LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

September 14/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site

http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletin16/english.september14.16.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

Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 11/27-33/:"Again they came to Jerusalem. As he was walking in the temple, the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders came to him and said, ‘By what authority are you doing these things? Who gave you this authority to do them?’Jesus said to them, ‘I will ask you one question; answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. Did the baptism of John come from heaven, or was it of human origin? Answer me.’ They argued with one another, ‘If we say, "From heaven", he will say, "Why then did you not believe him?"But shall we say, "Of human origin"?’ they were afraid of the crowd, for all regarded John as truly a prophet.So they answered Jesus, ‘We do not know.’ And Jesus said to them, ‘Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things."

Whoever does not provide for relatives, and especially for family members, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever
First Letter to Timothy 05/01-10/:"Do not speak harshly to an older man, but speak to him as to a father, to younger men as brothers, to older women as mothers, to younger women as sisters with absolute purity. Honour widows who are really widows. If a widow has children or grandchildren, they should first learn their religious duty to their own family and make some repayment to their parents; for this is pleasing in God’s sight. The real widow, left alone, has set her hope on God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day; but the widow who lives for pleasure is dead even while she lives. Give these commands as well, so that they may be above reproach. And whoever does not provide for relatives, and especially for family members, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. Let a widow be put on the list if she is not less than sixty years old and has been married only once; she must be well attested for her good works, as one who has brought up children, shown hospitality, washed the saints’ feet, helped the afflicted, and devoted herself to doing good in every way."

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 13-14/16

Martyr Bachir Gemayal: The Grain of Wheat & the Yeast/Elias Bejjani/September 14/16
Analysis: Is an Israeli-Syrian military conflict on the horizon/Yossi Melman/Jerusalem Post/September 13/16
The real 'evil empire'/Ronen Bergman/Ynetnews/September 13/16
Can Syrians trust the current US-Russia truce/Camelia Entekhabi-Fard/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
Beyond propaganda: Is Syria still beautiful/Maria Dubovikova/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
The US-Russian deal means Assad has won the Syrian civil war/Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
Tarnishing its reputation and holding Saudi Arabia accountable/Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
Uzbekistan’s pivot/Andrew J. Bowen/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
Shaky cease-fire starts in Syria/Laura Rozen/Al-Monitor/September 13/16
Syrian cease-fire reflects US, Russian interests/Maxim A. Suchkov/Al-Monitor/September 13/16
Are Saudis open to rapprochement with Iran/Ali Hashem/Al-Monitor/September 13/16
The Story Of The Palestinian Village Leagues/By: Yigal Carmon/MEMRI/September 13/16/
Palestinians: Bad News for Israel-Haters/Khaled Abu Toameh/ Gatestone Institute/September 13/16
Sweden: Who Do Christian Leaders Serve/Nima Gholam Ali Pour/ Gatestone Institute/September 13/16

Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on on September 13-14/16
Martyr Bachir Gemayal: The Grain of Wheat & the Yeast
Rifi: Saad Hariri is Finished, Sunnis Awaiting a 'New Hariri'
Shehayyeb: Bourj Hammoud Landfill Ready Oct. 7, Trash to be Removed from 45 Towns Tonight
Amin Gemayel: Respecting National Pact Must Include Sovereignty, Arms, Foreign Policy
March 14 Sources Downplay FPM Threat to Topple Government
Tarras Says General Security Wrongfully Accused Him of 'Meeting IS Members in Turkey'
Bassil: There Won't be New President, Electoral Law without Respecting National Pact
Geagea: Presidential Vote Blocked to Reach Constituent Assembly, Not Boost Aoun's Chances
Rahi meets Franjieh in Diman
Ghattas Khoury from Mehrab: Hariri to return soon, Presidential dossier to move again in new direction
Sidon Deputies followup on boat incident, Siniora contacts Health Minister requesting that injured be treated at Ministry's expense
Seven rescued boat passengers taken to hospitals in Sidon
Hariri: Closing down 'Future TV' is out of question!
Chocolate Entrepreneur of Lebanese Descent Emerges in World's Cocoa Leader

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on on September September 13-14/16
Germany Arrests Three IS Suspects with 'Links' to Paris Attackers
Iran threatened to shoot missiles at US navy planes
Syria War Death Toll Now More than 300,000
Syrian army ‘shoots down’ an Israeli planes, Tel Aviv denies
Israel Denies Syrian Army Shot Down Israeli Warplane, Drone
UN aid trucks cross into Syria through Turkey
Russia Troops Monitoring Truce on Aleppo Road
Syria truce holds, aid preparations underway
Iran unveils new helicopter-carrying catamaran ship
Brexit by 2019, EU parliament negotiator urges
Three Qatari soldiers killed in Yemen
Eid day attack injures 4 in Pakistan
EU should expel Hungary for mistreating migrants, Luxembourg minister says

Links From Jihad Watch Site for on September 13-14/16
Canada: Trudeau government warns of returning jihadis even as he visits terror-linked mosque
Muslim migrants in Germany go on “vacation” to their war-torn homelands
Austria: Muslim gets two years for reposting videos of Islamic State jihad beheadings
Kosovo: Muslims set fire to Orthodox cathedral, use it as a toilet
Three Muslim migrants sent by the Islamic State arrested in Germany
Obama: Eid al-Adha shows how Islam can “unite us under the banners of fellowship and love”
Spain: Muslim banned from entering churches after vandalizing several, burning images of Virgin Mary
Bangladesh President reveals that Islam is a religion of peace
The Innocence of Muslims” filmmaker: “I don’t think there is such a thing as freedom of speech”
Yemen: Locals break into and rob Christian church
Mexico helping unvetted African migrants to U.S. border, many from Al-Shabaab jihadi hotbed

Links From Christian Today Site for on September 13-14/16
Christians in Iraq 'desperate' for help, report Archbishops
More than 3,500 Muslim refugees in Germany baptised into Christian faith
Yazidi girl who escaped ISIS: Militants 'sang happily' as they entered Sinjar to massacre thousands
We will take Jesus onto the streets, say Archbishops of Canterbury and York
Coptic Christians hospitalised in clash with Muslims
China: Christian summer camp organisers detained by police for 'indoctrinating minors'
Christian woman hacked to death in India
Nicaragua ends restrictions targeting Christian missionaries
Is inequality a deadly sin?
Moscow v Constantinople: The battle over Ukraine's Orthodox Christian
South Africa bans American pastor over gay hate speech
Orlando nightclub shooter's mosque damaged in arson attack
Clinton's pneumonia: 'I didn't think it was a big deal'

Latest Lebanese Related News published on on September 13-14/16
Martyr Bachir Gemayal: The Grain of Wheat & the Yeast
Elias Bejjani/September 14/16
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/09/13/elias-bejjani-martyr-bachir-gemayal-the-grain-of-wheat-the-yeast/
John 12/24: "Most certainly I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit."
On September 14, 1982, on the same day that Lebanon was celebrating the Day of the Holy Cross, its President-elect, Sheik Bachir Gemayel, passed away into the hands of the Almighty God after carrying the cross of the country to heaven. He was not even 34 years old, but what he achieved for the freedom and dignity of Lebanon places him among the great men who left a stamp of glory on the history of Lebanon.
Bachir, the hero, dreamt of a sovereign, free and independent Lebanon, and his dream became the objective of all free-minded Lebanese men and women. And even as the hands of evil and hatred took him away through a cowardly assassination plot (14/09/82), his dream lives on in the fiber of our people and their conscience for as long as the Cedars of Lebanon tower over the country from their peaks.
Today we remember Bachir in our prayers. We also remember his fallen comrades who gave so much for our beloved country, and we learn from their sacrifice many a lesson. On this sad day, our hopes are renewed, our determination is re-energized, and our commitment to the cause is re-confirmed.
Bachir’s bright star was high in the skies of Lebanon and with it the hopes of the Lebanese people. But the joy was killed and the hopes dashed when his star fell from the skies, a martyr to his noble ambitions aiming at building a strong Lebanon, confirmed in its sovereignty and independence.
Bachir believed that "the one Lebanon is the Lebanon of the 10,452 km2, that the Lebanese must win back completely so that it belongs to its sons and daughters in all their communities, creeds, and beliefs". But even as he departed, what he believed in remains in the hearts and minds of all the Lebanese people.
Bachir was raised on the cross of Lebanon on the day we remember the Cross. He was killed in a political act at the intersection of the interests of nations, individuals, and terrorist groups that feared for their own egotistical interests should a unified, free and sovereign Lebanon rise from its ashes. Bachir established the framework and then was unjustly taken from us too soon.
Those same regimes of evil, Syria and Iran, and groups and factions like the terrorists, Hezbollah, continue today to hold the Lebanese people and their country hostage to their greed, hatred, and savage schemes. They have mastered the art of subservience and bowing at the doorstep of the forces of occupation. They are shepherds of doom who have reneged on every pledge they made and abandoned their flock.
They are factions whose job is to drive wedges between the free people of the Land of the Cedars, assassinating their aspirations and hopes in deed, thought, decision and execution. They assassinate Lebanon every morning and every hour of their waking day, killing its sovereignty, its free decision-making, its democracy and culture.
Bachir's venomous assassination still lingers to this day in all its ugliness, its corruption and its neglect. It still lingers in its displacement and emigration, Dhimmitude, apostasy, with economic, social, financial, political, security and patriotic decline.
It still lingers with the rule of personal over national interests. It still lingers with the dismemberment of the political parties; the politicization of the judiciary; the truncation of sovereignty with the imposition of foreign interference, and the abandonment of human, religious and ethical values.
Bachir’s dream is here to stay and will never disappear, because it is the dream of a people who want a dignified life, a dream that calls upon unity, sovereignty and peace.
We are today together to remember the martyrdom of Bachir and his 22 comrades, lifting our eyes and hearts in the midst of danger and trouble to the redeemer of suffering humanity, Jesus-Christ, who said "And if I were to rise above the earth, I shall take with me everyone" (John12/32). We ask Him for light, faith, strength, and hope to continue our march forward and lift ourselves, our homeland, and our people to victory, to peace, to righteousness, to freedom and to all that is good in this world. For Bachir is alive in our beings and in our minds.
Sheik Bachir, Lebanon's elected president who was assassinated before assuming his presidential responsibilities was and still is the patriotic blessed yeast that was brewed and produced solid foundations of freedom, sovereignty and independence, as well as perseverance and hope in all Lebanese minds and hearts.
Terrorists and powers of evil could not destroy the dream that Bachir left for us. Even the gates of hell shall not be able to shake our deeply-rooted faith in peace, love and democracy. Bachir is the grain of wheat and the yeast. Bachir's dream is alive and glowing. As expressed in Galatians 5/9: "A little yeast grows through the whole lump".
Bachir the Dream shall never die
N.B: This piece was first published in September 14/2009

Rifi: Saad Hariri is Finished, Sunnis Awaiting a 'New Hariri'
Naharnet/September 13/16/Resigned Justice Minister Ashraf Rifi has announced that his ties with al-Mustaqbal Movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri are “totally severed,” while claiming that the former premier has lost his influence in the Sunni community. “There are no channels of communication or any exchange of words or greetings,” Rifi said in an interview with MTV. The minister however noted that he is maintaining communication with al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc head MP Fouad Saniora, MP Bahia Hariri, Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq and “other members of al-Mustaqbal Movement.” Commenting on Mashnouq's decision to ask the government to ban the Arab Democratic Party and the Islamic Unification Movement faction led by Hashem Minqara, Rifi noted that “Prime Minister Tammam Salam will not dare to put the disbanding of the two groups on the cabinet's agenda.”“If he refrains from doing so, I will not hesitate to attack him,” Rifi added. The resigned minister also noted that from now on he will not visit the Center House – the headquarters of ex-PM Saad Hariri. “I belong to Qureitem not to the Center House,” Rifi added, referring to the headquarters of slain ex-PM Rafik Hariri, Saad's father. Saad “Hariri is finished and the Sunnis are awaiting a new Hariri,” the resigned minister went on to say. Boasting about his rising influence in the Sunni community, Rifi added: “I am strong in Tripoli and my influence is spreading to Akkar in which I will have candidates (in the parliamentary elections). I also have presence now western and central Bekaa and I'm rivaling Hariri in Beirut's third electoral district.”Rifi also revealed that Saudi Arabia had asked him through its ambassador to fulfill two demands that he snubbed – “visiting the Center House and returning to the government.” He however emphasized that his relation with the kingdom is characterized by “respect” and that Riyadh has not tried to “restrict” his political activities. Separately, Rifi hailed the Lebanese Forces and its leader Samir Geagea, describing the LF chief as “our first ally.”Asked why he has not visited Maarab lately, Rifi said he does not want to “embarrass” Geagea. Rifi also ruled out any political developments in Lebanon before the U.S. presidential elections, noting that Free Patriotic Movement founder MP Michel Aoun and Marada Movement chief MP Suleiman Franjieh have no chances to reach the Baabda Palace.

Shehayyeb: Bourj Hammoud Landfill Ready Oct. 7, Trash to be Removed from 45 Towns Tonight
Naharnet/September 13/16/Works to set up a seaside garbage landfill in Bourj Hammoud will be completed on October 7 and the Sukleen firm will start removing accumulated trash from 45 towns in Northern Metn and Keserwan as of Tuesday night, Agriculture Minister Akram Shehayyeb said. “The problem was not in the roadway towards decentralization but rather in those who want to take it, and from day one we stressed the importance of administrative decentralization in our plan,” Shehayyeb, who is overseeing the government's emergency waste management plan, said at a press conference.
“All parties have admitted that the Bourj Hammoud and Costa Brava landfills were the obligatory gateway for launching administrative decentralization and everything that happened lately was unnecessary,” Shehayyeb added, referring to a lengthy sit-in by the Kataeb Party and environmental groups that halted works at the Bourj Hammoud site for around a month. The long-running protest prompted the Bourj Hammoud Municipality to prevent Sukleen's trucks from accessing a temporary storage site in the area, which resulted in a massive accumulation of garbage on the streets. “We apologize to citizens for what they and we have suffered due to the deeds of some politicians and parties seeking personal gains,” Shehayyeb added. “May God forgive everyone who delayed the implementation of the plan,” he said. The minister however thanked the Tashnag Party, Kataeb Party chief MP Sami Gemayel and Free Patriotic Movement officials Elias Bou Saab and Ibrahim Kanaan for their role in facilitating the latest solution. “Municipalities and municipal unions are asked to find sites for the temporary storage of the garbage that has accumulated on the streets,” Shehayyeb added, noting that the trash will be packaged in large bags prior to removal. “Sukleen will tonight start removing trash from 45 Metn and Keserwan towns whose municipalities are ready for the process,” the minister announced.
“The contractor tasked with setting up the Bourj Hammoud landfill has been asked to work day and night to make up for the delay,” he added, noting that the landfill will open on October 7. Kataeb and a number of environmental groups had on Sunday announced a “temporary suspension” of their sit-in outside the Bourj Hammoud site, noting that their protest has obliged authorities to revise the waste management plan and to endorse steps based on waste sorting, composting and decentralization. “The approach of decentralization in waste management has started and no one will be able to stop it,” Gemayel announced at a press conference. “Day after day, we are proving our determination to continue the battle against corruption,” he said. Saluting the “30 Northern Metn municipalities that laid the groundwork over the past four weeks by launching awareness campaigns, finding land lots and preparing for the creation of sorting and composting plants,” Gemayel blasted “corruption” in the government's contracts for “waste collection, waste sorting and treatment, the construction of the two landfills, the construction of the breakwater, and the land-filling of unsorted waste.”“That's why they were insisting on blocking decentralization seeing as it would halt suspicious deals at all levels,” the Kataeb chief added. “Through our protest, we have broken the siege and the municipalities have started waste sorting,” Gemayel noted, vowing that Kataeb and the civil society groups would “confront anyone who might try to stop municipalities from setting up sorting and treatment plants in their regions.”
“What happened is a first round in a long war and more rounds will follow. We will not let them rest and we will confront corruption and suspicious deals,” the Kataeb leader added. A spokesman for the environmental groups, Marc Daou, meanwhile said that the decision to suspend the sit-in was taken after several protesters were hospitalized as a result to their exposure to pollution emanating from the landfill and after garbage accumulating on the streets started to pose health and environmental risks. “We are against the plan that was devised by the coalition of corruption, against the land-filling of the sea, against random garbage dumps and against suspicious deals. We support environmental solutions that would be in the interest of the country and its citizens and we have achieved some progress in our confrontation,” said Daou. He also vowed to “follow up on all tenders” and “maintain the direct confrontation – from the gates of landfills to the gates of the Council for Development and Reconstruction.”The government has vowed to shorten the so-called transitional period in its waste management plan from four years to one year. Under the new agreements, a committee comprising lawmakers, municipalities and civil society representatives would also oversee the transition to waste management decentralization. Kataeb and environmental groups had accused authorities of seeking to “land-fill the sea” with unsorted and unrecycled garbage in a manner that poses environmental and health risks and violates the Convention for Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution. The country's unprecedented waste management crisis erupted in July last year when the country's central landfill in Naameh was closed amid the government's failure to find alternatives. The crisis saw streets, forests and riverbeds overflowing with trash for several months and triggered unprecedented street protests against the entire political class that sometimes turned violent. Experts have long urged the government to devise a comprehensive waste management solution that would include more recycling and composting to reduce the amount of trash going into landfills.

Amin Gemayel: Respecting National Pact Must Include Sovereignty, Arms, Foreign Policy
Naharnet/September 13/16/Former president Amin Gemayel noted Tuesday that commitment to the National Pact must involve the issues of “sovereignty,” Hizbullah's “arms,” “the state's authority” and Lebanon's “foreign policy.”“Nowadays, we are hearing a lot about the issue of respecting the National Pact, as if this term is being used for stirring sentiments and overbidding, and unfortunately it is being used in a selective manner,” Gemayel said after talks with ex-president Michel Suleiman in Yarze. “None of us is against respecting the National Pact, which is part of the constitution and our national traditions and practices, and commitment to the National Pact founded and preserved Lebanon. But respecting the National Pact cannot be arbitrary or a la carte,” Gemayel added, in an apparent jab at the Free Patriotic Movement and its ally Hizbullah. FPM chief Jebran Bassil has threatened that the FPM would “topple the government” through street protests if the other parties do not heed the movement's demand regarding “partnership” and the National Pact. “We cannot live together through nice words but rather through sharing responsibility and burdens in the presidency, the government, the parliament and appointments, or else we would be living a lie,” Bassil said. “We must be partners... We are not your employees, workers or second-class citizens. If you reject our president we will reject your president,” the FPM chief warned. He also cautioned that if the government “does not abide by the people's interest,” the FPM would “topple it in the street” for “violating the National Pact.”The FPM, which has the biggest Christian bloc in parliament, has suspended its participation in cabinet sessions and national dialogue meetings over accusations that other parties in the country are not respecting the National Pact. The 1943 National Pact is an unwritten agreement that set the foundations of modern Lebanon as a multi-confessional state based on Christian-Muslim partnership. Addressing Prime Minister Tammam Salam, Bassil had recently said that “the son of late PM Saeb Salam must pay great attention when he says that the government is respecting the National Pact when it convenes in the presence of ministers representing only six percent of a main component of the country (Christians).”Bassil has also warned that the country might be soon plunged into a “political system crisis” if the other parties do not heed the FPM's demands regarding Muslim-Christian “partnership.”Marada Movement chief Suleiman Franjieh hit back at Bassil last Monday, saying Marada and the other Christian parties in the cabinet “represent a lot more than six percent.”

March 14 Sources Downplay FPM Threat to Topple Government
Naharnet/September 13/16/March 14 sources have ruled out the possibility that the Free Patriotic Movement's latest escalation might reach the extent of toppling Prime Minister Tammam Salam's government, the Kuwaiti daily al-Anbaa said on Tuesday. “Such attempts have proved futile,” the sources said, noting that Fouad Saniora's government survived for nine months in 2008 “despite the encirclement of the Grand Serail by (protesters from) all the March 8 forces.” “Another reason is that Hizbullah and AMAL Movement are currently not part of this escalation,” the sources added. “Hizbullah -- which knows the strategic risks that may emanate from ousting the government amid vacuum in state institutions -- is communicating with the FPM and urging it to practice restraint,” the sources went on to say. According to the sources, the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council have also told Salam that his government and political stability in Lebanon are a red line. FPM chief Jebran Bassil had warned Sunday that the FPM would “topple the government” through street protests if the other parties do not heed the movement's demand regarding “partnership” and the National Pact. “We cannot live together through nice words but rather through sharing responsibility and burdens in the presidency, the government, the parliament and appointments, or else we would be living a lie,” Bassil said. “We must be partners... We are not your employees, workers or second-class citizens. If you reject our president we will reject your president,” the FPM chief warned. He also warned that if the government “does not abide by the people's interest,” the FPM would “topple it in the street” for “violating the National Pact.” “We cannot bear this any longer. If we take to the streets this time, we will not leave them, whether we protest alone or with anyone who would like to join us,” Bassil cautioned. The FPM, which has the biggest Christian bloc in parliament, has suspended its participation in cabinet sessions and national dialogue meetings over accusations that other parties in the country are not respecting the National Pact. The 1943 National Pact is an unwritten agreement that set the foundations of modern Lebanon as a multi-confessional state based on Christian-Muslim partnership. Addressing Prime Minister Tammam Salam, Bassil had recently said that “the son of late PM Saeb Salam must pay great attention when he says that the government is respecting the National Pact when it convenes in the presence of ministers representing only six percent of a main component of the country (Christians).” Bassil has also warned that the country might be soon plunged into a “political system crisis” if the other parties do not heed the FPM's demands regarding Muslim-Christian “partnership.” Marada Movement chief Suleiman Franjieh hit back at Bassil last week, saying Marada and the other Christian parties in the cabinet “represent a lot more than six percent.”

Tarras Says General Security Wrongfully Accused Him of 'Meeting IS Members in Turkey'
Naharnet/September 13/16/General Security interrogators accused Muslim cleric Sheikh Bassam al-Tarras of meeting Islamic State members during his latest visit to Turkey, media reports said on Tuesday. “Tarras says the interrogators questioned him about his visit to Turkey and accused him of meeting IS members in the hotel in a bid to frame him,” the Kuwaiti al-Anbaa newspaper reported. The pan-Arab daily al-Hayat meanwhile said the cleric was arrested “after his number was found on the cellphones of some members of the cell that was apprehended by the General Security on charges of carrying out the Ksara bombing.”“During interrogation, the detainees said they were attending the cleric's religious lectures,” al-Hayat added. Later on Tuesday, state-run National News Agency said Tarras was released after State Commissioner to the Military Court Judge Hani Helmi al-Hajjar questioned him and verified that he did not confess to having any ties to the bombing. Hajjar also determined that the detainees did not confess against Tarras during the General Security investigations, contrary to the previous reports, NNA added. “In light of these developments and after listening to Tarras' testimony at the General Security building, Judge Hajjar ordered his release pending further investigations,” the agency said. Tarras, a former member of the influential Muslim Scholars Committee, was interrogated on Sunday and freed on Monday following protests by the committee and a number of Islamic activists. The MSC had also issued a strongly worded statement against the General Directorate of General Security, demanding the cleric's “immediate release” and threatening judicial follow-up on the case. Al-Joumhouria newspaper had reported that Tarras “confessed to recruiting the mastermind of the cell that carried out the terrorist attack and securing his communication with a terrorist called Abou al-Baraa.”The bomb attack left an elderly woman dead and at least ten others wounded. The bomb that was placed at a busy roundabout was likely targeted against AMAL Movement convoys that were carrying supporters to a rally commemorating Imam Moussa al-Sadr in the southern city of Tyre.

Bassil: There Won't be New President, Electoral Law without Respecting National Pact
Naharnet/September 13/16/Free Patriotic Movement chief Jebran Bassil has warned that the country cannot have a new president or a new electoral law if the political parties do not respect the National Pact. “Without respecting the National Pact, there can't be a premiership and there can't be a government. There can't be (administrative and military) appointments and there can't be an electoral law. There can't be a parliament and there can't be a parliament speaker. There can't be a republic and there can't be a president for the republic,” Bassil cautioned during an FPM ceremony. “The FPM's cause today is to preserve the National Pact. This issue concerns both Christians and Muslims but today we are the targeted ones,” he added. The 1943 National Pact is an unwritten agreement that set the foundations of modern Lebanon as a multi-confessional state based on Christian-Muslim partnership. “We want freedom and national unity together but let no one try to enslave us under the excuse of our national unity. We want to live free,” Bassil went on to say. “Our 'Lebanese marriage' is a Maronite one... but even Maronites have permitted divorce should the purposes of marriage cease to exist. The National Pact is the basis of our 'marriage,'” Bassil added, referring to Christian-Muslim partnership. The FPM, which has the biggest Christian bloc in parliament, has suspended its participation in cabinet sessions and national dialogue meetings over accusations that other parties in the country are not respecting the National Pact. The FPM's boycott of cabinet meetings was initially linked to the thorny issue of military and security appointments. The movement has long voiced reservations over the government's decision-taking mechanism in the absence of a president. Addressing Prime Minister Tammam Salam, Bassil had recently said that “the son of late PM Saeb Salam must pay great attention when he says that the government is respecting the National Pact when it convenes in the presence of ministers representing only six percent of a main component of the country (Christians).” Bassil has also warned that the country might be soon plunged into a “political system crisis” if the other parties do not heed the FPM's demands regarding Muslim-Christian “partnership.”Marada Movement chief Suleiman Franjieh hit back at Bassil last Monday, saying Marada and the other Christian parties in the cabinet “represent a lot more than six percent.”

Geagea: Presidential Vote Blocked to Reach Constituent Assembly, Not Boost Aoun's Chances
Naharnet/September 13/16/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea has warned that some parties are obstructing the election of a new president in Lebanon because they are seeking to “change the political system.”“Some believe that the obstruction of the presidential vote is aimed at boosting (Free Patriotic Movement founder) General Michel Aoun's chances, but the obstruction is actually aimed at changing the political system through a constituent assembly or a similar move,” Geagea said in an interview with MTV. He noted that “the attempt to alter the current Lebanese system” has been running for 11 years now. “In the Syrian tutelage era, there was no need to change the system because it was being implemented in a flawed way. Based on these facts, we can now understand why the presidential vote is not being held and why we are living a political paralysis,” Geagea added. He however noted that the attempts to change the political system will not succeed due to lack of “consensus” on such a drastic move. “Any constituent assembly does not have chances to succeed and we do not have fears in this regard,” Geagea reassured. “Proposing a constituent assembly at the moment would resemble ten steps backwards, that's why we must improve this system instead of heading towards a worse system,” the LF leader said. As for national dialogue, Geagea pointed out that the LF supports dialogue in principle but noted that “the current format of the dialogue meetings cannot achieve anything.” “I tried it for five years and the more you increase the number of the debated topics the more you delay results,” he said. “If are unable to elect a president, shall we be able to choose a new electoral law and a new premier? We have been trying to devise an electoral law for eight years now, so combining all these problems will not lead to a solution,” Geagea added, dismissing Speaker Nabih Berri's call for reaching a so-called “package deal.” The LF leader also suggested limiting the national dialogue meetings to “five or six parties in order for dialogue to be serious.”Dialogue must also “have a clear agenda and a specific deadline, things that are not available in the current dialogue meetings,” Geagea added.
Berri has recently stressed that “there is no alternative” to the 1989 Taef Accord that ended the civil war while ruling out the possibility of holding a so-called constituent assembly in the foreseeable future. “Commitment to the Taef Accord is final and let no one think of any new constituent assembly. The Taef Accord is not a Quran or a Bible, but changing it is out of the question,” Berri said. “There is no better alternative at the moment and you must first implement the Taef Accord before talking about improving it,” the speaker added. There are fears in the country that the ongoing political and presidential vacuum might eventually lead to introducing constitutional amendments or holding a constituent assembly that would radically change the current political system that is based on a delicate distribution of power among the country's sects. Berri himself and Hizbullah have been recently accused of seeking a constituent assembly aimed at altering the political system in their favor. In June 2012, Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah openly called for “a constituent assembly elected by the people.”“Why don't we form a constituent assembly elected by the people -- not on a sectarian or regional basis but on the basis of competency -- in order to discuss all options. Let it discuss the Taef Accord, a new social contract or a non-sectarian system,” he said. Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 and Hizbullah, Aoun's Change and Reform bloc and some of their allies have been boycotting the parliament's electoral sessions, stripping them of the needed quorum. Al-Mustaqbal Movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri, who is close to Saudi Arabia, launched an initiative in late 2015 to nominate Marada Movement chief MP Suleiman Franjieh for the presidency but his proposal was met with reservations from the country's main Christian parties as well as Hizbullah. Hariri's move prompted Geagea to endorse the nomination of Aoun, his long-time Christian rival. The supporters of Aoun's presidential bid argue that he is more eligible than Franjieh to become president due to the size of his parliamentary bloc and his bigger influence in the Christian community.

Rahi meets Franjieh in Diman
ue 13 Sep 2016/NNA - Maronite Patriarch, Cardinal Bchara Boutros al-Rahi, met on Tuesday evening with Marada Party Head, MP Sleiman Franjieh, who visited him in Diman, with talks centering on the general situation prevailing in Lebanon.
Following their 90-minute encounter, Franjieh left without making any statement.

Ghattas Khoury from Mehrab: Hariri to return soon, Presidential dossier to move again in new direction
Tue 13 Sep 2016/NNA - Former MP Ghattas Khoury said, on Tuesday, that "former PM Saad Hariri shall return soon, and the Presidential dossier shall be re-activated, once again, towards a new direction." Khoury's words came on emerging from his meeting with Lebanese Forces Party Head, Samir Geagea, in Mehrab, commissioned by Hariri. "Talks centered on the main topic of concern in the country, namely the Presidency, in addition to the parliamentary elections law, to which we both accord great importance," added Khoury. He recalled, herein, the electoral law proposed by the Future Movement, along with the Lebanese Forces and Progressive Socialist Party, saying: "We are committed to this law, and what remains at this stage is to hold discussions with the other parties on basis of said law." "However, if we reach nowhere, there are democratic foundations in Parliament to come up with a new law," he added. Responding to a question about the possibility of electing a President in the 45th Parliament session, Khoury said: "I cannot predict that far, but there is an atmosphere in the country that is fully aware of the existing crisis in Lebanon, which will eventually cause the State to collapse, and that places all political leaders before a huge responsibility."

Sidon Deputies followup on boat incident, Siniora contacts Health Minister requesting that injured be treated at Ministry's expense
Tue 13 Sep 2016/NNA - Sidon Deputies, former PM Fouad Siniora and Bahia Hariri, followed-up on the sinking tourist boat incident off the port of Sidon on Tuesday. In this context, Siniora contacted Public Health Minister Wael Abu Faour, urging him for "a rapid initiative to treat the injured at the Ministry's expense."Hariri, in turn, remained in contact with Mayor of Sidon, Mohamed Saudi, and security forces, who updated her on the circumstances of the incident, the conditions of the injured, the actions taken to find out the causes and responsibilities, and the future measures to ensure more public safety and avoid any reoccurrence of such incidents.

Seven rescued boat passengers taken to hospitals in Sidon
Tue 13 Sep 2016 /NNA - Civil Defense Units pulled out of the water 7 passengers who were on board the sinking boat near Sidon Castle on Tuesday, who were rushed to nearby hospitals for immediate medical attention, NNA correspondent reported.

Hariri: Closing down 'Future TV' is out of question!
Tue 13 Sep 2016/NNA - Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri categorically denied, on Tuesday, recent news published on "An-Nashra" Website pertaining to the near shutting-down of "Future TV" Channel Station. He said via Twitter: "What was published by An-Nashra Website regarding the soon-to-be closure of Future TV, or even about thinking of drafting a statement to that effect, is totally groundless and out of the question!"

Chocolate Entrepreneur of Lebanese Descent Emerges in World's Cocoa Leader
Associated Press/Naharnet/September 13/16/The smell of chocolate wafts from the door of an artisanal shop that would not be out of place in Brooklyn. Founder Dana Mroueh takes in the sun while riding her stationary bicycle-turned-cocoa grinder on an ambitious journey that began just four months ago. She wants to introduce Ivory Coast, the world's leading cocoa producer, to the taste of processed cocoa beans, in the form of chocolate bars that she says are 100 percent local. The 27-year-old Mroueh is among an emerging group of chocolate makers who are trying to show this steamy West African country that it can take more control over its cocoa industry, from bean to bar, and win over the local market. "I think it's criminal for the planters and for the Ivorians who don't know the taste of chocolate," said Mroueh, an Ivorian of Lebanese descent who grew up watching her grandfather, a former pastry shop owner, have a difficult time selling his chocolate. "We need to emphasize the value of the Ivorian territory." Her MonChoco Chocolate bars are priced for upper-class consumers, with prices of around $5 apiece and experimental flavors including chili and sea salt. Fellow chocolate maker Axel Emmanuel is aiming at the other end of the market. The 32-year-old says he wants to dispel the myth that chocolate is exclusively for the rich. "We've decided to officially make the most inexpensive chocolate bar on the African continent," said Emmanuel, who was recognized by the country's president as the 2015 Young Entrepreneur of the Year. His Instant Chocolate bars go for about 30 cents apiece. Emmanuel sees potential in Ivory Coast's 10 percent economic growth last year, and in a small but growing middle class in many parts of Africa. As with many of Africa's agricultural resources, the true earnings come from their transformation, he said, and farmers ought to benefit from the growing locally made chocolate market as well. Ivory Coast has long been known for its raw cocoa production, producing about 35 percent of the world's supply. But less than a third of what it produces is turned into finished products at home. Now the government is encouraging change. Recently, billboards sponsored by the National Coffee and Cocoa Council sprouted throughout Abidjan, the country's largest city, urging the consumption of Ivorian chocolate. President Alassane Ouattara has said that by 2020, he hopes the country will process at least half of its raw cocoa. Chocolate makers say the task can be done with little money and limited space, but some cocoa experts say many farmers don't yet have the skills to transform their raw product. "It's a lot easier to teach farmers good agricultural practices," said Suzanne Ndongo-Seh, director of the World Cocoa Foundation's Cocoa Livelihoods Program. She warned that chocolate makers will have to work hard to expand their clientele in Africa, especially among more rural populations. Even though 70 percent of the world's cocoa beans originate in places like Ivory Coast, Ghana, Cameroon and Nigeria, chocolate is still considered a luxury. Some of Ivory Coast's young chocolate makers are pitching the healthy side of their products to win over consumers. "Our products are raw, not cooked, not roasted to conserve all the benefits of the cocoa bean because it's a product very, very rich in nutrients, to conserve also the antioxidants, minerals, and that's essential," Mroueh said. Olga Yenou, a former employee for the French chocolate manufacturer Cemoi, called cocoa good for the heart and nervous system. "It's good when used against stress, against fatigue, and it will be a shame to consider cocoa just like a candy," she said. Her Tafissa company turns local beans into finished products including a cocoa-and-cashew spread and a cocoa powder drink mix. Producing chocolate bars is a future ambition, she said. In a young market, she believes there's room for more local entrepreneurs. "We are all actors trying to spread the love of cocoa amongst Ivorians," Yenou said. "I believe the adventure will be long, as we are just getting started."
 

Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on on September 13-14/16

Germany Arrests Three IS Suspects with 'Links' to Paris Attackers
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 13/16/ police Tuesday arrested three men with forged Syrian passports accused of being Islamic State (IS) militants and labeled a possible "sleeper cell" with links to the Paris attackers. More than 200 police commandos took part in the pre-dawn raids in northern Germany to detain the men, who were suspected of either plotting an attack or awaiting orders to commit one. The men were identified only as Mahir al-H., 17, Ibrahim M., 18, and Mohamed A., 26, in a statement issued by federal prosecutors. They left Syria last October and traveled via Turkey and Greece -- a route used by tens of thousands of refugees and migrants -- and arrived in Germany in mid-November. Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere said the three apparently used the same migrant trafficking network as several of the IS gunmen who killed 130 people in Paris in November last year. "According to what we know so far, the investigation of the (federal criminal office) BKA points to links to the attackers of Paris from November 2015," de Maiziere told a press conference. "There is every reason to believe that the same trafficking group used by the Paris attackers also brought the three men who were arrested to Germany," he said, adding that their forged travel documents came from "the same workshop."He said German police had surveilled the men for months and tapped their phones, meaning that at no stage was there a risk of an attack.
- 'Awaiting instructions' -
Prosecutors said in their statement that Mahir al-H. had joined IS in its de facto capital of Raqa, Syria by September 2015 and received some weapons and explosives training. The following month, all three men had pledged to travel to Europe in talks with an IS fighter who was "in charge of missions and attacks" outside of the Syria-Iraq region where the group has its self-proclaimed caliphate. In Europe, "the three accused were meant to either execute a mission or await further instructions," the prosecution service said in the statement, adding that no evidence of "concrete orders or instructions" had been found.
The men had received mobile phones and four-figure cash sums in U.S. dollars, as well as the fake passports, from IS, the statement said. They were detained at three refugee shelters in the northern state of Schleswig-Holstein by more than 200 commandos of the federal police, BKA and police forces of several states. Police also raided several other asylum seeker shelters, Die Welt daily said. Warrants for their arrest had been issued by a federal judge on September 7, based in part on intelligence provided by Germany's domestic security agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution.
In July, Germany suffered two bloody attacks claimed by IS, which were carried out by migrants. German authorities have urged the public not to confuse migrants and "terrorists," but have acknowledged that more jihadists may have entered the country among the around one million asylum seekers who arrived last year.

Iran threatened to shoot missiles at US navy planes
AFP, Washington Tuesday, 13 September 2016/The Iranian military threatened to shoot down two US Navy planes flying over the Strait of Hormuz, a defense official told AFP on Tuesday, the latest in a string of encounters with Tehran. Two “maritime patrol aircraft” were flying separate missions in a similar area in international air space earlier this month when they received three radio calls from Iranian air defense. “They were threatening to shoot at us, to shoot us down, or fire missiles at us,” the defense official said, speaking on condition of anonymity ahead of a formal announcement. According to Fox News, which first reported the encounter, the US planes ignored the warning and continued on their mission. One unnamed defense officials told the news network that the US military had wanted to test the Iranians’ reactions. The defense official AFP spoke to said the incident was “unprofessional” but was not deemed unsafe because the US planes were outside the bounds of known Iranian anti-aircraft missile ranges. The Pentagon has in recent weeks denounced a series of “unsafe and unprofessional” maritime encounters in the Gulf, including one that prompted an American ship to fire warning shots at an Iranian vessel that got too close. Navy officials say ships from the US and Iranian navies interacted more than 300 times in 2015 and more than 250 times the first half of this year, with 10 percent of those encounters deemed unsafe and unprofessional. In January, the Iranian navy briefly captured the crews of two US patrol boats that had, through a series of blunders, strayed into Iranian territorial waters. The 10 American sailors were released within 24 hours.

Syria War Death Toll Now More than 300,000
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 13/16/More than 300,000 people have been killed in the Syrian conflict since March 2011, a monitor said in a new toll Tuesday, the first full day of an internationally-brokered truce. More than 86,000 civilians were among the 301,781 people killed, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. The civilian toll includes 15,099 children and 10,018 women, the Britain-based monitoring group said. Rebel fighters made up 52,359 of those killed. A total of 59,006 Syrian soldiers have been killed, in addition to 48,048 other pro-government fighters from countries including Iraq, Iran and Lebanon as well as Syria. Jihadists of the Islamic State group and the onetime al-Qaida affiliate now renamed the Fateh al-Sham Front accounted for 52,031 of the dead. The Observatory said another 3,645 victims could not be identified. The figure is an increase of nearly 9,000 on the last death toll published by the Observatory in early August. The United Nations and the major powers have made repeated efforts to end the bloodshed in Syria but all have so far failed. A new ceasefire brokered by Moscow and Washington went into effect at sundown on Monday and AFP correspondents and residents reported that it appeared to be holding on its first full day Tuesday.

Syrian army ‘shoots down’ an Israeli planes, Tel Aviv denies
Reuters Tuesday, 13 September 2016/Syria’s military said it shot down an Israeli warplane and a drone early Tuesday in response to an attack on Syrian army positions - a claim denied by Israel. Our air defenses blocked the attack and shot down the military aircraft in (the southern province of) Quneitra and a drone” in the province of Damascus, said the Syrian army statement carried by state news agency SANA. It accused Israeli forces of supporting “armed terrorist groups” in the country’s south. The Israeli army said none of its aircraft had been downed. “Overnight two surface-to-air missiles were launched from Syria after the (Israeli) mission overnight to target Syrian artillery positions,” military spokesman Arye Shalicar said. “At no point was the safety of (Israeli) aircraft compromised. Nothing true about what they claim.”The Israeli military earlier said it targeted Syrian army positions after stray fire from its war-torn neighbor hit the Israeli-held zone of the Golan Heights on Monday. An Israeli military spokeswoman told AFP Monday’s projectile was most likely not intentional, rather spillover from “internal fighting in Syria.” It was the fourth such incident in nine days, and came as a new Syrian ceasefire brokered by Russia and the United States came into force on Monday. The initial 48-hour truce does not apply to areas held by extremists such as ISIS.

Israel Denies Syrian Army Shot Down Israeli Warplane, Drone
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 13/16/Syria's military said it shot down an Israeli warplane and a drone early Tuesday in response to an attack on Syrian army positions -- a claim denied by Israel. "Our air defenses blocked the attack and shot down the military aircraft in (the southern province of) Quneitra and a drone" in the province of Damascus, said the Syrian army statement carried by state news agency SANA. It accused Israeli forces of supporting "armed terrorist groups" in the country's south. The Israeli army said none of its aircraft had been downed. "Overnight two surface-to-air missiles were launched from Syria after the (Israeli) mission overnight to target Syrian artillery positions," military spokesman Arye Shalicar said. "At no point was the safety of (Israeli) aircraft compromised. Nothing true about what they claim."The Israeli military earlier said it targeted Syrian army positions after stray fire from its war-torn neighbor hit the Israeli-held zone of the Golan Heights on Monday. An Israeli military spokeswoman told AFP Monday's projectile was most likely not intentional, rather spillover from "internal fighting in Syria." It was the fourth such incident in nine days, and came as a new Syrian ceasefire brokered by Russia and the United States came into force on Monday. The initial 48-hour truce does not apply to areas held by jihadists such as the Islamic State group.
 

UN aid trucks cross into Syria through Turkey
The Associated Press, Istanbul Tuesday, 13 September 2016/Twenty aid trucks crossed from Turkey into the divided Syrian city of Aleppo Tuesday after a ceasefire went into effect, state media said, although the UN could not confirm the report. The trucks carrying UN humanitarian supplies crossed through the Cilvegozu border gate in the southern province of Hatay, Anadolu news agency said, citing security sources. At least 40 trucks are expected to cross the border by the end of the day, it added. No confirmation could be immediately obtained from UN officials in Turkey. Turkey has said it was already making preparations to deliver humanitarian aid to Aleppo, where some 250,000 people in the rebel-held east are under government siege. A spokesman for the Turkish Red Crescent told AFP the aid group would start sending aid trucks to Aleppo from Wednesday, in coodination with the United Nations. Syria’s government on Tuesday warned that all aid going to Aleppo, particularly assistance sent by Turkey, must be coordinated with Damascus and the United Nations.

Russia Troops Monitoring Truce on Aleppo Road
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 13/16/Russia's military has deployed a "mobile observation post" to monitor the ceasefire on the key Castello Road heading into the shattered Syrian city of Aleppo, Russian news agencies reported Tuesday.
Russian wires reported from Aleppo that the post had been set up "at the entrance" to the city, on the road which provides a vital link to deliver humanitarian supplies to those still living there. The Castello Road to the north of Aleppo is a key flashpoint that runs to the rebel-held part of the city but has been controlled by Syrian regime forces. Under a ceasefire deal hammered out by Moscow and Washington that came into force Monday evening the route is meant to be demilitarized, with pro-regime and government forces supposed to pull back in a bid to allow aid to pass through. Russia's military said Monday that Syrian forces were ready to withdraw "simultaneously to" opposition forces, but Russian agencies did not report that the pull-back had started. The news agencies reported that military observers had also been deployed to the city of Hama. Russia has been flying a bombing campaign in Syria in support of President Bashar Assad since last September.

Syria truce holds, aid preparations underway
Reuters, Beirut Tuesday, 13 September 2016/A nationwide ceasefire brokered by the United States and Russia was mostly holding across Syria on Tuesday and efforts to deliver badly needed aid to besieged areas including the northern city of Aleppo got cautiously underway. Syrian state media said armed groups had violated the truce in a number of locations in Aleppo city and in the west Homs countryside on at least seven occasions on Tuesday. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said pro-government forces had shelled near two villages in the south Aleppo countryside and a neighborhood on the outskirts of Damascus.But there were no reports of deaths or injuries. The Russian military, which sent reconnaissance equipment to detect and suppress attempts at violations, said the ceasefire had largely been observed in Aleppo. Around 20 trucks carrying aid crossed into northern Syria from the Turkish border town of Cilvegozu, some 40 km (25 miles) west of Aleppo, a Reuters witness said, although with security a concern it was not clear how far into Syria they would go. A Turkish official said they were mostly carrying food and flour. The Syrian government said it would reject any aid deliveries to Aleppo not coordinated through itself and the United Nations, particularly from Turkey, Syrian state media reported. The UN said its trucks had not yet entered Syria and that it was still awaiting confirmation that the ceasefire was holding before sending in its own convoy. “We are waiting for this cessation of hostilities to actually deliver the assurances and the peace before trucks can start moving from Turkey. As I speak, that has not been the case,” Jens Laerke, spokesman for the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, said in Geneva.
“We need to enter an environment where we are not in mortal danger as humanitarian organizations delivering aid,” he said.
The ceasefire is the second attempt this year by the United States and Russia to halt the Syrian war. Russia is a major backer of President Bashar al-Assad, while the United States supports some of the rebel groups fighting to topple him. Some air attacks and shelling were reported in the first hours of the truce on Monday evening, but that appeared to die down and the Observatory, which monitors the war, said it had not recorded a single civilian death from fighting in the 15 hours since the ceasefire came into effect at 7pm (1600 GMT). Turkey said on Monday that, in conjunction with the United Nations, it aimed to send more than 30 trucks loaded with food, children’s clothes and toys to besieged parts of Aleppo within hours of the truce taking effect. The United Nations said on Friday the Syrian government had effectively stopped aid convoys this month and Aleppo was almost running out of fuel. The head of the city council for opposition-held Aleppo expressed concern that planned deliveries would be conducted according to Russian wishes and would not meet the needs of an estimated 300,000 people living there. Brita Hagi Hassan told Reuters the rebel-held part of the city, which has been fully encircled by pro-government forces for more than a week, was in dire need of fuel, flour, wheat, baby milk, and medicines. The council wanted to a role in overseeing the deliveries, he added, rejecting any presence of government forces on the road expected to be used to make the deliveries.
“We need 60 tonnes of flour each day,” he said.
Position of strength
More than 301,000 Syrians have been documented as killed since the start of the conflict in 2011, the Observatory said in its latest assessment on Tuesday, although it estimates the actual death toll at around 430,000, in line with the UN’s estimate. Some 11 million people have been made homeless in the world’s worst refugee crisis.UN Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura was monitoring the ceasefire very closely, a spokeswoman said, but she declined to comment on how it was being observed so far. Israel said its aircraft attacked a Syrian army position after a stray mortar bomb struck the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights, a now-routine Israeli response to the occasional spillover from the war. It denied a Syrian claim that a warplane and drone were shot down. The truce does not cover the militant groups ISIS or Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, a group formerly called the Nusra Front which was al Qaeda’s Syria branch until it changed its name in July. It initial aims include allowing humanitarian access and joint US-Russian targeting of such groups. The agreement comes at a time when Assad’s position on the battlefield is at its strongest since the earliest months of the war, thanks to Russian and Iranian military support.
The RIA news agency quoted Russia’s foreign ministry on Tuesday as saying Moscow and Tehran had no differences over the ceasefire deal. Hours before the truce took effect, an emboldened Assad vowed to take back all of Syria. In a gesture loaded with symbolism, state television showed him visiting Daraya, a Damascus suburb long held by rebels but recaptured last month after fighters surrendered in the face of a crushing siege. Fighting had raged on several key fronts before the truce, including Aleppo and the southern province of Quneitra on Monday, the first day of the Eid al-Adha Muslim holiday.
The Observatory said at least 31 were killed by air strikes on rebel-held Idlib province and eastern Damascus, and by the bombardment of villages in the northern Homs countryside and rocket attacks in the city of Aleppo before the truce.

Iran unveils new helicopter-carrying catamaran ship
By AP, Tehran, Iran Tuesday, 13 September 2016/Iran’s powerful Revolutionary Guard on Tuesday unveiled a new high-speed vessel the force says is capable of carrying a helicopter and up to 100 people, Iranian state TV reported. The report follows a series of close encounters between American warships and Guard vessels in the Persian Gulf. The TV showed a catamaran-type ship described as 55 meters (yards) long and 14 meters (yards) wide, carrying a light civilian helicopter, while the official IRNA news agency said its speed capability is 28 knots. The vessel was painted with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s call for US forces to “Go back to the Bay of Pigs.” In May, Khamenei criticized the US presence in the Persian Gulf region in an apparent reference to the 1961 failed invasion of Cuba’s Bay of Pigs by 1,500 CIA-trained exiles. During Tuesday’s inauguration ceremony, Guard navy chief Adm. Ali Fadavi denounced American presence in the Gulf, saying it “is a cause of insecurity and lawlessness.”Iran and the United States have had a history of close encounters. In August, a US Navy ship fired three warning shots in the direction of an Iranian boat that was approaching another American ship head-on in the North Arabian Gulf. It was the third incident that day, and came just a day after four small Iranian boats approached the USS Nitze at high speed in the Strait of Hormuz. The boats veered off after the US fired flares. At the time, Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency quoted Gen. Hosein Dehghan as saying that “if any foreign vessel enters our waters, we warn them, and if it’s an invasion, we confront.” He added that Iranian boats patrol to monitor traffic and foreign vessels in its territorial waters. In January, Iran briefly detained 10 US Navy sailors who mistakenly steered into Iranian waters.

Brexit by 2019, EU parliament negotiator urges
By AFP, Strasbourg, France Tuesday, 13 September 2016/Britain should trigger its divorce from the EU as soon as possible and formally leave by 2019, the European Parliament’s chief Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt said on Tuesday. Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister, also warned London that it could only keep access to the prized single market by accepting the free movement of all European Union citizens into Britain. “The UK should trigger the Article 50 as soon as possible so that we can finalize these negotiations by 2019” ahead of the next EU parliamentary elections that year, Verhofstadt told a news conference at the parliament in Strasbourg, France. “I cannot imagine that we start the next legislative cycle without agreement, and that we enter a new legislative cycle with no solution,” he added. British Prime Minister Theresa May has said she will not trigger Article 50 - the two-year divorce process leading to an exit from the EU - until early 2017 at the earliest. She has said London needs more time to finalize its demands, with the government split on how to curb immigration while keeping the benefits of the single market. But Verhofstadt said there could be little negotiation on this, saying the two concepts were “inseparable”. “The position of the parliament is very clear. The position has always been that if the UK wants to remain part of the single market it will also have to accept the free movement of our citizens,” he said. Verhofstadt, the head of the European Parliament’s Liberal group, was appointed last week to lead the legislature’s negotiations on Brexit. The parliament will have a final vote on Britain’s deal to leave the EU. His appointment caused shock in London as he is a diehard European and has been scathing in his criticism of Britain’s shock June vote to quit the 28-nation bloc.

Three Qatari soldiers killed in Yemen
Reuters Tuesday, 13 September 2016/Three Qatari members of a Gulf Arab military coalition have been killed during operations in Yemen, state media said, their country’s highest single death toll in the 18-month conflict. The soldiers died on Monday, state news agency QNA said, without giving any information on how or where they lost their lives. Qatar has sent around 1,000 ground troops to Yemen, the country’s first reported involvement in the Saudi-backed offensive. The Arab coalition is fighting to try to restore Yemen’s President Abdrabbou Mansour Hadi to power after Iran-allied Houthi militias advanced on his temporary headquarters in the southern port city of Aden in March last year.

Eid day attack injures 4 in Pakistan
The Associated Press, Karachi Tuesday, 13 September 2016/A suicide bomber injured four policemen, one critically, outside a Shiite mosque in southern Pakistan in an attack claimed by the Pakistani Taliban as the country marked the beginning of the religious festival Eid al-Adha on Tuesday. The incident occurred in Shikarpur in Sindh province, around 470 kilometres (300 miles) north of Karachi and the same district where at least 61 were killed in a suicide attack on another Shiite mosque in 2015. Officials said two suicide bombers tried to enter the Khanpur Imambargah but were intercepted by police.“Four of our men are injured of whom one is critical,” Umar Tufail, a senior local police officer told AFP. Tufail added doctors were also trying to save the life of the other suspected bomber, who was injured when the first one blew himself up but failed to detonate himself. “The attackers came as the worshippers were gathering to offer Eid prayers. Police were able to stop him at the gate outside the mosque,” A.D. Khawaja, chief of police for Sindh province said. Worshippers overpowered the second would-be suicide bomber as the police were reeling from their injuries, he added. A faction of the Pakistani Taliban, Jamaat-ul-Ahrar, claimed responsibility for the attack in a statement sent to media. Spokesman for the group Ehsan Ullah Ehsan said it was a part of an operation which would be spread to every area of the country. Pakistan has been hit by frequent sectarian violence in recent years, most of it perpetrated by hardline Sunni Muslim groups against minority Shiite Muslims, who make up around one in five of the population. The January 2015 attack on the Shiites in Shikarpur, blamed on the Sunni militant Lashkar-e-Jhangvi group, led to a wave of nationwide protests. In another incident Tuesday, two policemen died and four were injured when their van was hit by a blast in Quetta city in the southwestern province of Baluchistan. According to local police official Abdul Razaq, the van was targeted with a remote controlled bomb planted on the roadside. “One policeman died on the spot while another succumbed to his injuries later at the government hospital in the city,” another police official Abdullah Jan Afridi told AFP. He said the four policeman injured in the incident were stable. Baluchistan, which borders Iran and Afghanistan, has oil and gas resources but is afflicted by Islamist militancy, sectarian violence between Sunni and Shiite Muslims and a separatist insurgency.

EU should expel Hungary for mistreating migrants, Luxembourg minister says
The Associated Press, Berlin Tuesday, 13 September 2016/Hungary should be excluded from the European Union for anti-migrant policies that undermine EU values, including erecting a razor-wire fence, Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn said, provoking a scornful riposte from Budapest. The unusually strong attack came three days before a crucial summit intended to project the bloc’s unity after Britain’s shock decision to leave. “We cannot accept that the basic values of the European Union are being so seriously breached,” Asselborn told German daily Die Welt in comments published on Tuesday.
“Anyone, like Hungary, who builds fences against war refugees or breaches press freedom and the independence of the justice system should be temporarily, or if needed forever, excluded from the EU.”The direct call for the exclusion of a fellow EU member state was unprecedented, and underscored the extent of Europe’s divisions over sharing responsibility for the more than 1 million migrants and refugees who reached its shores last year. Asked about the remarks by reporters in Moscow, Asselborn said he had wanted to stress that the EU had to protect its core values, and he was not picking on one country.
“We can resolve the problem of Brexit but we can’t resolve the problems of the survival of the EU if we lose the essence of the EU. So what I told the German newspaper is not directed against one nation, it’s aimed at better understanding the essence and values of the EU,” he said. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said his country had defended Europe throughout its history, and described his Luxembourg colleague as “condescending, uppity, and frustrated.”Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has angered many of his EU partners with his tough rhetoric on migrants and by fortifying his borders to keep them out. He is urging the nation to vote in a referendum next month against future EU quotas stipulating how many refugees each country should take. The EU could not tolerate such behaviour, and exclusion was “the only possibility to preserve the integrity and values of the European Union,” Asselborn told Die Welt. Humans fleeing from war were being treated almost worse than wild animals, he added. “The fence that Hungary is building to keep out refugees is getting longer, higher and more dangerous. Hungary is not far from issuing an order to shoot refugees,” he said. In response, Szijjarto told state news agency MTI only Hungarians could decide who they were willing to live with, a right that neither Brussels bureaucrats nor the Luxembourg foreign minister could take away. He said it was strange that Asselborn, who came from the land of “tax optimisation”, and another Luxembourger, EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, were talking about shared burdens. “We understand what it means, though: Hungary has to pay the piper after other people make mistakes,” he said. Czech Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka sharply criticized Asselborn’s comments, saying calls to exclude member states were “nonsense”. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said he could understand impatience with Hungary. “However, it is not my personal approach to show a European member state the door.”

Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on on September 13-14/16

Analysis: Is an Israeli-Syrian military conflict on the horizon?
Yossi Melman/Jerusalem Post/September 13/16
The firing of two missiles at Israeli aircraft bears witness to the growing confidence of Assad’s army.
It is still too soon to determine whether the Syrian Army’s firing of missiles at IAF aircraft before dawn on Tuesday signifies a policy shift by the Assad regime regarding Israeli military activity in the area.
This determination will better be made if similar fire is carried out the next time the IAF or IDF gunners attack in response to mortar shells or artillery fire that land in Israeli territory.
However, one thing is already clear: The firing of two S-200 surface-to-air missiles in the Quneitra region was not a coincidence. The Syrian Army released an official statement on the incident.
This is the first known instance of Assad’s army retaliating to Israeli military activity in Syrian territory since the country’s civil war began some five-and-a-half years ago.
For the past several years, according to foreign media, the IAF has acted unmolested in Syrian airspace in violation of Syria’s sovereignty and the March 1974 Disengagement Agreement that the two countries signed after the Yom Kippur War.
The IAF, according to foreign reports, with both fighter jets and unmanned aerial vehicles, has been flying in Syrian airspace in order to gather intelligence. On more than 10 occasions, the air force attacked Syrian Army targets, including some on the outskirts of Damascus: warehouses, factories and convoys bringing advanced weaponry – precision surface- to-surface missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, and radar and anti-ship missiles – to Hezbollah in Lebanon. In the face of all of these attacks, Assad’s army swallowed its pride and did not respond.
The Syrian Army did not respond either when Israel shot down a Syrian Sukhoi warplane that neared its border a few years ago.
Israel also attacked on several other occasions, according to foreign reports, including assassinations by air strike of senior Hezbollah officials (among them the January 2015 strike that killed Jihad Moughniyeh, the son of former Hezbollah “defense minister” Imad Moughniyeh, and later, arch-terrorist Samir Kuntar in his safe-house in the Damascus suburbs), as well as an Iranian Revolutionary Guard general. This came amid attempts by Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s Quds Force commander, General Qassem Suleimani, to establish a military infrastructure in the Golan Heights – with Assad’s knowledge – to launch attacks against Israel. These alleged Israeli attacks thwarted this plan by the Hezbollah- Iran-Syria axis.
In addition, the IDF also responded with artillery fire, rockets and symbolic air strikes against Syrian Army outposts almost every time that errant shells from the fighting between the Syrian Army and rebel groups near the border “spilled over” and landed in Israeli territory.
The IDF’s responses were measured, and were mainly intended to send a message to the regime – the IDF said so expressly in its statements – that no matter what the source of the errant fire was, whether it came from the Syrian Army or the rebels, Israel sees the Assad regime as responsible and the sovereign power in charge of its territory.
Until last night’s events, the Syrian Army did not respond.
In the most recent episode, it responded forcefully, backed up by an official statement in which it took responsibility.
However, the IDF denied the Syrian Army spokesman’s claim that the missiles downed an Israeli warplane and drone, and said that the missiles had not even come close to the IAF aircraft.
But it is clear that the missiles were intended to send a signal to Israel that this was not accidental fire ordered by a junior commander in charge of an anti-aircraft battery, but rather, the result of orders from the senior command.
The incident bears witness to the growing confidence of Assad’s army, which is succeeding – for the most part because of Russian help – to expand its control in Syria (which is still only some 30 percent of the territory), and to cement the regime’s place as the opposition weakens and ISIS is at the beginning of the end.
As the regime’s army intensifies its assault on the rebels, including in the Golan Heights not far from Israel’s border, the chances for more errant shells landing in Israeli territory increase. Two additional shells fell on Tuesday afternoon.
The IDF is expected to respond, likely with increasing levels of force. If Assad’s army decides to retaliate like it did last night, the chances for an escalation of tensions and descent into violence on what has until now been a relatively quiet Golan Heights border also increase, despite the fact that most of the sides involved – Israel, the Assad regime, Russia, and some of the rebel groups – have no interest in heating up the border and sparking a military conflict.
 

The real 'evil empire'
Ronen Bergman/Ynetnews/September 13/16
Analysis: Watching North Korea, the Iranians have reached the conclusion that there is nothing like a nuclear weapon to secure a regime's survival and that the international community attaches no price tag to a blatant violation of agreements on the matter.
"We can't read them, they are completely impenetrable," said an Israeli intelligence official attempting to follow North Korea's ties with Iran and Syria. Israel has obtained information about those ties, but the information has always arrived from the Syrian or Iranian side, never from North Korea.
The man describes a state in which senior officials cannot be convinced to defect while they go abroad ("they hold their families hostage until they return home"), agents cannot be recruited ("they sleep in fortified embassy compounds in Damascus or Tehran, and there is no contact with them") and their codes cannot be cracked ("the codebooks and communication means never leave the embassy compound").
But Israel is not the only country that has failed to infiltrate North Korea. The entire West is surprised every time by the actions taken by that horrible state. As far as we know, that was also what happened three days ago, during its fifth nuclear test. A complete intelligence surprise, in complete violation of the promises North Korea pledged not so long ago. The Jong-il family, which has been controlling the country with an iron fist and oppression since the end of World War II, makes many promises. It just doesn’t promise to keep them.
With all due respect to Iran or Syria, North Korea is the real "evil empire" (the phrase US President Ronald Reagan applied to the Soviet Union in 1983). A state which, according to United Nations assessments, has some three million people in a state of hunger at any given moment, a state whose rulers have mortgaged all its resources in favor of themselves and the cruel army they have created. North Korea is the most sealed state in the world, the least penetrable one from an intelligence and cultural aspect, and is the least susceptible to economic pressure – because its rulers simply don’t care about their citizens.
North Korea has been the main supplier of missile, rocket, radar and nuclear component technologies to the State of Israel's worst enemies since the late 1980s. North Korea has nothing against Israel, it is simply looking for friends willing to pay a lot of money for the doomsday toys it markets without any pangs of conscience.
North Korea is continuously mocking the West. As part of a deal it signed with the Clinton Administration in the mid 1990s, it was supposed to receive nuclear knowledge for peaceful purposes in exchange for halting the military route to a bomb. Nonetheless, it secretly continued developing nuclear weapons. In 2002, when a US State Department envoy arrived in North Korea to present evidence to his hosts that they had continued to develop a nuclear weapon despite the agreements, he expected a sweeping denial. Instead, he received confirmation from his hosts, who announced that they had a nuclear weapon. In 2010, they struck another deal to place North Korea under a supervision regime in exchange for humanitarian aid, and violated it again with a series of ballistic missile launches and nuclear tests.
This crisis too will likely end without the flare-up of an all-out war between the two Koreas, but it conceals a grim lesson to the world, which is very relevant to Israel. Iran's leaders are looking at what happened to Muammar Gaddafi, and they certainly see him as a fool if not more. Gaddafi agreed to drop his nuclear weapon project in exchange for Libya's readmission into the family of nations. Had he not signed the deal and had he been in possession of a nuclear weapon when the riots broke out in his country, he could have possibly still been in power. There are strong doubts that NATO would have intervened in the situation in Libya if Gaddafi had nuclear bombs.
The Iranians are also watching North Korea, which developed a nuclear weapon and is using it to blackmail the West and terrify its neighbors. In other words, as far as Iran is concerned, the required conclusion is that there is nothing like a nuclear weapon to secure a regime's survival and that the international community attaches no price tag to a blatant violation of agreements on the matter.

Can Syrians trust the current US-Russia truce?
Camelia Entekhabi-Fard/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
From sunset on Eid al-Adha, one of the most celebrated holidays in the Muslim calendar, a truce began in Syria. The truce between the government and the opposition will be observed for 10 days while negotiations carry on with the US and Russia, with the UN acting as an observer. US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov agreed on this 10-day ceasefire in Geneva on Friday September 9. Interestingly, despite many countries being involved in the Syrian war, none have been invited to the talks in Geneva despite their significant influence on the frontlines. Iran is one of those countries. For its part, it cautiously welcomed the ceasefire on Sunday September 11 but also expressed concern and doubt regarding the truce. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Bahram Ghasemi said that the ceasefire should not be used as an opportunity to regroup or organize arms transfers to terrorist groups.Doubts about the truce. Iran does not recognize Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s opposition and does not differentiate between them and terrorist groups such as ISIS and the al-Nusra Front, conversely to the international community.
The Syria peace talks need negotiations which include all parties affiliated with the conflict – all parties should be heard
Considering such differences and taking into account the notion that the regime in Damascus will not accept any political transition or appease its long-suffering people, it is difficult to believe that this truce will last very long. Hours before the truce began, Assad, who appeared in Daraya for Eid al-Adha prayers on Monday, vowed to retake all of Syria. Speaking in Daraya, a former rebel stronghold recently surrendered to the government, Assad said “the Syrian state is determined to recover every area from the terrorists.”The truce will last when the will for unification and peace-making drives all parties to negotiate for peace. For its part, hardline Syrian rebel group Ahrar al-Sham didn’t accept the ceasefire which means that fighting will likely continue. Sparring between ISIS and the al-Nusra Front could also continue. As the Kurds, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran have not been included in the talks between Russia and the US, keeping these influential key players committed to the ceasefire in the long term will also be difficult.
All parties should be heard
The Syria peace talks need negotiations which include all parties affiliated with the conflict – all parties should be heard. While Iran and Saudi Arabia are experiencing a particularly tense moment in relations, it is difficult to believe that the American viewpoint will be accepted by the Saudis. On the other hand, the Iranian camp has different views to Russia on the Syria talks. However, they have no choice but to follow Russia’s lead due to ruined relations with most Arab countries. The United Nations’ 71st General Assembly is due to begin this week and will host world leaders and high level diplomatic delegations in New York City. A conference about the refugee crisis, with an eye on the Syria conflict and its refugee issue, will start on September 19 just a few days before the current Syria ceasefire expires on September 22. This is also an opportunity for Iran and Saudi Arabia to address their regional in New York, which is particularly important as this is Iranian President Hassan Rowhani’s last year in office. Will this truce hold and will the world put an end to this endless crisis?

Beyond propaganda: Is Syria still beautiful?
Maria Dubovikova/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
“Syria is always beautiful,” or so says the official slogan of the Syrian Ministry of Tourism’s newly-launched campaign. Five years into a devastating war, the death toll is soaring, the economy is ruined and swathes of the country lie in ruins. However, the end is nowhere in sight and the recently-negotiated truce between the US and Russia will likely fail, as its predecessors have done. The truce, which began at sunset on Monday, has already been disregarded by influential a rebel group Ahrar al-Sham, which is concentrated in the strategically important city of Aleppo. Thus the conflict will be doomed to finding a military solution which must take into account the moderate opposition and all global players involved in the conflict – based on this, the international community risks slipping into a global conflict.

Undesirable
Such a development is undesirable for both Moscow and Washington. For US President Barack Obama, who is facing his last months in power, an agreement on Syria must be added to his short list of achievements. For Russia, the diplomatic resolution of the conflict is the only way to avoid the collapse of its strategy in Syria and to avoid discreditable retreat from Syria. For both countries, a diplomatic resolution of the conflict is the only way to avoid global destabilization which is not in interests of any player. The key to finding a diplomatic resolution is a strong, reliable truce over the whole country, excluding areas under the control of ISIS and other radical organizations such as the group formerly known as the al-Nusra Front. The only way to save Syria and the Syrian people is to look reality straight in the face without sugar coating the truth. Officials in Damascus, it seems, prefer to remain blind
However, the problem lies in the fact that both sides are powerless to enforce the truce as it has become evident that they don’t have enough influence on the belligerent sides. A forced truce can never be continuous and sustainable as long it does not correspond to the will of at least one player on the ground. Furthermore, there is no trust between Russia and the US. The trustworthy and constructive relations between Kerry and Lavrov unfortunately do not characterize relations between the two countries. The political and military establishment in both countries suffer from phobias toward each other, aggravating bilateral relations, complicating the negotiation process and hampering the successful implementation of previously-reached agreements. In such conditions, Syria is not only a devastated country that has been torn apart by numerous external and internal players, flooded with the blood of innocent people, destroyed and shattered, but also a delayed-action bomb with a broken mechanism. You don’t know whether it will explode or not and if it does, no one knows when.
Inappropriate appeals
Such circumstances, multiplied by the severe humanitarian crisis, makes any kind of propaganda depicting peaceful life in Syria beyond good and evil. This call to travel to Syria was firstly disseminated in early 2016 by the Syrian state media broadcaster SANA.
On the sidelines of a journalist forum that took place in Moscow in early June 2016, one of the top officials of the agency replied to a witty comment made by Al Arabiya English Editor-in-Chief Faisal J. Abbas on the issue. The official said that the website had been hacked and that such appeals for tourism were inappropriate in such circumstances. However, the Ministry of Tourism began a campaign within months of the comment, promoting historical destinations in the country. They are sharing videos of the country as though the war is fictional. From Maaloula, which was liberated from ISIS in April 2014, to Tartus, where dozens were killed in an ISIS terrorist attack in the end of May, footage depicting beautiful scenes is making the rounds. Although tourism fed into Syria’s GDP in the past, it is madness to expect that it will become the cash cow of this now war-torn country. It is immoral toward the Syrians suffering in Aleppo. It is immoral toward the Syrians in devastated Homs. It’s immoral toward all those who are dying in Latakia, Damascus, Idlib provinces and other cities and areas. It is immoral to all those who perished, who are dying and will die in the war and in a humanitarian disaster caused by the war. Until now the only people who are attracted to Syria are the extremists from all over the world and soldiers of fortune joining various belligerent groups. The only way to save Syria and the Syrian people is to look reality straight in the face without sugar coating the truth. Officials in Damascus, it seems, prefer to remain blind.

The US-Russian deal means Assad has won the Syrian civil war
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
As the new ceasefire agreed between Russia and the United States is coming into effect, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad can finally relax in the knowledge that he has won the civil war. Sure, there is still a lot of fighting left to be done, but the result is a foregone conclusion. The reason for this can be gleaned from the detail of the Kerry-Lavrov deal. In principle, the deal stipulates that Russia and their Syrian clients in the Damascus government, along with Assad’s Iranian allies cease hostilities against American clients in the fighting, and in return those American clients stop their own offences against regime targets. Then, both the United States and Russia move on to bombing ISIS and al-Nusra targets. So far so good. The only problem is the definition of “al-Nusra targets.” ISIS has done a reasonably good job of distinguishing themselves on the battlefield by effectively fighting against everyone else. But the al-Nusra group has been much more porous. They have formed numerous alliances, of various durations, with most anti-regime groups. They would have had collaborations of convenience with virtually all rebel groups. And many rebel fighters would have moved in and out of different groups, and would have, at some point, had some kind of involvement with al-Nusra. In effect, Russia got a deal whereby it can go and bomb virtually all opposition to Assad, and can haggle with the US on a case-by-case basis on groups about which the US cares particularly strongly. For its part, the US walked into this deal with open eyes. Their strategic calculus has changed. They no longer care about Assad. Russia got a deal whereby it can go and bomb virtually all opposition to Assad, and can haggle with the US on a case-by-case basis on groups about which the US cares particularly strongly
The Obama administration has long realized that they lack the desire, and really even the popular backing, to ramp up their involvement in Syria sufficiently to influence the outcome of the civil war. So now they want to wash their hands of Syria and limit their exposure - while maintaining their priority of bombing ISIS into the dust.
The rebel camp
The short of it is that the US no longer cares very much about any of the assets it has in the rebel camp and has conceded to the Russian position that the Damascus regime should prevail, and the sooner the better. It may deem it tactically wise to protect some of their clients, but by and large, the rebels have been abandoned by their biggest backer and can expect to be hammered into submission whenever any association can be drawn between them and al-Nusra - which will be often. Just how well this will turn out now remains to be seen. There is still no reason to suppose that a victorious Assad would be gracious in victory, given how little regard he has shown towards his civilian population so far. We can expect that many of the regions where he suspects opposition to his regime to re-ignite will be cleansed. So Aleppo will continue to be laid to waste. And the refugees will continue to pour over the border for a while longer. While those who have already made it to Europe who had hoped to one day go back to their country may find that is no longer an option available in their futures. Perhaps Alawites and Christians and other religious minorities will be able to go back to some kind of Baathist co-existence, but Sunni suspicion and hostility towards the regime will remain. And the regime’s suspicion and hostility towards the country’s Sunni population will also continue. Perhaps this kind of division can be contained and managed, in the same way that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been successfully contained and managed, with only occasional flares of violence. But there will never again be a sense that the state of Syria has any kind of legitimate basis, or that there is more keeping it together than just force: Alawite, Russian and Iranian. There will never again be any hope that the state of Syria can ensure justice for all its people.

Tarnishing its reputation and holding Saudi Arabia accountable
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
The unreasonable has happened. The US Congress, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives, has unanimously passed a bill allowing the families of 9/11 victims to sue the Saudi government for damages. It is not reasonable to accuse the very country which the al-Qaeda organization has targeted the most. Al-Qaeda has been attacking Saudi Arabia since 1995 – that explosion in Riyadh was orchestrated six years before 9/11. There is a large quantity of data and videos in which al-Qaeda leaders have stated, prior to the attack on New York, that Saudi Arabia and the US are its enemies.
Espousing radical ideology is the accusation leveled against the Saudi government while linking it to al-Qaeda. However, calling Saudi Arabia guilty is like accusing companies such as Google, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube of being responsible for the actions of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) because users of those online platforms express extremist opinions! It is nonsensical to accuse any government of a crime due to the existence of extremist ideology within its borders as this could apply to many countries in the world. For example, in France, Britain and the Netherlands, there are many who are as radical and primitive as Saudi Arabia’s extremists. Official authorities can only be held responsible if they play a role in managing terrorist organizations or if they are lenient toward them. This does not apply to Saudi Arabia or France or Facebook or other real or virtual communities.
A failure of communication
In an attempt to understand this development, we must ask how this unreasonable accusation developed from articles in newspapers and statements into a dangerous draft law that threatens an entire state? I think the main reason is due to the failure of communication between both sides, despite the old and new relationship between them. There has been failure and confusion in understanding the phenomenon of widespread religious extremism, terrorism framed as popular movements, Islam as religion, Muslims as followers, extremist Muslims and Islamic governments. Saudi Arabia is actually the key to fighting terrorism, whether on the ideological front or in terms of providing the tools to fight it. It is easy to mix up these factors and this has played a role in simplifying the problem. This has led some to consider Saudi Arabia a conservative Islamic country that is responsible for what happened, despite many other important details.
This US decision and its effect on relations are an example of the threat posed due to a failure of communication between two countries.‎ I think Saudi Arabia committed one mistake, it only depended on diplomacy to resolve its issues with the US. This approach works with countries with centralized regimes controlled by one leadership body, like in Russia or China. However, this approach is insufficient when dealing with Western countries with several bodies of power and authoritative institutions. Former British Prime Minister David Cameron, who recently stepped down as premier, used all his influence to deter citizens from voting to exit the EU but he failed. He even sought the help of US President Barack Obama who addressed the Brits, calling on them not to vote in favor of exiting the EU. However, they did not listen.‎
The reality
The rhetoric used against Saudi Arabia is that it conservative or extremist. However, Saudi Arabia has been the most active in fighting al-Qaeda and ISIS. Saudi Arabia has been the most active country in terms of arresting all those who have relations with terror groups, or have even thought about establishing relations with them or have tried to travel to warzones. Thousands of terror convicts are now in Saudi prisons and they include men who incited violence, clerics who issued fatwas (religious edicts) in support of al-Qaeda, media figures who justified violence and businessmen who provided funds to organizations which the UN categorizes as terrorist. There are others who were suspended from working because they support al-Qaeda. Meanwhile, such men are on the loose and live a happy life in countries like Britain, France and Germany and they’re not held accountable! The Senate and the House of Representatives in the US Congress committed a grave mistake when they approved the JASTA bill (the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act). Saudi Arabia is actually the key to fighting terrorism, whether on the ideological front or in terms of providing tools to fight it. Without its participation, the world would be embroiled in a difficult situation. It’s important to differentiate between terrorism and religious conservatism related to women’s niqab or prohibiting women from driving or other social controversies which Muslims face today. These controversies express a conflict between the old, conservative Islam and modern Islam. This struggle exists inside Saudi society and is publically discussed but it has nothing to do with terrorism. Most terrorist ideologies are rooted in the Islamic Revolution in Iran and are not drawn from Saudi Arabia. Following the revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini and his government were the first ones to encourage using violence in the name of religion. They’re the ones who brought back the idea of martyrdom, revived it and marketed the culture of religious war against the West. If we exclude the Afghanistan war, Saudi Arabia has not been a party to any international terrorist events, including 9/11.
**This article was first published in Asharq al-Awsat on Sept. 13, 2016.

Uzbekistan’s pivot?
Andrew J. Bowen/Al Arabiya/September 13/16
At the end of August, President Islam Karimov, who through an iron fist ruled Uzbekistan for a quarter of century since its independence, suddenly passed away with no named heir. Almost half of the country’s population, the most populous nation in Central Asia, has known no other leader than Karimov. The late president leaves his former Prime Minister Shavkat Mirziyaev, the de facto head of the Samarkand Clan, now as acting president with a relatively weak hand to manage this geopolitically pivotal state’s domestic politics and its relations with its two main suitors, Russia and China.
A competition for power
It’s unclear how much power Mirziyaev will exert when he’s officially elected president in December. In Uzbekistan, elections are simply a ceremonial exercise to give “democratic” legitimation not a real competition for power. This competition has and continues to play out behind the scenes.
The delay in officially announcing President Karimov’s death pointed to an end of August and beginning of September tug of war amongst Uzbekistan’s different powerbrokers. Nigmatilla Yuldashev, the chairman of the senate, was constitutionally designated to serve as acting president until elections, but he recused himself last week from such a role in favor of Mirziyaev. Mirziyaev, who chaired the funeral arrangements for Karimov recent in Samarkand, appears to have gathered enough internal support to likely succeed Islam Karimov as president of Uzbekistan. He will however have to contend with Rustam Inoyatov, the ageing head of the state’s main intelligence and state security service. Inoyatov, who is also head’s Uzbekistan’s the Tashkent clan, was the second-most powerful man in the country under Karmiov and remains informally more powerful than Mirziyaev presently.
Will Uzbekistan pivot to Russia? While Moscow may be a less attractive economic partner than Beijing, the lower costs of a deeper economic relationship with Russia than with China may push Mirziyaev closer to Putin
Inoyatov’s decision to not seek the presidency is open to speculation but points to a possible preference to remain in the shadows and an agreement brokered with Mirziyaev on Uzbekistan’s future governance. The former prime minister is both younger and a more palatable compromise successor amongst the country’s political and security factions of various degrees of influence.
If a likely political alliance was struck between the two men, the balance of power between the two could smoothly work but also could be beset to behind-the-scenes fighting.
Domestic continuity?
While many may have hoped that Karimov’s passing would mark a new era for the state’s stagnating economy, neither Mirziyaev nor Inoyatov are likely to embrace substantial economic or political reforms. Both men have benefited and thrived under Karimov’s patronage and his common autocratic diktat of stability over political and economic liberalization.
Mirziyaev may be forced to choose economic reform if he hopes to pull Uzbekistan out of its economic malaise and remain popular with the country’s large young population, but these changes could threaten his and Inoyatov’s grasp on power. On a score of economic freedom in 2015, the post-Soviet republic was ranked 47 out of 100 and occupies a special place on the World Bank’s World Governance Indicators as the most corrupt country on earth. Only 20 percent of the state’s economy is in private sector control. Economic remittances as high as $6 billion dollars in 2015 from Russia helped slightly offset Karimov’s failing self-reliant “Uzbek model” but they halved in 2015 due to Russia’s poor economic environment.
Pivot to Russia?
Beyond Uzbekistan’s borders, Mirziyaev has to weigh his relations with Russia and China. President Karimov adeptly balanced these relations in keeping the state independent from anyone suitors. With Karimov’s passing, Uzbekistan is now more in play.
President Putin’s visit to Uzbekistan on the September 5, including his very public meeting with then Prime Minister Mirziyaev, signals Russia’s intention to try to bring Uzbekistan closer into its informal sphere of influence: “Greater Eurasia.” Moscow also is concerned about any political instability creating a space for radical Islamists near its borders. Karimov struggled with an Islamist insurgency in its Fergana Valley region and across its borders in Afghanistan and Tajikistan.
President Karimov, much to Putin’s annoyance, resisted Russia’s past engagement efforts. In 2012, he withdrew Uzbekistan from Russia’s Collective Security Treaty Organization and never joined the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), a customs union including Russia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan. After Putin’s annexation of Crimea, Karimov reportedly worried such a fate could befall his state whose population is about 10 percent ethnically Russian.
Mirziyaev’s family connections to the Kremlin and his embrace by President Putin suggest that he’s warmer to Russia than his predecessor. However, this could purely be calculated pragmatism as Mirziyaev navigates post-Karimov politics. The former prime minister may purely use Putin’s warmth as a temporary protection from his opponents and his ally, Inoyatov before charting a similar independent course as Karimov did.
Russia’s main competitor, at least, economically for Uzbekistan’s favor is China. Unlike Moscow who is more constrained economically to help revive the country’s economy, Beijing is more attractive partner in terms of investment and economic development. For example, through its broader “One Belt, One Road” strategy, President Xi Jinping has pledged $40 billion dollars to develop its new “silk road” and Central Asia is a key component. Beijing is already Tashkent’s main trading partner and shows no qualms about Uzbekistan’s governance.
However, Tashkent’s recalcitrance to economic reform due to vested state economic interests and influential domestic constituencies will likely be roadblocks for further Chinese investment unless Mirziyaev and the political elite decide to economically liberalize and accept those risks and costs. Moscow, more so than Beijing, then is likely to try to bring Mirziyaev closer into its political space.
Will Uzbekistan pivot to Russia? While Moscow may be a less attractive economic partner than Beijing, the lower costs of a deeper economic relationship with Russia than with China may push Mirziyaev closer to Putin as he seeks to address Uzbekistan’s economic challenges and make his own mark on the country as he tries to consolidate power. The degree to whether the new President will seek deeper ties with Russia politically will depend on the strength of his political position at home.
As it stands, though, President Putin will likely benefit in the short to medium term from a weaker Uzbek premier.

Shaky cease-fire starts in Syria
Laura Rozen/Al-Monitor/September 13/16
WASHINGTON — A shaky pause in major fighting went into force in Syria at sundown Sept. 12, three days after the United States and Russia announced they had reached a deal to try to establish a nationwide cease-fire, expand access to humanitarian aid and make way for Syrian combatants to return to the negotiating table.
US Secretary of State John Kerry urged all the parties to the cessation of hostilities — including a skeptical Syrian opposition — to support the truce deal that would eventually see the United States and Russia coordinating on the targeting of al-Qaeda’s Syria affiliate, Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra). Kerry warned its failure could lead to an escalation of the conflict, which would make keeping Syria a unitary nation difficult after five brutal years of civil war that have killed an estimated half a million people.
“I believe this is the only realistic solution to this conflict,” Kerry told journalists at the State Department on Sept. 12. “I urge all parties to support it. It may be the last chance one has to save a united Syria.”
Under the plan, announced by Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov after daylong talks in Geneva on Sept. 9, a seven-day period of calm or at least reduced violence starting Sept. 12 would then lead to the establishment of a US-Russian Joint Implementation Center (JIC), which would share intelligence and coordinate the targeting of Jabhat Fatah al-Sham as well as the so-called Islamic State (IS).
Once the JIC is set up, the Syrian air force would no longer be permitted to carry out airstrikes in areas of Syria where the moderate opposition or Jabhat Fatah al-Sham is present, though it could continue strikes against IS.
But in a sign of the complexity of the deal and the relative secrecy with which it has been negotiated, there was confusion about what restrictions exactly would be enforced on the Syrian air force. Kerry, speaking at the top of the State Department press briefing Sept. 12, suggested the Syrian air force could seek permission from the JIC to strike targets in Jabhat Fatah al-Sham-dominant, predesignated areas.
But State Department spokesman John Kirby subsequently issued a statement indicating that was not correct.
"We have seen reports based on the Secretary’s comments — and those of the spokesperson — this afternoon, that the United States and Russia could approve of strikes by the Syrian regime. This is incorrect,” Kirby said in a statement Sept. 12.
“To clarify: The arrangement announced last week makes no provision whatsoever for the United States and Russia to approve strikes by the Syrian regime, and this is not something we could ever envision doing,” Kirby said. “A primary purpose of this agreement, from our perspective, is to prevent the Syrian regime air force from flying or striking in any areas in which the opposition or Nusra [Jabhat Fatah al-Sham] are present. The purpose of the JIC, if and when it is established, would be to coordinate military action between the United States and Russia, not for any other party."
The Syrian opposition and armed groups issued statements offering lukewarm, conditional support for a truce, if not for the broader US-Russian plan, until receiving further information on it. One complaint they have is that they have not seen the US-Russian deal text, which Kerry and Lavrov said Sept. 9 would not be released for operational security reasons.
“My feeling is that the concept of a cessation of hostilities is good,” Bassam Barabandi, a former Syrian diplomat now with the Syrian opposition High Negotiating Committee, told Al-Monitor on Sept. 12. “Delivery of food is very good. The concept of Assad stopping barrel bombing would be great. At the same time, nobody saw the deal. We don’t know how to endorse something that we did not see.”
The US administration has offered briefings on the deal to High Negotiations Committee chief Riyad Hijab, Barabandi said, but Hijab has been attending the hajj, the religious pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia, so has not been able to be reached. But it has not provided the text of the deal.
Syria’s armed opposition groups “agree in principle to a [cessation of hostilities], but they are not willing to fully sign onto the whole deal until they receive the clarifications and guarantees they’ve requested in a new letter to [US Syria Envoy] Michael Ratney,” Charles Lister, a Syria expert at the Middle East Institute, said.
Syria’s armed opposition groups are “hedging their bets for now,” Lister said. “They will semi-abide by it, until they’re provided with an excuse not to. … They reserve the right to self-defense. They will protect aid deliveries around Aleppo, so long as the regime does the same.”

Syrian cease-fire reflects US, Russian interests
Maxim A. Suchkov/Al-Monitor/September 13/16
A Syrian cease-fire brokered over the weekend by the United States and Russia went into effect Sept. 12, though it remains to be seen whether it holds.
Pessimism over the agreement’s prospects for success followed soon after it was announced Sept. 10 in Geneva by US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. That pessimism is not entirely groundless. Indeed, Russians and Americans see what constitutes the key part of the agreement differently.
For the American party, the key is Russia’s willingness to restrain the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from conducting air operations over areas held by opposition forces and Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (formerly the al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra). The Russians, however, pin their hopes on the US ability to ensure the opposition groups Washington has been supporting refrain from violence and separate themselves from Jabhat Fatah al-Sham. Therefore, each party expects that potential violations will by and large come from their opponent’s side.
However, some in Russia think sabotage might come not only from opposition forces and radicals but also from some groups inside the Syrian government. Anton Mardasov, the head of the Department of Middle Eastern Conflicts of the Moscow-based Institute for Innovative Development and one of Russia’s closest observers regarding the Syria crisis, explained the situation to Al-Monitor.
He said, “Proponents of the Syrian regime are divided into those aligning with Iran and those inclined to support the Russians. Similar divisions exist within Syrian security and intelligence forces: While the General Intelligence Directorate and Political Security Directorate are currently cooperating with Moscow, the Syrian Military Intelligence and Air Intelligence Forces [align with] with Tehran.”
Geographically, what makes the agreement difficult to implement is that in recent months Syria has become even more fragmented security-wise and in terms of “zones of control.” Enforcing jurisdiction of the agreement across all of the territories in this case is unrealistic and would require different tools in various provinces.
A big part of the agreement will not be made public; this became one of the main controversies of the deal, raising suspicions that it eventually will be imposed on Syria. Seeking to justify the need for such secrecy, Lavrov said, “We can’t make these documents public, for they contain quite serious and sensitive information. We wouldn’t want them to fall into the hands of those who will most likely seek to derail the measures we agreed upon.”
Washington and Moscow also barely concealed that in its ultimate form, the agreement has been received with skepticism and even opposition by some decision-makers on each side.Reacting to news about the Pentagon feeling reluctant to cooperate with the Kremlin on the battlefield, a source in the Russian Press Corps noted that both sides “came to agreement on their own interests but packaged it as a compromise, [even] a consensus.”
Yet, even if that is true, it signals an important message that both Russia and the United States are committed to exercise their political will to ensure implementation of the agreement and exert influence over the respective parties. In that sense, it’s not a question of whether Moscow and Washington fully understand the set of challenges ahead — people involved in the talks are experienced and professional enough to forecast potential pitfalls at least as well as outside observers. The issue is whether Moscow and Washington accurately calculate how much actual influence they have over their proxies; past experience has shown that getting them under full control simply isn’t always possible.
Another set of challenges may come from outside sponsors – Iran, Turkey and Gulf monarchies. A perception that the agreement fortifies the regional standings of Russia and the United States might easily trigger their temptation to manipulate respective Sunni-Shiite proxy groups inside Syria to weaken the position of the “big powers.” The agreement also seems to leave a chunk of Iranian and Saudi interests unsatisfied. Therefore, even if they support the agreement publicly, well-reasoned domestic skepticism about the deal in Tehran and Riyadh is understandable and should not be underestimated. At the same time, few believe the two can jointly put forward something constructive while continuing the war of attrition.
Neither should it be much of a surprise that Moscow is taking advantage of the agreement to strike some points about sanctions, and to flag as irrelevant Washington’s opinion of Russian isolation — it has become an attribute of contemporary Russian foreign policy and will be there for a long time. Preserving the focus on these matters, however — which certainly is an additional pressure for the Obama administration — will give the agreement zero chance to promote peace. Instead, the agreement should come as a litmus test for all responsible forces to show just how serious and responsible they actually are to place peace and security in Syria over their immediate political interests, which lack any true strategic depth.
For all the caveats, the significance of the agreement goes far beyond Syria and may spell something promising for a general framework of US-Russian relations in the region. Some of the experts with Kremlin insights believe that regardless of the profound crisis in US-Russian relations, Presidents Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama ended up being the main interlocutors in the Syria crisis.
Fyodor Lukyanov, Russia’s foremost foreign policy analyst, argues in a Sept. 7 column for Russia in Global Affairs, “Russia and the United States can no longer manage international processes the way they did during the Cold War. Yet they still come to the forefront as only strong-hand ultimate decision-makers in key crises: The EU has lost the attributes of a political entity — both as an institution and at the level of its individual members — while China, India and Iran, despite obvious growth in their ambitions, aren’t yet ready to play a big political-military game independently.” He thus insists that “relations between Putin and Obama are an example of rather effective risk-minimizing in a situation when the relationship has an antagonistic character and interests are diverging on core aspects, while the vision of the world is diametrically different.”
Lavrov stated that despite “a deep lack of confidence and trust between Russia and the American partners,” the reached agreement is just the “beginning of our new relations.” That might be a stretch. Yet, if the parties end up establishing what they call a “Joint Implementation Center” to coordinate bilateral intelligence and start launching joint airstrikes against agreed-upon terrorist groups in Syria, it might indeed breathe new life into cooperation on Syria. It won’t go far and will in no way be strategic — at the very best, tactical. Nonetheless, it might just be enough of a start to help shore up US-Russian relations enough to prevent further erosion of the region, which has entered a prolonged period of systemic instability.

Are Saudis open to rapprochement with Iran?
Ali Hashem/Al-Monitor/September 13/16
According to Islamic teachings, the hajj is the annual manifestation of Muslim unity. This is a common theme among Muslim scholars when describing the scene of millions of Muslim worshipers from around the world, all wearing plain white robes and performing the same rituals, despite their ethnic and sectarian differences. This grand, symbolic gesture of Islamic unity seems to be reeling under the effect of politics, in particular the row between the two dominant Islamic states in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and Iran, which since 2012 appear to be engaged in an undeclared state of regional war.The two countries opened a new chapter in their already tense relations Sept. 5 when Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, launched one of the harshest verbal attacks on the government of Saudi Arabia since being chosen to succeed Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1989. In his annual hajj message, Khamenei recalled the stampede during last year’s hajj that led to a reported 2,000 people being killed, among them 472 Iranians. “The heartless and murderous Saudis locked up the injured with the dead in containers — instead of providing medical treatment and helping them or at least quenching their thirst. They murdered them.” Khamenei called Saudi rulers “disgraced and misguided” and referred to Saudi muftis as “impious and haram eating … who blatantly issue fatwas against the Book and Sunnah.” Khamenei said those who accuse Iran of preventing its citizens from making the hajj are “media minions” of Saudi Arabia and reporting lies. Khamenei added that Muslims should “reconsider the management” of the annual pilgrimage.
“The Saudi-Iranian tension is dangerous and takes the conflict to the edge of the abyss,” said former Saudi diplomat Abdullah Shammari in an interview with Al-Monitor. Shammari, an expert on Iranian and Turkish affairs, accused Tehran of starting the row by interfering in Saudi affairs, referring to Tehran’s reaction to the execution of dissident Saudi Shiite cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr earlier this year. Protesters then attacked Saudi diplomatic compounds in Tehran and Mashhad. Shammari said, “This led to the severance of diplomatic ties [by Riyadh], and Iran stopped its pilgrims from doing the hajj this year despite the flexibility shown by Saudi officials, but it seems this is serving the agenda of certain lines in Iranian politics.” In response to Khamenei’s comments, Saudi Arabia’s top cleric, Grand Mufti Abdulaziz Al Sheikh, accused the Iranians of being non-Muslims, because they are descendants of Zoroastrians. “They are the sons of the Magi [Zoroastrians], and their hostility toward Muslims is an old one, especially with the people of the Sunnah [Sunnis],” said the mufti. His comment incited another round of responses, including from Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who tweeted, “Indeed; no resemblance between Islam of Iranians & most Muslims & bigoted extremism that Wahhabi top cleric and Saudi terror masters preach.” Al-Monitor has learned that Riyadh sent Tehran a message through unofficial channels clarifying that the grand mufti’s inflammatory comments were not an official position.  “The latest comments by the Saudi mufti should be put into the accompanying context,” Shammari said. “The interview was on the phone, and it reflects an angry personal point of view after the Iranian supreme leader’s message that crossed all red lines.” He added, “The comments are personal and political and can’t be regarded as a religious fatwa.”The hajj is only one of several points of conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia, which are already on opposite sides in several battles around the region. In Yemen, Saudi Arabia is fighting alongside the government of President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, while in Syria, Iran is fighting alongside the government of President Bashar al-Assad against rebels backed by Saudi Arabia among other powers. “The [Iranian supreme] leader’s hajj message was linked to regional issues too,” Tehran University professor Mohammad Marandi told Al-Monitor. He explained that the message was also related to the “constant bombardment of civilian targets in Yemen, the support for Wahhabi extremists in Syria and Iraq, the subjugation of the people in Bahrain, and also it is linked to the general attitude of the Saudi regime toward non-Wahhabis and the fact that they treat non-Wahhabis as inferior beings.”
That said, Marandi thinks that there might be a chance for rapprochement. He said, “If there is a real change in Saudi policies, then it is very likely that there will be a change in course, but if not, then the Iranians feel that the Saudis are heading toward instability and perhaps demise. So if the Saudis want to spare themselves of such an end, they have to back off and swallow their pride.” Shammari, however, expressed pessimism in regard to a significant change in the situation, explaining that the average Saudi knows very well that the Iranian supreme leader is not using his comments to boost his popularity at home, but means what he said. Shammari remarked, “A miracle is needed when the highest [Iranian] authority is using such harsh rhetoric against Riyadh. … Unfortunately, regional and world powers are exploiting this conflict for their interests, while the people of Saudi Arabia and Iran are the ones who will pay the price.”
While it is true that Khamenei’s hajj message was tough, it was not the harshest from an Iranian leader to date. That distinction goes to Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1988 hajj message, which made note of the killing of more than 402 pilgrims in Mecca the preceding year, most of them Iranians. He described the Saudi-Iranian struggle as a war between good and evil and presented the House of Saud as pre-Islamic idolaters. Despite the tough rhetoric of today, there might be cause to believe a change in course between Tehran and Riyadh could occur sooner rather than later.

The Story Of The Palestinian Village Leagues
By: Yigal Carmon/MEMRI/September 13/16/September 13, 2016 MEMRI Daily Brief No.103
Twenty-three years ago today, on the lawn of the White House, the Oslo Accord was signed. Both Israel and the US shared the questionable assumption that the PLO represented the one and only option for a peace with the Palestinian people. Indeed, such was the situation at that time. However, this situation was the product of the policies of all the parties involved – the US, Israel, and, in its own way, the PLO, which had systematically eliminated its opponents. Fifteen years previously, a Palestinian movement had emerged in the Palestinian territories that sought peace with Israel in opposition to the PLO. It failed. Although 38 years have passed since that failure, the PLO and its supporters in the West are still haunted by this movement. I personally was involved in this endeavor and witnessed it firsthand. Here is the story of the Village Leagues. In August 1978, Mustafa Dodin and a group of Palestinian activists submitted a request to the Military Administration in the West Bank to establish a village league in the Hebron area. Dodin, a former Jordanian minister, was a prominent figure in that region, and was known for his opposition to the PLO and his ties with the Jordanian government, especially with the circle of Wasfi Al-Tal, who had been Jordan's prime minister.[1] Having returned from Jordan to his native town of Dura near Hebron, Dodin wanted to establish a political movement that would strive for a settlement with Israel. However, the Israeli administration refused to allow political activity of any kind in the occupied territories, even if its objective was to negotiate a peace treaty with Israel. Dodin was therefore compelled to submit a new request for establishing a social-administrative body as was legal under Jordanian law (which continued to apply to the occupied territories under the Israeli Military Administration), namely a village league. Even this request was held up for about a year and a half until its final approval in August 1978.
The objection to political activity reflected what was known as the "Dayan policy," which had prevailed since the summer of 1967. This policy was never formulated systematically by Dayan himself, but was, rather, a composite of general principles, guidelines and specific ad hoc directives that he issued to his subordinates. It included a ban on political activity of any kind, as well as an instruction to avoid any preferential treatment of moderate elements. This applied equally to supporters of Jordan and to the handful of individuals who strove for Palestinian autonomy under the aegis of Israel, whose most notable representative was the renowned attorney from Ramallah, Aziz Shehadeh.[2] In practice, however, implementation of the policy went much further: extremist PLO supporters were treated sympathetically by the Israeli authorities and extremist newspapers such as Al-Fajr and Al-Shaab were granted licenses on direct instructions from Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan. The official explanation given for this was that Israel did not intervene in the public conduct and freedom of speech of residents of the territories so long as they refrained from terrorist activities.
The Dayan Policy And The Establishment Of The Village Leagues
The authorization accorded to former Jordanian government minister Mustafa Dodin and his supporters, who declared openly that their objective was a negotiated peace treaty with Israel, represented, therefore, an abrupt departure from the principles of the Dayan policy. This change was the outcome of a prolonged struggle on the part of the office of the Advisor on Arab Affairs at West Bank military HQ, which was headed by Professor Menahem Milson. But even after authorization had been given, members of the village leagues were obliged to deal with opposition from almost all bodies concerned – directly or indirectly – with matters in the West Bank, from figures within the Military Administration itself to local and foreign journalists.
Why was there so much opposition to a policy that on the face of it was both necessary and desirable? The answer is that the Dayan policy was considered a success and was supported by most of these bodies. Never clearly formulated, the Dayan doctrine comprised a variety of constituents such as the open bridges policy, the holding of local elections, good and enlightened governance and a liberal attitude at all levels that included maximum freedom on the public plane. This attitude went so far as to create the impression that the Dayan policy sought to establish a Jordanian-Israeli condominium in the area. At the political level, however, the objective was just the opposite: Dayan wanted to reduce Jordanian political claims in the territories, partly, at least, by means of weakening Jordanian supporters' status on the ground.[3]
Despite the Dayan policy's intentions, liberal journalistic and political circles supported it for a variety of reasons: some because they disliked Jordan's autocratic monarchical regime and others because they favored Palestinian autonomy. Among Israel's right-wingers, too, there was support for Dayan's policies, because of their anti-Jordanian orientation, which suited the position of the proponents of "greater Israel."
As long as the territories remained quiet from the political and security point of view, the Dayan policy appeared to be a success, and, indeed, the continuing quiet was mistakenly attributed to this policy rather than to the presence of the moderate Palestinian elements who were in actuality responsible for maintaining calm. However, in the wake of the October 1974 Arab Summit decision to recognize it as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People, the PLO gained strength in the territories, and anti-Israeli incitement increased. Violence escalated still more when Minister of Defense Shimon Peres, who had replaced Dayan while retaining his policies, ordered municipal elections to be held in the territories.
Two years had by this time elapsed since the Rabat resolution that recognized the PLO as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People, and since the organization's recognition by the UN General Assembly. But the Israeli Military Administration, like many people in Israeli political circles, completely ignored the significance of these historic events and continued its long-standing embrace of the Dayan policy. Thus, when riots broke out in the occupied territories in 1975, these people were unwilling to recognize them as the outcome of the erosion of the public status of the pro-Jordanian faction and other moderates and the result of the policy of the Israeli Military Administration, which purposely undermined the status of pro-Jordanian elements while affording freedom of action to the anti-Jordanian faction, i.e., supporters of the PLO. They had believed that the 1976 elections would have a different outcome and when, contrary to their expectations, PLO supporters were elected, they sought every means to cast the results in a positive light: "When all's said and done, these are public servants who will clean the streets and develop the towns, because that's what they were elected to do – they won't get involved in politics." But the hopes of those who expressed this optimistic forecast were soon dashed, as the first action taken by the supposedly pragmatic Mayor of Hebron was not street sweeping but the rejection of government bonuses due to his municipality, as he wished to avoid having to sign a contract with the Israeli authorities in accordance with the formulation in use since 1967. Very soon the pro-PLO mayors united around their opposition to the imposition of value added tax in the territories, a purely financial issue stemming from the introduction of VAT in Israel, which they exploited for purposes of anti-Israeli propaganda. The heads of the chambers of commerce, however, who were known to be pro-Jordanian, assumed a pragmatic stance and conducted practical negotiations over the ways in which the imposition of VAT was applied in practice.
It should be emphasized here that the cumulative result of the implementation of the Dayan policy over the years was an increasing radicalization of the population in the direction of the PLO and its objectives. Nonetheless, the Military Administration and its senior officers continued to operate in accordance with the spirit of the Dayan policy, which still lived on in the offices of the Coordinator of Activities in the Territories and the Military Administration, even after Dayan was forced to resign and was replaced by Shimon Peres. Significant change in the political approach came only in the summer of 1976, when Professor Menahem Milson took office as Advisor on Arab Affairs in the West Bank. Now the sanctity of Dayan's policy was challenged and a new approach was introduced. In November 1976 I joined the Arab Affairs Department as Milson's aide.
Our activities contradicted the Dayan policy in practice at every level. It should be noted, however, that we did nothing clandestinely, nor did we violate military discipline. Unlike Dayan's policies, which tacitly contradicted and undermined official government policy, we acted in accordance with the declared fundamental principles of the Israeli government: namely, as Jordan was regarded as a non-hostile entity, we made efforts to transform it into a partner for political dialogue, despite the Rabat resolutions, and pro-Jordanian elements were now to be supported rather than suppressed.
Our point of departure was completely contrary to that of the Dayan policy. Dayan had striven to perpetuate Israel's control of the territories, while hoping that Jordan would collapse as a result of internal conflict with the terrorist organizations in 1970 and so provide a solution to the Palestinian national problem. His speeches at the time are evidence of the fact that he did not believe in the possibility of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. We, however, did not subscribe to this pessimistic and fatalistic view of strife as perpetual and inescapable. Although we were acutely aware of the depth and seriousness of the conflict and its historical roots, our familiarity with events on the ground gave us reason to believe in the possibility of pursuing a judicious peace-directed policy by strengthening moderate elements who understood that terrorism endangered the Palestinians themselves and were interested in promoting peace. Although we were well aware that these elements were not dominant and that the positions they espoused were not largely shared by the urban elite that for years had constituted the leading sector of Palestinian society, we also knew that most members of the non-urban population – the silent majority – were prepared to accept this approach if assured of an Israeli commitment to it expressed both on the political plane and by actions on the ground.
With the approval of the minister of defense, seven village leagues were established in the West Bank, initially in Hebron, later in Ramallah and Bethlehem and finally in the northern districts of Nablus, Jenin and Tulkarm.
The fact that they were founded despite extensive opposition from both the Israeli and Palestinian Arab establishment shows that we had appraised the situation correctly. We regarded the encouragement of peace-oriented moderates opposed to the violent path of the PLO as a principle of moral and political importance. We could not be sure that it would lead to peace, but we were quite sure that peace with the PLO was impossible, as the organization represented the problem of the refugees of 1948 and the demand for the right of return. We were right about this, too: the PLO's demand for the right of return has hindered all progress towards a peace agreement, even when Israel offered ninety-seven percent of the occupied territories (when Ehud Barak was prime minister) or one hundred percent, with a territorial swap (during Olmert's term).
We did not regard our political struggle against the PLO as one that could be resolved decisively at a single stroke; we viewed it, rather, as a prolonged campaign that could be won on points. We were convinced it would be better for Israel to deal with Palestinians who opposed terrorism and sought peace negotiations, rather than with an organization whose very essence was armed struggle and a return to Israel within the Green Line. This strategic principle, which we regarded as natural and justified even if it did not bring peace, was not acceptable to Israeli politicians on either left or right. Each clung to its own policy: the right rejected dialogue with Arab moderates because of its fear that such talks would lead to territorial compromise, while the left refused to abandon its belief and hope that the PLO would turn out to be a partner for peace. Our successful establishment of village leagues throughout the West Bank was short lived because we were working against a political consensus that was not just international and pan-Arab but, unfortunately, Israeli too.
Authorization for the operation of the village leagues was, as we have said, the outcome of a prolonged and determined months-long struggle conducted tirelessly against the legal advisor to the Military HQ in the West Bank, the ministry of defense's department of international law, and, of course, the defense minister's bureau and the office of the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories. In order to promote the idea of the village leagues within the defense minister's bureau, Milson agreed to proposal of Ezer Weitzman, defense minister in the Likud government, that he accept the post of Advisor on Arab Affairs to the office of the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories. Milson assumed the post in January 1978 and did eventually succeed in persuading Weitzman, who was defense minister at the time, to agree, albeit halfheartedly, to the establishment of the village leagues. The office of the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, which represented the Dayan policy, was not the only factor involved in the dispute over the approval of the village leagues, as many other figures within the security establishment had also adopted this policy and regarded it as "the height of political wisdom."[4] Brigadier-General David HaGoel, commander of IDF forces in the West Bank, however, supported approving the village leagues and allowed us to fight for it, but he was replaced in the spring of 1978 by Brigadier-General Ben-Eliezer whose attitude towards the whole initiative lay somewhere between indifference and hostility. Several months later, at the end of September, Menahem Milson concluded his term of office as Arab Affairs Advisor to the Coordinator of Israeli Activities in the Territories and returned to his post at the Hebrew University, leaving me to fight on alone. Although I had a superb staff of aides – officers with an excellent command of Arabic and an extensive background in Arab and Middle-Eastern studies who did their work diligently and devotedly, identified with their jobs and shared my approach to the task in hand – I had no support from anyone within the defense minister's bureau who could fight for the village league initiative.
Opponents Of The Village Leagues And Their Motives
As was to be expected, the struggle did not end with the minister of defense's authorization. Instead it intensified, as all those who had been opposed and had prophesied, on the basis of their supposed expertise, that the initiative would fail, now strove with all their might to ensure that their prophecy would be fulfilled. Notable opponents included journalists reporting on the occupied territories and left-wing political figures; some staff officers in the Military Administration; military personnel, especially IDF Central Command under Major-General Moshe Levi and his successor Ori Or; the foreign press; the consuls, especially the US consul in East Jerusalem; Jordan; the PLO; and the settlers.
Why were all these groups opposed to an initiative that had been approved by the minister of defense and which should have seemed natural and justified from all points of view, both moral and political? The following is a brief survey:
The overwhelming majority of journalists reporting on events in the occupied territories had strong political views and regarded the PLO as the appropriate representative of the Palestinians. They maintained that, although the declared positions of the PLO were radical, its real positions were moderate, or else they believed that they would become so in the future. Most of these journalists were personally acquainted with supporters of the PLO in the territories, who saved them time and effort by supplying them regularly – and selectively, of course – with information as to what was happening on the ground. But this willingness of pro-PLO Palestinian figures to supply information came at a price, as the journalists were expected to reciprocate with sympathetic media coverage. As these reporters were in any case weary to the point of abhorrence of Jordan and its supporters, they had no difficulty in providing sympathetic coverage of pro-PLO public figures such as Fahd Qawasme (mayor of Hebron), Muhammad Milhem (mayor of Halhul) and their ilk. For some of the Israeli journalists, fostering relationships with radical Palestinian figures in the context of the Dayan policy was a way of representing themselves to the foreign media as enlightened and progressive. In short, their behavior was unprofessional and clearly uncritical.
Left-wing political circles in Israel regarded the Palestinian moderates as quislings[5] and referred to PLO supporters as "national figures" and "the authentic leadership." Thus, their opposition to the activities of the village leagues was both political and emotional.
The civilian staff officers of the Military Administration, who deserve credit for managing the routine of life in the territories for years and who were, in the great majority, conscientious civil servants, opposed the village league activities because their desire to retain their jobs and status made them extremely unwilling to transfer any responsibilities to the local population. Sometimes their behavior verged on the pathetic, so much so that we used to joke that some of them would, perhaps, prefer to remain at their posts under Palestinian rule rather than lose their jobs. This situation was very different from that of the early months after the 1967 war, when these posts were filled by senior staff officers ("ministers" who worked alongside the regional commander and dealt with civilian matters) who had held very high rank in the relevant government ministries before being seconded to these newly-created positions in the wake of the Six-Day War. Twelve years later, however, these posts were now filled by mid-level Israeli functionaries who had been dispatched by their ministries to this "exile" where they at once achieved the status of "ministers" – a position they were understandably reluctant to relinquish by transferring their responsibilities to members of the local population.
Some of the generals who headed IDF Central Command were similarly offended by our activities. Their indignation was primarily personal, as we had deprived them of their status as policy czars in the occupied territories and as the Central Command's representatives to the upper echelons of government – i.e., the ministry of defense and sometimes the cabinet, too – a status that was very important to them. This situation had come about because until 1981 the territories were under the control of a military administration that was subordinate to the military authorities and first and foremost to IDF Central Command. The generals strove to absolve themselves completely of any responsibility for our activities, which had attracted criticism from the media and left-wing elements: these officers wished to make it clear to critics that they had no part in this initiative and should therefore be excluded from any criticism of it. They undermined our activities, which often impinged upon those of the army, and generally helped the settlers, in part because of their military obligation to defend them. In most cases they also believed that the Dayan policy was indeed "the height of political wisdom" and that Dayan "understands the Arabs" better than the rest of us.
There was an additional reason for the army's dissatisfaction with our activities. When Professor Milson was appointed head of the Civil Administration in 1981, he asked Minister of Defense Ariel Sharon to remove a number of military governors whom for a variety of reasons we considered unsuitable, and replace them with a group of reserve officers, mainly from HaShomer HaTzair kibbutzim. These potential replacements possessed the following qualities: they had served in military intelligence, they spoke Arabic and had a background in Middle East studies, they understood the significance of political ideology and were familiar with political plans, demonstrations and pamphlets, and, most importantly, they had been brought up to strive for peace. The minister of defense approved this apparently odd request immediately. Naturally, he had his own reasons for doing so: he realized at once that people with these qualities would help to calm the situation on the ground. Milson approached veteran Mapam leader Yaakov Hazan, as the officers required permission from the movement to enlist as career soldiers. Hazan questioned him on our activities, on their objectives and on the aims of the Palestinian moderates whom we wished to encourage. When he had ascertained that the goal was a peace agreement with Israel, he allowed the officers to enlist. However, when Aliza Amir, then executive secretary of the Kibbutz Artzi Federation, heard of this, she appealed urgently to party secretary Victor Shem-Tov, shouting: "The old man (i.e. Hazan) has gone mad, he's going to help Sharon," and Shem-Tov revoked the authorization. Only two people were prepared to flout kibbutz discipline and join us, but neither was allowed to remain with us for very long.
Nearly all representatives of the foreign media supported the PLO, which by this time had already attained international recognition. Like the local Israeli reporters, they tried to compensate for their ignorance of the situation and their lack of Arabic by maintaining close ties with extremists who provided them with information that they did not have to go to the trouble of obtaining for themselves. The resulting reports were unprofessional and uncritical, though less so than those of Israeli reporters in the territories, as they lacked the sense of emotional identification that characterized the Israeli journalists. (For example, when the village leagues held their large conference in Hebron in November 1982, attended by many thousands and covered by all the international television networks, at which the Village Leagues leadership called for peace with Israel, Davar reporter Danny Rubinstein headed his article "A Sad and Depressing Day in Hebron"). The foreign consuls, spearheaded by the US Consulate, implemented the policies of their foreign ministries, opposing Israeli occupation and supporting the PLO, which had been accorded international recognition by the UN. Insofar as they could, the consuls sabotaged our policies and extended help to extremist PLO supporters. Jordan's attitude to the village leagues can be divided into two different periods. At first official Jordan lent them tacit support, as it realized that their activities were designed to strengthen Jordan's position in the territories and support its status as the political representative of the occupied areas, in defiance of the Rabat and UN resolutions of 1974.[6] However, after March 8, 1982, when Border Guard Commander Tzvi Bar revealed that the Border Guards were providing weapons training for members of the village leagues for the purpose of self-defense,[7] Jordan had no choice but to declare officially that the leagues were illegal under Jordanian law. After making this decision, it took a number of administrative measures to discourage Jordanian passport holders – i.e., all residents of the occupied territories – from joining the village leagues. Jordan was obliged to do this in order not to appear to be acting against the Arab consensus, which, in the wake of the Rabat resolution, viewed the PLO as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People. It should be pointed out here that there was never any intention of establishing militias of any kind within the framework of the village leagues; a small number of league members were equipped with weapons from the IDF armory only after terrorists had murdered the leader of the Ramallah league, and this move was designed solely to allow members to protect themselves. The head of IDF Central Command refused to allow military personnel to provide weapons training, a problem the ministry of defense staff solved by approaching Tzvi Bar, who was close to Arik Sharon.
The PLO's natural opposition to the village leagues found expression in the murder of the head of the Ramallah league, and, several years later, of the head of the Jenin league, too. Throughout the entire period this opposition was also expressed on a routine basis by violent threats, a public boycott and a variety of actions designed to paralyze league activities.
From the outset the GSS had reservations about a policy of support for moderates and a corresponding withholding of support for hostile elements. There were a number of reasons for this, including a desire to stick to the Dayan doctrine, which opposed helping moderate elements and preferred the extremists, to whom it referred as "the authentic leadership." Moreover, as the GSS's mandate was defined as the prevention of terrorism and spying, the organization did not consider incitement or hostile public activity to be within its purview, even though both led directly to extremism and acts of terrorism. And the GSS had another reason for opposing the leagues: some very highly placed hostile Palestinian public figures had duplicitously acquired GSS protection in return for information. I believe it was hard for the GSS to come to terms with the fact that the Arab Affairs Advisory Department was operating in every way as an intelligence research network in an area so closely contingent upon its own and distributing its findings extensively to both the political echelon and the media.
The Jewish settlers were another influential element in the occupied territories. Their attitude to the village leagues, like their attitude to the rest of the local population, ranged from indifference to hostility. Certain circles and individuals in the Hebron area were especially hostile; among them was Elyakim Haetzni, a well-known public figure because of his struggle within Israel as an activist in the Shurat HaMitnadvim organization in the early 1950s. Although he had taken up residence in the occupied territories, unlike most settlers he was a secular Jew and preserved a fair-minded attitude towards his Arab neighbors. As a lawyer he represented local Arabs in court cases against the Israeli authorities when he believed they had been unjustly treated, and also maintained good personal relations with a number of the village league activists. On the public and political plane, however, he was in favor of total annexation of the territories, utterly opposed league activities and appealed to Israel's ministers of defense to prevent their developing any further. He explained his opposition by claiming that he had no fear of the PLO, as Israel would never hold talks with it. The village leagues, on the other hand, posed a problem and it was Mustafa Dodin, rather than Arafat, who frightened Haetzni, as his striving for peace was liable to cause Israel to withdraw from the territories in order to reach an agreement with him. Later, after the massacres at Sabra and Shatila, when Minister of Defense Arik Sharon found himself in serious political isolation and vitally needed the settlers' support, Haetzni's pressure on Sharon to stop the activities of the village leagues acquired significant weight.
Sharon And The Village Leagues
In 1981, after Ariel Sharon's appointment as minister of defense, it seemed as if the village leagues were being granted a fresh opportunity, as Sharon invited Professor Milson to become commander of the West Bank. Despite our many doubts, we wanted to believe that the mere fact of Sharon's having chosen to appoint Professor Milson to this position was evidence of a genuine intention to initiate new moves in the territories. Sharon expressed verbal support for the concept of the village leagues and appeared willing to help our activities. These hopes, however, were soon dashed. Firstly, he yielded to the pressure of many people who were opposed both to our policy and to us personally. Instead of continuing military rule in the territories – a situation that the Palestinians themselves had come to terms with since 1967, as it was rooted in international law as regards occupied territory – he transformed the Military Administration into a new entity known as the Civil Administration, which had no basis in international law. This new framework complicated our activities from the outset with a pointless and unnecessary struggle over its legitimacy. It also provided an excuse for all PLO supporters to fight against it on the grounds that this new framework constituted a step towards annexation of the territories. Secondly, Sharon did not keep a single one of his promises to help the village leagues; he provided no financial aid for development of the territories, and held no discussions – neither one on one nor in wider forums – on overall policy for the area. To our sorrow, we realized that all his promises amounted to nothing more than a great deception: he had no interest in the subject and no intention of devoting his time or the ministry of defense's resources to it. As a result the leagues, which in early 1981 had organized themselves into a national framework as the Federation of Village Leagues, continued to languish amid their internal and external problems without any prospect of improvement. This was despite their own best efforts and the widening of the circle of supporters who believed that the leagues represented a new political direction with which the Israeli government would cooperate for the sake of peace. In September 1982, less than a year after his appointment, Milson resigned his post in the wake of the Sabra and Shatila massacres, and I was appointed to replace him. Now began the inevitable process of decline, as the minister of defense was entirely preoccupied by the massacres and their repercussions. After Sharon was forced to resign and was replaced by Moshe Arens, Shlomo Ilya was appointed head of the Civil Administration. He treated the village leagues with hostility and plotted against their leaders until eventually, due also to the pressure their many opponents applied to the new minister of defense, the league federation was disbanded and the weapons supplied to its members for self-defense purposes were taken away from them, leaving them vulnerable and susceptible to harm. All the opponents of the leagues celebrated what they referred to as their "failure," which in fact was no failure at all: neither the PLO nor the Arab states nor any of the other hostile elements had been able to overcome them – the Israeli government alone was responsible for their demise, without ever once having discussed the concept, its significance or its prospects. One could say that such failure was inevitable when an attempt was made to initiate a historic political process in the face of universal opposition. The subsequent initiative attempted by the Israeli government with the PLO in 1993, with the full support of a national and international consensus, was no more successful, for reasons we ourselves had foreseen and had warned against.
Popular Misconceptions About The Village Leagues
I should like to take this opportunity to lay to rest two false perceptions propagated by the opponents of the village leagues. The first is that the establishment of the village leagues and the assistance they received were part of a putative "Sharon-Milson plan." As we have described above, the leagues were established three years before Sharon became minister of defense, and he was in no way involved in their creation: he assumed office years after they were already in existence. The expression "Sharon-Milson plan," which refers, of course, to something that never existed, was invented by a number of journalists in order to discredit the leagues by presenting them as Sharon's creation, and others parroted the expression through ignorance.
The second misconception is the claim that our objective in establishing the village leagues was to sow dissent between the rural and urban Palestinian populations, in accordance with the doctrine of "divide and rule." This claim, too, is devoid of any substance. As stated above, the real reason behind Mustafa Dodin's request to establish a village league was that he was precluded from establishing a political movement that would work openly towards peace negotiations with Israel. When he came to us with this request in 1977, we told him there was no chance it would be granted, as the minister of defense refused to allow the formation of political movements, even if their stated objective was to reach a peace settlement, and therefore his only chance was to establish an administrative body, as sanctioned by Jordanian law. A few days later Dodin proposed that he solve this problem by creating a village league. In other words, the village-league structure was imposed upon Dodin and his supporters against their will – and thus it was similarly imposed upon us, as we wanted to help those Palestinians who wished to work towards peace negotiations with Israel.
We cannot conclude this article without mentioning that the Israeli consensus against the village leagues was not total. In 1983 a movement supporting the leagues sprang up within the extreme Israeli left. This movement, which was named HaDerech LaShalom ("The Way to Peace") did not represent any official body, but was composed of leading kibbutz movement activists from HaShomer HaTzair, Ihud HaKvutzot and HaKibbutz HaMeuhad. Prominent figures included Yonah Eisenberg from Kibbutz Gan Shmuel, Hanoch Beeri of HaZorea, Dudik Shoshani from Lahav, Yaakov Yonish of Beit HaShita, Ezra Dloomy of Rosh HaNikra and Shlomo Leshem of Urim. They got in touch with members of the leagues, met with them, helped them, organized conferences and other events with them and generally made every effort to show the Israeli public that an option for Israeli-Palestinian peace could be found close to home, with no need to look overseas. But, as in 1983 the Israeli authorities were already engaged in the process of doing away with the leagues, there was little they could do and their support did not bring salvation.
*Yigal Carmon is President of MEMRI. This article was first published in the Israeli magazine Kivvunim Hadashim, Issue n. 29, Jerusalem, December 2013.
Endnotes:
[1] Al-Tal was murdered by the PLO in 1971 for his activity against this organization in September 1970.
[2] Aziz Shehadeh was shot dead on December 2, 1985.
[3] The policy of open bridges and permission to bring in salaries earned by teachers and staff continuing to work as civil servants in Jordan under the auspices of the Israeli Military Administration were things with which Dayan was obliged to comply, even though initially he explicitly forbade them. Nor did the results of the local elections held in accordance with Dayan's orders in 1972, in which Jordanian supporters maintained their status as mayors and heads of regional councils, accord with Dayan's intentions: he had hoped to install anti-Jordanian elements in these positions, and to this end had encouraged them to run for office. In one instance he was successful in installing Karim Khalaf, who had served as district attorney in the Israeli administration, as mayor of Ramallah, after he had stood for office with the encouragement of the Israeli authorities. The year 1976 saw the election of well known self-professed PLO supporters held in high esteem by the minister of defense, who instructed the administration to help them, supposedly without reference to their declared political positions.
[4] Much of the Israeli public likewise regarded Dayan as a man who "understands the Arabs."
[5] The first person to apply this term to them was Major-General Shlomo Gazit, who was an indefatigable proponent of the Dayan policy and the first Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories.
[6] This was the position of King Hussein. The prime minister of the time, Mudar Badran, while never actually acting contrary to the king's instructions, was not sympathetically inclined towards Mustafa Dodin, with whom he had clashed when the latter had held an official position in the Jordanian government.
[7] Bar leaked this information in a distorted and improper fashion for purposes of personal aggrandizement, with no regard at all for the consequences of his action.
© 1998-2016, The Middle East Media Research Institute All Rights Reserved. Materials may only be cited with proper attributi

Palestinians: Bad News for Israel-Haters
Khaled Abu Toameh/ Gatestone Institute/September 13/16
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8917/palestinians-abdullah-tamimi
Sheikh Abdullah Tamimi and his colleagues do not believe in boycotts and divestment. They are convinced that real peace can be achieved through dialogue between Palestinians and all Israelis -- not just those who are affiliated with the left-wing. The Israeli left-wing, they contend, does not have a monopoly over peace-making.

For Tamimi, real peace begins between the people and through economic cooperation and improving the living conditions of the Palestinians. This, he explains, is more important than the talk about the establishment of a Palestinian state, which he believes, under the current circumstances, is not a realistic option. This notion goes against the ideas of the advocates of "anti-normalization" and others in the West obviously acting against the true interests of the Palestinians by promoting boycott and divestment against Israel.
Venal leadership has always been the main tragedy of the Palestinians. But it has created a vacuum that provides an opportunity for Palestinians such as Tamimi to search for other alternatives. This, of course, comes as bad news for those who hate Israel and keep hoping to destroy it. Now the question is, who will triumph: Palestinians and their Jewish neighbors in the West Bank who wish to live in peace, or the anti-Palestinian, anti-Israel, "anti-normalization" activists who seek to derail a true peace at any cost?
By all accounts, Sheikh Abdullah Tamimi, who hails from an influential clan in Hebron, is an extraordinarily courageous and unique Palestinian. His bravery lies not in rescuing a child from a burning house, and his singularity lies not in donating his salary to an orphanage.
Tamimi's courage and exceptionality showed up in a different sphere: he recently spoke at a seminar organized by Jewish residents of the settlement of Efrat, in Gush Etzion (south of Jerusalem). The seminar was held under the title, "Relations between Jews and Arabs in Gush Etzion." The event was attended by another courageous Palestinian, Khaled Abu Awwad, General Manager of the Israeli-Palestinian Bereaved Families Forum, a grassroots organization that promotes reconciliation as an alternative to hatred and revenge.
Sheikh Abdullah Tamimi (left) speaks at a seminar on relations between Jews and Arabs in the Gush Etzion area, on August 2, 2016.
Thanks to this courageous move, Tamimi has now been "disowned" by his clan. This is one of the most humiliating forms of punishment in tribal systems: the individual loses the support and protection of the clan and is boycotted socially -- weddings and funerals become very lonely affairs. Moreover, Tamimi is being labelled as a "traitor" and a "collaborator" with Israel.
Tamimi did indeed participate in the seminar. But that is not all. He took with him several Palestinians from the town of Yatta in the Hebron area and the Jelazoun refugee camp near Ramallah.
Encounters between Jewish settlers and Palestinians are not unheard of. Thousands of Palestinians work in most of the settlements and many others maintain close relations with settlers and do business with them on a daily basis. These Palestinians could not care less about the anti-Israel boycott movement or the "anti-normalization" groups operating in the West Bank.
For them, the need to earn their families' bread far outweighs the voices calling for boycotts and divestment. These ordinary Palestinians strive to get on with their lives without the fear of boycott activists' threats.
Tamimi and his colleagues do not believe in boycotts and divestment. They are convinced that real peace can be achieved through dialogue between Palestinians and all Israelis -- not just those who are affiliated with the left-wing. The Israeli left-wing, they contend, does not have a monopoly over peace-making.
For Tamimi, real peace begins between the people and through economic cooperation and improving the living conditions of the Palestinians. This, he explains, is more important than the talk about the establishment of a Palestinian state, which he believes, under the current circumstances, is not a realistic option.
In his speech at the seminar, Tamimi pointed out that peace and calm do not always come from "peaceniks" and leftists.
"In our work, we search for the right-wing in Israel, the hardliners in Israeli society and the settlers to sit and talk with them," he said. "There are many things that they need to know about Islam and the Quran. This dialogue should be the basis for any future solutions."
Insisting that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is political, and not religious, Tamimi told his Jewish audience that many Palestinian groups that claim to represent Islam are not authentic representatives of Islam. "They are using Islam as a bridge to achieve their goals, but in reality they do not represent Islam," he stressed. Tamimi was clearly referring to Hamas and other radical Palestinian Islamist groups, although he did not mention them by name.
Tamimi disclosed that he is currently in touch with thirteen leading Islamic clerics in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, to address the daily humanitarian needs of the Palestinian population and bring it to the public's attention. "The humanitarian needs of the people are at the top of our list of priorities," he said. "We do not want bloodshed. We have needs that we are demanding with all available methods." He believes that both Israelis and Palestinians should invest in dialogue, especially between religious leaders from both sides, to talk about shared interests. "We need to sit together and understand each other," he added. "This will help the leaders make decisions. We want both peoples to live a dignified life."
Tamimi's is not a lone voice in the desert. He represents an increasing number of Palestinians who have lost confidence in their leaders' ability to improve their living conditions and achieve peace and stability in the region. These Palestinians support the idea of "economic peace" between the two peoples -- a notion that goes against the ideas of the advocates of "anti-normalization" and others in the West obviously acting against the true interests of the Palestinians by promoting boycott and divestment against Israel.
Ironically, while those hoping to destroy Israel are campaigning for boycotts and other economic harm to it, a growing number of Palestinians are marching in the opposite direction.
Tamimi is not just another ordinary Palestinian. Besides being an Islamic cleric, he also belongs to one of the largest Palestinian clans in Hebron. In these days of unrelenting incitement and indoctrination by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA), it is refreshing to see and hear an Islamic cleric stand up and utter words of true peace. The only Islamic clerics we have seen in recent years are those who preach hate against Israel, Jews and "infidels."
Yet, of course, Tamimi's bold stance does not come without a price. Shortly after the news of the seminar and Tamimi's remarks were broadcast on Israel's Channel 10 TV, a man who claimed to be the leader (mukhtar) of the Tamimi clan issued a statement strongly condemning the "corrupt" cleric for meeting with Jewish settlers.
The man, Hijazi Tamimi, wrote on Facebook that, as the leader of the Hebron clan, he did not authorize any of his family members to meet with settlers:
"As long as I am alive, I will not permit any member of my clan to meet with settlers, no matter what the circumstances. On behalf of myself and the Tamimi clan, we announce our decision to disown the above-mentioned [Abdullah Tamimi], condemn what was mentioned in the TV report and question his credibility. Anyone who wants to discuss political matters should go to the elected president of the Palestinian people, Mahmoud Abbas."
What the clan leader neglected to note was that the "elected" president is now in the 11th year of his four-year term in office. He also forgot to mention that not all Palestinians agree with the policies of Mahmoud Abbas and his Palestinian Authority, and consider boycotts and divestment harmful to the interests of their people. Abbas's repeated rejection of offers to return to the negotiating table, or hold a summit with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu without pre-conditions, was also not noted.
Other members of the clan joined the attack on Abdullah Tamimi and called for punishing him for meeting with settlers. "Who is this guy who claims to be a sheikh?" asked Qassem Tamimi. "This is Rabbi Abdullah. He is not one of us and he has no connection to our clan."
Tamimi is a rare voice of sanity among Palestinian Islamic clerics, most of whom are busy spewing hate towards Israel and Jews from mosques and media outlets.
But Abdullah Tamimi's message reflects the growing discontent with the way Palestinian leaders are handling the affairs of their people. Last week, Palestinians received yet another reminder of the malfeasance of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas governments, with the decision to suspend local elections scheduled for October 8. The decision, taken by the Palestinian High Court, came as no surprise to many Palestinians. It followed weeks of mutual accusations and tensions between the two rival parties, with each side targeting each other's candidates by arresting them, harassing them or disqualifying their lists.
An article published here in July questioned the Palestinians' ability to hold fair and free elections, especially in light of the ongoing tensions between Abbas's Fatah faction and Hamas, and internal squabbling within Fatah. The article also noted that Abbas was embarking on a gigantic gamble by authorizing the local elections.
The Palestinian Authority and Hamas have once again failed their people; they are not even capable of ensuring a free and fair election. Venal leadership has always been the main tragedy of the Palestinians. But it has created a vacuum that provides an opportunity for Palestinians such as Tamimi to search for other alternatives. This, of course, comes as bad news for those who hate Israel and keep hoping to destroy it with boycotts, stabbings, car-rammings and the like. Now the question is, who will triumph: Palestinians and their Jewish neighbors in the West Bank who wish to live in peace, or the anti-Palestinian, anti-Israel, "anti-normalization" activists who seek to derail a true peace at any cost?
Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist, is based in Jerusalem.
Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on Twitter
© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Sweden: Who Do Christian Leaders Serve?
Nima Gholam Ali Pour/ Gatestone Institute/September 13/16
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8920/sweden-church-immigration
In Swedish Christianity, Jesus has been reduced from being the son of God, to an activist fighting for multiculturalism and open borders. According to Archbishop Antje Jackelén of the Church of Sweden, Jesus has clear political positions on both migration and integration policies.
According to a senior official in the Church of Sweden, the call to wear a cross to show solidarity with persecuted Christians is "un-Christian".
One might describe the Swedish Christianity as a new religion that worships multiculturalism and leftist values in general.
"The leadership of the Church of Sweden no longer wants to lead a Christian community; they want to lead a general ethical association for humanistic values." — Ann Heberlein, doctor of theology and lecturer at Lund University.
One can have different interpretations of what Jesus did or what opinions he had, but we can all agree that he did not serve the Emperor or other earthly rulers. Too many Christian leaders in Sweden have become the servants of earthly rulers by conveying the message of the political establishment in Sweden.
Christianity is a universal religion, therefore Christianity in Sweden should have many similarities with Christianity in other countries.
If Christianity in Sweden begins to embrace a doctrine that has nothing to do with the universal world religion of Christianity, Sweden has then invented a new religion.
If you look at how Christianity has developed in Sweden today, it seems that this is what Sweden is about to get.
Stefan Swärd is an influential Christian pastor in Sweden with a background in the Evangelical Free Church in Sweden. In an op-ed from September 2014, Swärd describes Christianity the following way:
"When congregations in Sweden meet in diversity and integration and integrate Africans, Chinese and Latin Americans, they express the very essence of the Christian community's being."
He continues,
"As Christians, we should work for a generous refugee policy. We will work so our churches and congregations become good examples of functioning integration, where people of different backgrounds can come together in a common life."
In December 2014, he gathered 380 Swedish ministers from the Pentecostal movement, the Evangelical Free Church in Sweden, the Uniting Church in Sweden, the Salvation Army, Word of Faith Movement and the Swedish Alliance Mission, as well as several other churches, to sign a petition, which declared, among other things, that these denominations do not believe that Sweden applies a refugee policy that is too generous. This was written before the migration crisis in 2015, when Sweden already had the most liberal immigration policy in Europe and gave all Syrians permanent residence in Sweden.
To those concerned about the future of Sweden, where many new migrants might not be able to be assimilated or might not want to be assimilated, Swärd is regarded as misusing Christianity to argue for a liberal immigration policy.
In his recent book, Jesus Was Also a Refugee (Jesus var också flykting), Swärd and his co-author, Micael Grenholm, try to answer the following question: "What does God think about the global refugee crisis and Swedish migration policy?" The answer that the book gives is that there should be no immigration restrictions at all and that rich countries have to open their borders simply because they are rich countries.
Swärd and his coalition of ministers are not an anomaly in Swedish Christianity. They represent the norm for what much of Swedish Christianity preaches nowadays. Antje Jackelén, the archbishop of Sweden's largest denomination, the Church of Sweden, said in an interview from January 9, 2016 that Jesus would not approve of the Swedish government's new restrictive migration policies, which the government was forced to implement because of the migration crisis. Archbishop Jackelén stated:
"The Bible is full of stories of refugees. Jesus himself was a refugee in his infancy. To protect the stranger, the one who is not protected, runs like a thread through the Old and New Testament. There would probably be no approval from Jesus for the government policy."
On the basis of what many Christian leaders in Sweden say, Jesus seems to have been interested in migration policies, and he seems to have thought that they should be liberal.
According to the Church of Sweden, there are even clear political positions that God has on how immigrants should integrate into a new country. Archbishop Antje Jackelén, for instance, said in an interview from September 2014 that if one requires that immigrants assimilate into the country after their arrival, it is contrary to a Christian view of humanity. Is that statement based on the Bible, or is it based on the political agenda of the Swedish liberal establishment? Antje Jackelén leads the church in which 63% of Sweden's population are members. Her message is that Jesus has clear political positions on both migration and integration policies.
Christian leaders in Sweden have re-made Christianity into a religion that serves the political agenda of an establishment whose extreme liberal ideology lacks popular support. Left: Sweden's Crown Princess, King, Archbishop Antje Jackelén, and the Queen pose after the archiepiscopal ordination of Jackelén on June 15, 2014 (Image source: Church of Sweden). Right: Influential Swedish Christian pastor Stefan Swärd co-wrote the book Jesus Was Also a Refugee, which advocates for a policy of no immigration restrictions; rich countries have to open their borders simply because they are rich countries.
After the June 2016 terrorist attack in Orlando, Florida, in which ISIS sympathizer Omar Mateen murdered 49 people at a gay nightclub, another influential Christian pastor in Sweden, Stanley Sjöberg, wrote on his Facebook page that homosexuals should be more low-key, not to provoke Muslims. After his statement about the Orlando massacre, Sjöberg told a Christian magazine:
"But I believe that we must adapt to the multicultural way when we've brought several hundred thousand Muslims here. I believe that politicians and serious thinkers agree with me that we cannot just continue with our culture, with Pride festivals, or to drink in public. We in Europe are forced to step back to show a little more considerate attitude to the environment."
The Church of Sweden has actively tried to influence Swedish politicians to support a liberal immigration policy. When the Swedish parliament was going to vote on restrictive migration policies in June 2016, a bishop of the Church of Sweden in the Diocese of Västerås pleaded with MPs to vote against the proposal. When the media asked him why he should interfere in political matters he responded:
"It is obvious to me. Otherwise I would not carry out my duties as bishop unless I committed myself to the vulnerable."
There are lot of vulnerable people in Sweden. 225,000 retirees in Sweden lived in poverty in 2014, and all estimates shows that this number is going to grow rapidly. So why is the Church of Sweden obsessed with vulnerable people who come from other countries?
It seems to have become part of Church of Sweden's mission -- and Christianity in Sweden generally -- to make the country implement a liberal immigration policy.
But is this really the mission of the Church and Christianity? What happened with spreading the Word and letting people know that Jesus is the truth, the way and the life?
It is not even certain that Christian leaders in Sweden care so much about Jesus and his opinions. After a French priest, Jacques Hamel, was murdered by ISIS sympathizers in Rouen, France, on July 26, 2016, an initiative started in Sweden where Swedish Christians took "selfies" with a cross to show solidarity with persecuted Christians. The initiative, called "Mitt kors"("My cross"), was started by three priests from the Church of Sweden. The Church of Sweden, however, criticized it. Gunnar Sjöberg, Head of Communications for the Church of Sweden, wrote on his Facebook page:
"I really do not know about that. This thing about Christians suddenly wearing a cross as a sign for or against something. It is actually nothing new, but the call seems seditious and un-Christian in the conflicts that already exist."
So now, according to a senior official in the Church of Sweden, the call to wear a cross to show solidarity with persecuted Christians is "un-Christian".
That the Church of Sweden distances itself from people who carry the cross caused Ann Heberlein, a doctor of theology and lecturer at Lund University, to write,
"The leadership of the Church of Sweden no longer wants to lead a Christian community; they want to lead a general ethical association for humanistic values of the most vulgar kind."
The Church of Sweden's attacks on the "My cross" initiative continued until one of the priests who had started it publicly left the Church of Sweden. In an article, Johanna Andersson, the priest who is resigning, writes:
"Church leadership has for several weeks been running a campaign against us who started the group 'My cross.' In this campaign, I have been discredited, called 'questionable', 'unclean', 'agitator', 'un-Christian' and attributed xenophobic hidden agendas."
The question, therefore, is whether some Christian leaders in Sweden really care about Jesus and Christianity or whether they are using Jesus to convey a political agenda which includes a liberal immigration policy and multiculturalism.
While the Church of Sweden opposed a campaign that tried to use the cross to show solidarity with the persecuted Christians, Archbishop Antje Jackelén co-authored an op-ed in one of Sweden's largest newspapers with four other Swedish religious leaders, including Mahmoud Khalfi, chairman of the Swedish Imam Council, who has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.
There are many examples of how Christianity in Sweden has gone astray and become something else. One might describe Swedish Christianity as a new religion that worships multiculturalism and leftist values in general. In Swedish Christianity, Jesus has been reduced from being the son of God, to an activist fighting for multiculturalism and open borders.
In 2013, the Swedish Social Democratic Youth League had an advertisement for elections in the Church of Sweden, in which they declared that "Jesus was a Social Democrat." Meanwhile, there are Christian leaders who claim to know exactly what Jesus thought about the current government's immigration policy.
This is the state of Swedish Christianity today, and it is not certain that Christians around the world would recognize the religion in Sweden called Christianity. Christian leaders in Sweden have taken Christianity and made it into a religion that serves the political agenda of an establishment whose extreme liberal ideology lacks popular support among the Swedish people.
If the Swedish establishment wants multiculturalism, then Christian leaders will declare that God says multiculturalism is good. If the Swedish establishment wants a liberal immigration policy, Jesus says that he has always been for a liberal immigration policy, despite the fact that he was born more than 2000 years ago. Swedish Christianity has become a mixture of madness and deception.
In Malmö the Church of Sweden publishes a local magazine called Trovärdigt. In the latest issue, you can read that a priest, who serves at St. Peters church in Malmö, said,
"The rainbow in the Pride Flag is also a sign of the promise between God and man".
Really? Not even the most radical gay activists believe that the rainbow in the gay pride flag is a sign of the promise between God and man. For many influential Christian leaders in Sweden, it does not matter what it says in the Bible anymore. In fact, if you take a step back and look at the overall picture, it is clear that many Christian leaders in Sweden do not worship God; they worship the romanticized, multicultural utopia they want Sweden to become. These Christian leaders betray not only the Swedish people, but they also betray the God that they promised to serve, by making Christianity into a bullhorn for the liberal elite who hold political power in Sweden.
One can have different interpretations of what Jesus did or what opinions he had, but we can all agree that he did not serve the Emperor or other earthly rulers. Too many Christian leaders in Sweden have become the servants of earthly rulers by conveying the message of the political establishment in Sweden.
**Nima Gholam Ali Pour is a member of the board of education in the Swedish city of Malmö and is engaged in several Swedish think tanks concerned with the Middle East. He is also editor for the social conservative website Situation Malmö. Gholam Ali Pour is the author of the Swedish book "Därför är mångkultur förtryck"("Why multiculturalism is oppression").
© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.