syria
Yemen foes begin direct talks
to resolve key issues
AFP, Kuwait City Saturday, 30 April 2016/Yemen’s warring parties began
face-to-face peace talks on Saturday on “key issues” in a bid to end the
conflict in the impoverished Arab country, the United Nations said. “All
delegations are present. Key issues will be addressed,” Charbel Raji, spokesman
for Yemen’s UN envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, told AFP about the negotiations
taking place in Kuwait. Most of the meetings in talks which began April 21 have
so far been confined to encounters between rival delegations and Ould Cheikh
Ahmed. More than 6,800 people have been killed and around 2.8 million displaced
in Yemen since a Saudi-led coalition began operations in March 2015 against
Iran-backed Houthi militia, who seized swathes of territory including the
capital Sanaa. Key issues to navigate include the withdrawal of armed groups, a
handover of heavy weapons, the resumption of a political transition and the
release of prisoners. The new phase of meetings comes after the government and
rebel delegations each submitted a framework for a political and security
solution to end the 13-month war. The government delegation said their proposal
is based on implementing UN Security Council Resolution 2216, which states that
the rebels must withdraw from seized territories and disarm before talks can
progress. Meanwhile, the insurgent-controlled sabanews.net website quoted an
unnamed source from the rebel delegation as saying that their proposals include
“forming a consensus authority that would oversee (political) transition.” The
rebel proposals also include lifting of the blockade imposed by the Saudi-led
military coalition on Yemen. Sabanews.net website reported that a “new phase in
the negotiations begins Saturday, which would truly test the positions of the
United Nations and international community” in the search for peace. Both sides
said that they were committed to ensuring the success of the talks in Kuwait,
which were preceded by a shaky ceasefire that came into effect on April 11. The
main sticking point remains that the rebels want to discuss a political
settlement before surrendering arms while the government delegation insists that
implementing the UN resolution is a priority. The government delegation on
Friday urged the UN envoy to pressure the insurgents to end what it called
ceasefire violations by the rebels.The UN Security Council on Monday stressed
the importance of agreeing on a “roadmap” to implement security measures
including the withdrawal of heavy weapons from Yemeni towns.
Yemen govt forces seize
Qaeda-held military camp
AFP, Mukalla, Yemen Saturday, 30 April 2016/Yemeni government forces backed by
an Arab coalition seized an al-Qaeda training camp in the southeastern province
of Hadramawt Saturday along with “large amounts” of weapons, its governor told
AFP. It comes during an offensive launched last month to recapture areas in the
south overrun by al-Qaeda and which on Sunday saw loyalist forces recapture
Hadramawt provincial capital Mukalla, which the militants had occupied for a
year. “The offensive is continuing in Qoton to hunt down al-Qaeda militants,”
said Hadramawt governor Major General Ahmed bin Braik, referring to a town north
of Mukalla. Braik said government forces overran an al-Qaeda training camp in
the town where they “confiscated large amounts of weapons” and “arrested eight
al-Qaeda militants”. “Mukalla is now a safe city,” Braik added. The capture of
the military camp comes as Yemen’s warring parties began face-to-face peace
talks on Saturday on “key issues” in a bid to end the conflict in the
impoverished Arab country. An AFP reporter there said the situation had returned
to normal as pro-government forces deployed across Mukalla with troops from the
Arab coalition securing the ports. Government troops that seized the city were
backed by special forces from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as well
as by coalition air strikes, the alliance said in a statement. At least 27
Yemeni soldiers died in the fight to retake Mukalla, military officials and
medics said. And while the coalition has said that more than 800 militants were
killed, al-Qaeda issued a statement on Monday denying the claim as “lies” and
saying its dead “do not exceed the number of fingers on both hands”. The
statement addressing Hadramawt residents and signed by Ansar al-Sharia, another
name for Al-Qaeda in Yemen, said that the militants withdrew only to spare
Mukalla the destruction of fighting. “We will fight the battle by our own rules
and ways and not by those of the enemy,” said the statement, adding that the UAE
had played the biggest role in the fight for Mukalla. An officer there had told
AFP that residents of Mukalla, home to an estimated 200,000 people, had appealed
to the militants to spare it and pull out. The Yemen-based al-Qaeda in the
Arabian Peninsula is regarded by Washington as the network’s most dangerous
branch, and AQAP militants have come under repeated US air and drone strikes.
Muslim prayer hall set on
fire on French island of Corsica
Reuters Saturday, 30 April 2016/A Muslim prayer hall was seriously damaged by
fire overnight in the capital of the French island of Corsica, local authorities
said, four months after a separate Muslim prayer hall there was ransacked. No
one was injured in the fire in Ajaccio, which police are investigating as
criminal after finding two separate sources of fire inside the hall. “This is
unacceptable,” Ajaccio mayor Laurent Marcangeli told iTELE news channel. “Those
sites are not sufficiently protected.”In late December, the island was rocked by
days of racial tension after firemen in Ajaccio were attacked on a housing
estate with a large immigrant population and a Muslim prayer hall was attacked
in anti-immigrant protests that followed.
Six dead as Sudan army,
insurgents clash in Kordofan: rebels
AFP | Khartoum Saturday, 30 April 2016/New fighting has broken out between
Sudanese troops and rebels in the state of South Kordofan, leaving six
insurgents dead and several wounded, a rebel group said. President Omar al-Bashir’s
forces have been battling the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N)
in South Kordofan and Blue Nile since 2011, but in recent months the two
southern states have seen long periods of calm compared with previous years. The
SPLM-N said clashes began on Wednesday and continued until late Friday, with
fighting initially erupting west of the town of Um Serdiba.
“On our side we lost six comrades and 18 others were wounded,” rebel spokesman
Arnu Lodi said in a statement late on Friday. He said the rebels had inflicted
“heavy casualties” on the Sudanese troops. The military spokesman was
unreachable for comment.
Khartoum limits press access to the war-hit border regions, making it nearly
impossible to verify the often-contradictory reports from the army and the SPLM-N
about fighting there.
Italy merchant ship rescues
26 migrants off Libya, others feared missing
Reuters | Rome Saturday, 30 April 2016/An Italian merchant ship rescued 26
migrants off the coast of Libya in rough seas and others were feared missing,
the Coast Guard said on Saturday. The Coast Guard received a call from a
satellite telephone on Friday but no voice was heard. It tracked the signal to a
location about seven miles off the Libyan coast, a spokesman said. An Italian
merchant vessel in the area was diverted and on Friday night rescued the 26 from
a rubber boat that had taken on water. The spokesman said such boats used by
human traffickers can hold between 100-120 people and are usually full but no
information was available on the number that might be missing. The migrants were
transferred onto a Coast Guard ship in international waters and taken to
Lampedusa, the island south of Sicily where tens of thousands have arrived in
recent years. With the closing of land routes in the Balkans and a recent deal
under which Greece sends migrants back to Turkey, Italian officials expect more
to try to make the longer and much more dangerous crossing from Libya.
400 German protesters
shouting ‘refugees can stay, Nazis must go’ arrested
By Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Saturday, 30 April 2016/Police have detained
about 400 leftists who were protesting against the national convention of the
populist Alternative for Germany party in Stuttgart. German news agency dpa
reported that protesters were shouting “refugees can stay, Nazis must go,” as
some 2,000 party members arrived at the convention center on Saturday morning.
Protesters temporarily blocked a nearby highway and burned tires on another road
leading to the convention center. Some 1,000 police officers were on the scene
to prevent violent clashes between far right party members and demonstrators.
Alternative for Germany, or AfD, has been growing in political influence as it
campaigns on an anti-refugee and anti-Islam platform. Now polling around 14
percent, AfD is eyeing entry into the federal parliament in elections next year
after a string of state election wins. The AfD was formed only three years ago
and has since gradually shifted its policies to the right, while entering half
of Germany’s 16 state legislatures and the European parliament. Having initially
railed against bailouts for debt-hit eurozone economies, it has changed focus to
protest against mostly-Muslim migrants and refugees, more than a million of whom
sought asylum in Germany last year. The AfD has loudly protested against
Chancellor Angela Merkel’s liberal migration policy but also channelled popular
anger against established political parties and the mainstream press. Around
2,400 members are expected at the weekend congress, which comes after AfD deputy
leader and European parliament member Beatrix von Storch last week caused anger
by labelling Islam a “political ideology that is incompatible with the German
constitution”. Von Storch said the congress would call for a ban on Islamic
symbols in Germany such as minarets on mosques, the call to prayer and full-face
veils for women. It will openly challenge the government position, repeatedly
stated by Merkel, that today “Islam is part of Germany”, a country that is home
to some four million Muslims.(With AP and AFP)
Bombed Brussels airport
departure hall to partly reopen Sunday
AFP, Brussels Saturday, 30 April 2016/The departure hall at Brussels airport,
hit in March by a deadly double suicide bombing claimed by ISIS, will partly
reopen on Sunday, the management said. The twin explosions on March 22 killed 16
people and devastated the departure hall, shattering the building’s glass
facade, collapsing ceilings and destroying check-in desks. The airport was
completely closed for 12 days after the attacks and has progressively been
restarting operations, though it is not expected to return to full capacity
until June. “After a reopening ceremony, passengers from three flights on Sunday
afternoon will be able to check in in the departure hall,” airport management
said in a statement on Saturday. From Monday, passengers will check in for
flights at 111 desks in the departure hall and 36 others in temporary buildings.
“The airport capacity is rising to at least 80 percent of the number of
passengers before the attacks,” the statement said. Travellers have been asked
to arrive three hours before their flights to allow time for extra police
security checks at the entrance to the departure hall. A total of 32 people were
killed and more than 300 wounded in coordinated suicide bombings at the airport
and a metro station in central Brussels in Belgium’s worst ever terror attacks.
Russia defends intercept of
US reconnaissance plane over Baltic
Reuters Saturday, 30 April 2016/Russia said on Saturday it had sent a fighter
plane on Friday to intercept a US aircraft approaching its border over the
Baltic Sea because the American plane had turned off its transponder, which is
needed for identification.
The Pentagon said the US Air Force RC-135 plane had been flying a routine route
in international airspace and that the Russian SU-27 fighter had intercepted it
in an “unsafe and unprofessional” way. CNN reported that the Russian jet had
come within about 100 feet (30 meters) of the US plane and had performed a
barrel roll. “All flights of Russian planes are conducted in accordance with
international regulations on the use of airspace,” the Russian Defense Ministry
said in a statement. “The US Air Force has two solutions: either not to fly near
our borders or to turn the transponder on for identification.”
Friday’s incident underlines rising tensions between Russia and the United
States over Eastern Europe. NATO has said it plans its biggest build-up in the
region since the Cold War to counter what it considers to be a more aggressive
Russia. The Baltic states, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which joined NATO in
2004, have requested higher and permanent presence of the alliance, fearing a
threat from Russia after it annexed the Crimea peninsula from Ukraine in 2014.
The Kremlin denies any intentions to attack the Baltic countries, but it has
often said that they have become an aggressive “Russophobic kernel” pushing NATO
towards a consistently anti-Russian course. “We are already starting to get used
to the insults of the Pentagon regarding alleged ‘unprofessional’ maneuvers when
our fighters intercept US spy planes at the Russian border,” the defense
ministry said in its statement.
Turkish warplanes hit PKK
targets in rural areas
Reuters, Diyarbakir, Turkey
Saturday, 30 April 2016/The Turkish army carried out air strikes in rural parts
of southeastern Turkey and northern Iraq, targeting logistics posts used by
Kurdish militants, security sources said on Saturday. Twenty jets took off from
Diyarbakir air base late on Friday and bombed sites used by Kurdistan Workers
Party (PKK) militants for food and weapons support in Hakurk, Avasin and Qandil
in northern Iraq, the sources said. Two separate rounds of air bombardments were
carried out in Sirnak province near the Iraq border after receiving an
intelligence tip-off, the sources said.
The Turkish military has frequently carried out air strikes in the area in
recent months after a 2-1/2-year ceasefire and peace process between the
government and the PKK broke down last summer. Thousands of militants and
hundreds of civilians and soldiers have been killed since then and a handful of
cities in the predominantly Kurdish southeast have been engulfed in the worst
violence since the 1990s. The government has refused to return to the
negotiating table and has said it will crush the PKK, considered a terrorist
organization by Turkey, the European Union and the United States. Separately on
Saturday, one Turkish soldier was killed and two police officers wounded in a
rocket attack by PKK militants in Nusaybin, a town near the Syrian border, where
a round-the-clock curfew has been in place since mid-March due to army
operations. More than 40,000 people have been killed in the conflict since the
PKK launched its insurgency in 1984.
Turkish leaders proudly
remember Ottoman WWI victory in Iraq
AFP, Istanbul Saturday, 30 April 2016/Turkey’s leaders on Friday celebrated the
100th anniversary of a famous victory by the Ottoman army in World War I against
Allied forces in today’s Iraq, as the authorities place greater emphasis on the
pre-Republican history of the country. The surrender by a British-led force at
the garrison in Kut al-Amara (Kut in modern Iraq) is seen as the last Ottoman
victory of the war which ended in the defeat of the Empire and its German
allies. “Turkey is changing. We are remembering again our history that was
forgotten. We are rediscovering our history,” Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
said at a major ceremony in Istanbul also attended by President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan. “It was a matter a life and death for the Ottomans. This was a
resistance of all the peoples of the middle east against colonialism,” said
Davutoglu. Turkey’s rulers have been keen to use the 100th anniversary of World
War I as a source of national pride, even though the war ended in defeat for the
Ottoman Empire and would ultimately lead to its collapse. Last year, the Turkish
government placed great emphasis on celebrating the 100th anniversary of the
1915 Battle of Gallipoli where Ottoman forces resisted a ground invasion by the
Allies. The ruling Islamic-rooted Justice and Development Party (AKP) and
Erdogan are eager to show the Ottoman Empire as a source of pride for modern
Turks. But Davutoglu denied that the celebration of the victory at Kut marked
any rejection of the modern Turkish republic founded by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in
1923 in the ruins of the Ottoman Empire. “The spirit of Kut al-Amara is the most
significant foundation on which our republic has risen.”“Kut al-Amara is a
victory of all of us. Kut al-Amara is the victory of all peoples of the Middle
East.”The Siege of Kut began in December 1915 when joint British and Indian
forces seeking to take Baghdad decided to hold their position in Kut rather than
fall back further against advancing Ottoman forces. With their food supplies
running low, the Allied troops were besieged by the Ottoman forces for months as
British troops sent to relieve them were beaten back in successive battles by
the Ottomans. The commander of the British-Indian forces, Charles Townshend,
surrendered on April 29, 1916 and thousands of Allied troops who survived were
taken prisoner.
ISIS claims deadly Baghdad
bombing
The Associated Press, Baghdad Saturday, 30 April 2016/ISIS claimed
responsibility for a bombing Saturday east of Baghdad, according to a statement
posted on an ISIS-affiliated website. The attack killed at least 21 people and
wounded at least 42 others, according to Iraqi police and hospital officials.
The ISIS statement described the attack as a three-ton truck bombing. The attack
targeted Shiite civilians shopping in an open-air market selling fruit,
vegetables and meat in Nahrawan, according to Iraq’s Interior Ministry. The ISIS
statement and initial reports from local officials at the scene claimed the
bombing targeted Shiite pilgrims walking to Baghdad’s holy Kadhimiyah shrine.
“It was not a road for people walking toward Kadhimiyah,” said Brig. Gen. Saad
Mann, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry and Baghdad Operations Command. The
attack’s casualty figures were confirmed by police and hospital officials who
spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to speak to the
press. Thousands of Shiite pilgrims from across Iraq are expected to travel on
foot to the shrine of 8th-century Imam Moussa al-Kadhim over the coming days to
commemorate the anniversary of his death. Security in the capital has been
tightened in anticipation of the crowds; additional checkpoints have been set up
and roads have been closed. ISIS regularly carries out attacks targeting Iraq’s
Shiite majority, including attacks on Shiite pilgrims and civilians in Baghdad’s
Shiite neighborhoods. ISIS views Shiites as apostates deserving of death. Mann
said the attack in Baghdad was carried out by IS in response to recent
territorial losses in Iraq. “The only strategic weapon left for them are
(suicide bombers),” Mann said. While ISIS still controls large swaths of Iraq’s
west and north, the group has suffered a series of territorial losses over the
past year. Most recently ISIS fighters were pushed out of the western town of
Hit. In the face of those losses, analysts and Iraqi security officials say the
extremist group is increasingly turning to insurgent-style attacks in Baghdad
and other areas far from the frontline fighting. More than 40 civilians have
been killed in high-profile bombings in Baghdad over the past month. On March
25th an ISIS-claimed suicide bombing attack on a stadium killed 29 and wounded
60. Saturday’s attack also comes amid a political crisis in Iraq as the
country’s Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is under increasing public pressure
after repeated failed attempts at political reform to combat corruption and
waste.
Iraqi protesters storm
Baghdad’s parliament
By Staff writer, Al Arabiya English Saturday, 30 April 2016/An emergency state
was declared in Baghdad after hundreds of supporters of Shiite Muslim cleric
Muqtada al-Sadr on Saturday stormed the capital’s fortified Green Zone and some
entered the parliament building.The protesters stormed the parliament after
lawmakers failed to convene for a vote on overhauling the government. The
protesters, who had gathered outside the heavily fortified district housing
government buildings and foreign embassies, crossed a bridge over the Tigris
River chanting, “The cowards ran away!” in apparent reference to lawmakers
leaving parliament, one of the witnesses said. A guard at a checkpoint said the
protesters had not been searched before entering. TV footage showed them waving
Iraqi flags and chanting “Peaceful, peaceful!.” Some were standing on top of
concrete blast walls that form the outer barrier to the Green Zone. The
protestors, many of whom were seen waving Iraq's national flag, were responding
to calls made by Sadr. This week, lawmakers again failed to approve new cabinet
ministers. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi had been seeking to replace the
previous cabinet, which had been marred by allegations of corruption and
patronage. In a press conference Sadr denounced Iraqi political circles who are
obstructing Abadi’s reforms that would see current ministers replaced by
technocrats with no party affiliation to tackle systemic political patronage
that has enabled bribery and embezzlement. Sadr also called for a one-million
man “peaceful” demonstration. “The political sides want to suppress the reform
movement,” he said, describing the “reform movement as having only the interest
of people in its core.”Protestors are seen at the parliament building as they
storm Baghdad's Green Zone after lawmakers failed to convene for a vote on
overhauling the government, in Iraq April 30, 2016. (Reuters) He added: “[The
reform movement] is for God, the will of people and Sadr has zero interest in
it.”Instead those who are trying to cling to the status quo are those who want
to keep the “quota system” to keep “their interests intact,” he said. Observers
have criticized Iraq’s quota system, which divides power between Shiites, Sunnis
and Kurds. The quota which keeps the presidency post for a Kurd and the
premiership for a Shiite are blamed for political corruption, and weakening the
state and its army. Sadr is so far the main Iraqi political figure, who is
lending his weight to push for Abadi’s reforms, stressed that the reform
movement’s protests “will continue to be peaceful.”Last Friday, Sadr warned
political party leaders that they would face street protests if they obstruct
Abadi’s government overhaul to fight corruption. “You are not staying here! This
is your last day in the Green Zone,” shouted one protester as thousands broke
into the fortified area in central Baghdad.
EU condemns Iraq parliament protest
EU foreign affairs commissioner Federica Mogherini on Saturday criticized the
storming of the Iraqi parliament by protesters as potentially destabilizing the
country. “The reported attack today on the Iraqi Parliament and the violent
protests in Baghdad risk to further destabilise an already tense situation,”
Mogherini said. “It appears a deliberate disruption of the democratic process. A
rapid restoration of order is in the interest of the Iraqi people, who have been
suffering for too long for the lack of stability in their country, and is in the
interest of all the region, confronted by many threats.” “It’s crucial that all
Iraqis and all the regional and international actors contribute to build a
cooperative environment and a democratic, inclusive political process to
stabilize the country,” Mogherini concluded. (With Reuters, AFP)
Big win for Rowhani’s allies
in Iran election second round
AFP, Tehran Saturday, 30 April 2016/Reformist and moderate politicians allied
with Iran’s President Hassan Rowhani won twice as many seats as their
conservative rivals in the second round of parliamentary elections, official
results said Saturday. The reformist List of Hope that backs Rowhani gained 38
lawmakers in run-off polls that took place Friday, with conservatives winning 18
and independents 12, the interior ministry said. The second ballot for 68 seats
was needed as no candidate won the minimum 25 percent of votes in the first
round of voting which took place on February 26, and its outcome will make the
List of Hope the biggest single group in parliament when lawmakers are sworn in
next month. The second ballot to complete a new 290-seat parliament took place
Friday because initial polls on February 26 did not produce clear winners in the
68 seats. Rowhani's allies made huge gains in the first round of elections, on
February 26, when voters drove many conservatives out of the parliament. Results
from Friday's second ballot will decide who has the most power when lawmakers
are sworn in next month, opening or potentially closing a politically delicate
path to even limited social and cultural change in the Islamic republic. Tension
over the vote's high stakes was dramatically underlined by a shooting involving
supporters of rival candidates in a southern province. The rare political
violence left four people wounded, a security official said. Around 17 million
citizens were eligible to vote on Friday in 55 towns and cities. There was no
voting in Tehran as the List of Hope swept all 30 of the capital's 30 seats in
the first round.
Iran ranks 190 out of 199 for
press freedoms - watchdog
Saturday, 30 April 2016 /National Council of Resistance of Iran/NCRI - The
mullahs' regime in Iran ranks among the world's top ten state violators of press
freedoms, the U.S.-based watchdog Freedom House has said in its latest annual
report.
The situation for journalists in Iran remains uncertain in the face of "harsh
censorship" and "increased arrests by security services," Freedom House said in
its report FREEDOM OF THE PRESS 2016 published on Tuesday. "The Iranian
government attempted to shape domestic media coverage of the international
agreement on its nuclear program. The Supreme National Security Council
instructed media outlets to praise Iran’s team of negotiators and to avoid any
talk of 'a rift' between top officials," the report said. "The intelligence
division of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps arrested several journalists
late in the year for alleged involvement in an 'infiltration network' serving
hostile foreign countries," it added. Iran and Syria jointly ranked 190th out of
199 countries in the global rank for freedom of the press. They jointly ranked
as the Middle East's top press freedom violator.
Rouhani’s record on workers’
rights in Iran
Saturday, 30 April 2016/National Council of Resistance of Iran/NCRI – Millions
of Iranian workers are continuing to suffer from poverty out of unemployment,
inadequate pay or non-receipt of their wages. Their situation has worsened since
Hassan Rouhani took office as the regime’s President in 2013.
The following is a breakdown of just some of the problems faced by Iranian
workers:
1. The Global Wage Report by the International Labour Organization (ILO)
indicates that Iranian workers’ wage ranks 138 out of 148 countries. Some 65
percent of Iranian workers cannot afford to buy food for their families on a
daily basis with their current wages.
2. Unlike the labor standards and policies set by the ILO, over the past 37
years the minimum wage for labor in Iran has not been set in proportionality
with the true inflation rate. The minimum wage for an Iranian worker in the
current year is 8,120,000 Rials (U.S. $270) a month whereas the official poverty
line announced by Iran’s Central Bank is 35,000,000 Rials (1160 dollars). Yet,
there are many workers who have not received even these very low wages for
several months.
3. Workers enjoy no job security in Iran and can easily be made redundant.
Between March 20 and April 20, 2016, more than 5000 workers were dismissed from
various work units in Iran’s northern, central and southern provinces without
being paid for their work.
4. Trade unions are not officially recognized in Iran, and at present many
active unionists are in jails on long term sentences simply due to their union
activities and forming independent trade unions. Iranian authorities do not even
acknowledge workers’ rights for May Day gatherings.
5. Iran’s most important financial and production fields and units are owned and
monopolized by the regime’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and the
institutions affiliated with the mullahs’ Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, while
Iranian workers and their families who form 40 million of Iran’s 80 million
population have a less than 10% share of the profit.
6. Women workers are in a yet worse situation. Some female workers are paid one
third of the wage paid to male workers for similar work, and at present 82% of
women who are the main breadwinner in a family are unemployed.
7. The rate of suicide has risen amongst Iranian workers due to severe poverty.
Between March 2015 and March 2016 there have been more than 5800 protests by
workers across the country, but they have been suppressed by the regime.
26 government bodies in Iran
involved in suppression of women
Saturday, 30 April 2016/National Council of Resistance of Iran/NCRI - Mullah
Ahmad Khatami, the regime’s interim Friday prayers leader in Tehran, on Friday
reiterated the legality to suppression of women in Iran based on the regime’s
fundamentalist laws. "The law to combat mal-veiling has been adopted as part of
the 2007 Act approved by the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution.
According to this Act, 26 governmental bodies must get to work. This Act
consists of 310 Articles specifying duties to be implemented by these
governmental bodies," he said.
Last week the mullahs' regime launched a new plan to suppress women for
"improper veiling." It deployed some 7,000 so-called undercover 'morality police
officers' in Tehran tasked with suppressing women on the streets and alerting
official law enforcement agencies of instances of “mal-veiling” and other
“violations” of the mullahs’ fundamentalist laws. Khatami said: "In the police’s
plan, the fight against improper veiling is stressed as legal and kind, and
these measures are only undertaken by police officers. Thanks a lot to them."
Khatami also expressed his fear of the spread and universality of internet
technology.
He stipulated: "There is now a major war in the cultural arena especially in
cyberspace. This war is ongoing in websites, foreign channels, audiovisual and
print media, in the field of books and movies as well. These are the weapons of
the soft war."
Commenting on the recent plan to crack down on women in Iran, Ms. Farideh Karimi,
a member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) and a human rights
activist, last week said: “Suppression of women is further institutionalized in
Iran with each passing day. The regime's suppressive institutions are ever more
blatantly cracking down on women. This has been a tenet of the mullahs' regime
from its outset. The addition of 7000 forces dedicated to the suppression of
women and further gender discrimination speaks well of the reality that Hassan
Rouhani is no different from the other mullahs and the hopes for an improvement
of women's rights in Iran which some had advocated at the start of Rouhani's
tenure as President are a mirage. According to the regime’s laws, Rouhani has
the authority to halt the new suppressive measures against women. By refusing to
do so, he is in practice endorsing them.”
The Iranian regime has hanged at least 66 women and 2,300 men since Hassan
Rouhani took office as President in 2013.
Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on May 01/16
Britain? Moderates? How's That Again?
Douglas Murray/Gatestone
Institute/April 30/16
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7930/britain-muslim-moderates
A new poll of British Muslims found that a majority hold views with which most British people would disagree. For instance, 52% of British Muslims think that homosexuality should be made illegal. An earlier poll found that 27% of British Muslims have "some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks" at the offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo last year.
Whenever opinion poll results come out, nearly the entire Muslim community, including nearly all Muslims in the media and all self-appointed groups of "Muslim community leaders" try to prove that the poll is a fraud.
If I had always known my "community"
harboured such views, and a poll revealing this truth came out, I would be
deeply ashamed. But when such polls emerge about the opinions of British
Muslims, is that there is never any hint of introspection. There is no shame and
no concern, only attack.
If there were indeed a "moderate majority," when a poll comes out saying that a
quarter of your community wants fundamentally to alter the law of the land and
live under Sharia, the other 75% would spend their time trying to change the
opinions of that quarter. Instead, about 74% of the 75% not in favour of sharia
spend their time covering for the 25% and attacking the polling company which
discovered them.
One often hears about the "moderate Muslim majority." 'After any terrorist
attack, politicians tell us that, "The moderate majority of Muslims utterly
condemn this." After any outrage, commentators and pundits spring up to say, "Of
course the vast majority of Muslims are moderate." But is it true? Are the vast
majority of Muslims really "moderate"?
A number of factors suggest perhaps not -- most obviously the problem repeatedly
revealed by opinion polls. Time and again, the results of opinion polls in the
Western world, never mind in the Middle East or North Africa, show a quite
different picture from the "moderate majority" aquatint.
True, such polls can often show that, for instance, only 27% of British Muslims
have "some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks" at the offices of the
French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo last year. True, that is only between a
quarter and a third of British Muslims sympathizing with the blasphemy
enforcement squad. On other occasions, such as recently in Britain with a new
ICM poll commissioned by Channel 4, they find that a majority of Muslims hold
views with which most British people would disagree. So for instance, the recent
ICM poll found that 52% of British Muslims think that homosexuality should be
made illegal. That's a striking figure. Not 52% of British Muslims saying
homosexuality is "not their cup of tea" or that they are "not entirely on board
with gay marriage," but 52% of British Muslims thinking that homosexuality
should be made a crime under the law.
But it is what happens after such polls emerge that the "moderate majority" idea
really comes under strain. First, of course, there is always an attempt to put a
positive spin on the results. So for instance, when the post-Charlie Hebdo poll
came out last year, the BBC (which had commissioned the poll) ran it with the
headline, "Most British Muslims 'oppose Muhammad cartoon reprisals.'" Although
true, it is not the most striking aspect of its findings. But it is what happens
next that is most revealing and more truly calls into question whether we are
really dealing with a "moderate majority" or, more truthfully, with a "moderate
minority." Because whenever the results come out, nearly the entire Muslim
community, including nearly all Muslims in the media and all self-appointed
groups of "Muslim community leaders," try to prove that the poll is a fraud. It
happened with the release of the ICM poll in the UK, as it has happened with
every previous poll. With the exception of only one or two prominent dissident
Muslims, every Muslim voice in the media and every Muslim group decided not to
concern themselves with the ICM findings, but to try to pull apart the validity,
methodology and even 'motives' of the poll. This is deeply revealing.
It is worth trying a thought-experiment here. Whatever community you come from,
imagine your reaction if a poll like the ICM one on British Muslims had come out
about whatever community you feel a part of. Imagine you are a Jew and a poll
had come out saying the majority of other Jews in your country want to make
being gay a crime. What would your first reaction be? My impression is that most
Jews would be deeply embarrassed. Very shortly after that first reaction, you
might begin to wonder what could be done to change such a terrible statistic
around. It is possible, if you knew nobody of your faith who thought that
homosexuality should be criminalized and had never come across this position
before (or any previous polling which suggested the same thing) that you might
question the credibility and methodology of the poll. But otherwise, you would
probably sigh and wonder what could be done to improve things. If you knew the
findings to be fairly accurate, why would you try to tear apart the findings?
Likewise, if tomorrow a poll were published of the opinions of white British
people of Christian upbringing in the UK, I would take some interest in it. If
it revealed that 39% of British Christians believed that wives should always
obey their husbands (as the ICM poll showed British Muslims believe) then I
would have some worries. If it also found that almost a quarter (23%) of British
people of Christian origin wanted areas of the UK to divest themselves of the
law of the land and be run instead on some Biblical literalist "take" on the
law, I would worry some more.
Of course, neither of these eventualities is remotely likely to arise. But let
us say that it did. What would be my reaction? The first would be to hang my
head in shame. And I would hang it just that bit lower if the findings came as
absolutely no surprise to me. If I had always known my "community" harboured
such views, and a poll revealing this truth came out, I would be deeply ashamed
that what I had always known was now known by everyone else in the country.
What is most interesting then, when such polls emerge about the opinions of
British Muslims, is that there is never, ever, any hint of such introspection.
There is no shame and no concern, only attack. If there were indeed a "moderate
majority," then when a poll comes out saying that a quarter of your community
wants fundamentally to alter the law of the land and live under Sharia law, the
other 75% would spend their time trying to change the opinions of that quarter.
Instead, about 74% of the 75% not in favour of sharia spend their time covering
for the 25% and attacking the polling company which discovered them. It is a
tiny symptom of a much larger problem, the repercussions of which our societies
have hardly begun to face.
**Douglas Murray is a current events analyst and commentator based in London.
© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. No part of the Gatestone
website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without
the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute
The Missing Link in the
Debate about US Middle East Strategy
Middle East Briefing/April 30/16
The debate about a new US strategy in the Middle East, upon the change of guards in Washington, is often dominated by a distinct military perspective and a single focus on regional security defined in an excessively narrow terms. In the debate going on now we detect that foreign aid is not given its proper place. Furthermore we argue in favor of conceiving the term foreign aid in a totally different manner than the way it exists now. We believe that the way in which foreign aid programs are currently shaped resulted in placing this element at a lower place in the list of the elements of US strategy while it potentially represents a game changer in the quest for regional security.
But first we should lay down how we define foreign assistance. Foreign assistance in this approach means targeted programs to develop the productive forces in troubled countries. It is not handouts to this or that government. It is not assistance to enhance military to military ties. It is rather an encompassing term that targets various objectives: Security, social stability, governance, respect of international law and universal rights, fighting radicalism and good neighborhood behavior are, with varying degrees, a reflection not of wealth, but rather of how wealth is generated in any given society.
Enhancing the productive forces through expansion of targeted foreign aid could ultimately yield positive results in all those accounts. The foreign aid in our context is a globally coordinated effort to democratize the economies of several Arab countries through providing targeted assistance in sectors like small businesses, integrated small farming, small transportation projects, fish farming, education and health care. A dynamic local market creates its culture and increases awareness of individual rights, the rule of law and the need for effective governance. The current aid programs are hardly targeting a specific desirable social impact. This contributes to the dilemmas US strategists face when shaping their approach to the Middle East.
In the case of human
rights violations, for example, we find that the opposition between working with
allies on the one hand and how “democratic” those allies are on the other, has
never been solved properly yet. People condemn working with, say, Arab
governments which, in the views of many, do not respect human rights, only to
find themselves with no other choice but working with the regimes they have just
condemned. Often, the contradiction is presented as a strategic conflict between
realism and idealism. As it is not solved, it may be the source of future
conceptual errors in the part of officials and administrations. Furthermore,
taking it as an irreconcilable contradiction, risks either ending up with making
any defense of values and respect of international norms meaningless and
ineffective, or threatening alliances and interests.
So far, the “solution” offered to this contradiction divides areas of relations
with any ally and picks what fits a specific objective. During the Arab Spring,
for example, the common argument was that the Spring provides a perfect solution
to the dilemma. It promises building democratic regimes capable of contributing
to an open and liberal world space and of respecting human rights, all the while
not presenting the US with any strategic threat. Yet, the failure of the Arab
Spring, changes in Washington’s priorities, and the administration pursue of
what it considered US regional interests in the region paved the road to a
disappointments, tension and misunderstandings.
Things evolved until
the emergence of the Islamic State and its turn to violence and terrorism
against far countries. This looked as a way out for those who could not find a
proper rationale to shape a strategy in the Middle East. Now, the rationale
presented itself readymade and clear-cut: Fight ISIL.
In other words, fighting ISIL helped freeze the tiring search for a theoretical
framework able to define the US strategy. It covered the real theoretical
problems which need to be addressed. It provided an immediate goal that no one
can dispute, hence makes the debate about those problems less urgent. But the
problems are still standing before our eyes and still threaten deep confusion
and splits in the future. It also threatens to make the US strategy more
vulnerable to the ideological inclinations of future administrations, as much as
it was during the Bush and Obama’s administrations.
Certain principles have been widely talked about in recent years stirring all
kinds of disputes, yet without finding a conceptual framework that addresses
both sides of the spectrum. They come clear once posed by specific questions. Is
it the role of the US to “revolutionize” Middle East societies? To which extent
should the US go in its quest to “spread democracy”? What should the US do when
one of its allies use violence against their own people? Should the US act
unilaterally in regional crisis? And how? What logic should underline force
sizing in regional crisis? How could the US combine its values and its
alliances? Should the US make the rise of terrorism a central issue in forming
regional alliances? etc., etc.
The general frame which gathers all these issues is that of finding a force multiplier to bridge the gap between capabilities and mission. And the key to this force multiplier is obviously a regional “security clubs” so to speak. Yet, even this general concept has its problems. It does not address a good part of the legitimate questions just mentioned. In other words, it does not provide the conceptual framework that combines the two opposed views of “realists” vs. “idealists”. The missing element will remain missing so far as the screen has the existing dominant military dimension and narrow definition of security and the element of economic assistance is brushed aside as a long term shot. The military dimension should be only one component of the general strategy. The current dispersion in the map of tools-which should otherwise be combined to build a strategy-is very obvious. The reason is that while the military was active in debating and formulating a “general strategy”, the economic and cultural dimension of that strategy did not go through the same level of reflection and debate. The economic dimension in any strategy is mainly thought of in a passive form-that is as a punishment (sanctions-boycott-etc.). Furthermore it is perceived as a burden (how much will that cost us?). It is one underdeveloped tool that could provide, as it did in the post Second World War Europe, a powerful base to build alliances.
Clearly, time has
changed and so did the US relative economic weight and mussels. But this means
shaping the proper economic aid programs to fit today’s capabilities and means
on the one hand, and play an important role in the US regional strategy on the
other.
The naïve concept of “exported democracy” stems from a willingness to expand the
zone of peace, respect for international law, and universal human rights. But
Iraq and Libya tell us that military intervention achieved exactly the opposite,
at a huge cost.
US strategy should move to give prominence to the economic missing link. The
current tools in the US foreign aid programs show how this link was hardly
developed in the last five decades. The US spent almost $23 billion in
humanitarian assistance and $14 billion in foreign military assistance in 2013.
Yet, wars, famine and crisis are abundant. The security situation in the region
did not improve. In fact it deteriorated rapidly. The central problem here is
that in the current political culture in the US, the word strategy is often
interpreted in military terms. Once the debate on the military strategy reaches
a conclusion, other tools like foreign aid are quickly “attached”, parallel to
the military objectives, to make a mathematical addition which claims to serve
the total strategy.
The concept of
foreign aid has to be revolutionized and changed profoundly. Foreign aid is not
a hand out to needy countries. It should rather be a plan to introduce specific
social changes within those countries. A new global blueprint for the division
of labor between various regions has to be debated. The Middle East is not
socio-economically developed even if some of its countries are very rich. It is
not wealth that counts. It is how wealth is generated. For generating wealth
through development, innovation, education, work, and market forces shape all
sides of social life be it culture, gender equality, view of minorities,
political rights and proper governance. It is in the “how” that we will be
talking about the social structure. And it is in the social structure that we
will be talking about respect of universal human rights and international law,
terrorism, democracy, governance, etc. Presumably, it is a new map of global
division of labor that should present the foundation of a new concept of the
term global security. While this should not be taken in opposition to the “force
multiplier” of regional military alliances, the US strategy should focus first
on how to develop the productive forces of troubled regions.
Developing productive capacities in a given country is based on a combination of
advice, assistance, sharing expertise, a proper plan of integrating small
business and other sectors, help in opening trade agreements between different
countries, etc. The US role as a world leader would cease to be defined in
military terms. Yet, this economic link will yield its fruits on the social
stability of the given countries in the troubled regions.
Would this imply that the US has to pour massive amounts of money into those regions? Not at all. What it takes is a different understanding of the real roots of crisis in the world troubled regions and a different definition of the term global security. This should be followed by a collective global effort to develop the productive capacity of those regions. Developing the productive capacities is not synonym to foreign aid. These are two completely different concepts. In countries where the productive forces are not developed, the rule is that international laws, or any laws for that matter, are not respected. Even China today is different than the Cultural Revolution China. The “prescription” of international financial institutions has to be replaced by governments led plan to end the economic misery of most countries in the Middle East. It doesn’t matter that today many of the region’s governments do not have a defendable human rights record. At one point, changing their behavior would become inevitable, not due to foreign military intervention, but due to their own natural evolution. This point comes on the road, not to wealth, but to how this wealth is generated.
Security is not a
military term. It is wider than that. The stagnant economies of troubled regions
should be considered the primary threat to world security. These economies
should be helped to move forward. The ignition system must become the core of US
strategy in the Middle East. The US must lead an international effort to
implement a plan to get the region out of its current futile cycle of wars,
crisis and violence. To sum up, the foreign aid program has to be globalized,
based on a global division of labor and a global effort to restart the region’s
economies in a targeted way which expands the peoples participating in the
economic free market sphere. This should be incorporated into the structure of
the US strategy, all the while targeting it towards enhancing the productive
forces within troubled countries. The current formula of foreign aid programs is
not only not working, it camouflages any new concept in looking at the economic
dimension as the missing link in the US strategy. This should not, however, be
done on the expense of delaying the establishment of regional alliances based on
burden sharing under the pretext of any idealist arguments.
Splits Inside the White House
about Syria while the Road Forward is Clear to All
Middle East Briefing/April 30/16
Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser, said Friday April 22, “The
movement of any additional Russian military support into Syria would be
inconsistent with our shared objective of getting a political process moving”.
Russia has repositioned artillery near the city of Aleppo, several U.S.
officials told Reuters. Despite withdrawing some fixed-wing aircrafts in March,
Russia has also bolstered its forces in Syria with advanced helicopter gunships,
and renewed airstrikes against moderate opposition groups, said U.S. officials,
speaking on condition of anonymity”, Reuters reported the same day. The report
describes as well the deepening splits in the administration over Putin’s
intentions in Syria.
But splits about what exactly? Isn’t it obvious that President Putin positioned
himself from the start in a win-win spot? Why would any official in the White
House, if he was in Putin’s shoe, be energized to find a political way out if
both military options are more attractive than the proposed solutions? Why would
he grant Washington’s illusions a free lunch? If he doesn’t, he will save his
dime, and still gets what he wants. In other words, Assad is making progress on
the ground, the Iranians conditioned their current relations with Moscow on
Putin’s support to the Syrian dictator and Russia’s presence in Syria is
“secured” so long as Assad is in power. Furthermore, if the ceasefire remains
respected, the Russians are sitting tight in the West of Syria. To tip the
picture, the political solution as proposed does not threat Russian presence in
West Syria in any way. It is a win-win situation for Putin. Time for him to pick
as he pleases. But could anyone tell us one good reason why Putin should
sacrifice his ties with Iran and his comfortable position this for an uncertain
result of an uncertain political process? Could anyone explain why should Mr.
Putin be energized one way or the other? Even if Assad goes, according to the
proposed political solution, the Russians will remain. Their interests are safe
either way. They only gain Iran’s gratitude if they neglect Ben Rhodes’s
warnings. And they do.
As we previously said in Middle East Briefing (April 18): unless Putin exacts a
fair price elsewhere for his real cooperation in Syria, he would be a fool to
give up voluntarily one inch in Syria. No, not for free, and he certainly isn’t
a fool. He has his own agenda, which is perfectly normal, in other spots from
Ukraine to Central Asia to East Europe. He wants something in return. Something
to compensate for what he may pay to buy the Obama administration lunch in
Syria.
As Putin’s price is a little high, from Washington perspective, Syria’s war will
drag on. But this is not the point. The point is how the Obama administration
approached the diplomatic process. It should have been based on a reading of how
Putin thinks, not on begging him to cooperate or eloquently explaining to him
the logical reasons why he should.
Indeed, there are common Russian-American objectives in Syria: Defeating ISIL
and stabilizing the country. But while the moment, as we see it now, appears to
provide common grounds between Moscow and the others, it is also the very moment
when others are most vulnerable to miscalculations and deception. The promoted
rationality which aims at explaining a specific position in the part of Russia
may be merely a smokescreen to hide different Russian objectives, all the while
as it provides deceptive explanations about Russia’s moves. It could be a very
convincing smoke screen set to drag the others to Moscow’s calculus. It is
important to see the individual interests built in any situation in objective
light regardless of what is said or of promoted explanations even if they seem
credible.
Any “normal” country, say as South Africa, has in a way or another, an interest
in defeating ISIL. Yet, South Africa has no say in the situation we are talking
about. Mutual interests is an abstract term. It is concretized at the moment
there are actual leverages and actual interests for this or that country in the
given situation. But these actions should be consistent with the final
objectives at all the moments. Yet, President Putin does n’t seem to be
consistent, in all his moves, with the general framework agreed upon with
Secretary Kerry. He is helping destroy the ceasefire he himself negotiated with
Kerry and said he approves. Positioning additional forces to take Aleppo proves
that common objectives used by the Obama administration as an explanation of why
it is working closely with Assad, was a Russian smokescreen all along.
Yet, either Putin is sincere or not is not the point and should not be made the
point. In either case the element of a country’s individual interest gains its
concrete weight proportionally to the country’s leverage within the concept of a
collective approach. If a given country has no tools to shape and influence the
course of joint actions, it would remain a spectator as much as South Africa is
in the case of Syria. Therefore, the US should have worked harder on developing
its own leverages in the Syrian crisis from the start. This would have
marginalized the importance of Putin intentions and would have placed questions
about his real objectives in a different context where the US has multiple
choices, not only to plead its case in the Kremlin or be threatened to swallow
“Assad has to go” and put its role in the current desperate corner we see now.
For the Obama administration, it is not “logical” that Assad remains in power as
this would lead to the Arabs and the Turks providing the opposition with all
they want to carry on the fight. It will not guarantee defeating ISIL or the
stabilizing Syria or preventing any future emergence of another terrorist group.
This is all fine.
But President Putin does not see it this way. He believes that Assad can,
through brutal force and barrel bombs, remain in power and do the job
nevertheless. Why wouldn’t he move to adapt to the US position? Because he does
n’t have to. Because if he moves along with the US he would risk his alliance
with Tehran. Because in either case, Assad or no Assad, he was given by the US
an advance commitment to preserve his individual interests in Syria the moment
the US gave up on the moderate opposition and the moment it structured the
diplomatic approach the way it did.
From the start, the Obama administration did not do anything to change the
calculus on the ground to force Putin or Assad to see it differently. The
administration did not even see that Putin might interfere heavy handedly in
Syria to force the American to pay him a price somewhere else in the world, and
to solidify his ties with Iran. Putin was actively multiplying his leverage in
Syria which was totally logical. What wasn’t is the long speeches in Washington
justifying why the administration refused, for five years, many reasonable
proposals to increase its own leverage there. This ultimately led to
Administration officials knocking on the doors of the Kremlin to plead their
case or losing sleep to try to figure out Putin’s real intentions.
Yet, we have the National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, resisting any serious
step to change the calculus on the ground. As Reuters told us: “Other officials,
including National Security Advisor Susan Rice, have vetoed any significant
escalation of U.S. involvement in Syria”, a senior official told the news
service. “Rice is the fly in the ointment, said a person familiar with the
internal debate”, the agency added. But is the fly really Rice or President
Obama?
The President said he is faced with the following dilemma: If he helps the
opposition, he will be engaged in a proxy war with Russia. But if he doesn’t,
Putin will further ridicule Washington’s policies in the Middle East and further
expand Russia’s influence there. Yet the question here is: Why does the
President see assistance to the opposition as a proxy war against Russia? Putin
helps Assad bombs groups which receive assistance from the US, as the White
House repeatedly warned last fall. Isn’t this an involvement in a proxy war
against the US? By stating that the US doesn’t want to be engaged in a proxy war
against the Russians, the President gives the impression that he is struggling
to find an acceptable explanation for a policy he chose already. It is a “post
festum” rhetoric.
Rhetoric aside, the configuration on the ground is clear, and Washington still
has five minutes to midnight. The Obama administration must arm carefully vetted
groups all the while devising mechanisms to put the brakes on their movement
when necessary by keeping strong channels within any group. Allies can help, but
the US still has to keep “its own” and exclusive channels. Qualitative arms
should be accounted for every hour of the day. Use of such arms should be
cleared, at least in general principles, beforehand.
There is no point in embalming the Geneva peace process. James Baker allegedly
said to a reluctant Israeli PM Yitzhak Shamir during the preparations for Madrid
Conference of 1991 “You know how to get in touch. Call us if you need us. Good
Bye”. But those were the days my friends. The US Knew what should be done and
did it. Now, Secretary Kerry should say the same to both Sergei Lavrov and
Bashar Al Assad instead of trying single handedly to save a hopeless
administration’s policy. The US should go full steam ahead with assisting
moderate opposition until the point where Assad, Iran and Mr. Putin accept a
reasonable political deal that preserves the Syrian State and stops the daily
blood bath.
We reiterated multiple times in the past what is already known to everyone: You
cannot reach a reasonable political solution unless the balance of power on the
ground favors a reasonable political solution. For those who say that they had
to try to stop the death of innocent civilians we would say that what is
essential is not trying, but it is how you try. Sometimes trying to stop a
tragedy leads to exacerbating it. President Obama told us that he tried to stop
a tragedy in Benghazi in March 2011. Well, the tragedy now is the situation in
all of Libya, including Benghazi.
The moment is not ripe for a favorable political solution in Syria yet.
US-GCC: Another Step towards NATO’s Role in Gulf Security
Middle East Briefing/April 30/16
While President Barack Obama was hardly welcomed with open arms during his
recent visit to Saudi Arabia, behind the scenes, progress is being made on a new
“trilateral alliance,” involving the United States, NATO and the Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC). This effort transcends the Obama Administration, and
has been slowly moving forward for the past dozen years. Obama Administration
sources claim that in the closed-door discussions with King Salman, President
Obama was able to counter Saudi fears of a burgeoning US-Iran alliance by
spelling out US plans to deepen cooperation with the GCC countries, which would
include efforts to contain Iran’s regional destabilizing actions. While this
Administration spin is dubious, the deeper process of military cooperation and
eventual integration between US, NATO and GCC forces was the subject of talks
led by US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, CIA Director John Brennan and top
officials from the US Central Command, who met with GCC counterparts the day
before Obama arrived in Riyadh, in preparation for Obama’s meeting with the GCC
heads of state. Carter and Brennan have also established strong lines of
communication with Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin-Salman, which is another
venue through which the military cooperation is quietly moving forward.
As reported in MEB, the idea of a formal NATO-GCC alliance has been on the table
for years, with former Obama Administration National Security Advisor General
James Jones (a former Commander-in-Chief of NATO) promoting the idea at a 2010
conference at the National Defense University in Washington. In fact, the formal
framework for an eventual NATO-GCC integration has been in place since 2004,
when the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI) was launched on the sidelines of
the NATO summit in the Turkish capital. Four GCC countries formally joined the
ICI, which established military-to-military cooperation with NATO on a
country-by-country basis. Those four GCC states—Bahrain, Qatar, UAE and
Kuwait—were joined in December 2014 by Saudi Arabia and Oman at the tenth
anniversary conference of the ICI in Doha. At that session, NATO Secretary
General Jens Stoltenberg spelled out three immediate areas of greater NATO-GCC
ICI cooperation: increased military cooperation, maritime security and political
consultations. He cited the Libya campaign as a recent example of NATO and GCC
military integration, and invited all of the GCC countries to join NATO’s “Ocean
Shield” counter-piracy program.
At an earlier ICI meeting in 2011, Kuwait had proposed to host an ICI Regional
Center, which would be a point of integration between NATO and the four GCC
states formally part of the ICI. GCC countries are also being encouraged to join
NATO’s Civil-Military Cooperation Centre of Excellence in Enschede, Netherlands,
and its Centre of Excellence Defense Against Terrorism headquarters in Ankara.
These centers engage in practical coordination of military and civilian defense
personnel, establishing the kinds of personal channels of communication that
will be vital to more formal NATO-GCC force integration in the future. The
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative founding charter provided for membership
expansion, even beyond the GCC states, to include “all interested countries in
the region who subscribe to the aim and content of this initiative, including
the fight against terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction.” In addition to the ICI, NATO earlier established a Mediterranean
Dialogue, with similar objectives of security cooperation, increased systems
interoperability and intelligence sharing. The member countries of the
Mediterranean Dialogue, in addition to the 26 NATO countries are: Algeria,
Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia. At the December 2012
NATO summit in Chicago, Libya was formally invited to join the Mediterranean
Dialogue. With new priority attached to the fight against the Islamic State in
Libya, some NATO and US military officials are looking at the near-term prospect
of joint military actions against ISIL in North Africa, which would be a
concrete opportunity to expand force integration, albeit on an ad hoc basis.
While both of these formal partnership structures exist, there are clear
obstacles that stand in the way of rapid integration of NATO and the GCC. These
obstacles are not insurmountable and there is already progress. The GCC is
moving forward with the creation of a joint military command, which is vital to
the plans for further integration with NATO. Saudi Arabia has taken the lead in
promoting this joint command, including greater attention towards common weapons
systems that also match up with NATO capacities. Another issue that must be
resolved is the role of two leading Arab military powers—Egypt and Pakistan—in
the NATO-Middle East military integration. While Saudi Arabia has, by far, the
biggest military budget in the Arab world (Saudi Arabia’s annual defense
expenditures this year passed Russia’s budgeting), Pentagon and NATO officials
believe that some form of involvement by Egypt and/or Pakistan is vital for
there to be a viable Arab military force to partner with NATO.
Both Egypt and Pakistan refused Saudi requests for military assistance in the
Yemen war, while the United States and Great Britain have actively participated.
[In their talks in Riyadh, President Obama and Defense Secretary Carter both
emphasized concerns over Al Qaeda’s growing presence in Yemen. In the days
following the summit, Saudi and UAE military forces launched effective bombing
and ground operations against Al Qaeda positions in Yemen.]
Washington sources emphasize that the NATO-GCC integration is “down the road,”
but remains a clear priority objective. That will remain the case regardless of
who wins the November presidential elections in the United States. In the
interim, as efforts like the ICI and Mediterranean Dialogue mature, the United
States military will continue to take the lead in moving the integration process
forward. Washington will continue to pursue “coalitions of the willing” to
address issues like the war against the Islamic State. The anti-ISIL coalition
that was forged in Paris on September 15, 2014 included leading Arab states:
Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the
UAE (all six of the GCC states). But even as these coalitions take up the
immediate issues of fighting ISIL, dealing with piracy, the refugee crisis and
humanitarian and natural disasters, the process of formal institutional
collaboration is always prominent in the minds of NATO and Pentagon officials,
who see NATO building partnerships that will form the basis of the core security
architecture for the twenty-first century. And nowhere is such an architecture
more essential than in the extended Middle East.
Mohammed Ben Salman Opens
Saudi Arabia’s Road to the Future
Middle East Briefing/April 30/16
Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammad Ben Salman laid out his economic plan for
Saudi Arabia 2030. The vision, if applied, means the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
will be transformed profoundly in all aspects. While the plan may lead to
positioning the Kingdom in the twenty first century and making it a considerable
economic power on the global theatre, it also brings challenges and tests the
will of the Saudi people and the wisdom of the Saudi elite. Lower oil prices,
budget deficit, regional turmoil, and social and economic stagnation encouraged
the visionary young Prince to come out with this transformative plan which will
both restructure the Kingdom’s economy and rewrite its social contract. The plan
was preceded with a long and through search for ways forward. Some of the best
economic and financial brains in the world were invited to contribute their
ideas, and some of the biggest financial and economic institutions globally
participated in the debate. The young Prince entered the challenge without any
prior ideological inclination. He was focused only on facts and on finding a way
forward for his country.
The plan is in many ways a masterful piece of work of history. The young Prince
reflects a younger mentality shaped by the information technology age and the
free access to knowledge. He is supported by his father, King Salman, and he
comes in a time when Saudi Arabia is hearing a wakeup call coming from its
overdependence of natural resources and the narrowing of the welfare state
circle. Ben Salman wants to establish the World’s largest sovereign wealth fund
at over $2 trillion. He is considering a new set of arbitration rules and
business regulations which would certainly improve substantially the foreign
investment environment in the Kingdom, and he is pushing forward strategically
targeted Saudi investment in the Middle East and the world. The Prince’s plan
aims at opening a wider door to foreign investment in order to energize the
national economy, Saudi investments, youth employment and the Kingdom’s ability
to generate wealth through a diversified economy.
The mission of modernizing the Kingdom will not be easy. Stagnation creates its
own mentality and institutions. Habits, fear of change and versed interests in
the status quo make a mighty alliance defending the traditional way of dealing
with the Kingdom’s future. This way is summed up in kicking the issue of the
future down the road to the future and hoping it will take care of itself by
then. The traditional way was, and still is, threatening not only the future of
Saudi Arabia, but its present as well. The young Prince will soon come under
criticism, either whispered or loudly expressed. No one can challenge the status
quo, not exclusively in Saudi Arabia but in any place else, without provoking
those who benefit from stagnation. The tide of criticism to Ben Salman would not
be modest. The status quo defenders are not easy adversaries. The young Prince
would need to be very cautious and gradual in implementing his vision. It is not
only that he is confronted with deeply rooted interests and views that belong to
the past, but it is also that Saudis are not used to changing their course or to
hearing visionary ideas that cross the limits of the established norms.
Old ways are present in all domains of daily life in Saudi Arabia. It is even
considered a source of pride. People are used to evaluating their present in
terms of their past, not on future. The young Prince has a considerable enemy in
the general culture and the understandable fear of change. He got the courage
and the support to think forward and it is expected that the young generation of
Saudis will back him all the way.
Ben Salman demonstrated that he deeply understands the challenges facing his
country and the courage to plan a way forward. The Prince’s plan, based on
common sense economics, targets enhancing domestic and foreign investment throw
opening avenues to the private sector and reducing the role of government in
areas where the government is not the best player, all the while pushing all the
elements of the plan to provide the Saudi youth with larger opportunities of
work and participation in the economy of their country. Currently, almost two
third of employed Saudis work for the government. Half of Saudis are under 25
years old. This is obviously unsustainable in the medium term and it was placing
Saudi Arabia in an increasingly narrower place as its budget is coming under
extreme pressure while the future of oil prices is far from certain.
The plan will move Saudi economy towards a new age of information technology,
high tech, innovation and dynamism. It will create its own needs that has to be
fulfilled in education, health and infrastructure. In the health sector, for
examples, the plan aims at privatizing all hospitals while keeping their
services affordable. Furthermore, the plans aim at a gradual reduction in the
relative weight of oil in the Saudi economy, a bolder move towards
diversification, keeping the social balance and enhancing social stability and
opening avenues for economic growth. Ben Salman said recently that the
Investment Fund he is planning to create would work as a spring board to take
the Kingdom to an economy free of dependence on oil. He realizes that this will
require a reshaping of the social contract in order to place a wider economic
imitative, and responsibilities, in the hands of the economically empowered
citizens.
Yet, oil will remain the locomotive of Saudi economy for some time to come and
until Ben Salman’s plan bring its fruits. The Kingdom will privatize a small
portion of its giant ARAMCO. ARAMCO is at least double the size of any other oil
company. It produces almost 10 million barrels per day and has the potential to
add some 2.5 million barrels more. It has never stopped exploration and drilling
despite the huge capacity it already has. The privatized portion of ARAMCO’s
operations will be mostly in the downstream assets.
There is confidence that the young Prince would be able to navigate through the
current financial squeeze the Kingdom is going through due to lower oil prices.
A couple of years ago the Kingdom needed a $95 per barrel price level to achieve
fiscal balance, currently and after an intensive effort by Mohammad Ben Salman,
the level of fiscal balance has been reduced to 66.70. The young Prince based
his new economic plan on a $30 per barrel. The young Prince is trying to open a
new path to the future for Saudi Arabia. A path which is not hostage to oil
production and market prices. The impact of such a transformation would be
indeed very profound either on the Saudi society or in the Middle East. It is a
courageous effort to remake Saudi Arabia. Would those who dwell lazily in the
past have the courage to dream of a bright future with him?
The world cannot let Aleppo
be slaughtered before our eyes
Brooklyn Middleton/Al Arabiya/April 30/16
The slaughter of Aleppo is underway. At least 212 civilians have been killed,
including at least 57 children, since April 18. The bloodshed is certain to
increase in the coming weeks as the regime and allied forces launch a major
offensive to attempt to retake rebel-held territory in the city. The past
several days have proved utterly brutal in Aleppo and a number of videos show
footage of all too familiar scenes: Dust covered babies and tiny children being
pulled from rubble, horrifically mangled bodies, and devastated civilian
infrastructure. In one especially barbaric attack, the Assad regime
intentionally targeted Al Quds hospital, massacring at least 55 people. Among
the dead at the Doctors without Borders-supported facility was one of Aleppo’s
very last paediatricians. Meanwhile, reports indicated rebels have intensely
shelled government-held areas of the city, killing at least 71.
As the Assad regime and its allied forces continue carrying out war crimes with
impunity, the international community must reflect on how history will look back
at this period of bloodshed. Amid the devastating surge in violence, the United
States and Russia brokered a nebulous “regime of calm,” agreement, which calls
for a cessation of fighting in areas of Damascus and Latakia for 24 and 72
hours, respectively. Excluding Aleppo from the agreement - where a halt in
fighting is most desperately needed – is a tragic mistake.
Extermination
The past several days in Aleppo have further demonstrated a particularly
poignant truth: Syria is perhaps one of the most well-tracked conflicts in
history, with shaky camera footage emerging only minutes after an airstrike and
consistent real time coverage of rebel and regime battles. Yet, despite the
overwhelming amount of information made available almost instantly about war
crime after war crime, the atrocities have continued. The US has waged a
justified war against ISIS but the chief orchestrator of the entire conflict
remains untouched; the war in Syria will never end so long as the perpetrator of
the worst violence enjoys impunity for his crimes. Just months ago in February,
the United Nations indicated that the Assad regime is guilty of carrying out the
war crime of “extermination” against his own people. A government guilty of such
a campaign cannot be dealt with in civil negotiations.
Aleppo cannot be the stage for the latest unforgiveable crimes against humanity
that we watch unfold like helpless spectators. This devastating conflict has
been punctuated by multiple opportunities for the US to more broadly intervene;
they have not been seized. As the slaughter of Aleppo begins, the impetus for
the US to act is nearly as strong as it was after Assad massacred his own people
in the worst chemical weapon attack since Halabja. With the help of Turkey and
Arab allies, the US should implement a No-Fly Zone (NFZ) and ensure the
protection of Syrians by force. The regime and Russia cannot continue dictating
the role of the US in Syria while at the same time carrying out horrific attacks
against civilians.
Aleppo cannot be the stage for the latest unforgiveable crimes against humanity
that we watch unfold like helpless spectators
When the very last airstrike is launched and the last barrel bomb dropped, no
party can look back and claim they were ignorant of what exactly the situation
on the ground in Syria was during its hellish war. No one can deny that the
world knew thousands of Syrians died from torture at the hands of government
forces. Summaries of the conflict will note that regime defector Ceaser smuggled
55,000 photographs into the west, showing the world images of detainees whose
eyes had been gouged out and whose rib cages and hip bones appeared to be on the
verge of breaking through their pale and yellowed skin. “History counts its
skeletons in round numbers. A thousand and one remains a thousand, as though the
one had never existed,” wrote Wislawa Szymborska in her devastating poem “Hunger
Camp At Jaslo.” In Syria, the dead that haven’t been disappeared continue to be
counted daily but only after the war will the real death toll come to be known.
Until the international community acts to protect Syrian civilians, Aleppo will
continue burning. And more photos of dust covered tiny bodies will surface. And
the world can look forward to one day counting more and more skeletons in round
numbers.
How long can Aleppo endure destruction?
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/April 30/16
The Syrian regime is deliberately choosing their targets for airstrikes.
Hospitals and civilian neighborhoods have been bombed violently and residents
have been left defenseless due to the international embargo. Repeated
bombardments in recent days have exhausted rescue workers who have been
continuously digging through debris in search of survivors under bombed
buildings. The victims include doctors, nurses, aid workers, residents of
neighborhoods, most of them women and children who cannot even escape. The
bombings have been going on for several days and hundreds of civilians have died
in the city of Aleppo. They have been left at the mercy of Assad’s regime, its
militias and the Russian forces. No one in the international community is doing
anything even though Syria, especially Aleppo , is supposed to be under the
truce agreement negotiated under the United Nations’ umbrella!
How is it possible that massacres are allowed to be committed every day and
parties sponsoring the Geneva negotiations aren’t moved to taking action beyond
releasing worthless statements, such as calling for ‘the regime of silence?’
The massacres in the days of the truce have exceeded the massacres in the days
of the war
What is happening in Aleppo is terrifying; it is supposed to drive the
opposition to reject the false truce, and theatrical negotiations, as massive
destruction strikes the nation that have struggled through years of war and the
sectarian cleansing.
It is inconceivable for the Gulf states to stay quiet and to compromise on what
we see as a dangerous and incomparable escalation never witnessed before.
Nothing is left for the Syrian people after being abandoned by the Turks, and
the West which defines the misfortune of 24 million Syrians only with the
existence of ISIS.The city of Aleppo, since the involvement of the Russians in
the war, have been the object of destruction. Aleppo is one of the largest
cities in Syria and most severely targeted by the regime’s airstrikes and by the
Russians. While the bombing are also continuing in the Ghouta region of
Damascus, the countryside of Latakia and other cities the international
community’s only sending more military reinforcements to the areas under the
control of ISIS. The United States has sent one 150 military to Hasaka, and the
Turks are threatening to enter the border to hunt down Kurdish rebels and the
Syrian people are left alone to face the regime forces that carries out
destruction of what remains in the neighborhoods of major cities. Aleppo is
already isolated and faces shortage of relief supplies. It has blocked roads in
front of people who are trying to escape to the Turkish borders in the north.
The United Nations did not respect its pledge that the negotiations will take
place alongside the ceasefire, allowing aid workers to deliver the needed
assistance to the victims. The massacres in the days of the truce have exceeded
the massacres in the days of the war. This confirms that the negotiations are
not only supporting the Syrian regime, which has been revived by Iranian and
Russian allies, but also dashing hopes of peace on the ground.
Does Erdogan
want his own Islamic state?
Mustafa Akyol/Al-Monitor/April 30/16
Parliament Speaker Ismail Kahraman unexpectedly sparked controversy in Turkey
when on April 25 he declared that Turkey’s new constitution should forgo mention
of “secularism” and instead be a “religious constitution” referencing God. His
words reignited Turkey’s always tense “secularism debate,” which has been
amplified since 2002 when the Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power.
Kahraman's remarks led to protests in a number of cities, a call by the main
opposition leader for him to resign and allegations by secular pundits that the
Speaker had shown the AKP’s “true face,” its “real intentions.” Because Kahraman
is a known confidant of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, many also suspected that
his statement was part of a scheme being orchestrated by Turkey's leader.In the
next two days, however, the major figures in the AKP disowned Kahraman’s
position on a “religious constitution.” The AKP’s Mustafa Sentop, chairman of
parliament's constitutional commission, said that Kahraman’s view was not a
“party stance” and that “secularism is preserved in our constitutional draft.”
Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu asserted, “In the new constitution that we are
preparing, the principle of secularism will be included.” He added that it would
be a “liberal interpretation” of secularism, not an “authoritarian” version. In
also addressing the controversy, Erdogan not only professed support for
secularism, but even offered an inspired defense of the principle.
Defining secularism as the state's “obligation to stay at an equal distance to
different faith groups,” he explained why it is a good idea: “If the faith of
all religious groups in this country is guaranteed in the constitution, and the
state’s equal distance to all religious groups is a foundation, why do you need
to emphasize Islam? If I can live my faith as a Muslim the way I want to, the
issue is over. If a Christian can live his/her Christianity, if a Jew can live
his/her Jewishness or an atheist can live his/her atheism, the issue is also
over for them.”
Will Erdogan's powerful statement ease the tensions over secularism? Probably
not, because many secularists fear that they have not yet seen the AKP’s “true
face.”
A common view in opposition circles is that Kahraman’s statement on doing away
with secularism and introducing a religious constitution did not reflect his
“personal views,” as he claimed, but was in fact part of a plan cooked up by
Erdogan. Accordingly, Erdogan wanted to test the waters by having Kahraman float
the idea of a religious constitution, but then defended secularism after the
reaction it elicited. An “Islamic state,” however, remains Erdogan's long-term
goal in their thinking. Another, more persuasive interpretation of events would
be as follows.
Erdogan’s ambitions are more about power than doctrine. For power, he needs to
sustain popular support, and for popular support, he needs to use religion, but
only to a certain extent. While religious symbolism has broad appeal in Turkey,
a Quran-thumping Islamic state does not. Various polls bear this out. The most
recent survey of the political inclinations of Turkish society was conducted in
2013 by the Pew Research Center, which found that only 12% of all Turks support
“making Sharia the official law in their country.” In contrast, 84% of
Pakistanis and 74% of Egyptians supported the idea.
Erdogan likely has the support of this hardcore, Islamist minority of 12%, who
probably do expect him to create their utopia. At the same time, he also has the
support of a much larger block of “conservative” voters who are religious and
like reference to religion, but who still prefer to live under secular law. This
is why Erdogan would want to retain secularism in the Turkish constitution,
albeit while not shying from venerating religion in the public square or perhaps
even in the constitution.
A journalist with access to the AKP recently wrote in an insider report that
there is a chance that the new constitution will preserve secularism — “laiklik,”
from the French “laïcité” — but the preamble might make reference to “Allah and
the religion of Islam,” along with some historical figures such as Rumi and
Atatürk — in other words, something for everybody. Another rumor is that the
preamble will make reference to “the Creator,” a possible inspiration from the
US Declaration of Independence.
The more likely future for Turkey is not a Sharia-imposing Islamic state, but a
more conservative state re-designed in the image of the AKP. Keep in mind that
the latter-day ideology of the party is not simply “Islamism” after all, but “Erdoganism,”
in which Islamism is indeed an important theme, but not the only theme. This
would not put Turkey on the path to becoming another Iran or Saudi Arabia, as
Turkey’s secularists fear, but it could lead in the direction of another Russia,
where a similar ideology, “Putinism,” rules.
As the journalist Fareed Zakaria astutely observed, Putinism consists of five
fundamentals: religion, nationalism, social conservatism, state capitalism and
government media control. “Returning to the values of religion” — in particular
Orthodox Christianity — is a powerful theme in Putin’s agenda, with a global
vision of “protecting persecuted Christians all over the world.” Replace
“Christian” with “Muslim,” and one has Turkey’s ruling ideology.
Egypt must preserve its
lifeline by tackling the water crisis now
Ehtesham Shahid/Al Arabiya/April 30/16
The Nile has been a lifeline for Egypt at least since the time of the pharaohs.
Yet, despite the world’s largest river travelling for over 4,000 miles in the
vicinity, water is now considered “scarce” in the country with the highest
population in the Arab world.
According to one estimate, Egypt’s per capita annual supply of water is expected
to drop from 600 cubic meters to 500-cubic-meter threshold in 2025, the level
categorized “absolute scarcity” as per international norms. This is an alarming
situation as United Nations’ Africa Water Vision 2025 says the interdependence
between water availability and development is exemplified by the link between
water and poverty.
Some of these can be attributed to the pressure of a rising population and
shifting climactic conditions. However, there is a developmental element to it
as well, which can be labeled as human intervention. Since time immemorial,
annual floods would dump rich silt on the banks of the Nile, making the lands
fertile. This silt deposit is said to have made this region one of the richest
agricultural areas in the world and the basis of one of the most ancient human
civilizations.
However, things changed with dams beginning to regulate the flow of the Nile.
The most prominent example is the Aswan High Dam of the 1970s. The Aswan helped
in providing about a half of Egypt’s power supply and improving navigation along
the river, but also, arguably, created conditions that have resulted in Egypt
today becoming the world’s largest wheat importer.
Farmers’ plight
This chain of events is often blamed for many traditional farmers today seeking
alternate employment to survive. Even farmers who survived have been forced to
use fertilizer as a substitute for the nutrients that no longer fill the flood
plain. Untreated industrial and agricultural wastes, sewage, and municipal
waste-water making their way to the river have made things worse. Egyptian
economy has always relied heavily on the agricultural sector for food and other
products. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), it provides
livelihood for about 55 percent of the population and employs 30 percent of the
labor force. In other words, Egypt’s tryst with the Nile has been a classic case
of too much water bringing destruction and too little bringing drought. While
technology has been routinely finding solutions to address challenges faced by
urban societies, it’s the farmers who need help simply because they find
themselves relegated to the background in terms of resource allocation. Indeed
efforts have been made to help poor farmers enhance their productivity, some of
whom have yielded good results.
Egypt’s tryst with the Nile has been a classic case of too much water bringing
destruction and too little bringing drought. The International Center for
Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), for instance, has optimized and
validated a number of technology packages to benefit farmers in various places
in the world, including Egypt. The government says it is restructuring state
agricultural lender to make it more accountable. It is also setting up a
commodities exchange where small farmers are expected to be some of the main
sellers. Egypt has a battle at hand to ensure adequate conditions for its
farmers. Like many other parched lands around the world, it needs to mitigate
water scarcity, implement conservation techniques and control water pollution.
The country also needs to implement more efficient irrigation techniques.
Another challenge at hand is tackling the issue of Ethiopia building a dam and
hydroelectric plant upstream that may cut Egypt’s share of the Nile. These
challenges are going to be absolutely critical for farmers of Egypt, and the
country as a whole, considering it continues to be a predominantly rural
population. Finding answers to these are indeed more important than hunt for
gold that is going on in the country’s deserts.
The Ghassanid
Imperial Titles
Michael Peschka/The Royal Herald/April 30/16
The Ghassanid Imperial address is object of interest of the historians, jurists
and also people curious about the etymology of dynastic titles.
Although not very commented and notorious, the historical information and
evidence are very abundant confirming that initially the Ghassanid rulers, even
though already Kings by their own right, have received the title of “Basileus”
which back in the 6th century CE was the official title of the emperor himself.
About the “Basileus” title:
“Basileus and Megas Basileus were exclusively used by Alexander the Great and
his Hellenistic successors in Ptolemaic Egypt, Asia (e.g. the Seleucid Empire,
the Kingdom of Pergamon and by non-Greek, but Greek-influenced states like the
Kingdom of Pontus) and Macedon. The feminine counterpart is basilissa (queen),
meaning both a queen regnant (such as Cleopatra VII of Egypt) and a queen
consort. It is precisely at this time that the term basileus acquired a fully
royal connotation, in stark contrast with the much less sophisticated earlier
perceptions of kingship within Greece.” Chrysos, Evangelos K. (1978), “The Title
ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ in Early Byzantine International Relations”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers
(Dumbarton Oaks) 32: 66–67, JSTOR 1291418
“By the 4th century however, basileus was applied in official usage exclusively
to the two rulers considered equals to the Roman Emperor: the Sassanid Persian
Shahan shah (“king of kings”), and to a far lesser degree the King of Axum,
whose importance was rather peripheral in the Byzantine worldview.” Chrysos,
Evangelos K. (1978), “The Title ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ in Early Byzantine International
Relations”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers (Dumbarton Oaks) 32: 35, 42, JSTOR 1291418
“… the title acquired the connotation of “emperor“, and when barbarian kingdoms
emerged on the ruins of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century, their
rulers were referred to in Greek not as basileus but as rēx or rēgas, the
hellenized forms of the Latin title rex, king.” Kazhdan, Alexander, ed. (1991),
Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, Oxford University Press, p. 264, ISBN
978-0-19-504652-6
“Until the 9th century, the Byzantines reserved the term Basileus among
Christian rulers exclusively for their own emperor in Constantinople.” Chrysos,
Evangelos K. (1978), “The Title ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ in Early Byzantine International
Relations”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers (Dumbarton Oaks) 32: 52–57, JSTOR 1291418
Famous Ghassanid King Al-Harith
Unfortunately, there’s some confusion regarding the early Ghassanid titles. Many
authors, for lack of information and interest in study the Ghassanid history in
depth, have confused and mixed the numerous Ghassanid titles altogether:
“Al-Malik Al-Ghassassinah” (from the Arab “King of the Ghassanids”), “Basileus
Araves” (from the Greek “Emperor of all Arabs”), Phylarch, Archphylarch, etc.
Some authors even try to use the term “Chieftain” in the pejorative way. The
most common mistake is to call the Ghassanid Kings merely as “Phylarchs”.
“A phylarch (Greek: φύλαρχος, Latin: phylarchus) is a Greek title meaning “ruler
of a tribe”, from phyle, “tribe” + archein “to rule”. In Classical Athens, a
phylarch was the elected commander of the cavalry provided by each of the city’s
ten tribes. In the later Roman Empire of the 4th to 7th centuries, the title was
given to the leading princes of the Empire’s Arab allies in the East
(essentially the equivalent to “sheikh”), both those settled within the Empire
and outside. From ca. 530 to ca. 585, the individual phylarchs were subordinated
to a supreme phylarch from the Ghassanid dynasty.” Kazhdan, Alexander, ed.
(1991). Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford University Press. p. 1672. ISBN
978-0-19-504652-6
Here is also important to make a reference regarding the title “Sheikh”.
Sheikh also transliterated Sheik, Shaik, Shayk, Shaykh, Shaikh, Cheikh, and
Shekh— is a noble and honorific title in the Arabic culture. Commonly designates
a hereditary ruler of a tribe or people. The title is given to a royal male at
birth, whereas the related title “Sheikha” is given to a royal female at birth.
The title “Sheikh” also has a religious connotation being given to prominent
Islamic leaders or clerics, which is not our focus here. The word literally
means “a man of great power and nobility”, and it is used strictly for the royal
families of the middle east. The title means: leader, elder, or noble. However,
there are many degrees of “Sheikh”. It goes from a non-sovereign, non-dynastic
Ottoman tax collector or a leader of small Bedouin tribe to the prince of a
nation, like the UAE, Bahrain, etc. Hence, a Sheikh from a sovereign or
semi-sovereign ruling family is the equivalent of a prince.
Here’s also important to mention the principle of sovereign equivalency.
Although there are differences in Royal rank (with merely honorific meaning),
the Prince of Monaco is as sovereign as the Emperor of Japan or the Queen of the
United Kingdom.
But “Sheikh” was not the title given to the Ghassanid Kings. According to
Professor Irfan Shahid:
“The title awarded to the Ghassanid Ruler or Chief by his own people was neither
Patricius nor Phylarch but king (Malik). The title, established beyond doubt by
Procopius is confirmed by the contemporary poetry of Hassan and of later poets
who continued this authentic tradition.” Irfan Shahîd, Byzantium and the Arabs
in the sixth century, Volume 2 part 2 pg.164
“The dignity of king in Procopius had been sharply differentiated from the
“Supreme Phylarchate” (archyphilarchia), with which Arethas was endowed …” Irfan
Shahîd, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, vol. 1, 1995, p. 103
“The dignity of king was not new to the Ghassanids; they had brought it with
them from the Arabian Peninsula where its assumption by a Ghassanid ruler is
attested in a Sabaic inscription. When the Ghassanids appeared on the stage of
Byzantine history, their chiefs, such as Tha’laba and Harith had already been
kings to their subjects.” Irfan Shahîd, Byzantium and the Arabs in the sixth
century, Volume 1, p.104
In 528 CE, emperor Justinian I bestowed upon King Al-Harith VI (Arethas in Greek
sources) the aforementioned title of “Basileus” which, as cited, signified at
that period the same as emperor.
“The old Basileia (kingship) was confirmed by the byzantine emperor; the new one
was bestowed by him…” Irfan Shahîd, Byzantium and the Arabs in the sixth
century, Volume 1, p.104
“In the case of the Ghassanids it was a confirmation and an extension of the
royal tradition that the Ghassanids had had and which they had brought with them
from south Arabia.” (Ibid p.111)
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, an empire is:
“a major political unit having a territory of great extent or a number of
territories or peoples under a single sovereign authority; especially: one
having an emperor as chief of state”
The “Basileus Araves” or “the Emperor of the Arabs”ruled over many tribes in
addition to the Ghassanid people.
“These were included in the phrase in Procopius that spoke of the elevation of
Arethas to the Archyphilarchia and the Basileia: ‘as many tribes as possible
placed under his command’.” Irfan Shahîd, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth
Century, vol. 2, part 1, 1995, p. 51
Traditionally, each tribe was sovereign or semi-sovereign, having its own
autonomous ruler. By simple logic that would make the bestowed “Basileia” an
imperial title to all of the Arabs allied to the Byzantine empire.
“And though the Ghassanid King was the head of what we would today call a client
state, he and the [byzantine] emperor met on equal footing – as comrades in arms
– discussing matters of earthshaking and less-than-earthshaking importance.”
Gene Gurney, “Kingdoms of Asia, the Middle east and Africa”, 1986, p.70
Here, the Ghassanid vassalage also has to be explained.
“Feudal Vassalage. So, also, tributary states, and those subject to a kind of
feudal dependence or vassalage, are still considered as sovereign, unless their
sovereignty is destroyed by their relation to other states. Tribute… does not
necessarily affect sovereignty …, nor does the acknowledgement of a nominal
vassalage or feudal dependency.” Henry Wager Halleck, Elements of international
law and laws of war p.44
” . . . the mere fact of dependence or feudal vassalage and payment of tribute,
or of occasional obedience, or of habitual influence, does not destroy, although
it may greatly impair, the sovereignty of the state so situated.”(Ibid. p. 188)
According to one of the Forefathers of International Law, Emmerich de Vattel in
his book, “Law of Nations”:
BOOK I – CHAP. I.
OF NATIONS OR SOVEREIGN STATES
5. States bound by unequal alliance. We ought, therefore, to account as
sovereign states those which have united themselves to another more powerful, by
an unequal alliance, in which, as Aristotle says, to the more powerful is given
more honour, and to the weaker, more assistance. The conditions of those unequal
alliances may be infinitely varied, but whatever they are, provided the inferior
ally reserve to itself the sovereignty, or the right of governing its own body,
it ought to be considered as an independent state, that keeps up an intercourse
with others under the authority of the law of nations.
6. Or by treaties of protection. Consequently, a weak state, which, in order to
provide for its safety, places itself under the protection of a more powerful
one, and engages, in return, to perform several offices equivalent to that
protection, without however divesting itself of the right of government and
sovereignty, – that state, i say, does not, on this account, cease to rank among
the sovereigns who acknowledge no other law than that of nations.
8. Of feudatory states. The Germanic nations introduced another custom – that of
requiring homage from a state either vanquished, or too weak to make resistance.
Sometimes even, a prince has given sovereignties in fee, and sovereigns have
voluntarily rendered themselves feudatories to others. When the homage leaves
independency and sovereign authority in the administration of the state, and
only means certain duties to the lord of the fee, or even a mere honorary
acknowledgment, it does not prevent the state or the feudatory prince being
strictly sovereign. the king of Naples pays homage for his kingdom to the pope,
and is nevertheless reckoned among the principal sovereigns of Europe…”
The Ghassanid vassalage was limited to honorific homage and military alliance.
Not even financial tribute or taxes were paid to Constantinople, on the
contrary, a “salaria” or salary was paid to the Ghassanid kings so they could
pay the Arab armies. Therefore, no harm to the Ghassanid sovereignty.
Such imperial bestowal to the Ghassanid King was so colossal and magnanimous
that was criticized by Greek historian Procopius, a harsh critic of Arabs and
especially the Ghassanid kings:
the Basileia (kingship) conferred by Justinian on Arethas takes a new meaning,
one which Procopius’ comment that is something that ‘among the Romans (both
western and eastern – byzantine) had never been done before‘…” (Ibid)
The imperial bestowal was very well documented being corroborated by hard
evidence as the Usays inscription.
Usaysinscript
The Usays inscription
“The (Usays) inscription is considered to be the most important Arabic
inscription of the sixth century, the second most important of all the
pre-Islamic Arab inscriptions as a historical document.” Irfan Shahîd, Byzantium
and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, vol. 1, 1995, p. 117
“But the strongest evidence [of the imperial bestowal] is supplied by
contemporary epigraphy — the Usays Inscription carved by one of [King] Arethas
commanders, Ibn Al-Mughira, who refers to him around A.D. 530 as Al-Malik, the
King. There is also no doubt that the Ghassanid Arethas was dressed as a King on
important occasions in Ghassanland, since the poet laureate of later times
underscores his own eminent position among his Ghassanid patrons by nothing that
he used to sit not far from their crowned head.” Irfan Shahîd, Byzantium and the
Arabs in the sixth century, Volume 2 part 2 pg.164
“Contemporary documents reflect the contrast between the two Basileiai
(kingships). In Simeon, Jabala is termed as ‘King of The Ghassanids’, in Usays
inscription Arethas is called simply ‘The King’, possibly indicating the
extension of the Basileia (kingship) over non-Ghassanids including the person
who sets up the inscription.” (Ibid)
Also important to mention that the title of “Emperor of the Arabs” – wrongly
called “king of the Arabs” by some authors – was subsequently confirmed by at
least two other byzantine emperors. King Al-Mundhir ibn Al-Harith in 580 CE by
Emperor Tiberius II Constantine (Justinian Dynasty /ruled 578-582 CE); and King
Jabla ibn Al-Ayham by Emperor Heraclius (Heraclian Dynasty / ruled 610-641 CE).
(See John A. Shoup, Culture and Customs of Jordan, pg. xvii)
It’s known by academia that the Ghassanid Dynasty ruled many realms in direct
male line after the fall of the first State until 1747 CE. (See Ignatious Tannos
Khoury, The Sheikhs Chemor rulers of Akoura (1211-1633 CE) and rulers of Zawie
(1641-1747 CE)” Beirut, Lebanon, 1948)
“After the disappearance of the Ghassanid state, isolated Ghassanian Princes
continued to reign in some oases and castles, along with Salihids and some other
phylae.” Bowesock/Brown/Grabar “Late Antiquity” –, Harvard University Press,
1999, p. 469
Certainly, the most noteworthy of those reigns was the Byzatine Empire in the
9th Century CE.
“Although little is known of Jabala’s activities after his emigration to
Anatolia, his place in the history of the Ghassanids in the Middle Byzantine
period is important, since it was he who established a strong Ghassanid presence
in Byzantine Anatolia, one which lasted for many centuries. The climax of this
presence was the elevation of one of his descendants to the purple and his
establishment of a short-lived dynasty which might be described as the House of
Nicephorus.” “Ghassan post Ghassan” by Prof. Irfan Shahid, Festschrift “The
Islamic World – From classical to modern times”, for Bernard Lewis, Darwin Press
l989, pg. 325
solidus nicephorus
Solidus of the Ghassanid emperors of Byzantium Nikephorus and Staurakius
“Nicephorus (A.D. 802-11) was a descendant of the Ghassanid [King] Jabala.”
(Ibid.)
This assertion was even stronger not merely citing the King Jabala as ancestor,
but the eponym of the Royal Ghassanid Dynasty using the name of King Jafna, the
founder of the Ghassanid Kingdom. Therefore, we can conclude that Emperor
Nicephorus (or Nikephoros) was not only citing his ascendancy but by using the
term “Jafna” he was claiming to be the head of the Ghassanid Dynasty.
“…This valuable information comes from Tabari; see Tarik (Cairo, 1966), VIII,
307, when he speaks of [King] Jafna, the eponym of the Ghassanids, rather than
[King] Jabala.” (Ibid. pg.334)
For all of the aforementioned, the Ghassanid Dynasty has the imperial dignity
not only once, but twice. First, in 528 CE receiving it from the highest emperor
of those times, the Byzantine; and second by being elevated to that very throne
in 802 CE.